THE
FIRST
BOOKE
,
TREATING
CHIEFELY
of
Lay-Elders
.
CHAP.
I.
Answering
the
Refuters
Preamble
.
THE
refuter
,
Ad
pag.
●
before
he
would
encounter
the
Sermon
it selfe
,
thought
good
to
spend
some
of
his
splene
vpon
the
Author
of
the
Sermon
,
the
matter
,
and
the
text
:
proudly
insulting
ouer
the
Author
;
scornefully
gibing
at
the
matter
,
and
captiously
carping
at
the
choyse
of
the
text
.
[
(1)
](A20733-e4650-b)
(1)
The
points
in
〈◊〉
Sermon
,
m●●●
and
plain●●
handled
.
fiue
smooth
stones
taken
out
of
the
fountaine
of
Gods
word
,
&
streames
of
antiquitie
)
as
not
able
to
stand
in
his
hands
,
being
as
he
saith
,
litle
worth
,
yea
miserable
poore
indeed
.
He
scoffeth
Tobiah-like
[
(2)
](A20733-e4680-b)
(2)
Neh●●
4.3
.
at
my
building
as
ruinous
and
tottering
,
so
readie
to
tipe
and
fall
,
as
if
belike
but
one
of
the
foxes
[
(3)
](A20733-e4730-b)
(3)
Cant●
15.
The
foxe●
heretikes
schi●
ma●l●●
.
that
trouble
the
vine
doe
come
vpon
it
,
the
goodly
mansion
built
for
our
reuerend
Bishops
,
as
a
tower
of
defence
for
their
Lordships
to
rest
in
,
(
which
proud
and
disdainefull
sco●fe
hee
repeateth
againe
pag.
8.
)
will
fall
to
the
ground
.
For
answere
whereof
,
I
desire
the
Reader
to
compare
the
latter
end
of
his
preface
,
with
this
begining
of
his
confutation
.
For
there
,
bearing
the
Reader
in
hand
,
that
he
hath
sufficiently
confuted
my
Sermon
;
hee
vseth
my
praise
as
a
steppe
to
raise
himselfe
,
and
to
aduantage
his
cause
,
giuing
me
greater
commendation
,
then
either
I
doe
desire
,
or
deserue
:
but
here
,
beginning
his
confutation
,
he
would
perswade
the
Reader
he
shall
easily
performe
it
;
his
aduersarie
being
little
worth
,
yea
miserable
poor●
indeed
,
his
building
ruinous
and
tottering
ready
to
tipe
and
fall
.
Which
imputations
,
if
they
be
not
true
,
proue
him
to
be
a
lyer
;
if
true
,
a
worthlesse
and
witlesse
fellowe
;
worthlesse
,
who
passing
by
all
the
worthies
of
our
side
,
and
their
most
accurate
and
learned
treatises
,
And
whereas
Sanballat-like
he
saith
,
I
make
great
boast
in
my
Sermon
of
much
riches
,
&c.
I
answere
with
Nehemiah
,
Giue
care
saith
he
,
for
I
will
speake
of
excellent
things
,
and
the
opening
of
my
lippes
shall
teach
things
that
be
right
:
for
my
mouth
shall
speake
the
truth
,
and
my
lippes
abhorre
wickednes
:
so
now
in
the
very
entrance
hee
playeth
Pyrgopolinices
himselfe
,
Pl●●
glori●●
tu
le●●
dissi●●●
spiri●●
si
ver●●
soli●●
taking
on
,
as
if
with
a
little
paper-shotte
he
could
ouerthrowe
all
my
building
,
and
blowe
poore
me
away
as
it
were
with
a
breath
.
Sect.
2.
The
matter
also
he
scoffeth
at
,
applying
vnto
it
the
speech
of
one
of
the
sons
of
the
Prophets
(
whom
he
calleth
[
(a)
](A20733-e5020-b)
(a)
H●●●
at
the
●●●
of
the●●●
2.
Ki●●●
a
poore
laborer
,
to
make
him
,
as
it
seemeth
the
liker
to
me
)
saying
of
his
axe
when
the
head
fell
into
the
water
,
Alas
Maister
,
it
is
but
borrowed
.
Neither
doubteth
he
with
what
forhead
I
knowe
not
(
for
he
goeth
vnder
a
vizard
)
to
affirme
,
that
my
whole
building
from
the
foundation
to
the
roofe
,
is
but
old
stuffe
taken
out
of
D.
Bilsons
booke
of
the
perpetuall
gouernement
of
the
Church
.
Which
base
calumniation
framed
(
as
it
may
seeme
)
according
to
his
owne
practise
,
he
doth
odiously
repeate
ad
nauseam
vsque
,
euen
so
often
harping
on
this
string
,
as
I
haue
occasion
to
handle
,
(
though
neuer
so
differently
,
)
the
same
points
with
that
most
learned
and
reuerend
diuine
.
To
which
obiection
I
answere
,
that
if
it
were
true
,
it
would
proue
the
refuter
to
be
but
a
childish
,
and
yet
an
odious
wrangler
.
Childish
,
for
it
is
the
fashion
of
wrangling
boyes
in
their
Sophemes
and
disputations
,
when
they
cannot
tell
how
to
answere
an
argument
,
to
tell
the
opponent
,
he
had
it
in
such
a
booke
.
And
it
is
the
part
of
an
odious
wrangler
to
seeke
the
disgrace
of
my
person
,
by
that
which
doth
no
whit
aduantage
his
cause
.
For
what
aduantage
is
this
to
his
cause
,
to
obiect
,
that
my
proofes
are
the
same
with
D.
Bilsons
;
seeing
his
proofes
be
such
,
as
neuer
were
,
and
neuer
wil
be
answered
.
But
if
the
obiection
be
false
,
as
euery
man
that
compareth
the
treatises
may
easily
discerne
;
then
,
besides
the
testimonie
of
odious
wrangling
,
he
shall
gaine
to
himselfe
the
commendation
of
a
slanderous
libeller
.
For
,
besides
my
consent
in
iudgement
with
that
most
reuerend
learned
man
,
which
I
most
willingly
and
gladly
professse
,
there
is
not
any
thing
almost
besides
concurrence
in
diuerse
allegations
,
which
should
breed
any
iust
occasion
of
this
surmile
.
And
as
for
them
,
I
doe
professe
,
that
the
most
of
them
are
of
mine
owne
reading
,
and
those
,
which
before
I
had
either
not
read
,
or
not
obserued
,
I
did
not
content
my selfe
to
alleadge
them
as
it
were
at
the
second
hand
;
but
to
examine
the
allegations
,
and
to
cite
them
out
of
the
Authors
themselues
.
So
that
,
although
the
liquor
many
times
is
the
same
,
yet
I
drewe
it
at
the
fountaine
,
and
not
at
the
streame
;
remembring
who
saith
,
Tardi
est
ingenij
riuulos
consectari
,
Cic.
de
orat
.
fontes
non
videre
.
Which
course
,
better
Schollers
then
my
aduersarie
,
would
allowe
,
especially
to
one
that
had
no
more
time
then
I
had
,
both
to
prouide
what
to
speake
,
and
to
speake
what
I
had
prouided
.
And
forasmuch
as
in
many
places
of
his
booke
,
he
maketh
references
to
D.
Bilsons
booke
,
to
shew
,
that
what
I
deliuer
,
was
taken
thence
:
I
intreat
the
Reader
once
for
all
to
compare
the
places
.
For
thereby
he
shall
see
this
cauiller
to
haue
played
the
Ratte
,
both
in
discouering
his
owne
falshood
,
And
whereas
he
obiecteth
,
that
my
house
is
built
of
old
stuffe
,
&c.
Let
him
knowe
,
that
in
these
kindes
of
buildings
,
the
oldnes
of
the
stuffe
is
a
great
commendation
.
For
that
,
which
is
the
oldest
,
is
the
truest
.
And
that
which
hath
beene
of
greatest
antiquitie
,
for
the
time
past
,
will
also
be
of
the
longest
continuance
for
the
time
to
come
.
As
for
those
buildings
which
our
new
Church
wrights
haue
lately
set
vp
specke
and
spanne
new
,
His
third
quarrell
is
against
the
choyse
of
the
text
,
Ad
〈◊〉
His
〈◊〉
at
the
〈◊〉
of
the
〈◊〉
Abo●●
as
it
were
the
plot
of
ground
whereon
to
set
my
building
.
The
which
because
it
is
allegoricall
,
is
compared
to
a
marish
ground
,
where
though
I
digge
deepe
,
and
doe
what
I
can
,
I
shall
hardly
find
fast
ground
whereon
to
lay
my
foundation
.
The
which
quarrell
doth
please
him
so
well
,
that
he
repeateth
it
againe
,
pag.
3.
But
without
cause
.
For
seeing
the
exposition
of
the
allegory
is
not
doubtfull
,
but
is
confessed
on
both
sides
,
that
as
by
the
7.
starres
,
are
meant
the
7.
Angels
,
so
by
the
Angels
the
Bishops
of
the
Churches
:
who
seeth
not
,
that
this
assertion
,
that
the
calling
of
Bishops
is
lawfull
&
good
,
is
built
on
the
foundation
of
the
Apostle
Iohn
,
as
it
were
vpon
a
Rocke
.
For
although
some
obiect
,
that
by
the
Angels
are
meant
,
either
all
Ministers
in
generall
,
as
the
newe
sect
of
disciplinarians
doth
,
Bez.
i●●●
2.
or
the
presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
,
as
the
Elder
and
more
learned
disciplinarians
doe
,
who
doe
not
stand
for
the
new-found
parish-discipline
;
yet
I
doe
proue
both
by
the
text
it selfe
,
and
by
other
euidence
,
that
the
calling
of
Diocesan
BB.
is
in
this
text
commended
vnto
vs
vnder
this
title
of
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
.
But
hereof
more
in
my
answere
to
the
third
pag.
CHAP.
II.
Diuiding
the
Sermon
,
and
defending
the
first
part
thereof
which
he
calleth
the
Preface
.
HAuing
thus
quarrelled
with
the
Author
,
the
matter
and
subiect
of
he
Sermon
,
he
setteth
vpon
the
[
(a)
](A20733-e5340-b)
(a)
The
diuision
of
the
Sermon
,
with
the
summe
of
the
Preface
thereof
.
Sermon
it selfe
.
Which
in
the
abortiue
booke
,
was
dismembred
into
sixe
parts
,
and
yet
one
maine
part
left
out
.
In
this
after-birth
,
into
3
;
viz
,
the
Preface
,
the
body
of
the
Sermon
,
and
the
conclusion
.
The
Preface
,
he
saith
,
is
concerning
the
text
,
and
the
fiue
points
I
vndertake
to
handle
;
and
that
againe
he
mangleth
into
4.
sections
.
But
if
my
aduersaries
were
as
good
in
diuiding
,
as
they
are
in
making
diuision
;
or
so
skilfull
in
analysing
logically
,
as
they
are
captious
in
comptrolling
that
which
hath
bene
logically
composed
;
they
would
,
either
haue
followed
the
ordinarie
diuision
of
orations
,
Arist.
Rhet.
3
.
1●
.
saying
,
that
the
Sermon
consisted
of
4
parts
,
which
are
,
1.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
proaeme
,
(
to
pag.
2.
lin.
3.
)
2.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
proposition
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
wherein
the
points
to
be
handled
are
first
diduced
out
of
the
text
,
to
pag.
6.
l.
16.
)
and
secondly
enumerated
and
distinctly
marshalled
(
pag.
6
&
7.
)
3.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
confirmation
prouing
and
defending
those
fiue
points
,
(
from
pag.
8.
to
94.
)
4.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
conclusion
containing
the
application
,
(
pag.
94.
to
the
end
:
)
Or
,
if
this
diuision
had
not
liked
them
,
they
might
out
of
the
transition
pag.
94.
haue
obserued
a
distribution
of
my
Sermon
into
2.
parts
;
viz.
the
explication
,
continuing
to
that
place
,
and
the
application
from
thence
to
the
end
.
The
explication
containeth
2.
assertions
:
the
first
,
that
the
pastors
or
gouernours
of
the
primitiue
Churches
(
here
meant
by
the
Angels
,
)
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
&
such
(
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
)
as
ours
be
.
The
second
,
that
the
function
of
Diocesan
BB.
is
lawfull
and
good
.
Of
these
two
assertions
,
the
former
,
is
an
explication
of
the
text
;
the
latter
,
a
doctrine
collected
out
of
the
text
so
explained
.
These
assertions
are
,
for
the
handling
of
the
text
,
first
propounded
to
be
discussed
,
in
that
which
he
calleth
the
Preface
,
and
afterwards
proued
,
in
that
which
he
calleth
the
body
of
my
booke
.
The
former
,
as
I
said
,
may
be
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
proposition
;
the
latter
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
confirmation
.
Now
for
the
tryall
of
the
first
,
viz.
wheth●er
by
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
we
are
to
vnderstand
Diocesan
BB.
or
not
,
these
two
points
are
propounded
to
be
examined
;
first
,
what
manner
of
Churches
they
were
whereof
they
were
Bishops
,
whether
parishes
onely
,
(
as
our
new
disciplinarians
say
,
)
or
dioceses
,
as
we
and
the
elder
disciplinarians
hold
:
and
consequently
,
whether
themselues
were
parishionall
,
or
diocesan
BB.
2.
what
manner
of
preheminence
they
had
in
their
Churches
,
in
respect
whereof
they
be
called
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
whether
onely
a
prioritie
in
order
aboue
other
Ministers
,
and
that
but
for
a
short
time
and
by
course
;
or
a
superioritie
in
degree
,
and
maioritie
of
rule
for
terme
of
life
.
And
this
is
the
summe
of
that
which
he
calleth
the
Preface
.
Now
I
come
to
his
sections
,
and
his
quarrells
against
the
same
.
Serm.
Sect.
1.
pag.
1.
Our
Lord
and
Sauiuor
Christ
,
hauing
appeared
to
S.
Iohn
,
in
a
glorious
forme
,
&c.
to
heauen
at
the
mids
of
pag.
3.
In
these
words
two
questions
(
which
be
determined
in
the
2.
assertions
,
what
manner
of
persons
are
meant
by
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
.
And
why
this
question
was
to
be
discussed
,
I
alleadged
,
as
he
saith
,
2.
reasons
.
The
first
,
because
when
the
holy
Ghost
expoundeth
the
starres
by
Angels
,
this
interpretation
it selfe
is
allegoricall
,
and
therefore
needeth
some
exposition
.
The
second
reason
is
propounded
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
preuenting
a
secret
obiection
against
the
former
reason
,
which
might
be
this
:
though
the
interpretation
be
allegoricall
,
yet
the
exposition
of
the
allegorie
is
agreed
vpon
,
to
wit
,
that
by
the
Angels
are
meant
the
Bishops
of
those
Churches
,
and
therefore
further
explication
needeth
not
:
to
this
I
answere
in
a
discretiue
sentence
,
granting
the
antecedent
,
but
denying
the
consequence
,
that
,
although
it
be
agreed
vpon
,
that
the
Angels
are
the
Bishops
of
the
Churches
;
yet
,
in
these
times
it
is
become
a
great
controuersie
,
and
needfull
to
bee
decided
,
what
manner
of
Bishops
they
were
,
which
in
former
ages
was
not
wont
to
be
called
into
question
.
A●
pag.
3.
Against
the
former
reason
,
the
resuter
first
obiecteth
2.
things
:
the
one
,
that
it
maketh
against
my selfe
;
the
other
,
that
it
is
:
〈…〉
and
〈◊〉
he
telleth
me
how
I
might
haue
bestowed
〈…〉
maketh
against
me
,
he
proueth
thus
〈…〉
faith
he
is
allegoricall
,
th●refore
it
was
〈…〉
&c.
Whereunto
I
haue
answered
,
that
the
meaning
of
the
allegory
is
on
both
sides
agreed
vpon
,
and
that
our
aduersaries
themselues
confesse
,
that
the
Angels
were
the
Bishops
of
the
Churches
:
and
therefore
,
by
their
owne
confession
,
the
text
was
as
fitly
chosen
,
as
if
it
had
beene
said
,
the
7.
starres
are
the
Bishops
of
the
7.
Churches
.
Yea
but
,
saith
he
,
though
it
be
granted
that
the
Angels
be
the
Bishops
,
yet
not
such
Bishops
as
you
speake
of
.
Then
the
vnfitnes
of
the
text
(
be
like
)
is
not
because
it
is
allegoricall
,
but
because
in
his
conceit
it
is
impertinent
.
Which
his
conceit
proueth
the
exposition
of
this
text
to
be
needfull
,
as
I
shewed
in
the
second
reason
.
Yea
,
but
hereby
,
saith
hee
,
the
first
reason
appeareth
to
be
superfluous
.
It
followeth
not
.
Of
the
same
thing
there
are
many
times
giuen
two
expositions
,
a
shorter
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
a
larger
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
of
both
there
was
need
in
this
place
.
The
necessitie
of
the
former
ariseth
from
the
allegory
,
which
I
breefly
expound
according
to
the
receiued
interpretation
,
viz.
that
the
Angels
signifie
the
Bishops
of
the
Churches
.
The
necessitie
of
the
latter
,
ariseth
from
the
controuersie
,
After
hee
hath
shewed
that
my
first
reason
might
well
haue
beene
spared
,
he
telleth
me
,
that
I
Whether
the
Angels
were
7
might
haue
spent
my
paines
better
in
opening
a
doubt
,
which
either
I
did
not
,
or
would
not
see
.
And
what
is
that
I
pray
you
?
For
it
is
great
pittie
,
I
had
not
your
helpe
.
If
I
would
needs
haue
these
Angels
to
be
Diocesan
Bishops
,
I
should
haue
giuen
some
reason
,
why
the
number
of
them
is
not
limited
,
as
well
as
of
the
Churches
,
to
seuen
&
no
more
.
And
from
hence
reasoneth
thus
.
If
the
holy
Ghost
by
Angels
had
meant
Diocesan
Bishops
(
whereof
there
is
but
one
in
a
Church
)
then
would
heehaue
limited
them
,
as
well
as
the
Churches
,
to
the
number
of
seuen
:
But
he
hath
not
limited
them
to
seuen
:
Therefore
by
Angels
he
meaneth
not
Diocesan
BB.
The
assumption
he
proueth
,
because
if
the
holy
Ghost
had
intended
to
signifie
no
more
but
7.
Angels
,
he
would
haue
said
,
the
7.
starres
are
the
7.
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
.
And
hauing
so
doughtily
proued
that
the
number
of
the
Angels
is
not
limited
,
from
thence
(
as
if
he
had
made
all
Cocke-sure
)
he
inferreth
2.
things
:
1.
that
the
holy
Ghost
,
in
not
limiting
the
number
,
would
haue
vs
to
vnderstand
,
there
were
more
Angels
or
Bishops
then
7.
in
these
Churches
:
2.
that
where
euery
Epistle
is
directed
to
the
Angell
of
each
Church
as
to
one
,
we
are
not
literally
to
vnderstand
one
,
but
by
a
synecdoche
more
then
one
.
Which
light
as
he
calleth
it
,
standing
at
the
entry
dore
,
if
I
had
had
his
eyes
to
haue
discerned
,
I
should
no
doubt
haue
seene
an
high
point
in
a
lowe
house
.
But
were
not
I
pray
you
the
Angels
or
BB.
to
whom
S.
Iohn
writeth
,
iust
seuen
?
helpe
me
,
I
beseech
you
,
to
remoue
this
veile
,
which
hideth
the
light
,
you
speake
of
from
me
.
The
starres
which
Christ
h●ld
in
his
hand
were
iust
seuen
,
or
limitted
to
the
number
of
7.
Apoc.
1.16
,
20.
&
2.1
.
The
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
were
the
starres
which
Christ
held
in
his
hand
.
Apoc.
1.20
.
Therefore
the
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
were
iust
7.
or
limited
to
the
number
of
7
,
Againe
,
of
7.
monades
or
vnities
,
such
as
be
7.
singular
persons
;
the
number
is
iust
7.
The
Angells
were
7.
Monades
or
Vnities
,
as
beeing
7.
singular
persons
;
therfore
of
the
Angells
the
number
is
iust
7.
That
the
Angels
were
7.
singular
persons
,
it
appeareth
by
the
inscriptions
of
the
7.
Epistles
written
vnto
them
,
viz:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
:
to
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Smyrna
,
&c
:
where
,
whosoeuer
is
able
to
count
20.
may
easily
finde
iust
7.
I
will
recite
them
,
and
let
the
refuter
keepe
the
tale
.
The
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
;
1.
the
Angell
of
the
Church
of
Smyr●a
;
2
:
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Pergamus
;
3
:
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Thyatira
;
4.
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Sardes
;
5
:
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Phyladelphia
;
6.
the
Angell
of
the
church
of
Laodicea
;
7
:
seuen
Angels
,
neither
more
nor
lesse
.
Moreouer
,
to
whom
the
7.
Epistles
were
written
,
they
were
iust
7
:
for
they
were
written
singulae
singulis
;
the
first
to
the
first
,
the
second
to
the
second
,
&c.
To
the
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
,
the
7.
Epistles
were
written
:
Therefore
the
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
,
were
iust
7.
The
same
is
testified
by
Arethas
,
vnto
these
7.
Churches
,
blessed
Iohn
(
saith
hee
)
reckneth
,
In
Apoc.
1.11
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
ouerse●ing
or
superintendent
Angels
,
iust
of
the
same
number
:
and
by
Ambrose
,
wee
must
vnderstand
the
7.
Angels
,
to
bee
the
gouernours
of
the
7.
Churches
;
Ambros.
in
Apoc.
1.
and
afterwards
he
calleth
them
the
7.
rulers
of
the
7.
Churc●●s
.
Yea
,
but
the
holy
Ghost
if
hee
had
limited
their
number
to
7.
would
haue
said
that
the
7.
Starres
are
the
7.
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
that
he
hath
more
plainely
limited
the
number
,
then
if
hee
had
said
so
.
For
if
hee
had
said
,
they
are
the
7.
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
,
such
a
captious
Sophister
as
my
aduersarie
,
would
haue
expounded
septem
,
7.
by
septeni
,
seuen
a
peece
,
and
so
haue
multiplied
them
by
7.
as
if
there
had
bene
according
to
the
number
of
the
supposed
Deacons
at
Ierusalem
,
7.
in
euery
Church
.
But
when
hee
saith
,
the
7.
starres
are
the
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
:
he
plainly
signifieth
,
that
there
were
iust
so
many
of
them
,
as
of
the
Churches
:
that
is
to
say
seuen
.
Seeing
therfore
the
number
of
the
Angels
is
limited
to
seuen
,
it
is
not
materiall
what
the
refuter
inferreth
from
the
not
limitation
of
them
.
And
whereas
he
saith
,
that
by
the
Angel
in
each
inscription
we
are
to
vnderstand
more
then
one
:
I
would
know
of
him
,
first
,
what
reason
he
hath
to
forsake
the
grammaticall
sense
?
And
where
the
holy
Ghost
speaketh
but
as
of
one
,
how
he
dare
without
good
reason
expound
him
as
speaking
of
more
then
one
?
Secondly
,
whether
in
one
particular
congregation
there
were
more
Pastors
then
one
?
Thirdly
,
whether
himselfe
did
not
teach
,
pag.
2.
that
the
Angels
signifie
such
BB.
or
Ministers
,
as
were
Pastors
onely
of
particular
congregations
:
4.
whether
in
Ephesus
there
were
more
particular
congregations
,
seeing
in
Ephesus
as
him self
saith
,
pag:
3.
there
were
more
angels
.
For
one
that
had
his
facultie
in
syllogizing
,
might
appose
him
with
these
Syllogismes
.
1.
The
Pastor
or
Bishop
of
a
particular
congregation
is
but
one
,
and
hee
,
as
the
new
discipline
teacheth
,
the
supreme
Ecclesiasticall
officer
in
euery
Church
.
Each
Angell
of
the
Churches
,
saith
the
refuter
,
did
signifie
a
Pastor
or
Bishop
of
a
particular
congregation
:
Therefore
each
Angel
did
signifie
but
one
.
2.
Where
were
many
Angels
,
were
many
Pastors
of
particular
congregations
,
and
where
were
many
Pastors
of
particular
congregations
,
there
were
more
particular
congregations
then
one
.
But
at
Ephesus
,
saith
my
aduersary
,
were
many
Angels
,
and
so
many
Pastors
.
Therefore
at
Ephesus
,
there
were
more
particular
congregations
then
one
.
Which
two
conclusions
,
are
directly
contradictory
to
his
other
assertions
,
both
here
,
&
else
where
in
his
booke
.
Sect.
4.
Hauing
thus
manifestly
proued
,
the
Angel
of
that
Church
:
it
wil
be
easie
,
both
to
free
my
Text
from
the
cauil
,
which
more
then
once
my
aduersary
obiecteth
against
it
;
as
also
,
out
of
the
text
,
to
cleare
the
maine
controuersie
,
which
is
in
hand
.
For
,
whereas
he
obiecteth
that
all
Ministers
are
Angels
,
Pag.
2.
&
4
and
6.
as
I
my selfe
teach
in
the
Sermon
of
the
dutie
and
dignitie
of
Ministers
:
And
therefore
,
that
nothing
can
bee
gathered
from
this
Text
,
which
is
not
common
to
all
Ministers
:
for
that
the
Angels
are
Bishops
(
saith
hee
)
who
denyeth
?
but
withall
,
who
knoweth
not
that
so
are
all
Ministers
?
I
answere
,
that
all
Minsters
,
who
haue
charge
of
soules
,
are
in
a
generall
sense
called
Angels
,
Pastors
,
Bishops
,
because
they
are
messengers
sent
from
God
,
to
feede
&
to
ouersee
his
flocke
.
But
yet
,
where
there
are
many
ministers
,
who
are
in
general
called
Angels
,
Pastors
,
Bishops
;
if
there
bee
one
,
and
but
one
,
who
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
called
the
Angell
,
the
Pastor
,
the
Bishop
of
that
Church
,
he
is
plainely
noted
to
haue
a
singular
preheminence
aboue
the
rest
.
Wherof
see
more
in
my
answere
to
pag:
6.
Infr.
S.
12.
And
this
is
so
plaine
a
case
,
that
euen
Beza
himselfe
(
though
a
chiefe
patron
of
the
pretended
discipline
,
and
one
that
sheweth
himselfe
as
loath
as
may
be
,
in
Apoc
:
2.
that
the
Episcopall
degree
should
be
hence
proued
;
confesseth
,
that
by
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
(
&
so
of
the
rest
)
we
are
to
vnderstand
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
him
that
was
the
Prelate
,
or
President
of
the
Presbyterie
;
for
so
els-where
he
confesseth
,
that
Iustin
Martyre
calleth
him
,
In
Philip
:
1.
whom
others
call
the
Bishop
,
And
although
he
would
haue
vs
thinke
,
that
this
office
of
Presidentship
was
not
perpetuall
,
but
for
a
short
time
,
and
that
by
course
:
yet
he
would
haue
vs
also
note
out
of
1.
Tim:
5.19
.
where
Timothy
is
willed
,
Notandum
in
hoc
loco
Timotheum
in
Ephesino
Presbyterio
,
tum
fuisse
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
i.
Antistitem
,
vt
vocat
Iustinus
.
Bez
:
in
Tim.
5
:
19.
not
to
receiue
an
accusation
against
a
Presbyter
,
but
vnder
2.
or
3.
witnesses
;
that
Timothie
was
at
that
time
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
Iustine
calleth
him
,
that
is
Antistes
,
the
Prelate
or
President
in
the
Presbitery
at
Ephesus
.
Now
it
is
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
Timothy
was
sent
thither
,
to
be
President
among
them
as
his
course
only
or
turne
shuld
come
,
as
though
the
other
Presbyters
there
were
equall
to
him
.
Moreouer
,
we
are
able
to
shewe
by
the
testimonie
of
the
most
ancient
Authors
in
the
Church
,
who
were
these
singular
persons
,
whome
the
holie
Ghost
doth
call
the
Angell
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
,
and
likewise
at
Smyrna
.
For
as
before
this
time
,
Timothy
had
bene
the
Angell
,
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
Beza
,
confesseth
,
so
at
this
time
,
Onesimus
was
the
Pastor
of
Ephesus
,
as
Ignatius
testifieth
,
&
Polycarpus
the
Byshop
of
Smyrna
:
If
therefore
Onesimus
was
but
one
man
,
and
likewise
Polycarpus
:
then
wee
may
be
bold
to
conclude
,
that
the
Angell
of
the
Church
of
Ephesus
,
was
but
one
singular
person
,
and
likewise
the
Angell
of
Smyrna
;
and
so
of
the
rest
.
So
much
of
the
first
reason
.
The
second
indeed
(
saith
hee
)
necessarily
occasioneth
vs
to
enquire
what
manner
of
BB.
these
Angels
were
,
Ad
Pag.
What
〈◊〉
of
Bishop
Angels
〈◊〉
because
,
as
I
said
,
some
of
our
times
haue
made
a
question
of
that
,
which
in
former
ages
was
not
wont
to
be
called
into
controuersie
;
so
saith
hee
,
because
B.
Bilson
and
B.
Barlow
haue
fancied
to
themselues
another
sort
of
Bishops
,
then
either
the
scriptures
of
the
new
Testament
do
mention
,
or
any
sound
Diuines
doe
teach
thereout
.
This
then
is
the
controuersie
which
remaineth
to
be
decided
,
whether
sort
of
BB.
such
,
as
those
learned
Fathers
,
and
my selfe
,
do
defend
,
or
such
as
my
aduersary
and
his
adherents
do
stand
for
,
is
that
kinde
of
Bishop
,
which
hath
bene
but
of
late
deuised
,
and
neuer
till
of
late
obtruded
on
the
Church
.
And
on
which
side
the
iudicious
Reader
shall
see
better
euidence
,
&
more
pregnant
proofes
,
I
adiure
him
,
in
the
name
of
God
without
partialitie
,
to
assent
thereto
.
The
second
question
is
,
concerning
the
qualitie
of
the
function
,
viz:
that
the
calling
of
B.B.
(
who
are
here
meant
by
the
starres
and
Angels
)
is
lawfull
and
good
.
And
this
is
a
doctrine
so
necessarily
arising
out
of
the
Text
,
that
if
it
be
proued
that
Bishops
are
here
meant
by
starres
and
Angels
(
which
was
the
thing
I
vndertook
before
to
proue
,
&
now
doubt
not
by
Gods
help
to
make
euident
)
it
cannot
be
denied
but
that
their
calling
is
both
aproued
as
good
,
and
commended
as
excellent
.
Neither
would
the
refuter
haue
wrangled
with
this
passage
,
hauing
nothing
to
say
,
but
that
which
with
an
idle
Coccysme
he
oft
repeateth
,
and
in
this
place
is
altogether
impertinent
,
that
Diocesan
BB.
are
not
here
meant
:
were
it
not
that
he
was
resolued
before
hand
to
cauill
with
whatsoeuer
hee
should
find
in
my
booke
.
Especially
if
you
consider
,
that
elsewhere
hee
would
make
me
beleeue
the
proofe
of
this
doctrine
to
be
superfluous
,
the
former
point
being
once
proued
.
Serm.
Sect.
2.
Pag.
3.
For
the
deciding
of
the
former
question
,
two
things
are
in
the
wordes
offered
to
our
consideration
.
For
whereas
they
are
said
to
be
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
we
are
first
to
consider
what
maner
of
Churches
they
were
,
whereof
they
were
the
Angels
;
and
secondly
,
what
manner
of
preheminence
they
had
in
those
Churches
,
in
regard
wherof
they
are
called
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
.
As
touching
the
first
:
wee
are
to
trie
,
whether
these
Churches
whereof
they
were
Angels
or
BB.
were
Parishes
or
Dioceses
,
and
consequently
,
whether
they
were
Parishionall
or
Diocesan
BB.
&c:
to
pag.
5.
own
case
.
That
these
2.
things
are
offered
to
our
consideration
(
saith
the
refuter
)
wee
denie
not
:
but
if
he
had
walked
with
a
right
foote
in
the
path
hee
entred
into
,
To
whom
I
will
not
giue
that
answere
which
Festus
did
to
Paul
,
that
too
much
learning
hath
made
him
madde
:
for
hee
seemeth
not
to
be
greatly
sicke
of
that
disease
:
but
I
may
truely
say
that
too
much
anger
and
wrath
(
which
is
furor
breuis
)
which
he
vnmeasurably
sheweth
in
this
Section
,
hath
made
him
so
to
forget
himselfe
,
that
hee
wrangleth
without
witte
and
against
sense
.
Vnlesse
any
man
that
is
in
his
wittes
will
say
,
that
it
is
not
lawfull
for
a
Preacher
to
explane
his
Text.
For
what
was
it
that
in
this
Section
I
had
in
hand
?
was
it
not
to
indeuour
the
explication
of
my
Text
,
and
to
shew
what
manner
of
BB:
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
?
for
the
explication
wherof
,
what
could
more
fitly
be
propounded
,
then
the
consideration
of
these
2.
things
?
viz:
what
manner
of
Churches
they
were
,
whereof
they
were
the
Angels
or
BB:
and
what
manner
of
preheminence
they
had
in
those
Churches
,
in
regard
wherof
they
are
termed
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
;
that
from
my
Text
rightly
expounded
of
Diocesan
BB.
I
might
deduce
the
doctrine
of
the
lawfulnes
of
their
calling
,
and
from
it
inferre
the
vse
.
Indeed
if
I
had
bene
now
propounding
the
doctrine
gathered
out
of
the
Text
,
or
vrging
the
vse
therevpon
inferred
,
there
had
bene
reason
I
should
prooue
them
,
as
afterwards
I
doe
,
by
the
Text
already
explicated
.
But
when
I
am
about
to
explicate
the
Text
,
&
propound
the
points
that
are
therein
questionable
to
be
discussed
for
the
clearing
of
the
Text
,
who
seeth
not
that
the
handling
of
these
points
is
the
very
explication
of
the
Text
,
and
the
Text
that
which
is
explicated
?
And
if
the
Text
be
that
which
is
explicated
,
who
could
bee
so
senselesse
,
as
either
to
require
that
the
points
should
be
explaned
by
the
Text
,
or
to
finde
fault
,
that
by
the
handling
of
them
the
Text
is
explaned
.
But
now
hee
is
pleased
of
his
grace
to
consider
them
.
bitter
inueighing
,
scornefull
,
vpbraiding
,
ouerflowing
of
the
gall
,
with
spitting
out
vnsauoury
reproaches
,
making
a
calumnious
out-crie
in
the
ende
of
the
Section
:
and
much
adoe
he
had
,
not
to
apply
to
mee
that
saying
of
Salomon
,
(
with
whome
it
better
fitteth
,
let
the
Reader
iudge
)
Proud
,
haughtie
,
and
scornefull
is
his
name
that
worketh
in
his
arrogancie
wrath
,
Ad
Pag.
Pro.
21.
●●
and
in
the
ende
out
of
the
super-aboundance
of
his
charitie
,
hee
is
afraide
for
mee
,
that
I
care
not
to
loose
much
of
my
peace
within
:
that
all
I
here
speake
is
Night
worke
,
proceeding
from
great
distemper
of
the
braine
,
&c.
Was
my
aduersaries
backe
or
conscience
rather
galled
,
was
hee
guiltie
to
himselfe
,
of
being
one
of
the
coyners
of
those
newe
opinions
,
that
hee
thus
flingeth
and
kicketh
,
when
they
are
so
gentlie
touched
?
Who
,
knowing
that
those
Assertions
were
some
of
those
16.
positions
,
for
the
tryall
whereof
,
the
vnchristian
and
vnmodest
offer
of
disputation
was
made
,
which
are
there
magnified
,
as
beeing
such
chiefe
points
in
controuersie
betweene
vs
and
the
Papists
,
that
if
in
them
the
BB.
(
ioyning
as
they
pretend
,
with
the
Papists
)
haue
the
truth
;
then
extreme
wrong
is
offered
to
the
Church
of
Rome
,
by
our
separating
therefrom
,
and
all
Protestant
Churches
are
for
that
cause
Schismaticall
:
that
if
the
Priests
and
Iesuites
can
satisfie
them
in
these
points
,
they
would
bee
reconciled
to
the
Church
of
Rome
:
Who
,
I
say
,
knowing
this
,
could
with
more
mildnesse
haue
spoken
of
such
Schismaticall
nouelties
?
For
where
hee
saith
,
that
almost
all
of
them
haue
bene
alwayes
generallie
maintained
and
practised
,
by
all
soundly
reformed
Churches
,
hee
seemeth
,
either
not
to
care
what
hee
speaketh
,
or
by
soundly
reformed
Churches
,
to
meane
none
but
Brownists
,
or
such
like
.
Betweene
whom
and
these
vnchristian
and
immodest
challengers
,
there
went
as
wee
say
but
a
paire
of
sheeres
;
These
,
remaining
after
a
sort
in
the
peece
;
the
other
,
beeing
by
open
Schisme
cut
off
:
Which
againe
they
haue
manifested
in
their
late
petition
to
the
Kings
Maiestie
:
they
may
be
tollerated
Schismatickes
.
But
to
let
passe
their
new-coyned
positions
,
(
excepting
those
that
concerne
this
cause
,
)
with
the
Libellers
bitter
wranglings
,
and
vaine
ianglings
,
There
are
two
things
in
answere
to
this
Section
,
which
I
may
not
let
passe
:
the
one
,
is
his
defence
of
the
challengers
;
the
other
,
a
great
aduantage
taken
against
a
word
,
which
as
hee
saith
,
I
dropt
by
the
way
.
His
defence
is
,
against
that
calumnious
outcrie
,
as
hee
calleth
it
,
Hee
answereth
,
that
the
challengers
hold
the
King
and
his
Houshold
to
bee
an
entire
Church
of
it selfe
.
But
tell
mee
,
doe
they
hold
it
to
bee
a
true
Church
?
that
so
the
King
may
be
thought
to
be
a
member
of
a
true
Church
.
Or
if
they
doe
;
Why
may
they
not
with
the
like
reason
acknowledge
a
Bishop
and
his
familie
,
to
bee
an
entire
familie
by
themselues
?
But
it
is
no
matter
what
they
holde
,
vnlesse
they
were
more
learned
and
iudicious
.
The
aduantage
which
is
taken
at
my
words
had
need
to
bee
verie
great
,
Ad
pa
〈…〉
Sec
〈…〉
Their
〈◊〉
that
by
sertion
〈◊〉
cesan
〈◊〉
Popelin
●●swered
.
or
else
the
refuter
and
his
copartners
doe
shewe
themselues
to
be
very
weake
men
:
seeing
it
is
fiue
times
repeated
in
print
;
once
in
their
late
petition
,
with
great
amplifications
;
once
in
the
Abortiue
booke
,
with
this
note
in
the
margent
,
sic
tu
beas
amicos
?
Thrice
in
this
Booke
,
with
great
triumphes
and
insultations
:
not
onely
in
the
treatise
it selfe
,
but
also
euery
where
in
the
margent
,
demanding
with
scorne
,
in
this
place
,
Is
this
your
kindnesse
to
your
friends
?
in
the
second
,
sic
tu
beas
amicos
?
in
the
third
,
quid
facias
odio
,
sic
vbi
amore
noces
?
The
Reader
must
needes
expect
some
great
matter
,
Montes
perbi
su●●●
Aug:
〈◊〉
Psal.
10
▪
Quid
d
〈…〉
tanto
fe●●
hic
prom●●●sor
hiat●
.
parturiunt
montes
,
nascetur
ridiculus
mus
.
Horat:
de
art
:
Poet.
seeing
these
hilles
thus
to
swell
,
The
words
whereat
they
take
aduantage
were
these
.
Least
they
might
seeme
to
set
vp
an
absolute
Popeling
in
euerie
parish
,
who
should
haue
not
onely
supreame
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
they
adioyne
to
him
(
that
is
,
to
their
Parish
Bishop
)
a
Consistorie
of
Lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
.
Out
of
which
words
they
frame
this
proposition
;
They
which
haue
not
onely
supreme
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
are
absolute
Popelings
:
hereto
they
adde
an
assumption
of
their
owne
,
All
Diocesan
Bishops
,
haue
not
onely
supreme
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
;
and
from
thence
inferre
their
victorious
&
triumphing
conclusion
;
therefore
all
Diocesan
Bishops
are
absolute
Popelings
.
And
this
,
they
say
,
is
mine
owne
reason
,
whereby
I
make
Diocesan
Bishops
absolute
Popelings
.
Mine
owne
reason
?
in
which
there
is
nothing
mine
,
but
the
proposition
,
which
also
is
stretched
beyond
,
not
onely
my
meaning
,
but
euen
my
words
?
this
proposition
(
I
denie
not
)
may
bee
framed
out
of
my
words
:
they
who
giue
to
a
Bishop
,
not
onely
supreme
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
doe
seeme
to
set
vp
an
absolute
Popeling
.
From
which
words
,
if
they
had
bene
retained
,
this
might
haue
bene
concluded
,
if
I
did
giue
to
our
Bishops
,
both
supreme
and
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
as
I
doe
not
,
that
then
I
might
seeme
to
set
vp
absolute
Popelings
.
But
it
were
well
with
my
aduersaries
,
if
to
seeme
,
and
to
bee
,
were
all
one
.
And
yet
,
I
doe
not
so
much
as
seeme
,
to
anie
that
is
wise
and
indifferent
,
to
make
our
Bishops
,
as
they
say
,
absolute
Popelings
.
The
application
of
this
to
the
BB.
is
made
in
the
assumption
,
which
is
both
false
and
foolish
,
and
is
not
mine
,
but
theirs
.
They
say
,
it
is
not
onely
impleyed
and
intended
,
but
is
one
of
the
chiefe
and
principall
points
I
vndertake
to
proue
throughout
my
Sermon
.
But
their
saying
is
false
and
friuolous
.
How
doe
they
prooue
it
?
For
the
question
beeing
(
saith
our
refuter
)
whether
the
Churches
should
bee
gouerned
by
Pastors
and
Elders
,
or
by
Diocesan
Bishops
:
whereas
they
say
,
by
Pastors
and
Elders
,
adioyning
the
Elders
to
the
Pastors
,
and
making
them
both
subiect
to
the
whole
congregation
,
&c.
M.D.
taketh
all
from
them
all
,
and
putteth
the
reynes
into
his
Diocesan
alone
,
so
making
him
by
his
owne
rule
the
absolute
Popeling
.
Here
I
intreate
the
Reader
,
to
keepe
in
store
for
future
vse
,
the
state
of
the
question
,
as
it
is
here
propounded
by
the
refuter
.
In
the
meane
time
,
let
vs
after
his
owne
manner
examine
his
argument
.
The
question
being
whether
the
Churches
should
be
gouerned
by
Pastors
and
Elders
(
for
I
will
for
your
credites
sake
leaue
out
that
Brownisticall
and
Anabaptisticall
dotage
concerning
the
chiefe
authoritie
of
the
people
)
or
by
Diocesan
BB.
whosoeuer
taketh
all
from
Pastors
and
Elders
,
and
(
shall
I
adde
)
the
people
too
,
and
putteth
the
reynes
into
the
hands
of
the
Diocesan
alone
,
he
giueth
him
not
onely
supreme
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
and
so
maketh
him
an
absolute
Popeling
.
But
the
question
being
as
I
said
,
M.
D.
taketh
all
authoritie
from
the
Pastors
,
Elders
and
people
,
and
putteth
the
reynes
into
the
hands
of
the
Diocesan
Bishop
alone
.
Therefore
M.
D.
giueth
to
the
Diocesan
,
not
onely
supreme
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
and
so
by
his
owne
rule
maketh
him
an
absolute
Popeling
.
Sect.
10.
To
let
you
see
,
As
touching
the
pastors
of
parishes
,
I
leaue
to
them
that
pastorall
power
,
which
euer
was
granted
to
them
since
the
first
distinguishing
of
parishes
,
and
allotting
of
seuerall
Presbyters
to
them
,
that
is
to
say
,
both
po●●statem
ordinis
,
the
power
of
order
▪
as
they
are
Ministers
,
&
potestatem
iurisdictionis
spiritualis
seu
internae
▪
]
a
power
of
spirituall
and
inward
iurisdiction
,
to
rule
their
flocke
after
a
priuate
manner
,
as
it
were
in
foro
conscientiae
,
in
the
court
of
conscience
,
as
they
are
pastors
of
that
flocke
.
By
which
power
they
rule
and
guide
their
flocke
,
not
onely
in
their
publike
Ministery
,
but
also
in
their
priuate
attendance
,
or
if
yee
will
so
call
it
,
superintendence
,
as
occasion
shal
be
offered
.
For
as
touching
their
publicke
ministery
;
they
are
the
leaders
and
guides
of
the
people
in
Gods
seruice
;
they
preach
the
word
,
therein
teaching
,
confuting
,
instructing
,
reprouing
,
correcting
their
hearers
;
they
administer
the
sacraments
,
as
the
stewards
of
Gods
house
;
by
the
one
,
admitting
into
Gods
family
,
those
which
belong
to
his
couenant
;
by
the
other
,
nourishing
the
houshold
of
Christ
,
in
due
season
:
and
both
by
the
word
and
sacraments
,
exercising
so
much
of
the
power
of
the
keyes
,
In
the
booke
of
ordination
it
is
presupposed
,
that
a
Minister
may
and
ought
to
Minister
the
doctrine
and
sacraments
and
the
discipline
of
Christ
,
as
the
Lord
hath
commanded
,
and
as
this
realme
hath
receiued
the
same
.
Fol.
12.
interrog.
2.
The
second
vntruth
.
as
of
right
belongeth
to
them
,
as
well
binding
the
notoriously
scandalous
and
impenitent
,
by
denouncing
the
threatnings
of
God
against
them
in
the
word
,
and
by
repelling
them
for
the
time
from
the
sacrament
;
as
also
loosing
the
penitent
belieuers
,
by
applying
to
them
the
gracious
promises
of
the
Gospell
,
and
adding
thereto
the
sacraments
as
seales
.
So
that
all
power
is
not
taken
from
the
pastors
:
neither
is
all
giuen
to
the
Bishop
alone
.
For
in
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
,
others
are
ioyned
with
him
:
some
vnder
him
,
some
aboue
him
.
Vnder
him
,
in
the
mother
Church
or
Cathedrall
,
the
Deane
and
Chapter
,
which
in
the
ancient
Church
as
hereafter
wee
shall
shewe
,
were
called
Archpresbyters
,
and
presbyteri
ciuitatis
:
in
the
other
Churches
of
the
Diocesse
diuided
into
seuerall
precincts
,
the
Archdeacons
and
rurall
Deanes
,
gouerning
them
as
the
Chorepiscopi
were
wont
in
the
primitiue
Church
.
Not
to
speake
of
the
Chancellers
and
Officials
,
the
former
being
adioyned
to
the
Bishops
,
the
latter
to
the
Archdeacons
,
by
reason
of
their
skill
in
the
Ecclesiasticall
lawes
.
Aboue
him
,
not
onely
the
Archbishop
and
his
courts
,
but
also
the
prouinciall
Synodes
,
assembling
chiefly
for
ordaining
Ecclesiasticall
Canons
and
constitutions
,
by
which
the
Bishops
are
to
rule
,
and
to
be
ruled
.
In
making
whereof
,
though
the
Ecclesiasticall
authoritie
especially
appeareth
,
yet
neither
all
the
Bishops
alone
,
and
much
lesse
any
one
Bishop
,
concludeth
any
thing
,
but
with
the
consent
of
the
Presbytery
.
And
therefore
this
may
to
the
former
authoritie
of
Ministers
be
added
,
that
in
making
Ecclesiasticall
lawes
,
they
haue
a
voyce
,
either
by
themselues
,
if
they
be
sent
to
the
Synode
,
or
by
such
as
themselues
shall
choose
.
Sect.
11.
In
the
proposition
likewise
are
two
vntruthes
.
Indeed
,
But
that
which
hee
saith
of
my
ascribing
the
supreme
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
to
the
Diocesan
Bishops
,
that
is
the
supreme
and
the
loudest
lye
,
and
maketh
the
assumption
of
his
chiefe
Syllogisme
most
euidently
false
.
Doe
I
,
or
any
of
vs
say
,
that
the
Diocesan
Bishop
hath
the
supreme
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
?
doth
not
our
Church
subiect
the
Bishop
to
the
Archbishop
,
and
prouinciall
Synodes
?
doth
not
appeale
lye
from
the
sentence
of
the
Bishop
to
the
Archbishop
,
and
likewise
from
him
to
the
Kings
Delegates
?
doth
not
himselfe
acknowledge
pag.
69.
the
Bishops
so
to
be
subiected
to
the
two
Archbishops
,
as
that
if
we
may
iudge
by
the
outward
appearance
and
practise
,
we
may
in
his
opinion
seeme
to
haue
but
two
Churches
,
and
those
prouinciall
,
the
one
of
Canterbury
,
and
the
other
of
Yorke
?
doe
wee
not
all
,
with
one
consent
,
acknowledge
,
the
Kings
Maiestie
to
haue
the
supreme
authoritie
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
?
and
whereas
the
greatest
authoritie
of
Churchmen
is
exercised
in
Synodes
,
and
the
greatest
authoritie
of
Synodes
is
the
making
of
Church-lawes
;
yet
the
ratification
of
them
we
submit
to
the
King
(
according
to
the
Practise
of
the
[
(a)
](A20733-e8730-b)
(a)
Euseb.
in
vita
Constant
.
lib.
3.
saith
that
Constantine
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Concil
▪
Tol●t
.
●
.
in
sin●
,
edict
.
reg.
de
confirm
.
concil
.
Conc.
Const.
5.
Rogamus
clemētiātisam
saith
the
counsell
to
the
Emperour
Theodos.
vt
per
litras
〈◊〉
pietatis
ratum
esse
jubeas
conf●●mesque
concilij
decre●um
.
Con.
Chalc.
●ct.
3.
sacro
〈…〉
edicto
〈◊〉
Marti●us
the
Emperour
〈…〉
confirmamus
.
ancient
Churches
liuing
vnder
Orthodoxall
Kings
)
in
so
much
that
they
,
and
all
our
Church-lawes
,
are
called
the
Kings
[
(b)
](A20733-e8880-b)
(b)
Sir
Edw.
Cooke
do
iure
regis
Ecclesiastico
.
Ecclesiasticall
lawe
.
Now
then
,
if
neither
I
take
all
authoritie
from
the
pastors
,
nor
giue
all
to
the
Bishops
,
nor
ascribe
vnto
them●
sole
,
nor
supreme
authoritie
;
what
haue
the
libellers
gained
by
all
their
triumphing
outcryes
,
but
the
manifestation
of
their
owne
manifold
vntruthes
?
Yea
but
the
title
of
absolute
Popelings
agreeth
better
to
our
Diocesan
BB.
then
to
their
parish
BB.
Neither
did
I
say
that
they
are
such
,
but
that
if
they
did
not
ioyne
vnto
them
a
consistory
of
Elders
,
they
would
seeme
to
set
vp
,
not
onely
a
Popeling
,
but
an
absolute
Popeling
in
euery
parish
▪
a
petite
pope
indeed
their
pastor
is
in
regard
of
that
supremacy
they
ascribe
vnto
him
,
(
making
him
the
supreme
Ecclesiasticall
officer
in
euery
Church
)
which
wee
deny
to
our
Bishops
,
and
were
it
not
,
that
hee
hath
a
consistory
ioyned
to
him
,
as
the
Pope
hath
of
Cardinals
,
hee
would
bee
more
then
a
pope
.
And
againe
,
whereas
our
Bishops
are
to
be
guided
by
lawes
,
which
by
their
superiors
are
imposed
vpon
them
;
their
pastors
with
their
Elders
and
people
hauing
(
as
the
Pope
saith
he
hath
)
a
supreme
,
immediate
and
independent
authoritie
sufficient
for
the
gouernement
of
their
Churches
in
all
causes
Ecclesiastical
,
and
therefore
for
making
of
Ecclesiasticall
lawes
,
they
are
to
be
gouerned
by
their
owne
lawes
.
For
the
chiefe
thing
in
Ecclesiasticall
gouernement
,
is
the
authoritie
to
prescribe
lawes
Ecclesiasticall
.
If
therefore
each
parish
hath
(
as
they
say
it
hath
)
sufficient
authoritie
within
it selfe
,
for
the
gouernement
of
it selfe
in
all
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
immediately
deriued
from
Christ
;
then
questionlesse
they
haue
authoritie
to
prescribe
lawes
Ecclesiasticall
.
And
as
the
Pope
doth
not
acknowledge
the
superioritie
of
a
synode
to
impose
lawes
vpon
him
,
no
more
doe
they
.
They
will
giue
synodes
leaue
to
deliberate
of
that
which
may
be
best
,
H.I.
&
supplic
.
an
1609.
and
to
perswade
thereto
,
but
they
will
not
be
ruled
by
them
.
As
for
the
Kings
supremacie
in
causes
Ecclesiastical
,
how
it
may
stand
with
their
maine
assertion
,
wherein
they
ascribe
to
euery
parish
an
independent
authoritie
immediately
deriued
from
Christ
,
sufficient
for
the
gouernement
of
it selfe
in
all
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
I
will
not
dispute
.
Serm.
Sect.
3.
pag.
5.
that
they
had
this
name
Angels
,
in
regard
of
their
generall
calling
of
the
ministerie
,
not
because
of
any
soueraignetie
or
supremacie
ouer
other
their
fellow
Ministers
,
as
(
he
saith
)
I
imply
here
,
and
plainely
but
vntruely
affirme
afterwards
.
In
which
fewe
words
are
2.
vntruthes
.
Whereof
the
former
is
an
errour
,
that
they
are
to
tearmed
in
respect
of
their
generall
calling
of
the
ministery
.
For
though
to
be
called
Angels
,
generally
agreeth
to
all
Ministers
:
yet
for
one
and
but
one
among
many
Ministers
in
one
and
the
same
Church
to
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
called
the
Angell
of
that
Church
,
is
not
a
common
title
belonging
to
all
Ministers
in
regard
of
their
generall
calling
,
but
a
peculiar
stile
belonging
to
one
,
who
had
singular
preheminence
aboue
the
rest
,
Conf.
wit
.
Hart.
pag●
461.
Act.
20.1
Apoc.
2.1
.
that
is
to
say
,
a
Bishop
.
So
saith
D.
Raynolds
:
in
the
Church
of
Ephesus
,
though
it
had
sundry
Elders
and
pastors
to
guide
it
;
yet
among
those
sundry
was
there
one
chiefe
,
whom
our
Sauiour
calleth
the
Angell
of
the
Church
,
and
writeth
,
that
to
him
which
by
him
the
rest
should
know
.
And
this
is
he
whom
afterward
in
the
primitiue
Church
the
fathers
called
Bishop
.
As
touching
the
latter
:
where
he
saith
that
I
doe
here
imply
that
the
Bishops
haue
a
soueraignety
or
supremacy
ouer
other
Ministers
,
and
afterwards
doe
affirme
it
plainely
,
that
plainely
is
a
plaine
lie
.
Soueraignetie
and
supremacy
ouer
other
Ministers
none
but
Papists
giue
to
their
Bishop
,
and
they
to
none
but
to
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
Superioritie
indeed
belongeth
to
Bishops
ouer
other
Ministers
,
and
so
much
is
intended
in
this
place
.
To
the
reason
,
Ad
pag.
7.
The
refuter
mistaking
the
reason
and
craftily
concealing
th●
diuision
whic●
is
among
them
)
is
bol●
to
charge
〈◊〉
with
foure
vntruthes
.
if
it
had
beene
obscure
,
hee
should
haue
answered
,
as
Aristotle
teacheth
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
I
vnderstand
not
.
For
better
were
it
to
plead
ignorance
,
then
to
wrangle
with
that
he
doth
not
,
or
will
not
vnderstand
.
For
I
doe
plainely
note
in
the
Sermon
two
sorts
of
disciplinarians
,
who
are
opposite
vnto
vs
in
this
controuersie
;
the
one
,
a
new
sect
of
disciplinarians
lately
risen
amongst
vs
,
(
who
haue
coyned
the
new-found
parish
discipline
,
which
commeth
nearer
the
practise
of
the
Brownists
,
then
of
any
well
ordered
Church
)
of
whom
I
spake
in
the
former
point
:
the
other
,
a
sort
of
graue
and
learned
diuines
,
such
as
Caluin
and
Beza
,
&c.
who
stand
for
that
discipline
,
which
is
practised
in
Geneua
,
and
some
other
reformed
Churches
;
shewing
that
as
they
doe
not
consent
with
our
newe
disciplinarians
in
the
former
point
,
so
they
dissent
from
vs
in
the
latter
,
touching
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
.
The
refuter
vnderstandeth
all
as
a
grant
made
by
them
,
whereof
some
part
hee
acknowledgeth
to
be
true
,
the
rest
he
reiecteth
as
false
.
And
though
in
neither
he
doe
vnderstand
what
was
intended
,
yet
hee
is
as
bold
as
blind
Bayard
to
blunder
out
this
blustering
speech
,
that
with
one
breath
I
blowe
out
both
truth
and
falshood
.
Neither
doubteth
he
,
though
meerely
ignorant
of
that
which
he
auoucheth
,
to
charge
me
with
foure
vntruthes
;
denying
1.
that
they
grant
Bishops
which
here
are
called
Angels
,
to
haue
beene
set
ouer
Dioceses
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
whole
citie
and
countrey
adioyning
.
2
That
they
teach
the
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
to
be
lay
or
annuall
.
3
That
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
were
nothing
else
but
presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
.
4
That
their
presidentshippe
was
onely
for
a
weeke
or
a
moneth
,
and
that
by
course
as
being
common
to
them
in
their
turnes
.
For
the
manifestation
of
the
truth
in
all
these
points
,
I
shall
not
need
to
seeke
further
then
to
the
writings
of
Caluin
and
Beza
.
Sect.
14.
As
touching
the
first
,
Caluin
teacheth
,
that
in
the
primitiue
Church
(
when
in
the
gouernement
thereof
there
was
nothing
almost
dissonant
from
Gods
word
)
each
citie
had
a
colledge
of
Presbyters
,
Inst.
lib.
4.
c.
4.
who
were
Pastors
and
Doctors
;
and
that
to
euery
citie
was
assigned
a
certaine
region
,
which
should
receiue
their
Presbyters
(
meaning
the
pastors
of
seuerall
parisnes
)
from
thence
,
and
should
be
accoumpied
as
part
of
that
Church
.
Euery
Colledge
was
subiect
to
some
one
Bishop
.
But
if
the
countrey
,
which
was
vnder
his
Bishopricke
,
was
larger
,
then
that
he
could
in
all
places
discharge
all
the
functions
of
a
Bishop
;
in
certaine
places
throughout
the
countrey
were
appointed
certaine
Presbyters
,
who
in
busines
of
lesse
importance
should
be
in
his
steed
.
These
were
called
Chorepiscopi
,
because
in
the
prouince
they
represented
the
Bishop
.
Likewise
[
(a)
](A20733-e9620-b)
(a)
de
gradib
.
ministr.
c.
24.
Beza
teacheth
,
that
the
first
distribution
of
the
Church
into
Dioceses
,
was
framed
according
to
the
diuision
of
the
prouinces
vnder
the
Romane
Empier
,
into
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
it
were
precincts
of
gouernement
,
which
Plinie
calleth
conuentus
&
iurisdictiones
,
in
the
chiefe
cities
whereof
the
presidents
kept
their
courts
of
iudgment
,
of
which
sort
Pliny
[
(b)
](A20733-e9680-b)
(b)
Plin.
lib.
5.
cap.
29.
&
30.
reckneth
9.
in
Asia
the
lesse
,
fiue
whereof
are
mentioned
in
the
Apocalypse
(
viz.
Laodicea
,
Sardes
,
Ephesus
,
Smyrna
,
Pergamus
.
Neither
are
we
,
saith
he
,
to
imagine
that
this
order
at
the
first
proceeded
rather
from
a
councill
or
decree
of
the
ancient
fathers
assembled
together
,
then
from
the
very
instinct
of
nature
,
and
instigation
of
necessitie
.
Now
saith
hee
,
in
the
chiefe
Towne
of
euery
Diocesse
,
the
[
(e(
](A20733-e9790-b)
(e(
So
by
A●●brose
his
w●●●rant
hee
calleth
a
B●sho●
who
saith
th●●●
Timothie
wa●
such
a
one
at
Ephesus
.
first
Presbiter
,
who
afterwards
by
a
dangerous
Catachresis
,
was
called
a
Bishoppe
,
in
the
daily
common
iurisdiction
,
Praeerat
caeteris
,
tum
vrbanis
tum
alijs
eius
regionis
,
com-Presbyteris
,
id
est
,
totj
Diocoesi
;
was
President
ouer
his
fellow
Presbyters
,
both
of
the
Citie
and
Countrey
,
that
is
,
the
whole
Diocese
.
And
because
sometimes
the
Countrey
was
of
larger
extent
,
then
that
all
vpon
euery
occasion
,
could
conueniently
meete
in
the
Citie
;
and
forasmuch
,
as
other
small
Cities
and
Townes
did
neede
commune
inspection
or
ouersight
,
they
also
had
their
Chorepiscopi
,
that
is
,
Countrey-Bishops
,
or
Vice-Bishops
.
For
the
second
,
[
2
](A20733-e9850-b)
2
That
the
onely
gouerning
Elders
be
of
the
Laitie
,
and
annuall
officers
.
For
whereas
Caluin
diuideth
the
Church
into
two
Orders
or
Ranks
,
Clerum
,
sc.
&
plebem
;
the
Clergie
and
Laitie
,
hee
plainely
saith
,
that
these
Elders
are
chosen
from
among
the
Laitie
.
And
forasmuch
as
being
chosen
,
they
doe
not
become
to
bee
of
the
Clergie
,
Inst.
lib
:
4
:
c.
12.
Sect.
1.
li.
4.
c.
3.
Se.
8
hee
must
needes
meane
,
that
they
still
continue
to
be
of
the
Laitie
.
And
that
hee
thought
they
should
be
annuall
,
the
order
of
the
Church
of
Geneua
by
him
set
downe
,
doth
declare
.
Both
which
points
Beza
acknowledgeth
together
.
de
grad:
Ministr
:
c.
11.
In
this
Citie
of
Geneua
saith
hee
,
those
gouerning
Elders
,
(
which
in
the
title
of
the
chapter
hee
called
annuall
)
are
chosen
yearely
,
not
of
the
baser
sort
of
the
people
,
but
out
of
the
very
order
of
25.60
.
and
200.
men
:
(
which
be
the
councills
of
state
in
Geneua
,
2.
being
chosen
out
of
the
25.4
.
out
of
the
60.
and
6.
out
of
200.
)
not
without
the
knowledge
and
consent
of
the
people
:
I
say
,
euery
yeare
newe
are
chosen
,
or
the
olde
confirmed
.
So
euery
where
(
saith
hee
)
in
other
free
Churches
,
according
to
the
condition
of
the
place
,
the
like
choice
is
obserued
.
For
of
the
Laitie
,
some
are
chosen
to
this
Eldership
in
Scotland
yearely
,
in
the
Low-Countreyes
they
are
chosen
for
2.
yeares
,
the
halfe
of
them
being
changed
euery
yeare
.
Now
it
may
not
be
doubted
,
but
that
those
which
bee
of
the
25.
or
60.
or
200.
in
Geneua
,
being
all
States-men
(
as
their
gouerning-Elders
Bee
)
are
Lay-men
.
great
consideration
must
bee
had
(
saith
Beza
)
that
Princes
and
Noble
men
,
and
such
as
haue
authoritie
and
preheminence
in
the
Church
,
bee
chosen
to
be
of
the
Seignorie
.
And
surely
,
saith
he
,
in
another
place
,
(
prouing
that
there
ought
to
bee
such
Elders
of
the
Laitie
ioyned
to
the
Ministers
)
vnlesse
some
chosen
men
out
of
the
bodie
of
the
whole
congregation
,
The
Presby●●●●●
&
〈◊〉
.
pag:
112.
doe
sit
in
that
assemblie
,
whereby
the
whole
Church
is
gouerned
,
Scarcely
shall
the
vniuersall
name
of
that
Church
agree
to
that
assemblie
,
wherewith
notwithstanding
Christ
adorneth
it
:
Namely
,
because
they
being
chosen
out
of
all
the
parts
of
the
whole
Church
,
should
represent
the
whole
Church
.
His
reason
therefore
is
,
that
as
the
whole
Church
consisteth
of
the
Clergie
and
Laytie
:
So
that
Senate
,
which
is
to
represent
the
whole
Church
,
must
consist
not
onely
of
the
Clergie
,
but
of
the
Laitie
also
.
And
in
another
place
he
prooueth
by
a
necessary
disiunction
(
as
he
thinketh
)
that
if
there
must
bee
a
Presbyterie
at
all
,
De
grad:
Minist:
cap.
11
pag:
64.
§
Sect.
16.
a
good
part
thereof
must
be
chosen
out
of
the
Laitie
.
Whence
doe
they
thinke
they
are
to
be
chosen
,
if
not
of
them
whom
they
call
Lay-men
?
&c.
Thirdly
,
that
they
make
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
or
ancient
BB.
in
respect
of
their
superioritie
,
[
3
](A20733-e10330-b)
3
They
held
that
the
Angels
were
but
Presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
.
only
Presidents
of
the
presbyterie
,
&c.
Nothing
is
more
plaine
.
The
Presbyters
(
saith
Caluin
)
in
euery
Citie
chose
one
out
of
their
number
,
to
whom
specially
they
giue
the
title
of
a
Bishop
,
least
from
equalitie
(
as
is
wont
)
dissentions
should
arise
.
But
yet
the
Bishop
was
not
so
in
honour
and
dignitie
superiour
,
Inst.
lib.
4.
c.
4.
Sect:
2.
Vid
T.
C●li
:
1.109
.
&
110.
Eccles.
disciplia
.
ang
,
pag:
181.182
.
that
hee
had
dominion
ouer
his
colleagues
.
But
what
office
the
Consul
had
in
the
Senate
,
to
propound
matters
,
to
aske
voyces
,
to
goe
before
others
in
counselling
,
admonishing
,
exhorting
,
by
his
authoritie
to
rule
the
whole
action
,
and
to
execute
that
which
by
common
counsell
hath
bene
decreed
,
that
office
did
the
B.
beare
,
in
the
assemblie
of
the
Presbyters
.
Againe
,
euery
Colledge
of
Presbyters
onely
for
preseruation
of
peace
and
good
order
,
were
subiect
to
one
Bishop
,
who
did
so
goe
before
others
in
dignitie
,
that
himselfe
was
subiect
to
the
assemblie
of
the
bretheren
,
meaning
the
Presbyterie
.
Caluin
therefore
maketh
the
Angels
or
ancient
Bishops
,
nothing
else
but
presidents
of
the
Presbyterie
,
or
moderators
of
the
Assemblie
.
Beza
,
In
Apoc.
2.1
as
by
each
of
these
Angels
he
vnderstandeth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
President
of
the
Presbyterie
,
(
as
before
I
noted
;
So
he
will
acknowledge
the
first
Bishops
,
de
grad:
Ministr
:
cap.
20
114.123
.
to
haue
bene
no
other
but
presidents
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
,
Presidents
ouer
the
assemblies
of
Pastors
,
(
to
wit
,
of
diuerse
Parishes
,
belonging
to
one
Church
)
whose
authoritie
he
will
acknowledge
to
bee
nothing
else
but
the
Dignitie
of
the
first
place
in
the
sacred
Assemblie
,
with
the
right
of
ruling
the
common
action
,
without
any
dominion
ouer
those
which
sit
with
him
.
And
such
a
presidentship
hee
acknowledgeth
to
bee
a
Diuine
ordinance
.
And
whereas
Ierome
saith
,
there
was
a
time
when
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
presbyters
,
hee
would
not
haue
him
so
vnderstood
,
as
if
they
had
not
alwayes
a
president
.
D.
Sarauia
objecteth
,
that
in
Saint
Iohns
time
,
these
7.
Churches
of
Asia
had
by
Diuine
ordinance
7.
BB.
set
ouer
them
,
whome
hee
calleth
the
Angels
;
Beza
replieth
;
Wherefore
vrge
you
this
against
Ierome
&
vs
?
For
when
he
saith
,
that
the
Churches
at
the
first
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
,
wee
may
not
thinke
he
was
so
vnwise
,
as
to
dreame
that
none
of
the
Presbyters
was
President
of
the
assemblie
.
And
most
plainely
in
the
next
Chapter
.
As
touching
the
first
Presbyter
(
saith
hee
)
or
Bishop
of
the
Diocesse
,
what
his
Dignitie
was
,
and
wherein
it
did
consist
,
I
haue
often
shewed
;
that
it
was
wholly
of
Order
,
and
not
of
degree
.
Euery
one
of
his
fellow-Presbyters
or
Pastors
ruling
his
own
Parish
,
and
that
first
Presbyter
or
Byshop
of
the
Diocesse
,
hauing
a
super-intendencie
or
in-spection
ouer
all
his
fellow-Presbyters
,
thus
farre
,
as
to
admonish
them
of
their
dutie
;
as
also
hauing
assembled
his
Presbyterie
,
either
on
set
dayes
,
or
extraordinarilie
,
to
propound
matters
to
them
concerning
the
Diocesse
,
or
the
Censure
of
manners
,
to
aske
their
voices
,
to
pronounce
what
to
the
rest
seemeth
good
.
From
which
iudgement
,
it
was
lawfull
to
appeale
to
a
Prouinciall
Synode
.
As
touching
the
last
point
,
what
the
learned
disciplinarians
hold
,
[
(a)
](A20733-e10890-b)
(a)
Sec
T.C.
lib.
1.110
.
Eccl.
discipl
:
Ang.
pag.
184.
Beza
often
vrgeth
this
point
,
that
the
ancient
BB:
had
this
presidentship
,
but
for
a
short
time
,
and
that
by
course
.
And
as
hee
professeth
the
presidentship
in
the
Presbytery
of
euery
Church
,
to
be
a
diuine
ordinance
,
&
immutable
;
So
hee
acknowledgeth
those
BB:
alone
for
diuine
,
who
had
this
presidentship
but
for
a
short
time
and
by
course
.
How
be
it
hee
confesseth
,
that
howsoeuer
,
the
order
it selfe
,
De
Minist:
grad:
cap
:
23
pag:
142.
ca
:
141.153
.
(
Namely
,
that
there
should
bee
a
president
in
each
presbyterie
)
is
perpetuall
and
immutable
,
as
beeing
essentiall
:
Yet
ordinis
modum
;
the
manner
of
this
order
:
though
it
were
a
diuine
ordinance
,
that
it
should
bee
by
course
and
for
a
short
time
,
was
variable
,
as
being
but
accidentall
.
In
what
sense
it
is
to
be
taken
,
that
Ierome
saith
,
The
Churches
in
the
beginning
,
were
gouerned
by
the
common
Counsell
of
the
Presbyters
.
Ambrose
teacheth
;
namely
so
,
as
there
should
bee
one
among
them
,
not
superiour
in
degree
,
but
first
in
the
dignitie
of
Order
and
Honour
;
to
which
office
euery
one
should
succeede
in
their
turnes
.
Now
,
what
space
of
time
was
prescribed
to
this
Presidentship
,
And
after
,
speaking
of
that
change
which
Ierome
noteth
,
hee
giueth
this
reason
thereof
;
That
the
Primacie
of
Order
,
by
course
or
turnes
of
mutuall
succession
,
was
by
experience
found
not
sufficient
for
auoyding
of
Schisme
:
the
dignitie
of
this
Primacie
being
communicated
vnto
each
of
the
Pastors
in
their
turnes
.
Therefore
that
which
had
bene
common
to
all
in
their
turnes
,
it
was
thought
good
to
translate
vnto
one
;
and
that
one
chosen
by
the
iudgement
of
the
whole
Presbitery
.
Let
the
refuter
therefore
take
home
those
foure
vntruths
to
himselfe
,
which
hee
obiected
against
mee
;
whether
out
of
vnmannerly
ignorance
,
or
rather
cunning-rudenes
.
For
it
can
hardly
be
thought
that
such
bolde
challengers
of
the
BB.
and
so
confident
an
vndertaker
of
this
busines
,
could
simply
be
ignorant
of
these
things
:
And
verilie
,
for
my
part
,
I
was
of
opinion
,
till
I
sawe
H.I.
booke
to
the
King
,
and
the
vnmodest
&
vnchristian
offer
of
disputation
:
that
they
who
stand
for
the
pretended
reformation
among
vs
,
had
sought
for
no
other
discipline
,
then
that
which
Caluin
and
Beza
taught
,
and
the
reformed
Churches
,
especiallie
of
Geneua
doth
,
and
Scotland
did
practise
.
But
when
I
saw
the
nouell
Assertions
,
wheron
the
new-found
parish
discipline
is
founded
,
vrged
with
such
bold
vehemencie
,
I
must
confesse
,
I
was
much
alienated
from
that
side
.
And
so
I
hope
will
all
moderate
Christians
,
when
they
shall
consider
how
they
make
no
ende
of
broaching
more
and
more
Nouelties
.
Serm.
Sect.
4
pag.
6.
Hitherto
the
two
Assertions
contained
in
the
explication
haue
beene
propounded
to
be
discussed
.
Now
,
in
this
Section
,
I
made
way
to
the
proofe
hereof
,
by
enumerating
distinctly
the
seuerall
points
which
I
purposed
to
handle
,
for
the
proofe
of
either
.
And
first
for
the
former
,
which
is
the
explication
of
my
Text
(
viz:
)
that
the
Angells
or
Pastors
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
and
such
,
for
the
substance
of
their
function
,
as
ours
bee
.
)
I
endeuoured
to
prooue
it
,
both
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
disproouing
the
presbyterian
discipline
,
wherein
I
intended
a
disiunctiue
argumentation
,
that
(
the
question
beeing
,
whether
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
presbyteries
,
as
they
say
,
consisting
for
the
greater
part
of
Lay-men
,
or
by
BB:
as
wee
holde
,
)
the
disproofe
of
their
presbyteries
,
might
bee
a
proofe
for
our
Bishops
:
and
also
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
shewing
what
the
authoritie
of
the
Angels
or
ancient
Bishops
was
,
as
well
extensiuè
,
against
our
newe
disciplinarians
,
(
viz:
)
that
the
Churches
whereof
they
were
Byshops
,
were
Dioceses
,
and
themselues
Diocesan
Bishops
;
as
intensiuè
,
against
the
Elder
,
and
more
learned
disciplinarians
,
that
BB.
were
superiour
to
other
Ministers
,
not
onely
in
order
,
but
in
degree
also
.
&c.
And
for
the
proofe
of
the
2
Assertion
,
which
is
a
doctrine
arising
out
of
the
Text
before
explaned
,
concerning
the
lawfulnesse
of
the
Bishops
calling
,
this
is
proposed
to
bee
proued
,
that
the
fanction
of
Byshops
,
is
of
Apostolicall
and
diuine
institution
;
and
this
,
as
in
the
ende
of
the
Section
is
signified
,
was
the
thing
chiefely
intended
by
mee
.
These
points
I
did
not
thus
propound
in
Dichotomies
,
which
the
greatest
part
doth
not
so
well
conceiue
and
remember
,
but
for
more
easinesse
,
was
content
to
make
a
bare
enumeration
of
them
.
And
this
is
the
frame
,
of
that
which
hee
calleth
the
bodie
of
my
Sermon
,
the
which
our
refuter
endeuoreth
heere
to
put
out
of
frame
:
For
hauing
first
,
of
the
fiue
points
which
I
propound
,
referred
the
first
foure
to
the
former
part
of
my
maine
distribution
(
as
he
calleth
it
)
where
I
enquire
what
manner
of
Bishops
the
Angels
were
;
and
the
last
to
the
latter
,
which
respecteth
the
qualitie
of
their
function
:
in
the
next
words
,
as
if
presently
he
had
forgotten
himselfe
,
after
hee
hath
shewed
his
scornefull
and
disdainefull
spirit
,
hee
setteth
vp
a
frame
of
his
owne
to
worke
vpon
.
The
mansion
(
saith
hee
)
that
hee
buildeth
,
is
a
Princely
and
pleasant
Palace
for
our
Bishops
Lordships
,
vnder
the
roofe
whereof
,
their
Honours
may
dwell
safely
,
as
in
a
Sanctuary
,
without
danger
of
the
aduersarie
,
and
much
delight
.
Looke
we
vpon
the
bare
frame
,
as
it
standeth
,
without
glasing
,
painting
,
&c:
it
is
of
this
forme
:
The
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
7.
Churches
is
lawfull
and
good
:
The
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
Church
of
England
,
is
the
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
seuen
Churches
.
Therefore
the
function
of
the
Byshops
of
the
Church
of
England
is
lawfull
and
good
.
The
proposition
of
this
syllogisme
is
laid
downe
,
pag:
2.
and
55.
where
hee
saith
,
that
the
office
and
function
of
Bishops
,
heere
meant
by
Angels
,
is
in
this
Text
approoued
,
as
lawfull
and
commended
as
excellent
:
That
is
is
lawfull
and
good
;
hauing
diuine
,
both
Institution
being
Angels
,
and
approbation
being
starres
.
The
assumption
is
in
the
same
second
page
propounded
thus
:
The
Bishops
of
the
7.
Churches
,
(
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
(
were
such
as
the
reuerend
fathers
of
our
Church
are
.
The
which
hee
saith
,
by
the
grace
of
God
hee
will
plainely
prooue
,
and
that
in
the
foure
first
points
of
the
fiue
,
for
to
them
he
there
referreth
vs
for
that
purpose
.
pag.
61.
Wee
are
therefore
in
the
next
place
to
see
,
out
of
which
of
those
foure
points
it
is
concluded
,
and
how
:
Which
to
my
vnderstanding
must
be
out
of
the
second
,
third
,
and
4.
points
,
after
this
manner
.
The
function
of
those
Bishops
,
whose
Churches
are
Dioceses
,
and
themselues
Diocesan
Bishops
,
superiour
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
,
hauing
sole
power
of
Ordination
and
Iurisdiction
,
is
the
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
7.
Churches
.
The
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
Church
of
England
,
is
the
function
of
those
Bishops
whose
Churches
are
Dioceses
,
and
themselues
Diocesan
Bishops
;
superiour
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
,
hauing
sole
power
of
Ordination
and
Iurisdiction
.
Therefore
the
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
Church
of
England
,
is
the
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
seuen
Churches
.
In
lieue
of
the
proposition
of
this
Syllogisme
,
wee
haue
the
prosyllogisme
,
or
proofe
of
it
,
in
the
2.3
.
and
4.
points
before
named
,
&c.
For
first
,
whereas
there
are
of
the
fiue
points
which
I
propounded
,
two
of
principall
vse
,
seruing
directly
,
the
one
to
disproue
their
Presbyterian
discipline
,
the
other
to
approue
the
gouernement
by
Bishops
,
(
both
which
,
hee
could
wish
that
I
had
spared
)
hee
would
faine
make
his
Reader
belieue
,
that
of
these
two
,
To
countenance
these
sophisticall
shifts
,
he
hath
brought
my
Sermon
to
the
Smiths
forge
,
and
hauing
hammered
it
well
,
hee
hath
reduced
the
whole
body
of
it
into
one
syllogisme
,
with
the
proofs
thereof
.
Vsing
this
syllogisme
for
the
parts
of
my
Sermon
,
as
the
tyrant
vsed
his
bed
for
his
ghests
,
cutting
off
those
parts
which
seeme
to
reach
ouer
,
and
retching
out
those
which
seeme
to
come
short
.
But
let
vs
examine
his
Syllogisme
which
with
the
prosyllogisme
of
the
assumption
hee
propoundeth
as
the
Analysis
of
the
whole
body
of
my
Sermon
.
The
function
of
the
Bishops
of
the
seauen
Churches
is
lawfull
and
good
,
&c.
I
doe
not
deny
but
that
out
of
diuerse
places
of
my
Sermon
patched
together
,
some
such
Syllogisme
as
this
may
be
framed
.
But
in
Analysing
we
must
respect
,
not
what
we
can
deuise
or
collect
,
but
what
the
writer
did
intend
,
and
our
Analysis
must
be
answerable
to
his
Genesis
.
It
is
apparant
that
I
propounded
two
things
to
be
distinctly
proued
,
the
one
as
the
explication
of
the
text
shewing
what
manner
of
Bishops
the
Angels
were
:
the
other
as
a
doctrine
collected
out
of
the
text
,
concerning
the
qualitie
of
their
function
,
viz.
that
the
calling
of
Diocesan
Bishops
is
lawfull
and
good
.
This
,
which
I
propounded
as
a
doctrine
to
be
collected
out
of
the
text
,
pag.
2.
and
as
a
conclusion
to
be
proued
in
the
last
part
,
pag.
55.
and
is
indeed
not
the
proposition
,
but
the
conclusion
of
the
Syllogisme
which
himselfe
frameth
,
he
would
against
sense
make
the
Reader
belieue
was
by
me
propounded
as
the
proposition
of
his
Syllogisme
.
As
for
the
proposition
which
he
assigneth
to
me
,
I
did
not
expresse
,
but
tooke
it
for
granted
in
the
collection
of
the
doctrine
out
of
the
text
,
which
may
be
collected
after
this
manner
:
Bishops
are
such
as
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
therefore
their
function
is
lawfull
and
good
.
Of
which
collection
if
any
man
should
make
doubt
,
the
consequence
would
be
proued
by
the
addition
of
the
proposition
.
The
calling
of
such
,
as
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
is
lawfull
and
good
,
&c.
Wherefore
as
there
were
two
distinct
parts
propounded
by
me
,
so
if
he
had
drawne
the
same
into
two
distinct
Syllogismes
concluding
the
same
question
,
and
not
confounded
the
parts
of
the
Sermon
to
make
the
principall
branches
thereof
to
seeme
heterogeneall
or
superfluous
,
he
had
not
much
missed
of
my
proiect
.
The
former
Syllogisme
as
I
haue
said
might
be
this
.
The
calling
of
such
as
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
is
lawfull
and
good
.
Diocesan
BB.
are
such
as
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
,
therefore
the
calling
of
Diocesan
BB.
is
lawfull
and
good
.
The
proposition
I
tooke
for
granted
,
and
therefore
did
not
expresse
it
.
The
assumption
is
the
same
with
the
former
assertion
,
and
is
proued
by
the
foure
first
points
.
The
conclusion
I
did
not
expresse
,
being
implyed
in
the
collection
of
the
doctrine
out
of
the
text
.
The
latter
Syllogisme
is
this
.
That
calling
which
is
of
appostolicall
and
diuine
institution
is
lawfull
and
good
:
The
calling
of
Diocesan
BB.
is
of
apostolical
&
diuine
institution
,
Therefore
it
is
lawfull
and
good
:
of
this
Syllogisme
the
assumption
,
is
the
same
with
the
fift
point
here
propounded
.
So
that
of
the
fiue
points
,
which
I
propounded
,
not
any
one
is
either
impertinent
or
superfluous
,
the
foure
former
seruing
to
proue
the
former
assertion
which
is
the
assumption
of
the
former
Syllogisme
,
the
fift
and
last
being
the
assumption
of
the
second
Syllogisme
.
As
for
the
second
Syllogisme
which
he
assigneth
to
me
,
I
vtterly
disclaime
it
:
because
as
no
one
part
thereof
is
propounded
by
me
,
so
both
the
premisses
are
false
and
contrarie
to
my
meaning
.
For
neither
to
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
nor
to
the
Bishops
,
doe
I
ascribe
that
sole
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
which
he
speaketh
of
,
as
after
shall
appeare
.
But
that
his
Analysis
of
my
Sermon
was
meerely
forced
against
the
light
of
his
owne
conscience
,
appeareth
,
first
,
by
the
quarrels
which
thereout
he
hath
raised
,
seeing
by
his
Analysis
,
of
the
fiue
parts
the
first
seemeth
impertinent
,
the
last
superfluous
,
the
three
in
the
middes
not
prouing
that
for
which
as
he
saith
they
are
brought
.
For
could
he
perswade
himselfe
that
his
Analysis
or
resolution
was
answerable
to
my
Genesis
or
composition
of
the
Sermon
,
when
he
saw
two
parts
of
the
fiue
could
not
be
brought
to
his
frame
,
and
the
other
three
not
to
be
sutable
vnto
it
?
Secondly
,
by
the
distribution
of
my
Sermon
,
and
the
transitions
which
I
vse
,
wholy
disagreeing
from
his
Analysis
.
Thirdly
,
by
the
Analysis
propounded
here
by
my selfe
,
and
by
the
defence
of
the
seuerall
parts
here
ensuing
,
wherein
I
shall
by
the
helpe
of
God
manifestly
proue
,
that
neither
the
first
of
the
fiue
was
impertinent
,
nor
the
last
superfluous
,
nor
the
other
three
concluding
besides
the
purpose
.
But
now
we
are
to
intreate
of
them
seuerally
,
hauing
first
giuen
you
to
vnderstand
,
that
he
diuideth
the
body
of
my
Sermon
as
he
calleth
it
into
fiue
parts
,
&
euery
part
into
diuerse
sections
:
as
namely
,
the
first
,
which
concerneth
the
Eldership
,
into
eight
sections
,
in
all
which
the
summe
of
that
which
I
maintaine
is
this
,
that
there
were
no
other
Presbyters
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
but
Ministers
.
CHAP.
III.
Defending
the
two
first
Sections
concerning
Elders
.
Serm.
Sect.
1.
pag.
8.
And
first
I
am
to
shew
,
that
there
were
no
other
Presbyters
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
but
Ministers
.
A
sufficient
proofe
whereof
may
be
this
,
&c:
to
obtrude
vpon
vs
,
in
the
end
of
the
8.
pag.
AS
touching
this
first
point
,
the
refuter
endeuoureth
two
things
.
he
wardeth
and
repelleth
my
blowes
:
and
then
,
that
we
may
see
what
a
man
he
is
of
his
hands
,
he
sheweth
,
that
he
also
can
strike
if
need
be
.
His
former
act
is
a
reproofe
of
my
treatise
,
the
latter
a
proofe
of
his
owne
assertion
.
And
first
in
grosse
,
he
reiecteth
the
whole
discourse
of
Elders
as
impertinent
,
and
after
descendeth
to
the
particulars
.
A●
pag.
10.
For
the
first
:
Reason
would
,
saith
he
,
that
M.
D.
had
shewed
vs
,
how
this
first
point
pertaineth
to
the
proofe
of
the
matter
in
question
.
Whatsoeuer
he
conceiue
of
it
,
I
discerne
not
,
what
affinitie
it
can
haue
with
any
member
of
his
former
assumption
,
&c.
de
facto
,
whether
the
primitiue
Church
were
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
,
as
we
say
;
or
by
Presbyteries
of
such
Elders
,
as
they
spake
of
.
The
second
,
de
iure
,
whether
the
Church
may
lawfully
be
gouerned
by
Bishops
,
as
we
hold
;
or
must
needs
be
gouerned
by
their
Presbyteries
,
as
they
affirme
.
The
first
question
is
handled
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
,
the
second
in
the
latter
.
The
question
debated
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
,
I
say
againe
,
is
this
;
whether
the
primitiue
Churches
were
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
,
such
as
(
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
)
ours
be
;
or
by
such
Presbyteries
,
as
the
Presbyterians
stand
for
.
And
those
,
either
parishionall
,
consisting
of
the
Parish-Bishop
,
and
a
company
of
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
as
the
new
and
shallow
sort
of
disciplinarians
doe
boldly
,
though
ignorantly
affirme
:
or
Presbyteries
in
the
cities
,
consisting
of
the
president
and
other
Presbyters
,
whereof
some
are
Ministers
,
but
the
greater
some
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
as
the
Elder
and
more
learned
sort
of
disciplinarians
doe
teach
.
[
*
](A20733-e12270-b)
*
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Arist.
M●taph
.
li.
10.
c.
5.
In
this
question
,
as
the
refuter
will
confesse
,
(
vnlesse
he
will
confesse
himselfe
to
be
ignorant
in
logicke
)
this
disiunction
is
implyed
;
either
the
Church
was
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
,
as
we
say
;
or
by
such
Presbyteries
,
as
they
speake
of
.
And
this
disiunction
,
though
it
be
not
absolutely
necessarie
,
yet
is
it
necessarie
ex
hypothesi
,
and
so
presupposed
on
both
sides
.
For
,
this
being
the
question
,
whether
the
Church
were
gouerned
by
Bishops
,
in
med
.
as
the
Phylosopher
saith
.
And
that
this
is
the
question
betweene
vs
,
the
refuter
hath
truely
witnessed
in
respect
of
the
parts
of
the
disiunction
,
though
in
the
latter
he
falsifieth
my
assertion
,
where
he
saith
,
the
question
betweene
vs
is
,
whether
the
Churches
should
be
gouerned
by
Pastors
and
Elders
,
or
by
Diocesan
Bishops
.
The
question
indeed
de
facto
for
the
time
past
,
is
,
whether
the
primitiue
Church
were
gouerned
by
Diocesan
BB.
or
such
Presbyteries
as
they
speake
of
.
The
question
de
iure
respecting
also
the
time
present
and
to
come
,
is
,
whether
the
Church
may
or
should
be
gouerned
by
Bishops
as
we
say
,
or
must
be
gouerned
by
their
Presbyteries
,
as
they
affirme
.
This
therefore
being
the
question
,
whether
by
our
Bishops
,
or
their
Presbyteries
,
and
this
question
implying
a
necessarie
disiunction
:
who
seeth
not
that
the
disproofe
of
their
Presbyteries
,
is
a
direct
proofe
for
our
Bishops
.
The
disiunctiue
argumentation
standeth
thus
.
Either
the
primitiue
Church
was
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
,
or
by
such
Presbyteries
as
they
stand
for
:
But
not
by
such
Presbyteries
as
they
stand
for
:
Therefore
by
Diocesan
Bishops
.
The
proposition
is
implyed
in
the
very
question
betweene
vs
:
and
the
disiunction
is
therein
by
both
parties
presupposed
as
necessarie
.
The
assumption
is
,
that
first
point
of
the
fiue
,
which
now
we
haue
in
hand
.
The
conclusion
determineth
the
assertion
which
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
was
propounded
to
be
proued
,
viz.
that
the
primitiue
Church
was
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
.
This
passage
therefore
concerning
Lay-Elders
,
will
I
hope
be
acknowledged
not
to
be
impertinent
.
For
,
the
question
,
which
now
we
haue
in
hand
,
being
,
whether
there
were
any
such
Presbyters
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
as
were
not
Ministers
:
forasmuch
as
the
Presbyterians
are
the
opponents
and
plaintiffes
,
not
onely
holding
the
affirmatiue
,
that
there
were
such
,
but
vehemently
vrging
that
still
there
ought
to
be
such
;
we
contrariwise
the
respondents
and
defendants
,
holding
the
negatiue
,
to
wit
,
that
neither
there
were
such
,
nor
now
need
to
be
:
the
Reader
therefore
is
to
vnderstand
,
that
,
this
burden
of
prouing
,
lieth
vpon
them
which
hold
and
vrge
the
affirmatiue
,
that
there
were
and
still
ought
to
be
Lay-Elders
:
and
that
in
vs
it
is
a
sufficient
proofe
of
the
negatiue
,
if
we
can
maintaine
,
that
they
are
not
able
to
proue
the
affirmatiue
.
And
whereas
all
their
proofes
may
be
reduced
to
two
heads
,
for
either
they
be
such
testimonies
where
the
worde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
Presbyter
is
named
,
or
where
at
the
least
the
function
it selfe
is
(
as
they
suppose
)
meant
;
to
these
two
heads
therefore
I
oppose
two
contrarie
assertions
.
The
one
,
that
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
Presbyter
,
doth
alwayes
signifie
a
Minister
:
the
other
,
that
there
is
no
one
pregnant
testimonie
mentioning
or
meaning
the
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elder
.
The
former
of
them
,
being
affirmatiue
,
I
doe
briefly
confirme
by
three
reasons
;
the
latter
,
being
such
a
negatiue
as
cannot
otherwise
be
proued
(
for
the
induction
of
the
particulars
were
infinite
)
I
doe
therefore
maintaine
it
against
the
principall
instances
of
the
aduersaries
.
And
this
is
the
summe
of
this
passage
.
Now
I
come
to
his
cauils
,
with
the
particulars
.
If
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
,
the
ancient
fathers
and
councils
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
Presbyter
(
noting
an
Ecclesiasticall
person
)
doth
euermore
signifie
a
Minister
or
Priest
,
and
there
cannot
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
be
alledged
out
of
the
scriptures
,
councils
or
fathers
,
mentioning
or
meaning
any
Lay-annuall-onely-gouerning-Presbyters
,
then
were
there
no
other
Presbyters
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
but
Ministers
:
but
the
antecedent
is
true
,
therefore
the
consequent
.
In
the
antecedent
of
the
proposition
he
noteth
two
parts
:
Ad
pag.
11.
His
cauill
against
the
former
part
of
the
antecedent
and
the
consequence
deduced
therefrom
.
the
former
whereof
he
reiecteth
as
superfluous
,
because
the
latter
is
as
firme
and
full
without
it
.
And
yet
hauing
reiected
the
former
,
he
saith
the
consequence
is
infirme
and
weake
.
But
if
the
former
be
therefore
superfluous
,
because
the
latter
is
firme
and
full
without
it
,
by
this
reason
it
shall
not
be
lawfull
for
a
man
to
bring
two
arguments
for
one
thing
,
the
one
concluding
the
question
without
the
other
.
Yea
but
these
two
are
ioyned
in
one
proposition
,
and
therefore
either
must
afford
necessarie
helpe
to
the
other
,
or
the
one
is
superfluous
.
Blame
him
then
that
ioyned
them
,
and
disdaine
th●t
sophisticall
shifts
of
the
refuter
,
deuised
to
make
himselfe
worke
.
Yea
but
if
they
be
not
ioyned
,
the
former
wil
be
weake
and
of
no
strength
,
for
it
will
not
suffice
that
I
say
the
word
Presbyter
doth
euermore
signifie
a
Minister
,
vnlesse
I
added
onely
.
For
though
it
alway
signifie
a
Minister
,
yet
it
may
also
signifie
him
that
is
no
Minister
.
But
in
mine
vnderstanding
,
if
it
alwaies
signifie
a
Minister
,
it
neuer
signifieth
him
that
is
not
a
Minister
.
Neither
will
it
serue
their
turne
that
they
make
Presbyter
the
genus
of
teaching
and
gouerning-Elders
,
vnlesse
they
can
shew
,
that
as
alwaies
it
signifieth
a
Minister
,
so
in
some
place
,
an
onely-gouerning
Elder
also
,
and
they
must
remember
that
in
this
cause
of
Elders
,
they
are
the
opponents
,
and
therefore
they
must
proue
that
the
places
which
they
alledge
for
their
Lay-presbyters
,
not
onely
may
,
but
of
necessitie
must
be
vnderstood
of
them
,
or
else
in
vaine
doe
they
vrge
and
obtrude
them
vpon
vs
.
And
surely
we
must
needs
esteeme
it
a
very
partiall
genus
,
and
such
as
yet
was
neuer
heard
of
,
that
is
alwaies
predicated
of
the
one
species
,
and
neuer
of
the
other
.
If
animal
,
did
alwaies
signifie
a
man
,
and
were
neuer
predicated
of
any
other
thing
but
man
,
we
should
hardly
thinke
it
were
the
genus
,
but
the
selfe
same
species
,
and
conuertible
with
it
;
as
indeed
Presbyter
is
with
Minister
,
and
therefore
not
the
genus
of
it
▪
and
that
I
proued
,
Arist.
Poster
17.
when
I
said
,
it
alwaies
signifieth
a
Minister
,
because
in
english
it
is
priest
,
and
in
the
scriptures
is
confounded
with
Episcopus
,
and
noteth
such
a
person
as
must
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
able
to
preach
.
But
let
him
adde
onely
if
that
would
please
him
,
though
so
much
be
signified
without
it
.
No
,
it
will
not
serue
the
turne
,
for
though
Presbyter
doe
alwaies
and
onely
signifie
a
Minister
,
and
neuer
signifie
an
onely
gouerning
Elder
,
yet
there
might
bee
gouerning
Elders
,
who
were
signified
by
other
names
.
Why
but
then
there
were
no
Presbyters
but
Ministers
,
which
was
the
point
to
be
proued
.
And
what
then
becommeth
(
which
is
the
chiefe
scope
of
this
place
)
of
all
those
testimonies
,
wherein
the
word
Presbyter
is
mentioned
,
which
T.
C.
and
others
doe
alledge
;
supposing
the
most
of
the
places
in
the
scriptures
,
councils
and
fathers
,
where
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
,
Presbyter
is
mentioned
,
to
be
so
many
proofes
of
your
gouerning
Elders
?
call
you
this
a
weake
proofe
,
which
doth
not
onely
at
once
bereaue
you
of
all
those
testimonies
where
Presbyter
is
mentioned
,
and
wherein
your
chiefe
strength
did
lie
;
And
much
lesse
the
other
.
For
if
there
cannot
be
produced
so
much
as
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
out
of
the
scriptures
,
councils
,
or
fathers
,
mentioning
or
meaning
,
any
lay
,
annuall
,
onely-gouerning
Elders
,
with
what
proofs
will
they
vrge
them
,
or
with
what
conscience
can
they
obtrude
them
,
as
the
ordinance
of
Christ
?
An
argument
taken
from
the
scriptures
alone
negatiuè
,
was
wont
to
be
a
sufficient
disproofe
of
any
pretended
ordinance
of
Christ
;
and
shall
not
an
argument
holde
negatiuely
from
Scriptures
,
Fathers
,
Councels
,
and
all
?
Notwithstanding
,
the
consequence
must
needs
be
infirme
and
weake
,
for
although
there
be
no
proofe
of
any
Lay-annuall-onely
gouerning
elders
,
yet
may
there
be
,
&
indeed
is
for
all
that
,
proofe
sufficient
,
for
such
only
gouerning
Presbyters
as
are
ecclesi●sticall
,
&
and
to
be
perpetuall
.
Wherefore
which
way
soeuer
the
proposition
lye
,
the
consequence
therof
I
flatly
deny
,
saith
our
ryming
refuter
.
But
heere
I
intreat
the
Reader
to
trie
the
spirit
of
this
Sophister
.
For
if
himselfe
acknowledge
,
that
my
meaning
is
,
simply
to
denie
the
onely-gouerning
Elders
;
then
can
hee
not
be
excused
from
this
imputation
of
setting
himselfe
to
wrangle
against
conscience
.
But
so
much
hee
acknowledgeth
,
when
hee
commeth
to
the
assumption
,
for
otherwise
he
could
not
haue
wrangled
therewith
.
M.
D.
meaing
(
saith
he
)
is
simply
to
denie
all
kinde
onely-gouerning
Elders
,
therefore
I
denie
the
assumption
.
His
meaning
was
not
to
denie
all
,
but
annuall
and
Lay-Elders
,
therefore
I
flatly
denie
the
consequence
.
Thus
you
see
,
how
he
is
carried
with
a
spirit
of
contradiction
,
not
caring
to
gaine
say
himselfe
,
so
hee
may
seeme
to
contradict
mee
.
But
so
farre
was
the
consequence
from
being
to
be
denyed
,
Lay
,
and
annuall
,
that
rather
it
was
to
be
graunted
;
These
words
being
added
,
ad
maiorem
cautelam
,
and
distinctly
propounded
,
to
make
the
consequence
so
much
the
stronger
,
and
to
signifie
that
I
spake
of
all
Elders
whatsoeuer
,
that
are
not
Ministers
,
call
them
as
you
will
,
whether
Lay
,
or
annuall
;
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
.
And
here
againe
,
let
the
Reader
obserue
,
that
the
new
sect
of
Disciplinarians
will
not
haue
such
Elders
as
lately
were
in
Scotland
,
and
still
are
at
Geneua
,
and
the
Low
Countreys
▪
No
,
they
scorne
such
,
those
be
Lay
&
annuall
,
as
you
haue
heard
,
but
these
may
not
be
so
.
Therfore
let
the
elder
sort
of
Disciplinarians
be
accounted
wise
,
who
,
though
they
were
faine
to
yeeld
that
the
greater
part
of
their
presbyteries
should
be
of
the
Laitie
,
yet
they
did
foresee
that
the
Ministers
would
beare
the
sway
(
as
indeed
they
ought
)
because
they
were
perpetuall
,
the
others
annuall
,
or
but
for
a
short
time
;
whereas
these
men
,
making
the
Lay-Elders
perpetuall
,
and
referring
matters
to
be
ruled
by
pluralitie
of
voyces
,
absurdly
subiect
the
Ministers
to
bee
ruled
and
ouer-ruled
by
them
,
who
,
in
the
most
Countrey-parishes
,
are
more
fitte
to
holde
the
plough
then
to
sit
at
the
sterne
of
the
Church
.
And
so
,
desperate
or
franticke
whether
are
they
nowe
growne
,
that
although
they
make
their
parish-Bishop
the
supreme
officer
in
the
visible
Church
;
and
doe
holde
that
euery
parish
hath
a
sufficient
and
independent
authoritie
,
immediately
deriued
from
Christ
,
viz:
that
the
word
Presbyter
,
(
noting
an
Ecclesiasticall
person
,
in
the
Church
of
Christ
)
euermore
in
the
Scriptures
,
Councells
,
and
Fathers
,
signifieth
a
Minister
,
hee
denyeth
.
For
,
if
the
word
onely
bee
added
▪
it
is
vtterly
false
.
For
I
shall
make
it
euident
(
saith
hee
)
that
the
worde
Presbyter
doth
sometimes
signifie
one
that
is
not
a
Minister
.
So
that
,
by
his
owne
confession
,
all
is
one
,
whether
the
word
onely
bee
inserted
or
omitted
,
the
contradictorie
being
one
,
and
the
same
,
that
sometimes
it
signifieth
one
that
is
not
a
Minister
.
But
though
hee
delay
the
Reader
for
his
owne
proofes
,
(
which
I
dare
assure
him
will
not
satisfie
his
iudicious
expectation
)
yet
seeing
he
setteth
himselfe
to
catch
and
snatch
at
euery
word
,
he
should
not
haue
passed
by
those
arguments
●hereby
I
proued
my
Assertion
,
and
I
am
perswaded
,
would
not
,
if
silence
had
not
bene
his
best
answere
.
For
a
man
of
his
Acumen
,
might
easily
out
of
those
fewe
words
haue
raised
three
syllogismes
,
which
he
could
not
so
easily
answere
.
But
the
labour
which
hee
thought
best
to
spare
,
I
will
vndertake
for
him
.
For
,
-
1.
If
the
word
Priest
,
(
freed
as
it
is
in
our
Church
,
from
the
popish
abuse
,
and
conceiued
without
all
relation
to
reall
sacrifices
)
be
the
proper
English
of
presbyter
,
as
it
noteth
an
Ecclesiasticall
person
,
then
presbyter
signifieth
a
Minister
onely
,
and
as
well
might
question
bee
made
whether
there
were
any
Lay-priests
,
as
Lay-presbyters
;
but
the
former
is
true
,
therefore
the
latter
.
-
2.
That
word
,
which
in
the
Scriptures
is
confounded
with
Episcopus
,
or
Bishop
,
doth
signifie
a
Minister
onely
.
But
Presbyter
by
their
owne
confession
,
Cal.
in
Tit.
is
confounded
with
Episcopus
,
or
Bishop
.
Therefore
presbyter
,
doth
signifie
a
Minister
onely
.
-
3.
That
word
,
which
being
in
the
Scriptures
confounded
with
Bishop
,
doth
also
note
such
a
person
as
by
the
Apostles
rule
must
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
able
to
preach
,
doth
signifie
a
Minister
of
the
word
onely
;
for
in
none
but
Ministers
is
that
propertie
required
.
But
Presbyter
is
such
a
word
,
as
beeing
in
the
Scriptures
confounded
with
Bishop
,
doth
also
note
a
person
,
who
must
by
the
Apostles
rule
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
able
to
preach
.
Therefore
the
word
Presbyter
,
doth
signifie
a
Minister
onely
.
The
latter
part
of
his
assumption
(
saith
he
)
in
case
he
vrge
the
words
Lay
,
and
annuall
,
may
perhaps
be
true
,
and
his
cause
neuer
the
better
,
nor
ours
the
worse
by
it
,
it
being
enough
for
vs
,
if
there
be
Ecclesiasticall
gouernours
,
which
are
no
Ministers
.
You
see
then
the
cause
of
the
new
reformers
,
is
not
the
cause
of
other
reformed
Churches
,
as
I
said
.
But
seeing
M.
D.
saith
hee
,
is
simplie
to
denie
all
kinde
of
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
I
as
plainely
denie
the
assumption
.
So
that
both
his
propositions
in
this
Syllogisme
doe
want
their
armour
of
proofe
,
and
waite
vpon
M.
D.
as
two
poore
seruants
vpon
their
master
for
their
cloth
,
before
they
can
doe
him
any
seruice
.
Marke
well
the
spirit
of
this
man
.
For
hauing
denyed
without
reason
the
consequence
of
the
proposition
,
being
(
euen
as
himselfe
propoundeth
it
)
vndeniable
,
were
it
not
that
he
cauilled
with
the
words
Lay
&
annuall
,
which
in
his
a●swere
to
the
●ssumption
,
he
confesseth
were
not
to
be
cauilled
with
:
and
hauing
barely
denied
both
the
former
part
of
the
assumption
,
which
I
fortified
by
3.
reasons
,
which
hee
could
not
answere
,
and
also
the
latter
,
without
any
shew
of
reason
,
though
the
proofe
of
the
contradictory
in
both
lye
vpon
him
,
(
which
course
any
man
might
take
to
answere
the
best
argument
that
euer
was
propounded
,
)
notwithstanding
hee
scornefully
craketh
,
as
if
hee
had
done
some
great
act
,
which
might
giue
occasion
to
leaue
fighting
,
and
fall
a
crowing
.
For
my
part
,
I
greatly
wonder
a●
him
,
how
he
could
either
content
himselfe
,
or
hope
to
satisfie
his
reader
with
such
answeres
.
For
if
it
be
a
sufficient
answere
to
say
.
I
fl●tly
deny
the
proposition
,
&
I
do
as
plainely
deny
〈◊〉
assumption
;
who
cannot
answere
sufficiently
any
Syllogisme
whatsoeuer
?
But
if
a
man
hauing
thus
answered
,
shall
take
occasion
thereby
to
insult
ouer
his
aduersary
,
verily
as
hee
deludeth
egregiously
his
Reader
that
is
simple
,
so
he
maketh
himselfe
ridiculous
,
if
not
odious
,
to
him
that
is
iudicious
.
manner
of
laying
them
downe
.
For
in
regard
thereof
,
he
chargeth
me
with
three
no
small
faultes
.
First
,
inclination
to
popery
:
2.
falshood
:
3.
contempt
and
scorne
.
The
which
imputations
,
if
he
cannot
make
good
by
sound
euidence
,
he
will
shew
himselfe
vnmanerly
in
obiecting
them
.
How
then
proueth
hee
the
first
?
He
saith
,
and
saith
it
againe
,
that
I
delight
to
call
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
by
the
n●me
of
Priests
,
which
all
but
those
that
are
Popish
,
or
desirous
to
please
the
Papists
would
rather
forbeare
.
First
,
I
denie
that
those
which
call
Ministers
by
the
name
of
priests
,
are
popish
.
For
those
worthie
instruments
vnder
God
,
of
that
happie
reformation
,
which
is
among
vs
,
&
separation
from
Poperie
,
in
the
booke
of
Common
prayer
,
in
the
booke
of
Orders
,
and
in
other
their
writings
,
doe
ordinarily
vse
that
name
.
And
when
they
distinguish
the
Clergie
into
three
degrees
,
they
vsually
reckon
these
three
orders
,
Bishops
,
Priests
,
and
Deacons
,
therein
imitating
the
most
ancient
and
purest
writers
,
both
of
the
Greek
&
Latin
Church
,
who
seldome
vsing
the
word
Minister
,
distinguish
the
same
degrees
by
words
of
the
same
signification
:
viz.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
Episcopi
,
Presbyteri
,
Diaconi
,
that
is
,
Bishops
,
Priests
,
Deacons
.
Yea
,
but
the
Popish
shauelings
haue
appropriated
the
words
to
themselues
.
,
and
protestant
writers
find
fault
with
them
for
calling
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
by
the
name
of
Priests
,
to
which
purpose
he
alleadgeth
D.
Whitaker
,
&
D.
Raynolds
Whereto
I
answere
:
of
the
word
Priest
,
there
are
two
vses
,
whereof
the
one
is
an
abuse
,
the
other
is
the
right
&
proper
vse
of
the
word
,
according
to
the
natiue
signification
therof
.
The
abuse
is
,
when
it
is
ascribed
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
,
as
it
is
the
English
of
Sacerdos
,
which
signifieth
a
Sacificing
Priest
,
and
implieth
a
relation
to
sacrifices
.
Thus
the
Papists
abuse
the
name
when
they
applie
it
to
the
Ministers
of
their
Gospell
,
with
relation
to
their
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
.
And
thus
D.
Whitaker
denieth
both
Sacerdos
and
Priest
(
as
it
is
the
English
of
Sacerdos
)
to
agree
to
the
Ministers
of
the
new
Testament
.
Ad
Duraeum
.
The
right
vse
of
the
word
is
,
when
it
is
vsed
as
the
English
of
Presbyter
,
and
without
any
relation
to
sacrifice
.
For
Presbyter
is
the
name
which
the
Apostles
and
all
antiquitie
gaue
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
,
D.
Raynolds
doth
confesse
,
where
also
he
sheweth
,
that
the
Papists
play
the
sophisters
in
vsing
the
word
Priest
,
after
a
double
sort
,
the
one
,
as
it
is
deriued
from
Presbyter
,
the
other
,
as
it
signifieth
the
same
that
Sacerdos
.
For
Priest
,
as
i●
signifieth
a
man
appointed
to
Sacrifice
is
[
(c)
](A20733-e13990-b)
(c)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Sacerdos
,
and
not
Presbyter
.
The
name
which
the
Apostles
giue
a
Minister
,
[
(d)
](A20733-e14030-b)
(d)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
Presbyter
and
not
Sacerdos
.
And
againe
,
though
th'
Apostles
call
the
Ministers
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
whence
our
English
name
of
Priests
is
deriued
;
yet
they
did
not
call
them
priests
,
as
the
name
of
priest
hath
relation
to
Sacrifice
.
For
the
worde
Priest
hath
two
meanings
:
the
one
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
other
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
whereof
the
one
is
giuen
by
the
Apostles
,
but
doth
not
implie
authoritie
to
sacrifice
;
the
other
,
doth
implie
authoritie
to
Sacrifice
,
but
is
not
giuen
by
the
Apostles
.
It
is
plaine
therefore
,
that
the
worde
Priest
is
rightly
vsed
in
the
signification
of
presbyter
,
but
abused
,
as
I
said
,
in
the
Sermon
,
to
signifie
Sacrificing
priests
.
I
confesse
,
that
the
first
Translators
of
the
Bible
into
English
,
in
these
latter
times
,
being
,
(
as
D.
Fulke
saith
)
not
Lords
of
mens
speech
,
The
name
Priest
saith
D.
Fulke
,
wee
doe
not
finde
fault
with
,
as
it
commeth
of
presbyter
,
Co●r
.
Rhem.
in
Matth.
23.
S.
●
.
In
Act.
14.
S.
4.
but
as
it
is
commonly
vsed
for
a
Sacrificing
priest
.
Againe
,
as
for
the
name
priest
,
as
it
is
deriued
of
the
Greeke
,
wee
doe
not
refuse
it
,
but
rather
wish
that
the
Sacrificers
of
the
Law
had
neuer
bene
called
by
it
.
And
againe
more
fullie
,
wee
doe
not
contend
for
the
terms
,
nor
refuse
the
name
priest
,
To
conclude
therefore
,
according
to
the
true
Etymologie
,
wee
confesse
the
name
to
be
good
,
and
doe
vse
it
in
our
seruice
booke
and
otherwise
,
knowing
that
it
implieth
no
sacrificing
,
as
you
most
fondly
and
ridiculously
would
enforce
out
of
it
.
But
in
Translation
,
because
by
common
speech
a
priest
was
taken
for
a
Sacrificer
,
and
the
Translators
had
no
other
name
,
whereby
to
call
the
Sacrificers
of
the
Lawe
,
but
priests
,
to
make
and
obserue
that
difference
which
the
holie
Ghost
alwayes
obserueth
in
the
Newe
Testament
,
they
call
the
one
Priests
,
the
other
Elders
.
But
if
they
had
called
the
one
Sacrificers
,
and
the
other
priests
,
that
priests
might
haue
bene
knowne
to
differ
from
Sacrificers
,
it
had
bene
a
small
matter
,
and
perhaps
hindered
you
of
this
vaine
quarrell
.
It
is
not
a
popish
abuse
therefore
to
call
Ministers
priests
,
but
to
giue
the
name
priest
,
to
Sacrificers
.
And
likewise
,
it
is
an
abuse
of
Innouators
,
to
giue
the
Name
presbyter
,
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
(
as
it
is
a
name
of
an
office
,
and
not
of
age
,
)
which
is
proper
to
Ministers
,
to
them
who
are
no
priests
.
Who
,
though
they
may
be
called
Saecerdotes
,
that
is
,
Sacrificers
,
as
all
Christians
may
,
yet
presbyters
they
cannot
truely
be
called
.
But
how
doth
hee
proue
that
I
delight
to
haue
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
called
priests
?
Forsooth
because
there
was
no
necessitie
laid
vpon
me
to
call
them
so
,
but
might
haue
contended
my selfe
with
the
name
of
Ministers
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
that
I
mention
the
Name
Priest
,
(
the
proper
English
of
presbyter
;
)
as
a
necessarie
argument
,
to
proue
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
presbyter
,
doth
signifie
a
Minister
,
as
I
shewed
before
,
affirming
that
they
might
as
well
make
question
,
whether
there
were
any
Lay-priests
as
Lay
-
presbyters
.
For
this
was
the
first
argument
of
the
three
;
to
none
whereof
the
refuter
could
see
any
necessitie
laide
vpon
him
to
answere
.
It
is
necessarie
with
him
(
belike
,
)
to
wrangle
with
words
,
but
not
to
answere
arguments
.
Now
to
conclude
my
answere
to
his
first
accusation
,
I
appeale
to
the
refuter
himselfe
,
and
to
all
which
either
know
mee
,
or
haue
read
my
other
Bookes
;
whether
this
imputation
was
laid
to
my
charge
,
out
of
an
vpright
conscience
,
or
not
rather
out
of
an
vncharitable
desire
to
bring
mee
,
though
vniustlie
,
into
the
dislike
of
the
people
,
to
whom
the
Name
priest
is
odious
,
as
D.
Fulke
truely
noteth
;
because
they
knowe
not
the
Etymologie
of
it
.
[
n
](A20733-e14650-b)
n
Matt.
23.
For
if
they
knew
that
the
English
word
Priest
,
as
also
the
like
wordes
in
French
and
Italian
,
were
deriued
from
Presbyter
,
and
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
Presbyter
,
is
the
name
which
the
holie
Ghost
and
all
antiquitie
ordinarilie
giueth
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Newe-Testament
;
They
would
rather
condemne
them
that
abuse
,
either
the
name
Priest
,
to
Sacrificers
,
as
the
Papists
do
;
or
the
name
Presbyter
,
wherof
Priest
is
the
true
English
,
to
signifie
Lay-Elders
,
as
our
Disciplinarians
doe
:
then
hee
would
mislike
our
Church
,
which
vseth
the
word
aright
?
Namely
,
as
the
proper
and
true
English
of
Presbyter
,
from
whence
it
is
deriued
,
without
anie
relation
to
Sacrifices
at
all
.
Wherevnto
this
is
to
be
added
,
that
howsoeuer
our
first
Translators
in
King
Henrie
his
time
,
auoyding
the
worde
priest
,
translated
Presbyteri
,
by
Elders
;
Yet
by
Elders
they
vnderstood
no
other
but
Ministers
.
As
appeareth
by
this
speech
of
M.
Tindall
.
Presbyteri
Pag.
251.
All
that
were
called
Elders
(
or
Priests
,
if
they
so
will
,
)
were
called
BB.
also
.
question
might
as
well
bee
made
,
whether
there
were
annuall
Ministers
,
or
Lay-Priests
,
as
annuall
or
Lay-Presbyters
.
But
this
I
prooued
,
when
I
demonstrated
by
three
arguments
,
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
presbyter
,
doth
signifie
none
but
a
Minister
.
Ad
Pag.
13.
For
if
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
presbyter
,
as
it
is
the
name
of
an
Ecclesiasticall
office
,
doth
signifie
nothing
but
a
minister
or
priest
,
as
I
prooued
;
then
that
question
might
as
well
bee
made
of
Ministers
or
Priests
,
as
of
presbyters
.
But
how
I
pray
you
doth
hee
conuince
mee
of
falshood
?
with
an
if
begging
the
question
,
if
Presbyter
doth
not
signifie
onely
a
Minister
,
then
question
may
be
made
of
Lay-Presbyters
,
though
not
of
annuall
Ministers
or
Lay-Priests
.
As
if
hee
should
haue
said
,
if
you
will
graunt
mee
the
question
,
and
denie
that
which
you
haue
already
prooued
,
and
I
could
not
answere
,
then
I
shal
be
able
to
charge
you
with
vntruth
.
Yea
,
but
the
vntruth
of
my
speech
was
before
manifest
in
the
former
part
of
the
answere
to
the
proposition
.
His
words
there
,
be
these
:
that
the
consequence
is
weake
,
because
there
might
be
other
Presbyters
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
though
the
word
Presbyter
did
euermore
signifie
a
Minister
.
So
that
this
was
but
a
poore
shift
for
want
of
proofe
to
referre
the
Reader
as
oft
he
doth
to
another
place
,
where
he
should
find
little
to
the
purpose
.
In
both
places
,
as
you
see
,
all
that
he
can
say
is
,
that
seeing
it
might
be
there
were
Presbyters
that
were
not
Ministers
,
and
if
there
were
such
,
which
I
haue
disproued
,
then
that
would
appeare
to
be
false
,
which
I
haue
proued
to
be
most
true
.
I
come
to
his
third
accusation
:
8.
The
third
i●putation
of
scorne
and
contempt
.
It
would
be
noted
saith
he
,
with
what
contempt
and
scorne
he
calleth
the
Elders
in
question
,
Lay-annuall-onely-gouerning
Elders
.
And
it
would
be
noted
say
I
,
with
how
bad
a
conscience
he
wilfully
depraueth
the
manner
of
vttering
my
words
,
to
giue
some
small
colour
both
to
his
vnconscionable
denyall
of
the
proposition
which
himselfe
contradicted
in
answere
to
the
assumption
;
and
also
to
this
forged
calumniation
.
For
whereas
I
propounded
the
words
distinctly
with
a
Comma
or
note
of
distinction
,
lay
,
annuall
,
onely-gouerning
Presbyters
,
vsing
these
diuers
titles
more
fully
and
certainely
to
expresse
whom
I
meant
;
he
hath
ioyned
them
with
notes
of
vnion
Lay-annuall-onely-gouerning
Elders
,
as
if
I
had
in
contempt
&
scorne
of
them
,
framed
a
nickname
for
them
,
compounded
of
all
these
words
.
And
whereas
he
saith
,
that
I
call
them
lay
in
disgrace
of
the
Elders
,
and
reproach
of
those
who
stand
for
them
,
as
though
they
committed
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
to
such
as
are
base
and
priuate
persons
:
the
truth
is
,
that
he
disgraceth
the
laitie
intollerably
,
as
if
there
were
no
lay
persons
but
base
and
priuate
men
.
Indeed
if
I
had
said
,
that
such
men
as
be
not
of
the
Clergie
,
are
to
be
called
idiotae
,
(
as
some
of
your
side
would
haue
them
called
,
rather
then
lay
men
)
you
might
haue
had
some
colourable
pretence
for
this
accusation
.
But
when
with
Caluin
we
diuide
the
whole
Church
into
the
clergie
and
laitie
:
Instit.
li.
4.
c.
12.
li.
1.
vnder
the
laitie
,
we
comprehend
the
noble
as
well
as
the
base
,
and
publike
persons
as
well
as
priuate
,
and
men
of
excellent
gifts
as
well
as
Idiots
.
And
it
is
but
a
seely
exception
,
which
you
doe
vsually
make
,
that
you
would
not
haue
them
called
lay
,
but
Ecclesiasticall
.
For
first
,
that
word
doth
not
distinguish
them
from
the
Ministers
.
And
secondly
,
because
Ecclesia
the
Church
,
being
diuided
into
the
Clergie
,
and
laitie
,
those
which
be
lay
men
(
as
not
being
of
the
Clergie
,
)
may
haue
Ecclesiasticall
offices
,
and
in
regard
thereof
may
be
called
Ecclesiasticall
officers
,
as
Church
wardens
among
vs
,
officials
,
Chancellers
,
and
commissioners
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
as
well
as
your
Elders
,
whom
though
you
make
Ecclesiasticall
officers
,
yet
you
cannot
denie
them
to
be
Lay-Elders
.
De
grad.
Ministr.
cap.
11.
Beza
saith
,
that
in
the
sacred
senate
,
which
is
called
the
Presbyterie
,
there
is
no
superioritie
of
degree
or
power
,
but
a
distinction
of
order
;
and
that
all
matters
are
managed
by
common
and
equall
right
in
giuing
their
voices
:
the
whole
consistorie
being
for
that
cause
called
a
Presbyterie
,
because
,
howsoeuer
otherwise
there
may
be
distinction
of
degrees
among
them
,
yet
in
this
common
function
the
Ministers
are
made
equall
with
the
Elders
,
and
the
Elders
with
the
Ministers
.
So
that
they
wrong
them
shrewdly
,
who
shall
say
,
where
all
haue
equall
right
,
and
where
all
things
are
swaied
by
the
greater
number
of
voices
,
the
one
or
two
voices
at
the
most
of
the
Ministers
,
are
like
to
be
ouer-ruled
by
the
multitude
of
Elders
.
Serm.
Sect.
2.
pag.
8.
Where
the
words
of
the
abortiue
booke
seemed
bitter
and
spitefull
enough
,
Ad
pag.
1.
there
our
refuter
followeth
that
copy
:
otherwise
to
that
potion
of
worme-wood
,
he
addeth
an
infusion
of
gall
,
as
in
this
place
.
It
is
strange
saith
the
abortiue
booke
,
that
a
man
of
such
skill
in
logicke
as
I
acknowledge
D.
D.
to
be
&c:
and
more
strange
that
one
of
his
temper
&c:
is
it
fit
for
D.
D.
modestie
,
&c.
Not
so
,
saith
the
libeller
,
you
must
not
attribute
any
skill
in
logicke
,
or
modestie
to
him
now
:
wee
must
make
our
followers
belieue
,
that
since
he
hath
written
in
defence
of
the
Antichristian
calling
of
the
prelates
,
those
petite
popes
,
he
hath
lost
all
modestie
,
and
skill
in
logicke
too
.
For
if
we
cannot
answere
his
arguments
,
nor
take
away
his
answeres
,
let
vs
disgrace
his
person
:
so
will
our
followers
be
sure
to
preiudge
any
thing
he
saith
,
and
which
is
our
desire
,
the
people
whom
he
thought
to
satisfie
,
shal
be
kept
in
the
same
tearmes
they
were
wont
.
But
my
purpose
is
not
by
reciting
his
words
to
spread
this
part
of
his
spitefull
libell
,
and
much
lesse
by
vouchsafing
an
answere
to
multiply
words
in
this
kind
with
so
odious
a
wrangler
.
To
passe
by
therefore
his
barking
eloquence
,
or
dogge-rhetoricke
,
the
reader
is
to
vnderstand
that
in
this
section
and
those
which
follow
,
I
endeuour
to
defend
the
two
former
assertions
,
viz.
that
they
can
neither
proue
that
the
word
Presbyter
doth
signifie
any
but
a
Minister
,
nor
yet
produce
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
mentioning
or
meaning
their
lay
or
onely-gouerning-Elders
.
Now
I
would
know
of
my
aduersarie
for
my
learning
,
how
such
a
negatiue
as
this
should
be
maintained
.
Whether
,
by
induction
of
particulars
,
or
by
speciall
insisting
vpon
the
instances
which
the
aduersaries
giue
:
not
the
former
,
for
that
were
to
examine
euery
sentence
in
the
scriptures
,
councels
and
fathers
,
which
were
infinite
.
If
the
latter
,
should
I
in
one
of
the
least
parts
intended
in
the
Sermon
,
where
I
had
promised
breuitie
,
stand
vpon
euery
particular
allegation
which
could
hardly
haue
beene
discussed
in
a
whole
Sermon
?
or
should
I
make
choise
of
some
of
the
principall
,
which
are
of
more
weight
then
all
the
rest
?
the
latter
course
I
was
necessarily
to
make
choise
of
.
And
therefore
supposing
our
opposites
to
insist
on
those
two
testimonies
,
which
are
of
more
weight
then
all
the
rest
,
yea
then
all
,
that
all
of
them
can
say
besides
in
this
cause
,
I
endeuoured
to
defend
my
assertions
against
them
.
And
although
I
did
not
intend
to
dispute
Syllogistically
as
the
opponent
,
but
to
defend
the
truth
as
the
respondent
;
yet
this
my
defensiue
answere
is
brought
to
the
anuill
,
and
forged
into
a
Syllogisme
after
this
manner
.
If
neither
Paul
in
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
nor
Ambrose
vpon
1.
Tim.
5.1
.
(
he
should
haue
added
,
which
two
allegations
onely
I
esteeme
worth
the
answering
,
or
which
two
are
of
more
worth
then
all
the
rest
)
doe
not
mention
or
meane
any
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
then
no
pregnant
testimonie
can
be
alledged
to
that
purpose
.
But
neither
doth
Paul
,
nor
Ambrose
,
in
those
places
mention
or
meane
any
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
:
Therefore
no
pregnant
testimonie
can
be
produced
to
that
purpose
.
The
refuters
three
wonders
.
In
answering
the
proposition
,
he
wonders
,
and
wonders
againe
at
three
things
.
First
at
my
want
of
modestie
,
in
that
I
gloriously
despise
,
and
insolently
reiect
the
iudgements
of
those
diuines
,
who
besides
those
two
,
alledge
many
other
testimonies
,
when
I
say
,
I
esteeme
these
two
onely
worth
the
answering
.
Whereunto
I
answere
,
that
I
esteemed
no
other
,
in
that
shortnesse
of
time
,
worthy
to
be
stood
vpon
but
those
two
.
And
if
that
answere
will
not
suffice
him
,
I
plainely
professe
,
and
yet
without
despising
the
iudgement
of
any
learned
man
,
that
these
two
testimonies
are
the
two
maine
pillars
,
whereon
their
whole
building
leaneth
:
and
that
,
as
their
other
testimonies
depend
vpon
the
presupposall
of
these
as
giuing
witnesse
to
their
Lay-Elders
:
so
these
being
taken
from
them
,
the
rest
haue
scarcely
any
probabilitie
in
them
,
but
may
as
easily
be
reiected
,
as
obiected
.
And
this
I
will
say
,
because
I
am
so
indignely
prouoked
,
that
if
my
aduersarie
,
or
any
of
his
copartners
,
can
produce
but
any
one
testimonie
,
either
out
of
scriptures
,
or
fathers
,
that
either
may
be
compared
with
either
of
these
,
or
that
in
it selfe
,
without
an
eye
to
these
,
hath
so
much
as
any
shew
of
a
necessary
or
demonstratiue
proofe
,
I
will
then
be
content
,
that
they
should
wonder
,
&
wonder
again
,
at
my
want
of
modestie
.
Secondly
,
he
wonders
at
my
want
of
logicke
in
making
so
feeble
a
consequence
.
The
consequence
,
though
it
be
not
absolutely
necessarie
,
yet
vpon
supposall
,
that
these
are
the
two
chiefe
proofes
,
without
which
,
all
they
can
say
besides
for
their
Elders
,
is
scarce
worth
the
answering
,
it
is
necessarie
.
For
,
if
any
testimonies
proue
their
Elders
,
then
certainely
the
chiefe
,
and
which
be
,
as
it
were
,
all
in
all
.
Thirdly
,
he
wondreth
at
the
weake
proppe
,
whereby
this
consequence
is
vnderset
;
which
is
my
vnfained
profession
,
that
to
my
knowledge
,
there
were
onely
these
two
allegations
,
which
I
esteemed
(
in
that
shortnesse
of
time
)
worth
the
answering
;
which
was
reason
sufficient
for
my
insisting
on
those
two
alone
.
If
this
proppe
be
so
weake
,
let
his
knowledge
,
and
the
skill
of
all
his
adherents
,
shew
but
one
other
testimonie
comparable
to
these
two
.
But
that
he
may
leaue
both
wondring
and
wandring
,
I
doe
againe
plainely
and
confidently
affirme
,
that
the
whole
cause
of
the
Lay-Elders
relieth
on
these
two
places
;
and
therefore
as
in
the
former
negatiue
assertion
I
did
imply
;
so
now
I
expresse
,
a
challenge
to
him
and
all
his
partakers
,
to
produce
any
one
such
testimonie
if
they
can
.
This
challenge
I
say
was
implyed
,
when
I
professed
that
they
cannot
alledge
out
of
the
scriptures
,
Councels
,
or
Fathers
,
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
mentioning
or
meaning
,
any
lay
,
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
.
Ad
pag.
15.
To
this
challenge
,
what
doth
our
insulting
refuter
,
reply
?
Sundry
others
besides
these
two
I
both
could
and
would
alledge
,
and
approue
also
(
I
doubt
not
)
to
all
iudicious
and
indifferent
men
,
His
answere
to
the
challenge
.
but
that
others
before
now
haue
said
enough
to
that
purpose
.
And
at
this
time
,
(
professing
my selfe
an
answerer
onely
,
not
an
opponent
)
it
is
not
my
[
(a)
](A20733-e15610-b)
(a)
The
abort●●e
booke
hath
the●e
worde
,
no
man
can
reasonably
looke
that
we
should
dispute
the
question
.
part
to
dispute
the
questions
,
but
d●fend
the
truth
,
so
farre
onely
as
M.
D.
opposeth
to
it
in
his
Sermon
.
In
which
words
,
though
he
dares
not
,
as
you
see
,
accept
the
challenge
,
yet
he
setteth
a
good
face
vpon
it
.
For
whereas
I
said
,
and
say
againe
,
that
besides
these
two
testimonies
,
they
can
produce
no
more
of
any
moment
in
comparison
;
he
saith
,
that
hee
both
could
and
would
produce
many
more
.
He
would
,
I
doe
not
doubt
,
if
he
could
:
but
because
he
doth
not
,
you
may
be
assured
,
he
cannot
.
What
he
,
and
all
of
them
can
doe
,
he
performeth
afterwards
,
when
he
will
let
you
see
that
they
can
strike
also
;
and
yet
that
all
,
is
as
nothing
to
these
two
.
The
reasons
of
his
refusall
are
two
;
the
one
,
because
others
before
now
,
haue
said
enough
to
that
purpose
;
but
that
I
denied
vpon
certaine
knowledge
.
And
what
they
haue
said
to
any
purpose
,
hath
beene
confuted
also
before
now
;
and
that
,
though
often
repeated
,
and
oft
refuted
,
as
threed-bare
as
it
is
,
himselfe
doth
afterwards
produce
,
hauing
nothing
to
say
,
that
hath
so
much
as
a
good
shew
of
a
necessarie
proofe
,
as
hereafter
shall
appeare
.
The
other
,
because
he
being
the
answerer
onely
,
and
not
the
opponent
,
it
is
not
his
part
,
neither
can
it
reasonably
be
expected
at
his
hands
,
that
he
should
dispute
the
questions
,
but
onely
defend
the
truth
.
The
which
is
a
sophisticall
,
and
if
I
may
freely
speake
what
I
truely
thinke
,
a
lewde
shift
,
to
elude
my
answeres
and
the
reasons
thereof
,
and
to
delude
the
vnlearned
Reader
.
For
who
I
pray
you
,
be
the
opponents
and
plaintiffes
in
this
controuersie
,
wee
or
they
?
Those
which
be
in
possession
doe
not
vse
to
be
plaintiffes
.
Neither
would
there
haue
beene
any
controuersie
betwixt
vs
,
if
they
did
not
oppose
:
forasmuch
therefore
as
they
are
the
opponents
,
vrging
the
pretended
discipline
;
we
the
defendants
maintaining
the
established
discipline
among
vs
;
it
is
a
sufficient
defence
of
our
cause
,
especially
where
wee
hold
the
negatiue
,
if
wee
shewe
that
their
proofes
are
not
sufficient
;
and
their
proofes
are
not
sufficient
,
which
doe
not
necessarily
and
ineuitably
proue
,
that
which
they
vrge
.
Neither
let
them
euer
hope
to
bring
in
their
Lay-Elders
,
till
they
haue
necessarily
proued
that
they
ought
to
be
admitted
.
But
the
lewdnes
of
this
shift
is
then
most
manifest
,
when
as
I
ex
professo
vndertaking
to
answere
their
obiections
,
he
will
needs
make
me
the
opponent
:
and
where
it
is
required
of
them
,
necessarily
to
proue
what
they
say
,
and
is
sufficient
for
me
,
to
shew
that
their
proofe
is
not
necessarie
;
absurdly
,
against
all
order
of
disputation
,
he
maketh
himselfe
the
respondent
,
and
me
the
opponent
.
So
that
my
answeres
must
be
put
into
Syllogismes
,
and
his
proofes
be
thought
sufficient
,
if
he
can
but
say
,
that
they
make
not
against
his
cause
,
though
they
doe
not
proue
it
.
Examples
of
this
shamefull
dealing
wee
shall
not
want
long
.
For
in
the
discussing
of
their
allegation
out
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
which
is
their
chiefe
obiection
,
it
is
most
manifest
,
that
they
are
the
opponents
,
and
I
the
answerer
.
But
my
aduersarie
maketh
me
the
opponent
,
and
my
answeres
must
be
oppositions
,
and
so
put
into
Syllogismes
:
and
in
the
end
as
you
shall
see
,
whereas
that
is
the
onely
place
in
scripture
which
they
can
with
any
shew
of
necessarie
proofe
alledge
for
their
Elders
;
hee
would
make
the
Reader
belieue
,
that
he
hath
acquited
himselfe
well
,
if
their
Elders
be
not
necessarily
disproued
out
of
that
place
.
When
indeed
,
if
they
be
not
necessarily
and
ineuitably
proued
out
of
it
,
they
haue
no
ground
nor
warrant
for
them
in
the
scriptures
.
Againe
in
my
preface
(
where
the
refuter
vnderstandeth
me
to
haue
made
a
challenge
,
desire
nothing
but
reason
;
and
doth
not
onely
promise
to
satisfie
my
desire
,
but
also
beareth
the
Reader
in
hand
,
that
hee
hath
brought
sound
demonstrations
,
pregnant
proofes
,
arguments
strongly
grounded
vpon
the
scriptures
,
&c:
but
now
,
when
he
should
come
to
the
performance
,
when
I
againe
renew
the
challenge
;
auerring
,
that
they
haue
no
such
proofes
,
and
exspecting
that
he
should
produce
them
,
if
he
haue
any
:
his
answere
is
,
that
alas
he
is
the
respondent
,
and
it
cannot
with
any
reason
be
exspected
,
that
he
should
bring
proofes
or
dispute
the
questions
.
And
that
you
may
yet
more
fully
note
the
absurditie
of
this
disputer
,
(
of
whose
great
acts
in
this
booke
,
I
heare
no
small
vants
)
though
he
say
,
it
is
not
his
part
to
produce
proofes
,
neither
can
it
with
reason
be
exspected
of
him
,
which
afore
he
confessed
to
be
reason
:
yet
this
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
needfull
proofes
,
whereby
hee
might
proue
something
,
which
is
by
vs
denied
.
But
if
there
be
any
thing
,
which
seemeth
to
make
for
his
cause
,
and
which
we
freely
confesse
,
as
for
example
,
the
consent
of
diuerse
protestant
writers
with
them
in
some
things
,
there
he
will
be
sure
,
to
be
plentifull
in
prouing
of
that
,
which
no
man
doth
denie
.
And
this
is
the
chiefe
thing
,
which
he
and
his
consorts
in
compiling
this
booke
,
haue
laboured
.
As
if
they
should
haue
said
:
doe
you
indeed
grant
,
that
diuerse
protestant
writers
expound
such
and
such
places
as
we
doe
?
and
doe
you
not
denie
,
but
that
diuerse
of
them
agree
with
vs
in
some
things
?
Mary
that
will
we
proue
at
large
,
and
although
reason
grounded
on
scripture
,
testimonie
of
antiquitie
,
and
no
small
consent
of
newe
writers
be
against
vs
:
yet
we
will
make
a
faire
muster
of
those
newe
writers
which
be
for
vs
:
and
though
the
greatest
part
of
them
be
parties
in
the
cause
as
well
as
our selues
,
yet
we
will
alledge
them
as
witnesses
without
exception
,
and
will
neuer
haue
done
with
alledging
their
testimonies
.
For
though
the
learned
will
easily
discerne
the
desperatenesse
of
our
cause
,
yet
the
vnlearned
sort
,
who
are
carried
away
with
shewes
,
seeing
such
a
multitude
of
learned
men
on
our
side
,
will
still
cleaue
vnto
vs
,
&c.
And
this
shall
suffice
(
saith
hee
)
for
his
proposition
.
To
his
assumption
I
answere
,
by
denying
it
,
and
affirming
that
both
these
places
doe
speake
of
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
and
that
I
will
cleare
(
as
the
opponent
,
no
doubt
)
by
the
places
themselues
,
which
now
come
to
be
handled
.
CHAP.
IIII.
Containing
my
first
Reason
,
why
Lay-Elders
are
not
proued
,
out
of
1.
Tm.
5.17
.
Serm.
Sect.
3.
pag.
9.
The
Presbyters
(
saith
Paul
)
that
rule
well
,
let
them
be
accounted
worthie
of
double
honour
,
especially
they
,
who
labour
in
the
Word
and
doctrine
.
From
whence
they
gather
a
distinction
of
Presbyters
,
or
Elders
;
that
some
are
Gouerning
Elders
onely
;
others
,
also
Ministers
.
Wherevnto
I
answere
,
that
not
any
of
the
Fathers
,
nor
any
other
before
our
age
,
did
euer
vnderstand
this
text
of
anie
other
,
but
of
the
Ministers
of
the
word
;
they
conceiuing
of
it
,
as
if
the
Apostle
had
saide
,
Let
those
Ministers
or
Priests
which
rule
well
,
&c.
THeir
reason
briefly
standeth
thus
:
The
Apostle
in
this
place
,
doth
set
downe
2.
sorts
of
Elders
,
the
one
,
onely
ruling
;
the
other
labouring
also
,
in
the
word
and
doctrine
.
Therefore
besides
the
Ministers
which
laboured
in
the
Word
and
Doctrine
,
there
were
other
Presbyters
or
Elders
,
which
were
no
Ministers
.
This
,
as
I
sayd
,
is
the
principall
reason
that
is
alleadged
for
the
Lay-Elders
,
wherewith
the
Disciplinarians
doe
wonderfully
please
themselues
.
T.
B.
is
so
confident
,
that
hee
iudgeth
them
to
be
of
no
sound
iudgement
that
will
not
acknowledge
two
sorts
of
elders
to
be
contained
in
this
place
.
D●
grad.
Minist.
●
.
13
Another
T.
B.
that
spied
them
vnder
the
wings
of
the
4.
Beasts
,
Apoc:
4.
saith
plainely
:
they
are
blind
,
and
of
no
vnderstanding
,
that
cannot
or
will
not
see
them
in
this
place
.
T.
C.
setting
some
colour
vpon
Act.
14.23
.
to
make
it
shewe
for
Lay-Elders
,
at
length
he
saith
,
Why
should
wee
follow
coniectures
?
when
S.
Paul
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
doth
declare
what
these
Elders
are
?
The
author
of
the
counterpoison
affirmeth
,
that
the
Apostle
in
expresse
words
,
doth
in
this
place
set
downe
their
two
sorts
of
Elders
.
And
this
is
vsuall
with
them
all
,
to
confirme
their
exposition
of
other
places
which
are
ambiguous
,
by
this
which
they
esteeme
most
cleare
.
To
their
reason
I
answered
,
by
denying
their
antecedent
,
and
because
I
would
not
shake
off
the
opponents
with
a
bare
deniall
as
enemies
,
but
satisfie
them
as
bretheren
,
I
yeelded
some
reasons
of
my
deniall
,
which
I
set
downe
in
2.
degrees
.
For
whereas
they
vrge
the
Lay-Elders
,
as
necessarily
collected
out
of
this
place
;
First
,
I
answere
,
there
is
no
necessitie
that
the
place
should
be
vnderstood
of
any
other
but
Ministers
.
And
secondlie
,
that
this
place
is
so
farre
from
concluding
Lay-Elders
,
that
it
doth
exclude
them
,
or
conclude
against
them
.
The
former
againe
,
I
maintaine
by
two
reasons
:
The
which
I
can
well
bee
content
that
my
aduersary
shall
reduce
into
Syllogismes
,
so
hee
would
frame
them
,
as
beeing
the
reasons
of
a
respondent
,
that
is
,
such
as
bee
propounded
,
to
shew
that
there
is
no
necessitie
of
their
inference
from
this
Text.
For
that
as
I
saide
,
is
a
sufficient
defence
for
the
respondent
.
The
first
reason
is
this
;
If
none
of
the
Fathers
,
nor
any
other
before
our
age
,
did
euer
vnderstand
this
text
of
Lay-Elders
,
but
all
with
one
consent
,
conceiued
of
it
,
as
spoken
onely
of
Ministers
:
Then
is
it
not
necessary
,
nor
yet
likely
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
meant
in
this
place
.
For
surely
if
there
had
beene
anie
such
Elders
in
the
Apostles
times
,
the
ancient
Fathers
,
which
were
neere
those
times
,
had
bene
more
likely
to
haue
noted
these
two
sortes
of
Elders
,
then
those
who
came
so
manie
hundred
yeares
after
.
But
none
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
nor
any
other
before
our
age
,
euer
vnderstood
this
Text
of
Lay-Elders
:
but
all
with
one
consent
,
conceiued
of
it
as
spoken
of
Ministers
.
Therefore
it
is
not
necessarie
,
nor
yet
likely
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
here
meant
.
Of
this
Syllogisme
he
denyeth
both
the
the
parts
.
Ad
Pag.
1●
His
first
reaso●
of
his
denyal●
of
the
consequence
.
And
of
his
deniall
▪
of
the
consequence
in
the
proposition
,
hee
giueth
three
reasons
.
The
first
,
because
wee
may
not
argue
negatiuely
,
concerning
the
sense
of
the
Scriptures
,
from
the
authoritie
of
the
Fathers
,
&c.
Wherevnto
I
answere
,
that
I
argue
as
affirmatiuely
from
the
consent
of
the
Fathers
,
and
of
all
before
our
age
,
who
alwaies
conceiued
of
these
words
,
as
if
the
Apostle
had
said
,
Let
the
Ministers
or
Priests
which
rule
well
,
&c:
as
negatiuely
:
Neither
doe
I
reason
as
he
would
make
me
to
argue
,
that
either
because
this
place
is
not
by
the
Fathers
expounded
,
of
Lay-Elders
,
therefore
that
exposition
is
necessarily
to
be
reiected
:
or
because
it
is
alwaies
by
them
interpreted
,
as
speaking
of
Ministers
onely
:
Therefore
this
interpretation
is
necessarily
to
be
receiued
.
But
thus
I
reason
,
that
this
exposition
is
more
likely
,
which
hath
the
perpetuall
and
vniuersall
consent
of
the
Fathers
,
and
of
all
writers
before
our
age
,
then
that
which
not
onely
hath
not
their
allowance
,
but
is
cleane
contrarie
to
their
interpretation
.
Wherevnto
I
now
adde
that
,
which
my
aduersarie
will
neuer
be
able
to
answere
.
That
exposition
of
the
word
Presbyters
.
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
which
is
agreable
to
the
perpetuall
vse
of
the
word
in
Scriptures
,
Councells
,
and
Fathers
,
is
to
be
admitted
,
and
contrariwise
,
that
exposition
thereof
,
which
cannot
bee
warranted
by
any
one
example
or
testimony
,
either
of
Scriptures
,
Councells
,
or
Fathers
,
(
it
being
a
word
in
all
of
them
of
frequent
vse
)
may
not
be
admitted
,
and
much
lesse
vrged
,
as
the
onely
true
sense
of
that
place
.
But
by
the
word
Presbyteri
to
vnderstand
the
Ministers
of
the
Word
and
Sacraments
alone
,
is
an
exposition
thereof
,
agreeable
to
the
perpetuall
vse
of
the
word
,
in
Scriptures
,
Councels
,
and
Fathers
;
and
not
one
testimony
can
be
alleadged
,
where
the
word
(
signifying
an
Ecclesiasticall
function
)
doth
import
any
other
but
a
Minister
:
and
contrarywise
,
to
vnderstand
the
word
Presbyters
in
that
place
,
as
containing
in
the
signification
thereof
Lay-Elders
,
is
such
an
exposition
of
that
word
as
cannot
be
warranted
by
any
one
example
or
testimony
,
either
of
Scriptures
,
Councels
,
or
Fathers
.
Therefore
the
former
interpretation
,
expounding
that
word
of
Ministers
alone
,
is
to
be
receiued
;
and
the
other
,
including
Lay-Elders
,
is
not
to
be
admitted
,
and
much
lesse
is
it
to
be
vrged
,
as
the
onely
true
sense
of
that
place
.
For
my
part
,
vntill
my
aduersarie
shall
bee
able
to
disprooue
this
assumption
by
some
one
instance
,
which
I
am
well
assured
hee
shall
neuer
be
able
to
doe
:
I
will
take
it
for
graunted
,
and
in
my
conscience
am
fully
resolued
,
that
the
Apostles
meaning
in
this
place
,
is
all
one
,
as
if
he
had
said
;
Let
the
Ministers
or
Priests
which
rule
well
,
&c
:
which
argument
,
if
no
more
could
bee
added
,
is
sufficient
to
shew
,
that
Lay-Elders
cannot
be
prooued
out
of
this
Text.
That
interpretation
which
hath
the
consent
of
the
new
writers
,
though
contrary
to
the
exposition
of
the
Fathers
,
is
to
be
preferred
before
that
which
hath
the
consent
of
the
Fathers
.
The
Interpretation
of
the
word
Presbyters
,
as
implying
Lay-Elders
,
hath
the
consent
of
new
writers
.
Therefore
that
is
to
bee
preferred
.
The
proposition
is
propounded
.
pag.
20.
lin.
22.
&c:
the
assumption
is
set
downe
,
pag.
16.
lin.
17.
&c.
To
the
parts
of
which
syllogisme
before
I
answere
,
I
must
knowe
of
the
disputer
,
whether
he
meane
the
consent
of
all
the
new
writers
,
or
not
,
for
if
the
word
all
bee
not
added
,
the
proposition
is
absolutely
to
be
denied
.
For
it
is
against
sense
,
that
the
opinions
of
some
new
writers
should
be
preferred
,
not
onely
to
other
,
and
perhaps
as
many
,
and
as
learned
new
writers
;
but
also
to
the
generall
and
perpetuall
consent
of
all
writers
before
our
time
.
If
it
be
added
,
then
is
the
assumption
manifestly
false
.
For
that
exposition
hath
not
the
consent
of
all
,
nor
as
I
am
perswaded
,
of
the
most
protestant
diuines
.
Notwithstanding
,
hee
endeuoureth
to
prooue
both
.
That
the
proposition
is
true
,
Rheti
.
l.
1.
c.
15.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
ancient
are
of
greatest
credit
.
If
it
concerne
a
matter
of
story
or
fact
,
as
whether
there
were
any
Lay-Elders
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
or
not
;
I
would
without
comparison
,
giue
credit
to
the
ancient
writers
,
who
liued
in
,
or
neere
those
times
,
then
to
them
who
liued
13.
or
14.
hundred
yeares
after
them
.
Yea
,
but
the
points
being
in
question
in
these
dayes
,
and
not
in
the
Fathers
,
the
newe
writers
haue
beene
the
more
occasioned
to
search
into
them
.
Tell
me
then
,
why
was
not
this
point
called
into
question
in
the
Fathers
times
?
Was
it
not
because
there
was
none
to
contradict
their
iudgement
?
And
doth
not
this
proue
,
that
the
Assertion
,
which
in
this
cause
is
opposite
to
antiquitie
,
is
to
be
condemned
of
noueltie
?
Againe
,
you
say
the
iudgement
of
the
new
writers
is
to
be
preferred
,
because
they
haue
more
searched
into
the
matter
,
as
being
now
in
question
.
Wherevnto
I
answere
,
that
in
this
very
respect
,
the
authoritie
of
the
ancient
is
to
bee
preferred
,
for
the
reason
which
the
Philosopher
giueth
in
the
place
before
alleadged
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
The
olde
be
of
most
credit
,
for
they
are
vncorrupt
,
or
vnpartiall
.
Whereas
contrary
wise
,
the
new
writers
,
which
oppose
themselues
to
vs
,
who
follow
the
auncient
,
are
parties
in
the
cause
;
and
therefore
to
be
preiudged
as
partiall
.
And
whereas
he
challengeth
mee
to
shew
if
I
can
,
what
mou●th
〈◊〉
to
thinke
that
the
spirit
of
God
,
who
enlightned
them
,
as
touching
the
substance
,
in
which
they
were
so
sound
,
did
faile
them
in
this
particular
:
I
aske
him
whether
hee
doth
thinke
they
were
free
from
all
errour
or
mistaking
in
the
expounding
of
Scriptures
?
and
if
hee
thinketh
that
they
did
faile
in
any
particular
,
I
would
desire
him
to
shew
what
moueth
him
to
thinke
,
that
the
spirit
of
God
,
who
enlightned
them
as
touching
the
substance
,
in
which
they
were
so
sound
,
did
faile
them
in
that
particular
?
This
therfore
was
a
meere
colour
:
or
if
there
were
any
weight
in
it
,
might
not
I
more
iustly
make
the
like
demaund
of
him
concerning
the
Fathers
;
what
reason
he
hath
to
think
,
that
the
auncient
Fathers
who
had
such
profound
knowledge
in
the
greatest
mysteries
of
diuinitie
,
whereby
they
confounded
the
most
subtill
heretikes
,
should
be
ignorant
of
those
things
which
appertaine
to
the
outward
gouernement
of
the
Church
?
or
what
reason
he
hath
to
imagine
,
that
the
writers
of
our
age
do
know
what
was
done
or
not
done
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
better
then
the
Fathers
,
that
liued
in
those
times
?
For
that
also
is
to
be
noted
,
how
hee
playeth
the
egregious
Mountae
●banke
,
in
commending
and
setting
forth
his
authorities
in
most
glorious
manner
.
Luther
that
rose
vp
as
a
bright
morning
starre
,
euen
another
Elias
of
these
times
.
Bullinger
,
that
learned
and
faithfull
Pastor
of
the
Church
of
Zuricke
:
Peter
Martyr
,
that
burning
and
shining
lampe
of
Oxeforde
:
Zanchius
,
a
man
admirable
for
iudgement
and
paines
:
the
very
Oedipus
,
(
saith
the
abortiue
booke
)
of
the
Schoole-mens
riddles
:
Chemnitius
,
the
worthy
examiner
of
the
Tridentine
Councell
,
and
ouerthrower
of
their
heresies
:
Olde
Father
Nowell
,
in
his
booke
published
by
authoritie
,
and
commaunded
to
be
taught
:
D.
Whttaker
,
who
like
another
Dauid
,
fought
valiantly
against
the
popish
Goliah
.
D.
Fulke
,
one
of
the
wonders
of
our
daies
,
&c.
Iust
commendations
I
confesse
of
worthy
men
,
whose
memories
are
blessed
.
Notwithstanding
when
he
hath
all
done
,
one
good
reason
alledged
,
though
it
were
by
the
meanest
of
his
25
,
had
bene
of
more
worth
then
the
allegation
of
all
their
authorities
,
though
they
had
bene
as
many
more
.
But
this
was
done
as
I
said
,
to
please
the
vnlearned
:
for
otherwise
where
the
new
writers
gainsay
him
and
his
fellowes
,
as
they
do
in
the
points
of
their
new-found
parish
discipline
,
they
set
not
a
button
by
them
all
.
But
if
bragging
of
all
,
or
almost
all
the
new
writers
,
he
name
but
25
,
Aduers
.
falso
nomi●
.
Episc.
331.
For
in
the
place
by
him
cited
,
hee
doth
not
so
much
as
speake
of
this
Text
,
and
much
lesse
expound
it
:
But
hee
speaketh
onely
of
the
19.
verse
,
Receiue
not
an
accusation
against
an
Elder
:
where
vnderstanding
Elder
,
according
to
the
vse
of
the
word
,
in
the
first
verse
of
that
chapter
,
as
a
word
of
age
,
as
well
as
of
office
,
(
as
Chrysostome
also
doth
,
though
he
vnderstand
,
vers:
17
:
of
Ministers
onely
)
he
saith
,
that
how
soeuer
the
popish
Bishops
,
against
whome
hee
writeth
,
did
expound
this
place
of
Priests
,
that
is
themselues
,
that
they
might
be
the
more
free
from
accusation
or
reproofe
:
yet
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
Presbyteri
,
that
is
,
Elder
and
graue
men
,
(
for
such
then
,
bare
rule
in
the
Church
)
meaning
thereby
most
plainely
auncient
Ministers
,
as
appeareth
by
the
words
following
;
which
the
refuter
hath
Sophistically
and
shamefully
peruerted
.
For
the
Apostle
doth
not
speake
,
De
ijs
Episcopis
(
saith
Luther
,
)
&
Sacerdotibus
,
qui
iam
nostra
aetate
plerumque
sunt
aetate
florenti
&
penè
adolescentes
,
sed
de
senibus
&
grand●●
bus
in
Scriptura
peritis
loquitur
;
Of
those
Bishops
and
Priests
,
which
now
in
our
time
are
,
for
the
most
part
of
a
flourishing
age
,
and
in
a
manner
young
youthes
,
and
lusty
gallants
,
(
which
hee
meant
in
the
words
going
a
little
before
,
when
he
calleth
them
Penelopes
sponsos
,
)
but
hee
speaketh
of
such
as
be
aged
,
and
ancient
men
,
skilfull
in
the
Scriptures
.
Obserue
now
our
Sophysters
dealing
.
First
hee
saith
,
Luther
expoundeth
this
verse
of
Lay-Elders
;
when
as
Luther
doth
not
so
much
as
speake
of
this
text
:
2.
that
he
should
say
,
their
Lay-elders
ruled
in
the
Church
then
,
when
hee
plainely
speaketh
of
ancient
and
aged
Ministers
.
3.
that
Luther
denieth
simplie
,
that
Paul
speaketh
of
BB.
and
Priests
.
For
so
hee
citeth
his
words
;
Neque
enim
loquitur
de
Episcopis
&
Sacerdotibus
,
when
he
saith
,
that
he
speaketh
not
of
such
Bishops
as
were
in
his
time
,
young
&
lusty
men
;
but
of
such
as
were
aged
&
skilfull
in
the
scriptures
.
Bullinger
in
neither
place
alledged
,
doth
say
,
that
there
were
elders
in
the
chuch
,
which
were
not
ministers
,
but
rather
the
contrary
.
For
on
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
he
vnderstandeth
that
text
,
as
requiring
the
stipend
of
the
ministery
,
&
seemeth
to
confound
the
words
Ministers
and
Presbyters
in
that
sentence
which
the
refuter
citeth
by
halues
.
Cum
emin
varià
sint
in
ecclesia
munia
non
vnius
quoque
generis
ministri
aut
Presbyteri
sunt
.
For
where
Bullinger
saith
,
Ministers
or
Presbyters
be
not
all
of
one
kind
,
by
Presbyters
,
meaning
no
other
but
Ministers
,
he
citeth
him
thus
:
the
Elders
are
not
of
one
kind
,
leauing
out
the
word
Ministers
.
And
vpon
the
words
following
in
the
nineteenth
verse
,
he
saith
,
as
to
a
diligent
&
good
Minister
of
Christ
sustenance
is
due
,
so
also
defence
,
the
reason
of
which
law
is
this
,
a
Presbyter
is
the
Minister
of
truth
,
and
truth
procureth
hatred
,
The
rest
,
in
the
places
cited
,
doe
acknowledge
a
second
sort
of
Elders
,
besides
those
which
chiefely
laboured
in
the
word
and
doctrine
,
but
whe
they
were
of
the
laitie
or
Clergie
they
doe
not
mention
.
As
for
D.
Fulk
in
his
answere
to
the
Rhemists
on
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
he
giuing
two
interpretations
of
that
place
,
preferreth
that
whereby
the
Apostles
words
are
vnderstood
of
Ministers
or
Priests
onely
,
that
as
euery
one
of
them
laboureth
more
in
preaching
and
teaching
,
he
is
so
much
the
more
to
be
honoured
.
But
of
his
assumption
this
is
more
then
enough
,
seeing
this
is
not
the
question
betweene
vs
,
whether
any
of
the
new
writers
doe
stand
for
the
new
Elders
,
for
that
is
confessed
.
His
third
reason
for
the
deniall
of
my
proposition
:
Ad
pag.
21.
His
third
reason
:
because
my
exposition
is
not
made
by
any
of
the
Fathers
.
that
if
that
consequence
is
good
,
my
interpretation
of
this
place
is
naught
,
seeing
it
hath
not
so
much
as
the
naked
shade
of
any
father
to
couer
it
.
Naked
to
couer
!
But
what
figge
leaues
can
he
find
to
couer
this
naked
,
and
shamelesse
vntruth
?
For
whereas
my
exposition
consisteth
of
two
points
,
the
first
and
principall
that
by
Presbyters
I
vnderstand
,
Ministers
,
as
if
the
Apostle
had
said
let
the
Ministers
that
rule
well
&c:
Primas
.
in
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
〈◊〉
1.
Tim.
●
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
This
is
to
rise
well
,
to
spare
or
forbare
nothing
for
the
care
of
the
sheepe
.
§
Sect.
7.
the
second
that
by
the
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
commonly
are
translated
gouerning
well
,
I
vnderstand
the
commendable
performance
of
their
duetie
in
generall
,
for
the
latter
I
alledged
the
authoritie
of
Ierome
and
of
the
Syricke
Paraphrast
,
to
whom
others
might
be
added
;
for
the
former
,
I
haue
the
generall
consent
of
all
the
Fathers
and
of
all
writers
before
our
age
,
who
haue
expounded
this
place
,
and
not
one
of
them
can
be
produced
to
the
contrarie
;
and
yet
he
is
not
ashamed
to
say
,
that
my
interpretation
hath
not
the
patronage
of
any
one
Father
.
And
thus
much
of
the
proposition
:
in
confuting
whereof
,
when
he
hath
spent
fiue
whole
pages
with
very
ill
successe
as
you
see
,
he
concludeth
with
as
vaine
and
causelesse
a
bragge
,
as
his
successe
was
badde
.
The
assumption
(
that
none
of
the
Fathers
nor
any
before
our
age
did
euer
expound
this
text
of
any
but
Ministers
)
though
he
dares
not
plainely
denie
it
;
yet
that
it
may
appeare
,
how
he
setteth
himselfe
to
wrangle
with
euery
thing
,
he
seeketh
all
the
corners
of
his
wit
to
find
some
starting
holes
:
out
of
which
he
may
easily
be
driuen
,
if
the
Reader
wil
but
remember
these
two
things
.
First
,
that
I
speake
of
such
as
haue
before
our
age
,
(
meaning
hoc
seculum
this
centurie
or
hundred
of
yeares
)
expounded
this
place
,
either
in
their
commentaries
,
or
in
their
other
writings
,
which
be
extant
.
For
it
were
foolish
presumption
to
rely
vpon
their
iudgements
,
who
,
either
did
not
write
of
it
,
or
whose
writings
are
not
extant
,
whereby
their
iudgement
might
be
knowne
.
Secondly
,
that
I
am
in
this
point
the
respondent
,
answering
their
allegation
out
of
this
place
;
and
that
the
refuter
is
the
opponent
;
who
,
if
he
will
say
any
thing
to
the
purpose
,
must
proue
by
good
instance
the
affirmatiue
,
that
some
one
of
the
Fathers
,
or
some
other
before
our
age
hath
expounded
this
place
of
Lay-Elders
;
and
not
absurdly
vrge
me
,
being
the
respondent
,
to
proue
the
negatiue
;
which
as
it
cannot
be
otherwise
proued
,
but
by
alledging
,
that
no
instance
can
be
giuen
to
the
contrarie
;
so
might
it
be
easily
disproued
by
any
one
instance
,
if
any
such
could
be
giuen
.
If
these
two
things
be
remembred
,
the
bare
recitall
of
his
fiue
exceptions
wil
be
a
sufficient
euidence
of
his
folly
.
First
diuerse
of
the
Fathers
may
so
haue
expounded
it
,
though
their
writings
be
not
come
to
our
hands
:
there
is
one
instance
,
therfore
some
haue
so
expounded
it
.
2.
Some
of
them
as
Augustine
,
Ierom
,
Chrysostome
,
&c:
haue
so
written
,
that
th●y
may
well
be
so
vnderstood
,
(
which
is
vtterly
false
for
they
vnderstand
by
Presbyters
,
no
other
but
Ministers
)
ergo
,
&c.
3.
Others
write
so
briefly
,
that
they
expound
not
the
former
wordes
of
this
text
,
(
because
Presbyter
to
them
was
as
plaine
as
Minister
to
vs
)
ergo
,
&c.
4
The
ancientest
of
them
(
as
Ignatius
,
Polycarpus
,
Tertullian
,
Origen
,
Cyprian
,
&c:
)
whose
workes
are
now
extant
,
though
they
left
nothing
written
vpon
this
place
,
yet
(
no
doubt
)
they
vnderstood
it
of
Lay-Elders
;
for
they
alwaies
in
their
writings
(
wherein
Presbyter
is
oft
mentioned
)
doe
vnderstand
thereby
a
Minister
of
the
word
,
yea
but
they
were
most
like
to
beare
witnesse
to
this
truth
.
No
doubt
for
three
of
them
,
Ignatius
,
Polycarpus
,
&
Cyprian
,
were
Metropolitan
Bishops
;
&
by
the
other
two
,
Tertullian
and
Origen
,
who
were
Presbyters
you
may
easily
conceiue
,
what
manner
of
men
the
Presbyters
(
who
were
distinguished
from
Bishops
)
were
.
Yea
but
in
many
mens
iudgements
(
who
would
faine
haue
it
so
)
they
did
giue
witnesse
to
this
truth
,
though
they
left
nothing
written
vpon
this
place
.
But
the
fift
passeth
all
,
for
therein
hee
giueth
plaine
instances
I
warrant
you
of
some
before
our
age
,
&c.
For
Luther
,
Bucer
,
Bullinger
,
and
diuerse
others
in
their
time
,
vnderstood
this
place
of
Lay-Elders
,
therefore
diuerse
before
our
age
.
The
antecedent
he
taketh
for
granted
,
as
well
as
he
might
,
because
as
we
heard
before
how
Luther
who
doth
not
speake
of
this
text
,
by
Presbyteri
vnderstandeth
verse
.
19.
ancient
Ministers
,
and
Bullinger
expounds
it
not
of
Lay-Elders
;
so
,
what
Bucer
saith
,
we
haue
not
yet
heard
.
But
the
consequence
he
proueth
by
such
an
argument
,
as
sheweth
he
was
very
neare
driuen
,
because
D.
King
in
a
Sermon
preached
in
the
yeare
1606.
saith
,
In
Cant.
8
.
1●
.
that
the
Geneua
discipline
had
not
at
that
time
seene
the
age
of
a
man
,
though
you
should
reckon
the
age
of
a
man
not
at
an
100.
but
70.
yeares
,
and
well
might
he
say
so
.
For
in
Geneua
it
was
first
conceiued
in
the
yeare
1537.
Ecclesiam
compo●e●●
and
had
drawne
the
first
draught
of
it
,
got
the
assent
of
the
Senate
and
people
of
Geneua
on
the
20.
of
July
,
1537.
howbeit
before
the
yeare
,
But
why
should
time
which
is
so
precious
be
spent
in
confuting
such
seelly
shifts
,
whereof
euen
the
refuter
himselfe
is
by
this
time
(
I
hope
)
ashamed
.
CHAP.
V.
Containing
my
second
reason
,
why
Lay-Elders
are
not
proued
out
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
Serm.
Sect.
4.
pag:
9.
Neither
doth
the
Apostle
indeed
note
two
sorts
of
Elders
,
as
they
imagine
,
but
two
duties
of
the
Ministers
,
&c:
to
pag.
11.
med.
IN
these
words
is
set
downe
the
second
reason
of
my
exception
against
their
allegation
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
prouing
that
there
is
no
necessitie
this
place
should
be
vnderstood
,
as
they
imagine
,
of
Lay-Elders
.
The
reason
standeth
thus
:
If
the
words
may
very
well
be
vnderstood
of
two
duties
of
Ministers
,
the
one
generall
,
to
be
good
presidents
,
the
other
special
,
to
labour
in
the
word
&
doctrine
,
in
respect
whereof
the
Apostle
requireth
double
honour
to
be
yeelded
vnto
them
,
then
is
there
no
necessitie
that
this
place
should
be
vnderstood
as
they
imagine
of
Lay-Elders
:
But
the
Antecedent
is
true
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
I
might
haue
reasoned
thus
.
If
diuerse
and
sundry
expositions
,
all
of
them
vnderstanding
this
place
of
Ministers
alone
,
may
be
giuen
,
and
each
of
them
more
probable
or
likely
then
that
which
is
for
the
Lay-Elders
;
then
is
there
no
necessitie
,
nor
yet
likelihood
,
that
the
place
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
:
But
diuerse
and
sundry
such
expositions
may
be
giuen
,
as
after
you
shall
heare
.
Therefore
there
is
no
necessitie
nor
yet
likelihood
,
that
this
text
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
.
But
I
thought
it
sufficient
to
insist
in
this
one
exposition
,
which
seemeth
to
me
to
haue
beene
the
very
meaning
of
the
Apostle
.
For
seeing
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
Presbyter
,
as
it
noteth
an
Ecclesiasticall
person
,
doth
alwaies
in
all
other
places
,
in
the
writings
both
of
the
Apostles
&
Fathers
,
signifie
a
Minister
or
Priest
,
and
no
one
testimonie
can
be
alledged
to
the
contrarie
:
what
sense
is
there
,
that
it
should
otherwise
be
expounded
here
,
vnlesse
the
other
words
of
the
sentence
did
inforce
so
much
.
But
that
they
doe
not
,
seeing
they
note
onely
two
duties
of
Ministers
,
for
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
the
generall
dutie
of
the
Ministers
,
that
is
,
to
be
good
presidents
;
and
to
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
,
is
the
speciall
duetie
,
for
which
especially
honour
is
due
to
them
.
I
had
once
thought
,
that
the
especiall
dueties
of
a
Minister
had
here
beene
mentioned
,
the
one
respecting
his
behauiour
onely
;
the
other
,
the
ministerie
of
the
word
,
vnto
which
all
the
duties
of
a
Minister
may
be
referred
.
But
I
did
consider
,
it
would
be
obiected
,
that
the
meaning
of
the
Apostle
was
not
,
that
double
honour
should
be
giuen
to
Ministers
,
that
onely
liued
well
,
vnlesse
they
did
also
preach
:
for
in
another
place
where
he
would
haue
Ministers
to
be
honored
and
loued
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
more
then
aboundantly
for
their
worke
sake
,
which
labour
among
you
,
and
which
gouerne
you
in
the
Lord
:
and
therefore
I
insisted
in
this
exposition
,
against
which
,
well
may
my
aduersarie
cauill
after
his
fashion
,
but
hee
can
take
no
iust
exception
;
especially
,
if
the
emphasis
or
force
of
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
be
not
neglected
.
As
for
his
triuiall
gibes
,
going
lame
vpon
both
feete
,
of
going
vpright
on
one
legge
and
halting
of
another
,
of
halting
on
the
former
legge
,
and
limping
of
the
hinder
legge
:
they
are
fitter
for
him
to
vse
,
then
for
me
to
answere
.
But
though
hee
boasteth
,
that
my
Syllogismes
hitherto
haue
beene
lame
on
both
feete
;
yet
I
trust
the
iudicious
Reader
will
testifie
with
me
,
that
he
hath
not
beene
able
as
yet
,
to
disproue
any
one
proposition
,
or
assumption
,
which
hitherto
hath
beene
produced
.
And
I
am
verily
perswaded
,
for
all
his
gibes
,
he
will
haue
no
better
successe
in
those
which
remaine
.
lame
on
both
feete
,
now
I
goe
vpright
on
one
legge
,
the
consequence
of
the
proposition
being
good
.
But
yet
he
saith
I
am
neuer
the
nearer
,
for
on
my
assumption
as
it
were
on
the
other
legge
,
I
halt
downe
right
still
.
But
shall
the
proposition
escape
so
,
thinke
we
?
No
,
I
warrant
you
:
though
hee
can
obiect
nothing
against
the
matter
,
yet
he
must
needs
cauill
at
the
words
,
for
he
will
play
small
game
rather
then
s●t
out
:
two
faults
hee
findeth
with
the
words
,
charging
me
that
I
speake
vnfitly
and
vnkindly
.
vnfitly
,
when
I
say
the
Apostle
doth
here
note
two
duties
of
Ministers
,
the
one
generall
,
the
other
speciall
.
What
logicke
or
reason
is
there
in
this
kind
of
speech
,
saith
he
.
What
opposition
betwixt
these
two
duties
?
so
much
is
he
set
vpon
opposition
and
diuision
,
that
hee
thinkes
there
is
no
reason
in
that
speech
,
where
is
no
opposition
.
And
what
is
the
logicke
that
this
logicaster
doth
teach
me
?
forsooth
I
should
haue
said
,
that
the
Apostle
first
speaketh
of
the
Ministers
dutie
in
generall
,
and
afterwards
in
speciall
.
Thus
,
in
disprouing
the
manner
of
my
speech
he
doth
vnwittingly
approue
it
:
such
is
his
iudgement
.
For
if
the
Apostle
first
speaketh
of
the
dutie
in
generall
,
and
afterwards
in
speciall
;
then
doth
hee
speake
of
two
duties
,
the
one
generall
,
the
other
speciall
.
For
when
you
speake
of
a
dutie
in
generall
,
doe
you
not
meane
a
generall
dutie
?
and
when
you
mention
a
dutie
in
speciall
,
doe
you
not
meane
a
speciall
dutie
?
Yes
,
your selfe
doe
speake
so
pag.
25.
where
you
say
,
the
duties
are
in
the
former
clause
,
generall
;
in
the
latter
,
speciall
.
Neither
doth
that
need
to
offend
you
,
that
I
call
them
two
,
when
you
speake
of
them
in
the
same
place
in
the
plurall
number
.
For
if
the
one
be
not
the
other
,
as
you
will
grant
,
then
there
is
no
question
,
but
they
are
two
.
But
,
if
want
of
opposition
was
the
fault
of
my
speech
,
what
opposition
I
beseech
you
is
in
yours
?
or
what
logicke
was
in
this
,
to
require
opposition
betwixt
the
whole
and
the
part
?
or
if
you
conceiued
of
Dutie
as
the
Genus
,
and
of
this
speech
as
a
distribution
thereof
,
what
logicke
was
it
,
not
to
discerne
an
opposition
in
a
distribution
of
duties
into
generall
and
speciall
?
for
generall
and
speciall
I
hope
be
opposite
.
All
this
notwithstanding
,
my
logicke
maister
chideth
me
for
want
of
logicke
.
If
a
man
saith
he
should
say
,
there
are
two
duties
of
a
Logician
,
the
one
generall
,
to
reason
well
,
the
other
speciall
,
to
iudge
well
,
would
he
not
be
thought
to
speake
of
logicke
,
without
logicke
?
Yes
verily
,
if
in
so
speaking
hee
should
intend
a
perfect
distribution
of
logicall
duties
:
Which
,
notwithstanding
your
cauills
,
might
thus
be
performed
.
The
duties
of
a
Logician
are
either
generall
,
as
that
which
is
comprehended
in
the
definition
of
Logicke
,
to
reason
well
:
or
speciall
,
as
those
which
be
contained
in
the
distribution
of
Logicke
,
to
inuent
well
,
and
to
iudge
well
.
But
,
if
in
imitation
of
the
Apostles
speech
,
you
should
say
,
Logicians
that
reason
well
,
that
is
all
good
Logicians
,
are
to
be
honoured
,
especially
those
which
are
iudicious
,
or
which
doe
excell
in
iudgement
,
I
might
note
out
of
this
speech
,
not
two
sorts
of
Logicians
,
but
two
duties
or
faculties
of
all
Logicians
,
in
respect
whereof
they
are
to
be
honoured
;
the
one
generall
,
to
reason
well
,
the
other
speciall
to
iudge
well
,
disposed
not
in
a
distribution
,
but
in
a
comparatiue
sentence
,
which
some
Logicians
call
axioma
relatae
qnantitatis
,
wherin
the
duties
of
a
Logician
are
thus
compared
;
that
whereas
Logicians
are
to
be
honoured
for
the
performance
of
their
take
libertie
,
to
disgrace
,
reuile
,
slaunder
,
and
libell
,
against
our
betters
,
we
may
not
be
touched
in
the
least
degree
▪
neither
will
wee
sticke
obliquè
to
reuile
him
,
The
assumption
was
this
;
This
assumption
containing
the
exposition
of
this
place
,
hee
oppugneth
with
all
his
force
,
cauilling
that
it
is
but
a
bare
shift
,
and
such
as
will
not
serue
my
turne
:
and
this
hee
vndertaketh
to
proue
by
three
reasons
,
which
will
prooue
nothing
,
but
his
owne
want
of
iudgement
.
For
,
Ad
pag.
2.
&
●4
.
as
touching
the
first
:
Is
not
this
extreame
want
of
iudgement
,
to
alledge
the
manifold
expositions
of
this
place
,
as
a
matter
of
great
disaduantage
to
vs
;
when
as
indeed
,
it
notably
disaduantageth
his
cause
?
especially
,
to
triumph
and
insult
ouer
vs
for
this
cause
,
Saying
Loe
here
,
how
their
tongues
and
pennes
in
the
exposition
of
this
place
are
diuided
,
as
in
the
building
of
the
Tower
of
Babell
:
and
how
they
hauing
no
sure
holde
to
trust
vnto
,
flie
from
one
to
another
,
as
Zidkia●h
went
from
chamber
to
chamber
,
to
hide
him
.
Now
whether
this
multitude
of
expositions
bee
an
aduantage
to
his
cause
,
or
disaduantage
,
the
Reader
may
hereby
iudge
.
For
seeing
the
learned
men
of
our
side
doe
reason
thus
,
as
I
noted
before
,
(
if
diuerse
and
sundry
expositions
of
〈◊〉
text
〈◊〉
be
giuen
,
not
including
your
Lay-Elders
,
euery
one
whereof
is
〈◊〉
probable
th●n
yo●rs
:
then
is
it
not
necessary
,
nor
yet
likely
that
your
Lay-Elders
be
heere
meant
.
)
Who
seeth
not
,
but
by
how
which
the
more
expositions
can
bee
giuen
in
this
ki●●e
,
by
so
much
the
lesse
necessitie
there
is
to
admit
your
exposition
of
Lay-Elders
.
But
our
men
doe
thus
reason
:
D.
Bilson
,
pag
:
130.
The
fourth
reason
(
saith
hee
)
that
holdeth
mee
from
receiuing
this
construction
(
implying
Lay-Elders
)
is
,
that
I
finde
diuerse
and
sundry
interpretations
more
agreeable
to
the
Text
,
and
more
answerable
to
S.
Paules
meaning
then
this
.
His
reason
standeth
thus
.
If
diuerse
and
sundry
interpretations
are
found
more
agreeable
,
&c.
then
that
for
Lay-Elders
,
then
haue
wee
no
reason
to
yeelde
that
Lay-Elders
are
meant
in
this
place
.
But
diuerse
and
sundry
such
interpretations
may
be
giuen
,
which
he
proueth
,
by
producing
foure
of
them
.
Likewise
D.
King
,
as
your selfe
doe
cite
him
,
arguing
to
the
same
purpose
,
saith
,
How
many
interpretations
may
bee
brought
to
diuert
and
disappoint
Lay-gouernours
?
and
then
alledgeth
diuerse
.
Of
all
which
interpretations
,
(
which
by
Presbyters
vnderstand
Ministers
)
it
may
truely
be
affirmed
,
that
they
are
more
agreeable
to
the
meaning
of
the
Apostle
,
then
yours
.
Seeing
they
expound
the
word
Presbyter
according
to
the
perpetuall
vse
of
it
,
in
the
writings
both
of
the
Apostles
and
Fathers
:
wheras
of
your
vse
of
the
word
,
after
all
your
paines
and
laying
your
heads
,
and
helps
together
,
you
are
not
able
to
produce
any
one
testimonie
,
no
not
one
.
Wherefore
,
looke
how
manie
such
probable
expositions
may
be
giuen
,
vnderstanding
this
place
of
Ministers
onely
,
they
are
so
manie
proofes
,
that
there
is
no
necessitie
of
admitting
your
interpretation
.
The
first
.
If
others
opposing
to
Lay-Elders
haue
brought
8.
or
9.
expositions
,
which
are
but
shifts
to
auoid
them
,
all
of
them
being
diuerse
among
themselues
,
and
from
that
which
M.
D.
bringeth
,
then
this
10.
of
his
,
is
but
a
shift
also
:
but
the
former
is
true
,
therefore
the
latter
.
If
the
reader
desire
to
haue
examples
of
such
lame
legs
,
as
the
refuter
talketh
of
,
here
hee
may
haue
a
couple
.
For
as
touching
the
proposition
:
seeing
among
different
expositions
,
one
onely
is
the
true
and
proper
meaning
of
the
place
:
may
not
this
exception
be
taken
against
any
exposition
be
it
neuer
so
true
,
being
but
one
amongst
manie
?
For
suppose
the
other
9.
were
but
shifts
,
how
will
it
follow
,
that
therefore
the
tenth
is
so
:
Must
all
expositions
bee
false
or
vnfit
,
because
the
most
are
such
?
If
those
9.
expositions
be
shifts
as
you
say
,
and
if
yours
be
false
as
I
haue
proued
,
this
is
so
farre
from
preiudging
the
truth
of
mine
,
which
is
the
eleuenth
,
as
that
it
is
a
strong
presumption
to
confirme
it
.
For
,
seeing
it
is
to
be
presumed
,
that
some
one
true
exposition
of
this
Text
is
knowne
;
and
seeing
all
other
knowne
expositions
of
this
place
,
are
either
supposed
by
you
,
or
proued
by
mee
to
be
false
:
it
remaineth
therefore
,
that
this
eleuenth
is
true
:
The
consequence
therefore
of
the
proposition
is
starke
lame
.
The
assumption
also
is
false
.
For
those
diuers
expositions
are
not
shifts
,
as
this
shifting
Sophister
cauilleth
,
but
being
all
(
I
meane
so
many
as
by
Presbyters
vnderstand
Ministers
)
more
probable
then
that
which
standeth
for
Lay-Elders
:
(
for
that
doth
not
so
much
as
touch
the
subiect
wherof
the
Apostle
speaketh
)
they
are
so
many
proofes
to
auoid
the
necessitie
of
their
Lay-Elders
,
which
by
them
are
as
necessary
,
vrged
and
obtruded
vpon
vs
.
And
this
was
his
first
reason
,
which
he
brought
,
to
make
it
appeare
that
my
exposition
is
but
a
bare
shift
.
His
second
,
brought
to
the
same
purpose
,
either
proueth
it
thus
,
5.
His
2.
Reason
.
or
not
at
all
.
If
M.
D.
vtterly
reiect
8.
of
the
aforesaid
expositions
,
and
resteth
vpon
one
of
those
4.
which
D.
Bilson
propounded
,
then
his
exposition
is
a
bare
shift
.
But
M.
D.
reiecteth
8.
of
the
former
expositions
,
and
resteth
vpon
one
of
those
4
which
D.
B.
propoundeth
.
Therefore
his
exposition
is
a
bare
shift
.
In
the
proposition
,
there
is
not
so
much
as
a
shewe
of
a
good
consequence
,
vnlesse
it
be
presupposed
(
which
I
haue
disproued
)
that
D.
B.
expositions
are
but
bare
shifts
.
His
assumption
,
which
in
plaine
termes
he
setteth
downe
,
containeth
two
vntruthes
.
For
first
,
if
you
vnderstand
my
words
,
as
they
may
be
vnderstood
of
them
that
conceiue
mee
to
be
the
answerer
in
this
place
,
and
as
my selfe
euen
now
propounded
them
,
then
doth
it
not
follow
that
I
vtterly
reiect
all
other
expositions
:
because
,
in
adding
this
to
the
former
,
I
seeme
to
preferre
it
before
the
rest
.
Againe
,
that
I
rest
in
one
of
those
4.
expositions
,
which
he
recited
out
of
D.
B.
is
not
onely
false
,
but
if
you
respect
his
intent
,
sclanderous
also
,
as
all
other
his
references
are
,
as
to
any
that
will
compare
them
,
may
easily
appeare
:
For
not
any
of
D.
B.
4.
expositions
vnderstandeth
the
former
branch
as
containing
the
generall
dutie
of
a
Minister
.
Howbeit
some
of
the
examples
which
hee
produceth
,
together
with
his
explication
of
some
of
them
,
doe
well
agree
with
my
exposition
,
as
you
shall
heare
in
my
answere
,
to
his
third
reason
,
which
being
his
shoot-ancor
,
if
it
faile
him
,
his
Lay-Elders
are
like
to
suffer
shipwracke
.
Heare
his
words
.
Ad
Pag.
25.
His
third
reason
,
containing
3.
Syllogisme●
Thirdly
,
that
it
may
appeare
,
that
M.
D.
is
besides
the
true
meaning
of
the
Apostle
,
in
the
sense
hee
resteth
on
,
let
vs
weigh
the
Apostles
words
well
,
and
wee
shall
finde
them
clearely
and
euidently
,
to
speake
of
persons
,
and
at
the
most
,
but
indirectly
of
duties
.
The
Elders
that
rule
well
,
especially
they
:
can
any
man
be
so
blind
as
not
to
see
,
that
these
Elders
,
and
they
must
needes
signifie
persons
,
who
must
be
counted
worthie
of
double
honour
?
No
,
saith
M.D.
but
this
account
riseth
from
the
consideration
of
their
duties
.
Euen
so
,
we
denie
it
not
:
but
may
it
not
be
so
▪
and
yet
2.
sorts
of
Elders
heere
noted
?
Yes
verily
.
The
elders
that
faithfully
discharge
their
dutie
in
gouerning
the
Church
,
are
worthie
of
double
honour
:
especially
those
who
labour
in
the
Word
and
Doctrine
.
Is
there
any
thing
in
this
Scripture
thus
vnderstood
,
to
shutte
out
2.
kindes
of
Elders
?
Are
not
the
duties
in
the
former
clause
generall
,
in
the
latter
speciall
?
Yes
saith
he
,
but
for
all
that
,
they
bee
indeed
two
duties
of
the
Minister
onely
.
Of
which
discourse
,
the
best
that
I
can
make
,
is
this
:
If
the
comparison
betwixt
the
persons
euidently
noted
in
this
Text
,
doth
seeme
to
fauour
the
distinction
of
Elders
,
into
2.
sorts
,
and
the
comparison
betweene
the
duties
indirectly
noted
,
doth
not
hinder
the
said
distinction
,
that
,
then
is
there
nothing
in
this
Text
,
to
exclude
two
sorts
of
Elders
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
in
both
the
parts
thereof
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
The
former
part
of
the
antecedent
is
proued
thus
:
The
persons
here
mentioned
are
in
the
comparison
noted
to
be
of
two
sorts
.
Elders
are
the
persons
here
mentioned
:
Therefore
Elders
are
in
this
comparison
,
noted
to
bee
of
2.
sorts
.
The
latter
thus
:
The
distinction
of
duties
into
generall
and
speciall
:
doth
not
exclude
two
sorts
of
Elders
:
For
the
generall
agreeth
to
both
sorts
.
The
distinction
of
duties
heere
mentioned
,
is
into
generall
and
speciall
:
Therefore
the
distinction
heree
mentiond
,
doth
not
exclude
two
sorts
of
Elders
.
By
the
refuters
maine
conclusion
,
it
is
euident
,
that
hee
hath
gotten
the
wrong
end
of
the
staffe
.
For
whereas
this
place
to
Timothie
,
is
the
chiefe
;
and
,
as
I
iudge
,
the
onely
place
to
speake
of
in
the
Scriptures
,
which
all
of
them
without
exception
obiect
,
and
most
confidently
vrge
,
as
necessarily
including
and
concluding
their
Lay-Elders
,
in
answering
whereof
,
this
part
of
my
Sermon
is
spent
:
my
aduersary
by
his
Sophysticall
shifts
,
in
making
mee
the
opponent
,
and
himselfe
the
respondent
,
would
make
the
Reader
belieue
,
that
he
hath
acquitted
himselfe
well
,
if
this
place
bee
not
against
Lay-Elders
.
But
the
Reader
must
remember
,
that
it
lieth
vpon
my
aduersarie
,
and
those
of
his
side
,
out
of
this
place
,
invincibly
,
and
ineuitably
to
inforce
Lay-Elders
,
or
to
confesse
that
they
cannot
be
proued
out
of
the
Scriptures
.
Neither
will
it
suffice
him
to
say
,
they
may
be
here
meant
,
vnlesse
he
can
necessarily
proue
and
demonstrate
,
that
they
are
,
and
must
necessarily
be
meant
in
this
place
.
Otherwise
I
may
graunt
his
maine
conclusion
,
without
anie
preiudice
to
our
cause
:
when
the
chiefe
thing
which
he
proueth
is
,
that
the
principall
,
and
almost
onely
place
obiected
by
themselues
for
Lay-Elders
,
doth
not
make
against
them
.
But
if
the
onely
place
,
which
can
to
any
purpose
bee
alledged
for
them
,
doe
exclude
them
,
which
in
the
last
reason
I
doe
endeuour
to
proue
;
being
as
yet
not
proceeded
so
farre
,
but
onely
to
maintaine
that
they
be
not
heere
included
;
then
is
the
cause
of
the
Lay-Elders
most
desperate
.
The
which
,
that
it
may
appeare
,
I
will
not
refuse
,
seeing
my
aduersarie
hath
found
this
starting
hole
,
to
examine
his
proofes
.
And
first
,
I
denie
the
connexion
or
consequence
of
his
proposition
.
For
if
this
Text
include
them
,
then
are
they
included
in
this
word
Presbyteri
,
the
Text
speaking
of
none
but
such
.
But
that
word
,
being
a
word
of
order
proper
to
Ministers
or
Priests
,
doth
not
include
them
,
nor
can
any
one
example
or
testimonie
produced
to
that
purpose
:
Therefore
Lay-Elders
are
not
included
in
this
Text.
double
honour
,
or
maintenance
appointed
to
all
the
Presbyters
,
of
whome
Paul
speaketh
;
from
which
Lay
Elders
are
excluded
,
as
I
shall
shew
in
my
third
reason
.
As
touching
his
second
Syllogisme
,
I
answere
first
to
the
proposition
,
that
the
persons
here
mentioned
,
are
not
noted
to
be
of
two
sorts
:
but
that
the
comparison
is
betweene
two
duties
belonging
to
one
sort
or
order
of
men
;
or
if
you
will
,
betweene
men
of
the
same
order
,
in
respect
of
their
duties
;
the
words
being
as
plaine
in
the
language
of
the
Apostles
,
and
of
all
the
Fathers
,
both
Greeke
and
Latine
,
as
if
it
had
bene
said
in
our
language
,
Let
the
Ministers
or
Priests
,
&c:
And
this
I
hold
for
a
most
certaine
and
vndeniable
truth
.
The
comparison
betweene
the
dueties
,
I
explane
thus
,
that
as
to
Presbyters
or
Ministers
double
honour
is
due
,
for
their
dutie
in
generall
:
So
especially
,
for
that
which
is
the
principall
:
the
comaprison
being
betweene
the
generall
or
whole
duety
,
&
a
particular
,
or
part
of
the
duty
,
which
is
preferred
,
as
being
the
principall
.
The
comparison
betweene
the
persons
,
in
regard
of
those
duties
,
and
depending
vpon
the
former
standeth
thus
:
that
as
all
they
that
performe
the
generall
are
to
be
honoured
,
so
especially
they
,
who
in
speciall
sort
performe
the
principall
.
Thus
much
then
the
words
import
,
that
as
all
Presbyters
who
demeane
themselues
well
in
their
places
,
are
to
bee
accounted
worthy
of
double
honour
:
so
especially
those
that
labour
painefully
in
the
Word
and
Doctrine
.
Let
vs
consider
the
like
examples
.
All
Counsellours
that
demeane
themselues
well
in
their
functions
are
highly
to
be
honored
,
especially
,
those
that
are
good
Patriotes
,
or
Comon-wealthsmen
.
From
whence
it
were
absurde
to
inferre
,
that
there
is
a
sort
of
good
counsellours
that
bee
not
good
Patriotes
.
But
in
this
speech
I
note
,
in
respect
of
the
duties
of
counsellours
,
that
this
is
the
principall
;
and
in
respect
of
the
persons
,
that
they
are
chiefly
to
be
honored
,
who
are
in
speciall
manner
such
.
Likewise
(
to
vse
the
refuters
owne
example
)
All
Logicians
that
reason
well
,
that
is
,
all
good
Logicians
are
to
bee
honoured
,
or
well
esteemed
of
:
especially
,
those
that
are
iudicious
,
or
that
haue
a
speciall
facultie
of
iudging
well
.
It
may
not
hence
be
gathered
,
that
there
are
any
good
Logicians
,
that
are
not
iudicious
,
or
that
cannot
iudge
well
.
But
I
note
,
that
as
among
the
faculties
of
a
Logician
,
good
iudgement
is
the
principall
;
so
they
which
be
iudicious
,
are
most
to
be
esteemed
.
So
,
all
good
Seruants
are
worthie
to
bee
rewarded
,
especially
,
those
that
are
faithfull
,
&c:
In
like
manner
,
when
the
Apostle
saith
,
All
Presbyters
or
Ministers
,
that
demeane
themselues
well
:
(
that
is
,
all
good
Ministers
)
are
to
be
accounted
worthie
double
honour
:
especiallie
those
which
labour
in
the
Word
and
Doctrine
:
Wee
may
not
collect
from
hence
,
that
there
is
a
sort
of
Presbyters
worthie
of
double
honour
,
which
doe
not
labour
in
the
word
.
But
the
meaning
of
the
comparison
is
,
that
as
among
the
duties
of
Presbyters
,
or
Ministers
,
Preaching
is
the
principall
:
so
they
chiefly
are
to
bee
accounted
worthie
of
double
honour
,
who
labour
;
or
if
you
will
,
who
in
speciall
manner
doe
labour
therein
.
And
this
speciall
manner
is
noted
in
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
For
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
to
labour
painefully
,
and
vnto
wearinesse
.
Which
paines
is
to
be
esteemed
,
as
well
by
diligence
,
in
the
studie
of
the
Word
:
Doth
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
(
saith
hee
)
that
is
chiefly
(
the
note
of
comparison
)
distinguish
as
well
things
as
persons
,
and
not
so
well
diuerse
respects
,
as
diuerse
subiects●
for
example
,
if
we
should
say
,
Magistrates
that
gouerne
well
are
worthie
of
double
honour
,
specially
they
that
heare
the
complaints
of
the
poore
:
Were
hee
not
very
fansifull
that
would
hence
conclude
,
there
are
therefore
two
sorts
of
Magistrates
,
one
that
gouerne
well
,
another
that
heareth
the
complaints
of
the
poore
.
Nothing
is
more
common
,
then
by
this
kind
of
speech
to
note
as
well
two
diuerse
qualities
in
one
man
,
as
two
sundry
sorts
of
men
;
yea
thereby
to
preferre
a
part
before
the
generall
comprising
that
part
.
As
teachers
are
to
be
liked
for
their
learning
,
specially
for
their
knowledge
in
the
scriptures
:
Good
men
are
to
be
loued
for
their
vertues
,
especially
if
they
be
liberall
.
To
the
assumption
affirming
that
Elders
are
the
persons
here
mentioned
,
I
answere
,
that
no
Elders
are
here
mentioned
but
Ministers
,
and
that
Presbyteri
in
this
place
are
vnfitly
translated
Elders
:
for
though
that
be
the
english
of
it
,
as
it
is
a
word
of
age
,
yet
it
is
not
the
english
of
it
(
according
to
the
vse
of
our
language
)
as
it
is
a
word
of
order
,
noting
(
as
it
doth
in
this
place
)
an
Ecclesiasticall
function
,
but
Ministers
or
Priests
,
whom
we
do
not
vse
in
our
common
speech
to
call
Elders
.
But
hereof
I
haue
alreadie
spoken
.
There
remaineth
his
third
Syllogisme
,
yes
saith
hee
but
for
all
that
,
they
be
indeed
two
duties
of
the
Ministers
onely
.
His
proofe
therefore
was
nothing
else
but
a
meere
begging
of
the
question
.
And
when
he
should
haue
proued
that
in
the
former
part
of
the
sentence
(
Let
the
Elders
that
gouerne
well
)
the
Lay-Elders
are
comprised
,
or
else
haue
ceassed
to
vrge
them
:
faire
and
mannerly
he
slippeth
his
necke
out
of
the
collar
,
putting
me
to
disproue
it
,
and
telling
me
,
that
otherwise
I
should
offend
(
wherein
as
respondents
doe
not
vse
to
offend
,
so
himselfe
being
indeed
the
opponent
,
in
this
place
is
extremely
faultie
that
is
to
say
)
in
begging
the
question
.
gouerning
or
ruling
well
.
I
vnderstand
the
whole
dutie
of
the
ministerie
in
generall
;
and
not
onely
gouerning
in
that
sence
,
as
it
may
be
common
to
the
supposed
Lay-Elder
.
The
first
is
the
principall
,
and
alreadie
proued
;
though
the
refuter
had
rather
seeme
not
to
haue
seene
the
reasons
,
which
he
did
not
see
how
to
answere
,
then
goe
about
either
to
confute
them
,
or
to
bring
any
testimonie
where
Presbyter
doth
signifie
a
Lay-Elder
.
But
as
he
would
not
see
the
former
reasons
,
so
either
he
doth
not
,
or
will
not
see
the
force
of
the
latter
.
A●
pag.
26.
he
,
as
though
he
saw
no
force
of
argument
in
all
this
,
feareth
not
to
confesse
all
:
and
yet
will
needs
maintaine
that
inference
,
because
forsooth
al
this
may
be
verified
of
Lay-Elders
,
&c.
But
say
I
,
when
you
vrge
your
Elders
as
from
this
place
,
your
inference
is
not
,
that
what
is
said
of
Presbyters
gouerning
well
,
may
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
,
but
must
be
vnderstood
of
them
,
or
else
you
speake
to
no
purpose
.
Now
,
although
there
be
some
shew
of
an
inference
,
if
by
gouerning
well
were
meant
onely
so
much
as
might
be
common
to
Lay-Elders
;
yet
if
you
vnderstand
these
words
in
the
generall
sense
,
you
shall
see
not
so
much
as
a
shew
of
a
good
consequence
,
nor
any
reason
to
moue
a
man
to
make
such
an
inference
:
which
I
did
verily
thinke
,
that
all
men
of
vnderstanding
would
readily
haue
conceiued
:
and
yet
my
lot
is
,
to
light
vpon
such
an
aduersary
,
as
either
doth
not
,
or
will
not
see
it
,
vnles
it
be
beaten
into
him
.
Goe
too
then
:
Is
not
this
your
inference
from
this
text
,
that
because
the
Apostle
requireth
double
honour
to
be
giuen
to
such
Elders
as
gouerne
well
,
though
especially
to
those
which
labour
in
the
word
,
that
therfore
besides
those
which
labour
in
the
word
,
there
are
certaine
onely-gouerning
Elders
?
Vnderstand
therefore
those
former
words
in
the
general
sense
which
I
giue
,
and
your
inference
will
be
both
senelesse
and
false
.
Senelesse
thus
:
the
Presbyters
that
fulfill
their
office
,
or
that
demeane
themselues
well
in
their
place
,
are
worthy
of
double
honour
,
especially
those
,
that
labour
in
the
word
;
therefore
besides
those
which
labour
in
the
word
,
there
are
certain
onely
gouerning
Elders
:
for
of
this
inference
there
is
no
sence
,
vnlesse
it
be
supposed
,
that
none
can
fulfill
their
office
or
demeane
themselues
well
,
but
your
Lay-Elders
.
If
therefore
you
will
ground
them
vpon
this
place
according
to
the
generall
sence
which
you
seeme
to
allow
,
call
them
no
more
the
onely-gouerning
Elders
,
but
the
onely
good
,
or
well
demeaned
Presbyters
.
False
,
because
the
words
being
generally
vnderstood
of
the
whole
dutie
of
the
ministerie
can
be
vnderstood
of
none
but
Ministers
;
the
generall
,
which
includeth
the
speciall
,
being
peculiar
to
the
Minister
as
well
as
the
speciall
.
Thus
therefore
I
reason
:
Those
words
which
import
the
performance
of
the
whole
dutie
of
the
ministerie
,
cannot
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
but
of
Ministers
onely
:
The
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
translated
which
gouerne
well
,
import
the
performance
of
the
whole
dutie
of
the
ministerie
in
generall
:
Therefore
the
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
translate●
which
gouerne
well
,
cannot
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
but
of
Ministers
onely
.
The
proposition
you
cannot
be
so
absurd
as
to
denie
,
vnlesse
you
will
attribute
the
performance
of
the
whole
office
of
the
ministerie
in
generall
to
your
onely-gouerning-Elders
.
The
assumption
you
freely
confesse
,
and
all
the
proofs
〈◊〉
and
yet
with
great
●●oath
of
idle
and
addle
words
,
you
〈◊〉
maintaine
the
contradictorie
to
the
conclusion
,
〈…〉
nor
●e●●●ng
any
force
at
all
in
my
proofe
,
which
yo●
valiantly
ouerthrow
by
denying
the
conclusion
.
So
that
I
must
conclude
▪
that
you
extremely
want
,
Besides
the
former
proofe
,
I
produce
for
the
confirmation
of
my
exposition
,
the
speech
of
the
same
Apostle
,
to
the
same
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
,
Act.
20.28
.
to
paralel
this
.
And
whereas
of
my
exposition
there
are
two
parts
,
the
one
concerning
the
subiect
or
parties
here
mentioned
,
whom
I
expound
to
be
ministers
onely
,
the
other
concerning
their
duties
,
in
regard
whereof
double
honour
is
due
to
them
,
the
one
generall
,
the
other
speciall
:
in
both
respects
,
the
one
text
doth
answere
the
other
,
as
face
answereth
to
face
in
the
water
.
For
first
that
Presbyters
here
are
Ministers
onely
,
I
proue
thus
:
The
Presbyters
to
whom
Paul
speaketh
Act.
20.
were
Ministers
onely
:
The
Presbyters
of
whom
he
speaketh
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
were
the
same
to
whom
he
spake
,
Act.
20.
Therefore
the
Presbyters
of
whom
he
speaketh
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
were
Ministers
onely
.
Secondly
that
the
duties
both
generall
and
speciall
are
peculiar
to
Ministers
,
I
proue
by
this
argument
:
The
duties
which
Paul
requireth
,
Act.
20.28
.
are
duties
required
peculiarly
of
Ministers
.
The
duties
for
which
double
honour
is
due
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
both
generall
and
speciall
are
the
same
with
those
which
Paul
requireth
,
Act.
20.28
.
therefore
the
duties
for
which
double
honour
is
due
,
1.
Tim.
5
17.
are
duties
peculiarly
required
of
Ministers
.
This
latter
Syllogisme
my
expert
aduersarie
obserued
not
:
the
former
he
flingeth
after
his
manner
into
a
connexiue
Syllogisme
.
For
though
his
forge
doe
scarcely
afford
any
other
,
yet
hee
hath
gotten
a
pretie
smacke
of
Syllogizing
that
way
,
were
it
not
that
his
Syllogismes
for
the
most
part
,
are
too
long
by
the
halfe
.
But
here
he
surpasseth
himselfe
,
for
hee
hath
cast
my
whole
Syllogisme
into
his
connexiue
proposition
,
and
in
his
minor
repeateth
at
large
both
the
proposition
and
assumption
.
But
let
vs
see
what
he
saith
to
these
Syllogismes
.
In
the
first
he
onely
denieth
my
proposition
,
viz.
that
the
Presbyters
,
Act.
20.
were
none
but
Ministers
:
which
I
must
confesse
in
that
breuitie
I
tooke
for
granted
,
because
I
thought
it
needed
not
to
be
proued
.
For
seeing
that
verse
is
not
onely
generally
vnderstood
,
(
euen
of
them
which
stand
for
Lay
Elders
,
writing
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Caluin
,
in
Act.
&c.
D.
Whi●ak
de
pon●
.
Rom.
pag.
1
but
commenting
vpon
,
or
otherwise
expounding
that
place
)
of
Ministers
,
but
also
is
alledged
both
by
protestants
and
papists
to
iustifie
the
calling
of
BB.
I
did
presume
,
that
it
was
to
be
vnderstood
of
such
onely
as
are
Ministers
at
the
least
.
But
that
which
before
was
for
breuitie
omitted
,
shall
now
be
supplyed
.
First
therfore
I
argue
thus
:
All
those
that
are
called
BB.
in
the
acts
and
writings
of
the
Apostles
are
Ministers
of
the
word
.
All
the
Presbyters
to
whom
Paul
speaketh
,
Act.
20.28
.
are
called
BB.
Therefore
all
the
Presbyters
to
whom
Paul
spake
,
Act.
20.28
.
were
Ministers
of
the
word
.
Or
thus
:
Lay-Elders
are
no
where
called
BB.
All
the
Presbyters
,
Act.
20.28
.
are
called
Bishops
:
Therefore
none
of
those
Presbyters
were
Lay-Elders
.
Shall
I
need
to
proue
any
of
the
premisses
.
Are
our
Presbyterians
of
late
growne
so
absurd
as
to
denie
them
?
What
?
are
not
all
BB.
Ministers
,
and
are
your
Lay-Elders
growne
of
late
to
be
Bishops
?
did
not
our
refuter
pag
●
affirme
that
these
Presbyters
,
Act.
20.
are
Angels
and
Bishops
,
and
that
Angels
are
pastors
?
and
are
Lay-Elders
,
Angels
and
pastors
too
?
●ie
for
shame
!
and
yet
so
absurd
is
our
refuter
,
as
to
say
that
some
of
these
Elders
whom
Paul
calleth
Bishops
,
were
not
Ministers
,
but
their
lay
or
onely-gouerning
Elders
.
All
Episcopi
or
Bishops
,
must
by
the
Apostles
rule
(
which
is
generall
)
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
able
to
teach
,
1.
Tim.
3.2
.
that
is
as
he
expoundeth
himselfe
,
Tit.
1.9
.
holding
fast
the
faithful
word
,
according
to
doctrine
that
they
may
be
able
to
exhort
with
holesome
doctrine
,
and
conuince
the
gain-sayers
.
But
not
Lay-Elders
,
nor
any
but
Ministers
,
doe
need
by
the
Apostles
rule
to
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
able
to
preach
in
that
sense
that
he
expoundeth
it
,
Tit.
1.9
.
For
on
those
words
Caluin
obserueth
,
that
it
is
required
in
them
,
that
they
should
be
learned
,
and
indued
with
sound
knowledge
,
and
that
their
doctrine
should
tend
to
edification
,
&c.
Therefore
not
Lay-Elders
,
nor
any
but
Ministers
,
are
Bishops
.
As
for
authoritie
;
let
him
shew
me
any
testimonie
of
scripture
,
or
of
any
sound
writer
,
old
or
new
,
that
is
not
a
partie
,
vsing
the
word
Bishop
for
Lay-Elder
,
or
any
one
that
is
not
a
Minister
,
Inst.
li
4.
c.
3.
§
8.
and
I
will
yeeld
to
him
the
bucklers
.
Caluin
,
though
a
partie
,
plainly
saith
,
that
the
scripture
vseth
promiscuously
these
words
,
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
Pastors
&
Ministers
;
to
signifie
those
who
doe
exercise
the
ministerie
of
the
word
.
And
hauing
intreated
of
them
,
in
conclusion
he
saith
,
that
as
yet
he
had
not
spoken
of
any
other
functions
but
such
as
consist
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
.
And
in
another
place
,
although
he
coll●teth
out
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
two
sorts
of
Presbyters
,
Caluin
.
in
Tit.
1.5
.
yet
he
saith
,
that
the
Presbyters
mentioned
,
Tit.
1.5
.
are
by
the
context
manifested
to
be
no
other
,
but
Doctors
or
Teachers
,
because
Paul
presently
after
calleth
them
Bishops
.
Againe
,
all
pastors
of
Christs
flocke
are
Ministers
onely
:
All
the
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
,
were
pastors
of
Christs
flocke
:
therefore
they
were
Ministers
onely
.
Or
thus
:
Lay-Elders
are
not
Pastors
of
Christs
flocke
(
of
other
flocks
perhaps
they
may
.
)
All
the
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
were
Pastors
of
Christs
flocke
:
Therefore
they
were
not
Lay-Elders
.
That
they
were
pastors
I
proue
thus
:
Bishops
set
ouer
the
flocke
of
Christ
by
the
holy
Ghost
to
feed
the
Church
of
God
,
are
pastors
:
The
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
were
such
,
Act.
20.28
.
Therefore
they
were
pastors
.
In
Act.
2
And
that
Caluin
confesseth
more
then
once
.
And
our
refuter
also
in
the
place
before
alledged
;
from
whose
confession
I
argue
thus
:
The
Angels
were
pastors
saith
our
refuter
,
The
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
were
Angels
,
therefore
the
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
were
pastors
.
But
why
should
so
plaine
a
thing
seeme
to
be
made
doubtfull
with
longer
proofe
?
for
if
such
Presbyters
as
were
also
Bishops
and
pastors
,
were
any
but
Ministers
:
then
Presbyters
,
Bishops
and
pastors
were
Lay-Elders
also
;
and
Lay-Elders
were
all
in
all
.
And
whereas
he
obiecteth
,
that
Lay-Elders
may
be
comprehended
vnder
the
name
Presbyter
and
Episcopus
,
because
D.
B.
saith
,
that
these
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Bishop
,
Presbyter
,
Deacon
or
Minister
,
are
oft
so
largely
taken
,
as
that
they
comprise
all
Ecclesiasticall
functions
:
I
answere
in
a
word
,
by
Ecclesiasticall
functions
,
he
meaneth
onely
the
functions
of
the
Ministerie
,
including
neither
your
Lay-Elders
,
nor
your
Lay-Deacons
,
no
more
then
our
Churchwardens
and
Collectors
for
the
poore
.
As
touching
the
latter
Syllogisme
which
the
refuter
saw
not
:
feeding
the
flocke
of
Christ
,
which
is
also
noted
as
the
speciall
dutie
,
Act.
20.28
.
The
refuter
though
he
saw
not
the
reason
,
yet
he
would
be
sure
to
contradict
my
assertion
,
and
therefore
stumbling
vpon
the
proposition
,
Ad
pag.
28.
he
saith
,
that
neither
of
the
duties
mentioned
in
the
Acts
are
restrained
to
Ministers
onely
.
For
to
attend
to
the
flocke
is
all
one
saith
he
with
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
is
more
generall
,
and
the
speciall
dutie
of
feeding
which
he
confineth
to
the
word
and
doctrine
,
is
often
vsed
for
gouerning
also
,
as
Mat.
2.6
.
Apoc.
2.27
.
&
7.17
.
&
12.5
.
&
19.
15.
Grec
.
schol.
in
Act.
14.23
.
The
truth
of
my
proposition
,
as
I
said
,
dependeth
on
the
former
Syllogisme
,
as
vpon
a
sure
hold
,
and
the
dutie
signified
,
1.
Tim.
5.
by
ruling
well
:
and
Act.
20.
by
attending
to
themselues
and
their
flocke
,
being
applied
(
as
in
both
places
it
is
)
to
Ministers
,
and
importing
,
as
he
hath
confessed
,
the
whole
dutie
of
the
ministerie
in
generall
,
must
be
confessed
to
bee
restrained
to
Ministers
.
As
for
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
in
this
pla●●
is
truely
translated
to
feed
,
besides
the
proper
sense
wherin
somtimes
it
is
vsed
,
as
Luk.
17.7.1
.
Cor.
9.7
.
Iud.
12
:
it
hath
indeed
2.
metaphoricall
significations
in
the
Scriptures
:
translated
from
shepheards
,
to
ciuill
or
spirituall
pastors
;
the
one
,
as
it
is
applied
to
Princes
,
&
ciuill
Pastors
,
and
so
it
signifieth
chiefly
to
rule
;
Spirituall
Pastors
,
and
so
it
signifieth
chiefly
to
feed
with
spirituall
food
.
For
our
Sauiour
commanding
Peter
,
if
he
loued
him
to
feed
his
sheepe
:
(
which
text
the
Papists
,
vnderstanding
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Paul
.
Act.
20.28
.
to
feede
the
flocke
:
as
also
,
by
our
Sauiour
himselfe
,
Luke
12
:
42
:
where
the
Lords
seruant
is
said
to
be
set
ouer
his
houshold
,
to
this
end
,
to
giue
them
their
foode
in
due
season
.
Caluin
speaking
of
this
word
,
in
1.
Pet.
5.2
.
saith
,
the
name
of
Presbyter
,
containeth
in
it
the
dutie
of
feeding
:
And
the
definition
of
the
word
is
to
be
knowne
.
Because
the
flocke
of
Christ
,
Pasci
non
potest
nisi
pura
doctrina
quae
sola
spirituale
est
pabulum
,
cannot
bee
fedde
but
with
pure
Doctrine
,
which
is
the
onely
spirituall
foode
.
Hence
it
is
,
that
Pastors
&
Doctors
,
(
which
some
would
distinguish
)
are
in
the
scriptures
confounded
.
As
Eph:
4.11
.
For
whereas
the
Apostle
when
he
would
note
diuerse
functions
,
vseth
notes
of
distinction
,
saying
:
Christ
gaue
some
to
be
Apostles
,
some
to
be
Euangelists
,
&c
when
he
commeth
to
Pastors
and
Doctors
,
he
vseth
a
note
of
copulation
.
For
he
doth
not
say
,
some
Pastors
,
&
some
Doctors
;
but
some
pastors
and
Doctors
,
vsing
the
latter
word
,
as
the
explication
of
the
former
,
some
others
In
the
places
,
which
the
refuter
quoteth
,
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
not
applied
at
all
to
Ecclesiasticall
persons
:
but
either
to
Christ
;
and
to
him
,
either
as
our
King
,
&
then
it
signifieth
to
rule
(
as
Mat.
2.6
.
cited
out
of
Mi.
5.1
.
&
Apoc.
12
5.
as
it
is
vsually
paralleld
with
Psal.
2.9
.
Apoc.
19.15
.
compared
with
v.
16.
)
or
as
our
pastor
&
doctor
,
and
then
it
signifieth
to
feed
,
and
so
ought
to
be
translated
,
as
Apoc:
7.17
.
(
where
,
to
our
hunger
&
thirst
,
v.
16.
his
feeding
&
leading
vs
to
the
waters
of
life
is
opposed
:
)
or
else
it
is
applied
to
all
the
faithfull
,
who
in
Christ
are
made
Kings
,
as
Apo.
2.27
.
Greeke
scholiast
,
in
the
place
quoted
,
hath
no
such
thing
:
But
is
alledged
by
T.
C.
to
another
purpose
,
for
the
proofe
of
Lay-Elders
(
as
we
shal
heare
)
which
perhaps
was
the
cause
of
this
allegation
,
But
on
the
place
in
hand
,
Attend
to
your selues
,
and
the
flocke
:
he
saith
that
Paul
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
enioyneth
the
teachers
two
things
to
be
done
:
and
noteth
also
,
whom
Luke
called
ver.
17.
Presbyters
,
to
bee
called
in
this
verse
Bishops
:
either
saith
hee
,
because
presbyters
or
ministers
also
,
must
superintend
the
flocke
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
else
hee
calleth
Bishops
here
,
such
as
indeed
be
Bishops
:
&
in
like
manner
,
on
1.
Pet.
5.1.2
with
some
parallel
with
Act
,
20.28
.
Hee
noteth
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
fellow-Elder
:
in
that
place
,
if
it
bee
not
vsed
as
a
word
of
age
,
doth
import
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
honour
of
a
Bishop
,
as
if
he
had
called
himselfe
their
fellow
Bishop
.
For
in
the
booke
of
the
Acts
also
,
Bishops
are
called
Presbyters
.
and
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hee
vnderstandeth
the
Clergie
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
saith
hee
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Hee
calleth
Clerum
,
(
which
is
translated
inheritance
)
the
sacred
companie
.
Euen
as
we
now
also
do
call
it
,
that
is
to
say
the
Clergie
.
Which
exposition
if
we
follow
,
then
those
presbyters
to
whom
Peter
writeth
,
prescribing
vnto
them
how
they
should
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
That
is
(
saith
Caluin
,
)
Episcopatu
fungi
,
exercise
the
office
of
a
Bishop
,
and
noting
their
authority
ouer
the
Clergie
,
were
such
as
we
call
bishops
:
But
of
that
,
by
the
way
.
Now
if
the
presbyters
,
Act
:
20.
were
ministers
and
teachers
as
I
haue
proued
,
and
as
all
writers
,
almost
,
euen
those
that
are
parties
in
the
cause
do
teach
:
then
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
we
are
to
vnderstand
the
dutie
of
feeding
,
The
refuter
hauing
with
such
successe
as
you
see
,
endeuored
to
maintaine
,
presbyters
,
Act.
20.
were
as
wel
Lay-Elders
as
ministers
,
and
that
the
duties
both
generall
,
of
attending
to
themselues
,
&
the
whole
flocke
,
and
also
special
of
feeding
the
Church
,
were
required
,
as
common
to
Ministers
with
Lay-elders
(
which
assertions
I
haue
confuted
,
with
euidence
of
truth
)
in
this
exposition
,
or
opposition
rather
,
he
doth
so
please
himselfe
,
as
that
hee
doubteth
not
to
retort
my
Syllogisme
vpon
me
after
this
manner
,
If
the
presbyters
spoken
of
Acts
20
,
28
,
be
not
onely
ministers
,
but
gouerning
Elders
also
,
and
the
same
with
those
.
1.
Tim
,
5.17
.
then
the
presbyters
spoken
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
are
not
onely
Ministers
,
but
gouerning
Elders
also
:
But
the
presbyters
spoken
of
Acts
20
,
28
,
are
not
onely
ministers
,
but
gouerning
elders
also
,
&
the
same
with
those
1.
Tim
5
,
17
Therefore
,
the
presbyters
spoken
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
are
not
onely
Ministers
,
but
gouerning
Elders
also
.
Heere
this
great
Logick-maister
,
that
taketh
vpon
him
to
teach
,
and
to
comptroll
mee
in
matters
of
Logicke
,
bewrayeth
himselfe
to
bee
a
Logicaster
,
or
smatterer
in
Logicke
:
For
an
entire
and
a
better
Syllogisme
,
concluding
the
same
question
as
I
noted
before
in
his
Analyzing
of
mine
,
is
here
tumbled
into
the
proposition
;
&
the
proposition
and
assumption
therof
,
not
only
idlely
,
but
with
disaduantage
to
himself
,
if
he
had
meant
to
haue
proued
it
,
repeated
.
But
because
he
hath
bene
at
some
paines
with
me
this
way
to
shew
his
own
ignorance
,
I
will
teach
him
to
make
his
sillogis
:
thus
:
The
Presbyters
to
whom
Paul
did
speake
,
Acts
20.28
.
were
not
ministers
onely
,
but
Lay
or
gouerning
Elders
also
:
The
Presbyters
of
whom
hee
speaketh
,
I.
Tim.
5.17
.
were
the
Presbyters
to
whom
he
spake
,
Acts.
20
▪
28.
Therefore
the
presbyters
of
whome
hee
speaketh
,
Tim.
5.17
.
were
not
onely
ministers
,
but
Lay
,
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
also
.
This
proposition
which
is
but
part
of
his
own
assumption
,
when
he
shal
be
able
to
make
good
by
any
sound
proofe
,
I
will
subscribe
to
his
Lay-Elders
.
For
whereas
hee
for
want
of
better
proofe
saith
,
that
hee
hath
already
iustified
it
by
the
ouerthrow
of
mine
,
it
is
a
most
vaine
bragge
,
as
I
hope
it
doth
sufficiently
appeare
to
the
reader
.
For
what
one
reason
,
or
shew
of
reason
hath
hee
brought
,
or
can
bring
,
to
proue
that
the
Presbyters
mentioned
,
Acts.
20.
were
Lay
,
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
?
CHAP.
VI.
Maintaining
the
third
reason
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
not
mentioned
nor
meant
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
Serm.
Sect.
5.
pag.
11.
And
that
hee
speaketh
not
there
of
Lay
,
or
onely
gouerning-Elders
,
it
may
further
be
prooued
,
by
plaine
euidence
out
of
the
text
.
For
seeing
by
honour
in
that
place
,
the
Apostle
vnderstandeth
honourable
maintenance
,
which
by
their
owne
confession
,
is
not
due
to
Lay-Elders
:
it
is
therefore
certaine
,
that
this
place
acknowledgeth
none
such
.
Thus
therfore
I
argue
:
To
all
those
Elders
,
who
are
mentioned
or
meant
in
this
place
,
the
honour
of
maintenance
is
due
for
their
worke
sake
.
To
the
Lay-Elders
,
the
honour
of
maintenance
is
not
due
for
their
worke
sake
.
Therefore
the
Lay-Elders
,
are
not
mentioned
nor
meant
in
this
place
,
&c:
to
pag.
13.
Ad.
pag.
29.
THe
refuter
hauing
neither
learning
enough
to
beare
the
weight
of
this
argument
,
nor
wit
enough
to
forbeare
it
,
in
answearing
therto
,
he
vttereth
more
gall
then
would
well
become
an
honest
man
.
The
virus
and
poison
of
his
libelling
speeches
I
leaue
to
himselfe
:
The
vir●s
and
force
of
his
arguments
and
answeres
,
I
will
take
vpon
me
plainely
to
confute
,
and
both
here
and
euery
where
else
,
by
the
helpe
of
God
,
to
put
him
to
silence
.
First
(
as
his
manner
is
)
though
he
dares
not
deny
the
proposition
of
my
syllogisme
to
be
most
true
and
vndoubted
,
D.
B.
hath
better
reasons
to
comprise
them
vnder
Presbyters
,
then
your
W.
T.
had
vnder
the
name
of
Deacons
,
to
vnderstand
your
Lay-Elders
,
though
T.C.
himselfe
did
subscribe
to
his
opinion
.
And
wheras
you
challenge
those
reuerend
men
,
for
seeking
by
warrant
of
this
place
,
to
surcharge
the
Church
with
maintenance
of
vnpreaching
Ministers
and
Deacons
:
I
answere
,
they
do
not
hold
,
that
in
euery
parish
such
ought
to
be
maintained
(
as
you
would
haue
your
Presbyterie
erected
in
euery
parish
)
but
where
better
,
&
more
sufficient
Ministers
cannot
be
had
;
which
was
the
case
of
many
parishes
in
England
,
at
the
beginning
of
Q.
Elizabeths
raigne
,
&c.
But
all
his
spite
is
against
the
assumption
:
My
assumption
was
this
:
To
Lay-Elders
,
the
honour
of
maintenance
is
not
due
for
their
worke
sake
.
Hereunto
I
require
a
direct
answere
.
If
hee
say
that
the
honour
of
maintenance
,
yea
,
double
honor
,
T.
C.
also
expound
〈◊〉
plentifull
maintenance
,
is
due
vnto
them
:
he
should
haue
brought
sufficient
proofes
,
both
to
confute
the
iudgement
of
those
learned
Diuines
,
who
reformed
(
as
directors
)
other
Churches
,
and
condemne
the
practise
of
all
reformed
Churches
,
which
hauing
those
Presbyters
,
doe
not
allow
,
neither
doe
thinke
themselues
bound
to
allow
any
maintenance
at
all
to
their
Lay-Elders
:
and
also
to
perswade
all
those
reformed
Churches
which
haue
them
not
,
and
which
in
manie
parishes
are
either
not
able
,
or
not
willing
to
yeeld
sufficient
maintenance
to
one
learned
minister
,
to
erect
in
euery
parish
,
besides
the
Pastor
,
and
the
Doctor
,
a
Senate
of
Lay-Elders
,
with
purpose
to
vndergoe
an
vnsupportable
charge
,
and
to
think
themselues
bound
by
the
word
of
God
to
allow
them
all
,
and
euery
of
them
sufficient
maintenance
.
But
what
one
reason
doth
he
,
or
can
he
alledge
to
perswade
this
,
or
where
doth
he
go
about
to
perswade
it
?
If
he
say
,
according
to
the
iudgement
and
practise
of
all
Churches
whatsoeuer
,
which
either
haue
them
,
or
haue
them
not
,
that
this
honour
of
maintenance
is
not
due
vnto
them
;
why
doth
he
not
ingenuously
confesse
,
that
which
is
ineuitably
proued
out
of
the
words
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
neither
mentioned
nor
meant
in
this
place
.
If
hee
say
(
as
indeed
that
is
all
he
doth
say
)
that
my
proofes
are
not
sufficient
:
what
better
proofe
would
hee
require
in
such
breuitie
,
then
the
confession
of
the
parties
?
yea
,
but
they
doe
not
confesse
it
.
First
therefore
I
will
proue
their
confession
.
And
secondly
,
I
will
demonstrate
,
that
the
double
honour
of
maintenance
,
though
they
did
not
confesse
so
much
,
is
not
by
the
word
of
God
,
due
to
their
imagined
Lay-Elders
for
their
workes
sake
.
Their
confession
I
proue
thus
:
That
there
should
be
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
elected
out
of
the
people
or
Laitie
,
without
maintenance
to
be
yeelded
to
them
,
was
prescribed
by
the
learned
reformers
according
to
the
word
of
God
as
they
pretended
.
Therefore
,
that
there
sho'uld
be
Elders
,
elected
out
of
the
Laitie
,
without
maintenance
to
be
yeelded
to
them
,
was
the
Doctrine
of
the
learned
reformers
.
The
proposition
needs
no
proofe
:
The
assumption
I
confirme
thus
;
That
which
is
practised
according
to
the
lawes
of
Discipline
,
in
all
those
reformed
churches
:
where
the
Presbyteries
be
erected
,
was
prescribed
by
the
learned
reformers
,
according
to
the
word
of
God
,
as
they
pretended
.
The
election
of
only-gouerning
Elders
,
out
of
the
Laity
,
without
maintenance
to
be
yelded
to
them
,
is
practised
in
all
those
reformed
churches
,
according
to
the
laws
of
discipline
Therefore
the
election
of
only
gouerning-Elders
,
out
of
the
Laitie
,
without
maintenance
to
be
yeelded
to
them
,
was
prescribed
by
the
learned
reformers
,
according
to
the
word
of
God
,
as
they
pretended
.
And
consequently
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
not
to
haue
maintenance
,
is
both
the
Doctrine
of
the
learned
reformers
,
and
the
practise
of
all
those
Churches
reformed
by
them
.
The
proposition
is
manifest
,
because
the
lawes
of
Discipline
in
those
Churches
,
were
either
prescribed
by
the
learned
reformers
,
or
framed
according
to
their
prescript
.
The
assumption
may
also
be
euidently
proued
by
induction
:
For
the
Lay-Elders
,
neither
in
the
Churches
of
Geneua
,
France
,
Low-countreys
,
haue
,
nor
of
Scotland
,
had
any
maintenance
allowed
them
,
&
that
according
to
the
lawes
of
their
discipline
;
neither
can
the
refuter
giue
any
one
instance
to
the
contrary
.
It
shal
suffice
me
to
make
instance
in
Geneua
,
which
was
a
patterne
in
this
behalfe
to
the
rest
.
4.
His
obiection
denying
their
confession
refuted
.
Now
let
vs
see
what
the
refuter
obiecteth
.
1.
That
I
might
haue
read
the
contrary
in
Calui●
,
Bullinger
,
Beza
,
Cartwright
,
D.
Bilson
,
and
D.
Sutcliffe
,
but
that
it
seemes
I
did
not
read
on
that
side
of
the
leafe
.
And
it
seemes
to
mee
,
that
you
would
not
haue
me
read
on
that
side
as
yet
,
or
rather
,
that
there
is
no
such
thing
to
be
read
:
Else
you
would
haue
pointed
,
if
not
to
the
leafe
,
yet
at
least
,
to
the
booke
.
For
my
part
,
I
professe
that
I
doe
not
remember
,
that
I
haue
read
any
such
thing
,
either
in
Caluin
,
Beza
,
or
Bullinger
,
but
the
contrary
,
as
I
haue
shewed
in
Caluin
and
Beza
.
As
for
Bullinger
,
you
had
lesse
reason
to
alledge
him
,
As
touching
D.
Bils
:
it
is
strange
that
you
should
both
accuse
mee
for
taking
this
reason
from
him
,
and
also
charge
him
with
teaching
the
contrary
.
In
his
preface
,
hee
saith
thus
:
By
no
precept
nor
example
will
it
euer
be
proued
,
that
Lay-presbyters
had
in
the
Apostles
times
,
or
should
haue
by
the
word
of
God
at
any
time
,
double
honour
and
maintenance
from
the
Church
of
Christ
.
Wherefore
they
must
either
giue
all
Lay-Elders
double
maintenance
,
as
S.
Paul
willeth
,
which
they
doe
not
,
or
shutte
them
cleane
from
these
words
,
which
yeeld
double
maintenance
,
by
Gods
Law
to
Presbyters
that
rule
well
.
Ad
pag
:
30.
And
to
the
like
purpose
hee
speaketh
,
in
the
place
by
you
quoted
.
The
speech
of
that
worthy
learned
man
,
D.
〈◊〉
who
is
highly
to
be
commended
for
his
great
learning
,
good
paines
,
and
zealous
affection
for
the
maintenance
of
the
truth
,
whom
you
vilely
and
vngraciously
abuse
,
as
you
doe
all
others
that
come
in
your
way
,
be
they
neuer
so
worthy
champions
of
our
Church
against
the
Papists
,
his
reproofe
I
say
of
T.
C.
for
requiring
maintenance
as
due
to
the
Lay-Elders
,
the
Elders
whereof
the
Apostles
speake
receiued
wages
of
the
Church
.
But
(
saith
he
)
the
new
Aldermen
in
all
Churches
where
they
raigne
,
liue
vpon
interest
of
their
owne
money
or
goods
,
and
receiue
no
salarie
of
the
Churches
.
Neither
had
he
indeed
any
great
reason
(
in
my
iudgement
)
to
blame
T.
C.
(
that
I
may
also
come
to
him
)
as
opposing
his
iudgement
to
the
practise
of
the
reformed
Churches
.
if
the
Apostle
would
charge
the
Churches
being
in
persecution
,
and
therefore
poore
with
maintaining
Elders
,
which
being
poore
,
were
not
sometimes
able
to
liue
without
some
reliefe
from
the
Church
,
&c:
how
much
more
ought
there
now
to
be
Seniors
,
when
the
Churches
be
in
peace
,
and
therefore
not
so
poore
,
and
when
there
may
be
chosen
such
for
the
most
part
throughout
the
realme
,
as
are
able
to
liue
without
charging
the
Church
any
whit
,
as
the
practise
of
these
daies
doth
manifestly
declare
.
For
if
it
had
beene
his
iudgement
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
to
be
maintained
otherwise
then
for
need
,
he
would
haue
argued
thus
.
If
by
the
Apostles
rule
,
the
Elders
were
to
be
maintained
for
their
workes
sake
,
by
the
Churches
being
poore
and
in
p●rsecution
,
then
much
more
are
they
to
be
maintained
when
the
Churches
be
in
peace
and
profp●ritie
,
and
so
would
haue
assumed
the
antecedent
,
to
conclude
the
consequent
.
But
seeing
he
doth
tollere
consequens
,
contradict
the
consequent
,
saying
,
that
when
the
Churches
are
in
peace
and
prosperitie
,
such
a
course
may
and
ought
to
be
taken
(
for
that
may
seeme
to
be
his
meaning
)
according
to
the
example
of
all
the
reformed
Churches
,
that
the
Church
shall
not
be
charged
at
all
with
the
maintenance
of
the
Seniors
,
that
is
to
say
,
by
choosing
men
of
abilitie
who
need
no
reliefe
;
it
is
easie
to
conclude
tollendo
antecedens
,
that
his
iudgement
was
,
that
(
this
rule
of
the
Apostle
notwithstanding
,
)
Lay-Elders
were
not
to
haue
maintenance
for
their
workes
sake
,
but
reliefe
onely
if
they
did
need
.
it
is
not
necessarie
that
they
should
prouide
for
any
more
of
them
,
sauing
those
that
are
exercised
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
,
vnlesse
any
of
the
rest
may
need
the
liberalitie
of
the
Church
.
But
suppose
that
this
were
T.
C.
iudgement
,
or
the
opinion
of
any
other
among
vs
,
who
hath
conceiued
a
platonicall
Idea
of
discipline
which
he
neuer
saw
practised
:
were
this
sufficient
to
disproue
my
assertion
,
who
haue
the
confession
of
the
learned
reformers
in
respect
of
their
doctrine
,
and
of
the
reformed
Churches
in
respect
of
their
practise
?
Or
if
this
were
a
sufficient
exception
against
the
consent
of
those
which
stand
for
discipline
,
that
some
one
doth
hold
a
singular
opinion
by
himselfe
;
then
can
their
consent
be
scarcely
alledged
for
any
one
affirmatiue
point
of
discipline
,
euery
man
almost
pleasing
himselfe
in
the
noueltie
of
his
inuention
,
and
in
the
singularitie
of
his
opinion
.
For
plentifull
proofe
whereof
,
§
5.
His
second
obiection
is
,
that
although
in
practise
reformed
Churches
doe
not
giue
their
Lay-Elders
any
maintenance
,
yet
this
doth
not
hinder
,
but
that
in
their
iudgement
they
may
according
to
the
Apostles
rule
,
Can
we
doubt
saith
he
,
but
our
Clergie
maisters
thinke
M.
D.
worthy
of
a
Bishoppricke
for
his
paines
in
pleading
their
cause
:
yet
we
see
they
bestowe
not
so
much
as
a
suffraganeship
on
him
.
Shall
we
therefore
say
they
doe
not
thinke
him
to
deserue
it
?
What
a
profane
mockerie
is
this
,
to
expound
the
Apostles
words
,
as
though
hee
would
haue
the
people
thinke
they
had
discharged
their
dutie
in
esteeming
onely
their
Ministers
worthy
of
double
honour
,
when
in
fact
they
doe
not
yeeld
them
sufficient
maintenance
.
If
he
were
in
the
ministerie
(
as
I
know
not
whether
he
be
or
not
)
and
the
people
should
answere
him
thus
:
Syr
,
though
we
allow
you
no
maintenance
as
you
desire
,
yet
let
this
content
you
,
that
according
to
the
Apostles
rule
,
we
count
you
worthy
of
double
honour
:
would
he
not
thinke
S.
Paul
abused
,
himselfe
deluded
,
yea
and
Christ
his
Lord
and
maister
in
him
to
be
mocked
?
God
is
not
mocked
.
That
which
I
say
of
Ministers
,
is
in
like
manner
to
be
vnderstood
of
Lay-Elders
,
if
they
be
included
in
this
text
.
The
words
of
the
Apostle
are
generall
,
the
Presbyters
that
rule
well
,
let
them
be
counted
worthy
of
double
honour
.
Wherefore
let
them
either
acknowledge
that
the
Lay-Elders
are
not
meant
in
this
place
,
or
else
teach
the
people
before
they
admit
Lay-Elders
,
to
thinke
themselues
bound
by
the
Apostles
rule
,
to
yeeld
them
double
honour
,
T.
C.
a
plentifull
reward
,
such
as
may
be
fully
sufficient
for
them
and
their
housholds
)
and
to
yeeld
it
willingly
&
gratefully
.
For
that
is
the
Apostles
meaning
,
when
he
requireth
the
Presbyters
to
be
accounted
worthy
of
double
honour
,
not
onely
that
this
honour
of
maintenance
should
be
giuen
them
,
as
appeareth
by
the
reasons
which
he
hath
annexed
;
but
that
the
people
should
giue
it
,
not
grudgingly
,
and
as
it
were
by
constraint
of
law
,
as
thinking
the
Ministers
not
worthy
of
maintenance
:
but
willingly
and
gratefully
,
as
esteeming
them
most
worthy
of
double
honour
,
and
thinking
it
a
small
matter
to
giue
temporall
things
to
them
,
Pauls
refusing
of
maintenance
from
the
Corinthians
and
Thessalonains
,
or
of
wealthy
Ministers
refusing
to
burden
the
Churches
by
taking
maintenance
from
them
:
vnlesse
he
can
proue
,
that
order
being
taken
in
those
Churches
for
the
maintenance
of
their
Elders
,
which
they
may
readily
receiue
if
they
will
,
themselues
doe
voluntarily
,
and
freely
refuse
it
.
For
if
those
Elders
be
comprised
vnder
Presbyters
in
this
text
,
there
must
the
like
order
be
taken
for
maintenance
of
all
by
the
Apostles
rule
,
though
the
painefull
Preachers
are
chiefely
to
be
respected
.
But
the
contrarie
course
is
taken
.
Neither
is
there
not
hauing
of
maintenance
to
be
ascribed
to
their
owne
refusing
,
as
in
the
example
of
Paul
,
and
the
wealthy
Ministers
;
but
to
the
Churches
not
allowing
them
maintenance
.
need
not
insult
ouer
those
reformed
Churches
,
which
with
consent
of
the
Elders
themselues
,
thinke
it
best
to
ease
the
people
of
that
charge
,
seeing
the
paines
to
be
taken
in
the
office
of
the
Eldership
is
not
such
,
but
that
they
may
attend
their
ciuill
callings
and
meanes
of
liuing
,
as
well
as
our
Churchwardens
,
and
ciuill
officers
.
In
which
words
,
first
,
he
wrongfully
chargeth
me
with
insulting
ouer
those
Churches
.
Secondly
,
he
confuteth
himselfe
,
who
hauing
before
denied
them
to
be
Lay-Elders
,
here
confesseth
they
haue
ciuill
callings
,
which
they
may
attend
vpon
,
as
well
as
our
Churchwardens
.
Thirdly
,
where
hee
speaketh
of
the
Elders
consent
in
not
taking
maintenance
,
it
is
the
consent
of
obedience
to
the
lawes
and
orders
of
the
Church
,
such
as
is
in
our
Churchwardens
,
who
by
the
like
consent
haue
no
maintenance
.
But
to
leaue
his
words
,
and
to
come
to
the
substance
of
his
speech
;
seeing
their
paines
are
not
such
,
but
that
they
may
follow
their
ciuill
callings
and
worldly
busines
,
and
seeing
they
haue
ciuill
callings
to
attend
vpon
,
and
other
sufficient
meanes
of
liuelihood
,
being
in
all
these
respects
like
,
if
not
superiour
to
our
Churchwardens
,
it
may
not
be
thought
that
the
Apostle
who
was
desirous
the
Churches
should
be
eased
as
much
as
might
be
,
would
require
them
to
giue
double
honour
to
such
,
as
neither
deserued
nor
needed
such
maintenance
.
And
therfore
he
did
not
comprise
them
vnder
the
name
of
Presbyters
(
which
indeed
signifieth
Priests
or
Ministers
)
or
if
he
did
,
no
Church
must
thinke
it selfe
to
haue
authoritie
to
dispense
with
the
Apostle
,
but
must
acknowledge
it selfe
bound
,
if
it
vnderstand
Lay-Elders
to
be
comprised
in
this
text
,
willingly
and
gratefully
to
giue
double
(
that
is
sufficient
and
plentifull
)
maintenance
to
them
,
esteeming
them
worthy
of
it
for
their
worke
sake
.
The
onely
thing
which
is
obiected
by
the
learned
of
that
side
,
that
their
Lay-Elders
,
if
they
stand
in
need
,
are
to
be
maintained
.
Whereunto
I
now
adde
,
that
some
of
them
so
vnderstand
the
Apostle
:
and
I
answere
,
that
if
hee
be
so
vnderstood
in
respect
of
Lay-Elders
,
he
must
in
like
manner
be
vnderstood
of
Ministers
,
his
speech
being
generall
,
and
fauouring
the
Ministers
no
more
then
thus
,
But
here
the
refuter
behaueth
himselfe
as
one
that
is
at
a
nonplus
for
reason
,
and
at
an
ouerplus
for
rancour
:
his
words
added
to
the
last
I
cited
,
be
these
.
But
to
proue
it
,
he
propoundeth
(
out
of
the
surueyour
of
discipline
,
cap.
10.
)
an
obiection
,
and
then
answereth
it
.
The
summe
whereof
is
this
,
that
the
maintenance
allowed
them
,
is
rather
a
beggarly
almes
giuen
in
charitie
for
need
,
then
that
honourable
stipend
,
which
iniustice
is
due
to
them
for
their
worke
sake
.
But
to
proue
it
,
saith
he
,
what
would
I
proue
?
the
refuter
is
confoun●ed
,
he
knoweth
not
well
what
he
saith
.
He
propoundeth
saith
he
an
obiection
out
of
the
surueyour
.
Sure
his
eyes
dazeled
,
and
his
witts
were
to
seeke
.
In
the
suruey
is
not
so
much
as
a
shew
of
any
such
obiection
:
neither
is
it
alledged
to
any
other
end
,
but
to
proue
that
,
whereunto
the
letter
in
the
margent
directed
him
,
that
is
,
that
they
make
choise
of
such
as
haue
no
need
.
But
what
is
it
?
the
summe
whereof
is
this
,
that
the
maintenance
allowed
them
is
rather
a
beggerly
almes
,
&c.
Is
this
the
summe
of
the
obiection
?
that
is
senselesse
,
and
yet
he
seemes
to
say
so
:
What
then
?
is
it
the
summe
of
the
answere
,
or
of
both
?
no
man
that
were
not
at
a
losse
would
say
it
.
I
professe
I
haue
not
often
read
a
speech
more
senselesse
.
To
helpe
him
out
of
the
maze
,
and
to
make
him
confesse
that
hee
was
at
a
nonplus
,
I
will
explaine
my
words
.
For
whereas
some
obiect
said
I
,
&c:
My
meaning
was
this
,
the
onely
thing
which
is
obiected
to
disproue
my
assumption
,
that
to
the
Lay-Elders
the
honour
of
maintenance
is
not
due
for
their
worke
sake
,
is
this
:
that
Lay-Elders
if
they
stand
in
need
are
to
be
maintained
.
Which
obiection
hath
beene
made
personally
to
me
,
I
will
not
say
by
the
refuter
,
though
some
thinke
so
,
for
I
take
that
obiector
to
be
an
honester
man
:
and
that
which
is
obiected
,
is
that
conceit
not
onely
of
T.
C.
the
maister
,
and
the
demonstrator
his
scholler
,
but
of
Danaeus
also
writing
on
that
place
:
Their
Aldermen
must
be
(
according
to
their
owne
positions
)
men
of
good
calling
:
and
among
other
things
in
that
chapter
,
are
cited
the
lawes
of
Geneua
,
requiring
,
that
all
their
twelue
Lay-Elders
should
be
men
of
state
&c:
as
I
said
before
.
Secondly
,
I
answered
,
if
they
chance
to
haue
need
(
which
is
a
case
that
happeneth
as
seldome
at
the
least
to
them
,
as
to
our
Church-wardens
)
and
if
they
be
relieued
(
as
our
Church-wardens
also
should
in
the
like
case
)
that
then
the
maintenance
which
is
allowed
,
is
for
their
need
,
and
not
for
their
worke
sake
.
But
the
Apostle
saith
,
the
Presbyters
are
worthy
of
double
honour
,
and
the
workeman
is
worthy
of
his
stipend
,
&c.
As
if
I
had
said
:
the
reliefe
which
is
giuen
to
Lay-Elders
for
their
need
(
if
euer
that
doe
happen
)
doth
not
disproue
my
assumption
,
nor
proue
that
they
are
included
in
this
text
.
For
,
The
maintenance
which
the
Apostle
requireth
to
be
giuen
to
Presbyters
is
not
a
beggarly
almes
(
that
is
a
poore
mans
reliefe
giuen
by
way
of
almes
,
)
bestowed
onely
in
charitie
to
supply
their
need
,
but
an
honourable
stipend
,
(
Paul
calleth
it
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Philo
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
our
Sauiour
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
in
iustice
due
to
the
Presbyters
for
their
worke
sake
.
But
the
reliefe
,
which
they
require
to
be
giuen
to
their
Lay-Elders
,
is
a
beggarly
almes
(
that
is
a
poore
mans
reliefe
giuen
by
way
of
almes
)
and
bestowed
onely
in
charitie
to
supply
,
their
need
,
and
not
an
honourable
stipend
(
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&c:
)
in
iustice
due
for
their
worke
sake
.
Therefore
the
reliefe
which
they
require
to
be
giuen
to
their
Lay-Elders
is
not
that
maintenance
which
the
Apostle
requireth
to
be
giuen
to
Presbyters
.
Now
let
vs
heare
what
the
refuter
addeth
to
his
former
words
.
But
saith
he
as
the
obiection
is
needlesse
,
so
his
answere
is
insufficient
,
here
now
he
speaketh
with
reason
,
though
without
truth
.
The
obiection
is
made
by
the
chiefe
of
his
side
,
and
is
the
best
(
though
needlesse
)
if
not
the
onely
obiection
,
they
haue
.
My
answere
is
such
as
you
haue
heard
,
that
is
to
say
,
such
an
answere
,
as
whensoeuer
he
medleth
with
it
,
will
bring
him
to
a
nonplus
againe
:
but
because
I
said
he
speaketh
with
reason
,
let
vs
heare
his
reason
.
For
saith
he
albeit
their
necessitie
occasioneth
their
maintenance
by
common
allowance
,
Ad
pag.
3●
yet
is
it
for
their
worke
sake
that
they
are
maintained
:
to
which
I
reply
:
if
it
were
a
maintenance
in
iustice
due
for
their
worke
sake
,
and
not
a
reliefe
giuen
onely
in
charitie
by
way
of
almes
for
their
need
;
that
then
it
ought
in
iustice
to
be
giuen
to
them
,
whether
they
be
in
need
or
not
.
For
the
workeman
is
worthy
of
his
stipend
for
his
worke
sake
;
and
willingly
it
must
be
giuen
him
as
deseruing
it
,
whether
he
need
or
not
.
For
although
it
be
a
crying
sinne
,
and
doe
offend
more
against
charitie
to
hold
it
from
him
if
he
need
:
yet
it
offendeth
as
much
against
iustice
,
to
withhold
the
stipend
from
the
workeman
,
that
is
not
in
need
.
The
stipend
,
which
Paul
appointeth
to
Presbyters
,
in
respect
of
their
paines
in
edifying
the
Church
,
which
is
the
house
of
God
,
is
as
due
in
iustice
to
them
for
their
worke
sake
,
as
the
stipend
is
due
to
a
Carpenter
,
that
buildeth
an
house
.
And
as
it
were
iniustice
ioyned
with
folly
,
for
a
man
not
to
thinke
himselfe
bound
to
giue
the
Carpenter
his
stipend
,
vnlesse
he
be
poore
:
the
like
is
to
be
conceiued
of
the
stipend
denied
to
Presbyters
for
their
wealth
,
which
is
due
for
their
worke
.
The
rest
of
his
speech
is
vttered
in
rancour
and
gall
:
but
the
points
be
these
.
First
,
that
it
doth
not
become
me
,
&c:
to
call
it
a
beggerly
maintenance
.
Secondly
,
that
it
is
more
then
is
giuen
to
our
Church-wardens
that
are
crept
into
their
roomes
.
The
third
,
which
is
more
plainely
vttered
in
the
abortiue
booke
,
that
the
like
perhaps
will
not
make
D.
D.
rich
.
In
what
sense
I
called
it
beggarly
almes
,
giuen
onely
in
charitie
,
opposing
it
to
honourable
stipend
,
due
in
iustice
,
I
haue
already
explaned
.
To
the
second
I
answere
,
our
Church-wardens
,
hauing
lesse
trouble
,
haue
notwithstanding
no
lesse
allowance
,
then
your
Elders
,
for
they
haue
none
at
all
.
And
where
you
say
,
our
Church-wardens
are
crept
into
their
roomes
:
you
must
first
proue
that
euer
they
had
a
roome
in
the
Church
.
For
we
will
neuer
grant
that
our
Church-wardens
be
your
Elders
successours
,
till
you
haue
proued
your
Elders
to
haue
beene
their
predecessors
.
And
whereas
you
make
your selues
merrie
with
my
want
of
riches
,
as
you
did
before
with
my
want
of
preferment
;
I
tell
you
plainely
,
I
had
rather
be
poorer
then
M.D.
is
with
a
good
conscience
,
then
to
be
as
rich
as
some
of
you
by
maintaining
a
faction
,
to
be
maintained
by
it
.
Let
thy
Kingdome
come
,
wee
are
to
pray
,
that
your
Discipline
may
be
aduanced
;
that
the
question
betweene
the
BB.
and
you
,
is
about
no
lesse
matter
then
this
,
Wee
will
not
haue
this
man
to
raigne
ouer
vs
:
and
to
vs
is
applyed
that
terrible
doome
,
Those
mine
enemies
that
would
not
haue
mee
to
raigne
ouer
them
,
bring
hither
,
and
slay
them
before
mee
:
and
many
such
like
speeches
,
concerning
the
kingdome
of
Christ
,
which
being
applied
to
your
owne
deuices
,
are
not
farre
from
blasphemie
.
These
confident
speeches
considered
,
a
man
would
think
that
you
haue
most
euident
,
certaine
,
and
vndeniable
grounds
for
your
Presbyteries
.
But
when
I
come
to
examine
your
proofes
,
&
to
search
the
Scriptures
,
and
records
of
antiquitie
;
I
professe
vnfainedly
,
&
in
the
feare
of
God
,
that
I
cannot
sufficiently
wonder
,
that
men
of
reading
should
approue
,
&
men
of
sinceritie
should
vrge
so
confidently
,
and
maintaine
so
resolutely
,
euen
vnto
silencing
and
depriuation
,
such
not
onely
humane
deuices
,
but
meere
nouelties
,
as
the
sacred
ordinances
of
Christ
our
Sauiour
;
for
which
,
after
all
the
search
which
hath
beene
made
,
there
cannot
be
produced
any
sound
testimonie
.
But
to
come
to
the
point
:
you
say
,
(
if
you
deny
my
aforesaid
assumption
,
)
that
to
Lay-Elders
gouerning
well
double
honour
is
due
by
the
word
of
God
,
for
their
worke
sake
.
I
say
,
the
holie
Ghost
is
so
farre
from
assigning
this
double
honour
to
them
,
that
neither
their
worke
,
or
office
it selfe
,
for
which
that
honour
should
be
due
to
them
,
nor
their
qualities
whereby
they
should
bee
qualified
for
that
office
,
nor
themselues
,
For
first
,
as
touching
their
office
:
it
is
by
them
assigned
,
either
to
their
Elders
seuerally
,
or
to
the
Elder-ship
iointly
Their
duty
seuerally
,
is
to
be
watchmen
in
the
Church
,
hauing
their
seuerall
Wards
or
precincts
appointed
to
them
,
wherein
they
are
to
obserue
the
manners
of
men
for
auoiding
offences
,
and
other
occurrents
for
peruerting
disorders
.
The
manners
of
men
they
are
to
enquire
into
,
and
to
prie
into
their
faults
,
that
if
they
be
secret
or
small
,
they
may
admonish
the
offenders
priu●ly
:
if
open
or
great
,
they
may
informe
the
Consistory
therof
.
And
for
other
occurrents
,
they
are
to
looke
that
good
orders
be
kept
,
especially
respecting
the
sacraments
.
As
they
are
to
informe
their
pastor
if
there
be
any
childe
in
their
Warde
to
be
baptized
,
if
there
be
any
in
their
precinct
,
lately
come
into
the
parish
,
to
acquaint
the
Minister
before
the
Communion
,
and
at
the
Communion
to
keepe
backe
those
whose
religion
and
honestie
is
not
knowne
,
and
whom
the
Ministers
haue
not
dealt
withall
before
.
Wherfore
,
as
in
respect
of
manners
,
they
are
by
them
compared
to
the
Censors
of
the
Romanes
,
so
in
respect
of
good
orders
,
they
are
as
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Athenians
.
The
ioynt-office
of
the
Elders
,
is
the
office
of
the
whole
Presbyterie
,
or
Eldership
,
Consistorie
,
or
sacred
Senate
,
which
in
the
Assemblie
of
the
Elders
of
the
Church
,
who
by
common
counsell
and
authoritie
,
do
rule
and
gouerne
the
same
.
For
as
Lacedemon
had
her
Seignorie
,
Athens
her
high
court
of
the
Areopagi●●s
,
Rome
,
her
Senate
,
and
euery
kingdome
their
counsell
,
so
euery
Church
,
(
that
is
,
euery
parish
according
,
to
the
new
disciplinarians
)
must
haue
her
Presbyterie
,
or
sacred
Senate
,
vnto
which
Christ
hath
giuen
the
keyes
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
,
whereby
is
meant
all
Ecclesiasticall
power
and
authoritie
.
This
authoritie
respecteth
either
the
Officers
of
the
Church
,
or
the
offenders
.
Officers
,
as
Pastors
,
Doctors
,
Elders
,
Deacons
.
Concerning
whome
the
Eldership
hath
authoritie
to
elect
,
ordaine
,
depriue
,
or
depose
them
.
As
touching
offenders
,
the
Eldership
hath
authoritie
to
censure
them
,
either
by
reproofe
,
suspension
,
or
excommunication
.
Belieue
mee
,
if
the
word
of
God
hath
committed
these
things
to
the
hands
of
the
Elders
,
then
haue
they
an
office
of
great
consequence
indeed
.
Eccl.
dis.
fo
.
5
But
if
you
remember
their
own
positions
,
T.C.
l.
pag
:
16
Demons●
pag
:
1
:
●
that
the
Word
of
God
doth
perfectly
describe
all
the
lawfull
offices
of
the
Church
;
and
that
no
office
or
calling
in
the
Church
is
lawfull
,
but
that
which
is
directly
warranted
out
of
the
Word
:
yet
it
was
the
sinne
for
which
Coreh
,
Dathan
,
and
Abiram
were
punished
,
in
that
they
presumed
,
though
they
were
Leuites
,
to
take
in
hand
that
for
which
they
had
no
warrant
:
then
can
you
not
but
expect
most
manifest
&
pregnant
proofes
out
of
the
Scripture
,
directly
warranting
this
whole
office
,
and
all
the
branches
thereof
.
Or
if
you
faile
of
your
expectation
,
you
cannot
but
wonder
at
the
extreme
boldnes
of
them
,
who
holding
these
positions
,
impose
vpon
the
Church
,
an
office
of
such
authority
,
not
as
an
humane
pollicie
,
but
as
the
holie
ordinance
of
Christ
,
hauing
no
warrant
in
the
Scriptures
.
But
what
one
pregnant
testimonie
of
Scripture
can
they
produce
,
Besides
,
Prophets
,
and
Priests
,
or
Ministers
,
or
of
Censors
of
mens
manners
,
besides
ministers
and
Magistrates
:
and
much
lesse
doe
the
scriptures
appoint
a
peculiar
officer
to
be
the
accuser
of
the
bretheren
.
Indeed
it
is
the
dutie
of
all
good
Christians
,
mutuallie
to
exercise
the
duties
of
the
Communion
of
Saints
,
by
instructing
,
exhorting
,
admonishing
,
rebuking
,
comforting
one
another
.
And
as
the
Apostle
s●ith
,
to
consider
or
obserue
on●
another
,
to
prouoke
vnto
loue
,
and
to
good
workes
.
We
may
not
be
of
Cains
minde
,
Am
I
my
brothers
keeper
?
We
are
so
farre
to
be
keepers
and
obseruers
of
our
brethren
,
as
by
all
good
meanes
to
further
and
aduance
the
saluation
one
of
another
.
The
Lord
hath
charged
thee
in
the
Law
,
freely
to
rebuke
thy
brother
,
and
not
suffer
sinne
to
rest
upon
him
.
And
likewise
in
the
Gospell
,
If
thy
brother
sinne
against
thee
(
either
committing
an
iniurie
against
thee
,
or
giuing
thee
offence
,
by
some
sinne
committed
in
thy
knowledge
,
laying
by
his
euill
example
,
a
scandall
or
stumbling
blocke
in
thy
way
,
)
goe
and
reprous
him
,
privately
betweene
thee
&
him
alone
,
If
he
heare
thee
thou
hast
wonne
thy
brother
.
But
if
he
heare
thee
not
,
take
yet
with
thee
one
or
two
;
if
he
will
not
heare
them
,
tell
the
assemblie
,
&c.
But
a
speciall
Church-officer
to
prye
into
other
mens
faults
,
such
as
S.
Peter
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
scriptures
do
not
appoynt
,
and
much
lesse
to
informe
against
,
or
to
accuse
priuate
offenders
,
such
as
we
call
Prom●ters
,
and
the
Grecians
,
Sycophants
.
As
for
their
diuiding
of
Parishes
into
Wardes
,
and
awarding
them
to
seuerall
Elders
,
as
also
all
the
rest
of
the
offices
and
duties
assigned
to
their
Elders
,
of
acquainting
the
ministers
who
is
to
bee
Baptized
,
what
new
parishioners
are
come
,
of
helping
at
the
Communion
,
and
repelling
some
there
from
,
they
must
and
doe
confesse
they
haue
no
scripture
for
them
:
and
yet
all
these
duties
must
bee
thought
to
be
prescribed
in
Gods
word
.
Eccl.
discipl
.
122
To
which
purpose
,
the
arguments
which
some
of
their
chiefe
writers
do
vse
,
are
these
.
First
,
that
although
all
these
things
be
not
specially
expressed
in
scripture
,
T.C.
Beza
Arguments
prouing
the
office
of
Elders
out
of
the
Scripture
,
answered
.
yet
forasmuch
as
offences
must
bee
auoided
,
and
those
duties
of
Charitie
,
and
Communion
of
Saintes
must
bee
performed
,
as
also
those
things
which
appertaine
to
good
order
prouided
for
:
and
forasmuch
as
there
are
no
other
officers
or
Elders
to
whom
the
charge
of
these
things
should
belong
;
therefore
satis
vt
opinor
apparet
,
haec
ad
Presbyterorum
officium
ex
verbo
Dei
referenda
esse
;
I
thinke
it
sufficiently
appeareth
,
that
these
things
by
the
word
of
God
,
are
to
be
referred
to
the
office
of
Elders
.
Their
argument
standeth
thus
.
All
necessary
duties
which
the
Scripture
hath
not
assigned
to
other
officers
or
Elders
,
it
hath
appointed
to
these
Elders
.
But
the
duties
before
spoken
of
,
are
necessarie
duties
,
which
the
scripture
hath
not
assigned
to
any
other
officers
or
Elders
.
Therefore
the
duties
before
spoken
of
,
the
scripture
hath
assigned
to
these
Elders
.
It
seemeth
by
the
proposition
,
that
the
Lay-Elders
haue
begged
a
book
of
concealments
,
that
they
may
be
authorized
to
deale
in
all
these
causes
,
for
which
other
men
haue
not
expresse
commission
.
But
first
I
denie
that
the
Scipture
hath
graunted
them
any
such
concealements
.
Nay
,
I
most
confidently
auow
,
that
they
themselues
are
concealed
in
the
Scriptures
,
which
doe
not
once
mention
them
in
anie
place
.
And
therefore
,
if
there
bee
cases
omitted
,
that
the
Scripture
hath
not
assigned
to
other
Elders
or
officers
;
We
may
thinke
it
hath
referred
them
to
the
wisedome
of
the
Church
,
and
authoritie
of
the
Soueraigne
,
r●●●er
then
to
them
,
whom
it
neuer
mentioneth
.
Secondly
I
answere
,
that
there
are
many
necessarie
duties
,
the
performance
whereof
the
holy
Ghost
hath
not
assigned
to
any
publike
Officers
at
all
,
as
though
there
should
bee
speciall
offices
appointed
for
them
;
but
are
to
be
performed
by
euery
Christian
;
as
the
aforesaid
duties
which
concerne
the
auoyding
of
scandales
,
the
duties
of
Charitie
and
Communion
of
Saints
.
Likewise
,
there
are
duties
respecting
outward
order
and
decencie
,
which
the
Scripture
doth
not
prescribe
in
particular
,
and
much
lesse
assigne
to
any
peculiar
office
.
But
the
determination
of
these
particulars
,
and
the
nomination
of
the
functions
or
persons
wherevnto
they
shal
be
assigned
,
is
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
Church
,
and
authoritie
of
the
Soueraigne
.
And
to
such
purposes
,
other
Churches
may
appoint
Lay-Elders
,
as
well
as
ours
doth
Churchwardens
,
so
they
doe
not
vrge
them
as
the
ordinance
of
Christ
,
nor
giue
them
commission
to
intermeddle
with
things
aboue
their
reach
,
as
being
peculiar
either
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Word
,
or
the
Ciuil
Magistrate
.
Their
second
Argument
.
As
for
that
part
of
their
office
of
taking
heede
to
offences
,
Their
2.
argument
.
1.
Thess.
5.12
.
Act.
20.28
.
Heb.
13.17
.
1.
Pet.
5.1.2
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
who
can
doubt
,
but
that
charge
properly
appertaineth
vnto
the
Elders
,
seeing
they
are
said
in
the
Scriptures
to
ouersee
,
and
to
gouerne
.
For
this
ouersight
can
haue
but
two
parts
onely
,
wherof
the
first
partaineth
to
doctrine
&
religion
;
the
other
,
to
life
and
manners
.
Seeing
then
,
that
two
sorts
of
Elders
are
expresly
named
by
Saint
Paule
,
wherof
the
first
sort
are
occupied
in
Preaching
,
and
Doctrine
:
It
is
necessary
that
the
other
should
haue
charge
of
manners
and
conuersation
,
for
that
onely
remaineth
.
This
discourse
containeth
2.
Syllogismes
:
the
First
,
All
Presbyters
who
in
the
Scriptures
are
said
to
ouersee
and
gouerne
,
hauing
not
that
ouersight
,
which
respecteth
doctrine
and
religion
,
haue
the
ouersight
of
manners
,
and
care
of
auoyding
offences
:
for
these
are
the
two
parts
of
ouersight
:
The
Lay-Elders
,
are
such
Presbyters
,
as
in
the
Scriptures
are
said
to
ouersee
&
gouerne
,
hauing
not
that
ouersight
,
which
respecteth
doctrine
and
religion
.
Therefore
the
Lay-Elders
haue
the
ouersight
of
manners
,
and
care
of
auoyding
offences
.
The
2.
If
the
Apostle
expressely
name
2.
sorts
of
Elders
,
distinguished
,
according
to
the
2.
parts
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
ouersight
,
viz:
Ministers
and
Lay-Elders
,
then
it
doth
necessarily
follow
,
that
as
the
Ministers
,
haue
the
care
and
ouersight
of
doctrine
and
religion
;
so
the
Lay-Elders
haue
the
ouersight
of
manners
and
care
of
auoiding
offences
.
But
the
Antecedent
is
true
.
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
Therefore
the
consequent
.
To
the
assumption
of
the
former
Syllogisme
,
I
answere
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
no
where
s
said
in
the
Scriptures
to
be
Presbyters
,
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
to
gouerne
or
ouersee
,
but
all
those
places
,
which
be
alleadged
to
this
purpose
,
are
to
bee
vnderstood
of
Ministers
onely
.
Besides
,
the
same
Author
hath
confessed
;
that
Lay
Elders
are
not
Byshops
,
neither
will
he
say
,
that
they
be
Pastors
.
But
the
places
which
he
quoteth
,
are
to
be
vnderstood
of
Bishops
&
Pastors
.
Of
Act.
20.28
.
&
1.
Pet.
5.
I
haue
already
spoken
,
as
also
of
1.
Thess.
5.12
.
Why
Heb.
13.17
.
should
be
applpyed
to
Lay-Elders
,
there
is
no
reason
;
vnlesse
whatsoeuer
is
spoken
of
Spirituall
gouernors
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
them
.
The
Writers
,
both
olde
and
new
,
expound
it
of
Bishops
and
Pastors
.
The
assumption
also
of
the
second
syllogisme
is
vntrue
,
neither
hath
it
any
thing
to
support
it
,
but
their
owne
exposition
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
which
I
haue
proued
to
be
false
.
Neither
is
that
true
,
which
is
presupposed
in
both
syllogismes
:
that
there
must
be
two
sorts
of
Elders
answerable
to
the
two
parts
of
ouersight
.
For
both
the
parts
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
ouersight
,
belong
to
those
which
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
ouerseers
,
that
is
Bishops
and
Pastors
,
whose
dutie
is
,
both
to
teach
and
to
gouerne
.
Their
third
Argument
is
taken
from
the
practise
of
the
primitiue
Church
next
succeeding
the
Apostles
.
Which
of
all
their
Arguments
is
most
friuolous
,
there
being
not
anie
testimonie
of
any
writer
,
or
example
of
any
Church
to
bee
alledged
,
that
euer
there
was
such
an
office
in
the
Church
.
But
howsoeuer
these
duties
to
be
performed
by
the
Elders
seuerally
,
might
be
borne
with
,
so
they
were
not
obtruded
as
the
ordinances
of
Christ
:
yet
the
ioynt
office
of
their
Lay
-
presbyteryes
is
intollerable
.
For
what
reason
can
they
alledge
for
their
intruding
into
the
sacred
office
of
Bishops
and
Pastors
,
&
vsurping
the
keyes
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
,
which
our
Sauiour
Christ
committed
to
none
,
but
to
the
Apostles
,
and
their
successors
?
That
Lay-men
should
haue
authoritie
,
and
that
by
the
ordinance
of
Christ
,
to
ordaine
Ministers
by
imposition
of
hands
,
to
remit
or
retaine
sinnes
,
to
excommunicate
the
obstinate
,
or
to
reconcile
the
penitent
,
is
an
opinion
too
absurde
to
be
confuted
.
Thus
therefore
I
reason
,
according
to
their
owne
principles
.
No
office
in
the
Church
is
lawfull
,
as
themselues
say
,
which
hath
not
expresse
warrant
in
the
scriptures
,
which
is
all
one
,
as
if
they
had
said
,
All
lawfull
offices
in
the
church
,
haue
expresse
warrant
in
Gods
word
.
The
office
of
the
Lay-Elders
seuerally
,
and
of
their
Elderships
yearely
,
hath
not
expresse
warrant
in
Gods
word
:
Therfore
it
is
vnlawfull
.
To
their
office
wee
will
ioyne
the
consideration
of
their
qualities
:
Timo
〈◊〉
,
and
in
him
all
Bishops
,
what
manner
of
persons
to
or●a●●
Ministers
,
or
Deacons
.
Forgotten
?
say
they
,
why
,
are
they
not
plainly
expressed
in
that
place
?
Yes
no
doubt
,
for
that
is
agreed
vpon
among
vs
:
For
some
will
needs
comprise
them
vnder
the
Bishop
or
Minister
,
and
feare
not
to
●ay
,
su●
modo
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
able
〈◊〉
preach
after
their
fashion
.
Others
acknowledge
,
that
they
are
neuer
comprehended
vnder
the
name
Bishop
,
and
that
it
is
necessarily
required
of
Ministers
alone
,
to
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
able
to
preach
,
especially
,
in
that
sense
that
the
Apostle
meaneth
,
as
appeareth
by
comparing
that
place
with
Tit:
1.9
:
yet
resolued
to
finde
a
roome
for
them
in
that
place
,
and
not
to
suffer
them
to
be
excluded
,
are
faine
to
s●row●e
them
vnder
the
name
of
Deacons
:
It
shall
〈◊〉
me
to
alledge
,
that
forsomuch
as
the
Eldership
is
in
their
conceit
a
different
office
,
both
from
the
Minister
and
Deacon
,
that
it
is
comprehended
in
neither
.
For
who
cannot
conceiue
this
reason
?
None
but
Bishops
,
Ministers
,
and
Deacons
,
are
described
in
that
place
:
(
Bishops
and
Ministers
in
the
former
description
,
and
Deacons
in
the
latter
:
)
But
Lay-elders
are
neither
Bishops
or
Ministers
,
nor
Deacons
,
but
an
imagined
office
distinct
from
both
:
Therefore
they
are
not
described
in
that
place
.
The
refu●●●
hath
solemnely
proclaimed
before
,
and
required
all
men
to
take
notice
of
it
,
that
their
Elders
ought
to
be
men
religious
,
of
great
grauitie
and
pietie
,
and
of
good
yeares
also
,
if
it
may
be
,
as
the
name
importeth
,
called
with
due
examination
,
chosen
with
consent
of
the
congregation
ouer
which
they
are
set
,
with
prayer
and
imposition
of
hands
put
a
part
to
that
Ecclesiasticall
office
.
All
which
I
will
not
denie
to
haue
beene
politickely
deuised
,
so
it
may
be
acknowledged
an
humane
deuise
,
and
not
a
diuine
ordinance
.
But
why
are
not
the
margents
filled
with
scriptures
for
the
proofe
of
these
things
?
The
truth
is
,
there
is
not
one
testimonie
of
scripture
to
be
alledged
,
prescribing
the
office
,
or
describing
the
qualities
of
Lay-Elders
.
But
perhaps
there
may
be
mention
sufficient
of
them
in
the
scriptures
to
warrant
their
calling
,
though
neither
their
office
nor
their
qualities
be
described
in
the
word
of
God
.
Nor
that
neither
:
as
shall
appeare
,
when
I
come
to
answere
the
refuters
allegations
for
them
.
In
the
meane
time
I
will
not
doubt
to
renew
my
former
challenge
,
if
they
can
produce
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
out
of
the
scriptures
,
whereby
it
may
necessarily
be
concluded
,
that
either
there
were
at
any
time
,
or
ought
to
be
at
all
times
in
the
Church
of
Christ
such
Elders
and
Elderships
as
they
speake
of
,
that
then
I
will
yeeld
to
them
in
the
whole
controuersie
betwixt
vs
.
But
vntill
such
proofe
be
produced
for
them
,
which
will
neuer
be
:
they
shall
giue
me
leaue
to
esteeme
their
doctrine
of
Lay-Elders
,
to
be
,
as
it
is
,
a
meere
fiction
,
how
vehemently
soeuer
it
be
vrged
and
obtruded
vpon
vs
,
as
the
holy
discipline
of
Christ
.
And
now
had
wee
done
with
this
place
of
the
Epistle
to
Timothie
,
Ministers
are
especially
to
be
honoured
for
their
paines
in
preaching
of
the
word
,
that
being
,
in
Pauls
estimation
,
the
chiefe
worke
of
the
ministerie
.
For
first
,
he
would
faine
know
of
me
why
●adde
in
Pauls
estimation
.
I
answere
,
because
it
was
necessarie
to
be
added
:
for
in
such
comparatiue
sentences
,
where
one
part
seemeh
to
be
preferred
before
all
the
rest
,
we
are
not
alwaies
to
vnderstand
that
part
simply
to
be
the
chiefe
,
but
in
the
estimation
of
the
speaker
,
who
in
some
respect
preferreth
it
to
the
rest
.
As
for
example
,
if
that
you
should
say
,
all
good
Ministers
or
Preachers
are
greatly
to
be
honoured
,
especially
they
,
who
goe
before
their
people
in
the
example
of
a
godly
life
:
I
would
expound
your
meaning
(
as
I
did
the
Apostles
)
to
be
this
,
that
whereas
double
honour
is
due
to
all
Ministers
or
Preachers
,
for
the
performance
of
their
dutie
in
generall
,
〈◊〉
they
are
especially
to
be
honoured
for
their
godly
life
,
that
being
in
your
estimation
the
chiefe
commendation
of
a
Minister
.
Or
to
vse
the
refuters
owne
example
,
which
before
I
explaned
:
all
logicians
that
reason
well
,
are
to
be
well
accounted
of
,
especially
they
that
iudge
well
,
or
are
iudicious
.
In
this
speech
are
to
be
noted
,
not
two
sorts
,
but
two
duties
of
logicians
;
the
one
generall
,
to
reason
well
,
the
other
,
speciall
to
iudge
well
,
disposed
in
a
comparatiue
sentence
,
wherein
the
duties
of
a
logician
are
thus
compared
,
that
whereas
logicians
are
to
be
esteemed
for
the
performance
of
their
dutie
in
generall
;
yet
especially
they
are
to
be
honoured
for
iudging
well
,
that
being
in
the
estimation
of
him
that
shall
so
speake
,
the
chiefe
worke
of
a
Logician
:
I
say
in
the
estim●i●●
of
him
that
shall
so
speake
;
for
another
perhaps
would
say
thus
;
All
logicians
that
reason
well
are
to
be
well
esteemed
,
especially
those
that
analise
well
:
another
perhaps
thus
.
All
good
Logicians
are
to
be
honoured
,
especially
those
that
are
methodicall
;
another
thus
,
especially
those
that
inuent
well
.
In
like
manner
I
explane
the
Apostles
speech
,
as
hath
beene
shewed
before
.
I
but
saith
he
,
if
this
be
true
that
those
Ministers
are
especially
worthy
of
double
honour
,
that
labour
in
the
word
and
doctrine
;
then
some
poore
Ministers
that
continually
preach
or
would
doe
,
if
they
might
be
suffered
,
are
more
especially
to
be
honoured
then
some
great
prelates
,
that
seldome
or
neuer
preach
:
and
it
was
the
enuy
of
this
illation
,
which
by
saying
in
Pauls
estimation
,
you
would
deriue
from
your selfe
to
the
●●●stle
.
Answ.
The
Apostles
comparison
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
them
which
be
of
the
same
degree
,
being
Presbyters
and
no
more
.
Neither
was
it
Pauls
meaning
,
writing
to
Timothie
the
Bishop
,
that
any
of
the
Presbyters
should
haue
more
maintenance
then
he
,
(
for
that
is
the
honour
whereof
hee
speaketh
)
though
perhaps
they
were
more
painefull
in
preaching
,
as
hauing
better
opportunitie
.
It
is
well
knowne
that
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
when
the
reuenewes
of
●ach
Church
were
diuided
into
[
a
](A20733-e26480-b)
a
Vid
●
confess
.
●
s.
30.
Syn●
Rom.
sub
syluest.
c.
12.
q.
2.
●
.
27.28.2.30
.
foure
parts
,
the
Bishop
alone
had
one
fourth
part
,
and
that
was
as
much
as
all
the
Presbyters
and
all
the
rest
of
the
clergie
(
though
perhaps
there
were
an
hundred
of
them
)
had
amongst
them
:
For
all
of
them
had
but
another
fourth
part
,
a
third
fourth
part
went
to
the
buildings
and
reparations
,
and
the
fourth
to
the
poore
.
His
second
cauill
,
3●
His
2.
ca●●●
that
in
other
places
,
viz.
pag.
42.45.53
.
I
haue
through
flatterie
contradicted
this
assertion
,
making
gouerning
a
labour
of
greater
honour
then
preaching
.
Answ.
In
none
of
those
places
doe
I
compare
preaching
with
gouerning
,
but
Bishops
with
Presbyters
,
saying
and
prouing
that
Bishops
are
superiour
to
Presbyters
in
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
and
that
the
Bishops
are
the
Apostles
successors
in
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
.
But
doth
it
follow
because
Bishops
are
superiour
to
Presbyters
,
that
therefore
preaching
is
a
worke
inferiour
to
gouernement
?
I
trust
Bishops
are
equall
at
the
least
with
Presbyters
in
the
power
of
order
,
as
it
respecteth
the
ministerie
of
the
word
and
sacraments
,
so
that
what
can
be
said
in
commendation
of
the
order
of
Presbyters
in
respect
of
the
ministerie
,
belongeth
also
to
Bishops
.
If
therefore
BB.
being
at
the
least
equall
with
Presbyters
in
the
power
of
order
,
respecting
the
ministerie
of
the
word
and
sacraments
,
be
aboue
them
not
onely
in
the
exercise
of
that
power
,
but
also
in
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
;
they
may
,
without
disparagement
to
the
ministerie
of
the
word
,
be
said
to
be
superiour
to
other
Ministers
.
To
your
third
cauill
I
might
answere
as
to
the
first
,
CHAP.
VII
.
〈◊〉
Ambros●
in
1.
Tim.
5.
●
.
doth
not
giue
testimonie
to
the
Lay
-
〈…〉
that
their
exposition
of
Ambrose
is
vntrue
.
S●rm
.
Sect.
6.
pag.
13.
I
come
now
to
Ambrose
writing
on
the
first
verse
of
the
same
chapter
,
1.
Tim.
5.
where
the
Apostle
exhorting
Timothie
not
to
rebuke
an
Elder
or
aged
man
,
Ambrose
giueth
this
reason
.
For
among
all
nations
old
age
is
honourable
,
and
then
addeth
:
vnde
&
synagoga
&
postea
ecclesia
seniores
habuit
,
quorum
sine
consilio
nihil
agebatur
in
ecclesia
.
Quod
qua
negligentia
obsoleuerit
nescio
,
nisi
forte
doctorum
desidia
aut
magis
superbia
,
dum
soli
volunt
aliquid
videri
.
Whence
it
is
that
both
the
Synagogue
and
afterwards
the
Church
had
Seniors
,
Without
whose
counsell
nothing
was
done
in
the
Church
.
Which
by
what
negligence
it
is
growne
out
of
vse
,
I
knowe
not
,
vnlesse
perhaps
by
the
slouthfulnes
of
the
learned
or
Teachers
,
or
rather
pride
,
whiles
they
alone
will
seeme
to
be
something
.
Which
words
whosoeuer
vnderstand
,
as
giuing
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
,
they
wrong
Ambrose
,
&c.
10.
lines
further
.
IN
this
allegation
the
disciplinarians
haue
great
confidence
:
For
this
testimonie
of
Ambrose
saith
T.C.
is
so
cleare
and
open
,
part
.
●
Pag.
44.
that
he
which
doth
not
giue
place
vnto
it
,
must
needs
be
thought
as
a
Bat
,
or
an
Owle
,
or
some
other
night-bird
to
delight
in
darkenesse
.
And
it
is
a
world
to
see
how
the
refuter
thinking
that
his
cause
wil
be
aduantaged
by
this
testimonie
of
Ambrose
,
taketh
on
like
a
beggar
on
horsebacke
,
or
a
coward
when
he
hath
gotten
his
aduersarie
at
a
supposed
aduantage
.
See
you
not
how
he
braggeth
and
vanteth
,
how
he
crakes
and
crowes
,
and
all
for
want
as
of
a
good
spirit
,
so
of
a
sound
iudgement
,
presuming
of
aduantage
,
where
he
hath
none
,
as
the
euent
will
proue
.
Concerning
this
testimonie
of
Ambrose
,
he
findeth
fault
as
well
with
my
maner
of
alleaging
,
as
of
discussing
it
.
At
the
allegation
he
hath
three
cauills
.
First
he
repeateth
his
friuolous
cauillation
concerning
the
consequence
of
an
argument
which
he
bestoweth
vpon
me
:
that
,
if
in
this
place
of
Ambrose
there
be
no
mention
of
Lay-Elders
,
then
there
is
none
to
be
found
in
the
fathers
writings
.
The
second
,
Ad
pag.
33
.
that
I
alleage
this
place
not
out
of
Ambrose
himselfe
(
which
is
a
base
slander
,
for
I
had
Ambrose
lying
before
me
)
but
out
of
D.
Bils
.
because
forsooth
I
cited
the
first
words
(
which
are
not
so
pertinent
,
shewing
the
slender
occasion
whereupon
Ambrose
vttered
this
sentence
)
in
english
,
as
D.
B.
doth
:
And
yet
his
blind
malice
would
not
let
him
see
that
I
cited
the
latter
sentence
in
latine
,
out
of
the
Authour
,
which
D.
B.
alleageth
in
English
.
Quod
qua
negligentia
obsolouerit
,
&c.
Which
words
if
I
had
cited
as
a
chiefe
man
of
your
side
doth
,
you
would
haue
charged
me
,
either
to
haue
alleaged
a
place
which
I
had
neuer
seene
,
or
else
notoriously
depriued
it
.
T
▪
〈◊〉
.
1.
pag.
183.
Ambrose
speaking
of
this
office
of
the
●lders
(
although
,
saith
he
,
not
vpon
so
good
occasion
,
)
thus
〈◊〉
saith
,
whereupon
the
Synagogue
,
and
after
the
Church
had
Elders
without
whose
counsel
nothing
was
done
in
the
Church
.
Which
Elders
I
know
not
by
what
negligence
they
are
worne
out
,
&c:
and
againe
,
his
saying
is
that
the
Elders
fell
away
by
the
ambition
of
the
doctors
.
Which
allegation
the
rest
,
which
were
but
gleaners
after
him
,
taking
vpon
his
word
,
haue
vrged
,
as
if
the
Seniors
themselues
,
of
whom
Ambrose
speaketh
,
were
ceassed
before
his
time
,
inferring
thereupon
that
he
meaneth
Lay-Elders
,
because
the
learned
Presbyters
still
remained
in
the
Church
.
When
Ambrose
doth
not
say
,
that
the
Seniors
themselues
were
growne
out
of
vse
,
(
for
he
doth
not
say
,
qui
qua
negligentia
ob●oleuerint
)
but
that
(
themselues
remayning
)
their
counsell
was
neglected
.
If
it
be
demanded
;
why
then
doth
he
say
habuit
ecclesia
,
the
Church
had
;
I
answere
because
the
verbe
was
to
haue
reference
both
to
the
Church
which
had
beene
before
his
time
,
and
also
to
the
Synagouge
,
not
because
the
Church
had
not
Seniors
still
.
For
Ierome
,
Augustine
,
and
Gregorie
are
alleaged
by
the
disciplinarians
themselues
,
that
there
were
Seniors
in
the
Church
long
after
Ambrose
his
time
.
Andabatarum
more
and
as
cowards
vse
to
doe
,
winking
,
smote
he
saw
not
what
,
nor
cared
what
,
so
as
he
might
deale
his
blowes
apace
,
condemning
me
in
that
for
which
he
had
cause
to
thanke
me
:
notwithstanding
I
will
acknowledge
my
thankefulnes
to
him
,
for
handling
this
matter
so
well
,
that
in
this
point
he
hath
left
our
cause
better
then
he
found
it
.
For
whereas
there
being
two
expositions
of
this
place
according
to
the
two
significations
of
the
word
doctorum
,
the
sentence
hath
almost
no
shew
of
probabilitie
for
Lay-Elders
,
if
doctorum
be
translated
Doctors
,
but
seemeth
very
fauourable
to
them
if
doctorum
signifie
the
Learned
:
my
aduersarie
,
I
thanke
him
,
hath
freed
me
from
the
difficultie
of
the
latter
,
(
if
his
exceptions
against
it
be
good
)
and
hath
permitted
me
to
rest
securely
in
the
former
.
The
reader
therefore
is
not
to
expect
from
me
an
ample
defence
of
that
latter
sense
against
his
exceptions
,
which
make
for
vs
.
For
if
his
exceptions
be
good
,
and
that
sense
vntrue
(
as
he
saith
,
it
is
certaine
and
plaine
that
it
is
)
then
will
there
be
no
difficultie
at
all
in
answering
this
testimonie
of
Ambrose
,
that
translation
which
seemed
most
to
fauour
Lay-Elders
,
being
reiected
.
I
haue
knowne
,
when
aboue
a
dozen
testimonies
of
ancient
writers
directly
testifying
that
Timothie
was
Bishop
of
Ephesus
(
in
which
number
Ambrose
was
one
)
the
chiefe
patrone
of
the
pretended
discipline
among
vs
,
hath
refused
so
much
as
to
examine
the
allegations
,
T.
C.
h.
2.
part.
1.
pag.
●
14.
〈◊〉
.
528.
Luk.
1.
pag.
41.
as
a
thing
vnworthy
the
turning
of
a
leafe
,
and
in
another
place
he
shaketh
off
Ambrose
thus
:
As
for
Ambrose
,
a
child
may
see
how
violently
he
forceth
the
text
,
&c.
And
againe
,
the
errours
and
corrupt
expounding
of
scriptures
,
which
are
found
in
his
workes
,
declare
,
that
it
had
beene
more
safe
for
the
Church
,
if
by
studie
of
the
scriptures
,
he
had
first
beene
a
scholler
of
diuinitie
,
or
euer
he
had
beene
made
Doctor
.
And
of
this
authoritie
is
Ambrose
when
he
is
alleaged
against
the
pretended
discipline
.
But
if
hee
let
fall
a
speech
,
which
seemeth
,
and
but
seemeth
to
fauour
their
cause
,
though
so
impertinent
as
if
it
had
beene
foisted
in
by
others
,
though
in
a
booke
,
wherein
besides
some
suspected
,
there
is
apparant
corruption
,
In
my
handling
this
testimonie
,
[
i)
](A20733-e27690-b)
i)
My
re●●
their
caption
,
as
●●ging
Ambrose
,
●●●●red
as
●●●dest
.
First
,
my
deniall
of
their
exposition
with
the
reasons
of
my
denyall
.
Secondly
,
a
refutation
of
their
proofes
.
Thirdly
,
an
allegation
of
reasons
(
omitted
by
Ambrose
)
why
the
counsell
and
assistance
of
the
Seniors
in
Ambrose
his
time
was
growne
out
of
vse
.
In
the
denyall
it selfe
,
he
layeth
vpon
me
such
an
imputation
of
immodestie
,
as
he
did
before
of
vnkindnesse
.
For
although
he
cannot
be
against
it
,
but
that
I
may
(
salua
modestia
)
confute
the
new
writers
for
their
false
or
wrong
expounding
Ambrose
of
Lay-Elders
(
whom
he
neuer
so
much
as
dreamed
of
)
yet
he
cannot
abide
I
should
say
they
wrong
Ambrose
,
though
I
proue
that
they
wrong
him
by
misconstruing
his
words
,
and
giuing
them
a
wrong
sense
.
Ad
pag.
3
&
35.
And
in
this
nice
and
idle
cauill
,
for
want
of
better
matter
,
he
spendeth
almost
a
leafe
,
aggrauating
the
accusation
by
numbring
12.
Diuines
of
our
time
,
who
vnderstand
Ambrose
as
speaking
of
Lay-Elders
,
and
alleaging
that
it
is
more
likely
that
I
should
mistake
him
,
In
prefat
.
then
they
.
Indeed
if
I
were
alone
in
this
cause
,
and
did
oppose
my
credit
alone
to
their
authoritie
,
or
expected
as
my
aduersarie
falsely
accuseth
me
,
like
another
Pythagoras
to
be
belieued
vpon
my
bare
word
:
such
arrogancie
(
I
confesse
)
would
not
become
me
.
But
he
seeth
,
and
(
I
hope
)
feeleth
,
that
I
say
not
any
thing
in
this
controuersie
,
which
I
doe
not
proue
by
such
reasons
,
as
he
doth
not
know
,
without
sophisticall
shifts
and
meere
cauills
how
to
answere
.
If
these
new
writers
proue
their
exposition
of
Ambrose
by
any
sound
reason
,
why
be
not
their
arguments
produced
?
if
they
speake
without
reason
,
why
is
their
bare
authoritie
obiected
against
,
both
so
many
reasons
as
haue
beene
vsed
to
shew
there
neuer
were
such
Elders
,
and
also
against
the
generall
consent
of
antiquitie
,
which
neuer
acknowledged
any
Presbyters
or
Ecclesiasticall
Elders
,
but
Ministers
only
.
Of
my
denyall
he
acknowledgeth
two
reasons
:
Sect
▪
5.
The
reason
why
their
exposition
was
to
be
reiected
.
which
though
they
were
lighter
then
they
be
,
are
of
more
weight
then
bare
testimonies
,
especially
of
parties
,
who
are
not
to
depose
in
their
owne
cause
.
Howbeit
I
acknowledge
but
one
reason
,
though
my
speech
may
be
resolued
into
two
Syllogismes
,
whereof
the
one
is
a
prosyllogisme
to
the
other
:
and
because
he
saith
,
in
steed
of
prouing
,
I
doe
nothing
but
begge
the
question
,
I
will
resolue
the
reason
of
my
answere
into
this
Syllogisme
.
They
which
make
Ambrose
against
his
meaning
to
testify
that
which
hath
no
warrant
,
either
in
the
scriptures
,
or
elder
writings
of
antiquitie
,
doe
wrongfully
expound
him
:
But
those
which
expound
Ambrose
,
as
giuing
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
,
doe
make
him
against
his
meaning
,
to
testifie
that
which
hath
no
warrant
either
in
Scriptures
,
or
elder
writings
of
antiquitie
:
Therefore
those
who
expound
Ambrose
as
giuing
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
,
doe
wrongfully
expound
him
.
The
proposition
is
manifest
.
The
assumption
hath
2.
parts
,
the
one
that
Lay-Elders
haue
no
warrant
either
in
scriptures
,
or
in
the
elder
writings
of
antiquitie
.
The
other
,
that
the
sense
which
they
giue
to
his
words
,
is
against
his
meaning
.
The
former
was
prooued
in
my
former
challenge
,
that
not
any
one
testimony
can
be
produced
out
of
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
and
Fathers
,
mentioning
or
meaning
any
Lay-Elders
.
The
which
is
a
sufficient
allegation
in
a
respondent
holding
the
negatiue
,
vntill
the
opponent
by
sufficient
instance
can
proue
the
affirmatiue
.
And
therefore
his
cauill
in
saying
,
either
that
I
do
but
begge
the
question
,
which
himselfe
should
proue
,
is
false
and
foolish
:
or
that
if
it
were
granted
:
it
would
not
proue
their
exposition
to
be
against
his
meaning
,
(
for
he
might
testifie
that
which
hath
no
warrant
either
in
scriptures
,
or
elder
monuments
of
antiquitie
)
is
both
an
ignorant
mistaking
(
for
those
words
as
you
see
,
were
not
inserted
to
that
end
,
)
and
a
needlesse
extenuating
of
Ambrose
his
testimonie
,
as
being
such
a
one
,
of
whom
it
may
be
said
,
that
he
testifieth
that
which
hath
no
warrant
either
in
scriptures
or
other
monuments
of
antiquitie
.
Ad
Pag.
36.
The
rest
of
his
words
are
meere
babbling
.
The
latter
I
prooue
,
by
this
Reason
:
To
whom
Ambrose
giueth
testimonie
,
hee
complaineth
that
their
councel
and
assistance
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
was
grown
out
of
vse
,
&
seemeth
to
charge
the
bishops
with
slothfulnes
,
or
pride
therefore
.
But
it
was
not
Ambrose
his
meaning
to
complaine
that
the
councell
or
assistance
of
Lay-Elders
was
growne
out
of
vse
,
nor
to
charge
the
BB:
with
slothfulnes
or
pride
for
it
:
Therefore
it
was
not
his
meaning
to
giue
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
.
The
truth
of
the
proposition
is
euident
,
by
the
words
of
of
Ambrose
himelfe
.
The
assumption
is
thus
proued
:
A
Diocesan
Bishop
,
who
not
onely
approoued
,
but
laboured
to
magnifie
his
owne
calling
,
and
was
as
farre
as
any
from
subiecting
either
Bishops
or
Ministers
,
to
the
Presbyteries
of
Lay-men
(
as
the
Presbyterians
doe
)
would
not
complaine
that
the
councell
or
assistance
of
Lay-Elders
,
(
such
as
the
Disciplinarians
meane
)
was
not
vsed
,
or
charge
the
Bishops
with
slothfulnes
or
pride
for
it
:
But
such
a
one
was
Ambrose
:
Therefore
hee
would
not
complaine
for
want
of
Lay-Elders
,
&c.
The
proposition
if
it
bee
explaned
,
will
need
no
further
proofe
.
The
Elderships
of
Lay-men
,
such
as
the
Disciplinarians
stand
for
,
1.
were
neuer
in
vse
together
with
Bishops
,
but
either
were
deuised
to
supplie
the
gouernement
of
Bishops
,
when
they
were
depressed
,
as
in
Geneua
,
Scotland
,
and
the
Low-Countreys
,
or
where
orthodoxall
Bishops
were
wanting
,
as
in
France
,
or
are
vrged
to
extrude
Bishops
,
as
among
vs
:
2.
in
their
Presbyteries
consisting
for
the
greatest
part
of
Lay-Elders
,
all
hauing
equall
right
of
Suffrage
,
and
all
things
beeing
carried
by
pluralitie
of
voyces
,
it
is
euident
that
the
Ministers
,
which
in
parish
presbyteries
are
but
one
or
two
at
the
most
,
and
in
others
the
farre
lesse
number
,
are
subiected
to
the
Lay-Elders
,
as
being
the
greater
number
.
It
is
manifest
therefore
,
that
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
who
not
onely
approued
but
sought
to
magnifie
his
calling
,
and
was
as
farre
as
anie
from
subiecting
Bishops
or
Ministers
to
the
Presbyteries
of
Lay-men
,
would
not
complaine
of
the
want
of
such
Elderships
.
Now
that
Ambrose
was
such
a
one
as
I
affirme
in
the
assumption
,
I
will
manifestly
proue
in
answering
the
refuters
cauills
.
For
hee
(
as
being
ledde
with
a
spirit
of
contradiction
)
after
his
vsuall
manner
,
graunteth
neither
proposition
nor
assumption
,
nor
any
one
braunch
of
them
to
bee
true
.
Which
course
(
mee
thinks
)
should
discredit
him
with
all
indifferent
Readers
,
who
may
discerne
him
to
write
,
not
out
of
conscience
,
but
out
of
a
resolution
to
cauill
and
contradict
:
especallie
,
if
they
consider
that
hitherto
(
though
he
would
scarcely
graunt
any
thing
to
be
true
that
I
had
saide
:
yea
,
in
his
preface
auowed
,
that
I
haue
scarce
vttered
one
true
word
)
yet
he
hath
not
bene
able
to
proue
any
one
thing
which
I
deliuered
to
be
false
.
And
such
will
his
successe
be
in
the
rest
.
If
Ambrose
were
a
Diocesan
Bishop
(
vnderstand
who
magnified
his
own
calling
,
and
could
not
abide
that
Bishops
or
Ministers
should
be
subiected
to
the
censures
of
Lay-men
)
then
would
he
not
giue
testimony
to
Lay-Elders
,
(
he
should
haue
said
,
then
would
he
not
haue
complained
of
the
want
of
Lay-Elders
,
who
were
neuer
thought
to
be
wanting
,
where
Bishops
were
thought
to
be
lawfull
.
And
why
?
because
D.
Whitgift
was
a
Bishop
,
yea
an
Archbishop
;
and
D.
K.
would
be
a
Bishop
,
and
yet
both
giue
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
.
Because
D.
Whitgifts
graunt
is
oft
laid
in
our
dish
,
The
testimony
,
which
D.
K.
giueth
to
your
Lay-Elders
,
appeareth
by
his
Sermon
:
where
,
for
confuting
your
Presbyteries
,
you
say
hee
spitteth
out
much
poyson
against
these
Elders
,
and
spendeth
much
gall
vpon
them
.
God
grant
the
poyson
of
Aspes
be
not
vnder
your
lippes
,
and
that
your selfe
be
not
in
the
gall
of
bitternes
,
who
so
virulently
&
bitterly
vse
to
raile
on
men
of
so
good
note
in
Gods
Church
.
But
his
testimonie
concerning
your
Elders
,
is
so
farre
from
complaining
of
the
want
of
them
,
as
that
he
doth
not
onely
say
,
but
also
proue
at
large
,
that
there
neuer
were
,
nor
yet
do
need
to
be
such
.
Only
you
catch
hold
of
his
exposition
of
Ambrose
his
speech
,
which
as
he
saith
,
may
well
be
vnderstood
of
Elders
in
yeares
,
experience
,
and
grauitie
,
hauing
some
temporary
commission
to
assist
in
ordering
the
Church
,
but
not
such
as
your
Lay-Elders
.
It
is
very
true
,
that
although
Seniores
or
Presbyteri
,
bee
a
name
of
order
,
signifying
Ministers
and
Priestes
;
yet
according
to
the
originall
signification
therof
,
it
is
vsed
by
Tertullian
,
and
heere
by
Ambrose
,
(
as
appeareth
by
the
occasion
of
his
words
)
as
opposed
to
the
Iuniores
of
the
Clergy
.
Apolog:
c.
3
.
And
so
not
only
Luther
vnderstandeth
the
word
as
you
heard
before
,
De
offic.
li.
c.
20.
but
Ambrose
so
speaketh
else-where
:
shewing
that
it
was
not
needfull
that
the
Iuniores
,
the
younger
men
of
the
Clergie
should
goe
to
the
houses
of
Widowes
,
and
Virgins
but
onely
to
visit
them
,
&
hoc
cum
senioribus
and
that
with
the
Seniors
or
elder
sort
of
the
Clergie
,
that
is
with
the
Bishop
or
with
the
Presbyters
,
The
second
consequence
.
Secondly
,
he
reiecteth
this
consequence
:
if
Ambrose
did
labour
to
magnifie
the
calling
of
Bishops
,
then
was
it
not
his
meaning
,
&c:
for
saith
he
Su●tonius
or
Tacitus
might
magnifie
the
excellencie
of
the
Monarchy
,
and
yet
confesse
that
the
state
of
Rome
had
beene
democraticall
,
or
might
they
not
complaine
that
the
aduise
of
the
Senators
was
not
now
regarded
,
without
whose
counsell
Tiberius
in
his
fiue
first
yeares
would
doe
little
or
nothing
?
These
examples
,
vnlesse
they
had
beene
better
fitted
,
are
to
little
purpose
.
If
he
could
haue
said
,
A
Monarch
labouring
not
onely
to
iustifie
but
to
magnifie
the
royall
calling
,
and
not
enduring
that
Monarches
and
Princes
should
be
subiected
,
either
to
the
Senate
or
people
,
would
notwithstanding
complaine
that
the
state
is
not
either
Aristocraticall
or
popular
,
he
had
fitted
the
example
,
though
he
had
spoken
vntruely
;
For
if
Suetonius
and
Tacitus
had
beene
Emperours
and
such
as
did
magnifie
the
Monarchicall
gouernement
and
could
not
abide
either
that
the
common-wealth
should
be
ruled
by
the
multitude
,
or
themselues
ouer-ruled
of
the
greater
part
of
the
senate
,
then
would
they
not
complaine
that
the
gouernement
was
not
Democratical
,
or
Aristocratical
.
But
thus
he
might
haue
said
both
fitly
and
truely
.
As
a
good
king
mislyking
that
some
of
his
predecessors
had
managed
all
things
without
the
aduise
of
their
senatours
,
might
complaine
,
that
through
their
pride
or
temeritie
the
aduise
of
the
senators
was
neglected
:
so
Ambrose
a
good
Bishop
,
seeing
the
Bishops
not
to
regard
the
aduise
of
their
ancient
Presbyters
,
that
is
Ministers
,
as
it
were
their
senatours
,
without
whose
aduise
nothing
of
importance
was
wont
to
be
done
in
the
Church
,
might
also
complaine
that
their
counsell
and
assistance
was
growne
out
of
vse
through
the
slouthfulnes
or
pride
of
the
Bishops
.
As
for
Samuel
,
if
either
the
state
before
was
Monarchicall
,
or
if
he
had
magnified
the
Monarchicall
gouernement
of
the
Iewes
when
Saul
was
set
ouer
them
,
he
had
had
little
reason
to
complaine
for
the
altering
of
that
gouernement
into
a
Monarchy
.
But
the
state
before
had
beene
Monarchicall
,
neither
did
Samuel
magnifie
the
Monarchicall
gouernement
when
Saul
was
set
ouer
them
.
For
vntill
Saul
,
God
himselfe
was
the
Monarch
of
the
Iewes
,
Samuel
,
they
haue
not
reiected
thee
,
but
me
haue
they
reiected
,
that
I
should
not
reign●
ouer
them
.
And
so
farre
is
Samuel
from
commending
the
gouernement
of
the
ear●hly
King
,
in
comparison
of
the
Celestiall
;
that
describing
vnto
them
the
fashion
of
their
future
king
,
§
Sect.
8.
As
touching
the
third
branch
,
he
saith
the
consequence
thereof
is
of
the
same
feather
with
the
former
.
If
Ambrose
could
not
endure
that
Bishops
or
Ministers
should
be
subiected
to
Lay-persons
,
then
would
he
not
complaine
that
Lay-Presbyters
were
out
of
vse
.
It
followeth
not
saith
he
,
there
may
be
Presbyters
wherein
are
Lay-Elders
and
yet
the
Bishops
and
Ministers
not
be
subiected
to
them
.
But
say
I
,
where
the
farre
greater
part
of
the
Presbyteries
consisteth
of
Lay-men
,
as
alwaies
it
hath
done
according
to
the
practise
of
Geneua
,
and
alwaies
would
doe
according
to
the
new
Parish-discipline
,
it
cannot
be
auoided
,
but
that
the
fewer
number
of
Ministers
would
be
subiected
to
the
farre
greater
number
of
Lay-Elders
;
especially
,
if
they
(
according
to
the
wise
conceit
of
our
new
disciplinarians
)
may
be
perpetuall
.
But
whether
these
three
branches
seuerally
doe
inferre
a
necessary
consequence
or
no
,
it
is
not
materiall
,
seeing
they
were
ioyntly
propounded
,
and
seeing
from
them
vnited
a
necessary
consequence
dependeth
.
Wherfore
the
seuering
of
them
to
weaken
the
consequence
,
and
to
breede
matter
of
cauil
,
was
a
sophisticall
,
if
not
a
leaud
trick
.
The
leaudnes
whereof
will
the
better
appeare
,
if
we
consider
his
dealing
with
the
assumption
:
for
he
,
that
hauing
seuered
the
branches
of
the
proposition
,
exacted
from
euery
one
seuerally
a
necessary
consequence
:
in
the
assumption
,
he
will
haue
them
all
taken
together
.
For
before
he
taketh
the
assumption
in
pieces
,
meaning
to
cauill
with
euery
part
seuerally
,
he
vseth
this
Caution
:
Prouided
alwaies
,
and
be
it
remembred
of
the
Reader
,
that
if
any
one
of
the
three
parts
thereof
proue
false
,
though
the
other
two
be
neuer
so
true
,
the
whole
assumption
is
in
law
of
true
reason
,
vtterly
void
and
of
none
effect
:
But
if
in
the
proposition
I
be
vrged
to
make
good
the
consequence
from
each
part
seuerally
,
the
assuming
of
any
one
part
will
conclude
the
question
.
As
thus
:
If
I
must
be
forced
to
maintaine
this
consequence
,
If
Ambrose
were
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
then
would
hee
no●
complaine
of
the
want
of
Lay-Elders
:
it
wil
be
sufficient
to
assume
thus
,
but
he
was
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
to
conclude
,
that
therefore
he
would
not
complaine
of
the
want
of
Lay-Elders
.
It
is
true
,
that
it
is
required
in
my
assumption
,
as
I
propound
it
,
that
euery
branch
must
be
true
:
but
the
reason
hereof
is
,
because
they
were
ioyned
in
the
proposition
to
make
good
the
consequence
.
For
if
they
be
seuerally
propounded
in
the
proposition
,
they
may
also
seuerally
be
assumed
in
the
assumption
.
Whiles
therefore
he
chargeth
me
with
a
bad
consequence
,
himselfe
is
to
be
charged
with
a
badde
conscience
.
M.
D.
was
a
Dioces●n
Bishop
.
Was
he
so
indeed
?
Had
he
not
onely
supreme
,
but
〈◊〉
authoritie
(
as
our
BB:
haue
)
ouer
(
I
know
not
how
)
many
hundreds
of
Ministers
,
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
?
Was
he
an
absolute
Pop
lin●
indeed
?
What
a
shame
is
this
?
that
he
who
euen
now
charged
so
m●ny
learned
men
to
haue
done
Ambrose
wrong
,
should
now
be
found
the
man
●uilty
of
that
trespas
?
Ambrose
was
no
more
like
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
then
he
that
is
tyed
by
vertue
of
his
calling
,
to
preach
the
word
,
&
administer
the
sacraments
in
his
owne
Church
,
&c.
Can
a
man
of
a
sincere
conscience
professing
(
as
themselues
terme
it
)
the
cause
of
sinceritie
,
be
so
malepartly
confident
in
denying
that
whereof
he
is
vtterly
ignorant
?
or
rather
can
a
man
that
taketh
vpon
him
the
defence
of
this
controuersie
,
as
a
chiefe
champion
of
the
pretended
discipline
,
and
one
(
I
doubt
not
)
of
the
chiefe
challengers
of
the
Bishops
,
to
dispute
with
them
in
these
causes
,
be
ignorant
,
that
Ambrose
was
a
Diocesan
Bishop
?
doth
he
know
that
he
was
a
Diocesan
at
the
least
,
and
can
he
thus
denie
it
,
and
keepe
his
conscience
sincere
?
well
,
though
the
taske
be
all
one
,
as
if
I
should
be
required
to
proue
that
the
Bishop
of
London
,
or
rather
the
Archbishop
of
Yorke
,
is
a
Diocesan
Bishop
:
yet
seeing
my
learned
aduersarie
denieth
it
,
and
pretendeth
some
reason
of
his
denyall
:
I
will
first
proue
,
that
Ambrose
was
at
the
least
a
Diocesan
B
:
and
for
the
greatnes
of
his
authoritie
,
and
largenes
of
his
iurisdiction
,
comparable
with
ours
;
and
in
the
second
place
,
I
will
answere
his
reasons
.
First
therfore
you
are
to
be
aduertised
,
that
Mediolanum
Millaine
,
whereof
Ambrose
was
Bishop
,
not
onely
is
a
Metropolis
,
or
seate
of
a
Metropolitan
,
but
was
both
in
and
before
Ambrose
his
time
.
Strabo
[
(a)
](A20733-e29170-b)
(a)
Geograph
.
lib.
5.
Insubres
hac
aetate
sunt
qui
Mediolanum
Metropolin
habuere
.
saith
it
was
a
Metropolis
,
wherein
the
gouernour
of
the
prouince
of
Liguria
and
Aemilia
kept
his
residence
.
Athanasius
speaking
of
Dionysius
the
Bishop
of
Millaine
saith
[
(b)
](A20733-e29260-b)
(b)
Epist.
ad
solita
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
it
also
is
a
mother
citie
of
Italy
.
It
is
also
euident
and
a
thing
confessed
by
Beza
[
(c)
](A20733-e29310-b)
(c)
De
grad.
Min.
c.
24.
that
the
distribution
of
the
Church
into
Dioceses
&
prouinces
,
was
framed
according
to
the
diuision
of
the
Dioceses
and
Prouinces
vnder
the
Romane
Empire
.
Ambrose
himself
[
(d)
](A20733-e29350-b)
(d)
Centur.
4
c.
10
.
11●7
.
Ruffin
.
hist.
li.
2
c.
11.
Paulin.
in
vit.
Ambr.
was
a
man
of
consular
dignitie
in
Rome
,
and
being
appointed
gouernour
of
Liguria
and
Aemilia
came
to
Millaine
.
Where
keeping
his
residence
,
it
fell
out
[
(e)
](A20733-e29450-b)
(e)
Theod.
lib.
4.
c.
5.
that
Auxentius
the
Bishop
being
dead
,
and
the
Emperour
Valentinian
hauing
assembled
(
as
the
manner
)
[
(f)
](A20733-e29500-b)
(f)
Balsam
.
in
Conc.
cost
.
in
.
c.
2.
olim
omnes
pro.
●īciarum
metropolitani
,
a
proprijs
synodis
eligebantur
.
Conc
C.
haelc
.
act
.
11.
ostendat
Bassianus
si
per
synodum
ReMetropolis
was
for
the
choise
of
a
Metropolitan
)
the
Bishops
of
that
uerendorum
Episcoporum
&
consueta
lege
Episcopus
Ephesiorum
est
constitutus
.
The
honour
and
sublimitie
Episcopall
cannot
be
matched
with
any
comparison
:
if
you
compare
it
with
the
excellencie
of
Princes
and
ciuill
Magistrates
,
you
shall
compare
gold
with
lead
.
As
for
the
people
,
the
Episcopall
function
hath
not
onely
obtained
to
be
preferred
before
them
,
but
also
is
enioyned
by
Euangelicall
precepts
with
fatherly
authoritie
to
gouerne
them
:
for
they
,
as
the
sheepe
of
Christ
,
are
committed
to
BB.
as
to
rulers
,
who
together
with
Peter
receiued
that
authoritie
to
gouerne
them
,
&c.
Againe
,
[
(n)
](A20733-e29590-b)
(n)
Cap.
3.
these
things
I
haue
spoken
saith
he
,
to
shew
that
nothing
in
this
world
is
more
excellent
then
Bishops
.
For
his
deeds
,
consider
his
repelling
of
Theodosius
[
(o)
](A20733-e29650-b)
(o)
Theodor
.
li
5.
c.
18.
the
Emperour
from
entring
into
the
Church
,
vntill
he
had
testified
his
repentance
:
his
not
permitting
him
to
remaine
within
the
Chancell
,
alledging
[
(p)
](A20733-e29680-b)
(p)
Ibid.
that
it
was
a
place
peculiar
to
the
Clergie
,
(
which
fauour
when
Nectarius
the
Bishop
of
Constantinople
would
haue
granted
to
him
,
Theodosius
professed
that
he
had
with
much
a
doe
learned
the
difference
between
an
Emperour
and
a
Bishop
,
adding
,
that
he
had
scarce
found
a
Teacher
of
the
truth
.
Ambrose
is
the
onely
man
whom
I
know
worthy
the
name
of
a
Bishop
)
his
refusing
to
be
tried
in
a
cause
of
faith
,
in
the
Emperours
Consistorie
,
when
Valentinian
the
younger
had
sent
for
him
,
contrarie
to
a
law
made
by
his
Father
Valentinian
,
protesting
that
he
would
rather
loose
his
life
,
then
by
his
yeelding
,
the
honour
of
Bishops
should
be
diminished
.
Non
[
(q)
](A20733-e29770-b)
(q)
Epist.
32.
ad
valentin
.
imp
.
tanti
est
Ambrosius
vt
propter
se
deijciat
sacerdotium
,
non
tanti
est
vnius
vita
,
quanti
est
dignit
as
omnium
sacerdotum
:
his
refusall
[
(r)
](A20733-e29810-b)
(r)
Orat.
in
Auxent
.
l.
5.
Epist.
inter
Epist.
32.
&
33.
Epist.
33.
to
deliuer
vp
the
Churches
to
be
possessed
of
Arians
at
the
Emperour
Valentinians
commandement
,
professing
that
the
palaces
pertained
to
the
Emperour
,
but
the
Churches
to
the
Bishop
.
His
other
doubt
is
,
whether
I
compare
Ambrose
with
them
of
his
owne
time
,
or
with
them
that
liued
before
or
after
,
&c:
here
was
a
knot
sought
in
a
bullrush
:
seeing
my
meaning
is
euident
,
that
Ambrose
laboured
as
much
as
any
of
the
ancient
approued
Fathers
.
And
that
he
did
so
,
it
is
alreadie
sufficiently
manifested
.
If
that
be
so
saith
he
,
then
either
all
men
thought
it
needfull
for
the
Bishop
to
be
aduised
and
directed
as
D.
Bilson
saith
by
the
counsell
and
consent
of
Elders
:
Ambrose
who
thoght
it
needful
,
as
appeareth
by
this
testimonie
,
labored
not
to
magnifie
such
a
calling
of
Bishops
,
as
M.D.
maintaineth
.
Ambrose
&
others
thought
it
needful
,
that
a
presbyterie
of
graue
&
ancient
ministers
,
should
with
their
counsell
&
aduise
assist
the
Bishops
in
cases
of
doubt
(
as
D.
Bilson
saith
)
of
daunger
and
importance
,
when
as
yet
nether
Synodes
could
assemble
,
nor
Christian
Magistrates
could
be
found
to
help
and
assist
the
Church
.
But
this
,
as
it
doth
nothing
further
the
cause
of
Lay-Elders
:
so
doth
it
no
more
detract
from
the
dignitie
of
Bishops
,
to
vse
the
counsell
of
wise
and
learned
men
;
then
it
doth
derogate
from
the
Maiestie
of
Kings
,
to
vse
the
aduise
of
their
wise
&
faithfull
Counsellors
.
There
remaineth
the
third
branch
.
That
if
adioyning
Presbyters
to
the
Byshop
bee
a
subiecting
him
to
them
,
I
doubt
not
but
this
testimony
will
prooue
,
that
Ambrose
was
not
willing
,
that
Ministers
should
bee
subiected
to
the
Consistories
of
Lay-men
.
There
are
two
differences
between
that
which
Ambrose
holdeth
and
our
new
Disciplinarians
.
Ambrose
speaketh
of
an
assistance
of
ancient
ministers
;
they
,
of
Lay-Elders
.
Ambrose
,
of
an
assistance
to
aduise
and
direct
,
such
as
is
the
aduise
of
Counsellers
to
a
Prince
;
they
of
an
assistance
to
ouerrule
,
as
in
the
Romane
Senate
,
by
plurality
of
voices
,
giuing
their
Bishop
not
so
much
as
one
negatiue
voice
,
Ambrose
therfore
requireth
an
assistance
of
ministers
subjected
to
the
Bishop
:
they
an
assistance
of
Lay-Elders
,
subjecting
the
Bishops
to
them
.
Neither
should
they
of
all
men
raile
against
the
BB.
for
submitting
ministers
to
Chancellors
,
&c.
seeing
it
is
not
so
vntollerable
,
that
ministers
should
be
subjected
to
the
censure
of
men
wise
and
learned
in
the
lawes
,
and
that
so
farre
onely
as
the
B.
shall
thinke
fit
,
as
that
they
should
not
onely
be
ouerruled
by
such
as
the
Lay-Elders
must
needs
be
in
most
countrey-parishes
,
but
also
stand
to
the
curtesie
of
them
and
their
neighbours
,
to
be
deposed
and
depriued
at
their
pleasure
.
Now
,
how
farre
Ambrose
was
from
subiecting
BB:
or
Ministers
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
to
the
Consistories
of
Lay-men
,
may
appeare
,
first
,
by
his
sentence
giuen
against
Palladius
,
the
Arfian
.
Bishop
,
in
the
Councell
of
Aquileia
For
when
Palladius
refused
to
answere
,
Cons.
Aquil.
but
before
some
honourable
persons
of
the
Laytie
,
who
were
at
hand
.
Ambrose
answered
,
Priests
or
BB.
ought
to
iudge
of
Lay-men
,
and
not
Lay-men
of
Priests
.
And
againe
,
though
hee
bee
found
guiltie
of
manie
impieties
,
notwithstanding
we
are
abashed
,
that
hee
which
challengeth
Priesthood
to
himselfe
,
should
seeme
to
be
condemned
of
Lay-men
.
And
therefore
forasmuch
as
heerein
hee
is
to
be
condemned
,
who
expecteth
the
sentence
of
Lay-men
(
seeing
rather
priests
ought
to
iudge
of
Laymen
)
according
to
those
things
which
to
day
wee
haue
heard
Palladius
professing
,
and
according
to
those
things
which
he
refused
to
condemne
.
I
pronounce
him
(
saith
Ambrose
)
vnworthie
of
Priest-hood
.
qui
nec
munere
impar
sit
,
nec
iure
dissimilis
:
who
is
neiher
in
function
vnequall
,
nor
in
right
vnlike
;
that
is
,
Sacerdotes
de
Sacerdotibus
voluit
iudicare
:
Hee
would
haue
BB:
(
for
them
ordinarily
hee
meaneth
by
Sacerdotes
)
to
iudge
of
BB:
or
Priests
.
Yea
,
moreouer
(
saith
hee
)
if
a
Bishop
were
otherwise
called
into
question
,
and
the
cause
of
manners
were
to
be
examined
,
euen
this
also
would
hee
(
that
is
,
Valentinian
the
Father
)
haue
to
belong
to
Episcopall
iudgement
.
When
did
you
euer
heare
most
gracious
Emperor
,
that
Lay-men
in
a
cause
of
faith
iudged
of
BB:
Are
wee
therefore
so
bowed
with
flatterie
,
that
wee
forget
the
right
of
BB
?
And
that
I
should
thinke
what
God
hath
giuen
mee
,
is
to
bee
committed
to
others
?
If
a
Bishop
must
be
taught
of
a
Lay-man
what
to
follow
,
let
the
Lay-man
dispute
,
and
let
the
Bishop
heare
,
let
the
B
:
learne
of
the
Lay-man
.
But
surely
if
wee
call
to
minde
either
the
tenor
of
holie
Scriptures
,
or
ancient
times
,
who
can
denie
,
but
that
in
a
cause
of
Faith
,
In
causa
inquam
fidei
Episcopos
solere
de
Imperatoribus
Christianis
,
non
Imperatores
de
Episcopis
judicare
:
You
shall
one
day
(
if
it
please
God
)
come
to
ripe
yeares
,
and
then
you
will
be
able
to
iudge
.
Qualis
ille
Episcopus
sit
,
qui
Laicis
Sacerdotale
substernut
!
What
a
Bishop
he
is
,
that
subiecteth
the
right
of
Bishops
to
Lay-men
.
Your
Father
beeing
through
Gods
goodnes
of
ripe
yeares
,
said
,
Meum
non
est
:
I
am
not
able
:
(
For
so
Ambrose
expoundeth
him
in
the
next
Sentence
,
Inhabilem
se
ponderi
tanti
putabat
esse
Iudicij
)
to
iudge
among
BB.
&
doth
your
Grace
now
say
,
I
ought
to
iudge
;
would
Ambrose
condemne
such
a
Bishop
as
should
subiect
the
right
of
BB.
to
Lay-men
,
and
would
hee
allow
of
such
prerbyteries
of
Lay-men
as
intrude
vpon
the
right
of
BB:
yea
which
are
vrged
to
extrude
BB
?
could
hee
not
indure
that
a
B.
or
minister
should
be
iudged
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
by
the
consistory
of
the
Emperour
,
because
it
consisted
of
Lay-men
;
and
would
hee
allow
a
B.
or
minister
should
be
iudged
,
yea
deposed
and
depriued
by
a
parishionall
consistory
or
whole
parish
consisting
of
Lay-men
?
doth
he
commend
the
good
Emperour
that
said
he
was
vnable
to
iudge
among
Bishops
;
and
would
hee
allow
of
priuate
men
,
vnlearned
,
and
vnacquainted
with
gouernement
,
as
competent
Iudges
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
?
And
thus
much
of
my
denyall
of
their
exposition
of
Ambrose
,
made
good
by
sufficient
proofe
.
CHAP.
VIII
.
The
proofe
of
their
Exposition
of
Ambrose
,
disproued
,
and
the
reas●os
which
I
alleadged
,
why
the
Counsell
of
the
Seniors
,
was
neglected
,
defended
.
Serm.
Sect.
7.
Pag.
14.
But
let
vs
examine
the
force
of
their
Argument
.
Ad
Pag.
39.
Ambrose
saith
,
there
were
Elders
in
the
Church
,
as
well
as
in
the
Synagogue
:
Therefore
,
say
they
,
there
were
Elders
.
It
followeth
not
,
&c:
to
learned
Presbyters
,
in
the
middle
of
pag.
16.
THeir
Argument
is
heere
such
,
as
in
this
question
of
Lay-Elders
,
perpetuallie
they
vse
in
all
their
proofes
,
of
Scriptures
,
and
Fathers
,
that
is
,
from
the
genus
to
the
species
:
yea
,
to
a
fancied
,
or
fained
species
,
affirmatiuely
.
As
if
they
should
say
,
hee
is
a
Magistrate
,
therefore
a
Constable
,
an
ancient
Cittizen
,
therefore
an
Alderman
,
or
rather
thus
:
It
is
a
man
,
therefore
the
man
in
the
moone
.
I
see
a
shippe
,
therefore
it
is
Argo
.
Like
the
wise
man
of
Athens
,
who
standing
in
Pyraeo
on
the
key
there
,
saide
euery
shippe
he
saw
was
his
.
Sauing
that
he
was
somewhat
wiser
,
because
he
had
a
shippe
at
the
Sea
:
These
mens
shippe
,
doth
swimme
in
their
owne
braines
.
So
strong
is
their
fancie
,
as
wee
shall
heare
,
that
when
either
Christ
saith
,
[
(a)
](A20733-e30620-b)
(a)
Matt.
18.
Tell
the
Church
,
that
is
,
as
themselues
expound
it
,
the
rulers
of
the
Church
,
they
strongly
conclude
,
therefore
tell
Lay-Elders
:
or
Luke
[
(b)
](A20733-e30670-b)
(b)
Act:
14.23
.
that
Paul
and
Barnabas
,
ordayned
Presbyters
,
ergo
,
Lay-Elders
,
or
Iames
,
[
(c)
](A20733-e30720-b)
(c)
Iam:
5.
is
any
sicke
,
let
him
send
for
the
Presbyters
,
ergo
,
for
Lay-Elders
:
or
Paul
[
(d)
](A20733-e30770-b)
(d)
Rom.
12.8
hee
that
ruleth
,
Marke
how
he
speaketh
of
a
ruler
,
therefore
of
a
Lay-Elder
:
God
hath
appointed
gouernements
,
therefore
of
Lay-Elders
:
or
Ignatius
[
(f)
](A20733-e30820-b)
(f)
Ad
Trallian
.
be
subiect
to
the
Presbyters
,
as
to
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
ergò
,
to
Lay-Elders
:
or
Tertullianus
,
[
(g)
](A20733-e30870-b)
(g)
Apolo
.
39
Certaine
approued
Seniors
be
presidents
,
&c:
ergo
,
Lay
Elders
:
or
Ierome
[
(h)
](A20733-e30920-b)
(h)
In
Esa.
3
wee
haue
a
Senate
of
Presbyters
,
Ergo
,
of
Lay-Elders
.
And
that
no
man
should
liue
in
feare
of
the
great
stroakes
,
which
this
great
champion
hath
threatned
,
let
him
vnderstand
,
that
these
be
all
the
strokes
that
he
will
strike
,
when
his
turne
of
striking
commeth
.
To
this
argument
,
and
all
the
rest
,
I
answere
by
denying
the
consequence
,
which
is
so
badde
,
as
the
refuter
is
loath
to
Father
it
;
and
yet
neither
in
this
,
nor
in
any
other
of
their
testimonies
,
they
haue
or
can
make
no
better
.
Well
,
saith
he
,
Whatsoeuer
the
argument
is
,
the
answere
is
well
worse
.
meaning
,
as
it
seemeth
,
the
reason
of
the
answere
,
which
was
this
:
for
euen
the
Synagogue
had
Seniors
of
the
Priests
,
as
well
as
of
the
people
.
My
reason
may
thus
be
explained
:
If
not
onely
the
Church
had
Seniors
,
that
were
ministers
,
whose
aduise
was
neglected
in
Ambrose
his
time
,
but
euen
also
the
Sinagogue
(
meaning
Israell
,
or
the
state
of
the
Iewes
)
had
Seniors
of
the
Priests
;
then
it
followeth
not
,
that
the
Seniors
of
whom
Ambrose
speaketh
,
were
Lay-Elders
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
in
both
the
parts
of
it
:
Therefore
the
consequent
:
The
consequent
of
the
proposition
is
necessarie
:
for
an
argument
from
the
genus
to
the
species
,
doth
not
hold
affirmatiuely
.
Genus
saith
Fabius
,
[
(i)
](A20733-e31110-b)
(i)
Quintil.
li
:
5.
c
:
10.
ad
probandum
speciem
minimum
valet
,
plurimum
ad
refellendum
,
the
generall
is
of
no
force
,
to
proue
the
speciall
affirmatiuely
,
though
it
bee
of
great
force
to
disproue
it
,
if
you
argue
from
it
negatiuely
.
As
for
example
,
it
followeth
no●
,
because
it
is
a
tree
,
that
therefore
it
is
a
plane
tree
.
It
is
not
necessary
,
saith
the
Philosopher
[
(k)
](A20733-e31170-b)
(k)
Topic
2.2
that
what
is
affirmed
of
the
genus
,
should
also
be
affirmed
of
the
species
.
As
touching
the
assumption
:
the
former
part
,
viz:
that
the
Church
had
seniors
,
which
were
ministers
,
I
tooke
for
granted
,
because
either
all
those
places
of
Scriptures
and
Fathers
as
I
say
,
or
at
least
some
,
as
my
aduersarie
will
confesse
,
where
Presbyters
be
named
,
Ministers
are
vnderstood
.
The
second
part
I
proue
out
of
[
(l)
](A20733-e31240-b)
(l)
Ier.
19.1
.
Ps.
37.2
.
Ierem
:
19.1
.
where
the
Prophet
is
commanded
to
take
with
him
some
,
not
onely
of
the
Seniors
of
the
people
,
but
also
of
the
Seniors
of
the
Priests
,
that
is
,
men
of
authoritie
as
well
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
state
as
of
ciuill
.
Which
words
,
though
the
refuter
vnderstand
as
I
doe
,
as
prouing
,
not
that
the
Iewes
had
an
Eccclesiasticall
Senate
,
consisting
partly
of
the
Priests
,
and
partly
of
the
Elders
of
the
people
(
for
of
such
a
presbyterie
,
though
there
be
much
talke
,
yet
there
is
no
proofe
)
but
that
in
the
Iewish
state
there
were
as
well
Seniors
of
the
priests
,
as
Seniors
of
the
people
:
notwithstanding
the
seely
Philosopher
,
would
faine
make
the
Reader
belieue
,
that
I
confesse
(
which
most
confidently
I
doe
denie
)
that
in
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
,
there
was
an
Ecclesiasticall
Eldership
,
consisting
both
of
the
priests
and
Seniors
of
the
people
:
and
therevpon
would
inferre
,
that
this
testimonie
maketh
mee
:
Because
(
forsooth
)
Ambrose
acknowledgeth
that
there
was
such
an
Eldership
in
the
Church
,
as
had
beene
among
the
Iewes
.
But
among
the
Iewes
there
was
as
hee
saith
,
I
confesse
,
an
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
consisting
of
the
Priests
,
and
Elders
of
the
people
,
therefore
Ambrose
acknowledgeth
such
a
Presbyterie
to
haue
bene
in
the
Church
,
consisting
of
Ministers
,
and
Lay-Elders
.
First
for
Ambrose
:
hee
doth
not
speake
of
Eldership
,
either
among
Iewes
or
Christians
;
but
sheweth
,
that
because
both
the
Iewes
and
Christians
had
Seniors
,
this
is
an
Argument
,
that
age
is
honorable
,
seeing
that
ancient
men
were
of
authoritie
,
both
among
the
Iewes
,
who
had
Seniors
as
well
in
the
Ecclesiasticall
as
ciuil
state
,
and
also
among
Christians
.
Now
,
to
inferre
from
hence
,
that
either
the
Iewes
or
Christians
had
an
Ecclesiasticall
senate
consisting
in
part
of
Lay-Elders
,
is
a
vaine
collection
.
For
if
by
Synagogue
is
meant
the
state
of
the
Iewes
(
they
might
haue
)
as
indeed
they
had
)
a
Senate
consisting
of
Priests
and
Leuites
,
and
chiefe
of
the
people
;
but
that
was
not
an
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
,
as
hereafter
shall
be
shewed
,
but
their
chiefe
Counsell
of
state
▪
●f
by
Synagogue
,
you
vnderstand
only
the
ecclesiasticall
state
of
the
Iews
;
in
that
,
ther
were
no
other
seniors
,
but
of
the
Clergie
of
Israel
.
And
as
for
my
confession
,
I
protest
,
that
I
meant
nothing
lesse
,
then
that
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
had
an
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
consisting
of
the
Seniors
of
the
Priests
and
Elders
of
the
people
.
For
I
know
it
to
be
an
idle
conceit
,
hauing
no
other
warrant
,
but
the
probabile
est
,
of
a
new
writer
,
a
chiefe
party
in
this
cause
.
But
hereof
more
in
my
answer
to
his
allegation
,
out
of
Matth:
18.
Besides
,
can
any
man
that
doth
not
wilfully
peruert
my
meaning
,
vnderstand
me
to
speake
of
any
,
but
the
Seniors
of
the
priests
,
saying
,
&
of
such
Ambrose
speaketh
,
when
he
saith
,
in
the
Church
,
Ad
pag.
40.
or
Church-causes
,
nothing
was
don
without
their
consent
.
But
it
may
be
,
that
your
former
consequence
may
be
confirmed
,
if
the
testimonie
of
Ambrose
be
better
pressed
vpon
vs
,
to
which
purpose
I
say
in
the
Sermon
:
If
it
be
saide
that
Ambrose
speaketh
,
&c.
If
it
be
said
?
saith
the
refuter
,
he
knoweth
it
well
enough
,
that
it
is
said
,
and
shal
be
maintained
,
that
Ambrose
speaketh
of
such
Seniors
,
whose
aduise
was
neglected
,
through
the
default
of
the
teachers
,
(
not
learned
or
teachers
,
as
M.
D.
setteth
it
downe
)
and
therefore
of
such
Seniors
as
were
not
teachers
.
Cunningly
therefore
and
to
weaken
the
force
of
our
argument
,
doth
hee
here
so
produce
and
alledge
it
,
as
if
it
were
rather
conceiued
for
our
helpe
by
himselfe
then
propounded
and
expressed
by
vs
.
Let
him
therefore
,
for
his
honestie
and
credits
sake
,
shew
the
Reader
where
this
testimonie
of
Ambrose
is
thus
vrged
.
In
the
mean
time
,
the
Reader
shal
vnderstand
these
2.
things
First
,
that
the
disciplinarians
,
knowing
that
their
proofes
out
of
Scriptures
and
Fathers
,
will
not
necessarily
conclude
for
them
,
if
they
should
seeme
to
inforce
them
by
discourse
:
Therefore
they
vse
this
poore
pollicie
,
to
holde
them
out
,
(
as
it
were
Mineruaes
shield
,
as
if
they
were
so
pregnant
,
that
they
need
not
to
be
vrged
,
but
the
very
naming
of
them
were
sufficient
to
put
vs
to
silence
.
—
They
thinke
it
therfore
,
their
best
course
,
in
all
their
writings
almost
to
take
it
for
graunted
,
that
their
discipline
is
the
very
discipline
and
kingdome
of
Christ
,
their
presbyterie
,
the
very
ordinance
of
Christ
:
and
when
they
should
proue
it
,
as
they
would
seeme
most
sufficiently
to
doe
,
they
holde
out
a
few
places
of
the
Scriptures
and
Fathers
,
barely
quoted
,
being
so
farre
from
vrging
them
,
as
that
for
the
most
part
,
they
doe
not
so
much
as
cite
the
words
:
(
thus
in
the
booke
of
H.
I.
dedicated
to
the
King
.
The
other
thing
is
,
that
I
haue
vrged
this
testimony
for
them
,
and
(
to
speake
the
trueth
)
haue
inforced
it
better
,
and
made
it
stronger
for
them
,
then
euer
they
made
it
,
or
haue
yet
the
witte
to
conceiue
.
But
to
answere
their
argument
,
for
now
it
is
theirs
,
neither
must
my
wordes
be
retained
,
learned
,
or
teachers
,
&c
:
The
Reader
therfore
is
to
remember
what
before
was
saide
,
that
the
word
Doctorum
,
being
ambiguous
,
signifying
either
learned
,
or
teachers
,
this
place
of
Ambrose
doth
accordingly
admit
two
interpretations
.
The
one
,
as
it
signifieth
Learned
,
and
is
a
common
title
to
the
Bishops
and
Presbyters
:
the
other
,
as
it
signifieth
Doctors
or
Teachers
,
and
was
a
title
in
those
times
peculiar
to
the
BB.
as
shal
be
proued
.
The
former
of
these
,
which
seemeth
more
to
fauor
the
Lay-Elders
,
my
aduersary
doth
reiect
,
&
insisteth
in
the
latter
.
But
he
doth
not
shew
(
as
me
thinkes
he
should
)
how
this
testimony
then
will
conclude
for
Lay-Elders
.
It
was
sufficient
for
him
,
to
contradict
mee
,
though
hee
left
his
cause
in
w●rse
case
then
he
found
it
.
For
my
part
,
I
am
so
farre
from
this
spirit
of
contradiction
,
that
I
doe
agree
with
him
in
preferring
the
latter
exposition
,
which
by
Doctorum
,
vnderstandeth
Doctors
,
before
the
other
.
Let
vs
see
then
,
how
that
sense
being
retained
,
this
place
doth
conclude
for
Lay-Elders
.
All
Seniors
that
were
not
called
Doctors
,
in
those
times
,
were
Lay-Elders
.
The
Seniors
,
whose
counsell
was
neglected
by
the
Doctors
,
were
such
Seniors
,
as
in
those
times
were
not
called
Doctors
:
Therefore
the
Seniors
,
whose
counsell
was
neglected
by
the
Doctors
,
were
Lay-Elders
.
I
denie
the
proposition
:
because
in
those
times
the
title
of
Doctor
or
Teacher
was
peculiar
to
BB:
we
therefore
may
with
more
truth
affirme
that
all
Seniors
or
Presbyters
that
were
not
called
Doctors
in
that
time
,
were
Ministers
;
and
thereupon
conclude
,
that
therefore
the
Seniors
,
whose
Counsell
was
neglected
by
the
Doctors
,
were
Ministers
.
For
the
clearing
of
this
matter
,
-
1.
That
not
Presbyters
,
but
Bishops
,
were
in
those
times
called
Doctors
.
-
2.
That
the
Presbyters
,
though
they
were
not
called
Teachers
,
were
notwithstanding
Ministers
.
-
3.
That
certaine
ancient
or
principall
Ministers
called
Seniores
,
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
did
so
assist
the
Bishop
,
that
nothing
almost
of
importance
was
done
without
their
counsell
and
aduise
.
-
4.
That
their
counsell
and
assistance
was
much
neglected
,
and
themselues
much
debased
in
Ambrose
his
time
.
For
the
first
:
[
(a)
](A20733-e32000-b)
(a)
li.
2.
part.
2.
pag.
42.
&
43.
therefore
thought
the
Presbyters
,
which
are
mentioned
in
the
Fathers
,
to
haue
beene
no
Ministers
,
because
he
perceiued
they
were
no
Teachers
,
and
for
this
cause
commendeth
the
decree
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
that
the
Presbyters
should
no
more
teach
,
and
preferreth
the
Affrican
Churches
before
others
,
for
that
the
same
order
was
obserued
therein
.
As
touching
Alexandria
,
Socrates
[
(b)
](A20733-e32080-b)
(b)
Socr.
lib.
5.
c.
22.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
reporteth
that
Presbyters
doe
not
preach
there
,
&
Sozomen
[
(c)
](A20733-e32130-b)
(c)
Sozom.
li
7.
c.
19.
that
the
Bishop
alone
of
the
citie
doth
preach
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
saith
he
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Both
of
them
assigning
the
heresie
of
Arrius
to
haue
beene
the
originall
occasion
of
that
custome
.
Concerning
the
vse
of
the
Affrican
Churches
saith
T.
C.
vntill
Augustines
time
,
that
one
testimonie
[
(d)
](A20733-e32240-b)
(d)
Possidon
.
in
vita
.
Augustini
.
is
more
then
sufficient
,
whereby
is
affirmed
that
Valerius
B.
of
Hippo
did
contrarie
to
the
custome
of
the
Affrican
Church
,
in
that
he
committed
the
office
of
teaching
vnto
Augustine
who
was
an
Elder
of
that
Church
,
and
that
he
was
checked
therefore
of
the
Bishops
,
checked
I
say
,
notwithstanding
that
Valerius
is
there
declared
to
haue
done
it
for
support
of
his
infirmitie
,
because
himselfe
was
not
so
apt
to
preach
.
To
conclude
,
his
conceit
is
,
that
not
the
Presbyters
mentioned
in
the
Fathers
and
by
him
translated
Elders
,
but
the
Bishop
onely
had
right
to
preach
,
the
other
but
by
indulgence
or
by
commandement
.
In
those
times
therefore
the
Bishops
alone
were
called
Doctores
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
at
the
least
:
for
further
proofe
whereof
,
if
you
expect
some
other
testimonie
either
of
Ambrose
,
or
of
others
in
that
time
,
you
may
haue
recourse
to
his
booke
of
offices
,
and
to
the
Councell
of
Carthage
.
Ambrose
[
(e)
](A20733-e32360-b)
(e)
De
offic.
li.
2.
c.
24.
therefore
saith
,
that
the
Bishop
must
not
be
offended
,
if
either
a
Presbyter
or
Deacon
,
or
any
other
of
the
Clergie
doe
by
mercy
,
fasting
,
integritie
,
learning
or
reading
obtaine
great
estimation
.
Gratia
enim
ecclesiae
laus
Doctoris
est
,
for
the
grace
of
the
Church
is
the
Doctors
that
is
the
Bishops
praise
.
But
if
any
doe
not
obey
the
Bishop
and
desiring
to
aduance
himselfe
,
seeketh
a●
counterfeit
affectation
of
learning
,
humilitie
,
or
mercy
,
he
is
lifted
vp
with
pride
going
astray
from
the
truth
.
In
the
Councell
of
Carthage
it
was
decreed
,
that
the
people
which
neuer
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
should
not
haue
[
(f)
](A20733-e32430-b)
(f)
Conc.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
54.
Carthag.
3.
c.
42.
Mat.
23.8.10
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
a
Doctor
or
Teacher
of
their
owne
,
that
is
a
Bishop
:
for
so
is
the
title
of
that
chapter
,
that
the
parts
of
the
Diocesse
without
the
consent
of
the
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
should
not
receiue
another
Bishop
.
T.
C.
that
therefore
the
Presbyteri
mentioned
in
the
Councells
Fathers
and
histories
of
the
Church
,
were
no
Ministers
;
or
that
by
the
word
of
God
they
had
nothing
to
doe
with
the
word
and
Sacraments
.
Farre
be
it
from
vs
so
to
thinke
,
for
nothing
is
more
euident
,
then
that
they
were
Ministers
.
The
Fathers
knew
no
Lay-Presbyters
,
nor
Lay-Deacons
no
more
then
Lay-Bishops
;
but
reckoned
these
three
,
[
(g)
](A20733-e32580-b)
(g)
Conc.
Aneyr.
c.
1.
&
.
2.
Can.
Apost.
8.14.16.17.50
.
Conc.
Nic.
c.
3.
Con.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
3.
&
4.
Carth.
2.
c.
2.
Antioch
.
c.
3.
Chalced.
c.
2.
Sard.
c.
10.
&c.
for
sacred
or
consecrated
persons
,
calling
them
three
degrees
of
the
Clergie
;
the
Bishop
,
answering
to
the
high
Priest
;
the
Presbyters
,
to
the
Priests
;
and
the
Deacons
,
to
the
Leuites
.
For
proofe
whereof
,
there
are
almost
as
many
euidences
in
the
Canons
of
the
councells
,
as
there
be
leaues
.
But
that
it
may
most
clearely
appeare
,
that
the
Presbyters
were
Ministers
,
I
will
proue
it
first
by
their
name
,
Secondly
by
their
office
,
thirdly
,
by
some
lawes
that
peculiarly
concerned
them
.
For
their
name
:
as
they
are
most
vsually
called
Presbyters
,
so
oftentimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
Sacerdotes
and
these
names
confounded
with
Presbyteri
,
that
is
,
Priests
.
In
the
Councell
of
Carthage
[
(h)
](A20733-e32760-b)
(h)
Con.
Carth.
2.
c.
2.
grae
c.
3.
continencie
is
committed
to
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
as
it
becommeth
holy
Bishops
,
Priests
and
Leuits
.
Tertullian
[
(i)
](A20733-e32810-b)
(i)
De
prescript
.
aduers
.
herstico
.
reprouing
the
disorder
of
Hereticks
saith
,
among
them
,
hodie
Presbyter
qui
cras
laicus
,
nam
&
laicis
Sacerdotalia
munera
iniungunt
,
he
is
to
day
a
Presbyter
who
to
morrow
is
a
lay-man
:
for
euen
to
lay-men
doe
they
inioyne
priestly
functions
.
Cyprian
[
(k)
](A20733-e32860-b)
(k)
Lib.
4.
Epist.
10.
speaking
of
Numidiuns
to
be
chosen
a
Presbyter
saith
he
was
reser●ed
that
God
might
adde
him
to
our
Clergy
,
and
that
he
might
adorne
the
decayed
store
of
certaine
Presbyters
with
glorious
[
(l)
](A20733-e32910-b)
(l)
Sacerdotibus
.
Priests
.
And
more
plainely
in
another
place
he
saith
[
(m)
](A20733-e32940-b)
(m)
Cum.
Episcopo
Presbyteri
Sacerdotali
honore
coniuncti
.
lib.
3.
epist.
1.
that
the
Presbyters
are
ioyned
with
the
Bishops
in
priestly
honour
.
Dionysius
termed
the
Areopagite
,
insteed
of
Bishop
,
Presbyter
and
Deacon
,
into
which
three
he
distinguisheth
the
Clergie
,
vseth
[
(n)
](A20733-e32990-b)
(n)
Ecclesiast.
hierarch
.
c.
5.
the
names
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
the
Bishop
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
Presbyters
,
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
Deacons
.
Sozomen
[
(o)
](A20733-e33050-b)
(o)
Soz.
li.
7.
c.
19.
also
calleth
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
is
Priests
,
Isidorus
,
[
(p)
](A20733-e33100-b)
(p)
Isid.
de
eccles.
offic.
lib.
2.
c.
7.
those
who
in
the
old
Testament
were
called
Sacerdotes
,
are
they
who
who
are
called
Presbyteri
.
And
then
hee
setteth
downe
their
office
.
That
to
them
is
committed
the
dispensation
of
diuine
mysteries
,
they
rule
the
Church
,
and
in
the
consecration
of
the
body
and
blood
of
Christ
are
partners
with
the
Bishops
,
as
also
in
teaching
the
people
and
office
of
preaching
.
The
Ancient
Councell
of
Ancyra
[
q)
](A20733-e33170-b)
q)
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
1.
permitting
the
Presbyters
(
who
hauing
once
sacrificed
,
did
after
refuse
)
to
retaine
their
place
;
notwithstanding
suspendeth
them
from
the
exercise
of
their
function
in
these
respects
,
forbidding
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
to
offer
the
communion
,
to
preach
,
or
to
minister
in
any
part
diuine
seruice
.
The
learned
Author
of
the
vnfinished
worke
which
goeth
vnder
the
name
of
Chrysostome
[
r)
](A20733-e33220-b)
r)
In
Mat.
25.
homil.
53.
by
the
seruant
which
receiued
fiue
talents
and
gained
other
fiue
,
vnderstandeth
a
Presbyter
sent
of
God
,
whome
he
calleth
sometimes
Teacher
and
sometimes
Priest
:
and
sheweth
how
by
his
fiue
talents
he
gaineth
other
fiue
:
that
is
,
by
the
knowledge
of
Christ
as
a
talent
committed
to
him
,
a
godly
life
;
by
the
office
of
a
Presbyter
the
careful
gouernement
of
the
Church
:
by
the
word
,
the
sincere
preaching
of
the
word
of
truth
:
by
baptisme
,
the
begetting
of
worthy
children
to
the
Church
:
by
the
sacrifice
;
the
offering
of
an
holy
and
immaculate
sacrifice
for
the
people
,
and
making
intercession
for
their
sinnes
.
More
particularly
for
the
ministerie
of
the
Sacraments
,
the
Councell
[
(s)
](A20733-e33260-b)
(s)
Conc.
Laod.
c.
8.
of
Laodic●a
determined
that
those
which
returned
from
the
heresie
of
the
Cataphrygians
,
though
of
the
Clergie
among
them
,
though
supposed
great
men
,
must
with
all
diligence
be
instructed
and
baptized
either
of
the
Bishops
or
Presbyters
of
the
Church
.
Tertullian
saith
,
[
(t)
](A20733-e33330-b)
(t)
Tertull.
de
baptism
.
Hier.
adu
.
Lucifer
.
the
chiefe
Priest
which
is
the
Bishop
hath
right
to
giue
baptisme
,
then
Presbyters
&
Deacons
,
&c.
In
the
Canons
[
(u)
](A20733-e33360-b)
(u)
Can.
Apost
.
3.
&
31.
Conc.
Neocaesar
.
13.
C.
Carth.
graec
.
4.
Con●
.
Elib
.
c.
32.
C.
Const.
in
Trullo
.
c.
26.
called
the
Apostles
&
in
diuerse
Councells
it
is
presupposed
that
to
Presbyters
it
belongeth
to
administer
the
communion
In
the
Councell
of
Nice
[
(x)
](A20733-e33440-b)
(x)
Conc.
Nic.
c.
18.
the
Deacons
who
are
there
said
to
haue
no
power
to
celebrate
the
Communion
,
are
forbidden
to
deliuer
it
to
the
Presbyter
who
hath
power
,
but
must
receiue
it
either
at
the
Bishops
or
Presbyters
hands
.
To
omit
other
of
the
Fathers
,
[
(y)
](A20733-e33480-b)
(y)
Cypr.
li.
3.
epist.
14.
&
15.
doth
not
Ierome
[
(z)
](A20733-e33530-b)
(z)
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
expressely
testifie
,
that
the
Presbyters
prayers
,
the
body
and
blood
of
Christ
are
consecrated
.
For
the
Leiturgie
or
saying
of
diuine
seruice
,
it
is
reckoned
[
(a)
](A20733-e33560-b)
(a)
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
1.
&
2.
among
the
functions
both
of
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
such
Presbyters
or
Deacons
as
without
the
consent
of
their
Bishop
doe
remoue
to
other
Churches
and
refuse
to
returne
when
they
are
called
by
their
B.
are
[
(b)
](A20733-e33590-b)
(b)
Can.
Apost
.
15.
Conc.
Antioch
c.
3
&
4.
forbidden
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
minister
or
serue
any
more
.
As
for
the
ministery
of
the
word
;
though
Presbyters
were
for
a
time
by
reason
of
Arrius
his
fall
restrained
from
preaching
,
yet
both
before
and
after
they
were
allowed
to
preach
.
Among
their
functions
,
as
you
heard
,
the
Councell
of
Ancyra
[
(c)
](A20733-e33680-b)
(c)
Con.
Ancyr.
c.
1.
reckoneth
preaching
.
The
58.
Canon
[
(d)
](A20733-e33700-b)
(d)
Can.
Apost.
58.
of
the
Apostles
so
called
,
requireth
them
to
instruct
not
onely
the
laitie
,
but
the
Clergie
also
.
Ignatius
[
(e)
](A20733-e33730-b)
(e)
Ad
Antioch
.
requireth
them
to
feede
the
flocke
.
Origen
[
(f)
](A20733-e33760-b)
(f)
In
Ps.
37.
hom.
1.
testifieth
,
that
all
BB.
and
all
Presbyters
or
Ministers
erudiunt
nos
,
do
instruct
vs
,
&c.
Basil
[
(g)
](A20733-e33800-b)
(g)
Ethic.
〈◊〉
.
70.
saith
,
that
to
them
and
to
Deacons
,
in
committed
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
preaching
of
the
Gospel
.
Caluin
[
(h)
](A20733-e33840-b)
(h)
Instit.
li.
4.
c.
4.
§
3.
speaking
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
saith
,
it
was
the
dutie
in
those
times
of
the
Bishop
,
as
wel
as
of
the
Presbyters
,
to
apply
themselues
to
the
ministerie
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
,
Chrysost.
[
(i)
](A20733-e33890-b)
(i)
Chry.
in
1.
Tim.
3.
hauing
affirmed
that
there
is
no
great
difference
betweene
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
rendreth
this
reason
,
for
they
also
haue
receiued
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
authoritie
to
teach
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&
gouernement
of
the
Church
,
and
what
things
the
Apostle
hath
said
concerning
Bishops
,
doe
agre●
also
to
Presbyters
.
In
them
therefore
it
is
required
that
they
should
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
able
to
preach
as
most
plainly
appeareth
by
comparing
that
place
with
Tit.
1.5
7.9
.
Socrates
[
(k)
](A20733-e33980-b)
(k)
Lib.
5.
c.
22.
reporteth
that
in
Caesarea
of
Cappadocia
,
and
in
Cyprus
on
the
Saterdaies
and
Lords
daies
in
the
euening
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Presbyters
and
B
B.
expound
the
scriptures
.
§
Sect.
5.
As
touching
the
custome
of
Alexandria
,
in
restraining
the
Presbyters
from
preaching
,
he
[
(l)
](A20733-e34090-b)
(l)
Socrat.
ibid.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
saith
,
that
it
began
after
Arrius
troubled
the
Church
:
and
Sozomen
[
(m)
](A20733-e34140-b)
(m)
Sozom
lib.
7.
c.
19.
likewise
,
that
it
was
not
the
custome
before
Arrius
being
a
Presbyter
by
his
preaching
broached
his
new
opinions
.
And
this
is
most
plainely
testified
by
Epiphanius
,
[
(n)
](A20733-e34190-b)
(n)
Haeres.
68.
who
saith
that
Arrius
was
a
Presbyter
in
Alexandria
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
who
was
Rector
of
the
Church
called
Baucalis
,
for
all
the
Catholicke
Churches
,
saith
he
in
Alexandria
are
vnder
one
Archbishop
,
and
to
them
seuerally
are
assigned
Presbyters
:
whereof
when
he
had
named
some
,
he
saith
in
one
of
these
was
Colluthus
,
in
another
Carpones
,
in
another
Sarmatas
,
&
Arrius
in
another
.
Now
it
is
manifest
,
that
euery
one
of
these
at
their
accustomed
meetings
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
teaching
the
people
committed
to
their
charge
in
their
Sermons
,
made
diuision
in
the
people
,
whereof
some
inclined
to
Arrius
,
othersto
Colluthus
,
some
to
Carpones
,
others
to
Sarmatas
.
And
as
they
taught
diuersly
in
their
seuerall
Churches
,
some
one
thing
,
some
another
:
so
the
people
called
themselues
,
some
Arrians
,
some
Colluthians
,
&c.
Neither
was
it
the
custome
of
the
Churches
of
Affrica
,
as
T.C.
gathereth
,
that
Presbyters
should
not
preach
at
all
;
but
that
they
might
not
preach
,
nor
administer
the
communion
in
the
presence
of
the
Bishop
.
And
that
was
it
which
both
Valerius
granted
to
Augustine
being
a
Presbyter
[
(o)
](A20733-e34440-b)
(o)
Possidon
.
in
vita
.
Angust
.
c.
5.
potestatem
coram
se
in
Ecclesia
Euangelium
predicandi
power
to
preach
the
Gospell
in
the
Church
himselfe
being
present
,
contrarie
to
the
vse
and
custome
of
the
Affrican
Churches
,
and
also
nonnulli
Episcopi
not
all
,
but
some
Bishops
found
fault
with
.
Whose
reprehension
Valerius
regarded
not
,
because
he
knew
it
was
the
custome
in
the
East
Churches
(
as
appeareth
by
Chrysostomes
homilies
at
Antioch
.
)
And
some
other
Bishops
,
(
euen
Aurelius
[
(p)
](A20733-e34530-b)
(p)
August
.
Epist.
77.
himselfe
the
Bishop
of
Carthage
,
)
were
so
farre
from
finding
fault
with
Valerius
,
that
they
followed
his
example
.
Insomuch
that
some
other
Presbyters
hauing
receiued
the
like
power
,
began
to
preach
the
word
to
the
people
Coram
Episcopis
in
the
presence
of
the
Bishops
.
But
that
so
learned
a
man
as
T.
C.
should
be
so
transported
with
preiudice
as
to
thinke
that
Augustine
was
a
Lay-presbyter
I
cannot
sufficiently
wonder
,
especially
,
considering
that
Valerius
,
when
he
had
ordained
him
Presbyter
,
reioyced
and
gaue
thankes
[
(q)
](A20733-e34610-b)
(q)
Possid
.
in
v●t
.
August
.
c.
5.
to
God
,
who
had
heard
his
prayers
in
sending
such
a
one
,
as
might
,
verbo
Dei
&
doctrina
salubri
Ecclesiam
Dei
aedeficare
edifie
the
Church
of
God
,
with
the
word
of
God
and
wholesome
doctrine
.
Ierome
[
(r)
](A20733-e34650-b)
(r)
De
7.
ordin
.
Eccle.
such
another
Lay-Presbyter
no
doubt
)
though
hee
grant
that
the
Presbyters
may
not
celebrate
the
Communion
in
the
presence
of
the
Bishop
standing
at
the
Altar
(
for
so
his
words
are
Nec
ego
dico
presentibus
Episcopis
,
&c:
though
in
Gratian
[
(s)
](A20733-e34700-b)
(s)
Dist.
95.
c.
6.
it
be
corruptly
written
.
Ecce
ego
dico
)
yet
he
saith
,
[
(t)
](A20733-e34740-b)
(t)
Ad
Nepotian
.
pessimae
consuetudinis
est
in
quibusdam
ecclesijs
tacere
Presbyteros
&
presentib
.
episcopis
non
loqui
.
it
was
a
very
bad
custome
in
some
Churches
that
Presbyters
might
not
preach
in
the
presence
of
Bishops
.
And
such
was
the
custome
of
the
Church
of
Rome
as
appeareth
by
Leo
[
(u)
](A20733-e34780-b)
(u)
Leo.
epist.
88.
in
fine
.
who
denieth
it
to
be
lawfull
for
Presbyters
in
the
presence
of
the
Bishop
vnlesse
he
command
them
either
to
administer
the
Sacrament
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
or
to
teach
the
people
,
&c.
The
Councell
of
Vaux
,
[
(w)
](A20733-e34830-b)
(w)
Conc.
vasens.
2.
c.
2.
tempore
.
Theodosij
.
2.
held
not
long
after
Ambrose
his
time
,
decreed
for
the
edification
of
all
Churches
,
and
for
the
profite
of
the
whole
people
,
that
not
onely
in
cities
,
but
also
in
parishes
the
Presbyters
should
haue
power
giuen
them
to
preach
.
And
if
by
any
infirmitie
the
Presbyter
were
hindered
,
so
that
he
could
not
preach
by
himselfe
,
that
then
the
Deacon
should
read
some
homily
of
the
Fathers
.
To
conclude
,
it
seemeth
strange
to
me
,
that
they
,
who
out
of
the
[
(x)
](A20733-e34900-b)
(x)
Ex
Chrysost.
in
1.
Tim.
3.
&
Hieron
.
ad
Euag.
Fathers
would
proue
the
Presbyters
to
be
equall
to
the
BB.
in
power
of
order
,
as
indeed
they
are
,
excepting
the
power
of
ordination
,
(
for
as
Ierome
[
(y)
](A20733-e34950-b)
(y)
Adeuagr
.
saith
,
excepting
ordination
,
what
doth
a
Bishop
that
a
Presbyter
may
not
doe
,
)
equall
I
say
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
,
should
denie
they
were
Ministers
;
or
that
to
preach
or
to
administer
the
Sacraments
did
not
belong
to
them
by
reason
of
their
office
.
Ambrose
[
(z)
](A20733-e34980-b)
(z)
in
1.
Tim.
3.
saith
of
a
Presbyter
and
Bishop
there
is
one
order
,
vterque
enim
sacerdos
est
,
for
either
of
them
is
a
Priest
.
There
remaine
the
lawes
and
discipline
peculiar
to
Presbyters
as
being
of
the
sacred
ministerie
:
As
for
example
,
that
Presbyters
and
Deacons
should
not
be
chosen
ex
plebe
out
of
the
people
or
laitie
but
[
(a)
](A20733-e35050-b)
(a)
Epist.
Concil.
Illyrici
.
apud
Theodor.
li.
4.
c.
9.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
out
of
the
sacred
order
or
Clergie
.
That
as
in
the
Counsell
of
Nice
it
was
attempted
,
[
(b)
](A20733-e35100-b)
(b)
Socrati
.
li.
c.
11.
so
in
some
others
concluded
,
[
(c)
](A20733-e35120-b)
(c)
Con.
Const.
in
Trullo
.
c.
3.
that
Presbyters
and
Deacons
should
lead
a
single
life
;
that
he
which
had
married
a
widow
,
or
was
the
husband
of
a
second
wife
,
might
not
be
a
Presbyter
.
That
they
might
not
take
vpon
them
worldly
busines
,
not
so
much
as
[
(d)
](A20733-e35140-b)
(d)
Cyprian
.
li.
1.
Epist.
9.
Gardianship
;
that
they
might
not
[
(e)
](A20733-e35170-b)
(e)
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
3.
Nicen.
c.
15.
Arelat.
2.
c.
15.
Laodic
.
c.
24.
remoue
from
citie
to
citie
,
or
from
one
Church
to
another
,
without
the
leaue
of
the
Bishop
;
that
they
might
not
goe
into
a
Tauerne
,
and
such
like
.
It
is
therefore
most
euident
,
that
howsoeuer
the
Bishops
were
called
the
Doctors
,
yet
the
Presbyteri
also
were
Ministers
.
Neither
can
any
one
instance
be
giuen
of
a
Presbyter
either
in
,
or
before
or
after
Ambrose
his
time
,
who
was
not
a
Minister
.
For
howsoeuer
T.
C.
affirmeth
,
that
this
Eldership
of
theirs
continued
in
the
Church
diuerse
hundred
yeares
after
Ambrose
his
time
(
which
doth
not
well
agree
with
his
exposition
or
reading
of
Ambrose
)
yet
being
chalenged
by
D.
Whitgift
[
(f)
](A20733-e35290-b)
(f)
D.
Whit.
653.
to
shew
any
one
testimonie
,
and
auouching
that
he
could
not
produce
any
one
,
he
[
(g)
](A20733-e35310-b)
(g)
T.C.
l.
2.
part.
2.
pag.
68.
in
med
.
§
Sect.
6.
The
3.
thatanciēt
Ministers
called
Seniores
were
wont
to
assist
the
B.
answereth
thus
:
The
next
I
leaue
to
the
Readers
iudgement
.
For
the
third
:
there
was
great
necessitie
that
the
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
when
they
had
neither
the
assistance
of
the
Magistrate
,
nor
direction
of
Ecclesiasticall
lawes
,
should
vse
the
Councell
and
assistance
of
wise
and
learned
men
.
For
which
cause
,
Cyprian
,
[
(h)
](A20733-e35400-b)
(h)
Lib.
2.
Epist.
5.
&
.
l.
3.
Epist.
10.
&
.
19.
&
22
to
auoid
both
ouersights
in
himselfe
and
offence
in
others
,
resolued
to
doe
nothing
of
moment
without
the
common
councell
,
and
aduise
of
his
Clergie
,
and
for
the
same
cause
was
Chrysostome
[
(i)
](A20733-e35480-b)
(i)
Synod
.
contr.
Chrysost.
iur
.
gra●corom
.
556.
accused
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
without
the
Presbytery
and
without
the
consent
of
his
Clergie
he
made
ordinations
.
And
that
Presbyters
were
wont
to
heare
causes
,
and
to
assist
the
B.
it
appeareth
by
the
testimonies
,
first
of
Ignatius
[
(k)
](A20733-e35530-b)
(k)
ad
Trall
.
who
calleth
the
Presbytery
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
consistorie
of
God
,
a
band
of
Apostles
,
and
the
Presbyters
the
Councellers
,
and
Coassessors
of
the
Bishops
.
2.
of
Tertullian
,
[
(l)
](A20733-e35590-b)
(l)
Apolog.
c.
39.
president
probati
quique
seniores
the
approued
Seniors
be
praesident
.
[
(k)
](A20733-e35620-b)
(k)
Apolog.
c.
39.
Thirdly
of
Clement
[
(m)
](A20733-e35650-b)
(m)
Clem
:
epist.
1
:
ad
Iacob
.
in
his
epistle
to
Iames
,
translated
by
Rufinus
,
&
cited
by
Gratian
,
if
any
of
the
brethren
haue
Saints
let
them
not
be
judged
by
secular
Iudges
,
sed
apud
Presbyteros
Ecclesiae
quicquid
illud
est
dirimatur
,
[
(n)
](A20733-e35710-b)
(n)
de
7.
ord:
eccl:
dist.
95
c.
8.
but
before
the
Presbyters
of
the
church
let
the
cause
be
decided
,
&
to
their
determination
let
the
parties
stand
.
Fourthly
of
Ierome
,
Presbyters
,
saith
hee
(
meaning
ministers
whom
he
also
calleth
Preists
,
and
attributeth
to
them
the
ministery
of
the
worde
and
Sacraments
)
from
the
beginning
were
appointed
Iudges
of
causes
,
&c.
And
to
the
same
purpose
the
Authors
of
the
centuries
[
(o)
](A20733-e35780-b)
(o)
Centur.
4
7.
pa.
490.
§
Sect.
7.
The
4.
that
the
Seniors
aduise
was
growne
out
of
vse
in
Ambrose
his
time
.
testifie
,
that
the
Presbyters
besides
that
they
taught
the
people
,
did
also
compound
suites
and
controuersies
.
Now
that
their
aduise
was
much
neglected
,
and
themselues
but
too
much
dejected
by
the
Byshops
in
Ambrose
his
time
,
appeareth
not
onely
by
his
,
but
also
by
Ieromes
[
(p)
](A20733-e35860-b)
(p)
Hier.
de
7.
ordin
.
eccl:
c.
7
,
&
ad
Nepotianum
complaint
.
Likewise
,
by
diuers
Canons
in
the
fourth
councell
of
Carthage
,
[
(q)
](A20733-e35920-b)
(q)
Conc.
Carthag.
4.
held
about
the
yeare
401
wherein
it
was
decreed
,
[
(r)
](A20733-e35940-b)
(r)
Can:
22.
that
the
Bishop
without
the
assemblie
of
his
clergie
,
should
not
ordaine
clerkes
:
&
that
in
the
[
(s)
](A20733-e35960-b)
(s)
Can:
3.
ordination
of
a
presbyter
,
the
Presbyters
also
,
which
be
present
,
should
with
the
Bishop
impose
their
hands
:
that
the
B
:
[
(t)
](A20733-e35990-b)
(t)
Can.
23.
should
not
determine
any
mans
cause
,
but
in
the
presence
of
his
Clergy
:
that
he
[
(u)
](A20733-e36010-b)
(u)
C
:
32.
might
not
alienate
or
sell
the
goods
or
possessions
of
the
Church
,
without
the
consent
of
his
clergie
:
that
the
Bishop
[
(w)
](A20733-e36030-b)
(w)
C
:
34.
&
35.
though
in
the
Church
,
and
in
the
assembly
of
the
presbyters
,
ought
to
sit
in
an
higher
place
,
yet
priuatly
he
should
vse
the
presbyters
as
his
Colleagues
,
and
sitting
himselfe
,
should
not
suffer
a
presbyter
to
stand
:
that
[
(x)
](A20733-e36060-b)
(x)
C
:
37
&
39.
the
Deacons
should
acknowledge
themselues
to
be
Ministers
to
the
presbyters
,
as
well
as
to
the
Bishops
;
&
that
if
the
presbyters
badde
them
,
they
might
sit
in
their
presence
,
which
otherwise
they
might
not
[
(y)
](A20733-e36090-b)
(y)
Con
:
Nic.
c.
18.
doe
.
All
these
things
considered
,
together
with
that
which
before
hath
bene
alledged
,
to
proue
that
there
were
neuer
any
Lay-Elders
,
doe
necessarily
euince
,
that
there
is
no
reason
to
imagine
,
if
Doctorum
signifie
Doctors
or
Teachers
,
Lay-Elders
to
be
meant
by
Seniors
in
this
place
.
And
so
much
of
the
exposition
of
this
place
,
according
to
the
former
sense
of
the
word
Doctorum
,
signifying
Doctors
:
which
,
with
my
aduersaries
consent
,
I
doe
much
preferre
before
the
other
,
and
therefore
can
be
very
well
content
to
giue
in
the
latter
.
Ad
pag.
41.
for
Doctorum
,
being
according
to
this
interpretation
,
a
common
title
both
to
Bishops
and
Presbyters
,
Ambrose
his
meaning
may
be
conceiued
to
be
this
,
that
the
assistance
and
councell
of
ancient
Ministers
,
meant
by
Seniors
,
who
were
wont
to
assist
the
Bishop
,
was
growne
out
of
vse
,
either
by
their
owne
negligence
,
or
the
Bishops
pride
.
Whereunto
,
after
much
froath
of
idle
words
,
he
replyeth
,
First
,
Ad
pag.
42.
that
the
Councell
of
Ministers
was
not
growne
out
of
vse
in
Ambrose
his
time
:
and
this
he
indeuoureth
to
proue
by
fiue
testimonies
,
First
of
Ierome
[
(a)
](A20733-e36310-b)
(a)
Gen.
in
Tit.
1.
saying
that
the
Churches
at
the
first
were
gouerned
communi
presbyterorum
consilio
,
by
the
common
Councell
of
Presbyters
:
Which
testimonie
maketh
against
him
:
for
Ierome
speaketh
of
such
Presbyters
as
Paul
speaketh
of
,
who
were
Ministers
,
and
are
there
called
Bishops
.
If
therefore
the
Church
was
at
the
first
gouerned
by
common
councell
of
Ministers
,
and
if
Ambrose
complaine
that
their
councell
in
his
time
was
neglected
,
which
at
the
first
had
beene
vsed
,
and
whereby
the
Church
had
beene
gouerned
:
who
seeth
not
,
that
it
was
the
neglect
of
the
Ministers
aduise
wherof
Ambrose
complaineth
:
2.
yea
but
Ierome
[
(b)
](A20733-e36400-b)
(b)
Ierom.
in
Esa.
3.
saith
,
we
also
in
the
Church
haue
senatum
nostrum
●●tum
Presbyterorum
,
our
senate
a
company
of
Presbyters
:
which
testimonie
is
wont
to
be
alleaged
,
to
proue
that
in
Ieromes
time
there
was
a
Presbyterie
of
Lay-Elders
.
But
here
my
aduersarie
presupposing
that
Lay-Elders
were
growne
out
of
vse
,
in
Ambrose
his
time
,
(
whom
T
:
C
:
supposeth
to
haue
continued
diuers
hundred
yeares
after
Ambrose
bringeth
it
to
proue
,
that
in
Ieromes
time
,
who
was
almost
as
ancient
as
Ambrose
,
there
was
a
Senate
of
Ministers
,
which
no
man
doubteth
of
.
For
else-where
he
saith
[
(c)
](A20733-e36490-b)
(c)
Ad
Rusticum
16.
q.
1.
c.
7.
Ecclesia
.
the
Church
hath
a
Senate
,
a
companie
of
Presbyters
,
without
whose
Counsell
,
the
Monkes
may
doe
nothing
.
And
not
only
in
Ieromes
time
the
Church
had
,
but
in
all
Ages
since
,
euen
to
this
day
,
it
hath
such
a
Senate
,
which
in
latter
times
hath
called
Capitulum
,
the
chapter
.
Howbeit
,
both
in
Ambrose
his
time
,
and
since
,
the
aduise
,
and
assistance
thereof
,
notwithstanding
the
Decree
of
the
fourth
counsell
of
Carthage
,
hath
beene
,
though
in
some
things
euen
to
this
day
vsed
,
yet
in
the
most
things
,
and
for
the
most
part
neglected
.
His
third
testimony
,
(
which
hee
saith
is
plaine
enough
)
of
the
saide
Ierome
,
[
(d)
](A20733-e36570-b)
(d)
Dist
95.
c.
6.
ex
.
lib.
de
7.
gradib
.
Eccl.
cited
in
the
canon
Law
,
is
also
plaine
against
him
.
For
hauing
saide
as
euen
now
I
alledged
him
,
that
the
presbyters
from
the
beginning
had
bene
appointed
to
heare
and
iudge
causes
,
as
the
Bishops
assistants
,
hee
prooueth
it
,
because
they
also
in
the
scriptures
are
called
Bishops
,
howsoeuer
now
the
Bishops
enuied
them
that
dignitie
,
&c.
[
(e)
](A20733-e36590-b)
(e)
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
23.
His
4.
testimonie
is
,
the
23.
canon
of
the
councell
of
Carthage
(
which
euen
now
I
cited
)
which
maketh
against
him
,
rather
then
for
him
.
For
seeing
good
lawes
arise
from
bad
manners
,
it
is
to
bee
imagined
,
that
according
to
the
complaint
of
Ambrose
and
Ierome
,
who
were
somewhat
before
this
councell
,
the
presence
of
the
Clergie
,
and
[
(f)
](A20733-e36640-b)
(f)
Though
the
Clergie
were
to
be
present
,
yet
none
but
Presbyters
were
the
Bishops
coassessors
:
for
Deacons
might
not
sit
among
Presbyters
,
C.
Nic.
c.
18
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
presbyteri
sedeni
,
Diaconi
stant
.
assistance
of
the
presbyters
was
neglected
:
and
that
this
neglect
gaue
occasion
to
the
making
of
that
canon
.
His.
5.
testimonie
is
of
D.
Bilson
,
(
though
hee
name
also
another
learned
man
,
only
to
abuse
him
.
)
Howbeit
[
(g)
](A20733-e36670-b)
(g)
Chap.
11.160
.
D.
Bilson
vnderstandeth
Ambrose
,
as
complaining
of
the
Bishops
of
his
time
,
who
whiles
they
would
seeme
to
rule
alone
,
had
excluded
,
or
neglected
the
aid
&
counsell
of
their
bretheren
of
the
Clergie
,
who
were
wont
to
aduise
and
assist
them
,
as
well
in
Doctrine
as
in
Discipline
.
And
whereas
in
the
second
place
he
replieth
,
that
slothfulnesse
and
pride
must
needs
be
referred
to
the
same
persons
,
and
not
slothfulnes
to
presbyters
,
Ad
pag
:
43.
Whether
slothfulnes
&
pride
must
necessarily
be
referred
to
the
same
subject
Doctorum
:
signifying
Learned
:
and
being
a
common
title
both
to
BB.
and
Presbyters
.
and
pride
to
BB:
I
answeare
,
that
if
Doctorum
be
a
common
title
to
both
(
as
it
is
,
if
it
signifie
learned
)
and
if
the
slothfulnes
of
the
presbyters
,
rather
then
of
the
BB.
be
as
like
almost
to
be
the
cause
why
their
assistance
grew
out
of
vse
,
as
the
pride
of
the
BB:
then
is
there
no
necessitie
that
slothfulnesse
and
pride
should
both
be
attributed
to
the
Bishops
:
but
rather
it
is
very
likely
,
that
slouthfulnes
is
imputed
to
presbyters
,
and
pride
to
the
Bishops
.
But
both
the
parts
of
the
Antecedent
is
true
,
therefore
the
consequent
.
But
let
vs
heare
his
Reasons
.
The
first
,
If
Ambrose
had
meant
to
ascribe
slouthfulnes
,
to
the
Seniors
,
hee
would
haue
saide
,
that
their
assistance
grew
out
of
vse
,
either
by
their
owne
slothfulnes
,
or
rather
by
the
pryde
of
the
BB.
The
second
:
he
would
haue
said
not
Doctorum
,
but
Ipforum
desidiâm
,
which
reason
is
the
latine
of
the
first
,
and
the
first
the
english
of
this
:
Such
iudgment
heere
is
shewed
in
distinguishing
of
arguments
.
But
who
knoweth
not
,
that
the
same
sentence
may
very
manie
wayes
bee
varied
,
in
respect
of
the
words
,
the
same
sence
remaining
?
so
that
this
exception
might
be
made
against
any
exposition
almost
.
If
I
should
say
:
As
in
Christs
Colledge
,
so
in
some
others
,
Elections
were
wont
to
bee
caryed
by
the
voyces
of
the
iuniors
,
as
well
as
the
Seniors
,
which
thing
is
now
grown
out
of
vse
,
by
what
meanes
I
know
not
,
vnlesse
perhaps
,
by
the
remissenes
of
the
fellowes
,
or
rather
arrogancie
whiles
they
would
rule
alone
,
I
might
not
vnfitly
so
speake
,
ascribing
remissnes
to
the
iunior
fellowes
,
and
arrogancie
to
the
Seniors
.
His
third
and
fourth
reasons
are
impertinent
,
vnderstanding
the
word
Doctorum
of
Doctors
,
a
title
in
those
times
,
peculiar
to
Bishops
,
&
not
of
learned
,
which
is
common
to
both
.
For
though
the
speciall
title
of
Doctors
according
to
the
former
interpretation
,
which
is
●
better
,
be
opposed
to
of
the
Seniors
or
presbyters
,
who
were
not
called
Doctors
;
yet
to
a
common
title
,
neither
of
the
specials
,
to
which
it
is
common
,
are
to
be
opposed
,
but
both
to
be
subiected
.
The
5.
that
Ambrose
chargeth
both
slothfulnes
and
pride
vpon
the
same
persons
,
called
Doctors
,
&c.
But
this
should
haue
bene
prooued
and
not
begged
:
especially
,
seeing
I
disprooue
it
in
the
reason
following
.
For
that
which
he
pratteleth
of
amplifying
the
fault
,
by
rising
from
the
lesse
to
the
greater
,
hath
not
so
much
as
a
shew
of
a
good
reason
,
to
dsproue
my
exposition
;
seeing
of
the
2.
causes
,
Ambrose
seemeth
to
make
the
slothfulnesse
of
the
learned
,
that
is
,
the
Presbyters
,
not
so
principall
as
the
pride
of
the
learned
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
BB.
vnles
perhaps
saith
he
,
by
the
slothfulnes
of
the
presbyters
,
or
rather
pride
of
the
BB.
Lastly
,
saith
he
,
If
we
make
diuers
sorts
of
teachers
(
he
should
haue
said
learned
)
Ambrose
his
speech
were
defectiue
,
and
somewhat
must
be
added
,
as
either
by
the
slothfulnes
of
the
teachers
,
or
rather
pride
of
the
Bishops
,
or
some
of
them
.
I
answere
,
if
the
word
Learned
be
vsed
,
being
a
title
common
,
both
to
the
Seniors
and
the
Doctors
,
there
needs
no
addition
to
make
the
sentence
perfect
;
but
a
distinct
application
of
the
common
title
to
the
speciall
sorts
,
according
to
their
seuerall
faultes
,
by
which
they
are
to
be
distinguished
;
Slothfulnesse
beeing
the
fault
of
the
one
,
and
pride
of
the
other
,
as
before
you
heard
,
in
the
example
of
fellowes
.
But
why
should
I
spend
time
in
answering
such
slieght
Objections
?
as
a
common
title
,
both
to
the
Bishops
and
Seniors
,
and
that
saith
hee
,
as
if
hee
were
another
Pythagoras
,
vpon
his
bareword
,
I
say
his
bare
word
;
for
as
yet
he
hath
not
vouchsafed
vs
one
piece
of
a
Reason
.
This
is
one
of
the
refuters
poore
shifts
,
to
make
himselfe
wrangling
worke
:
To
take
an
Assertion
of
mine
,
and
hauing
seuered
it
from
the
Reasons
wherewith
it
was
guarded
,
to
cauill
with
mee
,
as
if
without
alledging
a
Reason
,
I
would
(
like
an
other
Pythagoras
)
bee
belieued
vppon
my
bare
word
.
Whereas
in
truth
,
both
heere
and
in
other
places
,
where
I
am
the
Answerer
,
I
render
more
reasons
then
were
needfull
,
were
it
not
,
that
I
sought
to
satisfie
,
in
hope
that
men
will
at
the
length
be
satisfied
with
reason
.
As
for
example
,
this
place
of
Ambrose
is
objected
,
as
giuing
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
.
I
answere
there
is
no
necessitie
,
this
place
should
so
bee
vnderstood
.
Here
might
I
haue
rested
,
and
put
the
opponents
to
inforce
this
testimonie
,
which
by
them
is
barely
propounded
.
But
being
desirous
to
giue
satisfaction
,
I
vrge
it
for
them
thus
:
Ambrose
saith
,
there
were
Seniors
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
whose
councell
was
now
neglected
,
therefore
he
giueth
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
.
I
denie
the
consequence
,
giuing
a
reason
,
because
those
Seniors
were
of
the
Clergie
and
not
of
the
Laitie
.
Against
this
answere
I
make
them
replie
thus
;
The
Seniors
aduise
was
neglected
by
the
learned
:
Therfore
themselues
were
such
as
were
not
learned
,
or
of
the
Clergie
.
To
this
I
answere
,
that
if
the
word
Doctorum
signifie
learned
,
Notwithstanding
this
place
may
be
vnderstood
of
the
Seniors
of
the
clergie
onely
:
If
wee
conceiue
Doctorum
signifying
learned
,
as
a
common
title
,
both
to
the
BB:
&
Seniors
,
and
of
this
answeare
I
giue
a
reason
by
explaning
this
testimony
of
Ambrose
.
And
whereas
I
did
foresee
that
it
would
be
objected
that
Doctorum
was
to
be
vnderstood
either
of
pastors
of
parishes
alone
,
according
to
the
conceite
of
the
new
Disciplinarians
,
or
of
BB.
a
lone
according
to
the
rest
:
I
therfore
sought
to
preuent
this
obiection
in
those
words
,
for
if
you
expound
Doctorum
for
pastors
,
&c.
Wherein
a
sufficient
reason
is
concluded
,
holding
strongly
against
the
parish
B.
&
his
Elders
.
And
not
contented
with
all
this
,
in
desire
to
giue
satisfaction
,
I
rendred
the
true
causes
besides
arrogancy
of
BB.
which
I
knewe
was
presupposed
,
why
the
assistance
of
the
ancient
ministers
,
called
Seniors
,
was
growne
out
of
vse
:
and
yet
forsooth
,
like
another
Pythagoras
▪
I
looke
that
my
bare
word
should
be
credited
without
reason
.
Yea
,
but
saith
hee
,
that
which
is
added
in
steed
of
a
Reason
,
hath
no
more
reason
in
it
,
but
his
owne
blindnes
,
saying
,
that
I
cannot
see
how
,
&c.
But
is
it
not
strange
,
that
hee
,
who
is
so
sharpe
sighted
to
finde
out
Syllogismes
where
none
were
intended
,
could
see
no
reason
heere
?
Or
shall
we
not
thinke
,
that
he
chose
rather
like
a
shifting
sophister
,
to
take
aduantage
of
that
modest
phrase
,
them
to
encounter
with
the
reason
it selfe
,
which
may
thus
be
concluded
.
That
which
is
a
matter
of
great
labour
and
paines
,
to
the
vndertaker
,
and
ease
to
the
relinquisher
,
is
not
to
be
ascribed
to
slothfulnes
in
him
that
taketh
it
vpon
him
,
but
rather
in
them
who
are
eased
.
But
the
taking
of
the
whole
burden
,
and
cumbersome
imployment
of
hearing
suites
,
and
managing
all
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
vpon
the
BB:
is
a
matter
of
great
labour
and
paines
to
them
,
and
ease
to
the
Seniors
.
Therefore
the
Bishops
,
vnderaking
the
whole
burden
,
and
cumbersome
imployment
of
hearing
suites
,
and
managing
all
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
is
not
to
be
ascribed
to
slothfulnes
in
them
,
but
rather
to
the
Seniors
.
One
of
these
premisses
should
haue
bene
denyed
,
And
first
,
he
denyeth
that
Ambrose
spake
by
guesse
,
as
I
say
,
but
certaienly
and
vpon
knowledge
;
when
Ambrose
his
expresse
words
bee
these
,
Quod
qua
negligentia
obsoleuerit
nescio
,
nisi
forte
,
&c:
which
by
what
negligence
it
is
growne
out
of
vse
I
know
not
,
Ad
pag.
44.
vnlesse
perhaps
by
the
slouthfulnes
,
&c.
2.
He
saith
,
it
might
be
a
matter
of
slothfulnes
,
in
the
BB:
to
suffer
the
seniors
to
neglect
their
duties
.
But
not
to
their
own
so
great
trouble
,
will
M
,
D.
say
,
we
might
belieue
him
,
if
wee
saw
not
pride
driue
men
to
vndertake
,
more
then
they
either
need
to
be
charged
with
,
or
are
able
to
weeld
.
Then
is
it
not
their
slothfulnes
belike
,
that
caused
them
to
take
the
whole
burden
vpon
themselues
,
but
their
pride
,
which
made
them
winke
at
the
seniors
slothfulnes
,
as
giuing
way
to
their
owne
ambition
.
Thirdly
,
he
saith
,
the
Bishops
might
prouide
for
their
owne
ease
,
by
putting
off
the
burthen
to
their
Chancellors
,
Commissaries
,
Officialls
,
Whether
the
BB.
did
put
off
the
burden
to
their
Chancellours
,
&c.
&c:
&
therefore
it
might
be
imputed
to
them
as
a
matter
of
sloth
or
idlenesse
,
&
pride
to
:
and
so
the
word
Doctorum
,
rightly
expounded
,
for
Pastors
of
Parishes
alone
,
and
not
to
Diocesan
Bishops
.
As
thogh
their
Parish-Bishops
were
more
likely
to
haue
had
Chauncellours
,
&c:
then
Diocesan
BB:
But
I
answere
,
1.
the
question
is
not
what
they
might
haue
done
,
but
what
they
did
.
Now
it
is
euident
,
that
in
Ambrose
his
time
,
and
a
good
while
after
,
till
the
Presbyteries
were
in
a
manner
whollie
neglected
,
the
Bishops
had
not
ordinary
vicars
,
or
chancellors
,
or
ordinary
Commissaries
,
which
were
not
of
the
Clergie
;
But
what
they
did
without
the
aduise
of
their
Seniors
,
they
performed
ordinarily
in
their
owne
persons
,
or
else
extraordinarily
delegated
the
same
to
some
of
speciall
trust
.
In
some
cases
,
it
is
euident
,
that
both
then
,
and
long
after
,
they
vsed
the
assistance
of
their
Presbyterie
,
as
in
the
iudgement
of
Heresie
,
or
for
deposing
of
a
clergie
man
,
&c.
Siricius
the
B.
of
Rome
,
in
an
Epistle
[
(a)
](A20733-e37690-b)
(a)
Ambros
:
epist
:
80.
to
Ambrose
,
denouncing
Iouinian
,
Auxentius
,
&c.
for
heretickes
,
sheweth
,
that
for
their
triall
,
his
whole
presbyterie
had
beene
assembled
;
and
saith
,
that
by
the
common
consent
of
his
whole
clergie
,
they
were
condemned
for
heretickes
.
The
4.
councell
of
Carthage
,
[
(b)
](A20733-e37750-b)
(b)
Cap.
23.
as
you
heard
,
ordained
that
the
Bishop
should
heare
mens
causes
in
the
presence
of
his
clergie
.
The
2.
councel
of
Towers
decreed
[
(c)
](A20733-e37780-b)
(c)
Turon
.
2.
c.
7.
that
a
Bishop
might
not
depose
an
Archpresbyter
,
without
the
counsell
of
all
his
compresbyters
:
But
whom
negligence
casteth
out
,
let
him
with
the
counsell
of
the
presbyters
be
remoued
.
The
councell
of
Carthage
[
(d)
](A20733-e37830-b)
(d)
Cō.
Cart.
graec
:
c.
20.
siue
Carth
:
3.
c.
8.
appointed
,
that
in
the
cause
of
a
Presbyter
,
sixe
,
and
of
a
Deacon
,
three
Bishops
should
be
joyned
with
their
own
Bishop
,
because
as
the
councell
of
Ciuill
[
(e)
](A20733-e37880-b)
(e)
con
:
hispal
:
2.
c.
6.
determined
,
one
Bishop
may
to
Priests
,
and
ministers
,
that
is
,
Presbyters
&
Deacons
.
giue
their
honour
,
but
one
alone
may
not
take
it
from
them
:
but
in
the
cause
of
inferiour
Clergie
men
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Bishop
alone
of
the
place
shall
heare
and
determine
it
,
viz.
in
the
presence
of
his
Clergie
,
according
to
the
aforesaid
[
(f)
](A20733-e37940-b)
(f)
Conc.
Carth.
4
c.
23.
Canon
of
the
fourth
Councell
of
Carthage
.
But
as
in
some
cases
they
vsed
the
counsell
of
the
Presbyteri
;
so
in
others
they
did
for
the
most
part
vndergoe
the
whole
burthen
themselues
.
For
the
proofe
whereof
,
the
examples
of
Ambrose
and
Augustine
may
suffice
.
For
Ambrose
was
so
occupied
in
hearing
and
determining
mens
causes
,
that
he
had
so
little
time
left
him
for
his
corporall
repast
,
or
spirituall
studies
;
that
Augustine
[
(g)
](A20733-e38030-b)
(g)
August
.
Confess
.
lib.
6.
c.
3.
could
neuer
finde
him
at
leisure
to
breake
his
minde
vnto
him
.
And
Augustine
[
(h)
](A20733-e38070-b)
(h)
August
.
Epist.
110.
Non
permittor
ad
quod
volo
vacare
ante
meridiem
▪
post
meridiem
occupationibus
hominum
teneor
.
was
so
encombred
with
hearing
of
causes
,
that
scarcely
he
could
haue
the
forenoone
for
his
studies
,
the
afternoone
being
wholly
taken
vp
with
other
mens
busines
:
neither
could
he
,
when
the
Councels
of
Numidia
and
Carthage
had
imposed
a
taske
vpon
him
,
and
when
his
people
had
promised
to
forbeare
him
for
fiue
dayes
,
obtaine
so
much
breathing
time
from
their
affaires
.
But
when
hee
was
olde
,
and
was
desirous
to
spend
the
rest
of
his
time
in
writing
,
and
in
the
studie
of
the
scriptures
,
he
nominated
Eradius
to
be
his
successor
;
in
most
earnest
manner
requiring
,
and
charging
the
people
,
that
they
would
suffer
him
to
put
off
the
burden
of
those
imployments
to
him
.
Possidonius
[
(i)
](A20733-e38140-b)
(i)
Possid
.
in
vita
August
.
c.
19.
giueth
him
this
testimonie
,
that
he
heard
mens
causes
diligently
,
sometimes
to
the
hower
of
repast
,
sometimes
fasting
the
whole
day
:
but
alwaies
himselfe
had
the
cognisance
of
them
,
and
determined
them
.
The
Emperour
Iustinian
[
(k)
](A20733-e38180-b)
(k)
Constit.
Nouell.
123.
c.
21.
prouided
by
law
,
that
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
ciuill
iudges
should
haue
nothing
to
doe
:
sed
sanctissimus
Episcopus
secundum
sacras
regulas
causae
finem
imponat
,
but
let
the
holy
Bishop
according
to
the
Sacred
Canons
determine
the
cause
.
As
for
ordinarie
Vicars
,
Chancellors
or
Commissaries
which
were
Lay-men
,
in
those
times
the
Bishops
had
none
:
for
not
so
much
as
the
steward
of
the
Church
might
be
a
Lay-man
:
whereupon
Gregorie
[
(l)
](A20733-e38240-b)
(l)
Lib.
7.
Epist.
66.
writing
to
Ianuarius
a
Bishop
,
chargeth
him
to
take
heed
,
that
Ecclesiasticall
matters
be
not
committed
to
secular
men
,
but
to
some
approued
of
the
Clergie
.
And
the
second
Councell
of
Ciuil
,
penned
as
it
seemeth
by
Isidor
who
was
president
thereof
,
pronounceth
[
(m)
](A20733-e38300-b)
(m)
Conc.
hispal.
2.
c.
9.
it
an
vnseemely
thing
Laicum
esse
vicarium
Episcopi
,
&
seculares
in
ecclesia
iudicare
,
that
a
Lay-man
should
be
the
Bishops
Vicar
,
&
that
secular
men
should
iudge
in
the
Church
:
for
in
one
and
the
same
officer
there
must
not
be
different
profession
.
Which
hauing
confirmed
out
of
Deuteronomie
,
it
inferreth
:
wherefore
it
behoueth
vs
to
obey
Gods
booke
and
the
preceps
of
the
holy
Fathers
,
ordaining
that
they
who
shal
be
associated
to
Bishops
in
Church-gouernement
,
may
not
differ
neither
in
profession
nor
habit
.
Notwithstanding
that
they
extraordinarily
committed
to
others
or
delegated
causes
to
be
heard
appeareth
by
the
aforesaid
example
of
Augustine
.
But
more
clearely
by
the
practise
of
Siluanus
a
godly
Bishop
of
Troas
,
not
long
after
Ambrose
his
time
:
who
[
(n)
](A20733-e38400-b)
(n)
Socrat.
lib.
7.
c.
37.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
perceiuing
that
they
of
the
Clergie
made
gaine
of
the
contentions
of
them
who
came
to
be
iudged
,
he
would
not
at
any
time
appoint
a
iudge
of
the
Clergie
,
but
himselfe
receiuing
the
petitions
of
Suiters
would
make
choise
of
some
faithful
man
or
other
of
the
laitie
,
whom
he
knew
to
be
a
louer
of
iustice
,
and
to
him
he
would
commit
the
hearing
of
the
cause
:
and
for
this
cause
Socrates
saith
he
was
greatly
renowmed
.
Out
of
which
examples
we
may
note
that
causes
were
wont
to
be
brought
to
the
Bishop
,
that
he
heard
them
himselfe
if
he
had
leisure
:
otherwise
,
that
he
committed
the
hearing
of
the
cause
to
some
of
his
Clergie
:
but
yet
so
,
as
if
he
saw
cause
,
he
might
make
choise
of
some
other
,
whom
he
durst
better
trust
.
Secondly
,
I
answere
,
that
the
reason
which
I
vsed
,
concludeth
most
strongly
,
against
the
refuters
exposition
,
who
by
Doctorum
will
needs
vnderstand
parish
Bishops
.
Who
if
they
should
take
the
whole
burden
vpon
them
of
Church-gouernement
,
and
deciding
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
without
the
aide
or
assistance
of
the
Elders
,
could
not
therefore
be
accused
of
idlenes
:
for
I
hope
the
refuter
will
not
say
,
that
they
also
had
Chancellers
or
Comissaries
vnder
them
to
whom
they
might
put
off
those
cumbersome
imployments
.
§
Sect.
12.
Of
Deanes
and
Chapters
and
Cathedrall
Churches
.
That
there
were
Cathedrall
Churches
in
Ambrose
his
time
.
It
remaineth
now
,
that
I
should
proceed
to
the
causes
,
which
I
rendred
why
the
Councell
of
the
Seniors
in
Ambrose
his
time
was
so
much
neglected
by
Bishops
.
But
that
my
aduersary
,
after
his
accustomed
maner
,
will
needs
take
occasion
to
shew
his
owne
ignorance
,
by
taking
vp
a
speech
which
as
he
saith
,
I
let
drop
by
the
way
,
concerning
Deanes
and
Chapters
of
our
Cathedrall
Churches
,
as
being
a
resemblance
or
remainder
of
the
Presbyteries
which
were
in
the
Primitiue
Church
.
For
such
is
his
reading
,
that
he
doubteth
not
to
deny
,
that
in
Ambrose
his
times
there
were
any
Cathedrall
Churches
,
or
that
our
Deanes
and
Chapters
are
so
much
as
resemblances
of
the
Presbyteries
of
those
times
.
For
Cathedrall
Churches
,
you
are
to
vnderstand
,
that
although
in
euery
Diocesse
there
were
many
parish
churches
,
both
in
country
and
citie
,
yet
there
was
one
chiefe
church
in
the
citie
,
which
was
the
Bishops
Cathedra
or
seat
,
wherein
the
Bishop
most
vsually
performed
the
duties
of
the
Episcopall
and
pastorall
function
,
whereunto
a
peculiar
Clergie
belonged
,
consisting
of
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
and
other
inferiour
orders
,
and
whereto
Episcopium
the
Bishops
house
was
neare
adioyning
.
This
church
in
those
times
was
called
sometimes
Cathedra
sc.
Episcopi
,
as
Concil.
Carthag
.
[
(o)
](A20733-e38620-b)
(o)
Conc.
Carth.
5.
c.
5.
where
it
was
decreed
that
no
Bishop
,
relicta
cathedra
,
leauing
his
Cathedrall
Church
,
should
remoue
his
seate
or
See
,
to
any
church
in
his
Diocesse
,
the
Greeke
[
(p)
](A20733-e38660-b)
(p)
Carthag
.
graec
.
c.
72.
hath
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
And
likewise
BB:
are
forbidden
[
(q)
](A20733-e38690-b)
(q)
Carthag
.
c.
122.
siue
Affric
.
c.
88.
Item
.
Carthag
.
graec
.
c.
54.
siue
Affric
.
c.
20.
Conc.
Mileuit
.
c.
24.
&
25.
to
neglect
any
of
those
places
which
belong
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
Matrix
,
&
Matrix
Cathedra
[
(r)
](A20733-e38790-b)
(r)
Conc.
Carth.
3.
c.
46.
Carth.
gr.
c.
124.
Affric
.
c.
90.
as
Conc.
Carth.
3.
c.
46.
Episcopus
qui
matricom
tenet
.
Conc.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
24
siue
Affric
.
c.
90.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
If
in
the
mother
Churches
,
that
is
to
say
the
Cathedrall
the
Bishop
shal
be
negligent
,
&c:
sometimes
[
(s)
](A20733-e38910-b)
(s)
Conc.
Aurelian.
3.
c.
18.
Conc.
Neocaesar
.
c.
13.
Ciuitatensis
ecclesia
,
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
in
the
Councell
of
Neocaessaria
.
Such
a
Church
was
that
in
Millaine
,
whereunto
Ambrose
his
house
adioyned
:
for
that
[
(t)
](A20733-e39010-b)
(t)
Theodoret.
l.
5
c.
18.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
house
of
salutation
where
Ambrose
sate
,
when
Theodosius
came
to
him
to
be
absolued
,
was
not
,
as
T.
C.
imagined
,
Ambrose
his
owne
house
before
he
was
Bishop
:
for
it
was
intra
septa
Ecclesiae
within
the
bounds
of
the
Church
,
&
Paulinus
[
(u)
](A20733-e39110-b)
(u)
Paulin.
in
vita
Ambr
.
nihil
sibi
quod
hic
suum
diceret
,
derelinquens
.
testifieth
,
that
Ambrose
gaue
away
all
when
he
was
made
Bishop
,
and
left
himselfe
nothing
which
here
he
might
call
his
owne
.
In
that
Church
Ambrose
vsually
preached
,
to
that
Church
the
Emperour
himselfe
resorted
,
In
the
chancell
whereof
,
when
Theodosius
the
Emperour
would
haue
remained
to
receiue
the
communion
,
Ambrose
[
(x)
](A20733-e39170-b)
(x)
Theod.
lib.
5
c
18.
sent
him
word
by
his
Archdeacon
,
that
that
place
was
peculiar
to
the
clergie
,
which
belonged
to
this
Church
,
consisting
of
the
Arch-Presbyter
and
the
other
Presbyters
,
of
the
Archdeacon
and
other
Deacons
,
and
other
inferior
orders
of
the
Clergie
.
For
albeit
the
name
Decanus
was
not
perhaps
as
yet
in
vse
,
yet
the
office
was
,
and
the
Deane
signified
by
other
names
.
For
sometimes
he
was
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
chiefe
or
ruler
of
the
Presbyters
,
euen
as
Ambrose
his
Archdeacon
,
in
the
place
euen
now
cited
,
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Such
a
one
was
Chrysostome
,
[
(y)
](A20733-e39270-b)
(y)
Theodor
.
l.
3.
c.
19.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
in
Antioch
a
long
time
.
[
(z)
](A20733-e39320-b)
(z)
Lib.
4.
c.
18.
Eulogius
at
Edessa
:
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
so
Peter
[
(a)
](A20733-e39380-b)
(a)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
was
the
Protopresbyter
in
the
Church
at
Alexandria
.
And
Arsacius
,
[
(b)
](A20733-e39420-b)
(b)
Socrat.
lib.
6.
c.
9.
Iure
gaecorum
.
in
synod
.
Contr.
Chrysost.
pag.
557.
who
succeeded
Chrysostome
in
the
Bishopricke
of
Constantinople
,
the
Protopresbyter
there
.
In
latine
most
vsually
Archipresbyter
;
as
[
(c)
](A20733-e39490-b)
(c)
Hist.
tripart.
li.
10.
c.
10.
histor.
tripat
.
lib.
10.
c.
10.
and
in
the
fourth
Councell
of
Carthage
:
[
(d)
](A20733-e39550-b)
(d)
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
17
where
it
was
decreed
that
the
Bishop
should
take
care
of
widowes
,
Orphans
&
strangers
,
not
by
himselfe
but
by
his
Archpresbyter
,
or
by
his
Archdeacon
.
Ierome
[
(e)
](A20733-e39590-b)
(e)
Ad
Rustic
.
Monach.
tom.
1.
pag.
46.
shewing
that
in
each
societie
there
is
some
one
ruler
,
saith
,
singuli
Ecclesiarum
Episcopi
,
singuli
Archipresbyteri
,
singuli
Archdiaconi
the
Churches
haue
each
of
them
one
Bishop
,
one
Archpresbyter
,
on
Archdeacon
.
In
processe
of
time
they
were
called
decani
.
Archipresbyteri
[
(f)
](A20733-e39650-b)
(f)
Decret.
Gregor.
li.
1.
tit.
23.
deoffic
Arch.
c.
7.
a
pluribus
decani
nuncupantur
,
Archpresbyters
of
the
most
are
called
Deanes
.
Neither
were
there
onely
Archpresbyters
and
Deanes
of
Cathedrall
Churches
which
were
called
[
(g)
](A20733-e39720-b)
(g)
Duaren
.
de
sacr.
Eccles.
minist.
&
benef
.
lib.
1
c.
8.
Archipresbyteri
vrbani
,
&
ciuitatenses
,
of
whom
all
these
former
testimonies
are
to
be
vnderstood
;
but
also
rurall
Deanes
,
called
sometimes
Archipresbyteri
decani
,
as
in
the
Councell
[
(h)
](A20733-e39770-b)
(h)
Con●
.
Turonens.
2.
c.
20.
of
Towers
,
and
sometimes
decani
firsti
.
Archipresbyteri
parochiarum
in
the
Councell
of
[
(i)
](A20733-e39820-b)
(i)
Concil.
Agath
.
c.
15.12
.
q
2.
c.
32.
●ist.
50.
c.
64.
Agatha
.
The
chapter
was
wont
to
be
called
Presbyterium
.
Placuit
Presbyterium
contrahi
we
thought
good
the
Presbyterie
should
be
gathered
together
saith
Cornelius
[
(k)
](A20733-e39920-b)
(k)
Cypr.
lib.
3.
Epist.
11.
to
Cyprian
.
And
Syricius
[
(l)
](A20733-e39970-b)
(l)
Ambros.
Epist
80.
the
Bishop
of
R●me
in
an
Epistle
to
Ambrose
,
facto
Presbyterio
,
the
Presbyterie
being
assembled
,
somtimes
[
(m)
](A20733-e40010-b)
(m)
Hier.
in
Esai.
3.
se●atus
,
caetus
Presbyterorum
,
the
senate
,
or
assembly
of
Presbyters
.
The
Presbyters
or
Seniors
themselues
were
called
sometimes
[
(n)
](A20733-e40050-b)
(n)
Conc.
Neocaesar
.
c.
13.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
[
(o)
](A20733-e40080-b)
(o)
Conc.
Agath
.
c.
22.
ciuitatenses
Presbyteri
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
,
seniores
[
(p)
](A20733-e40120-b)
(p)
Tertull.
Apol.
c.
39.
by
Tertullian
and
Ambrose
,
[
(q)
](A20733-e40160-b)
(q)
Ambr.
in
1.
Tim.
5.1
.
in
the
place
alleaged
.
The
ancient
Councell
of
Ancyra
hauing
pronounced
it
vnlawfull
for
the
Chorepiscopi
or
countrey
Bishops
to
ordaine
Presbyters
or
Deacons
,
addeth
[
(r)
](A20733-e40210-b)
(r)
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
13.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
neither
yet
is
it
lawfull
for
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
:
whereby
it
may
in
part
appeare
,
what
was
the
estimation
of
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
in
comparison
of
the
countrie
Bishops
.
But
as
the
Archipresbyteri
in
latter
times
were
called
decani
,
so
these
Presbyters
of
the
citie
were
in
processe
of
time
called
Canonici
&
prebendarij
and
the
company
of
them
which
had
beene
called
Presbyterium
,
was
termed
capitulum
in
english
Chapter
.
Caluin
[
(s)
](A20733-e40310-b)
(s)
Instit.
li.
4.
c.
5.
saith
Presbyteri
vrbani
versi
sunt
in
canonicos
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
are
turned
into
Canons
or
prebendaries
.
And
it
is
to
be
noted
saith
Duarenus
,
that
in
euery
citie
there
was
a
certaine
College
[
(t)
](A20733-e40360-b)
(t)
De
sacr.
Eccle.
minist.
ac
.
benef
.
li.
1.
c.
7.
of
these
Presbyters
which
the
Bishop
gouerned
,
By
all
which
it
is
more
then
euident
,
that
as
in
the
ancient
times
they
had
Cathedrall
churches
as
well
as
we
,
and
those
endowed
with
great
reuenewes
,
as
it
is
easie
to
proue
:
so
the
Deanes
and
chapters
of
our
Cathedrall
Churches
are
the
remainder
of
their
Presbyteries
,
our
Deanes
being
those
who
were
called
Archpresbyters
,
our
Prebendaries
,
those
which
were
called
Presbyteri
vrbani
,
our
chapters
those
which
they
called
Presbyteries
.
Neither
doth
that
hinder
which
our
refuter
obiecteth
,
that
our
BB:
haue
not
the
like
assistance
of
the
Deane
and
chapter
that
the
ancient
BB:
had
of
their
Presbyteries
.
For
Ambrose
complaineth
,
that
euen
in
his
time
their
counsell
was
neglected
.
And
yet
in
these
times
,
as
the
Bishop
may
vse
their
aduise
if
he
please
,
so
in
some
cases
their
assistance
is
necessarily
required
,
the
acts
of
the
Bishop
being
void
without
their
consent
.
Besides
sede
vacante
,
in
the
vacancy
of
the
See
,
the
custodie
of
the
Bishopricke
&
Episcopall
rights
,
as
also
the
election
of
the
new
Bishop
,
is
after
a
sort
referred
to
them
.
Ad
pag.
46.
And
as
in
times
past
,
so
now
,
the
placing
and
displacing
of
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
,
whom
we
call
Prebendaries
,
appertaineth
to
the
BB:
a
few
Churches
onely
among
vs
excepted
.
And
to
conclude
,
as
Deanes
and
Chapters
with
vs
are
in
a
maner
peculiar
to
Cathedrall
Churches
,
the
seats
of
Bishops
(
some
collegiate
Churches
excepted
:
)
so
were
the
Presbyteries
in
the
primitiue
Church
.
Insomuch
that
our
new
sect
of
disciplinarians
might
as
well
say
,
there
was
in
old
time
,
&
now
should
be
,
a
Deane
&
chapter
,
as
a
Presbyterie
in
euery
parish
.
If
therefore
they
will
sue
for
reformation
according
to
the
precedent
of
the
primitiue
Churches
,
let
them
seeke
and
sue
,
that
the
Bishops
may
vse
the
counsell
and
assistance
of
the
Presbyterie
of
the
citie
,
which
we
call
the
Deane
and
Chapter
,
and
they
may
hope
to
preuaile
,
if
none
of
the
reasons
why
their
assistance
is
forborne
be
sufficient
,
which
now
come
to
be
examined
.
Serm.
Sect.
8.
pag.
16.
But
howsoeuer
Ambrose
knew
not
what
to
say
of
this
matter
,
otherwise
then
by
coniecture
,
&c:
to
the
end
of
the
first
point
,
pag.
17.
These
reasons
I
added
by
way
of
surplusage
or
aduantage
,
I
doubt
not
but
the
true
causes
&c:
the
refuter
depraueth
my
speech
,
as
if
the
word
I
,
had
beene
vttered
with
an
immodest
Emphasis
:
when
as
I
meant
no
more
by
that
speech
,
then
when
we
say
,
proculdubio
,
or
dubium
non
est
:
which
kind
of
speech
my
aduersarie
(
me
thinkes
)
should
not
so
greatly
mislike
,
sithens
their
Lay-Elders
,
which
haue
beene
vrged
with
such
heat
,
haue
no
better
warrant
then
dubium
non
est
,
satis
opinor
,
constat
,
probabile
est
,
as
you
shall
heare
,
when
we
come
to
their
proofes
.
They
may
say
confidently
,
there
were
Lay-Elders
in
the
time
of
the
Apostles
,
yea
from
the
time
of
Moses
vntill
Christ
,
and
that
after
the
example
of
the
Iewes
(
who
indeed
neuer
had
such
Presbyteries
)
they
are
to
be
erected
in
euery
parish
:
and
yet
haue
no
better
warrant
for
these
things
,
then
their
owne
coniectures
.
They
may
take
vpon
them
to
auow
without
reason
,
that
to
haue
beene
done
in
the
Apostles
times
,
whereunto
neither
scripture
nor
Father
giueth
testimonie
:
and
in
me
it
is
great
immodestie
to
affirme
that
,
which
but
one
of
the
Fathers
seemed
to
doubt
of
,
though
I
alleage
sufficient
reason
of
my
affirmation
.
For
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
when
Christians
neither
had
frequent
Synodes
to
determine
doubts
,
nor
Synodall
constitutions
to
direct
the
Bishops
,
nor
the
authoritie
of
the
Christian
Magistrate
to
rectifie
what
was
amisse
in
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
,
there
was
great
necessitie
that
the
Bishop
should
vse
the
aduise
and
counsell
of
other
wise
and
learned
men
:
otherwise
,
his
will
would
haue
seemed
to
stand
for
a
law
,
and
his
gouernement
would
haue
beene
subiect
to
ouersight
in
himselfe
,
to
remedilesse
wrong
towards
the
clergie
and
people
,
and
to
the
obloquy
and
scandall
of
all
.
But
when
as
prouinciall
Synodes
were
frequently
[
*
](A20733-e40720-b)
*
viz:
Twice
a
yeare
.
Conc.
Nic.
c.
5.
Antioch
.
c.
20.
Chal.
ced.
c.
19.
assembled
to
determine
doubts
,
to
right
the
causes
of
them
that
were
wronged
,
to
prescribe
so
many
Ca●ons
and
constitutions
,
as
to
the
BB:
assembling
in
Councell
seemed
sufficient
for
their
direction
,
when
the
authoritie
of
the
christian
Magistrate
was
helpefull
to
the
Church
;
then
we
may
easily
conceiue
,
that
as
the
Councell
and
assistance
of
the
Presbyterie
was
not
so
needfull
,
so
both
to
the
Presbyters
desiring
their
ease
and
Scholasticall
quietnesse
,
and
also
to
the
Bishops
desiring
to
rule
alone
,
it
would
seeme
needlesse
:
which
reason
I
am
well
content
it
shall
be
put
into
the
equall
balance
of
the
Readers
iudgement
,
against
the
cauills
of
the
refuter
,
And
thus
much
concerning
the
testimonie
of
Ambrose
:
which
hauing
cleared
as
well
as
that
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
being
the
onely
places
of
moment
,
which
vse
to
be
produced
in
this
cause
,
I
might
safely
conclude
from
all
the
premisses
,
that
therfore
there
were
no
Lay-Elders
in
the
primitiue
Church
:
From
whence
,
besides
the
maine
conclusion
,
that
therefore
the
primitiue
Church
was
gouerned
by
Diocesan
Bishops
,
Against
the
former
,
D.
Bilson
affirming
that
euery
Church
in
the
Apostles
times
had
many
Prophets
Pastors
and
Teachers
,
which
,
as
the
refuter
saith
,
Ad
pag.
49.
might
make
a
Presbyterie
.
But
the
Churches
D.
Bilson
speaketh
of
,
were
not
in
seuerall
parishes
,
but
as
he
saith
in
populous
cities
,
such
as
that
of
Ephesus
Act.
20
:
and
those
prouided
,
not
for
any
one
parish
,
but
for
the
whole
citie
and
countrey
adioyning
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
Diocesse
.
For
when
my
aduersarie
shall
produce
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
that
in
such
congregations
,
as
we
call
parishes
,
there
was
a
Presbyterie
of
Ministers
,
I
will
also
grant
,
that
there
were
no
other
but
parish
Bishops
.
In
the
meane
time
let
the
Reader
hold
this
for
a
certaine
and
vndeniable
truth
,
that
there
were
no
Presbyteries
of
Ministers
,
but
onely
in
cities
and
Cathedrall
Churches
,
but
hereof
I
shall
haue
occasion
to
speake
in
the
second
booke
.
As
touching
the
second
conclusion
,
it
followeth
thus
:
the
parish
pastor
had
either
a
Presbyterie
to
assist
him
,
or
he
was
subiect
to
superiors
,
as
namely
the
Diocesan
and
prouinciall
Bishops
,
to
ouerrule
him
,
or
else
he
ruled
like
a
Pope
;
for
a
fourth
thing
cannot
be
named
,
before
there
were
Christian
Magistrates
.
But
it
is
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
in
the
primitiue
Church
they
had
an
absolute
popeling
,
who
neither
had
assistants
nor
superiors
,
for
that
were
to
ascribe
not
onely
supreme
,
but
also
sole
power
to
them
:
and
it
is
as
false
,
that
in
seuerall
parishes
there
was
a
Presbyterie
to
assist
him
,
therefore
it
remaineth
that
the
parish
Bishops
were
subiect
to
the
authoritie
of
the
Diocesan
and
prouinciall
Bishops
.
To
the
proposition
he
answereth
two
w●ies
,
first
by
retortion
:
that
what
I
say
of
the
parish
Bishop
his
ruling
as
a
Pope
,
may
with
more
probabilitie
be
spoken
of
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
which
I
haue
answered
before
.
For
this
is
the
second
place
where
he
laboureth
out
of
my
word●
to
proue
our
Diocesan
Bishops
to
be
popes
,
vsing
this
insultation
in
the
margent
.
Sic
tu
beas
ami●os
?
But
though
their
parish
Bishops
,
whom
they
make
the
supreme
Ecclesiasticall
officers
,
would
be
absolute
popelings
,
if
presbyteries
were
not
adioyned
to
them
,
because
they
should
haue
not
onely
Supreame
,
but
also
sole
authoritie
:
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
our
Bishops
,
to
whom
neither
supreme
,
nor
sole
authoritie
belongeth
,
should
he
esteemed
such
.
Secondly
he
denieth
the
disfunction
,
alleaging
that
a
fourth
thing
might
be
added
concerning
the
chiefe
authoritie
of
the
people
:
Which
,
if
it
be
added
in
the
proposition
,
is
with
the
rest
to
be
denied
in
the
assumption
.
For
this
brownisticall
or
rather
Anabaptisticall
conceit
(
for
some
of
the
Brownists
disclaime
it
)
that
the
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
subiected
to
the
people
,
as
if
the
state
of
the
Church
had
beene
Democraticall
or
popular
,
is
a
dotage
that
was
neuer
dreamed
of
till
of
late
,
and
therefore
as
it
is
most
confidently
to
be
denied
,
so
it
needed
not
to
be
inserted
in
the
proposition
.
CHAP.
IX
.
Answering
the
testimonies
which
by
the
refuter
are
alleaged
to
proue
Lay-Elders
.
BVt
now
had
I
need
to
call
for
armour
of
defence
.
For
hitherto
saith
the
refuter
we
haue
warded
the
blowes
that
M.
D.
gaue
to
beat
downe
the
Lay-presbyterie
,
now
let
vs
shew
,
that
we
also
can
strike
,
if
need
be
.
The
Reader
,
that
hath
found
the
refuter
so
strict
in
exacting
Syllogismes
of
me
,
euen
when
I
performe
the
part
of
an
answerer
,
cannot
but
expect
most
formall
and
accurate
Syllogismes
at
his
hands
.
But
he
shall
finde
that
to
be
true
,
which
I
foretold
him
not
long
since
:
that
this
great
Champion
,
not
daring
to
vrge
his
testimonies
,
or
to
reduce
his
proofes
into
Syllogismes
;
according
to
the
poore
pollicie
of
them
all
,
holdeth
out
certaine
testimonies
,
as
it
were
Pallas
shield
,
thinking
with
the
bare
quotation
of
them
,
though
he
cite
them
not
,
to
put
vs
to
silence
.
And
to
this
purpose
,
like
a
notorious
Mountebanke
,
setting
himselfe
to
delude
the
simple
,
he
commendeth
his
witnesses
,
euen
Christ
himselfe
,
his
Apostles
,
and
Euangelists
with
swelling
titles
,
when
their
testimonies
themselues
are
not
so
much
as
cited
;
as
though
he
thought
it
more
needfull
to
winne
credit
to
his
witnesses
,
then
to
proue
,
●hat
they
testifie
that
,
for
which
he
would
seeme
to
alleage
them
.
But
you
shall
heare
Pyrgopolinices
himselfe
:
For
the
scriptures
we
haue
(
among
others
)
these
mightie
ones
to
wage
battell
for
vs
.
First
the
great
Emperour
of
the
Christian
armie
,
our
Sauiour
Christ
himselfe
,
Mat.
18.17
.
Next
a
great
worthy
,
Act.
14.23
.
Adde
to
these
Iames
the
Apostle
,
one
of
the
Pillars
of
the
Church
Iam.
5.14
.
and
that
famous
Generall
of
the
gentiles
,
the
Apostle
Paul
:
Rom.
12
8.1
.
Cor.
12.28
.
These
are
most
worthy
witnesses
indeed
,
and
without
exception
.
If
any
one
of
these
giue
testimonie
to
your
Lay-Elders
,
we
will
most
willingly
yeeld
.
But
I
pray
you
let
vs
heare
their
words
;
It
shall
not
need
:
if
you
will
not
belieue
vs
,
that
they
giue
testi-monie
to
Lay-Elders
,
yet
belieue
other
diuines
,
who
say
they
doe
.
Are
they
witnesses
,
what
they
said
only
,
or
what
by
the
holy
Ghost
is
committed
to
writing
?
If
the
latter
,
why
be
not
their
owne
testimonies
produced
,
but
other
witnesses
must
be
deposed
,
that
they
said
so
,
when
it
appeareth
vpon
most
authenticall
record
,
whether
they
said
so
or
not
?
Let
vs
therefore
heare
the
words
themselues
.
dic
Ecclesiae
,
tell
the
Church
or
assembly
.
What
then
?
therefore
there
ought
to
be
Lay-Elders
in
euery
congregation
.
See
you
not
by
this
time
,
what
a
striker
this
is
?
first
there
may
be
question
,
whether
Ecclesia
signifie
the
whole
congregation
of
the
people
,
or
an
assembly
of
iudges
or
gouernours
:
if
the
former
sense
be
followed
,
there
is
no
shew
for
Lay-Elders
.
If
the
latter
,
which
is
the
more
likely
,
question
againe
may
be
made
,
whether
Christ
speake
of
the
Synedrion
of
the
Iewes
,
as
Caluin
and
some
others
suppose
,
or
of
Christian
gouernours
:
if
of
the
Synedrion
,
which
was
a
ciuill
senate
and
indeed
the
high
counsell
of
estate
in
the
policie
of
the
Iewes
,
what
doth
that
make
for
Ecclesiasticall
Elders
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
and
that
in
euery
parish
?
If
of
christian
gouernours
,
as
the
Fathers
expound
it
;
what
sense
is
there
to
vnderstand
the
words
of
Lay-Elders
,
vnlesse
it
can
otherwise
be
proued
,
either
that
Christ
had
alreadie
ordained
them
,
or
that
afterwards
they
were
in
vse
in
the
Church
of
Christ
.
But
the
former
is
absurd
:
and
for
the
latter
they
haue
not
so
much
as
a
faire
shew
,
being
disarmed
of
the
two
places
,
which
I
haue
vindicated
out
of
their
hands
,
viz:
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
and
Ambrose
in
1.
Tim.
5.1
.
Nay
further
I
adde
,
that
if
it
could
be
proued
(
as
it
neuer
will
)
that
euer
there
were
Lay-Elders
in
the
Church
before
this
our
age
,
yet
they
should
but
argue
from
the
Genus
to
the
Species
affirmatiuely
,
tell
the
gouernours
,
ergo
Lay-Elders
:
wherefore
this
is
a
very
seely
argument
.
Yea
but
other
diuines
say
,
that
Christ
spake
of
Lay-Elders
.
What
others
say
it
is
not
greatly
materiall
in
this
kind
,
so
long
as
we
plainely
see
,
there
is
no
necessitie
nor
probabilitie
so
to
vnderstand
him
.
But
who
are
they
that
say
so
?
Chrysostome
,
Theophylact
,
Erasmus
,
Caluin
,
Beza
,
Piscator
vpon
the
place
it selfe
,
For
the
three
first
,
because
they
are
no
parties
,
I
can
be
content
to
examine
their
testimonies
.
All
that
Chrysostome
saith
of
those
words
is
this
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
tell
the
Church
,
that
is
Prelates
and
gouernours
:
and
on
those
words
whatsoeuer
you
shall
bind
on
earth
,
&c:
nec
dicit
saith
he
,
Ecclesiae
presuli
,
neither
did
he
say
to
the
prelate
of
the
Church
,
whom
he
vnderstood
by
Church
,
bind
him
with
bands
or
cords
,
&c.
Theophylact
explaineth
the
words
thus
:
Theoph.
in
Mat.
18.
If
before
two
or
three
witnesses
hee
being
reprooued
shall
not
bee
ashamed
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
Oecolampadius
translateth
thus
,
Ne
graueris
tunc
in
Ecclesiae
suggestu
invulgare
peccatum
,
sticke
not
then
to
publish
his
fault
in
the
pulpit
of
the
Church
or
iudgement
seate
.
But
the
accent
sheweth
that
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
we
are
to
vnderstand
An
tistites
or
presides
,
the
Prelates
of
the
Church
.
And
those
words
,
what
you
shall
bind
,
&c:
he
expoundeth
thus
,
If
thou
who
art
wronged
shall
hold
the
offender
as
a
Publican
or
Ethnicke
,
euen
such
a
one
he
shal
be
in
heauen
,
but
if
thou
loose
him
,
that
is
,
forgiue
him
,
he
shal
be
pardoned
in
heauen
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
not
onely
what
the
Priests
loose
are
loosed
,
but
also
what
we
who
are
wronged
doe
bind
or
loose
,
the
same
shal
be
bound
or
loosed
:
where
,
by
Priests
,
he
meaneth
those
,
whom
before
he
called
the
Prelates
of
the
Church
.
Erasmus
maketh
this
Paraphrase
:
Paraphra
.
in
Mat.
18.
If
the
offender
be
so
vntractable
,
that
he
will
be
moued
neither
with
shame
nor
feare
of
iudgement
,
bring
the
matter
to
the
congregation
,
that
either
he
maybe
reformed
by
the
content
of
the
multitude
,
or
by
authoritie
of
them
which
be
rulers
ou●
the
multitude
.
But
if
he
be
so
farre
past
cure
,
that
he
will
not
be
corrected
neither
by
secret
and
brotherly
monition
,
neither
by
the
knowledge
and
consent
of
two
or
three
,
neither
by
the
shame
of
his
fault
vttered
and
disclosed
,
neither
by
the
authoritie
of
the
●hiefe
rulers
,
leaue
him
to
his
disease
.
My
aduersarie
therefore
,
to
salue
his
credit
,
had
need
to
bring
those
,
from
whom
he
had
these
testimonies
at
the
second
or
third
hand
,
to
depose
,
that
Chrysostome
,
Theophylact
,
and
Erasmus
doe
say
,
that
Christ
speaketh
of
Lay-Elders
.
Otherwise
he
will
hardly
escape
the
censure
of
imposture
,
and
seeking
to
seduce
the
people
with
glorious
shewes
.
To
the
rest
of
his
witnesses
I
answere
,
that
what
new
writers
,
being
parties
in
the
cause
,
doe
testifie
without
warrant
of
scripture
,
euidence
of
reason
,
or
testimonie
of
antiquitie
,
it
deserueth
no
credit
.
ordained
Presbyters
in
euery
Church
,
therefore
Lay-Elders
.
How
is
this
consequence
proued
?
because
the
greeke
Scholiast
and
a
few
new
writers
say
so
.
But
here
the
disputer
,
for
his
credite
sake
,
must
plead
,
that
he
(
for
his
part
)
neuer
saw
the
Greeke
Scholiast
,
but
receiued
this
allegation
from
T.
C.
else
he
must
be
accused
either
of
grosse
ignorance
,
or
notorious
falsification
.
I
see
not
saith
T.
C.
why
it
may
not
be
referred
to
Elders
(
meaning
Lay-Elders
)
as
well
as
too
Bishops
,
there
setteth
forth
,
how
they
set
a
full
order
in
the
Church
.
And
of
that
iudgement
is
the
greeke
Scholiast
,
which
affirmeth
,
that
those
which
followed
S.
Paul
and
Barnabas
,
were
worthy
to
be
Bishops
,
and
that
they
created
of
them
Elders
and
Deacons
:
Vnderstanding
Oecumenius
,
as
if
by
Bishops
he
meant
ordinarie
Ministers
,
and
Elders
and
Deacons
,
their
Lay-Elders
and
Lay-Deacons
:
which
were
a
notable
deprauing
of
Oecumenius
his
meaning
,
if
he
were
so
to
be
translated
.
But
his
words
being
these
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
those
who
haue
but
small
skill
in
greeke
doe
know
,
that
the
article
of
the
plurall
number
with
the
preposition
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
doth
most
vsually
signifie
no
more
then
the
proper
name
alone
,
so
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
all
in
one
with
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
so
is
vsed
by
Oecumenius
in
the
very
next
sentence
following
,
as
you
shall
heare
.
Besides
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
doth
not
signifie
they
were
worthy
,
but
they
had
the
dignitie
or
honour
:
or
if
they
had
beene
worthy
to
haue
beene
Bishops
,
Paul
and
Barnabas
had
small
reason
,
in
that
want
of
sufficient
Ministers
,
to
make
them
lay
either
Elders
or
Deacons
.
So
that
Oecumenius
his
words
are
thus
to
be
translated
,
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
Paul
and
Barnabas
had
the
dignitie
of
Bishops
,
for
that
they
ordained
by
imposition
of
hands
,
not
onely
Deacons
but
also
Presbyters
.
Note
also
saith
hee
that
in
Miletum
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Barnabas
and
Paul
were
by
imposition
of
hands
ordained
,
but
I
found
another
coppie
which
for
Miletum
hath
Antioch
,
and
that
is
more
probable
.
His
meaning
is
that
at
Antioch
Paul
and
Barnabas
were
ordained
Bishops
.
Act.
13.2
.
And
that
Oecumenius
by
Presbyters
vnderstood
Ministers
or
Teachers
,
it
is
apparant
by
his
words
going
before
:
for
demanding
,
why
the
Apostles
made
not
Presbyters
in
Cyprus
and
Samaria
,
but
in
these
places
mentioned
▪
Act.
14.
he
answereth
,
those
were
neare
to
Ierusalem
and
the
apostles
,
and
in
Antioch
the
word
preuailed
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
in
these
places
they
needed
much
exhortation
,
chiefly
those
of
the
gentiles
needed
much
teaching
.
The
third
testimonie
,
Is
any
man
sicke
among
you
?
let
him
call
for
the
Presbyters
of
the
Church
,
and
let
them
pray
ouer
him
,
annointing
him
with
oile
in
the
name
of
the
Lord
.
Therefore
there
were
Lay-Elders
in
S.
Iames
time
.
This
consequence
is
proued
because
Caluin
and
foure
other
new
writers
say
so
.
The
fourth
:
Ambrose
in
Rom.
12.
Rom.
12.8
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
he
that
ruleth
,
in
diligence
,
this
Ruler
must
needs
be
the
Lay-Elder
.
For
besides
certaine
new
writers
,
Ambrose
saith
so
.
But
Ambrose
vnderstandeth
the
words
generally
of
any
Ruler
,
expounding
him
that
ruleth
to
be
eum
qui
curam
vt
praesit
fratribus
suscipit
him
that
vndertaketh
the
care
to
rule
his
brethren
.
The
fifth
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
God
hath
appointed
in
the
Church
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
gouernements
:
these
gouernements
must
needs
be
of
Lay-Elders
,
for
besides
some
new
writers
,
Ambrose
,
Ierome
,
Theodoret
,
doe
testifie
so
much
.
Ambrose
his
words
be
these
,
sunt
&
gubernatores
gui
spiritualib
.
retinaculis
hominibus
documento
sunt
,
there
are
also
gouernours
who
with
spirituall
reines
doe
nurture
men
.
Ierome
,
qui
sciunt
singulos
prout
apti
sunt
gubernare
,
who
know
to
gouerne
euery
one
according
as
they
are
apt
.
Theodoret
,
hereby
he
signified
the
administrations
or
gouernements
of
the
Church
.
These
be
all
the
places
of
scripture
which
this
great
striker
species
affirmatiue
;
as
if
they
should
say
,
the
scriptures
speake
of
gouernours
,
therefore
of
Lay-Elders
;
of
Presbyters
,
therefore
of
onely
gouerning
Presbyters
.
But
seeing
they
neuer
were
,
nor
euer
will
be
proued
by
other
arguments
;
the
reason
taken
from
these
places
,
is
from
the
Genus
,
to
a
fancied
and
platonicall
Idea
,
or
poeticall
species
,
and
that
affirmatiuè
.
If
I
should
say
,
it
is
a
bird
,
therefore
a
Swanne
,
it
were
but
a
simple
argument
:
but
if
thus
,
it
is
a
Bird
,
therefore
a
blacke
Swanne
,
it
were
too
ridiculous
.
Such
are
the
arguments
of
this
disputer
:
for
if
he
should
say
,
the
holy
Ghost
speaketh
in
three
of
these
places
of
gouernours
,
therefore
of
Presbyters
,
it
were
a
weake
argument
;
but
when
he
inferreth
therefore
Lay-presbyters
,
who
were
more
rare
then
blacke
Swannes
,
it
is
very
ridiculous
.
If
the
worst
argument
in
my
Sermon
,
euen
when
he
made
the
worst
of
it
,
had
concluded
no
better
then
the
best
of
these
,
he
would
neuer
haue
done
insulting
and
triumphing
.
But
I
cannot
blame
him
,
they
be
the
best
proofes
his
cause
can
afford
;
they
are
the
testimonies
,
which
the
principall
patrones
of
the
Presbyterie
doe
vse
to
alledge
.
But
you
will
say
,
this
is
a
strange
kind
of
arguing
to
proceed
from
men
,
who
allow
no
office
in
the
Church
but
what
hath
expresse
and
direct
warrant
in
the
scriptures
:
this
is
the
meaning
of
the
scriptures
,
because
some
new
diuines
doe
thinke
so
.
We
are
wont
to
hold
,
that
scripture
is
to
be
expounded
by
scripture
,
as
by
conference
of
other
paralell
scriptures
,
or
by
inference
out
of
the
context
it selfe
,
diduced
by
some
artificiall
argument
;
or
if
these
faile
,
especially
,
in
such
places
as
concerne
matters
of
storie
or
fact
,
as
for
example
,
whether
there
were
any
Lay-Elders
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
we
fly
to
the
expositions
of
the
Fathers
,
&
testimonie
of
antiquitie
.
But
what
would
you
haue
a
man
doe
,
these
proofes
and
testimonies
fayling
,
the
best
glosse
they
can
set
vpon
their
cause
,
and
the
fairest
excuse
for
themselues
is
,
that
some
other
new
writers
,
in
matters
of
substance
for
the
most
part
Orthodoxall
,
haue
beene
partly
of
their
minde
,
and
yet
if
we
consider
,
that
two
or
three
principall
men
,
hauing
vpon
necessitie
deuised
the
Presbyterie
,
to
supply
the
roome
of
the
Bishop
before
eiected
,
and
afterwards
(
being
growne
into
liking
with
their
owne
deuise
,
because
a
few
places
of
the
scriptures
and
Fathers
especially
,
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
and
Ambrose
in
1.
Tim.
5.1
.
seemed
to
fauour
the
same
)
commended
it
to
others
,
as
warranted
by
scriptures
and
Fathers
;
others
,
taking
it
vpon
their
word
without
sufficient
tryall
,
haue
yeelded
their
consent
,
and
by
their
writings
commended
the
same
to
posteritie
:
I
say
,
if
these
things
be
considered
,
we
haue
no
great
reason
,
much
to
esteeme
the
testimonies
either
of
the
principall
Authors
,
or
of
the
pedarie
fautors
of
the
Presbyterian
discipline
,
being
all
parties
in
the
cause
.
But
now
if
I
should
proue
vnto
you
,
De
concil
.
qu.
5.
cap.
3.
he
will
neuer
dare
to
shew
.
For
first
,
where
he
produceth
D.
Whitakers
as
a
witnesse
,
that
Christ
when
he
said
tell
the
Church
meant
Lay-Elders
:
it
is
euident
to
any
that
readeth
him
,
that
by
Ecclesia
in
that
place
,
he
vnderstandeth
the
Church
represented
in
a
Councell
,
whether
prouinciall
,
which
he
sheweth
to
be
aboue
a
Bishop
;
or
generall
,
which
he
proueth
to
be
aboue
the
Pope
.
For
if
a
Bishop
or
the
Pope
should
offend
,
the
course
which
our
Sauiour
prescribeth
to
Peter
himselfe
and
the
rest
of
his
Apostles
should
be
taken
;
First
,
by
priuate
admonition
,
Secondly
,
before
two
or
three
witnesses
,
and
thirdly
,
if
these
faile
,
by
telling
the
Church
.
For
the
second
place
he
alleageth
D.
Fulke
,
In
Act.
14.23
.
who
doth
not
once
mention
Lay-Elders
,
nor
meane
them
in
that
place
.
But
our
translation
being
accused
by
the
Rhemists
,
for
that
where
we
should
say
Priests
,
In
Act.
14.
we
say
Elders
:
D.
Fulke
doth
not
deny
,
but
that
Priests
or
Ministers
are
there
meant
by
Elders
,
whom
he
could
be
content
should
be
called
Priests
,
as
Priests
is
the
English
of
Presbyters
,
and
wisheth
that
the
sacrificers
of
the
law
had
neuer
beene
called
by
that
name
,
but
that
it
had
beene
reserued
(
if
I
vnderstand
him
)
to
signifie
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
.
There
is
no
question
therefore
betweene
them
,
whether
Lay-Elders
be
there
meant
;
but
whether
the
Ministers
,
who
are
there
meant
by
the
name
Presbyteri
,
whom
the
Papists
would
haue
translated
Priests
,
may
not
also
be
called
Elders
.
In
act.
14.23
.
Aretius
,
though
he
holdeth
the
distinction
of
Elders
,
and
so
is
a
partie
in
the
cause
,
notwithstanding
by
Presbyters
,
Act.
14
23.
he
vnderstandeth
Ministers
onely
.
Ministr●s
ordinat
per
singulas
Ecclesias
,
expende
hic
quid
sint
Presbyteri
,
nimirum
ministri
certis
Ecclesiis
deputati
,
vnde
duplex
fuit
primitiuae
Ecclesiae
genus
Presbyterorum
,
vnum
quod
Ecclesiae
praer
at
docendo
,
quales
isti
hic
sunt
,
&c.
In
Iam.
5.14
.
For
the
third
,
he
abuseth
againe
the
testimonie
of
D.
Fulke
,
who
,
as
in
the
former
place
,
by
Presbyteros
,
vnderstandeth
Priests
or
Ministers
.
And
as
the
Rhemists
blamed
,
after
the
same
manner
,
our
translation
,
for
saying
Elders
and
not
Priests
,
he
answereth
as
before
.
And
whereas
they
obiect
,
that
our
Elders
be
not
such
as
the
Apostle
Iames
requireth
to
be
sent
for
,
as
being
not
deputed
specially
to
publike
praying
or
administration
of
the
Sacraments
;
he
answereth
,
that
although
in
some
Churches
there
be
some
Elders
appointed
only
to
gouerne
,
yet
is
there
no
Church
,
in
which
there
be
no
Elders
appointed
specially
to
publicke
prayers
and
administration
of
Sacraments
.
But
admitting
,
that
the
Ministers
of
our
Church
be
such
as
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
,
you
demaund
why
we
translate
them
not
Ministers
▪
I
answere
(
saith
he
)
because
the
word
signifieth
Elders
,
&
not
Ministers
,
&
yet
we
contend
not
for
the
terme
,
nor
refuse
the
name
Priest
,
when
it
signifieth
the
same
whom
the
Apostle
calleth
Presbyterum
,
but
when
by
abuse
of
Papists
it
is
taken
to
signifie
a
sacrificer
.
D.
N●well
,
who
indeed
speaketh
of
certaine
Seniors
which
with
the
Pastor
,
that
is
the
Bishop
,
were
to
exercise
the
discipline
of
the
Church
,
but
whether
they
were
chosen
out
of
the
Clergie
,
or
laitie
,
he
sheweth
not
:
by
the
places
which
he
quoteth
for
the
proofe
of
them
,
diuerse
whereof
,
euen
in
the
iudgement
of
Caluin
,
are
to
be
vnderstood
of
Ministers
,
he
may
seeme
to
meane
Seniors
of
the
Clergie
.
In
the
fourth
and
fifth
he
abuseth
the
testimonie
of
Th.
Morton
(
not
the
learned
and
iudicious
Deane
of
Winchester
,
Th.
Morton
.
in
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
but
another
old
acquaintance
of
mine
)
who
in
Rom.
12.8
.
&
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
by
gouernours
,
vnderstandeth
those
,
who
haue
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
.
These
may
suffice
for
a
taste
of
his
good
dealing
with
new
writers
,
especially
our
owne
countrey
men
:
the
rest
,
let
examine
them
who
either
haue
the
bookes
,
or
thinke
it
worth
their
paines
.
CHAP.
X.
Containing
an
answere
to
the
same
testimonies
,
and
some
other
proofes
,
as
they
are
vrged
by
other
disciplinarians
.
THus
much
might
suffice
to
haue
answered
his
allegations
out
of
the
scriptures
;
were
it
not
,
that
some
perhaps
will
imagine
,
that
these
places
might
be
better
vrged
.
For
their
satisfaction
therefore
,
I
will
take
vpon
me
,
briefly
,
yet
fully
to
answere
these
and
some
other
of
the
best
proofes
,
as
they
are
vrged
by
T.
C.
M.
Caluin
,
Beza
and
Dudley
Fenner
.
First
therefore
concerning
,
vrged
by
T.C.l.
1.
pag.
176.
Mat.
18.17
.
T.
C.
argueth
thus
.
By
Church
is
meant
either
all
the
people
,
or
the
Pastor
alone
,
or
the
Pastor
with
the
ancients
and
Elders
;
but
neither
the
people
,
nor
Pastor
alone
,
therefore
the
Pastor
with
the
ancients
and
Elders
.
The
disiunction
is
grounded
vpon
a
supposition
of
the
newfound
parish
discipline
,
that
there
were
no
other
Ecclesiasticall
gouernours
but
parishionall
,
which
I
shall
hereafter
by
Gods
helpe
proue
to
be
absurd
.
In
the
meane
time
,
for
the
confutation
of
this
disiunction
,
it
shall
suffice
to
note
that
,
which
all
disciplinarians
confesse
,
that
our
Sauiour
Christ
speaketh
according
to
the
manner
of
those
times
either
bidding
them
tell
the
assembly
,
that
is
the
Synedrion
;
of
the
Iewes
;
or
at
least
,
that
the
partie
offending
is
to
be
delated
to
the
like
assembly
,
authorized
for
hearing
of
causes
,
in
the
Church
of
Christ
.
Wherefore
T.
C.
and
our
new
disciplinarians
,
must
first
proue
these
two
things
,
first
,
that
there
was
an
Ecclesiasticall
Presbyterie
in
euery
Synagogue
,
and
secondly
,
that
what
they
had
in
euery
Synagogue
we
ought
to
haue
in
euery
parish
,
before
they
may
vrge
the
like
,
in
imitation
of
them
,
to
be
erected
in
euery
parish
among
vs
.
But
they
are
so
farre
from
prouing
the
latter
of
these
assertions
,
that
they
faile
in
the
former
.
T.
C.
professeth
,
T.
C.
lib.
2.
part
2
pag.
46.
he
cannot
proue
it
out
of
the
old
testament
;
but
that
it
may
be
concluded
out
of
the
new
,
he
hopeth
the
Reader
will
iudge
;
considering
that
the
policie
of
the
Church
now
,
was
in
this
point
taken
from
the
Iewes
Church
.
As
if
he
should
say
:
forasmuch
as
the
Church
,
which
imitated
the
Iewes
,
had
in
euery
parish
a
Presbyterie
(
which
indeed
is
most
notoriously
false
)
it
is
to
be
supposed
,
that
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
had
in
euery
Synagogue
the
like
.
Where
,
by
a
circular
disputation
,
the
question
which
we
denie
,
is
brought
to
proue
his
argument
,
whereby
notwithstanding
he
would
seeme
to
proue
the
question
.
For
aide
therefore
he
bringeth
the
custome
of
the
moderne
Iewes
,
who
,
if
they
had
any
such
custome
,
were
no
fit
presedents
for
vs
to
follow
.
But
indeed
they
,
though
they
haue
their
Rabbi
in
euery
Snagogue
,
yet
an
Ecclesiasticall
Presbyterie
they
neuer
had
for
ought
that
I
can
find
.
And
whereas
he
,
and
after
him
the
author
of
the
Counterpoison
,
alleage
Ierome
,
that
they
had
their
Elders
in
Euery
Synagogue
,
which
should
aswell
admonish
the
polluted
to
abstaine
from
the
assemblies
,
as
to
reproue
the
Sabbath-breakers
;
I
cannot
sufficiently
wonder
at
the
allegation
:
for
Ierome
mentioneth
that
custome
of
the
Iewes
,
which
he
speaketh
of
,
as
one
of
the
worst
of
the
Pharisaicall
traditions
which
he
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
one
(
saith
he
)
I
will
mention
to
the
shame
of
the
whole
nation
,
and
which
I
will
not
mention
for
modestie
sake
;
&
therfore
we
may
be
sure
,
neither
Christ
transmitted
,
nor
Ierome
commended
it
to
the
Church
.
Secondly
,
the
gouernours
of
their
Synogogues
,
which
Ierome
speaketh
of
,
were
such
as
were
to
iudge
of
cleane
and
vncleane
,
a
dutie
peculiar
to
the
Priests
.
T.
C.
addeth
concerning
the
Sabbath
,
is
by
Ierome
mentioned
as
another
tradition
of
the
Pharisies
hauing
no
affinitie
with
the
former
.
Yea
but
the
new
testament
speaketh
of
them
in
diuerse
places
,
T.
C
ibid.
pag.
47.
Matt.
23.2
.
de
Rep.
Hebr.
l.
2.
cap.
8.
De
polit
Iudaic
.
c.
18.
Sigon
li.
5.
c.
10.
Act.
13.15
.
&
18.8.17
.
calling
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
chiefe
of
the
Synagogues
.
The
archisynagogi
were
such
as
now
they
call
their
Rabbies
as
being
the
Scribes
and
Pharisies
who
were
their
Teachers
sitting
in
the
chaire
of
Moses
,
as
Sigonius
witnesseth
.
Bertram
likewise
saith
,
those
who
at
the
first
were
called
Prophets
and
afterwards
Scribes
and
Doctors
of
the
law
,
at
the
last
in
the
Synagogues
were
called
Archisynagogi
,
(
for
those
who
were
in
the
Temple
were
called
scribae
templi
)
and
of
these
in
the
greater
Synagogues
there
were
more
then
one
.
Beza
also
seemeth
to
haue
beene
of
the
same
minde
.
Howbeit
,
both
he
and
Bertram
(
who
dedicateth
his
booke
vnto
him
)
doe
thinke
,
that
in
the
Synagogue
of
the
cities
,
these
Rulers
had
Elders
ioyned
with
them
.
But
it
may
be
you
expect
their
proofes
.
Heare
therefore
the
very
foundation
of
the
Presbyterie
:
to
wit
,
that
what
was
the
order
of
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
,
Christ
translated
and
recommended
to
his
Church
.
But
in
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
there
were
Elders
ioyned
to
the
Teachers
to
make
vp
an
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
.
How
the
proposition
will
be
made
good
,
I
know
not
:
The
assumption
is
proued
thus
.
There
were
Leuites
in
the
Synagogues
,
saith
Beza
,
Bez.
de
presbyt.
&
excommun
.
102.
in
whose
hands
the
spirituall
administration
was
,
there
being
ioyned
to
them
vt
probabile
est
as
it
is
probable
,
some
Citizens
of
note
.
Hence
is
mention
of
the
Archisynagogi
,
who
ruled
the
assemblies
.
Bertr
.
de
polit.
Iudaic.
c.
18.
Those
saith
Bertram
who
had
beene
called
Prophets
and
after
Scribes
,
as
the
last
in
the
Synagogues
were
called
Archisynagogi
,
vnde
verisimile
est
whence
it
is
likely
that
those
Archisynagogi
,
did
moderate
the
order
of
Seniors
,
who
were
to
enquire
into
mens
manners
:
for
the
Synagogues
also
had
their
Ministers
,
Luc.
4.20
.
So
that
(
belike
)
the
Minister
or
attendant
,
to
whom
Christ
gaue
the
book
,
was
one
of
these
Seniors
,
or
ex
illustrib
.
ciuibus
,
as
Beza
speaketh
.
Well
,
&
what
was
their
office
?
Horum
proculdubio
partes
fuerunt
,
their
office
no
doubt
was
,
not
to
admit
to
the
Synagogue
them
,
whom
the
Synedrion
of
Ierusalem
had
excluded
from
the
Synagogues
.
Bez
:
vbisup
:
And
what
their
office
hath
bene
since
in
the
Church
,
you
heard
it
proued
before
,
by
Satis
opinor
constat
:
I
thinke
it
is
euident
enough
.
So
that
the
very
foundation
,
Eccl:
disc
.
whereon
the
presbyterie
of
Lay-Elders
,
(
which
with
such
vehemencie
and
violence
hath
bene
vrged
as
the
vndoubted
ordinance
of
Christ
)
is
grounded
,
is
no
better
then
the
probable
conjectures
of
some
new
writers
,
who
are
parties
in
the
cause
:
probable
(
I
say
)
in
their
owne
conceipts
:
For
else
there
is
not
so
much
as
probabilitie
in
their
Assertions
.
And
so
much
of
M.
Cartwrights
collection
out
of
Matth:
18.17
.
and
what
else
is
said
of
others
,
in
fauour
of
the
presbyters
in
the
Synagogues
of
the
cities
.
§
Sect.
3.
Calu
:
in
Matth
:
18.17
.
Bez
:
de
presbyt
,
&
excon
:
p.
106.
neque
ambigimus
quin
Chrūs
ad
verāistā
institutionem
ecclesiastici
Synedrij
respexerit
Counterpois
.
4.
Reason
for
Elderships
.
Now
let
vs
see
what
Caluin
,
Beza
,
and
others
,
collect
out
of
that
place
of
Mathew
.
When
Christ
biddeth
them
tell
the
Church
:
Forasmuch
as
there
was
no
Christian
church
established
,
wherevnto
they
might
repaire
,
it
were
absurde
to
vnderstand
Christ
as
propounding
the
iudgement
of
the
Church
,
which
yet
was
not
.
Therefore
dubium
non
est
,
it
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
Christ
spake
of
such
an
assembly
as
was
then
in
vse
alluding
to
the
order
of
the
olde
Church
,
wherein
,
after
their
returne
from
Babylon
,
a
select
Councell
was
established
,
which
they
called
Sinhedrim
,
in
Greek
Synedrion
,
whervnto
the
censure
of
Doctrine
and
manners
was
committed
.
Which
Synedrion
,
besides
some
Priests
and
Leuites
,
consisted
of
the
Elders
of
the
people
.
And
although
the
discipline
was
corrupted
amongst
the
Iewes
in
our
Sauiour
Christs
time
,
and
therefore
it
is
not
likely
that
our
Sauiour
would
send
his
Disciples
to
their
Assemblies
to
haue
their
causes
heard
;
yet
dubium
non
est
,
it
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
forme
of
discipline
which
had
beene
vnder
the
Law
,
was
by
Christ
transmitted
to
vs
:
and
that
the
forme
of
discipline
,
which
was
in
vse
in
the
Church
of
Christ
succeeded
in
the
roome
thereof
.
The
summe
is
.
What
manner
of
presbyters
were
among
the
Iewes
,
the
like
Christ
ordained
in
his
church
:
when
hee
said
,
Tell
the
Church
:
But
among
the
Iews
there
was
an
Ecclesiasticall
presbyterie
,
which
,
besides
the
priests
and
Leuites
,
consisted
of
the
Elders
of
the
people
:
Therefore
such
an
Ecclesiasticall
presbyterie
Christ
ordained
in
his
Church
.
The
proposition
hath
no
other
proofe
but
their
owne
testimonie
,
signified
in
those
asseuerations
,
dubium
non
est
,
neque
ambigimus
:
for
that
which
is
added
by
Beza
&
the
author
of
the
counterpoison
,
that
the
wordes
which
Christ
vsed
,
Let
him
be
to
thee
as
an
Heathen
or
Publican
▪
to
proue
that
he
spake
according
to
their
custome
,
doe
in
no
sort
prooue
,
that
hee
translated
their
forme
of
gouernement
into
his
church
.
For
if
Christ
did
translate
from
the
state
of
the
Iewes
,
any
Consistories
into
his
church
,
then
hee
transmitted
such
,
as
were
either
ordained
of
God
,
or
deuised
by
men
.
If
the
former
,
then
such
as
God
ordained
for
the
gouernment
of
the
people
,
either
in
the
Wildernes
,
or
in
the
Land
of
promise
.
In
the
Wildernes
,
by
the
aduise
of
Iethro
.
and
approbation
of
God
,
Answereable
to
these
,
the
Lorde
appointed
Consistories
or
Senates
,
for
the
gouernement
of
the
people
in
the
Land
of
promise
.
To
the
former
,
Deuteron
:
16.18
.
Iudges
and
Officers
shalt
thou
make
thee
in
all
thy
Cities
,
throughout
all
thy
Tribes
,
and
they
shall
iudge
the
people
with
righteous
iudgement
.
To
the
latter
,
Deut:
17.
If
there
arise
a
matter
too
harde
for
thee
in
Iudgement
betweene
blood
&
blood
,
betweene
plea
&
plea
,
betweene
plague
and
plague
,
in
the
matters
of
controuersies
,
within
thy
Gates
,
then
shalt
thou
arise
,
and
goe
vp
into
the
place
which
the
Lord
thy
God
shall
choose
,
and
thou
shalt
come
vnto
the
Priests
and
Leuites
and
the
iudge
(
that
is
,
Iudges
saith
Caluin
)
that
shall
be
in
those
dayes
,
and
aske
,
and
they
shall
shewe
thee
the
sentence
of
iudgement
.
In
euery
cause
that
shall
come
to
you
of
your
brethren
that
dwell
in
the
cities
,
betweene
blood
and
blood
,
betweene
law
and
precept
,
statutes
and
iudgements
,
you
shall
admonish
them
,
&c.
Besides
these
,
the
Lord
ordained
no
consistories
,
or
senates
.
But
none
of
these
did
Christ
translate
into
his
Church
,
for
none
of
them
was
Ecclesiasticall
.
Neither
did
he
translate
those
which
were
deuised
by
men
;
whether
by
the
Iewes
,
as
their
Synedrion
or
Sanedri●n
,
Ioseph
.
antiq.
lib.
14.
c.
11.
Sigon
.
lib.
6.
c.
7.
which
was
their
chiefe
counsell
of
state
,
which
Caluin
saith
after
their
returne
from
Babylon
they
did
institute
,
or
by
P.
Gainius
the
Proconsul
of
Syria
,
who
ordained
foure
more
Synedria
of
the
like
nature
:
which
some
suppose
to
haue
beene
the
cause
,
why
our
Sauiour
speaketh
in
the
plurall
number
Matt.
10.17
.
Mar.
13.9
.
But
of
the
counsell
renewed
by
Iosaphat
,
and
the
Synedrion
ordained
of
the
Iewes
,
But
how
little
credit
is
to
be
giuen
to
that
proposition
,
may
appeare
by
this
dilemma
:
for
by
Church
,
Christ
doth
signifie
either
the
consistories
and
assemblies
of
the
Iewes
,
or
assemblies
in
the
Church
of
Christ
.
If
the
former
,
then
was
the
direction
,
which
Christ
giueth
,
peculiar
to
those
times
,
and
pertaineth
not
to
the
Church
of
Christ
,
Perpet
.
gouern
.
chap.
4.
as
D.
Bilson
sheweth
in
the
fourth
chapter
of
his
booke
,
whereunto
I
doe
referre
you
.
If
the
latter
,
then
had
he
not
so
much
as
respect
or
reference
to
the
Consistories
of
the
Iewes
,
so
farre
was
he
from
translating
them
into
his
Church
,
Our
Sauiour
Christ
intreating
of
scandales
and
offences
,
first
teacheth
vs
that
we
be
carefull
to
auoid
offences
,
and
that
we
doe
not
in
that
respect
seeme
to
disregard
any
of
his
little
ones
.
2.
Hee
directeth
vs
what
course
wee
are
to
take
when
wee
are
offended
.
If
thy
brother
(
that
is
,
one
professing
the
same
religion
)
shall
sinne
against
thee
(
that
is
,
priuately
,
)
either
by
injurie
,
vniuersall
Counsell
,
according
to
the
nature
of
the
offence
,
and
the
qualitie
&
degree
of
the
offender
.
And
if
he
will
not
heare
the
assembly
,
but
remaining
obstinat
,
draw
vpon
him
their
censure
of
excommunication
,
wherby
they
shall
bind
the
offender
,
&
after
a
sort
deliuer
him
to
Satan
;
then
shalt
thou
hold
him
no
more
as
a
brother
,
or
thinke
thy selfe
bound
to
exercise
the
duties
appertaining
to
the
communion
of
Saints
,
but
withdraw
thy selfe
from
him
,
abandon
him
,
and
haue
no
more
to
doe
with
him
,
then
a
Iew
of
this
time
would
haue
to
doe
with
an
heathen
or
publican
,
that
by
these
meanes
seeing
himselfe
auoided
&
shunned
,
hee
may
at
length
be
ashamed
and
brought
to
repentance
.
And
least
any
man
should
lightly
esteeme
the
iudgement
of
the
Church
,
Verily
I
say
vnto
you
,
saith
our
Sauiour
,
speaking
to
his
Apostles
,
and
in
them
to
all
their
successors
,
to
whom
the
keyes
of
heauen
are
committed
,
Whatsoeuer
you
(
for
you
and
such
as
you
sitting
in
Consistory
or
Synode
,
are
they
whom
I
meant
by
the
Church
or
assembly
)
whatsoeuer
you
shall
binde
on
earth
shall
be
bound
in
heauen
:
and
whatsoeuer
you
shall
loose
on
earth
shall
be
loosed
in
heauen
.
Neither
thinke
,
when
I
mentioned
the
church
,
I
meant
a
great
assembly
only
,
or
the
whole
congregation
;
for
I
say
vnto
you
,
that
where
2.
or
3.
are
gathered
together
in
my
name
,
I
am
there
in
the
middes
of
them
,
&
therfore
,
if
but
2.
of
you
shal
consent
in
asking
any
thing
of
God
(
as
namely
pardon
for
the
penitent
sinner
)
it
shall
be
graunted
vnto
you
.
If
against
this
exposition
it
shal
be
obiected
,
that
the
Churches
hearing
and
censuring
of
offences
would
be
prejudiciall
to
Magistrates
:
I
answere
,
offences
and
offenders
admitte
diuers
distinctions
.
Of
offences
,
some
are
open
&
notorious
,
some
are
secrete
&
priuate
.
Some
againe
are
grieuous
and
capital
crimes
,
which
may
not
be
concealed
or
left
vnpunished
,
other
be
offences
not
so
hainous
or
enormous
,
but
they
may
be
concealed
and
pardoned
,
where
is
hope
of
amendment
:
For
notorious
and
enormous
crimes
our
Sauiour
doth
not
prescribe
this
course
,
but
for
the
priuate
and
lesse
offences
.
Againe
,
offenders
are
either
(
in
the
iudgment
of
charity
)
our
brethren
in
Christ
,
or
the
sonnes
of
Belial
:
For
the
latter
,
we
may
take
the
ciuile
course
of
Iustice
,
for
the
former
we
must
take
a
spirituall
course
of
Christian
charitie
,
that
wee
may
winne
our
brother
vnto
Christ
,
or
recouer
him
beeing
fallen
,
which
course
our
Sauiour
heere
prescribeth
.
By
Church
therefore
or
assemblie
,
our
Sauiour
meaneth
neither
the
supposed
Ecclesiasticall
senate
of
the
Iewes
,
nor
yet
a
Presbyterie
of
Christians
answerable
therto
,
consisting
for
the
most
part
of
Lay-elders
.
Not
the
former
:
for
Christ
speaketh
of
such
,
as
should
meet
in
his
name
,
to
whom
he
promiseth
,
what
they
bind
vpon
earth
,
shal
be
bound
in
heauen
:
neither
are
we
to
think
,
that
our
Sauior
would
send
his
disciples
to
the
corrupt
Consistories
of
the
vnbelieuing
Iewes
,
as
Caluin
also
saith
.
It
was
a
strange
conceit
therefore
of
Beza
,
not
only
to
imagine
,
In
Matt
:
18
17.
&
in
Marc
:
5.22
.
that
the
name
Church
is
here
attributed
to
the
Iews
,
but
that
the
Archisynagogi
assembled
together
were
they
who
are
meant
by
Church
in
this
place
.
Or
if
that
were
true
,
how
should
this
direction
belong
to
vs
,
seeing
not
only
the
imaginarie
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
of
the
Iewes
is
vanished
,
but
also
the
true
Synedrion
is
long
since
abolished
,
and
their
whole
policie
abrogated
.
Not
the
latter
,
for
our
Sauiour
,
by
Church
vnderstandeth
such
as
should
haue
power
to
bind
&
loose
sinnes
,
as
appeareth
by
the
words
following
.
Which
power
of
the
keyes
of
binding
and
loosing
sinners
,
Neither
had
the
Iewes
indeed
such
an
ecclesiasticall
Senate
,
as
they
speake
of
,
The
assumption
confuted
mixed
of
the
Priests
and
Leuites
,
with
the
Elders
of
the
people
:
as
I
am
now
to
shew
in
answering
the
assumption
.
For
if
this
be
true
,
that
the
Iewes
had
no
such
Presbyterie
,
then
what
shew
of
trueth
or
probabilitie
is
in
their
argument
taken
from
Matth:
18.17
▪
Caluin
saith
,
that
the
Iewes
after
their
returne
from
captiuitie
,
in
Math
:
18.17
.
had
a
chosen
counsell
,
to
which
was
committed
the
censure
of
doctrine
&
manners
,
which
they
called
Sinhedrin
,
or
Sanedrin
,
in
Greek
Synedrion
.
T.C.
holdeth
,
that
the
Synedrion
was
not
then
first
instituted
,
For
it
would
follow
(
saith
he
)
that
the
Priests
,
&
other
Leuiticall
teachers
who
were
a
part
of
that
Bench
,
had
then
their
first
institution
:
when
it
is
plaine
,
that
the
Priests
and
Leuiticall
teachers
were
instituted
before
the
Synedrion
,
De
presbyt:
&
excomm
:
pag
103.
Lib:
2.
part
:
2.
pag:
40.
and
so
might
haue
continued
their
function
,
though
the
Sanedrin
had
neuer
bin
.
Beza
fetcheth
the
first
institution
of
it
from
Moses
,
&
the
instauration
therof
,
when
it
was
decayed
from
Iosaphat
.
T.
C.
doubteth
not
to
fetch
the
Eldership
from
Exod:
4.
With
his
Elders
therefore
,
as
being
the
eldest
in
conceit
,
I
will
beginne
.
This
order
of
Eldership
(
saith
hee
,
)
was
taken
from
the
gouernement
of
the
people
of
God
,
before
,
and
vnder
the
Law
.
Before
the
Law
,
the
Elders
which
Moses
assembled
,
Exod:
4.
were
Ecclesiasticall
officers
:
for
it
is
not
likely
,
that
vnder
such
a
Tyrant
,
they
should
haue
Magistrates
of
their
owne
.
I
answere
briefly
:
the
state
of
the
Hebrews
,
if
you
respect
the
whole
people
,
was
neither
a
settled
Church
,
nor
established
common-wealth
.
But
if
you
respect
the
seuerall
kinreds
and
Families
,
they
were
ruled
by
the
Elders
of
the
people
,
which
were
the
heads
of
the
Families
;
See
Beza
,
de
Presbyt:
&
excomm
:
pag:
101.
who
,
as
alwayes
from
the
beginning
,
so
at
that
time
,
&
vntill
the
separation
of
the
Tribe
of
Leui
,
to
the
priestly
function
,
were
both
priests
and
magistrates
,
to
their
seuerall
kinreds
and
Families
.
Wherefore
let
them
,
who
will
needes
haue
these
to
be
Lay-Elders
,
tell
vs
,
who
were
then
the
priests
,
whome
these
Elders
did
assist
.
Vnder
the
Law
,
he
findeth
these
Elders
in
Elisha
his
house
,
2.
King
:
6.
and
in
Ezekiels
house
,
Ezek:
because
it
is
vnlike
that
in
so
corrupt
a
state
the
Prophets
could
haue
the
ciuill
Gouernors
to
consult
with
:
&
is
it
not
more
vnlike
,
that
there
should
be
approued
Elders
of
an
ecclesiasticall
Senate
,
either
in
the
Apostoticall
Church
of
Israell
,
vnder
Achab
and
Iehoram
,
or
in
Mesopotamia
,
whether
Ezekiell
,
and
those
Elders
of
Iuda
were
transported
,
who
could
neuer
be
found
vnder
the
most
godly
Kings
at
Ierusalem
?
Againe
,
hee
findeth
them
standing
on
the
right
hand
of
Ezra
,
and
on
the
left
,
Nehem:
Being
distinguished
both
from
the
teaching
Leuites
,
and
from
the
people
:
From
the
people
,
because
they
stood
by
Ezra
.
From
the
teaching
Leuites
,
because
he
speaketh
of
them
after
.
Therefore
they
must
needs
bee
Lay-Elders
:
as
though
,
either
some
of
the
Princes
of
the
people
might
not
stand
with
Ezra
,
or
that
these
might
not
haue
beene
priests
,
or
that
all
the
Leuites
were
teachers
,
or
that
there
were
no
more
teaching
Priests
or
Leuites
but
those
,
which
are
mentioned
then
,
and
there
to
haue
taught
the
people
.
Hee
that
considereth
what
T.
C.
was
able
to
say
in
a
good
cause
,
must
needs
thinke
this
cause
to
be
very
badde
,
which
he
was
not
able
to
make
good
by
better
arguments
,
then
those
most
vnlikely
likely-hoods
.
Sigon
:
li.
6.
c.
7
,
ex
Talmud
:
Lib.
6
,
c
,
4
,
ex
Ier
:
19
,
1
,
together
with
the
Princes
&
Seniors
of
the
people
,
being
besides
the
High-priest
70.
or
71.
in
number
:
Of
which
,
that
in
Deut:
17.8.9
.
is
to
bee
vnderstood
.
These
were
called
Sanedrin
,
and
did
sit
in
Gazith
:
In
which
number
,
those
which
were
priests
,
were
called
Seniores
Sacerdotum
,
and
those
which
were
Princes
,
were
called
Seniores
populi
,
as
Sigondus
saith
.
And
likewise
that
the
Sanedrioth
or
consistories
in
other
cities
,
consisted
as
well
of
the
learned
Leuits
as
of
the
seniors
of
the
people
.
Iosephus
saith
,
that
to
euery
consistory
in
the
cities
belonged
2.
Leuites
.
The
reason
heereof
was
,
De
presbyt:
&
excom:
pag:
104
-
Leuit:
10
,
10
&
which
should
respondere
de
iure
(
as
Beza
imagineth
this
shuld
)
was
altogether
needles
.
But
his
proofs
are
as
weake
,
as
his
imagination
was
strong
.
His
only
proofe
for
the
1.
institution
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
senat
,
is
Leuit:
10.10
.
where
they
were
ordained
saith
he
,
to
shew
the
difference
betweene
holy
&
profane
,
betweene
cleane
&
vncleane
,
&
to
teach
the
law
of
God
.
But
no
such
thing
can
,
with
any
shew
of
probabilitie
be
gathered
out
of
the
text
,
where
the
Lord
speaking
to
Aaron
,
commandeth
him
,
&
his
sonnes
the
priests
,
by
a
perpetual
law
,
that
they
should
not
drink
wine
nor
strong
drink
,
when
they
were
to
enter
into
the
sanctuary
,
whereby
they
might
be
hindered
from
exercising
their
function
discreetly
&
soberlie
,
either
in
iudging
betweene
holie
&
profane
,
between
cleane
and
vncleane
,
or
in
teaching
the
people
;
which
duties
were
to
be
performed
in
the
sanctuary
,
by
the
priests
,
as
well
seuerally
as
ioyntly
,
&
no
ecclesiasticall
senate
at
all
here
instituted
:
or
if
there
were
,
Synedrion
Hierosolymita●um
,
consisting
of
the
Leuites
and
Priests
,
and
of
the
heads
of
the
chiefe
families
in
Israel
,
ordained
for
the
iudgements
of
God
and
controuersies
of
men
,
which
was
to
heare
and
determine
all
manner
of
causes
that
were
brought
vnto
them
from
the
iudgements
or
consistories
of
the
inferior
cities
,
&
were
to
iudge
betweene
blood
and
blood
,
that
is
slaughter
and
slaughter
,
betweene
the
law
and
the
precept
,
betweene
statutes
and
iudgements
,
hauing
among
them
in
the
causes
of
God
,
Amarias
the
high
Priest
;
and
in
the
causes
of
the
King
,
Zebadiah
a
Prince
of
Iuda
,
as
chiefe
,
and
that
the
Maisters
or
gouernours
the
Leuits
were
with
them
to
instruct
them
in
the
law
.
Shoterim
.
See
1.
Chron
234.
For
whereas
he
would
proue
,
that
Iosaphat
ordained
two
distinct
counsels
at
Ierusalem
,
by
these
reasons
,
because
the
dutie
of
the
one
was
to
deale
in
the
causes
of
God
,
the
other
of
the
King
:
the
one
should
determine
de
iure
,
the
other
de
facto
:
the
one
,
had
for
the
president
the
high
Priest
,
the
other
a
Prince
of
Iuda
:
none
of
these
reasons
doe
proue
,
that
Iosaphat
ordained
any
thing
but
that
,
which
before
had
beene
appointed
by
God
;
In
Pentateuch
.
in
deut.
17
9.
Also
see
Deu.
19
17.
Leuites
and
●udge
,
that
is
iudges
,
saith
Caluin
,
as
appeareth
by
the
holy
historie
,
where
it
is
declared
that
Iosaphat
besides
the
P●i●sts
and
Leuites
chose
the
Princes
of
the
families
of
Israel
:
for
the
godly
King
would
decline
n●uer
a
whit
from
the
rule
of
Gods
law
.
To
this
counsell
the
difficult
causes
afore
said
as
we●l
ciuill
as
Ecclesiasticall
,
as
well
de
facto
,
Sigon
de
rep.
Hebr.
lib.
6.
c.
7.
as
de
iure
,
were
to
be
brought
from
other
ciuill
courts
,
as
appeareth
both
in
Deut.
17.8
.
and
also
2
Chron.
19.20
.
Besides
,
it
is
ridiculous
to
imagine
,
that
the
ciuill
senate
should
determine
onely
de
facto
,
and
that
questions
de
iure
should
be
brought
to
the
Ecclesiasticall
;
the
rather
because
that
counsell
,
which
was
appointed
by
God
,
Deut.
17.
and
renewed
by
Iosaphat
did
consist
of
the
Priests
and
Leuits
and
Elders
of
the
people
,
and
was
to
determine
and
to
decide
all
questions
of
doubt
and
difficultie
:
or
if
they
were
to
seeke
to
an
Ecclesiasticall
senate
,
it
is
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
Lay-Elders
should
be
ioyned
to
the
Priests
and
Leuits
to
answere
de
iure
.
As
for
the
causes
of
God
,
which
verse
8
are
termed
the
iudgement
and
cause
of
the
Lord
and
are
particularized
,
verse
.
10.
and
Deut.
17.8
.
(
betweene
blood
and
blood
betweene
law
and
precept
,
&c.
)
we
are
to
vnderstand
them
to
be
not
onely
Ecclesiasticall
but
also
ciuill
,
so
farre
as
either
they
were
to
be
decided
b●
the
lawes
of
God
,
or
concerned
the
obseruation
or
transgression
of
Gods
law
,
whereby
that
land
was
gou●rned
,
in
iudging
,
whereof
,
they
also
exercised
Gods
iudgement
.
The
causes
of
the
King
were
such
as
belonged
to
the
Kings
house
,
or
his
eschequer
.
And
it
is
fond
to
imagine
,
that
those
causes
which
were
to
be
decided
by
the
iudicial
and
mor●ll
lawes
of
God
,
were
not
the
causes
of
God
,
as
well
as
those
which
concerned
the
ceremoniall
law
.
Neither
do
I
therefore
reiect
the
exposition
of
Beza
and
some
others
,
who
by
the
causes
of
God
,
vnderstand
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
and
by
the
causes
of
the
king
,
ciuill
causes
,
because
it
is
preiudiciall
to
my
defence
;
but
because
it
is
repugnant
to
the
truth
:
for
though
their
interpretation
were
admitted
,
it
would
no
more
proue
,
that
there
were
two
distinct
Syn●dria
,
Antiq.
lib.
9.
c.
1.
then
that
which
I
doe
embrace
.
For
though
Zebadiah
the
prince
of
Iuda
was
the
chiefe
in
the
causes
of
the
King
,
as
Amariah
the
high
priest
was
the
chiefe
in
the
causes
of
God
,
yet
were
they
Colleagues
and
coassessors
in
the
same
counsell
,
that
he
being
returned
to
Ierusalem
appointed
iudges
there
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
of
the
Priests
and
Leuits
,
and
of
the
chiefe
or
principall
men
of
the
people
:
Synedrion
fuisse
.
71.
cui
precrat
Sacerdos
Summus
.
The
high
Priest
had
autho●itie
to
call
or
assemble
the
counsell
,
till
the
time
of
Antipater
Herods
Father
,
but
after
wards
not
without
the
Lieuetenants
leaue
.
Sigon
.
li.
6.
c.
7.
Iosep.
l.
20.
Cal.
in
Mat.
18.
requiring
them
to
exercise
iust
iudgement
,
but
especially
that
they
should
be
diligent
in
determining
those
difficult
causes
that
should
be
brought
to
them
from
inferiour
iudgement
seats
:
but
the
chiefe
or
presidents
of
them
,
as
colleagues
and
coassessors
be
appointed
Amasiah
the
Priest
,
and
Zabadiah
of
the
tribe
of
Iuda
:
and
relating
the
law
,
Deu.
17.8
.
[
(a)
](A20733-e47700-b)
(a)
Li.
4.
c.
8.
he
saith
,
if
the
iudges
(
in
the
cities
)
be
not
able
to
determine
any
cause
,
it
is
entirely
to
be
sent
to
the
holy
citie
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
(b)
](A20733-e47760-b)
(b)
Li.
6.
c.
7.
and
let
the
high
Priest
and
the
Prophet
(
that
is
the
scribe
or
Doctor
of
the
law
saith
[
(c)
](A20733-e47800-b)
(c)
Luk.
22.66
.
Sigonius
)
and
the
senate
assembling
together
,
pronounce
what
seemeth
right
.
Besides
,
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
counsell
at
Ierusalem
,
after
the
captiuitie
,
which
consisted
of
priests
and
Leuits
,
besides
the
Seniors
of
the
people
,
and
whereof
the
high
priest
was
president
as
Bertram
confesseth
,
hauing
authoritie
to
assemble
it
,
&c.
Act.
5.21
.
Matt.
26.57.59
.
was
the
high
councell
of
state
called
the
Sanedrin
or
Synedrion
,
or
consistorium
Gazith
which
dealt
in
causes
not
onely
Ecclesiasticall
,
but
also
ciuil
,
and
in
causes
criminall
and
capitall
.
Neither
happened
this
by
the
ambition
of
the
priests
,
but
by
the
ordinance
of
God
in
respect
of
the
first
institution
,
Deut.
17.
and
instauration
by
Iosaphat
.
2.
Chron.
19.
and
by
his
approbation
,
as
Caluin
witnesseth
,
in
respect
of
the
erection
of
it
after
the
captiuity
.
For
as
the
Lord
promised
by
Esay
to
restore
their
iudges
and
counsellers
after
the
captiuitie
,
Contr.
Appion
.
lib.
2.
ouerseers
of
all
,
iudges
of
controuersies
,
and
punishers
of
such
as
are
by
the
law
condemned
.
And
so
much
for
the
present
shall
suffice
concerning
the
counsell
at
Ierusalem
,
vntill
I
come
to
answere
Caluins
opinion
.
De
presb
.
&
excom.
pag.
102.
In
Marc.
5.22
.
de
presbyt.
112.
Pag.
103.
As
touching
Ecclesiasticall
Presbyters
in
other
cities
,
Beza
hath
nothing
but
his
owne
coniectures
:
For
the
courts
of
iudgement
,
which
both
Moses
instituted
,
and
Iosaphat
renewed
,
though
they
had
Leuites
among
them
,
were
to
deale
not
onely
in
Ecclesiasticall
,
but
also
in
ciuill
and
criminall
causes
.
The
reasons
which
he
bringeth
for
distinct
Ecclesiasticall
senates
are
three
.
First
,
because
the
Archisynagogi
had
,
as
it
is
probable
,
Seniors
of
the
people
ioyned
with
them
.
Secondly
,
because
the
name
of
Church
in
this
place
of
Mathew
is
giuen
to
them
,
which
could
not
be
,
vnlesse
they
did
consist
of
the
laitie
,
as
wel
as
the
clergie
.
Thirdly
,
because
as
the
ciuill
consistories
assembled
in
the
gates
,
so
the
Ecclesiasticall
,
in
the
Synagogues
.
To
the
first
I
answere
,
that
a
probabilitie
(
if
this
were
such
,
as
indeed
it
is
not
)
is
no
proofe
:
to
the
2.
that
the
name
Ecclesia
is
not
giuen
to
the
Archisynagogi
,
but
to
the
Rulers
of
Christs
Church
assembling
in
his
name
,
with
whom
he
promised
his
presence
,
and
to
whom
he
committed
the
power
of
the
keyes
,
to
whom
also
the
name
Ecclesia
,
which
may
be
giuen
to
any
company
of
Christians
,
be
it
but
of
two
or
three
meeting
in
the
name
of
Christ
,
doth
fitly
agree
.
Thirdly
,
he
telleth
vs
of
Ecclesiasticall
consistories
ordained
by
Moses
,
and
renewed
by
Iosaphat
,
sitting
in
Synagogues
;
when
there
is
not
once
mention
in
the
old
testament
,
either
of
Ecclesiasticall
consistories
,
or
yet
of
Synagogues
.
And
in
the
new
,
such
iudges
are
mentioned
in
Synagogues
,
in
the
Synagogues
of
the
cities
,
iudgements
were
exercised
by
ordinarie
iudges
;
the
greater
and
weightier
causes
,
as
also
the
appeales
of
the
lesse
being
referred
to
the
counsell
●t
Ierusalem
.
And
againe
,
that
the
people
came
to
the
Synagogues
to
prayer
,
to
heare
the
law
and
the
Prophets
,
and
to
heare
the
iudgement
of
Moses
law
,
as
well
ciuill
as
Ecclesiasticall
And
so
much
of
Beza
.
Calui●
by
Ecclesia
vnderstandeth
the
Synedrion
or
Sanedrin
of
the
Iewes
instituted
by
them
after
their
returne
from
Babylon
:
In
Mat
18.17
.
In
Num.
11.16
.
which
he
conceiueth
to
haue
beene
an
Ecclesiasticall
senate
,
to
which
belonged
the
censure
of
doctrine
&
maners
,
hauing
the
power
o●
excommunication
&c.
What
this
Synedrion
was
,
Caluin
himselfe
shall
tell
vs
,
It
is
certaine
saith
he
that
the
Iewes
,
when
they
were
returned
from
the
Babylonian
banishment
,
because
they
might
not
make
a
King
,
did
imitate
this
example
(
of
appointing
70.
Elders
.
Num.
11
)
in
ordaining
the
Synedrion
.
Onely
so
much
honour
was
granted
to
the
memorie
of
Dauid
and
the
Kings
,
that
out
of
their
stocke
they
would
choose
70.
gouernours
,
in
whom
should
be
the
chiefe
power
:
And
this
course
continued
vntill
Herod
,
&c.
The
Sanedrin
indeed
was
the
high
counsell
of
state
,
which
was
to
iudge
of
causes
,
not
only
Ecclesiasticall
,
but
also
ciuill
and
criminal
,
yea
capitall
,
hauing
the
authoritie
of
the
sword
and
power
of
life
and
death
.
Whereby
they
adiudged
malefactors
conuicted
of
capital
crimes
to
one
of
these
foure
kinds
of
death
,
stoning
,
Sigon
.
lib.
6.
c.
7.
ex
Talmud
.
&
Petr.
Galatin
.
burning
,
killing
with
the
sword
and
strangling
;
hauing
also
authoritie
to
ordaine
Sanedrioth
,
that
is
,
the
consistories
of
iudges
in
other
cities
;
to
whom
alone
it
appertained
to
iudge
the
cause
of
a
tribe
,
of
a
false
Prophet
,
of
the
high
Priest
,
&c.
And
howsoeuer
their
power
was
much
restrained
after
Iewrie
became
a
prouince
subiect
to
the
Romanes
;
notwithstanding
the
Romanes
hauing
granted
the
Iewes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
libertie
to
liue
according
to
their
owne
lawes
,
permitted
them
to
exercise
authoritie
both
in
iudging
not
onely
Ecclesiasticall
but
also
ciuill
and
criminall
causes
,
as
an
heathen
or
Publican
,
but
he
was
to
die
the
death
.
Finally
there
was
but
one
Synedrion
for
the
whole
estate
of
the
Iewes
by
the
appointment
of
God
,
and
that
in
the
place
which
he
should
choose
,
either
ordained
by
Moses
,
or
restored
by
Iosaphat
,
or
renewed
by
the
Iewes
after
their
captiuitie
.
Wherefore
our
disciplinarians
might
as
well
desire
to
haue
a
parliament
or
high
counsell
of
state
in
euery
parish
,
as
such
a
consistorie
as
this
was
.
To
conclude
this
place
:
Though
it
were
true
,
that
the
Iewes
had
an
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
consisting
of
Priests
and
Elders
of
the
people
:
yet
it
cannot
be
proued
,
that
in
this
place
of
Mathew
Christ
alluded
to
it
,
and
much
lesse
that
he
ordained
the
like
in
his
Church
.
But
now
I
haue
shewed
,
that
the
Iewes
had
no
such
Ecclesiasticall
senate
:
and
therefore
out
of
this
place
nothing
can
with
any
shew
of
probabilitie
be
concluded
for
Lay-Elders
.
The
second
testimonie
T.
C.
vrgeth
thus
:
T.
C.
lib.
1.174
.
Diuerse
Ministers
were
not
ordained
in
euery
congregation
:
Diuerse
Elders
were
ordained
in
euery
congregation
:
therefore
there
were
Elders
which
were
not
Ministers
.
The
proposition
he
proueth
,
because
it
was
not
like
that
they
had
diuerse
Ministers
for
such
a
number
of
congregations
as
were
then
to
be
preached
vnto
.
I
distinguish
of
the
word
congregation
,
which
T.
C.
vseth
ambiguously
:
for
in
the
assumption
it
signifieth
the
Church
of
a
whole
citie
:
in
which
sense
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
all
one
:
T.
C.
seemeth
to
acknowledge
to
haue
beene
diuerse
in
euery
citie
or
Church
,
contrarie
to
our
refuter
,
as
we
shall
heare
in
the
second
booke
.
And
in
this
sense
it
may
be
true
,
that
not
euery
congregation
had
diuerse
Presbyters
:
as
with
vs
euery
citie
or
Church
hath
diuerse
Presbyters
,
yet
euery
congregation
hath
not
.
De
relig.
pag.
1
68.
In
Act.
14.23
.
In
Act.
14.23
.
Zanchius
,
though
a
fauourer
of
the
Presbyterie
,
reckoneth
this
place
among
those
,
wherin
Ministers
of
the
word
are
called
Presbyters
.
Aretius
,
though
he
acknowledgeth
the
distinction
of
Presbyters
into
two
sorts
,
yet
he
confesseth
this
place
is
,
as
you
heard
before
,
to
be
vnderstood
of
Ministers
.
Caluin
himselfe
the
principall
Patrone
of
the
Eldership
,
vnderstandeth
by
Presbyters
in
this
place
Ministers
,
and
Preachers
.
Prebyteros
his
vocari
int●rpretor
,
quibus
iniunctum
erat
docendi
munus
:
Presbyters
here
I
interprete
those
to
be
called
,
to
whom
the
office
of
teaching
was
enioyned
.
Yea
but
saith
T.
C.
though
Caluin
say
Ministers
;
here
be
called
Presbyters
,
yet
he
doth
not
say
that
they
onely
:
yea
he
must
be
vnderstood
(
as
implying
Lay-Elders
vnder
Presbyters
)
seeing
he
auoucheth
the
place
of
Titus
,
which
to
vs
seemeth
all
one
with
Act.
14
,
)
for
the
establishment
of
these
Elders
,
and
quoteth
instit.
lib.
4.
c.
3.
s.
8.
where
he
writeth
thus
.
Whereas
I
called
those
who
gouerne
the
Churches
indifferently
,
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
Pastors
,
Ministers
,
I
did
according
to
the
vse
of
the
scripture
,
which
confoundeth
these
words
:
for
whosoeuer
exercise
the
ministerie
of
the
word
,
it
giueth
the
title
of
Bishops
to
them
.
So
where
Paul
commandeth
Titus
to
ordaine
Presbyters
in
euery
citie
,
he
straightwaies
addeth
,
for
a
Bishop
must
be
vnreproueable
,
Tit.
1.5.7
.
so
Phil.
1.1
.
&
Act.
20.17.28
.
here
now
it
is
to
be
obserued
,
that
hitherto
we
haue
reckoned
those
officers
onely
,
which
consist
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
.
You
see
then
,
how
Caluin
in
his
institutions
,
vrged
this
place
in
the
Epistle
to
Titus
for
Lay-Elders
.
Wil
you
also
heare
his
iudgment
in
his
commentarie
vpon
the
place
?
Caluin
.
in
Tit.
1.5
.
although
we
gather
saith
he
out
of
the
1.
Tim:
5
:
that
there
were
two
sorts
of
Presbyters
,
yet
the
context
here
will
straightwaies
shew
,
that
no
other
then
Doctors
are
here
vnderstood
,
that
is
who
were
ordained
to
teach
;
becàuse
by
and
by
he
will
call
them
Bishops
.
But
for
all
this
T.C.
seeth
not
,
why
it
may
not
be
referred
to
Elders
,
meaning
Lay-Elders
,
as
well
as
too
BB
:
meaning
Ministers
.
But
say
I
,
you
must
see
that
Lay-Elders
not
onely
may
,
but
must
necessarily
be
vnderstood
in
this
place
,
or
else
it
is
absurdly
alleaged
by
you
to
proue
them
.
Yes
,
he
and
the
Author
of
the
counter
poison
will
proue
,
that
they
are
meant
here
:
for
the
word
Elders
is
set
downe
generally
signifying
as
well
Lay-Elders
as
Ministers
,
therefore
Paul
and
Barnabas
ordained
Lay-Elders
as
well
as
Ministers
.
To
the
consequence
I
first
answere
,
that
if
Elders
were
a
generall
name
comprising
more
sorts
then
one
,
and
if
Luke
had
said
,
that
they
ordained
all
sorts
of
Elders
,
this
consequence
would
haue
held
:
for
from
the
Genus
vniuersally
taken
,
we
may
affirmatiuely
conclude
the
speciall
sorts
.
But
Luke
not
speaking
so
,
it
is
sufficient
for
the
truth
of
the
historie
,
if
they
ordained
any
sort
of
Elders
.
Now
it
is
confessed
of
all
,
that
they
ordained
Ministers
,
therefore
though
Elders
were
the
Genus
,
yet
this
were
a
very
weake
argument
.
Yea
but
saith
T.C.
S.
Luke
there
setteth
forth
,
how
they
set
a
full
order
in
the
Church
:
Counterpois
.
arg.
6.
for
Elders
.
and
his
purpose
was
saith
another
to
declare
how
the
Apostles
brought
the
Churches
to
a
perfect
and
full
order
of
Church
gouernement
,
Whereunto
I
answere
first
,
that
the
Church
might
haue
a
perfect
and
full
order
of
gouernement
without
them
,
And
secondly
that
Lukes
meaning
was
not
to
signifie
that
they
brought
those
Churches
to
a
full
and
perfect
order
of
gouernement
at
their
first
conuersion
,
which
was
not
to
be
expected
;
but
that
now
they
began
to
establish
Churches
,
placing
among
them
Presbyters
or
Ministers
,
as
being
necessarie
for
the
very
being
of
visible
Churches
,
without
mention
(
I
say
not
of
Bishops
,
who
notwithstanding
were
added
before
they
were
brought
to
the
full
and
perfect
order
of
gouernement
,
but
euen
)
of
Deacons
.
The
consequence
therefore
were
naught
,
though
the
antecedent
were
true
,
that
is
,
though
Presbyter
were
the
Genus
,
or
generall
word
,
signifying
as
well
Lay-Elders
as
Ministers
;
for
it
were
onely
an
argument
from
the
Genus
to
the
Species
affirmatiuely
.
But
the
antecedent
I
haue
before
proued
to
be
most
false
:
there
being
not
any
testimonie
to
be
produced
out
of
scriptures
,
Counsels
,
Fathers
,
or
histories
of
the
Church
where
Presbyter
signifieth
an
Ecclesiasticall
function
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
doth
signifie
any
other
but
a
Minister
of
the
word
.
And
therefore
it
is
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
Luke
Act.
14.
doth
by
Presbyters
meane
any
other
then
Ministers
.
Counterpois
.
argum.
5.
for
Lay-Elder
.
1.
Tim.
4.
1.
Thess.
5.14
.
The
third
testimonie
,
I
find
not
vrged
any
where
,
but
in
the
counterpoison
.
Where
it
is
said
,
that
Iames
willing
them
,
when
they
be
weake
,
to
send
for
the
Elders
of
the
Church
,
thereby
plainely
declareth
,
that
the
Church
ought
not
onely
to
haue
a
pastor
and
a
doctor
,
whose
chiefe
attendance
must
be
on
reading
exhortation
and
doctrine
;
but
also
many
,
who
ought
alwaies
to
be
readie
at
an
instant
calling
of
diuerse
and
many
at
once
,
that
none
in
that
necessarie
worke
be
neglected
.
It
followeth
thereby
that
besides
them
,
there
ought
to
be
such
other
Elders
as
may
admonish
the
vnruly
,
comfort
the
weake
minded
,
and
be
patient
towards
all
.
If
all
this
were
granted
as
it
is
propounded
,
it
would
not
follow
thereupon
,
that
therefore
there
should
be
any
Lay-Elders
,
but
many
Ministers
in
euery
Church
:
for
such
were
those
in
the
place
cited
,
But
his
meaning
(
no
doubt
)
was
this
:
There
ought
to
be
many
Elders
in
euery
Church
,
therefore
some
Lay-Elders
.
The
consequence
he
taketh
for
granted
:
the
antecedent
he
proueth
thus
.
There
were
many
Elders
in
euery
Church
in
S.
Iames
time
,
therefore
there
ought
to
be
many
now
.
For
answere
to
his
antecedent
and
proofe
thereof
,
we
are
to
distinguish
of
the
word
Church
.
For
if
thereby
he
meane
the
Church
of
a
whole
citie
and
countrey
adioyning
,
there
were
,
and
are
many
Presbyters
in
euery
Church
:
but
if
thereby
he
meane
euery
seuerall
congregation
,
meeting
,
or
assembly
of
Christians
:
there
neither
are
,
nor
were
many
Presbyters
appointed
to
euery
such
Church
.
In
S.
Iames
time
,
though
in
each
Church
there
were
diuerse
assemblies
of
Christians
meeting
as
they
could
;
yet
were
not
parishes
distinguished
,
nor
Presbyters
seuerally
and
certainely
allotted
to
them
;
but
to
the
Church
of
a
whole
citie
and
countrey
adioyning
,
there
was
one
Bishop
,
and
many
Presbyters
prouided
.
But
when
parishes
were
distinguished
,
to
each
of
them
seuerally
a
Presbyter
was
assigned
out
of
the
Clergy
or
Presbyterie
of
the
citie
;
the
residue
of
the
Presbyters
remaining
with
the
Bishop
,
who
(
as
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
)
retained
still
the
charge
of
the
whole
Diocesse
,
as
I
will
God
willing
shew
in
the
next
booke
.
Wherefore
,
though
in
S.
Iames
time
,
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
there
were
in
euery
Church
(
that
is
Diocesse
)
many
Presbyters
;
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
therefore
in
euery
parish
there
should
be
diuerse
Presbyters
.
But
his
consequence
is
especially
to
be
insisted
vpon
:
for
though
there
were
in
each
Church
many
Presbyters
,
as
at
Ephesus
Act.
20.
and
at
Ierusalem
where
Iames
himselfe
was
Bishop
Act.
15.
&
.
21.
of
which
number
Iames
would
haue
the
weake
to
send
for
some
;
yet
in
that
number
there
was
not
one
,
who
was
not
a
Minister
.
Neither
can
any
sound
reason
be
alleaged
,
why
we
should
conceiue
these
Presbyters
,
of
whom
Iames
speaketh
,
to
haue
beene
any
other
then
Ministers
.
First
the
title
which
is
giuen
them
,
viz:
Presbyters
of
the
Church
as
Act.
20.17
.
is
peculiar
to
Ministers
,
not
one
instance
to
be
giuen
to
the
contrarie
.
Secondly
,
the
function
,
for
the
performance
wherof
they
were
to
visit
the
sicke
,
chiefely
,
if
not
onely
pertaining
to
Ministers
,
and
that
was
not
onely
to
pray
ouer
the
partie
,
and
that
(
as
it
seemeth
by
the
phrase
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
with
imposition
of
hands
,
Bez.
in
Iam.
5.
but
also
to
annoint
him
with
the
oile
in
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
that
by
the
oile
,
as
an
outward
,
though
temporarie
Sacrament
,
annexed
to
the
temporarie
gift
of
healing
,
granted
for
a
time
not
onely
to
the
Apostles
,
Wherefore
I
make
no
question
,
but
the
speach
of
Saint
Iames
is
to
be
vnderstoode
,
according
to
the
perpetuall
vse
of
the
word
,
the
generall
interpretation
of
all
writers
both
old
and
new
,
Zanch.
de
relig
pag.
168.
(
excepting
not
all
that
be
parties
in
the
cause
,
)
and
the
generall
and
continuall
practise
of
the
Church
,
expounding
him
,
as
if
he
had
said
,
let
him
call
for
the
Ministers
,
&c.
Counterpoison
.
arg.
2.
for
Elders
.
The
fourth
testimonie
is
thus
vrged
.
If
the
Apostle
setting
downe
the
ordinary
members
of
Christ
his
Church
,
which
differ
in
their
proper
action
,
doe
set
downe
the
Elder
to
be
ouer
the
people
with
diligence
,
and
not
to
be
occupied
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
either
by
exhortation
or
doctrine
,
but
to
admonish
them
and
rule
them
;
then
the
onely-gouerning
Elders
were
ordained
by
the
Apostles
:
but
the
first
say
they
is
manifest
,
Rom.
12.6.7.8
.
therefore
the
second
.
But
the
first
,
say
I
,
is
so
farre
from
being
manifest
,
that
it
cannot
so
much
as
obscurely
be
gathered
out
of
the
text
.
It
is
true
,
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
the
members
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
of
the
diuerse
gifts
bestowed
vpon
them
,
which
the
Apostle
exhorteth
euery
one
knowing
his
proportion
,
or
measure
,
in
all
humilitie
and
modestie
to
imploy
to
the
common
good
of
the
whole
body
.
But
you
must
vnderstand
,
First
,
that
the
members
of
Christ
are
not
onely
officers
in
the
state
Ecclesiasticall
,
but
all
Christians
whatsoeuer
,
as
well
in
the
body
politicke
,
as
Ecclesiasticke
,
whether
publicke
or
priuate
.
Secondly
,
that
the
Apostle
doth
not
speake
of
distinct
offices
which
are
not
coincident
to
the
same
persons
,
but
of
the
diuerse
gifts
,
and
graces
of
Gods
spirit
:
But
if
the
Apostle
had
here
propounded
distinct
offices
,
then
might
7.
be
distinguished
,
and
those
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
in-compatible
in
the
same
person
.
But
neither
are
there
according
to
these
branches
.
7.
distinct
offices
;
And
besides
,
they
are
,
or
may
be
all
,
or
diuers
of
them
,
coincident
to
the
same
person
.
As
for
Lay-Elders
,
they
are
neither
particular
,
lie
expressed
,
nor
in
the
generall
implyed
.
The
speech
is
generall
,
hee
that
gouerneth
,
in
diligence
,
appartaining
to
all
,
that
haue
authoritie
,
not
onely
in
the
church
,
but
also
in
the
family
or
common-wealth
.
Indeed
,
if
it
were
presupposed
,
(
which
will
neuer
be
proued
by
them
,
nor
graunted
by
vs
)
that
among
gouernours
,
Lay-Elders
had
a
place
in
the
primitiue
church
;
then
this
generall
might
particularly
be
applyed
to
them
,
after
this
manner
;
all
gouernours
ought
to
be
diligent
,
therfore
they
.
But
seeing
there
were
none
such
,
for
men
to
argue
from
the
generall
,
to
a
fained
speciall
,
and
that
affirmatiuè
,
in
this
manner
;
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
gouernours
,
therefore
of
Lay-Elders
:
It
is
an
argument
like
all
the
rest
,
not
worth
the
answering
.
Yea
,
but
the
disputer
alleageth
Caluin
,
who
in
his
institutions
affirmeth
that
this
place
cannot
bee
otherwise
vnderstood
.
Yea
Caluin
himselfe
confesseth
else-where
,
that
howsoeuer
this
place
doe
seeme
especially
to
be
vnderstood
of
Ecclesiasticall
Gouernours
or
Seniors
;
Inst.
li.
4.
c.
●●
§
Sect.
4.
tamen
dubium
non
est
,
quin
omne
iustae
prefecturae
genus
nobis
commendet
;
Yet
it
is
not
to
bee
doubted
but
that
the
Apostle
doth
commend
vnto
vs
all
kindes
of
iust
gouernement
.
In
Rom
:
12.8
.
And
againe
,
although
properly
he
call
the
Church-Gouernors
,
and
namely
the
Seniors
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
notwithstanding
what
he
saith
of
them
,
may
vniuersally
be
extended
to
gouernements
of
all
sorts
.
By
Caluins
owne
confession
therfore
,
the
words
may
generally
be
vnderstood
.
And
if
they
may
,
then
also
they
must
.
For
who
shall
dare
without
good
warrant
,
to
restraine
the
generall
sence
of
the
holy
Ghost
to
one
onely
particular
;
Especially
,
that
being
but
a
counterfeit
;
as
if
the
Apostle
when
he
saith
,
hee
that
gouerneth
,
in
diligence
,
had
said
,
let
the
Lay
,
or
only
gouerning
Elders
be
diligent
in
their
office
.
Beza
de
presbyt:
&
excōm
.
113.
Yea
but
the
Apostle
speaketh
of
such
a
Gouernour
,
as
might
neither
teach
nor
exhort
:
and
therefore
beeing
neither
Pastor
nor
Doctor
,
it
must
needes
be
the
only
gouerning
Elder
.
Of
this
Enthym●me
both
the
antecedent
is
false
,
and
the
consequence
vnsound
.
For
if
the
Apostle
speake
of
such
a
Gouernour
,
as
might
not
teach
,
nor
exhort
,
then
neither
distribute
,
nor
shew
mercie
;
and
by
the
same
reason
,
the
teacher
,
and
exhorter
,
of
whome
hee
spake
before
,
may
not
gouerne
.
But
as
I
said
,
the
Apostle
doth
not
speake
of
distinct
offices
,
but
of
diuerse
gifts
,
which
manie
times
concurre
in
the
same
person
.
So
that
,
as
hee
that
teacheth
and
exhorteth
,
may
also
gouerne
,
and
distribute
:
so
hee
that
gouerneth
,
as
the
Pastor
,
may
teach
and
exhort
,
and
not
onely
hee
,
but
the
Father
is
to
teach
and
exhort
his
children
,
the
maister
his
familie
;
yea
,
In
Tit.
1.
sect:
2.
contra
Rhem.
§
Sect.
13.
1
Cor.
12.28
.
and
yet
are
they
no
Ecclesiasticall
Lay-Elders
.
To
conclude
,
D.
Fulke
vnderstandeth
this
place
chiefly
of
Bishops
,
whom
he
supposeth
here
to
be
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
Heb:
13.17
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
The
fifth
and
last
testimonie
,
is
thus
inforced
by
them
.
If
God
hath
set
in
his
Church
Gouernours
distinct
from
the
Ministers
of
the
Word
,
then
hath
he
ordained
Lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
.
Bez.
de
presbyt:
&
ex
:
comm:
113.
T.
C.
lib.
2.
part.
2.38
.
Counterpois
:
Argum
:
3.
for
Elders
.
Vers:
27.
But
the
first
is
testified
by
the
Apostle
,
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
therefore
God
hath
ordained
lay
or
onely
gouerning
Elders
.
In
this
Syllogisme
no
part
is
sound
:
for
first
the
consequence
of
the
proposition
is
naught
:
for
by
Church
as
it
is
taken
in
the
assumption
,
citing
1.
Cor.
12.
is
meant
the
whole
body
of
Christ
,
and
by
the
members
of
his
body
,
all
Christians
;
among
whom
God
hath
established
degrees
of
superiors
to
gouerne
,
and
inferiors
to
obey
in
all
societies
,
as
well
in
the
family
&
commonwealth
,
as
in
the
Ecclesiasticall
state
.
Secondly
,
the
assumption
is
false
:
for
,
although
it
be
true
that
in
Christs
body
there
are
gouernours
Occonomicall
&
politicall
distinct
from
the
Ministers
;
yet
Paul
doth
not
in
this
place
testifie
,
that
Christ
hath
set
in
his
Church
gouernours
distinct
from
the
Ministers
;
and
much
lesse
doth
he
testifie
,
that
in
the
Church
,
that
is
the
state
Ecclesiasticall
,
he
hath
ordained
gouernours
which
are
not
Ministers
.
Nay
,
which
is
more
,
the
Apostle
doth
not
once
mention
gouernours
in
this
text
:
for
it
is
the
fault
of
the
translation
,
for
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
is
helpes
and
gouernements
,
to
read
helpers
and
gouernours
:
it
being
the
purpose
of
the
holy
Ghost
in
all
the
12.13
.
and
14.
chapters
,
to
discourse
of
the
diuerse
gifts
wherewith
God
doth
adorne
the
membes
of
his
Church
:
&
in
this
context
,
in
the
midsts
of
other
gifts
,
which
are
expressed
in
the
abstract
,
he
placeth
these
two
,
for
so
he
saith
,
powers
,
gifts
of
healing
,
helpes
,
gouernements
,
kindes
of
tongues
.
Now
it
is
no
better
reason
to
make
two
distinct
offices
of
helpers
and
gouernours
out
of
these
words
,
then
to
raise
three
others
out
of
the
other
three
,
powers
,
gifts
of
healing
and
kinds
of
tongues
.
But
it
were
ridiculous
to
make
three
distinct
offices
of
these
three
;
so
is
it
of
the
other
.
And
if
the
other
three
are
to
be
accounted
as
gifts
,
and
not
as
offices
;
why
should
we
not
so
conceiue
of
helpings
and
gouernings
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
gift
of
helping
and
gouerning
?
Yea
I
say
further
,
that
although
in
the
beginning
of
the
verse
,
the
Apostle
doth
reckon
three
offices
,
Apostles
,
Prophets
,
Teachers
:
yet
his
purpose
was
not
exactly
to
distinguish
Ecclesiasticall
functions
,
but
to
enumerate
the
diuerse
gifts
of
Gods
spirit
,
For
if
the
Apostle
had
meant
in
this
place
to
distinguish
the
Functions
and
Offices
of
the
Church
:
then
from
this
Text
should
eight
distinct
offices
bee
collected
;
neither
should
these
gifts
haue
bene
coincident
into
the
same
persons
;
so
that
teachers
might
not
gouerne
,
and
gouernours
might
not
teach
,
It
is
plaine
therefore
,
that
the
Apostle
did
not
distinguish
the
offices
of
the
Church
,
but
orderlie
recount
the
gifts
and
graces
,
wherewith
the
Lord
doth
beautifie
diuers
members
of
the
Church
.
And
whereas
the
Corinthians
were
proud
of
their
gift
of
tongues
,
Chrysost:
in
1.
Cor:
12.
1.
Cor:
12.31
.
&
14.1.3
.
In
1.
Cor.
12.
and
despised
others
;
the
Apostle
sheweth
that
among
all
these
gifts
which
hee
reckoneth
,
that
of
tongues
deserueth
the
last
place
:
And
therfore
exhorteth
them
to
be
zealous
of
the
better
gifts
,
chiefly
to
follow
after
loue
,
and
to
couet
after
spiritual
gifts
,
but
among
them
to
desire
,
rather
to
prophecie
,
that
is
to
preach
,
then
to
speak
with
tongues
.
And
whereas
the
holie
Ghost
doth
marshall
in
order
the
gifts
of
God
,
according
to
their
worthines
,
saying
:
First
,
second
,
third
:
if
by
helpes
he
should
meane
Deacons
,
and
by
gouernments
Elders
,
then
must
we
hold
Deacons
to
be
preferred
before
Elders
,
which
will
not
be
granted
.
If
anie
man
doubt
whether
helps
and
gouernments
are
to
be
accounted
gifts
,
Chrysostome
may
resolue
him
:
who
as
of
the
former
he
saith
,
that
is
in
especial
maner
the
gift
of
God
,
so
also
of
the
latter
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
be
fitte
to
gouerne
,
and
to
administer
spirituall
things
:
and
he
addeth
,
that
our
duties
are
called
Gods
gifts
,
to
teach
vs
,
that
our
abilitie
in
performance
of
our
dutie
,
is
the
gift
of
God
.
So
Oecumenius
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
also
he
calleth
a
gift
,
though
it
require
our
labour
also
and
industrie
.
Nazianzen
also
reckoneth
them
among
the
graces
of
the
spirit
.
For
the
spirit
(
saith
he
)
is
one
,
but
the
graces
are
not
equall
,
nor
yet
the
receptacles
of
the
spirit
.
For
to
one
,
by
the
spirite
is
giuen
the
word
of
Wisedome
and
contemplation
;
to
another
,
the
word
of
knowledge
or
reuelation
;
to
another
,
firme
&
vndoubted
faith
;
to
another
,
the
inoperations
of
powers
,
&
high
wonders
;
to
another
,
the
gifts
of
healing
▪
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
helpes
,
that
is
,
Presidencies
▪
or
Patronages
;
Gouernements
,
that
is
,
Poedagogies
of
the
flesh
,
kindes
of
tongues
,
interpretations
of
tongues
.
I
am
not
ignorant
,
Ambros
:
in
1.
Cor:
12.
A-Apostolos
]
ipsi
Episcopi
sunt
.
Theodoretus
Eccleesiarū
administrationes
per
haec
significauit
.
Anselm
:
Th:
Aquin
:
Dyonisius
,
Carthus
:
N.
Lyranus
.
in
1.
Cor:
12.
that
some
before
our
time
haue
vnderstood
diuerse
of
these
members
to
haue
bene
Ecclesiasticall
functions
.
But
yet
their
exposition
wholly
agreeth
with
the
gouernment
of
our
Church
,
not
with
the
pretended
discipline
.
For
by
Apostles
,
they
vnderstand
,
not
only
the
12.
Apostles
,
but
their
successors
also
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
Byshops
;
and
by
helps
,
they
vnderstand
them
,
who
help
the
Bishops
in
the
gouernment
of
the
church
,
as
the
Deanes
and
Archdeacons
;
and
by
gouernements
,
the
gouernors
or
rectors
of
seuerall
parishes
.
These
with
1.
Tim:
5.17
▪
are
the
testimonies
of
Scripture
,
which
vsually
be
aleaged
by
the
patrons
of
the
presbyterie
,
not
one
of
them
almost
either
omitting
any
of
them
,
or
adding
any
other
.
[
*
](A20733-e51570-b)
*
Ad
pag
:
5●
So
that
this
Disputer
might
trulie
conclude
,
that
this
is
the
strength
,
and
indeed
all
the
strength
they
haue
out
of
the
Scriptures
.
Which
how
strongly
or
strangely
rather
,
they
haue
concluded
for
the
Lay-Elders
,
it
doth
sufficiently
appeare
to
them
,
that
haue
not
either
a
strong
preiudice
,
or
a
weake
iudgement
.
Assuredly
,
if
the
Fathers
be
no
stronger
for
them
,
then
the
Scriptures
,
then
is
the
cause
of
the
Lay-Elders
very
weake
and
languishing
.
CHAP.
XI
.
Answering
the
Allegations
out
of
the
Fathers
,
for
Lay-Elders
.
OF
the
Fathers
he
also
braggeth
,
as
he
did
before
of
the
Scriptures
.
But
in
the
vpshot
,
all
the
force
of
his
arguments
,
either
out
of
Scriptures
or
Fathers
,
relyeth
vpon
the
authority
of
certaine
new
writers
,
who
are
the
most
,
&
almost
all
of
them
,
parties
in
the
cause
.
Which
is
a
kinde
of
arguing
,
deuised
to
retaine
the
vnlearned
in
their
former
opinion
;
that
because
so
many
late
Diuines
vnderstand
the
Scriptures
and
Fathers
,
according
to
their
receiued
opinions
,
they
may
be
confirmed
therein
.
But
is
not
this
a
strange
kind
of
reasoning
:
Ignatius
,
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Ambrose
,
(
which
are
all
the
Fathers
hee
nameth
,
&
but
nameth
,
as
though
with
their
names
hee
hoped
to
ouercome
vs
)
giue
testimonie
to
Lay-Elders
;
therefore
Lay-Elders
were
in
vse
in
the
primitiue
church
:
&
when
we
quietly
grant
this
consequence
,
&
only
desire
them
to
proue
the
antecedent
:
Is
it
not
strange
,
I
say
,
that
this
disputer
should
not
produce
the
testimonies
themselues
,
&
endeuour
by
necessary
euidence
to
demonstrate
,
that
they
are
to
be
vnderstood
as
speaking
of
Lay-Elders
?
but
to
bring
in
a
sort
of
new
writers
,
the
most
wherof
are
parties
,
to
depose
,
that
these
,
ancient
Fathers
say
as
they
would
haue
them
.
Did
they
heare
them
say
so
,
or
did
they
read
their
writings
?
If
they
read
their
testimonies
;
are
they
the
same
which
we
haue
in
print
,
or
some
speciall
manuscripts
,
which
yet
are
not
come
to
light
?
if
such
,
why
are
they
not
produced
?
If
their
testimonies
be
vpon
publike
record
,
&
in
print
,
why
should
not
we
examine
the
records
themselues
,
&
trust
to
our
owne
eyes
and
iudgments
,
rather
than
to
the
opinions
of
them
,
who
are
partiall
in
the
cause
?
Or
if
these
new
writers
had
reasons
to
perswade
vs
,
that
these
Fathers
doe
speake
for
Lay-Elders
,
why
are
not
their
reasons
produced
?
By
your
leaue
,
I
will
produce
their
testimonies
for
you
.
And
because
it
pittyeth
me
the
to
see
well-meaning
people
abused
(
I
had
almost
said
guld
)
with
glorious
shewes
:
I
will
let
them
see
,
that
not
any
one
testimonie
,
which
you
doe
vse
to
produce
out
of
the
Fathers
,
doth
conclude
for
Lay-Elders
.
And
first
,
hereafter
he
will
shew
how
he
is
to
be
vnderstood
,
when
he
commeth
to
answere
my
quotations
out
of
him
.
But
I
quote
him
not
in
the
question
of
Elders
,
but
among
my
proofs
for
Bishops
.
And
if
hee
haue
no
stronger
proofes
out
of
Ignatius
for
elders
,
then
the
selfe-same
that
I
alledge
for
Bishops
,
may
you
not
think
that
he
is
very
strong
for
them
?
The
truth
is
,
he
perceiued
they
were
too
weake
to
bee
vrged
by
him
as
an
opponent
,
and
therefore
chose
to
speake
to
them
as
an
answerer
,
hoping
to
perswade
the
simple
reader
,
that
Lay-Elders
are
sufficiently
proued
by
Ignatius
his
testimonie
,
if
they
be
not
disproued
thereby
,
as
hereafter
you
shall
heare
.
T.
C.
and
after
him
the
author
of
the
counterpoison
,
H.I.
pag
:
67
,
Protestat
.
out
of
Sc.
41.
Ad
Trallian
.
Ad
Trall
.
the
demonstrator
of
discipline
,
&
almost
who
not
?
cite
this
sentence
of
Ignatius
.
There
is
no
Church
which
can
stand
without
her
Eldership
or
counsell
.
Vnto
which
,
H.I.
addeth
2.
more
,
out
of
his
epistles
to
them
of
Tarsus
&
Smyrna
.
In
the
1.
of
these
Epistles
,
Ignatius
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
be
subiect
to
the
Bishop
as
to
the
Lord
:
&
a
little
after
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&
to
the
Presbyters
,
as
to
the
Apostles
of
Iesus
Christ
our
hope
.
Of
the
Deacons
in
the
next
words
he
sath
,
that
they
be
ministers
of
the
mysteries
of
Christ
Iesus
,
and
not
of
meate
and
drinke
.
A
reason
of
the
former
speech
he
rendreth
in
these
words
,
the
Byshop
is
the
type
of
the
Father
of
all
,
the
Presbyters
are
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
the
Consistory
of
God
,
and
a
band
or
Colledge
of
the
Apostles
of
Christ
.
Then
followeth
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
without
these
,
that
is
,
BB.
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
no
elect
Church
is
,
no
holy
congregation
,
no
assemblie
of
Saints
.
This
testimony
proueth
,
that
as
each
Church
had
a
Bishop
and
Deacons
,
so
also
Presbyters
and
a
presbyterie
.
But
what
manner
of
presbyters
they
were
,
it
appeareth
:
1.
by
the
Bishops
and
Deacons
,
between
whom
they
are
vsually
ranged
by
Ignatius
,
as
the
second
degree
of
the
Clergie
,
willing
the
Lay-men
to
bee
subiect
to
the
Deacons
,
the
Deacons
to
the
Presbyters
,
the
Presbyters
to
the
Bishop
,
Ah
Smyrn
.
and
the
Bishop
to
Christ
:
which
by
the
way
is
H.
I.
third
testimonie
,
and
in
effect
the
same
with
the
second
.
Ad
Tarsens
:
Ad
Philadelp
And
againe
,
let
the
Presbyters
,
and
the
Deacons
,
and
the
rest
of
the
Cleargie
,
together
with
all
the
people
,
bee
obedient
to
the
Bishop
.
By
which
it
is
plaine
,
they
had
not
in
those
times
,
either
Lay-Elders
,
or
Lay-Deacons
:
For
the
very
Deacons
are
by
him
called
the
ministers
of
Christ
vnto
the
word
of
God
,
and
ministers
of
the
mysteries
of
Christ
.
Ad
Smyrn
.
Ad
Trall
.
As
for
the
BB:
they
were
not
parish
Byshops
assisted
,
according
to
the
new
conceit
,
with
Lay-Elders
,
but
BB:
of
Cities
(
such
as
Ignatius
himselfe
,
who
was
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
the
chiefe
Citie
of
Syria
,
)
hauing
the
assistance
of
diuerse
Presbyters
,
who
were
Clergie
men
,
or
ministers
;
and
so
are
in
expresse
termes
reckoned
by
Ignatius
,
as
one
of
the
degrees
of
the
clergie
,
whom
in
the
words
before
alleaged
,
and
in
other
places
,
hee
resembleth
to
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
and
would
haue
them
so
obeyed
:
Ad
Smyrn
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
ad
Maguel
.
The
Senate
of
the
Apostles
.
Ad
Antioch
.
exhorting
them
with
the
words
which
Saint
Peter
vseth
to
ministers
,
1.
Epist:
5.2
.
to
feed
the
flocke
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
This
is
also
proued
by
the
vniuersal
consent
of
the
most
ancient
Councells
,
Canons
,
and
Fathers
,
who
in
innumerable
places
,
mentioning
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
neuer
conceiue
of
them
otherwise
then
of
3.
degrees
of
the
clergie
,
in
that
very
sense
wherin
our
church
doth
vse
&
retaine
them
.
And
thus
much
concerning
that
most
worthy
martyr
,
and
Bishop
Ignatius
:
sauing
,
that
I
would
commend
a
few
sen●ences
of
his
,
to
this
disputer
and
his
consorts
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
be
you
vnited
to
the
Bishop
,
submitting
your selues
to
God
by
him
in
Chirist
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
whosoeuer
are
Christs
,
they
are
with
the
Bishop
.
And
againe
,
doe
not
thinke
that
I
speake
this
,
as
hauing
vnderstood
the
separation
of
some
,
[
(a)
](A20733-e52390-b)
(a)
Ad
Philadelph
.
he
is
witnesse
to
me
,
for
whose
sake
I
am
bound
,
that
I
haue
not
learned
this
from
the
mouth
of
man
,
[
(b)
](A20733-e52420-b)
(b)
Ibid.
§
Sect.
3.
but
the
spirit
hath
preached
vnto
me
,
saying
these
things
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
without
the
Bishop
doe
nothing
,
loue
vnitie
,
auoid
diuisions
.
The
testimonie
,
which
is
vsually
cited
out
of
Tertullian
,
is
in
his
Apologetico
.
Where
,
hauing
said
that
Christians
did
vse
to
meet
in
assemblies
and
congregations
to
prayer
,
and
to
the
hearing
of
the
word
,
he
addeth
[
(c)
](A20733-e52480-b)
(c)
The
testimonie
of
Tertulli
.
apolog.
Cap.
39.
there
are
also
exhortations
,
[
(d)
](A20733-e52510-b)
(d)
T.
C.
and
after
him
the
counter
poi●
.
cite
this
testimonie
thus
:
If
there
be
any
that
hath
committed
such
a
fault
that
he
is
to
be
put
away
from
the
pertaking
of
the
prayer
of
the
Church
,
and
from
all
holy
matters
or
affaires
:
there
d●
beare
rule
or
be
presidents
,
certaine
of
the
most
approued
ancients
or
Elders
,
which
haue
obtained
this
honour
,
not
by
money
,
but
by
good
report
.
chastis●ments
and
diuine
censure
:
iudgement
is
exercised
with
great
aduise
,
as
among
those
who
are
certaine
that
God
doth
see
them
:
and
it
is
a
great
foreshewing
of
the
iudgement
to
come
,
if
any
shall
so
offend
as
that
he
shal
be
banished
from
the
communion
of
prayer
,
and
of
the
assembly
,
and
of
all
holy
fellowship
.
Praesident
probati
quique
seniores
honorem
istum
non
pretio
sed
testimonio
adepti
,
the
presidents
of
our
meetings
are
approued
Seniors
,
hauing
obtained
this
honour
,
not
by
reward
,
but
by
good
report
.
By
which
testimonie
it
is
apparant
,
that
the
same
parties
were
the
presidents
of
the
assembly
as
well
in
prayer
and
in
the
ministerie
of
the
word
,
as
in
the
exercise
of
discipline
and
censures
.
But
Ministers
and
not
Lay-Elde●s
were
presidents
and
Rulers
of
the
meetings
in
publicke
prayer
and
ministerie
of
the
word
,
therefore
also
in
the
exercise
of
discipline
.
Who
these
presidents
were
,
Tertullian
himselfe
sheweth
else
where
,
testifying
that
the
Christians
receiued
the
Sacrament
both
in
the
time
of
their
meales
,
and
also
in
their
meetings
before
day
,
nec
de
aliorum
manu
quam
presidentium
sumimus
Neither
doe
we
receiue
it
at
the
hands
of
any
others
then
of
our
presidents
.
On
which
words
Beatus
Rhenanus
writeth
thus
,
Presidentes
voc
at
presbyteros
etiam
alibi
,
the
Presbyters
he
calleth
presidents
also
in
another
place
,
and
quoteth
the
place
alleaged
out
of
the
Apologeticke
.
And
whereas
Tertullian
imagined
(
though
erroneously
)
that
the
husband
of
a
second
wife
could
not
be
a
Bishop
or
Minister
,
[
(e)
](A20733-e52590-b)
(e)
De
c●rona
militis
.
his
opinion
he
vttere●
▪
in
these
words
,
how
derogatorie
from
faith
,
De
Monogamia
:
quem
librum
scripsit
aduersus
Ecclesiam
.
Hierom.
in
Catalog
.
whom
he
endeuoureth
to
refute
,
vnderstood
that
rule
of
the
Apostle
as
peculiar
to
Bishops
&
Ministers
,
he
chargeth
them
also
with
the
breach
thereof
euen
in
that
sense
.
Quot
enim
&
ex
digamiae
president
apud
vos
,
insultantes
vtique
apostolo
?
for
how
many
after
their
second
mariage
are
presidents
among
you
,
euen
insulting
ouer
the
Apostle
and
blush
not
when
these
things
are
read
before
them
?
It
is
plaine
therefore
,
that
the
Seniors
which
were
presidents
in
the
assemblies
of
Christians
,
of
whom
Tertullian
speaketh
,
were
Ministers
,
whatsoeuer
some
new
writers
whom
he
quoteth
,
doe
say
to
the
contrarie
.
For
whereas
among
others
who
were
parties
in
the
cause
,
he
quoteth
B.
Iewell
,
who
indeed
is
no
partie
,
I
answere
,
if
he
haue
alleaged
the
rest
no
better
then
him
,
(
as
for
my
part
I
meane
not
to
search
,
especially
seeing
the
chiefe
of
his
Authors
are
quoted
at
Random
,
)
he
will
gaine
the
opinion
of
a
notable
falsifier
of
Authors
.
a
Priest
is
nothing
else
but
Senior
,
and
that
a
Priest
and
Elder
are
both
one
thing
.
And
whereas
Harding
affirmed
,
that
Priests
and
Deacons
waited
onely
vpon
the
Bishops
but
gaue
no
sentence
in
counsels
(
which
in
respect
of
prouinciall
counsels
,
is
euidently
false
)
he
disproueth
that
assertion
.
First
by
Act.
15.
D.
Whitgift
conceiuing
,
as
Bishop
Iewell
did
,
that
these
Seniors
were
Ministers
;
T.
C.
obiecteth
,
(
and
it
is
the
onely
thing
he
obiecteth
)
that
it
is
incredible
,
that
all
the
Churches
,
whose
defence
Tertullian
taketh
vpon
him
,
and
whose
vsage
he
doth
describe
,
had
such
a
college
of
Seniors
that
were
Ministers
.
Whereunto
the
answere
is
easie
,
that
Tertullian
speaketh
of
the
Churches
in
cities
,
in
which
onely
were
Presbyteries
(
vnto
which
the
parishes
of
the
countrey
adioyning
,
so
soone
as
there
were
any
,
were
subiect
)
and
those
wholy
consisting
of
Minist●rs
.
Neither
can
any
testimonie
or
example
be
alleaged
,
either
of
Presbyters
that
were
not
Ministers
,
or
of
Presbyteries
in
villages
or
countrey
parishes
.
As
touching
Cyprian
:
Demonstr.
c.
12.
H.
I.
pag.
67.
The
Demonstrator
of
discipline
and
H.
I.
in
his
booke
though
they
take
together
such
testimonies
of
the
Fathers
as
they
thought
fauoured
Lay-Elders
;
yet
they
durst
not
mention
Cyprian
,
as
reposing
any
of
their
strength
in
his
testimonie
.
T.
C.
citeth
Cyprian
,
as
noting
a
piece
of
the
office
of
these
Elders
by
diuiding
the
communion
bread
into
equall
portions
,
Cypr.
lib.
4.
epist.
5.
and
carying
it
for
the
assistance
of
the
Bishop
in
little
baskets
or
trayes
,
where
by
placing
their
office
in
this
assisting
the
Minister
,
he
doth
manifestly
shut
them
out
from
the
ministering
of
the
Sacrament
,
&c:
whereof
also
it
commeth
that
in
another
place
he
calleth
them
brethren
which
had
care
of
the
basket
.
When
I
consider
T.
C.
his
learning
and
professed
pietie
,
I
cannot
sufficiently
wonder
at
his
allegations
out
of
the
Fathers
,
In
the
meane
time
,
know
ye
saith
he
,
that
we
haue
alreadie
designed
to
them
honorem
Presbyterij
,
the
honour
of
Priesthood
,
vt
sportulis
ijsdem
cum
.
Presbyteris
honorentur
that
they
may
be
honoured
with
the
wages
(
or
as
it
was
afterwards
called
canonicall
portion
)
equall
with
Presbyters
,
sessuri
nobiscum
,
being
hereafter
to
fit
with
vs
(
namely
as
Presbyters
)
when
they
shal
be
growne
in
yeares
.
And
that
this
was
Cyprians
meaning
,
the
other
place
by
him
cited
doth
proue
.
For
whereas
one
Geminius
Victor
had
by
his
will
named
Faustinus
a
Presbyter
to
be
a
tutor
or
gardian
;
The
which
manner
and
forme
saith
he
,
is
still
retained
in
the
Clergie
,
that
they
who
in
the
Church
of
God
are
preferred
to
the
order
of
Clerkes
,
should
by
no
meanes
be
called
away
from
the
diuine
administration
,
nor
be
tyed
to
worldly
cumbers
and
imployments
,
sed
in
honore
sportulantium
fratrum
tanquam
decimas
ex
fructibus
accipientes
,
but
that
receiuing
the
honour
of
brethren
,
who
haue
wages
of
the
Church
,
as
it
were
tythes
of
fruits
,
they
should
not
depart
from
the
Altar
and
seruice
of
God
.
Those
,
Duaren
.
de
sacr.
eccl.
minist.
&
b●n
.
lib.
1.
c.
18.
C.
de
sacro
.
cccl.
l.
placet
.
&c.
Lib.
3.
epist.
14.
&
15.
whom
he
calleth
sportulantes
fratres
,
were
afterwards
called
Canonici
,
a
Canon
,
that
is
from
the
ordinarie
and
certaine
pension
or
prebend
which
was
allotted
to
them
.
And
where
he
saith
the
Presbyters
were
excluded
from
ministring
the
communion
,
it
is
apparant
in
the
writings
of
Cyprian
,
that
vsually
they
did
administer
that
Sacrament
,
and
in
diuerse
of
his
Epistles
are
reproued
by
him
,
for
giuing
the
communion
to
some
,
which
had
fallen
in
time
of
persecution
,
without
his
consent
.
The
Author
of
the
Counterpoyson
citeth
another
testimonie
of
Cyprian
,
Know
ye
saith
he
that
I
haue
made
Saturus
Reader
,
and
Optatus
subdeacon
,
whom
we
heretofore
had
made
next
the
Clegie
,
when
either
to
Saturus
on
Easter-day
we
granted
once
or
twice
leaue
to
read
,
or
when
with
the
Presbyters
Doctors
Readers
we
appointed
Optatus
the
Teacher
of
the
hea●ers
,
examining
whether
all
things
did
agree
to
them
,
which
ought
to
be
in
those
who
are
prepared
for
the
Clergie
.
Where
,
because
Presbyters
are
mentioned
as
distinct
from
Doctors
,
(
which
he
supposeth
to
be
Ministers
)
and
Readers
,
he
inferreth
they
were
Lay-Elders
.
To
omit
his
mistakings
,
and
not
vnderstanding
the
place
,
it
is
euident
that
Doctores
audientium
were
Catechists
,
Theod.
Balsam
.
in
Conc.
Nēocaess
.
c.
5.
&
Ancyr.
c.
20.
Niceph
li.
5.
c.
4.
(
for
audientes
were
the
inferiour
ranke
of
Catechumeni
)
who
were
so
farre
from
being
chiefe
in
the
Clergie
next
to
the
Bishop
as
Presbyters
,
that
Cyprian
signifieth
,
when
he
and
the
rest
had
appointed
Optatus
doctorem
audientium
,
they
had
made
him
next
to
the
Clergie
,
that
is
at
the
next
election
to
be
chosen
into
the
Clergie
,
examining
whether
all
things
did
agree
to
him
which
ought
to
be
in
them
who
are
prepared
for
the
Clergie
.
Neither
should
this
seeme
strange
,
seeing
Origen
was
Catechist
at
Alexandria
,
when
he
was
but
eighteene
yeare
old
:
Who
afterwards
comming
into
Palaestina
,
was
permitted
by
the
Bishops
there
,
publickly
to
expound
the
scriptures
.
Which
when
Demetrius
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
vnderstood
,
by
letters
he
reproued
those
Bishops
;
Euseb.
lib.
6.
c.
20.
Niceph.
l.
5.
c.
14.
asking
them
,
if
euer
it
were
heard
,
that
Lay-men
,
such
as
Origen
then
was
,
should
preach
in
the
presence
of
Bishops
.
Therefore
the
distinction
of
Presbyters
from
such
Teachers
,
doth
not
proue
that
themselus
were
not
Ministers
.
Such
Teachers
in
Alexandria
after
Origen
,
were
Dionysius
and
Heraclas
;
whom
notwithstanding
,
the
Presbyters
,
who
till
then
were
wont
to
choose
their
Bishop
out
of
their
owne
order
,
Hier.
adeuagrium
.
elected
Bishops
,
as
hereafter
we
shall
shew
.
But
what
manner
of
Seniors
the
Presbyters
were
,
whom
Cyprian
so
often
mentioneth
,
may
sufficiently
appeare
by
this
one
testimonie
,
where
he
saith
,
cum
episcopo
Presbyteri
sacerdotali
honore
coniuncti
,
the
Presbyters
were
ioyned
with
the
Bishop
in
the
honour
of
Priesthood
.
What
other
allegations
they
haue
out
of
Cyprian
worth
the
answering
,
I
know
not
.
But
this
I
protest
,
that
I
haue
read
ouer
Cyprian
,
hauing
alwaies
an
eye
to
this
present
question
;
but
I
neuer
met
with
any
one
testimonie
,
that
(
in
my
poore
iudgement
)
did
seeme
to
sound
for
Lay-Elders
.
Perpet
.
gouern
.
Chap.
11.
I
find
them
all
more
then
sufficiently
answered
by
the
learned
and
reuerend
B.
Bilson
,
to
whom
I
referre
the
Reader
,
hauing
my selfe
insisted
longer
on
this
question
then
at
the
first
I
intended
.
Ad
pag.
52.
Neither
will
I
vouchsafe
an
answere
to
his
new
supply
,
either
of
testimonies
of
new
writers
(
though
I
know
some
of
them
to
be
falsified
)
or
examples
of
other
reformed
Churches
,
whereby
he
seeketh
to
bleare
the
eyes
of
the
simple
.
For
if
this
cause
were
to
be
tryed
by
pluralitie
of
voices
for
witnesse
to
the
truth
,
or
of
examples
for
practise
of
it
,
who
knoweth
not
,
that
we
are
able
to
ouersway
them
without
comparison
,
no
writer
till
our
age
giuing
testimonie
,
no
Church
since
the
Apostles
times
vntill
this
present
age
giuing
approbation
to
Lay-Elders
;
but
all
writers
and
Churches
before
our
time
,
giuing
testimonie
and
approbation
to
the
gouernement
of
Bishops
.
To
omit
that
as
in
the
number
of
learned
men
we
are
not
inferiour
,
so
in
the
multitude
of
Churches
at
this
day
,
which
doe
not
admit
the
Lay-Elders
,
c.
ult
.
we
are
farre
superiour
,
as
hereafter
shal
be
shewed
.
And
thus
much
I
hope
will
suffice
for
the
first
point
.
FINIS
.
LONDON
Imprinted
by
Thomas
Creed
.
1611.
THE
SECOND
BOOKE
,
PROVING
That
the
Primitiue
Churches
,
indued
with
Power
of
Ecclesiasticall
Gouernment
,
The
First
Chapter
entreating
of
the
diuers
acceptations
of
the
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Church
,
Diocesse
,
and
that
which
is
translated
,
Parish
.
IN
this
second
conflict
I
find
the
Refuter
very
confident
,
like
the
men
of
Ai
,
(
though
not
vpon
the
like
occasion
)
as
though
my
forces
were
not
able
to
stand
before
him
.
But
forasmuch
as
in
the
former
assault
I
haue
taken
the
Acropolis
&
chiefe
hold
of
the
Presbyterian
Discipline
,
I
doubt
not
,
but
that
when
he
shall
with
the
men
of
Ai
looke
backe
,
and
see
the
chiefe
Tower
of
his
defence
,
I
meane
the
Presbytery
,
vanishing
as
it
were
a
smoake
,
his
courage
will
bee
abated
.
For
the
Presbytery
being
downe
,
what
hath
he
wherewith
to
hold
out
Bishoppes
?
For
seeing
the
Primitiue
Churches
were
gouerned
eyther
by
Diocesan
Bishoppes
,
as
we
hold
,
or
by
Pastors
of
Parishes
,
assisted
with
Lay-Elders
as
they
imagine
,
who
seeth
not
that
vpon
the
ouerthrow
of
the
Presbyteries
,
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
is
necessarily
inferred
?
Hauing
therefore
proued
the
first
point
of
the
fiue
,
with
such
euidence
of
truth
,
as
I
am
wel
assured
all
the
gainesayers
thereof
will
neuer
bee
able
soundly
and
substantially
to
confute
,
I
need
not
doubt
of
preuailing
in
the
rest
.
As
for
the
2.
next
points
which
I
handle
,
concerning
Dioceses
,
and
Diocesans
;
the
refuter
thinketh
they
be
the
weakest
of
all
the
fiue
,
and
the
worst
appointed
,
and
thereupon
would
take
occasion
to
cauill
at
my
order
,
(
as
if
I
were
to
learne
Methode
of
him
)
whereas
indeed
his
imputation
of
weakenesse
to
these
2.
parts
,
if
it
were
true
,
would
commend
my
disposition
of
them
as
Homericall
,
seeing
I
haue
marshalled
them
Nestorio
more
,
after
the
manner
of
Nestor
,
in
medio
infirma
,
placing
the
weakest
in
the
middest
.
The
chiefest
points
in
my
estimation
being
the
first
,
and
the
two
last
.
The
truth
is
,
I
did
more
lightly
passe
ouer
these
two
then
the
rest
,
but
not
out
of
an
opinion
of
weakenes
in
the
points
themselues
,
but
partly
in
a
conceit
of
their
euidence
,
and
partly
in
consideration
that
they
were
not
either
so
worthie
or
so
needfull
to
be
insisted
vpon
as
the
rest
.
For
first
,
I
supposed
them
to
be
so
euident
,
that
howsoeuer
T.
C.
in
whose
steppes
our
new
Disciplinarians
tread
,
vpon
weaker
grounds
then
a
man
of
learning
&
iudgement
should
haue
stood
vpon
,
doth
deny
them
;
yet
scarsly
any
other
man
of
learning
&
iudgement
besides
him
would
gain-say
them
.
Secondly
,
that
the
three
weightiest
points
which
are
most
contradicted
,
and
in
which
these
2.
are
presupposed
,
were
most
worthy
in
that
breuity
(
whereto
I
was
confined
)
to
be
stood
vpon
.
And
thirdly
,
that
J
needed
not
to
bee
so
carefull
in
prouing
of
them
,
seeing
the
chiefest
patrones
of
the
pretended
Discipline
,
as
Caluin
and
Beza
,
&c.
doe
herein
ioin
with
vs
against
our
new
sect
of
Disciplinarians
,
as
hath
already
beene
proued
.
Now
whereas
I
brought
forth
these
forces
,
intending
only
a
light
skirmish
,
&
velitationem
quandam
tanquam
leuis
armaturae
;
my
aduersary
bringeth
his
maine
battel
into
the
field
,
as
if
the
euent
of
this
whole
warfare
depended
vpon
this
encounter
.
I
will
therefore
not
onely
bring
a
new
supply
like
those
of
the
Israelites
which
came
vpon
the
men
of
Ai
,
as
they
were
pursuing
the
other
companies
of
Israel
;
but
also
cause
these
Arguments
,
which
now
like
the
troupes
of
Israel
seem
in
his
conceit
to
flie
before
him
,
to
returne
vpon
him
a
fresh
.
And
forasmuch
as
here
we
are
to
entreat
of
Churches
,
[
a
](A20733-e54680-b)
a
Act.
19.32.39.40
.
Psal.
22.23
.
&
26.5.12
.
&
149.1
.
Nehem.
5.7
.
in
the
Greeke
translation
.
,
any
assembly
,
company
or
congregation
of
men
whatsoeuer
,
ciuill
or
ecclesiasticall
,
holy
or
prophane
,
is
in
all
the
places
of
the
new
Testament
(
excepting
Act.
19.
)
appropriated
to
the
Companies
of
the
faithfull
.
For
whereas
all
mankind
is
to
be
diuided
into
two
Companies
;
the
one
is
the
world
,
which
is
the
kingdome
of
darkenesse
,
containing
manie
particular
companies
which
are
all
the
Synagogues
of
Sathan
,
the
other
,
the
Kingdome
of
God
;
this
latter
is
called
Ecclesia
,
signifying
a
Company
of
men
as
redeemed
,
so
also
called
out
of
the
world
,
And
thus
it
is
vsed
in
the
Scriptures
either
more
-
Generally
,
to
signifie
eyther
the
-
Vniuersal
company
of
them
that
are
elected
in
Christ
,
or
called
to
be
Saints
,
as
Ephes.
1.22
.
&
3.21
.
&
5.23
.
24.25.27.29
,
32.
Act
2.47
.
Colos.
1.18.24
.
-
The
two
main
parts
of
the
vniuersall
Church
-
Triumphant
in
heauen
,
as
Heb.
12
23.
-
Militant
on
earth
,
as
Mat.
16.18
.
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
Eph.
3.10
.
1.
Tim.
3.15
,
and
that
eyther
-
dispersed
in
diuers
nations
and
Countries
throughout
the
world
,
1.
Cor.
10.32
.
&
15
9.
Act.
8.3
.
Gal
1.13
.
Phil.
3.6
.
-
Congregated
in
an
vniuersall
or
O●cumenicall
Synode
-
Particularly
,
&
that
either
-
Definitely
,
to
signifie
the
Church
of
a
-
Nation
in
the
number
-
Singular
.
Act.
7
38.
-
Plural
.
Rom.
16.4
.
1.
Cor.
16.1.19
.
2.
Co.
8.1
.
Ga.
1.2.22
-
And
these
either
dispersed
or
congregated
into
a
-
Synode
or
consistory
.
-
Mat.
18.17
-
Act.
15.22
-
Congregation
,
whether
set
:
or
vncertain
as
-
Act.
11.26
.
&
14.27
.
1.
Cor.
11
18
22.
&
14.5.12.19
23.28.34.35.3
.
Ioh.
6.
-
City
and
Country
adioyning
.
Act.
5.11
.
&
8.1
.
&
11.12
.
&
12.1.5
.
&
13.1
.
&
14.23
.
&
20.
17.28
.
1.
Cor.
1.2
.
2
Co.
1.1
.
&
8.23
.
Col
4.16
.
2.
Thes.
1.1
.
1.
Tim.
5.16
.
Iam.
5.14
.
Apoc.
1.4
.
11.20
.
&
2.1.7.8.12.18
.
&
3.1.7.14
.
-
Village
or
towne
.
Rom.
16
1.
-
Family
,
Rom.
16.5
.
1.
Cor.
16
9.
Col.
4.5
.
Philem.
2.
-
Indefinitely
,
signifying
any
company
of
Christians
,
not
defining
either
the
-
Place
,
Society
,
whether
of
a
Nation
,
City
,
&c.
quantity
,
whether
an
entire
church
or
but
a
part
,
as
-
Act.
9.
●1.
&
15
3.4.41
.
&
18.22
.
Rom.
16.16
23.1
.
Co.
4.17
.
&
6.4
.
&
11.16
.
&
14.
33.
2.
Cor.
8.18.19.24
.
&
●1
8.28
.
&
12.13
.
Phil.
4.15
.
1.
Thes.
2.14
.
2.
Thes.
1.4
.
●
.
Tim.
3.5.3
.
Iohn
.
9.
10.
Apoc.
2.7.17.23.29
.
&
3.6.13.22
.
&
22.16
.
The
significations
of
the
word
Church
being
so
manifold
in
the
Scriptures
,
So
is
the
company
of
Christians
professing
the
true
faith
of
Christ
in
any
Nation
or
part
of
the
world
to
bee
termed
by
the
name
of
a
Church
.
For
euen
as
the
whole
people
of
Israel
professing
the
true
religion
,
were
one
Church
,
though
containing
verie
many
particular
Congregations
or
Synagogues
,
which
also
were
so
many
Churches
:
euen
so
the
whole
people
of
England
,
professing
through
Gods
mercy
,
the
true
Catholike
and
Apostolicke
faith
,
is
to
bee
called
the
Church
of
England
.
For
whereas
some
alleage
,
that
the
Church
of
the
Iewes
was
one
,
because
it
was
vnder
one
high
Priest
,
who
was
a
figure
,
and
therefore
ceased
:
it
is
euident
that
it
was
one
Church
,
because
it
was
one
people
or
commonwealth
,
ruled
by
the
same
lawes
,
professing
the
same
religion
,
both
before
there
was
one
high
Priest
,
and
after
there
were
through
corruption
more
then
one
.
Neither
was
the
high
Priest
in
respect
of
his
preeminence
and
gouernment
ouer
the
priests
and
people
a
type
of
Christ
(
for
then
had
he
,
as
well
as
Melchisedeck
,
been
a
type
of
Christs
gouernment
and
kingly
office
,
as
well
as
of
his
priesthood
,
and
consequently
Christ
might
haue
bin
a
priest
of
the
order
of
Aaron
,
as
well
as
of
Melchisedeck
but
in
respect
of
his
sacrifice
for
the
whole
people
,
and
intercession
for
them
,
and
his
entrance
alone
within
the
sanctuary
,
bearing
the
names
of
the
twelue
Tribes
:
for
Christs
gouernment
appertaineth
to
his
kingdome
,
and
not
to
his
priesthood
.
Likewise
the
Christian
people
of
any
Citie
and
Country
adioyning
,
whether
that
which
wee
call
a
prouince
or
diocesse
,
though
consisting
of
many
particular
congregations
,
is
rightly
termed
a
Church
,
as
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
Antioch
,
Ephesus
,
Smyrna
,
Sardes
,
Philadelphia
,
&c.
Jn
like
manner
,
the
Christian
people
of
one
Towne
or
Village
,
containing
but
one
congregation
,
which
we
call
a
parish
,
is
truly
called
a
church
,
as
perhaps
that
of
Cenchreae
.
And
to
conclude
,
the
company
of
faithfull
in
one
familie
doe
deserue
the
name
of
a
Church
,
as
hath
bin
shewed
.
Indeed
that
any
particular
Chruch
of
a
whole
Nation
,
Citie
and
Country
,
Towne
,
Parish
,
or
family
,
(
family
I
say
being
alone
,
and
not
a
part
of
a
congregation
,
but
as
an
entire
Church
or
parish
by
itselfe
)
may
bee
accounted
a
true
visible
Church
,
there
is
required
besides
the
profession
of
the
true
faith
,
wherein
the
life
and
being
of
a
Church
consisteth
,
the
ministery
of
the
word
and
sacraments
,
and
eutaxy
,
or
some
good
order
of
gouernment
.
Not
that
all
gouernours
are
to
be
placed
in
euery
society
or
Church
,
but
that
the
effect
and
benefit
of
the
gouernment
is
to
redound
to
euery
particular
.
For
as
well
might
an
high
Councell
of
State
,
or
Parliament
,
such
as
was
the
synedrion
of
the
Iewes
,
which
was
but
one
for
the
whole
Nation
,
be
required
in
euery
Citie
,
and
a
Maior
and
Aldermen
(
such
as
be
in
London
and
other
chiefe
Cities
)
in
euery
village
,
as
a
Bishop
and
Presbytery
in
euery
parish
.
In
the
meane
time
,
paroecia
cui
presbyter
praest
:
so
in
the
plurall
,
if
they
be
referred
to
one
diocesse
,
they
signifie
parishes
,
or
some
parts
of
the
diocesse
(
though
with
this
difference
,
that
dioceses
doe
note
Parishes
onely
in
the
Country
,
but
ecclesia
and
paroecia
,
commonly
,
as
well
those
in
the
Citie
,
as
in
the
country
)
but
referred
to
whole
Nations
,
or
larger
parts
of
the
world
,
they
signifie
dioceses
.
But
I
will
speake
of
them
seuerally
,
And
because
my
aduersary
shall
not
say
I
speake
without
booke
,
[
a
](A20733-e55600-b)
a
Can.
Apost.
14.
of
the
ancient
Canons
,
called
the
Apostles
,
forbiddeth
a
Bishop
to
leaue
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
his
owne
charge
,
and
to
leape
into
another
:
and
wh●reas
Eusebius
the
author
of
the
ecclesiasticall
history
,
being
the
Metropolitan
Bishop
of
Caesarea
,
and
much
importuned
to
remoue
to
Antioch
,
which
at
that
time
was
the
seat
of
the
third
patriarch
,
refused
that
offer
:
Constantine
[
b
](A20733-e55650-b)
b
Euseb.
l.
3.
de
vit.
Constantini
,
pag.
146.
the
great
doth
greatly
commend
him
for
keeping
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Apostolik●
canon
.
Which
canon
the
Council
of
Nice
hath
reference
vnto
,
when
it
saith
[
c
](A20733-e55700-b)
c
Conc.
Nic.
c.
15.
that
Bishops
remouing
from
one
City
to
another
,
or
as
wee
speake
,
from
one
See
to
another
,
did
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
contrary
to
the
Canon
.
The
meaning
therefore
of
the
Canon
forbidding
a
Bishop
to
remoue
from
one
paroecia
to
another
,
was
to
forbidde
him
to
remoue
from
one
Diocesse
to
another
.
The
councill
of
Antioch
,
speaking
to
the
same
purpose
,
retayneth
the
same
words
,
forbidding
a
Bishop
[
d
](A20733-e55760-b)
d
Conc.
Antioc
.
c.
21.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
bee
translated
from
one
paroecia
to
another
▪
Where
it
were
absurd
to
vnderstand
the
councell
as
speaking
of
a
parish
,
because
this
councell
being
latter
then
the
councell
of
Nice
,
it
is
euident
that
at
that
time
,
there
were
not
onely
Bishops
of
Dioceses
,
and
Metropolitanes
ouer
Prouinces
▪
but
also
patriarches
diuiding
among
them
the
Christian
world
.
And
to
the
same
purpose
,
the
councill
of
Sardica
[
e
](A20733-e55800-b)
e
Epist.
synod
.
Sardic
.
apud
Theodor.
l.
2.
c.
8.
noting
the
breach
of
these
canons
,
among
other
vnlawfull
practises
of
the
Arians
,
expresseth
it
in
these
words
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
translations
from
lesse
Cities
to
greater
paroecias
,
that
is
,
dioceses
,
or
Bishoprickes
In
the
same
Councell
it
is
decreed
[
f
](A20733-e55850-b)
f
Con.
Sard.
c.
15.
,
that
if
any
Bishoppe
will
ordaine
in
any
degree
of
the
clergy
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
out
of
another
paroecia
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
Minister
belonging
to
another
Bishop
,
without
the
consent
of
his
owne
Bishop
,
the
ordination
shall
be
voide
.
The
councels
[
g
](A20733-e55900-b)
g
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
●8
.
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
18.
Martin
.
Brac
c●a●
,
Capi●
.
synod
.
gr.
c.
10.
e●
.
12.
of
Ancyra
and
Antioch
speaking
of
Bishops
,
the
one
,
not
receiued
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
paroecia
,
or
diocesse
,
the
other
,
not
accepting
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
paroecia
or
bishopricke
vnto
which
he
was
ordained
,
most
plainely
by
paroecia
vnderstand
the
charge
of
a
Diocesan
Bishop
.
Epiphanius
[
h
](A20733-e56010-b)
h
Epiph.
epist.
ad
Ioan.
Hierosol
.
apud
Hieronym
.
t.
2.
excusing
himself
to
Iohn
the
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
who
was
offended
with
him
,
for
that
he
had
,
as
was
supposed
,
ordained
a
Presbyter
in
his
diocesse
,
answereth
among
other
things
,
that
diuers
Bishops
had
ordained
in
his
diocesse
,
without
his
offence
.
Yea
,
he
had
exhorted
Philo
&
Theoprobus
,
two
Bishops
,
that
in
the
Churches
of
Cyprus
,
which
were
neer
to
them
,
ad
mea
autem
paroeciae
videbantur
ecclesiam
pertinere
,
eo
quod
grandis
esset
et
lat
a
prouincia
,
ordinarent
presbyteros
,
et
Christs
ecclesiae
prouiderent
,
but
seemed
,
faith
he
,
to
belong
to
the
Church
of
my
paroecia
,
that
is
,
Bishopricke
,
they
would
,
because
it
was
a
great
and
large
prouince
,
ordaine
Presbyters
,
and
prouide
for
the
Church
of
Christ
.
Where
it
is
testified
,
that
the
Churches
throughout
a
large
Prouince
,
were
but
part
of
his
paroecia
,
that
is
,
diocesse
.
[
i
](A20733-e56120-b)
i
Conc.
Aruern
tempore
Pelag.
c.
9.
,
should
not
contrary
to
the
canons
,
inuade
parochiam
cuiuslibet
episcopi
,
the
paroeciae
,
mening
diocesse
of
any
other
Bishop
.
The
third
Councell
of
Toledo
[
k
](A20733-e56170-b)
k
Conc.
Toletan
.
3
tempore
Pelag.
c.
3.
hath
these
words
;
Si
quid
episcopi
ecclesiis
ad
suam
parochiam
pertinentibus
dederint
,
&c.
If
Bishops
shall
giue
any
thing
to
Churches
belonging
to
their
paroecia
,
that
is
,
Bishopricke
.
Gregory
the
Great
when
he
would
signifie
,
that
the
antient
canons
commanded
that
prouinciall
synods
should
be
held
twice
a
yeere
,
saith
[
l
](A20733-e56220-b)
l
Lib.
7.
epist.
110.
,
they
had
taken
order
,
de
habendis
per
parochias
concilijs
.
The
synod
held
in
England
[
m
](A20733-e56260-b)
m
Apud
Bedam
.
in
b●st
.
Angl.
l.
4
c.
5.
can
.
2.
.6
.
An.
673.
decreed
,
that
no
Bishop
should
inuade
the
paroecia
of
another
:
and
that
Bishops
and
other
clergy
men
,
being
strangers
,
may
not
exercise
any
priestly
function
without
the
leaue
of
the
Bishop
,
in
cuius
paroecia
,
in
whose
diocesse
they
are
knowne
to
remaine
.
In
the
Councell
of
Arles
[
n
](A20733-e56330-b)
n
Con.
Arelat.
sub
Carolo
Mag
c.
17.
,
it
was
ordained
,
that
once
a
yeere
euery
Bishop
should
goe
about
parochiam
suam
,
that
is
,
his
diocesse
.
The
Councell
of
Mentz
[
o
](A20733-e56360-b)
o
Conc.
Mogunt
.
c.
31.
appoint
,
that
euery
Bishoppe
in
sua
parochia
,
that
is
,
in
his
owne
diocesse
,
should
make
diligent
inquirie
,
whether
there
were
any
Presbyters
or
Deacons
therein
,
that
belonged
to
another
Bishop
,
that
they
might
be
returned
to
him
.
In
the
Councell
of
Rhoan
[
p
](A20733-e56390-b)
p
Conc.
Rotho
▪
mag.
c.
6.
,
the
Bishop
is
forbidden
principalem
cathedram
s●ae
parochia
negligere
,
to
neglect
the
Cathedrall
Church
or
chiefe
seat
of
his
paroecia
,
that
is
,
Bishoprick
.
To
conclude
,
the
Councel
held
at
Wormes
[
q
](A20733-e56420-b)
q
Vorm●tien●
.
c.
62.
,
forbiddeth
Bishops
,
qu●
parochias
non
habent
,
which
haue
no
charge
of
their
owne
,
to
exercise
their
function
,
or
to
ordaine
in
alterius
parochia
,
in
the
paroecia
of
another
Bishop
,
without
the
appointment
of
the
Bishop
in
●uius
parochia
,
in
whose
diocesse
they
be
.
Whereby
it
doth
euidently
appeare
,
that
the
word
paroecia
,
being
attributed
to
a
Bishop
,
as
his
whole
charge
or
circuit
of
his
episcopall
iurisdiction
,
doth
signifie
a
diocesse
,
consisting
of
many
parishes
.
And
that
in
Eusebius
it
is
so
to
bee
vnderstood
,
it
is
most
manifest
,
because
hee
calleth
great
Churches
,
after
the
diuision
of
them
into
many
parishes
,
not
onely
in
the
Country
,
but
euen
in
the
Cities
,
by
the
name
of
Paroecia
.
To
which
purpose
,
Eusebius
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
paroecia
signifieth
the
Diocesse
.
let
vs
conferre
a
few
places
in
Eusebius
,
concerning
the
Church
of
Alexandria
:
whereby
his
meaning
,
when
he
speaketh
of
this
argument
,
wil
easily
appeare
.
For
hauing
said
,
lib.
6.
cap.
1.
that
Laetus
was
the
president
of
Alexandria
&
the
rest
of
Aegypt
,
he
addeth
[
r
](A20733-e56580-b)
r
Euseb.
l.
6.
c.
1.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
the
Bishoprick
of
the
paroecia
or
Churches
there
(
in
Alexandria
and
Aegypt
)
Demetrius
had
lately
receiued
.
In
the
eight
chapter
[
s
](A20733-e56640-b)
s
L.
6.
c.
8.
he
saith
,
that
Demetrius
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
president
or
Bishop
of
the
paroecia
,
that
is
,
the
Church
there
.
For
so
he
explaneth
himself
[
t
](A20733-e56700-b)
t
Lib.
c.
26.
chap.
26.
calling
him
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishop
of
the
Church
of
the
Alexandreans
:
and
what
he
meaneth
by
that
speech
he
sheweth
[
u
](A20733-e56730-b)
u
L.
6.
c.
3●
.
chap.
35.
Where
speaking
of
Dionysius
his
next
successor
but
one
,
hee
vseth
these
words
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hee
taketh
vpon
him
the
Bishopricke
or
charge
of
being
president
of
the
Churches
belonging
to
Alexandria
.
So
that
when
he
saith
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
paroecia
,
or
church
,
his
meaning
is
all
one
as
if
hee
had
said
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
of
such
a
Bishopricke
as
contained
many
Churches
.
And
in
the
same
sense
he
speaketh
(
though
in
the
plurall
number
)
when
hee
mentioneth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&c.
Euseb
li.
4.
c.
15.
&
l.
5.
c.
23
The
2.
signification
of
Paroecia
betokening
the
city
or
chiefe
seat
of
the
Bishop
the
paroeciae
or
churches
of
Pontus
,
the
churches
of
Asia
,
the
paroecia
of
the
holy
catholike
church
.
Thus
then
wee
see
,
that
in
antient
writers
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
Greeke
,
and
paroecia
(
corruptly
parochia
)
in
Latine
,
is
vsually
taken
for
the
whole
diocesse
consisting
of
many
parishes
,
when
it
betokeneth
a
Bishops
whole
charge
.
§
.
8.
Sometimes
it
signifieth
but
a
part
of
the
Bishoprick
,
as
when
the
whole
diocesse
is
diuided
into
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
signifying
the
city
or
chiefe
seate
,
or
see
of
the
Bishop
:
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
rest
of
the
diocesse
in
the
countrie
or
countries
thereto
belonging
.
For
manifestation
whereof
,
those
two
places
mentioned
in
the
sermon
are
sufficient
.
The
former
is
one
of
the
ancient
Canons
called
the
Apostles
,
in
these
words
[
x
](A20733-e57030-b)
x
Can.
apost
.
34
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
The
Bishops
of
euery
nātion
it
behoueth
to
agnize
him
that
is
Primate
or
first
among
them
,
and
to
esteeme
him
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
their
head
or
chief
,
and
to
do
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
nothing
that
exceedeth
the
bounds
of
their
owne
charge
or
iurisdiction
,
without
his
consent
,
and
that
euery
one
doe
deale
in
those
things
alone
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
belong
to
his
owne
Paroecia
,
that
is
,
see
or
Church
&
the
coū●ries
which
be
subiect
onto
it
.
Neither
may
he
(
that
is
,
the
Metropolitan
,
)
do
any
thing
without
the
consent
of
all
.
So
shall
there
bee
concorde
,
and
God
shall
bee
glorified
through
the
Lord
in
the
Holy
Ghost
:
Which
canon
is
renued
and
explained
in
the
councill
of
Antioch
,
the
canons
whereof
were
part
of
the
ancient
code
[
y
](A20733-e57120-b)
y
In
the
Councel
of
Chalcedon
Act.
11.
the
16.
&
17.
Canons
of
the
councell
of
Antioch
are
out
of
the
booke
of
the
Canons
of
Councels
quoted
as
the
96.
&
97.
Canon
,
which
sheweth
that
the
ancient
book
agreeth
with
the
edition
of
Til●us
,
which
reckoning
the
Apostles
Cano●s
by
themselues
alloweth
20.
Canons
to
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
25.
to
that
of
Ancyra
,
15.
to
the
Counc
.
of
Neocesaria
&
20.
to
the
counc
.
of
Gangra
,
all
which
arise
to
80.
Whereto
if
you
adde
the
canons
of
the
councill
of
Antioch
the
16.
of
that
councell
will
be
the
96.
&
the
17.
the
97.
or
book
of
canons
receiued
in
the
ancient
church
,
recited
some
of
them
in
the
great
councell
of
Chalcedon
,
and
ratified
all
of
them
in
the
generall
councell
of
Constantinople
held
in
Trullo
the
Emperours
Palace
.
The
canon
is
this
:
It
[
z
](A20733-e57180-b)
z
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
9.
behooueth
the
BB
,
of
euery
Prouince
to
acknowledge
the
Metropolitane
B.
and
that
he
taketh
vpon
him
the
cure
of
the
whole
Prouince
because
there
is
a
concourse
of
all
men
who
haue
businesse
from
all
places
vnto
the
Metropolis
on
mother
Citie
.
Wherefore
it
hath
beene
thought
good
or
decreed
,
that
he
should
excell
in
honour
,
and
that
without
him
the
rest
of
the
Bishops
should
doe
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
nothing
exceeding
the
bounds
of
their
owne
charge
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
according
to
the
ancient
receiued
Canon
of
our
Fathers
,
(
meaning
the
afore
cited
Canon
of
the
Apostles
,
which
it
reciteth
,
as
you
see
,
word
for
word
)
but
those
things
alone
which
concerne
his
owne
Pa●oecia
,
that
is
,
his
owne
See
or
Citie
,
and
the
Countries
which
be
vnder
it
.
For
euery
Bishop
hath
authoritie
ouer
his
owne
Paroecia
,
and
doth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
administer
according
to
the
feare
(
of
God
)
wherewith
he
is
endued
,
and
hath
a
prouident
care
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
whole
region
(
or
countrey
)
which
is
vnder
his
Citie
(
vsing
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
Paroecia
and
Citie
,
indifferently
)
so
that
hee
may
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
order
all
things
with
iudgement
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
beyond
his
bounds
hee
may
doe
nothing
without
the
Bishop
of
the
Mother
Citie
:
neither
may
he
without
●he
consent
of
the
rest
.
Then
which
testimonies
,
nothing
can
bee
alleged
more
pregnant
,
either
for
the
signification
of
the
word
,
or
for
the
proofe
of
our
assertion
,
that
the
Churches
or
charges
of
Bishops
were
not
parishes
,
but
dioceses
.
Sometimes
indeede
the
word
Paroecia
doth
signifie
that
which
we
call
a
parish
:
C.
Tolet.
3
▪
c.
20.
or
else
it
is
referred
to
a
Presbyter
as
his
proper
charge
.
To
which
purpose
consider
these
testimonies
.
The
Councell
of
Carthage
,
[
a
](A20733-e57410-b)
a
Carth.
4.
c.
102.
which
is
so
much
alleged
by
the
Disciplinarians
,
speaketh
,
as
of
the
Bishop
of
the
diocesse
,
so
of
a
Presbyter
,
qui
Parochiae
praeest
,
who
is
set
ouer
a
parish
.
The
[
b
](A20733-e57450-b)
b
Conc.
Tolet.
4.
c.
25.
&
26.
Councell
of
Toledo
speaketh
of
Presbyters
ordained
in
parochijs
&
per
parochias
.
Innocentius
[
c
](A20733-e57500-b)
c
Inn.
●
.
ep.
8.
ad
Flor.
the
first
writing
to
Florentius
a
Bishop
,
blameth
him
for
vsurping
a
parish
which
belonged
to
the
diocesse
of
Vrsus
another
Bishop
.
And
elsewhere
[
d
](A20733-e57550-b)
d
Epist.
l.
ad
.
Decent
.
c.
5
,
he
speaketh
●●
Sozom
l.
8.
c.
3.
Ius
Graecorom
p.
89.
and
of
a
Presbyter
;
so
there
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
dioecesis
,
of
a
Patriarch
,
which
we
may
call
a
Patriarchall
diocesse
;
of
an
Archbishop
,
which
we
call
a
Prouince
;
of
a
Bishop
,
which
we
call
a
Diocesse
;
and
of
a
Presbyter
,
which
we
call
a
Parish
.
For
the
two
first
,
these
few
examples
may
suffice
.
The
Emperour
Iustinian
[
a
](A20733-e57700-b)
a
Cod.
lit
.
tit.
4.
de
Episcopali
audientia
.
appointeth
,
Patriarch
of
the
Diocesse
;
but
first
,
according
to
the
sacred
constitutions
,
before
the
Bishop
of
the
City
,
in
which
the
Clergy
man
liueth
:
then
,
if
he
be
suspected
as
partiall
,
let
him
bring
the
party
accused
before
the
Metropolitane
Bishop
.
But
if
he
also
shall
not
allow
of
the
accusation
,
Sancimus
,
graece
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&
Nouell
.
123.
c.
22.
let
him
bring
him
before
the
Synode
of
that
prouince
&c.
but
if
still
hee
thinke
himselfe
wronged
,
let
him
appeale
to
the
Patriarch
of
the
Diocesse
,
from
whose
sentence
there
lieth
no
appeale
&c.
Afterwards
he
addeth
this
exception
;
that
wheras
there
are
two
sorts
of
Patriarches
,
some
,
who
in
the
Prouinces
wherein
they
are
,
beare
the
office
of
Metropolitanes
,
(
their
See
being
of
ancient
time
the
Metropolis
of
the
Prouince
,
such
were
the
Bishops
of
Antioch
,
Rome
,
and
Alexandria
,
)
others
per
totam
Diocesin
,
throughout
the
whole
Diocesse
,
doe
ordaine
the
Metropolitanes
and
other
Bishops
who
are
vnder
them
,
as
the
Bishop
of
Constantinople
[
b
](A20733-e57810-b)
b
H●rcalea
was
the
Metropolis
of
Thracia
,
vnto
which
Byzantium
had
beene
subiect
.
,
and
perhaps
Ierusalem
;
[
c
](A20733-e57820-b)
c
Cesarea
was
the
Metropolis
of
Palestina
.
)
therefore
the
causes
,
which
happen
in
the
Prouinces
of
the
former
sort
,
are
immediately
from
the
Bishops
to
be
brought
to
them
as
to
Metropolitanes
.
In
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
d
](A20733-e57850-b)
d
In
s
Graecor●m
.
p.
100.
,
or
disposition
of
the
Churches
,
subiect
to
the
Patriarch
of
Constantinople
,
made
by
the
Emperour
Leo
the
Philosopher
,
it
is
noted
,
that
seuen
Metropolitane
Churches
,
were
withdrawn
from
[
e
](A20733-e57880-b)
e
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Romane
Diocesse
,
with
the
Bishops
vnder
them
,
&
one
also
,
viz.
Sele●cia
in
Pamphylia
from
[
f
](A20733-e57910-b)
f
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Diocesse
of
the
East
,
(
meaning
of
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
for
he
,
as
Theodoret
[
g
](A20733-e57940-b)
g
Theod.
l.
4.
c.
23.
saith
,
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
ruler
or
chiefe
of
the
Bishops
in
the
East
,
)
together
with
26.
Bishopricks
subiect
thereto
.
Epiphanius
[
h
](A20733-e58000-b)
h
Epiph.
haer.
68.
,
as
you
heard
before
,
testifieth
this
to
haue
beene
the
custome
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
should
haue
the
Ecclesiastical
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Diocesse
,
or
Administration
of
all
Egypt
&
Thebais
,
Mareot
,
Libya
,
Ammoniace
,
Maraeotis
,
and
Pentapolis
.
It
is
said
of
Gregory
the
Great
[
i
](A20733-e58060-b)
i
Ioan.
Diac.
in
vit.
Greg.
l.
3.
c.
13.
The
Diocesse
of
an
Archbishop
.
,
that
vnto
the
Bishopricks
of
his
Diocesse
,
hee
inuited
Bishops
of
another
Diocesse
,
vacantes
,
being
voided
of
their
Bishoprickes
,
as
the
Bishop
of
Smyrna
,
hee
inuited
to
a
Bishopricke
in
Sicilia
.
The
circuit
also
of
an
Archbishops
iurisdiction
is
sometimes
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
Dioecesis
,
and
the
Archbishop
himselfe
[
k
](A20733-e58130-b)
k
Conc.
Chalc●
.
8.
&
17.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
in
the
Councell
of
Chalcedon
,
where
Archbishops
are
reckoned
as
a
middle
degree
,
betweene
Metropolitanes
and
Patriarches
;
the
name
of
Patriarch
being
also
giuen
sometimes
vnto
them
.
If
any
haue
a
controuersie
with
the
Metropolitane
of
the
Prouince
,
let
him
goe
vnto
,
either
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Primate
of
the
Diocesse
,
or
to
the
patriarch
of
Constantinople
.
The
same
Councell
[
l
](A20733-e58180-b)
l
Chalc.
c.
28.
appointeth
the
Metropolitanes
of
the
Dioceses
of
Pontus
,
Asia
,
and
Thracia
to
bee
ordained
by
the
Patriarch
of
Constantinople
,
and
the
BB.
of
euery
prouince
in
those
Dioceses
to
bee
,
as
they
were
wont
,
according
to
the
Canons
,
to
bee
ordained
of
their
Metropolitans
.
So
that
according
to
this
sense
a
prouince
is
but
part
of
a
Diocesse
.
Socrates
speaking
of
the
first
Councell
of
Constantinople
,
saith
[
m
](A20733-e58230-b)
m
Socrat.
l.
5.
c.
8.
that
they
established
Patriarches
,
meaning
Archbishops
,
diuiding
vnto
them
prouinces
.
Thus
of
the
Diocesse
of
Pontus
,
Helladius
the
Bishoppe
of
Cesarea
,
Gregorius
the
Bishoppe
of
Nyssa
,
Otreius
the
B.
of
Metileno
obtained
the
Patriarchship
.
The
Patriarchship
of
the
Diocesse
of
Asia
was
assigned
to
Amphilochius
of
Iconium
,
and
Optimus
of
Antioch
in
Pisidia
and
Gregory
[
n
](A20733-e58330-b)
n
Lib.
3.
Epist.
3.
writing
to
Constantius
the
Archbishop
of
Millaine
,
mentioneth
diuers
BB.
of
his
Diocesse
,
as
you
heard
[
o
](A20733-e58370-b)
o
Li.
1.
c.
7.
§.
9
§
12.
The
Diocesse
of
a
Bishop
.
before
.
But
we
are
briefly
also
to
shew
that
a
Bishops
charge
is
called
Dioecesis
.
The
first
Councell
of
Constantinople
decreeth
[
p
](A20733-e58420-b)
p
Conc.
Const.
1.
c.
2.
,
as
it
is
commonly
vnderstood
,
that
BB.
should
not
goe
out
of
their
Diocesse
vnto
Churches
without
their
bounds
,
and
that
they
should
not
[
q
](A20733-e58460-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
confound
the
Churches
.
Where
a
Diocesse
is
attributed
to
a
Bishop
,
as
the
circuit
and
bounds
of
his
iurisdiction
;
and
Churches
,
which
the
Councell
forbiddeth
to
be
confounded
,
are
confounded
with
Dioceses
.
Againe
,
that
BB.
[
r
](A20733-e58490-b)
r
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
&c.
being
not
called
,
may
not
goe
without
their
Diocesse
,
to
ordaine
Ministers
,
or
to
exercise
other
ecclesiasticall
administrations
.
In
the
Councell
of
Africke
[
s
](A20733-e58520-b)
s
Conc.
Afric
.
c.
65.
Carth.
Graec.
c.
101.
it
was
decreed
that
those
people
which
neuer
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
should
not
haue
a
Bishop
but
by
the
decree
of
the
whole
Synode
of
the
prouince
,
and
the
Primate
,
and
by
the
consent
of
him
in
whose
Diocesse
the
said
Church
is
.
Againe
,
that
one
Bishop
[
t
](A20733-e58560-b)
t
Conc.
Carth.
2
c.
11.
Dioecesis
taken
for
the
country
,
and
parts
of
the
Diocesse
therein
.
doe
not
inuade
the
Diocesse
of
another
.
Thus
Dioecesis
signifieth
the
whole
Diocesse
.
But
where
we
find
it
opposed
to
the
City
,
or
to
the
Cathedral
church
,
then
doth
it
signifie
the
rest
of
the
Diocesse
;
as
in
the
Africane
Councell
[
u
](A20733-e58600-b)
u
Con.
Afric
.
c.
84.
Conc.
Carth.
grae
.
c.
118.
it
was
ordained
that
the
Churches
in
the
Diocesse
conuerted
from
Donatisme
,
should
belong
to
the
Cathedra
or
See
of
the
Catholicke
B.
Againe
,
[
*
](A20733-e58640-b)
*
Con.
Afric
.
c.
38.
&
Carth.
graec
.
72.
Carth.
5.
c.
5.
the
BB
are
forbidden
to
leaue
their
chiefe
seat
or
See
,
&
to
remoue
themselues
to
another
church
in
their
Diocesse
.
Thus
in
the
plural
number
,
it
signifieth
sometimes
al
the
churches
in
the
Diocesse
,
meaning
the
country
,
&
somtimes
any
of
them
seuerally
.
It
was
concluded
vpon
in
the
Councel
of
Carthage
,
[
x
](A20733-e58710-b)
x
Carth.
grae
.
c.
14.
that
the
BB.
which
liue
in
the
vnity
&
communion
of
the
Church
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
hee
should
not
onely
iustly
retaine
his
owne
See
,
but
also
possesse
such
Dioeceses
,
that
is
parts
of
the
Diocesse
,
as
had
gotten
to
themselues
a
a
schismaticall
Bishop
of
their
owne
.
Againe
,
it
was
decreed
[
y
](A20733-e58750-b)
y
Conc.
Carth.
2.
c.
5.
that
Dioceses
(
that
is
,
parts
of
the
Diocesse
in
the
country
)
which
neuer
had
a
Bishop
,
should
not
haue
any
:
and
that
Diocesse
which
sometimes
had
,
should
haue
their
owne
B.
And
if
in
processe
of
time
,
the
faith
increasing
,
the
people
of
God
being
multiplied
,
shall
desire
to
haue
a
peculiar
gouernour
,
with
the
consent
or
liking
of
him
,
in
whose
power
the
Diocesse
is
,
let
them
haue
a
Bishop
.
Wee
haue
heard
it
ordained
[
z
](A20733-e58810-b)
z
Conc.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
57
siue
Cart.
3.
c.
46.
Afric
.
c.
23.
(
saith
Honoratus
and
Vrbanus
in
the
3.
Councell
of
Carthage
,
)
that
Dioceses
(
meaning
but
parts
of
the
Diocesse
in
the
Country
)
should
not
obtaine
a
Bishop
,
but
with
the
consent
of
him
vnder
whom
they
are
placed
.
But
perhaps
some
in
our
Prouince
when
they
haue
beene
ordained
Bishops
in
such
a
Diocesse
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
the
grant
of
the
B.
who
originally
holdeth
the
Dioceses
,
haue
challenged
other
Dioceses
,
this
ought
to
be
amended
.
Epigonius
answered
,
that
which
is
meet
,
is
reserued
to
euery
Bishoppe
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
out
of
the
company
or
combination
of
Parishes
iointly
possessed
,
no
part
should
bee
taken
to
haue
a
Bishoppe
of
her
owne
,
but
by
the
consent
of
him
,
who
hath
authority
,
meaning
the
Bishoppe
of
the
City
,
vnto
which
the
Country
belongeth
.
But
if
he
shall
grant
that
the
Diocesse
(
meaning
part
of
his
owne
Diocesse
)
permitted
shall
enioy
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
;
hee
that
is
so
preferred
may
not
encroch
vpon
other
Dioceses
,
(
that
is
,
other
parts
of
the
Diocesse
,
)
because
that
one
being
taken
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
out
of
the
body
of
many
was
vouchsafed
alone
to
receiue
a
Bishopricke
of
their
owne
.
The
which
sentence
when
Aurelius
the
Bishop
of
Carthage
,
and
president
of
that
Councell
had
consented
vnto
,
was
decreed
by
the
whole
Councell
.
And
that
wee
may
know
the
Parishes
in
the
Country
together
with
the
seuerall
Presbyters
set
ouer
them
,
belong
to
the
Diocesan
Bishop
,
euen
they
also
sometimes
are
called
by
the
name
of
Diocesse
.
In
the
councell
[
a
](A20733-e59010-b)
a
Conc.
Tolet.
4.
c.
35.
of
Toledo
Bishops
are
required
,
per
cunctas
Dioeceses
parochiasque
suas
,
to
goe
yearely
through
all
their
Dioceses
and
Parishes
.
And
againe
[
b
](A20733-e59050-b)
b
Ibid.
c.
32.
,
so
to
rule
their
Dioceses
,
that
is
,
Parishes
,
that
they
doe
not
presume
to
take
any
thing
from
their
right
,
but
(
according
to
the
authority
of
former
Councels
)
they
take
onely
a
third
part
of
the
offerings
and
tithes
.
But
in
an
other
Councell
[
c
](A20733-e59080-b)
c
Conc.
Braccar.
2.
c.
2
it
was
determined
,
that
no
B.
walking
per
suas
Dioeceses
,
through
his
Dioceses
,
shall
take
any
thing
besides
the
honour
of
his
chaire
,
that
is
,
2●
shillings
,
or
require
the
third
part
of
the
oblations
in
the
parish
churches
.
Sometimes
it
is
vsed
for
a
parish
Church
.
In
which
sense
,
a
parish
Presbyter
is
said
in
the
Councell
[
d
](A20733-e59120-b)
d
Conc.
Agat
.
c.
53.
&
54.
of
Agatha
,
Dioecesin
tenere
.
In
the
Councell
of
Orleans
[
e
](A20733-e59160-b)
e
Aurelian
.
3.
c.
18.
dioecesis
&
Basilica
are
vsed
promiscuously
,
as
Synonyma
.
To
which
purpose
it
is
said
[
f
](A20733-e59210-b)
f
Aurel.
4.
c.
32.
,
that
if
any
man
hath
,
or
desireth
to
haue
Dioecesin
,
that
is
,
a
Church
,
in
his
ground
,
he
must
assign
sufficient
land
vnto
it
,
&
prouide
a
Clerke
for
it
.
CHAP.
IJ.
Prouing
by
other
Arguments
that
the
ancient
Churches
which
had
Bishops
,
were
not
Parishes
,
but
Dioceses
.
ANd
thus
much
may
suffice
to
haue
spoken
of
the
names
,
about
which
the
testimonies
which
I
haue
brought
,
haue
beene
almost
so
many
euidences
for
the
Diocesan
,
and
against
the
parishionall
Bishops
.
Now
I
proceede
to
other
arguments
;
desiring
the
Reader
to
remember
that
the
question
is
concerning
such
Churches
,
as
were
endued
with
power
of
Ecclesiastical
gouernment
and
iurisdiction
,
to
wit
,
whether
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
the
ages
following
,
they
were
Parishes
,
as
we
cal
them
,
or
Dioceses
.
And
first
I
will
shew
they
were
not
Parishes
,
and
after
,
that
they
were
Dioceses
.
For
,
if
Parishes
,
then
the
Parishes
either
in
the
Countries
,
or
Cities
were
such
:
but
neyther
the
parishes
in
the
Country
,
nor
in
the
Citie
,
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
and
a
Presbytery
.
Which
is
so
euident
a
truth
to
them
that
haue
read
the
Councels
,
Histories
,
and
Fathers
of
the
antient
Church
,
that
it
is
to
be
wondred
,
how
men
of
learning
and
reading
,
being
also
men
of
conscience
,
can
deny
it
.
But
seeing
it
is
denied
,
I
must
be
content
to
proue
it
,
viz.
that
regularly
,
lawfully
,
ordinarily
Bishops
and
Presbyteries
were
not
placed
in
the
seuerall
parishes
.
For
these
words
I
hope
may
be
added
with
the
Refuters
leaue
,
seeing
neither
it
can
be
preiudicious
to
mee
what
was
at
any
time
vnlawfully
done
,
nor
aduantagious
to
him
,
vnlesse
hee
will
vrge
a
reformation
,
according
to
the
paterne
of
the
Churches
(
if
there
were
any
such
)
which
were
irregularly
,
extraordinarily
,
and
vnlawfully
gouerned
.
First
therefore
for
Country
parishes
,
because
I
maintaine
the
negatiue
,
and
the
proofe
of
the
affirmatiue
lieth
vpon
my
aduersary
,
I
challenge
him
to
produce
some
proofe
,
if
he
bee
able
,
within
400.
yeeres
after
Christ
,
of
Country
parishes
lawfully
,
regularly
,
ordinarily
furnished
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
and
gouerned
by
their
owne
Bishoppes
,
such
as
they
speake
of
,
assisted
with
their
Presbyteries
.
Which
if
hee
bee
not
able
to
performe
,
(
as
I
am
well
assured
hee
is
not
)
hee
must
acknowledge
his
parish
Bishoppe
to
bee
of
the
same
stampe
.
with
his
lay-presbyters
,
that
is
to
say
,
a
meere
counterfet
.
But
not
expecting
his
proofe
,
J
will
prooue
,
that
neither
they
had
Bishoppe
of
their
owne
,
nor
yet
Presbyteries
.
As
touching
the
former
,
it
cannot
be
denied
,
but
in
some
places
the
Presbyters
of
parishes
growing
ambitious
,
haue
desired
to
bee
Bishoppes
of
their
parish
,
and
their
people
vaine
glorious
haue
seconded
their
desire
.
But
in
all
well
ordered
Churches
,
their
presumption
hath
been
resisted
,
and
their
vaine
desires
frustrated
.
I
doe
confesse
,
that
in
Africke
,
which
alwaies
bringeth
forth
some
noueltie
,
and
from
whence
all
T.
C.
his
newes
in
this
cause
doe
come
,
some
parts
of
the
diocesse
being
very
populous
,
haue
obtained
a
Bishoppe
of
their
owne
.
But
when
?
Conc.
Carth.
gr.
c.
54.
&
101.
when
the
charge
was
so
great
,
as
that
by
it selfe
it
seemed
to
deserue
a
Bishop
.
And
how
?
First
,
with
the
leaue
of
the
Bishop
of
the
city
,
in
whose
diocesse
it
was
.
Secondly
,
with
the
approbation
of
the
Metropolitane
and
the
prouinciall
Synode
.
Thirdly
,
hee
which
obtained
the
honour
of
beeing
a
bishoppe
was
aduanced
to
a
higher
degree
,
then
himselfe
had
before
,
or
other
country
pastors
haue
,
and
was
ordained
a
Bishop
by
the
Metropolitan
and
two
other
Bishops
at
the
least
.
Conc.
Carth.
2.
c.
5.
In
the
second
councell
of
Carthage
it
was
decreed
,
that
the
Dioceses
(
meaning
,
as
I
haue
said
,
parts
of
any
diocesse
in
the
Country
)
which
neuer
receiued
Bishoppes
of
their
owne
,
may
haue
none
;
and
that
diocesse
which
sometimes
had
,
may
still
haue
a
Bishoppe
of
their
owne
.
And
if
in
processe
of
time
,
the
faith
increasing
,
the
people
of
God
being
multiplied
,
shall
desire
to
haue
a
gouernour
of
their
owne
,
that
then
they
may
haue
a
Bishoppe
with
his
leaue
,
in
whose
power
the
diocesse
is
.
Conc.
Carth.
3.
c.
42.
et
.
43.
Carth.
gr.
54.
In
the
third
Councell
of
Carthage
it
is
said
,
that
it
had
beeen
determined
in
many
Councels
,
that
the
people
which
be
in
the
parishes
or
diocesses
held
by
the
Bishoppes
,
which
neuer
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
should
not
receiue
gouernours
of
their
owne
,
that
is
to
say
,
Bishoppes
,
but
with
the
consent
of
the
Bishoppe
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
whom
from
the
beginning
they
haue
been
inioied
.
But
forasmuch
as
some
hauing
obtained
this
honor
abused
it
tyrannically
,
and
withdrew
themselues
schismatically
from
the
communion
of
other
Bishops
:
and
forasmuch
as
also
certaine
Presbyters
lifting
vp
their
neckes
against
their
BB.
vsed
indirect
meanes
to
allure
their
people
,
that
themselues
might
be
made
Bishoppes
;
therefore
it
was
ordained
,
that
such
a
people
in
the
paroecia
▪
or
diocesse
,
which
is
subiect
to
the
antient
Bishoppe
,
and
neuer
had
a
Bishoppe
of
their
owne
,
should
not
obtaine
a
proper
Doctor
,
meaning
Bishoppe
.
And
as
touching
those
which
had
attained
to
this
honour
vnlawfully
,
and
withdrew
themselues
from
the
synods
of
Bishoppes
,
it
was
determined
that
they
should
not
onely
lose
their
diocesse
,
but
also
their
owne
Church
.
For
it
is
fit
the
Bishops
which
are
vnited
to
all
their
brethren
,
and
to
the
whole
synod
,
should
iustly
retaine
not
onely
their
owne
Cathedra
or
See
,
but
also
that
they
should
possesse
such
dioceses
.
And
whereas
some
[
l
](A20733-e59500-b)
l
Ibid.
c.
46.
Carth.
gr.
c.
57.
being
made
Bishops
in
part
of
other
mens
dioceses
,
with
their
leaue
and
consent
,
did
incroach
vpon
parts
of
the
diocesse
not
granted
vnto
them
,
it
was
concluded
,
that
he
which
in
the
diocesse
is
preferred
to
be
Bishoppe
,
by
the
consent
of
the
antient
Bishoppe
,
who
holdeth
the
mother
or
cathedrall
Church
,
shall
only
retain
that
people
vnto
which
he
was
ordained
.
Finally
,
in
another
Councell
[
m
](A20733-e59530-b)
m
Conc.
Afr.
c.
65.
Carth.
gr.
c.
101
of
Africke
,
it
was
decreed
,
that
such
people
as
neuer
had
B.
of
their
own
,
should
in
no
wise
obtaine
a
B.
vnlesse
it
be
by
the
decree
of
the
whole
synod
of
euery
prouince
,
and
of
the
primate
,
and
also
by
the
consent
of
him
vnder
whose
diocesse
the
said
Church
is
placed
.
Out
of
which
canons
,
we
may
obserue
these
things
.
First
,
that
the
Country
churches
belonged
to
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Bishop
in
the
Citie
.
Secondly
,
that
euer
from
the
beginning
,
they
haue
belonged
to
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
.
Thirdly
,
that
those
parts
of
dioceses
,
which
then
had
no
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
neuer
had
.
Fourthly
,
that
the
number
of
Bishopricks
was
not
wont
to
be
diminished
,
or
the
circuits
of
them
inlarged
,
but
contrariwise
,
if
there
were
cause
,
the
number
was
increased
,
and
the
circuits
or
dioceses
lessened
.
Fifthly
,
that
when
a
new
Bishopricke
was
to
be
erected
,
it
was
erected
in
some
Bishops
diocesse
,
but
not
without
his
leaue
and
liking
,
and
also
approbation
of
the
Primate
and
Prouinciall
synod
.
Sixthly
,
that
when
a
new
Bishopricke
was
erected
,
that
part
wherein
it
was
erected
,
was
taken
,
as
before
I
noted
[
n
](A20733-e59620-b)
n
Cart.
gr.
c.
54.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
from
all
the
parts
iointly
possessed
,
and
as
it
were
from
the
body
of
the
rest
.
Seuenthly
,
that
hee
which
was
preferred
to
such
a
Bishopricke
was
not
a
parish
Bishoppe
.
For
besides
his
owne
Church
,
hee
had
a
diocesse
.
Neither
were
they
appointed
according
to
the
new
conceit
to
euery
parish
,
but
to
such
populous
parts
of
dioceses
,
as
might
seeme
worthy
of
a
Bishop
.
Eighthly
,
that
when
a
new
Bishopricke
was
erected
,
the
Presbyter
who
obtained
this
honour
,
was
anew
ordained
thereto
as
Bishoppe
,
and
so
placed
in
a
superiour
degree
of
the
Ministerie
,
then
that
which
hee
had
when
he
was
the
Pastor
or
Presby●er
onely
of
a
parish
.
[
o
](A20733-e59690-b)
o
Clem.
ep.
1.
ad
Iacob
.
Clemens
and
[
p
](A20733-e59730-b)
p
Anaclet
.
ep.
3.
c.
2.
Anacletus
,
ordaining
that
Bishoppes
should
not
bee
ordained
in
Villages
or
Townes
,
or
small
Cities
,
lest
the
names
of
Bishoppes
should
grow
vile
:
but
in
such
places
Presbyters
were
seuerally
to
bee
placed
in
each
of
them
.
But
I
need
not
the
testimonies
of
such
as
are
supposed
counterfet
:
and
yet
it
is
to
bee
confessed
,
that
the
Epistle
of
Clemens
was
aboue
one
thousand
two
hundred
yeeres
agoe
translated
by
Ruffinus
;
and
that
which
in
this
point
either
of
them
decreed
,
agreeth
with
the
generall
and
perpetuall
practise
of
the
Church
,
from
the
Apostles
time
to
our
age
.
But
to
let
them
passe
:
the
Epistle
of
Leo
[
q
](A20733-e59800-b)
q
Leo
ep.
87.
ad
episc
.
Afr.
c.
2.
the
Great
,
is
without
suspicion
,
which
he
wrote
to
the
Bishops
of
Africke
,
requiring
that
this
among
all
the
statutes
of
the
Canons
be
obserued
,
that
not
in
any
places
or
townes
,
Bishops
should
be
consecrated
,
nor
where
heretofore
they
haue
not
been
,
seeing
where
the
lesse
people
or
smaller
companies
are
,
the
care
of
Presbyters
may
suffice
.
But
episcopall
gouernment
is
onely
to
be
set
ouer
greater
people
and
more
frequent
or
populous
Cities
,
lest
what
the
decrees
of
the
holy
Fathers
inspired
of
God
haue
forbidden
,
the
height
of
priesthood
should
be
giuen
to
villages
and
parishes
,
or
obscure
and
solitary
townes
,
and
the
episcopall
honour
whereto
more
excellent
things
ought
to
bee
committed
,
it selfe
should
grow
vile
or
contemptible
,
by
the
multitude
thereof
.
The
canons
whereof
he
speaketh
(
that
I
may
also
come
to
them
)
were
the
Canons
of
the
councels
held
at
Sardica
and
Laodicea
.
The
councell
held
at
Sardica
not
long
after
the
councell
at
Nice
,
assembled
by
the
authority
of
the
two
Emperors
Constans
and
Constantius
,
celebrated
by
341
BB.
as
Balsamo
saith
,
among
whom
some
of
the
chiefe
had
bene
present
at
the
councill
of
Nice
,
as
Hosius
and
Athanasius
&c.
which
also
confirmed
the
faith
before
concluded
in
the
councel
of
Nice
,
at
that
time
much
oppugned
by
the
Arians
●this
councell
,
I
say
,
determined
[
r
](A20733-e59910-b)
r
Conc.
Sardic
.
c.
6.
that
it
is
simply
[
s
](A20733-e59940-b)
s
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
vnlawfull
to
constitute
a
Bishop
in
a
village
or
small
[
t
](A20733-e59970-b)
t
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
City
,
vnto
which
euen
one
onely
Presbyter
doth
suffice
.
For
it
is
not
needfull
that
Bishops
should
bee
placed
there
,
lest
the
name
&
authority
of
a
Bishop
grow
into
contempt
.
But
the
Bishops
of
the
prouince
(
being
assembled
as
before
was
said
by
the
Metropolitan
)
must
ordaine
Bishops
in
such
Cities
as
where
before
had
beene
Bishops
.
But
if
there
shall
any
Citty
bee
found
so
abounding
with
multitude
of
people
,
that
it
may
seeme
worthie
of
a
Bishopricke
,
let
it
haue
a
Bishop
.
For
that
of
Laodicea
,
though
it
were
but
a
prouinciall
Synode
,
yet
the
decrees
thereof
were
receiued
into
the
ancient
Code
of
canons
,
and
were
confirmed
by
the
generall
councell
[
u
](A20733-e60020-b)
u
Con.
Constant
.
in
Trull
.
c.
2.
held
in
Trullo
.
In
that
councill
[
x
](A20733-e60040-b)
x
Conc.
Laodicen
.
c.
56.
alids
57
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
for
so
Balsam
and
some
manuscripts
and
latin
translations
,
read
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
therefore
it
was
decreed
,
that
Bishops
ought
not
to
bee
placed
in
villages
and
countrey
townes
,
but
visitors
:
and
that
those
which
before
that
time
had
beene
ordained
,
might
doe
nothing
without
the
consent
of
the
Bishop
,
who
is
in
the
Citty
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
The
same
hath
Photius
,
[
y
](A20733-e60140-b)
y
Phot.
Nomecan
.
lit.
1.
c.
19.
Ne
sit
omnino
in
parua
ciuitate
vel
vice
Episcopus
.
To
these
we
may
ad
the
decree
of
the
councell
of
Toledo
:
which
though
it
were
of
latter
times
then
the
councels
before
mentioned
,
[
z
](A20733-e60200-b)
z
Conc.
Tolet.
12.
c.
4.
yet
was
held
aboue
9.
hundred
yeares
agoe
,
beeing
ratified
and
confirmed
by
Eringius
the
King
:
which
I
doe
the
rather
mention
,
because
whereas
the
Bishop
of
Merida
[
z
](A20733-e60240-b)
z
Conc.
Tolet.
12.
c.
4.
by
the
commandement
of
their
late
King
Bamba
,
had
ordained
a
Bishop
in
a
monastery
standing
in
a
small
towne
,
the
said
councell
finding
it
to
be
a
nouellous
attempt
,
contrary
to
the
canons
of
the
councels
and
practise
of
the
Church
,
decreed
that
there
should
not
continue
in
the
place
aforesaid
an
Episcopall
See
,
neither
should
any
Bishop
afterwards
bee
placed
there
.
As
for
him
,
that
was
ordained
not
by
his
owne
ambition
,
but
by
the
Kings
compulsion
;
they
grant
to
him
this
fauour
,
to
bee
remooued
to
the
See
of
some
Bishoppe
deceasing
.
And
in
the
end
they
make
this
generall
decree
:
If
any
man
shall
cause
a
Bishop
to
bee
made
in
those
places
,
where
a
Bishop
neuer
was
,
let
him
be
anathema
in
the
sight
of
God
almighty
:
So
Burchardus
readeth
decret.
lib.
5.
c.
32.
and
moreouer
let
both
the
ordainer
and
the
ordained
lose
the
degree
of
his
order
,
because
hee
hath
presumed
to
ouerthrow
not
onely
the
decrees
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
but
also
the
Apostolicall
ordinances
.
This
therefore
is
my
first
argument
against
parish
Bishops
in
the
countrey
:
That
which
was
iudged
vnlawfull
by
the
canons
of
approoued
councils
,
and
decrees
of
godly
Bishops
,
was
neuer
lawfully
,
regularly
,
ordinarily
practised
:
But
the
placing
of
Bishops
in
countrie
parishes
,
was
iudged
vnlawfull
by
the
canons
of
approoued
councels
,
and
decrees
of
godly
Bishops
,
as
I
haue
shewed
:
Therefore
the
placing
of
Bishops
in
country
parishes
was
neuer
lawfully
,
regularly
,
ordinarily
practised
.
that
the
country
Bishops
(
which
had
beene
before
ordained
)
were
parish
Bishops
.
For
those
Bishops
,
because
they
were
placed
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Countries
,
were
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
you
would
say
,
Countrie-Bishops
,
to
distinguish
them
from
the
other
Bishops
,
whose
See
was
in
the
Citie
.
Now
these
Chorepiscopi
were
not
in
all
Dioceses
,
much
lesse
in
all
parishes
;
nor
assigned
,
where
they
were
,
to
one
parish
(
as
they
were
Bishoppes
)
but
where
the
Diocesse
was
large
,
were
ordained
in
some
places
remote
from
the
citie
,
to
supply
the
absence
of
the
Bishop
,
in
some
such
circuits
as
our
rurall
Deanries
are
,
wherein
diuers
parishes
were
contained
.
These
Chorepicsopi
at
the
first
,
had
Episcopall
ordination
,
by
the
imposition
of
the
hands
of
three
Bishops
,
insomuch
that
of
the
three
hundred
and
eighteene
Bishoppes
assembled
at
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
there
were
fifteeene
Countrie-Bishoppes
:
For
which
fifteene
,
if
all
pastors
of
parishes
had
beene
Countrie-Bishoppes
,
there
might
haue
beene
,
I
doubt
not
,
fifteene
hundred
,
if
not
fifteene
thousand
:
But
when
these
Countrie-Bishoppes
,
beeing
but
the
Bishoppes
suffraganes
,
and
substitutes
,
placed
in
the
Countrie
to
supplie
the
Bishoppes
roome
,
and
to
exercise
some
matters
of
lesse
moment
appertaining
to
the
Episcopall
function
,
began
to
encroach
vpon
the
Bishoppes
right
,
and
to
vsurpe
Episcopall
authoritie
,
and
jurisdiction
beyond
their
commission
;
they
were
by
little
and
little
restrained
;
and
when
they
would
not
be
kept
within
their
compasse
,
their
order
(
at
least
as
they
were
Bishops
)
beeing
but
an
humane-ordinance
,
deuised
for
the
ease
of
the
Bishoppes
in
the
citie
,
was
in
most
places
abolished
.
But
forsomuch
as
that
which
is
recorded
concerning
these
countrie
Bishops
,
doth
giue
great
light
to
this
present
controuersie
,
it
will
not
be
vnprofitable
,
nor
,
I
hope
,
vnpleasing
to
the
reader
,
if
I
acquaint
him
with
that
which
is
written
concerning
them
.
First
therefore
in
the
councel
of
Neocesaria
,
wherunto
among
other
BB.
two
Chorepiscopi
subscribed
,
we
find
this
difference
betweene
country
presbyters
&
country
Bishops
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
a
](A20733-e60510-b)
a
Conc.
Neocaes
.
c.
13.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Presbyters
or
Ministers
of
the
countrey
may
not
offer
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
the
cathedrall
Church
of
the
City
,
the
Bishop
or
Presbyters
of
the
citty
beeing
present
,
neither
may
they
at
the
time
of
prayer
deliuer
the
bread
nor
the
cuppe
:
but
if
they
bee
absent
,
and
one
of
them
alone
bee
called
to
prayer
,
then
hee
may
,
because
hee
is
of
the
same
Church
or
Diocesse
,
as
some
note
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
b
](A20733-e60580-b)
b
Ibid.
c.
14.
,
but
countrey
Bishops
,
who
are
indeede
after
the
manner
of
the
70.
yet
beeing
honoured
as
fellow
Ministers
,
they
doe
offer
.
Vpon
which
words
Balsamo
[
c
](A20733-e60630-b)
c
Theod.
Bals.
in
Conc.
Neocaesar
.
noteth
two
things
.
First
,
where
the
councell
saith
they
were
as
the
Seuentie
,
it
seemeth
to
deny
that
they
had
power
to
ordain
ministers
and
deacons
.
Secondly
,
that
among
other
vses
,
for
which
they
were
appointed
,
they
were
ordained
to
distribute
the
money
to
the
poore
,
which
appertained
to
them
.
Besides
,
we
may
obserue
that
both
the
country
Bishops
and
country
Presbyters
,
belong
to
the
diocesse
of
the
Bishop
in
the
city
(
which
heereafter
wil
more
clearely
appeare
)
and
that
the
countrey
Bishop
was
in
a
degree
of
honour
superiour
to
country
Ministres
,
and
yet
inferiour
to
the
Bishops
.
The
councel
of
Ancyra
[
d
](A20733-e60660-b)
d
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
13.
which
is
more
ancient
than
the
former
,
and
both
of
them
elder
then
the
councill
of
Nice
,
perceiuing
the
country
Bishops
to
encroch
vpon
the
Bishops
right
,
determined
[
e
](A20733-e60680-b)
e
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&c.
it
to
be
vnlawfull
for
contrey
Bishops
to
ordaine
Presbyters
or
Deacons
.
The
councell
of
Antioch
,
[
f
](A20733-e60720-b)
f
Conc.
Antio
.
c.
8.
the
Latins
call
them
for
matas
literas
.
though
it
gaue
liberty
to
countrey
Bishops
which
were
blamelesse
,
to
send
canonicall
letters
(
as
the
manner
of
Bishops
among
themselues
,
in
those
times
was
)
which
it
denied
to
country
presbyters
:
yet
for
so
much
as
the
Chorepiscopi
stil
presumed
to
ordaine
,
alleging
that
they
might
lawfully
doe
it
,
because
they
had
beene
ordained
as
Bishops
.
Jt
therefore
determined
,
[
g
](A20733-e60760-b)
g
Con.
Antioc
.
c.
10.
that
Bishops
placed
in
the
Townes
and
Countries
,
called
Chorepiscopi
,
although
they
had
receiued
the
ordination
of
BB
yet
they
should
know
their
owne
measure
,
and
gouerne
the
Churches
subiect
vnto
them
,
and
content
themselues
with
the
care
and
ouersight
thereof
:
and
hauing
authoritie
to
ordaine
Subdeacons
and
Exorcists
,
should
satisfie
themselues
with
preferring
of
them
,
and
not
presume
to
ordaine
Presbyters
or
Deacons
,
without
[
h
](A20733-e60790-b)
h
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
the
Bishop
in
the
Citie
whereunto
both
himselfe
and
the
Country
are
subiect
.
But
if
any
shall
presume
to
transgresse
this
decree
,
hee
shall
be
depriued
of
that
honour
which
hee
hath
.
And
whereas
they
pretended
that
they
had
episcopall
ordination
,
and
therefore
as
BB
might
ordaine
Ministers
;
to
take
away
that
pretence
,
it
determined
also
,
that
the
Country
B.
should
be
ordained
(
not
of
the
Metropolitan
and
two
or
three
other
Bishops
,
as
a
Bishop
,
but
as
other
Presbyters
or
Ministers
)
of
the
Bishop
of
the
City
,
vnto
which
he
is
subiect
.
So
that
whereas
before
Chorepiscopi
were
Suffragan
Bishops
,
afterwards
(
according
to
this
decree
)
they
were
but
Presbyters
in
deede
,
though
they
had
the
title
of
Bishops
;
neither
were
they
acknowledged
for
any
more
by
the
Fathers
and
Councels
of
latter
times
.
There
is
an
Epistle
which
goeth
vnder
the
name
of
Damasus
,
[
i
](A20733-e60870-b)
i
Damas.
epist.
4.
de
Chorepiscopis
.
the
Author
whereof
supposeth
,
that
Chorepiscopi
are
but
Presbyters
,
because
they
are
found
[
k
](A20733-e60920-b)
k
Conc.
Neocaesar
.
c.
14.
to
haue
beene
ordained
at
the
first
after
the
example
of
the
70.
But
now
because
they
are
not
necessarie
in
regard
of
their
diligence
towards
the
poore
,
and
because
they
presumed
aboue
that
which
was
lawfull
for
them
to
doe
,
therefore
they
are
remooued
from
Episcopall
offices
.
Wee
know
(
saith
hee
)
there
were
but
two
orders
among
the
Disciples
of
Christ
,
that
is
to
say
,
of
the
12.
Apostles
,
and
70.
Disciples
:
whence
this
third
came
,
we
know
not
;
for
neither
are
they
Bishops
,
because
they
be
not
ordained
of
three
Bishops
,
but
only
of
one
;
neither
may
Bishops
by
the
Canons
bee
placed
in
Country
townes
;
neither
may
they
be
in
the
Citie
,
because
in
one
Citie
there
may
be
but
one
Bishop
.
Neither
will
they
bee
called
Presbyters
,
but
will
be
accounted
more
then
Presbyters
.
Whether
Damasus
were
Author
of
that
Epistle
,
I
know
not
;
but
this
I
am
sure
,
that
Leo
[
l
](A20733-e61010-b)
l
Leo
epist.
88.
the
great
in
his
Epistle
to
the
BB.
of
Germanie
and
France
,
doth
shew
himselfe
to
bee
of
the
same
iudgement
,
a
good
part
of
his
Epistle
differing
little
from
the
aforesaid
Epistle
,
which
beareth
the
name
of
Damasus
.
And
this
iudgement
of
Leo
was
so
approued
of
the
Councell
of
Ciuill
,
[
m
](A20733-e61050-b)
m
C.
Hispal.
2.
c.
7.
whereof
Isidore
was
President
,
that
it
followeth
the
same
almost
word
for
word
.
That
the
Chorepiscopi
were
superiour
to
them
,
it
is
apparant
,
because
not
onely
they
had
some
iurisdiction
ouer
diuers
parishes
,
but
for
a
time
had
episcopall
ordination
,
and
had
authoritie
to
ordaine
Subdeacons
,
and
to
place
Readers
in
parishes
,
as
also
they
might
send
Formatas
,
or
Canonicall
Epistles
,
which
the
Presbyters
might
not
doe
.
Likewise
,
when
Bishops
were
at
any
time
conuerted
from
heresie
,
[
n
](A20733-e61170-b)
n
Con.
Nic.
c.
8.
though
they
were
not
permitted
to
be
Bishops
of
the
City
,
yet
they
were
gratified
with
the
name
and
authoritie
of
Chorepiscopi
.
In
the
time
of
Theodosius
and
Valentinian
,
a
certaine
Bishop
had
beene
ordained
by
two
Bishops
only
:
but
this
ordination
the
Councell
of
Rhegium
[
o
](A20733-e61220-b)
o
Conc.
Rhegiens
.
c.
1.2.3.4
.
pronounced
void
,
and
censured
the
ordainers
.
As
for
the
partie
ordained
,
because
hee
had
of
himselfe
renounced
the
Bishopricke
,
they
thought
good
to
follow
the
example
of
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
and
to
gratifie
him
with
the
name
and
title
of
a
Chorepiscopus
;
but
so
,
as
that
hee
should
not
ordaine
,
nor
exercise
any
other
episcopall
function
,
but
only
confirme
Nouices
,
and
consecrate
Virgins
,
and
in
all
things
behaue
himselfe
as
inferiour
to
a
Bishop
,
and
as
superiour
to
a
Presbyter
.
And
this
was
my
second
argument
,
whereby
I
haue
prooued
,
that
Countrey
parishes
had
no
Bishops
.
Neither
had
each
of
them
a
Presbyterie
,
[
p
](A20733-e61270-b)
p
Conc.
Sardic
.
c.
6.
,
and
by
the
iudgement
of
Leo
[
q
](A20733-e61300-b)
q
Leo
epist.
87.
.
Yea
not
Presbyters
only
did
seuerallie
gouerne
parishes
,
as
with
vs
,
but
sometimes
Deacons
also
were
by
themselues
set
ouer
charges
.
You
heard
before
diuers
testimonies
of
the
Presbyters
of
parishes
,
as
namely
that
[
r
](A20733-e61320-b)
r
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
102.
of
the
Councel
of
Carthage
,
Presbyter
qui
Paroeciae
praest
,
&c.
the
Presbyter
which
gouerneth
the
parish
.
The
like
is
presupposed
of
Deacons
in
the
Councell
of
Eliberis
,
[
s
](A20733-e61360-b)
s
Conc.
Eliber
.
c.
77.
which
is
supposed
to
be
as
ancient
as
the
Councell
of
Nice
:
If
any
Deacon
ruling
a
people
,
shall
without
a
Bishop
or
Presbyter
baptize
any
,
&c.
Againe
,
if
parishes
besides
their
Presbyter
or
Pastor
had
a
presbytery
,
then
was
it
either
of
the
Ministery
,
or
of
the
Laitie
.
But
Presbyteries
of
Ministers
were
only
in
Cities
,
and
Cathedrall
Churches
,
and
not
any
examples
can
bee
alleged
of
Presbyteries
in
the
Country
,
no
not
to
assist
the
Chorepiscopi
,
much
lesse
to
assist
the
Presbyters
of
parishes
:
and
Presbyteries
of
Lay
men
were
neuer
heard
of
till
this
last
age
:
Therefore
the
seuerall
parishes
had
not
Presbyteries
.
Moreouer
,
Churches
endued
with
power
ecclesiasticall
sufficient
for
the
gouernment
of
themselues
,
But
Countrey
parishes
had
not
the
power
of
ordination
.
Therefore
Countrey
parishes
were
not
indued
with
power
ecclesiasticall
,
neither
had
they
a
Bishop
or
Presbyterie
of
their
owne
.
For
the
Assumption
,
let
the
Refuter
consider
with
mee
,
what
course
was
taken
in
Countrey
parishes
,
when
their
Minister
was
departed
.
Among
themselues
they
had
ordinarily
none
;
or
if
by
chance
they
had
,
they
could
not
ordaine
him
,
but
were
(
as
sometimes
it
happened
in
Cities
)
to
offer
him
to
the
Bishop
to
be
ordained
.
Vniuersities
they
had
none
from
whence
to
fetch
a
learned
Minister
:
out
of
other
dioceses
they
were
not
to
bee
supplied
,
vnlesse
first
it
did
appeare
,
that
their
owne
Bishop
was
not
able
out
of
his
Clergie
to
furnish
them
.
To
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
therefore
they
did
resort
,
who
out
of
the
Clergie
belonging
to
the
Cathedrall
Church
,
(
wherein
,
as
the
Nurserie
of
the
diocesse
,
diuers
were
brought
vp
in
the
studie
of
diuinitie
)
did
supply
their
want
,
assigning
some
one
of
his
Clergie
vnto
them
.
But
if
there
were
none
fit
,
(
as
sometimes
their
store
was
drawne
drie
,
by
supplying
the
wants
of
many
)
they
might
not
ordaine
a
Minister
of
another
diocesse
,
whom
they
called
another
Bishops
Clerke
,
without
his
leaue
and
dimissorie
letters
:
for
that
in
the
Canons
was
condemned
as
a
great
wrong
;
and
such
ordinations
were
to
be
disanulled
.
If
therefore
the
Bishop
neither
had
of
his
owne
,
nor
knew
not
readily
where
to
be
supplied
out
of
a
neighbour
diocesse
,
with
the
consent
of
his
neighbour
Bishop
,
he
sent
to
the
Metropolitan
,
[
t
](A20733-e61470-b)
t
Conc.
Carth.
Gr.
c.
54.
siue
Carth.
3.
c.
42.
who
either
out
of
his
owne
Clergie
,
or
some
other
in
the
Prouince
,
was
to
supplie
them
.
And
this
,
as
it
is
euident
to
them
who
haue
read
any
thing
concerning
the
state
of
the
ancient
Churches
;
so
is
it
confessed
by
Caluin
.
Each
City
(
saith
he
)
[
u
](A20733-e61520-b)
u
Iustit
.
l.
4.
c.
4.
§.
2.
had
a
College
of
Presbyters
,
who
were
Pastors
and
Teachers
;
for
both
did
they
all
discharge
the
office
of
teaching
,
&c.
to
the
people
,
and
also
that
they
might
leaue
seede
behinde
them
,
they
were
diligently
imploied
in
instructing
the
younger
sort
of
the
Clergie
.
To
euery
Citie
a
certaine
region
was
attributed
,
which
should
receiue
their
Ministers
from
thence
,
and
be
accounted
of
the
body
of
that
Church
.
It
is
therefore
euident
,
that
Countrey
parishes
had
not
each
of
them
a
Bishop
and
Presbyterie
,
nor
that
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
which
they
talke
of
.
And
much
lesse
had
the
parishes
in
the
Cities
.
I
shall
haue
occasion
to
speake
more
of
this
point
when
I
shall
[
x
](A20733-e61600-b)
x
Lib.
3.
cap.
3.
intreat
of
the
singularitie
of
preheminence
which
the
Bishop
in
euery
diocesse
had
for
terme
of
life
.
A
few
testimonies
therfore
shal
suffice
in
this
place
.
In
the
Church
of
Rome
there
were
many
not
onely
Presbyters
besides
the
one
onely
lawfull
Bishop
,
but
also
diuers
parishes
and
titles
soone
after
the
Apostles
times
,
whereunto
Presbyters
were
assigned
seuerally
,
the
Bishop
being
the
Superintendent
ouer
them
all
.
About
the
yeere
250.
Cornelius
[
a
](A20733-e61640-b)
a
Euseb.
lib.
6.
c.
43.
being
chosen
Bishop
of
Rome
,
Nonatianus
a
Presbyter
of
Rome
discontented
with
the
election
,
by
the
instigation
of
Nonatus
a
fugitiue
Bishop
lately
come
out
of
Africke
,
not
only
broached
the
heresie
of
the
Nouatians
,
or
Catharists
,
but
procure●●
three
simple
B
shops
fetched
from
the
vttermost
parts
of
Italie
,
to
ordaine
him
B●shop
of
Rome
:
hauing
also
inueigled
by
his
subtilties
,
certaine
famous
men
,
that
had
beene
Confessours
to
bee
of
his
partie
,
and
to
ioine
with
him
in
the
schisme
against
Cornelius
.
Of
this
fact
,
what
was
the
iudgement
of
Cyprian
,
of
Cornelius
,
and
other
B●shops
,
and
finally
of
the
Confessours
themselues
,
you
shall
in
few
words
heare
.
For
when
Nouatianus
had
sent
his
Messengers
,
as
to
other
chiefe
B●shops
,
so
to
Carthage
,
to
procure
the
approbation
of
Cyprian
,
hee
disswadeth
them
from
the
schisme
,
telling
them
[
b
](A20733-e61740-b)
b
Cypr
li.
2.
epist.
11.
that
a
B●shop
being
ordained
,
and
approoued
by
the
testimonie
and
iudgement
of
his
fellow
B●shops
,
and
of
the
people
,
another
may
not
by
any
meanes
be
ordained
.
And
writing
to
some
of
those
Confessours
,
hee
signifieth
his
great
griefe
,
[
c
](A20733-e61770-b)
c
Li.
3.
epist.
2.
because
he
vnderstood
that
they
,
contrary
to
the
order
of
the
Church
,
contrary
to
the
law
of
the
Gospell
,
contrarie
to
the
vnity
of
Catholike
discipline
,
had
thought
it
meet
,
that
another
B.
should
be
made
,
that
is
to
say
,
which
is
neither
right
nor
lawfull
to
bee
done
,
that
another
Church
should
be
erected
,
the
members
of
Christ
dismembred
,
&c.
Cornelius
hauing
called
together
diuers
Bishops
besides
his
owne
Clergie
,
deposed
the
Bishops
who
ordained
Nouatianus
:
and
writing
of
these
matters
to
Fabius
[
d
](A20733-e61840-b)
d
Euseb.
l.
6.
c.
43.
the
B.
of
Antioch
,
he
saith
,
this
Patron
of
the
Gospell
forsooth
(
meaning
Nouatian
)
did
not
know
that
in
a
Catholike
Church
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
there
ought
to
bee
but
one
B.
in
which
notwithstanding
he
could
not
be
ignorant
,
but
that
there
are
46.
Presbyters
,
and
108.
more
of
the
Clergie
.
The
Confessors
[
e
](A20733-e61900-b)
e
Epist.
Cornel.
ap●d
Cypr.
l.
3.
epist.
11.
afterwards
acknowledging
their
fault
,
among
other
things
in
their
submission
confesse
,
that
as
there
is
but
one
God
and
one
Lord
,
so
in
a
Catholike
Church
there
ought
to
be
but
one
Bishop
.
Now
whereas
Cornelius
testifieth
,
that
there
were
besides
the
Bishop
,
who
ought
to
be
but
one
,
46.
Presbyters
in
the
Citie
of
Rome
,
and
108.
others
of
the
Clergie
:
if
any
man
(
notwithstanding
it
bee
also
testified
by
diuers
,
that
there
were
diuers
Churches
in
Rome
,
whereunto
seuerall
Presbyters
were
assigned
)
will
needes
hold
,
that
the
whole
Church
of
Rome
was
but
one
parish
,
and
that
all
these
Presbyters
and
Clerkes
attended
but
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
;
I
cannot
let
him
from
being
so
absurd
.
Howbeit
,
this
is
certaine
,
that
in
the
next
age
,
in
Optatus
[
f
](A20733-e61960-b)
f
Contr.
Parmen.
l.
2.40
.
&
quod
excurrit
basilicas
,
&c.
his
time
,
when
there
were
in
Rome
aboue
fortie
parish
Churches
,
whereunto
seuerall
Presbyters
were
deputed
,
there
remained
still
but
one
only
Bishop
.
The
like
is
to
be
said
of
Alexandria
,
wherein
(
as
Epiphanius
[
g
](A20733-e62010-b)
g
Haeres.
69.
testifieth
)
were
before
the
time
of
Constantine
many
parish
Churches
,
all
which
(
at
least
so
many
as
were
Catholike
)
were
vnder
one
Archbishop
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
ouer
them
seuerally
are
Presbyters
placed
,
for
the
ecclesiasticall
necessities
of
the
inhabitants
,
who
might
each
of
them
bee
neere
vnto
their
owne
Church
,
&c.
Now
(
saith
Epiphanius
)
besides
the
Church
called
Caesaria
,
which
was
burnt
in
Iulians
time
,
and
reedified
by
Athanasius
,
there
are
many
others
,
as
the
Church
of
Dionysius
,
of
Theonas
,
of
Pierius
,
of
Serapion
,
of
Persaea
,
of
Dizya
,
of
Mendidius
,
of
Amianus
,
of
Baucalis
,
and
others
.
In
one
of
these
was
Colluthus
Presbyter
,
in
another
Carpones
,
in
another
Sarmatas
,
and
Arius
[
h
](A20733-e62220-b)
h
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
in
another
,
namely
,
that
which
is
called
Baucalis
.
The
same
is
testified
by
Nicetas
Choniates
,
[
i
](A20733-e62270-b)
i
L.
5.
Orthod.
fid.
c.
1.
affirming
,
that
in
Alexandria
there
were
of
old
many
Churches
subiect
to
the
B.
of
Alexandria
,
committed
seuerally
to
Presbyters
,
as
that
which
is
called
Baucalis
,
and
those
which
haue
their
names
from
S.
Dionysius
,
Theonas
,
&c.
and
that
Arius
being
the
gouernor
of
the
schoole
in
Alexandria
,
was
by
Achilles
the
B.
(
the
predecessour
of
Alexander
)
set
ouer
the
Church
called
Baucalis
.
And
although
there
be
not
the
like
euidence
for
multitude
of
parishes
in
other
Cities
immediately
after
the
Apostles
times
;
yet
is
it
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
in
euery
City
when
the
number
of
Christians
was
much
increased
,
the
like
diuision
of
parishes
was
made
,
vnto
which
,
not
BB.
but
seuerall
Presbyters
were
appointed
:
there
remaining
in
each
Citie
but
one
Bishop
,
as
the
practise
of
all
Churches
in
the
Christian
world
from
the
Apostles
times
to
our
age
doth
inuincibly
prooue
.
For
,
Churches
containing
within
their
circuit
not
onely
Cities
with
their
Suburbs
,
but
also
whole
Countries
subiect
to
them
,
were
dioceses
.
But
the
Churches
subiect
to
the
ancient
B●shops
in
the
Primitiue
Church
,
contained
within
their
circuit
not
onely
the
Cities
with
their
suburbs
,
but
also
the
whole
Countries
subiect
to
them
.
Therefore
they
were
dioceses
.
The
assumption
is
prooued
by
these
reasons
:
first
,
The
circuit
of
a
Bishops
charge
was
anciently
diuided
into
these
parts
,
the
Citie
with
the
suburbs
,
and
Country
subiect
to
it
.
For
proofe
whereof
,
you
heard
before
two
most
plaine
testimonies
:
The
former
,
in
one
of
the
Canons
of
the
Apostles
[
k
](A20733-e62450-b)
k
Ca●
.
Apost.
34.
(
so
called
)
charging
the
Bishop
with
his
owne
Paroecia
,
and
the
Countries
which
be
vnder
it
:
The
other
in
the
Councell
of
Antioch
,
[
l
](A20733-e62480-b)
l
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
9.
which
reciting
the
same
words
,
addeth
this
reason
:
For
euery
Bishop
hath
authoritie
ouer
his
owne
Paroecia
,
and
doth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
performe
the
dutie
of
a
Diocesan
,
hauing
a
prouident
care
or
superintendencie
of
the
whole
Countrey
which
is
vnder
his
Citie
,
so
that
he
may
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
order
all
things
with
iudgement
.
To
the
same
purpose
is
the
diuision
of
Churches
subiect
to
each
Bishop
,
into
the
Church
of
the
Citie
called
[
m
](A20733-e62520-b)
m
Cont.
Carth.
Gr.
c.
54.72
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
N●trix
Ecclesia
,
and
all
other
parish
Churches
within
the
diocesse
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
And
hence
ariseth
the
distinction
of
Presbyters
subiect
to
the
same
Bishop
that
others
were
[
n
](A20733-e62570-b)
n
Conc.
Neo●●sar
.
c.
13.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Presbyters
of
the
citie
,
or
as
in
some
Latine
Councels
they
are
called
[
o
](A20733-e62600-b)
o
Cont.
Agat●
.
c.
22.
,
Ciuitatenses
,
others
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Countrey
Ministers
,
or
dioecesan●
,
Ministers
of
the
diocesse
.
Secondly
,
from
the
beginning
.
Jn
the
generall
Councell
of
Ephesus
[
p
](A20733-e62680-b)
p
Cont.
Ephes.
p●st
.
aduent
.
epist.
Cyp.
,
when
complaint
was
made
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
had
encroached
vpon
them
of
Cyprus
,
for
the
ordination
of
their
Metropolitan
,
who
euer
from
the
Apostles
times
,
were
in
that
and
other
matters
of
greatest
moment
,
ordered
by
their
owne
prouinciciall
synods
,
his
attempt
was
censured
[
q
](A20733-e62700-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
as
an
innouation
contrary
to
the
ecclesiasticall
lawes
,
and
Canons
of
the
holy
Apostles
.
And
therefore
this
generall
decree
was
made
by
the
Councell
for
all
dioceses
and
prouinces
,
that
no
Bishop
shall
take
vpon
him
any
other
prouince
or
countrey
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
for
the
time
past
,
and
from
the
beginning
hath
not
been
vnder
him
or
his
Predecessors
.
And
againe
,
that
to
euery
prouince
or
countrey
their
right
should
be
kept
pure
and
vnui●lable
,
which
had
belonged
to
them
for
the
time
past
,
and
from
the
beginning
,
according
to
the
custome
antiently
receiued
.
Likewise
in
the
Councell
of
Carthage
[
r
](A20733-e62760-b)
r
Conc.
Carth.
gr.
c.
54.
,
that
the
people
in
the
Country
which
neuer
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
should
not
receiue
a
Bishop
,
but
by
the
consent
of
the
Bishop
,
by
whom
(
and
his
antecestors
)
they
haue
bin
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
from
the
beg●nning
possessed
.
And
where
some
had
schismatically
seized
vpon
some
part
of
a
diocesse
,
and
being
guilty
of
their
wrong
,
would
sequester
themselues
from
the
meetings
and
synods
of
the
Bishops
,
it
was
decreed
,
that
the
lawfull
Bishop
should
inioy
,
not
only
his
See
,
but
also
such
dioceses
.
And
againe
,
it
was
demanded
[
s
](A20733-e62810-b)
s
Ibid.
c.
57.
,
what
course
should
be
taken
if
a
Bishopricke
being
erected
in
a
part
of
the
diocesse
,
by
the
consent
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Bishop
who
hath
held
the
dioceses
from
the
beginning
,
the
new
Bishop
should
encroach
vpon
other
parts
of
the
diocesse
,
which
were
not
intended
to
him
.
Answer
was
made
,
that
as
that
part
which
he
had
,
was
taken
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
out
of
the
company
of
parishes
ioyntly
possessed
,
and
as
a
member
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
out
of
the
body
of
many
by
the
consent
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Bishop
who
had
authority
or
power
:
so
the
new
Bishop
should
not
encroach
vpon
any
other
.
The
great
councel
of
Chalcedon
[
t
](A20733-e62900-b)
t
Conc.
Chalced.
c.
17.
,
determined
,
that
countrey
parishes
should
vnremoueably
remaine
to
the
Bishops
which
held
them
.
Which
Canon
was
renewed
in
the
councell
of
Constantinople
[
u
](A20733-e62920-b)
u
in
T●●●lo
.
c.
25.
,
with
this
addition
,
if
the
said
Bishops
held
them
quietly
and
without
contradiction
for
the
space
of
thirty
yeeres
.
[
x
](A20733-e62960-b)
x
Confessed
by
Caluin
.
Inst.
l.
4.
c
4.
§
2.
&
Bez●
de
grad.
c.
24.
,
called
ch●repiscopi
.
Who
where
the
country
seemed
larger
,
then
that
the
Bishop
by
himselfe
could
performe
all
episcopall
offices
,
were
for
the
more
ease
of
the
Bishops
,
and
commodity
of
the
country
Churches
,
appointed
in
certaine
places
as
their
suffragans
or
vicegerents
,
and
to
performe
vnder
them
,
and
for
them
,
some
episcopall
duties
of
lesse
moment
:
but
yet
so
,
as
the
chorepiscop●●
might
doe
[
y
](A20733-e63020-b)
y
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
13.
nothing
of
weight
without
the
appointment
of
the
Bishop
,
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
10.
neither
might
he
ordaine
without
the
Bishop
of
the
citie
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
vnto
which
both
himselfe
and
his
Country
is
subiect
.
Fourthly
,
Finally
,
it
may
be
alleaged
,
that
as
with
vs
Bathe
and
Wels
,
Couentry
and
Lichfield
,
London
and
Co●chester
,
so
in
the
primitiue
Church
more
cities
then
one
,
with
the
countries
thereto
belonging
,
haue
sometimes
made
but
one
diocesse
.
For
when
to
the
general
Councell
of
Ephesus
[
a
](A20733-e63110-b)
a
Exempl
.
libelli
syn
.
Ephes.
oblati
ab
Euprepio
&
Cyrillo
Episcopis
.
,
petiton
was
made
by
certaine
Bishops
;
that
whereas
it
had
bin
an
antient
custome
in
the
prouinces
of
Europe
,
that
diuers
Bishops
should
haue
each
of
them
two
cities
vnder
them
,
as
the
Bishop
of
Heraclea
had
both
Heraclea
and
Panion
,
the
Bishop
of
●yze
had
also
Arcadiopolis
,
the
Bishop
of
C●●la
Callipolis
,
the
Bishop
of
Sabsadia
,
A
phrodi●ias
,
and
the
latter
of
these
Cities
neuer
had
a
proper
Bishop
of
their
owne
,
but
euer
from
the
beginning
were
subiect
to
the
aforesaid
Bishops
:
and
whereas
now
they
feared
some
innouation
,
they
referred
the
cause
to
the
Councell
.
The
Councell
therefore
determined
,
that
there
should
not
then
,
nor
afterwards
bee
any
innouation
,
but
the
aforesaid
Bishops
should
according
to
the
antient
custome
,
which
hath
the
force
of
a
law
,
retaine
the
said
Cities
.
And
likewise
it
may
be
added
,
that
some
whole
nations
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
subiect
to
one
Bishop
,
not
as
the
primate
or
Patriarch
,
for
that
was
ordinary
(
so
was
Ignatius
[
b
](A20733-e63140-b)
b
Ignat.
epist.
ad
Rom.
Bishop
of
Syria
,
Liberius
[
c
](A20733-e63170-b)
c
Socrat.
l.
4.
c.
12
of
Italy
,
Cyprius
[
d
](A20733-e63210-b)
d
Nazianz.
encom
.
Cypr.
Conc.
Const.
Trull
.
c.
2.
of
Africke
,
Diodorus
[
e
](A20733-e63240-b)
e
Theodor.
l.
5.
c.
4.
of
Cilicia
,
Basil
[
f
](A20733-e63280-b)
f
Sozum
.
l.
5.
c.
1●
.
the
Great
of
Cappadocia
,
&c.
)
but
as
hauing
one
onely
Bishop
:
as
the
nation
of
the
Scythyans
[
g
](A20733-e63310-b)
g
Sozum
.
lib.
6.
c.
21.
hauing
many
cities
,
townes
,
and
castels
,
had
all
of
them
by
antient
custome
one
only
Bishop
,
which
was
the
Bishop
of
their
chiefe
citie
Tomis
.
CHAP.
III.
Maintaining
the
first
Argument
in
the
Sermon
,
prouing
that
the
seuen
Churches
of
Asia
,
&c.
were
Dioceses
.
THese
testimonies
and
proofes
hitherto
produced
,
are
so
euident
&
demonstratiue
for
dioceses
and
diocesans
,
as
that
if
no
more
could
be
said
,
they
are
sufficient
,
if
not
to
perswade
,
yet
at
the
least
to
conuince
the
gainsaiers
.
But
if
besides
these
,
the
arguments
which
the
Refuter
hath
in
chase
,
shall
be
made
to
returne
vpon
him
,
and
to
driue
him
and
his
consorts
like
the
men
of
Ai
,
vpon
these
new
forces
;
and
if
the
forces
which
hee
bringeth
to
maintaine
his
quarell
,
shall
bee
found
to
bee
of
no
force
,
and
altogether
vnable
to
endure
the
least
encounter
;
then
doe
I
hope
,
that
our
Disciplinarians
themselues
will
be
perswaded
to
speake
no
more
for
the
new
found
parish
Discipline
.
But
before
I
enter
into
this
second
conflict
,
I
am
to
take
a
suruey
of
his
forces
,
which
I
perceiue
are
diuided
into
2.
troopes
,
the
one
encountering
with
my
forces
,
the
other
fortifying
their
hold
of
the
parish
discipline
.
In
his
encounter
or
refutations
;
(
Serm.
s.
1
pag.
17.
I
come
now
to
the
second
:
which
is
,
to
shew
that
in
the
Apostles
time
and
in
the
ages
following
,
the
Churches
wherof
the
Bishops
are
called
Angels
,
(
or
to
vse
their
own
words
,
the
visible
Churches
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiastical
gouernment
)
were
Dioceses
properly
,
and
not
parishes
.
This
is
prooued
out
of
this
place
&c.
)
The
assertion
which
I
indeuour
to
prooue
in
the
foure
first
points
of
my
Sermon
,
was
this
,
that
the
Angels
or
gouernors
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
and
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
,
such
as
ours
be
.
This
assertion
,
after
I
had
prooued
it
in
the
first
point
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
disproouing
their
Presbyteries
:
in
the
three
next
points
I
indeuour
to
prooue
it
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
shewing
that
they
were
such
as
ours
are
,
both
in
respect
of
the
largenesse
of
their
authoritie
;
to
which
end
I
shew
that
their
Churches
were
Dioceses
in
the
second
point
,
and
themselues
Diocesans
in
the
third
:
and
in
respect
of
the
height
of
their
authoritie
and
Preheminence
,
that
they
were
superiour
in
degree
to
other
ministers
&c.
which
I
prooue
in
the
fourth
.
In
this
second
point
therefore
,
if
I
indeauour
to
prooue
that
the
primitiue
Churches
,
which
had
Bishops
,
and
Presbyteries
,
and
were
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiastical
gouernment
,
were
not
parishes
properly
,
but
Dioceses
;
nothing
could
be
more
directly
,
and
pertinently
deliuered
.
But
the
onely
thing
,
which
I
seeke
to
prooue
and
maintaine
in
this
part
,
as
euery
man
seeth
,
is
,
that
the
Churches
which
had
Bishops
and
Presbyteries
,
&c.
were
not
parishes
properly
,
but
Dioceses
.
And
this
I
first
prooue
by
mine
owne
arguments
,
and
secondly
maintaine
against
theirs
.
Churches
,
whose
circuit
contained
not
onely
cities
,
but
also
countries
adioyning
,
were
Dioceses
.
The
circuit
of
the
7.
churches
,
wherof
the
7.
Angels
were
Bishops
,
(
and
whereto
other
Churches
hauing
Bishops
,
and
Presbyteries
,
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
were
like
)
contained
the
cities
and
Countries
adjoyning
▪
Therefore
the
7.
Churches
&c.
were
Dioceses
.
The
proposition
I
did
not
expresse
,
but
did
presuppose
it
,
and
take
it
for
granted
.
Likewise
that
part
of
the
assumption
(
inclosed
in
the
parenthesis
)
affirming
that
to
the
7.
Churches
,
all
others
which
had
Bishops
,
and
Presbyteries
,
and
consequently
were
indued
with
the
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
were
like
,
I
also
presupposed
:
because
it
is
not
to
be
doubted
but
that
the
primitiue
Churches
indued
with
the
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
were
of
the
like
nature
and
constitution
.
And
vpon
this
hypothesis
,
the
onely
argument
which
this
great
disputer
bringeth
to
make
good
his
cause
,
Pag.
66.
is
grounded
:
affirming
that
it
is
clear
by
all
learned
(
I
know
not
what
)
that
the
constitution
of
the
visible
Churches
,
was
at
the
first
one
&
the
same
in
al
places
.
Now
that
the
7.
Churches
within
their
circuit
contained
both
the
cities
and
Countries
thereto
adjoyning
,
it
is
proued
;
first
,
ioyntly
.
For
if
the
7.
Churches
within
their
circuit
comprised
all
the
Churches
in
Asia
,
then
all
both
in
cities
and
countries
:
but
the
first
is
true
;
for
our
Sauiour
Christ
writing
to
the
churches
in
Asia
compriseth
all
vnder
these
7.
as
being
the
principall
,
and
containing
within
their
circuit
all
the
rest
.
Then
,
seuerally
:
The
church
of
Ephesus
,
contained
a
great
and
ample
citie
(
indeed
a
Metropolis
or
mother
city
)
and
the
country
subiect
to
it
:
the
church
of
Smyrna
a
mother
city
&
the
country
belonging
to
it
:
the
church
of
Sardes
a
mother
city
and
the
country
adioyning
:
the
church
of
Laoidcea
,
a
mother
city
and
the
country
vnder
it
:
the
Church
of
Pergamus
,
or
Pergamum
,
a
famous
city
,
(
which
had
beene
the
fear
of
the
Kings
of
Asia
)
and
the
countrey
belonging
to
it
:
the
churches
also
of
Thyatira
and
Philadelphia
contained
a
cities
with
their
territories
.
Now
let
vs
see
how
our
refu●er
cauilleth
with
these
arguments
.
The
first
he
frameth
thus
:
If
the
churches
of
Asia
to
which
our
sauiour
Christ
writ
,
But
the
churches
of
Asia
were
such
.
Therefore
they
were
Dioceses
&c.
Of
this
syllogisme
(
saith
hee
)
the
assumption
is
on
the
eighteenth
page
,
and
the
conclusion
on
the
seuenteenth
.
The
proposition
is
of
necessity
so
to
be
supplied
.
To
which
I
answere
,
that
the
consequence
thereof
is
naught
.
Euen
so
in
your
conceit
bee
almost
all
that
you
make
for
me
.
Ad
page
.
54.
His
answer
to
the
proposition
.
But
●s
your
necessity
or
need
such
,
that
you
cannot
frame
a
syllogisme
with
hope
to
answer
it
,
vnlesse
the
proposition
haue
consequence
which
you
may
deny
?
Let
me
intreat
you
,
that
the
proposition
may
be
simple
as
euen
now
I
propounded
it
,
&
then
deny
it
if
you
can
.
Churches
whose
circuit
contained
not
on
the
cities
but
also
the
co●ntries
adioyning
were
Dioceses
.
This
proposition
will
stand
vnmooueable
,
when
the
fo●●dation
of
your
discipline
wil
be
raced
.
And
so
wil
the
consequence
which
your self
propound
,
being
grounded
on
this
proposition
as
the
hypothesis
therof
.
But
why
is
the
consequence
naught
?
for
it
will
not
be
amisse
to
take
a
breef
view
how
he
playeth
with
it
.
2.
reasons
he
rendreth
1.
Because
it
presupposeth
that
al
Churches
in
the
world
at
that
time
were
●mple
and
great
Cities
.
Which
as
it
appeareth
to
bee
manifestly
false
to
all
that
are
of
any
vnderstanding
;
so
it
,
and
some
other
places
in
his
booke
doe
plainely
bewray
that
hee
doth
not
knowe
,
V●de
infir
.
lib.
4.
c.
4.
§
3.
What
is
the
hypothesis
of
of
a
conuexiue
proposition
.
what
is
the
hypothesis
or
thing
presupposed
in
a
connexiue
proposition
.
The
which
that
hee
may
know
heere
after
,
let
him
dispose
his
connexiue
proposition
in
an
enthymeme
;
and
what
part
of
the
syllogisme
is
wanting
,
let
him
vnderstand
that
to
be
presupposed
as
the
hypothesis
whereon
that
consequence
is
grounded
.
And
if
that
hypothesis
bee
false
,
let
him
know
that
the
consequence
is
naught
.
But
if
it
bee
true
(
as
alwaies
it
is
in
their
argumentations
who
do
not
dispute
sophistically
,
for
they
presuppose
and
take
for
granted
nothing
but
that
which
in
their
opinion
is
certaine
and
manifest
)
then
is
the
consequence
necessary
.
As
for
example
,
let
his
connexiue
proposition
be
disposed
in
this
E●thymeme
:
The
7.
churches
contained
within
their
circuit
,
not
onely
the
Cities
but
the
countries
adioining
:
Therefore
the
seuen
Churches
were
dioceses
.
That
which
is
presupposed
in
this
consequence
is
the
proposition
of
the
syllogisme
which
is
vnderstood
:
viz.
Churches
which
within
their
circuit
contained
not
onelie
cities
but
the
countries
adioyning
,
were
dioceses
.
Which
being
a
certaine
and
manifest
truth
,
the
consequence
was
necessary
.
But
if
I
should
say
thus
:
Churches
whose
circuit
contained
both
cities
and
countreys
adioyning
,
were
dioceses
:
Therfore
the
7.
churches
were
dioceses
:
in
this
consequence
the
assumption
were
presupposed
,
viz.
that
the
circuit
of
euerie
of
the
seuen
churches
contained
both
the
citie
,
and
country
adioyning
.
Which
parts
of
Syllogismes
omitted
in
Enthymemes
▪
if
the
refuter
would
adde
to
make
vp
a
simple
syllogisme
,
either
in
his
arguing
or
analysing
,
hee
might
spare
both
himselfe
and
his
aduersary
a
great
deale
of
superfluous
trouble
about
his
consequences
.
Hee
must
therefore
vnlearne
that
art
(
if
he
would
not
be
accounted
a
trifler
)
of
flinging
all
arguments
into
a
connexiue
Syllogisme
,
that
hee
may
haue
a
consequence
to
cauill
with
.
But
so
farre
is
the
proposition
which
hee
propounded
from
presupposing
that
all
Churches
in
the
world
were
great
and
ample
Cities
,
that
it
doth
not
so
much
as
presuppose
those
seuen
in
Asia
,
which
it
mentioneth
,
to
be
such
.
That
is
not
presuppo●ed
in
the
proposition
,
but
is
assumed
or
affirmed
in
the
Assumption
.
Nothing
is
presupposed
in
the
Consequence
of
the
proposition
,
but
the
simple
proposition
,
which
I
said
was
the
hypothesis
thereof
.
If
it
be
●aid
,
that
what
I
say
of
the
seuen
churches
,
I
would
haue
vnderstood
of
all
other
churches
,
and
so
seeme
to
presuppose
(
though
not
in
my
proposition
,
yet
in
my
argumentation
)
that
which
the
Refuter
doth
obiect
:
I
answere
,
that
as
in
other
places
I
am
not
to
bee
blamed
for
concluding
from
other
Churches
to
these
seuen
:
so
neither
here
for
concluding
from
these
seuen
,
to
all
others
.
For
the
forme
and
constitution
of
all
the
Primitiue
Churches
,
being
one
and
the
same
,
as
the
Refuter
confesseth
;
it
is
euident
that
what
is
truely
said
of
other
Primitiue
churches
in
respect
of
their
constitution
,
is
verified
of
these
seuen
:
And
what
is
verified
of
these
seuen
,
may
bee
truely
affirmed
of
the
rest
.
Not
that
all
churches
had
within
their
circuit
great
and
ample
Cities
,
(
that
was
spoken
concerning
fiue
of
these
in
Asia
)
it
is
sufficient
that
they
had
Cities
with
the
countries
adioining
.
And
so
had
all
Churches
which
had
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbytery
,
or
were
(
as
you
speake
and
meane
)
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernement
.
T.
C.
hath
an
instance
:
this
disputer
also
hath
one
instance
,
pag.
57.
and
one
in
this
place
,
and
in
some
others
.
And
yet
all
is
but
this
:
Some
church
was
not
a
City
,
as
for
example
,
Cenchrea
.
He
might
haue
said
Cenchrea
.
Their
reason
is
thus
explicated
:
Cenchreae
was
not
a
City
,
Rom.
16.11
.
Cenchreae
was
a
Church
,
Therefore
some
Church
was
not
a
City
.
J
distinguish
of
the
word
Church
.
For
I
denie
not
but
the
company
of
Presbyters
in
a
family
is
a
Church
,
much
more
in
a
village
or
towne
.
But
the
question
is
of
such
a
church
,
as
had
a
Bishop
assisted
with
a
Presbytery
,
and
had
,
as
they
speake
,
the
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernement
.
Such
a
Church
was
seated
onely
in
Cities
,
or
great
towns
answerable
to
Cities
.
And
therefore
,
if
they
meane
(
as
they
doe
:
or
else
they
might
aswell
hold
their
peace
)
that
in
Cenchreae
was
such
a
Church
;
I
deny
the
assumption
.
Cenchreae
was
subiect
to
the
church
of
Corinth
,
as
al
other
towns
thereabouts
,
and
neuer
had
a
Bishoppe
or
a
Presbytery
of
her
owne
.
Yea
,
but
she
had
a
Deacon
.
Suppose
that
were
so
,
what
then
?
seuerall
Deacons
,
and
seuerall
Presbyters
were
placed
in
parish
Churches
,
where
was
neither
B.
nor
Presbytery
,
nor
the
power
(
which
they
speake
of
)
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
.
And
yet
their
Deacon
was
but
a
Diaconisse
,
namely
Phoebe
.
Of
whom
also
it
may
be
doubted
,
whether
Paul
calleth
her
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
one
that
ministred
to
the
Church
in
Cenchreae
,
in
respect
of
an
office
imposed
vpon
her
to
minister
to
the
needy
,
&
to
entertaine
strangers
on
the
churches
cost
,
or
in
regard
of
her
voluntary
ministring
to
the
faithful
there
,
of
her
own
substance
.
For
if
she
were
,
as
Bullinger
,
and
diuers
before
him
report
,
nobilissima
&
ditissima
foemina
,
a
most
noble
,
and
most
wealthy
woman
;
it
is
not
like
,
that
she
was
a
widow
maintained
of
the
church
;
Mary
,
Ioanna
,
Chusa
,
&
Susanna
mentioned
in
the
Gospell
,
which
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
ministred
to
Christ
of
their
goods
)
did
maintaine
and
relieue
the
poore
of
the
Church
there
,
and
giue
entertainement
to
Christian
trauellers
of
her
owne
cost
.
In
which
respect
Paul
saith
of
her
,
though
it
were
granted
,
that
these
7.
were
great
Cities
,
&
the
Countries
adioyning
;
●et
there
might
be
diuers
others
,
which
were
small
,
&c.
See
you
not
how
he
seeketh
about
for
starting
holes
?
What
if
there
were
(
and
that
is
more
than
might
be
)
other
smal
churches
?
(
as
indeed
there
was
none
such
as
we
speak
of
,
but
they
were
seated
in
the
Cities
,
neither
was
any
so
small
,
but
if
it
were
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiastical
gouernment
,
it
was
of
the
same
constitution
with
those
which
were
greater
)
.
What
is
that
to
this
consequence
?
If
these
Churches
contained
ech
of
them
not
onely
the
City
,
but
the
country
adioining
,
then
they
were
not
Parishes
properly
,
but
Dioceses
.
His
answere
if
it
bee
well
weighed
,
is
an
exception
against
the
conclusion
.
As
if
hee
should
say
,
though
I
would
fain
wrangle
with
your
proposition
,
but
cannot
(
for
how
is
it
possible
,
but
that
if
these
churches
did
containe
ample
Cities
with
the
countries
,
such
as
we
cal
shires
,
belonging
to
them
,
they
were
not
dioceses
but
parishes
?
)
&
although
your
assumption
should
bee
granted
,
namely
,
that
these
churches
contained
not
only
the
cities
,
but
countries
:
notwithstanding
your
conclusion
is
to
be
excepted
against
.
For
though
these
were
dioceses
,
yet
others
might
be
parishes
.
Such
a
froward
aduersary
I
haue
met
withall
;
who
in
other
places
accusing
mee
,
for
not
concluding
what
these
churches
,
or
the
angels
of
them
were
,
here
findeth
fault
that
J
conclude
what
they
were
.
But
both
his
accusations
are
alike
vniust
;
seeing
the
constitution
of
them
,
and
all
others
(
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
)
was
the
same
;
and
what
is
said
of
the
one
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
other
.
His
second
reason
why
the
consequence
is
naught
:
§.
5.
because
it
doth
not
appeare
,
(
neither
is
it
true
)
that
euery
one
of
these
Churches
was
diuided
into
diuers
seuerall
ordinary
asblies
,
all
of
them
depending
vpon
some
one
as
the
chiefe
,
without
power
of
ecclesiastical
gouernment
apart
in
themselus
.
Is
this
the
denial
of
any
thing
but
the
conclusion
?
is
not
the
deniall
of
the
conclusion
,
an
euidence
that
the
answerer
is
confounded
?
and
is
not
confusion
a
manifest
signe
of
one
that
writeth
against
his
conscience
,
resolued
not
to
bee
perswaded
,
though
his
conscience
be
conuicted
?
As
touching
his
assertion
opposed
to
my
conclusion
,
that
they
were
not
Dioceses
,
because
they
were
not
diuided
.
&c.
it
containeth
three
branches
:
First
,
that
they
were
not
diuided
into
diuers
ordinary
assemblies
.
Secondly
,
If
they
were
,
yet
they
did
not
all
depend
vpon
some
one
as
the
chiefe
.
Thirdly
,
That
they
had
the
power
of
ecclesiastical
gouernement
in
themselues
.
These
assertions
would
haue
beene
proued
by
them
that
are
opponents
,
and
will
needes
perswade
vs
to
admitte
of
their
parish
Discipline
.
But
I
am
well
assured
that
they
are
notable
to
proue
any
one
of
them
.
And
although
it
were
sufficient
for
me
to
deny
these
assertions
,
and
to
put
them
to
proue
them
:
yet
because
I
desire
from
my
soule
to
satisfie
our
opposites
in
this
cause
,
as
Brethren
;
and
because
they
containe
the
very
grounds
of
the
parish-discipline
,
I
will
briefly
disproue
them
.
For
,
as
touching
the
first
,
I
haue
often
wondred
what
our
brethren
meane
to
argue
from
the
example
of
the
churches
which
were
not
diuided
into
parishes
;
to
those
that
bee
.
Would
they
haue
the
Church
of
a
City
,
and
country
belonging
to
it
,
to
bee
all
but
one
congregation
,
assembling
ordinarily
in
one
place
?
If
they
would
,
them
are
they
too
absurd
to
be
thought
worthy
to
be
confuted
.
But
though
they
would
,
the
ancient
christians
would
not
;
who
when
their
multitude
was
increased
,
in
all
places
of
the
world
were
diuided
into
diuers
particular
assemblies
.
If
they
would
haue
them
diuided
,
as
of
necessity
they
must
:
then
let
them
tell
mee
,
whether
wee
(
that
doe
,
and
of
necessity
must
,
consist
of
diuers
congregations
)
are
to
follow
the
example
of
any
ancient
church
,
as
it
was
before
it
was
diuided
,
or
as
it
was
after
it
was
diuided
.
If
the
former
,
then
are
they
absurd
againe
:
If
the
latter
,
then
haue
I
that
which
I
desire
.
They
will
say
perhaps
,
that
each
congregation
after
the
diuision
,
was
as
that
one
before
.
Nothing
lesse
:
Let
them
proue
that
,
and
I
will
yeeld
in
the
whole
cause
.
The
one
before
had
a
Bishop
,
and
a
Presbytery
,
as
they
will
confesse
which
were
to
attend
the
whole
flocke
,
but
after
the
diuision
,
not
each
parish
had
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbytery
,
but
one
of
the
Presbyters
assigned
to
it
,
the
rest
remaining
with
the
Bishop
,
who
(
as
before
)
assisted
with
his
Presbytery
,
had
a
generall
superintendencie
ouer
them
,
as
well
diuided
as
vndiuided
,
and
was
but
one
in
euery
diocesse
,
as
well
after
the
diuision
as
before
.
Which
is
so
manifest
a
truth
,
so
confirmed
by
testimonies
before
cited
,
so
testified
by
the
generall
consent
and
practise
of
the
Christian
world
,
not
one
instance
to
be
giuen
to
the
contrary
,
as
that
it
cannot
but
conuince
the
conscience
,
I
hope
also
it
will
perswade
.
For
tell
mee
I
pray
you
,
were
not
parishes
distinguished
in
Constantines
time
and
before
,
as
well
as
now
?
Yes
questionlesse
.
Were
any
other
assigned
to
them
seuerally
,
then
seuerall
Presbyters
,
euen
as
they
be
now
?
That
also
is
out
of
doubt
.
Was
it
euer
,
or
at
any
time
otherwise
,
after
the
diuision
of
parishes
?
No
without
question
.
There
remained
but
one
Bishop
,
and
one
Presbytery
for
the
whole
citie
and
country
,
as
well
after
the
diuision
as
before
.
And
that
is
so
euident
a
truth
,
by
that
which
hath
bin
said
,
that
no
man
of
learning
can
with
a
good
conscience
any
longer
denie
it
.
But
it
will
be
said
,
[
a
](A20733-e64150-b)
a
Bez.
de
grad.
c.
24.
Beza
,
and
testified
by
Doctor
[
b
](A20733-e64180-b)
b
Rain
.
&
.
H.
542.
Rainolds
,
and
others
[
c
](A20733-e64210-b)
c
Caes.
Baron
.
an.
39.10
.
Wolfg.
Laz.
de
rep.
Rom.
l.
2.
c.
12.
Beat.
Rhena●●
.
in
lib.
Not●t
.
prouinciar
.
imp.
Rom.
in
descriptione
Illyrici
.
,
that
the
distribution
of
the
Church
did
vsually
follow
the
diuision
of
the
common-wealth
:
insomuch
that
those
countries
which
were
subiected
to
the
ciuill
iurisdiction
exercised
in
any
citie
,
were
also
subiect
ordinarily
to
the
ecclesiasticall
:
and
as
they
were
accounted
of
the
same
county
or
prouince
,
in
respect
of
ciuill
gouernment
,
so
of
the
same
Church
or
diocesse
in
regard
of
spirituall
.
And
as
the
Church
followed
the
ciuill
distribution
at
the
beginning
,
so
also
if
there
were
any
new
citie
erected
by
the
authority
of
the
Emperour
,
it
was
decreed
by
the
Councell
of
Constantinople
[
d
](A20733-e64260-b)
d
Const.
in
Trullo
.
c.
38.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
(
following
therein
the
canon
of
their
forefathers
)
that
the
order
of
ecclesiasticall
things
should
follow
the
ciuill
and
publike
forme
.
Therefore
though
these
Churches
had
not
been
diuided
into
seuerall
congregations
,
yet
had
they
each
of
them
been
dioceses
.
But
now
I
adde
,
that
at
the
time
of
writing
the
Reuelation
,
which
was
almost
an
hundeed
yeeres
after
the
birth
of
Christ
,
it
is
more
then
probable
,
that
they
contained
diuers
congregations
.
For
when
Paul
had
continued
but
two
yeeres
at
Ephesus
,
the
holy
Ghost
[
e
](A20733-e64320-b)
e
Act.
19.10
.
testifieth
,
that
all
which
inhabited
Asia
(
so
properly
called
)
did
heare
the
word
of
the
Lord
Iesus
both
Iewes
and
Gentiles
.
Well
,
Paul
hauing
placed
many
Presbyters
among
them
,
and
hauing
continued
among
them
for
the
space
of
three
yeeres
,
afterwards
[
f
](A20733-e64350-b)
f
Act.
20.31
.
sendeth
Timothy
to
be
their
Bishoppe
,
who
ordinarily
continued
among
them
vntill
his
death
.
And
that
you
should
not
thinke
there
was
but
that
Church
at
Ephesus
in
Pauls
time
,
hee
maketh
mention
[
g
](A20733-e64380-b)
g
1.
Cor.
16.19
.
of
the
Churches
of
Asia
.
Saint
Peter
likewise
had
preached
,
and
by
his
preaching
conuerted
many
in
Asia
,
to
whom
among
others
,
hee
directeth
[
i
](A20733-e64400-b)
i
1.
Pet.
1.1
.
his
first
Epistle
.
After
the
death
of
Peter
and
Paul
,
because
those
Churches
were
as
Paul
had
foretold
,
much
annoled
with
heretikes
,
Saint
Iohn
[
k
](A20733-e64450-b)
k
Testified
by
Origen
.
Eusebius
,
Epiphanius
,
Chrysost.
Nazianz
.
apud
Caes.
Baron
.
in
a●
.
44.29
.
,
by
the
direction
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
went
into
those
parts
,
preached
the
Gospell
for
many
yeeres
,
ordained
Bishoppes
and
Presbyters
where
need
was
.
To
the
ministery
of
the
Apostles
,
adde
the
preaching
of
the
Bishoppes
and
Presbyters
ordained
by
them
,
and
disciples
which
they
had
instructed
:
by
whose
ministerie
,
not
onely
many
particular
Christians
,
but
some
Churches
were
brought
to
the
faith
.
As
that
of
Colossae
,
(
which
was
in
the
confines
of
Phrygia
,
bordering
on
this
Asia
)
in
Pauls
time
,
planted
by
the
ministerie
of
Epaphra●
[
l
](A20733-e64490-b)
l
Coloss.
1.7
.
,
as
their
founder
;
watered
by
the
ministerie
of
Archippus
,
as
their
Bishoppe
.
Now
I
appeale
to
the
conscience
of
euery
indifferent
Reader
,
whether
it
bee
not
vnlikely
,
that
not
in
any
one
of
these
famous
Churches
,
no
not
in
that
of
Ephesus
,
there
were
in
the
whole
citie
and
country
belonging
to
it
,
any
more
then
one
ordinary
congregation
,
after
the
preaching
of
such
,
and
so
many
for
the
space
of
forty
fiue
yeeres
.
And
so
much
for
the
first
of
his
assertions
:
the
other
two
I
will
ioyne
together
.
For
if
there
were
but
one
Bishoppe
for
the
Church
,
both
of
the
citie
and
country
,
(
as
there
were
but
seuen
in
all
these
seuen
Churches
)
and
but
one
Presbytery
:
if
the
Churches
both
of
the
citie
and
country
were
subiect
to
the
Bishoppe
of
the
citie
:
if
the
parishes
both
of
citie
and
country
had
neither
Bishoppe
nor
Presbytery
,
but
Presbyters
seuerally
assigned
to
them
:
if
the
Presbyters
of
the
country
were
ordained
by
the
Bishoppe
of
the
citie
,
and
not
onely
they
,
but
the
rurall
Bishoppes
also
were
subiect
to
his
authoritie
;
all
which
,
I
haue
by
most
euident
arguments
and
testimonies
proued
already
:
then
did
the
seuerall
congregations
and
parishes
,
which
J
haue
also
prooued
were
all
but
members
of
one
body
,
depend
vpon
the
chiefe
Church
in
the
citie
as
the
head
,
which
afterwards
was
called
Matrix
ecclesia
,
cathedra
episcopi
,
or
the
cathedrall
Church
,
neither
had
the
power
of
ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
whereof
they
speake
,
as
I
haue
also
proued
before
.
Who
euer
said
that
the
Church
of
Ephesus
was
a
great
Citie
?
Who
knoweth
not
that
the
Citie
is
one
thing
,
and
the
Church
another
?
But
this
might
serue
M.D.
turne
to
dazell
the
eies
of
the
simple
,
&c.
As
touching
this
foule
imputation
(
that
I
may
beginne
with
it
)
J
thanke
God
,
I
am
free
,
both
from
desire
,
and
intent
of
daz●ling
the
eyes
of
the
simple
.
But
as
in
my
conscience
I
am
cleerely
resolued
of
the
truth
of
these
fiue
points
contained
in
the
Sermon
:
so
I
haue
endeuoured
with
plaine
euidence
,
to
vphold
and
maintaine
the
truth
,
against
the
nouelty
of
your
inuentions
,
and
the
subtilties
of
your
sophistications
,
wherewith
you
haue
too
long
both
dazeled
and
seduced
the
simple
.
So
much
of
that
by
the
way
.
If
hee
discerned
the
speech
which
I
vsed
,
to
bee
improper
,
had
hee
not
so
much
neither
Art
,
I
meane
either
Rhetoricke
,
or
Logicke
,
nor
grace
,
I
meane
charity
,
as
either
to
conceiue
me
to
haue
spoken
by
a
trope
,
or
to
explane
my
speech
by
such
an
enunciation
,
as
the
nature
of
the
arguments
doth
require
?
When
it
is
said
in
my
text
,
the
seuen
starres
are
the
Angels
;
will
he
say
,
who
euer
heard
that
starres
were
Angels
?
Or
when
Christ
saith
,
This
cup
is
my
bloud
that
is
sh●d
,
or
,
the
new
Testament
in
my
bloud
:
will
he
say
;
who
euer
heard
that
the
cup
is
bloud
or
the
Testament
?
When
I
said
the
Churches
are
the
cities
and
the
country
;
could
he
neither
vnderstand
me
as
speaking
(
after
that
most
vsuall
metonymy
)
of
the
Christian
people
in
the
citie
and
country
:
nor
yet
explane
my
words
,
as
the
nature
of
the
arguments
contained
in
the
speech
doth
lead
him
?
If
I
should
say
,
a
man
is
not
onely
body
,
but
soule
also
,
or
,
the
body
is
not
one
member
alone
,
but
many
,
you
would
vnderstand
me
thus
:
Man
consisteth
of
body
and
soule
;
the
body
consisteth
not
of
one
member
alone
,
but
of
many
.
Or
thus
;
Whole
man
containeth
these
two
parts
:
the
bodie
containeth
not
one
member
alone
,
but
many
.
Euen
so
the
Church
or
diocesse
of
Ephesus
is
(
that
is
,
containeth
)
not
only
the
City
,
but
the
Country
.
But
is
that
so
strange
a
thing
with
our
learned
Refuter
,
Ephesus
,
Smyrna
,
&c.
And
so
vsuall
is
it
with
good
Authors
speaking
of
BB.
to
say
they
were
Bishops
of
such
or
such
a
Citie
,
as
I
might
fill
a
Volume
with
quotations
to
this
purpose
.
These
few
testimonies
may
suffice
:
Eusebius
[
m
](A20733-e64650-b)
m
Euseb.
Chr.
an
.
45.
Ann.
71.
saith
,
that
Euodius
was
the
first
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
and
that
Ignatius
was
the
second
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
&c.
The
Councell
of
Nice
writing
to
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
maketh
mention
[
n
](A20733-e64700-b)
n
Socrat.
lib.
1.
fol.
177.
a.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
.
Athanasius
[
o
](A20733-e64760-b)
o
Epist.
ad
Epise.
Afric
.
calleth
Damasus
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishop
of
the
great
Citie
Rome
;
and
Dionysius
,
[
p
](A20733-e64810-b)
p
De
sentent
.
Dionys.
the
B.
of
Alexandria
.
The
first
Councell
of
Constantinople
[
q
](A20733-e64830-b)
q
Conc.
Const.
1.
c.
1.2.3
.
mentioneth
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
the
Bishop
of
Constantinople
,
and
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
And
more
plainely
in
the
Councell
held
in
Trullo
,
[
r
](A20733-e64860-b)
r
Const.
in
Trul.
c.
2.
Nectarius
is
said
to
haue
beene
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
of
Constantinople
,
Dionysius
the
Archbishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
great
Citie
of
Alexandria
.
Looke
into
the
subscriptions
of
Bishops
vnto
Councels
,
as
to
that
of
Nice
subscribed
Osius
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
of
Corduba
,
Alexander
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
&c.
to
the
Councell
of
Sardica
,
Athanasius
Bishop
of
the
great
Citie
of
Alexandria
,
Alexander
Bishop
of
the
Citie
of
Mesenia
;
and
in
like
maner
all
the
rest
,
stiling
themselues
Bishops
of
the
Cities
.
Looke
into
the
inscriptions
of
epistles
written
either
by
Bishops
,
or
vnto
Bishops
:
Ignatius
stileth
himselfe
thus
:
[
s
](A20733-e64980-b)
s
Ignat.
ad
Polycarp
.
Ignatius
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
.
Leo
[
t
](A20733-e65030-b)
t
Epist.
1.2.3
.
&c.
in
his
Epistles
stileth
himselfe
sometimes
Bishop
of
Rome
,
sometimes
Vrbis
Romae
,
of
the
Citie
of
Rome
.
Basil
writeth
to
Eusebius
the
Bishop
of
Samosata
,
to
Athanasius
the
Bishop
of
Ancyra
,
to
Ambrose
the
Bishop
of
Millaine
,
and
writing
to
the
Bishops
of
France
and
Jtaly
,
calleth
himselfe
the
B.
of
Caesar●a
.
This
title
giuen
to
Bishops
after
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
plainly
prooueth
also
,
that
they
were
not
Bishops
of
any
one
parish
,
but
of
all
the
Churches
in
the
Citie
,
and
of
the
whole
diocesse
.
My
assertion
therefore
,
that
each
of
the
seuen
Churches
was
not
only
the
Citie
,
but
the
countrey
also
adioining
,
would
according
to
the
true
meaning
thereof
haue
beene
consuted
,
if
hee
had
beene
able
,
and
not
the
words
fondlie
cauilled
with
.
But
not
contended
heere
with
,
he
stretcheth
my
words
beyond
that
which
his
owne
conscience
would
tell
him
was
my
meaning
;
as
if
I
had
said
,
that
all
the
people
in
the
City
and
Country
had
beene
at
this
time
Christians
.
Which
could
scarcely
bee
verified
of
any
Citie
and
Country
for
200.
yeeres
after
and
more
,
I
meane
vntill
Constantines
time
.
Neuerthelesse
,
this
was
an
assertion
which
he
found
himselfe
able
to
confute
.
And
therefore
full
soberly
he
goeth
about
it
,
telling
vs
,
that
there
were
not
then
so
many
Christians
as
inhabitants
,
nor
it
was
not
then
in
Ephesus
,
as
it
is
now
in
London
.
And
very
learnedly
out
of
h●s
reading
telleth
vs
,
that
Polycarpus
[
u
](A20733-e65190-b)
u
Euseb.
l.
4.
c.
15.
was
put
to
death
by
the
rage
of
the
heathen
multitude
,
in
the
sight
of
his
people
:
when
euery
body
knoweth
,
that
in
all
Cities
and
Countries
,
for
the
space
of
almost
300.
yeeres
,
the
Christians
were
persecuted
by
the
Gentiles
.
If
any
man
aske
,
how
it
may
bee
said
,
that
the
Church
contained
the
Citie
and
Country
,
when
but
a
few
Christians
,
in
comparison
of
the
heathen
,
were
in
either
of
both
:
I
answer
(
as
before
)
that
the
circuit
of
the
Church
or
diocesse
was
the
same
,
when
there
were
few
,
and
when
there
were
many
,
yea
when
all
were
Christians
.
Neither
were
there
more
Bishops
set
ouer
the
Citie
and
Country
when
all
were
Christians
,
then
when
there
were
but
a
few
;
the
same
Bishop
of
the
Citie
hauing
iurisdiction
ouer
all
the
Christians
both
in
the
Citie
and
country
,
as
well
when
all
were
Christians
,
as
when
but
a
few
:
which
J
prooued
before
by
the
generall
consent
and
perpetuall
practise
of
all
Christendome
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
;
which
ought
without
comparison
to
preuaile
with
vs
aboue
the
authoritie
of
a
few
selfe-conceited
persons
among
vs
,
who
are
not
so
singular
for
learning
,
as
they
are
singular
in
opinion
;
whose
pride
and
arrogancie
in
aduancing
themselues
against
the
iudgment
and
practise
of
the
vniuersall
church
in
all
places
,
and
in
all
ages
since
the
Apostles
times
,
is
intolerable
.
Yea
but
saith
hee
,
the
Church
of
Smyrna
writing
[
*
](A20733-e65270-b)
*
Euseb.
l.
4.
c.
15.
of
the
said
Martyrdome
of
Polycarpus
,
intituleth
her selfe
the
Church
of
God
which
is
at
Smyrna
.
Was
there
a
whole
Diocesse
or
Countrey
of
Christians
inhabiting
Smyrna
?
Which
is
an
obiection
scarce
worth
the
answering
.
For
whether
by
the
Church
of
Smyrna
you
vnderstand
the
whole
Diocesse
,
it
was
seated
chiefely
in
the
Citie
(
as
the
soule
,
which
is
in
all
the
bodie
,
is
said
to
bee
in
the
head
;
and
God
,
who
is
in
all
places
,
to
be
in
heauen
)
or
but
that
part
which
did
inhabit
the
Citie
,
you
are
not
to
maruell
,
if
the
whole
companie
of
Christians
inhabiting
a
City
,
are
called
a
Church
,
seeing
the
companie
of
Christians
in
a
parish
,
or
in
a
familie
,
deserueth
that
name
.
Neither
doth
the
naming
of
it selfe
the
Church
which
is
at
Smyrna
,
exclude
the
Churches
in
the
Countrey
from
being
of
the
same
bodie
or
diocesse
with
it
.
And
thus
much
may
suffice
to
haue
spoken
concerning
the
first
syllogisme
which
he
framed
for
mee
.
Now
are
wee
to
examine
the
second
.
M.D.
(
saith
he
)
perceiuing
that
this
assumption
wanted
strength
,
sought
to
fortifie
it
by
two
reasons
.
This
is
my
aduersaries
vsuall
,
though
odious
,
fashion
,
sophistically
to
argue
euery
assertion
of
weaknesse
,
for
which
I
bring
proofe
:
when
rather
the
proofe
(
if
it
bee
good
,
as
hitherto
hee
hath
not
beene
able
to
disprooue
any
)
doth
argue
the
weakenesse
of
their
iudgement
,
who
denie
or
doubt
of
the
truth
which
is
prooued
,
and
the
strength
also
of
the
assertion
,
which
is
armed
with
such
proofe
.
Ad
pag.
55.
The
former
reason
he
propoundeth
thus
:
If
our
Sauiour
writing
to
the
Churches
of
Asia
,
numbreth
but
seuen
,
and
some
of
them
mother
Cities
,
then
were
they
great
and
ample
Cities
,
and
not
the
Cities
alone
,
but
the
Countries
adioining
.
But
our
Sauiour
writing
to
the
Churches
of
Asia
,
numbreth
but
seuen
.
&c.
To
let
passe
his
vnmannerly
gibing
,
not
worth
the
mentioning
,
and
to
referre
you
to
the
manner
how
this
Syllogisme
is
to
be
framed
,
before
[
x
](A20733-e65400-b)
x
Supr.
§.
2.
mentioned
,
let
vs
see
how
hee
dealeth
with
this
frame
which
himselfe
hath
fashioned
.
He
denieth
,
after
his
vsuall
manner
,
both
the
proposition
and
the
assumption
.
So
hard
is
my
happe
,
that
scarce
any
one
proposition
or
assumption
,
which
hee
frameth
for
me
,
may
be
acknowledged
to
be
true
:
and
yet
so
hard
is
his
happe
,
that
he
is
not
able
to
prooue
any
one
either
proposition
or
assumption
of
mine
to
be
vntrue
.
The
proposition
hee
would
confute
by
an
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
though
it
were
granted
that
our
Sauiour
wrote
these
epistles
to
all
the
Churches
of
Asia
,
yet
it
will
not
follow
,
that
therefore
all
the
rest
depended
vpon
these
,
as
children
vpon
the
mother
.
To
which
he
addeth
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
denying
the
former
part
of
the
assumption
,
viz.
that
our
Sauiour
did
not
write
to
all
the
Churches
of
Asia
.
His
deniall
of
the
consequence
he
confirmeth
by
putting
a
case
:
If
the
Emperour
finding
some
abuses
commonly
raigning
in
the
whole
Country
of
Asia
,
should
haue
written
to
these
principall
and
mother
Cities
for
the
reforming
of
those
abuses
,
with
intent
(
saith
he
)
that
all
other
Cities
and
Townes
should
be
warned
by
his
reproofe
of
them
,
(
which
put-case
with
that
intent
is
worthy
to
be
put
into
a
cap-case
)
might
a
man
conclude
thereupon
,
that
all
other
Townes
and
Cities
of
Asia
were
subiect
to
the
gouernment
of
these
seuen
?
But
say
I
,
put
the
case
,
that
the
Emperor
so
should
doe
,
with
that
intent
,
which
is
,
and
also
hath
beene
vsuall
in
such
cases
,
that
is
,
to
the
intent
that
what
hee
writeth
to
them
,
might
by
and
from
them
be
notified
to
those
Townes
and
Villages
which
were
within
the
circuit
of
their
iurisdiction
:
would
it
not
strongly
proue
,
that
all
those
other
townes
and
villages
were
subiect
to
them
?
Come
we
to
our selues
.
When
the
King
or
his
Counsell
would
haue
any
thing
intimated
to
all
his
Subiects
in
certaine
Counties
,
are
not
warrants
directed
to
the
Lieutenants
of
each
County
,
from
them
to
the
high
Constables
of
euery
hundred
,
from
them
to
the
Constables
of
euery
towne
?
and
doth
not
this
shew
that
the
officers
of
the
towne
are
subordinate
to
those
of
the
hundred
,
and
much
more
to
the
gouernours
of
the
County
?
In
like
manner
when
the
Archbishop
would
haue
any
thing
imparted
to
euery
parish
,
hee
directeth
his
letters
to
the
Bishops
,
they
,
to
the
Archdeacons
,
they
,
to
the
officers
in
euery
Dean●y
,
they
acquaint
(
in
particular
)
euery
Parish
.
Euen
so
by
Christ
his
writing
to
the
7.
Churches
,
what
he
would
haue
imparted
to
all
the
particular
Churches
,
it
may
bee
gathered
,
that
the
rest
of
the
particular
Churches
were
subiect
to
them
.
And
it
may
well
be
,
that
when
our
Sauiour
writing
to
euery
one
of
the
Angels
seuerally
,
&
concluding
each
Epistle
with
this
Epiphonema
,
Let
him
that
hath
an
eare
,
heare
what
the
Spirite
saith
to
the
Churches
,
would
haue
it
vnderstood
what
he
writeth
to
the
Angell
,
he
writeth
to
the
Churches
,
which
be
vnder
his
charge
.
And
thus
you
haue
heard
,
how
he
hath
fared
with
the
Proposition
.
The
Assumption
hee
distinguisheth
into
two
parts
,
the
former
,
affirming
that
Christ
wrote
to
all
the
churches
of
Asia
:
the
latter
,
that
some
of
these
seuen
Churches
were
Mother-Cities
:
both
hee
denieth
as
false
.
The
former
,
because
it
is
vnlikely
,
as
he
saith
,
if
not
impossible
,
that
our
Sauior
writing
to
that
third
part
of
the
world
which
was
not
much
lesse
then
both
the
other
,
Africa
and
Europe
,
would
write
but
to
these
7.
which
were
all
together
in
one
little
corner
of
it
.
Here
I
appeale
to
my
aduersary
,
if
he
be
a
man
of
learning
,
whether
hee
doth
not
cauill
against
the
light
of
his
conscience
,
seeing
he
could
not
be
so
ignorant
▪
as
to
thinke
,
that
by
Asia
mentioned
in
the
Apocalypse
,
and
else
where
in
the
Epistles
and
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
is
not
meant
Asia
the
great
,
nor
yet
that
which
is
called
Asia
minor
,
being
the
whole
Chersonesus
,
now
called
Natolia
,
bounded
on
the
north
with
Pontus
Euxinus
,
on
the
west
with
the
Hellespont
,
&
mare
Aegaeum
,
on
the
south
,
with
the
Mediterranean
sea
,
including
▪
according
to
Ptolemey
,
eight
countries
,
whereof
Asia
(
so
properly
called
)
is
one
.
And
albeit
he
knoweth
(
as
I
am
perswaded
)
that
by
Asia
in
the
Apocalypse
,
is
meant
onely
that
,
which
is
so
properly
called
;
yet
he
maketh
a
great
flourish
,
partly
to
shew
some
small
skill
in
Geography
;
but
chiefly
(
that
I
may
vse
his
owne
terme
,
)
to
dazell
the
eyes
of
the
simple
;
either
that
the
great
Kingdomes
of
Asia
maior
should
bee
Parishes
vnder
the
seuen
Churches
:
or
that
those
many
famous
Churches
of
Asia
Minor
,
as
the
Churches
of
Derbe
,
Lystria
,
Iconium
,
Antioch
in
Pisidia
,
Pergain
Pamphylia
,
of
Galatia
,
which
were
many
,
were
but
dependants
vpon
these
seuen
.
If
hee
doth
not
know
,
that
none
of
these
Countries
are
contained
in
that
Asia
whereof
the
holy
Ghost
speaketh
:
let
him
compare
but
these
few
testimonies
of
Scripture
.
Act.
2.9.10
.
&
6.9
.
&
16.6.7
.
&
1.
Pet.
1.1
.
and
he
shall
find
,
that
Cilicia
,
Pontus
,
Galatia
,
Cappadocia
,
Bythinia
,
Phrygia
,
Pamphylia
,
and
Mysia
,
(
meaning
Mysia
maior
,
or
Olympina
)
being
all
parts
of
Asia
minor
,
are
reckoned
as
diuers
countries
from
that
Asia
,
which
is
mentioned
in
the
Scriptures
.
If
the
refuter
would
needs
haue
shewen
his
skill
in
Geography
,
he
should
haue
done
well
to
haue
set
down
the
bounds
and
limits
of
this
Asia
,
whereof
wee
speake
.
For
the
Authors
that
write
thereof
,
whome
I
haue
seene
,
doe
not
agree
with
the
Scriptures
.
The
Romanes
,
when
Attalus
[
a
](A20733-e65690-b)
a
Strabo
Geograph
.
lib.
13.
Philomator
the
King
of
Pergamus
,
and
the
countries
adioyning
,
had
bequeathed
his
Kingdome
to
them
,
and
they
had
recouered
it
from
Aristonicus
who
claimed
it
as
his
inheritance
,
they
reduced
it
into
a
Prouince
,
and
by
the
name
of
the
continent
called
it
Asia
,
hoping
it
would
be
an
introduction
to
the
rest
.
Erasmus
[
b
](A20733-e65740-b)
b
Erasmus
Annot
,
in
Rom.
16.
saieth
,
it
is
euident
,
that
when
Asia
is
named
absolutely
,
that
part
of
Asia
minor
is
signified
where
Ephesus
standeth
.
And
[
c
](A20733-e65770-b)
c
Erasm.
in
Act.
16.
on
Act.
16.
where
Paul
and
his
company
were
forbidden
to
preach
the
Word
in
Asia
,
the
holy
Ghost
meaneth
(
saith
hee
)
that
Asia
,
not
which
by
the
generall
name
is
called
minor
,
enuironed
on
each
side
,
but
on
the
East
,
with
the
Sea
,
and
which
comprehendeth
Phrygia
,
Pamphylia
,
Galatia
,
and
some
other
Countries
;
but
that
which
is
neare
to
Ephesus
;
for
that
properly
is
called
Asia
-
minor
.
But
hee
doth
not
tell
vs
how
much
of
the
Country
,
which
is
not
farre
from
Ephesus
,
is
contained
within
the
circuit
of
Asia
.
Those
which
write
of
Geography
,
giue
a
larger
circuit
vnto
it
,
then
agreeth
with
the
Scriptures
,
bounding
it
northward
on
Bithynia
,
westward
on
Propontis
,
Hellespont
,
and
the
Aegean
sea
,
which
in
those
places
is
called
the
Icarian
sea
:
Southward
,
on
the
Rhodian
sea
:
Eastward
,
on
Lycia
,
Pamphylia
,
and
Galatia
.
And
by
this
meanes
,
they
include
within
the
limites
of
it
.
Phrygia
,
both
the
greater
and
the
lesse
(
wherein
Troy
stood
,
)
and
Mysia
,
both
the
greater
,
which
is
called
Olympina
,
and
the
lesse
,
which
is
called
[
d
](A20733-e65820-b)
d
Ptolem.
calleth
Mysia
Pergamene
,
maior
.
Pergamene
.
When
as
Phrygia
is
in
the
Scriptures
distinguished
from
Asia
,
and
onely
the
borders
or
frontiers
of
it
,
where
Laodicea
(
according
to
their
opinion
)
standeth
,
are
reckoned
in
it
,
and
likewise
Mysia
,
Olympina
,
and
Phrygia
minor
,
(
which
is
also
called
Epictetus
or
Troas
)
are
reckoned
apart
from
Asia
.
So
that
according
to
the
scriptures
,
Asia
seemeth
to
include
,
Ionia
,
Mysia
▪
Pergamene
,
Lydia
,
or
Maeonia
,
and
perhapps
Caria
;
for
thereof
is
no
mention
.
In
Ionia
stoode
Ephesus
,
and
from
it
northward
,
Smyrna
.
In
Mysia
Pergamene
[
e
](A20733-e65860-b)
e
Mysiae
principatum
Pergamum
obtinuit
.
Aen.
Sylu.
in
Asia
minor
.
C
62.
Acolis
quondam
Mysia
appellata
.
Plin.
l.
5.
c
30.
Ptolemy
among
the
Cities
of
Lydia
,
and
Maeonia
reckoneth
Thyatira
,
Sard●s
and
Philadelphia
.
stood
Pergamum
northward
from
Smyrna
:
and
southward
from
it
Thy●tira
,
which
Strabo
calleth
Mysorum
vltimam
.
In
Lydia
(
which
Strabo
,
Ptolemy
and
Pliny
,
l.
5.
c.
29.
take
to
bee
all
one
with
Maeonia
)
stood
Sardo●
(
which
Strabo
calleth
Lydorum
caput
)
southward
also
from
Pergamus
.
In
the
confines
of
Mysia
and
Lydia
stood
Philadelphia
.
The
borders
of
Phrygia
,
Caria
and
Lydia
are
hardly
distinguished
,
saith
[
f
](A20733-e65960-b)
f
Strabo
l.
13.
Strabo
,
because
they
meet
together
,
and
are
confounded
in
the
midlands
,
(
as
Aeneas
Syluius
saith
,
)
and
this
confusion
is
encreased
,
saith
Strabo
,
because
the
Romaines
haue
diuided
these
countries
,
not
by
the
nations
,
but
according
to
the
administrations
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
that
is
,
circuits
of
iurisdiction
,
wherein
Courts
are
kept
,
and
iudgements
exercised
according
to
law
.
Now
in
these
confines
standeth
Laodicea
,
which
according
to
Ptolemey
[
g
](A20733-e66030-b)
g
Ptol.
l.
5.
c.
2.
is
a
City
of
Caria
,
and
by
the
testimony
of
the
holy
Ghost
in
the
Apocalypse
is
a
part
of
Asia
,
though
by
the
most
Geographers
it
is
saide
to
stand
in
the
borders
of
Phrygia
.
Eunapius
[
h
](A20733-e66070-b)
h
In
Maximo
.
speaking
of
Clearchus
made
proconsull
of
Asia
,
by
Valens
the
Emperor
,
describeth
the
circuit
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
that
which
now
properly
is
called
Asia
,
that
it
beginning
at
Pergamum
,
and
comprehending
the
sea
coasts
,
endeth
in
the
continent
at
Caria
,
the
mount
Tmolus
circumscribing
the
borders
thereof
on
Lydia
.
So
that
according
to
this
description
the
circuit
of
Asia
is
lesse
then
that
which
is
limited
in
the
Scriptures
,
Lydia
,
and
Caria
being
excluded
.
And
accordingly
in
the
subscriptions
[
i
](A20733-e66120-b)
i
Subscript
.
Con.
Nicen.
,
to
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
not
onely
Phrygia
,
but
Lydia
also
and
Caria
are
reckoned
apart
from
Asia
,
that
we
should
not
maruaile
,
that
a
lesse
circuit
is
assigned
vnto
it
in
the
Scriptures
,
then
the
Geographers
doe
describe
,
seeing
within
a
lesse
compasse
then
that
which
the
Scriptures
assigned
thereunto
,
it
is
circumscribed
by
others
.
Seeing
therefore
Asia
is
gathered
into
so
small
a
compasse
,
let
vs
see
what
the
refuter
can
obiect
,
why
our
Sauiour
writing
to
these
seuen
Churches
,
should
not
vnder
them
comprise
all
the
Churches
in
Asia
.
Because
euen
there
or
near
,
saith
he
,
we
find
diuers
other
churches
:
as
those
of
Colossa
,
Hierapolis
,
&
Troas
mentioned
in
the
Scripture
;
to
let
passe
Magnesia
,
and
Trallis
recorded
in
other
writers
.
But
none
of
the
three
former
are
mentioned
in
the
scripture
as
parts
of
Asia
:
Troas
beeing
the
same
with
phrygia
minor
,
and
Hierapolis
,
and
Colossae
,
Cities
of
Phrygia
maior
.
It
is
recorded
by
Eusebius
[
k
](A20733-e66210-b)
k
In
Chronico
.
,
that
in
the
yeare
of
Christ
66.
and
tenth
of
Nero
[
l
](A20733-e66230-b)
l
Tacitus
saith
in
the
6.
of
Nero
,
and
so
as
it
is
thought
within
two
yeares
after
the
Epistle
to
the
Colossians
was
writen
.
Tacit.
l.
14
codem
anno
Scil.
6.
Neronis
exillustribus
Asiae
vrbibus
Laodicea
tremore
terrae
prostrata
,
nullo
a
nobis
remedio
proprijs
opibus
reualuit
.
these
three
cities
Laodicea
,
Hierapolis
,
and
Colossae
,
were
ouerthrowne
with
earthquakes
.
And
although
we
read
that
Laodicea
was
quickly
reedified
,
and
flourished
againe
,
when
Saint
Iohn
wrote
the
Reuelation
,
and
Hierapolis
not
long
after
,
seeing
we
read
that
Papias
Saint
Iohns
Scholler
was
by
him
made
Bishop
there
▪
yet
of
Colossae
,
as
[
m
](A20733-e66310-b)
m
Cal.
in
argum
.
epis
.
ad
Coloss.
Caluin
obserueth
,
that
shortly
after
the
Epistle
was
written
to
them
,
that
Church
with
the
rest
perished
;
so
that
it
stood
in
Saint
Iohns
time
,
I
read
not
,
neither
doe
I
remember
any
mention
of
it
,
or
of
the
Bishops
thereof
,
in
,
or
neere
those
times
.
Howbeit
in
processe
of
time
it
was
reedified
,
and
called
Conae
,
or
Chonae
,
whereof
Nicetus
the
writer
of
the
annales
,
because
he
was
of
that
citie
is
called
Coniates
.
Oecumenius
[
n
](A20733-e66360-b)
n
In
Coloss.
1.
saith
that
Colossae
was
a
citie
of
Phrygia
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
is
now
called
Chona
,
and
by
that
name
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
reckoned
among
the
Bishopricks
as
they
are
digested
by
Le●
[
o
](A20733-e66410-b)
o
Iur.
graecor●m
.
pag.
●8
.
num.
54.
the
Emperour
.
That
Colossae
was
no
parte
of
Asia
Theodoret
sheweth
:
For
beeing
of
opinion
that
Paul
had
beene
at
Colossae
,
he
prooueth
[
p
](A20733-e66460-b)
p
Prefat.
in
Epist.
ad
Coloss.
it
because
it
is
said
that
he
went
through
Phrygia
.
Neither
saith
he
let
any
man
object
that
Paul
was
forbidden
[
q
](A20733-e66490-b)
q
Act.
18.
of
God
.
For
Luke
speaketh
of
Asia
and
Bithynia
,
not
of
Phrygia
.
As
touching
Magnesia
,
and
Trallis
;
it
appeareth
not
,
that
they
were
as
yet
conuerted
vnto
the
faith
▪
when
they
were
conuerted
(
as
not
long
after
I
confesse
they
were
,
seeing
Ignatius
a
little
before
his
death
did
write
vnto
them
)
they
were
▪
inferiour
to
those
seuen
which
Saint
Iohn
nameth
as
the
principall
,
and
both
of
them
subject
to
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
;
as
appeareth
by
the
subscriptions
in
the
Councill
of
Chalcedon
[
r
](A20733-e66550-b)
r
Action●
.
where
Eutropius
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
subscribing
,
as
other
Metropolitanes
did
,
for
himselfe
and
the
Bishops
which
were
vnder
him
beeing
absent
,
among
twentie
others
mentioneth
Alexander
of
Magnesia
,
and
Maximus
of
Trallis
.
Likewise
in
the
distribution
of
the
Churches
made
by
Leo
the
Emperour
[
s
](A20733-e66600-b)
s
Iu●
.
graecevom
.
pag.
90.
among
the
Bishops
subiect
to
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishop
of
Tralles
,
and
of
Magnesia
,
vpon
Maander
are
numbred
.
Vpon
these
weake
premisses
the
Refuter
inferreth
a
very
confident
conclusion
.
It
is
cleare
therefore
,
saith
he
,
that
our
Sauiour
intended
not
to
write
to
all
the
Churches
of
Asia
,
but
onely
to
those
seven
which
he
nameth
;
to
no●e
of
which
,
so
many
and
so
famous
Churches
could
belong
.
Whereto
I
aunswere
,
according
to
that
which
I
haue
prooued
,
that
euery
Church
that
was
in
Asia
in
these
times
,
was
either
one
of
these
seuen
,
or
depending
on
them
.
As
for
those
Churches
which
he
mentioneth
in
Asia
maior
,
or
Asia
minor
,
yea
euen
those
which
were
in
Phrygia
minor
,
or
Troas
,
or
in
Phrygia
maior
,
as
Hierapolis
,
and
Colossae
,
were
not
any
of
them
in
Asia
so
properly
called
:
there
remaine
only
Magnesia
,
and
Tralles
to
prooue
his
conclusion
.
Which
either
he
cannot
prooue
to
haue
beene
Churches
at
this
time
;
or
if
they
were
,
hee
cannot
disprooue
,
that
they
belonged
to
one
of
these
seuen
.
So
that
nothing
,
which
he
can
obiect
,
doth
hinder
,
but
that
vnder
these
seuen
,
our
Sauiour
did
write
to
all
the
Churches
in
Asia
.
it
is
vtterly
false
:
for
his
reason
is
no
other
,
but
that
which
I
haue
alreadie
confu●ed
,
that
they
were
neither
mother
cities
,
nor
cities
at
all
.
And
whereas
he
obiecteth
,
that
the
Epistles
were
directed
to
the
Angell
of
the
Church
in
Ephesus
,
in
Smyrna
&c.
and
not
of
Ephesus
the
Church
,
Smyrna
the
Church
,
as
of
the
whole
cities
were
the
Churches
:
I
answere
,
that
although
the
whole
citie
of
Ephesus
meaning
Civitas
,
was
not
the
Church
vntill
it
was
wholly
conuerted
to
the
profession
of
Christianitie
:
notwithstanding
the
whole
citie
,
meaning
vrbs
,
was
contained
within
the
circuite
of
the
Church
intended
by
the
Apostles
,
and
acknowledged
by
the
iudgement
and
practise
of
that
Church
,
conformable
to
the
iudgement
and
practise
of
all
other
churches
in
christendome
.
Neither
is
that
materiall
that
the
church
is
said
to
haue
bin
in
Ephesus
(
as
it
also
was
when
the
whole
city
was
conuerted
to
christianity
)
seing
in
vrbe
,
in
the
city
,
the
church
was
chiefly
seated
,
as
was
said
before
.
Now
that
some
of
these
were
Metropoleis
,
that
is
,
as
I
said
,
not
onely
mother
cities
,
but
also
Metropolitan
churches
,
I
wil
briefly
declare
.
Those
cities
which
were
capita
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
heads
of
the
ciuil
iurisdiction
,
where
the
presidents
of
the
Roman
prouinces
held
their
assemblies
,
&
kept
their
courts
,
were
mother
cities
to
the
rest
,
which
were
vnder
the
said
iurisdiction
.
But
such
were
fiue
of
these
,
as
hath
beene
heeretofore
noted
out
of
Plinie
:
[
t
](A20733-e66830-b)
t
Plin.
l.
5.
c.
29
et
30.
viz.
Ephesus
,
Smyrna
,
Pergamum
,
Sardes
,
&
Laodicca
.
Where
also
Philadelphia
is
noted
as
one
of
the
cities
subiect
to
Sardes
:
and
Thyatira
to
Pergamus
.
This
distinction
the
Church
followed
in
al
,
excepting
Pergamus
,
which
it selfe
was
subiected
to
Ephesus
:
and
Thyatira
,
which
had
belonged
to
it
,
sometimes
to
Synada
(
for
in
the
councel
of
Chalcedon
[
u
](A20733-e66870-b)
u
Actio
.
6.
Marmianu●
the
Bishop
of
Synada
among
the
BB.
which
were
vnder
him
,
reckoneth
Helladius
of
Thyatira
)
sometimes
to
Sardes
,
as
in
the
Emperor
Leo
[
x
](A20733-e66900-b)
x
Iur.
gracorom
.
pag.
90.
the
Philosophers
time
.
The
Bishops
of
the
other
4.
in
the
council
of
Chalcedon
[
y
](A20733-e66920-b)
y
Actio
.
3.
in
the
condemnation
of
Dioscorus
,
are
stiled
Metropolitanes
;
and
in
the
diuers
subscriptions
to
that
councill
,
are
placed
among
the
Bishops
of
the
mother
cities
.
In
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
z
](A20733-e66960-b)
z
Iur.
graecorā
.
88.
or
distribution
of
the
Churches
by
the
Emperour
Leo
,
Ephesus
is
a
Metropolis
[
a
](A20733-e66990-b)
a
Page
90.
hauing
36.
Bishopricks
vnder
it
,
among
which
Pergamum
is
the
19.
Sardes
likewise
is
a
Metropolis
,
hauing
vnder
it
24
Bishopricks
,
whereof
Philadelphia
is
the
first
and
Thyatira
the
third
;
to
Laodicea
likewise
[
b
](A20733-e67010-b)
b
page
94.
21.
Bishoprickes
were
subiect
,
and
to
Smyrna
,
[
c
](A20733-e67030-b)
c
page
100.
7.
And
so
much
may
suffice
for
the
first
argument
grounded
on
the
text
.
CHAP.
4.
That
Presbyters
were
appointed
,
not
to
parishes
,
but
to
dioceses
.
THe
Analysis
of
the
2.
argument
is
mistaken
by
him
,
to
say
no
worse
:
for
hee
should
haue
looked
to
the
end
of
that
,
which
though
he
make
the
3.
section
,
should
haue
beene
ioined
to
the
2.
Where
hee
should
haue
found
this
to
be
the
main
conclusion
of
al
that
which
followeth
the
first
argument
(
concerning
the
7.
churches
)
,
to
that
place
.
viz.
That
the
Presbyteries
in
the
Apostles
times
,
were
not
appointed
to
parishes
,
but
to
dioceses
.
From
whence
the
principall
question
of
this
part
,
is
thus
to
be
inferred
.
The
Presbyteries
ordained
by
the
Apostles
were
appointed
not
to
parishes
,
but
Dioceses
:
therefore
the
churches
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernement
were
not
parishes
,
but
dioceses
.
This
consequence
the
refuter
granteth
,
in
granting
the
connexiue
proposition
of
the
syllogisme
,
which
he
frameth
p.
58.
l.
1.
If
he
did
not
,
it
might
easily
be
confirmed
by
adding
the
assumption
,
viz.
to
visible
Churches
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernement
the
Presbyters
ordained
by
the
Apostles
were
appointed
.
The
antecedent
(
which
is
also
the
proposition
of
the
syllogism
if
the
assumption
bee
added
)
I
proue
by
2.
arguments
.
The
first
concluding
thus
:
They
who
were
appointed
to
whole
cities
and
countreys
to
labor
so
far
as
they
were
able
,
the
conuersion
of
al
that
belonged
to
God
,
were
appointed
to
dioceses
,
and
not
to
parishes
.
Ad
pag.
54.
This
proposition
I
omitted
also
,
as
taking
it
for
granted
.
As
for
his
cauils
against
his
owne
proposition
which
he
framed
for
the
nonce
to
cauill
withall
,
they
are
not
worth
the
refuting
.
For
besides
that
he
absurdly
cauilleth
with
me
,
as
thogh
I
had
said
,
that
al
in
the
city
&
country
were
in
S.
I●bus
time
conuerted
:
he
alleadgeth
that
there
is
no
necessity
,
that
they
which
were
conuerted
,
should
be
of
the
same
church
with
them
,
who
did
conuert
them
.
As
for
example
they
of
Ceuchrea
receiued
the
gospel
from
Corinth
,
and
yet
were
a
distinct
Church
:
For
it
is
called
the
church
of
C●nchrea
.
Rom.
16.
1.
But
I
spake
of
them
which
did
accidentally
conuert
others
,
but
of
such
as
by
whose
meanes
the
conuersion
of
the
city
and
country
was
originally
intended
.
And
I
say
,
that
they
whose
ministery
was
intended
for
the
conuersion
of
the
city
and
countrey
;
to
their
care
or
charge
,
both
for
the
first
conuerting
of
them
,
&
gouernment
of
them
being
conuerted
,
the
city
&
country
belonged
.
As
for
Cenchreae
,
though
it
be
called
a
church
,
(
as
euery
company
of
christians
may
so
be
termed
)
yet
it
was
not
such
a
church
as
they
speak
of
,
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiastical
gouernement
;
but
subiect
to
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Church
of
Corinth
.
Now
followeth
the
assumption
:
But
the
Presbyteries
ordained
by
the
Apostles
were
appointed
for
whole
cities
&
countries
therto
belonging
,
to
labour
so
farre
as
they
were
able
the
conuersion
of
al
that
belonged
to
God
.
This
assumption
confirmed
with
2.
arguments
,
is
set
down
p.
18.
the
one
,
the
end
intended
by
the
Apostles
in
appointing
presbyters
in
cities
,
which
was
the
conuersion
of
the
nation
,
for
which
themselues
first
preached
in
the
chiefe
cities
:
the
other
,
is
the
〈◊〉
,
or
as
they
call
it
causa
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
their
hope
,
by
the
ministery
of
the
Presbyters
placed
in
the
city
,
to
conuert
them
which
belonged
to
God
both
in
city
&
country
,
grounded
on
the
force
of
the
gospell
testified
by
our
Sauior
.
The
words
are
these
:
for
it
is
euident
that
the
Apostles
when
they
intended
to
conuert
any
〈◊〉
,
they
first
preached
to
the
chiefe
cities
therof
▪
Wherin
when
through
Gods
blessing
they
had
conuerted
some
,
their
manner
was
to
ordaine
Presbyters
▪
hoping
by
their
ministery
to
conuert
not
only
the
rest
of
the
city
but
also
in
the
countries
adioyning
so
many
as
did
belong
to
God
.
The
Kingdom
of
heaven
being
like
a
little
leauen
,
which
being
put
into
any
part
of
the
〈◊〉
,
seasoneth
all
.
These
words
thus
set
downe
at
large
,
be
the
assumption
of
the
syllogisme
which
he
hath
framed
(
for
what
cannot
he
bring
within
the
compasse
of
his
syllogisms
?
)
and
therof
he
maketh
3.
parts
.
About
the
first
,
he
saith
,
hee
will
not
striue
,
viz.
the
Apostles
beginning
to
p●each
in
the
chiefe
cities
of
euery
nation
,
which
(
though
he
think
I
cannot
proue
)
is
most
easie
to
bee
proued
,
because
it
was
the
most
wise
and
likely
course
to
be
taken
for
the
conuersion
of
nations
:
as
also
because
it
is
manifest
both
by
the
scriptures
&
other
ancient
records
,
that
they
took
that
course
:
As
Paul
intending
the
conuersion
of
Asia
,
where
hee
staied
three
yeares
,
continued
in
Ephes●s
all
the
time
:
it
was
the
office
of
those
Presbyters
,
to
attend
vpon
the
flock
,
that
is
,
the
company
already
conuerted
,
but
that
it
can
neuer
be
shewed
,
nor
may
reasonably
be
thought
that
it
was
any
part
of
their
proper
duty
to
labour
the
conuersion
of
the
residue
either
in
citie
or
country
.
By
which
few
words
the
deepe
wisedom
of
the
parish-disciplinarians
may
easily
be
sounded
.
1.
They
conceiue
that
churches
in
the
first
constitution
of
them
when
there
were
but
a
few
conuerted
,
and
before
parishes
were
distinguished
,
were
in
the
same
estate
that
now
they
are
being
fully
constituted
,
al
being
conuerted
to
the
profession
of
the
faith
,
&
parishes
distinguished
,
pastors
being
seuerally
assigned
to
certain
particular
ordinary
set
congregations
.
2.
That
the
flocke
ouer
which
they
were
set
,
was
onely
that
number
of
christians
already
conuerted
,
and
not
the
whole
number
which
in
those
parts
pertained
to
God
.
But
our
Sauiour
calleth
the
elect
not
conuerted
his
sheepe
.
Vpon
the
proposition
therfore
and
the
assumption
before
propounded
,
this
conclusion
notwithstanding
al
his
cauills
,
doth
follow
:
Therefore
the
Presbyteries
ordained
by
the
Apostles
,
Ad.
Pag.
5●
.
were
appointed
not
to
parishes
but
to
Dioceses
.
(
Serm.
sect.
3.
page
18.
Neither
were
the
parishes
distinguished
&c.
to
page
19.
l.
5
)
The
second
argument
whereby
the
same
assertion
in
these
words
is
proued
may
thus
be
framed
:
When
the
Churches
were
not
diuided
into
seueral
parishes
nor
Presbyters
assigned
to
their
seuerall
titles
or
cures
,
but
werein
common
to
attend
the
whole
flock
feding
them
that
were
already
conuerted
,
and
labouring
the
conuersion
of
the
rest
,
so
farre
as
they
were
able
both
in
citie
and
country
:
then
were
not
the
Presbyteries
appointed
to
parishes
,
but
to
dioceses
.
In
the
Apostles
times
the
churches
were
not
diuided
into
seuerall
parishes
,
&c.
Therefore
in
the
Apostles
times
the
Presbyteries
were
appointed
not
to
parishes
,
but
to
dioceses
.
The
proposition
seemeth
to
be
of
necessary
and
euident
truth
:
for
when
there
were
no
parishes
distinguished
,
how
could
the
Presbyters
be
assigned
to
seuerall
parishes
?
And
if
they
were
appointed
to
labour
the
conuersion
of
all
which
belonged
to
God
,
both
in
citie
and
countrey
,
how
were
they
not
appointed
to
dioceses
?
For
can
hee
thinke
,
that
all
the
people
which
belonged
to
God
in
the
city
and
country
,
and
which
after
also
were
conuerted
,
belonged
to
one
parish
?
Is
it
not
euident
,
that
after
their
conuersion
they
were
diuided
into
many
both
in
citie
and
countrey
?
And
what
though
at
the
very
first
all
the
Christians
in
the
citie
and
countrey
,
if
they
had
beene
assembled
together
,
would
haue
made
but
a
small
congregation
?
were
they
therefore
of
one
parish
before
there
was
any
parish
at
all
?
Was
not
the
circuit
of
the
Church
,
as
before
hath
beene
prooued
,
and
of
the
Bishop
and
Presbyteries
charge
,
the
same
in
purpose
and
intention
at
the
first
,
when
they
were
but
a
few
,
which
it
was
afterwards
in
execution
,
when
all
were
conuerted
?
The
assumption
also
is
that
which
the
Refuter
himselfe
holdeth
,
that
there
were
not
in
any
Church
many
parishes
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Howbeit
,
I
except
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
as
after
you
shall
heare
.
But
though
he
know
not
how
to
answer
directly
to
either
of
both
,
yet
he
wrangleth
with
both
,
and
as
a
man
confounded
,
yet
resolued
to
contradict
,
though
against
the
light
of
his
conscience
,
he
denieth
the
conclusion
,
and
contradicteth
himselfe
.
The
proposition
after
his
perpetuall
manner
,
hee
propoundeth
connexiuely
:
If
the
parishes
were
not
distinguished
,
&c.
then
were
not
the
Presbyters
appointed
for
parishes
,
&c.
The
force
of
the
connexion
,
as
it
inferreth
they
were
appointed
to
dioceses
,
he
suppresseth
,
leauing
out
the
words
of
greatest
force
,
viz.
that
they
were
appointed
to
labour
the
conuersion
of
those
that
belong
to
God
,
so
farre
as
they
should
be
able
,
both
in
the
citie
,
and
in
the
countries
adioining
.
And
as
it
inferreth
that
they
were
not
appointed
to
parishes
,
he
answereth
not
:
only
he
maketh
a
flourish
with
the
shew
of
regestion
;
which
kinde
of
answer
best
fitteth
him
that
is
at
a
Nonplus
.
Howsoeuer
the
world
goeth
,
the
consequence
must
be
denied
:
that
is
resolued
vpon
,
though
he
haue
nothing
to
oppose
against
it
.
Yes
he
hath
two
things
to
oppose
;
the
first
a
question
,
What
if
euery
one
of
the
Churches
then
were
but
one
parish
?
As
if
hee
should
say
,
What
if
the
maine
question
betweene
vs
bee
true
,
in
that
part
which
wee
hold
,
viz.
that
the
Churches
were
parishes
,
and
not
dioceses
?
Where
are
you
then
?
Why
,
but
I
prooue
they
were
not
parishes
,
because
the
presbyteries
were
not
appointed
to
parishes
,
but
to
dioceses
.
And
come
you
now
with
this
question
,
What
if
they
were
?
Yea
but
I
will
prooue
they
were
.
You
will
neede
your
proofes
in
a
fitter
place
.
Yea
but
in
the
meane
time
I
disprooue
your
consequence
.
You
will
say
something
perhaps
to
bleare
the
eies
of
the
simple
:
but
you
doe
not
indeede
denie
,
and
much
lesse
doe
you
disprooue
the
consequence
.
The
deniall
of
the
consequence
were
this
:
Though
it
bee
supposed
that
parishes
were
not
distinguished
,
and
that
the
Presbyteries
were
appointed
for
the
conuersion
of
all
both
in
Citie
and
Countrey
;
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
they
were
appointed
to
dioceses
,
and
not
to
seuerall
parishes
:
and
not
this
,
nay
but
the
Churches
were
each
of
them
but
one
parish
.
This
is
to
denie
the
maine
conclusion
which
is
already
prooued
.
Yea
but
the
proofe
of
this
deniall
disprooueth
your
consequence
.
The
consequent
perhaps
,
which
is
the
conclusion
,
but
the
consequence
it
cannot
,
without
supposing
as
it
doth
not
,
those
things
which
are
supposed
in
the
proposition
,
thus
:
Though
there
were
no
parishes
,
yet
they
were
assigned
to
parishes
:
though
they
were
appointed
both
for
Citie
and
Country
,
yet
they
were
not
appointed
for
dioceses
.
You
deny
therefore
,
as
a
man
amazed
,
the
maine
conclusion
:
the
consequence
of
the
proposition
you
touch
not
.
But
let
vs
see
how
he
disproueth
the
conclusion
,
Such
as
are
the
French
and
Duch
Churches
here
in
England
,
such
were
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
.
But
the
French
and
Duch
Churches
here
in
England
are
not
diocesan
,
but
distinct
parishionall
assemblies
.
Therefore
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
were
not
diocesan
,
but
distinct
parishionall
assemblies
.
First
,
I
denie
the
proposition
,
not
onely
because
the
circuit
of
the
Churches
(
in
the
Apostles
intention
)
was
not
included
within
a
Citie
,
as
of
the
French
and
Duch
Churches
with
vs
;
but
chiefly
because
the
French
Church
(
for
example
)
in
London
is
but
one
Church
,
among
many
professing
the
same
religion
,
being
a
certaine
and
set
number
,
hauing
a
Presbytery
consisting
for
the
most
part
of
lay
men
,
placed
among
vs
,
not
with
purpose
to
conuert
either
the
City
or
Country
to
them
,
but
to
attend
them
of
their
owne
Church
;
whereas
contrariwise
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
,
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
were
not
each
of
them
one
among
many
,
but
were
planted
among
heathen
people
,
hauing
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyterie
of
learned
men
placed
among
them
,
as
leauen
is
put
into
the
lumpe
,
with
purpose
to
conuert
the
rest
both
in
Citie
and
Country
.
The
Church
which
had
the
Bishop
and
Presbytery
first
placed
in
it
,
was
Matrix
Ecclesia
,
as
after
it
was
called
,
begetting
other
Churches
and
spirituall
Fathers
for
them
;
which
being
begotten
in
Citie
and
Countrey
,
were
all
(
euen
when
the
whole
Citie
and
Country
were
filled
with
her
off-spring
)
to
bee
subordinate
and
subiect
to
her
,
as
their
mother
.
But
no
such
thing
can
be
imagined
of
the
Duch
and
French
Churches
among
vs
.
As
touching
the
assumption
,
I
say
,
that
the
French
and
Duch
Churches
with
vs
are
not
properly
parishes
,
nor
such
as
the
ancient
parishes
were
,
after
the
first
diuision
of
them
,
seeing
the
members
thereof
dwell
in
many
distinct
parishes
,
either
of
them
being
endued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernement
,
and
not
subordinate
to
another
Church
as
members
thereof
,
but
being
entire
bodies
by
themselues
are
models
(
as
it
were
)
of
diocesan
Churches
,
hauing
a
Presbytery
(
as
the
Church
of
Geneua
hath
)
to
supply
the
want
of
a
Bishop
,
which
once
[
c
](A20733-e67660-b)
c
Alasco
.
they
had
,
and
still
might
haue
,
in
imitation
of
the
ancient
Christians
,
who
when
the
Citie
where
they
dwelt
was
replenished
,
and
the
Mother
Church
occupied
with
men
of
another
faith
,
(
as
with
Arians
sometimes
in
Antioch
and
Alexandria
)
as
ours
be
with
men
of
another
Language
,
had
a
Bishop
of
their
owne
in
all
respects
like
other
Bishops
,
sauing
that
they
held
not
the
Mother
Church
,
and
therefore
had
neither
the
like
Clergie
,
nor
the
like
reuenewes
to
maintaine
them
.
The
second
thing
which
hee
opposeth
,
is
(
as
I
said
)
a
shew
of
regestion
:
which
he
propoundeth
with
great
confidence
,
as
if
hee
had
mee
at
no
small
aduantage
saying
,
that
I
pull
downe
with
one
hand
that
I
set
vp
with
another
.
If
there
were
at
that
time
no
parishes
,
how
could
there
bee
dioceses
,
seeing
euery
diocesse
consisteth
of
diuers
distinct
parishes
?
Thus
(
saith
he
)
the
light
will
breake
out
,
though
men
shut
their
eies
against
it
.
You
see
how
bragge
hee
would
seeme
to
bee
.
But
good
sir
,
what
is
this
to
my
consequence
?
If
there
were
no
parishes
in
the
Apostles
times
,
then
the
Presbyteries
were
not
appointed
to
parishes
.
You
answer
,
If
there
were
no
parishes
,
then
there
were
no
dioceses
.
To
what
end
is
this
spoken
?
To
denie
my
consequence
,
or
the
maine
conclusion
?
Assume
,
But
you
say
there
were
no
parishes
,
therefore
there
were
no
dioceses
;
which
is
the
contradictorie
to
the
maine
conclusion
.
But
where
doe
I
say
there
were
no
parishes
?
Not
in
the
proposition
,
where
it
is
only
supposed
;
but
in
the
assumption
:
for
that
which
is
supposed
in
the
antecedent
of
the
proposition
,
is
positiuely
set
downe
in
the
assumption
.
Therefore
when
he
would
seeme
to
deny
the
consequence
of
the
proposition
,
he
doth
not
so
much
as
touch
it
.
But
by
taking
a
supposed
aduantage
,
against
the
Assumption
,
hee
denieth
the
principall
conclusion
.
But
let
vs
examine
his
argument
.
If
there
were
no
parishes
in
the
Apostles
times
,
there
were
no
Dioceses
.
This
consequence
I
deny
.
For
the
Diocesse
was
the
same
before
the
Parishes
were
diuided
and
after
.
And
the
circuit
of
the
spirituall
iurisdiction
intended
the
same
before
parishes
were
diuided
,
with
that
it
was
after
they
were
diuided
,
that
is
answerable
to
the
ciuill
.
The
same
circuit
belonging
to
the
Church
both
in
the
intention
,
before
all
were
conuerted
,
and
in
execution
after
all
were
conuerted
,
which
belonged
to
the
ciuill
state
,
Yea
,
but
saith
he
;
euery
Diocesse
consisteth
of
distinct
Parishes
.
It
is
true
after
the
distinction
of
Parishes
,
but
not
before
,
as
a
bach
of
bread
consisteth
of
many
distinct
loaues
after
the
distinction
,
which
before
it
contained
vndistinguished
in
the
lumpe
.
A
man
consisteth
of
many
distinct
members
after
they
are
distinguished
,
which
at
his
first
conception
were
not
distinct
.
The
Proposition
being
thus
recouered
out
of
his
hands
,
J
am
now
to
rescue
the
Assumption
.
And
yet
here
,
this
assumption
must
be
censured
,
as
hauing
no
truth
in
it
,
for
that
it
denieth
Parishes
to
haue
beene
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
the
Presbyters
to
haue
beene
assigned
to
their
seuerall
titles
or
cures
.
They
be
his
wordes
in
the
conclusion
of
his
answere
to
the
assumption
.
And
the
same
he
repeateth
,
pag.
71.
But
let
vs
see
what
he
obiecteth
against
the
assumption
.
First
,
an
errour
in
it
before
noted
,
concerning
the
end
of
the
Presbyters
ordination
,
which
he
saith
,
is
here
repeated
,
and
(
therefore
not
of
ignorance
by
him
omitted
in
the
proposition
)
the
which
though
hee
call
an
errour
,
yet
I
proued
to
be
an
euident
truth
,
and
discouered
the
shallownes
of
their
iudgement
,
which
do
denie
it
.
Besides
that
errour
,
he
chargeth
the
maine
points
in
the
assumption
as
altogether
void
of
truth
.
The
points
are
these
:
1.
that
parishes
were
not
distinguished
in
the
apostles
times
2.
that
Presbyters
were
not
then
assigned
to
their
seuerall
titles
or
cures
:
3.
that
they
were
in
common
to
attend
the
whole
flocke
conuerted
.
For
that
which
is
added
of
labouring
the
conuersion
of
the
residue
,
&c.
is
the
errour
forsooth
which
before
he
noted
.
How
proueth
he
these
points
to
be
false
?
Thus
:
whome
can
M.D.
perswade
that
the
Apostles
would
either
appoint
or
allow
of
such
confused
assemblies
,
wherein
the
teachers
and
hearers
should
euery
day
so
disorderly
be
changed
?
And
then
putteth
the
like
case
of
a
schoole
,
himselfe
being
worthy
to
be
put
into
a
cloake-bagge
.
For
in
which
of
these
points
doth
this
orderly
&
vnconfounded
man
,
note
such
disorder
and
confusion
?
or
was
not
the
confused
conceite
he
speaketh
of
,
in
his
own
braine
?
Let
him
call
to
mind
what
euen
now
hee
said
in
oppugning
the
proposition
;
that
euery
one
of
the
churches
then
,
was
but
one
parish
,
which
by
reason
of
the
multitude
of
the
people
had
many
teachers
.
Do
we
not
see
the
like
,
saith
he
,
in
the
French
&
Duch
churches
here
in
England
?
&
concludeth
,
that
such
Parishes
there
were
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
none
but
such
.
Tell
me
then
,
is
the
French
or
Duch
Church
in
London
distinguished
either
of
them
into
seuerall
parishes
,
which
is
the
first
point
?
If
they
be
,
how
are
they
but
one
Parish
?
Are
their
ministers
,
supposing
them
to
be
as
he
saith
many
,
(
as
there
were
many
Presbyters
in
the
Apostles
times
in
each
Church
before
the
diuision
of
the
parishes
)
are
they
assigned
to
seueral
titles
,
that
is
,
parishes
or
cures
?
If
their
Church
be
not
diuided
into
diuers
parishes
,
how
can
their
Presbyters
be
assigned
to
diuers
?
which
is
the
2.
point
.
Thirdly
,
doe
not
their
ministers
communi
consilio
&
mutuo
auxilio
,
by
common
counsel
and
mutuall
helpe
attend
their
whole
flocke
,
none
of
them
being
appointed
to
a
seuerall
charge
?
And
yet
all
this
(
I
hope
)
without
disorder
or
confusion
.
That
therefore
which
hee
bableth
in
the
greatest
part
of
the
page
,
concerning
disorder
and
confusion
,
is
wholy
to
be
ascribed
to
his
owne
distemper
and
confusion
.
Yea
,
M.D.
telleth
vs
that
the
Presbyters
were
to
attend
the
whole
flocke
.
So
saith
S.
Luke
,
Act.
20.28
.
What
of
that
?
if
they
were
to
attend
the
whole
flocke
in
common
,
then
were
they
not
assigned
to
seuerall
parishes
,
which
were
but
parts
of
the
flocke
,
Doth
either
of
them
say
,
that
a
flocke
was
any
more
then
one
ordinarie
assembly
,
and
might
not
that
be
a
Parish
as
well
as
a
Diocesse
?
Either
of
whome
?
hee
had
mentioned
none
but
S.
Luke
onely
.
But
let
that
passe
.
For
to
what
purpose
doth
he
aske
,
whether
Luke
said
,
that
a
flocke
was
any
more
then
one
assembly
?
If
the
flocke
were
but
one
assembly
,
that
which
I
proposed
is
the
more
confirmed
.
For
if
they
were
to
attend
al
one
assembly
,
them
were
they
not
assigned
to
seueral
parishes
.
But
yet
I
would
haue
him
know
,
that
the
word
flock
,
the
word
ecclesia
or
church
which
there
,
&
the
word
people
,
which
in
other
places
is
vsed
as
a
word
of
the
same
signification
,
is
of
a
larger
extent
then
to
signifie
onely
one
assembly
.
The
flocke
is
that
,
for
which
Christ
the
good
shepheard
did
giue
his
life
;
the
Flocke
,
the
Church
,
the
people
of
God
.
Neither
doe
I
doubt
,
for
the
reasons
before
alleadged
,
but
that
the
flock
in
which
those
Presbyters
,
Act.
20.
were
set
as
ouerseers
,
was
the
people
belonging
to
God
in
the
City
of
Ephesus
,
and
the
Country
adioyning
,
where
he
saith
,
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
ordinarily
vsed
of
beasts
and
fowles
that
heard
and
flocke
together
.
I
confesse
it
is
beyond
the
compasse
of
my
reading
,
who
neuer
read
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
applied
to
fowles
,
but
haue
found
the
word
vsed
properly
for
a
flocke
of
sheepe
,
and
metaphorically
for
the
flocke
of
Christs
sheepe
;
but
that
flocke
is
not
one
onely
particular
congregation
.
For
Luke
12.32
.
Iohn
10.16
.
as
touching
the
word
Ecclesia
,
which
he
denieth
to
signifie
any
other
outward
company
of
men
,
then
a
particular
congregation
only
,
I
haue
already
said
more
to
confute
that
ignorant
conceit
then
will
be
answered
in
hast
.
But
heare
his
conclusion
:
if
my
,
(
that
is
,
if
the
word
Ecclesia
doth
not
signifie
any
other
then
a
particular
congregation
)
what
truth
is
there
in
his
assumption
,
that
denieth
parishes
to
bee
distinguished
,
(
he
would
haue
said
to
haue
beene
distinguished
,
)
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
the
Presbyters
to
haue
been
assigned
to
their
seuerall
titles
or
cures
?
This
conclusion
I
desire
may
be
kept
in
remembrance
,
vntill
as
you
haue
seene
him
deny
it
before
,
so
you
shall
see
him
againe
and
againe
to
deny
it
.
Jn
the
meane
time
I
beseech
you
how
is
it
inferred
?
If
the
word
Church
signifie
onely
a
particular
congregation
,
(
and
such
a
one
was
that
flock
in
which
the
Presbyters
were
set
,
Act.
20.28
.
)
therefore
there
is
no
truth
in
the
assumption
which
denieth
the
parishes
to
haue
beene
distinguished
,
and
the
Presbyters
assigned
to
their
seuerall
titles
or
cures
.
Who
seeth
not
,
that
the
contrary
is
to
bee
inferred
?
Jf
the
word
Church
did
signifie
one
congregation
,
and
was
in
euery
City
but
one
,
and
if
such
was
the
flocke
which
the
Presbyters
were
appointed
to
attend
wholly
and
in
common
,
then
it
followeth
that
the
flocke
was
not
diuided
into
particular
parishes
,
nor
the
Presbyters
assigned
to
seuerall
cure●
.
And
so
the
assumption
by
his
owne
inference
is
proued
to
be
true
.
This
and
thus
weakly
,
saith
the
refuter
,
hath
M.D.
proued
the
point
of
so
great
importance
:
And
thus
and
thus
stongly
,
say
I
,
hath
our
refuter
disproued
it
.
Now
let
the
iudicious
Reader
iudge
,
whether
my
weakenesse
hath
not
been
of
sufficient
force
to
ouerthrow
his
strength
.
CHAP.
V.
Answering
their
obiection
,
who
say
,
that
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
all
the
Christians
in
each
great
Citie
,
were
but
one
particular
congregation
,
assembling
in
one
place
.
NOw
wee
are
to
examine
their
proofes
.
And
first
,
that
which
I
obiected
for
them
,
and
then
that
which
the
Refuter
bringeth
for
himselfe
.
(
Serm.
sect.
4.
page
19.
Against
this
which
hath
been
said
,
they
doe
obiect
,
that
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
&c.
16
lines
▪
)
Here
the
refuter
chargeth
me
,
that
I
making
shew
of
taking
away
what
euer
can
bee
said
against
my
assertion
,
doe
propound
but
one
onely
bare
obiection
,
whereas
diuers
testimonies
and
reasons
both
from
scriptures
and
fathers
haue
been
alleaged
by
others
,
&c.
Thus
makes
he
no
conscience
,
either
of
belying
me
,
who
onely
intended
to
answere
that
,
which
I
tooke
to
be
their
chiefe
obiection
,
and
had
of
late
been
most
vrged
:
or
of
outfacing
the
truth
with
vaunts
of
diuers
testimonies
and
reasons
,
which
are
scarce
worth
the
answering
;
blaming
also
me
for
bringing
but
one
reason
for
them
,
when
himselfe
after
all
his
brags
,
bringeth
but
one
,
and
that
not
so
strong
,
though
you
adde
thereto
the
testimonies
which
he
vaunteth
of
.
In
the
obiection
,
which
J
bring
for
them
,
he
putteth
such
confidence
,
that
if
he
can
make
it
good
against
me
(
whereof
he
doubteth
not
,
such
is
his
tried
valor
)
all
my
labour
about
my
Sermon
will
proue
nothing
worth
.
No
doubt
he
would
appeare
to
be
some
tall
man
,
if
he
durst
shew
his
head
.
But
let
vs
heare
his
dispute
:
for
he
hath
taken
the
obiection
out
of
my
hands
,
because
I
did
not
vrge
it
strongly
for
them
,
obiecting
no
more
then
J
knew
my selfe
able
to
answere
:
and
yet
all
that
he
addeth
is
but
losse
of
time
in
multiplying
of
words
.
First
,
he
premiseth
a
syllogisme
concluding
the
maine
question
,
that
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
(
hee
should
haue
added
as
I
did
,
and
the
age
following
,
for
themselues
in
their
question
include
two
hundred
yeeres
)
were
not
dioceses
properly
,
but
parishes
.
If
the
Presbyteries
and
presidents
therof
in
the
great
Cities
●ere
assigned
but
to
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
assembled
together
in
one
place
:
then
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
(
and
in
the
age
following
)
were
not
dioceses
properly
,
but
parishes
.
But
the
Presbyteries
and
presidents
thereof
in
the
great
Cities
were
assigned
but
to
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
assembled
together
in
one
place
.
Therefore
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
(
and
in
the
age
following
)
were
not
dioceses
properly
but
parishes
.
The
consequence
of
the
proposition
is
cleare
by
that
I
answered
a
little
before
,
where
I
said
that
ad●cesse
must
needs
consist
of
distinct
congregations
.
But
if
this
proposition
haue
no
better
hypothesis
to
support
it
,
I
may
deny
it
:
seeing
I
haue
proued
before
,
that
there
were
dioceses
in
the
first
conception
of
the
Churches
before
distinction
of
parishes
.
So
that
the
addition
of
this
syllogisme
hath
made
his
cause
somewhat
worse
then
it
was
before
.
The
assumption
is
th●●●r●●●d
:
If
all
the
Christians
in
any
one
great
Citie
did
make
but
one
such
congregation
:
hee
should
say
to
one
particular
ordinarie
congregation
assembled
together
in
one
place
.
But
al
the
Christian●
in
any
great
Citie
(
vnderstand
in
the
first
200
yeeres
)
did
make
but
one
such
congregation
.
Therefore
both
the
Presbyteries
and
presidents
therof
of
were
assigned
but
to
one
congregation
.
The
former
syllogisme
for
breuity
I
omitted
,
desiring
in
few
words
to
bring
their
argument
to
the
issue
,
presuming
that
any
man
might
from
my
conclusion
deduce
the
maine
question
,
after
this
manner
:
They
were
prouided
but
for
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
assemb●ing
together
in
one
place
.
Therefore
not
for
a
diocesse
.
The
second
which
containeth
the
issue
,
I
propounded
as
forcibly
as
he
hath
done
.
But
my
aduersary
is
one
of
those
disputers
,
who
when
the
consequence
of
an
Enthymeme
is
denied
,
make
it
good
by
a
connexiue
syllogisme
.
When
as
an
Enthymeme
,
for
disputation
,
is
by
somuch
better
then
a
connexiue
syllogisme
,
by
how
much
it
is
shorter
:
the
consequence
being
thesame
with
the
connexion
of
the
proposition
,
the
antecedent
all
one
with
the
assumption
,
and
the
consequent
the
very
same
with
the
conclusion
of
the
connexiue
syllogisme
.
Such
disputers
are
good
to
waste
paper
,
and
spend
time
.
But
to
the
point
.
For
,
saith
hee
,
seeing
the
deniall
is
vpon
this
ground
,
that
the
Prestbyters
were
appointed
not
onely
to
take
charge
of
them
that
were
conuerted
,
but
also
to
labour
the
conuersion
of
the
rest
,
which
we
haue
shewed
to
bee
false
,
it
wil
remaine
good
notwithstanding
.
But
I
haue
proued
that
it
is
an
vndigested
fancy
&
rare
conceit
of
shallow
(
if
not
giddy
)
heads
,
which
see
no
further
then
their
nose
end
,
to
imagine
that
the
Apostles
intending
(
as
they
cannot
deny
)
the
conuersion
of
the
citie
and
country
,
did
place
in
the
citie
a
Bishop
and
Presbytery
,
to
take
charge
only
of
that
small
number
which
at
the
first
was
conuerted
;
but
chiefly
from
hence
to
infer
,
that
euery
particular
parish
should
haue
the
like
B●shop
and
Presbytery
.
The
antient
Church
of
God
in
all
places
vnderstood
the
Apostles
intent
as
I
expound
the
same
.
And
therefore
when
all
both
in
citie
and
country
,
were
conuerted
to
the
profession
of
the
faith
,
they
acknowledged
the
generall
care
and
inspection
ouer
them
all
,
to
belong
to
that
one
B●shop
of
the
citie
,
and
themselues
as
I
said
in
the
Sermon
,
to
be
part
of
that
Church
:
and
neuer
did
,
vnlesse
it
were
in
time
of
schisme
or
heresie
,
set
vp
another
B.
and
Presbytery
within
the
diocesse
:
but
euery
congregation
contented
it selfe
with
a
learned
Presbyter
,
if
it
could
bee
so
well
prouided
for
.
And
this
is
so
manifest
a
truth
,
that
I
doubt
not
to
pronounce
him
void
either
of
a
sound
iudgement
,
or
good
conscience
,
that
shall
deny
it
.
This
consequence
therefore
will
neuer
bee
made
good
.
And
therefore
the
Refuter
might
haue
saued
his
labour
if
it
were
ought
worth
,
which
he
spendeth
vpon
the
assumption
,
vntill
he
had
proued
the
proposition
.
Yea
but
this
consequence
belike
might
haue
been
made
stronger
.
For
he
did
wisely
,
saith
he
,
to
digge
the
pit
no
deeper
,
but
that
he
might
be
able
to
fill
it
againe
:
so
could
hee
not
haue
done
,
had
●e
gone
as
low
as
we
doe
,
who
thus
frame
our
reason
:
All
the
Christians
in
any
one
great
Citie
and
the
townes
about
it
(
vnlesse
there
were
distinct
Churches
in
those
townes
)
did
make
but
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
,
assembled
in
one
place
.
Therefore
both
the
Presbyters
and
Presidents
thereof
,
were
assigned
but
to
one
congregation
.
I
mislike
not
his
addition
of
the
townes
about
,
so
he
will
bee
pleased
,
as
hee
addeth
them
to
strengthen
his
consequence
,
so
not
to
forget
(
as
I
doubt
he
will
)
to
take
them
into
the
defence
of
his
antecedent
.
But
where
he
speaketh
of
his
digging
deeper
;
others
as
good
Pioners
as
hee
,
to
vndermine
the
state
of
our
Church
,
went
no
deepeer
:
and
I
durst
not
adde
more
to
their
antecedent
,
as
he
hath
done
,
lest
I
should
make
it
too
absurd
.
But
what
meaneth
that
parenthesis
,
(
vnlesse
there
were
distinct
Churches
in
those
townes
?
)
I
feare
to
be
circumuented
with
this
inclosure
.
Belike
there
were
more
congregations
then
one
in
the
cities
and
townes
(
as
he
said
before
Cenchrea
was
a
distinct
Church
from
Corinth
)
and
then
,
how
shall
all
both
in
citie
and
country
,
be
said
to
bee
but
one
congregation
?
Tush
,
wee
haue
a
bush
for
that
gap
.
We
will
except
all
other
congregations
but
that
one
,
and
so
they
being
excepted
,
all
will
bee
but
one
.
Ridiculum
caput
!
As
if
you
had
said
,
all
the
congregations
of
Christians
both
in
citie
and
country
were
but
one
,
vnlesse
there
were
more
then
one
.
I
promise
you
you
haue
digged
well
,
and
haue
hedged
your
ditch
with
a
strong
enclosure
.
But
why
had
you
not
the
like
hedge
or
wall
rather
for
the
citie
?
(
vnlesse
there
were
distinct
Churches
in
the
citie
)
for
then
all
had
been
cockesure
.
This
hedge
for
the
townes
,
and
this
wall
for
the
citie
,
would
haue
sufficiently
fenced
the
antecedent
.
But
then
the
consequence
had
been
ridiculous
:
and
as
it
is
now
propounded
,
(
with
this
inclosure
in
the
antecedent
)
is
altogether
as
weake
as
it
was
before
.
For
to
what
purpose
are
the
townes
added
,
if
the
parishes
be
excepted
?
And
by
this
inclosure
the
antecedent
it selfe
is
bewraied
of
falshood
.
For
if
there
were
in
the
citie
and
country
more
distinct
Churches
,
or
parishes
,
(
as
here
is
supposed
)
and
these
all
subordinate
to
one
(
as
I
haue
manifestly
proued
before
)
then
all
these
will
make
a
diocesse
.
I
say
therefore
againe
,
that
though
their
antecedent
were
true
,
yet
the
consequence
were
to
be
denied
.
Serm.
sect.
5.
pag.
19.
But
the
Antecedent
is
not
onely
false
,
but
also
vnreasonable
,
and
vncredible
,
&c.
20.
lines
,
to
,
one
day
.
)
The
reason
whereby
I
disprooue
the
Antecedent
,
is
by
the
Refuter
framed
after
his
fashion
,
and
propounded
at
large
.
It
shall
suffice
to
turne
his
proposition
into
an
Enthymeme
;
thus
:
Ad.
Pag.
62.
The
number
of
the
Christians
in
the
greatest
Cities
was
very
great
,
(
hee
should
haue
said
,
greater
then
could
ordinarily
meet
in
one
assembly
)
the
times
such
for
persecution
,
as
would
not
permit
them
ordinarily
to
meet
in
great
multitudes
,
and
the
places
of
their
meeting
priuate
and
vncapeable
of
any
great
multitude
,
(
I
say
such
multitudes
:
)
Therefore
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
all
the
Christians
in
any
great
Citie
(
and
the
townes
about
,
which
he
should
haue
added
)
did
make
more
then
one
particular
congregation
ordinarily
assembling
in
one
place
.
Did
not
I
tell
you
that
hee
would
forget
to
adde
to
the
Cities
,
the
Townes
about
them
,
which
hee
did
adde
to
his
Antecedent
to
make
the
former
consequence
good
,
but
dares
not
adde
it
now
for
feare
of
marring
all
?
But
what
doth
he
answere
to
it
,
as
it
is
?
First
,
hee
cauilleth
,
and
meerely
cauilleth
with
the
consequence
,
obiecting
such
things
as
hee
is
perswaded
in
his
owne
conscience
,
neither
were
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
nor
ought
to
haue
been
.
Themselues
doe
teach
,
that
parishes
ought
to
bee
so
well
compact
and
trussed
together
,
T.
C.
H.I.
as
that
all
of
the
same
Church
may
conueniently
and
ordinarily
meet
together
;
and
also
that
where
the
multitude
is
greater
,
then
that
all
can
well
meete
together
,
they
ought
to
diuide
themselues
into
diuers
congregations
.
And
now
he
telleth
vs
of
great
parishes
,
either
in
the
suburbs
of
London
,
or
in
some
parts
of
the
land
,
which
were
at
their
setting
out
nothing
so
populous
as
now
they
are
:
both
which
sorts
being
so
mightily
increased
in
respect
of
the
number
of
their
parishioners
,
himselfe
I
dare
say
is
of
opinion
that
they
ought
to
bee
diuided
.
And
therefore
ought
not
(
but
that
hee
meant
to
cauill
)
to
haue
supposed
the
practise
of
the
primitiue
Church
(
which
hee
and
his
consorts
doe
alwaies
vrge
as
a
precedent
for
imitation
)
to
bee
sutable
to
those
instances
,
which
though
hee
giueth
,
yet
hee
and
all
his
partners
doe
vtterly
mislike
,
as
swaruing
from
the
practise
of
the
primitiue
Churches
.
And
where
he
saith
,
M.
D.
doth
mistake
the
matter
,
whiles
hee
thinketh
that
wee
hold
,
that
all
and
euerie
of
the
Christians
in
the
great
Cities
did
,
or
could
alwaies
meete
in
the
same
place
:
hee
vtterly
mistaketh
me
in
so
conceiuing
(
though
I
am
not
ignorant
they
hold
very
strange
things
)
but
this
J
conceiue
you
to
hold
,
that
each
visible
Church
was
,
and
still
ought
to
bee
a
particular
ordinary
constant
congregation
of
Christians
,
which
not
onely
may
conueniently
,
but
also
must
necessarily
,
(
if
they
bee
not
by
sufficient
causes
hindered
)
assemble
together
ordinarily
to
praier
,
and
to
the
ministery
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
.
And
I
say
,
that
in
respect
of
the
number
,
or
rather
innumerable
company
of
Christians
(
which
T.
C.
himselfe
thinketh
to
haue
been
greater
in
those
times
then
now
)
in
respect
of
the
times
wherein
they
liued
,
raging
with
persecution
,
and
in
regard
of
the
places
,
vncapeable
of
such
multitudes
,
it
is
vncredible
,
yea
impossible
,
that
all
the
Christians
in
the
greatest
cities
and
countries
about
them
,
should
make
but
one
particular
congregation
,
ordinarily
and
constantly
meeting
in
one
place
.
Neither
doth
that
further
his
cause
,
which
hee
professeth
to
be
their
assertion
,
that
the
Christians
which
dwelt
in
and
about
any
great
Citie
,
and
were
called
the
Church
of
the
Citie
,
were
members
of
one
body
:
for
not
onely
they
,
but
also
those
that
dwelt
in
the
remotest
parts
of
the
Country
(
though
distinguished
into
many
particular
congregations
)
did
not
hold
themselues
to
bee
entire
bodies
by
themselues
(
vnlesse
they
were
schismatickes
or
heretikes
)
but
all
members
of
the
same
outward
body
and
visible
Church
,
whereof
the
mother
Church
in
the
citie
was
the
chiefe
or
head
,
by
which
they
were
denominated
,
and
also
distinguished
(
as
now
they
are
)
from
other
Churches
.
Ad
pag.
63.
Hauing
thus
cauilled
with
the
consequence
,
hee
proceedeth
to
the
antecedent
,
(
which
is
the
assumption
of
his
syllogisme
)
denying
euery
particular
branch
thereof
.
And
first
for
the
number
:
hee
would
examine
my
proofes
:
but
what
should
hee
speake
of
proofes
,
when
all
I
say
is
but
vpon
imagination
?
Verily
,
for
ought
I
see
,
my
imaginations
are
better
reasons
then
your
strongest
proofes
.
And
that
here
appeareth
where
you
weaken
my
imagination
,
J
will
not
say
falsifie
it
,
by
propounding
it
after
your
maner
.
But
could
a
man
professing
sincerity
,
so
cast
off
all
shame
,
as
to
affirm
that
all
I
say
,
is
but
vpon
imagination
,
when
of
that
which
I
say
there
are
foure
proofes
set
downe
in
the
Sermon
?
first
,
by
comparison
of
the
lesse
to
the
greater
:
secondly
,
an
instance
of
Rome
:
thirdly
,
the
testimony
of
Cornelius
:
fourthly
,
the
testimony
of
Tertullian
.
The
first
he
propundeth
thus
:
If
the
multitude
of
Christians
at
Ierusalem
within
a
few
weekes
after
Christ
was
very
great
,
then
was
it
great
in
such
cities
.
But
the
former
is
true
:
Therefore
the
latter
.
It
is
your
fashion
to
make
my
consequences
not
to
exceed
the
proportion
of
your
owne
imagined
ability
in
answering
them
.
My
reason
standeth
thus
:
If
the
multitude
of
Christians
at
Ierusalem
was
verie
great
within
a
few
weekes
after
the
ascension
of
Christ
;
then
in
all
likelihood
the
number
of
Christians
in
greater
cities
hauing
the
like
(
though
not
alwaies
so
great
)
meanes
,
was
within
two
hundred
yeeres
increased
so
much
,
as
to
exceed
the
proportion
of
one
particular
assembly
,
ordinarily
meeting
in
one
place
.
But
the
former
is
true
:
In
my
argument
(
as
you
see
)
comparison
is
made
not
onely
betweene
Ierusalem
and
other
greater
Cities
,
but
chiefly
(
which
was
omitted
by
the
Refuter
)
betweene
the
short
time
of
a
few
weekes
,
and
the
continuance
of
200.
yeeres
.
Jf
at
Ierusalem
,
within
a
few
weekes
,
the
Christians
were
become
many
thousands
;
how
may
wee
thinke
they
were
increased
before
the
end
of
200.
yeeres
,
in
Rome
,
Alexandria
,
Ephesus
,
Antioch
,
and
such
like
Cities
?
So
that
I
doubt
not
,
but
the
consequence
is
strong
enough
(
containing
an
argument
from
the
lesse
to
the
greater
)
though
I
prooue
none
of
those
foure
things
which
hee
would
haue
prooued
:
as
first
,
that
all
which
were
conuerted
in
Ierusalem
at
that
time
,
remained
members
of
that
Church
.
Which
maketh
not
against
the
consequence
,
but
rather
for
it
,
seeing
those
which
remained
not
in
Ierusalem
,
were
by
persecution
dispersed
to
other
Cities
,
to
helpe
forward
the
plough
of
Christ
there
.
Secondly
,
that
all
the
great
Cities
had
the
like
meanes
to
that
of
Ierusalem
:
which
needeth
not
to
be
proued
,
seeing
the
meanes
which
had
beene
vsed
,
and
the
miracles
which
had
beene
wrought
at
Ierusalem
,
were
also
effectuall
in
other
places
,
and
are
at
this
day
,
besides
the
like
meanes
of
their
owne
.
Thirdlie
,
though
the
meanes
were
alike
,
that
yet
the
effects
were
answerable
:
which
also
needeth
not
to
be
prooued
,
seeing
wee
know
by
the
report
of
the
best
Writers
,
how
wonderfully
and
miraculously
the
Church
was
multiplied
in
the
greatest
Cities
within
that
time
.
Fourthly
,
that
there
was
neuer
any
apostasie
in
any
of
those
Churches
with
which
Paul
(
in
his
conceit
)
doth
seeme
to
charge
them
of
Asia
,
2.
Tim.
1.15
.
Which
exception
also
is
friuolous
,
S.
Paul
saith
,
that
all
who
are
in
Asia
had
forsaken
him
;
hee
must
be
admonished
to
reforme
his
iudgement
.
For
first
,
Paul
speaketh
not
of
all
the
Christians
of
Asia
,
but
onely
of
all
those
Asians
of
note
,
who
had
beene
in
Rome
since
his
imprisonment
:
of
which
number
(
saith
hee
)
are
Phygellus
and
Hermogenes
.
Neither
doth
hee
speake
of
an
apostasie
from
the
faith
,
but
of
their
forsaking
him
in
his
affliction
,
as
the
Disciples
had
shrunke
from
our
Sauiour
Christ
:
for
else
,
when
hee
saith
in
the
fourth
chapter
of
the
same
epistle
,
In
my
first
Apologie
no
man
stood
with
me
,
but
all
●id
forsake
me
,
wee
might
in
like
manner
collect
,
that
all
were
Apostares
from
the
faith
.
But
what
kinde
of
desertion
Paul
meaneth
,
whereinto
those
of
Asia
did
fall
,
it
appeareth
by
the
contrary
practise
of
Onesiphorus
,
whom
he
commendeth
in
the
same
place
,
who
often
refreshed
Paul
,
and
was
not
ashamed
of
his
chaine
:
but
when
he
was
at
Rome
,
hee
was
so
farre
from
shrinking
from
Paul
,
that
hee
most
diligently
sought
him
out
and
found
him
.
The
others
of
Asia
(
of
whom
hee
complaineth
)
when
they
were
in
Rome
,
shrunke
from
him
,
as
being
ashamed
or
afraid
of
his
chaine
.
Thus
Chrysostome
expoundeth
it
,
that
Paul
when
hee
was
apprehended
,
Chrys.
in
2.
Tim.
1.
hom.
3.
was
forsaken
of
his
friends
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
it
is
likely
there
were
many
then
in
Rome
,
from
the
parts
of
Asia
;
but
none
,
saith
hee
,
stood
to
mee
,
no
man
would
know
me
,
all
were
estranged
from
me
.
Theophylact
likewise
:
When
Paul
was
apprehended
of
Nero
,
hee
was
forsaken
of
all
the
faithfull
in
Asia
.
who
from
Asia
had
gone
to
Rome
with
him
.
O●cumenius
in
like
manner
:
When
Paul
was
apprehended
of
Nero
,
his
friends
of
Asia
did
forsake
him
:
for
there
were
in
Rome
many
of
Asia
which
were
followers
of
Paul
,
or
otherwise
faithfull
men
;
but
all
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
withdrew
themselues
,
and
as
we
say
,
drew
their
neckes
out
of
the
collar
,
after
Nero
had
laid
hold
on
him
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
(
saith
hee
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
those
in
Asia
,
that
is
,
those
of
Asia
.
It
is
likely
(
saith
Theodoret
)
that
some
of
those
which
in
Asia
had
beleeued
were
at
Rome
,
but
auoided
the
companie
of
Paul
for
feare
of
Nero.
As
for
the
assumption
,
Ad
pag.
64.
viz.
that
the
multitude
of
Christians
at
Ierusalem
within
a
few
weekes
was
great
,
it
maketh
nothing
(
saith
he
)
for
him
,
or
against
vs
.
Which
is
a
strange
speech
,
seeing
it
is
one
of
the
premisses
whereupon
the
conclusion
is
inferred
,
and
which
being
granted
,
their
assertion
cannot
be
true
.
But
heere
againe
hee
telleth
vs
of
the
great
parishes
about
London
,
saying
,
that
they
of
Ierusalem
did
all
meet
together
as
well
as
they
.
Which
is
spoken
against
reason
,
and
against
sense
:
for
first
,
it
was
not
intended
,
that
they
of
Ierusalem
should
meet
,
as
those
of
London
which
be
of
one
parish
,
after
their
multitude
was
increased
.
Secondly
,
neither
might
they
(
being
vnder
persecution
)
meet
in
great
multitudes
,
as
those
of
London
,
which
through
Gods
goodnes
enioy
peace
and
liberty
.
Thirdly
,
neither
had
they
such
places
of
meeting
for
great
multitudes
.
But
where
I
said
,
it
was
not
intended
,
when
their
multitude
should
bee
great
,
that
they
of
Ierusalem
should
assemble
together
,
as
they
who
are
of
one
parish
about
London
;
that
needeth
some
explanation
.
The
parishes
about
London
,
and
euery
where
from
the
beginning
,
are
each
of
them
one
among
many
,
seuered
from
the
rest
,
with
purpose
that
all
within
that
precinct
should
make
an
ordinarie
set
congregation
,
hauing
one
Presbyter
,
and
not
a
presbyterie
,
much
lesse
a
Bishop
assigned
to
them
:
whereas
contrariwise
,
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
whereunto
Iames
was
appointed
Bishop
,
assisted
with
a
presbyterie
of
Ministers
,
was
neuer
intended
to
be
one
parish
among
many
,
but
to
bee
a
mother
Church
,
which
should
by
Gods
blessing
beget
others
to
bee
seuered
from
it
in
particular
assemblies
,
and
yet
to
remaine
subordinate
and
subiect
vnto
it
,
as
children
to
the
mother
.
It
was
neuer
meant
,
neither
in
Ierusalem
,
nor
in
any
other
Citie
,
that
the
Bishop
and
his
presbyterie
should
bee
set
ouer
no
more
but
one
particular
congregation
;
or
that
as
more
congregations
should
bee
constituted
,
euerie
one
should
haue
a
Bishop
and
a
presbyterie
.
But
they
were
prouided
for
the
people
of
God
,
that
either
then
were
in
the
Citie
and
Countrey
,
or
after
should
bee
;
which
as
it
increased
,
was
to
be
diuided
into
seuerall
Congregations
,
whereunto
Presbyters
seuerally
were
to
bee
assigned
;
all
being
members
of
one
bodie
,
subiected
to
the
Bishop
and
Presbyterie
of
the
mother
Church
,
which
was
(
as
it
were
)
the
head
of
that
bodie
.
to
turne
the
poem
of
it
(
such
is
his
crueltie
)
to
the
very
heart
of
my
cause
.
But
his
minaces
are
but
words
,
and
his
words
but
winde
:
for
this
is
all
he
can
say
or
doe
:
If
the
Christians
in
Ierusalem
were
not
so
many
but
that
still
they
continued
one
parishionall
assemblis
,
meeting
together
in
one
place
;
then
the
Christians
of
other
Cities
might
be
,
and
did
so
in
like
sort
.
But
the
antecedents
is
crue
:
therefore
the
consequent
.
Of
the
consequence
(
hee
saith
)
no
reasonableman
can
make
any
doubt
:
and
so
taketh
it
for
granted
,
wanting
reason
to
prooue
it
.
Me
thinkes
there
is
great
reason
,
why
I
should
not
onely
doubt
of
it
,
but
plainely
denie
it
:
for
when
he
saith
,
At
Ierusalem
they
were
not
so
many
&c.
hee
should
haue
said
when
;
and
that
still
they
continued
,
&c.
hee
should
haue
said
how
long
;
that
being
compared
with
other
Cities
at
the
same
time
,
and
of
the
like
continuance
,
the
reason
of
his
consequence
might
appeare
.
There
bee
three
reasons
to
be
giuen
,
why
the
Church
at
Ierusalem
should
not
bee
at
the
end
of
one
hundred
or
two
hundred
yeeres
,
so
great
as
in
other
Cities
.
First
,
the
persecution
begunne
with
the
martyrdome
of
Steuen
,
and
continued
vntill
the
destruction
of
Ierusalem
:
vpon
the
beginning
of
which
persecution
,
Aelius
Hadrianus
about
the
yeare
137.
who
called
it
Aelia
after
his
owne
name
,
prohibiting
any
●ew
to
come
any
more
within
that
City
.
So
that
if
it
were
true
,
that
the
number
of
the
Christians
in
Ierusalem
within
the
first
200.
yeares
had
neuer
exceeded
the
proportion
of
a
parishional
assembly
:
yet
hereof
it
would
not
follow
,
that
the
number
of
Christians
in
other
Cities
,
should
for
200.
yeares
continue
so
smal
.
No
reasonable
man
therefore
would
looke
to
haue
that
consequence
granted
him
.
The
Assumption
also
is
false
.
Conc.
Nic.
c.
7.
reseruing
to
Caesarea
the
Metropolis
,
her
owne
dignity
.
Nether
is
it
probable
,
that
the
Church
at
Ierusalem
after
they
once
came
to
the
number
of
5000
(
as
quickly
it
did
,
&
continued
with
great
increase
vntil
the
death
of
Steuen
)
did
ordinarily
meete
all
in
one
place
.
We
reade
of
some
Panegyricall
meetings
,
as
it
were
,
in
Salomons
porch
,
and
in
the
temple
,
such
as
be
the
meetings
at
Paules
Crosse
,
or
at
the
Spittle
;
but
their
ordinarie
,
&
as
it
were
parishionall
meetings
,
were
by
companies
in
more
priuate
places
.
Nay
,
I
say
further
,
that
the
meetings
either
of
the
12.
Apostles
,
(
who
neuer
were
intended
to
be
members
,
either
all
,
or
any
of
them
,
of
one
parish
)
with
the
Disciples
,
Act.
6.1
.
or
of
some
of
them
with
the
Presbyters
,
and
whole
assembly
,
Act.
15.22.26
.
(
which
places
are
by
the
refuter
alleadged
)
were
not
parishionall
,
but
rather
Synodicall
.
As
for
those
other
places
in
the
Acts
:
some
of
them
are
ignorantly
,
some
absurdly
alleadged
.
In
the
2.
of
the
Acts
he
quoteth
three
places
,
viz.
the
two
first
verses
,
6.
&
44.
In
the
first
,
it
is
said
,
that
when
the
day
of
Pentecost
was
come
,
they
were
all
with
one
accord
in
the
same
place
.
All
,
that
is
,
all
the
Apostles
,
whose
mutuall
society
,
and
conuersing
together
is
noted
.
So
doe
some
old
Manuscrpts
reade
,
saith
Beza
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
all
the
Apostles
.
For
to
them
alone
had
Christ
promised
,
that
they
should
bee
baptized
,
Peter
stood
with
the
eleuen
,
and
the
people
who
wondred
at
them
,
seem
to
in●inuate
,
saying
,
are
not
all
these
men
of
Galilee
?
Is
it
not
strange
then
,
that
the
conuersing
of
the
Apostles
together
in
one
house
,
should
be
alleadged
as
an
example
,
yea
patterne
of
a
parishionall
assembly
?
Or
if
by
all
,
were
ment
the
120.
Disciples
assembled
before
the
descending
of
the
holy
Ghost
;
how
doth
it
proue
,
either
that
they
were
a
parishionall
assembly
,
wherein
the
12.
Patriarches
of
Christendome
were
met
;
or
that
they
continued
for
an
100.
or
200.
yeares
,
so
small
a
company
as
a
parishionall
assembly
;
seeing
within
a
few
dayes
,
yea
the
very
same
day
,
they
grew
to
bee
many
thousands
?
In
the
6.
verse
it
is
said
,
that
when
this
voice
or
rumor
was
spread
in
the
streetes
concerning
the
Apostles
,
speaking
with
variety
of
tongues
,
great
multitudes
of
people
flocked
together
,
not
of
Christians
(
to
make
a
parishionall
assembly
,
)
but
of
all
sorts
to
behold
this
wonder
:
whereat
when
some
had
wondred
,
and
some
had
scoffed
,
by
Peters
sermon
,
3000.
of
them
were
conuerted
.
In
the
44.
verse
,
Luke
saith
,
that
all
they
which
belieued
,
were
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
had
all
things
common
,
and
sold
their
possessions
,
&c.
Where
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
doth
either
signifie
they
conuersed
together
in
one
place
,
and
kept
company
one
with
another
,
and
so
speaketh
not
of
their
assemblies
,
for
vers.
46.
hee
speaketh
of
their
meeting
in
the
temple
,
(
where
they
could
not
meet
alone
,
)
wherein
nationall
,
rather
then
parishionall
meetings
vsed
to
bee
assembled
:
or
else
it
signifieth
they
were
in
one
,
that
is
,
they
were
ioined
together
in
heart
and
affection
,
as
it
is
said
Act.
4.32
.
which
sense
Caluin
preferreth
.
There
remaineth
Act.
21.22
.
where
the
Presbyters
of
Ierusalem
,
who
were
with
Iames
their
Bishop
,
when
Paul
came
to
him
,
tell
Paul
that
it
cannot
be
auoided
,
but
the
multitude
would
come
together
,
hearing
that
he
was
come
.
Vnderstanding
by
the
multitude
,
either
the
multitude
of
the
people
of
Ierusalem
,
as
well
those
which
belieued
not
,
as
those
which
did
,
(
for
they
direct
him
to
goe
into
the
temple
,
there
to
shew
himselfe
to
be
an
obseruer
of
the
law
)
or
the
company
of
beleeuers
onely
,
who
when
they
would
flocke
together
to
see
him
,
should
find
him
in
the
temple
conforming
himselfe
to
the
law
of
Moses
.
But
to
the
absurditie
of
alleadging
these
places
,
this
is
added
,
that
none
of
them
reach
any
thing
neare
the
time
which
we
speake
of
.
For
the
2.
of
the
Acts
speaketh
of
that
which
was
done
within
a
fortnight
after
Christs
Ascension
.
The
6.
before
the
martyrdome
of
Steuen
:
the
15.
aboue
20.
yeares
,
the
21.
about
15.
years
before
the
destruction
of
Ierusalem
,
that
is
,
almost
150.
yeares
before
the
period
of
that
time
whereof
we
speake
.
And
yet
in
Act.
21.
there
is
mention
of
I
know
not
how
many
ten
thousands
of
belieuing
Iewes
;
ver.
20.
You
see
,
say
they
to
Paul
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
how
many
ten
thousands
there
are
of
belieuing
Iewes
,
&c.
My
second
argument
to
proue
,
(
Serm.
Sect
6.
Pag.
20.
At
Rome
about
the
yeare
100.
the
Company
of
Christians
being
much
increased
&c.
Euaristus
diuided
them
into
diuers
Parishes
,
&c.
to
Apolog.
c.
37.
pag.
21.
To
this
instance
his
answere
is
twofold
.
First
,
that
it
is
but
a
tale
of
no
credite
,
nor
truth
.
Of
no
credite
;
because
,
both
the
author
deserueth
no
credite
,
and
the
matter
reported
by
him
,
is
vnlikely
and
vntrue
.
The
Author
,
either
because
wrongfully
hee
beareth
the
name
of
Damasus
;
or
if
it
be
Damasus
himselfe
,
hee
is
not
to
be
credited
in
reporting
a
matter
done
300.
yeares
before
his
time
.
So
that
wee
are
resolued
to
deny
it
,
let
the
author
bee
who
hee
will
.
Yea
,
but
the
Venetian
Edition
of
the
Councels
chargeth
that
Author
(
but
hee
saith
not
where
)
with
disagreement
from
other
approued
histories
,
(
but
he
saith
not
wherein
.
)
Doth
hee
in
this
particular
disagree
from
approued
histories
?
Or
is
there
any
reason
,
why
he
should
be
suspected
of
forgery
in
this
particular
?
In
all
writings
of
the
Romanists
,
which
are
suspected
of
forgery
,
there
is
something
contained
which
seemeth
to
bee
coined
,
or
foisted
in
for
an
aduantage
.
Now
I
would
gladly
know
,
to
what
end
they
should
faine
this
particular
?
serueth
it
to
magnifie
the
Papall
supremacy
,
or
to
maintaine
any
of
their
corruptions
,
or
to
contradict
their
opposites
in
any
thing
which
they
held
in
former
times
?
Nothing
lesse
.
For
to
begin
with
the
last
;
It
could
not
bee
counterfeited
with
purpose
to
contradict
any
body
;
for
,
that
one
and
the
same
Church
,
was
and
ought
to
be
diuided
into
Parishes
,
and
that
Presbyters
were
and
ought
to
be
seuerally
appointed
to
them
,
neuer
any
man
that
J
haue
read
or
heard
of
,
denied
before
T.
C.
Not
Caluin
,
nor
Beza
,
nor
any
other
fauourer
of
the
pretended
Discipline
before
him
.
Likewise
,
that
which
is
reported
,
was
a
godly
and
necessary
act
,
which
had
been
practised
long
before
this
in
Alexandria
(
though
I
knew
not
so
much
when
I
made
the
Sermon
,
but
you
shall
heare
of
it
in
due
place
)
which
also
was
practised
vpon
the
like
occasion
in
all
the
Churches
of
the
world
:
that
is
to
say
,
when
the
number
of
Christians
was
so
increased
,
that
they
could
not
all
conueniently
meet
in
one
place
;
they
were
by
their
B.
diuided
into
diuers
assemblies
.
Was
not
this
done
in
all
Churches
whatsoeuer
yea
ought
it
not
to
haue
bene
done
?
In
Rome
it
was
done
,
long
before
the
time
of
Damasus
(
for
before
his
time
there
were
aboue
40.
parish
Churches
built
in
Rome
)
and
no
doubt
but
it
had
a
beginning
,
and
a
beginner
;
which
,
if
it
were
not
Euaristus
,
let
it
be
shewed
who
it
was
.
It
was
done
,
as
J
will
straight
waies
note
,
before
Tertullians
time
,
who
flourished
about
the
year
180.
And
therfore
if
not
by
Euaristus
,
them
by
one
of
the
other
ancient
BB.
within
the
compas
of
the
limited
time
,
who
were
godly
BB.
&
famous
Martyrs
.
That
it
was
Euaristus
his
act
(
to
let
passe
Damasus
,
and
the
volumes
of
the
councils
which
report
it
out
of
him
,
Platina
,
Onuphrius
before
cited
,
and
Sabelliciu
testifying
the
same
:
Iohn
Bale
reporteth
of
Euaristus
,
that
hee
shining
with
the
grace
of
God
,
euen
in
the
time
of
persecution
increased
the
number
of
the
sacred
assemblies
of
Christians
.
De
viti●
R.
pontif
.
in
Euaristo
.
Likewise
Robert
Barnes
that
famous
Martyr
saith
,
Presbyteris
Rome
,
titulos
distribuit
:
Hee
distributed
the
titles
or
parishes
to
the
Presbyters
.
To
these
I
might
adde
the
testimony
of
a
Protestant
writer
,
who
for
30.
De
vitis
pontif
.
yeares
together
studiously
laboured
in
penning
a
Chronologie
(
though
it
be
not
printed
)
wherein
among
other
things
he
reporteth
of
Euaristus
(
who
as
he
noteth
was
made
Bishop
of
Rome
in
the
yeare
99.
Will
.
Harison
Prebendary
of
Windsore
.
)
that
hee
brought
the
places
of
the
assemblies
of
the
Christian
brethren
in
Rome
vnto
7
▪
congregations
▪
&
appointed
to
each
of
them
seuerall
pastors
&
teachers
,
that
they
might
by
such
means
remaine
more
secret
,
liue
in
better
securitie
,
and
heare
the
word
with
more
ease
and
profit
,
then
otherwise
they
could
(
considering
the
iniquity
of
the
time
)
if
they
did
meete
in
greater
numbers
.
As
touching
the
matter
,
he
saith
.
1.
it
is
vnlikely
that
the
Presbyters
attended
the
flocke
promiscuously
,
and
the
people
met
in
diuers
places
vncertainely
:
and
yet
that
which
he
excepteth
against
as
the
matter
,
is
not
so
much
as
material
.
The
question
is
,
whether
Euaristus
diuided
the
Church
of
Rome
into
diuers
seuerall
congregations
,
and
assigned
seuerall
Presbyters
to
them
,
as
Damasus
reporteth
.
But
whether
the
Presbyters
before
attended
them
promiscuously
,
or
the
people
mette
vncertainly
,
that
is
not
the
question
.
But
seing
hee
is
pleased
to
except
against
those
words
which
are
not
in
Damasus
,
but
Onuphrius
&
my selfe
added
as
a
reason
of
Euaristus
his
act
;
let
him
also
be
pleased
to
answer
me
,
whether
the
whole
Christian
people
of
Rome
in
the
city
,
suburbs
&
country
adioyning
,
did
vsually
&
ordinarily
meete
together
in
one
assembly
throghout
the
whole
term
of
200.
years
;
or
in
diuers
assemblies
,
as
they
could
most
conueniently
.
If
they
alwaies
or
most
vsually
met
together
;
then
,
whether
alwaies
in
one
certain
place
,
or
in
diuers
vncertainly
&
occasionally
.
The
former
himselfe
denieth
.
If
the
latter
,
then
the
Presbyters
had
not
charge
of
them
seuerally
,
but
of
them
al
promiscuously
:
then
also
the
people
met
vncertainly
.
If
they
did
not
ordinarily
meet
all
together
,
but
in
diuers
assemblies
(
which
is
the
truth
)
then
,
whether
were
the
seuerall
meetings
set
and
certain
,
and
seueral
Presbyters
appointed
to
them
:
or
were
the
meetings
and
Presbyters
for
the
instructing
of
those
assemblies
,
appointed
vncertainely
,
as
occasion
and
opportunity
serued
.
If
the
latter
,
which
seemeth
to
haue
beene
the
vse
before
Euaristus
his
time
:
then
that
is
true
,
which
hee
excepteth
against
.
If
the
former
,
which
was
brought
to
passe
by
Euaristus
,
then
the
maine
assertion
which
he
oppugneth
,
is
true
.
Secondly
,
he
would
proue
it
to
be
false
,
and
that
by
2.
testimonies
,
the
former
of
Iustin
Martyr
,
an.
142.
Who
directly
affirmeth
of
the
Church
of
Rome
in
speciall
(
as
in
generall
of
all
other
Churches
)
that
they
vsed
vpon
the
sabbath
day
all
to
assemble
together
in
one
place
.
His
words
are
these
:
On
the
sunday
as
it
is
called
,
all
the
Christians
dwelling
in
the
cities
,
or
abroad
in
the
countries
,
do
come
together
in
the
same
place
.
He
speaketh
not
of
the
Church
of
Rome
in
speciall
,
but
of
the
practise
of
all
Christians
in
general
.
Is
therefore
the
word
all
to
bee
taken
collectiuè
,
or
distributiuè
?
if
in
the
former
sense
,
then
his
meaning
should
be
that
all
Christians
in
the
world
,
whether
they
dwelt
in
cities
or
countreys
,
did
on
the
Lords
day
meet
in
one
place
;
which
is
absurd
.
If
the
latter
,
then
he
meaneth
all
them
distributiuely
,
who
,
whether
they
liued
in
the
cities
or
countries
,
belonged
to
one
congregation
.
As
if
one
of
vs
speaking
of
the
custome
of
our
times
should
say
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
on
Sunday
so
called
,
there
is
a
comming
together
of
all
into
one
place
who
doe
dwell
in
the
cities
or
the
countries
:
that
is
,
all
in
euery
place
that
belong
to
the
same
congregations
.
And
that
it
is
so
to
be
vnderstood
,
it
appeareth
by
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Cities
,
propounded
in
the
plurall
number
.
For
his
meaning
neuer
was
,
that
the
people
of
diuers
cities
did
meet
ordinarily
together
:
&
the
note
of
disiunction
●
or
,
added
to
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
cuntry
,
doth
signifie
that
those
of
the
country
did
not
al
meet
with
them
of
the
City
;
for
then
he
would
haue
said
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
but
that
al
did
meet
in
their
seuerall
congregations
,
whether
they
liued
in
the
cities
or
countries
.
His
other
testimony
is
of
Platina
,
Plat.
de
vit.
pontif
.
in
Dionysio
.
affirming
that
Dionysius
about
160.
yeares
after
Euaristus
,
did
first
diuide
and
set
(
out
)
parishes
,
and
therefore
hee
referreth
him
&
Damasus
to
Onuphrius
to
be
reconciled
.
But
well
may
this
refuter
with
shame
enough
hide
his
head
,
who
shameth
not
so
oft
to
falsifie
the
authors
which
hee
quoteth
.
This
is
that
which
Platina
reporteth
of
Dionysius
,
that
he
being
made
B.
straightwaies
diuided
the
Churches
and
coemiteries
(
which
were
the
places
of
christian
meetings
)
in
the
city
of
Rome
to
the
presbyters
:
Dionys.
epist.
ad
Seuerī
.
For
wheras
Seuerus
had
asked
his
direction
,
what
course
was
to
be
taken
concerning
parish
churches
throghout
the
prouince
of
Corduba
:
he
wisheth
him
to
follow
that
,
which
he
had
lately
done
in
the
church
of
Rome
,
ecclesias
vero
singulas
,
singulis
presbyteris
dedimus
,
seueral
Churches
we
assigned
to
seueral
presbyters
,
&
diuided
to
them
the
churches
&
coemiteries
,
&
ordained
that
euery
one
shold
haue
his
proper
right
,
in
such
sort
as
that
none
may
inuade
the
lands
,
bounds
or
right
of
another
parish
,
but
that
euery
one
should
be
content
with
his
owne
boundes
,
and
so
keepe
his
church
and
people
committed
to
him
,
that
before
the
tribunall
of
the
eternall
Iudge
he
may
giue
an
account
of
all
committed
to
him
,
and
may
receiue
glorie
and
not
iudgement
for
his
deeds
.
De
episcopat
.
et
titul
.
&c.
Now
these
reports
are
easily
reconciled
,
with
the
afore
cited
testimony
of
Damasus
.
For
,
as
Onuphrius
also
hath
obserued
,
Euaristus
first
diuided
the
parishes
to
the
presbyters
,
the
number
wherof
by
Hyginus
not
long
after
was
augmented
an.
138
After
whom
nothing
was
altered
vntill
the
time
of
Dionysius
:
an.
260.
who
increased
the
number
of
the
parishes
,
which
afterwards
were
multiplied
by
Marcellus
,
about
the
yeare
305
&c.
Besides
,
thogh
Euaristus
first
diuided
the
parishes
in
Rome
;
yet
Dionysius
might
be
the
first
that
set
out
the
country
parishes
.
Which
distinction
,
if
it
wil
salue
their
credits
,
who
haue
said
that
Dionysius
first
diuided
parishes
,
I
wil
not
be
against
it
.
His
2.
answere
is
,
that
if
Euaristus
did
any
such
thing
,
he
diuided
the
titles
to
only
gouerning
elders
&c.
A
likely
matter
.
For
the
titles
were
the
sacrae
aedes
,
the
places
of
metings
vnto
Gods
worship
,
in
which
the
Presbyters
,
or
as
Dionysius
calleth
them
,
sacerdotes
the
Priests
,
were
ordained
to
feed
the
people
committed
to
them
,
with
the
ministery
of
the
word
&
sacraments
,
and
goe
before
them
in
the
worship
of
God
.
But
of
lay
elders
I
haue
sufficiently
spoken
before
,
if
any
thing
wil
suffice
,
to
perswade
men
,
that
there
neuer
were
any
such
in
the
church
of
God
.
§.
12.
The
testimony
of
Cornelius
.
Euseb.
l.
6.
c.
43
My
3.
proof
,
is
the
testimony
of
Cornelius
the
B.
of
Rome
:
who
,
as
he
saith
,
there
were
46.
Presbyters
at
that
time
in
the
Church
of
Rome
,
&
108
others
of
the
clergy
,
&
1500.
poor
people
maintained
al
of
them
by
the
contribution
of
christians
:
so
he
calleth
the
Christian
people
in
Rome
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
very
great
&
innumerable
people
.
Did
the
B.
and
154.
clergy
men
attend
one
parishionall
assembly
only
?
was
there
1500.
poor
christians
,
besides
154
of
the
clergy
,
together
with
the
B.
maintained
of
one
parishional
congregation
?
was
an
innumerable
people
,
the
people
of
one
particular
ordinary
congregation
assembling
in
one
place
?
This
testimony
,
saith
our
refuter
,
is
quite
besides
the
purpose
,
a
fift
part
(
meaning
50.
yeres
beyond
the
time
we
speak
of
.
The
limitation
of
the
time
,
wherto
they
haue
confined
the
primitiue
church
was
deuised
for
a
poor
shift
,
because
they
knew
there
was
not
the
like
euidence
for
the
2.
century
,
as
for
the
3.
Otherwise
,
what
reason
can
be
rendred
,
why
there
should
be
diuers
parishes
vnder
one
B.
in
the
year
250.
if
it
were
not
so
in
the
year
200
?
especially
,
seing
they
,
which
of
purpose
haue
written
of
these
things
,
do
professe
that
there
was
no
difference
in
the
number
of
the
parishes
in
that
time
,
&
10.
years
after
.
What
reson
can
be
giuen
,
why
the
christian
people
which
was
innumerable
in
the
yeare
250.
should
haue
been
in
the
yeere
200.
the
people
of
one
particular
parish
?
especially
,
seeing
good
authors
before
the
year
200
,
doe
acknowledge
as
much
as
if
they
had
said
,
that
then
they
were
innumerable
.
To
which
purpose
in
the
4
place
I
quoted
Tertullian
,
seeing
(
saith
he
)
he
speaketh
vnlimitedly
of
the
christians
in
the
Romane
Empire
,
&
saith
nothing
herein
that
w●e
deny
,
nor
ought
for
M.D.
profit
.
By
his
good
leaue
therefore
,
I
will
recite
the
words
.
For
after
that
hee
had
professed
that
christians
then
(
contrary
to
the
iudgement
and
practise
of
the
Papists
now
)
thought
it
vnlawfull
for
them
to
auenge
themselues
on
their
persecutors
,
et
vestra
omnia
implenimus
,
and
we
haue
filled
al
places
that
are
yours
,
cities
,
Islands
,
Castles
,
towns
,
assemblies
&c.
only
your
temples
we
leaue
vnto
you
.
If
we
should
but
depart
away
from
you
,
the
losse
of
so
many
citizens
would
amaze
you
.
Without
doubt
you
would
be
astonished
ad
solitudinem
nostram
at
the
solitarines
which
our
absence
would
make
,
you
would
seek
the
reliques
of
a
dead
city
,
wherein
you
might
rule
,
more
enemies
then
citizens
wold
remain
vnto
you
;
but
now
you
haue
the
fewer
enemies
by
reason
of
the
multitude
of
Christians
,
penè
〈◊〉
ci●ium
,
being
almost
all
citizens
,
penè
omnes
ciues
Christianos
habendo
,
by
hauing
almost
al
your
Citizens
Christians
.
Let
the
Reader
judge
what
the
number
of
Christians
were
in
those
times
,
&
whether
Tertullian
doth
not
speake
chiefly
of
the
city
of
Rome
;
&
let
him
consider
whether
almost
all
the
citizens
of
Rome
(
of
whom
ordinarily
there
were
diuers
hundred
thousands
)
besides
christian
strangers
,
seruants
,
and
the
female
sex
,
were
like
to
be
the
people
of
one
parish
.
euen
the
greatest
part
almost
of
euery
city
,
do
cary
our selues
in
silence
&
modestie
.
And
so
much
concerning
the
multitude
of
the
people
.
Serm
sect.
7.
p.
21.
Ad
to
the
multitude
of
the
people
,
the
consideration
of
the
times
,
raging
for
the
most
part
with
persecution
&c.
to
the
end
of
the
2.
point
.
)
As
touching
the
times
,
the
refuter
answereth
,
that
how
furiously
soeuer
the
times
raged
with
persecution
:
yet
the
christian
people
did
vsually
assemble
together
.
Whereof
I
doubt
not
But
the
question
is
,
whether
in
diuers
congregations
,
as
I
say
,
&
as
it
is
most
euident
;
or
altogether
in
one
place
,
which
is
altogether
vncredible
.
As
for
the
places
,
wherin
the
christians
in
the
first
200.
yeares
vsed
to
assemble
,
especially
in
time
of
persecution
;
whereas
I
say
they
were
priuate
houses
,
vaults
and
secret
places
not
capable
of
such
multitudes
,
as
haue
bin
spoken
of
;
for
refuge
he
flieth
to
the
v●lts
&
holes
,
as
he
calleth
them
,
which
he
supposeth
were
capable
of
great
multitudes
,
but
omitteth
priuate
houses
,
and
other
small
roomes
turned
to
this
vse
.
And
whereas
J
say
they
were
not
capable
of
such
multitudes
,
as
were
th●
whole
companies
of
Christians
in
the
greatest
cities
,
proued
before
to
haue
bin
in
a
manner
innumerable
,
hee
onely
saith
great
multitudes
.
But
what
we
are
to
conceiue
of
this
point
,
let
vs
enquire
of
Hospinian
a
Protestant
writer
,
De
origin
.
templor
.
c.
6.
who
hath
trauelled
in
this
argument
.
He
therefore
saith
,
in
the
time
of
the
Apostles
,
and
some
while
after
,
the
places
of
meetings
which
Christians
had
,
were
simple
houses
,
neither
were
they
permitted
by
the
cruelty
of
tyrants
,
and
rage
of
the
people
,
to
build
,
I
say
not
magnificent
,
but
not
meane
Temples
.
The
places
therefore
of
publike
meetings
in
those
times
were
base
,
more
like
dens
and
secret
corners
,
then
magnificall
Temples
,
as
Eusebius●estifieth
●estifieth
.
And
Tertullian
plainly
affirmeth
,
that
in
his
time
the
Christians
had
no
other
temples
but
simple
houses
.
de
inuent
.
c.
6.
Polydor
Virgil
testifieth
,
that
the
Christians
were
so
far
from
hauing
any
temple
built
in
these
times
,
that
all
was
secret
,
&
their
places
of
meeting
were
chapels
,
and
those
hidden
and
for
the
most
part
vnder
the
ground
,
rather
then
in
open
and
publike
places
.
De
orig.
err●rum
.
lib.
1.
c.
21.
Bullinger
likewise
saith
,
that
the
antient
Christians
vnder
Constantine
the
Great
,
were
wont
vnder
the
quire
of
the
temples
to
build
crypta●
,
vaults
,
in
memory
of
the
persecutions
,
whereby
the
Christians
vnder
the
Emperors
before
Constantine
,
were
not
suffered
sometimes
to
come
abroad
;
and
therfore
they
were
forced
to
hold
their
assemblies
,
and
performe
the
sacred
exercises
in
secret
,
sometimes
in
dens
and
other
priuy
places
.
But
,
saith
the
Refuter
,
Let
them
bee
as
little
as
he
would
make
them
,
yet
it
doth
not
follow
hereof
,
that
the
Churches
in
the
Cities
alone
,
contained
many
particular
congregations
or
parishes
.
Ad
pag.
66.
To
which
purpose
againe
,
he
alleageth
his
chapels
of
ease
for
a
meere
euasion
,
seeing
himselfe
is
perswaded
there
was
none
such
in
those
times
.
And
where
he
saith
,
that
although
there
were
diuers
places
of
meeting
in
those
times
,
yet
all
appertained
to
one
congregation
;
I
confesse
it
to
be
true
:
for
euen
after
the
distinction
of
parishes
both
in
citie
and
country
,
all
of
them
belonged
to
one
Church
,
as
members
of
the
same
body
.
Yea
but
,
saith
he
,
if
there
were
many
particular
congregations
in
euery
city
,
how
chanceth
it
,
he
told
vs
before
,
that
the
parishes
were
not
distinguished
?
Distinguish
the
times
,
and
the
answere
is
easie
.
In
the
first
hundred
yeeres
,
though
Christians
met
in
diuers
places
,
as
they
could
;
yet
neither
,
were
there
in
the
most
cities
certaine
set
places
of
meeting
,
nor
certaine
Presbyters
assigned
to
them
,
as
to
their
perpetuall
and
peculiar
charge
.
But
at
the
end
of
the
first
hundred
yeeres
,
Euaristus
diuided
to
seuerall
Presbyters
in
Rome
,
titles
,
that
is
,
the
set
places
of
meetings
,
which
we
call
parish
Churches
,
whereof
they
were
entituled
,
and
called
the
Presbyters
of
such
and
such
a
title
or
parish
.
And
thus
haue
J
maintained
my
arguments
and
answers
against
his
cauils
.
Now
am
I
to
defend
my
assertion
against
his
proofes
.
CHAP.
VI.
Answering
the
Refuters
arguments
.
ANd
first
,
because
you
shall
know
what
he
meaneth
to
conclude
,
he
propoundeth
the
question
;
which
is
,
saith
he
,
whether
in
the
Apostles
times
and
the
age
following
,
that
is
,
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
the
visible
Churches
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
were
parishes
or
no.
In
which
question
,
seeing
he
&
his
consorts
restraine
the
times
of
the
primitiue
Church
to
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
;
the
Reader
will
I
hope
expect
,
that
he
should
conclude
,
that
fo●
this
whole
terme
at
the
least
,
the
churches
were
each
of
them
but
a
parish
,
and
that
in
all
this
time
there
were
no
dioceses
.
His
argumentation
containeth
two
ranckes
of
instances
:
the
former
taken
out
of
the
scriptures
;
the
latter
out
of
the
Fathers
.
The
former
he
concludeth
thus
:
The
Refuters
first
argument
.
If
the
Churches
of
Corinth
,
Ephesus
and
Antioch
(
being
visible
Churches
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
government
)
were
each
of
them
but
one
parish
(
vnderstand
for
the
whole
terme
of
200.
yeeres
)
then
the
other
visible
Churches
〈◊〉
with
the
like
power
,
were
also
each
of
them
(
during
the
same
terme
)
but
one
parish
.
But
the
Churches
of
Corinth
,
Ephesus
and
Antioch
,
(
being
visible
Churches
endued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
)
were
each
of
them
but
one
parish
(
for
the
first
200.
yeeres
.
Therefore
the
other
visible
Churches
endued
with
the
like
power
,
were
also
(
for
the
like
terme
)
each
of
them
but
one
parish
.
The
proposition
I
will
be
content
to
yeeld
to
my
aduersarie
,
so
it
may
be
lawfull
for
me
to
vse
the
like
:
for
then
I
would
conclude
thus
:
If
the
Churches
of
Alexandria
and
Rome
were
not
parishionall
Churches
in
the
first
200.
yeeres
,
neither
were
the
Churches
of
other
Cities
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
:
therefore
the
consequent
.
The
consequence
is
the
same
with
his
,
and
grounded
on
the
same
hypothesis
:
viz.
that
all
Churches
endued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
were
at
the
first
of
the
same
nature
and
constitution
.
The
former
part
of
the
assumption
,
concerning
Alexandria
,
I
will
manifestly
prooue
when
I
come
to
the
third
point
,
concerning
Diocesans
:
viz.
that
it
was
not
one
parish
,
but
contained
diuers
parishes
,
euen
in
the
first
100.
yeeres
.
Concerning
Rome
,
I
haue
proued
already
,
that
within
the
first
200.
yeeres
it
was
diuided
into
many
parishes
:
and
therefore
although
there
bee
not
so
good
euidence
for
other
Cities
in
particular
,
yet
the
like
is
to
bee
concluded
of
them
,
seeing
they
were
all
of
the
same
constitution
.
Passing
by
therefore
his
proposition
,
I
take
hold
of
his
assumption
,
and
doe
plainely
denie
,
the
Churches
he
speaketh
of
,
or
any
other
,
which
had
a
Bishop
and
Presbyterie
,
to
haue
beene
for
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
no
more
but
parishes
:
for
J
doubt
not
,
but
it
is
easier
to
proue
that
within
this
terme
,
not
onely
the
Presbyters
and
people
in
the
said
dioceses
,
but
also
the
Bishops
in
the
same
Prouinces
,
were
subiect
to
the
Bishops
of
these
three
Cities
.
For
as
it
is
euident
of
Antioch
,
by
the
testimonie
of
Ignatius
,
who
calleth
himselfe
the
Bishop
of
Syria
;
so
no
reason
can
bee
alleged
why
the
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Corinth
,
who
in
the
third
centurie
,
and
in
the
ages
following
,
were
Metropolitans
,
were
not
so
in
the
second
;
or
if
they
were
Metropolitans
in
the
third
,
and
in
the
ages
following
,
(
as
most
certainely
they
were
)
why
they
should
not
haue
beene
Diocesans
at
the
least
in
the
second
.
The
assumption
(
hee
saith
)
appeareth
plaine
by
the
proofe
of
the
particulars
.
But
what
doth
he
prooue
of
the
particulars
?
Are
his
syllogismes
so
soone
come
to
an
end
?
His
chiefe
proofes
be
,
that
in
the
Apostle
Pauls
time
each
of
them
vsed
to
assemble
in
one
Congregation
.
Was
this
your
assumption
?
You
that
are
so
strict
in
exacting
syllogismes
and
direct
proofes
,
should
not
haue
sought
to
carrie
away
the
matter
,
as
it
were
,
in
the
cloudes
.
Yea
but
that
which
he
prooueth
,
doth
prooue
the
assumption
.
That
shall
thus
bee
tried
by
his
owne
forme
of
argumentation
:
If
those
Churches
of
Corinth
,
Ephesus
,
and
Antioch
,
in
the
Apostle
Pauls
time
,
were
each
of
them
no
more
then
ordinarily
assembled
in
one
place
,
then
were
they
for
the
first
200.
yeeres
each
of
them
but
one
parish
.
But
the
Churches
of
Corinth
,
Ephesus
,
and
Antioch
,
in
the
Apostle
Pauls
time
,
were
each
of
them
no
more
then
ordinarily
assembled
in
one
place
.
Therefore
for
the
first
200.
yeeres
they
were
each
of
them
but
one
parish
.
The
proposition
is
omitted
by
the
disputer
,
as
taken
for
granted
:
but
therein
he
hath
plaied
the
sophister
;
for
he
that
meaneth
truly
,
doth
not
vse
to
omit
any
part
of
his
argument
,
but
that
which
is
certaine
,
or
confessed
.
But
the
consequence
of
this
proposition
is
worse
then
naught
:
for
if
hee
had
onely
said
thus
,
If
in
the
Apostles
times
they
were
each
of
them
but
one
Congregation
,
therefore
for
200.
yeeres
they
were
so
;
the
consequence
had
beene
starke
naught
:
or
if
he
had
onely
said
,
If
in
the
Apostles
time
they
were
each
but
one
Congregation
,
then
were
they
each
one
parish
;
that
consequence
also
had
beene
naught
:
but
when
he
saith
,
If
in
the
Apostles
times
each
was
but
one
Congregation
,
therefore
for
200.
yeeres
each
of
them
was
but
a
parish
;
that
consequence
is
,
as
I
said
,
worse
then
naught
.
That
the
first
of
the
two
consequences
is
naught
,
it
is
euident
:
for
though
at
the
first
conuersion
of
any
great
City
,
and
for
a
while
after
,
the
number
vsually
was
so
small
,
that
they
might
haue
assembled
in
one
place
;
yet
it
is
certaine
,
that
within
200.
yeeres
,
their
number
was
growne
to
bee
almost
innumerable
,
as
hath
beene
shewed
,
and
therefore
too
great
to
make
one
ordinarie
congregation
.
This
one
exception
(
if
no
more
should
bee
added
)
ouerturneth
all
his
dispute
.
As
touching
the
second
:
though
it
should
bee
granted
,
that
each
of
these
Churches
in
the
Apostles
time
,
did
ordinarilie
assemble
together
in
one
place
;
yet
would
it
not
follow
,
that
therefore
each
of
them
was
but
a
parish
;
and
much
lesse
(
which
is
the
end
of
all
this
disputation
)
that
all
Churches
endued
with
ecclesiasticall
power
should
be
but
parishes
;
and
consequently
,
that
euery
parish
should
haue
a
Bishop
and
presbyterie
.
The
reasons
of
my
deniall
of
these
consequences
I
haue
before
set
downe
at
large
,
Chap.
3.
§
5.
and
6.
and
therefore
this
disputation
I
haue
sufficiently
ouerthrowne
already
.
For
a
surplussage
I
adde
these
two
reasons
:
First
,
If
these
Churches
,
because
they
were
each
of
them
but
one
Congregation
,
were
parishes
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
;
then
were
they
such
Churches
,
as
after
the
diuision
,
parishes
were
.
This
consequence
may
not
be
denied
,
especially
by
them
who
would
haue
all
parishes
framed
to
the
constitution
of
the
first
Churches
.
But
they
were
not
such
:
for
the
parishes
,
after
their
diuision
,
had
not
a
Bishop
and
presbyterie
,
but
only
a
Presbyter
assigned
to
them
:
neither
was
the
Pastor
thereof
superintendent
ouer
others
,
neither
was
any
of
them
intended
to
bee
a
mother
Church
.
Secondly
,
if
that
assumption
was
false
which
denied
parishes
to
haue
beene
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
times
,
then
these
Churches
were
not
onely
many
congregations
,
but
many
parishes
also
.
His
Scriptures
for
Corinth
,
are
out
of
the
first
epistle
to
the
Corinthians
,
and
Rom.
●6
.
1
.
for
Ephesus
,
Act.
20.28
.
for
Antioch
,
Act.
14.27
.
Now
let
vs
consider
the
date
of
his
testimonies
,
and
then
what
is
testified
in
them
.
The
date
of
them
is
ancienter
then
Paul
his
going
to
Rome
,
which
was
in
the
yeere
5●
.
or
●6
.
Which
I
do
note
,
to
shew
to
what
time
his
proposition
is
to
bee
restrained
:
as
if
hee
had
said
,
The
thing
that
is
testified
for
Corinth
,
1.
Cor
11.
is
such
,
as
might
bee
written
to
the
Church
of
England
,
as
verse
18.
Strab.
l.
8.
Ad
pag.
67.
When
you
come
into
the
Church
,
I
beare
there
bee
schism●s
among
you
:
vers.
20.
When
you
come
together
in
the
same
place
,
this
is
not
to
eat
the
Supper
of
the
Lord
:
vers.
33.
When
you
come
together
to
eat
,
expect
one
another
.
Rom.
16.
There
is
mention
of
the
Church
of
Cenchreae
,
whereof
mention
hath
beene
made
now
thrice
,
to
no
purpose
,
vnlesse
it
bee
against
himselfe
:
for
if
C●nchreae
were
a
parish
subordinate
to
the
Church
of
Corinth
,
as
most
certainly
it
was
,
it selfe
hauing
not
a
Bishop
or
presbyterie
,
but
a
Presbyter
assigned
to
it
;
this
will
proo●e
,
that
the
mother
Church
of
Corinth
was
diocesan
,
(
as
all
Cathedrall
Churches
bee
)
and
that
parishes
distinguished
from
the
Cathedrall
,
as
children
from
the
mother
,
were
such
as
that
of
Cenchreae
.
That
which
is
testified
for
Ephesus
,
Act.
20.28
.
is
such
as
vpon
like
occasion
might
by
all
.
in
his
visitation
be
applied
to
a●●
the
ministers
of
a
diocesse
;
that
they
should
attend
the
stocke
,
&c.
For
must
the
word
stocke
,
which
may
be
extended
,
either
to
the
vniuersall
,
or
nationall
,
or
prouinciall
,
or
diocesan
Church
;
must
it
needes
signifie
onely
the
congregation
of
a
Parish
?
&
yet
he
,
that
breathes
nothing
but
nouelties
,
saith
it
is
a
new
conceit
,
to
suppose
a
Diocesan
flocke
.
But
this
calumny
of
nouelty
I
haue
by
plentifull
testimonies
of
antiquity
(
before
cited
)
wiped
cleane
away
.
As
touching
Act.
14.27
.
cited
for
Antioch
;
where
it
is
said
,
that
Paul
and
Barnabas
gathered
together
the
Church
,
to
relate
vnto
them
,
what
God
had
done
by
them
,
since
they
had
laid
their
hands
vpon
them
,
and
had
commended
them
to
the
grace
of
God
:
it
is
apparant
;
that
not
all
the
Church
consisting
of
husbands
,
and
wiues
,
their
children
and
seruants
,
but
some
of
the
chiefe
and
principall
,
perhappes
not
many
,
perhappes
not
any
,
besides
those
of
the
Clergy
,
were
called
to
that
meeting
.
These
were
his
proofes
out
of
the
Scripture
.
Eusebius
,
Ignatius
,
and
some
of
our
owne
Writers
,
all
which
testimonies
are
scarse
worth
the
mentioning
.
Eusebius
calleth
the
Churches
of
Corinth
,
Ephesus
and
Antioch
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Of
the
ancient
vse
of
this
word
,
sometimes
signifying
the
whole
Diocesse
,
sometimes
the
whole
City
and
Suburbes
,
I
haue
spoken
sufficiently
heretofore
,
as
also
of
that
which
hee
obiecteth
,
concerning
the
Parish
in
Ephesus
.
Wherto
I
adde
,
that
Eusebius
,
as
he
vsed
the
preposition
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
so
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
the
same
purpose
.
Ignatius
writing
to
the
Church
of
Ephesus
[
a
](A20733-e72860-b)
a
Ignat.
ad
Eph.
,
the
multitude
whereof
hee
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
as
if
he
had
of
purpose
noted
it
to
be
a
Church
consisting
of
many
multitudes
or
congregations
)
exhorteth
them
,
as
one
might
in
like
manner
the
faithfull
in
London
,
(
though
diuided
into
many
congregations
)
to
come
oft
together
to
[
b
](A20733-e72890-b)
b
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
giue
thanks
and
glory
to
God
:
for
when
you
come
oft
together
into
one
place
,
the
power
of
Satan
is
weakened
,
&c.
His
other
testimony
out
of
Ignatius
,
is
out
of
his
Epistle
to
Hero
,
where
he
calleth
the
Church
of
Antioch
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Synagogue
,
that
is
,
the
church
or
congregation
of
the
Lord
.
The
word
being
vsed
in
the
same
signification
with
Ecclesia
,
whereof
I
spake
before
.
But
whether
Ignatius
were
Bishop
onely
of
one
Congregation
,
or
parish
,
let
his
own
words
testifie
.
Remember
me
saith
he
,
[
c
](A20733-e73000-b)
c
Epist.
ad
Magnes
.
(
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Magnesians
)
in
your
praiers
,
and
the
Church
which
is
in
Syria
,
whereof
I
am
not
worthy
to
be
called
the
Bishop
.
And
in
the
Epistle
to
the
Romanes
towardes
the
latter
end
[
d
](A20733-e73030-b)
d
Igna.
ad
Ro.
,
Remember
in
your
praier
the
Church
in
Syria
,
the
which
,
in
stead
of
me
,
hath
the
Lord
to
bee
her
pastor
,
who
saith
I
am
the
good
shepheard
.
Or
,
if
these
words
bee
not
plaine
inough
,
hee
calleth
himselfe
in
the
[
e
](A20733-e73060-b)
e
Ad
Rom.
same
Epistle
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishop
of
Syria
.
Now
let
my
aduersarie
tell
mee
,
what
maner
of
Parish
Syria
was
.
And
let
me
heare
also
,
what
he
can
obiect
against
these
two
Epistles
of
Ignatius
to
the
Magnesians
,
and
Romanes
.
For
euen
they
[
f
](A20733-e73110-b)
f
P●rk
.
problem
.
,
which
suspect
his
Epistle
to
Her●
,
which
the
refuter
citeth
,
and
foure
others
,
acknowledge
these
two
to
bee
no
bastards
Eusebius
[
g
](A20733-e73150-b)
g
Euseb.
l.
3.
c.
35.36
.
mentioneth
both
.
And
that
to
the
Romans
,
he
not
onely
mentioneth
,
but
also
citeth
a
good
part
thereof
.
Thus
leauing
that
most
pregnant
,
and
authentique
euidence
of
Ignatius
to
my
aduersary
to
muse
vpon
;
J
come
to
his
testimonies
of
our
new
writers
,
all
which
(
excepting
two
testimonies
of
Tindall
)
he
most
childishly
alleadgeth
,
to
proue
,
that
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
,
and
of
other
the
like
Cities
,
were
each
of
them
but
a
Parish
;
because
they
call
a
Church
a
Congregation
;
vsing
the
word
Congregation
in
as
ample
sense
,
as
before
I
proued
the
word
Ecclesia
(
whereof
that
is
the
English
)
to
bee
vsed
.
The
auncient
English
Bibles
,
neuer
almost
vse
the
word
church
;
but
in
stead
thereof
doe
vse
the
word
congregation
,
not
onely
where
is
mention
of
particular
Churches
,
but
of
the
vniuersall
or
catholicke
Church
.
As
Mat.
16.
Vpon
this
rocke
I
will
build
my
congregation
.
Eph.
1.
Hee
hath
made
him
head
of
the
Congregation
,
which
is
his
body
.
Eph.
5.
Yee
husbands
loue
your
wiues
as
Christ
loued
the
congregation
.
And
so
in
the
Communion
Booke
,
both
in
the
Praiers
&
translation
there
vsed
.
As
in
the
Praier
for
the
King
,
before
the
Epistle
;
haue
mercy
on
the
whole
congregation
.
In
the
solemnization
of
Matrimony
,
out
of
Ephes.
5.
I
speake
of
Christ
and
the
Congregation
.
But
you
shall
heare
his
particulars
;
First
Tindall
translateth
the
word
Ecclesia
by
congregation
:
thus
,
to
the
angell
of
the
congregation
of
Ephesus
,
&c.
2.
Iohn
Bale
translateth
and
expoundeth
the
word
Candlesticke
and
Church
,
by
Congregation
.
The
reasons
why
the
first
Translaters
of
the
Bible
into
English
in
these
latter
times
did
auoid
the
name
Church
,
and
insteed
thereof
vsed
Congregation
,
doe
seeme
to
haue
been
these
two
.
The
first
,
because
Church
or
Kyrk
,
being
deriued
from
the
Greeke
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
doth
more
properly
signifie
the
place
of
meeting
,
then
the
congregation
it selfe
,
which
is
meant
by
ecclesia
:
and
therefore
the
word
Congregation
thought
to
be
the
fitter
translation
.
The
second
,
because
the
Papists
had
abused
the
word
Church
,
whether
it
were
generally
vsed
,
to
signifie
the
Romish
Church
;
or
particularly
,
to
import
the
Romish
clergy
.
So
saieth
Tindal
;
Because
the
clergy
had
appropriated
to
themselues
the
name
Church
,
therefore
I
translated
the
word
Ecclesia
,
by
this
word
Congregation
.
For
when
the
people
vnderstood
,
that
by
Church
was
meant
the
company
of
men
professing
the
faith
of
Christ
,
the
name
Church
is
euery
where
vsed
,
as
the
translation
of
ecclesia
.
Thirdly
,
Yea
,
but
D.
Fulke
iustifying
the
translation
of
Ecclesia
,
Eph.
5.23
.
by
congregation
,
argueth
plainely
,
that
he
held
the
Church
of
Ephesus
to
consist
but
of
one
particular
congregation
onely
.
Which
allegation
sheweth
extreame
want
,
either
of
iudgement
,
or
honesty
:
for
what
church
or
congregation
is
there
mentioned
?
the
Church
of
Ephesus
,
or
the
vniuersall
Church
of
Christ
?
when
it
is
said
,
as
Christ
is
the
head
of
the
Church
?
Vpon
which
words
,
when
the
Rhemists
had
noted
it
as
a
corruption
of
the
first
English
Bibles
,
which
did
not
vse
the
word
Church
,
but
congregation
in
stead
thereof
.
D.
Fulke
answereth
;
D.
Fulk
.
in
Eph.
5.
●
.
2.
that
the
Translator
rather
vsed
the
word
Congregation
then
Church
,
to
auoide
ambiguity
,
because
this
word
Church
is
commonly
taken
for
the
house
of
the
assembly
of
Christians
:
and
that
the
people
might
know
,
that
the
Church
is
a
gathering
together
of
al
the
members
into
one
body
,
which
in
the
name
of
church
doth
not
appeare
.
But
after
the
people
were
taught
to
distinguish
of
the
word
Church
,
and
to
vnderstand
it
for
the
mysticall
body
of
Christ
,
the
latter
translations
vsed
that
terme
;
not
that
the
other
was
any
corruption
;
or
the
latter
,
any
correction
;
but
to
declare
,
that
both
is
one
.
Is
it
not
plaine
,
that
he
by
congregation
vnderstandeth
the
vniuersall
Church
,
which
is
a
gathering
together
of
all
the
members
into
one
body
,
but
of
the
Church
of
Ephesus
speaketh
neuer
a
word
?
that
the
seuen
Churches
were
particular
congregations
,
meaning
thereby
(
that
which
I
doe
not
deny
)
particular
churches
,
and
that
euery
particular
congregation
is
a
Church
,
and
hath
priuiledges
of
a
Church
belonging
to
it
,
which
is
also
true
.
Fiftly
,
the
great
Church
Bible
readeth
thus
;
Iohn
to
the
seuen
Congregations
.
Lastly
,
D.
Bilson
saith
,
that
the
church
is
neuer
taken
in
the
old
or
new
Testament
for
the
Priests
alone
,
but
for
the
congregation
of
the
faithfull
.
From
which
allegations
to
inferre
,
that
each
church
is
but
one
particular
congregation
,
is
(
as
I
said
)
most
childish
.
But
those
2.
out
of
Tindall
,
the
one
,
that
a
Bishop
was
the
gouernour
but
of
one
congregation
:
the
other
,
that
hee
was
the
ouerseer
but
of
a
Parish
,
to
preach
the
word
to
a
parish
:
was
not
a
childish
mistaking
,
but
a
wilfull
misalleadging
of
the
Author
,
who
in
the
former
place
hath
no
such
thing
.
Or
if
hee
haue
any
where
,
he
vseth
the
word
Congregation
in
as
large
a
sense
as
Ecclesia
,
wherof
it
is
the
translation
.
In
the
latter
,
speaking
of
such
a
Bishop
as
is
described
,
1.
Tim.
3.
that
is
,
of
such
a
one
as
(
in
his
conceit
)
was
but
a
Presbyter
;
hee
saith
,
by
the
authority
of
the
gospell
,
they
that
preach
the
word
of
God
in
euery
Parish
,
and
(
performe
)
other
necessary
ministeries
,
haue
right
to
challenge
an
honest
liuing
:
Vid.
infr
lib.
4.
c.
7.
§
9.
Neither
is
the
Refuter
content
once
to
haue
falsified
the
testimony
of
this
holy
Martyr
;
but
againe
in
the
end
of
his
booke
hee
alleadgeth
him
to
the
same
purpose
.
After
hee
hath
thus
doughtily
proued
his
Assumption
concerning
these
3.
Churches
,
Ignatius
,
Tertullian
,
and
Eusebius
concerning
others
.
Ignatius
exhorteth
the
Magnesians
,
that
they
would
all
come
together
into
one
place
to
praier
;
all
,
as
with
vs
,
that
belonged
to
the
same
congregation
.
And
perswading
the
Philadelphians
to
vnity
,
Ad
Philadelph
.
exhorteth
them
,
that
they
would
vse
one
faith
,
one
preaching
,
one
eucharist
,
because
the
body
of
Christ
is
one
,
and
his
bloud
one
,
one
cup
,
and
one
bread
,
one
Altar
for
the
whole
Church
,
and
one
Bishop
with
the
Presbytery
and
Deacons
:
for
there
is
but
one
God
the
Father
,
&c.
one
faith
,
one
baptisme
,
and
one
Church
,
which
the
Apostles
haue
founded
from
one
end
of
the
world
to
another
,
&c.
In
which
words
,
none
fauoureth
the
Refuters
conceit
,
but
that
of
one
altar
seruing
for
the
whole
Church
:
the
word
Altar
being
expounded
for
the
Communion
Table
,
which
is
not
likely
,
and
too
much
sauoureth
of
popery
.
But
by
one
altar
,
is
meant
Christ
,
who
sanctifieth
all
our
sacrifices
or
oblations
,
and
maketh
them
acceptable
to
God
:
as
Ignatius
expoundeth
himselfe
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Magnesians
;
all
as
one
,
runne
together
into
the
Temple
of
God
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
vnto
one
Iesus
Christ
as
it
were
vnto
one
altar
.
But
that
which
he
alleageth
out
of
the
same
Epistle
,
that
they
were
to
gather
themselues
together
into
one
place
to
chuse
their
Bishop
:
if
it
were
rightly
alleaged
,
would
proue
,
not
their
ordinary
and
parishionall
,
but
extraordinary
and
panegyricall
meeting
to
such
an
end
:
but
this
needed
not
:
their
Bishop
at
this
time
was
come
to
Ignatius
in
his
iourny
towards
Rome
,
as
appeareth
by
the
beginning
of
the
Epistle
,
as
it
were
vpon
an
honourable
ambassage
from
the
Church
,
as
were
the
BB.
of
other
Churches
.
But
he
saith
,
it
becometh
you
as
being
a
Church
of
God
,
to
doe
as
other
Churches
haue
done
;
that
is
,
as
he
sheweth
in
the
words
following
,
to
appoint
a
Bishop
,
that
he
may
〈◊〉
Antioch
performe
the
●mbassage
of
God
,
that
it
may
be
granted
to
them
being
gathered
together
into
one
place
,
to
glorifie
the
name
of
God
From
whence
also
the
Re●uter
gathereth
,
that
a
Bishop
is
Gods
Ambassador
to
a
people
that
are
together
in
one
place
.
Which
is
true
,
so
oft
as
he
preacheth
.
But
Ignatius
meaneth
nothing
lesse
,
then
that
they
should
appoint
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
;
but
onely
willeth
them
to
send
a
Bishop
,
as
it
were
vpon
ambassage
thither
.
Ignat.
ad
S●yrn
.
His
meaning
is
more
plainly
expressed
in
his
Epistle
to
the
S●yrneans
,
where
he
writeth
to
the
same
purpose
,
that
seeing
the
Church
of
Antioch
after
his
departure
had
some
peace
,
(
the
persecutors
contenting
themselues
to
haue
taken
him
who
was
their
ringleader
from
among
them
)
he
exhorteth
them
to
ordaine
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
sacred
Ambassador
,
who
when
he
should
come
into
Syria
,
should
reioice
with
them
,
because
they
had
peace
.
the
Christian
Churches
were
all
one
body
,
and
came
all
together
into
a
company
and
congregation
.
By
which
testimony
,
if
it
were
truely
alledged
,
all
Christian
Churches
,
as
they
are
one
body
of
Christ
,
so
all
should
meet
together
to
make
one
parish
.
His
words
be
these
:
I
will
now
set
forth
the
practises
of
the
Christian
party
:
That
hauing
refuted
the
euils
(
obiected
)
I
may
declare
the
good
.
We
are
a
body
consenting
in
the
knowledge
of
religion
,
in
the
truth
of
discipline
or
doctrine
,
and
the
couenant
of
hope
:
We
come
together
into
a
company
and
congregation
.
Which
words
may
be
verified
of
the
Christians
of
these
times
,
which
in
euery
Church
are
diuided
into
seuerall
congregations
.
he
calleth
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
the
parish
of
Ierusalem
,
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
the
parish
of
Alexandria
,
&c.
To
which
J
answere
,
that
Eusebius
indeed
calleth
each
of
the
Churches
by
the
name
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
he
calleth
none
of
them
a
parish
,
as
we
vnderstand
the
word
parish
.
In
the
place
which
hee
quoteth
concerning
Ierusalem
,
Eusebius
saith
,
Eus.
l.
3.
c.
11.
that
after
the
martyrdome
of
Iames
(
who
no
doubt
from
an
Apostle
,
had
been
preferred
to
bee
a
parish
Bishop
,
because
he
was
Christs
kinsman
)
the
Apostles
and
disciples
of
Christ
,
which
yet
remained
,
did
from
all
places
come
together
,
with
those
who
were
of
Christs
kinred
,
to
consult
,
whom
they
might
thinke
worthy
to
bee
Iames
his
successor
;
and
that
with
one
consent
they
made
chuce
of
Simeon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
,
as
worthy
the
throne
of
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
Church
,
because
he
also
was
our
Sauiours
kinsman
.
All
this
was
done
(
no
doubt
)
in
a
parish
meeting
,
to
set
a
parish
B.
in
his
throne
.
In
which
throne
of
Iames
,
reserued
,
as
Eusebius
saith
,
till
his
time
,
the
BB.
of
Ierusalem
,
hauing
the
honour
of
Patriarches
,
did
succeed
.
As
touching
Alexandria
,
it
is
euident
by
that
which
before
hath
been
shewed
,
that
Eusebius
speaking
of
the
Bishop
there
,
calleth
him
sometime
the
Bishop
of
the
Church
or
paroecia
,
sometimes
of
the
Churches
or
paroeciae
,
belonging
to
Alexandria
,
and
all
in
one
and
the
same
sense
:
which
plainely
sheweth
,
that
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hee
doth
not
meane
that
which
we
call
a
parish
.
Which
wil
then
better
appeare
,
when
I
shall
proue
that
from
Saint
Marks
time
,
there
were
more
Churches
or
parishes
there
,
and
yet
but
one
Church
and
one
Bishop
.
But
suppose
it
were
granted
him
,
that
each
of
the
Churches
for
a
time
did
not
exceed
for
their
number
,
the
proportion
of
an
ordinary
congregation
;
yet
this
would
not
proue
them
to
haue
been
parishes
,
as
hath
been
shewed
.
Thus
and
thus
weakely
,
to
vse
his
owne
words
,
the
Disputer
hauing
prooued
his
cause
,
notwithstanding
concludeth
with
a
stout
brag
.
Now
let
any
man
,
iudge
whether
M.D.
hath
better
proued
,
that
the
Churches
in
those
times
were
dioceses
,
or
I
,
that
they
were
parishes
.
So
say
I
,
let
any
man
now
iudge
,
who
is
of
iudgement
;
and
if
there
be
any
comparison
betweene
the
plaine
euidence
which
I
haue
brought
,
and
his
slender
proofes
,
let
me
be
taken
for
a
man
of
no
iudgement
.
the
worst
is
still
behinde
:
for
his
cause
indeed
,
but
to
mine
,
aduantage
.
For
if
there
were
not
onely
diocesan
,
but
also
prouinciall
Churches
,
and
that
within
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
;
then
is
it
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
there
were
no
Churches
,
but
parishional
.
Neither
did
,
or
doth
the
being
of
prouinciall
Churches
,
hinder
dioceses
,
or
diocesan
BB.
These
be
the
shallow
conceipts
of
this
disputer
,
and
his
fellow
challengers
of
disputation
:
First
,
that
euery
visible
Church
hath
a
sufficient
and
independent
authority
,
immediately
deriued
from
Christ
,
for
the
gouer●●ent
of
it selfe
in
al
causes
ecclesiasticall
.
Secondly
,
that
euery
parish
is
or
ought
to
be
such
a
Church
.
From
the
former
of
these
,
this
disputer
seemeth
to
inferre
,
that
if
diocesan
Churches
and
BB.
be
subordinate
to
the
prouinciall
Churches
,
and
BB:
that
then
the
prouinciall
be
the
onely
Churches
.
And
by
the
same
reason
when
the
prouinces
were
subiect
to
the
Patriarches
,
none
but
patriarchall
Chuches
,
(
as
that
of
Rome
,
Constantinople
,
Alexandria
,
Antioch
and
Ierusalem
)
were
to
be
esteemed
Churches
.
But
let
vs
heare
the
disputer
.
And
how
is
this
proued
?
because
he
saith
the
BB.
of
either
prouince
in
England
are
Suffraganes
,
or
rather
Curates
to
the
two
Arch-bishoppes
in
their
seuerall
prouinces
,
euen
their
deputies
exercising
ecclesiastical
iurisdiction
,
from
and
vnder
them
.
It
shall
not
be
amisse
therefore
for
M.D.
to
confute
him
the
next
time
he
writeth
.
In
the
meane
time
you
should
haue
answered
for
your selues
,
and
not
put
off
the
confutation
of
his
reioynder
to
others
.
But
though
you
cannot
confute
him
,
yet
you
can
abuse
him
,
as
by
reuiling
and
scornefull
termes
in
other
places
of
your
booke
;
so
here
by
notorious
falsifying
of
his
words
▪
For
where
doth
he
say
that
our
Bishops
bee
but
Suffraganes
or
Curates
to
the
two
Arch-bishoppes
,
as
you
without
shame
or
conscience
doe
belie
him
?
saith
hee
,
or
meaneth
he
any
more
but
this
,
that
during
the
time
of
the
Archiepiscopal
visitation
,
wherby
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Ordinary
is
suspended
,
that
ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
which
he
practiseth
,
he
doth
exercise
from
and
vnder
the
Archbishop
as
his
deputy
?
And
what
is
this
to
our
purpose
?
Yea
but
,
If
we
may
iudge
(
saith
our
Disputer
)
by
the
outward
practise
,
we
haue
onely
two
Churches
,
and
they
are
prouinciall
,
the
one
of
Canterbury
,
the
other
of
Yorke
,
vnsubordinate
either
to
other
,
or
to
any
other
ecclesiasticall
power
,
and
so
entire
Churches
(
such
as
hee
would
haue
euery
parish
to
be
.
)
Heere
by
the
way
let
the
Reader
iudge
,
with
what
conscience
the
Refuter
hath
so
oft
obiected
against
our
Bishoppes
,
that
they
be
petite
popes
,
hauing
sole
and
supreme
authority
,
seeing
now
himselfe
confesseth
,
that
according
to
the
order
and
discipline
of
our
Church
,
they
are
subiect
to
the
Metropolitanes
.
But
to
the
point
:
none
of
these
things
which
hee
obiecteth
,
doe
hinder
the
being
of
dioceses
,
or
diocesan
Bishoppes
;
no
not
though
they
had
been
by
G.P.
called
the
Archbishoppes
Suffraganes
.
For
whereas
the
Bishoppes
haue
been
by
authors
which
haue
written
within
these
nine
hundred
yeeres
,
called
Suffraganes
to
the
Archbishoppes
,
they
meane
thereby
comprouinciall
Bishoppes
▪
who
in
the
election
of
the
Metropolitanes
,
and
in
the
prouinciall
synods
held
by
the
Metropolitanes
,
did
giue
their
suffrages
with
them
:
not
that
they
bee
such
as
commonly
we
call
Suffraganes
,
but
are
as
absolute
Bishoppes
as
haue
been
since
the
first
appointment
of
Metropolitanes
;
and
they
were
actually
acknowledged
,
as
they
were
at
the
first
intended
,
so
soone
as
the
diuers
cities
of
one
prouince
had
their
Bishops
.
In
all
which
,
as
there
was
consociation
among
themselues
,
as
being
all
of
one
body
;
so
also
subordination
to
the
Bishop
of
the
Metropolis
,
or
mother
Citie
,
as
being
their
head
.
Thus
was
it
prouided
in
the
canons
,
which
for
their
antiquity
,
are
called
the
Apostles
canons
,
that
the
Bishops
of
euery
nation
must
acknowledge
him
that
in
the
first
or
primate
among
them
,
and
esteeme
him
as
the
head
,
and
that
they
should
doe
nothing
exceeding
the
bounds
of
their
owne
iurisdiction
,
without
his
consent
.
And
that
euery
one
may
doe
those
things
alone
which
belong
to
his
owne
Church
and
the
Countries
which
bee
vnder
it
.
Neither
may
hee
(
meaning
the
Primate
)
doe
any
thing
without
the
consent
of
all
.
The
same
is
repeated
and
explaned
,
as
yee
heard
before
in
the
Councell
of
Antioch
;
C.
Antioch
.
c.
10.
The
councell
of
Sardica
calleth
the
metropolitan
the
gouernor
of
the
prouince
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
c.
6.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
calling
the
Primate
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishoppe
which
gouerneth
in
the
mother
Citie
,
appointing
him
to
haue
the
care
of
the
whole
prouince
,
because
there
is
concourse
of
men
,
who
haue
businesse
from
all
parts
of
the
country
to
the
mother
Citie
.
And
although
they
forbad
Bishoppes
to
attempt
any
thing
beyond
their
compasse
,
without
his
consent
,
according
to
the
antient
canon
,
yet
they
say
,
Euery
Bishoppe
hath
power
or
authority
of
his
owne
diocesse
,
to
administer
or
gouerne
the
same
according
to
his
conscience
,
and
to
haue
prouident
care
of
the
whole
Country
subiect
to
his
Citie
,
and
to
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
to
dispose
of
all
things
with
iudgement
.
In
Conc.
Constant.
1.
c.
2.
as
Balsa●●
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
heads
by
themselues
of
their
prouinces
,
being
Bishoppes
of
their
owne
peculiar
dioceses
,
and
yet
hauing
a
generall
superintendencie
ouer
the
whole
prouince
.
I
cannot
deny
,
but
that
long
before
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
there
were
Patriarches
aboue
Metropolitanes
,
whose
originall
,
as
it
seemeth
,
proceeded
from
humane
policie
;
Conc.
Nic.
c.
6.
as
the
cause
of
their
ratification
and
continuance
is
ascribed
to
antient
custome
.
But
the
superiority
of
Metropolitanes
was
either
intended
by
the
Apostles
,
as
I
thinke
,
when
they
appointed
Bishoppes
ouer
mother
Cities
,
who
though
at
the
first
actually
were
but
Bishoppes
of
their
owne
diocesse
,
yet
vpon
the
conuersion
of
other
Cities
in
the
prouince
,
were
to
be
ackowledged
the
chiefe
;
De
gradib
.
c.
24.
or
at
least
,
as
Beza
supposeth
,
they
were
ordained
,
not
by
authority
of
Councels
,
but
s●●dente
natura
,
&
necessitate
flagitante
;
nature
aduising
,
and
necessitie
requiring
it
.
For
it
was
conuenient
,
or
rather
necessary
,
that
there
should
be
consociation
of
Churches
within
the
same
prouince
;
and
that
the
gouernours
of
the
seuerall
dioceses
,
should
meete
for
the
common
good
;
as
also
that
the
wrongs
offered
to
any
by
the
Bishoppes
within
their
dioceses
,
might
bee
remedied
.
By
consequent
therfore
it
was
necessary
,
especially
before
there
were
Christian
magistrates
,
that
one
in
euery
prouince
should
be
held
as
chiefe
,
or
primate
,
who
should
assemble
the
synods
,
moderate
them
being
assembled
,
see
the
decrees
executed
,
and
haue
a
generall
superintendencie
ouer
the
whole
prouince
.
Beza
therefore
speaking
of
the
aforesaid
Canon
of
the
Apostles
,
De.
grad.
c.
20.
saith
,
quid
aliud
hic
statuitu●
quam
ordo
ille
,
quem
in
omnibus
ecclesiis
restitutum
cupi●●●
?
What
other
thing
is
here
ordained
,
but
that
order
,
which
in
all
Churches
wee
desire
may
be
restored
?
That
there
were
Metropolitane
Bishoppes
within
the
first
200
yeeres
,
it
is
euident
by
those
prouincial
councels
,
which
in
the
second
Century
were
held
concerning
the
feast
of
Easter
,
Euseb.
l.
5.
c.
23
being
assembled
and
guided
by
Metropolitanes
.
As
the
president
of
the
prouinciall
synode
held
at
Rome
,
was
Victo●
the
Metropolitane
Bishoppe
of
Rome
;
of
those
in
Palestina
,
Theophilus
the
Metropolitane
of
Caesarea
,
and
Narcissus
Bishoppe
of
Ierusalem
;
of
that
in
France
,
Irenaeus
the
Bishoppe
of
Lyons
;
of
that
in
Achaia
,
Bacchylus
the
Bishoppe
of
Corinth
;
of
that
in
Asia
,
Polycrates
the
Bishoppe
of
Ephesus
.
And
so
of
that
in
Osroene
and
of
diuers
others
.
Now
it
is
to
be
noted
,
that
Eusebius
speaking
of
the
synode
held
in
France
,
saith
,
there
was
a
meeting
of
the
Churches
in
France
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
which
Churches
Irenaeus
was
B.
Such
a
parish
B.
was
he
.
Ex
Balsam
.
in
Conc.
Ephes.
c
8.
&
exemplar
.
suggest
.
de
Cypri
.
Episcopis
&
ex
Decreto
Conc.
Ephes.
post
aduentum
Episcoporum
Cypri
.
That
there
haue
been
Metropolitanes
,
and
prouinciall
Churches
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
,
this
one
euidence
among
many
,
which
might
bee
alleaged
,
may
sufficientlie
euince
.
In
the
time
,
of
the
first
Ephesine
Councell
,
Dionysius
the
gouernour
of
the
East
,
whose
chiefe
seat
was
Antioch
,
hauing
appointed
Theodorus
to
bee
the
Lieutenant
of
the
Isle
of
Cyprus
,
the
Patriarch
of
Antioch
,
because
the
ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
for
the
most
part
followed
the
ciuill
,
challenged
authority
ouer
the
Isle
of
Cyprus
,
and
power
of
ordaining
the
Metropolitan
Bishop
of
Constantia
,
the
mother
city
of
Cyprus
.
To
which
end
,
the
clergy
of
Antioch
procured
from
Dionysius
letters
,
both
to
the
clergy
of
Constantia
,
and
to
the
Lieutenant
of
Cyprus
,
to
interdict
them
from
chusing
their
Metropolitane
,
the
See
being
then
void
:
or
if
they
had
already
chosen
their
Bishop
,
that
both
he
and
they
should
repaire
to
the
Councell
at
Ephesus
,
hoping
that
by
the
Councell
they
should
be
ouerruled
,
according
to
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
his
desire
.
Reginus
therefore
,
who
was
chosen
Bishoppe
,
with
other
Bishoppes
of
Cyprus
,
Can.
Apost.
35.
put
vp
a
Supplication
to
the
Councell
,
complaining
that
the
Bishoppe
and
clergy
of
Antioch
had
sought
,
contrary
to
the
Apostles
Canons
,
and
contrary
to
the
determination
of
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
Conc.
N●c
.
c.
5.6
Constant.
1.
c.
2
to
bring
them
in
subiection
to
them
:
and
therefore
requested
,
that
as
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
,
as
〈◊〉
innouation
,
contrary
to
the
lawes
ecclesiasticall
,
and
ca●●●s
of
the
holy
Apostles
,
decreed
,
not
onely
that
the
Bishoppes
of
Cyprus
,
but
also
of
all
other
dioceses
and
prouinces
,
should
retaine
their
antient
right
;
and
that
no
Bishop
should
challenge
vnto
himselfe
any
prouince
,
which
had
not
bin
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
former
times
from
the
beginning
,
vnder
his
predecessors
iurisdiction
.
It
hath
seemed
good
therefore
to
the
sacred
and
economical
synod
,
that
to
euery
prouince
her
right
,
which
●●er
from
the
beginning
it
hath
had
,
shall
bee
kept
pure
and
i●●iolable
,
according
to
the
antient
receiued
custome
.
Euery
Metropolitan
hauing
good
l●a●●
to
take
a
copie
of
this
Act
for
his
owne
security
.
Whereby
it
appeareth
,
that
the
Isle
of
Cyprus
had
a
Metropolitane
from
the
Apostles
time
.
And
that
no
Metropolitane
had
,
or
ought
to
haue
,
the
gouernement
of
any
prouince
,
which
had
not
alwaies
from
the
beginning
been
subiect
to
his
Se●
.
And
that
Metropolitanes
were
either
actually
appointed
,
or
at
the
least
intended
by
the
Apostles
,
appeareth
hereby
:
That
euer
since
their
times
,
in
all
prouinces
,
throughout
the
Christian
world
,
there
haue
been
Metropolitanes
,
neuer
misliked
or
contradicted
by
any
,
vntil
this
our
age
.
And
whereas
the
Refuter
obiecteth
,
To
his
question
therefore
demanding
,
where
then
are
our
Diocesan
Churches
become
?
I
answere
,
there
remaine
24
of
them
,
where
they
were
wont
to
be
,
for
any
thing
that
he
can
say
to
the
contrary
,
besides
the
Churches
of
Canterbury
and
Yorke
;
which
,
as
they
be
prouinciall
Churches
in
respect
of
the
2.
prouinces
;
so
are
they
Diocesan
in
respect
of
the
peculiar
dioceses
belonging
vnto
them
.
And
where
he
saith
,
the
Cathedrall
Churches
are
as
it
were
parishes
,
he
saith
he
knowes
not
what
.
For
Cathedral
Churches
,
which
are
the
mother
Churches
of
euery
diocesse
,
neither
are
,
nor
euer
were
parishes
;
nor
the
Bishop
,
nor
Presbyteries
of
them
,
euer
intended
to
one
parish
.
And
if
it
so
fall
out
,
that
to
some
part
of
the
Cathedrall
Church
a
particular
parish
belong
;
therto
a
seuerall
Presbyter
is
appointed
as
to
other
Parishes
.
The
meetings
in
Cathedral
Churches
whereof
the
Bishops
haue
beene
presidents
,
were
neuer
Parishionall
,
but
rather
Panegyricall
,
euen
in
the
most
ancient
and
purest
Churches
,
vnder
the
best
and
most
renowned
Bishops
since
the
Apostles
times
.
In
the
conclusion
the
Refuter
pusheth
at
me
with
a
Dilemma
,
as
it
were
with
a
paire
of
rams
hornes
.
For
such
is
his
wisdome
,
that
he
thinketh
diocesan
&
prouinciall
Churches
(
which
are
subordinate
one
to
the
other
)
to
be
so
opposite
,
as
that
to
hold
the
one
,
is
to
deny
the
other
.
And
therefore
if
I
yeeld
there
be
prouinciall
Churches
,
then
I
must
confesse
there
be
no
diocesan
:
or
if
I
will
needes
hold
there
be
diocesan
Churches
,
then
I
ouerthrow
the
prouinciall
.
So
that
what
may
soeuer
we
looke
,
saith
he
,
I
see
nothing
against
vs
,
but
all
for
vs
.
Thus
hath
he
brought
himselfe
into
a
fooles
paradise
,
where
I
leaue
him
to
feed
vpon
his
owne
fancies
,
and
to
solace
himselfe
with
the
conceit
of
his
imagined
conquest
.
CHAP.
VII
.
Prouing
the
third
point
of
the
Sermon
,
that
the
Bishops
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
Diocesan
Bishops
.
(
Serm.
sect
.
1.
Now
these
Presbyteries
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
the
Presbyterians
confesse
,
had
,
&c.
ad
lin.
a
fine
4.
)
THe
Refuter
hath
acquitted
himselfe
,
in
his
owne
conceit
,
so
valiantly
and
victoriously
in
subuerting
my
former
assertion
concerning
dioceses
,
which
he
supposeth
to
be
the
foundation
of
my
building
;
that
as
he
lookes
for
no
strength
in
the
rest
of
the
building
to
resist
his
forces
,
(
the
foundation
it selfe
being
so
weake
and
tottering
)
so
he
promiseth
to
himself
assured
successe
in
ouerthrowing
the
rest
.
But
if
my
building
be
founded
,
as
it
were
,
on
a
rocke
,
against
which
his
maine
forces
could
not
preuaile
at
al
,
but
like
the
waues
and
billowes
of
the
sea
,
though
they
beate
against
it
with
great
noise
,
returne
backe
with
froth
and
fome
,
(
as
I
hope
it
appeareth
to
euery
indifferent
and
iudicious
Reader
)
then
may
I
promise
to
my selfe
the
like
successe
in
withstanding
his
future
assaults
.
And
the
better
hope
J
doe
conceiue
hereof
,
Ad
page
70.
because
he
seemeth
to
confesse
that
if
I
can
demonstrate
that
the
ancient
Churches
,
were
dioceses
,
that
then
the
other
points
will
follow
of
their
owne
accord
.
But
,
that
I
haue
so
demonstrated
,
that
I
neuer
expect
any
sound
answere
thereto
.
As
for
this
point
which
now
I
haue
in
hand
,
it
is
not
onely
demonstrated
already
,
in
the
proof
of
the
former
,
but
is
also
by
necessary
consequence
deduced
therefrom
.
My
purpose
therefore
is
to
bee
as
briefe
in
propugning
this
truth
,
as
hee
is
in
oppugning
the
same
.
J
will
therefore
omit
his
friuolous
cauill
,
which
now
the
fourth
time
he
repeateth
for
my
not
concluding
,
what
he
,
according
to
his
forced
Analysis
,
would
haue
concluded
:
because
the
Reader
cannot
but
discerne
,
that
I
directly
conclude
what
before
was
propounded
,
viz.
that
the
Angels
or
Pastors
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
diocesan
Bishoppes
,
which
I
proue
in
the
Sermon
by
degrees
:
first
seuerally
,
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
and
after
the
distribution
of
them
,
both
in
the
city
and
in
the
country
:
then
iointly
,
both
before
and
after
.
For
hauing
concluded
the
former
point
with
these
words
,
that
the
Churches
contained
many
particular
congregations
,
vnto
all
which
there
was
but
one
Presbytery
,
or
Colledge
of
Presbyters
assigned
:
and
hauing
here
signified
,
that
by
the
confession
of
the
most
learned
Disciplinarians
,
each
Presbytery
had
a
President
,
which
S.
Iohn
calleth
the
Angell
of
the
Church
,
and
the
Fathers
,
a
Bishop
;
I
proue
from
that
which
hath
already
been
proued
,
that
the
President
of
the
Presbytery
,
the
Angell
,
of
the
B.
of
the
Church
,
was
not
a
parishionall
,
but
a
diocesan
Bishop
.
But
before
I
come
to
the
proofe
contained
in
this
section
,
I
am
to
note
,
how
those
last
words
of
the
former
part
,
which
are
very
materiall
,
are
by
this
refuter
passed
ouer
in
silence
.
For
it
would
be
knowne
,
whether
there
were
in
Cities
(
where
were
many
congregations
)
yea
in
whole
dioceses
,
any
more
Presbyteries
or
Colledges
of
Presbyters
,
then
that
one
belonging
to
the
mother
Church
in
the
Citie
.
If
to
shew
either
his
ignorance
,
or
want
of
good
conscience
,
he
shall
say
there
were
(
as
indeed
that
is
their
assersion
,
that
in
euery
parish
both
in
citie
and
country
,
there
ought
to
bee
a
Presbytery
or
senate
of
ruling
Elders
)
let
him
giue
but
one
approued
instance
to
proue
his
assertion
in
the
first
foure
hundred
yeeres
,
and
I
will
yeeld
,
that
where
was
a
parish
Presbytery
,
there
was
a
parish
Bishop
.
If
Calum
and
the
reformers
of
other
Churches
,
according
to
the
pretended
discipline
,
had
been
of
that
iudgement
,
they
would
not
haue
appointed
one
onely
Presbytery
for
many
parishes
.
If
he
shall
confesse
that
in
a
whole
circuit
,
which
wee
call
a
diocesse
,
there
was
but
one
colledge
or
senate
of
Presbyters
,
consisting
of
those
who
were
called
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
,
(
which
is
a
most
certaine
and
vndeniable
truth
)
then
must
he
confesse
his
platforme
of
parish
discipline
to
be
a
meere
nouelty
,
and
an
vndisgested
fancy
,
hauing
no
warrant
of
scriptures
,
nor
testimony
of
antiquity
;
and
contrary
wise
,
that
there
was
but
one
Presbytery
,
and
one
Bishop
set
ouer
a
whole
diocesse
.
Hee
that
catcheth
at
euery
word
,
yea
at
the
least
letter
whereat
hee
hopeth
to
haue
the
least
aduantage
,
(
as
at
the
terme
pagani
in
this
passage
,
and
at
the
little
letters
,
in
the
word
Cretians
)
would
not
swallow
vp
in
silence
such
pregnant
arguments
,
if
silence
were
not
his
best
answere
.
The
presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
were
diocesan
BB.
The
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
were
presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
.
Therefore
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
were
diocesan
BB.
Which
is
the
hansomest
syllogisme
he
hath
bestowed
on
me
as
yet
,
neither
wil
I
refuse
to
maintaine
any
one
part
of
it
,
if
he
will
be
pleased
to
take
notice
of
that
,
which
euen
now
was
proued
;
that
there
was
but
one
Presbytery
for
a
whole
diocesse
.
So
the
proposition
will
be
manifest
,
that
the
presidents
of
Presbyteries
(
which
were
prouided
for
whole
dioceses
)
whom
the
fathers
call
BB.
were
diocesan
BB.
for
so
much
might
haue
been
added
to
the
proposition
out
of
my
words
.
The
assumption
I
haue
made
good
before
by
the
confessions
of
Caluin
and
Beza
.
But
he
beginneth
with
the
assumption
,
saying
that
he
hath
good
cause
to
doubt
of
it
,
and
that
I
doe
but
threapen
kindnesse
on
them
when
I
talke
of
their
Confessions
.
For
plentifull
proofe
whereof
I
referre
you
to
that
which
before
hath
been
alledged
out
of
Caluin
and
Beza
.
Now
to
the
proposition
(
saith
the
Refuter
)
for
answere
whereto
in
one
word
,
and
then
frameth
a
syllogisme
,
the
conclusion
whereof
is
this
;
therefore
the
Bishop
who
was
set
ouer
a
whole
diocesse
,
and
who
was
President
of
the
Presbytery
,
allotted
to
a
whole
diocesse
,
was
vndoubtedly
a
diocesan
Bishop
.
Was
this
the
proposition
which
he
denied
?
or
was
he
so
vnreasonable
to
deny
it
?
What
can
be
more
euident
?
But
hee
seeth
by
this
time
what
a
goodly
analysis
he
hath
here
made
.
To
returne
therefore
to
mine
owne
analysis
.
In
this
section
I
proue
,
that
the
antient
Bishops
were
diocesan
Bishops
,
euen
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
by
three
arguments
,
which
for
breuity
sake
I
ioined
together
.
The
first
.
If
the
Churches
whereof
they
were
BB.
were
dioceses
,
and
not
parishes
,
then
were
they
diocesan
BB.
But
the
Antecedent
is
true
,
as
hath
already
been
proued
in
the
second
point
.
Therefore
the
consequent
.
The
second
:
If
the
parishes
were
not
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
time
,
nor
ministers
appointed
to
peculiar
titles
or
seuerall
cures
,
then
there
could
be
no
Parishionall
Bishops
in
that
time
.
But
the
former
hath
already
been
proued
;
Therefore
the
latter
is
true
.
The
assumption
is
to
be
vnderstood
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
I
said
before
,
that
is
,
as
true
for
the
most
part
.
For
it
admitmitteth
some
exceptions
,
as
namely
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
(
and
perhaps
some
others
)
wherein
I
acknowledge●
the
parishes
to
haue
been
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
times
;
but
so
,
as
seuerall
Presbyters
being
assigned
to
them
,
there
remained
one
Bishop
ouer
all
.
The
third
.
If
the
Presbyteries
were
allotted
to
whole
dioceses
,
and
not
to
seuerall
parishes
,
then
the
Bishops
who
were
Presidents
of
those
Presbyteries
,
were
not
parishionall
,
but
diocesan
.
But
the
first
is
true
,
as
hath
been
already
prooued
:
Therefore
the
second
.
To
all
three
,
he
answereth
by
denying
the
assumption
:
the
truth
whereof
dependeth
vpon
the
proofes
of
the
second
point
,
which
haue
been
so
many
,
and
so
manifest
,
as
I
hope
to
heare
no
more
of
the
new-found
parish
discipline
.
Serm.
sect.
2.
pag.
22.
Howbeit
in
the
end
of
the
Apostles
times
,
parishes
began
to
be
distinguished
in
Cities
,
and
afterwards
in
the
Country
,
&c.
to
page
24.
line
3.
)
Those
Bishops
who
were
ouer
all
the
parishes
both
in
the
citie
and
country
,
were
diocesan
,
and
not
parishionall
Bishops
.
The
antient
Bishops
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
were
ouer
all
the
parishes
both
in
the
citie
and
country
,
viz.
after
they
were
distinguished
:
Therefore
the
antient
Bishops
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
were
diocesan
,
and
not
parishionall
Bishops
.
The
proposition
is
most
euident
.
The
assumption
standeth
on
two
parts
:
first
,
that
the
Bishops
were
ouer
all
the
parishes
in
the
citie
,
after
they
were
diuided
.
The
second
,
that
the
Bishops
were
ouer
all
the
parishes
in
the
country
,
after
their
diuision
.
The
former
I
proue
in
this
section
by
induction
of
particulars
:
the
latter
in
the
next
.
The
Analysis
being
here
mistaken
by
him
,
Ad
pag.
72.
&
73.
I
wil
not
meddle
with
that
,
which
hee
hath
thereby
taken
occasion
to
speake
besides
the
purpose
:
because
heere
I
finde
him
more
modest
,
then
hitherto
he
hath
shewed
himselfe
:
neither
will
I
shame
him
with
his
owne
friends
,
when
for
an
euasion
he
supposeth
,
that
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
some
Ministers
might
haue
more
Churches
vnder
them
,
like
our
double
beneficed
men
and
pluralists
,
euen
those
that
haue
tot
quot
,
and
yet
be
no
Bishops
.
Onely
I
will
touch
those
things
,
which
contradict
that
which
I
haue
deliuered
.
And
first
,
he
obserueth
a
contradiction
in
my
speech
.
I
said
,
that
parishes
(
in
cities
)
were
not
(
for
the
most
part
)
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Here
I
●ay
,
that
in
the
end
of
the
Apostles
times
,
viz.
about
the
yeere
one
hundred
,
they
began
to
be
distinguished
at
Rome
,
by
Euaristus
the
Bishop
there
.
A
shrewd
contradiction
J
promise
you
,
especially
if
you
consider
,
that
all
the
Apostles
,
but
S.
Iohn
,
were
dead
before
this
time
,
and
that
this
was
in
the
very
end
of
S.
Iohns
time
.
Yea
but
after
I
say
,
that
Titus
was
Bishop
of
the
Cretians
,
(
I
cry
you
mercy
,
I
should
haue
said
Cretans
,
and
yet
by
his
leaue
,
the
Geneua
translation
and
others
,
read
Cretians
)
and
Timothy
of
them
in
Asia
,
therefore
parishes
were
distinguished
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Neither
is
this
a
contradiction
:
for
although
Timothy
was
Bishop
of
Asia
,
and
Titus
of
the
Churches
in
Creet
;
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
the
parishes
in
the
Churches
of
Asia
or
Creet
,
were
distinguished
.
They
were
both
by
Pauls
direction
,
as
well
by
letter
as
example
,
to
ordaine
Presbyters
in
the
seuerall
cities
;
but
that
they
placed
any
in
the
country
,
or
assigned
the
Presbyters
to
seuerall
cures
in
the
Cities
,
wee
reade
not
.
In
Rome
,
and
Alexandria
,
and
so
in
other
cities
,
the
parishes
being
once
diuided
,
were
assigned
to
seuerall
Presbyters
,
the
Bishop
remaining
superintendent
ouer
them
all
:
Therefore
the
Bishops
were
ouer
all
the
parishes
in
the
cities
,
after
they
were
once
diuided
.
As
touching
Rome
,
I
shew
that
the
parishes
were
first
distinguished
by
Euaristus
,
about
the
100.
yeare
;
and
not
a
Presbytery
,
but
seuerall
Presbyters
assigned
to
them
,
as
hath
beene
prooued
heeretofore
.
At
Alexandria
I
proue
,
that
the
Bishop
had
the
charge
of
many
Churches
,
within
the
first
200.
yeares
.
But
what
I
say
concerning
Alexandria
,
(
for
that
is
his
vsuall
censure
of
such
proofes
as
he
knowes
not
how
to
answere
)
because
that
Church
is
excepted
against
[
a
](A20733-e76520-b)
a
By
T.
C.
pa.
nusquam
.
,
as
the
beginner
,
and
breeder
of
diocesan
gouernment
.
Excepted
against
?
why
?
what
was
done
in
Alexandria
,
which
all
the
Churches
in
the
world
did
not
practise
,
so
soone
as
the
parishes
were
diuided
?
But
what
if
this
order
began
in
S.
Iohns
time
?
what
if
by
S.
Marke
,
who
died
fiue
or
sixe
yeares
before
Peter
and
Paul
?
let
Eusebius
,
alledging
the
reports
of
them
that
went
before
him
,
be
witnesse
;
viz
,
Euse.
l.
2.
c.
15
that
Marke
being
sent
into
Aegypt
did
preach
the
Gospell
there
,
and
was
the
first
which
did
constitute
[
c
](A20733-e76630-b)
c
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
the
Churches
in
Alexandria
it selfe
.
Then
euer
since
S.
Marks
time
,
there
haue
bene
Churches
in
Alexandria
,
which
all
from
the
beginning
were
subiect
to
the
B.
Of
these
Churches
[
d
](A20733-e76680-b)
d
Euse.
l.
5.
c.
9
,
as
J
alledged
in
the
sermon
,
was
Iulianus
Bishop
in
the
first
yeare
of
Commodus
,
viz.
180.
In
the
10
of
Commodus
,
Demetrius
was
[
e
](A20733-e76740-b)
e
Lib.
5.
c.
2●
.
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Churches
in
Alexandria
.
And
againe
more
fully
,
that
in
the
10.
yeare
of
Seuerus
,
Lae●us
was
president
of
Alexandria
,
and
the
rest
of
Aegypt
[
f
](A20733-e76800-b)
f
Lib.
6.
c.
1.
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
of
the
Churches
there
,
Demetrius
had
lately
receiued
the
Bishopricke
after
Iulianus
.
In
the
third
yeare
of
Philippus
,
after
Heraclas
had
beene
sixteene
yeares
Bishop
,
Dionysius
receiued
[
g
](A20733-e76880-b)
g
Lib.
6.
c.
35.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Bishopricke
of
ruling
the
Churches
in
or
about
Alexandria
.
So
it
is
said
of
Peter
[
h
](A20733-e76940-b)
h
Socra
.
l.
2.
c.
6
the
famous
B.
of
the
Curches
of
Alexandria
.
[
i
](A20733-e76980-b)
i
Euseb.
l
9.
c.
6
of
Alexander
,
that
he
was
Bishop
of
the
Churches
belonging
to
that
City
.
Constantius
requested
of
Athanasius
the
Bishop
[
k
](A20733-e77050-b)
k
Ruf.
l.
1.
c.
19
,
one
of
the
Churches
,
which
were
many
,
at
Alexandria
,
for
the
Arians
.
Valens
by
his
letters
signified
,
that
Athanasius
might
safely
retaine
the
gouernment
[
l
](A20733-e77110-b)
l
Socr.
l.
4
c.
13.
of
the
Churches
.
What
these
Churches
were
,
Epiphanius
before
in
part
declared
,
[
m
](A20733-e77160-b)
m
Epiphan.
haeres.
69.
signifying
that
they
were
of
ancient
assigned
to
seuerall
Presbyters
;
all
of
them
which
were
Catholique
,
or
orthodoxall
,
beeing
vnder
the
Bishop
.
Neither
should
this
seeme
strange
,
that
the
Churches
in
Alexandria
were
subiect
to
the
Bishop
,
seeing
the
rest
in
Aegypt
were
vnder
his
iurisdiction
.
Neither
was
this
a
thing
peculiar
to
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
but
common
to
others
,
especially
who
were
Bishops
of
mother
Cities
.
Ignatius
was
Bishop
not
onely
of
Antioch
,
[
n
](A20733-e77200-b)
n
Epist.
ad
R●
but
of
Syria
,
as
you
heard
testified
by
himselfe
.
Irenaeus
the
Bishop
of
Lyons
,
was
Bishop
of
the
[
o
](A20733-e77240-b)
o
Eus.
l.
5.
c.
23
Churches
in
France
.
And
to
omitte
others
,
as
Diodorus
the
Bishop
of
Tarsus
,
to
whose
charge
was
committed
the
[
p
](A20733-e77280-b)
p
Theo.
l.
5.
c.
4.
nation
of
the
Cilicians
,
Amphilochius
,
who
gouerned
the
whole
[
q
](A20733-e77310-b)
q
Li
4.
c.
11.
nation
of
the
Lycaonians
,
Photinus
Bishop
of
the
[
r
](A20733-e77340-b)
r
Socr.
l.
2
c
18
Churches
in
Illyricum
,
Agapetus
Bishop
of
the
[
s
](A20733-e77380-b)
s
Soc.
l.
7.
c.
3.
Churches
which
were
vnder
Synada
&c:
Eusebius
testifieth
of
[
t
](A20733-e77420-b)
t
Euseb.
l.
3.
c
4
Titus
,
and
in
the
next
age
after
of
Philippe
[
u
](A20733-e77470-b)
u
Lib.
4.
c.
21.
,
that
hee
was
B.
of
the
Churches
in
Creet
.
Theodoret
saith
the
like
,
[
*
](A20733-e77510-b)
*
Theodor.
in
1.
Tim.
3.
and
of
Timothe
that
hee
was
Bishop
of
the
Asians
,
whose
metropolis
was
Ephesus
.
It
is
manifest
,
saith
Chrysostom
[
x
](A20733-e77570-b)
x
in
1.
Tim.
5.19
.
that
to
Timothy
was
committed
the
rest
of
the
Church
,
or
[
y
](A20733-e77610-b)
y
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Ad
pag.
75.
The
refuters
answere
to
these
testimonies
.
that
whole
nation
of
Asia
.
To
these
testimonies
of
Eusebius
and
Theodoret
,
(
I
name
so
many
as
were
cited
in
the
sermon
)
the
refuter
answers
:
First
,
that
Eusebius
liued
230.
yeares
,
after
Timothy
and
Titus
;
and
Theodoret
330.
What
then
?
the
question
is
not
whether
the
witnesses
liued
in
the
first
200.
yeares
,
but
whether
within
that
time
,
there
were
diocesan
Bishops
?
It
is
a
very
vncharitable
and
vnlearned
part
,
that
I
say
no
worse
,
to
imagine
that
Eusebius
and
Theodoret
would
,
of
their
owne
heads
,
testifie
these
things
,
and
not
by
the
relation
of
those
which
liued
in
former
ages
:
especially
,
seeing
Eusebius
saith
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
it
is
recorded
in
histories
.
But
suppose
the
testimonies
of
these
2.
were
not
sufficient
;
what
will
he
say
to
that
cloud
of
the
ancient
&
most
authentick
witnesses
,
which
with
one
consent
do
testifie
,
that
Timothy
was
B.
of
Ephesus
,
&
those
parts
of
Asia
;
and
that
Titus
was
B.
of
Creet
?
But
of
this
more
heereafter
.
In
the
meane
time
,
let
it
bee
acknowledged
,
as
a
point
of
intollerable
impudency
,
that
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
so
agreeable
with
the
scriptures
(
I
meane
especially
the
Epistles
to
Timothy
and
Titus
,
written
to
them
,
as
to
Bishops
)
any
of
vs
should
deny
credit
to
the
constant
,
generall
and
perpetuall
consent
of
the
ancient
writers
,
whereof
some
liued
13
or
1400
yeares
before
vs
.
2.
Yea
but
if
these
testimonies
be
true
,
Titus
and
Timothy
were
Archbishops
.
So
is
Titus
called
in
the
subscription
of
that
Epistle
.
And
that
they
were
Metropolitanes
,
appeareth
by
all
their
successors
,
who
were
Bishops
of
Gortynae
and
Ephesiu●
:
the
one
,
Metropolis
of
Creet
,
the
other
of
Asia
.
How
D.
Bilson
denieth
this
,
let
the
reader
see
page
.
409.
of
his
book
,
(
the
other
which
the
refuter
citeth
beeing
misalledged
)
where
he
citeth
Chrysostome
[
a
](A20733-e77870-b)
a
H●mil.
1.
in
.
Tit.
and
Ierome
[
b
](A20733-e77910-b)
b
De
script
.
ec●les
.
in
Tit●
.
testifying
that
to
Titus
was
committed
a
whole
Iland
,
and
the
iudgement
of
so
many
Bishops
;
[
c
](A20733-e77940-b)
c
Praefat.
in
1.
ad
Tim.
Theodoret
,
that
to
Timothe
Paul
committed
the
charge
of
Asia
.
Now
if
there
were
Metropolitan
Bishops
in
the
Apostles
times
,
who
besides
their
own
peculiar
diocesse
,
had
the
ouersight
also
of
other
Dioceses
&
Bishops
;
it
should
not
seeme
strange
,
that
there
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
who
besides
their
cathedrall
churches
,
had
manie
parishes
and
Presbyters
subordinate
to
them
.
To
which
purpose
Epiphanius
[
d
](A20733-e78000-b)
d
Epist.
ad
Io●n
.
Hieros
.
apud
Hierony●
.
●
.
2.
also
was
alledged
,
who
saith
that
each
Bishop
had
diuers
churches
vnder
them
:
to
whom
many
other
might
be
added
;
as
that
of
Optat●●
,
[
e
](A20733-e78030-b)
e
Lib.
2.
cou●r
.
Par●en
.
that
in
the
city
of
Rome
(
where
was
but
one
onely
Bishop
)
were
aboue
forty
Churches
:
the
Epistle
of
Constantine
[
f
](A20733-e78070-b)
f
Euseb.
in
vita
Const.
Theod.
l.
1.
c.
19
to
Eusebius
,
mentioning
those
diuers
Churches
which
were
vnder
him
,
and
signifying
as
the
multitude
of
Christians
did
encrease
,
so
the
number
of
Churches
was
to
be
multiplied
:
the
testimony
of
Theodoret
[
g
](A20733-e78120-b)
g
In
epist.
ad
Leon.
M.
the
Bishop
of
Cyrus
,
who
affirmeth
,
that
it
was
his
lotte
to
be
pastor
of
800.
Churches
:
for
so
many
parishes
,
saith
hee
,
hath
Cyrus
.
Yea
but
Epiphanius
was
390.
yeares
after
Christ
.
Will
any
wise
man
therefore
inferre
that
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeares
it
was
so
?
Good
sir
,
sauing
your
wisedome
,
you
shall
seldome
reade
in
ancient
records
of
enlarging
of
dioceses
:
but
of
the
contracting
of
them
,
by
erecting
new
Bishopricks
,
very
oft
.
It
was
testified
before
,
[
h
](A20733-e78210-b)
h
Ex
Cont.
Ephesin
.
Et
Asrit
.
&c.
that
the
circuits
of
dioceses
were
from
the
beginning
of
the
Churches
:
and
therefore
what
circuit
was
of
any
Bishopricke
in
Epiphanius
his
time
,
the
same
ordinarily
,
if
not
greater
,
was
in
the
first
200.
yeares
.
Serm.
sect.
3.
page
24.
As
touching
countrey
townes
,
to
page
25.
ad
lin.
8.
In
this
section
I
proue
the
latter
part
of
the
former
assumption
,
concerning
country
parishes
.
viz.
that
the
Bishop
of
the
citie
was
ouer
them
also
:
which
I
proue
by
this
Enthymeme
:
The
B.
and
the
Presbytery
of
the
City
in
all
places
acknowledged
t●em
to
belong
to
their
charge
:
Therefore
the
Bishop
was
ouer
them
,
as
being
part
of
his
Diocesse
.
The
antecedent
I
proue
by
their
care
ouer
them
,
both
before
they
were
conuerted
,
and
after
.
Before
,
because
they
labored
their
conuersion
;
after
,
because
the
Bishop
out
of
his
Presbytery
assigned
to
each
of
them
a
Presbyter
,
not
a
Presbytery
,
or
a
B.
2.
Where
the
diocesse
was
large
,
he
substituted
a
Chorepiscopus
,
or
country
B.
Of
these
points
,
the
last
,
our
refuter
wery
conscionably
concealeth
:
all
the
former
,
very
learnedly
he
denieth
.
He
denieth
,
I
say
:
1.
That
the
Bishop
and
Presbytery
of
the
city
acknowledged
the
country
to
belong
long
to
their
charge
.
Which
,
as
it
is
a
most
ignorant
conceit
,
as
hath
beene
proued
before
:
so
would
it
haue
beene
most
precious
to
the
church
of
God
,
if
the
BB.
and
Presbyof
those
times
,
had
so
conceiued
.
Now
that
both
they
and
the
country
churches
so
conceiued
,
as
J
said
,
the
vniuersall
&
perpetuall
practise
of
the
church
of
Christ
,
subiecting
in
al
places
the
country
parishes
to
the
Bishop
of
the
city
,
doth
ineuitably
proue
.
2.
That
they
did
not
labour
their
conuersion
by
vertue
of
their
office
,
but
were
to
attend
those
who
were
conuerted
.
As
if
the
Bishop
,
and
presbytery
had
beene
ordained
onely
for
those
fewe
,
that
were
at
the
first
conuerted
;
and
were
not
rather
,
as
leauen
put
into
the
meale
,
to
season
the
whole
lump
.
I
would
gladly
know
therefore
,
who
after
the
death
of
the
Apostles
and
apostolicall
men
(
which
laboured
in
the
cities
)
were
appointed
or
prouided
for
the
conuersion
of
the
country
towns
?
If
it
were
not
the
office
of
the
Bishop
and
Presbytery
of
the
city
,
to
which
they
were
subiect
;
much
lesse
was
it
the
office
of
others
,
who
being
neither
Apostles
,
nor
Euangelists
,
were
tied
to
their
own
charges
,
&
might
not
by
the
most
ancient
canons
of
the
church
,
exercise
any
mysteriall
function
out
of
their
owne
bounds
.
Besides
the
bounds
of
Ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
followed
the
ciuill
ordinarily
;
so
that
those
countries
were
subiect
to
the
Bishop
of
the
City
in
respect
of
ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
,
which
were
subiect
to
the
city
it self
.
And
therfore
as
they
were
actually
vnder
the
Bishops
charge
,
after
their
conuersion
;
so
were
they
intentionally
,
before
.
This
is
a
point
clearly
confessed
by
Caluin
,
as
you
shall
heare
.
So
is
the
third
,
though
this
learned
man
deny
it
;
viz
,
that
Presbyters
were
by
the
Bishops
of
the
city
assigned
to
country
parishes
out
of
the
clergy
of
the
city
.
For
the
clergy
of
the
city
was
the
seminary
of
the
ministery
for
the
whole
diocesse
.
Neither
was
there
any
other
ordinary
meanes
to
supply
the
Churches
which
wanted
.
Schollers
of
their
own
,
fitte
●o
be
ministers
,
country
parishes
had
not
:
vniuersities
there
were
none
:
learned
men
from
other
dioceses
were
not
to
be
expected
,
vnlesse
the
Bishop
of
the
city
were
not
able
out
of
his
clergy
to
furnish
them
.
But
hereof
I
haue
spoken
before
:
As
touching
the
last
,
that
where
the
diocesse
was
large
,
the
Bishop
in
certaine
places
appointed
Chorepiscopos
,
as
his
substitutes
,
who
together
with
their
charge
remained
subiect
to
the
Bishop
of
the
city
(
which
is
a
thing
most
notorious
,
and
confessed
by
Caluin
and
Beza
,
being
also
a
most
euident
proofe
,
that
the
churches
were
dioceses
,
and
the
Bishops
diocesan
,
as
J
haue
shewed
before
)
our
refuter
passeth
it
ouer
in
silence
;
with
what
conscience
,
let
the
refuter
Iudge
.
Passing
therefore
by
this
,
which
in
no
wise
he
was
able
to
answer
,
Ad
pag.
77.
he
oppugneth
the
3.
point
,
bringing
an
instance
of
his
owne
,
and
taking
exception
against
my
proofe
.
We
haue
,
saith
hee
,
a
plaine
instance
to
the
contrary
in
the
churches
of
Cenchrea
and
Corinth
.
A
plain
instance
?
to
what
purpose
?
that
Cenchrea
had
a
Bishoppe
and
a
presbytery
,
and
not
a
seuerall
presbyter
assigned
to
it
?
that
when
it
wanted
a
presbyter
,
it
was
not
furnished
from
the
clergy
of
Corinth
?
It
is
euident
that
Cenchrea
was
a
village
belonging
to
Corinth
and
subiect
vnto
it
,
as
were
al
other
townes
and
villages
in
those
parts
:
and
as
the
rest
,
so
it
(
euen
by
his
[
a
](A20733-e78520-b)
a
Page
57.
own
confession
)
receiued
the
gospell
from
Corinth
.
That
it
euer
had
a
Bishop
it
is
incredible
:
for
by
the
lawes
of
the
church
,
those
churches
which
at
the
first
had
Bishops
,
were
to
haue
them
stil.
Let
him
shew
,
that
euer
it
had
a
Bishop
or
a
presbytery
,
or
that
it
was
not
subiect
to
the
Bishop
of
Corinth
,
as
well
as
other
towns
and
villages
of
Achaia
;
that
ordinarily
it
receiued
not
their
presbyter
from
Corinth
,
from
whence
,
by
his
owne
confession
,
it
receiued
the
Gospel
;
and
I
wil
yeeld
to
him
.
If
none
of
these
things
can
be
necessarily
proued
;
nay
if
none
of
them
be
probable
or
likely
,
how
could
he
say
that
this
was
a
plaine
instance
to
the
contrary
.
And
yet
this
is
the
fourth
time
that
the
church
of
Cenchreae
hath
been
obiected
to
no
purpose
,
vnlesse
it
be
to
confute
himselfe
.
Against
my
allegation
of
the
councell
of
Sardica
,
hee
taketh
great
exception
,
obiecting
two
contrary
things
vnto
me
:
whereof
,
if
either
were
true
,
the
one
would
take
away
the
other
.
The
former
,
is
subtilty
and
craft
,
as
though
I
went
about
to
delude
my
auditors
at
Lambith
,
and
readers
euery
where
.
For
,
saith
he
,
when
was
this
Councell
held
?
was
it
not
about
the
yeere
347.
almost
150.
yeeres
after
the
time
in
question
?
If
I
had
alleaged
that
canon
,
only
to
testifie
the
practise
of
the
Church
at
that
time
,
not
permitting
Bishops
in
country
townes
and
villages
,
there
had
been
some
small
colour
for
this
obiection
:
and
yet
but
a
colour
,
seeing
they
doe
not
(
as
you
shall
heare
)
prohibit
the
ordaining
of
Bishops
in
any
Church
where
they
had
formerly
been
.
And
therefore
the
practise
of
the
Church
for
multitude
of
Bishops
now
,
was
as
it
had
been
before
;
sauing
that
by
this
canon
order
was
taken
for
erecting
Bishoprickes
,
where
none
had
been
,
but
not
for
dissoluing
of
Bishopricks
,
where
any
were
.
But
it
was
the
iudgement
and
determination
of
that
Councell
,
which
chiefely
I
alledged
;
which
was
,
that
one
Presbyter
is
sufficient
for
a
village
or
towne
.
And
therefore
nothing
was
in
this
respect
to
bee
innouated
,
but
as
they
had
hitherto
no
Bishops
or
Presbyteries
,
but
Presbyters
seuerally
assigned
to
them
,
so
they
should
continue
.
The
iudgement
of
these
men
(
I
hope
)
was
not
much
inferiour
to
theirs
,
who
liued
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
.
This
being
a
councel
of
three
hundred
orthodoxall
Bishops
who
confirmed
the
decrees
of
the
councell
of
Nice
,
among
whom
was
Osius
the
famous
confessour
,
Theod.
l.
2.
c.
15
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
and
Athanasius
(
then
whom
there
hath
not
bene
a
more
famous
Bishop
for
piety
,
wisdome
,
learning
and
soundnesse
in
religion
since
the
Apostles
times
)
whose
iudgement
also
in
this
particular
was
approued
,
as
hath
bene
shewed
,
by
the
decrees
of
other
councils
,
by
the
iudgment
of
other
fathers
,
by
the
practise
of
all
churches
,
and
neuer
gaine
said
or
misliked
by
any
in
the
former
ages
,
nor
yet
by
the
reformers
of
the
church
in
our
age
according
to
the
pretended
discipline
,
T.
C.
and
perhaps
some
one
or
2.
others
excepted
.
Now
I
would
gladly
know
,
what
either
reasons
our
refuter
hath
to
confute
their
iudgement
,
or
testimonies
to
ouerweigh
their
authority
.
There
was
therefore
no
subtill
purpose
in
mee
to
delude
any
in
this
allegation
,
but
an
euill
conscience
in
him
that
sought
with
so
friuolous
an
euasion
to
elude
so
plaine
and
pregnant
euidence
.
The
other
thing
which
hee
obiecteth
is
simple
follie
,
in
alledging
a
Canon
,
which
,
as
he
saith
,
maketh
so
much
against
mee
.
For
,
saith
hee
,
what
greater
proofe
can
there
bee
,
that
villages
or
little
cities
or
townes
vsually
had
BB.
ouer
them
euen
till
that
time
,
viz.
the
yeare
347
,
then
that
the
councill
of
Sardica
was
faine
to
make
such
a
decree
against
it
?
For
the
vntruth
of
which
obiection
,
his
ignorance
must
bee
his
best
excuse
.
It
is
plaine
,
that
in
that
canon
direction
is
giuen
chiefely
for
erecting
of
new
Bishopricks
;
authorizing
the
Metropolitane
and
the
other
Bishoppes
of
the
prouince
,
if
the
people
of
cities
and
populous
places
desired
a
Bishop
,
to
erect
a
new
Bishopricke
:
but
forbidding
this
to
be
done
in
villages
or
petite
cities
or
townes
,
for
which
they
iudged
the
ministery
of
one
Presbyter
to
be
sufficient
.
Besides
,
the
councill
of
Nice
had
decreed
,
that
the
priuiledges
of
all
churches
should
bee
preserued
;
and
the
councils
of
Africke
more
then
once
determined
,
that
what
Church
soeuer
had
in
former
times
had
a
Bishop
,
should
still
haue
a
B.
and
the
ancient
custome
of
the
church
was
euer
held
as
a
law
among
them
,
in
this
behalfe
.
So
that
I
hold
it
for
a
certaine
truth
,
that
what
Church
in
the
end
of
the
first
400
yeares
had
not
a
Bishop
,
the
same
had
none
in
the
beginning
:
and
what
Church
soeuer
had
in
the
first
200.
yeares
a
B.
was
at
the
end
of
400.
yeares
acknowledged
to
haue
right
to
a
B.
Indeed
I
doe
confesse
that
the
people
of
countrey
townes
sometimes
being
vaineglorious
,
lifting
vp
their
necks
against
their
Bishoppes
,
haue
inflamed
their
desires
:
but
these
attempts
were
esteemed
vnlawfull
,
and
therefore
as
in
councels
they
were
prohibited
,
so
in
well
ordered
Churches
they
were
not
allowed
.
But
hereof
also
I
haue
spoken
before
.
Yea
but
,
§.
8.
The
refuters
instances
of
parish
Bishops
answered
.
saith
hee
,
this
canon
was
not
vniuersally
obserued
,
as
may
appeare
by
the
oft
renewing
of
it
,
in
other
councils
,
and
the
practise
of
the
Churches
to
the
contrary
afterward
.
Here
J
aske
him
,
first
,
when
this
was
done
?
for
will
he
prooue
,
that
the
irregular
and
vnlawfull
practises
of
vaineglorious
people
,
and
ambitious
ministers
in
the
fourth
or
fifth
century
after
Christ
,
were
the
lawfull
and
ordinary
practises
of
the
purest
churches
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
?
Secondly
,
whether
it
were
lawfully
done
,
or
not
?
if
yea
,
then
doth
hee
contradict
the
iudgement
of
approued
councils
,
the
authority
of
orthodoxall
Fathers
,
the
general
consent
of
the
ancient
churches
of
Christ
,
hauing
nothing
to
oppose
therto
but
vain
surmises
,
&
vnlikely
likelihoods
.
If
not
,
why
are
they
alledged
?
shal
irregular
&
vnlawful
practises
be
commended
as
paterns
for
imitation
?
But
let
vs
heare
his
instances
,
which
T.
C.
with
great
labor
and
long
study
gathered
.
The
1.
Was
not
Zoticus
Bishop
of
a
small
village
,
called
Coman
?
If
I
say
no
,
how
will
hee
proue
it
?
Eusebius
is
alledged
[
h
](A20733-e78960-b)
h
Eus.
l.
5
c.
16.
lib.
5.
c.
16.
where
Apollinarius
speaking
of
certain
approued
men
,
&
BB.
who
came
to
try
the
spirit
of
Maximilla
(
one
of
Montanus
his
truls
)
mentioneth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Zoticus
of
(
or
from
)
the
village
Comana
,
whose
mouth
Themiso
stopped
:
noting
the
place
,
not
wherof
he
was
Bishop
,
but
whence
he
came
or
where
he
was
borne
,
for
he
was
Episcopus
Otrenus
in
Armenia
,
saith
Caesar
[
i
](A20733-e79070-b)
i
An.
205.27
.
Baronius
,
ex
vic●
Comana
in
Armenia
ori●ndus
,
Bishop
of
Otrea
in
Armenia
,
borne
at
the
village
Comana
in
Armenia
.
Jn
the
eighteenth
chapter
of
the
same
book
of
Eusebius
[
k
](A20733-e79110-b)
k
Euseb.
l.
5.
c.
18.
Apollonius
reporteth
the
same
story
;
which
Nicephorus
[
l
](A20733-e79160-b)
l
Lib.
4.
c.
25.
also
reciting
,
vseth
these
words
:
Apollonius
reporteth
that
Zoticus
Ostrenus
when
Maximilla
began
to
prophecy
at
Pepuza
(
a
place
which
Montanus
called
Ierusalem
)
indeuored
to
conuince
her
euil
spirit
,
but
was
hindred
of
those
which
were
her
fauourits
,
meaning
Themiso
.
Indeed
Apollinarius
calleth
him
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
whereupon
Nicephorus
supposed
him
to
be
but
a
Presbyter
:
but
thogh
Apollinarius
being
B.
of
Hierapolis
calleth
him
in
one
place
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
[
m
](A20733-e79290-b)
m
1.
Pet.
5.1
.
Peter
cals
himself
,
being
more
then
a
Presbyter
,
&
as
BB.
vsually
cal
one
another
Consacerdotes
:
yet
afterwards
he
expresselie
calleth
him
a
Bishoppe
.
And
thus
the
village
,
the
little
village
Coman
hath
lost
her
Bishoppe
.
For
little
the
Refuter
added
of
his
owne
,
to
make
his
instance
the
greater
.
The
second
:
Was
not
Mares
(
he
should
haue
said
,
Maris
)
Bishoppe
of
Solica
?
Of
Solica
?
Truelie
I
cannot
but
smile
that
so
great
a
clerke
hath
learned
his
letters
no
better
;
for
though
the
first
letter
be
not
vnlike
an
S.
yet
is
it
the
D.
vsed
in
that
print
,
as
hee
might
haue
learned
of
a
[
n
](A20733-e79380-b)
n
T.C.
l.
2.
pag.
519.
Deacon
in
the
same
page
.
But
this
sheweth
that
our
refuter
taketh
his
allegations
at
the
second
hand
,
not
consulting
with
the
author
.
Theodoret
[
o
](A20733-e79420-b)
o
L.
5.
c.
4.
saith
,
that
Eusebius
Vercellensis
ordained
Maris
Bishop
in
Dolicha
,
which
hee
saith
was
but
a
small
towne
,
vsing
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
I
will
speake
of
,
when
I
come
to
Nazianzum
,
which
also
is
termed
so
.
For
,
saith
Theodoret
,
Eusebius
beeing
desirous
to
install
Maris
,
a
man
worthy
commendation
and
shining
with
many
sorts
of
vertues
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
the
Episcopall
throne
,
he
came
to
Dolicha
,
by
which
phrase
it
appeareth
,
he
did
not
ordaine
him
the
Presbyter
of
a
parish
,
but
such
a
Bishop
as
others
were
,
at
least
of
that
time
,
being
the
fourth
century
after
Christ
,
So
farre
hath
our
refuter
also
ouershotte
his
marke
.
For
though
Dolicha
were
but
a
small
city
or
towne
,
as
some
of
our
Bishops
Sees
in
England
and
Wales
be
:
yet
that
hindreth
not
,
but
that
it
might
haue
a
diocesse
belonging
thereto
,
as
wel
as
ours
haue
,
though
perhaps
not
so
great
.
The
third
,
Apud
Hier.
tom
.
1.
Fortè
Baiēsit
.
Asclepius
of
a
small
towne
in
Africke
.
For
this
,
T.
C.
quoteth
Ierome
tom.
1.
catalog
.
Gennadij
vir
.
illustr.
Gennadius
indeed
saith
,
that
he
was
vici
non
grandis
episcopus
.
But
Ioannes
de
Trittenhem
in
his
booke
de
scriptorib
.
ecclesiast
.
saith
that
he
was
Vagensis
teritorij
episcopus
;
so
that
although
his
seat
was
no
great
town
,
yet
his
diocesse
was
that
whole
territory
.
But
when
was
this
?
about
the
yeare
440.
so
farre
doth
my
aduersary
,
who
complaineth
of
my
ouershooting
my
marke
when
J
alledged
the
councill
of
Sardica
,
ouershoot
me
:
for
when
he
wil
scarse
suffer
me
to
shoot
tenscore
:
he
,
as
if
he
▪
were
shooting
for
the
flight
,
shoots
22
,
euen
tweluescore
beyond
the
marke
.
I
say
vnto
him
,
it
was
not
so
from
the
beginning
.
But
by
councels
of
Africk
held
towards
the
end
of
the
fourth
century
permitted
,
Conc.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
54.
et
57.
et
.
101.
Afric
.
c.
20.
et
23.
et
65.
namely
,
that
in
part
of
the
diocesse
belonging
to
the
B.
of
a
city
,
new
Bishoprickes
might
be
erected
,
if
the
people
of
those
partes
being
populous
desiring
so
much
,
and
the
Bishoppe
of
the
city
consenting
thereto
,
it
were
agreed
vpon
by
the
prouinciall
Synode
.
But
the
Bishops
of
the
fifth
century
so
much
exceeded
in
their
indulgence
that
way
,
in
granting
popular
requests
,
against
the
canons
of
other
receiued
councels
,
and
ancient
practise
of
the
Church
:
that
Leo
the
great
Bishop
of
Rome
,
Leo
epist.
87.
ad
Episcopos
Afric
.
c.
2.
was
faine
to
write
vnto
the
Bishops
of
Africke
to
stay
that
excesse
.
The
fourth
:
What
was
Nazianzum
,
but
a
small
towne
where
that
famous
Gregory
the
Diuine
was
B
?
For
which
T.
C
quoteth
Socrat.
l.
4.
c.
20.
But
what
if
Nazianzum
were
a
City
?
what
if
Gregory
the
Diuine
were
not
B.
of
Nazianzum
?
Nazianzum
,
Socrat.
l.
4.
c.
26.
though
Socrates
make
mention
of
it
as
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
meane
city
,
yet
he
calleth
it
a
citie
:
and
though
somwhere
it
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
a
little
city
or
towne
,
yet
was
it
such
a
city
,
that
the
Emperor
Leo
the
Philosopher
,
reckoneth
it
among
the
seats
of
the
Metropolitane
BB.
not
that
I
thinke
it
had
any
other
cities
or
Bishopricks
subiect
vnto
it
.
Iur.
graecorom
.
in
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
pag
88.
I
will
not
stand
to
argue
that
question
,
whether
Gregory
the
Diuine
were
Bishop
of
Nazianzum
.
For
although
diuers
good
Authors
affirme
it
;
Greg.
epist.
42.
et
65
Caes.
Baron
.
an.
366.
num.
10.
yet
I
beleeue
Gregory
himselfe
,
who
saith
,
he
was
not
B.
but
onely
coadiutor
to
his
Father
there
.
He
was
by
his
dear
friend
Basil
the
great
,
made
Bishop
of
Sa●●●●
,
partly
against
his
wil
,
and
af●er
was
made
Bishop
of
Constantinople
;
but
leauing
both
the
former
,
being
seized
vpon
by
Anthimu●
the
Bishop
of
Tyana
,
who
placed
another
there
;
the
latter
,
resigning
it
into
the
hands
of
the
councill
of
Constantinople
,
which
preferred
Nectarius
to
bee
his
successor
;
hee
returned
vnto
Nazianzum
,
where
finding
the
See
void
,
obtained
of
Helladius
,
who
was
the
Bishoppe
of
Caesarea
after
Basil
,
that
Eulalius
might
bee
ordained
Bishoppe
there
.
But
I
will
not
dispute
this
question
;
seeing
it
is
confessed
,
that
Nazianzens
father
was
B.
of
that
diocesse
.
These
bee
all
the
instances
which
T.C.
bringeth
in
this
cause
,
excepting
one
more
out
of
the
canon
law
,
which
our
refuter
thought
not
worth
the
obiecting
.
But
his
inference
hereupon
is
worth
the
obseruing
.
Al
this
M.D.
could
not
choose
but
know
,
if
he
had
read
but
somuch
as
M.
Cartw.
2.
reply
with
as
good
a
mind
,
as
hee
did
D.
Bilson
.
Whereto
I
answere
:
that
I
read
with
resolution
to
yeeld
to
the
trueth
whersoeuer
I
find
it
.
But
God
hath
giuen
me
so
much
iudgment
,
as
not
to
be
perswaded
by
meere
colours
,
such
as
I
signified
in
my
preface
T.
C.
arguments
in
this
cause
to
bee
,
and
such
as
in
this
treatise
I
haue
prooued
many
of
them
to
bee
,
and
so
will
the
rest
,
if
the
Refuter
shall
vrge
them
,
or
take
vpon
him
to
maintaine
them
.
Hauing
so
substantially
answered
the
substance
of
my
argument
,
pagani
,
a
pag●
,
and
that
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
Pomp.
Festus
saith
,
quia
eadem
aqua
vterentur
)
remained
for
the
most
part
heathenish
,
after
the
cities
,
for
the
most
part
,
were
conuerted
to
Christianity
.
Hee
thinketh
the
heathen
were
called
pagani
,
because
they
are
not
Christs
Souldiers
;
induced
so
to
thinke
,
because
Tertullian
saith
,
Apud
hunc
,
tam
miles
est
paganus
fidelis
,
quam
paganus
est
miles
infidelis
.
Which
hee
englisheth
thus
,
as
well
a
faithfull
Souldier
as
an
vnbeleeuing
souldier
is
a
pagan
.
Which
if
it
were
Tertullians
meaning
,
as
well
Christians
,
as
infidels
should
be
called
Paganes
.
But
Tertullian
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
darke
,
and
writeth
(
as
it
seemeth
)
aboue
some
mens
capacity
.
With
Christ
,
saith
Tertullian
,
as
well
a
belieuing
pagan
is
a
souldier
,
as
an
vnbeleeuing
souldier
,
is
a
pagan
;
meaning
by
Pagan
,
according
to
the
vse
of
the
Romanes
,
him
that
is
not
a
Souldier
.
Whereas
therefore
among
the
Romanes
,
and
all
warlike
nations
,
those
who
were
Souldiers
,
were
greately
honoured
(
as
the
vse
of
the
word
miles
and
armiger
with
vs
doth
shew
)
and
contrariwise
those
who
were
not
Souldiers
;
were
of
base
esteeme
,
called
Pagani
,
perhaps
in
some
such
sense
as
Villani
with
vs
,
that
is
to
say
,
villaines
,
clownes
,
boores
:
Tertullian
disswading
Christians
from
going
to
warre
vnder
infidels
,
perswadeth
them
not
to
be
moued
with
this
respect
,
of
being
honoured
,
if
they
be
souldiers
;
and
dishonoured
,
if
they
be
not
:
for
,
saith
he
,
with
Christ
,
a
faithfull
man
,
though
despised
in
the
world
as
a
pagan
,
is
highly
esteemed
and
honoured
;
and
also
an
vnfaithfull
man
,
though
honoured
as
a
souldier
,
or
cheuallier
in
the
world
,
is
of
base
account
with
Christ
.
But
how
heathen
people
should
from
hence
be
called
Pagani
,
I
know
not
,
vnlesse
christians
were
also
called
milites
or
cheualliers
:
for
Pagani
here
,
as
a
base
terme
signifying
villains
or
clownes
or
boores
,
is
opposed
to
milites
,
as
a
name
of
honour
.
Ad.
Pag.
78.
BB.
both
before
,
&
after
the
diuision
of
Parishes
were
diocesans
.
(
Serm.
sect.
4.
pag.
25.
Thus
then
parishes
were
distinguished
both
in
the
cities
&
countries
,
and
seueral
presbyters
particularly
assigned
&c.
to
,
promiscuously
,
pag.
26.
)
In
this
section
,
I
proue
that
the
BB.
both
before
&
after
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
were
diocesan
:
and
first
I
answere
an
obiection
:
for
wheras
some
might
imagine
,
that
Bishops
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
were
parishional
,
after
,
diocesan
,
as
being
set
ouer
many
churches
:
I
shew
(
which
before
hath
bene
proued
)
that
the
circuit
of
the
Bishops
charge
,
or
diocesse
,
was
the
same
before
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
which
it
was
after
,
&c.
And
to
this
purpose
I
declare
,
that
the
circuit
of
the
B.
charge
from
the
beginning
,
contained
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
meaning
thereby
the
City
whence
he
hath
his
denomination
,
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
the
country
subiect
vnto
it
.
And
wheras
some
vnderstand
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
signifie
a
parish
,
according
to
the
vulgar
vse
of
the
English
word
,
I
shewed
that
in
the
best
authors
,
euen
after
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
it
signifieth
the
whole
city
with
the
suburbs
.
My
reason
standeth
thus
:
To
whose
iurisdiction
both
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
that
is
,
the
city
&
suburbs
,
though
containing
manie
parishes
)
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
that
is
,
the
whole
country
belonging
to
the
same
citie
)
is
subiect
,
he
is
ouer
the
Churches
both
in
citie
and
country
,
and
consequently
a
diocesan
.
But
to
the
iurisdiction
of
the
antient
Bishoppes
,
both
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
citie
and
suburbs
,
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
country
thereto
belonging
,
were
subiect
.
Therefore
the
antient
BB.
were
ouer
the
Churches
both
in
the
citie
and
country
,
and
consequently
were
diocesans
.
The
proposition
is
of
vndeniable
truth
,
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
being
so
vnderstood
,
as
I
prooued
before
.
The
assumption
J
proue
by
two
most
pregnant
testimonies
;
Can.
Apost
.
34.
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
9.
C.
35.
the
one
,
being
one
of
the
ancient
canons
called
the
Apostles
;
the
other
a
canon
of
the
councell
of
Antioch
,
whereof
I
haue
also
spoken
before
.
But
to
them
we
may
adde
the
next
canon
called
the
Apostles
,
C.
Antioch
.
c.
22.
which
is
also
recited
in
the
councell
of
Antioch
:
That
a
Bishoppe
may
not
presume
out
of
his
owne
limits
,
to
exercise
ordinations
,
to
Cities
and
Countries
not
subiect
to
him
.
And
if
he
shall
be
conuinced
to
haue
done
this
without
the
consent
of
them
,
who
hold
those
Cities
or
Countries
,
let
him
be
deposed
,
and
those
also
whom
he
hath
ordained
.
This
syllogisme
being
too
strong
to
be
refuted
,
his
best
course
was
not
to
see
it
.
Notwithstanding
he
cauilleth
with
some
points
therein
.
For
whereas
his
chiefe
proofe
before
,
was
,
that
the
Church
of
Antioch
,
of
Ephesus
,
of
Ierusalem
,
of
Alexandria
&c.
were
each
of
them
but
one
particular
congregation
&c.
because
Eusebius
calleth
each
of
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
thereby
abusing
the
Reader
,
as
if
Eusebius
had
by
that
name
ment
that
which
we
cal
a
parish
;
here
he
disauoweth
the
authority
of
Eusebius
alledged
according
to
his
true
meaning
,
vnlesse
he
had
said
it
was
of
that
signification
in
the
end
of
the
Apostles
time
,
and
the
age
following
.
Which
is
a
silly
shift
:
seeing
Eusebius
speaking
of
the
Churches
of
whole
Cities
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
euen
of
such
as
he
had
expressly
mentioned
as
containing
many
Churches
,
he
calleth
them
by
that
name
.
As
at
Alexandria
he
acknowledged
the
Churches
to
haue
beene
instituted
by
Saint
Marke
,
and
yet
he
comprehendeth
them
all
afterwards
,
yea
after
the
number
of
them
was
increased
,
vnder
the
name
of
the
paroecia
in
Alexandria
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
.
And
where
besides
Eusebius
,
I
quote
Epiphanius
,
and
the
Councell
of
Antioch
,
he
saith
,
It
is
to
no
purpose
to
cloy
the
Reader
with
multitude
of
allegations
,
concerning
the
decrees
or
practises
of
latter
ages
.
Which
also
is
a
very
friuolous
exception
,
seeing
it
is
easie
to
shew
,
that
the
dioceses
or
circuits
of
Churches
were
vsually
lessened
:
but
that
they
were
any
wheres
inlarged
,
he
will
hardly
shew
.
Therefore
,
looke
what
the
circuits
of
the
Churches
or
Bishops
charges
were
in
Eusebius
or
Epiphanius
his
time
,
the
same
,
at
the
least
,
they
were
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
.
seeking
to
bleare
mens
eyes
with
the
name
of
the
Apostles
Canons
.
In
that
I
said
they
were
so
called
,
it
doth
sufficienttly
both
here
and
where
after
I
cite
them
,
shew
my
meaning
.
But
let
vs
heare
what
he
can
say
against
them
,
for
my
mind
giueth
me
,
he
will
leaue
them
in
better
credit
then
hee
found
them
.
If
wee
were
so
simple
saith
he
,
as
to
take
them
for
their
doing
,
yet
should
not
a
man
of
his
profession
so
abuse
our
simplicity
:
He
knoweth
there
was
a
time
,
when
Rome
her selfe
saw
too
much
in
them
,
to
acknowledge
them
for
the
Apostles
:
See
Gratians
decree
dist.
15.
c.
sancta
Romana
,
&
dist.
16.
cap.
canones
.
In
both
places
it
is
said
,
that
they
are
apohryphall
(
as
we
call
the
bookes
of
Ecclesiasticus
and
Wisdome
)
not
because
they
are
either
false
or
counterfet
,
but
because
they
are
not
acknowledged
to
be
of
the
Apostles
owne
writing
:
for
if
they
were
,
they
ought
to
be
esteemed
of
canonicall
authority
,
like
the
other
scriptures
.
Notwithstanding
they
are
ecclesiasticall
canons
,
which
for
their
great
antiquity
and
authentike
authority
,
are
commonly
called
Apostolicall
,
receiued
of
antient
Fathers
,
and
approoued
by
Councels
.
And
although
some
of
them
may
be
suspected
,
[
*
](A20733-e80990-b)
*
As
the
last
of
all
which
leaueth
out
the
Apocalypse
,
and
reckoneth
Clements
Epistles
and
Constitutions
as
canonicall
.
For
the
Councell
in
Trullo
which
receiueth
the
85
Canons
,
notwithstanding
reiecteth
Clements
constitutions
.
as
foisted
in
,
or
depraued
by
heretikes
,
yet
those
which
are
specially
cited
by
Fathers
and
Councels
as
authentike
,
are
without
exception
;
being
of
as
great
credit
as
any
other
ecclesiasticall
writings
whatsoeuer
.
Such
is
the
canon
wee
speake
of
,
the
words
whereof
which
I
cited
being
verbatim
,
recited
in
the
Councell
of
Antioch
.
I
will
not
discusse
this
controuersie
,
wherein
much
may
be
said
on
both
sides
.
Only
this
J
will
say
,
that
as
Damascen
[
a
](A20733-e81010-b)
a
de
orthod.
fid.
l.
4.
c.
18.
in
fine
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
exceeded
the
truth
,
in
reckoning
them
with
the
canonicall
scriptures
:
so
some
learned
and
iudicious
men
haue
been
much
ouerseene
in
too
much
censuring
of
them
:
as
first
,
that
they
are
condemned
in
the
canon
law
,
when
indeed
the
very
scope
[
b
](A20733-e81070-b)
b
vid
gloss
.
of
the
16.
distinction
is
to
authorize
them
,
and
to
acknowledge
them
,
though
not
as
canonicall
scriptures
,
yet
as
authenticall
canons
.
Secondly
,
that
Isidor
condemneth
them
:
Whereas
indeed
the
words
of
Isidor
[
c
](A20733-e81120-b)
c
Praefat.
in
con
.
cil
.
vid.
dist.
16.
c.
4.
,
in
the
true
copy
are
these
.
That
by
reason
of
their
authority
,
we
prefixe
before
the
other
councels
,
the
canons
called
the
Apostles
(
although
of
some
they
are
called
apocryphal
)
because
the
greater
part
receiue
them
;
and
the
holy
fathers
haue
by
synodall
authority
ratified
them
,
and
placed
them
among
canonicall
constitutions
.
Thirdly
,
that
they
are
condemned
by
the
Councell
in
Trullo
[
d
](A20733-e81190-b)
d
Conc.
Const.
in
Trullo
.
c.
2.
:
when
as
indeed
that
Councell
reiecting
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
constitutions
of
Clement
,
(
which
also
were
called
Apostolicall
)
because
they
were
depraued
by
heretikes
,
authorized
the
canons
,
decreeing
that
the
85.
canons
shall
remaine
firme
and
sure
,
which
of
their
[
e
](A20733-e81250-b)
e
Tilius
his
Edition
being
here
defectiue
,
is
out
of
the
manuscript
copies
thus
to
be
supplied
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
holy
and
blessed
fore-fathers
were
receiued
,
and
confirmed
,
and
deliuered
vnto
them
in
the
name
of
the
holy
and
glorious
Apostles
.
And
whereas
some
thinke
,
that
Epiphanius
is
the
first
that
mentioneth
them
;
I
finde
it
to
bee
otherwise
.
For
diuers
of
them
are
cited
before
his
time
,
being
sometimes
called
absolutely
the
canons
,
sometimes
the
ecclesiasticall
canons
,
sometimes
the
antient
receiued
canons
of
our
Fathers
,
sometimes
Apostolicall
canons
,
as
I
haue
partly
noted
before
[
f
](A20733-e81350-b)
f
Ex
Conc.
Nic.
c.
15
&
16.
C.
Antioch
.
c.
9
&
ex
ep.
Const.
.
Neither
is
the
authority
of
the
generall
Councell
held
at
Ephesus
,
though
after
Epiphanius
his
time
,
to
be
neglected
,
which
calleth
them
[
g
](A20733-e81410-b)
g
Conc.
Ephes.
post
aduent
.
Episcoporum
Cypr.
the
canons
of
the
holy
Apostles
.
So
much
of
those
canons
,
and
also
of
this
section
,
which
though
it
doe
most
directly
and
necessarily
conclude
,
Ad
page
79.
that
Bishops
were
set
ouer
dioceses
,
yet
he
calleth
it
a
needlesse
discourse
,
which
,
because
he
knew
not
how
to
answere
,
he
taketh
leaue
to
passe
by
it
.
Serm.
sect.
5.
pag.
26.
These
three
points
whereof
hitherto
I
haue
intreated
,
are
of
such
euident
,
&c.
to
page
28.
line
6.
)
as
a
captiue
by
way
of
triumph
,
but
as
one
that
taketh
part
with
vs
,
against
our
new
sect
of
Disciplinarians
,
especially
in
the
second
and
third
point
,
(
which
their
dissenting
from
Caluin
,
Beza
,
and
other
learned
Authors
of
discipline
,
he
alwaies
cunningly
dissembleth
.
)
And
that
his
authority
may
be
of
more
weight
,
as
I
confesse
him
to
haue
bin
a
worthy
seruant
of
Christ
,
whose
memory
with
me
is
blessed
;
so
I
professe
him
to
haue
bin
the
first
or
chiefe
founder
of
the
Presbyterian
or
Geneuian
discipline
:
in
setting
vp
whereof
,
the
Bishopricke
being
dissolued
,
and
the
common
weale
reduced
to
a
popular
State
,
I
acknowledge
him
to
haue
dealt
very
wisely
,
his
proiect
of
discipline
being
the
best
,
that
that
Citie
did
seeme
at
that
time
capable
of
,
there
being
no
hope
,
that
either
a
Bishop
or
a
Presbytery
consisting
wholly
of
Ministers
,
would
be
admitted
.
But
he
cannot
indure
to
heare
,
that
Caluin
should
bee
esteemed
the
first
founder
of
this
discipline
.
For
confutation
whereof
,
he
telleth
vs
(
what
we
haue
heard
an
hundred
times
,
but
neuer
shall
see
proued
)
that
this
discipline
was
both
practised
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
primitiue
Church
,
and
hath
testimony
from
many
learned
men
,
Ignatius
,
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Ambrose
,
&c.
Wickliffe
,
the
Waldenses
,
Luther
and
diuers
others
hereafter
to
be
named
,
that
liued
before
Caluin
writ
:
hee
should
haue
said
,
that
writ
before
Caluin
liued
,
and
then
not
one
word
of
all
this
goodly
speech
had
been
true
;
which
as
I
haue
manifested
already
in
respect
of
Ignatius
,
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Ambrose
,
Luther
,
so
farre
as
they
haue
been
alleaged
:
so
shall
I
in
respect
of
Wickliffe
and
the
Waldenses
,
whoneuer
once
dreamed
of
their
lay
presbyteries
,
and
much
lesse
of
their
new-found
parish
discipline
.
Neither
can
he
abide
that
Caluin
should
be
said
to
agree
with
vs
in
these
three
points
;
but
he
must
abide
it
,
for
truth
will
preuaile
.
But
that
were
exceeding
strange
,
saith
hee
,
that
he
should
ouerthrow
that
discipline
which
he
was
so
carefull
to
establish
.
Let
him
not
abuse
the
Reader
;
his
agreeing
with
vs
in
the
second
and
third
point
,
ouerthroweth
the
new-found
parish
discipline
,
but
agreeth
with
the
doctrine
of
the
learned
Reformers
,
and
with
the
practise
of
Geneua
,
vnderstanding
by
B.
(
as
they
doe
)
the
President
of
their
Presbytery
:
their
Church
being
a
diocesse
consisting
of
many
parishes
,
ouer
which
one
Presbytery
only
is
appointed
.
Of
which
Presbytery
,
if
the
President
were
perpetuall
,
●as
he
was
in
Caluins
time
,
and
(
as
alwaies
he
was
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
there
being
not
one
instance
to
be
giuen
to
the
contrary
;
which
order
Beza
misliketh
not
,
but
sometimes
wisheth
it
were
restored
)
then
should
they
come
neerer
the
practise
of
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
then
now
they
doe
.
In
the
meane
time
,
as
their
Church
is
a
diocesse
,
and
their
Presbytery
seruing
for
the
whole
diocesse
;
so
the
President
for
the
time
being
,
is
diocesan
.
But
whether
that
be
so
or
not
;
once
,
Caluins
iudgement
agreeth
with
mine
in
these
three
points
:
It
may
be
,
saith
he
,
for
the
latter
end
of
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
.
But
the
conscience
must
ground
it selfe
vpon
the
commandement
and
example
of
the
Apostles
in
the
word
of
God
.
As
though
we
were
destitute
thereof
,
and
they
contrariwise
,
for
their
discipline
,
had
the
precept
and
practise
of
the
Apostles
.
Which
well
may
they
take
for
granted
,
but
neuer
will
bee
able
to
prooue
:
and
as
though
the
vniuersall
and
perpetuall
practise
of
all
the
Churches
in
Christendome
,
and
consent
of
all
the
Fathers
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
,
were
not
a
sufficient
demonstration
to
perswade
a
man
that
hath
a
sound
iudgement
,
ioined
with
a
good
conscience
,
what
was
the
doctrine
and
practise
of
the
Apostles
.
For
if
any
man
shall
say
,
that
all
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
and
all
the
godly
Fathers
,
and
glorious
Martyrs
,
did
euer
from
the
Apostles
times
obserue
a
discipline
and
gouernement
of
the
Church
,
repugnant
to
that
which
the
Apostles
had
prescribed
;
I
doubt
not
to
say
of
such
a
man
,
that
as
hee
is
void
of
modesty
,
so
hath
he
no
great
store
either
of
iudgement
or
honesty
.
Calu.
in
tit
.
l.
4.
c.
4.
sect.
1.
Let
these
words
,
before
the
papacy
,
be
obserued
of
them
who
say
we
haue
receiued
our
gouernment
from
the
Papists
.
But
how
farre
forth
Caluin
agreeth
with
vs
,
will
appeare
by
that
chapter
which
I
alleaged
,
the
title
whereof
is
this
;
Concerning
the
state
of
the
ancient
Church
and
the
maner
of
gouerning
which
was
in
vse
before
the
papacy
.
The
which
,
as
he
saith
in
the
beginning
,
will
represent
vnto
our
eies
a
certaine
image
of
the
diuine
institution
.
For
although
the
Bishops
of
those
times
made
many
canons
,
whereby
they
might
seeme
to
expresse
more
then
was
expressed
in
the
holy
scriptures
,
notwithstanding
with
so
good
caution
they
framed
their
whole
administration
according
to
that
only
rule
of
Gods
word
,
that
you
may
easily
perceiue
,
that
they
had
almost
nothing
in
this
behalfe
,
diss●nant
from
the
word
of
God
.
This
is
a
good
testimony
,
you
will
say
,
giuen
to
the
discipline
of
the
primitiue
Church
:
but
doth
hee
testifie
,
that
the
three
points
you
speake
of
are
agreeable
thereunto
?
that
shall
you
now
heare
.
And
first
,
concerning
the
Presbyteries
hee
saith
,
as
before
I
alleaged
,
euerie
Citie
had
their
Colledge
of
Presbyters
,
who
were
Pastors
and
Teachers
,
&c.
The
Refuter
repeateth
the
words
,
which
I
cited
out
of
Caluin
thus
:
that
the
Presbyteries
consisted
of
Ministers
.
Thereof
giuing
this
censure
:
Craf●ily
,
or
carelesly
is
this
spoken
.
The
former
,
if
wittingly
hee
left
out
,
onely
;
the
latter
,
if
he
did
not
heed
it
.
Who
denieth
that
the
Presbyteries
consisted
of
ministers
?
Wil
it
follow
thence
that
therefore
there
were
no
other
gouerning-Elders
?
No
man
can
be
so
ignorant
,
or
so
shamelesse
,
as
to
say
,
that
Caluin
was
of
opinion
,
that
the
Presbyteries
consisted
of
Ministers
onely
,
either
in
the
Apostles
times
,
or
in
the
age
following
.
What
shall
become
of
m●●
now
,
no
man
being
so
ignorant
and
shamelesse
?
I
hope
to
salue
both
presentlie
.
I
confesse
,
good
sir
,
that
Caluin
collecteth
two
sorts
of
Elders
out
of
1.
Tim.
5.17
.
I
confesse
also
,
that
speaking
in
generall
of
the
practise
of
the
Church
,
he
saith
coldly
and
in
few
words
,
the
rest
of
the
Presbyters
were
set
ouer
the
censure
of
maners
and
corrections
.
But
when
he
commeth
more
particularly
to
relate
the
practise
of
the
antient
Church
,
he
giueth
full
testimony
to
the
truth
.
For
can
any
man
vnderstand
Caluin
,
as
saying
,
they
had
any
other
Presbyery
,
besides
the
colledge
of
Presbyters
in
euery
Church
?
Doth
not
Caluin
plainly
say
,
euery
citie
had
their
colledge
of
Presbyters
,
who
were
Pastors
and
Teachers
?
Yes
that
he
doth
:
but
the
word
only
was
either
craftily
,
or
carelesly
omitted
.
Heare
then
the
words
of
Caluin
:
Habebant
ergo
singulae
ciuitates
Presbyterorum
collegium
,
qui
pastores
erant
ac
Doctores
.
Nam
&
apud
populum
munus
docendi
,
exhortandi
&
corrigendi
,
quod
Paulus
episcopis
iniungit
,
omnes
obibant
:
&
quo
semen
post
se
relinquerent
,
iunioribus
,
qui
sacra
militae
nomen
dederant
,
crudiendis
,
nanabant
operam
:
Euery
citie
therefore
had
a
colledge
of
Presbyters
,
who
were
Pastors
and
Teachers
.
For
both
they
exercised
all
of
them
the
function
of
teaching
,
exhorting
,
and
correcting
,
which
Paul
enioyneth
to
Bishoppes
,
and
also
that
they
might
leaue
a
seed
behind
them
,
they
imploied
their
labour
in
teaching
the
younger
sort
,
who
had
giuen
their
names
,
to
serue
in
the
sacred
warfare
,
that
is
,
the
younger
sort
of
the
Clergy
.
Thus
therefore
J
reason
:
The
Colledge
of
Presbyters
,
according
to
Caluins
iudgement
,
consisted
onelie
of
Ministers
;
The
Presbytery
of
each
Citie
was
the
colledge
of
the
Presbyters
:
Therefore
the
Presbyterie
of
each
City
,
according
to
Caluins
iudgement
,
consisted
onely
of
Ministers
.
The
assumption
is
euident
:
The
proposition
himselfe
proueth
,
when
hee
saith
omnes
,
all
of
them
exercised
the
offic●
of
teaching
,
&c.
which
Paul
prescribeth
to
BB.
&c.
What
can
be
more
plaine
?
For
where
there
are
none
but
Ministers
,
there
are
Ministers
only
:
where
all
exercise
the
function
of
teaching
and
preaching
to
the
people
,
which
Paul
inioyned
Bishops
;
and
instructing
the
younger
sort
of
the
clergy
,
there
are
none
but
Ministers
.
Therefore
where
all
exercise
the
function
of
teaching
and
preaching
,
&c.
there
are
Ministers
only
.
Vnicuique
ciuita●i
erat
attributa
certa
regio
,
qua
Presbyteros
iude
sumeret
,
&
velut
corpori
ecclesiae
illius
accenseretur
:
To
euery
Citie
was
attributed
a
certaine
region
or
country
,
which
from
thence
should
receiue
their
Presbyters
,
and
be
reckoned
as
being
of
the
body
of
that
Church
.
What
can
be
more
plaine
,
that
each
Church
contained
the
citie
and
country
adioyning
,
that
both
citie
and
country
made
but
one
Church
,
as
it
were
one
body
,
whereof
the
head
was
the
citie
,
the
other
members
the
parishes
in
the
country
:
that
the
Presbyteries
were
only
in
cities
,
and
that
the
country
parishes
receiued
each
of
them
their
Presbyter
,
when
they
wanted
,
from
thence
?
Who
therefore
(
to
vse
his
owne
words
)
could
be
either
so
ignorant
as
not
to
see
,
or
so
shamelesse
as
not
to
acknowledge
,
that
the
Churches
in
Caluins
iudgement
were
dioceses
?
How
doth
he
auoid
this
?
Forsooth
Caluin
doth
not
name
dioceses
.
But
doth
he
not
meane
dioceses
,
when
he
speaketh
of
Churches
containing
each
of
them
a
citie
and
country
adioyning
?
Yea
but
he
doth
not
tie
the
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
to
the
Bishops
Church
.
No
doth
?
he
acknowledgeth
no
Presbytery
but
in
the
cities
,
of
which
the
Bishops
were
Presidents
.
As
for
country
parishes
,
they
had
not
Presbyteries
,
but
seuerall
Presbyters
:
and
those
they
had
,
as
Caluin
saith
,
from
the
Presbytery
of
the
citie
.
Besides
,
when
he
maketh
the
citie
and
country
to
be
but
one
body
,
it
cannot
be
doubted
,
but
that
he
meant
the
Church
in
the
citie
was
the
head
of
this
body
,
and
the
rest
of
the
parts
subiect
vnto
it
.
Whereto
you
may
adde
that
which
after
he
saith
of
chorepiscopi
placed
in
the
diocesse
,
where
it
was
large
,
as
the
Bishops
deputy
,
in
the
country
subiect
to
him
.
But
what
Caluins
iudgement
was
in
this
behalfe
.
let
the
Church
of
Geneua
,
framed
thereby
,
test●fie
.
Which
is
as
much
a
diocesse
now
,
as
when
it
was
vnder
a
Bishop
,
there
being
but
one
Presbytery
,
vnto
which
all
the
parishes
are
subiect
.
But
let
vs
heare
what
this
Refuter
doth
confesse
Caluin
to
haue
acknowledged
in
this
behalfe
:
He
neither
nameth
dioceses
,
nortieth
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
to
the
Bishops
Church
,
but
onely
acknowledgeth
that
for
orders
sake
some
one
Minister
was
chosen
,
to
be
,
not
a
diocesan
,
but
a
titular
Bishop
.
Thus
it
fareth
with
men
that
wrangle
against
the
light
of
their
Conscience
,
being
conuicted
with
euidence
of
truth
;
but
desirous
to
make
a
shew
of
opposition
,
when
they
know
not
what
to
say
against
it
.
Doth
not
Caluin
plainly
say
,
that
to
each
citt●
was
attributed
a
certaine
region
,
and
that
both
were
one
Church
as
it
were
one
body
?
To
what
purpose
doth
he
then
say
,
that
he
only
acknowledgeth
that
for
orders
sake
,
&c.
Is
not
his
answere
in
effect
this
,
Caluin
doth
confesse
that
the
Churches
indeed
were
dioceses
,
and
that
the
Bishops
had
vnder
their
charge
both
the
citie
and
country
adioyning
,
(
for
that
also
he
confesseth
in
the
next
point
)
but
they
were
not
Bishops
hauing
such
authority
as
you
speake
of
?
that
is
,
I
confesse
he
〈◊〉
with
you
in
the
second
and
third
point
,
as
you
say
;
but
yet
in
the
fourth
(
which
also
you
confesse
)
he
dissenteth
from
you
.
Howbeit
hee
expresseth
his
mind
absurdly
,
when
he
saith
,
not
a
diocesan
,
but
a
titular
Bishop
.
For
was
not
the
Bishop
a
diocesan
,
if
his
Church
was
a
diocesse
?
if
he
had
vnder
his
charge
both
the
city
and
country
adioyning
?
Yea
but
he
was
not
a
diocesan
,
but
a
titular
Bishop
.
Though
Caluin
acknowledgeth
the
Bishop
to
haue
been
only
President
of
the
Presbytery
,
like
to
the
Consull
in
the
senate
of
Rome
(
which
you
call
a
titular
B.
)
wherein
(
being
the
fourth
point
)
he
dissenteth
from
vs
;
yet
doth
he
acknowledge
,
that
vnder
his
Bishopricke
,
was
contained
both
the
citie
and
country
,
and
consequently
that
he
was
a
diocesan
Bishop
,
vnlesse
he
that
is
Bishop
of
a
diocesse
,
be
not
a
diocesan
Bishop
.
His
testimony
therefore
to
the
third
is
cleere
,
If
the
country
which
was
vnder
his
Bishopricke
,
were
larger
then
he
could
sufficiently
discharge
all
the
offices
of
a
Bishop
in
euery
place
,
rurall
Bishops
were
substituted
here
and
there
to
supply
his
place
.
Which
is
a
most
pregnant
testimony
,
both
against
the
parish
discipline
and
also
for
the
diocesan
.
For
if
euery
parish
had
sufficient
authority
within
themselues
,
what
needed
rurall
Bishops
to
ouerlooke
them
?
If
the
Bishop
of
the
City
had
been
Bishop
but
of
one
parish
,
why
doth
Caluin
say
the
Countrey
was
vnder
his
Bishopricke
?
Why
doth
he
say
,
that
the
Bishopricke
was
sometimes
so
large
,
that
there
was
need
of
Countrey
Bishops
as
his
deputies
,
to
represent
the
Bishop
in
the
prouince
or
countrey
?
But
what
saith
the
Refuter
to
this
?
he
confesseth
(
not
ingenuously
,
but
as
it
were
〈◊〉
Minerua
,
as
if
it
stuck
in
his
teeth
)
that
Caluin
saith
somewhat
to
that
purpose
.
But
that
somewhat
is
as
good
as
nothing
:
for
hee
doth
not
say
they
were
diocesan
Bishops
:
(
O
impudency
!
)
neither
doth
he
speake
of
the
Apostles
〈◊〉
,
of
which
all
the
question
is
,
for
the
feeling
of
a
Christian
conscience
in
the
〈◊〉
of
gouernment
.
All
the
question
concerning
the
Apostles
times
?
doe
not
your selues
extend
your
assertion
to
200.
yeares
?
And
if
nothing
will
settle
the
conscience
but
what
is
alledged
from
the
Apostles
times
,
what
haue
you
to
settle
your
conscience
for
your
opinion
,
who
can
alledge
no
sound
proofe
neither
from
the
Apostles
times
,
nor
afterwards
?
But
to
what
purpose
should
I
spend
more
words
in
this
matter
,
seeing
I
haue
heretofore
proued
,
that
the
circuit
of
euery
Bishops
charge
,
was
from
the
beginning
as
great
,
if
not
greater
,
then
afterwards
?
And
if
nothing
may
be
in
the
Church
,
but
as
it
was
in
the
Apostles
times
,
then
ought
not
the
whole
people
of
any
country
be
conuerted
to
the
profession
of
Christianity
,
because
none
was
then
:
and
as
well
might
they
alleage
,
that
no
whole
country
ought
to
bee
conuerted
to
the
profession
of
the
faith
,
because
none
was
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
to
deny
the
people
of
a
whole
country
to
be
a
Church
,
because
it
was
not
so
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Thus
haue
I
manifestly
proued
,
that
Calu●●
giueth
testimony
to
the
first
point
;
and
in
the
two
latter
,
that
he
wholly
agreeth
with
vs
.
So
doth
●eza
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
,
testifying
the
Churches
were
diocese●
,
Bez.
de
grad.
min.
c.
24.
and
that
in
the
chiefe
towne
of
euery
diocesse
,
the
first
Presbyter
,
who
afterwards
began
to
be
called
a
Bishop
,
(
hee
speaketh
therefore
of
the
Apostles
times
)
was
set
ouer
his
fellow
Presbyters
,
both
of
the
Citie
and
countrey
,
that
is
the
whole
diocesse
.
And
because
sometimes
the
countrey
was
of
larger
extent
then
that
all
vpon
euery
occasion
could
conueniently
meete
in
the
Citie
;
and
forasmuch
as
all
other
small
Cities
and
townes
did
need
common
inspection
,
or
ouer
sight
,
they
had
also
their
Chorepiscopi
,
that
is
,
countrey
or
vice-Bishops
.
Yea
but
(
saith
he
,
being
guilty
to
himselfe
of
vntruth
in
denying
Caluins
consent
with
vs
)
it
had
been
nothing
to
the
purpose
if
Caluin
had
agreed
with
him
in
all
,
seeing
he
affi●meth
withall
,
that
they
were
but
humane
ordinances
,
and
aberrations
from
the
word
of
God
.
That
which
Caluin
speaketh
of
the
superiority
of
Bishops
in
degree
(
which
is
the
fourth
point
,
wherein
I
confesse
he
dissenteth
from
vs
,
and
from
the
truth
,
supposing
it
to
be
of
custome
,
and
humane
constitution
)
that
the
●●futer
extendeth
to
all
his
reports
concerning
the
ancient
Church
gouernment
;
when
as
he
plainely
testifies
,
that
with
so
great
〈◊〉
they
had
composed
the
gouernment
,
that
there
〈…〉
it
almost
diss●nant
from
the
word
of
God
.
Do●●
〈◊〉
where
say
or
insinuate
,
that
it
is
an
aberration
from
the
word
of
God
,
either
that
their
colledge
of
Presbyters
did
consist
wholy
of
Pastors
and
Teachers
?
neuer
be
shewed
.
And
now
are
we
come
to
his
conclusion
,
containing
a
most
vaine
bra●ge
,
proceeding
either
from
pitifull
ignorance
,
or
extreme
vnconscionablenes
:
That
hauing
answeared
my
arguments
(
in
such
sort
as
you
haue
heard
)
and
wanting
indeed
proofs
,
worth
the
producing
,
he
shal
not
need
(
the
vntruth
of
this
third
point
is
so
euident
)
to
bring
any
proofe
for
the
maintenance
of
the
contrary
assertion
.
And
so
I
leaue
him
,
conceiuing
hope
of
victory
,
like
the
King
of
A●
,
betweene
these
old
forces
,
which
I
haue
made
to
retire
vpon
him
,
and
the
new
supplies
marching
towards
him
.
FINIS
.
THE
THIRD
BOOK
,
prouing
the
superiority
of
Bishops
aboue
other
Ministers
.
CHAP.
1.
Confuting
the
refuters
preamble
to
the
fourth
point
,
and
defending
mine
owne
entrance
thereinto
.
(
Serm.
sect.
1.
pag.
28.
In
the
fourth
place
therefore
we
are
to
intreat
of
the
superioritie
of
BB.
ouer
other
Ministers
:
for
although
the
Presbyterians
and
we
agree
in
this
&c.
almost
to
the
end
of
the
pag.
29.
)
OF
the
fiue
points
which
I
propounded
,
three
haue
alreadie
been
handled
:
the
first
concerning
Lay
Elders
,
against
both
sorts
of
Disciplinarians
,
aswell
the
elder
,
as
the
younger
;
though
betweene
their
opinions
there
is
this
difference
,
that
the
elder
require
such
a
presbyterie
in
each
Citie
or
Diocesse
;
the
yonger
,
in
each
Parish
.
In
the
second
and
third
concerning
Dioceses
,
and
Diocesans
,
I
had
to
deale
onely
with
our
new
sect
of
Disciplinarians
,
who
vrge
the
new-found
parish-discipline
.
In
the
fourth
and
fift
which
remaine
,
I
propounded
to
my selfe
the
confutation
of
the
elder
and
more
learned
sort
of
disciplinarians
,
not
greatly
regarding
,
what
our
innouatours
in
these
2.
points
do
hold
,
or
deny
;
their
proper
opinions
concerning
the
parish
discipline
,
being
in
the
three
former
points
sufficiently
confuted
.
The
which
I
doe
the
rather
note
,
for
2.
causes
.
The
one
,
that
the
reader
may
vnderstand
the
refuters
euasions
,
in
disauowing
such
assertions
as
I
ascribe
vnto
the
disciplinarians
,
to
be
to
no
purpose
;
seeing
they
are
held
by
men
more
learned
and
iudicious
,
with
whom
principally
I
had
to
deale
.
The
other
that
he
may
discerne
the
pouerty
and
weakenesse
of
their
cause
;
the
chiefe
,
and
almost
only
strength
thereof
,
being
the
allegation
of
diuers
protestant
writers
,
(
whom
I
called
the
learneder
sort
of
Disciplinarians
)
who
are
parties
in
the
cause
.
As
touching
the
fourth
point
;
the
refuter
,
before
hee
come
to
my
words
,
maketh
an
idle
flourish
:
the
summe
whereof
is
this
;
that
were
it
not
,
that
by
confuting
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
he
should
overthrow
the
Supremacy
of
the
Pope
,
he
would
scarse
haue
vouchsafed
an
answeare
to
my
discourse
.
Here
therefore
he
sheweth
two
things
;
first
,
that
by
confuting
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
he
shall
withall
refute
the
supremacie
of
the
Pope
.
2.
that
otherwise
,
an
answere
to
me
in
this
fourth
point
were
needlesse
.
In
the
former
,
he
seemeth
ignorantly
,
and
yet
maliciously
to
presuppose
,
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
and
the
supremacie
of
the
Pope
,
hang
as
it
were
vpon
one
pin
;
and
that
he
which
graunteth
the
one
,
must
needs
hold
the
other
.
For
the
Basis
or
ground
of
his
dispute
,
is
this
,
such
as
is
,
and
ought
to
be
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
,
such
is
,
and
ought
to
be
the
gouernment
of
the
parts
or
seuerall
Churches
;
and
contrariwise
.
from
hence
he
hath
two
inferences
:
the
first
thus
:
Such
as
is
,
and
ought
to
be
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
,
such
is
,
and
ought
to
be
the
gouernment
of
the
parts
or
seuerall
Churches
.
But
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
is
Aristocraticall
,
and
not
Monarchicall
:
therefore
the
gouernment
of
the
parts
or
seuerall
Churches
is
,
and
ought
to
be
Aristocraticall
,
and
not
Monarchicall
.
The
proposition
he
taketh
for
graunted
,
To
fight
for
that
in
the
particulars
,
which
in
the
generall
I
wish
ouerthrowne
.
But
it
would
be
knowne
,
what
he
meaneth
by
the
particulars
,
or
parts
of
the
Church
,
whose
gouernment
he
would
haue
aunswerable
to
the
vniuersal
or
whole
Church
.
If
he
mean
only
parishionall
Churches
(
as
he
needs
must
)
:
For
,
there
is
no
other
visible
Church
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
in
his
conceit
but
a
Parish
;
Parishes
(
no
doubt
)
may
be
proud
of
the
comparison
:
for
then
,
as
some
of
them
haue
written
in
stately
maner
,
as
Rome
had
her
Senate
,
Lacedaemon
her
Seigniorie
,
Athens
her
Areopage
,
Ierusalem
her
Synedrion
,
Venice
(
which
our
Refuter
addeth
)
her
councell
of
State
;
and
lastly
,
(
which
exceedeth
all
)
as
the
vniuersall
Church
hath
her
Oecumenicall
synode
,
so
the
Church
of
euery
Parish
,
in
euery
street
,
and
in
euery
hamlet
,
must
haue
an
Ecclesiasticall
senate
.
But
what
parts
soeuer
he
vnderstand
,
whether
Parishionall
,
Nationall
,
or
Diocesan
Churches
,
the
proposition
is
vntrue
:
for
of
Prouinciall
,
or
Nationall
Churches
,
the
Metropolitans
,
and
Bishops
of
dioceses
,
are
,
and
ought
to
be
the
gouernors
.
But
howsoeuer
,
in
that
respect
the
forme
of
gouernment
may
seeme
to
be
Monarchicall
;
yet
in
respect
of
the
maner
of
gouerning
,
the
Metropolis
vsing
the
aduise
of
the
Nationall
,
or
Prouinciall
synodes
,
the
Bishop
of
his
Presbyterie
,
they
may
be
Aristocraticall
.
Who
knoweth
not
that
the
common
wealth
of
Rome
somtimes
was
popular
,
and
likewise
that
of
Athens
(
for
it
is
an
errour
of
the
Refuter
to
reckon
Athens
with
Venice
,
as
an
example
of
Aristocracie
;
)
yet
the
seuerall
prouinces
were
ruled
by
seuerall
gouernours
,
as
Propraetors
,
and
Proconsuls
.
The
gouernment
of
this
whole
Island
(
blessed
be
God
,
for
vniting
the
two
Kingdomes
in
the
person
of
our
Soueraigne
)
is
Monarchicall
:
yet
the
gouernment
of
seuerall
parts
by
Counsels
,
and
Presidents
thereof
,
may
seem
so
far
Aristocraticall
.
The
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
in
Heauen
and
earth
is
Monarchicall
vnder
one
head
and
Monarch
,
which
is
Christ
our
King
.
And
for
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
vpon
earth
,
he
hath
no
Vicar
generall
,
but
the
holie
Ghost
,
who
appointeth
gouernors
vnder
him
,
which
may
gouerne
the
seuerall
parts
of
the
Church
in
some
respect
monarchically
,
though
the
whole
Church
,
by
the
mutuall
consociation
of
her
gouernours
for
the
common
good
,
and
by
the
concurrence
of
them
to
an
Occumenicall
synode
,
is
gouerned
Aristocratically
:
for
the
whole
Church
beeing
but
one
bodie
,
there
ought
to
be
a
Christian
consociation
of
the
gouernors
thereof
for
the
common
good
of
the
whole
bodie
.
If
among
the
Princes
of
the
whole
world
,
there
were
the
like
consociation
,
the
vniuersall
world
should
be
gouerned
in
that
respect
Aristocratically
,
though
the
seuerall
parts
for
the
most
part
Monarchically
.
So
much
of
the
proposition
.
The
assumption
he
prooueth
by
the
testimonies
of
our
writers
against
the
Papists
,
to
define
,
determine
,
or
commaund
,
but
onely
to
deliberat
,
and
aduise
,
as
H.
I.
in
his
booke
vrging
reformation
,
and
other
the
Christian
and
modest
challengers
of
disputation
,
together
with
the
humble
[
n
](A20733-e83070-b)
n
An.
1609.
petitioners
suing
for
a
toleration
,
do
teach
.
Secondly
,
Our
writers
hold
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
vniuersall
to
be
Aristocraticall
,
because
as
our
Sauiour
Christ
ascending
into
Heauen
,
left
his
twelue
Apostles
,
as
it
were
twelue
Patriarches
,
aunswerable
to
the
Princes
of
the
twelue
tribes
[
a
](A20733-e83100-b)
a
Cypr.
de
Simplic
praelatorum
:
Hoc
erant
vtique
caeteri
Apostoli
quod
suit
Petrus
,
pari
consorrio
prae●liti
&
honoris
&
pot●statis
.
,
furnished
with
equall
authority
and
power
,
whose
colledge
was
the
supreme
Senate
of
the
vniuersall
church
:
so
they
committed
the
Churches
to
Bishops
,
as
their
successours
,
being
equall
in
degree
;
[
b
](A20733-e83120-b)
b
Eiusdem
sacerdotij
.
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
who
as
they
gouerne
the
Churches
seuerally
,
so
ioyntly
(
with
other
gouernors
)
are
the
highest
Senate
of
the
vniuersall
Church
.
But
it
was
neuer
practised
in
the
Church
of
God
,
that
any
presbyters
or
pastors
of
parishes
should
be
called
to
generall
councils
,
to
haue
right
of
suffrage
and
authority
to
judge
and
determine
those
matters
which
were
debated
in
those
councils
;
but
both
they
and
Deacons
(
I
meane
some
of
them
)
were
to
attend
their
Bishop
,
to
assist
him
with
their
priuate
counsell
and
aduice
:
which
one
argument
(
by
the
way
)
doth
notably
set
forth
the
superiority
of
Bishops
ouer
other
ministers
.
But
as
his
assumption
crosseth
the
conceits
of
our
new
Disciplinarians
,
so
is
his
conclusion
repugnant
to
their
assertion
,
who
ascribing
the
supreme
authority
in
their
seuerall
Churches
to
the
whole
congregation
,
stand
for
a
popular
state
,
rather
then
Aristocraticall
.
Whereas
indeed
the
gouernment
of
Churches
,
as
they
are
prouinciall
,
are
according
to
the
ancient
Canons
which
are
in
vse
with
vs
,
gouerned
by
prouinciall
synodes
,
and
therefore
by
a
regiment
Aristocraticall
.
So
that
of
this
syllogisme
,
the
proposition
is
false
,
the
assumption
is
gainesaid
by
themselues
,
and
the
conclusion
,
confuting
their
owne
assertion
,
agreeth
with
the
practise
of
prouinciall
churches
with
vs
.
§
.
4.
His
other
inference
is
this
:
If
the
gouernment
of
the
seurall
Churches
may
be
monarchicall
,
then
by
the
same
reason
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
may
be
monarchicall
.
But
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
may
not
be
monarchicall
:
therefore
the
gouernment
of
the
seueral
Churches
may
not
.
This
consequence
is
vnsound
,
there
being
not
the
like
reason
of
the
whole
Church
and
of
the
parts
.
And
that
is
the
answere
,
which
ou●
men
doe
make
to
the
papists
,
when
they
vrge
this
reason
;
as
there
was
but
one
high
priest
,
for
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
vnder
the
Law
,
so
there
should
be
,
but
one
chiefe
Bishop
for
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
.
They
answere
,
there
is
not
the
like
reason
betweene
the
Church
of
one
nation
,
and
of
the
whole
world
.
Cal.
Inst.
li.
4.
ca.
6.
s.
2.
Gentis
vnius
&
totius
orbis
longè
diuersa
est
ratio
,
perinde
est
,
ac
siquis
contendat
totum
mundum
a
praefecto
vno
debere
regi
,
quia
ager
vnus
non
plures
praefectos
habeat
.
For
of
the
vniuersall
Church
,
Christ
onely
is
the
head
;
which
supreame
and
vniuersal
gouernment
,
if
any
man
shall
assume
to
himselfe
,
as
the
Pope
of
Rome
doth
;
thereby
he
declareth
himselfe
to
be
Antichrist
,
or
emulus
Christi
,
sitting
in
the
Church
of
God
,
as
God
,
and
lifting
vp
himselfe
aboue
all
that
is
called
God
.
But
as
touching
the
seuerall
Churches
,
those
who
be
the
lieutenants
of
Christ
,
may
be
called
the
heads
or
gouernors
thereof
,
as
soueraigne
princes
of
all
states
and
persons
within
their
dominions
,
Metropolitans
of
prouinciall
Churches
,
Bishops
of
their
dioces
,
and
Pastors
of
their
seuerall
flocks
.
Secondly
,
whereas
particular
men
are
enabled
by
God
to
gouerne
seuerall
churches
;
no
mortall
man
is
able
to
weild
the
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
:
which
is
one
of
the
maine
arguments
,
which
our
writers
vse
against
the
monarchicall
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
:
which
this
refuter
seeketh
in
vaine
to
infringe
.
The
Romane
Emperors
,
when
their
Empire
was
at
the
largest
,
and
they
esteemed
themselues
Lords
of
the
world
,
enioying
indeed
not
one
third
part
of
the
whole
,
yet
finding
themselues
vnable
to
weild
so
great
a
burden
,
were
faine
to
assume
colleagues
vnto
them
with
whom
they
parted
the
Empire
,
when
they
might
haue
retained
the
whole
.
Thirdly
,
the
monarchicall
gouernment
of
the
whole
Church
would
proue
dangerous
and
pernicious
to
the
same
,
if
that
one
head
or
Monarch
thereof
should
fall
into
errour
or
idolatry
;
especially
,
he
being
so
aboue
the
whole
Church
as
that
he
should
not
be
subiect
to
a
generall
Councell
.
But
the
heads
of
seuerall
Churches
,
if
they
erre
or
fall
,
may
by
the
Synodes
of
other
Bishops
be
brought
into
order
,
or
deposed
.
Examples
whereof
we
haue
in
all
,
euen
the
chiefe
seats
of
Bishops
,
as
of
Marcellinus
at
Rome
,
Paulus
Samosatenus
at
Antioch
,
Dioscorus
at
Alexandria
,
Nestorius
and
Macedonius
at
Constantinople
.
&c.
Cyprian
writing
to
Stephanus
Bishop
of
Rome
about
the
deposing
of
Martianus
Bishop
of
Arles
saith
,
Fourthly
,
to
the
head
of
seuerall
Churches
the
members
may
haue
easie
and
speedie
recourse
,
for
clearing
of
doubts
,
and
deciding
of
controuersies
&c.
But
from
all
parts
of
the
world
men
could
not
without
infinite
trouble
,
besides
manifold
inconueniences
,
repaire
to
one
place
.
These
reasons
may
suffice
for
the
confutation
of
the
proposition
.
The
assumption
is
false
in
respect
of
Christ
,
who
is
the
Monarch
of
the
Church
;
otherwise
I
acknowledge
it
to
be
true
,
Ad
pag.
82.
but
without
any
disaduantage
to
my
cause
:
the
odious
consequence
of
the
proposition
(
which
is
so
oft
vrged
)
being
vnsound
.
If
therefore
he
can
no
better
disproue
the
Supremacy
of
the
Pope
,
then
he
doth
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
it
were
better
he
should
be
silent
,
then
busie
himselfe
in
matters
aboue
his
reach
.
The
other
part
of
his
idle
flourish
is
a
vaine
bragge
,
that
were
it
not
for
that
cause
,
he
should
not
neede
to
busie
himselfe
in
answearing
,
or
examining
this
point
.
For
if
neither
the
Churches
were
dioceses
,
nor
the
Bishops
Diocesan
,
to
what
end
should
wee
enquire
what
power
or
iurisdiction
they
had
?
But
the
Churches
were
dioceses
and
the
BB.
diocesan
,
as
I
haue
manifestly
proued
before
,
and
as
those
Disciplinarians
do
confesse
,
with
whom
chiefly
I
deale
in
this
point
:
who
granting
that
the
Churches
were
dioceses
,
§
.
5.
Now
that
the
state
of
the
controuersie
betwixt
vs
and
them
may
appeare
,
I
shew
wherein
the
Presbyterians
agree
with
vs
,
and
wherein
they
dissent
from
vs
.
But
first
he
findeth
fault
that
I
call
them
Presbyterians
,
as
sometimes
I
doe
also
Disciplinarians
;
though
thereby
I
meane
no
other
,
but
such
as
doe
stand
for
the
Presbytery
,
and
for
that
discipline
,
being
loth
either
to
call
them
aduersaries
(
whom
I
acknowledge
to
be
brethren
)
or
to
offend
them
with
the
title
of
Puritans
,
wherewith
others
doe
vpbraid
them
.
And
howsoeuer
he
in
bitter
scorne
doth
say
,
that
of
my
charity
I
doe
in
scorne
so
call
them
:
I
doe
professe
vnfainedly
,
that
out
of
a
charitable
mind
,
I
did
terme
them
Presbyterians
,
not
knowing
how
to
speake
of
them
,
as
dissenting
from
vs
,
more
charitably
.
And
whereas
I
say
they
agree
with
vs
in
this
,
that
by
diuine
institution
there
was
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
and
still
ought
to
be
,
one
set
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
he
saith
;
I
had
need
to
be
as
mighty
in
eloquence
as
Pericles
,
if
I
would
perswade
that
.
But
small
eloquence
may
serue
,
where
there
is
such
euidence
to
proue
the
truth
.
Only
the
Reader
must
remember
,
that
I
speake
not
of
my
aduersary
,
and
other
new fangled
disciplinarians
,
who
are
not
to
haue
the
credit
of
comming
so
neere
the
truth
;
but
of
men
of
greater
learning
,
and
better
desert
in
Gods
Church
:
who
as
they
agree
with
vs
,
that
the
Churches
were
dioceses
,
and
the
Presbyteries
with
the
Presidents
thereof
prouided
for
diocesses
,
(
which
●
haue
shewed
before
)
so
they
consent
in
this
,
that
the
Presbyteries
had
by
diuine
ordinance
a
President
set
ouer
them
:
the
which
I
wil
proue
straightwaies
,
after
I
haue
noted
his
censure
concerning
the
three
points
wherein
I
said
they
differ
from
vs
.
The
first
,
that
they
make
the
Bishop
superior
in
order
only
,
and
not
in
degree
.
2.
That
they
assigne
a
superiority
or
presidentship
vnto
him
for
a
short
time
,
and
that
by
course
.
3.
That
granting
vnto
him
a
priority
of
order
,
they
deny
vnto
him
a
maiority
of
rule
or
power
.
To
the
first
he
saith
,
If
by
degree
I
meane
dignity
onely
(
as
neuer
any
man
did
)
they
doe
not
deny
the
President
to
be
superior
indignity
and
honour
,
during
the
time
of
his
presidentship
:
which
is
nothing
else
but
to
grant
vnto
him
a
priority
of
order
,
which
Beza
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
prerogati●e
or
precedence
,
Ad
pag.
33.
and
to
go
before
in
honor
.
But
if
I
vnderstand
degree
,
of
office
and
ministery
distinct
from
Presbyters
,
as
theirs
is
from
deacons
,
then
he
professeth
themselues
to
dissent
from
vs
.
And
so
let
them
:
for
he
cannot
be
ignorant
,
that
I
maintaine
the
antient
distinction
of
the
ecclesiasticall
Ministers
into
three
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
degrees
,
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
As
for
those
Presidents
of
Presbyteries
,
which
were
superior
to
the
other
Presbyters
,
in
order
and
not
in
degree
;
such
were
they
whom
they
were
wont
to
call
,
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
sometimes
archipresbyteri
,
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
to
say
,
Deanes
,
and
not
Bishops
.
And
it
was
a
great
ouersight
in
these
learned
men
,
vnder
the
name
and
title
of
the
ancient
Bishops
,
to
describe
vnto
vs
Deanes
.
To
the
second
,
he
saith
;
It
is
manifestly
false
:
for
we
tie
not
the
presidentshippe
to
any
short
or
long
time
,
nor
giue
it
to
all
presbyters
by
course
,
as
if
it
were
a
matter
of
diuine
institution
:
howsoeuer
,
where
all
are
fit
for
that
seruice
,
(
as
no
doubt
but
in
Vtopia
they
all
are
)
we
thinke
it
perhaps
(
for
he
doth
but
ghesse
at
things
which
he
knoweth
not
)
in
discretion
(
he
might
haue
said
,
indiscretion
)
confirmed
by
experience
,
not
amisse
to
haue
the
businesse
so
carried
.
To
the
third
he
saith
;
That
it
also
is
vntrue
:
for
wee
giue
(
saith
he
)
the
President
,
during
the
time
of
his
presidentship
,
as
priority
of
order
,
so
maiority
of
rule
;
though
not
supreme
and
sole
authority
,
as
none
but
Papists
doe
,
and
they
to
none
but
to
the
Pope
.
As
touching
their
agreement
with
vs
,
[
a
](A20733-e83820-b)
a
De
grad.
Minist.
cap.
23.
,
is
not
onely
an
ordinance
diuine
,
but
also
essentiall
and
immutable
.
The
latter
,
which
is
ordinis
modus
,
though
it
were
of
diuine
institution
,
yet
it
is
but
accidentall
,
and
so
mutable
.
And
when
hee
distinguisheth
Bishops
into
three
sorts
[
b
](A20733-e83850-b)
b
De
grad.
Minist.
c.
24.
p.
177
,
he
calleth
them
onely
diuine
,
which
haue
a
priority
of
order
onely
,
and
that
for
a
time
and
by
course
.
As
for
those
which
had
a
perpetuall
presidentship
,
whereunto
they
were
preferred
by
election
,
by
whom
the
priority
of
order
(
as
he
imagineth
)
was
changed
into
a
superiority
of
degree
,
and
were
such
as
hee
will
not
absolutely
[
c
](A20733-e83880-b)
c
Ibid.
c.
23.
p.
144.
156.
condemne
:
yet
such
(
in
his
opinion
)
are
but
humane
:
and
to
these
he
supposeth
the
name
Bishop
first
to
haue
beene
appropriated
.
Such
diuine
Presidents
he
acknowledgeth
these
seuen
Angels
to
haue
been
,
and
before
them
Timothy
at
Ephesus
.
And
whereas
Ierom
saith
,
at
the
first
the
Churches
were
gouerned
〈◊〉
Presbyterorum
consili●
;
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
:
N●●
confuso
,
saith
he
,
&
perturbat●
?
What
[
d
](A20733-e83960-b)
d
Pag.
139.140
,
saith
he
,
confused
and
disordered
:
so
as
when
the
Presbyters
did
meete
,
none
should
be
President
among
them
?
That
is
not
likely
:
therefore
euen
then
the
Presbytery
had
a
President
.
And
where
it
was
obiected
by
D.
Sarauia
,
against
that
opinion
of
Ierome
,
that
these
seuen
Churches
had
each
of
them
an
Angell
by
diuine
ordinance
set
ouer
them
,
to
whom
a
more
eminent
authority
belonged
in
the
regiment
of
the
Church
;
to
what
purpose
,
saith
Beza
[
e
](A20733-e84010-b)
e
Pag.
159.160
,
doe
you
vrge
this
against
Ierome
?
For
when
hee
said
,
the
Churches
were
gouerned
at
the
first
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
,
wee
may
not
thinke
,
that
hee
so
doted
,
as
to
dreame
that
none
of
the
Presbyters
was
President
ouer
that
assembly
.
As
for
the
third
and
the
last
,
nothing
is
more
euident
[
f
](A20733-e84050-b)
f
Vide
supr.
l.
1.
c.
2
§.
16.
,
then
that
Caluin
and
Beza
,
For
he
was
not
so
superior
in
honour
and
dignity
(
saith
Caluin
[
g
](A20733-e84130-b)
g
Calu.
Instit.
l.
4.
c.
4
s.
2.
)
as
to
haue
dominion
ouer
his
Colleagues
.
And
againe
;
that
he
did
goe
so
before
others
in
dignity
,
that
himselfe
was
subiect
to
the
assembly
of
his
brethren
.
Beza
[
h
](A20733-e84190-b)
h
Beza
de
grad.
p.
156
157.
acknowledgeth
their
superiority
to
haue
been
the
dignity
or
honour
of
the
first
place
,
but
no
degree
of
rule
ouer
their
compresbyters
.
And
is
not
this
part
of
H.
I.
his
second
maine
assertion
,
that
the
ancient
Bishops
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
differed
from
other
pastors
onely
in
priority
of
order
,
and
not
in
maiority
of
rule
?
T.
C.
[
i
](A20733-e84240-b)
i
T.
C.
l●
.
110.
likewise
speaking
of
him
that
was
chosen
to
moderate
the
meeting
of
Ministers
,
saith
,
If
any
man
will
call
him
a
President
,
or
Moderator
,
or
a
Gouernour
,
we
will
not
striue
,
so
that
it
be
with
these
cautions
;
that
hee
be
not
called
simply
Gouernour
,
or
Moderator
,
but
Gouernour
or
Moderator
of
that
action
,
and
for
that
time
,
and
subiect
to
the
orders
that
others
bee
,
and
to
be
censured
by
the
company
of
the
Brethren
,
as
well
as
others
,
if
hee
be
iudged
anyway
fault●
.
And
that
after
that
action
ended
,
and
meeting
dissolued
,
hee
sit
him
downe
in
his
old
place
,
and
set
himselfe
in
equall
state
with
the
rest
of
the
Ministers
.
Thirdly
,
that
this
gouernment
or
presidentship
bee
not
so
tied
to
that
Minister
,
but
that
at
the
next
meeting
it
shall
bee
lawfull
to
take
another
.
The
vntruths
therefore
which
the
Refuter
hath
bestowed
vpon
me
here
,
he
must
be
intreated
to
take
to
himselfe
.
To
proue
their
dissent
from
vs
in
this
fourth
point
,
Antichristian
,
pettite
Popes
,
&c.
so
doe
they
wish
and
labour
for
the
extirpation
of
them
,
whereas
Beza
speaking
reuerently
of
them
,
praieth
for
their
continuance
.
But
both
his
distinction
and
his
wish
,
by
the
Refuter
are
peruerted
,
expounding
him
as
though
he
had
accounted
for
humane
,
those
which
had
onely
a
priority
of
order
:
whereas
indeed
he
acknowledgeth
such
a
presidentship
as
you
haue
heard
,
to
be
a
diuine
ordinance
;
and
vnderstandeth
his
praier
,
where
he
wisheth
the
continuance
of
the
Bishops
,
as
if
he
had
wished
that
so
long
as
England
hath
Bishops
,
they
may
bee
such
as
may
giue
their
liues
for
the
truth
,
as
they
did
.
Where
,
whiles
hee
vnderstandeth
Beza
as
wishing
our
Bishoppes
to
be
Martyrs
,
he
indiscreetly
maketh
him
to
wish
that
our
Princes
may
bee
persecutors
,
which
God
forbid
.
That
which
he
addeth
concerning
my
saying
Am●●
to
the
like
wish
for
the
Churches
of
France
and
Scotland
,
and
yet
be
no
maintainer
of
their
presbyteries
,
is
meerely
idle
;
for
I
did
not
bring
in
Beza
as
a
maintainer
of
Bishops
,
bvt
rather
did
note
him
as
one
of
their
chiefe
opposites
,
citing
his
differences
from
vs
,
and
mentioning
that
distinction
of
Bishops
:
howbeit
I
acknowledge
his
proposition
to
be
with
more
moderation
,
then
is
commonly
to
be
found
in
the
Disciplinarians
among
vs
.
that
the
Bishops
or
Angels
of
the
primiti●e
Church
,
were
as
well
as
ours
,
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
:
and
secondly
,
to
declare
more
particularly
,
wherein
their
superiority
did
consist
.
Ad
pag.
84.
But
before
he
entreth
the
combate
,
distrusting
himselfe
and
his
cause
,
he
seeketh
(
as
such
champions
vse
to
doe
)
which
way
(
if
need
be
)
he
may
make
an
escape
:
and
hauing
to
this
purpose
looked
well
about
him
,
he
hath
found
out
two
starting
holes
,
whereby
he
hopeth
to
finde
some
euasion
.
The
former
hath
these
windings
and
turnings
in
it
:
1.
That
the
primiti●e
church
is
to
be
confined
to
the
Apostles
times
,
and
not
extended
to
the
whole
200
yeares
.
2.
That
the
question
is
●●
be
●nderstood
of
the
Angels
of
the
7.
Churches
.
3.
That
I
must
p●●●●e
these
Angels
to
haue
had
sole
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
.
The
first
of
these
argueth
extreame
diffidence
:
for
Caluin
,
and
others
,
in
this
question
,
within
the
limits
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
include
the
times
of
Constanti●e
,
at
the
least
;
yea
Caluin
includeth
all
the
time
[
k
](A20733-e84540-b)
k
Iust.
l.
4.
c.
4.
a●tepapa●●m
,
before
the
Papacy
;
in
which
time
he
acknowledgeth
the
forme
of
Church
gouernment
,
to
haue
had
nothing
in
it
almost
disso●ant
from
the
word
of
God
.
And
whereas
,
saith
he
[
l
](A20733-e84600-b)
l
Parag.
4.
euery
prouince
had
among
their
Bishops
an
Archbishop
;
and
whereas
also
in
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
there
were
established
Patriarchs
,
who
in
order
and
dignity
were
superior
to
the
Archbishops
,
that
appertained
to
the
preseruation
of
discipline
.
And
although
he
misliketh
that
the
gouernment
so
established
,
was
called
Hiera
:
●hy
;
notwithstanding
,
if
omitting
the
name
,
saith
he
,
we
looke
into
the
thing
,
we
shall
finde
that
the
ancient
Bishops
would
not
frame
a
forme
of
Church
gouernment
differing
from
that
which
God
prescribed
in
his
word
.
And
Beza
[
m
](A20733-e84670-b)
m
Confess
c.
5.
§
29.
confesseth
,
that
those
things
which
were
ordained
of
the
antient
Fathers
,
concerning
the
seats
of
Bishops
,
Metropolitanes
,
and
Patriarches
,
assigning
their
limits
▪
and
attributing
vnto
them
certaine
authority
,
were
appointed
optimo
zelo
,
out
of
a
very
good
zeale
.
And
therefore
(
no
doubt
)
out
of
such
zeale
,
as
was
according
to
knowledge
;
otherwise
it
would
haue
been
far
from
being
optimus
,
the
best
.
Zanchius
[
n
](A20733-e84740-b)
n
De
relig.
c.
25.
§
11.
intreating
of
the
diuers
orders
of
Ministers
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
as
Presbyters
,
Bishops
,
Archbishops
,
&c.
faith
,
they
may
be
defended
.
Against
which
,
some
learned
man
(
I
will
not
say
Beza
)
hauing
taken
exception
,
Zanchius
maketh
this
apology
.
[
o
](A20733-e84790-b)
o
Obseru.
in
cap.
25.
aphor.
10.11
.
When
I
wrote
this
confession
of
the
faith
,
I
did
write
all
things
out
of
a
good
conscience
,
and
as
I
beleeued
,
so
I
freely
spake
.
Now
my
faith
is
grounded
chiefly
and
simply
on
the
word
of
God
:
Something
also
in
the
next
place
on
the
common
consent
of
the
whole
antient
Catholike
Church
,
if
that
bee
not
repugnant
to
the
Scriptures
.
I
doe
also
beleeue
,
that
what
things
were
defined
and
receiued
by
the
godly
Fathers
,
being
gathered
together
in
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
by
the
common
consent
of
all
,
without
any
gainsaying
of
the
holy
scriptures
,
that
those
things
also
(
though
they
be
not
of
the
same
authority
with
the
holy
Scriptures
)
proceeded
from
the
holy
Ghost
.
Hence
it
is
,
that
those
things
that
be
of
this
kind
,
I
neither
will
,
nor
dare
with
good
conscience
mislike
.
But
what
is
more
certaine
out
of
histories
,
Councels
,
and
writings
of
all
the
Fathers
,
then
that
those
orders
of
Ministers
,
whereof
I
spake
,
were
established
,
and
receiued
by
the
common
consent
of
all
Christendome
?
Quis
a●tem
ego
sim
,
qui
quod
tota
Ecclesia
approbaui●
,
improbem
?
And
who
am
I
that
I
should
disallow
that
which
the
whole
Church
allowed
?
&c.
Neither
doe
I
see
any
reason
,
For
my
part
,
I
make
no
doubt
,
but
that
Anianus
,
who
succeeded
S.
Marke
at
Alexandria
,
being
a
man
[
p
](A20733-e84920-b)
p
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
24
beloued
of
God
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
euery
way
admirable
,
had
the
same
episcopall
authority
which
S.
Marke
had
before
him
,
and
that
he
,
and
those
which
succeeded
him
,
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
viz.
Abilius
and
Cerd●
had
no
lesse
authority
as
diocesan
Bishops
,
then
those
which
came
two
hundred
yeeres
after
them
.
Indeed
,
when
the
Churches
multiplying
,
there
was
a
consociation
of
dioceses
in
the
prouince
,
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
became
actually
a
Metropolitan
Bishop
,
which
from
the
first
might
bee
intended
:
and
when
there
was
a
consociation
of
prouinces
subiected
to
him
,
he
became
a
Patriarch
,
the
antient
Fathers
in
godly
policie
so
thinking
it
necessary
.
Now
if
any
man
shall
thinke
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
was
but
a
parish
Bishop
at
the
first
,
and
vpon
cons●ciation
of
parishes
subiected
to
him
,
became
a
diocesan
,
he
is
to
vnderstand
,
that
the
diocesse
,
and
the
mother
Church
of
the
diocesse
,
was
before
any
parish
;
that
parishes
arise
out
of
the
distribution
of
the
diocesse
;
that
th●
Bishop
and
his
Presbytery
of
the
mother
Church
were
appointed
not
for
one
parish
,
but
for
the
whole
diocesse
;
that
at
Alexandria
,
in
,
and
from
S.
Marks
time
,
who
constituted
the
Churches
there
,
there
haue
been
more
Churches
then
one
subiected
to
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
.
Vnlearned
therefore
and
vngrounded
is
that
distinction
of
Bishops
into
six
sorts
,
Such
perhaps
first
of
all
was
Iulianus
the
tenth
Bishop
of
Alexandria
.
Perhaps
!
But
why
he
rather
then
S.
Marke
,
or
Anianus
,
or
any
other
of
his
predecessors
?
Because
in
his
time
first
mention
is
made
by
[
q
](A20733-e85110-b)
q
Lib.
5.
c.
9.
Eusebius
,
that
there
were
diuers
Churches
in
that
Citie
,
and
hee
Bishop
of
them
.
This
would
haue
gone
for
a
stout
reason
,
no
doubt
,
had
not
Eusebius
[
r
](A20733-e85160-b)
r
Lib.
2.
cap.
15
himselfe
testified
,
that
Saint
Marke
constituted
the
Churches
in
Alexandria
it selfe
:
which
euer
from
S.
Marks
time
had
but
one
Bishop
at
once
.
How
is
the
third
demonstrated
?
It
may
be
this
began
at
Alexandria
with
Dionysius
[
s
](A20733-e85220-b)
s
Anno
260.
,
the
thirteenth
Bishop
of
that
place
.
Very
well
;
perhaps
,
it
may
be
;
these
are
very
good
proofs
.
But
why
may
it
be
?
It
seemeth
to
be
Ieromes
meaning
,
where
he
saith
,
that
some
priority
in
Bishops
continued
there
from
Marke
to
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
.
Heare
Ieromes
words
[
t
](A20733-e85270-b)
t
Ad
Euagrium
.
:
Euen
at
Alexandria
from
Marke
the
Euangelist
,
vnto
the
Bishops
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
the
Presbyters
alwaies
hauing
chosen
one
from
among
themselues
,
and
placed
him
in
a
higher
degree
,
called
him
Bishop
;
euen
as
an
army
chooseth
a
Generall
.
Which
words
Ierome
wrote
to
magnifie
the
calling
of
Presbyters
,
and
to
prefe●re
them
before
Deacons
;
both
because
they
chose
their
Bishop
,
as
also
because
they
did
elect
him
from
among
themselues
,
vntill
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
.
But
it
is
a
world
to
see
what
is
collected
from
these
words
,
both
by
that
Author
,
and
also
T.
C.
By
that
Author
,
first
,
That
some
priority
in
Bishops
continued
there
from
Marke
to
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
.
As
if
Ierome
had
giuen
any
the
least
signification
of
the
lesse
authority
of
Bishops
before
Heraclas
,
then
after
,
and
had
not
signified
some
difference
onely
in
their
election
.
For
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
who
had
been
Origens
schollers
,
and
succeded
him
one
after
the
other
in
his
office
of
Catechist
,
or
Teacher
in
Alexandria
,
in
respect
whereof
,
they
were
no
more
Presbyters
,
then
Origen
[
u
](A20733-e85410-b)
u
Vide
supr.
l.
1.
c.
11.
§.
4.
himselfe
had
been
;
notwithstanding
for
their
excellent
learning
,
the
Presbyters
(
who
till
then
had
euer
chosen
one
out
of
their
owne
number
to
be
Bishop
)
made
choice
of
these
two
,
one
after
the
other
,
although
at
the
time
of
their
election
,
they
were
not
Presbyters
.
But
what
followeth
?
At
Heraclas
(
it
is
probable
)
was
a
period
of
one
sort
,
viz.
of
titular
diocesan
Bishops
:
and
with
Dionysius
began
another
,
viz.
of
ruling
diocesan
BB.
Priority
of
order
in
one
Bishop
[
x
](A20733-e85470-b)
x
Had
the
Bishop
priority
of
order
only
in
respect
of
his
parishioners
?
ouer
a
parish
,
seemeth
to
haue
continued
exclusiuely
,
from
Marke
to
Iulian●●s
(
for
he
was
ashamed
to
say
,
that
Saint
Marke
,
who
,
as
the
same
Ierome
testifieth
,
was
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
was
but
a
parish
Bishop
:
)
ouer
a
diocesse
,
from
Iulian●●
to
Heraclas
〈◊〉
,
and
the
maiority
of
ruling
in
the
diocesse
,
to
haue
〈◊〉
with
Dionysius
.
O
acumen
!
But
the
proofe
is
admirable
,
and
the
conclusion
passeth
all
.
The
proofe
is
this
:
Nothing
l●●teth
vs
,
but
that
thus
we
may
probably
thinke
.
More
is
the
pitie
.
For
true
learning
and
a
sound
iudgement
,
would
haue
let
you
from
entertaining
,
and
much
more
from
broching
such
vnlearned
and
vngrounded
fancies
.
Yea
but
,
by
this
meanes
,
Eusebius
and
Ieromes
relation
shall
well
agree
.
I
answere
,
though
these
fancies
had
neuer
beene
heard
of
,
there
had
not
beene
so
much
as
any
shew
of
disagreement
betwixt
them
.
The
conclusion
:
Howsoeuer
it
is
,
this
is
certaine
,
that
neither
the
one
,
nor
the
other
,
was
knowne
before
these
times
.
As
if
he
had
said
;
Perhaps
Iulianus
was
the
first
titular
Bishop
.
It
may
be
the
ruling
diocesan
Bishoppes
beganne
at
Alexandria
with
Dionysius
.
At
Heraclas
,
it
is
probable
,
was
a
period
of
one
sort
,
&c.
Nothing
letteth
vs
but
that
thus
wee
may
probably
thinke
.
But
how
soeuer
vncertaine
our
premisses
be
,
wee
are
resolued
vpon
a
certaine
conclusion
,
it
is
certaine
,
&c.
Is
it
not
strange
that
so
certaine
a
conclusion
should
be
inferred
vpon
so
vncertaine
premises
?
especialle
seeing
it
is
most
certaine
that
before
Dionysius
his
time
,
there
were
not
onely
diocesan
,
but
also
Metropolitan
BB.
But
will
you
also
heare
what
T.
C.
gathereth
out
of
these
words
of
Ierome
?
T.
C.
his
collection
out
of
Ierom●
words
.
Godly
〈◊〉
m●slik●d
this
order
of
giuing
the
name
Bishoppe
to
one
in
a
Church
,
and
by
all
likelihood
broke
it
:
which
Ieromes
words
[
y
](A20733-e85670-b)
y
Ad
Euagr.
do
apparently
import
.
This
custome
was
in
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
from
Saint
Marke
,
vntill
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
:
for
vnlesse
there
were
some
change
then
,
why
should
hee
not
rather
haue
said
,
From
Saint
Marke
to
his
time
?
First
,
to
his
assertion
,
I
say
it
is
vntrue
,
that
godly
men
misliked
the
giuing
of
the
name
Bishoppe
to
one
in
Church
,
neither
was
there
any
reason
why
they
should
mislike
it
.
For
first
,
as
the
name
of
Angels
,
being
common
to
all
Ministers
,
is
by
the
holy
Ghost
appropriated
to
Bishops
,
in
such
sort
,
as
though
euery
Minister
be
an
Angell
,
yet
onely
one
is
the
Angell
of
the
Church
:
so
by
the
same
reason
,
Episcopi
being
in
the
scriptures
a
title
common
to
al
Ministers
,
is
so
appropriated
to
one
in
euery
Church
,
that
whereas
all
Ministers
are
Bishops
in
a
generall
sense
,
one
onely
is
the
Bishop
of
that
Church
:
neither
was
it
arrogancy
,
but
modesty
rather
in
Bishops
,
who
assumed
this
name
.
For
whereas
in
the
Scriptures
they
are
called
sometimes
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
sometimes
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Rulers
,
sometime
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
sometimes
episcopi
,
they
contented
themselues
with
the
title
of
least
honour
,
and
left
the
name
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
importing
the
honour
of
the
Ministery
in
generall
,
to
other
Ministers
.
Neither
is
there
any
more
reason
(
as
D
Raynolds
[
a
](A20733-e85810-b)
a
Conf.
p.
462.
also
saith
)
why
the
appropriating
of
the
name
Bishop
to
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
should
be
misliked
,
then
of
giuing
the
name
Minister
to
Presbyters
,
which
is
common
to
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
Besides
,
it
is
most
certaine
,
that
in
the
writings
of
Ignatius
,
and
others
,
who
liued
in
,
or
neere
the
Apostles
times
,
the
name
episcopus
was
appropriated
to
the
Angel
of
ech
Church
.
Ierome
plainly
testifieth
,
that
from
S.
Mark●
time
,
who
was
the
first
Bishop
,
whom
three
other
succeeded
in
the
Apostles
times
;
one
,
who
was
set
in
a
superior
degree
,
was
called
Bishop
.
But
that
the
custome
of
giuing
this
name
to
one
,
in
the
Church
,
(
which
from
S.
Marks
time
had
continued
)
should
begin
to
be
misliked
in
the
time
of
Heraclus
and
Dionysius
,
is
against
reason
;
vnlesse
it
may
be
thought
,
that
the
estimation
of
Bishops
then
decreased
;
which
ill
agreeth
with
H
I.
conceit
.
What
antient
Writer
mentioning
Dionysius
,
doth
not
cal
him
Bishop
of
Alexandria
?
Eusebius
so
termeth
him
.
Athanasius
,
Chron.
●n.
251.
&
hist.
l.
6.35
.
&c.
Athanas.
de
sentent
.
Dionysij
Episcopi
Alexandrini
.
who
was
one
of
his
successors
,
doth
not
only
cal
him
Bishop
oftentimes
,
but
also
acknowledgeth
him
to
haue
bin
a
Metropolitan
B.
or
rather
Patriarch
.
For
when
as
the
Bishops
of
Pentapolis
began
to
fauor
the
heresie
of
Sab●llicus
,
Dionysius
to
whose
charge
those
Churches
did
appertaine
,
sought
to
reform
them
,
You
haue
heard
T.
C.
assertion
.
His
reason
is
this
,
some
change
there
was
therefore
in
the
name
Bishop
.
How
weake
a
reason
this
is
I
shal
not
need
to
note
,
seeing
I
haue
shewed
wherein
the
change
was
,
there
being
lesse
likelihood
of
alceration
in
this
kind
,
then
in
any
other
.
For
could
any
man
at
that
time
mislike
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
should
be
called
a
Bishop
,
seeing
at
that
time
he
was
without
the
mislike
of
any
a
Metropolitan
Bishop
,
yea
a
Patriarch
?
But
to
returne
to
H.
I.
who
saith
his
Diocesan
L.
Bishop
ruling
alone
,
who
was
not
established
in
Ambrose
,
Ierome
,
and
Augustines
time
,
tooke
place
soone
after
.
And
how
is
this
proued
?
He
saith
,
hee
doubts
not
of
it
:
though
he
be
not
able
to
shew
,
neither
where
,
nor
when
,
nor
by
whom
,
nor
how
the
Bishops
authority
was
increased
after
Augustines
times
.
What
if
in
Augustines
time
the
authority
and
preheminence
of
Bishops
was
abated
and
restrained
,
namely
in
the
fourth
Councell
of
Carthage
,
more
then
euer
before
?
For
whereas
the
antient
Canons
referre
the
power
both
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
to
the
Bishop
,
without
mentioning
the
assistance
of
the
Presbytery
:
And
whereas
Bishoppes
before
,
such
as
were
peaceable
and
well
disposed
,
did
voluntarily
vse
the
aduice
and
assistance
of
their
clergy
:
by
that
Councell
the
assistance
of
the
clergy
,
both
in
ordination
and
iurisdiction
in
the
Churches
of
Africk
,
became
necessary
.
Neither
doe
I
know
any
reason
,
why
the
authority
of
diocesan
Bishops
after
Augustines
time
should
bee
thought
to
haue
increased
.
For
as
by
the
lawfull
authority
of
Christian
Kings
&
Princes
,
to
whom
they
were
subordinate
,
in
regard
of
the
common
good
of
the
kingdom
,
whereof
they
were
members
:
so
much
more
by
the
vsurped
supremacy
of
the
B.
of
Rome
,
after
the
yeer
607.
the
authority
of
bishops
was
lessened
&
impaired
.
We
are
to
come
to
his
fift
step
,
Conc.
Nic.
can.
6.
when
Patriarches
begun
.
In
the
Councel
of
Nice
(
held
about
the
yeere
three
hundred
twentie
foure
)
it
is
acknowledged
to
haue
been
an
antient
custome
,
which
there
was
ratified
,
that
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
should
haue
authority
of
Egypt
,
Libya
,
and
Pentapolis
:
and
the
like
custome
for
the
Bishop
of
Rome
in
the
West
,
and
of
Antioch
in
the
East
is
mentioned
;
and
the
antient
priuiledges
to
each
Church
,
espcially
to
each
Metropolis
reserued
.
To
say
nothing
of
Rome
,
whereof
the
Papists
say
too
much
:
it
is
plaine
by
that
testimony
of
the
Nicene
Councell
,
of
Epiphanius
before
alleaged
,
of
Athanasius
euen
now
cited
,
that
the
Bishops
of
Alexandria
had
of
old
,
long
before
their
time
,
patriarchall
authority
.
For
that
of
Antioch
,
the
testimony
of
Ignatius
added
to
the
authority
of
the
Nicene
Councell
,
Ignat.
Epist.
ad
Rom.
is
sufficient
,
calling
himselfe
the
Bishop
of
Syria
;
whereby
we
cannot
conceiue
him
to
haue
been
lesse
then
an
Archbishop
.
Now
if
I
should
aske
H.I.
or
this
Refuter
,
when
Metropolitanes
first
began
;
they
would
not
be
able
truly
to
assigne
their
originall
after
the
Apostles
times
.
And
therefore
cunningly
were
they
omitted
by
H.
I.
though
I
cannot
accuse
him
of
any
great
skill
in
making
a
doubt
,
whether
Caesarea
in
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
be
reckoned
as
one
of
the
foure
seats
of
the
Patriarches
.
For
expresse
mention
is
made
of
Aeli●
,
which
was
the
new
name
giuen
by
Adrian
to
Ierusalem
;
Conc.
Nic.
c.
7.
to
which
,
according
to
antient
custom
,
the
next
place
of
honor
after
Antioch
was
granted
;
the
proper
dignity
notwithstanding
to
the
Metropolis
(
which
indeed
was
Caesarea
)
being
reserued
.
But
if
Metropolitanes
had
not
their
beginning
after
the
Apostles
times
,
as
no
man
is
able
to
shew
they
had
,
then
can
it
not
be
doubted
,
but
that
diocesan
Bishops
,
much
more
were
in
the
Apostles
times
:
for
euery
Metropolitan
was
originally
B.
of
his
peculiar
diocesse
,
being
not
actually
a
Metropolitan
,
vntill
diuers
Churches
in
the
same
prouince
,
being
constituted
,
there
was
a
consociation
among
themselues
,
and
subordination
of
them
to
him
,
as
their
primate
.
There
was
therefore
no
such
difference
betweene
the
first
two
ages
of
the
Churches
,
and
those
which
followed
,
as
that
either
H.
I.
or
the
Refuter
should
restraine
the
times
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
either
to
the
end
of
the
second
century
,
or
of
the
first
,
with
hope
to
escape
that
way
.
Wherefore
what
proofes
I
bring
from
the
third
or
fourth
,
yea
or
fifth
century
,
for
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
they
are
to
be
esteemed
such
as
doe
directly
and
sufficiently
proue
the
question
,
vnlesse
they
shall
be
able
to
shew
,
not
onely
that
no
such
thing
was
in
vse
,
but
also
that
it
was
not
intended
in
the
Apostles
time
,
and
the
age
following
:
for
what
was
receiued
and
practised
by
generall
consent
in
all
Christendome
,
so
soone
as
God
gaue
peace
vnto
his
Church
,
was
vndoubtedly
desired
and
intended
from
the
beginning
.
The
second
corner
of
his
first
starting
hole
,
that
the
question
is
of
the
seuen
Angels
.
And
what
,
of
no
other
?
Is
it
not
lawfull
to
ascend
from
the
hypothesis
,
to
the
thesis
?
especially
when
it
is
confessed
by
the
Refuter
,
that
the
primitiue
Churches
were
all
of
the
like
constitution
?
And
therefore
what
may
be
said
either
of
the
seuen
Angels
,
in
respect
of
the
substance
of
their
calling
,
may
be
concluded
of
other
Bishops
:
and
what
may
be
said
of
the
office
of
other
Bishoppes
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
may
be
verified
of
these
Angels
.
The
third
,
that
I
must
proue
these
Angels
to
haue
had
sole
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
:
which
also
is
repeated
in
his
second
euasion
.
But
where
doe
I
say
in
all
the
sermon
,
that
the
Bishops
had
the
sole
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
?
Where
doe
I
deny
either
that
the
BB.
did
,
or
might
vse
the
assistance
of
their
Presbyters
,
for
either
of
both
,
or
that
in
the
defect
of
Bishops
,
both
the
one
and
the
other
might
be
performed
by
Presbyters
?
In
a
word
,
where
doe
I
deny
all
power
either
of
ordination
or
iurisdiction
to
Presbyters
?
But
let
the
Reader
vnderstand
,
that
there
are
two
maine
calumniations
,
whereby
this
Resuter
and
his
consorts
doe
vse
to
disgrace
my
Sermon
with
their
followers
.
The
one
,
that
I
hold
the
tenure
of
our
episcopal
function
so
to
be
iure
diuino
,
as
though
no
other
manner
of
gouernment
were
any
way
,
or
any
where
lawfull
.
The
other
,
that
J
ascribe
so
the
sole
power
of
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
to
BB.
as
though
the
Presbyters
had
no
iurisdiction
,
or
as
though
those
Churches
had
no
lawful
Ministers
,
which
haue
not
such
BB.
to
ordaine
them
.
His
other
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
starting
hole
,
is
that
which
hee
hath
already
foure
times
runne
into
;
CHAP.
II.
That
Bishops
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
.
(
Serm.
sect.
2.
pag.
29.
That
Bishoppes
were
superiour
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
,
all
antiquitie
with
one
consent
,
if
you
except
Aërius
,
&c.
to
the
end
of
pag.
31.
)
MY
reason
hee
frameth
thus
:
Ad
pag.
85.
If
all
antiquitie
(
except
Aërius
,
who
for
dissenting
in
this
point
,
was
counted
an
heretike
by
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
)
with
one
consent
doe
acknowledge
,
that
Bishops
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
:
then
Bishops
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
.
But
the
former
is
true
;
therefore
the
latter
.
First
hee
cauilleth
with
the
consequence
,
(
which
no
man
bearing
the
face
of
a
Diuine
,
I
had
almost
said
of
a
Christian
,
would
doe
)
calling
it
,
sore
,
poore
,
feeble
,
and
insufficient
,
vnlesse
the
consent
of
the
Apostles
and
Euangelists
be
added
.
Where
let
the
Reader
consider
,
what
is
the
question
which
is
here
concluded
,
viz.
That
the
Bishops
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
superiour
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
.
This
question
plainly
is
de
facto
,
of
what
was
:
for
de
iure
,
that
is
,
of
the
quality
&
lawfulnes
,
I
intreat
in
the
second
assertion
.
Now
for
a
man
to
deny
credit
to
all
antiquitie
in
a
matter
of
fact
not
gainsaid
by
scripture
,
it
is
a
plain
euidence
that
he
is
addicted
to
nouelty
and
singularity
,
rather
then
the
truth
.
Doth
all
antiquity
testifie
with
one
consent
,
that
the
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
degree
;
and
hath
any
of
vs
the
forehead
to
deny
it
?
Neither
is
the
consent
of
the
Apostles
wanting
,
as
●
proue
in
the
sermon
both
in
the
particulars
of
the
superiority
in
respect
of
the
fact
,
as
also
in
respect
of
the
right
,
in
the
demonstration
of
the
second
assertion
.
Where
I
doe
with
such
euidence
demonstrate
,
that
the
Bishops
,
described
in
the
first
assertion
,
are
of
Apostolicall
institution
;
as
I
am
well
assured
that
this
Refuter
,
with
all
his
partakers
,
will
neuer
be
able
soundly
and
substantially
to
confute
.
For
there
is
nothing
written
with
such
euidence
of
truth
,
but
that
captious
persons
may
easily
cauill
with
it
.
And
although
it
had
been
sufficient
for
the
demonstration
of
the
first
assertion
,
to
haue
produced
such
euidence
as
doth
testifie
onely
de
facto
;
yet
many
of
the
allegations
which
I
bring
,
doe
also
giue
testimony
to
the
right
.
Thus
much
of
the
authoritie
of
antiquitie
,
whereon
the
consequence
is
grounded
.
2.
The
first
argument
,
prouing
that
BB.
were
superior
in
degree
,
because
Aërius
was
counted
an
hertike
for
denying
it
.
Epiph.
haer
.
75.
Aug.
haer.
53.
Now
to
the
thing
testified
,
which
is
the
assumption
:
which
I
proue
by
fiue
arguments
.
The
first
:
If
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
doe
reckon
Aërius
among
the
heretikes
,
condemned
by
the
antient
Catholike
Church
,
for
denying
the
superiority
of
Bishops
:
then
the
antient
Church
doth
giue
testimony
to
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
not
onely
de
facto
,
but
also
de
iure
.
But
the
first
is
true
;
therefore
the
second
.
Against
the
argument
it selfe
he
hath
nothing
to
say
:
but
where
I
said
all
antiquity
,
besides
Aërius
,
did
acknowledge
the
superiority
of
Bishops
:
against
this
he
obiecteth
,
that
either
Ierome
is
against
Bishops
as
well
as
Aërius
,
or
Aërius
is
brought
in
by
me
to
no
purpose
.
For
de
facto
Aërius
denied
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
no
more
then
Ierome
did
.
And
de
iure
Ierome
denies
it
as
well
as
he
.
For
that
which
he
addeth
of
diuers
others
consenting
in
iudgement
,
is
a
vaine
flourish
:
let
him
name
but
one
other
in
the
first
six
hundred
yeeres
(
I
thinke
I
might
say
1000.
)
and
I
wil
yeeld
the
cause
.
And
those
latter
Writers
which
consent
with
him
,
vse
his
words
,
&
build
vpon
his
authority
:
so
that
the
whole
weight
of
this
cause
lieth
on
Ieroms
shoulders
,
whom
if
I
can
disburden
thereof
,
there
can
nothing
at
all
be
produced
out
of
antiquitie
against
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
.
First
,
then
I
say
,
that
they
abuse
Ierome
,
who
match
him
with
Aërius
:
for
besides
that
Aërius
was
a
damned
hereticke
,
being
a
most
perfect
Arian
(
as
Epiphanius
saith
,
who
liued
at
the
same
time
)
liuing
in
a
Church
of
Arians
,
Epiph.
in
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
haer
.
75.
Aug.
haer
.
53.
Epiph.
standing
in
election
for
the
Bishopricke
against
Eustathius
,
who
also
was
an
Arrian
;
out
of
a
discontented
humor
(
the
common
sourse
of
Schisme
and
heresie
)
broached
this
heresie
(
as
Epiphanius
&
Augustine
censure
it
)
Presbyterum
ab
Episcope
nulla
differentia
debere
discerni
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
denying
the
Superiority
of
Bishops
,
both
de
Iure
,
as
Augustine
reporteth
his
opinion
;
and
de
facto
,
as
Epiphanius
;
alledging
that
there
is
no
difference
between
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
.
For
there
is
one
order
(
saith
he
)
of
both
,
one
honor
,
and
one
dignitie
.
The
Bishop
imposeth
hands
,
so
doth
the
Presbyter
:
the
B.
giueth
the
lauer
(
of
Baptisme
)
so
doth
the
Presbyter
:
the
B.
doth
administer
Gods
worship
,
so
doth
the
Presbyter
:
the
B.
sitteth
on
the
throne
,
so
also
doth
the
Presbyter
.
But
Ierome
was
not
so
mad
(
to
vse
the
refuters
words
of
Aërius
,
who
indeed
,
as
Epiphanius
saith
,
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
franticke
fellow
)
as
to
deny
the
Superioritie
of
BB.
de
facto
,
which
oftentimes
he
doth
auouch
;
neither
doth
he
deny
it
de
Iure
.
And
therfore
the
refuter
here
hath
deliuered
two
vntruthes
:
the
one
,
that
(
he
saith
)
Aërius
did
not
deny
the
Superioritie
of
BB.
de
facto
:
which
most
manifestly
he
did
,
and
did
it
no
doubt
with
this
mind
,
that
though
he
missed
of
the
Bishopricke
,
which
ambitiously
he
had
desired
;
yet
he
would
be
thought
as
good
a
man
as
a
Bishop
.
The
other
,
that
he
saith
,
Ierome
denied
the
Superiority
of
BB.
de
Iure
.
For
it
is
most
euident
by
many
testimonies
alledged
in
the
Sermon
,
that
Ierome
held
the
Superiority
of
Bishops
to
be
lawfull
and
necessary
.
For
though
somewheres
he
saith
that
Bishops
are
greater
then
Presbyters
rather
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
,
then
by
the
truth
of
Diuine
disposition
;
yet
he
acknowledgeth
that
custome
to
be
[
a
](A20733-e87180-b)
a
Ad
Euagr.
an
Apostolicall
tradition
;
and
therefore
either
he
may
be
vnderstood
as
holding
the
superioritie
of
BB.
to
be
not
Diuini
,
but
Apostolici
iuris
:
or
he
may
be
interpreted
as
speaking
of
the
names
,
prouing
by
diuers
testimonies
of
the
Scripture
,
that
Presbyters
are
called
Bishops
.
But
heereof
wee
may
not
conclude
,
that
therefore
Presbyters
and
Bishops
are
all
one
;
for
not
onely
Bishops
,
but
also
Apostles
[
b
](A20733-e87220-b)
b
1.
Pet
5.1
.
2.
Iohn
1.
and
3.
Iohn
1.
,
are
called
Presbyters
,
and
the
Apostleship
[
c
](A20733-e87270-b)
c
Act.
1.20
.
is
called
Bishopricke
.
For
howsoeuer
all
Presbyters
are
in
the
Scriptures
called
Angels
and
Bishops
;
yet
that
one
among
many
,
who
had
singular
preheminence
aboue
the
rest
,
is
by
the
warrant
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
called
the
Angell
of
the
Church
;
and
by
the
same
warrant
,
may
be
called
the
Bishop
.
Now
whereas
Aërius
for
denying
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
was
by
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
iudged
and
heretike
,
hereby
it
appeareth
that
this
alleagation
not
onely
proueth
the
superiority
de
facto
,
but
de
iure
:
for
seeing
there
is
no
heresie
which
is
not
repugnant
to
Gods
word
,
it
is
euident
that
they
who
iudged
this
opinion
of
Aerius
to
be
an
heresie
,
did
also
iudge
it
contrarie
to
Gods
word
.
Neither
did
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
alone
condemne
Aërius
for
an
heretike
;
but
as
Epiphanius
[
d
](A20733-e87450-b)
d
Heres.
75.
reporteth
,
all
Churches
both
in
City
and
Countrey
did
so
detest
him
and
his
followers
,
that
being
abandoned
of
all
,
they
were
forced
to
liue
in
the
open
fields
,
and
in
wods
.
[
e
](A20733-e87560-b)
e
Epist.
ad
.
●
.
K.
a
man
.
For
be
it
,
that
Epiphanius
did
not
sufficiently
answere
some
one
of
Aërius
his
allegations
:
is
that
sufficient
to
excuse
Aërius
from
being
an
heretike
;
seeing
that
testimony
[
f
](A20733-e87610-b)
f
Phil.
1.1
.
may
be
sufficiently
answered
,
as
J
haue
shewed
;
and
seeing
euery
testimony
alleaged
by
each
heretike
,
hath
not
alwaies
beene
sufficiently
answered
by
euery
one
that
hath
written
against
them
?
The
Allegation
which
Aërius
bringeth
out
of
Phil.
1.1
.
doth
onely
proue
,
that
the
Presbyters
were
called
Bishops
at
what
time
,
he
which
was
the
Bishop
of
Philippi
,
namely
Epaphroditus
[
g
](A20733-e87670-b)
g
Phil.
2.25
.
Vide
Theodor.
〈◊〉
Phil.
2.25
.
,
was
called
their
Apostle
.
And
it
is
confessed
by
many
[
h
](A20733-e87700-b)
h
Chrysost.
Hieronym
.
Ambros.
Theodor.
Oecum
.
&c.
of
the
Fathers
,
that
howsoeuer
there
were
many
in
Philippi
,
which
in
a
generall
signification
were
called
Bishops
:
yet
there
was
but
one
,
nay
,
that
there
could
be
but
one
,
which
properly
was
called
the
Bishop
of
Philippi
.
And
as
touching
Augustine
;
I
maruell
,
that
learned
men
could
derogate
so
much
from
him
,
as
that
he
,
at
that
time
especially
,
would
write
vpon
the
authoritie
of
others
,
what
himselfe
vnderstood
not
:
For
Augustine
was
no
youngling
or
nouice
at
that
time
;
but
hee
wrote
that
booke
in
his
elder
age
,
euen
after
hee
had
written
[
i
](A20733-e87770-b)
i
In
Epist
ad
Qu●dvul●de
ū
.
his
bookes
of
Retractations
,
at
what
time
hee
had
written
230.
bookes
,
besides
his
Epistles
and
Homilies
.
Neither
doth
Augustine
write
any
thing
in
his
preface
of
that
booke
,
whereby
it
might
bee
gathered
,
that
hee
was
in
doubt
,
whether
any
of
those
particulars
which
he
noteth
,
were
to
be
judged
heresies
;
onely
he
saith
,
that
what
maketh
an
Heretike
,
can
in
his
judgement
hardly
,
if
at
all
,
be
set
downe
in
an
accurate
definition
.
Notwithstanding
,
he
distributeth
his
intended
Trea●ise
into
two
parts
:
The
first
,
of
the
heresies
which
after
Christs
ascension
had
been
contrarie
to
his
doctrine
,
and
which
he
could
come
to
the
knowledge
of
:
among
which
,
the
heresies
of
Aërius
haue
the
53.
place
:
in
the
latter
,
hee
promiseth
to
dispute
what
maketh
an
Heretike
.
But
though
he
came
not
to
that
,
or
if
he
did
,
what
he
wrote
of
that
point
is
not
come
to
our
hands
;
yet
in
the
conclusion
of
his
Treatise
,
which
is
extant
,
he
saith
thus
[
k
](A20733-e87810-b)
k
August
de
haeres
in
fine
.
;
What
the
Catholike
Church
holdeth
against
these
(
meaning
all
the
88.
heresies
which
before
he
had
recited
)
it
is
but
a
superfluous
question
:
seeing
it
is
sufficient
in
this
behalfe
to
know
,
Eam
contra
ist●
sentire
,
nec
aliquid
horum
in
fidem
quenquam
d●bere
recipere
,
that
the
iudgement
of
the
Church
is
contrary
to
these
,
and
that
no
man
ought
to
receiue
any
of
these
into
his
beleefe
.
And
again
;
Omnis
itaque
Christianus
Catholicus
ist●
non
debet
credere
,
&c.
wherefore
it
is
the
duty
of
euery
Catholicke
Christian
to
beleeue
none
of
these
.
But
it
will
be
said
;
doe
you
then
hold
euery
one
to
be
an
heretique
,
who
is
of
Aërius
iudgement
in
this
point
?
Whereunto
I
answeare
:
first
,
that
although
I
hold
them
to
be
in
an
error
,
yet
I
doe
not
judge
them
to
be
heretiques
,
who
do
not
with
pertinacy
defend
their
error
.
And
secondly
,
I
make
great
difference
betweene
errors
in
the
articles
of
faith
,
and
fundamentall
points
of
Religion
(
such
as
was
the
error
of
Aërius
as
he
was
an
Arrian
,
and
such
as
is
the
error
of
those
who
deny
our
iustification
by
Christs
righteousnes
)
and
in
matters
of
Discipline
:
for
these
though
they
be
dangerous
,
yet
they
are
not
damnable
errors
;
and
it
is
no
great
disparagement
to
men
,
otherwise
learned
and
orthodoxall
,
to
haue
been
ouerseene
in
matters
of
Church
gouernment
;
so
that
they
doe
not
for
the
same
leaue
the
Church
and
make
separation
:
for
such
also
be
counted
heretikes
by
the
Councels
,
1.
Constant.
ca.
6.
As
for
the
refuter
;
it
is
at
his
choice
whether
he
will
be
accounted
an
heretike
,
or
not
.
In
my
iudgement
he
were
best
to
say
,
Errare
possum
,
I
may
erre
(
as
in
this
controuersie
hitherto
to
hath
done
)
sed
h●reticus
esse
nolo
,
but
I
will
●e
no
heretike
,
by
obstinate
defending
of
that
,
wherein
his
conscience
is
conuicted
.
Chrysostome
,
Augustine
,
and
Ambrose
obiected
as
fauouring
the
opinion
of
Aërius
:
but
vnworthily
.
Chrysostome
[
l
](A20733-e87990-b)
l
In
1.
Tim
3.
hom.
9.
&
10.
is
alleadged
,
as
if
he
should
say
,
There
is
in
a
manner
no
difference
betweene
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
.
Indeed
Chrysostome
vnderstanding
by
Episcapus
,
1.
Tim.
3.
him
that
is
properly
called
a
Bishop
,
asketh
why
Paul
speaking
of
Bishops
,
and
Deacons
,
maketh
no
mention
there
of
Presbyters
.
Whereunto
he
maketh
answeare
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
because
there
is
no
great
difference
:
for
they
also
haue
receiued
doctrine
and
gouernment
[
m
](A20733-e88110-b)
m
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
of
the
Church
;
and
those
things
which
Paul
said
concerning
Bishops
,
agree
to
them
.
But
doth
it
hence
follow
,
that
in
Chrysostomes
judgement
,
there
was
no
difference
betwixt
a
Bishop
,
and
a
Presbyter
?
doth
not
Chrysostome
in
the
next
words
acknowledge
,
that
the
Bishops
are
superiour
to
Presbyters
in
respect
of
ordination
?
And
as
touching
singularitie
of
preheminence
;
doth
not
he
teach
,
that
in
one
[
n
](A20733-e88160-b)
n
In
Phil.
1.
Citie
,
or
Church
,
(
where
are
many
Pre●byters
)
there
ought
to
be
one
Bishop
?
and
so
he
●old
Sisi●●ius
the
Nouatian
[
o
](A20733-e88190-b)
o
Socrat.
l.
6.
c.
22.
Bishop
at
Constantinople
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
And
though
he
ascribe
gouernment
of
the
Church
to
the
Presbyters
vnder
the
Bishop
;
doth
he
not
[
p
](A20733-e88240-b)
p
Homil.
20.
ad
pop.
Antioch
.
in
initio
.
acknowledge
the
Bishop
to
be
the
gouernor
of
the
Presbyters
?
and
when
he
was
Bishop
himselfe
did
he
not
exercise
[
q
](A20733-e88270-b)
q
Theod.
l.
5.
ca.
28.
great
authority
ouer
them
?
But
what
saith
Augustine
?
Quid
est
Episcopus
,
nisi
primus
Presbyter
?
what
is
a
Bishop
but
the
first
Presbyter
?
doth
he
not
expound
himselfe
?
primus
Presbyter
,
[
r
](A20733-e88330-b)
r
Aug.
quast.
noui
&
vet.
test
.
101.
t.
4.
h.
e.
〈◊〉
Sacerdos
,
the
first
Presbyter
,
that
is
,
the
high
Priest
?
such
a
one
therefore
in
Augustines
judgement
,
is
the
Bishop
to
Presbyters
,
as
the
high
priest
was
to
the
other
priests
:
for
in
the
same
place
also
he
compareth
the
Deacons
to
the
Leuits
,
and
the
Presbyters
to
the
Priests
.
Yea
,
but
Ambrose
saith
,
Of
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
,
there
is
one
order
,
for
either
of
〈◊〉
a
Priest
;
but
the
Bishop
is
the
first
.
The
words
are
not
in
his
booke
de
dignitate
Sacerdotali
,
as
it
is
quoted
;
for
there
I
find
the
contrarie
:
for
,
Ambrose
saith
[
s
](A20733-e88430-b)
s
Ambr.
de
dignit
.
Sacerd.
cap.
3.
,
There
is
one
thing
which
God
requireth
of
a
Bishop
,
another
of
a
Presbyter
,
another
of
a
Deacon
.
And
againe
,
he
signifieth
[
t
](A20733-e88460-b)
t
Cap.
5.
,
that
as
Bishops
do
ordaine
Presbyters
,
and
consecrate
Deacons
;
so
the
Archbishop
ordaineth
the
Bishop
.
But
they
are
found
in
his
commentarie
on
the
first
to
Timothe
cap.
3.
[
u
](A20733-e88490-b)
u
Ambr.
in
1.
Tim.
3.
Where
asking
the
same
question
with
Chrysostome
,
why
after
the
mention
of
the
Bishop
,
he
presently
addeth
the
ordination
,
or
order
of
Deacon
?
because
,
saith
he
,
of
a
Bishop
,
and
Presbyter
,
there
is
one
ordination
,
or
order
:
for
either
of
them
is
a
Priest
:
but
the
Bishop
is
the
first
:
so
that
euery
Bishop
is
a
Presbyter
,
but
not
euery
Presbyter
a
Bishop
:
for
among
the
Presbyters
,
the
Bishop
is
the
first
.
Now
what
he
meaneth
by
the
first
Presbyter
,
may
else
where
be
shewed
in
his
writings
.
In
the
Bishop
,
saith
he
[
x
](A20733-e88550-b)
x
In
●●ph
4.
,
are
all
orders
,
because
he
is
primus
Sacer●●●s
,
hoc
est
,
Princeps
est
Sacerd●tum
,
the
first
Priest
,
that
is
,
the
Prince
of
the
Priests
:
and
in
the
place
alleaged
,
he
signifieth
[
y
](A20733-e88580-b)
y
In
1.
Tim.
3.
that
Timothe
the
Bishop
,
was
the
first
Presbyter
at
Ephesus
.
And
such
presbyters
I
doe
confesse
our
BB.
to
be
.
So
much
of
Aër●us
:
concerning
whom
,
I
haue
often
maruelled
,
what
some
learned
men
doe
mean
,
to
go
about
to
salue
the
credit
of
such
a
frantique
fellow
,
as
Epiphanius
describeth
him
,
being
also
an
absolute
Arian
,
and
schismaticke
or
Separatist
from
the
true
Churches
.
Now
,
saith
the
refuter
,
let
vs
take
a
view
of
his
great
army
of
antiquity
;
the
whole
number
of
them
is
but
fiue
,
and
4.
of
them
almost
200.
yeares
vnder
age
.
Marke
here
,
either
the
skill
,
or
conscience
of
this
great
Analyser
.
The
first
argument
,
which
indeed
is
vnanswerable
,
that
he
swalloweth
.
And
in
stead
of
analysing
and
answearing
the
rest
,
he
cauils
at
the
number
,
and
at
their
age
.
I
will
therefore
propound
my
arguments
and
withall
answere
his
cauils
.
And
first
,
for
their
number
;
besides
the
fiue
he
speaketh
of
,
I
produced
the
testimonies
of
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
,
deliuering
not
only
their
own
opinions
,
but
the
iudgement
of
the
Church
;
Epiphanius
reporting
,
that
all
Churches
did
reject
and
condemne
Aërius
;
and
Augustine
testifying
,
that
the
Catholike
Church
did
hold
the
contrary
to
Aërius
his
assertion
;
that
as
I
said
,
was
my
first
argument
.
My
second
argument
is
this
:
Antiquity
did
distinguish
the
ministers
of
the
Church
into
3.
degrees
;
viz
,
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
answerable
to
the
high
Priest
,
the
Priests
and
L●●ites
vnder
the
Law
:
Therefore
it
giueth
testimony
to
the
superiority
of
BB.
ouer
other
ministers
in
degree
.
The
antecedent
I
proue
by
the
the
testimony
of
the
Councill
of
Sardica
,
of
Optatus
,
of
Ignatius
,
and
generally
by
the
testimony
of
Fathers
in
Councils
;
in
which
,
as
I
said
,
nothing
is
more
vsuall
then
the
distinction
of
Ministers
into
these
3.
degrees
.
That
clause
,
if
it
had
pleased
the
refuter
to
haue
taken
notice
of
,
it
might
haue
preuented
his
cauill
concerning
either
the
number
,
or
the
age
of
my
witnesses
.
But
he
(
such
is
his
conscience
)
passing
by
it
,
b●aggeth
(
wi●h
what
face
I
know
not
)
that
I
haue
no
antiquitie
,
which
distinguisheth
the
ministrie
into
3.
degrees
.
Here
therefore
3.
things
are
to
be
shewen
,
which
are
so
many
arguments
.
1.
That
antiquity
distinguisheth
the
Clergy
into
3.
degrees
.
2.
That
it
termeth
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
degrees
.
3.
That
they
compare
them
to
the
high
Priest
,
Priests
and
Leuits
.
As
touching
the
first
:
this
distinction
of
Ministers
is
so
frequent
in
the
ancient
Canons
,
that
if
a
man
do
but
open
the
booke
at
all
aduentures
,
he
shall
not
often
light
vpon
such
a
place
,
where
this
distinction
is
not
to
be
found
.
Jn
the
ancient
Canons
,
called
the
Apostles
,
it
is
mentioned
20.
times
at
the
least
in
the
Council
of
Nice
,
3.
or
4.
times
;
in
the
Councill
of
Ancyra
,
and
Antioch
often
,
and
so
in
the
rest
.
Which
of
the
ancient
Fathers
doth
not
acknowledge
this
distinction
of
Ministers
?
Ignatius
,
as
we
shall
heare
,
giueth
plentifull
testimony
to
it
.
Clement
[
a
](A20733-e88900-b)
a
Epist.
1.
in
his
Epistle
to
Iames
translated
by
Ruffi●●●
,
testifieth
this
to
haue
been
the
Doctrine
of
Peter
according
to
the
institution
of
Christ
,
that
Presbyters
should
be
obedient
to
their
Bishops
in
all
things
.
And
again
,
[
b
](A20733-e88960-b)
b
Epist.
3.
that
Presbyters
and
Deacons
and
others
of
the
Clergy
must
take
heed
,
that
they
doe
nothing
without
the
licence
of
the
Bishop
.
Dionysius
[
c
](A20733-e89010-b)
c
Eccl.
Hierarch
.
c.
5.
an
ancient
and
learned
writer
(
if
not
the
Areopagite
)
propoundeth
the
same
distinction
vnder
the
names
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Tertullian
[
d
](A20733-e89070-b)
d
De
fuge
in
persecut.
&
de
Baptismo
.
acknowledgeth
it
.
Orogen
[
e
](A20733-e89100-b)
e
Homil.
7.
in
Ierem
likewise
,
terming
the
Bishop
him
q●●totim
Ecclesia
a●cemobtinet
.
So
doth
Cyprian
,
and
Cornelim
,
and
almost
who
not
?
Yes
,
saith
the
Refuter
,
Anacletus
and
Damas●●●
[
f
](A20733-e89210-b)
f
Epist.
2.
vivisuque
.
,
afform●
there
were
but
two
degrees
,
Bishops
and
Priests
;
and
Ignatius
[
g
](A20733-e89230-b)
g
Ad
Phil.
&
Trall
.
diuideth
the
offices
of
the
Church
into
Bishops
and
Deacons
.
But
hauing
thus
(
as
he
thinketh
)
set
them
and
others
of
the
Fathers
togither
by
the
eares
,
he
will
not
go
about
to
part
them
.
Let
them
(
saith
he
)
agree
about
the
matter
as
they
can
.
Howbeit
,
the
reconciliation
is
easily
made
.
For
Anacletus
(
if
that
were
his
Epistle
)
speaketh
only
of
[
h
](A20733-e89280-b)
h
Epist.
3.
Sacerdotum
(
fratres
)
ordo
bipartitus
est
.
Priests
,
and
of
two
orders
of
them
,
ordained
by
Christ
:
but
Deacons
were
not
called
Sacerdotes
,
as
Bishops
and
Presbyters
were
:
Sacerdotes
being
vsually
distinguished
into
maiores
,
which
be
Bishops
;
and
minores
,
which
be
Presbyters
.
Neither
were
Deacons
ordained
by
Christ
himselfe
,
but
by
the
Apostles
.
And
with
this
distinction
of
Anacletus
those
vnsuspected
[
i
](A20733-e89370-b)
i
Cyprian
.
Ambrose
.
Ierome
.
Augustine
.
fathers
agree
,
who
hold
,
that
these
two
degrees
of
ministers
were
ordained
by
Christ
,
when
he
appointed
twelue
Apostles
(
whose
successours
are
the
Bishops
)
and
the
three
score
and
twelue
Disciples
,
whom
the
Presbyters
succeed
.
Now
,
if
the
Bishops
succeed
the
Apostles
,
and
the
Presbyters
succeed
the
72.
Disciples
,
as
diuers
of
the
ancient
approued
Fathers
do
teach
;
then
it
cannot
be
denied
,
but
that
the
calling
of
Bishops
,
and
their
superioritie
,
as
also
the
inferior
degree
of
Presbyters
,
is
of
Christs
owne
institution
.
The
like
is
to
be
said
of
Damasus
[
k
](A20733-e89400-b)
k
Epist.
,
4.
,
who
acknowledgeth
but
two
Orders
among
the
Disciples
in
Christs
time
,
the
twelue
Apostles
,
and
the
70.
disciples
;
and
by
that
reason
rejecteth
the
Ch●r●piscopi
,
because
they
neither
were
Bishops
,
as
he
proueth
;
nor
Presbyters
,
as
themselues
pretended
.
Among
the
Disciples
of
Christ
,
saith
he
,
we
know
but
two
Orders
,
that
is
,
of
the
twelue
Apostles
,
and
so●mentie
disciples
.
Whence
this
third
order
is
〈◊〉
we
know
not
.
As
for
Ignatius
,
his
testimonie
is
falsified
.
In
his
Epistle
ad
Tralli●●os
[
l
](A20733-e89480-b)
l
Ignat.
ad
Trall
.
,
he
wisheth
them
.
To
〈…〉
without
their
Bishop
,
to
be
subiect
to
their
Presbyters
,
and
to
please
their
Deacons
,
as
being
the
ministers
of
the
mysteries
of
Christ
.
Againe
,
He
that
doth
any
thing
without
the
Bishop
,
and
the
Presbyters
,
and
the
Deacons
,
such
a
one
is
without
:
For
what
is
the
Bishop
;
but
he
that
hath
power
aboue
all
?
&c.
What
the
Presbyterie
,
but
a
sacred
companie
,
counsellors
,
and
coassessors
of
the
Bishop
?
What
the
Deacons
,
but
imitators
of
the
Angegelicall
powers
?
&c.
he
that
disobeyeth
these
,
reiecteth
Christ
,
and
impeacheth
his
ordinance
.
And
in
the
end
:
Farewell
in
the
Lord
Iesus
being
subiect
to
your
Bishop
,
and
likewise
to
the
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
His
other
Epistle
ad
Phil.
is
so
wisely
quoted
,
that
I
know
not
whether
he
mean
the
Philippians
,
or
Philadelphians
.
But
it
is
no
great
matter
,
whether
he
meane
:
for
as
neither
of
both
doth
testify
that
,
for
which
he
quoteth
them
:
so
both
of
them
doth
mention
the
distinction
of
ministers
into
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
In
the
Epistle
to
the
Philippians
[
m
](A20733-e89540-b)
m
Ign.
ad
Philipp
.
he
exhorteth
them
to
be
subiect
to
the
Bishop
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
And
towards
the
end
,
he
saluteth
Vitalius
their
Bishop
,
the
sacred
colledge
of
Presbyters
,
and
his
fellow
ministers
,
the
Deacons
.
The
Epistle
to
the
Philadelphians
[
n
](A20733-e89580-b)
n
Ign.
ad
Philadelph
.
he
directeth
especially
to
them
,
who
were
one
with
the
Bishop
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
In
the
Epistle
it selfe
,
that
al
who
be
Christs
,
are
on
the
Bishops
side
.
And
besides
that
testimony
alledged
in
the
Sermon
,
he
saith
,
attend
to
the
Bishop
,
the
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
To
conclude
,
in
these
3.
Epistles
Ignatius
giueth
testimonie
to
this
distinction
into
3.
degrees
,
noting
their
callings
,
9.
times
,
and
not
once
letteth
any
thing
fal
,
which
may
seeme
to
insinuate
any
such
thing
as
the
refuter
alledgeth
;
and
therefore
with
what
conscience
he
citeth
authors
let
the
reader
iudge
.
Now
that
these
three
orders
were
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
degrees
,
it
should
not
seeme
strange
,
seeing
the
Apostle
vseth
that
word
in
that
sense
1.
Tim.
3.13
.
noting
the
Deaconship
to
be
a
degree
to
the
Presbytery
,
Cyprian
[
o
](A20733-e89720-b)
o
Li.
4.
Epist.
2.
Ad
sacerdotij
sublime
fastigium
cunctis
religionis
gradibus
ascendit
.
saith
of
Cornelius
,
that
he
came
to
the
Bishopricke
not
suddainly
,
but
hauing
been
promoted
through
all
the
Ecclesiasticall
offices
,
he
ascended
to
the
height
of
Priesthood
by
all
the
degrees
of
Religion
.
In
the
Councill
of
Sardica
[
p
](A20733-e89780-b)
p
Sard.
c.
10.
lat
13.
,
it
is
decreed
,
That
if
any
rich
man
o●
Rhetorician
[
q
](A20733-e89810-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Rhetoricae
vacans
.
Balsam
.
,
be
from
the
court
desired
to
be
Bishop
,
he
shall
not
be
ordained
,
vntill
he
haue
performed
the
ministry
of
a
reader
,
Deacon
and
Presbyter
,
that
so
through
euerie
[
r
](A20733-e89850-b)
r
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
degree
of
he
be
thought
worthy
he
may
by
way
of
promotion
ascend
vnto
the
height
[
s
](A20733-e89880-b)
s
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
of
Bishopricke
,
and
the
degree
of
euery
order
shall
haue
a
good
time
,
&c.
and
he
being
thought
worthy
of
the
diu●es
:
Priesthood
,
shal
be
made
partaker
of
the
[
t
](A20733-e89910-b)
t
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
greatest
honor
.
The
same
Councill
[
u
](A20733-e89940-b)
u
Theodor.
l.
5.
c.
8.
in
their
Synodicall
Epistle
report
of
the
Arians
,
that
they
had
not
only
receiued
thos●
who
had
bin
expulsed
for
Arianisme
,
but
also
preferred
them
to
a
greater
degree
,
as
from
Deacons
,
to
be
Presbyters
,
and
from
Presbyters
,
to
be
Bishops
.
The
Councils
of
[
y
](A20733-e90010-b)
y
Conc.
Ephes.
c.
1.2.6
.
Ephesus
and
[
z
](A20733-e90040-b)
z
Chal●
.
c.
2
&
12.
Chalcedon
,
diuers
times
for
a
penaltie
threaten
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
,
with
the
losss
of
their
degree
.
And
most
plainly
the
Council
of
Carthage
[
a
](A20733-e90090-b)
a
Con●
.
Carth.
Gra●
.
c.
3.
Siue
Carthag.
2.
c.
2.
mentioneth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
these
three
degrees
,
〈◊〉
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
And
againe
,
[
b
](A20733-e90150-b)
b
Con●
.
Carth.
Grae.
〈◊〉
.
Carth.
6.
c.
●
.
all
the
degrees
of
Clerkes
from
the
hiest
to
the
lowest
.
The
like
testimonie
to
that
which
Cyprian
gaue
to
Cornelius
,
doth
Nazianzen
[
c
](A20733-e90230-b)
c
In
Encomio
Athanas●●
.
giue
both
to
Athanasius
,
that
he
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hauing
gaue
through
all
the
degrees
in
order
,
and
hauing
been
in
euery
of
them
,
as
Theodoret
[
d
](A20733-e90290-b)
d
L.
1.
c.
26.
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
e
](A20733-e90330-b)
e
Admirable
.
,
was
chosen
Bishop
;
and
also
to
[
f
](A20733-e90350-b)
f
In
vita
Basil.
Basil
,
that
he
ascended
to
his
Bishoprick
,
by
the
order
and
law
of
the
spirituall
ascent
;
and
Socrates
[
g
](A20733-e90380-b)
g
L.
7.
c.
41.
to
Pr●clus
,
that
he
was
first
a
Reader
,
then
by
A●ticus
preferred
to
the
Deacon-ship
,
afterwards
,
when
he
was
Presbyter
,
he
was
by
the
same
Attic●●
,
made
Bishop
of
Cyzicum
.
Op●a●us
[
h
](A20733-e90450-b)
h
Contr.
Parme●
.
lib.
1.
,
as
I
alleaged
in
the
Sermon
,
assigneth
to
Deacons
,
the
third
ministerie
,
to
Presbyters
,
the
second
,
to
BB
whom
he
calleth
principes
omnui●̄
,
the
first
.
Burchardus
[
i
](A20733-e90500-b)
i
Decret.
l.
●
.
c.
●5
.
citeth
this
saying
of
Augustine
being
a
Bishop
:
You
Presbyters
know
ye
,
that
your
degree
is
the
second
,
and
next
to
ours
:
for
euen
as
Bishops
haue
the
place
of
the
Apostles
in
the
Church
;
euen
so
the
Presbyters
of
the
other
disciples
:
the
former
,
haue
the
degree
of
Aaron
,
the
high
Priest
;
the
latter
,
of
his
sonnes
.
In
which
words
the
third
point
also
is
testified
.
Whereunto
Ierome
[
k
](A20733-e90570-b)
k
Ad
E●agr
.
in
fine
.
Ad
Nepoti
.
Epist.
2.
Quod
Aaron
&
falios
eius
,
hoc
Episcopum
&
Presbyteros
esse
nouimus
.
himself
in
more
places
then
one
giueth
testimony
,
affirming
that
in
the
Church
,
the
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
are
answerable
to
the
high
Priest
,
Priests
,
and
Leuits
.
Now
to
reject
these
testimonies
,
as
being
vnder
age
,
as
though
they
did
historically
relate
only
what
was
in
their
own
times
,
and
not
dogmatically
set
downe
the
orders
,
and
degrees
of
the
ministerie
,
perpetually
obserued
in
the
Church
of
Christ
;
is
a
verie
vnlearned
shift
.
If
any
one
of
these
,
as
namely
Ierome
,
shal
but
seeme
to
fauor
any
of
their
assertions
,
though
in
their
sense
he
contradict
himself
,
and
gainsay
all
others
,
both
Councils
,
&
fathers
;
against
such
a
testimonie
no
exception
,
either
of
minoritie
of
age
,
or
singularitie
of
opinion
will
be
admitted
;
but
that
authoritie
must
ouerweigh
all
,
that
himself
,
and
others
say
to
the
contrarie
.
It
is
a
world
to
see
how
Ierome
in
this
case
is
magnified
,
and
preferred
before
all
antiquitie
:
Who
can
tell
better
then
Ierome
?
who
better
acquainted
with
the
historie
of
the
Church
then
Ierome
?
&c.
But
when
most
pregnant
&
plain
testimonies
are
produced
out
of
Ierome
,
prouing
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
agreeable
with
al
antiquity
,
then
Ierome
is
a
youngling
,
and
vnder
age
.
But
where
I
said
in
the
judgement
of
antiquitie
,
This
gay
reason
Cardinall
Turr●cremata
,
&
Bellarmine
out
of
him
,
bring
to
proue
,
that
there
must
be
one
Pope
ouer
the
whole
church
,
as
there
was
one
high
Priest
among
the
Iewes
:
and
it
proueth
that
as
substantially
,
as
it
doth
this
.
The
which
is
wickedly
spoken
,
and
desperately
,
as
many
things
of
late
haue
been
vttered
by
that
faction
;
as
that
the
Papists
arguments
for
the
Popes
Supremacie
,
were
as
good
as
ours
,
for
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
.
But
of
these
blasphemous
speeches
,
whereby
they
match
the
ordinance
of
Christ
by
his
Apostles
,
with
the
height
of
Antichrists
pride
;
I
hope
this
Refuter
,
&
his
consorts
will
one
day
haue
the
grace
to
repent
.
I
confesse
it
is
ordinary
with
the
Papists
,
to
alledge
out
of
the
Fathers
for
the
Popes
supremacy
,
what
they
testified
for
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
.
But
will
any
be
so
desperate
,
as
to
say
,
the
same
testimonies
abused
and
detorted
by
Papists
,
do
as
substantially
prooue
that
for
which
they
are
alleaged
besides
the
true
meaning
of
the
fathers
;
as
that
,
for
which
they
are
truely
and
faithfully
alleaged
?
Good
reason
therefore
had
Caluin
,
and
the
rest
to
refute
that
argument
,
because
,
as
Caluin
[
k
](A20733-e90730-b)
k
Inst.
l.
4
c.
6.
s.
2.
saith
.
There
is
not
the
like
reason
betweene
one
small
people
,
and
the
whole
world
.
The
whole
Church
hath
no
head
,
or
vniuersall
Bishop
,
but
Christ
:
But
each
seuerall
.
Church
may
haue
their
head
,
and
seuerall
Bishop
,
answerable
to
the
high
Priest
of
the
Iewes
,
as
diuers
of
the
Fathers
haue
taught
:
Therfore
Ignatius
requireth
the
Smyrneans
to
honor
the
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
the
high
Priest
:
and
it
is
an
vsual
thing
with
the
Fathers
,
not
only
to
apply
those
things
which
were
spoken
of
the
high
Priest
to
Bishops
,
but
also
to
call
the
Bishop
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
po●tificem
,
Sacerdotem
summum
&c.
and
Bishoprick
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
[
l
](A20733-e90890-b)
l
Pag.
51.
he
threatned
to
prooue
his
lay
Presbyters
out
of
Ignatius
,
when
he
should
come
,
to
answere
my
allegations
out
of
him
:
which
how
it
will
be
performed
,
the
reader
is
now
to
expect
.
In
the
meane
time
,
little
reason
had
he
so
much
to
cleuate
the
authority
of
those
godly
and
learned
epistles
:
for
his
own
confession
,
that
they
are
recorded
in
Eusebius
,
is
a
good
proofe
they
are
not
counterfeits
.
But
he
is
pleased
to
heare
him
speak
.
And
whereas
Ignatius
[
m
](A20733-e90960-b)
m
Ad
Smyrn
.
teacheth
,
that
the
lay
〈◊〉
must
be
subiect
to
the
Deacons
,
they
to
the
Presbyters
▪
&
the
Presbyters
to
the
Bishop
:
the
refuter
denieth
the
Presbyterie
,
and
Deaconship
to
haue
been
degrees
of
the
ministery
,
but
vnderstandeth
such
Deacons
as
were
only
imployed
in
looking
to
the
poore
,
and
such
Presbyters
as
were
only
gouerning
elders
.
The
vanity
of
which
conceipt
J
haue
sufficiently
declared
before
,
if
anything
will
suffice
.
And
I
am
ashamed
for
the
refuter
,
that
he
should
be
either
so
ignorant
,
as
not
to
know
;
or
so
vnconscionable
,
as
not
to
acknowledge
,
that
these
three
,
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
,
haue
alwaies
since
the
Apostles
times
been
esteemed
three
degrees
of
Ministers
,
by
the
vniuersall
and
perpetual
consent
of
all
Christendome
vntill
our
age
.
Notwithstanding
,
his
arguments
,
such
as
they
are
,
must
be
answered
.
And
first
for
Deacons
(
he
saith
)
they
were
no
Ministers
of
the
word
,
That
Deacons
were
in
a
degree
of
the
ministrie
.
but
imployed
only
in
looking
to
the
poore
:
and
that
he
proueth
,
by
the
confession
of
D.
Bilson
.
What
maner
of
men
the
Deacons
were
,
of
whom
Ignatius
speaketh
,
Ignatius
himselfe
sufficiently
declareth
,
in
his
Epistles
to
the
Trallians
[
n
](A20733-e91130-b)
n
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
where
he
calleth
the
Deacons
,
the
ministers
of
the
mysteries
of
Christ
;
and
to
the
Smyrneans
[
o
](A20733-e91160-b)
o
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
Deacons
of
Christ
vnto
the
word
of
God
;
to
the
Philadelphians
[
p
](A20733-e91190-b)
p
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
ministring
to
the
Bishop
in
the
word
;
to
the
Antiochians
[
q
](A20733-e91220-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
the
sacred
Deacons
.
Neither
doth
D.
Bilson
deny
it
.
Only
he
maketh
question
of
the
7.
which
were
elected
Act.
6.
whether
they
were
such
,
as
properly
were
called
Deacons
,
and
are
the
third
degree
of
the
ministry
,
or
such
as
were
chosen
onely
to
be
ouerseers
of
the
poore
:
to
which
purpose
he
citeth
the
generall
Councill
held
in
Trullo
[
r
](A20733-e91260-b)
r
Conc.
Const.
in
Trullo
ca.
16.
,
correcting
the
Canon
of
the
Council
held
at
Neocaesaria
[
s
](A20733-e91280-b)
s
Conc.
Neocaes
.
cap.
15.
,
which
appointeth
that
in
euery
Church
there
should
be
7.
Deacons
,
in
imitation
of
the
act
[
t
](A20733-e91300-b)
t
Act.
6.
of
the
Apostles
,
in
ordaining
7.
But
(
say
they
)
we
comparing
the
sense
of
the
Fathers
,
with
the
speech
of
the
Apostles
,
do
finde
,
that
they
spake
not
of
men
[
u
](A20733-e91330-b)
u
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
seruing
at
the
mysteries
(
such
as
properly
be
called
Deacons
)
but
at
tables
;
alledging
Chrysostome
,
who
enquiring
what
the
office
of
these
7.
was
,
plainely
denieth
,
that
they
were
Deacons
:
whereupon
they
denounce
(
as
D.
Bilson
hath
alledged
)
that
the
foresaid
7.
Deacons
,
must
not
be
taken
for
those
that
serued
at
the
mysteries
,
but
for
such
as
were
trusted
with
the
dispensation
of
the
common
necessities
of
those
that
were
assembled
togither
.
And
verily
to
me
it
seemeth
more
then
probable
,
that
these
7.
were
not
such
as
S.
Paul
speaketh
of
1.
Tim.
3.
&
were
in
vse
in
the
primitiue
church
,
being
a
degree
inferior
to
Presbyters
:
for
these
7
or
the
most
of
them
,
were
,
as
[
x
](A20733-e91410-b)
x
Have
s.
20.
mis●t
etiam
alios
72.
ad
praedicand●m
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
E●●phaenius
,
&
others
do
testifie
,
chosen
out
of
the
70.
Disciples
,
&
were
(
no
doubt
)
principall
men
among
them
,
full
of
the
holy
Ghost
&
wisdom
,
being
before
this
ministers
of
Gods
word
.
For
as
the
Apostles
,
the
chiefe
and
principal
ministers
,
thought
it
to
appertain
to
their
duty
to
take
care
of
the
poore
;
so
when
the
Apostles
were
disburdned
therof
,
that
care
was
committed
to
7
▪
others
,
who
were
chief
men
among
the
disciples
.
Neither
may
it
be
doubted
,
but
that
as
Steuen
was
a
worthy
preacher
;
so
the
rest
(
when
their
temporary
function
at
Ierusalem
was
ended
by
the
dispersion
of
the
faithful
vpon
the
death
of
Steuen
)
gaue
themselues
to
the
preaching
of
the
word
,
as
appeareth
in
Philip
[
y
](A20733-e91500-b)
y
Act.
8.5
&
21.8
.
,
who
was
one
of
the
7.
And
wheras
the
Refuter
saith
,
that
D.
Bilson
[
z
](A20733-e91540-b)
z
Cap.
15.
confesseth
the
Deacons
to
haue
bin
only
imploied
in
looking
to
the
poor
;
the
contrary
is
euident
:
for
speaking
euen
of
those
7.
he
collecteth
by
S.
Pauls
precepts
concerning
Deacons
,
that
their
office
was
not
only
a
charge
to
looke
to
the
poore
,
but
also
to
attend
the
sacred
assemblies
&
seruice
of
the
Church
,
&
euen
a
step
to
the
ministery
of
the
word
,
meaning
,
as
I
suppose
,
to
the
Presbytery
.
sacred
ministery
[
a
](A20733-e91610-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
themselues
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
their
dutie
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Ignat.
ad
Trall
.
Can.
Apost.
15.
Conc.
An●yr
.
cap.
2.
,
helping
the
Bishop
or
the
Presbyter
in
the
diuine
seruice
,
offering
the
bread
and
the
cup
,
&
performing
as
it
were
the
office
of
a
cryer
in
the
Church
,
(
which
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
in
dismissing
those
which
were
to
depart
,
in
commanding
silence
,
and
exciting
the
people
to
deuotion
,
and
attention
.
In
the
Council
of
Nice
[
b
](A20733-e91680-b)
b
Cap.
18.
,
fault
is
found
with
Deacons
,
who
in
some
Cities
did
giue
the
Eucharist
to
the
Presbyters
:
but
they
are
commaunded
to
containe
themselues
within
their
bounds
,
knowing
that
they
be
the
Bishops
ministers
,
&
are
inferior
to
the
Presbyters
,
and
to
receiue
the
Communion
after
the
Presbyters
,
at
the
hands
either
of
the
Bishop
,
or
the
Presbyters
.
Iustine
Martyr
[
c
](A20733-e91730-b)
c
Apol.
2.
,
speaking
of
the
Eucharist
,
saith
,
after
the
president
hath
giuen
thanks
,
and
the
people
hath
blessed
,
they
,
who
with
vs
are
called
Deacons
,
do
giue
and
communicate
to
euery
one
that
is
present
,
of
the
bread
&
wine
,
and
doe
carie
it
to
those
which
are
absent
.
And
hauing
repeated
the
same
againe
,
he
speaketh
of
the
collections
for
the
poore
:
shewing
that
what
was
collected
,
was
committed
(
not
to
the
Deacon
,
but
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
President
,
by
him
to
be
distributed
.
Tertullian
[
d
](A20733-e91790-b)
d
Tertull.
de
Bapt.
saith
,
The
chiefe
Priest
,
which
is
the
Bishop
,
hath
the
right
of
giuing
Baptisme
,
then
the
Presbyters
,
&
the
Deacons
,
but
yet
not
without
the
authority
of
the
Bishop
.
[
e
](A20733-e91820-b)
e
Cypr.
passim
.
Cyprian
euery
where
speaketh
of
them
,
as
being
of
the
sacred
ministerie
.
The
ancient
Councill
of
Eliberis
hath
this
canon
[
f
](A20733-e91850-b)
f
Conc.
Elib
.
ca.
77.
,
If
any
Deacon
,
ruling
,
or
hauing
the
charge
of
a
people
,
without
either
Bishop
or
Presbyter
baptize
any
,
those
the
Bishop
by
his
blessing
must
accomplish
.
The
council
of
Carthage
[
g
](A20733-e91880-b)
g
Carth.
Gr●c
.
ca.
25.
siue
Carth
5.
ca.
3.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
speaking
of
BB.
&
other
inferior
orders
,
which
do
handle
the
sacred
mysteries
,
reckoneth
Subdeacons
,
Deacons
,
&
Presbyters
.
Ierome
hath
these
words
[
h
](A20733-e91950-b)
h
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
,
If
at
the
prayer
of
the
Bishop
alone
the
holy
Ghost
descendeth
,
they
are
to
be
lamented
,
who
in
villages
,
and
townes
,
&
other
remote
places
,
being
baptized
by
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
,
do
sleep
,
or
depart
this
life
,
before
they
be
visited
of
the
Bishop
.
The
safetie
of
the
Church
dependeth
vpon
the
dignitie
of
the
chiefe
Priest
(
meaning
the
Bishop
.
)
To
whom
,
if
a
power
peerelesse
,
and
eminent
aboue
all
be
not
giuen
,
there
will
be
as
many
schismes
in
the
Church
,
as
Priests
.
Hence
it
is
,
that
without
the
Chrisme
,
(
which
the
Presbyters
&
Deacons
were
wont
[
i
](A20733-e92000-b)
i
Conc.
Carth.
4.
ca.
36.
to
receiue
from
their
own
Bishop
)
and
commandement
of
the
Bishop
,
neither
Presbyter
nor
Deacon
hath
right
to
baptize
.
In
the
4.
Councill
of
Carthage
,
which
is
so
oft
alleaged
by
the
Disciplinarians
,
ther
is
direction
giuen
for
the
ordination
[
k
](A20733-e92050-b)
k
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
2.3.4
.
of
the
Bishop
,
Presbyter
,
and
Deacon
,
&
other
of
the
Clergie
.
The
Deacon
[
l
](A20733-e92090-b)
l
Ca.
37.
is
taught
to
acknowledge
himself
to
be
the
minister
aswell
of
the
Presbyter
,
as
of
the
Bishop
.
The
Deacon
[
m
](A20733-e92110-b)
m
Ca.
38.
is
authorized
euen
in
the
presence
of
a
Presbyter
,
if
ther
be
necessity
,
&
he
be
commanded
,
to
deliuer
the
Eucharist
of
Christs
body
to
the
people
,
&
to
wear
[
n
](A20733-e92130-b)
n
Ca.
41.
an
Albe
only
in
time
of
oblation
,
or
reading
.
To
conclude
,
Cyprian
,
and
other
of
the
fathers
,
when
they
terme
the
Deacons
Leuits
,
&
make
them
answerable
to
the
Leuits
,
as
they
do
the
Presbyters
to
the
Priests
,
do
euidently
declare
,
what
they
thought
concerning
the
office
of
Deacons
.
That
the
Presbyters
were
not
ministers
of
the
word
,
Therefore
they
were
not
Ministers
.
The
proposition
is
proued
by
2.
reasons
.
First
,
because
it
were
a
mockery
of
a
ministerie
to
deny
Ministers
power
to
execute
their
office
.
Secondly
,
because
euery
popish
Priest
had
potestatem
ordinis
,
that
is
,
power
to
do
all
things
that
belong
to
his
order
.
First
,
to
the
proposition
it selfe
,
I
say
it
is
very
false
,
and
that
the
contradictorie
in
all
the
parts
of
it
is
true
:
viz
that
they
who
might
,
yea
ought
to
preach
,
baptize
,
administer
the
Lords
supper
,
and
performe
any
other
pastorall
dutie
,
being
therto
licensed
of
the
Bishop
,
were
ministers
.
From
which
we
may
assume
and
conclude
thus
:
But
the
ancient
Presbyters
might
,
yea
ought
to
preach
,
baptize
,
administer
the
Lords
supper
,
and
performe
any
other
pastorall
duties
,
being
therto
authorized
by
the
Bishop
:
Therefore
they
were
ministers
.
And
that
the
proposition
is
false
,
it
may
appeare
by
the
practise
of
our
owne
Church
,
and
of
all
the
antient
Churches
,
whose
Presbyters
are
,
and
were
Ministers
(
as
I
haue
sufficiently
prooued
before
,
for
the
conuiction
,
I
doubt
not
,
of
the
refuters
conscience
)
and
yet
neither
may
,
nor
might
preach
,
baptize
,
administer
the
Lords
Supper
,
and
performe
other
ministeriall
functions
,
but
by
leaue
or
authority
from
the
Bishop
.
Neither
yet
is
the
ministery
of
our
clergy
now
,
nor
of
the
Presbyters
in
times
past
,
a
mockery
,
because
it
agreeth
not
with
his
fancy
:
but
his
fancy
is
a
meere
nouelty
,
disagreeing
from
the
generall
practise
of
the
most
antient
Churches
.
For
howsoeuer
afterwards
he
malepertly
chargeth
mee
with
not
vnderstanding
the
distinction
of
ecclesiasticall
power
,
in
potestatem
ordinis
et
iurisdictionis
;
into
the
power
of
order
and
iurisdiction
:
yet
doth
he
both
here
and
there
bewray
himself
not
to
vnderstand
it
.
For
though
euery
Minister
,
as
hee
is
a
Presbyter
hath
potestatem
ordinis
;
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
hee
may
at
his
owne
pleasure
exercise
that
power
.
We
must
therfore
take
knowledge
of
two
distinctions
:
the
one
,
of
the
power
of
order
and
of
iurisdiction
:
for
euery
minister
hath
the
power
of
order
as
hee
is
a
Presbyter
simply
;
but
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
as
he
is
praelatus
,
or
pastor
.
The
former
he
hath
giuen
him
in
his
ordination
;
the
latter
,
in
his
institution
.
By
the
former
,
hee
is
qualified
and
authorized
to
preach
and
administer
the
sacraments
,
and
to
doe
other
●spirituall
actions
peculiar
to
his
order
,
which
another
man
,
who
is
not
of
that
order
,
neither
can
doe
,
nor
may
haue
leaue
to
doe
.
But
hee
may
not
performe
these
duties
which
belong
to
the
power
of
his
order
to
any
congregation
,
as
the
Pastor
therof
,
vnlesse
that
flocke
be
assigned
and
committed
to
him
by
the
Bishop
,
who
hath
the
charge
of
the
whole
diocesse
.
A
presbyter
therefore
though
he
haue
potestatem
ordinis
,
may
not
perform
pastoral
duties
to
any
congregation
,
which
are
part
of
the
Bishops
charge
,
vnlesse
hee
be
authorized
therto
by
the
Bishop
;
from
whom
hee
receiueth
potestatem
iurisdictionis
,
curamque
animarum
et
regimen
ecclesia
parochialis
,
in
his
institution
.
Againe
,
we
must
distinguish
betweene
the
power
it selfe
and
the
exercise
&
execution
of
it
.
For
although
euery
minister
hath
thesame
power
of
order
which
is
common
to
them
with
Bishops
in
respect
of
preaching
the
worde
and
administring
Baptisme
and
the
Lords
Supper
,
yet
the
exercise
of
their
power
is
,
and
alwaies
hath
been
subiected
to
the
authority
of
the
Bishop
,
to
be
permitted
,
directed
,
restrained
and
suspended
by
him
.
This
subordination
and
subiection
of
the
presbyters
to
the
Bishop
,
for
the
exercise
of
their
power
,
which
euer
hath
beene
practised
in
the
Church
,
doth
not
make
either
their
function
to
be
a
mockery
of
the
ministery
,
as
the
refuter
malepertly
speaketh
,
nor
themselues
to
be
no
ministers
.
But
plainly
proueth
the
contrary
,
as
I
haue
shewed
.
For
whereas
he
obiecteth
out
of
Tertullian
[
a
](A20733-e92470-b)
a
De
baptismo
.
,
that
any
lay
man
might
baptize
by
the
Bishops
〈◊〉
he
falsifies
his
testimony
.
His
words
be
these
:
Dandi
baptismum
ius
●ab●t
summus
sacerdos
qui
est
episcopus
,
&c.
The
cheif
Preist
,
which
is
the
Bishop
,
hath
the
right
to
giue
baptisme
.
Then
the
presbyters
and
deacons
;
but
not
without
the
authority
of
the
Bishop
for
the
honor
of
the
Church
;
which
being
safe
,
peace
is
safe
[
b
](A20733-e92520-b)
b
●lioquin
etiam
laicis
ius
est
.
.
Otherwise
euen
laymen
haue
right
.
Where
Tertullian
sheweth
,
that
the
ordinary
right
of
baptizing
appertaineth
to
Bishops
,
Presbyters
,
deacons
,
as
belonging
to
the
power
of
their
order
;
though
for
the
honour
and
peace
of
the
Church
,
the
Bishop
bee
superiour
in
the
exercise
of
that
power
,
which
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
are
not
to
exercise
without
his
authority
:
otherwise
,
that
is
,
extraordinarily
,
and
in
case
of
necessity
,
the
lay
man
,
euen
without
the
Bishops
leaue
,
hath
right
(
in
Tertullians
iudgement
)
to
baptize
.
Where
he
saith
,
That
in
Tertullians
time
,
who
was
himselfe
a
Presbyter
,
Presbyters
and
Deacons
were
not
ministers
,
and
much
lesse
in
Ignatius
time
;
I
hope
he
wil
r●call
this
foule
error
,
proceeding
from
extreme
ignorance
,
when
he
hath
read
what
before
hath
been
alledged
to
the
contrary
.
And
whereas
the
last
testimony
,
which
I
alledged
out
of
[
c
](A20733-e92580-b)
c
Ad
Philadelph
.
Ignatius
for
these
three
degrees
of
the
ministery
,
plainely
excludeth
their
lay
Presbyters
and
lay
Deacons
,
reckening
Presbyters
and
Deacons
as
degrees
of
the
clergy
;
he
answereth
two
things
;
the
first
,
That
the
Epistle
strongly
sauoureth
of
corrupter
times
,
then
those
Ignatius
loued
in
,
by
that
very
word
clergy
appr●priated
therein
to
the
ministers
,
which
is
of
a
far
latter
breed
.
He
should
haue
done
well
to
haue
shewed
,
how
late
the
breed
is
.
For
I
am
well
assured
that
[
d
](A20733-e92660-b)
d
Cypr.
passim
.
Cyprian
vseth
the
word
clerus
for
the
clergy
ordinarily
,
who
was
little
more
then
a
hundred
yeares
after
Ignatius
.
And
Origen
,
[
e
](A20733-e92720-b)
e
In
Ierem.
hom.
7.
before
him
,
mentioneth
this
distinction
of
the
clergy
and
laity
.
Tertullian
,
who
liued
in
the
same
century
with
Ignatius
,
distinguisheth
each
company
of
Christians
,
as
sometimes
[
f
](A20733-e92760-b)
f
De
fuga
in
persecut.
Quam
ipsi
authores
.
i.
ipsi
〈◊〉
,
&
presbyteri
&
episcopi
fugiunt
,
quomodo
Laicus
,
&c.
Cum
duces
fugiunt
quis
de
gregario
numero
,
&c.
Cùm
ecclesia
distituitur
à
clero
.
,
into
gregem
&
duces
,
the
flocke
and
the
guides
;
ecclesi●
ordinem
&
laicos
,
the
order
of
the
Church
,
meaning
those
which
were
in
orders
,
and
the
lay
people
:
so
sometimes
in
ecclesiam
&
clerum
,
the
assembly
and
the
clergy
.
The
clergy
also
or
guides
,
he
distinguisheth
into
these
three
degrees
,
Deacons
,
Presbyters
,
Bishops
.
The
antient
Canons
,
called
the
Apostles
[
g
](A20733-e92820-b)
g
Can.
Apost.
2.11
.
&
12.
&c.
,
often
mention
those
of
the
clergy
,
as
opposed
to
the
laity
.
But
if
I
should
say
,
that
S.
Peter
vseth
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
the
same
sense
,
when
writing
to
Bishops
,
whom
he
calleth
Presbyters
,
&
himself
their
Compresbyter
,
he
willeth
them
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
not
exercise
lordship
ouer
the
clergy
,
I
should
deliuer
that
which
is
agreeable
to
the
interpretation
of
the
antient
[
h
](A20733-e92910-b)
h
Oecum
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Writers
,
and
as
I
am
perswaded
to
the
truth
.
Neither
doe
I
doubt
but
the
vse
of
the
word
clerus
,
was
first
taken
from
that
place
of
Peter
,
who
therein
followed
the
phrase
of
the
old
Testament
,
wherein
it
is
oft
said
,
that
the
Lord
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
portion
or
the
inheritance
of
the
Priests
and
Leuites
.
For
therefore
are
they
called
Clerici
,
saith
Ierome
[
i
](A20733-e93000-b)
i
Ad
Nepotianum
.
,
vel
quia
de
sorte
sunt
Domini
,
vel
quia
ipse
Dominus
sors
.
i.
pars
clericorum
est
:
Either
because
they
are
the
Lords
portion
,
(
which
notation
some
late
writers
do
mislike
,
not
without
cause
,
the
people
also
being
Gods
inheritance
)
or
because
the
Lord
is
their
portion
:
which
is
agreeable
with
the
scriptures
.
His
other
answer
is
,
though
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
were
of
the
clergy
,
yet
they
were
not
Ministers
:
for
there
were
many
of
the
clergy
which
were
not
Ministers
.
Let
him
therefore
tell
me
whether
there
were
any
Ministers
in
the
clergy
adioined
to
the
Bishop
or
not
:
if
he
say
no
,
hee
is
worthy
to
be
hissed
at
:
if
yea
,
who
were
these
Ministers
,
if
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
were
not
?
Besides
,
it
is
plaine
,
that
the
Clergy
of
the
antient
Churches
consisted
wholly
of
schollers
,
which
were
trained
vp
in
learning
:
the
Clergie
belonging
to
each
Bishoppe
,
being
the
seminary
of
the
whole
diocesse
:
out
of
which
,
not
only
euery
parish
,
both
in
the
Citie
and
Country
,
was
to
be
furnished
with
Ministers
,
but
also
the
Bishop
himselfe
,
in
the
vacancie
of
the
See
,
was
to
be
chosen
.
Moreouer
,
ordinarily
those
of
the
clergy
ascended
by
degrees
from
the
lower
to
the
higher
,
the
Bishop
being
chosen
out
of
the
Presbyters
&
Deacons
,
(
for
euen
Ignatius
his
successor
was
his
deacon
,
Her●
:
)
the
Presbyters
&
deacons
out
of
the
inferior
orders
,
as
of
sub
deacons
,
or
readers
,
&c.
Wherby
it
is
most
euident
,
that
presbyters
&
deacons
were
not
such
,
as
the
lay-elders
and
lay-deacons
which
are
now
adaies
in
some
reformed
Churches
;
but
men
brought
vp
in
learning
and
seruice
of
the
Church
,
hauing
attained
degrees
of
the
sacred
Ministery
,
such
as
Presbyters
and
Deacons
are
with
vs
.
And
so
much
of
my
second
argument
.
It
is
sacriledge
to
reduce
a
Bishop
to
the
degree
of
a
Presbyter
.
Therefore
BB.
were
superior
to
Presbyters
in
degree
,
not
onely
de
facto
,
[
k
](A20733-e93180-b)
k
Pag.
77.
but
also
de
iure
.
But
what
is
this
,
saith
he
,
to
the
Apostles
times
,
and
the
age
following
?
Indeed
,
if
the
Councell
had
testified
the
superiority
of
Bishops
de
facto
onely
,
there
had
been
some
colour
for
this
exception
,
especially
if
he
could
haue
proued
an
alteration
in
the
state
of
Bishops
,
and
the
aduancement
of
them
to
a
higher
degree
,
to
haue
begun
after
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
.
But
seeing
no
such
matter
can
truly
be
alleaged
,
and
seeing
also
that
famous
Councell
giueth
testimony
to
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
not
only
de
facto
,
but
also
de
iure
,
and
that
in
such
sort
,
as
it
deemeth
it
sacrilege
to
reduce
a
Bishop
to
the
degree
of
a
Presbyter
;
it
cannot
therefore
bee
denied
,
but
that
this
is
a
most
pregnant
testimony
,
if
it
bee
rightly
alleged
.
Let
vs
therefore
consider
the
occasion
of
those
words
,
which
in
the
copie
whereon
Th.
Balsamo
doth
comment
,
and
in
some
manuscript
Greeke
copies
,
is
the
twenty
nine
canon
of
that
Councell
.
When
Eustathius
Bishop
of
Berytum
(
for
so
I
find
him
termed
diuers
times
in
the
Acts
[
l
](A20733-e93280-b)
l
Acts
4.5.6.9
.
of
that
Councell
,
in
Euagr●m
[
m
](A20733-e93300-b)
m
Euagr.
hist.
lib.
2.
cap.
2.
,
in
Photius
[
n
](A20733-e93340-b)
n
Ph.
N●m●can
.
tit.
9.
c
11.
,
and
Balsamo
[
o
](A20733-e93380-b)
o
Balsam
.
in
Conc.
Chalc.
c.
29.
)
and
not
of
Tyre
,
(
as
in
Tilius
his
Greeke
edition
it
is
corruptly
printed
)
when
Eustathius
J
say
,
had
withdrawne
diuers
Bishopricks
from
the
Metropolitan
Church
of
Tyrus
,
deposing
the
Bishops
,
whom
Photius
the
Bishop
of
Tyrus
had
ordained
,
and
bringing
them
downe
to
the
degree
of
Presbyters
:
complaint
was
made
to
the
great
Councell
of
Chalcedon
,
and
the
matter
therein
in
propounded
by
the
Princes
,
in
these
words
[
p
](A20733-e93430-b)
p
Act.
Concil.
Chalced.
de
Photio
&
Eustathis
episcopis
.
:
Concerning
the
Bishops
ordained
by
Photius
,
and
degraded
by
Eustathius
,
and
after
they
had
been
Bishops
,
commanded
to
be
Presbyters
,
what
is
the
sentence
of
this
holy
Synod
?
Whereto
Paschasinus
and
Lucentiu●
Bishops
,
and
Bonifaciu●
Presbyter
,
vicegerents
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
answered
[
q
](A20733-e93490-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
:
To
reduce
a
Bishop
to
the
degree
of
a
Presbyter
,
it
is
sacrilege
:
if
any
iust
cause
depose
them
from
their
Bishopricke
,
neither
ought
they
to
retaine
the
place
of
Presbyters
.
But
if
without
any
crime
they
haue
beene
remoued
from
their
honour
,
they
shall
returne
againe
to
their
episcopall
dignity
.
Ana●olius
the
Archbishop
of
Constantinople
said
,
These
Bishops
who
are
said
to
haue
descended
from
the
episcopall
dignity
vnto
the
order
of
Presbyters
,
if
for
iust
cause
they
are
condemned
,
neither
are
they
worthy
of
the
honour
of
Presbyters
.
But
if
without
any
reasonable
cause
they
haue
been
deiected
to
a
lesse
[
r
](A20733-e93530-b)
r
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
degree
,
they
are
worthy
,
if
they
be
blamelesse
,
to
[
s
](A20733-e93560-b)
s
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
recouer
againe
the
dignity
and
priesthood
of
their
Bishopricke
.
If
you
thinke
that
these
were
but
the
priuate
opinions
of
these
men
,
heare
the
censure
of
the
whole
Councell
:
All
the
reuerend
Bishoppes
cried
;
[
t
](A20733-e93600-b)
t
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Righteous
is
the
iudgement
of
the
Fathers
,
wee
all
say
the
same
things
;
the
Fathers
haue
decreed
iustly
,
let
the
sentence
of
the
Archbishops
hold
.
My
fourth
argument
is
drawne
from
the
testimony
of
Ierome
:
[
u
](A20733-e93680-b)
u
Ad
Euagrium
.
that
at
Alexandria
from
Marke
the
Euangelist
,
vnto
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
Bishops
,
euermore
the
presbyters
hauing
chosen
one
from
among
themselues
,
and
placed
him
in
exce●siori
gradu
,
in
an
higher
degree
,
called
him
Bishop
▪
euen
as
an
armie
chooseth
a
Generall
.
This
testimony
the
Refuter
eleuateth
in
two
respects
.
The
first
,
because
Ierome
is
vnder
age
.
Which
is
a
very
simple
euasion
.
For
Ierome
doth
not
onely
testify
what
was
in
his
time
,
but
also
giueth
plaine
euidence
,
that
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
euen
from
S.
Marke
vntill
Heraclas
,
Bishops
were
placed
in
a
superior
degree
aboue
Presbyters
.
Secondly
,
because
Bëllarmine
alleageth
the
s●me
testimony
to
the
same
purpose
,
whose
allegation
is
answered
by
Ch●mier
:
whose
answer
if
I
like
not
,
he
bids
me
try
what
I
can
say
in
defence
of
Bellarmine
against
it
.
To
omit
how
odiously
this
is
set
downe
,
I
doe
professe
,
that
I
may
with
better
credit
agree
with
Bellarmine
,
wherein
he
consenteth
with
all
antiquity
,
then
the
Refuter
and
his
consorts
can
agree
with
Aërius
;
wherein
he
dissenting
from
all
antiquity
,
was
by
Epiphanius
,
Philaster
,
Augustine
,
and
all
the
Catholike
Church
in
his
time
,
condemned
for
an
heretike
.
But
let
vs
heare
his
answers
.
First
,
that
Ierome
proueth
by
the
practise
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
that
which
before
he
had
demonstrated
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
to
wit
,
that
a
Presbyter
and
a
Bishop
differ
not
.
Neither
doth
he
call
Marke
a
Bishop
,
but
an
Euangelist
.
This
answere
might
become
our
refuter
better
then
Chamier
.
For
first
it
is
vntrue
,
that
Ierome
in
these
words
proueth
that
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
differ
not
.
For
doth
hee
not
plainly
say
that
the
Bishop
was
placed
in
a
higher
degree
?
and
doth
hee
not
compare
him
in
respect
of
the
Presbyters
which
chose
him
,
to
the
Chieftaine
or
Generall
,
chosen
of
the
Army
?
Secondly
,
he
faileth
in
setting
downe
Ieromes
purpose
;
which
was
not
to
prooue
there
was
no
difference
betwixt
Bishoppes
and
Presbyters
;
but
to
prooue
,
that
Presbyters
were
superior
to
Deacons
.
That
he
proueth
by
many
arguments
.
First
,
because
the
name
Episcopus
,
Bishop
,
in
the
Scriptures
is
giuen
to
Presbyters
.
Secondly
,
because
the
Apostles
and
Bishops
are
in
the
Scriptures
called
Presbyters
:
to
which
purpose
he
alleageth
1.
Tim.
4.13
.
1.
Pet.
5.1
.
2.
Iohn
1.
and
3.
Iohn
1.
the
Bishops
were
set
ouer
Presbyters
;
he
confesseth
it
was
done
for
auoiding
of
schisme
;
but
yet
so
,
as
by
the
Presbyters
the
Bishop
was
chosen
out
of
the
Presbyters
,
euer
since
S.
Marks
time
,
vntill
Heracla●
and
D●●●ysius
,
as
a
Generall
by
the
Army
,
or
the
Arch-deacon
by
the
Deacons
,
out
of
their
owne
company
.
Whereby
he
would
also
insinuate
,
that
a
Presbyter
is
so
much
better
then
a
Deacon
,
as
a
Bishop
is
superior
to
an
Arch
deacon
.
Thirdly
,
where
he
saith
,
that
Ierome
doth
not
call
Marke
a
Bishop
,
but
an
Euangelist
,
and
saith
else
where
,
that
he
planted
that
Church
:
It
is
plaine
,
that
in
another
place
[
*
](A20733-e94020-b)
*
Prooem.
in
Matthaeum
.
he
confesseth
Marke
to
haue
been
the
first
Bishop
of
Alexandria
.
If
Marke
therefore
were
superiour
in
degree
to
the
Presbyters
at
Alexandra
,
as
no
man
wil
deny
;
then
must
the
same
be
confessed
of
Anianus
,
and
the
rest
of
his
successors
,
as
Ierome
plainely
testifieth
.
Secondly
he
answeareth
,
That
the
order
by
which
the
Presbyters
chose
a
Bishop
from
among
themselues
,
continued
to
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
time
,
whom
he
therefore
calleth
Bishops
,
to
the
end
he
might
signifie
,
that
in
their
daies
after
one
hundred
and
forty
yeers
were
expired
from
Marks
comming
to
Alexandria
,
that
order
was
changed
.
Then
at
the
soonest
,
saith
the
refuter
,
began
M.
D.
superiority
of
Bishops
to
creep
in
,
&c.
Which
answere
,
if
his
meaning
be
as
our
refuter
conceiteth
,
is
vnsound
.
For
first
where
he
saith
the
order
was
changed
in
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
that
is
spoken
but
by
ghesse
,
because
Ierome
nameth
them
.
Vpon
which
coniecture
,
T.
C.
and
H.
I.
as
you
haue
heard
,
did
build
their
two
diuers
fancies
.
For
Ieromes
meaning
was
not
to
signifie
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
was
altered
:
but
as
I
haue
shewed
,
that
vntill
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
who
were
not
Presbyters
,
but
Teachers
of
the
schoole
in
Alexandria
,
the
Presbyters
euer
since
S.
Marks
time
,
did
chuse
one
out
of
their
owne
number
.
That
which
the
Refuter
addeth
,
is
absurd
,
and
against
Ieromes
plaine
words
:
Then
at
the
soonest
began
M.
D.
superiority
of
Bishops
to
creepe
in
:
for
the
superiority
I
spake
of
,
is
superiority
in
degree
.
And
Ierome
saith
,
that
euer
from
Saint
Marke
,
and
therefore
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
the
BB.
had
been
placed
in
a
higher
degree
.
My
fift
argument
is
also
from
the
authority
of
[
a
](A20733-e94260-b)
a
Ad
Euagrium
.
Ierome
,
tradition
apostolicall
.
Secondly
,
that
as
the
high
Preist
was
in
degree
superiour
to
the
other
Preists
,
and
they
to
the
Leuits
:
so
by
an
apostolicall
ordinance
the
Bishop
is
superiour
to
the
Presbyters
,
and
the
Presbyters
to
the
Deacons
.
That
wee
may
know
,
saith
he
,
the
apostolicall
traditions
are
taken
out
of
the
old
testament
,
looke
what
Aaron
and
his
sonnes
and
the
Leuits
were
in
the
Temple
;
the
same
let
the
Bishops
,
Preists
and
Deacons
challenge
in
the
Church
.
To
this
testimony
containing
two
impregnable
proofs
for
the
superiority
of
BB.
not
onely
de
facto
,
but
also
de
iure
;
the
refuter
thought
it
his
wisest
course
to
say
nothing
.
To
these
arguments
this
may
be
added
:
That
as
the
new
ordination
of
a
Deacon
,
when
he
was
made
a
Presbyter
,
doth
proue
that
he
was
aduanced
to
a
higher
degree
of
the
ministery
:
euen
so
when
a
Presbyter
was
chosen
to
be
Bishop
,
he
was
by
a
new
ordination
promo●ed
to
the
Bishopricke
,
as
to
a
higher
degree
.
The
two
first
canons
,
among
those
which
are
called
the
Apostles
,
appoint
Can.
Apost
.
1.
&
2.
,
that
a
Bishop
should
be
ordained
of
two
or
three
Bishops
:
but
let
a
Presbyter
,
say
they
,
be
ordayned
of
one
Bishop
,
and
likewise
a
Deacon
,
and
the
rest
of
the
clergy
.
Valeriu●
the
Bishop
dealth
with
the
Primate
,
the
Bishop
of
Carthage
,
by
letters
intreating
him
that
Augustine
(
who
then
was
Presbyter
)
might
be
ordained
Bishop
of
Hippo
:
which
being
obtained
[
d
](A20733-e94470-b)
d
Possidon
.
in
vita
Augustini
.
,
Augustine
tooke
vpon
him
the
care
of
the
Bishopricke
,
&
maioris
loci
〈…〉
,
and
ordination
of
a
greater
place
.
The
councell
of
Sardica
[
e
](A20733-e94510-b)
e
Con.
Sard.
c.
10.
,
taketh
order
,
that
before
a
man
may
be
a
Bishop
he
must
first
performe
the
ministery
of
a
Reader
,
then
of
a
Deacon
,
then
of
a
Presbyter
,
that
so
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
euery
degree
,
if
hee
be
worthy
,
he
may
arise
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
vnto
the
height
of
the
Bishopricke
.
Theadoret
[
f
](A20733-e94570-b)
f
Lib.
4.
c
18.
testifieth
,
that
Iohn
(
Chrysostome
)
hauing
been
the
chiefe
of
the
Presbyters
at
Antioch
a
long
time
,
oft
times
might
haue
been
chosen
to
the
Bishopricke
(
which
he
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Apostolicall
presidency
)
but
alwaies
did
flie
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
principality
.
So
that
though
he
were
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
chiefe
of
the
Presbyters
;
yet
he
was
no
Bishop
,
neither
durst
he
for
a
long
time
take
vpon
him
that
degree
of
principality
.
So
much
of
the
superiority
of
Bishops
in
generall
.
CHAP.
III.
Shewing
wherin
the
superiority
of
Bishops
did
and
doth
consist
:
and
first
of
the
singularity
of
preeminence
.
(
Serm.
sect.
3.
page
32.
But
let
vs
consider
more
particularly
wherein
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
did
and
doth
consist
,
&c.
ad
lin.
a
fine
6
:
THe
superiority
of
Bishops
ouer
other
Ministers
,
I
place
in
three
things
:
singularity
of
preeminence
during
life
,
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
the
power
of
iurisdiction
:
all
which
I
ground
on
Tit.
1.5
.
But
where
I
say
,
during
life
,
hee
saith
,
Ad
pag.
89.
This
addition
needed
not
,
seeing
it
is
grounded
vpon
an
erroneous
conceit
of
mine
owne
,
whereby
I
charge
them
as
holding
the
contrary
.
Secondly
,
that
it
is
not
proued
out
of
the
place
alleaged
.
In
the
former
hee
sheweth
how
audacious
he
is
,
seeing
,
Beza
the
chiefe
patron
of
the
pretended
discipline
,
holdeth
that
the
Presidents
of
the
Presbyteries
(
which
afterwards
,
as
he
saith
,
were
called
Bishoppes
)
ought
to
be
but
for
a
short
time
,
and
that
by
course
,
and
esteemeth
them
which
had
a
perpetuall
presidenship
,
to
be
Bishops
humane
[
g
](A20733-e94800-b)
g
Lib.
1.
cap.
2.
§.
17.
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
.
The
practise
also
of
those
Churches
where
the
discipline
is
vsed
,
doth
prooue
what
their
Founders
thought
was
agreeable
to
Gods
word
.
This
their
conceit
is
euidently
confuted
by
the
Epistles
to
Titus
and
to
Timothy
.
For
seeing
they
doe
confesse
,
that
they
were
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
the
Churches
of
Creet
and
Ephesus
;
it
is
euident
,
that
they
continued
in
this
Presidentshippe
,
whiles
they
liued
there
.
For
it
is
absurd
to
imagine
,
that
Titus
was
sent
to
Creet
,
and
Timothy
to
Ephesus
,
to
be
presidents
there
in
their
turnes
,
and
when
their
turnes
were
ended
,
to
be
subiected
to
other
of
the
Presbyters
there
in
their
course
.
But
these
things
the
refuter
doth
but
cauill
at
by
the
way
.
For
he
granteth
that
Titus
had
this
superioritie
which
we
speake
of
:
his
maine
answer
is
,
that
Titus
was
not
a
Bishop
.
Which
afterwards
J
proue
in
the
Sermon
,
by
the
common
consent
of
the
antient
and
most
approoued
Writers
of
the
Church
;
with
whose
affirmation
,
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
if
this
Refuters
deniall
shall
be
weighed
in
the
ballance
of
an
vnpartiall
iudgement
,
it
will
be
found
as
light
as
vanitie
it selfe
.
But
of
this
question
more
hereafter
[
h
](A20733-e94910-b)
h
Lib.
4
cap.
4.
.
In
the
meane
time
,
J
will
but
desire
the
Reader
to
take
this
for
granted
,
because
it
cannot
be
denied
,
that
if
Titus
was
Bishop
of
Creet
,
then
Bishops
had
this
threefold
superioritie
which
I
speake
of
.
Where
I
commend
this
order
of
Church
gouernement
,
consisting
in
the
superiority
of
Bishoppes
,
and
inferioritie
of
other
Ministers
;
this
graue
and
learned
Refuter
maketh
a
scorne
at
it
,
saying
,
It
is
a
toy
to
please
children
,
and
a
gay
Epiphonema
wanting
a
note
of
exclamation
(
he
would
haue
said
,
acclamation
)
to
grace
it
.
The
which
argueth
his
spite
against
the
gouernment
of
Bishoppes
,
rather
then
his
might
,
being
neither
able
to
endure
the
iust
commendation
of
episcopall
gouernment
,
nor
yet
to
confute
it
.
For
what
hath
he
but
trifles
and
toies
to
obiect
against
it
?
For
where
hee
saith
,
I
begge
the
question
,
supposing
ech
Church
to
be
a
diocesse
;
the
conscience
of
the
Reader
,
I
hope
also
of
the
Refuter
,
will
testifie
,
that
what
I
suppose
in
this
behalfe
,
hath
beene
before
sufficiently
prooued
.
Besides
,
those
with
whom
I
principally
contend
in
this
point
,
doe
confesse
the
Churches
indued
with
power
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernement
,
to
haue
beene
dioceses
[
l
](A20733-e95010-b)
l
Lib.
1.
cap.
2.
§.
14
,
as
hath
beene
shewed
.
I
say
then
(
which
also
I
prooued
afterwards
by
the
testimonies
of
Cyprian
and
Ierome
,
whereto
the
authoritie
of
[
k
](A20733-e95060-b)
k
Basil
,
epist.
67.
ad
Ancyr
.
professeth
that
the
members
of
the
Church
are
by
the
gouernment
of
the
Bishop
,
as
it
were
of
the
soule
,
vnited
and
knit
together
.
Whether
the
vnitie
of
ech
Church
,
depend
vpon
the
vnity
of
the
B.
Basil
may
bee
added
)
that
the
vnitie
of
each
Church
,
meaning
a
diocesse
,
dependeth
of
the
vnitie
of
the
Bishoppe
:
and
the
setting
vp
of
a
second
,
vnlesse
it
were
by
way
of
coadiutorshippe
,
hath
euer
been
esteemed
the
making
of
a
schisme
in
the
Church
.
But
of
this
more
anon
.
§
.
2.
But
let
vs
heare
,
if
it
bee
worth
the
hearing
,
what
more
particularly
hee
obiecteth
against
these
three
points
.
And
first
he
trifleth
to
no
purpose
,
when
he
asketh
,
If
there
bee
not
as
much
vnity
in
a
parish
vnder
one
Pastor
,
as
in
a
diocesse
vnder
a
Bishoppe
.
For
though
ech
parish
,
if
it
were
,
according
to
the
new
conceit
,
an
entire
body
within
it selfe
,
vnsubordinate
to
any
other
,
may
perhappes
haue
vnitie
within
it selfe
:
yet
in
the
Church
of
the
diocesse
or
prouince
,
that
may
happen
(
which
Ierome
affirmeth
is
like
to
happen
,
where
is
no
Bishoppe
)
that
there
shall
bee
as
many
schismes
as
parishes
.
And
surely
what
man
of
iudgement
and
moderation
,
can
without
horrour
thinke
of
those
manifold
schismes
and
diuisions
which
would
ensue
,
if
euery
parish
should
haue
(
according
to
the
newe
conceit
)
sufficient
authoritie
within
it selfe
vnsubordinate
and
independent
,
for
the
gouernment
of
it selfe
,
in
all
causes
ecclesiasticall
?
Yea
but
saith
he
,
If
there
bee
not
as
great
vnitie
of
the
Church
in
a
parish
vnder
one
Pastor
,
as
in
a
diocesse
vnder
one
Bishoppe
,
then
the
more
Churches
are
vnder
one
gouernement
,
the
greater
is
the
vnitie
.
But
the
consequent
is
false
,
therefore
the
antecedent
.
The
consequence
of
the
proposition
is
true
,
being
not
extended
without
the
limits
of
the
question
.
The
more
particular
Churches
in
any
one
visible
Church
are
subordinate
to
one
Bishoppe
,
the
greater
is
the
vnitie
.
But
by
one
visible
Church
I
meane
the
Christian
people
of
one
diocesse
,
or
of
one
prouince
,
or
at
the
most
of
one
Nation
.
For
the
Christian
people
liuing
vnder
diuers
lawes
,
as
they
be
diuers
Nations
,
so
are
they
diuers
visible
Churches
,
though
the
faithfull
in
them
all
are
members
of
one
and
the
same
Catholike
Church
.
Let
vs
heare
how
he
prooueth
the
assumption
.
If
the
more
Churches
are
vnder
one
gouernment
the
greater
vnitie
,
then
welfare
the
Pope
,
who
if
this
be
true
,
maketh
vnitie
of
all
Churches
in
the
world
.
As
who
should
say
,
all
the
Churches
in
the
world
are
vnder
the
Popes
gouernment
:
so
that
whiles
hee
denieth
the
superiority
of
Bishoppes
,
hee
seemeth
(
else
there
is
no
sense
in
his
speech
)
to
hold
the
Popes
supremacie
.
If
any
man
shall
say
,
that
as
the
vnity
of
ech
Church
dependeth
on
the
singular
preeminence
of
the
Bishoppe
:
so
the
vnity
of
the
whole
Catholicke
Church
by
the
same
reason
shall
depend
of
the
Popes
supremacy
,
(
which
seemeth
to
haue
beene
the
Refuters
meaning
,
who
desireth
as
much
as
may
bee
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishoppes
and
supremacy
of
the
Pope
may
seeme
to
bee
of
one
tenure
:
)
I
answere
,
that
the
vnitie
of
the
whole
Church
standeth
in
this
;
that
it
is
one
body
,
vnder
one
head
Christ
.
And
as
in
a
diocesse
,
to
set
vp
a
second
head
,
is
to
set
vp
an
Antibishoppe
,
and
to
make
a
schisme
from
the
true
Bishoppe
:
so
in
the
whole
Church
,
to
acknowledge
a
second
head
,
is
to
set
vp
Antichrist
,
and
to
make
an
apostasie
from
Christ
.
Neither
was
it
euer
the
meaning
of
our
Sauiour
,
that
as
euery
particular
Church
should
be
vnder
one
Pastor
,
so
the
whole
Church
should
be
vnder
one
visible
head
,
or
earthly
Monarch
.
For
then
would
not
he
haue
furnished
his
twelue
Apostles
with
equall
power
and
authority
,
as
I
haue
said
before
.
no
ordination
at
all
without
a
Bishoppe
,
Ad
pag.
83.
or
that
the
Bishop
had
the
sole
power
thereof
.
Thus
being
resolued
to
wrangle
,
if
he
finde
not
matter
to
cauill
at
,
he
will
faine
it
.
I
did
not
say
there
could
be
no
ordination
without
a
Bishoppe
:
but
that
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
to
our
age
,
it
hath
been
the
receiued
opinion
in
the
Church
of
God
,
that
the
right
of
ordination
of
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
is
such
a
peculiar
prerogatiue
of
BB.
as
that
ordinarily
and
regularly
,
there
could
be
no
lawfull
ordination
but
by
a
Bishop
:
otherwise
I
doe
confesse
in
the
sermon
,
that
extraordinarily
,
and
in
case
of
necessity
,
Presbyters
may
ordaine
in
the
want
of
a
Bishop
.
Concerning
the
third
,
he
saith
it
is
enough
to
preserue
good
order
in
Churches
,
if
iurisdiction
be
in
the
ministers
and
Presbyters
.
Hee
meaneth
in
the
seuerall
parishes
,
which
may
after
a
fashion
be
gouerned
,
where
the
supreame
ecclesiasticall
officer●
(
I
meane
the
parish
minister
)
assisted
with
such
a
senate
,
as
ech
parish
is
like
to
afford
,
hath
the
reines
of
gouernment
in
all
causes
ecclesiasticall
committed
to
them
.
But
I
pray
you
,
how
shall
there
be
any
good
order
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Churches
of
a
diocesse
,
or
prouince
,
when
euery
parish
is
so
according
to
the
new
conceipt
an
entire
body
of
it selfe
,
(
indeed
a
member
by
Schisme
rent
from
the
the
rest
)
as
it
hath
neither
consociation
with
▪
nor
subordination
to
others
?
For
they
are
not
gouerned
by
consociation
,
who
deny
the
definitiue
power
of
synods
,
as
our
new
Disciplinarians
do
;
neither
do
they
acknowledge
any
subordination
:
for
their
Pastor
forsooth
is
the
supreme
ecclesiasticall
officer
,
and
the
power
of
ech
parish
is
independent
,
immediatly
deriued
from
Christ
.
Now
,
how
is
it
possible
there
should
be
good
order
in
the
gouernment
of
so
many
parishes
in
a
Kingdome
,
where
is
no
subordination
;
no
superiours
,
nor
inferiours
,
but
all
equall
?
But
this
is
enough
for
our
Disciplinarians
,
if
they
might
be
subiect
to
no
superiors
,
but
that
each
of
them
might
be
the
supreme
ecclesiasticall
officer
in
euery
Church
.
(
Serm.
sect.
4.
pag.
32.
As
touching
the
first
,
to
pag.
36.
l.
a
fine
8.
)
Jn
this
section
I
proue
,
that
the
Bishops
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
singularity
of
preeminence
for
terme
of
life
.
Which
is
a
point
very
materiall
,
prouing
both
against
the
new
Disciplinarians
,
that
the
BB.
were
diocesan
,
there
being
but
one
for
ech
diocesse
,
as
hath
been
touched
before
:
and
against
the
elder
,
that
the
BB.
were
not
such
as
their
Presidents
of
the
Presbytery
,
or
Moderators
of
assemblies
among
them
,
whose
preeminence
is
but
a
priority
of
order
,
and
but
for
a
short
time
,
parity
of
Ministers
,
which
is
the
other
maine
piller
of
the
pretended
discipline
.
Here
therefore
it
behoued
the
Refuter
,
if
his
cause
were
such
,
as
indeed
he
could
maintaine
with
soundnes
of
learning
,
and
euidence
of
truth
,
both
to
haue
disproued
this
superiority
of
BB.
and
to
haue
proued
his
parity
of
Ministers
.
But
he
passeth
by
in
haste
,
touching
only
vpon
the
points
,
as
a
dogge
by
the
riuer
Nilus
,
not
daring
to
stay
by
it
;
&
yet
so
brag
he
is
,
that
he
would
seem
to
haste
away
not
for
feare
,
but
rather
in
disdain
,
as
not
vouchsafing
to
waste
time
in
a
matter
either
so
impertinent
,
as
the
former
part
of
this
section
,
or
so
needlesse
,
as
the
latter
.
For
this
is
his
vsual
guise
,
to
cast
off
those
points
of
the
Sermon
,
which
indeed
are
most
materiall
,
as
impertinent
or
needlesse
.
The
former
is
impertinent
,
because
it
is
not
prooued
to
belong
to
those
seuen
Angels
,
nor
within
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
.
Which
is
a
meere
euasion
,
vnlearned
,
and
J
greatly
doubt
also
vnconscionable
.
Doe
I
not
plainely
note
that
these
seuen
Angels
had
this
singularity
of
preeminence
,
when
as
I
say
the
holy
Ghost
teacheth
,
that
whereas
there
were
many
Presbyters
▪
who
also
were
Angels
in
euery
Church
:
yet
there
was
but
one
,
who
was
the
Angell
of
ech
Church
?
For
to
his
obiection
of
their
not
being
diocesan
Bishops
,
I
haue
answered
before
.
And
for
the
time
,
doe
I
not
affirme
,
that
Timothy
had
this
singularity
of
preeminence
at
Ephesus
,
Titus
in
Creet
,
Epaphroditus
in
Philippi
,
Archippus
at
Colosse
in
the
Apostles
times
?
As
for
the
rest
of
my
witnesses
,
they
doe
either
testifie
de
iure
,
which
in
their
iudgement
is
perpetuall
;
or
if
they
speak
de
facto
,
it
is
of
that
which
was
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Cornelius
the
worthy
martyr
,
who
was
Bishop
of
Rome
about
the
yeere
two
hundred
fifty
,
auoucheth
,
that
there
ought
to
be
but
[
a
](A20733-e95470-b)
a
Epist
Cornel.
apud
Euseb.
lib.
6.
c.
43.
one
Bishop
in
a
Catholike
Church
,
though
the
number
of
Presbyters
and
other
clergy
men
were
very
great
,
and
imputeth
it
as
a
matter
of
great
ignorance
to
Nouatian
,
that
he
did
not
know
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
there
ought
to
be
but
one
Bishop
in
a
Catholike
Church
,
wherein
he
knew
there
were
forty
six
Presbyters
,
&c.
This
testimony
is
reiected
,
because
it
was
giuen
fifty
yeeres
after
the
date
:
which
were
but
an
euasion
,
if
it
did
testifie
de
facto
onely
.
But
seeing
Cornelius
speaketh
de
iure
,
of
what
ought
to
be
,
I
hope
that
which
ought
not
to
haue
been
in
Cornelius
his
time
,
was
not
lawfull
before
,
vnlesse
the
Refuter
can
shew
,
that
before
Cornelius
his
time
,
plurality
of
Bishops
in
one
Church
was
counted
lawfull
.
§
.
5.
The
Councell
of
Nice
[
b
](A20733-e95590-b)
b
Conc.
Nic.
cap.
8.
(
whose
testimonie
I
also
alleaged
)
was
of
this
iudgement
,
that
there
ought
not
to
bee
two
Bishoppes
in
one
Citie
.
For
hauing
decreed
,
that
when
the
Catharists
,
that
is
,
Puritans
or
Nouatians
,
returned
to
the
Catholike
Church
,
those
who
were
of
the
clergy
should
retaine
their
degree
,
as
hee
that
was
a
Deacon
or
a
Presbyter
should
so
continue
,
and
likewise
a
Bishoppe
(
for
euen
the
Puritanes
or
Catharists
themselues
had
their
Bishoppes
)
if
there
were
not
another
alreadie
in
the
Catholike
Church
.
But
if
there
were
a
Bishoppe
of
the
Catholike
Church
alreadie
,
then
it
is
manifest
[
c
](A20733-e95610-b)
c
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
before
hand
,
that
the
Bishoppe
of
the
Church
shall
haue
the
honour
of
the
Bishoppe
:
but
hee
that
was
called
Bishoppe
among
the
Catharists
shall
haue
the
honour
of
a
Presbyter
:
vnlesse
it
please
the
Bishop
to
communicate
vnto
him
the
honour
of
the
name
.
But
if
that
like
him
not
,
he
shall
finde
him
out
either
a
Chorepiscopus
,
that
is
,
a
country
Bishops
,
or
a
Presbyters
place
,
that
still
he
may
be
retained
in
the
clergy
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
there
may
not
be
two
Bishop
▪
in
one
Citie
Which
words
in
Ruffinus
[
d
](A20733-e95670-b)
d
Ruffin
.
l.
10.
c.
6.
can
.
10.
Conc.
Cabilon
.
ca.
4.
are
the
tenth
Canon
:
Ne
in
vna
Ciuitate
duo
sint
Episcopi
.
Augustine
also
vnderstood
,
though
somewhat
too
late
,
that
it
was
forbidden
by
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
that
there
should
be
any
more
Bishops
in
a
Church
then
one
.
For
how
soeuer
,
whiles
he
was
ignorant
thereof
,
he
was
drawne
to
take
vpon
him
the
B●shopricke
of
Hippo
,
whiles
Valerius
was
aliue
;
yet
when
himselfe
was
old
,
and
desired
that
Eradius
might
bee
his
Coa●●utor
,
whom
also
he
nominated
for
his
successor
;
yet
he
thought
it
vnlawfull
that
whiles
himself
liued
he
should
be
ordanied
Bishop
Whiles
Valerius
liued
(
saith
he
[
e
](A20733-e95760-b)
e
August
.
epist.
110.
Possidon
.
in
vita
August
.
c.
8.
)
I
was
ordained
Bishop
,
and
I
sate
with
him
,
both
of
vs
being
ignorant
,
that
it
was
forbidden
by
the
Councell
of
Nice
.
But
what
was
reprehended
in
me
,
shall
not
be
blamed
in
him
.
Or
as
Possidonius
speaketh
,
Quod
sibi
factum
esse
doluit
▪
alijs
fieri
noluit
.
In
the
next
place
,
I
bring
the
testimonies
of
Ierome
[
f
](A20733-e95840-b)
f
In
Phil.
1.1
.
,
Chrysostome
,
Ambrose
,
Theodoret
,
and
Oecumenius
on
Phil.
1.
All
which
(
I
confesse
)
liued
after
the
two
hundred
yeeres
:
but
they
testifie
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
there
could
be
no
more
Bishops
then
one
.
And
the
like
hath
Primasius
on
the
same
place
.
To
all
this
hee
answers
,
that
he
will
not
greatly
striue
about
mens
deuices
:
which
no●withstanding
he
can
neuer
proue
to
bee
humane
;
and
I
trust
the
singularity
of
preeminence
in
each
of
these
Angels
,
in
Timothy
,
in
Titus
,
&c.
was
no
humane
deuice
.
But
though
he
will
not
striue
,
yet
he
alleageth
that
little
which
hee
was
able
,
and
that
also
more
then
himselfe
doth
beleeue
to
be
true
.
For
he
obiecteth
that
Epiphanius
and
Eusebius
also
in
his
ecclesiasticall
story
,
reckon
both
Peter
and
Paul
for
Bishops
of
Rome
at
one
time
.
Founders
they
both
were
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
as
Irenaeus
[
g
](A20733-e95960-b)
g
Lib.
3.
ca.
3.
testifieth
,
and
hauing
founded
the
Church
,
ordained
Linus
Bishop
:
but
that
either
of
them
both
,
and
much
lesse
that
both
at
once
were
Bishops
of
Rome
,
the
Refuter
himselfe
doth
not
beleeue
.
To
what
purpose
then
doth
he
alleage
that
which
himselfe
is
perswaded
to
be
false
?
Would
he
haue
his
Reader
beleeue
that
to
be
true
,
which
himselfe
beleeueth
to
be
vntrue
?
That
which
he
quoteth
out
of
Athanasius
[
h
](A20733-e96020-b)
h
Vid
Athan.
cont.
Mess.
that
there
were
diuers
Bishops
in
some
one
Church
,
though
I
cannot
finde
,
it
may
be
true
in
time
of
schisme
and
diuision
;
as
at
Antioch
sometimes
there
were
three
Bishops
,
&c.
His
allegation
out
of
D.
Sutcliffe
[
i
](A20733-e96060-b)
i
De
pontif
.
Rom.
l.
1.
c.
5.
is
very
childish
:
as
though
when
he
saith
,
that
Paul
ordained
in
euery
Towne
or
Citie
Presbyters
and
Bishops
;
his
meaning
were
,
that
in
euery
Citie
he
placed
more
Bishops
then
one
.
If
I
should
say
;
there
are
Bishops
placed
in
euery
Citie
or
diocesse
throughout
England
,
J
should
speake
truly
:
and
yet
my
meaning
would
be
,
that
in
euery
diocesse
there
is
but
one
.
Where
I
say
,
who
do
not
deny
other
formes
of
gouernment
to
be
lawfull
,
pag.
95.
and
no
further
hold
the
episcopall
function
to
be
of
diuine
institution
,
then
as
being
ordained
by
the
Apostles
,
it
proceeded
from
God
,
without
implying
any
necessary
perpetuity
thereof
,
pag.
92.
should
now
plainly
auouch
a
necessity
of
retaining
the
gouernment
of
diocesan
BB.
for
the
preseruation
of
the
Church
in
vnity
,
&c.
But
the
Read●r
that
fauoreth
the
Refuters
person
and
cause
,
hath
more
cause
to
be
amazed
at
his
dealing
.
For
first
,
is
not
this
a
plaine
lie
,
and
a
notorious
falsification
of
my
words
,
to
say
I
plainly
auouch
a
necessity
of
retaining
the
gouernment
of
diocesan
Bishops
,
&
c
?
Where
doe
J
mention
or
mean
that
necessity
he
speaketh
of
?
Could
those
words
,
so
is
it
for
the
same
cause
to
be
retained
,
no
otherwise
be
expounded
,
then
as
implying
an
absolute
necessity
?
That
is
to
be
retained
which
is
meet
,
or
fit
,
expedient
or
conuenient
,
profitable
or
needfull
to
be
reteyned
.
Secondly
let
the
reader
remember
how
oft
the
refuter
hath
charged
me
for
saying
the
Bishops
calling
to
be
holden
ᵈ
,
iure
diuino
,
implying
a
perpetuall
necessity
thereof
,
and
chargeth
the
doctrine
[
l
](A20733-e96200-b)
l
Praefat.
pag.
3.
&
5.
of
my
sermon
to
be
in
that
respect
contrary
to
the
lawes
of
our
land
,
which
make
the
forme
of
Church
gouernment
to
be
alterable
by
the
King
;
and
yet
here
acknowledgeth
for
aduantage
,
that
I
holde
no
such
matter
.
Thirdly
let
it
be
obserued
,
how
vnder
this
pretence
of
amazement
,
he
shifteth
of
the
testimony
of
Cyprian
,
which
sitteth
so
neare
to
him
,
and
his
consorts
.
But
the
reader
I
hope
will
beare
in
mind
the
words
off
Cyprian
[
m
](A20733-e96250-b)
m
Cypr.
l.
4.
epist.
9.
,
noting
the
source
of
all
schismes
to
be
this
,
when
the
Bishop
,
who
is
but
one
,
and
gouerneth
the
Church
,
by
the
proud
presumption
of
some
is
contemned
&c.
And
in
the
same
epistle
,
you
ought
to
know
,
saith
he
,
to
Pupianus
,
that
the
Bishop
is
in
the
Church
,
and
the
Church
in
the
Bishop
,
and
that
whosoeuer
are
not
with
the
Bishop
are
not
in
the
Church
;
and
that
they
doe
flatter
themselues
in
vaine
who
haue
not
peace
with
the
Priests
of
God
(
that
is
the
Bishops
)
&c.
To
this
purpose
Cyprian
often
writeth
.
[
n
](A20733-e96310-b)
n
Lib.
1.
epist.
3.
,
Neque
enim
ali●●de
haereses
,
&c.
Neither
haue
heresies
or
schismes
any
other
beginning
then
this
,
that
Gods
Priest
(
meaning
the
Bishop
)
is
not
obeied
.
Neither
is
one
Bishop
for
the
time
,
nor
one
Iudge
in
Christs
steed
acknowledged
,
&c.
Againe
,
haec
sunt
initia
haereticorum
[
o
](A20733-e96380-b)
o
Lib.
3.
epist.
9.
,
these
bee
the
beginnings
of
heretikes
,
these
the
risings
and
indeuors
of
ill
minded
schismatikes
,
that
they
please
themselues
,
and
contemne
their
B.
with
swelling
pride
.
Sic
de
ecclesia
receditur
,
thus
doe
men
depart
from
the
Church
,
&c.
And
in
another
place
[
p
](A20733-e96420-b)
p
Serm.
2
▪
de
zelo
&
liuore
.
Ad
pag.
91.
:
Hence
doe
men
rush
into
heresies
and
schismes
,
when
they
speake
euill
of
Priests
,
and
enuy
their
Bishops
,
&c.
The
Lord
open
their
eies
who
are
faulty
in
this
behalfe
,
that
they
may
see
their
sinne
,
and
touch
their
hearts
that
they
may
repent
thereof
.
Ad
pag.
91.
that
[
q
](A20733-e96500-b)
q
Con●
.
Luciferianos
.
vnlesse
this
singularitie
of
preeminence
be
yeelded
to
the
Bishop
,
there
will
be
as
many
schismes
as
Priests
.
The
second
,
[
r
](A20733-e96530-b)
r
Ad
Euagr.
that
euer
since
Saint
Marks
time
,
the
Presbyters
hauing
elected
one
,
placed
him
in
a
higher
degree
,
and
called
him
Bishoppe
.
The
third
,
that
[
s
](A20733-e96560-b)
s
In
Tit.
1.
when
some
beganne
to
say
,
J
am
of
Paul
,
I
of
Apollo
,
(
which
was
in
the
Apostles
time
)
it
was
decreed
by
the
whole
world
,
that
one
being
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
,
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
in
euery
Church
,
vnto
whom
the
care
of
the
whole
Church
should
appertaine
.
Of
these
allegations
,
the
first
giueth
testimony
to
this
superiority
de
iure
:
the
other
two
testifying
de
facto
,
beare
witnesse
that
it
hath
been
so
in
and
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
.
These
testimonies
are
featly
auoided
,
with
a
promise
to
answere
them
afterwards
,
when
he
will
say
neuer
a
word
to
the
present
,
not
almost
to
any
purpose
.
The
second
part
of
this
section
,
as
not
worth
the
mentioning
,
hee
hath
so
oft
refuted
it
alreadie
.
Refuted
oft
?
I
would
bee
sory
that
hee
should
bee
able
with
soundnesse
of
reason
and
euidence
of
truth
to
refute
any
one
sentence
in
the
Sermon
.
All
the
refutation
of
this
point
,
which
hitherto
wee
haue
had
,
was
this
:
that
I
charged
them
with
vntruths
,
that
I
threaten
kindnesse
on
them
,
that
I
had
need
to
be
as
eloquent
as
Pericles
,
if
I
could
perswade
that
any
of
them
haue
said
this
,
when
as
I
haue
brought
foorth
most
plaine
and
euident
allegations
to
this
purpose
.
And
although
I
forbeare
to
mention
Beza
,
tendering
his
credit
,
yet
what
I
heere
confuted
,
is
auouched
by
him
in
his
twenty
third
chapter
of
his
booke
,
concerning
the
degrees
of
Ministers
,
chiefly
in
the
141.142.143
.
pages
.
Now
because
this
point
is
of
great
moment
,
For
when
Nouatian
was
ordained
a
second
Bishop
in
Rome
besides
Cornelius
,
some
of
the
Clergy
hauing
ben
before
Confessors
,
who
also
had
consented
to
him
,
mooued
with
repentance
,
and
returning
from
schisme
vnto
the
Church
,
confessed
their
error
,
saying
[
t
](A20733-e96770-b)
t
Concil.
epist.
apud
Cypr.
lib.
3.
epist.
11.
,
Nos
errorem
nostrum
confitemur
,
&c.
Neith●r
are
we
ignorant
that
there
ought
to
be
one
God
,
one
Christ
the
Lord
,
whom
we
haue
confessed
,
one
holy
Ghost
,
one
Bishop
in
a
Catholike
Church
.
Likewise
when
Constantius
being
intreated
by
the
godly
Matrons
in
Rome
,
gaue
consent
that
Liberius
should
returne
,
but
withall
appointed
that
hee
and
Felix
should
rule
the
Church
in
common
:
the
faithfull
people
deriding
that
sentence
of
the
Arrian
Emperor
,
with
one
voice
cried
,
as
[
u
](A20733-e96840-b)
u
Theod.
lib.
2.
cap.
11.
Theodoret
reporteth
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
one
God
,
one
Christ
,
one
Bishop
.
After
these
speeches
of
the
true
Christian
people
adorned
with
pietie
and
iustice
,
Liberius
returned
,
and
Felix
departed
to
another
Citie
,
and
shortly
died
.
Which
came
to
passe
by
Gods
good
prouidence
,
saith
Sozomen
[
*
](A20733-e96930-b)
*
Soz
l
4.
c.
15.
,
that
the
seat
of
Peter
,
should
not
be
diffamed
as
gouerned
at
once
by
two
rulers
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
which
is
a
note
of
dissension
,
and
repugnant
to
the
law
ecclesiasticall
.
2.
And
that
the
adding
of
a
second
Bishop
was
iudged
vnlawfull
and
esteemed
as
a
note
of
schisme
,
Cyprian
in
some
other
places
besides
those
which
before
I
cited
,
doth
testifie
.
Writing
therfore
to
the
foresaid
Confessors
,
who
had
ioined
with
Nouatian
[
x
](A20733-e97020-b)
x
Lib.
3.
epist.
2.
,
Granat
me
,
saith
he
,
it
greiueth
me
&c.
When
I
vnderstood
that
you
there
against
ecclesiasticall
order
,
against
the
Euangelical
law
,
against
the
vnity
of
Catholicke
institution
,
haue
thought
that
another
Bishop
was
to
be
made
,
that
is
to
say
,
which
is
vngodly
,
and
vnlawfull
to
be
done
,
that
another
Church
should
be
instituted
,
the
members
of
Christrent
asunder
,
the
minde
and
body
of
the
Lords
flocke
,
which
is
but
one
,
to
be
torne
with
schismaticall
emulation
.
And
in
another
place
[
y
](A20733-e97070-b)
y
Li.
4.
Epist.
2.
,
Where
a
Bishop
is
once
lawfully
ordained
,
whosoeuer
now
will
be
made
Bishop
,
it
is
necessarie
that
he
should
be
put
forth
of
the
Church
,
and
that
he
haue
not
the
Churches
ordination
,
who
doth
not
hold
the
vnity
of
the
Church
.
Whosoeuer
he
be
,
though
he
boast
much
of
himselfe
,
and
challenge
verie
much
to
himselfe
;
he
is
prophane
,
he
is
an
aliant
,
he
is
out
of
the
Church
.
And
for
as
much
,
as
after
the
first
Bishop
,
there
cannot
be
a
second
,
whosoeuer
after
that
one
,
who
ought
to
be
alone
,
is
made
,
he
is
not
the
second
,
but
none
at
all
.
Thirdly
,
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
,
Eusebius
,
and
other
approued
authors
,
most
plainly
prouing
,
that
there
was
but
one
Bishop
at
once
in
the
ancient
and
Apostolicall
Churches
.
Fourthly
,
what
the
preeminence
and
superioritie
of
Bishops
was
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
and
others
of
the
Clergie
,
appeareth
by
this
,
that
in
good
writers
they
are
said
the
Bishop
his
Presbyters
,
the
Bishops
Deacons
,
the
Bishops
clergy
.
Thus
Arius
[
a
](A20733-e97150-b)
a
Epiph.
haer
.
69.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
is
said
to
haue
been
Alexanders
presbyter
,
Petrus
and
Irenaus
[
b
](A20733-e97210-b)
b
Athanas.
Ad
sol●t
.
vitam
agentes
.
,
Timothe●●
[
c
](A20733-e97240-b)
c
Ruff.
in
hist.
l.
1.
c.
17.
and
Macarius
[
d
](A20733-e97280-b)
d
Theodor.
l.
2.
c.
8.
to
haue
been
Athanasius
[
e
](A20733-e97320-b)
e
Socr.
l.
2.
c.
23.
his
Presbyters
;
the
vicegerents
of
Siluester
,
in
the
councill
of
Nice
were
his
Presbyters
[
f
](A20733-e97360-b)
f
Euseb.
de
vit.
Const.
l.
3.
.
Thus
[
g
](A20733-e97380-b)
g
Sozom.
l
8.
c.
15.
Crispio
is
said
to
haue
been
Epiphaniu●
his
archdeacon
,
Heraclides
[
h
](A20733-e97440-b)
h
Socr.
l.
6.
c.
11.
to
haue
been
Chrysostomes
deacon
.
In
a
word
,
all
of
the
Clergie
were
said
to
be
the
Bishops
clerks
,
as
in
the
councill
of
Africke
[
i
](A20733-e97480-b)
i
Conc.
Afric
.
c.
21.
Carth.
grac.
c.
54.
Socr.
l.
2
c.
23.
:
Let
no
Bishop
take
anothers
clerke
,
without
the
consent
of
him
whose
clerk
he
is
.
The
which
is
a
plain
argument
of
the
great
preeminence
which
the
Bishops
of
the
primitiue
Church
had
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
and
others
of
the
clergie
.
To
these
we
will
adde
the
testimonie
of
Bucer
[
k
](A20733-e97540-b)
k
De
regno
Christi
.
l.
2.
c.
12
,
against
whom
the
Refuter
cannot
except
,
as
being
partiall
for
Bishops
.
By
the
perpetuall
obseruation
of
the
Church
,
saith
he
,
euen
from
the
Apostles
themselues
,
we
see
it
seemed
good
to
the
holie
Ghost
,
that
among
the
Presbyters
,
to
whom
the
charge
of
the
Church
is
specially
committed
,
one
shold
haue
the
singular
charge
of
the
Churches
:
and
in
that
charge
and
care
gouerned
al
others
;
for
which
cause
the
name
of
Bishop
was
attributed
to
these
chiefe
Gouernors
of
Churches
:
Howbeit
,
without
the
counsell
of
the
other
Presbyters
they
ought
not
to
determine
any
thing
&c.
Thus
much
of
the
Preeminence
of
Bishops
.
CHAP.
IIII.
That
Bishops
were
superior
in
power
,
Ierome
.
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
and
first
in
the
power
of
ordination
.
(
Serm.
sect.
5.
pag.
36.
Let
vs
see
if
Bishops
were
not
also
superiour
in
power
.
Hearken
to
Ierome
.
The
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
on
the
dignitie
of
the
chiefe
Priest
or
Bishop
:
to
whom
if
there
be
not
yeelded
exors
&
ab
omnibus
eminens
potestas
,
a
peerelesse
power
,
and
eminent
aboue
all
,
there
will
be
so
many
Schismes
in
the
Churches
,
as
there
be
Priests
.
)
THis
testimony
is
handled
by
him
as
Sir
Christopher
Blunts
head
was
vsed
,
after
his
apprehension
;
first
healed
,
and
then
cut
off
:
For
first
,
he
explanes
the
testimonie
,
and
then
reiects
it
.
He
restraineth
Ieromes
speech
to
the
Church
in
his
owne
time
,
viz.
in
the
end
of
the
fourth
age
,
saying
,
That
no
man
can
without
open
violence
stretch
it
further
.
Which
is
as
vnlearned
a
shift
,
as
euer
was
heard
of
.
As
though
Ierome
had
spoken
onely
of
that
which
was
in
his
time
,
and
not
of
that
which
in
his
judgement
ought
to
be
.
Was
it
Ieromes
judgement
,
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
was
needfull
for
the
auoiding
of
Schismes
in
his
time
onely
?
doth
he
not
plainly
teach
,
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
began
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
that
at
the
first
they
were
ordained
for
auoiding
of
Shismes
?
For
the
former
,
doth
he
not
say
,
that
Iames
was
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
Timothe
of
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
?
Doth
he
not
say
,
that
euer
since
Saint
Marks
time
,
there
haue
been
Bishops
placed
in
a
superiour
degree
aboue
the
Presbytes
?
Doth
he
not
call
the
superioritie
of
BB.
a
tradition
Apostolicall
?
and
doth
he
not
say
,
that
it
began
in
the
whole
world
,
when
diuisions
began
in
the
Church
,
saying
,
I
am
of
Paul
,
&c.
which
was
in
the
Apostles
time
?
&c.
As
touching
the
latter
,
he
saith
,
indeed
that
at
the
first
the
Churches
(
vnder
the
Apostles
,
before
BB.
were
ordained
)
were
gouerned
by
the
common
Counsell
of
Presbyters
.
But
whereas
afterwards
one
was
elected
,
who
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
In
Schismatis
remedium
factum
est
,
It
was
prouided
as
a
remedie
against
Schisme
,
lest
euery
man
drawing
after
him
,
should
rend
in
peeces
the
Church
of
Christ
.
And
least
we
should
think
,
that
afterwards
to
be
referred
to
the
times
after
the
Apostles
;
he
addeth
in
the
next
words
,
Nam
&
Alexandriae
,
For
euen
at
Alexandria
,
euer
since
Mark
the
Euangelist
(
who
died
5.
or
6.
yeares
before
Peter
,
and
Paul
,
and
almost
40.
yeares
before
Saint
Iohn
,
)
the
Presbyters
haue
alwaies
chosen
one
,
and
placed
him
in
a
higher
degree
,
and
called
him
Bishop
.
In
Tit.
1.
The
like
he
hath
in
Titum
1.
that
when
diuisions
began
in
the
Church
,
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
,
that
one
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
to
whom
omnis
Ecclesiae
cura
pertineret
,
&
Schismatum
semina
tollerentur
,
the
care
of
the
whole
Church
,
or
all
the
care
of
the
Church
should
appertaine
,
and
that
the
seeds
of
Schismes
might
be
taken
away
,
or
as
he
speakth
afterwards
,
vt
dissensionum
plantaria
euellerentur
ad
vnum
omnem
solicitudinem
esse
dela●●●
▪
that
the
first
plants
or
sets
of
dissensions
might
be
plucked
out
,
the
whole
care
was
committed
to
one
.
It
is
most
plaine
therefore
,
that
in
Ieromes
judgement
,
the
superioritie
of
BB.
was
needfull
for
the
auoiding
of
Schisme
,
not
onely
in
his
own
time
,
but
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
when
Bishops
were
first
ordained
.
And
as
he
teacheth
,
that
BB.
were
instituted
for
auoiding
of
Schisme
,
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
so
his
judgement
in
the
place
alleaged
was
,
that
for
the
same
cause
they
are
necessarily
to
be
reteined
:
Yea
,
he
saith
,
Salus
Ecclesia
,
The
safetie
of
the
Church
dependeth
on
this
dignitie
of
Bishops
,
and
that
vnlesse
a
peerelesse
and
supereminent
power
be
giuen
vnto
them
,
there
would
be
as
many
Schismes
in
the
Churches
,
as
there
be
Priests
.
For
,
To
stretch
it
to
the
Apostles
times
(
saith
he
)
were
to
make
Ierome
a
wilde
headed
〈◊〉
indeed
.
Thus
Ierome
,
if
he
agree
not
with
the
conceipts
of
some
giddie
heads
,
shall
be
judged
wild-headed
.
And
why
so
I
pray
you
?
For
three
reasons
.
First
,
because
Ierome
in
diuers
places
disputeth
,
and
concludeth
that
BB.
and
Presbyters
are
equall
by
the
word
of
God
.
Whereunto
I
answeare
,
that
this
is
all
which
Ierome
in
this
cause
saith
,
that
Bishops
,
and
Presbyters
are
the
〈◊〉
in
the
Scriptures
.
His
meaning
is
,
that
before
Bishops
were
ordained
,
the
names
Episcopus
&
Presbyter
were
confounded
,
and
the
same
men
were
called
Presbyters
,
and
Bishops
;
which
I
do
not
denie
.
But
no
wheres
he
saith
,
that
Bishops
and
Presbyters
were
equall
:
for
before
BB.
were
ordained
,
he
could
not
say
that
Presbyters
and
Bishops
were
equall
:
he
saith
they
were
the
same
.
After
Bishops
were
ordained
,
which
he
acknowledgeth
to
haue
been
done
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
that
by
the
Apostles
,
for
which
cause
he
calleth
their
institution
,
a
tradition
Apostolicall
;
he
plainly
confesseth
,
that
one
,
who
was
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
,
and
was
called
the
Bishop
of
the
Church
,
to
haue
been
placed
in
a
higher
degree
.
But
hereof
we
shall
haue
occasion
hereafter
to
intreat
more
fully
.
His
second
reason
:
Ierome
maketh
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
in
Alexandria
the
first
authors
of
aduancing
one
minister
aboue
another
in
power
.
The
words
are
,
Nam
&
Alexandriae
á
Marco
Euangelista
vsque
ad
Heraclam
&
Dionysium
Episcopos
,
Presbyteri
semper
vnum
ex
se
electum
in
●●ccelsiori
gradu
collocatum
Episcopum
nominabant
,
quo
modo
si
exercitus
imperatorem
faciat
.
For
euen
at
Alexandria
euer
since
Mark
the
Euangelist
,
vntill
the
Bishops
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
the
Presbyters
haue
alwaies
called
one
,
being
chosen
out
of
themselues
,
and
placed
him
in
a
higher
degree
,
Bishop
;
euen
as
an
armie
chooseth
their
chiefetaine
.
Which
words
as
so
far
from
giuing
the
least
inckling
of
the
Refuters
conceit
,
that
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
should
be
the
first
authors
of
aduancing
Bishops
,
that
they
plainely
declare
the
Bishops
euer
from
Saint
Marks
time
to
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
to
haue
been
placed
in
a
higher
degree
aboue
the
Presbyters
,
as
the
generall
aboue
the
souldiours
.
T.
C.
conceit
,
who
collecteth
the
cleane
contrarie
to
our
refuter
,
hath
the
better
glosse
:
for
,
he
imagineth
,
that
vntill
Heralas
,
and
Dionysius
,
they
who
were
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
,
were
called
Bishops
,
but
then
godly
men
misliking
the
appropriating
of
the
name
to
one
in
a
Church
,
ceased
to
call
him
so
.
And
he
might
haue
added
with
no
lesse
colour
out
of
the
words
,
that
the
Bishops
till
then
had
been
placed
in
a
higher
degree
aboue
other
ministers
,
but
then
good
men
misliking
their
aduancement
aboue
their
fellow
ministers
,
brought
them
a
peg
lower
.
To
these
conjectures
the
words
would
seeme
to
them
that
vnderstand
not
the
right
meaning
thereof
,
(
which
heretofore
I
haue
declared
)
to
giue
some
colour
of
likelyhood
,
were
it
not
that
the
practize
of
the
Church
did
openly
proclaime
the
contrarie
.
Wherefore
,
of
all
collectors
,
my
Refuter
shal
beare
away
the
bell
:
For
,
he
that
can
collect
out
of
these
words
,
Euer
vntill
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
,
the
Bishop
was
placed
in
a
higher
degree
,
that
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
were
the
first
that
aduanced
the
Bishops
,
needs
not
doubt
to
collect
,
quidlibet
,
ex
quolibet
,
what
himselfe
will
,
out
of
any
thing
whatsoeuer
.
Ierome
in
the
same
Epistle
doth
teach
the
contrarie
,
is
most
false
:
For
Ierome
plainly
confesseth
the
Bishop
to
be
superiour
in
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
in
the
end
concludeth
,
that
what
Aaron
and
his
sonnes
,
and
the
Leuites
were
in
the
temple
,
the
same
let
Bishops
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
,
challenge
to
themselues
in
the
Church
.
The
Refuter
hauing
thus
salued
this
testimonie
of
Ierome
,
in
the
end
rejects
it
:
For
if
this
be
true
,
that
vnlesse
the
Bishop
haue
a
peerelesse
power
,
there
will
be
as
many
Schismes
in
the
Church
,
as
there
be
Priests
;
then
by
the
like
reason
Bellarmine
may
argue
,
if
there
be
not
a
peerelesse
power
giuen
to
the
Pope
,
there
will
be
as
many
Schismes
in
the
Churches
,
as
there
ar
Bishops
.
but
this
latter
consequence
is
naught
:
so
is
the
former
.
Thus
Ierome
,
on
whose
only
authoritie
among
the
ancient
,
the
Disciplinarians
in
this
cause
relie
,
when
he
speaketh
any
thing
for
the
BB.
his
credit
is
no
better
with
them
,
then
if
he
had
spoken
for
the
Popes
supremacie
.
But
this
is
his
desperate
malice
against
the
holy
calling
of
Bishops
,
whereby
he
seeketh
euery
where
to
parallele
the
Christian
superioritie
of
BB.
with
the
Antichristian
supremacy
of
the
Pope
.
But
all
in
vaine
:
For
though
it
be
true
in
Ieromes
conceit
,
that
if
there
were
no
Bishops
,
there
would
be
as
many
Schismes
almost
as
Priests
;
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
th●t
if
there
were
no
Pope
,
there
would
bee
as
many
Schismes
as
Bishops
.
For
first
,
experience
teacheth
how
to
judge
of
this
matter
:
for
vntill
the
yeare
607.
the
Pope
neuer
attained
to
his
supremacie
;
and
yet
the
Church
was
more
free
from
Schismes
,
before
that
time
,
then
since
,
whereas
contrariwise
,
when
there
were
no
Bishops
for
a
short
season
,
in
the
Apostles
times
,
in
most
of
the
Churches
,
euery
one
of
the
Presbyters
,
as
Ierome
[
a
](A20733-e98520-b)
a
In
Tit.
1●
.
speaketh
,
sought
to
draw
Disciples
after
him
:
which
he
supposeth
to
haue
been
the
occasion
of
instituting
Bishops
.
Secondly
,
there
is
great
oddes
betweene
BB.
and
the
greatest
number
of
Presbyters
.
One
Bishop
,
say
the
Fathers
of
the
Africane
councill
[
b
](A20733-e98550-b)
b
Conc.
Afr.
c.
22.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
55.
,
may
ordaine
many
Presbyters
,
but
one
man
fit
to
be
a
Bishop
is
hard
to
be
found
.
Thirdly
,
before
there
was
one
supreme
or
vniuersall
Bishop
,
there
was
vnitie
and
communion
betweene
all
the
Bishops
in
Christendome
,
whose
course
to
preserue
vnitie
in
the
Churches
and
to
auoid
Schisme
,
was
to
communicate
the
confessions
of
their
faith
one
with
an
other
by
their
communicatorie
,
pacificall
or
formed
letters
.
And
if
any
were
in
error
,
they
sought
first
seuerally
by
their
letters
to
reclaime
them
;
and
if
they
preuailed
not
,
they
assembled
in
Councils
either
to
reduce
them
to
vnitie
,
or
to
depose
them
.
Cyprian
saith
[
c
](A20733-e98620-b)
c
Li
4.
Epist.
9.
,
that
the
Catholike
Church
is
one
,
not
rent
into
Schismes
nor
diuided
,
but
euery
where
knit
togither
&
coharentium
sibi
inuicem
Sacerdotum
glutino
copulata
,
and
coupled
with
the
glew
as
it
were
of
Bishops
agreeing
mutually
among
themselues
.
And
in
another
place
[
d
](A20733-e98670-b)
d
Lib.
3.
Epist.
13.
,
which
before
hath
beene
alledged
;
Therefore
is
the
bodie
of
Bishops
copious
,
coupled
together
with
the
glew
of
mutuall
concord
,
and
with
the
bond
of
vnitie
,
that
if
any
of
our
companie
shall
be
authour
of
an
Heresie
,
&
shall
endeuour
to
rend
the
flocke
of
Christ
,
and
to
make
hauocke
thereof
,
the
rest
may
helpe
&c.
Whereas
contrariwise
,
if
there
were
one
supreme
and
vniuersall
Bishop
,
whose
authoritie
were
greater
then
of
generall
Councils
,
as
the
Papists
teach
;
when
he
doth
erre
,
who
should
reclame
him
,
when
he
is
exorbitant
,
who
should
reduce
him
into
the
way
,
when
he
shall
draw
with
him
innumerable
troopes
of
soules
into
Hell
,
who
may
say
vnto
him
,
Domine
,
cur
ita
facis
?
Syr
,
why
do
you
so
?
And
as
the
Church
is
to
be
carefull
for
auoiding
Schisme
,
and
preseruation
of
itselfe
in
the
vnitie
of
truth
,
which
may
be
prouided
for
,
as
it
was
wont
,
yea
,
better
then
it
was
wont
(
where
are
Christian
,
and
Orthodoxall
magistrates
)
by
the
BB.
singularitie
of
preeminence
in
euery
seuerall
Church
,
and
mutuall
concord
of
them
in
the
truth
:
so
must
it
be
as
carefull
to
auoid
conspiring
&
consenting
in
vntruth
.
But
where
there
is
one
supreme
and
vniuersall
Bishop
,
when
he
erreth
and
goeth
astray
,
he
becommeth
as
we
see
in
the
Papacie
,
the
head
of
a
Catholike
Apostasie
from
Christ
.
So
that
this
pretended
remedie
against
Schisme
,
causing
a
Catholike
apostasy
,
is
as
much
,
or
more
,
to
be
auoided
then
Schisme
it selfe
,
the
remedie
being
far
worse
then
the
feared
maladie
.
Serm.
sect.
6.
pag.
37.
This
power
is
twofold
,
the
power
of
ordination
and
of
iurisdiction
,
&c.
19.
lines
to
,
Titus
in
Creet
.
)
Where
I
place
the
power
wherein
Bishops
are
superior
to
Presbyters
in
these
two
things
;
the
Reader
is
to
vnderstand
,
that
I
mention
the
principall
,
and
most
essentiall
:
for
otherwise
,
ancient
writers
mention
[
e
](A20733-e98770-b)
e
Damas.
epist.
de
Chorepiscop
.
Hicronym
.
de
7.
ordin
.
eccles.
et
aduers.
Lucifer
.
Leo
epist.
BB.
other
prerogatiues
of
Bishops
,
wherein
their
superioritie
doth
consist
;
as
by
imposition
of
hands
to
confirme
them
that
are
baptized
,
and
publickely
to
reconcile
the
penitents
,
to
consecrate
Churches
&c.
of
some
whereof
Ierome
indeed
saith
,
they
did
belong
ad
honorem
potius
Sacerdotij
,
quàm
ad
legis
necessitatem
,
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
rather
to
the
honor
of
the
Priesthood
,
then
to
the
necessitie
of
law
.
But
what
saith
the
Refuter
?
Now
at
the
last
yet
,
saith
he
,
(
it
seemeth
that
hee
hath
been
long
delaied
,
or
that
he
hath
greatly
longed
,
in
hope
to
do
great
matters
,
to
deale
in
this
matter
of
ordination
)
let
vs
see
,
how
it
is
proued
that
Bishops
must
haue
sole
power
of
ordination
.
But
where
good
sir
,
do
I
say
they
must
haue
the
sole
power
of
ordination
,
which
you
haue
so
oft
objected
,
and
now
againe
do
repeat
?
make
you
no
conscience
of
publishing
vntruthes
?
cannot
BB.
be
superior
to
other
ministers
in
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
jurisdiction
,
which
is
the
thing
which
I
maintaine
,
vnlesse
they
haue
the
sole
power
?
or
do
I
heere
dispute
what
Bishops
must
haue
,
when
I
onely
shew
what
the
ancient
Bishops
were
wont
to
haue
?
If
he
shall
say
,
that
vnlesse
they
had
the
sole
power
of
ordination
,
they
had
not
the
superioritie
which
our
Bishops
haue
;
I
answer
,
that
our
BB.
haue
no
more
the
sole
power
of
ordination
,
then
the
ancient
Bishops
had
.
And
this
I
added
in
the
Sermon
,
that
although
the
power
of
ordination
was
held
in
the
primitiue
Church
to
be
so
peculiar
to
Bishops
,
as
that
ordinarilie
and
regularlie
the
ordination
was
not
thought
lawfull
,
which
was
not
done
by
a
Bishop
:
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
but
that
extraordinarily
,
and
in
case
of
necessitie
,
Presbyters
might
ordaine
.
Howbeit
,
I
must
confesse
,
I
am
not
able
to
alleage
any
approued
examples
thereof
.
If
the
Refuter
can
,
which
I
do
more
then
doubt
of
,
he
shall
do
well
to
produce
them
:
it
may
tend
to
the
credit
of
some
other
Churches
,
it
cannot
be
preiudiciall
to
the
cause
which
I
maintaine
Seeing
therefore
the
Refuter
doth
alter
the
state
of
the
question
,
making
me
to
proue
that
which
I
did
not
intend
,
because
he
could
not
answeare
that
which
was
propounded
:
I
should
neither
wrong
him
,
nor
the
Reader
,
If
I
vouchsafed
him
no
further
answeare
in
this
point
.
But
in
very
truth
,
he
is
so
far
from
refuting
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
in
the
power
of
ordination
which
J
propounded
,
that
he
is
not
able
to
disproue
their
sole
power
,
which
himselfe
hath
foisted
into
the
question
.
For
as
touching
my
first
argument
;
Ad
pag.
92.
BB.
superiour
in
the
power
of
ordination
.
The
1.
proofe
.
whereas
he
frameth
for
me
this
consequence
,
It
hath
been
the
receiued
opinion
in
the
Church
of
God
,
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
,
that
the
right
of
ordination
of
Presbyters
,
is
such
a
peculiar
prerogatiue
of
Bishops
,
as
that
ordinarilie
,
and
regularlie
,
there
could
be
no
ordination
,
but
by
a
Bishop
:
therefore
BB.
haue
sole
authoritie
of
ordination
,
(
he
should
haue
said
,
therefore
they
are
superiour
to
other
ministers
in
the
power
of
ordination
:
)
he
passeth
by
this
consequence
,
though
he
would
faine
perswade
his
Reader
,
that
it
is
lyable
to
(
he
cannot
tell
what
)
just
exception
:
and
only
insisteth
on
the
antecedent
,
which
is
the
assumption
of
his
prolixe
syllogisme
.
But
it
is
worth
the
hearing
,
how
he
doth
disproue
it
.
Forsooth
It
halteth
downe
right
,
hauing
no
strength
but
from
a
false
supposition
(
and
so
proued
to
be
)
that
there
were
alwaies
Diocesan
Bishops
.
Here
the
Refuter
,
if
he
would
haue
said
any
thing
to
satisfie
his
Reader
,
should
haue
produced
some
approued
example
of
ordination
,
either
in
the
Apostles
times
,
or
since
,
performed
by
Presbyters
without
a
Bishop
;
whereby
he
might
haue
disproued
my
assertion
:
but
not
being
able
so
to
doe
,
he
betaketh
himselfe
to
his
ordinarie
trade
of
answearing
by
meere
cauillations
.
He
talketh
of
a
supposition
,
whereon
the
assumption
is
grounded
;
when
as
the
speech
is
simple
,
and
categoricall
as
they
speake
,
and
not
hypotheticall
;
and
the
effect
of
his
answeare
is
not
the
deniall
of
a
supposition
,
but
the
taking
away
of
the
subiect
of
the
question
:
as
if
he
should
say
;
Bishops
were
not
,
therefore
they
had
not
this
power
:
For
where
he
addeth
Diocesan
,
that
is
spoken
vnseasonably
:
for
the
question
now
is
not
what
their
authoritie
was
extensiuè
:
whether
to
a
Diocese
or
not
,
which
in
this
point
is
not
materiall
;
but
what
it
was
intensiuè
in
respect
of
other
ministers
.
By
that
starting
hole
therefore
he
cannot
escape
:
especially
,
if
it
be
added
,
that
the
supposition
is
not
(
as
he
vntruely
saith
)
false
:
for
that
errour
he
will
as
I
hope
recant
,
when
he
shall
haue
read
,
what
I
haue
alledged
for
the
proofe
of
Dioceses
and
Diocesan
Bishops
.
And
whereas
he
saith
,
he
hath
proued
it
to
be
false
;
that
also
is
vntrue
:
for
he
neuer
went
about
it
.
Nec
ausus
est
:
nec
potuit
,
onely
he
rejected
it
in
a
glorious
maner
,
as
being
so
manifestly
false
,
that
he
should
not
need
to
disproue
it
.
But
suppose
for
a
little
while
,
that
the
refuters
,
and
the
rest
of
the
challengers
conceit
were
true
,
that
there
were
no
Bishops
but
parishionall
,
and
that
the
Presbyters
joyned
to
them
were
lay
elders
:
it
would
then
be
knowne
,
when
the
pastorall
charge
was
voide
,
who
did
ordaine
the
new
Bishop
or
Pastor
.
You
will
say
,
that
is
alreadie
defined
.
It
is
one
of
the
maine
positions
which
the
great
challengers
haue
offred
to
prooue
,
that
euery
parish
hath
within
it selfe
authoritie
to
elect
,
ordaine
depose
,
and
depriue
their
Minister
:
Not
that
the
whole
parish
doth
ordaine
,
but
onely
the
Presbyterie
.
Very
good
:
this
then
is
the
effect
of
the
new
Disciplinarians
conceit
,
that
the
power
of
ordination
belongeth
ordinarily
neither
to
Bishops
,
nor
to
other
ministers
,
but
to
their
Presbyterie
consisting
of
lay
elders
.
But
if
they
can
proue
by
any
one
approued
example
,
that
lay
elders
had
euer
,
or
at
any
time
,
right
to
ordaine
,
or
to
impose
hands
,
I
will
yeeld
in
the
whole
cause
.
My
second
proofe
he
hath
peruerted
,
If
the
power
of
ordination
were
not
in
the
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
neither
before
Timothe
and
Titus
were
sent
,
but
in
the
Apostles
;
nor
after
,
but
in
the
Bishops
(
that
is
to
say
,
in
Timothe
and
Titus
,
and
their
successors
)
;
then
the
power
of
ordination
is
a
prerogatiue
peculiar
to
Bishops
,
wherein
they
are
superior
to
other
ministers
.
But
both
the
parts
of
the
antecedent
are
true
:
therefore
the
consequent
.
The
former
part
of
the
antecedent
I
prooue
by
Pauls
substituting
Timothe
at
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
in
Creet
,
to
that
end
,
that
they
might
ordaine
elders
;
notwithstanding
that
there
were
diuerse
Presbyters
in
both
those
Churches
before
.
Whereto
he
answereth
,
that
it
had
been
lawfull
for
the
Presbyters
,
and
people
to
haue
ordained
:
but
at
the
first
,
they
were
lesse
fit
for
the
purpose
,
then
an
Euangelist
.
That
the
people
sometimes
haue
had
some
stroake
in
election
of
their
Bishops
,
I
do
not
denie
;
but
that
they
euer
had
any
right
to
ordaine
,
can
neuer
be
proued
.
That
the
Presbyters
had
right
to
haue
done
it
,
he
should
haue
declared
.
But
what
Presbyters
doth
he
speake
of
?
ministers
?
they
I
trust
,
if
the
new
conceit
be
true
,
were
confined
ech
man
to
his
own
parish
;
neither
might
they
intermeddle
in
other
parishes
,
euerie
parish
hauing
sufficient
authoritie
within
it selfe
:
neither
can
it
be
thought
,
that
the
Presbyters
of
latter
times
should
be
fit
,
and
that
they
which
were
ordained
by
the
Apostles
themselues
,
were
not
fit
for
the
execution
of
their
power
?
assuredly
,
if
it
were
not
fit
for
them
to
ordaine
,
but
for
Timothe
and
Titus
;
by
the
same
reason
,
neither
is
it
fit
for
Presbyters
afterwards
,
but
for
Bishops
,
who
succeeded
Timothe
and
Titus
.
Jf
he
say
,
the
lay
Presbyters
and
the
people
had
right
to
ordaine
;
he
must
first
proue
(
which
he
will
neuer
be
able
to
doe
)
that
euer
there
were
such
Presbyters
;
and
then
he
must
proue
,
that
they
and
the
people
had
right
to
ordaine
ministers
:
which
when
he
hath
performed
,
he
may
hope
to
proue
any
thing
.
The
latter
part
of
the
antecedent
,
I
proue
thus
:
Who
were
the
successors
of
Timothe
and
Titus
for
the
gouernment
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
to
them
after
their
decease
was
their
power
of
ordination
deriued
:
The
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
were
the
successessours
of
Timothe
and
Titus
for
the
gouernment
of
those
Churches
,
and
not
Presbyters
.
Therefore
to
the
BB.
and
not
to
the
Presbyters
,
was
the
power
of
Ordination
deriued
.
Hereto
he
answereth
that
Timothe
and
Titus
,
were
Euangelists
,
and
not
Bishops
,
and
therefore
that
which
followeth
,
of
deriuing
their
authoritie
,
to
their
successors
,
is
meerely
idle
.
Thus
no
part
of
my
syllogisme
is
answeared
,
vnlesse
it
be
the
conclusion
.
But
to
answeare
his
reason
,
whereby
he
goeth
about
,
〈◊〉
cl●●●
pel●ere
:
their
being
Euangelists
,
whiles
they
attended
the
Apostle
in
his
peregrinations
,
and
were
not
deputed
to
any
one
place
,
doth
not
hinder
,
but
that
they
might
be
and
were
Bishops
,
(
as
all
antiquitie
with
one
consent
testifieth
)
when
they
were
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
.
Neither
is
it
greatly
materiall
,
as
touching
the
force
of
this
argument
,
whether
they
were
Euangelists
,
or
Bishops
:
seeing
the
power
which
they
had
of
ordination
and
jurisdiction
,
was
not
to
dye
with
them
;
but
to
be
transmitted
to
them
,
who
should
succeed
them
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
.
Now
that
the
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
and
so
of
all
other
Churches
,
did
succeed
Timothe
and
Titus
,
and
other
Apostolicall
men
,
who
were
the
first
gouernors
of
the
Churches
;
is
a
most
certaine
truth
,
as
the
singular
succession
of
Bishops
in
those
Churches
from
the
Apostles
times
,
doth
ineuitably
euince
.
But
hereof
I
shall
haue
better
occasion
hereafter
to
speake
.
Now
that
the
Presbyters
were
not
their
successors
,
it
is
euident
:
for
they
had
the
selfesame
authoritie
(
and
no
greater
)
vnder
the
Bishops
,
who
were
successors
to
Timothe
and
Titus
,
which
before
they
had
vnder
them
.
For
they
which
had
no
other
authoritie
after
them
,
then
they
had
vnder
them
,
could
not
be
their
successors
.
(
Serm
Sect.
7.
p.
37.
They
obiect
1.
Tim.
4.14
Neglect
not
the
gift
which
is
in
thee
,
which
was
giuen
thee
by
imposition
of
hands
of
the
Presbytery
&c.
to
ex
authoritate
pag.
39.
)
MY
answere
to
this
testimony
out
of
1.
Tim.
4.
is
,
Ad
pag.
93.
That
howsoeuer
the
Presbyterians
doe
vpon
this
place
especially
build
the
authoritie
of
their
pretended
Presbyteries
,
yet
this
text
maketh
not
for
them
.
That
it
maketh
not
for
them
,
I
proue
by
this
reason
.
If
there
be
but
two
expositions
which
are
giuen
of
the
word
Presbyterie
,
neither
whereof
doth
fauour
their
presbyteries
;
then
the
authoritie
of
their
Presbyteries
cannot
be
concluded
out
of
this
place
.
But
neither
of
the
two
expositions
do
fauour
their
Presbyteries
:
Therefore
their
authoritie
cannot
be
concluded
hence
.
The
exceptions
which
he
taketh
against
this
answere
are
very
friuolous
.
As
first
,
that
how
many
expositions
soeuer
any
text
in
the
conceit
of
men
may
admit
,
the
holy
ghost
except
by
way
of
allegorie
intendeth
but
one
.
Be
it
so
:
but
yet
there
may
be
question
,
which
of
the
diuerse
expositions
which
be
giuen
,
is
the
sense
of
the
holy
Ghost
:
vnlesse
that
must
needs
be
alwaies
the
meaning
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
the
refuter
fancieth
.
For
my
part
,
I
did
not
take
vpon
me
to
determine
,
whether
sense
is
the
more
likely
:
Jt
was
sufficient
for
me
,
that
whereas
there
be
but
these
two
expositions
which
are
or
can
be
giuen
,
neither
of
both
maketh
for
the
pretended
Presbyteries
.
His
first
exception
therefore
is
to
no
purpose
.
Now
that
the
former
exposition
vnderstanding
by
Presbyterium
the
Priest-hood
or
office
of
a
Presbyter
,
maketh
nothing
for
their
Presbyteries
,
it
is
more
then
euident
.
And
that
this
exposition
,
which
so
plainly
defeateth
their
Presbyteries
,
is
very
probable
;
I
shewe
first
,
because
the
word
is
in
that
sense
oft
vsed
,
though
not
in
the
new
testament
,
yet
in
greeke
writers
of
the
Church
.
It
suffiseth
the
Refuter
,
that
it
is
not
vsed
in
that
sense
in
any
other
place
of
Scripture
:
and
yet
himselfe
saying
that
the
word
is
no
wheres
else
vsed
in
all
the
Scriptures
,
doth
as
much
prejudge
his
own
exposition
,
as
this
.
How
be
it
I
do
not
deny
,
but
the
worde
is
else
where
vsed
in
the
Scriptures
;
onely
this
I
say
,
that
there
is
no
other
place
,
wherein
it
can
be
drawne
to
signifie
the
Christian
Presbyterie
,
meaning
either
the
company
of
Presbyters
,
or
the
office
of
a
Presbyter
.
This
then
being
the
onely
place
where
it
is
so
vsed
,
we
must
not
expect
parallele
places
in
the
Scripture
to
confirme
either
sense
.
Secondly
I
shew
that
this
may
be
the
sense
,
because
not
onely
diuerse
in
former
times
as
Ierome
,
Primasius
,
Anselmus
,
Haymo
,
Lyra
,
but
Caluin
also
doe
so
expound
it
.
To
this
his
answere
is
worse
then
friuolous
,
that
though
these
writers
doe
so
expound
it
,
yet
Doctor
Bilson
doth
not
say
that
therefore
it
may
be
so
vnderstood
.
And
why
so
I
pray
you
?
because
he
confesseth
that
Chrysostome
,
Theodoret
and
other
Graecians
expound
it
of
the
persons
which
did
ordaine
,
not
of
the
function
whereto
Timothe
was
ordained
.
Doth
not
Doctor
Bilson
say
it
may
be
so
vnderstood
,
when
more
then
once
he
mentioneth
it
as
one
of
the
receiued
expositions
of
that
place
,
approued
by
Caluin
himselfe
the
chiefe
patron
(
for
I
must
not
say
founder
)
of
the
Presbyterian
Discipline
?
neither
doth
his
relating
of
Chrysostomes
exposition
proue
that
he
rejecteth
the
other
;
no
more
,
then
his
alledging
of
Ieromes
interpretation
doth
argue
,
that
he
refuseth
that
of
Chrysostomes
:
but
reciting
both
[
a
](A20733-e99640-b)
a
Pag.
129.252
indifferently
he
referreth
it
to
the
Readers
choise
whither
to
embrace
.
But
let
vs
heare
how
the
Refuter
confuteth
this
interpretation
.
Presbyterium
,
viz.
that
it
may
signifie
the
office
of
a
Presbyter
,
defended
.
The
exposition
of
Ierome
,
Primasius
,
Anselme
;
Haymo
is
not
to
be
rested
vpon
;
because
where
Paul
saith
the
grace
giuen
by
Prophecie
,
they
say
,
the
grace
of
Prophecie
,
plainely
mistaking
the
Apostle
:
as
who
should
say
,
because
they
mistooke
the
meaning
of
the
word
Prophecie
,
therefore
they
erred
in
expounding
the
word
Presbyterie
,
by
which
reason
we
may
argue
that
hee
which
mistaketh
some
one
thing
,
vnderstadeth
nothing
aright
.
What
if
the
refuter
himselfe
doth
mistake
?
for
it
is
not
all
one
to
say
the
gift
giuen
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
by
Prophecie
,
and
according
to
former
Prophecies
,
as
he
expoundeth
it
.
But
by
Prophecie
,
is
,
by
the
Reuelation
and
Direction
of
the
holy
Ghost
;
whereby
the
Bishops
,
who
were
ordained
by
the
Apostles
,
were
designed
and
chosen
.
But
what
if
they
did
not
mistake
?
might
not
they
meane
by
the
gift
of
Prophecie
,
the
gift
which
was
giuen
by
Prophecie
?
yea
,
was
not
the
gift
of
Prophecying
,
and
preaching
aright
,
which
Paul
exhorteth
him
not
to
neglect
(
for
he
continueth
the
exhortation
begun
in
the
words
going
before
[
b
](A20733-e99750-b)
b
2.
Tim.
4.13
.
attend
to
reading
,
exhortation
and
Doctrine
)
the
gift
which
was
giuen
him
by
Prophecie
at
his
ordination
?
Certes
,
Bullinger
thinketh
the
words
may
so
be
vnderstood
.
Donum
quod
tibi
delegatum
est
ad
prophet
andum
.
and
this
is
all
which
Ierome
saith
,
Prophetiae
gratiam
habebat
tum
ordinatione
Episcopatus
.
But
what
if
some
of
them
did
not
call
it
the
grace
of
Prophecie
?
Anselmus
hath
no
such
words
,
but
calleth
it
gratiam
Episcopalis
of●icij
,
which
by
prophecie
was
giuen
him
at
his
ordination
.
But
be
it
,
that
their
exposition
were
not
to
be
rested
in
,
because
of
their
other
mistaking
;
what
is
this
to
Lyras
and
Caluins
exposition
,
which
is
the
same
?
What
more
?
The
three
last
,
Anselmus
,
Haymo
,
and
Lyra
follow
Ierome
hand
ouer
head
:
For
though
they
expound
the
word
of
the
office
,
yet
they
reade
it
not
Presbyterij
,
but
Presbyteri
.
But
was
not
this
exception
taken
hand
ouer
head
,
and
at
all
aduentures
?
did
not
Anselmus
read
Presbyterij
?
let
his
owne
words
testifie
:
For
first
,
he
readeth
Pauls
words
thus
:
Quae
gr●tia
est
data
tibi
per
propheliam
,
cum
impositione
manuum
Presbyterij
;
and
then
expoundeth
them
after
this
manner
[
c
](A20733-e99910-b)
c
Anselm
.
in
1.
Tim.
4.14
.
:
He
speaketh
of
that
imposition
of
hands
,
which
was
vsed
at
his
ordination
;
which
imposition
of
hands
was
Presbyterij
,
of
the
Presbyterie
,
or
Priesthood
;
and
then
giueth
two
reasons
of
the
word
,
either
because
by
this
imposition
he
receiued
the
Presbyterie
,
that
is
the
office
of
a
Bishop
;
for
a
Bishop
is
often
called
Presbyter
by
the
Apostles
,
and
likewise
a
Presbyter
is
called
a
Bishop
:
or
because
it
was
the
imposition
of
the
hands
of
a
Presbyter
,
that
is
Paul
[
d
](A20733-e99970-b)
d
2.
Tim.
1.6
.
,
who
imposed
hands
vpon
him
:
for
so
Peter
and
Iohn
call
themselues
in
their
Epistles
.
So
that
he
readeth
Presbyterij
;
though
in
one
of
his
explanations
he
expoundeth
it
,
as
if
the
Apostle
by
Presbyterij
,
did
meane
Presbyteri
.
The
ordinarie
glosse
indeed
readeth
Presbyteri
,
but
so
doth
not
Lyra
:
For
expounding
the
word
,
he
saith
,
Est
autem
Presbyterium
,
the
Presbyterie
is
the
dignitie
or
office
of
a
Presbyter
,
&
accipitur
hic
Presbyterium
pro
Episcopatu
and
Presbyterie
or
Priesthood
here
is
taken
for
the
office
of
a
Bishop
.
Thus
you
see
how
faithfully
he
hath
dealt
with
these
authors
.
It
may
be
he
will
deale
more
truelie
with
Caluin
.
For
wheras
I
alleage
his
iudgement
in
his
Institutions
,
vnderstanding
Paul
,
not
as
if
he
spake
of
the
Colledge
of
Seniors
,
but
of
the
ordination
it self
:
as
if
he
had
said
;
Endeuour
that
the
grace
which
by
imposition
of
hands
thou
didst
receiue
when
I
made
thee
Presbyter
,
be
not
in
vaine
:
he
saith
thus
,
that
Caluin
in
his
former
writings
,
leaued
to
that
sense
of
the
word
,
I
deny
not
:
but
in
his
latter
times
,
and
namely
in
his
Commentary
on
that
place
,
though
he
say
that
exposition
is
not
much
[
e
](A20733-e100110-b)
e
Much
is
foisted
in
by
the
Refuter
.
Caluin
saith
,
Non
malè
.
Ad
pag.
49.
amisse
,
yet
hee
affirmeth
,
that
they
which
vnderstand
it
of
the
Colledge
of
Presbyters
,
in
his
iudgement
thinke
rightly
of
it
.
Which
answere
consisteth
of
forged
cauillations
.
For
first
he
would
make
the
Reader
beleeue
,
that
Caluins
iudgement
in
his
Institutions
,
is
the
opinion
of
his
younger
head
,
and
that
his
iudgement
in
his
Commentary
is
to
be
preferred
,
as
proceeding
from
riper
yeeres
.
It
would
therefore
first
be
knowne
,
whether
that
edition
of
his
Institutions
,
which
I
alleaged
set
forth
by
himselfe
,
or
his
Commentaries
on
the
Epistle
to
Timothy
,
be
the
latter
.
Is
it
not
euident
that
he
wrote
that
Commentary
in
King
Edwards
time
,
whiles
the
Duke
of
Somerset
was
liuing
?
Whereas
that
edition
of
his
Institutions
,
was
set
forth
by
him
in
the
time
of
Queene
Elizabeth
.
Againe
,
where
Caluins
iudgement
seemeth
to
vary
,
who
doubteth
but
that
is
to
be
esteemed
his
setled
iudgement
wherein
he
rested
,
which
is
set
downe
in
the
Jnstitutions
,
whereunto
himselfe
doth
referre
his
Reader
for
this
purpose
:
being
indeed
a
most
accurate
and
elaborate
worke
,
often
reuiewed
,
and
polished
by
him
?
And
therefore
though
the
first
draught
of
his
Institutions
was
made
in
his
younger
daies
,
which
in
processe
of
time
he
did
by
little
and
little
bring
to
perfection
;
yet
the
last
edition
much
differing
from
the
first
,
is
as
it
were
his
last
resolution
,
for
those
things
which
are
contained
therein
.
Whereas
therefore
of
the
two
senses
,
which
in
his
Commentaries
he
giueth
of
the
word
Presbytery
,
misliking
neither
,
he
maketh
choice
in
his
Institutions
of
that
which
vnderstandeth
the
office
,
and
plainely
reiecteth
the
other
,
which
thereby
vnderstandeth
the
Colledge
of
Presbyters
,
and
that
to
proue
,
that
sometimes
no
more
then
one
did
impose
hands
,
which
hee
confirmeth
by
the
Apostles
owne
testimony
,
who
saith
,
that
himselfe
and
no
more
did
impose
hands
on
Timothy
,
and
that
the
grace
which
was
giuen
him
,
was
by
the
imposition
of
Pauls
hands
,
it
cannot
be
denied
,
that
Caluins
iudgement
wherein
he
rested
,
was
,
that
by
the
Presbytery
,
not
the
Colledge
,
but
the
office
is
meant
.
to
appeale
to
my
conscience
,
and
to
appose
me
what
gouerneth
the
genuine
case
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Presbytery
.
I
answere
,
first
,
that
it
may
be
gouerned
of
the
word
gift
,
which
trai●ction
of
words
,
the
learned
tongues
doe
better
beare
then
the
English
,
which
for
the
most
part
disposeth
words
according
to
the
construction
:
and
yet
the
English
will
beare
it
well
enough
,
if
the
words
betweene
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
gift
,
and
Presbytery
,
be
inclosed
in
a
parenthesis
.
Neglect
not
the
gift
which
was
in
thee
(
which
was
giuen
thee
by
prophecie
,
with
imposition
of
hands
)
of
priesthood
or
Presbytery
.
But
indeed
Ierome
,
Anselme
,
and
Caluin
,
and
the
rest
,
to
whom
I
adde
Erasmus
,
vnderstand
it
as
gouerned
of
the
words
next
going
before
,
without
any
traiection
,
with
imposition
of
hands
,
that
is
ordination
of
priesthood
,
(
for
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
all
one
euen
in
the
iudgement
of
the
Refuter
)
that
is
,
when
thou
wast
ordained
Presbyter
.
So
saith
Ierome
,
Cum
ordinations
episcopatus
,
when
thou
wert
ordained
Bishoppe
.
Anselme
;
This
imposition
was
presbyterij
,
of
the
priesthood
,
because
by
this
imposition
of
hands
(
meaning
ordination
)
hee
receiued
the
Presbytery
,
that
is
the
office
of
a
Bishop
.
I
vnderstand
,
saith
Caluin
,
the
ordination
it selfe
:
as
if
he
should
say
;
the
grace
which
by
imposition
of
hands
thou
d●st
receiue
,
when
I
made
thee
Presbyter
.
Calum
therefore
vnderstandeth
it
to
be
gouerned
,
as
if
it
were
said
,
Cum
ordinatione
Presbyteratus
.
For
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
signifieth
either
the
Senate
or
company
of
Presbyters
,
which
in
Latine
we
call
Presbyterium
,
or
the
office
,
degree
,
and
order
of
a
Presbyter
,
which
we
call
Presbyteratus
.
Yea
but
the
Refuter
will
shew
the
absurdity
of
this
interpretation
,
by
laying
downe
the
order
of
the
words
in
the
Greeke
:
and
yet
varieth
not
at
all
from
the
order
which
I
myselfe
set
downe
.
But
this
is
but
to
please
the
simple
.
For
he
might
as
well
require
the
words
in
Greeke
and
Latine
,
to
be
set
downe
in
the
order
of
construction
,
as
to
make
the
order
of
words
in
Greeke
and
Latine
sentences
to
be
answerable
to
the
English
.
Howbeit
,
this
exception
is
against
his
owne
conceit
,
of
the
traiection
of
the
words
;
it
toucheth
not
the
exposition
of
Ierome
,
Caluin
,
and
the
rest
,
which
is
without
traiection
.
In
his
conclusion
,
where
he
bids
me
forbeare
to
bleare
the
eyes
of
the
Readers
with
an
exposition
against
reason
,
and
mine
owne
conscience
;
he
wrongeth
me
egregiously
,
and
not
me
alone
,
but
all
the
Authors
whom
I
alleaged
.
For
first
,
I
did
not
deliuer
this
as
my
exposition
,
but
faithfully
recited
the
interpretation
giuen
by
these
Authors
.
Secondly
,
if
I
had
rested
in
this
interpretation
,
as
I
did
not
,
(
though
I
see
no
reason
why
I
may
not
)
why
should
it
be
counted
against
reason
,
and
against
conscience
in
me
,
which
I
receiued
from
so
approued
Authors
?
But
what
a
contumely
is
this
to
Ierome
,
Caluin
,
and
the
rest
,
whose
exposition
it
is
,
warranted
by
the
testimony
of
Paul
,
to
say
,
they
bleare
the
eies
of
their
Readers
with
an
exposition
against
reason
,
and
their
owne
conscience
?
I
wish
the
Refuter
,
vnlesse
his
iudgement
were
better
,
to
forbeare
to
condemne
other
mens
expositions
,
as
void
of
reason
:
and
vnlesse
his
knowledge
were
greater
,
not
to
measure
other
mens
conscience
by
his
owne
.
For
that
which
is
against
his
conscience
,
as
not
being
within
the
compasse
of
his
science
may
bee
agreeable
to
the
science
,
and
consceince
of
them
,
who
haue
more
knowledge
and
better
iudgements
.
But
if
he
would
needs
censure
Caluins
exposition
as
void
of
reason
,
why
did
he
not
answere
Caluins
reason
,
grounded
on
the
authority
of
Saint
Paul
?
For
if
Timothy
were
ordained
by
a
Presbytery
▪
then
vndoubtedly
by
more
then
one
;
But
Paul
(
saith
Caluin
[
a
](A20733-e100640-b)
a
C●lu
.
In●li●
.
lib.
4.
cap
3.
in
fine
.
)
in
another
place
saith
,
that
he
,
and
not
any
more
imposed
hands
on
Timothy
:
2.
Tim
1
6.
And
so
much
might
suffice
for
the
former
exposition
,
sauing
that
by
way
of
aduantage
,
something
is
to
bee
added
out
of
Erasmus
[
b
](A20733-e100710-b)
b
E●asm
.
in
1.
Tim.
4.14
.
;
who
also
vnderstanding
the
word
Presbytery
,
of
the
office
,
giueth
notwithstanding
another
sense
:
This
Paul
saith
,
Thou
hast
not
onely
the
gift
of
prophecie
,
but
also
the
efficacie
by
imposition
of
hands
,
to
giue
the
spirit
also
to
others
,
and
that
by
the
office
of
thy
priesthood
,
namely
,
as
thou
art
Bishop
.
And
to
this
interpretation
hee
was
led
by
force
of
the
Greeke
preposition
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
signifieth
with
,
not
as
an
instrument
,
but
as
a
companion
.
And
this
may
seeme
to
haue
been
[
c
](A20733-e100770-b)
c
Ambros.
in
1.
Tim.
4.
Ambrose
his
iudgement
also
,
that
Paul
gratiam
dari
ordinatoris
significat
,
signifieth
the
grace
of
an
ordainer
to
be
giuen
.
Which
sense
if
we
follow
,
this
place
maketh
wholly
for
the
Bishops
authority
in
ordaining
,
this
being
the
sense
of
the
Apostle
,
that
Timothy
had
receiued
the
gift
of
the
ministery
together
with
power
to
impose
hands
on
others
,
by
vertue
of
his
office
,
as
he
was
Bishop
.
The
latter
exposition
is
of
them
,
who
vnderstand
the
word
Presbytery
,
For
some
by
Presbytery
,
vnderstand
the
Apostle
,
as
speaking
of
himselfe
by
a
synecdoche
,
led
thereunto
by
the
Apostles
testimony
in
the
place
[
d
](A20733-e100880-b)
d
2.
Tim.
1.6
.
before
cited
,
where
he
exhorteth
Timothy
to
stirre
vp
the
grace
which
was
in
him
by
imposition
,
saith
he
,
of
my
hands
.
And
this
is
one
of
Anselmus
his
expositions
,
with
whom
Dionysius
Carthus
.
agreeth
,
ioining
both
his
expositions
in
one
:
Manuum
Presbyterij
,
saith
he
,
i.
manuum
meaerum
,
that
is
,
of
my
hands
who
did
ordaine
the●
Bishop
.
By
which
imposition
,
the
Presbytery
or
priesthood
was
conferred
vpon
thee
.
So
that
in
their
iudgement
(
wherewith
Caluin
also
agreeth
)
none
but
Paul
did
impose
hands
in
the
ordination
of
Timothy
.
The
second
interpretation
is
of
the
Greeke
Fathers
,
Chrysostome
,
Theodoret
,
Theophylact
,
and
Oecumenous
,
who
expounding
the
word
collectiuè
,
doe
vnderstand
a
senate
or
company
of
Apostles
and
Apostolicall
men
,
who
were
either
Bishops
,
or
more
then
Bishops
.
Chrysostomes
words
be
these
[
e
](A20733-e101050-b)
e
Chrys.
in
1.
Tim.
4.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Presbytery
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
Hee
doth
not
speake
here
of
Presbyters
,
but
of
Bishops
:
for
surely
Presbyters
did
not
ordaine
a
Bishop
.
Oecumenium
[
f
](A20733-e101110-b)
f
Oc●um
.
in
1.
Tim.
4.
hath
the
like
words
;
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Theophylact
[
g
](A20733-e101170-b)
g
Theophylact.
in
1.
Tim.
4.
;
Of
the
Presbytery
,
that
is
,
of
Bishoppes
.
Theodoret
[
h
](A20733-e101210-b)
h
Theodor.
in
1.
Tim.
4.
;
He
calleth
them
here
the
Presbytery
,
who
had
receiued
Apostolicall
grace
.
Neither
doth
any
Writer
that
I
know
of
,
before
our
age
,
vnderstanding
the
word
collectiuè
,
for
a
company
,
expound
it
otherwise
:
but
conceiuing
Timothy
to
haue
been
ordained
Bishoppe
by
the
company
of
Apostolicall
men
,
who
either
were
Bishoppes
,
or
more
then
Bishoppes
.
Now
we
doe
not
deny
,
but
that
diuers
Bishops
are
to
concurre
in
the
ordination
of
a
Bishop
.
But
that
hindereth
not
,
but
that
Presbyters
and
Deacons
may
be
ordained
by
one
.
So
are
wee
taught
in
the
two
first
canons
[
i
](A20733-e101270-b)
i
Can.
Apost
.
1.
&
2.
called
Apostolicall
.
Let
a
Bishop
be
ordained
of
two
or
three
Bishoppes
.
Let
a
Presbyter
be
ordained
by
one
Bishoppe
,
likewise
a
Deacon
and
the
rest
of
the
clergy
.
This
exposition
therefore
defeating
their
pretended
Presbytery
,
is
so
farre
from
derogating
from
the
superiority
of
BB.
in
ordaining
,
as
that
it
plainly
prooueth
it
,
because
the
ordination
of
BB.
wherewith
Presbyters
haue
nothing
to
doe
,
belongeth
to
BB.
The
third
exposition
is
of
Beza
,
and
some
other
new
Writers
,
who
by
Presbytery
,
vnderstand
the
order
of
Presbyters
.
By
which
name
,
saith
Beza
[
k
](A20733-e101350-b)
k
Beza
in
1.
Tim.
4.
,
that
whole
company
is
signified
,
which
did
labour
in
the
word
in
that
Church
,
where
this
was
done
.
Neither
will
I
reiect
this
exposition
,
though
it
be
new
,
being
vnderstood
of
Timothy
,
his
ordination
to
be
a
Presbyter
;
so
that
they
will
not
deny
that
which
Paul
affirmeth
,
that
himselfe
was
so
principall
a
man
in
this
company
,
as
that
hee
doubteth
not
to
say
,
that
the
grace
which
was
giuen
by
the
imposition
of
hands
of
the
Presbytery
[
l
](A20733-e101410-b)
l
1.
Tim.
1.14
.
,
was
giuen
by
the
imposition
of
[
m
](A20733-e101430-b)
m
2.
Tim.
1.6
.
his
hands
.
Which
sheweth
,
that
if
any
Presbyters
did
ioyne
with
Paul
,
it
was
no
otherwise
then
as
they
vse
to
doe
with
BB.
by
the
Canon
[
n
](A20733-e101460-b)
n
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
3.
of
the
fourth
Councell
of
Carthage
,
and
by
the
discipline
and
order
[
o
](A20733-e101490-b)
o
In
the
booke
of
ordaining
Priests
it
is
appointed
,
that
the
B.
with
the
Priests
present
,
shall
lay
their
hands
on
the
head
of
him
that
is
ordained
.
of
our
Church
.
And
this
answereth
the
first
thing
which
the
Refuter
inferreth
vpon
this
exposition
,
that
if
Presbytery
signifie
a
companie
of
seniors
,
as
it
must
(
for
J
tell
you
his
word
must
stand
for
law
)
then
it
will
follow
that
the
power
of
ordination
was
not
in
one
mans
hand
alone
.
For
though
that
alone
bee
of
his
owne
adding
,
yet
it
is
plaine
,
that
Paul
and
antient
BB.
had
this
power
as
much
alone
,
as
our
Bishoppes
.
Where
I
say
,
this
place
maketh
nothing
either
for
their
parish
Presbyteries
,
or
lay
Presbyteries
whatsoeuer
,
hee
saith
,
It
skilleth
not
now
what
Presbytery
this
was
.
Belike
then
it
skilleth
not
,
what
becommeth
of
the
maine
pillar
of
your
Discipline
,
so
you
can
make
any
poore
shift
to
maintaine
the
point
which
presently
is
in
hand
.
But
if
this
be
the
onely
place
of
scripture
,
which
mentioneth
a
Christian
Presbytery
,
on
which
also
the
Disciplinarians
do
principally
build
the
authority
of
their
pretended
Presbyteries
,
it
maketh
not
a
little
(
me
thinks
)
for
the
iustifying
of
our
cause
,
that
it
maketh
not
at
all
for
their
Presbyteries
;
which
(
by
the
confession
[
p
](A20733-e101600-b)
p
Calu.
Instit.
lib.
4.
cap
3.
§
16.
Hoc
posiremò
habondum
est
,
filos
pastore●
manus
imposuisse
Ministris
.
of
Caluin
)
haue
no
right
to
impose
hands
.
Neither
can
it
bee
denied
,
but
that
it
is
sacrilegious
vsurpation
,
and
horrible
intrusion
vpon
the
right
of
the
Ministery
,
if
lay
men
shalt
take
vpon
them
to
ordaine
by
imposition
of
hands
.
Besides
,
it
skilleth
something
,
that
the
Greeke
Fathers
vnderstand
by
Presbytery
,
a
company
of
Bishops
:
which
,
as
it
proueth
the
Prerogatiue
of
BB.
in
the
ordaining
of
BB.
so
doth
it
not
impeach
their
superioritie
in
ordaining
Ministers
.
And
where
hee
maketh
〈◊〉
say
,
they
were
no
Presbyters
;
hee
mistaketh
the
matter
,
vnlesse
hee
vnderstand
meere
,
or
onely-Presbyters
.
For
BB
and
Apostolicall
men
,
yea
the
Apostles
themselues
were
Presbyters
,
and
so
call
themselues
;
but
they
were
not
bare
,
or
onely-Presbyters
,
as
those
bee
which
are
not
Bishops
.
But
if
they
were
not
Presbyters
,
saith
he
,
then
was
the
Apostle
to
blame
to
call
them
so
.
If
the
word
bee
vnderstood
collectiuè
,
hee
calleth
the
company
of
them
which
imposed
hands
on
Timothy
,
the
Presbytery
.
And
forasmuch
as
not
onely
inferior
Ministers
,
but
Bishops
and
Apostles
are
called
Presbyters
,
it
being
a
common
name
to
all
Ministers
of
the
word
and
sacraments
,
it
should
not
seeme
strange
that
a
company
or
senate
of
Bishops
,
or
Apostolicall
men
,
should
be
called
a
Presbytery
.
Now
that
they
were
not
meere
Presbyters
,
the
Fathers
proue
:
Because
Presbyters
might
not
ordaine
a
Bishop
:
neque
enim
fas
erat
,
saith
Ambrose
[
q
](A20733-e101740-b)
q
In
1.
Tim.
3.
,
nec
licebat
,
vt
inferior
ordinaret
maiorem
.
Neither
was
Timothy
any
,
saith
he
.
Bluntly
and
peremptorilie
spoken
.
But
the
Fathers
that
before
I
mentioned
,
take
it
for
granted
:
and
it
is
the
generall
consent
of
all
the
antient
Fathers
,
as
wee
shall
heare
;
the
authoritie
of
some
one
whereof
,
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
ought
to
ouerweigh
the
whole
nation
of
Disciplinarians
contradicting
the
same
.
In
fine
,
distrusting
this
burrough
,
hee
flieth
to
his
old
starting
hole
,
out
of
which
hee
hath
beene
so
often
ferretted
:
that
the
Fathers
spake
onely
of
their
owne
times
,
which
is
nothing
to
the
ordaining
of
Ministers
in
the
Apostles
times
,
almost
foure
hundred
yeeres
before
them
.
The
absurdity
of
which
euasion
,
the
Reader
may
easily
discerne
,
if
hee
will
but
call
to
minde
what
were
the
Greeke
.
Fathers
wordes
before
cited
,
and
vpon
what
occasion
they
were
vttered
.
Hee
speaketh
here
,
saith
Chrysostome
and
Occumenius
,
not
of
Presbyters
but
of
Bishoppes
.
For
Presbyters
did
not
ordaine
Bishoppes
.
Is
it
not
most
plaine
,
that
they
speake
of
the
Apostles
time
?
And
were
it
not
absurd
to
vnderstand
them
thus
,
Paul
by
the
Presbytery
which
ordained
Timothy
,
vnderstandeth
Bishoppes
,
and
not
Presbyters
;
because
howsoeuer
in
those
times
Presbyters
might
ordaine
,
yet
in
our
times
they
cannot
?
But
let
me
aske
the
Refuter
this
question
:
Seeing
it
is
agreed
vpon
by
all
,
that
Paul
here
speaketh
of
Timothy
his
ordination
:
to
what
function
hee
thinketh
he
was
ordained
?
If
to
be
a
Presbyter
,
or
Pastor
,
as
Caluin
saith
,
or
to
be
a
Bishoppe
,
as
all
the
Fathers
acknowledge
,
then
was
hee
not
onely
ordained
to
an
ordinary
function
in
the
Church
,
but
also
assigned
to
a
particular
Church
,
whereof
hee
was
made
Pastor
,
as
Caluin
speaketh
,
or
Bishoppe
,
as
the
Fathers
affirme
.
But
that
his
last
ordination
,
whereof
the
Apostle
speaketh
,
was
not
to
the
degree
of
a
Presbyter
,
but
of
a
Bishoppe
,
appeareth
by
the
whole
Epistle
;
wherein
his
singularity
of
preeminence
ouer
Presbyters
,
and
superiority
in
power
both
for
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
is
presupposed
.
If
he
say
,
that
he
was
ordained
to
be
an
Euangelist
,
to
omit
the
singularity
&
the
nouelty
of
the
conceit
;
it
would
be
knowne
what
Presbytery
this
was
,
that
imposed
hands
on
Timothy
.
Had
the
Presbytery
of
any
parish
(
such
as
our
Disciplinarians
dreame
of
,
consisting
for
the
most
part
of
laymen
)
or
the
Presbytery
of
any
particular
Church
,
though
consisting
wholly
of
Ministers
,
authority
by
imposition
of
hands
to
ordaine
an
extraordinary
function
,
and
that
to
be
exercised
in
other
parts
of
the
world
,
where
themselues
had
nothing
to
doe
?
(
Serm.
sect.
8.
page
39.
Yea
but
the
Councell
of
Carthage
(
say
they
)
committeth
authority
of
imposing
hands
to
Presbyters
,
to
the
end
of
page
44
)
Here
the
Refuter
meaning
to
make
short
worke
,
hauing
little
to
say
,
hath
made
a
long
section
,
which
he
might
better
haue
diuided
into
three
.
For
three
diuers
things
are
heere
performed
.
The
first
,
an
answere
to
the
obiection
our
of
the
fourth
Councell
of
Carthage
.
The
second
,
a
new
supply
of
proofes
for
the
superiority
of
BB.
in
the
power
of
ordination
.
Thirdly
a
preuention
of
popish
cauils
,
in
fauor
of
some
reformed
Churches
,
where
the
Presbyterian
discipline
is
established
.
As
touching
the
first
,
the
Refuter
saith
,
that
canon
may
serue
to
shew
,
Ad
pag
95.
that
the
Fathers
of
this
Councell
thought
it
not
fit
,
no
not
to
leaue
ordination
to
the
Bishop
alone
.
But
because
he
perceiueth
,
by
that
which
I
answered
,
that
that
Canon
,
though
greatly
vrged
by
the
Disciplinarians
,
maketh
nothing
against
the
superiority
of
BB.
in
ordaining
,
and
that
it
agreeth
with
the
discipline
of
our
Church
,
and
consequently
conuicteth
him
of
vntrue
dealing
:
(
seeing
he
●udgeth
,
that
BB.
by
that
canon
haue
not
sole
authority
of
ordaining
,
and
yet
will
make
his
Reader
beleeue
,
that
I
defend
their
sole
power
of
ordaining
:
which
by
the
discipline
of
our
Church
,
is
no
more
sole
in
our
BB.
then
it
was
by
that
canon
in
the
BB.
of
Africke
:
)
for
thes●
causes
,
I
say
,
he
refuseth
to
vrge
this
canon
:
though
hee
pretend
,
hee
will
neither
trouble
the
Reader
,
nor
himselfe
about
the
examining
of
it
;
because
,
forsooth
,
it
commeth
not
neere
the
time
in
question
.
Perhaps
his
conscience
told
him
,
that
he
knew
of
no
testimony
nor
example
of
the
Presbyters
concurrence
with
the
B.
in
ordination
,
before
that
time
:
and
that
in
the
foresaid
Councell
,
their
assistance
to
the
B.
in
ordaining
,
was
first
ordained
:
which
if
it
did
,
as
worthily
it
might
,
then
had
he
no
reason
to
vrge
that
canon
to
proue
the
practise
of
the
Church
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
in
a
particular
,
which
by
that
canon
was
first
appointed
.
Hauing
thus
remoued
their
two
maine
obiections
which
stood
in
my
way
,
[
a
](A20733-e102210-b)
a
2.
Tim.
1.6
.
hands
.
Paul
left
Titus
[
b
](A20733-e102250-b)
b
Tit.
1.5
.
in
Creet
,
that
he
should
ordaine
Presbyters
,
and
chargeth
Timothy
[
c
](A20733-e102280-b)
c
1.
Tim.
5.22
.
that
he
should
not
lay
hands
hastily
on
any
man
,
&c.
The
Canon
[
d
](A20733-e102310-b)
d
C.
2.
called
the
Apostles
,
appointeth
that
a
Presbyter
,
and
so
a
Deacon
,
be
ordained
of
one
.
The
Councell
of
Antioch
[
e
](A20733-e102330-b)
e
C.
9.
acknowledgeth
euery
Bishop
within
his
owne
diocesse
,
to
haue
authority
to
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
.
The
Councell
of
Africke
[
f
](A20733-e102360-b)
f
Afr.
c.
22.
&
Carth.
graec
.
c.
45.
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
one
Bishop
may
ordaine
many
Presbyters
.
The
Councell
of
Hispalis
[
g
](A20733-e102400-b)
g
Hispal
.
2.
c.
6.
or
Ciuill
;
A
Bishop
alone
may
giue
to
Priests
and
Deacons
their
honour
.
Chrysostome
[
h
](A20733-e102450-b)
h
De
Sacerd.
describeth
the
Bishop
by
this
property
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
he
that
is
to
ordaine
vs
.
The
people
of
Hippo
[
i
](A20733-e102490-b)
i
Possidon
.
de
vitae
Aug.
c.
4.
wanting
a
Presbyter
,
lay
hold
on
Augustine
,
and
as
it
was
wont
to
be
done
,
bring
him
to
Valerius
the
Bishop
,
desiring
him
to
ordaine
him
.
To
these
adde
the
penaltie
inflicted
vpon
the
B.
alone
,
when
any
ordination
was
irregular
.
Sozomen
[
k
](A20733-e102540-b)
k
Soz
l.
4.
c.
24.
reporteth
,
that
Elpidius
,
Eustathius
,
Basilius
of
Ancyra
,
Eleusius
,
among
other
faults
obiected
against
them
,
were
deposed
,
because
euery
of
them
had
ordained
contrary
to
law
.
The
afore●aid
Councell
of
Carthage
decreeth
,
[
l
](A20733-e102590-b)
l
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c.
68.69
.
distinct.
50.
ex
poe●itentib
.
that
if
a
B.
wittingly
ordain
a
penitent
,
he
shall
be
depriued
of
the
power
of
his
Bishoprick
,
at
least
from
the
power
of
ordaining
.
And
to
the
like
penalty
doth
it
subiect
a
Bishop
,
who
shall
ordaine
such
a
one
,
as
hath
married
her
that
is
diuorced
,
&c.
But
you
shall
neuer
reade
,
that
the
Presbyters
were
found
fault
with
for
vnlawfull
ordinations
,
vnlesse
that
any
of
them
did
encroach
vpon
the
Bishops
right
in
ordaining
:
which
is
a
plaine
euidence
,
that
the
power
of
ordaining
was
in
the
B.
and
not
in
the
Presbyters
.
When
Epiphanius
being
at
Constantinople
[
m
](A20733-e102650-b)
m
Socr.
l.
6.
c.
23.14
.
ordained
a
Deacon
,
he
was
blamed
as
offending
against
the
Canons
,
not
because
hee
wanted
the
presence
of
his
Presbytery
,
but
because
hee
did
it
in
Chrysostomes
diocesse
.
It
is
to
no
purpose
to
meddle
with
these
allegations
out
of
the
Councels
,
which
were
well
nigh
three
hundred
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
times
,
and
some
of
them
such
,
as
deserue
neither
imitation
,
nor
approbation
.
Here
let
the
Christian
Reader
iudge
what
credit
he
deserueth
,
that
so
contemptuously
shaketh
off
the
authority
of
antient
Councels
,
euen
the
second
among
the
foure
antient
generall
Councels
,
which
are
and
haue
been
from
time
to
time
receiued
in
the
Church
[
n
](A20733-e102750-b)
n
Gregor.
mag
.
l.
1.
epist.
24.
Sicut
Euangelij
4.
libros
sic
4.
concilia
suscipere
&
venera●i
mef●teor
.
Dist.
15.
c.
sicut
.
,
as
it
were
foure
Gospels
.
But
let
vs
examine
the
particulars
,
&
consider
whether
they
deserued
to
be
so
lightly
reiected
.
The
first
testimony
was
taken
out
of
an
Epistle
[
o
](A20733-e102820-b)
o
A●hana
.
apol.
2.
in
epist.
●resh
.
&
diacon
.
Mareot
.
ad
Curios
&
Philagr
.
praefect
.
Aegyp●i
.
written
by
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
of
Mareot
,
in
the
behalfe
of
Athanasius
the
Great
,
their
Bishop
,
who
was
accused
,
for
that
by
his
appointment
Macarius
had
disturbed
one
Ischyras
,
a
pretended
Presbyter
in
the
administration
of
the
Communion
,
and
had
broken
the
sacred
cup.
They
testifie
these
things
to
be
false
,
and
among
the
rest
they
deny
,
that
Ischyras
was
a
Presbyter
,
because
hee
was
ordained
of
Colluthus
,
the
Presbyter
,
who
was
but
an
imaginary
,
or
[
p
](A20733-e102900-b)
p
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
phantasticall
Bishop
;
and
afterwards
by
a
generall
Councell
[
q
](A20733-e102920-b)
q
This
seemeth
to
haue
been
the
generall
Councell
of
Sardica
,
which
was
not
two
hundred
fiftie
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
times
.
,
to
wit
,
by
Osius
and
the
BB.
who
were
with
him
,
commanded
to
remaine
a
Presbyter
,
as
he
had
been
before
.
For
which
cause
,
all
that
were
ordained
of
Colluthus
,
among
whom
was
Ischyras
,
returned
to
their
former
place
and
order
.
The
like
is
testified
by
the
Synod
of
Alexandria
[
r
](A20733-e102970-b)
r
Epist.
Synod
.
Alex.
in
Apol.
2.
Athanas.
,
which
denieth
that
Ischyras
could
be
ordained
Presbyter
by
Colluthus
,
seeing
Colluthus
himselfe
died
a
Presbyter
,
and
all
his
ordinations
were
reuersed
,
and
all
[
s
](A20733-e103020-b)
s
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
that
were
ordained
by
him
were
held
as
lay
men
.
Hereunto
we
may
adde
another
most
pregnant
testimony
,
expressed
in
the
acts
of
the
same
generall
Councell
of
Sardica
[
t
](A20733-e103060-b)
t
Vid.
Balsam
.
in
Co●c
Sard●c
.
c.
18.19
.
&
editionis
Tilianae
c.
20.
,
wherein
it
was
decreed
,
that
forsomuch
as
Musaeus
and
Eutychianus
were
not
ordained
Bishops
,
that
therfore
such
Clerks
as
they
had
ordained
should
be
held
as
lay
men
.
My
second
testimony
is
out
of
the
second
generall
Councell
[
u
](A20733-e103110-b)
u
Constantinop
.
●
.
c.
4.
Graec.
&
6.
L●t
.
Balsam
.
in
Conc.
Const.
1.
c
4.
,
concerning
Maximus
,
who
being
by
birth
an
Alexandrian
,
&
by
profession
a
Cynick
Philosopher
,
before
hee
was
conuerted
to
Christianity
,
and
receiued
into
the
Clergy
by
Gregory
the
Diuine
,
against
whom
he
ambitiously
sought
the
Bishopricke
of
Constantinople
,
bribing
the
BB.
of
Egypt
:
Who
being
come
to
Constantinople
,
and
excluded
out
of
the
Church
,
went
into
a
certaine
minstrels
house
,
and
there
vnlawfully
chose
Maximus
the
Cynick
to
be
Bishop
of
Constantinople
.
The
generall
Councell
therefore
assembled
at
Constantinople
,
determineth
thus
concerning
Maximus
;
that
he
neither
was
,
nor
is
a
Bishop
,
neither
[
*
](A20733-e103220-b)
*
Soz.
l.
7
c.
9.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
they
Clerks
who
had
been
ordained
by
him
,
in
what
degree
so
euer
of
the
Clergy
.
And
to
this
I
will
adioyne
another
testimony
out
of
the
fourth
generall
Councell
[
g
](A20733-e103270-b)
g
Conc.
Chalc.
act.
11.
,
where
Bassianus
who
had
been
Bishop
of
Ephesus
,
and
now
sought
to
recouer
it
,
alleaged
for
himselfe
,
that
if
he
were
not
Bishop
,
then
were
not
they
clerks
which
had
been
ordained
by
him
.
Neither
were
ordinary
Presbyters
alone
forbidden
to
ordaine
,
country
BB.
sometimes
were
restrained
,
and
sometimes
forbidden
altogether
to
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
.
Restrained
,
whiles
there
were
such
as
had
receiued
episcopall
ordination
,
that
they
might
not
ordaine
without
the
leaue
of
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
,
whereunto
both
the
Chorepiscopus
himselfe
,
and
his
Country
is
subiect
.
Forbidden
altogether
,
when
they
ceased
to
haue
episcopall
ordination
,
and
were
ordained
,
as
other
Presbyters
by
the
B.
of
the
Citie
alone
.
It
seeemeth
to
me
,
that
Chorepiscopi
,
vntill
the
Councel
of
Antioch
,
had
sometimes
episcopall
ordination
,
being
ordained
by
two
or
three
Bishops
.
And
therefore
to
the
Councell
of
Neocaesaria
,
and
Nice
,
they
subscribed
among
other
BB
But
forasmuch
as
they
being
but
(
for
matters
of
lesse
importance
)
vicegerents
in
the
Country
to
the
Bishop
of
the
diocesse
,
whose
seat
was
in
the
Citie
,
being
after
the
maner
[
y
](A20733-e103390-b)
y
Conc.
Neecaes
.
c.
13.
of
the
seuenty
disciples
,
Presbyters
rather
then
BB.
did
incroach
vpon
the
Bishoppes
rights
and
prerogatiues
,
not
knowing
their
owne
measure
;
therefore
they
were
restrained
,
as
in
other
matters
of
importance
:
so
in
ordinations
,
to
doe
nothing
without
the
leaue
of
the
Bishop
.
Thus
the
ancient
[
z
](A20733-e103410-b)
z
Which
was
before
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
and
was
within
little
more
then
200.
yeares
after
the
Apostles
times
.
Councill
of
Ancyra
determined
;
That
it
was
not
lawfull
[
a
](A20733-e103420-b)
a
C.
13.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
that
Countrie
Bishops
should
ordaine
Presbyters
,
or
Deacons
,
vnlesse
[
b
](A20733-e103450-b)
b
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
they
had
leaue
granted
vnto
them
by
the
Bishop
,
with
his
letters
:
for
so
Theod.
Balsam
.
expoundeth
that
Canon
;
the
Fathers
of
this
Synode
determine
,
that
the
Countrie
Bishop
may
not
ordaine
Presbyters
or
Deacons
,
without
the
letters
of
the
Bishop
.
The
Councill
of
Antioch
thus
[
c
](A20733-e103500-b)
c
C.
10.
:
It
seemeth
good
to
the
holy
Synode
,
that
those
which
are
placed
in
villages
,
and
countrey
Townes
called
Countrey-Bishops
[
d
](A20733-e103530-b)
d
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
although
they
haue
receiued
the
ordination
of
BB.
should
know
their
owne
measures
,
and
administer
the
Churches
subiect
to
them
,
and
content
themselues
with
the
charge
and
care
of
them
,
and
to
ordaine
Readers
,
Subdeacons
,
and
Exorcists
,
and
to
content
themselues
with
preferring
of
them
.
But
that
they
should
[
e
](A20733-e103560-b)
e
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
not
presume
to
ordaine
a
Presbyter
or
a
Deacon
without
the
Bishop
in
the
citie
,
whereunto
both
himselfe
and
his
countrey
is
subiect
.
If
any
shall
dare
to
transgresse
this
definition
,
he
shall
be
deposed
from
that
honour
which
he
hath
;
and
that
the
countrie
Bishop
should
be
made
of
the
B.
in
the
citie
,
wherto
he
is
subiect
.
Which
last
clause
(
as
I
suppose
)
was
added
,
to
take
from
them
that
colourable
pretence
,
whereupon
they
had
presumed
before
to
ordaine
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
;
viz.
because
they
had
Episcopall
ordination
by
the
Metropolitane
,
and
two
or
three
other
BB.
To
preuent
this
,
the
Councill
decreeth
,
that
from
that
time
forward
,
they
should
be
ordained
,
not
as
other
BB.
by
the
Metropolitane
,
and
two
,
or
three
other
Bishops
;
but
as
other
Presbyters
,
by
the
Bishop
of
the
citie
:
and
so
hauing
not
so
much
as
an
Episcopall
ordination
,
to
make
them
(
as
they
were
before
)
titular
Bishops
,
they
might
acknowledge
themselues
to
haue
no
right
of
ordination
of
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
Harmenopulus
[
f
](A20733-e103600-b)
f
Tit.
9.
de
Chorepiscop
.
in
his
abridgement
of
the
Canons
,
setteth
this
downe
as
the
summe
of
both
these
Canons
,
13.
Ancyr.
and
10.
Antioch
.
Let
not
a
Countrey
Bishop
ordaine
a
Presbyter
or
Deacon
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
without
the
licence
of
the
Bishop
.
To
the
like
purpose
the
Councill
of
Laodicea
[
g
](A20733-e103660-b)
g
Conc.
Laod.
c.
56.
determined
,
that
Bishops
may
not
be
ordained
in
villages
,
and
Countrey
townes
,
[
h
](A20733-e103680-b)
h
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
so
it
is
in
●alsam
and
some
manuscripts
.
but
visiters
:
and
that
those
which
were
before
ordained
,
may
do
nothing
[
i
](A20733-e103720-b)
i
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
without
the
consent
of
the
Bishop
in
the
citie
.
By
these
two
Councils
therefore
,
as
Episcopall
ordination
for
the
time
to
come
was
denied
to
the
Countrey
Bishops
,
so
also
power
of
ordaining
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
To
the
same
purpose
I
quoted
[
k
](A20733-e103740-b)
k
Damas.
Epist
▪
4.
De
Chorepiscop
.
Damasus
,
and
Leo
,
who
proue
,
that
Chorepiscopi
were
not
indeed
Bishops
,
but
Presbyters
;
and
therefore
had
no
right
to
ordaine
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
.
Chorepiscopi
,
saith
,
Leo
,
[
l
](A20733-e103800-b)
l
Leo
Epist.
BB.
according
to
the
Canons
of
Neocaesaria
,
and
decrees
of
other
Fathers
,
are
the
same
with
Presbyters
,
bearing
the
figure
of
the
sonnes
of
Aaron
,
and
being
after
the
maner
of
the
70.
Disciples
.
And
although
in
respect
of
the
ministerie
they
haue
a
common
dispensation
with
Bishops
,
notwithstanding
some
things
are
forbidden
them
by
the
authoritie
of
the
old
law
,
some
of
the
new
,
and
by
Ecclesiasticall
Canons
,
as
the
consecration
of
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
,
&c.
And
to
his
sentence
the
Councill
of
[
m
](A20733-e103840-b)
m
Hispal
.
2
c.
7.
Hispalis
subscribed
.
Basil
likewise
plainely
signified
to
the
Chorepiscopi
,
that
if
any
without
his
appointment
were
receiued
into
the
ministerie
,
he
should
bee
held
for
a
lay
man
.
These
testimonies
plainely
euince
,
that
in
the
primitiue
Church
the
power
of
ordination
was
so
in
Bishops
;
as
that
either
themselues
did
ordaine
,
or
if
this
power
were
communicated
to
others
,
it
was
by
leaue
and
permission
from
them
.
And
little
reason
had
the
refuter
so
lightly
to
esteeme
these
testimonies
,
as
being
vnder
age
.
For
vnlesse
he
be
able
to
shew
,
that
in
the
first
200.
yeares
the
Presbyters
either
had
de
iure
the
power
to
ordaine
,
or
that
de
facto
they
did
vse
to
ordaine
,
which
he
will
neuer
be
able
to
shew
;
the
worst
of
these
testimonies
for
the
Bishops
,
is
of
more
worth
then
all
that
he
shall
be
able
to
say
against
them
.
Let
him
produce
,
if
he
can
,
any
one
testimony
of
Scripture
,
any
one
sentence
out
of
Councils
,
Histories
or
Fathers
,
prouing
that
Presbyters
without
a
Bishop
had
right
to
ordaine
,
and
I
will
yeeld
to
him
.
But
he
doth
not
goe
about
by
sound
learning
and
euidence
of
truth
to
refell
my
assertions
,
which
indeed
he
cannot
doe
;
but
by
vnlearned
shifts
,
and
sophistiall
cauillations
,
to
elude
them
,
as
he
can
;
either
not
doubting
,
but
such
refutations
would
serue
his
turne
to
reteine
the
people
in
their
preconceiued
alienation
from
Bishops
,
or
else
hoping
,
that
J
would
not
vouchsafe
him
an
answere
.
But
to
returne
to
my
proofes
:
[
n
](A20733-e103950-b)
n
Conc.
Hispa●
.
2.
c.
5.
Dist.
23.
c.
14.
when
as
a
certaine
Bishop
in
the
ordination
of
one
Presbyter
and
two
Deacons
vsed
only
the
help
of
a
Presbyter
to
reade
the
words
of
consecration
,
and
to
blesse
them
,
himself
laying
on
his
hands
,
but
being
not
able
for
the
paine
of
his
eies
to
reade
;
the
Councill
of
Hispalis
reuersed
the
ordination
,
as
vnlawfull
.
This
is
the
Councill
,
which
the
refuter
judged
to
deserue
neither
imitation
,
nor
approbation
:
by
which
censure
of
this
one
,
though
he
durst
not
giue
it
of
any
of
the
forenamed
Councils
;
yet
it
being
indefinitely
propounded
,
he
discrediteth
the
rest
with
the
vnlearned
,
who
are
not
able
to
distinguish
.
But
let
vs
heare
more
particularly
his
graue
censure
of
this
Councill
;
What
a
toy
was
it
for
the
Councill
of
Ciuill
in
Spaine
,
to
reuerse
the
ordination
&c.
What
a
boy
is
this
(
might
these
Fathers
say
)
that
presumeth
thus
to
censure
vs
?
was
not
Isidor
the
Archbishop
of
Ciuill
,
the
president
of
this
Councill
,
and
author
of
these
Canons
,
one
of
the
most
learned
writers
which
haue
beene
in
the
Church
within
this
1000.
yeares
[
o
](A20733-e104050-b)
o
See
Cent.
7
▪
51
▪
2.
with
whom
this
Refuter
for
learning
is
not
to
be
named
the
same
day
?
was
not
this
Council
held
against
the
Heretickes
called
Acephali
,
&
did
it
not
learnedly
and
judiciously
confute
them
?
did
these
graue
fathers
toy
,
when
by
graue
censures
they
sought
to
preserue
the
discipline
,
and
canons
of
the
Church
,
to
maintaine
the
lawfull
authoritie
of
BB.
and
to
preuent
the
presumptuous
vsurpation
of
Presbyters
,
contrarie
to
the
Canons
of
the
Church
?
had
not
the
ancient
councill
of
Orenge
[
p
](A20733-e104070-b)
p
Conc.
Arausican
.
c.
29.
decreed
,
That
if
any
Bishop
should
by
any
infirmitie
or
weaknesse
,
either
fall
into
the
dulnesse
of
his
senses
(
as
this
Bishop
did
)
or
loose
the
facultie
of
speech
,
he
should
not
suffer
Presbyters
(
as
this
Bishop
also
did
)
vnder
his
presence
,
to
do
those
things
which
are
not
done
,
but
by
Bishops
;
but
that
he
should
call
for
a
Bishop
,
to
whom
he
may
commit
that
which
is
to
be
done
in
the
Church
?
But
if
we
must
talke
of
toyes
,
what
a
toy
was
this
,
that
(
all
these
things
which
I
haue
alleaged
,
being
duely
considered
)
diuers
of
our
disciplinarian
Ministers
haue
renounced
their
ordination
,
which
they
had
receiued
from
a
Bishop
,
that
they
might
be
ordained
by
such
as
themselues
?
And
thus
you
haue
heard
,
how
easilie
he
hath
answered
the
Councils
,
by
vouchsafing
them
no
answere
.
Now
let
vs
weigh
his
answeres
to
the
testimonies
of
Ephiphanius
and
Ierome
.
There
be
Lectures
of
the
par●●ie
of
Ministers
one
day
to
be
published
,
which
will
shew
the
weaknesse
of
Epiphanius
his
reasons
;
and
there
is
another
learned
man
that
hath
answered
the
allegation
out
of
Ierome
.
Why
,
but
hath
the
Refuter
no
answeres
of
his
owne
,
that
he
referreth
vs
thus
to
other
men
?
yes
no
doubt
;
such
answeres
as
his
are
neuer
to
seeke
.
First
,
he
wrangleth
with
Ephiphanius
,
and
then
with
me
for
alledging
him
.
He
telleth
Epiphanius
,
that
he
beggeth
the
question
.
Alas
good
man
,
he
wanted
the
Refuters
acumen
in
disputing
.
And
what
was
the
question
I
pray
you
?
was
it
not
the
same
which
is
now
betweene
you
and
vs
,
whether
Bishops
and
other
Ministers
be
equall
,
as
Aërius
held
?
This
assertion
of
Aërius
,
Ephiphanius
disproueth
by
two
maine
arguments
,
as
I
do
yours
;
prouing
that
BB.
are
superiour
to
other
Presbyters
,
both
in
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
iurisdiction
.
His
former
argument
may
thus
be
concluded
.
Epiph.
haeres.
75.
That
order
,
which
hath
power
by
ordination
to
beget
Fathers
to
the
Church
,
is
superiour
to
that
which
hath
not
that
power
.
The
order
of
Bishops
hath
power
by
ordination
,
to
beget
Fathers
to
the
Church
,
which
the
order
of
Presbyters
is
not
able
to
doe
:
Therefore
the
order
of
Bishops
,
is
superiour
to
the
order
of
Presbyters
.
Call
you
this
begging
of
the
question
?
Yea
,
but
Aërius
denied
,
that
Bishops
had
power
more
then
Presbyters
,
to
beget
Fathers
.
How
is
this
proued
?
he
said
they
were
equall
.
It
followeth
not
.
Aerius
being
a
giddie-headed
fellow
,
because
he
perceiued
the
Presbyters
to
doe
the
same
things
,
that
the
Bishops
did
in
some
particulars
;
by
an
insufficient
enumeration
or
induction
,
concludeth
,
that
therfore
there
was
no
difference
betweene
them
.
The
parts
of
Aërius
his
induction
concerne
the
superioritie
and
preeminence
of
the
Ministerie
in
generall
aboue
the
people
,
noting
those
things
whch
be
common
to
Bishops
,
with
other
ministers
,
as
their
imposing
hands
on
the
penitent
,
their
giuing
of
Baptisme
,
their
executing
of
Diuine
seruice
,
their
sitting
in
the
chaire
or
pulpit
to
instruct
the
people
;
but
considered
not
the
respect
which
was
between
the
Bishop
and
the
Presbyters
themselues
.
Epiphanius
therefore
sheweth
,
that
although
it
were
true
,
that
Bishops
and
Presbyters
did
the
same
things
,
which
argue
their
Preeminence
in
common
aboue
the
Laity
:
yet
this
hindreth
not
,
but
that
Bishops
were
superiour
to
the
Presbyters
:
and
this
Epiphanius
proueth
by
two
instances
,
which
Aërius
himselfe
could
not
denie
:
because
the
Bishops
were
ordainers
of
the
Presbyters
,
hauing
the
power
of
ordination
of
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
which
Presbyters
had
not
;
the
second
,
because
the
Bishops
were
also
gouernours
and
judges
ouer
Presbyters
.
The
Refuter
therefore
should
rather
haue
suspected
the
shallownesse
of
his
own
judgement
,
then
haue
laid
such
an
imputation
vpon
Epiphanius
.
For
where
Epiphanius
saith
,
that
Presbyters
were
not
able
to
beget
Fathers
:
he
asketh
,
What
hindreth
them
,
but
the
vsurpation
of
Bishops
?
In
which
words
,
two
things
are
implied
:
The
first
,
that
the
power
of
ordination
,
which
the
BB.
haue
,
is
vsurped
by
them
:
The
second
,
that
Presbyters
haue
as
good
right
to
ordaine
as
they
.
But
you
will
say
,
how
are
those
things
proued
?
you
must
be
intreated
to
take
them
vpon
his
word
:
for
proo●e
he
hath
none
:
and
yet
can
he
by
no
meanes
abide
begging
of
the
question
.
But
such
is
the
boldnesse
of
our
new
Disciplinarians
,
that
they
doubt
not
to
prefer
their
new-fangled
opinions
,
&
self-set
assertions
,
which
haue
no
ground
nor
warrant
in
the
word
of
God
,
or
true
reason
,
before
the
judgement
and
practize
of
all
the
ancient
Fathers
,
of
all
the
approued
Councils
,
of
all
true
Christian
Churches
of
former
times
.
We
proue
,
that
the
Apostles
had
the
right
of
ordaining
;
that
this
right
was
from
them
deriued
to
their
substitutes
,
and
to
their
successors
;
to
their
substitutes
,
as
to
Timothe
in
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
in
Creet
,
to
Mark
at
Alexandria
,
to
Polycarpus
at
Smyrna
,
to
Euodius
at
Antioch
,
to
Linus
at
Rome
,
&c.
to
their
successors
,
as
to
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
,
the
successor
of
Saint
Iames
at
Ierusalem
,
&c.
that
from
these
substitutes
and
first
successors
of
the
Apostles
,
the
same
was
deriued
to
their
successors
,
which
without
all
doubt
were
the
BB.
of
the
seuerall
Churches
.
And
hereunto
we
adde
the
generall
consent
of
the
Fathers
,
and
Councils
;
many
of
them
affirming
and
confirming
,
not
one
,
I
say
not
one
,
denying
the
superioritie
of
BB.
in
ordaining
:
the
perpetuall
practize
of
all
true
Christian
Churches
,
not
one
approued
instance
to
be
giuen
to
the
contrarie
:
and
yet
he
shameth
not
to
auouch
the
Bishops
right
in
ordaining
to
be
but
vsurpation
.
As
touching
Presbyters
,
that
they
haue
right
to
ordaine
,
we
see
no
warrant
in
the
word
,
but
rather
the
contrarie
;
no
testimonie
of
Fathers
,
no
decree
of
Councils
for
it
,
but
many
testimonies
and
decrees
against
it
;
no
approued
example
to
warrant
it
;
how
then
could
he
say
the
Presbyters
haue
as
good
right
to
ordain
as
BB
▪
But
because
he
shal
not
cary
the
matter
without
proofes
,
this
I
will
offer
him
;
that
if
he
can
bring
any
one
pregnant
testimonie
or
example
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
any
approued
authoritie
or
example
out
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
Councils
or
Histories
of
the
Church
,
prouing
that
the
Presbyters
had
by
and
of
themselues
an
ordinarie
power
or
right
to
ordaine
ministers
,
J
meane
Presbyters
,
and
Deacons
;
I
will
promise
to
subscribe
to
his
assertion
.
But
if
he
cannot
do
this
,
as
I
know
he
cannot
;
then
let
him
for
shame
giue
place
vnto
the
truth
.
Againe
,
whereas
Epiphanius
in
the
assumption
saith
,
that
BB.
beget
Fathers
,
meaning
that
they
haue
power
to
ordaine
ministers
of
the
word
,
and
sacraments
,
or
as
he
expoundeth
himselfe
,
[
a
](A20733-e104640-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
teachers
;
he
fondly
cauilleth
at
Epiphanius
words
,
saying
,
that
ministers
are
no
spirituall
Fathers
vntill
they
beget
children
vnto
God
.
Why
,
but
their
calling
is
to
be
spirituall
Fathers
,
ordained
of
God
to
this
end
,
that
they
may
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
&
ministery
of
the
Gospell
beget
children
vnto
God
▪
when
Stephen
said
[
b
](A20733-e104700-b)
b
Act.
7.8
.
that
Iacob
begat
the
twelue
Patriarches
,
meaning
those
whom
God
appointed
to
bee
the
first
Fathers
of
the
twelue
Tribes
;
will
the
refuter
wrangle
with
him
,
because
when
they
were
begotten
,
they
were
not
Fathers
?
euen
so
BB.
are
said
to
beget
Fathers
,
because
by
ordination
they
beget
such
,
as
by
the
institution
of
their
calling
,
and
ordinance
of
God
,
are
to
be
spirituall
Fathers
.
Ad
pag.
96.
And
thus
much
of
the
assumption
.
The
proposition
also
he
denieth
,
finding
great
fault
with
me
,
saying
,
that
it
is
a
strange
and
fearefull
thing
that
I
hauing
so
worth
:
he
set
out
in
my
former
Sermon
the
excellencie
of
the
ministers
calling
in
regard
of
his
labouring
in
the
word
,
doe
now
turne
all
topsey
tur●●y
,
and
preferre
making
of
ministers
before
begetting
soules
.
And
to
this
purpose
he
alledgeth
that
to
beget
one
childe
vnto
God
,
is
more
pretious
then
to
beget
a
thousand
Fathers
to
the
Church
,
and
of
more
comfort
at
the
day
of
iudgement
,
&c.
But
be
of
good
comfort
,
this
fault
which
he
layeth
to
my
charge
,
is
but
as
he
saith
,
in
his
poore
vnderstanding
.
For
there
be
three
things
which
shew
the
pouertie
of
his
conceipt
.
The
first
,
that
he
thinketh
I
do
therefore
preferre
the
ordaining
of
Ministers
before
preaching
,
because
I
say
that
Bishops
are
superiour
to
other
ministers
in
the
power
of
ordination
.
It
seemeth
he
hath
not
learned
the
distinction
of
those
three
things
wherein
superioritie
consisteth
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
excellencie
,
imperie
,
and
power
.
The
magistrate
is
superior
to
the
minister
,
in
imperie
,
and
ciuill
authoritie
;
but
the
minister
notwithstanding
is
superior
to
the
magistrate
in
excellencie
.
But
the
second
thing
doth
much
more
shew
the
shallownesse
of
his
conceipt
:
he
conceiueth
of
ministers
,
as
hauing
alone
the
power
of
preaching
;
and
of
Bishops
,
as
hauing
onely
the
power
of
ordination
:
whereas
if
he
had
but
considered
that
the
authoritie
of
preaching
is
common
to
the
Bishop
with
other
ministers
,
and
the
Bishop
in
respect
of
his
office
superior
in
the
exercise
;
because
he
may
licence
,
and
he
may
vpon
just
occasion
suspend
this
power
in
others
(
though
perhaps
in
personall
gifts
the
Presbyter
may
excell
the
Bishop
:
)
he
could
not
but
haue
discerned
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
without
any
disparagement
to
the
ministerie
of
the
word
;
for
that
they
being
at
least
equall
in
(
respect
of
their
function
)
to
other
ministers
in
the
power
of
preaching
,
are
superior
in
the
power
of
ordaining
.
The
third
,
that
he
conceiueth
Epiphanius
to
haue
made
a
comparison
betweene
preaching
,
and
ordaining
,
which
he
doth
not
,
For
the
calling
of
Bishops
is
an
order
generatiue
of
Fathers
,
begetting
Fathers
to
the
Church
;
but
the
order
of
Presbyters
being
not
able
to
beget
Fathers
,
doth
by
the
lauer
of
regeneration
(
that
is
baptisme
)
beget
children
to
the
Church
,
and
not
Fathers
,
verily
,
or
teachers
.
And
you
are
to
marke
how
he
speaketh
of
begetting
Fathers
and
children
to
the
Church
.
And
who
can
denie
,
but
that
it
is
a
matter
of
greater
consequence
,
the
begetting
of
a
Father
to
the
Church
,
then
of
a
child
?
But
Epiphanius
his
meaning
was
,
that
the
Bishop
hauing
power
of
baptizing
common
to
them
with
Presbyters
,
Now
I
come
to
Ierome
:
verie
strange
,
that
I
should
bring
him
as
a
patron
of
the
Bishops
sole
power
in
ordination
.
It
seemeth
,
that
the
Refuter
conceiueth
nothing
aright
.
I
bring
in
Ierome
in
this
place
,
not
as
a
patron
of
BB.
but
as
one
,
who
pleading
for
the
superioritie
of
Presbyters
aboue
Deacons
,
&
desiring
to
raise
them
as
neare
as
he
can
to
BB.
doth
notwithstanding
confesse
,
that
Bishops
are
superiour
in
ordination
.
What
doth
a
Bishop
(
saith
he
)
excepting
ordination
,
which
a
Presbyter
may
not
do
?
To
which
,
the
Refuter
hauing
no
answere
of
his
owne
,
intreateth
another
to
answere
for
him
;
which
done
,
he
craketh
,
as
if
he
had
layed
me
on
my
backe
.
The
answere
is
,
that
Ierome
speaketh
of
his
owne
time
.
No
doubt
:
for
speaking
in
the
present
tense
,
whereby
he
signifieth
actum
continuum
,
he
doth
not
exclude
his
owne
time
.
But
doth
he
speake
therefore
of
his
owne
time
onely
?
or
doth
he
signifie
,
that
there
was
a
time
since
there
were
first
Bishops
,
(
which
he
confesseth
,
was
in
the
time
of
the
Apostles
)
when
the
Bishops
had
not
this
power
?
if
this
could
be
shewed
,
then
Ierome
might
be
thought
not
to
speake
of
the
Apostles
times
.
Nay
,
doth
not
Ierome
speake
as
well
de
iure
,
as
de
facto
,
when
he
saith
,
What
doth
a
Bishop
&c.
that
is
,
what
hath
a
Bishop
right
to
doe
by
the
power
of
his
order
,
which
a
Presbyter
hath
not
right
to
doe
by
the
power
of
his
order
,
onely
except
ordination
?
that
I
confesse
to
be
aboue
the
Presbyters
power
.
Well
,
and
to
what
end
doth
Ierome
speak
this
of
his
owne
time
?
That
hauing
shewed
before
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
the
practise
of
the
Church
at
Antioch
,
that
of
old
a
Bishop
,
and
a
Presbyter
were
all
one
;
he
might
see
,
that
in
his
time
also
,
there
remained
a
proofe
thereof
:
because
a
Bishop
then
did
nothing
,
except
ordination
,
which
a
Presbyter
could
not
doe
.
Ioan.
Epist.
2.
&
3.
And
this
is
Ieromes
first
argument
that
Presbyters
are
superiour
to
Deacons
.
But
hence
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
therefore
the
offices
of
a
Bishop
,
and
Presbyter
,
are
confounded
;
especially
,
after
the
institution
of
a
Bishop
.
Doth
Ierome
thinke
,
that
euerie
Presbyter
is
equall
in
degree
with
Timothe
,
because
the
office
of
Timothe
in
Ieromes
vnderstanding
is
called
Presbyterium
?
or
that
they
are
equall
with
Peter
,
and
Iohn
,
because
they
called
themselues
Presbyters
?
His
second
argument
to
prooue
the
superioritie
of
Presbyters
aboue
Deacons
,
is
,
because
Bishops
were
chosen
out
of
Presbyters
,
and
by
Presbyters
;
whereas
contrariwise
,
he
that
is
chosen
from
among
Deacons
,
by
Deacons
,
is
but
an
Archdeacon
.
The
former
part
he
first
illustrateth
by
the
end
,
which
was
to
auoid
Schisme
;
and
then
prooueth
it
by
the
Practise
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
.
In
his
setting
downe
the
end
,
he
lets
fall
one
word
,
which
if
it
be
not
fauourablie
expounded
,
will
make
him
contradict
himselfe
,
and
the
truth
.
For
vpon
the
allegation
of
Saint
Iohns
second
and
third
epistle
he
saith
,
Quòd
autem
poste●
vnus
electus
,
that
one
afterwards
was
chosen
who
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
it
was
prouided
as
a
remedie
against
Schisme
,
lest
euerie
one
drawing
after
him
should
rend
the
Church
of
Christ
.
What
say
you
Ierome
,
were
Bishops
first
ordained
after
Saint
Iohns
time
?
doe
not
your selfe
testifie
that
Saint
Iames
a
little
after
the
ascension
of
Christ
was
by
the
Apostles
made
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
that
Marke
was
Bishop
of
Alexandria
?
that
euer
since
his
time
(
and
he
dyed
almost
40.
yeares
before
Saint
Iohn
)
there
hath
beene
a
Bishop
,
in
a
degree
superiour
to
other
Presdyters
?
that
Timothe
was
Bishop
of
Ephesus
&c.
That
word
afterwards
therefore
,
is
not
to
be
referred
to
Saint
Iohns
time
,
but
to
those
testimonies
where
he
prooued
the
name
Episcopus
to
be
giuen
to
Presbyters
;
which
custome
,
as
he
supposeth
,
continued
,
vntill
one
of
the
Presbyters
,
beeing
chosen
from
among
the
rest
,
was
called
Bishop
:
for
indeed
whiles
Apostles
or
Apostolicke
men
were
made
BB.
,
BB.
were
called
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
:
But
when
out
of
the
Presbyters
one
was
chosen
,
he
began
for
difference
sake
to
be
called
,
the
Bishop
,
the
Angell
of
the
Church
.
Now
that
BB.
were
chosen
out
of
Presbyters
,
and
by
Presbyters
,
he
prooueth
by
the
example
of
the
Church
at
Alexandria
:
For
euen
at
Alexandria
,
from
Marke
the
Euangelist
vnto
Heraclas
and
Dionysius
BB.
(
who
were
not
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
)
the
Presbyters
haue
alwaies
called
one
,
chosen
from
among
themselues
,
and
placed
in
a
higher
degree
,
the
Bishop
:
euen
as
if
an
army
doe
choose
their
generall
,
or
Deacons
choose
from
among
themselues
one
,
whom
they
know
to
be
industrious
,
and
call
him
the
Archdeacon
.
His
fourth
argument
is
this
.
There
be
many
things
which
a
Bishop
by
the
power
of
his
order
may
doe
,
which
a
Deacon
cannot
:
but
there
is
nothing
which
a
Bishop
may
doe
by
the
power
of
order
,
excepting
ordination
,
which
a
Presbyter
may
not
doe
.
A
Presbyter
is
therefore
by
so
much
superior
to
a
Deacon
,
by
how
much
he
is
nearer
to
the
Bishop
:
this
is
the
verie
scope
of
this
place
,
and
to
the
same
are
all
the
arguments
following
referred
&c.
the
summe
whereof
is
,
that
the
Presbyterie
is
a
degree
betweene
the
Bishops
,
and
Deacons
.
Now
let
vs
see
what
he
prooueth
by
the
practise
of
the
Church
at
Antioch
:
he
would
say
at
Alexandria
,
that
of
old
a
Bishop
,
and
a
Presbyter
were
all
one
.
See
you
not
how
he
prooueth
it
,
when
he
saith
,
that
euer
since
Marks
time
the
Bishop
hath
beene
placed
in
a
higher
degree
aboue
the
Presbyters
?
Was
this
to
prooue
that
a
Bishop
,
and
Presbyter
are
equall
,
or
all
one
?
or
did
Ierome
intend
any
thing
else
,
but
to
prooue
the
Presbyters
superiour
to
Deacons
,
and
that
by
such
arguments
as
before
I
analysed
?
We
haue
heard
what
Ierome
prooueth
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
practise
of
the
Church
at
Alexandria
;
now
at
the
last
,
let
vs
heare
the
end
of
his
speech
.
That
he
(
I
know
not
who
)
might
see
,
that
in
his
time
also
there
remained
a
proofe
thereof
,
because
a
Bishop
euen
then
did
nothing
except
ordination
which
a
Presbyter
could
not
doe
.
Toto
coelo
errat
:
it
was
not
Ieromes
end
,
to
prooue
the
Presbyter
equall
with
the
Bishop
,
but
superiour
to
the
Deacon
:
For
if
the
former
had
beene
his
intent
;
this
,
and
the
other
from
the
practise
of
Alexandria
:
had
beene
very
vntoward
arguments
to
prooue
his
purpose
.
At
Alexandria
the
Bishop
euer
since
Marks
time
was
superiour
to
Presbyters
in
degree
,
therefore
they
were
equall
.
The
Bishop
is
superiour
in
the
power
of
ordination
,
therefore
Presbyters
be
his
equals
.
Hath
not
the
Refuter
now
great
cause
,
thinke
you
,
to
crake
of
this
answere
?
was
this
,
among
all
the
testimonies
which
I
alledged
,
chosen
as
most
misalledged
,
by
occasion
whereof
,
he
might
pay
me
mine
owne
,
and
tell
me
that
it
was
wherried
in
with
●are●
by
him
that
looked
an
other
●ay
?
Blessed
bee
God
,
that
so
guided
me
in
the
way
of
truth
,
that
among
all
my
allegations
,
the
refuter
hath
not
beene
able
to
charge
mee
with
misalledging
any
one
.
As
for
this
;
nothing
could
bee
more
pregnant
,
and
pertinent
to
proue
,
that
BB
were
superiour
to
Presbyters
in
ordination
,
then
as
I
said
in
the
sermon
,
that
Ierome
himselfe
,
euen
when
,
and
where
he
seeketh
to
aduance
the
Presbyters
,
as
high
as
hee
can
,
aboue
the
Deacons
;
doth
confesse
ordination
to
be
peculiar
to
Bishops
.
Now
,
whereas
Ierome
saith
a
Presbyter
may
doe
any
thing
which
a
Bishop
doth
,
Where
you
are
not
to
vnderstand
him
,
or
other
of
the
Fathers
speaking
som●time
to
the
like
purpose
,
as
though
the
B.
were
not
superiour
,
in
any
thing
else
;
but
that
potestate
ord●nis
,
as
touching
power
of
order
,
●e
is
superior
only
in
ordination
.
For
that
he
is
superior
potestate
iurisdictionis
,
they
euery
where
acknowledge
.
I
know
some
[
a
](A20733-e105770-b)
a
Bell.
de
Cler.
l.
1.
c.
15.
answere
,
that
in
Ieromes
iudgement
BB.
are
iure
diuin●
superiour
to
other
Ministers
,
onely
in
the
power
of
ordination
:
but
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
iure
apostolico
;
in
that
hee
acknowledgeth
,
that
superiority
of
BB.
was
brought
in
by
the
Apostles
necessarily
for
auoiding
of
schismes
.
Which
answere
I
refusing
,
because
Ierome
saith
the
like
[
b
](A20733-e105840-b)
b
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
in
Titum
.
●
ad
Euagr.
de
7.
Ordin
.
Eccles.
of
the
superiority
of
the
BB.
in
generall
,
and
of
the
power
of
ordination
in
particular
,
that
it
was
reserued
to
the
B.
ne
a
multis
disciplina
ecclesia
vendicata
,
concordiam
sacerdotum
solueret
,
et
scandala
generaret
;
made
choice
of
this
other
,
as
the
more
like
to
bee
true
.
Not
that
J
absolutely
was
of
this
iudgement
,
that
the
right
of
ordination
doth
belong
to
the
power
of
Episcopall
order
;
as
appeareth
by
that
supposall
which
J
made
in
the
sermon
page
44.
l.
3.
but
that
I
supposed
it
to
be
the
iudgment
of
Ierome
,
and
some
other
fathers
,
who
acknowledging
the
Bishop
to
bee
superiour
in
iurisdiction
,
and
yet
affirming
that
hee
is
superiour
onely
in
the
right
of
ordination
or
imposing
hands
:
must
thus
bee
vnderstood
,
as
iudging
the
Bishop
to
bee
superiour
onely
therein
,
quoad
ordinis
potestatem
,
as
touching
the
power
of
order
:
they
holding
other
things
belonging
to
the
power
of
order
,
as
the
ministry
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
of
Baptisme
,
and
the
Lords
Supper
,
to
bee
common
to
BB.
with
other
ministers
:
but
the
power
of
ordination
to
bee
peculiar
to
the
BB.
and
in
their
iudgements
not
communicable
to
Presbyters
:
because
as
Thomas
[
c
](A20733-e105930-b)
c
2
2●
.
q.
187.2
.
c.
saith
,
ea
quae
sunt
ordinis
non
possunt
committi
nisi
habenti
ordinem
.
Hereunto
the
Refuter
,
after
his
malepert
and
saucy
manner
,
answereth
:
that
I
vnderstand
not
this
distinction
.
For
,
saith
he
,
potestas
ordinis
,
power
of
order
is
not
potestas
ordinationis
,
power
of
ordination
,
but
power
to
doe
all
that
which
belongeth
to
the
order
of
that
ministery
which
hee
hath
receiued
,
as
Tolet
[
d
](A20733-e106010-b)
d
Instruct.
sacerd.
l.
1.
c.
3.
sheweth
.
But
whether
of
vs
spake
without
vnderstanding
,
let
the
iudicious
Reader
heereby
iudge
.
For
he
conceiueth
me
,
as
no
man
would
that
is
not
of
a
very
shallow
conceipt
,
as
if
I
confounded
the
power
of
order
with
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
as
though
the
power
of
order
contained
nothing
else
but
the
power
of
ordaining
,
whenas
I
plainely
made
it
,
according
to
those
Fathers
iudgement
,
but
one
part
of
the
power
of
Order
:
they
supposing
other
parts
of
the
power
of
order
to
bee
common
vnto
Presbyters
,
[
e
](A20733-e106080-b)
e
De
pont.
Rom.
l.
4.
c.
22.
that
Potestas
ordinis
refertur
ad
sacramenta
conficienda
,
the
power
of
order
is
referred
to
the
ministery
of
the
Sacraments
.
Me
thinks
the
Refuter
should
adde
,
that
it
is
also
referred
to
the
ministery
of
the
Worde
.
But
what
doth
Bellarmine
and
all
other
Papists
vnderstand
by
Sacraments
?
Doe
they
not
meane
fiue
others
besides
Baptisme
and
the
Lords
Supper
,
the
ministery
of
two
whereof
,
viz.
of
confirmation
,
and
of
orders
they
make
peculiar
to
BB.
and
of
the
other
fiue
common
to
them
with
all
Priests
?
and
doth
not
Bellarmine
therefore
prooue
,
that
the
order
of
Bishops
is
superiour
to
that
of
Presbyters
,
and
that
Bishops
are
superiour
in
the
power
of
order
,
because
[
f
](A20733-e106150-b)
f
De
Sacram.
ord.
1.
C.
3.
the
Bishop
may
conferre
two
Sacraments
,
which
the
Presbyters
may
not
,
viz.
the
Sacrament
of
confirmation
and
of
orders
?
Howbeit
of
the
former
,
Ierome
saith
[
g
](A20733-e106190-b)
g
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
,
that
it
was
reserued
as
peculiar
to
BB.
potiùs
ad
honorem
sacer
dotij
,
quàm
ad
legis
necessitatem
.
It
is
true
,
that
some
Popish
writers
make
BB.
and
Presbyters
to
be
but
one
order
;
but
you
must
withall
take
the
reason
of
that
Popish
conceipt
:
They
hold
,
that
the
Sacrament
of
the
altar
(
as
they
call
it
)
is
the
Sacrament
of
Sacraments
,
whereunto
the
Sacrament
of
orders
is
subordinate
[
h
](A20733-e106230-b)
h
2
.
2●
.
q.
40.4
.
&
supplem
.
q
37.2
.
c.
;
all
their
orders
of
Clerks
being
ordained
to
the
ministerie
of
the
altar
;
and
that
euery
one
of
their
7.
orders
(
all
which
they
call
Sacraments
)
is
onely
to
be
counted
a
Sacrament
,
as
it
hath
reference
to
the
Eucharist
:
to
which
purpose
[
h
](A20733-e106270-b)
h
2
.
2●
.
q.
40.4
.
&
supplem
.
q
37.2
.
c.
Thomas
Aquinas
doth
somewhat
ridiculously
distinguish
their
7.
orders
,
according
to
their
diuers
offices
referred
to
that
Sacrament
.
And
forasmuch
as
in
the
whole
power
of
order
this
is
the
supreme
act
,
by
pronouncing
the
words
of
consecration
to
make
the
very
body
of
Christ
,
which
is
as
well
performed
by
a
Priest
,
as
a
Bishop
:
therefore
they
teach
[
i
](A20733-e106320-b)
i
Suppl
.
q.
40.5
.
,
that
Bishops
,
and
Priests
are
both
of
one
order
;
and
that
the
order
of
Bishops
,
as
it
is
a
Sacrament
,
is
not
superior
to
that
of
Presbyters
,
but
only
as
it
is
an
office
,
in
respect
of
certaine
sacred
actions
;
&
in
this
sense
,
saith
Thomas
,
that
the
Bishop
hath
power
in
sacred
and
Hierarchicall
actions
in
respect
of
Christs
mysticall
body
aboue
the
priest
,
the
office
of
a
Bishop
is
an
order
.
For
you
must
vnderstand
that
they
make
al
Ecclesiasticall
power
to
haue
referrence
to
the
[
k
](A20733-e106350-b)
k
Bellarm.
de
Sacram.
ord.
1.
c.
9.
body
of
Christ
,
either
verum
,
his
true
bodie
in
the
Sacrament
of
the
altar
,
which
they
call
the
power
of
order
;
or
mysticum
,
mysticall
(
that
is
,
the
the
Church
and
members
thereof
)
which
they
cal
the
power
of
iurisdiction
.
This
new
Popish
conceipt
therefore
of
confounding
Bishops
and
Presbyters
into
one
order
,
ariseth
from
their
idol
of
the
Masse
,
&
their
doctrine
of
transubstantiation
,
wherby
euery
Priest
is
as
able
to
make
his
maker
,
as
the
Pope
himselfe
.
I
call
it
newe
,
because
all
the
ancient
writers
doe
confesse
(
as
before
hath
been
shewed
)
Bishops
,
Hier.
de
.
7.
ord.
.
acknowledgeth
the
order
of
BB.
to
be
the
seuenth
and
the
highest
order
.
Presbyters
and
Deacons
to
be
three
distinct
degrees
,
and
consequently
orders
of
the
Ministery
:
for
what
is
an
order
but
that
degree
,
which
,
among
things
or
persons
which
are
subordinate
one
to
another
,
some
being
higher
,
some
lower
,
any
one
hath
obtained
?
1.
And
first
,
that
ecclesiasticall
power
is
to
bee
distinguished
into
the
power
of
order
and
iurisdiction
.
2.
That
the
power
of
order
is
a
spirituall
power
,
whereby
ecclesiasticall
persons
are
qualified
and
enabled
to
doe
sacred
actions
appertayning
to
the
seruice
of
God
and
saluation
of
men
,
which
they
who
are
not
of
the
same
order
at
the
least
,
may
either
not
at
all
,
or
not
ordinarily
performe
.
3.
That
this
power
is
that
which
is
granted
to
ecclesiastical
persons
in
their
ordination
,
and
appertaineth
to
them
as
they
simply
are
of
that
order
,
though
they
haue
no
iurisdiction
or
charge
,
and
therfore
cannot
be
taken
from
them
whiles
they
continue
in
that
order
.
4.
That
of
Ecclesiasticall
order
there
are
three
degrees
,
in
Bishops
,
Presbyters
and
Deacons
:
and
because
neither
of
the
two
superiour
orders
may
be
granted
to
any
per
saltum
:
therfore
each
superiour
order
includeth
the
inferiour
,
so
that
a
presbyter
may
doe
that
which
belongeth
to
a
Deacon
,
and
a
Bishop
that
which
belongeth
to
to
a
presbyter
,
but
not
contrariwise
.
5.
That
the
power
of
the
order
of
Presbyters
is
besides
the
performance
of
the
diuine
liturgy
and
power
to
administer
the
sacrament
of
Baptisme
and
to
preach
,
common
to
them
with
Deacons
(
who
shall
be
thereunto
authorized
by
the
B.
)
a
power
also
to
minister
the
holy
communion
,
and
authority
to
remit
and
retaine
the
sinnes
of
men
:
which
last
I
doe
not
doubt
to
referre
to
the
power
of
order
.
First
,
because
it
is
giuen
to
the
minister
in
his
ordination
,
and
belongeth
to
him
as
he
is
simply
a
Presbyter
,
without
iurisdiction
or
relation
to
a
charge
.
And
secondly
,
because
it
continueth
with
him
whiles
he
is
of
the
order
,
though
his
charge
and
iurisdiction
should
be
taken
from
him
.
Besides
,
this
power
of
remitting
and
retaining
sinnes
is
called
the
key
of
order
,
and
according
to
the
Popish
doctrine
[
n
](A20733-e106520-b)
n
Bell.
de
pont.
R
l.
1.
c.
12.
,
belongeth
to
the
conferring
of
the
sacrament
of
penance
.
6.
The
power
of
order
in
B.
B
(
besides
all
this
power
which
is
in
the
Presbyters
)
is
power
by
imposition
of
hands
to
conuey
grace
[
o
](A20733-e106560-b)
o
1.
Tim.
4.14
.
2.
Tim.
1.6
.
,
as
the
ordinary
instrument
of
the
holy
ghost
,
either
to
parties
baptized
for
their
confirmation
;
or
to
penitents
,
for
their
reconciliation
;
or
to
parties
designed
to
the
ministery
,
for
their
ordination
.
As
touching
the
former
,
the
ancient
writers
gather
it
to
bee
peculiar
to
BB.
because
howsoeuer
many
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
conuerted
and
baptized
by
men
of
inferiour
order
,
yet
the
Apostles
alone
,
and
after
them
the
BB.
had
authority
to
put
their
hands
vpon
them
that
they
might
receiue
the
holy
Ghost
.
Acts.
8.
&
19.
And
for
the
latter
,
we
read
,
that
both
the
Apostles
themselues
and
such
as
they
ordained
Bishops
,
did
ordaine
ministers
by
imposition
of
hands
:
insomuch
that
whereas
at
Ephesus
and
in
Creet
(
where
were
diuers
Presbyters
before
)
Timothy
and
Titus
were
appointed
to
ordaine
ministers
.
I
hold
this
authority
to
impose
hands
to
belong
to
the
power
of
order
:
Iust.
l.
4.
c.
14.
§
20.
Imposit●onem
manuum
,
qua
ecclesiae
ministri
in
suum
mann●●uitiantur
,
vt
non
inuitus
patior
vocari
sacramentum
,
●t●
inter
ordinaria
sacramenta
(
sci
.
quae
in
vsum
totius
ecclesia●
sunt
instituta
)
non
numero
.
&c.
19
§.
31.
Impositionem
〈◊〉
in
veris
legitimisque
ordinationibus
sacramentum
esse
concedo
.
though
not
such
a
sacrament
as
Baptisme
and
the
Lords
supper
,
which
are
seales
and
pledges
of
our
vnion
and
communion
with
Christ
;
yet
in
a
more
generall
sense
,
as
a
sacrament
is
defined
a
visible
signe
of
inuisible
grace
.
I
say
it
is
a
sacred
action
of
spirituall
efficacie
,
consecrating
a
man
to
the
seruice
of
God
in
the
Ministery
,
conueiing
vnto
him
the
power
of
that
order
whereunto
hee
is
ordained
,
whereby
he
is
qualified
to
performe
sacred
actions
of
spirituall
and
supernaturall
efficacie
.
Wherefore
I
doe
not
see
,
why
the
power
of
begetting
spirituall
Fathers
to
the
Church
by
ordination
,
as
Epiphanius
speaketh
,
should
not
be
thought
to
belong
to
the
power
of
order
in
BB.
euen
as
the
begetting
of
sonnes
to
the
Church
by
baptisme
,
to
the
power
of
order
in
all
Ministers
.
Secondly
,
because
this
power
is
conferred
vpon
each
Bishop
in
their
consecration
,
and
belongeth
to
him
as
being
a
Bishop
simply
,
and
cannot
be
taken
from
him
whiles
he
remaines
a
Bishop
,
though
his
Bishopricke
be
taken
from
him
,
and
may
be
exercised
by
him
,
where
he
hath
no
iurisdiction
.
Whereof
examples
might
be
produced
of
Athanasius
,
Eusebius
▪
Vercellensis
,
and
other
godly
Fathers
,
who
when
they
were
turned
out
of
their
Bishoprickes
,
and
others
placed
in
their
roomes
,
not
onely
retained
their
power
,
but
also
exercised
the
same
,
as
occasion
was
offered
in
other
Churches
.
Thirdly
,
because
all
ecclesiasticall
power
,
being
referred
either
to
the
power
of
order
or
of
iurisdiction
,
this
must
therefore
be
referred
to
the
power
of
order
,
because
it
cannot
be
referred
truly
to
the
power
of
iurisdiction
:
and
that
for
these
two
reasons
:
both
because
the
Bishop
cannot
communicate
this
power
to
others
,
as
he
may
iurisdiction
:
and
also
because
he
doth
not
lose
it
with
his
iurisdiction
,
but
retaineth
it
when
his
Bishopricke
is
taken
from
him
,
and
may
as
well
exercise
it
without
his
diocesse
,
where
he
hath
no
iurisdiction
,
as
another
Minister
may
preach
or
baptize
out
of
his
owne
parish
.
Whenas
therefore
I
expounded
Ierome
and
some
others
,
who
say
the
B.
is
superior
to
the
Presbyters
onely
in
ordination
,
as
not
meaning
that
he
is
not
superiour
also
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
but
that
in
respect
of
the
power
of
order
,
he
was
superior
onely
in
the
right
of
ordaining
;
because
whereas
other
parts
of
the
power
of
order
be
common
to
him
with
Presbyters
,
that
of
ordaining
is
his
peculiar
right
and
prerogatiue
,
I
did
not
speake
without
vnderstanding
.
Contrariwise
the
Refuter
,
as
in
laying
to
my
charge
that
I
confound
the
power
of
order
with
ordination
,
he
spake
he
knew
not
what
:
so
in
the
inference
which
he
bringeth
vpon
his
former
words
,
hee
pratleth
without
vnderstanding
.
Now
if
the
power
of
ordination
did
belong
properly
to
the
office
of
BB.
then
were
the
BB.
superior
to
the
other
Ministers
potestate
ordinis
,
Ad
pag.
97.
(
but
the
former
I
haue
manifestly
proued
,
therefore
the
latter
must
be
granted
)
but
that
is
the
question
,
saith
he
;
as
who
should
say
,
he
were
resolued
to
deny
the
conclusion
.
But
heare
him
I
pray
you
.
Notwithstanding
(
to
let
him
inioy
his
owne
distinction
)
of
BB.
differ
onely
in
ordination
from
Presbyters
,
quoad
ordinis
potestatem
,
then
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
Presbyters
are
equall
with
them
potestate
ordinis
,
by
the
power
of
their
order
.
Wherefore
where
afterwards
he
draweth
vnto
BB.
the
whole
power
of
censuring
vnder
the
name
of
potestas
iurisdictionis
,
he
maketh
that
to
be
adiuine
,
which
is
but
an
humane
preeminence
by
his
owne
distinction
.
All
which
is
meere
babling
,
without
sense
,
or
vnderstanding
what
he
saith
,
as
the
Reader
who
vnderstandeth
what
I
haue
deliuered
concerning
this
distinction
,
will
easily
iudge
.
There
remaineth
the
third
part
of
this
section
;
wherein
out
of
a
Christian
and
charitable
desire
to
preserue
the
credit
of
such
reformed
Churches
as
haue
no
BB.
I
endeuoured
to
preuent
the
obiections
of
Papists
,
[
a
](A20733-e106840-b)
a
Ambros.
in
Eph.
4.
Ambrose
and
[
b
](A20733-e106870-b)
b
Aug.
quest.
●x
vet.
&
non
.
test
.
mixtim
.
4.101
.
Augustine
,
the
latter
by
[
c
](A20733-e106900-b)
c
Cyp.
l.
3.
ep.
17.
Cyprian
and
diuers
[
d
](A20733-e106940-b)
d
Conc.
Carth.
graec
.
c.
43.
Carth.
2.
c.
4.
Conc.
Arausic
.
c.
2.
Councels
.
And
moreouer
,
the
Popish
Writers
themselues
[
e
](A20733-e106990-b)
e
Summa
Angelica
.
ordo
.
§.
2.
doe
teach
,
that
the
Pope
may
giue
licence
to
him
that
is
not
a
Bishop
to
ordaine
:
so
that
hee
to
whom
such
licence
is
giuen
,
haue
those
orders
himselfe
,
which
he
would
giue
to
another
.
If
therefore
by
the
Popes
licence
,
a
Presbyter
may
ordaine
Presbyters
,
much
better
may
a
company
of
Presbyters
,
to
whom
in
the
want
of
a
Bishop
the
charge
of
the
Church
is
deuolued
,
be
authorised
thereto
by
necessity
,
which
,
as
they
say
,
hath
no
law
.
To
this
passage
,
inserted
by
me
onely
in
fauour
of
the
Churches
where
the
presbyterian
discipline
is
established
,
which
I
would
not
lay
open
to
popish
cauils
;
the
Refuter
,
if
he
had
been
led
with
a
good
spirit
,
would
rather
haue
answered
with
thanks
,
then
haue
set
himselfe
to
wrangle
and
cauill
therewith
,
as
if
he
cared
not
,
so
he
may
haue
something
to
speake
against
,
what
becommeth
of
those
Churches
,
which
notwithstanding
he
would
seeme
to
fauor
more
then
my selfe
.
The
which
vngracious
course
he
taketh
againe
in
answering
the
95.
page
of
my
Sermon
;
where
I
forced
my selfe
,
as
in
this
place
,
to
speake
as
much
as
the
truth
would
permit
in
fauour
of
the
aforesaid
Churches
.
But
if
my
answers
for
them
either
here
,
or
there
,
do
not
please
the
Refuter
and
his
consorts
,
I
will
hereafter
giue
them
leaue
to
answer
what
they
please
.
Neither
will
I
any
more
disaduentage
the
truth
,
which
I
defend
,
in
a
desire
to
gratifie
them
,
seeing
my
indeuor
is
so
vngratefully
taken
.
Which
I
speake
,
not
as
though
I
thought
his
exceptions
against
my
defence
any
thing
worth
.
For
where
he
obiecteth
,
that
if
the
Fathers
had
thought
the
power
of
ordination
to
haue
bin
peculiar
to
BB.
by
any
ordinance
of
God
,
they
would
not
haue
allowed
any
such
ordination
as
I
speake
of
without
a
B
:
it
followes
not
.
For
though
they
held
the
right
of
Baptizing
to
belong
to
the
Ministers
of
the
Church
by
Gods
ordinance
;
though
they
held
the
right
of
imposing
hands
to
be
peculiar
to
the
Apostles
and
their
successors
:
yet
in
a
case
of
necessity
,
Apostolorum
&
suc●●ssorum
●orum
●st
per
manus
impos●tionem
donum
spiritus
sancti
tradere
.
Damas
.
epist.
de
Chorepiscopis
.
Tertull.
de
B●ptismo
.
Conc.
Eli●
.
c.
38.
Hier.
aduers
.
Lucifer
.
they
held
baptisme
without
a
Minister
,
and
confirmation
without
a
B.
to
be
lawfull
.
In
like
maner
,
though
they
held
that
the
right
of
ordination
was
peculiar
to
Bishops
by
Apostolical
institution
,
&
therefore
taught
that
none
but
Bishops
could
regularly
and
ordinarily
ordaine
:
notwithstanding
in
a
case
of
necessity
,
we
may
well
thinke
they
would
haue
allowed
of
such
an
ordination
as
J
spake
of
,
though
(
as
I
said
)
not
as
regular
,
according
to
the
rules
of
ordinary
Church
gouernment
,
yet
as
effectuall
and
iustifiable
in
the
want
of
a
B.
If
he
still
say
they
wou●d
not
,
then
must
he
confesse
that
the
practise
of
the
Disciplinarians
is
such
,
as
the
Fathers
of
the
Primitiue
Church
would
in
no
case
haue
allowed
:
and
that
is
all
the
inconuenience
that
can
come
to
our
cause
,
if
my
defence
of
them
be
not
sufficient
.
As
for
his
cauill
at
my
supposall
of
the
right
of
ordination
,
to
belong
to
the
power
of
order
in
BB.
I
haue
answered
before
.
To
such
obiections
one
answer
is
enough
,
two
is
too
many
.
And
thus
much
of
the
Bishops
right
in
ordaining
.
CHAP.
V.
That
Bishops
were
superior
to
other
Ministers
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
.
(
Serm.
sect.
9.
pag.
45.
Now
I
am
to
shew
,
that
the
B.
is
superiour
also
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
.
The
Presbyters
indeede
,
&c.
to
the
end
of
the
page
.
)
HEre
the
Reader
is
to
obserue
,
what
is
by
me
propounded
to
be
proued
,
not
that
the
BB.
had
,
or
haue
the
sole
power
of
iurisdiction
,
the
defence
whereof
the
Refuter
euery
where
would
faine
force
vpon
me
,
but
that
they
are
,
and
were
superiour
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
or
gouernment
.
I
deny
not
the
Presbyters
(
which
haue
charge
of
soules
)
to
haue
iurisdiction
both
seuerally
in
their
parishes
,
and
iointly
in
prouinciall
synods
.
And
I
haue
confessed
before
,
that
Presbyters
haue
with
,
and
vnder
the
Bishops
exercised
some
iurisdiction
.
I
grant
that
godly
BB.
before
they
had
the
countenance
and
assistance
of
Christian
Magistrates
,
and
direction
of
Christian
lawes
,
vsed
in
all
matters
of
moment
to
consult
with
their
clergy
;
imitating
therein
,
as
Ierome
[
a
](A20733-e107190-b)
a
Hier.
in
Tit.
1.
speaketh
,
the
example
of
Moses
,
Qu●
cùm
haberet
in
potestate
solus
praesse
populo
;
who
when
it
was
in
his
power
to
gouerne
the
people
alone
,
hee
chose
seuenty
with
whom
to
iudge
the
people
.
This
was
practised
by
Cyprian
[
b
](A20733-e107230-b)
b
Lib.
3.
epist.
10.
f.
,
who
resolued
from
the
beginning
of
his
Bishopricke
,
to
doe
nothing
of
importance
alone
,
because
he
would
preuent
dissension
and
scandals
.
Ambrose
[
c
](A20733-e107280-b)
c
In
1.
Tim.
5.
●
.
,
also
teacheth
that
there
was
a
time
,
when
nothing
was
done
without
the
aduice
of
the
Presbyters
,
who
therefore
by
Ignatius
[
d
](A20733-e107320-b)
d
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Ignas
▪
ad
Trall
.
,
are
called
the
counsellours
and
coassessours
of
the
B.
Which
course
if
it
were
vsed
still
,
as
it
would
ease
the
Bishops
burden
very
much
;
so
would
it
nothing
detract
from
their
superiority
in
gouerning
:
the
sway
of
their
authority
being
no
lesse
when
they
vsed
the
aduice
of
their
Presbyters
,
then
when
they
vsed
it
not
.
For
the
assistance
of
the
Presbyters
was
to
helpe
and
aduice
,
but
neuer
to
ouerrule
the
Bishop
.
Neither
will
any
man
say
,
that
the
authority
of
a
Prince
who
vseth
the
aduice
of
his
counsell
,
is
the
lesse
for
it
,
but
the
mo●e
aduised
.
But
what
the
authority
of
BB.
was
in
the
primitiue
Church
in
respect
of
gouernment
,
[
e
](A20733-e107390-b)
e
C.
Carth.
grae
.
c.
68.
Carthage
calleth
the
authority
of
BB.
was
,
may
first
appeare
by
this
,
that
they
were
accounted
the
gouernours
and
rulers
of
the
Churches
,
meaning
thereby
dioceses
.
For
though
there
were
many
ministers
,
who
were
Angels
,
Pastors
,
Bishops
:
y●t
there
was
but
one
in
euery
Church
,
who
was
the
Angel
,
the
Pastor
,
the
Bishop
,
the
gouernour
of
the
Church
;
bearing
as
Ignatius
[
f
](A20733-e107420-b)
f
Ignat.
ad
.
Trall
.
saith
,
the
sway
of
authority
aboue
and
ouer
them
all
.
But
I
delight
to
heare
Ierome
,
the
onely
pretended
patron
of
the
Disiplinarians
;
who
confesseth
,
as
wee
haue
heard
[
g
](A20733-e107450-b)
g
Contra
Lucifer
.
,
that
of
necessity
a
peerelesse
power
and
eminent
aboue
all
,
is
to
bee
attributed
to
Bishoppes
,
and
that
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
thereon
.
Hee
therefore
in
his
Commentary
vpon
[
h
](A20733-e107470-b)
h
Hier.
1.
Esa.
60.
Esay
chap.
60.
verse
17.
reading
according
to
the
Septuag.
[
i
](A20733-e107530-b)
i
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
I
will
giue
thy
Princes
in
peace
,
and
thy
Bishops
in
righteousnesse
,
saith
,
Herein
the
Maiestie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
is
to
bee
admired
,
which
calleth
,
principes
futuros
ecclesiae
episcopos
,
the
Princes
or
Rulers
which
should
bee
of
the
Church
,
Bishoppes
,
whose
visitation
is
all
in
peace
,
and
the
name
of
their
dignitie
(
meaning
their
superintendencie
)
in
righteousnesse
.
And
on
those
words
[
k
](A20733-e107580-b)
k
Hier.
in
Psal.
44.
,
of
the
45.
Psalme
,
In
stead
of
fathers
children
shall
be
borne
vnto
thee
;
O
Church
,
saith
he
,
the
Apostles
were
thy
fathers
,
for
they
begate
thee
.
Now
forasmuch
as
they
are
gone
out
of
the
world
thou
hast
BB.
who
were
borne
of
thee
.
For
these
also
are
thy
fathers
,
because
thou
art
gouerned
of
them
.
And
on
the
words
following
,
whom
thou
shalt
make
Princes
in
all
the
earth
:
for
,
saith
he
,
in
the
name
of
God
the
gospell
is
spread
in
all
ends
of
the
world
,
in
which
Principes
ecclesiae
,
i.
episcopi
;
the
princes
of
the
Church
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
Bishops
are
placed
.
On
which
words
Augustine
[
l
](A20733-e107660-b)
l
Aug.
in
Ps.
44
also
doth
comment
to
the
like
purpose
:
In
stead
of
the
Apostles
,
sonnes
are
borne
to
thee
,
BB.
are
ordained
:
thinke
not
thy selfe
forsaken
,
because
thou
seest
not
Peter
and
Paul
who
beg
at
thee
;
of
thine
owne
issue
is
sprung
a
fatherhood
:
Agnoscant
qui
pr●cisi
sunt
,
veniant
ad
vnitatem
,
&c.
Let
them
which
are
precise
or
cut
off
by
schisme
,
acknowledge
it
and
come
vnto
vnity
.
The
Church
hath
borne
sonnes
,
and
in
steed
of
her
fathers
,
hath
made
them
princes
ouer
all
the
earth
.
Optatus
[
m
](A20733-e107690-b)
m
L.
2.
aduers.
Parmen
.
likewise
calleth
the
BB
apices
&
principes
omnium
.
The
Councell
of
Carthage
[
n
](A20733-e107730-b)
n
Carth.
gr.
c.
39.
Afr.
c.
35.
decreed
,
that
when
the
Donatists
returned
to
the
Church
,
they
should
be
receiued
each
one
in
their
degrees
,
according
to
the
will
and
pleasure
of
the
B.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
who
gouerneth
the
Church
in
the
same
place
,
if
he
shall
thinke
it
expedient
for
the
peace
of
the
Church
▪
Cyprian
[
o
](A20733-e107780-b)
o
Lib.
1.
epist.
3.
,
though
he
had
approued
Cornelius
his
courage
,
in
that
Felicissimus
a
wicked
schismaticke
,
attended
with
a
troope
of
desperate
fellowes
,
was
by
him
vigore
pleno
,
quo
episcopum
agere
oportet
,
pulsus
de
ecclesia
,
with
full
vigour
of
au●hority
and
courage
,
wherewith
it
behoueth
a
B
to
deale
,
driuen
out
of
the
Church
;
yet
perceiuing
him
to
be
somwhat
daunted
with
the
threatnings
of
those
lewd
companions
;
if
this
be
so
,
saith
he
,
that
the
●●daciousnes
of
wicked
men
be
feared
,
that
what
they
cannot
doe
by
right
and
equity
,
they
may
●ccomplish
by
rash
and
desperate
courses
,
actum
est
de
episcopatus
vigore
,
&
de
ecclesiae
gubernandae
sublimi
ac
diuina
potestate
,
then
farewell
the
vigour
of
episcopall
authority
,
and
that
high
and
diuine
power
of
gouerning
the
Church
.
But
more
fully
is
this
authority
described
in
the
Councels
of
Antioch
and
Constantinople
,
and
also
in
the
writings
of
Ierome
.
Euery
Bishop
(
saith
the
Councell
of
Antioch
)
[
p
](A20733-e107870-b)
p
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
9.
hath
authoritie
of
his
owne
See
,
both
to
gouerne
it
according
to
the
feare
of
God
which
is
before
his
eies
,
and
to
haue
a
prouident
care
of
the
whole
Countrey
which
is
vnder
his
Citie
,
as
also
to
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
to
gouerne
all
things
with
iudgement
.
The
Councell
held
in
Trullo
[
q
](A20733-e107900-b)
q
Constant.
in
Trullo
.
c.
37.
decreed
,
that
forasmuch
as
some
Cities
being
occupied
by
the
Barbarians
inuading
Christian
kingdomes
,
the
Bishops
of
the
said
Cities
could
not
enioy
their
seat
,
and
performe
such
offices
there
as
belong
to
the
episcopall
function
;
that
they
should
retaine
their
[
r
](A20733-e107930-b)
r
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
eximiam
ill
.
〈◊〉
pontificatus
dignitatem
.
eminent
dignitie
and
authoritie
,
so
that
they
may
canonically
exercise
ordination
of
the
diuers
degrees
of
Clerkes
,
and
that
they
may
vse
within
their
bounds
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
authoritie
of
their
Prelacie
,
and
that
all
their
[
s
](A20733-e107980-b)
s
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
administration
be
firme
and
lawfull
.
But
what
saith
Ierome
?
He
hauing
intreated
[
t
](A20733-e108020-b)
t
De
7.
ordinib
.
Eccles.
of
the
other
degrees
of
the
Clergie
,
at
the
last
commeth
to
intreat
de
praecipuo
gradu
Ecclesiae
of
the
chiefe
degree
of
the
Church
,
qui
ordo
episcopalis
est
,
which
is
the
order
of
Bishops
:
the
power
whereof
he
setteth
downe
in
these
words
:
Hee
ordaineth
Priests
and
Leuites
,
that
is
,
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
&c.
Hee
[
u
](A20733-e108080-b)
u
Fabricae
Dei
praeest
.
gouerneth
the
Church
of
God
:
he
sheweth
what
euery
one
ought
to
do
:
he
cond●mneth
,
he
receiueth
,
he
bindeth
,
hee
looseth
that
which
was
bound
,
hee
hath
the
keyes
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
,
hee
openeth
and
shutteth
the
throne
of
God
,
(
meaning
heauen
)
hauing
nothing
(
meaning
no
ecclesiasticall
order
)
aboue
him
,
&c.
But
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
ouer
Presbyters
I
shewed
in
the
sermon
,
The
Presbyters
iurisdiction
is
ouer
the
flocke
of
one
parish
:
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Bishop
is
ouer
the
whole
Diocese
.
The
Presbyters
is
priuate
in
the
court
of
conscience
:
the
Bishops
publike
,
and
in
the
externall
Court
also
.
The
Presbyter
gouerneth
the
people
onely
of
one
flocke
:
the
Bishop
gouerneth
not
only
the
people
of
the
whole
Diocese
,
but
the
Presbyters
also
themselues
.
The
Presbyters
receiue
institution
vnto
their
iurisdiction
from
the
Bishop
,
and
exercise
it
vnder
the
Bishop
of
the
Diocese
,
who
hahauing
(
as
the
Councell
of
[
*
](A20733-e108160-b)
*
C.
24.
Antioch
and
Ierome
say
)
the
care
of
the
whole
Church
or
Diocese
,
admit
the
Presbyters
in
partem
solicitudinis
,
into
part
of
their
care
,
by
giuing
them
institution
to
their
seuerall
parishes
.
The
Presbyters
doe
answer
to
the
sonnes
of
Aaron
,
and
are
the
successours
of
the
70.
Disciples
,
as
diuers
of
the
Fathers
doe
teach
:
but
the
Bishops
answer
to
Aaron
,
and
are
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
,
as
I
proue
by
the
testimonie
of
Ierome
,
[
x
](A20733-e108230-b)
x
Hieron
.
ad
Marcel
.
aduers
.
Montan.
who
saith
,
that
in
the
true
Church
Bishops
doe
hold
the
place
of
the
Apostles
;
and
of
Irenaeus
,
[
y
](A20733-e108260-b)
y
Ir.
l.
3.
c.
3.
that
the
Apostles
left
the
Bishops
their
successors
,
deliuering
vnto
them
their
owne
place
of
gouernment
.
To
all
this
the
Refuter
maketh
a
dilatorie
answer
,
not
purposing
indeede
to
answer
these
allegations
at
all
.
Of
these
points
I
purpose
not
(
saith
he
)
to
say
any
thing
in
this
place
,
because
the
former
concerning
the
difference
of
the
Bishops
and
Presbyters
iurisdiction
,
must
presently
be
disputed
:
the
latter
is
to
be
discussed
in
the
last
point
of
his
fiue
.
And
thus
hath
he
by
a
cleanly
deuice
au●ided
these
allegations
,
which
he
knew
not
how
to
answer
,
and
very
featly
rid
his
hands
of
them
.
But
if
the
Reader
shall
vpon
examination
finde
,
that
hee
speaketh
nothing
to
these
allegations
,
and
proofes
in
the
places
whereunto
he
is
differred
,
hee
must
needes
thinke
,
that
their
cause
of
sinceritie
(
as
they
call
it
)
is
not
very
sincerely
handled
.
Hauing
thus
in
generall
noted
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
The
authoritie
therefore
of
the
Bishop
respecteth
either
the
things
of
the
Church
,
or
the
persons
.
Whatsoeuer
things
(
saith
the
Councell
[
a
](A20733-e108360-b)
a
C.
Ant.
c.
24.
of
Antioch
)
appertaine
to
the
Church
,
are
to
be
gouerned
,
husbanded
,
and
disposed
by
the
iudgement
and
authoritie
of
the
Bishop
,
to
whose
trust
the
whole
people
is
committed
,
and
the
soules
of
the
congregation
.
And
againe
:
[
b
](A20733-e108390-b)
b
Ibid.
c.
25.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
the
Bishop
hath
the
power
or
authoritie
of
those
things
which
belong
to
the
Church
.
And
this
authoritie
the
Bishops
had
from
the
beginning
;
for
,
as
what
was
at
the
first
giuen
to
the
Church
,
was
laid
at
the
Apostles
feet
,
so
afterwards
what
was
contributed
,
was
committed
(
saith
[
c
](A20733-e108430-b)
c
Apol.
2.
Iustine
Martyr
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
the
Bishop
.
Heereof
you
may
reade
more
,
Conc.
Gangr
.
c.
7.
&
8.
Concil.
Tol.
3.
c.
19.
&
4
c.
32.
Balsam
.
in
Concil.
Carth.
Gr.
c.
36.
alias
33.
As
touching
persons
,
Monachi
,
monasticall
persons
;
who
,
though
they
were
sequestred
from
the
companie
and
societie
of
secular
men
,
as
they
count
them
,
yet
were
they
not
exempted
from
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Bishop
.
The
great
Councell
of
Chalcedon
[
d
](A20733-e108590-b)
d
Conc.
Chalc.
c.
4.
determined
,
that
no
man
should
build
a
monastery
any
where
,
or
house
of
prayer
,
without
the
consent
of
the
Bishop
of
the
Citie
:
and
that
those
which
in
euery
Citie
or
Countrey
,
[
e
](A20733-e108620-b)
e
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
did
leade
a
monasticall
life
,
should
bee
subiect
to
the
Bishop
.
See
more
,
c.
8.
Conc.
Afric
.
c.
47.
Agath
.
c.
27.
&
58.
Theod.
Balsam
.
saith
,
[
f
](A20733-e108700-b)
f
Bals.
in
Conc.
Carth.
c
83.
that
Monkes
were
more
subiect
to
the
Bishop
,
then
to
the
Gouernour
of
the
monasterie
.
As
touching
the
Laitie
,
I
said
,
Serm.
sect.
10.
pag.
46.
to
pag.
47.
l.
6.
I
should
not
neede
to
prooue
the
Bishops
authoritie
ouer
the
people
of
their
Diocese
,
if
I
demonstrate
their
rule
ouer
the
Presbyters
thereof
,
Ad
pag
98.
&c.
Not
neede
(
saith
the
Refuter
?
)
Ye●
you
must
prooue
the
power
of
censuring
the
people
to
be
their
only
right
,
vnlesse
you
yeeld
that
preeminence
to
be
giuen
them
jure
humano
,
as
indeede
it
must
be
,
seeing
they
haue
it
not
potestate
ordinis
,
by
the
power
of
their
order
.
The
Refuter
is
to
be
borne
with
,
if
hee
talke
at
randon
,
seeing
he
is
(
as
it
seemeth
)
out
of
his
element
.
The
thing
which
I
was
to
prooue
,
if
it
had
beene
needfull
,
was
,
that
whereas
Presbyters
did
gouerne
each
one
the
people
of
a
parish
,
and
that
priuately
,
the
Bishop
gouerneth
the
people
of
the
whole
diocese
,
and
that
publikelie
:
the
which
I
held
needlesse
to
prooue
,
because
before
it
was
prooued
,
that
they
had
the
charge
of
the
whole
Diocese
,
and
were
Pastors
thereof
:
And
secondly
,
because
if
I
prooue
they
gouerned
the
Presbyters
,
who
were
the
gouernours
of
the
seuerall
flockes
,
then
much
more
their
iurisdiction
did
extend
to
the
flockes
themselues
.
Where
he
saith
,
J
must
prooue
that
the
censuring
the
people
is
their
onely
right
;
I
answer
,
it
is
sufficient
to
prooue
their
superioritie
in
iurisdiction
,
which
I
intended
,
and
that
none
in
the
Diocese
doth
exercise
externall
iurisdiction
,
but
from
the
B.
and
vnder
him
.
A
notable
euidence
whereof
wee
haue
in
Siluanus
[
g
](A20733-e108910-b)
g
Socr.
l.
7.
c.
37.
the
famous
Bishop
of
Troas
,
who
perceiuing
those
of
his
Clergie
to
make
gaine
of
mens
suits
,
appointed
others
whom
he
thought
good
,
to
bee
the
Judges
of
mens
causes
,
whereby
he
got
himselfe
great
renowne
.
And
as
for
the
power
of
binding
and
loosing
in
the
court
of
conscience
,
it
is
common
to
Bishops
with
all
Presbyters
,
howsoeuer
in
respect
of
the
vse
and
exercise
thereof
,
they
are
subiect
to
the
Bishop
.
Where
hee
saith
,
that
Bishops
haue
their
iurisdiction
jure
humano
,
because
they
haue
it
not
potestate
ordinis
,
by
the
power
of
their
order
,
he
seemeth
to
harpe
vpon
something
,
which
hee
doth
not
well
vnderstand
.
For
although
the
Schoolemen
and
Papists
[
h
](A20733-e108990-b)
h
Bellarm.
de
Pont.
R.
l.
4.
cap.
vlt.
teach
,
that
to
the
power
of
order
belongeth
a
character
and
grace
which
God
alone
doth
giue
in
their
ordination
;
yet
they
grant
also
,
that
the
jurisdiction
which
is
conferred
to
them
by
the
will
of
man
,
doth
also
mediately
proceede
from
God
.
And
howsoeuer
it
be
true
,
that
Bishops
with
vs
are
assisted
iure
humano
,
[
i
](A20733-e109030-b)
i
Statut.
anno
Elizab.
1.
to
exercise
their
publike
and
externall
iurisdiction
,
and
to
iudge
in
causes
ecclesiasticall
by
the
Kings
ecclesiasticall
Law
;
yet
this
doth
not
hinder
,
but
that
they
are
authorized
thereunto
iure
Apostolico
,
as
is
manifest
by
the
Apostles
themselues
,
by
Timothie
and
Titus
,
and
all
the
ancient
Bishops
of
the
Primitiue
Church
,
who
by
authoritie
deriued
to
them
from
the
Apostles
,
did
exercise
the
ecclesiasticall
censures
ouer
the
people
and
clergy
,
before
there
were
any
lawes
of
Christian
Magistrates
to
authorise
or
assist
them
thereunto
.
But
he
is
pleased
to
see
how
I
proue
the
BB.
to
haue
been
superior
to
the
Presbyters
in
iurisdiction
;
in
generall
of
BB.
for
here
his
Coccysme
againe
hath
place
,
that
I
should
haue
proued
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
to
haue
had
iurisdiction
ouer
ministers
vnder
them
.
Which
is
a
miserable
poore
shift
indeed
.
Was
not
this
the
thing
propounded
to
be
proued
,
that
the
BB.
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
superior
in
iurisdiction
?
doth
not
himselfe
confesse
,
that
the
ancient
Churches
were
all
of
one
Constitution
?
And
is
not
the
proofe
of
the
generall
,
a
proofe
of
the
particular
also
?
If
I
should
say
,
these
seauen
Angels
had
this
iurisdiction
;
some
such
exception
of
singularity
in
them
,
would
with
as
great
reason
be
taken
,
as
against
Timothy
and
Titus
.
But
when
I
proue
,
that
BB.
in
generall
had
this
superiority
,
I
doe
more
then
proue
,
that
these
seauen
Bishops
had
it
.
The
reason
which
I
vse
is
an
induction
.
The
Bishop
had
superiority
in
iurisdiction
both
to
the
Presbyters
,
that
were
parts
of
the
Presbytery
assisting
him
,
and
to
the
Pastors
assigned
to
seuerall
cures
.
Therefore
he
had
superior
iurisdiction
to
all
the
Presbyters
in
the
diocesse
.
But
the
Refuter
maketh
me
reason
thus
:
If
the
Bishoppes
had
maiority
of
rule
both
ouer
the
Presbyters
that
assisted
them
,
and
also
ouer
the
Pastors
allotted
to
their
seuerall
charges
,
then
had
they
power
of
iurisdiction
.
But
they
had
maiority
of
rule
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
assisting
them
and
the
Pastors
,
&c.
Therefore
they
had
power
of
iurisdiction
.
Why
?
Needes
this
to
be
proued
,
that
Bishops
had
power
of
iurisdiction
,
which
euery
parish
Minister
hath
?
Or
doth
the
Refuter
deny
,
that
Bishops
had
power
of
iurisdiction
?
Or
if
he
cannot
but
grant
the
conclusion
,
what
a
folly
is
it
to
wrangle
with
the
premises
?
And
yet
for
feare
of
granting
the
conclusion
,
first
hee
pickes
a
quarrell
with
the
proposition
.
For
though
they
had
maiority
of
rule
,
&c.
yet
w●ll
it
not
follow
they
had
sole
power
of
iurisdiction
.
Whence
commeth
this
sole
I
pray
you
,
that
hath
so
oft
been
foisted
in
?
I
feare
greatly
from
an
euill
conscience
,
resolued
to
oppugne
and
deface
the
truth
.
Cannot
the
B.
be
superior
to
Presbyters
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
vnlesse
they
haue
(
as
none
haue
)
the
sole
power
of
iurisdiction
?
flatly
denieth
the
assumption
.
But
what
reason
doth
he
giue
of
his
deniall
?
what
euidence
of
truth
doth
he
bring
to
proue
the
contrary
?
Alas
,
he
troubleth
not
himselfe
that
way
,
all
his
care
and
endeuour
is
to
find
out
starting
holes
and
euasions
to
elude
the
truth
.
I
proue
first
in
generall
,
that
BB.
had
maiority
of
rule
,
or
superiority
of
iurisdiction
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
euen
those
of
the
City
,
who
were
the
chiefe
.
Then
in
particular
,
in
the
next
section
.
The
former
I
proue
,
first
,
by
the
testimony
of
Ierome
[
l
](A20733-e109280-b)
l
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
,
who
confesseth
,
that
of
necessity
a
power
eminent
aboue
all
and
admitting
no
partner
,
at
least
no
compeere
,
is
to
be
granted
to
the
B.
To
this
besides
the
poore
euasion
of
Ieromes
minority
,
and
being
vnder
age
,
before
answered
,
he
saith
,
Ierome
speaketh
of
such
BB.
as
hee
acknowledgeth
to
〈◊〉
no
warrant
in
the
scriptures
,
and
to
haue
beene
brought
into
the
C●●rch
by
occas●●●
of
schisme
after
the
Apostles
times
.
Both
which
I
haue
before
proued
,
and
shall
▪
againe
proue
to
be
manifestly
false
.
Doth
Ierome
deny
BB.
to
haue
warrant
in
the
scriptures
?
besides
the
places
of
the
new
testament
often
alledged
,
call
to
mind
those
two
[
m
](A20733-e109330-b)
m
Hier.
in
.
Ps.
44.
&
in
Esa.
60.
,
on
Psalme
45.
and
Esay
60.
Where
he
calleth
them
,
principes
ecclesia
by
warrant
of
those
scriptures
.
Doth
Ierome
say
,
they
were
not
brought
into
the
Church
vntill
after
the
Apostles
times
?
doth
not
he
confesse
Iames
,
Mark●
,
Timothy
Titus
,
and
diuers
others
to
haue
been
BB.
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
that
euer
since
S.
Marke
there
haue
beene
BB.
at
Alexandria
?
Secondly
,
I
alledge
Ignatius
[
n
](A20733-e109420-b)
n
Ad
Trall
.
What
is
a
B.
but
he
that
holdeth
all
authority
ouer
all
?
,
whom
themselues
oft
alledge
for
their
Presbyteries
.
But
see
what
hard
hap
some
men
haue
:
he
,
whose
authority
is
so
good
when
he
is
alleaged
by
them
,
is
but
a
counterfeit
when
he
is
produced
by
me
.
And
yet
those
who
[
o
](A20733-e109440-b)
o
Problem
.
Perk.
suspect
fiue
of
his
epistles
,
because
Eusebius
and
Ierome
mention
but
seauen
,
acknowledge
this
ad
Trallianos
to
be
none
of
the
fiue
which
are
suspected
,
but
one
of
the
seauen
which
are
receiued
.
This
●uasion
should
not
haue
bin
vsed
,
if
he
could
tell
how
to
answer
his
testimony
otherwise
.
Yes
that
he
can
.
For
though
Ignatius
doe
say
that
a
B.
is
such
an
one
as
holdeth
or
manageth
the
whole
power
and
authority
aboue
all
,
God
amend
that
soule
,
that
so
oft
foisteth
in
that
sole
besides
my
meaning
and
my
words
.
And
yet
truely
Ignatius
saith
faire
for
the
sole
power
.
For
if
the
B.
haue
the
whole
power
and
authority
aboue
all
,
why
may
he
not
be
said
to
haue
the
sole
power
and
authority
ouer
all
?
what
?
saith
the
refuter
,
he
alone
?
May
not
a
man
say
as
much
of
the
Duke
of
Venice
,
or
of
the
King
of
Polonia
?
yet
are
neither
of
these
soueraignes
:
no
more
had
the
B.
for
all
these
words
any
supreme
and
sole
authority
.
Do
I
any
where
say
,
that
the
BB.
haue
or
ought
to
haue
supreme
and
sole
authority
,
which
here
againe
he
obiecteth
to
make
the
BB.
according
to
my
iudgement
forsooth
absolute
Popelings
?
will
these
odious
slanders
wilfully
deuised
to
disgrace
the
truth
,
which
I
taught
,
neuer
bee
left
?
and
yet
that
is
vntrue
which
he
saith
of
the
Duke
of
Venice
,
and
that
is
more
then
we
desire
,
that
the
B.
in
his
diocese
,
should
be
like
the
King
of
Polonia
in
his
kingdome
.
For
though
the
Duke
of
Venice
bee
aboue
any
other
in
Venice
;
yet
hee
hath
not
the
whole
power
and
authority
aboue
al
:
neither
doe
we
make
the
B.
to
haue
supreme
power
in
his
diocese
,
as
the
King
of
Poland
hath
in
his
realme
;
though
in
respect
of
the
election
of
him
to
his
kingdome
,
and
of
BB.
to
their
sees
,
there
be
somelikenes
.
In
the
third
place
I
alleage
another
testimony
of
[
p
](A20733-e109600-b)
p
Ad
Antioch
.
Ignatius
,
feed
the
flocke
which
was
among
them
,
vsing
the
words
which
Peter
doth
1.
Epist.
5.
Vntill
God
should
declare
who
should
bee
their
[
q
](A20733-e109680-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Gouernour
,
meaning
the
Bishop
.
Where
the
B.
in
plaine
termes
is
called
the
gouernor
of
the
Presbyters
.
There
can
be
no
question
but
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
is
a
maiority
of
rule
.
And
yet
he
saith
this
testimony
doth
not
proue
any
such
maiority
of
rule
:
and
that
for
foure
worthy
reasons
.
First
,
because
this
is
one
of
those
places
which
the
disciplinarians
absurdly
alledge
for
the
proofe
of
onely-gouerning
elders
(
which
neuer
were
)
the
duty
inioined
them
being
pastorall
.
Secondly
,
because
the
Church
whereof
he
was
B.
was
but
one
congregation
at
that
time
.
And
yet
he
expressely
calleth
himselfe
the
[
r
](A20733-e109770-b)
r
Ad
Roman
.
Bishop
of
Syria
:
which
plainely
proueth
,
that
he
was
not
onely
a
diocesan
,
but
a
Metropolitan
B.
Yea
but
in
his
epistle
to
Ierome
he
calleth
it
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
I
wil
not
vrge
the
error
in
the
name
Ierome
,
for
Heron
:
perhaps
it
was
not
our
Ieremies
[
s
](A20733-e109850-b)
s
Pref.
to
inform
.
,
but
his
Barucks
fault
.
The
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
hee
absurdly
translateth
,
Synagogue
and
parish
,
signifieth
congregation
,
and
is
the
same
with
ecclesia
,
or
Church
.
For
Ignatius
hauing
signified
to
him
that
he
should
be
his
successour
in
the
Bishopricke
,
he
saith
[
t
](A20733-e109940-b)
t
Ignat.
ad
Heronem
.
;
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
the
congregation
of
the
Lord
shall
not
be
as
sheepe
without
a
pastor
.
But
hereof
I
haue
spoken
heretofore
.
Howbeit
,
both
this
and
the
former
answere
here
are
meere
euasions
.
For
suppose
that
(
which
I
haue
proued
to
be
most
false
)
that
there
were
onely-gouerning
elders
in
Antioch
,
and
that
the
Church
had
been
but
one
parish
,
can
he
be
so
absurde
asto
say
,
that
none
of
the
Presbyters
in
Antioch
were
ministers
?
If
any
were
(
as
indeed
they
were
all
as
I
haue
abundantly
proued
before
)
is
not
the
B.
here
plainely
noted
to
be
their
gouernour
?
and
if
he
were
their
gouernour
,
was
he
not
aboue
them
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
or
gouernment
?
Or
what
is
this
to
the
present
question
,
whether
the
Church
of
Antioch
contained
one
congregation
or
more
,
if
it
cannot
be
denied
that
the
B.
was
superiour
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
to
the
Presbyters
of
that
Church
,
how
great
or
how
little
soeuer
it
was
?
His
third
reason
of
all
others
is
most
impertinent
.
For
what
is
this
to
the
purpose
,
if
it
were
true
,
that
the
duty
which
Ignatius
inioineth
them
of
feeding
,
that
is
,
of
instructing
and
guiding
the
people
,
was
not
perpetually
belonging
to
their
office
,
but
onely
in
the
time
of
the
vacancie
,
till
they
had
another
gouernour
,
seeing
he
noteth
that
himselfe
had
been
,
and
his
successour
should
bee
their
gouernour
?
But
it
is
vntrue
which
he
saith
,
concerning
the
perpetuity
of
the
duty
.
For
Ignatius
his
meaning
was
,
that
as
they
were
at
all
times
to
feed
the
people
,
so
especially
in
the
absence
or
want
of
the
Bishop
,
the
care
and
attendance
of
the
flocke
in
the
defect
of
a
B.
being
deuolued
to
them
.
Fourthly
,
If
M.
D.
doe
vrge
,
saith
he
,
that
Ignatius
was
,
and
so
also
his
successor
their
gouernour
,
(
which
was
indeed
the
onely
thing
for
which
the
place
was
alleaged
,
and
to
which
point
alone
hee
ought
to
haue
directed
his
speech
)
the
answere
is
easie
,
that
he
might
be
so
,
and
yet
the
Church
but
a
parish
,
and
those
Presbyters
gouerning
Elders
.
An
easie
answere
indeed
:
as
who
should
say
,
though
the
allegation
doe
proue
that
for
which
you
bring
it
,
yet
it
doth
not
disprooue
some
other
of
our
absurdities
,
for
the
disproofe
whereof
you
do
not
bring
it
:
as
that
the
Church
was
a
parish
,
and
the
Presbyters
onely
gouerning
elders
.
Was
the
disproofe
of
those
points
to
be
expected
from
this
place
,
and
at
this
time
?
do
you
not
say
,
it
is
one
of
the
places
which
is
ordinarily
brought
out
of
Ignatius
,
for
proofe
of
onely-gouerning
Elders
?
And
must
this
be
your
shift
to
auoid
my
argument
,
proouing
out
of
this
place
the
superiority
of
Bishops
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
that
for
any
thing
can
hence
be
alleaged
,
the
Presbyters
might
be
onely
gouerning
Elders
?
Js
not
the
Refuter
neere
driuen
,
thinke
you
,
when
he
would
beare
his
Reader
in
hand
,
that
his
lay
Presbyters
be
sufficiently
proued
,
if
the
place
which
themselues
bring
for
them
,
doth
not
disproue
them
;
but
especially
,
when
he
is
driuen
to
alleage
this
as
a
poore
shift
to
auoid
another
thing
in
question
?
Yea
but
if
the
Church
were
a
parish
,
and
they
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
then
was
Ignatius
but
as
a
Parson
of
a
parish
:
and
Parsons
,
though
they
be
called
,
rectores
ecclesiarum
,
gouernours
of
the
parish
Churches
,
are
farre
enough
from
the
maiority
of
rule
in
question
.
Whereto
J
answere
,
that
if
he
would
need●
make
Ignatius
but
the
Parson
of
a
parish
,
assisted
with
a
Presbytery
of
lay
Elders
,
hee
should
haue
conceiued
him
to
be
such
a
one
as
themselues
fancie
,
and
not
as
ours
are
.
For
he
should
not
haue
been
subordinate
and
subiect
as
ours
are
(
and
as
all
Presbyters
of
[
t
](A20733-e110140-b)
t
The
Councell
of
Sardica
saith
,
they
are
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
subiect
to
the
B.
and
ought
to
performe
a
sincere
ministery
vnto
them
,
c.
14.
parishes
euer
were
)
to
the
Bishops
,
but
as
they
fancy
,
indued
with
a
power
vnsubordinate
and
independent
;
and
therefore
had
a
supremacy
,
rather
then
superiority
,
as
being
the
supreme
ecclesiasticall
officer
in
all
that
Church
.
But
how
I
beseech
you
is
it
proued
,
that
Ignatius
was
but
a
parish
Bishop
?
Because
,
forsooth
,
the
Church
of
Antioch
might
be
a
parish
,
and
the
Presbyters
thereof
onely-gouerning
Elders
,
for
any
thing
that
I
haue
here
said
to
the
contrary
,
which
indeed
I
intended
not
in
this
place
.
But
now
I
discerne
a
worthy
stratageme
of
this
Refuter
,
in
chusing
rather
to
answere
the
places
out
of
Ignatius
,
being
brought
for
superiority
of
Bishops
,
then
himselfe
to
vrge
them
for
the
lay-elders
:
hoping
to
perswade
some
kind
of
Readers
,
both
that
their
Elders
are
sufficiently
proued
,
if
they
be
not
disprooued
out
of
the
places
which
themselues
doe
bring
to
proue
them
:
and
also
,
that
by
such
an
answere
,
the
superiority
of
Bishops
is
sufficiently
auoided
.
But
to
conclude
this
point
,
whiles
the
Refuter
goeth
about
to
proue
,
that
Antioch
(
which
was
the
Metropolis
of
Syria
,
and
the
chiefe
Citie
of
all
the
East
)
was
but
a
parish
Church
:
and
the
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
who
was
also
(
as
Ignatius
testifieth
of
himselfe
)
the
Bishop
of
Syria
,
Theodor.
hist.
l.
5.
c.
23.
and
as
Theodoret
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
chiefe
or
pr●●ate
of
all
the
Bishops
in
in
the
East
,
to
haue
been
but
a
Parson
of
a
parish
Church
;
the
Reader
will
hereby
learne
,
what
conceit
to
haue
of
his
learning
and
iudgement
,
and
what
credit
to
giue
to
his
new-●angled
opinions
.
(
Serm.
sect.
11.
pag.
47.
)
Now
the
Presbyters
were
subiect
to
their
B.
both
as
their
ruler
to
be
guided
,
to
page
50.
med
.
)
Hauing
in
generall
shewed
the
Bishops
superiority
in
iurisdiction
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
euen
those
of
the
Citie
;
in
this
section
J
proue
it
more
particularly
by
the
parts
of
gouernment
,
which
are
,
both
to
rule
and
direct
;
as
also
to
censure
and
correct
.
I
shew
therefore
,
that
the
Presbyters
of
the
Citie
were
subiect
to
the
Bishoppe
,
both
as
their
ruler
,
to
be
guided
and
d●rected
by
him
,
and
also
as
their
Iudge
,
to
be
censured
and
corrected
of
him
.
Where
the
Refuter
,
if
he
would
needs
be
analysing
and
syllogising
,
should
haue
framed
this
argument
:
To
whom
the
Presbyters
were
subiect
,
both
as
to
their
ruler
,
to
be
guided
and
directed
by
him
;
and
as
to
their
Iudge
,
to
be
censured
and
corrected
of
him
,
he
was
superior
to
them
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
,
and
maiority
of
rule
.
To
the
B.
the
Presbyters
were
subiect
,
both
as
to
their
ruler
,
to
be
guided
and
directed
by
him
;
and
as
to
their
Iudge
to
be
censured
and
corrected
of
him
.
Therefore
the
B.
was
superiour
to
the
Presbyters
in
power
of
iurisdiction
and
maiority
of
rule
.
The
proposition
of
this
syllogisme
is
of
euident
&
vndeniable
truth
.
The
assumption
consisteth
of
two
parts
:
the
former
concerning
the
rule
of
direction
,
the
latter
concerning
the
power
of
correction
:
which
I
doe
in
order
proue
by
euident
testimonies
,
whereunto
he
opposeth
nothing
but
cauilling
shifts
and
euasions
.
By
way
of
analysis
he
saith
thus
:
The
former
proofe
of
the
assumption
touching
the
Bishops
maiority
of
rule
,
was
generall
,
concerning
diocesan
and
parishionall
Presbyters
.
Now
follow
the
reasons
for
each
of
them
in
particular
:
and
first
,
for
the
Bishoppes
iurisdiction
ouer
the
diocesan
,
in
regard
of
direction
.
Where
I
desire
him
to
tell
vs
,
what
he
meaneth
by
diocesan
Presbyters
,
whether
such
as
assisted
the
Bishop
in
the
diocesan
gouernment
?
If
yea
,
hee
dreameth
of
that
hee
cannot
proue
.
To
omit
the
commendation
of
his
skill
in
analysing
,
which
is
not
great
,
his
resutation
heere
is
,
as
you
plainely
see
,
not
onely
a
dreame
,
but
the
dreame
of
a
dreame
.
He
saith
,
I
dreame
of
diocesan
Presbyters
,
when
himselfe
(
belike
)
did
dreame
so
.
Where
speake
I
one
word
of
diocesan
Presbyters
?
where
doe
I
once
name
them
?
Is
the
Refuters
conscience
no
better
,
then
still
to
father
vpon
mee
vntruths
for
his
owne
aduantage
?
doth
he
not
thereby
bewray
what
a
cause
he
maintaineth
,
which
cannot
be
vpheld
but
by
forgeries
?
Neither
if
J
had
spoken
of
diocesan
Presbyters
,
would
I
haue
vsed
the
word
in
that
sense
.
For
as
parts
of
the
diocesse
in
the
country
are
sometimes
in
the
Councels
called
dioceses
;
so
are
Country
Ministers
called
[
a
](A20733-e110400-b)
a
Conc.
Agath
.
c.
22.
Tolet.
3.
c.
20.
dioecesani
,
qui
[
b
](A20733-e110450-b)
b
Carth.
4.
c.
36.
per
dioeceses
ecclesias
regunt
:
which
in
the
Councell
of
Neocaesaria
,
are
[
c
](A20733-e110490-b)
c
Neocaes
.
c.
13.
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
,
Country
Ministers
,
and
are
opposed
to
the
Presbyters
of
the
Citie
,
who
are
there
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
else
where
[
d
](A20733-e110540-b)
d
C.
Agath
.
c.
22.
Ad
pag.
100.
,
ciuitatenses
Presbyteri
.
Of
whom
it
may
bee
truly
said
,
that
the
Colledge
or
company
of
them
was
the
Presbytery
,
which
being
not
assigned
to
any
one
parish
,
was
prouided
to
assist
the
Bishoppe
in
the
feeding
and
gouernment
of
the
diocesse
,
as
I
haue
prooued
before
,
and
in
that
sense
might
be
called
dioecesani
.
§.
11.
But
let
vs
see
his
reason
,
saith
the
Refuter
.
If
the
40.
Canon
of
the
Apostles
saith
he
(
I
said
,
the
ancient
Canon
,
)
if
the
Councels
of
Arles
and
Ancyra
,
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
and
Ignatius
affirme
,
that
BB.
had
maiority
of
rule
for
direction
ouer
Diocesan
Presbyters
,
then
they
had
such
maiority
.
But
all
these
affirme
so
:
therefore
they
had
so
.
The
former
part
of
my
[
e
](A20733-e110670-b)
e
§
10.
aforesaid
Assumption
,
that
the
Presbyters
of
the
City
were
subiect
to
the
B.
as
their
ruler
to
be
directed
by
him
,
I
proue
,
first
in
generall
,
because
they
might
doe
nothing
of
importance
without
his
direction
or
consent
,
then
particularly
,
in
respect
of
those
things
which
did
belong
to
the
power
of
their
order
.
For
as
touching
the
former
;
if
the
Presbyters
might
doe
nothing
without
the
B.
nothing
without
his
appointment
,
or
consent
;
then
were
they
subiect
to
him
,
as
their
ruler
,
to
be
guided
and
directed
by
him
.
But
the
former
I
proue
by
these
testimonies
,
whereto
more
may
be
added
;
therefore
the
latter
cannot
be
denied
.
Of
the
Syllogisme
which
he
framed
,
hee
denieth
first
the
Consequence
of
the
proposition
;
not
shaming
to
affirme
,
that
although
the
ancient
Canon
called
the
Apostles
,
though
the
auncient
Councels
of
Ancyra
and
Arles
,
though
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
and
Ignatius
,
doe
all
testifie
the
maiority
of
rule
in
BB:
yet
it
would
not
follow
that
they
had
it
.
It
will
follow
then
,
that
the
ancientest
Councels
,
and
Fathers
deserue
no
credit
:
which
whosoeuer
shall
affirme
,
doth
much
more
without
comparison
,
deserue
not
onely
no
credit
,
but
no
audience
,
nay
no
sufferance
,
he
is
not
to
bee
endured
.
But
what
pretence
hath
hee
,
to
discredite
their
authorities
?
forsooth
none
of
them
,
excepting
Tertullian
and
Ignatius
liued
in
the
first
200.
yeares
.
As
if
all
truth
were
confined
within
that
periode
:
or
as
if
some
of
the
Fathers
which
succeeded
(
as
Cyprian
by
name
)
deserued
not
as
much
credite
as
they
.
As
for
Cyprian
,
hee
came
40.
or
50.
yeares
after
:
and
the
Councell
of
Ancyry
some
50.
or
60.
yeares
after
him
.
No
doubt
,
but
great
alteration
in
discipline
,
and
Church-gouernement
,
was
or
could
be
pretended
to
haue
been
in
the
Church
,
before
Constatines
time
whiles
it
was
vnder
the
Crosse.
But
let
the
Refuter
esteeme
of
these
authorities
as
hee
pleaseth
;
there
is
no
modest
or
moderate
Christian
,
but
will
preferre
the
affirmation
of
any
of
these
,
especially
,
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
before
the
negation
of
a
thousand
such
as
the
libelling
refuter
.
After
he
hath
thus
eleuated
their
authority
,
[
f
](A20733-e110820-b)
f
Can.
Apost.
39.
al
40.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
without
the
appointment
and
consent
of
the
Bishoppe
,
hee
frameth
such
an
answere
,
as
euery
word
whereof
almost
doth
argue
extreame
either
vnconscionablenesse
,
or
ignorance
.
Hee
saith
,
It
doth
not
proue
they
had
maiority
of
rule
,
or
sole
soueraignty
ouer
them
▪
Sole
soueraignity
?
O
defiled
conscience
,
which
ceasest
not
to
ascribe
such
odious
and
absurd
assertions
to
me
!
But
why
is
not
the
maiority
of
rule
in
the
Bishoppe
hence
proued
,
and
the
subiection
of
Presbyters
to
him
as
to
their
ruler
,
to
bee
guided
and
directed
by
him
,
seeing
they
are
charged
to
doe
nothing
without
his
direction
and
warrant
?
what
can
bee
more
plaine
?
forsooth
,
the
like
Phrase
is
vsed
Can.
35.
and
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
9.
where
BB.
are
enioyned
to
doe
nothing
without
the
sentence
of
the
Archbishoppe
,
nor
he
in
their
Parishes
without
the
sentence
or
appointment
of
them
all
.
If
therefore
the
Maiority
of
rule
in
BB.
may
be
proued
from
this
Canon
,
then
in
like
manner
from
the
other
two
Canons
,
the
maiority
of
rule
not
onely
in
Archbishops
in
those
dayes
ouer
BB.
but
also
of
Bishops
in
their
Parishes
,
ouer
the
Archbishop
.
But
the
consequent
is
false
in
both
the
parts
of
it
:
the
former
,
for
there
were
no
Archbishops
in
those
dayes
;
the
latter
,
because
BB.
had
not
authority
ouer
Archbishoppes
:
therefore
the
Antecedent
also
is
vntrue
.
Here
the
refuter
vnder
some
shew
of
learning
hath
bewraied
much
ignorance
.
For
first
,
as
touching
the
proposition
:
his
reason
is
vnlike
,
and
his
allegation
out
of
the
[
g
](A20733-e110910-b)
g
.Can.
Apost.
34.
a●
35.
34.
Canon
is
vntrue
.
The
Bishoppe
of
euery
nation
m●st
agnize
him
that
is
the
first
or
Primate
among
them
,
and
esteeme
him
as
the
chiefe
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
It
is
not
said
as
in
the
Canon
by
me
cited
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
simply
,
as
the
refuter
citeth
it
;
but
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Is
there
no
difference
betweene
these
two
speeches
,
to
doe
nothing
simply
,
and
to
do
nothing
more
,
or
exceeding
their
own
bounds
?
For
that
this
is
the
meaning
of
the
Canon
,
the
words
following
doe
plainely
declare
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
but
that
they
doe
onely
those
things
which
appertaine
to
their
own
See
,
and
the
countries
vnder
it
.
But
more
plainely
in
the
Councel
of
Antioch
[
h
](A20733-e111020-b)
h
Con.
Antioc
.
c.
9.
,
that
the
rest
of
the
Bishops
doe
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
nothing
more
then
those
things
onely
which
concerne
euery
mans
owne
Church
and
Countries
which
bee
vnder
it
.
And
that
you
should
not
vnderstand
them
,
as
the
Refuter
doth
without
vnderstanding
,
they
adde
;
for
euery
Bishoppe
hath
authority
of
his
owne
City
,
both
to
gouern
according
to
the
feare
(
of
God
)
which
hee
hath
,
and
to
haue
care
of
all
the
Country
,
as
also
to
ordaine
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
and
to
administer
euerything
with
iudgement
.
And
yet
I
doe
not
deny
,
but
that
the
Metropolitanes
are
superior
to
their
Comprouinciall
Bishoppes
,
in
the
power
of
Iurisdiction
;
although
all
Bishops
whatsoeuer
,
are
equall
in
the
power
of
order
.
Neither
should
the
Bishops
by
the
like
reason
be
superiour
to
the
Archbishops
in
their
parishes
,
as
he
ignorantly
addeth
.
For
the
Canon
doth
not
speake
of
the
seuerall
Bishops
in
their
Dioceses
,
which
hee
absurdly
calleth
Parishes
;
but
of
the
whole
Company
of
them
assembled
in
a
Prouinciall
Synode
,
saying
that
he
must
doe
nothing
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
without
the
consent
of
them
all
.
Howsoeuer
therefore
either
the
Metropolitane
,
or
any
other
of
the
Bishoppes
in
their
owne
seuerall
Dioceses
might
doe
those
things
which
concerned
their
owne
proper
charge
;
yet
[
i
](A20733-e111100-b)
i
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Conc.
Const.
1.
c.
2.
prouinciall
businesses
(
which
exceeded
the
bounds
of
any
one
mans
charge
)
were
to
be
dispatched
in
Prouinciall
Councels
;
wherein
the
Metropolitane
was
to
be
acknowledged
as
the
chiefe
and
President
thereof
,
who
called
them
together
,
and
moderated
the
assembly
;
but
so
,
as
the
Bishops
might
doe
nothing
without
him
seuerally
,
so
he
might
doe
nothing
without
them
all
iointly
;
and
as
hee
was
superiour
to
them
seuerally
,
so
was
hee
inferiour
to
them
all
iointly
,
that
is
,
to
the
Synode
.
The
Assumption
likewise
in
the
former
part
of
it
is
false
,
and
the
reason
of
it
also
.
For
there
were
Metropolitanes
in
the
first
two
hundred
yeares
,
and
they
were
superiour
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
to
their
Bishops
.
But
before
he
will
let
this
testimony
passe
,
hee
hath
one
point
of
ignorance
more
to
shew
,
and
that
is
,
because
Archbishoppes
are
mentioned
,
c.
35
,
alias
34.
therefore
these
Canons
were
none
of
the
Apostles
,
nor
any
others
aboue
an
hundred
,
he
will
not
say
(
whatsoeuer
hee
thinkes
)
two
hundred
yeares
after
them
.
For
Archbishops
were
not
hatched
(
so
reuerentlie
he
speaketh
)
a
long
time
after
,
all
men
being
iudge
.
The
antiquitie
of
these
Canons
I
haue
touched
before
;
shewing
,
that
within
little
more
then
two
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
time
,
they
were
then
accounted
auncient
Canons
.
But
to
the
point
.
If
hee
speake
of
the
name
Archbishoppe
,
it
is
not
mentioned
in
the
Canons
,
called
the
Apostles
;
if
of
the
office
of
a
Metropolitane
,
which
is
meant
in
the
aforesaid
Canon
;
I
haue
proued
before
,
that
it
hath
beene
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
.
Those
learned
men
,
which
hold
Archbishops
to
be
of
a
latter
edition
,
by
that
name
vnderstand
Patriarches
;
and
those
of
2.
sorts
,
being
either
so
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
the
Patriarches
of
Rome
,
Constantinople
,
Alexandria
,
Antioch
,
and
Ierusalem
;
or
such
as
are
more
vsually
called
Archbishops
,
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
gouernors
of
large
prouinces
,
beeing
in
a
degree
betweene
,
Metropolitanes
,
and
Patriarches
,
which
seeme
to
haue
beene
ordained
in
the
first
Councell
of
Constantinople
,
as
Socrates
[
k
](A20733-e111270-b)
k
Socr.
hist.
l.
5.
c.
8.
witnesseth
.
Hence
it
is
,
that
Isidor
[
l
](A20733-e111310-b)
l
Orig.
lib.
7.
c.
de
clericis
.
saith
Ordo
Episcoporum
quadripartitus
est
,
i.
in
Patriarchis
,
Archiepiscopis
,
Metropolitis
atque
Episcopis
:
and
the
same
distinction
is
noted
in
the
Councill
of
[
m
](A20733-e111360-b)
m
C.
Chalc.
c.
9.
et
17.
Chalcedon
,
and
in
the
[
n
](A20733-e111390-b)
n
Lib.
1.
tit.
4.
de
episcopali
audientia
.
Code
,
Sanc●mus
:
et
Novell.
123
c.
22.
and
constitutions
of
Iustinian
,
and
in
the
[
o
](A20733-e111470-b)
o
Ius
graecorom
page
88.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
made
by
Leo
the
Emperour
&c.
To
the
same
purpose
I
alledged
the
ancient
Councell
of
Arles
[
p
](A20733-e111520-b)
p
Arelat.
1.
c.
19
,
that
Presbyters
may
doe
nothing
without
the
knowledge
,
and
consent
of
their
BB.
and
of
Ancyra
the
most
ancient
approued
Councill
that
is
extant
[
q
](A20733-e111560-b)
q
Ancyr.
c.
12.
alias
13.
I
cite
the
Latine
text
because
the
Greeke
seemeth
to
be
defectiue
.
,
Non
licere
Presbyteris
ciuitatis
,
sine
Episcopi
praecepto
amplius
aliquid
imperare
,
nec
sine
authoritate
literarum
eius
in
vnaquaque
parochia
aliquid
agere
.
That
it
is
not
lawfull
for
the
Presbyters
of
the
citie
to
doe
any
thing
of
importance
without
the
Bishops
appointment
,
no●
to
do
any
thing
in
any
parish
without
the
authoritie
of
his
letters
.
To
these
J
adde
the
first
Councill
of
Toledo
;
[
r
](A20733-e111610-b)
r
Toletan
.
1.
c.
20.
Sine
conscientia
Episcopi
nihil
p●nit●●
Presbyteri
agere
praesummunt
,
Let
the
Presbyters
presum●
to
doe
nothing
at
all
without
the
knowledge
,
and
consent
of
the
Bishop
.
And
forasmuch
as
for
a
poore
euasion
he
alledgeth
,
that
these
Councils
by
me
cited
,
though
the
ancientest
that
are
extant
,
are
vnder
age
;
which
ill
becommeth
him
to
object
,
who
hath
no
witnesses
to
the
contrarie
before
this
present
age
;
I
will
therfore
produce
one
or
two
more
,
who
liued
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
conuersed
with
them
.
Ignatius
therefore
in
an
Epistle
which
the
Refuter
hath
before
cited
,
saith
[
s
](A20733-e111670-b)
s
Ad
Magnes
.
that
neither
Presbyter
,
nor
Deacon
ought
to
doe
any
thing
without
the
B.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
neither
let
any
thing
seeme
reasonable
vnto
you
,
which
is
done
without
his
warrant
.
To
him
I
will
adioyne
a
testimony
of
Clement
,
wishing
the
Reader
to
credit
it
no
further
then
he
seeth
cause
.
He
[
t
](A20733-e111720-b)
t
Epist.
1.
ad
Iacob
.
therefore
reporteth
it
as
a
doctrine
of
Peter
,
that
no
Presbyter
ought
to
doe
any
thing
in
any
Bishoppes
parish
or
diocesse
,
without
his
permission
;
and
that
all
Presbyters
ought
without
delay
to
be
obedient
to
their
BB.
in
all
things
.
§
.
14.
But
as
I
prooued
that
Presbyters
might
doe
nothing
without
the
Bishoppes
appointment
or
consent
,
As
touching
Baptisme
,
I
alleaged
Tertullian
[
u
](A20733-e111820-b)
u
Lib.
de
baptisme
.
,
testifying
,
that
the
Bishoppe
hath
the
right
to
giue
Baptisme
;
then
the
Presbyters
and
the
Deacon●
:
but
yet
not
without
the
authority
of
the
Bishoppe
,
for
the
honour
of
the
Church
,
(
that
is
,
the
honour
due
vnto
him
in
the
Church
)
which
being
safe
,
peace
is
safe
.
Where
note
in
Tertullians
time
,
within
the
first
two
hundred
yeeres
,
the
Bishoppe
was
so
greatly
honoured
,
that
the
peace
of
the
Church
was
supposed
to
depend
on
the
honour
of
the
Bishoppe
,
as
Ierome
also
speaketh
,
&
that
the
ordinary
right
of
baptizing
was
primarily
in
the
Bishop
;
secondarily
,
in
the
Presbyters
&
Deacons
,
but
not
to
be
exercised
by
them
without
his
authority
:
whereas
extraordinarily
,
and
in
case
of
necessitie
,
lay
men
in
his
iudgement
might
baptize
.
To
this
the
Refuter
giueth
fiue
answeres
,
but
neuer
a
good
one
.
As
first
,
that
Tertullian
speaketh
not
of
their
iuresdiction
in
the
Apostles
times
,
or
af●er
by
authority
from
them
.
Hee
speaketh
nor
de
facto
,
but
de
iure
;
noting
what
right
Bishops
had
:
and
hee
sheweth
the
ordinary
right
of
baptizing
which
the
Presbyters
had
,
was
not
without
the
Bishops
authority
.
2.
That
the
preeminence
he
giueth
them
was
for
the
honor
of
the
Church
,
and
preseruation
of
peace
.
What
then
?
was
this
peculiar
to
his
time
?
Were
they
not
as
carefull
of
the
honour
of
the
Church
,
and
preseruation
of
peace
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
after
?
3.
Neither
doth
he
speake
of
the
authority
of
the
Bishop
in
generall
,
but
of
an
honour
giuen
him
in
one
particular
.
And
for
one
particular
belonging
to
the
power
of
order
,
did
I
alleage
it
,
that
hauing
prooued
this
point
in
generall
,
I
might
also
shew
it
in
the
particulars
,
which
cannot
otherwise
be
done
,
but
sigillation
,
one
by
one
.
Yea
but
this
honour
no
one
particular
,
might
well
bee
in
a
titular
Bishoppe
,
that
had
no
such
iurisdiction
.
Titular
Bishops
in
the
primitue
Church
were
such
,
as
had
the
name
and
title
,
but
not
the
authority
of
a
Bishop
granted
to
them
.
Such
a
one
was
Meletius
,
who
by
the
censure
of
the
Councell
of
Nice
[
*
](A20733-e112000-b)
*
Epist.
Synod
.
Nic.
apud
.
So●r
.
l.
1.
c.
6.
,
was
not
to
haue
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
authority
,
but
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
bars
name
of
a
Bishop
.
And
such
were
[
x
](A20733-e112070-b)
x
Synod
.
Nic.
c.
8.
Nouatian
Bishops
,
returning
to
the
Church
permitted
to
be
,
if
the
Catholike
Bishop
would
gratifie
them
with
the
name
and
title
of
a
Bishop
.
I
reade
of
Eustathius
[
y
](A20733-e112110-b)
y
Epist.
Synodi
Ephes.
ad
synodum
Pamphyl
.
,
the
Metropolitan
B.
of
Pamphylia
,
who
being
desirous
to
leade
a
more
quiet
and
solitary
life
,
gaue
vp
his
Bishopricke
:
whereupon
Theodorus
was
chosen
in
his
roome
.
For
it
was
not
meet
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
the
Church
should
continue
a
widow
,
and
that
the
flockes
●f
our
Sauiour
should
remaine
without
a
gouernour
.
But
he
afterwards
repenting
him
of
the
abdication
of
his
Bishopricke
,
putteth
vp
a
petition
to
the
Councell
of
Ephesus
,
that
hee
might
at
the
least
retaine
the
name
and
honour
of
a
Bishop
.
At
his
request
,
the
Councell
writeth
to
the
Synod
of
Pamphylia
,
that
he
might
haue
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
name
,
the
honour
,
and
communion
of
a
Bishop
:
but
yet
so
,
as
that
neither
he
doe
ordaine
,
nor
taking
vpon
him
the
charge
of
the
Church
,
should
performe
sacred
actions
by
his
owne
authority
Thus
we
see
who
were
titular
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
such
as
were
gratified
with
the
name
,
but
wanted
the
office
and
authority
of
a
Bishoppe
.
As
for
those
who
had
the
office
of
a
Bishoppe
,
of
whom
Tertullian
speaketh
;
they
had
also
vigorem
episcopatus
,
the
vigor
of
the
episcopall
office
:
whereof
Cyprian
so
oft
speaketh
,
and
the
sway
of
authority
ecclesiasticall
was
in
their
hands
:
insomuch
that
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
who
by
the
power
of
their
order
had
right
to
baptitize
,
might
not
euen
in
Tertullians
time
exercise
that
power
,
but
by
authority
from
the
Bishop
.
In
the
fourth
place
the
Refuter
obiecteth
,
that
these
Presbyters
were
not
ordinary
Ministers
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
,
§
15.
Ad
pag.
101.
but
such
as
he
and
his
fellowes
dreame
of
;
because
Tertullian
in
the
very
next
words
affirmeth
,
alioquin
etiamlaicis
iut
est
,
otherwise
lay
men
also
might
baptize
.
That
the
Presbyters
were
Ministers
,
I
haue
manifestly
proued
before
,
and
I
haue
noted
already
,
that
Tertullian
signifieth
the
ordinary
right
of
baptizing
to
be
in
the
Bishop
,
Presbyters
&
Deacons
,
that
yet
extraordinarily
and
in
the
case
of
necessity
,
lay
men
might
baptize
.
And
so
Ierome
[
a
](A20733-e112300-b)
a
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
seemeth
to
exhound
Tertullians
meaning
.
Hence
it
is
that
without
Chrisme
(
which
[
b
](A20733-e112340-b)
b
Conc.
Carth.
4.
c
36.
the
Presbyters
of
the
seuerall
parishes
were
to
fetch
from
their
B.
)
and
without
the
commandement
of
the
Bishop
neither
Presbyter
nor
Deacon
haue
right
to
baptize
.
Which
notwithstanding
wee
know
to
be
oft
times
lawfull
for
lay
men
to
doe
,
si
tamen
necessitas
cogit
,
but
yet
so
,
if
necessity
doe
compell
.
But
nothing
is
more
euident
then
that
the
Presbyters
were
Ministers
,
by
that
which
hath
heretofore
been
deliuered
.
Whereunto
this
helpeth
somewhat
,
that
Tertullian
opposeth
Presbyters
and
Deacons
to
laymen
.
This
obiection
the
Refuter
thought
to
preuent
,
by
saying
,
that
the
gouerning
Elders
and
Deacons
were
accounted
among
the
Clergy
.
Which
also
is
an
vnlearned
assertion
.
For
to
omit
the
arguments
which
before
were
brought
to
prooue
,
that
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
were
degrees
of
the
sacred
Ministery
;
it
is
plaine
,
that
the
clergy
of
each
diocesse
was
a
company
of
such
as
were
trained
vp
in
learning
,
it
being
the
seminary
of
the
whole
diocesse
.
And
as
they
profited
in
yeeres
,
learning
,
and
pietie
,
so
they
were
preferred
to
bee
Readers
,
then
Exorcists
,
then
Acolythi
,
then
Sub-deacons
,
after
that
Deacons
,
then
Presbyters
,
out
of
whom
ordinarily
was
chosen
the
Bishoppe
.
And
moreouer
,
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
with
the
rest
of
the
Clergy
,
had
all
their
maintenance
according
to
their
place
and
degree
in
the
Church
.
And
therefore
our
disciplinarians
,
if
they
will
haue
such
Presbyters
and
Deacons
as
were
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
they
must
fetch
them
from
the
Vniuersitie
,
and
schooles
of
learning
,
as
we
doe
,
and
maintaine
them
by
the
charges
of
the
Church
,
as
well
,
though
not
with
so
large
allowance
▪
as
the
Bishop
.
His
last
euasion
(
for
none
of
his
answers
is
better
)
is
,
that
the
lower
Tertullian
speaketh
of
,
might
well
be
,
and
was
on
a
parish
Bishop
,
the
Presbyters
being
subiect
to
him
,
as
his
assistants
for
that
one
Church
.
But
parish
Bishoppes
,
such
as
they
speake
of
,
and
lay
elders
be
of
one
edition
,
neuer
heard
of
before
our
age
.
For
the
more
manifest
proofe
whereof
,
I
referre
you
to
that
which
before
hath
been
by
mee
alleaged
.
Jt
is
euident
therefore
by
the
testimonies
of
Tertullian
and
Ierome
,
that
such
was
the
superioritie
of
Bishoppes
,
in
respect
of
iurisdiction
,
that
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
,
though
the
right
to
baptize
belonged
to
their
power
of
order
,
yet
they
might
not
exercise
that
power
,
without
iurisdiction
and
authority
granted
them
from
the
Bishop
.
[
c
](A20733-e112490-b)
c
Ad
Smyrnens
.
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
Let
that
Eucharist
be
allowed
as
firme
and
warrantable
,
which
is
celebrated
vnder
the
Bishop
,
that
is
,
in
his
presence
;
or
by
such
(
namely
in
his
absence
,
or
in
those
Congregations
where
he
is
not
present
)
as
he
should
permit
or
appoint
.
The
words
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
preuent
the
Refuters
cauill
,
who
saith
,
that
the
Church
was
but
one
Congregation
,
wh●rein
no
man
had
authoritie
to
minister
the
word
or
Sacraments
,
but
with
the
liking
of
the
Pastor
.
For
that
Eucharist
which
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
was
in
the
congregation
,
where
the
Bishop
was
present
,
it
being
administred
in
other
congregations
by
such
as
the
Bishop
did
authorize
.
But
the
idle
conceit
of
one
onely
Congregation
in
the
greatest
Churches
hath
beene
before
sufficiently
refuted
.
Where
I
alleged
Cyprian
,
reproouing
the
Presbyters
of
Carthage
,
for
giuing
the
Communion
to
some
which
had
fallen
in
time
of
persecution
,
without
warrant
from
him
,
though
he
were
absent
,
therin
not
regarding
as
they
ought
[
d
](A20733-e112620-b)
d
Cypr.
li.
3.
ep.
14.15.16
.
praepositum
sibi
Episcopum
,
the
Bishop
who
was
set
ouer
them
,
nec
Episcopo
honorem
Sacerdotij
sui
&
Cathedrae
seruantes
,
nor
reseruing
vnto
the
Bishop
the
honour
of
his
Priesthood
and
Chaire
:
the
Refuter
saith
,
the
same
answer
which
he
gaue
to
Tertullian
,
will
serue
(
as
a
poore
shift
)
for
Cyprians
testimonie
,
who
had
iust
cause
to
complaine
,
that
the
Presbyters
,
who
in
his
absence
were
to
feede
the
Flocke
,
had
taken
vpon
them
to
admit
to
the
Communion
,
&c.
Doth
not
the
Refuter
see
his
former
shift
will
not
serue
the
turne
?
Is
it
not
plaine
,
that
the
Presbyters
which
Cyprian
speaketh
of
,
who
as
hee
saith
elsewhere
,
[
e
](A20733-e112690-b)
e
Li.
3.
epist.
1.
were
cum
Episcopo
sacerdotali
honore
coniuncti
,
ioined
to
the
Bishop
in
the
honour
of
Priesthood
,
who
were
to
feed
the
people
,
and
whose
office
it
was
to
deliuer
the
holy
Communion
to
the
people
,
were
Ministers
of
the
word
and
Sacraments
?
Againe
,
will
it
serue
the
turne
to
say
,
either
that
the
Presbyters
had
authority
only
in
this
particular
of
the
Sacrament
,
or
that
Cyprian
was
either
but
a
titular
or
a
parish
B.
whom
I
haue
proued
before
to
haue
beene
a
Metropolitan
?
In
the
end
he
resteth
in
his
first
answer
,
that
Cyprian
is
vnder
age
.
Alas
good
Cyprian
,
how
hard
was
thy
happe
,
that
thou
wert
not
Bishop
one
[
f
](A20733-e112760-b)
f
Cyprian
testifieth
when
hee
wrote
the
booke
,
De
duplici
martyri●
,
that
it
was
about
the
year
240.
and
it
is
plaine
that
he
was
B.
in
Fabianus
the
B.
of
Rome
his
time
,
who
ended
his
life
in
the
yeere
249.
after
hee
had
beene
B.
14.
yeeres
.
§
17.
The
like
is
said
of
other
ministeriall
functions
.
fortie
yeeres
sooner
,
that
the
Refuter
and
his
consorts
,
which
now
haue
excluded
thee
without
the
compasse
of
their
imagined
Primitiue
Church
,
might
haue
esteemed
thy
testimonie
as
good
as
Tertullians
,
or
others
who
wrote
in
the
first
200.
yeeres
!
The
like
I
might
haue
added
concerning
other
ministeriall
functions
.
The
second
Councell
of
Carthage
[
g
](A20733-e112820-b)
g
Conc.
Carth.
2.
c.
9.
decreed
,
that
if
any
Presbyter
without
the
consent
of
the
B.
should
in
any
place
agenda
celebrare
,
celebrare
diuine
seruice
,
and
performe
such
actions
as
belong
to
the
ministerie
,
hee
should
be
deposed
.
The
Councell
of
Gangra
pronounceth
him
accursed
,
who
shal
performe
the
actions
of
the
church
,
meaning
those
things
which
appertaine
to
Gods
publike
seruice
,
and
the
ministerie
of
the
word
and
sacraments
,
[
h
](A20733-e112860-b)
h
Gangr
.
c.
6.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
there
being
not
present
a
Presbyter
by
the
appointment
of
the
Bishop
.
The
ancient
Canon
,
[
i
](A20733-e112900-b)
i
C.
30.
aliâs
31.
called
the
Apostles
,
appointeth
,
that
such
a
Presbyter
as
will
of
his
owne
authoritie
,
without
the
appointment
of
the
B.
hold
assemblies
for
the
seruice
of
God
,
&
vse
of
the
sacraments
,
that
he
should
be
deposed
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
ambitious
.
The
same
hath
the
Councell
of
Antioch
,
[
k
](A20733-e112950-b)
k
Conc.
Antioch
.
c.
5.
in
the
fifth
Canon
;
which
Canon
being
recited
in
the
Councell
of
Chalcedon
,
[
l
](A20733-e112970-b)
l
Act
4.
all
the
BB.
gaue
it
this
acclamation
:
This
is
a
iust
rule
;
this
is
the
rule
of
the
Fathers
.
This
case
being
propounded
in
the
Councell
of
Carthage
,
[
m
](A20733-e112990-b)
m
Carth.
graec
.
c.
10.
&
11.
if
a
Presbyter
being
condemned
by
his
owne
B.
shall
swell
with
pride
against
him
,
and
thinke
he
may
apart
celebrate
the
diuine
seruice
,
and
offer
the
Communion
,
&c.
the
Councell
determined
,
if
any
Presbyter
swelling
with
pride
against
his
B.
shall
make
a
schisme
,
withdrawing
himselfe
from
the
Communion
of
his
B.
&c.
let
him
be
anathema
.
For
a
conclusion
,
I
alleged
the
words
of
Ignatius
,
[
n
](A20733-e113050-b)
n
Ad
Smyrn
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Let
no
man
without
the
B.
that
is
,
without
his
leaue
and
authority
,
doe
any
thing
that
belongeth
to
the
Church
.
To
which
the
Refuter
maketh
this
one
only
answer
,
of
one
congregation
,
which
I
haue
confuted
more
then
once
.
To
proue
the
Bishops
power
and
authority
in
correcting
Presbyters
,
[
o
](A20733-e113140-b)
o
Li.
3.
epist.
9.
telleth
Regatianu●
a
B.
who
had
beene
abused
of
his
Deacon
,
that
pro
Episcopatus
v●gore
&
Cathedrae
authoritate
,
for
the
vigour
of
his
Bishopricke
,
and
authority
of
his
chaire
,
hee
might
himselfe
haue
censured
him
as
he
thought
good
;
&
counselleth
him
,
if
the
Deacon
did
persist
,
hee
[
p
](A20733-e113200-b)
p
Fungaris
circa
eum
potestate
honoris
tui
,
vt
eum
vel
deponas
,
vel
abstineas
.
should
exercise
the
power
of
his
honor
towards
him
,
and
either
depose
him
,
or
excommunicate
him
.
Secondly
,
Ierome
[
q
](A20733-e113240-b)
q
Aduers
.
Vigilant
.
ad
Riparium
.
maruelling
that
the
B.
where
Vigilantius
was
Presbyter
,
did
not
virga
apostolica
,
with
the
apostolike
and
with
an
iron
rodde
,
breake
that
vnprofitable
vessell
,
and
deliuer
him
vnto
the
destruction
of
the
flesh
.
Both
these
the
refuter
casteth
off
,
as
vncompetent
witnesses
,
who
speake
but
of
the
practise
of
their
owne
times
;
as
who
should
say
,
it
had
beene
otherwise
before
their
times
.
But
it
is
plaine
almost
by
innumerable
testimonies
,
some
whereof
I
will
cite
[
r
](A20733-e113300-b)
r
§
20.
anon
,
that
the
ancientest
Canons
,
Councels
,
and
Fathers
acknowledge
and
allow
this
correctiue
power
in
the
Bishops
ouer
the
Presbyters
and
Deacons
in
the
Primitiue
Church
.
As
for
the
Apostles
times
,
I
prooue
the
same
out
of
the
Apocalypse
,
but
more
plainely
out
of
the
Epistles
to
Timothe
and
Titus
.
The
former
reason
,
if
the
Refuter
will
giue
me
leaue
to
frame
it
,
is
this
:
Those
who
either
are
commended
for
examining
,
and
not
suffering
such
in
their
Church
,
as
called
themselues
Apostles
,
and
were
not
,
or
were
reprooued
for
suffering
false
Teachers
,
had
a
correctiue
power
ouer
other
Ministers
.
The
Angell
of
the
Church
of
Ephesus
[
s
](A20733-e113370-b)
s
Apoc.
2.2
.
is
commended
for
the
former
:
the
Angell
of
the
Church
of
Thyatira
[
t
](A20733-e113380-b)
t
Apoc.
2.20
.
is
reproued
for
the
latter
.
Therefore
these
Angels
,
which
before
I
haue
proued
to
be
BB.
had
a
correctiue
power
ouer
other
Ministers
.
His
answer
is
friuolous
,
Ad.
past.
102.
that
neither
these
Angels
were
diocesan
Bishops
,
which
before
hath
been
prooued
,
nor
these
false
Teachers
diocesan
Presbyters
,
which
word
himselfe
deuised
for
a
shift
.
Is
it
not
against
sense
(
saith
hee
)
that
the
Presbyters
which
were
subiect
to
the
B.
should
call
themselues
Apostles
?
If
they
were
not
subiect
to
him
,
why
is
hee
either
commended
for
exercising
authoritie
ouer
them
,
or
reprooued
for
suffering
them
?
And
if
they
were
not
Presbyters
,
because
they
called
themselues
Apostles
,
be
like
they
were
better
men
.
Js
it
not
then
against
sense
,
to
deny
that
Presbyters
were
subiect
to
the
censure
of
the
Bishop
,
because
he
imagineth
these
,
who
were
subiect
to
their
censure
,
were
better
men
?
Whatsoeuer
they
were
,
whether
Presbyters
,
or
in
a
higher
degree
;
whether
of
the
Bishops
presbytery
,
or
not
;
whether
of
his
diocese
originally
,
or
come
from
other
places
,
it
is
plaine
,
that
they
were
Teachers
,
and
that
being
in
their
diocese
,
the
Bishops
had
authoritie
either
to
suffer
them
to
preach
,
or
to
inhibit
them
;
to
retaine
them
in
the
Communion
of
their
Church
,
or
to
expell
them
.
My
other
reason
,
that
BB.
had
correctiue
power
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
is
,
because
Timothe
and
Titus
had
such
power
ouer
the
Presbyters
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
:
as
I
proue
by
most
euident
testimonies
out
of
Pauls
epistles
[
u
](A20733-e113530-b)
u
1.
Tim.
1.3.5.19.20.21.22.6.14
.
and
Epiphanius
[
*
](A20733-e113550-b)
*
Haeres.
75.
his
inference
on
these
words
to
Timothe
:
Against
a
Presbyter
receiue
not
thou
an
accusation
,
but
vnder
two
or
three
witnesses
,
&c.
Therefore
(
saith
he
)
Presbyters
are
[
x
](A20733-e113590-b)
x
Par
in
parem
non
habet
imperium
.
subiect
to
the
B.
as
to
their
Iudge
.
To
my
inference
out
of
S.
Paul
he
answereth
,
that
Timothe
and
Titus
were
not
BB.
and
that
I
shall
neuer
prooue
they
were
.
I
desire
therefore
the
Reader
to
suspend
his
iudgement
vntill
hee
come
to
the
proofes
on
both
sides
;
and
if
he
shall
not
find
my
proofes
for
their
being
BB.
to
be
better
then
his
to
the
contrarie
,
let
him
beleeue
me
in
nothing
.
In
the
meane
time
let
him
know
,
that
if
the
generall
consent
of
the
ancient
Fathers
deserue
any
credit
for
a
matter
of
fact
,
then
must
it
be
granted
that
Timothe
and
Titus
were
Bishops
.
Against
Epiphanius
hee
obiecteth
,
that
hee
tooke
for
granted
that
which
Aerius
constantly
denied
.
But
this
is
one
of
his
presumptuous
and
malapeit
conceits
;
for
when
Epiphanius
prooueth
against
Aerius
,
that
Bishops
were
superiour
to
other
Presbyters
,
because
Timothe
was
,
taking
it
for
granted
that
Timothe
was
a
Bishoppe
:
what
moderate
or
reasonable
man
would
think
otherwise
,
but
that
this
assertion
,
that
Timothe
was
a
Bishoppe
,
was
such
a
receiued
truth
,
as
hee
knew
Aërius
himselfe
would
not
deny
it
?
(
Serm.
sect.
12.
pag.
50.
But
consider
also
the
Presbyters
as
seuered
in
place
from
the
Bishop
,
to
offenders
,
pag.
52.
My
first
Argument
to
proue
the
iurisdiction
of
Bishops
ouer
Presbyters
assigned
to
their
seuerall
cures
,
is
,
that
when
any
place
in
the
country
was
voide
,
the
Bishoppe
assigned
a
Presbyter
to
them
out
of
his
Presbytery
,
which
as
hath
beene
said
before
,
Caluin
confesseth
;
and
is
an
euident
argument
,
as
to
proue
the
iurisdiction
of
the
Bishop
ouer
the
country
parishes
,
and
Presbyters
thereof
,
so
to
demonstrate
that
the
Bishops
were
Diocesan
.
This
reason
because
hee
could
not
answere
,
he
would
as
his
maner
is
,
perswade
the
Reader
that
it
is
needlesse
.
Secondly
,
I
alledge
that
these
Presbyters
might
doe
nothing
but
by
authority
from
the
Bishoppe
,
from
whome
they
had
their
iurisdiction
,
and
therefore
were
subiect
to
him
as
their
ruler
.
Thirdly
,
Ad
Pag.
103.
that
they
were
subiect
to
his
iudgement
and
censures
.
These
two
points
with
their
proofes
,
hee
passeth
ouer
,
as
if
hee
made
hast
to
the
reason
following
,
which
he
supposeth
to
be
the
weakest
.
For
this
is
his
maner
,
to
passe
by
in
breuity
,
or
in
silence
the
best
proofes
,
and
if
he
meet
with
any
thing
which
seemeth
to
him
weaker
then
the
rest
,
there
he
resteth
like
a●lie
in
a
raw
place
.
But
by
his
leaue
I
will
insist
a
little
on
these
two
points
.
And
first
,
for
the
former
point
in
generall
,
the
ancient
Councell
of
Laodicea
hauing
ordained
that
Country
Bishops
might
do
nothing
without
the
consent
of
the
B.
in
the
City
;
in
like
maner
commaundeth
the
Presbyters
[
a
](A20733-e113900-b)
a
Con.
L●od
.
c.
56
alias
57.
to
doe
nothing
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
without
the
consent
of
the
B.
The
same
hath
Damasus
,
[
b
](A20733-e113950-b)
b
Epist.
de
Chorepiscopis
.
who
hauing
spoken
of
Country
Bishops
,
in
like
manner
saith
,
this
must
be
held
concerning
Presbyters
;
vt
sine
iussu
proprij
Episcopi
nihilagant
,
that
they
do
nothing
without
the
commaundement
of
their
owne
B.
To
omit
those
actions
that
belonged
to
the
power
of
order
,
which
I
haue
already
proued
they
could
not
performe
without
licence
and
authority
from
the
Bishop
:
consider
,
how
in
respect
of
their
persons
those
of
the
Clergy
were
subiect
to
the
Bishop
,
to
be
disposed
by
him
.
First
,
hee
had
authority
to
promote
them
from
one
degree
to
another
,
as
he
saw
cause
;
insomuch
[
c
](A20733-e113980-b)
c
Conc.
Carth.
Graet
.
c.
31.
&
Aquisgran
.
c.
56.
that
if
they
refused
to
bee
promoted
by
him
they
were
to
loose
that
degree
from
which
they
would
not
be
remoued
.
Secondly
,
they
might
not
remoue
[
d
](A20733-e114020-b)
d
Can.
Apost.
15.
Con.
Antioc
.
c.
3.
Constant.
in
Trul.
c
▪
17.
Carth.
4.
c.
27.
from
one
Diocese
to
another
without
his
consent
.
If
they
did
,
he
had
authority
to
call
them
backe
.
Or
if
any
other
Bishop
should
ordaine
any
of
his
Clerks
without
his
consent
,
or
letters
dimissory
[
e
](A20733-e114110-b)
e
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
,
and
in
that
Church
preferre
him
to
a
higher
degree
;
his
own
B.
might
reuerse
that
ordination
,
&
bring
him
again
to
his
own
Church
.
Con.
Nic.
c.
16.
Arel.
2.
c.
13.
Sard.
c
15.
Constant.
in
Trullo
.
c.
17.
Venet.
c.
10
Epaun.
c.
5.
Thirdly
,
they
might
not
so
much
as
trauel
from
one
City
to
another
,
without
the
B.
licence
,
&
his
commendatory
[
f
](A20733-e114140-b)
f
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
letters
.
This
was
decreed
by
the
councell
of
Laodicea
[
g
](A20733-e114160-b)
g
C.
Laod.
c.
42.
&
41.
,
and
diuers
others
,
as
Con.
Agath
.
c.
38.
Epaunens
.
c.
6.
Aurelian
.
3.
c.
15.
Venet.
c.
5.
Turon
.
c.
11.12
.
Hereby
the
Reader
will
easily
discerne
,
that
the
whole
Clergy
of
euery
Diocese
was
subiect
to
the
B.
as
to
their
Ruler
.
[
h
](A20733-e114220-b)
h
l.
1.
Epist.
3.
In
their
controuersies
.
testifieth
,
that
heresies
and
schismes
arise
hence
,
that
the
Bishop
is
not
obeied
,
nec
v●us
in
Ecclesia
ad
tempus
sacerdos
&
ad
tempus
index
vice
Christi
cogitatur
,
neither
is
one
B.
in
the
Church
and
one
iudge
for
the
time
in
the
stead
of
Christ
acknowledged
.
First
,
in
their
controuersies
:
for
when
Clerks
[
i
](A20733-e114270-b)
i
Con.
Carth.
4.
c.
5●
.
are
at
variance
,
the
B
▪
shal
bring
them
to
concord
,
either
by
reason
,
or
by
his
power
.
If
there
be
a
controuersie
betweene
Clerks
,
saith
the
Councel
of
Chalcedon
[
k
](A20733-e114310-b)
k
c.
Chalc.
c.
9.
,
they
shal
not
forsake
their
owne
B.
but
first
their
cause
shall
be
tried
before
him
.
And
if
in
their
sutes
they
thought
themselues
[
l
](A20733-e114340-b)
l
c.
Carth.
grae
.
c.
28
&
126.
wronged
in
their
Bishoppes
court
,
then
were
they
either
to
se●ke
to
the
next
BB
[
m
](A20733-e114370-b)
m
C.
Chalc.
9.
,
if
the
matter
could
not
be
differred
to
the
next
Synode
:
or
else
they
might
appeale
[
n
](A20733-e114390-b)
n
Cod.
Iustin.
de
audien
.
tia
episcopali
c.
sancimus
.
to
the
Metropolitane
,
or
Prouinciall
Synode
.
But
that
the
B.
should
be
ouerruled
,
controlled
,
or
censured
by
his
owne
Presbytery
,
it
was
neuer
heard
of
,
vnlesse
it
were
by
way
of
insurrection
or
rebellion
.
Secondly
,
in
causes
criminall
,
If
any
Presbyter
or
Deacon
,
saith
the
ancient
Canon
[
o
](A20733-e114440-b)
o
Can.
Apost.
32.
,
be
excommunicated
by
the
B.
he
may
not
be
receiued
by
another
into
the
Communion
,
then
by
him
who
did
excommunicate
him
whiles
he
liueth
.
Which
Canon
is
ratified
in
the
Councell
of
Nice
[
p
](A20733-e114470-b)
p
Conc.
Nic.
c.
5.
in
these
words
;
as
touching
those
which
be
excommunicate
,
whether
they
be
of
the
Clergy
or
Laity
,
by
the
BB.
in
euery
Prouince
,
let
that
Canon
be
obserued
,
that
those
that
are
excommunicated
of
one
should
not
goe
to
another
,
&c.
The
Councell
of
[
q
](A20733-e114500-b)
q
C.
Antioch
.
c.
4.
Antioch
decreed
,
that
if
any
B.
being
deposed
by
a
Synode
,
or
a
Presbyter
or
Deacon
by
his
owne
B.
shall
presume
before
they
be
restored
by
a
Synod
to
exercise
their
ministery
,
their
degree
should
be
vnrecouerable
;
and
that
they
which
communicate
with
them
,
should
be
cast
out
of
the
church
.
Again
,
[
r
](A20733-e114530-b)
r
Ibid.
c.
6.
If
any
of
the
Laitie
,
or
Clergy
,
whether
Presbyters
or
Deacons
&c.
shal
be
excommunicated
by
his
own
B.
he
may
not
bee
receiued
of
another
.
And
yet
againe
,
[
s
](A20733-e114570-b)
s
C.
12.
If
any
Presbyter
or
Deacon
being
deposed
by
their
owne
Bishop
,
&c.
The
Councell
of
Sardica
[
t
](A20733-e114600-b)
t
Sardic
.
c.
13.
forbiddeth
a
Bishop
to
receiue
a
Presbyter
or
Deacon
,
&c.
whom
hee
knoweth
to
haue
beene
excommunicated
by
his
owne
Bishop
.
Againe
,
[
u
](A20733-e114640-b)
u
C.
14.
If
any
B.
through
choler
shall
rashly
excommunicate
a
Presbyter
or
Deacon
,
it
shall
bee
lawfull
for
them
to
appeale
to
the
Metropolitane
.
Exuperantius
a
Presbyter
being
excommunicated
by
Triferius
his
Bishop
for
some
misdeamenour
towards
him
,
the
Councill
of
Taurin
[
*
](A20733-e114680-b)
*
C.
4.
left
his
restitution
to
the
arbitrement
of
the
Bishop
;
by
whom
he
had
beene
excommunicated
.
The
Councill
of
Carthage
[
x
](A20733-e114700-b)
x
Carth.
graec
.
c.
9.
Carth.
2.
c.
7.
decreed
,
that
they
which
receiued
those
which
be
excommunicated
,
shall
be
guiltie
of
the
same
fault
with
them
,
who
doe
flie
from
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
canonicall
sentence
of
their
owne
B.
Out
of
the
same
Councel
[
y
](A20733-e114760-b)
y
Carth.
graec
.
c.
10.
Carth.
2.
c.
8.
I
cited
before
a
decree
concerning
Presbyters
which
were
condemned
of
their
owne
Bishoppe
.
And
in
the
[
z
](A20733-e114810-b)
z
Afric
.
c.
29.
&
Carth.
gr.
63
&c.
133.134
.
African
Councel
there
is
another
decree
concerning
Clergy
men
of
what
degree
soeuer
,
that
haue
beene
condemned
by
the
iudgement
of
their
Bishop
.
In
the
4.
Councell
of
Carthage
[
a
](A20733-e114860-b)
a
Carth.
4
c.
55.
it
was
decreed
that
the
Bishop
should
excommunicate
the
accusers
of
their
brethren
,
and
that
if
they
did
repent
,
hee
should
receiue
them
vnto
the
communion
,
but
not
into
the
Clergie
.
The
councell
of
Ephesus
[
b
](A20733-e114900-b)
b
Ephes.
c.
5.
,
that
if
any
for
their
misdeedes
being
condemned
,
either
by
a
Synode
,
or
their
own
Bishop
,
should
be
restored
by
Nestorius
or
his
complices
either
to
the
communion
or
to
their
degree
,
that
they
should
notwithstanding
remaine
excommunicated
or
deposed
.
The
Councell
of
Agatha
[
c
](A20733-e114940-b)
c
C.
2.
appointed
▪
that
disobedient
Clerks
should
bee
corrected
of
their
Bishop
.
In
the
Councell
of
Chalcedon
there
is
a
Canon
[
d
](A20733-e114970-b)
d
Chalc.
c.
23.
concerning
such
Clerks
as
being
excommunicated
by
their
own
Bishops
,
got
themselues
to
the
City
of
Constantinople
,
&c.
In
the
same
Councell
Carosus
[
e
](A20733-e115010-b)
e
Act.
4.
vseth
these
words
;
They
are
Bishops
,
they
haue
power
to
excommunicate
,
and
to
condemn
.
These
testimonies
for
councels
may
suffice
.
For
I
will
not
descend
to
those
of
latter
times
,
the
latest
which
I
haue
cited
being
the
4.
generall
Councell
.
For
examples
,
the
like
plenty
might
bee
shewen
of
them
,
who
haue
been
excommunicated
or
deposed
by
the
B.
Thus
Alexander
deposed
[
f
](A20733-e115050-b)
f
Theod.
l.
1.
c.
2.
Arius
;
[
g
](A20733-e115090-b)
g
Socr.
l.
6.
c.
4.
Sozom.
l.
8.
c.
3.
and
Chrysostome
diuers
of
his
Clergie
.
Euryches
was
canonically
[
h
](A20733-e115160-b)
h
Euagr.
l.
2.
c.
4.
deposed
by
his
owne
Bishop
,
and
diuers
Presbyters
excommunicated
by
[
i
](A20733-e115190-b)
i
Conc.
Chalc.
act.
10.
Ibus
the
Bishop
,
&c.
To
conclude
,
Bishops
,
saith
Balsam●
[
k
](A20733-e115240-b)
k
Bals.
in
Conc.
Eph.
c.
5.
,
haue
authority
eyther
to
excommunicate
their
Clergy
or
to
depose
them
.
Thus
haue
I
proued
by
euident
testimonies
,
that
al
sorts
of
Presbyters
,
and
other
clergy
men
in
euery
diocesse
were
subiect
to
the
Bishop
.
Whereunto
this
I
adde
,
that
since
the
first
institution
of
Bishops
,
which
was
in
the
Apostles
times
vntill
our
age
,
it
was
neuer
otherwise
:
but
all
clergy
men
,
if
either
they
withdrew
themselues
from
their
subiection
to
their
orthodoxall
B.
they
were
counted
schismatickes
;
or
if
they
liued
vnder
no
Bishop
,
they
were
wont
to
be
called
headlesse
Clerks
.
By
no
meanes
,
saith
the
councill
of
[
l
](A20733-e115300-b)
l
Burchard
.
decret.
l.
2.
c.
126.
ex
Conc.
Parisiens
.
Paris
,
are
they
to
be
accounted
Clerks
,
or
Priests
,
who
do
not
liue
vnder
the
gouernment
and
discipline
of
some
Bishop
:
for
such
the
custome
of
the
ancient
Church
called
acephalos
,
that
is
,
headlesse
.
To
these
testimonies
in
the
end
I
added
a
reason
,
The
pastors
of
seueral
parishes
in
the
primitiue
church
were
either
subiect
to
the
authority
and
iurisdiction
of
the
Bishop
;
or
they
had
associates
in
the
parishes
ioyned
with
them
in
the
gouernment
thereof
,
or
ruled
alone
without
controle●●●t
,
beeing
neither
restrained
by
associates
,
nor
subiect
to
BB.
But
neither
had
they
associates
in
the
parishes
ioined
with
them
,
neither
did
they
rule
alone
without
controlement
,
beeing
neither
restrained
by
associates
,
nor
subiect
to
the
Bishop
.
Therefore
the
pastors
of
seuerall
parishes
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
subiect
to
the
authority
and
iurisdiction
of
the
bishop
.
First
he
taketh
exception
against
the
conclusion
,
saying
that
I
doe
not
conclude
that
which
he
looked
for
.
What
he
looked
for
,
I
know
not
,
nor
care
not
;
the
thing
which
I
propounded
to
proue
,
was
,
that
the
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
were
superior
to
the
Presbyters
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
or
gouernment
.
Which
is
most
euidently
proued
by
this
argument
a
relatis
:
If
the
Presbyters
were
inferiour
and
subiect
to
the
iurisdiction
and
gouernement
of
the
Bishops
,
then
were
the
Bishops
superiour
to
them
in
the
power
of
iurisdiction
and
gouernement
.
What
can
bee
more
plaine
?
or
how
could
they
bee
,
as
he
absurdly
imagineth
subiect
to
the
iurisdiction
and
gouernement
of
the
B.
if
he
neither
had
power
to
rule
and
direct
them
,
nor
authority
and
iurisdiction
to
censure
and
correct
them
?
His
exception
therefore
against
the
conclusion
is
a
very
friuolous
cauill
,
like
all
the
rest
of
his
answers
.
To
the
proposition
hee
answereth
,
by
denying
the
distruction
as
insufficient
,
because
a
fourth
thing
might
bee
added
,
and
that
is
the
authority
of
the
congregation
.
But
though
this
might
be
added
according
to
the
phantasticall
conceit
of
some
fanaticall
spirits
in
our
time
,
who
make
the
gouernement
of
the
Church
to
be
neither
monarchiall
,
nor
aristocraticall
,
but
democraticall
,
or
rather
ochlocraticall
;
yet
was
it
not
to
be
added
,
because
there
could
bee
no
question
thereof
according
to
the
iudgement
and
practise
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
whereof
I
spake
.
But
let
him
adde
it
if
the
please
;
for
it
may
as
easily
be
denied
in
the
assumption
,
as
added
in
the
proposition
.
The
proposition
will
perhaps
seeme
somwhat
the
better
,
and
the
assumption
wil
be
neuer
the
worse
.
Therfore
,
this
also
was
a
meere
cauill
.
As
touching
the
assumption
:
that
part
which
denieth
them
to
haue
ruled
alone
,
hee
would
haue
granted
,
but
that
I
proued
it
.
See
the
spirit
of
contradiction
.
What
then
?
will
he
deny
it
?
No
,
but
heereby
he
wil
take
aduantage
to
inferre
his
triumphing
conclusion
,
Ad
pag.
104.
that
Bishopsforsooth
he
Popes
,
&
then
say
it
is
my
conclusion
.
But
to
this
their
conclusion
,
which
they
haue
published
in
print
in
most
glorious
and
vaunting
manner
fiue
times
that
I
know
of
,
arguing
nothing
but
their
gerat
malice
&
small
iudgement
,
I
haue
answered
before
to
their
shame
.
How
oft
must
they
bee
told
,
that
wee
neither
make
our
Bishops
supreme
gouernours
,
as
they
doe
their
parish
Bishop
:
nor
sole
,
as
theirs
would
bee
,
if
they
had
not
the
assistance
of
their
Presbyters
?
And
who
knoweth
not
,
that
it
is
the
supremacy
that
maketh
a
Pope
:
and
supremacy
they
giue
to
their
parish
Bishop
.
The
other
part
of
the
assumption
,
which
saith
they
had
not
assistants
in
the
parish
to
restraine
them
,
he
denieth
.
But
before
he
wil
examine
my
reason
which
I
broght
to
proue
it
,
his
grauity
thoght
good
to
cauil
with
the
phrase
,
which
(
saith
he
)
soundeth
very
strangely
in
our
eares
.
Assistants
are
for
his
helpe
whom
they
assist
,
not
to
hinder
in
the
execution
of
his
office
;
so
doe
the
Iustices
of
peace
assist
the
Iudges
at
the
assises
.
Therefore
he
should
either
,
not
haue
called
them
assistants
,
or
forborne
the
terme
of
restraining
.
Where
were
so
many
eares
,
as
he
speaketh
of
,
there
were
more
heads
then
one
that
ioined
in
this
work
,
as
I
vnderstand
there
did
.
But
where
so
many
heads
were
,
it
is
strange
there
was
no
more
iudgement
.
Are
your
Presbyteries
assisting
your
parish
Bishop
,
to
be
compared
to
the
Iustices
of
peace
at
the
assises
,
who
haue
no
right
of
suffrage
or
giuing
sentence
?
or
not
rather
to
the
Iudges
assisting
the
chiefe
Iudge
in
euery
Court
?
haue
not
all
in
your
Presbyteries
or
consistories
equal
right
of
suffrage
,
and
are
not
all
things
carried
by
plurality
of
voice
?
Is
it
not
plaine
,
that
the
Iudges
in
the
Kings
bench
,
or
common
plees
,
who
are
assistants
to
the
L.
chiefe
iustices
,
are
ioyned
to
either
of
them
,
as
to
he●lpe
him
in
giuing
right
iudgment
,
so
to
restraine
him
,
that
he
iudge
not
alone
,
according
to
his
own
pleasure
?
Is
it
not
euident
when
more
are
ioyned
in
one
commission
,
that
they
are
ioyned
as
well
to
restraine
him
that
is
the
cheefe
,
that
he
shall
doe
nothing
alone
,
as
to
helpe
him
in
the
execution
thereof
?
What
a
shallow
conceit
then
was
this
,
that
assitants
might
not
be
said
to
restraine
;
seeing
their
office
is
,
as
to
helpe
him
whom
they
assist
to
doe
right
,
so
to
restraine
him
that
hee
doe
no
wrong
.
Let
vs
now
heare
what
hee
can
say
to
the
reason
;
which
is
this
:
If
the
pastors
of
euery
parish
had
assistants
,
then
Presbyteries
,
either
of
lay-presbyters
or
of
Ministers
But
they
had
not
presbyteries
to
assist
them
,
neither
of
lay-presbyters
,
nor
of
ministers
.
Therefore
they
had
none
assistants
.
The
Proposition
is
grounded
vpon
this
hypothesis
,
which
I
tooke
for
granted
,
that
all
assistants
or
coassessours
ioined
with
the
Bishop
or
pastor
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
,
that
are
any
wheres
noted
to
haue
been
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
were
Presbyters
.
For
that
which
againe
he
addeth
concerning
the
whole
congregation
,
is
a
very
fond
conceit
.
Whoeuer
heard
that
the
whole
congregation
assisted
the
pastor
in
the
gouernement
of
it selfe
?
assuredlie
they
which
attribute
authority
to
the
whole
congregation
ascribe
vnto
it
the
chiefe
authority
,
as
in
popular
states
:
which
the
refuter
hath
before
acknowledged
,
saying
,
[
a
](A20733-e115640-b)
a
Page
6.
that
they
subiect
both
the
pastors
&
elders
to
the
whole
congregation
,
turning
the
world
vpside
down
,
and
making
the
flock
to
rule
their
pastor
.
And
yet
how
this
standeth
with
their
other
position
,
that
the
pastor
is
the
supreme
ecclesiasticall
officer
in
euery
Church
.
J
cannot
sell
,
vnlesse
they
meane
the
highest
vnder
the
Church
it selfe
.
Which
if
it
be
so
,
then
is
not
the
Church
according
to
their
conceit
assistant
to
the
Pastor
,
but
the
Pastor
is
the
Churches
deputy
and
lieuetenant
for
the
gouernement
of
it selfe
,
in
which
gouernement
of
the
Church
the
Presbyters
bee
his
assistants
.
But
whatsoeuer
might
be
added
to
the
proposition
,
according
to
the
vnstayed
fancies
of
certaine
innouators
,
which
I
respected
not
,
the
proposition
is
necessary
according
to
the
practise
of
the
primitiue
Church
wherof
only
J
sp●ke
.
Ad.
pag.
105.
But
he
denyeth
the
assumption
also
,
saying
,
that
they
had
other
Presbyters
which
were
not
ministers
.
But
I
hope
he
wil
vnsay
that
saying
,
when
he
shall
haue
read
what
before
hath
beene
deliuered
concerning
their
onely-gouerning
Elders
.
Besides
,
against
their
parish-presbyters
I
alledged
the
practise
of
the
Churches
in
Scotland
and
Geneua
.
For
in
Scotland
they
had
not
a
Presbytery
or
consistory
in
euery
parish
,
but
in
such
circuits
as
are
answerable
to
our
deanries
.
And
whereas
he
saith
,
that
neither
I
nor
hee
〈…〉
truely
what
the
practise
of
Geneua
is
,
but
by
uncertaine
reports
;
hee
should
haue
spoken
for
himselfe
.
For
what
I
report
concerning
Geneua
,
I
haue
read
,
as
in
other
Authors
,
so
in
Beza
himselfe
,
shewing
that
they
haue
but
one
Ecclesiasticall
presbyterie
,
or
consistorie
,
for
all
the
parishes
both
in
the
city
and
territory
thereto
belonging
,
consisting
of
eighteene
seniors
,
whereof
6.
are
Ministers
constant
,
and
12.
chosen
euery
yeare
out
of
their
3.
councils
of
state
,
viz.
6.
out
of
the
councill
of
200
4
out
of
that
of
60
,
and
2.
out
of
the
25.
as
I
haue
noted
before
.
But
where
he
saith
that
Geneua
may
well
be
taken
for
one
parish
,
seeing
it
hath
no
diocesan
Bishop
,
it
seemeth
he
doth
not
greatly
care
,
what
he
saith
.
Belike
there
is
but
one
parish
church
,
and
all
the
rest
,
beeing
aboue
20.
be
chapels
of
ease
;
and
who
then
is
the
pastor
of
the
whole
Church
of
Geneua
?
and
what
be
they
that
are
set
ouer
the
Churches
,
if
they
bee
not
the
pastors
of
them
?
Againe
,
it
is
not
long
since
Geneua
was
vnder
a
Bishop
,
and
then
was
it
a
Diocese
,
and
is
it
now
come
to
bee
but
a
parish
?
or
shall
we
not
rather
say
,
that
as
the
Bishop
in
his
time
was
Diocesan
;
so
the
presbyterie
now
,
is
not
a
parishionall
,
but
a
Diocesan
presbyterie
,
and
that
the
whole
Church
of
Geneua
consisting
of
many
parishes
,
is
as
well
a
Diocese
now
,
as
it
was
before
?
It
remaineth
therefore
as
I
said
in
the
sermon
,
that
the
ministers
of
seuerall
parishes
were
subiect
to
the
Bishop
,
whose
pastoral
care
extended
it selfe
to
al
,
euen
theremotest
parishes
in
his
Diocese
&c.
CHAP.
VI
Titles
of
honour
giuen
to
BB.
(
Serm.
sect.
13.
pag.
52.
Thus
haue
you
heard
,
that
the
Angels
or
BB.
of
the
Primitiue
Church
,
were
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
such
as
ours
be
.
&c.
to
the
end
of
the
fourth
point
.
)
HEere
(
I
thanke
him
)
he
compareth
me
to
such
as
be
called
Iuglers
,
Whether
BB.
may
be
called
Lords
.
because
as
they
can
perswade
men
they
see
what
they
doe
not
see
:
so
I
would
perswade
my
hearers
that
they
heard
which
they
did
not
heare
.
Whether
of
vs
doth
vse
more
plaine
euidence
of
truth
,
and
whether
of
vs
tricks
of
legerdemaine
,
I
appeale
to
the
conscience
of
the
Reader
;
though
it
bee
the
refuter
himselfe
.
But
good
sir
,
though
it
was
not
in
me
to
perswade
euery
one
that
did
heare
,
yet
me
thinks
I
might
without
offence
say
they
had
heard
that
which
they
did
heare
,
whether
it
were
true
or
false
.
And
I
hope
in
God
,
that
which
now
I
haue
written
in
defence
of
that
which
they
heard
,
will
not
onely
satisfie
those
which
are
not
wilfully
addicted
to
your
nouelties
;
but
also
conuict
the
conscience
of
the
gainesayers
:
whom
I
desire
in
the
feare
of
God
,
to
take
heede
how
they
resist
a
truth
whereof
their
conscience
is
conuicted
.
it
is
hard
to
kicke
against
the
pricks
.
To
that
which
hee
obiecteth
concerning
the
mentioning
of
prouinciall
Bishops
,
whome
I
did
not
name
before
,
I
answere
:
that
although
I
did
not
expressely
and
by
name
argue
for
prouinciall
Bishops
:
yet
diuers
of
my
proofes
were
directly
of
them
,
and
by
a
consequence
from
the
greater
to
the
lesse
applied
to
Bishops
:
as
also
by
this
reason
,
because
eeuery
prouinciall
Bishop
is
a
diocesan
Bishop
,
though
not
contrariwise
.
To
his
other
cauill
of
not
direct
concluding
,
I
haue
answered
already
4.
or
5.
times
.
Ad
page
.
106.
But
before
I
ended
this
4.
point
,
I
thought
it
needfull
to
preuent
an
obiection
which
is
vsually
made
;
that
whatsoeuer
the
office
of
the
ancient
Bishops
was
,
yet
they
were
not
called
Lords
,
as
ours
bee
.
Whereunto
I
answered
,
that
men
were
not
to
be
offended
at
that
title
,
for
these
two
causes
:
1.
Because
it
is
a
title
in
the
holy
scriptures
giuen
,
both
to
naturall
and
spirituall
Fathers
,
as
I
proued
out
of
Genesis
3●
.
35.1
.
Kings
.
18.7.13
.
2.
Because
the
title
of
Angels
,
which
the
Holy
Ghost
in
this
place
giueth
to
them
,
is
a
title
of
greater
honour
,
then
the
other
,
by
how
much
the
heauenly
gouernours
of
men
vnder
God
,
are
more
excellent
then
the
earthly
.
To
the
former
,
besides
some
insulting
speeches
,
the
word
Lord
was
a
terme
common
too
all
superiours
as
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
Greeke
,
and
Dominus
in
Latine
:
which
I
confesse
to
be
true
in
the
vocatiue
case
,
the
words
being
vsed
as
our
English
,
Sir
.
But
otherwise
,
where
the
word
is
to
be
translated
Lord
,
it
is
both
in
Hebrew
and
Greeke
a
word
of
like
honour
with
our
English
,
Lord
.
And
therefore
it
was
a
great
ouersight
in
those
,
which
translating
1.
Pet.
3.
where
Peter
saith
that
Sara
called
Abraham
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Lord
,
read
,
that
she
called
him
Sir
.
For
her
words
,
whereunto
Peter
had
relation
,
were
these
,
Vadoni
zaken
,
and
my
Lord
is
olde
.
It
were
something
foolish
to
say
,
and
my
Sir
.
Yea
but
saith
he
,
the
word
Lord
with
vs
is
appropriated
to
men
of
Nobility
and
speciall
place
in
ciuill
gouernment
.
To
omitte
that
it
is
not
so
appropriated
to
them
,
but
that
euen
meane
gentlemen
are
so
called
in
respect
of
the
manours
which
they
hold
,
it
appeareth
by
that
which
hath
bene
said
,
that
Bishops
not
onely
now
haue
,
but
in
the
Primitiue
Church
had
,
as
speciall
and
as
honourable
a
place
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
,
as
the
ciuill
magistrates
he
speaketh
of
,
haue
in
the
common
wealth
.
Their
calling
also
beeing
more
honourable
,
I
see
no
reason
,
why
they
should
be
enuyed
an
equall
title
of
honour
.
To
the
latter
reason
he
answereth
2.
things
.
the
titles
of
honour
now
giuen
to
Bishops
were
also
inferiour
to
the
title
of
Angels
,
which
the
holy
Ghost
giueth
them
;
and
yet
then
they
had
them
not
,
nor
till
Poperie
(
he
meaneth
the
Papacie
)
was
grown
to
his
full
height
.
His
simple
Reader
would
thinke
that
hee
speaketh
vpon
certaine
knowledge
,
and
cannot
but
beleeue
him
,
and
so
be
deceiued
by
his
confident
speeches
;
but
he
speaketh
at
all
aduentures
,
as
his
affection
,
not
as
his
knowledge
lead
him
.
The
Papacie
came
not
to
the
ful
height
vntil
the
time
of
Hildebrand
,
which
was
aboue
a
thousand
yeares
after
Christ
:
when
the
Pope
had
gotten
the
temporall
supremacie
,
and
so
both
the
swords
.
The
beginning
of
that
,
which
our
writers
call
the
Papacie
,
was
when
the
Pope
first
obtained
the
spirituall
supremacie
,
which
was
about
the
yeare
sixe
hundred
and
seauen
.
If
therefore
I
shall
prooue
,
that
Bishops
had
as
honourable
titles
in
the
first
sixe
hundred
yeares
,
as
they
haue
now
with
vs
;
I
shall
euince
,
that
not
onely
before
the
height
,
but
before
the
arising
of
the
Papacie
,
they
were
called
Lords
,
and
by
other
titles
no
lesse
honourable
then
Lord
.
But
I
will
not
desire
so
large
a
scope
;
the
most
of
my
proofes
shall
be
contained
within
three
or
foure
hundred
yeares
after
the
death
of
Christ
.
Alexander
therefore
the
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
writing
to
Alexander
Bishop
of
Constantinople
giueth
him
this
stile
,
[
a
](A20733-e116350-b)
a
Theodor.
l.
1.
c.
4.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
To
my
most
honourable
brother
:
Not
long
after
,
Arius
writeth
thus
to
Eusebius
of
Nicomedia
,
[
b
](A20733-e116420-b)
b
Th.
l.
1.
c.
5.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
my
most
desired
Lord
.
The
same
Eusebius
[
c
](A20733-e116480-b)
c
Ibid.
c.
6.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
my
Lord
Paulinus
Bishop
of
Treuers
,
vsing
also
the
same
title
more
then
once
in
the
same
Epistle
of
Eusebius
of
Caesaria
,
calling
him
my
Lord
Eusebius
.
For
though
these
two
whom
I
last
cited
,
were
not
sound
in
the
faith
;
yet
their
writing
sheweth
,
what
was
the
custome
of
the
Church
before
the
Councill
of
Nice
.
Not
long
after
the
same
Councill
,
Athanasius
succeeded
the
foresaid
Alexander
:
in
his
behalfe
the
Bishops
which
came
out
of
Aegypt
write
to
the
Bishops
assembled
in
Councill
at
Tyrus
,
[
d
](A20733-e116550-b)
d
Atha
.
Apol.
2.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
our
most
honourable
Lords
.
The
Synode
held
at
Ierusalem
[
e
](A20733-e116600-b)
e
Sozom.
l.
3.
c.
22.
writing
also
in
his
behalfe
to
the
Presbyters
,
Deacons
,
&
people
in
Aegypt
,
Lybia
&
Alexandria
moue
them
to
be
thankful
vnto
God
,
who
hath
now
,
say
they
,
restored
vnto
you
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
your
pastor
and
Lord
.
About
the
same
time
,
certain
BB.
direct
their
letters
to
Iulius
B.
of
Rome
[
f
](A20733-e116680-b)
f
Soz.
l.
3.
c.
23.
the
great
Patron
of
Athanasius
,
vnder
this
stile
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
the
most
blessed
Lord
&c.
Gregory
Nazianzene
[
g
](A20733-e116750-b)
g
Greg.
Naz.
epist
ad
Greg.
Nyss.
writing
to
Gregory
Nyssen
concerning
a
false
report
which
had
beene
spread
,
that
the
BB.
had
put
him
by
the
bishopricke
,
saith
,
let
no
man
speake
vntruths
of
mee
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
nor
of
my
Lords
the
BB.
The
councell
held
at
Illyricum
writing
to
the
Churches
and
Bishops
of
Asia
and
Phrygia
&c.
hath
these
words
[
h
](A20733-e116800-b)
h
Theo.
l.
4.
c.
9.
,
we
haue
sent
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
our
Lord
and
fellow
minister
Elpidius
to
take
notice
of
your
doctrine
,
whether
it
bee
as
we
haue
heard
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
our
Lord
and
fellow
Minister
Eustathius
.
George
the
Bishop
of
Laodicea
[
i
](A20733-e116860-b)
i
Soz.
l.
4.
c.
13.
writeth
to
certain
BB.
thus
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
the
most
honourable
Lords
.
The
fathers
of
the
second
generall
Councell
[
k
](A20733-e116910-b)
k
Constantine
p.
1.
apud
.
Theodor
.
l.
5.
c.
9.
direct
their
letter
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
the
most
honourable
Lords
Damasus
,
Ambrose
,
&c.
And
in
the
same
epistle
,
speaking
of
BB.
call
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
most
reuerend
and
most
honorable
brethren
.
The
said
Ambrose
holding
with
other
BB.
a
Synode
,
and
writing
a
synodicall
epistle
to
Syricius
then
B.
of
Rome
,
among
other
BB.
Aper
a
Presbyter
subscribed
thereunto
for
his
B.
vsing
these
words
:
[
l
](A20733-e117020-b)
l
Ambros.
Epist.
81.
Exiussudomini
Episcopi
Geminiani
,
at
the
commandement
of
my
L.
B.
Geminianus
.
And
this
was
the
vsuall
stile
which
Presbyters
did
vse
when
they
did
subscribe
to
Councels
instead
of
their
B.
whose
place
they
supplied
.
As
to
the
Councell
of
Arles
,
[
m
](A20733-e117050-b)
m
Conc.
Arelat.
3.
Desiderius
Presbyter
directus
à
Domino
meo
Ioanne
Episcopo
,
directed
from
my
Lord
Iohn
the
B.
haue
giuen
my
consent
,
and
subscribed
:
and
so
three
others
there
mentioned
;
&
in
like
maner
to
diuers
other
[
n
](A20733-e117080-b)
n
Turonens
.
1.
Epaunens
.
Valent.
Aurelian
.
3.
Toleta
.
3.
&c.
Councels
.
Whosoeuer
will
peruse
the
Acts
of
the
great
Councell
of
Chalcedon
,
hee
shall
seldome
read
any
B.
mentioned
without
some
title
of
great
reuerence
and
honour
;
as
reuerendissimus
,
sanctissimus
.
And
long
before
that
,
Socrates
[
o
](A20733-e117150-b)
o
Socr.
hist.
l.
6.
in
prooem
.
acknowledgeth
,
that
it
was
the
vsuall
manner
in
his
time
,
not
to
speake
of
BB.
without
titles
of
great
honour
,
calling
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
most
religious
,
most
holy
,
or
such
like
.
And
[
p
](A20733-e117200-b)
p
Chrys.
in
Ps.
13.
apud
Caes.
Baron
.
an.
58.2
.
Chrysostome
saith
plainly
,
that
Heretikes
haue
learned
of
the
Diuell
,
not
to
giue
due
titles
of
honour
to
Bishops
.
But
where
hee
findeth
fault
with
them
,
for
that
in
stead
of
those
titles
which
argue
their
authoritie
,
they
said
,
your
reuerence
,
your
wisedome
,
and
such
like
;
what
would
hee
haue
said
to
the
tearmes
that
haue
beene
vsually
giuen
to
our
Bishops
by
the
Disciplinarians
among
vs
?
I
say
,
among
vs
:
for
Caluin
,
Beza
,
and
others
,
when
they
haue
had
occasion
to
write
to
our
Bishops
,
haue
not
refused
to
giue
them
their
titles
of
honour
.
To
omit
the
rest
,
Caluin
[
q
](A20733-e117280-b)
q
Epist.
Caluin
.
ad
Cranmer
.
writing
to
Archbishop
Cranmer
,
vseth
these
titles
,
Illustrissime
Domine
,
Ornatissime
&
clarissime
Praesul
,
&c.
Zanchius
[
r
](A20733-e117320-b)
r
Epist.
Dedic
.
l.
de
3.
Elohius
.
to
Bishop
Grindall
,
Reuerendissime
Antistes
.
Beza
[
s
](A20733-e117360-b)
s
Suru
.
131.
Septemb.
15.
1589.
and
Sadeel
to
Archbishop
Whitgift
,
Reuerendissimo
viro
,
&
in
Christo
Patri
,
Domino
Archiepiscopo
Cantuariensi
,
serenissimae
Reginae
Consiliario
,
&
totius
Angliae
Primati
,
&c.
His
second
answer
containeth
two
things
:
the
former
,
that
the
title
of
Angels
which
the
holy
Ghost
giueth
to
BB.
(
for
that
onely
J
mentioned
)
is
quite
besides
the
purpose
,
my
argument
being
this
:
The
holy
Ghost
giueth
BB.
a
more
honourable
title
,
in
calling
them
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
then
if
he
had
called
them
Lords
.
Therefore
wee
should
not
thinke
much
that
they
are
called
Lords
.
He
answereth
:
The
Angels
are
glorious
creatures
of
heauen
,
and
haue
some
fit
resemblance
of
the
Ministers
office
:
Lord
,
Lordship
,
and
grace
,
are
tearmes
of
ciuill
honour
,
not
so
well
befitting
the
Ministers
of
Christ
Iesus
.
I
confesse
they
doe
not
so
well
befit
them
,
because
they
come
short
of
that
honour
and
excellencie
,
which
in
the
name
of
Angels
the
holy
Ghost
ascribeth
to
them
.
For
they
are
called
not
only
Angels
,
that
is
,
messengers
and
ambassadours
of
God
,
as
all
ministers
are
,
in
respect
of
their
ministerie
;
but
also
each
of
them
is
called
the
Angell
of
the
Church
,
whereof
he
is
B.
in
respect
of
his
gouernment
,
and
gardianship
of
the
Church
:
as
the
holy
Angels
of
God
are
said
to
be
their
Angels
,
ouer
whom
they
are
appointed
Gouernours
,
and
gardians
.
Therefore
the
name
Lord
giuen
to
them
in
respect
of
their
gouernment
and
authoritie
,
is
a
title
of
lesse
honour
,
then
that
which
in
the
same
respect
is
giuen
them
by
our
Sauiour
Christ
.
Neither
are
they
therefore
ciuill
Lords
,
because
they
haue
that
title
of
Lords
common
to
them
with
the
Lords
temporall
.
For
who
knoweth
not
the
distinction
betweene
the
Lords
spirituall
and
temporall
,
so
often
mentioned
in
the
Acts
of
Parliament
?
And
whereas
in
the
second
place
hee
would
insinuate
,
that
our
Sauiour
Christ
expresly
forbiddeth
these
titles
of
Lordship
and
grace
,
Luc.
22.
where
though
hee
readeth
thus
,
[
t
](A20733-e117520-b)
t
Luc.
22.26
.
The
Kings
of
the
Gentiles
reigne
ouer
them
,
and
they
that
beare
rule
ouer
them
,
are
called
gracious
Lords
;
but
you
shall
not
bee
so
:
yet
he
is
not
so
ignorant
of
the
Greeke
tongue
,
as
not
to
know
,
that
neither
gratious
nor
Lords
are
there
mentioned
in
the
originall
text
.
That
was
an
affectionate
translation
of
those
,
who
were
too
partiall
in
this
cause
.
That
very
title
,
which
our
Sauiour
speaketh
of
,
two
of
the
Ptolemies
,
Kings
of
Aegypt
,
did
assume
vnto
themselues
,
either
of
them
being
called
Ptolomeus
Euergetes
,
Ptolemy
the
bountifull
or
benefactor
.
But
indeed
in
the
language
,
wherein
our
Sauiour
spake
,
the
word
[
u
](A20733-e117580-b)
u
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Nedibim
.
which
is
translated
Benefactors
,
is
often
vsed
for
Principes
or
Heroes
,
as
Psa.
118.9
.
It
is
better
to
trust
in
the
Lord
,
then
to
put
our
trust
in
Princes
.
And
that
seemeth
to
haue
beene
Lukes
meaning
,
as
not
only
Merceru●
[
*
](A20733-e117670-b)
*
In
Pagnia
.
thesaur
.
but
Beza
[
x
](A20733-e117700-b)
x
In
Luc.
22.26
.
also
supposeth
.
The
70.
translate
the
word
,
Prou.
19.6
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
King
;
in
Psal.
118
9.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
Princes
.
So
Psal.
47.10.83.12.113.7
.
But
1.
Sam.
2.8
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Pro.
8.16
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
It
is
also
plaine
,
that
the
disciples
imagining
that
Christ
should
be
a
worldlie
Monarch
,
expected
,
that
themselues
should
be
earthly
Princes
,
in
great
authoritie
about
him
,
euery
one
affecting
a
neerer
place
about
him
then
his
fellowes
,
as
appeareth
by
the
two
sonnes
of
Zebede
,
whose
ambitious
suite
to
Christ
,
that
they
might
sit
one
on
his
right
hand
,
and
the
other
on
his
left
in
his
kingdome
,
gaue
occasion
of
this
speech
,
as
Matthew
[
y
](A20733-e117850-b)
y
Matt.
20.20
▪
25.
noteth
.
Whereas
therefore
they
both
erred
in
their
imagination
,
thinking
that
they
should
be
great
Princes
vnder
an
earthly
Monarch
,
and
were
corrupt
in
their
affection
,
each
one
of
them
ambitiously
seeking
superioritie
ouer
the
rest
,
our
Sauiour
seeketh
to
reforme
both
,
telling
them
that
neither
they
should
bee
earthly
Princes
,
as
they
imagined
,
in
these
words
,
But
you
not
so
;
neither
ought
they
to
affect
ambitiously
superioritie
ouer
others
,
but
that
by
how
much
they
should
exceed
others
in
dignitie
,
they
should
labor
by
so
much
the
more
to
excell
them
in
humility
,
imitating
his
example
.
Neither
did
our
Sauiour
Christ
interdict
his
Apostles
,
either
superioritie
of
authority
ouer
others
,
or
titles
of
eminent
honour
.
The
authoritie
and
dignitie
of
being
his
Apostles
,
is
greater
then
any
,
either
honour
or
title
,
that
is
giuen
to
our
BB.
Ierome
[
z
](A20733-e117880-b)
z
Hier.
in
Tit.
1.
writing
on
Pauls
stile
which
he
assumeth
to
himselfe
,
Tit.
1.1
.
saith
,
Where
hee
calleth
himselfe
the
Apostle
of
Iesu
Christ
,
it
seemeth
some
such
thing
as
of
hee
had
said
,
Pr●fectus
pr●terio
Augusti
Caesaris
,
Magister
exercitus
Tiberij
Imperatoris
.
For
euen
as
the
Iudges
of
this
world
,
that
they
may
seeme
the
more
noble
,
take
names
from
the
Kings
whom
they
serue
and
from
the
dignitie
wherewith
they
are
puffed
vp
,
euen
so
the
Apostle
challenging
to
himselfe
great
authoritie
among
Christians
,
he
signified
before
hand
that
he
was
the
Apostle
of
Christ
,
that
by
the
authoritie
of
the
name
bee
might
bring
in
awe
those
that
should
reade
,
shewing
thereby
,
that
all
which
beleeue
in
Christ
,
must
be
subiect
to
him
.
we
call
not
Shepheards
nor
Fathers
Lords
,
and
therefore
the
paternall
or
pastorall
authoritie
of
Bishops
doth
not
make
them
capable
of
such
Lordly
titles
.
J
answer
,
that
Magistrates
,
yea
Princes
,
both
in
Scriptures
and
prophane
Writers
,
are
called
Pastors
,
as
well
as
Bishops
,
and
for
the
same
cause
are
Lords
.
Neither
doe
I
doubt
,
but
that
the
title
of
Father
,
being
giuen
by
way
of
honour
to
him
that
is
not
a
naturall
Father
,
is
a
word
of
as
great
honour
at
the
least
,
as
Lord
:
and
that
is
the
signification
of
the
name
Papa
,
which
hauing
beene
giuen
in
the
Primitiue
Church
to
all
Bishops
,
as
a
title
of
eminent
honour
,
is
for
that
cause
by
the
Pope
of
Rome
appropriated
to
himselfe
.
The
second
,
there
is
too
great
oddes
betweene
the
titles
of
Bishops
and
other
Ministers
,
the
one
being
called
Masters
,
the
other
Lords
.
I
answered
,
there
is
no
such
great
difference
betweene
Master
and
Lord
,
that
inferiour
Minister
,
which
assume
to
themselues
the
title
of
Master
,
should
denie
the
title
of
Lord
to
Bishops
.
Hee
replieth
,
as
conceiuing
my
speech
simply
,
that
there
was
no
great
difference
betweene
Master
and
Lord
.
If
you
respect
their
vse
in
relation
,
as
they
are
referred
to
their
correlatiues
,
there
is
no
difference
;
if
the
vse
,
without
relation
among
vs
,
there
is
great
difference
;
but
yet
not
so
great
,
as
that
Ministers
which
assume
the
one
to
themselues
,
should
denie
the
other
to
Bishops
,
there
being
as
great
difference
betwixt
their
degrees
,
as
their
titles
.
Where
he
saith
,
it
is
not
assumed
,
but
giuen
by
custome
to
them
,
as
Masters
of
Arts
;
both
parts
are
false
:
for
both
it
is
giuen
to
all
Ministers
,
as
they
are
Ministers
,
though
not
Masters
of
Arts
,
though
not
graduates
;
and
also
I
especially
meant
certaine
Ministers
,
who
not
enduring
the
title
of
Lord
to
be
giuen
to
Bishops
,
will
neither
tell
you
their
name
by
speech
,
nor
set
it
downe
in
writing
,
without
the
preface
of
Mastership
.
The
third
,
if
Bishops
bee
called
Lords
,
then
are
they
Lords
of
the
Church
.
I
answered
,
it
followeth
no
more
that
they
are
therefore
Lords
of
the
Church
,
because
they
are
called
Lords
,
then
the
Ministers
are
Masters
of
the
Church
,
because
they
are
called
Masters
:
for
neither
of
these
titles
is
giuen
to
them
with
relation
,
but
as
simple
titles
of
honour
and
reuerence
.
No
?
saith
he
,
let
their
stiles
speake
,
Lord
of
Hath
and
Welles
,
Lord
of
Rochester
,
&c.
What
?
Lord
of
the
Cities
?
nothing
lesse
,
but
Lords
of
the
Diocese
.
They
are
Lords
of
neither
,
but
Lord
BB.
both
of
the
City
and
Diocese
.
And
the
relation
is
not
in
the
word
Lord
,
but
in
the
word
Bishop
,
though
it
bee
not
expressed
alwaies
,
but
many
times
is
vnderstood
.
The
Refuter
hauing
thus
weakly
,
Ad
pag.
107.
friuolously
,
and
fondlie
shifted
off
my
arguments
and
testimonies
,
rather
then
lie
shifted
off
my
arguments
and
testimonies
,
rather
then
answered
them
,
there
being
not
one
line
in
my
Sermon
hitherto
,
which
I
haue
not
defended
with
euidence
of
truth
against
his
cauillations
;
notwithstanding
,
concludeth
with
a
most
insolent
bragge
,
as
if
he
had
(
as
his
fauourites
giue
out
)
laid
me
on
my
backe
.
And
therefore
as
some
wrestlers
,
after
they
haue
giuen
one
the
foile
,
will
iet
with
their
hands
vnder
their
side
,
challenging
all
others
;
euen
so
he
,
hauing
in
his
weake
conceit
giuen
me
a
strong
ouerthrow
,
because
he
findeth
me
too
weake
to
stand
in
his
armes
,
hee
challengeth
all
commers
,
saying
,
Let
him
that
thinketh
he
can
say
more
,
supplie
his
default
.
I
do
vnfainedly
confesse
,
there
be
a
great
number
in
this
Land
(
blessed
be
God
)
who
are
able
to
say
much
more
in
this
cause
then
I
am
:
notwithstanding
,
a
stronger
propugner
thereof
shall
not
neede
against
this
oppugner
.
And
because
I
am
assured
in
my
conscience
of
the
truth
and
goodnesse
of
the
cause
,
I
promise
the
Refuter
,
if
this
which
now
I
haue
written
,
will
not
conuince
him
,
as
I
hope
it
will
;
whiles
he
will
deale
as
a
Disputer
,
and
not
as
a
Libeller
,
I
will
neuer
giue
him
ouer
(
God
giuing
me
life
and
health
)
vntill
I
haue
vtterly
put
him
to
silence
.
In
the
meane
time
,
let
the
Reader
looke
backe
to
that
which
hath
beene
said
on
both
sides
:
let
him
call
to
minde
,
if
he
can
,
what
one
proofe
this
Refuter
hath
brought
for
the
paritie
of
Ministers
;
what
one
sound
answer
he
hath
giuen
to
any
one
argument
,
or
testimonie
to
my
one
proposition
or
assumption
which
I
haue
produced
;
and
then
let
him
consider
whether
this
glorious
insultation
proceeded
not
from
an
euill
conscience
,
to
a
worse
purpose
,
which
is
,
to
retaine
the
simple
seduced
people
in
their
former
tearmes
of
factiousnes
.
THE
FOVRTH
BOOKE
,
Maintayning
the
fift
point
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
and
diuine
Institution
.
The
I.
CHAPTER
:
Prouing
the
Episcopall
function
to
be
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
because
it
was
generally
receiued
in
the
first
300.
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
.
Serm.
pag.
54.
&c.
to
page
55.
li.
7.
THE
Refuter
finding
himselfe
vnable
to
confute
this
discourse
of
the
lawfulnesse
of
the
BB.
calling
,
would
faine
perswade
his
Reader
that
it
is
needlesse
;
moued
,
and
mouing
thereto
by
as
friuolous
reasons
as
euer
were
heard
of
.
For
though
it
be
true
,
that
this
point
hath
already
beene
proued
by
one
argument
,
is
it
therefore
needlesse
to
confirme
the
same
by
a
second
?
Did
euer
any
man
meete
with
such
a
captious
trifler
,
as
would
not
permit
a
man
to
proue
the
same
truth
by
two
arguments
,
but
the
one
must
straight
be
reiected
as
needlesse
?
but
indeed
his
analysis
was
forced
;
as
he
could
not
but
discerne
,
both
by
the
distribution
of
the
Sermon
page
2.
and
also
by
the
transition
here
vsed
,
neither
was
this
point
handled
before
,
but
the
former
assertion
,
whereby
the
text
was
explicated
;
that
the
Angels
or
Bishops
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
diocesan
Bishops
,
and
such
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
,
as
ours
be
,
superiour
to
other
ministers
in
degree
,
&c.
This
which
now
wee
are
to
handle
,
is
the
second
assertion
,
being
a
doctrine
gathered
out
of
the
text
,
so
explicated
.
I
confesse
the
former
doth
proue
the
latter
;
and
that
doth
commend
the
methode
of
my
Sermon
,
and
both
being
disposed
together
may
make
this
Enthymeme
.
The
Pastors
or
gouernours
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
here
meant
by
the
Angels
,
were
diocesan
Bishops
,
and
such
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
,
as
ours
be
.
Therefore
the
calling
of
such
diocesan
Bishops
as
ours
be
,
is
lawfull
.
But
I
contented
not
my selfe
with
collecting
the
doctrine
out
of
the
text
,
but
as
the
manner
of
all
preachers
is
,
when
they
haue
collected
a
doctrine
,
which
is
controuersall
;
I
thought
it
needfull
to
proue
,
and
to
confirme
the
same
with
other
arguments
.
But
other
arguments
,
saith
he
,
needed
not
,
if
the
three
middle
points
were
sufficiently
cleared
:
what
will
he
assume
?
but
the
three
former
points
were
sufficiently
cleared
?
therefore
as
the
first
point
was
bootlesse
,
so
this
last
is
needlesse
.
If
he
like
not
of
this
assumption
,
he
cannot
make
this
conclusion
,
which
notwithstanding
he
maketh
:
if
he
will
assume
,
that
they
were
not
sufficientlie
cleared
,
as
he
hath
borne
the
reader
in
hand
all
this
while
,
then
he
must
needs
conclude
against
himselfe
,
that
therefore
these
other
arguments
were
needfull
.
The
truth
is
,
though
the
former
points
were
so
sufficientlie
cleared
,
as
that
the
refuter
had
nothing
,
whereby
to
auoid
the
euident
truth
thereof
conuicting
his
conscience
,
but
beggerly
shifts
and
sophisticall
euasions
;
notwithstanding
,
for
so
much
as
some
of
them
,
with
whom
I
had
to
deale
,
are
so
lead
with
a
spirit
of
contradiction
,
as
if
they
were
in
the
contradiction
of
Chore
,
(
the
Lord
open
their
eyes
and
turne
their
hearts
)
I
therefore
thought
it
needfull
,
for
the
more
full
conuiction
of
the
gainesayers
,
to
confirme
by
other
arguments
the
doctrine
which
I
collected
out
of
the
text
.
But
where
I
had
beene
to
blame
for
not
setting
downe
this
collection
plainely
(
were
it
not
a
point
of
Art
sometimes
to
conceale
Art
)
the
reader
is
to
coy
the
refuters
head
,
for
making
so
plaine
a
collection
for
his
own
conuiction
,
&
as
they
say
,
for
gathering
a
rod
for
his
own
taile
.
The
collection
being
reduced
into
a
sillogism
standeth
thus
.
The
calling
of
such
as
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
is
lawfull
and
good
;
Diocesan
BB.
such
as
our
be
,
are
here
meant
by
the
Angels
.
Therefore
the
calling
of
Diocesan
BB.
such
as
ours
are
,
is
lawfull
and
good
.
The
proposition
is
such
as
no
man
of
vnderstanding
or
conscience
will
make
question
of
,
saith
the
refuter
,
we
aske
no
more
,
but
to
haue
this
assumption
confirmed
,
that
the
Angels
were
such
,
and
then
you
shall
not
need
other
arguments
to
proue
this
conclusion
.
But
the
assumption
say
I
,
is
that
which
in
the
Sermon
,
and
in
this
defence
thereof
hitherto
hath
beene
proued
:
how
sufficiently
I
referre
to
the
reader
,
and
I
appeale
to
the
refuter
.
This
therefore
may
stand
for
the
first
argument
.
I
proceed
to
that
which
was
expressed
in
the
Sermon
,
omitting
what
else
he
hath
in
this
section
as
being
either
refuted
before
,
or
vnworthy
to
be
mentioned
now
.
Serm.
Sect.
2.
pag.
55.
&c.
to
pag
56.
l.
1.
All
the
question
,
saith
he
,
of
the
lawfulnesse
had
beene
ended
before
this
time
,
if
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
had
beene
proued
to
be
such
BB.
But
say
I
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
were
the
BB.
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
who
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
were
proued
to
be
such
,
and
those
proofes
in
this
defence
haue
hitherto
beene
confirmed
in
such
sort
as
I
hope
the
refuter
will
acknowledge
himselfe
to
be
satisfied
:
Ad
pag.
109.
if
not
,
yet
it
is
but
folly
to
multiply
words
concerning
the
proofes
of
the
former
assertion
:
for
they
must
stand
,
vntill
the
refuter
or
some
other
of
more
strength
shall
take
vpon
him
to
assaile
them
:
And
I
doubt
not
,
but
they
will
stand
after
they
haue
beene
assailed
.
My
argument
therefore
standeth
thus
:
What
function
hath
diuine
institution
and
approbation
is
lawfull
and
good
.
The
function
of
BB.
such
as
were
described
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
,
hath
diuine
institution
,
as
being
Angels
sent
of
God
,
and
approbation
,
as
being
Starres
which
Christ
holdeth
in
his
right
hand
.
Therefore
the
function
of
such
BB.
is
lawfull
and
good
.
To
the
assumption
he
hath
nothing
to
answere
,
besides
the
bare
deny
all
thereof
,
but
that
which
already
he
hath
repeated
three
or
foure
times
since
he
entred
into
this
fift
point
:
that
diocesan
BB.
are
not
meant
by
the
Angels
and
Starres
,
and
chargeth
me
,
as
though
I
thought
it
enough
to
affirme
it
,
&
would
haue
my
readers
to
take
it
vpon
my
bare
word
:
when
the
thing
which
I
haue
proued
hitherto
hath
beene
only
this
,
that
the
Angels
or
BB.
of
the
primitiue
Church
were
such
as
in
the
former
assertion
wer
described
.
But
the
assumption
I
proue
in
the
residue
of
the
sermon
,
first
by
consequence
,
&
then
directly
.
By
consequence
,
in
the
next
section
.
Ad
pag.
110.
That
the
function
of
such
BB.
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
Serm.
Sect.
3.
pag.
56.
for
what
function
or
gouernment
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
that
is
to
be
acknowledged
a
diuine
ordinance
(
in
respect
of
the
first
institution
,
as
hauing
God
the
author
thereof
.
)
The
Episcopall
function
,
or
gouernment
by
BB.
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
Therefore
it
is
a
diuine
ordinance
,
&c.
to
pag.
61.
l.
2.
The
proposition
is
acknowledged
not
onely
by
Beza
,
[
a
](A20733-e118840-b)
a
De
grad.
c.
23.
who
saith
,
if
it
proceeded
from
the
Apostles
,
I
would
be
bold
to
ascribe
it
wholy
,
as
all
other
Apostolicall
ordinances
,
to
the
institution
of
God
,
but
also
by
the
refuter
himselfe
:
as
needing
no
proofe
.
The
assumption
I
proued
by
three
arguments
:
wherein
I
proceeded
as
it
were
by
degrees
:
two
whereof
,
saith
the
refuter
,
are
needlesse
;
as
if
still
he
held
it
superfluous
to
bring
more
arguments
then
one
.
I
confesse
,
that
any
one
of
these
cords
are
strong
enough
to
bind
a
stronger
man
,
then
this
refuter
;
yet
I
thought
it
not
needlesse
to
vse
three
,
knowing
that
,
as
Salomon
saith
,
a
three-fold
cord
is
not
easily
broken
.
The
first
of
the
three
I
thus
propounded
:
That
gouernment
which
was
generally
and
perpetually
vsed
in
all
Christian
Churches
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
,
and
was
not
ordayned
by
generall
Councils
,
was
vndoubtedly
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
This
proposition
I
proued
,
first
by
two
testimonies
of
Augustine
,
[
b
](A20733-e118950-b)
b
De
Baptisme
.
cont.
Donat.
l.
4.
c.
24
&
Epi.
118.
whereunto
might
be
added
the
like
testimonies
out
of
Tertulian
,
[
c
](A20733-e119000-b)
c
De
praescript
.
aduers.
haeres
.
&
con
.
Marc.
l.
4.
Constatid
ab
Apostolis
traditum
,
quod
apud
Ecclesias
Apostolorum
fuerit
sacrosanctum
.
T.
C.
[
d
](A20733-e119030-b)
d
Lib.
2.
pag.
2.
saith
,
the
example
of
the
Apostles
and
generall
practise
of
the
Church
vnder
their
gouernment
,
euen
without
a
commandement
draweth
a
necessitie
.
Secondly
,
By
reason
,
shewing
,
that
both
it
is
incredible
,
that
all
the
godly
Fathers
and
Christian
Churches
would
abolish
that
gouernment
which
was
ordayned
by
Christ
and
his
Apostles
:
and
also
impossible
,
that
a
gouernment
not
receiued
from
the
Apostles
,
nor
ordained
by
Councils
,
should
at
once
be
set
vp
in
all
parts
of
the
Christian
world
.
But
the
refuter
saith
,
Ad
pag.
111.
I
did
not
need
to
proue
the
proposition
:
for
though
such
a
change
might
be
possible
,
yet
it
is
so
vnlikly
that
it
is
against
both
Christianity
&
ciuility
to
suspect
,
that
there
was
any
such
:
for
which
grant
,
(
though
he
could
doe
no
other
)
I
thinke
my selfe
as
much
beholding
to
him
,
as
if
he
had
granted
the
cause
.
But
thereupon
(
saith
he
)
we
may
boldly
inferre
,
that
if
in
the
Apostles
times
the
gouernment
was
in
the
hands
of
the
presbitery
,
it
continued
in
the
Church
along
time
after
their
decease
:
from
which
proposition
I
may
boldly
and
truely
assume
&
conclude
;
that
after
the
Apostles
times
the
gouernment
was
not
in
the
hands
of
such
presbiteries
,
as
the
disciplinarians
speake
of
;
therefore
neither
in
the
Apostles
times
.
The
assumption
consisteth
of
two
parts
,
the
former
that
the
gouernment
of
the
Churches
by
such
BB.
was
generally
and
perpetually
vsed
in
all
Christian
Churches
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
;
the
latter
,
and
was
not
ordained
by
generall
Councils
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
,
Therefore
the
consequent
.
He
maketh
a
doubt
of
the
proposition
:
because
he
hath
not
learned
,
that
speeches
in
disputation
indefinitly
propounded
are
generally
to
be
vnderstood
for
auoiding
of
clenches
:
and
therefore
when
I
say
the
Angels
or
gouernours
,
I
meane
all
the
Angels
or
gouernours
;
when
I
say
in
the
three
hundred
yeers
,
I
meane
throughout
that
terme
:
euen
from
the
death
of
Saint
Iohn
,
to
the
end
of
the
foure
hundred
yeere
after
the
incarnation
of
Christ
.
The
assumption
hath
beene
proued
at
large
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
and
in
this
defence
thereof
:
first
by
this
disiunction
,
either
the
Churches
after
the
Apostles
time
were
gouerned
by
diocesan
BB.
as
we
say
,
or
by
presbiteries
,
consisting
for
the
most
part
of
Lay-elders
,
as
the
disciplinarians
hold
.
But
neuer
by
such
presbiteries
.
Therefore
euer
by
BB.
Secondly
,
I
haue
proued
that
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
,
the
Churches
haue
been
dioceses
and
the
BB.
diocesans
,
superiour
to
other
ministers
in
degree
,
hauing
singularity
of
preeminence
during
life
,
and
majoritie
of
power
in
respect
both
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
:
his
answere
is
,
that
he
hath
answered
those
points
of
my
Sermon
,
where
he
hath
shewed
that
I
proued
no
such
matter
:
whereunto
I
reply
,
Ad
pag.
112.
that
all
his
answeres
were
but
shifts
and
euasions
,
and
stand
fully
confuted
.
But
perhaps
the
refuter
will
say
;
if
I
had
vnderstood
your
proposition
as
vttered
in
generall
termes
,
as
now
it
is
expounded
by
you
;
then
I
would
haue
taken
the
same
exception
against
the
proofe
of
the
assumption
,
which
I
did
against
your
proposition
:
for
although
in
some
part
of
that
time
some
BB.
were
perhaps
,
such
as
you
described
;
yet
it
followeth
not
▪
that
generally
and
perpetually
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
they
were
such
.
That
they
were
generally
such
in
the
last
of
the
three
hundred
yeeres
,
which
is
the
fourth
century
after
Christ
,
it
thing
most
fully
testified
,
and
most
manifestly
proued
in
the
proofe
of
the
former
points
,
and
hath
been
confessed
by
the
refuter
:
neither
can
be
denyed
of
any
man
,
who
hath
any
sound
learning
,
ioyned
with
a
good
conscience
.
Let
vs
then
consider
,
when
such
BB.
had
their
beginning
.
Perhaps
some
will
say
,
they
began
with
Constantine
,
for
then
was
the
greatest
alteration
in
the
state
of
the
Church
.
I
answere
,
the
alteration
was
in
respect
of
outward
peace
and
prosperitie
,
wherewith
God
blessed
his
Church
,
not
in
the
discipline
or
doctrin
of
the
Church
:
in
respect
of
the
wealth
,
and
better
maintenance
of
the
BB.
not
in
the
substance
of
their
calling
.
It
is
euident
that
BB.
were
diocesan
before
they
were
actually
Metropolitanes
;
and
Metropolitanes
,
before
they
were
Patriarches
:
for
of
the
combination
of
dioceses
,
did
follow
Metropolitanes
;
and
vpon
the
consociation
of
prouinces
,
were
Patriarches
ordayned
,
and
yet
long
before
the
Councill
of
Nice
[
f
](A20733-e119320-b)
f
Con.
Nic.
c.
6.
the
Patriarches
were
in
vse
,
and
the
customes
of
subiecting
diuerse
prouinces
to
them
,
are
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
ancient
customes
.
In
the
same
canon
it
was
also
decreed
,
that
the
priuiledges
or
prerogatiues
of
Churches
,
meaning
especially
the
priuiledges
of
being
mother
Churches
,
should
be
reserued
to
them
:
which
priuiledge
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
,
belonged
to
them
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
.
When
the
B.
of
Antioch
attempted
to
ordaine
the
Metropolitane
of
Cyprus
,
the
BB.
of
Cyprus
complaine
to
the
Councill
of
Ephesus
,
alledging
that
euer
since
the
Apostles
,
the
Metropolitane
B.
of
Constantia
was
ordained
by
the
Synode
of
the
prouinciall
BB.
whereupon
the
Councill
[
g
](A20733-e119410-b)
g
Conc.
Ephe.
post
aduentum
Episcoporum
Cypri
.
not
onely
censured
the
attempt
of
the
B.
of
Antioch
as
an
innouation
contrarie
to
the
rules
of
the
Apostles
;
but
also
determineth
,
first
,
that
no
B.
should
haue
to
doe
with
any
countrey
or
prouince
which
had
not
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
euer
from
the
beginning
belonged
to
his
See
:
and
secondly
that
euery
prouince
within
it selfe
should
retayne
inuiolable
such
rights
as
they
had
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
euer
from
the
beginning
according
to
the
custome
receiued
of
old
.
If
therefore
Metropolitanes
and
Patriarches
were
in
vse
long
before
Constantines
time
,
who
can
doubt
but
diocesan
BB.
were
much
more
?
Long
since
saith
Cyprian
,
[
h
](A20733-e119510-b)
h
Cyp.
lib.
4.
epi.
2
in
all
prouinces
and
in
all
cities
BB.
are
ordained
,
in
age
ancient
,
sound
in
faith
,
tryed
in
affliction
,
&c.
in
Prouinces
,
Metropolitanes
,
such
as
himselfe
was
;
in
Cities
,
diocesans
.
Alexander
Euaristus
in
the
Bishopricke
of
Rome
;
he
testifieth
,
[
i
](A20733-e119640-b)
i
Eus.
hist.
l.
4.
c.
1.
&
2.
that
in
those
times
both
the
doctrine
[
k
](A20733-e119690-b)
k
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
of
Christ
and
his
Church
did
flourish
dayly
more
and
more
.
Likewise
in
the
time
of
Adrian
he
testifieth
both
that
the
[
l
](A20733-e119730-b)
l
c.
6
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Churches
shined
in
all
places
of
the
world
like
most
glorious
lights
,
and
the
faith
of
Christ
in
all
nations
flourished
.
And
in
the
same
book
,
[
m
](A20733-e119760-b)
m
lib.
4.
c.
19.20.21.22
.
after
he
had
noted
the
succession
of
the
BB.
of
Rome
,
Alexandria
,
Antioch
,
shewing
how
Soter
succeeded
Anicetus
at
Rome
,
Agrippinus
Celadion
at
Alexandria
,
Theophilus
Heros
who
had
succeeded
Cornelius
,
and
he
Heron
at
Antioch
,
and
hauing
mentioned
some
other
famous
BB.
as
Dionysius
of
Corinth
,
and
Pinytus
of
Candy
,
Philippe
,
Apollinaris
,
Melita
,
Musanus
,
Modestus
,
and
Irenaeus
,
he
saith
,
that
Hegesippus
flourished
at
the
same
time
,
[
n
](A20733-e119900-b)
n
An.
8.
Antoni
.
Christi
169.
whose
testimonie
of
the
estate
of
the
Church
in
his
time
he
hath
recorded
,
to
this
effect
,
[
o
](A20733-e119930-b)
o
Eus.
l.
4.
c.
22.
that
iourneying
toward
Rome
,
in
many
places
he
had
conference
with
the
BB.
all
which
he
found
to
be
teachers
of
one
and
the
same
doctrine
:
and
hauing
spoken
of
the
Epistle
of
Clemens
to
the
Corinthians
,
he
giueth
this
testimony
to
the
Church
of
Corinth
in
particular
,
that
it
had
continued
in
the
right
faith
vntill
that
time
,
when
hee
comming
to
Corinth
,
saw
Primus
the
B.
with
whom
he
conuersed
there
a
good
while
,
reioycing
together
in
the
true
faith
.
But
when
I
came
to
Rome
,
saith
he
,
I
continued
with
Anicetus
,
whose
Deacon
Eleutherius
was
:
but
Soter
succeeded
Anicetus
,
and
after
him
Eleutherius
was
B.
Now
,
saith
he
,
in
euery
succession
and
in
euery
city
all
things
stood
as
the
law
preacheth
,
and
as
the
Prophets
,
and
as
our
Lord
.
And
afterwards
speaking
of
the
heresies
which
did
spring
in
his
time
;
after
that
Iames
,
saith
he
,
surnamed
the
Iust
,
had
suffered
Martyrdome
,
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
is
made
B.
whom
all
men
preferred
for
this
cause
,
because
he
was
the
Lords
cousin
:
wherefore
they
called
the
Church
a
Virgin
;
for
as
yet
she
had
not
been
corrupted
with
vaine
doctrines
:
but
Thebulis
because
he
was
not
made
B.
began
to
corrupt
it
,
being
the
broacher
of
one
of
the
seauen
heresies
which
were
in
the
people
.
So
much
of
the
first
argument
.
before
[
p
](A20733-e120180-b)
p
Hier.
in
.
Tit.
that
by
the
instinct
of
the
deuill
,
factions
began
in
the
Church
,
and
it
was
said
among
the
people
,
I
am
of
Paul
,
I
〈◊〉
of
Apollos
,
I
am
of
Cephus
,
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
presbyters
:
The
1.
but
when
euery
one
accounted
those
for
his
whom
he
had
baptised
,
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
,
that
one
being
chosen
from
the
presbiters
,
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
in
euery
Church
,
vnto
whom
the
care
of
that
whole
Church
or
diocese
should
appertaine
,
and
that
the
seeds
of
schismes
might
be
taken
away
.
For
full
answer
to
this
testimony
,
he
referreth
vs
to
another
place
;
and
when
he
commeth
thither
,
I
doubt
he
will
not
say
much
to
the
purpose
.
In
the
meanetime
,
he
answereth
first
,
to
the
testimony
itselfe
,
and
then
to
my
inference
out
of
it
:
to
the
testimony
he
answereth
,
that
Ierome
maketh
the
beginning
of
this
constitution
of
BB.
not
in
the
Apostles
times
,
nor
in
the
times
immediatly
succeeding
the
Apostles
.
Not
the
former
because
otherwhere
he
saith
that
BB.
were
superiour
to
presbiters
rather
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
,
then
any
ordinance
of
God
.
Whereto
I
answer
,
that
custome
himselfe
calleth
[
q
](A20733-e120250-b)
q
Ad.
Euagr.
an
Apostolicall
tradition
:
and
else
where
most
plainely
and
fully
testifieth
in
many
places
(
some
whereof
are
noted
in
the
Sermon
)
both
that
BB.
were
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
also
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
themselues
.
Not
the
latter
,
because
it
is
,
as
I
had
told
him
,
against
the
modest
charitie
of
a
Christian
to
imagine
,
that
all
the
Church
would
conspire
at
once
to
thrust
out
the
gouernment
established
by
the
Apostles
,
and
insteed
thereof
to
bring
in
another
of
their
owne
.
But
say
I
,
it
is
most
manifest
,
that
BB.
were
placed
in
all
Churches
in
the
next
age
to
the
Apostles
:
and
therefore
he
must
either
grant
,
that
the
Apostolicall
Churches
receiued
this
gouernment
from
the
Apostles
,
or
else
confesse
(
according
to
his
vsuall
modesty
in
setting
light
by
the
testimony
of
all
antiquitie
,
)
that
all
Churches
conspired
to
alter
the
gouernment
which
the
Apostles
had
established
.
But
of
his
modestie
I
would
know
,
when
he
thinketh
this
gouernment
by
BB.
began
;
and
whether
he
must
not
be
forced
of
necessity
,
either
to
lay
that
foule
imputation
vpon
all
the
ancient
Churches
,
on
all
the
godly
Fathers
and
blessed
Martyrs
;
or
to
yeeld
that
they
had
receiued
this
forme
of
gouernment
from
the
Apostles
.
My
inference
also
he
denyeth
.
When
as
not
withstanding
the
allegation
giueth
full
testimonie
to
the
generality
,
saying
,
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
:
and
of
the
perpetuity
there
can
be
no
question
,
if
the
beginning
were
not
latter
then
I
intended
.
But
it
is
plaine
,
that
by
Ieroms
meaning
it
began
in
the
Apostles
times
:
at
the
first
indeed
he
saith
,
before
BB.
were
ordained
,
the
same
men
were
called
Presbiteri
&
Episcopi
:
and
vntill
factions
beganne
,
the
Churches
were
gouerned
(
viz.
in
the
absence
of
the
Apostles
)
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Presbiters
:
which
may
be
true
of
the
most
Churches
,
excepting
that
of
Ierusalem
,
by
Ieromes
owne
confession
.
But
when
factions
began
,
as
those
did
in
the
Apostles
[
r
](A20733-e120360-b)
r
1
Cor.
1.
times
,
whereof
he
speaketh
;
the
Apostles
ordayned
,
and
in
the
whole
Christian
world
it
was
obserued
,
that
for
auoiding
of
schisme
one
should
be
chosen
from
among
the
presbiters
,
who
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
and
to
whom
the
whole
care
of
the
Church
,
that
is
,
the
diocese
should
appertaine
.
As
for
the
reasons
whereby
he
proueth
the
consequence
feeble
,
they
are
exceeding
weake
.
First
,
because
Ierom
speaketh
not
of
the
times
immediately
succeeding
the
Apostles
.
It
is
very
true
:
for
he
speaketh
of
that
which
was
done
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
hath
bene
said
:
secondly
,
saith
he
,
because
he
saith
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
,
which
could
not
well
be
without
a
generall
Councill
,
vnlesse
it
soaked
in
by
little
and
little
,
till
at
the
last
it
ouer-flowed
all
places
.
The
decree
which
he
speaketh
of
,
could
be
no
other
but
of
the
Apostles
:
for
as
hath
been
said
,
what
was
generally
obserued
in
the
Churches
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
,
before
there
was
a
generall
Councill
to
decree
it
,
proceeded
vndoubtedly
from
the
Apostles
.
Now
it
is
more
then
euident
,
that
long
before
the
first
generall
councill
,
there
were
not
onely
Diocesan
BB.
but
Metropolitanes
also
,
yea
Patriarches
:
that
which
he
talketh
of
soking
in
by
little
and
little
,
agreeth
not
with
the
generall
decree
,
whereof
Ierome
speaketh
,
whereby
what
is
instituted
is
ordayned
at
once
.
Neither
can
hee
assigne
any
time
after
the
Apostles
,
when
BB.
had
either
lesse
charges
,
or
lesse
authority
,
then
in
the
end
of
the
first
three
or
foure
hundred
yeares
.
Their
Diocesses
oft
times
as
hath
beene
shewed
,
were
lessened
in
processe
of
time
,
but
seldome
or
neuer
enlarged
.
Neither
is
it
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
their
authority
among
Christians
was
greater
before
there
were
Christian
Magistrates
,
then
afterwards
.
For
before
,
they
called
and
held
their
Councels
by
their
owne
authority
,
they
heard
and
iudged
all
causes
among
Christians
,
they
punished
all
kindes
of
faults
[
s
](A20733-e120440-b)
s
Conc.
Ancyr.
c.
16.20.21.22.23.24.25
.
Et
Neocaes
.
c.
2.
&
3.
by
Ecclesiasticall
censures
.
The
other
testimony
of
Ierome
,
is
out
of
his
commentarie
on
Psal.
45.
which
I
haue
mentioned
before
.
the
Church
in
steed
of
her
Fathers
,
which
were
the
Apostles
,
had
sonnes
which
were
the
BB.
who
should
be
appointed
gouernours
in
all
parts
of
the
world
.
He
saith
first
,
this
testimonie
is
an
allegorie
vpon
the
45.
Psalme
,
and
not
a
historie
of
the
times
.
Which
is
a
friuolous
euasion
.
For
it
is
an
exposition
of
the
Prophecie
by
the
historie
or
euent
,
and
so
not
onely
he
,
but
Augustine
also
expoundeth
the
place
.
Secondly
,
he
alledgeth
,
that
Ierome
doth
not
say
,
that
the
Church
had
BB.
as
soone
as
the
Apostles
were
gone
:
which
also
is
friuolous
.
For
he
signifieth
that
the
BB.
did
succeede
the
Apostles
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
,
which
else
where
he
plainly
professeth
,
saying
,
that
[
t
](A20733-e120630-b)
t
Ad.
Euagr.
BB.
are
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
.
If
any
other
had
come
betweene
them
and
the
Apostles
,
those
other
should
haue
beene
the
Apostles
successors
,
and
they
the
predecessors
to
the
BB.
Besides
,
others
of
the
Fathers
in
plaine
termes
testifie
,
that
the
Apostles
committed
the
Church
euery
where
to
the
BB.
and
left
them
their
successors
:
which
in
the
successions
also
of
BB.
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
is
plainely
declared
.
Simeon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
succeeding
Iames
,
Evodius
,
Linus
,
Timothie
,
Tittu
,
&c.
substituted
by
the
Apostles
,
Peter
and
Paul
,
and
succeeding
them
in
the
gouernment
of
those
Churches
wherein
they
were
placed
.
Thirdly
,
he
saith
,
Ierome
applied
the
Psalme
to
the
practise
of
the
times
wherein
he
liued
,
not
expounding
the
meaning
of
the
Prophecie
,
which
if
he
had
done
he
must
haue
acknowledged
that
such
BB.
were
by
the
ordinance
of
God
.
Who
could
be
so
shameless
as
to
say
,
that
Ierome
expoundeth
not
the
meaning
of
the
Prophecie
when
hee
commenteth
thus
:
Pro
patribus
tuis
nati
sunt
tibi
filij
.
Fuerunt
O
Ecclesia
Apostoli
patres
tui
,
quia
ipsi
te
genuerunt
:
nunc
autem
quia
illi
recesserunt
à
mundo
,
habes
pro
his
Episcopos
filios
,
quia
à
te
creati
sunt
:
sunt
énim
&
hi
patres
tui
,
quia
ab
ipsis
regeris
.
Hee
therefore
expoundeth
the
meaning
of
the
Prophecie
,
applying
it
to
the
state
of
the
Church
immediatly
after
the
decease
of
the
Apostles
,
and
not
onely
to
Ieromes
times
.
Why
but
then
Ierome
must
be
thought
to
haue
helde
the
function
of
BB.
to
be
a
diuine
ordinance
:
that
followeth
not
;
for
he
might
hold
them
to
be
prophecied
of
,
as
he
also
confesseth
,
Es.
60.
and
yet
esteeme
them
but
an
apostolical
ordinance
,
being
neither
immediately
ordained
of
God
,
nor
yet
prouided
as
generally
&
perpetually
to
be
necessarily
obserued
,
as
those
things
which
are
said
to
be
simply
diuini
iuris
.
My
third
argument
consisteth
of
two
branches
;
the
former
,
affirmatiue
,
that
the
Councels
,
Histories
,
and
Fathers
with
one
consent
giue
testimony
to
the
gouernment
by
BB:
the
other
,
negatiue
,
that
not
any
one
pregnant
testimony
of
any
sound
writer
,
or
example
of
any
one
orthodoxal
or
apostolicke
Church
(
viz.
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
)
can
be
produced
to
the
contrarie
.
To
the
former
he
answereth
,
that
the
Councels
,
Histories
and
Fathers
,
either
beare
witnesse
of
their
owne
times
,
which
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
seeing
the
ancientest
[
u
](A20733-e120890-b)
u
Note
his
reason
:
the
testimonies
of
the
Fathers
to
no
purpose
,
because
the
antientest
Councils
were
in
the
fourth
age
.
Councell
was
in
the
fourth
age
of
the
Church
,
or
else
iudge
of
the
BB.
in
former
times
,
by
that
which
they
saw
then
in
practise
,
taking
all
that
had
the
same
name
of
BB.
to
haue
beene
pertakers
of
the
same
authoritie
.
If
the
Fathers
did
beare
witnesse
onely
of
their
owne
times
,
it
were
sufficient
for
the
proofe
of
my
assertion
,
seeing
there
were
diuers
in
all
the
terme
specified
of
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
,
which
giue
testimonie
vnto
it
:
as
in
the
first
age
after
the
Apostles
(
to
omit
them
of
the
two
latter
)
Ignatius
,
Hegesippus
,
Irenaeus
,
Clemens
,
Tertullian
,
doe
giue
plaine
testimonie
vnto
it
;
and
two
of
them
,
as
hath
beene
shewed
,
to
wit
,
Ignatius
and
Irenaeus
,
were
not
onely
Diocesan
,
but
also
Metropolitane
BB.
But
the
Fathers
,
histories
and
councils
,
doe
not
onely
speake
of
their
owne
times
;
but
also
relate
what
was
done
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
immediatly
vpon
their
decease
.
Doe
they
not
testifie
with
one
consent
,
as
I
partly
shew
in
the
two
arguments
following
,
that
there
were
BB.
in
the
Apostles
times
,
appointed
and
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
themselues
?
doe
they
not
say
,
that
the
Apostles
committed
the
Churches
to
them
,
and
left
them
to
be
their
successors
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
?
is
not
this
one
of
the
chiefe
things
which
Eusebius
propoundeth
to
himselfe
in
his
history
,
[
w
](A20733-e120960-b)
w
They
be
the
first
words
of
Eusebius
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
to
set
down
the
succession
of
BB
?
chiefely
,
of
those
who
next
succeeded
the
Apostles
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
?
But
let
the
Reader
iudge
of
the
Refuter
,
and
his
cause
,
by
that
which
followeth
.
The
Fathers
discerned
not
,
or
knew
no
difference
betweene
the
calling
or
authority
of
the
BB.
which
were
in
their
owne
time
,
and
those
which
had
beene
before
them
,
but
thought
and
wrote
of
them
as
being
alike
,
the
chiefest
of
them
in
euery
age
from
the
Apostles
,
being
BB.
themselues
.
The
refuter
and
his
fellowes
comming
thirteene
or
foureteene
,
yea
almost
fiueteene
hundred
yeares
after
some
of
them
,
will
needes
haue
a
difference
;
and
rather
then
it
shall
not
stand
,
all
the
Fathers
must
be
condemned
as
Idiots
,
for
not
seeing
that
which
these
learned
men
doe
see
.
I
greatly
meruaile
with
what
face
,
or
rather
with
what
conscience
the
refuter
could
auouch
these
things
.
The
Nagatiue
part
of
my
reason
,
is
directly
false
in
both
the
parts
of
it
,
as
well
for
testimonies
as
examples
.
But
I
desire
the
reader
to
haue
an
eye
to
the
refuters
dealing
,
so
shall
he
easily
discerne
to
what
poore
shifts
he
is
driuen
:
first
consider
,
what
was
the
assumption
of
my
first
Syllogisme
,
which
by
these
foure
arguments
I
doe
proue
;
to
wit
,
that
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
the
gouernment
by
BB.
was
generally
and
perpetually
vsed
.
This
I
proue
in
this
third
reason
,
by
the
testimonies
of
Antiquity
,
both
affirmatiuely
,
that
all
antiquity
,
viz.
Councils
,
Fathers
,
Histories
,
with
one
consent
giue
testimony
to
it
:
and
also
negatiuely
,
that
no
testimony
or
example
of
antiquity
,
no
ancient
Councill
,
Father
or
History
,
no
example
of
any
antient
orthodoxall
or
Apostolicall
Church
,
can
be
produced
to
the
contrary
.
Now
consider
his
instances
,
wherein
he
spendeth
aboue
sixe
leaues
;
and
if
any
one
of
them
be
both
true
and
direct
to
the
purpose
,
then
say
that
I
haue
no
iudgement
.
First
for
testimonyes
:
We
haue
pregnant
testimonies
,
saith
he
,
of
the
ancients
,
and
of
many
sound
writers
in
these
latter
ages
,
who
affirme
,
that
BB.
and
ministers
were
all
one
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
that
one
minister
exercised
not
authority
ouer
his
fellow
ministers
,
as
BB.
since
haue
done
and
still
doe
.
First
,
consider
the
persons
of
the
witnesses
,
which
he
is
about
to
produce
,
and
then
the
things
which
they
are
to
depose
▪
for
whereas
I
neuer
meant
to
extend
the
negatiue
part
of
my
reason
,
further
then
the
affirmatiue
:
and
therefore
as
I
said
that
the
Councils
,
Histories
,
and
Fathers
,
doe
all
giue
testimonie
to
the
Episcopall
gouernment
,
so
I
meant
that
no
pregnant
testimonie
either
of
Councils
,
Histories
or
Fathers
,
(
which
I
comprised
vnder
the
generall
name
of
sound
writer
)
could
be
produced
to
the
contrary
:
he
,
for
instance
alledgeth
a
company
of
new
writers
in
this
present
age
,
as
if
they
were
competent
witnesses
to
depose
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
or
to
testifie
what
was
done
or
not
done
in
the
Church
foureteene
or
fifteene
hundred
yeeres
agoe
:
or
as
if
when
I
chalenge
them
to
shew
any
one
testimony
of
antiquity
to
the
contrary
,
it
were
a
sufficient
instance
,
to
oppose
against
me
a
sort
of
new
writers
,
who
for
the
most
part
also
are
parties
in
the
cause
.
But
yet
what
shall
these
witnesses
testifie
?
forsooth
two
things
:
First
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
BB.
and
ministers
were
all
one
:
whereunto
in
the
first
place
I
answere
,
that
this
deposition
is
not
to
the
purpose
.
In
this
argument
I
speake
of
what
was
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
;
but
he
will
make
his
witnesses
to
depose
what
was
in
the
Apostles
times
:
perhaps
he
will
say
,
the
conscience
must
build
it selfe
vpon
the
practise
of
the
Apostles
times
:
(
but
say
I
)
in
this
reason
I
proue
,
that
the
Episcopall
gouernment
was
in
vse
in
the
Apostles
times
,
because
it
was
generally
and
perpetually
vsed
in
the
next
three
hundred
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
times
;
which
consequence
himselfe
hath
granted
●gainst
the
assumption
therefore
he
should
bring
his
witnesses
,
if
they
had
any
thing
to
say
;
and
not
to
be
so
absurd
,
as
by
them
to
deny
my
conclusion
againe
,
the
Ancients
that
say
BB.
and
Presbiters
were
all
one
in
the
Apostles
times
,
speake
of
that
part
of
their
time
,
when
as
in
the
most
places
there
were
no
BB.
or
at
least
not
chosen
from
among
the
Presbiters
:
for
before
there
were
such
BB.
the
same
persons
indeed
were
called
Episcopi
&
Presbyteri
:
but
when
BB.
were
chosen
out
of
the
Presbiters
,
which
they
also
confesse
was
done
in
the
Apostles
time
(
as
namely
at
Alexandria
)
they
professe
,
The
other
thing
,
which
he
will
haue
his
witnesses
testifie
is
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
one
Minister
did
not
exercise
authority
aboue
another
as
BB.
since
haue
done
:
to
which
assertion
,
I
am
sure
no
sound
writer
will
depose
▪
for
I
pray
you
,
were
not
the
Apostles
ministers
?
were
not
Timothie
and
Titus
ministers
?
were
they
not
also
superiour
to
other
ministers
?
did
they
not
exercise
authoritie
ouer
them
?
If
Timothie
therefore
and
Titus
were
superiour
to
other
ministers
and
exercised
authoritie
ouer
them
;
why
may
not
BB.
who
succeed
not
onely
them
(
whether
they
were
BB.
or
not
)
but
also
the
Apostles
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
,
be
superiour
also
to
other
ministers
,
and
exercise
authoritie
ouer
them
?
But
come
we
to
his
witnesses
,
Ignatius
,
Iustin
Martyr
,
Tertullian
.
whereof
he
would
seeme
to
haue
great
store
:
howbeit
,
he
will
content
himselfe
with
a
few
,
and
he
will
passe
by
Ignatius
,
Iustin
Martyr
,
and
Tertullian
,
as
hauing
done
their
seruice
already
:
●et
the
reader
vnderstand
,
that
this
is
a
most
vaine
flourish
:
for
he
is
not
able
to
produce
any
one
testimonie
out
of
any
one
of
the
Councils
,
Histories
or
Fathers
,
that
speaketh
against
the
gouernment
of
the
BB.
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
,
in
respect
either
facti
or
iuris
,
that
is
,
as
either
denying
that
the
Church
was
so
gouerned
then
,
or
that
it
ought
to
haue
beene
so
gouerned
.
And
as
for
Ignatius
,
Iustin
Martyr
,
&
Tertullian
▪
the
greatest
advantage
he
could
haue
by
them
,
was
to
vse
their
names
:
for
there
is
not
a
word
in
them
sounding
against
the
gouernment
of
BB.
but
pregnant
testimonies
for
them
:
especially
in
Ignatius
and
Tertullian
,
whom
I
haue
often
quoted
in
this
cause
.
It
is
true
,
that
the
refuter
did
alledge
these
Authors
as
witnesses
to
proue
that
fond
and
vnlearned
conceipt
,
that
the
ancient
Churches
were
no
other
but
Parishes
,
to
proue
that
which
is
more
fond
,
that
there
is
and
ought
to
be
no
other
visible
Churches
indued
with
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
but
Parishes
.
But
the
vanitie
of
his
conceipt
,
and
the
weakenesse
of
his
allegations
,
haue
I
hope
beene
sufficiently
layd
open
before
in
the
defence
of
the
second
point
.
Passing
therefore
by
them
,
the
refuter
will
begin
with
Cyprian
,
[
a
](A20733-e121390-b)
a
Cyp.
l.
3.
Epi.
19
who
affirmeth
that
the
menaging
of
the
Church
busines
,
euen
in
his
dayes
belonged
to
the
Counsell
of
himselfe
and
the
rest
of
the
Presbyters
,
omnium
nostrûm
concilium
spectat
,
and
therefore
durst
not
take
it
to
himselfe
alone
,
praei●dicare
ego
&
soli
mihi
re●
omnem
vendicare
non
audeo
.
Here
let
the
reader
consider
with
me
,
first
,
the
person
of
the
witnesse
which
is
produced
,
and
then
the
thing
which
is
witnessed
:
was
not
Cyprian
himselfe
,
not
onely
a
Diocesan
,
but
also
a
Metropolitane
B.
?
did
not
he
in
iudgement
allow
the
function
of
such
BB.
?
directly
he
saith
that
BB.
[
b
](A20733-e121440-b)
b
l.
4.
Epist.
9.
are
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
,
and
that
they
answere
to
the
high
Priest
in
the
law
:
that
the
Lord
Iesus
,
when
he
appointed
Apostles
,
[
c
](A20733-e121480-b)
c
l.
3.
Epist.
9.
ordained
BB.
The
Deacons
must
remember
,
saith
he
,
that
the
Lord
himselfe
chose
Apostles
,
that
is
,
BB.
but
Deacons
were
chosen
by
the
Apostles
themselues
after
the
Ascension
of
the
Lord
,
as
ministers
of
their
Episcopall
function
,
and
of
the
Church
.
Doth
not
he
teach
[
d
](A20733-e121530-b)
d
li.
3.
Epist.
2.
&
13.
l.
4.
Epist.
2.
that
in
one
Church
,
meaning
a
whole
Diocese
,
there
may
be
but
one
B.
?
&
that
to
set
vp
a
second
is
to
make
a
schisme
,
and
to
rend
in
pieces
the
body
of
Christ
?
doth
he
not
often
plead
for
the
superioritie
of
BB.
ouer
the
Presbiters
,
shewing
[
e
](A20733-e121590-b)
e
li.
1.
Epist.
3.
l.
3.
epi.
9.
&
14.
&
15.
how
they
ought
to
reuerence
and
obey
them
,
and
that
the
contrary
is
the
source
of
all
schisme
?
Neither
doe
heresies
,
saith
he
,
[
f
](A20733-e121670-b)
f
li.
4.
Epist.
9.
arise
or
schismes
from
any
other
beginning
then
this
,
that
the
Priest
of
God
(
meaning
the
B.
)
is
not
obeyed
,
neither
one
Priest
for
the
time
in
the
Church
,
and
one
Iudge
for
the
time
in
stead
of
Christ
is
acknowledged
:
whom
if
the
whole
brotherhood
according
to
Gods
commandement
would
obey
,
&c.
How
oft
doth
he
speake
of
the
vigour
[
g
](A20733-e121730-b)
g
li.
3.
Epist.
9.
&
16.
li.
1.
Epist.
3.
of
the
Episcopall
power
,
and
of
the
authoritie
of
his
chaire
,
whereby
he
acknowledgeth
,
euen
those
of
the
Clergie
might
be
either
excommunicated
or
deposed
.
Is
it
not
likely
therefore
thinke
you
,
that
Cyprian
would
testifie
against
the
function
or
authoritie
of
BB.
?
[
h
](A20733-e121860-b)
h
li.
3.
Epist.
14.
,
being
absent
,
reprooued
by
letter
,
that
they
not
regarding
their
Bishop
set
ouer
them
,
nor
the
[
i
](A20733-e121890-b)
i
Epi.
15.
&
16.
honour
due
to
him
,
nor
reseruing
to
him
the
honour
of
his
Episcopall
office
,
and
his
chaire
,
had
without
his
appointment
(
though
absent
)
reconciled
them
and
receiued
them
to
the
communion
:
others
procured
the
Martyrs
and
Confessors
to
write
to
Cyprian
in
their
behalfe
;
that
when
peace
should
be
restored
to
the
Church
,
peace
might
vpon
the
examination
of
their
cause
be
giuen
to
them
.
Cyprian
[
k
](A20733-e121940-b)
k
li.
3.
Epist.
15.
therefore
writeth
to
the
Martyrs
commending
them
,
that
whereas
the
Presbiters
should
haue
taught
them
what
appertained
to
the
discipline
of
the
Church
;
they
were
to
learne
of
these
Martyrs
,
to
referre
their
petitions
and
desires
to
the
B.
and
then
willeth
them
to
set
downe
in
writing
particularly
,
whom
they
desired
to
be
receiued
:
he
writeth
also
to
the
people
,
[
l
](A20733-e121970-b)
l
li.
4.
Epist.
16.
signifying
,
that
he
had
receiued
letters
from
the
Martyrs
in
the
behalfe
of
those
which
had
fallen
,
promising
when
God
should
grant
peace
vnto
them
that
he
might
returne
to
them
,
the
behauiour
and
repentance
of
them
which
had
fallen
should
be
examined
in
their
presence
:
and
hauing
signified
his
great
dislike
of
the
Presbiters
act
,
who
not
reseruing
vnto
him
the
honour
of
his
Priesthood
and
chaire
,
had
without
his
allowance
communicated
with
them
which
had
fallen
.
In
the
end
,
he
desireth
that
they
which
had
fallen
would
patiently
heare
his
counsell
&
expect
his
returne
,
that
when
through
Gods
mercy
we
shall
come
vnto
you
many
of
my
fellow
BB.
being
assembled
together
,
may
according
to
the
discipline
of
the
Lord
,
in
the
presence
of
the
confessors
,
examine
the
letters
and
desires
of
the
blessed
Martyrs
:
he
writeth
in
like
manner
to
the
[
m
](A20733-e122010-b)
m
Epi.
17.
&
18
Clergy
,
that
is
,
to
the
Presbiters
and
Deacons
;
willing
them
,
for
as
much
as
still
his
returne
was
delayed
,
that
in
the
case
of
necessity
they
should
not
expect
his
presence
,
but
for
such
,
as
should
be
in
danger
of
death
,
to
lay
their
hands
vpon
them
,
and
reconcile
them
;
especially
,
such
as
had
beene
commended
by
the
Martyrs
;
as
for
the
rest
,
he
would
haue
them
stay
,
till
hee
being
restored
to
the
Church
,
and
they
all
being
assembled
together
,
might
determine
what
was
to
be
done
.
But
being
importuned
againe
by
letters
from
the
Confessors
,
who
had
desired
him
,
and
by
him
the
rest
of
the
BB.
to
grant
peace
,
as
themselues
did
to
them
which
had
fallen
;
he
writeth
againe
to
the
Presbiters
and
Deacons
that
letter
,
which
by
the
refuter
is
cited
;
saying
,
[
n
](A20733-e122040-b)
n
L.
3.
Epist.
19.
concerning
those
(
which
had
fallen
,
and
by
the
Confessours
haue
desired
to
be
reconciled
)
vntill
it
be
certainely
knowne
,
what
course
they
haue
taken
since
their
fault
committed
,
seeing
it
is
a
matter
which
belongeth
to
the
Councill
and
iudgement
of
vs
all
,
I
dare
not
preiudicate
,
and
challenge
to
my selfe
a
thing
which
is
common
;
and
therefore
appointeth
that
course
to
be
taken
,
which
I
mentioned
out
of
the
last
Epistle
:
and
to
the
same
purpose
writeth
to
diuers
BB.
and
by
name
to
Calidonius
[
o
](A20733-e122100-b)
o
L.
3.
Epist.
20.
,
shewing
him
what
order
he
had
taken
in
this
matter
,
and
willing
him
to
signifie
the
same
to
other
BB.
that
the
like
course
might
be
taken
by
them
.
If
these
letters
,
all
concerning
the
same
businesses
,
be
conferred
together
,
you
may
obserue
,
first
,
that
Cyprian
was
a
Metropolitane
B.
hauing
authoritie
to
assemble
and
to
direct
his
comprouinciall
BB.
as
may
appeare
also
by
the
Synodes
held
,
and
Synodicall
Epistles
written
by
him
.
Secondly
that
he
speaketh
not
of
Church
businesse
in
generall
,
but
of
this
particular
;
which
was
of
so
great
importance
,
that
he
saith
[
p
](A20733-e122150-b)
p
L.
3.
Epist.
18.
,
it
was
the
cause
not
of
one
Church
or
of
one
Prouince
,
but
of
the
whole
world
.
Thirdly
,
that
he
would
not
deale
alone
in
this
busines
,
but
he
would
call
a
Synode
of
his
fellow
BB.
besides
his
Clergie
;
and
in
the
presence
of
the
people
haue
the
cause
of
them
which
had
fallen
examined
.
Fourthly
,
that
although
he
would
not
deale
alone
in
this
busines
,
being
a
cause
of
so
great
moment
,
but
would
haue
it
referred
to
the
examination
&
censure
of
his
fellow
BB.
besides
the
concurrence
of
the
people
,
and
his
owne
Clergy
in
this
iudgement
;
notwithstanding
the
chiefe
stroak
in
this
busines
was
in
him
;
as
appeareth
,
both
by
their
petitions
,
and
his
directions
.
And
therefore
the
whole
cariage
of
this
businesse
doth
prooue
the
Episcopall
authoritie
of
the
B.
and
Cyprians
superioritie
,
not
onely
ouer
his
owne
Presbiters
,
but
also
ouer
his
fellow
Bishops
,
so
farre
is
it
from
impleading
the
same
▪
and
further
I
say
,
that
Cyprian
,
because
his
comming
to
the
Bishopricke
was
much
resisted
by
Felicissimus
and
his
complices
,
and
the
time
wherein
he
liued
troublesome
and
dangerous
:
therefore
though
he
might
(
as
Ierome
[
q
](A20733-e122220-b)
q
In
Tit.
1.
speaketh
of
all
Bishops
)
rule
alone
as
Moses
,
yet
as
Moses
,
he
voluntarily
vsed
the
assistance
of
others
,
hauing
as
himselfe
[
r
](A20733-e122260-b)
r
lib.
3.
Epist.
10
saith
,
from
the
beginning
of
his
Bishoprick
determined
to
doe
nothing
by
his
own
priuate
sentence
,
without
the
counsell
of
the
Clergy
,
and
consent
of
the
people
:
whereby
it
appeareth
,
that
his
vsing
of
the
Clergies
counsell
,
and
consent
of
the
people
,
was
not
of
necessity
,
but
voluntary
:
and
therefore
when
he
saw
cause
,
and
did
finde
himselfe
not
to
need
either
the
counsell
of
the
Clergy
,
or
consent
of
the
people
,
he
would
sometimes
doe
matters
of
importance
,
(
as
namely
the
ordination
of
Clerks
)
alone
:
as
himselfe
signifieth
in
an
Epistle
[
s
](A20733-e122290-b)
s
lib.
Epist.
5.
l●b
.
3.
Epist.
22.
lib.
4.
Epist.
5.
to
the
Presbiters
,
Deacons
,
and
the
whole
people
.
In
ordaining
of
Clerkes
I
doe
vse
before
hand
to
consult
with
you
,
and
by
common
counsell
to
weigh
the
manners
and
deserts
of
all
:
but
humane
testimonies
are
not
to
be
expected
,
when
we
haue
diuine
suffrages
;
and
therefore
signifieth
that
he
had
without
them
ordained
Aurelius
and
others
to
be
Clerks
.
But
suppose
,
that
of
necessitie
Cyprian
was
to
vse
the
aduise
,
or
expect
the
presence
and
conscience
of
his
Clergy
,
in
dispaching
matters
of
importance
;
would
this
be
an
instance
against
the
Episcopall
gouernment
in
those
times
?
did
the
fourth
Councill
of
Cathage
[
t
](A20733-e122390-b)
t
Con.
Carth.
4.
cap.
22.
&
23.
,
set
foorth
these
two
Canons
,
the
one
,
that
a
B.
without
the
Councill
of
his
Clergie
should
not
ordaine
Clerkes
:
requiring
also
that
the
assent
or
conniuence
and
testimony
of
the
people
should
be
had
?
the
other
,
that
a
B.
should
heare
no
mans
cause
but
in
the
presence
of
his
Clerkes
,
and
that
the
sentence
of
the
B.
should
be
void
which
was
not
confirmed
by
the
presence
of
his
Clergie
,
and
yet
no
man
doubteth
,
but
that
when
that
Councell
was
held
(
which
was
about
foure
hundred
yeeres
after
Christ
)
the
sway
of
Ecclesiasticall
authoritie
,
both
for
ordination
,
and
iurisdiction
was
in
the
Bishop
.
But
I
haue
vouchafed
too
long
an
answere
to
so
weake
an
allegation
.
Ambrose
his
testimony
,
which
was
,
as
he
saith
,
debated
at
large
in
the
first
point
.
It
was
debated
indeed
,
but
nothing
to
this
present
purpose
.
Ambrose
saith
,
that
the
B.
was
wont
to
vse
the
aduise
of
his
Presbiters
;
though
in
his
time
it
was
growne
out
of
vse
:
and
the
matter
debated
betweene
vs
,
was
,
whether
those
Seniors
,
were
Ministers
,
as
I
proued
,
or
Lay-elders
as
the
refuter
pretended
;
but
whether
they
were
the
one
or
the
other
,
the
authoritie
and
gouernment
of
the
B.
was
no
more
impayred
by
vsing
their
counsell
,
then
the
authority
of
a
Prince
by
vsing
the
aduise
of
his
Counsellours
:
vntill
such
time
and
in
such
cases
as
by
the
Canons
and
Canonicall
law
their
consent
was
required
as
necessarie
.
These
two
allegations
,
if
they
had
beene
reduced
into
sillogismes
,
would
haue
made
very
loose
inferences
:
and
so
would
the
testimonies
of
Ierom
,
who
euery
where
almost
,
saith
the
refuter
,
speaketh
for
vs
.
This
is
vauntingly
spoken
,
and
yet
the
truth
is
,
that
as
no
where
s
indeed
he
speaketh
for
them
;
so
none
of
the
Fathers
is
more
plentifull
of
pregnant
testimonies
,
then
he
is
,
for
BB.
as
partly
hath
beene
shewed
already
,
and
more
shall
be
declared
hereafter
.
Of
the
testimonies
which
the
refuter
citeth
,
three
[
u
](A20733-e122620-b)
u
Ad
Ocean
in
Tit.
1.
Ad
Euagr.
are
all
to
one
purpose
;
that
at
the
first
in
the
Apostles
times
,
BB.
and
Elders
were
all
one
:
that
is
,
the
same
men
,
who
were
called
Presbiters
,
were
also
called
BB.
(
but
by
the
way
,
where
were
the
Lay-presbiters
then
?
were
they
also
called
BB.
?
)
and
that
till
factions
did
arise
,
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbiters
.
To
these
allegations
I
haue
already
made
answere
,
which
I
doe
breifely
repeate
;
that
in
the
Apostles
times
before
BB.
were
ordayned
,
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Presbiters
,
as
vnder
the
Apostles
:
and
vntill
the
BB.
were
elected
from
among
the
Presbiters
in
the
seueral
Churches
,
the
names
of
Presbiters
&
Episcopus
,
were
confounded
,
but
when
BB.
were
chosen
out
of
the
Presbiters
,
as
they
were
not
at
the
first
(
for
the
first
BB.
were
Apostles
,
as
Iames
;
and
Apostolicall
men
,
as
Marke
,
Timothie
,
and
Titus
,
Linus
,
Evodiu●
,
&c.
and
were
not
called
Episcopi
,
but
Apostoli
)
then
,
[
(w)
](A20733-e122730-b)
(w)
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
Theodor.
in
1
Tim.
3.
for
distinction
sake
,
he
which
was
chosen
from
among
the
Presbiters
and
placed
in
a
higher
degree
,
began
to
be
called
Episcopus
,
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
:
the
name
of
Apostle
being
left
to
them
who
principally
were
so
called
.
But
what
will
the
refuter
conclude
from
hence
?
There
was
a
time
whiles
the
Apostles
liued
,
when
thesame
men
were
called
Presbiters
and
BB.
that
is
,
the
names
were
confounded
.
Therefore
in
the
three
hundred
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
the
Churches
were
not
gouerned
by
Diocesan
BB.
But
as
the
allegations
were
impertinent
,
The
Bishops
preferment
,
saith
Ierome
according
to
the
refuters
allegation
,
was
not
by
necessitie
of
law
,
but
granted
to
him
to
honour
him
withall
.
In
that
Dialogue
,
there
is
a
controuersie
betweene
the
true
Christian
,
and
the
Luciferian
:
the
true
Christian
would
haue
those
which
were
baptised
by
Arians
,
to
be
baptised
againe
,
before
they
should
be
receiued
againe
vnto
the
communion
:
because
by
their
baptisme
,
who
belieued
the
Father
alone
to
be
God
,
the
Sonne
a
creature
,
and
the
holy
Ghost
the
seruant
of
both
,
the
holy
Ghost
was
not
communicated
:
the
Luciferian
held
,
they
might
be
receiued
without
baptisme
,
by
imposition
of
hands
,
whereby
the
holy
Ghost
should
be
giuen
them
,
which
before
they
had
not
receiued
:
and
to
that
purpose
alledgeth
the
practise
of
the
Apostles
,
who
by
imposition
of
hands
gaue
the
holy
Ghost
to
those
whom
Philippe
the
Deacon
had
baptised
;
and
the
custome
generally
receiued
of
the
Church
,
that
BB.
by
imposition
of
hands
doe
communicate
the
holy
Ghost
to
them
that
are
baptised
.
The
true
Christian
replyeth
,
that
BB.
vse
to
impose
hands
onely
on
those
who
were
baptised
into
the
true
faith
,
and
that
by
the
baptisme
giuen
by
a
Presbiter
of
Deacon
,
the
holy
Ghost
also
is
conferred
.
But
,
saith
he
,
if
here
you
demaund
why
hee
that
is
baptized
in
the
Church
receiueth
not
the
holy
Ghost
but
by
the
hands
of
the
B.
whom
we
hold
to
be
giuen
in
true
baptisme
;
vnderstand
,
that
this
obseruation
is
deriued
from
that
authority
that
the
holy
Ghost
after
the
ascension
of
the
Lord
descended
vpon
the
Apostles
:
and
the
same
thing
we
finde
done
in
many
places
,
ad
honorem
potius
Sacerdotij
,
quàm
ad
legis
necessitatem
;
more
for
the
honour
of
the
Episcopall
function
,
then
for
the
necessitie
of
a
law
.
For
otherwise
,
if
onely
at
the
prayer
of
the
B.
the
holy
Ghost
doth
descend
,
then
lamentable
is
their
case
,
who
in
Villages
and
Townes
,
and
in
other
remote
places
,
being
baptized
of
Presbiters
and
Deacons
,
doe
depart
out
of
this
life
,
before
the
B.
visite
them
:
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
on
the
dignitie
of
the
B.
&c.
as
hath
beene
oft
alledged
.
That
which
Ierome
speaketh
of
this
one
prerogatiue
of
BB.
the
refuter
extendeth
to
his
whole
preferment
,
or
preheminence
;
and
saith
,
he
hath
it
not
by
any
necessitie
of
law
,
but
is
granted
to
him
to
honour
him
.
The
preheminence
of
the
B.
in
generall
,
Ierome
supposed
to
be
of
such
necessity
as
that
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
vpon
it
;
but
for
this
particular
of
giuing
the
holy
Ghost
,
he
saith
,
there
was
no
such
necessitie
:
because
in
the
Baptisme
by
a
Presbiter
,
or
Deacon
before
the
B.
imposeth
his
hands
,
the
holy
Ghost
is
bestowed
.
But
as
I
said
,
this
testimonie
is
also
impertinent
,
not
concluding
that
for
which
it
is
brought
.
For
it
is
a
strange
inference
:
their
preheminence
was
giuen
not
of
necessitie
,
but
to
honor
them
;
therfore
the
Church
was
not
gouerned
by
them
in
the
three
hundred
years
after
Christ
,
&
his
Apostles
.
Neither
is
it
impertinent
only
to
his
purpose
,
but
also
it
concludeth
for
me
:
for
if
BB.
had
their
preheminence
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
as
here
it
is
presupposed
:
then
their
gouernment
is
proued
to
haue
beene
in
vse
:
but
whether
it
were
by
an
honour
voluntarily
giuen
them
,
or
by
necessitie
of
law
,
that
in
this
present
point
is
not
materiall
.
he
citeth
Augustine
in
an
Epistle
to
Ierome
,
granting
that
the
office
of
a
B.
was
greater
then
another
Minister
,
The
testimony
of
Augustine
Epist.
19.
through
a
custome
of
the
Church
,
that
had
gotten
the
vpper
hand
,
and
not
otherwise
.
If
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
the
office
of
a
B.
was
become
greater
before
Ierome
and
Augustines
time
,
then
BB.
had
this
preheminence
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
;
so
farre
is
this
testimonie
from
disprouing
the
gouernment
of
BB.
in
those
times
.
But
neither
is
it
truely
alledged
:
for
he
speaketh
not
so
much
of
the
office
,
as
the
names
;
and
that
not
otherwise
is
added
by
the
Refuter
:
and
the
granting
he
talketh
of
,
was
not
a
yeelding
vpon
necessitie
,
but
a
modest
cession
from
his
right
.
Augustine
towards
the
end
of
the
Epistle
earnestly
desireth
Ierome
,
that
hee
would
boldly
correct
him
,
wherein
hee
should
thinke
it
needfull
:
Quanquam
enim
secundum
honorum
vocabula
,
quae
iam
Ecclesiae
vsus
obtinuit
,
Episcopatus
Presbyterio
maior
sit
,
tamen
in
multis
rebus
Augustinus
Hieronymo
minor
est
;
licèt
etiam
â
minore
quolibet
non
sit
fugienda
vel
dedignanda
correctio
.
For
though
according
to
the
names
of
honour
,
Bishopship
is
greater
then
Priesthood
,
that
is
,
is
a
name
of
greater
honour
,
or
is
honoured
with
greater
titles
,
notwithstanding
in
many
things
Augustine
is
inferiour
to
Ierome
:
howbeit
correction
is
not
to
be
shunned
or
disdayned
from
euery
one
that
is
inferiour
.
In
that
Episcopatus
is
a
name
of
greater
honour
then
Priesthood
,
it
is
to
be
ascribed
to
the
vse
and
custome
of
the
Church
;
for
at
the
first
they
were
confounded
.
Againe
,
might
not
some
one
of
our
BB.
in
King
Edwards
time
,
haue
vsed
the
same
words
,
writing
to
Caluin
,
as
well
as
Augustine
vsed
them
towards
Ierome
?
would
therefore
the
Refuter
inferre
,
that
in
the
times
fore-going
,
there
had
not
beene
Diocesan
BB.
or
that
they
ought
not
to
be
superiour
to
other
Ministers
?
Surely
,
howsoeuer
Augustine
in
modesty
,
or
any
other
being
a
B.
was
loath
to
preferre
himselfe
before
Ierome
,
or
any
other
man
of
renowne
,
being
but
a
Presbiter
,
by
reason
of
his
great
learning
and
renowned
piety
;
yet
were
it
a
sawcie
part
for
him
that
is
but
a
Presbiter
,
to
thinke
himselfe
equall
with
a
Bishop
.
Ierome
was
farre
from
it
:
and
therefore
in
his
Epistles
to
Augustine
,
giueth
him
titles
of
great
honour
,
vsing
this
inscription
:
[
a
](A20733-e123270-b)
a
Aug.
●
.
2.
Epist.
17.
&
18.
Domino
verè
,
sancto
,
&
beatissimo
Papae
Augustino
,
&c.
And
this
farewell
,
the
Lord
preserue
you
,
Domine
verè
sancte
&
suscipiende
Papa
:
and
the
like
I
haue
said
before
of
Caluin
[
b
](A20733-e123340-b)
b
Ad
Cra●●er
.
.
From
Augustine
,
he
maketh
a
large
step
to
Erasmus
[
c
](A20733-e123390-b)
c
Erasmus
in
1.
Tim.
4.
,
who
saith
,
Of
olde
there
was
no
difference
betweene
a
Presbyter
,
a
Priest
,
(
but
that
the
Refuter
left
out
,
for
feare
of
excluding
his
lay-elder
)
and
a
B.
And
then
hee
leapeth
backe
againe
to
Theodoret
,
Theodoret.
Beda
.
Sedulius
.
&c.
Beda
,
Sedulius
,
Oecumenius
,
Primasius
,
Theophilact
,
&c.
who
affirme
the
same
.
And
doe
not
I
my selfe
professe
the
same
in
this
Sermon
?
doe
I
not
also
proue
it
in
the
Sermon
of
the
dignity
of
the
ministerie
,
that
in
the
Acts
and
Epistles
of
the
Apostles
these
two
words
Presbyter
&
Episcopus
,
were
confounded
,
and
the
same
men
were
called
Presbyteri
&
Episcopi
?
what
will
hee
conclude
thereof
?
that
therefore
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
the
Church
was
not
gouerned
by
BB
?
or
that
the
office
of
a
B.
and
a
Presbyter
,
were
at
any
time
confounded
?
nay
,
can
hee
proue
so
much
as
the
names
after
the
Apostles
time
were
vsually
confounded
?
Ignatius
,
who
liued
in
the
Apostles
times
,
euery
where
distinguisheth
them
;
and
so
doe
the
after
Writers
,
as
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Eusebius
,
&c.
sauing
that
to
BB.
they
giue
sometimes
the
more
generall
name
of
Presbyters
,
or
[
d
](A20733-e123520-b)
d
Sacerdotes
.
Priests
:
which
is
not
to
be
meruailed
at
,
seeing
the
Apostles
,
Peter
and
Iohn
,
doe
call
themselues
Presbyters
.
Yea
,
but
some
Protestant
Writers
,
whom
afterwards
hee
will
cite
,
haue
vnderstoode
Ierome
and
the
rest
as
the
Refuter
doth
:
and
not
they
onely
,
but
Michael
Medina
a
Popish
Writer
,
is
of
opinion
,
that
they
held
the
same
error
with
Aerius
.
This
is
a
strange
kind
of
arguing
,
which
our
Refuter
vseth
,
to
bring
new
Writers
to
depose
what
the
old
haue
testified
.
Are
not
their
testimonies
extant
in
print
?
may
we
not
read
them
with
our
owne
eyes
,
and
weigh
them
in
our
owne
iudgements
?
that
wee
leauing
the
records
themselues
,
should
seek
to
the
d●positions
of
new
writers
to
know
what
the
olde
haue
testified
?
but
of
the
errour
of
them
,
who
suppose
Ierome
,
and
some
other
of
the
Fathers
,
to
haue
beene
of
the
same
iudgement
with
Aerius
I
haue
spoken
before
,
neither
doubt
I
now
to
affirme
that
they
ioyned
in
opinion
with
Aerius
,
no
more
then
I
do
:
for
they
writing
on
Phil.
1.
1
Tim.
3.
Tit.
1.
1
Pet.
5.
doe
say
,
that
in
these
places
the
names
Presbyter
&
Episcopus
,
were
confounded
,
which
places
my selfe
haue
alledged
to
the
same
purpose
.
After
he
had
alledged
what
hee
was
able
out
of
the
olde
Writers
,
to
the
new
Writers
,
who
as
he
saith
were
called
out
of
the
thickest
mists
of
Poperie
,
to
the
light
of
the
Gospell
:
heaping
vp
a
sort
of
testimonies
without
order
,
and
without
iudgement
,
and
mingling
also
some
testimonies
out
of
the
canon
law
,
and
some
Popish
Writers
among
them
.
And
because
to
follow
him
,
were
to
runne
the
wild-goose
race
,
I
will
reduce
their
testimonies
to
certaine
heads
,
and
then
giue
him
an
answere
to
them
all
.
Some
therefore
are
brought
to
testifie
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
BB.
and
Presbyters
were
all
one
,
(
the
which
is
true
,
for
the
same
men
were
called
Presbyters
and
BB:
)
as
Heming
.
and
Zauch
.
in
Phil.
1.1
.
Isidor
.
and
Dist.
21.
c.
Cleros
.
ex
Isidor
.
Duaren
.
de
ministr.
&
benef
.
l.
1.
c.
7.
Gloss.
ord.
Card.
Cassander
,
the
councils
of
Constance
and
Basill
,
Chemnitius
,
Lubbertus
,
D.
Fulke
.
D.
Willet
.
D.
Morton
.
Some
,
that
there
was
no
difference
betweene
B.
and
Presbyter
till
after
the
Apostles
times
:
but
afterwards
BB.
were
set
ouer
Presbyters
:
as
Danaeus
.
Some
,
that
at
the
first
there
were
no
such
BB.
as
were
afterwards
:
and
when
they
were
brought
in
they
were
not
Monarches
of
the
Church
,
&c.
as
Chamier
.
Some
,
that
iure
diuino
Episcopi
&
Presbyteri
be
all
one
:
as
Iunius
and
Phil.
Morney
,
and
D.
Whitak
.
which
is
true
concerning
the
vse
of
the
words
in
the
Scriptures
.
Some
that
Episcopatus
is
not
a
distinct
order
from
Presbyteratus
iure
diuino
,
as
D
,
Holland
:
whose
not
writings
,
but
speeches
,
he
citeth
vpon
report
.
Some
,
that
B.
and
Presbyter
by
the
word
of
God
is
the
same
,
not
in
name
onely
,
but
also
in
office
:
as
Sad●●l
.
Some
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
the
Churches
were
gouerned
communi
presbyterorum
consilio
,
but
after
the
Apostles
they
chose
one
to
be
B.
as
Musculus
.
Some
that
Christ
made
ministers
equall
,
&
that
there
was
at
the
first
no
contention
,
(
which
how
true
it
is
appeareth
by
Christs
appointing
twelue
Apostles
and
seauentie
Disciples
,
and
by
the
contention
among
the
Apostles
themselues
for
superioritie
,
whiles
Christ
was
with
them
,
)
as
Bullinger
.
Some
,
that
as
the
Apostles
were
equall
,
so
their
successors
:
which
is
true
;
for
the
BB.
are
equall
among
themselues
,
though
superiour
to
other
ministers
,
as
the
Apostles
were
to
the
seauentie
Disciples
,
)
as
D.
Whitakers
.
Some
,
that
Aerius
was
not
an
hereticke
for
saying
that
according
to
the
vse
of
the
scriptures
Episcopus
&
Presbiter
,
is
all
one
,
which
is
true
,
neither
had
he
beene
an
hereticke
if
he
had
said
no
more
,
and
that
Ambrose
,
Chrysostome
,
Ierome
,
and
Augustine
,
were
of
the
same
iudgement
,
as
B.
Iewell
.
Some
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
there
were
onely
two
degrees
of
ministers
,
Presbiters
and
Deacons
,
as
D.
Humfrey
.
Some
,
that
Bishops
were
not
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
Sadeel
.
Some
,
that
BB.
he
superiour
to
Prebiters
by
mans
decree
,
and
not
by
scripture
:
by
custome
of
man
,
not
by
the
authoritie
of
God
:
by
mans
law
,
and
not
by
Apostolicall
institution
,
as
Heming
,
in
Phil.
1.1
.
Bulling.
Iunius
,
B.
Pilkington
,
the
Canon
law
falsified
de
iure
positiuo
,
as
Cusanus
:
not
by
Gods
law
,
as
D.
Raynolds
:
no
otherwise
but
by
custome
,
as
Sadeel
.
Some
,
that
Episcopus
and
Pastor
of
one
flocke
was
at
the
first
all
one
.
as
D.
Raynolds
.
Some
,
that
there
was
alwaies
one
principall
,
which
by
common
vse
was
called
a
B.
being
chiefe
,
though
not
alone
,
both
in
gouernment
and
ordination
,
as
D.
Fulke
.
Some
,
that
BB.
be
in
a
higher
degree
of
superioritie
,
but
not
Princes
;
that
not
they
onely
are
Pastors
,
that
they
haue
the
right
of
consecration
,
though
not
onely
,
as
D.
Willet
.
Some
,
that
the
sole
and
supreame
authority
in
a
B.
is
tyranny
,
as
Bullinger
.
Some
,
that
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
by
the
first
institution
was
not
Monarchicall
,
but
Aristocraticall
,
as
Chamier
.
Some
,
that
elections
were
not
in
corners
,
nor
by
one
,
as
Gualther
.
Some
,
that
Presbiters
may
ordaine
,
as
being
all
one
with
BB.
in
office
,
as
Sadeel
.
Some
,
that
Priests
had
voices
and
seates
in
Councils
(
as
indeed
they
haue
with
vs
)
as
the
councill
of
Constance
and
Basill
.
Some
,
that
such
Archbb.
as
are
aboue
Metropolitanes
,
were
not
ordayned
by
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
,
as
D.
Bilson
;
who
also
is
alledged
as
hauing
beene
of
the
Refuters
minde
,
because
he
citeth
Ierome
in
Tit.
1.1
.
&
ad
Euagr.
Some
,
that
there
were
two
sorts
of
Elders
,
as
Iunius
.
Some
,
vnderstanding
Ieromes
words
of
the
time
when
factions
began
,
not
of
the
Apostles
times
,
but
afterward
,
as
Iunius
.
These
are
all
his
witnesses
,
Danaeus
,
Musculus
,
Iunius
,
&c.
doe
testifie
,
that
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
the
gouernment
by
BB.
was
not
generally
receiued
.
Therefore
some
ancient
Councils
,
Histories
,
or
Fathers
,
doe
testifie
so
much
.
Yea
,
but
you
speake
of
sound
Writers
in
generall
,
will
he
say
,
and
so
I
conclude
:
Therefore
some
sound
Writers
doe
testifie
so
much
.
But
it
is
plaine
say
I
,
that
I
meane
the
ancient
.
But
to
his
argument
such
as
it
is
,
I
answere
:
first
,
that
if
these
Writers
had
testified
that
which
is
contayned
in
the
antecedent
,
yet
had
not
they
beene
competent
witnesses
in
a
matter
of
fact
fourteene
or
fifteene
hundred
yeares
before
their
time
,
the
greatest
part
of
them
being
also
parties
in
the
cause
.
But
indeede
not
all
,
no
nor
any
one
of
his
witnesses
doth
testifie
that
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
was
not
generally
receiued
;
but
all
his
allegations
accommodated
to
that
conclusion
,
are
most
ridiculous
.
As
for
example
:
in
in
the
Apostles
times
Bishops
and
Presbyters
were
the
same
.
Therefore
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
,
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
was
not
receiued
.
Bishops
were
ordayned
not
by
Gods
law
,
&c.
Therefore
they
were
not
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
:
and
so
of
the
rest
.
But
some
body
will
say
,
though
these
testimonies
be
impertinent
to
the
present
purpose
,
and
I
must
needes
confesse
,
that
your
Refuter
did
grossely
abuse
his
vnlearned
Readers
in
making
such
a
flourish
with
them
:
notwithstanding
,
some
of
the
allegations
contayne
assertions
contrarie
to
some
points
in
your
Sermon
.
Of
whom
,
in
steed
of
answere
,
if
I
should
aske
this
question
,
whom
hee
conceiueth
to
be
aduersaries
to
vs
in
this
cause
?
he
would
answere
,
those
that
stand
for
the
pretended
discipline
.
And
who
be
those
?
Caluin
,
Beza
,
Danaeus
,
lunius
,
Sadeel
,
and
the
most
of
those
whom
the
Refuter
hath
alledged
.
If
they
be
aduersaries
in
this
cause
,
is
it
to
be
wondred
that
they
haue
deliuered
contrary
assertions
?
and
if
they
be
parties
in
the
cause
,
are
their
testimonies
to
be
admitted
?
Verily
,
he
might
better
haue
alledged
M.
Cartwright
,
and
M.
Trauers
,
then
some
of
those
whom
hee
did
cite
,
being
more
parties
in
the
cause
then
they
,
as
not
onely
hauing
written
in
defence
of
their
discipline
,
but
liuing
where
it
is
practised
;
but
that
hee
knew
the
simple
Reader
,
who
cannot
be
ignorant
that
T.
C.
and
W.
T.
are
parties
,
was
ignorant
that
these
outlandish
Writers
were
aduersaries
vnto
vs
in
the
cause
,
to
whose
assertions
,
seeing
it
is
folly
to
oppose
the
authorities
of
learned
men
,
who
are
on
our
side
,
whom
the
Refuter
would
reiect
as
parties
;
I
oppose
the
testimonies
of
antiquity
,
and
the
reasons
contayned
in
this
booke
;
desiring
the
Reader
in
the
feare
of
God
to
giue
credit
without
partiality
to
that
side
on
which
there
is
better
euidence
of
truth
.
And
thus
hauing
turned
ouer
,
Ad
pag.
125.
Allegation
of
Examples
.
and
as
I
suppose
ouerturned
more
then
fiue
leaues
,
which
hee
blotted
with
these
testimonies
;
I
come
to
his
examples
,
of
which
hee
hauing
not
any
one
betweene
the
Apostles
times
and
ours
;
therefore
giueth
instance
in
the
Churches
of
our
time
,
and
in
the
time
of
the
Apostles
.
But
marke
I
pray
you
,
what
was
my
assertion
,
which
hee
would
seeme
to
contradict
.
Was
it
not
this
,
that
no
example
of
any
Orthodoxall
or
Apostolicall
Church
can
be
produced
,
to
proue
that
in
the
three
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
and
his
Apostles
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
was
not
generally
receiued
?
No
:
saith
hee
,
what
say
you
then
,
to
the
Churches
of
Heluetia
,
France
,
lowe
Countries
,
&c.
[
*
](A20733-e124810-b)
*
I
omit
here
how
shamefully
he
belyeth
the
Doctrine
of
the
Churches
of
England
,
Wirtemberge
,
and
Sweueland
,
as
opposite
to
the
gouernment
of
BB.
quoting
Harmon
.
Confess
.
Sect.
11.
The
Church
of
Sweueland
is
so
farre
from
opposing
it selfe
to
the
spirituall
authority
of
Bishops
,
that
it
doth
not
contradict
the
secular
power
and
soueraigntie
of
such
Bishops
as
be
Princes
.
in
our
time
?
and
to
the
Church
of
Corinth
,
Cenchrea
,
Ephesus
and
Antioch
in
the
Apostles
times
?
Marry
this
I
say
;
that
the
Refuter
is
a
very
trifler
,
who
pretending
to
giue
instance
of
some
Church
within
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
times
contrarie
to
my
assertion
,
thinkes
to
satisfie
his
Reader
eyther
with
examples
of
some
Churches
in
our
age
,
or
of
those
in
the
Apostles
times
,
whereof
this
present
question
is
not
.
I
confesse
that
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
at
the
first
had
not
Bishoppes
excepting
that
of
Ierusalem
.
Notwithstanding
,
before
the
death
of
Saint
Iohn
,
the
Churches
had
not
onely
Bishops
but
diuers
of
them
a
succession
of
Bishops
,
and
such
were
two
of
those
which
he
nameth
,
to
wit
,
Antioch
and
Ephesus
:
for
at
Antioch
there
were
Bishops
successiuely
in
the
Apostles
times
.
Evodius
and
Ignatius
.
And
at
Ephesus
,
before
the
Angel
,
(
to
whom
that
Epistle
is
directed
Apoc.
2.1
)
Timothie
.
About
the
yeare
one
hundred
seauenty
and
foure
[
a
](A20733-e124940-b)
a
Euseb.
Chron.
anno
174.
Dionysius
was
B.
of
Corinth
,
and
before
him
was
Primus
,
who
was
of
the
same
time
with
Anicetus
,
Anno
one
hundred
fifty
sixe
:
before
whom
there
was
a
succession
from
the
Apostles
time
,
as
[
b
](A20733-e124990-b)
b
Euseb.
hist.
l.
4.
c.
21.
&
22.
Hegesippus
recordeth
.
As
for
Cenchrea
,
that
neuer
had
a
peculiar
Bishop
of
her
owne
,
but
was
subiect
as
other
Townes
and
Parishes
of
Acha●a
to
the
Bishop
of
Corinth
.
As
touching
the
Churches
after
the
Apostles
times
,
the
Refuter
hath
nothing
to
obiect
,
but
what
before
he
hath
alleadged
out
of
Iustin
Martyr
,
and
Tertullian
,
in
whom
there
is
not
a
word
against
Bishops
.
Iustin
Martyr
,
[
c
](A20733-e125080-b)
c
Apol.
2.
speaketh
but
of
one
gouernour
in
each
Church
,
whom
he
calleth
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
that
is
,
the
B.
saith
Beza
)
speaking
so
plainely
for
the
singularity
of
preheminence
of
one
B.
in
each
Church
,
that
T.
C.
[
d
](A20733-e125130-b)
d
Lib.
1.14
.
who
would
perswade
that
in
the
seueral
Churches
there
were
more
Bishops
then
one
,
saith
,
that
euen
in
Iustines
time
there
began
to
peepe
out
something
which
went
from
the
simplicity
of
the
Gospell
,
as
that
the
name
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
was
common
to
the
Elders
,
with
the
Ministers
of
the
word
,
was
it
seemeth
appropriated
vnto
one
.
And
whereas
this
place
of
Iustine
was
alleadged
[
e
](A20733-e125190-b)
e
Lib.
2.621
.
,
to
proue
the
Bishops
superiority
ouer
the
Presbyters
(
for
euen
Beza
[
f
](A20733-e125220-b)
f
Bez.
in
1
Tim.
5.
&
in
Phil.
1.
confesseth
hee
was
the
President
of
the
Presbyterie
,
who
afterwards
was
called
a
Bishop
)
hee
answereth
;
if
it
should
be
granted
that
Iustines
President
had
superioritie
ouer
the
Ministers
,
yet
how
fondly
is
it
concluded
,
that
it
is
Lawfull
,
because
it
was
?
And
as
I
haue
answered
his
allegation
before
[
g
](A20733-e125280-b)
g
Lib.
1.
cap.
11.
§
3.
out
of
Tertullian
[
h
](A20733-e125320-b)
h
Apologe●
.
c.
39.
for
lay-elders
,
wherein
is
nothing
that
maketh
against
Bishops
:
so
haue
I
cited
pregnant
places
in
his
writings
,
giuing
testimony
not
onely
to
the
gouernment
of
BB.
in
his
time
,
but
prouing
a
continued
succession
[
i
](A20733-e125340-b)
i
Praescrip.
contr.
haere
.
of
them
from
the
Apostles
to
his
time
.
It
is
plaine
therefore
that
the
refuter
with
the
help
of
all
his
collectors
,
is
not
able
to
produce
any
one
example
of
an
orthodoxall
and
Apostolicall
Church
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
times
,
wherin
the
Episcopall
gouernment
was
not
receiued
:
so
that
my
argument
standeth
firme
and
sure
in
all
the
parts
of
it
.
To
my
fourth
reason
concluding
the
perpetuity
of
the
Episcopall
gouernment
in
the
ancient
Churches
,
Ad
pag.
126.
The
fourth
argument
from
the
succession
of
BB.
from
the
succession
of
BB.
deduced
from
the
Apostles
times
vntill
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
remayning
as
yet
vpon
authenticall
records
,
Eusebius
[
k
](A20733-e125400-b)
k
Euseb.
hist.
&
Chron.
,
euery
where
carefully
setting
downe
this
succession
,
and
Irenaeus
[
l
](A20733-e125430-b)
l
Iren.
li.
3.
c.
3.
and
Tertullian
[
m
](A20733-e125470-b)
m
Tertul
de
praescript
.
prouing
the
deriuation
of
the
orthodoxall
doctrine
from
the
Apostles
to
their
time
by
the
personall
succession
of
BB.
in
the
Churches
teaching
the
same
truth
.
He
obiecteth
,
Augustine
Epist.
24.
Christiana
societas
persedes
Apostolorum
ac
successiones
Episcoporum
certa
per
orbem
propagatione
diffunditur
.
and
saith
the
obiection
is
worth
the
answering
,
that
I
deceiue
them
with
the
name
:
he
confesseth
there
was
a
succession
of
BB.
but
the
first
were
not
like
the
latter
:
for
though
the
latter
were
Diocesan
Bishops
yet
the
former
were
not
.
Belike
they
were
first
Parish
BB.
and
then
titular
Diocesan
BB.
and
then
ruling
Diocesans
,
then
Lord
Diocesans
,
then
Metropolitanes
,
then
Patriarches
:
which
being
obiected
vpon
ridiculous
grounds
[
n
](A20733-e125550-b)
n
li.
3
cap.
1.
§.
10
&
12.
(
heretofore
confuted
)
I
held
scarse
worth
the
mentioning
in
the
Sermon
.
It
is
apparant
by
this
succession
,
that
within
the
compasse
of
euery
Diocese
there
was
onely
one
B.
at
a
time
,
there
hauing
bin
no
more
in
any
Diocese
at
the
end
of
the
first
or
second
hundred
,
then
were
at
the
end
of
of
foure
hundred
yeeres
:
and
therefore
this
succession
doth
euidently
proue
a
perpetuitie
of
Diocesan
BB.
from
the
Apostles
times
downewards
.
And
thus
the
former
part
of
my
assumption
is
manifest
.
Wherefore
(
as
I
said
in
the
Sermon
)
this
to
a
moderate
Christian
might
seeme
a
sufficient
commendation
of
the
Episcopall
function
,
though
no
more
could
be
said
for
it
:
that
in
the
best
times
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
it
was
borne
of
so
many
thousand
godly
and
learned
Bishops
,
receiued
in
all
true
Churches
,
approued
of
all
the
orthodoxall
and
learned
Fathers
,
allowed
and
commended
of
all
the
famous
Councils
.
[
o
](A20733-e125610-b)
o
Conc.
Nic.
c.
6.
of
Nice
,
was
so
farre
from
first
ordayning
Bishops
or
Metropolitanes
,
that
it
acknowledgeth
Patriarches
to
haue
beene
long
before
that
time
in
vse
,
and
confirmeth
the
ancient
[
p
](A20733-e125630-b)
p
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
custome
of
subiecting
diuers
Prouinces
to
them
.
For
there
were
Diocesan
Bishops
before
there
were
Metropolitanes
actually
,
and
Metropolitanes
were
long
before
Patriarches
,
and
Patriarches
had
beene
long
in
vse
before
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
and
yet
that
Councill
was
held
within
two
hundred
and
thirtie
yeeres
after
the
Apostle
times
.
Wherefore
seeing
the
proposition
of
my
syllogisme
was
so
euidently
true
,
That
gouernment
which
no
where
was
in
vse
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
,
is
not
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
gouernment
of
the
Churches
by
a
parity
of
ministers
and
assistance
of
Lay-elders
in
euery
parish
was
no
where
in
vse
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
.
Therefore
it
is
not
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
proposition
is
as
certaine
as
the
former
;
the
assumption
I
haue
already
proued
in
the
former
syllogisme
.
For
if
the
gouernment
by
Diocesan
BB.
was
generally
and
perpetually
receiued
in
those
three
hundred
yeares
after
the
Apostles
:
then
is
it
manifest
,
that
this
gouernment
,
which
they
speake
of
,
was
no
wherein
vse
.
But
because
it
is
infinite
to
proue
such
a
negatiue
by
induction
of
particulars
,
which
might
be
disproued
by
any
one
instance
by
them
which
hold
the
affirmatiue
;
therefore
I
left
the
proofe
of
the
affirmatiue
to
the
refuter
.
Let
vs
see
then
how
he
answeareth
;
forsooth
by
opposing
the
like
syllogisme
,
saying
:
That
gouernment
which
was
generally
in
vse
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
,
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
gouernment
of
the
Churches
by
a
parity
of
ministers
and
assistance
of
onely-gouerning
Elders
in
euery
parish
,
was
generally
in
vse
in
the
first
three
hundred
yeeres
.
Therefore
it
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
And
then
braggeth
that
his
proofe
for
their
discipline
is
as
good
as
mine
against
it
.
Wher
the
refuter
doth
not
so
much
bewray
his
ignorance
in
the
lawes
of
disputation
,
as
the
badnes
of
his
cause
;
choosing
rather
to
boast
,
that
their
gouernment
was
generally
and
perpetually
vsed
,
then
to
giue
any
one
instance
to
proue
it
.
what
needed
this
generall
assertion
,
vnlesse
it
were
to
beguile
the
simple
who
are
lead
with
shewes
,
when
one
perticular
instance
would
haue
serued
?
But
that
the
reader
may
vnderstand
,
that
this
my
assumption
was
vndoubtedly
true
,
I
will
make
the
refuter
this
faire
offer
;
that
if
he
can
bring
any
one
pregnant
and
approued
example
of
a
Christian
Church
gouerned
by
a
parity
of
ministers
,
and
assistance
of
onely-gouerning
Elders
,
I
will
promise
to
suscribe
to
their
discipline
.
wherefore
let
not
the
reader
be
carried
away
with
vaine
shewes
,
neither
let
him
belieue
,
that
their
pretended
discipline
was
instituted
by
the
Apostles
,
vntill
they
be
able
to
shew
(
as
they
neuer
will
be
)
that
it
was
sometime
and
some
where
practised
within
three
hundred
yeeres
say
a
thousand
foure
hundred
if
you
will
after
the
Apostles
.
The
II.
CHAPTER
.
Prouing
the
function
of
BB.
to
be
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
because
it
was
vsed
in
those
times
without
their
dislike
.
Serm.
Sect.
4.
pag.
61.
Now
I
proceede
to
the
second
degree
,
ascending
to
the
Apostles
times
,
from
whence
in
the
second
place
I
argue
thus
:
That
gouernment
which
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
was
vsed
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
and
was
not
contradicted
by
them
,
was
vndoubtedly
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
&c.
ad
pag.
65.
WHere
I
take
this
proposition
for
granted
(
namely
of
the
aduersaries
)
he
saith
,
I
reckon
without
mine
host
:
&
yet
confesseth
it
to
be
true
according
to
their
opinion
who
hold
there
may
be
but
one
gouernment
in
the
Church
,
and
that
instituted
by
the
Apostles
;
which
is
the
generall
opinion
of
the
Disciplinarians
,
confessed
in
effect
by
himselfe
,
Pag.
130.
Yea
but
I
say
afterward
,
in
fauour
of
the
Disciplinarians
(
therein
clawing
a
Churle
,
according
to
the
homely
prouerbe
,
as
appeareth
by
this
refuter
)
that
though
the
gouernment
by
BB.
is
the
best
;
yet
we
doubt
not
but
where
this
may
not
be
had
,
others
may
be
admitted
,
neither
doe
we
deny
but
that
siluer
is
good
,
though
gold
be
better
.
If
therefore
,
saith
he
,
there
be
diuers
kindes
of
gouernment
which
may
be
admitted
,
then
might
there
be
a
gouernment
in
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
times
not
contradicted
by
them
,
which
yet
was
not
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
whereto
I
answere
:
first
,
that
I
did
not
say
simply
,
that
other
gouernments
may
be
admitted
besides
that
which
was
ordained
by
the
Apostles
,
but
where
that
cannot
be
had
.
But
whiles
the
Apostles
liued
,
that
which
they
ordayned
might
be
had
.
Againe
,
if
any
in
the
Apostles
times
should
of
their
owne
heads
haue
altered
the
forme
of
gouernment
established
by
them
,
and
consequently
haue
set
vp
a
worse
,
it
cannot
be
thought
,
that
either
the
Apostles
would
haue
allowed
it
,
or
that
all
Churches
would
haue
retayned
that
gouernment
,
which
they
had
not
receiued
from
the
Apostles
.
Besides
,
it
is
incredible
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
any
forme
of
gouernment
was
vsed
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
but
that
which
was
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
:
and
therefore
the
proposition
is
more
then
manifest
.
Now
followeth
the
assumption
:
whereof
are
two
parts
,
the
one
,
that
the
gouernment
by
BB.
was
vsed
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
the
other
that
it
was
not
contradicted
by
them
.
The
former
I
proue
by
two
arguments
:
the
one
because
the
seauen
Angels
were
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
they
were
BB.
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
such
as
ours
be
:
and
therefore
such
BB.
were
in
the
Apostles
time
.
Ad
pag.
128.
His
answer
to
the
assumption
.
Ere
the
refuter
will
answere
to
the
matter
of
the
assumption
,
he
propoundeth
two
things
worthy
his
obseruation
:
the
one
,
that
I
confine
the
number
of
the
Angels
to
seauen
,
which
neither
the
text
doth
(
saith
he
)
nor
himselfe
euer
did
till
now
:
Did
not
I
before
obserue
in
the
Sermon
,
that
there
was
but
one
Angell
in
each
of
the
seauen
Churches
;
and
doth
not
the
text
say
,
that
the
seauen
Starres
are
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
?
I
haue
spoken
of
this
point
before
,
onely
let
the
refuter
call
to
mind
this
argument
among
the
rest
.
The
text
saith
the
Starres
were
seauen
.
The
text
saith
that
the
Angels
be
the
Starres
.
Therefore
the
text
saith
the
Angels
be
seauen
.
The
other
is
,
that
I
shunne
the
terme
Diocesan
,
in
which
notwithstanding
the
whole
question
consisteth
:
for
no
man
doubteth
,
that
the
gouernment
was
by
BB.
in
the
Apostles
times
,
seeing
that
both
ministers
and
ruling
Elders
were
called
BB.
doth
he
not
speak
against
the
light
of
his
owne
conscience
,
when
he
saith
I
auoid
the
name
Diocesan
,
seeing
in
expresse
termes
I
said
,
they
were
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
such
as
ours
be
?
If
I
had
onely
said
Diocesan
,
he
might
haue
excepted
in
behalfe
of
the
learneder
sort
of
Disciplinarians
;
that
they
doubted
not
but
that
the
Angels
were
superintendents
of
the
City
and
countrey
adioyning
;
but
all
the
question
(
would
they
say
)
is
,
of
the
superiority
,
whether
they
had
a
singular
preheminence
for
terme
of
life
,
a
superiority
in
degree
,
a
maiority
of
power
in
respect
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
:
when
as
therefore
I
say
,
that
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
they
were
such
BB.
as
ours
are
,
I
doe
say
,
not
onely
that
they
were
Diocesan
,
but
also
that
they
were
superiour
to
other
ministers
in
degree
,
&c.
But
whence
I
pray
you
,
hath
the
refuter
this
confidence
so
boldly
to
affirme
,
that
their
ruling
Elders
were
called
BB.
?
Caluin
and
M.
Trauers
,
&c.
confesse
that
BB.
signifie
onely
preaching
Elders
,
and
are
your
Lay-elders
now
become
BB
?
the
people
may
haue
ioy
of
such
guides
that
cease
not
to
broach
such
fansies
.
After
he
hath
played
a
little
with
the
assumption
,
plainely
denieth
it
:
what
thinke
you
,
saith
he
,
M.
D.
bringeth
to
proue
it
?
Nothing
saith
the
refuter
,
but
that
which
hath
already
beene
answeared
:
if
that
were
true
,
yet
that
nothing
is
more
then
the
refuter
will
euer
be
able
to
disproue
:
and
that
is
this
,
that
the
seauen
Angels
were
BB.
all
doe
confesse
:
that
they
were
such
BB.
as
ours
be
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
,
I
proued
in
the
first
foure
points
of
the
Sermon
:
yea
but
saith
he
,
I
haue
proued
that
for
the
substance
of
their
calling
they
were
but
ordinarie
ministers
:
let
the
reader
therefore
in
Gods
name
iudge
secundum
allegata
&
probata
,
according
to
the
euidence
which
hath
beene
brought
on
both
sides
and
where
he
saith
,
I
quickely
haue
done
with
the
scriptures
,
because
they
indeed
afford
but
slender
shew
,
&c.
I
answere
first
,
that
I
had
no
reason
to
insist
longer
in
this
proofe
,
vnlesse
I
would
haue
repeated
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
againe
:
was
it
not
sufficient
to
referre
them
to
the
former
part
where
this
point
was
professedly
handled
?
neither
is
he
ignorant
,
but
that
in
demonstration
of
the
latter
part
of
the
assumption
▪
I
bring
other
proofes
out
of
the
scripture
.
But
faine
he
would
disgrace
our
cause
with
the
reader
as
though
we
had
no
proofes
in
scripture
:
which
ill
becommeth
him
,
that
hath
not
one
sillable
in
the
scriptures
,
or
other
monuments
of
antiquity
to
proue
their
Presbiterian
discipline
.
But
it
is
vntrue
,
that
I
bring
nothing
to
proue
the
assumption
,
but
what
was
before
answered
.
For
I
bring
two
other
arguments
,
to
proue
that
these
seauen
Angels
were
such
BB.
The
former
,
though
this
great
analyser
either
did
not
,
or
would
not
see
it
:
that
two
of
these
Angels
were
Polycarpus
and
Onesimus
,
Polycarpus
the
B.
of
Smyrna
,
and
Onesimus
the
B.
of
Ephesus
,
and
what
is
said
of
two
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
rest
.
That
Polycarpe
was
in
these
times
the
B.
of
Smyrna
,
I
proued
by
the
testimonie
of
the
Church
of
Smyrna
[
a
](A20733-e126320-b)
a
Eus.
l.
4.
ca.
15.
,
testifying
that
he
had
beene
the
B.
of
the
Catholicke
Church
in
Smyrna
.
And
of
Bullinger
[
b
](A20733-e126360-b)
b
in
Apoc.
co●
.
9.
,
who
noteth
,
that
Polycarpe
had
beene
B.
of
Smyrna
thirteene
yeares
before
the
reuelation
was
giuen
,
and
so
continued
for
many
yeares
after
.
Whereunto
may
be
added
those
authenticall
testimonies
which
after
are
alledged
,
that
he
was
made
B.
of
Smyrna
by
S.
Iohn
.
That
Onesimus
was
B.
of
Ephesus
at
this
time
▪
I
proue
by
the
testimonie
of
Ignatius
who
liued
at
the
same
time
,
who
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Ephesians
mentioneth
their
B.
Onesimus
.
The
latter
argument
prouing
that
these
seauen
Angels
were
BB.
is
,
because
from
them
all
a
succession
of
BB.
was
continued
in
those
seauen
Churches
to
the
Councill
of
Nice
,
and
afterwards
:
for
to
omit
,
that
the
auncient
BB.
of
these
Churches
are
sometimes
occasionally
mentioned
[
c
](A20733-e126440-b)
c
Eus.
l.
5.
ca.
24.
&
lib.
4.
cap.
26.
Sozo
.
lib.
4.
c.
24.
,
as
Polycrates
of
Ephesus
,
Thraseas
of
Smyrna
,
Melito
of
Sardes
,
&c.
it
is
euident
,
that
the
Bishops
of
these
Churches
subscribed
to
diuerse
of
the
ancient
Councils
,
as
to
the
councill
of
Nice
,
Menophantes
B.
of
Ephesus
,
Eutychius
of
Smyrna
,
Artemidorus
of
Sardes
,
Thomasion
of
Philadelphia
,
Serras
of
Thyatira
,
Nunechius
of
Laodicea
▪
to
the
Council
of
Chalcedon
,
Stephanus
of
Ephesus
,
Aethericus
of
Smyrna
,
Eutropius
of
Pergamus
,
Helladius
of
Thyatira
,
Florentius
of
Sardes
,
Megalus
of
Philadelphia
,
Nunechius
of
Laodicea
.
To
this
argument
the
Refuter
answereth
nothing
in
particular
.
With
these
two
arguments
the
refuter
ioyneth
that
which
I
propounded
Pag.
63.
concerning
the
succession
of
Bishops
in
some
Churches
within
the
Apostles
times
,
being
indcede
the
second
argument
,
whereby
I
proued
the
assumption
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
were
BB.
To
all
these
he
answereth
,
Ad
pag.
129.
first
ioyntly
,
and
then
cauilleth
with
some
of
them
seuerally
.
His
ioynt
answere
to
them
all
,
I
reserue
vntill
I
come
to
that
second
argument
.
The
Epistle
of
Smyrna
,
which
himselfe
heretofore
alledged
as
authenticall
,
being
now
alledged
by
me
,
so
hard
is
my
hap
,
is
growne
suspitious
:
and
why
I
pray
you
?
for
the
Refuter
trauailed
of
a
point
of
learning
,
which
he
desired
to
be
deliuered
of
.
Forsooth
because
it
vseth
the
word
Catholicke
,
which
is
not
to
be
found
in
any
of
the
Epistles
of
Polycarpus
,
or
Ignatius
,
nor
seemeth
to
haue
beene
in
vse
vntill
the
end
of
the
second
age
.
Clemens
Alexandrinus
I
thinke
is
the
ancientest
in
whom
it
can
be
found
.
How
many
Epistles
of
Polycarpus
this
Refuter
hath
read
I
know
not
;
for
my
part
I
haue
seene
no
more
but
his
Epistle
to
the
Philippians
[
d
](A20733-e126780-b)
d
Inter
Orthodoxographa
.
.
Indeede
Suidas
[
e
](A20733-e126810-b)
e
In
Polycarpo
.
,
who
noteth
him
to
haue
beene
the
Disciple
of
S.
Iohn
,
and
the
successor
[
f
](A20733-e126840-b)
f
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
of
Bucolus
,
who
was
the
first
B.
of
Smyrna
,
saith
▪
he
wrote
an
Epistle
to
Dionysius
the
Areopagite
,
and
to
other
Churches
;
which
Epistles
,
if
the
Refuter
haue
,
he
should
doe
well
to
communicate
them
;
if
not
,
how
can
he
tell
that
the
word
Catholicke
was
not
vsed
in
them
?
But
to
the
point
,
was
not
the
Creed
of
the
Apostles
as
ancient
as
this
Epistle
,
which
writeth
of
the
martyrdome
of
Polycarpe
,
who
was
put
to
death
in
the
seauenth
of
Aurelius
Antonius
,
about
the
yeare
one
hundred
sixtie
and
nine
?
and
yet
that
mentioneth
the
Catholicke
Church
.
Againe
,
was
not
this
a
high
point
of
learning
,
to
suspect
this
Epistle
to
be
counterfait
,
because
it
vseth
a
word
which
hee
confesseth
,
is
vsed
by
Clemens
Alexandrinus
,
who
liued
at
the
same
time
,
though
wrote
not
perhaps
more
then
twentie
yeares
after
?
Where
I
proued
,
that
Epistle
of
Ignatius
to
the
Ephesians
,
or
at
least
that
testimonie
which
I
cited
concerning
Onesimus
their
Bishop
,
not
to
be
counterfait
,
because
Eus●bius
[
g
](A20733-e126960-b)
g
Euseb.
l.
3.
c.
35.
mentioneth
that
Epistle
,
and
those
words
;
he
saith
,
this
argument
is
none
of
the
sufficientest
:
but
I
alwaies
thought
,
if
Ignatius
his
Epistles
were
counterfaited
,
that
this
happened
to
them
since
Eusebius
time
.
It
sufficeth
me
,
that
the
testimonie
which
I
alledged
,
was
not
in
Eusebius
his
time
,
who
liued
within
two
hundred
yeares
after
Ignatius
,
suspected
as
counterfait
.
For
if
Eusebius
,
and
those
in
his
time
,
knew
no
cause
to
suspect
that
Epistle
;
I
know
no
reason
,
besides
his
owne
suspiciousnesse
,
why
the
Refuter
should
suspect
it
.
The
second
argument
,
whereby
I
proue
the
former
assumption
is
this
,
[
h
](A20733-e127070-b)
h
Iranaeus
.
Eusebius
.
Epiphanius
.
Augustine
.
&c.
,
of
best
credit
in
the
Church
of
God
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
,
reckoning
vntill
the
death
of
S.
Iohn
,
that
is
,
to
the
yeere
of
our
Lord
one
hundred
and
one
,
there
were
not
onely
BB.
but
also
a
succession
of
BB.
in
diuerse
Churches
:
as
at
Rome
,
Linus
,
Anacletus
,
Clemens
,
Euaristus
:
at
Ierusalem
,
Iames
the
iust
,
and
Simeon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
:
at
Antioch
,
Evodius
and
Ignatius
:
at
Alexandria
,
S.
Marke
,
Anianus
,
Abilius
,
Cerdo
:
hereto
he
saith
,
that
he
hath
formerly
shewen
,
that
if
not
all
,
yet
the
most
of
these
witnesses
doe
affirme
that
those
BB.
were
ordinary
ministers
,
without
any
such
supreame
power
(
he
ought
to
say
if
he
would
leaue
his
calumniating
superiority
in
the
power
)
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
.
But
this
is
one
of
his
vsuall
bragges
,
vttered
with
what
conscience
I
know
not
:
for
what
one
of
these
hath
he
or
what
one
among
all
the
ancient
Writers
can
he
bring
to
make
good
his
assertion
?
Now
the
answere
,
which
he
maketh
to
these
arguments
ioyntly
,
that
the
seauen
Angels
,
and
these
Bishops
whereof
there
were
,
as
I
said
,
successions
in
the
Apostles
times
were
Bishops
indeed
(
no
meruaile
for
so
were
the
lay
Elders
)
but
not
Diocesan
:
for
what
though
long
after
the
Apostles
times
they
were
so
,
doth
it
follow
thereupon
,
that
therefore
they
were
so
in
their
times
?
If
euer
there
had
beene
within
the
compasse
of
a
Diocesse
more
Bishops
then
one
at
once
since
the
Apostles
times
,
or
if
it
could
be
truly
alledged
,
that
the
circuit
of
the
Bishops
charge
was
enlarged
from
a
Parish
to
a
Diocesse
;
then
were
there
some
colour
for
this
exception
,
but
these
conceipts
I
haue
disproued
heretofore
,
and
therefore
doubt
not
most
confidently
to
conclude
,
that
if
the
successors
of
these
seauen
Bishops
,
or
of
the
others
whom
I
named
,
as
hauing
beene
Bishops
in
the
Apostles
times
,
were
in
the
end
of
three
hundred
yeares
Diocesan
Bishops
;
then
were
their
first
antecessors
such
.
Neither
is
his
example
of
the
Duke
of
Venice
to
the
purpose
;
vnlesse
hee
could
proue
,
that
the
latter
Bishops
within
the
first
three
hundred
yeares
had
vsurped
or
vsed
,
as
they
were
Diocesans
,
a
greater
and
larger
authoritie
then
had
belonged
to
their
Predecessors
.
The
latter
part
of
the
assumption
remaineth
to
be
proued
,
this
proofe
is
needlesse
,
seeing
the
Bishops
were
such
as
he
fansieth
:
but
till
he
can
disproue
the
former
part
of
my
Sermon
,
and
of
this
Treatise
;
hee
must
giue
the
Reader
leaue
to
thinke
they
were
such
,
as
they
haue
beene
manifestly
proued
to
be
:
but
this
needlesse
accusation
,
being
commonly
vsed
by
the
Refuter
against
such
passages
of
my
Sermon
as
are
most
materiall
;
maketh
me
conceiue
there
is
somewhat
in
this
point
,
that
hee
could
wish
had
beene
spared
,
or
at
least
whereabout
he
meaneth
to
spare
his
answere
.
That
this
passage
was
not
needlesse
,
but
very
materiall
,
appeareth
hereby
.
For
if
I
had
onely
said
,
that
BB.
had
beene
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
therefore
were
of
their
institution
,
it
might
haue
beene
obiected
,
that
there
were
abuses
crept
into
the
Churches
in
the
Apostles
time
,
whereof
notwithstanding
the
Apostles
were
not
Authors
:
wherefore
in
this
place
I
shew
that
Bishops
not
onely
were
in
the
Apostles
times
,
but
also
were
approued
by
them
.
That
they
were
in
respect
of
their
function
approued
,
I
proue
,
by
the
examples
of
the
7.
Angels
approued
by
S.
Iohn
,
or
rather
by
our
Sauiour
Christ
;
of
Epaphroditus
the
Apostle
or
B.
of
the
Philippians
,
(
who
therefore
is
not
mentioned
in
the
inscription
of
that
Epistle
,
because
the
Epistle
was
sent
by
him
)
commended
by
S
▪
Paul
[
k
](A20733-e127340-b)
k
Phil.
2.25.29
.
,
as
his
compatner
both
in
his
function
and
in
affliction
,
and
the
Philippians
commanded
to
haue
in
honour
such
.
Iames
[
l
](A20733-e127370-b)
l
Act.
15.
&
21.
Gal.
1.19
.
the
Iust
,
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
approued
of
all
.
Archippus
[
m
](A20733-e127420-b)
m
Col.
4.17
.
Philem.
1.
the
B.
of
Colossa
approued
of
Paul
,
Antipas
[
n
](A20733-e127460-b)
n
Ap.
2.13
.
who
had
beene
B.
of
Pergamus
commended
by
the
holy
Ghost
.
To
none
of
these
hath
the
Refuter
any
thing
to
say
,
but
to
Epaphroditus
,
whom
he
would
not
therefore
haue
thought
to
haue
beene
a
Diocesan
B.
because
Paul
calleth
him
his
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
fellow
work●-man
,
nor
that
the
Apostle
meant
to
equall
him
to
himselfe
in
the
Apostleship
:
for
Epaphroditus
was
none
,
&c.
Though
that
word
doth
not
proue
it
,
neither
was
it
alledged
to
that
end
,
but
as
one
of
the
titles
of
commendation
giuen
to
Epaphroditus
;
yet
the
word
Apostle
,
which
I
alledged
,
doth
proue
it
;
neither
should
the
Refuter
haue
balked
that
,
to
lay
hold
vpon
another
,
vnlesse
it
were
to
deceiue
the
simple
.
It
is
therefore
to
be
noted
▪
that
as
the
twelue
Patriarches
of
Christs
Church
,
which
were
sent
into
the
whole
world
,
some
going
one
way
,
some
another
,
were
called
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
and
not
the
Apostles
of
any
Church
in
particular
(
excepting
Iames
,
who
was
the
Apostle
of
the
Iewes
)
so
those
Apostolicall
men
,
who
were
set
ouer
particular
Churches
as
the
Bishops
thereof
,
were
for
a
time
called
the
Apostles
of
those
Churches
.
So
Paul
calleth
Epaphroditus
the
Apostle
of
the
Philippians
,
and
therefore
it
was
malepertly
said
by
the
Refuter
,
that
he
was
not
an
Apostle
.
But
of
this
more
[
o
](A20733-e127630-b)
o
Chap.
3.
§
12.13.14
.
hereafter
.
Before
I
ended
this
point
,
I
thought
it
needfull
to
meet
with
that
obiection
which
ordinarily
is
made
out
of
Ierome
,
[
p
](A20733-e127710-b)
p
In
Tit.
1.
therfore
confesseth
in
the
place
which
is
vsually
obiected
,
that
when
factions
began
to
arise
in
the
Church
,
some
saying
I
am
of
Paul
,
I
am
of
Apollos
,
I
am
of
Cephas
(
which
was
in
the
Apostles
times
,
1
Cor.
1.
)
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
,
and
therefore
by
the
Apostles
(
for
who
should
in
the
Apostles
times
make
such
a
generall
decree
but
the
Apostles
?
yea
,
and
Ierome
himselfe
calleth
the
Episcopall
function
a
[
q
](A20733-e127790-b)
q
Ad
Euagr.
tradition
Apostolicall
)
that
one
being
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
,
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
vnto
whom
the
care
of
the
whole
Church
should
appertaine
.
Whereunto
I
added
his
confession
of
the
same
truth
in
other
places
.
For
he
confesseth
that
Iames
[
r
](A20733-e127830-b)
r
Catalog
.
script
.
the
Iust
,
shortly
after
the
Passion
of
Christ
was
made
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
and
continued
B.
there
thirtie
yeares
,
euen
vntill
his
death
.
In
the
same
Catalogue
it
is
confessed
,
that
Simon
succeeded
the
said
Iames
in
the
Bishopricke
,
and
that
Timothie
was
B.
of
Eph●sus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
,
and
Polycarpe
of
Smyrna
in
S.
Iohns
time
;
that
Linus
[
s
](A20733-e127930-b)
s
In
Clemente
.
,
Anacletus
and
Clemens
were
BB.
of
Rome
.
Hee
confesseth
also
,
that
at
Alexandria
[
t
](A20733-e127970-b)
t
Ad
Euagr.
euer
since
S.
Marke
there
had
beene
BB.
chosen
successiuely
:
that
S.
Marke
was
the
[
u
](A20733-e128010-b)
u
Proaem
.
in
Mat.
first
B.
of
the
Church
at
Alexandria
,
and
that
Anianus
[
w
](A20733-e128040-b)
w
Catalog
.
in
Marco
.
succeeded
him
.
After
whom
there
were
two
more
Abilius
and
Cerdo
in
the
Apostles
times
.
It
is
most
plaine
therefore
,
that
Ierome
acknowledgeth
BB.
to
haue
beene
in
the
Apostles
time
.
Now
let
vs
see
,
what
tricke
the
Refuter
hath
to
auoide
such
plaine
euidence
.
Forsooth
because
these
testimonies
were
as
he
saith
,
(
not
knowing
indeed
,
nor
greatly
caring
what
he
affirmeth
)
brought
in
by
me
out
of
order
,
and
some
of
them
come
to
be
handled
againe
:
he
will
answere
generally
and
briefly
,
that
the
Bishops
Ierome
speaketh
of
,
were
not
Diocesan
Lords
;
but
such
as
himselfe
describeth
,
where
hee
sheweth
the
custome
of
the
Church
of
Alexandria
,
&c.
Whether
they
were
called
Lords
,
or
not
,
it
is
not
greatly
materiall
;
seeing
they
were
called
the
Angels
,
and
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
which
are
titles
of
greater
honour
;
neither
doth
it
appertaine
to
the
substance
of
their
calling
;
in
regard
whereof
I
defend
the
ancient
Bishops
to
haue
beene
such
as
ours
are
.
And
such
doth
Ierome
describe
them
in
the
place
which
the
Refuter
[
x
](A20733-e128170-b)
x
Ad
Euagr.
meaneth
.
For
hee
plainly
noteth
the
Bishop
to
haue
beene
but
one
in
a
whole
Church
or
Diocese
,
to
whom
the
care
[
y
](A20733-e128190-b)
y
In
Tit.
1.
of
the
whole
Church
did
belong
;
superiour
also
to
the
Presbyters
in
degree
,
&c.
taketh
his
turne
to
reply
and
that
thus
:
That
gouernment
which
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
was
vsed
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
and
was
not
contradicted
by
them
,
was
of
Apostollicall
institution
.
The
gouernment
by
common
consent
of
Elders
was
vsed
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
and
not
contradicted
by
them
.
Therefore
the
gouernment
by
the
common
consent
of
Elders
was
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
Proposition
(
saith
he
)
is
sure
on
our
side
,
though
it
was
not
of
his
.
See
●ee
,
homo
homini
quantum
praestat
,
that
which
is
weake
in
my
hand
,
is
strong
in
this
.
The
truth
it selfe
belike
is
so
partiall
,
as
that
it
is
true
onely
in
his
mouth
.
For
the
strengthening
of
the
assumption
(
saith
hee
)
besides
that
which
before
I
answered
Sect.
3.
(
which
was
besides
the
testimonie
of
Cyprian
and
Ierome
before
answered
,
an
allegation
of
some
new
Writers
,
who
are
parties
in
the
cause
)
I
will
adde
the
testimonies
of
B.
Whitgift
,
D.
Bilson
,
D.
Sutcliffe
,
and
D.
Downame
himselfe
,
all
speaking
to
the
truth
thereof
.
He
should
haue
done
well
to
haue
cited
these
testimonies
;
so
would
it
haue
appeared
,
that
we
spake
according
to
the
truth
,
but
not
according
to
his
meaning
,
which
is
vntrue
.
But
I
answere
to
his
assumption
,
and
first
to
the
former
part
of
it
,
by
distinction
.
If
by
Elders
,
he
meaneth
the
onely
gouerning
Elders
,
as
well
as
Ministers
(
as
hee
doth
,
or
else
he
saith
little
for
the
pretended
discipline
)
I
answere
,
that
the
Church
was
neuer
gouerned
by
the
common
Counsell
of
such
Aldermen
:
neither
did
Cyprian
and
Ierome
testifie
it
,
nor
D.
Bilson
,
D.
Sutcliffe
,
or
D.
Downame
confesse
it
.
If
by
Elders
,
he
meane
onely
Ministers
,
as
Ierome
did
,
when
he
said
,
at
the
first
the
Churches
before
factions
did
arise
,
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Elders
,
two
things
may
be
questioned
:
first
,
whether
this
gouernment
of
theirs
were
vnsubordinate
,
according
to
the
new
discipline
;
and
secondly
,
whether
the
Apostles
did
intend
,
that
the
Churches
should
be
so
gouerned
still
.
Whereunto
I
answere
,
according
to
the
euident
light
of
truth
,
that
the
Presbyters
gouerned
the
Churches
,
as
vnder
the
Apostles
,
and
that
but
for
a
time
,
vntill
the
Apostles
substituted
BB.
or
left
them
as
their
successors
,
committing
the
gouernment
of
the
seuerall
Churches
vnto
them
.
To
the
second
part
of
his
assumption
I
answere
,
that
the
Apostles
contradicted
that
gouernment
(
which
hee
speaketh
of
,
by
common
counsell
of
Elders
ruling
without
a
B.
)
not
so
much
by
words
as
by
deeds
:
when
ordayning
BB.
in
seuerall
Churches
,
they
committed
the
whole
care
thereof
as
Ierome
[
a
](A20733-e128560-b)
a
In
Tit.
1.
speaketh
,
or
at
least
,
the
chiefe
care
and
authoritie
,
as
Ignatius
[
b
](A20733-e128590-b)
b
Ad
Trall
.
testifieth
,
to
them
.
And
so
leauing
the
Refuter
to
rowle
the
stone
he
speaketh
of
,
I
proceed
to
my
third
argument
.
The
III.
CHAPTER
:
Prouing
that
the
Apostles
themselues
ordayned
Bishops
.
Serm.
Sect.
5.
pag.
65.
But
yet
I
proceede
to
a
further
degree
,
which
is
,
to
proue
that
the
Apostles
themselues
ordayned
BB.
and
committed
the
Churches
to
them
,
and
therefore
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
without
question
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
&c.
to
38.
yeares
,
pag.
69.
without
question
it
is
good
;
yet
I
confesse
he
might
haue
taken
more
iust
exception
,
then
he
hath
hitherto
against
any
,
which
was
not
of
his
owne
making
:
so
farre
is
it
from
concluding
the
same
,
by
the
same
.
For
he
might
haue
said
,
though
they
ordayned
the
persons
,
yet
Christ
instituted
the
function
,
and
that
is
the
iudgement
of
many
of
the
Fathers
,
who
holde
that
our
Sauiour
Christ
in
ordayning
his
twelue
Apostles
,
and
his
seauentie
two
Disciples
,
both
which
sorts
he
sent
to
preach
the
Gospell
;
he
instituted
the
two
degrees
of
the
ministerie
BB.
answering
to
the
high
Priest
,
and
Presbyters
answerable
to
the
Priests
.
Againe
,
those
Fathers
who
affirme
the
BB.
to
be
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
;
doe
by
consequence
affirme
,
that
Christ
when
he
ordayned
Apostles
,
ordayned
BB.
and
Cyprian
[
c
](A20733-e128740-b)
c
li.
3.
Epist.
9.
in
plainetermes
saith
so
much
,
that
our
Lord
himselfe
ordayned
Apostles
,
that
is
to
say
,
Bishops
.
For
the
Popish
conceipt
,
that
the
Apostles
were
not
made
Priests
till
Christs
last
supper
;
nor
BB.
till
after
his
resurrection
,
as
it
is
sutable
with
other
their
opinions
deuised
to
aduance
the
Popes
supremacy
;
so
it
is
repugnant
to
the
iudgement
of
the
ancients
,
&
contrary
to
the
truth
.
Seeing
the
very
Disciples
,
who
were
inferiour
to
the
Apostles
,
were
authorized
before
Christs
last
supper
,
to
preach
&
to
baptise
.
Neither
had
they
,
or
needed
they
,
any
new
ordination
,
whereby
they
might
be
qualified
to
administer
the
Sacrament
.
But
of
this
matter
I
will
not
contend
:
for
whether
the
function
were
first
ordayned
by
Christ
or
instituted
by
the
Apostles
;
Christ
is
the
authour
thereof
,
either
immediatly
,
according
to
the
former
opinion
;
or
mediatly
,
according
to
the
latter
.
And
those
things
are
said
to
be
of
▪
Apostolicall
institution
,
which
Christ
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
.
The
antecedent
of
my
argument
,
statim
post
passionem
Domini
,
straight
wayes
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
,
ordayned
Iames
the
iust
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
as
[
d
](A20733-e128840-b)
d
Catal.
scrip
.
Ierome
testifieth
.
Here
my
refuter
maketh
me
to
argue
thus
;
culling
out
one
part
of
my
argumentation
from
the
rest
;
Iames
was
ordayned
Bishop
by
the
Apostles
,
therefore
the
Apostles
ordayned
Bishops
.
And
then
denieth
the
consequence
,
because
though
Iames
being
an
Apostle
had
Episcopall
power
in
respect
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
yet
it
would
not
follow
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
Diocesan
Bishops
in
other
Churches
.
But
my
argument
is
an
induction
,
standing
thus
.
The
Apostles
ordayned
BB.
at
Ierusalem
,
and
in
other
Churches
,
(
which
afterwards
particularly
I
doe
enumerate
)
therefore
they
ordayned
BB.
That
they
ordayned
BB.
at
Ierusalem
,
I
proue
,
because
they
ordayned
Iames
the
Iust
,
and
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
,
BB.
of
Ierusalem
.
That
they
ordayned
Iames
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
I
proue
in
this
section
.
That
they
ordained
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
and
Bishops
in
other
Churches
,
I
proue
afterwards
,
according
to
the
order
of
time
:
Beginning
here
with
Ierusalem
because
that
Church
had
first
a
Bishop
.
[
e
](A20733-e129020-b)
e
Catalog
.
scrip
.
;
whose
words
are
these
,
Iames
who
is
called
the
brother
of
our
Lord
,
&
f●●named
the
iust
,
straight
wayes
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
was
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
the
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
.
This
is
that
Ierome
,
on
whose
onely
authoritie
almost
the
Disciplinarians
in
this
cause
relye
;
alledging
out
of
him
,
that
Bishops
were
not
ordayned
till
after
the
Apostles
times
.
Secondly
,
of
Eusebius
,
and
of
the
most
ancient
histories
of
the
Church
,
whose
testimonies
he
citeth
to
this
purpose
:
first
,
therefore
he
saith
in
generall
[
f
](A20733-e129080-b)
f
Hist.
l.
2.
c.
1.
that
the
histories
[
g
](A20733-e129120-b)
g
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
before
his
time
did
report
,
that
to
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
,
surnamed
the
iust
,
the
throne
of
the
Bishopricke
of
the
Church
in
Ierusalem
was
first
committed
.
Then
particularly
,
he
citeth
Clemens
[
h
](A20733-e129170-b)
h
Ex
hypotypos.
6.
Alexandrinus
,
testifying
that
Iames
,
Peter
and
Iohn
,
after
the
ascension
of
our
Sauiour
did
choose
Iames
the
iust
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
.
Afterwards
Hegesippus
[
i
](A20733-e129220-b)
i
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
23.
&
Hieronym
.
Catalog
.
ex
Hegesippi
5.
hypomnem
▪
(
who
was
nere
the
Apostles
times
as
Ierome
speaketh
,
being
as
Eusebius
saith
in
the
very
first
succession
of
the
Apostles
,
)
to
the
like
purpose
.
Eusebius
[
k
](A20733-e129300-b)
k
An.
33.
himselfe
in
his
Chronicle
translated
by
Ierome
,
hath
these
words
;
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
is
by
the
Apostles
made
the
first
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
.
Againe
,
in
his
history
[
l
](A20733-e129340-b)
l
lib.
3.
c.
7.
he
not
onely
saith
,
that
Iames
called
the
brother
of
our
Lord
was
the
first
Bishop
of
Ierus●●em
;
but
also
testifieth
[
m
](A20733-e129380-b)
m
lib.
7.
c.
19.
&
32.
vpon
his
knowledge
,
that
the
Episcopall
throne
or
chaire
,
wherein
Iames
sate
as
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
and
wherein
all
the
BB.
of
that
See
succeeded
him
,
was
yet
in
his
time
to
be
seene
,
being
preserued
as
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
a
worthy
and
sacred
[
n
](A20733-e129440-b)
n
Vid.
Ruff.
transl
.
l.
7.
c.
15.
monument
.
And
finally
,
both
in
his
historie
[
o
](A20733-e129470-b)
o
Euseb.
hist.
l.
3.
c.
11.
l.
4.
c.
5.22
.
l.
5.
c.
11.
l.
6.
c.
10
&c.
l.
7.
c.
32.
and
Chronicle
he
setteth
down
the
succession
of
the
Bishops
of
Ierusalem
from
Iames
vnto
Macarius
,
whom
he
noteth
to
haue
been
the
thirtie
ninth
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
reckoning
Iames
the
first
,
and
Simon
the
second
,
and
Iustus
the
third
,
Zacheus
the
fourth
,
&c.
Epiphanius
[
p
](A20733-e129660-b)
p
Epiph.
haer.
66.
also
testifieth
,
that
Iames
the
Lords
brother
was
[
q
](A20733-e129690-b)
q
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
the
first
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
and
setteth
downe
the
same
succession
of
the
Bishops
,
from
Iames
vnto
Hilarion
,
noting
the
yeeres
of
the
seuerall
Emperours
reigne
,
vnto
which
they
continued
Bishops
.
The
same
concerning
Iames
is
witnessed
by
Chrysostome
[
r
](A20733-e129750-b)
r
In
Act.
homil
.
3.
&
33.
in
initio
,
by
Ambrose
[
s
](A20733-e129800-b)
s
Ambr.
in
Gal.
1.19
.
on
the
Epistle
to
the
Galathians
;
Paul
saw
Iames
at
Ierusalem
,
because
there
he
had
beene
ordayned
B.
of
the
Apostles
.
By
Dorotheus
[
t
](A20733-e129840-b)
t
Dor.
in
synops
.
,
by
Augustine
[
u
](A20733-e129870-b)
u
Aug.
contr.
Crescon
.
l.
2.
c.
37.
,
and
(
to
omit
all
other
testimonies
of
particular
men
)
by
the
generall
Councill
of
Constantinople
[
(w)
](A20733-e129900-b)
(w)
In
Trul.
c.
32.
,
affirming
that
Iames
,
who
according
to
the
flesh
was
brother
of
Christ
our
Lord
was
the
first
to
whom
the
throne
of
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
was
entrusted
.
§
4.
These
testimonies
for
a
matter
of
story
(
me
thinks
)
should
suffice
:
let
vs
then
see
,
what
the
refuter
obiecteth
.
First
,
that
which
he
obiected
against
the
consequence
is
more
direct
against
the
antecedent
;
The
refuters
exceptions
.
&
that
is
,
that
if
the
Apostles
ordayned
Iames
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
then
they
gaue
him
the
Episcopal
power
;
but
they
gaue
him
no
power
which
the
Lord
had
not
before
inuested
in
his
person
,
as
an
Apostle
;
therefore
they
did
not
ordayne
him
B.
I
answere
by
distinction
;
the
power
of
order
(
if
I
may
so
terme
it
)
Iames
had
before
,
as
those
who
are
Bishops
,
sine
titulo
;
but
the
power
of
iurisdiction
was
committed
to
him
when
he
was
designed
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
and
had
the
Church
of
Iewry
in
particular
assigned
to
him
.
For
though
our
Sauiour
Christ
bad
the
Apostles
to
goe
into
all
the
world
;
yet
his
meaning
was
not
,
that
euery
one
should
trauerse
the
whole
world
:
For
if
euery
one
had
been
to
trauell
ouer
all
the
world
,
great
inconuenience
,
disorder
,
and
confusion
would
haue
followed
thereof
.
Therefore
the
Apostles
,
who
by
our
Sauiour
were
indefinitely
appointed
to
goe
into
all
the
world
,
by
the
direction
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
before
their
dispersion
from
Ierusalem
,
deuided
the
world
among
themselues
;
in
such
sort
,
that
one
being
assigned
to
one
part
,
&
another
to
another
,
euery
man
walked
within
his
owne
compasse
,
and
according
to
his
owne
Canon
[
y
](A20733-e130050-b)
y
2
Cor.
10.13.15.16
.
vide
Chryso
.
in
2
Cor.
10.
&
gloss
.
ordin
.
or
rule
,
and
did
not
vsually
build
vpon
the
foundation
of
another
,
nor
enter
one
into
anothers
labours
.
Now
,
as
they
were
carefull
to
prouide
for
other
parts
of
the
world
;
so
would
they
not
all
forsake
Iewry
and
Ierusalem
,
but
assigne
one
of
their
company
to
take
charge
thereof
.
Who
,
though
he
wer
an
Apostle
,
yet
being
assigned
to
the
peculiar
Church
of
one
nation
,
might
not
vnfitly
be
called
,
as
he
was
indeed
,
the
B.
thereof
.
And
hence
it
is
,
that
although
the
Apostles
were
commanded
to
goe
into
all
the
world
,
yet
Iames
stayed
at
Ierusalem
vntill
his
death
.
Secondly
he
taketh
exception
against
the
euidence
which
I
brought
;
first
,
because
it
is
not
testified
in
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
Ad
pag.
132.
that
they
made
Iames
B
of
Ierusalem
.
As
though
the
Apostles
did
nothing
,
but
what
is
recorded
in
the
Actes
;
and
as
though
we
should
deny
credit
to
the
ancientest
writers
,
and
such
as
be
of
best
credit
,
reporting
with
one
consent
a
matter
of
fact
not
registred
in
the
Acts.
But
though
the
act
of
making
him
B.
be
not
set
downe
in
the
Acts
;
yet
the
story
so
speaketh
of
his
continuance
[
z
](A20733-e130180-b)
z
Act.
15.
&
21.
at
Ierusalem
,
of
his
assistance
of
Presbyters
,
of
his
presidency
in
that
Councill
where
Peter
and
Paul
were
present
;
that
it
may
appeare
their
testimonie
is
true
,
and
agreable
to
the
scriptures
,
who
haue
reported
him
to
be
B.
there
.
The
next
exception
is
,
that
I
produce
none
of
the
Apostles
Disciples
to
testifie
it
.
And
what
one
of
them
,
whose
writings
are
extant
could
I
alledge
,
whom
,
you
would
not
reiect
as
counterfeit
?
Clemens
[
a
](A20733-e130250-b)
a
Clem.
Epist.
1.
the
Disciple
of
the
Apostles
,
not
only
writeth
an
Epistle
to
Iames
translated
by
Ruffinus
,
calling
him
the
Bishop
of
Bishops
gouerning
the
holy
Church
of
the
Hebrewes
in
Ierusalem
,
but
also
in
his
booke
of
recognitions
[
b
](A20733-e130300-b)
b
R●●●gn
.
lib.
1.
translated
likewise
by
the
same
Ruffinus
,
and
dedicated
to
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
,
calleth
him
vsually
the
B.
yea
,
the
cheife
of
Bishops
:
which
titles
,
how
the
Pope
can
disgest
,
I
know
not
.
But
suppose
,
that
none
of
the
disciples
of
the
Apostles
in
those
few
writings
of
theirs
which
be
extant
,
had
giuen
testimony
to
this
matter
:
were
not
the
testimony
of
Hegesippus
,
and
Clemens
,
who
both
liued
in
the
very
next
age
to
the
Apostles
,
sufficient
?
It
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
Iames
his
being
B.
of
Ierusalem
was
a
thing
as
notorious
,
and
as
certainely
knowne
among
Christians
in
those
times
;
as
there
is
no
doubt
made
among
vs
now
,
that
D.
Cranmer
was
Archbishop
of
Canterbury
in
King
Henry
the
eights
time
.
In
the
third
place
he
would
seeke
to
descredit
all
Historyes
in
generall
;
because
the
most
learned
B.
of
Ely
,
in
a
Sermon
preached
when
he
was
of
Chichester
,
truely
noteth
,
what
might
be
obiected
against
historians
of
latter
times
.
But
Eusebius
is
free
,
as
I
suppose
,
from
that
imputation
,
and
much
more
Hegesippus
,
and
Clemens
,
in
whom
also
that
cauill
of
his
hath
no
place
,
that
they
spake
of
Bishops
which
had
beene
before
,
according
to
the
condition
of
them
in
their
times
.
For
such
was
the
estate
of
Ierusalem
,
and
of
the
Iewes
in
their
times
;
as
that
the
condition
of
the
Bishops
there
was
rather
impayred
,
then
increased
.
Neither
were
they
,
nor
any
other
,
whom
I
cited
,
so
simple
,
but
that
they
knew
as
well
as
the
refuter
,
that
Iames
was
an
Apostle
;
neither
did
they
know
any
reason
,
which
the
refuter
would
seeme
to
know
,
why
his
being
an
Apostle
should
hinder
his
being
the
Apostle
,
or
Angell
of
that
Church
.
For
so
were
the
Bishops
at
the
first
called
.
Fourthly
and
lastly
,
that
Iames
was
not
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
neither
could
be
,
so
that
their
testimonie
is
not
onely
false
,
but
impossible
.
But
how
is
this
proued
?
forsooth
because
two
or
three
late
writers
(
worthy
men
I
confesse
,
D.
Whitakers
,
Bishop
Iewell
,
D.
Raynolds
)
doe
deny
,
that
he
was
Bishop
there
.
If
they
all
had
denyed
●t
,
as
they
did
not
;
yet
without
any
disparagement
to
them
,
the
affirmation
of
so
many
ancient
writers
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
agreeable
also
with
the
scriptures
,
proued
by
the
succession
of
the
Bishops
of
Ierusalem
,
remayning
yet
in
diuers
good
authors
vpon
record
,
besides
other
euidence
,
may
ouerweigh
their
denyall
.
But
what
if
they
all
did
not
deny
it
?
to
D.
Raynolds
I
know
not
what
to
say
,
the
refuter
onely
maketh
a
shew
with
his
name
,
neither
alledging
his
words
,
nor
quoting
the
place
.
He
citeth
Bishop
Iewels
defence
of
the
Apology
,
pag
300.
telling
Harding
out
of
Clemens
Epist.
1.
that
Iames
was
no
otherwise
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
then
ouer
all
the
other
Churches
;
where
is
no
such
matter
.
Indeed
in
the
300.
page
.
of
his
reply
vnto
Harding
,
Clement
vnto
Iames
B.
of
Ierusalem
writeth
thus
:
Clemens
Iacobo
fratri
Domini
,
Episcopo
Episcoporum
,
regenti
Hebraeorum
sanctam
Ecclesiam
Hierosolymis
,
sed
&
omnes
Ecclesias
quae
vbique
Dei
prouidentia
fundatae
sunt
.
Clement
vnto
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
,
the
B.
of
BB.
gouerning
the
holy
Church
of
the
Iewes
at
Ierusalem
,
and
besides
all
the
Churches
that
be
founded
euery
where
by
Gods
prouidence
.
These
be
all
his
words
,
sauing
that
hee
saith
,
if
Harding
had
so
good
euidence
for
the
B.
of
Rome
,
he
would
not
thus
haue
passed
it
ouer
in
silence
.
Which
if
you
compare
with
the
refuters
allegation
,
you
may
well
wonder
at
his
dealing
.
Doth
not
B.
Iewel
himselfe
in
plaine
termes
call
Iames
the
B.
of
Ierusalem
?
and
that
which
is
said
of
his
gouerning
other
Churches
,
is
not
his
saying
,
but
Clements
,
if
it
be
truely
printed
in
the
copies
[
d
](A20733-e130800-b)
d
Tom.
1.
Concil.
per
Cragg
.
Merlinum
Iouerium
.
which
B.
Iewel
did
follow
.
Neither
would
it
follow
of
those
words
alledged
,
as
they
are
,
that
he
was
no
otherwise
B.
of
Ierusalem
then
ouer
all
the
other
Churches
.
The
B.
of
Constantinople
,
though
he
were
called
vniuersall
or
oecumenicall
Patriarch
;
yet
was
he
the
Diocesan
B.
of
the
Church
of
Constantinople
alone
:
and
that
was
his
peculiar
Diocese
.
So
if
Clement
had
meant
that
Iames
had
beene
the
gouernour
of
all
Churches
,
yet
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
was
his
Diocese
,
wherein
Simon
and
the
rest
of
the
Bishops
of
Ierusalem
did
succeed
him
,
and
thereof
he
had
his
denomination
.
The
Pope
himselfe
,
though
he
claime
to
be
vniuersall
Bishop
,
yet
is
he
specially
Bishop
of
Rome
;
and
his
cathedrall
Church
is
the
Church
of
Laterane
,
of
which
he
is
Bishop
.
Howbeit
,
in
the
edition
of
that
Epistle
set
forth
by
Sichardus
,
and
printed
at
Basill
together
with
his
recognitions
anno
1526.
we
read
thus
.
Sed
&
ominibus
Ecclesiis
quae
vbique
sunt
.
By
which
copy
,
if
it
be
true
,
Iames
is
not
signified
to
be
the
gouernour
of
all
Churches
;
but
Clements
Epistle
is
directed
not
onely
to
Iames
,
but
to
all
Churches
,
&c.
Yea
but
D.
Whitakers
by
eight
arguments
doth
proue
,
that
he
neither
was
,
nor
might
be
B.
of
Ierusalem
.
I
promise
you
,
this
maketh
a
faire
shew
,
if
it
be
true
.
But
this
also
is
a
manifest
vntruth
.
For
the
arguments
that
he
vseth
,
are
to
proue
,
that
Peter
was
not
Bishop
of
Rome
.
Yea
but
the
same
are
as
effectuall
to
proue
that
Iames
might
not
be
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
:
and
therefore
to
these
eight
arguments
he
doth
referre
[
e
](A20733-e131030-b)
e
de
Pont.
q.
3.
s.
9.
c.
3.
R
me
.
But
this
also
is
vntrue
.
For
six
of
these
eight
,
are
such
,
as
the
refuter
with
all
his
sophistry
cannot
with
any
shew
of
truth
applie
to
St.
Iames.
For
his
third
argument
,
taken
from
Peters
long
absence
from
Rome
,
after
he
was
according
to
their
opinion
B.
there
cannot
be
,
applyed
to
Iames
,
who
was
resident
at
Ierusalem
;
as
the
Actes
,
besides
other
witnesses
,
testifie
.
Nor
the
fourth
,
that
if
Peter
were
B.
then
had
he
two
Bishopricks
.
For
he
had
beene
by
their
owne
doctrine
as
well
B.
of
Antioch
,
as
of
Rome
.
But
no
such
thing
can
be
obiected
against
Iames.
Nor
the
fift
that
whiles
Peter
liued
Linus
was
B.
of
Rome
:
so
he
was
indeed
by
the
appointment
of
Peter
and
Paul
,
as
Irenaeus
teacheth
.
But
whiles
Iames
liued
none
was
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
but
he
.
But
after
he
was
dead
,
Simon
was
chosen
to
be
his
successor
.
Nor
the
sixt
,
that
the
authors
which
mention
Peters
going
to
Rome
,
note
this
to
haue
beene
the
end
,
not
to
be
B.
there
,
but
to
oppose
Simon
Magus
.
But
the
cause
of
Iames
his
staying
and
continuing
at
Ierusalem
was
to
take
charge
of
that
Church
,
which
,
during
his
life
,
had
no
other
B.
Nor
the
seauenth
,
that
if
Peter
were
B.
of
Rome
then
would
he
haue
professed
himselfe
the
Apostle
of
the
Gentiles
,
neither
would
he
haue
conuenanted
with
Paul
,
that
he
and
Barnabas
should
take
care
of
the
Gentiles
,
but
himselfe
,
and
Iames
,
and
Iohn
,
of
the
Circumcision
.
For
Iames
as
he
is
said
to
haue
beene
B.
of
Ierusalem
;
so
hee
professeth
himselfe
to
haue
beene
the
Apostle
of
the
Iewes
.
For
besides
,
that
he
writeth
his
Epistle
[
f
](A20733-e131290-b)
f
Erasm.
argum
.
in
Epist.
Iacobi
.
Iacobus
quum
erat
Hierosolymitarum
Episcopus
scribit
&
caeteris
Iudaeis
&c.
to
the
Iewes
;
he
,
and
Peter
,
and
Iohn
,
gaue
the
right
hand
of
fellowship
to
Paul
and
Barnabas
,
that
themselues
would
be
for
the
Circumcision
And
for
as
much
as
Peter
and
Iohn
trauelled
to
other
parts
,
Iames
alwayes
abiding
at
Ierusalem
;
it
is
more
then
probable
,
that
the
Church
of
Iewry
was
peculiarly
assigned
to
him
.
Neither
is
it
for
nothing
that
both
in
the
15.
of
the
Acts
,
he
is
noted
as
President
,
or
chiefe
in
that
Councill
,
and
in
the
2.
Chapter
to
the
Galathians
.
Paul
speaking
of
such
Apostles
,
as
were
at
Ierusalem
,
he
giueth
the
precedence
to
Iames
before
Peter
and
Iohn
.
Nor
the
eight
,
for
they
that
say
Peter
was
Bishop
of
Rome
,
say
Paul
was
also
,
meaning
that
they
were
both
founders
of
the
Church
,
but
Linus
was
the
B.
to
whom
they
both
committed
the
Church
as
[
g
](A20733-e131470-b)
g
lib.
3.
c.
3.
Irenaeus
saith
.
But
they
which
say
Iames
was
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
mention
him
alone
.
Neither
was
he
founder
of
that
Church
:
but
Christ
himselfe
,
who
was
the
minister
of
Circumcision
.
Bishops
haue
certaine
Churches
assigned
to
them
.
The
Apostles
had
not
certain
churches
assigned
to
them
.
Therefore
the
Apostles
were
not
Bishops
.
The
assumption
is
to
be
distinguished
according
to
the
times
.
For
when
Christ
gaue
them
their
indefinite
commission
[
h
](A20733-e131600-b)
h
Mar.
16.15
.
,
goe
into
all
the
world
,
hee
assigned
no
Prouinces
,
nor
parts
of
the
world
to
any
.
Notwithstanding
,
before
they
were
to
goe
abroad
,
he
willeth
them
to
stay
at
Ierusalem
,
till
they
had
receiued
the
holy
Ghost
,
who
should
direct
them
what
to
doe
;
and
we
may
be
assured
,
that
he
did
not
direct
them
to
goe
confusedly
,
but
distinctly
,
some
to
one
part
of
the
world
,
some
to
another
.
Howbeit
,
when
they
ceased
to
trauaile
in
their
olde
dayes
,
and
rested
in
some
chiefe
Citie
where
they
had
laboured
;
they
were
reputed
Bishops
of
that
place
,
where
they
rested
:
though
some
of
them
perhaps
were
not
properly
Bishops
.
And
this
is
true
of
Peter
,
and
of
the
most
of
the
Apostles
.
But
herein
Iames
differeth
from
the
rest
:
for
to
him
at
the
first
,
before
their
dispersion
,
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
was
assigned
.
Neither
did
he
trauaile
,
as
the
rest
,
from
one
Country
to
another
,
being
not
confined
to
any
one
Prouince
;
though
in
the
end
of
their
trauels
some
of
them
made
choise
of
some
speciall
place
,
where
they
rested
,
exercising
(
no
doubt
)
a
patriarchall
authority
,
as
it
were
,
in
that
circuit
,
where
they
had
trauailed
,
and
planted
Churches
.
Thus
Iohn
rested
at
Ephesus
,
and
others
in
other
places
.
That
assumption
therefore
,
which
is
true
of
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
is
not
true
of
Iames
:
and
were
to
be
denied
if
the
Syllogisme
were
thus
framed
.
BB.
had
certaine
Churches
assigned
to
them
:
Iames
had
not
a
certaine
Church
assigned
to
him
:
Therefore
he
was
not
B.
This
assumption
I
haue
disproued
.
And
therefore
though
that
argument
may
seeme
to
conclude
sufficiently
against
Peters
being
B.
of
Rome
;
it
concludeth
not
against
Iames
his
being
B.
of
Ierusalem
.
And
besides
,
betweene
Iames
and
the
rest
this
difference
may
be
noted
;
that
whereas
they
hauing
planted
Churches
,
when
they
saw
their
time
,
committed
the
same
to
certaine
BB.
(
so
Peter
and
others
of
the
Apostles
committed
Antioch
to
Evodius
;
Peter
and
Paul
committed
Rome
to
Linus
;
Paul
committed
Ephesus
to
Timothie
;
Creet
to
Titus
;
Iohn
committed
Smyrna
to
Polycarpus
,
and
diuers
other
Churches
in
Asia
to
other
Bishops
,
as
Eusebius
[
i
](A20733-e131840-b)
i
Lib.
3.
c.
23.
reporteth
;
yet
Iames
abiding
all
his
time
at
Ierusalem
,
committed
that
Church
to
no
other
;
though
when
he
was
dead
,
the
Apostles
committed
it
to
Simon
,
whom
they
ordayned
his
successour
.
The
second
reason
applied
to
Iames.
If
Iames
were
B.
then
by
the
same
reason
other
of
the
Apostles
were
BB.
But
the
other
Apostles
were
not
Bishops
properly
;
Therefore
not
Iames.
Why
I
should
not
grant
this
consequence
,
I
haue
shewed
sufficient
reason
in
setting
downe
the
difference
betweene
Iames
and
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
.
Therefore
that
reason
also
,
howsoeuer
it
may
take
place
as
touching
Peter
,
in
whom
no
such
difference
from
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
can
be
truly
noted
:
yet
it
holdeth
not
against
Iames
his
being
B.
of
Ierusalem
.
If
the
Refuter
,
or
any
other
be
not
as
yet
perswaded
of
this
point
;
to
satisfie
him
in
the
maine
point
,
that
the
Apostles
appointed
and
ordained
Bishops
;
I
will
be
content
to
suppose
,
that
Iames
was
not
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
because
it
might
be
supposed
and
granted
,
without
any
great
preiudice
to
the
cause
:
seeing
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
same
ancient
Authors
,
who
testifie
that
the
Apostles
appointed
Iames
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
doe
also
witnesse
;
that
after
his
death
,
the
Apostles
who
were
then
remayning
,
ordayned
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
to
be
B.
there
,
as
hereafter
[
k
](A20733-e132050-b)
k
Cap.
4.
§.
20.
shall
be
shewed
.
Ad
pag.
133.
that
I
deuise
[
l
](A20733-e132160-b)
l
He
museth
,
as
he
vseth
.
those
obiections
to
make
my selfe
worke
:
when
as
indeed
they
be
the
two
maine
points
wherein
Beza
differeth
from
vs
.
But
,
saith
he
,
who
euer
conceiued
any
such
thought
of
the
Apostle
Iames
?
I
am
sure
there
is
not
a
syllable
,
nor
a
letter
of
him
at
all
in
the
place
he
quoteth
out
of
Beza
:
the
more
wrong
he
doth
him
,
&c.
All
this
adoe
ariseth
from
the
misprinting
of
one
letter
in
the
margent
,
(
c
)
being
put
for
(
p.
)
For
in
the
[
m
](A20733-e132240-b)
m
Degrad
.
minist.
c.
3.
pag.
23.
23.
page
of
that
book
,
in
the
end
of
the
third
chapter
,
he
hath
this
saying
:
though
I
grant
that
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
was
in
order
first
in
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
;
yet
it
followeth
not
,
that
he
was
in
degree
superiour
either
to
the
Apostles
,
or
else
to
his
fellow
Ministers
.
Which
saying
,
as
it
seemeth
,
I
should
not
neede
to
haue
confuted
,
if
all
the
Disciplinarians
were
of
our
Refuters
minde
,
who
censureth
that
speech
as
vntrue
and
vnreuerent
.
But
yet
,
that
he
might
let
his
Reader
see
,
that
he
is
able
to
defend
any
thing
against
me
;
he
saith
,
if
a
man
would
speake
so
vntruly
and
vnreuerently
,
he
might
easily
maintayne
it
against
the
answere
that
M.
D.
bringeth
.
They
must
remember
,
saith
he
,
that
he
was
an
Apostle
,
and
his
honour
and
degree
by
his
Bishopricke
not
impaired
.
As
if
the
question
were
not
of
him
,
as
a
B.
not
as
an
Apostle
.
His
superiority
in
degree
proceeded
from
his
Apostleship
,
and
yet
as
a
B.
he
might
be
superiour
in
order
onely
.
This
tricke
of
fast
and
loose
was
not
worth
the
shewing
,
vnlesse
it
could
haue
beene
done
more
cleanely
.
To
returne
these
trickes
of
fast
and
loose
to
such
a
shifting
Sophister
,
as
I
haue
proued
the
Refuter
to
be
;
it
is
plaine
,
that
Beza
speaketh
simply
of
Iames
,
as
the
chiefe
in
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
as
wel
in
respect
of
the
Apostles
,
as
the
Presbyters
there
.
And
therefore
considereth
him
as
an
Apostle
,
as
well
as
a
B.
And
if
he
had
intended
any
such
distinction
as
the
Refuter
imagineth
,
hee
should
haue
conceiued
,
that
Iames
his
honour
and
degree
by
his
Bishopricke
was
impaired
,
and
that
the
Apostles
in
choosing
him
to
be
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
should
rather
haue
depressed
him
,
then
done
him
honour
.
But
they
thought
it
a
singular
honour
to
be
the
Apostle
or
Bishop
of
that
Church
which
Christ
himselfe
had
founded
.
And
therefore
as
Clement
noteth
,
the
chiefe
of
the
Apostles
,
Peter
,
Iames
,
and
Iohn
,
though
Christ
had
vouchsafed
to
them
greater
honour
then
the
rest
,
yet
would
not
arrogate
[
n
](A20733-e132400-b)
n
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
1.
to
themselues
that
honour
,
but
preferred
Iames
the
iust
the
brother
of
our
Lord
thereunto
;
and
when
it
was
void
againe
by
his
death
,
they
made
choise
of
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
for
the
same
cause
[
o
](A20733-e132460-b)
o
Euseb.
l.
3.
c.
11.
&
l.
4
c.
22.
ex
Hegesippo
.
,
because
he
also
was
the
Lords
kinsman
.
The
graue
censure
of
the
Refuter
is
,
that
Clements
speech
is
vnsauourie
,
and
the
respect
carnall
which
Hegesippus
and
Eusebius
alledge
.
Thus
is
hee
able
,
as
it
were
with
a
breath
,
to
blowe
away
these
worthy
Authors
,
Hegesippus
,
Clemens
,
and
Eusebius
;
they
are
not
able
to
stand
before
him
.
But
why
vnsauourie
?
when
the
Apostles
were
to
be
dispersed
into
diuers
parts
of
the
world
,
was
it
not
a
speciall
honour
for
one
amongst
them
,
without
that
trauaile
&
wandring
,
wherto
the
rest
were
subiect
,
to
be
set
ouer
the
mother
Church
of
Christendome
,
which
Christ
himselfe
had
founded
,
to
be
the
Apostle
of
that
people
which
had
sundry
prerogatiues
aboue
all
other
Nations
,
and
in
respect
of
that
place
to
haue
a
precedence
before
the
other
Apostles
,
Ad
pag.
134.
as
Iames
had
,
Act.
15.
Gal.
2
?
And
why
carnall
?
were
not
they
bound
in
respect
of
that
loue
and
reuerence
which
they
did
owe
to
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
to
preferre
his
neere
kinsmen
according
to
the
flesh
,
being
at
the
least
equall
with
others
?
It
is
certaine
,
that
Iames
[
p
](A20733-e132690-b)
p
Hier.
Catal.
in
Iacobo
.
in
Epist.
ad
Gal.
c.
1.
&
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
23.
ex
Hegesippo
.
for
his
admirable
piety
was
wonderfully
honoured
,
not
onely
among
Christians
,
but
also
among
the
vnbeleeuing
Iewes
;
as
might
easily
be
shewed
,
in
so
much
that
Iosephus
[
q
](A20733-e132750-b)
q
Orig.
contr.
Celsum
l.
1.
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
23.
Hier.
catal
.
in
Iacobo
.
imputeth
the
destruction
of
Ierusalem
to
his
death
,
as
to
a
principall
cause
.
But
,
saith
he
,
if
it
had
beene
arrogancie
in
them
,
why
not
in
him
?
That
which
had
beene
arrogancie
in
them
to
haue
arrogated
to
themselues
,
was
no
arrogancie
in
him
to
vndertake
being
imposed
vpon
him
.
Yea
,
but
if
it
were
so
great
a
priuiledge
,
why
might
it
not
haue
aduanced
him
to
a
higher
degree
aboue
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
?
because
the
Apostleship
being
the
highest
degree
of
the
Ministerie
,
this
was
the
greatest
honour
to
haue
a
priority
and
precedence
in
that
degree
.
Yea
,
but
I
denie
him
to
haue
beene
B.
when
I
say
,
that
whereas
before
the
Apostles
had
ioyntly
gouerned
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
that
charge
which
before
they
had
in
common
,
they
being
now
to
depart
committed
to
him
in
particular
;
but
their
charge
was
of
Apostles
,
not
of
Bishops
.
As
though
the
charge
of
Apostles
is
not
by
the
holy
Ghost
called
[
r
](A20733-e132870-b)
r
Act.
1.20
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
that
is
Bishopricke
;
and
as
though
Iames
,
who
before
was
an
Apostle
absolutely
,
did
not
by
this
designement
become
the
Apostle
of
the
Iewes
.
Neither
was
this
a
clipping
of
his
wings
,
as
it
pleaseth
the
Refuter
to
speake
,
more
then
of
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
when
by
mutual
consent
euery
mans
Prouince
as
it
were
,
circuit
and
charge
was
assigned
to
him
.
But
I
spake
not
without
booke
,
deliuering
mine
owne
conceipts
as
the
Refuter
euery
where
doth
:
but
what
I
said
,
I
receiued
from
their
owne
,
and
almost
onely
Author
Ierome
,
which
he
receiued
also
from
[
s
](A20733-e132930-b)
s
Catal.
script
.
in
Iacobo
.
Hegesippus
.
Hegesippus
,
saith
he
,
who
was
neare
the
Apostles
times
in
the
fift
booke
of
his
Commentaries
speaking
of
Iames
,
saith
,
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
sirnamed
the
iust
,
receiued
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
post
Apostolos
,
after
the
Apostles
.
As
touching
the
other
point
,
[
t
](A20733-e133020-b)
t
Act.
15.
&
21.
Gal.
1.
&
2.
Hieron
,
Catal.
Euseb.
hist.
&
Chron.
as
the
superintendent
of
that
Church
vntil
his
death
,
ruling
the
same
by
the
space
of
thirtie
yeares
,
after
that
manner
as
his
successor
after
him
ruled
it
eight
and
thirty
yeares
.
Yea
,
but
this
doth
not
proue
that
he
was
B.
Neither
was
it
so
much
alledged
to
that
end
,
as
to
shew
the
preheminence
which
he
had
was
not
(
as
Beza
saith
of
all
the
ancient
Bishops
,
which
hee
acknowledgeth
to
be
diuine
)
for
a
short
time
,
or
by
course
;
but
for
terme
of
life
.
And
yet
it
proueth
the
maine
point
also
,
that
he
was
B.
and
as
the
Geneua
translators
confesse
[
u
](A20733-e133080-b)
u
In
Act.
21.18
.
superintendent
of
that
Church
.
For
if
he
were
not
the
Apostle
of
that
Church
,
that
is
to
say
the
B.
why
did
not
he
after
the
example
of
other
Apostles
trauaile
into
other
parts
,
but
continued
there
ruling
that
Church
by
the
space
of
thirty
yeares
,
vntill
his
death
?
Forsooth
hee
did
not
stay
so
much
to
rule
that
Church
,
for
that
might
haue
beene
otherwise
performed
,
as
to
conuert
the
multitudes
of
Iewes
which
should
resort
thither
.
Where
,
hee
saith
,
the
Church
might
otherwise
haue
beene
gouerned
,
it
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
vnlesse
he
can
shew
,
that
it
was
otherwise
gouerned
.
There
is
no
doubt
,
but
that
Church
had
a
Pastor
assigned
to
them
by
the
Apostles
,
who
would
not
leaue
that
mother
Church
as
a
flocke
without
a
shepheard
.
But
what
Pastor
had
it
,
if
Iames
who
continued
there
,
and
ruled
it
for
thirtie
yeares
were
not
the
Pastor
thereof
?
There
is
no
doubt
to
be
made
,
but
the
cause
and
end
of
his
staying
there
thirtie
yeares
,
was
the
same
of
his
successour
Simons
staying
there
thirtie
eight
yeares
,
and
of
his
successours
euery
one
vntill
their
death
.
Wherefore
was
it
not
great
pitie
that
the
Refuter
did
forget
himselfe
to
spend
so
much
time
in
things
that
were
so
impertinent
?
Serm.
Sect.
6.
pag.
69.
As
touching
other
Churches
,
wee
are
to
obserue
,
that
the
Apostles
did
not
at
the
very
first
planting
of
them
appoint
BB.
vnto
them
,
&c.
to
pag.
72.
li.
17.
The
difference
in
respect
of
the
time
,
which
before
I
noted
betwixt
Ierusalem
and
other
Churches
,
I
doe
in
this
section
explane
;
shewing
,
that
the
Apostles
did
not
at
the
first
planting
of
them
appoint
Bishops
to
them
,
as
presently
after
the
ascension
of
Christ
,
they
appointed
a
Bishop
ouer
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
:
yeelding
these
reasons
,
because
as
yet
there
was
neither
that
choise
,
nor
yet
that
vse
of
them
among
a
people
which
was
to
be
conuerted
,
before
it
needed
to
be
gouerned
;
and
shewing
what
course
they
did
take
,
before
they
appointed
Bishops
,
namely
,
that
first
they
ordayned
Presbyters
[
w
](A20733-e133210-b)
w
Act.
14.23
.
&c.
to
labour
the
conuersion
of
the
people
,
to
feed
them
being
conuerted
,
and
to
attend
them
in
common
,
gouerning
them
after
a
priuate
manner
,
and
as
it
were
in
foro
conscientiae
.
And
this
is
that
,
which
Ierome
[
x
](A20733-e133240-b)
x
In
Tit.
1.
saith
,
that
the
Churches
at
the
first
before
Bishops
were
appointed
ouer
them
,
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Presbyters
.
But
the
Episcopall
power
which
consisteth
specially
in
the
right
of
ordination
,
and
in
the
sway
of
Ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
committed
to
one
;
I
said
the
Apostles
each
of
them
retayned
in
their
owne
hands
,
as
was
manifest
[
y
](A20733-e133250-b)
y
2
Thess.
3.14
.
1
Cor.
5.
,
whiles
eyther
they
continued
neare
them
,
or
meant
not
to
be
long
from
them
.
All
which
while
,
Bishops
were
not
so
needfull
,
the
Apostles
prouiding
for
the
necessitie
of
those
Churches
,
either
by
their
presence
,
or
by
their
letters
and
messengers
.
And
this
I
noted
to
be
the
cause
,
why
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
,
Bishops
are
so
seldome
(
though
not
so
seldome
as
some
imagine
)
mentioned
,
and
the
name
with
Presbyter
confounded
.
But
when
as
they
were
to
leaue
the
Churches
altogether
,
either
by
departure
from
them
or
by
death
(
that
the
Churches
should
not
be
left
fatherlesse
,
they
fulfilled
that
in
Psal.
45.
according
to
Augustines
and
Ieromes
exposition
,
in
steed
of
Fathers
,
that
is
,
the
Apostles
,
there
shall
be
children
borne
vnto
thee
,
whom
thou
shall
make
Princes
ouer
all
the
earth
,
that
is
,
Bishops
succeeding
the
Apostles
in
the
regiment
of
the
Church
)
At
their
departure
they
left
substitutes
,
and
at
their
death
appointed
successours
,
to
whom
they
committed
the
gouernment
of
the
Churches
,
furnishing
them
by
a
singularitie
of
preheminence
,
both
with
the
right
of
Ordination
and
with
the
power
of
Iurisdiction
,
as
well
ouer
the
Presbyters
,
as
the
people
of
each
Citie
with
the
Countrey
adioyning
.
And
these
I
saide
at
the
first
were
called
,
sometimes
the
[
a
](A20733-e133310-b)
a
Apoc.
1.2.3
.
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
[
b
](A20733-e133330-b)
b
Heb.
13.17
.
,
Praepositi
,
Rulers
,
Heb.
13.17
.
(
which
text
in
the
auncient
[
c
](A20733-e133360-b)
c
Can.
39.
canons
called
the
Apostles
,
and
in
the
second
Epistle
of
Ignatius
[
d
](A20733-e133380-b)
d
Ad
Trall
.
,
as
also
the
name
praepositi
in
Latine
Fathers
from
thence
is
appropriated
to
BB.
)
sometimes
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
&c.
And
first
hee
snatcheth
at
those
wordes
where
I
said
,
that
vntill
the
Apostles
were
to
leaue
the
Churches
altogether
,
Bishops
were
not
so
needfull
,
as
after
their
departure
and
death
,
which
is
most
manifest
.
Belike
,
saith
he
,
they
were
needfull
before
,
but
the
Apostles
would
put
off
the
matter
till
there
was
no
remedie
,
and
I
cannot
much
blame
them
if
it
be
true
which
D.
Bilson
[
e
](A20733-e133520-b)
e
Cap.
12.
pag.
224.
saith
that
they
were
to
keepe
the
power
of
imposition
of
hands
to
themselues
,
vnlesse
they
would
loose
their
Apostleship
.
It
is
more
meruaile
therefore
that
they
would
ordaine
any
Bishops
at
all
,
as
long
as
they
liued
,
then
that
they
would
deferre
the
doing
of
it
so
long
as
they
could
.
Which
words
,
as
they
contayne
a
meere
cauill
at
my
words
,
not
worth
the
answering
;
so
a
meere
belying
of
that
reuerend
B.
who
saith
,
that
the
Apostles
could
not
loose
that
(
viz.
the
power
of
imposing
hands
and
deliuering
vnto
Sathan
,
which
the
Fathers
call
Episcopall
power
)
vnlesse
they
lost
the
Apostleship
withall
.
Secondly
,
hee
obiecteth
want
of
proofes
.
What
proofe
bringeth
he
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
such
Bishops
in
other
Churches
?
neither
one
text
of
Scripture
,
nor
any
testimonie
out
of
the
ancient
Writers
,
onely
authoritate
praetoria
,
hee
telleth
vs
Pythagoras
like
,
they
did
so
,
&c.
Here
,
in
complayning
of
the
want
of
proofes
,
he
giueth
sufficient
proofe
of
a
bad
conscience
.
In
this
section
I
did
but
in
generall
(
hauing
noted
the
difference
of
the
time
)
declare
,
what
course
the
Apostles
tooke
,
first
in
deferring
the
choise
of
Bishops
;
and
afterwards
in
appointing
them
.
The
proofes
doe
follow
in
the
sections
following
,
shewing
the
places
where
,
and
the
persons
whom
the
Apostles
ordayned
Bishops
.
That
imputation
of
speaking
Pythagoras
like
,
hee
hath
often
layd
vpon
me
,
and
yet
not
so
oft
as
vniustly
,
who
haue
in
this
Sermon
and
in
this
Treatise
deliuered
nothing
almost
without
plentifull
proofe
or
sufficient
authority
.
Thirdly
,
hee
carpeth
at
the
names
,
wherewith
I
said
the
first
Bishoppes
were
called
,
asking
what
is
all
this
to
the
matter
.
Would
he
prooue
they
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
because
they
were
called
by
these
names
?
what
a
notorious
cauiller
is
this
?
may
nothing
be
spoken
but
by
way
of
proofe
?
may
nothing
be
said
by
declaration
,
or
explanation
,
or
preuention
?
I
knew
it
was
obiected
,
that
Bishops
are
not
mentioned
in
the
scriptures
,
the
name
Episcopus
Bishop
,
being
giuen
to
Prebyters
:
and
therefore
that
is
not
like
,
they
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
,
of
whom
no
mention
is
in
the
Scriptures
.
For
preuention
of
this
obiection
,
or
assoyling
this
doubt
,
I
declared
first
,
that
the
Bishops
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
are
called
,
sometimes
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
sometimes
their
rulers
,
sometimes
their
Apostles
.
Yea
,
but
in
my
former
Sermon
I
gaue
all
these
names
saue
onely
the
name
of
Apostles
to
all
ministers
.
The
former
Sermon
is
of
ministers
in
generall
,
including
the
Bishops
,
and
diuers
things
there
spoken
of
ministers
in
generall
,
doe
principally
belong
to
Bishops
.
All
Pastors
are
rulers
or
rectors
of
their
seuerall
flockes
,
but
the
Bishops
are
rulers
both
of
them
and
their
flocke
.
All
ministers
are
called
Angel●
,
but
the
Bishop
alone
is
the
Angell
of
each
Church
or
Diocese
,
&c.
But
by
what
authority
saith
he
,
is
the
title
of
Apostle
appropriated
to
BB
?
he
would
haue
said
,
communicated
to
them
with
the
twelue
.
For
I
know
no
man
so
foolish
,
as
to
appropriate
it
to
the
Bishops
.
This
reason
I
rendred
,
why
they
be
called
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
;
because
they
succeeded
the
Apostles
in
the
gouernment
of
the
particular
Churches
:
whereof
I
gaue
instance
Phil.
2.25
.
where
Epaphroditus
,
who
was
the
B.
or
Pastor
of
Philippi
,
is
therefore
called
their
Apostle
.
Therefore
?
saith
he
.
Who
saith
so
?
Ambrose
,
Ierome
,
Theodoret
,
Caluin
,
Thomas
Aquinas
,
if
we
will
beleiue
D.
D.
but
if
we
will
looke
vpon
the
bookes
themselues
,
not
one
of
them
saith
so
.
Caluin
,
Aquinas
,
and
some
other
indeed
,
as
Lyra
,
interlineall
glosse
,
Lombard
,
Anselme
,
&c.
are
of
minde
that
Apostle
there
signifieth
teacher
and
no
more
.
Caluin
saith
thus
[
g
](A20733-e133850-b)
g
Caluin
▪
in
Phil.
2.25
.
,
The
name
of
Apostle
here
,
as
in
many
other
places
,
is
taken
generally
for
proquolibet
Euangelista
,
for
any
Euangelist
.
But
by
their
Euangelist
,
he
vnderstandeth
their
Pastor
,
and
so
calleth
him
diuers
times
,
vsing
that
word
vpon
that
occasion
sixe
or
seauen
times
in
that
place
.
Paul
sendeth
to
them
Epaphroditus
,
ne
Pastore
carerent
qui
recte
compositum
statum
tueretur
,
least
they
should
want
their
Pastor
who
might
maintaine
their
well
ordered
state
.
On
these
words
,
verse
26.
He
had
a
longing
desire
towards
you
all
,
and
was
pensiue
,
because
you
had
heard
that
he
was
sicke
:
Caluin
noteth
,
a
signe
of
a
true
Pastor
,
that
when
he
was
farre
distant
from
them
,
notwithstanding
was
affected
with
the
care
and
desire
of
his
flocke
;
and
when
he
vnderstood
that
his
sheepe
sorrowed
for
his
sake
,
was
pensiue
for
their
sorrow
.
In
like
manner
the
godly
carefulnesse
of
the
Philippians
for
their
Pastor
is
noted
on
the
27.
where
Paul
signifieth
,
what
griefe
he
should
haue
conceiued
,
if
Epaphroditus
had
died
;
Paul
saith
he
was
mooued
with
the
losse
of
the
Church
which
he
saw
would
haue
beene
destituted
optimo
Pastore
of
a
very
good
Pastor
in
so
great
want
of
good
men
.
On
the
twenty
eight
he
saith
,
Paul
did
the
more
carefully
send
him
,
because
he
was
sory
that
for
his
occasion
he
had
beene
withheld
from
the
flocke
committed
to
him
.
On
the
twenty
nineth
he
obserueth
how
desirous
Paul
is
,
that
good
Pastors
may
be
much
esteemed
,
&c.
let
the
reader
therefore
iudge
,
whether
Epaphroditus
were
not
in
Caluins
iudgement
the
Pastor
of
the
Philippians
.
By
the
Apostle
saith
Ambrose
[
h
](A20733-e134050-b)
h
Ambr.
in
Phil.
2.
,
he
was
made
their
Apostle
,
that
is
Bishop
,
as
Ambrose
[
i
](A20733-e134090-b)
i
Ambr
in
Eph.
4.11
.
&
1.
Cor.
12.28
.
expoundeth
the
word
in
other
places
,
Apostoli
Episcopi
sunt
,
the
Apostles
are
Bishops
.
But
according
to
the
refuters
sence
,
he
had
beene
an
Apostle
,
not
of
Pauls
making
,
but
of
their
owne
.
Ierome
[
k
](A20733-e134160-b)
k
Hier.
in
Phil.
2.
writing
on
those
words
,
my
fellow
Souldiour
and
your
Apostle
,
fellow
Souldiour
saith
he
,
by
reason
of
his
honour
,
because
he
also
had
receiued
the
office
of
being
an
Apostle
among
them
.
And
on
those
words
,
haue
in
honour
such
,
not
onely
him
saith
hee
,
qui
vester
est
Doctor
,
who
is
your
Doctor
,
by
which
word
in
Ieromes
time
,
Bishop
most
commonly
was
signified
,
&c.
Theodoret
[
l
](A20733-e134250-b)
l
Theodor.
in
Phil.
2.
saith
thus
,
hee
called
him
Apostle
,
because
to
him
the
charge
of
them
was
committed
.
Wherefore
it
is
manifest
,
that
those
which
in
the
beginning
of
the
Epistle
were
called
Bishops
were
vnder
him
,
as
hauing
the
place
of
Presbyters
.
And
from
this
place
,
as
afterwards
I
noted
,
Theodoret
[
m
](A20733-e134290-b)
m
Theod.
in
1
Tim.
3.
gathereth
,
that
at
the
first
,
they
,
whom
now
wee
call
Bishops
were
called
Apostles
.
Thus
Epaphroditus
was
the
Apostle
of
the
Philippians
.
Thomas
Aquinas
[
n
](A20733-e134340-b)
n
Th.
Aquin.
in
Phil.
2.
;
hee
calleth
him
brother
,
saith
he
,
by
reason
of
his
faith
;
fellow
worker
in
the
labour
of
preaching
,
fellow
souldier
,
because
they
had
suffered
tribulation
together
,
your
Apostle
,
that
is
Doctor
.
Hic
fuit
Episcopus
Philippensium
,
Hee
was
the
Bishop
of
the
Philippians
.
And
so
saith
Bullinger
[
o
](A20733-e134400-b)
o
In
Phil.
2.
,
Philippensium
Episcopus
erat
.
With
what
face
therefore
could
the
Refuter
denie
,
that
any
one
of
these
Authors
did
say
,
that
hee
was
therefore
called
the
Apostle
of
the
Philippians
,
because
hee
was
their
Bishop
and
Pastor
?
And
so
are
they
to
be
vnderstood
,
who
expound
the
word
Apostle
by
Teacher
.
As
Chrysostome
[
p
](A20733-e134450-b)
p
Chrysost.
in
Phil.
2.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
those
whom
the
Refuter
nameth
.
For
they
did
not
,
by
Apostle
vnderstand
euery
common
Teacher
,
or
teaching
Presbyter
,
but
specialem
doctorem
saith
Anselme
[
q
](A20733-e134510-b)
q
In
Phil.
2.
,
instructorem
praecipuum
their
chiefe
instructor
,
sayeth
Dionysius
Carthusianus
.
These
authors
,
Apostle
,
not
in
respect
of
any
sacred
function
,
which
he
performed
towards
them
,
but
because
he
was
their
Messenger
to
the
Apostle
.
And
of
this
iudgement
,
he
saith
,
are
Primasius
,
Haymo
,
Caietan
,
and
two
others
,
which
be
as
much
partyes
in
this
cause
as
himselfe
,
Beza
,
and
Piscator
.
And
Caluin
acknowledgeth
it
to
agree
with
the
place
.
Primasius
[
r
](A20733-e134640-b)
r
In
Phil.
2.25
.
saith
,
that
Epaphroditus
had
receiued
gradum
Apostolatus
,
the
degree
of
Apostleshippe
among
them
.
Caluin
doth
indeed
mention
that
interpretation
▪
but
so
,
as
he
preferreth
the
other
;
sed
prior
sensus
meliùs
(
meo
iudicio
)
conuenit
:
But
the
former
sence
in
my
iudgement
agreeth
better
.
He
could
not
thinke
,
that
both
sences
,
being
so
different
,
agreed
to
the
text
.
Yea
but
he
hath
two
reasons
to
proue
his
to
be
the
more
likely
sence
.
First
,
as
the
words
following
in
the
same
Verse
and
Chapt.
4.18
.
doe
shew
,
how
he
ministred
to
him
;
so
the
same
phrase
is
vsed
to
the
like
purpose
,
2
Cor.
8.23
.
where
the
brethren
sent
with
Titus
to
receiue
the
Corinthians
beneuolence
,
are
called
Apostles
,
that
is
,
messengers
of
the
Churches
.
I
acknowledge
,
that
Epaphroditus
brought
a
gratuity
from
the
Philippians
to
Paul
to
supply
his
necessity
,
being
a
prisoner
in
Rome
.
And
the
brethren
likewise
who
accompanyed
Titus
,
were
to
receiue
the
beneuolence
of
the
Corinthians
;
but
it
is
vnlikely
;
that
either
he
,
or
they
,
were
called
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
in
that
regard
.
It
appeareth
by
diuers
of
Ignatius
his
Epistles
,
that
when
the
churches
did
send
one
vpon
a
Christian
Embassage
,
the
B.
commonly
was
entreated
to
take
that
Embassage
vpon
him
.
In
like
manner
the
Philippians
,
being
to
send
as
it
were
vpon
Embassage
to
Paul
,
Epaphroditus
their
B.
vndertooke
that
voyage
He
being
therfore
both
their
B.
and
their
Embassadour
,
it
is
more
likely
,
that
he
was
called
their
Apostle
because
he
was
their
Bishop
;
then
for
that
hee
was
their
Embassadour
.
For
it
is
vnlikely
,
that
the
name
of
that
sacred
function
of
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
who
also
himselfe
is
the
Apostle
of
our
profession
,
should
be
vsed
in
the
Scriptures
to
signifie
the
messengers
of
men
.
Besides
,
in
both
places
,
the
Apostle
intendeth
by
this
title
highly
to
commend
Epaphroditus
,
and
the
others
;
but
this
had
beene
but
a
small
commendation
,
that
they
were
messengers
of
the
Churches
.
Againe
,
if
they
in
2
Cor.
8.
were
called
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
because
they
were
their
messengers
;
then
those
Churches
should
haue
sent
them
:
but
it
is
euident
,
that
Paul
himselfe
sent
them
,
for
as
it
was
required
of
him
,
Gal.
2
:
so
had
hee
vndertaken
,
to
procure
a
supply
for
the
reliefe
of
the
brethren
in
Iudaea
,
who
were
oppressed
with
famine
.
And
to
that
end
hauing
before
dealt
with
the
Corinthians
,
sendeth
Titus
and
two
others
,
to
receiue
their
contribution
.
His
second
reason
is
,
§
14.
The
second
reason
answered
.
that
it
standeth
not
so
well
with
the
properties
of
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
signifieth
a
messenger
,
to
entitle
any
man
(
in
regard
of
his
ministeriall
function
)
their
Apostle
to
whom
,
as
his
from
whom
hee
is
sent
.
And
therefore
among
all
the
titles
Paul
taketh
to
himselfe
to
magnifie
his
office
,
Here
the
Refuter
whiles
he
goeth
about
to
discouer
my
ignorance
(
as
though
I
knew
not
the
signification
of
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
well
as
he
)
bewrayeth
his
owne
.
For
it
is
euident
,
that
in
the
Scriptures
the
word
is
vsed
with
reuerence
as
well
to
the
parties
to
whom
,
as
to
the
party
from
whom
,
the
Apostle
is
sent
.
Thus
Paul
calleth
himselfe
the
Apostle
of
the
Gentiles
[
s
](A20733-e135010-b)
s
Rom.
11.13
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
and
saith
,
that
Peter
had
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Apostleship
of
Circumcision
[
t
](A20733-e135060-b)
t
Gal.
2.7.8
.
,
meaning
that
he
was
the
Apostle
of
the
Iewes
,
because
to
himselfe
was
committed
the
Gospel
of
vncircumcision
,
as
to
Peter
of
the
circumcision
.
So
Angels
haue
relation
,
not
only
to
the
sender
who
is
God
,
but
to
the
parties
to
whom
they
are
sent
,
and
are
called
their
[
u
](A20733-e135080-b)
u
Mat.
18.10
.
Angels
.
And
euen
as
Angels
absolutely
spoken
,
is
a
title
of
all
ministers
who
are
sent
of
God
,
but
vsed
with
reference
to
the
Churches
whereto
they
are
sent
(
as
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
)
doe
signifie
the
Bishops
or
Pastors
of
the
same
churches
;
so
Apostoli
,
absolutely
vsed
is
a
title
of
all
Embassadours
[
(w)
](A20733-e135120-b)
(w)
Ro.
16.7
.
sent
from
God
with
authority
Apostolicall
,
though
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
giuen
to
Paul
[
x
](A20733-e135150-b)
x
Act.
14.14
.
and
Barnabas
and
the
twelue
Apostles
;
but
vsed
with
reference
to
particular
Churches
,
doth
signifie
their
Bishops
.
And
in
that
sence
Epaphroditus
is
called
the
Apostle
of
the
Philippians
.
And
howsoeuer
the
word
may
signifie
any
messenger
with
relation
to
any
sender
;
yet
in
the
scriptures
it
is
not
vsed
to
signifie
messengers
sent
from
men
,
neither
is
to
be
translated
otherwise
then
Apostle
.
For
though
our
Sauiour
doe
seeme
to
speake
indefinitly
[
y
](A20733-e135190-b)
y
Iohn
13.16
.
Iohn
13.16
.
of
the
Apostle
and
him
that
sendeth
him
;
yet
it
is
euident
,
that
he
meaneth
himselfe
who
sent
,
and
the
Apostles
who
were
sent
.
were
B.
yet
no
Diocesan
.
But
admit
saith
the
refuter
,
that
Epaphroditus
were
Bishop
or
Pastor
of
Philippi
where
abouts
I
will
not
striue
,
how
shall
it
be
proued
that
Philippi
was
a
Diocesan
Church
?
&c.
This
is
written
,
as
the
most
of
the
booke
,
to
bleare
the
eyes
of
the
simple
.
For
I
cannot
thinke
he
which
would
vndertake
this
cause
,
was
so
void
of
iudgement
,
as
the
refuter
here
would
shew
himselfe
to
be
,
if
he
wrote
sincerely
.
For
I
pray
you
,
what
was
the
point
which
here
I
had
in
hand
?
was
it
not
to
shew
,
that
the
Bishops
at
the
first
in
the
Apostles
times
were
called
Apostles
?
and
doe
I
not
proue
it
by
this
instance
,
that
Epaphroditus
being
the
Bishop
of
the
Philippians
,
is
therefore
called
their
Apostle
?
Admit
it
be
so
,
saith
the
refuter
,
yet
how
shall
it
be
proued
,
that
Philippi
was
a
Diocesan
Church
,
and
how
weakely
with
that
,
doth
M.
D.
inferre
,
that
he
was
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
like
to
ours
for
the
substance
of
his
office
.
All
men
see
he
deceiueth
his
reader
with
the
like
equiuocation
in
the
word
Bishop
,
which
in
the
Apostles
times
by
his
owne
confession
was
common
to
all
Pastors
,
though
afterwards
appropriated
to
some
speciall
persons
:
as
if
he
should
haue
said
,
I
grant
that
which
here
you
doe
proue
,
but
yet
that
followeth
not
hereon
,
which
you
intended
not
.
That
the
Churches
were
Diocesses
,
and
the
Bishops
Diocesan
,
like
to
ours
for
the
substance
of
their
office
,
I
proued
before
in
the
former
part
:
here
,
I
am
so
farre
from
inferring
or
prouing
it
,
that
I
presuppose
it
,
as
sufficiently
proued
before
.
But
this
is
the
poore
shift
,
which
the
refuter
vsually
flyeth
vnto
,
when
he
hath
nothing
to
answere
.
He
perswaded
himselfe
(
such
was
his
iudgement
)
that
in
the
question
of
parishes
and
Diocesses
he
had
the
vpper
hand
:
and
therefore
,
when
he
is
foiled
in
any
of
the
points
following
,
he
flyeth
to
that
as
his
refuge
;
yea
but
though
this
be
so
as
you
say
,
yet
the
Church
was
not
a
Diocese
,
nor
the
Bishop
a
Diocesan
.
But
how
little
reason
he
hath
to
imagine
Philippi
one
of
the
[
a
](A20733-e135360-b)
a
Act.
16.12
.
Sedul
.
in
Phil.
1.
Philippi
Metropolis
Macedoniae
.
cheife
Cities
of
Macedonia
,
to
haue
beene
a
parish
Church
;
may
be
gathered
by
that
,
which
before
hath
beene
said
of
the
like
Cities
.
Where
he
saith
,
I
goe
about
to
deceiue
the
reader
with
the
like
equiuocation
of
the
word
Bishop
he
doth
me
wrong
.
But
he
and
his
consorts
deceiue
the
readers
,
when
they
would
perswade
them
,
that
because
in
the
Apostles
writings
and
for
some
part
of
the
Apostles
time
,
the
names
Episcopus
&
Presbyter
were
confounded
,
namely
vntill
Bishops
began
to
be
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
;
that
therefore
the
offices
were
confounded
.
For
here
I
shew
,
that
when
Presbyters
were
called
Episcopi
,
those
who
euer
since
the
Apostles
times
haue
beene
called
Bishops
,
were
then
called
the
Agels
,
and
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
to
whom
,
as
I
noted
before
out
of
[
b
](A20733-e135420-b)
b
in
2.
Phil.
2.25
.
Theodoret
,
those
who
were
then
called
Episcopi
,
that
is
Presbyters
,
were
subiect
.
For
as
I
said
in
the
Sermon
,
[
c
](A20733-e135510-b)
c
Eph.
4.11
.
1
Cor.
12.28
.
of
Scripture
,
vnderstandeth
Bishops
:
and
to
the
like
purpose
Cyprian
:
[
d
](A20733-e135530-b)
d
l.
3.
Epist.
9.
Apostolos
,
id
est
,
Episcopos
&
praepositos
dominus
elegit
,
the
Lord
chose
Apostles
,
that
is
Bishops
and
Gouernours
.
For
as
Theodoret
[
e
](A20733-e135560-b)
e
Theodor.
in
1
Tim.
3.
hath
well
obserued
on
1
Tim.
3.
In
times
past
,
saith
he
,
they
called
the
same
men
Presbyters
and
Bishops
,
and
those
who
now
are
called
Bishops
they
named
Apostles
.
But
in
processe
of
time
,
they
left
the
name
Apostle
to
those
who
are
properly
called
Apostles
,
and
the
name
of
Bishop
they
gaue
to
them
who
had
beene
called
Apostles
.
Thus
Epaphroditus
was
the
Apostle
of
the
Philippians
,
Titus
of
the
Cretians
,
and
Timothie
of
the
Asians
.
Which
testimony
,
if
it
be
conferred
with
some
before
cited
out
of
Ierome
,
the
truth
concerning
this
matter
will
appeare
to
be
this
.
Whiles
the
Bishops
were
Apostles
and
Apostolicke
men
(
for
such
were
the
first
Bishops
)
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
were
also
called
the
Apostles
of
the
Churches
,
other
Ministers
being
then
called
Presbyteri
&
Episcopi
indifferently
;
but
when
the
first
Bishops
being
dead
,
their
successours
were
to
be
chosen
out
of
the
Presbyters
,
(
which
Ierome
noteth
to
haue
been
done
at
Alexandria
euer
since
the
death
of
S.
Marke
,
and
was
done
in
all
other
places
where
were
no
Euangelists
,
or
Apostolicall
men
remayning
)
then
they
left
the
name
Apostle
,
and
for
difference
sake
called
him
the
Bishop
.
Wherefore
as
I
said
in
the
Sermon
,
it
was
not
long
,
that
the
name
Episcopus
was
confounded
with
Presbyter
.
For
Ignatius
,
(
who
was
a
B.
aboue
thirtie
yeares
in
the
Apostles
time
,
after
that
Evodius
had
beene
B.
of
Antioch
aboue
twenty
yeares
before
him
)
appropriateth
the
name
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
a
Bishop
;
and
vsually
distinguisheth
the
three
degrees
of
the
Clergie
,
as
the
Church
euer
since
the
Apostles
hath
distinguished
them
,
by
these
three
names
,
Bishop
,
Presbyter
,
and
Deacon
.
Yea
,
but
we
may
gather
out
of
Theodorets
testimonie
,
saith
the
Refuter
,
that
the
report
which
M.
D.
maketh
of
Ignatius
his
appropriating
the
name
of
Episcopus
to
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
is
without
any
sufficient
warrant
.
For
seeing
Ignatius
liued
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
died
within
sixe
yeares
after
S.
Iohn
,
and
Theodoret
saith
,
that
in
processe
of
time
the
name
of
B.
was
imposed
;
it
is
not
likely
Ignatius
should
be
the
imposer
of
it
.
No
man
includeth
the
processe
of
time
within
the
compasse
of
sixe
yeares
any
man
will
thinke
.
The
processe
of
time
,
wherof
Theodoret
speaketh
,
was
as
appeareth
by
conference
of
him
with
Ierome
in
the
Apostles
time
.
At
the
first
,
towards
the
beginning
of
the
Apostles
time
,
the
Gouernours
of
the
Churches
were
called
Apostles
;
but
in
processe
of
time
,
when
the
first
Bishops
who
had
beene
Apostles
or
Apostolicall
men
were
dead
,
and
now
were
to
be
chosen
out
of
the
Presbyters
,
which
was
towards
the
latter
end
of
the
Apostles
times
;
then
they
began
to
be
called
Episcopi
,
Bishops
.
And
that
this
was
so
,
appeareth
not
onely
by
Ignatius
,
who
continually
vseth
the
word
as
the
first
and
highest
degree
of
the
Clergie
,
Presbyters
as
the
second
,
and
Deacons
as
the
third
:
but
also
by
other
monuments
of
antiquity
which
I
mentioned
in
the
Sermon
.
I
haue
the
longer
insisted
on
this
point
,
because
it
is
of
great
consequence
.
For
hereby
it
appeareth
first
that
when
the
name
Presbyter
and
Episcopus
were
confounded
,
yet
the
offices
of
Bishops
and
Presbyters
were
not
confounded
.
Secondly
,
that
Bishops
being
then
called
Apostoli
,
were
superiour
to
other
Ministers
who
were
called
Presbyteri
&
Episcopi
.
And
lastly
,
that
such
Bishops
as
were
superiour
to
other
Ministers
,
were
in
the
Apostles
times
,
and
mentioned
in
the
Apostles
writings
.
The
IIII.
CHAPTER
.
Shewing
the
Places
where
,
and
the
Persons
whom
,
the
Apostles
ordayned
BB:
but
chiefly
,
that
Timothie
was
B.
of
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
.
Serm.
Sect.
7.
pag.
72.
But
we
are
also
to
shew
the
places
where
,
and
the
persons
whom
,
the
Apostles
ordayned
BB.
and
first
out
of
the
scriptures
&c.
to
all
ordayned
there
,
pag.
75.
IN
this
section
and
the
two
next
following
,
I
proue
that
Timothie
and
Titus
were
by
S.
Paul
ordayned
Bishops
:
the
one
of
Ephesus
,
the
other
of
Creet
,
and
maintaine
the
same
assertion
against
their
obiections
.
Afterwards
,
I
shew
out
of
other
the
auncientest
monuments
of
antiquitie
,
that
other
BB.
of
other
places
,
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
.
This
,
saith
the
Refuter
,
is
the
last
supply
to
maintaine
the
former
antecedent
,
by
shewing
the
places
where
,
and
the
persons
whom
the
Apostles
ordayned
Bishops
.
If
this
faile
he
is
vndone
.
As
who
should
say
,
that
all
which
hitherto
hath
beene
said
,
hath
by
him
beene
very
learnedly
and
sufficiently
refuted
.
When
as
in
truth
hee
hath
not
beene
able
to
confute
any
one
sentence
or
line
of
the
Sermon
hitherto
,
with
soundnesse
of
reason
,
or
euidence
of
truth
.
And
the
like
assurance
I
haue
of
that
which
followeth
.
Now
that
Timothie
and
Titus
were
by
the
Apostle
ordained
Bishops
:
I
proue
by
a
two-fold
reason
,
which
I
ioyned
together
,
&
is
thus
to
be
dissolued
:
the
former
standing
thus
.
If
in
the
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
it
be
presupposed
that
Paul
had
ordayned
Timothie
and
Titus
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
then
is
it
true
,
that
they
were
by
him
ordayned
BB.
of
those
Churches
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
That
the
antecedent
is
true
I
proue
by
this
reason
;
because
it
is
presupposed
in
the
Epistles
,
that
the
Apostle
had
committed
to
them
Episcopall
authority
,
both
in
respect
of
Ordination
,
and
Iurisdiction
,
to
be
exercised
in
those
Churches
.
Against
which
consequence
this
onely
thing
can
be
obiected
,
that
the
Episcopall
authority
might
be
committed
to
them
not
as
ordinarie
Bishops
or
Pastors
of
those
Churches
,
but
as
extraordinarie
gouernours
or
Euangelists
,
which
afterwards
is
answered
.
To
this
argument
the
Refuter
answereth
not
.
Ad
pag.
137.
The
second
he
frameth
thus
:
If
the
Epistles
written
to
Timothie
and
Titus
be
the
very
patternes
and
precedents
of
the
Episcopall
function
,
whereby
the
Apostle
enformeth
them
,
and
in
them
all
Bishops
how
to
exercise
their
function
,
then
Timothie
and
Titus
were
Bishops
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
First
,
he
taketh
exception
against
the
proposition
,
saying
,
though
it
make
a
goodly
shew
yet
was
it
confuted
long
agoe
by
M.
Cartwright
.
Whose
confutation
either
he
thinketh
to
be
insufficient
,
or
else
he
doth
but
kill
a
dead
man
in
seeking
with
a
new
on-set
to
disproue
the
consequence
.
First
,
for
the
consequence
it selfe
,
I
auouch
thus
much
;
that
from
that
antecedent
,
I
might
not
onely
haue
inferred
that
particular
,
that
therefore
these
two
to
whom
the
Epistles
were
written
were
Bishops
:
but
in
generall
,
that
the
function
of
Bishops
;
whose
authority
and
office
is
described
,
and
the
manner
of
the
execution
thereof
prescribed
in
the
directions
giuen
to
Timothie
and
Titus
in
these
Epistles
,
hath
warrant
in
the
word
of
God
:
and
when
they
can
make
as
good
an
argument
for
their
lay-elders
,
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
I
will
subscribe
to
their
Presbyterian
discipline
.
Of
T.
C.
answere
to
that
consequence
,
T.
C.
answere
refuted
.
I
haue
taken
speciall
notice
heretofore
;
and
did
greatly
wonder
,
that
hee
could
satisfie
himselfe
with
such
a
friuolous
answer
.
And
I
do
no
lesse
wonder
at
the
Refuters
either
lacke
of
iudgement
,
who
tooke
that
answere
for
good
payment
,
or
want
of
consideration
and
care
of
T.
C.
credit
in
referring
vs
to
so
sleight
and
friuolous
an
euasion
.
For
whereas
D.
Whitgift
[
h
](A20733-e136420-b)
h
Pag.
404.
argueth
thus
,
That
Timothie
was
Bishop
,
the
whole
course
of
the
Epistles
written
vnto
him
declareth
,
wherein
is
contayned
the
office
and
dutie
of
a
Bishop
,
and
diuers
precepts
peculiarly
pertayning
to
that
function
;
T.
C.
[
i
](A20733-e136460-b)
i
Lib.
2.
part.
1.
pag.
312.
answereth
,
that
by
this
reason
he
might
as
well
proue
that
Timothie
was
a
deacon
,
or
a
widdowe
,
an
olde
man
or
an
olde
woman
,
seeing
in
those
Epistles
the
Apostle
wrote
of
their
duties
.
Yea
,
rather
that
hee
was
a
Deacon
,
considering
that
there
is
nothing
in
the
description
of
a
Deacon
which
agreeth
not
to
him
,
but
in
the
description
of
a
Bishop
that
which
he
requireth
of
not
being
giuen
to
wine
,
and
not
being
a
young
Christian
,
could
haue
no
place
in
Timothies
instruction
.
Not
to
argue
with
T.
C.
but
to
let
him
rest
in
peace
;
can
the
Refuter
be
so
ignorant
,
or
without
iudgement
,
as
to
thinke
,
that
D.
Whitgift
when
hee
spoke
of
the
whole
course
and
tenure
of
the
Epistles
,
did
meane
onely
the
description
of
a
B.
or
Minister
set
downe
in
the
beginning
of
the
third
chapter
of
the
former
Epistle
?
if
that
had
beene
his
argument
,
hee
had
argued
thus
:
Paul
directeth
Timothie
what
manner
of
men
to
ordayne
Bishops
or
Ministers
,
and
likewise
Deacons
.
Therefore
Timothie
himselfe
was
a
B.
or
Minister
,
or
likewise
a
Deacon
.
Is
it
not
plaine
,
that
by
the
whole
course
hee
vnderstandeth
all
those
directions
,
which
are
giuen
to
Timothie
throughout
the
Epistles
for
the
discharge
of
his
office
,
either
in
respect
of
the
Ministerie
common
to
all
Ministers
,
or
of
his
Episcopall
function
,
chiefly
in
regard
either
of
Ordination
or
Iurisdiction
,
vnto
which
heads
the
precepts
&
directions
in
those
Epistles
are
to
be
referred
?
for
when
he
speaketh
of
the
duties
of
men
and
women
,
olde
and
young
,
hee
directeth
Timothie
,
and
in
like
manner
Titus
[
k.
](A20733-e136610-b)
k.
Tit.
2.1.15
.
what
to
preach
.
When
hee
describeth
the
qualities
of
Ministers
,
and
Deacons
,
and
Widowes
;
he
directeth
him
what
manner
of
Ministers
and
Deacons
to
ordayne
,
and
Widowes
to
admit
.
And
whereas
D.
Whitgift
hauing
said
,
that
in
those
Epistles
diuers
precepts
pertaine
peculiarly
to
the
Episcopall
function
:
T.C.
chalengeth
him
to
shew
him
any
one
precept
in
those
Epistles
which
is
proper
to
a
B
:
It
is
not
hard
to
shew
him
more
then
one
,
as
,
lay
thy
hands
hastily
on
no
man
.
Against
a
Presbyter
or
Minister
receiue
not
an
accusation
but
vnder
two
or
three
witnesses
,
&c.
These
are
perpetuall
directions
,
which
were
not
common
,
eyther
to
other
Christians
,
or
other
Ministers
:
therefore
peculiar
to
BB.
And
this
was
T.
C.
confutation
of
the
Proposition
:
Now
let
vs
heare
what
the
Refuter
can
say
.
The
Proposition
saith
hee
,
§.
3.
The
refuters
answere
to
the
Proposition
confuted
.
is
grounded
vpon
a
false
supposition
,
and
what
is
that
?
that
the
Apostle
by
describing
in
these
Epistles
the
rules
to
be
obserued
in
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
intended
to
informe
Timothie
and
Titus
as
BB.
and
in
them
all
other
BB.
how
to
carry
themselues
in
those
matters
.
Is
this
the
Supposition
,
whereon
the
Proposition
is
grounded
?
Alas
good
man
,
you
know
not
[
l
](A20733-e136760-b)
l
Vide
supr.
l.
2.
c.
3.
what
the
Hypothesis
or
Supposition
of
an
Hipotheticall
Proposition
is
:
this
which
you
suppose
to
be
the
Supposition
of
the
Proposition
,
is
plainly
the
Assumption
of
the
Syllogisme
,
which
your selfe
framed
.
But
because
the
Refuter
hath
confounded
himselfe
with
his
owne
hypotheticall
or
connexiue
Proposition
,
I
will
propound
my
Argument
in
another
forme
.
Whosoeuer
describing
vnto
Timothie
and
Titus
their
office
and
authoritie
,
as
they
were
Gouernours
of
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
and
prescribing
their
dutie
in
the
execution
thereof
,
and
that
as
afterwards
I
shew
to
be
performed
by
them
and
their
Successours
till
the
comming
of
Christ
,
doth
plainely
describe
the
office
and
authoritie
,
and
prescribe
the
dutie
of
BB:
hee
doth
presuppose
them
to
be
BB
;
the
one
of
Ephesus
,
the
other
of
Creet
.
But
Paul
in
his
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
describing
vnto
them
their
office
and
authoritie
as
they
were
Gouernours
of
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
and
prescribing
their
dutie
in
the
execution
thereof
to
be
performed
by
them
and
their
successours
vntill
the
comming
of
Christ
,
doth
plainly
describe
the
office
and
authority
,
and
prescribe
the
duty
of
BB.
Therefore
Paul
in
his
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
presupposeth
them
to
be
Bishops
,
the
one
of
Ephesus
,
the
other
of
Creet
.
This
Proposition
,
because
I
know
not
what
can
be
obiected
against
it
.
T.
C.
and
the
Refuter
hauing
assailed
it
in
vaine
,
I
will
once
againe
take
for
granted
.
The
assumption
I
proue
by
those
particulars
,
wherein
the
Episcopall
authoritie
doth
chiefly
consist
,
both
in
respect
of
Ordination
,
Tit.
1.5
.
1
Tim.
5.22
.
and
also
of
Iurisdiction
,
they
being
the
censurers
of
other
Ministers
doctrine
.
1
Tim.
1.3
.
2
Tim.
2.16
.
Tit.
1.10.11
.
and
3.9
.
and
iudges
of
their
persons
and
conuersation
,
1
Tim.
5.19.20.21
.
Tit.
3.10
.
to
which
proofes
he
answereth
nothing
.
Wherevnto
might
be
added
the
authority
of
Gregorie
Nazianzene
[
m
](A20733-e137030-b)
m
In
Encomio
Athanas.
,
of
Chrysostome
[
n
](A20733-e137060-b)
n
Hom.
10.
in
1
Tim.
,
of
Oecumenius
[
o
](A20733-e137110-b)
o
In
1
Tim.
5.
,
and
Gregory
[
p
](A20733-e137150-b)
p
Respons.
ad
August
.
ad
〈◊〉
.
,
testifying
that
these
Epistles
doe
teach
Bishops
how
to
behaue
themselues
in
the
Church
of
God
.
Now
because
the
Refuters
supposition
is
the
same
in
ef●ect
with
his
assumption
,
I
will
examine
first
what
he
obiecteth
against
the
assumption
vnder
the
name
of
that
supposition
,
and
so
proceed
to
his
answere
which
he
directed
against
the
assumption
.
The
summe
of
that
which
he
obiecteth
against
the
supposition
,
is
this
,
that
though
Timothie
and
Titus
were
by
Paules
direction
to
doe
those
things
,
which
Bishops
arrogate
to
themselues
;
yet
they
were
to
doe
them
by
an
higher
power
,
and
therefore
not
as
Bishops
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
that
they
were
to
be
done
by
a
power
which
was
to
continue
in
the
Church
vntill
the
end
;
and
therefore
not
by
a
higher
power
then
Episcopal
.
And
secondly
,
that
the
power
Episcopal
,
whereby
Bishops
doe
these
things
which
Timothie
and
Titus
had
in
commission
,
is
so
much
of
the
Apostolicall
power
as
was
to
continue
in
the
Church
vnto
the
end
.
§
4.
His
answere
to
the
assumption
.
Ad
pag.
138.
The
assumption
it selfe
hee
denyeth
,
saying
,
these
Epistles
are
not
precedents
of
the
Episcopall
function
,
&c.
The
reason
of
his
deniall
is
this
.
What
though
Bishops
haue
now
gotten
that
power
into
their
hands
,
yet
were
not
those
instructions
giuen
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
as
Bishops
,
(
the
Apostles
dreaming
of
no
such
soueraigntie
)
but
particularly
to
Timothie
and
Titus
as
Euangelists
,
and
in
generall
to
the
Presbyters
,
to
whom
the
charge
of
those
affaires
belongeth
.
To
the
Euangelists
,
to
administer
in
all
the
Churches
of
those
Regions
,
whither
the
Apostles
sent
,
or
where
they
left
them
:
to
the
Presbyters
,
to
administer
in
their
seuerall
congregations
or
Churches
.
Hee
said
euen
now
that
Timothie
and
Titus
did
those
things
which
BB.
doe
by
a
higher
power
,
&
now
he
saith
he
Apostle
dreamed
not
of
any
such
soueraignty
,
as
the
BB.
haue
.
Where
he
saith
these
instructions
were
not
giuen
to
BB.
but
particularly
to
these
Euangelists
to
performe
them
in
all
Churches
and
Regions
where
he
should
place
them
,
and
generally
to
Presbyters
,
&c.
both
parts
are
false
.
For
these
directions
Paul
gaue
to
Timothie
and
Titus
to
be
obserued
of
them
as
they
were
particularly
assigned
gouernours
of
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
and
are
such
as
are
to
be
obserued
to
the
end
.
Neither
are
these
instructions
giuen
in
generall
to
Presbyters
,
neither
doth
the
charge
of
these
affaires
belong
to
them
.
And
that
these
things
belong
to
the
BB.
I
haue
sufficiently
proued
before
[
r
](A20733-e137430-b)
r
Lib.
3.
.
To
make
the
matter
plaine
,
he
bringeth
in
an
example
,
which
is
worth
the
hearing
.
Suppose
,
saith
he
,
a
Democraty
,
where
the
common-wealth
is
gouerned
by
the
people
;
it
must
needs
be
that
in
such
a
place
there
are
lawes
for
the
choosing
and
ordering
of
Officers
.
What
if
this
gouernment
fall
into
the
hands
of
the
Nobilitie
,
which
continue
the
same
lawes
,
still
in
the
same
cases
?
What
if
some
mightier
then
the
rest
,
at
the
last
make
himselfe
sole
Gouernour
,
still
obseruing
those
fundamentall
lawes
,
which
were
at
the
first
established
:
is
it
to
be
saide
,
that
those
lawes
are
the
verie
patternes
and
precedents
of
the
Aristocraticall
,
or
Monarchicall
gouernement
,
whereby
the
first
maker
of
those
lawes
would
enforme
,
in
the
one
,
the
Nobilitie
,
in
the
other
,
the
Monarchie
,
and
in
them
,
all
other
,
how
to
exercise
that
function
?
The
administration
of
Church
matters
touching
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
was
first
in
the
seuerall
Churches
,
or
congregations
;
which
by
their
Presbyteries
had
the
menaging
of
all
Church
businesse
:
in
processe
of
time
,
it
came
to
be
restrayned
to
the
Clergie
onely
,
the
B.
and
his
Presbyterie
of
Ministers
onely
;
at
last
,
as
things
grew
worse
and
worse
,
the
B.
like
a
Monarch
got
the
reynes
into
his
owne
hands
.
Now
though
the
lawes
of
Ordination
and
Iurisdiction
remaine
the
same
,
and
the
practise
also
in
some
sort
;
yet
are
they
not
patternes
and
presidents
either
of
the
second
or
third
kinde
of
gouernment
;
neither
were
they
giuen
to
instruct
the
Bishop
alone
,
or
the
Bishop
and
his
Clergie
together
.
First
,
[
t
](A20733-e137610-b)
t
de
grad.
Ministr.
c.
23.
pag.
155
,
Democraticus
quidam
fanaticus
,
shewing
that
these
who
plead
that
cause
,
are
lead
with
a
phantasticall
&
fanaticall
spirit
.
For
is
it
not
a
phrensy
to
vrge
the
peoples
supremacy
in
Church-gouernment
?
is
there
any
shew
in
scripture
,
or
in
reason
,
that
the
sheepe
should
rule
their
Shepheard
,
or
the
flocke
their
Pastor
?
But
for
the
confutation
of
them
,
I
referre
them
to
other
Disciplinarians
,
from
whom
they
had
their
first
grounds
;
seing
by
this
fancy
they
seeke
to
ouerturne
,
as
well
those
Churches
where
the
Geneua
discipline
is
established
as
ours
.
The
third
dreame
is
,
that
the
lawes
of
Church-gouernment
prescribed
in
the
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
were
prouided
for
the
democraticall
state
of
the
Church
.
So
that
when
Paul
saith
lay
not
thou
hands
on
no
man
hastily
,
you
must
vnderstand
the
speech
directed
not
to
Timothie
,
to
whom
the
Epistle
was
written
,
but
to
the
people
,
that
they
should
not
suffer
their
Lay-elders
when
their
minister
is
dead
,
to
be
hasty
in
laying
hands
on
a
new
.
And
when
hee
saith
doe
not
thou
receiue
an
accusation
,
&c.
it
must
be
vnderstood
of
the
people
and
Presbyterie
.
After
two
or
three
admonitions
doe
thou
auoid
an
hereticke
or
excommunicate
him
,
that
is
,
thou
people
.
What
of
Creet
?
belike
the
whole
Iland
of
Creet
was
a
Parish
too
.
The
next
fancy
is
,
that
the
popular
state
of
the
seuerall
Churches
did
first
degenerate
into
an
Aristocraty
,
and
after
into
a
Monarchie
.
But
it
is
as
cleare
as
the
light
,
that
the
seuerall
Churches
were
at
the
first
gouerned
by
the
Apostles
or
Apostolicall
men
seuerally
,
and
that
either
perpetually
,
as
by
Iames
,
Marke
,
&c.
or
but
for
a
time
,
as
by
Peter
,
Paul
,
&c.
and
that
when
the
Apostles
left
the
Churches
,
they
committed
them
to
other
Apostolicall
men
,
such
as
Timothie
,
Titus
,
Evodius
,
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
,
Linus
,
Clemens
,
&c.
communicating
vnto
them
the
same
authority
both
for
the
worke
of
the
ministery
,
and
for
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
which
themselues
had
in
those
seuerall
Churches
:
and
what
authoritie
each
of
them
had
,
their
successors
in
the
seuerall
Churches
had
the
same
.
Neither
haue
our
BB.
at
this
day
,
greater
authority
in
menaging
Church
causes
,
then
Timothie
and
Titus
and
other
the
first
Bishops
had
.
Who
was
to
ordaine
ministers
in
Creet
and
to
gouerne
that
Church
?
did
not
Paul
commit
these
things
to
Titus
,
without
mentioning
,
either
of
Presbytery
,
or
people
?
are
not
all
his
precepts
for
ordination
and
Church-gouernment
directed
onely
to
Titus
for
Creet
,
&
to
Timothie
for
Ephesus
?
and
doth
not
this
euidently
shew
,
that
howsoeuer
they
might
vse
either
the
presence
,
and
consent
of
the
people
,
or
the
Counsell
and
aduise
of
the
Presbyters
in
causes
of
greatest
moment
,
as
Princes
also
doe
in
common-wealthes
:
yet
the
sway
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
was
in
them
?
It
is
therefore
most
plaine
,
that
in
the
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
it
is
presupposed
,
that
they
had
Episcopall
authority
:
and
that
the
rules
and
directions
giuen
to
them
are
precedents
for
Bishops
and
patternes
vnto
them
for
the
exercise
of
their
Episcopall
function
.
And
this
I
proue
againe
in
my
Sermon
by
another
argument
,
Those
things
which
were
written
to
informe
not
Timothie
and
Titus
alone
,
as
extraordinarie
persons
,
but
them
and
their
successors
,
to
the
end
of
the
world
,
were
written
to
informe
Diocesan
Bishops
:
But
those
Epistles
were
written
to
informe
not
Timothie
and
Titus
alone
as
extraordinarie
persons
but
them
and
their
successors
to
the
end
of
the
world
.
Therefore
they
were
written
to
informe
Diocesan
BB.
The
assumption
(
for
with
that
the
refuter
beginneth
)
I
proued
by
testimony
,
[
a
](A20733-e137980-b)
a
1
Tim.
6.13.14
.
,
straightly
charging
Timothie
,
that
the
commandements
and
directions
,
which
he
gaue
him
,
should
be
kept
inuiolable
vntill
the
appearing
of
our
Lord
Iesus
Christ
;
&
therfore
by
such
,
as
should
haue
the
like
authority
to
the
end
.
[
b
](A20733-e138000-b)
b
in
1
Tim.
6.14
.
Hereof
Caluin
,
saith
thus
,
nomine
mandati
significat
quae
hactenus
de
officio
Timothie
disseruit
.
Vnder
the
name
of
the
commandement
he
signifieth
those
things
whereof
hitherto
he
had
discoursed
concerning
the
office
of
Timothie
.
And
againe
,
omnino
ceriè
ad
ministerium
Timothie
refero
,
I
doe
wholy
referre
it
to
the
ministerie
of
Timothie
.
For
Paul
wrot
to
this
end
,
to
giue
direction
to
Timothie
,
how
he
should
behaue
[
c
](A20733-e138070-b)
c
1
Tim.
3.15
.
himselfe
in
the
Church
,
which
is
the
house
of
the
liuing
God
.
Which
directions
he
chargeth
him
Chap.
6.
to
obserue
inuiolable
vntill
the
comming
of
Christ
:
which
could
not
be
performed
in
the
person
of
Timothie
,
who
was
not
to
continue
to
the
end
,
but
in
a
succession
of
them
,
who
should
haue
the
like
authority
vntill
the
end
.
T.
C.
and
other
Disciplinarians
,
hauing
fancied
that
the
Apostles
had
giuen
direction
in
that
Epistle
for
onely-gouerning
Elders
:
hereupon
conclude
[
d
](A20733-e138100-b)
d
T.C.
l.
1.177
.
l.
2.
part.
2.
p.
55.
,
that
they
are
to
be
continued
vntill
the
comming
of
Christ
,
So
that
they
can
conclude
vpon
that
charge
the
continuance
of
an
office
not
once
mentioned
in
that
Epistle
:
but
they
cannot
,
or
will
not
see
,
how
the
continuance
of
that
office
,
which
Timothie
did
beare
,
for
the
execution
whereof
all
these
directions
are
giuen
,
is
concluded
vpon
the
same
ground
.
The
second
testimonie
was
of
Ambrose
[
e
](A20733-e138180-b)
e
Ambr.
in
1.
Tim.
6.14
.
,
writing
on
those
words
of
Paul
,
saying
,
that
Paul
is
so
circumspect
;
not
because
he
doubted
of
Timothie
his
care
,
but
in
regard
of
his
successors
,
that
they
after
the
example
of
Timothie
,
might
continue
the
well
ordering
of
the
Church
.
His
answere
to
the
proofe
of
the
assumption
.
The
effect
of
the
refuters
answere
is
,
that
he
could
be
content
to
graunt
this
assumption
,
were
it
not
that
he
is
resolued
to
deny
the
conclusion
,
which
followeth
thereupon
.
For
first
,
hee
granteth
Pauls
purpose
to
instruct
those
that
should
succeed
Timothie
and
Titus
,
in
the
authoritie
which
they
had
,
but
not
in
their
office
.
And
that
this
authoritie
was
not
,
nor
was
to
be
,
in
the
hands
of
any
one
particular
man
,
but
the
right
of
it
was
in
the
whole
congregation
,
the
execution
in
the
Presbytery
.
So
that
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
might
be
continued
without
Bishops
,
&c.
It
is
sufficient
for
the
truth
of
the
assumption
,
which
the
refuter
granteth
;
that
what
Paul
did
write
to
Timothie
&
Titus
,
he
wrote
not
to
them
alone
as
extraordinarie
persons
,
whose
authoritie
should
dye
with
them
,
but
to
those
also
which
should
succeed
them
in
the
like
authoritie
vntill
the
end
.
But
whether
the
Bishops
were
to
be
their
successours
,
or
the
whole
congregation
,
or
the
Presbyterie
,
belongeth
not
to
the
assumption
:
but
rather
to
the
proposition
.
Howbeit
,
that
which
he
saith
,
either
in
denying
the
Bishops
to
be
the
successours
of
Timothie
and
Titus
,
or
affirming
the
congregation
and
Presbyterie
to
haue
succeeded
them
in
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
is
spoken
altogether
,
as
against
the
truth
,
so
without
proofe
.
I
will
therefore
returne
to
the
proposition
,
flatly
denyeth
it
.
Thus
therefore
I
reason
:
If
the
successours
of
Timothie
and
Titus
were
Diocesan
Bishops
,
then
those
things
which
were
written
to
informe
their
successours
were
written
to
informe
Diocesan
Bishops
:
But
the
successors
of
Timothie
&
Titus
were
Diocesan
BB.
Therefore
those
things
which
were
written
to
informe
the
successours
of
Timothie
and
Titus
,
were
written
to
informe
Diocesan
Bishops
.
Here
the
refuter
,
thinking
he
had
as
good
reason
to
deny
the
one
part
of
this
syllogisme
,
as
the
other
,
denyeth
both
.
The
consequence
of
the
proposition
is
feeble
saith
he
,
vnlesse
it
were
certaine
,
that
the
Bishops
both
de
facto
were
,
&
de
iure
ought
to
haue
beene
their
successors
.
That
the
Bishops
were
de
facto
their
successors
,
&
of
all
other
Apostolical
men
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Churches
,
I
haue
already
proued
,
and
there
vpon
haue
inferred
,
that
de
iure
also
they
were
.
Because
what
gouernment
was
not
onely
generally
receiued
in
the
300.
yeeres
after
the
Apostles
,
but
also
was
in
vse
in
the
Apostles
times
,
in
the
Apostolicall
Churches
,
that
without
doubt
was
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
assumption
I
proue
by
two
arguments
:
first
,
by
this
disiunction
.
Either
the
Bishops
were
their
successours
,
or
the
Presbyteries
,
or
(
which
the
refuter
would
adde
)
the
whole
congregation
.
But
neither
the
Presbyteries
,
nor
the
whole
congregation
,
which
had
no
greater
,
nor
other
authority
and
power
vnder
Bishops
,
then
they
had
before
,
vnder
Timothie
and
Titus
.
Therefore
the
Bishops
were
their
successors
.
Againe
,
those
who
succeeded
Timothie
and
Titus
in
the
gouernment
of
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
were
their
successors
.
But
the
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
did
succeed
Timothie
and
Titus
in
the
gouernment
of
those
Churches
.
Therefore
they
were
their
successors
.
These
reasons
the
refuter
saw
not
:
onely
he
taketh
vpon
him
to
answere
the
proofes
of
this
last
assumption
.
[
a
](A20733-e138910-b)
a
Euseb.
l.
5.
c.
25
Ad
Pag.
140.
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
another
:
But
also
that
from
Timothie
vntill
the
Councill
of
Chalcedon
there
was
a
continued
succession
of
Bishops
.
For
whereas
in
the
Councill
of
Chalcedon
,
Stephanus
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
being
deposed
,
some
question
did
arise
,
whether
the
new
Bishop
who
was
to
succeed
were
to
be
chosen
and
ordained
by
the
Councill
,
or
by
the
Prouinciall
Synode
of
Aisa
;
Leontius
[
b
](A20733-e138980-b)
b
Conc.
Chalc.
Act.
11.
the
Bishop
of
Magnesia
in
the
Prouince
of
Asia
,
alledged
that
from
St.
Timothie
to
that
time
there
had
beene
twenty
seauen
Bishops
of
Ephesus
,
all
ordained
there
.
To
this
he
answereth
nothing
,
but
that
which
before
hath
been
refuted
;
that
howsoeuer
the
latter
Bishops
of
those
twenty
seauen
might
be
Diocesan
,
the
former
were
not
.
For
it
is
certaine
,
that
both
the
latter
and
the
former
were
not
onely
Diocesan
,
but
also
Metropolitan
Bishops
.
And
where
I
number
the
Angell
of
Ephesus
in
this
rancke
,
he
saith
,
that
I
tediously
begge
the
question
.
But
I
appeale
to
the
refuter
himselfe
,
first
,
whether
this
Angell
was
not
the
B.
and
gouernour
of
the
Church
of
Ephesus
,
secondly
whether
he
did
not
succeed
Timothie
in
the
gouernment
of
that
Church
,
thirdly
,
whether
he
was
not
one
of
those
twenty
seauen
Bishops
mentioned
by
Leontius
in
the
Councill
of
Chalcedon
.
And
the
like
may
be
said
of
Polycrates
,
who
had
beene
the
eight
Bishop
of
his
owne
kindred
,
sauing
that
concerning
him
there
is
more
euidence
,
that
he
being
Bishop
of
Ephesus
was
the
Metropolitane
or
primate
of
Asia
.
For
Eusebius
[
c
](A20733-e139090-b)
c
lib.
5.
cap.
24.
saith
,
that
he
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
he
was
the
ruler
or
chiefe
of
the
Bishops
of
Asia
;
who
[
d
](A20733-e139140-b)
d
cap.
25.
by
his
authoritie
did
assemble
a
Prouinciall
Synode
to
discusse
the
question
concerning
Easter
.
As
touching
Creet
,
if
Titus
had
successours
in
the
gouernment
of
Creet
,
it
would
be
auailable
for
Arch-bishops
which
were
not
bred
a
great
while
after
,
but
it
maketh
nothing
for
Diocesan
Bishops
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
first
,
though
such
Archbishops
,
as
were
also
called
Patriarches
,
were
not
from
the
Apostles
times
:
yet
such
as
are
Metropolitanes
,
were
.
And
againe
,
if
Prouinciall
Bishops
may
be
proued
to
haue
been
from
the
Apostles
times
,
much
more
may
Diocesan
.
For
euery
Metropolitane
is
a
Diocesan
,
but
not
contrariwise
.
And
although
I
doe
not
remember
,
that
I
haue
any
where
read
of
the
next
successour
to
Titus
,
yet
I
read
of
Gortyna
the
mother
City
of
Creet
,
and
the
Metropolitane
Bishops
thereof
,
who
were
Arch-bishops
of
Creet
,
and
successors
of
Titus
;
though
not
his
immediate
successours
.
For
Dionysius
of
Corinth
,
who
flourished
at
the
same
time
with
Hegesippus
[
e
](A20733-e139260-b)
e
Euseb.
li.
4.
c.
21.
&
23.
&
29
,
writing
an
Epistle
to
the
Church
of
Gortyna
,
together
with
the
rest
of
the
Churches
of
Creet
,
hee
commendeth
Philippe
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
their
Bishop
,
for
his
renowned
vertue
.
And
although
he
called
him
the
Bishop
of
the
Churches
in
Creet
:
yet
the
Diocesan
Churches
had
their
Bishops
too
,
as
the
Church
of
Gnossus
a
City
of
Creet
,
had
Pinytus
at
the
same
time
her
Bishop
,
which
proueth
the
other
to
haue
beene
an
Arch-bishop
.
Theodorus
Balsamo
saith
ᶠ
,
antiquius
Nomocanonum
versaui
,
&c.
I
haue
perused
the
ancient
Code
of
Councils
,
and
by
the
subscriptions
I
finde
,
that
in
this
Councill
held
in
Trullo
,
Basil
the
Bishop
of
Gortyna
(
which
is
the
Metropolis
of
Creet
)
was
present
.
And
where
he
saith
,
that
Creet
hauing
many
Churches
had
no
one
Bishop
to
gouerne
them
,
after
Titus
the
Euangelist
,
till
Diocesan
Bishops
had
got
the
sway
of
Ecclesiasticall
matters
:
I
confesse
it
is
true
,
but
he
must
remember
,
that
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
there
were
Diocesan
Bishops
.
And
in
the
very
next
age
after
them
,
Philippe
was
Archbishop
of
Creet
.
But
though
there
were
no
direct
proofe
,
that
Diocesan
or
Prouinciall
Bishops
were
the
successours
of
Timothie
and
Titus
;
yet
it
might
easily
be
gathered
by
other
Churches
,
from
whose
forme
of
gouernment
Ephesus
and
Creet
did
not
vary
.
It
cannot
be
denyed
,
but
what
authoritie
Timothie
and
Titus
had
,
the
one
in
Ephesus
,
the
other
in
Creet
,
the
same
had
Marke
at
Alexandria
,
Evodius
at
Antioch
,
Linus
at
Rome
,
&c.
Neither
may
it
be
doubted
,
but
that
each
of
these
had
Bishops
to
their
successours
,
euen
in
the
Apostles
times
,
as
before
hath
beene
shewed
:
and
therefore
the
refuter
should
not
make
it
so
strange
,
that
Bishops
were
the
successours
of
Timothie
and
Titus
.
Serm.
Sect.
8.
pag.
75.
Against
this
,
two
things
are
obiected
,
first
that
Timothie
and
Titus
may
seeme
not
to
haue
beene
appointed
BB.
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
because
they
did
not
continue
there
,
but
were
remoued
to
other
places
,
&c.
to
other
in
Creet
.
pag.
78.
The
first
obiection
is
thus
framed
by
the
Refuter
.
Timothie
and
Titus
did
not
continue
in
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
but
were
remoued
to
other
places
.
Therefore
Timothie
and
Titus
were
not
ordayned
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
.
I
answere
by
distinction
.
For
if
by
continuing
,
they
vnderstand
(
as
the
words
seeme
to
import
)
a
perpetuall
residence
without
remouing
or
trauelling
thence
vpon
any
occasion
;
then
I
denie
the
consequence
,
or
proposition
,
which
is
vnderstood
.
For
by
no
law
,
either
of
God
,
or
man
,
are
Bishops
or
other
Pastors
so
affixed
to
their
cures
,
but
that
vpon
speciall
and
extraordinarie
occasion
,
they
may
,
either
for
their
owne
necessitie
,
or
for
the
greater
,
or
more
publicke
good
of
the
Church
,
trauaile
or
remoue
to
other
places
.
It
is
sufficient
that
they
be
ordinarily
resident
vpon
their
charge
.
If
by
continuing
be
meant
ordinarie
residence
,
then
I
denie
the
antecedent
;
and
doe
contrariwise
affirme
,
that
although
vpon
speciall
and
extraordinary
occasions
they
were
by
the
Apostle
called
to
other
places
,
as
his
or
the
Churches
necessity
required
:
yet
these
were
the
places
of
their
ordinary
residence
.
And
that
I
proue
,
because
they
both
liued
and
died
there
.
That
they
continued
,
or
had
their
ordinary
abode
there
in
their
life
time
,
I
proue
by
testimony
of
Scripture
,
and
other
euidence
.
For
if
Paul
required
Timothie
[
h
](A20733-e139750-b)
h
1
Tim.
1.3
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
continue
or
abide
still
in
Ephesus
,
and
appointed
Titus
[
i
](A20733-e139790-b)
i
Tit.
1.5
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
continue
to
redresse
what
was
wanting
in
Creet
,
then
were
they
to
continue
,
or
haue
their
ordinarie
residence
there
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
in
both
the
parts
thereof
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
The
Refuter
denieth
the
consequence
to
be
of
any
force
,
Ad.
pag.
141.
vnlesse
first
it
could
be
proued
,
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
signifieth
a
perpetuall
abiding
in
a
place
without
departing
from
it
all
a
mans
life
;
which
needeth
not
,
seeing
ordinarie
residence
,
which
is
meant
by
that
terme
,
&
which
is
required
in
BB.
&
ordinarie
Pastors
,
may
be
without
such
perpetuall
abiding
.
Secondly
,
except
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
be
vnderstood
also
for
the
whole
terme
of
life
.
But
it
sufficeth
,
that
it
signifieth
to
continue
in
redressing
,
as
the
Geneua
translation
also
readeth
.
For
thereby
is
meant
,
as
I
said
,
that
hee
was
not
left
there
for
a
brunt
,
but
that
he
should
,
as
things
were
defectiue
,
or
wanting
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
continue
to
redresse
them
,
and
still
keepe
that
Church
in
reparation
.
Ad
pag.
142.
For
though
the
Church
were
new
(
as
the
Refuter
obiecteth
to
signifie
that
it
should
not
need
any
reparation
)
yet
were
the
Bishops
and
Presbyters
subiect
to
death
,
and
the
places
of
them
which
dyed
were
to
be
supplied
,
and
the
Church
subiect
to
personall
corruptions
,
both
for
doctrine
,
discipline
&
manners
,
which
would
need
reformation
.
And
whereas
their
opinion
,
who
imagine
that
Timothie
was
required
to
stay
at
Ephesus
but
for
a
short
time
,
when
Paul
went
into
Macedony
,
Act.
20.
is
contrary
to
that
former
testimony
concerning
Timothie
:
I
shew
,
that
in
all
the
iourneyes
of
Paul
into
Macedony
,
mentioned
in
the
Acts
,
Timothie
did
accompany
him
.
And
therefore
,
that
this
voyage
of
Paul
was
after
his
first
being
at
Rome
,
with
which
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
end
,
not
mentioning
any
of
his
trauels
,
and
other
occurrents
,
which
afterwards
happened
for
the
space
of
nine
or
tenne
yeares
.
Euseb.
l.
2.
c.
20.
The
Acts
of
which
time
cannot
otherwise
be
knowne
,
but
by
such
of
his
Epistles
as
were
written
in
that
time
,
and
other
monuments
of
antiquity
.
The
which
passage
,
though
the
Refuter
hath
passed
by
in
silence
,
I
thought
good
to
put
the
Reader
in
minde
of
,
that
he
may
acknowledge
many
things
to
haue
beene
done
by
the
Apostles
,
which
are
registred
in
other
records
of
anitquity
,
though
they
be
not
mentioned
in
the
history
of
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
which
endeth
with
those
things
which
happened
aboue
fourty
yeares
before
the
death
of
S.
Iohn
.
Now
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
which
were
performed
after
S.
Lukes
history
thereof
,
were
in
part
recorded
by
Hegesippus
,
and
Clemens
,
and
other
auncient
Authors
,
which
testifie
that
Paul
ordayned
Timothie
B.
of
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
;
and
that
he
,
and
other
Apostles
appointed
other
Bishops
in
other
places
.
Whose
testimonies
whosoeuer
doe
refuse
to
beleiue
,
doe
themselues
deserue
no
credit
.
To
those
allegations
therefore
out
of
Paul
,
viz.
Dorotheus
in
synopsi
.
Hieron
.
siue
Sophron.
in
Catalogo
in
Tito
.
Isidorus
de
vita
&
morte
sanctorum
.
Num.
87.
&
88.
Vincent
.
lib.
10.
c.
38.
Antonius
ex
Policrate
part.
1.
tit.
6.
c.
28.
Niceph.
l.
10.
c.
11.
Who
report
,
that
Timothie
and
Titus
,
as
they
liued
,
so
also
dyed
,
the
one
at
Ephesus
,
the
other
in
Creet
.
The
Refuter
answereth
,
he
may
well
credit
the
report
of
these
Authors
,
and
yet
not
grant
that
therefore
they
were
Diocesan
Bishops
of
those
places
.
Indeed
,
if
I
had
argued
thus
,
as
the
Refuter
would
haue
the
Reader
thinke
,
Timothie
and
Titus
dyed
,
the
one
at
Ephesus
,
the
other
in
Creet
:
Therefore
they
were
BB.
there
;
it
had
beene
a
loose
consequence
.
But
he
wrangleth
besides
the
pupose
.
It
was
obiected
,
that
Timothie
and
Titus
were
not
Bishops
of
those
places
,
because
they
did
not
continue
there
.
I
proue
,
that
they
held
their
ordinary
residence
there
,
not
onely
because
S.
Paul
required
them
both
,
to
continue
there
;
but
other
Authors
also
testified
,
that
they
both
liued
and
died
there
.
The
Refuter
answereth
,
and
would
haue
the
Reader
content
himselfe
with
this
answere
,
that
howsoeuer
indeed
it
is
true
that
they
continued
there
,
yet
hereof
it
followeth
not
that
they
were
Diocesan
Bishops
of
those
places
.
Yea
,
but
saith
he
,
it
would
be
obserued
,
that
M.
D.
granteth
the
consequence
to
be
good
,
namely
that
they
were
not
Bishops
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
if
they
did
not
continue
there
but
were
remoued
to
other
places
.
Now
that
they
were
remoued
himselfe
confesseth
,
&c.
If
I
had
confessed
,
that
they
were
remoued
,
and
also
that
if
they
were
remoued
,
they
were
not
Bishops
.
Then
I
should
haue
granted
both
the
antecedent
of
the
Enthymeme
,
(
which
hee
said
before
that
I
denyed
)
and
also
the
consequence
.
But
indeed
I
denyed
the
consequence
,
in
that
sence
which
the
Refuter
conceiueth
,
and
yet
granted
,
that
though
they
were
sometimes
remoued
;
yet
they
kept
ordinary
residence
,
the
one
at
Ephesus
,
the
other
in
Creet
.
And
therefore
their
trauelling
,
or
remouing
vpon
extraordinary
occasions
,
doth
not
hinder
their
being
BB.
Doe
you
indeed
grant
,
that
sometimes
they
were
remoued
?
marry
that
will
I
proue
,
saith
the
Refuter
,
out
of
2
Tim.
4.9
.
11.12.21
.
&c.
and
therevpon
inferre
,
they
were
not
Bishops
.
But
neither
are
all
his
proofes
good
,
neither
is
his
inference
sound
.
He
would
proue
that
Timothy
was
not
at
Ephesus
,
when
the
second
Epistle
was
written
to
him
.
For
first
,
thither
the
Apostle
sent
Tychicus
.
As
if
he
had
said
,
whether
Paul
sent
Tychicus
,
there
Timothie
was
not
.
Belike
there
was
some
such
Antipathy
betweene
them
,
that
one
place
could-not
hold
them
both
.
Secondly
,
because
from
the
place
where
he
was
,
Paul
requireth
him
to
come
to
him
to
Rome
,
&
with
him
to
bring
the
cloake
,
the
books
&
parchments
which
he
left
at
Troas
.
As
though
Timothie
might
not
as
well
come
from
Ephesus
to
Rome
as
from
some
other
place
,
and
as
though
his
bidding
him
to
bring
the
things
left
at
Troas
,
did
not
argue
,
that
he
was
at
Ephesus
,
which
is
in
the
same
peninsula
,
rather
then
else
where
.
But
that
he
was
at
Ephesus
,
may
be
gathered
hereby
:
because
the
Apostle
willeth
him
,
to
salute
Aquila
and
Priscilla
(
whom
he
left
at
Ephesus
,
Act.
18.19
.
)
&
the
houshold
of
Onesiphorus
,
which
also
was
there
.
2
Tim.
4.19
.
with
1.16
.
Sedulius
vnderstandeth
Paul
,
Sedul
.
in
2
Tim.
4.9
.
bidding
Timothie
2
Tim.
4.9
to
come
to
him
quickly
,
as
requiring
him
to
come
from
Ephesus
to
Rome
.
Now
heare
his
inferences
,
Titus
was
sent
from
Candy
to
Rome
,
and
from
thence
he
was
dispatched
into
Dalmatia
,
therfore
he
was
not
B.
of
Candy
.
Timothie
was
not
at
Ephesus
when
the
second
Epistle
was
written
to
him
,
therefore
hee
was
not
B.
there
,
&c.
He
stayed
with
Paul
some
time
in
Rome
,
therefore
he
was
not
B.
of
Ephesus
.
These
are
goodly
inferences
to
oppose
to
the
euidence
gathered
out
of
the
Epistles
,
and
to
the
generall
consent
of
antiquity
,
which
testifieth
that
they
were
Bishops
.
Ad
pag.
143.
Whereas
therefore
he
asketh
,
who
dare
be
so
bold
or
vnreasonable
as
to
imagine
that
Paul
had
made
them
Bishops
?
I
say
,
it
is
intollerable
boldnesse
,
and
arrogancie
,
to
auouch
the
contrarie
.
And
such
is
that
presumptuous
speech
,
that
if
Timothie
and
Titus
had
beene
Bishops
,
it
had
beene
a
matter
neither
of
good
report
for
them
,
nor
of
good
example
for
the
ages
following
that
they
should
be
called
to
other
places
.
For
,
so
long
as
ordinarily
they
were
resident
,
their
absence
at
some
times
vpon
vrgent
and
weighty
occasions
,
was
neither
of
ill
report
,
nor
bad
example
.
Besides
,
when
the
Apostle
sent
Tychicus
to
Ephesus
,
and
sent
for
Timothie
from
Ephesus
,
he
sent
the
one
to
supply
the
absence
of
the
other
,
as
Caluin
also
hath
obserued
.
Serm.
Sect.
9
pag.
78.
&c.
to
the
midst
of
page
81.
The
second
obiection
saith
the
Refuter
,
lyeth
thus
,
Timothie
and
Titus
were
Euangelists
.
Therfore
they
were
not
Diocesan
BB.
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
.
This
consequence
I
denied
,
because
their
being
Euangelists
did
not
hinder
,
but
that
when
they
were
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
and
furnished
with
Episcopall
power
,
they
became
Bishops
.
Against
which
answere
the
Refuter
obiecteth
two
things
.
First
,
that
their
being
Euangelists
did
hinder
their
assigning
to
certaine
Churches
,
without
which
they
could
not
be
Bishops
.
And
this
hee
proueth
by
two
reasons
.
For
first
,
if
the
Apostle
had
assigned
them
to
certaine
Churches
,
then
should
he
haue
confounded
the
offices
which
(
as
himselfe
saith
,
1
Cor.
12.28
.
Eph.
4.11
.
)
God
had
distinguished
.
Secondly
,
hee
should
haue
depriued
Timothie
and
Titus
of
a
higher
calling
,
and
thrust
them
as
it
were
out
of
the
Hall
into
the
Kitchin
.
These
are
nice
points
,
which
none
of
the
Fathers
did
euer
vnderstand
:
neither
did
they
conceiue
,
but
that
Euangelists
might
,
without
any
disparagement
to
them
,
be
assigned
to
seuerall
Churches
,
and
so
become
Bishops
.
For
if
they
held
,
that
the
Apostles
themselues
being
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
as
Iames
was
to
Ierusalem
,
were
BB.
much
more
Euangelists
.
Matthew
,
Marke
,
Luke
and
Iohn
:
who
though
they
all
preached
,
yet
for
the
penning
of
the
Gospell
are
peculiarly
called
Euangelists
.
In
the
former
sence
the
word
is
taken
,
either
generally
,
Calu.
inst.
l.
4.
c.
4.
§
4.
fortassis
etiam
70.
discipuli
,
quos
secundo
loco
ab
Apostolis
Christus
designabit
,
fuerunt
Euangelistae
.
Act.
8.
and
is
expresly
called
an
Euangelist
.
Act.
21.8
.
Of
the
latter
sort
were
Timothie
and
Titus
,
while
they
accompanied
the
Apostle
Paul
in
his
trauailes
,
and
were
not
assigned
to
any
certaine
place
.
That
which
the
Fathers
say
of
the
7●
.
Disciples
,
that
they
had
but
the
degree
of
the
Presbytery
,
may
of
this
latter
sort
much
more
be
verified
,
who
were
ordayned
Ministers
of
the
Gospell
by
imposition
of
hands
.
Idem
in
1
Cor.
15.7
per
omnes
Apostolos
intelligit
●on
solos
12.
sed
70.
discipulos
etiam
.
Sic
Chrysost.
et
Theodor●t
,
&c.
Neither
did
they
differ
from
other
Presbyters
but
in
this
,
that
they
accompanied
the
Apostles
as
their
helpers
,
being
not
tyed
to
any
one
place
.
For
neither
had
they
the
power
of
ordination
,
neither
as
Zanchy
saith
did
they
gouerne
the
Churches
,
Zanch.
in
Eph.
4
now
one
,
then
another
,
as
the
other
Euangelists
and
Prophets
did
.
Wee
see
what
the
office
of
Euangelists
was
.
[
a
](A20733-e141530-b)
a
Chrysost.
Theophyl
.
Oecum
.
in
Eph.
4.
Writers
expounding
that
place
,
plainely
say
,
they
were
not
Euangelists
,
but
Pastors
or
Bishops
.
For
they
,
after
they
were
placed
,
the
one
in
Ephesus
,
the
other
in
Creet
,
did
not
trauaile
vp
and
downe
as
in
former
times
,
when
they
accompanied
the
Apostle
;
but
ordinarily
remained
with
their
flockes
.
The
Greeke
Scholiast
saith
thus
.
Euangelists●
that
is
,
those
which
did
write
the
Gospell
:
Pastors●
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hee
meaneth
such
as
had
the
Churches
committed
to
them
,
such
as
Timothie
was
,
such
as
Titus
.
And
to
the
same
purpose
,
both
Chrysostome
,
and
Theophylact
,
doe
mention
them
by
name
.
Neither
was
it
a
debasing
of
Timothie
and
Titus
,
when
they
were
made
Bishops
,
but
an
aduancement
.
Forwhereas
before
,
they
were
but
Presbyters
(
though
called
Euangelists
in
a
large
sence
:
)
they
were
now
made
the
Apostles
of
those
Churches
,
and
by
imposition
of
hands
ordayned
Bishops
.
In
the
second
place
hee
taketh
exception
against
those
words
,
where
I
say
,
they
were
furnished
with
Episcopall
power
,
and
denieth
that
when
Timothie
&
Titus
were
assigned
to
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
they
receiued
any
new
authority
which
before
they
had
not
,
or
needed
any
such
furnishing
.
But
were
to
exercise
their
Euangelesticall
function
in
those
places
.
For
so
Paul
biddeth
Timothie
after
hee
had
beene
at
and
gone
from
Ephesus
[
b
](A20733-e141720-b)
b
●
.
Tim.
4.5
.
to
doe
the
worke
of
an
Euangelist
.
If
they
receiued
no
new
authority
,
why
did
Timothie
receiue
a
new
ordination
by
imposition
of
hands
,
whereof
the
Apostle
speaketh
in
two
[
c
](A20733-e141750-b)
c
1
Tim.
4.14
.
2
Tim.
1.6
.
places
,
and
which
the
Fathers
vnderstand
of
his
ordination
to
be
Bishop
?
were
men
admitted
to
the
extraordinarie
function
of
Euangelists
,
by
the
ordinarie
meanes
of
imposing
hands
?
or
may
we
thinke
,
that
any
but
the
Apostles
(
being
not
assigned
as
Bishops
to
seuerall
Churches
)
had
that
authority
wheresoeuer
they
came
,
which
Timothie
had
at
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
in
Creet
?
verily
Philippe
the
Euangelist
though
hee
conuerted
[
d
](A20733-e141790-b)
d
Act.
8.14.17
.
diuers
in
Samaria
,
and
baptized
them
:
yet
had
not
authority
to
impose
hands
,
whereby
men
might
be
furnished
with
graces
for
the
Ministerie
;
but
the
Apostles
Peter
and
Iohn
were
sent
thither
,
to
that
purpose
.
And
whereas
Paul
willeth
Timothie
to
doe
the
worke
of
an
Euangelist
,
what
is
that
,
but
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
to
preach
the
Gospell
diligently
,
and
to
fulfill
his
Ministerie
,
or
to
make
it
fully
knowne
,
the
word
Euangelist
being
there
taken
in
the
generall
sence
?
Now
what
his
Ministerie
was
Ierome
[
e
](A20733-e141860-b)
e
Hieronym
.
&
Sedul
.
in
2
Tim.
4.
&
Sedulius
declare
.
Ministerium
tuum
imple
,
Episcopatus
scilicet
,
Fulfill
thy
Ministerie
,
that
is
to
say
,
as
thou
art
a
Bishop
.
Now
that
their
being
Euangelists
did
not
hinder
them
from
being
Bishops
,
when
ceasing
from
their
trauailing
about
,
they
were
assigned
to
these
particular
Churches
,
I
proued
by
the
testimony
of
Zuinglius
:
[
f
](A20733-e141930-b)
f
In
Ecclesiaste
.
who
saith
,
that
Philip
the
Euangelist
,
who
had
beene
one
of
the
Deacons
,
was
afterwards
Bishop
of
Caesarea
,
Iames
the
Apostle
was
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
and
diuers
of
the
Apostles
(
which
may
much
more
be
verified
of
the
Euangelists
)
when
they
ceased
from
their
peregrinations
,
became
Bishops
of
certaine
Churches
,
as
by
the
ancient
histories
is
manifest
.
Whereto
the
refuter
answereth
two
things
,
first
,
that
Zuinglius
speaketh
according
to
the
phrase
of
the
histories
and
writers
before
him
;
therefore
say
I
,
according
to
the
truth
.
Or
else
we
must
thinke
that
none
of
the
Fathers
,
or
ancient
historiographers
knew
whom
to
call
Bishops
and
whom
not
.
But
the
refuter
,
and
his
fellows
onely
,
haue
this
knowledge
.
Ad
pag.
144.
Yea
but
a
certaine
learned
man
saith
,
that
when
the
Fathers
call
Peter
or
Iames
or
any
of
the
Apostles
Bishops
,
they
doe
not
take
the
name
Bishop
properly
.
For
Peter
I
graunt
,
but
of
Iames
there
is
another
reason
,
as
I
haue
shewed
before
.
And
although
it
were
true
,
that
Apostles
could
not
properly
be
called
Bishops
:
yet
what
is
that
to
Timothie
,
and
Titus
,
whom
I
haue
proued
notwithstanding
their
supposed
Euangelisticall
function
,
to
haue
beene
particularly
assigned
by
Paul
to
the
Churches
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
;
where
also
they
liued
and
dyed
?
His
other
answere
is
,
that
howsoeuer
Zuinglius
speake
of
their
being
Bishops
,
it
is
manifest
by
his
writings
,
he
neither
thought
they
were
(
and
so
belike
spake
otherwise
then
he
thought
)
nor
any
other
might
be
a
Diocesan
B.
as
by
a
testimony
hereafter
alledged
,
appeareth
,
where
he
saith
no
such
thing
.
I
will
therefore
adde
another
testimony
of
Zuinglius
in
the
same
booke
:
After
I
had
thus
answered
these
two
obiections
,
The
function
and
authoritie
which
Timothie
and
Titus
did
exercise
in
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
was
either
extraordinarie
,
and
Euangelisticall
,
as
the
Disciplinarians
teach
;
or
else
ordinarie
,
and
Episcopall
,
as
we
hold
.
But
it
was
not
extraordinary
and
Euangelisticall
;
Therefore
ordinary
and
Episcopall
.
The
assumption
I
proued
thus
;
The
supposed
Euangelisticall
function
of
Timothie
,
and
Titus
,
was
to
end
with
their
persons
,
and
admitted
no
succession
,
being
as
themselues
teach
,
both
extraordinary
and
temporary
;
But
the
function
and
authority
,
which
they
had
,
as
being
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
viz.
of
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
(
consisting
especially
in
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
iurisdiction
)
was
not
to
end
with
their
persons
,
but
to
be
continued
in
their
successors
.
Therefore
the
function
and
authority
which
Timothie
and
Titus
had
,
as
being
assigned
to
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
was
not
extraordinary
and
Euangelisticall
.
Here
the
refuter
would
make
his
reder
belieue
,
that
I
hauing
before
denyed
the
consequence
of
the
second
obiection
,
doe
also
deny
the
antecedent
,
and
in
this
place
reason
against
it
.
But
I
doe
not
deny
they
were
Euangelists
,
howsoeuer
I
doe
not
conceiue
their
Euangelisticall
function
to
haue
beene
such
,
and
so
great
,
as
the
refuter
and
other
Disciplinarians
suppose
,
and
therefore
I
call
it
their
supposed
Euangelicall
function
.
Now
,
that
I
did
not
intend
to
deny
,
or
disproue
that
antecedent
,
but
to
bring
a
new
supply
of
arguments
,
taking
occasion
by
the
last
obiection
;
appeareth
by
those
words
,
which
I
premised
,
as
it
were
an
introduction
to
this
argument
,
hereof
we
may
conclude
thus
.
But
let
vs
heare
what
he
answereth
.
Forsooth
he
flatly
denyeth
the
assumption
,
wherein
though
he
vntruely
say
,
that
I
begge
the
question
,
that
Timothie
and
Titus
were
assigned
to
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
as
ordinarie
Bishop
or
Pastors
of
those
Churches
;
for
that
I
doe
assume
but
conclude
;
yet
hath
he
nothing
to
disproue
it
,
but
a
meere
begging
of
the
question
,
and
denyall
of
the
conclusion
,
rather
then
the
assumption
;
viz.
that
they
had
no
assignment
to
those
Churches
,
but
onely
as
euangelists
,
which
doth
not
touch
the
assumption
:
no
more
then
that
which
followeth
.
Neither
by
that
(
Euangelisticall
)
office
(
saith
he
)
did
they
take
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
from
the
Churches
,
in
which
by
right
it
is
seated
;
but
with
the
Churches
ordayned
ministers
,
and
redressed
such
things
,
as
were
amisse
,
though
perhaps
that
right
of
laying
on
hands
might
sometimes
be
performed
by
them
alone
,
&c.
What
is
all
this
to
the
assumption
?
which
if
he
would
deny
,
and
make
this
denyall
good
,
he
should
haue
said
,
and
proued
it
,
that
the
function
and
authoritie
which
they
exercised
in
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
was
to
end
with
their
persons
,
and
admitted
no
succession
,
or
was
not
to
be
continued
in
their
successors
.
But
he
roues
,
and
raues
,
as
men
vse
to
doe
,
which
being
at
a
non-plus
,
would
faine
seeme
to
answere
somewhat
.
And
that
which
he
answereth
,
besides
that
it
is
impertinent
,
is
partly
also
vntrue
.
For
when
he
saith
,
that
Timotie
and
Titus
did
not
take
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
from
the
Churches
,
&c.
First
,
he
would
insinuate
,
that
Bishops
doe
;
as
though
herein
there
were
some
difference
betweene
Bishops
and
them
;
when
as
indeed
,
neither
Bishops
,
nor
they
,
doe
take
that
authority
from
the
Church
;
but
they
,
and
all
other
first
BB.
receiued
their
authority
from
the
Apostles
,
and
deriued
the
same
to
their
lawfull
successors
.
Secondly
,
he
saith
,
that
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
by
right
is
seated
in
the
whole
Church
or
congregation
:
which
is
not
true
of
any
particular
congregation
,
but
in
case
of
necessity
;
wherein
both
the
succession
of
their
owne
clergy
failing
,
and
the
help
of
others
wanting
,
the
right
is
deuolued
to
the
whole
body
of
the
Church
.
But
let
this
goe
among
other
his
Brownisticall
,
or
rather
Anabaptistiall
nouelties
.
I
proceed
to
the
proofe
of
my
assumption
,
Ad
pag.
145.
That
their
function
was
ordinary
,
and
their
authority
perpetually
necessary
.
which
hee
hath
layd
forth
thus
:
That
function
and
authority
which
is
ordinarie
,
and
perpetually
necessary
,
not
onely
for
the
well
being
,
but
also
for
the
very
being
of
the
visible
Churches
,
was
not
to
end
with
the
persons
of
Timothie
and
Titus
,
but
to
be
continued
in
their
successors
.
But
the
function
and
authority
that
they
had
,
as
being
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
is
ordinary
and
perpetually
necessary
,
not
onely
for
the
well
being
,
but
also
for
the
very
being
of
the
visible
Churches
:
Therefore
the
function
and
authority
which
they
had
,
as
being
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
was
not
to
end
with
the
persons
of
Timothie
,
and
Titus
,
but
to
be
continued
in
their
successors
.
The
assumption
is
thus
to
be
explaned
;
the
function
which
Timothie
,
and
Titus
had
,
as
being
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
was
ordinary
;
and
the
authority
,
which
they
did
exercise
,
consisting
chiefly
in
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
,
was
perpetually
necessary
.
This
assumption
the
refuter
would
seeme
to
deny
,
and
yet
granteth
,
that
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
is
perpetually
necessary
;
onely
he
denieth
it
to
be
necessary
,
that
there
should
be
in
euery
Church
an
Euangelist
to
exercise
that
authority
.
So
that
of
the
two
points
in
the
assumption
,
the
latter
hee
granteth
,
that
the
authority
which
they
exercised
was
perpetually
necessary
;
the
other
,
that
the
function
which
they
had
being
assigned
to
those
Churches
was
ordinary
,
hee
toucheth
not
:
but
denieth
that
,
which
I
did
not
affirme
,
to
wit
,
that
it
was
necessary
there
should
be
an
Euangelist
alwayes
in
euery
Church
to
exercise
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
iurisdiction
:
Did
I
affirme
this
?
or
rather
did
I
not
teach
the
contrary
,
when
I
said
that
the
function
whereby
they
did
exercise
that
power
of
ordination
,
and
iurisdiction
,
was
not
an
extraordinary
function
,
as
the
Euangelisticall
;
but
ordinary
,
as
the
Episcopall
?
Now
that
the
function
which
Timothie
and
Titus
had
,
being
assigned
to
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
was
an
ordinary
function
,
&
the
very
same
which
the
Bishops
that
succeeded
them
,
and
all
other
BB.
both
in
,
and
since
the
Apostles
times
haue
exercised
;
it
is
most
certaine
,
for
though
in
them
,
who
cheifly
are
called
Euangelists
,
there
were
diuers
things
extraordinary
,
besides
their
limitation
to
no
certaine
place
,
as
their
immediate
calling
from
Christ
,
their
extraordinary
gifts
of
the
Spirit
,
as
of
reuelation
,
and
of
working
miracles
,
as
appeareth
by
Steuen
and
Philippe
:
yet
in
Timothie
,
and
Titus
,
and
others
who
were
called
Euangelists
,
because
they
were
the
companions
of
the
Apostles
in
their
iourneyes
,
and
assistants
in
their
worke
of
the
ministery
,
there
was
nothing
extraordinarie
,
but
their
not
limitation
to
any
certaine
Churches
.
For
their
calling
to
the
ministery
was
ordinary
,
and
their
gifts
,
though
great
,
yet
attayned
and
increased
by
ordinary
meanes
.
When
as
therefore
they
were
assigned
to
certaine
Churches
,
as
the
Pastors
and
gouernours
thereof
,
whereunto
they
were
ordayned
by
imposition
of
hands
,
and
by
that
ordination
were
furnished
with
power
of
ordination
and
Ecclesiasticall
iurisdiction
;
their
function
was
the
same
ordinary
function
,
which
their
successors
,
and
all
other
Bishops
did
exercise
.
But
as
the
refuter
said
,
And
therefore
the
refuter
doth
greatly
wrong
me
,
when
hee
saith
,
that
I
make
this
Episcopall
power
,
perpetually
necessary
,
and
chargeth
me
with
contradicting
my selfe
in
another
place
,
where
I
acknowledge
,
that
where
the
Episcopall
gouernment
may
not
be
had
,
there
others
may
be
admitted
.
For
the
clearing
therefore
of
the
whole
controuersie
,
and
plaine
manifestation
of
that
which
I
hold
therein
;
we
will
make
vse
of
a
distinction
,
which
the
learned
vse
concerning
matters
of
gouernment
.
In
all
gouernments
therefore
there
are
these
things
to
be
considered
:
pot●stas
,
ordo
,
formae
vel
modus
,
titulus
,
siue
applicatio
potestatis
ad
personam
,
&
vsus
.
First
the
power
to
be
exercised
in
gouernment
;
then
the
order
,
whereby
the
inferiours
both
to
be
gouerned
&
gouerning
are
subordinate
to
the
superiours
:
after
,
the
forme
and
the
manner
of
gouernment
,
as
,
whether
it
be
a
Monarchy
,
where
the
power
is
in
one
,
or
an
Aristocraty
,
wher
it
is
in
few
,
or
a
Democraty
,
where
it
is
in
the
multitude
:
and
how
each
gouernment
is
ordered
:
the
title
,
as
whether
the
gouernours
are
put
in
and
intituled
to
their
power
and
authority
,
by
succession
,
or
by
election
or
institution
;
and
after
,
how
they
vse
and
exercise
their
authority
,
&c.
Of
these
,
the
two
first
,
that
there
should
be
power
of
gouernment
,
and
order
therein
,
&
in
the
people
gouerned
are
essentiall
&
perpetual
,
as
the
immutable
ordinances
of
God
.
The
other
,
many
wayes
are
accidentall
&
variable
.
But
yet
,
if
question
be
made
,
what
forme
of
gouernment
in
the
commonwealth
is
the
best
,
&
hath
the
best
warrant
;
I
would
say
the
Monarchy
,
as
hauing
diuine
,
both
institution
,
and
approbation
.
But
yet
so
,
as
where
this
cannot
so
well
be
had
,
the
other
formes
of
gouernment
be
lawfull
.
Euen
so
in
the
Church
of
euery
country
,
that
there
should
be
a
power
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
to
be
exercised
,
&
an
order
or
eutaxy
,
it
is
the
perpetual
&
immutable
ordinance
of
God
,
the
Church
being
by
his
appointment
a
well
ordered
society
,
&
as
the
wise
man
saith
,
Now
if
we
shall
enquire
,
Anacletus
,
Clemens
,
Euaristus
;
what
Marke
had
at
Alexandria
,
the
same
after
him
had
Anianus
,
Abilius
and
Cerdo
,
and
all
these
in
the
Apostles
times
:
and
what
Timothie
had
at
Ephesus
,
the
same
had
Gaius
,
who
(
if
Dorotheus
is
to
be
creditted
)
was
his
next
successor
,
In
synops.
in
Gai●
.
Actio
.
11
Onesimus
after
him
,
and
Polycrates
,
and
euery
one
of
those
twenty
seauen
,
mentioned
in
the
Councill
of
Chalcedon
,
which
from
Timothie
to
that
time
,
had
beene
successiuely
the
Bishops
of
Ephesus
.
These
,
to
my
vnderstanding
,
are
plaine
euidences
to
warrant
the
Episcopall
function
,
and
to
shew
the
deriuation
of
their
authority
from
the
Apostles
;
and
to
perswade
Christians
to
preferre
that
forme
of
gouernment
before
others
.
For
as
I
added
,
and
will
now
repeate
a
reason
,
which
the
refuter
might
more
easily
elude
with
a
male
pert
speech
,
calling
it
wauing
and
crauing
,
then
to
answere
with
soundnesse
of
reason
,
and
euidence
of
truth
.
If
the
Apostles
,
whiles
themselues
liued
,
thought
it
necessary
(
that
is
,
needfull
and
behoofefull
for
the
well
ordering
of
the
Churches
already
planted
)
to
substitute
therein
such
as
Timothie
and
Titus
furnished
with
Episcopall
power
,
then
much
more
after
their
decease
haue
the
Churches
need
of
such
gouernours
:
But
the
former
is
euident
by
the
Apostles
practise
in
Ephesus
and
Creet
,
and
all
other
Apostolicall
Churches
.
Therefore
the
latter
may
not
be
denyed
.
All
which
notwithstanding
,
I
doe
not
deny
,
but
that
where
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
cannot
be
had
,
another
forme
may
be
vsed
;
because
the
modus
,
or
forme
of
being
in
the
B.
alone
,
doth
not
seeme
so
to
be
of
diuine
ordinance
,
but
that
it
may
vpon
necessity
be
altered
.
But
if
any
shall
reply
,
that
howsoeuer
in
ciuill
gouernment
the
forme
is
variable
,
yet
for
Church
gouernment
we
are
to
keepe
vs
close
to
the
word
of
God
,
and
what
hath
warrant
there
we
are
to
hold
perpetuall
and
vnchangeable
by
men
,
as
some
of
our
Disciplinarians
vse
to
argue
:
I
wish
them
to
looke
to
this
inference
.
For
if
they
doe
not
leaue
that
hold
,
they
must
needes
grant
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
hauing
that
warrant
in
the
Scriptures
which
I
haue
shewed
,
is
to
be
holden
iure
diuine
.
And
whereas
to
confute
me
,
or
rather
to
fight
with
his
owne
shadow
,
hee
saith
,
that
other
reformed
Churches
haue
continued
many
yeares
,
and
may
doe
more
,
without
Bishops
:
I
confesse
they
haue
,
and
I
wish
they
may
continue
to
the
end
in
the
sincere
profession
of
the
truth
.
But
where
hee
saith
,
that
they
haue
continued
in
more
quietnesse
,
then
ours
hath
done
,
or
is
like
to
doe
:
for
that
wee
may
thanke
him
,
and
other
vnquiet
spirits
,
who
haue
troubled
the
peace
of
Israell
,
with
vrging
and
obtruding
their
owne
fancies
for
the
ordinances
of
God
.
To
these
reasons
I
added
the
testimonies
of
antiquity
,
Ad
pag.
146.
which
with
a
generall
consent
beareth
witnesse
to
this
truth
,
that
Timothie
was
B.
of
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
.
Of
all
which
the
Refuter
maketh
very
light
.
All
that
remaineth
to
proue
,
that
Timothie
was
B.
of
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
Creet
,
is
no
more
but
this
;
the
subscriptions
to
the
Epistles
to
Titus
,
and
2
to
Timothie
,
call
them
Bishops
,
as
also
the
generall
consent
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
and
histories
of
the
Church
,
doe
.
No
more
(
quoth
he
)
but
the
generall
consent
of
antiquity
in
a
matter
of
fact
,
agreeable
with
the
Scriptures
?
Why
,
the
testimony
of
some
one
of
the
Fathers
affirming
it
,
ought
to
be
of
more
weight
with
vs
,
then
the
deniall
of
the
same
by
all
the
Disciplinarians
in
the
world
.
But
let
vs
come
to
the
particulars
.
First
,
This
is
something
plaine
.
But
he
asketh
me
,
why
I
seuered
them
from
the
consent
of
the
ancient
Fathers
?
was
it
because
I
thought
them
to
be
of
the
Canon
?
I
answere
,
that
I
did
not
seuer
them
,
but
ioyne
them
in
a
copulatiue
speech
;
and
if
I
had
beene
of
opinion
,
that
they
were
of
the
Canon
,
I
would
not
haue
said
as
I
did
,
it
appeareth
not
onely
by
the
subscriptions
,
but
also
by
the
generall
consent
of
the
Fathers
:
but
contrariwise
,
not
onely
by
the
generall
consent
of
the
Fathers
,
but
also
by
the
subscriptions
annexed
by
the
Apostle
himselfe
.
But
though
it
were
not
likely
(
as
he
hath
alledged
out
of
T.
C.
)
that
they
were
subscribed
by
the
Apostle
himselfe
;
yet
is
it
certaine
,
that
they
are
of
great
antiquity
,
and
of
better
credit
,
then
the
Refuter
and
some
other
Disciplinarians
would
make
them
.
Indeed
,
if
any
other
learned
man
,
that
were
not
a
party
in
this
cause
,
had
censured
these
subscriptions
;
I
would
haue
respected
their
censures
;
but
the
cauillations
of
Disciplinarians
against
them
(
who
being
parties
in
this
cause
,
are
so
plainely
confuted
by
them
)
are
to
be
reiected
.
Let
vs
therefore
heare
,
what
the
Refuter
obiecteth
against
them
.
How
little
credit
those
subscriptions
deserue
,
it
may
appeare
by
that
vnder
the
Epistle
to
Titus
,
which
is
quite
contrary
to
the
Epistle
it selfe
.
And
why
so
,
I
pray
you
?
the
subscription
saith
,
the
Epistle
was
written
from
Nicopolis
,
and
Paul
himselfe
willeth
Titus
to
come
vnto
him
to
Nicopolis
,
for
I
haue
determined
to
winter
there
.
But
if
Paul
had
beene
now
at
Nicopolis
,
when
he
wrote
,
he
would
haue
said
,
not
there
,
but
here
.
Therefore
hee
was
but
a
simple
fellow
,
that
was
the
Author
of
that
subscription
.
So
saith
this
great
Criticke
.
But
if
you
will
consider
with
me
,
that
Paul
being
,
as
vsually
he
was
,
in
peregrination
;
Titus
could
not
well
tell
where
he
was
,
neither
had
Paul
signified
in
the
Epistle
where
he
then
was
,
therefore
wrote
being
at
Nicopolis
,
as
any
discreet
man
would
in
the
like
case
,
come
to
mee
to
Nicopolis
,
for
I
meane
to
winter
there
:
whereas
if
hee
had
written
,
as
the
Refuter
would
haue
had
him
,
if
hee
were
at
Nicopolis
;
come
hither
,
for
I
meane
to
winter
here
,
or
come
to
Nicopolis
,
for
I
meane
to
winter
here
:
might
not
Titus
haue
said
,
where
Paul
;
as
being
vncertaine
where
Paul
was
,
and
whether
himselfe
was
to
goe
.
This
therefore
is
too
seely
a
censure
,
though
receiued
from
T.
B.
himselfe
,
to
ouerthrow
the
authority
of
so
ancient
a
subscription
,
in
which
besides
the
ancient
Greeke
copies
,
it
is
also
testified
in
the
Syriack
,
that
this
Epistle
was
written
from
Nicopolis
,
Athanasius
[
a
](A20733-e143750-b)
a
Synops.
sacr.
script
.
speaking
of
that
Epistle
to
Titus
,
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Hee
wrote
this
Epistle
from
Nicopolis
,
for
there
he
wintered
.
Oecumenius
testifieth
the
same
in
his
argument
on
that
Epistle
to
Titus
.
Sedulius
[
b
](A20733-e143810-b)
b
In
Tit.
1.
likewise
,
this
Epistle
hee
wrote
from
Nicopolis
,
and
Theophylact.
argument
.
in
Epist.
ad
Tit
;
the
Authors
of
the
Centuryes
,
cent.
1.
l.
2.
c.
10.
in
Tito
.
To
the
subscriptions
I
added
the
testimonies
of
these
Fathers
.
First
,
Eusebius
[
c
](A20733-e143930-b)
c
Euseb.
l.
3.
c.
4.
reporteth
out
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
Histories
which
were
before
his
time
,
that
Timothie
had
first
the
Bishopricke
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
of
the
Churches
in
Creet
.
Secondly
,
the
auncient
Author
of
the
booke
de
diuinis
nominibus
[
d
](A20733-e144000-b)
d
Dionys.
de
diuin.
nom
.
dedicating
the
same
to
Timothie
Bishop
of
Ephesus
,
if
it
be
Dionysius
Areopagita
himselfe
,
who
liued
at
the
same
time
with
Timothie
,
doth
beare
an
vndeniable
witnesse
to
this
truth
:
or
if
it
be
another
vsing
his
name
,
yet
he
plainely
signifieth
,
that
in
his
time
it
was
a
thing
generally
receiued
,
that
Timothie
was
Bishop
of
Ephesus
.
Thirdly
,
Dorotheus
[
e
](A20733-e144080-b)
e
In
synops
.
saith
,
that
Timothie
was
by
Paul
ordayned
the
B.
of
the
Ephesians
,
&
he
calleth
Titus
the
B.
of
the
Cretians
.
Fourthly
,
Ambrose
[
f
](A20733-e144150-b)
f
Prefat.
in
1
Tim.
1.
testifieth
the
same
,
Paul
instructeth
Timothie
being
already
created
a
B.
how
he
ought
to
order
the
Church
.
And
againe
,
[
g
](A20733-e144200-b)
g
In
1
Tim.
1.
he
entreateth
Timothie
his
fellow
Bishop
,
&c.
Againe
,
[
h
](A20733-e144230-b)
h
In
1
Tim.
3.
Timothie
was
a
B.
Hence
it
is
,
that
Paul
directeth
him
,
how
he
should
ordaine
a
B.
Likewise
of
Titus
[
i
](A20733-e144270-b)
i
Prefat.
in
Epist.
ad
Tit.
he
testifieth
,
that
the
Apostle
consecrated
him
B.
Fiftly
,
Ierome
[
k
](A20733-e144320-b)
k
Hier.
in
1
Tim.
1.14
.
noteth
,
that
Timothie
receiued
the
grace
,
which
Paul
exhorteth
him
not
to
neglect
,
when
he
was
ordayned
B.
And
wher
Paul
willeth
him
to
fulfill
his
Ministery
[
l
](A20733-e144370-b)
l
in
2
Tim.
4.
,
Ierom
vnderstandeth
it
of
his
Bishopricke
.
And
in
the
Catalogue
of
Ecclesiasticall
Writers
which
is
in
his
first
Tome
,
it
is
testified
[
m
](A20733-e144400-b)
m
Hier.
in
Catalog
.
,
that
Timothie
was
ordayned
of
blessed
Paul
the
B.
of
the
Ephesians
,
and
that
Titus
was
B.
of
Creet
.
Sixtly
Chrisostome
[
n
](A20733-e144490-b)
n
Chrysost.
in
Phil.
1.
,
writing
on
those
words
Phil.
1.
Bishops
and
Deacon●
,
saith
,
what
meaneth
this
?
were
there
many
Bishops
of
one
City
?
in
no
wise
;
but
so
he
called
the
Presbyters
.
For
then
were
the
names
common
,
and
a
Bishop
was
also
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
Deacon
or
minister
.
For
which
cause
writing
to
Timothie
being
a
Bishop
,
fulfill
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
thy
ministery
.
For
that
he
was
a
Bishop
,
he
saith
,
doe
not
hastily
impose
thy
hands
vpon
any
man
,
&
againe
,
with
the
[
o
](A20733-e144580-b)
o
1
Tim.
4.14
.
imposition
of
the
hands
of
the
Presbytery
]
but
Presbyters
did
not
ordaine
a
Bishop
,
&
in
another
place
[
p
](A20733-e144600-b)
p
Prefat.
in
Epi.
1
ad
Tim.
,
hee
giueth
this
reason
,
why
Paul
wrote
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
and
not
to
Syluanus
,
or
Silas
,
or
Clemens
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
because
he
had
already
committed
the
Churches
to
them
,
but
the
others
he
still
carryed
about
with
him
.
And
on
the
fourth
to
the
Ephesians
[
q
](A20733-e144710-b)
q
in
Ephes.
4.
,
hee
giueth
instance
in
Timothie
and
Titus
as
being
Pastors
assigned
to
certaine
places
.
Seauenthly
Epiphanius
[
r
](A20733-e144770-b)
r
●ares
.
75.
,
saith
,
that
Paul
1
Tim.
4.
writeth
to
a
Bishop
,
and
that
a
Presbyter
cannot
be
the
same
with
a
Bishop
:
the
diuine
speech
of
the
Apostle
teacheth
who
is
a
Bishop
and
who
a
Presbyter
,
when
he
saith
to
Timothie
being
a
Bishop
,
receiue
not
hastily
an
accusation
against
a
Presbyter
,
&c.
Eightly
Primasius
[
s
](A20733-e144840-b)
s
Prefa●
.
in
1
Tim.
saith
,
Timothie
was
a
Bishop
and
Pauls
Disciple
.
That
grace
[
t
](A20733-e144880-b)
t
in
2
Tim.
1.
was
the
blessing
,
which
Timothie
when
he
was
made
Bishop
,
receiued
by
imposition
of
hands
.
Ninthly
Theodoret
[
v
](A20733-e144930-b)
v
in
1
Tim.
3.
,
saith
,
that
Titus
was
the
Apostle
,
that
is
,
Bishop
of
the
Cretians
,
and
Timothie
of
the
Asians
.
And
out
of
him
Oecumenius
[
w
](A20733-e144980-b)
w
prefat.
in
Tit.
citeth
these
words
:
Titus
was
an
admirable
Disciple
of
Paul
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
he
was
by
Paul
ordayned
Bishop
of
Creet
.
And
in
another
place
[
x
](A20733-e145030-b)
x
Praesat
.
in
1
Tim.
,
why
did
Paul
hauing
other
Disciples
,
as
Silas
,
and
Luke
,
and
others
,
write
onely
to
Timothie
and
Titus
?
We
answere
.
Because
to
these
he
had
committed
Churches
,
but
the
others
he
had
still
with
him
.
Tenthly
,
Sedulius
[
y
](A20733-e145140-b)
y
In
1
Tim.
1.
,
this
Timothie
was
B.
in
Ephesus
,
as
it
is
said
in
the
booke
of
histories
.
And
on
these
words
▪
stirre
vp
the
grace
which
was
giuen
thee
by
the
imposition
of
hands
[
z
](A20733-e145180-b)
z
In
2
Tim.
1.6
.
,
that
is
,
iuxta
ordinationem
tuam
in
Episcopatum
,
by
thy
ordination
into
the
Bishopricke
.
11.
Gregory
[
a
](A20733-e145220-b)
a
Pastor
.
cur
.
part.
2.
c.
11.
the
great
;
hence
it
is
,
that
Paul
admonisheth
his
Disciple
,
praelatum
gregi
,
being
the
Prelate
of
a
flocke
,
saying
attend
reading
vntill
I
come
.
12.
Isidor
saith
[
b
](A20733-e145300-b)
b
De
vita
&
morte
sanctorum
.
87.
&
88.
,
that
Timothie
was
Bishop
of
Ephesus
.
13.
Polycrates
[
c
](A20733-e145360-b)
c
Apud
Antonin
.
part.
1.
tit.
6.
c.
28.
§
6.
&
Vincent
specul
.
l.
10.
c.
38.
saith
,
that
Timothie
trauailing
with
Paul
to
Ephesus
,
was
made
the
first
B.
there
by
him
in
the
raigne
of
Nero.
14.
Theophylact
[
d
](A20733-e145470-b)
d
Theophyl
.
in
Eph.
4.
vnderstandeth
by
Pastors
,
and
Doctors
,
Eph.
4.
those
to
whose
care
the
Church
was
committed
,
that
is
to
say
,
BB.
such
as
Timothie
and
Titus
.
And
for
that
cause
he
saith
[
e
](A20733-e145510-b)
e
Praefat.
in
1
Tim.
that
Paul
wrote
to
them
two
.
Againe
[
f
](A20733-e145550-b)
f
Prolog
.
in
Tit.
,
Titus
being
ordayned
Bishop
is
set
ouer
the
great
Island
Creet
.
15.
Oecumenius
[
g
](A20733-e145600-b)
g
Oecum
.
in
1
Tim.
1.
,
on
those
words
,
I
requested
thee
to
remaine
in
Ephesus
,
saith
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
here
hee
had
ordayned
him
B.
And
againe
,
in
Tim.
5.
he
speaketh
of
ordinations
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
for
he
wrote
to
a
B.
And
of
Titus
[
h
](A20733-e145700-b)
h
In
Tit.
1.
he
saith
,
that
Paul
left
him
to
ordaine
BB.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
hauing
first
made
him
a
B.
And
of
both
,
on
those
[
i
](A20733-e145740-b)
i
In
Eph.
4.
words
,
Pastors
and
Doctors
he
saith
,
Paul
meaneth
such
,
as
to
whose
trust
the
Churches
were
committed
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
BB.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
such
as
Timothie
and
Titus
.
16.
Nicephorus
[
k
](A20733-e145820-b)
k
Lib.
2.
c.
34.
saith
,
that
after
Paul
was
first
dismissed
from
Rome
,
he
wrote
his
former
Epistle
to
Timothie
,
whom
he
had
ordayned
before
B.
of
Ephesus
.
And
another
Epistle
hee
wrote
vnto
Titus
,
whom
,
hauing
before
ordayned
B.
of
Creet
,
he
had
left
there
.
To
these
I
might
adde
the
testimonies
of
diuers
new
writers
,
but
I
will
mention
onely
a
few
,
whose
iudgements
the
Disciplinarians
will
not
easily
reiect
.
First
therefore
Caluin
[
l
](A20733-e145910-b)
l
Calu●
in
Epist.
ad
Tim.
1.
in
diuers
places
on
the
Epistles
to
Timothie
,
doth
note
that
he
was
the
Pastor
of
the
Church
at
Ephesus
.
The
authors
of
the
Centuryes
[
m
](A20733-e145950-b)
m
Centur.
1.
l.
2.
c.
10.
in
Ioan.
Euang.
say
,
it
is
euident
,
that
Paul
appointed
Timothie
the
Pastor
to
the
Church
of
Ephesus
.
D.
Fulke
[
n
](A20733-e146040-b)
n
in
Tit.
1.5
.
saith
,
among
the
Clergie
,
for
order
and
seemely
gouernment
,
there
was
alwayes
one
principall
,
to
whom
by
long
vse
of
the
Church
the
name
of
B.
or
superintendent
hath
beene
applyed
;
which
roome
Titus
exercised
in
Creta
,
Timothie
in
Ephesus
,
and
others
in
other
places
,
&c.
Finally
Beza
[
o
](A20733-e146120-b)
o
in
1
Tim.
5.19
.
himselfe
noteth
,
that
Timothie
was
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
Iustine
calleth
him
,
that
is
,
Antistes
or
President
in
the
Presbytery
at
Ephesus
,
that
is
to
say
according
to
Bezaes
language
,
a
Bishop
.
though
the
Fathers
call
them
BB.
yet
properly
they
were
not
Bishops
,
which
bare
denyall
of
his
,
if
it
be
weighed
with
the
testimonies
of
the
ancient
,
which
I
named
,
will
proue
as
light
as
vanity
it selfe
.
Secondly
,
that
the
consent
of
the
Fathers
is
not
so
generall
as
I
would
make
men
beleiue
,
seeing
both
Ambrose
and
Ignatius
doe
make
Timothie
a
Deacon
.
And
for
proofe
thereof
he
referreth
vs
to
T.C.
whose
words
are
these
[
p
](A20733-e146330-b)
p
T.C.
l.
2.
part.
1.3.14
.
,
all
ancient
writers
are
not
of
that
iudgement
,
for
not
to
speak
of
Ambrose
,
which
calleth
Timothie
a
Deacon
,
where
he
opposeth
a
Deacon
to
a
Bishop
:
Ignatius
[
q
](A20733-e146380-b)
q
Ad
Trall
.
an
ancient
writer
saith
,
that
hee
was
a
Deacon
:
&
that
where
diuiding
the
ministeries
of
the
Church
into
Bishops
and
Deacons
,
&c.
doth
openly
oppose
a
Deacon
to
a
Bishop
.
little
reason
had
T.C.
to
speake
of
Ambrose
,
and
therefore
might
well
say
,
not
to
speake
of
him
.
For
these
are
Ambrose
[
r
](A20733-e146440-b)
r
in
Phil.
1.1
.
his
words
:
(
with
the
BB.
and
Deacons
)
that
is
,
with
Paul
and
Timothie
qui
vtique
Episcopi
erant
,
who
verily
were
Bishops
,
he
also
signified
the
Deacons
which
ministred
vnto
him
.
For
he
writeth
vnto
the
people
.
For
if
he
had
written
to
the
Bishops
and
Deacons
,
he
would
haue
written
to
their
persons
:
and
it
had
beene
fit
,
that
he
should
haue
written
to
the
Bishop
of
the
place
,
not
to
two
or
three
,
as
hee
did
to
Titus
,
and
to
Timothie
.
Ignatius
[
s
](A20733-e146530-b)
s
Ad
Trallian
.
his
words
be
these
:
What
be
the
Deacons
but
the
imitators
of
the
Euangelicall
powers
ministring
vnto
him
(
that
is
,
the
Bishop
,
as
the
Angels
doe
to
God
)
a
pure
and
blamelesse
ministerie
,
as
holy
Steuen
to
Iames
the
blessed
,
and
Timothie
and
Linus
to
Paul
,
Anacletus
and
Clemens
to
Peter
.
Distinguish
the
times
,
and
the
answere
is
easie
.
Timothie
was
such
an
Euangelist
,
as
first
ministred
to
Paul
as
a
Deacon
,
afterwards
was
ordayned
Presbyter
,
as
Ambrose
[
t
](A20733-e146660-b)
t
In
1
Tim.
3.
●
Timotheum
Presbyterum
ordinatum
significat
.
saith
,
and
lastly
a
Bishop
;
which
is
as
the
same
Ambrose
[
v
](A20733-e146710-b)
v
In
Eph.
4.
saith
,
primus
Presbyter
.
But
doth
his
seruing
vnder
Paul
as
a
Deacon
,
proue
that
afterwards
he
was
not
a
Bishop
?
nay
,
rather
his
being
a
Deacon
,
and
afterwards
a
Presbyter
doth
proue
he
was
not
such
an
Euangelist
,
as
the
Refuter
imagineth
.
And
by
as
good
reason
he
might
proue
that
neither
Linus
,
nor
Anacletus
,
nor
Clemens
were
Bishops
of
Rome
,
because
they
had
serued
vnder
Peter
and
Paul
,
as
Deacons
.
Here
is
all
,
that
our
Refuter
can
,
either
by
himselfe
,
or
with
T.
C.
helpe
,
obiect
out
of
antiquity
against
Timothie
his
being
a
Bishop
.
His
third
answere
is
,
that
the
Scripture
calleth
him
an
Euangelist
,
2
Tim.
4.5
.
and
therefore
he
was
no
B.
which
is
the
same
with
the
second
obiection
,
already
answered
.
I
hope
therefore
I
may
be
bold
with
the
Readers
consent
to
conclude
,
that
Timothie
and
Titus
were
ordayned
BB.
by
the
Apostle
Paul
;
the
one
,
of
Ephesus
;
the
other
,
of
Creet
.
Serm.
sect.
10.
pag.
81.
&c.
to
pag.
87.
l.
1.
In
this
section
I
brought
diuers
most
plaine
and
pregnant
euidences
to
proue
,
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
BB:
noting
the
Places
where
,
and
the
Persons
whom
they
ordayned
.
The
which
,
because
the
Refuter
passeth
ouer
,
as
it
were
in
silence
,
I
will
breifly
recite
;
that
it
may
appeare
to
the
Reader
,
that
the
Refuter
had
cause
to
be
silent
,
because
the
euidence
of
truth
did
put
him
to
silence
.
First
,
I
shewed
out
of
[
a
](A20733-e147020-b)
a
Euseb.
Chron.
ann.
4
5.
hist.
l.
3.
c.
22.
Eusebius
,
that
about
the
yeare
fortie
fiue
Euodius
was
made
Bishop
of
Antioch
,
by
the
Apostles
Peter
and
Paul
,
as
Ignatius
[
b
](A20733-e147110-b)
b
Ad
Antioch
.
who
succeeded
him
in
the
Apostles
times
,
doth
witnesse
.
Secondly
,
that
Peter
and
Paul
ordayned
Linus
Bishop
of
Rome
,
about
the
yeare
56
,
whom
Anacletus
succeeded
,
and
after
him
Clemens
:
testified
by
[
c
](A20733-e147190-b)
c
Iren.
l.
3.
c
3.
Irenaeus
and
[
d
](A20733-e147230-b)
d
Euseb.
l.
5.
c.
6.
&
l.
3.
c.
4.
et
c.
13.
&
22.
Eusebius
.
Thirdly
,
that
by
the
appointment
of
Peter
,
Marke
was
the
first
B.
of
Alexandria
,
whom
Anianus
succeeded
in
that
Bishopricke
,
after
him
Abilius
,
and
then
Cerdo
,
all
in
the
Apostles
times
:
testified
by
[
e
](A20733-e147360-b)
e
Niceph.
l.
14.
c.
39.
Greg.
l.
6.
Epist.
37.
Euseb.
lib.
2.
c.
24.
Hier
proaem
.
in
Matt.
&
in
Catal.
in
Marco
.
&
ad
Euagr.
Dor.
in
synops.
Euseb.
Chron.
an
.
65.
&
86.
&
99.
Nicephorus
,
Gregory
,
Eusebius
,
Ierome
and
Dorotheus
.
Fourthly
,
that
after
the
death
of
Iames
the
iust
,
Simon
the
sonne
of
Cleophas
was
by
the
Apostles
which
then
were
remayning
,
made
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
:
testified
by
[
f
](A20733-e147520-b)
f
Euseb.
hist.
l.
4.
c.
22.
Chron.
an.
63.
Hegesippus
,
and
Eusebius
.
Fiftly
,
that
Iohn
the
Apostle
ordayned
Polycarpe
Bishop
of
Smyrna
:
testified
by
[
g
](A20733-e147610-b)
g
Iren.
l.
3.
c.
3.
Eus.
l.
3.
c.
35.
&
l.
4.
c.
14.
Tertull.
de
praescript
.
Hier.
in
Catal.
Irenaeus
,
Eusebius
,
Tertullian
and
Ierome
.
Sixtly
,
that
Iohn
after
his
returne
from
exile
,
ordayned
BB.
in
diuers
places
:
testified
by
[
h
](A20733-e147730-b)
h
Eus.
l.
3.
c.
23.
Clemens
Alexandrinus
,
and
Eusebius
.
Finally
,
that
the
Apostles
committed
the
Church
,
which
is
in
euery
place
,
to
Bishops
whom
they
ordayned
,
leauing
them
their
successours
:
testified
by
[
i
](A20733-e147790-b)
i
Iren.
l.
4.
c.
63.
l.
3.
c.
3.
&
l.
5.
Tertull.
de
praescrip●
.
Irenaeus
,
and
Tertullian
,
who
saith
,
that
as
Smyrna
had
Polycarpe
from
S.
Iohn
,
and
Rome
Clement
by
the
appointment
of
Peter
;
so
the
rest
of
the
Churches
can
shew
quos
ab
Apostolis
in
Episcopatum
constitutos
Apostoli●i
seminis
traduces
habent
;
what
Bishops
they
haue
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
,
the
deriuers
of
the
Apostolicall
seed
.
To
all
this
he
hath
nothing
to
answere
,
but
that
which
heretofore
hath
beene
fully
refuted
:
that
these
Bishops
were
but
ordinary
Pastors
of
particular
congregations
,
&c.
sa●ing
that
he
taketh
also
exception
against
their
assertion
,
who
said
,
that
Bishops
be
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
.
But
not
onely
Irenaeus
,
and
Tertullian
haue
auouched
so
much
,
but
diuers
others
of
the
Fathers
,
as
Cyprian
,
Ierome
and
Augustine
.
Cyprian
[
k
](A20733-e148020-b)
k
Cypr.
l.
4.
Epi.
9
saith
,
praepositi
,
that
is
Bishops
,
Apostolis
vicaria
ordinatione
succedunt
,
succeed
the
Apostles
as
being
ordained
in
their
steed
.
And
Ierome
[
l
](A20733-e148080-b)
l
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
saith
,
omnes
Episcopi
Apostolorum
successores
sunt
,
all
Bishops
are
the
successors
of
the
Apostles
.
And
againe
he
saith
[
m
](A20733-e148110-b)
m
ad
Marell
.
de
error
.
Monta.
,
Episcop●s
Apostolis
succedere
.
And
Theodoret
[
n
](A20733-e148150-b)
n
li.
4.
c.
18.
,
calleth
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
And
likewise
Basill
[
o
](A20733-e148200-b)
o
Epist.
55.
ad
Ambros.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
presidency
of
Apostles
,
who
haue
deliuered
to
Bishops
,
as
Irenaeus
[
p
](A20733-e148260-b)
p
Ire
.
3.
c.
3.
saith
,
their
owne
place
of
gouernment
in
the
seuerall
Churches
.
And
this
is
that
,
which
both
Ierome
[
q
](A20733-e148300-b)
q
August
.
&
Hier.
in
Psa.
44.
,
and
Augustine
expounding
those
words
of
the
45.
Psalme
pro
patribus
nati
tibi
sunt
filij
,
haue
deliuered
;
that
insteed
of
the
Apostles
,
Bishops
were
ordayned
gouernours
of
the
Church
in
all
parts
of
the
world
.
Which
point
is
duely
to
be
considered
.
For
hereby
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
Bishops
haue
receiued
and
deriued
their
authority
from
the
Apostles
,
whose
successors
they
are
,
not
onely
in
respect
of
doctrine
(
as
all
other
true
ministers
)
but
also
in
the
gouernment
of
the
seuerall
Churches
.
And
when
the
Disciplinarians
can
shew
the
like
warrant
for
their
Presbyteryes
,
especially
of
Lay-elders
;
or
our
refuter
,
and
his
good
friends
the
Brownists
,
for
the
cheife
authority
of
the
people
,
we
will
harken
to
them
.
Once
,
it
is
euident
,
that
Christ
committed
the
authority
and
gouernment
of
his
Church
to
his
Apostles
,
who
were
to
deriue
the
same
to
others
.
Wherefore
who
haue
any
ordinary
right
,
they
haue
receiued
the
same
from
the
Apostles
.
So
Timothie
and
Titus
receiued
their
authority
from
Paul
,
Linus
from
Peter
and
Paul
,
Policarpus
from
Iohn
,
&c.
And
all
other
the
first
Bishops
from
the
Apostles
,
from
whom
by
a
perpetuall
succession
it
hath
beene
deriued
to
the
Bishops
which
are
at
this
day
.
But
where
is
any
euidence
of
the
like
deriuation
from
the
Apostles
of
authority
to
the
people
of
Lay-elders
,
I
know
not
.
Thus
haue
I
made
good
my
former
proofes
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
The
V.
CHAPTER
.
Answering
the
allegations
out
of
Ierome
.
Serm.
Sect.
11.
pag.
87.
Against
all
this
that
hath
beene
said
to
proue
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
,
the
authoritie
of
Ierome
is
obiected
,
&c.
to
page
89.
AGainst
the
testimonies
of
men
,
saith
the
refuter
,
what
is
fitter
to
be
obiected
,
then
the
authority
of
such
a
man
as
of
set
purpose
disputing
the
question
,
determineth
the
contrary
to
that
which
was
so
commonly
anouched
.
Which
speech
,
if
it
be
duely
examined
,
iust
exception
may
be
taken
against
euery
branch
thereof
.
For
first
hee
would
insinuate
,
that
nothing
hath
beene
brought
to
iustifie
the
calling
of
Bishops
besides
the
testimonies
of
men
;
when
besides
the
testimonies
of
men
,
I
haue
brought
good
euidence
of
sound
reason
,
and
besides
that
,
better
proofe
out
of
the
scriptures
to
warrant
the
Episcopall
function
,
then
euer
was
,
or
will
be
brought
for
the
Presbyterian
discipline
.
Againe
,
it
were
fitter
,
and
to
better
purpose
,
against
the
testimonies
of
men
(
if
I
had
produced
no
other
proofe
)
to
haue
brought
either
testimonies
of
scripture
,
or
sound
reasons
;
or
for
want
of
them
,
the
testimonie
of
so
many
,
and
so
approued
authors
,
to
counterpoise
the
weight
of
their
authorities
,
who
haue
beene
alledged
on
the
contrary
part
.
But
scriptures
failing
,
reasons
wanting
,
testimonies
of
other
Fathers
being
to
seeke
,
Ierome
alone
must
be
faine
to
beare
the
whole
burden
of
this
cause
.
For
though
some
latter
writers
may
be
alledged
to
the
like
purpose
;
yet
all
is
but
Ierome
.
Whose
not
onely
iudgement
they
follow
,
but
reteyne
his
words
.
Neither
doth
Ierome
so
oft
dispute
this
question
,
or
determine
the
contrary
,
as
the
refuter
in
his
shallow
conceipt
imagineth
.
Or
if
any
wheres
he
doth
determine
the
contrary
,
against
that
which
was
commonly
auouched
both
by
himselfe
and
others
;
his
determination
deliuered
in
heat
of
disputation
ought
not
to
be
of
so
great
weight
,
as
what
he
hath
deliuered
,
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
heat
of
contention
but
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
dogmatically
or
historically
.
For
Ierome
was
but
a
Presbyter
;
and
there
were
two
things
in
his
time
,
which
might
prouoke
him
by
way
of
contention
to
say
more
in
the
behalfe
of
his
degree
,
then
doth
exactly
agree
with
the
truth
.
The
one
was
,
that
the
Bishops
of
those
times
did
too
much
depresse
the
Presbyters
.
For
they
might
not
onely
in
their
presence
not
preach
,
nor
baptize
,
nor
administer
the
Communion
,
but
also
in
some
places
they
might
not
preach
at
all
,
nor
any
where
baptize
,
vnlesse
they
fetched
their
Chrisme
from
the
Bishop
,
against
which
practises
of
the
Bishops
Ierome
in
some
places
of
his
works
doth
inueigh
.
Ad
Nepotian
.
&
de
●
.
ordin
.
Eccles.
But
that
which
troubled
him
most
was
,
that
the
Deacons
in
his
time
,
especially
at
Rome
,
because
they
had
more
wealth
(
as
the
fashion
of
the
world
is
)
thought
themselues
better
men
then
the
Presbyters
.
For
the
confutation
of
whom
,
he
seeketh
to
aduance
the
Presbyters
aboue
the
Deacons
as
much
as
he
can
;
and
may
seeme
to
match
them
,
more
then
truth
would
permit
,
with
the
Bishops
.
For
which
,
the
onely
ground
which
he
hath
is
this
,
because
the
name
Bishop
and
Presbyter
were
for
a
while
in
the
Apostles
times
confounded
.
Which
(
God
knoweth
)
is
a
weak
ground
,
and
easily
out
of
his
owne
writings
ouerturned
.
Hier.
in
Tit.
1.
But
let
vs
examine
the
particulars
.
First
it
is
alledged
out
of
Ierome
,
that
vntill
factions
did
arise
in
the
Church
,
some
saying
I
am
of
Paul
,
I
am
of
Apollo
,
&c.
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Presbyters
:
but
when
they
began
to
draw
Disciples
after
them
,
namely
such
as
themselues
had
baptised
,
it
was
agreed
in
the
whole
world
,
that
one
being
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
,
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
to
whom
the
whole
care
of
the
Church
should
belong
,
and
that
the
seede
of
schismes
might
be
taken
away
.
Whereunto
I
answered
,
first
,
that
this
speech
in
respect
of
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
is
vntrue
,
which
was
first
gouerned
by
the
Apostles
in
common
,
and
after
committed
to
Iames
in
particular
,
before
we
read
of
any
Presbyters
there
ordained
.
The
refuter
replieth
,
that
my
consequence
is
naught
,
for
euen
whiles
the
Church
was
gouerned
in
common
by
the
Apostles
,
it
was
not
gouerned
without
the
counsell
of
the
Presbyters
of
the
same
Church
,
much
lesse
did
Iames
afterwards
take
the
whole
authority
into
his
owne
hands
,
from
them
.
Which
exception
of
his
is
of
no
force
,
because
there
were
no
Presbyters
ordayned
in
that
Church
,
when
it
was
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Apostles
;
and
I
added
,
which
he
should
haue
disproued
,
if
he
would
haue
said
any
thing
to
the
purpos●
,
that
Iames
was
assigned
Bishop
to
that
Church
,
before
we
read
of
any
Presbyters
ordayned
in
,
or
to
that
Church
.
For
if
Iames
were
Bishop
of
that
Church
before
it
had
Presbyters
,
then
was
not
that
Church
ruled
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
,
before
they
had
a
Bishop
.
Iames
indeed
after
he
was
Bishop
,
ordayned
Presbyters
,
whose
counsell
and
assistance
he
did
vse
in
the
gouernment
and
instruction
of
that
Church
(
as
other
Bishops
vsed
to
doe
in
the
like
case
)
as
wee
read
Act.
15.
and
21.
Yea
but
the
whole
multitude
saith
he
,
as
appeareth
by
Act.
6.2.5
.
had
the
choise
of
Church-officers
.
What
then
?
therefore
the
Church
was
not
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
the
Apostles
,
or
was
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
?
Because
the
Greekish
Iewes
(
which
had
their
Liturgy
and
scriptures
in
the
Greeke
tongue
)
were
discontented
with
the
Apostles
distribution
of
the
Churches
stocke
,
the
Apostles
therefore
to
auoid
contention
and
scandall
,
and
to
giue
euery
one
contentment
,
departed
from
their
right
,
and
willed
the
whole
multitude
to
choose
seauen
,
whom
wee
(
say
the
Apostles
)
may
appoint
to
this
busines
.
Surely
,
if
where
the
Presbyters
are
erected
,
the
people
,
who
doe
contribute
to
the
releife
of
the
poore
,
are
permitted
to
make
choise
of
ouerseers
&
collectors
for
the
poore
;
it
wer
but
a
simple
consequence
to
inferre
hereupon
,
that
therefore
the
Churches
are
not
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
.
And
to
as
little
purpose
,
or
rather
lesse
,
is
that
which
followeth
.
If
the
Apostles
altogether
,
or
Iames
alone
afterterwards
,
had
by
vertue
of
their
extraordinarie
calling
the
power
of
ordination
and
iurisdiction
in
●heir
hands
,
in
that
,
as
in
all
other
Churches
;
yet
the
Pastors
of
the
Churches
afterwards
,
being
no
Apostles
,
had
no
such
vnlimited
power
;
and
so
Ierome
still
speaketh
truely
of
the
ordinary
gouernment
of
the
Church
.
And
so
Ierome
still
spake
vntruely
,
in
respect
of
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
.
I
doe
confesse
,
this
was
peculiar
to
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
and
differing
from
the
order
of
other
Churches
:
that
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
had
a
Bishop
before
it
had
Presbyters
of
her
owne
.
And
therefore
though
I
did
not
deny
his
speech
to
be
vntrue
in
respect
of
other
Churches
;
yet
I
proued
it
to
be
vntrue
,
in
respect
of
Ierusalem
,
by
his
owne
testimony
.
But
before
I
come
to
the
sifting
thereof
,
there
are
two
other
things
to
be
noted
in
this
speech
of
the
refuter
.
For
that
which
he
pratleth
of
Iames
his
sole
power
exercised
in
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
by
vertue
of
his
extraordinarie
calling
,
is
altogether
impertinent
:
seeing
Ierome
,
of
whom
the
question
is
,
Catalog
.
in
Iacobo
.
confesseth
,
that
hee
was
Bishop
,
and
ruled
that
Church
as
the
Bishop
thereof
thirtie
yeeres
.
Neither
is
it
true
,
that
the
ordinarie
Pastors
of
that
Church
had
not
the
like
power
therein
,
which
Iames
had
.
For
there
is
no
question
,
but
what
authority
Iames
had
in
the
gouernment
of
that
particular
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
Simon
his
successor
had
the
same
,
and
all
the
Bishops
of
Ierusalem
after
him
.
§
3.
Ieromes
speech
vntrue
in
respect
of
Ierusalem
.
Catalog
.
in
Iaco.
Now
,
that
Ieromes
speech
was
vntrue
in
respect
of
Ierusalem
,
I
proued
by
Ieromes
owne
testimony
;
affirming
,
that
Iames
straight
wayes
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
was
by
the
Apostles
ordayned
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
.
Here
the
refuter
hath
found
out
a
quirke
,
which
if
it
were
true
,
would
not
yet
serue
his
turne
.
The
quirke
is
,
that
Ierome
is
mistaken
by
false
pointing
and
reading
,
for
that
straight
way
belongeth
not
to
Iames
his
being
made
Bishop
:
but
is
brought
to
shew
,
that
Iohn
maketh
mention
of
him
,
immediately
after
he
hath
spoken
of
our
Lords
passion
.
So
that
Ierome
doth
not
say
,
that
Iames
straight
wayes
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
was
ordayned
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
but
that
Iohn
mentioned
him
presently
after
hee
had
spoken
of
the
passion
of
our
Lord
.
Let
me
lay
downe
the
whole
sentence
,
that
it
may
appeare
more
plainely
.
Iames
saith
Ierome
,
who
is
called
the
brother
of
our
Lord
,
surnamed
Iustus
:
the
sonne
as
many
thinke
of
Ioseph
by
another
wife
:
as
it
seemeth
to
me
of
Mary
the
sister
of
our
Lords
mother
;
of
whom
Iohn
in
his
booke
maketh
mention
,
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
straight
wayes
,
(
statim
,
id
est
,
continenter
&
immediate
vt
loquuntur
,
Iohn
19.25
.
saith
Iunius
)
who
was
ordayned
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
by
the
Apostles
.
And
this
manner
of
reading
is
auouched
by
Sophronius
,
that
translated
that
booke
of
Ierome
into
Greeke
,
who
maketh
the
distinction
presently
after
straight
wayes
,
seuering
that
word
from
his
ordination
by
the
Apostles
.
Among
many
other
proofes
of
his
learning
&
iudgement
,
the
refuter
giueth
this
for
one
.
For
first
,
this
subtility
hee
receiued
from
Iunius
as
he
doth
professe
,
but
exceedingly
dulled
by
comming
through
his
fingers
.
For
whereas
Iunius
referr●th
the
word
of
whom
to
Mary
the
sister
of
our
Lords
mother
,
Contr.
Bellarm.
controu.
5.
l.
1.
c.
15.
§
18.
of
whom
Iohn
maketh
mention
straight
waies
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
Iohn
19.25
.
our
learned
refuter
referreth
it
to
Iames
,
&
that
twice
for
failing
.
But
though
he
might
be
mistaken
in
the
English
of
Ieromes
cuius
,
yet
me
thinkes
so
learned
a
man
should
haue
known
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
Sophronius
,
should
haue
beene
referred
to
her
and
not
to
him
.
But
let
that
passe
.
To
iustifie
his
correction
of
this
place
of
Ierom
,
he
saith
this
manner
of
reading
is
auowed
by
Sophronius
,
&c.
which
is
neither
so
,
nor
so
.
For
between
the
Greeke
and
the
Latine
there
is
onely
this
difference
(
in
that
edition
which
I
haue
,
being
as
I
suppose
the
best
)
that
whereas
in
the
Latine
,
there
is
a
Colon
at
the
word
filius
,
which
followeth
meminit
;
in
the
Greeke
,
there
is
but
a
Comma
;
but
at
the
word
statim
in
Latin
,
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
Greeke
,
no
distinction
at
all
.
The
Latine
words
are
these
,
vt
mihi
autem
videtur
,
Mariae
sororis
matris
Domini
cuius
Ioannes
in
libro
suo
memunt
,
filius
:
p●st
passionem
Domini
statim
ab
Apostolis
Hierosolymorum
Episcopus
ordinatus
.
The
Greeke
,
these
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
For
the
correction
it self
,
I
would
be
loth
to
contest
with
Iunius
,
neither
is
that
subtilty
which
he
hath
found
out
preiudiciall
to
my
assertion
,
as
you
shall
heare
;
notwithstanding
I
must
needs
say
,
he
was
greatly
transported
with
preiudice
,
when
he
would
referre
the
aduerbe
statim
to
the
verbe
meminit
,
rather
then
to
the
participle
ordinatus
.
For
though
both
the
Comma
and
Colon
that
come
betweene
them
were
taken
away
,
yet
the
word
filius
comming
also
betweene
,
cleane
spoileth
his
conceipt
.
For
can
any
man
of
indifferency
thinke
,
that
Ierome
being
an
elegant
writer
,
if
he
had
meant
that
the
aduerbe
statim
should
haue
waited
on
the
verbe
meminit
,
would
haue
disposed
it
thus
,
cuius
Ioannes
meminit
filius
post
passionem
Domini
statim
ab
Apostolis
Hierosolymorum
Episcopus
ordinatus
?
But
now
weigh
the
refuters
iudgement
.
Suppose
,
that
this
place
were
read
as
Iunius
would
haue
it
,
and
that
Iames
were
not
so
presently
made
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
after
Christs
passion
,
as
Ieromes
words
seeme
to
import
,
but
that
after
the
Apostles
he
tooke
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
,
as
Ierome
citeth
out
of
Hegesippus
;
what
is
all
this
,
but
the
same
that
my selfe
set
downe
in
the
Sermon
both
in
this
place
also
pag.
68.
in
these
words
,
the
Apostles
first
ioyntly
ruled
the
Church
at
Ierusalem
,
but
being
to
goe
into
all
the
world
,
and
no
longer
to
be
accounted
members
of
that
particular
Church
,
ordained
Iames
to
be
Bishop
.
And
that
charge
which
before
they
had
in
common
,
they
now
comitted
to
him
in
particular
.
And
this
is
that
,
which
Ierome
citeth
out
of
Hegesippus
,
who
saith
,
Iames
the
brother
of
our
Lord
surnamed
Iustus
receiued
or
vndertooke
the
Church
of
Ierusalem
after
the
Apostles
.
And
if
the
refuter
will
needs
expound
after
the
Apostles
,
to
signifie
after
their
departing
from
Ierusalem
,
I
must
intreat
him
to
take
with
him
the
words
both
of
Eusebius
,
Ibid.
Eusebius
in
his
Chronicle
noteth
Iames
to
haue
beene
made
B
▪
of
Ierusalem
,
in
the
same
yeere
wherin
Christ
was
crucified
,
that
is
,
according
to
his
computation
Anno
33.
who
sometimes
saith
,
the
throne
of
that
Bishopricke
was
committed
to
him
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
the
Apostles
;
therefore
before
their
dispersion
;
&
sometimes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
with
the
Apostles
:
therefore
whiles
they
were
present
;
and
also
of
Ierome
,
who
plainely
saith
,
that
he
was
ordained
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
by
the
Apostles
:
but
chiefly
that
he
will
remember
,
that
the
words
straight
wayes
after
the
passion
of
our
Lord
,
are
to
be
ioyned
with
the
other
words
,
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
:
then
will
he
acknowledge
himselfe
satisfied
for
this
point
.
§
4.
Secondly
I
answered
in
respect
of
other
Churches
;
that
which
Ierome
saith
,
Now
let
vs
see
,
Ad
pag.
149.
what
the
Refuter
can
reply
against
this
answer
.
Forsooth
as
if
he
knew
,
or
regarded
no
lawes
of
disputation
,
he
thrusts
himselfe
into
the
answerers
place
,
and
maketh
me
the
opponent
,
casting
my
answer
into
a
Syllogisme
,
and
bids
me
proue
euery
part
and
parcell
of
it
,
or
else
all
that
I
say
is
to
little
purpose
;
himselfe
in
the
meane
while
,
who
should
follow
the
argument
which
I
answered
,
and
take
away
my
answer
,
goeth
about
to
proue
nothing
,
but
himselfe
to
be
a
shifting
Sophister
.
I
thinke
it
was
neuer
heard
in
disputation
,
that
the
opponent
hauing
receiued
the
answere
,
and
reciting
the
summe
thereof
,
saying
,
sic
respondes
,
would
cast
it
into
a
Syllogisme
and
then
bid
the
answerer
proue
the
parts
thereof
.
But
such
a
disputer
am
I
matched
with
.
And
how
I
pray
you
doth
he
reduce
my
answere
into
a
Syllogisme
?
that
which
I
brought
to
cleare
the
former
part
of
my
answer
,
is
made
the
argument
to
proue
both
the
parts
in
a
filthy
long
Syllogisme
;
and
that
which
I
added
to
proue
the
latter
part
,
he
mentioneth
as
straggling
speches
brought
in
to
no
purpose
.
This
is
his
analysing
,
which
whether
it
be
done
of
vnskilfulnes
,
or
wilfulnes
,
I
refer
it
to
his
owne
conscience
I
cannot
iudge
therof
,
because
I
know
not
the
man
.
But
if
my
answere
must
needes
be
reduced
into
Syllogismes
,
If
whiles
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
,
the
Presbyters
did
gouerne
the
same
as
vnder
the
Apostles
,
the
Episcopall
office
and
authority
being
not
in
them
but
in
the
Apostles
,
the
Presbyters
being
such
then
vnder
the
Apostles
as
they
were
afterwards
vnder
the
Bishops
:
then
their
gouerning
of
the
Church
by
common
counsell
doth
not
proue
,
that
the
office
of
a
B.
and
a
Presbyter
was
confounded
.
But
the
antecedent
is
true
in
all
the
parts
thereof
:
Therefore
the
consequent
.
The
consequence
I
did
illustrate
by
this
distinction
,
the
name
of
Bishop
was
confounded
with
Presbyter
,
but
the
office
was
not
,
for
that
was
not
in
the
Presbyters
,
but
in
the
Apostles
.
The
consequence
when
it
was
worse
for
the
addition
of
the
second
part
,
the
Refuter
granted
;
yet
he
thought
good
to
gather
out
of
it
this
worthy
obseruation
,
that
if
there
was
a
time
before
there
were
Bishops
.
When
the
Presbyters
gouerned
the
Churches
as
vnder
the
Apostles
;
then
all
that
while
there
were
no
Diocesan
Bishops
(
the
Refuter
speaketh
sentences
)
and
so
no
distinction
betweene
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
in
office
.
This
,
and
so
,
could
not
well
be
gathered
out
of
the
proposition
,
being
repugnant
vnto
it
;
for
if
there
were
no
distinction
betweene
the
office
of
a
Bishop
and
a
Presbyter
,
then
were
the
offices
confounded
.
Suppose
the
common-wealth
of
Iewry
,
being
a
Prouince
vnder
the
Emperour
of
Rome
,
had
beene
gouerned
by
the
Synedrion
or
common
counsell
of
the
Seniors
for
a
time
,
vntill
the
Emperour
had
placed
a
soueraigne
King
ouer
them
,
as
hee
did
Herod
;
it
might
be
said
,
that
for
a
time
that
common-wealth
was
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
their
Elders
,
but
as
vnder
the
Emperour
,
who
kept
the
regall
authority
in
his
owne
hands
.
Hereof
it
might
not
be
infered
,
that
the
office
of
the
Senatours
and
of
a
King
were
confounded
.
For
the
soueraignty
was
in
the
Emperour
,
and
the
Senatours
might
haue
beene
the
same
vnder
their
King
,
which
they
had
beene
vnder
the
Emperour
,
&c.
As
touching
the
assumption
,
he
saith
,
it
should
haue
beene
proued
;
and
I
say
,
if
he
were
able
,
he
should
haue
disproued
it
.
For
my
part
,
I
was
in
this
place
the
answerer
;
and
the
parts
of
the
assumption
be
such
,
as
either
had
beene
before
cleared
,
or
seemed
to
neede
no
proofe
.
For
first
,
that
the
Presbyters
ruled
the
Churches
as
vnder
the
Apostles
,
it
is
manifest
.
That
the
Episcopall
authority
consisting
specially
in
the
power
of
Ordination
,
and
publicke
Iurisdiction
,
was
not
in
them
but
in
the
Apostles
;
partly
was
proued
before
,
to
wit
,
that
Presbyters
neuer
had
it
;
and
partly
needed
no
proofe
,
viz.
that
the
Apostles
had
it
.
And
surely
little
need
had
Paul
to
haue
sent
Timothie
to
Ephesus
,
and
Titus
to
Creet
,
to
exercise
the
power
of
Ordination
and
publicke
Iurisdiction
in
those
Churches
;
if
the
Presbyters
had
the
same
before
they
came
.
But
still
I
desire
some
euidence
,
whereby
the
deriuation
of
this
power
of
Ordination
and
Iurisdiction
,
from
the
Apostles
to
the
Presbyters
,
or
people
,
may
be
warranted
.
Thirdly
,
that
the
Presbyters
were
the
same
vnder
the
Apostles
then
,
which
they
were
afterwards
vnder
the
Bishops
,
I
take
for
a
certaine
truth
.
For
if
they
were
the
same
vnder
Timothie
and
Titus
,
that
they
were
vnder
the
Apostles
;
then
questionlesse
they
were
the
same
vnder
the
Bishops
,
who
haue
no
other
function
,
nor
exercise
any
other
authority
,
then
that
which
Timothie
and
Titus
had
and
exercised
in
Ephesus
and
Creet
.
And
these
I
hope
are
reasons
sufficient
to
approue
the
former
part
of
my
answere
,
vntill
the
refuter
who
is
the
opponent
,
be
able
to
disproue
it
.
The
second
part
of
my
answere
may
be
concluded
thus
.
If
after
a
while
,
namely
when
the
Apostles
were
to
discontinue
from
the
Churches
which
they
had
planted
,
the
Apostles
themselues
ordayned
BB.
then
the
Presbyters
ruling
of
the
Churches
by
common
counsell
for
a
time
,
doth
not
hinder
,
but
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
institution
:
But
the
former
is
true
:
Therefore
the
latter
.
The
consequence
needeth
no
proofe
:
the
assumption
I
proue
by
Ieromes
owne
testimony
.
For
if
Ierome
doe
testifie
,
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
BB.
and
withall
doe
note
the
time
when
,
the
place
where
,
and
the
end
wherefore
,
then
doth
he
giue
plentifull
testimony
to
this
truth
:
But
Ierome
doth
testifie
,
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
BB.
and
withall
noteth
the
time
when
,
the
place
where
,
and
the
end
wherfore
.
The
time
and
place
he
noteth
:
That
Ierome
helde
BB.
to
be
ordayned
in
the
Apostles
time
,
I
proue
out
of
the
place
alledged
;
when
factions
began
to
spring
in
the
Church
,
saith
Ierome
,
some
saying
I
am
of
Paul
,
I
am
of
Apollo
,
I
am
of
Cephas
;
which
was
in
the
Apostles
times
,
1
Cor.
1.
and
it
were
fond
to
imagine
,
that
factions
did
not
begin
till
after
their
time
.
Ad
pag.
150.
This
argument
the
Refuter
would
discredit
,
because
Sanders
vseth
the
like
,
and
his
owne
answere
he
would
credit
with
the
name
and
countenance
of
certaine
learned
men
;
which
is
one
of
his
ordinary
shifts
to
bleare
the
eyes
of
the
simple
,
who
many
times
respect
more
who
speaketh
,
then
what
is
said
.
But
my
argument
standeth
thus
:
When
the
factions
began
,
whereof
Ierome
speaketh
,
BB.
were
ordayned
,
as
he
saith
:
In
the
Apostles
times
the
factions
began
,
whereof
Ierome
speaketh
:
Therefore
in
the
Apostles
times
Bishops
were
ordayned
,
as
he
saith
.
The
effect
of
the
answere
which
hee
bringeth
is
,
that
Ierome
speaking
of
Schismes
which
did
arise
after
the
Apostles
times
,
alludeth
to
that
speech
of
the
Apostle
;
not
that
hee
thought
Bishops
were
ordayned
in
those
times
,
but
that
hee
might
shew
,
that
schisme
was
the
cause
of
changing
the
order
of
Church-gouernment
.
Which
answere
might
haue
some
shew
of
probability
,
if
Ierome
himselfe
did
not
both
in
other
places
,
which
I
cite
,
most
plainely
testifie
,
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
in
the
Apostles
times
;
and
also
in
the
place
alledged
expressely
speake
of
those
factions
which
did
arise
in
Corinth
,
and
other
places
in
the
Apostles
times
.
The
factions
whereof
he
speaketh
,
did
arise
from
hence
,
that
vnusquisque
eos
quos
baptizauerat
suos
putabat
esse
non
Christi
,
saith
Ierome
,
euery
one
esteemed
those
whom
he
had
baptized
to
be
his
owne
and
not
Christs
.
Now
it
is
apparant
,
that
this
is
the
very
thing
which
Paul
reproueth
in
the
Corinthians
,
that
euery
one
sayd
they
were
his
who
[
a
](A20733-e150610-b)
a
1
Cor
1.14.16
.
had
baptized
them
,
and
therefore
thanketh
God
that
he
had
baptized
none
of
them
,
but
Crispus
and
Gaius
,
and
the
houshold
of
Stephanas
.
For
by
this
meanes
,
as
Caluin
[
b
](A20733-e150660-b)
b
in
1
Cor.
4.14
.
also
obserueth
,
[
c
](A20733-e150670-b)
c
1
Cor.
4.6
.
the
factious
and
ambitious
teachers
(
whom
he
meant
vnder
the
name
of
Paul
and
Apollos
)
sought
to
draw
Disciples
after
them
.
Yea
but
Ierome
in
his
Epistle
to
Evagrius
,
sheweth
that
in
the
Apostles
times
Bishop
and
Presbyter
was
all
one
;
and
that
afterwards
Bishops
were
first
ordayned
as
a
remedy
against
schisme
.
To
this
I
haue
answered
before
,
shewing
that
Ierome
there
proueth
that
the
names
at
the
first
were
confounded
,
and
the
same
men
were
called
Presbyters
and
Bishops
vntill
one
out
of
the
Presbyters
in
euery
Church
was
chosen
,
and
set
aboue
the
rest
,
and
called
a
Bishop
.
Which
Ierome
there
confesseth
to
haue
bin
done
euer
since
St.
Markes
time
,
and
therefore
in
the
time
of
the
Apostles
.
For
the
first
Bishops
were
not
chosen
out
of
the
Presbytery
of
the
Churches
,
whereof
they
were
made
BB.
but
were
Apostolicall
men
,
I
meane
either
Apostles
,
or
some
of
their
companions
and
assistants
:
all
which
while
,
the
Bishops
were
called
Apostles
,
as
I
shewed
out
of
Theodoret
:
the
names
Presbyter
&
Episcopus
being
as
yet
confounded
.
And
whereas
he
saith
,
that
I
answered
euen
now
,
the
course
of
gouernment
was
not
changed
at
the
first
when
facti●●s
began
,
he
doth
but
threapen
kindnesse
on
mee
:
for
I
said
no
such
thing
.
If
therefore
Ierome
teacheth
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
when
factions
began
:
and
also
that
in
the
Apostles
time
factions
did
begin
;
then
in
Ieromes
iudgement
Bishops
were
ordayned
in
the
Apostles
times
;
but
Ierome
teacheth
both
the
one
and
the
other
,
as
is
manifest
by
that
which
hath
beene
said
.
Ierome
.
In
Tit.
1.
As
touching
the
Place
;
Ierome
saith
,
in
toto
orbe
decretum
est
,
it
was
decreed
in
the
whole
world
,
that
one
being
chosen
from
among
the
Presbyters
should
be
set
ouer
the
rest
,
to
whom
the
whole
care
of
euery
Church
should
appertaine
.
From
whence
I
reason
thus
.
A
generall
decree
in
the
whole
Christian
world
could
not
be
made
in
the
Apostles
times
without
the
authority
and
consent
of
the
Apostles
:
This
generall
decree
was
made
in
the
Apostles
times
:
Therefore
not
without
their
authority
and
consent
.
The
assumption
I
proue
thus
:
This
generall
decree
in
the
whole
world
was
made
either
in
the
Apostles
times
,
or
neare
their
times
.
But
not
neare
their
times
,
for
there
could
no
such
generall
decree
be
made
without
a
generall
Councill
.
And
there
was
no
generall
councill
before
the
councill
of
Nice
,
before
which
councill
there
were
not
onely
Diocesan
and
Metropolitane
Bishops
but
also
Patriarches
.
The
Refuter
answereth
,
that
Ieromes
words
deceiue
mee
.
For
though
Ierome
saith
it
was
decreed
,
yet
he
doth
not
meane
that
it
was
decreed
,
but
that
it
came
from
custome
,
and
that
paulatim
,
by
little
and
little
.
The
Refuters
answere
therefore
maketh
Ierome
to
contradict
himselfe
;
whose
speeches
notwithstanding
are
thus
reconciled
.
For
that
which
hee
there
calleth
custome
,
in
another
place
[
e
](A20733-e150970-b)
e
Ad
Euagr.
hee
termeth
an
Apostolicall
tradition
,
and
the
Apostolicall
tradition
is
that
vniuersall
decree
which
hee
speaketh
of
.
And
where
Ierome
saith
,
by
little
and
little
that
the
rootes
of
discension
might
be
plucked
vp
,
the
whole
care
was
committed
to
one
:
that
is
to
be
vnderstood
thus
;
that
although
it
were
agreed
vpon
at
once
,
and
decreed
to
be
put
in
practise
in
the
whole
world
;
yet
it
was
not
practised
at
once
in
the
whole
world
,
but
first
in
one
Church
,
as
at
Ierusalem
,
after
in
Antioch
,
then
in
Rome
,
after
in
Alexandria
,
in
all
which
Churches
not
onely
the
first
Bishops
were
ordayned
in
the
Apostles
times
,
but
their
successours
also
,
and
that
by
the
testimonie
of
Ierome
himselfe
as
followeth
in
the
next
proofe
.
For
hauing
thus
shewed
in
generall
both
the
time
and
place
out
of
Ierome
,
[
f
](A20733-e151100-b)
f
Catal.
in
Iacobo
.
was
by
the
Apostles
ordayned
Bishop
of
Ierusalem
,
before
their
departure
thence
:
that
when
hee
had
gouerned
that
Church
30.
yeares
,
Simon
[
g
](A20733-e151130-b)
g
Catal.
in
Simone
.
his
brother
,
or
kinsman
,
succeeded
him
in
the
Bishopricke
,
who
liuing
vntill
he
was
120.
yeares
old
was
crucified
vnder
Traiane
?
Doth
not
he
witnesse
that
Ignatius
[
h
](A20733-e151180-b)
h
Catal.
in
Ign.
was
the
third
Bishop
of
Antioch
in
the
Apostles
times
?
that
Marke
[
i
](A20733-e151210-b)
i
Proaem
.
in
Mat.
was
the
first
Bishop
of
Alexandria
,
and
that
he
dying
[
k
](A20733-e151230-b)
k
Catal.
in
Marco
.
at
Alexandria
in
the
eight
of
Nero
(
that
is
foure
or
fiue
yeares
before
the
death
of
Peter
and
Paul
)
Anianus
succeeded
him
?
Doth
he
not
say
,
that
Cl●mens
[
l
](A20733-e151310-b)
l
Catal.
in
Clem.
was
the
fourth
Bishop
of
Rome
after
Peter
.
For
,
saith
he
,
Linus
was
the
second
,
Anacletus
the
third
,
all
in
the
Apostles
times
?
Doth
hee
not
expresly
testifie
that
Polycarpus
[
m
](A20733-e151370-b)
m
Catal.
in
Polycarp
.
was
S.
Iohns
Disciple
,
and
by
him
ordayned
Bishop
of
Smyrna
?
and
is
it
not
testified
in
the
same
Catalogue
that
Timothie
[
n
](A20733-e151410-b)
n
Catal.
in
Timoth.
&
Tit.
was
of
blessed
Paul
ordayned
B.
of
the
Ephesians
,
and
that
Titus
was
B.
of
Creet
?
Hereunto
the
Refuter
maketh
an
answere
like
himselfe
,
that
hee
hath
often
told
me
,
that
Iames
,
Marke
and
Timothie
neither
were
,
nor
might
be
Bishops
.
And
I
haue
often
tolde
him
of
his
poore
shifts
,
whereof
this
is
one
.
For
the
question
being
here
,
not
whether
these
men
simply
were
Bishops
or
not
,
but
whether
Ierome
saith
so
,
or
no
;
I
hauing
alledged
plaine
testimonies
of
Ierome
auerring
that
they
were
Bishops
:
he
,
in
steed
of
maintayning
his
assertion
,
which
was
that
Ierome
testifieth
Bishops
not
to
haue
beene
ordayned
vntill
after
the
Apostles
times
,
giueth
Ierome
the
lye
,
but
answereth
not
to
the
point
.
For
if
Ierome
testifie
,
that
these
men
were
Bishops
in
the
Apostles
times
,
how
is
not
he
ashamed
to
say
,
that
in
Ieromes
opinion
there
were
no
Bishops
in
the
Apostles
times
?
And
where
he
saith
that
Polycarpe
(
and
the
like
no
doubt
would
say
of
Linus
,
and
Clemens
,
and
Ignatius
&c.
)
was
the
ordinarie
Pastor
of
that
one
congregation
at
Smyrna
,
and
no
Diocesan
Bishop
:
which
euasion
I
haue
heretofore
auoided
,
I
desire
this
answere
may
be
compared
with
the
next
,
which
he
maketh
concerning
the
end
.
§
9.
The
end
of
ordayning
BB.
according
to
Ierome
.
Aduers
.
Lucifer
.
The
end
,
saith
Ierome
,
was
to
auoid
Schisme
,
and
acknowledgeth
that
for
the
same
end
they
are
to
be
retayned
;
professing
,
that
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
vpon
the
dignitie
of
the
Bishop
,
to
whom
if
a
peerelesse
power
and
eminent
aboue
all
be
not
yeelded
,
there
would
be
as
many
Schismes
in
the
Churches
as
Priests
.
The
Refuter
answereth
,
that
some
say
,
the
remedy
was
almost
worse
then
the
disease
.
But
first
,
what
is
this
to
the
purpose
?
that
the
Refuter
had
rather
there
should
be
a
Schisme
in
euery
Parish
,
then
a
Bishop
of
the
Diocese
?
it
was
Ieromes
iudgement
,
that
I
opposed
to
their
allegation
out
of
Ierome
.
And
if
Ierome
testifie
,
that
in
the
Apostles
times
Bishops
were
ordayned
to
auoyd
Schisme
,
and
that
this
was
a
necessarie
remedie
,
insomuch
that
he
doubteth
not
to
say
that
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
vpon
it
;
it
was
as
much
as
in
this
place
either
I
intended
,
or
could
by
the
aduersarie
be
required
.
Secondly
,
where
Ierome
saith
,
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
for
auoyding
of
Schisme
,
hee
meaneth
such
Schisme
as
the
Presbyters
(
whom
hee
calleth
Sacerdotes
,
Priests
)
would
make
,
if
there
were
not
one
in
euery
Church
set
ouer
them
,
to
whom
the
care
of
that
whole
Church
should
belong
.
Now
applie
the
Refuters
answere
concerning
Polycarpus
,
which
is
his
ordinarie
answere
,
that
the
first
BB.
were
but
ordinarie
Pastors
of
one
congregation
,
such
as
wee
call
Rectors
or
Pastors
of
seuerall
parishes
.
Were
such
ordained
to
auoide
schisme
among
priests
?
or
were
not
such
the
priests
,
whose
schisme
was
to
be
auoided
by
setting
one
B.
in
euery
diocese
ouer
them
?
or
could
the
refuter
thinke
,
that
the
ordaining
of
such
ordinarie
pastors
was
a
remedie
worse
then
the
disease
?
is
it
not
therefore
cleare
,
that
the
Bishops
,
whom
Ierome
acknowledgeth
to
haue
beene
in
the
Apostles
times
,
were
not
ordinarie
Pastors
of
seuerall
congregations
or
parishes
,
equall
to
other
Presbyters
;
In
excelfjiori
gradu
ad
Euagr.
but
one
in
euery
diocese
set
in
a
superiour
degree
aboue
the
rest
to
preserue
them
in
vnitie
and
to
keepe
them
from
schisme
?
Thirdly
,
where
to
the
iudgement
of
Ierome
he
opposeth
the
testimonie
of
others
,
who
say
the
remedie
was
almost
worse
then
the
disease
,
because
this
superioritie
of
BB.
did
breed
the
Papacy
:
this
sheweth
,
that
great
and
sound
D●uines
sometimes
let
fall
,
especiallie
when
they
write
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
vnsound
speeches
grounded
on
weake
proofes
.
For
how
is
it
prou●●
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
did
breed
the
supremacie
of
the
Pope
.
Because
as
at
the
first
one
Presbyter
was
before
the
rest
,
and
made
a
Bishop
,
so
afterwards
one
B.
was
preferred
aboue
the
rest
,
so
this
custome
bred
the
Pope
and
his
Monarchy
.
By
which
reason
,
all
superioritie
should
be
condemned
as
the
originall
of
the
Popes
supremacie
.
For
might
not
a
man
as
well
say
,
that
as
one
Presbyter
in
euery
parish
is
superiour
to
the
rest
according
to
their
conceipt
;
so
one
Pastor
which
is
the
Bishop
in
euerie
diocese
is
superiour
to
the
other
Pastors
,
&c.
But
indeed
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
is
so
far
from
breeding
the
Papacy
as
the
cause
or
originall
,
Calu.
Iust.
l.
4.
c.
4.
§
4.
Bez.
Confes.
c.
5.
§
29.
Zanch.
de
relig.
obseru.
in
cap.
25.
Beza
and
Zanchius
confesse
,
yet
neither
did
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
breede
them
;
nor
they
,
the
Papacy
.
The
true
originall
of
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
Metropolitanes
,
and
Patriarches
in
their
circuites
was
the
patterne
of
ciuill
gouernment
in
the
Romane
Empire
,
diuided
into
certaine
precin●ts
,
which
the
Church
did
follow
.
Whereas
therefore
to
each
citie
the
countrey
adioyning
was
subiect
,
the
Apostles
first
placed
Bishops
in
the
cities
,
committing
to
their
charge
not
only
the
citie
but
countrey
subiect
to
it
,
which
wee
call
a
Diocese
,
wherein
from
the
beginning
,
there
was
neuer
more
lawfully
then
one
B.
and
whereas
in
euery
prouince
,
wherein
were
many
Cities
,
there
was
one
Metropolis
or
mother
citie
,
where
the
ruler
of
that
prouince
was
seated
;
in
like
manner
,
so
soone
as
Bishops
were
placed
in
the
seuerall
cities
,
they
acknowledged
the
B.
of
their
mother
citie
their
primate
,
and
chiefe
B.
of
the
Prouince
.
And
as
the
whole
Empire
was
diuided
among
certaine
gouernours
,
who
were
called
praefecti
praetorio
,
whereof
one
was
placed
in
Rome
hauing
the
gouernment
of
Italy
,
Affricke
and
part
of
Illyricum
.
A
second
in
Alexandria
hauing
the
rule
of
Egypt
,
Lybia
,
Pentapolis
&c.
A
third
at
Antioch
,
ruling
Syria
and
other
countreyes
of
the
East
.
A
fourth
in
France
gouerning
France
,
Germanie
,
Spaine
and
Britaine
;
so
the
diuers
prouinces
subiect
to
the
praefecti
praetorio
,
at
least
the
three
former
,
were
subiected
to
the
Bishops
of
the
same
sees
,
who
afterwards
were
called
Patriarches
;
whose
Patriarchal
authoritie
was
ratified
in
the
Councill
of
Nice
;
Con.
Nic.
c.
6.
to
wit
,
that
according
to
the
auncient
custome
the
B.
of
Rome
should
haue
the
care
sub
vrbicarum
prouinciarum
as
Ruffinus
reporteth
that
Canon
,
that
is
as
I
suppose
,
of
the
prouinces
belonging
to
that
pretorian
prefecture
,
that
the
B.
of
Alexandria
should
haue
the
gouernment
of
Egypt
,
Lybia
and
Pentapolis
,
and
the
B.
of
Antioch
the
regiment
of
Syria
and
other
countreyes
in
the
East
.
After
Constantinople
,
was
built
,
and
made
the
seat
of
the
Empire
,
diuers
countreyes
were
subiect
to
the
prefecture
,
and
consequently
to
the
Bishopricke
thereof
.
Neither
as
I
said
did
the
superioritie
of
Patriarches
(
though
perhaps
larger
,
then
was
absolutely
needfull
,
because
the
Ecclesiasticall
causes
of
euery
prouince
might
be
sufficiently
determined
in
the
prouincial
Synodes
)
notwithstanding
I
say
,
it
did
not
breede
the
Popes
supremacie
.
Which
did
arise
from
another
occasion
:
which
was
this
.
The
Bishop
of
Constantinople
,
considering
that
the
Churches
of
Alexandria
and
Antioch
had
that
prerogatiue
which
they
had
,
because
they
were
seates
of
praefecti
praetorio
;
and
Rome
,
because
it
had
beene
the
seate
not
onely
of
the
praefectus
,
but
of
the
Emperour
himselfe
,
(
though
at
that
time
in
respect
of
ciuill
gouernment
it
were
subiect
to
the
Exarch
of
Rauenna
,
for
which
cause
the
Archbishop
of
Rauenna
contended
with
the
B.
of
Rome
for
the
superioritie
)
and
with
all
remembring
,
that
Constantinople
was
the
seate
of
the
Empire
;
contended
therefore
,
that
as
the
Emperour
,
who
had
his
seate
at
Constantinople
,
was
the
Monarch
of
the
world
,
so
himselfe
might
be
acknowledged
the
vniuersall
B.
or
oecumenicall
Patriarch
.
The
which
ambition
,
though
it
were
condemned
by
Gregorie
the
B.
of
Rome
as
Antichristian
(
for
there
is
no
vniuersall
B.
or
head
of
the
whole
Church
but
Christ
)
yet
his
successor
Boniface
the
third
,
did
imitate
,
and
exceede
.
Alledging
,
that
Rome
whereof
hee
was
Bishop
was
the
ancient
seate
of
the
Empire
,
and
that
the
Emperour
though
hee
remained
at
Constantinople
,
yet
hee
was
the
Romane
Emperour
.
At
length
with
much
a
doe
,
and
contention
,
obtained
of
the
Emperour
Phocas
,
not
only
that
he
should
be
called
an
Oecumenicall
Patriarch
,
(
for
that
title
the
B.
of
Constantinople
hauing
once
vsurped
,
enioyed
it
,
as
well
as
hee
,
and
doth
retayne
it
to
this
day
)
but
that
his
See
should
be
head
of
all
Churches
.
And
this
was
the
true
originall
of
the
Popes
supremacie
.
Serm
sect.
12.
pag.
89.
Secondly
they
vrge
Ieromes
inference
in
that
place
;
Presbyters
at
the
first
ruled
the
Church
by
common
counsell
,
therefore
the
BB.
and
they
ought
to
rule
the
Church
in
common
still
.
The
refuter
denyeth
this
inference
to
be
Ieromes
,
or
that
any
hath
vrged
such
an
inference
from
him
.
When
indeed
the
inference
plainely
is
Ieromes
,
and
is
that
which
among
all
their
obiections
,
is
to
best
purpose
obiected
by
the
Disciplinarians
.
Ierome
had
said
before
,
that
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
is
all
one
;
and
that
before
factions
did
arise
by
the
instinct
of
the
Diuell
,
some
saying
I
am
of
Paul
,
&c.
the
Churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
counsell
of
Presbyters
,
&c.
Of
those
speeches
when
hee
had
made
a
briefe
recitall
,
haecpropterea
,
&c.
he
maketh
an
inference
to
this
effect
,
that
for
as
much
as
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
were
all
one
at
the
first
,
therefore
both
Presbyters
should
know
themselues
to
be
subiect
to
the
B.
and
BB
superiour
to
the
Presbyters
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
,
&c.
And
for
as
much
as
at
the
first
the
churches
were
gouerned
by
the
common
councell
of
the
Presbyters
,
as
vnder
the
Apostles
,
that
therefore
the
B.
being
set
ouer
the
Presbyters
should
not
altogether
exclude
them
,
but
should
in
communi
Ecclesiam
regere
rule
the
church
in
common
;
imitating
Moses
,
who
,
when
hee
had
in
his
power
to
rule
the
people
of
Israel
alone
,
chose
seauenty
,
with
whom
he
might
iudge
the
people
.
Which
obiection
,
being
better
then
any
the
refuter
hath
made
in
this
booke
,
I
will
not
let
it
passe
without
some
answere
.
For
it
appeareth
that
neither
the
Apostles
or
Apostolicall
men
being
Bishops
,
were
simply
bound
to
vse
the
councell
of
the
Presbyters
,
but
that
the
vse
of
them
was
voluntarie
,
after
the
example
of
Moses
,
as
Ierome
saith
;
and
the
auncient
Bishops
of
the
Primitiue
Church
who
were
of
the
best
disposition
,
(
as
Cyprian
by
name
)
did
follow
their
example
,
resoluing
to
doe
nothing
of
moment
,
without
their
counsell
and
aduise
:
seeking
therein
the
good
and
peace
of
the
Church
.
And
this
custome
was
vsed
by
all
godly
Bishops
,
vntill
as
I
said
,
the
Presbyters
aduise
and
assistance
,
to
themselues
seeming
troublesome
,
and
to
the
B.
by
reason
of
the
frequent
Synodes
and
Synodall
constitutions
needlesse
,
grew
out
of
vse
;
whereupon
Canons
were
made
that
their
counsell
and
assistance
should
be
required
an
had
in
greater
matters
,
which
is
not
misliked
but
wished
to
be
more
vsed
.
And
so
much
may
suffice
to
haue
answered
an
obiection
;
which
the
refuter
doth
not
acknowledge
.
I
proceede
therefore
to
the
third
,
Ad
pag.
152.
The
chiefe
obiection
that
BB.
are
greater
then
Presbyters
by
the
custome
of
the
church
not
by
Diuine
ordinance
.
which
is
as
it
were
the
shoote-anchor
of
the
Disciplinarians
;
which
fayling
their
Discipline
will
suffer
shipwracke
.
Presbyters
and
Bishops
were
all
one
;
therefore
Bishops
are
to
know
that
they
be
greater
then
the
Presbyters
,
rather
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
,
then
by
the
truth
of
Diuine
disposition
.
To
this
obiection
I
returned
two
answeres
:
the
first
,
that
where
Ierome
saith
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
is
all
one
,
it
may
be
vndertooke
of
the
names
,
which
hee
proueth
by
many
[
n
](A20733-e152480-b)
n
Phil.
1.1
.
Acts
20.17.28
.
Tit.
1.5.7
.
1
Pet.
5.
testimonies
to
be
confounded
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
.
And
in
this
sense
it
is
true
,
that
whereas
now
Episcopus
is
more
then
Presbyter
,
it
is
to
be
ascribed
to
the
custome
of
the
Church
,
as
before
I
haue
noted
out
of
Theodoret.
And
in
the
same
sense
Augustine
[
o
](A20733-e152530-b)
o
Epist.
19.
ad
Hier.
is
to
be
vnderstood
,
when
hee
saith
,
according
to
the
names
of
honour
in
which
the
vse
of
the
Church
hath
preuailed
Episcopatus
,
Bishopship
is
a
name
of
greater
honour
then
Presbyterium
.
The
refuter
comming
to
examine
this
answere
,
saith
,
I
denyed
the
Antecedent
,
when
as
indeed
I
granting
the
Antecedent
,
in
that
sense
which
I
giue
in
the
answere
,
denyed
the
consequence
.
That
although
the
distinction
of
the
names
was
not
by
diuine
disposition
,
but
by
the
custome
of
the
Church
:
yet
that
hindreth
not
,
but
the
function
may
be
of
Apostolicall
institution
.
Seeing
they
which
at
the
first
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
to
the
Episcopal
function
,
though
they
were
not
called
Bishops
till
they
were
chosen
out
of
the
Presbyters
,
yet
were
called
sometimes
the
Apostles
,
sometimes
the
Angels
of
the
churches
.
So
that
when
the
names
were
confounded
,
the
offices
were
not
.
But
the
refuter
censureth
this
distinction
as
an
idle
conceipt
and
shift
hauing
no
colour
of
excuse
for
it
.
As
though
it
needed
excuse
,
when
I
brought
iust
defence
of
it
,
which
hee
is
not
able
to
answere
.
For
how
shall
Ieromes
minde
be
knowne
in
that
assertion
,
that
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
was
all
one
,
but
by
the
proofes
which
he
bringeth
for
it
?
but
all
his
proofes
are
that
the
names
were
confounded
in
the
writings
of
the
Apostles
;
and
that
the
same
men
were
called
Presbiteri
&
Episcopi
,
and
that
was
all
that
Ierome
could
truely
inferre
out
of
those
places
.
For
if
hee
would
haue
concluded
out
of
them
that
the
offices
were
confounded
,
his
consequences
would
be
very
weake
.
The
second
defence
of
my
answere
was
this
,
that
Ierome
is
to
be
vnderstood
eyther
of
the
names
or
of
the
offices
:
But
not
of
the
offices
,
therefore
of
the
names
.
If
you
shall
vnderstand
Ierome
,
as
affirming
that
the
offices
were
confounded
,
and
denying
that
the
office
and
superioritie
of
Bishops
was
of
Diuine
disposition
,
in
that
sense
that
Apostolicall
ordinances
may
be
said
to
be
of
Diuine
Institution
,
you
shall
make
Ierome
,
not
onely
to
striue
against
the
streame
of
all
Antiquitie
;
but
also
to
be
contrarie
to
himselfe
;
but
this
latter
is
absurd
;
so
is
the
former
.
To
the
former
reason
the
refuter
answereth
not
,
Can
any
man
be
so
sotttish
,
saith
he
,
as
to
imagine
that
the
question
betwixt
Ierome
and
those
Deacons
was
about
names
,
not
offices
?
or
would
Ierome
reason
so
simply
as
to
proue
the
dignitie
of
the
Presbyters
aboue
Deacons
,
because
the
name
of
Presbyter
and
Episcopus
was
all
one
?
it
were
absurd
to
spend
more
time
in
answering
so
vnreasonable
a
distinction
.
You
see
how
bragge
our
refuter
is
,
when
hee
seemeth
to
haue
gotten
neuer
so
little
aduantage
.
To
his
former
question
I
answere
,
that
although
the
question
was
concerning
the
office
of
Presbyters
and
Deacons
whether
were
superiour
;
yet
Ierome
might
,
and
indeede
did
proue
the
Presbyters
to
be
superiour
,
because
as
the
Apostles
did
call
themselues
Presbyters
,
so
Presbyters
were
called
Bishops
.
Yea
but
saith
he
in
the
second
question
,
Ierome
would
not
reason
so
simply
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
that
not
onely
learned
men
,
but
the
holy
Ghost
also
in
the
Scriptures
[
q
](A20733-e152840-b)
q
Heb.
1.
doth
reason
to
that
purpose
,
prouing
their
dignitie
to
be
greater
who
haue
obtained
a
greater
name
.
For
as
the
Philosophers
[
r
](A20733-e152850-b)
r
Plat.
Arist.
say
,
names
are
the
resemblances
and
imitations
of
the
things
.
Secondly
hee
obiecteth
the
authoritie
of
diuerse
new
,
and
I
confesse
,
worthy
Diuines
,
But
saith
hee
we
neede
not
stand
in
feare
of
that
glittering
flourish
,
whereby
wee
are
charged
to
make
Ierome
striue
against
the
streame
of
all
Antiquitie
,
and
to
be
contrarie
to
himselfe
,
if
eyther
hee
confound
the
functions
or
deny
it
to
be
an
Apostolicall
ordinance
,
that
Bishops
should
be
set
ouer
the
Presbyters
.
What
one
testimonie
of
Antiquitie
within
the
first
two
hundred
yeares
,
eyther
hath
beene
,
or
can
be
alledged
to
that
purpose
?
of
as
little
force
are
the
allegations
which
M.
D.
saith
,
hee
hath
cited
out
of
Ieromes
writings
.
In
both
which
answeres
the
refuter
sheweth
himselfe
to
be
very
impudent
.
For
first
,
that
the
office
or
degree
of
Bishop
and
Presbyter
are
distinct
;
haue
I
not
brought
forth
most
plaine
and
plentiful
proofes
,
out
of
Ignatius
,
Tertullian
,
Origen
,
Cyprian
,
and
other
auncient
writers
?
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
,
haue
I
not
alledged
most
pregnant
testimonies
out
of
Ignatius
,
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
,
Hegesippus
and
Clemens
,
cited
by
Eusebius
?
and
can
it
seeme
doubtfull
to
any
,
that
shall
reade
what
is
alledged
by
mee
and
the
refuter
in
this
controuersie
which
way
the
streame
of
Antiquitie
runneth
?
And
as
for
Ierome
,
what
more
plaine
testimonies
can
be
desired
,
then
those
which
I
brought
to
proue
,
that
in
his
iudgement
Bishops
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
.
And
that
Ierome
neuer
thought
,
that
the
office
of
Bishop
and
Presbyter
was
confounded
,
it
may
further
appeare
by
these
reasons
.
For
where
Paul
writeth
to
the
Bishops
and
Deacons
at
Philippi
,
here
,
saith
Ierome
[
s
](A20733-e153050-b)
s
Hier.
in
Phil.
1.
,
by
Bishops
wee
vnderstand
Presbyters
.
For
in
one
Citie
there
could
not
be
more
Bishops
then
one
.
Which
plainely
sheweth
,
hee
thought
that
although
Presbyters
had
the
name
,
yet
they
had
not
the
office
of
Bishops
,
and
that
although
there
might
be
many
in
one
Citie
which
had
the
name
,
yet
there
could
be
but
one
,
that
had
the
office
of
a
Bishop
.
Againe
on
1
Tim.
3.
he
[
t
](A20733-e153090-b)
t
Hier.
in
1
Tim.
3
saith
,
it
is
demanded
,
why
the
Apostle
made
no
mention
there
of
Presbyters
,
but
comprehended
them
in
the
name
of
Bishops
?
because
,
saith
he
,
the
degree
of
Presbyters
is
the
second
,
and
almost
the
same
with
that
of
Bishops
.
Diuine
disposition
,
as
including
onely
those
things
which
be
eyther
directly
and
immediately
of
Diuine
institution
,
or
are
Diuini
iuris
,
of
Diuine
right
,
as
being
perpetuall
and
immutable
;
but
not
as
excluding
Apostolicall
ordinances
.
For
Ierome
,
besides
that
he
hath
plentifully
testified
,
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
,
hee
doth
also
expressely
call
this
function
Episcopall
an
[
u
](A20733-e153200-b)
u
Ad
Euagr.
Ad
pag
153.
Apostolicall
tradition
.
But
this
testimonie
the
refuter
thinketh
to
elude
,
because
in
the
writings
of
the
Fathers
,
the
precepts
and
obseruations
of
their
forefathers
though
indeede
not
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
are
called
Apostolicall
traditions
.
Which
answere
may
haue
place
in
such
traditions
,
as
haue
no
testimonie
or
proofe
,
that
the
Apostles
ordayned
them
;
but
for
this
matter
in
question
,
we
haue
had
plentifull
and
pregnant
proofes
,
and
euident
testimonies
,
not
onely
of
other
authors
,
but
of
Ierome
himselfe
,
plainely
auouching
,
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
,
and
particularly
relating
the
persons
whom
,
the
places
where
,
the
time
when
,
the
Apostles
ordayned
them
.
If
neither
of
these
answeres
,
will
satisfie
the
refuter
,
then
must
he
be
forced
to
confesse
,
that
Ierome
was
inconstant
in
this
question
,
holding
one
while
that
Bishops
were
of
Apostolicall
Institution
,
and
another
while
that
they
were
not
.
And
if
Ierome
were
vnconstant
which
is
the
worst
that
can
be
obiected
against
this
cause
,
and
wherewith
I
would
be
loath
to
charge
him
,
then
let
it
be
considered
,
whether
those
testimonies
which
he
hath
in
more
places
deliuered
dogmatically
and
historically
,
for
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
,
himselfe
being
a
Presbyter
;
are
not
to
ouerweigh
those
fewer
,
which
hee
vttered
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
the
heate
of
disputation
,
as
a
partie
in
the
cause
,
maintaining
the
dignitie
of
Presbyters
,
himselfe
being
a
Presbyter
,
against
eyther
the
indignities
offered
them
by
the
Bishops
or
the
insolencie
of
[
w
](A20733-e153290-b)
w
Hier.
ad
Euagr.
August
.
quaest.
ex
vet.
&
nou.
test
.
101.
Deacons
who
sought
to
ouerpeere
them
.
Thus
haue
I
proued
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
,
and
consequently
of
Diuine
institution
.
The
VI.
CHAPTER
.
Prouing
directly
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Diuine
institution
.
Serm.
Sect.
13.
pag.
92.
I
will
in
the
last
place
directly
,
yet
briefly
proue
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
diuine
institution
,
&c.
to
protection
of
their
persons
pag.
94.
THe
refuter
hath
more
then
once
charged
me
,
that
I
maintaine
the
Episcopall
function
to
be
held
iure
diuino
,
implying
thereby
,
that
it
is
generally
and
perpetually
necessarie
.
Wherefore
least
he
should
be
taken
in
the
manner
,
as
a
wilfull
deprauer
of
my
assertion
,
hee
leaueth
out
all
that
which
I
haue
deliuered
to
explane
my
meaning
,
and
beginneth
this
section
at
the
middle
of
a
sentence
,
where
the
explication
endeth
.
Such
shifts
may
deceiue
the
simple
for
a
while
,
sed
mendacia
diu
non
fallunt
,
but
lyes
will
not
beguile
long
,
as
Cyprian
saith
.
If
he
had
meant
to
deale
truely
,
hee
should
haue
begunne
this
section
at
the
diuision
pag.
91.
in
the
end
;
where
by
a
distinction
of
that
which
might
be
Ieromes
meaning
,
I
take
occasion
to
passe
to
the
direct
proofes
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Diuine
institution
.
But
because
I
did
foresee
,
that
this
my
assertion
would
be
vnderstoode
,
as
if
I
held
the
function
of
Diocesan
Bishops
so
to
be
diuini
iuris
,
as
that
it
is
generally
,
perpetually
and
immutably
necessarie
for
the
being
of
a
Church
and
that
no
other
forme
of
gouernment
may
in
no
case
be
any
wayes
admitted
;
therefore
both
in
the
text
,
and
in
the
margent
I
explaned
the
assertion
which
I
hold
,
shewing
plainely
in
what
sense
I
maintaine
the
calling
of
Diocesan
Bishops
to
be
of
diuine
institution
.
All
which
though
the
refuter
passed
ouer
in
silence
,
yet
I
thinke
it
needfull
to
repeate
,
that
both
my
sinceritie
,
and
his
fraudulent
dealing
may
appeare
.
My
words
in
the
Sermon
were
these
:
If
his
(
that
is
Ieromes
)
meaning
should
be
,
that
the
superioritie
of
Bishops
ouer
Presbyters
,
though
it
be
an
Apostolicall
tradition
(
as
himselfe
calleth
it
)
yet
notwithstanding
is
not
directly
of
Diuine
institution
:
although
there
be
small
difference
betwixt
these
two
(
as
I
vnderstand
Diuine
institution
)
because
what
the
Apostles
did
in
the
execution
of
their
Apostolicall
function
they
did
by
direction
of
the
holy
Ghost
:
In
the
margent
also
(
fearing
least
my
meaning
would
not
plainely
enough
appeare
)
to
preuent
the
cauils
of
those
which
be
aduersaries
to
the
cause
which
I
maintaine
,
I
noted
these
words
.
Though
in
respect
of
the
first
institution
,
there
is
small
difference
betweene
an
Apostolicall
and
Diuine
ordinance
,
because
what
was
ordained
by
the
Apostles
proceeded
from
GOD
(
in
which
sense
and
no
other
,
I
doe
hold
the
Episcopall
function
to
be
a
Diuine
ordinance
,
I
meane
in
respect
of
the
first
institution
)
yet
in
respect
of
perpetuitie
,
difference
by
some
is
made
betweene
those
things
which
be
Diuini
,
and
those
which
be
Apostolici
iuris
:
the
former
,
in
their
vnderstanding
being
generally
,
perpetually
and
immutably
necessarie
;
the
latter
,
not
so
.
So
that
the
meaning
of
my
defence
plainely
is
,
that
the
Episcopall
gouernment
hath
this
commendation
aboue
other
formes
of
Ecclesiasticall
regiment
,
that
in
respect
of
the
first
institution
,
it
is
a
Diuine
ordinance
;
but
that
it
should
be
such
a
Diuine
ordinance
,
as
should
be
generally
,
perpetually
,
immutably
,
necessarily
obserued
,
so
as
no
other
forme
of
gouernment
,
may
in
no
case
be
admitted
,
I
did
not
take
vpon
mee
to
maintaine
.
With
what
conscience
therefore
the
refuter
hath
laid
the
maintenance
of
that
assertion
to
my
charge
,
and
omitted
the
explanation
of
my
defence
in
this
place
,
the
Reader
may
easily
iudge
;
especially
if
hee
remember
that
where
hee
thought
any
aduantage
could
be
taken
out
of
this
explanation
of
my
defence
,
there
hee
taketh
notice
of
it
,
as
namely
page
90.
of
his
booke
;
where
hee
supposing
,
that
I
auouch
a
necessitie
of
retayning
the
gouernment
of
Diocesan
Bishops
,
hee
vseth
these
words
.
Who
would
haue
thought
to
haue
heard
such
a
speech
from
him
that
acknowledgeth
another
gouernment
good
and
lawfull
.
pag.
95.
and
maketh
the
calling
of
Bishops
no
further
of
diuine
institution
,
then
as
being
ordayned
by
the
Apostles
it
proceeded
from
God
,
without
implying
thereby
any
necessarie
perpetuitie
thereof
?
Pag.
92.
Thus
sincerely
their
cause
of
sinceritie
,
as
themselues
call
it
,
is
maintained
.
Ad
pag.
154.
Now
that
Bishops
were
ordayned
of
God
,
I
proue
by
this
argument
,
as
the
refuter
hath
framed
it
:
If
God
ordayned
Timothie
,
Archippus
,
and
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
Churches
Bishops
,
then
were
Bishops
ordained
by
God
.
But
God
ordained
them
Bishops
:
Therefore
Bishops
were
ordained
by
God
.
As
touching
Timothie
:
I
argued
thus
.
By
whom
was
he
ordained
Bishop
?
By
Paul
,
I
confesse
,
as
the
instrument
;
but
yet
by
the
holy
Ghost
as
the
author
and
directer
of
his
ordination
.
For
he
was
made
B.
by
prophecie
.
1
Tim.
4.
[
a
](A20733-e153720-b)
a
1
Tim.
4.14
.
How
is
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
What
is
by
Prophecie
?
(
saith
Chrysostome
)
by
the
holy
[
b
](A20733-e153770-b)
b
Chrysost.
hom
.
4.
Grac.
5.
latin
.
in
1
Tim.
1.
Ghost
.
Paul
stirring
him
vp
,
putteth
him
in
minde
,
who
elected
and
ordained
him
;
as
if
hee
had
said
,
God
hath
chosen
thee
,
hee
hath
committed
his
Church
vnto
thee
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
thou
wert
made
Bishop
not
by
humane
suffrage
,
but
by
Prophecie
;
that
is
,
by
Diuine
reuelation
,
saith
Theodoret
[
c
](A20733-e153860-b)
c
Theodoret.
;
that
is
,
spiritu
sancto
iubente
,
by
the
commandement
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
saith
Theophilact
[
d
](A20733-e153900-b)
d
Theophil
.
;
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
saith
Oecumenius
[
e
](A20733-e153940-b)
e
Oecum
.
in
1
Tit.
4.
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
for
by
the
appointment
of
the
holy
Ghost
Bishops
were
made
,
and
not
at
randome
.
Whereunto
you
may
adde
the
testimonie
of
Caluin
[
f
](A20733-e154000-b)
f
Calu.
in
1
Tim.
4.
.
Per
Prophetiam
]
quomodo
?
quia
scilicet
spiritus
sanctus
oraculo
Timotheum
destinauerat
vt
in
ordinem
pastorum
cooptaretur
.
Neque
enim
delectus
tantuacute
;
m
fuerat
hominum
iudicio
vt
fieri
solet
,
sed
praecesserat
spiritus
nuncupatio
.
To
this
argument
the
refuter
answereth
nothing
,
but
that
,
which
I
haue
plainely
and
fully
confuted
before
;
that
Timothie
was
not
a
Bishop
,
though
Caluin
as
you
see
,
confesseth
,
that
Timothie
by
the
oracle
of
the
holy
Ghost
was
chosen
into
the
order
of
Pastors
.
For
if
hee
were
a
Pastor
,
it
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
he
was
a
Bishop
.
That
Archippus
was
ordayned
Bishop
of
God
,
I
proue
thus
.
Because
Col.
4.17
.
Paul
vsing
the
same
exhortation
to
him
which
hee
gaue
to
Timothie
[
g
](A20733-e154130-b)
g
2
Tim.
4.5
.
the
Bishop
of
Ephesus
,
namely
,
that
hee
should
fulfill
his
ministerie
,
hee
addeth
,
which
thou
hast
receiued
in
the
Lord
;
and
therefore
by
Gods
ordinance
,
and
as
it
were
at
his
hands
.
The
refuter
hauing
framed
the
argument
thus
,
Hee
that
receiued
his
Episcopall
ministerie
in
the
Lord
,
was
ordained
a
B.
by
the
Lord
.
Archippus
receiued
his
Episcopall
ministerie
in
the
Lord
:
Therefore
hee
was
ordained
Bishop
by
the
Lord
:
He
denyeth
the
proposition
;
because
neither
is
all
Episcopall
ministerie
proper
to
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
else
the
Apostle
would
not
haue
made
a
B
and
Presbyter
all
one
;
neither
is
that
office
onely
in
the
Lord
.
Of
which
reasons
,
the
latter
is
meerely
impertinent
,
and
friuolous
.
For
who
euer
said
,
or
thought
,
that
the
office
of
a
Bishop
onely
is
in
the
Lord
?
neither
is
the
former
to
any
purpose
,
seeing
he
knoweth
,
that
by
Episcopall
ministerie
I
vnderstand
the
function
of
a
Diocesan
Bishop
,
and
therefore
should
not
haue
denyed
the
proposition
,
but
haue
distinguished
of
the
assumption
,
saying
,
that
hee
did
not
receiue
the
Episcopall
ministerie
,
meaning
the
function
of
a
Diocesan
Bishop
.
For
proofe
whereof
,
it
sufficeth
to
mee
,
that
Archippus
was
as
Ambrose
[
h
](A20733-e154260-b)
h
in
Col.
4.17
.
noteth
,
Bishop
of
Collosae
,
which
was
a
Citie
:
seeing
I
haue
manifestly
proued
before
,
that
the
Bishops
of
Cities
were
Diocesan
Bishops
.
Ad
pag.
155.
&
156.
As
touching
the
Angels
I
argue
thus
;
Those
who
are
called
by
the
holy
Ghost
the
Angels
of
the
Church
;
and
were
signified
by
the
seauen
starres
which
were
in
Christs
right
hand
,
had
Diuine
both
institution
and
approbation
:
The
Diocesan
Bishops
of
the
seauen
Churches
are
called
by
the
holy
Ghost
the
Angels
of
the
seauen
churches
,
and
were
signified
by
the
seauen
starres
which
were
in
Christs
right
hand
.
Therefore
the
Diocesan
Bishops
of
the
seauen
Churches
had
diuine
both
institution
and
approbation
.
The
proposition
I
proued
,
because
they
who
are
called
Angels
are
authorized
and
sent
of
God
,
and
starres
whose
both
preheminence
of
dignitie
is
noted
in
this
life
(
for
the
starres
[
i
](A20733-e154380-b)
i
Apoc.
12.1
.
are
the
crowne
of
the
Church
)
and
also
prerogatiue
of
glorie
which
they
shall
haue
in
the
world
to
come
.
And
finally
,
they
who
are
signified
by
the
seauen
starres
in
the
right
hand
of
Christ
,
are
such
as
Christ
doth
both
approue
and
protect
.
The
assumption
I
went
not
about
to
proue
now
,
because
it
was
proued
at
large
in
the
former
part
of
the
Sermon
.
And
yet
all
that
the
refuter
answereth
to
the
purpose
,
is
,
that
they
were
not
Diocesan
Bishops
.
For
that
which
he
addeth
besides
,
is
but
the
vttering
of
his
spleene
,
and
emptying
his
gall
against
Bishops
,
to
whom
he
cannot
abide
(
such
is
his
malice
)
that
the
titles
of
Angels
and
starres
,
which
notwithstanding
the
holy
Ghost
giueth
to
the
Bishops
of
the
seauen
Churches
,
and
which
himselfe
acknowledgeth
to
be
titles
common
to
all
ministers
,
should
be
applyed
to
Bishops
.
It
is
true
,
that
these
titles
of
Angels
and
stars
are
common
to
all
ministers
,
yet
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
to
signifie
their
preheminence
)
they
be
attributed
to
Bishops
.
For
as
I
haue
said
before
;
when
in
a
Church
,
where
are
many
Ministers
,
who
are
all
tearmed
Angels
,
the
Bishop
onely
is
called
the
Angel
of
the
Church
,
this
title
doth
note
his
singular
preheminence
.
And
the
same
is
signified
when
as
there
being
a
great
number
of
ministers
in
Asia
who
all
were
starres
,
the
seauen
Bishops
onely
of
those
Churches
are
signified
by
the
seauen
starres
which
Christ
held
in
his
right
hand
.
Now
if
these
seauen
Bishops
were
Diocesan
Bishops
as
I
haue
manifestly
proued
them
,
and
all
the
Bishops
of
the
auncient
Churches
to
haue
beene
;
then
must
the
refuter
be
content
to
endure
,
both
that
Diocesan
Bishops
were
called
the
Angels
of
the
Churches
,
and
the
starres
which
Christ
held
in
his
right
hand
;
and
consequently
also
,
that
the
function
of
Diocesan
Bishops
is
of
Diuine
institution
.
And
thus
passing
by
his
rayling
,
as
not
worth
the
mentioning
,
I
proceede
to
the
conclusion
of
my
Sermon
.
The
VII
.
CHAPTER
.
Defending
the
conclusion
of
the
Sermon
,
The
third
part
of
the
Serm.
Sect.
1.
page
94.
Thus
hauing
proued
this
doctrine
arising
out
of
the
Text
,
that
the
Episcopall
function
is
of
Apostolicall
and
diuine
institution
:
it
remaineth
,
that
we
should
from
thence
gather
some
vses
to
our selues
both
for
the
informing
of
our
iudgement
,
and
reforming
of
our
liues
,
&c.
to
now
let
vs
,
pag.
97.
THe
vse
which
serueth
for
rectifying
the
iudgement
is
contained
in
this
section
,
and
it
is
first
propounded
,
and
afterwards
maintained
against
two
obiections
.
The
vse
is
this
,
that
as
the
Episcopall
function
hath
been
manifestly
proued
to
be
lawfull
and
good
;
as
being
the
ordinance
of
God
,
so
we
would
all
be
perswaded
to
acknowledge
it
.
But
the
refuter
is
like
the
deafe
Adder
,
that
stoppeth
her
eare
;
he
will
not
be
perswaded
,
though
he
be
conuicted
.
For
though
he
braggeth
,
that
this
answere
of
his
doth
manifest
that
I
haue
not
brought
any
one
good
proofe
in
the
whole
Sermon
;
yet
this
defence
of
mine
will
make
it
euident
,
that
he
hath
not
been
able
to
disproue
any
one
of
my
proofes
,
which
he
hath
gone
about
to
answere
(
for
the
most
part
)
with
sound
learning
,
but
to
elude
with
shifts
and
cauillations
.
But
some
will
say
,
My
resolution
of
this
doubt
I
signified
before
Serm.
pag.
92.
that
I
did
not
hold
it
so
to
be
diuini
iuris
,
as
that
necessarily
it
were
to
be
obserued
alwayes
and
in
all
places
,
and
so
himselfe
confesseth
pag.
90.
of
his
booke
.
And
therefore
when
he
said
my
resolution
was
obscure
and
doubtfull
(
for
doubling
I
leaue
to
him
)
he
was
disposed
to
cauill
.
I
referre
indeed
the
consideration
of
this
inference
to
our
Disciplinarians
,
who
hauing
conceipted
the
Presbyterian
platforme
to
be
described
in
the
scriptures
;
doe
therefore
vrge
the
same
,
as
perpetuall
and
vnchangeable
,
signifying
,
that
if
they
will
be
constant
in
their
iudgement
,
they
must
by
the
same
reason
acknowledge
the
Episcopall
gouernment
,
which
hath
warrant
in
the
word
,
to
be
perpetuall
and
vnchangeable
.
Which
conceipt
of
theirs
hath
perhaps
beene
the
cause
,
why
they
haue
giuen
out
to
make
my
Sermon
odious
among
their
followers
,
that
I
maintaine
the
Episcopall
function
to
be
diuini
iuris
,
as
being
commanded
of
God
,
and
perpetually
imposed
vpon
all
Churches
.
Neuerthelesse
,
I
plainely
declared
my
resolution
to
be
this
,
that
although
we
be
well
assured
,
that
the
forme
of
gouernment
by
Bishops
is
the
best
,
as
hauing
not
onely
the
warrant
of
scripture
for
the
first
institution
,
but
also
the
perpetuall
practise
of
the
Church
from
the
Apostles
times
to
our
age
,
for
the
continuance
of
it
;
notwithstanding
we
doubt
not
,
where
this
may
not
be
had
,
others
may
be
admitted
;
neither
doe
we
deny
,
but
that
siluer
is
good
,
though
gold
be
better
,
which
obiection
and
answere
,
I
inserted
of
purpose
into
the
Sermon
,
to
preserue
the
credit
of
those
reformed
Churches
,
where
the
Presbyterian
discipline
is
established
,
and
that
they
might
not
be
exposed
,
or
left
naked
to
the
obloquies
of
the
Papists
.
Ad
pag.
158.
that
I
contradict
my selfe
,
and
that
in
the
conclusion
of
my
Sermon
I
did
ouerthrow
what
before
I
had
builded
.
But
as
alwayes
hitherto
,
so
now
also
,
he
hath
shewed
his
malice
to
be
greater
then
his
strength
.
For
though
hee
chargeth
me
,
as
hauing
often
and
peremptorily
auouched
the
perpetuall
necessitie
of
the
gouernment
of
the
Church
by
Diocesan
Bishops
:
yet
neither
often
,
nor
once
,
neither
peremptorily
,
nor
at
all
,
neither
the
perpetuall
necessitie
,
nor
any
absolute
necessitie
at
all
,
is
vrged
in
any
one
of
the
allegations
,
which
hee
so
hotly
,
as
it
were
with
fire
and
towe
,
obiecteth
.
The
first
which
is
obiected
out
of
pag.
33.
hath
beene
explained
before
.
For
when
I
said
,
that
as
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
was
first
ordayned
for
the
preseruation
of
the
Church
in
vnity
,
and
for
the
auoiding
of
schisme
;
so
it
is
for
the
same
cause
to
be
retained
:
I
did
not
meane
any
absolute
necessitie
of
retaining
it
,
but
that
as
at
the
first
it
was
ordained
,
as
being
thought
fit
,
expedient
and
needfull
to
auoid
schisme
;
so
it
is
fit
,
expedient
and
needfull
for
the
same
cause
to
be
retained
.
Neither
doe
I
see
how
hee
can
inferre
this
perpetuall
necessitie
which
he
talketh
of
out
of
pag.
72.
where
I
said
,
the
Epistles
to
Timothie
and
Titus
are
the
very
patternes
and
Presidents
of
the
Episcopall
function
,
whereby
the
Apostle
informeth
them
,
and
in
them
all
Bishops
how
to
exercise
their
function
touching
ordination
and
iurisdiction
.
For
although
Paul
giueth
his
directions
primarily
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
and
to
all
such
as
should
haue
the
like
function
that
is
to
say
,
Bishops
:
yet
if
this
forme
of
gouernment
be
changed
,
those
which
shall
exercise
the
like
authority
,
must
follow
those
directions
,
as
being
giuen
,
though
primarily
and
directly
to
Bishops
,
yet
secondarily
,
and
by
consequence
,
to
those
who
though
they
were
not
Bishops
,
should
haue
the
like
authority
And
to
the
like
purpose
is
that
alleadged
out
of
pag.
74.
and
that
we
should
not
thinke
as
some
doe
that
these
things
were
spoken
to
them
as
to
extraordinarie
persons
(
whose
authoritie
should
dye
with
them
)
but
to
them
and
their
successors
to
the
end
of
the
world
,
he
straitly
chargeth
Timothie
,
that
the
commandements
and
directions
which
hee
gaue
him
,
should
be
kept
inuiolable
vnto
the
appearing
of
our
Lord
Iesus
Christ
;
and
therefore
by
such
,
as
should
haue
the
like
authority
vnto
the
end
.
And
presently
after
,
for
the
authority
which
was
committed
to
them
is
perpetually
necessary
,
without
which
the
Church
neither
can
be
gouerned
(
as
without
iurisdiction
)
neither
yet
continued
(
as
without
ordination
)
and
therefore
not
peculiar
to
extraordinary
persons
,
but
by
an
ordinary
deriuation
to
be
continued
in
those
,
who
are
the
successors
of
Timothie
and
Titus
.
Here
I
appeale
to
the
refuters
conscience
whether
he
be
not
perswaded
of
the
truth
of
both
these
sentences
.
Can
he
deny
,
the
authority
which
was
committed
to
Timothie
and
Titus
,
to
be
perpetually
necessary
,
which
is
the
summe
of
the
second
sentence
?
or
if
it
be
perpetually
necessary
,
that
some
were
to
haue
it
to
the
end
of
the
world
,
which
was
affirmed
in
the
former
sentence
?
If
he
had
learned
the
distinction
betwixt
potestas
,
&
modus
potestatis
,
whereof
I
spake
before
;
the
power
or
authority
it selfe
being
the
perpetuall
ordinance
of
God
,
the
manner
or
forme
of
gouernment
wherein
that
power
is
exercised
being
mutable
;
hee
would
not
so
hotly
haue
vrged
these
allegations
.
Yea
but
that
pag.
79.
is
aboue
all
shew
of
exception
saith
hee
where
hee
saith
,
the
function
and
authority
which
Timothie
and
Titus
had
was
not
to
end
with
their
persons
but
to
be
continued
in
their
successors
as
being
ordinary
and
perpetually
necessary
not
onely
for
the
well
being
,
but
also
for
the
very
being
of
the
visible
Churches
.
How
this
spe●ch
is
to
be
vnderstood
,
I
distinctly
shewed
before
,
not
thinking
(
I
protest
)
of
this
obiection
made
by
the
Refuter
.
For
when
I
said
,
their
function
and
authority
was
ordinarie
and
perpetually
necessary
,
I
meant
,
that
their
function
was
ordinary
as
being
Pastorall
and
Episcopall
,
and
that
the
authority
which
they
had
was
perpetually
necessary
,
as
was
said
in
the
former
allegations
.
If
he
shall
perhaps
vrge
those
words
which
mention
the
successors
of
Timothie
and
Titus
to
the
end
of
the
world
:
I
answere
,
it
is
more
then
likely
,
that
they
shall
haue
successors
in
the
same
function
in
some
Churches
to
the
end
,
that
is
to
say
,
Bishops
;
though
in
some
others
,
that
forme
of
gouernment
being
altered
,
the
authority
may
be
in
those
who
doe
not
succeed
them
in
the
said
function
at
least
in
the
same
forme
and
manner
of
gouerning
.
that
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
is
necessary
for
the
very
being
of
visible
Churches
,
and
also
that
there
may
be
visible
Churches
without
it
;
either
he
doth
ignorantly
mistake
,
or
wilfully
depraue
my
sayings
.
For
though
I
said
,
the
authority
which
Timothie
and
Titus
exercised
,
was
perpetually
necessary
,
both
to
the
being
of
Churches
as
the
power
of
ordination
,
and
to
the
well
being
as
the
authority
of
iurisdiction
;
yet
I
neuer
said
,
that
this
forme
of
gouernment
was
necessary
to
the
being
of
visible
Churches
.
And
where
hee
goeth
about
to
proue
,
that
the
Episcopall
gouernment
is
not
perpetually
necessary
,
because
there
be
many
visible
Churches
at
this
day
without
it
;
what
doth
hee
else
,
but
fight
with
his
owne
shadow
,
seeing
that
in
fauour
onely
of
those
Churches
this
passage
was
by
me
inserted
?
almost
all
visible
Churches
are
without
Bishops
.
For
not
to
mention
all
other
Churches
which
be
in
the
Christian
world
,
which
haue
alwayes
had
,
and
still
haue
Bishops
:
and
to
speake
onely
of
the
reformed
Churches
in
Europe
:
is
it
not
euident
,
that
the
farre
greater
part
of
them
is
gouerned
by
Bishops
,
and
which
is
all
one
with
Bishops
;
by
Superintendents
?
The
refuter
,
when
hee
desired
to
the
vttermost
pag.
52.
to
enlarge
the
number
of
those
Churches
which
haue
the
Presbyterian
Discipline
,
he
reckoned
the
reformed
Churches
of
Fraunce
,
the
Low-countreyes
,
Saxony
,
Heluetia
,
Bohemia
,
Zuricke
,
Berne
,
Geneua
,
Sauoy
,
Palatine
,
Poland
,
Hungary
,
Gernsey
,
Iersey
,
Scotland
:
from
which
number
notwithstanding
some
Churches
are
to
be
substracted
,
as
all
in
Scotland
,
and
some
if
not
all
,
in
Saxony
,
neither
doe
I
suppose
that
their
Presbyterian
discipline
is
established
in
Zuricke
,
and
all
the
Churches
of
Heluetia
,
neither
is
any
one
whole
kingdome
ruled
by
that
discipline
.
So
that
I
am
perswaded
there
are
scarse
so
many
particular
Churches
or
congregations
,
gouerned
by
the
Presbyterian
discipline
in
all
the
world
,
as
are
gouerned
by
Bishops
in
the
Kings
dominions
,
in
great
Britaine
and
in
Ireland
.
But
besides
these
.
I
finde
alledged
by
one
of
great
wisdome
and
iudgement
many
more
which
are
not
gouerned
by
the
Presbyterian
discipline
,
Suru
.
pag.
362.
as
the
Churches
of
Denmarke
,
Sueuia
,
all
the
reformed
Churches
of
Germany
(
sauing
in
some
parts
of
the
Low-countreyes
,
and
of
late
about
Heidelberge
,
procured
in
the
minority
of
the
Prince
)
all
the
Churches
in
the
Duchy
of
Saxony
,
the
Duchy
of
Brunswicke
and
Luneburge
,
the
Duchy
of
Megalopurge
,
the
Duchy
of
Wirtemberge
,
all
the
Churches
within
the
countreyes
of
the
Marquesse
of
Brandeburge
and
the
Marquesse
of
Bade
,
all
the
Churches
within
the
gouernment
of
the
Earledome
of
Henneberge
,
the
Earledome
of
Swartzenberge
,
the
Earledome
of
Lenning
,
the
Earledome
of
Hannaw
,
the
Earledome
of
Oetinghe
,
the
Earledome
of
Mansfield
,
the
Earledome
of
Stalbergh
,
the
Earledome
of
Glich
,
the
Earledome
of
Rheinesterne
,
and
the
Earledome
of
Leonstine
,
and
all
the
Churches
in
the
Barony
of
Limpurge
,
the
Barony
of
Schenburge
,
and
the
Barony
of
Wildenfield
.
Whereunto
may
be
added
all
the
Churches
,
in
foure
or
fiue
and
thirty
,
(
at
the
least
)
free
cities
with
their
territories
,
the
most
of
them
as
large
and
ample
as
Geneua
;
in
none
whereof
the
Presbyterian
discipline
is
erected
.
Which
enumeration
is
a
good
euidence
also
to
iustifie
my
answere
to
the
next
obiection
:
which
is
this
.
Ad
pag.
159.
Some
will
say
the
Protestants
which
were
the
blessed
instruments
of
God
for
the
reformation
of
religion
in
this
last
age
,
are
thought
to
haue
preferred
the
other
discipline
by
Presbyteries
,
before
this
by
Bishops
:
and
therefore
in
thus
magnifying
the
Bishops
;
you
seeme
to
ioyne
with
the
Papists
against
them
.
Whereunto
I
answered
,
that
those
godly
and
learned
men
allowed
the
Episcopall
function
,
and
simply
desired
the
continuance
thereof
,
if
with
it
they
might
haue
enioyed
the
Gospell
.
For
proofe
whereof
I
referred
the
reader
to
the
Suruey
of
the
pretended
discipline
cap.
8.
pag.
110.111
.
&c.
In
refuting
of
which
answere
,
the
refuter
dealeth
very
absurdly
with
me
,
and
the
reuerend
author
of
the
Suruey
.
For
when
I
referred
the
reader
to
a
Chapter
of
that
booke
,
contayning
many
notable
testimonies
,
to
proue
that
which
I
said
:
the
refuter
dealeth
as
a
man
resolued
to
deny
my
conclusion
,
what
proofes
so
euer
I
should
bring
against
him
.
And
though
I
referre
him
to
testimonies
for
number
and
weight
sufficient
,
either
to
satisfie
,
or
to
conuince
him
,
if
he
would
but
haue
turned
to
the
place
;
yet
he
saith
,
hee
cannot
possibly
see
,
how
I
should
haue
any
such
opinion
of
those
godly
and
learned
men
,
whose
writings
(
as
he
saith
)
doe
so
often
and
so
vehemently
professe
the
contrary
.
And
that
he
may
not
seeme
to
speake
without
ground
,
he
desireth
me
to
leaue
the
Surueyour
,
and
heare
what
he
can
say
.
As
if
the
Surueyour
were
not
worthie
to
be
heard
when
the
learned
refuter
is
to
speake
.
When
as
indeed
our
Refuter
,
for
ought
I
see
by
him
,
is
not
for
wisedome
,
learning
and
iudgement
worthie
to
be
named
with
that
reuerend
Author
on
the
same
day
.
But
though
he
would
seeme
not
to
vouchsafe
an
answere
to
the
Suruey
,
yet
the
truth
is
,
he
durst
not
acquaint
the
Reader
with
those
testimonies
:
which
howsoeuer
before
I
did
mention
for
breuity
sake
,
I
may
not
now
wholy
conceale
from
the
Reader
.
And
although
I
might
by
way
of
requitall
,
desire
him
to
lay
aside
h●s
misse-alledged
allegations
,
as
vnworthie
to
be
examined
,
and
to
giue
eare
to
those
testimonies
cited
by
the
Surueyour
;
yet
I
will
vouchsafe
an
answere
to
his
authorities
,
after
I
haue
recited
some
few
testimonies
of
the
chiefe
Protestant
writers
,
as
I
find
them
cited
by
the
Surueyour
,
referring
the
Reader
,
for
the
rest
,
to
the
Suruey
it selfe
.
And
first
I
wil
begin
with
the
Augustane
confession
(
whervnto
the
chiefe
learned
men
who
first
were
called
Protestants
did
subscribe
,
Suruey
.
pag.
110
&
111.112
.
&c.
Caluin
soone
after
being
one
of
the
number
)
and
with
the
Apologie
thereof
.
We
haue
oft
protested
(
say
they
[
a
](A20733-e155330-b)
a
Histor.
confess
.
August
.
per
Chytr
.
p.
109.
)
that
we
doe
greatly
approue
the
Ecclesiasticall
policy
&
degrees
in
the
Church
,
and
as
much
as
lyeth
in
vs
,
doe
desire
to
conserue
them
.
We
doe
not
mislike
the
authority
of
Bishops
so
that
they
would
not
compell
vs
to
doe
against
Gods
commandement
.
We
doe
here
protest
[
b
](A20733-e155360-b)
b
Apol.
Confess
.
August
.
per
Pap.
pag
137.
,
and
we
would
haue
it
so
recorded
,
that
we
would
willingly
preserue
the
Ecclesiasticall
and
Canonicall
policy
:
if
the
Bishops
would
cease
to
tyrannize
ouer
our
Churches
.
This
our
minde
or
desire
shall
excuse
vs
with
all
posterity
,
both
before
God
and
all
Nations
,
that
it
may
not
be
imputed
vnto
vs
,
that
the
authority
of
Bishops
is
ouerthrowne
by
vs
.
I
would
to
God
it
lay
to
me
,
saith
Melancthon
[
c
](A20733-e155410-b)
c
Ibid.
pag.
305.
,
to
restore
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
,
&c.
By
what
right
[
d
](A20733-e155440-b)
d
Melanct.
to
Camerar
.
in
histor.
Confess
.
August
.
per
Chytr
.
p.
389.
or
law
may
we
dissolue
the
Ecclesiasticall
policy
,
if
the
Bishops
will
grant
vs
that
which
in
reason
they
ought
to
grant
?
and
though
it
were
lawfull
,
yet
surely
it
were
not
expedient
.
Luther
was
euer
of
this
opinion
;
whom
many
for
no
other
cause
I
see
doe
loue
,
but
for
that
they
thinke
they
haue
cast
off
their
Bishops
by
meanes
of
him
,
and
haue
obtayned
a
liberty
,
which
will
not
be
profitable
for
our
posterity
.
Would
to
God
,
saith
George
[
e
](A20733-e155500-b)
e
Concion
.
Georg.
Princ.
Anhalt
.
fol.
6.
Prince
Anhall
,
that
those
which
carry
the
names
&
titles
of
Bishops
would
shew
themselues
to
be
Bishops
indeed
.
I
wish
they
would
teach
nothing
that
is
disagreeable
to
the
Gospell
,
but
rule
their
Churches
thereby
;
Oh
how
willingly
and
with
what
ioy
of
heart
would
we
receiue
them
for
our
Bishops
;
reuerence
them
,
obey
them
,
and
yeeld
vnto
them
their
Iurisdiction
and
Ordination
?
Which
we
alwaies
,
and
M.
Luther
both
in
words
and
in
his
writings
very
often
professed
.
If
they
would
bring
vnto
vs
such
an
Hierarchy
saith
[
f
](A20733-e155560-b)
f
Calu.
to
Sadol
.
Caluin
,
wherein
the
Bishops
shall
so
rule
,
as
that
they
refuse
not
to
submit
themselues
to
Christ
,
that
they
so
depend
vpon
him
as
their
onely
head
,
&c.
Then
surely
if
there
be
any
that
shall
not
submit
themselues
to
that
Hierarchy
reuerently
,
and
with
the
greatest
obedience
that
may
be
,
I
confesse
there
is
no
Anathema
whereof
they
are
not
worthy
.
In
the
articles
[
g
](A20733-e155620-b)
g
Artic.
protest
.
cap.
de
vnit
.
Ecclesiae
.
agreed
vpon
by
Melancthon
,
Bucer
,
Caluin
,
and
other
learned
men
,
it
is
said
,
for
the
auoyding
of
Schismes
there
was
a
profitable
ordination
that
a
B.
should
be
chosen
out
of
many
Priests
,
who
should
rule
the
Church
by
teaching
the
Gospell
,
and
by
retayning
the
discipline
,
and
who
should
gouerne
the
Priests
themselues
.
Afterwards
also
there
were
degrees
made
of
Archbishops
&
aboue
them
of
Patriarches
,
&c.
These
Ordinations
,
if
those
that
gouerne
doe
their
duety
)
as
preach
,
ouersee
the
doctrine
and
manners
of
their
Churches
,
correct
errours
and
vice
,
practise
Ecclesiasticall
censures
,
&c.
are
profitable
to
preserue
the
vnity
of
the
Church
.
And
in
their
additions
to
the
said
[
h
](A20733-e155660-b)
h
Resp.
protest
.
articles
:
As
concerning
ordination
,
we
especially
approue
the
ancient
custome
of
the
Church
▪
&c.
This
difficult
and
necessary
charge
for
the
Church
,
it
is
to
be
wished
(
reformation
being
made
)
that
the
Bishops
would
take
vpon
them
.
And
we
heare
that
our
learned
men
haue
expresly
so
yeelded
ordination
to
those
Bishops
,
if
first
there
may
be
a
reformation
.
In
a
Treatise
made
by
Bucer
[
i
](A20733-e155700-b)
i
De
Reform
.
aduers
.
Eccles.
p.
95.
with
the
aduise
of
the
said
learned
men
,
and
offered
to
the
Emperour
,
it
is
thus
written
:
we
must
endeuour
,
that
that
forme
and
distribution
of
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
,
which
the
Canons
doe
prescribe
to
Bishops
and
Metropolitanes
be
restored
,
and
kept
.
The
same
[
k
](A20733-e155730-b)
k
De
vi
&
vsis
ministr.
p.
565.
Bucer
,
speaking
of
Bishops
and
Metropolitanes
,
and
of
their
authority
ouer
the
Churches
and
Ministers
within
their
Dioceses
,
and
Prouinces
,
he
saith
,
this
was
agreeable
to
the
law
of
Christ
,
&c.
And
in
another
[
l
](A20733-e155770-b)
l
De
Regno
Christi
.
pag.
67.
place
.
Now
by
the
perpetuall
obseruation
of
all
Churches
,
euen
from
the
Apostles
times
,
we
doe
see
,
it
seemed
good
to
the
holy
Ghost
,
that
among
Priests
to
whom
the
procuration
of
Churches
was
chiefly
committed
,
there
should
be
one
,
that
should
haue
the
care
&
charge
of
diuers
Churches
,
and
the
whole
Ministery
committed
to
him
:
and
by
reason
of
that
charge
he
was
aboue
the
rest
,
and
therefore
the
name
of
Bishop
was
attributed
peculiarly
vnto
these
cheife
rulers
of
Churches
.
And
againe
,
[
m
](A20733-e155800-b)
m
De
cura
curat
.
p.
251.
In
the
Apostles
times
one
of
the
Priests
or
Pastors
was
chosen
and
ordayned
to
be
the
Captaine
and
Prelate
ouer
the
rest
;
who
went
before
the
rest
,
and
had
the
care
of
soules
,
and
the
administration
of
the
Episcopall
office
especially
and
in
the
highest
degree
.
And
this
he
proueth
by
the
example
of
Iames
,
Act.
1.
and
after
concludeth
in
this
sort
.
The
like
ordination
hath
beene
perpetually
obserued
in
other
Churches
likewise
,
as
we
may
learne
out
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
Histories
,
and
the
most
ancient
Fathers
,
as
Tertullian
,
Cyprian
,
Irenaeus
,
Eusebius
and
others
.
It
were
a
most
profitable
order
for
the
welfare
of
the
Church
,
saith
Iacob
[
n
](A20733-e155860-b)
n
Loc.
comm.
de
Ecclesia
.
p.
699.
Heerbrandus
a
very
learned
man
if
euery
particular
Prouince
had
her
Bishops
and
the
Bishops
their
Archbishops
.
These
few
testimonies
among
many
doe
sufficiently
discouer
,
with
what
minde
the
Refuter
desired
me
to
lay
them
and
all
the
rest
a●ide
,
and
to
giue
eare
to
his
allegations
,
as
more
worthy
to
be
heard
.
Let
vs
therefore
heare
them
▪
hee
will
passe
by
an
Epistle
of
one
Oram
written
vnder
the
name
of
Lucifer
to
the
Pope
and
his
Prelates
,
yet
because
he
entreateth
the
Reader
to
turne
to
it
in
the
booke
of
Martyrs
,
as
fitting
belike
our
Bishops
,
hee
is
worthy
not
to
passe
vnpunished
,
when
hee
comes
to
light
For
that
letter
being
a
meere
inuectiue
against
the
horrible
enormities
of
the
Popish
Prelates
,
speaking
nothing
at
all
of
their
office
,
but
that
they
were
the
successours
of
the
Apostles
,
in
referring
the
Reader
vnto
it
,
what
was
his
intent
,
but
that
he
should
apply
the
things
spoken
of
their
greiuous
enormities
to
our
Bishops
?
then
which
,
hee
could
not
offer
a
greater
villany
to
them
.
I
desire
the
Reader
that
hath
any
moderation
in
him
to
read
that
Epistle
,
and
by
his
intended
application
thereof
to
our
Bishops
,
to
iudge
of
our
refuters
spirit
,
though
he
professeth
in
the
last
page
,
how
greatly
he
reuerenceth
the
Bishops
persons
.
In
the
next
place
,
to
let
you
thinke
hee
hath
great
store
(
euen
whiles
hee
quoteth
either
not
Protestants
or
such
as
were
not
of
our
age
,
of
whom
alone
the
question
is
)
hee
saith
,
he
will
passe
by
also
that
which
is
written
by
defensor
pacis
part
.
2.
c.
15.
and
well
might
hee
passe
by
him
;
for
though
he
hold
,
that
the
Priestly
Character
is
the
same
in
Priests
and
Bishops
,
yea
in
the
Pope
himselfe
,
and
that
they
haue
the
same
essentiall
authority
which
is
the
power
of
order
,
and
likewise
in
imitation
of
Ierome
holdeth
,
that
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
at
the
first
were
one
,
&c.
Notwithstanding
,
he
no
more
disalloweth
the
superiority
of
Bishops
;
then
either
some
other
Papists
,
who
haue
contended
,
that
for
as
much
as
order
,
in
that
it
is
a
Sacrament
,
hath
reference
to
the
Sacrament
of
the
Altar
which
the
Priest
doth
offer
,
and
make
his
maker
,
as
well
as
the
Pope
himselfe
,
that
therefore
Bishops
and
Presbyters
be
of
one
order
;
or
then
Ierome
,
who
though
he
saith
Episcopus
and
Presbyter
were
at
the
first
all
one
▪
yet
professeth
,
that
the
safety
of
the
Church
dependeth
vpon
the
dignity
of
the
Bishop
,
&c.
Iohn
Wickliffe
.
Hauing
passed
by
these
two
,
hee
professeth
to
begin
with
Wickliffe
,
whom
hee
would
faine
haue
the
Reader
beleeue
,
to
haue
beene
a
Marprelate
,
or
an
oppugner
of
the
superiority
of
Bishops
.
But
howsoeuer
,
either
Papists
through
malice
,
or
Protestants
for
want
of
information
,
haue
in
some
points
[
q
](A20733-e156140-b)
q
As
in
that
which
the
Refuter
calleth
the
twelfth
article
,
and
Pighius
his
question
.
so
conceiued
of
him
(
of
both
which
sorts
the
refuter
quoteth
some
)
yet
those
who
haue
perused
his
writings
[
r
](A20733-e156160-b)
r
Thom.
Iames
his
Apologie
for
Wickliffe
,
prouing
his
conformity
with
the
now
Church
of
England
.
Epist.
dedic
.
&
cap.
8.
s.
21.
protest
,
that
not
onely
for
doctrine
,
but
also
for
discipline
,
hee
was
wholy
conformable
to
the
present
Church
of
England
,
approuing
the
gouernment
of
Archbishops
,
Bishops
,
and
Archdeacons
,
&c.
And
whereas
the
Rhemists
obiect
against
Wickliffe
,
that
he
had
renued
the
heresie
of
Aerius
;
D.
Fulke
[
s
](A20733-e156240-b)
s
In
Phil.
1.1
.
answereth
thus
.
It
appeareth
by
many
places
of
Wickliffe
his
works
,
and
namely
in
his
Homily
on
Phil.
1.
that
he
acknowledged
the
distinction
of
Bishops
and
Priests
for
order
and
gouernment
,
although
for
doctrine
and
administration
of
the
Sacraments
,
they
are
all
one
.
Indeed
in
the
booke
of
Martyrs
,
where
be
eighteene
articles
obiected
against
Wickliffe
(
though
neither
the
twelfth
article
which
the
Refuter
mentioneth
,
nor
that
which
Pighius
obiecteth
against
him
is
contayned
in
that
number
)
the
which
articles
he
explaneth
.
Among
which
the
fifteenth
is
this
,
that
euery
Priest
rightly
and
duely
ordered
according
to
the
law
of
grace
,
hath
power
according
to
his
vocation
,
whereby
he
may
minister
the
Sacraments
,
and
consequently
absolue
any
man
confessing
his
fault
,
being
contrite
and
penitent
for
the
same
.
Which
article
,
when
he
came
to
expound
,
hee
gaue
this
reason
;
because
that
the
order
of
Priesthood
in
his
owne
nature
and
substance
receiueth
no
such
degrees
either
of
more
or
lesse
.
And
yet
notwithstanding
the
power
of
inferiour
Priests
in
these
dayes
be
vpon
due
consideration
restrayned
,
and
sometimes
againe
in
time
of
extreame
necessitie
,
released
.
And
thus
according
to
the
Doctors
,
a
Prelate
hath
a
double
power
,
to
wit
,
the
power
of
order
,
and
the
power
of
Iurisdiction
or
regiment
.
And
according
to
the
second
power
,
the
Prelates
are
in
an
higher
maiestie
and
regiment
.
Thus
haue
I
recited
word
for
word
what
is
set
downe
in
the
booke
of
Martyrs
;
the
words
whereof
the
Refuter
depraueth
,
making
Wickliffe
to
say
,
Ad
pag.
160.
the
order
of
Priesthood
receiueth
no
degrees
of
more
or
lesse
,
howsoeuer
the
Doctors
say
,
that
the
Prelate
hath
a
double
power
,
&c.
Whereby
he
would
make
the
Reader
beleeue
,
that
he
differed
from
those
Doctors
,
with
whom
he
doth
agree
:
affirming
(
as
many
others
haue
done
,
who
notwithstanding
allowed
of
the
superiority
of
Bishops
)
that
in
the
power
of
order
all
Priests
are
equall
,
though
Bishops
haue
also
the
power
of
Iurisdiction
,
wherein
they
are
superiour
to
other
Priests
.
To
the
same
purpose
is
alledged
his
assertion
of
two
orders
Priests
and
Deacons
,
which
the
Papists
themselues
holde
,
diuiding
Priests
●nto
Maiores
which
be
Bishops
,
and
Minores
which
be
Presbyters
.
Bal.
Centur.
6.1
.
Why
he
quoteth
Bales
centuries
I
know
not
,
vnlesse
it
were
to
shew
his
more
exquisite
reading
then
other
mens
,
hauing
belike
read
there
something
concerning
this
cause
,
which
no
man
else
is
able
to
read
or
to
finde
.
But
I
had
almost
forgotten
his
first
allegation
,
which
the
Refuter
pretending
such
plenty
,
might
well
haue
omitted
as
impertinent
.
For
though
he
enuied
against
the
excessiue
lordlinesse
and
tirannicall
domination
of
the
Popish
Bishops
:
Yet
doth
it
not
proue
,
that
he
was
an
enemie
to
the
superiority
of
Bishops
,
or
the
substance
of
their
calling
.
And
whereas
with
Wickliffe
hee
ioyneth
the
Waldenses
,
whose
opinion
he
doth
not
cite
but
by
the
report
of
Pighius
;
it
is
euident
by
the
booke
of
Martyrs
in
their
story
,
that
they
acknowledged
these
three
degrees
,
Bishops
,
Priests
and
Deacons
,
Artic.
7.
And
therefore
is
vntruly
layd
to
their
charge
by
Aeneas
Syluius
,
that
they
held
no
difference
of
degrees
among
Priests
,
vnlesse
perhaps
by
Priests
,
be
meant
Bishops
.
saith
the
Refuter
,
who
was
charged
by
the
Pope
and
his
officers
to
erre
.
First
,
in
that
he
held
not
,
nor
allowed
,
that
by
the
Church
was
meant
the
Pope
,
Cardinals
,
Archbishops
and
Clergie
vnderneath
them
,
but
affirmed
that
signification
[
u
](A20733-e156610-b)
u
The
words
are
,
&
dicit
illam
significationem
extortam
à
scholaribus
.
to
be
drawne
out
of
the
Schoole-men
.
Secondly
,
that
he
auouched
all
Priests
to
be
of
like
power
,
and
therefore
the
reseruation
of
the
Bishops
casualties
order
of
Bishops
,
and
consecration
of
Clerks
[
w
](A20733-e156640-b)
w
The
refuter
putteth
in
Priests
.
was
inuented
onely
for
couetousnesse
.
Thirdly
,
that
he
held
,
that
euery
man
hath
authority
to
inuest
men
into
the
cure
of
soules
.
Whereto
I
answere
,
first
,
that
these
articles
were
indeed
exhibited
against
him
to
the
Pope
by
Michael
de
Causis
,
but
I
doe
not
read
,
that
either
he
acknowledged
them
to
be
true
,
or
that
he
was
condemned
for
them
.
Secondly
,
in
the
book
of
Martyrs
,
and
also
in
his
Story
prefixed
before
his
works
,
it
is
said
,
that
of
the
articles
which
were
obiected
against
him
,
there
were
but
a
few
which
he
acknowledged
to
be
true
.
This
therefore
is
the
refuters
argument
,
Iohn
Hus
was
accused
by
his
malicious
aduersaries
,
who
made
no
conscience
of
accusing
him
falsly
,
that
hee
held
all
these
articles
;
therefore
all
these
were
his
opinions
.
But
if
it
be
sufficient
to
accuse
,
as
the
Emperour
said
,
who
can
be
innocent
?
the
godlyest
Martyrs
neuer
wanted
accusers
;
whom
if
the
refuter
should
therfore
pronounce
guilty
of
those
matters
whereof
they
were
accused
,
he
should
shew
himselfe
a
wise
man
.
But
so
he
dealeth
with
Iohn
Hus
:
he
was
accused
of
these
opinions
,
therefore
he
held
them
.
Wherfore
he
must
either
proue
,
that
Hus
did
acknowledge
them
to
be
true
,
or
else
what
doth
hee
but
subscribe
to
the
accusations
of
his
malicious
accusers
against
him
.
But
suppose
the
first
of
these
three
were
his
,
what
will
the
refuter
inferre
thereof
?
he
did
not
hold
nor
allowe
that
by
the
Church
was
meant
the
Pope
,
Cardinalls
,
Archbishops
and
Clergie
vnderneath
them
;
therefore
hee
did
not
allowe
the
calling
of
Orthodoxall
Bishops
.
Michael
de
Causis
his
accuser
,
for
this
article
quoteth
his
booke
de
Ecclesia
,
where
I
finde
this
assertion
(
by
the
allegation
whereof
,
you
may
guesse
how
he
was
vsed
in
the
rest
)
that
the
Pope
of
Rome
[
x
](A20733-e156740-b)
x
Hus.
de
Eccl.
c.
7.
with
his
Cardinalls
is
not
the
whole
body
of
the
vniuersall
Church
but
a
part
,
and
that
the
Pope
is
not
the
head
thereof
,
but
Christ
.
The
which
assertion
hee
opposeth
against
the
sayings
of
some
Doctors
,
who
held
,
first
,
that
the
Romane
Church
is
the
Church
vniuersall
:
that
of
the
Church
of
Rome
the
Pope
is
the
head
,
and
the
colledge
of
Cardinalls
the
body
.
Which
assertion
,
if
you
shall
compare
with
his
aduersaries
allegation
,
and
apply
to
the
refuters
purpose
,
you
shall
perceiue
the
malice
of
the
one
,
and
folly
of
the
other
.
For
the
second
article
,
his
accuser
doth
not
quote
any
of
his
bookes
,
but
saith
thus
,
aliqualiter
patet
iste
articulus
ex
praedictis
,
this
article
after
a
sort
may
be
gathered
out
of
the
precedent
articles
,
wherein
there
is
no
such
matter
contayned
.
The
third
he
proueth
by
Husses
fact
,
because
in
the
kingdome
of
Boheme
many
by
him
and
his
fauourers
and
abetters
haue
beene
thrust
into
Parish
Churches
,
which
they
a
good
while
ruled
without
the
institution
of
the
See
Apostolicke
,
and
also
of
the
ordinary
of
the
City
of
Prage
.
Whether
Hus
did
this
or
no
,
it
is
questionable
;
but
if
there
had
beene
Orthodoxall
Bishops
,
by
whose
authority
faithfull
Ministers
might
haue
beene
instituted
;
without
question
,
he
would
neuer
haue
attempted
any
such
enterprise
.
But
hee
held
the
Popish
Clergy
to
be
Antichristian
,
and
therefore
did
as
he
did
.
Otherwise
for
the
function
it selfe
of
Bishops
,
he
saith
plainely
more
then
[
y
](A20733-e156820-b)
y
De
Eccles.
c.
10
&
15.
once
,
that
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
had
equall
honour
and
power
with
Peter
,
and
that
when
they
deceased
the
Bishops
did
succeede
in
their
place
.
And
that
all
Bishops
of
Christs
Church
following
Christ
in
manners
,
are
the
true
Vicars
of
the
Apostles
.
And
out
of
Ierome
,
that
all
Bishops
are
the
Apostles
successours
.
And
approueth
that
saying
of
Bede
[
z
](A20733-e156880-b)
z
Ex
Bed
.
in
Luc.
10.
,
as
no
man
doubteth
but
the
twelue
Apostles
did
premonstrate
the
forme
of
Bishops
:
So
the
seauenty
two
did
beare
the
figure
of
the
Presbyters
and
second
order
of
Priests
.
Iohn
Hus
;
to
whom
the
refuter
ioyneth
Ierome
of
Prage
,
who
iustifieth
the
doctrine
of
Wickliffe
and
Hus
against
the
pompe
and
state
of
the
Clergie
.
Which
if
he
had
done
,
he
had
spoken
neuer
a
word
in
disallowance
of
the
Episcopall
function
.
But
that
word
state
is
foisted
in
by
the
refuter
,
who
alledgeth
almost
nothing
truely
.
His
words
were
these
[
a
](A20733-e157020-b)
a
Act.
&
Mon.
in
the
history
of
Ierome
of
Prage
.
,
whatsoeuer
things
M.
Iohn
Hus
and
Wickliffe
had
holden
or
written
specially
against
the
abuse
and
pompe
of
the
Clergy
,
he
would
affirme
euen
vnto
the
death
.
And
againe
,
that
all
such
articles
as
Iohn
Wickliffe
and
Iohn
Hus
had
written
and
put
forth
against
the
enormities
,
pomp
and
disorder
of
the
Prelates
,
he
would
firmely
hold
and
defend
.
And
persisting
still
in
the
praise
of
Iohn
Hus
,
hee
added
moreouer
,
that
hee
neuer
maintayned
any
doctrine
against
the
state
of
the
Church
,
but
onely
spake
against
the
abuses
of
the
Clergy
,
against
the
pride
,
pompe
and
excesse
of
the
Prelates
.
For
it
was
a
greife
to
that
good
man
,
saith
he
,
to
see
the
Patrimonies
of
Churches
mispent
and
cast
away
vpon
harlots
,
great
feastings
and
keeping
of
horses
and
dogges
,
vpon
gorgeous
apparrell
,
and
such
other
things
vnbeseeming
Christian
religion
.
And
againe
,
I
take
God
to
my
witnesse
,
that
I
doe
beleiue
and
hold
all
the
articles
of
the
faith
,
as
the
holy
Catholicke
Church
doth
hold
and
beleiue
the
same
,
but
for
this
cause
shall
I
now
be
condemned
,
for
that
I
will
not
consent
with
you
vnto
the
condemnation
of
those
most
holy
and
blessed
men
aforesaid
,
whom
you
haue
most
wickedly
condemned
for
certaine
articles
,
detesting
and
abhorring
your
wicked
and
abhominable
life
.
Whereby
it
is
apparant
,
that
both
hee
,
and
they
did
not
speake
against
the
function
or
calling
of
Bishops
,
but
against
the
personall
abuses
and
enormities
of
the
Popish
Bishops
,
which
none
but
a
viperous
broode
would
apply
to
the
persons
of
our
Bishops
,
and
much
lesse
against
their
sacred
function
.
After
them
ariseth
Martin
Luther
saith
the
refuter
,
M.
Luther
.
whose
sayings
hee
quoteth
in
his
booke
against
Popish
Bishops
,
of
priuate
Masse
,
and
against
the
Papacie
,
&c.
But
for
the
first
of
these
,
Luther
himselfe
hath
giuen
vs
this
caueat
.
Let
no
man
thinke
that
what
is
spoken
against
these
tyrants
,
is
spoken
against
the
Ecclesiasticall
state
and
true
Bishops
or
good
Pastors
.
Let
no
man
thinke
that
what
is
said
or
done
against
these
sluggish
beasts
and
slowe
bellies
,
is
said
or
done
against
the
heads
of
the
Christian
Church
.
And
howsoeuer
in
the
heate
of
his
zeale
against
these
Antichristian
Bishops
hee
vttered
some
things
which
seeme
preiudiciall
to
the
calling
:
yet
you
haue
heard
it
testified
before
[
c
](A20733-e157190-b)
c
Supr.
§.
5.
by
sufficient
witnesses
,
Ad
pag.
161.
that
in
his
iudgement
hee
allowed
the
gouernment
of
Bishoppes
.
Whereunto
adde
the
testimony
of
Camerarius
[
d
](A20733-e157240-b)
d
Camerar
.
in
vita
Phil.
Melancth.
,
that
Melancthon
non
modò
ad
stipulatore
sed
etiam
authore
ipso
Luthero
,
not
onely
by
the
consent
,
but
aduise
of
Luther
perswaded
,
that
if
Bishops
would
grant
free
vse
of
the
true
doctrine
,
the
ordinary
power
and
administration
ouer
their
seuerall
Dioceses
should
be
restored
vnto
them
.
[
e
](A20733-e157330-b)
e
Ecclesiast.
cited
,
that
Iames
was
B.
of
Ierusalem
,
Philippe
of
Caesarea
,
Timothie
of
Ephesus
▪
cannot
lightly
speake
against
the
Episcopall
function
it selfe
.
If
he
speake
against
the
Popish
Clergy
for
arrogating
the
name
Church
to
themselues
;
what
is
that
to
the
purpose
?
or
if
he
affirme
,
that
euery
seuerall
congregation
according
to
the
phrase
of
the
Scriptures
,
is
a
Church
who
denieth
it
?
or
if
hee
inueigh
against
the
sole
and
supreme
power
of
Bishops
,
whom
doth
this
touch
,
but
the
Pope
?
Caluin
,
Zanchius
and
other
learned
men
haue
said
and
done
as
much
,
who
notwithstanding
approued
the
Episcopall
function
.
Ph.
Melancthon
Ad
pag.
162.
And
as
Melancthon
was
of
Ieromes
iudgement
,
that
Bishop
and
Presbyter
at
the
first
was
all
one
,
so
with
Ierome
he
doth
allowe
the
superiority
of
Bishops
:
and
where
the
Episcopall
gouernment
was
ouerthrowne
▪
he
sought
to
restore
it
,
as
you
haue
heard
before
,
and
did
restore
it
as
may
appeare
by
these
testimonies
.
You
[
f
](A20733-e157490-b)
f
Hist.
August
.
Confess
.
pag.
306.
will
not
beleeue
saith
he
writing
to
Luther
,
how
greatly
they
of
Noricum
and
some
others
doe
hate
me
propter
restitutam
Episcopis
iurisdictionem
,
for
restoring
the
iurisdiction
to
Bishops
.
Againe
[
g
](A20733-e157530-b)
g
Ibid.
pag.
304.
,
some
are
wonderfully
angry
with
me
,
because
I
seeme
to
restore
the
dominion
of
Bishops
.
Camerarius
[
h
](A20733-e157560-b)
h
In
vita
Philippi
Melancth
.
also
reporteth
▪
how
inhumanely
some
accused
Philip
for
maintaining
of
Bishops
,
&c.
[
i
](A20733-e157630-b)
i
Pag.
251.
all
that
were
called
Elders
or
Priests
if
they
so
wel
were
called
BB.
also
,
though
they
haue
diuided
the
names
now
.
Yea
but
in
his
booke
[
k
](A20733-e157680-b)
k
Pag.
133.
&
135.
of
the
obedience
of
a
Christian
man
,
he
saith
that
a
B.
is
the
ouerseer
but
of
a
parish
,
and
is
to
preach
the
word
of
God
vnto
a
parish
,
and
for
the
same
to
chalenge
an
honest
liuing
of
the
parish
.
This
allegation
the
refuter
hath
notably
wrenched
.
For
Tindals
words
be
these
:
by
the
authoritie
of
the
Gospell
they
that
preach
the
word
of
God
in
euery
parish
,
and
performe
other
necessary
ministeries
,
haue
right
to
chalenge
an
honest
liuing
.
For
Tindall
speaketh
of
such
a
B.
as
was
but
a
Presbyter
;
and
saith
,
that
hee
which
preached
the
word
in
euery
Parish
,
should
haue
an
honest
liuing
,
the
refuter
citeth
him
as
saying
,
that
a
B.
is
but
an
ouerseer
of
a
Parish
,
&c.
In
the
next
place
he
citeth
Viret
,
as
pleading
for
a
popular
state
in
euery
church
;
wherein
,
if
the
allegation
be
true
,
he
is
singular
,
hauing
neither
the
iudgement
of
any
other
sound
Diuine
,
nor
practise
of
any
reformed
Church
that
I
know
of
,
No
not
of
Geneua
it selfe
,
to
second
him
.
For
though
the
common
wealth
of
Geneua
be
reduced
to
a
popular
state
,
yet
the
gouernment
of
the
church
by
their
consistorie
,
is
Aristocraticall
.
And
though
he
passeth
by
(
as
well
he
might
)
Caluin
and
Beza
,
Bucer
,
Peter
Martyr
,
Bullinger
,
Brentius
,
Musculus
,
whom
he
thought
good
to
mention
onely
as
fauourers
of
the
pretended
discipline
;
yet
neither
any
of
these
,
nor
any
other
moderate
and
iudicious
Diuine
doth
condemne
(
as
our
Presbyterians
doe
)
eyther
the
ancient
gouernment
by
Bishops
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
or
the
retayning
thereof
in
reformed
churches
now
,
as
hath
been
shewed
before
.
But
he
is
pleased
to
conclude
with
some
of
our
own
writers
and
Martyrs
.
Francis
Lambard
,
who
is
alledged
as
saying
,
that
a
B.
and
preacher
,
a
church
and
a
parish
is
all
one
,
that
euery
parish
should
haue
right
to
choose
their
Pastour
,
and
(
which
is
a
very
vnaduised
speech
if
it
be
truely
alledged
)
to
depose
him
if
he
proue
vnworthy
,
but
not
as
disallowing
the
gouernment
of
the
church
by
orthodoxal
BB.
eyther
now
,
or
in
the
Primitiue
church
,
which
was
the
point
to
be
proued
.
And
the
like
is
to
be
said
of
Iohn
Lambart
,
&c.
As
for
Bradford
whom
hee
citeth
as
holding
that
the
Scripture
knoweth
no
difference
betwixt
a
B.
and
a
minister
,
meaning
that
the
names
were
confounded
and
that
nothing
is
to
be
gotten
by
the
succession
of
Popish
BB.
as
minister
not
,
but
Lord
it
:
yet
nothing
can
be
alleadged
out
of
him
to
proue
that
he
disalloweth
the
gouernment
of
orthodoxal
Bishops
.
But
it
is
strange
,
that
he
should
alleadge
B.
Hooper
,
and
B.
Bale
,
as
disallowing
in
their
iudgement
,
the
superioritie
of
BB.
which
they
allowed
in
their
practise
.
But
all
that
is
said
out
of
B.
Hooper
,
is
eyther
that
BB.
were
not
till
Siluesters
or
Constantines
time
,
In
precept
.
8.
such
as
they
are
now
:
(
which
is
true
in
respect
of
their
outward
estate
,
which
by
the
peace
and
prosperitie
of
the
Church
was
much
increased
,
but
is
not
to
be
vnderstood
in
respect
of
the
substance
of
their
calling
)
or
that
excommunication
should
not
be
vsed
by
the
B.
alone
;
which
is
little
,
or
nothing
to
the
present
purpose
,
as
if
hee
must
needs
disallow
the
Episcopall
function
,
who
would
not
haue
the
Bishop
to
excommunicate
alone
.
Ad
pag.
164.
B.
Bale
vnderstandeth
by
the
names
of
blasphemie
written
on
the
heads
of
the
beast
.
Apoc.
13.
the
titles
of
Popish
offices
,
which
he
saith
are
vsurped
,
and
not
appointed
by
the
holy
Ghost
;
among
which
when
he
reckoneth
Metropolitanes
,
Diocesans
,
Parsons
,
Vicars
,
and
Doctors
,
he
cannot
be
vnderstood
as
speaking
of
these
offices
in
the
true
church
,
but
as
they
are
members
of
Antichrist
.
For
what
is
the
office
of
a
Parson
,
but
of
a
Pastour
,
&c.
And
that
this
was
his
meaning
,
appeareth
by
the
other
allegation
[
n
](A20733-e158030-b)
n
In
Apoc.
17.3
.
,
wherein
besides
the
titles
and
offices
of
the
Popish
hierarchy
(
among
whom
he
reckoneth
BB.
Doctors
&
Priests
)
he
addeth
temporall
gouernors
also
,
as
Emperours
,
Kings
,
Princes
,
Dukes
,
Earles
,
Lords
,
Iustices
,
Deputies
,
Iudges
,
Lawyers
,
Mayors
,
Baylifes
,
Constables
,
&c.
leauing
their
owne
duetie
offices
(
as
to
minister
rightly
)
to
serue
their
abhomination
.
After
these
,
for
want
of
better
proofes
,
hee
alleadgeth
the
testimonie
of
the
English
men
which
were
at
Geneua
in
Queene
Maries
time
,
and
were
the
first
authors
of
this
contention
for
the
pretended
discipline
among
vs
;
to
whose
testimonie
in
their
owne
cause
,
that
they
present
to
vs
the
forme
of
a
Church
limited
within
the
compasse
of
Gods
word
,
what
should
I
answere
,
but
that
they
haue
often
said
,
but
neuer
will
be
able
to
proue
,
that
their
discipline
is
prescribed
in
Gods
word
?
Lastly
,
he
alleadgeth
M.
Foxe
,
whose
testimonie
though
in
vaine
I
sought
in
three
seuerall
editions
;
yet
his
iudgement
is
apparant
,
by
that
which
may
easily
be
found
.
Hee
therefore
saith
,
according
to
the
refuters
allegation
,
that
in
the
Primitiue
Church
there
was
not
then
any
one
mother
Church
(
such
as
the
church
of
Rome
now
pretendeth
her selfe
to
be
)
aboue
other
Churches
,
but
the
whole
vniuersall
Church
was
the
mother
Church
,
vnder
which
vniuersall
Church
in
generall
were
comprehended
all
other
particular
Churches
in
speciall
(
hee
meaneth
the
Churches
of
seuerall
countreyes
,
and
Prouinces
)
as
sister
Churches
together
,
not
one
greater
then
another
but
all
in
like
aequalitie
.
What
will
hee
hence
conclude
,
that
therefore
there
were
no
BB.
nor
Archbishops
?
Not
so
.
But
that
therefore
as
the
Diocesan
churches
were
equall
,
so
were
the
BB.
and
as
the
Metropolitane
churches
were
equal
,
so
the
Archbb.
Heare
Mr.
Foxe
[
o
](A20733-e158160-b)
o
Act.
&
Mon.
pag.
20.
edit.
1570.
himselfe
where
he
debateth
this
question
.
If
they
say
there
must
needs
be
distinction
of
degrees
in
the
church
,
and
in
this
distinction
of
degrees
superioritie
must
necessarily
be
granted
for
the
outward
discipline
of
the
church
for
directing
matters
,
for
quieting
of
schismes
,
for
setting
orders
,
for
commencing
of
Conuocations
&
Councils
as
need
shal
require
,
&c.
Against
this
superioritie
we
stand
not
;
and
therefore
we
yeeld
to
our
superiour
powers
,
Kings
and
Princes
our
due
obedience
,
and
to
our
lawfull
gouernours
vnder
God
of
both
regiments
,
Ecclesiasticall
and
Temporall
.
Also
in
the
Ecclesiasticall
state
we
take
not
away
the
distinction
of
ordinarie
degrees
,
such
as
by
the
scripture
be
appointed
,
or
by
the
Primitiue
Church
allowed
.
As
Patriarkes
or
Archbb.
BB.
Ministers
and
Deacons
,
for
of
these
foure
we
especially
reade
,
as
chiefe
.
In
which
foure
degrees
,
as
we
grant
diuersitie
of
office
,
so
we
admit
in
the
same
also
diuersitie
of
dignitie
:
neither
denying
that
which
is
due
to
each
degree
,
neither
yet
maintaining
the
ambition
of
any
singular
person
.
For
as
we
giue
to
the
Minister
place
aboue
the
Deacon
,
to
the
B
aboue
the
Minister
,
to
the
Archbishop
aboue
the
B.
so
wee
see
no
cause
of
inequalitie
,
why
one
Minister
,
should
be
aboue
another
minister
:
one
Bishop
in
his
degree
aboue
another
B.
to
deale
in
his
Diocese
,
or
one
Archbb.
aboue
another
Archbishop
.
And
this
is
to
keepe
an
order
duely
and
truely
in
the
church
,
&c.
Here
then
is
the
question
betweene
vs
and
the
Papists
,
whether
the
Metropolitane
church
of
Rome
with
the
Archbb.
of
the
same
ought
to
be
preferred
before
other
Metropolitane
churches
and
Archbb
through
vniuersall
Christendome
or
not
?
But
I
added
in
the
Sermon
,
that
howsoeuer
the
first
reformers
of
religion
(
whom
they
cal
Protestants
)
did
not
disallowe
the
Episcopall
gouernment
,
but
simply
desired
the
continuance
thereof
,
(
as
I
haue
now
proued
by
their
owne
testimonies
)
notwithstanding
,
when
together
with
the
Gospell
,
&c.
ad
pag.
97.
li.
a
fine
4.
In
which
words
,
I
doe
partly
excuse
the
auncient
Protestants
,
who
first
yeelded
to
the
deposing
of
Bishops
,
and
partly
accuse
the
innouatours
among
our selues
.
The
refuter
as
if
he
were
desirous
to
leaue
them
without
excuse
,
saith
,
that
is
a
bad
excuse
,
because
it
was
easier
to
choose
one
fit
man
among
them
to
be
their
B.
then
to
finde
diuers
Pastors
and
Elders
meet
for
the
Presbyteries
.
Harm.
confes
.
s.
11.
Ad
pag.
165.
Conc.
Afric
.
c.
22.
&
Carth.
Grac.
●55
.
I
deny
not
,
but
that
among
them
there
were
some
fit
to
haue
been
BB.
yet
the
speech
of
the
refuter
is
vntrue
.
It
being
an
easier
matter
as
the
Fathers
of
the
Affricane
council
professed
,
to
find
many
fit
men
to
be
Presbyters
(
especially
if
the
laitie
also
afford
fit
men
for
that
purpose
)
then
to
finde
one
fit
to
be
a
B.
But
the
refuter
doth
not
consider
,
first
who
should
haue
ordained
them
,
secondly
,
how
they
should
haue
been
maintained
,
thirdly
,
and
chiefely
,
whether
the
assistance
of
the
ciuil
Magistrates
could
haue
been
had
for
deposing
the
BB.
vnles
they
had
yeelded
both
to
the
dissolution
of
the
Bishoprickes
,
and
to
the
alteration
of
the
forme
of
gouernment
,
&c.
Now
that
the
Protestants
which
subscribed
to
the
Augustane
confession
did
simply
desire
the
continuance
of
the
Episcopal
gouernment
;
De
relig.
obseru.
in
cap.
25.
§
10.
&
11.
the
same
with
BB.
&
Archbb.
he
shall
heare
the
iudgement
of
Zanchius
in
this
behalfe
Who
after
he
had
signified
his
approbation
of
the
auncient
forme
of
gouernment
by
BB.
and
Archbb.
and
had
confirmed
the
same
by
the
testimony
of
M.
Bucer
,
he
addeth
for
further
confirmation
the
practise
of
reformed
churches
,
some
wheerof
both
in
deed
&
name
haue
retained
BB.
&
Archbb.
and
besides
saith
he
,
in
the
churches
of
Protestants
there
are
re
ipsa
in
very
deed
BB.
and
Archbb.
whom
hauing
changed
the
good
Greeke
names
into
bad
latin
words
,
they
call
Superintendents
and
generall
Superintendents
.
Heare
the
history
of
the
Augustane
confession
.
Hist.
August
.
Confes.
per
Chytr
.
Ministers
may
bereduced
into
3.
orders
Deacons
,
Pastors
&
superintendents
.
Deacons
we
cal
yong
Ministers
who
are
ioyned
to
Pastors
&c.
We
call
them
Pastors
,
to
whom
though
alone
some
church
is
safely
committed
,
not
doubting
but
that
they
may
rule
the
same
without
a
colleague
.
Loc.
com
.
pag.
699.
Suru
.
118.
Superintendents
we
cal
these
Pastors
,
who
are
set
ouer
other
Pastors
&
Deacons
.
With
vs
saith
Heerbrand
there
are
Deacons
,
Pastors
,
speciall
superintendents
,
and
ouer
them
generall
superintendents
.
But
why
in
other
churches
the
learned
men
haue
not
restored
BB.
I
gaue
this
reason
:
for
that
they
could
not
,
eyther
because
the
Popish
BB.
were
still
countenanced
by
the
ciuill
Magistrate
,
as
in
France
:
or
because
the
forme
of
ciuill
gouernment
being
after
the
expulsion
of
the
B.
changed
into
a
popular
state
,
could
no
more
endure
the
gouernment
of
a
B.
then
Rome
after
the
expulsion
of
Tarquinius
,
the
regiment
of
a
King
.
The
refuter
saith
they
could
,
thereby
insinuating
that
they
would
not
.
But
doth
he
thinke
that
the
Popish
BB.
in
France
countenanced
by
the
state
,
would
endure
Antibishops
to
be
set
vp
against
them
in
their
Diocese
?
And
for
Geneua
,
is
it
not
a
plaine
case
,
that
,
that
state
was
so
farre
from
admitting
againe
the
gouernment
of
BB.
that
Caluin
being
out
of
hope
to
get
a
Presbytery
established
of
Ministers
alone
,
was
faine
to
accept
of
a
Presbyterie
wherin
twelue
Citizens
are
ioyned
to
sixe
Ministers
?
neither
is
that
to
be
omitted
which
Zanchius
in
the
place
before
cited
,
doth
adde
in
the
next
words
.
But
euen
in
those
Churches
also
where
neither
the
good
Greeke
names
,
nor
the
bad
Latine
names
are
vsed
,
notwithstanding
there
vse
to
be
some
chiefe
men
,
in
whose
hands
all
the
authoritie
almost
is
.
Where
therefore
these
be
vpheld
and
Bishops
repelled
it
may
seeme
to
be
but
a
controuersie
concerning
the
names
,
but
when
wee
agree
of
the
things
,
why
should
we
striue
about
the
names
?
At
Geneua
,
while
Caluin
liued
,
he
was
the
perpetuall
president
of
their
Ecclesiasticall
Senate
,
differing
rather
in
name
,
then
authoritie
from
a
B.
And
Beza
likewise
for
the
space
of
ten
yeares
had
the
like
authoritie
,
till
Danaeus
comming
thither
that
course
was
altered
.
Since
which
time
▪
Beza
finding
some
inconueniences
,
which
he
knew
not
how
to
redresse
,
hath
sometimes
signified
his
desire
to
some
(
whom
I
know
)
wishing
with
all
his
heart
,
that
with
the
reformation
of
religion
the
Episcopall
gouerment
in
that
church
had
beene
retayned
.
And
I
haue
beene
very
credibly
informed
,
that
the
most
learned
and
iudicious
Diuines
both
in
France
,
and
Geneua
,
could
well
be
contented
,
that
the
ancient
gouernment
by
BB.
were
renewed
among
them
.
which
neede
not
seeme
strange
to
vs
,
seeing
in
the
Church
of
Scotland
,
where
the
Geneua
Discipline
had
for
a
long
time
beene
practised
,
notwithstanding
,
when
the
matter
was
referred
to
voices
,
of
that
great
number
which
were
assembled
to
that
purpose
,
there
were
not
aboue
fiue
which
stood
for
the
Presbyterian
discipline
,
as
I
haue
beene
informed
by
some
that
were
there
.
But
there
are
two
things
more
in
the
refuters
answere
to
be
touched
;
the
one
that
against
sense
he
chargeth
me
twice
in
this
place
as
holding
the
gouernment
by
BB.
to
be
so
necessary
as
that
there
cannot
be
a
visible
Church
without
it
.
I
say
,
against
sense
,
because
in
the
former
part
of
this
section
I
acknowledged
that
where
this
gouernment
could
not
be
had
,
others
might
be
admitted
:
and
in
this
place
,
I
doe
not
onely
excuse
those
Diuines
which
wanting
the
Episcopall
gouernment
brought
in
the
Presbyteries
,
but
also
commend
their
fact
as
wisely
performed
.
The
other
is
,
that
out
of
a
desire
of
contradicting
me
,
hee
denyeth
the
state
of
Geneua
to
be
popular
.
But
let
Bodin
who
could
discerne
betweene
the
diuers
formes
of
policie
,
be
iudge
betweene
vs
.
De
repub.
l
2.
c.
6.
Anno.
1523.
The
selfe
same
yeare
saith
he
,
that
Andreas
Doria
did
establish
the
Aristocracie
at
Geneua
,
did
they
of
Geneua
hauing
expelled
their
B.
change
the
Monarchy
into
a
popular
state
.
And
after
libertie
was
restored
to
the
commonweale
,
although
they
ordayned
a
Senate
or
Councill
of
two
hundred
men
,
yet
the
people
reserued
to
themselues
the
right
&
authoritie
of
making
lawes
,
of
creating
the
chiefe
Magistrates
,
of
making
warre
and
concluding
peace
,
which
are
the
principall
prerogatiues
of
Soueraigntie
,
called
iura
Maiestatis
.
In
the
latter
part
of
this
Section
I
did
accuse
the
innouatours
among
vs
,
affirming
that
as
in
those
places
where
orthodoxall
Bishops
could
not
be
had
,
Presbyteries
were
wisely
brought
in
:
so
are
they
very
inconsiderately
obtruded
on
those
churches
,
where
Bishops
most
soundly
professing
the
Gospell
of
Christ
are
established
;
especially
,
considering
that
the
gouernment
by
Bishops
is
not
onely
simply
good
,
and
lawfull
,
but
also
in
comparison
to
be
preferred
before
the
Presbyterian
Discipline
,
as
hauing
better
warrant
.
Here
the
refuter
,
who
was
so
ready
to
take
away
the
excuses
which
I
brought
for
other
churches
,
hath
nothing
to
pretend
as
an
excuse
for
himselfe
and
his
consorts
.
Serm.
Sect.
2.
pag.
97.
Let
vs
now
consider
what
practicall
vses
&c.
to
the
end
.
The
practicall
vses
concerne
,
eyther
those
who
liue
vnder
the
authoritie
of
the
BB.
or
the
reuerend
Fathers
themselues
.
The
former
,
that
for
as
much
as
the
gouernment
of
Bishops
is
the
ordinaance
of
God
,
wee
would
reuerence
their
persons
,
and
obey
their
authoritie
.
The
latter
,
that
they
would
from
this
Text
receiue
,
both
comfort
and
encouragement
in
good
things
;
and
also
admonition
,
that
as
they
are
called
starres
and
Angels
,
so
they
would
endeauour
to
be
answerable
to
their
names
.
Ad
pag.
166.
The
latter
vse
the
refuter
toucheth
not
,
neither
doth
hee
gainesay
the
former
,
but
professeth
that
what
they
are
here
exhorted
vnto
,
they
are
and
haue
beene
carefull
to
performe
,
appealing
to
all
men
whether
they
haue
not
alwayes
reuerenced
the
persons
and
obeyed
the
authoritie
of
Bishops
.
Whereunto
,
though
I
could
say
some
thing
;
yet
I
will
say
no
more
but
this
;
that
as
I
wish
it
were
true
in
respect
of
the
time
past
,
so
I
pray
to
God
it
may
be
verified
of
them
for
the
time
to
come
.
Amen
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
FINIS
.