[Page] [Page] THE Regiment of the Church: AS IT IS AGREABLE WITH Scriptures, all Antiquities of the Fathers, and mo­derne Writers, from the Apostles themselues, vnto this present age.

I. Cor. 14. v. 40. v. 26. Let all things be done decently, and in order. Let all things be done to edification.
I. Cor. II. v. 16. If any man iust to be contentions, we haue no such customes, nor the Churches of God.

TC

LONDON. Imprinted by T. C. for William Welby, and are to be sold at his Shop in Paules Church-yard, at the Signe of the Grayhound. 1606.

TO THE MOST REVEREND FA­ ther, my very good Lord, Richard by Gods holy ordinance the Lord Arch-bishop of Canterburie his grace, primate and metropolitane of all Eng ­land, grace and peace from God the father, and from our Lord Iesus Christ.

AS many things (most reuerend father,) are both comely and profitable; so neither is there, neither can there be anything more necessarie, in any well managed church or christian common weale, then godly vni­formitie and christian vnitie in pure Reli­gion, the proper and peculiar worship of the euerliuing God. Which vnitie and vniforme conformitie for all that, not onely the cruell and blood-thristie Papists in former times, but the Brownists also and the Martinists, (cursed broodes untimely hatched, detested of God, and irkesome to the world,) haue of late daies endeuoured with might & maine, to disturbe, & extinguish it, & to take it quite out of the way. For the speedie conuersion, or else for the vtter confusion, of which professed enemies of the godly vnitie and true christian peace of Gods Sion, I deeme them right happie, who can in any small measure concur by way of re­dresse, and put to their helping hand. Against the former sect, I haue published many books, challenging all English Iesuites, Seminaries, & Iesuited Papists; yea prouoking and adiuring them all ioyntly and seuerally, to frame some an­swere either to all or to some one of the saide bookes. But wil ye haue the truth? their harts faile them, their own con­sciēces accuse them, they are at their wits end, & know not in the world what to say or write. They will not answere, [Page] and why I pray you? because forsooth they cannot, but to their owne shame and confusion euerlasting. For if they could, they would vndoubtedlie answere mee, so to saue their owne credite, and the life of their late harched Ro­mish Religion. About three yeeres agoe, a railing Iesuit, an odde swaggering Diuine terming himselfe E. O. in his detection against Maister D. Sutcliffe, and Maister Willet, taketh notice of the bookes which I haue published against them, and telleth his Readers, (if they may beleeue him,) that the confutation of my workes is vndertaken. But what followeth? (and the said confutation must be pub­lished, if it shall be thought expedient.) By which words with the circumstances annexed thervnto, wee may easily vnderstand three memorable points. First, that the Pa­pists are mightilie troubled, about the answearing of my bookes. Secondly, that they can not tell in the worlde, how and in what sort to answere them. Thirdly, that they would haue all their Popish Vassalls to think, that they haue alreadie answered them; and that they are not published, because it is not thought a thing expedient to bee done. But I pray thee, gentle Reader; who will beleeue these Ie­suits? what wise man will euer thinke that the Iesuits haue for the space of eyght or nine yeares considered howe to answere my bookes, and after the answere is vndertaken, cannot tell if it bee expedient to publishe the same? for as the Philosopher can tell them, Vltimum in executione, debet primum esse in intentione. That which is the last in execu­tion, must bee the first in intention. Yea, the very light of Nature and daylie experience teacheth vs; that in all our actions wee must chieflie and principallie respect the end, for the which wee intende to doe them. They dare not fight the combat valiantly, neyther with the long sworde, [Page] nor yet with the shorte. They dare not encounter mee, and cast mee their Gauntlet, No, no, Negry quidem, can bee extorted from their pennes. Against the latter sect, because they whollie dissent from the Papists, and agree with our English Churche, in the chiefest fundamentall points of Doctrine, an other manner of methode, and a different kinde of proceeding, must bee vsed against them. They exclaime with open mouthes, and crie out against our English Church; flying from our companies, and de­testing vs, as prophane, polluted, and forlorne people. They vse Conventicles, Whisperings, and meetings, in Woodes, Fieldes, and odde corners. They beare the simple people in hand, that our Temples are propha­ned; our Doctrine corrupt, our Sacraments impure, our Byshops Antichristian, and our kind of Church-gouern­ment repugnant to that sacred forme and order, which our LORD IESVS prescribed in his holie worde. They say of themselues (but Laus propriioris sordescit,) that they are inspired of the holy Spirit, that they are sent from Heauen to reforme our Church, and to direct it into all Truth. With which faire speeches, and sugred words, (alas for pittie) they seduce the rude vulgar sorte, steale away their hearts, and make them disobedient to higher powers. And while these good fellowes, (the Brow­nists and Martinists,) seeke to bee reputed the onely wise­men vpon Earth, they neither knowe what they say, nor yet whereof they affirme; but doe open a large window to all disloyaltie and sedition euery where, and giue the Papists some comforte and hope, once to enioye theyr long expected daye. In regarde hereof (most Reue­rend Father, and worthie Prelate,) my selfe (though the meanest of manie thousands in this our English [Page] Churche) haue thought it operaepretium, to vse my Penne in my plaine and simple manner, for the vnitie and true peace of our English Sion. and for the manifestation of the lawfull gouernmēt thereof. I haue in this present discourse (most honourable, constant, wise, and christian Patron, of the Churches libertie, power, freedome, & auncient prero­gatiue, which the Brownists and foolish Martinists would turne vpside downe,) made euident demonstration of the lawfull gouernment of our Church. And that is done in such compendious manner, as neither the Reading can be thought tedious, nor the price of the book chargeable, with such perspicuitie, as the most simple, (euen very babes and children,) may with al facility understād the same with such sufficiēcie, as no Brownist, or Martinist, or other malitious aduersarie of our churches godly setled gouernment who­soeuer, shall euer be able while the world indures: either with Scriptures, Councels, Fathers, or Ecclesiastical Histo­ries, to gain say or with stand the same. I haue succinctly and euidently, set down before the eyes of the indifferent Rea­der, that the monarchical gouernāce of our English church, is both the best and the most laudable of all others. That there is & euer hath beene in all former ages of the church, superioritie of one church-minister aboue and ouer ano­ther, and that one may this day lawfully haue iurisdiction ouer another. That Bishops, Arch-bishops, Primates, Me­tropolitains, & Patriarches, haue euer beene in the church: euen from the Apostles themselues. That no church-laws, canons, ordinances, or constitutions Ecclesiasticall what­soeuer; either ought to be established, or can bee of force, strength, power, or authoritie, without the lawfull assent of the supreme ciuill magistrate. That the church hath power, [Page] freedome, & authoritie, to dispose of all indifferent things, to ordaine ceremonies, and Ecclesiastical rites, to appoint, make, constitute, and establish lawes, canons, ordinances, and constitutions whatsoeuer not repugnant to Gods holy word, so that it be done for any one of these three ends, vz. For order, for comlinesse, or for edification sake, that there is grauitie, decencie, modestie, and edification; as well in the apparell allotted for the Ministers and the ministerie, as in the other ceremonies of our English Church. That the gouernment of euery particular Church may be altered and changed, as the circumstances of times, places, and per­sons shal require. That no charge is so tied to the practise of the Apostles, but for her necessitie she may alter & change the same. Many other points of great moment, are handled in this compendious discourse. To which or to some part thereof, all that may be reduced with facilitie, whatsoeuer the aduersaries haue said or possibly can say, against the gouernment of our English Church. The worke such as it is, (most gratious Lord,) I humbly dedicate vnto your grace, as well to giue a signification of a thankefull minde for all your graces fauours towards me, namely, for your great liberalitie in time of my sicknesse at my last being at London, as also for your graces most Christiā zeale, singu­lar care, & painful endeuours, employed for the good and quiet of the Church; both of late dayes, about the most profitable and necessarie canons of Anno, 1604; and in for­mer times, euen euer since Church-gouernment was first imposed vpon you. For which holy vigilancie and godly care, though the Brownists, the Martinists, and other en­uious and malitious male-contents, doe both thinke and speake hardly of your grace, yet are all that loue the com­mon good and peace of our English Church, bound in the [Page] highest degree to bee thankfull to your Grace for the same. The Almightie preserue your Grace, confirme your God­lie zeale against the disturbers of the common peace, and giue you a long and happie life vpon Earth, (for his owne glorie, and the Godlie gouern­ment of his Church,) and life eter­nall in the worlde to come.

Amen.

Your Graces most humble and most bounden, Thomas Bell.

THE REGIMENT of the Church.

CHAP. I. Of sundrie kinds of gouernment, with the nature, qualitie, and condition of the same.

ARistotle, that worthy, learned, & famous Philosopher, shewing plainly in a large politicall discourse, that there be three kinds of lawful Regiment, and three like­wise of wicked Gouernement, neither more nor fewer. The first lawfull kinde is called, Monarchia, a Monarchy, when Monarchia. one alone doth rule & gouerne. The se­cond is called, Aristocráteia, an Aristocratie, when a fewe of Aristocrv­teia. the best in the common-weale doe gouerne it. The third is called Democratia, a Democratie; when many of the vulgar Democratia. people doe rule. For euery state of the Church & cōmon weale, doth either seeke the publique good thereof, or their owne priuate gaine and pleasure. If the common good be sought and intended, the gouernment is godly; but if pri­uate Aristotel. Lib. 3. Polit Cap. 5. & Lib. 8 Ethic. Cap. 10. gaine or pleasure be either wholy or principally inten­ded, the gouernment is wicked. If the gouernment be law­full, right, and godly; it is either by one, and called a Monar­chie; or by some fewe of the best, and called an Aristo­cratie; or by many, and called a Democratie. If the King or [Page 2] Monarch ruling alone, (as our most gratious Soueraigne hath told vs most learnedly in his Basilicōdoron) shal by the making and execution of good lawes, acknowledge him­selfe Basilicon do­ron. Pag. 25. ordained for the good of his people, and thereupon employ all his studie, care, industrie, and endeuours, to procure, establish, and maintaine their welfare, and true christian peace, as their naturall father, and kindly maister; then is hea King indeede, and his gouernment a true Mo­narchy. But if he studie to frame the gouernmēt of the com­mon weale, to aduance his priuate lucre, to satisfie his own singular contentment, and to serue his inordinate and sen­suall pleasure, he is then so farre from being a king indeed, that he is become a slat tyrant, and his gouernment changed into a plaine tyrannie. If few doe gouerne well, being of the best and wisest, it is a lawfull Aristocratie: but if these few Tyrannis. gouerne wickedly, seeking their own priuate, & not the cō ­mon Oligarchia. good, it is called an vngodly Oligarchie. If many rule wel, it is called a Democratie or popular state, but if they go­uerne naughtily, it is termed a Timocratie, Ochlocratie, or A­narchy. Timocratia Ochlocratia. Anarchia. Wher the gentle reader must seriously obserue with me, that paucitie and multitude, are not the essential diffe­rences of Oligarchie and Timocratie: but wealth and pouer­ty are the things indeed, which work the intrinsecal distin­ction in these defects of pollicie. These kinds of Regiment may analogically in some proportion, be applied to the in­feriour magistrates vnder his most excellent maiestie; viz. to the LLs. of the most honourable priuie Councell, the L. Analogice in suo genere. Chauncellour, the L. Treasurer, the Iustices of the Kings-Beneh & Cōmon place, Barons of the Exchequer, Iustices of Peace, &c. & in sundry places and causes, to the cōmons of this Realme. Which obseruation if it be wel remembred. will be a motiue to put euery one of them in mind of their place & calling, that they may vse their gouernment accor­dingly. This discourse is so cleere and euident, as I decme it a thing altogether needlesse to vse further proofe therein. For all learned men, both Philosophers and Diuines, doe with vniforme assent subscribe thereunto.

Obiection. 1.

The Law of nature teacheth vs, that wee may loue our selues more then our neighbours. For which respect, God himselfe appointed mans own loue to be the squire & rule, by which he must measure his loue toward his neighbour. The king therefore is not bound to regard more the good of his subiects, then his owne priuate commoditie, and the contentation of his mind.

The Answere.

I answere with S. Austen, that kings must serue God two waies. First, as men: which thing is performed, by liuing August. epist. 50. ad Bonifa [...]. godly, soberly, & iustly. Secondly, as kings; which they may 1 performe, by the making & execution of godly lawes, for 2 the honour and seruice of God principally: and secondari­ly, for the cōmon good and peaceable gouernment of their people. I say, (by the making & execution of godly lawes,) because it is not enough for Kings to make godly lawes, vnlesse they procure the same to be duly executed. In the former respect, kings may loue themselues more then their subiects; but in the latter, (viz. as they are kings,) they must haue greater care to procure the welfare and good of their people, then the welfare and good of themselues. And the same may be said Analogically & proportionally, of all in­feriour magistrates. To which I must needs adde, that the honour, wealth, and preseruation of a king, is indeede the honour, wealth, peace, and good of his people. So that eue­ry way the kings owne loue is respected, and his own ho­nour and good procured.

Obiection. 2.

If the king, by his vngodly gouernment, may become a tyrant, then may his subiects resist his proceedings, then may they depose him from his royall Diademe, Scepter, and Regalitie.

The Answere.

I answere, that a kingdome may be possessed two waies; viz, by election, and by succession or discent of blood roy­all. They that are kings the first way (as the Emperour of the Romans, the king of Polonia, and if there be any others of like sort,) if they change their gouernment into tyrannie, and violate the lawes, to which by couenant, oath, and promise, they stand obliged in their election; they (I say,) may be deposed by the same power & authoritie, by which they were inuested into their throne. The reason hereof is euident; because the possession, right, and vse of their regall authoritie, is not independant & absolute, but conditionall and relatiue; and consequently, such a King degenerating from his oath and promise, standeth at the curtesie of his e­lectors, concerning the interest, possession, and vse of his prerogatiue royall. But they, who are Kings by discent and succession in blood royall, (as is our most wise, pious, lear­ned, and religious Soueraigne, who happily this day raig­neth ouer vs,) haue an absolute and independāt soueraign­tie ouer their subiects, which neither doth, nor euer did stand, in the curtesie, power, and pleasure of their people. For Kings by succession and discent in blood royall, are Kings Ipso facto, so soone as their auncestors are deceased, e­uen before the act of their annointing and Coronation, as also before the oathe; which vsually they take for the god­ly administration of their kingdomes. Such ceremonies, though they be very comely and expedient for sundrie respects, yet are they not any essential part of their princely Kings by suc­cession, are Kings indeed, before their Coronation. rights and royall prerogatiue, how necessarie soeuer some esteeme the same, deeming them no Kings without them. And consequently, their proceedings may not vndutifully be resisted: much lesse may their authoritie begain said; and least of all may their sacred persons be deposed from their S [...]pt [...]rs and prerogatiues royall. No, no, not though they should degenerate and fall into tyrannie, or flat Atheisme and Aposta [...]. And yet I freely graunt, that as the king is a­ [...] his Bishops in respect of his royall Regiment, and hath power to correct and punish them; yea, euen to de­pose [Page 5] and displace them, as King Salomon deposed Abiathar, if the cause so require: So semblably is the Bishops power, 1. Reg. 2. V. 27. in respect of his Ministrie, touching exhortation and re­buking, aboue the Princes. In regard whereof, the good Bishop Saint Ambrose is highly commended for his Godly zeale, and Christian courage, in reprehending the Emperour [...]. But withall, this must euer be remembred, and most loyal­lie Vide in fra, cap. 11. [...]sp. ad [...] ob [...]ect in 6. propos. obserued of all Bishops in Christes Church; that the Prince (though full of notorious crimes) may neuer bee shunned, neither of the people, nor yet of the Bishops: be­cause he is appointed of God, to be their gouernour. Much lesse may the people for sake their obedience to his authori­tie, because they must forsake their obedience to his vices. Hee may be shunned priuatelie, and his vices detested ge­nerallie: but loyall obedience and faithfull seruice, may ne­uer be denied him Hec may bee admonished by the Bishoppes in the court of Conscience, concerning his publique offences: but he may neuer be iudged in the court of their Consistorie, tou­ching his Royal power, and Princely prerogatiue. He may be reprooued, if his faults be publique and notorious; but his subiects may neuer depose him, because their authoritie stretcheth not so farre. Hee hath no Iudge that can punish him, but the great Iudge of all, euen the God of Heauen. Of which subiect I haue elsewhere disputed more at large. The generall councel of Constance (where was present that great In my motiu [...], and golden bal­ance. Conc. Constan. ses. 15. learned Doctor, Iohannes Gerson, then Chauncelour of Paris,) condemned it for a notorious heresie, and him for an He­ret que that held the same; viz. to holde and maintaine it to be a thing lawfull for the subiects to kill euery Tyrant that Mark this wel. reigned tyrannically ouer them. Where wee must obserue & marke seriously, the word (euery.) For the Councell con­demneth not the killing of those Tyrants, which raigne ty­rannicallie by violent intr [...]sion and vnlawfull vsurped pos­session; but the killing of those Princes (though raigning ty­rannically and liuing most licentiously,) who were inuested and [...]thronized into their kingdomes, by lawful descent of blood royall, and auncient hereditarie succession.

CHAP. II. Of the chiefest and best kinde of Gouernment.

ARistotle that famous Philosopher, ha­uing reckoned vp the three former kindes of Gouernment, adjoyneth forthwith these golden wordes; Atque harum optima quidem est regnum, deter­rima verò censuum potestas, And the best of these Gouernements, is a Mo­narchie Aristot. Ethicor. lib. 8. cap. 10. lib. 3. polit. cap. vlt. or Kingdome, but the worst is a Democratie.

The Israelites and people of the Iewes, were euer gouer­ned by a Monarchie; euen from Adam vnto Christes most sacred Aduent. For 1 first, the Patriarkes had the rule and gouernment. Secondly, Moses and Iosua were the lea­ders 2 and gouernours of the people. Thirdly, Gedeon, 3 Iair, Samson, and others, did rule and iudge the Israelites. Fourthly, Kings, Saul, Dauid, Salomon, Iehosaphat, Eze­chias, 4 Ioas, and others. 5 Fiftly, Zorobabel and the Macha­bees were gouernours. And this gouernment continued, euen from the Captiuitie vntil Christ.

This kinde of gouernment to bee the best, may easilie be prooued: as well by the manner of Mans creation, as by the naturall propension giuen vnto him. Touching the manner, wee are all framed of one, not of many. The Protoplast Adam, of the earth; of him, Eue; of them twaine, all the rest. Herevppon Saint Chrysostome, (who for his great learning and Eloquence, was surnamed the golden mouthed Doctor,) concludeth a Monarchie or Kingdome, to bee the best kinde of Gouernment vppon earth. His wordes are these: Equidem si quanquam [Page 7] hoc sint pacto geniti, primus tamen statim hominum semine pa­rentum procreatus adeo insaniuit, tantam rixam, tantam in­uidiam Diaboltes seminauit; quid put as fecisset, si non ab eadem prorsus radice pullulasset genus h [...]marum? deinde, hunc impe­rare, illam subesse iussit; esse, n. inter aquales amulationem nouit: itaque no [...]uit esse Democratiam, sed Regnum.

For although they be thus be gotten, yet if hee that was the first man produced by the seede of his parents, did so rage, and was so furious: and if the Diuell also did raise vp such contention and enuie: what thinkest thou would hee haue done, if mankinde had not issued out of the same [...]oote? He therefore commanded the one to rule, the other to obey. For he knew, that emulation would arise among equalls. He therefore would not haue a Democratie, or po­pular state, but a Kingdome. Thus writeth this learned [...]ather.

Touching naturall propension, which must needes bee referred to God the author of Nature: it appeareth by it, that a Monarchie or rule of one, is most agreeable to nature it selfe. For first, in euery house the Father of the familie 1 doth gouerne all the rest: the wife, the children, and the seruants. Againe, the greatest part of the whole worlde, 2 a gouerned by kings. Thirdly, Monarchies and King­domes 3 are farre more auncient, then either Aristocraties, or Democraties. For proofe hereof, the onely testimonie of she excellent Historiographer Iustinus may suffice. These are his words: Principio rerum, gentium nationumque impe­ [...]ium penes reges erant: quos ad fastigium huius maiestat is, non Iustinus hist. lib. 1. in intio. ambitio popularis, sed spectata inter bonos moderatio prouehe­ [...]at.

In the beginning of the world, the gouernment of people and nations was vnder Kings: whome ver­tue, & not popular ambition, aduaunced to that high seate of Maiestie. Fourthly, the creatures which are without 4 reason, and haue onely sense, seeme naturally to de­sire the gouernment of one. The holy Fathers doe [Page 8] so testifie of them, and experience it selfe doth shew it to be so. S Hierome hath these words; Nulla ars absque magistro dis­citur. Etiam muta animalia & ferarum greges, ductores sequun­tur snos. Hier. ad Rusti­cum, t [...]m. [...]. [...]ol 22. B. In apibus principes sunt. Grues vnum sequuntur ordine literato. Imperator vnus. Iudex vnus prouinciae. Roma, vt con­dita est, duos fratres simul habere reges non potuit, & parricidio dedicatur.

No Art is learned without a maister. Yea, euen the dumbe cattell, and slockes of wilde beastes, doe all follow their lea­ders. The Bees haue their gouernours; & the very Cranes follow on in order, in forme of a letter. There is one Em­perour. There is one iudge of a prouince. Rome was no soo­ner built, then it abhorred to haue two kings at once to rule ouer it; so as without cruell murder, the dedication thereof was not accomplished. But what neede is thereof further proofe in this dispute? seeing it is euident to al that hold the Christian faith aright, that God omnipotent is the supreme Monarch in heauen and earth, and gouerneth by that kind of regiment, which is neither Democraticall, nor yet Ari­stocratical, but monarchicall; and consequently, a monarchy must needes be the best kind of gouernment. And whoso­euer can and list to read that holy, auncient, and learned fa­ther S. Ciprian, shall finde this discourse so apparant, as he Ciprian deido­lorum vanitate can neuer stand long in doubt thereof. I therfore conclude, that whosoeuer shall denie a simple monarchie to be the best kind of gouernment, must perforce fall vnawares, into the error of the Marcionistes, of the Manichies, and of the Ethnickes. For if it be true, as it is most true, as all Christians must confesse, that the world is ruled in the best maner and best kind of gouernment by God that made it, it must fol­low of necessitie, that neither a Democratie, nor yet an Ari­stocrat [...]e, is the best forme of Regiment. For otherwise doub [...]lesse, there must be many makers of this world, and many Gods.

CHAP. III. Of the kind of gouernment, of the Church and common weale of England.

NOw seeing it is true, (as is alreadie pro­ued,) that a Monarchie is the best kind of gouernment, and that the Church and common-weale of England, is go­uerned by a most wise, most learned, most vigilant, and most religious Mo­narch, Gods saithfull seruant, and our gratious and most happie Soueraigne, it followeth by a necessarie consequence, that the kind of gouernment vsed in the Church and common-weale of England, is the best and most laudable of all other. For (as our gratious soue­raigne Basilicon do­ron. Pag. 41. Chrysost in 13. Cap ad Roman. Cyprian. libr 1. epis. 3. writeth most learnedly,) paritie is an enemy to vni­tie, and the mother of confusion. The selfe same saith S. Chrysostome, when he auoucheth degrees and superioritie to haue therefore bene appointed, because equalitie engen­dreth strife and contention. The same sai h S. Cyprian, when he affirmeth boldly, that heresie, or Schisme did not rise of any other occasion, but onely vpon this, that there was not one Priest and one Iudge for the time, appointed in the Church in the stead of Christ, to whom the whole brotherhood should yeelde obedience. The same saith S. Hierome, when he auoucheth one to haue beene chosen a­mong Hieron. ad Evagrium. 10. 3. Fol. 150. Chrysost. in 13. cap. ad Rom. col. 256. the Bishops to rule ouer the rest, least euery one ac­cording to his own fansie, should teare in peeces the church of Christ. Yea, a Monarchicall gouernment is so necessarie euery where, and in all sorts of creatures, that S. Chrysostome acknowledgeth it amongst the bruite beasts: in the Bees, Cranes, slockes of sheepe, and Fishes of the Sea. And ther­fore after a long discourse, he concludeth in these wordes, Libertas [...]. illa dissolu [...]a ac moderamine carens, vbique mala, [Page 10] confusionisque causa est. For dissolute libertie without go­uernment, is euery where euill, and the cause of confusion. But because the excellencie of English gouernment, shall be proued by degrees throughout this whole discourse; thus much shall suffice for this place, because I endeuour to auoide tautologie, and not to bee tedious to the Rea­der.

CHAP. IIII. Of the supreame government of the ciuil magistrate ouer all persons and all causes, within his Realmes, territories, and do­minions.

OF this theame I haue written more largely in other treatises, and therefore See the downfall of Poperie, & the golden ballance of triall. I purpose now to speake no more ther­of, then I deeme conuenient for the matter I haue in hand. For which pur­pose it were enough to well effected Readers, to call to minde that the godly Kings as well in time of the law of Moses, as in the time of the new testament and lawe of grace, did manage all mat­ters both of Church and Common-weale; and therefore Ios. 1. 8. Numer. 27. Vers. 17. 2. par. 23. Vers. 11. the ciuill magistrate was commanded to reade the booke of the whole lawe, as well of the first as of the second table, and to studie the same night and day. Therefore was the ciuil magistrate commaunded, to goe out and in, before the people, and to leade them out and in, that the congregation of the Lord, bee not as sheepe which haue no shepheard. Therefore was the booke of the Lawe, deliuered into the Kings hands, at such time as hee receiued the crowne and was annointed. Musculus a great learned man, and famous writer, affirmeth resolutely; that the care of reforming and maintaning religion, doth more [Page 11] appertaine to the ciuill magistrate, then to the Mini­sters of the Church. His expresse wordes are these; Moses Primus catholicus Israelis magistratus, personam Musculus de magistr. pag. 628. & P. 629. & P. 632. & infra, cap. prope [...]i­nem, nota. Ios. 5. cap. gerens, non sacerdotis, quae Aaroni imposita fuit, sed superioris potestatis, similem regiae, omnem in populo dei religionē constituit, ipsique Aaroni, & levitarum ordini, facienda & vitanda prae­scripsit. In quo manifestè videmus, disponendae religionis cu­ram, magis ad superiorem magistratum, quàm ad sacerdo­tum ordinem pertinere. Sequitur; post mortem Mosis, cura religionis v [...]â cum magistratis, devolutae est non ad Eleaza­rum sacerdotem, sed ad Iehosuah filium Nun, de triba non Levi, sed Ephraim. Huic mandabat dominus, vt filios Israel secundò circumcideret. Frat autem circumcisio, signum faederis dei, omninò ad religionem pertinens. Sequitur; in per­sona Samuelis cohaesere quidèm & magistratus & sacerdotium, veram moderandae religionis curam sustinuit ille quoque, non vt sacerdos, sed vt magistratus, quo, tum non erat in Israele superior: vt magistratus indicabat Israelem, ac disponebat publica omnia, tam sacrae quam prophana; vt sacerdos sacrifica­bat, pro populo orabat, illumque docebat.

Moses the first Catholique Magistrate in Israel, bea­ring the person not of a priest which was imposed vpon Aaron, but of an higher power like vnto a Kings, ap­pointed order for all manner of Religion in the peo­ple of GOD, and prescribed to Aaron himselfe and to the order of the Leuits, both what they should doe, and what they should auoide and leaue vndone. Where­in we see euidently, that the care of ordering Religion doth more pertaine to the higher magistrate, then to the order of the Priests. After the death of Moses, the care of Religion, together with the Magistracie, was devol­ued not to Eleazar the Priest, but to Iosuah the sonne of Nun, who was not of the Tribe of Leui, but of Ephraim. To him God gaue cōmandement, that he sho [...] circum­cise the second time the children of Israel. But circu [...]cisi­on [Page 12] doubtlesse was the signe of Gods couenant, which per­taineth wholy to religiō. In the person of Samuel, there did cohere both the Magistracie & the Priesthood; but he re­ceiued the charge of moderating religion, not as hee was a Priest, but as hee was a Magistrate, greater then whom there was none at that time in Israel. As a magistrate, he did iudge Israel, and ordered all publique affaires, as well sa­cred as prophane, ecclesiastical as ciuill; but as a Priest, hee offered sacrifice, prayed for the people, and taught them.

Out of these wordes of this great learned writer, I note these golden lessons for the good of the well affected Rea­der. First, that Moses was a ciuill magistrate, hauing autho­ritie 1 like vnto a king. Secondly, that his power was grea­ter, then was the authoritie of Aaron the hie Priest. Third­ly, 2 that Moses ordered all matters in religion, and not Aa­ron 3 who was the hie Priest. Fourthly, that he appointed to Aaron and to the whole order of the Leuites, both what 4 they should doe, and what they should leaue vndone. Fift­ly, that the charge & care of religion, doth appertaine more 5 neerely to the magistrate, then to the order of the Priests. Sixtly, that the magistrate hath the charge and care of orde­ring 6 religion, inseparably annexed to his ciuill office, in that hee is a magistrate. 7

Seuenthly, that a Bishop may haue authoritie to deale in ciuil causes, as Samuel did. Eightly, that Samuel disposed all 8 ecclesiasticall affaires, not as hee was Priest, but as hee was Musculus, vbi supra. vide cundem authorem in­fra, cap. 11. in resp ad 2. obiect 6 pro­position, & nota valde va [...]de, Psal. 2. the ciuill Magistrate. All which obseruations, this learned writer proueth by the examples of many kings; of Dauid, Salomon, Asa, Iosaphat, Ezechias, and others. And of King Dauid, hee addeth this most golden and memorable sen­tence; (Dauid) quoniam sciebat hanc primam curam pertinere ad reges & magistratus, vt religio Deiritè disponatur, hortatus cos est ad id offi [...]ij. Dauid because he knewe this chiefe care to pertaine to magistrates, to see religion rightly ordered, he exhorted them to that office, saying; Now ô Kings vn­derstand, be learned, yee that iudge the earth. Whosoeuer readeth this learned writer seriously throughout his whole [Page 13] discourse, can no longer stand doubtfull of the truth of this question. Zanchius de Religione cap. 16. art. 9

Zanchius a most learned writer, and a man of singular iudgement, in that booke which he left, for a testimonie of his faith and Christian beliefe vnto the world, and there­fore the more to be regarded, hath these expresse wordes: Improbamus & illos, qui authoritatem in religione, necis tan­tum causa attribuūt magistratibus: dum illos negant authorita­tem habere convocandi synodos, deliberandide religione, refor­mandiecclesias, & quae ad populorum salutem pertinent, e sacris literis statuends, aliudque eo esse nolunt, quàm eorum quae ab episcopis definiuntur, exequntores.

Wee reproue in like manner all those, who yeelde and giue authoritie in religion vnto Magistrates, onely in Ca­pitall matters touching death, whilest they denie them au­thoritie to call Synodes to consult of religion, to reforme Churches, and to appoint out of Gods word, the things that pertaine to the saluation of their subiects: and will one­ly haue them to bee the bare exequutors of those things, which the Bishops doe decree.

Thus writeth this learned Doctor, a man of as great a iudgement, as any is in the christian world. Out of whose words I note first, that he condemneth many, who now a­daies 1 thinke themselues very wise. Secondly, he auoweth 2 that magistrates haue authoritie to call Synodes. Thirdly, 3 that they haue power to deliberate of religion. Fourthly, 4 that they haue authoritie to reforme the ministers and church-affaires. Fiftly, that they haue power to order those 5 things, which pertaineth vnto mans saluation.

Maister Martyr a very learned writer, discourseth at large, both of the authoritie of the minister and of the ma­gistrate. He sheweth most excellently, both how the mini­ster Petrus Mar­tyr, in lib. Iu­dic. cap. 19. Fol. 161. ought to exhort and rebuke the magistrate, and how the magistrate ought to reforme, gouerne, and punish the minister. Some part of his golden discourse I will briefely set downe, referring the reader for the rest to the place quo­ted in the margent.

Nihil est in toto mundo, ad quod verb [...] dei se non extendat, quo­circa [Page 14] longè falluntur, qui clamitare solent; quid conscionator cum rep quid cū armis? quid cum pharmacopolis? quid cū cocis? at di­cat &c. There is nothing in the whole world, to which the word of God doth not extend it selfe. Wherefore they are farre deceiued, that are wont to exclaime and say; What hath the Preacher to doe with the Common-weale? what hath he to doe with warres? what with the Apothecaries? what with cookes? but let these good fellowes tell vs, why the Minister of Gods word, when he perceiueth Gods law to bee transgressed in these things, may not rebuke the same out of Gods word? why hee may not admonish the malefactors? why he may not exhort them to desist from sinne? it is his part doubtlesse to reproue sinners; not with the sword, not with Pecuniarie mulct, not with imprison­ment, not with the sword, not with exile, but with the force & power of Gods word. Then this learned man proceeds, and telleth vs, that the ciuill Magistrate must see and pro­uide, that the Bishops, Pastors, & Doctors of the Church, doe teach Gods word purely, rebuke sinners fatherly, and administer the Sacraments reuerently. After this, he telleth his Reader, that kings haue not charge onely of the bodies of their subiects, but of their soules also. For, (saith this great learned Doctor,) we must not make princes swine­heards and heardmen for keepers of cattell, who haue care onely of the bellies, flesh, and skinnes of their subiects; be­cause kings must prouide & see, that their subiects liue ver­tuously and in the feare of God: yea, he saith further, that if the Ministers teach not aright, or doe not administer the Sacraments orderly: thē the Magistrate must reduce them into order, and see that they teach sincerely, and doe not a­buse the Sacraments, nor deliuer thē otherwise then Christ hath commanded. And if they liue wickedly and disorder­ly, he must depose them from the Ministerie. Thus wri­teth this Doctor, and much more he hath to the like effect, but I studie to be briefe. Bucerus de regno Chri­sti, lib. 2. cap. 1

M. Bucer an other great learned Clerke, in that worthy worke which he dedicated, to king Edward the 6. of happy memorie, telleth him resolutely, that euery soule is subiect [Page 15] to his Empire, aswell the Bishops as the rest of the Clergie: and that therefore he must be the more vigilant, and care­full, to reforme them and their Ministerie. And M. Cal­uin Calvin. in Epist. ante Esaiam, ad Eliza. An­gliae, Reginā. in his Epistle to Queene Elizabeth of happie memorie, ascribeth vnto her the same prerogatiue, in causes Ecclesi­asticall: very earnestly exhorting her Maiestie, in the bo­wels of Christ Iesus, to bee carefull in purging the Church from superstition and poperie. See the xj. Chapter in the sixt proposition, in the answere to the first Obiection, and note it well.

CHAP. V.

Of the Degrees of Ministers, Bishops, Arch-bishops, Metropolitanes, and Patriarches, and of their Anti­quitie in the best and purest times of the Church.

Paragraph first, of the degrees and superioritie of one Minister ouer an other.

SAint Austin that famons writer and Aug. vixit, A. D. 399. strong pillar of Christs Church, who li­ued aboue 1200. yeares agoe, affirmeth resolutely and plainly vnto S. Hierome beeing then an Elder or Presbyter of Christes Church: that his authoritie and degree, was aboue S. Hieromes, because hee was a Bishop. These are S. Austins owne words: Augustin. Epist. 19. to. a p. 52. Quanquam. n. secundum honorum vocabula, quae iam vsus ec­clesiae obtinuit, episcopatus presbyterio maior sit, tamen in mul­tis rebus Augustinus Hieronymo minor est: licet etiam a minore quolibet, non sit refugienda vel dedignanda correctio.

For although according to the wordes of honour, which now are of force by the custome of Christes Church, the degree & office of a Bishop is greater thē the degree & of­fice of a Priest or Elder: yet Austin is in many things infe­riour to Hierome, neither may the superiour disdaine to be rebuked of his inferiour.

Out of these wordes of S. Austin, I obserue first, that to 1 be a Bishop in S. Austins time, (at which time it cannot bee denied, but the Church was in good state and order,) was [Page 16] an higher degree then to bee a Priest or Elder. Secondly, that Bishops were in those dayes honourable, and called Lord Bishops; which I gather out of these words, (secundum 3 honorum vocabula) according to the wordes of honour. Thirdly, that this superioritie amongst Ministers had been a long time in the Church, euen before S. Austins dayes, because Saint Austine saith, this superioritie came by the custome of the Church.

S. Hierome, who liued in S. Austins dayes, confirmeth S. Austins testimonie touching the superioritie of one mi­nister ouer an other: these are his wordes: Nam & Alexan­driae à Hier. epist. ad Euagr. tom. 3 fol. 150. B. Marco Euangelista vsque ad Heraclam & Dionysium Episcopos, presbyteri semper vnum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum episcopum nominabant: quomodo si exercitus imperatorem faciat: aut diaconi eligant de se, quem industrium noverint, & archidiaconum vocent. quid. n [...]facit excepta ordina­tione episcopus, quod presbyter non faciat? sequitur: presbyter & episcopus, aliud aetatis, aliud dignitatis est nomen. sequitur: quod Aaron, & filij eius, at que Levitae in templo suerunt, hoc sibi episcopi, & presbyteri, & diaconi vendicent in ecclesia.

For at Alexandria, from Marke the Euangelist vnto He­raclas and Dionysius being both Bishops, the Priestes did This was A. D. 6. 4. whiles S. Pe­ter, S. Paul, and others were yet liuing. alwayes choose one among them, whom they placed in an higher degree, and called him Bishop: as if an host of men should make a Generall ouer them: or the Deacon chuse one of themselues, whom they sawe more vigilant, and should call him Arch-deacon. For what doth a Bi­shop sauing the ordination, that a Priest doth not? Tou­ching a Priest and Bishop, the one is the name of age, the other of dignitie. That which Aaron, and his sonnes, and the Leuites were in the temple, the same may the Bishops, and Priestes, and Deacons challenge in the Church.

Out of these wordes of this holy Father and learned writer, I note first, that a Bishop hath an higher degree in 1 the Church, then hath a Priest or Elder. I note secondly, that this superioritie among Ministers, hath euer beene in 2 [Page 17] the Church since the time of Saint Marke the Euangelist. Thirdly, that the name of a Bishop is the name of digni­tie 3 & honour. Fourthly, that as Aaron had a degree aboue 4 the Priestes in the time of Moses, so haue Bishops now a degree aboue the other Ministers or Elders. Fiftly, that a 5 Bishop onely ordeyneth Ministers.

Saint Chrisostome, who liued in Saint Austines time, had very great superioritie ouer Bishops; for hee was not onely Bishop of Constantinople, but also ruled many other Churches, both in Thracia, Pontus and Asia. These are the expresse words of Theodoretus in his historie, concer­ning this matter: Atque hoc modo prospexit non illi solum ci­vitati, Theodor. hist. eccl. lib. 5. cap. 28. verum etiam tot [...] Thratiae quae est in sex episcopatus divi­sa; & cunctae etiam Asiae quae vndecim habet antistites. Ponti­cam praeterea ecclesiam, quae eundem habet episcoporum nume­rum quem Asia, eisdem legihus adornavit.

And Chrysostome the Bishop of (Constantinople) did by this meanes not onely prouide for that citie, but also, for all Thracia, which is diuided into sixe Bishoptickes: as also for the whole Countrey of Asia, which hath in it eleuen Bishops. He also ruled Pontus which hath the same num­ber of Bishops with Asia, and beautified it with the same Lawes.

Out of these words of this holy Father, worthily surna­med the golded mouthed Doctor; I obserue first, that hee 1 was the Arch-bishop of Constantinople. Secondly, that hee 2 had also iurisdiction Archiepiscopall, ouer 28. Bishops; in Thracia, Asia, and Pontus. And that the Reader may fully know what iurisdiction this holy Father vsed ouer these Churches; two things must be remembred, which are set downe in the place quoted in my Margent. The one, that he commaunded the Priests to liue after the Lawes. The other, that he did [...]ptiue them of their Priestly function, which did violate and transgresse the lawes. So then it is cleare and euident, that there are degrees of superioritie a­mongst Ministers; yea, that one Bishop hath iurisdiction [Page 18] ouer another: as S. Chrysostome being a Patriarch, had ouer 28. other Bishops.

S. Ignatius, who was Bishop of Antioch, and S. Iohns dis­ciple, and liued in the Apostles time, A. D. 97 sheweth e­uidently, An, D. 9. 7. that in his time one Minister had rule ouer an­other, the Bishops ouer the Priests. For writing to the peo­ple of Smyrna in Asia, he hath these expresse words; Hono­rate Deum, vt authorem omnium & dominum, Episcopum au­tem tanquam principem sacerdotum, imaginem Des forentem; principatum quidem secundum deū, sacerdotium verò secundum Christum. Honour God as the authour and Lorde of all things, and a Bishop, as the Prince or chief of Priests, bea­ring the image of God; superioritie according to GOD. Priest-hood according to Christ. And in the same Epistle hee reckoneth vp seuerall degrees: of Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and Lay-men. The same Ignatius, in that Epistle which he wrote to the Church of Trallis in Asia hath these words: Quid est. n. Episcopus, nisi omnem principatum & po­testatem omnium illorum tenens, quemadmodum deceat homi­nem tenere imitationē des factum secundū virtutē. For what is a Bishop, but one that hath power and rule ouer them all, (he speaketh of Priestes and Deacons,) as it becommeth a man made according to vertue, to keepe the imitation of God. Thus writeth this holy Father, who suffered a most cru­ell death for the testimonie of Iesus Christ: beeing cast out to wilde beasts, to be torne of them in pieces for the truths­sake. Euseb lib. 3 cap. 30. Hier. in ca­tal script. eccles. tom 1. fol. 124. A. Augusti. ac haere­sib ad quod­vult deum to. 6. haeres. 53. Of these his Epistles and Martyrdome, S. Polycarpe, S. Hierome, and Eusebius Caesariensis, doe all three yeede a most lawdable and constant testimonie; such as is able to penetrate any mans heart, that shall seriously peruse the same.

S. Epiphanius, and S. Austin, doe both of them enroll a­mong heresies, this opinion of Aerius: that a Priest, or Pastor, was equall to a Bishop. Cum esset presbyter, inquit Augustinus, doluisse fertur, quod Episcopus non potuit ordina­ri. Sequitur: dicobat etiam, presbyterum ab Episcoponulla diffe­rentia [Page 19] debere discerni. Aerius saith S. Austin, being himselfe a Priest, is reported to haue bene very sory, that hee could not be made a Bishop. The same Aerius held also this o­pinion, that there was no difference betwixt a Priest and a Bishop. S. Epiphanius affirming that Aerius held the same Epiphan. cont. haeres. lib. 3. to. 1. haeres. 75. pag. 196. errour, confuteth it by many sound reasons, amongst which this is one: Dicere. n igsum Episcopum & Prosbyterum aequa­lem esse, quomodo erit possibile? Episcoporum. n. ordo patrum generator est: patres. n. generat ecclesia. Presbyterorum verò non potens generare patres, per lavacri regenerationem generat filios ecclesiae: non tamen patres aut doctores. For to say, that a Bishop and a Priest are equall, how is it possible? For the order of Bishops is the begetter of the Fathers: for that order begetteth Fathers to the Church. But the order of Priests is not of abilitie to beget the Fathers: but it beget­teth sonnes to the Church by the regeneration of Baptisme: yet not Fathers or Doctors. This auncient Father liued a­boue 12. hundred yeares agoe, at which time it was holden for a grosse errour generally, to say, affirme, or thinke, that A. D. 372. a Priest was equall to a Bishop, in degree, dignitie, or iu­risdiction.

This reason which S. Epiphanius maketh touching the begetting of Fathers to the Church, is invincible, and ne­uer can be answered. It is the very same in substance with that of S. Hieromes, which I haue set downe alreadly: viz. that a Bishop differeth from a Pastorall Elder, by the po­wer of ordaining and making Ministers. And, to proue the superioritie of a Bishop aboue a Priest, or Pastorall El­der: that which Saint Austin telleth vs of Aerius, is a flat and euident demonstration. For Aerius being a Priest, sought by all meanes to bee a Bishop, and was sorie that hee could not attaine and accomplish his desire. For greife whereof, hee opposed himselfe against the prudent and godly setled order of the Church: affirming very desperately as Saint Epiphanius saith, that a Priest was [Page 20] euery way equal to a Bishop. Now I pray you who know­eth not this to bee true? that a wise man will neuer bes [...]e and busie himselfe, to attaine that which he hath alreadie: Let this p [...]int be well m [...]r [...]ed. [...]. 372. [...] thousand and [...] yeares. a [...]. But [...] it is▪ as you haue heard already; that [...]erius being a Priest, [...] under with might and maine to be made a Bishop: Ergo it must needs be granted: that to be a Bishop was [...], a degree & d [...]gnitie aboue a Priest. But to [...]hat end should [...] point and question, which [...] is a position to constant, [...] generally re­ceived, in the dayes of S. Hierome, S. Aust [...]e, S. Chrysostome, S. Epiphani [...]s, Eusebues, Policarpus & [...], is I haue alrea­dy proue? [...] Reader shall thinke better of moderne writers, then of these auncient, holy, and learned Fathers: I am content for his better satisfaction, to alledge the [...]l [...]t testimonies and expresse wordes, of the best ap­proued Caluin, in 2. s [...]r. 10. writers in this last age. M. Caluine hath these ex­presse wordes. Quamvis. n [...] commune sit omnibus verbi mi­nistris idemque officium sunt tamen honoris gradus.

For although there bee one Office common to all the Ministers of the word, yet are there degrees of honour (a­mong Caluin, in cap. 1. [...]. vide cund [...]m ad 2 ga [...]t. [...]er. 9. them. Againe, in another place he hath these words, Di [...]cimus quidem ex hoc loco, non eam fuisse tunc aequalitatē in­ter ecclesia ministres, quin v [...]us aitquis authoritate & consitio praeesset nihil tamen hoc ad tyranmcum & profanum collatio­num morem, qui in Papatis regnat. longe. n. diuersafuit aposto­lorum ratio.

We learne by this place, that there was no such equali­tie among the Ministers of the Church in those dayes, but that one was preferred before an other in counsell and authoritie. Yet this is nothing like to that tyrannicall and prophane custome of ruling in Popedome, which is faire different from the manner of the Apostles.

The second Paragraph, of the artiquitie of Bishop, Arch­bishops, Primates, Metropolitans, and Patriarches, in the Christi­an Church of God.

THe truth is, that the Church of Christ was sometime, both without the names & degrees, of Arch-bishops, Metropo­litans, Primates, and Patra [...]ches; yet it did not long so continue, but was alte­red in the kind of gouernment, euen in the time of the Apostles. This affir­mance S. Hierome maketh so manifest, that I cannot but wonder, how any without blushing doe denie the same.

These are S. Hieroms owne words; Quod autem postea vni­ [...] electus est. qui caeteris praeponeretur, in [...] remedium Hier. ad Eua­grium. Tom. 3. Fol. 150. factum est, ne vnusquisque adse trabens Christi ecclesiam rum­peret. Nam & Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista vsque ad Heraclam & Dionysium episcopos presbyteri semper vnum ex [...]e electum, in excelsiors gradu collocatum, episcopum nomina­ [...]bant.

But that afterward one was chosen to beare rule ouer the [...]est, it was done to auoid schisme, least euery one should [...]aw companie to himselfe, and so breake the vnitie of the Church. For at Alexandria from S. Marke the Euangelist vnto the Bishops Hera [...]las & Dionysius, the priests or elders did euer cloose one among them, whom they placed in an [...]agher degree, and named him Bishop.

The same Father in an other place, hath these expresse wordes. Idem est presbyter qui episcopus, & antequam diabeli Hier. in. 1. Cap ad T [...] ­tum. i [...]stinctu studia in religiene sierent & diceretur in populis; ego sum Peuli ego Apolio, ego verò Cephae; communi presbytererum [...] ecclesiae gubernabantur. Postquam verò vnusquisque eos quo [...] baptizaverat, suos putabat esse non Christian toto orbe ac­cr [...]um est, vt v [...]usde presbyteris euctus svperponeretur caeteris, ad quem omnis ecclesiae cura pertineret, & s [...]i [...]matum scmina tellere [...]tur.

[Page 22] An Elder and a Bishop are all one, and before dissenti­on by the diuels procurement arose in the Church, and the people began to say, I am of Paul, I of Apolle, and I of Cophas; the churches were gouerned by the common con­sent of the Pastorall Elders, Ministers, or Priests. But after that euery one did thinke those to be his, and not Christs, whom he had baptized; it was decreed throughout the whole world, that one of the ministers or Priest should bee chosen and set ouer the rest, to whom the whole care of the Church should appertaine, that the seeds of schisme might be taken away.

Out of these plaine aslertions of this holy, learned, and auncient father, I obserue first, that in the very beginning of 1 the primitiue church, al the ministers were equal in degree, and did gouerne the church with a general & cōmon con­sent. Secondly, that in very short time the diuell raised vp 2 such dissention in the church, that it was thought meete to alter the kind of gouernment, & to set one minister ouer the rest. Thirdly, yt this was done to take away schisme. Fourth­ly, 3 that this alteratiō was made, euen in the Apostles dayes, 4 viz. whē one said he held of Paul, an other, he held of Peter an other, he held of Apollo: at what time S. Marke the Euangelist, was made the Bishop of Alexandria. Fiftly, that this 5 superioritie among the ministers of the church, was decreed Jrenaus ad­Vers. Heres. li­br. 5. cap. 2. pag. 589. by a settled lawe throughout the whole world. S. Irenaeus hath these wordes; Omnes. n. hij valaë posteriores sunt quam episcopi, quibus Apostoli tradiderunt ecclesias.

For all these come farre after Bishops, to whom the Apo­stles committed the charge of churches.

Maister Zuinglius a famous and zealous defender of the Gospell, is wholy consonant to these holy and ancient Fa­thers. Vide infra, cap. 10. in re­spons. ad 2. obiect. His wordes shall be set downe at large, when I come to the ordering of Ministers.

Saint Timothy and S. Titus, had superioritie ouer all o­ther Ministers, both at Ephesus, and at Creta; and conse­quently, they were made Arch-bishops by Saint Paul him­selfe. [Page 23] This is constantly affirmed. both by Saint Cry­sostome. Theodoritus, Oecumenius, and many other famous writers. Saint Chrysostome hath these expresse wordes; Vnus ex Pauls socij [...] hic fuit vir probatus; neque [...]n profectò Chrysost. ad Titum, hom. 1 in initio. ills integram insulam permisisset, neque ea quae aeerant praece­pisset im [...]lenda & tam multorum episcoporum iudicium commi­sisset, nisi multùmilli confideret.

This worthy man was one of S. Pauls fellowes; for doubt­lesse, he would neuer haue committed one whole Iland vn­to him, neither haue commanded things wanting to be ac­complished, nor yet haue cōmitted the iudgemēt of so ma­ny Bishops vnto him, vnlesse he had had great confidence in him. Thus writeth this holy, learned, and ancient father, touching the superioritie of Titus.

Of Timotheus the same father writeth thus; Quaeri me­vitò Chrysost. ad Tim. 2. hom. 10. inprincip. potest quomodo Timotheum adse vocet, cui ecclesiae gentis­que totius crediderat gubernacula?

It may worthily be demaunded, how hee calleth Ti­mothy vnto him, to whom he had committed the gouern­ment of the Church and of the whole nation. Marke well these wordes, (gentis totius, of the whole nation;) and these wordes likewise, (integram insulam, the whole Iland;) and these wordes withall, (Muitorum episcoporum iudicium, the iudgement of many Bishops.) For out of the said wordes it is cleerely and euidently deduced, that both Timotheus and Titus were Arch-bishops in Saint Paules time; the one hauing iurisdiction ouer all Asia, the other ouer all Creta, two great and large countries.

Illyricus a very famous late writer, and a most worthy de­fender Illyricus in prefat. ad 1. ep. ad Tim. of Christian truth, iumpeth with S. Chrysostome in his iudgement and opinion. These are his expresse words; Harum autem tres priores scriptae ad duos praestantes doctores plurimarumque ecclesiarum episcopos. Timotheum & Titum, potissimùm informant episcopum aut superintendentem, & per cum etiam totam ecclesiam ab ipso gubernandam ac instru­ [...]ndam.

[Page 24] But the three former of these written to two excellent Doctors and Bishops of many churches. Timotheus and Ti­tus, doe specially informe a Bishop or superintendent, and by him the whole Church also, which must be gouerned and instructed by him. Loe here, gentle Reader; Timothie and Titus were Arch bishops, that is to say, the Bishops of many Churches. I here let passe the wordes of Theodoretus, Oecumentus, and others, in regard of breuitie.

Saint Cyprian, that holy, learned, and auncient Father, who Cyprian libr. 4 epist. 8 liued aboue one thousand and three hundred yeares agoe, was not only the Bishop of the famous citie of Carthage; but he had also the gouernment both of Numidia and of Mauritania, two goodly regions in Affrica. So doth S. Cy­prian himselfe write of himselfe, and therefore the storie is of good credite.

Many Councels, (of Nice, Antioch, Carthage, Mileuitane, Chaic [...]do [...], and others) make mention of Arch-bishops, Me­tropolitans, Conc. Nicae. can. 6 concil. 3. carthag. can. 28. conc Antioch. can. 9. Calvin. libr. 4 institut. cap. 4 sect 4. [...]. Primate, and Patriarches. It shall suffice in re­gard of breuitie, to relate onely master Calnius testimonie of the famous Councel of Nice. These are maister Caluins expresse words, Quod autem singulae provinciae vnum habe­bant inter episcopos archiepiscopum quod item in Nicaena syno­do constituti sunt patriarchae quiessent ordine & dignitate archi­epitscopis superiores; id ad a [...]s [...]iplinae conservationem pertinebat. Quanquam in hac disputatione praeteriri non potest, quod raris­simi erat vsus. Ob hanc igitur causam potissimum iustituti sunt illi gradus, vt si quid in ecclesia qualibet incideret, quod non posset bene a pa [...]cis expediri, ad synodum provincialem referre­tur Si [...]nagnitudo aut difficultas causae maiorc̄ quoque discussio­ [...] [...], ad [...]i [...]ebantur patriarchae vaa cum synodis, a qubu [...] esset provocatio, nisi ad vniversaie concilium, [...] sic constitutam non ulli Hierarch [...]am vocarūt nomine ( [...]) improprio [...]erè [...] veteres episc [...]pos non [Page 25] aliam regendae ecelesiae formam volnisse fingere, ab ea quam deus verbo suo praescripsit.

That euery prouince had an Arch-bishop among their Bishops, and that the Councell of Nice did appoint Patri­arches, which should be in order and dignitie aboue Arch-bishops, it was done for the preseruation of discipline. Al­though in this discourse wee may not forget that it was a thing of very rare vse. For this cause therefore were those degrees especially appointed, that if any thing should hap­pen in any particular church, which could not there be de­cided, the same might be referred to a general Synod. If the greatnesse or difficultie of the cause, required yet greater consultation; then were added Patriarches together with the Synodes, from whom there could be no appeale, but onely vnto a Generall Councell. This kinde of gouern­ment some called a Hierarchie, a name improper and not vsed in the Scriptures, as I thinke. For the holy Ghost would not haue vs to dreame of any dominion or rule, when question is made of Church gouernment. But omit­ting the name, if we consider the thing it selfe; we shall find, that these old Bishops would not frame any other kind of gouernment in the Church, then that which God prescri­bed in his word.

Thus writeth Maister Caluin of the antiquitie of degrees and superioritie, amongst the Ministers of the Church. Which whosoeuer shall ponder seriously, (all partialitie set apart, (together with the constitutions, testimonie, and approbation of the most sacred and renowned generall Councel of Nice (which Councel was euer to this day high­ly reuerenced throughout the Christian world;) that man doubtlesse, cannot but approoue and allowe our Bi­shops and Arch-bishops with their names and authori­ties, this day established in the godly setled gouernment of the Church of England, For first, Maister Caluin graun­teth willingly, the truth it self plainly leading him thereun­to,) 1 that in the time of the famous Councell of Nice, [Page 26] there were both Arch-bishops and Patriarches. Secondly, that yt patriarches were in order & dignitie aboue the Arch-bishops; 2 and consequently, that there was euen then, (viz. aboue one thousand two hundred and fortie yeares agoe,) superioritie Episcopall, Archiepiscopall, and Patriarchall, among the ministers of the Church, one minister hauing iurisdiction ouer and vpon an other. More then which doubtlesse, our Bishops and Arch-bishops doe not this day challenge, in our Church of noble England. Thirdly, that this superioritie and dignitie among Ministers, was or­dained 3 for the preseruation of discipline in the Church: and consequently, that as it was then godly, conuenient, and necessarie for the Church, so is it this day, in our Church of England. Fourthly, that the kinde of gouern­ment 4 by Arch-bishops and Patriarches. was agreeable to that forme of gouernment, which God prescribed in his word. This is a point of great moment, which may not bee forgotten. To which I also adde, (which the Reader must obserue seriously with mee,) that the Councell of Nice telleth vs plainely, that this superioritie of one Mini­ster aboue and ouer an other, (which the Brownists can­not endure,) was not then first appointed, but had beene time out of minde by an auncient custome of the church, which the Councell confirmed and established by her decree. But how doe I proue it? doubtlesse, by the ex­presse wordes of the Councell.

For the Councell in the sixt Cannon, hath these Conc. Nicae. can. 6. wordes; Mos antiquus perduret. Let the olde custome continue. And in the seuenth cannon, it hath these wordes; Quoniam mos antiquus obtinuit, & vetusta traditio. Because Can. 7. an olde custome and auncient tradition hath preuailed, &c. Which olde custome had beene in the Church, e­uen from Saint Marke the Euangelist, and from Saint Timothy and Saint Titus, as is already prooued. And if a­ny one will yet bee obstinate, and denie that this olde [Page 27] custome, whereof the holy, and auncient Councell spea­keth, beganne in the Apostles time; let that man or those persons which so shall say or affirme, name the time before the Nicene Councell, when Archbishops and Patriarches first beganne. And if any man can this performe. I promise to bee of his opinion. If other­wise, both reason and true humilitie would aduise that This can ne­uer be per­formed, while the world endu­reth man and those persons, who shall so say or thinke; to yeelde all due obedience to their superiours, and wil­lingly to subscribe vnto the truth. Which doubtlesse they will doe, that heretofore haue refused to embrace the ceremonies of our English Church; if this Text of the Gospell, bee not truly verified in them; (for they lo­ued the praise of men, more then the praise of God.) But howe is this possible? I will vnfold the case, Gen­tle Ioh. 12. Vers. 43. Reader; protesting that I doe it of charitie, and for edification sake. The truth I will plainly and sincere­ly set downe, concealing the parties name; because I loue the man, and haue regard vnto his credite. Tal­king with a Preacher of mine acquaintance, (a man o­therwise both godly, learned, and of singular gifts,) concerning the cannons of Anno. 1604. and the kinde of gouernment of this our English Church, when hee seemed to mee, to haue nothing of moment to say a­gainst the same, hee answered mee thus: that hee would neither loose his liuing, nor weare the surplesse nor yet make the signe of the crosse in the childs forhead. And when I demaunded how that could bee; hee answered that hee would keepe one to doe it, but not doe it him­selfe. When I replied, that hee might as lawfully doe This ought to be well pondered. it himselfe, as procure an other to doe it; hee vttered these wordes.

How can I doe that, against which I haue so often prea­ched. I proceeded, and told him as a friend; that his refusall seemed to tast of the spirit of the proude Pharise; and not of [Page 30] the humble Publican, &c. Well, I hope the partie wil be o­bediēt. But certes, I thought afore; that all their proceedings had been of meere conscience, which now I perceiue to be of pride in a great many of them, through which manner of dealing (I wil not say hypocrisie) the simple sort become disobedient, and are deepely drowned in errour; and our Church pitifully turmoyled, with schismes & dissention.

The godly, learned, and zealous Patron of pure religi­on, maister Bucer, deriueth the superioritie of Arch-bi­shops euen from the Apostles themselues. These are his expresse words; I am ex perpetua ecclesiarum observations, abipsis Bucerus de­regno christs, libr. 2. cap. 12 in initio. apostolis videmus, visum & hoc esse spiritu sancto, vt inter presbyteros, quibus ecclesiarum procuratio potissimùm est commissa, vnus ecclesiarum & totius sacriministerij curam gerat singularē, eaque cura & solicitudine cunctis praeerat alij [...]. Qua de causa, episcopi nomen huiusmodi summis ecclesiarum cur atoribus est peculiaritèr attributum.

Now we see by the perpetuall obseruation of churches, euen from the Apostles themselues; that it pleased the holy Ghost, that among the ministers to whom especially the gouernment of the church is committed, one should haue the chiefe care, both of the churches and the whole sacred ministery; & that he in that care and sollicitued, should be aboue al the rest; for which cause, the name of Bishop is pe­culiarly giuen to such chiefe gouernours of churches. Thus writeth maister Bucer. Out of whose words I note first, that the superioritie of Arch-bishops and bishops, proceedeth from the holy Ghost. Secondly, that this superioritie was e­uer in the church, euē from the Apostles. The same author 1 hath in yt same Chap. much more matter to the same effect. 2 The famous doctor & zealous christian Hieronymie Zanchis Legatur ca­put integrū. us, in the cōfessiō of his faith granteth freely, that there were Arch-bishops, Metropolitans, and Patriarches, before the Nicene Councel. These are his words: Cum hanc cōs [...]riberem Zanchius de relig. p. 170. fidei confessionē omnia ex bona conscientia scripsi; & sicut credi­as sic etiam isberè loquutus sum, vt faciendū esse docent sacrae li­tera [Page 29] Fides autē mea nititur cùm primis & simpl [...]citèr verbo Dei. Deinde nonnihil etiam communi totius veteris catholica Ecclesia consensu, si ille cum sacris literis non pugnet. Credo. n. qua a pijs patribus in nomine Domini congregatis, communi omnium con­sensu citra vllā sacrarū litorarum contradictionē, definita & re­ceptafuerunt: ea etiam (quanquā haud eiusdem cum sacris lite­ris authoritatis) a spiritu sancto esse. Hinc fit, vt quae sunt huins­cemodi, ea ego improbare noc velim, nec audeā bona conscientia, quid autem certius ex Historijs, ex concilijs, & ex omnium pa­trum scriptis quàm illos ministrorū ordines, de quibus diximus, communi totius reipublicae christianae consensu, in ecclesia consti­tutos receptosque fuisse? Quis autem ego sum, qui quod tota ec­clesia approbavit, improbem? sed neque omnes nostri temporis docti viri improbare ausi sunt: quippe qui norunt & licuisse haec Ecclesiae, & ex pietate atque ad optimos fines pro electorum aedi­ficatione, ea omnia fuisse profecta & ordinata.

When I worte this Confession of my Faith, I wrote euery thing with a good conscience; and as I beleeued, so I also freely spoke, as holy writ teacheth me to doe. My be­liefe is principally & simply, grounded vpon Gods word: then, some-what also vpon the cōmon consent of the aunci­ent Catholique Church, so it doe not swarne from the holy Scriptures. For I bel [...]eue, that such things as yt holy Fathers Vide infra, cap. 10. ex Zuinglio & notato valaè. gathered together in Gods name, haue with common con­sent defined and receiued without any contradiction of the holy Scriptures: do proceed from the holy Ghost, though not of the same authoritie with the holy Scriptures. Hence comes it, that my selfe neither will, nor with safe consci­ence dare, reproue such kinde of decrees. But what is more cleare and euident, by Histories, by Councels. and by the writings of all the Fathers, then yt those orders of Ministers, (wherof we haue spoken:) haue bene appointed & receiued in the Church, euen with the common consent of the whole christian Common weale? And who am I, that I should reproue that, which the whole Church hath approued? yea, which all the learned men of our age, durst neuer reproue [Page 30] to this day? as who knew (right well) that both the Church might lawfully doe these things, & also that they proceeded of pietie, & that all things were ordained to very godly pur­poses, for edefication of Gods elect. Thus writeth this lear­ned, godly, zealous, and iudicious Father: who for his rare learning, profound knowledge, pure zeale, & great iudge­mēt, was inferior to none of his age in Christs Church, if not superiour to all. Out of whose words I obserue many more excellent & worthy documēts, for the help of the wel affec­ted Reader. First, that this godly learned man was fully 1 resolued to die in that Faith, which he heare speaketh of. Secondly, that he published this his Confession of Faith, 2 with a good conscience, constantly beleeuing as he wrote. Thirdly, that his Faith was grounded vppon the word of 3 God. Fourthly, that the Decrees of the holy Fathers as­sembled 4 in Christes name, defined by the common consent of all, and not repugnant to the Scriptures, were not sim­ply the Decrees of men, but also of the holy Ghost. Fiftly, 5 that the Degrees of Ministers, and superioritie of Bishops Arch-bishops, Primates, and Patriarches, were approued and receiued by vniforme and common consent, through­out the whole Church of Christ. Sixtly, that this great 6 learned man neither durst, nor could with good conscience reproue the same. Seuenthly, that the Church had au­thoritie 7 to appoint, constitute & ordaine, such degrees and superiority amongst the Ministers of the Church. Eightly, 8 that such constitutiōs proceeded of pietie, & were ordeined for edisicatiō of the Church. To the testimony of this graue writer, I deeme it worth the labour, to adde that which the same Doctor hath in another place. These are his words: Hoc ego ingenuè denuò profiteor, talem esse meam conscientiam, Zanch. de relig. pag. 250. Vide infra, cap. 7. & no­tato. vt a veterū patrum sive dogmatibus, sive scripturarum interprae­tationibus, non facilè, nisivel manifestis sacrarum literarum te­stimonijs, vel necessarijs consequentijs, apertisque demonstratio­nibus convictus atque coactus, discedere queam. Sic enim acqui­escit mea conscientia, & in hac mentis quiete cupio etiāmors.

[Page 31] I againe professe freely my conscience to be such, that I cannot easily depart, either from the Doctrines of the aun­cient Fathers, or from their interpretations of the holy Scriptures: vnlesse I bee convicted and compelled there­vnto, either with the manifest testimonies of holy Writ, or with necessarie consequences and manifest demonstrati­ons. For so my conscience is at rest, and in this quiet of minde I desire to die. Out of which wordes, I note two things, both memorable and of great importance: wishing the gentle Reader, to marke them attentiuely. First, that 1 the auncient Fathers haue decreed according to the holy Scriptures, superioritie, among Ministers in the Church, and the degrees of Bishops, Arch-bishops, Primates, Me­tropolitans, Suffragans, and Patriarches. Secondly, that 2 this learned Doctor thinketh himselfe bound in consci­ence, to acknowledge, receiue, and obey such decrees and constitutions of the holy Fathers: and therefore earnestly desireth to ende his life in that beliefe.

Nicolaus Hemingius affirmeth constantly, that the pure Hemingius in Enchiri­dio. Pag. 368. church which followed the Apostles-time, ordeyned diuers degrees of Ministers for the peaceable Regiment of the Church: as Metropolitans, Arch-bishops, & Patriarches.

The 1. Obiection.

Ye know that the Lords of the Gentiles haue domina­tion Matth. 20. V. 25. ouer them, and they that are great, exercise authoritie ouer them. But it shall not be so among you: but whoso­euer will be great among you, let him be your seruant.

The Answere.

I answere, that these wordes of our Sauiour Christ, doe on­ly condemne ambitious desire of rule and the tyrannicall v­ [...]ge thereof: but not simply all superioritie, and lawfull authoritie of one aboue an other. I proue it first because 1 Christ saith not, the Lords of the Iewes, but the Lords of the Gentiles beare rule ouer them. As if hee had said: you may not haue that tyrannicall kind of gouernment, which [Page 32] the gentiles vsed; nor such ambitious desire and sinister af­fection of rule, as was found among them. And therefore is it significantly said, (it shall not be so,) He saith not, it shal not be at all, but it shall not be so, as it was among the Gen­tiles. Secondly, bcause it is the frequent custome of the 2 holy Scriptures, to forbid things simply without excep­tion: when it doth in deedes and true meaning prohibite onely the abuse and the inordinate desire and vsage of the same. Call no man your father vppon earth, (saith Christ Mat. 23. U. 9. 10. 11. for there is but one your Father, which is in heauen, B [...] not called Doctors: for one is your Doctor, euen Christ▪ But he that is the greatest among you, let him be your ser­uant. So Christ forbiddeth to bee carefull for to morrowe, Mat 6. v. 25. 28. 31. Prou. 6. v. 6. 7. 8. 2. Thess. cap. 3. 10. to bee carefull for our life, for rayment, for meate, and for drinke. And yet in true sense and meaning of holy writt [...] the moderate and honest care of such things is not forbidden, but onely the inordinate and distrustfull desire and can thereof. Nay, nay, the Scripture willeth the sluggarde it learne of the Pismire, who hauing no guide, gouernour nor ruler, prepareth her meate in the Summer, and gathethereth her foode in haruest. And the Apostle giueth commandement, that if any will not worke, the same must no eate. Thirdly, because both olde and late writers of be 3 account, doe expound this text of S. Matthew, against in ordinate and ambitious desire of ruling. S. Chrysostome th [...] Chysost in 20. Chap. Mat pag. 549. golden mouthed Doctor, for his great learning and eloquence so surnamed, hath these wordes: It a gentium [...]n esse ostendit, prima quaeque appetere, tyrannica enim haec passi [...] & nonnunquam eximios etiam viros perturbat, quapropter [...] vehementiore castigatione indigent, acrius etiam ipse insurg [...] comparatione gentium, agrotantem ipsorum animum retinem It a horum quidèm invidiā, illorum verò arrogantiā succidit qua magna voce dicens: nolite tanquam contempti commoveri: [...] qui primatum quaerunt, sibijpsis dedecori sunt, ignorantes hoc pacto in infirma detrudere.

Thus he sheweth it to be the manner of the Gentile [Page 33] to desire superiority. For this is a tyrannical passion, & doth often trouble excellent men. Wherefore seeing they haue need of vehement castigation, he doth sharpely reprooue thē: so bridling their sickly minde, by comparing thē to the Gentiles. And by this meanes he taketh away enuie from the one sort, and arrogant pride from the other: as if hee should cry with a loude voyce, be not troubled (with pas­sions of pride,) as contemptible persons. For they that seeke Primacie, doe dishonour themselues: not knowing, that by this meanes they doe abase themselues.

Theophilactus hath the same sense and interpretation, which he vttereth almost in the very same wordes. Many Theophil. in 20. cap. mat. other writers expound this text in the selfe same manner, neither can any one auncient father be alledged to the con­trary sense and meaning.

Fourthly, because the originall worde Catacurieuèin, doth plainly insinuate so much vnto vs. Aretius a very lear­ned 4 writer, & a great patron of pure Religion, hath these words: Catacurieuèin. Est dominari cum aliena tyrannide: Aretius in 20. cap. mat. Catexousiazein, in potestate violentèr tenere. The one Greek word is to beare rule tyrannically: so is the other Greeke word, to haue violent power ouer men. Erasmus, Muscu­lus, and many other learned writers, are of the same opinion.

Musculus hath these expresse wordes: Non est autem Musculus in cap. 23. Matth. putandum, quod omninò prohibeat, ne quis vocetur inter Chri­stianos pater aut Magister, aut Dominus; vt illicitum sit liberis, cum vndè sunt gen [...]ti, vocare patrem: aut discipulis cum a quo instituuntur appellare Magistri aut praeceptoris vocabulo: vel servis, heros suos appellitare Dominos: cum & sacra Scrip­tura iubeat, vt filij honorent patres suos, & Apostolus admo­neat servos, vt dominis suis obediant: & dominos vt aequi sint erga servos: & cum audisset in carcere a custode carceris voca­ri dominos se & Silam, non prohibuerit: verum it a vocari pa­trem & magistrum, vt vocabantur Scribae & Pharisaei, prohi­betur hoc loco. Primùm, illi amabant vocari Rabbi: ergo [Page 34] affectus horum cognominum vetatur. Deinde, ita vocari rabbi volebant, vt ab ipsis prorsus penderet populus domini, nec vlla in re placitis ipsorum repugnaret: at hoc pacto vocari patrem & magistrum, nemini mortalium competit. Est enim vnus ve­rus pater tantùm deus, & vnus veru [...] magister Christus, a cuius debemus pendere praeceptis vt non liceat nobis in alterius cuius­piam tur are verba magistri. Sequitur; hec satis indicat, quo­modo prohibuerit suos vocari rabbi & magistros; viz. vt dixi contradrim itus ambitum, dominandi (que) libidinem ista sunt aicta. Alioqui dixisset; nemo inter vos sit reliquis maior. I am verò vbi dicit qui maximus est vestrum, erit vester minister, os­tenait se non ita dixisse, vos omnes fratres estis, quòd per omnia voluerit suos esse inter se aequales; sed vt ij qui reliquos ex donis dei excellebant, ad omnium ministerium sese demit­serent.

We may not thinke, that Christ doth altogether forbid, that no christian shall be called father, or maister, or Lord; as if it were vnlawfull for children to call him father, that did beget them; or for Schollers to call him Maister who teacheth them; or for Seruants to call their Maisters Lords; seeing the holy Scripture commaundeth children to honour their Parents, and the Apostle also willeth Ser­uants to obey their Maisters, and when hee heard the kee­per of the Prison call him, and Silas Maisters he did not re­buke him for the same; but so to bee called Father and Maister, as the Scribes and Pharises were called, hee vtterly forbiddeth in this place. First, they greatly de­sired to bee called Rabbi, and therefore the affection of such names is forbidden. Againe, they wished so to be called Rabbi, that GODS people should wholy de­pend vpon them, and in no respect denie or withstand their ordinances and Decrees. But to bee called Father or Maister in this sort and manner, agreeth to no mor­tall man.

For there is one onely true Father, which is GOD [Page 35] himselfe, and one onely true Maister, which is Christ, vpon whose commaundements wee must so depend, that wee may in no case sweare to the wordes of any other man. Heere wee are sufficiently taught, in what sense Christ for bad his Disciples to bee called Rabbi, and Maisters, viz. As I saide, against the ambition of Primacie, and desire to rule, are these things spoken, (and not simply against Rule, Dominion, or Superi­oritie.) For otherwise, hee would haue saide; let none amongst you, bee greater then the rest. But nowe, when hee saith, hee that is the greatest of you, shall bee your Seruant, hee sheweth himselfe not to have saide, yee are all brethren, for that hee woulde haue them in all things to bee equall among themselues, but that they who excelled others in the gifts of GOD, might humble themselues to the seruice of others. Thus writeth this great learned Father, out of whose golden wordes, wee may gather euidently sundry necessarie documents, for a resolute and full aunswere to the prece­dent obiection. For first, hee affirmeth constantly, that Christ doth not simply prohibite Christians to bee cal­led 1 Rabbies or Maisters, but so as the Scribes and Pha­rises desired to bee called Maisters. Secondly, hee tel­leth vs, that Paul and Silas were well pleased to bee 2 called Maisters. Thirdly, hee auoucheth roundly, that CHRIST did not forbid Dominion, Rule, and Su­perioritie, 3 but onely ambition and greedie desire of bea­ring rule ouer others. Which his opinion, hee proo­veth to bee grounded vpon Christs owne wordes. And doubtlesse, it is to bee admired, that any Learned Infra cap. 12. sect. 4. ex Pe. Marty. man will holde the contrarie opinion. See Peter Mar­tyrs opinion, and note it well. His expresse wordes shall bee set downe, when I come to speake of the church­discipline.

The Reply.

Maister Caluin and many other learned writers, al­leage this Text against that superioritie, which the late Bi­shops of Rome doe challenge ouer other Ministers of the Church: which doubtlesse they could never truely doe, if one Bishop or Minister may be superiour to another.

The Answere.

I answere, that M. Caluin, and other learned men, doe truely alledge this Scripture, against the falsly challenged Primacie of the proude & arrogant Bishop of Rome. And yet for all that, it doth not prohibite the moderate and law­full superioritie of one Minister ouer another: which is both necessarie for the peaceable managing of the Church, and hath euer beene vsed in the Church, as it is already prooved. For the Bishop of Romes superioritie, is so farre from heing moderate and lawfull: that it may truely be termed tyrannicall, and plaine diabolical. Because (as I haue proved at large in other discourses,) hee taketh vpon him to depose kings, to translate kingdomes, and in most brutish and savage manner, to tyrannize ouer mens soules and consciences, Idque iure divino, as hee beareth the world in hand.

The 2. Obiection.

The names of Arch-bishops, Primates, and Patriar­ches, are proud names, disholy, prophane, and not to bee found in the holy Scriptures.

The Answere.

I answere: First, that though the names be not expres­sed in holy writ, yet is the thing it selfe sufficiently contei­ned in the same, as is already proved.

[Page 37] Secondly, that the very names are so farre from being pro­phane and disholy; that the most zealovs Patrons of the Presbitery, doe allowe and approue the same for lawfull and holy, and to haue beene ordained of the holy Fathers for a godly end and purpose. Maister Caluins opinion is alreadie set downe, in this present chapter. Yet for better satisfaction of the Reader, let him heare what the same au­thour saith in an other place. These are his wordes; Quod duodecim vnum habuerint inter se qui omnes regeret, nihil mi­rum. Caluin. libr. 4 intit. cap. 6 sect. 8. Hoc. n. fert natura, hoc hominum ingenium postulat, vt in quovis caetu etiamsi aequales sint omnes potestate, vnus tamen sit veluti moderator, in quem alij respiciant. Nulla est curia sine consule, nullus consessus indicum sine Praetore sen quaesitore, col­legium nullum sine Praefecto, nulla sine magistro societas.

That the twelue Apostles had one among them to go­uerne the rest, it was no maruell. For nature requireth it, and the dispositiō of men will so haue it, that in euery com­pany, though they be all equall in power, there be one as gouernour, by whom the rest may be directed. There is no Court without a Consull, no Senate without a Pretor, no Colledge without a Presidēt, no societie without a maister. Now it is euident, that neither Bishops nor Arch-bishops in our church of England, haue greater authoritie, then mai­ster Caluin speaketh of in this place. For to say nothing of the dignitie of Consuls and Pretors, which was very great among the Romans; the maister of a Colledge, (as euery Scholler of Cambridge and Oxford can tell, (hath a perpe­tuall office; hee is chiefe gouernour of that societie, and all the members thereof owe obedience vnto him, as to their head; he hath authoritie to punish, and to see lawes exe­cuted within his Colledge, as Bishops, and Arch-bishops haue in their dioceses & prouinces. And most certaine it is, that no Arch-bishop in England hath that authoritie in his prouince, which the Consul had in Rome. Beza in con­fess. cap. 7. Pag. 257.

Maister Beza confesseth, that antiquitie vsed the names of Bishops and Arch-bishops, and willingly admitteth of [Page 38] them as holy names. These are his expresse wordes; Nam quod pastores temporis progressu distincti sunt in metropolitas, e­piscopos, & quos nunc vocant curatos id est, singulis paraecijs pra­fectos, id minime factum est respectu ministerij verbi; sed potum habita ecclesiasticae iurisdictionis ac disciplinae ratione. Itaque quod attinet ad verbi praedicandi munus, & sacramentorum ad­ministrationē nullum est inter archiepiscopos, episcopos, & curatos discrimen. Omnes. n. tenentur suos greges eodē [...]ibo pascere ide [...] ­que communi nomine postores & episcopi in scripturis passim vo­cantur. Quae verò istorum impudentia est sacra nomina vsurpa­re, & propter ea apostolorum & verorum opiscoporum successio­nem iactare?

For that in processe of time, pastors were distinguished into Metropolitans, (or Arch-bishops,) Bishops, and Cu­rates; it was not done in respect of the Ministerie of the word, but in regard of ecclesiasticall iurisdictition and dis­cipline. Therefore touching the office of Preaching and Ministration of the sacraments, there is no difference be­twixt Arch-bishops, Bishops, and Curates. For they all are bound to feede their flockes with the same meate, and ther­fore are they called in the Scriptures by the common name of Pastors and Bishops. But how impudent are these men, which vnder colour of these holy names, glory in the suc­cession of the Apostles and true Bishops? thus writeth ma­ster Beza, iumping, (as euery childe may see,) with that doctrine which I now defend. Yea, the same Beza affirmeth these degrees and names, to haue beene appointed by the auncient Church vpon a very good zeale. These are his wordes in an other place; Neque verò nos ignoramus, quammulia sint a veteribu [...] constituta, de episcoporum, metropolitarū, & Patriarcharum sedibus idque optimo zelo, & definitis cuinsique Beza in con­sess cap. 5. Art. 29. limitibus, certaque attributa authoritate. Neither are wee ignorant, how many cōstitutions the old fathers haue made concerning the seates of Bishops, Metropolitans, and Patris arches; and that vpon a very godly zeale, assigning to euery one his boundes and authoritie. Thus the Reader seeeth, [Page 39] how Caluin, Beza, Bucer, Zanchius, and Hemingius, doe hold the same opinion, which I now defend.

The Reply.

The Bishops, Arch-bishops, Patriarches, and such like, of which Beza, Caluin, the Councell of Nice, and other coun­cels make mention, were not such as our Bishops in Eng­land, Prelates of the Garter, high Commissioners, Iustices of Peace, and Quorum.

The Answere.

I answere, First, that the same superioritie of one minister 1 ouer an other, was then in the olde Arch-bishops, Patri­arches, and such like, which is this day in ours here in this land, yea, greater by one degree at the least, because England neuer had a Patriarch in it. Secondly, that Arch-bishops, 2 Primates, and Metropolitans, (which are all one in effect) had then the same iurisdiction in other countries, which See Hemin­gius in enchi­rid, Pag. 368 &. p. 372. &. p. 373. & infra. cap, 10. verba eius haben­tur. conc. Anti­och. can. 9 our bishops haue this day in England. That is to say, a supe­riour charge and sollicitude, of all Churches within their prouinces. Which thing, (though it be alreadie prooued sufficiently to all well affected Readers,) may yet bee fur­ther confirmed, with such a plaine and manifest testimony of the auncient Councell of Antioch, (which was holden a­boue a thousand and two hundred yeares agoe, as euery child may behold the truth thereof. These are the wordes, Persingulas regiones episcopos convenit nosse, Metropolitanum episcopum sollicitudinem totius provincia gerere. Propter quod ad metropolim omnes vndique, qui negotia videntur habere, con­currant. Vnde placuit eum & honore praece [...]lere, & nihil amplius praeter eum caeteros episcopos agere, secundum antiquam a patrio bus nostris regulam constitutam, nisi ea tantùm quae ad suam di­ocaesim pertinent possessionesque. It is meete that the Bishops of euery countrie doe know, that the Metropolitan hath the charge of the whole prouince. For which respect, al the Bi­shops round about him, which haue any busines, must haue recourse vnto yt citie, (wher ye Arch-bishop or metropolitan [Page 40] doth reside.) Wherefore we haue decreed, according to the auncient Law of our Fathers, both that he shal excel in ho­nour, and also that all the other Bishops shall doe nothing at all without him, sauing those things onely, which apper­taine to their owne diocesse and possessions. Thus decree­eth this auncient and famous Councell, out of which doc­trine, I obserue these worthy lessons. First, that an Arch­bishop or Metropolitan had in old time, the charge of the 1 whole prouince. And consequently, that our Arch-bi­shops and Metropolitans in the English church, haue no new Ministerie, nor other authoritie; then was had and practis­ed by the holy Fathers in auncient time, euen in the primi­tiue church. Secondly, that this authoritie of an Arch-bi­shop 2 to rule a whole prouince, was not first constituted by this Councel, (though it were of very great antiquitie,) but was receiued by an auncient rule from their forefathers. Thirdly, that all the Bishops of the prouince, must bee di­rected by the Metropolitan or Arch-bishop. Fourthly 3 that the other Bishops could doe nothing, without the au­thoritie 4 of the Arch-bishop; such things onely excepted, as pertained to their owne diocesse and possessions. Let thus much be graunted to our Bishops, (which good reason will affoord them,) and they will desire no more. But, because the testimonie of the best Patrons of the presbyterie, can­not but prevaile much in this controuersie, let vs heare the verdicts, of the chiefest Doctors herein. Maister Caluins testimonie is already knowne, touching the authoritie of Arch-bishops in forrein countries, but I wil alledge and set before the Readers eyes, his plaine testimonie for our Bishops heere in England. These are his owne wordes, in his Epistle to Arch-bishop Cranmer. Calvinus Cranmero Caluin. epist. 127. Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, S. D. sequitur; sūma est in te autho­ritas, quam non magis tibi honoris amplitudo conciliat, quàm concepta pridèm de tua prudentia & integritate opinio. Caluin to Cranmere the Arch-bishop of Canterburie, sendeth saluta­tions. The supreame and highest authoritie resteth in your [Page 41] selfe, which your great honour did not more procure, then the opinion lately conceiued of your prudence and inte­gritie. The same Caluin in his Epistle to Doctor Grindall the Bishop of London hath these wordes; Quod tamen cu­ram popularium nostrorum qui in praecipua episcopatus tui vrbe habitant, suscipere dignatus es, non solūm vt libertas illis daretur reginae beneficio dei purè invocandi, sed vt pastorem fidum hinc accerserent, nisi hac de causa me tibi obstrictum faterer, stullitiae & inhumaintatis essem damnandus. Yet that you haue vouch­safed to take care of our vulgar country-men, which reside in the chiefe citie of your bishopricke, not onely that by the Queenes fauour they might haue freedome to serue God aright, but that also they might call from hence a faithfull pastor; if I should not confesse my selfe bound vnto you herein, I might iustly bee condemned both of follie, and of nhumanitie.

Out of these wordes, I obserue these corollaries. Frst, that heecalleth the Bishop of Canterburie, Arch-bishop; 1 and consequently, that hee did not thinke the name, to bee either antichristian, or vnlawfull. Secondly, that hee 2 did acknowledge the chiefest authoritie, to be in the Arch­bishop; and consequently, superioritie to be among our mi­nisters. Thirdly, that he granted one man to haue the charg 3 of many Churches; that is, the Bishop of London. For hee saith (in the chiefe citie of our Bishopricke.) and that it may appeare yet more euidently, that he graunteth the charge of a whole prouince to one onely Arch-bishop; I will alledge some part of that his Epistle, which he addressed to the Po­tent Caluin. ad seren. regem Poloniae, epist. 190. and mightie king of Polonia. Thus doth he write; Que admodum si hodie illustrissimo Poloniae regno vnus praeesset Ar­chiepiscopus, non qui dominaretur in reliquos, velius ab illis e­reptumsibi arrogaret; sed qui ordinis causa in synodis primum te­neret locum, & sanctā inter collegas suos & fratres vnitatem foveret. Euen as if this day one Arch-bishop should be the president of the most honourable Kingdome of Po­lonia; not as one that should haue dominion ouer the rest, [Page 42] or should challenge to himself the right taken from others; but as one who for order sake, should haue the chiefe place in synodes, and should preserue holy vnitie, among his sel­lowes and brethren. I he [...]e are the words of this great lear­ned man who was the greatest and chiefest patrone of their presbiterie, & the first man in the world that set it abroach, and brought it into the Church. And yet doth he graunt plainly, as much as our Bishops will require. For hee graunteth, (as wee see,) that one Arch-bishop may haue a superioritie, ouer all other Bishops in the large kingdome of Polonia. The exception that he maketh, I willingly ad­mit, and so will all our Bishops likewise doe. As who nei­ther doe nor euer did, once make or giue the least signe of a­ny such superioritie, ouer their fellowes and louing bre­thren. No, no, no such thing can truly be imputed to them. For with vs euery minister in his Parish, and euery Bishop in his Diocesse; hath the charge of their owne flockes and Parishes, to Preach the word, and to administer the Sacraments vnto them, in as ample and large manner, as Maister Caluin heere requireth. Which his wordes im­mediately Caluin. vbi supra. epist. 190. afore-going doe declare, beeing these. Vetus quidem ecclesia patriarchas instituit, & singulis etiam provineijs quosdam attribuit primatus, vt hoc concordiae vincu [...]o meliùs in­ter [...]e devincti manerent episcopi. The anciēt Church did con­st [...]ate Patriarches, and assigned for euery prouince one prim [...]e; that by this bond of concord, the Bishops might be more firmely vnited among themselues. Like as if one Arch-bishop should be the chiefetaine, of the whole King­dome of Polonia; and so foorth as is alreadie saide. Where wee see, or may see, if wee will; that Maister Caluin ac­knowledgeth the same superioritie, both in the aunci­ent times of the Church, and more lately in the Arch-bishop of Polonia, which is this day giuen and allotted to the Arch-bishop of Canterburie, ouer the other Bishops and Ministers in England. Now, for aunswere to the o­ther [Page 43] part of the obiection, touching high Commissioners, Iustices of Peace and Quorum, I haue referued the next Chapter.

CHAP. VI. Of civill offices, in Ecclesiasticall persons.

THe authoritie in ciuill matters commit­ted to the ministers of the Church, is not made a thing intrinsically incidēt to the Ciuil offi [...]s; are not in trinsecally incident to the ministery. Vide infra, cap. 11. ex. Musculo, propè finem cap. & nota valdè. ministerie, or as a part thereof, but it is cōmitted to them by the Prince, (whom his subiects are not to limit what per­sons he shall vse in counsell, or to whom hee shall commit the execution of his lawes,) and it is added to their ministerie, as profitable and necessarie for the present state and good of the Church. Which good to bee procured by that meanes, rather then by any other imployment besides; it may appeare both by experience, and practise. By experience, for that wee see those Kingdomes, Princes, and people, most blessed of God, where learned and godly Bishops haue beene recei­ued into the Princes Counsell. By practise, because I haue both heard and read, that maister Caluin and maister Beza were admitted to be Counsellours of the seate at Geneua, be­ing thought sit men for that place. Who doubtlesse would neuer haue yeelded thereunto, if they had thought it a thing either vnlawfull in it selfe, or incompatible to their function. No, no, it is neither vngodly, nor yet vn­seemely, for a Minister to come from the Pulpit, to the correction of vice, sinne, and wickednesse. But contrari­wise, it is so godly, so comely, and so necessarie: that it euer hath beene vsuall, both in the Lawe of nature, in the Lawe of Moses, and in the Lawe of grace: [Page 44] for First, in the lawe of nature, Melchisedech was both King and Priest. So reporteth holy Moses in his booke 1 of Genèsis, and Saint Paul to the Hebrewes. And Saint Hie­rome In lege na­tura. Gen. 14. Hebr. 7. Hier. in trad. Hebr. in Ge­nes. tom. 4. Fol 95. telleth vs, that all the eldest sonnes of the holy Patriarches, were both Kings and Priests. Aiunt hunc esse Sem filium Noe, & supputantes annos vitae ipsius, o­stendunt eum ad Isaac vsque vixisse, omnesque primogenitos Noe, donec sacerdotio fungeretur Aaron, fuisse pontifi­ces.

The Hebrewes (saith Saint Hierome,) affirme this (Mel­chisadech) to bee Sem the sonne of Noah, and reckoning the yeeres of his life, they shewe vs that he liued vntill I­saac: and that all the first begotten of Noah, vntill Aarons Priest-hood began, were Bishops. Yea, whosoeuer will de­nie, that Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, and others, did rule o­uer those who were committed to their charge, as wel in ec­clesiasticall In lege Mo­sis. as ciuill causes, they may truly be said to knowe nothing in the scriptures.

Secondly, in the Lawe of Moses, Moses himselfe 2 was both the ciuill Magistrate and a Priest. For Moses Exod. 18. 13. Exod. 32. Vers. 27. Leuit. 8. Exod. 40. 1. Sam. 2. Vers. 11. &. Cap. 4 18. 1. Sam. 8. Act. 13. 21. 2. Paral. 19. Vers. 10. iudged the people from morning vnto euen. Hee put the Malefactors to death, who had committed Idolatry. Hee consecrated Aaron and his sonnes, and burnt sweet incense on the golden Altar.

Heli was both the high Priest, and iudge of the people, for the space of 40 yeares together.

Samuel likewise was both a Priest and iudge ouer the people, for the space of 30. yeares together. The good king Iosaphat made the Priests iudges, both in ecclesiastical and ciuil causes. And after the captiuitie of the Iewes, the Machabees, were rulers, aswel in ciuil as in ecclesiastical cau­ses. Read the books of the Machabees, Iosephus, & Egesippus. and this truth will soone appeare. But what neede many words, in a case so cleere and euident? God himselfe made a general law, yt the priests & the ciuil magistrate shuld iont­ly determine, iudge and decide, all controuersies. These are [Page 45] the expresse wordes of the Law; if there rise a matter too Deut. 17. v. 8. 9. hard for thee in iudgement, betweene boold and blood, betweene plea and plea, betweene plague and plague, in the matters of controuersie within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and goe vnto the place, which the Lord thy God shall chuse. And thou shalt come to the Priestes of the Levites, & to the iudge that shall be in those dayes, and aske, and they shall shewe thee the sentence of iudge­ment. These wordes are so plaine, as all interpretation may be thought needlesse. 3

Thirdly, in the Gospell, and newe Testament, wee In lege gra­tiae. haue a pluralitie of examples in this behalfe. S. Paul, when he made his abode at Corinthus, with Aquila, and Prescilla, whom Claudius the Emperour had driuen from Rome: he Acts 18. v. 2. 3. wrought with his hands, being of the same craft with them, and made tents as they did.

S. Augustine, thought it a thing so lawfull, for a Bi­shop to be iudge in causes Ecclesiasticall; that I wonder, how any man hearing or reading his owne words, can any longer stand in doubt thereof. Thus doth he write: Quis August. de opere mon. cap. 29. tom. 1. Cor. 9. v. 7. plantat vineam, & de fructu eius non edit? Quis pascit gregem, & de lacte gregis non percipit? Tamen Dominum Iesum, in cuius nomine securus haec dico, testem invoco super animam meam, quoniam quantum attinet ad meum cōmodum multo mallem per singulos dies certis horis, quantum in bene moderatis monasterijs constitutum est aliquid manibus operari, & caeteras horas babe­re ad legendū & orandum aut aliquid de divinis litteris agendum liberas; quam tumultuosissimas perplexitates causar ūalienarum patide negotijs secularibus, vel iudicando dirimendis, vel interve­niendo praecidendis; quibus nos molestijs idem affixit Apostolus, non vtique suo, sed eius qui in eo loqu [...]batur arbitrio, quam ta­men ipsum perpessum fuisse non legimus. Aliter. n. se habebat a­postolatus eius discursus. Sequitur: quem tamen laborem non sine consolatione domini suscipimus prospe vitae aeternae, vt fructum seramus cum tolerantia, Servi n sumus cius Ecclesiae, & maxime infirmioribus membris, quanta libet in eodem corpore membra [Page 46] sumus. Omitto alias innumerabiles ecclesiasticas curas, quat for tasse nemo credit, nisi qui expertus est. Non ergo alligamui onera gravia, & humeris vestris imponimus, quae nos digito non attingimus: quandoquidem si officil nostri sarva ratione possemus, videt ille qui probat corda nostra, mallemus haee agere, quae vt a­gatis hortamur, quàm ea quae non agere cogimur.

Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruite thereof? who seedeth a flocke, and receiueth not of the milke of the flocke? Yet I call the Lord Iesus to witnesse vpon my soule, in whose name I boldly vtter these words: that touching mine owne commoditie, I had much rather euery day to worke some thing with mine hands, as it is ap­pointed in well gouerned Monasteries, and to haue the houres free, to read, and to pray, and to doe some exercise in the holy Scriptures: then to suffer the tumultuous per­plexities of other mens causes touching secular affaires, ei­ther in determining thē by iudging, or in cutting thē off by intreating: to which molestations the Apostle hath tyed vs, not by his own iudgemēt, but by his iudgement who spake in him; which troubles for al that himself did not vndergoe, because his course apostolicall had an other respect. Which labour notwithstanding we endure with consolation in the Lord, for the hope of eternall life, that we may bring forth fruit with patience, for we are seruants of the Church, and especially to the weaker members, how mean members so euer we are in the same bodie. I let passe innumerable o­ther Ecclesiasticall cares, which perhaps none will beleeue, but he that hath tryed the same. We therfore doe not binde grieuous burdens together, and impose them on your shoulders, which we doe not touch with our finger: seeing we had rather do those things which we exhort you to do, then which we our selues are compelled to doe; if we could so doe with the discharge of our dutie, as knoweth God the searcher of our hearts. Thus discourseth this holy, aunci­ent, and most learned Father. Out of whose doctrine, I obserue many golden, worthy, and very necessarie docu­ments, [Page 47] for the instruction of all indifferent Readers. First, 1 that he delt much in secular causes and affaires of the world. Secondly, that he had rather haue wrought with his hands, 2 and haue done much bodily labour in the monasterie; then to haue beene so tossed and turmoyled, in hearing and de­termining ciuill causes of his people. Thirdly, that he v­sed 3 sometimes to ende matters by way of intreatie, as a friend: and sometime by absolute authoritie, as a Iudge. Let this point be well marked, because it is of great mo­ment. Fourthly, that the Apostle had bound him so to 4 deale in secular affaires. Fiftly, that the Apostle did not 5 impose that secular charge vpon him, by his owne iudge­ment and authoritie: but by the counsell and iudgement of God himselfe, who spake in him. Which charge he pro­ueth out of the Apostles doctrine, in the place and chap­ter quoted in my Margent. Sixtly, that S. Austin did vn­dergoe 6 the molestations of secular businesse, because hee hoped thereby to attaine eternall life. Seuenthly, that hee 7 could not doe his bounden dutie, vnlesse hee were some­times occupied in deciding ciuill causes. So farre was this holy Father from their opinion, who more rashly then wisely, affirme it a damnable thing, and an Antichristian marke, for a Bishop to be a Iustice of Peace, or of Quorum: and yet cannot any learned writer be named, for the space of a thousand and two hundred yeares, who reputed not S. Austin for a very holy man, and a most graue & learned writer. Let all such persons therefore consider better of the matter, and either wilfully condemne that holy Father, and mighty pillar of Christes Church; or else let them henceforth be more sparing of such savage loquacitie, and approue the Christian and laudable offices of Iustice of Peace and Quorum, in the reuerend Fathers, the Lord Bi­shops of the English Church. For Saint Anstin was both a Lord bishop, and as it were a Iustice of Peace, as is appa­rant by that which is already said, since the beginning of this discourse.

[Page 48] The same Saint Augustine in the presence of Religian [...] and Martinianus, his fellow bishops, and Saturninus, Leporius, Barnabas, Fortunatianus, Ructicus, Lazarus, and E­radius Augustin [...] Epist. 110. Priests, declaring to the people what paines hee had taken many yeares for them, being greatly occupyed, mo­lested, and troubled in their secular affaires, earnestly re­quired of them for Christes sake, that now in his olde age they would bee content, that hee might commit some part of his secular care, vnto one Eradius, a yong man, but a ver­tuous Priest? to which request when the people had yeel­ded, Saint Austin added these wordes; Ergo fratres, quicquid est quod ad me perferebatur, adillū perferatur, vbi necessariu [...] babuerit, consilium meum non negabo, auxilium absit, vt sub­traham. Therefore brethren, whatsoeuer was wont to bee brought to my hearing, let it hence-foorth come to him and when he shall haue neede, I will not denie my counsel God forbid, I should with-drawe my helpe. By which words of this Holy father, it is most apparāt to euery child, that hee was very much encombred with secular busines, both in the foore-noone and in the after-noone; and yet for all that, he durst not wholy withdraw himselfe: no not with the consent of the people: least in so doing he should of fend God. And therefore he said; Absit, God forbid. Let the word (absit) be well remembred.

Saint Epiphanus the Bishop of Salamina, a Citie of Cy­prus, behaued himselfe so worthily and Christianly, while hee was occupied in politique and ciuill affaires, that is short time he became famous among many Nations.

Hermias Sozomenus in his Ecclesiastical Historie, writeth Sezom lib. 6. of the said Father in these words: Nam cum in multit [...] dine cap. 32. Hist. eccles. hominum, & in vrbe ampla, eaque maritima, sacerdot [...] fungeretur, ob praestantiam virtutis, qua etiam negotijs civili [...] occupatus vsus est, bre [...]i cum civibus, tum peregrinis cuius [...] nationis notus factus est; illis quidem, vt qui eum coram vidissent, eiusque piae vitae fecissent periculum: his autem, vt qui i [...] idem de eo narramibus fidem adiunxissent.

[Page 49] For when hee executed his priestly function in a most populous and large citie, which was an hauen towne neere vnto the Sea; in a short space he was famous among all Na­tions, for his great vertues which he made vse of, while hee was busied with secular affaires. To the Citizens he became famous, because they knewe him familiarly, and had made good tryall of his holy life. To the Strangers, in that they beleeued the constant report of the Citizens. Loe, this auncient writer, holy Father, and learned Doctor, (who liued aboue one thousand two hundred yeares agoe,) was either a Iustice of Peace, when he was the Bishop of Cy­prus; or else had some other ciuill office, equivalent to the same.

Dorotheus a vertuous and learned Priest of Antioch did serue the Emperour in ciuill affaires. Eusebins Caesa­riensis writeth of this auncient Priest (who liued more then one thousand three hundred yeares agoe,) in these wordes; Dorotheum dignitate sacerdotali tum Autiochiae do­natum, Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 26. virum sanè disertum cognovimus. Hic in sacris literis exquisitè eruditus fuit; linguae hebraicae diligentèr navavit ope­ram, adeò vt scripturas hebraicas scientèr posset intelligere. Erat honestis ac liberalibus parentibus prognatus, humanioris lite­raturae neutiquam expers; eunuchus reverànatus, vti illum im­perator propter incredibilem eius naturam in suam familiam a sciverit & praefectura purpura tingendae, quae apud Tyrum est, honorificè donarit.

We knowe Dorotheus a Priest of Antioch, an eloquent man in deede. He was very skilfull in the holy Scriptures; he had profited so in the Hebrew tongue, that he could per­fectly vnderstand the Scriptures in Hebrew, hee was de­scended of honest and liberall parents, not vnseene in hu­mane literature. He was indeede an Ennuch borne, so that the Emperour rauished with his excellent nature, receiued him into his Court, and gaue him an honourable charge to ouersee his house, where his purple was dyed at Tyrus.

[Page 50] Nicephorus Callistus in his Ecclesiasticall Historie, telleth vs of one Philaeas, a famous Bishope and blessed Nicephor. lib. 7. cap. 9. Martyr; who (as hee reporteth,) got great credite for his dexteritie in deciding ciuil causes committed to his charge. But to let others passe, let vs heare, what a famous late wri­ter saith: who fauoured the presbyteriall Discipline, so farre foorth, as either by learning or safe conscience hee could agree therevnto. These are his expresse wordes: Zanchius de religione, Page 176. Uide suprà cap 4 ex Mus [...]ulo, & notato. Et infrà cap. 11. ex eodem. & nota valdè resp ad. 2. obuct. Interim non diffitemur episcopos, qui simul etiam principes sunt praeter authoritatem ecclesiasticam, sua etiam hebere iura po­litica seculare sque potestates, quemadmodum & reliqui habent principes: ius [...]perands secularia; ius gladij; nonnullos ius eligendi confirmandique reges & imperatores, aliaque politicae constituends & administrandi, subditos (que) sibi populos ad obedien­tiam sibi praestandam cogendi. Ac proinde jatemur politicis ho­rum mandatis, quae sine transgressione legis divinae servari pos­sunt, a subditis obtemperandum esse non solum propter timorem, sed etiam propter conscientiam.

Neuerthelesse, wee doe not denie, that Bishops which are also Princes, may besides their authoritie eccle­siasticall, haue also politicall right and secular power, like as other Princes haue: right to commaund secular matters; authoritie to vse the sword; authoritie to choose and confirme Kinges and Emperours, & to constitute and administrate, other ciuill affaires, as also to compell their subiects to yeelde obedience to them in that behalfe. And therefore wee graunt, that their subiects must obey their civill commandes, which may be kept without offence of Gods law: and that not onely for feare, but also for con­science sake.

The same Zanchius in an other place hath these wordes: Quis autem illis omninò obediendum esse, quo iure, Zanch. vbi suprà, Pag. 274. quaque iniuria principes suerint creats, ex testimonijs a me allao us non videat apertè demonstrari? cur. n. qui subdits sunt Mo­guntino, Colontensi, Trevirensi, principibus imperij simul & [Page 51] archiepiscopis, in rebus cum pietate christiana non pugnantibus non obtemperent? seditiosorum certè fuerit, non obtemperare. Quodsi istis, cur non etiam Romano ijsdem in rebus & candem ob causam, qui sub eius vivunt imperio? eadem. n. horum om­nium est ratio.

And who cannot see it euidently proued, by the exam­ples which I haue alledged, that they must bee obeyed vn­doubtedly, whether they be by right, or no right created Princes. For why shall not subiects obey in things not against Christian pietie, the Princes of the Empire be­ing also Arch-bishops, of Moguntia, Colen, and Tre­vers? it is doubtlesse the properietie of sedicious persons, not to yeelde obedience vnto them. And if these must bee obeyed, why not also the Bishop of Rome, in the same matters and for the same cause, of those that liue with­in his Empire? for there is the like reason of them all. Thus writeth the famous and great learned Doctor Zan­chius. Out of whose resolution, I obserue these points, for the good of the gentle Reader.

First, that Ecclesiasticall and Civill iurisdiction are 1 compatible, and may both be in one and the same subiect at once.

Secondly, that Bishops which are also Princes, may 2 together with their Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, haue also se­cular power, and authoritie to vse the sword, and such like.

Thirdly, that the people within their dominions 3 and liberties, are bound to obey them.

Fourthly, that they must obey not onely for feare, but 4 euen for conscience-sake.

Fiftly, that whosoeuer shall disobey such Bishops 5 and Arch-bishops, doe shewe themselues thereby to be seditious fellowes. To which I adde, that this doctine of this great learned man, (who was a most zealous [Page 52] professour of Christes Gospell) doth flatly confound, and euen strike dead, pronouncing a sharpe vae vobis to all such, as shall obstinately refuse to obey our Bishops and Arch-byshops here in England. For whatsoeuer can be obiected against our Bishops, why wee shall not obey them: the same may be alledged against those Bishops, of which Zanchius speaketh in this place. Yea our Bi­shops, are as lawfully created Barons, and doe this day as lawfully enioy their temporall Baronries (for ought I know,) by the free donation of the Kings of this Realme of famous memorie, as doe the Bishops of Germanie. I therefore conclude, from a good foundation surely layd, that Bishops and Arch-bishops, aswell concerning their names and titles, as their authoritie, iurisdiction, and su­perioritie ouer other Ministers, are both lawfull, necessa­rie and agreeable to the practise of the Catholique Church in all Ages: and consequently, that none will or can de­nie the same, but such as are either wholy ignorant, in the auncient Councels, holy Fathers, and ecclesiasticall hi­stories: Calvin in harmon. evangel. pag. 263. or else maliciously bent to speake against their owne knowledge, and wittingly and willingly to oppose them selues against the knowne truth. Yea, Maister Cal­vin graunteth freely, that hee which is Lorde of a Village or Citie, may exercise the office of teaching.

CHAP. VII. Of the Churches authoritie, in things indifferent.

The first aphorisme, of things de facto altered in the Church.

MAny things being in their owne nature indifferent, haue beene changed in the Church by her authoritie, as the circum­stances of times, places, and persons did require. First, our Lord Iesus did cele­brate the holy Communion and memo­riall Mat. 26. V. 20. Mar. 14 v. 23. Luc. 22 v. 19. I. cor. II 23. exod. 12. 18. numb. 28. 17. luc. 22. 14 mar. 14. 18. mat. 26 v. 20 Iohn. 13. v. 14. 15. of his sacred passion, in the euening after Supper. Yet the Churches custome this day is and e­uer was, to celebrate the same in the morning before Din­ner. Secondly, Christ did celebrate the same, vsing vnlea­uened bread therein, but the reformed Churches doe this day vse leauened bread without offēce in so doing. Third­ly, Christs Apostles receiued the blessed Eucharist fitting: but the custome of the Church hath euer beene, to receiue the same kneeling. And they that would seeme to haue most spiced consciences, will not sticke to receiue it stan­ding or walking. Fourthly, Christ washed his Apostles feete, willing them to followe his example, and to wash one anothers feete. Fiftly, the Apostles made a solemne Decree, Act. 15. v. 29. affirming it to proceede from the holy Ghost, to abstaine from blood, & that which is strangled. And yet the church many yeares agoe, haue wholy altered that holy ordinance and Apostolicall constitution. Sixtly, Saint Paul, after hee had willed the Corinthyans, and vs in them, to be followers of him, euen as he was of Christ, telleth them and vs plain­ly, that euery man praying or Prophesing hauing any thing on his head, dishonoureth his head. And yet at this day, Vide infrà, Cap. 14. membro. 7. smalaccount is made therof. This point will be made more plaine, when I come to speake of the oath Ex officio.

The second Aphorisme, of things not expressed in the Scrip­tures, and yet decreed by the Church to be obserued and kept.

IN the church of the Hebrewes, wee read of many approoued constitutions, for which there was no warrāt in the writ­ten word. First, King Salomon appoin­ted a solemne festiuitie, for the dedicati­on of the Temple, which continued for 1. Reg. 8. 2. par. 7. the space of seuen whole daies. Second­ly, Queene Hester and Mordicai appointed the Iewes to keepe a solemne feast, for the remembrance of their happy deliuerāce from Hamans crueltie. Thirdly, the Machabees, Iudas and his brethren, ordained that the dedication of the Altar should be kept from yeare to yeare, by the space of Hest. cap. 3. and cap. 9. 1. mach. 4. V. [...]9. eight daies with mirth and gladnesse. Fourthly, in the daies of Nehemiah the Captaine, and of Ezra the Priest, the Iewes were appointed to keepe the dedication of the wall at Hie­rusalem, with thankes-giuing, and with songes, Cymbals, Violes, and Harpes. Concerning which dedication institu­ted Ez. 616. Ne. he. 12. v. 27. by Iudas Machabaeus, Christ himself honoured it with his presence, and maister Caluin affordeth it this explicati­on. Ac si diceres, innovationes; quia templum quod pollutum fu­erat, Ioan. 10. v. 22 Caluin. in 10 Iohan. de integro consecratum fuit auspicijs Iudae Machabaei; ac tunc institutum fuit vt quotannis festus ac celebris esset dedicati­onis novae dies, vt dei gratiam quae finem Antiochi tyrannidi impo­suerat, memoria repeterent. Tunc autem in templo Christus promo [...]e apparuit, vt in frequenti hominum conventu vberior esset praedicationis suae fructus▪ As if thou shouldest say, innouatiōs; because the Temple which had bene polluted, was cōsecra­ted a fresh by Iudas Machabaeus his authoritie, & then was it ordained, that there should be yearely a feast and a solemne day of the new dedicatiō that they might remember Gods grace and mercy, which had made an end of Antiochus his tyranny. At which time, Christ was present after his maner in the Temple, that in so great a concurse of people, his [Page 55] Preaching might haue the better effect. Yea, maister Cal­uin granteth that the Iewes instituted their Sanhe [...]rim after Caluin sup. 18 mat. their returne from Captiuitie.

This libertie the Church hath this day, as may appeare by the freedome in altering the Saboth-day. For, as I haue In my suruey proued at large, by the testimonie not onely of the ancient Fathers, but also of the best approued late writers, Philippus Melanction, Erasmus Roterodamus, Iohannes Caluinus, Petrus Vide infrà, cap. 10. ex Bucero. Martyr, Pellicanus, Bullingerus, and Vrsinus, in my booke of Suruey; though it be constant & perpetuall, to haue one day in the weeke assigned for diuine seruice, that being the mo­rall part of the Sabaoth and vnalterable; yet, whether this or that day ought to bee appointed for that purpose, it is a thing that respects the time, and may bee changed by the church. If any shal hold the contrary doctrine, he must per­force fall into flat iudaisme, & tye himselfe to the obseruāce of dayes, moneths & yeares, against the Apostolike doc­trine For to be tied of necessitie to the time, is a flat Iewish Gal. 4. v. 10. superstition, & intrinsecally ceremonial; as all the aforena­med learned men: doe & will testifie with me. yet I neither wish, nor deeme it a thing conuenient, to change the Lords day or Saboath.

The third aphorisme of the rules which the Church must ob­serue, in all her constitutions, ordinances, and decrees.

THe first rule, which the Church must ob­serue in her lawes, decrees, & constitutions, is this; viz. That shee prohibite nothing which God commandeth, neither cōmand Regula. any thing, which God prohibiteth. Ye shal Prima. put nothing to the word which I cōmand Deut. 4 2. you, neither shal ye take ought there-from. Take heed ther­fore, Deut. 5. 32. that yee doe as the Lord your God hath commanded you: turne not aside to the right hand, nor to the left. Let not this booke of the law depart out of thy mouth, but me­ditate therein day and night, that thou maiest obserue and Ios. 1. 8. doe according to all that is written therein.

[Page 56] The second rule is this; that the decrees and constituti­ons of the Church, bee not made a part of Gods worship, Regula. Secunda. Mat. 15. 9. Coloss. 2. V. 23. nor holden as necessary vnto saluation. For as our Saui­our saith, they worship him in vaine, who teach for Doc­trines, the precepts of men. And therfore doth the Apostle condemne Ethelothrescêian all voluntarie worship deuised by man.

The third rule is this; that the decrees and constitutions Regulaterti­a. of the Church, be onely made of things indifferent, and for one of these three endes; viz. either for edification, or for decencie and comelinesse, or for order sake, and peaceable gouernment of the Church. Of these endes speaketh the Apostle, where he willeth all things to be done vnto edify­ing, and to be done decently, and orderly. These three A­phorismes 1. Cor. 14. v. 26. 40. seriously obserued, & duly pondered, all Cere­monies, Ordinances, Decrees, and Constitutions of our English Church, will find ready and sufficient approbati­on.

The Demonstration.

The corollarie and illation deduced out of the precedent Aphorismes may be made cleare and euident, by three in­uincible and irrefragable reasons. Wherof the first is taken, from the authoritie of the holy Scriptures; the second, from the practise of the Catholique Church. The third, from the vniforme consent of best approued late Writers.

The 1. reason drawne from the holy Scriptures.

HOly Writt teacheth vs, that the Church De facto hath Vide infrà, cap 14 mem­bro, 2. in resp. ad 2 obiect. ex Zuinglio. altered many things, which Christ himselfe did both institute, and put in practise. That the Church ordai­ned and Decreed many things, whereof the Scripture ma­keth no mention. And that the Church may make decrees, Lawes, ordinances, and constitutions, in all things Adiapho­rois which are of their own nature indifferent; so the same [Page 57] tend to edification, comelinesse, or peaceable gouernment of the Church. This reason is proued, throughout, all the Vide infrà, ca. 9. ex Cal­vino & Beza precedent Aphorismes. And it will be more plaine, when I come to speake of the election of ministers.

The 2. reason, drawne from the practise of the auncient Church.

IF the gentle Reader shall call to minde, what I haue in this discourse alreadie set downe, out of the Decrees of Supra, cap. 4: 5. &. 6. the auncient and holy Councels; out of the holy Fathers, and best approoued late Writers; hee cannot rest doubt­full, or stagger any longer in this behalfe. Saint Austen writeth so grauely and so copiously of this matter, in ma­ny of his bookes extant in the world; as hee is well able to satisfie euery one, that will be perswaded with rea­son. In his Epistle to Ianuarius, (to omit all other his ma­nifold testimonies,) he telleth vs, that yt Catholique Church by her freedome and authoritie, hath instituted certaine so­lemne feastes, of the passion, resurrectiō, ascension of Christ, Aug. in epist. ad Ianuar. epist. 118. vide Calu. lib. 4. instit. cap. 10. §. 19. and descending of the holy Ghost, to be yearely obserued throughout the Christian world. He addeth these most golden wordes; Nec disciplina vlla est in his melior graui pru­dentique christiano, quàm vt eo modo agat quo agere viderit ec­closiā ad quamcunque fortè devenerit. Quod. n. neque contra fi­dem, neque contra bonos mores iniungitur, indifferentèr est ha­bendū et pro eorum inter quos vivitur societate servandum est.

Neither can there be any better discipline in these mat­ters for a graue and discrete christan, then to doe so as hee shall see that Church doe, to which hee hath occasion to come. For, that which is neither against faith, nor against good manners, may be indifferently obserued for their so­cietie, amongst whom we doe conuerse. In the same Epistle the same holy Father telleth vs Saint Ambrose his iudge­ment, August vbi­suprà. concerning the varietie of fasting. These are his [Page] wordes; Cum Romā venio, ieiuno sabbato, cum hic sum, non ie­iuno: sic etiam tu, ad quam sortè ecclesiam veneris, eius morem serva, si cuiquam non vis esse scandalo, nec quenquā tibi. Whē I Vide suprà cap. 5. §. 2. ex zanchio, & nota valdè. come to Rome (saith Saint Ambrose,) I fast on Satterday; when I am here at Millan, I doe not fast. Euen so must you doe, when you come to any other Church, you must doe after the manner of that Church, if you will neither scanda­lize others, nor haue others to scandalize you. Heere is a most golden rule, how to behaue our selues in things indif­ferent. viz, to conforme our selues to the time, place, and persons, when, where, and with whom we doe conuerse. If our brethren would seriously ponder, and duly weigh this golden aduise of this holy Father, they would abandon all contention doubtlesse, about the signe of the Crosse, the Surplesse, and such like indifferent things; and for that du­tie which they owe vnto the magistrate, whom they are bound to obey in all lawfull things, euen for conscience sake; they would conforme themselues to his lawes and Rom. 13. their brethren, and not to scandalize the whole Church as they doe.

To this graue testimonie of Saint Austen and Saint Ambrose, it shall suffice for the second reason, to adde this memorable obseruation, viz. that our brethren, who labour so busily to enforce vs violently, to receiue their newe dis­cipline; are not able to make demonstration to vs, either out of the Scriptures, or generall Councels, or the holy fa­thers, Vide Caluin. & nota val d. lib. 4. instit cap 2. §. 11. or ecclesiasticall histories; that any Church in the Christian world, from two hundred yeares before the fa­mous Councell of Nice, vntill maister Caluins daies that is, for the space of a thousand foure hundred yeares toge­ther to say nothing of former times, had either the same newe 2. Tim. 1. Vers. 6. vide Caluin. lib. 4. instit. cap. 3. §. 16. discipline in practise, or any pastors made after their manner. Which if it cannot be done, they wil (I doubt not) after ma­ture delibration had therein, confesse willingly and truly at least in their hearts; that in this Church of England, there [Page 59] is this day a lawfull ministerie, consisting of lawfull Mini­sters and Bishops, according to the practise of the Church in all ages.

The third reason, drawne from the vniforme consent of best approued late writers.

MAister Caluin hath a very large and learned discourse Calu. libr. 4. instit. cap. 10. 5. 30. vide. Zanchiū in compend. ip­sissima. n. ha­bet verba. pag. 641. of this question, some part whereof shall suffice at this present. These are his wordes. Quia autem in ex­terna disciplina & ceremonijs, non valuit sigillatim praescribere quid sequi debeamus, quod illud pendere a temporum conditione provideret, ne que iudicaret vnam seculis omnibus formam con­venire, confugere hic oportet ad generales quas dedit regulas, vt ad ea [...] exigantur quaecunque ad ordinem & decorum praecipi ne­cessitas ecclefiae postulabit, Postremò quia ideo Nihil expressū trae [...] didit, quianec ad salutem haec necessaria sunt, en prc moribus vni­uscuiusque gentis ac seculi varie accommodari debent ad ecclesiae aedificationem, provt ecclesiae vtilit as requiret, tam vsitatas mu­tare & abrogare, quam novas instituere conveniet, Fateor equi­dem, non temerè, nec subinae, nec levibus de causis, ad novationem esse decurrendum. Sed quid [...]oceat vel aedificet, charit as optimè iudicabit, quam si moderatricē esse patiemur, salva erunt omnia.

But because in externall discipline and ceremonies, hee would not particularly prescribe what wee ought to fol­lowe, Notato cap. 10. ex Buce­ro Zuinglie, Hemingio, nota valde. because he foresaw that this depended vpon the state and condition of the time, and did not deeme one maner to be agreeable to all ages; here we must haue recourse to his generall rules giuen vs, and make triall by them of what things soeuer, the necessrie of the Church shall require for order and comelinesse. Lastly, because hee there­fore deliuered nothing expressely, for that they are not ne­cessarie to saluation, but must be applied diuersly to the be­nefit of the Church, as the manners of euery nation doe re­quire, it shall therefore be convenient, as well to chaunge and abolish the olde ceremonies, as to institute newe, as the good of the Church shall require. I confesse freely that [Page 60] we must not vse innouation, neither rashly, nor often, nor vpon light occasions. But what shall bee hurtfull or profi­table, charitie shall best discerne; which if we shall suffer to rule vs, euery thing shall be well.

The same author in an other place, hath these wordes; Caluin. in. 1. cor. 11. v. 2. Ego autem non nego, quin aliquae fuerint apostolorum traditiones non scriptae; sednon concedo fuisse doctrinae partes, nec de rebus ad salutem necessarijs. Quidigitur? quae pertinerent ad ordinem Vide infrà, cap. 10. per totum. & cap 14. ex Hie­ron. notetur loeus in mem­bro. 4. & poluiam. Scimus. n. vnicuique ecclesiae liberum esse, politiae for­mam instituere sibi aptam & vtilem quae dominus nihil certiprae­scripserit.

But I denie not, that the Apostles deliuered some traditi­ons, which are not written. Yet I doe not grant, that they were either parts of doctrine, or necessary to saluatiō What were they then? doubtlesse, such as pertained to pollicy and order For we knowe, that euery Church hath her fredome and libertie, to institute and ordaine such a kind of pollicie (& discipline) as shall be thought meet & profitable for the same; because our Lord prescribed no certaine rule there­in.

The same author in an other place, hath these words; Altos Caluin in ar [...] gum ad gal. omnes ritus illic non vsitatos, nō tantùm restuebant sed andactèr etiam damnabant. Talis morosit as deterrima est pestis, quum mo­rem ecclesiae vnius volumus provnivsrsali lege valere.

They did not onely refuse all other ceremonies not vsed Vide infr [...] cap. 9. & no­ta vaidè, in that place, but did also malepertly condemne them. Such Morositie is a most noysome plague; when wee will make the manner and discipline of one onely Church, to be a generall rule for all. Thus writeth this learned Doc­tor. Out of whose wordes I may truly gather so much, as will euidently make good the question I have in hand.

For First, he telleth vs plainly, that the holy Apostle did 1 not set downe any certaine rule or lawe, concerning things indifferent.

Secondly, that hee lest that freedome and libertie to 2 the Church, and that for this ende and purpose; because [Page 61] forsooth; he foresaw in his wisedome, that such things de­pended vpon the condition of times: and that one manner of discipline, was not conuenient to all places and persons. Thirdly, that euery Church may either chaunge her olde 3 ceremonies, or institute new, as the necessitie of the Church requireth. Fourthly, that charitie is the best rule to follow 4 herein: and that euery thing is lawfull, which is agreeable to the same. Which rule S. Augustine appointed before him, as I haue proued already. Fiftly, that the Church hath re­ceived 5 many vnwritten traditions, concerning the disci­pline, order, and government of the Church. Sixtly, that 6 it is free and lawfull for euery Church, to appoint, ordaine and constitute, that kind of pollicie, discipline, & govern­ment, which is most sit & profitable for the same. And the reason hereof is yeelded to be this; because our Lord Ie­sus hath prescribed no setled law therein, but hath left all indifferent things to the libertie of his Church. Seuenthly, 7 that there can no greater plague come to the Church, then to tye all Churches to one kinde of externall govern­ment. Zanchius teacheth the selfe same doctrine, euen in Zanch. vbi suprà. the same words.

Petrus Martyr, after he hath distributed traditions in­to three orders, shewing one kinde to bee expressed in the Scriptures: an other plaine repugnant to the same; the third neither contrary to the word of GOD, neither ne­cessarily affixed vnto it: addeth these expresse words: Martyr in 1. Cor. 1. 10.

Sunt nonnullae traditiones, quas neutras appellare libuit, quod verbo deinec adversentur, nec illinecessariò cohaereant, in­quibus mos ecclesiae gerendus est, tribus interposit is cautionibus. Primùm videndum est, ne obtrudantur, quasidei cultus & decu­liar is quaedam sanctimonia; quandcquidem potius recipiendae sunt adordinum conservandum, & civilem ecclesiae commoditatem, Vide infrà, cap. 14. membr 2. & 3. per totum. atque sacrarum actionum decorum: alioquin in sacris literis luculentèr habemus descripta, quaead sanctitatem & cullum dei cōducunt Praeterea cavere oportet, ne quaesic tradūtur, it a pute­mus necessaria, vt pro tempore amoveri non possint, Servetur ec­clesiae [Page 62] suum ius de his medijs, vt quoadilla statuat, quicquid vi­derit magis adificationem credentium promovere. Consideretur demùm, saepiùs nimijs traditionibus & ceremonijs in immensum auct is populum Christi sic gravari, vt tantum non obruatur.

There bee some traditions, which may bee termed uentrall or indifferent, for that they neither are against Gods word, neither doe they necessarily cohere with it. In which ceremonies, the Churches constitution must bee o­beyed, if three cautions doe concurre. First, that they bee 1 not obtruded, as Gods worship, or peculiar holinesse; but as pertaining to order and the ciuill commoditie of the Church, and to comlinesse in divine actions: otherwise all things are sufficiently comprised in the holy Scriptures, which pertaine to holinesse and gods worship. Secondly, 2 we must beware, that they be not reputed so necessarie, that they cannot be chaunged, as the time requireth. Let the Church keepe her interest and libertie in these indifferent things, to appoint what shall be thought most necessarie to the edifying of the faithfull. Lastly, let it bee well remem­bred, 3 that the multitude of Ceremonies doth often so an­noy the people, that they are almost vndone therewith.

M. Beza, hath these words: Quoniam multitudo plerum­que & impirita est, & intractabilis, & maior pars saepè meliorem Beza, in conses. cap. 5. Art. 35. vincit, ne in democratia quidem leguimè constituta omnia per­missa sunt [...]ffraeni vulgo; sed constituti sunt ex populi consensu certi magistratus, qui plebi prae [...]ant, & inconditam multitudinem regant. Quod sihaec prudentia in negotij [...] humanis requiritur, multò sanè magis opus est certa moderatione in ijs rebus, in qui­bus homines prorsus caecutiunt, neque causa est, cur quisquam sani iudi [...]ij homo clamitet, nullum hic esse prudentiae locum, nisi hanc prudentiam de qua loquor, ostendat cum deiverbo pugnare, quod sanè non arbitror. Neque. n. simplicitèr spectandum quid sit ab Apostolis factum in politia ecclesiastica, quum diversissimae sint circumstantiae, ac proinde absque Cacozelia non possint omnia omnibus locis ac temporibus ad vnam candēque formam revocari: sed potius spectandus est eorum finis & scopus inva­riabilis, [Page 63] & ea deligenda forma ac ratio rerum agendarum, quae rectè eò àeducat.

Because the multitude is for the most part ignorant and intractable, and the greater part doth often times prevaile against the better; all things are not euen in a popular state lawfully appointed, committed to the vnbridled multitude, but certain Magistrates are appointed by the peoples con­sent, to guide, rule, and gouerne them. If this wisedome be required in wordly affaires, much more is a moderation to be had in those matters: in which men are altogether blin­ded. Neither is there any cause, why any man of sound iudgement shall exclaime, that in such matters, there is no place for pollicie; except hee can shewe this pollicie whereof I speake, to be repugnant to the word of GOD, which I am perswaded he can never doe. For we must not simply looke, what the Apostles did in ecclesiasticall polli­cie and Church-gouernment, seeing there is so great varie­tie of circumstances, that a man cannot without preposte­rous zeale, reduce all things in all places and times to one Vide Bezam, cap. 5. Art. 17. and the same forme in doing things, which leadeth the right way to the same. Thus writeth Maister Beza, who hath many like periods to the like effect, which I omit in regard of brevitie.

Out of these words, I note first, that the Church is not 1 so strictly bound to the practise of the Apostles, that she must alwayes follow the same in these Adiaphorôis Se­condly, 2 that the Church in things indifferent, hath The authori­tie of the Church is very great. power to make any Lawes, which are not repugnant to the word of God. Which point I would haue the Reader to ponder seriously, because it is very emphaticall and of great moment. Thirdly, that all Churches cannot haue 3 one and and the same kind of government, because the cir­cumstances of times, places, and persons, will not suffer it. Fourthly, that the Church in all the lawes and constituti­ons, must chiefly respect the peaceable government of the people.

[Page 64] Hieronymus Zanchius is consonant to the other Doctors, while he writeth in this manner: De ritibus & ceremonijs in Zanch. de relig. Pag. 183. ecclesia servandis, eadem pietas & eccle siarum aedificatio flagitat; ne nimis acritér, quasi pro aris & focis, vt dici solet, sit aimicati [...], disceptetur, sed singulis ecclesijs l [...]beri relinquantur; quemad­modum ettam in veteri ecclesia factum fuisse, apud Socratem & alios ecclesiasticos scriptore [...] legimus. Quibus ae rebus in gene­re, probamus atque amplectimur vtramque epistolam Augustini ad Ianuarium. Haec. n. faciunt ad ecclesiae aedificationem.

Touching Rites and Ceremonies to bee obserued in the Church, the same pietie and edifying of the Church re­quireth, that wee contend not too biterly, as if it were for matters of great moment: but that euery Church haue her libertie therein, as we reade in Socrates and other ecclesia­sticall writers, that it was the olde custome of the Church. Of which things in generall, we allow and embrace both the Epistles which Austin wrote to Ianuarius. For these things tend to the edification of the Church.

The same Zanchius in an other place, hath these words: Zanch. de religi Pag. 169. Interea tamen non improbamus patres, quodiuxta variam tum verbi dispensandi, tum regendae ecclesiae rationem varios quoque ordines ministrorū multiplicaverint; quando id eis liberum fuit, Vide eundem Zanchium in compend. Pag. 641. & pag. 636. sicut & nobi [...], & quando constat, id ab illis fuisse factum hone­stis de causis, ad ordinem ad decorū, & ad aedificationem ecclesiae, pro eo tempore pertinentibus.

In the meane while wee blame not the Fathers, that for the diuers manner of dispensing the word and gouerning the Church, they haue also multiplyed diuers orders of Ministers; because they had libertie so to doe, as our selues also haue: and because it is euident, that they did that vp­on honest causes, which pertained at that time, to order comelinesse, and edification of the Church. Thus wri­teth the most learned Doctor, Maister Zanchius; who (if I bee iudge,) was a man of as rare learning and profound iudgement, as euer was any in the Church. Out of whose words I of serue; First, that wee should not moue conten­tion 1 [Page 61] in the Church, for any rites and Ceremonies in the same. Secondly, that euery Church hath her libertie there­in, 2 to appoint what is best for her owne government. Thirdly, that the Church of olde time, did vse so to doe. 3 Fourthly, that Zanchius approueth S. Austins rule herein, 4 as M. Calvin did before him. Fiftly, that it was lawfull for 5 the auncient Church to appoint sundry orders of ministers; and the church this day hath the same authoritie. Sixtly, 6 that the causes and respects, for which the church may or­daine and make lawes in things indifferent, are either edi­fication, order, or decencie; as I haue proved already at large.

The Corollarie of the Chapter.

FIrst, the church may chaunge Christs owne practise, 1 and that in Rites and ceremonies pertaining to the holy Sacraments. Secondly, the church may appoint so­lemne 2 feastes to be obserued: as Salomon did institute the dedication of the Temple for seuen dayes; Hester & Mor­decai, Calvin. in 18. mat. notetur. the festivitie of their deliuerance: Ezra and Nehemi­as, the dedication of the wall at Ierusalem: Iudas and his brethren, the dedication of the Altar for eight dayes. Thirdly, the Iewes instituted their Sanhedrim, after their 3 returne from their captivitie in Babylon. Fourthly, the 4 church by S. Austins iudgement may make any Lawes, which are neither against faith nor good manners. Fiftly, 5 the church (saith Maister Calvin,) hath authoritie left her in things indifferent, either to make newe lawes, or to cassiere and chaunge the old; so often as the necessitie of the church doth so require. Sixtly, the church receiued many vnwritten 6 traditions, concerning order and government of the Calvin. in 1. cor. 11. Church. Seuenthly, the church, saith Zanchius, hath au­thoritie to constitute moe orders of Ministers, when it is 7 for the good of the Church. Eightly, the church may make 8 any lawes, which are not repugnant to Gods word. So [Page 62] saith M. Beza, telling vs plainly, that we must not so much respect what the Apostles did, as what the peace and good of the church requireth. Much other like matter, the same Beza, together with Calvin, Martyr, and Zanchius, haue deliuerd vnto vs: as may appeare by this present Chapter. I therefore conclude, that the authoritie, which this our our English church doth this day challenge vnto her, in her ri [...]es, ceremonies, ordinances, lawes, and constitutions, is grounded vppon the holy Scriptures, the practise of the Catholique Church, and the best approued late writers. Al obiections, that possibly can be made against the lawes and constitutions of our English Church, may bee answered with all facilitie, by that which is plainly deliuered in this Uide infra, cap 9. present Chapter, whosoeuer shall marke it well, will (I thinke,) bee of mine opinion, see the ninth Chapter, and marke it.

CHAP. VIII. Of things indifferent in particular.

The first Aphorisme, of Chruch-holy dayes.

THe vulgar people for a great part, what through vndiscreet zeale in some, and tootoo rash preaching (Ne quid gramu [...] d [...]a) in othersome, are so perswaded, or rather bewitched & blinded; that they Uide infra, cap. 14. membr. 7. thinke they serue God better, (alas for pittie) if they be quaffing in the Ale­house, or sleeping in their chambers, or gazing in the streets; then doe their honest neighbours, in going to the church on holy dayes, there to ioyne with the faithfull in hearing diuine seruice and godly prayers. They are not abashed to say for their vnchristian excuse; that no power vpon earth can appoint an holy-day, and that it is great superstition to obserue the same. But certes, none [Page 63] that are well studied or read, either in the holy ecclesiasti­call histories, or in generall Councels, or in the auncient Fathers, or in the best approued late writers, can ever with­out great blushing, avouch or defend that vntimely hatched doctrine, and vnsoundly conceived opinion.

Queene Hester and godly Mordecai, appointed an holy Hest. 3. & 9. day; for the remembrance of Gods great benefit toward them, in deliuering them from Hamans crueltie.

King Solomon ordained a solemne festivitie, for the space 1. reg. 8. 2. par 7. 1. math. 4. see Chap 7. Aphor. 2. of seuen dayes: in the dedication of the Temple.

The Machabees instituted an holy feast, to bee kept from yeere to yeere, for the space of eight dayes; for the de­dedication of the Altar. Which feast Christ vouchsafed to honour, with his corporall presence at Hierusalem.

The Iewes instituted their new Sanhedrim Synedrion, or Calvin in 18. cap. matt. sect. 16. in confess. Helvet. Pag. 174. Presbiterie, after their returne from their captimitie in Baby­lon, as maister Calvin recordeth, in his Harmonie vpon Saint Matthew.

The reformed churches in Helvetia, doe right well al­low the feastes or holy dayes: of the Nativitie, resurrecti­on, and such like.

If I should endevour my selfe to recount all that, which may easily be collected out of the auncient councels, & the holy-fathers, for the approbatiō & allowāce of holy-daies, after the custome at this day, & of auncient time vsed in this church of England: time would sooner faile me, then matter whereof to speake. I will in regard to brevitie, content my selfe onely with one or two testimonies of councels, as al­so of the graue, holy, auncient, & most learned father, S. Au­stin: & then proceed to the testimonie of late writers, be­cause in this dispute, they whō it chiefly concerneth, either haue not seene or read the councels and the fathers, or else more rashly then wisely, contemne their degrees & iudge­ments, and without all rime & reason preferre their owne opinions before them. The councel holden at Granado, or Elebertine, aboue 1200. yeares ago, (such is the antiquitie of A. D. 325. [Page 64] holy-dayes in the Christian Church,) reputed the practise of the Church in former ages, to be of such force in that be­halfe; that they deemed them Heritiques, that would not obediently yeeld vnto the same. These are the expresse words of the Elebertine Councel: Pravam institutionē emen­dari placuit, iuxta authoritatem scripturarum; vt cuncti diem Concil. Ele­bert. can. 43. Pentecostes celebremus. Quod qui non fecerit, quasi novam haresim induxisse notetur.

We haue decreed, that the depraved institution bee amended, according to the Scriptures: that wee may all keepe the day of Penticost, (and the feast of Whitson­day.) Which who soever shall refuse to doe; let him bee no­ted as one that hath brought a new heresie into the Church. Thus writeth this holy Councel, which for antiquitie sake ought to bee reuerenced, seeing Poperie long after that time had no footing in the Church. And yet (as we see by their Decrees) he was in those dayes to be holden for an heritique; that would appose himselfe against the Holy­dayes, then obserued by the Lawes and ordinances of the Church. For, no Scripture prescribeth vnto Christians, the observation of Pentecost, which wee call Whitsontide. For though the holy and auncient Councell, speake of a­mending according to the Scriptures; yet is it not that Councels meaning that the Scripture appointeth that festi­vitie to be observed in the Christian Church: but that it is therefore according to the Scripture, because the Scrip­ture in generall termes, hath giuē authoritie to the Church, to make Lawes in all such indifferent things. Let this point neuer be forgotten.

The Councell of Arles, of Antioch, and many others, Cone. Arel. Can. 1. haue made the like decrees.

Saint Austin (whom for vertue, antiquitie, and learning, Co Antioch. Dan. 1. the whole world hath reverenced,) hath written so plainly and so effectually, for the Churches authoritie in making Vide Calvin. de. Aug. lib. 4 Instuit. cap 15. in fine. Lawes for Holy-dayes; that his Epistles to Ianuarius, may suffice all such, as can reade them, and will bee [Page 65] satisfied with reason. His wordes are alreadie alledged, in the seuenth Chapter, and third Aphorisme. To which I am content for the better satisfaction of the Reader, to adde the same holy Fathers wordes else-where. Writing purpose­ly of keeping holy daies against Adimantus a Manichee, he hath these expresse wordes; Nam nos quoque & domini­cum diem & pascha solennitèr celebramus, & quastibet alias August. con­tra Adimāt. cap. 16. tom. 6 christianas dierum festivitates. Sea quia intelligimus quò perti­neant, non tempora observamus, sed quae illis significantur tempo­ribus. Haec anglicè redduntur postea.

The same holy father in another place, hath these words; Aug. in pre­fat in epist. Iohannis. tom. 9. Meminit sanctitas vestra, evangelium secundum Iohannem ex ordine lectionum nos so [...]ere tractare. Sed quia nunc interposita est solennit as sanctorum dierum, quibus certas ex evangelio lecti­ones oportet in ecclesia recitars, quae ita sunt annuae vt aliae esse non possint; ordo ille quem susceperamus, necessitate paululum intermissus est non omissus.

Your holinesse remembreth, that wee were wont to in­treate vpon the Gospell of S. Iohn, according to the order of the lessons. But because at this time there is interposed the solemnitie of Saint-daies, vpon which daies certaine lessons taken out of the Gospel must be read, which are so yearely done, that they cannot be changed; that order which we had taken in hand, is through necessitie some­what intermitted, but not omitted. For we also do solemne­ly Hac prace­dunt latinè. celebrate, both the Lords day, and Easter, and all other festival daies of Christians. But because we vnderstand, to what end they are referred, wee doe not obserue times, but the things signified by the times.

Out of these wordes, I obserue first, that in S. Austens time, the Church obserued & kept many festivall or Saints 1 daies. Secondly, that the Church did allot speciall por­tions 2 and parts of the holy Scripture, to bee read vppon those Saints daies. Thirdly, that the Church obserued 3 those daies for signification; which is a point of great mo­ment, Vide Aug. de ciuit. lib. 10. cap. 4. and therefore ought to be well remembred.

[Page 66] Matthias Flacius Illyricus, after he hath distributed the obseruation of times into foure orders; naturall, ciuill, ec­clesiasticall, and superstitious, he addeth these wordes; Ec­clesiastica, Illyricus in. 4. cap. ad gal. quae etiam decoro & bono ordini servit; quò facit quo­que dies dominica, & tempora precipuarum historiarū, aut fac­torum Christi quae prosunt ad aedificationem rudium; vt rectiùs meminerint, quando sit dominus natus, passus, & quando in coe­lum ascenderit ae de singulis illis historijs suo tempore tāto com­modius instituantur, quod valdè rudium memoriae prodest.

The ecclesiasticall is that, which serued for comelinesle and good order; as is also the Lords day, and other feasts, wherein we celebrate the memorie of the chiefe histories Vide infra, cap. 14. mem­bro. 2. per. totum. or Acts of Christ, which be profitable for the instruction of the simple; that they may the better remember, when the Lord was borne, when hee suffered, and when hee ascended vp into heauen, and bee more fitly taught in due time, concerning euery seuerall historie pertai­ning therevnto. In which place, the same learned Wri­ter affirmeth, that obscruation onely to bee superstiti­ous; when wee put a necessitie, worship, merite, or righte­ousnesse, in the obseruing of time.

Out of these wordes I obserue first, that the keeping of Saints-daies in the Church, serueth for order and come­linesse 1 in the gouernment of the Church. Secondly, that the obseruation of Saint-daies, is very profitable for the 2 instruction of the simple people. Which doctrine is agree­able to that, which Saint Austen deliuered afore Illyricus was borne. Thirdly, that seeing we put neither necessitie, 3 nor worship, nor merite, nor righteousnesse, in the obser­uation of holy daies, our keeping of them, can no way be superstitious.

The reformed Churches in Germanie, in their Ar­ticles Confes. Aug­artic. 15. pag 6. In apolog. pag. 192. which they exhibited to the Emperour, doe allowe the festiuities of Saints and other holy daies. And the fa­mous Doctor Philippus Melanthon, in his Apologie of the saide Articles, hath these wordes. Item, vt ordo & po­litia [Page 67] ecclesiae doceat impersios, quid quo tempore gestum sit, hinc sunt feriae natalis paschatis: pentecostes, & similes, hoc est, quod Epiphanius ait, politiae causa institutas esse traditiones viz. ordinis causa, & vt ordo ul [...] aamoneat ho­mines de historia, & beneficijs Christi. As also that or­der and pollicie in the Church may teach the ignorant, what things were done, and at what time: hence come holy daies of the natiuitie, Easter, Pentecost, and the l [...]ke. Which is it, that Epiphanius saith; that traditions were ordained for pollicie sake, viz. for to keepe order in the Church, and that that order might admonish the people, of the historie and benefits of Christ. Be­hold here, how all Writers agree one with another: affir­ming vniformely, that holy daies are lawfully ordained and kept in the Church: and that for signification sake, and instruction of the people. Bulling. de precept 4. dec. 2 serm. 4. & in epist. adrom. cap. 14.

Maister Budinger a famous Preacher of the Church of Tigwie, holdeth the selfe same opinion, both in his Decades, and in his commentarie vpon the Epistle to the Romanes. Where hee alloweth the keeping of the holy daies and festiuities, of the natiuitie, circumcisi­on, and ascension; the feasts of the Virgin Marie, Iohn Baptist, and many others.

Maister Zanchius is consonant to the former Writers, Zanch de re­lig. pag 182. deliuering his opinion in these wordes: Post diem domi­ni [...]um non possum non probare illorum quoque dierum sancti­fi [...]aitonem quibus momoria recurrit, celebrataque in veteri ecclesia fuit nativitatis D. N. I. C. circumcisionis, passio­nis, resurrectionis, ascentionis in coelum missionis speritus sancti in apostolos. Reliqui diebus provt quaeque ecclesia expedire indi­caverit, sic etiam sacrum caetum convocet ad verbum, ad sacra­menia, ad preces, ad collectas. Semper vero absit, omnis dierum superstitiosa observatio.

Next after the Lords day, I cannot but like and allowe the sanctification of those daies also, in which the aunci­ent [Page 72] Church did celebrate the memorie, of the natiuitie of our Lord Iesus Christ, of the circumcision, passion, resur­rection, ascension, and the comming downe of the holy Ghost vpon the Apostles. Vpon all other daies, as euery Church shall thinke it expedient, so let them call together the congregation, to Sermons, Sacraments, praiers, and col­lections. But euer all superstitious obseruation, must bee quite laide away.

Out of these wordes of this zealous Christian, and most learned Father, (whose authoritie, if I had nothing else to say, would weigh deepely with mine owne conscience,) I note first, that Zanchius doth highly reuerence the consti­tution of the Church, concerning holy-daies. Secondly, that euery Church hath free libertie to appoint such holy-daies, as are most conuenient for themselues. Thirdly, that no Caluin. in. 4. cap. ad gal. in 2. cap. ad co­los. inst. lib. 2. cap. 8. s. 34. such constitution of daies is vnlawful, but that onely which tendeth to superstition. And maister Caluin himselfe agree­eth vnto Zanchius, in many places of his workes.

The second Aphorisme, of kneeling at the holy Communion.

THeir opinion, who hold it vnlawfull to receiue the holy Communion, kneeling on their knees; seemeth to me so redicu­lous, senselesse, and voide of all Christi­an modestie; that I deeme it needlesse, to vse many words for the cōfutation ther­of. King Salomon the wisest King that 3. Reg. 4. v. 29. 2. par. 6. Vers. 13. 1. reg, 8. v. 54. 2. par. 6. v. 13. euer liued in the world, vsed to kneele vpon his knees, and to stretch out his hands, when he offe­red vp his prayers vnto God. For thus saith holy Writ of him, in that behalfe; When Salomon had made an ende of praying all his prayer and supplication vnto the Lord, he arose from before the Altar of the Lord, from kneeling on his knees, and stretching of his hands to heauen.

[Page 73] Ezra when he praied to the Lord, confessed his sinnes Ezra 9. 10 V. 1. cap 9. v 5. dan 6. 10. mat. 26. v. 29. mar. 14. 32. luc. 22 41. act. 9. 40 act. 20. v. 36. Act. 7. v. 60. ephes. 3. 14. with teares, and feldown before the house of God, and prai­ed to God, vpon his knees, and Daniel praied vpon his knees three times a day. Christ our sauiour himselfe fell down on his face, when he praied to his father. And Saint Luke saith, that when he was drawen aside from his Dis­ciples, he kneeled down, and praied. S. Peter praied knee­ling, after the example of Christ his Lord and maister.

Saint Steuen, when the cursed Iewes gnashed their teeth against him, and ran violently vpon him, and stoned him to death, fell to his praiers, and kneeled vpon his knees. And Saint Paul bowed his knees vnto God, when he prai­ed for the people, These testimonies drawne from the holy Scriptures, and from the very practise of Christ himselfe, and his faithfull seruants, were able to satisfie euery well disposed minde; neuerthelesse, to take away all contention and wrangling, if it may be had and obtained of the aduerse part; I am content to alledge Maister Caluins opinion, whose authoritie with them may not be gainsaid or with­stood. These are his expresse wordes; Hic testarioperae Caluin. lib. 4. instit. cap. 10. §. 30. See the se­uenth chap­ter pertotum. praetium est, eas demum humanas constitutiones me probare, quae & dei authoritate sundatae & ex scriptura desumptae, adeoque prorsus diuinae sint. Exemplum sit in geniculatione, quae fit dum solennes habentur precationes, quaeritur sitne humana traditio, quam repudiare vel negligere cuivis liceat. Dico sic esse humana, vt simul sit divina: a [...]i est quatenus pars est decori illius cuius cu­ra & observatio nobis per apostolum commendatur; hominum 1. Cor. 14. Vers 40. autem, quitenus specialitèr designat, quod in genere fuerat iudi­catum magis quam expositum.

Here it is worth the labour to testifie, that I doe alowe & approue those cōstitutions of men, which are deriued from Vide infra, cap 14. memb. 2. per totum membr. 3. &. 7. & nota. Gods authoritie and the holy Scripture, and so are altoge­ther become diuine. Let vs take example in kneeling, which is done in time of solemne praiers. The question is, if it be such a tradition of man, as euery one may refuse and contemne the same, as he list. I answere, that it is so the tra­ditiō [Page 74] of man, as it is elso a traditiō of God. It is of God, as it is a part of that comelines, the care & cōservatiō wherof is cō ­mended to vs by the Apostle. But it is of man, in respect that it designeth out in specialty, yt was generally insinuated, ra­ther thē expounded. Thus writeth M. Calvin, out of whose 1 words I observe these golden Lessons. First, that all consti­tutions are diuine, which are deduced and gathered out of 2 the Scriptures. Secondly, that euery ordinaunce of the Church, which pertaineth to comelinesse, is a cōstitution di­vine. And consequently, that euery Ceremonie approved this day in the Church of England, is a divine tradition; and therefore must euery one reverently & obediently receiue Note well hi [...] doctrine. the same, as the ordinance of Almightie God. If this doc­trine of M. Calvins were deepely in printed in euery Eng­lish subiects he [...], there would not one English subiect be so [...]nd in the [...]and, who would kicke, sp [...]e, or once in ut­ter, against the least ceremonie in the English Church. For euery childe seeth; that by M. Calvins doctrine euery Ce­remonie pertaining to comelinesse, Est de iure di [...]o, groun­ded vpon the generall rule of Gods law. And consequent­ly, he that wil denie any ceremonie in the English Church, A generall groun [...]er all our Eng­lish ceremo­nies. out of M. Calvins doctrine. to be divine and not approved by Gods word▪ must proue out of Gods word which he wil neuer do,) that ye ceremonie doth no way pertaine to comelinesse in the church. For, no wise man can thinke, that yt is rather to be accoūted comely or vncomely which a few yonglings of late dayes haue e­steemed so; thē that which was euer reputed so throughout the Christian world, of al learned men generally for 1000. yeeres together. Nay, for one thousand foure hundred yeeres: that is, from S. Marke the Euangelist, vntill a thousand and some hundred yeares were expired, and if no one learned writer can bee sound, for the space of so many hundred yeares, that will avouch any one Ceremo­nie in the Church of England this day vsed, as kneeling, the signe of the Crosse, the Surplesse, and such like, to bee an vncomely Ceremonie; then doubtlesse, such ceremonies by Maister Calvins doctrine, are grounded vpon Gods word, [Page 75] and must bee obeyed, & receiued accordingly. I wish the Reader to marke these words of Maister Calvin: Dei est, quatenus pars est decori: It is of God, as it is a part of come­linesse. I wish I say, the Reader to marke them well: be­cause they are of great importance, and doe proue them [...]t­ter in controversie most euidently. To which former wordes of M. Calvin, let vs now adde the wordes, which follow immediately in the same place. Thus doth hee write: Ab hoc vno ex [...]mplo estimar [...] licet quid de toto hoc ge [...] nere sit sentiendum, By this one example (of kneeling,) wee Calvin. lib 4 instit cap. 10. § 30. may easily iudge, what is to be thought of all other ceremo­nies. Loe, thus the case standeth; this ceremonie the church hath ordeyned, iudging it to pertaine to comelinesse: Ergo, it is of God. No answere can be made, or deniall to vse the some ceremonies: vnlesse the partie so refusing can proue Vide infra, cap. 14 & notato valde per totum. for his excuse, that such a ceremony pertaineth not to come­linesse, which can never bee prooved till the worlds ende. For all antiquitie all Councels, all Fathers, all Histories, are of the contrarie opinion.

The third Aphorisme of the Surplesse and other apparrel of the Ministers.

THat which is already said in the former Aphorisme, is a sufficient demonstra­tion of this question, to all well affected Readers. Yet I am content to adde a word or two for the helpe of the sim­ple vulgar sort.

Saint Iohn the Baptist did weare an vnwonted kinde of apparell, so to set foorth his extraordinarie Ministerie, and the rather to moue the people to enquire of his office. And no sound reason can be yeelded, why the same vse can not this day Mat. 3. Uerse. 4. be made of the distinct kinde of apparell in the Ministers of the Church.

[Page 76] Samuel the Prophet had a distinct kinde of apparell, from all the other people. For Saul was perswaded, that he 1. Sam. 28. whom the Witch had raised vp, was Samuel the Prophet. Which opinion, Saul conceiued onely vpon this ground, because the Witch named his attire. Yea, the Prophets were euer knowne from other men, by a distinct and pecu­liar kind of apparell. This to be so, the wordes of the Pro­phet Zach. 13. Vers. 4. Zacharie will declare, which are these; in that day shal the Prophets be ashamed euery one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they weare a rough gar­ment to deceiue. The Glosse in the Geneva Bible, yeel­deth vs this exposition. They shall no more weare Pro­phets apparell, to make their doctrine seeme more holy.

Maister Caluin granteth freely, that the Prophets were distinguished from the people, by a peculiar kind of gar­ment. Caluin. in zachar. cap. 13. 4. These are his expresse wordes; Haec summa est, non re­prehendi in pseudoprophetis vestem ipsam, quemadmodū quidam parùm consideratè arripiunt hunc locum, vt damnent & vestes oblongas, & qui [...]quid displicet eorum morositati.

This is the summe, that this kind of garment was not reproued in the false Prophets, as some men doe rashly wrest this place to condemne long gownes, and whatsoe­uer else doth not please their way wardnesse.

The same Maister Caluin in an other place, hath these wordes-Sedex Z [...]charia apparet prophetas certa pally forma à Caluin in harmon. pag. 296. reliquis fuisse distinctos. Nec verò ratione caruit, doctores it a vistiri: vt in eorum hal [...]tu plus gravitatis & modestiae, quā in vulgari, extarct. But by Zacharie it is apparant, that the Pro­phets were distinguished from the rest of the people, by a certaine kind of cloake. And it was not without reason that the doctors were so attired, that in their habite there might be more granitie and modestie, then in the vulgar people. Out of this doctrine thus deliuered by M. Caluin I obserue these worthy documēts First, that it is expediēt, y• the mi­nisters be known by their apparel. 2. that they are way-ward fellowes, that speake against varietie of garmēts, in the mi­nisters [Page 77] and people. Thirdly, that there is grauitie, & mode­stie, & consequently comelinesse, in the apparrell of Mini­sters. This is a point of great importance, it may not bee Note this point well. forgotten. It is of such moment, that it striketh dead, and can neuer be answered.

S. Hieromie maketh this question plaine and cleere these Hieroni lib. aduers. pcla­giam fol. 124. tom. 3. are his words; Quae sunt rogo inimicitiae contra deum, si tuni cam hobutro mundiorem: si episcopus presbyter, & diaconus, & reliqui [...]s ord [...] eccusi [...]sticus, in administratione sacrificicrum candida veste processerint?

What emnitie (I pray you,) is there against God, if I doe weare a more cleanly garment? if a Bishop, a Priest, or Deacon, and the rest of the Clergie, be attyred with a white vesture, in time of devine service? Vide infra, ca. 10. ex Bucero.

Againe in an other place, the same auncient, holy, and learned Father, hath these expresse words; Porrò religio divina Hier. in Eze­chiel. cap 44. fol. 257. tom. 5. Vide Ambr. de ijsqui misterijs ime­tiantur, cap. 7. tom 4. alterum habitum habet in ministerio, alterum in vsu vitâ (que) communi.

Furthermore, divine religion hath one habite in the ministerie, an other in common life and vse thus writeth S. Hieromie: whose wordes in both the places, (if they bee aptly ioyned together,) wil make it euident to euery indif­ferent Reader; that in S. Hieroms time which was aboue one thousand and two hundred years agoe,) the Ministers of the Church did weare a Surplesse. For, in the former place he affrmeth, that the Ministers of the Church did weare a white garment; and in the latter he saith, that they vsed one kinde of garment in the time of Gods divine ser­uice, an other in their common conversation.

M. Bucer, that famous, godly, and learned writer, in his resolution to M. Hopper, concerning the wearing of gar­ments in time of divine service and Sacraments, hath these Buterus de re vestiaria in sacris, in epist. ad Iohan. Hopperum. expresse wordes: Constat dominum nostrum Iesum Christū substantiam tantum ministerij, cum verbi tum sacramentorum suis verbis nobis praescripsisse, & caetera omnia quae ad decentem & vtilem administrationem mysteriorum eius pertinent, ordi­nanda [Page 78] permisisse ecclesiae, Unde sacram laenam nos nec vesperi, nec in domo privata, nec discubendo, nec cum viris tantum cele­bramus. Sequitur; illa autem ae loco, ae tempore, de habitu corporis, ad sacram caenam vel cerebrandam vel sumendam; de admittendis & mulierculis ad sacrae caenae communionem; de mo­do precum atque [...]ymnorum ad deum ita att [...]m de vesiuis & alijs rebus ad externum decorum pertinentibus: non dubito deminum ecclesiae suae liberam fecisse potestatens statuendi de his rebus & ordinandi quae indicaverit quaelibet ecclesia apud suum populum maxime collatura, ad sustinendam & augendam reverentiam erga omnia domini sacra. Si itaque aliquae ecclesiae ex hac li­bertate Chirsts & ad hunc finem adificandae plebis Christi mini­stros suos vellent in sacris ministerijs aliquibus singularibus ve­stibus vti remota omni superstitione omni levitate, omni (que) etiam inter fratre: dissensione, id est, abvsu; tales cer [...]è ecclesias non vi­deo quis possit iure ob hanc rem condemnare vilius peccati, ne­aum communionis cum Antichristo Quid si ecclesia aliqua [...]uro & sancto suorum consensu eum morem haberet, vt s [...]nguli etiam ad caenam sacram, sicut olim re [...]ens baptiza [...]i agebant, veste al­ba vterentur? eam, n. l [...]bertatem, si quis contendat nul [...] ecclesiae Christi esse permittendam, oportebit sanè faters vnum ex his; aut nihil omnino circa caenam domini ordinandum ecclesiis esse concessum de quo non habeant expressum Christi man­datum quo pacto, condemnabuntur cunctae ecclesiae impiae audaciae. Nam omnes & tempus & locum, & habitum corporum in sa­crae caenae celebratione observant, admittunt que ad sacrae commu­nionem mulieres: de quibus omnibus rebus, non so [...]um [...]u [...]um habent domini mandatum, sed etiam contrarium exemp [...]m. Dominius, n suam caenam celebravit vesperi non manè; in demo privata non publica, d [...]umbens cum suis & sumpta caena pas­chait? non siant; & hanc solam sui communionem e [...]hibens; denique exclusis mulieribus, quas habuit tamen inter [...]s cipu [...]as suas sanctissimas Aut fieri non posse, vt siut ecclesiae, quas do­min [...] v [...]que omni liberet suspu tone & al vsu bonarum erta­turarum suarum, vt puris per veram fidem in nomen eius sint omnes Dei [...]onae creaturae, & vsu significationis purae: quod qui [Page 79] dicat, is certe nagabit eo ipso Christum dominum esse omnibus hominibus eum quem se promisit futurum omnibus liber atorem ab omni immunditia. Aut posse impios abvsu suo bonas dei crea­turas per seita v [...]tare, vt nemini pio ad [...]m vsum queant de­seruire, quod aper [...]è adversatur testimonio spiritus sancts Rom. 14. 1. cor. 8. & 9. 1. tim. 4. aut ceriè non li [...]ere Christianis res quastibet di ponere & ad admonendum creatoris sui, & nostri, etusque in not benefictorum atque nostrorum erga cum efficio­rum; id quod pugnat cum eo quod spiritus sanctus passim docet de agnos [...]ēao & colendo deo in omnibus operibus suis, & faciendo omnia in nomine domini nostra Iesu Christi ad gloriam Patris.

It is avident, that our Lord Iesus Christ hath prescribed to vs in his word, the substance onely of the Ministerie, both of the word, and of the Sacraments; and hath permit­ted his Church to order all other things, concerning the decent and profitable administration of his mysteries. Wherevpon we celebrate the holy supper, neither at night, neither in private houses, neither sitting downe at the Ta­ble, nor with men onely, but touching the time, place, and habite of the bodie, either for celebrating or for receiuing the Holy supper: touching the admission of women vnto the Communion of the sacred Supper, and the manner of singing and praising God: touching apparrel also, & other things pertaining to externall comelinesse: I doubt not, but our Lord hath giuen free power to his Church, to or­der and dispose of those things, as euery Church shall iudge it to bee most profitable for her people, to sup­port and increase reuerence toward all the holy mysteries of God. If therefore any Churches, vppon this libertie graunted by Christ, and for this ende of edifying Christes people, would haue their Ministers to vse in time of the holy Misteries, some speciall kinde of apparell: all su­perstition, levitie, & dissention or abuse being taken away: doubtles. I see not, how any man cā iustly condemne such a church of any sin in that behalfe, much lesse of communion with Antichrist. What if any Church with a pure and [Page 80] holy consent of her children had such a custome, that eve­rie one should vse a white vesture in time of the holy Sup­per, as the newly baptized ought in olde to doe? for, if any will contend, that yt libertie may not be granted to Christes Church, hee must doubtlesse confesse one of these: either that the Church hath no authoritie at all, to ordeine any thing touching the Lords Supper, whereof they haue not the expresse commandement of Christ, and so all Churches shall be condemned of impious audacitie, for all Churches obserue in the celebration of the holy Supper, both the time and place, and the attire of the body, and doe withall admit women to the holy Communion. Touching all the which, they haue not only no commandement of the Lord, but haue also a contrary example, for our Lord celebrated his Supper at night, not in the morning; in a private house, not in a publike place; sitting at the table with his Apo­postles, and eating the Paschall, not standing; and so exibi­ted the holy Communion. Yea, the women were exclu­ded, whom he reputed among his most holy seruantes. Ei­ther that it can not be, that there bee any Churches, which our Lord doth so free from all suspition and the abusing of his good creatures, that to the pure all the creatures of God be good through right faith in his name, and pure in the vse of signification; which whosoeuer shall say, hee doubtlesse must therevpon denie that Christ our Lord is the deliuerer of all men from all vncleannesse, as hee pro­mised to be. Either that the wicked can by their abuse so pollute the creatures of God, which are good of their owne nature, that no godly man can vse them to a godly ende; which saying is euidently, against the testimonie of the ho­ly Ghost. Or certes, that Christians can not lawfully dis­pose of all creatures, to put them in minde of their maker, and of our selues, and of his benefits toward vs, and of our duties toward him: which maketh against that, which the holy Ghost teacheth euery where, for the acknowledge­ment and worship of God in all his works, and for the do­ing [Page 81] of all things in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, to the glory of his father.

Againe, in an other place hee writeth thus; Porrò, dicere Bucerus vbi supra. has vestes per Antichristiabv [...]um sic esse contaminatas, vt nulli ecclesiae, quantumvis aliqua Christum suum & rerum ominium libertatem nosset et coleret, sint permittendae religio sanè mihi est, nec vllam video scripturam, qua possim ist [...]m bonae dei creaturae condemnationem tueri. Seqnitur: ritum aliquem Aaronicum esse, vel Antichristianū in nullis haeret dei creaturis, in nulla veso te, in nulla fioura, in nullo colore, aut vllo des opere; sed in ani­mo & professione, bonis dei creaturis ad impias significationes ab­vtentium.

Furthermore, to say, that these garments and vestures are so polluted by the abuse of Antichrist, that they may bee permitted to no Church, although such a Church did both worship Christ, and know the libertie of all things, it is to me doubtlesse a great scruple of conscience: neither do I know any Scripture, by which I may defend this con­demnation of the good creature of God, that any rite be­commeth Aaronical or Antichristian, it is not grounded in any of Gods creatures, in any vesture or garment, in any figure, in any colour, or in any worke of God: but in the minde and profession of them, who abuse the good crea­tures of God to wicked significations.

Thus writeth M. Bucer in this place, as he doth else­wher Vide Bucer. In 4 cap. ad Ephes. to the same effect. Out of whose wordes, I obserue,

First, that Christ hath onely prescribed in his word, the substance of his holy worship. Secondly, that hee hath 1 giuen power to his Church, to dispose and order all other 2 things, which concerne the decent and profitable governe­ment and administration of his holy Mysteries. Third­ly, 3 that the Church may appoint her Ministers to weare speciall garments, euen in the time of the holy Ministerie. Fourthly, that such garments may bee ordained, for de­cencie 4 and for edification. Fiftly, that the vse of such gar­ments, 5 cannot be condemned by any Text of Scripture: [Page 82] nor yet they iustly accused of any sinne, who appoint them to be worne, Sixtly, that no abuse of man, Antichrist, or 6 the maister-divell of hell, can so pollute them, but they may this day be lawfully vsed of the faithfull. Seventhly, 7 that the Church may ordaine ceremonies, for honest and godly significations.

The ancient Councel of Carthage, (which was holden Conc. Car­thag. 4. [...]. [...]14. about the same time, and at which S. Austin was present,) hath these expresse words; Vt diaconus tempore oblutionis tantum vel lectionis alba induatur. Let the Deacon weare a white ga men: onely in the time of oblation and reading. Do, the Deacons did we are Albes, Surplesses, or white ve­s [...]ores, name them as yee list, so you agree in the thing it selfe) aboue a 1200. yeares agoe: and that, in the time of divine seruice. At this councell were present 214. Bishops, of which S. Augustin was one, and yet all these holy men, li­ving in those dayes when no corruption of Religion had crept into the Church, affirme constantly with vniforme consent, that it was the custome of the Church, to weare white garments in time of divine seruice.

M. Beza, in his Epistle to certaine Englishmen, de­maunding his opinion touching the wearing of cappes and Beza in epist. 12 pag. 107. Vide cundem in confess. cap 5. art. 17. in fine. garments, aswel in the common vse as in the Ministerie and Church seruice, answered in these wordes: Respondemus, etsi ista nostro quidem iudicio non recte revehuntur in ecclesi­am, tamea quum non sint ex earum rerum genere, quae per se impie sunt, non videri nobis illas tanti momenti vt propterea vel pastors i [...]is de [...]crendum sit potiùs minislerium, quàm vt vestes il­las assumant vel gregibus omitt endum publicum pablnum, potiùs quàm ita veslitos pastores audiant.

We answere, that albert as we thinke, these things are not well brought into the Church againe; yet seeing they be not wicked or euill of themselues, and of their owne nature, they seeme not to vs to be a matter of so great moment, that therefore either the Pastors should forsake the Ministerie, rather then weare them, or the sheepe want their publique forrage, rather then heare their pastors so at [...]yred.

The same Beza, in another Epistle to M. Grindal, then [Page 83] Bishop of London, being demaunded, whether the Pastors ought rather to refuse the Ministerie then to weare caps & Beza in Epist. 8. pag. 85. Vide infrà, cap. 10. ex Bucero & Zuinglio & nota valdè. surplesses, this cautele being added, that they are not made for any holinesse, Religion, or worship, but for order and pollicie, answereth in these wordes: Respondeo, minimè mihi videri deserendas ecclesias propter vestes aut pileos, aut aliquid eiusmodi verè medium, & indifferens.

I answere, that in my opinion they ought not to forsake the Church for cappes & garments, or for any like thing, which is indifferent of it selfe indeed. Thus writeth M. Be­za, when his counsell and opinion was required, concer­ning the wearing of the surplesse, and other Ceremonies in our English Church. Out of whose words, I note; First, that 1 M. Beza did not fully vnderstand the state of our Church: which I gather by the word, (Revehuntur) are brought in­to the Church againe. Where indeed, if true information had beene giuen, (let them looke vnto it, that report to for­ren countries, so sinisterly of their Soveraigne and natiue coūtries) he would haue iudged better of the case. Second­ly, 2 that the ministers ought not to refuse the ministerie, nor to make such cōtentiō, for the wearing of yt surples, & such like things. Thirdly, that the cappe, surples, & the like cere­monies 3 are things truly indifferēt of their own natures & in thēselues. Which point, if it be wel marked, wil make good Epist. 12. pag. 112. Vide infra, cap. 14. membr. 2. per totum. & membr. 3. & 7. notentur Ualde. the vse of al ceremonies in our English church. To cōclude, M. Beza, in the end & closing vp of his Epistle, exhorteth our English brethren to obey the Q. Maiestie, & all the Bi­shops in the land. Id (que) ex animo, and that sincerely. Which counsel they neither followed then, nor yet do now follow the same; they seemed then willing, to reply vpon his reso­lution. But no man can please them, that speaketh not Placentia, and as they shall appoint him to say and do.

The Surples, Tippit, Cappe, and the like, are popish cere­monies, 1. Obiection. and haue beene prophaned by the papists, and therefore may not now be vsed.

I answere both with S. Austin, and with M. Calvin to this in soluble so supposed obiection; wh [...]h indeede is The answer. [Page 84] of no force at all, to moue any man to disobey the lawes of the Church. S. Austin writing to Publicola, who desired to be resolved in such kinde of questions, hath these wordes; August ad publicol. Epist. 154. Pag. 453. Cum templa, idola, luci, & si quid huiusmodi data potestate ever­tuntur, quamvis manifestum est cum id agimus, non ea nos ho­norare sed potius detestari: ideo tamen in vsus nostros privatos duntaxat & proprios non debemus inde aliquid vsurpare, vt ap­pareat nos pietate ista descernere, non avaritia. Cum vero in vsus communes, non proprios ac privatos, vel in honorem dei veri convertuntur, hoc de illis fit quod de ipsis hominibus cum ex sacrilegis [...] impijs in veram religionem mutantur. Hoc deus in­telligitur docuisse illis testimorijs quae ipse proposuisti cum de lu­co alicnorum deorum iussit ligna ad holocaustum adhiberi. Et de Hiericho, vt omne aurum, argentum, & aeramentum, infer­retur Iudic. 6. ver. 25. 26. Ios. 6. 24. in the sauros Domini.

When temples Idoles, groues, and such like things, are by authoritie overthrowne, although it bee manifest, that when we doe that, we honour them not, but detest them; yet for all that, we may not therefore conuert them to our owne private vses onely and commoditie, that it may ap­peare that we destroy them for Religion-sake, and not for couetousnesse. But when they are not converted to our owne priuate vses, but into common vses, or to the honour of the true god; then that is done in them, which is done and brought to passe in them, which is wrought in men themselues, when of idolaters and wicked persons they are chaunged into true religion. This God himselfe taught in those testimonies, which thou thy selfe hast vsed; when hee commanded, that the wood of that grove which was dedi­cated to str [...]nge Gods, should be taken and vsed for his sa­c [...]tices. And of Hiericho that all the gold, siluer, and brasse, should be brought into the treasurie of the Lord.

M. Calvin is of the same iudgement, whole words are Calvin in [...] cap 23. vers 24. these; Ne (que). n. nobis hodiè religio est templa retinere quae pol­luta fuerunt [...]delis, & accommodare in meliorem vsum; quae nos non obstringit, quod propter consequentiam legi additum [Page 85] est. Fateor quidem, quaecunque ad superstitionē fovendā spectant, è medio tollendaesse; modò ne praecise vrgendo quod per se me­dium est, simus in nimio rigore superstitiosi.

For we this day make no scrupulositie of conscience, to retaine still those Churches which were polluted with I­dols: and to apply them to a better vse, because that which is added to the Lawe by way of consequence, doth not bind vs. I graunt willingly, that all those things which tend to the planting of superstition, ought to bee taken away, so that by precise vrging of that which is of it self indifferent, we be not in too much rigour superstitious. Thus writeth Maister Caluin.

Out of these wordes of these two great learned Fathers, I note these worthy lessōs, First, that things superstitiously 1 abused, may be applied to the honour and seruice of God. Secondly, that things which were superstitiously vsed, may 2 after their application to a good and godly vse, be resem­bled to those persons, who of Idolaters are become good Christians. Thirdly, that God himselfe hath taught this to 3 be so, at two seuerall times in two distinct subiects. First, when he commaunded the wood of the groues, which had beene dedicated to the false Gods, to bee applied to his owne vse and sacrifice. Secondly, when he appointed, that the gold, siluer, and brasse, which had beene prophaned in Hiericho, should be brought into the treasurie of the Lord. Fourthly, that our owne practise doth approue the same to be lawfutl, while we retaine Temples abused by the Pa­pists. 4 To which I adde, the keeping still of Bels, Pulpits, Wine, strong drinke, and good cheare. For all these haue beene, and this day are abused; not onely by the Papists, but euen by those who liue among vs, and professe them­selues to be of vs. And therefore, if wee will reiect the one sort for abuse, wee must also reiect all the rest for the same Vide infra, cap. 10 ex Bucero. respect. Vnlesse perhaps it be a sufficient answere, that our owne conceits neither grounded vpon authoritie nor rea­son, must teach vs what to doe in all respects.

The Reply.

Wine, strong Drinke, Bels, Pulpits, and the like, are things of necessarie vse, so are not Tippets, Caps, and Surplesses. Therefore the case is not like.

The Answere.

I answere: first, that we may liue without all those things, which in the prepositiō are holden for necessarie. Second­ly, 1 that not onely maister Caluin and S. Austen speake inde­finitely 2 and generally of all things abused, but the Brow­nists and Martinists doe in their refusal approue the same, viz. the things obiected are not necessarie, and therefore they meet in woods, fields, and odde corners. Thirdly, that 3 if the superstitious vse of a thing, doe so change the nature of the same thing, that it can neuer be wel vsed againe, then doubtlesse must we perforce reiect all things, which haue once bin prophaned and superstitiously vsed. Neither will it or can it serue our turne to say, this is necessarie, so is not that. For as the Apostle saith; Non sunt facienda mala, vt iu­de Rom. 3. v. 8. eveniat bonum. Wee must not doe euill, that good may come thereupon. But if the thing before indifferent in it owne nature, doe stil remaine indifferent, notwithstanding the abuse, (as I haue alreadie proued it;) then may the law­ful magistrate, and much more the Church with his autho­ritie Vide infra, cap 14. pro­pofine. and assent concurring, retaine stil some thing, & reiect other some, as it shall seeme most expedient, for the quiet and peaceable gouernment of the Church. For the Church hath free libertie and power to dispose of all things, which are Adiaphora, indifferent of their own nature.

The 2. Reply.

It is against my conscience to weare a Surplesse, to make the signe of the Crosse in the childs forehead, and so forth. Ergo I may not doe it.

The Answere.

True it is, that whosoeuer doth any thing against his con­sciēce, sinneth, though the thing he doth, be otherwise law­ful to be done. Wherfore his onely remedie is this: either to reforme his erroneous conscience, or else peaceably, to giue place to the law, & not contentiously to withstand the law of his superiours, (to whō, vnder God he oweth obedience) and so to raise vp schisme & contention in the Church. But it is to be feared, that some pretend conscience, where onely pride beareth the sway. Because forsooth, they haue more rashly then wisely, Preached against the same ceremonies informer times?

The 3. Reply.

The reformed Churches in other countries, haue abo­lished such Popish ceremonies. Why therefore should we keepe them still in our Churches?

The Answere.

I answere; 1. that as some other Churches haue reiected 1 some ceremonies, which we still retaine. Ô so haue we re­iected 2 some ceremonies, which some other churches stil re­taine. Secōdly, yt as other churches are not to be condemned for reiecting such ceremonies, seeing they be no essentiall parts of religiō, so neither ought our Church to be euil cen­sured 3 for retaining thē; being things indifferēt in their own nature. Thirdly, that many things are conuenient for some places, persons, and times, which for all that are very preiu­dicial, and nothing beseeming nor befitting other persons, times, and places; many things good for one cōmon. weale, which are too too hurtfull for an other; many things con­uenient for the gouernment of one Church, which would quite destroy the state and pollicie of an other. Euery Church therefore hath her freedome, power, and authori­tie, in all things indifferent; to make constitute, and ordaine such lawes, as shal be thought most expedient for the good Vide infrà, cap. 10. ex. Bucero. thereof. This assertion is proued at large in the Seuenth Chapter, throughout all the Aphorismes therof. To which place I referie the reader, for better satisfaction in this be­halfe.

The 2. Obiection.

The grauen Images of their Gods shall yee burne with Deut. 7. Vers. 25. fire, and couet not the siluer and gold that is in them, nor take it vnto the, least thou be snared therewith, for it is an abomination, before the Lord thy God.

The Answere.

I answere; first, with S. Austen in these wordes; Satis appa­ret, Aug. in ep. 154. pag. 453. aut ipsos privatos vsus in talibus esse prohibitos, aut ne sic in­de aliquid inferatur in domum vt honoretur Tunc n. est abomi­natio 1 & execratio, non cum talibus sacrilegijs honor apertissima destructione subvertitur. It appeareth sufficiently, that either priuate vses be forbidden in such things, or else that no­thing should so be brought into thine house, that it be ho­noured. For then is it abomination and execration, not when together with the Idolatrie, the honour is also eui­dently ouer throwne. Secondly, that this was a politicall 2 Lawe, giuen onely to the Iewes for a time; and consequent­ly, that wee Christians are not strictly bound to the same. The ignorance whereof, hath brought many into many grosse errors. I therefore note heere by the way, for the be­nefit of the well affected and thankfull Reader, that the Lawe of Moses was threefold. viz. ceremoniall, iudiciall, and morall; whereof the morall part doth this day onely remaine in force with vs Christians, as which is indeed the very Lawe of nature, imprinted in euery mans heart in his natiuitie, and so cannot be altered or changed. But the cere­moniall part was ordained, to prefigure the ministerie of Christ then to come; and the iudiciall part was semblably appointed, for the conseruation of iustice among the Iewes. And consequently, as they both pertained to that time and that people onely, so were they both expired by the aduent of our Lord Iesus. This Saint Paul teacheth to be [Page 89] so; where he telleth vs, that the Priest-hood being transla­ted, the Lawe must also of necessitie haue a change. Hence Hebr. 7. Vers. 12. commeth it first, that where one could not by that Law, be condemned vpon the testimonie of one man, but of two at 1 the least, hee may this day bee condemned lawfully vpon one mans oath, where the Lawe of the Realme doth so ap­point. Where I cannot but greatly admire them, who seeme Deut. 19. Vers. 15. to condemne such Lawes, by vertue of the iudiciall Lawe of Moses. For the morall part onely being now in force, the other can haue no place. But the morall and naturall Vide infra, cap. 15. & notato. part, (marke well my wordes,) doth onely require this, viz. that great care and circumspection be had in iudgement, and that none bee condemned vniustly. Touching the number of witnesses, the Lawe of nature is silent, and lea­ueth that point as Arbitrarie to the of man. Hence com­meth it. Secondly, that blasphemers, adulterers, & such like 2 malefactors, are this day suffered to liue in many Christian kingdomes, and that thing is permitted, without any tran­gression of Gods lawe in that behalfe, For the Lawe of na­ture doth onely require this, viz. that sinne be so punished, as standeth best with the peaceable gouernment of the common-weale. Touching the quantitie and kind of pu­nishment, it saith nothing at all. Hence commeth it. Third­ly, that the intailing of lands is lawfull this day among 3 Christians, although some haue more audaciously then wisely, auouched the contratie in open Pulpit. It is there­fore most prudently and right Christianly prouided in the Cannos of Anno. 1604. that none shall bee permitted to Preach without Licence. Hence commeth it. Fourthly, that the true owners may for good causes and considera­tions 4 lawfully sell their landes and inheritance, and others lawfully buy the same, howsoeuer some without all testi­monie of Scriptures, Councels, or Fathers, doe perempto­rily Preach against the same. I will for charitie sake heere conceale, what to my griefe and the scandall of many, hath out of open Pulpit sounded in mine eares. Hence cōmeth [Page 90] it fiftly, that Fathers may giue their lands lawfully to any of their children; either to the yongest, or to any of the rest, 5 or to the Church, Hospitals, kinstolkes, or meere stran, gers, so it be done for good respects, and godly considera­tions for the Law of nature requireth no more of Parents, concerning Goods, lands, and possessions, but this onely thing; that they bring vp all their children in true faith, ho­ly feare, and humble obedience, and prouide competently for their honest mainteinance and sustentation. If any shal hold the contrarie, hee will giue occasion to set all the land together by the eares, Hence cōmeth it Sixtly that sundry 6 customes in this land; viz. where brethren inherite toge­ther as sisters at the common lawe, and the youngest sonne before the eldest, are not vnlawfull, the like may be saide of many other points in the iudiciall Lawe, and to this pre­sent obiection. For the naturall part of this iudiciall Lawe, doth onely require this of vs: viz. that we keepe our selues from Idolatry, and from doing any honour or worship to the same. Maister Caluin doth not dissent from this mine exposition, concerning the text alledged in the obiection. These are his expresse words, Quamvis autem politicum hoc fuerit praeceptum, & tantum veters populo ad tempus datum, ex co tamen colligimus quám detestabilis sit idolatria, quae ipsa etiam Caluin, in. 7. deut. v. 25. dei opera sua soeditate inficit. Although this were a politicall precept, and giuen onely to the Iewes for a time, yet may we gather therof, how detestable a thing Idolatry is, which with the silth thereof infecteth the very workes of God. Loe, this precept was onely giuen to the Iewish people, and endured but for that time; and so, as it is iudicial, it doth not this day touch vs that be Christians at all.

Maister Musculus iumpeth with M. Caluin, for the truth of this question. These are his expresse wordes. Hactenus ostendimus abrogandam fuisse legem Mosaicam per adventum Musculus de legib. Pag. 140. Christs, & nova legis introductionem, iam consequentèr videndū est, quatenus sit abrogat? Sequitur quaern̄t, an tota sit abrogata? respondemus; si totus Moses cessit Christo, vtique tota illius lex [Page 91] cessit legi Christi. Hitherto we haue shewed, that the Law of Moses must be abrogated by Christs aduent, & by the in­troduction of the new law. Now we haue to consider con­sequently, in what sort it is abrogated. The question is as­ked, if it be wholy abrogated, (or onely in part?) we an­swere, that seeing Moses himselfe gaue place wholy vnto Christ, the Lawe doubtlesse of Moses must likewise giue place wholy to the Law of Christ.

The Reply.

But maister Caluin saith plainly, that Idolatry infecteth the very workes of God with the filth thereof. Therefore things once applied to Popish superstition and Idolatrie, can neuer thenceforth be lawfully vsed.

The Answere.

I haue proued alreadie, out of M. Caluins own wordes; Supra, in 1. Obiect. that we may vse things lawfully, which haue bin abused to Idolatrie; as Temples, Pulpits, and such like. Neither doth maister Caluin say here, that such things are polluted in themselues; but that they are so called in respect of the peo­ple, so to terrifie them the more from Idolatry. For these are his wordes immediately going afore; Respondendum est, anrum vel argentum impio abusu minimè fuisse vitiatum, sed quamvis omns macula in se careret, populi respectu fuisse poliu­tum. Talis suit animalium immundities; non quod in se qui [...]quam baberent inquinamenti, sed quoniam deus eorum esu inter dixe­rat. I answere, that the gold or mony was not defiled with the impious abuse thereof; but albeit it was without all ble­mish in it selfe, yet in respect of the people it was polluted. Such was the vncleannesse of the beasts (in the lawe;) not for that they had any pollution in themselues, but because God had forbidden to eate them. Loe, M. Caluin granteth freely, that they are still indifferent in their owne nature, as they were afore.

The 3. Obiection.

There is no order in them, but confusion, no comeli­nesse, Vide infra, cap 8. per to­tum. but deformitie; no obedience, but flat contempt of God and his word.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that I haue alreadie proued sufficiently, 1 that there is grauitie, modesttie, and comelinesse, in the ap­parell of our Ministers, and that as well in their common life, as in the time of their ministration. Secondly, that it is 2 not euery priuate mans part to define, decide, and appoint; what is order and comelinesse in things in different, and the external gouernment of the Church, but that pertaineth to them onely, to whom God hath committed the managing of his house. Which point is likewise proued aboundantly in the Chapters aforegoing.

The 4. Aphorisme, of ceremonies vsed id Wed. locke or marriage.

IN the solemnization of Matrimonie, two things are much reproued; viz the Ring, and the simbolicall signification. To the former I answere, that seeing Wed-locke is a vassible ciuill contract, there is great reason, that it should be assured with some ciuill, permanent, and externall signe. Hereupon the Church, (which hath authoritie to ordaine ceremonies, as is alreadie proued,) doth appoint a round Ring, as a ceremonie best beseeming such a contract. For the Ring being round and without end in it selfe is very fit and meete to signifie to the married couple; that they ought to be ioyned in the perpetual band of loue, the one to the other.

To the latter I answere semblahly, that S. Paul may as iustly be reproued therein, as the Church of England. For Ephes. 5. after he hath discoursed at large, of the high misterie of ma­trimonie, assuming the husband and the wife to be one flesh; hee foorthwith addeth, that hee speaketh of the [Page 93] great misterie betweene Christ and his Church. Which symbolicall signification. [...]s approued by Saint Austin, Ambr. in 5. cap ad Ephe, Vide Aug. tract. 9 in Iohā Pag. 58. tom 9. S. Chysostome S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, and many others. It shall suffice in this so cleere a case to alleage S. Ambrose his words for all the rest. Thus doth bee write; Mysterij Sa­cramentum grande in vnitate viri ac foeminae esse signifi [...]at, sed aliam causam quae non discordet a memorato mysterio flagitat, quam scit ad prosectum humani generis pertinere, hoc est ecclesiae & salvatoris: vt sicut relictis parentibus home vxori suae ad­haerdt, it a & relicto omni errore ecclesia adhaereat & subijciatur capiti suo, quod est Christus.

He signifieth, that there is a great mysterie, in the vni­tie of the wife and her husband. Neither doth hee reveale this onely, but he also requireth an other cause, which dif­fereth not from the said mysterie, which hee knoweth to appertaine to the profit of mankinde; that is of the Church and of our Saviour. That as man forsaking his parents, Bucerus in censura mi­nister. eccles. Zanchius us 5 cap. ad ephes. pag. 416. Note well the next Aphorisme, ex Bucero. adhaereth to his wife, so the Church leauing all errour, must adhaere and be subiect to her head, which is Christ.

M Bucer, approveth and highly commendeth euery ce­remonie, which our church vseth cōcerning holy wedlock.

Hieronimus Zanchius a most zealous and learned writer, singeth the same song with Saint Ambrose. These are his words; Talis fuit eductio Evae ex latere Adae dormientis. Item, coniunctio Evae cum Adamo in matrimonium. Res in se fuit visibilis & sub sensum cadens, sed aliam occultam repre­sentabat, eductionem & creationem ecclesiae ex latere Christi in cruco mortui, & vnionem ecclesiae cum Christo.

Such was the eduction of Eve out of the side of A­dam, when he was a sleepe. So also was the coniunction of Eve with Adam, in the matrimoniall contract, the thing in it selfe was visible and subiect to our sence; but it did re­present another secret thing, euen the eduction and crea­tion of the Church out of Christes side being dead vppon the Crosse, and the vnion of the Church with Christ.

The fift Aphorisme, of the Symbolicall signe vsed in the confirmation of Children.

IT is greatly disliked and highly reprooued, that our Bishops doe lay their hands vpon children, to certifie them by this signe of Gods fauour to­wards them. To which I answere, that the fact and vsage of our Bishops in confirming children, is according to the practise of the church in al former ages; and therefore ought it not, either to bee so lightly reiected, Eusebius lib. 6. Hist. cap. 35. or so rashly condemned. S. Cornelius, writing to his brother Fabius, sheweth evidently, how one Novatus being bapti­tized in his bed, regarded not after his recoverie the rest of the ceremonies, whereof he should haue bene partaker ac­cording to the rule of the Church; no, not so much as to be sealed or confirmed by the Bishop, & for that cause did he not receive the holy ghost. Now, this Cornelius liued above Cornelius vixit. An. 454. 1100. yeeres agoe, at what time the church was free from all herisies, errours, & superstition. And yet did the church even then vse to confirme children, in the selfe same maner now vsed in our English Church.

S. Augustin deliuereth the custome of the Church in his time, in such golden & excellent words; as I verely thinke he is able to satisfie every one, that shall with a single eye and vpright iudgement, all parcialitie set apart, duely pon­der the same. These are his words; Numquid modo quibus im­penitur August. in E­pist Iohannis tract. 6. tom. 9. Pag. 422. manus vt accipiant spiritum sanctum, hoc expectatur, vt linguis loquātur? aut quando imposuimus manus istis infantibus, attendit vnusquis (que) vestrum, vtrū linguis loquerentur? & cùm videre [...] cos linguis non loqui ita perversocorde aliquis vestrū fuit, vt diceret; non acceperunt isti spiritum sanctum; nāsi accepissen [...], linguis loquerentur qu [...]aamodum tunc factum est? si ergo per haec miracula non fiat modo testimonium praesentiae spiritus sancti vn­de fit, vnde cognoscit quis (que) se accepisse spiritum sanctum? inter­roget [Page 95] cor suum, si deligit fratrem spiritus Deimanet in illo.

Is it this day expected, that they speake with tongues, vpon whō the Bishop hath laid his hands, that they should receiue the holy Ghost? or when we imposed hands, vpon Infants, did euery one of you marke, if they spake with tongues? and when he sawe they spake not with tongues, was then any of you so way wardly affected, as to say; they haue not receiued the holy Ghost; for if they had, they would speake with tongues, as it came then to passe. If therefore we haue not the testimonie of the presence of the holy Ghost by miracles, how knoweth euery one, that hee hath receiued the holy Ghost? Let him dispute the matter with his owne heart, and if he loue his brother, the spirit of God abideth in him. Thus write these holy Fathers, Vide infra, cap. 14. memb. 2. in fine ex Zuinglio. shewing plainly vnto vs the practise of the Church in their dayes, and that the holy Ghost is giuen in confirmation; as also that the imposition of hands is a signe thereof in Gods children, though not giuen in such miraculous manner, as in the Apostles-time.

Saint Hieromie teacheth the selfe same doctrine, which Cornelius and Saint Austin haue deliuered. These are his words: Quod si hoc loco quaeris, quare in ecclesia baptizatus, Hierony ad­versus Lu­cifer. tom. 3. fcl. 63. B. nisi per manus episcopi non accipiat spiritum sanctum, quem nos asserimus in vero baptismate tribui; disce hanc observationem ex ea authoritate descendere, quod post ascensum domini spiritus sanctus ad Apostolos descendit. Et multis in locis idem factita­tum reperimus, ad honorem potiùs sacerdotij quàm ad legis ne­cessitatem.

If thou heere demaund, why hee that is baptized in the Church, receiueth not the holy Ghost but by the hands of the Bishop, which wee say is giuen in true bap­tisme; learne this observation to descend of that authoritie, because after our Lords ascention, the holy Ghost came downe vpon the Apostles. And wee finde the same ob­served in many places, rather for the honour of Priest­hood, then for necessitie of the Law.

[Page 96] M. Bucer, that great learned Doctor, is very conso­nant Bucerus in 4. cap. ad Ephes. to the auncient fathers herein. These are his expresse wordes; Signum impositionis manuum etiam episcopi soli prae­bebant, & non absque ratione. Sive n. sit foedus domini bapti­zatis confirmandum; Sive reconciliandiij, qui grauius peccarunt; Sive ecclesijs ministri ordinandi; haec omnia ministeria maximè decent eos, quibus summa ecelesiarum cura demandata est.

The signe also of imposition of hands, was giuen by Uide infra, cap. 10 & nota resp. ad 2. obiect. the Bishops onely, and that not without reason. For whe­ther the baptized were to be confirmed with the couenant of the Lord: or they who had sinned grieuously, were to bee reconciled; or Ministers were to bee ordeyned vnto Churches: all these Ministeries doe especially pertaine vn­to them, to whom the cheifest charge of the Church is com­mitted. Thus writeth learned Bucer, shewing most evi­dently vnto all indifferent Readers: that imposition of hands in the confirmation of children, was an auncient and laudable ceremonie, and that it pertained onely to the Bi­shops to administer the same, and that vpon great reason. Let these words of M. Bucer, (& non absque ratione, and not without reason) be well marked, and neuer forgotten.

M. Fulke, a late famous writer, (who was a great fa­uourer Uide Am­bros. de sa­cram. bibr. 3. cap. 2. of the Presbyterie, and of good credite with the chiefest Patrons thereof,) hath these expresse wordes: The auncient ceremonie of imposition of hands, which is no­thing else (as S. Austin saith,) but prayer over a man to be strengthened & confirmed by the holy Ghost, or to receiue encrease of the gifts of the holy Ghost, (as S. Ambrose saith,) we do not in any wise mislike, but vse it our selues. Lo, this godly, zealous, and learned writer granteth freely, that con­firmation is an auncient and godly Ceremonie: which to be so, he proveth out of S. Austin and S. Ambrose. Yea, he addeth the approbation of this Church of England rec­koning himselfe for one of the number and members ther­of. We doe not (saith he,) in any wise mislike it, bvt vse it our selues. What then may we, or can we say or thinke, of [Page 97] the proude Brownists, sa [...]cie Barrowists, and arrogant Pu­ritan [...]? Who, either through ignorance of the practise of the auncient Churches, and for want of knowledge in the ecclesiasticall Histories and Councels; or else (which is farre worse,) vppon a singular Philautia, and fond admi­ration of their owne fansies and conceits; doe most arro­gantly and rashly censure and condemne all others, both old and moderne writers, which will not embrace their phantasticall imaginations, and receiue the same as the de­crees of the holy Ghost. Certes, I wonder, that they are not ashamed of themselues. For, it can with no reason bee denied; that God by the hartie and earnest prayers of his Church, doth worke those effects in those children which bee his, whereof the impositions of hands is a signe.

The Reply.

The Church hath not authoritie to institute, either Sacraments, or sacramentall signes.

The Answere.

I answere; First, that our Church doth neither ordeine Sacraments, nor yet any sacramentall signes; but doth on­ly explaine and declare the effect, purport, and true mea­ning Uide infrà cap. 14 & nota memb. 2. & 3. 2 of that signe, which the Apostles vsed in that behalfe. Secondly, that the Church hath power to ordeine Cere­monies in things indifferent, for edification, order, & come­linesse; and consequently, to expresse and declare the same by fit significant wordes. Which thing I haue proued at large in the seuenth Chapter, by the vnitorme testimonie of S. Ambrose, whose words are these: Accepisti post haec vesti­menta candida, vt esset indicium quod exueris in volucrum pec­catorum indueris innocentiae casta velamina.

Afterward thou didst receiue a white vesture, to sig­nifie that thou art deliuered from the snare of sinne, and art clad with the vaile of innocencie. Bucerus, Zuinglius, and Homingius, doe all 3. approue this custome of the Church. [Page 98] Maister Bucer hath these words; Et hic admodùm commo­dus ritus esse videtur, si modo quid ista omnia significent, populo subinde explicetur. This also seemeth to bee a very fit Rite, Bucerus in censura minist [...]cc [...]l. so the people bee sometime taught, what all these things do siginfie. Here he graunteth, that Ceremonies may be appointed for signification sake. Let this bee remembred well, and not forgotten.

The sixt Aphorisme, of the signe of the Crosse, vsed in Baptisme.

IT is a thing so cleare and euident by all ec­clesiasticall Histories, that the heathen ob­iected to the Christians in reproch, that the God in whom they beleeued, was hanged on the Crosse; as none but either tootoo wilfull, or tootoo ignorant, will or can de­nie the same. In regard whereof the church in all ages, even in the Primitiue and Apostolique time, so to nourish and keepe among them the memorie of their redemption wrought vpon the Altar of the crosse, & to make it known to Iew Gentile, and all the world, that they were not asha­med of the true humilitie of their Saviour in that most ig­nominious kinde of death, which he voluntarie suffered for their sinnes; did institute, and ordaine the comely and most christian vsage of the signe of the Crosse, & that all christi­ans in their first ordinarie and vsuall vnion with Christ by holy Baptisme, should receiue for that ende and purpose, the signe of the Crosse in their fore-heads. Herevpon the holy Fathers of best approved antiquitie, S. Cyprian. Saint Basill, S. Augustin, S. Hierome, S. Chrysostome, and all the rest, make mention of the like vsage of that most comely christian badge, every where in their most learned workes. Yea, the most holy and best learned fathers, doe proue the same vse out of holy Scriptures. Saint Cyprian hath these expresse words; Omnem autem super quem signum scriptum est, Cyprian ad ad Deme­trianum, [...]. ne tetigeritis. Quod autē sit hoc signum, & qua in parte corporis positum, manifestat alio in loco Deus, dicens; transi per mediam [Page 99] Hierusalem, & notabis signum super frontes virorum qui inge­munt & maerent ob iniquitates, quae fiunt in medio ipsorum.

Euery one vpon whom the signe of the Crosse is made, shall be free and vntouched. And what signe this is, and in what part of the body it is made, God sheweth in ano­ther place, saying; Passe through the midst of Hierusalem, Ezech. 9. Verse 4. Exod. 13. verse 12. Uide cundē Cyprian. libr. 4. epist 6 & make a signe vpon the fore-heads of them that mourne, and cry for all the abhominations that bee done in the middest thereof. In which place, the same holy Father and Martyr of Iesus Christ, proueth that signe to pertaine to the future passion of Christ Iesus, out of another place of holy writ. These are his wordes; Quod autem occiso agno praecedit in imagine, impletur in Christo secuta postmodum veritate.

That which went before in figure, euen the Lambe which was slaine: is fulfilled in Christ, the veritie that fol­lowed after the same.

S. Austin, in the disputation betwixt the Synagogue and Augst. de altere. eccles. & synagogae. tom. 6. pag. 57 the Church, alledgeth against the Iewes, this very Text of Ezechiel, for the confirmation of making the signe of the Crosse in the fore-heads of Christians. Vellem addiscere, vbi signum frontis acceperis, vel quis propheta signum istud quod di­cis, hoc est, signū frontis signacuso sanctificationis inciderit. I would learne saith the Synagogue, where thou receiuedst the signe of the fore-hed, or which of the Prophets maketh mention Ezech. 9. v. 4. of that signe of which thou speakest, calling it the signe of sanctification in the fore-head. To this question S. Austin answereth in the person of the Church, prouing it out of the 9. of Ezechil as S. Cyprian had done afore him; as also out of the Reuelation, in the 14. Chapter, hee vseth an ex­cellent and large discourse against the Synagogue; to which for brevitie-sake, I referre the Reader.

The same S Austin in an other place, hath these expresse August. in ps. 141. pag. 1125. words; Insultet ille Christo crucifixo, videam ego in frontibus regum crucē Christi. Sequitur; vs (que) adeo de cruce nō erubesco, vt non in occulto loco habeā crucē Christi, sed in fronte portem.

Let the Pagan deride Christ crucified, but let mee be­holde his Crosse in Kings fore-heads. I am so farre from [Page 100] being ashamed of Christes Crosse, that I keepe it not in a secret place, but doe beare it in my fore-head. Marke well, gentle Reader, this godly period of this auncient, blessed, and learned Father.

S. Hierome in like manner proueth the lawfull making of Hier. in cap. 9. Ezech. tom. 5. the Crosse in the fore-heads of the Christians, out of the same words of the Prophet Ezechiel. Thus doth he write; Et vt ad nostra veniamus, antiquis hebraeorū literis quibus vs (que) hodiè vtuntur Samaritani, extrema Than litera crucis habet si­militudinem, quae in Christianorum frontibus pingitur.

And to come to our owne, in the olde Characters and Letters of the Hebrewes, which the Samaritanes vse to this day; the last Letter which is Than, hath the image or simi­litude of the Crosse, which is made in the fore-heads of Christians.

S. Beda likewise gathereth the same conclusion, out of di­uers Beda, in apo. calip. cap. 7. places of the scripture. These are his words; Ad hoc. n. gentium confractum est imperium, vt signo fidei cui restiterant, facies sanctorum liberè notaretur. Sequitur; ne (que) n. frustra in fronte pontificis nomen domini tetragrammaton scribebatur, uisi quia hoc est signum in fronte fidelium. For in this signe the do­minion of the Gentiles was ouerthrowne, that the faces of Saints might be marked with the signe of Faith, which the Gentiles had resisted.

Thus write the auncient and holy Fathers; out of whose words, I obserue; First, that the making of the signe of the 1 Crosse in the fore-heads of christians, is grounded vpon the holy scripture. Secondly, that it was the custome of the 2 Church, to vse the signe of the crosse in their dayes; that is to say, aboue 1315. yeares agoe. To which I adde, that the same vsage was the custome of the church, in the time of O­rigen and of Tertullian; that is, almost 1400. yeares a­goe. And no maruell, seeing it was an Apostolicall tra­dition. If any hold the contrary, let him name the time, and the Author; and if I cannot proue a further antiquitie, I will be of his opinion. Thirdly, that those holy Fathers, 3 [Page 101] (Saint Cyprian, Saint Austen, Saint Hierome. Saint Beda) did reioyce to beare the signe of the Crosse in their foreheads. Maister Bucer in cen­sura graun­teth the vse to be most an­cient, and to be both come­ly and profit­able. And consequently, that a Christian needeth not be asha­med now adaies, to beare the same badg in his forehead. If I should stand to recount the testimonies of the holy Fa­thers, for the confirmation of the lawfull vse and making of the signe of the Crosse; I should both wearie my selfe, and be tedious to the Reader. I will therefore conclude with the iudgement of Maister Zanchius, whose onely ver­dit me thinkes, should be sufficient in this behalfe. These are his expresse wordes. Alia vero traditiones non sunt ne­cessariò retinendae in ecclesijs, etsi vetustae & a patribus comme­moratae; Zanchius in compendio, pag. 654. vt quod christianum oportet signo crucis frontem muni­re, diebus veneris & sabbathi ieiunare. Nam etsi servari pos­sent, si absque superstitione exercerentur, tamen conscientiam non obligant. Sequitur summa igitur & conclusio haec sit, eas tra­ditiones, quae dei verbo conformes, & ad vsum ecclesiae animos­que hominum ad pietatem & verum dei cultum excitandos ac­commodatae sunt, Ibidem, pag. 657. etiamnum retinendas & vsurpandas esse, citra tamen superstitionem & opinionem meriti.

The Church is not bound of necessitie, to retaine still. Other traditions, although they be auncient, and mentio­ned Vide infra, cap. 10. ex Bucero, Zuinglio, & Hemingio, propè finem capit is. by the Fathers: as that a Christiā must make the signe of the Crosse in his forehead, and fast vpon Friday and Sa­terday. For although these ceremonies and traditions might be still retained and kept, if that were done without superstition, yet for all that, they doe not bind a mans con­science to keepe them. Let this therefore be the summe and conclusion that such traditions as agree with the word of God, and serue for the Churches vse, and to stirre vp mens mindes to pietie and the true worship of God, may this day b [...] still retained and vsed, so it be done without superstition and opinion of merite. This is the conclusion of the most learned Doctor, Maister Zanchius, and I see no reason, why it should not be my conclusion also. And con­sequently, I doe constantly affirme with him, that the signe [Page 102] of the Crosse may this day be vsed lawfully; so it be not Vide tu He­mingium, in syntagm in. 4 lege decalog [...], & notate. ioyned with superstition, and opinion of merite. Let this be well obserued; that Zanchius graunteth freely, that the signe of the Crosse may bee made, and that euen in the forehead. For, it is the very case now in question, and constantly affirmed by Zanchius; that it may bee well vs­ed, though it may also bee laide away. To which lat­ter, both I and the Church of England doe willingly a­gree Vide infra. cap. 10. ex Bucero, & nota valdè. with him. But withall I say, that seeing it is a ceremo­nie indifferent, and may lawfully bee vsed; it is not in the power of a priuate subiect, to appoint or commaund to lay it away; but peaceably, louingly, and obedi­ently, to admit and receiue the same; knowing and e­uer Rom 13. Vers. 1 remembring, that in all things lawfull, higher powers must be obeyed.

CHAP. IX. Of the Election of Ministers.

I Haue proued alreadie, that the church Supra, cap. 7. hath authoritie to make decrees, lawes, ordinances, and constitutions, in all things which are Adsaphora indifferent in their owne nature, and tend to the peaceable gouernment of the Church. for the church of God may safely admit, diuers formes and orders wherby it may bee gouerned; according to the diuersitie of the state thereof, and variable circumstances of times, places, and persons. The same liber­tie and freedome is granted to the Church, in the Election of her Ministers. This veritie may easily be proued, by foure reasons of great importance viz. By apostolicall pra­ctise, decrees of auncient Councels, the testimonie of the holy Fathers; and the consent of best approoued late Writers.

The first Reason drawne from the practise of Christ and his Apostles.

CHrist himselfe, as his holy Gospell teacheth vs, did of Mat. 10. Uerse. 1. Luke. 10. Uerse. 1. himselfe alone without the consent and voices of his people, both call and choose his Apostles. And in like manner, himselfe alone did cal & choose his disciples, whō he sent abroad to Preach the Gospell, into euery citie and place, whither he himself should come. But most certain it is, that we are boūd to imitate Christs facts & deeds, before all other mens. For euery his action, is and ought to be our instruction. For this cause doth the Apostle exhort the E: Ephes. 5. Uers. 1. 1. Cor. 11. 1. phesians and in them all other Christians, to be followers of God, as deare children. And the same Apostle willeth vs to be followers of him, euen as he followed Christ.

The Apostles themselues in their Elections of ministers, did not euer obserue one and the same manner. For, in one Act. 1. 26. place we reade, that they presented two, Barsabas & Mat­thias whereof the one was chosen by Lot. In an other place, Act. 6. 3. we find that this course was altered. For the people presen­ted seuen to the Apostles, who all were chosen without Lots, & vpon whom the Apostles also laid on their hands. Wee reade in an other place, that this forme was like wise Act. 14. V. 23. changed, and that the Apostles Paul and Barnabas, ordained ministers in euery citie, in which ordaination they neither obserued casting of Lots, nor yet any presentment by the 1. Tim. 5. 2. tom. 1. v. 6. Tit. 1. 5. people. We find in an other place, that S. Paul Elected and ordained both Timothy and Titus, and gaue them authori­tie to ordaine others. Hereupon I inferre this euident con­clusion, that there is no certaine forme prescribed for the E­lection of ministers, which is to be obserued for euer in the Church, but that euery Church is free to change the same, according to the circumstances of times, places, and per­sons. Which doctrine wil better appeare, when I shal come to the fourth Reason.

The second Reason drawne from the Decrees of auncient councels.

THe Councell of Laodicea, holden in the yeare of our Concil. Lao­dicen. can. 13. Lord 370. hath these wordes, Non est permittendum tur­bis electionem eorum facere, qui sunt ad sacerdotium promo­vends. The people may not be permitted, to haue the E­lection and choise of them, who are to be preferred, to the Ministerie of the Church.

The Councell of Cabilon hath these wordes. Si quis epis­copus Concil Cabi­lon. can. 10. de quacunque civilate fuerit defunctus, non ab alio nisia comprev [...]ncialibus, clero, & civibus suis, alterius habeatur e­lectio. Sin autem huius ordinatio irrita habeatur. If any Bi­shop shall dye, of what citie soeuer he be, let not an other be chosen by any other, saue onely by the Citizens, Clear­gie, and bishops of the same prouince, If it be done other­wise, Conc. autich. can. 19. the ordination shall be of no effect. The Councell of Antioch teacheth the selfe same Doctrine.

The councell of Nice, after it hath pronounced the E­lection of the people to be voide and of none effect, addeth Conc. 2. Ni­cen. can. 3. & nic. 1. can. 4. these wordes. Oportet. n. eum qui est promo vendus ad episcopa­tum, ab episcopis eligi. For, he that shall be made a Bishop, must be chosen of the Bishops. And this second Councell of Nice alledgeth the first Councell of Nice, vpon which they ground this their Decree. This reason therefore is consonant to the former, that there is no certaine prescript rule, for the Election of the Ministers of the Church.

The third Reason drawne from the Testimonie of the holy Fathers.

SAint Hierome in his Epistle to Evagrius, hath these ex­presse wordes: Nam & Alexandriae a Marco evangelista Hierom. ad Evagr. tom. 3. Fol. 150. A. vsque ad Heraclam & Dionisium episcopos, presbiteri semper vnum ex so electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum, episcopum [Page 105] nominabant. For at Alexandria from Marke the Euange­list vntill the Bishops Heraclas and Dionisius, the pastorall Vide infra, cap. 14. memb. 2. & 3. per totum. Elders did alwaies choose one among them, whom they placed in an higher degree, and called him Bishop. Marke these words well. Saint Hierome saith heere, that the Priests or Pastorall Elders did in Saint Markes time, (which was in the time of the Apostles,) choose one of themselues to be their Bishop. He maketh no mentiō at al, of any interest that the people had in that Election.

He that can and list, may reade in the Ecclesiasticall Hi­stories, that when Anxentius the Arian was depriued of the Bishopricke of Millan, then Valentinianus the Emperour called the Bishops together, and willed them to place such a one in that Bishopricke, as was fit for the place. Which motion of the Emperour did no sooner sound in the eares of the Bishops, but they forthwith humbly requested the Emperour, that he himselfe would choose one whom hee thought most meete in that behalfe. Yet the Emperour both grauely, prudently, and most Christianly answered, that it were much better for them to choose one, for that they were best able to iudge and discerne, of his meetnesse for that place. In the ende, the good Emperour seeing the people tum [...]tuously deuided abo [...]t the Election, was content to interpose his authoritie, and to commaund Am­brose to be ord [...]ined Bishop there. These are the wordes of Theodoretus. Hac dissensione cognita Ambrosius vrbis prae­fectus, Theodor. lib. 4. hist. cap. 6. veritus ne qui [...]novarum rerum molirentur prop [...]re ad ecclesiam cōtendit. Illi sed [...]tione compressa vno ore omnes postu­lant, vti Ambrosius. qui adhuc sacris Baptismi m [...]sterijs non e­rat initiatus ipsi [...] designetur episcopus Quare audua, [...] iubet illum egregium virum extemplo & initiari, & episcopum ordinari.

So soone as this dissention was knowne. Ambrose the gouernour of the Citie, fearing least they should [...] some new tumult, commeth with speede vnto t [...]e C [...]urch. The people beholding him made an end of their variance, and [Page 106] all with one assent desired, that Ambrose not as yet Baptized with the holy Lauer, might bee designed their Bishop. Which when the Emperour heard, hee commaun­ded, that forthwith that worthy man should be Baptized, and then created their Bishop. Thus writeth this auncient and learned father.

Out of these wordes I obserue first; that in the time of 1 Theodoret, (who liued almost 1200. yeares agoe) the peo­ple had voices in the Election of the Ministers of the Church. Secondly, that such vsage of popular Election, 2 was the cause of great tumults and sedition in the Church. Thirdly, that it was lawfull for the Bishops, to haue kept 3 the authoritie and interest of Election in themselues. Fourthly, that the confirmation of Bishops, was then in the 4 power of the Emperour. Fiftly, that it greatly skilleth not 5 who doe chose, so fit men be chosen for the places.

Eusebius Caesariensis affirmeth constantly, that two Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 7. hist. eccles. excellent Bishops in Palestine, Theoctistus Bishop of Caesa­rea, and Alexander Bishop of Hierusalem, did of themselues make the famous Doctor Origen Minister of the Church. Many like testimonies, are euery where to be found in the historie of the Church, but I studie to be briefe.

The fourth Reason, drawne from the vniforme consent of late Writers.

MAister Caluin, whose onely testimonie were suffi­cient in this dispute,) is so plaine and resolute, that whosoeuer shall with iudgement and indiffe­rencie peruse his Doctrine, cannot but yeelde vn­to mine opinion in this behalfe. These are his expresse wordes; Est quidem & il [...]ud (fateor) optima ratione sancitum in Laodicens [...] consilio, ne turbis electio permittatur. Uix. n. vnquam evenit, vt tot capita vno sensu rem aliquam benè Caluin inst. lib. 4. cap. 4 [...]. 1 [...]. componant.

This I confesse, was with very great reason decreed in [Page 107] the councell of Laodicea, that the Election should not bee permitted to the common people. For it is very seldome or neuer seene, that so many heads can agree to conclude any matter well. Loe, this great learned man, (who was the greatest patron of the new discipline,) graunteth freely and roundly, that the Church may change the maner of electi­on, and consequently, that no one certaine kind of election, is de iure diuino, decreed by Gods law to be perpetuall.

Againe in an other place, the same Doctor hath these wordes; Verum in caeteris consentanea fuit ipsorum observatio; Caluin. inst. lib. 4. cap 4. §. 10. cum Pauli descriptione. In eo autem quod tertio loco posuimus, quinam scz. ministros instituere debeant, non vnum semper te­nerunt ordinem. But in all the rest, their obseruation was a­greeable to the discriptiō of the Apostle. And touching the third point, who ought to choose the Ministers, they did not alwaies obserue the same order. Loe, the maner of chu­sing Vide suprà, cap. 7 per totum. the Ministers, was not the same in euery place, but va­ried according to the circumstances of times and places, as seemed best to euery Church.

Maister Beza is so plaine in this controuersie, (though he be deemed one of the chiefest patrons of the Presbyterie) Beza in con­fession. cap. 5. art. 35. & art. 17. in fine. that I thinke his words indifferently po [...]de [...]ed, will suffici­ently confirme mine opinion, and the Doctrine I defend. These are his expresse words; Quoniam plerumque multitu­do & imperita est & intractabilis, & maior part saepe meliorem vincit, ne in democratia quidem legitimè constituta, omnia per­missa sunt effrent vulgo; sed constituti sunt ex populi consensu cer­ti magistratus qui plebi praeeant, & inconditam multitudinem regāt. Quod sihaec prudetia in negotijs humanis requiritur, mul­to Vide infra, cap. 14. per tota, & no­tum valde, membr. 2. & 3. sanè magis opus est certa moderatione in ijsrebus, in quibus ho-mines prorsus caecutiūt. Ne (que) causa est, cur quisquā sani iudicij ho­mo clamitet nullis hic esse prudētiae locū, nisi hanc prudētiā de qua loquor, ostendat cum dei verbo pugnare, quod sanè non arbitror. Sequitur: neque. n. simplicitèr spectandū, quid sit ab apostolis fac­tum in politia ecclesiastica. quum diuersissimae sint circumstan­tiae, ac proinde abs (que) Cacozelia non possint omnia omnibus locis [Page 108] ac temporibus ad vnam eandemque formam revocari, sed potius spectandus est eorum finis & scopus invariabilis, & ea de­ligenda forma ac ratio rerum agendarum, quae rectaeo de­ducat.

Because the multitude is for the most part ignorant and intractable, and the greater part doth often preuaile a­gainst the better; there cannot bee found euen a popular state lawfully appointed, where all things are commited to the vnruly multitude, but certaine magistrates are appoin­ted by the consent of the people to rule them. If this pru­dence must be had in humane affaires, much more is a mo­deration required in those matters, wherein men are alto­gether blinded. Neither is there any cause why any man of sound iudgement should exclame, that in such a case there is no place for pollicie; vnlesse he can shewe this pollicie whereof I speake, to bee repugnant to the word of God, which I thinke he can neuer doe. For we must not alwaies looke, what the Apostles did in Church gouernment, see­ing there is so great diuersitie of circumstances, that a man [...] Absque [...]. cannot without preposterous zeale reduce all things in all places and times, to one and the selfe same for the; but it is sufficient, if respect be had to their end and purpose, which Vide supra, cap. 7 aphor. 3. [...]at. 3. is not variable, and that manner and forme in Church­matters be vsed, which leadeth directly thereunto. Thus writeth Maister Beza.

Out of this Doctrine, which maister Beza hath freely deliuered to our consideration, I obserue these worthy documents; which I wish the gentle Reader, to keepe al­waies in his good remembrance. First, that the common 1 people are ignorant and intractable, and so vnfiit to beare any [...]way in matters of great moment. Secondly, that in 2 worldly matters the vn [...]uly multitude are euer gouerned by others in euery well managed common-weale. Thirdly, 3 that a greater care must be had in Church-gouernment, and that the vulgar sort must haue lesse dealing therein. Fourthly, that no wise man will or can denie, that the 4 [Page 109] Church must vse great pollicie in these affaires. Fiftly, that 5 no private man may speake against the Churches pollicie, vnlesse hee can prooue the same to bee against the word of God. Sixtly, that the Church is not alwayes bound to fol­low 6 that in her pollicie and gouernment, which the Apo­stles did practise in their time. Which sixe points, if wee shall ponder them seriously; we can not but finde our Eng­lish church gouernment, to bee agreable to Maister Bezas Vide suprà cap. 7. doctrine. Who, I verely thinke, if he were here and did behold the same, would with applause subscribe there­vnto.

M. Bullenger, a man of high esteeme in Christs church, hath these wordes; Quamobrem hinc efficitur, ecclesiam habe­re Bullenger. aaversus Anahapt. libr. 3. cap. 4. potestatem & mandatum eligendi ministros. Hoc autem face­re potest vel tota ecclesia vel fidi homines ab ecclesia ad hoc elects, provt commodius, vtilius & ad pacem conscrvanaam aptius vi­detur, pro locorum, personarum & temporum ratione. Nam cuncta haec ad Pauli regulam dirigenda sunt vt omnia decentèr & ordine fiant. Sequitur [...] ita Paulus & Bernabas presbyteros seu ministros elegerunt in ecclesus Asiae. Et Titus in Creta, & Timotheus in Ephesi, ecclesiarum ministros ordinarunt. Habent aut [...]mi [...] [...]uam potestatem, ex eo quod a tota ecclesia de­lecti sunt, quae ex verbo dei potestatem & mandatum habet eli­gendi ecclisiae ministros.

Wherfore hence it commeth, that the Church hath power Vide cap. II. ex Musculo, & nota valdè and commandement to choose Ministers. And this com­mission may be performed, either by the Church her selfe wholy or by some faithfull persons chosen by the Church, to this ende and purpose; as shall be thought more conve­nient, profitable, and sit for the peace of the Church, re­gard being had to the places, persons, and times. For all these things must bee referred to Saint Pauls rule, that all things may be done decently and in order. So Paul and Bernabas, choose Ministers in the Churches of Asia. So Titus choose Ministers in Creta, and Timotheus choose pa­storall Elders at Ephesus. And these persons haue autho­ritie [Page 110] so to doe, because the whole church hath chosen them there vnto; which by Gods word hath power and commis­sion, to choose the ministers of the Church. Thus writeth this famous Doctor. Out of these wordes, I obserue these golden Lessons. First, that the authoritie to choose and e­lect 1 the ministers of the church, pertaineth vnto the whole church. Secondly, that the church hath this libertie and 2 power granted to her; either to choose them her self by ge­neral voices of all, or else to appoint some special persons for that ende and purpose. Thirdly, that the manner of elec­ting 3 church-ministers may be chaunged, as the circumstan­ces of times, persons, or places shall require. Fourthly, that 4 this varietie of election, is grounded vpon Gods word. Fift­ly, 5 that Paul, Bernabas, Titus, and Timotheus, did of them­selues choose the ministers of the church; and consequent­ly, that the manner of electing church-ministers this day v­sed in the church of England, is agreeable to the word of God, and also to the Apostolique practise of the Primitiue church. For our Bishops doe not exercise any authoritie at all, saue that onely, which the whole church assembled in Parliament, did by vniforme assent committed vnto them.

The first Obiection.

S. Cyprian telleth vs, that the people haue interest in the Election of Ministers, which was giuen them by diuine Cypr. lib. 10 epist. 4. authoritie. Ergo, it is not in mans power, to take away that freedome from them.

The Answere.

I answere; First, that S. Cyprian meaneth nothing else by diuine authoritie, but divine examples; not any divine 1 precept, commanding it so to be done, Uiz. that there are examples in the Scripture, by which wee may learne, that the common people were present at the election of the Ministers, to giue testimonie to the church of their life and conuersation; as witnesses of their honest behauiour, not [Page 111] as Iudges of the Election. This my answere is grounded vpon S. Cyprians owne words, which I proue sundry wayes. Num. 20. 1. v. 2. 7. Act. 1. act. 6. First, because he proueth his assertion onely by examples; viz. For that Eleazar, Matthias, & the 7. Deacons, were cho­sen in the sight & presence of the people. Now we know, that examples onely shew what may be done; but they are not a law, which doe or can commaund a thing of necessi­tie to bee done. Christ ministred the holy Eucharist after Supper, but wee doe it before dinner. The Apostles re­ceiued it sitting but wee take it kneeling. Christ ministred it in vnleauened bread, but wee in bread that is leauened.

So we see a great disparitie, betwixt examples and pre­cepts. The former doe instruct vs, but not compell vs; the Vide inferius, cap. 14. memb 2. & 3. & nota val­dè. cap. totū. latter doe not onely teach vs, but they also commaund vs. Againe because S. Cyprian, hath these words; Quod & ipsum videmus de divina authoritate descendere, vt sacerdos plebe prae­sente sub omnium oculis deligatur, & dignus at (que) idoneus publi­co indicio ac testimonio comprobetur.

Which thing wee see descends from diuine authoritie, that the Priest may bee chosen when the people are pre­sent, in the eyes of them all; that he may be proued worthy, by publique iudgement and testimonie. And a little after, he sheweth more plainly the cause, why the people are pre­sent at elections. Et Episcopus deligatur plebe praesente, quae singulorum vitam plenissimè novit. And that the Bishop may bee chosen in the presence of the people, who know best what euery mans life hath beene. Thirdly, because S. Cyprian confesseth in that very place, that some Prouinces had an other custome, whom hee reproueth not.

I answere secondly, that if the Antecedent bee admit­ted, and wee also graunt the peoples interest to be, De iure 2 divino; yet can nothing be inferred therevpon, against the practise of the Church of England. The reason is euident, because nothing is done in our Churches of England, to which the people haue not yeelded their assent, as is alrea­die proued.

The 2. Obiection.

The example of the Apostles, saith M. Calvin, is to vs Uice praecepti. Ergo, wee may not chaunge, or depart from their practise in any wise.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that I haue proued the contrary, both out of Maister Calvin and M. Beza: yea, M Calvin him­selfe granteth freely, that Christes owne practise may bee chaunged: and that in a matter of greatest moment, euen in the blessed Eucharist. These are his owne words: Nihil a Christs consilio ac voluntate alienū facere videri, qui non con­temptu neque temeritate sed ipsa necessitate adacti, provino a­liua in ijs regionibus vsitatae potionis genus usurparent. Hoc do­mini Calvin, epist. 25 apud Be­zam. Pag. 167. Calvini responsum, vt optima ratione nixum, & Christi consilio consentaneum, noster catus adeo comprobavit vt eos su­perstitiosè sacere censuerimus, qui a vini symbolo vs (que) adeo pen­derent, vt alter ā caenae partem omittere mallent, quā Analogon aliud symbolum ita cogente necessitate, vsurpare.

M. Calvin (saith M. Beza,) answered to his brethren in America which haue no wine, that they should not doe contrary to Christes will and meaning, who not vpon con­tempt, but constrained with necessitie, would vse insteede of wine, some other kinde of drinke vsuall in that countery. Which counsell of M. Calvin our congregation did so well like, as grounded vppon good reason, and agreeable to Christes counsell, that we iudged them to be superstitious, which did so depend vpon the Symbole of wine, that they had rather omit the one part of the Supper, then to vse vpon necessitie, an other Symbole proportionable vnto wine. This was M. Calvins opinion, in this important and most weightie affaire.

M. Beza likewise deliuereth his iudgement, in another [Page 113] subiect of like moment. These are his expresse words;

Secundi generis sunt ipsa signorum materia, & nonnullo­rum r [...]uum a domino institutorum forma; vt exempti gratia, panis & vinum sunt caenae signa ex Domini institutione. Ubi igitur panis aut vini, vel nullus est vsus, vel nulla certo tem­pore copia, num caenae Domini nulla celebrabitur? Imò ritè ce­lebrabitur, si quod panis aut vini vicem, vel ex vsu communi vel pro temporis ratione supplet, panis aut vini loco adhibea­tur. Haec. n. mens fuit Christi, quum panem ac vinum ad haec mysteria deligeret, vt propositis earum rerum signis quibus corpus nostrum alitur, veram alimoniam spiritualem velut ob oculos representaret. Itaque a Christi sententi a nihil aber­rat, qui nullo prorsus novandi studio pro pane & vino substi­tuat, quae etsi non parem, similem tamen alimonia analogiam habeant. Desie etiam aqua & tamen baptismus alicuius differ­ri cum adificatione non possit, nec debeat; ego certè quovis alio liquore, non minus ritè quam aqua baptizarim.

Of the second kinde are the matter of the signes, and the forme of certaine Rites which our Lord ordained; as for examples sake, bread and wine, are the signes of the Supper, by our Lords owne institution. Where therefore there is either no vse at all of bread and wine, or else great want for a time, shall we celebrate no Supper of the Lord? Yea, it shall bee celebrated aright, if that bee taken in the place of bread and wine, which either by common vse, or in regard of the time, is vsed in the stead of bread or wine. For this Christ intended, when he chose bread and wine for these mysteries; that by proposing before our eyes, the signes of those things with which our bodies is nourished, he might represent the true foode of our soules. Therefore he swarueth not at all from Christes meaning, who hauing no desire of innovation, vseth in stead of bread and wine, those things, which though they haue not equall, yet haue they like proportion of nourishment with bread and wine. There wants also water, and yet Baptisme neither ought nor can be differed with edification; my selfe doubtlesse [Page 114] would baptize in any other liquor, no lesse lawfully then I would in water. This is maister Bezaes iudgement, euen in the essentiall parts of the Sacraments.

Out of this doctrine thus deliuered by these two lear­ned Doctors, M. Calvin, and M. Beza I observe these most important documents. First, that the authoritie of 1 the church is so great, that it can alter the matter of the Sa­craments, both of Baptisme and the Lordes supper, if credit may be giuen to these great Doctors doctrine

Secondly, that the vse of the Lords Supper and of Bap­tisme 2 is of such necessitie, that this chaunge may and ought to be admitted, rather then wee bee defrauded of the bene­fite thereof.

Thirdly, that neither the practise of the Apostles, nor 3 the examples of Christ, nor yet Christes owne institution: No, not in the matter of Sacraments, is of such force and moment; but that the church vpon good and necessarie cause, may alter and chaunge the same. And consequent­ly, it must needes be graunted, neither can it with any co­lour of reason bee denied; that the Church may chaunge the maner of choosing her ministers, as necessarie circum­stances of times, places, and persons shall require. Espe­cially, seeing there is neither example, commandement, or institution of Christ to the contrarie.

CHAP. X. Of the ordeining of Ministers, and the Ceremonies thereto apperteining.

THat Bishops haue and euer had autho­ritie, to make, order, and admit Mini­sters of the Church; it is so cleere and evident, by the Scriptures, Councels, Fathers and continuall practise of the Church, that I cannot but admire [Page 115] their audatious temeritie, that doe oppugne the same. Marke well the answers, to all the Obiections in this Chapter.

Saint Paul chargeth. Bishop Timothie, not to lay his 1. Tim. 5. V. 22. 2 tim. 1. 6. tit. 1. 5. hands rashly on any man. And the same Saint Paul telleth vs, that he left Bishop Titus at Creta, that he might order and make ministers in euery towne.

Now, that Timothie and Titus ordained Ministers, it is cleere by the Text it selfe. But two doubts re­maine; Vide suprá cap 5. The one, whether Timothie and Titus had more authoritie then other common Ministers, or not. The other, whether they alone ordained Ministers or with the ioynt-authoritie of others.

Touching the former, I haue prooued alreadie by many testimonies, that both Titus and Timotheus were Arch-bishops, and had superioritie ouer many other Bishops.

I will heare adioyne the testimonie of Hemingius, Hemingius in enchir. pag. 367. p. 372. p 367. p. 373. whose wordes are these: Attamen Paulus gradu digns tatis & ordine Timotheo & Tito erat superior. Timo­theus gradu & ordine excelluit reliquos Ephesmae vrbis presbyteros. Et Titus Cretensihus praecrat. Sequitur, inter hos ministros agnoscit etiam ecclesia nostra gradus dignitatis & ordines, pro diversitate donorum, laborum magnitudine, ac v [...] ­cationum dignitate ac iudicat barbaricum esse, de ecclesia hunc ordinem tollere velle. Iudicat caeteros Ministros suis episco­pis oportere obtemperare in omnibus, quod ad adificatio­nem ecclesiae faciunt, iuxta verbum dei ac vtilem ecclesiae oeconomium. Iudicat episcoposius habere in caeteros ministros ecclesiae non despoticum sed patrium.

But Paul in deegree and order of dignitie, was superiour to Timothie and Titus. Timothie in degree and order, excelled all other Presbyters or Priestes of E­phesus; and Titus was gouernour ouer the Cretions. Among these Ministers, our Church also acknowledgeth degrees of dignitie, & orders, according to the diuersitie of [Page 116] giftes, labours, and calling: and deemeth him to bee a plain rudes be, that once hath but a minde to take this order out of the Church. Our Church also iudgeth, that all o­ther Ministers must obey their Bishops, in all things which pertaine to edification, according to the word of God, and the profitable dispensation of the Church. Shee iudgeth that the Bishops haue a soueraigntie ouer all other Mini­sters of the Church; yet not despoticall, but paternall.

Touching the latter, the scripture is plaine, that none Act. 1 act 6. act. 14 tit 1. 5. 2. tim. 1. 6. but Bishops did ordaine Church-ministers at any time. And these Fathers of the Church affirme cōstantly, that this was a speciall & knowne prerogative of Bishops; that they, and none but they, could order and make Ministers of the Church. S. Hierome hath these evident & expresse words; Quid enim facit excepta ordinatione Episcopus, quod presbyter Hieron. epist. ad Evagr. tom 3. fol. 150 B. non faciat? For what doth a Bishop, which a Priest doth not, the ordering of Ministers excepted? Loe in this one thing, doth a Bishop differ from Priests and inferiour Ministers; because no other Minister, saue onely a Bishop, can ordaine and make Ministers of the Church.

Saint Epiphanius, (who liued aboue one thousand and two hundred yeares agoe,) affirmeth plainly, that Bishops Epiph. cont. haer ab. 3. to 1. haer. 75. Pag. 296. onely make Priests, that is, begetteth fathers to the Church; and both he and Saint Austin enrolled the contrarie opini­on among flat heresies, censuring all them for Heretiques, that held or defended such absurdities.

Saint Irenaeus, (who liued next to the Apostles, and Irenaeus, lib. 3. cap 3. libr. 5. cap. 2. pag. 589. so could not bee ignorant, what was the Church practise in their dayes,) maketh this my doctrine without questi­on, and beyond all exception; that Bishops euen in the Apostolique time, were different in degree from Priests, and did create and make Priests, but neuer were crea­ted of Priests.

No, no: if Priests could make Priests: or if it were not an Apostolicall tradition, that that charge doth appertaine onely to Bishops, (as it is this day laubably obserued in [Page 117] the Church of England, then doubtlesse. Aerius could ne­uer haue beene censured for an Heretique. Adde hereunto, that which I haue alreadie deliuered, in the fist Chapter, in the first and second Paragraph; and thou shalt finde this Doctrine, to be agreeable to the practise of Christs church in all former ages. See Zanchius, and note well his wordes. Note well also the Answere to the second Obiection. Supra, cap. 5. [...]. 2.

The first Obiection.

It appeareth by Saint Hierome in his Epistle to Evagri­us, that one minister was made superiour to an other, onely by the ordinance of men.

The Answere.

I answere; First, that Saint Hierome calleth that mans or­dinance, 1 which was done by the Apostles immediately, for that they were men indeed, as we our selues are. Secondly, 2 that superiority of one Minister ouer and aboue an other, was in the Apostles time, and proceeded from authoritie apostolicall. This is alreadie proued. Thirdly, that a thing 3 may bee called de iure diuine, a diuine institution or ordi­nance, two waies. First, because it is of God immediately. Secondly, for that it is of them, who are so directed by Gods holy spirit, that they cannot erre. This phrase of speach, Saint Paul vseth in these wordes, to the remnant I 1. Cor. 7. Vers. 12: speake, and not the Lord. Where we may not doubt, but all that Saint Paul spoke, was from the Lord, and that his ordinance was diuine, and not meere humane. And in this sense, the superioritie of Bishops ouer other inferiour Mi­nisters of the Church, may bee called De iure diuine, or an ordinance diuine. Saint Hierome calleth it an humane or­dinance, rather then Diuine; because it was De iure diuine onely in genere, and mediately, and De iure humano in specie, and immediately.

The second Obiection

In the primitiue Church, there was neither Arch-bi­shop, Patriarke, nor Metropolitan, and yet no Church did or can excell the same, in gouernment, beautie, or per­fection,

The Answere.

I answere; First, that though in the very beginning of 1 the primitiue Church, there were no Arch-bishops, Patri­arches, or Metropolitans; yet were such very shortly after, euen in the time of the Apostles, as is alreadie proued. Se­condly, 2 that though Arch-bishops, and Metropolitans were not expressely named, yet were they equivalently im­plyed in the Apostles. Thirdly, that as the Church for a 3 time wanted Arch-bishops and Bishops, so did it also want Deacons and vnpriested Elders. And as the defect of the latter, did not argue the imperfection of the Church for that time; so neither did the want of the former, inferre any such necessarie consequence. Fourthly, that as the Church 4 had authoritie, for the circumstances of times, places, and persons, to ordaine Deacons, and vnpriested Seniours, (if any such euer were,) so also had it then, and this day hath like authoritie to ordaine Arch-bishops, and other Mini­sters Vide & nota Bullinger. supra cap. 9. p [...]ante obiect. I. of the church, for the common good, vnitie, and peace of the same. Whosoeuer shall read attentiuely, Maister Bul­lingers wordes against the Anabaptists of his time, shall finde and perceiue very euidently, that hee constantly de­fendeth this my opinion and doctrine.

Maister Bucer maketh this case most euident, whilest Bucerus in 4. cap ad [...] c. p 8. & [...] val. ac. hee sheweth the libertie, freedome, and authoritie of the Church, in these most pithy and golden wordes; At vero de [...]aeteris signis quae in sacris adhibita sunt a vete­ri [...], ve [...] hodi [...] adhibentur a multis, vt sunt ignis ad ox­orcijmes & catechi, mos, & alba vestis baptizatorum, sa­cer [Page 119] panis qui dabatur catechumenis, & pleraque alia, sic sentio. Siquae ecclesiae essent, quae puram Christi tenerent doctrinam, & sinceram servarent disciplinem, hisque sig­nis vterentur simpli [...]itèr & purè, absque omni superstitio­ne vel levitate. praecise ad pias admonitiones easquo probè ommbus intellectas; eas ecclesias non possem equidem prop­ter signorum talem vsum condemnare. Sequitur; hinc fit, vt homines sicut in privatis & publicis actionibus faciunt, ita vtilitèr etiam pleraque signa adhibeant sacris ceremo­rijs. Iterum ibidem; signum impositionis manuum etiam epis­copi soli prabebant, & non absque ratione. Sive. n sic faedus domini baptizatis confirmandum [...] sive reconciliandiij, qui gras viù [...] peccarunt; sive ecclesijs ministri ordinandi haec omnia mini­steria maximè decent eos, quibus summa ecclesiarum cur a de­mandata est.

Touching all other ceremonies, which were vsed of an­cient time in the holy misteries, or are this day in vse with many; as fire to Exorcismes and Catechismos, the white garment of the Baptized, holy bread giuen to the Ca­techumenes, and many other things, my opinion is this, if there were any Churches, which retained pure doctrine and sincere discipline, and did vse these signes and cere­monies simplely and purely, without all superstition or le­uitie, precisely to godly admonitions well vnderstood of all the people; I verily could not condemne those church­es, for the vse of such signes or ceremonies. Hence it com­meth, that as men doe in priuate and publique actions, so also may they adde many signes vnto their holy ceremo­nies, and that not without profit. The signe also of im­position of hands, was giuen by Bishops onely, and that Note well this point and doctrine, dels. uered by this great lear­ned man. not without reason. For whether the baptized were to bee confirmed with the couenant of the Lord, or they, who had sinned grieuously, were to be reconciled, or Ministers were to be ordained vnto Churches, all these ministeries doe especially partaine vnto them, to whom the chiefest charge of the church is committed.

[Page 120] Out of these golden wordes of this great learned Doctor, and renowned Writer, I obserue these worthy lessons. First, that in the auncient approued Churches were many 1 Ministeries, with which inferiour Ministers (then called Priests, as our Church this day vseth the same names,) had not to doe withall. Secondly, that onely Bishops (who 2 were superiours in degree,) could make, order, and conse­crate Priests, and other inferiour Ministers of the Church. Thirdly, that onely Bishops, and not Priests, did confirme 3 the baptized, by imposition of hands. Which thing our English Church doth this day lawdably obserue, howsoe­uer some mal-contents, more rashly then wisely impugne the same. Fourthly, that the Church hath authoritie to con­stitute symbols, signes and ceremonies, and to adde them 4 vnto the holy misteries. Fiftly, that we may not condemne 5 those Churches, which for godly considerations without superstition, doe vse such signes and ceremonies, as were not knowne or heard of in the primitiue Church. Oh that this doctrine were well marked, and remembred; for then doubtlesse all dissention would cease, and all mal-contents would yeeld obedience, to the godly settled Lawes of our English Church.

Maister Zuinglius a very learned and famous Writer, and a most zealous professor of Christs Gospell, is able to Zuinglius in eccles. pag. 48 satisfie all indifferent Readers. These are his expresse wordes: Simul & illud notari debet, quod apostolorum nomen deposuerunt, vt primùm vni alicui ecclesiae affixi, illius curam continuam habuerant, cum nimirum vel senecta impediti, vel morbis afflicti, peregrinationum molestijs & periculis amplius, sufficere non potuerunt. Tunc. n. non apostoli amplius, sed episcopi dicti sunt. Possumus autem huins rei exemplum, imo testem ad­ducere D. Iacobum, quem nos minorem ab atate dicimus. Hunc. n. Huronimus & omnes simul vetusti patres, Hierosolymitano­rum episcopum nominant, non aliam ob causam, quam quod ea in vrbe sedem fixam posuisset. Cum, n. antea, vt & reliqui apostoli, peregrinationibus deditus fidem vbique terrarum docuisset, tan­dem [Page 121] abipsis apostolis constitutus est, qui Hierosolymitanae eccle­siae curā, ceu diligens aliquis speculator, ageret: idem de Iohanne euangelista & christi discipulo dicere possumus. Cùm. n. multis & varijs periculis obiectus apostolieam functionem longo tempore administravisset, tandem Ephesiorum episcopus factus, in ea vrbe anno ab ascensione domini sexagesimo octavo è vivis excessit.

This also must be marked, that they laid away the name of Apostles, so soone as they were tyed to any one church, and had the continuall charge thereof. To wit, when they being either hindered with old age, or afflicted with disea­ses, were no longer able to endure troubles and molestati­ons of trauaile. For then they were no longer called Apo­stles, but Bishops. We may bring Saint Iames the yonger, for an example, or rather for a witnesse of this matter. For Hierome and all the auncient Fathers, call him the Bishop of Hierusalem; and for no other cause, saue onely that he had placed himselfe in that citie. For when in former times, hee as the rest of the Apostles, being giuen to peregrination, had taught the faith euery where, the Apostles made him, as a diligent watchman, the Bishop of Hierusalem. The same we may say of Saint Iohn the Euangelist, and disciple of Christ. For when he being exposed to many dangers, had executed the apostolicall function a long time, hee was at length made the Bishop of Ephesus, and died 68, yeares after our Lords ascension.

Out of these words of this excellēt discourse, I note first, 1 that in the Apostles something was extraordinarie and temporarie, and something likewise ordinarie and perpe­tuall. This is an obseruation of great moment, well wor­thy to be engrauen in Marble, with a Penne of Gold. Se­condly, 2 that the Apostles were some time Bishops, and that their function in that respect was perpetuall. Thirdly, that 3 so soone as they betooke themselues to an ordinarie cal­ling, Note this point wel [...] for it is of great moment. they ceased to bee called Apostles, and were na­med Bishops. And this their ordinarie calling, remai­neth this day in the Church, and shall continue vntill the [Page 122] worlds ende. Hence commeth it, that all the holy Fathers affirme with vniforme consent, that Bishops this day suc­ceede the Apostles in their ordinarily calling.

This graue Writer deliuereth his opinion for ceremo­nies, Zuinglius in acclesiaste, pag. 20. most plainly and prudently in these expresse wordes; Iam obijciebant odiose nimis, salem, butyrum, salivam, lutum, & alia id genus, imo ipsas quoque orationes quae super infantibus fi­unt, quod neque Iohannes, neque apostoli legerentur orationibus baptismo praeivisse. Ad quae sic respondimus, primùm ad ce­remonias; Christum interim caecos quosdam visui restituisse medi­antibus tactu aut luto, interim solo verbo (respice,) neque tamen eos minùs vidisse, qui tactu vel luto mediante aciem recepissent, quàm qui solo verbo, at nihil morari nos externa ista, si ecclesia iubeat res [...]indi factumque est, vt protinus iuberet, non ignoranti­bus nobis qui verbo praesumus, iam inter exordia ecclesiae horum fuisse vsum tametsi eis non tantum tribueretur, atque his nostris temporibus, vndè & citrà negotium recidimus. Now they obiected too odiously, Butter, Salt, spittle, Cley, and such; like, yea the very praiers made ouer infants, because nei­ther Iohn, nor the Apostles are read, to haue preuented baptisme with prayers. To which wee answered, and first to the ceremonies, that Christ sometime cured the blinde by touching and Clay, sometime by his word onely, neither for all that did they see lesse, who receiued sight by Clay and touching, then they which sawe by his onely word: but we make no reckoning of these externall things, if the church command them to be taken away, and wee o­be [...]ed, as shee appointed, albeit wee ministers are not igno­rant, that in the beginning of the church these ceremonies were vsed, though not in such sort as now adaies, and ther­fore without contradiction we reiect them.

Out of this dicourse we may learne sufficiently, howe to behaue our selues touching ceremonies. viz. to vse or refuse signes and ceremonies, as beeing thinges in­different, as the church shall thinke it expedient and ap­point to be done.

[Page 123] Hemingius an other famous late writer, hath these words; Augustinus & Ambrosius non offenduntur, ex coque aliae Re­mae, Hemingius in syntagm. in. 4. lege de­calogi. aliae Mediolani essent ceremoniae. Nam inter se iunguntur pij spiritis Christi, non humanis ceremonijs. Vt pios gubernatores ecclesiarum velim magno studio cavere, ne ceremoniae scanda­lo sint infirmis; it a privatos nolim quicquam mutare in cere­monijs, gravi authoritate a maioribus institutis & approba­tis. Neque est, quod exactissima ratio singularum ceremo­niarum inquiratur, modo non manifestam superstitionem & impietatem redoleant. Quidam offenduntur ceremonijs nostris, quas clamitant papisticas esse. Dicunt nos habere sacerdo­tes, altaria, vectes, candelos, imagines, exorcismos, sig­nationes crucis, planè papistico more. His ego respondeo, ecclesiam veram a falsae dictingunendam doctrina & cultu, non ceremonijs quae per se adiaphorae sunt. Neque. n cere­monias adiaphoras tanti momenti esse indicamus, vt propter illas schismata moveantur in ecclesia. Retineatur doctrinae sinceritas, retineatur purus dei cultus. Alia serviant par­tim tranquillitati, partim infirmitati hominum; & relin­quamus prudentia quberuatorum, & de his rebus dispici­ant.

Austen and Ambrose are not offended, that Rome had one kind of ceremonies, and Millan an other. For the godly are lincked together by the spirit of Christ, not by humane ce­remonies. As I wish the godly gouernours of Churches to be very circumspect, that ceremonies doe not scandalize weakelings, so would I not haue priuate persons to alter Vide suprá, cap. 9. per totum, & infrà, cap. 14 any thing in ceremonies, which our auncestors with graue authoritie haue ordained & approued. Neither is there any cause, why we should require an exact reason of euery ce­remonie, so that they imply not any manifest superstition and impietie. Some are offended with our ceremonies, cry­ing out that they are papisticall. They say, we haue Priests, Alters, Vestures, Candels, Images, Exorcismes, Crossings, euen after the Popish manner. To these good fellowes I aunswere, that the true Church is distinguished from [Page 124] the false, in doctrine and worship; but not in ceremonies, which are of their owne nature things indifferent. For we thinke not ceremonies indifferent to be of such moment, Marke this learned, wise, and goaty counsel that for them wee may make a Schisme in the Church. Let vs retaine the sinceritie of Doctrine, and hold fast the pure worship of GOD. Let other things serue partly peace and tranquillitie, partly the infirmitie of men; and let vs leaue these things to the prudent considera­tion of our superiours, and let them dispose there­of.

Out of these wordes of this great learned Writer, wee may gather all things necessarie, for the decision of all con­trouersies about rites and ceremonies of the Church. For first, hee telleth vs, that the varietie of ceremonies at Rome 1 and Millan, did not offend Saint Austen and Saint Am­brose. Secondly, that priuate persons must bee obedient to 2 the lawes of their superiours, and not to take vpon them to alter those ceremonies, which higher powers haue appointed. Thirdly, that wee must not be curious, to 3 demaund reasons for euery ceremonie. Fourthly, that all 4 ceremonies are tollerable, which containe not in them ma­nifest superstition and imp [...]etie. Fiftly, that Copes, Vest­ments, 5 Candels, Exorcismes, Crossings, and such like, are not things of suff [...]cient moment, to cause Schisme and dis­sention in the Church; but that all such things must be left, and wholy referred, to the consideration of higher pow­ers. And both Bucer and Zuinglius teacheth the same doc­trine, as is alreadie proued.

The third Obiection.

Now the Church is troubled with Chauncellours Com­missaries, Officials, and such like; for defence whereof, no reason can be yeelded.

The Answere.

The antiquitie of Chauncellours and Officials, or of the [Page 125] Substitutes and Vicars of Bishops, (which is all one in the thing it self,) is such & of so great authority in Gods church, that both old and late writers of best iudgement, modera­tion, and learning, haue acknowledged and approued the same. The auncient Councell of Ancyran, (which was a­fore Conc. Ancyr. Can. 13. the Nicen councell, euen almost 13. hundred yeares a­goe,) hath these expresse words: Vicarijs Episcoporum (quos graci corepiscopos vocāt,) non licere vel presbyteros vel diaconos ordinare; sed nec presbyteris civitatis sine episcopi praecepto am­pliùs aliquid imperare, nec sine authoritate literarum eius in vnaquaque parochia aliquid agere.

We decree (saith this councell,) that it is not lawfull for the Vicars or Substitutes of Bishops, (whom the Greekes call fellow-bishops or coadiutors,) to order either Priests or Deacons; neither yet to bee lawfull to the Priests of the Citie, to command any thing else without the Bishops au­thoritie, or without the authoritie of his letters, to doe any thing in any parish. The auncient councell of Neocaesarea, Conc. Neocae. can. 13. Con. An­tioch. can. 8. and the Councell of Antioch, being likewise of great anti­quitie, doe acknowledge and approue the saide Vicars or Substitutes of Bishops.

Hemingius agreeth with the Canons of the afore-named councels, deliuering his opinion in these wordes: Hac po­testate Hemingius in syntagm. de gubernat. eccles. ecclesia ordinat ministros pro commodo suo, vt omnia or­dinatè fiant ad instaurationem corporis Christi. Hinc ecclesia purior sequuta tempora Apostolorum, alios patriarchas, alios episcopos, alios corepiscopos, alios pastores & catechistas instituit. Sequitur decori partes sunt duae. Prior, vt excitemur ad pietatem illis adminiculis. Posterior, vt modestia & gravitas in pietatis tractatione eluceat.

By this power the Church ordereth Ministers for her owne good, that all things may bee done in order, for the instauration of the body of Christ. Hence the pure church, which followed after the dayes of the Apostles, appointed some to be Patriarches, some to be Bishops, some Coadiu­tors, Vicars, or fellow-bishops, othersome Pastors & Cate­chists. [Page 126] Comelinesse, hath two parts; the first, that we may be drawen to pietie by these helpes; the other, that mode­stie and gravitie may shine, in the ordinance of pietie.

Out of these words, I note first, that the Church may 1 make and constitute diuerse degrees of Ministers, for her owne peace and for the building vp of Christes mysticall body. Secondly, that Patriarches, Arch-bishops, and 2 Substitutes or Suffragans of Bishops, and such like, were ordained euen then, when the Church was in her puritie. A most worthy observation, remember it well gentle Rea­der. Thirdly, that Ceremonies are some helpes, to bring men vnto pietie. 3

M. Bucer, M. Zanchius, and M. Calvin, the greatest Pa­trons of Presbiterie, doe all agree vnto this my doctrine, ac­knowledging it for the doctrine of the best and purest Churches, next after the Apostles-dayes. In regard of bre­vitie, I surcease from recital of their words.

The Reply.

The Church of Geneva, where M. Calvin was the chief in his time, hath neither Patriarches, nor Arch-bishops, nor Suffragans, or substitute vicars.

The Answere.

I answere with M. Calvin himselfe, whose wordes are these; Talis morositas deterrima est pestis, quum morem ecclesiae Calvin in in arg in ep. ad gal. vnius volumus pro vniversali lege valere. Such morositie is a pestilent mischiefe, when we will haue the manner of one Church, to be in place of an vniversall law. Yea, if M. Cal­vin, were this day liuing, he would not affirme the vsage of Geneva, to be a fit paterne for the gouernment of our Eng­lish Church. Many Ceremonies and constitutions agree well to our Church, which were nothing convenient to some other. Hence commeth it, that the Church hath au­thoritie, [Page 127] as I haue alreadie prooued,) to constitute, make, and publish, such Canons, Rules, and Ordinances, as tend to the common good and peaceable government thereof.

The 4. Obiection.

The Bishops take vpon them to giue the holy Ghost, when they ridiculously make Ministers. For they say, Receiue ye the holy Ghost.

The Answere.

I answere, that the manner of ordering Ministers vsed in our English Church, descended by tradition from the best, most auncient, and purest Churches. Which thing Saint Ambrose, Saint Augustin, Saint Hierome, and all the holy Fathers doe constantly affirme with vniforme assent. Neither doth the Bishop take vppon him to give the holy Ghost, but humbly and reuerently pronounceth Christes wordes, according to the vsuall practise of all Churches in best approoued times; thereby signifying vn­to the newly ordered Ministers, their principall charge and dutie, and assuring them of the assistance of Gods holy Spirit, if they labour in their calling as they ought to doe. Which vsage of our English Church, is conso­nant aswell to the practise of auncient Churches, as to the doctrine of Saint Paul himselfe to Timothie, when 2. Tim 1. Uer. 6. Vide Calv. libr. 4 instit. cap. 3. in fine & notato. hee saith; Wherefore I put thee in remembraunce, thou stirre vp the gift of GOD which is in thee, by the putting on of mine hands. For albeit all things necessa­rie for our salvation, bee contained in the Scrip­tures, either expresly, or by neceslarie consequence, yet are many other things very profitable for the ex­ternall gouernment of the Church, which are partly receiued by tradition from the Apostles, and partly [Page 128] added by the authoritie of the Church, as circumstances of times, places, and persons did require. Of this point of doctrine M. Zuinglius disputeth very learnedly, in a large Zuinglius part. 2. De baptismo, pag. 87. discourse against the Anabaptists. His wordes are these; Apostolos baptizatos fuisse nusquālegimus, nisi quod de duobus tantùm mentio fiat, Iohan. 1. Vbi tamen idem hoc non disertè ex­pressum est, sed obscuriùs innuitur. Quod si ergo vestro more nihil eorum factum esse dicemus, quae scripturis sacris non conti­nentur; iam & D. virginem Mariam, & ipsos quoque Aposto­los, baptismi signo nunquam inauguratos fuisse fateri cogemur; quoa ab omni pietate & religione est quàm alienissimum. Sequi­tur: caeterùm quòd ad dogmata fides spectat, & eas res quae fi­dem nostram & internum hominem informant perpetuò hoc ce [...] presenti antidoto vtendum est, quod Deus non praecepit credere, vt credamus adsalutem necessarium non est. Cultum hunc non descripsit, nec iniunxit Dominus, ergo illi placere & acceptus Vide supra cap. 7. ex cal­vino, & nota. esse non potest. Ceremoniarum autem ratio longè alia est. Nec enim dicere licebit, de ceremonijs istis in Scriptura nihil proditum est, ergo ceremonijs istis vsi non sunt; quod ipsum in exemplo divae virginis & Apostolorum abundè satis demonstratum est.

We reade in no place of the holy Scripture, that the A­postles weare baptized; saue onely, that mention is made of two in S. Iohn. Where for all that, the same is not plaine­ly expressed, but obscurely infinuated. If therefore wee shall follow your manner, and denie all things, which are not conteyned in the holy scriptures; then certes, we shall bee compelled to graunt, that neither the blessed Virgin Marie, nor the Apostles them selues were euer baptized; which doubtlesse is a strange assertion, and farre from all pietie and religion. But touching doctrines of Faith, and those things which informe our faith & the inward mā, we must ever vse this as a present preseruatiue; what God hath not cōmanded vs to beleeue, to beleeue that is not necessa­rie to our saluation. Our Lord neither appointed, nor in­ioyned this kinde of worship; therfore it can neither please, nor bee acceptable to him. But touching ceremonies, the [Page 129] case is farre different. For wee may not say; there is no mention made of these Ceremonies in the Scripture, there­fore the Apostles vsed them not; which thing is prooued a­bundantly, by the example of the blessed Virgin, and of the Apostles. Out of this must excellent discourse, I ob­serue these worthy documents. First, that all things neces­sarie 1 for our saluation, are comprised in the holy Scrip­tures. Secondly, that many other things necessarie for 2 Church-gouernment, are receiued by tradition. Thirdly, 3 that it is not a good Argument, to reason after this manner; there is no mētion of these things in the Scriptures, therfore the Apostles vsed them not, or therefore they are not law­full. This doctrine is agreeable to Saint Austins rule, who August. in Epist. ad Ia­nuar. 1. Cor. 11. 16. calleth it insolent madnes, to withstand and contradict that, which is receiued by the custome of the whole Church. Yea, it is consonant to S. Pauls practise, against the mala­pert saucinesse of contentious persons.

CHAP. XI. Of the Presbyterie, and Seignorie.

SOme otherwise learned, doe this day labour with might and maine, to proue that our English church ought to be go­uerned See the 12. chap. sect. 4. ex Bullinge­ro, Gualtero, & alijs. with a Presbyterie; that is, with Pastors, Teachers, Laicall vnpriested Elders, and Deacons, These 4. (as they contend) are the lawfull Gouernors of euery particular congregation. Pastors and teachers, for procuring the aduancement of the faith of the Church; Elders, for the censure of their conuersation and life; and Deacons, for the comfort of the poore. That that the truth of this controuersie, (of which many talke, but very few vn­derstand it aright,) may be laide open to the indifferent Reader, I haue thought it good to proceed therein, by way of Propositions.

The 1. Proposition.

THat kinde of gouernment, which may bee altered for the circumstances of times, places, and persons, is nei­ther necessarie nor perpetuall. But the gouernment by Pastors, Doctors, Elders, and Deacons, (if euer there were any such kind of gouernment in the Christian world,) may be altered and chaunged; Ergo, it is neither necessarie, nor perpetuall. the Argument is in forme, and the Propositi­on most cleare & euident to euery childe. The difficultie or Supr [...] cap. 7. pertotum. doubt (if there be any,) resteth in the assumption. But I haue prooued it at large, where I disputed of the Churches au­thoritie, in things indifferent. Yea, there was a time, euen in the dayes of the Apostles, when the Church had no Act. 6. Acts 14. Vide infrà, cap. 12 sect. 4. Deacons. There was also a time, euen in the dayes of the same Apostles, when the Church had no vnpriested or vnpreaching Elders. Who so readeth seriously, the Acts of the Apostles and S. Pauls Epistles, can not bee ignorant in this behalfe.

The 2. Proposition.

CHrist did not translate the Sanhedrim, Synedrion, or Consistorie of the Iewes, vnto his Church in the newe Testament. I proue it first, because both their 1 lesse kinde of Sanhedrim, and their great (as they did after­ward diuide it,) was onely in one place for all the Realme; viz. First at Sylo, then at Hierusalem their chiefe citie, vn­till the worst and last alterations therein; but the seekers of the newe English Presbyterie, would haue the like, (if not the very same,) to bee erected in euery congregation. 2

Againe in both Consistories of the Iewish Sanhedrim, Vide infrà. ca. 12. sect. 4. aswell in the greater of the 70: as in the lesser of the 23. they were all either Priests, or Doctors of the Lawe, the 3 King and the Peeres of the Realme only excepted. Third­ly, [...]sa [...]. 10. v. 8. then Sanhedrim had partly politicall partly eclesiastical [Page 131] iurisdiction both together; but our Presbyters haue onely ecclesiasticall, seeing (as they graunt,) to be Iudges in ciuill places, is onely the Office of the ciuill Magistrate.

The 3. Proposition.

THe English supposed Presbyterie, is not compatible with a Christian Monarchie; but must perforce de­spoyle Vide infrà, in sexta propo­sition in resp. ad 2. obiect. her, and bereaue her of her royall soueraigni­tie. I proue it, because the sayd Presbyterie challengeth vnto her selfe, all authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall; the su­preme ouer-sight of which causes, pertaineth to the ciuill Magistrate, as is already proued.

The 4. Proposition.

THE English desired Presbyterie, is not grounded vpon the word of GOD. I proue it, because the Scrip­tures alledged by the Patrons thereof, doe conclude no such matter. The Textes are fiue in number, being all that any way seeme to make for their purpose. The first is out of the Gospell, (tell the Church). To this Text I Matt 18. ver. 17. 1 answere in this manner; First, that wee for the true mea­ning of this portion of Scripture, will giue credite to Saint Chrysostome, and the rest of the auncient Fathers; The Church to which this complaint must bee made, doth sig­nifie the Bishops and gouernours of the Church; who, ac­cording to all generall Councels, auncient Canons, and the continuall practise of the Church; were euer to this day reputed, acknowledged, and taken for the Church repre­sentiue. Secondly, that if we will be ruled by M. Calvins 2 censure; Christ doth not here say any thing of the church, Calvin in harmonia evang. 3. of the New Testament, but alludeth to the order of the Church of the Iewes. Thirdly, that by the iudgement of the graue and learned writer M. Bullinger, a great Patron of the Presbyterie, Christ speaketh here of the whole con­gregation; [Page 132] and not to a fewe persons, of whom consisteth Calvin in harmonia E­vang. the supposed Presbyterie. And this exposition is so agree­able to the Text, as none with right reason can denie the same. Yea this sense is indeed agreeable to the verdict of S. Chrysostome and of all the auncient Fathers, and to the continuall practise of the Church in all ages. These are Bullingerus advers. Ana­bapt. lib. 3. cap. 4 Vide infrà, cap. 12. sect. 4. & no. ta valdè. M. Bullingers wordes; Quamobrem, hinc efficitur, ecclesi­am habere potestatem & mandatum eligendiministros. Hoc au­tem facere potest, veltota ecclesia, vel fidi homines ab ecclesia, ad hoc electi, prout commodius, vtilius, & ad pacem conservan­dam aptius videtur; prolocorum, personarum, & temporumra­tione. Nam cuncta haec ad Pauli regulam dirigenda sunt, vt om­nia decentèr & ordine fiant. Wherefore, hence it com­meth, that the Church hath power and commaundement to choose her Ministers. And this may bee performed, either by the whole Church, or by faithfull men cho­sen of the Church for this ende and purpose; as shall bee thought more commodious, profitable, and fit for the con­seruation of peace; respect being had to places, persons, and times. For all these things must bee reterred to Pauls rule, that all things be done decently and in order. And a little after, the same Writer hath these wordes: Habent au­tem istisuam potestatem exeo quod a tota ecclesia detecti sunt, quaeex verbo Deipotestatem & manda [...]n̄ habet eligendi eccle­siae ministros. But these men haue their authoritie, for that the whole Church hath chosen them, which by Gods word hath power and commandement, to choose the Ministers of the Church. Thus writeth this learned man.

Out of whose words it is most apparent & cleare, that all power is graunted vnto the whole Church, who to auoyde confusion and for order sake, committeth her authoritie to certaine chosen persons. Which persons are the Bishops and Prelates of the Church, say I, and all antiquitie will confesse the same with me. For neither Councels, Fathers, nor auncient Canons, doe make any mention of the late vp­start presbyterie.

[Page 133] The Second text is fathered vpon Saint Paul, where he saith; let him that ruleth, doe it with diligence. The third Rom. 12. Vers. 8. text is drawne from the same Apostle, where he telleth vs, that God hath ordained in the Church, some Apostles, some Prophets, some teachers, some workers of miracles; 1. cor. 12. Vers. 28. after that, the gifts of healing, helpers, gouernours. To these two texts, which are of one and the same effect, for the establishing of the presbyterie, I answere in this māner; First, that the Apostle in both places may be vnderstood 1 indifferently, either of ciuill gouernours and gouernment onely, or of ecclesiasticall onely, or of both ioyntly, & con­sequently, that the text cannot be racked so, that it must perforce be vnderstood, of the vnpriested Seniors of the Presbyterie, especially, seeing it may as fitly, if not more truly, be vnderstood of Kings. Monarches, and other ciuill christian Magistrates; to whom the chiefe care and ouer­sight appertaineth, of all persons and causes within their kingdomes, territories, and dominions. Secondly, that the 2 original Greek word (Cubernesejs) signifieth gouernments, not gouernours. So that thereupon cannot be inferred ne­cessarily, any distinct gouernor from the afore-named A­postles, prophets, and Doctors. For diuers offices may bee and often are, coincident in one and the same officer. And for this respect, when the Apostle commeth to the repetiti­on Marke this point well. of his former assertions, and should by order haue men­tioned the gift of gouernance; he passeth it ouer in silence, albeit he reckoneth vp the other seuerally. Wherby hee gi­ueth vs to vnderstand, that hee containeth the same, either in all, or in some one of the former offices or gifts. Third­ly, 3 that none of the holy Fathers in their Commentaries, did euer gather out of these texts or the like, any vnprea­ching Seniors. Fourthly, that both maister Caluin, maister 4 Bucer, and maister Martyr, doe extend these places to all kinde of gouernment. The fourth text is taken from the Ephes. 4. Epistle to the Ephesians, which proueth nothing at all, be­cause there is no mention made in that place of any go­uernours, [Page 134] saue onely of Apostles, Euangelists, Prophets, Pastors, and Doctors. None of which doubtlesse, can be their vnpriested Elders.

The Fift text is borrowed from Saint Paul to Timothie, [...]. Tim. 5. where he saith, the Elders that rule well, are worthy of dou­ble honour: specially, they which labour in the word and Doctrine. This text I graunt, hath some colour (though no truth) of that, which is in question. But I answere, that the Apostle vnderstandeth by Elders, such as are ministers of the word, or else of the Sacraments. I proue it first, because 1 Saint Hierome, Saint Chrysostome, and Saint Ambrose, yea and maister Caluin himselfe, (where hee speaketh purpose­ly of Seniors,) doe so vnderstand the word (Elders.) Se­condly, 2 because the originall Greeke worde (Coptôntes) Caluin. libr. 4 institut. cap 4. § 2. which signifieth to labour painfully, doth argue a differēce betweene Elders of the same calling, whereof some labou­red more painfully then others did, the meaning of the A­postle is this, and no other: that laborious and painfull El­ders, are so much the more worthy to be graced with grea­ter honours: by howe much greater paines and trouble­some turmoyles, they vndertake in their ministerie. For by the word (labour,) Saint Paul vnderstandeth no ordinarie, vulgar, and meane exercise; but an extraordinarie, vehe­ment, and most painfull labour; such as Timothie, Titus, Luke, Marke, and others, were well acquainted withall. Thirdly, because the Apostle, if hee had meant that some 3 Elders did neither preach, nor administer the Sacraments, would haue added, which labour in the word and admini­stration of the Sacraments, for it had been as easily said, as, which labour in the word and doctrine; but, because there were some, that laboured onely in the word and doctrine, and other some likewise, who laboured in administring the Sacraments; hee saide (Coptôntes) which labour painfully, to distinguish them from such as laboured in the same kind and office, though not in so laborious and painefull maner.

The fift proposition.

THe constitution of the earnestly wished, and long expected English presbyterie, doth ouerthrowe it selfe, and can no way be defēded. I proue it first, be­cause 1 diaconesses or widowes are no lesse required in the holy scripture, then are Deacons; neither are the one 1. Tim. 5. more extraordinarie or temporarie, then are the o­ther. And consequently, the frame or building of the presbyterie is not perfect, seeing it consisteth onely of these foure; Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons. And to answere as some doe, that there must bee godly poore widowes when they can bee gotten, is not to the pur­pose. For if Gods appointment and order may bee al­tered in widowes, because sit women cannot bee got­ten; euen so may wee excuse, the want of their ru­ling vpriested Seniors, as also the want of their Prea­ching Ministers. For the necessitie and want of sit per­sons, 2 is equall in them all. I proue it. Secondly, be­cause Pastors and Doctors or Teachers are not distinct officers, but are taken in holy Writ for one and the same. For Saint Paul hauing seuered Apostles, Prophets, and E­uangelists, Ephes. 4. Vers. 11. addeth to them Pastors and Teachers by a coniunction copulatiue; which hoe would not haue done doubtlesse, if hee had deemed them to bee different or­ders. Saint Hierome is iumpe of mine opinion, and rea­soneth Hier. in hunc locum. after the selfe same manner. And Saint Au­sten beeing demaunded of Peulimis, what difference was betwixt Pastor and Doctor, a pastor and a Teacher, an­swered Aug. apud Haymonem, in 4. cap. ad ephes. in this sort; viz. That they were all one, be­cause hee cannot bee a pastor, who hath not Doc­trine, wherewith hee may feede the flocke committed to his charge.

[Page 136] Maister Bullinger decideth the controuersie in plaine tearmes, writing in this manner; Nemo autem est, qui non vi [...] deat hac vocabula invicem confundi & alterum accipi pro al­tero. Nam apostolus etiam propheta, doctor, evangelista, presby­ter, atque episcopus est. Et episcopus evangelista & propheta est. Propheta doctor, presbyter, & evangelista. Proinde apostolus pau­lus, varijs hisce vocabulis varia illa dona significavit, qua domi­nus ecclesiae suae importijt ad salutem.

Euery man seeth, that these wordes are confounded, and that one of them is taken for an other. For an Apostle is al­so a Prophet, a Doctor, an Euangelist, a Priest, and a Bi­shop. And a Bishop is an Euangelist and a Prophet. A Pro­phet is a Doctor, an Elder, and an Euangelist. Therefore the Apostle Paul, by these diuers names signifieth those di­uers gifts, which our Lord bestowed on his Church vnto saluation. I therefore conclude, that the pillers whereupon the presbyterie is builded, are sandie, rotten, and vnsound; and consequently, that that building which is reared vpon them, cannot but be vnstable and ruinous.

The sixt Proposition.

THe newe English presbyterie, was not knowne or heard of in the Christian world, for the space of fif­teene hundred yeares together at the least. This pro­position is sufficiently proued, by this precedent discourse; if it be well marked from the beginning. Yea, my bare as­sertion is a good proofe thereof; vntill the patrons of the contrarie opinion, can and shall name the time and place, when and where such a presbyterie was to be found.

The seuenth Proposition

ALL Ministers created and made by the newe presby­terie, are meere lay-persons, and cannot lawfully, ei­ther Preach Gods word, or administer the sacraments. [Page 137] This is alreadie proued. I will therefore salute our Brow­nists, Barrowists, and such like, as the learned and fa­mous Writer Maister Bullinger did the Anabaptists. His Bullinger. aduers. Ana­bapt. libr. 3. cap. 7. wordes are these; Quod si dicitis, vos instar apostolorum peculiarem vocationem habere, probate eam signis & mi­raculis, dono linguarum, doctrina apostolica, quemadmo­dum apostoli fecerunt. Hoc autem nunquam facietis, ideo­que vocatio vestra nihili, imò pernitiosa est ecclesiae Christi.

Now, if you say, you haue a speciall and peculiar calling, as the Apostles had: then must you prooue the same, by signes and miracles, by speaking diuers languages, and by doctrine apostolicall, as the Apostles did. Hier. adver. Lucifer. tom. 3. ferè in fine.

Saint Hierome saith; Ecclesia non est, quae non babet sacerdo­tem. Where there is no priest or minister, there can bee no Church.

The first Obiection

That not Kings, Monarches, and other independant ciuil magistrates, haue the supreame and highest authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall, but that Bishops and Priests haue that charge committed to them, as their proper and peculi­ar function, it may appeare euidently to all indifferent rea­ders, by the facts and proceedings of Bishops in the old te­stament. Ieroboams hand dried vp; Ozias was smitten with the leprosie, and thrust out of the Temple, king Saul depo­sed 1. Reg. 13. 2. par. 26. 1. sam 13. 2. reg. 11. 2. par. 19. from his kingdome, and all this befel vpon these kings, because they tooke vpon them, the supreame authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall. Yea, Iehoiada the Priest commaunded to put Queene Athalia out of the ranges, and to execute the iudgement of death vpon her. And king Iehosaphat affir­meth plainly, that Amariah was chiefe ruler in all matters of the Lord, as Zebadiah was the ciuill gouernour of all the kings affaires.

The Answere.

This obiection containeth a question of great moment, and is very obscure, intricate, and difficult. Wherefore I ad­monish [Page 138] and aduise the gentle Reader, to reade my answere againe, and againe, and to ponder it seriously, before hee giue his iudgement therein. My answere standeth thus, First, that Ieroboams hand was dried vp, and Saul deposed 1 from his royall throne; not, for that they challenged a so­ueraigntie aboue the Priests, and supreame authoritie in causes ecclesiastical; but, because they attempted arrogantly and presumptiously, to execute priestly functiō, in offering incense vpon the Altar, burnt offerings, & peace offerings. Secondly, that Vzziah or Ozias was smitten with the lepro­sie, 2 because hee would needes burne incense to the Lord, which was the Priests proper function. Neither did the Priests for all that thrust him out of the Temple, but duti­fully, (as it become them,) told him what was his dutie, and that he had offended God; and therefore they willed him to surcease from his wicked enterprise, and to goe foorth of the sanctuarie. Which was no other vsage, then S. Iohn the Baptist afforded Herode the Tetrach; when he told him, it was not lawfull for him, to haue his brothers wife. Third­ly, Mat. 14. Vers. 4. 3 that the fact of Iehosaphat, proueth euidently the Kings supreame power ouer all his subiects, as well in causes ec­clesiasticall, as ciuill. The reason hereof is euident, because King Iehosophat by vertue of his prerogatiue royall, placed both Amariah and Zebadiah in their seuerall functions, and prescribed the limits of their iurisdictions. Neither will it helpe to say, that Amariah was ruler in the mat­ters of the Lord, and Zebadiah in the Kings affaires. For Suprá. cap. 4. note the whole chap­ter. the meaning is not, that the Kings affaires are not the mat­ters of the Lord; seeing (as is alreadie proued,) that the King at his inauguration, receiueth the whole booke of the law, and charge to see Gods true worship and seruice euery where maintained. But the true sense of the text is this, and no other, viz. that those things, which the King in his owne person may execute, are precisely called the Kings affaires; to distinguish them from his other affaires, which himselfe cannot put in execution. [Page 139] For, albeit in the preaching of the word & administratiō of the Sacraments, the chosen minister hath onely the charge and authoritie to execute them; neuerthelesse, Gods annoin­ted Prince hath the supreame charge & souereigne authori­tie, to command the execution thereof; as also to correct and to punish the Minister, for the neglect of his dutie in that behalfe. Of which point I haue spoken sufficiently in my other bookes, and therefore deeme it a thing needlesse now to stand long vpon the same. Fourthly, touching the fact of Iehoiada the Priest, I answere, that it can no way, proue the superioritie of Priests ouer kings. For first, Ie­hoiada 1 was not a priuate man, but the high Priest in the cō ­mon weale of the Iewes; whose office it was, to iudge not ecclesiasticall matters onely, but also ciuill. For the Iewes had no other lawes, but the holy scriptures. Secondly, Ie­hoiada 2 did nothing against Athalia of himselfe, but with the aduise, assent, and helpe, of the Centurions and Peeres of the Realme; all which were bound by the lawe of Deutero­nomie, to defend the kingdome from strangers. Thirdly, Dent. 17. v. 15. Iehoiada was bound by the right of affinitie; to defend king Ioas, and to establish him in his Kingdome. For his wife 3 was the kings Aunt. Fourthly, God had assured by his 4 infallible promise, the Kingdome to the familie of Dauid. Now Athalia was not of the stocke and Progenie of David, but a stranger to the Kingdome. For her mother was a Sydonian, and her father an Israelite, more addicted to ido­latrie, then were the Gentiles. Besides this, the wicked pre­tensed Queene Athalia, had traiterously murdered and wholy extinguished, all the lawfull royall blood, (the yong childe king Ioas onely excepted, whom God contrarie to her knowledge, had miraculously preserued,) and withall shee had set vp the worship of Baal. Wherefore, it was the parts of the Priests and Peeres of the Kingdome, to protect the King, to defend his royall right, to suppresse the vsurped power of Athalia, and to deliuer the King, [Page 140] his kingdome, and themselues, from the confused Ataxia Idolatrie, & bloodie tyrannie, which she had brought vpon them by her violent intr [...]sion, and vniust vsurpation of the royall right of Ioas, their Lawfull King and vndoubted soueraigne. So then, albeit the Ministerie of feeding, of Preaching Gods word, and of the administration of his Sa­craments, pertaine onely to his ministers, neither may the meere ciuill magistrate in any wise intermedle therewith; yet for al that, most true it is, that the prouision for the food, the ouer sight that the children of God be duly fed, and that the ministers doe exercise their functiōs in vigilant & duti­full manner, belongeth to the ciuil independant, and abso­lute princes. For this respect is it, that Kings and Queenes Esa 49. Vers. 23. haue the names of nurses, not for that they nourish their children in ciuil matters onely, but as in ciuil, so also in spi­rituall, that is to say, in lacte verbi dei, in the milke of the word of God. For though the execution pertaine to the mi­nisters yet the prouision, direction, appointment, care, and ouer-sight, (which is the supreame gouernmēt indeed,) be­longeth onely, soly, and wholy to the prince. For this cause is it, that King Ezechias highly renowned in holy Writ, 2. par. 29. Vers. 5. 11. 15 though he were but yong in yeares, did for all that in re­gard of his prerogatiue royall, and supreame authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall, call the Priests and Leuits his sonnes, charging them to heare him, and to followe his direction, and commandement, for so are the words of the text. This notwithstanding, I graunt freely and willingly, that mini­sters in the action of their ecclesiastical function & church-ministerie, are aboue all christians, aboue Queenes, Kings, and Monarches, representing God vnto them, teaching, ad­monishing, & rebuking them, euen as all others: following the godly example therein, of S. Iohn yt Baptist. Yea if need so require and that the vices of the princes, kings, and mo­narches, be notorious, & scandalous to the whole church, Mat. 14. Vers. 4. the Bishops may denounce such potentates, to be enemies to the truth, aduersaries to GOD, and no true members [Page 141] of the Church; but forlorne people, to be reputed as Eth­nicks & publicans, vntill they giue true signes of vnfeyned repentance. But withall, this must euer be remembred and most loyally obserued, of all Bishops in Christs Church; Mat. 18. viz. that the prince, (though full of manifest vices, & most notorious crimes in the world,) may neuer be shunned, nei­ther of the people, nor of the Bishops; seeing God hath appointed him to bee their gouernour. Much lesse may the people forsake their obedience, to his sacred preroga­tiue royall and supereminent authoritie. And least of all, (for it is most execrable, damnable, and plaine diabolicall,) may either the people alone, or the Bishops alone, or both ioyntly together, depose their vndoubted soveraigne, though a Tyrant, Heretique, or Apostata. For all loyall o­bedience Vide suprà, ca. 4. & ca. 1. in resp. ad 2. obiect. and faithfull seruice in all civil affaires, and what­soever els is lawfull, they must euer yeeld vnto him. He may bee admonished by the Ministers in the Court of consci­ence, concerning his publique offences: but he may neuer bee iudged in the court of their Consistorie, touching his power royall and princely prerogatiue, their power is on­ly to admonish and rebuke him, and to pray to God to a­mend that is amisse. Hee hath no iudge that can punish him, but the great iudge of all, euen the GOD of heauen. Note the answeres to all the obiections following, & marke them seriously.

The 2. Obiection.

Great learned men doe hold, that there were vnpriested Seniors in the Primitiue Church, who together with the Pastors did gouerne the Church. And the same is this day practised, in many reformed Churches.

The Answere.

I answere: First, that I doe not condemne the practise of [Page 142] other reformed Churches, but teach plainly and Christian­ly, that euery Church hath freedome, libertie, and authori­tie, to make such canons, orders, ordinances, and constitu­tions, as shall bee thought most meete, fit, and conuenient, for the external gouernment thereof. Which thing I haue already proued; not onely by the practise of the Church in all ages, but also by the vniforme assent and constant ver­dict, of best approoued Patrons of the reformed Churches in this age. Secondly, that those great Patrons of the re­formed 2 Churches, who deeme vnpriested Elders to be con­venient for their particular precincts, free cities, and com­mon weales, doe for all that thinke an other gouernment more fit for Christian Monarchies, and doe highly com­mend the same. I might alledge the ioynt testimonies, of M. Gualter, M. Hemingius, M. Bucer, and of many other famous late Writers; But in regard of breuitie, onely M. Musculus shall content me for the present. These are his expresse words; Principio, vt constituat ecclesiarum ministres, Musculus in locis, titul de magistr. Pag. 632. vbi illi desiderantur, sive eligat eos ipse, five ab alijs iussu ipsim electos confirmet. Ne (que). n. convenit, vt praeter authoritatem po­testatis publicae public a quisquā numer a in ecclesia obeat. Dices; at secùs factūest in primis ecclesiis, in quibus a ministris ac plebe eligebantur ecclesiarum antistites. Respondeo; talis tum ecclesi­arum erat status vt aliter non essent eligendi ministri, propterea quod Christiano magistratu destituebantur. Sirevocas tempo­rum illorum mores, primùm conditiones ac statum quo (que) illorum revoca.

First, it is the dutie of the ciuil magistrate, to constitute the ministers of the church, where they be wanting; whether he choose thē himselfe, or confirme those which others by ap­pointment haue chosen. For it is not meete, that any mini­ster execute any function in the Church, without the au­thoritie of the publique Magistrate. You will say; But it was otherwise in the Primitiue Church, where the Mini­sters and the people did choose their Gouernours. I an­swere; the state of the Church was then such, that the Mi­nisters [Page 143] of the Church could not be chosen otherwise, be­cause then they were destitute of a Christian Magistrate. If thou wilt vse the manners of that time, thou must first call againe the condition and state of that time.

Out of these words, I note many golden obseruations. First, that the ciuill Magistrate may appoint and elect the 1 ministers of the Church. Secondly, that none can lawfully 2 execute any Church-foundation, or bee a Minister of the Church, without election, assent, authoritie, or confirmati­on of the ciuil magistrate. Thirdly, that the ciuil magistrate 3 may either choose the ministers himselfe, or appoint o­thers to doe it. Fourthly, that the gouernment of the church 4 may be altered, according to the circūstances of times, pla­ces & persons. Fiftly, that the English long expected pres­byterie, 5 can not stand with our English Christian Monar­chie. For, she challengeth that as her proper office, which as Musculus truly saith,) doth properly pertaine to the ci­uill Christian Magistrate.

I say thirdly, that it cannot be concluded out of the ho­ly Tertiò prin­cipaliter. Scriptures, that any annuall vnpriested Elders, had the rule of the Church with the Pastors and Bishops. 3

I say fourthly, that for want of Christian Princes, laicall 4 Elders may be assumed to the Church-gouernment, to help and assist the pastors. Yea, I further graunt, that the said El­ders may remaine vnder a christian prince so it be with his assent, good pleasure, and moderation. But I constantly denie, that such kind of gouernment must of necessitie bee had, in and vnder a Christian Monarchie.

The first Reply.

S. Ambrose writeth plainly, that the Synagogue, and af­ter, Ambros. in prior. Epist. ad Timoth. cap. 5. the Church had Seniours, without whose counsell no­thing was done in the Church. The which saith hee, by what negligence it was left of, I can not tell; except happi­ly it were through the slouth, or rather the pride of some pastors, because they alone would seeme to bee somewhat.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that S. Ambrose did not thinke those Elders, of whom hee speaketh, to be necessarie for the go­vernment of the Church. I prooue it, because hee being a most learned, zealous, and godly Arch-bishop, would for his zeale and pietie haue laboured to restore them: and could for his great authoritie, haue effected the same. Se­condly, 2 that Saint Ambrose speaketh of Elders in yeares, not of Elders in Office: that is, of wise, graue, and olde men of great experience, whom the Bishops in former times tooke in counsell with them, as did also the auncient Synagogue. Our Church-wardens in this age, doe in some sort resemble them.

It something grieued holy Ambrose, that graue men, auncient in yeares, whom the Apostle would not haue re­proued roughly, did not remaine in like esteeme with the pastors of the Church, as they were of old. This is the true meaning and sense of S. Ambrose, concerning those Elders he speaketh of. I prooue it out of S. Ambrose his owne wordes, which are these: Nam apud omnes vti (que) gen­tes, honorabilis est senectus. For among all nations olde age is honoured. For which cause, both the Synagogue of old, and the Church afterward, had alwayes certaine old men, without whose aduise nothing was done in the Church. Loe, he speaketh of honouring Elders and auncient men, in regard of their yeares. But he neuer meant to equalize them with those, who were Elders in calling, and gouer­ned the Churches vnder him. No, no: the blessed man Ambrose, that graue and holy Bishop of Millan, neuer drea­med or once conceiued in minde, that any order of the Mi­nisterie, set downe by Christes Apostles, was worne out of vse in his time.

The 2. Reply.

S. Hierome who followed S. Ambrose immediately tel­leth vs most plainly, that in his time the Presbyterie or El­dership was in the Church.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that if wee suppose your Presbyterie 1 to haue beene in Saint Hieroms time, and not in the dayes of Saint Ambrose; it will fauour vs, and wholy make against your helpes. The reason is euident, because that which Note this well. may bee vsed at some time, and be wanting at other times, is not of necessitie to be vrged at all times; and this is all that wee desire. Secondly, Saint Hierome speaketh of Priested 2 Elders, and not of men in no degree of the Ministerie. Hier. in Esa. to. 5. lib. 2. cap. 3. His wordes are these; Et nos habemus in ecclesia senatum nostrum, caetum Presbyterorum. And we haue in the Church our Senate, a companie of Elders or Priestes. Loe, hee speaketh of Priestes, and of Colledges of Cathedrall Churches. I proue it by two reasons; First, for that him­selfe telleth vs, in his words afore-going; that he speaketh of those Elders, whose election Saint Paul describeth vnto Timothie. Againe, because it is vnpossible, that those vn­priested Elders should bee in Saint Hieromes time, who were worne out in Saint Ambrose his time; because Saint Austin, S. Ambrose, and S. Hierome, were all at one and the same time.

The 3. Obiection.

The long expected Presbyterie, is no way preiudici­all to the Christian Monarchie, but giueth to him so much as the Scripture alloweth.

The Answere.

M. Gualter, a zealous, vertuous, and learned Writer, of high esteeme in the reformed Churches, sheweth plain­ly vnto the world, what right and authoritie the new pres­byterie Gualter. in I. cor. II. ascribeth vnto Princes. These are his wordes; The Donatists of our time ought to consider these things more diligently, which doe ouer rashly condemne whole Cities, [Page 146] and Countries, where the word of God is preached, the sacraments rightly administred publique praier celebrated, the poore sufficiently prouided for, and vices, by good and godly lawes for bidden and punished. All these things they esteem as nothing, except there be a certaine new magistra­cie appointed, which should haue authoritie ouer Princes also. The same learned writer in another place, discourseth in this manner: There be sundry that will needes institute Gualter. in 1. Cor. ca. 12. Elders, or an ecclesiasticall Senate, according to the ex­ample of the Primitiue Church, which also should haue au­thoritie ouer the Magistrates themselues, if at any time they did not their dutie. But it behooueth them first, to shew, that those their Seniours haue this power, whereof Paul doth presently speake: which thing seeing it doth by no meanes appeare, and yet they deliuer vnto Satan whome they will; they doe like, as if some would goe about to cleanse the leaprous, raise the dead, and worke other mira­cles, because these things were vsually done in the primitiue Church. The same learned Doctor in another place wri­teth thus: Their ambition is reproued, which goe about to Gualter. in 1. Cor 14. bring all Churches to the forme of their discipline and go­vernment, & cry out that there is no discipline there, where all things are not agreeable to their traditions and orders. But these mē receiue a iust reward of their arrogancy, when they that come frō them to other countries, goe beyond all men in fancinesse, & bring nothing from home, but a vaine and intollerable contempt of all good men, neither can they abide to be corrected by any admonition of others.

The zealous, godly, and learned Doctor Musculus, hath these expresse words. We thinke otherwise then they, Musculus in locis, de magistr. Pag. 631. who denie to Christian Magistrates, authoritie to make ec­clesiasticall Lawes. We boldly affirme, that all power of making authenticall Lawes, which binde the conscien­ces of the subiects, whether they be ciuill or ecclesiasticall: doe neither pertaine to the multitude of the faithfull, nor to the Ministers of Gods word, but properly to the Ma­gistrate [Page 147] onely, to whom more power is giuen ouer his sub­biects. Wherevpon they are called in the Scripture, Gods, who doe execute the Magistracie: which name of honour, we doe not reade that it was giuen vnto the Priestes. The very reason and nature of gouerning can not suffer, that there be 2. authentique powers in one people, two diuers law-makings and dominions, vnlesse it be by subordinati­on; euen as there is no place, for two heads in one body.

The same Musculus in another place, hath these golden Vbi suprà, Pag. 630. wordes: but we without dissimulation thinke thus. Like as the Christian Prince hath chiefe power & care in religion, so hath he also power to constitute and make ecclesiasticall lawes, & to reforme abuses in religion. The very nature of making lawes doth not suffer, that they command & make Lawes, who haue not power to defend the Lawes, and to take punishment of the transgressors: and that the Magi­strate should protect the lawes, and punish the offendors, who shal not haue power to make the lawes, which he doth defend. But Certes, among men he that hath power to com­mand, hath also power to take reuenge. I know it apper­taineth to the magistrate, to punish not onely the transgres­sors of his owne commandements, but also of Gods. But the case is altered, if the question be made of lawes ecclesi­asticall, neither divulged by God immediately, neither yet by his Apostles, but by men within the ministerie of the Church. Here doubtlesse it is not sit, that they which are of meaner authoritie, shall make Lawes: and they who are of higher power, must see them kept. Men of meaner de­gree, may cause lawes to be obserued: but superiours onely can make lawes, whose authoritie cōpelleth to obey them, and who haue power giuen thē of God, to punish the diso­bedient. While therefore they ascribe the constitution and promulgation of ecclesiasticall lawes to those, whom they call gouernours of the church, (to wit, the presbyterie,) and leaue only to the magistrate, power to see them kept, and to punish the offenders: what other thing do they, but giues [Page 148] that to inferiours being subiects, which of right belongeth to higher powers; and taketh it away from superiours, to whom euery soule must be subiect. And so they peruer­ting the ordinance of God make of subiects Lawe-ma­kers, and of Law-makers subiects. Thus writeth this lear­ned man.

Out of these learned discourses of these two most lear­ned and famous Writers, I note these worthy documents. First, that vnder most Christian Princes, where the Pres­byterie 1 beareth no sway; the word of God is soundly prea­ched, the Sacraments rightly administred, publique prayer duly celebrated, the poore sufficiently relieued, and vi­ces sharply punished. Secondly, that all these things will not content the maisters of the Presbyterie, vnlesse they 2 may haue Princes at their commaund. Thirdly, that if the Patrons of the Presbyterie, will needes haue all things af­ter 3 the manner of the Primitiue Church; then must they cleanse the leaprous, raise the dead, & worke miracles as the Apostles did. Fourthly, that the authors of the Presby­terie, 4 are arrogant, contentious, froward, and saucie fel­lowes. Bazilycon Doron. Pag 42. To which the Doctrine of our gracious soue­raigne in his Bazilycon Doron, is right consonant; when he telleth vs very grauely, (besides many other vices which 5 he there reckeneth vp,) that we shall neuer finde with any Hic-land, or border-theeues, greater ingratitude, and moe lyes and vile periuries, then with this kinde of people. Fiftly, that they denie vnto Princes, authoritie to make ecclesiasticall lawes. Sixtly, that not the Presbyterie, but 6 the ciuill magistrates, kings, Emperours, Monarches, and other independant superiours, haue power to make canons and ordinances ecclesiasticall. Seuenthly, that whiles they 7 assigne vnto princes, onely the execution of their Lawes; they make of inferiours, superiours; and of subiects, Law­makers: and so peruert the holy ordinance of God.

The 4. Obiection.

The gouernmēt of the church in the time of the Apostles, [Page 149] was the best & most perfect. Ergo, no reason why it should be changed.

The Answere.

I answere; First, that the Church in the Apostles time 1 was most perfect indeed, concerning faith and doctrine absolutely; as also touching external gouernment, if regard be duly had vnto that time. Secondly, that there was not al­waies 2 in the Apostolicall time, one and the same externall gouernment of the Church, as is alreadie proued. Thirdly, 3 that the externall pollicie of the Church, may admit altera­tion and change without all preiudice of faith and consci­ence; according to the circumstances, of times, places, and persons. And consequently, that Christian Princes enioy this day very lawfully and laudably, the chiefe care and su­preame ouer-sight thereof. Men of best account in the re­formed Churches, doe in plaine tearmes approue and con­firme this my doctrine. Maister Caluin hath these wordes; Scimus autem politiam pro varietate temporum recipere, imò Caluin. in inst. lib. 4. cap. 7. §. 15. exigere varias mutationes. Wee knowe that the pollicie (of the Church) receiueth, yea requireth diuers alterations, ac­cording to the varietie of time.

Maister Musculus, a man of great zeale, singular lear­ning, Musculus in locis, pag. 633. care and gifts, confirmeth Maister Caluins opinion in these words; The state of the Church was such at that time, that the ministers could not be chosen otherwise; because they then were without a Christian magistrate. If thou wilt call againe the manners of those times, thou must first call againe their state and condition. Againe, in an other place Vbi suprà, pag. 631. the same author writeth thus; I answere, that the Churches of God were at that time, destitute of a Godly and faithfull magistrate. Wherefore all iudgements betweene brethren & brethren, were then exercised by the Seniours in the ec­clesiasticall senate; as the custome also was in those christi­an churches, which the Apostles planted. But the condition is farre otherwise in those Churches, which by the benefit [Page 150] of God haue christian Princes and Magistrates, in whom resteth authoritie, power, law-making, and gouernance, not onely in prophane, but in holy things also. It is a most pestilent errour, that some thinke no otherwise of the chri­stian magistrate, then of a prophane gouernance, whose power reacheth onely to things prophane. Haec ille.

Maister Beza hath these golden wordes, We must not Beza in con­fession. cap. 5. sect. 35. simply looke or regard, what the Apostles did in the go­uernment of the Church, seeing the circumstances are most diuers and variable, and therefore without preposterous zeale, Cacozelia all things cannot in all places and times, be called to one and the same forme or order, but rather the ende and inuariable purpose of them must bee looked vnto, and that manner and forme of doing things must be chosen, which tendeth directly thereunto. Haec Beza.

Out of these most excellent and golden discourses of these great learned men, who were very famous and highly renowned in the best reformed churches. I gather these memorable obseruations. First, that the Church is not fix­ed 1 or tied, to any one setled kind of gouernment, but may be changed in her gouernance, as the circumstances of times, places, and persons shall require. Secondly, that it is 2 very fit and conuenient, sometimes to alter the gouernment of the church. Thirdly, that the church may not bee gouer­ned 3 now: as it was in those daies, when there were no chri­stian magistrates. Fourthly, that wee must not respect so 4 much what the Apostles did, as their intent and purpose, the scope and marke which they aimed at.

CHAP. XII. Of the discipline of the Church.

The first Section, of the multiplicitie of Church-discipline.

THe Authors, Patrons, and seekers of the new English presbyterie, reckon vp three parts of church-discipline; viz, 1. ye election & abdication of ecclesiasticall officers, 2. the excommunication of the stubborne, and absolution of the repen­tant. 3. the decision of all such matters, as rise vp in the church, whether it be touching corrupt man­ners, or peruerse doctrine. For answere whereunto, marke the next Section.

The second Section, containing an answere vnto the former.

There is but one onely kind of publique church-disci­pline, which is called in the new testament, by the name of excommunication. I say (publique,) because I grant priuate admonition and reprehension, to be a certaine kind of pri­uate discipline. I say (church-discipline,) because I acknow­ledge also ciuill discipline. Discipline consisteth intrinsecal­ly, in the punishing and correcting of vice. It is one part of the churches pollicie, farre different, from the election of ministers, and decision of controuersies.

The third Section of the essence, nature, and conditi­on of church-discipline.

The Patrones of the English presbyterie, doe make it an essential part of the Gospell, so necessarie to saluation, as no Church can bee without it, but the truth is otherwise. [Page 152] I proue it first, because S. Paul giueth a singular commen­dation to the Church of Corinth; although it wanted at 1. Cor. 1. that time the Church-discipline, which is excommunicati­on. 1. cor. 5. Secondly, because we may stay and continue in that 2 Church, which is destitute of excommunication. Which Note wel the next Section. doubtlesse we could not doe, if excommunication were a part of Christs Gospell, and necessarie vnto saluation. For we must flee from that Church, which wanteth any thing necessarie to saluation. This notwithstāding, many learned men, euē of best accoūt in the reformed, churches do think Bul adver. Anabapt. [...]b. 6. cap. it lawfull to remaine in those Churches, where excommu­nication is not in vse. Maister Bullinger writing against the Anabaptists, hath these words; This the Anabaptists vrge, that there is no true Church acceptable vnto God, where there is no excommunication. To whom we answere, that the Church of Corinth was a true Church, and so acknow­ledged of Paul, before there was any vse of excommunica­tion Gualter. in 1. cor. 5. v. 4. in it. The same doctrine is taught vniformely, of mai­ster Caluin, maister Gualter, and others. Thirdly, wheresoe­uer 3 the word of God is truly preached, and his Sacraments Caluin. lib. 4. instit. cap. 1. § 9. S. 10. lawfully administred, there is Christs Church vndoubted­ly. For these are the true markes, by which best learned Writers discerne the Church of God. The case is euident enough, it is needelesse to spend much time about it. Vide sententiam Gualteri, in fine sectionis subsequentis.

The fourth Section, of the persons that must excommunicate.

Excommunication precisely and chiefely pertaineth to the Church; and secondly to those to whom the Church hath cōmitted the execution thereof. I proue it by Christs Mat. 10. V. 15. 16. 17 mat. 5. v. 29. 30. owne wordes in his holy Gospell, where hee willeth his Disciples to tell the faults of their brethren, if they will not heare them vnto the Church, that is to say, vnto the whole congregation. And forthwith Christ addeth these wordes, [Page 153] Verily I say vnto you, whatsoeuer ye bind on earth, shall be bound in heauen; and whatsoeuer yee loose on earth, shall be loosed in Mat. 16. Vers. 19. Iohn. 20. Vers. 23. heauen. Againe, in an other place, he giueth the same autho­ritie of binding and loosing vnto Peter alone, which hee gaue in the other place to all the Apostles ioyntly. Third­ly, in an other place he giueth power to remit & retain sins, vnto his Disciples onely & soly. Out of which three seue­rall commissions of our Lord Iesus, I gather and conceiue two generall rules and settled lawes. The one, that onely The 1. rule. the successors of Christs Apostles and Disciples, haue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen; that is, of opening and shutting, of binding and loosing, of remitting and retaining sinnes; as also the power of excommunication, touching the vse and execution thereof. I say (touching the vse and execution thereof,) because it is one thing, to execute ex­communication, and the keyes of heauen; an other thing, to commit the execution thereof to others. The other, that The 2. rule. the whole Church hath authoritie, to commit the executi­on of the keyes and of excommunication, to some spe­ciall persons fit for that purpose; for comlinesse and order sake, and for auoyding of confusion. This my resolution I Two things must be pro­ued. will proue to be grounded vpon the doctrine of great lear­ned men, highly renowned in the reformed Churches, two things I haue to proue; first, that the whole Church hath power to commit the keyes and excōmunication, to some certaine fit persons chosen for that end and purpose. Se­condly, that onely the Ministers of the word & Sacramēts, can denounce the sentence and put the same in execution. Concerning the former, Maister Bullinger hath a long and learned discourse, which is able to satisfie any indifferent Reader. These are his expresse wordes; caeterum video con­troversum inter quosdam nostri aevi homines, &c. But I per­ceiue it is a controuersie among certaine men of our age, Bullinger. in 1 cor. 5. pag. 47. who should haue power to punish sinne, and to execute the discipline of the Church; some ascribing it to the whole Church, other some to speciall men chosē for that purpose. Doubtlesse, I cannot perceiue, that they offend, who giue [Page 154] this power to certain men chosē for that end, wtout doubt, they doe not offend against Gods word. But they obiect, if he shal not heare you, tel it to the church. Now some chosē men are not the church. But these men perceiue not, that Christ & his Apo. vsed the figure Synecdoche. For Paul saith you being gathered with my spirit. And in the latter Epis­tle, he saith; it is sufficient to the same man, that he was re­buked 2. Cor. 2. Verse. 6. of many. If they wil stand vpon Christs words (lite­rally) we wil see when they wil bring the whole church to­gether. But we speake, (say they,) of the particular Church. We therfore haue the victory, who say that Christ vsed the figure Synecdoche. We graunt, that this power is giuen to the whole Church, but we call the congregation of good men the Church. For it followeth forthwith, in the very words of our lord; where two or three are gathered toge­ther in my name, there am I in the mids of them. Therfore, if Christ, as they graunt, committed the ecclesiasticall disci­pline to a particular church, & two or three, & much more eight or twelue, make a particular church: what letteth, that christ cōmitted not the same to chosen men, who are con­secrate to Christs name? seeing the authoritie of ecclesiasti­call discipline, is more intiere & renowned among chosen godly men, then among the confused vulgar sort, who as they lack iudgement, so are they often carried away with affections. Haec Bullingerus.

Maister Gualter hath these words, potestatis christi meminit Gualter in 1. cor. 5. v, 4. alludeut ad mat. 18. ne ille ecclesie sententiā cōtemneret et hoc iu­bet, quiatunc non erat alia tales coercendi, quādo magistratus non erant christiani, ali [...] qui iste paenas dedisset secundum legem. Neque Leu. 20. Pauius obstitisset, vt apparet ex Rom 13. quia vero durūerat, ho­mines christianos Ethnicis obijcere, recurrit ad remedium quod christus dedit quoad iniurias privatas, mat. 18. sequitur potestas illa penes q [...]os erat? penes totā ecclesiā, quae tamē (ne cōfusio fieret) per delectos agebat ex senioribus. Sequitur; excommunicatio. n. non est ex necessarijs illis, sine quibus ecclesia non consistit.

He made mention of the power of Christ alluding to his wordes in Mathew, least he should contemne the sentence [Page 155] of the church. And he cōmandeth this to be done, because they had no other meanes at that time, to correct the diso­bedient, when there were no christian Magistrates. Other­wise this fellowe, should haue bin punished according to the law. Neither would Paul haue bin against it, as appea­reth by his doctrine to the Romans. But because it was a ve­ry hard case to send Christians to Ethnickes, he hath recourse to that remedie, which Christ appointed for priuate iniuries and in whom was that power? in the whole Church, which for all that, (to auoid cōfusion,) did execute the same by cho­sen seniours. For excommunication is none of those neces­sary things, without which the church cannot consist.

The same Doctor in an other place, hath these expresse Gualter. in 1. cor. 12. hom. 104 in fine. words; Hodie non, opus proprio seuatu ecclesiae. Agnoscamus be­neficium dei, Esa. 49. vicissim hi aguoscant se quoque mēmbra esse ecclesiae. Sequitur, nobis sufficiat habere pastores, scholas, magis­tratus pios, qui cuitum dei tueantur pauperes curent.

We haue this day no need at all of the senate of the church or presbyterie. Let vs acknowledge the goodnes of God, and let them likewise acknowledge themselues, to be the members of the church. Let it suffice vs, to haue Pastors, Schooles, godly Magistrates, that will defend the worship of God, and take care of the poore.

Maister Martyr deliuereth the same doctrine in substāce, Martyr in. 1. cor. 16 pag. 239. in these expresse words; fatemur deinde, claves ecclesiae vni­versae datas, caeterum ne confusio accidat; convenit, vt aliqui ex omnibus deligantur quivtantur clavibus, quarum vsus in omnes redundet qui christo credun̄t. Prepositos vero ecclesiarum habent des monet Paulus non semel, et christus non prohibuit, qui cum iussit ne magistri et Rabbi vocaremur, ambitionē repressit, volu­itque, vt nemo nostrum haec affectaret. Sed non interdixit, quin habeamus in honore, et appellemus honorifice, quos dominus nobis praefecit: imo Paulus ad Timotheum scribit, se positum esse ma­gistrum gentium. Wee likewise confesse, that the keyes 1. Tim. 2. Uers. 7. are giuen to the whole Church. But, to auoyde con­fusion; it is meete, that some out of all bee chosen, who may putt the keyes in vse: whose vse re doun­deth to all that beleeue in Christ. Now, that we must [Page 156] haue gouernours of Churches, Paule admonisheth more then once, & Christ did not forbid it; who, when he cōman­ded vs, not to be called Maisters and Rabbies, repressed ambition, being desirous, that none of vs should hunt after these things. But he neuer forbad vs, to reuerence and giue honourable names to those whom our Lord hath placed ouer vs. Yea, Paul writeth to Timothy, that himselfe was made the maister of the gentiles.

Maister Musculus is consonant to the rest, whose expresse wordes are these; denique curabit vt plebs ipsa viros graues, Musculus in locis, de ministris ver. dei, Pag. 204. timentes dei, ac boni testimonij deligant, quorum cura et vigilan­tia disciplina ecclesiae administretur, et si quid grauioris momenti accidat, ad ipsam ecclesiam referatur. Haec tamen omnia, quae ad indeterminatam potestatem referimus, ad illas tan tum pertinent ecclesias, quae christianum magistratum non habent, quales erant olim, priusquam principes christiani fierent.

Finally, he shall prouide that the people choose graue men, which feare God and haue a good report, by whose care and painfull labours the Church discipline may be ex­ecuted, and if any thing of greater moment fall out, that the same be referred to the Church. Yet all these things, which we referre to the power vndetermined, pertaine to those Churches onely, which have no Christian Magistrate, such as they were sometime, before there were Christian Prin­ces.

The same Doctor in an other place, hath these wordes; Hanc cuiusvis. Particularis ecclesiae potestatem, reprobos scilicet excommunicands, Romanus pontifex irritam reddidit, & e medio Musculus de eccles. pag. 311. sustulit.

This power of excommunication, which pertained to euery particular Church, the bishop of Rome made fru­strate, and tooke it quite away.

Out of these most learned discourses of these graue Writer, I obserue these memorable lessons for the benefit 1 of the reader. First, that the power to excommunicate, is giuen to the whole Church. Secondly, that the Church hath 2 power to commit the same to others, as it shall be thought [Page 157] meete for her good. Thirdly, that the Church for auoiding of confusion, did euer commit this iurisdiction, to some spe­ciall 3 persons fit for the same. Fourthly, that the common 4 vulgar sort want iudgement, and are often carried away with affections, and so are vnfit persons to retaine such iu­risdiction in their hands. Fiftly, that excommunication is 5 not any assentiall part of the Church. Sixtly, that the mo­deration 6 and chiefe power of disposing and committing, resteth principally in the Christian Magistrate, where the church receiueth such a blessing. And thus much of the for­mer part; viz. of the power of the whole Church. Let vs proceede to the latter part; viz, to whom the church hath committed this power.

Concerning this Latter member, it is to be holden for an vndoubted truth, and most Catholique doctrine; that none saue onely lawfull Ministers of Gods word and Sacra­ments, can lawfully denounce the sentence of excommu­nication. For this cause was it, that when our Lord Iesus gaue this authoritie to his whole church; he gaue it alwaies Mat. 16. Mat: 18. Iohn. 20. in the name, either of all, or of some one of his Apostles. And for the same cause was it, that the Church hath euer since committed the same, vnto her lawfull Bishops and Ministers of the word. The practise of the Church is most cleere and apparant, both by the councels, and by the vni­forme verdict of the holy fathers.

Ex concilijs.

This case is most apparant by the old canons, comōonly (for their antiquitie) called the canons of the Apo­stles. There I finde these expresse wordes; siquis presbyter, Can. 32. Apostol. aut diaconus, ab episcopo suo segregetur, hunc non licere ab alio recipi, sed ab ipso quieum sequestraverat; nisi forsitan obierit a­piscopus ipse, qui eum segregare cognoscitur,

If any Priest or Deacon be excommunicated of his Bi­shop, it shall not be lawfull for any other to receiue him, but onely the partie who seperated him; vnlesse perchance the Bishop die, that did excommunicate him. By this canon [Page 158] it is euident, that none but the Bishoppe vsed to excom­municate, and yet the same Canon is confirmed, as very authenticall, both by the councell of Antioch, and by the Conc. nican. can. 5. conc. antioch. can. 6 Conc. Sardic. can. 16. first councell of Nice, celebrated in the time of Constantine the great.

The auncient and famous councel of Sardica, hath these wordes; Hoc quoque omnibus placeat, vt siue diaconus, siue presbyter, siue quis clericorum ab episcopo suo communione fue­rit privatus, et ad alterum perrexerit episcopum, et scierit ille ad quem confugit, cum ab episcopo suo fuisse abiectum, non opertere vt ei communionem indulgeat.

Let vs all agree hereunto, that if a Deacon, or a Priest, or any of the Cleargie be excōmunicated of his own Bishop, and shall flee to an other Bishop, then he may not giue him the communion, if he knewe that his owne Bishop did ex­communicate him.

The secōd councell holden at Carthage, hath these words; Conc. Car­thage. 2. can. 8. Placet, vt si presbyter excommunicatut, aut correctus a suo epis­copo, sacrificare praesumpserit, anathematizetur.

We agree, that if a Priest being excommunicated, or pu­nished by his owne Bishop, shall presume to celebrate, ac­cursed be that man. And the selfe same decree is to be read, Conc. car­thage. 6. can. 10. in the sixt councell of Carthage.

Ex Patribus.

Saint Ambrose that graue, learned, and holy Bishop, did alone excommunicate the Emperour Theodosius.

Theototus Bishop of Laodicea, did himselfe alone excom­municate two Apolli [...]aries, the father being a Priest, and Sozom libr. 6. cap. 25. the sonne being a Reader. The cause thereof was this; viz. because they kept companie with a prophane Sophister E­piphanius, and heard his vngodly rimes, which he had made in the honour of Bacchus.

Alezander that godly and famous Bishop of Alexandria, did by himselfe alone excommunicate Arrtus, as both So­zomenus Sozom. L. 1. cap. 14. Nice phor. libr. 8. cap. 5. and Nioephorus doe contest in their stories. Ni­cephorus hath these expresse wordes; Alexander illum, et [Page 159] cum eo qui partes cius sequerētur, clericos omnes excōmunie avit.

Alexander did both excommunicate Arrius, and all the clerkes that held his opinion. Yea this was a rule so recei­ued, and a practise so common in the auncient Churches; that when a controuersie arose about the celebration of Ea­ster. A. D. 183. Victor that zealous Bishop of Rome about one thou­sand and foure hundred yeares agoe, would haue excōmu­nicated all the Bishops of Aus [...]; if Irenaeus the good Bishop of Lyons, had not disswaded him from that attempt.

The first Obiection.

Saint Paul did not alone excommunicate the incestuous 1. Cor. 5. v. 4. Corinthian, but together with the whole congregation. For he saith, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit.

The Answere.

I answere, first, that though Christ gaue the keyes, and Mat. 16. Mat. 18. Mat. 28. Ioh. 20. the power of remitting and retaining sinnes vnto the whole Church: yet did he commit the vse and execution of that power, vnto his Apostles and their successors til the worlds end. Secondly, that the Apostle himselfe alone did excom­municate the Corinthian, and required the presence of the people no otherwise, then the same is this day required in our English Churches, viz that the sentence be pronoun­ced in the hearing of the congregation, that they may ther­by auoid his companie that is excommunicated, and be ter­rified from the like offence. I proue it, because Saint Paules words are these; for I verely as absent in body, but present Vbi supr. Uers. 3. in spirit, haue determined alreadie as though I were pre­sent. By which words it is most apparant, that the determi­nation of the matter resteth onely in himself, and not in the people. For otherwise, he could not haue dicided the mat­ter in their absence, and without their assent. And it is con­firmed 2. Tim. 4. Vers. 14. 15. 2. Tim. 2. 17. to be thus, because he alone excommunicated Alex­ander the Copper Smith, and the same may bee thought probably, of Hymeneus and Philetus.

The second Obiection.

Theodosius confessed his fault before the congregation, and asked forgiuenesse of the same, and thereupon was ob­solued. And so it appeareth, that Ambrose alone did not excommunicate the Emperour.

The Answere.

It is the vsuall practise in our English Church, that no excommunicate person be receiued into the Church again, vntill he haue made publike confession, and asked pardon for his offence. And this notwithstanding, the Bishop a­lone doth excommunicate, as S. Ambrosius did the Empe­rour.

The Replie.

You say, that the execution of excommunication, per­taineth onely to the successours of the Apostles; & so con­sequently, it must pertaine to all Ministers of Gods holy Word and Sacraments; and not onely to your lordly Bi­shops.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that no such consequence can be inferred vpon my graunt. For though I graunt, and that truly, that 1 none but Ministers of Gods word and Sacraments, can lawfully denounce the sentence of excommunication; yet will it not follow thereupon, that I giue the same power to euery Minister in generall. For it is one thing to say, that none but Ministers can doe it; an other thing to affirme, that euery Minister Promiscuè may doe it. Secondly, that 2 all Ministers haue power habituall to excommunicate; but All ministers haue habitu­al, but not ac­tuall power. those Ministers onely haue actuall power to doe it, to whō the Church hath committed that iurisdiction. For seeing the Church hath all the power graunted to her dispensati­on, [Page 161] shee may giue to this or that Minister more or lesse, as shall be thought conuenient in her discretion.

CHAP. XIII. Of Preaching and other things coincident.

The first Section, of the vocation of Ministers, which cannot Preach.

ALthough it were to be wished, that all Ministers of Gods worde and Sacra­ments, should be able to Preach, and to deuide Gods word aright vnto the peo­ple, yet where and when sufficient men of that abilitie cannot be had, others of meaner talents and honest behauiour may not be reiected. And to hold that none may be ordered and admitted, to administer the Sa­craments and to reade the Scriptures and godly Prayers in the Church, for the comfort and edisication of the peo­ple, is not onely against Christs institution, but also against the vsual practise of the church in all ages. Neither is it pos­sible, to alledge for the ground of the contrarie opinion, ei­ther any sound reason out of holy Writ, or any one testimo­nie of any of the holy fathers, or any canon out of any an­cient councell. The latter member, viz. that it is against the continuall practise of the church, is as cleere as the Sunne­shning at noone day; & therfore I deem it a thing needlesse, to spend wordes in that behalfe. The former member, viz. that it is against Christs holy ordinance, I prooue out of Christs owne words in his last supper, when he said to his Disciples; Hoc facitè in mei memoriam. Doe this in my re­membrance. Luke. 22. Vers. 19. By these wordes, as all the holy fathers and Doctors affirme constantly, Christ made his Apostles Priests or Ministers, giuing them power and authoritie onely [Page 162] to consecrate the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood, and to deliuer the same vnto his people. Neither could they lawfully, haue either baptized, or preached, remitted, and retained sinnes, vntill they had receiued further authoritie so to doe; which was not granted to them indeede, vntill Christs glorious resurrecti­on. Whereupon it followeth by a necessarie and ineuita­ble consequ [...]tion, which neuer can be answered; that the Mat. 28. V. 19. Iohn. 20. V. 22. Preaching of GODS word and the administration of his holy Sacraments, are not so inseperably vnited and linked together, but that the one may stand intiere and pe [...]fect without the other. For Christs will and holy ordi­nance is that onely rule, by which and after which, all the actions, policie, and gouernment of his Curch, must be measured, ordered, and disposed.

And this reason ab authoritate legislatoris, is confirmed by an other argument drawen ab exemplo. Wedlocke or Mar­riage instituted for a triple ende; viz. for procreation of Gen. 1. 28. Gen. 2. 18. 1. Cor. 7. 2. children, for the avoyding of fornication, and for mutu­all helpe and societie, is perfect and lawfull for the seconda­rie ends, though the first cannot be atchieued. For marri­age is lawfull in old women, quib, desinunt muliedria, which Gen. 18. 11. are past the date of bearing children, as all learned men doe graunt. Ergo, the institution and ordering of Priests or Mi­nisters for a triple end; viz. for Preaching of Gods word Luke. 22. 19. Mat. 28. 19. Act. 13. 15. Iac. 5. 14. for administration of his holy Sacraments, and for reading of the holy Scriptures & godly prayers, for the comfort & edification of the congregation, is godly perfect, & lawfull for the last & second ends, albeit the first cānot be attained.

The same argument is further confirmed, by the testimo­nie Confess helv sect. 11. cap. 18. pag. 38. of the reformed churches in Helvetia; whose iudgement I think, the patrones of the English desired presbyterie, wil not easily reiect or cōdemne. Their expres words are these; domnanius ministros ineptos, & non instructos donis pastori neces­sarijs. Interim agnos [...]omus quorundam in veteri ecclesia pastorum simplicitatem innocuam, plus aliquando profuisse ecclisiae, quam quorundam eruditionem variam, exquisitam, delicatamque sed [Page 163] paulo fastuo siorem. Vnde ne hodie quidem reijcimus simplicitatem quorundam probam nec tamen omuino imperitam.

We condemne vnmeete Ministers, which are not indew­ed with gifts necessarie for a shepeheard. Howbeit, we ac­knowledge, that the harmelesse simplicitie of some shep­heards in the olde Church, did sometime more profit the Church, then the great, exquisite, and delicate, but a little to proud learning of some others. Wherefore we reiect not now adayes, the good simplicitie of certaine Ministers, so that they be not altogether ignorant. Loe, the great learned men, the maisters and rulers of the reformed Churches in Helvetia, allow and approue as much as we desire. The cass is cleere, it cannot be denied.

The first Obiection.

Saint Paul commandeth expressely, that euery Bishop 1. Tim. 3. v. 2. 3. Tit. 1. v. 7. 8. 9 or pastor should be able to teach, and to conuince the gain­sayers; Ergo, no mortal man can dispense with vnpreaching Ministers.

The Answere.

I answere; first, that if euery pastor must of necessitie be 1 able to conuince the gainsayers, so as otherwise he cānot be a lawfull pastor; then doubtlesse must many of those, who are of high esteeme with the fauourrs of the presbyterie, be vtterly forsaken, and deposed from their ministery. Second­ly, 2 that hospitalitie is required in a Minister, euen as is his preaching and aptnesse to conuince. And yet many pastors are allowed within the presbyterie, which for all that can keepe no hospitalitie. Thirdly, that by Saint Pauls canons 3 he is as vnlawfull a Pastor that is an angry Minister, as he that cannot Preach. For Saint Pauls wordes are as plaine for the one, as they are for the other, me orgilon, not angrie. But if all bee vnlawfull Pastors, that be angrie; howe can wee bee assured to finde any lawfull Tit. 1. 7. Pastors, either in the presbyterie, or else where? Many other [Page 164] conditions doth Saint Paul require in pastors, which will hardly be found in the elders of the Presbyterie. The true sense and meaning of Saint Paules wordes is this, and no other; viz. that it is meete and conuenient, that a Pastor of the Church haue those qualities and conditions which he reckoneth; but withall he meaneth nothing lesse, then that he is no lawfull Pastor, which wanteth some of the saide conditions. Yea, the originall Greeke word, doth confirme this mine exposition. For, deioun ton Episcopon doth onely signifie vnto vs, that a Bishop or Priest should of congrui­tie, and if it may be, haue such conditions and qualities, as the Apostle reckoneth vp to Titus and Timothy; not, that none can be true and lawfull pastors of the Church, which 1. Tim. 3. 2. are not indewed with all the aforenamed qualities. No, no, the latin word, (oportet,) and the Greeke word, (dei) haue no other sense and meaning; but that it behooueth, or that it is meete and conuenient; not, that it must of necessitie be so, or else no lawfull ordination.

The second Obiection.

Christ sent his Disciples forth to preach the kingdome of God, and to cure the sicke. Luke. 9. 2.

The Answere.

I answere, that this was a speciall charge giuen onely to the Apostles, and that it proueth as well, that all Ministers must be curers of diseases, as Preachers and conuincers of gainsayers.

The second Section, of Preaching without licence and authoritie.

The patrons of the Presbyterie affirme those canons, or­dinances, and constitutions, to be vngodly, wicked, and plaine diabolicall; which prohibite all Ministers to preach [Page 165] Gods word, that are not lawfully licenced thereunto. And they cry out against the most reuerend Fathers; because they put som to silence, whom they had licenced to preach in former times.

But I answere to these vnworthy complaints, and vn­christian 1 exclamations; first, that no man may take vpon Rom. 10. 15. Hebr. 5 4. him the ministerie, but he onely that is lawfully called ther­unto. Secondly, that the Church, to whom this authoritie 2 is graunted, may place and displace, giue licence to preach, and prohibite from preaching; as it shall be thought most conuenient for the peaceable gouernment thereof, and for edification of the people. For this cause did King Salomon Depose Abiathar the high Priest, and placed Sadock in his 1. reg. 2. v. 27. roome. But doubtlesse, he that hath power to displace the Minister, which is a greater thing; hath power, a fortiori, to suspend the Minister from execution, or to prohibite him Vide sect. 4. ex concil. Vasensi, et notato. Vide supra, cap. 12. sect. 4. ex. Mus­culo. to Preach; seeing that is a thing, that requireth lesse autho­ritie. Againe, if the Church had not power to displace, sus­pend, and prohibite Ministers from Preaching, as their de­meanours, and circumstances of times, places, and persons shall require; then doubtlesse would the Church abound, with schismes, confusion, and all ataxia contrarie to the Apostolike canon, which prescribeth all things to be done decently and in order. Yea, I protest vnto the world, that I deeme the prohibition of Preaching without licence, to be 1. Cor. 14. v. 26, 40. one of the most necessary and profitable Canons, that e­uer were ordained, constituted, and established, by this our English Church. For since euery man tooke vpon him to Preach at his owne pleasure, and was permitted to doe it when and where he would; lawfull authoritie hath binso impugned, new-sangled conceits so vsuall, vnsound doc­trine so cōmō, & the text it self either scantly touched or so rawly & vnclerkly handled; that the auditors were as igno­rant of the true meaning of the text in the end, as in the be­ginning of the sermon. Hereupon it followed of necessitie, that some for want of skil, (who euer were most desirous to [Page 166] haue the place,) some for disdaine of superioritie in their betters; and others vpon licentious saucinesse; did de­stroy more, and withdrawe moe people from liking of the Gospell in one moueth, then graue Preachers of great learning and rare gifts, were able to builde vp againe in one whole yeare. I will not disclose all I knowe in this behalfe, for that I haue no pleasure therein. Onely I wish, that all Preachers will hereafter studie seriously how and what to Preach, before they take in hand that most excel­lent and heauenly exercise. And so I wil conclude this sect­ion, with the graue censure of Maister Musculus. His Musculus de ministris verbi dei, pag. 202. words are these; Habent ministri Christi indeterminatam quan­dam potestatem, quam in ijs rebus esse dicimus, de quibus nihiless expresso verbo determinatūa domin [...]; & tamen aliqua ratione ad hoc conducunt, vt ministerium ipsorum velcōmodius, vel vtilius impleatur.

The ministers of Christ haue a certaine vndetermined power, which consisteth in those things, of which our lord hath determined nothing expressely in his word; and yet the same things serue to this end, that their Ministerie may be either more commodiously, or more profitably accom­plished. Loe, the Church hath power & freedome to order Vide supra. cap. 12. sect. 4. ex eodem. those things, which our Lord hath not expreslely determi­ned in his holy word. Now, it is most euident and appa­rent, to all that read the Scriptures, that our Lord hath not expressely appointed this minister, and that minister, when where, and in what habit he shall preach, and consequent­ly, the disposition and ordering thereof, pertaineth to the gouernours of the Church.

The third Section, of reading of Homilies in the Church.

The reading of learned Homilies in the Church, pro­nounced by vnpreaching Ministers, (so termed scornfully) are vehemently impugned, by the patrons of the long ex­pected presbyterie. To whom I answere; first, that father Lati [...]r that blessed Martyr, compiled a whole booke of [Page 167] godly and learned Sermons, (my selfe haue seene the same) which hee would neuer haue done, if hee had thought it a thing vnlawfull, to read or pronounce his Sermons in the Pulpit. The like may be said of Saint Augustine, Saint Am­brose, and many others, whose Sermons are this day extant in print, in the greater part of Europe. Secondly, that the distinct reading, of one of the godly and learned sermons 2 or homilies, setforth to be read in our English Churches, is able to edifie, and no doubt doth edifie the congregation more; then doe many of their sermons, who inueigh most bitterly against vnpreaching ministers. But these men are therefore enemies to reading, because they are carried away with a vaine Philantia, and loue nothing better, then to heare thēselues talking. For which end they wander abroad many times, leauing their owne charges either distitute, or onely supplied by vnpreaching Ministers, whom other­wise they condemne. And this they effect with desire, e­uen in those places, where their presence is neither necessa­ry, nor yet much desired. I speake not this, either in defence of vnpreaching ministers, (for I wish with all my hart, that euery church in England, were furnished with a godly lear­ned preacher) or in dislike of their zeale, who endeuoure themselues to preach often; so that be done with eutaxia, & obediēce of higher powers, & with such reuerence, ripenes, & due preparatiō, as appertaineth to that heauēly exercise. Thirdly, that one of the homilies or sermons aforenamed, 3 pronounced by an vnpreaching minister, (as they odiously tearme him,) is intrinsecally and formally a sermon, or a preaching, & consequently, that he is truly said to preach, who publikely and orderly pronounceth the same, I proue it, because to be vttered with a shrill or meane voyce, with this or that gesture, vpon the booke or without the booke, and other like circumstances, are all and euery of them mere accidentall and extrinsecall to a Sermon, Whosoeuer shal hold the contrary opinion, must perforce admit grosse absurdities, flat contradictions, and plaine impossibilities. [Page 168] Fourthly, if an vnlearned Minister shall receiue a learned Sermō, learnedly & orderly pēned by his learned friend, & shall cunne the same without the booke, and after the re­hearsall of his text, shall pronounce the same distinctly and orderly in the Pulpit; all the learned that heare him, and know not the truth of the matter, will say, (and that truly) that he made a learned Sermon, although he were but cal­vus comatus, in rei veritate. And euen so say I; that he prea­cheth in the Pulpit, who readeth Homilies penned to his hand. Howsoeuer that be; this is out of doubt; that many reading the Homilies doe more edifie the congregation, then many others that preach their owne collections, (I will not say inuentions and fansies,) and thinke themselues no fooles. It is likewise out of doubt, that the same Mini­sters doe preach Theologica, though not theolagicè; and con­sequently, that is accōplished by them, which is principally Aristotel. ethic lib. 2. cap. 4. intended by their aduersaries. Homelies be pith [...]e and sound, but Sermons are often vnlearned and errours.

The fourth Section, of reading of the Apocrypha in the Church.

The patrons of the presbyterie make most bitter excla­mations, against the reading of the Apocryphall bookes in the Church, and they haue preuailed so farre with some of the simple sort and vulgar people, that they will not once vouchsafe to reade or looke vpon those Bibles, which haue the Apocrypha in them. To whom I hope in God so to answere, as shall be able to satisfie them, if they will be satis­fied with reason. I Therfore say first, that the word apocry­phos in the original Greek tongue, signifieth hid or secret; and thereupon certaine books contained within the corps of the holy Bible, and deliuered to the primitiue and aun­cient Churches succeeding, were called Apocrypha, for that they were not acknowledged of the Church to be canoni­call, that is to say, to be the canon or rule of faith, as the o­ther [Page 169] Scriptures are. Secondly, that these Apocryphall bookes were euer in high esteeme in the Church of God, as the holy wrytings of holy men; and were also thought meete to be read in the Churches, as containing sit and ne­cessarie matter, aswell for the knowledge of the hystories, as for the instruction of Godly manners. This to bee so, will bee cleare and euident to all those, that can and [...] to peruse seriouslie, the ancient Councells, the holy Fathers, Iunius doth thinke the A­pocrypha to bee very pro­fitable to the churchs. and the histories of the churche. Whereof I shall here in briefe recounte some s [...]we, for the helpe of the simple and thankfull Reader. And hereby the way, the gentle Rea­der shall vnderstand, that maister Iunius a great learned man, and of high esteeme in the reformed churches, hath published notes vpon the Apocryphall bookes.

Saint Hierome hath these expresse words: Si [...]utergo Hierom epist. ad Chromat. & Heliod de lib. Salomon. Iudith & Tobyae, & Machabaeorum libros legit quidem Eccle­sia, sedinter Canonicas scripturas non recipit: sic & haec duo vo­lumina legit ad aedificatitonem plebis, non ad authoritatem Eccle­siasticorum dogmatum confirmandum.

As therefore the Church readeth the books of Iudith, and of Tobye, and of the Machabees, but receyueth them not amongst the Canonicall Scriptures: so doth it also reade these two volumes for edification of the people, but not to confirme any Ecclesiasticall doctrine.

Saint Augustine is of the same opinion, and deliuereth the matter in these expresse words: Hanc Scripturam quae August. cōtra 2. Gaudentij. epist. libr. 2 cap. 23. to. 7 appellatur Machabaeorum, non habent Iudaei sicut Legem, & Prophetas, & Psalmos, quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis, dicens, oportebat imp [...]eri omnia quae scrip­ta sunt in Lege, & Prophetis, & in Psalmis de me. Sed recep­ta est ab Ecclesia non invtiliter, si sobrit legatur, vel audiatur, maxime propter illos Machabaeos, qui pro Dei Lege, sicut veri Martyres, a persecutoribus tam indigna atque horrenda per­pessi sunt.

The Scripture which is of the Machabees, the Iewes re­pute not as they doe the Lawe, and the Prophets, and the [Page 170] Psalmes, to which the Lord gaue testimonie, as to his wit­nesses, saying, It behooued all things to be fulfilled, which are written in the Lawe, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalmes of mee: but the Church hath receiued it not with­out profite, if it bee read or heard soberly: especially for those Machabees, who for the Lawe of God, as true Mar­tyrs, suffred of their persecutors so vnworthy and hor­rible torments.

Saint Cyprian, Saint Ambrose, and other Fathers, teache the same Doctrine; and the continuall practise of the Churche in all ages, doth yeelde a constant testimonie therevnto.

Nowe, seeing the Churche of God hath thought it meete and profitable, to haue the Apocryphall books read in the Church; and seeing withall, that Saint Austen Saint Hierome, and other holy Fathers, do commend the same, I see no reason, why a few young heads without gray beards, (whose authoritie is no waye comparable with the practise of the Church neither their reading, experience, and iudge­ment, to bee equalized with the auncient & holy Fathers) should take vppon them so rashly to controll the Churche of England, and to condemne her for following the pra­ctise of the Church in all ages. Let these men weigh well with themselues; what the holy, most reuerend, and lear­ned Father, Saint Austen saith, to this and the like questi­ons. These are his expresse words; In his. n. rebus de qui­bus nihil certi statuit Scriptura Diuina, mos populi Dei, vel in­stituta maiorum pro lege tenenda sunt. For in those things, Augustin. ad Con [...]ulan. Episto. 86. touching which the holie Scritpure hath left no certaine rule; the custome of Gods people, and the ordinances of our ancestours, must be holden for a lawe. Behold here (gentle Reader,) a most excellent rule indeed, giuen vs by this holie Father and great learned Doctor. Which, if they, who this day impugne the governement of our En­glish Church, (the Prownists and their [...]herents I euer meane,) would duely ponder and regarde; they would [Page 171] doubtlesse surceasse to vexe and distourbe the peace of our Church, and receyue the ordinances of their auncestours, with all reuerence and humilitie. For the Church of En­gland doth make a flat separation, in which it doth in plain and expresse tearms, seuer & deuide the Canonicall books from the Apocryphall; so as no simple Reader, can but perceyue and vnderstand the same. And it is not to the purpose, to obiect as some haue done: that the Rubricke in the booke of common prayer, calleth the Apocryphall bookes holy Scripture. For first, when the Rubrick saith (the rest of the holie Scripture,) it may be vnderstood fitlie, of the bookes Canonicall following; especially, seeing it nameth not the Apocryphal expressely, but quoteth some of them afterwards. Secondly, the Apocrypha may true­ly and lawfully beecalled holie Scripture Analogicè, though Analogice nō autē vnivocè. not Univocè; that is to say, the wrytings of holy men, or bookes conteyning holie and good matter. And in this sense speaketh the Rubrick, as I iudge; and sundry of the holie Fathers, I am well assured, doe so tearme the bookes Apocryphall. Howsoeuer the Rubricke be expounded, or wrested, two things are apparant. Th' one, that the Ru­bricke doth not call them Canonicall scripture. Th' other, that the Church meaneth not to equalize them, with the Canonicall books of holy writ. I prooue it, because shee hath plainely distinguished the one from the other, and preferred the authoritie of the Canonicall. Neyther will it serue their turne to say, as some haue done; viz. That nothing may be read in the Church, but onely the Canoni­call scriptures. For first, no text of holy writ doth so af­firme; 1. and consequently, the Church hath power to deter­mine thereof, as is alreadie prooued. Secondlie, the an­cient 2. councell of Uasco, (which was holden aboue one Cont. Uascense. can. 4. thousand and one hundreth yeares agoe,) decreed plainlie in their publique assembly, that the Deacons should read the Homelies made by the holy Fathers. These are the expresse words of the Councell; Hoc etiam pro aedificatione [Page 172] omnium Ecclesiarum, & pro vtilitate totius populi nobis placuit, vt non solum in Ciuitatibus, sedetiam in omnibus parochijs ver­bum faciendi daremus Presbyteris Potestatem: ua, vt si pres­byter aliqua infirmitate prohibente, per seipsum non potuerit prae­dicare, Sanctorum Patrum Homiliae a Diaconis recitentur.

Wee haue also decreed for the edification of all Chur­ches, and for the good of all the people, that the Priests should bee licenced to preache, and not in Cities onely, but Beholde here licence graū ­ted to preach. also in euery Parish Churche; so that the Deacons may read the Homilies of the holy Fathers, if the Priest cannot preache himselfe, by reason of some infirmitie. Thirdly, it is voyde of all reason, and farre from all Christianitie, to .3. affirme it vnlawfull to read testimonialls, made to signifie the distresse of our honest Neighbours; that thereby wee may bee styrred vppe, to releeue them more bountifullie, Yea, (if it be true that some haue written,) it is a lawe a­mongst them of the Presbyterie, to haue their orders for gouerning the Church, reade publicklie once euery quar­ter. And I knowe Expropria scientia, that some of them, haue done more. Well, now-adayes euery vpstart yong­ling, that can rawely pronounce some Texts of the holie Byble (though hee but meanely conceyue the true sense,) will roundly take vpon him (I warrant you) to reuile our most Reuerend Fathers, the Archbyshops & Byshoppes, and to controll the gouernement of our Churche, as if hee had a Commission from Heauen to doe it. If I should disclose, what my selfe haue heard herein, and how I haue beene saluted sometimes, for speaking my minde in the de­fence of the Reuerend Fathers, and of the Godly setled Lawes of this Church of England: time would sooner faile mee, then matter whereof to speake.

CHAP. XIIII. Of certaine extrauagants very offensino to the Patrons of the Presbyterie,

The first member, of Christs Baptisme, and the circum­stances thereof.

IT is sharply reprooued, that the booke of common prayer, hath in it these wordes; that by the Baptisme of his welbeloued Sonne, God did sanctifie the floud Iordane, and all other waters, In the first prayer of Baptisme. to the mysticall washing away of sinne. By these words, (say they) the Minister is caused to testifie of God, that hee hath done that which hee neuer did. For answere herevnto, I say first, that I .I. wonder at the temerarious audacitie of these men, who presume to set abroach, Quie quid in buccam venerit. Truly saith th' Apostle of such qualified people; they would bee Doctours of the Lawe, and yet vnderstand not what they 1. Tim. 1. 7. speake, neither whereof they affirme. Secondlie, that if .2. maister Caluin say traielie, as he saith most truelie in deede; Caluin. in arg. in Epist. ad Galaethat. that it is a pestileut mischief, when the maner of one church, must bee made a Lawe to all the rest. Then doubtlesse may I say truely; that it is a mere pestilent mischiefe, when the gouernment of all the Churches in a whole Monarchy; must be squared and measured by the fancie and conceyte of euery priuate man. Thirdlie, that when our Sauiour Christ was baptized in Iordan, of his precursor Saint Iohn: .3. then did he sanctifie all waters, for the mysticall washing a­way Mat. 3. v. 13. of sinne. Neither is this mine opinion onely, neither yet the Doctrine of the Church of England onely; but it is the constant and vniforme affirmance of the holy Fathers. Tertullianus, (whose rare learning Saint Cyprian admyred, [Page 174] and therefore was daily conuersant with his works,) giueth this censure of Christs Baptisme in Iordan. Baptizato. n. Christo, idest sanctificante aquas in suo baptismate, omnis pleni­tudo Tertullianus aduers. Iu-daeos pa. 134. spiritalium retro Charismatum in Christo cessauit. For when Christ was baptized, that is to say, when Christ san­ctified the waters in his Baptisme, then all the fulnesse of former spirituall gifts ceased in Christ.

Saint Hylarie hath these words: Non ille necessitatem ha­buit abluendi sed per illum in aquis ablutionis nostrae erat sancti­ficanda purgatio. Sequitur. Atque ita & Prophetae testimonio Hylarius in matt. can. 2. lauacro non eget, & exempli sui authoritate Humanae salutis Sacramenta consummat, hominem & assumptoine sactificans & lauacro.

Hee stoode in no neede of washing; but in the waters of our washing, hee was to sanctifie our purgation. And so both by the testimonie of the Prophet, hee needeth no washing: and by the authoritie of his example, hee doth consummate the Sacraments of Mans saluation, sanctify­ing Man both in his assumption, and in his washing.

Saint Ambrose is consonant to the rest, and deliuereth his minde in these words: Baptizatus est ergo Dominus, non mundaeri volens, sed mundare aquas, vt ablutae per carnem Ambros. in Luc. lib. 2. cap. 2. Christi quae peccatum non cognouit, baptismatis ius haberent.

Our Lord therefore was baptized, not desiring to bee purged, but to cleanse the waters, that they beeing washed by the flesh of Christ, which knew no sinne, might enioy the right of baptisme.

Saint Hierome hath these words: Ipse Dominus noster Iesus Christus. qui non tam mundatus est in lauacro, quam la­uacro suo vniuersas aquas mundauit, statim vt caput extulit de fluento spiritum sanctum accepit, non quod vnquam sine spiritis Hieron. ad­uer. Lucifer. tom. 3. sancto fuerit, quippe qui de spiritu sancto in carne natus est; sed vt illud nobis monstraretur verum esse baptisma, quo spiritus sanctus adueniat.

Our Lord Iesus Christ, who rather cleansed all wa­ters by his washing, then receiued any cleansing, came no [Page 175] sooner out of the floud, but hee receiued the Holy Ghost: not that hee was any time without the Holy Ghost, who was conceyued by the Holy Ghost in the fleshe: but that wee should vnderstand that to be true baptisme, in which the Holy ghost is giuen.

Saint Bede, (who for his great vertue and rare learning was surnamed Venerablis, Venerable or Reuerend,) hath Beda in Luc cap. 3. these expresse words; Baptizatus est Dominus, non ipse aquis mundari, sed ipsas mundare cupiens aquas, quae ablutae per car­nem eius peccati vtique nesciam, Baptismi ius iuduerent, & quod tam innumera sub lege baptismata non poterant, contra prauaricationis malum vim regeneratiua sanctificationis coni ciperent.

Our Lord was baptized, not for desire to cleanse him­selfe, but to cleanse the waters, that they being washed by his flesh which knewe no sinne, might put vpon them the right of baptisme, and receiue the power of regeneratiue sanctification against the euill of preuarication, which all the washings vnder the Law could not performe. Thus write the holie Fathers. For the better vnderstanding of whose words, three things must be seriously obserued, touching the sanctification they speak of; viz. The time, the manner, and the ende. The time when they were san­ctified, the manner how they were sanctified, and the end for which they were sanctified.

Concerning the time, wee must knowe, that Christ in­stituted holie Baptisme two wayes. First, exemplarilie by fact; then expressely by word. Examplarilie, when hee was baptized in Iordan, about three yeeres & a halfe afore his Passion, at what time hee was about 30. yeeres of age. Matt. 3. 13. Expressely, after his Resurrection, about thirtie dayes be­fore his Ascention vp into Heauen. At which time Christ gaue commission to his Apostles, that they should teache Mat. 28. 19 and baptize all Nations.

Concerning the manner, hee did not instill any in­herent sanctimonie or holinesse into the waters, but onely [Page 176] did consecrate and depute them vnto an holie ende; viz. To be the fit and ordinarie matter of holy baptisme; like as God is saide to haue sanctified and blessed the seuenth Gen. 2. 3. Exod. 20. 11. day, not by putting any holy inherent qualitie into it, but by deputing and ordeyning it to his owne seruice and ho­ly worshippe. Now, that he ordained exemplarilie both the water of Iordan, and all others, to bee the vsuall matter of the Sacrament of Baptisme; it may appeare by manie circumstances of the Text, aswell for the matter of Bap­tisme, as for the forme and effect thereof. First, hee de­termined water to be the matter of baptisme, when he tou­ched 1. it with his owne most pure & holy flesh, and yeelded to be Baptized therewith. Secondly, hee determined the forme of Baptisme, when in his Baptisme the whole Tri­nitie 2. appeared sensiblie; for, the voyce of the Father was heard from Heauen; the Sonne was present in our flesh Mat. 3. v. 13. 16. 17. assumpted; and the Holy Ghost appeered in the shape of a Doue. And (as Saint Hylarie saith,) the effect of Bap­tisme was declared, for that the Heauens were opened in the celebration thereof.

Concerning the ende, Baptisme is affirmed of Christ himselfe, to bee our second byrth. In another place it is Ioh. 3. 5. Act. 22. v. 17. Tit. 3. 5. Rom 6. 4. Chrysosto. in cap. 3. mat. hom. 12. col. 114. said to washe away our sinnes (Sacramentally.) In ano­ther place, it is called the lauer of Regeneration, and Re­nouation of the Holie Ghost. And in another place, it is made the seale of our iustification by faith, of remission of our sinnes, and sanctification in the Holy Ghost. To this effect wryteth the golden mouthed Doctor Saint Chryso­stome, in these golden wordes; Neque ideo solum, sed vt & tu disceres, quontam super te quoque cum Sacro Fonte dilueris, Sanctus Spiritus veniat; iam vero non visibils specie, qua vtique non egemus, cum nobis pro cunctis sola fides sufficiat. Nam signa non credentibus, sed incredulis dantur.

Neither did the Doue appeare onely for that end, but that thou also mayst learne, that the Holy Ghost commeth vpon thee, when thou art washed in the holie Font; bu [Page 177] that appearance is not nowe adayes in any visible shape, whereof wee haue no neede, seeing sole faith sufficeth for all. For signes are not giuen to the faithfull, but to the incredulous persons. These things well pondered: the obiection against the booke of Common prayer, will bee to no purpose: vnlesse perhaps it will bee a caueat for the Author, (which I heartilie wish,) to write and speake more circumspectly in time to come. For I verily am perswa­ded, that all things contayned in the booke of Common prayer, are agreable to the holy Scriptures, & the practise of the Church in the purest times, and composed with such Iudgement, Pietie, Learning, and Religion: that all the wisedome in the worlde, is not able iustlie to controll the same. In so much, that I wonder, and greatly admire the audacious temeritie of manie: who being of small rea­ding and learning, (and of no iudgment and experience, if they bee compared to those auncient, graue, Godly, wise, and learned fathers, that compiled the booke of common prayer,) dare presume to condemne the same, with theyr bitter invectiues, vntimely censures, and vnchristianlike Anathematizations. True it is, that Saint Hierome saith: Nec sibi blandiantur, si de Scripturarum capitulis vi­dentur Hier. aduers. Lucifer: tom 3 in sine. sibi affirmare quod dicunt, cum & Diabolus de Scriptu­ris aliqua sit locutus, & Scripturae non in legendo, sed in intelli­gendo consistunt.

Neyther must they slatter themselues, if they seeme in their owne conceits to prooue so much as they say: seeing the Deuill himselfe alleadged Scripture (against our Lord Iesus,) and the Scriptures doe not consist in bare reading, but in true Sense and meaning. Would God this graue aduise giuen by this holy, auncient, and learned Father, might be a president and constant rule in this doleful age, to all nouices, superficiall diuines, and young students in Diuinitie, (who more rashly then Clerklie take vpon them to controll not onelie our most Reuerend Fathers, the graue, wise, and learned Byshops, but euen the whole Sy­node [Page 178] assembled in the Conuocation house, yea and the King himselfe) to walke circumspectlie, to liue obedient­lie, to think modestlie of their own gifts, & not to esteeme better of themselues and their iudgements then there is cause: but to thinke that a learned Synode can see as farre as they, and would as gladly goe to Heauen as they: and consequently to ponder with themselues seriouslie, that it is a too too malepeart saucinesse for young heads and super­ficiall Diuines of slender Iudgement, and lesse reading of the holy Fathers, auncient Councells, and Ecclsiasticall hystories; to censure and controll not onely the Godlie setled Lawes of our Christian Kingdome, but euen of the continuall practise of the Churche in all ages. I my selfe am about three score yeares of age; I haue endeuou­red by Prayer and painefull Studie to attayne good litera­ture, euer since I was fiue yeares of age; I haue liued, con­uersed, studied, & disputed in manie famous Vniuersities, aswell in England as in forraine Countries; I haue em­ployed my whole care, industry, and diligence, now for the space of thirty yeares and odde, to vnderstand Gods word aright, & to know what hath bene the practize of Christes church in all former ages: and for that ende and purpose, I haue for the space of thirtie yeares and odde, prouided all the auncient Fathers, Councells, Hystories Ecclesiasticall, and Chronographycall, so far forth as my abilitie was able to extend and reach; and that nothing should be wanting in this behalf, I haue borrowed bookes where I could, and haue also had recourse to the best Libraryes, both in the Vniuersities & els where; to the end I might gather notes out of such bookes, as I was not able to buye and prouide. In which behalfe, not my selfe onely, but all such as reape anie commoditie by my painfull labours, are more then a The L. Bish. of Cant. and the L. Byshop of Dur. haue goodly Li­braries. little beholden to these most Reuerend Fathers; Iohn the late Arch-byshoppe of Canterburie, Richard now the L: Arch-byshoppe of Canterburie, and Tobye the L: Bysh. of Durham; who haue for themselues & the good of others, [Page 179] most excellent, costly, and goodly Libraries: to which I haue found free accesse, at all times when I desired. All this beeing performed I haue verie seriouslie weighed, pondered, and considered, what the Papists, Arrians, Macedonians, Eutichians, Nestorians, Donatists, Carpocra­tians, Ebionites, Tatians, Manichees, Brownists, and other Sectaries, doe and can say for their opinions; and this not­withstanding, I finde the Doctrine and the Godlie setled Lawes of this Church of England, (amongst which I place the late Canons of Anno. 1604.) to bee consonant to Gods word, & to the vsuall practise of the Church in all former ages. These things I vtter in these tearms, because I hear­tilie wishe to perswade all such as are carefull of their salua­tion, to yeeld obedience to higher Powers, and not to bee Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. 1. Sam. 15. v. 22. carryed awaye with the Sugred words of superficiall Di­uines, but to learne that obedience is better then Sacrifice. I am now likelie euen by the course of Nature, shortly to forsake this worlde; and therfore I doe not seeke any pre­ferment for my paines, (which I neuer to this daye hunted after,) and much lesse doe I seek to draw men into errrours, and so to make shipwracke of mine owne Soule. No, no, my purpose, (God is my witnesse, is farre otherwise; as who am perswaded so fullie of the Doctrine which I deliuer, that I am not affrayde to ende my life in the same.

The second member, of certaine Rites and Ceremonies vsed in Baptisme.

New-fangled & oddely conceited persons, do scornful­lie inueigh against interrogatories ministred at Baptisme; against Godfathers, Godmothers, Fonts, and otherlike Ce­remonies, as things vnknowen in the time of the Apostles. To whome I answere in this manner; First, that manie things are this day lawfully done in the Church, which were not in vse in the Apostles time. This is already prooued. 1. Secondly, that the custome of the Church, in things indif­ferent, is to be esteemed among Christians for a Law, This 2. [Page 180] is likewise prooued. And let him that holdeth the con­trarie opinion, tell mee by what lawe hee can iustifie, that formall coniunction of men and wemen in holy wedlock, which is vsed not onely in our Church of England, but al­so in purest reformed Churches euerie where. Hee shall neuer bee able to alleadge any ground in that behalfe, but the vnwritten traditions of the Church. Of which traditi­ons th' Apostle spoke, (as learned interpreters tell vs) when Uide sup. ca. 10. per totū, & ex Calus. cap. 7. he said, he would set other things in order at his comming. Yea M. Caluin vpon that Text admitteth vnwrytten Tra­ditions, in things not necessarie to Saluation. Thirdlie, that Saint Austen, Saint Ambrose, and other auncient Fa­thers, 1. cor. 11. v. 34. (who liued in the pure ages of the Church,) make mention of Godfathers, and Godmothers, and of the in­terrogatories 3 which our Church vseth in the Baptisme of infants. Saint Austen beeing demaunded, howe they that being an infant to baptisme, are bolde to answere that hee beleeueth, and so to all other demaundes, seeing they dare promise nothing of his behauiour when hee commeth to mans state, answereth in these expresse wordes; Si. n. Sacramenta quandam similitudinem earumrerum quarum Sa­cramenta sunt, non haberent, omnino sacramenta non essent. Ex Aug in epist. ad Bonssac. [...]p. 23. pag. 57. 58. hac autem similitudine, plerunque etiam ipsarum rerum no­mina [...]. Sicut ergo secundum quendam modum sacra­mentum corpor [...]s Christi, corpus Christi est, Sacramentum san­gumis Christi sanguis Christi est, ita sacramentum Fidei, Fides [...] aliud credere, quam fidem habere. Ac [...] credere, qui fidei nondum ha­bet [...] habere propter fidei Sacramen­ [...] Uide [...] pag. 31 [...]. [...] propter conuersionis sacramen­t [...], [...] Celebrationem pertinet Sacra­ [...] nondum fides illa quae [...] tamen ipsius fidei Sacra­ [...] facit. Nam si [...]ut credere respondetur, ita eti­am [...], non [...] annu [...]ndo, sed ipsu [...] rei [...]. For if Sacraments had not a cer­taine [Page 181] similitude of those things whereof they bee Sacra­ments, they were no Sacraments at all. And by reason of this similitude, they are often called by the names of the things themselues. As therefore after a certaine manner of speaking the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ, and the Sacrament of the bloud of Christ, are the bodie and bloud of Christ; so the Sacrament of faith, is faith. Neyther is it any other thing to Beleeue, then to haue Faith. And therefore, when answere is made, that the infant beleeueth, which as yet hath not faith in deed; it is answered, that hee beleeueth, for the Sacrament of faith: and that he doth conuert himselfe to God, for the sacrament of conuersion, because the answere it selfe, perteyneth to the Celebration of the Sacrament. Therefore, although that faith which consisteth in the will of the beleeuers, doth not make the childe faithfull: yet doth the Sacrament of that Faith make him faithfull. For euen as it is answered that hee doth be­leeue, so is hee also called faithfull; not by signifying or graunting the thing it selfe in his minde, but by receyuing the sacrament of the thing. Thus writeth S. Austen, that auncient & learned Father, out of whose words I obserue against rash heads, & young Diuines, these most excellent instructions for the humble and Godly readers. First, that this holy & learned father, (whose vertue and learning all .1. the Christian world hath hitherto honored, and admyred.) relyeth & stayeth himself vpon the practise of the Church, which nowe adayes euery proude Brownist, and vnlearned Martinist, contemneth at his pleasure. Secondly, that it was the custome of the Church in S. Aust. time, (which custome he reuerenced,) euen as it is this day, in our Church of En­gland, 2. to propound interrogatories to the suerties, or God­fathers & Godmothers in the behalfe of the childe: as also they did lawfully and truely answere and promise, as the manner is nowe in our Churche, and that their answeres were to bee iustified, by vertue of the Sacrament.

The first Obiection.

The suerties which you call Godfathers and Godmo­thers, cannot performe that, which they promise in the name of the child. ergo it is a vaine and rediculous exercise.

The Answere.

I answere, that the suerties are well able to performe all that they promise, as who promise nothing absolutely, but with a condition vsually vnderstood in all such kinde of promises; viz, if we liue, if Gods will be so, to the vtmost of our power and so forth. And so much may be gathered, out of the expresse words in the booke of common pray­er.

The second Obiection.

Not the infants, but the Godfathers and Godmothers are baptized, and so rebaptization is admitted. For not the child, but they say, I renounce the diuell, that is my desire.

The Answere.

I answere; first, with the auncient father Areopagita, in Dionisius Areopag. de eccles. hierar­chia prope finem. these words, Non. n. hoc ait, ego pro puero abrenuncio, aut pro­mitto, sed puer abrenuntiat & profitetur: id est, profiteor me huic puero suasurum, cum intelligere sacra per aetatem poterit, diui­nis meis institutionibus, vt & nuntium remittat adversarijs, at­que ab eis deficiat, & profiteatur exolvatque diuina promissa. 1 Neither doth hee say this, I renounce or promise for the child, but, the childe renounceth and professeth, that is to say, I promise so to instruct the child, when he commeth to yeares of discretion, with my godly instructions and ex­hortations, he shall renounce all things aduerse, & professe and performe those heauenly promises which he maketh.

[Page 183] Secondly,mwith Saint Austen in these words: Miror sanè quod ita volueris, vt de his quae varie per diversa loca observan­tur, tibi aliqua conscriberem cum & non sit necessarium, & vna August. ad Iamar epist. 119. in his saluberrima regula retinenda sit, vt quae non sunt contra fidem, neque contra bonos mores, & habent aliquid ad exhorta­tionem vitae melioris, vbicunque institui videmus, velinstituta co­gnoscimus, non solum non improbemus, sed etiam laudando & imitando sectemur, si aliquorum infirmit as non ita impedit, vt am­plius detrimentum sit.

I maruell why you would haue me write to you, tou­ching those things which are diuersely obserued in diuers places, seeing that it is not necessarie, & that in these things we must hold this for a constant and sound rule, that what things soeuer are neither against faith, nor against good manners, and are some helpe to the furtherance of honest life, whersoeuer we see such things to be ordained, we must be so far from reprouing them, that wee must praise & imi­tate the same; vnlesse some weaklings bee so scandalized, that hurt commeth thereupon.

Thirdly, with the zealous and learned Writer maister Zuinglius, in these expresse words, Hic vero singulis videre li [...] 3 cet, quaenam sit contentiosi istius Satanae caliiditas, qui huiusmodi Zuingl. us Prrt. 2. debaptis. Fol. 87. rixis propter externa quaedam institutis, papatui amplissimas fenestras denuò aperire voluit. In huiusmodi vtique rebus Pauli Apostoli regula nobis obseruāda est. 1. cor. 14. sequitur, quorū v­sum & administrationem in nostro arbitrio & potestate sitam es­se ait, sic tamen ne quid cum dei instituto pugnans committamus, & ne pacem publicam, cuius nobis praecipua cura esse debet, propter externa haec interturbare libeat. licet ergo vel hodie quoque paedobaptismun (etiamsi hactenus in ecclesia vsurpatus non esset,) de novo instituere si aliquod inde commodum, & pacis concordiaeque frustus inde promanaret.

Here euery man may see, what subtiltie and craftie dea­ling contentious Satan vseth, who goeth about by these dissentions in external matters, to make againe a most rea­dy way and passage, for Poperie to enter into our gates. [Page 184] But in such matters doubtlesse, the Apostles rule must be obserued. Whose vse and administration he saith, is in our arbitrement and power: yet so, that we doe nothing against Gods ordinance, neither haue any desire to trouble the publique peace, whereof we must haue an especial care, for these externall matters. It is therefore this day lawfull for vs also, to institute and ordaine a newe the baptisme of in­fants, (although it had not hither to bin vsed in the church) if any commoditie, or good successe of peace and concord, might insue thereupon.

Out of these learned discourses of these graue and lear­ned Writers, I obserue these memorable rules for the be­nefit of the gentle Reader. First, that the ceremonies this 1 day of our English Church, are the same yt were vsed in the church in ye purest times. 2, that in things which are neither 2 against faith, nor against manners, the custome of the church must be a rule for vs to follow. This is a most wor­thy lesson, a most excellent rule, and a most necessarie ob­seruation. Thirdly, that the dissentions and schismes stirred vp about externall rites and ceremonies, proceede from 3 the crastie and deceitful dealing of the diuel. Fourthly, that the Church hath power to make and constitute any lawes, 4 which are not repugnant and contrarie to the word of God. Fiftly, that our Church hath this day power to haue institu­ted 5 the Baptisme of Infants, although it had not beene vsed in former ages. And consequently, that it hath power a fortiori, to set downe orders and lawes for the apparell of Ministers, for surplesles, square Caps, interrogatories in baptisme, and bowing of the knee at the name of Iesus, for kneeling at the holy Communion, for giuing thanks of women for their deliuerance from the perill of child-birth, for prohibiting to Preach without licence, for Reading of Homilies, and the like. Which rules and obseruations, if they were wel remembred, and duly obserued, all schismes, [...] dissention, whisperings, and mutinies, would wholy sur­ [...]ase in this Church of England.

The third member of Deacons, and their office in the Church.

In the booke of orders, there is an office called the Dea­con whose description is not to be found in Gods booke. namely consisting in helping the Priest in diuine seruice, especially when he ministreth the holy Communion, in reading holy Scriptures & Homilies in the congregation, instructing the youth in the Catechisme, in Baptizing and Preaching, if he be admitted thereunto by the Bishoppe. Thus Write the patrons of the Eldership, and earnestly wished Presbiterie, to whom I answere in this manner. First, that if it were true which they say, (as it is not indeed;) yet would it not followe, that the office of a Deacon this 1 day vsuall in the Church, should be a thing vnlawfull to be vsed. The reason is euident, because (as I haue already pro­ued,) the Church hath authoritie to constitute, make, and ordaine, any lawes ceremonies, canons, ordinances, and or­ders, Vide supra, Cap. 5. which are for the good of the Church, and not against the word of God. for the better confirmation whereof, let vs heare the verdict of maister Zanchius, that most famous Writer. These are his expresse words: interea tamen non im­probamus patres, quod iuxta variātū verbi dispensandi, tum re­gendae Zanchius de relig. Pag. 169. Ecclesiae rationem, varios quoque ordines ministrorū mul­tiplicarint, quando id eis liberum fint, sicut & nobis, & quando constat, id ab illis fuisse factum honestis de causis, ad ordinē ad de­corū & ad aedificationē ecclesiae pro eo tempore pertinentibus.

Neuerthelesse, we doe not discommend or reproue the adde huc membrum precedens fathers, because they did multiply and increase the orders of the ministers, according to the various manner of dis­pensing the word, and of gouerning the Church. Seeing that was in their libertie and power, as it is also in ours; And seeing also it is euident, that they did that for honest causes, for order, comlinesse, and edification of the Church, as that time did require. Out of these golden [Page 186] wordes, I obserue first, that the holy fathers in former ages 1 did institute diuers orders of Ministers: which orders though they be not found expressely in Gods booke, yet this great learned man dareth not disalowe or reproue the same. But our young maisters, (who for learning are vn­worthy to carrie his bookes after him) dare condemne them roundly, and make hauocke of the Lawes of the an­cient Church. Secondly, that the Church both then 2 and now, had and still hath full power and authoritie, to constitute diuers orders of Ministers in the Church. Let this obseruation bee well marked; for it is of great impor­tance, and no small moment. Thirdly, that such orders 3 and constitutions, doe pertaine to the order, comelinesse, and edification of the Church. Fourthly, that these things may be changed at the discretion of the Church, as the cir­cumstances 4 Nota mem­brum praece­dens valde. of the times, places, and persons doe re­quire.

I answere secondly, that the office of Deacons is no o­therwise this day in our English Churches, then it was of 2 old in all Churches throughout the Christian world. I Conc. Nicen. can. 14. Conc. Carth. 4. Can. 37. Iustin. A­pol. 2. in fine. proue it, for that both ancient councells, of Nice, Carthage, and others, and also the holy fathers, doe testifie the same so copiously, as none but younglings of no reading, can be ig­norant thereof.

Thirdly, that Deacons in the Apostolique time and pri­mitiue Church, did not onely serue the table, and minister 3 to the poore, but also baptize and preach the Gospell. I prooue it first, because there were Deacons at Ephesus, at Philippi, and in Crete; as may euidently be gathered of the Epistles, which were written to Timothie, Titus, and the ratio. 1. Philippians. And for al that, there was in those places at that time such paucitie of Christians, as there could bee either small neede or none at all, for Deacons to attend vpon the tables. Secondly, because the solemnitie of imposition of hands, vsed in the ordering and consecration of Dea­cons, 2 doth argue a further and more excellent function, [Page 187] then the bare and sole ministerie of the table. This was well obserued by the great learned Doctor Illyricus, whose Illyricus, in 1. Tim. 3. 9. wordes are these; Hinc autem apparet eos non tantum ad dis­pensationem elemosynarum alimentorumque, sed etiam ad insti­tutionem auditorum fuisse adhibitos, sicut & illi Act. 6. etiam simul docuerunt, non tantum aeconomiam administrarunt; sed nimirum munus illorum fuit tantum rudiores instituere, seu ca­techismum tradere, dum presbyteri omnibus sufficere laboribus nequeunt. Hence it is apparant, that the Deacons were or­dained, not onely to distribute almes and reliefe to the poore, but also to instruct and teach their auditors, as they also, of whom mention is made in the acts, were occupied in teaching, and not onely in houshold-businesse. For their office was to instruct the ignorant, and to Catechise, while the pastorall Elders could not vndergoe all the la­bours. Loe, Illyricus (who vnderstood the Scriptures, as well as our Brownists and Martinists,) affirmeth plainely and constantly, that the office of Deacons, euen in the A­postles time, was not onely to attend on the poore, but also to instruct and Preach the Gospell.

I proue it Thirdly, because Philippe the Deacon did not onely attend the poore, but was also occupied in Baptizing 3 and in Preaching. As also, for that Saint Steuen another Deacon, made a long, learned, and most godly Sermon, vn­to the obstinate and stiffe-necked Iewes; in which he pro­ued at large, that he did serue and worship the euerliuing Act. 8. v. 35. 38. Act. 7. Vsque. v. 53. God aright, euen that God who chose the fathers afore Moses was borne, and before their Temple was built.

The first Obiection.

Steuen the Deacon did not preach at all, but onely de­fended himselfe in a long Oration, against the wicked and slaunderous accusations of the stiffe-necked Iewes, which to doe is lawfull, not for Deacons onely, but also for all o­ther Christians.

The Answere.

I answere first, that Saint Steuen answered in the way 1 of Preaching for edification sake, not in the way of plea­ding for his owne defence, albeit one may answere accusa­tions in a Sermon. For first, hee sharpely reprooued Cap. 7. 51. Cap 6. 9. them, terming them stiffe necked, and of vncircumcised hearts and eares. Secondly, hee was in the sinagogue of 2 the Libertines. Thirdly, the end and scope of his speech, 3 was to proue the true and pure worship of God, neither to be affixed to the Temple, nor to any externall ceremonies. All which being put together, it is cleere that Saint Steuen made a godly Sermon. This my answere is confirmed by Illyricus in 6. cap. act. v. 8. the verdict of Illyricus, whose words are these, Videtur autem hic Stephanus egressus esse metas suae vocationis, qui magis apo­stoli, quam diaconi munus vsurpaverit, docendo, disputando, & miracula edendo. Sed sic deus solet suam quandam viam libere ingredi spirando suo spiritu vbi vult.

Steuen seemes here to haue passed the limits of his cal­ling, in vsing the function rather of an Apostle, then of a Deacon, teaching, disputing, and working miracles, But thus God will vse his owne waies, breathing with his spirit where he listeth.

Againe in another place, the same Illyricus hath these words: primum, est longa concto Stephani, vsque ad 53. Versum. ibidem cap. 7. v 1. Aretius in act. 7. Gual. in act. 6. de [...]de, est glortosum martyrium eiusdem. First, there is a long Sermon which Steuen made, vntil the 53. Vers then follow­eth his glorious martyrdome. M. Aretius and M. Gualte­rus doth both of them affirme constantly, that Saint Ste­uen vsed to preach vsualy. I answere secondly, that if it be true, (which the obiection thereof supposeth,) that an Apologie cannot consist with a true and godly Ser­mon: then will it follow of necessitie, that Saint Paule did not Preach before Foelix the gouernour of Iurie, which to Act. 24. v. 10. &c. hold, is against M. Caluin and all learned Writers. It will also followe thereupon, that Saint Peter did not Pre [...]ch, [Page 189] when hee answered to those that accused the Apostles of Drunkennesse, before the Iewes, and all the strangers that Act. 2. v. 15. did inhabite Ierusalem.

I answere thirdly, that the custome of the church is of 3. great authority, for the true sense & meaning of the doubt­full texts of Scripture. By which custome it is euident, that Deacons did Baptize and preache in the primitiue church: and that both Steuen and Philip did the same, although they were but Deacons, Saint Hierome hath these words, Hieron. adu. Lucifer. tom. 3. fol. 3. c. Non quidem abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiarum consuetudinem, vt ad eos qui longè in minoribus Vrbibus per Presbyteres & Diaconos baptizati sunt, Episcopus ad inuocationem Sancti spiritus ma­num impositurus excurrat.

I doe not denie, that this is the custome of the church, that the Byshop should goe to those, which in Villages a farre of were baptized by the Priests and Deacons, and lay his hands vpon them with inuocation of the Holie Ghost. Loe, the custome of the church approoued the baptisme of Deacons, which shall bee made more apparant, in answere to the next obiection.

The second Obiection.

Philip that baptized the Eunuch, was Philip th' A­postle, Act. 8. v. 35 38. not Philip the Deacon: Besides, hee was then an Euangelist, and so baptized & preached as an Euangelist, and not by vertue of his Deaconshippe.

The answere.

I answere: first, that this Philip, (wherof the controuersie 1 it made) was not an Apostle, but one of the seaue Deacons. Act. 8. v. 1. 14. Act. 8. v. 1. The reason hereof is euident, because all th' Apostles (as S. Luke writeth,) remained [...] at Ierusalem and consequently it must needes bee Philip the Deacon, who was dispersed with the rest, and came to [...], where hee now prea­ched [Page 190] and baptized. The words of the text are these, they were all scattered abroad through the Regions of Iudaea, and Samaria, except th' Apostles. Againe; then came Philippe, Act. 8 v. 5. Act. [...]. 14. into the Citie of Samaria, and preached Christ vnto them. Againe thus; Nowe, when the Apostles which were at Ierusalem, heard say that Samaria had receyued the worde of God, they sent vnto them Peter and Iohn. By these se­uerall Texts, it is most apparant to all indifferent readers, that Philippe which baptized the Aethiopian, was none of the Apostles; but was that Deacon which came into Sa­maria, Philippe th' Apostle being still at Ierusalem. But the Patrons of the Eldershippe, vse to shuffle vppe Scriptures, they care not how, so they may seeme to conclude their in­tent and purpose. Let vs heare what Maister Caluin saith, Calui. in. 21. Act. v. 7. 8. whose words are these; Caesareae vsos fuisse dicit hospitio Phi­lippi, quem Euangelistam vocat, licet vnus esset e septem Diaco­nis, vt visum est capite sexto. Diaconiam illam fuisse tempo­rale Uide Bezā. in [...]ses. ca. 5. munu [...], hinc conijcere promptum est; quod Philippo alioqui liberumnon fuisset, relicta Ierosolimae Caesaream migrare. He telleth vs, that they lodged with Philippe at Caesarea, whome he calleth Euangelist, although hee were indeed one of the seuen Deacons. Hence wee may gather, that his Deacon­shippe was but a temporarie office; for otherwise he could not haue left Ierusalem, and haue gone to Caesarea. Where I must needs wish the Reader to obserue by the way, that see­ing the office of Deacons was temporarie and mutable; much more may the same bee saide of vnpriested Elders, if anic such were in any age, place, or time.

I answere secondly, that Philip which baptized the Ae­thiopian Eunuch, was not onely once a Deacon, but still re­mained 2 so: and that he was called an Euangelist, because he did Euangelize, and preach the Gospell, In which sense e [...]ry preacher may thus be truelie called an Euangelist, as both M. Bullinger, & other learned writers graunt. This to be so, the verie expresse words of the text doe prooue it so plainly, that no denyall can be made therof. Thus wri­teth [Page 191] Saint Luke, Eiselthontes eis ton [...]icon Philippou tou Euan­gelistou ontos Act. 21. v. 8. ec ton hepta emeinamen par auto. Entring into the house of Philip th' Euangelist, being one of the seauen, wee aboade with him. Loe, S. Luke speaketh not in the preterperfect tense, or preterplusperfect tense, who hath or had bene one of the seauē Deacons; but he saith in the pre­sent tense, who is euen now one of the seauen; For so the Originall Greeke word (ontos), must needs be expressed, seing it is a participle of the present time, or time euen now beeing. And the holy Fathers together with the practise of the church, haue euer so vnderstood this text of Scripture.

Saint Epiphanius deliuereth his minde in these plaine Epipha. li. 1. to. 2. haeres. 21. pag. 18. tearmes; Omnes verò praeter ipsum susceperunt magnorum A. postolorum praesentians, & per impositionem manuum ipsorum acceperunt Spiritum sanctum. Nam quum Philippus Diaco­nus esset, non habebat potestatem imponendi manus, vt per hoc daret Spiritum sanctum.

They all, hee onely excepted, receyued the presence of the mightie Apostles, and by imposition of their hands, they enioyed the holy Ghost. For Philip being a Deacon onelie, had not power to impose hands, thereby to giue the holy Ghost.

S. Austen hath these expresse words; Iterum, multum di­stare inter Diaconum & sacerdotem liber approbat, quē dicimus August. in quaest. [...]xtim, quaest. 101. tom. 4 Hier. ide do­cet aduersus Lucifer. tom 3 fo. 63. B actus Apostolorum. Cumn. ex Samaria credidissent, Philippo praedicanti Diacono ab Apostolis ordinato, miserunt, inquit, ad eos Petrum & Ioannem, vt venirent, & his qui creder [...]t darent spiritum sanctum, per manus impositionem. Again, the booke which wee call the Acts of the Apostles, prooueth that a Deacon differeth much from a Priest. For when they of Samaria had beleeued the preaching of Philip the Deacon, ordeined of th' Apostles; they sent (saith the booke) Peter and Iohn vnto them, that they might giue the holy Ghost, by imposition of hands, to those that did beleeue. Thus wee see the iudgement of S. Epiphanius and S. Austen, who both iointly affirme Philip to haue bene but a Deacon, and [Page 192] yet to haue baptized and preached. Yea Maister Gual­ter, Maister Aretius, and the Magaeburgenses, doe all con­stanthe Gualter, in 8. Act. Aret. in cap. 8. Act. Magdeb. cent. 1. lib. 2. ca. 7. p. 508. and vniformely contest the same truth, with the auncient Fathers and continuall custome of the Church in all ages. They write plainely, that although Deacons were chieflie occupied about the dispensation of the chur­ches goods! yet did they employe their labours so far forth as they might, in the other ministeries of the church.

The fourth member of Deacons promoted to Priesthood.

The Church of England is charged to doe against the word of God, while shee vseth to make one and the same person, first a Deacon, and afterward a Priest. To which calumnie, I answere in briefe in this manner. First, that it is not against the word of God, but very consonant and al­together 1. agreable to the same. For no Scripture can bee alleadged, to prooue that a Deacon maye not become a Priest. Maister Caluin affirmeth constantly, that Philippe was first a Deacon, and afterward an Euangelist, Priest, or Caluian cap. 21. Act. pastorall elder. Secondly, that the church of England v­sing the Deaconshippe, as a steppe or degree vnto Priest­hood, 2. doth nothing against the iudgement of the auncient Fathers, but followeth the vsuall practise of the church in all ages. The reason hereof is, and euer was this; viz. that there might be some time of try all, of their behauiour in the Deaconshippe, before they were or could bee admitted to the order of Priesthood. No Councell, no Father, no hy­storie Ecclesiasticall, no time, no place, no person, since the Apostolike age, can be named to the contrary. To the con­tinuall practise of the Church from age to age, th' Apostles words may sitly be applied, when he saith: the deacons that 1. Ion. 3. v. 13 haue ministred well, get themselues a good degree. For sun [...] writer; of high esteem in the church, do [...] the word (Degree) a steppe vnto the [...] or Priesthood. This notwithstanding, [Page 193] it is not of necessitie, that euery Deacon become a Priest, by any canon or constitution of the church. For his behauiour in the Deaconship may be such, that the church will deeme him vnmeete to be preferred vnto Priesthood. And there­fore I conclude with these words of S. Hierome, Et si scrip­turae Hieron. adv. Lucif. tom. 3. fol. 63 c. authoritas non subesset, totius orbis in hanc partē consensus instar praecepti obtineret. Nā & multa alia quae per traditionē in Ecclesijs obseruantur, authoritatē sibi scriptae legis vsurpauerunt.

Although they were no authoritie in Holy Scripture; yet should the consent of all the Christian worlde, haue the force and strength of a law in this behalfe. For many other Uide supra, ca. 7. per totū. things, which the church obserueth by tradition, are be­come equiualent to the written law. Loe, S. Hierome affir­meth boldly & constantly, as do also S. Augustine. M. Caluin, and others, (as I haue already prooued,) that the custome & tradition of the church must bee in steede of a lawe vnto Christians. Which euer is to be vnderstood, in things not repugnant to the word of God, (or as M. Caluin. speaketh) Caluin in 1. cor. 11. which are neyther partes of doctrine, nor necessarie to sal­uation.

The fyfth member, of the generall confession made by priuate persons in the Church.

The Patrons of the expected Eldership or Presbyterie, exclame against the booke of common prayer; because it giueth libertie to the Laycall communicants, to make a ge­nerall confession of their sinnes, before the congregation then present; as if therby the Laicall communicants, should presently become publique ministers of the church. To these men I answere in this manner; first, that they seeme to 1 thēselues to be the onely wise men in the worlde, & to con­demne all the rest of follie: For otherwise, they would not so roundly & peremptorily take vpon themselues, and that without either Scripture, Councell, or Father; nay, with­out all time or reason, to controll & condemne the book of publique praier, (which I verily think to haue bene compo­sed by the assistance of the Holy Ghost;) & consequently, [Page 194] to condemne all the ancient Byshops, (those glorious mar­tyrs of our Lord Iesus,) the most famous Byshop of Saris­burie, (the Iewell of England in his time) the Byshops that now liue, (who are both wise, vertuous, & learned,) & all the residue of the learned Cleargie of this our English Church. Secondly, that by their grosse assertion, ioyned with a most 2 vnchristian reprehension, the lowly Publican highly com­mended Luke. 18. v. 13. in the Gospell, should bee made a Minister of the Church, or haue intruded him himself into the function of publique Ministerie, when hee knocked vppon his breast, & said; O God be mercifull to me a sinner. Thirdly, that by 3 the same reason, the notorious sinners which were put to open penance in the primitiue Church, and confessed their faults before the congregation. should bee in the same pre­dicament. Fourthlie, that publique penitents this daye, 4 (who are for all that approoued of the Patrons of the Pres­byterie,) should be caught in the same nette. Fyftlie, that the same may bee saide of Women, singing Psalmes in the Church, and that with more probabilitie; who for all that are approoued in so doing, not onely in this Church of En­gland, Augustin, ad Ianuarim epist. 118. but also in all other reformed churches wheresoeuer. I therefore conclude this member, with this Golden sen­tence of S. Austen; if any thing be obserued vniuersallie of the whole church; then not to obserue that, or to call it in­to question, is meere madnesse, and desperate follie.

The sixt member, of praying to be deliuered, from Lightning, Plague, and sodaine death.

It is scornefully obiected against the prayers of the church, that when wee pray to bee deliuered from plague, famine, and from other aduersitie, wee pray without faith, because wee haue no promise to receiue the things we pray 1. for. To whom I answere; First, that our Sauiour Christ taught vs so to pray, when hee deliuered to his Church the forme of that prayer, which we should daily vse; Being the [Page 195] most exact, and most perfect prayer, that euer was, or can Mat. 6. v. 13. be made. Where the Notes of the Geneua Byble expound it, to be deliuered from all aduersitie: And consequently, 2 that we pray with saith, seeing Holy writ is our warrant for 1. Ioh. 5. 14. Luke. 11. 9. Mat. 7. 7. Ioh. 16. 24. Apoe. 3. v. 20. that we pray. Secondly, that wee haue promise to receiue that wee pray for, so far forth as standeth with Gods glo­rie and our soules health. For Christ himselfe willeth vs to aske, and wee shall receiue; to seeke, and wee shall finde; to knocke, and it shall be opened vnto vs. Yea, he stan­deth knocking at the doore of our hearts, and if wee will open the do [...]e to him, hee will enter into the house of our hearts, and dwell with vs, and giue vs all things necessarie, both for our bodies, and for our soules. And to assure vs thereof, Christ willeth vs to beleeue that wee shall haue our Mar. 11. v. 24. request, it shall bee done vnto vs. And if any will replie, that many aske many things in prayer, and yet doe not at­taine the same: to such I answere with Saint Iames, in these Iac. 4. 3. words; yee aske, and receyue not, because yee aske amisse, that ye may lay the same out on your pleasures. Thirdly, 3 that when our church prayeth to bee deliuered from all ad­uersitie, In Dom. Tri­oration. Gen. 22. v. 11. she hath both the example and aduise of most holy men. The holy Patriarch Iacob, fearing to receyue some bodily harme and aduersitie of his brother, prayed to God in this manner; (O God) I pray thee deliuer mee from the hand of my brother from the hand of Esau; for I feare him, least hee will come and sinite mee, & the mother vpon the children King Dauid, fearing to receyue bodilie harme of his sonne Absalon, fled away from him, and prayed God to turne the counsell of Achitophel (who conspired with Ab­salon) into foolishnes. The whole congregation prayed to 2. Sam. 15. v. 31 psa. 20. God, to prosper their King, when hee went forth to battell against the Ammonites. And I deeme them no good sub­iects, to our most gracious Soueraigne King Iames, who will not pray to God vnfaynedlie, to defende him from all aduersitie; Neyther yet those persons who refuse [Page 196] to pray with our church; for all happinesse aswell corpo­rall & temporarie, as spirituall & Eternall, to our most ver­tuous Queene Anne, the noble Prince Henry, & all the rest Mat. 24. v. 02. of that most Royall progenie. Yea, Christ himselfe fore­warning his disciples, of externall future aduersity, willeth them to pray to bee defended from the same. Praye saith Christ, that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabboth day. And besides the sixt petition of the Lords prayer (which teacheth vs to pray) to be defended from all aduersitie, (as S. Cyprian, Ursinus, and Illyricus with manie other learned wryters expound it,) and besides the fourth Cyprian. in o­rat. dom. pag. 313. petition also, which teacheth vs to pray for all things need­full for this life, (as the same wryters tell vs,) many exam­ples of the new Testament doe make it cleere and euident, Vrsin. par. 4. pag. 422. that Christ was well pleased with their prayers, who pray­ed for things to this life appertaining. The Ruler prayed for the life of his Daughter, & Christ performed his desire. Mat. 9. 22. Mur. 10. v. 51 52. Mat. 9. 30. Mat. 15. v. 22. 28. Bartimaeus the sonne of Tymans desired to receiue his sight, & obtained his request. Two blind men followed Christ, and requested to receiue their sight, & hee yeelded to their petitions. A woman a Canaanite desired Christ to helpe her Daughter, who was miserablie vexed with a Deuill, & Christ cured her daughter presently. Many other like exā ­ples I might alledge; but in steed therof, this onelie goldē sentence of S. Augustine shall suffice. Cum dicimus, libera nos a malo, nos admonemus cogitare nondum nos esse in eo bono, vbi August. epist. 121. pa. 403. nullum patiemur malum. Et hoc quidem vltimum, quod in Do­minica oratione positum est, tam late, tamque enidenter, & ma­nifestè patet, vt homo Christianus in qualibet tribulatione consti­tutus, in hoc gemitus edat, in hoc lachrymas fundat, hinc exordi­atur, in hoc immoretur, ad hoc terminet orationem.

When wee say, Deliuer vs from euill, wee admonish ourselues to consider with our selues, that we are not as yet in that good estate, where wee shall suffer no euill. And this which is last placed in the Lords Prayer, is extended [Page 197] so farre, and so plainly, that a Christian man moued with a­ny kind of tribulatiō may in this petition sigh, in this shed his teares, begin herein, continue herein, and end his prayer herein. Thus writeth this holy father. And now, where it is wont to be obiected against the custome of our Church, that we know not that God wil deliuer vs from all such ad­uersitie: as from lightning, thunder, fire, water, sodaine death, and such like. I answere that we are not to command God, or to appoint him an houre, but to expect his good time, and to referre euery part and parcell of our petitions, to his holy will and pleasure euer implied in all our pray­ers. And againe, that if we must pray for nothing, but that onely which wee knowe God will grant, we shall seldome or neuer pray for any thing at all. No, wee must not say to our neighbour ryding towards London, God speede you well: nor to the sicke persons, GOD helpe you, nor for the preseruation of his Maiestie, GOD saue the King. How absurde these things are, euery childe can discerne: and yet the patrons of the Presbyterie condemne our Church, for Preaching to be defended from all aduersitie, vpon such sillie fansies and slender groundes.

The seventh member, of the oath ex officio.

It is thought a very haynous offence, that the Church doth sometime require an oath, whereby certaine persons are constrained to accuse themselues. Which oath, be­cause some doe offer it by vertue of their place and charge committed to them, is by some male-contents ironical­ly termed the oath ex officio. But I answere: first, that 1 it is as vsually ministred in the Ciuill affaires of the com­mon-weale, as in the Ecclesiasticall causes of the Church, whereof none can bee ignorant, that haue any notice of the ordinarie practise, of his Maiesties [Page 198] honourable Counsell in the North of England. Which vsage though of great antiquitie, hath for all that euer beene approued and deemed lawfull, as well by the wisest and best learned of the church, as also of the common­weale of England, vntill these last and worst dayes, in which some fewe young Doctors of small reading, haue audaciously taken vpon them, to censure both our church and Kingdome in that behalfe. 2. that it is noe small sinne 2 for the inferiour to disobey the Lawe of his superiour in indifferent things (of which sort and order is euery oath clad with circumstances to this case appertaining,) as it may euidently be prooued, by the testimonie of the best both olde and moderne Writers. It were enough for tryall hereof, to call to minde what is alreadie Written. But for better satisfaction of the friendly Reader, I am content to alledge their testimonies, whose iudgements the male-contents themselues will easily admit. Maister Beza hath these expresse wordes; Res alioqui per se mediae Beza, in e­pist. 24. pag. 155. Vide supra, cap [...]. & no­tat [...]. mutant quodammodo naturam, quum aliquo legitimo mandato vel praecipiuntur vel prohibentur, quia neque contra iustum prae­ceptum omitti possunt, si praecipiantur, neque contra interdictum fieri, si prohibeantur. Sequitur, & si. n. conscientias propriè solus deus ligat, tamen quatenus vel magistratus qui dei minister est, iudicat interesse reip. vt quippiam alio qui per se licitum non fiat, vel ecclesia ordinis & decori, adeoque aedificationis rationem ha­bens, leges aliquas de rebus medijs ritè condit; eiusmodi le­ges pijs omnino sunt observandae, & eatenus conscientias li­gāt, vt nemo sciens & prudens rebellandi animo, possit absque pece cato velfacere qua it a prohibentur, vel omittere quae praecipi­untur.

Things otherwise of themselues indifferent, doe after a sort change their nature, so soone as by any lawfull pre­cept, they are either commaunded or prohibited, because they neither can be omitted against a iust mandate, if they be commaunded: neither yet be done against an interdict, [Page 199] when they are forbidden. For albeit God alone doth pro­perly bind the conscience, yet for all that, when the Ma­gistrate Behold or­der and com­lines doe edi­fie. Let this be well mar­ked. being Gods minister, iudgeth it expedient for the publique weale, that a thing otherwise of it selfe lawfull, be not done, or the Church hauing respect to order and com­linesse, and consequently to edification, ordaineth lawes touching things indifferent, then such Lawes must be al­together obserued of the godly, and they so farre bind the consciences, that no man can wittingly and willingly with a rebellious minde, either doe the things so forbidden, or omit the things so cōmanded, but he shall thereby become guiltie of sinne.

Maister Martyr hath these wordes; Quare hand nos latere Pet. Mart. in. 1. cor. 1. sol. 8. a. oportet &c. Wherefore we must not be ignorant, that in the church there be three vertues of traditions. Some of them are euidently deduced and gathered out of the Scriptures. And touching this kinde, all the faithful are bound to com­municate together. Other some are wholy repugnant to the word of God, & they must be reiected, by what autho­ritie so euer they be obtruded. And there be a third sort of traditions, which we may call neutrall or indifferent; be­cause they are neither contrary to Gods word, nor yet ne­cessarily ioyned thereunto. In which last kind we must o­bey the church, three cautions being obserued. First, that they be not obtruded as a part of Gods worship, or peculiar holinesse, but as pertaining to order, & the ciuill commo­ditie of the church, & to comlinesse in diuine actions: for all things are contained sufficiently in the holy Scriptures, which pertaine to Gods worship and holinesse. Secondly, that they be not reputed so necessarie, but that they may be changed, if time so require. Let the church keepe her inte­rest in these indifferent things, to appoint what shall bee thought most necessarie and meete to edifie the faithfull. Last of all, let not Gods people be burdened with too great a multitude of them. Thus writeth this learned man.

The Churches in Heluetia in their confession of their [Page 200] faith, after a long discourse of rites and things indiffe­ [...]nt, Confess Hel [...]et. Pag. 211. added these wordes; Semper vero ecclesiae in huius­modiritibus, sicut medijs, vsae sunt libertate, id quod nos quo­que facimus. The Churches in such rites, as in things indif­ferent, haue euer vsed their libertie, which libertie our selues also challenge.

The Churches in Svevia: in their confession haue Confess. Sve­vica. Pag. 230. these wordes; Tales multas sanè ecclesia hodie iure obseruat, & pro occasione quoque condit novas, quas qui reiecerit, is non hominum, sed dei (cuius traditio est, quaecunqus vtilis est,) au­ctoritatem contemnit. Many such traditions the Church this day obserueth aright, and as occasion requireth, she appointeth and maketh new ones, which new orders who­soeuer shal reiect, he contemneth the authoritie not of men, but of God.

Out of these testimonies, of these famous, godly, zea­lous, and most learned writers, I obserue these golden les­sons. First, that things of their own nature indifferent, doe 1 after a sort change their nature, so soone as they be cōman­ded to be done, or left undone, by the setled lawes of the Church. Secondly, that they bind the consciences of all per­sons, 2 subiect to the Churches iurisdiction, so far and in such sort, that they cānot at any time, or in any place transgresse the same without great sinne, if such transgression be ioy­ned and annexed, either to scandall or contempt. Thirdly, that whosoeuer reiecteth such lawes and ordinances of the 3 Church, contemneth the authoritie of God, & not of men. Fourthly, that he sinneth grieuously, who either doth the 4 things which the Church prohibiteth, or omitteth the things which she commandeth to be done, so long as her commandements remaine within the limits of things indif­ferent, which she appointeth for order, decencie and the common good of the Church.

I answere thirdly, that the Church hath authoritie to Tertio Prin­cipa [...]ter. impose euery lawfull ordinance and constitution, which she deemeth profitable for the Church, vpon euery person [Page 201] subiect to her iurisdiction. This point is sufficiently proued alreadie, both in this present Chapter, and in many others throughout this discourse. So that henceforth, one onely thing remaineth for me to proue; viz. That to minister the oath ex officio, whereby one is bound to accuse himselfe is either a thing lawfull of it selfe, or else Adiaphoron and a thing indifferent of it owne nature. I attempt the proofe. Euery thing is either good of it selfe, as God the au­thor and giuer of all goodnesse, or euill of it selfe, as the blaspheming of God; or indifferent of it owne nature, as golde, money, oyle, wine, and such like. Now if the oath ex officio be good in it selfe, then doubtlesse, the Church may minister it to her subiects with out offence. None that hath sence or reason, will or can for shame denie the same. Againe, if it be Adiaphoron, a thing of it owne nature indifferent, then it is likewise in the power and libertie of the Church, to impose the same vppon euery member within her iurisdicti­on.

This is so sufficiently proued, as no deniall can bee made thereof. It is therefore either euill of it owne nature, or else doubtlesse it may not bee withstoode or gainesaide, that it is not ill of it owne nature, I thus proue it, and I wish the reader to marke well my wordes. If it bee euill, it is either euill simply and absolutely considered, as it is an oath: or else, as it is ministred to such a person. Not the former, because euerie magistrat may lawfully minister an oath, so often as due order of iustice doth require.

For as the Apostle saith, an oath for confirmation, is among men an ende of all strife. Yea, Gods name is confessed by true and lawfull oaths. For as holy Mo­ses Hebr. 6. Vers. 16. saieth, thou shall feare the Lord thy GOD, and serue him, and shall sweare by his name. And the Prophet Ioremiah telleth vs, that it is euer lawfull to Deut. 6. Vers. 13. [Page 202] sweare for the aduancement of GODS glorie, and the profit of others, so these three conditions, iustice, Iere. 4 v. 2 iudgement, and truth, bee alwaies annexed vnto it viz. if wee sweare truly, reuerently, and iustly. Not the lat­ter.

First. for that it may be, and often is ministred to many 1 without offence, as the aduersaries of the same oath cannot but confesse. But if it were euill of it owne nature, it could neuer be lawfully done.

Secondly, for that it is no sinne at all, for a sinner to ac­cuse himselfe of the sinne he hath committed. But it is a sin­gular 2 vertue to confesse our faults and offences, and the rea­dy way to obtaine fauour at Gods hands. This knew ho­ly Iosua right well, when speaking by the spirit of God hee 1. Ioh. 1. v. 9. willed Achan to acknowledge his sinne. My sonne saith he, I beseech ye giue glorie to the Lord God of Israel, & make Ios. 7. 19. confession vnto him, shewe mee now what thou hast done, hide it not from me. Loe, to confesse our secret sinnes to Gods minister, is to glorifie God and to honour his holy name. And therefore saith the note of the Geneua Bible, that God is glorified, when the truth is confessed. This knew Saint Mathew right well, when writing the Gospell of Iesus Christ, and reckoning vp the names of the Apo­stles, Mat. 10. Vers. 3. hee termeth himselfe Mathew the Publicane. This knew S. Paul right well, when he left it written to all po­sterities, that hee had bin a blasphemer, a persecuter, and an oppresser. This Saint Austen, Saint Hierome, and many 1. Tim. 1. Uers. 13. other holy men knewe right well, when they inrolled their peculiar sinnes in their owne bookes, which they divulged to the view of the whole world.

Thirdly, because the rule of charitie doth teach the same. How proue I that? forsooth, because our aduersaries herein 3 will not refuse to accuse ours neighbours by testifying the truth against them, when occasion so requireth euen vpon their oathes. And consequently, seeing the true loue of our Mat. 22. Vers. 39. selues is that rule, by which our loue towards our neighbor [Page 203] must be squared, it followeth of necessitie, that it is as law­full for vs to accuse and testifie against our selues, as it is to accuse and testifie against our neighbour. This reason can neuer be answered. And it will not serue to reply, that it is a cruell part to cause a man to accuse himselfe. For First, 1 there is no more crueltie in ministring the oath, whereby the malefactor accuseth himselfe, then there is in giuing sen­tence, against a felon or a traitor to suffer death. The reason is euident, because the Iudge be haueth himself alike in both cases. viz. He in both cases pla [...]eth the part of Gods annoin­ted and lawfull minister. Secondly, it cōmeth not of the na­ture 2 of the oath but, per accidens that the partie sworne doth accuse himselfe. For, if he were innocent, as he is nocent; he could not be accused, by vertue of the oath. For, the oath is as free to commend him, as to condemne him, and as indifferent to acquit him, as to accuse him. If it were other­wise, all that take the oath, shold be accused by vertue ther­of. Which how false it is, all the Christiā world can witnes. Thirdly, it is a vertue iustly to punish him, who vniustly 3 hath done iniurie to others. Fourthly, it is a great sinne in a 4 magistrate, to omit that punishment which iustly may be inflicted, to the harme & great daunger either of the whole 5 Church, or of many godly members in the same. Fiftly, the Mat. 5. Uers. 24. oath doth onely induce iurantem to that by way of iustice, which hee is bound to doe by Gods law of his own accord 6 viz. to confesse the iniurie hee hath done, and to be reco­ciled Rom. 13. to his brother. Lastly, he sinneth grieuously, whosō ­euer Uers. 2. 5. 1. Pet. 2. 13. refuseth to confesse the truth, when his competent and lawful Iudge demandeth it iuridically at his handes. I therefore conclude that albeit the competent iudge cannot lawfully and iuridically exact an oath, for the manifestati­on of sinnes secret and altogether vnknowne, (be­cause such secret sinnes are reserued onely and solely to the indgement of GOD,) yet when there goeth a com­mon fame, or when there is a vehement suspition, or semiplena probatio (as the Canons terme it,) of such a fact committed by such a Person: then the Iudge [Page 204] may lawfully by iuridicall processe, exact a corporall oath of euery suspected person. In which case onely (as I conceiue it,) the oath ex officio is ministred, and in no other. In regard whereof, I would wish all inferiours to be more obedient and circumspect in future times, and not to be carried away head-long with audacious temeritie, peremptorily to censure and condemne the Lawes of their superiours, the true nature wherof, many of them doe little vnderstand. Let them remember, what the wise man saith, be not iust ouermuch, neither make thy selfe ouerwise. And Eccles. 7. Uers. 18. Rom. 12. Uers. 3. as Saint Paul aduiseth vs, let no man presume to vnder­stand, aboue that which is meete to vnderstand, but that he vnderstand according to sobrietie. Which holy counsell if it were pondered aright, and deepely fixed in all mens hearts, many too too forward young Diuines, would more sparingly censure the lawes of their superiours, and follow Iac. 1. 19. Saint Iames his precept, in being swift to heare, and slow to speake.

CHAP. XV. Of the punishing and pardoning of male factors.

THe patrons of the newe English long wished presbyterie, are so sharpe, for­ward, and rigorous, in the punishing of sin & sinners, that in effect they spoile all magistrates of their lawfull authori­tie, & make them guiltie of sinnes moe then a fewe. For they write resolutely (I will not say, audaciously,) that the ciuill magistrates cannot saue the liues of any blasphemers, murderers, adulterers, and such like. Which how vnsound a doctrine it is, I purpose in God to make it manifest, by way of conclusions.

The first Conclusion.

No Christian Magistrate is this day bound to obserue, [Page 205] either the Ceremoniall, or the Iudiciall Lawe of Moses. I prooue it briefelie. The Lawe of Moses was Tripar [...]ite: Uide su. ca. 8. aphoris. 3. in resp. ad 2. obiect. Ceremoniall, Iudiciall, Morall. Of which three, the Mo­rall part onely is this daye in force with Christians. The reason hereof is this; because it is in deede the very lawe of Nature, imprinted in euery mans heart in his Na­tiuitie, and so cannot be altered. The Iudiciall parte was properlie, and peculiarlie appointed of God, for conserua­tion of Iustice, among the Iewes, in the land of promise, the land of Canaan, the land of Iewrie. The whole order of which gouernment ceased long fithence: viz. Euer since the people of Israell were expelled out of Iudaea, & began to dwell amongst the Gentiles: liuing without Gouernours, without a King, without a Priest, and without a Lawe. The Ceremoniall part was ordeined, to prefigure Christs future Priesthoode; and therefore was it whollie abro­gated, Ioh. 19. 30. Rom. 10. 4. Luke. 24. Heb. 7. v. 12. by Christs most blessed and Sacred Aduent. For Christ was the ende of the Lawe; in whom were fulfilled as well the figures as the promises contayned in the Lawe, and the Prophets. All which Saint Paul compriseth pithily, in these golden wordes. For, if the Priesthoode bee chaunged, then of necessitie, the Lawe also must bee changed. Yea, Christ himselfe seemed to insinuate no lesse, when hee refused to condemne the adulteresse to death, ac­cording to the Iudiciall law of Moses; albeeit the Scribes & Pharisees did euen then vrge him with the constitution of that Law. And S. Austen doth conclude no lesse out of Christs words, if hee be rightly vnderstood. But, for the Aug ad Poll. de adult. con­iugijs, tom. 6. true sense and meaning of S. Austens discourse, his two books written to Pollentin, must be well pondered & aptly matched together. For I stand not so much of Christs freeing the adulteresse, from the punishment of the Iudici­all law of Moses; as of that other ground, vppon which S. Austen stayeth himselfe. viz. That adulterie doth not dis­solue the bond of holy Wedlock. For albeeit sundrie late Wryters, otherwise of great learning and rare gifts, doe [Page 206] constantly teach (which some of our men haue also put in practise) that when the husband is diuorced from his wife, being an adulteresse then hee may lawfullie marrie an o­ther: yet Saint Austen grounding his opinion, vppon the words of Christ, & of S. Paul; concludeth constantly that whosoeuer shall marrie another wife, during the life of his former wife diuorced for adulterie, doth himselfe commit adulterie. Which (if it be true, which I leaue to the iudge­ment of the Church,) prooueth euidently that the Iudiciall law of Moses is not of sorce. These are S. Austens words: Haec verba Apostoli tot [...]es repetita, toties inculcata, vera sunt, viua sunt, sana sunt, plana sunt. Nulltus viri posterioris muli­er August. ad Pollen. lib. 2. ca. 4. tom. 6. vxor esse incipit, nisi prioris esse desiuerit. Esse autem desinet prioris, simoriatur vir eius, non sifornicetur. These words of th' Apostle so often repeated, so often inculcated, are true, are quick, are sound, are plaine. A woman beginneth not to bee the wife of any later husband, vnlesse shee first cease to bee the wife of the former. But shee ceaseth to bee the former husbands wife, if her husband die, not if hee com­mit adulterie.

Hemingius a great learned man, and a zealous professor of the Gospell, hath these words; Est & lex Iudicialis, quae Heming in enchirid pag. 156. cessante republica Mosis expira [...]nt: it a vt non necessario vllum hominem obliget in specie, nisi quaetenus portio cius aliqua, aut part est legis naturae, vt lex cōtraincoestas nuptias, Lev. 18. aut a Magistratu propomtur politico fine. There is also the Iudiciall lawe, which expired with the common-wealth of Moses: so that it doth not binde any man of necessitie, but so farre onely, as some portion of it, partaineth to the lawe of Na­ture, as the lawe against incestuous marriages: or so much of it, as the ci [...]le magistrate shall admit for pollicie.

Saint Cyrill hath these words; Sacundum legem adulter cū Cyrilius in Leuit. ab 11. Lev. 20, 10 Deut. 22, v. 22. adultera moriebatur, nec poterāt dicere, poenitentiam petimus & ven [...]a [...] deprecamur. Sequitur apud Christianos vero siadul­terium fuerit admissum, nonest praeceptum, vt adulter. vel adul­tera corporall [...] puniantur.

[Page 207] In the Lawe, both the adulterer and the adulteresse were punished by death; and they could not say, wee are peni­tent, & desire pardon for our sinnes. But among Christians, there is no commandement to punish them with death.

M Musculus that most zealous Christian, and great learned Doctor, hath these expresse words: Quaerunt, an tota sit abrogata? respondemus, si totus Moses cessit Christe, vtique tota illius lex, cessit legi Christi. Sequitur: in lege sunt mandata, promissa, & figurae. Perveritatem Christi, cessarunt promissa & figurae. Mandata legis sunt moralia, iudicialia, coe­remontalia. Caeremo [...]ialia cessasse, ex eo patet quod ipsum Sa­cerdotium legis, cuiannexae fuerunt caeremoniae, per sacerdotium Christi secundum or dinem Melchisedech est abrogatum, & iam olim re ipsa cessauit. Iudicialta quoque cessasse in eo declaratur, quod tota Israelis oeconomia qualem terrae promissae inhabitatio requirebat, ab eo tempore cessauit, quo exdulsi inter gentes, sine Rege, sine Ducibus, siue Sacerdote, & sine lege habitare coeperūt.

They demand, if the whole Law be abrogated? wee an­swere, if whole Moses gaue place to Christ, then hath his whole law giuen place to the lawe of Christ. In the Lawe are commandements, promises, and figures. The comman­dements of the law are morall, iudiciall, ceremoniall. That the ceremonialls are ceasled, it is thereby euident; for that the Priesthoode of the lawe, to which the ceremonies were annexed, is abrogated by the Priesthood of Christ, according to the order of Melchisedeth, & was long since expired. And that the iudicialls are also ceased, it is herein manifest; for that the whole order of the gouernment of Israell, which was requisite vnto the inhabiting of the land of promise, hath frō that time ceased, when they being expelled, beganne to dwell among the Gentiles, without a King, without gouernours, without a Priest, & wt out a law.

Maister Caluin hath a large and most learned dis­course of this question, which is able to satisfie anie in­different Musculus in locus de legib. pag Reader. Some small part thereof I will here set down, referring the Reader vnto the place for the residue. [Page 208] Sunt qui recte compositā esse remp. negent, quae neglectis Mosis politicis, communibus gentium legibus regitur. Quae sententta Caluin. in instit. lib. 4. cap. 20. Sect. 14. 15. 16. quam periculosa sit & turbulenta, videriut alij, mihi falsam esse ac stolidam, demonstrasse satis erit.

There be some which denie that common weale to bee well gouerned, which omitting the politique lawes of Mo­ses, is ruled by the common lawes of the Gentles. The which opinion how daungerous & seditious it is, let others iudge; it is enough for mee to haue shewed it to bee false and foolish.

Out of these large and learned discourses, it is most apparant to all indifferent Readers; that the law of Moses is wholie expired, and that Christians of necessitie are bound to no part thereof.

The Second Conclusion.

Although the law of Moses bee wholy expyred, so as of necessitie Christians are not bounde to the punishment therein prescribed against sinne & sinners, yet is sinne this day as odious in Gods sight, as euer it was, and remaineth punishable by the law Morall, (which is the law of Nature) more fullie explained in the Law of the Newe Testament; but the quantitie & kinde of punishment therein omitted, by reason of the mutabilitie of times, places, and persons, is wholly referred to the discretion of the wise & Godly Ma­gistrate. This conclusion containeth in it three parts: the expiration of the Mosaicall law: Gods wrath and indig­nation against sinne, & the quantitie & kinde of punishing sinne, which is cōmitted to the Magistrate. The first part is sufficiently cleered, by the context of the former cōclusion. The second part may be prooued by manie places of holie writ. For as th' Apostle saith: Tribulation & anguish shalbe vpon the soule of euery man, that doth euill: of the Iew first, & also of the Graecian. Again, in another place, the wages of Rom. 2. 9. Rom 6. 23. sinne, is death. Again, therefore shall her plagues come at one day, death and sorrowe, and famine, and shee shall bee [Page 209] burnt with fire; for that God which condemneth her, is a strong Apoc. 17. 8. Lord. And Christ himselfe sheweth his generall hatred against sinne, when hee pronounceth life eternall to Mat. 25, v. be prepared for the righteous, and euerlasting paine 46 for the wicked. The third and last part is proued two waies; affirmatiuely, and negatiuely. Of the former speaketh S. Paul, when hee telleth vs, That the Magi­strate Rom. 13. v. 3 is not to be feared for good workes, but for euil. 4 Where hee rendreth the reason thereof: vz. for that he is Gods Minister, to take vengeance on him, that doth euill. Of the same speaketh Saint Peter, when hee affir­meth the magistrate to bee appointed of God, for the punishment of euill doers, and for the prayse of them 1. Pet. 2. v. that doe well. Touching the latter there is no parte 14. in the whole corpse of the new testament, or of the old this day in force, which determineth eyther the quan­titie or kinde of punishment, with the which male fac­tors are to bee punished. This negatiue assertion is proofe sufficient, vntill some instance can bee giuen for the affirmatiue. Againe, as the Prophets containe no­thing, but an explication of the Law; so the New Te­stament containeth nothing but a cleare explication of the law and the Prophetes. This I haue elsewhere In the down­fall of Popery. proued at large, where hee that listeth may reade the same: for all the kindes of punishment expressed in the Mosaicall Law were meere iudiciall, and are alrea­die expired, as is proued in the former conclusion. The law Moral, (which is the law of nature) teacheth vs that Vide supra, cap. 8. aphor. 3 ob. 2. sinne ought to be punished; but for that no one kinde of punishment, not quantity in punishing, can be meet and agreeable to all nations, all times, all places, and al persons; it leaueth the quantitie and kinde of punish­ment to bee determined by the godly and prudent Magistrate, as shall bee thought most fit and commo­dious for the peaceable gouernement of the common weale, the circumstances of times, places and persons, [Page 210] euer dulie considered this is euident, by the practise of Caluin. in. in st [...]t. lib. 4. cap. 20. secti. 16. all nations; for (as M. Caluin writeth truely,) where Gods law (the law of nature,) forbiddeth to steale, the ancient lawes of the gentiles punished theft with dou­ble; others condemned theues with exile and bannish­ment; others adiudged them to be whipped; others to be put to death. False witnes was punished in som places onely with infamie, in other places with hanging. All lawes doe reuenge murder with blood, but yet with di­uers kinds of death. In some places there are grieuouser paines appointed for adulterers, in other places those that are more easie; yet wee see, how they all by this diuersitie of punishment, tend to one and the same end. For they all with one consent, giue sentence of punish­ment against those offences, which are condemned by the eternall lawe of god; to wit, murder, theft, adulterie, false witnes; but they agree not all; in the manner of the punishment: neithe truely is it necessarie or ex­pedient, that they should agree therein. Their is a coun­trey which should out of hand be destroied with theues and slaughter, if it did not with horible example deale verie sharpely with murderers. There is also some time, which requireth the enlarging of the sharpnes of punishment, and some people verie prone to some certaine sinne, vnlesse they be with great rigour kept in awe, he is then very euill affected and enuieth the publike com­moditie, that is offended with this diuersitie, which is most meete to retaine the obseruatiō of the law of God. Thus writeth M. Caluin, adding much more to the like 1. effect; which I omit in regard of breuitie, referring the Rom. 1. v. 31. reader to the place; out of whose words I note first, that all nations who haue (as S. Paule recordeth) the law of Rom. 2. v. 14. nature ingrafted in their harts, did not agree in the kind of punishing sin, but vsed some one kind, some another. 2. Secondly, that theft, murder, false witnesse, adulte­rie and such like, haue not one and the same kinde of [Page 211] punishment, in euerie people & natiō. Thirdly, that ad­dultery is punished in some places sharply, in other som 3. places more gentlie. Fourthly, that his diuersitie of the 4. kinds of punishment, is not onely godly and lawfull, but also expedient and necessarie. And so, I conclude, that the law morall, (which onely law is now in force) doth leaue the quantitie and kinde of punishment, to be determined by the ciuill Magistrate.

The third Conclusion.

Emperours and Empresses, Kinges and Queenes, ab­solute Princes and independant Magistrats, may law­fully in certaine causes, vpon good and godlie conside­rations, either tolerate sinne vnpunished, or pardon male factors. For the exact handling of this conclusion, (because it is a matter of great importāce, & very ne­cessary for many respects.) I deem it operapretiū & agrea­ble to the time in which we liue, to lay down some strōg the first. foundati­on. foundations in that behalfe. First, this is a constant Ax­iome, approued by vniform assent of al learned diuines Cess inte fine legis, cessat lex ipsa. When the finall cause or end for which the law was made, ceaseth, then doth the law of necessitie also cease. This foundation is grounded vpon the holy scripture; where by the flat act. 15. v. 28. 29. decree and setled law of the apostles, wee are bounde to abstaine frō blood & strangled meates. This notwith­standing, no man hath this day anie scruple of consci­ence to eate the same; & yet hereof no other sound rea­son can be yeelded, saue onely that the end for which that law was made, did lōg sithēce cease. For euē at that time was no precise necessitie, to abstaine from blood and strangled meates; But this law was onely made, in respect of the state of that time; that the Gentiles and the Iewes might liue more peaceably together, & there let this point be well marked. by avoid all occasion of contention and quarreling. And I therefor so soone as that end ceased, the law also [Page 212] ceased with it, and so we are this day freede from the same, yea, this Axiome is euident lumine naturali, euen by the light of nature: for euery law is made for some end, which end how often soeuer it may bee accompli­shed without the law, so often the execution of the law is needeles.

Secondly, wee must holde this for a constant foun­dation, The second foundation. that albeit the ciuill Magistrate be commaun­ded to punish malefactors, yet is neither the kinde of punishment, nor the quantitie thereof taxed by the law of God, but it still abideth indifferent, to bee determi­ned by the supreme ciuill Magistrate: (for as I haue Uide praeced. conclus. Vide supr. cap. 8. aphor. 3. in resp. ad 2 obiectionem alreadie proued,) although there were speciall punish­ment prescribed in the iudiciall law of Moses, for trans­gressors of the Sabboth, for adulterers, for false wit­nesses, for murderers, theeues and such like, yet neither by the Law morall, nor by any Law in the New Testa­ment, (to which lawes onely we Christians are this day bound,) is any such punishment determined, & there­fore may the ciuill Magistrate, (if it so seeme good vn­to him.) chaunge the vsuall punishment of theeues, (which with vs is to bee hanged,) and cause them to be cast into the sea with milstones about their neckes: and the same may bee saide, of the punishment for other malefactors.

Thirdly, wee must repute this for an vndoubted foundation; vz. that the end, for which Gods Law ap­pointeth The third foundation. malefactors to be punished, is the publike peace and good of the whole common-weale: for this is so euident by the course of the whole scripture, as it can neither with learning nor reason bee denied. Deut. 19. 20 1. Cor. 5. 13. 1. Tim. 5. 20 1. Cor. 8. 13. Mat 18, 6. The first cor­rela [...]e.

Out of these three foundations, thus firmely stabli­shed, these two Corrolaries, may euidently bee infer­red. First, that whensoeuer, any member of the com­mon weale committeth any capitall crime, for which hee ought to die by the law, whose life for all that is [Page 213] more profitable to the weale publike then his death; in such a case the Prince may pardon such a malefactor, & not thereby sinne at all: which thing christian Princes seeme to respect, when in the time of warres, they set such felons at libertie, as are able to doe seruice in de­fence of the Realme. Secondly, that when any male­factor The second Corollarie. is so mightie, or so strongly seated, or otherwise so vnfit to bee dealt withall, that the Prince cannot without probable daunger of his royal person, or great domage to the common-weale, punish the said male­factor; then in such a case, the prince may tollerate such a malefactor vnpunished, and not thereby sinne at all. These foundations and illations being once well vn­derstoode and remembred, the conclusion (though of great moment,) cannot but be manifest and cleare. Ne­uerthelesse, I will adioyne some sound reasons hereun­to, for the better confirmation of the same.

The first reason.

It is a common and generally receiued Maxime, as­well of all Ciuilians as Diuines; vz. Lex non obligat vl­tra intentionem legis-latoris. The law doth not bind a mā beyond the intention of the Law-maker. Whereupon I inferre first, that the ciuill magistrate may dispence 1. with his owne Law. Secondly, that the Prince being 2. Gods Minister, may tollerate or pardon malefactors, when, and so often as such tolleration or pardoning tendeth to the common good of the publike-weale, the reason is euident, because the intention of God the su­preme Law-maker, was euen that and none other, whē hee appointed his ministers to punish malefactors.

The obiection.

The Prince pardoneth many times, when hee little [Page 214] regardeth the common good; nay, whē his pardoning doth great harme to the publike weale, and Church of God.

The Answere.

I aunswere; first, that hee hath receiued his autho­ritie to profite the Church and common-weale, and 1. not to doe hurt vnto the same. Secondly, that it is suf­ficient to satisfie the consciences of subiectes, (who 2. haue not to examine their Soueraignes secret affaires, and to enquire what causes he hath to deale thus, and so in matters of State) that the Prince may in some ca­ses vpon some causes, either tollerate sin vnpunished, Marke this point well. or pardon malefactors. If the case were otherwise, eue­ry subiect might soone take occasion to rebell If the Prince abuse his authority, he must render an account to God for the same.

The second Reason.

Prodigalitie is a great sinne, condemned aswell in Philosophie, as in Diuinitie; it neither will nor can bee Christian Kinges. denyed. It is the exceeding extreame of the vertue libe­ral [...]tie. This notwithstanding all Christian Kinges (for ought that I can learne) haue euer tolerated the same vnpunished at least in some degree; neither were they for such tollerations reproued at any time by any an­cient approued writer, or learned Father whatsoeuer. Which doubtles is [...]nd ought to be so reputed an ar­gument of no small importance, For although Em­porour, Kinges and Monarches, may and doe sinne as­well as others of meaner calling; yet neither did they, neyther euer can they liue vnreproued; if at any time they sin notoriously, either by stabilishing wicked lawes [Page 215] publikly, or by suffering their subiects to make hauock o [...] Gods lawes dissolutely. For God can raise vp chil­dren of stones to Abraham; and neither is hee, nor e­uer Mat. 3. 9. will hee be destitute of faithfull couragious seruāts, who wil constantly, and without all feare, reproue all such as contemne his holy lawes. He hath watchmen on the wals of his Ierusalem, who will crie out against sin Esa. 62. 6. continually, and neuer keepe silence day nor night. He is not without his Elias, that will stoutely reproue all wicked Achabs, Hee hath in store a Daniel, to con­demne 1. Reg. 18. all naughtie Iudges, and to acquit his faithfull 18 Susannes. Hee will finde a Prophet to exclame against Dan. 13. 16. idolatrie, and to teach euery Ieroboam his dutie. He can and wil prouide an other Iohn Baptist, to speake bolde­ly 1. Reg. 13. 2. to all bloody Herods. And yet in so many hundred yeares, such tollerations haue neuer beene reproo­ued to my knowledge by any auncient Father, or o­ther learned VVriter. The reason hereof I take to bee this; because if this sinne were punished, there woulde rather hurte then benefite insue there­vppon.

The third reason

It is a generall Maxime receiued not onely in Diuinitie, but in Philosophie also; Ex duobus malis, minus eligendum. Of two euils the lesser is to bee chosen, that is to say; when two euils con­cur, so that both cannot be auoided, but that ne­cessarilie the one must happen; then it is not onclie not sinne, but godlie VVisedome, and Christian Policie, to preuent, and auoide the greater euill, with permission and tolleration of the lesse. For ex­ample sake; it is euill for a man to cutte off his owne arme or legge, if the thing bee absolutely, and simply considered in it selfe, yet to cut it off [Page 216] least the whole bodie putrifie or perish; is a very lawful act. Which thing all Christian Princes, & Monarches seeme to respect, when they in sundrie cases doe tolle­rate sinne vnpunished. The blessed man Moses, so high­ly renowned in holy writte, pardoned great malefactors in the hainous crime of diuorce, and this tolleration he graunted to auoide a greater euill; that is to say, least the Iewes vpon euery light cause should poyson those wiues whome they did not loue, for that such light di­uorcement was onely permitted, but neyther by God, not by Moses approued; I will demonstrate by these 1. important and insolluble reasons. First, because these are Christes owne wordes; Moses because of the harde­nesse of your heartes, suffered you to put away your Mat. 5. 31. Mat. 19. 7. wiues, but frō the beginning it was not so. Secondly, be­cause the mariage was indeed after suchlight diuource, 2. vnlawfull by the law. For thus writeth Saint Paul; know Deus. 24. v. 1 yee not Brethren (for I speak to them that know the Law) that Rom. 7. v. 1. the law hath dominiō ouer the mā, as long as he liueth; for the wo­mā 2. 3. which is in subiection to a mā, is bound by the Law to the Mā, while hee liueth; but if the man be di ade, shee is deliuered from the law of the man: So then if while the man liueth, shee take an other mā, she shal be called an adulteresse. Out of these words I note first, that marriage cannot bee dissolued, during 1. the life of the former husband. I note secondly, that this was so euen in Moses law; because Saint Paul saith 2. hee speaketh to them that knew the law, I note third­ly, 3. that to be married after diuorce for a light cause, during the life of the former husband is plaine & flat adulterie. I therefore conclude, that to tollerate sinne vnpunished vpon good cause, is no sin at all. This mine assertion of diuorcement is not onely grounded vpon the Scriptures, but also confirmed by the holy fathers, and best approued writers of this our age.

The 4. Reason.

We haue many examples in the holy scriptures of blessed mē that often pardoned Malefactors, & to this day were neuer reproued for the same. King Dauid par­doned 1. Sam. 25. v. 35. 2 Sam. 3. v. 6. 22. 28. 31. 2. Sam. 3. 1. Reg. 2. v. 8. 9. gen. 34. wicked Nabal at the peticion of his vertuous wife Abigal. The same king Dauid pardōed Abner, who rebelled against him for the house of Saul. The self same king tolerated Ioab in his naughtie dealings, albeit he was more then a little offended with his manners. The same king tolerated cursed Shemei, thogh he cōmanded his son Salomon to do execution on thē both, after that him selfe was dead. The holy Patriarch Iacob did not punnish his sonnes Simcon and Leuie with death, for their cruell murder done vpon the Sechemites; though vided August. epist. 119. he had plaine regall and supreame authoritie ouer thē S. Austen did verie often intreate the Emperours most earnestly and humbly, not onely to pardon heretickes, but also the Circumcellions most naughtie people and cruell murderers. The blessed virgin Mary was found to bee with child by the holy Ghost, befor S. Ioseph & shee came together. Whereupon Ioseph, because he was mat. 1. 19. a iust man, and would not put her to open shame, was minded to put her away priuily, thus reporteth holy writ. Out of which wordes I note first, that Ioseph knew the holy virgin to be with childe. Secondly that 1. he knew him selfe not to be the father of the childe. 2. Thirdly, that Ioseph knew no other, but that Mary his 3. wife was an adultresse. Fourthly, that he thoght to haue 4. put her a way secretly, so to keepe her from shame & punishment. Fiftly, that Ioseph was euen then deemed iust, when the sought and thought to keepe her from 5. shame; although in his iudgement, she deserued death by the law. Yea, S. Paul him selfe made intercession to Philemon for his seruant One simus, though he had beene in epist. ad philem. a vagabond and theuish fellow.

The first obiection.

No inferiour hath power to alter the law of his su­periour; and consequently, man cannot pardon or tole­rate malefactors, whō god appointeth to be punished

The answer

I answer; first that precepts deliuered to vs in holy writ vide. D. Zanch in 4. cap. ad ep [...]es. Pag 338. et Martyr. in 2. lib. Samuel. cap. 3. pag. 200. Aquenatem. 2. 2. q. 3. art. 2. cap. Rom. 10. v 9. 10. Mat. 7. 6. are of two sorts. Some affirmatiue, other some ne­gatiue. The negatiue bind vs at all times euery houre, and in euery place; but the affirmatiue, thogh they be very apt to bind, yet doe they not actually bind vs, saue then onely, when the due circumstances of times, places, and persons occurre, hereupon it commeth that it is neuer lawfull to steale, neuer lawful to commit ad­dultery, neuer lawfull to beare false witnes, neither at any time, nor in anie place. the reason hereof is this, because these precepts be negatiue. This notwithstand­ing, it is sometime lawfull to omit the precepts affirma­tiue. For exāple it is necessary vnto saluatiō, to mak con­fession of our faith; and yet we doe and may often o­mit the same, for that it is an affirmatiue precept. And therfore Christ willeth vs not to giue that which is holy to dogs; neither to cast our pearles before swine; leaste they tr [...]ad thē vnder their feete, and turne againe & al to rentus. But wee are then bound to confesse our faith when either it tendeth to the glorie of God, or to the good of our neighbour; so that if such confession were not then made, either god should be dishonoured, or our neighbour scandalized. So it is Gods cōmandemēt to giue him thy cloake, that will sue the at the law, and take away thy caate; & yet maiest thou at sundry times Mat. 5. v. 40 for sundry respects, denie him both thy coate and thy cloake. So it is Gods commaundement to go with him myles twaine, that will compell the to goe one; and yet maiest thou sundrie times denie lawfully, to Mat. 5. v. 41 goe with him either more or lesse so it is Gods com­maundement, [Page 211] neuer to turne away frō him, that would Mat. 5 v. 42. borrow money of the, or any other goods; and yet mai­est thou sundry times for sundry respects, denie to lend either thy mony or other things. All which and other the like haue this onely ground and foundation; vz. That they are precepts, affirmatiue, which neither bind at all times, nor yet in all places. For precepts af­firmatiue, modus lo­quendi. Scholarum. to vse schoole-tearmes; obligant semper sed non ad semper.

Secondly, that the ciuill magistrate had authoritie, to mitigate many punishmēts ordained for malefactors, Secundò. Principaliter. euen in the time of the old testamēt. For thogh he were appointed to punish them that vsed false weights and measures; yet was that punishment to be determined Deut. 25. v. 2. 3. 13. 14. according to the quantitie and qualitie of his trespasse. The partie that was worthy to be beaten, receiued many or few stripes, at the descretiō of the magistrate. M. Caluin a most zealous patron of pure religion, hath Caluin. in leu. 18. v. 6. Pag. 345. these expresse words; Impunè quidem vt liceat statui potest, sicut in arbitio Principis est panas remittere. Verum vt vitiosum non sit, quod vitiosum esse natura dictat, nullus legislator efficiet

A law may be made, that he which doth it shall not be punished; euen as it is in the princes pleasure, to par­don and releasse the punishment. But that that be not sinfull, which nature it selfe sheweth to be sinfull; no law maker can effect or bring to passe. Thus writeth this learned man, granting freely as we see; that the magistrate may sometime vpon good causes, tolerate those sinnes vnpunished, which gods law doth sharply reproue and speake against, where the reader must ob­serue with me, that Maister Caluin speaketh of the most notorious sinnes of incest; and consequently that hee graunteth power vnto the magistrate, to pardon what Malefactors or sinnes, so euer: For though the magistrate can neuer make that [Page 220] to be no sinne, which Gods lawe prounceth to bee sinne; yet (saith M. Caluin) the magistrate may make a law, that the same sinne shal not be punished, Which doubtles is the selfe same doctrine, that I do teach for the present.

Thirdly, that by the law of the New Testament, the Prince is onely charged in generall tearmes to punish Tertiò prin­cipaliter. malefactors, and that for the common good of his faithfull people, in regard whereof, hee may lawfullie cease from punishing them; when the common inten­ded good of his subiectes, eyther can not, or wil not insue thereupon. For if Kinges should at all times pu­nish all malefactors; the Church of God would often be depriued of most excelent and profitable members. For which respect our Sauiour himselfe telleth vs, that when the tares cannot be seuered from the good corn, Mat. 13. v. 3 [...]. vnlesse both be pulled vp together; then may they tol­lerate the tares or weedes with the good corne, vntill the time of haruell. As if hee had saide: when the wicked cannot be punished, but with great domage to the godly; then may the Magistrate tollerate such ma­lefactors Aug. ut ep. 110. tom. 2. vnpunished, and not thereby sinne at all. Therefore saith the holy father S. Austen; that Christes Church doth tollerate many thinges, which he neither doth nor can approue. And the same holy Father in a large and learned discourse against Parmenianus, shew eth plainely vnto the Reader; that the notorious sins must then be anathematized, when there is no daun­ger of schisme to enfue thereupon, not otherwise; least that turn to the churches harm, which was intended for her good. Amongst many other godly sentences, (which for breuitie I here omitte, these are his ex­presse wordes. In hac velut angustia quaestionis, non aliquid nou [...]m aut insolitum dicam, sed quod santas obseruat ecclesiae, August. cont. epist. Parme. lib. 3. cap. 2. tom. 7. vt cum quisque fratrū, id est, Christianorū intus in ecclesiae socie­tate constitutorum, in aliquo tali peccato fuerit deprehensus, vt [Page 221] anathemate dignus habeatur, fiat hoc vbi periculum schismatis nullum est. Sequitur nam & ipse dominus cum seruis volentibus zizania colligere, dixit, sinite vtraque crescere vsque ad messem, praemisit causam dicens, neforte cum vultis colligere zizania eradicetis, simul & triticum: Vbi satis osteudit, cum metus iste non subest, sed omnino de frumentorum certa stabilitate certa se­curitas manet, id est, quando ita cuiusque crimen notum est om­nibus, & omnibus execrabile apparet, vt velnullos prorsus, vel non tales habeat defensores per quos possit schisma contingere, nō dormi [...]t seueritas disciplinae. Sequitur, cum vero idem morbus plurimos occupaucrit, nihil aliud bonis restat, quam dolor & gomitus.

In this intricate question, I wil say no new or strāge thing, but euen that which the soundenes of the church obserueth; that when any Christian, which in the so­cietie of the church, shalbe taken with any such offéce, as shall deserue an anathematization, the same be done where there is no perill of schisme. For our Lorde himselfe, when hee saide to those that woulde gather the tares, suffer them to grow vntill the haruest; pre­mised the cause, saying, least while yee desire to gather the tares, ye plucke vp also the wheate. VVhere hee sheweth sufficiently; that when there is no such feare, but there abideth securitie enough of the stabilitie of the corne, that is, when euerie mans crime is so appa­rant and execrable to all, that eyther it hath none at al, or no such patrones as are able to raise vp a schisme, then may not the seueritie of discipline bee a sleepe. But when many haue the same disease, there resteth nothing for the godly, but sorrowe and lamentation. Thus writeth this holy Father; Out of whose wordes we may gather euidently, that the magistrate may law­fully tollerate sinne and sinners vnpunished, when by their punishment more hurt then good would ensue to the Church. VVhich selfe same doctrine, King Dauid full of the holy Ghost, deliuered long afore [Page 222] him, when he vttered these wordes; Know ye not, 'that there is a Prince, and a great man fallen this day in Israel? and I am this day weake and newly annointed King, and these men the 2. Sam. 3. v. 38. 39. sonnes of Zeruiah be too hard for me; the Lord reward the doer of euill, according to his wickednesse. Loc, the blessed King spared two most cruell murderers, Ioab and Abishai his brother; and this hee did onelie for this end, least by their punishment, greater hurt should haue come vnto his Kingdome.

The 2. Obiection.

Achab the King of Israel was punished with death because he granted pardon to Benhadad King of Aram. 1. Reg. 20. 1. Sam. 28. 1. Sam. 15. So King Saul was deposed from his kingdome, for that he spared Agag king of the Amalekites.

Answere.

I aunswere; first, that Achab was precisely designed 1. by God himselfe, to doe execution vpon Benhadad. And so was also Saul appointed in precise tearmes, to put 1. Reg. 20. 42. 1. Sam. 15. 3 King Agag to death. Secondly, that in the New Testa­ment, Princes haue no such special commaundemēt, 2. but are only charged in general to punish malefactors. Thirdly, that they were extraordinarie precepts, giuen 3. to these Kinges extraordinarilie, not to bee done gene­rally to all malefactors, but to two notorious persons in speciall; and consequently, that no generall Law can bee grounded thereupon. Fourthly, that affirmatiue precepts binde not in euery season, but when the due 4. circumstances of time, place and persons, and the com­mon good of the faithfull, shal so require, as is alreadie proued. For otherwise, I see not how Saint Paul can bee excused, who made earnest sute to Philemon, to pardon In Epist. ad Philem. his wicked seruant Onesimus, who vniustly had gone a­way out of his seruice. And the like may bee saide of [Page 223] Saint Austin, who so ofiē made intercession to the prin­ces of Africa, to pardon the Donatists and Circumcel­lions; who did not onelie disturbe religion, but also spoiled the Christians of their lawfull goodes. Yea, it was the vsuall custome of the Iewes, (as the holy gos­pel Luke 23. v. 17. beareth recorde,) to see some one Prisoner at liber­tie euerie Easter; which custome is not reproued in Mat. 27. v. 15. any place of holy writ. Fiftly, that it is a case so cleare by Saint Paul, that male factors may sometime bee par­doned, Mar. 15. 6. as it is without all rime and reason to denic the same. For what can be a greater offence, then such for­nication, as is not once named among the Gentiles; 2. Cor. [...]. v. 8. 9. 10. to wit, that one should haue hi fathers wife. And yet when the partie that did this horrible fact, seemed to giue signes of true remorse; Then Saint Paul himselfe pardoned him, and willed the Corinthians to doe the same. So did the Fathers of the Elebertine Councel, pardon the vsurers of the Laical sort; when they pro­mised Conc. Elebcr, can. 20. to surcease from vsurie, and to deale no longer therewith. And this Coūcel was celebrated aboue one thousand and two hundred yeares ago. Yea, the most famous Councel of Nice gaue pardō to such male­factors, Conc. Nicen. can. 11. as scarse deserued the same any way. I therefore conclude, that it is lawfull for Kinges, Emperours, and other independant Magistrates, to tollerate or pardō malefactors vnpunished, when and so often as the same shall tend to the good of the common weale; wherein Subiects are to obey, and not peremptorily to iudge, or curiously to examine, and enquire.

Soli Deo gloria.

FINIS.

A TABLE CONTAI­ning the chiefe and principall mat­ters of all the Chapters throughout this Discourse.

  • Of the sundrie kindes of gouernment, Chapter, 1.
  • Of the chiefe and best kinde of gouernment. cap. 2.
  • Of the kinde of gouernment of the English church. cap. 3.
  • Of the supreme authority of the Prince in all causes. cap. 4.
  • Of the degrees of Ministers, and the antiquity therof cap. 5
  • Of ciuill offices in Ecclesiasticall persons. cap. 6.
  • Of the churches authority in thinges indifferent. cap. 7.
  • Of thinges indifferent in particular; cap, surples, &c. cap. 8
  • Of the election of church-minister, cap. 9.
  • Of the ordering of ministers. cap. 10.
  • Of the Presbyterie. cap. 11.
  • Of the church discipline. cap. 12.
  • Of Preaching, and other things coincident. cap. 13.
  • Of certaine Extrauagants; ceremonies in Baptisme, &c: cap. 14.
  • Of the punishing and pardoning malefactors. cap. 15.
FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.