EPYSCOPACY, as it is taken for an Order in the Church above a Presbyter, or as wee commonly name him, the Minister of a Congregation, is either of Divine constitution, or of humane. If onely of humane, we have the same humane priviledge, that all men have ever had since Adam, being borne free, and in the Mistresse Iland of all the British, to retaine this Episcopacy, or to remove it, consulting with our owne occasions, and conveniences, and for the prevention of our owne dangers, and disquiets, in what best manner we can devise, without running at a losse, as wee must needs in those stale, and uselesse records of either uncertaine, or unsound antiquity, which if we hold fast to the grounds of the reformed Church, can neither skill of us, nor we of it, (so oft as it would lead us to the broken reed of tradition. If it bee of Divine constitution, to satisfie us fully in that, the Scripture onely is able, it being the onely Book left us of Divine authority, not in any thing more Divine then in the all-sufficiency it hath to furnish us, as with all other spirituall knowledge, so with this in particular, setting out to us a perfect man of God accomplish't to all the good workes of his charge. Through all which Booke can be no where, either by plaine Text, or solid reasoning found any difference betweene a Bishop, and a Presbyter, save that they be two names to signify the same order. Notwithstanding this clearnesse, and that by all evidence of argument, Timothy, and Titus (whom our Prelates claim to imitate onely in the controuling part of their office) had rather the vicegerency of an Apostleship committed to them, then the ordinary charge of a Bishoprick, as being 2 Tim. 4. men of an extraordinary calling, yet to verify that which Saint Paul foretold of succeeding times, when men began to have itching eares, then not contented with the plentifull and wholsom fountaines of the Gospell, they began after their owne lusts to heap to themselvs teachers, and as if the divine Scripture wanted a supplement, and were to be eek't out, they cannot think any doubt resolv'd, and any doctrine confirm'd, unlesse they run to that indigested heap, and frie of Authors, which they call Antiquity. Whatsoever time, or the heedlesse hand of blind chance, hath drawne down from of old to this present, in her huge dragnet, whether Fish, or Sea-weed, Shells, or Shrubbs, unpickt, unchosen, those are the Fathers. Seeing therefore some men, deeply conversant in Bookes, have had so little care of late to give the world a better account of their reading, then by divulging needlesse tractats stuff't with specious names of Ignatius, and Polycarpus, with fragments of old Martyrologies, and legends, to distract, and stagger the multitude of credulous readers, & mislead them from their strong guards, and places of safety under the tuition of holy writ, it came into my thoughts to perswade my selfe, setting all distances, and nice respects aside, that I could do Religion, and my Country no better service for the time then doing my utmost endeavour to recall the people of GOD from this vaine forraging after straw, and to reduce them to their firme stations under the standard of the Gospell: by making appeare to them, first the insufficiency, next the inconvenience, and lastly the impiety of these gay testimonies, that their great Doctors would bring them to dote on. And in performing this I shall not strive to be more exact in Methode, then as their citations lead mee.

First therefore concerning Ignatius shall be treated Pag. 4. fully, when the Author shall come to insist upon some places in his Epistles. Next to prove a succession of 27. Bishops from Timothy, he cites one Leontius Bishop of Magnesia, out of the 11. act of the Chalcedonian Councell: this is but an obscure, and single witnesse, and for his faithfull dealing who shall commend him to us, with this his Catalogue of Bishops? what know wee further of him, but that he might be as factious, and false a Bishop, as Leontius of Antioch that was a hunderd yeares his predecessor? for neither the praise of his wisedome, or his vertue hath left him memorable to posterity, but onely this doubtfull relation, which wee must take at his word; and how shall this testimony receive credit from his word, whose very name had scarse been thought on, but for this bare Testimony? But they will say hee was a member of the Councell, and that may deserve to gaine him credit with us. I will not stand to argue, as yet with faire allowance I might, that wee may as justly suspect, there were some bad and slippery men in that councell, as we know there are wont to be in our Convocations. Nor shall I neede to plead at this time, that nothing hath been more attempted, nor with more subtilty brought about, both anciently by other Heretiks, and modernly by Papists, then to falsifie the Editions of the Councels, of which wee have none but from our Adversaries hands, whence Canons, Acts, and whole spurious Councels are thrust upon us, and hard it would be to prove in all, which are legitimat against the lawfull rejection of an urgent, and free disputer, but this I purpose not to take advantage of, for what availes it to wrangle about the corrupt editions of Councells, when as we know that many yeares ere this time which was almost 500. years after Christ, the Councels themselves were fouly corrupted with ungodly Prelatisme, and so farre plung'd into worldly ambition, as that it stood them upon long ere this to uphold their now well-tasted Hierarchy by what faire pretext soever they could, in like manner as they had now learnt to defend many other grosse corruptions by as ancient, and suppos'd authentick tradition as Episcopacie. And what hope can we have of this whole Councell to warrant us a matter 400. years at least above their time concerning the distinction of Bishop and Presbyter, whenas we find them such blind Judges of things before their eyes in their decrees of precedencie between Bishop, and Bishop, acknowledging Rome for the Apostolick throne, and Peter in that See for the rock, the basis, and the foundation of the Catholick Church, and Faith, contrary to the interpretation of more ancient Fathers; and therfore from a mistaken text did they give to Leo as Peters successor a kind of preheminence above the whole Councel, as Euagrius expresses (for now the Pope was come to that height, as to arrogate to himselfe by his Vicars incompetible honours) and yet having thus yeilded to Rome the universall Primacie for spirituall reasons, as they thought, they conclude their sitting with a carnall, and ambitious decree to give the second place of dignity to Constantinople from reason of State, because it was new ROME, and by like consequence doublesse of earthly priviledges annext to each other City, wasthe BISHOP therof to take his place.

I may say againe therfore, what hope can we have of such a Councell, as beginning in the Spirit, ended thus in the flesh. Much rather should we attend to what Eusebius the ancientest writer extant of Church-history, notwithstanding all the helps he had above these, confesses in the 4. chap. of his 3. Book, that it was no easie matter to tell who were those that were left Bishops of the Churches by the Apostles, more then by what a man might gather from the Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles of St. Paul, in which number he reckons Timothy for Bishop of Ephesus. So as may plainly appeare, that this tradition of Bishoping Timothy over Ephesus was but taken for granted out of that place in St. Paul, which was only an intreating him to tarry at Ephesus, to do somthing left him in charge. 1 Tim. 1. 3. Now if Eusebius a famous writer thought it so difficult to tell who were appointed Bishops by the Apostles, much more may we think it difficult to Leontius an obscure Bishop speaking beyond his own Diocesse: and certainly much more hard was it for either of them to determine what kind of Bishops those were, if they had so little means to know who they were; and much lesse reason have we to stand to their definitive sentence, seeing they have bin so rash to raise up such lofty Bishops and Bishopricks out of places in Scripture meerly misunderstood. Thus while we leave the Bible to gadde after these traditions of the ancients, we heare the ancients themselvs confessing, that what knowledge they had in this point was such as they had gather'd from the Bible.

Since therfore Antiquity it selfe hath turn'd over the controversie to that sovran Book which we had fondly straggl'd from, we shall doe better not to detain this venerable apparition of Leontius any longer, but dismisse him with his List of seven and twenty, to sleep unmolested in his former obscurity.

Now for the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , it is more likely that Timothy never knew the word in that sense: it was the vanity of those next succeeding times not to content themselves with the simplicity of Scripture phrase, but must make a new Lexicon to name themselves by, one will be call'd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Antistes, a word of precedence, another would be term'd a Gnostick as Clemens, a third Sacerdos, or Priest, and talks of Altars; which was a plaine signe that their doctrine began to change, for which they must change their expressions: But that place of Justin Martyr serves rather to convince the Author, then to make for him, where the name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the president, or Pastor of the Brethren (for to what end is he their President but to teach them) cannot be limited to signifie a Prelaticall Bishop, but rather communicates that Greek appellation to every ordinary Presbyter: for there he tells what the Christians had wont to doe in their severall Congregations, to read, and expound, to pray and administer, all which he saies the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or Antistes did. Are these the Offices only of a Bishop, or shall we think that every Congregation where these things were done, which he attributes to this Antistes, had a Bishop present among them? unlesse they had as many Antistites as Presbyters, which this place rather seems to imply, and so we may inferre even from their own alledg'd authority, that Antistes was nothing else but Presbyter.

As for that namelesse Treatise of Timothy's martyrdome, only cited by Photius that liv'd almost Pag. 5. 900. yeares after Christ, it hansomely follows in that author, the Martyrdome of the seven Sleepers, that slept (I tell you but what mine Author sayes) three hundred seaventy, and two years, for so long they had bin shut up in a Cave without meat, and were found living. This Story of Timothy's Ephesian Bishopricke as it follows in order, so may it for truth, if it only subsist upon its own authority, as it doth, for Photius only saith he read it; he does not averre it. That other legendarie piece found among the lives of the Saints, and sent us from the shop of the p Euseb. l. 6. 〈◊〉 Jesuites at Lovain, does but bear the name of Polyerates, how truly who can tell? and shall have some more weight with us, when Polycrates can perswade us of that which he affirms in the same place of Eusebius 5. Book, that St. John was a Priest, and wore the golden brestplate: and why should he convince us more with his traditions of Timothy's Episcopacie, then he could convince Victor Bishop of Rome with his traditions concerning the Feast of Easter, who not regarding his irrefragable instances of examples taken from Philip, and his daughters that were Prophetesses; or from Polycarpus, no nor from St. Iohn himselfe, Excommunicated both him, and all the Asian Churches for celebrating their Easter judaically: he may therfore goe back to the seaven Bishops his kinsmen, and make his moane to them that we esteem his traditionall ware, as lightly as Victor did.

Those of Theodoret, Felix, and Iohn of Antioch are autorities of later times, and therfore not to be receiv'd for their Antiquities sake to give in evidence concerning an allegation, wherin writers so much their Elders, we see so easily miscarry. What if they had told us that Peter, who as they say left Ignatius Bishop of Antioch, went afterwards to Rome, and was Bishop there, as this Ignatius, and Irenaeus, and all Antiquity with one mouth deliver, there be never the lesse a number of learned, and wise Protestants who have written, and will maintain, that Peters being at Rome as Bishop cannot stand with concordance of Scripture.

Now come the Epistles of Ignatius to shew us first, that Onesimus was Bishop of Ephesus; next to assert the difference of Bishop and Presbyter, wherin I wonder that men teachers of the Protestant Religion, make no more difficulty of imposing upon our belief a supposititious ofspring of some dozen Epistles, whereof five are rejected as spurious, containing in them Herefies and trifles, which cannot agree in Chronologie with Ignatius, entitling him Arch-Bishop of Antioch Theopolis, which name of Theopolis that City had not till Iustinians time long after, as Cedrenus mentions, which argues both the barbarous time, and the unskilfull fraud of him that foisted this Epistle upon Ignatius. In the Epistle to those of Tarsus he condemns them for Ministers of Satan, that say Christ is God above all. To the Phillippians them that kept their Easter, as the Asian Churches, and Polycarpus did, and them that fasted upon any Saturday, or Sunday, except one he counts as those that had slain the Lord. To those of Antioch he salutes the Sub-Deacons, Chaunters, Porters, and Exorcists, as if these had bin Orders of the Church in his time: those other Epistles lesse question'd are yet so interlarded with Corruptions, as may justly indue us with a wholsome suspition of the rest. As to the Trallians he writes that a Bishop hath power over all beyond all government, and autority whatsoever. Surely then no Pope can desire more then Ignatius attributes to every Bishop, but what will become then of the Archbishops and Primates if every Bishop in Ignatius judgement be as supreme as a Pope? To the Ephesians, neare the very place from whence they fetch their proof for Episcopacy, there stands a line that casts an ill hue upon all the Epistle, Let no man erre, saith he, unlesse a man be within the rays, or enclosure of the Altar, he is depriv'd of the bread of life. I say not but this may be stretch'd to a figurative construction, but yet it has an ill look, especially being follow'd beneath with the mention of I know not what sacrifices. In the other Epistle to Smyrna wherein is written that they should follow their Bishop as Christ did his Father, and the Presbytery as the Apostles: not to speak of the insu •• e, and ill-layd comparison, this cited place lyes upon the very brimme of a noted corruption, which had they, that quote this passage, ventur'd to let us read, all men would have readily seen what grain the testimony had bin of, where it is said, that it is not lawfull without a Bishop to baptize, nor to offer, nor to doe sacrifice. What can our Church make of these phrases but scandalous: and but a little further he plainly falls to contradict the Spirit of God in Salomon, Judge by the words themselvs. My Son, saith he, honour God & the King; but I say, honour God and the Bishop as High-priest, bearing the image of God according to his ruling, and of Christ, according to his Priesting, and after him honour the King. Excellent Ignatius! can ye blame the Prelates for making much of this Epistle? Certainly if this Epistle can serve you to set a Bishop above a Presbyter, it may serve you next to set him above a King. These, and other like places in abundance through all those short Epistles must either be adulterat, or else Ignatius was not Ignatius, nor a Martyr, but most adulterate, and corrupt himselfe. In the midst therfore of so many forgeries where shall we fixe to dare say this is Ignatius? as for his stile who knows it? so disfigur'd and interrupted as it is, except they think that where they meet with any thing found, and orthodoxal, there they find Ignatius, and then they beleeve him not for his own authority, but for a truths sake, which they derive from els where: to what end then should they cite him as authentick for Episcopacie, when they cannot know what is authentick in him, but by the judgement which they brought with them, & not by any judgement which they might safely learne from him. How can they bring satisfaction frō such an Author, to whose very essence the Reader must be fain to contribute his own understanding. Had God ever intended that we should have sought any part of usefull instruction frō Ignatius, doubtles he would not have so ill provided for our knowledge, as to send him to our hands in this broken and disjoynted plight; and if he intended no such thing, we doe injuriously in thinking to tast better the pure Euangelick Manna by seasoning our mouths with the tainted scraps, and fragments of an unknown table; and searching among the verminous, and polluted rags dropt overworn from the toyling shoulders of Time, with these deformedly to quilt, and interlace the intire, the spotlesse, and undecaying robe of Truth, the daughter not of Time, but of Heaven, only bred up heer below in Christian hearts, between two grave & holy nurses the Doctrine, and Discipline of the Gospel.

Next follows Irenaeus Bishop of Lions, who is cited page 8, to affirm that Polycarpus was made Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles: and this it may seem, none could better tell then he who had both seen and heard Polycarpus: but when did he heare him? himselfe confesses to Florinus, when he was a Boy. Whether that age in Irenaeus may not be liable to many mistakings; and whether a Boy may be trusted to take an exact account of the manner of a Church constitution, and upon what terms, and within what limits, and with what kind of Commission Polycarpus receiv'd his charge, let a man consider, ere he be 〈◊〉 . It will not be deny'd that he might have seen Polycarpus in his youth a man of great eminence in the Church, to whom the other Presbyters might give way for his vertue, wisdome, and the reverence of his age and so did Amcetus Bishop of Rome, even in his own City, give him a kind of priority inadministring the Sacrament; as may be read in Eusebius: but that we should hence conclude a distinct, and superior order from the young observation of Irenaeus, nothing yet alledg'd can warrant us, unlesse we shall beleeve such as would face us down, that Calvin, and after him Beza were Bishops of Geneva, because that in the unsetl'd state of the Church, while things were not fully compos'd, their worth, and learning cast a greater share of businesse upon them, and directed mens eyes principally towards them, and yet these men were the dissolvers of Episcopacie. We see the same necessity in state affaires Brutns that expell'd the Kings out of Rome, was for the time forc't to be as it were a King himself, till matters were set in order, as in a free Commonwealth. He that had seen Pericles lead the Athenians which way he listed, haply would have said he had bin their Prince, and yet he was but a powerfull and eloquent man in a Democratie, and had no more at any time then a Temporary, and elective sway, which was in the will of the people when to abrogate. And it is most likely that in the Church they which came after these Apostolick men being lesse in merit, but bigger in ambition, strove to invade those priviledges by intrusion and plea of right, which Polycarpus, and others like him possest from the voluntary surrender of men subdu'd by the excellencie of their heavenly gifts, which because their Successors had not, and so could neither have that autority, it was their policy to divulge that the eminence which Polycarpus and his equalls enjoy'd, was by right of constitution, not by free wil of condiscending. And yet thus farre Irenaeus makes against them as in that very place to call Polycarpus an Apostolicall Presbyter. But what fidelity his relations had in generall, we cannot sooner learn then by Eusebius, who neer the end of his third Book, speaking of Papias a very ancient writer, one that had heard St. Iohn, and was known to many that had seen, and bin acquainted with others of the Apostles, but being of a shallow wit, and not understanding those traditions which he receiv'd, fill'd his writings with many new doctrines, and fabulous conceits, he tells us there, that divers Ecclesiasticall men, and Irenaeus among the rest, while they lookt at his antiquity, became infected with his errors. Now if Irenaeus were so rash as to take unexamin'd opinions from an Author of so small capacity, when he was a man, we should be more rash our selves to rely upon those observations which he made when he was a Boy. And this may be a sufficient reason to us why we need no longer muse at the spreading of many idle traditions so soon after the Apostles, whilst such as this Papias had the throwing them about, and the inconsiderate zeal of the next age, that heeded more the person, then the Doctrine, had the gathering them up. Where ever a man, who had bin any away conversant with the Apostles, was to be found, thether slew all the inquisitive eares, the exercise of right instructing was chang'd into the curiosity of impertinent fabling: where the mind was to be edified with solid Doctrine, there the fancy was sooth'd with solemne stories: with lesse fervency was studied what Saint Paul, or Saint Iohn had written then was listen'd to one that could say here hee taught, here he stood, this was his stature, and thus he went habited, and O happy this house that harbour'd him, and that cold stone whereon he rested, this Village wherein he wrought such a miracle, and that pavement bedew'd with the warme effusion of his last blood, that sprouted up into eternall Roses to crowne his Martyrdome. Thus while all their thoughts were powr'd out upon circumstances, and the gazing after such men as had sate at table with the Apostles (many of which Christ hath profest, yea thoughthey had cast out Divells in his name, he will not know at the last day) by this meanes they lost their time, and truanted in the fundamentall grounds of saving knowledge, as was seene shortly by their writings. Lastly for Ireneus, wee have cause to thinke him lesse judicious in his reports from hand to hand of what the Apostles did, when we find him so negligent in keeping the faith which they writ, as to say in his third Booke against Heresies, that the obedience of Mary was the cause of salvation to her selfe, and all mankind, and in his fift Booke, that as Eve was seduc't to fly God, so the Virgin Mary was perswaded to obey God, that the Virgin Mary might be made the Advocate of the Virgin Eve. Thus if Irenaeus for his neerenesse to the Apostles, must be the Patron of Episcopacy to us, it is no marvell though he be the Patron of Idolatry to the Papist, for the same cause. To the Epistle of those brethren of Smyrna, that write the Martyrdome of Polycarpus, and stile him an Apostolicall, and propheticall Doctor, and Bishop of the Church in Smirna, I could be content to give some credit for the great honour, and affection which I see those brethren beare him, and not undeservedly if it be true which they there say that he was a Prophet, and had a voyce from Heaven to comfort him at his death, which they could heare, but the rest could not for the noise, and tumult that was in the place, and besides if his body were so pretious to the Christians, that hee was never wont to pull off his shooes for one or other that still strove to have the office, that they might come to touch his feet, yet a light scruple or two I would gladly be resolv'd in; if Polycarpus (who, as they say, was a Prophet that never faild in what he foretold) had declar'd to his friends, that he knew by vision, hee should die no other death then burning, how it came to passe that the fire when it came to proofe, would not doe his worke, but starting off like a full saile from the mast, did but reflect a golden light upon his unviolated limbes exhaling such a sweet odour, as if all the incense of Arabia had bin burning, in so much that when the bill-men saw that the fire was overaw'd, and could not doe the deed, one of them steps to him, and stabs him with a sword, at which wound such abundance of bloud gusht forth as quencht the fire. By all this relation it appeares not, how the fire was guilty of his death, and then how can his prophesie bee fulfill'd? Next how the standers by could be so soone weary of such a glorious sight, and such a fragrant smell, as to hasten the executioner to put out the fire with the Martyrs blood, unlesse perhaps they thought, as in all perfumes, that the Smoake would bee more odorous then the flame? Yet these good brethren say he was Bishop of Smyrna. No man questions it, if Bishop, and Presbyter were anciently all one, and how does it appeare by any thing in this testimony that they were not? If among his other high titles of propheticall, Apostolicall, and most admired of those times, he bee also stil'd Bishop of the Church of Smirna in a kind of speech, which the Rhetoricians call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for his excellence sake, as being the most famous of all the Smyrnian Presbyters, it cannot bee prov'd neither from this nor that other place of Irenaeus, that hee was therefore in distinct, and monarchicall order above the other Presbyters, it is more probable, that if the whole Presbytery had beene as renowned as he, they would have term'd every one of them severally Bishop of Smyrna. Hence it is that wee read sometimes of two Bishops in one place, and had all the Presbyters there beene of like worth, we might perhaps have read of twenty.

Tertullian accosts us next (for Polycrates hath had his answer) whose testimony, state but the question right, is of no more force to deduce Episcopacy, then the two former. He saies that the Church of Smirna had Polycarpus plac't there by Iohn, and the Church of Rome Clement ordain'd by Peter, and so the rest of the Churches did shew, what Bishops they had receiv'd by the appointmēt of the Apostles. None of this will be contradicted, for we have it out of the Scripture that Bishops or Presbyters, which were the same, were left by the Apostles in every Church, and they might perhaps give some speciall charge to Clement, or Polycarpus, or Linus, and put some speciall trust in them for the experience they had of their faith, and constancy; it remaines yet to be evinc't out of this and the like places, which will never be, that the word Bishop is otherwise taken, then in the language of Saint Paul, and the Acts, for an order above Presbyters. We grant them Bishops, we grant them worthy men, we grant them plac't in severall Churches by the Apostles, we grant that Irenaeus, and Tertul: affirme this, but that they were plac't in a superiour Order above the Presbytery, shew from all these words why we should grant. 'Tis not enough to say the Ap: left this man Bishop in Rome, & that other in Ephesus, but to shew when they alterd their owne decree set downe by St. Paul, and made all the Presbyters underlings to one Bishop. But suppose Tertullian had made an imparity where none was originally, should hee move us, that goes about to prove an imparity betweene God the Father, and God the Sonne, as these words import in his Booke against Praxeas. The Father is the whole substance, but the Son a derivation, and portion of the whole, as he himselfe professes because the Father is greater then me. Beleeve him now for a faithfull relater of tradition, whom you see such an unfaithfull expounder of the Scripture. besides in his time all allowable tradition was now lost. For this same Author whom you bring to testifie the ordination of Clement to the Bishoprick of Rome by Peter, test fies also in the beginning of his treatise concerning Chastity, that the Bishop of Rome did then use to send forth his edicts by the name of Pontifex Maximus, and Episcopus Episcoporum chief Priest, and Bishop of Bishops. For shame then doe not urge that authority to keepe up a Bishop, that will necessarily ingage you to set up a Pope. As little can your advantage bee from Hegesippus an Historian of the same time not extant, but cited by Eusebius, his words are, that in every City all things so stood in his time as the Law, and the Prophets, and our Lord did preach. If they stood so, then stood not Bishops above Presbyters, for what our Lord, and his Disciples taught, God be thanked, we have no need to goe learne of him: and you may as well hope to perswade us out of the same Author, that James the brother of our Lord was a Nazarite, and that to him only it was lawfull to enter into the holy of Holies, that his food was not upon any thing that had life, fish, or flesh, that he us'd no wollen garments, but onely linnen, and so as he trifles on.

If therefore the tradition of the Church were now grown so ridiculous, & disconsenting from the Doctrine of the Apostles, even in those points which were of lest moment to mens particular ends, how well may we be assur'd it was much more degenerated in point of Episcopacy, and precedency, things which could affor'd such plausible pretenses, such commodious traverses for ambition, and Avarice to lvrke behind.

As for those Brittaine Bishops which you cite, p. 13. take heed what you doe, for our Brittaine Bishops lesse ancient then these, were remarkable for nothing more then their poverty, as Sulp Severus, and Beda can remember you of examples good store.

Lastly (for the fabulous Metaphrastes is not p. 16. worth an answer) that authority of Clemens Alexandrinus is not to be found in all his workes, and wherever it be extant, it is in controversie, whether it be Clements or no; or if it were it sayes onely that Saint Iohn in some places constituted Bishops: questionlesse he did, but where does Clement say he set them above Presbyters? no man will gainesay the constitution of Bishops, but the raising them to a superiour, and distinct order above Presbyters, seeing the Gospell makes them one and the same thing, a thousand such allegations as these will not give Prelaticall Episcopacy, one Chapell of ease above a Parish Church. And thus much for this cloud I cannot say rather then petty-fog of witnesses, with which Episcopall men would cast a mist before us, to deduce their exalted Episcopacy from Apostolick times. Now although, as all men well know, it be the wonted shift of errour, and fond Opinion, when they find themselves outlaw'd by the Bible, and forsaken of sound reason, to betake them with all speed to their old starting hole of tradition, and that wild, and overgrowne Covert of antiquity thinking to farme there at large roome, and find good stabling, yet thus much their owne dêify'de antiquity betrayes them, to informe us that Tradition hath had very seldome or never the gift of perswasion; as that which Church Histories report of those East, and Western Paschalists formerly spoken of will declare, who would have thought that Polycarpus on the one side could have err'd in what he saw Saint Iohn doe, or Anicetus Bishop of Rome on the other side, in what he or some of his friends might pretend to have seene Saint Peter, or Saint Paul doe, and yet neither of these could perswade either when to keep E • ster; The like frivolous contention troubled the Primitive English Churches, while Colmanus 〈◊〉 Wilfride on either side deducing their opinion 〈◊〉 the one from the undeniable example of Saint Iohn, and the learned Bishop Anatolius, and la ••• the miraculous Columba the other from Saint Peter, and the Nicene Councell could gaine no ground each of other till King Oswy perceiving no likelihood of ending the Controversie that way, was faine to decide it himselfe good King, with that small knowledge, wherewith those times had furnisht him. So when those pious Greek Emperours began, as Cedrenus relates, to put downe Monks, and abolish Images, the old Idolaters finding themselves blasted, and driven back by the prevailing light of the Scripture, sent out their sturdy Monks call'd the Abramites, to alledge for images the ancient Fathers Dionysius, and this our objected Irenaus, nay they were so high flowne in their antiquity, that they undertooke to bring the Apostles, and Luke the Evangelist, yea Christ himselfe, from certaine records that were then current, to patronize their Idolatry, yet for all this the worthy Emperour Theophilus, even in those darke times chose rather to nourish himselfe, and his people with the sincere milke of the Gospell, then to drinke from the mixt confluence of so many corrupt, and poysonous waters, as tradition would have perswaded him to by most ancient seeming authorities: In like manner all the reformed Churches abroad unthroning Episcopacy doubtlesse were not ignorant of these testimonies alledg'd to draw it in a line from the Apostles dayes, for surely the Author will not thinke he hath brought us now any new authorities, or considerations into the world, which the Reformers in other places were not advis'd of, and yet we see, the intercession of all these Apostolick Fathers could not prevaile with them to alter their resolved decree of reducing into Order their usurping, and over provender'd Episcopants: and God hath blest their worke this hunder'd yeares, with a prosperous and stedfast, and still happy successe. And this may serve to prove the insufficiency of these present Episcopall Testimonies not only in themselves, but in the account of those ever that have beene the followers of truth. It will next behoove us to consider the inconvenience we fall into, by using our selves to bee guided by these kind of Testimonies. He that thinks it the part of a well learned man, to have read diligently the ancient stories of the Church, and to be no stranger in the volumes of the Fathers shall have all judicious men consenting with him; not hereby to controule, and new fangle the Scripture, God forbid, but to marke how corruption, and Apostacy crept in by degrees, and to gather up, where ever wee find the remaining sparks of Originall truth, wherewith to stop the mouthes of our adversaries, and to bridle them with their own curb, who willingly passe by that which is Orthodoxall in them, and studiously cull out that which is commentitious, and best for their turnes, not weighing the Fathers in the ballance of Scripture, but Scripture in the ballance of the Fathers, if wee therefore making first the Gospell our rule, and Oracle shall take the good which wee light on in the Fathers, and set it to oppose the evill which other men seek from them, in this way of Skirmish wee shall easily master all superstition, and false doctrine; but if we turne this our discreet, and wary usage of them into a blind devotion towards them, and whatsoever we find written by them, wee both forsake our owne grounds, and reasons which led us at first to part from Rome, that is to hold to the Scriptures against all antiquity; wee remove our cause into our adversaries owne Court, and take up there those cast principles which will soone cause us to soder up with them againe, in as much as beleeving antiquity for it self in any one point, we bring an ingagement upon our selves of assenting to all that it charges upon us. For suppose we should now neglecting that which is cleare in Scripture, that a Bishop and Presbyter is all one both in name, and office, and that what was done by Timothy, and Titus executing an extraordinary place, as fellow labourers with the Apostles, and of a universall charge in planting Christianity through divers regions, cannot be drawne into particular, and dayly example, suppose that neglecting this cleerenesse of the text, we should by the uncertaine, and corrupted writings of succeeding times, determine that Bishop and Presbyter are different, because we dare not deny what Ignatius or rather the Perkin Warbeck of Ignatius sayes, then must we bee constrain'd to take upon our selves a thousand superstitions, and falsities which the Papist will prove us downe in from as good authorities, and as ancient, as these that set a Bishop above a Presbyter. And the plaine truth is that when any of our men of those that are wedded to antiquity come to dispute with a Papist, and leaving the Scriptures put themselves without appeale to the sentence of Synods, and Councells, using in the cause of Sion the hir'd souldjary of revolted Israel, where they give the Romanist one buff • , they receive two counterbuffs. Were it therefore but in this regard, every true Bishop should be afraid to conquer in his cause by such authorities as these, which if we admit for the authorities sake, we open a broad passage for a multitude of Doctrines that have no ground in Scripture, to break in upon us.

Lastly I doe not know, it being undeniable that there are but two Ecclesiasticall Orders, Bishops, and Deacons mention'd in the Gospell, how it can be lesse then impiery to make a demurre at that, which is there so perspicuous, confronting, and parallelling the sacred verity of Saint Paul with the offalls, and sweepings of antiquity that met as accidentally and absurdly, as Epicurus his atoms to patch up a Leucippean Ignatius, enclining rather to make this phantasme an expounder, or indeed a depraver of Saint Paul, then Saint Paul an examiner, and discoverer of this impostorship, nor caring how slightly they put off the verdit of holy Text unsalv'd, that sayes plainely there bee but two orders, so they maintaine the reputation of their imaginary Doctor that proclaimes three: certainly if Christs Apostle have set downe but two, then according to his owne words, though hee himselfe should unsay it, and not onely the Angell of Smyrna, but an Angell from Heaven should beare us downe that there bee three, Saint Paul has doom'd him twise, let him be accur'st, for Christ hath pronounc't that no tittle of his word shall fall to the ground, and if one jot be alterable it is as possible that all should perish; And this shall bee our righteousnes, our ample warrant, and strong assurance both now, and at the last day never to be asham'd of, against all the heaped names of Angells, and Martyrs, Councells, and Fathers urg'd upon us, if we have given our selves up to be taught by the pure, and living precept of Gods word onely, which without more additions, nay with a forbidding of them hath within it selfe the promise of eternall life, the end of all our wearisome labours, and all our sustaining hopes. But if any shall strive to set up his Ephod, and Teraphim of Antiquity against the brightnesse, and perfection of the Gospell, let him feare lest he and his Baal be turn'd into Bosheth. And thus much may suffice to shew that the pretended Episcopacy cannot be deduc't from the Apostolicall TIMES.