Concerning a Threefold Order of Bishops, Part 3
THE BISHOP OF THE Deuill.
THus alſo we deſcribe the biſhop of the deuill: that euen as that kind of biſhop ordained of God, degenerated by litle and litle, into an humane ordinance, whereof we intreated in the ſecond place: ſo this of the deuill, againſt which we now labour, is ſprouted forth of the corruptiō of the biſhop brought in by man. Of this intollerable corruption there are foule, moſt manifeſt, and vndoubted markes. Some of this kinde of biſhops hauehave wholy ſingled themſelues from the Elderſhips, ſo that they hauehave nothyng to do with them: Some hauehave wholy aboliſhed them. And that they hauehave chalenged vntounto themſelues, and I knowe not to what Officials the whole guidance of the church, & chiefly the authoritie to elect, to depoſe, and to excommunicate: ſo as they not onelyonly are aboue others, but as it were alone do exerciſe Lordſhip ouer Gods heritage, contrary to the expreſſe inhibition of Peter.
That alſo they hauehave inuaded vppon temporall dominions, contrary to the flat commaundement of Chriſt. And that they will not onelyonly be preſent, but alſo Preſident in cauſes of this lyfe, and affaires of the Common wealth, the cō mandement of the Apoſtle to the contrary notwithſtandyng, 2. Tim. 2. 1. Cor. 6. yea and that of Chriſt himſelfe, Luke 13. 14.
That alſo they waſte in riot & ſtatelineſſe agaynſt conſcience and al ſhame, the goods conſecrate to holy vſes.
That alſo they hauehave tied the ſpirit of God to certaine places and perſons, as though the biſhop of the more noble place, muſt needes hauehave neceſſary giftes aboue the reſt: or as though hee, who now is moſt fit, muſt needs be ſo alwais.
And laſt of all, that they are the image of that beaſt which is deſcribed, Apoc. 13. as Pope Anacletus hymſelfe witneſſeth, epiſt. 2. in as much as they are diſtinguiſhed among themſelues, by thoſe their thrones and degrees, according to the paterne of the Roman Empire. The Apoſtle, Act. 20. 19. foretold of this Hierarchie, as they terme it, of the falſe biſhop, which in tyme became an Antichriſtian primacie. And in the 3. Iohn 9. it is moſt manifeſt, that Sathan begun euen then to lay the foundation of this myſterie.
Now out of the hiſtory of the Nicene Councell, which otherwiſe touching doctrine was eueryevery where receyued, it is cleare how foule diſſentions were euen then, of orderyng the bonds betweene the biſhops, the fountaines whereof they were ſo farre from dammyng vg, that pretending auncient cuſtomes, they confirmed the Patriarkſhip, and made a way for the horrible Papacie of Rome then ſlidyng on, and vnderlayd the ſeate for the harlot that ſitteth vponupon ſeuen mountaines. But farre be it of, that theſe things, although they hauehave their auncient and great authoritie, ſhould be preiudiciall to the deuine and Apoſtolicall writings, according to the rule, whereof there is no wiſe man will doubt, that the Councels thēſelues are to be ſquared.
And to what purpoſe ſhould I confute that agreemēt betweene the prieſthood of the Leuites, & of Chriſt, which ſome old writers alleage to prooue this diueliſh oligarche, and at the length euē playne tiranny. In deede it is euident, that the high prieſt was a figure of Chriſt himſelfe, whoſe ſecond image if we graunt that the biſhops are, it wil folow, that there are as many images of Chriſt, as there be biſhops, in as much as there is none aboue him. But contrarywiſe, no biſhop hath bene the image of Chriſt. Beſides, biſhops are not heds of the vniuerſall Church, but of their owne perticular: Nay, no heads at all, in as much as the Biſhops are vnderunder Archbiſhops, the Archb. vnderunder Patriarkes, and they agayne vnderunder the Pope, that is not vnderunder the true figure, but the counterfet figure of Chriſt. Now ſeeing that our onelyonly hed is taken vp into heauen, a ſucceſſor for whom liuyng for euer, we are not to ſeeke: who ſeeth not that the elders ordayned by the law of God, come in the roume of the prieſtes of the lawe, and the Deacons to anſwer to the Leuites?