Lord Bishops None of the Lords Bishops, Chapter 1
LORD BISHOPS, NONE OF THE LORDS BISHOPS.
CHAPTER 1.
Of the State of the Question: Whether Bishops be de jure divino, of divine Authority?
OF Bishops, or Episkopoi, Episcopi, so called, so commended in Scripture, we doubt not, but they are de jure divino. But what are those Bishops? Not Diocesan Lord Bishops, so commonly called. For of such we no where read of in Scripture; as we shall fully prove anon. But those, whom the Scripture calleth Episcopos, are Presbyters, or Ministers of the Word, lawfully Called, and set over their severall Congregations respectively. Such onelyonly are Bishops jure divino. But as for such, as are Katagrestikoes, abusively styled Bishops, to wit, Diocesan or Lord Bishops, there is not so much as any one footstep of them in the Scripture. And therfore as these have not the true Nature and Calling of a Scripture-Bishop: So neither ought they to usurpe the Name and Title of Bishop. But as they are of humane invention and institution onelyonly, yea of humane presumption (as old Father Hierome saith) and not of divine Institution: So let them be known by such Titles onelyonly, as man hath given them, as namely Prelates &c. Prelati, or Prelates are so called, because they are preferred, or rather preferre them selves before and above others, that are GODS Ministers. And thus they participate of the Prelacie of the Great Antichrist, who is that*2 Thes. 2. 4. supereiromenos (as the Apostle styles him) he that exalts himselfe, above all that is called God. He is also called in the same place 'o a'ntikeímenos, that Adversary, called by Iohn, 'o Antíkristos, that Antichrist, to wit, that Adversary against Christ. And agreeable hereunto is that other Title of Prelates, namely Antistes in the Latine, which they interpret a witnesse: but it may rather be derived from the Greek; Anti is not a Latine Preposition, but Greeke, and signifies against. So as Antistes, is one that stands against; and it may answere to Antistasiastès, one of the adverse Faction, or on the contrary side, as all Prelates are Antistasiastai, adversaries against Christ, or Antichrists, which you will; as will further appeare. But we will content our selves with the Title of Prelate in this our whole insuing discourse, as being none of the Scripture-Bishops.
Now concerning Prelates, the learned Papists themselves are not, cannot be resolved, that they are jure divino, of divine institution immediately, but onelyonly at the most mediately, deriving their Prelacie from the Pope, as all his Canonized Saints doe their Saint-ship; saying, that the Pope hath his Supremacie jure divino, both as Christs Vicar, and Peters Successor: but all Prelates derive their Prelacie from no further a Fountaine, then the Pope, as from the well-head, or the Head of the Hierarchicall body, which gives them their lively motion, as the Head to the naturall members. This very point of Prelaticall Jurisdiction was canvased and controverted in the Councel of Trent, and held by some learned there, to be but jure Pontificio, by Pontifician Authority resident in the Pope:Histor. Concilii Trident. whom therefore they call Patrem Patrum, the Father of Fathers, as being the Father of the whole Paternity of Prelates. And our Prelates of England may remember, that till Hen. 8. cast the Pope out of England, the Prelates held all their Jurisdiction from the Pope, and their Authority was but translated from the Pope, to the King, So as passing from one man to another, it was meerly humane still. And the great Primate, the now Champion of the Church of England as he beares himselfe in his …a…e Book (his Relation of the Conference) confesseth thus much, That among these (to wit,‡Conference pag. 176, 177. Bishops in their severall Dioces, as there he names them) there was effectuall subjection respectively grounded upon Canon and Positive Law in their severall Quarters. Where by effectuall subjection he meanes subjection of the Prelates in every Province to the Arch-Prelate, or Primate: then he confesseth, that Archiprelaticall Iurisdiction is grounded upon Canon and Positive Law, and so consequently not upon the Holy Scriptures, as being jure divino. And thus much he confessed in open Court at the High Commission at Doctor BASTVVICKS Censure, that no one of the Apostles had Iurisdiction one over another; and so consequently not an Arch-Prelate over other Prelates, jure divino, but onelyonly jure Canonico, & Positivo, by Canon and Positive Law. Arch-Prelates therfore have no Iurisdiction by divine Institution. Or if he meane it of subjection of Ministers in every Diocese to their Prelates respectively, that this also is grounded upon Canon and Positive Law: though so he should say truly, yet in so saying, he should contradict himselfe, as where he saith elsewhere, That Christ thought it fitter to governe the Church (universall) Aristocratically by diverse, rather then by one Vice-Roy. As much to say, rather by many Popes, then by one. Confe. pag. 200.And this (saith he I beleeve to be true. So as he makes it an Article of his Faith, That Prelates are jure divino. Yet but a little before in the same page, it is not certaine that the whole Militant Church is a Kingdome: for there are no meane ones (saith he) which thinke our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the hands of the Apostles, and their Successors, in an Aristocraticall, or rather mixt government, &c. So as what others, and those no meane ones Thinke, the Prelate beleeves. And the Government, which some thinke, and he beleeves to be Aristocraticall, he understands to be Prelaticall, which (saith he) is Aristocraticall, or rather a mixt Government. What meanes he by a mixt Government? Namely, partly Aristocraticall and partly Monarchicall, for of those two he there speaketh. His meaning then is, that a Prelate is in part in Monarch. But where doe we find that Christ thought it fittest to Governe his Church by Prelats, that the Prelate is so confident to beleeve it? It seems he is one of Christs Cabinet Counsellors, that he is so intimately privie to his thoughts. For surely Christ hath no where left the impression of any such thought of his in his written word. But I suppose the Prelate doth but presume so, or charitably beleeve Christ thought so. Me thinks he should not so beleeve it, as to write upon it, I beleeve this is true. But thus (I say) this faith of his overthrows the credit of his former Saying, That Prelates with their effectuall Subjection, are grounded upon Canon, Confer. pag.or Positive Law, and so have no Authority from Christ (as the Prelate a little before affirmeth) of what force is his Canon? For there speaking of the Pope he saith, Nay out of all doubt, 't is not the least reason, why de facto, he hath so little successe, because de jure he hath no power given. But how then is it, that some few*Confer pag. 183. pages before he saith, that some one must be Ordine Primus, to avoyd confusion… and he speakes there of the Rom…e Prelate. It is then of necessity, that there must be one Ordine Primus to avoyd confusion in the Catholick Church Militant (which elswhere he makes to be visible, and Hierarchicall, or Prelaticall) then did not Christ leave so much exprest in writing, but to Canon and Positive Law? But perhaps Christ thought it best: and the Prelate so beleeves. Thus we see here is nothing, but Ridd…es, Ambiguities, and Contradictions, or Enterfeerings with our Prelate. What course then shall we take for a cleare resolution of the Question, That Prelates (as themselves affirme) are jure divino? Certainly, if they be jure divino, they must shew good proofe for it in the written word of God. And to this Rule we must hold them, and to this onelyonly. For it were to tread an endlesse maze, to goe about to prove a Divine Title, or Authority out of the Volumes of humane writings, or Ecclesias…icall Histories. They can tell us de facto what hath been: but that Prelates are de jure divine, that we must search for in the Sacred Records of Divine writ. If there we find it, well and good: but if there it be not, but the contrary: then all humane writings are in this point to be rejected, as of no credit, or value. Come we therfore to the Scripture, which will clearely tell us what Christ thought of this matter.