The Anatomy of Abuses Part 2, Part 2

The Anatomy of Abuses Part 2 · Part 2

THE CORRVPTIONS AND ABVSES OF THE SPIRITVALTIE.

Theodorus.

HAuing now spoken sufficiently of the corruptions and abuses of the temporaltie, if I might be so bold, I would request you somewhat to say concerning the corruptions and abuses of the spiritualtie, or (as some call it) of the ecclesiastical hierarchie. For I am fully persuaded that the one being so corrupt, the other can hardly bee without blemish.

Amphil.

I am verie loth to enter into that fielde, the view whereof offereth such store of matter to intreat of, as if I shoulde enter the same, I shoulde rather not knowe where to end, then where to begin. Besides, you knowe the olde prouerbe, Non bonum est ludere cum sanctis, It is not good to meddle with these holie ones, for feare of thunderbolts, to insue. But for that he is not onelyonly a false prophet, and a traitor to the truth, that teacheth false doctrine, but as well he that knoweth the truth, and either for feare of death, or desire of life, wil not expresse the same to the world. And for that, not onelyonly the author of any euill or mischiefe is giltie of offence before God. But also he that might vy discouerie therof preuent the same, and yet either will not, or for feare of death dares not. And for that as the olde prouerbe saith Qui …acet consentire videtur, he that concealeth the truth, seemeth to consent to errors, for these and the like causes, I will laye downe vntounto you some such corruptions and abuses, as seeme to be inormous, and stande in neede of reformation, omitting in the meane time to speake perticularly of all (for that they be innumerable) vntill I see how these fewe will be brouked of them. For it is a point of good physicke you knowe, to sée how the former meate receiued into the stomacke, will be digested, and concocted, before we receiue anye more into the same.

Theod.

You say very well. GiueGive me leaue then (by your patience) to aske you such questions, as I thinke conuenient for my further instruction, that by your good means I knowing the truth, may praise God in you, and also hauehave iust occasion to giuegive you thanks for the same.

Theod.

Aske what you thinke good in Gods …ame, and I will doe the best that I can, to resolue you in any thing that you shall demand.

Theod.

Then this shal be my first demand. Be the churches, congregations, & assemblies there distincted into particulars, as into parishes and precincts, one exempt from another, or are they dispersed here and there abroad, without any order, exemption, or limitation of place at all?

Amphil.

Euerie particular church, congregation, assemblie, or conuenticle is diuided one from another, and distincted into parishes, and pre…incts, which seuerall precincts and parishes are so circum…ired and limited about with bounds and marks, as euerie one is knowne of what parish he is, and vnderunder whose charge he liueth. So that euerie shepheard knoweth his flocke, euerie pastor his shéepe. And again… euerie flocke knoweth his shepheard, and euerie shéepe his pastor verie orderlie, and well in my simple iudgement.

Theod.

Doe you allow then of this partition of churches, and of one particular congregation from another?

Amphil.

Yea trulie. It is not amisse, but a verie good order, for thereby euerie pastor doth knowe his owne flocke, eueryevery shepheard his owne shéepe, which without this diuision could not be. Besides that we read that euen in the apostles daies (who writ to particular churches themselues, as to the Rom. Corint. Thes. Phil, &c.) in the daies of Christ, & in the times of the prophets before Christ, churches, assemblies, and congregations were euer distincted one from another, & diuided into seueral flocks companies, and charges. So that although they had not the name of this word parish amongst them, yet had the thing ment thereby in effect.

Theod.

Then it followeth by your reason, that there are infinite churches in Dnalgne, and I hauehave learned out of the book of God, that there is but one true church, and faithful spouse of Christ vponupon the earth. How reconcile you these two places?

Amphil.

Uerie well. For although there be infinite particular churches, congregations and assemblies in the world, yet doe they all make but one true church of God, which being diuided in time and place, is notwithstanding one church before God, being mēbers of the mystical body of Christ Iesus, & felow members one of another, so as they can neuer be diuided neither frō themselues, nor frō their head Christ.

Theod.

Who doe you constitute the head of the vniuersall church of Christ vppon earth, Christ Iesus, the pope, or the prince?

Amphil.

Christ Iesus, whose the bodie is, must néeds …e, & is the onelyonly true head of the vniuersall church. Then next vnderunder him euerie christian prince in his kingdom. And as for the pope he is head ouer the malignant church, the church of the diuel, and not of Christ Iesus. No he is so far from being head ouer the vniuersal church of Christ, that he is no true member of the same, but rather the childe of perdition, the first borne of satan, a diuell incarnate, and that man of sin (euen Antichrist himselfe) that must be destroied with the breath of Gods mouth.

Theod.

By whom be these particular churches and congregatious gouerned and ruled?

Amphil.

By bishops, pastors, and other inferiour officers.

Theod.

Do you shut out the prince then f…ont gouerning the church?

Amphil.

No God forbid. For take away… Brachium seculare, The lawfull power, and gouernement of the temporal magistrate from the regiment of the church, and ouerthrow the church altogither. And yet notwithstanding the necessitie hereof, the dooting anabaptists and brainesicke papists hauehave most deuilishly denied the same. The anabaptists denie (most absurdly) the authoritie of the magistrate altogither. The papists seing themselues conuinced by the manifest worde of GOD denye not their authority absolutely, but that their authority extendeth to the gouernement of the church, forsooth they vtterly denie, hereby exempting themselues, and plucking away their neckes from vnderunder the yooke of christian obedience due vntounto migistrates, contrarie to the expresse word of our sauiour Christ, and his apostles who saith Omnis anima subdita sit potestatibus supereminentibus? Let eueryevery soule be subiect to the higher powers, for there is no power but of God. And therefore they are to be obeyed as the ministers of God of all whatsoeuer.

Theod.

Well than I gather thus much that eueryevery king prince, or potentate is supreame head next vnderunder God, ouer the church of GOD dispersed through his kingdomes, and dominions, is not this true?

Amphil

Uerie true. And therefore that antichrist of Rome, hath plaide the traitor a long while, both to Christ Iesus and all christian kings, in arrogating and vsurping to be supreame head ouer all the world. Whereas indeed he being a greasie priest, & smered prelate, hath no more authority than other oiled shauelings hauehave, nor so much neither, and yet that authoritie is but ouer the maligant church of antichrist, and not of Christ Iesus. I beseech the Lord therefore to breake of that power, to grind in peces that stumbling blocke of offence and to wipe off the heads of that monstrous hidra, so as neuer any mo may growe thereof againe.

Theod.

Seeing you say that euerie prince is supreame head ouer the church of God within his dominions, what authoritie therfore assign you to the prince to execute in the church.

Amphil.

It is the office and dutie of a prince not only to see elected, sent forth, & called, good, able, & sufficient pastours, for the instruction of the church, but also to see that good orders, constitutions & rites be established, and duely performed, that the worde be preached, the sacraments truely ministred, excommunication, discipline and ecclesiasticall censures orderly executed to the honor of God, and benefit of his church. But if it be said that these thinges are to bee executed of the ecclesiasticall persons onelyonly. I answere true it is, but if the ecclesiasticall magistrate be negligent, secure, slouthfull, and carelesse about the execution hereof (as who seeth not some be) than ought the prince to shew his authoritie in commanding and inioining them to doe their office. Besides this it is the office of the prince to see all kind of sinne, as well in the church men themselues, as in all others of the church seuerely punished. And though I grant the prince to hauehave the soueraigntie and primacie ouer the church of GOD, within his dominions, yet my meaning is not, that it is lawfull for the prince to preach the word, to minister the sacramentes, or to execute the sentence of excommunication, and other ecclesiasticall discipline and censures of the church, but (as before) to see them done of them, to whom it apperteineth. For saith the apostle nemo sumat sibi, honorem nisi qui legittime, vocatus fuerit vt fuit Aaron. And againe, vnusquisque in ea vocatione, qua vocatus est maneat apud deum? But in times past the papists bare the worlde in hande, that no temporall power whatsoeuer coulde nor ought not to meddle wyth the clergie, and therefore made they vassals of most christian Princes. Yea that pernicious antichrist of Rome, in those daies of ignorance hath not béene ashamed to make Kings, Queenes, Emperours, Dukes, Lords, and all other how honorable or noble soeuer, his lackeis, his pages, his horsekeepers, and compelled them to hold his stirups, to leade his horse, and to prostrate themselues before him, whilest he trod vponupon their neckes. But God be praised, this great antichrist is discouered to all the world, and his shame so laid open, as eueryevery childe iustlie laugheth him to scorne.

Theod.

You said before that the churches there were gouerned by bishops, and pastors, how by them?

Amphil.

The bishops are graue, ancient, and fatherlie men, of great grauitie, learning, and iudgement (for the most part) constituted by the Prince ouer a whole country, or prouince, which they call their dioces. These graue fathers hauing authoritie aboue all other of the ministerie, in their dioces, do substitute vnderunder them in euerie particular church a minister, or ministers according to the necessitie of the same. And thus doeth eueryevery bishoppe in hys owne dioces thorow out the whole realme. So that no church how small soeuer, but it hath the truth of Gods word, and of his sacraments truly deliuered vntounto it.

Theod.

Are those preaching prelates that the bishops do place in euerie congregation or else reading ministers?

Amphil.

It were to be wished that all were preaching prelates, and not reading ministers only, if it could be brought to passe, but though all be not preachers, yet the most part be, God be praised therefore.

Theod.

Be any readers onlie, and not preachers, that is a great abuse. For I am persuaded that he that cannot preach, ought not to supplie a place in the church of God to read onlie, how say you?

Amphil.

It is no good reason to say bicause all ought to be preachers, that therefore readers are not necessarie. But indeed I am of this iudgement with you, that whoso can but read onelie, and neither is able to interpret, preach, expound, nor explane the scriptures, nor yet to refell and conuince the aduersarie, nor to deliuer the true sense and meaning of the scriptures, ought not to occupie a place in the church of God, as the pastor thereof. For God commandeth that the pastors be learned, saieng: Labia sacerdotum custodiant voritatem, & ediscant populi verbum dei ex ore eorum, Let the lips of the priests preserue knowledge, and let the people learne the truth out of their mouthes. And therefore those that hauehave not this dexteritie in handling the worde of God, they are not sent of God, neither are they Christs vicegerents or pastors to instruct his flocke. To such the Lord saith: They rule, but not by me, they run, but I sent them not, they crie thus saith the Lord, whereas hee neuer spake it. These are those woll shepheards, and dumbe dogs, of whom speaketh the prophet, that are not able to barke against sinne. And therefore I beseech the Lord to remooue them, and place able and sufficient pastors ouer his church, that GOD may be glorified, and the church edified in the truth.

Theod.

Bare reading I must néeds say is bare féeding, but what then? Better it is to hauehave bare feeding than none at all.

Amphil.

Uerie true. And therefore are not they more scrupulous than they ought, more curious than néedes, and more precise than wise, that bicause they cannot hauehave preaching in euerie church, doe therefore contemne reeding, as not necessarie? This is as though a man should despise meane fare, bicause he cannot come by better, whereas I thinke it is better to hauehave meane fare then none at all, or as though a man bicause he cannot come by the carnell at the first, will therefore ca… awaie both the nut and the carnell. It were good (as saith the apostle) that all could prophesie, that is, that all could preach, and expound the truth, but bicause that al hauehave not the gift, is therfore reading naught? And therefore a sort of nouatians lately sprong vp, hauehave greatly faulted herein, in that they hold that no reading ministers only ought to be permitted in the church of God, as though (as I say) because a man can not hauehave daintie fare, therefore it is good to hauehave none at all. But to be plaine, as I will not defende a dumbe reading ministerie only, so I will not condemne it for necessities sake, when otherwise eueryevery place cannot be sufficiently furnished at the first with good and sufficient men as it ought.

Theod.

But it is thought that there are inow able men in the vniuersities, and elsewhere to furnish eueryevery particular church with a preaching minister?

Amphil.

Truely I thinke there are so, if they were sought for & preferred: but alas those that are learned indeed they are not sought for nor promoted, but the vnlearned for the most part, somtimes by frendship, somtime by mony (for they pay wel for their orders. I heare say) and somtimes by gifts (I dare not say bribes) are int…uded. This maketh manie a good schooler to languish, and discourageth not a fewe from goyng to their bookes. Whereby learning greatlie decaieth, and barbarisme I feare me will ouerflow the realme if spéedie remedie be not had herein.

Theod.

As farre as I can gather by your speeches, there is both a reading and a preaching ministerie, whether doe you prefer before the other.

Amphil.

I preferre the preaching ministerie before a reading ministerie only: and yet the reading ministerie if the other can not be had, is not therefore euill, or not necessarie.

Theod.

But tell me this. If there might a preaching ministerie be gotten ought not the reading ministerie to giuegive place to the same?

Amphil.

Yea, doubtlesse. And therfore the bishops ought to seeke for the learned sort, and as it were to sue and make instance to them, and finding them worthy as well for their life, as doctrine to call them lawfully according to the prescript… Gods word, & so to sende them forth into the …rds haruest. And where the foresaide dumbe ministerie is, to displace the same, and place the other. By this meanes the word of God should flourish, ignorance (manger the head of satan) be abandoned, the church edified, and manie a one incouraged to go to their bookes, whereas now they practise nothing lesse, and all by reason that by their learning they hauehave no promotion nor preferment at all.

Theod.

Do these preaching ministers preach onelyonly in their owne cures, flockes and charges, or else indifferently abroad else where?

Amphil.

They preach for the most part in their owne charges, and cures whereouer the holie Ghost hath made them ouerseers, and for which they shall render a dreadfull account at the day of iudgemennt, if they doe not their dutie, diligently as God hath commanded. But though they preach most commonly in their owne cures, yet doe they sometimes helpe their felowe brethren to breake the bread of life to their charges also. Wherein me thinke they do not amisse. For if a watch man appointed by a whole citie, or towne to giuegive warning when the enimie commeth, seeing an other citye, or towne to be in danger, giueth sufficient warning to his owne citie, and goeth and warneth the other citie also, and so by this meanes deliuereth them both, I say, that in so doing, hée doth well, and according to charitie. And yet notwithstanding diuers new phangled felows sprong vp of late, as the Brownists, and there adherents, hauehave spoken verie blasphemouslie hereof, teaching in their railing pamphletes, that those who are lecturers or preach els wher than in their owne cures, are accursed before god. Than the which, what can be more absurdlie, or vntruely spoken? For if they grant (as they cannot deny) that the word of God is good, then cannot the declaration of that which is good in one place be hurtfull in another. And read we not that the apostles themselues went from place to place, preaching the word to euerie congregation? Christ Iesus did the same, & also taught vsus, that he came not to preach to one citie onelyonly, but to many?

Theod.

Doe the reading ministers onelyonly continue and read altogither in their owne charges or not?

Amphil.

The reading ministers after they be hired of the parishes (for they are mercenaries) they read commonly in their owne charges, and cures, except (which is a horrible abuse) that they hauehave two or three cures to serue all vponupon one day, and peraduenture two or three myles distant, one from another. Which maketh them to gallop it ouer as fast as they can, and to chop it vp with all possible expedition, though none vnderstand them, and as fewe be edified by them.

Theod.

Be these reading ministers well prouided for, so as they want nothing, or not?

Amphil.

No truly. For if the other preaching ministers bee not well prouided for (as in truth they be not) then how can the other be well maintained? And therfore they hauehave som of them ten pound a yeere (which is the most) some eight pound, some sixe pound, some fiue pound, some foure pound, some fortie shillings, yea and table themselues also of the same. And sometimes failing of this too, they runne roging like vagarents vp & downe the countries like maisterlesse men, to seeke their maintenance. Whereby some fall to one mischiefe, some to another, to the great slander of the Gospell of Iesus Christ, and scandall of the godlie. And yet part of these reading misters be too well prouided for, for some of them hauehave two or three, yea foure or fiue benefices apeece, being resident but at one of them at once, and peraduenture at neuer a one, but roist it out elsewhere, purchasing a dispensation for their discontinuance, and then may no man say: Domine cur ita facis? Sir why doe you so? For hee hath plenarie power and authoritie granted him so to doe.

Theod.

That is an horrible abuse that one man should hauehave two or thrée, or halfe a dozen benefices apéece as some hauehave, may anie man hauehave so many liuings at one time by the lawe of God, and good conscience?

Amphil.

As it is not lawfull for anie man to hauehave or enioie two wiues at once, so is it not lawfull for any man how excellent soeuer to hauehave mo benefices, mo flockes, cures, or charges in his handes than one at once. Nay I am fullie persuaded that it is more tollerable (and yet it is a damnable thing) for a man to hauehave two wiues or mo, than for a man to hauehave two benefices at once or mo. For by possibilitie a man might discharge the dutie of a good husband to two or thrée wiues (yet to hauehave mo than one is the breach of Gods commandements) but no man though he were as learned as Saint Paule, or the apostles themselues to whome were giuen supernaturall and extraordinarie giftes and graces, is able sufficientlie to discharge his dutie in the instruction of one church, or congregation, much lesse of thrée or foure or halfe a dozen as some hauehave. And as one father cannot bee manie fathers, one pastor manie pastours, nor one man diuerse men, so one sheepeheard or pastour cannot, nor ought not to hauehave diners charges, and flocks at once. Is it possible for any shepheard though he were neuer so cunning a man, to kéepe two or thrée flocks or mo at once, and so féed them wel and in due season dooing the dutie of a good shepheard in euerie respect, they being distant from him, ten, twentie, fortie, sixtie, an hundred. two hundred, or thrée hundred miles? Much lesse is there any man able to discharge the dutie of a good pastor ouer so manie flock…, churches, and congregations so farre distant in place, wheras the simplest flocke that is, re… reth a whole, and perfect man, & not a péece of a man. Therfore I aduise al benefice mongers, y^• hauehave mo charges then one, to take héede to thē selues, and to leaue them in time, for the blood of al those within their cures, or charges, that die ghostlie, for want of the truth of Gods word preached vntounto them, shall be powred vponupon their their heads, at the day of iudgement, and be required at their hands.

Theod.

If they hauehave so many benefices a peece, and some so farre distant from another, then it is not possible that they can be resident vponupon them all at once. But the matter is in dispute, whether they may not as well be absent, or present, what is your iudgment of that?

Amphil.

To doubt whether the pastor ought to be resident with his flocke, is to doubt whether the soule should be in the bodie, the eie in the head, or the watchman in his tower. For this I am fully persuaded of, that as the soule is the life of the bodie, and the eie the light of the same, so the word of God preached is the life, and light as well to the bodie as to the soule of man. And as necessarie as the one is to the bodie, so (and much more) necessarie is the other both to soule and bodie. Now certein it is, these things cannot be applied without the presence of the preacher or pastor▪ and therfore is his absence from his flocke a dangerous and a perilous thing, and as it were a taking away of their life and light from them; which commeth by the preaching of Gods word vntounto them.

Theod.

But they say though they be not present by themselues, …t be they present by their substitutes and deputies, is no… that a sufficient d…scharge for them before God?

Amphil.

I grant they are present by their deputies and substitutes, but if a man shoulde …ooke into a great sort of them, he should finde them such as are fit…er to feed hogs, than christian soules. For as for some of them are they not such as can scarcely read true english? And for their zeale to Gods worde and true religion, are they not such as can scarce tell what it meaneth? The truth of Gods word they cannot easily preach nor expound. The aduersarie they cannot refell: barke against sinne they dare not, bicause their liues are licentious. They will read you their seruice faire and cleanly (as the doting papists did their blasphemous) masses out of their porcesses) and when they ha…e done, they will to all kinde of want on pastimes and delights, with come that come will, and that vponupon sabboth day, festiuall day, or other, no day is amisse to them. And all the wéeke after, yea all the yéere (if I said all the yéeres of their life I lied not) they will not sticke to kéepe companie at the alehouse from morning till night, tipling and swilling till the signe be in Capricornus. Insomuch as if you would know where the best cup of drinke is, go to these malt woormes, and I warrant you you shall not misse of your purpose. By these mercenaries their deputies, and the like, I grant they are present in all their flocks, but so as it were better▪ or as good they were absent for any good they doe, but rather hurt by their euill example of life. The residence of these their deputies is no discharge for them before the tribunall seate of God: for notwithstanding the same, let them be sure to answere for the bloud of euerie one of their sheepe, that miscarrieth through their default, or their deputies. Their deputies shal not excuse them at the day of iudgement I dare be their warrant. Therefore I wish them to take heed to it betime, least afterward it be too late.

Theod.

But I heare say, that what is wanting either in their deputies, or in themselues for not being daily resident, they supply either by preaching their quarter sermons thēselues, or else (if they be not able) by procuring of others to do it for them. Is not that well?

Amphil.

It is as though a man eueryevery quarter of a yéere once, shuld take his plow, & go draw a furrow in a field, & yet notwithstanding should looke for increase of the same: were not be a foolish husbandman that wold do thus? And euen so is he no lesse vnwise that plowing but one furow, that is, preaching but one poore sermon in a quarter of a yéere (& perchance but one in a whole yéere, nay in 7. yéeres) wil notwithstanding loke for gret increse of the same. Now the cause why this ground bringeth not forth fruit is, for that it is not plowed, furowed, & tilled al togither as it ought to be. So the cause wherefore the pore churches doe not bring forth fruit is, for that they are not furrowed, manured, and tilled, as they ought, and bicause the word of God is not preached vntounto them, and as it were braied, punned, interpreted, and expounded, y^t it sinking down into the good ground of their harts, might bring forth fruit to eternal life. If the strongest mans body that liueth vponupon the earth should be nourished with nothing for a whole quarter of a yeeres space, but onelyonly with two or three drops of aqua vite, aqua angelica, or the like, eueryevery day, and at eueryevery quarters end should be fed with all manner of dainties, I am perswaded that his bodie notwithstanding would soone be weake inough. Nay do you thinke it were possible to liue one quarter of a yeere? Euen so falleth out in this case. For although our soules (which liue by the word of God, as our bodies doe by meate) be daily fedde with hearing the word read as it were with aqua vite, or swéet necter, and at euerie quarters ende, hauehave a most excellent & sumptuous banquet to pray vpō, yet may they macerate and pyne away notwithstanding for lacke of the continuance of the same. And therfore the worde of God is to be preached night and day, in time, and out of time, in season, and out of season, and that without ceasing, or intermission. And if that saieng of the prophet be true (as without all controuersie it is most true (that he is accursed. Qui fecerit opus domini negligenter, That doth the worke of the Lord negligently, or fradulently, then must it néeds be, that those who hauing cure of soules, and doe seldome, or neuer preach, are within the compasse of this curse. Let them take héede to it. The apostle Paule said of himselfe, Vae mihi nisi euangelizauero, Wo be to me, if I preach not the gospel, and doe they thinke that the same wo is not proper to them if they prech not? HaueHave they a greater priuiledge than the blessed apostle saint Paule had? No, no, these vaine excuses will not serue them, therfore as they tender the saluation of their owne soules, and many others, I wish them to take heede, and to shew themselues painefull laborers in the Lords haruest.

Theod.

As far as I remember by the lawes of Dnalgne there is a restraint, that none shall hauehave no more benefices at once than one, how is it then, that they can holde so manie a peece, without danger of the law?

Amphil.

They make the lawes (as it were) shipmens hoos…n, or as a nose of waxe, turning and wresting them, at their pleasure to anie thing they lust. But bicause they will auoide the lawes, they purchase a dispensation a licence, a commission, a pluralitie, a qualification, and I cannot tell what else, by vertue whereof they may hold totquots so manie, how manie soeuer, and that with as good a conscience as Iudas receiued the mony for the which he sold Christ Iesus the Sauiour of the world. Or if this way will not serue, then get they to be chaplines, to honorable, & noble personages by prerogatiue whereof they may holde I cannot tell how manie benefices, yea as manie as they can get. But I maruell whether they thinke that these licenses shall go for good paiment at the daie of iudgement. I thinke not. For sure I am that no license of man can dispense with vsus, to doe that thing, which is against Gods worde (as these totquots is) and therfore vnlawful. They may blind the foolish world with pretensed dispensations, and qualifications, but the Lorde will bring them to account for it in his good time, GOD grant they may looke to it?

Theod.

In whome doth the patronage, right, and gifture of these ecclesiastical promotions, and benefices consist, in the churches themselues, or in whom else?

Amphil.

Indeede you saie well. For who shoulde hauehave the patronage, the right, the interest, and gifture of the benefices, but the churches themselues, whose the benefices are by right, and to whome Proprio iu…e, They doe apperteine? For doe not the benefices consist either in tithes, or contributions, or both? Nowe, who giueth both the one and the other? Doe not the Churches? Then by good reason ought they to hauehave the gifture and bestowing of them, and the right and interest thereof ought to remaine in the power of the church, and not in anie other priuate man whatsoeuer.

Theod.

Why? Then I perceiue you would not hauehave anie priuate or singuler man of what degree soeuer, to hauehave the patronage the right, or gifture of anie ecclesiasticall liuing, but the churches themselues, is not that your meaning?

Amphil.

Yes truely, that is my meaning, and so I am of opinion it ought to be.

Theod.

Why so I beseech you?

Amphil.

Bicause one man may easely be corrupted, and drawne to bestowe hys benefice eyther for fauour, affection, or monie, vppon such as bee vnworthie, the whole Church will not so. Againe, the whole liuing is nothing else but either pure almes, or deuocion, or both, the Gentelman or other that pretendeth the gifture thereof, giueth not the whole liuing himselfe, ergo hee ought not to hauehave in his owne power, the only gifture of the same. Thirdly the whole church will not giuegive the same for simonie, one priuate man may be induced to doe it. Fourthlie, the church will kéepe no part of the liuing backe from the pastor, if he doe his dutie, nor imploie it to ther owne vse, the singularitie of one man may easilie be abused: nay the most patrones kéepe the fa…test morsels to themselues, and giuegive scarcely the crums to their pastors. But if the benefice be woorth two hundred pound, the will scarcely giuegive their pastor foure score. If it be woorth an hundred pound, they will hardly giuegive fortie pound. If woorth forty pound it is well if they giuegive ten pound, imploieng the better halfe to their owne priuate gaine. Now if this be not sacrilege, and a robbing of the poore churches of their substance, as also a defrauding of the Lords minister of his dutie and right, then I knowe not what sacrilege, and fraude meaneth. Yea there are some, that hauing ground in another parish, than where they dwell, against the time that their shéepe, kine, and other cattell should bring f…rth increase, will driue them thither, so that the fruit falling in the other rar…sh, he shall not néed i… pa… tithes for the same to his owne pastor where he dwelleth. And against the time that the other pastor of that parish where his cattell …ll, shall demand his tithes thereof, they will hauehave fetched home their cattell, so that by these sinister kind of meanes, they will neither pay in the one parish, nor in the other. But if the one commence sute against him, he answereth, they fell not in his parish: if the other doe the same, he pleadeth that he is not of his parish, nor dweth him ought. But indéed they wil pay for their ground in the other parish a little herbage (as they call it) a thing of nothing to stop his mouth withall. So that hereby the poore pastors are deteined from their right, and almost beggered in most places that I hauehave come in.

Theod.

How came temporall men by the right of their patronages, and how fell they into their clowches, can you tell?

Amphil.

I will tell you as farre as euer I could coniecture how they fel into their hands. In the beginning when Antichrist the pope exercised his vsurped authoritie, and challenged the title of supreme head ouer the vniuersall church of Christ vponupon the face of the earth, to whomsoeuer would either erect churches, temples, and oratories (as then the world was giuen to blinde superstition as to instaurate … beies, prieries, nunries, with other sumptuous edefices, and houses of religion, thinking the same a worke meritorious, and to gilte, crosses images, and the like fooleries) or else giuegive ground for the same to be built vponupon, his vnholie holines, did giuegive the patronage, and pretensed right of the same church, and benefice belonging to the same. Othersome thinke (to whome I willinglie subscribe) that the Churches (consisting of simple, and ignorant men for the most part) abusing the same benefices, and bestowing them vponupon vnmeete persons, the princes hauehave taken them out of their handes, and giuen the right patronage, and possession of the same to the temporaltie, to the ende they might bestowe them better. But as they were taken from the churches for some causes, so ought they to be remooued and giuen againe to the Churches for greater causes. For nowe are they bought and soulde for simonie, euen as an ore or a cow is bought and sold for mony.

Theod.

Are there no lawes for the restrainte of simonie, being so horrible, and detestable a vice in the church of God?

Amphil.

Yes that there are. As he that is patrone taking monie for his benefice, to loose the patronage of the same, and the ecclesiasticall person, that giueth it, to loose the same benefice, the monie giuen or promised to be giuen, and to remaine incapable of anie other ecclesiasticall promotion afterwarde for euer. But doe you thinke they are fooles? HaueHave they no shift to defeate the lawe. Yes I warrant you. For though they giuegive two hundred, or three hundred pound for a benefice, yet it shall be done so cloosely, as no dogges shall barke at it. But bicause at the time of their initiation, institution, induction, and admission they are sworne whether they came by it by simonie or no, whether they gaue anie monie for it, or no, therefore to auoide the guilte of periurie, they the pastors themselues will not giuegive anie monie, but their friendes shall doe it for them, and than may they sweare (with as good a conscience as euer Iudas betraied Christ) that they gaue not a penny, but came by it freely, as of gifte. Or if this waie fayle them, than must they giuegive the patrones a hundred pounde, or two hundred pounds vponupon some bargayne, that is not woorth a hundred pence, and then maye they sweare if neede be, that they came by the bene…ce frankelye, and freelye, and that they gaue the money vppon such and such a bargaine, without some of these practises, or without such a dish of apples, as Master Latimer talketh of with thirty angels in eueryevery apple, thogh he be neuer so learned a man, I warrant him, he gets nothing. But if he can get a graffe of this tree loden with such golden apples, it will serue him better, then all Saint Paules learning. For these and the like abuses infinite, if the patronages were taken away from them, that now enioy them, nay, that make ha…ocke of them, and either to rest in the right of the Prince (as they ought) or else in the right of the churches, who will not be corrupted, it were a great deale better, than nowe they bee. For now the poore pastours are so handled at the hands of their patrones, that they neyther hauehave mony to buy them bookes withall, nor which is lesse not to maintaine themselues vppon though but meanelye, but are manye times constrained either to wander abroad to séeke their liuings or els to take vp their Inne in an alehouse, or in some od corner or other, to the great discredite of the gospell of Christ, and offence of the godlie. This argueth flatly that we louelove not Christ Iesus, who make so little of his messengers, and ambassadors. He that despiseth you, despiseth me, and he that receaueth and maketh much of you, he receiueth me, and maketh much of me saith Christ. The beathen gentils, and pagans, prouide better for their idolatrous priests, then we do for the true preachers of the gospell, and disclosers of the secrets of God. For when the Egyptians were sore pooled of Pharao, the priests by his commandement were excepted, and permitied to hauehave all necessarie maintenance whatsoeuer. But we are of another mind, for we think whatsoeuer we get of thē is won, it is our own good, whereas in truth, what we withdrawe from thē (prouided that they be diligent preachers of the pospell) we withdraw it frō God, and ferrie it to the deuil. But hereof more shal be spoken (Christ willing) hereafter, when we come to this question, whether it be lawful for preachers and ministers of the Gospell, to receiue wages and stipends for preaching of the worde.

Theod.

By what law may a minister of the Gospell make claime to tithes, and other profits, emoluments, duties and commodities, belonging to him, by y^e law of God, or of man?

Amphil.

God in the law of Moses, gaue speciall commnandement that tithes, and other oblations, commodities, and profits should be giuen to the priests, to the end that they might attend vponupon the diuine seruice of God, and not busie themselues in worldly affaires, which ordinance or fanction being méere ceremonial▪ is now fully abrogate by Christ (for in him the truth, al ceremonies, shadowes, types & figures ceased, & toke their end.) And therfore cannot a preacher of the Gospel claime his tithes by the lawe of Moses, but by the positiue lawes of Christian princes, which are to be obeied in all things (not directly against true godlinesse) vponupon paine of damnation.

Theod.

Are tithes then due to be paid by the positiue law of man, and not by the lawe of God?

Amphil.

Yea truly by the positiue lawe of man: which godlie constitution is now no lesse to be obeied vnderunder the Gospel (being commanded by a christian prince) than the …iuine institution was to be obeied vnderunder the law. And although tithes bee due by the positiue lawes of man, yet are the same groūded vponupon the word of God, and commanded as well by God as by man. And therefore he that breaketh this ordinance (being an excellent policie) violateth the commandements of God, and breketh the constitution of his liege prince to his damnation, except he repent.

Theod.

Must euerie one pay his tithes truely to eueryevery pastor whether he be ought, or naught, learned or vnlearned, without any exception, or may he deteine it with good conscience from him that is an vnfit and vnable minister?

Amphil.

If he be a good pastor and diligent in his calling, and withal able to discharge the dutie of a faithful shepheard ouer his flock, then ought he to hauehave al tithes paid him whatsoeuer with the better, and if any should withhold the lest mite from him, he sinneth against the maiestie of God most gréeuously. And although he be a wicked man, and not able to discharge his dutie, though but in small measure, yet ought euerie man to pay him his due faithfully and truly. For in denieng him his dutie, they might séeme to withstande authoritie, which they ought not to doe. In the meane time giuing themselues to praier, and suing to them that hauehave the authoritie for his displacing, and placing of another that is more able in some measure to discharge the dutie of a faithfull pastor. Notwithstanding I know some are of opinion that if any man giuegive either tithes, or anie dutie else to their pastor being an vnfit, and an vnable person, he is partaker with him of his sinne, he communicateth with other mens offences, and he maintaineth him in his idlenesse, sloth, ignorance, and securitie, and therefore offendeth gréeuously. But I am of opinion that euerye man ought to pay their dutie (for else he might séeme as I said to resist the power) & if he be not able to discharge his dutie, to pray for his remoouing, and to make instance to them that are in authoritie appointed for the redresse of such inormities, for his displacing, and so not to attempt any thing without good and lawfull authoritie grounded vponupon the word for the same▪

Theod.

May a pastor that hath a charge and a flocke assigned him to watch ouer (hauing & maintainable liuing allowed him of his flock) preach in other places for monie▪

Amphil.

Hee may sometimes obteining licence for some reasonable cause of his owne flocke, preach the word of God abroad in other places, but then he ought to doe it gratis, co… tenting himselfe with the liuing allowed him at home of his owne parish. Notwithstanding, if the other churches where he shall hauehave preached, will voluntarily impart any thing to the supplie of his necessities, in respect of his pains taking, he may thankfully receiue the …ame. but he may not compell, nor constraine them to giuegive it him whether they will or not against their wils, as manie impudently do…e

Theod.

Then I perceiue if it be not lawfull for a pastor that hath a flocke, and a stipend appointed him, to receiue monie vppon constraint of strangers for preaching the worde abroad in other places, then is it not lawfull for him to take monie in his cure for preaching funerall sermons, marriage sermons, christening sermons, and the like, as many do. What say you to this?

Amphil.

There are manie woorthie of great blame in this respect. For though they rec…iue fortie pound, a hundred pound, or two hundred pound a yéere, of some one parish, yet will they hardly preach once a monethmonth, nay happily not once in a quarter of a yéere, and sometimes not once a twelue monethmonth, for the same. And if a man request them to preach at a burial, a wedding, or a christening, they will not doe it vnderunder an angell, or a noble at the lest. And therefore the papists, and aduersaries to the Gospel call our Gospel, a polling Gospel, our sermons roiall sermons, angell sermons, and noble sermons. You call say they our blessed masse a polling masse, but say they your preachings are more polling. For we say they would hauehave sold a masse for a grote, you will not sell a sermon vnderunder a roiall, or a noble. And thus these fellowes are a slander to the Gospel, and robbers of their fellowe brethren. If I should hire a man for fortie pound, an hundred pound, or more, or lesse, to teach my children nurture and knowledge, if he for the execution therof shuld aske me more for the same than we agréed for, were not this man a naughtie, exacting, and fraudulent felowe? Nay if I compound with him to teach them in the best maner he is able for so much, and he doth it not, and yet receiue my monie, hauehave not I good lawe against him? If he should say vntounto me, I will not doe it except you giuegive me more, were not this a very vnreasonable man? For hauing his monie that was couenant, is hee not bound both by lawe and conscience to teach them to the vttermost of his power? Or if he shall not doe it, and yet take my monie, is not he a théefe and a robber? Is this true in a priuate man, & not in an ecclesiasticall person? Is he not hired to that end & purpose to preach the word of God to his flocke? And hath hee not wages for the same? Shall he now denie to preach the same word except he hauehave more monie? Or is he not bound in conscience to preach the same night and day without ceasing? And if he doe not, is he not a deceiuer, a théefe, & a robber? The pastor therefore hauing taken vponupon him the cure & charge of his flocke, and hauing his stipend appointed for the same, is bound to preach the worde of God to all his flocke indifferently whether it be at buriall, wedding, christening (yea then especially) or at any other time whensoeuer, without taking, or requiring of any more monie, than the stipend he was hired for. For if he take any more, it is plaine theft before God, and one day shall be answered for: let them be sure of it.

Theod.

You condemne not funerall sermons then, so that they be good, doe you?

Amphil.

No, God forbid. Why should not godlie sermons be as wholsome (and as necessarie) at the burials of christians, when wee hauehave such liuely spectacles before our eies, of our mortalitie, miserie, and end, as they be at all other times? Yea truely at that present I thinke godlie sermons verie necessarie to put the people in remembrance of their mortalitie, of their great miserie, and frailtie, of their fatall end, of the immortalitie of the soule, of the generall resurrection at the last day, and of the ioie, felicitie, and beatitude of the life to come, with the like godlie instructions, that they may the better prepare themselues to the same when God shall call them hence to himselfe. And although of late some phantasticall spirites hauehave taught that the vse of them is naught, in that they stand in place of popish diriges, and I cannot tell what, yet cannot I be easilie drawne to assent vntounto them, for that I sée them in that respect a great deale more curious than godlie wise.

Theod.

Is it lawfull thinke you for ministers, and preachers of the Gospell to receiue stipends, and wages for their preaching?

Amphil.

Why not? Otherwise how should they bee able to kéepe themselues frée from worldly occupations, and trauels of this life (as they ought) to applie their studies for the discharge of their duties, to maintaine themselues, their family, and houshold, or how shuld they kéepe hospitalitie for the reléefe of the poore, all which they are bound to doe both by Gods lawe, and good conscience? Therefore take away liuings, and wages from the preachers, and ouerthrowe preaching altogither, the ordinarie meane to saluation in Christ. This caused the apostle to enter disputation of this point, where he prooueth by inuincible arguments, that a preacher or minister of the Gospell of Christ Iesus, may (Salua conscientia, With a good conscience) receiue wages, and stipends for his paines susteined in the affaires of the Gospell, and that for the causes abouesaid. Therefore saith this apostle: Boui trituranti non ligabis os, Thou shalt not mussle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth foorth the corne. Whereby is ment, that he that laboreth, and taketh paines in any good exercise, ought not to be denied of his méed for his paines. Againe he saith: Dignus est operarius mercede sua, The workman is woorthie of his reward. And still insisting in the same argument, hee saith: Qui euangelium praedicant, ex euangelio viuant, They that preach the Gospell, let them liue vponupon the Gospell. And yet further prosecuting the same more at large, he saith: Quis militat, &c. Who goeth on warfare at any time of his owne charges? Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit? Who féedeth a flocke, and eateth not of the milke of the flock. By al which reasons, and arguments it appeareth, that he who preacheth the Gospel ought to liue of the Gospell. But as euerie pastor that hath a peculiar stocke assigned him may with the testimonie of a good conscience receiue wages, and maintenance of his flocke, for his paines taken amongst them: so may he not, nor ought not to take wages or salarie of any other flocke adioining, if so be it, that either vponupon request, or his owne voluntarie good will, he preach the word of God amongst them. To them that are thus prouided for, Christ our sauiour saith: Gratis accepistis, gratis date, Fréely you hauehave receiued, fréely giuegive againe. But if any hauehave not a speciall flocke, or charge assigned him, then may he with good conscience receiue the beneuolencie, the friendly contributions, and rewards of the churches to whom he hath preached. And this is probable both by the word of God, and the examples of the apostles themselues.

Theod.

What say you of preachers, and lecturers, that hauehave no peculiar flockes, nor charges appointed them, are they necessarie, and may they receiue wages with a good conscience of the flockes, and charges where they preach the word of God?

Amphil.

First you aske me whether preachers, and lecturers that hauehave no peculiar …locks nor charges of their owne to attend vponupon, be necessarie. Whereto I a…swere. That considering the s…ate, & condition of the church at this day, they are most necessarie. But if it were so, that euerie church and congregation had his preacher (as eueryevery one ought to preach, else is he not sent by the Lord) then were they not so necessarie, but considering that most churches are planted and fraught with single reading ministers, they are verie behouefull to helpe to supplie the defect of the others, that through the good industrie as well of the one, as of the other, the churches of GOD may bee instructed and nourished with the worde of GOD to eternall life. Then you aske mee whether these lecturers and preachers may receiue wages of the churches to whom they preach, with a good conscience, whereto I answere, that they may. But yet I am persuaded, that it were much better for them to hauehave particular flocks of their owne▪ to the end that they receiuing sufficient maintenance of them, might (if they were at anie time disposed to bestowe any spirituall graces abroad) doe it Gratis, frankly and freely without any charges to the poore churches of Iesus Christ.

Theod.

But what if the pastors liuing be not maintaineable nor sufficient for him to liue vponupon, may hee not take wages of other flocks abroad?

Amphil.

I am persuaded no. For if his liuing be too little, then ought the church to mend it, but if the church either for want of zeale will not, or through extreame pouertie cannot increase his liuing, then ought the pastor to content himselfe with that little, which God hath sent him, following the example of the apostle, who biddeth the children of GOD to be content with their wages, bee it little or be it much: for if they hauehave meate, drinke, and cloth, it is inough, and as much as nature requireth. We brought nothing (saith he) into this world, neither shall we carrie any thing out. Againe, those that will be rich, fall into diuers temptations, and snares of the diuell, which drowne men in perdition and destruction. Therefore if it be s…fficient to yéelde him meate, drinke, cloth, and other necessaries, he is bound to content himselfe with the same. Which if he doe (for the zeale he beareth to his flocke) I doubt not but the Lord will open the harts of his flock towards him, and both make them able, and willing to support his necessities. For if hee deliuer vntounto them spirituall things, doubtlesse the Lord will moue them to giuegive vntounto him temporall things. And therfore ought he to perseuere, and in his good time, without all peraduenture the Lord will looke vponupon him, as he hath promised.

Theod.

Doe you allow of that vagarant ministerie, which is in manie countries, but most specially in Dnalgne sprong vp of late, to the discredite of the Gospell of Iesus Christ, and offence of the brethren?

Amphil.

Allow of it qouth you? No God forbid. But I rather deplore it with all my hart, knowing that it is most directly against the word of God, the example of the primitiue age and all good reformed churches thorough the world. Is it not a pitifull case that two hundred, thrée hundred, fiue hundred, a thousand, fiue thousand, yea possible ten thousand shall be called into the ministerie, in one countrie, not a quarter of them knowing where to hauehave any liuing or charge? And what do they then? Runne stragling, and rouing ouer countries, from towne to towne, from citie to citie, from shire to shire, and from one place to another, till they hauehave spent al that euer they hauehave, and then the most of them either become beggers, or else attempt wicked and vnlawfull meanes to liue by, to the great dishonour of God, and slander of the word.

Theod.

Me thinke this is a great abuse, that so manie, or any at all should be called into the ministerie, not hauing flocks, and charges prouided for them before.

Amphil.

It is a great abuse indéed. For if pastor come of Pasco, to feed, if he be not a shepheard that hath no flock, and if he be not a feeder, that giueth no sustinance, nor a father that hath no childe, then are they no shepheards, nor no watchmen sent from the Lord, that hauehave neither flocks, nor charges to watch ouer. For he that is made a shepheard (or a minister) that hath no particular flocke readie to receiue him, is so far from being a lawfull shepheard, by reason of his former admission, that he is rather made a pastor by the church that hireth him to be their watchman and guide, than of him that first called him into that function. And therefore woulde I wish that bishops and others to whome it doth (Ex officio) apperteine to call, and admit pastors, and teachers in the church of GOD, to bee verie carefull héerein, and not rashly to lay their handes vponupon any, before they hauehave had sufficient triall as well of their life and doctrine, as also of the flock and charge where they shal be resident, that they go not like maisterlesse hounds vp and downe the countries to the slander of the Gospell.

Theod.

Why? Then I perceiue you would hauehave none called into the ministerie, before there be a place void for him, is not that your meaning?

Amphil.

That is my meaning indéed.

Theod.

But are you able to prooue your assumption, out of the word of God, or else I will giuegive but small credit to you in such matters of controuersie as this is?

Amphil.

I hauehave not, neither doe I meane to speake anie thing vntounto you touching these matters, but what I am able (I trust) to prooue by the worde of GOD. And yet I grant Errare possum (for Hominis est labi, & decipi, Man may bee deceiued and fall) but Hereticus esse nolo, Erre I may, but heretike I will not be. No, so soone as I shall be conuinced by the manifest worde of God, of any of my former positions or assertions, I will willingly subscribe to the truth. But being persuaded as I am, giuegive me leaue, I beséech you (vnderunder correction) to speake what I thinke. But now to the purpose. In the first chapter of the Actes of the apostles recorded by the Euangelist Saint Luke, wee read that Matthias succéeding Iudas the traitour in the administration of the apostleship, was not chosen nor elected (notwithstanding that the apostles by the reuelation of the spirite of GOD, knew that he should fall from the same in the end) vntill the place was voide, and emptie. In the sixt chapter of the Actes of the apostles wee reade also of seuen deacons, which were chosen for the dailie ministring to the poore, but when I pray you? Not before the church (destitute of their seruice) had néed of them, nor before there were places readie to receiue them, wherein they might exercise their function, and calling. Then if the apostles would not choose not so much as deacons, which is an office in the church of God farre inferiour to the office of the pastor, or preacher, before places were void and readie to receiue them, much lesse would they, or did they choose or call any pastor into the church of God, before the church stood in need of him, and before there be a place readie to receiue him. Besides that, we read not thorough the whole euangelicall historie, that euer the apostles called any to be pastors and preachers of the word, before such time as there were places void for them. Common reason me …inke, and daily experience should teach vsus this truth sufficiently, if we were not wilfully blinded, that when any church or congregation is destitute of a pastor, it were better to place there one able person, than to make two or three hundred, or mo vnable fellowes, and they for want of liuing to runne stragling the countries ouer, without any liuing or maintenance at all, being glad of any thing. For as the old saieng is: Hungrie dogs eate sluttish puddings.

Theod.

What order would you hauehave obserued in this?

Amphil.

Me thinke this were a verie good order. That euerie church or congregation being destitute of a pastor should present to the bishops, and others to whom it dooth appertaine, one or two, three or foure able persons, or mo, or lesse, as they conueniently can, whose liues and conuersations they hauehave had sufficient triall of, whose soundnesse in religion, integritie of life, and godly zeale to the truth they are not ignorant of. Then the bishops and others to whom it doth apperteine, to examine and trie them thoroughly for their sufficiencie in learning, soundnesse in doctrine, and dexteritie in teaching, and finding them furnished with sufficient gifts for such an honorable calling to admit them, to lay their hands vppon them, and to send them foorth (the chiefest of them) to that congregation or church so destitute. Which order if it were strictly obserued and kept (as it ought to be) then should not so manie run abroad in the countries to seeke liuings, then should not churches bee pestered with insufficient ministers. Then should not the bishops be so deceiued in manie as they be. And no maruell. For how should the bishop choose but be deceiued in him, whom he neuer sawe before, whose conuersation he knoweth not, whose disposition hee is ignorant of, and whose qualities and properties in generall, he suspecteth not? Whereas if this order were established, that euerie church destitute of a pastor should present certeine able men, whose conuersation and integritie of life in euerie respect they perfectly knowe (for the whole church is not likely to erre in iudging of their conuersations, who hauehave béene either altogither, or for the most part conuersant amongst them) then (as I say, should not the bishop be deceiued in any, nor yet any church scandalized with the wicked liues of their pastors (or rather depastors) as they be. For now it is thought sufficient for the certeintie of his conuersation, if he either hauehave letters dimissorie from one bishop to another (whereas they little or nothing knowe the conuersation of the man) or else letters commendatorie from any gentleman, or other, especially if they be of any reputation. If he can get these things, he is likely to spéede I warrant him. Which thing is scarce well in my iudgement. For you knowe one priuate man, or two, or thrée, or foure may peraduerture either write vponupon affection, or else bee corrupted with bribes or gifts, whereas the whole church cannot, nor would not. Therefore is the other the surer way.

Theod.

How prooue you that the churches that are destitute of a pastor, ought to present him whom they would hauehave admitted, to the bishop, and not the bishop to intrude vponupon the church whom he will?

Amphil.

In the first chapter of the Actes of the apostles before cited, we read, that after the defection of Iudas the traitour, the apostle Peter knowing it necessarie that one shoulde be chosen in his place, to giuegive testimonie and witnesse of the resurrection, and ascension of Christ Iesus, commanded the church to present one or two, or mo, as they thought good, that hee with his fellowe brethren might confirme and allow them. And therevppon saith the text, they chose two, to wit, Matthias, and Ioseph, surnamed Bersabas. And the church hauing presented them, they were elected, confirmed, and allowed of the apostles and elders. Also in the foresaide sixt chapter of the Acts of the apostles when the deacons (whose office was to make collections for the poore, and to sée the same bestowed vponupon them without fraud or deceit) were to be chosen, the text saith, that the apostles desired the church to choose foorth seuen men from amongst them, of honest report, & ful of the holie Ghost, which they might appoint to that businesse. By all which reasons appereth, that the church ought to present him, or them, whom they would hauehave to be admitted, and not that the bishop ought to present, to allow,, or to intrude him vponupon the church at his pleasure against the will thereof.

Theod.

Why would you not hauehave pastors to be thrust vponupon the churches, whether the churches will or not?

Amphil.

Bicause it is manifest that no church will so willingly receiue, nor yet so louingly imbrace him that is intruded vpō them against their wils, as they will doe him that they like of, choose, and allow of themselues. And if the churches beare not a singular louelove, fauour, good will, and affection to their pastor, it is vnpossible that they should heare him, or learne of him with profit to their soules. And if they heare him not Auide & sitienter (as we say) Greedily and thirstily thereby to profit, then shal they perish euerlastingly, in that the word of God is the ordinarie meane appointed by the diuine maiestie. And therefore in conclusion if there be not a mutual amitie, louelove, and affection betwixt the pastor and his flocke▪ and if that the one l…ue not the other, as themselues, it is not to be looked for that either the one shall teach, or the other receiue any thing to their soules health, but rather the cleane contrarie.

Theod.

I pray you what is your iudgement in this? What if a man be once lawfully called into the ministerie, may he euer vponupon anie occasion whatsoeuer, leaue off the same function, and applie himselfe to secular affaires?

Amphil.

There is a twofold calling. The one a diuine calling immediately from God, the other a humane calling immediately from and by man. Now he that hath the first diuine calling (his conscience suggesting the same vntounto him, and the spirit of God certifieng his spirit of the certeintie thereof) being furnished with gifts and graces necessarie for such a high function and office (as God calleth none, but he indueth them first with gifts, and graces necessarie for their calling) and afterwards is lawfully called of man according to the prescript of Gods word, hauing a flocke appointed him wherevpon to attend, this man may not, nor ought not at any hand to giuegive ouer his calling, but to perseuere in the same to the end, for that he hath both the diuine and humane callings, being furnished with all gifts, and graces necessarie (in some measure) for the discharge of his high function and calling. Yet notwithstanding in time of extreame persecution, when Gods truth is persecuted, and his glorie defaced, if he have not wherewithall to maintaine his estate otherwise, he may for the time giuegive himselfe to manuall occupations, and corporall exercises in the affaires of the worlde, as we sée the apostles themselues did, who after Christ Iesus was crucified gaue themselues to their old occupations of fishing, making of of nets, tents, pauilions, and the like. But vponupon the other side, if a man hauehave not this diuine calling, his conscience bearing him witnesse thereof, nor yet the graces, gifts, and ornaments of the minde, fit for his calling (which whosoeuer hath not, it is a manifest argument that the Lorde hath not sent him, for those that hee sendeth, hee furnisheth with all kinde of graces, and giftes necessarie for their callings) this man though he be called by humane calling neuer so precisely, yet he may, nay hee ought to leaue his function, as vnwoorthie to occupie a roome in the church of God, representing (as an idoll doth) that thing which hee is not. Besides, hee that is compelled, and inforced either by friendes (as manie are) or by pouertie (as not a few bee) or for anie other respect else to take that high function vponupon him, without the testimonie of a good conscience, being not furnished with gifts, and graces fit for such a calling (which argueth directly that God hath not called him) hee I say is so farre from being bounde neuer to leaue his function and calling, that hee ought not one minute of an houre to continue in the same, though he bee called by man a thousande times. Therefore he that is a minister, and hath charge of soules committed vntounto him, let him if hee bee not furnished with such gifts …s his high calling requireth, in the name of GOD make no doubt of it to giuegive ouer his function vntounto others that are able for their giftes to discharge the same, in the meane time giuing himselfe to godlie exercises of life, as God may be glorified, his conscience disburthened, and the commonwealth profited.

Theod.

But I hauehave heard of some that considering the naughtinesse of their calling, and their owne insufficiencie to discharge the same, hauehave therefore left off their function, giuing themselues to secular exercises, and in the ende hauehave béene inforced to resume their former function vponupon them againe, and that whether they would or not. How thinke you of this?

Amphil.

I thinke truely that they who compelled them to take againe that function which they were not able to discharge, and therefore lest it hauehave gréeuously offended therein. This is as if I knowing a simple ignorant foole presumptuously to hauehave taken vponupon him a great and waightie charge, yea such a charge as all the wisedome in the world is not able thoroughly to performe, and when he in taking a view of his owne insufficiencie, shuld be mooued to leaue his charge to others better able to execute the same than hee, I should notwithstanding not onelyonly counsell, but also compell him to resigne againe his former great charge which I knowe he is neither woorthie, nor yet able euer to accomplish. Thinke you not that he that compelleth him to take againe that office or calling which before he had least for his inabilitie, shall not answere for the same, yes truely, you may be sure of it? In conclusion, he that is sufficiently furnished with such gifts as are necessarie for his calling, & withal is found able to discharge in some sort his duty ought not to leaue his function (for to such a on that so doth, Christ saith hee that laieth hande vppon the plough, and looketh backe, is not fit for the kingdome of God.) But againe, he that hath not these gifts, and graces sufficient for his calling, to the discharge of his dutie ought not to occupie a place in the church of God, as the pastor thereof, much lesse ought he when he hath (for his inabiltie) leaft the same to be constraied to resume againe his former function, and calling, which he is not able to discharge. But hereof inough.

Theod.

Then I perceiue that any minister or ecclesiasticall person that hath not gifts sufficient to discharge his duty may with good conscience leaue their functions, and giuegive themselues to liue by their labors, as others temporall men doe, may they not?

Amphil.

Yes, with a better conscience than to retaine them being not able to discharge them in any small measure. For with what cō science can he receiue temporall things of his flocke, and is not able to giuegive them spirituall? With what face can a shepeheard receiue of his sheepe, the milke, the wooll, and fleece, and yet will not, or cannot giuegive to the same either meate or drinke sufficiently? With what conscience can he receiue fortie pound, a hundred pound, or two hundred pound, a yeere of his poore flocke, and is not able to breake to them the breade of life, in such forme, and maner as he ought? Nay how can he euer hauehave quiet conscience that knowing that the blood of all those that die ghostlie for want of instruction shal be powred vponupon his head at the day of iudgment, and be demanded at his handes, will yet notwithstanding refeane the same charge, and function to himselfe still, not being able to discharge the least iote of the same? Therefore would I wish eueryevery man of what office, function, or calling soeuer he be, if he be not able to discharge his dutie in the same, to giuegive it ouer, and not for greedinesse of a little mucke or dung of the earth, (For monie is no better) to cast away their soules, which Iesus Christ hath bought with his most precious blood.

Theod.

Is it lawfull for a pastor or minister that hath a flocke to departe from the same. In the time of plague, pestilence, or the like, for feare of infection?

Amphil.

Is he a good sheepeheard that when he seeth the wolues comming, will take him to his heeles and runne away? Or is he a sure freend that when a man hath most neede of his helpe, will then get him packing, not shewing any fréendship towardes him at all? I thinke not? And truly no more is he a good pastor, or minister, (but rather a depastor, and minisher) that in time of any plague pestilence or sicknes, whatsoeuer will conuey himselfe away from his flocke, for feare of infection, at the houre of death, when the poore people hauehave most need of comfort aboue all other times, then is he their pastor that shoulde féede them, the furthest from them. When they stande vppon the edge as it were of saluation, or damnation, then permits he the wolfe to hauehave the rule ouer them. Our Sauiour Christ saith Bonus pastor animulam dat pro ouibus ▪ A good shepheard giueth his life for his shéepe, but these felowes are so far from giuing their liues for their sheepe, that they seeke to saue their owne liues with the destruction of their whole flocke. This is the louelove that they beare vntounto their flocke, this is the care they hauehave ouer their soules health, which Christ Iesus bought so deere with the price of his blood. Out vppon those shepheards that for feare of incurring of corporall death (which is to the Godly an entraunce into parpetuall glorie) will hazard manie a thousande to die a corporall and a spirituall death both, yea, & death of damnation both of body & soule for euer. Do they thinke that their blod shall not be asked at their hands at y^e gret day of the Lord. Do they thinke y^t their flieng away from their flock, is a mean to preserue their liues y^e longer vponupon earth: Is not God able to strike them as well in the fields, as in the city, as well in the country as in the towne, in one place, as well as in another? Is not his power eueriewhere? Is not his messenger death in al places? Saith he not in the booke of Deuteron▪ that if we doe not those things, which he hath commanded vsus in his sacred word, cursed shall wee bee at home, and cursed in the fields. And saith he not further, that the plague and pestilence, the botch, bile, blaine, or else what deadly infection soeuer shall followe vsus, and lay hold vponupon vsus, in what place soeuer we be, and shall neuer depart from vsus, till it hauehave quite consumed vsus from the face of the earth? And doe these fugitiues that ouerrun their flocks in time of infection, thinke that they shall escape the heauie wrath and vengeance of God for their tergiuersation and backsliding from their duties? Doe they thinke that God cannot saue them frm corporal death, but with the breach of their duties towards God? Is not the Lord as well able to defend them from any deadly infection if it be his good pleasure, as he was to defend Sidrach, Misaach, and Abednego from the flaming fire? Daniell from the mouth of the lions, Ionas frō the iawes of the mightie whale, with manie others that trusted in him? Doe they thinke that his arme is shortened, or his power weakened? Is he not able to deliuer his children, that in dooing of their duties depend vponupon his prouidence? And to bee plaine with them, me think that in flieng away from their flockes, they shew themselues to thinke that either God is not almightie, or else noc mercifull, or neither. For if they beléeued that he were almightie, and that hee were able to saue them, then they would neuer run awaie from their flocke, but depending vponupon his prouidence, beléeue that he is as well able to deliuer them in one place as in another, if it bee his good pleasure. And if they beléeued that he were mercifull, then would they rest vponupon the same, not doubting, but as he is almightie, and omnipotent, and therefore can doe al things, so he is most mercifull, and therfore wil preserue al those that put their trust in him. If a temporall magistrate that exerciseth but a ciuil office in the commonwealth shuld go away from his charge for feare of infection or plague, wheras his present abode might do more good than his absence, he greatly offendeth, how much more then offendeth he, that being a pastor or féeder of soules, flieth away from his charge, wheras his presence might doe a thousand times more good than his absence? And if it please the Lord to take them away to himselfe, are they not most happie? Enter they not into eternal glorie? And hauehave they not an end of all miseries and paines in this life, and the perfect fruition of perpetuall ioie in the heauens? Are they not blessed, if when the Lord shal call them, he find them so well occupied as in féeding, & breaking the bread of life to the pore members of Christ Iesus for whose sakes he shed his hart blood?

Theod.

But they say, we ought not to tempt God, which thing they must needs doe if they shoulde tarrie when they see death before their face. And they say further, that it is written that we must keepe the whole from the sicke, and the sicke from the whole. Besids saie they, Natura dedit, potestatem tuendi vitam omni animanti, Nature hath giuen power of defending of life to euerie liuing creture. Againe, eueryevery thing fleeth from his contrarie, but death is contrarie to nature, for it came through the corruption of nature, therfore we flie from the same by the instinct of nature. These and the like fond reasons they alledge, for their excuse in flieng from their flocks, and charges, what say you to them?

Amphil.

I can saie little to them. But onelie this, that none of all these reasons doe priuiledge them to discontinue from their flockes and charges. And whereas they saie, that their staieng were a tempting of God, it is verie vntrue, it is rather a reuerent obediēce to this tripled cōmandement, Pasce oues meas, pasce oues meas, pasce oues meas, Feede my sheepe, feede my sheepe, feede my sheepe. But indeede if it were so that a priuate man who hath no kind of function nor office, neither ecclesiasticall nor temporall, seeing himselfe if he staie stil in great danger of death, & might auoid the danger by flieng, & so by the grace of God prolong his life, and yet will not, this man if he tarie tempteth the Lord, and is a murtherer of himselfe before God. And to such it is said, thou shalt keepe the whole from the sicke, & the sick from the whole. This is the meaning & sence of these words, and not that they do priuiledge any man for not doing of his dutie. But notwithstanding all that can be said in confutacion of this great & extreeme contempt of their duties, I hauehave knowne and doe know some ministers (nay wolues in sheepes clothing) in Dnalgne that in time of any plague, pestilence or infection, thogh there hath bin no gret danger at all that hauehave bin so far from continuing amongst their flock, y^t if any one of them were sicke, although of neuer so cōmon or vsuall disease, yet fearing to be infected with the contagion thereof they hauehave absented themselnes altogither, from visiting y^e sick according as they ought, & as dutie doth bind them. Yea some of them (suppose you of mercenaries, & hirelings, but not of god pastors) are so nice, so fine & so feareful of death forsoth y^e in no case they cannot abide to visit the sicke, neither by day nor by night. But in my iudgement it is as incident to their office and dutie, to visite, to comfort, to instruct, and relieue the sicke, at the houre of death, as it is for them to preach the word of God to their flocke al the daies of their life. And peraduenture they may doe more good in one howre at the last gaspe, then they hauehave done all the daies of their life before. For he that in his life time hath had in small estimation the blessed worde of God, but following his owne humors in hope to liue long, hath lead a very wicked and impenitent life, nowe through the consideration and sight of death, which he seeth before his eies, togither with godly exhortations, admonitions, and consolations, out of the word of God, may easelie be withdrawne from his former wicked life, and dieng in the faith of Iesus Christ, with true repentance for his sinnes, to fore committed, liue for euer in ioye both of body & soule, whereas if exhortations had not bin, he might (happily) hauehave died irrepentant, or vtterly desperate to his euerlasting destruction for euer. Yea, it is cōmonly seene, that those who could neuer be wonne to Christ Iesus, all the daies of their life before, yet at the last howre they are soone recouered. Therefore ought not the pastors to neglecte their duties therein, but warely, and carefully to watche ouer their flocks, night and day without ceasing that whē the great shephard of the sheepe commeth, he may rewarde them with the immercessible crowne of eternall glory. And thus much be it spoken hereof.

Theod.

In whome doth the election of the minister or pastor consist in the church onelyonly or in the bishops?

Amphil.

I tolde you before (as I remember) that the church might examine the life, the conuersation, and disposition of him, or them, whome they would hauehave to be their pastor, and finding the same good to present him, or them, to the bishops, or elders to whome it apperteineth, to examine for his sufficiencie in knowledge, and dexteritie, in teaching and handling the word of God, and finding him a man furnished with gifts and graces necessary for such a high vocation, to call him lawfullie according to the word of God, and so to sende him foorth into the Lords haruest, as a faithfull laborer therein.

Theod.

But some are of opinion that the churches themselues of their owne absolute, and plenarie power ought to choose their pastor, and not bishops,

Ampil.

The churches hauehave no further power in the election of their pastor, than as I hauehave told you, that is, to iudge of his conuersation & integritie of life, referring the whole action besides to the bishops, and elders. For if the churches should elect their minister or pastor of themselues absolutely, besides that it would bréed confusion (for some would choose one, some another, some this, and some that, neuer contenting thēselues with any) the church should doe that also, which were directly contrarie to the word of God. For certeine it is the church hath no absolute power by the word of God to elect their pastor, to choose him, to cal him orderly in such forme as is appointed in the word, obseruing all kinde of rites, ceremonies, & orders belonging thereto. Neither was it euer séene that any church did euer practise the same. For in the dais of the apostles did the churches any more than choose foorth certeine persons of a tried conuersation, & presented thē to the apostles? And did not the apostles then whom our bishops now in this action do represent) lay their hands vponupon them, approue them (after triall had of their sufficiencie in knowledge) and sent them forth into the Lords vineyard? The churches laid not their hands vponupon them, or as some call it consecrated them not, nor vsed not any other ceremoniall rite in the election of them, as the apostles did. But as I grant that the church for som cause, and in so… respects is not to be excluded frō a consultatiue voyce (as before) or from being made priuie at al to the election of their pastor, so I denie that the church may absolutely of his owne plenarie power cal their pastor, all ceremonies and rites thereto belonging obserued, for that is to be don and executed of the bishops & elders, and not of the churches consisting of lay men, and for the most part rude, and vnlearned.

Theod.

What say you to a seigniorie or eldership, were it not good for the state of the church at this day that y^e same were established in eueryevery congregation, as it was in y^e apostles daies.

Amphil.

The seueral estates and conditions of the apostolicall churches, and of ours (al circumstances duly considered) are diuers, and much different one from another, and therefore though a seigniorie or eldership then in euerie particular church were necessarie, yet now vnderunder christian princes it is not so néedfull. The churches then wanted christian princes and magistrates to gouerne the same, and therefore had néed of some others to rule in the church. But God be thanked we hauehave most christian kings, pri…ces, and gouernors, to rule and gouerne the church, & therfore we stand in lesse néed of the other. And yet notwithstanding I grant that a seigniorie in eueryevery congregation were to be wished, if it could be brought to passe, yet cannot I perceiue, but that it would rather bring confusion, than reformation, considering the state of the church at this day. For in the apostles times when seigniories were ordeined, we read not of any shires, dioces, or precincts, where bishops and ecclesiasticall magistrates might exercise their authoritie and gouernement, as now they doe, and therefore, there being neither bishops, ecclesiasticall nor ciuill magistrates (as we hauehave now) it was necessarie that the seigniories shuld be ordeined. But now we hauing al these things, stand not in such necessitie of them, as the churches in the apostles daies did. Besides, the institution of elders was but meere ceremoniall, and temporall, and therefore not to continue alwaies, neither ought the necessitie thereof to binde all churches. Neither doe I thinke that all churches are bound for euer to one forme of externall gouernement, but that eueryevery church may alter, and change the same, according to the time, and present state therof, as they shal see the same to make for the glorie of God, and the common peace of the church.

Theod.

What say you to deacons? Is their office necessarie or not in the church of God at this day?

Amphil.

Their office (which was to make collections for the poore, to gather the beneuolencies, and contributions of euerie one that were disposed to giuegive, and to sée the same bestoed vponupon the poore and néedie members of the church) is very necessarie, and without doubt ought to be continued for euer. But yet is not the church tied to their names onelyonly, but to their office. Which office is executed by honest substantiall men (called Churchwardens or the like) chosen by the consent of the whole congregation to the same end and purpose, who daily gathering the friendlye beneuolencies of the churches, bestow, or sée the same bestowed vponupon the poore, and indigent of the same church, which was the greatest part of the deacons duties in the apostles daies. So that albeit wee hauehave not the name, we yet hold their office in substance and effect.

Theod.

What is your iudgement, ought there to be any bishops in the churches of christians?

Amphil.

To doubt whether there ought to be bishops in the churches of chr…stians, is to doubt of the truth it selfe. For is there not mention made of their names, dignities, functions, and callings, almost in eueryevery chapter of the new testament, in all the epistles of Paule, of Peter, of Iohn, of Iude, and of all the rest? Besides that did not the apostles themselues constitute and ordeine bishops and elders, and doe they not woonderfully commende the excellencie of their calling, inferring that those that rule well, are worthye of double honour? Whereby appeereth that bishops are not onlye needefull in the churches of christians, but also most needfull, as without whome I can scarcely see how the state of the church could well bee maintained. And therefore those that contend that they are not necessarie in a Christian Common wealth, shewe them selues either wilfull, waiwarde, or maliciouslye blinde, and striuing to catch their owne shadowes, they labour all in vaine, giuing manifest demonstration of their more than extreame follie to all the world.

Theod.

Well. Let it bee granted (as it cannot bee denied) that they are moste necessarie, yet in this I would verie gladlye bee absolued, whether they maye lawfullye vendicate or challenge to themselues superioritie, and primacie aboue their fellowe brethren of the ministerie or no, for some holde that there ought to bee equalitie in the ministerie, and no superioritie at all, how say you?

Amphil.

They doe not vendicate or challenge anie superioritie or primacie to themselues ouer their brethren in respect of their common callings, and functions (for therein the poorest pastor or shepheard that is, is coequall with them, they themselues will not denie) but in respect of dignitie, authoritie, and honour, which the prince and church doth bestowe vponupon them. So that the superioritie that they hauehave ouer their brethren, resteth in dignitie, authoritie, and honour, which it hath pleased the prince to dignifie them withall aboue their felowe brethren, and not in calling, function, or office, for therein they are all coequall togither. But if any curious he…s should demand why the prince should aduance any of the cleargie to such high dignitie, authoritie, and primacie aboue his brethren, I answer as it is in the Gospell: Is thine e…e euill, bicause the prince is good? May not the prince giuegive his gifts, his, dignities, and promotions to whom he will? And if the prince of his roiall clemencie be minded to bestowe vponupon his subiect any dignity or promotion, is it christian avedience to refuse the same? Nay is it not extréeme ingratitude towards his prince? Besides, who seeth not, that if there should be no superioritie (I meane in dignitie, & authoritie only) the same honorable office or calling would growe into contempt? For is it not an old saieng, and a true, Familiaritas, siue aequalitas parit contemptum, Familiaritie, or coequallitie doth euer bring contempt. And therefore take awaye authoritie, and honor from the magistrates either temporall or spirituall, and ouerthrowe the same altogither. If authoritie should not be dignified, as well with glorie, and externall pompe the better to grace the same, & to shew forth the maiestie thereof, would it not soone grow to be dispised, vilipended and naught set by? And therefore the more to innoble, and set foorth the excellencie of this honorable calling of a bishop, hath the prince, & the churches thought it good to bestow such authoritie, dignitie, and honor vponupon them, and not for anie other cause whatsoeuer. And therefore seeing it is the pleasure of the prince to bestowe such dignitie, authoritie, and honor vponupon them, me thinke, any sober christians should easely tolerate the same.

Theod.

Yea, but they saie, that there …ught to be no superioritie in the ministerie, bringing in the example of the apostles themselues amongst whom was no superiority, inequalitie, or principallitie at all?

Amphil.

Indeede amongst the apostles there was no superioritie, I grant, neither in office calling, authoritie, nor otherwise, but al were equall in ech respecte, one to another. But what than? The apostles were sent to preach, to the churches, and not to gouerne (and therefore they choose elders to rule the same) but our bishops are as well to gouerne, and to rule the churches in some respects, as to preach the worde. And therfore though there were no superioritie amongst the apostles, yet maye there be amongst our bishops in respect of gouerment, dignitie, and authoritie. And wheras they saie there ought to be no superioritie in the ministerie at all, I answeare no more there is in respect of euerie ones function, forme of calling, and office to preach the word and minister the sacraments. But in respect of gouernement, authoritie, dignitie, and honor, there is superioritie, and I am perswaded so ought to be. In which opinion, vntill they hauehave disprooued it, I meane Christ willing to persiste.

Theod.

But they adde further, and say that it strengtheneth the hands of the aduersaries, the papists. For saie they the papists may as well affirme that christian emperours kings, and potentates, and euen the churches of God themselues hauehave giuen to the pope that authoritie, that dignitie, and honor which he hath or claimeth aboue his fellowe brethren, as well as the bishop may say so. Besides it confirmeth the opinion of soueraigntie ouer at the churches in the world, For say they may not the pope saie that he receiued plenarie power to be head ouer all the world, from christian kings, emperours, and potentates, as well as the bishops may say, we receiued this power to be superior to our brethren from christian kings and princes. Now whether these reasons be a like I would gladly know.

Amphil.

They be verie vnlike, and so vnlike as there is no equallitie comparison, or semblance betwixt them. For first of all let thē note, that the pope nor any of his complices, and adherents doe not holde, nor pretende to holde (no they dare as well eate off their fingers as to say so, for then were their state in a wofull case) that their archdiuell, their god the pope I should say doth receiue his power either of authoritie, superioritie, primacie, souereigntie, or head ouer all the world from any earthly creature, but immediately from God himselfe. But whereas hée sayth that hee receiued his power of superioritie ouer all the worlde from no earthie creature, but from God himselfe, it is manifest that he receyued it neyther from God, (for his vsurped power is contrarie to God, and to his words in euerie respecte) nor from anie christian man, but from the Deuill himselfe, whose vicegerent or Liefetenant generall in his kingedome of impietie he shewes himselfe to be. Than let them note, that although hee pretended to holde his vsurped authoritie from man (as hee doth not,) yet is there no man howe mightie an Emperour, King, Prince, or Potentate soeuer, that is able proprio iure to giuegive him authoritie ouer all the worlde, without great and manifeste iniurye done to all other Princes, as to giuegive the soueraigntie, or chieftie of their Landes from them, to a straunger. But a Prince may lawfullye bestowe, and geue to his subiectes anie prerogatiue, title, authoritie, office function, gouernment, or superioritie of anie thing within his owne dominions and kingdomes, but no further he maye not. And therefore this reason of theirs holdeth not, that the Pope maye as well arrogate the one to himselfe, as the Byshops may the other to themselues.

Theod.

Séeing now it cannot be denied, but that bishops are most necessarie, and that they may also lawfully hold superioritie ouer their brethren (in respect of gouernement, regiment or authoritie) being giuen them of the prince, what say you then to this? Whether may a bishop be called by the name of an archbishop, metropolitane, primate, or by the name of my Lord bishop, my Lords grace, the right honourable, and the like, or not? For me thinke these titles and names are rather peculiar to the temporaltie than to them, & do sauour of vainglorie, and worldly pompe, rather than of any thing else. And which is more, me thinke they are against the expresse word of God. Wherefore I couet greatly to heare your iudgement thereof?

Amphil.

These names and titles may séeme to sauour of vaineglorie indéed, if they should arrogate them to themselues Iure diuino, as they doe not. But if you wil consider by whom they were giuen them, and how they doe require them, you wil not thinke it much amisse, nor farre discrepant from the sinceritie of the Gospell. First therefore note that they were giuen them by christian princes to dignifie, to innoble, to decore, and to set foorth the dignitie, the excellencie, and worthines of their callings. Secondly let them note that they require them as due vntounto them by the donation and gifture of men, and not Iure diuino, and therefore being giuen them for the causes aforesaid by christian kings and princes, they may in that respect hold them still without any offence to the diuine goodnesse, or his faithfull spouse vponupon the earth. But if they shuld claime them as due vntounto them by the lawe of God, as they doe not, then should they offend. For our sauiour Christ seeing his disciples and apostles ambiciously to affect the same vaineglorious titles and names, set before them the example of the heathen kings, thereby the rather to withdrawe them from their vaine humour, saieng: Reges gentium dominantur eis, &c. The kings of the gentils beare rule ouer them and those that exercise authoritie ouer them, be called gratious Lords, but Vos autem non sic, You shall not be so. In the which words he vtterly denieth them (and in them all others to the worlds end, that in the same office and function of life should succeed them) the titles of Lords, graces, or the like. The apostle also biddeth them to beware that they challenge not those vaine titles to themselues by the lawe of God, when he saith (speaking to bishops and pastors) Be not Lords ouer your flocks, &c. By these and manie other the like places of holie writt, it is cleare that they cannot arrogate these names, or titles to themselues by y^e word of God, neyther doe they, but (as I hauehave said) by the donation, the beneuolence, and gifture of christian Princes for the reuerent estimati- they bare and ought to beare to their high function and calling, in that they are his Liefetenants, his vicegerents in his Church, his messengers, his Ambassadors, the disclosers and proclaimers of his secretes, and his Aungels, (for so are they called in the scriptures) & therfore in respecte of the excellencie hereof, these names were giuen and attributed vntounto them. And truely to speake my simple iudgement, I sée not but that these names doe dignifie their callinges, shewe forth the maiestie thereof, and des moue the Churches to hauehave the same high calling in more reuerence, & honor, than otherwise they would, if they were called by bare & naked names onelie. But notwithstanding either this that hath béene saide, or anie thinge els that can be said herein, there are some waiward spirits lately reuiued, who held the same names to be méere Antichristian, blasphemous and wicked, and suche as at anie hande a Minister of the Gospell ought not to bee called by. But whereas they holde them to bée Antichristian, I holde them to be Christian names, and geuen by Christian Princes to the innobling and garnishing of their offices, functions, and callinges, which doubtlesse is a glorie to God denie it who will, or who can. And therefore in conclusion I say, that Byshops though not by the lawe of God, yet by the positiue law, donation, and gifture of Christian Princes, maye lawfully assume the saide titles, and names to them for the causes before cited. And therefore these names and titles béeing meere indifferent, and not derogating from the glorie of God, but rather making for the same, they are not of anye wise, sober, or faythfull Christian, neyther to bee inueighed against nor yet to bee in anye respecte dislyked beeing vsed as before. And thus much of the names and titles of Byshops.

Theodo.

Maye Byshops exercise temporall authoritie together with Ecclesiasticall, and maye they bee Iustices of peace, Iustices of Quorum, Iustices of Assises, Ewer, Determiner, and the lyke, or maye they as Capytall Iudges geue desinytiue sentence of lyfe and death vponupon malefactors and others, that by the iudiciall lawe of man hauehave deserued to dye?

Amphil.

There is neither of the callings temporall, nor ecclesiasticall, but it requireth a whole and perfect man, to execute the same. And if there were neuer founde any one man yet so perfect, as could throughly, and absolutlie performe his office in either of the callings temporall or ecclesiastical, much lesse can there euer one man be found, that is able to discharg them both. It is hard therefore that these two callings should concurre in one man. This is as though a man hauing an importable burthen alreadie vponupon his backe, should yet hauehave an other almost as burthenous vrged vppon him. And therefore as it were absurde to see a temporall magistrate mount into the pulpit, preach the worde, and minister the sacraments so absurde it is to see an ecclesiasticall magistrate exercise the authoritie temporall, and to giuegive sentence condemnatorie of life, & death, vponupon any criminous person, which properlie …elongeth to the temporall power. Besids, it is a great discredite to the temporall magistrate, because it may be thought that they are not wise nor politique inough to execute their office, nor discharge their duties without the aide, and assistance of the other. And which is more it hindereth them from the discharge of their duties in their owne calling, for it is written, no man can serue two masters, but either he must betraie the one or the other. When the woman taken in adultery was apprehended, and brought vntounto Christ, he refused to giuegive iudgement of hir, and yet it was a matter in effect ecclesiasticall, & appertained to an ecclesiasticall iudge. Then what ought they to do in matters meere ciuil? Againe our sauior Christ, when the yong man requested him to deuide the inheritance betwixt his brother, & him, refused the same saieng, Quis me constituit iudicem inter vos? Who made me a iudge or a deuider betwixt you. Whereby appeareth how farre ecclesiasticall persons ought to bee frō hauing to doe, with temporal matters. But whereas they say the bishops of Dnalgne do exercise temporall authoritie, and doe it as iudges capitall, giuing sentence condemnatorie of life, and death, it is verie vntrue otherwise than thus, to be present at the same, & to hauehave a consultatiue exhortatiue, or consentatiue voice onelyonly. Which vse me thinkes is v… rie good and laudable in my iudgement. For whereas the temporal magistrates not vnderstanding in euerie point the deapth of Gods lawe if they shoulde doe anie thing either against the same, or the lawe of a good conscience, they might informe them thereof, that all things might bée done to the glorie of God, the comforte of the poore members of Christe Iesus, and the benefit of the common welth.

Theodo.

What fashion of apparell doe the pastors, and Ministers weare vsually in their common affaires?

Amphil.

The same fashion that others doe for the most parte, but yet decente, and comlie, obseruing in euerie point a decorum. But as others weare their attire, some of this colour, some of that, some of this thinge, some of that, so they commonly weare all their apparell, at least the exteriour part of blacke colour, which as you know is a good, graue, sad, and auncient colour. And yet notwithstanding herein some of them (I speake not of all) are muche to bee blamed, in that they cānot content themselues with cōmon, and vsuall fashions, but they must chop and chaunge euerie day with the worlde. Yea some of them are as fonde in excogitating deuising and inuenting of new fashions euerie day, & in wearing the same, as the veriest Royster of them all. And as they are faultie in this respect, so are they herein to be blamed, in that they cannot contente themselues with cloth though neuer so excellent, but they must weare silkes, veluets, satans, damaskes, grograms, taffeties, and the like. I speake not agaynst those that are in authoritie for wearing of these thinges (for they both maie, and in some respectes ought to weare them for the dignifiyng of their offices and callings, which otherwise mighte growe into contempte) but against those that bée meane pastours, and Ministers, that flaunt it out in their saten doblets, taffetie doblets, silke hosen, garded gownes, cloakes, and the like. Alas howe shoulde they rebuke pryde, and excesse in others, who are as faultye therein as the reste? Therefore sayde Cato verye well, Quae culpare soles, ea tu ne feceris ipse ▪ for sayeth he, Turpe est doctori, cum culpa redarguit ipsum. Which is, those thinges which thou blamest in others, sée that thou thy selfe bee not guiltye in the same, for it is a foule blemish and a great shame and discredit, when that euyll which thou reprouest in an other, is apparent in thy selfe. For in so doing, a man reprehendeth as well himselfe as others, is a hinderance to the course of the Gospell, and what he buildeth with one hand, he pulleth down with the other. Christ Iesus the great pastor of the shéepe was himself contēted to go daily in one poore coat, beeing knit, or wouen all ouer without seeme, as the maner of y^e Palistinians is to this day. This me think was but a simple cote in the eie of the world, and yet Christ Iesus thought it pretious inough. Samuel was accustomed to walke in an olde gowne girded to him with a thong. Elias and Elizeus in a mantell, Iohn the baptist in camels haire with a girdle of a skin about his loines. The apostle Paule with a poore cloke, and the like, wherby appeareth, how farre a minister of the Gospell ought to be from pride, and worldly vanitie, obseruing the rules of christian sobrietie, as well in apparell, as in al things else, knowing that he is as a citie set vppon an hill, and as a candle set vppon a candlesticke to giuegive light, and shine to al the whole church of God. Therfore saith Christ: Sic luceat lux vestra coram hominibus, &c. Let your light so shine before men, that they seeing your good works, may glorifie your father which is in heauen: which God grant we may all doe.

Theod.

HaueHave they no other kind of apparell different from the common sort of men?

Amphil.

Yes marie hauehave they. They hauehave other attire more proper, and peculiar vntounto them (in respect of their functions and offices) as cap, tippet, surplesse, and the like. These they weare, not commonly, or altogither, but in especial when they are occupied in, or about the execution of their offices and callings, to this ēnd end purpose, that there may be a difference betwixte them, and the common sorte of people, and that the one maie be distincte from the other by this outward note or marke.

Theodo.

Is it of necessitie than required, that the Pastors and Ministers of the worde, should be distincted from other people, by anie seuerall kind of attire?

Amphil.

It is not required as of necessitie, bnt thought méete and conuenient to bee vsed for a decencie, and comlines in the Church of God. But notwithstanding the chiefest thyng wherby a pastor or minister oght to be known from the common, & vulgare sorte of people is, the preaching of the word of God, the administration of the sacraments, the execution of ecclesiastical discipline, and other censures of the Church, and withall his integritie of lyfe, and soundnesse of conuersation in euerie respecte. These are the true notes, and markes wherby a Minister of the Gospell ought to bee knowen and distincted from the other common sorte of people. And yet though these bee the chiefest notes whereby they are distinct from others of the temporaltie and laitie, yet are they not the onelie notes, or markes, for they are knowen and discerned from others also, by exteriour habite, and attire, as namely by cappe, tippet, surplesse, and such like: That as the first doth distinguish them from others, whilest they are exercised about the same, (for who is so doltishe that séeing a man preache, minister the sacraments, & execute other ecclesiasticall censures of the church, that will not iudge him to bee a Minister of the Gospell?) so the other notes of apparell (the surplesse except) may make a difference, and distinguishe them from others of the laitie abroad. To this end, that the reuerēce which is due to a good pastor, or minister of the Gospell may be giuen vntounto them. For as the Apostle saith, those elders that rule well, are worthie of double honour.

Theod.

But I hauehave heard great disputation and reasoning pro & contra, to and fro, that the pastors and ministers of the Gospell, ought not to be disseuered from the common sorte of people, by anie distincte kinde of apparell, but rather by sounding the Lordes voice on high, by ministring the sacramentes, and the like, what say you to the same?

Amphil.

Indéede there are some I confesse, that are of that opinion, and they bring in the example of Saule, enquiring of Samuell for the feers house, inferring that the Prophet was not distinct from other common people in his attire, for than Saule should easelie hauehave knowen him by the same. And the example of the damosell, that spake to Peter, inferring that whereas the mayde sayde, Thy speech bewrayeth thee, if he had bene distincte from others in attire, or outwarde apparell, shee would than hauehave sayd, Thy apparel sheweth thee to bee such a fellowe. These with the like examples they pretende to prooue that pastors and Ministers are not to bee discerned and knowen from the lay people, by anye kinde of apparell. But as I will not saie that they are to bee knowen, and discerned from others by apparell or habite onelye, (but rather by the lifting vp of their voices like Trumpetes as saith the Prophet) so I wyll not denye the same to bee no note or marke at all to knowe a Pastour or Minister of the Gospell by from others of the temporaltie, and laitie. And truelye sor my parte, I sée no great inconuenience, if they bee by a certaine kinde of decente habite (commaunded by a Christian Prince) known and discerned from others. Yet some more curious than wise, before they would weare anie distinct kind of apparell from others, they hauehave rather chosen to render vp both lininges, goods, families, and all, leauing their flockes to the mouth of the wolues.

Theod.

Is it lawfull for a minister of th… Gospell to weare a surplesse, a tippet or forked cappe, and the like kind of attire?

Amphil.

As they are commaunded by the Pope the great Antichrist of the worlde, they ought not to weare them, but as they be commaunded, and inioyned by a Christian Prince, they maie weare them without scruple of conscience. But if they should repose any religion, holinesse or sanctimonie in them, as the doting Papists doe, than doe they gréeuouslie offende, but wearing them as things méere indifferent (although it be controuersiall whether they bée things indifferente or not) I sée no cause why they maie not vse them.

Theod.

From whence came these garments can you tell, from Rome, or from whence els?

Amphil.

The most hold that they came first from Rome, the poison of all the world, & most likelie they did so, but other some searching the same more narrowlie, do hold y^t they came not from Rome, but rather from Grecia, which frō the beginning for the most part, hath euer béen contrarie to the Church of Rome. But from whence soeuer they came it skilleth not much, for béeing mere indifferent, they maie be worn or not worne without offence, according to the pleasure of the Prince, as things which of thē selues bee not euill, nor cannot hurte, excepte they be abused.

Theod.

Notwithstanding they holde this for a maxime, that in as much as they came first from the Papistes, and hauehave of them bene idolatrouslie abused, that therefore they are not, nor ought not to bee vsed of anie true pastors, or Ministers of the Gospell. Is this their assumption true, or not?

Amph.

It is no good reasō to say such a thing came from the Papistes, ergo it is naught. For we read that the Deuils confessed Iesus Christ to be the sonne of God, doth it follow therefore that the same profession is naughte, because a wicked creature vttered the same? All thinges are therefore to bee examined, whether the abuse consist in the thinges themselues, or in others that abuse them. Which being found out, let the abuses be remoued, and the thinges remaine still. A wicked man maye speake good wordes, doe good works before the world, (but because they wante the oile of faith to souple them withall, they are not good workes before the Lord) and maie ordaine a good thing which maie serue to good ends, and purposes. And because the same hath afterward béene abused, shall the thing it selfe therefore be quite saken away? No, take away the abuse, let the thinge remaine still, as it maye very well without anie offence, except to them, quibus omnia dantur scandalo, to whom all thinges are offence. And further, if these presicians would hauehave all things remoued out of the Church which hauehave béene abused to Idolatrie, than must they pull downe Churches, (for what hath bene abused more to Idolatrie and superstition?) pulpits, belles, and what not. Than must they take away the vse of bread and wine, not onelyonly from the church, but also from the vse of man in this life, because y^e same was abused to most shame full idolatrie, iu béeing dedicate to Ceres, and Bacchus, twoo stinking Idols of the Gentiles. Than must they take away not onelyonly the Epistles, and Gospels, but also the whole volume of the holy scriptures, because the Papistes abused them to idolatrie. By all which reasons with infinite the like, it manifestly appeareth, that manie things which hauehave beene instituted by Idolaters, or by them abused to Idolatrie, may be applied to good vses, and may serue to good ends, y^e abuses being takē away. Yet wold I not that any thing that hath béen idolatrously abused by the papists, should be reteined in the churches of Christians, if by any meanes they might be remoued, and better put in place.

Theodo.

Is the wearing of these garments a thing méere indifferent, or not? for some hold it is, some hold it is not?

Amph.

It is a thing w^tout al cōtrouersy mere indifferent, for whatsoeuer gods word neither expresly cōmandeth, neither directly forbiddeth, nor which bindeth not y^e conscience of a christian man, is a thing mere indifferent to be vsed, or not to be vsed, as the presēt state of y^• church, & time requireth. But it is certen that the wearing of this kind of attire is not expresly commanded in the word of God, nor directly forbid by the same, & therfore is mere indifferent, and may be vsed, or not vsed without burthē of cō science, as y^e present state of time shall require. And therfore séeing they be things indifferent, I wold wish eueryevery wise christiā to tollerate y^e same, being certen that he is neither better nor worse, for wearing or not wearing of them.

Theod.

Being things as you say mere indifferent, may any man lawfully refuse y^e wearing of thē against the cōmandement of his prince, whom next vnderunder God he ought to obey?

Amphil.

EueryEvery man is bound in conscience before God to obey his prince in all things, yea in things directly contrary to true godlines hée is boūd to shew this obediēce (but not to cōmit y^e euil) namely to submit himselfe life, lands, liuings, or els whatsoeuer he hath to y^e wil of his Princes, rather then to disobeie. If this obedience than be due to Princes in matters, contrarie to true godlinesse, what obedience than is due to thē in matters of small waight, of small importaunce, and méere triflles as these garments be, iudge you? He that disobeieth the cō maundement of his Prince, disobeieth the commaundement of God, and therfore would God all Ecclesiasticall persons that stande so muche vponupon these small pointes, that they breake the common vnitie, & band of charitie in the church of God, would nowe at the last quallifie themselues, shewe obedience to Princes lawes, and fall to preaching of Christ Iesus truelie, that his kingdome might dailie bee increased, their consciences discharged, and the Church edefied, which Christe Iesus hath bought with the shedding of his precious hart bloud.

Theod.

Maie a pastor, or a Minister of the Gospell forsake his flocke, and refuse his charge for the wearing of a surplesse, a cappe, tippet, or the like, as manie hane done of late daies, who being inforced to weare these garmentes, hauehave giuen vp their liuings, and forsaken all?

Amphil.

Those that for the wearing of these garments, being but the inuentions, the traditions, the rites, the ceremonies, the ordinances & constitutions of man, will leaue their flocks, and giuegive ouer their charges, not caring what become of the same, doe shew themselues to be no true shepheards, but such as Christ speaketh of, that when they sée the Wolfe comming will flie away, leauing their flocke to the slaughter of the gréedie wolfe. They giuegive euident demonstration also, that they are not such as the holie Ghost hath made ouerseers ouer their flocke, but rather such as being possessed with the spirite of pride and ambition, hauehave intruded them selues, to the destruction of their flocke. If they were such good shepheards as they ought to be, and so louing to their flocke, they would rather giuegive their life for their shéepe if néede required, than to runne from them, leauing them to the bloodie téeth of the mercilesse wolues. Is hee a good shepheard that watcheth dailie vppon his flocke, or hee that runnes from them for euerie light trifle? I thinke we would count him a verie negligent shepheard. And shall wee thinke him a diligent, or a good pastor, and one that would giuegive his life for his shéepe, as a good pastor should doe, that for such trifles wil estrang himselfe from his flocke for euer? Therefore I beséech God to giuegive them grace to looke to their charges, and to let the other trifles alone, being no part of our saluation or damnation.

Theod.

But they saie they refuse the wearing of these garments, because they are offensiue to the godlie, a scandall to the weake brethren, a hinderaunce to manie in comming to the Gospel, & an induration to the papists hardning their hearts, in hope that their trumperie will once come in again to their singular comfort.

Amphil.

It is an old saying. Better a bad excuse, than none at all. And truly it séemeth they are driuen to the wall, and sore graueled, that will flie to these simple shifts. But whatsoeuer they say or affirme, certain it is, that offensiue to the godly they cannot be, who hauehave already learned to distinguish betwixt the things abused, and the abuses themselues. And who know also how to vse things mere indifferent to good ends, and purposes. And therfore this question thus I shut vp in few words, that the wearing of these garmentes béeing commaunded by a Christian Prince, is not offensiue, or scandalous to anie good Christians, and to the other it mattereth not what it be. For they are such as the Lorde hath cast off into a reprobate sence, and preiudicate opinion, abusing all things, euen the truth it selfe to their owne destruction for euer excepte they repent, which I praye God they maye doe, if it bee his blessed will.

Theodo.

I pray you why doe they weare white in their surplesses, rather than any other colour? and why a forked cappe rather than a rounde one, for the Papistes (if they were the authors of these garmentes) hauehave their misteries, their figures, & their representations in all things. Wherfore I desire to know your iudgment herein.

Amphil.

You say the truth, for the Papistes hauehave their misteries in all thinges after their maner. Therfore thus they say that white doth signify holines, innocency, & al kind of integrity, putting them in mind what they ought to be in this life, and representeth vntounto them the beatitude, the felicitie, and happines of the life to come. And thys they prooue ab exemplis apparitionum, from the example of apparitiōs and visions, in that aungels, and celestial creatures hauehave euer appeared in the same colour of white. Therefore forsooth they must weare white apparell. The cornered cappe say these misterious fellows doth signifie, and represent the whole monarchy of the world, East, West, North, & South, the gouernment whereof standeth vponupon them, as the cappe doth vppon their heades. The gowne saye they doth signifie the plenary power which they hauehave to doe all things. And therefore none but the Pope, or hée with whome hee dispenceth, maie weare the same euerie where, bicause none hauehave plenariam potestatem plenarie power in euerie place, but (Beelzebub) the Pope. Yet the Ministers saith he, maie weare them in their Churches, & in their owne iurisdictions', because therein they hauehave full power from him. Thus foolishlie do they deceiue themselues with vaine shewes, shadows, and imaginations, forged in the mint of their owne braines to the destruction of manie. But who is he, that because these sottishe Papistes hauehave and doe gréeuouslie abuse these thinges, will therefore hauehave them cleane remoued? If all thinges that hauehave beene abused should be remooued because of the abuse, than should we hauehave nothing left to the supply of our necessities, neither meat, drinke, nor cloth for our bodies, neyther yet (which is more) y^e word of God, the spirituall food of our soules, nor any thing els almost. For what thing is there in y^e whole vniuersall world, that eyther by one Hereticke or other hath not béene abused? Let vsus therfore take the abuses away, and the things maie well remaine still. For may not we christians vse these thinges which the wicked Papists hauehave abused to good ends, vses, and purposes? I see no reason to the contrarie. And therefore in conclusion I beséech the Lorde that wee may all agrée togither in one truth, and not to deuide our selues, one from another for tris…es, making schismes, ruptures, breaches, and factions in the church of God, where we ought to nourish peace, vnitie, concord, brotherly louelove, amitie, and frendship, one amongst an other. And seeing we do all agree togither, and iump in one truth, hauing al one God our father, one Lord Iesus Christ our sauiour, one holy spirit of adoption, one price of redemption, one faith, one hope, one baptisme, and one and the same inheritance in the kingdome of heauen, Let vsus therefore agree togither in these externall shadowes, ceremonies, and rites. For is it not a shame to agree about the marow, and to striue about the bone? to contend about the karnell, & to vary about the shell? to agree in the truth, and to brabble for the shadow? Let vsus consider that this contention of ours among our selues, doth hinder the course of the Gospell from taking such deepe roote in the heartes of the hearers, as otherwise it would doe. And thus for this time brother Theodorus, we will breake off our talke concerning this matter, vntill yt please God that we may meete againe. Which if it please God we doe, I promise you in an other woorke to discourse of the same more at large. In the mean time let vsus giuegive our selues to fasiing, and prayer, most humbly beséeching his excellēt maiesty to blesse our noble Quéen, and to kéepe hir grace as the apple of his eie frō all hir foes, to maintaine his word, and gospell amongst vsus, to plant vnity, and concord within our walles, to increase our faith, to graunt vsus true and vnfained repentaunce for our sins, and in the end eternall life in the kingdome of heauen, thorow y^e precious death, passion, bloodshedding, and obedience of Christe Iesus our Lord, and onelyonly sauiour, to whom with the father and the holy ghost, one true, and immortal God, be al honor, praise, power, empire, and dominion throughout all congregations for euermore. And thus brother Theodorus I bid you farewell in the Lord, till I do sée you againe.

Theodo.

And I you also good brother Amphilogus, beséeching the Lord that if we méete not vponupon earth, we maye meete yet in the kingdome of heauen, there to rest in perfect felicitie for euer.

Amphil.

The Lord grant it for his mercies sake. Amen.

FINIS.

LONDON Printed by Roger Ward for William Wright, and are to be solde at his shop ioyning to Saint Mildreds Church in the Poultry, being the middle shop in the row. 1583.

End of the text · Philip Stubbes, The Anatomy of Abuses Part 2 (1583)