A Defense of the Sermon Preached at the Consecration of the Bishop of Bath, Book 1 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI. Maintaining the third reason, that Lay-Elders are not mentioned nor meant 1. Tim. 5.17.
Serm. Sect. 5. pag. 11. And that hee speaketh not there of Lay, or onelyonly gouerning-Elders, it may further be prooued, by plaine euidence out of the text. For seeing by honour in that place, the Apostle vnderstandeth honourable maintenance, which by their owne confession, is not due to Lay-Elders: it is therefore certaine, that this place acknowledgeth none such. Thus therfore I argue:
To all those Elders, who are mentioned or meant in this place, the honour of maintenance is due for their worke sake.
To the Lay-Elders, the honour of maintenance is not due for their worke sake.
Therefore the Lay-Elders, are not mentioned nor meant in this place, &c: to pag. 13.
Ad. pag. 29.THe refuter hauing neither learning enough to beare the weight of this argumēt, nor wit enough to forbeare it, in answearing therto, he vttereth more gall then would well become an honest man. The virus and poison of his libelling speeches I leaue to himselfe: The vir…s and force of his arguments and answeres, I will take vponupon me plainely to confute, and both here and eueryevery where else, by the helpe of God, to put him to silence.
First (as his manner is) though he dares not deny the proposition of my syllogisme to be most true and vndoubted,His cau… the prop yet he must needs cauill with it: And because hee hath nothing to say against it, hee hopeth with it to wound some of our side, who among other interpretatiōs of this place, hauehave thought the former part of this Text might more probably be vnderstood of not preaching Ministers, or Deacons, &c: then of Lay-Elders. And although I would bee loth to become a Proctor for vnlearned Ministers, especially, when learned may be had: yet thus much I will say, that if the Disciplinarians doe rightly ground vponupon this place a distinction of Presbyters, into two sorts, that there be some preaching Presbyters, some not: then this text doth without cōparison, fauour the not preaching ministers more thē the Lay-elders. Because it is a most certaine truth, which I hauehave manifestly proued, and which the refuter will neuer be able to disproue, that by Presbyters, ministers only are meant. As for Deacōs, (I meane not your Lay Deacons) D. B. hath better reasons to comprise them vnderunder Presbyters, then your W. T. had vnderunder the name of Deacons, to vnderstand your Lay-Elders, though T.C. himselfe did subscribe to his opinion. And wheras you challenge those reuerend men, for seeking by warrāt of this place, to surcharge the Church with maintenance of vnpreaching Ministers and Deacons: I answere, they do not hold, that in eueryevery parish such ought to be maintained (as you would hauehave your Presbyterie erected in eueryevery parish) but where better, & more sufficient Ministers cannot be had; which was the case of many parishes in England, at the beginning of Q. Elizabeths raigne, &c.
But all his spite is against the assumption:His spite against the assumption. though hee spend his spite, neither in disproouing it with force of argument, nor in answering my proofes with any substāce of reason, but in sophistical cauilling & odious wrangling. For whē he hath said what he was able, I cannot tell whether he doth denie the assumption, or graunt it, onelyonly hee cauilleth with my proofes of it.
My assumption was this: To Lay-Elders, the honour of maintenance is not due for their worke sake. Hereunto I require a direct answere.
If hee say that the honour of maintenance, yea, double honor,… that is, (as not only Theodore…, but T. C. also expound … plentifull maintenance, is due vntounto them: he should hauehave brought sufficient proofes, both to confute the iudgement of those learned Diuines, who reformed (as directors) other Churches, and condemne the practise of all reformed Churches, which hauing those Presbyters, doe not allow, neither doe thinke themselues bound to allow any maintenance at all to their Lay-Elders: and also to perswade all those reformed Churches which hauehave them not, and which in manie parishes are either not able, or not willing to yeeld sufficient maintenāce to one learned minister, to erect in eueryevery parish, besides the Pastor, and the Doctor, a Senate of Lay-Elders, with purpose to vndergoe an vnsupportable charge, and to think themselues bound by the word of God to allow them all, and eueryevery of them sufficient maintenance. But what one reason doth he, or can he alledge to perswade this, or where doth he go about to perswade it? If he say, according to the iudgement and practise of all Churches whatsoeuer, which either hauehave them, or hauehave them not, that this honour of maintenance is not due vntounto them; why doth he not ingenuously confesse, that which is ineuitably proued out of the words, that Lay-Elders are neither mentioned nor meant in this place. If hee say (as indeed that is all he doth say) that my proofes are not sufficient: what better proofe would hee require in such breuitie, then the confession of the parties? yea, but they doe not confesse it.
First therefore I will proue their confession. And secondly, I will demonstrate, that the double honour of maintenance, though they did not confesse so much, is not by the word of God, due to their imagined Lay-Elders for their workes sake.
Their confession I proue thus:Their … th… tenanc… due to … What the learned reformers prescribed to be done according to Gods word as they pretended, that was their Doctrine.
That there should be onelyonly gouerning Elders, elected out of the people or Laitie, without maintenance to be yeelded to them, was prescribed by the learned reformers according to the word of God as they pretended.
Therefore, that there sho'uld be Elders, elected out of the Laitie, without maintenance to be yeelded to them, was the Doctrine of the learned reformers.
The proposition needs no proofe:
The assumption I confirme thus;
That which is practised according to the lawes of Discipline, in all those reformed churches: where the Presbyteries be erected, was prescribed by the learned reformers, according to the word of God, as they pretended.
The election of only-gouerning Elders, out of the Laity, without maintenance to be yelded to them, is practised in all those reformed churches, according to the laws of discipline
Therefore the election of only gouerning-Elders, out of the Laitie, without maintenance to be yeelded to them, was prescribed by the learned reformers, according to the word of God, as they pretended. And consequently, that Lay-Elders are not to hauehave maintenance, is both the Doctrine of the learned reformers, and the practise of all those Churches reformed by them.
The proposition is manifest, because the lawes of Discipline in those Churches, were either prescribed by the learned reformers, or framed according to their prescript. The assumption may also be euidētly proued by induction: For the Lay-Elders, neither in the Churches of Geneua, France, Low-countreys, hauehave, nor of Scotland, had any maintenāce allowed thē, & that according to the lawes of their discipline; neither can the refuter giuegive any one instance to the contrary. It shal suffice me to make instāce in Geneua, which was a patterne in this behalfe to the rest.Bez. in vit. An. 1536. … 1541. In Geneua is this order takē by their lawes, whereof Caluin was the chiefe author, that of the 12. only gouerning Elders, ioyned to the 6. ministers, 6. shuld be chosen out of the Councell of 200.4. out of the Coūcel of 60.2. out of the Councel of 25. all statesmen;See the lawes of Geneua, & summ. capit. di…c…ph. Eccl. Gen…a inter e…ist. Calui…j Bez. de grad. M…. c. 11. pag. …. … ibid. … before the Hel…et confess. Lib. 1. 179. to this end, both that they should be of great countenance, and also that the Church should not be charged with allowing them any maintenāce: Beza professeth that eueryevery where in other Churches the like choyce, according to the state of the place, is made; viz: Not of the meaner or poorer sort, but men of great, both abilitie & authoritie, are chosen to be of the Presbyterie: And else-where he saith, that consideration must be had, that Princes & Noblemen, and such as be of authority, be chosen into the Seignorie. And T.C. himselfe cōfesseth it to be the practise of the Churches in these dayes, to make choice of such Elders, as are able to liue, without charging the church any whit. Their cōfessiō I hauehave shewed.
§ Sect, 4. His obiection denying their confession refuted.Now let vsus see what the refuter obiecteth. 1. That I might hauehave read the contrary in Calui…, Bullinger, Beza, Cartwright, D. Bilson, and D. Sutcliffe, but that it seemes I did not read on that side of the leafe. And it seemes to mee, that you would not hauehave me read on that side as yet, or rather, that there is no such thing to be read: Else you would hauehave pointed, if not to the leafe, yet at least, to the booke. For my part, I professe that I doe not remember, that I hauehave read any such thing, either in Caluin, Beza, or Bullinger, but the contrary, as I hauehave shewed in Caluin and Beza. As for Bullinger, you had lesse reason to alledge him,D. Bil…on. pag. 130. seeing that you found him cited together, with the other two, expounding this word honour, as signifying the maintenance due to ministers.
As touching D. Bils: it is strange that you should both accuse mee for taking this reason from him, and also charge him with teaching the contrary. In his preface, hee saith thus:pag. 7. By no precept nor example will it euer be proued, that Lay-presbyters had in the Apostles times, or should hauehave by the word of God at any time, double honour and maintenance from the Church of Christ. Wherefore they must either giuegive all Lay-Elders double maintenance, as S. Paul willeth, which they doe not, or shutte them cleane from these words, which yeeld double maintenance, by Gods Law to Presbyters that rule well. pag. 129.130. Ad pag: 30.And to the like purpose hee speaketh, in the place by you quoted.
The speech of that worthy learned man,D. … who is highly to be commended for his great learning, good paines, and zealous affection for the maintenance of the truth, whom you vilely and vngraciously abuse, as you doe all others that come in your way, be they neuer so worthy champions of our Church against the Papists, his reproofe I say of T. C. for requiring maintenance as due to the Lay-Elders,Pag. 90. I hauehave not seene to my remembrance. But this I remember well, that I hauehave read in his treatise of Ecclesiasticall discipline,1. Tim. 5. 1. Pet 5. that the Elders whereof the Apostles speake receiued wages of the Church. But (saith he) the new Aldermen in all Churches where they raigne, liue vponupon interest of their owne money or goods, and receiue no salarie of the Churches.
Neither had he indeed any great reason (in my iudgement) to blame T. C. (that I may also come to him) as opposing his iudgement to the practise of the reformed Churches.Lib. 1.17▪ 179. For although he seeme to say, that by the Apostles rule such Elders, as be poore, ought to be relieued at the Churches charge; yet it doth not seeme to be his iudgement, that he would hauehave Lay-Elders maintained at the Churches charge. But this is one of his colours, whereby he would perswade, that the Eldership should rather now be admitted, then in the Apostles times. Because if the Apostle would charge the Churches being in persecution, and therefore poore with maintaining Elders, which being poore, were not sometimes able to liue without some reliefe from the Church, &c: how much more ought there now to be Seniors, when the Churches be in peace, and therefore not so poore, and when there may be chosen such for the most part throughout the realme, as are able to liue without charging the Church any whit, as the practise of these daies doth manifestly declare. For if it had beene his iudgement, that Lay-Elders are to be maintained otherwise then for need, he would hauehave argued thus.
If by the Apostles rule, the Elders were to be maintained for their workes sake, by the Churches being poore and in p…rsecution, then much more are they to be maintained when the Churches be in peace and profp…ritie, and so would hauehave assumed the antecedent, to conclude the consequent.
But seeing he doth tollere consequens, contradict the consequent, saying, that when the Churches are in peace and prosperitie, such a course may and ought to be taken (for that may seeme to be his meaning) according to the example of all the reformed Churches, that the Church shall not be charged at all with the maintenance of the Seniors, that is to say, by choosing men of abilitie who need no reliefe; it is easie to conclude tollendo antecedens, that his iudgement was, that (this rule of the Apostle notwithstanding,) Lay-Elders were not to hauehave maintenance for their workes sake, but reliefe onelyonly if they did need.
Chap. 14. Pag. 74.Of the same iudgement is the demonstratour of discipline: for it being obiected that the parishes would be ouerburdened in prouiding for so many: he answereth, it is not necessarie that they should prouide for any more of them, sauing those that are exercised in the ministerie of the word, vnlesse any of the rest may need the liberalitie of the Church.
But suppose that this were T. C. iudgement, or the opinion of any other among vsus, who hath conceiued a platonicall Idea of discipline which he neuer saw practised: were this sufficient to disproue my assertion, who hauehave the confession of the learned reformers in respect of their doctrine, and of the reformed Churches in respect of their practise? Or if this were a sufficient exception against the consent of those which stand for discipline, that some one doth hold a singular opinion by himselfe; then can their consent be scarcely alledged for any one affirmatiue point of discipline, eueryevery man almost pleasing himselfe in the noueltie of his inuention, and in the singularitie of his opinion. For plentifull proofe whereof,Chap. 4.5.6.7.9.11.12.14.16.17.18.19.31.34. I referre you to the suruey of the pretended discipline.
§ 5. His second obiection is, that although in practise reformed Churches doe not giuegive their Lay-Elders any maintenance, yet this doth not hinder, but that in their iudgement they may according to the Apostles rule,His 2, Obiection. esteeme them worthy of it. Can we doubt saith he, but our Clergie maisters thinke M. D. worthy of a Bishoppricke for his paines in pleading their cause: yet we see they bestowe not so much as a suffraganeship on him. Shall we therefore say they doe not thinke him to deserue it?
What a profane mockerie is this, to expound the Apostles words, as though hee would hauehave the people thinke they had discharged their dutie in esteeming onelyonly their Ministers worthy of double honour, when in fact they doe not yeeld them sufficient maintenance. If he were in the ministerie (as I know not whether he be or not) and the people should answere him thus: Syr, though we allow you no maintenance as you desire, yet let this content you, that according to the Apostles rule, we count you worthy of double honour: would he not thinke S. Paul abused, himselfe deluded, yea and Christ his Lord and maister in him to be mocked?Gal. 6.7. Be not deceiued saith the Apostle, speaking in this cause, God is not mocked. That which I say of Ministers, is in like manner to be vnderstood of Lay-Elders, if they be included in this text. The words of the Apostle are generall, the Presbyters that rule well, let them be counted worthy of double honour. Wherefore let them either acknowledge that the Lay-Elders are not meant in this place, or else teach the people before they admit Lay-Elders, to thinke themselues bound by the Apostles rule, to yeeld them double honour,Lib. 1.178. (that is saith T. C. a plentifull reward, such as may be fully sufficiēt for them and their housholds) and to yeeld it willingly & gratefully. For that is the Apostles meaning, when he requireth the Presbyters to be accounted worthy of double honour, not onelyonly that this honour of maintenance should be giuen them, as appeareth by the reasons which he hath annexed; but that the people should giuegive it, not grudgingly, and as it were by constraint of law, as thinking the Ministers not worthy of maintenance: but willingly and gratefully, as esteeming them most worthy of double honour, and thinking it a small matter to giuegive temporall things to them,1. Cor. 9.11 Obiect. 3. of whom they receive spirituall. Neither is it to any purpose which he obiecteth concerning either Pauls refusing of maintenance from the Corinthians and Thessalonains, or of wealthy Ministers refusing to burden the Churches by taking maintenance from them: vnlesse he can proue, that order being taken in those Churches for the maintenance of their Elders, which they may readily receiue if they will, themselues doe voluntarily, and freely refuse it. For if those Elders be comprised vnderunder Presbyters in this text, there must the like order be taken for maintenance of all by the Apostles rule, though the painefull Preachers are chiefely to be respected.
But the contrarie course is taken. Neither is there not hauing of maintenance to be ascribed to their owne refusing, as in the example of Paul, and the wealthy Ministers; but to the Churches not allowing them maintenance.
Obiect. 4.To the like purpose is that which he saith, that I need not insult ouer those reformed Churches, which with consent of the Elders themselues, thinke it best to ease the people of that charge, seeing the paines to be taken in the office of the Eldership is not such, but that they may attend their ciuill callings and meanes of liuing, as well as our Churchwardens, and ciuill officers. In which words, first, he wrongfully chargeth me with insulting ouer those Churches. Secondly, he confuteth himselfe, who hauing before denied them to be Lay-Elders, here confesseth they hauehave ciuill callings, which they may attend vponupon, as well as our Churchwardens. Thirdly, where hee speaketh of the Elders consent in not taking maintenance, it is the consent of obedience to the lawes and orders of the Church, such as is in our Churchwardens, who by the like consent hauehave no maintenance. But to leaue his words, and to come to the substance of his speech; seeing their paines are not such, but that they may follow their ciuill callings and worldly busines, and seeing they hauehave ciuill callings to attend vponupon, and other sufficient meanes of liuelihood, being in all these respects like, if not superiour to our Churchwardens, it may not be thought that the Apostle who was desirous the Churches should be eased as much as might be, would require them to giuegive double honour to such, as neither deserued nor needed such maintenance.
And therfore he did not comprise them vnderunder the name of Presbyters (which indeed signifieth Priests or Ministers) or if he did, no Church must thinke it selfe to hauehave authoritie to dispense with the Apostle, but must acknowledge it selfe bound, if it vnderstand Lay-Elders to be comprised in this text, willingly and gratefully to giuegive double (that is sufficient and plentifull) maintenance to them, esteeming them worthy of it for their worke sake.
The onelyonly thing which is obiected by the learned of that side,§ Sect. The exc… tion, that Elders if need, are hauehave allo…ance, ans…red. is that, which I mention in the Sermon: that their Lay-Elders, if they stand in need, are to be maintained. Whereunto I now adde, that some of them so vnderstand the Apostle: and I answere, that if hee be so vnderstood in respect of Lay-Elders, he must in like manner be vnderstood of Ministers, his speech being generall, and fauouring the Ministers no more then thus,T.C. that as all Elders are to be maintained if they need, so especially Preachers; whom notwithstanding the Apostle would hauehave, according to equitie and iustice, maintained with an honourable stipend for their worke sake, and not onelyonly by way of almes to be relieued for their need.
But here the refuter behaueth himselfe as one that is at a nonplus for reason, and at an ouerplus for rancour: his words added to the last I cited, be these. But to proue it, he propoundeth (out of the surueyour of discipline, cap. 10.) an obiection, and then answereth it. The summe whereof is this, that the maintenance allowed them, is rather a beggarly almes giuen in charitie for need, then that honourable stipend, which iniustice is due to them for their worke sake. But to proue it, saith he, what would I proue? the refuter is confoun…ed, he knoweth not well what he saith. He propoundeth saith he an obiection out of the surueyour. Sure his eyes dazeled, and his witts were to seeke. In the suruey is not so much as a shew of any such obiection: neither is it alledged to any other end, but to proue that, whereunto the letter in the margent directed him, that is, that they make choise of such as hauehave no need. But what is it? the summe whereof is this, that the maintenance allowed them is rather a beggerly almes, &c. Is this the summe of the obiection? that is senselesse, and yet he seemes to say so: What then? is it the summe of the answere, or of both? no man that were not at a losse would say it. I professe I hauehave not often read a speech more senselesse. To helpe him out of the maze, and to make him confesse that hee was at a nonplus, I will explaine my words. For whereas some obiect said I, &c: My meaning was this, the onelyonly thing which is obiected to disproue my assumption, that to the Lay-Elders the honour of maintenance is not due for their worke sake, is this: that Lay-Elders if they stand in need are to be maintained. Which obiection hath beene made personally to me, I will not say by the refuter, though some thinke so, for I take that obiector to be an honester man: and that which is obiected, is that conceit not onelyonly of T. C. the maister, and the demonstrator his scholler, but of Danaeus also writing on that place:In 1. Tim. 5.17. To this obiection of their need, I answered first, that it is needlesse, (as the refuter also in the words following doth censure it) as being preuented by all those reformed Churches where the Presbyters be erected, in which order is taken, that none shall be chosen into the seigniorie, but such as be of good abilitie. To which purpose I cited the tenth chapter of the Suruey: the argument wherof is this. Their Aldermen must be (according to their owne positions) men of good calling: and among other things in that chapter, are cited the lawes of Geneua, requiring, that all their twelue Lay-Elders should be men of state &c: as I said before.
Secondly, I answered, if they chance to hauehave need (which is a case that happeneth as seldome at the least to them, as to our Church-wardens) and if they be relieued (as our Church-wardens also should in the like case) that then the maintenance which is allowed, is for their need, and not for their worke sake. But the Apostle saith, the Presbyters are worthy of double honour, and the workeman is worthy of his stipend, &c. As if I had said: the reliefe which is giuen to Lay-Elders for their need (if euer that doe happen) doth not disproue my assumption, nor proue that they are included in this text. For,
The maintenance which the Apostle requireth to be giuen to Presbyters is not a beggarly almes (that is a poore mans reliefe giuen by way of almes,) bestowed onelyonly in charitie to supply their need, but an honourable stipend, (Paul calleth it foreign Philo foreign our Sauiour foreign) in iustice due to the Presbyters for their worke sake.
But the reliefe, which they require to be giuen to their Lay-Elders, is a beggarly almes (that is a poore mans reliefe giuen by way of almes) and bestowed onelyonly in charitie to supply, their need, and not an honourable stipend (called foreign or foreign &c:) in iustice due for their worke sake.
Therefore the reliefe which they require to be giuen to their Lay-Elders is not that maintenance which the Apostle requireth to be giuen to Presbyters.§ Sect. 7 His excepti… that allowā … occasioned by the Elde… need, is yeelded for the… worke, answ…red.
Now let vsus heare what the refuter addeth to his former words. But saith he as the obiection is needlesse, so his answere is insufficient, here now he speaketh with reason, though without truth. The obiection is made by the chiefe of his side, and is the best (though needlesse) if not the onelyonly obiection, they hauehave. My answere is such as you hauehave heard, that is to say, such an answere, as whensoeuer he medleth with it, will bring him to a nonplus againe: but because I said he speaketh with reason, let vsus heare his reason. For saith he albeit their necessitie occasioneth their maintenance by common allowance, Ad pag. 3…yet is it for their worke sake that they are maintained: to which I reply: if it were a maintenance in iustice due for their worke sake, and not a reliefe giuen onelyonly in charitie by way of almes for their need; that then it ought in iustice to be giuen to them, whether they be in need or not. For the workeman is worthy of his stipend for his worke sake; and willingly it must be giuen him as deseruing it, whether he need or not. For although it be a crying sinne, and doe offend more against charitie to hold it from him if he need: yet it offendeth as much against iustice, to withhold the stipend from the workeman, that is not in need. The stipend, which Paul appointeth to Presbyters, in respect of their paines in edifying the Church, which is the house of God, is as due in iustice to them for their worke sake, as the stipend is due to a Carpenter, that buildeth an house. And as it were iniustice ioyned with folly, for a man not to thinke himselfe bound to giuegive the Carpenter his stipend, vnlesse he be poore: the like is to be conceiued of the stipend denied to Presbyters for their wealth, which is due for their worke.
The rest of his speech is vttered in rancour and gall: but the points be these. First, that it doth not become me, &c: to call it a beggerly maintenance. Secondly, that it is more then is giuen to our Church-wardens that are crept into their roomes. The third, which is more plainely vttered in the abortiue booke, that the like perhaps will not make D. D. rich. In what sense I called it beggarly almes, giuen onelyonly in charitie, opposing it to honourable stipend, due in iustice, I hauehave already explaned. To the second I answere, our Church-wardens, hauing lesse trouble, hauehave notwithstanding no lesse allowance, then your Elders, for they hauehave none at all. And where you say, our Church-wardens are crept into their roomes: you must first proue that euer they had a roome in the Church. For we will neuer grant that our Church-wardens be your Elders successours, till you hauehave proued your Elders to hauehave beene their predecessors. And whereas you make your selues merrie with my want of riches, as you did before with my want of preferment; I tell you plainely, I had rather be poorer then M.D. is with a good conscience, then to be as rich as some of you by maintaining a faction, to be maintained by it.
§ Sect. 8. No honour of maintenance appointed to Lay-Elders in Gods booke. See the suruey of discipli. Pag. 440.441.Thus hauehave I maintained my assumption, and the prosyllogisme thereof concerning their confession. Now I will proue by another argument, that the honour of maintenance is not by the word of God due to Lay-Elders, and that the Lay-Eldership is not the ordinance of God, nor hath any warrant in the scriptures. We hauehave often heard great words, that your Presbyterian discipline is an essential note of a true Church, if not an article of your faith; that it is to little purpose to receiue the doctrine, vnlesse we also embrace the discipline of Christ, meaning the pretended discipline: that your discipline is the kingdome of Christ, wherein your Presbyters hold, as it were Christs scepter; that to denie this discipline,Demōst & yet to professe Christ to be our King, is with the souldiers that crucified him, to put a Reede in his hand,Prefac. demons… and a crowne of thornes on his head: that in the second petition of the Lords prayer, Let thy Kingdome come, wee are to pray, that your Discipline may be aduanced; that the question betweene the BB. and you, is about no lesse matter then this,Ibid. whether Iesus Christ shall bee King or no: that in denying your discipline, wee are the men that say, Luke 19.Luk. 19. & 27. Table o… cipl. Wee wll not hauehave this man to raigne ouer vsus: and to vsus is applyed that terrible doome, Those mine enemies that would not hauehave mee to raigne ouer them, bring hither, and slay them before mee: and many such like speeches, concerning the kingdome of Christ, which being applied to your owne deuices, are not farre from blasphemie. These confident speeches considered, a man would think that you hauehave most euident, certaine, and vndeniable grounds for your Presbyteries. But when I come to examine your proofes, & to search the Scriptures, and records of antiquitie; I professe vnfainedly, & in the feare of God, that I cannot sufficiently wonder, that men of reading should approue, & men of sinceritie should vrge so confidently, and maintaine so resolutely, euen vntounto silencing and depriuation, such not onelyonly humane deuices, but meere nouelties, as the sacred ordinances of Christ our Sauiour; for which, after all the search which hath beene made, there cannot be produced any sound testimonie. But to come to the point: you say, (if you deny my aforesaid assumption,) that to Lay-Elders gouerning well double honour is due by the word of God, for their worke sake. I say, the holie Ghost is so farre from assigning this double honour to them, that neither their worke, or office it selfe, for which that honour should be due to them, nor their qualities whereby they should bee qualified for that office, nor themselues,§ Sect. 9 The office Lay-Elders n…t prescrib… in the scriptures. or their names, wherby they should be knowne are once mentioned, or intimated in the holy scriptures.
For first, as touching their office: it is by them assigned, either to their Elders seuerally, or to the Elder-ship iointly Their duty seuerally, is to be watchmē in ye Church, hauing their seuerall Wards or precincts appointed to them, wherein they are to obserue the manners of men for auoiding offences, and other occurrents for peruerting disorders.
The manners of men they are to enquire into, and to prie into their faults, that if they be secret or small, they may admonish the offenders priu…ly: if opē or great, they may informe the Consistory therof. And for other occurrēts, they are to looke that good orders be kept, especially respecting the sacraments. As they are to informe their pastor if there be any childe in their Warde to be baptized, if there be any in their precinct, lately come into the parish, to acquaint the Minister before the Communion, and at the Communion to keepe backe those whose religion and honestie is not knowne, and whom the Ministers hauehave not dealt withall before. Wherfore, as in respect of manners, they are by them cōpared to the Censors of the Romanes, so in respect of good orders, they are as the foreign, of the Athenians.
The ioynt-office of the Elders, is the office of the whole Presbyterie, or Eldership, Consistorie, or sacred Senate, which in the Assemblie of the Elders of the Church, who by common counsell and authoritie, do rule and gouerne the same.
For as Lacedemon had her Seignorie, Athens her high court of the Areopagi…s, Rome, her Senate, and eueryevery kingdome their counsell, so eueryevery Church, (that is, eueryevery parish according, to the new disciplinarians) must hauehave her Presbyterie, or sacred Senate, vntounto which Christ hath giuen the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, whereby is meant all Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie.
This authoritie respecteth either the Officers of the Church, or the offenders. Officers, as Pastors, Doctors, Elders, Deacons. Concerning whome the Eldership hath authoritie to elect, ordaine, depriue, or depose them.
As touching offenders, the Eldership hath authoritie to censure them, either by reproofe, suspension, or excommunication.
Belieue mee, if the word of God hath committed these things to the hands of the Elders, then hauehave they an office of great consequence indeed.Eccl. dis. fo. 5 But if you remember their own positions,T.C. l. pag: 16 Demons… pag: 1:… that the Word of God doth perfectly describe all the lawfull offices of the Church; and that no office or calling in the Church is lawfull, but that which is directly warranted out of the Word: yet it was the sinne for which Coreh, Dathan, and Abiram were punished, in that they presumed, though they were Leuites, to take in hād that for which they had no warrant: then can you not but expect most manifest & pregnant proofes out of the Scripture, directly warranting this whole office, and all the branches thereof. Or if you faile of your expectation, you cannot but wonder at the extreme boldnes of them, who holding these positions, impose vponupon the Church, an office of such authority, not as an humane pollicie, but as the holie ordinance of Christ, hauing no warrant in the Scriptures.
But what one pregnant testimonie of Scripture can they produce,The parts the Elders …ice, not p…scribed in Scripture. pursuing any one part of their Lay-Elders office? VponUpon my credite not one. For first a peculiar office, either of spirituall watch-men, the scriptures acknowledge none.
Besides, Prophets, and Priests, or Ministers, or of Censors of mens manners, besides ministers and Magistrates: and much lesse doe the scriptures appoint a peculiar officer to be the accuser of the bretheren.
Indeed it is the dutie of all good Christians, mutuallie to exercise the duties of the Communion of Saints, by instructing, exhorting, admonishing, rebuking, comforting one another. And as the Apostle s…ith, to consider or obserue on… another, to prouoke vntounto louelove, and to good workes.
We may not be of Cains minde,Heb: 1▪ who said, Am I my brothers keeper? We are so farre to be keepers and obseruers of our brethren, as by all good meanes to further and aduance the saluation one of another.
The Lord hath charged thee in the Law,Leu. 19. freely to rebuke thy brother, and not suffer sinne to rest upon him. And likewise in the Gospell,Matt: 18 15, 16, 17▪ If thy brother sinne against thee (either committing an iniurie against thee, or giuing thee offence, by some sinne committed in thy knowledge, laying by his euill example, a scandall or stumbling blocke in thy way,) goe and reprous him, privately betweene thee & him alone, If he heare thee thou hast wonne thy brother. But if he heare thee not, take yet with thee one or two; if he will not heare them, tell the assemblie, &c. But a speciall Church-officer to prye into other mens faults, such as S. Peter calleth foreign, the scriptures do not appoynt, and much lesse to informe against, or to accuse priuate offenders, such as we call Prom…ters, and the Grecians, Sycophants.
As for their diuiding of Parishes into Wardes, and awarding them to seuerall Elders, as also all the rest of the offices and duties assigned to their Elders, of acquainting the ministers who is to bee Baptized, what new parishioners are come, of helping at the Communion, and repelling some there from, they must and doe confesse they hauehave no scripture for them: and yet all these duties must bee thought to be prescribed in Gods word.
Eccl. discipl. 122To which purpose, the arguments which some of their chiefe writers do vse, are these. First, that although all these things be not specially expressed in scripture,T.C. Beza Arguments prouing the office of Elders out of the Scripture, answered. yet forasmuch as offences must bee auoided, and those duties of Charitie, and Communion of Saintes must bee performed, as also those things which appertaine to good order prouided for: and forasmuch as there are no other officers or Elders to whom the charge of these things should belong; therefore satis vt opinor apparet, haec ad Presbyterorum officium ex verbo Dei referenda esse; I thinke it sufficiētly appeareth, that these things by the word of God, are to be referred to the office of Elders. Their argument standeth thus.
All necessary duties which the Scripture hath not assigned to other officers or Elders, it hath appointed to these Elders.
But the duties before spoken of, are necessarie duties, which the scripture hath not assigned to any other officers or Elders.
Therefore the duties before spoken of, the scripture hath assigned to these Elders.
It seemeth by the proposition, that the Lay-Elders hauehave begged a book of concealmēts, that they may be authorized to deale in all these causes, for which other men hauehave not expresse cōmission. But first I denie that the Scipture hath graunted them any such concealements. Nay, I most confidently auow, that they themselues are concealed in the Scriptures, which doe not once mention them in anie place. And therefore, if there bee cases omitted, that the Scripture hath not assigned to other Elders or officers; We may thinke it hath referred them to the wisedome of the Church, and authoritie of the Soueraigne, r…er then to them, whom it neuer mentioneth. Secondly I answere, that there are many necessarie duties, the performance whereof the holy Ghost hath not assigned to any publike Officers at all, as though there should bee speciall offices appointed for them; but are to be performed by eueryevery Christian; as the aforesaid duties which concerne the auoyding of scandales, the duties of Charitie and Communion of Saints. Likewise, there are duties respecting outward order and decencie, which the Scripture doth not prescribe in particular, and much lesse assigne to any peculiar office.
But the determination of these particulars, and the nomination of the functions or persons wherevnto they shalbe assigned, is left to the discretion of the Church, and authoritie of the Soueraigne.
And to such purposes, other Churches may appoint Lay-Elders, as well as ours doth Churchwardens, so they doe not vrge them as the ordinance of Christ, nor giuegive them commission to intermeddle with things aboue their reach, as being peculiar either to the Ministers of the Word, or the Ciuil Magistrate.
Their second Argument.
As for that part of their office of taking heede to offences,§ Sect. … … Their 2. argument. 1. Thess. 5.12. Act. 20.28. Heb. 13.17. 1. Pet. 5.1.2. foreign. who can doubt, but that charge properly appertaineth vntounto the Elders, seeing they are said in the Scriptures to ouersee, and to gouerne. For this ouersight can hauehave but two parts onelyonly, wherof the first partaineth to doctrine & religion; the other, to life and manners. Seeing then, that two sorts of Elders are expresly named by Saint Paule, wherof the first sort are occupied in Preaching, and Doctrine: It is necessary that the other should hauehave charge of manners and conuersation, for that onelyonly remaineth.
This discourse containeth 2. Syllogismes: the
First, All Presbyters who in the Scriptures are said to ouersee and gouerne, hauing not that ouersight, which respecteth doctrine and religion, hauehave the ouersight of manners, and care of auoyding offences: for these are the two parts of ouersight:
The Lay-Elders, are such Presbyters, as in the Scriptures are said to ouersee & gouerne, hauing not that ouersight, which respecteth doctrine and religion.
Therefore the Lay-Elders hauehave the ouersight of manners, and care of auoyding offences.
The 2. If the Apostle expressely name 2. sorts of Elders, distinguished, according to the 2. parts of foreign, or ouersight, viz: Ministers and Lay-Elders, then it doth necessarily follow, that as the Ministers, hauehave the care and ouersight of doctrine and religion; so the Lay-Elders hauehave the ouersight of manners and care of auoiding offences.
But the Antecedent is true. 1. Tim. 5.17.
Therefore the consequent.
To the assumption of the former Syllogisme, I answere, that Lay-Elders are no wheres said in the Scriptures to be Presbyters, or foreign: to gouerne or ouersee, but all those places, which be alleadged to this purpose, are to bee vnderstood of Ministers onelyonly.
Besides, the same Author hath confessed; that Lay Elders are not Byshops, neither will he say, that they be Pastors.
But the places which he quoteth, are to be vnderstood of Bishops & Pastors. Of Act. 20.28. & 1. Pet. 5. I hauehave already spoken, as also of 1. Thess. 5.12. Why Heb. 13.17. should be applpyed to Lay-Elders, there is no reason; vnlesse whatsoeuer is spoken of Spirituall gouernors, is to be vnderstood of them. The Writers, both olde and new, expound it of Bishops and Pastors.
The assumption also of the second syllogisme is vntrue, neither hath it any thing to support it, but their owne exposition of 1. Tim. 5.17. which I hauehave proued to be false. Neither is that true, which is presupposed in both syllogismes: that there must be two sorts of Elders answerable to the two parts of ouersight. For both the parts of foreign, or ouersight, belong to those which be foreign, ouerseers, that is Bishops and Pastors, whose dutie is, both to teach and to gouerne.
Their third Argument is taken from the practise of the primitiue Church next succeeding the Apostles. Which of all their Arguments is most friuolous, there being not anie testimonie of any writer, or example of any Church to bee alledged, that euer there was such an office in the Church.
But howsoeuer these duties to be performed by the Elders seuerally, might be borne with, so they were not obtruded as the ordinances of Christ: yet the ioynt office of their Lay-presbyteryes is intollerable. For what reason can they alledge for their intruding into the sacred office of Bishops and Pastors, & vsurping the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, which our Sauiour Christ committed to none, but to the Apostles, and their successors? That Lay-men should hauehave authoritie, and that by the ordinance of Christ, to ordaine Ministers by imposition of hands, to remit or retaine sinnes, to excommunicate the obstinate, or to reconcile the penitent, is an opinion too absurde to be confuted.
Thus therefore I reason, according to their owne principles. No office in the Church is lawfull, as themselues say, which hath not expresse warrant in the scriptures, which is all one, as if they had said, All lawfull offices in the church, hauehave expresse warrant in Gods word.
The office of the Lay-Elders seuerally, and of their Elderships yearely, hath not expresse warrant in Gods word: Therfore it is vnlawfull.
To their office wee will ioyne the consideration of their qualities:§ Sect. 12. The qualitie of Elders, not described in Gods word. for surely, if the holy Ghost had prescribed in the scriptures, an office of such importance, it is to bee thought, that he would also hauehave described what manner of men were to be chosen to it, and how qualified for the performance of an office of so high a nature. And although he omitted their qualities in other places, yet mee thinks if it be a function that is in dignitie vnderunder the Minister, but aboue the Deacon, the Apostle could not hauehave forgotten them, in 1. Tim. 3: where he describeth the qualities, not only of Bishops and Ministers which be aboue them, but of the Deacons also, which are beneath them; directing Timo…, and in him all Bishops, what manner of persons to or…a… Ministers, or Deacons. Forgotten? say they, why, are they not plainly expressed in that place? Yes no doubt, for that is agreed vponupon among vsus: For some will needs comprise them vnderunder the Bishop or Minister, and feare not to …ay,…. that they also must be su… modo, foreign, that is, able … preach after their fashion. Others acknowledge, that they are neuer comprehended vnderunder the name Bishop, and that it is necessarily required of Ministers alone, to be foreign, able to preach, especially, in that sense that the Apostle meaneth, as appeareth by comparing that place with Tit: 1.9: yet resolued to finde a roome for them in that place, and not to suffer them to be excluded, are faine to s…row…e them vnderunder the name of Deacons:… Pag 44 though the name of Deacon, neither in scriptures, nor Fathers, was euer attributed to them. How they will compound these contrarieties I know not. For if they be comprised vnderunder the name Bishop, then are they not to be shrowded vnderunder Deacons and if they be contained vnderunder Deacons, then are they not comprised vnderunder Bishops.
It shall … me to alledge, that forsomuch as the Eldership is in their conceit a different office, both from the Minister and Deacon, that it is comprehended in neither. For who cannot conceiue this reason?
None but Bishops, Ministers, and Deacons, are described in that place: (Bishops and Ministers in the former description, and Deacons in the latter:)
But Lay-elders are neither Bishops or Ministers, nor Deacons, but an imagined office distinct from both:
Therefore they are not described in that place.
…The refu… hath solemnely proclaimed before, and required all men to take notice of it, that their Elders ought to be men religious, of great grauitie and pietie, and of good yeares also, if it may be, as the name importeth, called with due examination, chosen with consent of the congregation ouer which they are set, with prayer and imposition of hands put a part to that Ecclesiasticall office. All which I will not denie to hauehave beene politickely deuised, so it may be acknowledged an humane deuise, and not a diuine ordinance. But why are not the margents filled with scriptures for the proofe of these things? The truth is, there is not one testimonie of scripture to be alledged, prescribing the office, or describing the qualities of Lay-Elders.
But perhaps there may be mention sufficient of them in the scriptures to warrant their calling, though neither their office nor their qualities be described in the word of God. Nor that neither: as shall appeare, when I come to answere the refuters allegations for them. In the meane time I will not doubt to renew my former challenge, if they can produce any one pregnant testimonie out of the scriptures, whereby it may necessarily be concluded, that either there were at any time, or ought to be at all times in the Church of Christ such Elders and Elderships as they speake of, that then I will yeeld to them in the whole controuersie betwixt vsus. But vntill such proofe be produced for them, which will neuer be: they shall giuegive me leaue to esteeme their doctrine of Lay-Elders, to be, as it is, a meere fiction, how vehemently soeuer it be vrged and obtruded vponupon vsus, as the holy discipline of Christ.
And now had wee done with this place of the Epistle to Timothie, § Sect. 13. His 3. cau…les against pag. 10. answered.sauing that the refuter looking backe to the …enth page of my Sermon, as being loath thus to leaue wrangling with my exposition of that text, noted three things to be cauilled at, in this one speech, where I say, that Ministers are especially to be honoured for their paines in preaching of the word, that being, in Pauls estimation, the chiefe worke of the ministerie. For first, he would faine know of me why …adde in Pauls estimation . I answere, because it was necessarie to be added: for in such comparatiue sentences, where one part seemeh to be preferred before all the rest, we are not alwaies to vnderstand that part simply to be the chiefe, but in the estimation of the speaker, who in some respect preferreth it to the rest. As for example, if that you should say, all good Ministers or Preachers are greatly to be honoured, especially they, who goe before their people in the example of a godly life: I would expound your meaning (as I did the Apostles) to be this, that whereas double honour is due to all Ministers or Preachers, for the performance of their dutie in generall, … they are especially to be honoured for their godly life, that being in your estimation the chiefe commendation of a Minister. Or to vse the refuters owne example, which before I explaned: all logicians that reason well, are to be well accounted of, especially they that iudge well, or are iudicious. In this speech are to be noted, not two sorts, but two duties of logicians; the one generall, to reason well, the other, speciall to iudge well, disposed in a comparatiue sentence, wherein the duties of a logician are thus compared, that whereas logicians are to be esteemed for the performance of their dutie in generall; yet especially they are to be honoured for iudging well, that being in the estimation of him that shall so speake, the chiefe worke of a Logician: I say in the estim…i… of him that shall so speake; for another perhaps would say thus; All logicians that reason well are to be well esteemed, especially those that analise well: another perhaps thus. All good Logicians are to be honoured, especially those that are methodicall; another thus, especially those that inuent well. In like manner I explane the Apostles speech, as hath beene shewed before. I but saith he, if this be true that those Ministers are especially worthy of double honour, that labour in the word and doctrine; then some poore Ministers that continually preach or would doe, if they might be suffered, are more especially to be honoured then some great prelates, that seldome or neuer preach: and it was the enuy of this illation, which by saying in Pauls estimation, you would deriue from your selfe to the …stle. Answ. The Apostles comparison is to be vnderstood of them which be of the same degree, being Presbyters and no more. Neither was it Pauls meaning, writing to Timothie the Bishop, that any of the Presbyters should hauehave more maintenance then he, (for that is the honour whereof hee speaketh) though perhaps they were more painefull in preaching, as hauing better opportunitie. It is well knowne that in the primitiue Church, when the reuenewes of …ach Church were diuided into aVid … confess. … s. 30. Syn… Rom. sub syluest. c. 12. q. 2.….27.28.2.30.foure parts, the Bishop alone had one fourth part, and that was as much as all the Presbyters and all the rest of the clergie (though perhaps there were an hundred of them) had amongst them: For all of them had but another fourth part, a third fourth part went to the buildings and reparations, and the fourth to the poore.
His second cauill,§ Sect. 1… Ad pag. 3… His 2. ca… that in other places, viz. pag. 42.45.53. I hauehave through flatterie contradicted this assertion, making gouerning a labour of greater honour then preaching. Answ. In none of those places doe I compare preaching with gouerning, but Bishops with Presbyters, saying and prouing that Bishops are superiour to Presbyters in the power of ordination and iurisdiction, and that the Bishops are the Apostles successors in the gouernement of the Church. But doth it follow because Bishops are superiour to Presbyters, that therefore preaching is a worke inferiour to gouernement? I trust Bishops are equall at the least with Presbyters in the power of order, as it respecteth the ministerie of the word and sacraments, so that what can be said in commendation of the order of Presbyters in respect of the ministerie, belongeth also to Bishops. If therefore BB. being at the least equall with Presbyters in the power of order, respecting the ministerie of the word and sacraments, be aboue them not onelyonly in the exercise of that power, but also in the power of ordination and iurisdiction; they may, without disparagement to the ministerie of the word, be said to be superiour to other Ministers.
To your third cauill I might answere as to the first,His 3. cauill that the Apostle speaketh to the Bishop of Presbyters, not to a Presbyter; as you doe, of Bishops. But indeed our Bishops, as they ought all, so the most of them (as I trust) doe thinke themselues bound to preach, when they hauehave opportunitie and leysure in respect of their other weightie imployments; in regard whereof I hauehave alwaies thought, that one good Bishop, though hee hauehave not opportunitie to preach very oft, may doe more good in the Church of God, then a dozen good Preachers. So that in these three cauilles the refuter hath gained nothing, but the manifestation of his owne malice, which I pray God to forgiue him.