A Defense of the Sermon Preached at the Consecration of the Bishop of Bath, Book 1 · Chapter 9
CHAP. IX. Answering the testimonies which by the refuter are alleaged to proue Lay-Elders.
BVt now had I need to call for armour of defence. For hitherto saith the refuter we hauehave warded the blowes that M. D. gaue to beat downe the Lay-presbyterie, now let vsus shew, that we also can strike, if need be.
The Reader, that hath found the refuter so strict in exacting Syllogismes of me, euen when I performe the part of an answerer, cannot but expect most formall and accurate Syllogismes at his hands.
But he shall finde that to be true, which I foretold him not long since: that this great Champion, not daring to vrge his testimonies, or to reduce his proofes into Syllogismes; according to the poore pollicie of them all, holdeth out certaine testimonies, as it were Pallas shield, thinking with the bare quotation of them, though he cite them not, to put vsus to silence. And to this purpose, like a notorious Mountebanke, setting himselfe to delude the simple, he commendeth his witnesses, euen Christ himselfe, his Apostles, and Euangelists with swelling titles, when their testimonies themselues are not so much as cited; as though he thought it more needfull to winne credit to his witnesses, then to proue, …hat they testifie that, for which he would seeme to alleage them. But you shall heare Pyrgopolinices himselfe: For the scriptures we hauehave (among others) these mightie ones to wage battell for vsus. First the great Emperour of the Christian armie, our Sauiour Christ himselfe, Mat. 18.17. Next a great worthy,Ad pag. 50. Luke the Euangelist, Act. 14.23. Adde to these Iames the Apostle, one of the Pillars of the Church Iam. 5.14. and that famous Generall of the gentiles, the Apostle Paul: Rom. 12 8.1. Cor. 12.28.
These are most worthy witnesses indeed, and without exception. If any one of these giuegive testimonie to your Lay-Elders, we will most willingly yeeld. But I pray you let vsus heare their words; It shall not need: if you will not belieue vsus, that they giuegive testi-monie to Lay-Elders, yet belieue other diuines, who say they doe. Are they witnesses, what they said only, or what by the holy Ghost is committed to writing? If the latter, why be not their owne testimonies produced, but other witnesses must be deposed, that they said so, when it appeareth vponupon most authenticall record, whether they said so or not?
Let vsus therefore heare the words themselues.§ Sect 2. The first allegation. Matt. 18.17. The first is Matt. 18.17. Where our Sauiour Christ saith dic Ecclesiae, tell the Church or assembly.
What then? therefore there ought to be Lay-Elders in eueryevery congregation.
See you not by this time, what a striker this is? first there may be question, whether Ecclesia signifie the whole congregation of the people, or an assembly of iudges or gouernours: if the former sense be followed, there is no shew for Lay-Elders. If the latter, which is the more likely, question againe may be made, whether Christ speake of the Synedrion of the Iewes, as Caluin and some others suppose, or of Christian gouernours: if of the Synedrion, which was a ciuill senate and indeed the high counsell of estate in the policie of the Iewes, what doth that make for Ecclesiasticall Elders in the Church of Christ, and that in eueryevery parish?
If of christian gouernours, as the Fathers expound it; what sense is there to vnderstand the words of Lay-Elders, vnlesse it can otherwise be proued, either that Christ had alreadie ordained them, or that afterwards they were in vse in the Church of Christ. But the former is absurd: and for the latter they hauehave not so much as a faire shew, being disarmed of the two places, which I hauehave vindicated out of their hands, viz: 1. Tim. 5.17. and Ambrose in 1. Tim. 5.1. Nay further I adde, that if it could be proued (as it neuer will) that euer there were Lay-Elders in the Church before this our age, yet they should but argue from the Genus to the Species affirmatiuely, tell the gouernours, ergo Lay-Elders: wherefore this is a very seely argument.
Yea but other diuines say, that Christ spake of Lay-Elders. What others say it is not greatly materiall in this kind, so long as we plainely see, there is no necessitie nor probabilitie so to vnderstand him. But who are they that say so? Chrysostome, Theophylact, Erasmus, Caluin, Beza, Piscator vponupon the place it selfe,Chrys. in Mat. 18. presulibus S…eta… presidentibus. foreign. &c. For the three first, because they are no parties, I can be content to examine their testimonies.
All that Chrysostome saith of those words is this, foreign tell the Church, that is Prelates and gouernours: and on those words whatsoeuer you shall bind on earth, &c: nec dicit saith he, Ecclesiae presuli, neither did he say to the prelate of the Church, whom he vnderstood by Church, bind him with bands or cords, &c.
Theophylact explaineth the words thus:Theoph. in Mat. 18. If before two or three witnesses hee being reprooued shall not bee ashamed, foreign which Oecolampadius translateth thus,For of foreign, the genitiue plurall is foreign, according to the rule, in d…abus primis declinationibus ge…i … plurales circumflectuntur. Ne graueris tunc in Ecclesiae suggestu invulgare peccatum, sticke not then to publish his fault in the pulpit of the Church or iudgement seate. But the accēt sheweth that by foreign we are to vnderstād An tistites or presides, the Prelates of the Church. And those words, what you shall bind, &c: he expoundeth thus, If thou who art wronged shall hold the offender as a Publican or Ethnicke, euen such a one he shalbe in heauen, but if thou loose him, that is, forgiue him, he shalbe pardoned in heauen, foreign for not onelyonly what the Priests loose are loosed, but also what we who are wronged doe bind or loose, the same shalbe bound or loosed: where, by Priests, he meaneth those, whom before he called the Prelates of the Church.
Erasmus maketh this Paraphrase:Paraphra. in Mat. 18. If the offender be so vntractable, that he will be moued neither with shame nor feare of iudgement, bring the matter to the congregation, that either he maybe reformed by the content of the multitude, or by authoritie of them which be rulers ou… the multitude. But if he be so farre past cure, that he will not be corrected neither by secret and brotherly monition, neither by the knowledge and consent of two or three, neither by the shame of his fault vttered and disclosed, neither by the authoritie of the …hiefe rulers, leaue him to his disease.
My aduersarie therefore, to salue his credit, had need to bring those, from whom he had these testimonies at the second or third hand, to depose, that Chrysostome, Theophylact, and Erasmus doe say, that Christ speaketh of Lay-Elders. Otherwise he will hardly escape the censure of imposture, and seeking to seduce the people with glorious shewes.
To the rest of his witnesses I answere, that what new writers, being parties in the cause, doe testifie without warrant of scripture, euidence of reason, or testimonie of antiquitie, it deserueth no credit.
Sect. 3. The 2. allegation. Act. 14.23.The second testimonie, Act. 14.23. that Paul and Barnabas ordained Presbyters in eueryevery Church, therefore Lay-Elders. How is this consequence proued? because the greeke Scholiast and a few new writers say so.
But here the disputer, for his credite sake, must plead, that he (for his part) neuer saw the Greeke Scholiast, but receiued this allegation from T. C. else he must be accused either of grosse ignorance, or notorious falsification. I see not saith T. C. why it may not be referred to Elders (meaning Lay-Elders) as well as too Bishops, Lib. 2. part. 2. pag. 36.(meaning Ministers) seeing S. Paul there setteth forth, how they set a full order in the Church. And of that iudgement is the greeke Scholiast, which affirmeth, that those which followed S. Paul and Barnabas, were worthy to be Bishops, and that they created of them Elders and Deacons: Vnderstanding Oecumenius, as if by Bishops he meant ordinarie Ministers, and Elders and Deacons, their Lay-Elders and Lay-Deacons: which were a notable deprauing of Oecumenius his meaning, if he were so to be translated. But his words being these foreign, those who hauehave but small skill in greeke doe know, that the article of the plurall number with the preposition foreign or foreign, doth most vsually signifie no more then the proper name alone, so that foreign is all in one with foreign and so is vsed by Oecumenius in the very next sentence following, as you shall heare. Besides, foreign doth not signifie they were worthy, but they had the dignitie or honour: or if they had beene worthy to hauehave beene Bishops, Paul and Barnabas had small reason, in that want of sufficient Ministers, to make them lay either Elders or Deacons. So that Oecumenius his words are thus to be translated, it is to be noted, that Paul and Barnabas had the dignitie of Bishops, for that they ordained by imposition of hands, not onelyonly Deacons but also Presbyters.
Note also saith hee that in Miletum foreign Barnabas and Paul were by imposition of hands ordained, but I found another coppie which for Miletum hath Antioch,In verse. 26. from thence they sailed to Antioch, the coppie wheron Oecum, writeth, hath M… letum. and that is more probable. His meaning is that at Antioch Paul and Barnabas were ordained Bishops. Act. 13.2.
And that Oecumenius by Presbyters vnderstood Ministers or Teachers, it is apparant by his words going before: for demanding, why the Apostles made not Presbyters in Cyprus and Samaria, but in these places mentioned▪ Act. 14. he answereth, those were neare to Ierusalem and the apostles, and in Antioch the word preuailed, foreign, but in these places they needed much exhortation, chiefly those of the gentiles needed much teaching.
The third testimonie,The 3. allegation. Iam. 5.14. Iam. 5.14. Is any man sicke among you? let him call for the Presbyters of the Church, and let them pray ouer him, annointing him with oile in the name of the Lord. Therefore there were Lay-Elders in S. Iames time.
This consequence is proued because Caluin and foure other new writers say so.
The fourth:The 4. allegation. Rom. 12.8. Ambrose in Rom. 12. Rom. 12.8. foreign, he that ruleth, in diligence, this Ruler must needs be the Lay-Elder. For besides certaine new writers, Ambrose saith so. But Ambrose vnderstandeth the words generally of any Ruler, expounding him that ruleth to be eum qui curam vt praesit fratribus suscipit him that vndertaketh the care to rule his brethren.
The fifth 1. Cor. 12.28.The 5. allegation. 1. Cor. 12.28. God hath appointed in the Church foreign gouernements: these gouernements must needs be of Lay-Elders, for besides some new writers, Ambrose, Ierome, Theodoret, doe testifie so much.
Ambrose his words be these,In 1. Cor. 12.28. sunt & gubernatores gui spiritualib. retinaculis hominibus documento sunt, there are also gouernours who with spirituall reines doe nurture men.
Ierome, qui sciunt singulos prout apti sunt gubernare, who know to gouerne eueryevery one according as they are apt. Theodoret, hereby he signified the administrations or gouernements of the Church.
These be all the places of scripture which this great striker§ Sect. 4. durst make shew of.A common exception against these allegations. Whereof not any one can be said with any shew of probabilitie to speake one word for Lay-Elders. If Lay-Elders were first proued by other arguments or presupposed, the best argument that could out of these places be raised, were from the Genus to the species affirmatiue; as if they should say, the scriptures speake of gouernours, therefore of Lay-Elders; of Presbyters, therefore of onelyonly gouerning Presbyters.
But seeing they neuer were, nor euer will be proued by other arguments; the reason taken from these places, is from the Genus, to a fancied and platonicall Idea, or poeticall species, and that affirmatiuè. If I should say, it is a bird, therefore a Swanne, it were but a simple argument: but if thus, it is a Bird, therefore a blacke Swanne, it were too ridiculous. Such are the arguments of this disputer: for if he should say, the holy Ghost speaketh in three of these places of gouernours, therefore of Presbyters, it were a weake argument; but when he inferreth therefore Lay-presbyters, who were more rare then blacke Swannes, it is very ridiculous. If the worst argument in my Sermon, euen when he made the worst of it, had concluded no better then the best of these, he would neuer hauehave done insulting and triumphing. But I cannot blame him, they be the best proofes his cause can afford; they are the testimonies, which the principall patrones of the Presbyterie doe vse to alledge.
But you will say, this is a strange kind of arguing to proceed from men, who allow no office in the Church but what hath expresse and direct warrant in the scriptures: this is the meaning of the scriptures, because some new diuines doe thinke so. We are wont to hold, that scripture is to be expoū ded by scripture, as by conference of other paralell scriptures, or by inference out of the context it selfe, diduced by some artificiall argument; or if these faile, especially, in such places as concerne matters of storie or fact, as for example, whether there were any Lay-Elders in the primitiue Church, we fly to the expositions of the Fathers, & testimonie of antiquitie. But what would you hauehave a man doe, these proofes and testimonies fayling, the best glosse they can set vponupon their cause, and the fairest excuse for themselues is, that some other new writers, in matters of substance for the most part Orthodoxall, hauehave beene partly of their minde, and yet if we consider, that two or three principall men, hauing vponupon necessitie deuised the Presbyterie, to supply the roome of the Bishop before eiected, and afterwards (being growne into liking with their owne deuise, because a few places of the scriptures and Fathers especially, 1. Tim. 5.17. and Ambrose in 1. Tim. 5.1. seemed to fauour the same) commended it to others, as warranted by scriptures and Fathers; others, taking it vponupon their word without sufficient tryall, hauehave yeelded their consent, and by their writings commended the same to posteritie: I say, if these things be considered, we hauehave no great reason, much to esteeme the testimonies either of the principall Authors, or of the pedarie fautors of the Presbyterian discipline, being all parties in the cause.
But now if I should proue vntounto you,§ Sect 5. New writers falsified by the refuter. that as this disputer abused the names of so many of the Fathers, as he hath named: so also hath wronged some of the new writers: assuredly, if he be not as shamelesse, as he is namelesse, his face which now he hideth,De concil. qu. 5. cap. 3. he will neuer dare to shew. For first, where he produceth D. Whitakers as a witnesse, that Christ when he said tell the Church meant Lay-Elders: it is euident to any that readeth him, that by Ecclesia in that place, he vnderstandeth the Church represented in a Councell, whether prouinciall, which he sheweth to be aboue a Bishop; or generall, which he proueth to be aboue the Pope. For if a Bishop or the Pope should offend, the course which our Sauiour prescribeth to Peter himselfe and the rest of his Apostles should be taken; First, by priuate admonition, Secondly, before two or three witnesses, and thirdly, if these faile, by telling the Church.
For the second place he alleageth D. Fulke, In Act. 14.23.who doth not once mention Lay-Elders, nor meane them in that place. But our translation being accused by the Rhemists, for that where we should say Priests, In Act. 14.we say Elders: D. Fulke doth not deny, but that Priests or Ministers are there meant by Elders, whom he could be content should be called Priests, as Priests is the English of Presbyters, and wisheth that the sacrificers of the law had neuer beene called by that name, but that it had beene reserued (if I vnderstand him) to signifie the Ministers of the Gospell. There is no question therefore betweene them, whether Lay-Elders be there meant; but whether the Ministers, who are there meant by the name Presbyteri, whom the Papists would hauehave translated Priests, may not also be called Elders.
In act. 14.23.Aretius, though he holdeth the distinction of Elders, and so is a partie in the cause, notwithstanding by Presbyters, Act. 14 23. he vnderstandeth Ministers onelyonly. Ministr…s ordinat per singulas Ecclesias, expende hic quid sint Presbyteri, nimirum ministri certis Ecclesiis deputati, vnde duplex fuit primitiuae Ecclesiae genus Presbyterorum, vnum quod Ecclesiae praer at docendo, quales isti hic sunt, &c.
In Iam. 5.14.For the third, he abuseth againe the testimonie of D. Fulke, who, as in the former place, by Presbyteros, vnderstandeth Priests or Ministers. And as the Rhemists blamed, after the same manner, our translation, for saying Elders and not Priests, he answereth as before. And whereas they obiect, that our Elders be not such as the Apostle Iames requireth to be sent for, as being not deputed specially to publike praying or administration of the Sacraments; he answereth, that although in some Churches there be some Elders appointed only to gouerne, yet is there no Church, in which there be no Elders appointed specially to publicke prayers and administration of Sacraments. But admitting, that the Ministers of our Church be such as the Apostle speaketh of, you demaund why we translate them not Ministers▪ I answere (saith he) because the word signifieth Elders, & not Ministers, & yet we contend not for the terme, nor refuse the name Priest, when it signifieth the same whom the Apostle calleth Presbyterum, but when by abuse of Papists it is taken to signifie a sacrificer.
Act. 14.23.15.4.6.22.24. &. 20.17 28. Tit. 1.5.In the second and fift, he quoteth D. N…well, who indeed speaketh of certaine Seniors which with the Pastor, that is the Bishop, were to exercise the discipline of the Church, but whether they were chosen out of the Clergie, or laitie, he sheweth not: by the places which he quoteth for the proofe of them, diuerse whereof, euen in the iudgement of Caluin, are to be vnderstood of Ministers, he may seeme to meane Seniors of the Clergie.
In the fourth and fifth he abuseth the testimonie of Th. Morton (not the learned and iudicious Deane of Winchester, Th. Morton. in 1. Cor. 12.28.but another old acquaintance of mine) who in Rom. 12.8. & 1. Cor. 12.28. by gouernours, vnderstandeth those, who hauehave the gouernement of the Church.
These may suffice for a taste of his good dealing with new writers, especially our owne countrey men: the rest, let examine them who either hauehave the bookes, or thinke it worth their paines.