Westminster Annotations, Notice to the reader
AN ADVERTISEMENT TOUCHING The Annotation on Phil. 1. 1. and on 1 Tim. 3. 1. & 5. 17. and the Argument of the same Epistle, on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Chap. 6. 2. Wherein the Author may be thought to assert Episcopacy with some prejudice to the Truth, and to the Reformation of Church-Government now in hand: With a touch at some other particulars, for prevention of offence to the RELIGIOUS READER.
IT was the Authors own Note concerning the Tenet *Master Nicholas Byfield his Book on the Creed, Artic. 4. pag. 445. in Marg.of a worthy Divine, (now deceased) an erroneous Tenet (as he took it) that being dead, he thought it not sit to alter any thing he delivered therein; Therefore permitting it to passe, he directed the Reader to a Book (set out by publike Authority) for an Antidote against it. We shall do him the like favour, in forbearing to set a deleatur on his Dictates in the places forecited, and the like right to the Reader (the like in his intention, though in effect it would not prove so *For he directed to a Book of another, not of a better opinion.) rectifying his judgement, Lest he should be misled (by his Annotations) to conceive, that such an Episcopacy is founded on the Scriptures; and so of Divine Right, as by the Solemn Covenant of the three Kingdoms hath been disavowed: And upon such a supposition, some have inferred, That where there is no such Episcopal Government, there are no Presbyters; and where there are no Presbyters, there are no Sacraments; so Francise▪ a Sanct. Clarâ Apolog. Episcop. p. 151. And the next link of the Sorites will be, That where these are wanting, there is no Church: So far did the late Archbishop carry the consequence upon the defect of a Bishop (superior to Presbyters) in his conference with Fisher, p. 176. where he mis-interpreteth a saying of Jerom, to make it sound to his own sence.
[But the truth is, The foundation of such a Prelacy is rotten, and the building upon it must needs be ruinous; for in Evangelical antiquity, (we mean the most antient, even that of the Apostles times) the words Bishop and Presbyter are used in a promiscuous manner, as Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. 1. the Apostle passing from them to the Deacons, verse 8. without any expresse mention of Presbyters, because they were included in the word Bishop; and Acts 20 28. and 1 Pet. 5. 2. the original word is foreign, that is, Superintendents, there applyed to the office of Presbyters or Pastors over their Flocks. This community of Titles is observed and acknowledged not onelyonly by Jerom a Presbyter, but by ancient Bishops, as Chrysostom and Augustine, (as Duarenus a Papist hath noted, de Minister▪ cap. 7. fol. 8.) and by some Bishops also of the present age, and Protestant Church; as by Doctor Downham Bishop of Dery, in his Defence of his Consecration-Sermon, Lib. 1. cap. 3. p. 64. and Doctor Hall, Bishop of Exeter, in his Book of Episcopacy, Par. 2. p. 10, 11, 20.
For this Titular agreement, Chrysosrom rendreth a real reason: Because (saith he) there is in a manner no difference betwixt a Bishop and a Presbyter. Chrysost. in 1 Tim. 3. Homil. 11. Tom. 4. operum; and Jerom saith, A Presbyter and a Bishop were the same, until by the devils instinct, some turned Religion into Faction, Jerom Annot. in Tit. 1. Panormitan the great Canonist, with Jerom, denyeth the distinction betwixt Bishops and Presbyters by Divine right; for which he is taxed by that parasite of Prelates, Francise. a Sanct. Clarâ, Apol. Episc. p. 64. And one of the later and most learned Bishops in the English Church, ingenuously confesseth, That the office of a Bishop is above the office of a Priest, (a title of contraction of the word Presbyter or foreign) not by authority of Scriptures (by Scripture then a Bishop hath none authority over a Presbyter, as the Note on 1 Tim. 3. 1. importeth) but after the names of honour, which the custome of the Church hath now obtained. Bishop Jewels Defence of his Apolog. part. 2. cap. 3. p. 101. A custome which though very ancient and neer the Apostles times, as Chamier truely acknowledgeth, Lib. 10. c. 6. de O…cumenico Pontifice, Tom. 2. pag. 353. hath for a long time far departed from the Golden Rule, the Word of God, and hath contracted much of the drosse and rust of humane corruption, and much troubled the peace of the Church: and though it were taken up as a remedy of Schism, it hath been found by experience a principal occasion, both of Schism and of Heresie also, for they mutually beget and produce one another: Heresie is the cause of Schism; for where Heresie is, it is commonly conceived a just ground of Separation; and where it is but in conceit, it many times produceth the same effect; for upon that ground (in part) that the Church of England was Popish, and Antichristian, in a conformity of Government and Ceremonies to the Church of Rome (how far mistaken, or rightly understood, we are not now to examine) the Brownists, with some other Sects, made a Separation from it; and the Archiepiscopal Patriarks (who were set up to prevent Schism among Bishops, as Bishops for the like end were set up above Presbyters) were all of them Hereticks, saith Bellarm. de not is Ecclesiae, l. 4. not. 5 cap. 8. Tom. 2. p. 232. He excepteth the Roman Church, which we know to be guilty of a Masse of Heresies; and more Heretical then any, in that they hold it a perpetual priviledge of their Popes, (when they dictate …x Cathedra matter of saith to the whole Church) to be infallible, and free from all Her…sie and Errour. Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. l. 4 c. 2. Tom. 1. p 984. &c. 3. princip.
And when Heresie is set on high, it causeth Schism many wayes, especially two: First, By ambitious competition for the dignity whereto it is advanced, as in the Rivalship for the Roman Mitre there have been manifold Schisms; Bellarmine himself reckoneth no fewer then twenty six, from the Schism between Cornelius and Novatianus, Anno 254. and that betwixt Engenius the fourth, and Felix his Antipope, Anno 1439. in the later part of his Chronology, from p. 492. to p. 561. And secondly, By tyrannical domination, and that sometimes by rash and inconsiderate excommunications, by which Victor the Patriark of Rome, would have cut off from Ecclesiastical Ʋnion all the Churches of Asia, and neighbouring Diocesse, as Christians of another Faith, not truely Christian, because they kept not the Feast of Easter at the same time with the Roman Church; Euseb. Eccles. Hist. l. 5. c. 24. And sometimes men are induced (though not so violently inforced) to withdraw themselves from the Communion of Churches, by reason of the rigour of such Governours, and Prelatical Potentates, as take upon them to impose what they please, and urge what they have imposed, though either erroneous, or doubtful, or frivolous, with more severity then they do the known Laws and Commandments of God.
And as Heresie is often the cause of Schism, so is Schism also the cause of Heresie; for when Religion, either by choice or force is propagated in corners, many Heretical Doctrines are hatched and Preached, and afterward it may be Printed also, which had not been conceived nor divulged, if the Authors of them had continued in the society of publike Assemblies: And it is not to be doubted, but divers of those Heresies were privately brewed under the predominance of the Prelates, which are now publikely broached betwixt the pulling down of the Prelacy, and setting up of the Presbytery, as in an Interregnum.
But Chrysostom (where he maketh a Bishop and a Presbyter in a manner all one) maketh exception of the Object. power of Ordination, wherein he giveth a preeminence unto a Bishop above a Presbyter, in the place forealleadged.
By that, 1. We must not understand a sole power of Ordination, no not in Chrysostomes dayes (though Answ. in his time Episcopacy was advanced to an higher elevation then at the first, (which at the most was but a priority in order, without majority of power, and that priority to prevent disorder and confusion in the managing of the action) for he flourished about the yeer 398. and the same yeer was the fourth Councel of Carthage, in the third Canon whereof it is decreed, That in Ordination, all the Presbyters that are present, should lay their hands on the Ordained, as well as the Bishop; Bin. Tom. 1. Concil. p. 728. col. 1. & p. 751. col. 1. (which perhaps was the patern to the thirty fifth Canon of our English Prelates, in the yeer 1603.) for the Presbyters were joynt Governours of the Church with him, Jerom in Tit. 1. 5. Cyprian Epist. 6. Edit. Pamel. p. 12, 13. and op. 24. Presbyt. and Diac. which is acknowledged by Baronius (for the Papists) ad An. 58. …u. 10 11. Tom. 1. fol. 572. and by Bishop Downham for the English Prelates defence, Serm. Consecrat. l. 1. c. 7. p. 142, 143. and c. 8. p. 178. of such necessity to be joyned with him, that in the twenty third Canon of the forecited Councell, The Bishop ought not to hear any cause without the presence of the Presbyters; and if he did, and gave sentence in it, that sentence by their absence was made void, p. 728. col. 2.
Secondly, Nor must we conceive that without a Bishop Ordination is not valid: For first, There is no necessity of having a Bishop superiour to Presbyters (no not in the conceit of those who have been such Bishops themselves) as is plain by the general vote of the Bishops of the second Councel of Carthage in the fifth Canon, which is, That the Diocesse which never had Bishop, should have none still; Bin. Tom 1. Concil. p. 703. col. 2. Secondly, There is lesse cause to conceive a necessity of Ordination by a Bishop, since the faculty of Ordination is in the Presbyters, or Society of Presbyters, as Presbyters, 1 Tim. 4. 14. and therefore though the Ordination of Ministers by Presbyters, without Prelatical Bishops, be looked on as a novelty with us, it is no new thing in it self; but the old Ordination of the purest times renewed, by which a succession of Pastors may be continued, and Churches constituted, and the Ordinances of God sufficiently and effectually administred unto salvation: And so it is approved (as practised in other Churches) by such as professe a good opinion of, and great aff…ction to Prelatical Episcopacy; [for in the Divinity School in Oxford, July 9. An. 1608. The Ordination of Ministers in the reformed Churches (where they have no such Bishops as our Covenant disclaimeth) was publikely maintained to be lawful: And King James, lest the sharp language which he used against some under the name of Puritans, should be interpreted to the prejudice or reproach of forrain Churches (whose Ecclesiastical Government is Presbyterial) he professeth (in a Monitory Preface Printed in Latine in Octavo, in the yeer 1609.) That he had no aym at those Churches, nor at their Government, but left them to the liberty of the Reformed Religion; whose constitution or standing is so plain without Prelacy, and their salvation so assured, that he wants his sight (saith Bishop Andrews) who perceiveth not the one, and is of an iron heart if he consent not to the other; Resp. ad 2. Epist. Petr. Moulin. opusc. p. 176. And he that scrued up the Episcopal power to the highest pegg (whereupon it brake) in his plea for Episcopacy by Divine Right, when he wrote against the Brownists, was so far a friend to the Reformed Churches, and their Government, as to expresse his minde towards them in this manner: I reverence from my soul (so doth our Church their dear Sister) those worthy forrain Churches, which have chosen and followed those Forms of outward Government that are every way fittest for their own condition. It is enough for you to censure them, I touch nothing common to them with you. So Bishop Hall in his Apology against the Brownists, Sect. 19. p. 588.
But the Episcopal Government over Pastors, as well as over the people, may be proved Apostolicall, say Object. some; For in the subscription of the second Epistle of Paul to Timothy, Timothy is called the first Bishop of the Church of Ephesus; and in the conclusion of his Epistle to Titus, Titus is called the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians; in both which places there were many Pastors.
First, Timothy and Titus were not Bishops, nor could be; for to be a Bishop in their sence who stand for Answ. Prelacy, is to be a fixed President over divers Churches; but Timothy and Titus were Evangelists, such as were to passe and spread the Gospel from place to place, either as accompanying the Apostles, or as sent by them, where they might be of most use for the planting or establishing of Churches, 1 Tim. 4. 5. 2 Cor. 2. 13. and 8 23. and 12. 17, 18.
Secondly, These Postscripts are not acknowledged to be any integral parts of the Canonical Scripture, not onelyonly by Protestants (who do both deny them and disprove them, see Altare Damascen. p. 176, 177. D. Dixon, fol. ult. explan. Ep. ad Hebr.) but by Papists, who either passe them by without taking notice of them, (as Aquinas in his Comment, Menoch. in his Annot. on the Epp. of Paul) or expressely mention them, and censure them; so doth Estius, who saith of that in the second to Timothy. That it is an addition of an uncertain Author, and of no great authority; And of the Subscription or Postscript (as some call it) of the Epistle to the Hebrews (saith he) It deserves no credit, and sheweth it to be contrary to the truth of Story; and so do others.
Lastly, Whereas in the Annotation on Phil. 1. 1. there is alleadged the Synod of Nice, Forbidding two or more Bishops to have their seats in one City, and before that, Cornelius Bishop of Rome upbraided Novatus with ignorance (as Eusebius writeth in his sixth Book of Ecclesiastical story) for that he knew not that there ought to be but one Bishop in that Church, in which he could not be ignorant that there were fourty six Presbyters; and Oecumenius and Chrysostom affirm as much of Philippi, it being but one City, it cannot be supposed that there should be at the same time more Bishops. To all this it may be answered:
1. Concerning the Synod of Nice, it is not said which of the two Synods of Nice it was, (for there were two, and no more) whether the first, which was held about the yeer since Christ 314. Bellarm. Chron. part. alt. p. 494, 495. or the second, of the yeer 787. Bellar. Ibid. p. 520, 521. If he mean the later, it is of little credit in the Orthodox Church, since it was a Synod of Idolatrous Prelates, who met together for the erecting and establishing of Images in Churches, and of a Religious Reverence to be exhibited to them. If the former, he citeth no Canon of that Synod, nor is there any such Canon among the twenty, which are most received as the just number of the Canons of that Councell (see Bin. Tom. 1. Concila p. 340. ad p. 345. and Chanier▪ Tom. 2. l. 13. c. 8. p. 490.) nor among those twenty four that were set out by Alph. Pisamus, which he laboureth (but in vain) to prove genuine Canons of that Councell, l. 3. de Concil. Nicen. apud Bin. Tom. 1. p. 405, 406, &c. or if there were an expresse Canon to that purpose, it is so much younger then the Antiquity alleadged for the parity, or rather the identity of Bishops or Presbyters, that as to the point in question rightly stated, as before, it makes nothing for the Prelatical preeminence.
And secondly, That of Cornelius and Novatus will make as little for that purpose, as the former allegation; for which, in the Annotation is cited the sixth Book of Eusebius, but no Chapter; but the passage the Author meaneth, is in the thirty fifth Chapter, according to the Greek (the Latine Eitions count the Chapters in a different number) but not altogether as it is here cited; and it is probable the name is mistaken, Novatus for Novatianus (wherein divers, both ancient and modern Writers are deceived) for Novatus was a Presbyter of Carthage, Novatianus a Presbyter of Rome, and Antipope to Cornelius in the first Schism of the Romane Prelacy, Bell. Chronol. part. alt. p. 491. besides, the words are not rightly cited in the Note in this respect; for that Cornelius imputeth ignorance to Novatianus, in that he knew not there ought to be but one Bishop in the Catholike Church, yet the meaning must needs be in that Catholike Church; for which, he and Novatianus were then in competition, for the words following are, He was not ignorant that in that Church there were fourty six Presbyters, seven Deacons, seven Subdeacons, &c.
And if Cornelius (though a better man then his ambitious and fraudulet Antagonist (for Novatianus was both) spake big words to uphold the Prelacy he stood for (it being in his own case, and in so hot a contestation) it is no matter either of marvell or of moment, to maintain the Prelacy of Bishops, either as agreeable to the Word of God, or to most pure and primitive Antiquity, since Cornelius was contemporary with Cyprian in the third Century, Bellarmine notes him upon the yeer 254, Bell. Chronol. part. alt. p. 450. which was betwixt the seventh and eighth persecution, when Presbyters were as ready to give for their own ease and safety as Bishops, to receive any part of Ecclesiastical Authority, which was (as the conditions of Christians then stood) an undertaking of danger, as well as of honour; and that danger was a means of managing the power with more moderation and integrity; which when it was removed, and peace brought ease and plenty, the same men (if not in person, yet in office) which in bad times were good, in good …imes proved very bad; prosperity being commonly accompanied with pride and security, which makes (many times) a more dangerous shipwrack of the manners of many, then tyranny doth in mens persons and estates.
With this Animadversion of the usurped power of the Prelates, is virtually involved an avoidance of the Episcopal Confirmation, undeservedly honoured with the Title of an Apostolical Constitution by him who made the Annotations on the Epistle to the Hebrews, ch. 6. 2. who was not the same with the Expositor upon all the precedent Epistles: And for him (excepting what hath been noted already in his part of the work, and some other Notions of conformity thereto, as his Note on Gal. 6. 18. touching the English Liturgy, and the Note on Ephes. 3. 18. concerning the Crosse, and such like, (whereof we finde not many) he hath taken very commendable pains in his part, and employed his good parts (which have enabled him to be very serviceable for defence of the truth in many publike Contestations, with Popish and Arminian adversaries) to the profit of the Christian Reader: [And for his Errours, and what others, a judicious peruser shall observe, either in his part, or in the portion of his Colleagues, we beseech him seriously to consider, what we have professed in the Preface, at the beginning of the Book; but towards the end of the Preface, viz. That wherein any shall shew that we have erred (as men) they shall see that (as Christians) it was not want of love to the Truth, but want of light to discern it, that hath misled us from it. And so we hope, what is amisse but in part, shall not redound to the disparagement of the whole; and what is faulty in one, shall not be imputed to the prejudice of another, (though a Fellow-labourer in the same Vineyard) if he be not conscious of, or consenting to any erroneous opinion; which we resolved carefully to decline in all our Dictates, and cordially to disavow, if by better eyes then our own, any such be discovered unto us. And howsoever our service fall short of others expectations, and of our own desires, we beleeve, that he who shall diligently enquire after what others have done in this kinde, in what language soever, he shall not meet with any one Book upon the whole Bible, wherein more hath been endeavoured; and if our interest in it could be secured from suspition of partiality to it, we would say performed also, for the full, clear, and true Exposition of all the Canonicall Scriptures.