Review and Examination of the Doctrine, Part 1 · Chapter 3
CHAP. III.
The Diocesian Bishops Office debases extraoadinarie Offices, in confounding them with the ordinary. That Timothy and Titus power layes no foundation for Prelacy, cleared at large. The derivation of Prelacie from them, loaded with gross absurdites.
VIII. THe Diocesian Bishops Office, is in this contrare unto the word, in that It debases the Apostolical and Euangelistick Offices, and confounds the ordinarie & extraordinarie functions & administrations, which Scripture, Reason, & all sound Divines doe diversifie & distinguish. The Prelats Advocats, & this new informer particularly, pleads for and derives the Episcopal preheminence from the office and inspection of the Apstles and Euangelists, whom they affirme to have been properly & formally Bishops, in the sense they take the Diocesian Bishop, and that the formal power and offices, which they exercised are to be continued still in the Church. That Timothy was formally constitut Bishop of Ephesus, Titus of Crete, Iames of Ierusalem. And that the Prelats office, is the same, and properly Succeeds them, and is as it were, A continuation of their office in a formal sense. Timothy's authority is is one maine ground which the Episcopal men at the Isle of Wight, and this Auther also do plead to legittimat the Prelats office. This being clear, I say, this pretended Mould of the Diocesian Bishops Office and Authority, is lyable to the charge & censure of debasing these holy extraordinarie functions, and confounding them with the ordinary, which I prove, thus. 1. All sound protestant Divines do harmoniously assert the extraordinary nature of the Apostolick office as such, and likewayes of the Euangelists, reckening the Apostles, Prophets, and Euangelists as the extraordinary New Testament Officers, whose proper formal Office, died with them, and admits of no succession: for thus they ordinarily defyne the Apostles, that they were Christs immediatly called and extraornarily gifted universal Ambassadours, sent out, to lay every where the foundation of the Gospel Church, and to plant the Gospel government therein: Particularly Polanus in his Syntagma reckens up these as their extraordinary expired prerogatives (to which we will find this Informer in parte give assent.) 1. Their immediat institution by Christ. 2. Their immediat mission to teach, (Paul had his from heaven.) 3. Their universal legation to found and plant Churches throw the world. 2 Cor. 11: 28.—4. Its visible badge, (viz.) the conferring of the Spirit by the laying on of hands. 5. Their extraordinary authority beyond any of their Successors, as being set over the whole Church &c. Hence all the ingredients of their formal Office, as such, must needs be expired, And no Church Officer can be said to succeed them therein. Their Call was immediat, sure, non can succeed them in that. Their special or proper work, was to plant Churches and the Gospel-government in them, and set up their Officers, of all which Churches they were Ministers in actu exercits, sure no Church Officer could succeed them in this. Their Qualifications as such Ambassadours, were correspondent to this great work, (viz.) their gifts of miracles, gifts of tongues, Prophesie, infallibility in Doctrin; Sure now can pretend to succeed them in this. Nixt, for the Euangelists, their Office was equally extraordinary, it consisting in a planetary motion, from place to place, to water where the Apostles planted, to bring reports of the Churches state to the Apostles, and commissions from the Apostles to them. Their various motions, pro re nata, upon & down, even after these Epistles (wherein they are supposed to have receaved their Episcopal charge) were written to them; and the Scriptures absolut silence as to their ever returning to these Churches againe, besides the Apostle Pauls shewing expresly in these Epistles, their occasional transient employment in this places, and express recalling of them therefrom, to the further prosecution of their extraordinary employment, and in these very Epistles identifying the Office of the Bishop and Elder: All these clear grounds, I say, do evidently demonstrat that the work and office of Timothy and Titus as Euangelists, is expired, and cannot be pretended unto by any ordinary Church Officer, it being an appendix as it were of the Apostolick charge, and supposing its exercise and existance, and the Churches then - infant state and condition. Now, to make these high and extraordinary functions, ordinary, and thus confound the two together, must be a very gross usurpation. 2. Hence it is manifest, that the Episcopal function (as above described in the quality, and mould of the Diocesian Bishop) will never be found in these extraordinary functions, either formaliter, or eminenter, and consequently it must be a gross belying of the Spirit of God, to pretend this in the assuming of this usurped Office. First, The Episcopal Office will not be found in that of the Apostles or Euangelists formaliter. For these were universal unfixed Officers, set over no particular Church or Diocess: But were pro re nata to officiat to the whole Church as being (the Apostles especially) Officers thereof in actu exercito. Nixt, the Episcopal function is not included in these Offices eminenter, or in the ordinary power whi… the Apostles or Euangelists exercised, or transmitte … the Church. And that for these Reasons. 1. Neit… the Apostles nor Euangelists in respect of their perpet… ordinary Ministerial authority transmitted by them in … Church, did exercise Superiority Episcopal over other Ministers, but as to the perpetual Pastoral Charge, they held them their equals, and in the ordinary power of government, as wee saw above in the Apostles practise in ordination and Jurisdiction amongst Churches constitut, and farr less can we suppose that the Euangelists were in such Churches to exercise any single or Episcopal preheminence in government. For it were strange if Timothy who was ordained by a Presbytrye wherein Paul himself was present, should notwithstanding usurpe preheminence over a Presbytery though inferior to ane Apostle. And that whereas Presbyters did concurr pari passu with a whole Presbytery of Apostles in every peece of a judicial Act and decree, yet that ane Euangelist inferior to any of the Apostles, should take Episcopal preheminence over a Presbytery. 2. The Apostles planted no such ordinary Officers in the Church, as had that Episcopal Power, therefore the Episcopal Power was not transmitted by them in the Church: And by further consequence it is not included in their Office eminenter. For it is evident, that in the first plantation of the Churches they fixed Presbyters, or Pastors, as their immediat Successor's in the Ministerial power, and likewise in their last farewel's into Churches, they committed unto these Pastors the ordinary power of government, without the least hint of a Super-institution of any officer of a higher order. Act. 20: 28, 29. Compared with 25. 1 Pet. 5: 2, 3. with 2 Pet. 1: 14—3. It was in respect of Paules ordinary Ministerial power, and in that Capacitie, that he had hands laid upon him by that Presbytety at Antioch, and was sent out with other commissioners to that Synod at Jerusalem by them, which looked like a humble submission pro tanto, unto them, and is far from the Episcopal preheminence: since the Prelats dissoune all Subjection to the Prophes in greater or lesser assemblies. 4. The Prelats authority is this, he is upon the mater the only proper Pastor of the Diocess, whose Episcopal inspection reaches Pastores and flocks both, as is above cleared. He is the fountaine from whom the power of order and Jurisdiction in the wholl Diocess, is deryved, and the exercise of both depends upon his Lordly disposal. Now, this is contrare both to the Apostles and Evangelists their ordinary and extraordinary power, contrare to its very nature in universum, their office being a declarative executive Ministerie onlie: And Dominion or Lordship being discharged to all Apostles, and all Church Officers whatsoever.
Hence in the 3d. place, This Episcopal pretence, a…nt the derivation of their Lordly grandour, from the Apostolick Office, fastens a grosse charge of unfaithfulness upon them. 1. In assuming a power in its nature distinct from what there Lord allowed and enjoyned them (viz.) a Lordly dominion, not a ministerial Stewardshipe & service only, & such a dominion as Princes of the gentiles exercise, even to have the actus primus of a civil Lord-peer, yea Chieff-peer, or Parliament man. 2. In debaseing and Straitening their Apostolick Inspection, and carrying ane Office incompatible with it, and thus unfaithfully tearing out a parte of their commission. For, in becoming Diocesian Bishops, they should be fixed to particular diocesses, and therin exercise ane ordinary fixed poever, wheras their commission was to exercise ane extraordinary unfixed ministery towards all the Churches, planted, and to be planted. 3. In setting up up no such ordinare officers to succeed them in this so necessarie a work, but committing the wholl governement to meer presbyters as is said. 4. In ommiting in all their rules & prescriptions anent Church government, & the offices and officers therof, the least intimation of this officer, and giving no rules for either the qualifications or ordination of any higher officer then a meer presbyter, 5. In express dischargeing of Lordly dominion & preheminence among ordinary Church officers. Now, if this be not a debasing of, and hie reflection upon, these eminent extraordinary Church officers, both to make them carry ane office contrare and inferior unto, and inconsistent with ther holy functions, intrusted to them by the Lord, and likewayes in their practice to contradict their doctrin in relation to Church government, yea and in both their Doctrin and practice, to contradict & crosse the Lords great commission and instructions, If this be not, I say, a horrid reflection upon their faithfullnes, Let any judge.