The Healing Attempt, Chapter 6

The Healing Attempt · Chapter 6

p. 57CHAP. VI. Archbiſhop Uſher's Reduction of Epiſcopacy with ſome Notes on it. The Reduction of Epiſcopacy unto the Form of Synodical Government received in the Ancient Church; propoſed in the year 1641. as an Expedient for the prevention of thoſe Troubles, which afterwards did ariſe about the matter of Church-Government.

Epiſcopal and Presbyterial Government Conjoyned.

BY Order of the Church of England all Presbyters are charged to adminiſter the Doctrine and Sacraments, The Book of Ordination.and the Diſcipline of Chriſt, as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Realm hath received the ſame; And that they might the better underſtand what the Lord had commanded therein,Ibid. ex Act. 20.27, 28.Acts 20:27Acts 20:28 the Exhortation to St. Paul, to the Elders of the Church of Epheſus is appointed to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination; Take heed unto your ſelves and to all the Flock among whom the Holy Ghoſt hath made you Overſeers to Rule the Congregation of God, foreign ſo taken in Mat. 2.6. Revel. 12.5. & 19.15.Matt 2:6Rev 12:5Rev 19:15which he hath purchaſed with his Blood.

Notes.

Thus it was in the Old Book of Ordering Prieſts and Deacons; but on the Reſtauration of Charles II. there were ſuch Alterations made in the Books of Common Prayer and Ordering Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons, as do plainly ſhew, that tho' heretofore the Presbyters had Power to Rule, yet now they have none.

p. 58In the Act of Ʋniformity, 14 Car. 2. it is Declared, That the King's Majeſty (according to his Declaration of 25. October, 1660.) granted his Commiſſion under the Great Seal of England, to ſeveral Biſhops, and other Divines, to Review the Book of Common Prayer, and to prepare ſuch Alterations, and Additions, as they thought fit to offer: And afterwards the Convocations of both the Provinces of Canterbury and York, being by his Majeſty called and Aſſembled, (and now ſitting) his Majeſty hath been pleaſed to Authorize and require the Preſidents of the ſaid Convocations, and other the Biſhops, and Clergy of the ſame, to Review the ſaid Book of Common Prayer, and the Book of the Form and Manner of the making and Conſecrating of Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons; And that after mature Conſideration, they ſhould make ſuch Additions, and Alterations in the ſaid Books reſpectively, as to them ſhould ſeem meet and convenient; And ſhould Exhibit, and Preſent the ſame to his Majeſty in Writing, for his further Allowance, or Confirmation; ſince which time, upon full and mature Deliberation, they, the ſaid Preſidents, Biſhops, and Clergy of both Provinces, have accordingly Reviewed the ſaid Books, and have made ſome Alterations, which they think fit to be inſerted to the ſame, and have Exhibited and Preſented the ſame unto his Majeſty in Writing. All which his Majeſty having duly conſidered, hath fully Approved and Allowed the ſame, and recommended to this preſent Parliament.

The Books thus altered, were by this Parliament confirm'd and eſtabliſhed, and the Alterations ſuch as make the Office of the Presbyter quite another thing than it was before; for tho' in the old Book of Ordering Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons, the Reading unto the Presbyters at the time of their Ordination, Acts 20.27, 28. did put it out of Doubt, that the Presbyters were veſted with the Paſtoral Office, having Power given 'em to Rule the Church; In the new Book this Exhortation is removed from the Presbyters Ordination unto the Conſecration of Biſhops, thereby manifeſtly Evincing the Paſtoral Power to be taken from the Presbyter, and feated with the Biſhop only, and accordingly the name [Paſtor] which was in the p. 59old Book given unto the Presbyter, is in the new omitted, and in ſeveral places the word [Curate, or Prieſt] ſubſtituted in its ſtead; and whereas, in the old Book, the Presbyter was admitted [to the Miniſtry of Prieſthood] in the new it's to the [Order] and Miniſtry of Prieſthood, thereby making Prieſthood an Order diſtinct from thoſe of Deaconſhip and Epiſcopacy. In the Conſecrating of Biſhops in the Collect, to ſhew what they mean by Biſhop more than formerly, it's added by way of Explication to all Biſhops [the Paſtors of thy Church] and in the Prayer for the Biſhop [Almighty God, &c.] in the old Book 'twas, Repleniſh him ſo with thy Truth— that He may faithfully ſerve thee in this Office to the Edifying of thy Church; in the new it is [to the well Governing thy Church.] And when the Archbiſhop and other Biſhops preſent, do lay their Hands on the Elected, and according to the old Book, were to ſay, [Receive the Holy Ghoſt, &c.] in the new it's added [for the Office and Work of a Biſhop Now committed unto thee by the Impoſition of our Hands in the Name of the Father, &c.]

Thus the Alterations by Law eſtablſhed do clearly ſhew, that both the Name and Office of a Paſtor is taken from the Presbyter, and transferr'd over to the Dioceſan, who alone hath the Power of Ordering Prieſts and Deacons, and of Governing or Ruling the Church; whence it follows, that as there is but One Paſtor in a Dioceſs, there is but one Church; That all Pariſh-Aſſemblies are but parts or parcels of this One ſingle Church, under the Conduct and Government only of the Dioceſan Biſhop, their only Paſtor; That all Ordinations by Presbyters are of no greater Validity than thoſe by Deacons or Lay-men; and therefore altho' Ordination is no more to be repeated than Baptiſm, yet thoſe who have had their Ordination only by Presbyters, muſt be Ordained again, or not admitted unto any Benefice, nor allowed the Exerciſe of the Prieſtly Office, nor be eſteemed Lawful Prieſts; ſo that as there is a vaſt Difference between Queen Elizabeth's Biſhops and Charles the Second's, ſo between Queen Elizabeth's Law, and King Charles's. Q. Elizabeth's Act runs thus, That every Perſon under the Degree of a Biſhop, which doth or ſhall pretend to be a Prieſt or Miniſter of God's Holy Word and Sacraments, by reaſon of any other Form of Inſtitution, Conſecration, p. 60or Ordering, than the Form now uſed in the Reign of our moſt Gracious Soveraign Lady—ſhall—declare his Aſſent, and ſubſcribe to all the Articles of Religion, which only concern the Profeſſion of the true Chriſtian Faith, and the Doctrine of the Sacraments, compriſed in a Book Entituled, Articles, &c. [viz. 39 Articles]—upon pain, that every ſuch Perſon which ſhall not ſubſcribe, ſhall be (ipſo facto) deprived, and all his Eccleſiaſtical Promotions ſhall be void, as if he had been naturally dead.

King Charles his Law is thus, That no Parſon, who now is Incumbent, and in the Poſſeſſion of any Parſonage or Benefice, and who is not in Holy Orders by Epiſcopal Ordination, or ſhall not be before the ſaid Feaſt-day of St. Bartholomew, Ordained Prieſt or Deacon, ſhall have, hold, or enjoy any Parſonage with Cure—but ſhall be utterly diſabled, and ipſo facto deprived of the ſame, and all his Eccleſiaſtical Promotions ſhall be void, as if he had been naturally dead.

Touching Perſons ordained by any other Form than the Epiſcopal, a Subſcription to the Articles was ſufficient by 13 Eliz. c. 12. to Qualifie them for Spiritual Promotion, and Whittingham's, whoſe Ordination was only by Presbyters abroad, was eſteemed good, and he enjoyed his Benefice to the day of his death, as Traverſe, in his Supplication to the Council, affirms: but tho' the Articles be ſubſcribed unto by one having only an Ordination by Presbyters, he muſt be ordained by the Biſhop, or not admitted to any Eccleſiaſtical Promotion; or if admitted, he is ipſo facto deprived; and whoever conſults the Book of Ordering Presbyters, will find that the whole of it plainly declares, that the former Odination of the Perſon thus re-ordained, was invalid and null, and that till now he was never of the Presbyters Office; for the Ordination of one never before ordained, and the Ordination of him who was formerly ordain'd by Presbyters, is the ſame.

Whether I am right in theſe my Sentiments, I appeal to the Right Reverend and Reverend Biſhops and others of the Dignified Clergy, who, with the greateſt importunity, are deſired to declare their Judgments in this Matter.

To know what the Government of the Church of England is, that is by Archbiſhops, Biſhops; and what is the Office of a p. 61Presbyter, what that of a Biſhop, is a matter of extraordinary importance.

If it be the ſame it was in Edward the Sixth and Queen Elizabeth's days, which is the ſame with what the Learned Archbiſhop Ʋſher was for, the greateſt Bone of Contention between the Cons and Noncons will be removed farther. Every Pariſh-Presbyter will be granted to be a Paſtor, veſted with a Right to Rule the Church, (from whence, ſaith the Learned Archbiſhop, the name of Rector alſo was given unto him at firſt) and to adminiſter the Diſcipline of Chriſt, as well as to diſpenſe the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the difference between the Biſhop and the Presbyter to be only in Degree, and not in Order, as this Learned Primate ever held, as he ſaith in an Anſwer to an abuſive Report, that went abroad of him: I have ever declared my Opinion to be (ſaith he) That Epiſcopus & Presbyter gradu tantum differunt, non Ordine, and conſequently that in places where Biſhops cannot be had, the Ordination by Presbyters ſtandeth valid; and Dr. Bernard in his Animadverſions on the Archbiſhop's Opinion, aſſerts, That in this Judgment he was not ſingular; Dr. Davenant, that Pious and Learned Biſhop of Salisbury, conſents with him in it,Determinat. Q. 42. produceth the Principal of the Schoolmen, Gulielmus Pariſienſis, Gerſon, Durand, &c. Epiſcopatus non eſt Ordo praecise diſtinctus à Sacerdotio ſimplici, &c. non eſt alia poteſtas Ordinis in Epiſcopis quàm Presbyteris, ſed ineſt modo perfectiori. And declares it to be the general Opinion of Schoolmen, &c. And whereas the Primate ſaith, That in Caſes of Neceſſity, where Biſhops cannot be had, the Ordination by Presbyters ſtandeth valid: Biſhop Davenant concurs with him alſo, and produceth the Opinion of Richardus Armathanus (one of this Primate's Predeceſſors, and one of the moſt Learned men in his time) to be accordingly. To which divers others might be added, as in ſpecial Dr. Field ſometimes Dean of Gloceſter, in his Learned Book of the Church, where this Judgment of the Primate,Lib. 3. c. 39. & lib. 5. c. 27. and the Concurrence of Biſhop Davenant's, is largely confirmed. But that Book Entituled, The Defence of the Ordination of the Miniſters of the Reformed Churches p. 62beyond the Seas, maintained by Mr. Archdeacon Maſon againſt the Romaniſts (who wrote alſo a Defence of Epiſcopacy, and of the Miniſtry of the Church of England) is fufficiently known, and I have been aſſur'd it was not only the Judgment of Biſhop Overal, but that he had a Principal hand in it. He produceth many Teſtimonies, the Maſter of the Sentences, and moſt of the Schoolmen, Bonaventure, Thomas Aquinas, Durand, Dominicus Soto, Richardus Armachanus, Toſtatus, Alphonſus à Caſtro, Gerſon, Caniſius to have affirmed the ſame; and at laſt quotes Medina, a Principal Biſhop of the Council of Trent, who affirm'd, That Jerom, Ambroſe, Auguſtine, Sedulius, Primaſius, Chryſoſtome, Theodoret, Theophylact were of the ſame Judgment alſo. In a word, if the Ordination of Presbyters in ſuch places where Biſhops cannot be had, were not valid, the late Biſhops of Scotland had a hard Task to maintain themſelves to be Biſhops, who were not Prieſts, for their Ordination was no other.

What Dr. Bernard mentions about the Archbiſhop's diſlike of the late Prerbyterians here in England, is not ſo much againſt their Exerciſing the Power, as the Manner of their Exerciſe, they did not add to the Impoſition of Hands [Receive the Holy Ghoſt, &c.] nor ſo much as theſe words [Be thou a faithful Diſpenſer of the Word of God and of his Holy Sacraments, &c.] Moreover in the Cloſe to the Reduction the Primate and Dr. Holdſworth aver, That the Suffragans, mentioned in the ſecond Propoſition, may lawfully uſe the Power both of Juriſdiction and Ordination according to the Word of God and the Practice of the Ancient Church, who yet are but the Chorepiſcopi, of no other Order than the Presbyters, as hereafter I ſhall prove. A Declaring therefore thus much, namely, That the Presbyter is of the ſame Order, veſted with the Power both of Order and Juriſdiction, and an entruſting them with the Exerciſe thereof, as in the ſecond Propoſition, will contribute very much towards a well Eſtabliſhed Comprehenſion; And in Requital it's not to be doubted, but the Latitudinarian Nonconformiſt, of which there are a great number in this Kingdom, will readily yield to the Preſidency of one Presbyter, for the ſake of Union, to be over them, and cloſe with what the Archbiſhop further adds.

p. 63Archbiſhop.

Of the many Elders, who in common Ruled the Church of Epheſus, there was one Preſident, whom our Saviour in his Epiſtle to this Church, in a peculiar manner ſtileth the Angel of the Church of Epheſus: Revel. 1.Rev 1and Ignatius in another Epiſtle written about twelve years after unto the ſame Church, calleth the Biſhop thereof. Betwixt the Biſhop and the Presbytery of that Church, what an Harmonious Conſent there was in the Ordering of the Church-Government, the ſame Ignatius doth fully declare, by the Presbytery, which St. Paul, underſtanding the Community of the reſt of the Presbyters or Elders, who then had a hand,1 Tim. 4.14.1 Tim 4:14 not only in the Delivery of the Doctrine and Sacraments, but alſo in the Adminiſtration of the Diſcipline of Chriſt: for further proof of which, we have that known Teſtimony of Tertullian in his general Apology for Chriſtians.Ibidem etiam Exhortationes, Caſtigationes, & cenſura Divina; nam & judicatur magno cum pondere, ut apud certos de Dei conſpectu, ſummum ſummum que futuri Judicii praejudicium eſt, ſi quis ita deliquerit, ut à Communicatione Orationis, & Conventus & omnis ſancti Commercii relegetur: praeſident probati qui que Seniores, honotem iſtum non pretio, ſed Teſtimonio adepti. Tertul. Apologet. c. 39. In the Church are uſed Exhortations, Chaſtiſements, and Divine Cenſure; for Judgment is given with great advice, as amongſt thoſe, who are certain they are in the ſight of God, and it is the chiefeſt foreſhewing of the Judgment which is to come, if any man have ſo offended, that he be baniſhed from the Communion of Prayer, and of the Aſſembly, and of all Holy Fellowſhip. The Preſidents that bear Rule therein, are certain approved Elders, who have obtained this Honour, not by Reward, but by good Report, who were no other (as he himſelf intimates elſewhere) but thoſe from whoſe hands they uſed to receive the Sacrament of the Euchariſt.Nec de aliorum manibus quàm Praeſidentium ſumimus. Id. de Corona Militis, c. 3.

For with the Biſhop, who was the Chief Preſident (and therefore ſtiled by the ſame Tertullian in another place**Dandi quidem Baptiſini habet jus Summus Sacerdos, qui eſt Epiſcopus, dehinc Presbyteri & Diaconi. Id. de Baptiſ. c. 17 Summus Sacerdos for diſtinction p. 64ſake) the reſt of the Diſpenſers of the Word and Sacraments joyned in the Common Government of the Church; and therefore, where in Matters of Eccleſiaſtical Judicature, Cornelius Biſhop of Rome uſed the received Form of gathering together the Presbytery; Omni actu ad me perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium. Cornel. apud Cypr. Epiſt. 46.of what perſons that did conſiſt, Cyprian ſufficiently declareth, when he wiſheth them to read his Letters to the flouriſhing Clergie, Florentiſſimo illic clero tecum praeſidenti. Cypr. Epiſt. 55. ad Cornel.which there did Preſide or Rule with him. The preſence of the Clergie being thought to be ſo requiſite in matters of Epiſcopal Audience, that in the fourth Council of Carthage, it was concluded,Ut Epiſcopus nullius cauſam audiat abſ que praeſentia Clericorum ſuorum, alioquin irrita crit ſententia Epiſcopi, niſi Clericorum praeſentia confirmetur. Concil. Carthag. IV. cap. 23. That the Biſhop might hear no mans cauſe without the Preſence of the Clergie, and that otherwiſe the Biſhop's Sentence ſhould be void, unleſs it were confirm'd by the Preſence of the Clergie; which we find alſo to be inſerted into the Canons of**Except. Egberti, c. 43. Egbert, who was Archbiſhop of York in the Saxon times, and afterwards in the Body of the ‖‖15. q. 7. c. nullus.Canon Law it ſelf.

True it is, that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long diſuſed, yet ſeeing it ſtill profeſſeth, that every Paſtor hath a Right to Rule the Church (from whence the name of Rector alſo was given at firſt unto him) and to Adminiſter the Diſcipline of Chriſt, as well as to Diſpenſe the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the Reſtraint of the Exerciſe of that Right, proceedeth only from the Cuſtom now received in this Realm, no man can doubt, but by another Law of the Land, this hindrance may be well removed; And this Ancient Form of Government by the united Suffrages of the Clergy, might be reviv'd again; and with what little ſhew of Alteration, the Synodical Conventions of the Paſtors of every Pariſh might be accorded with the Preſidency of the Biſhops of each Dioceſs and Province, p. 65the indifferent Reader may quickly perceive by the peruſal of the enſuing Propoſitions.

I.

In every Pariſh the Rector, or incumbent Paſtor, together with the Church-Wardens and Sides-men, may every Week take notice of ſuch as live ſcandalouſly in that Congregation, who are to receive ſuch ſeveral Admonitions and Reproofs as the Quality of their Offence ſhall deſerve: And if by this means they cannot be reclaimed, they may be preſented to the next monthly Synod, and in the mean time debarr'd by the Paſtor from Acceſs unto the Lord's Table.

Notes.

The Name Rector, which ſignifieth a Governour or Ruler, was anciently given in common to Prelates, Biſhops, Abbots, and Pariſh-Presbyters, but chiefly to the Pariſh-Prieſt or Parſon that had Cure of Souls, as DƲ FRESENE obſerves out of the Lombardian Laws,Rectores Eccleſiarum Praelati, Epiſcopi, Abbates Parochiarum Presbyteri in lege Longob. l. 3. tit. 1. Sect. 42. tit. 10. Sect. 4. In Capitularibus Carol. M. lib. 3. tit. 75. &c. Maxime Rector Eccleſiae qui vulgo Curio, ſeu Curitus, ut in Charta Alaman. 43. apud Goldaſtum. DƲ FRESNE Gloſ. in verb. Rector. and Charles Great's Capitulars, and the Almaine Charter.

Lindwood alſo in his Provincial Conſtitution, declares the ſame;Communiter loquendo [per ipſorum Rectorum] intelligas de Rectoribus Eccleſiarum Parochialium. Poteſt etiam intelligi de omni Praelato Eccleſiae. Lindw. de Conſu. c. nullus ver. nullus Rector, & ver. Ipſorum Rectorum. and**Vid. Cowel's Interpreter, in Verb. Rector. Cowell affirms, That in our Common Law, Rector Eccleſioe Parochialis, is he that hath the Charge or Cure of a Pariſh-Church; qui tantum Jus in Eccleſia Parochiali habet, quantum Proelatus in Eccleſiâ Collegiatâ, That a Parſon and Rector were anciently the ſame: So††Lib. 4. Tract. 5. ca. pri. Bracton, Sciendum quod Rectoribus Eccleſiarum Parochialium competit Aſſiſa, qui inſtitui ſunt per Epiſcopos & Ordinarios, ut Perſonae. Lindwood holds the ſame: For,De Praeſump. c. ne Lepra, Sect. quod ſi. ver. Perſonatus. as he avers, That in aliquibus locis p. 66Rectores Eccleſiarum vocantur Perſonae, ſo he is as expreſs, that haec dictio Perſonae, eſt vulgare Anglicorum, & ponitur pro Rectore. Wats in his Gloſſary, obſerving the Word Perſonatus in Otho's Conſtitutions, delivered by Matthew Paris in Henry the Third's days,In quibus locis omnibus accipitur pro Rectoria, quam a Parſonage vocamus. and in Pope Innocent's Letter to the Abbot of St. Albans, aſſures us, that it ſignifies a Rectory, and the Perſona, or Parſon, is the Rector. De Confeſ Perſonar. & Cleric. Quod in quodan. ver. Perſona.John de Athon in his Commentary on Otho's Conſtitutions on the Word Perſonae, ſaith, (i.e.) Rectores; loquitur enim ſecundum vulgare Anglicorum. Lindwood, It is alſo clear from anciently acknowledged riſh-Church; and thereforethat Vicars Perpetual were to be Rectors or Governours of the Paon the Conſtitution of Simon Langham, where it's Ordain'd, That Nullus Rector preſume to ſell thoſe Tithes of his Church not yet received,Nullus Rector, ſupple vel Vicarius, ubi eſt Perpetuus De Conſuet. c. Nullus Rector, ver. Nullus Rector. before the Annunciation of the Bleſſed Mary, it muſt be underſtood alſo of Vicars Perpetual: And John de Athon is very large in diſcuſſing, and poſitive in determining it:Credo reſpectu Rectorum Vicarium dici Intitulatum, reſpectu vero aliorum nominare debet Rectorem. Conſtit. Otho. de Inſtit. Vicarior. verb. ad. Vicar. For, ſaith he, out of Innocent's Extrav. though if you conſider a Vicar Perpetual, with reſpect to his Rector, whoſe Vicar he is, he is not called a Rector; yet if compared with others, he is a Rector.

It's then very plain, That anciently every Parſon and Vicar Perpetual, were called Rectors or Governours; and why? but becauſe they were veſted with a Right to Govern their Churches, notwithſtanding which, it cannot now be inferr'd, that thoſe who ſtill bear the Name of Rector, are Governours of the Church; For the ancient Conſtitution of the Church is not only altered, whereby Pariſh Presbytens, Parſons, Rectors and Vicars Perpetual, have loſt all their ancient Power of Ruling; but by reaſon of Impropriations, mere Laicks, ever ſince the Statute of Diſſolution, that took away Appropriations p. 67from the Church, have been Parſons and Rectors, but not Rulers of the Church.

Sir Henry Spelman very Learnedly doth prove,Of Tithes, c. 29. That after the Appropriations, the Parſonage ſtill continues Spiritual, as well in the Eye of the Common Law, as of the Canon Law: for if it became Temporal by Appropriation, then were it within the Statute of Mortmaine, and forfeited by that Act; and as it continues Spiritual, it muſt be made to a Spiritual Perſon, and not Temporal, Spiritual Things and Spiritual Men being Co-Relatives, that cannot in Reaſon be divorced. However, we ſee that, de facto, Lay-men are poſſeſs'd of theſe Spiritual Impropriations, and thereby are become the Parſons and Rectors; and the Eccleſiaſtical Incumbent, who hath the Cure of Souls, is his Vicar, who, although according to the Ancient Dialect, might be called Rector, when compared with others, yet not with reſpect to the Lay-man, the Parſon or Rector of the Pariſh: He that hath the Parſonage or Rectory, is the Parſon or Rector; and that is the Lay-Impropriator.

Beſides, according to what hath been offer'd in the firſt Note, it's plain, that now no Governing Power is left with the Pariſh-Presbyter; He is not only denied the Exerciſe of ſuch a Power, but diverſted of the Power it ſelf; and if any of 'em have the Name of Rector left'em, it's vox & praeterea nihil.

If in this I am miſtaken, the Fathers of the Church are humbly deſired to tell the World ſo; but whether I am miſtaken or no, the reſtoring the Pariſh-Presbyters to the ancient Power of Rectors, and the Exerciſe of it, will be a great ſtep towards the healing our Breaches, eſpecially if what the ancient Chorepiſcopi, whom I muſt again mention, who were but Presbyters, enjoyed, may be allowed them: Of whom, more in my Notes under the next Propoſition.

II.

Whereas by a Statute in the Six and Twentieth Year of King Henry the Eighth (revived in the Firſt Year of Queen Elizabeth,)Ch. 14. Suffragans are appointed to be erected in Twenty Six ſeveral places of this Kingdom, the Number of them might very well be conformed unto the Number of the ſeveral Rural Deanries, into p. 68which every Dioceſ is ſub-divided; which being done, the Suffragan ſupplying the place of thoſe who in the ancient Church were called Chorepiſcopi, might every Month aſſemble a Synod of all the Rectors, or incumbent Paſtors within the Precinct, and according to the major part of their Voices, conclude all Matters that ſhall be brought into Debate before them.

Notes.

The Suffragans appointed to be erected in the Twenty Sixth Year of Henry the Eighth, were to be conſecrated by the Archbiſhop, and Two other Biſhops, or Suffragans, and by them admitted to the Epiſcopal Dighity; but yet were not to uſe, have, or execute any Juriſdiction or Epiſcopal Power or Authority within their ſaid Sees, nor within any Dioceſs or place of this Realm, or elſewhere within the King's Dominions, but only ſuch Juriſdiction, Power and Authority as ſhall be Licenſed and Limited to them, to take, do, and execute by a Commiſſion from the Biſhop of the See in which he is a Suffragan; nor were they to uſe any Juriſdiction, Ordinary, or Epiſcopal Power otherwiſe, nor longer time than limited by ſuch Commiſſion.

Theſe were the Suffragans appointed to be erected by Henry the Eighth, who though Conſecrated and Ordained to the Epiſcopal Dignity, yet muſt exerciſe no other Epiſcopal Power than was delegated to 'em by the Dioceſan's Commiſſion, which was a very precarious and uncertain thing. This Learned Archbiſhop doth therefore move, that inſtead of this ſort of Suffragan, we might have men to ſupply the place of the ancient Chorepiſcopi, who were not at firſt under ſuch Limitations, tho without Epiſcopal Conſecrations, they were veſted with the Powers and Authorities of City Biſhops; and that they might be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries. A motion, which if cloſed with by the Church of England, would, no doubt, touching this part of the Controverſie about the Government of the Church, heal the Diviſion; and the Church in her Condeſcention herein, would conform unto an ancient Practice of the Church, recogniz'd by all to be common, at leaſt in the Third Century: For though Biſhop Parker will not admit them to have been in the Church till the Fourth Century, becauſe no mention p. 69of 'em in any Record before the Council of Ancyra ſat, which (notwithſtanding what Angelocrator avers, who would have it be after the Council of Nice, becauſe Vitalis, Biſhop of Antioch, the firſt named amongſt the Biſhops that ſate in it, was not made a Biſhop before the Year 331.) it's generally held to be in the Year 314. And it's not eaſie to imagine, that theſe Chorepiſcopi could in ſo ſhort a time ſpring out of Nothing, and arrive to that height they were at An. 314, or as others 308. Beſides, there were ſeveral Chorepiſcopi in the Council of Nice, that was but Ten or Twelve Years after this; and Rabanus Maurus Seven or Eight Hundred Years ago produced an Apoſtolical Argument to prove, that they were as ancient as City Biſhops: For (ſays he) in the Book which Damaſus the firſt wrote on the deſire of Hierome the Presbyter, it's affirm'd, That Linus and Cletus, by the Commandment of St. Peter, Ordained Presbyters, who yet ſucceeded him not in the Apoſtolical Chair, Clemens being by the Order of this bleſſed Apoſtle, made his Succeſſor: And (ſaith Maurus) from hence it is, that the Chorepiſcopi, as I ſuppoſe, had their Riſe, and have ever ſince continued in the Catholick Church, who being Ordained, by their own Biſhops, by their Commandment did Ordain Presbyters, Deacons, and other Inferior Degrees, and diſcharge all the other Offices belonging to Prieſthood. So far Rabanus.

They were but Presbyters, and yet did Ordain and Exerciſe Epiſcopal Juriſdiction.

That they did at firſt exerciſe Epiſcopal Juriſdiction in the Countrey, is clear from the 13th Canon of the Council of Ancyra, which according to Zonaras and Balſaman is thus:

foreign. Exactly tranſlated by Gentianus Hervetus, Chorepiſcopos non …icere Presbyteros, vel Diaconos Ordinare, ſed ne que Ʋrbis Presbyteros, niſi cum literis ab Epiſcopo permiſſum fuerit, in aliena Parochia. This, as Biſhop Parker confeſſeth, is the moſt correct Copy; That it ſhall not be lawful for Countrey Biſhops to Ordain Presbyters or Deacons, nor yet for City Presbyters, without the permiſſion of their Biſhop. Only he omits this material Expreſſion. [in another Pariſh or Dioceſs]; which Words do greatly p. 70confound the Learned Archbiſhop of Paris, De Marca, who will therefore have the Greek Copy corrected:Quid eſt illud in aliena Paraeciâ, ac ſi Chorepiſcopis libera eſſet Ordinatio. Presbyteri in ſua Paraecia ſine literis. De Marc. de Concord. Sacer. & Imper. l. 2. c. 14. Sect. 1, 2. What is the meaning of theſe words, (ſaith he) foreign, in alienae paroicia? as if it had been lawful for-the Chorepiſcopi to Ordain Presbyters in their own Precincts, without the leave of the City-Biſhop. He will therefore have it, foreign, in unaquâque Paraecia, which agrees not only with the Tranſlation of Dionyſius Exiguus, but with an ancient Copy in the Library at Oxford, P. 140.as Thorndike of the Right of the Church, reports, who can make no Senſe of De Marca's Emendation: For, ſays he, can the Reading of the laſt words, foreign, ſeem probable to Reaſonable Perſons? What Conſequence of Senſe is there in ſaying, unleſs Licenſe be granted in every Pariſh? Which is plain, when it is ſaid, That the City-Presbyters do nothing in the Pariſh, that is in the Countrey or Dioceſs, without Authority by the Biſhop's Letters. So far Thorndike, who is for the blotting foreign out of Zonara's and Balſanion's Copy, and foreign out of the Copy at Oxford, and who agrees with De Marca, in adding foreign to the Canon, and prefers Iſidore Mercator's Tranſlation before the Original Greek, and have it thus, Vicariis Epiſcoporum, quos, Graeci Chorepiſcopos vocant, non licere Presbyteros vel Diaconos Ordinare, ſed nec Presbyteris Civitatis, ſine Epiſcopi Praecepto, amplius aliquid Imperare, vel ſine Autoritate Literarum ejus in unaquaque parochia aliquid agere: Whereby, contrary to all Rule, by Addition, Mutilation, &c. they impoſe a Senſe directly contradicting the expreſs Words of the Canon; which is done in ſo groſs a manner, that Thorndike himſelf was compell'd to acknowledge,Right of the Church, pag. 141, 142. That for his part he doth not believe that we have the true Reading of this Canon in any Copy that he hath heard of or ſeen.

But why is Thorndike, who is followed by Dr. Hammond and Biſhop Parker, all differing from Queen Elizabeth's Old Epiſcopal Divines, ſo concern'd to oppoſe the Univerſally Receiv'd p. 71Copies of Zonaras and Balſamon, but becauſe, do they what they can, it may be eaſily inferr'd, that before the Council of Ancyra, the Chorepiſcopi did ordain Presbyters, &c. that afterwards they might do it in their own Pariſhes without leave; in other Pariſhes with leave, or at leaſt in their own Pariſhes with leave. Thus much is the Import of Zonara's Balſamon's, and the Oxford Copies, one of which muſt be receiv'd, notwithſtanding any thing hitherto oppos'd unto 'em. The whole that Thorndike hath laid in againſt us, narrowly look'd into, comes to nothing.

The Reaſons why our Copy is to be ſuſpected, ſaith he, are theſe.

1. In an Arabick Paraphraſe now extant in the Oxford Library, there is nothing to be found of that Clauſe, foreign.

2. Iſidore Mercator's Tranſlation, which ſeems to be that which was anciently received in the Spaniſh Churches, before Dionyſius Exiguus, wherewith that Copy agreed which Hervetus tranſlated, as alſo Fulgentius his Breviate, which Pope Adrian the firſt followed, hath only this, Vicariis Epiſcoporum, quos Graeci Chorepiſcopos vocant, &c. ut ſupra.

3. Can the Reading of the laſt words, foreign ſeem probable, &c. ut ſupra.

4. Seeing this is that which is afterwards provided for, by the Council of Laodicea, Cap. LVI. in the ſame Subject, it ſeems very probable, that this ſhould be the proviſion which the Council of Ancyra intended, as all Ignatius his Epiſtles, and other Canons Apoſt. XL. Arelat. XIX. expreſs it.

To all which I reply,

1. The Greek Copy compared with Tranſlations, having the Reputation of an Original, is not to be neglected, though in the Arabick Paraphraſe the Clauſe about City Presbyters is omitted; for it might be either negligently or willingly done: Beſides, if this Clauſe had never been in the Original, there ſtill remains enough to carry our Point in that, as we ſhall hereafter prove the Chorepiſcopi were but Presbyters, and yet by the other parts of this Canon had power to ordain both Presbyters and Deacons, at leaſt with the permiſſion of the City-Biſhop.

p. 72To the Second, touching Iſidore's Tranſlation, which differs from Hervetus's and Dionyſius Exiguus's, as well as from every Greek Copy, cannot be of ſtrength enough to invalidate an Original, any more than the Vulgar, or any other Tranſlation of the Bible, can blaſt the Reputation of the Originals either of the Old or New Teſtament.

What hath been already urged about de Marca's diſguſt againſt foreign, and Thorndike's quarrel with foreign, is a ſufficient Anſwer to his Third Argument: For if the Canon hath any meaning, be it foreign, or foreign, or be there an Omiſſion of this Expreſſion, it cannot but be granted, that before this Council the Chorepiſcopi did Ordain Presbyters and Deacons without the City-Biſhop's leave, and afterwards with it.

To the Fourth, that the Council of Laodicea did many Years after this make the ſame Proviſion, hath nothing of Argument in it to prove, That the Council of Ancyra did ſo, long before Laodicea's doing It now, ſeeing it's not by way of confirmation of an anteceding Decree, is a ſufficient intimation, that Ancyra did it not.

However, ſeeing Thorndike will provoke us to conſult this 56th, or rather 57th Canon of Laodicea, to it we will go; which on a diligent ſearch we find to run thus: foreign, [foreign] ſay ſome, [foreign] ſay others, foreign. Hervetus renders it thus, Quod non oportet in vicis & pagis Epiſcopos conſtitui, ſed Periodeutas; hoc eſt, Circumcurſentores. Dionyſius Exiguus, Quod non oporteat in Villulis vel in Agris Epiſcopos conſtitui, ſed Viſitores. Iſidore Mercator thus, Non oportet in Villis & vicis Epiſcopos Ordinari, ſed Viſitatores; (i. e.) qui Circumeant, Conſtitui: No Biſhops ought to be appointed in the Countrey Towns or Villages, but Viſitors. Neither of theſe take notice of the Various Reading: for it may be [foreign] as well as [foreign], and ſo be thus tranſlated: For the future there ſhall not be Ordained in Countrey Places any Biſhops or Periodeutae, or Viſitors, making the Periodeutae and Countrey Biſhops the ſame; as De Marca, though he obſerves not this various Reading does, Ʋnde. Conſtanter aſſerere audeo eundem eſſe Chorepiſcopum, & Periodeutum; and as the ſame De Marca further obſerves, theſe Periodeutae p. 73were only Presbyters, as in the 4th Action of the Council of Chalcedon, mention is made of Alexander, Presbyter, and Periodeuta, and in the 11th Action of Valentine, Presbyter, and Periodeuta; whence I infer, that it's clear from this and the following parts of the Canon, that till this Council, Presbyters were not ſo very much under the Power of the Biſhops, but could act according to their own diſcretion, without conſulting the City-Biſhops. The Canon is, foreign, and thus rendred by Hervetus, Eos autem qui prius conſtituti fuerunt, nihil agere ſine mente Epiſcopi, qui eſt in Civitate, clearly enough inſinuating, that until this Council the Chorepiſcopi, the Periodeutae, who were but Presbyters, did act in the Country as they judged meet, without conſulting the Biſhop of the City; and it's well known, that their work was to Ordain Presbyters, Deacons, &c.

Thus much may ſuffice to vindicate what we have drawn from the Council of Ancyra to eſtabliſh the Power of the Chorepiſcopi, who agreeably enough to the 13th Canon of this Council, might exerciſe Epiſcopal Juriſdiction in their own Precinct, without the leave of the City-Biſhop, and with his Permiſſion they might do ſo out of their own Charge, even in the City.

To proceed, it's very clear that long after this time, yea, long after Damaſus, this Severity againſt the Chorepiſcopi, and Leo the Third's Attempt to ſuppreſs and baniſh them, when Charles the Great ſent Arno Invavenſis to know the mind of his Holineſs about them, they continued in the Exerciſe of their Office, governing the Country-Churches, ordaining Presbyters, &c. And altho' Hincmarus, as Baluzius in de Marca out of Flodoardus his Hiſtory obſerves,De Marca de Concord. lib. 2. c. 13, 14. wrote bitterly againſt thoſe City-Biſhops that had 'em in their Dioceſes,Fbodoard. Hiſt. Remenf. lib. 3. c. 29. yet Rabanus Maurus pleads as warmly in their Defence,In Hiſtor. Lanſiaca apud Palladium, c 106. Legimus Elpidium Monachum Presbyterum ordinatum à Timotheo Chorepiſcopo. Chorepiſcopos in Eccleſiis vacantibus innuit Hugo Flaviniac. an. 776. & Bercarius in Hiſt. Epiſcop. Verdanenſium, n. 13. Poſt hunc, Epiſcopatus iſtius Eccleſiae per 12. annos vacuus extitit, ſed quidem ſervus Dei (Amalbertus nomine,) juxta morem illius temporis Chorepiſcopus factus ipſam regebat Eccleſiam. For all theſe ſee Du Freſne's Gloſſary, ver. Chorepiſcopus. and they were continued in France and elſewhere. Elpidrus a Monk, was or dained Presbyter by Timothy a Country Biſhop: Amalbertus, a Chorepiſcopus, p. 74governed the Church of Verdun during a Vacancy of twelve years, conſecrated Churches, confirm'd Children, &c. as may be ſeen in Rudolphus his Life of Rabanus Maurus, and in De Marca.

That the Chorepiſcopi did exerciſe the Epiſcopal Power, altho' they were but Presbyters, may plainly be ſeen in the Decrees that were againſt 'em, interdicting their preſuming ſo to do for time to come. 'Twas this that fill'd the Soul of Damaſus 1.Vid. Epiſt. 5. Damaſi 1. Proſpero Numidiae primae ſedis Epiſcopo, Leoni, reparato, &c. with ſo much indignation againſt them, that they being but Presbyters, preſumed to diſcharge the Epiſcopal Office: And for this very reaſon it was, that Leo the Third, in Anſwer unto the Queſtion mov'd by Charles the Great, condemn'd them to Baniſhment, as may be ſeen in the ſelect Eccleſiaſtical Capitula of Charles the Great, where it's very clear, that tho' the French Prelates mitigated ſomewhat of the Rigour of the Pope's ſevere Decree againſt them, yet concurr'd ſo far with him, as to Ordain that the Country-Biſhops do no more enter on the Execution of the Epiſcopal Office, ita ut amplius nihil de Cpiſcopali miniſterio praeſumerent; and they decreed, That no Country-Biſhop preſume, by Impoſition of Hands, to give the Holy Ghoſt to any, or Conſecrate any Prieſt, Levite, or Subdeacon. And tho' theſe Capitula do null and make void all the Ordinations and Conſecrations of the Chorepiſcopi, Nicholas the Firſt doth ratifie and confirm them,Vide. Epiſt. 15. Nichol. 1. Tit. 1.Titus 1 as may be ſeen in his Epiſtle to Radolfus, and thus he did for the very Reaſon, the Capitula as well as Leo and Damaſus, did damn them. Damaſus ſays, that they are the ſame with Presbyters, becauſe they are inſtituted according to the Form of the Seventy Diſciples, who were never veſted with Jura Epiſcopalia, Tit. 4. c. 3.ſo Leo and the ſelect Capitula of Charles the Great, the Chorepiſcopi p. 75are not Chief Prieſts, nor Biſhops, neither do any of the Epiſcopal Rights belong unto them, ſeeing they were inſtituted according to the Form of the Seventy; for which cauſe let no one ſay,Et ne alicui talis Ordinatio, vel Confirmatio, aut Conſecratio Reiteratio eſſe videatur. That when any of thoſe who have been Ordained by the Chorepiſcopi, are afterwards Ordained by the City-Biſhop, that they were Re-ordained, but let 'em attend that Saying, Quod non oſtenditur geſtum, ratio non ſinit, ut videntur iteratum. And Pope Nicholas 1. gives this as a Reaſon, why he judges their Ordination valid. The Chorepiſcopi were ſuch as the Seventy, ſent out by our Lord Jeſus, who without doubt were veſted with the Epiſcopal Power.

But tho' theſe Papal Determinations are different, yet they agree in witneſſing to this Truth, That the Chorepiſcopi exercis'd Epiſcopal Authority. De Marca proves the ſame out of the Arabian Canons, tranſlated by Alfonſus Piſanus, and from the laſt words of the Canon of Antioch. Dr. Parker himſelf makes no doubt of it; for (ſays he) That theſe Chorepiſcopi had the Character of Proper Biſhops, Parker's Account, p. 154.appears plainly from the tenth Canon of Antioch, that allows them to Ordain the inferiour Officers of the Church.

This of Biſhop Parker doth exactly agree with the 55. Chapter of Nice, as tranſlated out of Arabick by Turrianus the Jeſuit. When the Chorepiſcopus viſits the Churches and Monaſteries under his Power, let him gather together the Elders of Caſtles, and expound unto 'em the Holy Scriptures, and enquire whether they have any Sons or Daughters, and give order that they be brought unto him, that he may ſign 'em, pray over them, impoſe Hands on 'em, bleſs and inſtitute Miniſters, that is, ſay the Notes on this Chapter, Lectores, Exorciſtae, & Hypodiaconi.

And that theſe Chorepiſcopi were but of the ſame Order with Presbyters, and were no otherwiſe Biſhops than as all other Presbyters are, is as clear; for their Ordination was by one Biſhop only, not by three, and when they entred on the Exerciſe of the Epiſcopal Power, they had no new Conſecration, as may be ſeen in the 54. Chapter of Nice, tranſlated out of the Arabick, where Turrianus renders it thus: Et debet Epiſcopus [vid. p. 76Civitatis] recitare ſuper electum [ſcil. Chorepiſcopum] Orationem conſuetam, Chorepiſcopus non ordinabatur, ſed per oraticnem benedicebatur.& Benedicere illi, dare que illi nomina omnium Eccleſiarum & Monaſteriorum qua ſub Poteſtate ejus ſunt. The Notes on this Chapter have it, that they were not conſecrated anew to the Office of a Country-Biſhop, but only by the Prayer of the City-Biſhop bleſſed. Damaſus 1. expreſly affirms them to be but Presbyters, in theſe words; Quod ipſi iidem ſunt qui & Presbyteri, ſufficienter invenitur, quia ad formam & exemplum ſeptuaginta inveniuntur prius inſtituti. The ſelect Capitula of Charles the Great concurring with Leo the Third,Tit. 4. c. 3. and ſpeaking of the Epiſcopal Rights, ſay the ſame; Haec verò non à Presbyteris vel Chorepiſcopis, qui ambo unius formae eſſe videntur.

Beſides, ſuch were ſome of the Ancient Canons▪ decreeing that there ſhould be but one Biſhop in a Dioceſs; and he only in the City, that made it neceſſary for ſome of thoſe who anciently would have the Biſhops to be of an Order ſuperiour above Presbyters to hold that theſe Chorepiſcopi, tho' they had the name of Biſhop given 'em, and were veſted with the Jura Epiſcopalia, were but Presbyters uſurping on the Epiſcopal Office; ſo Damaſus, Leo, and many French Biſhops in Charles the Great's days; and it hath alſo put ſome later Writers, ſuch as Bellarmine, Boverius in his Paraenetic Cenſure of de Dominis, Archbiſhop of Spalato's Book de Rep. Eccleſ. and De Marco to phanſie, that ſome, made Chorepiſcopi, were formerly Conſecrated to the Epiſcopal Dignity, and that others were but Presbyters; and thus by diſtinguiſhing the Office from the Perſon, they hoped to extricate themſelves; but as Dr. Parker well obſerves,Pag. 158. This is precariouſly ſaid without any ſhadow of Pretence for it, but meerly to ſalve his own Hypotheſis.

Others,Thorndike of Rights of Church. p. 146. ſuch as Thorndike, are driven to the Invention of another Diſtinction, which is between the Solemnity which an Act is executed with, and the Power and Authority by which it is done And that it cannot be prejudicial to any Power to do that by another, which ſeemeth not fit to be immediately and p. 77perſonally executed by it. Some Acts of the Primitive Church ſeem to require this Diſtinction; as the making of Presbyters by the Chorepiſcopi, or Countrey-Biſhops, mentioned in the ancient Greek Canons. Which by all likelihood were not properly Biſhops, becauſe not Heads of a City-Church, which is the Apoſtolical Rule for Epiſcopal Churches. Thus Thorndike, who differs greatly from the generality of his Brethren, who hold, that though the Poteſtas Juriſdictionis may be delegated to one that is not a Biſhop, yet the Poteſtas Ordinis cannot. However, it muſt be acknowledged, that there is a great difference between a Presbyter's Ordaining other Presbyters with the leave of the Biſhop, and his doing it by a Power derived from the Biſhop. One veſted with a Power, may not be able to exerciſe it without the leave of another; and yet when he hath leave, he then exerciſes a Power inherent in himſelf, virtute officii. The Biſhops themſelves cannot exerciſe the Power of Orders without the leave of the Supreme Civil Magiſtrate; and now that they do exerciſe it, 'tis with his leave; but it does not therefore follow, that the Power of Orders is derived from the Supreme Magiſtrate to the Biſhop.

In the Council of Ancyra it's not ſaid, That the Presbyter ſhall not Ordain Presbyters, unleſs the Biſhop delegates unto him a Power enabling him ſo to do; but he ſhall not exerciſe this Power without the conſent of the Biſhop, which was enjoyned by the Canon, to prevent Schiſms and Diviſions in the Church: So that I cannot ſee how this Diſtinction of Thorndike, ſo applauded by Dr. Parker, can help 'em.

To preſs this yet further, Henry the Eighth's Suffragans were conſecrated Biſhops, and had the ſame Power virtute officii, that any other Biſhop receiv'd at his Conſecration, but may not exerciſe it unleſs by Commiſſion from the City-Biſhop. But when they did exerciſe the Epiſcopal Authority, was it by a Power receiv'd at their Conſecration, and inherent in them, or by a Power deriv'd unto 'em from the City-Biſhop by Commiſſion? 'Twas by the former, no doubt; why elſe were they conſecrated? If then this Commiſſion given by the City-Biſhop to the Suffragan, limiting the Exerciſe of his Power, doth not infer, that the Suffragan did not act by a Derived Power, much leſs can theſe Words, [Let not the Chorepiſcopus Ordain Presbyters p. 78or Deacons without the conſent of the City-Biſhop] imply, that the Chorepiſcopus deriv'd the Power of Ordaining from the City-Biſhop. The Biſhop of Lincoln can't Ordain Prieſts or Deacons in Weſtminſter-Abby without the leave of the Dean of Weſtm…nſter; and yet when the Biſhop does Ordain any there with the Dean's leave, it's not, I preſume, by any Power deriv'd from the Dean that he does it, but by a Power inhering in himſelf; and the Words foreign import no other leave than this.

If then theſe Chorepiſcopi be conform'd to the Number of Rural Deanries, and the Rural Deans allowed to exerciſe the ſame Power the Chorepiſcopi did in the ancient Church, 'twill afford great Relief to the Conſciences of many Worthy Proteſtant Diſſenting Miniſters, without expoſing the Church of England to the Reproach of Novelty. To return to the Archbiſhop's Reduction, which continues the Second Propoſition thus.

Archbiſhop.

To this Synod the Rector and Church-Wardens might preſent ſuch impenitent perſons as by Admonitions and Suſpenſion from the Sacrament would not be reformed, who if they ſhould ſtill remain contumacious and incorrigible, the Sentence of Excommunication might be decreed againſt them by the Synod, and accordingly be executed in the Pariſh where they lived. Hitherto alſo all things that concerned the Parochial Miniſters might be referred, whether they did touch their Doctrine or their Converſation, as alſo the Cenſure of all New Opinions, Hereſies and Schiſms which did ariſe within that Circuit, with liberty of Appeal, if need ſo require, unto the Dioceſan Synod.

Notes.

It is not to be doubted, but that as ſoon as the Church of England grants unto the Presbyter the Exerciſe of the Epiſcopal Rights, they will be content that the Rural Dean, or Chorepiſcopus hold his Synod of Pariſh-Paſtors or Rectors within the Precincts of the Rural Deanry, and exerciſe as much Power as is here deſired.

p. 79III.

The Dioceſan Synod might be held once or twice in the Year, as it ſhould be thought moſt convenient. Therein all the Suffragans [i. e. Chorepiſcopi,] and the reſt of the Rectors, or incumbent Paſtors (or a certain ſelect number of every Deanry) within the Dioceſs might meet, with whoſe Conſent, or the major part of them, all things might be concluded by the Biſhop or Superintendent, foreign (i. e.) Superintendentes, unde & nomen Epiſcopi tractum eſt. Hieron. Epiſt. 85. ad Evagrium.(call him whether you will) or in his abſence by one of the Suffragans, whom he ſhall depute in his ſtead to be Moderator of that Aſſembly.

Here all matters of greater moment might be taken into conſideration, and the Orders of the monthly Synods reviſed and (if need be) reformed: And if here alſo any matter of Difficulty could not receive a full Determination, it might be referred to the next Provincial or National Synod.

Notes.

Dr. Poynet, Biſhop of Wincheſter, pleads for the Word Superintendent, as much better than that of Biſhop; and it is a word leſs offenſive to the Presbyterians than the other is; and perhaps becauſe the Archbiſhop found it ſo, he ſpeaks ſo indifferently of the Name; and to give Reputation to the word Superintendent, refers us unto St. Hierome: But it's to be hoped, that the wiſer of all Parties, when they have concerted the thing, will not quarrel about the Name, whether one or the other.

IV.

The Provincial Synod might conſiſt of all the Biſhops and Suffragans, and ſuch other of the Clergy as ſhould be elected out of every Dioceſs within the Province; the Archbiſhop of every Province might be the Moderator of this Meeting, (or in his room, ſome one of the Biſhops appointed by him) and all Matters be ordered therein by common conſent, as in the former Aſſemblies.

p. 80This Synod might be held every Third Year; and if the Parliament do then ſit, (according to the Act of a Triennial Parliament) both the Archbiſhops and Provincial Synods of the Land might joyn together, and make up a National Council: Wherein all Appeals from Inferior Synods might be received, all their Acts examined, and all Eccleſiaſtical Conſtitutions which concern the State of the whole Nation eſtabliſhed.

This Scheme of Church-Government, drawn up by this Learned Primate, as it is admirably adjuſted to the ſeveral Tempers of Men of different Apprehenſions about ſome things in Church-Government, ſo it is not in the leaſt repugnant to any thing of Chriſt's Inſtitution; for there is not aſcrib'd unto any of the Synodical Conventions a proper Juriſdiction over any Parochial Church. That in Matters of greater moment, care be taken, that all things be done in every Pariſh by a general Conſent, Concord and Agreement, is neceſſary; and to this end, that the Pariſh Rectors proceed not to Excommunication until they have conſulted the Dean Rural's Synod; and that what is done by theſe Synods be examined by Biſhops in a larger Aſſembly, and that by a larger again, until we come to a National, if the caſe ſo require.

Though it be ſaid, Let the Sentence of Excommunication be decreed againſt the obſtinately Impenitent by the Synod, yet it may be underſtood thus, Let the Rector of the Pariſh conſult the Synod, and there come to a Reſolution and Determination with the conſent of this Synod.

Whoever will conſult the Learned Writers of the Church of England, particularly Dr. Burnet, now Biſhop of Salisbury, will ſee cauſe to conclude them to be againſt the Power and Juriſdiction of Councils: That they are rather for Concord than Regiment: That particular Churches, as to matters of Government, are independent on any Convention or Colledge of other Biſhops or Paſtors whatſoever; that to this very end of ſecuring the Power of the Dioceſan or City-Biſhop, the Dioceſan Church is made a ſingle Church, Infimae Speciei; and whatever Power, Authority or Juriſdiction belong unto a particular Church of the loweſt Rank, they are affirmed to belong to the Dioceſan Church; which Dr. Barrow hath endeavoured to prove to be independent: p. 81So that let the bounds of particular Churches be made Parochial, or of no larger extent than a Pariſh-Congregation, and the Pariſh-Miniſter be entruſted with Paſtoral Power, to be exerciſed as above-mentioned, 'twill of courſe follow, that what is now ſaid to belong to a Dioceſan, muſt be ſeated in the Pariſh-Church.

There is not ſo much a Controverſie between the Powers, Preheminences and Priviledges of a particular Church, as about its Bounds and Limits. Reduce the Bounds of a particular Church to thoſe of a Pariſh, and the Debate will be at an end as to this point.

That the Primate by Chorepiſcopi means Presbyters veſted with the Epiſcopal Rights, is manifeſt from what he and Dr. Holdſworth in the end of the Reduction thus aſſert:

We are of the Judgment, That the Form of Government here propoſed, is not in any Point repugnant to the Scripture; and that the Suffragans mention'd in the Second Propoſition, may lawfully uſe the Power both of Juriſdiction and Ordination, according to the Word of God, and the Practice of the Ancient Church.

Ja. Armachanus. Rich. Holdſworth.