The Fundamentals of the Hierarchy Examined and Disproved, Treatise · Part 1 · Section 9
Section IX.
The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian.
BUT let's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers, and Reform'd transmarine Churches. Gerard, a famous Lutheran divine, aLoc. com. Tom. 6. Col. 260.altho', for Orders sake, he admit of some kind of Episcopacy, which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship, yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution, and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter. The Papists (saith hebCol. 261. Atqui superiorem illam jurisdictionis potestatem jure Divino Episcopis competentem Pontificii in eo vel maximè ponunt, quod Episcopus possit ordinare Ministros, Presbyteri vero minimè, &c.) especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this, that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot. And all along this Question he strongly proves that, during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter: and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary. But, we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men: we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines, Luther himself being the mouth to the rest, in the Articles of Smalcald cApud Osiandrum. Epitom. Hist. Eccles. parte. 1. Page 299. Art. Smalkald. de Episcoporum jurisdictione. Liquet autem confessione omnium, etiam Adversariorum nostrorum, hanc potestatem (Evangelium docendi viz. peccata remittendi &c.) communem esse omnibus,—Hic docet Hieronymus, distinctos graedus Episcoporum &c. tantum humana authoritate constitutos esse—quia autem jure Divino uullum est discrimen inter Episcopum &c.. It's clear (say they) even from the Confession of our Adversaries, that this Power, to wit of preaching, dispensing the Sacraments, Excommunication and Absolution, is common to all that are set over the Churches, whither they be called Pastors, Presbyters or Bishops: Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms, that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter, but that every Pastor was a Bishop.—Here Hierome teaches, that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor, was only appointed by humane Authority. And the matter it self (continues Luther and his Associats) declares no less, for, on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction. And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor.—And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor.
§ 2. As for Calvin, his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice, which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry, for hedInstit. 4. Cap. 3. Sect. 8. & alibi. asserts the Idenity of Bishop, Presbyter, Pastor, and Minister: and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter, he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7, as Hierome had done long before him, and Presbyterians do now. And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles, he tells us,eCap. 4. Neque tamen sic honore & dignitate superior erat E…iscopus ut dominium in collegas haberet sed quas partes habet Consul in Senatu—Atque id ipsum pro temporum necessi…ate fuisse humano consensu inductum fatentur ipsi veteres. that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters, but was among them, what the Consul was in the Senat, and his Office was to propone Matters, enquire the Votes, preside in Admonition, and moderat the Action, and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory: All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator. And that even this (saith he) was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves. But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza, who, every where is full sufficiently to our purpose, both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated, and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum, from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus, but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus. And were there any doubt concerning these, as indeed there's none, their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd, our very Adversaries being Judges, sufficiently discuss it, and prove them to be truly Presbyterian: and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers, Systematicks, Controvertists, and Commentators. As for Example, the famous and learn'd Musculus fLoc. Com. Page 246. Tertio eosdem esse Presbyteros quosque & Episcopos & Pastores, ex eo patet quod Act. 20. legimus ad hunc modum &c.—unde videas Apostolorum tempore in Ecclesia Christi eosdem fuisse Presbyteros, Pastores & Episcopos.asserts and proves from Acts 20. Philip. 1. and the like Texts, which we now use, that Bishop, Pastor and Presbyter are all one and the same, and that in one Church there were at one time conjunctly many Bishops. Of the same mind are all the Systematick Divines, yea even Tilen himself while Orthodox. We judge (saith hegSyntag. part. alt. Page. 544. Quod ex horum Pastorum seu Presbyter… rum collegio, unus reliquis esset praepositus & Episcopi cognomento ornatus singulariter ab humano ortum instituto, nona divino pracepto, existimamus, non solum cum Hieronymo verum etiam cum Lombardo, Gratiano, Card. Cusano & aliis.) not only with Hierome, but also with Lombard, Gratian, Card. Cusan and others, that the preferring one out of the Colledge of Pastors to the rest, and giving him the name of Bishop was a humane Invention. This Author indeed alter'd his mind concerning Church Government when he pelagianiz'd, for then he turns altogether (tho' to his cost) a Hectorer of the Zelots of the Genevan Discipline. Time would fail me in collecting Testimonies of this kind, seeing, there were ever few, I may say none, save a small handfull in Britain, who have not asserted that, during the Apostolick age, there was no such thing, as any distinction between Bishop and Pastor or preaching Presbyter: and that among these there was an intire equality.
To these we may add the Testimonies of the most and famousest of the reformed Churches in their Confessions, whereof we have seen not a few already, while we related the Testimony of the Helvetian Confession, together with the approbations thereof: no less illustrious and pregnant is the Testimony of the French Consession: We believe (say theyhArt. 30. Credimus omnes veros Pastores ubicunque locorum collocati fuerint eadem & aequali inter se potestate essepraeditos.) that all true Pastors where ever they be, are endu'd with equal and the same power, under that one Head Christ the Chief and Vniversal Bishop. To the same purpose also speaks the Dutch Confession: We believe (say theyiCredimus veram hanc Ecclesiam debere regi &c.) that this true Church ought to be governed by that spiritual Policy, so that there be in it Pastors or Ministers that may purely dispense the Word and Sacraments, that there be also Elders and Deacons &c.
§. 3. The harmonius and Catholick Testimony of all the reformed Churches are to some like pricks in their eyes, and thorns in their sides, and therefore, most various and hetrogeneous means are used to render it unserviceable. And amongst other things, we are told, that many forraign Divines and Churches have a great likeing for their Diocesan Way, and Zanchius (say theykPrideaux apud Maresium exam. prim. 4. Questionum Theolog. Pag. 63. pro Calvinistis &c.) counts all its Opposers Schismaticks. But Maresius answerslPage 66. Quamquam non ut dominus &c. that Zanchius never allow'd of a Lord Bishop, but only of such a one who is like a Rector of a Colledge, whose Power I'm sure, is little or nothing above that of a Moderator. Maresius adds mPag 65. Nullum novi Zanchii tractatum de &c.that he can find in no place of Zanchius, the words Prideaux had alledg'd. And lastly, as Maresius tells usnPage 66. Profitetur se non posse nostrorum zelum non amare qui ideo illa nomina (Episcoporum & Archi-episcoporum) oderunt &c., Zanchius professes that he cannot but love the zeal of such as hate the names of Bishop and Arch-Bishop, fearing least with these Names the ancient Ambition and Tyranny together with the destruction of the Churches should return. Prideaux also alledges that Calvin writing to the King of Poland, advises him to establish Bishops and Arch-bishops. But has the same return from Maresius oPage 67. Nec Calvinus ut somniat doctissimus Episcop. &c., viz. that this is the Bishop's own Dream, and that there is no such thing to be found in Calvin. This dealing is not very laudable.
Neither are Means wanting to procure Advocats from Abroad; onepSpanhemius F. contra Vander Waeyen. whereof brings many things either to defend or excuse the Hierarchy, and to shew that it's not ill link'd abroad, and amongst other things saith, qParte speciali. Page 149.that notwithstanding of what is in the Helvetian Confession, its Authors condemn not the Liberty of other Churches as they manifest in their Preface, protesting, that in all this Confession they agreed with the Church of England. But this Author cann't be ignorant, that seeing, according to that Confession, Christ gave equal Power to all Pastors, and according to what is alledg'd to be the Judgement of the present Church of England, he did the quite contrary. Their Preface can by no means prove, that they allow of the Sentiments and Practice of the present English Church, except he would have the Preface to contradict the Confession. But all this he says is only to darken an evident Truth; the meaning of the Preface being, that between the Helvetians and the English there was no such fundamental Difference as prohibited mutual Charity one to another which many have given, and may give to these, who, as they judge, retain'd many Errors, tho' not Fundamental. The same Author,rPages 129, 130, 131. 132, & alibi. objects, that many Churches, and amongst others, that of the Helvetians, have either Bishops over their Pastors, or, which is really the same, Superintendents. But to instance in the Helvetians, they in their Confession saying that, Christ gave a like Power to all Pastors &c. and therefrom concluding, that none may hinder to return to Christ's primitive Institution, make most apparent that they intended no continuation of any Superiority amongst Pastors, and consequently of no Bistops, or, their equivalent, Superintendents: but all this work he makes, is dicis gratia for the fashion only: for if in Helvetia or else where, there be any umbrage of Bishops or Superintendents, it's really an Obtrusion and Erastian Usurpation; and this we may learn from himself, freely acknowledging, sNomothesia istic Ecclesiastica penes supremum Magistratum.that the chief legislative Power in the Church matters, is in the hands of the supream Magistrat. Otherways he confesses, that tPag. 131, 132. Haud me equidem fugit &c.the choisest of Writers, and amongst others, Hoornbeck, make the Discipline of the Scots, French, Dutch, and Helvetian Churches to be one and the same. Moreover, he sufficiently answers himself while,uPage 130. Sed ut quod est dicam longissimo inter utrosque discrimine. Priorem siquidem mera est ordinis & honoris, null… jurisdictionis vel potestatis proprie dictae, praerogativa. he expresly grants, that between the Superintendents or Bishops through Germany, and these of England, there is an infinit difference, and that these in Germany have only a simple prerogative of Order, but not at all of any Jurisdiction, or any thing that can be properly term'd Power. Thus he. And I'm sure, that any P…aeses of an Assembly hath no less Superiority than he here ascribes to these transmarine Superintendents or Bishops: and indeed, shortly to give an account of this Author, besides, as we have now seen, he is oblig'd to pull back with the one hand, what he had bestow'd on the Hierarchicks with the other; his whole Discourse leans upon this Supposition, that there is no certain Form of Church Government left by Christ in his Word: on this depend his Glosses upon the passages we produced of the French and Dutch Confessions. Vide inter alia part. spec. a pag. 171 ad pag. 189, where he all along presupposes and inculcats, that, tho' according to the Authors of the Confessions, Christ gave equal Power, &c. to all Pastors, yet in their Judgement if the Church will, she may alter this kind of Government, and change that Equality which Christ gave, for an Inequality, and give some Pastors a Power over the rest. Which, if it be not a Contradiction to these Confessions, in stead of an Explication, it looks as like it is one Crow can be like another. For, who can believe, but that if the Authors of these Confessions had believ'd an indifferency of Equality or Inequality of Pastors, they had either intimated so much, or been altogether silent thereof, neither of which they did, but gave to the World solemnly as the Confession of their Belief, that Christ gave to to all Pastors equal and the same power: and yet, if we believe this Interpreter, this that Christ gave may, according to the Authors of that Confession be relinquish'd when Men will, and Inequality, it's quite contrary introduced in the place thereof. Is not this too like the dealing of the Romanists, who, when they are compell'd to acknowledge that the Apostles gave the Cup to the People, yet pretend that they may deprive them of what Christ and his Apostles gave them? Divers indeed have said, that Church Government was among the Adiaphora, and things indifferent. But these were more wary then to say (as he would have the Authors of these Confessions to say) that Christ gave equal, and the same Power to all Pastors, yea, such used not to grant that Christ gave either Equality or Inequality of Power, but left all to the Churches management.
Moreover, as he does us no dammage, so, I'm sure, he does the present Hierarchicks as little service; for, if this Hypothesis, that no kind of Church Government is juris divini, stand, then the jus divinum of Episcopacy is lost, and therefore I'm sure, they shall give him as little thanks as we. 'Tis also observable, that when ever the Authors of these Confessions, or other Divines of their Perswasion said, that Communion with Churches of a different Government was not to be broken, or any thing of that kind; he presently inferrs that they judg'd any other form no less agreeable to the word of God than their own.
And here I cann't but take nottice of what I have met with somewhere in M. Claude's historical defence of the Reformation (for, at present, I have not the book) viz. that Diocesan Episcopacy is no less condemnable than Pilgrimages, Purgatories, or some such Romish dotages which he there names, and how averse he was from Diocesan Episcopacy, is observed by the Prefacer to the English Translation: and yet, if we believe some, he gave large Testimonies of his great affection to the Diocesan cause.
And this brings to mind another Artifice; for when any Protestant Divines, considering the great Power of Popish Bishops, and vehemently desiring Peace for the free Preaching and Propagation of the Gospel, strain'd their Judgement, and seem'd at any time to do or say somewhat that appear'd to comply with Episcopacy, our Prelatists anone Infer, that such Divines were great Lovers of their Hierarchy. Thus, for Example, they abuse the Words and Actions of Melancton; but they should remember that sometimes, driving the same Design, some of these Divines seem'd no less to comply with the Papacy it self, as appear'd at the pressing of the Interim. The same end drove Melancton, when, in a Conference at Ausburg, as Osiander relatesxEpitom. Hist. Eccles. Part. 1. Cent. 16. Lib. 2. Cap. 15. Videtur autem Melancton in causa fuisse, ut Episcopis aliquid Jurisdictionis concederetur: speravit enim, si &c., he seem'd to yeeld somewhat of Jurisdiction to Bishops; for be hop'd that, if Jurisdiction were granted them, they would not so much oppose the Gospel. But Philip consider'd not, (continues Osiander) that the Fox may change his hair, not his Temper. Melancton yOsiand. Epit. Hist. Eccles. Cent. 16. Part. 1. Lib. 2. Cap. 37. De pontifice autem statuo. Si Evangelium admirteret, posse ei propter Pacem &c.granted also to the Pope, provided he would admit the Gospel, a superiority over other Bishops, founded only on humane right, and yeelded for procuring of the Peace of Christendom. Thus Melancton, through his extream desire of Peace, forc'd his own Judgement, for, with Luther and the rest, he subscribes the Smalkaldick Articles, wherein, as we have heard, the Scriptural Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter is most clearly asserted.
But, what ever they say to perswade us, that these or other such Divines favour them, we are little oblig'd to believe it, for they believe it not themselves: and these of our Adversaries that speak out their mind freely, tell us, that all the transmarine reformed Churches are really Presbyterian: It were too much I'm sure, to transcribe what D. Heylin says of this, for he freely grants it, and then through a whole large Folio, as such bespatters with the blackest of Railings and Calumnies, every one of the reformed Churches in particular.
No less positive is Howell, zFam. Letters. Vol. 3. Page 395.who makes Calvin the first Broacher of the Presbyterian Religion, And a little after, Thus (saith he) Geneva Lake swallowed up the Episcopal See, and Church Lands were made secular, which was the white they levell'd at. This Geneva Bird flew thence io France and hatch'd the Huguenots, which make about the tenth part of that People; it took wing also to Bohemia and Germany high and loe, as the Palatinate, the land of Hesse, and the confederat Provinces of the States of Holland.
Yea Bellarmine aDe Clericis cap. 14.—et nostris temporibus Lutherani & Calvinistae &c., being to write against Presbytry, lays down in the entry as undeniable that 'tis the common doctrine of both Calvinists and Lutherans.
§. 5. To these may be added all such as were valiant for the truths of God, and stoutly oppos'd themselves to Antichrist, before Luther, as the Waldenses and Albigenses, of whom Alphonsus de Castro bfol. 102. hunc eundem errorem post multos annos ab Inferis suscit arunt Waldenses, dicentes nullum esse inter Sacerdotes discrimen.relates, that they deny'd any difference between Bishop and Presbyter, and herein differ'd nothing from Aërius. This same may be learn'd from Thuan cHist. part. 1. lib. 5. Quibus respondent, qui hodie in Anglia puriorem doctrinam praese ferunt., who compares them with the English Non-conformists. So far from truth was D M. whendpag. 239. he says, that these only declaimed against the corrupt Manners of the Church of Rome, but never declaim'd against the subordination of one Priest unto another.
This same doctrine held Wicklef and his followers, denying that there is any difference between Bishop and Presbyter eAlphonsus de Castro fol 102.. The Waldenses and Wicklef were in this, as in the rest of their Articles, follow'd by J. Huss and his Adherents, who also asserted, that there ought to be no difference between Bishop and Presbyter or among PriestsfAenaeas Sylvius de Bohemorum origine et gestis cap. 53. dogmata sunt—inter Sacerdotes nullum discrimen esse &c.. Yea so Catholick and universall hath this doctrine, of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter, still been, that it hath all along, by the Romanists, been justly reck'n'd a prime doctrine of Romes Opposersgsee the history of the Council of Trent pages 596, 605, 606, 607.. Nor shall yow readily find one before Luther, for of such I now speak, of Truth's Witnesses who condemn'd not all distinction between Bishop and Presbyter.
§. 6. And even in England it self after the Reformation, the famousest Bishops and lights of that Church, as Hooper, Latimer, and others, could not, without great difficulty and reluctancy, admitt the exercing of the Episcopal Office, the using of their Priestly vestments &c: to be in any sense lawfull: so far were they from believing a Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy. But, as Voëtius observeshPolit. Eccles. part. 2. pag. 833. the use of it was excus'd rather than defended.
The first, or at least the Standard-bearer among the first, that either in England, or any where else in the reform'd World, had the brow to assert its Divine Right, appear'd in the latter part of Queen Elizabeths Reign: neither was he a Native of Britain, but a Flemming, I mean Hadrian Saravia once a Pastor in the reform'd Netherlands, but, as Maresius witnessesiExam. Theol. Quatuor Quaest. Insignium. Quaest. 1. pag. 68. S…raviam vero suis Belgium orthodoxum non annumerat, utpote &c., reject'd by them, as being an Enemy to both their Church and State. Neither was he better look'd on, as himself acknowledges kEpist. dedicat. ad Episcopos Anglicanos praefixâ libris de gradibus Ministrorum, et alibi pluries., by the rest of the reform'd Churches abroad. And I think every true Protestant will yeeld that they had reason so to do, seeing he dares makelDe gradib. Ministrorum cap 24. et alibi. not only Bishops, but also Arch-Bishops, Metropolitans, yea and Patriarchs to be of Divine Right. And over all these he places the Bishop of Rome, as the Supream in Order and Honour. He contends moreover, that one Man may be lawfully enough both a Bishop and a Civil Magistrat, and exerce one of these Offices by himself, and another by his Substitutes.mDe honore Praesulibus et Presbyteris debito. cap. 19. The vast Rents of Prelates, the external Pomp of Honours, Titles, and train like that of the greatest secular Nobles, agree well enough with the simplicity of a Gospel-Ministry. They may lawfully enough in their Grandor and multitude of Servants imitat the greatest Earls and Dukes. All this is sufficiently warranted by Christ while he chus'd twelve Apostles, and seventy Disciples. If you tell him that Christ riding to Jerusalem had no train of Servants, no Noble-men attending him, adorn'd with golden Chains, and riding on trapped Horses, he answers, that Christ did so throw the necessity of that time, least he had been suspected as affecting an earthly Kingdom, and that his want of such Splendor, was the fault of Herod and such Princes as knew him not. This Argument (continues Saravia) that they make against the Popish Prelats and ours, is frivolous, for it's deduc'd from the Deeds of the Infidels, and hath no place among Christians. Tho' nCap. 29.Bishops have Bands of arm'd Men to guard 'em, and Noble-men adorn'd with golden Chains constantly to Page and attend them; this ought to offend no Body. And whatsoever he says for covering this Scandal that such superlative Grandour, Pomp and Vanity give to every sober Beholder, his Reader shall find to be nothing else save what's commonly brought to palliat the Offence which the World so justly takes at the Luciferian Pride and Arrogance of the great Antichrist: yea even long after that time, notwithstanding of all the endeavours of Saravia and his Complices, so great a Stranger was this Doctrine even there, that T. HollandoSpanhem. part. spec. pag. 221. Quisc. Laudum pro gradu disputantem asserentemque Episcoporum ordinem esse divini ac necessarii juris, publica ignominia notavit., the King's Professor at Oxford branded Laud with publick infamy for asserting the divine right of Episcopacy.