The Diocesans Trial, Part 2 · Argument 14
The fourteenth Argument.
Those who had jurisdiction over Presbyters assisting them, and Presbyters affixed to Cures, they had a superiority of power over other ministers. But bishops had so, Ergo, &c.
The Assumption is manifest. Ignatius describeth the Bishop from this, that he should be the governour of the Presbytery and whole Church foreign. And Ierom and Austin on the 44. Psalme, call them the Pr…nces of the Church, by whom she is governed. The assumption is proved particularly. Those who had directive power above others, and corrective, they had majority of rule. But B…shops had. Ergo. The assumption proved. First, for directive power, the Presbyters were to doe nothing without them. Ig…a ad Mag. ad Smyr. They might not minister the sacrament of the supper but under the B…shop, Clem. Epist. 1. ad Iacob. Tert. lib. de …pt. Can. Apost. 38, Can. Carth…g. 4.38. Con. C…r. 2. Con. 9. Con. Can. 16. Conc. Ant. Can. 5.
Secondly, that they had corrective power, it is proved, Ap…c. 2 & 3. The Angel of Ephesus did not suffer false Apostles, and is commended for it, the Angel of Thiatira is reproved for suffering the like. Therefore they had power over other ministers. Cypr. lib. 3. Epist. 9. telleth Rega…ian he had power to have censured his Deacon. Ierom. adversus Vigilantium, marvelleth that the Bishop where Vigilanti…s was, did not breake the unprofitable vessell. Epiphaniu… saith Bishops, governed the Presbyters themselves, they the people. The Presbyters affixed to places and Churches, were subject to the Bishops, for when they were vacant, the bishop did supply them. Againe, the Presbyters had their power from him, and therefore were under him, and they were subject to the censure of the bishop. Those of his Clergie were under him; for he might promote them, they might not goe from one Diocesse to another without him, nor travell to the citie, but by his leave. The bishop was their judge, and might excommunicate them, Cypr…li. 1. Epist 3. Concil. Carth. 4. …ap. 59. Conc. Chal. cap. 9. conc. Nice. cap. 4. conc. Ant. cap. 4. ibid. cap. 6. cap. 12. Cart. 2. cap. 7. conc. Afric. cap. 29. conc. Ephes. cap. 5. conc. Chal. cap. 23. The examples of Alexander and Chrisostome prove this. All Presbyters were counted acepheli, headlesse, that lived not in subjection to a bishop. The Pastors of parishes were either subject to bishops, or they had associates in Parishes joyned with them, or they ruled alone. But they had not associates, neither did they rule alone. Ergo, they were subject to the authority and jurisdiction of the bishop.
Answer.
The proposition of the first Syllogisme it must be thus framed. Those who had power of jurisdiction in themselves, without the concurrence of other Presbyters, as fellow judges, they were greater in majority of rule. Thus bishops had not jurisdiction. True it is, they were called governours and Princes of their Churches, because they were more eminent ministers, though they had not Monarchiall power in Churches, but Consull-like authority: and therefore when they affected this Monarchy, what said Ierome, Noverint se saterdotes esse non dominos, noverint se non ad Princip…tum vocatos, ad servitium totius Eccl…siae. Sic Origen in Esa. hom. 7.
To the proofe of the Assumption. Wee deny that they had this directive power over all Presbyters. Secondly, that th…y had it over any by humane constitution infallible. Presbyters were in great difference. Those who are called propry sacerdotes, Rectores, Seniores. Minor…m Ecclesiarum praepositi, the B…shop had not, not challenged not that directive power over them, which hee did ever those who were numbred amongst his Cleri…kes, who were helpes to him in the Liturgy, in Chapells and parish…s which did depend on him as their proper teacher, though they could not so ordinarily goe out to him. The first had power within their Churches, to teach, administer, excommunicate, were counted brethren to the b…shops, and called Episcopi, or Coepiscopi, even of the Ancient: But the Presbyters which were part of their Clergy, they had …his directive power over them, the Canons Ecclesiasticall allowing the same. But I take these latter to have beene but a corruption of governing Presbyters, who came to bee made a humane ministery. 1. by having singular acts permitted. 2. by being consecrate to this, and so doing ex officio, what they were imployed in by the bishop. But sure these are but helpes to liturgy, according to the Canons. Preaching did not agree to them further then it could bee delegated or permitted. Finally, wee read, that by law it was permitted them: that it was taken away from them againe by the bishops: that it was stinted and limited sometimes as to the opening of the Lords Praier, the Creed and ten Commandements: as it is plaine to him that is any thing conversant in the ancient. Secondly, let us account them as Ministers of the word given by God to h…s Church: then I say, they could not have any direction, but such as the Apostles had amongst Evangelists: and this p…wer is g…ven to the bishops onelyonly by canon swerving from the first ordinance of Christ: for it maketh a Minister of the word become as a cypher, without power of his consecration, as Ierom speaketh, being so interpreted by Pilson himselfe. These decrees were as justifi…ble as th…t which forbiddeth any to baptise▪ who hath not gotten chrisme from the bishop Con. Carth. 4. cap. 36. unlesse the phrases doe note onelyonly a precedence of order in the b…shop above Presbyters, requiring presence and assent, as of a fellow and chiefe member, not otherwise.
To the proof of the second part of the former assumption, 1. we deny this majority of corrective power to have beene in the Apostles themselves: they had only a ministry executive inflicting that which Christs corrective power imposed. Secondly, we deny that this ministeriall power of censuring was singularly exercised by any Apostle or Evangelist, where Churches were constituted. Neither is the writing to one above others, an argument that he had the power to doe all alone without concurrence of others. To that of Cyprian against R…gatian; we deny that Cyprian meaneth he would have done it alone, or that he and his Presbytery could have done it without the consent of Bishops neighbouring: but that he might in regular manner have beene bold to have done it, because he might be sure, quod no… co…legae tui …mnesid ratum haberemus. Cyprian was of judgement, that he h…mselfe might doe nothing without the consent of his Presbyters, unlesse he should violate his duty, by running a course which stood not with the honour of his brethren. It was not modesty in him; but due observancy, such as he did owe unto his brethren. Neither did Cyprian ever ordinarily any thing alone. He received some, the people and the brethren contradicting, lib. 1. epist. 3. but not till he had perswaded them, and brought them to be willing. Thou seest (saith he) what paines I have to perswade the brethren to patience ▪ So againe, I hardly perswade the people, yea even wring it from them, that such should be received. Neither did he take upon him to ordaine Presbyters alone: but propounded, made request for them, confessing, that further then God did extraordinarily prevent both him and them, they had the right of suffrage, no lesse then himselfe, as by these epistles may …ppeare, lib. 1. …pist. 20. lib. 2. epist. 5. lib. 4. epist. 10. Ierom (though grandil… quen… sometimes) did never thinke a Bishop could lawfully without his Presbyteries concurrence, excommunicate. If he were as Moses, yet he would have these as the seventy. Againe, Ierom doth write expresly of all in generall, Et nos sen…cum habemus, coetum Presbytero…m, sine quorum consilio nihil agi à quaquam licet, … ut Romani habuerunt sen…tum cujus confilio cuncta gerebantur. Epiphanius s…ith. Bishops governed Presbyters: but it doth not follow, that therefore they did it alone without concurrence of their com Presbyters. As for the fixed Presbyters, the proofes are more uns…fficient. The Bishop supplyed them, therefore they were under him. For Colleges supply Churches, yet have they no jurisdiction over them. Secondly, the canons did provide ne plebi invitae Presbyter obtruderetur. Thirdly, we …iStinguish majority of rule from some jurisdiction. We grant the B…shop had such a jurisdiction as concer…ing the Church, so farre as it was in society with others, such as an Arch-bishop hath over a Province: but this did stand with the Rectors power of jurisdiction within his owne Church. Fourthly, though they had power by his ministeriall interposition, yet this doth not prove them dependant on him. For bishops have their power from others ordaining them, to whom notwithstanding they are not subject in their Churches. In case of delinquency they were subject to the bishop with the Presbytery, yet so that they could not be proceeded against till consent of many other bishops did ratifie the sentence. Thus in Cyprians judgement; bishops themselves delinquent, turning wolves, as Samosatenus, Liberius, &c. are subject to their churches and Presbyteries, to be deposed and relinquished by them. As for those that were part of his clerks, it is true, they were in greater measure subject to him, absolutely in a manner for their direction: but for his corrective power he could not without consent of his Presbyters and fellow bishops, do any thing. The bishop indeed is onelyonly named many times: but it is a common Synecdoche, familiar to the Fathers, who put the primary member of the church for the representative church, as Austine saith, Petrum propter Apostolatus simplicitatem figuram Eccl…siae g…ssisse. See concil. Sardicen. cap. 17. conc. Carth 4. cap. 2.3. Tol. 4 cap. 4. Socr. lib. 1.3. Soz. lib. 1. cap 14. As for such examples as Alexanders, it is strange that any will bring it, when he did it not without a Synod of many bishops, yea without his Clergie, as sitting in judgement with him. Ch…ysostomes fact is not to be justified: for it was altogether irregular, savouring of the impetuous nature to which he was inclined, though in regard of his end, and unworthinesse of his Presbyters, it may be excused, yet it is not to be imitated. As for those headlesse Clerkes, it m…ke…h nothing for the B…shops majority of rule over all Churches and Presbyters in them. For first, it seemeth to be spoken of those that lived under the conduct of the Bishop, a colleg…at life together, Eode refectorio & dormitori utehantur, & Canonice viventes ab Episcopo instru…bontur. Now when all such Clerkes did live then as members of a Colledge under a master, it is no wonder if th…y be called headlesse, who did belong to no Bishop. Secondly, say it were alike of all Presbyters, which will never be proved (for all Presby…ers in the Diocesse were not belonging to the Bishops Cl…rkes) say it were, yet will it not follow, …hat those who were under some, were subject to his authority of rule. For there is a head in regard of presidency of order, as well as of power. Bishops were to finde out by Canon the chiefe bishop of their Province, and to associate themselves with him. So bishops doe now live ranged under their Archbish…ps as heads. Priests therefore as well as Clerkes, di… l…ve under some jurisdiction of the bishops; but such as did permit them coer…ive power in their owne Churches, such as made the bishop a head in regard of dignity, and not of any power, whereby he might sw…y all at his pleasure. Thirdly, if the bishops degenerate to challenge Monarchy or tyranny, it is better to be without such heads then to have them: as we are more happy in being withdrawen from the headship of the bishop of Rome, then if he still were head over us. To the last insinuation proving that bishops had the governement of those Churches which Presbyters had, because neitheir Presbyters alone had it, nor with assistents. I answer, they had as well the power of government, as of teaching: and though they had not such assistants as are the presbyters of a cathedral church, yet they might have some, as a deacon, or other person sufficient in such small Churches. When the Apostles planted a bishop and Deacon onelyonly, how did this bishop excommunicate? When the fathers of Africa did give a bishop unto those now multiplied, who had enjoyed but a Presbyter, what assistants did they give him? what assistants had the Chorepiscopi, who yet had government of their Churches?