A retentiue, to stay good Christians, in true faith and religion, against the motiues of Richard Bristow Also a discouerie of the daungerous rocke of the popish Church, commended by Nicholas Sander D. of Diuinitie. Done by VVilliam Fulke Doctor of diuinitie, and Maister of Pembroke hall in Cambridge.
Fulke, William, 1538-1589.

The tenth Chapter.

THat the Apostles beside the prerogatiue of their Apo∣stleshippe,*had also the auctoritie to be particular Bi∣shoppes, which thing their name also did signifie in the olde time.

ALthough the Apostles had all such auctoritie, as e∣uerie * particular Bishop hath, yet had they not two offices, but one Apostleship. No more then a King al∣though he haue all auctoritie that euerie Constable Page  233 hath, is thereby both a King and a Constable, but a King onely. Neither doth their staying or as he calleth it resi∣dence, in some particular citie, proue that the Apostles either were or might be Bishops, that is geue ouer their generally charge and take vpon them a particular, or still reteyning their generall charge, to exercise the of∣fice of a Bishoppe any longer, then vntill the churche was perfectly gathered, where they remayned. For al∣though the holy Ghost distinguished their vniuersall charge into seuerall partes, to auoyde confusion, as in making Peter chiefe Apostle of the circumcision, and Paule of the Gentiles, yet were they not thereby made Bishoppes. And although the consent of writers is, that Iames was Bishoppe of Ierusalem, yet following the course of the Scriptures, we must hold that Iamesby de∣cree of the holy Ghost, was appoynted to stay there, not as a Bishoppe, but as an Apostle for the conuersion of the Iewes, which not onely out of all Iurie, but out of all partes of the world, came thither ordinarily to wor∣shippe. Of S. Peters sitting at Antioch as Bishoppe, we finde nothing in the Scriptures, and lesse of his remo∣uing to Rome. But we finde that when Peter came to Antioche, Paule withstoode him to his face, and repro∣ued him openly, which he might not well haue done, if Peter had bene supreame heade of the church, & in his owne see as M. Sander doth fantasie.

Where he alleageth the text & Episcopatum eius acci∣piat alter, and let an other take his Bishoprike, to proue that Iudas and so the Apostles were Bishoppes, it is too childish & fonde an argument, seeing the Greeke word, which S. Luke vseth & the Hebrue word which the Pro∣phet vseth, signifieth generally a charge or office, and not suche a particular office of a Bishoppe, as nowe we speake of.

He citeth farther Theodorete in 3. cap. 1. ad Tim. to proue yt the name of an Apostle in the primitiue church did signifie such a Bishoppe. But howe greatly Theodo∣ret was deceaued, appeareth by this, that he citeth for Page  234 proofe Philip. 2. Epaphroditus to be the Apostle of the Philippensians, because S. Paule sayth of him Epaphro∣ditus your Apostle, and my helper: whereas he meaneth that he was their messenger, vsing the worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the generall signification for a messenger, and not for the name of suche an officer as an Apostle or Bishoppe. He nameth also Titus and Timotheus which in the Scripture, are neuer called Apostles, likewise the A∣postles and Elders at Ierusalem, which were in deede the true Apostles of Christs immediat sending, and not Bishoppes ordeyned by men. And whereas Hierome sayeth, that all Bishoppes be successors of the Apostles, he meaneth manifestly in auctoritie, within their seuerall charges, and not that the Apostles were Bishops. Like∣wise where Augustine sayth, that the Bishoppes were made in steede of the Apostles, it rather proueth that the Apo∣stles, were no Bishoppes, for then if the Apostles were Bishoppes, he should say, Bishoppes were made in steede of Bishoppes.

The last reason is, that if the office of Bishoppes had not bene distinct in the Apostles, frō their Apostleship, that office woulde haue ceased with the Apostleshippe, for the whole being taken away no parte can remayne, except it had an other grounde to stande in, beside the Apostleshippe, as the Bishoppely power had. In deede if the Apostleshippe had ceased before Bishoppes had bene ordeyned, Bishoplike power woulde haue ceased with it: but seeing the Apostles ordeyned Bishops and Elders in euery congregation, to continue to the worlds ende, the Bishoppes office hath not ceased, though the office of the Apostles is expired. Wherefore seeing nei∣ther by Scripture, reason, nor Doctors, this distinction of offices in the Apostles, can be proued, when Peter is called heade, Prince, chiefe, first, Capteyne of the A∣postles by Cyrill, or any auncient writer, we must vn∣derstande, as Ambrose teacheth a primacie of confes∣sion or fayth, not of honor or degree de incar. dom cap. 4.