A counter-essay, or, A vindication and assertion of Calvin and Beza's presbyterian judgment and principles drawn from their writings, in answer to the imputations of a late pamphlet, entituled, An essay concerning church-government ... attempting to fasten upon them an episcopal perswasion ... / by a minister of the true Presbyterian Church of Scotland, established by law.

CHAP. Sixth.

THe Propositions and Demonstrations drawn out by this Pam∣phleter, upon the premised Definitions, Postulatum••, and Axi∣oms, (as the great projection and scope thereof) examined; the the unsoundness thereof discovered, and the Antitheses of his Proposi∣tions established, and his Demonstrations everted, by Counter-de∣monstrations, from Calvin and Beza.

Having thus evinced to the conviction of the judicious and imparti∣al, the pitiful mis-application, and forgery of all this Mars Citations, out of Calvin and Beza, to fortifie his scope and design, in these as∣sertions, which he calls Definitions, Postulatums, and Axioms; His Demonstrations drawn from them do fall by course, as the Superstru∣c••ure when the Foundation is razed. His Principles being found un∣sound, his Demonstrations, (the birth of them) will appear lighter then vanity; And like the little bag which Children finds in the Fields, and call the witch-ball, will be found to evaporat into Smoak with a smal touch.

The first Proposition he undertakes to Demonstrat from his Posi∣tions, above-examined, is,

That the 12 Apostles were president Bishops, over the 70 Dis∣ciples.

Answer.

In general, I may again animadvert here, that if by being Presi∣dent Bishops, be understood the Apostles univeral directive Authority and Inspection necessarly connected with, and sounded upon their insal∣libility, as being so many living Oracles, from whom the mind of Christ was infallibly to be sought, both by Ministers and People, as to every point of their respective duties, such a Presidency will be easily admitted; but in this respect he doth foolishly restrict, or ima∣gins, that Calvin & Beza, doth this restrict their Presidency or Episco∣pacy to the 70 Disciples, for thus they were president Bishops, over the universal Church, both Ministers and People, and that while they lived; In the same respect, and upon the same ground, upon

which they had this presidency over the 70 Disciples, they had it universally over all, both in the judgement of Calvin (as is above e∣vinced) and of all sound Divines. And in whatever respect he can alle••dge Calvin, to hold their Presidency, to be universal, over the 70 Disciples, it's easie to prove that he holds this Presidency, to be uni∣versal over all Churches and Ministers; and therefore if he will from hence infer, successors to them in Calvins judgment, he would make him hold twelve moral standing Primats, and universal Patriarchs or Popes, with infallible directive power over the whole Catholick Church.

2 I observe, that by asserting the Apostles, to be mee•• President Bishops, he would make men believe that he pleads only for a moral standing fixed Presidency; But (as I did above touch) he pleads by this first Proposition and Assumption, for a standing moral Prelatick Dominion, over Church Judicatories serued up to the highest Peg. Follows the Demonstration, whereof the first Proposition is,.

Major.

The President Bishop is he who from his Office preheminent to other Ministers, is invested with a fixed Power of Ordination regulat by Canons, and of Jurisdiction, ballanced by assisting Ministers. For proof of which, he adduces definition 3.

Answer.

This Proposition, as here worded, we did above dis-prove, and did shew, that according to his design in this Citation of Calvin, he must add both a sole power, and likewise an ordinary power; that this place of Galvin will neither prove his holding it fixed, nor an or∣dinary power in the Apostles, both which we have found Calvin doth disown in several places above-cited. Besides the above-evinced in∣consistency of the two Branches, of this Proposition, compared with his pretended proof; so that the Major appears nought. The assump∣tion is,

Assumption.

But in respect to the 70 Disciples, who were all in the holy Mini∣stry (by Postulatum first) and from among whom Matthias was cal∣led to be of the twelve by (Postulatum 1.) The sacred Colledge of the Apostles, had a fixed preheminency, (by Axiom 1.) invest∣ed

with the power of Ordination, regulated by Canons, (by Postula∣tum 1. and Definition 1.) and of Jurisdiction ballanced by assisting Ministers; (by Axiom 2)

Answer.

Not to resume what we have animadverted, upon his Assertion a∣nent the 70 Disciples and Calvin's silence as to Mathias in both the places cited by him, and his Comment upon Mathias Election; As for that which he asserts from Axiom 1▪ anent the Colledge of Apostles, their fixed preheminence, the Axiom itself asserts the regular Call of any Mi∣nister already ordained, is from an Inferior, to a Superior station, we did shew the impertinency of Calvins citation to prove this, and that he neither simply asserts this matter of fact, as he sets it down, nor gives his approbation of it, so that this Axiom is none of Calvins.

2. For his inference from it, that the 12 had a fixed Preheminency over the 70, who sees not its remotness? Behold, the visage of this Reason, Calvin says, that the Church sometimes choosed Presbyters, out of Deacons, ergo he ass••rts that the 12 Apostles had a fixed Prehe∣minence over the 70 Disciples.

3. If by [Fixed] he mean a preheminence ordinary, and to be con∣tinued, we have proved that Calvin denyes and disowns this, in the places above cited, and asserts as evidently as man can speak, that the Apostolick Official Preheminence, as such, was neither Fixed, Limited, nor Ordinary; that they were invested with a power of Ordination regulat by Canons, he tells us is proved by Postulatum 1. and Defini∣tion 1.

The Postulatum says, that the 70 Disciples were in the holy Order of the Ministry, and how he has proved this from Calvin, we have above seen, especially with relation to Mathias; Where we told him that Calvins assertion of the Sameness of the pastoral Function in all ordinary Pastors, and the extraordinary expired Nature of the Apostolick Inspe∣ction and Authority, cutts off his inference of such a standing Subordi∣nation among Pastors, as he imagins him to hold.

Next, what a Rope of Sand is this, the 70 were inferiour to the 12 Apostles, ergo they had a fixed ordinary power of Ordination over them; and (forsooth) regulated by Canons.

He next proves this by Definition 1. Which asserts that the power of

Ordination, is the Right of Governours of the Church to separate per∣sons duely qualified to the Ministry; This Calvin asserts, is proper on∣ly to Pastors, which we proved, doth infer clearly against this mans Design, Calvins asserting the Pastor to be the highest ordinary Officer, and the expired extraordinary Nature of the Apostolick and Evange∣listick Offices, together with the equal Function of all Pastors, which Assertions of Calvin doth render this Inference, Ergo the Apostles were invested with an ordinary power of Ordination and Iurisdiction over Pastors, to be transmitted to the Church, (which is this mans Scope and Conclusion upon the premised general Assertion of Calvin, anent the right of Church-Governours) to be a meer non sequitur, and an ergo, baculus stat in angulo.

The Apostles Preheminency in jurisdiction ballanced by assisting Mi∣nisters, he proves by Axiom 2. which he refers to Definition 2 and 3. Upon which i•• the examination of his Citations, we have proved, that this supposed Apostolick Preheminency is with Calvin neither Fixed, nor ordinary, or of a moral standing Nature, but did expire with these extra∣ordinary Functions; and that in Calvin's principles, it was cumulative unto, not privative of, the ordinary standing collegiat power of Pastors, which is to continue to the end; besides the inconsistency wherein we have observed, he involves Calvin in his Collections upon the place cited by him. Follows our Pamphleters grand Conclusion of his Demonstration.

Conclusion.

Therefore the 12 Apostles were president Bishops over the 70 Dis∣ciples, which was the thing to be demonstrated.

Answer.

If he mean an infallible directive power and presidency as Apostles, it is easily admitted by Calvin; But then, as I said, he foolishly restricts it to the 70 Disciples, which was over the whole Church both Mini••ters and People. If he mean a standing moral ordinary perpetual Presidency, especially relative to the 70, and wherein ordinary Officers were to succeed them, we have proved, that he will as soon squise Water from a Flint, as either premisses or conclusion from the places of Calvin refer∣red unto, in the two Propositions of his Demonstration.

And unto his Demonstration and proposition, I do from what is a∣bove

evinced, oppose his Counter-demonstration, and Antithesis of his Position and Conclusion. The Proposition is.

Proposition.

The Apostles were not fixed President ordinary Bishops over the 70 Disciples.

Demonstration.

They whose pr••sidency was not fixt to any Church or Station, nor Ordinary, but Extraordinary, and universal over the whole Church, both Ministers and Flocks, these had no fixed ordinary moral presiden∣cy, over the 70 Disciples. But the Apostolick presidency was of this Nature, in the Judgment of Calvin; ergo the Apostles were not ordi∣nary fixed president Bishops over the 70 Disciples. The Major is evi∣dent, for to be fixed, and not fixed, ordinary and extraordinary Pre∣sidents, yea, and in relation to the 70 Disciples only, and to the whole Church, Ministers and People, cannot consist. The Minor is cleared above, wherein it is evinced, that Calvin ass••rts the Apostolick Inspection, to be both Universal, Extraordinary and Unfixed. Hence we may safely conclude, ergo the Apostles were not ordinary presi∣dent Bishops, or in a proper and formal Sense over the 70 Disciples, which was to be proved. Come we to the second Proposition, which is this.

Proposition 2.

Timothy was a president Bishop over the Church of the Ephesians, and Titus over the Church of the Cretians.

Answer.

Before I come to his Demonstration, I again enquire, first if he mean such a Bishop as hath a preheminent Power in Ordination and Jurisdicti∣on, or a meer President, who is only to ask the Votes, and gather them, and thus a Moderator allenarly? This last he will not say, for it would clearly cross his Demonstration, and if the first, why calls he him by this discriminating smoothing term [President Bishop] and not ra∣ther Diocesian or Patriarchal Bishop; as he holds that Calvin and Beza do owne the designation and Office? Is•• he no more than a President who has a preheminent Official Power, yea, according to his forecited Collection from Calvin and Beza) a s••le power in Ordination and Juris∣diction over Pastors.

2. Since he will not say that Calvin will disowne the Apostles Epis∣copal Presidency over Timothy and Titus, as over the 70 Disciples, who with Calvin might be Evangelists, he should rather have ascribed to the Apostles, a moral standing Arch-Episcopacy or Patriarchat; for certain∣ly a president Bishop, over such a great President Bishop as Timothy and Titus, merits that Name.

The first Proposition of his Demonstration, is thus.

These are president Bishops who are from their Office preheminent unto other Ministers, invested with a fixed power of Ordination, regu∣lated by Canons, and of Jurisdiction, ballanced by assisting Ministers. To prove which we are referred again to Definition 3.

Answer.

We did upon this Definition collated with his proof out of Calvin, discover this mans pitiful Prevatication, and his involving Calvin and himself in palpable ••nconsistencies. We did also prove from several places of that learned Divine, that he denys this fixed and ordinary stand∣ing Presidency, both to Apostles and Evang••lists, and holds that such fixed Presidents, as the Church did after set up, did not infringe the collegiat power and Authority of Pastors, but were subject to them; And that Calvin disowns an official preheminency in any Pastor over a∣nother, and expresly a peculiar Designation of Bishop, as an abuse of Scripture language, and contrair to the Divine Institution. So that the Major of his Demonstration, and this Definition whereupon (as the preceeding) it is grounded, appears to be a rotten Fabrick, and a bowing Wall, and tottering Fence.

I cannot but further observe, that he makes this goodly Proposition, containing his Definition of the president Bishop, serve both Paul, and the other Apostlesturn, for proof of his Episcopal Presidency, and likewise Timothy with the inferiour sort of Bishops, thus equi-parating them, and shaping their Episcopacy with one and the same Standard and Measure; The place of Calvin which speaks of Paul's sole Imposi∣tion of Hands upon Timothy, whereby he would fortifie this part of the Definition, relating to Ordination, serves also with him for Timothy's like Episcopacy, giving thus to them both a sole power in Ordination; And how consistent this is with Calvins Sense of the power of the A∣postles and Evangelists, any who have read Calvin can easily judge.

Again (which makes good Jest) left Paul his first and high Bishop, and his Schollar the younger Bishop Timothy should 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 de∣borded, and play the wanton, and run out of their Circle, both De∣monstrations, and Difinitions hath a prudent Limitation annexed; That their power must be regulat by Canons, and well ballanced by assisting Mini∣sters; and yet Paul and Timothy's sole power in Ordination seems para∣mount to these Canons, and far to counter-ballance all Ministers Au∣thority. Follows the Assumption of his Demonstration.

Assumption.

But Timothy in the Church of Ephesus, and Titus in the Church of Crete, from their Offices, had a preheminency over other Ministers, in∣vested with a fixed power of Ordination and Jurisdiction, regulat by Canons, and ballanced by assisting Ministers; For proof of this we are referred to Postulatum 2.

Answer.

For evincing the Falshood of this Assumption, I do refer to what is answered on that Postulatum; wherein we have made it appear, that with Calvin the Official power and preheminency of both Apostles and Evangelists, being expired, and dying with their persons, our Pam∣phleters Inference of Calvins asserting a moral standing Official Prehe∣minency among Pastors, is most absurd. That with Calvin the Apo∣stolick and Evangelistick Preheminency being neither fixed nor ordinary, his Inference of a fixed and ordinary Preheminency, upon what Calvin asserts of the power of Apostles and Evangelists, is obviously imperti∣nent and groundless; We did also offer some Topicks and Arguments, from Calvins Doctrines and Principles, as to Apostles and Evangelists, which do clearly demonstrat the absurdity of his Collection, in this Postulatum from the words of Calvin annexed thereunto; as that with Calvin, the Official Power of Timothy, and his Inspection, was in extent Correspondent to that of Apostles, that it did suppose the Churches in fieri, as to their Organick Mold and Constitution; As likeways the Exi∣stence of the Apostolick Office, that Calvin expresly distinguishes, the official Presidency or Preheminency exercised by Timothy and Titus, as being extraordinary, from the ordinary and perpetual necessary Of∣ficial Power of Pastors; Likeways that with Calvin, neither Timothy nor Titus were fixed to any certain particular and determinat Station;

and are in this distinguished from ordinary and perpetually necessary Church-Officers. We did also shew that the place of Calvin, where∣by he would fortifie his Postulatum, doth palpably overthrow it, both in his asserting Timothy to be the Apostles Depute, sustaining his room, and none of the ordinary Ministry, and likeways in his express asserting his Power to be beyond the limits of the ordinary power of Pastors. So that the Assumption of this Demonstration, is also false, as the Major Proposition, and none of them Calvins, but a couple of phantastick Chymeraes of his own brain. The Conclusion.

Conclusion.

Therefore Timothy was a president Bishop over the Church of the Ephesians, and Titus over the Church of the Cretians; From what is said upon both Major and Minor appears to be a Cretian, idest, a lying Conclusion, and to have neither Geometrical or Logical Measures, though our Pasquiller adds unto it (as unto the former, and likeways the ensuing) his (quod erat demonstrandum) to make it appear so It hath neither vim consequentiae, nor a fixed ordinary mo∣ral standing Preheminency of Timothy and Titus, over these Churches, neither having any truth in it self, nor in the least following upon, or, being deduceable from any place of Calvin, which this Man hath cited, but rather the contrary. Which I make good, in the Antithesis of this Proposition, and counter demonstration ensuing.

Antithesis. 2.

Neither Timothy nor Titus had in Ephesus or Crete, a fixed ordinary Episcopal Preheminency, over Ministers and flocks in the judgement of Calvin.

Demonstration.

They whose Official Preheminence, or Presidence over these Churches, was Transient, and Temporary, supposing the existance of the Apostolick Office, was for modelling Churches as yet in fieri, as to their organick Being and constitution, and in all these respects, is expresly by Calvin distinguished, from the ordinary Official Power and Authority of Pastors, which is moral and perpetually necessary for Church Government, these Officers had in Calvins judgement, no fixed moral standing Preheminence Episcopal over these Churches. But the Official Presidence, and preheminence of Timothy and Titus,

at Ephesus and Crete, was of this nature in Calvin's judgement. There∣fore neither of them had, in his Judgement, a fixed ordinary Episeo∣pal Preheminence over these Churches, which was to be proved. The Major Proposition none can deny, who will not offer to reconcile contradictions, and involve Calvin therein.

The Minor hath been abundantly proved, from clear and positive assertions, of Calvin in the places above cited. The conclusion is clear∣ly de••uced.

Proceed we to the next proposition of our Author.

Proposition 3.

The Fathers of the Primitive Church were President Bishops,

Answer.

Here it's worthy of this Mans serious thoughts, how he has prov∣ed, or can prove, from any places of Calvin and Beza, that they honour none with this Epithet of Fathers of the primitive Church, but his supposed President Bishops; were all the ancient famous Divines, or Writers of the primitive Church, the knowledge of whom has reached us, such President Bishops, thus Authorized, as he imagines these Fathers were, in Calvin and Bezas judgement, sure he will not dare to assert this, and so the subject of the Question in this Proposi∣tion is uncertain. If he say, that he means these Fathers, who had this Official Power, and by this Description distinguishes them from other Fathers, besides that he is lyable to the former inconvenience, of imputing a notion and Phrase to these Divines, which they owne not, the Proposition thus seems rediculous, it being equivalent to this, the President Bishops were President Bishops.

—Come we to the Demonstration, whereof the 1. Proposition is thus

Major.

The Primitive Church retained the Government of one single per∣son preheminent in Office unto other Ministers, this is proved by Po∣stulatum 3. which asserts, that for avo••ding of schism, the primitive Church retained the Government of one single Person, preheminent in Office unto other Ministers, which is proved from Calvins assert∣ing (instit. lib. 4. cap. 4. Sect. 2.) That Presbyters in all Cities choose one, to whom especially they gave the name of Bishop; That Ierom

says, that at Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist to Heracleas and Dyonysius the Presbyters placed one in a Preheminent degree, whom they called a Bishop.

Answer.

I have at large upon that Postulatum, evinced the Impertinency, and falshood of this Collection from these words of Calvin; as likewise in my general animadversions upon the whole Pasquel; I did shew the inconsistances into which he involves Calvin, and himself also, in this assertion his impertinent inserting Calvin's approbation of the jus, from his simple narration of the matter of fact, and practice of the Church. I did also shew, that if he make Calvin allow meerly of a constant Pre∣sident, he crosses his scope of making him assert the Government to be in this President, if he make him assert more, viz. A sole Prehemi∣nence in Ordination and Jurisdiction, (as is clear he doth, comparing Axiom 2. with Definition 2. and 3.) Calvin gives him the lie, in as∣serting, that this President or Moderator at first set up by his bre∣thren, had no power over his Colleagues; but such as the Consul had in the Senat, to ask the Votes, &c. That he thus absurdly makes Cal∣vin assert the Government of the Senat, to have been in the Person of the Consul. I did also offer unto him Calvin and Ierom's Judgement in this poynt, thus, that as there was an early aberration from the Scrip∣ture path, in the matter of Government, so particularly, that this President or Proestos, was brought in humano consilio, and, protempo∣rum necessitate, by humane advice and counsel, and according to the times exigence, whereof as to Calvin, we offered two convincing proofs. 1. In that Calvin immediately after the words cited by this Pamphleter, makes mention, and approves of Ieroms Testimony upon Titus, asserting the Bishops power, in so far, as above that of the Pa∣stor, to be founded upon custom only, not divine appointment, asserting also the identity of the Bishop and Presbyter by divine Right, and the Official parity of all Pastors. And 2. that this Practice of appro∣priating the term Bishop to one, as a badge of an Official Power, of one Pastor, above another, is in terminis condemned by Calvin, as an abuse of the Holy Ghost's language, and contrair to the equal Offi∣cial Power of Pastors, asserted in Scripture; All which we forti∣fied by the assertion of this Divine parity of Pastors, in the French

Confession: and by the learned account both of Calvin and Ieroms judgement in this matter, exhibite by Dr. Rynalds; So that this Ma∣jor Proposition, is palpably false and groundless. Follows the As∣sumption.

Assumption.

But the Preheminence in Office, includs a proportional Jurisdiction over the Officers, who are under them, (by Axiom 2.) and the Power of Jurisdiction is fixed in the President Bishop, by Defini∣tion 3.

Answer.

To the first part of the proof, Preheminence in Office includs a proportional Jurisdiction, over the Officers who are under them, by Axiom 2. which refers to Definition 2. and 3. I Answer; We have upon these his two Definitions, here referred unto, fully discovered, That the places of Calvin annexed unto them, do not fortifie, but doth overthrow this Power, of the moral standing President Bishop, which therefrom, he undertakes to prove; we have also discovered the ab∣surdities, and inconsistancies which he involves Calvin and himself in∣to, by these his Definitions; we discovered that the place of Calvin annexed to Definition 2. speaks of Authority it self, not of its Object, defined by him, That Calvin holding the Function, and Official Power of all Pastors, to be one and the same, and consequently their Power of Ordination; and the power of Jurisdiction, being with this Pamphleter, commensurable thereunto, in Calvins sense, that learn∣ed Divine must consequently hold, the Power of Ordination, and Jurisdiction, to be one and the same in all Pastors, which clearly everts this mans scope, and his sense of th••s•• places of Calvin cited by him; we also proved, that the Official Preheminence, supposed existent among Church-officers, in that place of Calvin annexed to Definition 2. is by him expresly limited to that time and case of the Church; And that upon Tit. 1. v. 5, 6. He asserts Timothies inspection to be transi∣ent and unfixed; and in this commensurable to that of the Apostles; And that asserting likewise Timothie's Office to be beyond the ordinary power of Pastors, he doth in both respects contradict, the scope of this this Definition, and would thus twise contradict himself if it were otherwise.

Upon Definition 3. asserting in this President Bishop, a fixed Power of Ordination regulated by Canons, and of Jurisdictions, bal∣lanced by assisting Ministers, (proved by Calvin's asserting, that Paul only laid hands on Timothy,) 2 Tim. 1. 6. And that the Bishop had the power of the Consul, (Instit. lib. 4. cop. 4. Sect. 1.) I have made appear how pitifully this man stumbles and prevaricats. 1. In making Calvin assert a sole power, in this President Bishop, as well as a fixed power. And that 2. in making the Power of Jurisdiction, to be ballanced by assisting Ministers, and not annexing this Clause to the Power of Ordination, he either restricts it to this Power of Jurisdiction, imputing this to Calvin a Chimerical assertion of his own forgery, and involves Calvin and himself in a Contradiction, in that he asserts, that with him the Power of Jurisdiction is of like nature and correspondent to that of Ordination, the preheminence in Office and Iurisdiction, be∣ing one and the same by Axiom 2. or if both Power of Ordination, and Jurisdiction, be held thus ballanced by our Pamphleter, we have discovered that in betaking himself to this shift; he would be but out of the pit into the snare, incidit in s••yllam cupiens vitare Charybdin, for thus he overthrows his proof from Calvins assertion, that Paul and none else laid hands upon Timothy. 2. We have also made appear, that in his 3 Definition, he sayes nothing to his purpose and scope, unless he qualifie the Power of this supposed President Bishop, not only with the property, and adjunct of [fixed] but also with that of (Ordinary) both which that Calvin disowns in the Apostles and Evangelists, we proved from clear places, both of his Commentaries and Institutions.

And for his other proof of that Definition, taken from Calvins equi∣parating, the power of this President. Bishop, with that of the Con∣sul; We did disprove it, not only from Calvins explication, that it reach∣ed only the gathering of the Votes, and seeing the Sentence execute; but likewise, from his plain and positive assertion, that this Proestos or President was subject to his Colleagues, whence by inevitable con∣sequence, it follows, that he had no such Official Preheminence over them, as this man alledges Calvin doth hold.

3. Again, whereas the fixing of this Power in the President Bishop, is, as the other branch of his Assumption, proved by Definition 3.

What we have said to disapprove his scope in this 3 Definition, doth sufficiently evert this Branch, of the Assumption grounded there∣upon

4. Finally, upon Axiom 2. referring to both these his Definitions, we have evinced, that this Preheminence in Office, and proportion∣ed-preheminence in Jurisdiction, which Calvin in the places therein cited, supposes competent to the Apostles and Evangelists, was nei∣ther first Fixed, or secondly Ordinary, nor such as is of a moral stand∣ing nature, but did expire with the Persons of these extra••rdinary Offices; and that 3ly. During the existence of this extraordinary Pre∣heminence, in Office and Jurisdiction, it was in Calvins judgement, cumulative unto, not privative of, the ordinary collegiat authority of Pa∣stors, in Ordination and Jurisdiction; So that, that Axiom, as understood by this man, of a supposed moral standing preheminent president Bishop over Pastors, we have fully proved, in the places above-cited, that Calvin doth disown it, and consequently, the Assumption of this De∣monstration as none of his. The Conclusion is,

Therefore the Fathers of the primitive Church, were President Bi∣shops.

Which doth appear from what is said, to be a meer, yea a gross non sequitur; both Major and Assumption being palpably false, taking this President Bishop, in the extent and nature exprest in both these Propositions. And hereunto his Proposition and Demonstration, I shall oppose these two An••itheses, and Counter-demonstrations. The first Proposition is.

Proposition 1.

None of the Fathers, who were the first Proestos, or Fixed Mode∣rators, had de facto the Government in their Person, or an Official Preheminence in Ordination, and Jurisdiction, over their Brethren, in the Judgement of Calvin or Beza.

Proposition 2.

None who assums this in after times, were allowed of these Di∣vines, as to their pretended jus, or as having a Divine Warrand and Institution. The Proposition is proved thus.

Demonstration. Major.

They who according to Calvin and Beza, were only togather the Vo••es, moderate the Actions of the meeting, and were subject to the meeting, or Church Judicatory, as being chosen by them, these had not the Government in their Persons, or a Fixed Official Prehemi∣nency of Ordination and Jurisdiction over the same.

Assumption.

But the Presidency of the First Pro••st••••e•• or Moderators, was in these Divines Judgement of this nature. Therefore these first Proesto••e••, or Moderators, had no Official Preheminency, in Ordinati••n and Jurisdiction over their Brethren, or the Government of the Judica∣tories in their Persons, as is said. The Major is clear, and is ••ounded upon the Nature and Rule of oppos••ta; For to be subject to he mee∣ing, and to gather the Votes only, and that by their own Election and Choise, cannot consist with having a f••xed, yea, (according to this mans pleasing) a sole Official Power in Ordination and Jurisdicti∣on ••v••r them. The Assumption is above cleared, from the expres••▪ Assertions, of these Divines, wherein it is made good, that Calvin asserts, that this Moderator or Fixed President, at first brought in, was only to moderat the Actions of the meeting, and was subject to them. The same we heard Beza assert, in speaking of his humane E∣pis••••pacy, as subsequent to that which had the Divine Warrand. The Conclusion is legitimatly deduced.

The 2 Proposition, viz. No••e who assumed this sort of Presidency, in aft••••t••mes, viz. An Official Prehemi••ency in Ordination and Juris∣diction over Pastors, were allowed of Calvin or Beza, as having a Di∣vine Warrand, is thus proved.

Demonstration.

These Divines, who disallow of any s••rt of Dominion in a single per∣son, over Church Judicatories, who maintain the equal Function, and Official Power of Pastors therein, who dis••wn the very first con∣tinuing fixed Moderator as a humane invention, and do hold that even this fixed Moderator ought to be sub••ect, to the consistorial judicial Votes o•• ••is Brethren, these do disown a Fixed Official Pr••h••minence, in Ordina••ion and Jurisdiction, in any ordinary Pastor over Church-Judicatories, and do condemn such as assumed this; but Calvin and

Beza do disallow of this Power above exprest, in any pastor above his Brethren. Therefore they disallow of these who in after times assumed this, as having no divine warrand. The Major is Evident upon the same ground on which the former first Proposition is bottomed, which if any deny, they will necessarily involve them in Contradicti∣ons. The ••ssumption is evident, from the above-cited places of Cal∣vin and Beza. We heard Calvin clearly ass••r•• the equal Official power of pastors, and that even extraordinary Offices, were not to encroach upon this power; That the first Proestetes were only to gather the Votes, and were subject to the Meeting, we also heard that Beza calls this Fixed Moderater the ••pisiopus humarus, as dist••nguished from the first divine Bishop, and asserts, that the setting of him up, was an a••er∣ation, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from the Divine Rule, and that which gave th•• f••rst rise to Antichristian Tyranny; we also heard, that he disown even the inference of a Fixed Moderator, from the Angel of the Church∣es; we have also frequently Observed, how that Calvin disowns the peculiarity of the very name (Bishop) to one Pastor, as giving the least semolance of any difference in the Official power and function of pa∣stors. The Conclusion therefore of their disowning this Official pre∣heminent power in Ordination and Jurisdiction, assumed, or rather usurped in after times, evidently and necessarily fo••lows; yea, is so evident, that Beza in his Treatise de Episcopatu triphci, calls the Bi∣shop assuming, in after times this preheminence in Ordination and Iurisdiction over Pastors, the Satanical Bishop, and the poysoned egg, out of which Antichrist was hatched. Come we to the 4th Proposi∣tion of our pamphleter, which is this thus.

Proposition 4.

The president Episcopacie is approven by Christ, in the Book of the Revelation.

Answer.

Upon the Proposition it self, I shall only here again animadvert, and remind the Reader of this man's pitiful palpable ••orgery and abu∣sive Sophilirie in covering himself, and his design all alone g••••der the Cloud, and playing with the general terms of President Epis••••p••cie, to give some semblance of truth unto his proofs, as knowing that Calvin and Beza do express themselves modestly, of the first Proestotes, or

Fixed Moderators, who first took place, but his Mediums and Me∣thods of arguing, do sufficiently unmask his pitiful folly, for they do make these Divines plead for a Hierarchial Diocesian, or Patriarchal Prelat of the highest degree, with a fixed sole Power of Ordination and Jurisdiction; yea, shape•• out after the measures of Apostolick Authority. The first Proposition of his Demonstration, whereby the premised assertion, is fastned upon Beza, is thus. Demonstration.

Proposition 1.

The seven Angels of the seven Churches, written unto by St. Iohn in the Book of the Revelation, are encouraged against all the devices of the ungodly, upon condition of their continuing faithful in their Administrations; for proof of which, we are referred to Postulatum. 4.

Answer.

1. This Proposition in it self considered, we may safely admit, without the least prejudice to our cause, or help to his design. We might on the by here tell him (as our learned Mr. Gilespie admonish∣ed some of his fellows) that the Scripture Saints, (we may add, and inspecial, such an eminent Saint, and Divine, as the Apostle Iohn) needs no titles of Honour out of the Popes Callendar, and was acknow∣ledged such by the Churches, before this Canonizing came in use. And enquire whether our Author useth to prefix St. to Aaron when he names him, who is called the Saint of the Lord, together with Moses, and other old Testament Saints, and what ground of dispari∣ty and difference he can assign. But to pass this.

2. Since he referrs to Postulatum 4. where we have the same Pro∣position with an annext Sentence of Beza, on Revel, 2. 26. v. Where he expons, My Works, &c. of the faithful performance of the works laid upon this Angel, and shews that the Assembly of Pastors, are be∣spoken in the person of the President, to whom victory is promised, if he rely upon Christs power, &c. I shall here only resume what we have answered upon that 4 Postulatum, viz. That Bezas taking the An∣gel for a single Person, is the utmost conclusion he can draw from this passage, wherein as Beza differs from the ordinary current of Inter∣preters; So we have evinced the gross palpable folly, and forgery of this mans design and inference here-from, viz. That Beza ownes this president Bishop, which he hath shapen out, and described, since he can∣not

conclude from these words, that Beza asserts his Official Prehe∣minence and Authority, over his Colleagues, which we told him, is so Demonstratively evident, that Beza, disowns even the very infer∣ence of the necessity of a fixed Moderator, as following upon his As∣sertion, anent the president Angel, expressly adding this Proviso & Cauti∣on, to guard against any mis-application, of what he sayes anent the Angel, his being a single person; and thus in terminis gives this Pam∣phleter the lie, as if by a Prophetick Spirit, he had forseen this forgery, And holding the very first fixed Moderators, to have been the hu∣mane Custom, subsequent and opposite to the first divine appointment, and practice of the Official compleat parity among Pastors, our Lords enjoyning the Pastors, faithfulness in their administrations, and be∣speaking them thus in the person of the President, we told him, will therefore in Bezas sense and words, import no more, then a faithful exercise, of their joynt Collegiat Power and Authority, which Beza holds, was our Lords Institution, and at this time is existent. So we see the Major is nought. The Assumption is

Assumption.

But the Angels were President Bishops over other Ministers, within their respective Churches: For proof of this we are referred to Defi∣nition 4. Where we are told that the Angel of any Church represen∣tative, is the President Bishop over other Ministers, within the respe∣ctive Diocess, Province, or Patriarchat, which is proved by Beza, Rev. 2. and 24. His words are, To the Angel, that is the President, whom it behoved especially to be admonished, and by him his fellow Col∣leagues— To you the Angel, the President and the Assembly of your Colleagues.

Answer.

We have upon that Definition fully discovered the folly and im∣pertinency of this inference from the words of Beza, and this Mans pal∣pable shameless imposings upon him, as if these words, would bear the Conclusion, of his owning a President Bishop, with an Official, yea, sole Preheminence in Ordination and Jurisdiction, over ordina∣ry Pastors, of as high a nature as he supposes the Apostle Paul exercis∣ed, which appears by Definition 3. compared with its proof, this his arguing, we said is, a shameless imposing, both in that he supposes Beza to hold these Angels to be Patriarchat, Provincial, or Diocesi∣an

Angels or Bishops, above 260 years, before such a mold and cast of Churches was existent, as likewise, that every representative Church is Provincial, Diocesian, or Patriarchal, and inferring this high Patri∣archiall or Diocesian Prelat, with sole power of Ordination and Juris∣diction, from Bezas simple assertion of a president Angel in whom the rest of the Pastors were bespoken, yea and bespoken as his fellow Colleagues, viz of equal Official Authority in Bezas sense, unless he will make him contradict, not only himself, but Calvin, who expons, and under∣stands Colleagues thus; yea, and all this contrair to the express cau∣tion of Beza, in the same very place, who asserts, that this his sense and exposition of the President Angel, will not so much as bear the Conclusion of the necessity of a fixed Moderator, which he holds to be a humane invention, and that the Prelat of this Mans mold (and plead∣ed for by him, by these distorted citations) gave the rise to the An∣tichristian tyranny. If this be not shameless imposing, let any rational man judge. The Conclusion is▪

Conclusion.

Therefore the President Episcopacy is approven by Christ in the Book of the Revelation. To which our Pamphleter adds his usual— quod erat demonstrandum.

Answer.

Therefore the president Angel or Moderator is thus approven in Beza's Sense, who hath other Pastors, his Equals and Colleagues in Official power and Authority, is easily admitted; But ergo in Beza's Sense, the very fixed Moderator, far less the Diocesian Patriarchal Pre∣late, with sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction, is approved; Is a Chymerical Conclusion, which (as some Mushroms that Plinie speaks of) grows without a root, and hath no Support of either Major or Minor to fortifie it. And here again, I oppose this Antithesis, and counter-Demonstration, unto the preceeding.

Proposition.

The president Bishop with Official Preheminency, and fixed power of Ordination and Jurisdiction over Pastors, is in Beza's Sense, not approven by Christ, or bespoken by him in the Book of the Revelation, in the person of the Asian-angels.

Demonstration.

These Angels, who in Beza's Sense were bespoken only as Presidents, and Moderators, to whom the other Ministers of these respective Church∣es, were Colleagues of equal Official-power and Authority, and in so far only owned of Christ, these were not be-spoken and owned by him as such president Bishops, who had an Official preheminency, and a fixed Official power of Ordination and Jurisdiction over these Pastors or Ministers.

Assumption.

But these Angels were in the first Sense only be-spoken by Christ, and owned by him, according to Beza.

Conclusion.

Therefore the president Bishop with Official power of Ordination and Jurisdiction over Pastors, was not in Beza's Sense bespoken by Christ, or ordained by him, in the Book of the Revelation in the per∣son of any of the Asian-Angels, which was to be proved.

The Major is clear and necessarly true, by the rule of Opposits; which if we deny, we cannot free our selves, or Beza from a contra∣diction, it being impossible that he could bespeak them both ways, be∣cause these Offices are inconsistent in the same persons, and at the same time. The Assumption is thus proved. If Beza owne these other Pastors, as the Fellow-Colleagues of this president Angel, and will not owne him, so much as necessarly a fixed Moderator, which he holds to be a humane Invention, ascribing also to Satanical Invention, the President with official preheminency in Ordination and Jurisdiction over Pastors; Then in Beza's Sense, these Angels were not bespoken, and owned of our Lord, as having any Preheminence of this nature, but as Moderators only. But the first is evident, and hath been made good from several places of Beza; Therefore so is the other.