A sermon preached before Q. Elizabeth by that learned and reverend man Iohn Iewel ... ; with an answer of the same authour to some frivolous objections against the government of the church.

CERTAINE FRIVOLOVS OBJE∣ctions against the Government of the Church of England, answered by IOHN IEWEL, Bishop of Sarisbury.

The First Reason of the Novelists.

God so loved the Church, that He left a perfect patterne * 1.1 orderly. Ephes. 4.

But here is named neither Pope, nor Archbishop, nor Archdeacon.

BISHOP IEWELS Answer.

HOW know you that the fourth Chap∣ter ad Ephes. is a perfect patterne of Ec∣clesiasticall Government? Wee have now, neither Apostles, nor Evangelists, nor Prophets, yet are they the chiefe in that patterne: Neither have we there, either Bishop, or Presbyter, or Diaconus, or Catechista, or Lector; and yet are these necessary parts in Ecclesiasticall Govern∣ment; Therefore this Patterne is not perfect, to hold for ever; Neither were there then, any publique Churches, or Pulpits, or Schooles, or Vniversities, &c.

Saint Paul nameth neither Pope, nor Arch-bishop, I grant: and the Church is not governed by names, but by Offices. Every Bishop then was called Papa: And

Anacletus, that was next after Peter, (if there be any weight in his words) nameth Archbishops.

The Second Reason. * 1.2

The Synagogue of the Iewes was a figure of the Church of Christ, and God to the perfection of that Church omit∣ted nothing.

BISHOP IEWELS Answer.

I See not what you would conclude: Perhaps you will say, they had not the names of Pope, or Arch-Bishop: So had they not this name Episcopus in all Mo∣ses Law: yet were not all Priests of like auntiency in government. They had other names that were equi∣valent with Archbishops; as Principes Synagogae, Prin∣cipes Sanctuarij, Principes familiarum Leviticarum, Principes familiarum Sacerdotalium, Principes Sacerdo∣tum, Principes domûs Dei, Pontifex, Summus Pontifex, Summus Sacerdos. Therefore the negative reason is but weake.

Againe, whereas it is said, that to the perfection of the Synagogue there wanted nothing: it may be an∣swered, that to the perfection thereof there wanted many things, as it is knowne and confessed. And as the Synagogue had not the names of Pope and Arch-Bi∣shop; so had it not the name of Apostle, or Evangelist.

The Third Reason. * 1.3

Where the substance of any thing is most perfect, there the accidents be most perfect: But the substance of true Re∣ligion was most perfect in the Primitive Church, and yet there was then no Arch-Bishop. Ergo.

BISHOP IEWELS Answer.

FIRst, this Maxime is not proved: for it may well be doubted whether the most perfect substance hath evermore most perfect accidents. And againe, the sub∣stance of Religion is the same now, that it was then: The difference (if any be) standeth in the accidents, and not in substance.

In the Primitive Church, God raised up Apostles and Prophets, and gave them power extraordinary, as the gift of tongues, the gift of healing, the gift of go∣vernment, &c. In place whereof, he hath now given Vniversities, Schooles, Bishops, Arch. Bishops, &c.

But you may say, There was then no Arch-Bishop: So may you say, that before King Saul there was no King in Israel: So may you say, that before of late times there was neither Duke nor Earle in England: so may you say, that in the Primitive Church there was neither Deane, nor Parson, nor Prebendary; And yet now, both in Ecclesiasticall and civill government, all these are thought necessary.

* 1.4 Last of all, where you say, there was no Arch-Bishop in the Primitive Church, it is written by many, that Saint Paul made Titus Arch Bishop of Creta: * Erasmus saith, Paulus Titum Archiepiscopum Cretae consecravit: And Lyra likewise saith, Paulus instituit Titum Archi∣episcopū Cretensium. If these Authorities like you not, Chrysostome saith, * 1.5 Paulus Tito multorum Episcoporum judicium commisit: Now having the Government of many Bishops, what may we call him but an Arch-Bi∣shop?

The Fourth Reason.

The Ecclesiasticall and civill government may not be con∣founded, * 1.6 or be together in one person: But to be a Cheife, or a Ruler, is a civill power, Ergo, it cannot be exercised by any Ecclesiasticall person.

BISHOP IEWELS Answer.

BOth these governments were confounded in Mo∣ses: Therefore, they may be confounded. And the Priests of Israel had the Iudgement and government of the people. And Saint Augustine was troubled with hearing, and determining of Causes: as appeareth by Possidonius.

And where you say, to be a Chiefe, or a Ruler, is a Civill government: nay in Ecclesiasticall causes it is Ecclesiasticall government, and not civill: And these differences of government may not so unadvisedly be confounded: This is the key of Ecclesiasticall corre∣ction, and belongeth only to the Ecclesiasticall Offi∣cer, and to none other. Hereof Saint Paul saith, Sen••∣rem ne corripueris nisi sub &c. Tradidi illum Satana, &c. This jurisdiction is not civill, but Ecclesiasticall; and therefore may be exercised by any Ecclesiasticall person.

I beseech you take these sudden answers in good part. As for these reasons; in my judgement, they are not made to build up, and they are too weake to pull downe. Stultitia nata est in corde pueri, & virga disci∣plinae fugabit illam. It is but wantonnesse; correction * 1.7 will help it.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Novitio∣rum prima Ratio.
• * 1.2

  Secunda ra∣tio.
• * 1.3

  Tertia ra∣tio.
• * 1.4

  Erasm. in arguments epist. ad Ti∣tum.
• * 1.5

  Chrysost. in 1. cap. Tit.
• * 1.6

  Quarta Ratio.
• * 1.7

  Prov. 22.