SECT. IX.

HEre saith the Remonstrant,*we beat the aire. And yet not the aire, but the Remonstrant too into the confession of that which would not be confest heretofore by such of thē especially as have contended for such a Bishop as exercised spirituall jurisdiction out of his owne peculiarly demandated authority. If iurisdiction exercised from an authority peculiarly demandated, how not solely?* Well, now it is granted that this sole is cryed downe by store of antiquity. So then here we doe not fal∣sifie,* and it is granted that Presbyters have and ought to have and exercise a jurisdiction within their owne charge. But here the Remonstrant will distinguish againe, it Page  101 is in foro conscientiae. But consider Reader, whether this be the jurisdiction here under dispute. Whether that store of antiquity which he confesseth to cry downe sole jurisdiction, speake of a jurisdiction in foro consci∣entiae, as his false Margent saith, Clem Alexan. (whom we cited) doth. But indeed this distinction of the Re∣monstrant of a jurisdiction in foro interno and in foro externo, is like that distinction of Reflexivè and Archi∣podialiter. For all humane jurisdiction is in foro externo. If preaching the word (which is especially aim'd at by the Remonstrant, be an exercise of jurisdiction, Then he that hath the Bishops licence to preach in the Dio∣cesse, hath power to exercise jurisdiction through the Diocesse, and an University preacher throughout the whole Kingdome. Away with these toyes. He grants againe, that Presbyters ought to be consulted with in the great affaires of the Church, but doe our quotations prove no more? Bishops had their Ecclesiasticall Councell of Pres∣byters, with whom they did consult in the greatest matters: and was it onely in the greatest matters? Is this all that Cyprian saith? All that the Councell of Carthage saith when it determines ut Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentia Clericorum; alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi, nisi Clericorum praesentia confirmetur.* Doth this speak onely of great matters; when it saith Nullius causam audiat? Is this onely of a jurisdiction the Pres∣byters had in foro conscientiae? Were Bishops with their Consistory wont to sit to heare▪ and judge causes in foro conscientiae? good Reader judge of this mans truth and ingenuity, who not being able to divert the stroke of that Antiquity we brought to manifest a difference betweene ours and the former Bishops in the exercise Page  102 of their jurisdiction, would cast a mist before his Rea∣ders eyes, and perswade him he grants the whole se∣ction, when indeed hee grants nothing, onely seekes to slide away in the darke.

But our Bishops have their Deanes and Chapters (say you) and the lawes of our Church frequently make that use of them. Yes you have Deanes and Chapters, but who knowes not that they have a jurisdiction distinct from the Bishops, in which the Bishop hath nothing to doe with theirs, nor they with his. And the Bishops also de∣rive the exercise of jurisdiction to others (we know it too well) to Chancellours, Commissaries, Officials, and other of their underlings, even to the commanding of Christs Ministers to denounce their censures without any discerning what equity is in the cause. And what advise or assistance of Ministers is required, appeares by the very stile of your excommunications. G. R. Doctor of Law, Commissary, &c. to all Rectors, &c. For as much as we proceeding rightly, &c. have adjudged all and every one whose names are under-written to be excommu∣nicated. We doe therefore commit to you, &c. to denounce openly under paine and perill, &c. Given under our Seale such a day, &c. Let any footsteps of such a power be shewed in antiquity.

Presbyters he grants had their votes in Provinciall sy∣nods: we from good authority say more, they had their votes in all ordinary Iudicatures.

But after all these grants,* which are as good as no∣thing; now he comes to plead his owne. We justly say that the superiority of jurisdiction is so in the Bishop, as that Presbyters neither may, nor did exercise it without him? to what purpose is this? if the Remonstrant Page  103 speake of Scripture times: We have proved there was no superiority in them: if of latter times, it is not to the question: wee are proving Bishops never exercised jurisdiction without their Presbyters, as ours doe. He puts us to prove Presbyters exercised jurisdiction without Bishops, quam iniquè?

But the exercise of externall jurisdiction is derived from, by, and under the Bishop: No, neither from, by, nor under the Bishop, but from God, who hath made them over∣seers and rulers, and by the same Ecclesiasticall au∣thority that hath made you Bishops: and under Bi∣shops not in respect of divine power, but (if at all) in respect of Ecclesiasticall Canons onely. Your Timothy and Titus we shall meet in due place. Your Ignatius and the rest of your testimonies you could produce would (as you say truely) but surfeit the readers eyes,* unlesse you could bring them to prove, that Bishops did and might exercise sole jurisdiction. Onely because you so triumph in our supposed scapes; let us intreat you, or the reader for you to looke upon your cited Councell of Antioch 24, 25, Canon; where you say the Bishop hath power of those things that belong to the Church,* and see whether that speakes one word of jurisdiction: or be not wholy to be understood, of the distribution of the goods of the Church, as both the instance given in the Canon, and Zonaras on that place manifest.

One shift yet the Remonstrant hath more: and that is to tell us, that this joynt government was but occasionall and temporary in times of persecution.* But when a gene∣rall peace had blessed them, and they had a concurrence of soveraigne and subordinate authority with them, they be∣gan so much to •emit this care of conjoyning their forces, as Page  104 they supposed to finde lesse need of it. Doctor Downham to whom hee referres in the page before, assignes other reasons. Namely Presbyters desiring their ease and Scho∣lasticall quietnesse (which he saith and proves not) and also the Bishops desiring to rule alone:* which we finde to be the true cause by experience. For if the Bishops be of the Remonstrants mind, perswaded that the more fre∣quent communicating of all the important businesse of the Church, whether censures or determinations with those grave assistants, which in the eye of the Law are designed to this purpose, were a thing not onely unprejudiciall to the honour of Episcopacy, but behovefull to the Church. Why should not the Bishops doe it? save onely, that their ambitious desires of ruling alone swayes them against their owne judgement, and the determinations of the law. But indeed if this communicating of all the im∣portant businesse of the Church with those grave as∣sistants you speake of or with the Presbyters of the whole Diocesse, if you will, be onely an assuming them into the fellowship of consulting and delibera∣ting without any decisive suffrage, leaving the Bishop to follow or not to follow their advise; this is but a meere cosenage of the reader, and doth not hinder the sole power of Episcopall jurisdiction. And this is all that Downam grants lib. 1. c. 7. p. 161. where he saith that Bishops doe assume Presbyters for advise and di∣rection, as a Prince doth his Counsellors, not as a Con∣sull doth his Senators who are cojudges with the Consul. And this we perceive the Remonstrant well likes of, as that which makes much for the honour of their function.

And now sir,* you see that we have not fished all night, Page  105 and caught nothing: wee have caught your sole jurisdi∣ction: and might have caught your selfe, were you not such a Proteus, such a Polypus to shift your selfe into all formes and Colours. Having proved that Bishops in all times, succeeding the Apostles, had Presbyters joyned with them in the exercise of their jurisdiction; and that our Bishops have none, is more evident then that it needs proofe. This is more to you then Baculus in Angulo: it cannot but be Spina in oculis, & Sagittain visceribus, a thorne in your eye, and an arrow in your heart, convincing you to your griefe, that the Bishops you plead for, and the Bishops of former times are two.