Defensive doubts, hopes, and reasons, for refusall of the oath, imposed by the sixth canon of the late synod with important considerations, both for the penning and publishing of them at this time / by John Ley ... ; hereunto is added by the same author, a letter against the erection of an altar, written above five yeares agoe, and a case of conscience, touching the receiving of the sacrament, resolved.

Of Archbishops.

Of Archbishops, though their Authority be grea∣ter, yet as touching the Tenure by Divine Right, our beliefe is lesser: for they that hold Bishops to bee su∣periours to Presbyters by Divine Right (as the Apo∣stles were superiours to the 72. Disciples) doe not for the most part (unlesse they be Papists) allow of Arch∣bishops in that sacred Episcopacy; and even he, who was an Archbishop himselfe, and highly advanced in print the Episcopall degree, hath out of Ignatius ob∣served (and thereby affronted the Papall usurpation) that the twelve were allb 1.1 equall as an Aristocraticall Colledge, no Prince or Monarch ruling over the

rest, as the Romanists pretend and as∣sume in the name of St. Peter; wherein Saintc 1.2 Chrysostome is directly opposite unto them, observing how Saint Peter, in an assembly of the Disciples, doth all by their common consent, nothing by his owne autho∣rity, nothing in a lofty or a Lordly manner. For, that Authority (which they take up as Saint Peters right) his Master and ours thought too much for him, or any one man else; fore-seeing, as the Archbish. of Spalato noted,d 1.3 That a Monarchy in a Church-man would bee apt to breake out into a tyrannie over the Church. And for the tenure of Archiepiscopall authority, wee may beleeve Bishope 1.4 Jewel, where hee saith in answer to Master Harding, that though Primates or Archbishops had authority over the inferiour Bishops, yet they had it but by agreement and custome, neither by Christ, nor by Peter, nor Paul, nor by any right of Gods Word.

Object. If it be objected (as by some it hath been) that though the Apostles had no Archbishops among themselves (who had a priority of Order, and a ma∣jority of Rule above the rest of that fundamentall Function:) yet (in respect of other Bishops constituted by them) they were all Archbishops to those that were under them; It may be answered,

Answ. 1. That the right of Episcopacy hath not been so well cleared by Scripture, that it should bee taken for an undoubted ground, whereon to erect an Archiepiscopall power: for, there is so much diffi∣culty and dispute about that, as makes it to us uncapa∣ble of the assurance of an Oath.

Secondly, our Protestant Divines (when the Pa∣pists

plead for Peters Episcopall, or Archiepiscopall supremacy at Rome, to maintaine the usurpations of the Pope upon all other Churches) answered that (as we conceive, according to the truth) that to bee a Bi∣shop, or Archbishop, and an Apostle, imports a re∣pugnancy: for both Bishops and Archbishops were confined to a certaine compasse for their Authority; but the Apostles were of an unlimited liberty and power, both for planting and governing Churches all over the world: wherein they had every one of them such an equall and universall interest, thatf 1.5 no Apostle had any part of the world to himselfe, wherein the rest had not an Apostolicall and Pastorall right as well as he; which is not, nor can be so in Epi∣scopall, or Archiepiscopall callings.

Object. If the opinion ofg 1.6 Estius be interposed, viz. That Archiepiscopacy was founded, when Timothy was made Bishop of Ephesus, the Metropolis of Asia, wherein he hadh 1.7 many Bishops under his Jurisdiction: that (to say nothing of what is said of the unbishoping of Ti∣mothy and Titus, in a particular booke of that title) being brought in without proofe, will bee as readilyk 1.8 denied by some, as it is easily affirmed by any: and if we should say, that untill Pope Zepherinus (in the third Century) named himselfe anl 1.9 Archbishop, or untill the reigne of Constantine (as a very learnedm 1.10 Writer hath observed) there is no mention of an Archbishop: it will not bee easie (perhaps) for any (by legitimate Testimony) to bring in an instance, to disprove the

observation in the Easterne Church; and for the We∣sterne, it came later thither, as the Sun-setting cometh after the Sun-rising. And Filasacus a Divine of Paris saith,n 1.11 It is not used in these parts, untill the first Ma∣tiscon Councell, scil. anno 587.

Which may bee to us the more probable, because we have had experience (in our owne time of ao 1.12 principall point of now-Archiepiscopall Government, the Pre∣sidentship of a Provinciall Synod) without an Archbishop. So was it in the yeare 1603. when the Bishop of London was Pre∣sident of the Synod then assembled: Archbish.p 1.13 Whit∣gift (against Master Cartwright) endeavoureth to maintaine, That the office of an Archbishop was in use in the Apostles time, and by theirq 1.14 appointment in an Apostolicall Canon; and thatr 1.15 Titus was an Archbi∣shop over Crete; ands 1.16 Dionysius Areopagita (the Scho∣lar of S. Paul) Archbishop of Athens. But his proofes (as some of us upon examination have found them) are too low, and too flat for the height and compasse of the Arch of his Asseveration, especially as applyed to the state and authority of Archbishops in the Church of England, the prelation particularly, oppo∣sed by Master Cartwright, who (conceiving both the authority and title of an Archbishop by Scripture to belong peculiarly to Christ, and not finding the namet 1.17 Archbishop there) taketh up the title Archshepheard, 1 Pet. 5.4. as equivalent to it.

The greatest Antiquity, and best Authority that

wee find for that title, is that whichu 1.18 Archbishop Whitgift citeth out of Master Fox, viz. That in the time of Eleutherius, an. 180. there were in Britaine 28. head Priests, which in the time of Paganisme they called Flamines; and three Archpriests among them, which were called Archiflamines, as Judges over the rest: these 28. Flamines (upon the conversion of the Britains) were turned to 28. Bishops, and the three Archiflamines to three Archbishops: which, if it be true, yet it is far below that which is alledged for the calling of Arch∣bishops; and yet more ancient then honourable, for the conformity to Pagan preheminence.

Nor will it serve to say (as Popex 1.19 Eugenius the fourth said of the name Cardinall) that though it were not ex∣presly mentioned in the beginning of the Christian Church, yet the office was in∣stituted by Saint Peter, and his succes∣sours. For, not to insist upon the name Cardinall, of which the saying of the Pope is an unprobable ficti∣on, superiority among Bishops is to be reduced rather to a secular, then to a sacred Originall. For our Arch∣bishop of Canterbury that now is, saith,y 1.20 It was insinu∣ated, if not ordered, that honours of the Church should follow honours of the State; as appeareth by the Canons of the Councell ofz 1.21 Chalcedon, and Antioch. It was thought fit therefore (though as Sainta 1.22 Cyprian speaks) there bee one Episcopacy, the calling of a Bishop bee one and the same; that yet among Bishops there should be a certaine subor dination and subjection: the Empire there∣fore being cast into severall divisions (which they then

called Diocesses) every Diocesse contained severall Provinces, every Province severall Bishops: the chiefe of a Diocesse in that large sense was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and sometimes a Patriarch, the chiefe of the Province a Me∣tropolitan, next the Bishops in their severall Diocesses (as we now use the word.) Among these there was ef∣fectuall subjection grounded upon Canon, and positive Law, in their severall Quarters; all the difference there was but Honorary, not Authoritative. So farre he; where, though he name the title Bishop, Patriarch, and Metropolitan, hee doth not mention the title Archbi∣shop.

And though hee grant, thatb 1.23 the Church of Rome hath had, and hath yet a more powerfull principality, then any other Church; yet he saith, shee hath not that power from Christ. The Romane Patriarch by Ecclesi∣asticall constitutions (saith hee) might perhaps have a primacy of order; but for principality of power they were all equall, as the Apostles were before them: and hee might have said so much as well of Bishops, as of Pa∣triarchs; for, except for Ecclesiasticall Constitutions, and positive Lawes, they are not subordinate one to another: neither the authority nor title then of Metro∣politan or Archbishop is taken to bee so ancient, or war∣rantable by the Word of God, as that of the Bishops, in the judgement of such as are the dearest friends to Prelaticall dignity. Yet, as wee deny not, but that an inequality betwixt Bishops and Presbyters is (asc 1.24 Cha∣mier confesseth) most ancient, and very neere the Apo∣stles

times; so wee yeeld it as probable, that Archbi∣shops are very ancient also, and as certaine, that there have been, and are very many, as worthy to be Arch∣bishops, as others to be Bishops: and that there have been of that elevation men of as eminent desert for learning and devotion, both in ancient and later times, as any that have lived in the same Ages with them; but in regard of more doubt of their Authenticke tenure, then of that of Bishops (though that also bee very much doubted of) wee have the lesse heart to sweare to Archiepiscopall preheminence.

Object. If it bee said, thatd 1.25 Archbishops were set up for the keeping out of Schisme among Bishops, as Bishops for that end were set over Presbyters, we doe not gainsay it; but say, that our Doubt is not now of the politicke end, but of the originall right of their exaltation: and withall we may note, that this Argu∣ment, drawne from the prevention of Schisme, may climbe too high, and indeed it hath done so; for, at the next step, it lifteth up Patriarchs above Archbi∣shops; and at the next after that, a Pope above Patri∣archs: and all this upon the same pretence of preven∣ting of Schisme; but the further it hath advanced, the worse it hath succeeded for the welfare of the Church, both in respect of Heresie and Schisme: for Bellarmine saith,e 1.26 All the Patriarchall Churches (ex∣cept the Romane) for a long time have had Bishops which were manifest Heretickes.

If his observation be as true for the most (which for a great part we may beleeve, though we dare not take it upon his bare word) as his exception is false for the Romane Patriarch: for he is the most Hereticall and

Schismaticall Prelate in the world, wee can have no great confidence in the end [the keeping out of Schisme] unlesse the meanes, the raising up of Bishops to that height, be found to bee warranted by the Word of God; yet wee make great difference betwixt the Popes claime of universall and unlimited Supremacy upon this ground, and that of Archbishops and Patri∣archs confined within the reach, and under the checke and restraint of a temporall Potentate.

For the other offices of Government named in the Oath, or involved in the &c. there is none that plead∣eth a Divine Right; and we may say of most of them, asf 1.27 Bishop Downham doth of some of them, As for ordinary Vicars (that is, Vicars which are Ecclesiasticall Judges in ordinary) Chancellours, or Commissaries (scil. of the Laity) the Bishops in these times (i. of Saint Au∣gustine and Ambrose) had none, not so much as the Steward of the Church might bee a Lay-man. They neither did then, nor rightly could they claime a Di∣vine and Apostolicall right for their callings: which wee may the rather say, for the saying of Anacletus, who (about the yeare 103. being Bishop of Rome) hath in one of his Epistles written, That there were but two orders ordained by our Saviour, viz. of Bishops and Priests, nor were any more either orders or degrees, either appointed by God, or taught by the Apostles: whereof though many doubt, in regard of that he affirmeth of the originall of Bishops; yet they will easily assent to his deniall of the rest, and what their right is, either by custome, or humane constitution, we are very doubt∣full: and, while we doubt, we dare not sweare.

Notes

• b 1.1

  Abundè probavi Chri∣stum suam Ec∣clesiam Apo∣stolis omni∣bus aequè commendâsse, eosque ad hoc necessariâ potestare aequè omnes adornâsse confentit. Ignat. episi. ad Philadelph. dum ad Apostolos veluti ad Presbyterium, Ecclesiae Collegium, recurri postulat; Collegium verò Aristocraticum nemo ignorat. Spalat. de Repub Eccles. lib. 1. c. 12. pag. 137. The Archbish. that now is saith the like of the Ari∣stocraticall Government, and equality of the Apostles, and quoteth Bellarm. de Ro. Po. l. 1. c. 9. to the same purpose, making account his words are a confession of the truth a∣gainst his owne side. So in relat. of his conference. pag. 168, 200, 202, 380. See Bishop Hall of Episcopacy. part. 2. pag. 13.
• c 1.2

  Jam & illud considera, quàm Petrus agit omnia ex communi Discipulorum sententia, nihil au∣thoritate suâ, nihil cum Imperio. Chrysost. bom. 3. in Act. Apost. cap. 1. tom. 3. col. 459.
• d 1.3

  Spalat. de Repub. Eccles. l. 1. c. 12. p. 138.
• e 1.4

  Bish Jewels defence of his Apolog part. 2. c. 3. divis. 5. pag. 110.
• f 1.5

  Non erat ea facta divisio (scil. inter Apostolos) ut alter ab alteri∣us abstineret Apostolatu. Baron. Annal. tom. 1. an. 51. 27. col. 424.
• g 1.6

  Estius com∣ment. in 1 Tim. 5.19. col. 809.
• h 1.7

  Bish. Hall reckons 36. Bi∣shopricks un∣der Ephes. part. 2. p. 24.43. See Will. Synops. papis. controv. 5. in append. ad quaest. 3. p. 273.
• k 1.8

  Didoclau. Al∣tare Damascen. pag. 175.
• l 1.9

  Cent. 3. c. 10. col. 275.
• m 1.10

  Archiepi∣scopi & Patri∣archae in usum abierunt, quo∣rum ante Constantini tempora altum silentium. Dan. Chamier. de oecumen. pontif. lib. 10. cap. 6. tom. 2. pag. 353.20.
• n 1.11

  Filasac. de sacr. ep. Anth. ch. 19. sect. 1. Concil. Matisc. 1. Can. 4.
• o 1.12

  Doct. Saravia saith, the Assem∣blies of the Presbyterians are no Synods but Conventicles, because he readeth not of any Synod with∣out an Archbishop. Sarav. de Tri∣plic. ep. q. 3. p. 90.
• p 1.13

  Archb. Whit∣gifl in his re∣ply to Master Cartwr. p. 310, 313, 427, 432.
• q 1.14

  Can. 33. (or 34. as some ac∣compt) p. 470. Archb. Whitgi.
• r 1.15

  Ibid. pag. 400.
• s 1.16

  Pag. 470.
• t 1.17

  The title Archbishop, is proper to Christ, as ap∣peareth by Saint Peter, where he calleth him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is an Archshepheard, or Archbi∣shop; for Bishop and Shepheard are all one. Ibid. p. 300.
• u 1.18

  Archb. Whit∣gifts reply to Mast. Cartwr. pag. 323. ex M^r. Fox Martyrol. tom. 1. p. 146.
• x 1.19

  Eugen. 4. Epist. ad Episcop. Can∣tuarien. ait, Cardinalium nomen non fuisse in principio nascentis Eccles. expressum, munus tamen & officium à B. Petro & ejus succes∣soribus evidenter crat institutum. Fran. Long. annot. in 2. Concil. Rom. pag. 201.
• y 1.20

  Archb. Laud in his relat. of his confer. pag. 176.
• z 1.21

  Concil. Chal∣ced. Can. 9. & Act. 16.
• a 1.22

  Cypr. de sim∣plic. Praelat. Episcopatus unus est.
• b 1.23

  Archb. Laud ubi supra. pag. 168.
• c 1.24

  Inaequalita∣tem inter Epi∣scopum & Presbyterum esse vetustissimam, & vicinam Apostolorum temporibus ultrò fatemur. Fr. Chamier. de oecumen. pontif. l. 10. c. 6. tom. 2. p. 85.3. col. 2.
• d 1.25

  Archb. Whit∣gift in his de∣fence of the answ. to the Admon. p. 386.
• e 1.26

  Omnes Ec∣clesiae Patriar∣chales (praeter Romanam) ha∣buerunt per longa tempora manifestos Haereticos. Bel. de notis Eccl. 4. not. 5. c. 8. p. 74.
• f 1.27

  Bish. Downh. in the defence of his consecr. Serm. l. 1. c. 8. pag. 185.