stand the true meaning of the jus divinum of episcopacy; or, if they did, whether they could possibly be so absurd as to raise so senseless and inconsequent inferences upon it?

5. Whether there be any question at all in the fifth question; since the Remonstrant himself hath so fully cleared this point, professing to hold episcopacy to be of apostolical, and in that right, divine institution?

6. Whether master Beza have not heard soundly of his distinction of the three kinds of episcopacy, in the full and learned answer of Saravia; and whether he might not have been better advised than in that conceit of his to cross all reverend antiquity; and whether the painter that dressed up his picture after the fancy of every passenger do not more fully resemble those that frame their discipline according to the humour of their people, varying their projects every day, than those which hold them constantly to the only ancient and apostolical form?

7. Whether it were not fit that we also should speak as the ancient fathers did, according to the language of their times; and whether those fathers could not better understand and interpret their own meaning in the title of episcopacy than these partial and not over-judicious answerers; and whether they have not clearly explicated themselves in their writings to have spoken properly and plainly to the sense now enforced?

8. Whether presbyters can without sin arrogate unto themselves the exercise of the power of public church government, where bishops are set over them to rule and order the affairs both of them and the church; and whether our Saviour, when he gave to Peter the promise of the keys, did therein intend to give it in respect of the power of public jurisdiction to any other save the apostles, and their successors the bishops; and whether ever any father or doctor of the church, till this present age, held that presbyters were the successors to the apostles, and not to the seventy disciples rather?

9. Whether ever any bishops assumed to themselves power temporal to be barons, and to sit in parliament as judges, and in court of star-chamber, &c, or whether they be not called by his majesty's writ and royal authority to these services; and whether the spiritual power which they exercise in ordaining, silencing, &c, be any other than was by the apostles delegated to the first bishops of the church, and constantly exercised by their holy successors in all ages, especially by Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustin,

and the rest of that sacred order; men which had as little to do with antichrist as our answerers have with charity?

10. Whether the answerers have not just cause to be ashamed of patronizing a noted heretic, Aërius, in that for which he was censured of the ancient saints and fathers of the church; and whether the whole church of Christ, ever since his time till this age, have not abandoned those very errors concerning the equality of bishops and presbyters which they now presume to maintain?

11. Whether the great apostasy of the church of Rome do or did consist in maintaining the order of government set by the apostles themselves; and whether all the churches in the whole Christian world, even those that are professedly opposite to the church of Rome, do let in antichrist by the door of their discipline, since they all maintain episcopacy no less constantly than Rome itself?

12. Whether, if episcopacy be, through the munificence of good princes, honoured with a title of dignity and largeness of revenues, it ought to be ever the more declined; and whether themselves, if they did not hope to carry some sway in the presbytery, would be so eager in crying up that government; and whether, if there were not a maintenance annexed, they would not hide themselves, and jeopard their ears rather than mancipate themselves to the charge of souls?

13. Whether there be no other apparent causes to be given for the increase of popery and superstition in the kingdom besides episcopacy, which hath laboured strongly to oppose it; and whether the multitude of sects and professed slovenliness in God's service in too many have not been guilty of the increase of profaneness amongst us?

14. Why should England, one of the most famous churches of Christendom, separate itself from that form of government which all churches through the whole Christian world have ever observed, and do constantly and uniformly observe and maintain? and why should not rather other less noble churches conform to that universal government which all other Christians besides do gladly submit unto?

15. Why should the name of bishops, which hath been for this 1600 years appropriated, in a plain contradistinction, to the governors of the church, come now to be communicated to presbyters, which never did all this while so much as pretend to it; and if in ancient times they should have done it, could not have escaped

a most severe censure? And, shortly, whether, if we will allow you to be bishops, all will not be well?

16. Whether, since both God hath set such a government in his church as episcopacy, and the laws of this land have firmly established it, it can be lawful for you to deny your subjection unto it; and whether it were not most lawful and just to punish your presumption and disobedience in framing so factious a question?

And thus I hope you have a sufficient answer to your bold and unjust demands, and to those vain cavils which you have raised against the Humble Remonstrance.'

God give you wisdom to see the truth, and grace to follow it! Amen.

TO THE POSTSCRIPT.

THE best "beauty" that you could "have added to your discourse," brethren, had been honesty and truth, both in your allegations of testimonies and inferences of argumentation. In both which, I must needs say, and I speak it in the presence of God, to whom I must shortly give an account, that I never saw any writer that would dare to profess Christian sincerity, so foully to overlash; as if ye made no conscience by what means you uphold a side or win a proselyte. God touch your hearts with a true sense of that whereof you cannot be but in this discourse convinced!

Now you think to garnish your work with a goodly pasquin, borrowed, for a great part, out of " Sion's Plea," and the "Breviate;" consisting of a rhapsody of histories "concerning the pride, insolence, treachery, cruelty, and all other the deadly sins of popish prelates, but especially of those who swayed the see of Canterbury in those days of darkness and Romish tyranny." Whereto, I suppose, you expect no answer, as being a thing utterly unconcerning us; and that whereof I might say, setting aside the ill intention of an application, as Huntingdoniensis said of the cardinal's adultery, Celari non potuit, negari non debuit. But tell me, brethren, what can be your drift in this your tedious relation? Is there any man that offers to undertake their B b

BP. HALL, VOL. IX.

patrocination? or is it any advantage to you to make their memory yet more odious? Let them have been as foul as ill-will can make them; let them have been, in their times, devils incarnate; what is that to us?

They were bishops," you say. True; but they were popish bishops; limbs of that body whose head we abjure. The fault of their wickedness was in the popery, not in the episcopacy; in the men, not the calling. Why should you think to choke us with these hateful instances? If I should go about to rake together all the insolencies, murders, incests, treasons, and villainies, that have been done by popish presbyters in the time of that lawless ignorance and superstition, would you think these could be any blemish to you? Why will you then be so miserably uncharitable as to cast upon us the crimes of those whom we equally condemn, and to feoff their faults upon their chairs? What one profession is there in all mankind which, if we should go about to ransack, would not yield some persons extremely vicious? Shall the vocation be condemned for the crimes of the men?

At last, to make up the mouth of your admirable charity, you tell us of the gracious "practices of the prelates, from the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign to this present day;" whose "great design," you say, still hath been "to hinder reformation, to further popery and Arminianism, to beat down preaching, to persecute zealous professors," and some such other noble projects of episcopal piety.

Tell me, brethren, as you will answer it before the just Judge of all the world, have these been the main designs of bishops? Are they all guilty of these woful enormities, or are they not? If ye say they are, the world will cry shame on your falsehood: if they are not, the world will cry no less shame on your injustice in taxing all for the fault of some.

What are these the only remarkable works that your eyes could discover to fall from the hands of bishops? Could you see no colleges, no hospitals built? no churches re-edified? no learned volumes written? no heresies confuted? no seduced persons reclaimed? no hospitality kept? no great offenders punished? no disorders corrected? no good offices done for the public? no care of the peace of the church? no diligence in preaching? no holiness in living? Truly, brethren, I can say no more, but that the fault is in your eyes, and not in your object; wipe them, and look

better: yea, I beseech God to open them rather, that they may see good as well as evil.

As for that base and scurrilous proverb, to which you say it is now come (whereas the world knows it is elder than your grandsires, and was taken up in the popish times), it were more fit for a scurra in trivio, or some ribald upon an ale-bench, than for grave divines.

How easy were it for me to reckon up an hundred of such spiteful adages, which vulgar envy hath been wont to cast upon the rest of the clergy, worthy of nothing but scorn! and so had this been, if your wit and charity had not been alike. But surely, brethren, if" whatsoever is spoiled, they say, The bishop's foot hath been in it;"" I doubt not but they will say, The bishop's foot hath been in your book; for I am sure it is quite spoiled by this just confutation. After your own pottage (for your proverb sapit ollam), you tell us of Bonner's "broth;" I should have too much wondered at this conclusion, but that I hear it is the fashion in some countries to send in their kail in the last service; and this, it seems, is the manner amongst our Smectymnuans.

Well, to shut up all, let them of their Bonner's "beef" and "broth" make what brewis they please for their credulous guests. Learned and worthy doctor Moulin shall tell them, that the restoration of the English church and eversion of popery, next under God and our kings, is chiefly to be ascribed and owed to the learning and industry of our bishops; some whereof, being crowned with martyrdom, subscribed the gospel with their blood. Thus he. Neither doubt I, but that many of them, if occasion were offered, would be ready to imitate them in those red cha

racters.

In the meantime I beseech the God of heaven to humble you in the sight and sense of your own grievous uncharitableness; and to put at last into your hearts and tongues the counsels of peace. AMEN.

a P. Moulin. Epist. iii. ad episcop. pue episcoporum doctrinæ et industriæ." Winton., &c. ["Instaurationem ec- -See Opusc. quædam posthuma Lanclesiæ Anglicanæ et eversionem papis- celotti episc. Wint. Lond. 1629. p. 179.] mi post Deum et reges debere præci