Five disputations of church-government and worship

Sect. 3. Some passages here will occasion the Question (as p. 5.) Whether and how far Church Government is jure Divino?] But of this, in the main I am agreed with them that I dispute. To speak further, my own judgement is, 1. That the Spirit of God hath established all the Officers and worship-Ordinances of his Church; and that no new Church-office or Ordinance of worship (as to the substance) may be instituted by man; 2. But that there are many Circumstantials about the Exercise of those Offices and Ordinances, that are not determined particularly by a Law, but are left to humane prudence to determine of, by the General directions of the Law. And so I suppose that Bishops and Presbyters are but one Office, of Gods institution; but in the exercise of this Office if one for order be made a Moderator or President of the rest, or by agreement (upon a disparity of parts or interest) do unequally divide their work between them, in the exercise, it is a thing that may be done, and is fit where the Edification of the Church requireth it, but not a thing that always must be done, nor is of it self a Duty, but a thing indifferent. The following Case therefore I hence resolve.

Sect. 4. Quest. [Whether the Order of subject Presbyters might lawfully be created by Bishops or any humane Power? and whether the Order of Bishops might lawfully be created for the avoiding of Schism by the consent of Presbyters? or Metropolitans by Bishops?]

Answ. If you understand by the word [Order] a distinct Office, none may create any of these but God. But if by [Subject Presbyters] be meant only men of the same Office with Bishops, that do for the Churches benefit subject themselves to the direction or Presidency of another, (upon some disparity in their gifts or the like) in the exercise of that Office, I suppose that this is a thing that by Consent may be lawfully done. And so I verily believe that betimes in the Church it was done, (of which anon.) So if by [Bishops] be meant no distinct Office, but one of the Presbyters chosen from among the rest, to exercise his Ministry in some eminency above the rest, by reason of his greater Gifts, or for Peace and Order, I doubt not but it is a thing that consent may do: (And accordingly the Canon Law defines a Bishop that he is [Unus è Presbyteris, &c.] So if by [a Metropolitan] be not meant another Office, but one in the same Office, by reason of the advantage of his Seat, chosen to some acts of Order for the common benefit, I doubt not but it may be done: but every such Indifferent thing, is not to be made Necessary, statedly and universally to the Church.