The humble answer of the Divines attending the Honourable Commissioners of Parliament, at the…The humble answer of the Divines attending the Honorable Commissioners of Parliament, at the…

For Clemens his Testimony, which your Majesty conceiveth to be made use of, as our old fallacy, from the promiscuous use of the words to infer the indistinction of the things; we refer our selves to himself in his Epistle, now in all mens hands, whose Testimony we think cannot be eluded, but by the old Artifice, of hiding the Bishop under the Presbyters name: for they that have read his whole Epistle, and have considered, that himself is ⟨p. 36⟩called a Bishop, may doubt of Clemens opinion, concerning the distinct offices of Bishops and Presbyters, or rather not doubt of it, if only his one Epistle, may be impanelled upon the Inquest. Concerning Ignatius his Epistles, your Majesty is pleased to use some earnestness of expression, charging some of late, without any regard of ingenuity or truth, out of their partial disaffection to Bishops, to have endeavoured to discredit his writings. One of those cited by us, cannot (as we conceive) be suspected of disaffection to Bishops; and there are great Arguments drawn out of those Epistles themselves, betraying their insincerity, adulterate mixtures, and interpolations; So that Ignatius cannot be distinctly known in Ignatius. And if we take him in gross, we make him the Patron (as Baronious, and the rest of the Popish writers do) of such rites and observations, as the Church in his time cannot be thought to have owned. He doth indeed give testimony to the Prelacy of a Bishop above a Presbyter, that which may justly render him suspected, is that he gives too much. Honour (saith he) the Bishop as Gods high Priest, and after him you must honour the King. He was indeed a holy Martyr, and his writings have suffered Martyrdom, aswell as he; Corruptions could not go currant, but under the credit of worthy Names.

For Clemens his Testimonie, which your Majestie conceiveth to be made use of, as our old fallacie, from the promiscuous use of the words to inferre the indistinction of the things; wee referre our selves to himselfe in his Epistle, now in all mens hands, whose Testimonie wee thinke cannot be eluded, but by the old Artifice, of hiding the Bishop under the Presbyters name: for they that have read his whole Epistle, and have considered, that himselfe is ⟨p. 36⟩called a Bishop, may doubt of Clemens opinion, concerning the distinct offices of Bishops and Presbyters, or rather not doubt of it, if onely his one Epistle, may be impaneld upon the Inquest. Concerning Ignatius his Epistles, your Majesty is pleased to use some earnestnesse of expression, charging some of late, without any regard of ingenuity or truth, out of their partiall disaffection to Bishops, to have endeavoured to discredit his writings. One of those cited by us, cannot (as we conceive) be suspected of disaffection to Bishops; and there are great Arguments drawn out of those Epistles themselves, betraying their insincerity, adulterate mixtures, and interpolations; So that Ignatius cannot be distinctly known in Ignatius. And if we take him in grosse, we make him the Patron (as Baronious, and the rest of the Popish writers do) of such rites and observations, as the Church in his time cannot be thought to have owned. He doth indeed give tetimonie to the Prelacy of a Bishop above a Presbyter, that which may justly render him suspected, is that he gives too much. Honour (saith he) the Bishop as Gods high Priest, and after him you must honour the King. He was indeed a holy Martyr, and his writings have suffered Martyrdom, aswell as he; Corruptions could not go currant, but under the credit of worthy Names.