to comprehend the High Priests whom he does not expresly mention And probably it was in imitation of the Hellenist Jews that many of the Primitive Christian Writers distinguish'd the Clergy into two Ranks and to make them speak consistent with themselves we need only grant that two different Orders by reason of some general agreement between them are contain'd in one of the Branches of the Distinctions which they use This one thing being consider'd may answer a great part of Blondel's Apology And it shews that if nothing else hinders Clemens might comprehend all the Ruling Officers of the Church under the Name of Bishops that being a word which at that time was of a general signification yet some of them might be Supreme and others Subordinate to them He might call them indifferently Bishops or Presbyters yet some of them might be Prelats and the rest of an inferior Rank and under their Authority But supposing what for my part I am inclin'd to believe that all the Bishops mention'd by Clemens were mere Presbyters I know not what service this can do you For he intimates that there were Officers distinct from them and superior to them And only to these Renowned Men as he calls them and the Apostles whom he joyns with them he ascribes the Power of Ordination which hath been the Prerogative of the Bishops ever since his days 'T is true it may seem that there was no Bishop at Corinth when he sent this Epistle thither which was before the Destruction of Jerusalem But if the See was vacant at that time it might be fill'd before the first Century was expir'd Certain it is that about the middle of the following Age Primus was Bishop of Corinth by Succession as you may learn from Hegesippus And if you enquire into the Original of that Succession Tertullian will lead you to it for he places at Corinth one of the Chairs of the Apostles It was in another of them that S. Clemens himself sate who is the Author of this Epistle He was a Bishop or an Apostle as he is styl'd by Clemens Alexandrinus He is mentioned in the Table of the Roman Apostles which was taken by Mabillon out of a Book of Canons in the Abbey of Corbie and which amounts to the same thing he is reckon'd in all the Catalogues that are extant of the Roman Bishops S. Irenaeus who liv'd near his time informs us that he was Bishop of Rome The same is attested by Tertullian and Origen by Eusebius and Epiphanius by Optatus and Jerom by Augustin and many others So that we have as great certainty of it as there is that Clemens writ the Epistle which bears his Name And if there be no ground to doubt of it as I think there is not his silence concerning a Bishop of Corinth is not so cogent an Argument against Episcopacy as his own Example is for it there not being the least cause to believe that so Excellent a Person would have born an Office which himself condemn'd or believ'd to be sinful CHAP. XI After the Apostles Decease the Churches were govern'd by single Persons who were distinguish'd by the Name of Bishops IN what hath been already said of Episcopal Government I have for the most part limited my Discourse to the first Century and only touch'd on it incidentally as continued in succeeding times I come now more fully to shew that after the Apostles decease the Churches or Dioceses were govern'd by Single Persons who were then distinguish'd by the Name of Bishops This appears from many passages in the Epistles of S. Ignatius as also from the Fragments that remain of Hegesippus and Dionysius of Corinth of Polycrates and others who flourish'd in the second Century In the third Origen acquaints us it was the custom to have no more than One Bishop of a Church and this he plainly intimates where he tells us expresly that in every Church there were Two For according to him one of them was visible and the other invisible One of them a Man and the other an assisting Angel 'T is true near the beginning of that Age Narcissus had Alexander for his Colleague in the Government of the Church of Jerusalem But as he was the first we meet with in Ecclesiastical History that after the Apostles days admitted of a Coadjutor so his Case was Extraordinary not only by reason of his extreme Old Age but also because as Eusebius informs us his breach of the Churches Rule was dispenc'd with by Divine Revelation The Rule was that of One Church or Diocese there might be no more than one Bishop On which principle Cyprian and Cornelius argued against the Novatians And the Council of Nice meant the same thing in prohibiting a plurality of Bishops in one City and did not thereby introduce an Innovation but confirm an useful part of the Ancient Discipline It was high time to do this for when Epiphanius speaking of Alexandria says that it never had two Bishops as other Cities he intimates that in the days of Alexander who was present in the Nicene Council some Cities in Egypt had a plurality of Bishops and if so it was a thing fit to be repress'd as being contrary to the Primitive Custom a Custom so avow'd and which had been so well establish'd that when the Roman Confessors abandon'd the Schismaticks by whose arts they had been deluded and made their submission to Cornelius when they acknowledged their errors before him with great humility they profess'd they could not charge themselves with the ignorance of this That as there is one God one Christ and one Holy Spirit so there ought to be but one Bishop of a Catholick Church Yet a doubt still remains on what account it was that other Cities differ'd from Alexandria in such a manner as Epiphanius suggests And some are of opinion that the reason of it was because some Catholick Bishops assum'd Coadjutors after the example of Narcissus But I rather think it proceeded from the Meletians of whom he discourses in this place and who with a mighty industry set up their Schismatical Bishops and Assemblies At Alexandria it seems they could not carry on their designs so successfully as in other parts of Egypt till as Epiphanius relates the matter they took their advantage of the death of Alexander and the absence of Achillas his Successon and then in opposition to him they made Theonas their Bishop and at Alexandria it self erected Altar against Altar But if you are not mistaken these Meletians reform'd a great abuse at Alexandria by that action For there you say the departure from the Primitive Institution of having divers Bishops of one City began as we are told by Danaeus who citeth Epiphanius and might have cited others Thousands doubtless Sir he might have cited to as much purpose that is to testifie such things as never enter'd
support his Opinion which is oppos'd by the whole current of Antiquity His Friend Walo Messalinus was more cautious who acknowledges that the distinction of the Orders of Bishops and Presbyters was most Ancient and only requires that the Apostles times should be excepted and yet his demand is too extravagant For the Fathers generally believ'd that there was such a distinction in their days and that by their appointment in Churches of their own plantation This may appear from what has been said already and it may be farther confirm'd from Tertullian who thus upbraids the Hereticks with their Novelty and confutes their pretences to Tradition Let them declare says he the Originals of their Churches Let them shew an Order of their Bishops flowing by Succession in such a manner from the beginning that their first Bishop had an Apostle or an Apostolical Person who was conversant with the Apostles for his Ordainer and Predecessor And he adds that this the Apostolical Churches did And thus he thought to stop the mouths of Gain-sayers and triumphs much in his Argument But his attempt had been extremely vain if they might have return'd him this Answer Sir you are under a mistake or would impose on us The Apostles were Extraordinary Officers and had no Successors nor did they constitute any Bishops as you pretend The Bishops you speak of have deprav'd the Government of the Church They have advanced themselves upon the steps to corruption and contrary to the Divine Institution usurpt a power over their Brethren What reason have we then to believe that they hold fast that profession of faith which was once deliver'd to the Saints since they have so ambitiously trampled on their Equals and made no conscience to establish their own Greatness on the ruines of the Ancient Discipline 'T is our Glory that we have none of them and that we regard not their Authority Yet upon your grounds this they might have replied to the Confusion of that Learned Father had it then been believ'd that Episcopacy was an Innovation I know it has been objected that there are Intricacies and Inconsistences in the Catalogues of the Successions which the Fathers have left us But so there are in the Catalogues of the High Priests that are gâ—ven by Jewish and Christian Writers as Mr. Selden will inform you And also in the Catalogues of the Archontes who amongst the Athenians gave the Name and Title to the year as you may find if you compare many of their Names as they are express'd in the Marble Chronicle at Oxford with what is extant concerning them in the Books of the most famous Greeks and those Books one with another Yet no Body doubts but there was amongst the Israelites a Succession of High Priests from Aaron and amongst the Athenians a Succession of Archontes from Creon And we have no reason to question but there was such a Succession of Bishops from the Apostles as the Fathers speak of notwithstanding in the Tables of their Succession which have been convey'd to us there be some variation The Words of King Charles l. are very apposite to my purpose For says that Judicious and Excellent Prince All Humane Histories are subject to such frailties There are differences in Historiographers in reciting the Succession of the Babylonian Persian and Macedonian Kings and of the Saxon Kings in England And we find more inextricable difficulties in the Fasti Consulares the Catalogues of the Roman Consuls notwithstanding their great care in keeping the publick Records and the exactness of the Roman Histories than are to be found in the Episcopal Catalogues c. Yet all men believe there were Kings in those Countreys and Consuls in Rome in those times So that the discrediting of the Catalogues of Bishops in respect of some uncertainty and differences which yet may be fairly reconcil'd tendeth rather to the Confirmation of the thing it self 2. Wherever Christianity prevail'd the Government of the Churches was Episcopal For as S. Irenaeus argued for the Christian Religion that the Churches amongst the Germans amongst the Hiberi and Celtae the Churches planted in the East in Egypt and Libya and in the Middle Region of the World or Palestine had not a Faith or Tradition different from one another but as one Sun gave light to all the World so did the same Truth shine every where Thus may we say of the Ecclesiastical Polity or Government in the first Ages after the Apostles It was every where the same It was the same as we have seen in Europe and in Asia and in Africa And distant as the Nations were in situation and different as they were in their Customs and Manners yet when Christianity was receiv'd amongst them it brought Episcopacy with it A plain Argument that both proceeded from the same Uniform Cause and that Prelacy was not esteem'd a mere prudential thing that might be rejected at pleasure In the passage that I last cited from Tertullian he manifestly shews that all Apostolical Churches were govern'd by a Succession of Bishops from the beginning And in this he follows Irenaeus who intimates that he could have set down such a Succession in the rest as he did in the Church of Rome but that he was unwilling to swell his Volume into too great a Bulk And in the following Age S. Cyprian says that Bishops were long since ordain'd through all Provinces and all Cities To the Testimony of the Fathers I shall add another of a Modern Writer but it relates to the practice of former times and is pertinent to my design The Author I mean is the celebrated Dr. Walton whose Edition of the Polyglott Bibles was not a little for the honour of our Church and Nation yet it rais'd the Envy of some and that drew from him these words It appears says he by these Ancient Translations that what our Sectaries have cryed down in the Church of England as Popish Innovations viz. Episcopal Government Set Forms of Liturgies Observation of Festivals besides the Lord's Day were us'd as they are still in those Eastern Churches planted by the Apostles and their Successors in Asia and Africk from the first times of their Conversion so that what these men would exterminate as Romish and Antichristian Novelties have been Anciently us'd by those famous and flourishing Churches which never profess'd Subjection to the See of Rome This is that Cordolium of our Novelists the Practice of the Vniversal Church of Christ all the World over I have shew'd what was the Original of Prelacy or Episcopacy and how universally it did obtain But the Dissenters understanding by a Bishop such a Minister as may have no other Pastor above him nor any Presbyter under him I would demand Where there is any instance of him in the holy Scripture or whether the Primitive Fathers writ any thing of him In what Country did he live In what Nation under the Heavens did he exercise his Pastoral
Baume in the Bishoprick of Geneva and that Luther and Melancthon were Spiritual Princes of the Empire and Electors of Germany We are now almost at twice the distance from the beginning of Luther's Reformation as Tertullian was from the days of the Apostles And we are more remote from the coming of King James the First to the Crown of England than Irenaeus was from the death of S. John when he argued against the Valentinians from the Succession of Bishops to the Apostles in the Government of the Churches And what he said of it must then have appear'd either so palpably false that it would have expos'd him and his Cause to derision or so evidently true that your Exceptions against it would at that time have been to the same effect as if a Dissenter should now declare That the Conformists had in this last Age introduced several Corruptions into the Church and Episcopacy amongst the rest That in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth all the Ministers in the Kingdom were equal but after her decease the Defection began and was afterwards gradually carried on till the Prelats arriv'd at their present Greatness That one need but some Experience in the use of things and a little proportion of mother wit to discover this and to make a clear and distinct conception of it That however the Bishops might pretend that they had Predecessors in the last Century and produce for it the Testimony of many Authors yet those Authors were tainted with partial humours and there were Fob Traditions passed for current in their time so that we are under no obligation to believe them And now Sir I leave you to judge whether a person that should discourse seriously in such a manner were fit to be argued with or to be managed another way according to the Rules of Art You have another Bold Stroke yet remaining which is that the Catalogues of Bishops deduced from the Apostles for ought you see deserves but little more credit as being but little better ascertain'd than the Catalogues of the British Kings deduced from Brute And this falls heavy upon S. Jerom as well as others for he approv'd such Catalogues and hath helpt to convey them to Posterity When you press'd him into your service you made honourable mention of him under the Titles of Pious and Learned of which he must make a forfeiture when he stands in your way and though he only confirms by his own suffrage what was generally believ'd in former Ages yet in that câ—…se for ought you see his word deserves little more Credit than the most absurd or groundless Fables For such are the Stories of Brute and the Kings of his Line They have no foundation in any Ancient History or Authentick Records but about two thousand years after the time of Brute's reputed Landing at Totness they were first publish'd to the World He that gave the first reputation to them was Geoffrey of Monmouth who is call'd by one of our Antiquaries the English Homer and the Father of Lies And as for his Brutus some have observ'd as Mr. Camden acquaints us that he was never hoard of till in a Barbarous Age one Hunibald a foolish Writer feign'd that Francion a Son of Priamus was the Founder of the French Nation But then a report was rais'd that our Country-men were descended from the Trojans and our Princes from this Brutus who was said to be the Son of Sylvius and Grand-Son of Aeneas and 't is no wonder that in the times of the thickest ignorance a fiction so agreeable was entertain'd and propagated amongst our Ancestors who disdain'd that their Neighbours should excel them in extraction whom they equal'd in courage And now if any shall affirm that as much or near as much may be said against the Testimonies of the Fathers asserting the Succession of Bishops to the Apostles I must beg your excuse if I tell him in the words of a late Author for whom I know you have some fondness that he has not wip'd his eyes but is moist with prejudice and passion It is not any want of clearness or strength in the Testimony which the Fathers give concerning the Original of Episcopacy that drew from you the odious Reflections which you cast on them but the force there is in it to demonstrate that the Strokes and Lineaments of your Scheme of Church-Government are meerly the work of Fancy and that you have employ'd your Pen in the service of a bad Cause This appears from what has been said already and I shall here add nothing more to confirm it but one Instance which I think I may safely oppose against all that ever was written for the Presbyterian Equality of Ministers from the days of Aerius to this very moment The Instance I intend is that of Polycarp who is not only said to have been Bishop of Smyrna by Polycrates and Tertullian who flourish'd not long after him and by Eusebius Jerom Socrates Sozomen Victor Capuanus Suidas and many others who liv'd at a greater distance from him but by such as knew him and could not be ignorant of his Character There were many that had the advantage of his Ministry Many that had liv'd under his Government in the Church of Smyrna and were Eye-witnesses of his Martyrdom who expresly declare that he was their Bishop This they do in an Epistle which is yet extant and which the famous Joseph Scaliger Critical as he was so highly approv'd and valu'd that he reckons it amongst the Noblest Monuments of Christian Antiquity and professes that he could not read it without something of Extasie S. Irenaeus who was his Scholar informs us likewise that he was Bishop of Smyrna And the same is attested by S. Ignatius who was not only his Contemporary but his Friend as also by Philo and Agathopus who acquaint us further that Ignatius on whom they attended being in his way to Rome where he was about to be torn in pieces by Wild Beasts for the Christian Faith paid a Visit to Polycarp at Smyrna and that both these Excellent Men had been train'd up under the same Master and were the Disciples of S. John But if S. Polycarp was Bishop of Smyrna he was not the only Minister there for he begins his Epistle to the Philippians thus Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him And from these Presbyters he had no reason to distinguish himself as he does if both of them had born the same Office But in what manner he stood related to them may appear from hence that there was not one of all the Ancients I have cited to prove that he was a Bishop who meant not that he was a Prelate And if enquiry be made how he obtain'd his Office from Tertullian and Jerom and many others we learn that it was convey'd to him by S. John But S. John it seems was not alone in that
Apostles Instructions useless and impertinent He had not only Power to correct and punish Miscarriages He was also oblig'd to give suitable encouragement to the industrious Let the Elders that rule well says the Apostle be accounted worthy of double honour especially they that labour in the word and doctrine 1 Tim. 5.17 I know that the meaning of these words has been mightily controverted by dissenting Parties and that they have been made a foundation by some for the establishment of such a sort of Officers as before the last Age were never heard of in the Christian World But though they yield no such Consequence as these men would draw from them yet in my opinion they may give some light to the matters before us and afford us a Pattern of what was practis'd in the Primitive times For 1. All Presbyters were not then usually employ'd in labouring in the Word and Doctrine as will be manifest to any that will but consult what Mr. Le Moyne has written on this Subject and the Authorities mention'd by him But there was no reason to fear that the people should want Instruction when the Bishop who preach'd himself had many Presbyters under him and employ'd some in teaching some in administring the Sacraments some in visiting the Sick and comforting the Weak and Afflicted some in enquiring into Scandals and assisting in the Affairs of Government And the Inconveniencies that might arise from Emulation if every one had been Judge in his own Cause were best avoided by the Authority of the Bishop who assign'd Work and Encouragement to them suitable to their several Capacities 2. In the Primitive Times the Bishop was intrusted with the Goods of the Church and out of the Contributions that were made to him he appointed subordinate Officers to supply the Wants of private Christians He was also obliged to make provision out of the same for his Clergy And for this Timothy was a Precedent whose duty it was to take care that the Labourer should have his Reward and that the Elders who rul'd well should receive double honour or a double portion out of the Publick Stock They depended on him therefore for their maintenance as well as in the exercise of their Function But that the force of what I have argued from the Pre-eminence and Power of Timothy may the better appear I am desirous his Case may be compar'd with the following Instance in which we are alike disinteressed Nicocles was advis'd by Isocrates to confer Honors on the most deserving and to commit the management of Affairs to Men of worth as knowing that the Miscarriages of those that were in such a station would be imputed to him He was also advis'd to take cognizance of Complaints and to judge indifferently according to the Merits of the Cause between contending Parties And this was enough to satisfie any one that had never heard the Name of Nicocles and knew nothing of his Character that he had the Administration of Government and that the persons about whom he receiv'd this counsel were his Subjects In like manner when we reflect on the direction that was given to Timothy concerning the Ordination of Ministers and the danger he incurr'd if he did not observe it when we also consider how he was requir'd to proceed if an Action were brought before him against a Presbyter and what Care he was oblig'd to take of the Elders that ruled well we have reason to conclude that they were not his Equals but under his Inspection and Authority That Timothy had Episcopal Authority is manifest I think from what has been said and that he was Bishop of Ephesus appears from hence that there he resided that he might exercise his Apostolical Power in such manner as we have seen and that he might charge some who were persons doubtless that had Right to preach the Gospel to teach no other Doctrine The Apostle intended not as M. Daille observes that he should act feebly with those that were so bold as to corrupt a thing so important He does not say that he should pray or exhort them or that he should remonstrate to them or simply that he should conjure them not to depart from the truth He uses a term that implies more vigour and requires him to denounce to them that they teach no other Doctrine than the Apostles did For to denounce is to act with Authority in the Name and instead of another whose Person one sustains or whose Minister he is and with a Menace of Punishment to the disobedient And from hence says our Author it appears that Timothy was left by S. Paul in the Church of Ephesus with Authority to govern it and to censure and depose even Preachers themselves And if so I think we may safely conclude that they were under his Jurisdiction notwithstanding any thing this Learned Man added for the service of his Hypothesis What I have said of the Office of Timothy fully agrees with the Sentiments of the Ancients For by some of them he is styl'd an Apostle by some a Bishop and both meant the same thing Others speak more plainly and say that he was Bishop of Ephesus and of this Belief generally were the Fathers Nevertheless against that which they so universally receiv'd you produce several Objections and refer me for more to Mr. Prynne whose Treatise intitled The Vnbishopping of Timothy and Titus c. came lately to my hands and now I am able to tell you that he is a very promising Author He pretends that he has refuted the Arguments for Episcopacy taken from the examples of Timothy and Titus in an irrefragable manner and that he hath shaken the rotten pillars and undermin'd the sandy foundations of the high towring Hierarchy and left it without any divine prop to support it longer This work he dedicates to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York proposing to them two things one of which he modestly leaves to their choice 1. He challenges them to give him a speedy solid satisfactory answer which must be pretty difficult if as he tells them he had made it manifest that their founding their Prelacy on a Divine Right on which grounds only they were willing to continue in their station was a mere absurd ridiculous fiction 2. In defect of this he requires them to relinquish their places and not any more to advance themselves above their Fellow-Ministers And for this demand there might have been some reason had he demonstrated every thing of which he boasts so confidently with as much certainty as he hath from abundance of Quotations and Examples both foreign and domestick that Bishops may dye of the Plague as well as other Folk notwithstanding their Rochets Miters Crofiers to the confusion of those arrogant Prelates that think otherwise But I was soon convinced that no great matter was to be expected from him for not far from the beginning of his
being under his Jurisdiction He was requir'd to inflict Ecclesiastical Censures on the disobedient and set things in order in many Churches His Office therefore or Power was Episcopal To prove this I have not urged any thing from the Postscript of the Epistle to Titus and therefore I am not concern'd at your exception against it or to enquire into its Authority What is manifest from the Epistle it self and confirm'd by the Testimony of the Fathers is sufficient for my purpose That however there were many Churches in Crete yet they were govern'd by a single Person as their Chief Pastor or Bishop What you object against his Episcopacy from the multitude of Cities in Crete looks like one of the Efforts of Mr. Prynne and is so confus'd that I can make no coherent sense of it You suppose that every Church or Congregation must have a Bishop for which you give no other reason but that some are confident of it and I confess if matters between us had been to be determin'd by confidence you had often put me to a loss Yet here I do not see what service it can do you For I would demand whether the Bishop you assign to every Congregation was a mere Presbyter or a Prelate If you say the first what is it to the purpose unless you could prove that he was not subject to another Pastor who had the Charge of many Congregations If the last what is become of the Cause for which you contend If Titus say you was a Bishop over all the Churches in Crete he was a Bishop of Bishops that is of Prelatical Bishops as your words import and consequently if they express your thoughts you must believe that at that time there were such Bishops And now methinks our Controversie appears a little oddly For the Tables are turn'd and you are got on the side of Prelacy You contend that the Cretian Elders were Prelatical Bishops when I cannot allow that they were more than Presbyters I cannot be convinc'd but that Titus being left in Crete was the only Bishop in the modern sense of the word of all the Churches there Nor do I see any reason why this should be thought inconsistent with an Episcopal Function Theodoret had eight hundred Parishes under his Care yet this did not cause a Nullity in his Ordination And however there were many Cities in Scythia yet anciently one Bishop had the Charge of them all without any loss of his Episcopal Office Inconveniences indeed may arise from such large extent of Dioceses but this was not the case when as Rabanus Maurus tells us Bishops govern'd whole Provinces under the Name of Apostles or when Titus remain'd in Crete For then 't is certain there were many Churches under his Care and Administration and by what Title soever he was distinguish'd it is not material as to the Nature and Ends of Government But if he was Bishop of so many Churches you would fain know which was the Church of the Cretians where he resided To which I can say nothing but that it seems probable he visited all the Churches of his Diocese and resided chiefly in the Metropolis If this satisfies not your pang of longing as I have no ability so I have no inclinati to gratifie it any farther For could I name with the greatest certainty the City where he commonly dwelt you might also enquire what part of that City or what Street he inhabited and propose many other Questions of the like importance to which I am not prepar'd to give any Reply It is sufficient that he was a Pastor of many Churches and had Authority over their Presbyters and Deacons For if this be true it strikes at the Root of the Presbyterian and Independent Opinions about Church-Government And I know not what can be said in Vindication of them unless it be that he was an Extraordinary Officer This you insist on and to prove it you tell me he was an Evangelist But the Scripture says of him no such thing From the Scripture indeed we learn that Philip was an Evangelist and yet he wanted Power either to Confirm those that were Baptiz'd or to Ordain Officers by Imposition of Hands But Titus could perform the last of these which was the greater and consequently he was something more than an Evangelist and could be no less than an Apostle or a Bishop But that he may be reckon'd amongst the Pastors Extraordinary you likewise urge That he was only left in Crete as the Deputy or the Delegate of the Apostle and that but for a time till he should have established Churches in every City and Organiz'd them with Elders which having done you say 't is very probable that he return'd again to S. Paul to give an Account of that Affair and then you think his Commission expir'd Not that you have read any such thing of him in Scripture But since he was oblig'd to act as the Apostle had appointed from hence you collect that his Deputation was but Temporary And you might as well have concluded that since it was the Duty of Presbyters and Deacons to walk as the same Apostle appointed or according to the Rules he gave for their Conversation their Offices also were Temporary and design'd for no long continuance You think his Case differ'd from theirs in this that he was employ'd in frequent Travels but in answer to that I need only tell you That his Journeys to Jerusalem to Macedonia and to Corinth were undertaken and finished before he was left in Crete That he died there as we are inform'd by Paulinus and Sophronius and that the Government of the Church has been Episcopal in that Island ever since his days When I had proceeded thus far I had the satisfaction to peruse some Printed Papers of an Eminent Person wherein amongst other things he treats of this subject and I was glad to find that I had not differ'd from the Sentiments of so great a Man which he hath express'd in these words We are not to suppose says he that the Power of Titus extended not to a Jurisdiction over Elders when he had ordain'd them For if any of those whom he had ordain'd as believing them qualified according to the Apostles Rules should afterwards demean themselves otherwise and be self-willed froward given to wine can we believe that Titus was not as well bound to correct them afterwards as to examine them before And what was this Power of Ordination and Jurisdiction but the very same which the Bishops have exercis'd ever since the Apostles Times But they who go about to Unbishop Timothy and Titus may as well Unscripture the Epistles that were written to them and make them only some particular and occasional Writings as they make Timothy and Titus to have been only some particular and occasional Officers But the Christian Church preserving these Epistles as of constant and perpetual Vse did thereby suppose the same kind
you much insist as if it afforded some great advantage to your Cause Whereas the Fathers who us'd that expression which you so well approve had no such Notion of a First Presbyter as you have entertain'd but made the same distinction between him and his Clergy as there was between the High Priest and the other Priests that were under his Authority Another thing for which you cite this Commentator is the information he gives us that the Eldest was always the First Presbyter till the inconveniences of that course occasion'd the change which he says was made by a Council But to this I know not how to assent because it appears from Scripture and the Writings of the most Primitive Fathers that they who in the early times of Christianity were advanced to the Charge of Bishops were commonly qualified for it and distinguish'd by the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost or their own personal worth and there is no probability that a meer number of years was then held sufficient to recommend a person to the highest Office in the Christian Church Yet if there was sometime such preference given to seniority and such a change made in some particular Country as the Author mentions I am not concern'd about it But if you think the Ancient Custom he speaks of was universal and that a departure from it over the World was decreed by a General Council I would gladly know where it was assembled Blondel thinks the alteration was introduced by the Council of Nice and for this he directs us to the fourth Canon of that Council in which there is not a word of this matter nor are there any footsteps of it in Antiquity But whatever was the ground of advancing persons to the Office of Bishops manifest it is that this Commentator believ'd the Office it self was of Divine Institution and superior to that of Presbyters For he declares that James was constituted Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles and that the Apostles in general were Bishops He affirms that Timothy and Titus and the Angels of the Asiatick Churches were Bishops also And in the Bishop says he all Orders are contain'd because he is the Prince or Chief of the Priests And yet this is one of the Fathers by whose Testimony you are content matters between us should be determin'd Another of them is S. Jerom who informs us I confess that originally a Presbyter was the same as a Bishop and that at first the Churches were govern'd by the common Counsel of Priests But it must be consider'd that according to him the Churches were only under that Administration till by the instigation of the Devil divisions did arise and one said I am of Paul and another said I am of Apollos or I of Cephas And it may seem not a little for the advantage of Episcopacy if as he intimates it was the best means of extirpating Schism when a Presbyterian parity was found insufficient for that purpose and if it was therefore establish'd over the world by universal Decree and that whilst many of the Apostles were alive Blondel I know assigns a later date to that Decree and would have us believe that it was not made before the year 140. But I am much more inclin'd to think that it was never made at all than that this project was first set on foot to remove the seeds or beginnings of Schisms almost a hundred years after they were sown at Corinth or after it was there said among the people I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas Blondel saw this absurdity and to avoid it he falls into another He would persuade us that the Schisms here mention'd are such as did not disturb the Church till a long time after the decease of Paul and Apollos and Cephas and did not arise amongst the Corinthians but others that imitated their example But by this exposition he does not only force the words of the Author from their plain literal meaning without any necessity but also makes him contradict his own avowed sense say in effect that Episcopacy was not instituted before the year 140 notwithstanding in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers and other parts of his works he hath left us an account of several Bishops distinct from Presbyters that were ordain'd by the Apostles themselves 'T is true S. Jerom sometimes in his heats of which the cause is sufficiently known let fall such words as seem inconsistent with the Rights of Episcopacy yet if those words had been assaulted by his Adversaries he would not have been at a loss but had made provision for a vindication of himself or a safe retreat either by other expressions or the secret meaning of the same He may seem to oppose the subordination of Presbyters to the Bishop as an innovation or a departure from a former institution of Government yet he allows as we have seen that this departure was made about the time that S. Paul writ his first Epistle to the Corinthians He intimates that it was necessary and in his Treatise against the Luciferians he declares that the welfare of the Church depends on the dignity of the Bishop to whom says he if there be not granted a certain peerless Authority there will be as many Schisms as there are Priests He may seem to believe that Bishops were not Constituted by any Divine order or disposal and perhaps he thought that they were not appointed by any Precept of Christ himself yet he denies not that they were Ordained by those that had Commission from him and acted in his Name and by his Power He may seem to be of Opinion that the Episcopal Praeeminence or Jurisdiction was at first a meer prudential Contrivance and afterwards confirm'd by Custom Yet in the production of it he ascribes no more to Prudence than the laying hold on a sad occasion when it was offer'd for its establishment And the Custom he speaks of he resolves into Apostolical Tradition and this he grounds on Scripture That we may know says he that the Apostolical Traditions were taken out of the Old Testament What Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple That may the Bishops and Presbyters and Deacons challenge in the Church And this is as much as I demand Another of your Authors is S. Augustin who acquaints us indeed that the Titles of Bishop and Presbyter were distinguish'd by Custom But it does not follow that there was not the same disparity of Officers when those words were of promiscuous use as there was afterwards when they were limited in their signification If this gives you not satisfaction Grotius will tell you what is agreeable to that which has been said already That when the Fathers speak of Custom they do not exclude an Apostolical Institution Nay S. Augustin says that what hath been always held by the whole Church and was not appointed by Councils is most
rightly believ'd to proceed from Apostolical Authority And that he did not believe Episcopacy was introduced into the Church after the Apostles decease appears from several instances and particularly from hence that he thought the Angels of the Asiatick Churches were their Bishops Thus far your Witnesses have appear'd against you and with them you have fitly join'd S. Chrysostom who says not as you pretend that there is no difference in a manner between Bishops and Priests but that the difference is not great Thereby intimating that some difference there was even in the Apostles days for of these he he speaks And in this he tells us they were distinguish'd that only the Bishops had the power of Ordination A thing so destructive of the cause for which you are concern'd that the Dissenters doubtless had rather see all the Volumes of Chrysostom in a flame than be concluded by his testimony After all you must depend I think on the testimony of such as Danaeus Buchanan Johannes Major and Hector Boethius and of what Authority these men are I come now to enquire If we may believe Danaeus say you Epiphanius himself was at last compell'd to confess that in the Age of the Apostles no such distinction between Bishops and Presbyters as I contend for was to be found To which I reply If we may believe Epiphanius himself he confess'd no such matter On the contrary when he had represented Aerius as the plague of mankind when he had expos'd and condemn'd his detestable ingratitude towards Eustathius and shew'd how he loaded his Benefactor with calumnies because he was advanced to a Bishoprick to which that modest Leveller aspir'd he then gives an account of this opinion of the Heretick That there is no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter which he censures as extremely foolish and proceeds to the confutation of it That a Presbyter says he cannot be the same with a Bishop the sacred word of the Apostle declares For thus he writes to Timothy Rebuke not an Elder but intreat him as a Father But why should he forbid him to rebuke an Elder but that he had Authority over him He admonishes him ver 19. Not to receive an accusation against an Elder but before two or three Witnesses But he did not give direction to any of the Presbyters not to receive an accusation against a Bishop not to rebuke a Bishop This then is a manifest Argument of the disparity of those Officers in the judgment of Epiphanius But if you can make him confess what he denies if you can make him approve what he confutes and bring him to an agreement with one whom he represents as a prodigious villain and a monster then you may believe Danaeus But his credit labours much at present and you have said nothing to relieve it It hath been little for the honour of the Presbyterian Government that the Father of it hath been thought to be Aerius But you think it is of more ancient and better extraction The Scots you say who receiv'd the knowledge of Christianity in the first Age had not any knowledge for many Ages after that appears of any but Presbyterian jurisdiction And for this you quote Buchanan who tell us that no Bishop ever presided in the Church of Scotland before Palladius his time and that the Church unto that time was govern'd by Monks without Bishops with less pride and outward pomp but greater simplicity and holiness And if his word may be taken for it this would be something to the purpose But Camden says that his History was condemn'd of falshood by the Parliament of Scotland and that Buchanan before his death bitterly accus'd himself of the Calumnies he had divulged So that however I have a great value for his wit and learning I think no great credit is due to his testimony since he wanted that veracity which is essential to a good Historian But here it seems we need not depend on his word alone for he is warranted by the Authority of Johannes Major whose words you set down and they are to the same effect as the former And really say you this testimony given by Johannes Major is very full And who would not now think that this Johannes Major was an Ancient Father that could give such a full and exact account of the Primitive times Yet did this man draw down his History of Great Britain as far as the Marriage of K. Henry VIII of England with the Princess Catherine of Aragon and dedicated it to K. James V. of Scotland He was alive says Labbe in the year 1520. And one that would undertake to declare what men were doing above a thousand years before he was born had need to vouch better Authority than his own to gain belief But John Major is not the only Evidence Buchanan might have cited Beda you tell me says that Palladius was sent unto the Scots who believ'd in Christ as their first Bishop How great an advantage is it to have the faculty of close reasoning Yet so dull am I that I do not perceive how the words of Bede prove those of Buchanan to be true For 1. Palladius might be sent into Scotland and yet not into the Country now call'd by that name and intended by Buchanan It might be into Ireland of which Beda himself says that it is properly the Country of the Scots and accordingly in Claudian the Scot is the Irish man And that Palladius was sent to the Irish Scots hath been prov'd by those great Antiquaries the Bishops of S. Asaph and Worcester to whom I refer you for satisfaction 2. The Christian faith hath no such dependance on Monkery but the Scots might believe though there had never been any Monks in the world And I take it to be manifest that there were none so early as you imagine Polydor Vergil ascribes the institution of Monkery to S. Antony who died as he tells us in the year 361. Danaeus says that it began to be in request in Egypt after the year 300 and that it was later before it was receiv'd in Europe He attributes the invention of it to superstition and an idolatrous admiration of external things He compares the Monks to swarms of drones and says that in the year 500. they were dispers'd and multiplied like the Locusts in the Revelation upon the face of the whole Earth You see Sir what sentiments your friend Danaeus had of these men and of their institution and little did he think that the Church of Scotland was so happy in an excellent sort of Presbyterian Monks in the best and purest Ages S. Jerom himself who had such a zeal for the Monastick way of living that he was willing to say as much for the honour of it as he was able carries the original of it notwithstanding no higher than Antony or Paul the Thebaean But which of them soever was the Founder of it
Imprimatur Z. Isham R. P. D. Henr. Episc Lond. Ã Sacris Feb. 4. 1691 2. A TREATISE OF Church-Government Occasion'd by some LETTERS Lately Printed concerning the same SUBJECT BY ROBERT BURSCOUGH M. A. LONDON Printed for Samuel Smith at the Prince's Arms in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1692. THE PREFACE TO THE READER AN Observing Italian has given us an Account of a Transaction which is not so well known amongst us as many others of the like Nature He acquaints us that in an Assembly of Catholicks as he calls them which were brought together by the Late Earl of Bristol a Consultation was held concerning the fittest Means of propagating their Religion in this Kingdom and they agreed that one of the most proper Methods they could make use of for that purpose was to testifie a mighty Zeal and to make a great shew of Friendship for the Non-conformists Whereupon he tells us They represented them as Men of Trade whose Sufferings would be prejudicial to the Nation They pretended to commiserate their Condition and declaim'd perpetually against Persecution And there were two things he says which they propos'd to themselves in this Conduct The first was to maintain the Sectaries against the Church of England hoping they might sooner destroy it by Intestine Divisions and so more easily open a Gate to Popery The second was Under a pretence of tolerating these Sectaries to stop the Execution of the Laws about Religion that their Priests might meet with less opposition in advancing the Religion of the Church of Rome In pursuance of this Design as my Author also informs us They prevail'd with King Charles the Second to issue out his Declaration for Liberty of Conscience which was recall'd by the interposition of the Parliament But the Project which was then so happily blafted by the Parliament reviv'd to amazement in the following Reign and the Nation had the pain to see a Jesuite made a Privy Counsellor and Prime Minister of State and the Protestant Dissenters very deep in his Interests and warm under his Influence To see these Dissenters so liberally offering up their Incense to the Court which was then labouring to inslave us to the Pope and the Court answering their Devotion with many Favors For so it was as every Body knows And when this Alliance was confirm'd between them hardly a Week pass'd over our heads which did not bring us fresh Intelligence of their mutual Endearments What I have said of the Dissenters must not be understood of the whole Body of them without exception For to do them Right some of them were afflicted at the shameful Confederacy in which their Brethren were engaged But neither in Number nor in Zeal and Diligence did they equal those that beheld our Church in distress with such Eyes as the Children of Edom look'd on Jerusalem in the day of her Adversity when they cry'd to the Babylonians Rase it rase it to the foundation But it pleas'd God to disappoint their Devices so that their hands could not perform their Enterprise And one might then have thought that the Reflection on their Actions should have been such a Mortification to them as would have dispos'd them to an Accommodation and Union with those from whom they had made an Unreasonable Separation and who were so willing to forget their former Miscarriages and to receive them with all imaginable Tenderness But they on the contrary have since appear'd more averse from the Way of Peace than ever And it is Observable that the Kindness of the Papists put them into a strange fit of Complaisance and was the Cause that either they employ'd their Pens in the service of the Church of Rome or not against it But the Obligations which they have receiv'd from the Conformists instead of abating have inflam'd their Rage and given them Encouragement to write abundance of Books such as they are against the Church of England And this may shew how dissatisfied they remain in their present Circumstances and that as long as we live with them and not under them we are like to hear of their Complaints When my Adversary who is of their number and gave occasion to this Discourse saw Their Politicks and his Own defeated I had hopes that he would leave me to the Retirement I affected and give me no farther trouble with his Disputes about Church-Government I was in expectation that he would either study to be quiet or that I should meet with him amongst some late Apologists But when I least suspected it he appears in Print on the Offensive side and rudely attacking a whole Community he would persuade his Readers that a Separate National Jurisdiction such as he supposes that of our Ecclesiastical Rulers to be cannot but weaken the Jurisdiction of Kings and other States and is neither more nor less but the very same thing that heretofore was found so burdensom under the Papacy and that made the best and wisest and greatest of our Kings so uneasie So that he lays it down he says as a Maxim that nothing can be of greater danger to any Government than a National Hierarchy that does not depend upon it or is not in the Measures and Interests of it Fresh Experience has learn'd us this In which words his design is to cast an Odium on the Conforming Clergy and to suggest that they have been hurtful unto Kings and usurpt a Jurisdiction that is inconsistent with the Safety and the Rights of Sovereignty But if this cannot be prov'd against them either from the Nature of their Jurisdiction it self or from their National Union or Matter of Fact on which he grounds the Charge he must be content to bear the Infamy of a false Accuser By the Jurisdiction of the Clergy which is first to be consider'd either he understands that which is Spiritual and such as the Pastors of the Church receiv'd from Christ and to say that this hath no Limits and is pernicious to the State is not only to injure the Truth but to cast a Reproach upon our Lord himself Or else he means their Temporal Authority with which they have been legally vested by Sovereign Princes and then he knows that he hath falsly call'd it Independent Unboundable and Uncontrollable he knows it is false that this is neither more nor less but the very same Supreme and Absolute Power which the Popes claim'd and usurpt and by which they made our Kings so Uneasie And I leave him to answer the Convictions of his own Conscience for the wrong he hath done the Reformation by so odious a Reflexion Another thing on which he grounds his Censure of the Clergy is their National Union and he argues that This together with the Independence which he ascribes to them must needs render them very dangerous as putting them into a condition of being made a powerful Faction and easie to be practis'd upon and inabling the Heads of the Faction to convey Malignity to all their Subordinates and
these to the People And thus when the abolishing of the Episcopal Government with all its dependences Root and Branch was in agitation Mr. Nathaniel Fiennes objected against the Bishops That by their Power over other Ministers who had an influence upon the People they might mould them both according to their own wills and having put out our eyes says he as the Philistins did Sampson 's they may afterwards make us grind and reduce us to what slavery they please A dreadful thing indeed had there been any foundation for the apprehension of it But if such Fantômes as may at any time be rais'd by Art or the Strength of Imagination and have nothing in them of Substance or Reality be sufficient to disquiet us we are like to enjoy but little rest And to come nearer to the purpose If a meer possibility of doing hurt be so dangerous and formidable to Princes This would be enough to create in them frightful Idea's of their Guards and their Armies and of all that are about them and render them at last like Pashur a Terror to themselves He could not but see that a meer Capacity in the Clergy of conveying Malignity was not sufficient to make them Enemies to the State and he pretends that they have been actually guilty of a most notorious defection from their Duty to the Civil Magistrate and that it has been found by Experience not only that there never was but that there never can be in the World a thing more dangerous to any Government than the National Hierarchy An Accusation that sounds very harsh and runs high not against a few single persons only but a considerable Society But he hath not told us in what Instance they were liable to it or when it was they became so criminal It is certain that in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth they could not deserve so hateful a Character For Jealous as She was of her Glory She could not find that it was eclips'd by them But She did perceive how necessary it was to check and repress the Attempts against them and was sensible as Mr. Camden acquaints us that her own Authority was struck at through the sides of the Bishops As this Admirable Princess penetrated into the Secrets of Foreign Courts so She perfectly understood the Interests of her own Kingdoms And if any would know what She thought of some fiery Zealots of those Times who spent their Heats in opposing Episcopacy and the Liturgy it may be seen in Serjeant Puckering's Speech recorded by Sr. William Dugdale for it is made by Her Command Her Successor King James could never discover that nothing could be more dangerous to him than the National Hierarchy He always believ'd that Episcopacy was of Divine Institution and as he found it establish'd here to his great satisfaction so he never saw cause to repent of his defence of it and the Privileges annex'd to it How well he approv'd the Constitution of the Church of England may appear from hence that in his Speech in the Star-Chamber he affirm'd That of any Church that ever he read or knew of present or past he thought in his Conscience This was the most pure and nearest the Primitive and Apostolical Church in Doctrine and Discipline and the sureliest founded on the Word of God of any Church in Christendom At the same time he complain'd of the Contempt that was cast on a Church so Reform'd and the Governours thereof and looking on it as a sign of Impending Judgments he says God will not bless us and our Laws if we do not reverence and obey Gods Law which cannot be except the Interpreters of it be respected and reverenced Such a regard He had for them from a Principle of Religion and their Fidelity to Him was answerable to it and contributed not a little to the Safety of his Person the Support of the Throne and the Welfare of the Nation But as for the many Dangers to which he was expos'd they arose from other Quarters They either proceeded from the Conspiracies of Papists whose Principles he examin'd and confuted that neither the Subversion of States nor the Murthers of Kings should have free passage in the World for want of timely Advertisement or from the Practices of another sort of persons whom he calls the very Pests in the Church and Common-wealth and by whom as he declares to all Christian Monarchs Free Princes and States he was persecuted not from his Birth only but four Months before his Birth In the Reign of King Charles the First the Clergy were not wanting in their demonstrations of Loyalty as we all know and they felt Yet I grant that some had discours'd before his Majesty that Episcopacy as claim'd and exercis'd within this Realm was not a little derogatory to the Regal Authority as well in the Point of Supremacy as Prerogative in the one by claiming the Function as by a Divine Right in the other by exercising the Jurisdiction in their own Names But on that occasion He told Dr. Sanderson that he did not believe the Church-Government as by Law establish'd was in either of the aforesaid respects or any other way prejudicial to his Crown Nevertheless he requir'd that Learned Man from whom I borrow'd this Relation to draw up an Answer to those two Objections for the satisfaction of others which he did accordingly And I shall only crave leave to transcribe from him the following words which he uses near the Conclusion of his Treatise By this time says he I doubt not all that are not wilfully blind do see and understand by sad experience that it had been far better both with King and Kingdom than now it is or is like to be in haste if the Enemies of Episcopacy had meant no worse to the King and his Crown than the Bishops and those that favour'd them did I shall not further exercise your patience in going about to prove that the Clergy were faithful to the Crown in the Reign of King Charles the Second You may well enough remember what King James the Second acknowledged that the Church of England had been eminently Loyal in the defence of his Father and support of his Brother in the worst of Times But that our Church-men have since revolted from their Principles which were then said to be for Monarchy I do not understand Nor was our Author willing in plain terms to inform us when it was that they became such Examples of Malignity lest the Calumny might easily be detected Yet Obscure as he is he hath left us a Key to his meaning for he intimates that they have been found to be dangerous by fresh experience when they were not in the Measures and Interests of the Government respecting doubtless the late Times before the great Revolution And so the Secret comes out which was at the bottom and rais'd his Indignation In the Opinion you see of this Gentleman the Clergy were
Bishops should be confin'd within their proper and certain bounds Yet when their circumstances resemble those of the Apostles and the great work is to convert Infidels to the Christian faith doubtless it is then fit that they should make freer Excursions And therefore the Great Council of Constantinople that so strictly limited Bishops within their own Dioceses excepted those from their general Rule who liv'd among the Heathens and gave them liberty to attempt their Conversion and that within the bounds of other Bishops as Balsamon and Zonaras explain the Canon And yet I cannot think that they to whom this Liberty was indulged were Bishops of a distinct Species when they only differ'd from others in a particular Circumstance Nor can I believe that they were Bishops at home and something else abroad or that they forfeited their Episcopal Character when they were making Converts or confirming them in a forein Province It is farther observable that the Canons by which Ecclesiastical Officers were restrain'd within certain Precincts being made in Times of Peace did not bind in Cases of Necessity On which account Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople determin'd that it was lawful to communicate with the Presbyters who were ordain'd at Rome and Naples and in Lombardy without the Acclamation or a Title And this he confirms from the Examples of Athanasius and Eusebius who when Arianism prevail'd confer'd Orders out of their own Dioceses A plain Argument that they had contracted no such Relation to a particular People but they remembred they were Bishops of the Catholick Church and thought they might on some occasions exercise their Episcopal Power in any part of it without a breach of Catholick Communion To conclude As the Office of Presbyters was the same when they were severally appropriated to distinct Congregations as it was when they had the Care or Government in common of many Congregations under the Presidence of the Bishop So is the Office of Bishops the same whether they are limited or not within certain Dioceses And to serve the Necessities of the Church some of them may be the more strictly confin'd and not suffer'd to pass their Line and others may be left to greater freedom in the exercise of their Function without any essential difference 2. It was not essential to the Office of an Apostle that he should constantly be engag'd in Travels S. Paul who was so abundant in his Labours remained two years at Ephesus and S. James resided much longer at Jerusalem as I shall shew in the following Chapter In the mean time let me tell you that all the Arguments by which you would prove that the Apostles were Extraordinary Officers perform more than you would have them or nothing at all If they prove any thing it is that the Apostles could have no Successors in Teaching and Instructing the People which yet you say was a standing and perpetual part of their Office So that you must be content I think either to yield up the Cause or you will be concern'd as much as I to answer your own Objections CHAP. IV. S. James was an Apostle and yet he was Bishop of Jerusalem and constantly resided there AMongst the Arguments by which some would prove that the Apostles were Extraordinary Officers I find none more frequently produced than that which is taken from their unsetled condition And this you urge after the example of others but something you have in the management of it that is peculiar and must be ascrib'd to to your own invention Sure I am say you Athanasius in his Comment upon the Epistle to the Romans ad c. 2. v. 1. affirms the Office of the Apostles to have been to go up and down and preach circumvagari as his Translator renders him Evangelium praedicare But excuse me Sir if I tell you that sure I am you never saw any such Comment of Athanasius nor any such Translator as you have mention'd nor have they any Being but in your Imagination The use you make of the words you have cited is almost as surprising as the Quotation it self In the judgement say you of this so celebrated a Father the Apostles as such were but Itinerant Preachers as if you had a mind to depress them now as much as you exalted them before I leave you to clear your self as well as you can and I come now to prove what I have already propos'd that it was not essential to the Office of an Apostle that he should be constantly engaged in Travels And this I think is very clear from the example of S. James the Just I know that many Learned Men have deny'd that this James was one of the Twelve which others notwithstanding of great Eminence have affirm'd But I have no need to be interessed in that Controversy I think it sufficient that he had both the Name and Authority of an Apostle And I shall shew that he was Bishop of Jerusalem and constantly resided there I join these things together because of their Affinity If I prove either of them it will be for my purpose if both the truth will be more confirm'd and they will give mutual light to one another That S. James was Bishop of Jerusalem appears from the Testimony of a whole Cloud of Witnesses amongst which Clemens Alexandrinus and Hegesippus are the most commonly produced and chiefly depended on by the Assertors of Episcopacy as being the most Ancient and best qualified to gain an assent to their information S. Clemens flourished in the next Age after the Apostles and as Blondel says truly of him he was eminent for Holiness and all manner of Learning But Divine Learning was the highest in his esteem to acquire which he travel'd into many Countries and as himself acquaints us he had Masters to instruct him that were of several Nations One of them he tells us was of Coelosyria and another of Egypt the third he mentions was an Assyrian and the fourth a Hebrew And these having preserv'd the Doctrines and Institutions of the Apostles pure which they receiv'd from Peter and James from John and Paul as Children from their Parents communicated them to him and others in his time We have therefore reason to think that he was not deceiv'd nor design'd to impose on Posterity when he left us this relation for which I now make use of his Name That although our Lord had prefer'd Peter and James and John before the rest of the Apostles yet they did not contend about Honour but chose James the Just to be Bishop of Jerusalem Jerusalem was the principal Place wherein our Saviour himself exercis'd his Office and taught personally when he was upon Earth It was the Metropolis of the Jews who afforded Converts to the Christian Faith before Salvation was brought to the Idolatrous Gentiles The Church of Jerusalem therefore was justly styl'd by the Council of Constantinople the Mother of Churches and it consisted of a
of Grotius on Matth. 28.20 seem highly rational From hence says he it very manifestly appears it was the mind of Christ that the Apostles should commit to others and they again to other faithful persons that Charge of Government which was committed to them For since this Promise extends it self to the Consummation of the World and the Apostles could not live so long Christ is plainly to be thought to have spoken to their Successors in that Office And this Sir is the Testimony of that Learned Man who for the reputation he hath justly gain'd in the World of great knowledge and exact Criticism may signifie something with you to use your own words and if he was not much mistaken this Text of Scripture by which you would prove that the Apostles were Extraordinary Officers overthrows what you design by it and supposes that the Apostles ought to have Successors till the coming of our Lord to Judgment 4. The Office of the Apostles or the Authority they had over Presbyters was committed to many in their days that were not of the Twelve and it was preserved after their decease It was therefore design'd for Continuance and ought to remain in all Ages This Consequence I take for granted and the Assertions from whence it is drawn I shall clear in their proper places At present I only observe that if they are true they will much confirm what went before For whatever extraordinary Qualifications and peculiar Privileges the first Apostles had it will be manifest that the Authority they had as Supreme Governours of the Church was none of them That could not be limited to them which was convey'd to others What was communicated was certainly communicable CHAP. VI. The Title and Office of Apostles were communicated to many besides the Twelve I Shew'd before that however there were Originally but Twelve Apostles yet their Office might be confer'd on others that were not of that number and that it actually was so is evident from the examples of Paul and Barnabas who were Apostles and that not only in Title but in Power also For the first of these declares that he was nothing behind the very chiefest Apostles And if Barnabas had ow'd him any Subjection when a Controversie happen'd between them it might easily have been ended by that Authority which one of them might have exercis'd and the other ought to have obey'd but they debated the matter on equal terms and neither of them gave place to the other The result was when the Contention between them grew sharp they departed asunder and took different courses But at another time they agreed and went together to Jerusalem and then James and Peter and John who seem'd to be Pillars paid to both the regard that was due to their Collegues They gave to both the right hand of fellowship and both went to exercise their Apostolical Office among the Heathen as the other three did among those of the Circumcision You think however that Barnabas was an Apostle of an Inferior Order and that he had his Apostleship from the Church For this you quote Acts 11.22 where you tell me the Church is said to send forth Barnabas as their Apostle and not barely to dismiss him But you might as well have said that when the Brethren sent away Paul they did not barely dismiss him but made him an Apostle And at the same rate you may carry on the work of Criticism farther and declare that when the Magistrates sent Serjeants to free Paul and Silas when Herod sent an Executioner to cut off the Head of John the Baptist when the Chief Priests and Scribes sent forth Spies that should feign themselves just Men and when the Pharisees and Chief Priests sent Officers to take our Saviour all these that were sent were transform'd into so many Apostles That Barnabas was as you imagine subordinate to any other Apostles is altogether improbable For S. Paul speaks of him as a Person in the same Station with himself where he says Have we not power to lead about a Sister a Wife as well as other Apostles and as the Brethren of the Lord and Cephas and I only and Barnabas have we not power to forbear working 1 Cor. 9.5 6. Which words suppose S. Barnabas to have been S. Paul's Colleague and S. Paul to have had equal Power with any of the most eminent Apostles and both to have been vested with all the Rights and Authority that belonged to the Apostleship for otherwise those Expostulations would have been liable to great exceptions Besides Paul and Barnabas there were many others that were not of the Twelve and yet did bear the Title of Apostles and of what account they were in the Church Theodoret informs us He observes that anciently the same persons were indifferently call'd Presbyters and Bishops and then such as are now call'd Bishops were styled Apostles but afterwards this Title was left to those that were properly Apostles and on others who sometimes had it the Name of Bishop was impos'd To the same effect is that passage which is cited by Amalarius from the Reputed Ambrose wherein he shews that they who were ordain'd to govern the Churches after the Apostles by which says Salmasius he means others besides the Twelve finding themselves not equal to their Predecessors in Miracles or other Qualifications would not challenge to themselves the Name of Apostles but the Titles of Bishops and Presbyters they thus divided That of Presbyters they left to others and that of Bishops was appropriated to them who had the Power of Ordination so that they presided over Churches in the fullest right This place is quoted several times by Salmasius but how contrary it is to what he endeavours to establish is very obvious for it plainly intimates that there were always Prelates in the Christian Church only with this difference The first of them excell'd the rest in Gifts and were call'd Apostles but their Successors finding how disproportion'd their Merit was to that Title thought fit to decline it and then they began to be distinguished by the Name of Bishops Yet both were of the same Order and govern'd with the same Authority This is not the only instance wherein Salmasius has done right to the Truth with disservice to his Cause For in his Dissertation against Petavius he proves that there were many Secondary Apostles as we call them for distinction sake which were the Disciples of the First And these he tells us govern'd the Churches with equal Right and Power and in the same manner as the First had done He also ascribes to them the same Place over Presbyters that Bishops had in succeeding times So that according to him there were always Prelates since the days of Christ differing indeed from one another in Name and Circumstance in the first Ages but not in Authority Amongst the Prelates of the first Century I think
is consistent enough with his setled Residence in his Diocese when the Church of Ephesus was committed to his Administration I do not remember any other material Objection against what I have said concerning this subject So that I make no doubt still to affirm that Timothy was an Ordinary Pastor of the Church and thus much in effect is acknowledged by some Learned Presbyterians who say he was the first Presbyter or President of the Presbytery And if they would allow such Presidents as have the full Power of Ordination which he had Presidents with Authority equal to his and which as Cameron gathers from 1 Tim. 5.19 was greater than was consistent with the Office of other Presbyters Presidents that are so for life as Ludovicus Cappellus thinks they originally were Then if they please they may call them Presidents still and I shall not contend about the Name if we are agreed about the Thing But since you and many others have not made the Concessions I have mention'd I shall farther prove that the Office of Timothy was such as I have describ'd by the following Arguments 1. If it had been intended that the Authority committed to Timothy and others of his Rank should be temporary either this may appear from the nature of the thing or it might have been expected that we should have had some notice of it in the Scripture For if we may take the liberty without any grounds to fasten on it the Title of Temporary or Extraordinary we may by the same means soon put an end to any Constitutions whatsover But there is nothing in the nature of this Authority that may hinder its continuance nothing in the Scripture that declares it to be abrogated We may conclude therefore that as it is fit to be continued so it was design'd to be so in all succeeding times 2. We have no reason to believe that S. Paul would alter his own Constitutions without a cause or that without any necessity he would put the Government of a Church into a new Model and divert the Course of Discipline from that Channel in which it ought to run in all Ages If therefore he sent Timothy as an Extraordinary Commissioner to interpose in the Affairs of Ephesus we may suppose this to have been either 1. Because there was some Extraordinary Work which none but Extraordinary Officers could perform or 2. Because there were no Ministers at Ephesus or such only as were unfit for Government But neither of these can well be imagin'd Not the first for the Work was no other than what hath or might have been perform'd by Bishops ever since Not the second for there were Presbyters at Ephesus of eminent Gifts such as the Holy Ghost had made Overseers It seems improbable then that these were constituted Supreme Standing Rulers of the Church or that the Work for which they were so well qualified was so soon taken out of their hands Particularly it seems improbable either that they had the Power of Ordination or that it would have been transfer'd from them to a Stranger who came to visit them but was not of their number and that without any ground or reason given or any notice taken of them as concern'd in the matter Flaminius did a thing acceptable to the Greeks when he gave them permission to live after their own Laws But if he had afterwards sent amongst them some Governour with Power and Commission to over-rule and controul their Magistrates and to disturb that Polity which had been established by his Concession by such Changes and Turns of Affairs he would have introduc'd and encouraged great Irregularities and put his former Admirers upon upbraiding his Levity or questioning his Veracity And let us now suppose if you please that such Elders were constituted by S. Paul at Ephesus as were inabled and obliged to perform the highest Acts of Ecclesiastical Authority as Supreme Ordinary Pastors and were design'd also to be a Pattern for following Ages Let us farther suppose that an Officer Extraordinary had afterwards been left amongst them with Commission from that Apostle to alter the measures they had taken and to suspend the exercise of a principal part of their Function by taking it wholly to himself and that without any Miscarriage laid to their Charge you may easily perceive what Reflections this might have occasioned and that such Proceedings would have been so far from setting things in order that one has reason to think they would have put them into greater confusion 3. If such eminent Presbyters as were at Ephesus and a Church so flourishing as that of Ephesus was had a Governour put over them this ought not to be esteemed an extraordinary thing for doubtless other Presbyters and Churches whose Exigences were greater had so too And if such a Subordination of Officers was necessary when the Apostles were alive I cannot imagine why an end should afterwards be put to it when there was more occasion of it than ever Some of the most Learned Opposers of Episcopacy grant that Timothy and others of his Rank govern'd Churches with the same Plenitude of Power as Bishops afterwards did who as they say were rais'd in the second Century for the Cure of Schism But if in the common sense of Christians Prelacy was useful to that purpose as 't is supposed this must have obliged them to preserve it when it had been introduced amongst them by such as were directed by the Spirit of God and it could be no great Argument of their Wisdom if they laid aside that which was of Divine Original and were very shortly afterwards put upon contriving how to restore it by a Humane Invention 4. It seems very improbable that the Apostle should write two Epistles to Timothy only to direct him in the temporary Administration of the Affairs of a Place where he was only to make a transient Visit But if from the Examples we have of Presbyters and the Rules that are laid down for them in Scripture we may gather that such ought to be continued Then may we also conclude from the Example of Timothy from the Authority he had and the Rules that were given to him for the exercise of it and which are of perpetual use that the Office with which he was vested ought to be preserv'd in the Church till the end of the World 5. As we learn from the Scripture that Timothy resided at Ephesus so it may something confirm what I have said of his relation to that Place if there he ended his days And this is what is testified by Sophronius who tells us that there he gloriously suffer'd Martyrdom But more fully by an Ancient Writer in Photius who acquaints us that he was put to death at the detestable Festival called the Catagogium which he would have abrogated 6. After his death we find Onesimus in his Place who is said to be Bishop of Ephesus by Ignatius his Co-temporary and by whom he is
it I do not understand You have some other quotations from the Fathers which I need not here examine having done it already But I proceed to shew that it is altogether improbable that the Pastours of the Church who came next after the Apostles should conspire to deprave a Divine Institution And this I think will appear if it be consider'd 1. That they were persons of admirable Holiness and Virtue 2. If they had not been such they could not so suddenly have agreed in the same design to corrupt the Church as you contend in the same manner 1. They were persons of admirable Holiness and Virtue Clemens Alexandrinus gives an account what care S. John took of the Churches after his return from Patmos and that he admitted such into the Clergy as were design'd or distinguish'd by the Holy Ghost And as I noted before Irenaeus says the Apostles were desirous that they should be very perfect and unblamable in all things whom they left to be their Successors to whom they committed their own place of Government And can we imagine that such persons as these conspir'd to deprave an Institution of Christ When they daily expos'd their lives to danger when they despis'd the Vngulae and Catastae the rage of Savage Boasts and more Savage Men when a firm adherence to their Religion expos'd them to the Scourge or the Cross the Axe or the Fire and when they express'd such a chearful readiness to embrace the sorest evils that could be inflicted on them and death it self under the most dreadful Circumstances rather than deny their Master were they then contriving to ruin his Discipline or Caballing to make themselves great Or if the mystery of iniquity did so generally work in the Prelates who are suppos'd to have usurpt Authority over their Brethren was there not an honest Presbyter in the world to put them in mind of their Duty or to admonish them to keep their Station Was there not one upon earth that would oppose their Innovations or plainly tell them that by the appointment of Heaven all Presbyters are equal If the Presbyters had no regard for their own Authority had they no concern for their Masters glory Had they no remembrance of what the Apostles taught or of the Instructions for the Government of the Church which they had given Did they not only quietly see the degeneracy spread apace but help it forward by relinquishing the Trust and Authority committed to them by the Holy Ghost We have no reason certainly to suspect any such matters of them but if we had I should dread the Consequences of it 2. If the Bishops who liv'd in the next Age to that of the Apostles had not been persons of so much Perfection and Virtue yet they could not so suddenly have agreed to corrupt the Church in the same manner Arnobius disputing against the Gentiles says in vindication of the History of Christianity If that be false whence comes it to pass that the whole World was in so short a time fill'd with this Religion or how came Nations so distant to receive it with one consent And in like manner I may demand If Prelacy be a defection from an Institution of Christ or his Apostles how came it to gain so early an admission amongst persons of so many different Countries and Languages How came it so suddenly to be establish'd in all the Churches upon the face of the Earth You say that Ecclesiastical Prelates arose at best by occasion and prudentially upon the increase of Believers But how did they every where meet with the like occasions How came all the Churches in the World to act by the same Prudential Rules If you can shew how all the Bishops upon Earth agreed to exalt themselves above their Brethren and how the Presbyters every where so suddenly consented in their submission to them you are the man of the world fittest to write a Commentary on the Philosophy of Epicurus and to prove that his Atoms by their accidental concourse perform'd all the feats and wonders that have been attributed to them That I have not been singular in matching such improbabilities may appear from the words of Mr. Chillingworth which I shall here set down When I shall see says he all the Fables in the Metamorphosis acted and prove Stories when I shall see all the Democracies and Aristocracies in the world lie down and sleep and awake into Monarchies Then will I begin to believe that Presbyterial Government having continued in the Church during the Apostles times should presently after against the Apostles Doctrine and the will of Christ be whirl'd about like a Scene in a Masque and transform'd into Episcopacy In the mean time continues my Author whilst these things remain thus incredible and in human reason impossible I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus Episcopal Government is acknowledged to have been universally receiv'd in the Church presently after the Apostles times Between the Apostles times and this presently after there was not time enough for nor possibility of so great an alteration And therefore there was no such alteration as is pretended And therefore Episcopacy being confessed to be so Ancient and Catholick must be granted also to be Apostolick CHAP. XVII Episcopacy cannot be thought a degeneracy from an Apostolical Constitution if the Testimony of the Fathers may be admitted Their Testimony vindicated IT is certain that the Testimony of the Fathers cannot be admitted to determine the Controversie between us but with the ruine of your Cause it being altogether inconsistent with your Opinion That Episcopacy was not of a Divine or Apostolical Appointment but introduced prudentially and gradually advanced upon the steps to Corruption Even of that select Company who as you say were as Pious and Learned Fathers as any the Churches ever own'd and to whom you profess'd your adherence there was not a man who did not believe that Bishops were constituted by Christ himself or his Apostles or by both You have one Refuge however yet remaining which is to reject those as incompetent Witnesses who upon examination appear against you And accordingly you tell me That the Fathers wrote things they saw not and fram'd matters according to their own conceits and many of them were tainted with partial humours You farther add That the Catalogues of the Succession of Bishops which Eusebius has given us are only Conjectural and Traditionary words fitly join'd together That himself tells us there was a great Chasm in Ecclesiastical History for the three first Centuries Ay that in the third Book of that History Chap. 4. he says expresly as to the persons that succeeded the Apostles in the Government of the Churches that it is hard to tell particularly and by name who they were And that in making his Catalogues he went by way of Collection and Inference from what is written by S. Paul c. But the sum of what Eusebius does indeed say in that