never repealed by any succeeding Parliament But we are informed by the same R. Coke d that by the 1. Tac. 25. the Marian Act was repealed and so that of Edward revived And now to see him who pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel whose Office is only Ministerial and spiritual exercised only in spiritual things without reaching Men's Bodies inflicting only Rebukes and such verbal punishments to see such I say keeping Courts altogether Civil and inflicting corporal mulcts and Punishments after the manner of Worldly Potentats but especially when all this is done in their own Name would really make the indifferent Beholder averre that such imitated to the Life his Romish Holiness and believed much better his Doctrine of his receiving both spiritual and temporal Sword than that of our Saviour whereby he prohited his Apostles and their Successours all such earthly Grandure and despotick Power as resembles the Lordship and Dominion of worldly Princes § 3. But their Maxime not only intimats that Prelacy well accordeth with Mouarchy but also that any other Form of Church-government is destructive thereof Which how they will evince I know not How they can shew that Presbytrie with which I am only here concerned is destructive of or in the least inconsistent with Monarchy I cannot perceive They can I am sure neither deduce their Inference from the Practice of Presbyterians nor the Principles of Presbytrie Not from the first for though they load them as if they had been the Cause of many Civil Broyls and Calamities and especially of these ensuing the Year 38. We may justly yea with the allowance of the Hierarchie's greatest Favourers reject the Charge and send it home to the Prelats who by their attempting to introduce into the Church a Mass of Romish Superstitions and their Pride and Tyranny exercised on all sorts were become unsupportable to both Nobility and People B. Laud Montegue and such Papaturients were then earnestly labouring the reintroduction of a Mass of Romish Leaven into England though there were but too much there already which had never been cast â—ut Take one Instance or two in the words of R. Coke a high Church-of-England-man and no Lover of Presbyterians I 'm sure The Bishops saith he of the Province of Canterbury in their own Names enjoin the removal of the Communion-table in the Paroch Churches Vniversities from the body of the Church or Chancel to the east of the Chancel cause Rails to be set about the Table and refuse to administer the Sacrament to such as shall not come up to the Rails receive it Kneeling that the book of Sports on Sundays be read in Churches and enjoin Adoration I do not find that Adoration was ever enjoined before nor any of the forenamed Injunctions in any Canon of the Church Our Bishops were of the same mettal with these Innovatours in England and their most docile Schollars Laud therefore and his Faction apprehending that we would make but a small resistance against them to whom England was likely to yeeld prepared for us all her Cup with some other additional Drugs more Romish than what was obtruded on the English Witness the Form in the Administration of the Sacrament which as R. Coke acknowledges was the same in the Mass. But seeing the knowledge of the state we were in when the Nation entred into a Covenant and opposed that Stream of Romish Abominations contributes not a little to repell their fierce charges of Rebellion and Sedition the Reader will pardon me though at some length I transcribe a Passage from one who is beyond suspicion of being partial in favours of Presbytrie Covenant or ought of that nature I mean Dr. Burnet The Bishops saith he therefore were cherished by him the King viz. with all imaginable expressions of kindness and confidence but they lost all their Esteem with the People and that upon divers Accounts The People of Scotland had drunk in a deep prejudice against every thing that savoured of Popery This the Bishops judged was too high and therefore took all means possible to lessen it both in Sermons and Discourses mollifying their Opinions and commending their Persons not without some reflections on the Reformers But this was so far from gaining their Design that it abated nothing of the Zeal was against Popery but very much hightned the rage against themselves as favouring it too much There were also subtile Questions started some Years before in Holland about Predestination and Grace and Arminius his Opinion as it was condemned in a Synod at Dort so was generally ill reported of in all reformed Churches and no-where worse than in Scotland but most of the Bishops and their Adherents undertook openly and zealously the Defence of these Tenets Likewise the Scotish Ministers and People had ever a great respect to the Lord's-day and generally the Morality of it is reckoned an Article of Faith among them but the Bishops not only undertook to beat down this Opinion but by their Practices expressed their neglect of that Day and after all this they declared themselves avowed Zealots for the Liturgy and Ceremonies of England which were held by the Zealous of Scotland all one with Popery Vpon these Accounts it was that they lost all their Esteem with the People Neither stood they in better Terms with the Nobility who at that time were as considerable as ever Scotland saw them and so proved both more sensible of Injuries and more capable of resenting them They were offended with them because they seemed to have more interest with the King than themselves had so that Favours were mainly distributed by their Recommendation they were also upon all Affairs nine of of them were Privy Counsellers divers of them were of the Exehequer Spotswood Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews was made Chancellour and Maxwell Bishop of Ross was fair for the Treasury and engaged in a high rivalry with the Earl of Traquair then Treasourer which tended not a little to help foreward their Ruine And besides this they began to pretend highly to the Titles and Impropriations and had gotten one Learnmonth a Minister presented Abbot of Lindoris and seemed confident to get that state of Abbots with all the Revenue and Power belonging to it again restored into the hands of Churchmen designing also that according to the first Institution of the Colledge of Justice the half of them should be Churchmen This could not but touch many of the Nobility in the quick who were too large sharers in the Patrimony of the Church not to be very seusible of it They were no less hatefull to the Ministry because of their Pride which was cried out upon as unsupportable Great Complaints were also generally made qf Simoniacal Pactions with their Servants which was imputed to the Masters as if it had been for their advantage at least by their allowance They also exacted a new Oath of Intrants besides what was in the Act of Parliament for obedience to
over the Bishops was only in respect of the royalty of the Isle which the King gave the Abbot As if ever Bede or any man else could have mark'd such a Superiority as strange and unusual it being nothing but what every Prince or Lord of any place still practises who altho' he subject himself to a Bishop in Spirituals yet in respect of Temporals and the Royalty uses to retain the Superiority But which ' utterly spoils the Bishop's comment Bede tells that all Columbanus got was the possession of a little Isle able to sustain about five Families for building of a Monastry without the least mention of his being invested with the Royalty thereof or any other Island and yet to him were all the Bishops of the whole Province all the Bishops of Scotland saith the Saxon Chronicle cited by the Bishop himself subjected so that this pretended Royalty of Columban over the Island becomes a vain dream tho' 't were real could do him no kindness the whole Prouince being certainly a far other thing than any such Island wherefore the Superiority this Presbyter had over these Bishops must needs have been in Ecclesiastick affairs and this was really remarkable and unusual But of this enough for whosoever believes that the errand of this most ancient Preacher and Propagator of Christ's Kingdom was to win an earthly Kingdom to himself and that the King shar'd with him his Soveraignity and Realm may as soon swallow the whole legend of Constantine's Donation to Sylvester But to return to the Advocat as in the things that he touches he wholly prevaricats so he never handles our main Argument which is taken from what is related of our Churches practice preceeding the coming of Palladius He only refers to Spotswood who says Buchanan is of opinion that before Palladius his coming there was no Bishop in this Church what warrant he had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Joannes Major saith speaking of the same Palladius The Scots he says were instructed in the Christian Faith by Priests and Monks without any Bishops But from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other form of Government will not stand with any reason For be it as they speak that by the Travels of fome pious Monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by Monks seeing long after these times it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with matters of the Church nor were they reckon'd among the Clergy But it 's strange how he can alledge Buchanan to be supported by no Authors except Major for Palladius his being Scotland's first Bishop he could not but know that not only Major but also Fordun Bede with many others within the Isle Prosper Bergumensis and among the later Historians the Magdeburgenses Baron with many other Transmarines assert it And this last affirms that none can deny it § 4. It 's true Spotswood says that Boeth out of ancient Annals reports that these Priests were wont for their better Government to elect some one of their number by common suffrage to be Chief and Principal among them without whose knowledge and consent nothing was done in any matter of importance and that the person so elected was called Scotorum Episcopus a Scots Bishop or a Bishop of Scotland But they reap little advantage here for in Boeth's words y there is no mention as the Bishop without book affirms whether these Annals were ancient or modern But whatever they be Hector gives ground to believe that he had Annals declaring the contrary as appears by his words above cited where he homologated that common sentiment of Christians and told us that Palladius was our first Bishop and that none before him had any Hierarchical Power in Scotland To alledge therefore Boethius as espousing their cause here is ony to set him at variance with all Christians and by the ears with himself But grant it were as Spotswood says yet there should no small dammage accreu to their Cause seeing on supposition hereof it follows that the Episcopal Ordination was altogether wanting in the primitive Church of Scotland it not being supposeable that this one man could Ordain all the Pastors in Scotland yea that even this their great Bishop had no other Ordination himself but what he receiv'd from Presbyters § 5. The Bishop's following words from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith c. are altogether void of reason For it 's granted that after the coming of Palladius which is the time whereunto he must refer the gathering of the Church she then indeed began to have another Government and never man yet pleaded that because the Church of Scotland was not govern'd by Bishops before Palladius therefore 't was not really govern'd by them after his coming which is the Inference the Bishop's words seem to deny But I believe there is more in them for they are abstruse and judge their meaning to be that tho' we had no Bishops before Palladius yet this can be no ground to conclude that we ought to have none afterward our Church being then rude and in her infant state The Advocat is of the same mind saying that before Palladius his time our Church was constituenda or unsettl'd But who can believe it For first it 's generally suppos'd that Palladius came to free this Church from Pelagianism and not to establish Church-government Secondly Is 't credible that the Church of Scotland after so long a continuation and flourishing of Christianity had been rather than any other Churches without any certain form of Government This is certainly a thing unparalellable even according to our Adversaries who tell us that every Church very soon after its beginning had its Diocesan Bishops and so a certain form of Government Thirdly Yea altho' many other Churches had been without all Government for such a tract of time there is ground to believe that Scotland could not they lying most of this time under the persecuting Sword whereas we read of no persecution in our Church even while our Kings were Pagan and our King Donald the I the first crown'd Head in the World that ever subject'd it self to Jesus Christ very much encourag'd the Christians and was seconded herein by severals of his Successors And altho' some of 'em were vitious and their Reigns short or vex'd with Wars yet such trouble never struck directly against Christianity like the fury of the Pagans throngh the rest of the World and others were both excellent Men and had longer and peaceable Reigns as Findochus and Cratilinthus but especially Fincormachus an excellent man and a great promoter of Religion and therefore as is most presumable was a great Instrument under God for the settlement of our Church-affairs Add to all this Fourthly That the terrible Storm of Persecution through the Roman World drove then from the Brittons
Office for which they were separated was neither new nor perpetual § 17. Having overthrown the Reasons of his Gloss it must yeeld to the Text expresly telling us they were erected only for that time and that for the paucity of Ministers endowed with singular Graces But this reason says he is nought For suppose we 20 30 40 Men in the Kingdom qualifi'd for the Office of the Ministry could not these have divided the Kingdom into a proportionable number of large Parishes And still as more Men turn'd qualifi'd could they not have lessen'd these greater Parishes But he with whom our Reformers were all most contemptible Idiots and more especially in Church-policy needs not wonder tho' they had fall'n into a much greater Solecism But he forgets that many in these most dark times were made Ministers who yet needed the Assistance and Direction of the better qualifi'd for a while in Church-policy and matters of such importance till they should be able to go hand in hand with them and that the main end of Superintendents was the perpetual Travelling Preaching and Instructing where there were no Pastors and planting of Churches As well continues he as our Presbyterian Brethren now unite Presbytries A strange mistake as if where Presbytries are united any Minister took for his proper Charge a multitude of Parishes He here insinuats that in the Superintendents there was established a Prelacy But the present Question is only about the sentiments of our Reformers and that they never thought the use of Superintendents croffed the Doctrine of Parity is most clear were there no more from their using Superintendent-commissioners even after they had declar'd Episcopacy unlawfull in it self But all this their jangle is the fruit of meer prejudice or worse for none near these times look'd on Superintendency as perpetual Not the Court Party seeing they endeavour'd to change Superintendents for Tulchan Bishops not the rest of the Church who as the necessity of them decreased suffer'd them to wear out And after that in an unanimous Assembly they had ordain'd that the whole Church should be divided in a competent number of Presbytries declar'd that Superintendents were no longer expedient And good ground had they even from that very Book of Policy so to do for if the whole tenor of that Head of Superintendents appointing them almost constantly to Travel to Preach thrice a week at least and beside that to examine the Life c. of the Ministers the Orders of the Kirks the manners of the People care how the Poor be provided how the Youth be instructed admonish where it 's needfull by good Counsel compose Differences note and delate to the Kirk hainous Crimes and all this because of the paucity of qualifi'd Ministers evidently proclaims not that this Superintendent was a kind of Evangelist expedient only at that juncture of the re-entry of the Gospel into Scotland I appeal to the candid Judgement of the impartial Moreover if 't were otherwise why should they not as punctually have described his Duties after the time of his perpetual Travels his Preaching thrice a week and other such vast Labours were ended for he grants these were to indure but for a time after which he insinuats that the Superintendents were to remain quiet in their chief Towns but no word in all the account we have of them of such distinctions of times of such perpetual rest not a word therefore of their perpetuity Lastly which he wisely i. e. sutably to his purpose omitted for like the Council ask'd at Abel it ends the matter see this Head of Superintendents Because say they we have appointed a larger Stipend to them that shall be Superintendents than to the rest of the Ministers we have thought good to signifie to your Honours such Reasons as moved us to make difference betwixt Preachers at this time Now pray may not he that runs read here that had it not been for some forcing Circumstances and Exigencies of the then present time they had made no difference at all between one Minister and another And then after a few lines they laid down their Reasons in the very words the sense whereof is now under Debate If the Ministers c. § 18. In the mean while we need not be much concern'd whether these Superintendents were to be temporary or perpetual there being nothing therein that made any real difference between the Church-government which was then and that which is now And indeed these vast Travels and Pains in preaching thrice a week c. are sure enough Tokens that the Superintendent could not be much distinguish'd from an ordinary Pastor save in these extraordinary Labours and was far from the Episcopal Eminency and Grandour seeing he was so far from the Episcopal ease and idleness without which the former but rarely obtains This and other such Proofs of the vast difference between the Superintendents and their Diocesans and of the likeness between the Government under the Reformers and that which is now our Author slides over with rallry saying it may be as well told them that Bishops wore black Hats and silk Superintendents blew Bonets and tartan as if most constant and hard labour in the Gospel were no more valuable for distinguishing one Minister from another than highland Plydes and blew Bonnets He meets you with the like Drollery if you mind him that the Superintendents had no Metrapolitan and Episcopal Consecration or Ordination but it 's risus sardonius And his Questions What is this to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governours of the Church Do these differences distinguish between Bishops and Superintendents as to preheminence of Power flow from deep dissimulation of the mortal Wound giv'n to his Cause seeing without Episcopal Ordination which was never requir'd to a Superintendent For Knox as for example who with our Author was only a Presbyter ordain'd or admitted as they then spoke Spotswood Superintendent there can be no Episcopal Power no not so much as the very essentials of a Bishop These Superintendents were also without any Civil Places power or emoluments that way which make up the far greater part of the Episcopal greatness and still subject and accountable to the General Assemblies And there was reason for it saith our Author supposing that General Assemblies as then constituted were sit to be supream Judicatories of the National Church For there was no reason that Superintendents should have been Popes Then surely either were our Prelats Popes or most vehemently covetted a papal Power seeing above all things they fear'd abhorr'd and studi'd the ruine of these our General Assemblies And no wonder if they did so and that our Author intimats his dislike of these our Assemblies For if this one thing viz. the subjection of the Superintendents to these Assemblies as they were then constituted be duely weigh'd it 's fair to â—et them on the very same levell with their Brethren For give him never so great a Power in the Province where
be concluded the first step of the Beast's Throne But this retorsion being once handl'd shall hurt us no more then what we have already removed for take a Gospel Ministry unconfounded with a papal Hierarchy and then there is not the least colour or pretext for any Man 's ascribing to it the first rise of Popery the parity we plead for among Pastors of Flocks secures a Gospel-Ministry from any force or appearance of reason in any such assault whereas on which I 'm not now to dwell the Topicks establishing Prelacy tend no less to assert a Papacy But again the belief of a Gospel-Ministry as a thing altogether necessary for the Being of a Church is so well and so universally rooted in the hearts of all Christians that they compar'd with the rest have scarce amounted to a handfull who had the holdness to deny it and so there 's little hazard to be fear'd from these few contemptible Objectors and tho' there seem'd to be and the Objection should appear never so pungent yet it could be really of no weight against so necessary and indispensible an Ordinance Whereas on the other hand there 's so little necessity of Prelacy that the far greatest and best part of its Abettors and in these the Author himself as in due time shall appear grants that 't is no different Order from Presbytry has no footing in the Word of God and in a word to the overthrow of his Principles confounds a Prelat with a parochial Pastor Another grand but just prejudice against the Hierarchy is the looseness and prophanity most frequently cleaving thereto how prophane and scandalous they and theirs were during former Prelacy has already appear'd of the latter the matter is no less evident for at such a height growth during their Government yea under their wings did prophanity abusing of God's blessed Name and such gross immoralities arrive that to abstain from such vices and follow piety was a Crime well nigh able to make a Man pass for a Whig and Phanatick and what hazard did enshew these Sir-names none is ignorant All this and much more was not only evident to the body of this Kingdom but was also notic'd abroad and amongst others by their Friend R. Coke Yea his Majesty whom Divine Mercy sent for our Relief well knew 't and accordingly in his Declaration for Scotland has amongst many others this most memorable Sentence Although saith He the Dissenters have just cause of distrust when they call to mind how some hundreds of their Ministers were driven out of their Churches without either Accusation or Citation the filling of many of whose Places with Ignorant and Scandalous Persons hath been one great occasion of all those Miseries which that Country for a long time hath groaned under They may pretend that such Enormities were only accidental to Prelacy which may fall out under any Government but none versant in Church Story is ignorant how much mischief and scandal this Hierarchy hath cast upon Christianity Let them read Socrates and other Records of these more ancient times and they shall find that the Prelats tho' but beginning to appear and by far not so degenerat from the simplicity of the Gospel as afterward by their swelling tympany and aspiring to Domination induc'd the People to commit the most lewd and vile Pranks readily imaginable to the doolfull scandalizing of Jew and Gentile and their utter abominating of Christianity it self as is clear from the miserable Havock Destruction and Slaughter the contrary Factions of Bishops in the Plea for the Episcopal See between Damasus and Vrsinus prompted the People to commit from the most scandalous Pranks of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria the most unhumane and barbarous concomitants and consequents of the Deposition of Chrysostome with many other such open Impieties all caus'd and occasion'd by the Prelatick pride and insolency which publick and most scandalous Enormities had the Christian World retain'd the truly Primitive and Apostolick Parity we plead for could never have hapned for had the Superiority Riches and Grandour the very aples of these most unchristian Contentions been wanting and had every Pastor been kept at the earnest labour of Teaching Exhorting and Catechising a particular Flock or Congregation with only such a competent Stipend as suffic'd to secure him from the contempt of Poverty not to feed Luxury Grandour and such like Vices there had been no occasion of such lamentable Broyls This was observ'd by Nazianzen who himself was Bishop of Constantinople and therefore he earnestly wish'd that there had been no primacy of Place no Prelacy no Prerogative no Superiour or Inferiour Degrees of Pastors The marrow of Saravia's Answer to this most cogent place of Nazianzen is that he finds no fault with the Order of Degrees themselves but with Men and with the times wherein the ambition of the Arrians troubl'd the Church The common and blunt shift of the Romanists whereby to palliat the unlawfullness of their Papacy and a real and clear contradiction of Nazianzen's plain words And was not afterward the Papal and Prelatical pride and affectation of secular rule the prime source of the unspeakable Evils that reign'd all along before the Reformation and yet continue in the Papacy Is not that Kingdom where Prelacy is of most account fill'd with the most idle naughty and profain Clergy-men that are to be found at least in the Protestant World And how can it be otherwise seeing things or Offices retaining litle or nothing of what did primitively constitute them produce quite contrary effects to these design'd by the Authors thereof But nothing is more plain than that the simplicity of the Gospel-Ministry is alter'd into a secular Grandour more by far resembling the Princes of the Gentiles than the Apostles of our Meek and Lowly Jesus who came not to be ministred to but to Minister Now the best of things once degenerat become most noxious what can therefore be expected from such but that they should suit their Government and Policy change the Spirit of a Gospel-Ministry for that of Pomp and Secularity grow intirely Carnal and so become the source of Prophanity in stead of Holiness Part II. Wherein the Epistles of Ignatius are more particularly consider'd and the Plea of the Hierarchicks therefrom examin'd Section I. Of the Author and his Work IT is evident and clear to the more thinking and ingenuous part of the Christian World how Rome's Advocats while they Agent her Cause from the truly Canonical Writings of the Apostles and Prophets after some few struglings sorry evasions and feeble resistance are compell'd to give back and in reality abandon their Posts but were they permitted to use Apocryphal Writings which they say are Ancient enough and written not long after the Holy Scriptures were not these also pull'd out of their hands by demonstrating the spuriousness thereof they should perhaps make a greater appearance and keep the fields somewhat longer The same also is the fate
of other Hierarchicks pleading the Cause of Episcopacy for while they manage it from Scripture-grounds you may perceive them to make so wide and incoherent Deductions so slender and pitifull Defences so wild and unbottom'd Distinctions as loudly proclaim that except they procure Auxuliaries from some other where they must also defert their Cause and leave the Field to their Adversaries But let them descend somewhat lower to Ecclesiastick Antiquities we shall find their confidence stronger for they then bring a multitude of great Names as so many arm'd Champions marshell'd in Rank and Order Among these there be some wherewith as with so many Elephants they threaten to make vast lanes among their Adversaries but there 's no great cause of terror for if they be but boldly confronted we shall then find them either like these Elephants Ctesias and Diodore fable to have been us'd by their fictitious Semiramis deceitfull Images and hobgoblings to strike a vain fear in their Enemies or like the African Elephants in Polybius which in stead of destroying the adverse Party frequently turn'd back dissipated and overthrew these who brought them to the Battel The greatest of these and whom they with most confidence produce is their Epistolick Ignatius who is to them as one of the Hee-goats and Rams before the Flock of whom they boast as if nothing should stand before him It shall not therefore be amiss if as we promis'd we look more narrowly into this their bold Assertion and examine if their Grounds be equal to their Confidence § 2. Ignatius as Eusebius relates was a Bishop or Pastor of Antioch and being brought to Rome in the time of Trajan the Emperour gloriously laid down his Life for the Cause of Christianity He is said to have written in his Journey to Rome several Epistles viz. To the Smyrneans to Polycarp to the Ephesians to the Magnesians to the Philadelphians to the Trallians and Romans all which are either mention'd or cited by Eusebius There are other Epistles also by Writers of a much later date ascribed to Ignatius but in the first seven only do our Adversaries place the weight of their Cause and therefore with them alone we shall be concerned § 3. Of these Epistles in the former Century first in Latine and then in Greek appeared at the first but two or three only afterward they amounted to fifteen all which they Father'd upon Ignatius these were greedily hugg'd by the Romanists and reason they had so to do most of these Epistles being fraughted with stuff that savour'd of the Romish Innovations and proclaim'd them several Centuries posteriour to Ignatius his Age and accordingly these Editions were scarce born while they were condemn'd and stigmatiz'd by the most learn'd of the Reform'd viz. Calvin the Magdeburgick Centuriators and afterwards by Whittaker Perkins Scultet Rivet and others as the issue of a quite other Parent than him of whom they boasted § 4. Notwithstanding hereof the Advocats for Prelacy such as Whitgift Bilson Dounam Heylyn Taylor and the rest of the Party lean'd on these Epistles as firm propes of their Caufe giving severals of 'em the Epithets of Learned and Pious without the least exception Thus for a long time were these Epistles condemn'd by many yet applauded by a few § 5. But at length the most learn'd and famous Dr. Vshher lighted on two Latine Manuscripts much differing from the former Editions and containing many passages cited by the Ancients that were wanting in the former And soon after Isaacus Vossius produc'd a Greek Coppy out of the Duke of Tuscanie's Library in many things agreeing with Vsher's Manuscripts These Coppies bred a wonderfull confidence in the minds of the Episcopal Party after which every one of them gave his loud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therewith pleas'd themselves as if the Controversie concerning Prelacy had been already determin'd by a Divine Oracle But in the mean while and by this very Action of imbracing and extolling this new Edition as the only genuine Coppy of Ignatius They publish'd to the World that they had all along while in conjunction with Romanists and in opposition to Protestants they so passionatly propugn'd the former Editions either been lamentably shallow in their knowledge of Ecclesiastick Antiquity notwithstanding their great boast thereof as if all Men beside were Dwerfs herein or which is little better exceedingly partial in favours of their Cause and Interest However maugre all such Impeachments they alter their Judgements as they see fit reject what they had but the other day warmly hugg'd and applaud their new Ignatius § 6. Yet also they were their alone herein for the most learn'd and these of the reform'd Churches who were most able to give Judgement concerning such Controversies as Blondel Salmasius and others continu'd in their former Sentiment believing that these new Copies did as really ly under just suspicion as the Old After divers Re-encounters amongst learn'd Men concerning these Epistles Dallaeus a learn'd French Minister wrote more largely and directly to evince them spurious but was oppos'd by Dr. Beverige and D. Pearson who wrote his Vindiciae Ignatianae a large and laborious Work to prove that these Epistles were the genuine product of Ignatius in which his Party triumphed not a little apprehending that this Matter was decided so as there was no more Dispute or Opposition to be feared But 't was not long till Daill's Defence was undertaken by Monsieur L'arroque another learn'd Pastor of the French Church and being again oppos'd by Pearson and Beverge wrote a second time concerning the same Subject § 7. But such Arts were us'd as suppress'd and stiffl'd the Work of this learn'd Author of which Book L'arroque's Son in his Life prefix'd to his Adversaria Sacra gives us this account He publish'd his Observations on Pearson's vindiciae Ignatianae and Beverige ' s Annotations which came to the light by this occasion John Daille being departed this Life two great Englishmen who had procur'd to themselves a perpetual Fame of whom the one lately deceas'd had the Name of the Bishop of Chester the other was adorn'd with the Title of Dr. but deserv'd a greater Dignity exploded what Daille had written concerning Ignatius his Epistles But L'arroque in favours of his deceas'd Friend undertook the Patrociny of this Hero and except Fame be altogether false has fortunatly defended his Judgement These Observations were again assaulted by the famous Beverige to whom our Author preparing an Answer which we have by us almost perfected thro' the Importunity of some Friends was suddenly turn'd another way This he did the more willingly both because he had done enough in favours of his dead Friend and also that he might make it appear that seeing while he was yet fresh he sounded a retreat he had unwillingly entred the Lists with the English Protestants Thus he and who these Friends were we are inform'd by another Author a Man of the Episcopal Perswasion and therefore may
a particular reference to the Flock or People and seeing finally so many things spoken by Ignatius of these Bishops can agree only to Congregational Pastors I conclude that by these Ignatian Bishops not Diocesan Prelats but Pastors of particular Flocks not only may but of necessity must be understood And it 's further observable that Preaching Visiting of particular Persons and the rest of the Pastoral Work is either injoin'd unto or clearly intimated to belong to the Bishop only but nothing to the Presbyters save sitting in Council with him Now if our Opposites insist on their contrary Argument from the largeness of the Cities and from this that Ignatius still speaks but of one Bishop therein and hence conclude that he must be Diocesan the result of all must be a sharper Conflict between Ignatius and himself and so a fuller proof of the spuriousness of these Epistles it being evident from what is adduc'd that this Bishop was only a Pastor of a single Congregation yea so evident that it hath puzl'd the learn'dest of our Opposites § 4. Of this mind is Joseph Mede For speaking of these Ignatian Epistles It should seem saith he that in these first times before Dioceses were divided into those lesser and subordinate Churches we now call Parishes and Presbyters assigned to them they had not only one Altar in one Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the Company or Corporation of the Faithfull united under one Bishop or Pastor and that was in the City and Place where the Bishop had his See and Residence like as the Jews had but one Altar and one Temple for the whole Nation united under one High-Priest And yet as the Jews had their Synagogues so perhaps might they have more Oratories than one tho' their Altar were but one there namely where the Bishop was On Sunday saith Justin Martyr all that live in Towns or in the Country meet together in one Place namely as he there tells us to celebrate and participate the Holy Eucharist Why was this but because they had not many places to celebrate in And unless this were so whence came it else that a schismatical Bishop was said to set up another Altar and that a Bishop and an Altar are made Correlatives See St. Cyprian Ep. 40. 72. 73. Et de unitate Ecclesiae And thus perhaps is Ignatius also to be understood in that forequoted Passage of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Where 't is clear that Mr. Mede well perceived the thing we now plead for in Ignatius viz. that this Bishop was only the Pastor of a single Flock Indeed fear to offend his Friends or something else made him say so little as he could and something that he ought not to have said while he would parallel this Altar with that of the Jews yet he 's express enough that all subject to the Bishop met in one place for Participation of the Sacraments and consequently for hearing of the Word and moreover really acknowledgeth that Dioceses then were only what Parishes are now and if so tho' they had other Oratories 't is nothing to the purpose of our Opposits which yet his perhaps proves him afraid to assert For he knew well enough that seeing as he grants all under his Charge took their Communion with the Bishop at his Church which as every one knows was then Celebrated at least every Lord's day any other Oratories for publick Worship had been altogether unnecessary with which superfluities the Church in these early and tempestuous days was not at all acquainted In vain therefore Dr. Maurice that he may at once abuse both Mede and Ignatius tells us that Altar in the primitive sense signified not only the Communion Table but the whole Place where the Chair of the Bishop and the Seats of the Presbyters were placed and in this sense there was but one Altar in one Diocess as there is now but one Consistory as is clear from Ignatius and Usher And to be in one Altar which is Ignatius his Phrase is only to be in Communion with the Bishop And this Dr. Maurice would have to be Mede's meaning thereof But the falshood of this is not only evident from Ignatius who all along as we have seen reciprocats his Bishop with the Pastor of a particular Flock but also from Mede's express words as we have already observed from them I pass as scarce good sense Dr. Maurice his saying that Altar not only signified the Communion Table but the whole place of the Bishop's Chair c. The Dispute not being what place or thing in a Church Altar signifi'd but if thereby in Ignatius one or more places for publick Worship be meaned yea this my sense of Ignatius Doctor Wake seems to grant while he says speaking of these Ignatian times that none officiated but either the Bishop himself or he who was appointed or allow'd by him and that they had in every such Place of their Assembling one Table or Altar at which they performed this Service We have heard already Mede rightly observing out of Ignatius that the Altar or Communion Table was only at the Bishop's Residence and where he officiated And we see from Dr. Wake that in every place of solemn Worship they had an Altar or Communion Table The Conclusion then is which we also already heard Mede acknowledging that there were then no fewer Bishops than Places of publick Worship which is the Truth and what we conclude from Ignatius And to these add the words of one who is neither unskillfull in these Matters nor yet Partial in favours of Presbytry In the beginning saith he the Bishops whole Charge was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the strain of Ignatius his Epistles especially that to Smyrna it would appear that there was but one Church at least but one Place where there was one Altar and Communion in each of these Parishes for he saith there was one Bishop one Church and one Altar And now judge of the symphony of this Assertion with the Principles of the Author or how he could averr that if these Epistles be Genuine the Cause of Presbytry will be undone But of all things most strange and unaccountable is Dr. Pearson's Conduct in the Dispute who with indefatigable pains and vast learning wrote his Defence of Ignatius to the end as he pretends he might well nigh infallibly establish a Diocesan Bishop and yet has proved so far from hitting the white at which he ultimately levell'd that on supposition of the sufficiency of his Vindiciae he most sufficiently demonstrats the Identity of Bishop and parochial Pastor during the time of Ignatius and thus inavoidably ruines what he most earnestly intended to repair And now behold the vast Fabrick and Engine wherewith they threaten the utter Ruine of Presbytry turning upon and shattering to pieces their Dio cesan Hierarchy Nec enim Lex justior ulla Quam necis Artifices
than the rest assert that it is founded on the Example and Institution of Christ or his Apostles § 3. This Discourse therefore shall weigh the Advantages alledged to flow from Episcopacy that it may appear if it have such Effects as they Promise As also inquire if the Hurt and Dammage does not preponderat all the Good they can pretend to be linked to their Hierarchy Neither shall we neglect to examine if what the most Learned of that Perswasion bring from Ecclesiastick Antiquity be subservient to their Cause Section II. The Aphorism No Bishop No King discuss'd A Chief Argument whereby they would prove the necessity of Prelacy they bring from the great Support which they say it affords to Monarchy Hence with them No Bishop No King is an axiomatick Aphorism which cannot be readily granted seeing to name no more the charges the Hierarchy stood the King and Kingdom made a dear Bargain Much was spent in their stated Revenues but more by their clandestine Exactions and other sinistrous means of draining the Country and places of their pretended Jurisdictions throw which there are Incorporations that even at this day groan under the Debts they then contracted And yet more by sustaining Standing-forces to be Janizaries to the Prelates and their Complices and persecute the sincerer part of Protestants for else there was then no use of such numbers Yet their Maxime may be thus far granted that Prelacy may much contribute to the introduction of a Despotick and Arbitrary Government And indeed the great Power they usurped and manifold Influences they had over both Cities and Country either to wheedle or menace them to elect such Members of Parliament as pleased them and to Cajole or awe these Parliament-men to speak in their own Dialect And the being of a good number of them prime Lords of the Articles whereby they had either the mediat or immediat Flection of the rest made them well nigh able to effect no less Which kind of Government no Wise and Paternal Prince will desire § 2. Moreover that Princes have no great reason to be fond of them is apparent from their great unfitness to manage Politick and State-Affairs There are two Ways whereby one may be fitted for being a Statesman either when Natural induements are extraordinary which I doubt if many of our Prelats could affirm of themselves Or else that of Education and continued Industry whereby to be fitted for State-imployments but so far were they from any thing of this that during their greener years they had quite other Studies and Imployments being designed for the Ministry and so were obliged to prosecute hard the Study of Divinity which I am sure will give any Man his handsfull of Work who makes earnest of it From this they are taken to feed some Flock which at least will give them no less exercise Now how these Men can be fit for managing State-affairs or how they can be well kept from falling into Solecisms therein whose skill is so small is not very discernable But though they were never so well fore-armed for such high State-imployments how find they leisure to exercise them Is not the Ruling and Governing so many Ministers and Churches which they alledge themselves to be entrusted with a Work heavy enough to exercise if not to bruise any one Man Or where have they found Warrant to relinquish the Ministry and turn themselves to Offices of State when offered or to undertake both together Do they not believe that either of them is heavy enough Know they not that not only the Apostle but also the ancient Canons and to name no others these which though not truly are called the Canons of the Apostles most clearly condemn this their Practice Let neither say they a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken upon him any secular Business otherways let him be cast out off his Office Hence we may learn if it be out of Conscience that these Men plead for Antiquity when they palpable contemn and trample what themselves count the most venerable Precepts thereof Moreover it 's observable how they so far as their Interest led them still studied the ruine of those to whom they owed their Being as Bishops Thus the Roman Prelats studied the Ruine of both the Eastern and Western Emperours Thus the Bishops of Scotland brought no small Vexation to both King and Nobility in the Reign of Alexander the III. And so Becket of Canterâ—ury and his Faction handled Henry the II of England But worse did their Successours treat Richard the II whom in his Absence they deprived of his Kingdom It 's vain to repone that these were Papists seeing the ambition of Prelats is well enough known of whatever Name they be Yea such also have been the Practices of Prelats who acknowledged no Pope as divers of the Greek Patriarks who helped not a little to Dethrone their Emperour And the English Bishops as Sir Francis Knols complains in a Letter to Secretary Cicil encroached not a little upon the Priviledges of the Crown kept Courts in their own Name and still give out that the Complex of their Office i. e. the civil part of it as well as the other without any Distinction was not from the King but from Jesus Christ. Which Encroachments are really Imperium in Imperio On which account this their usurped Power as being dangerous and of a Romish Original was abolished in the first Parliament of Edward the VI. The Substance of what Dr. Sanderson either insinuats or more clearly expresseth in Answer hereto is that this was a Corruption in Edward 's Reformation And that some other Courts in England as well as these of the Bishops are not kept in the King's Name But sure it 's not very credible that this was a Corruption seeing nothing else since Edward's Days hath been done during the succeeding Reigns for that Church's further Reformation but 't is an odd Paradox if we consider the Author for it was Mary who Abolished this Act of Edward and restored their Power when she brought back the rest of Popery And though other Courts as he says be not kept in the King's Name yet reason teacheth and former experience proves how dangerous it was to give Ecclesiasticks ought that looks like an Absolute power and worldly Grandure whereby like the Pope they may by his Artifices arrive at length to a real Independency And indeed B. Laud made large steps towards it who as Roger Coke relates copt with the King himself and maugre both his Will and Authority must visit Colledges not as his Commissioner but by his own Metropolitan right and plumed thus saith the Author in his own Feathers all black and white without one borrowed from Caesar whereby the more he assumes to himself the less he leaves to the King he now soars higher And notable here is Dr. Sanderson's disingenuity who always gives out that the Marian Act which he still compares with yea prefers to that of Edward was
Stilling fleet And amongst many others these his wâ—ords are most observable for having taken notice that Eusebius makes it a most hard Matter to know who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches they planted adds say you so is it so hard a Matter to find out who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches planted by them unless it be mention'd the Writings of Paul What becomes then of our unquestionable Line of Succession of the Bishops of several Churches and the large Diagrams made of the Apostolick Churches with every one's Name set down in his Order as if the Writer had been Clarenceaulx to the Apostles themselves Is it come to this at last that we having nothing certain but what we have in Scriptures And must then the Tradition of the Church be our Rule to interpret Scriptures by An excellent way to find out the Truth doubtless to bend the Rule to the croocked stick c. Again it 's certain that for divers Centuries Bishops were nothing like what they are now either in exercising Civil Power or Jurisdiction over other Pastors or yet in the largeness of Dioceses so that the Term Bishop in respect of the two is little better than an equivocal It 's certain also that the ancient Church wanted not her own Blemishes which was well perceived by her Doctors who still look'd on the Word of God only as the Rule of Faith and Manners on which they never founded the Episcopal Superiority Hence this their Argument carries nothing of Cogency Section VI. The Instance of Aërius condemn'd by Epiphanius prov'd to be unserviceable to our Antagonists TO Illustrat and Corroborat this their Argument from Antiquity they adduce the Instance of Aërius who was for this his Judgement of Presbytry as well as for Arrianism condemn'd and counted Heretick by Epiphanius But it is certain that Epiphanius censur'd Aërius not only for his being Anti-episcopal and as he believ'd because Arrian but also for his rejecting of Lents set and Anniversary Fasts and for denial of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead Now either purer Antiquity join'd with Epiphanius in asserting of the necessity of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and other such Fopperies or they did not and if they join'd with him therein then our Prelatists if they be Protestants are concern'd to reflect better of how little weight their Argument from the Ancients pressing their unwarrantable Additions can be unto them But if they say that sounder Antiquity consented not to Epiphanius while he urged Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and such Anti-scriptural Fictions we return that neither did the choicest of the Ancients agree with him in his Plea for Prelacy The Judgement of Hierom is so well known herein that the Bishop of Spalato acknowledges that Hierom can by no means yea not byforce be reconcil'd to their Cause Hierome's Judgement saith Saravia was private all one with that of Aërius and contrary to the Word of GOD wherefore we shall examine his Arguments And on this account he is much offended with Hierome accusing him of Vanity Self-contradiction and Prevarication And Alphonsus de Castro sharply reproveth Thomas Waldensis another Papist who had intended to pervert the Testimonies which are commonly alledg'd for Presbytry out of Hierome There De Castro having prov'd out of divers places of Hierome that he was truly for the Scriptural and Apostolick Idenity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter concludes against Waldensis that of necessity there must be another way taken to Answer the Passages alledg'd out of Hierome for Presbytry And at length flatly opposes himself to Hierome in this Matter and saith that we ought rather to believe the Decrees of Popes and Councils than the Doctrine of Hierome though both very Holy and Learn'd And Medina another Champion of the Hierarchy cited by Bellarmine asserts the same of Hierome saying He was of the same Judgement with Aërius in this Matter Bellarmine is very displeas'd with his Brother for his Ingenuity and therefore attempts to bring Hierome over to the Episcopal Party but instead of performing this Task he only fruitlesly endeavours to set Hierome at variance with himself The like success had another of the same Fraternity who like Bellarmine attempted to draw Hierome to his Faction Bayly the Jesuit And yet with these the most disingenous of the whole fry of Loyolites some called Protestants stick not warmly to join themselves and plead for a Patrociny to their Cause from Hierome § 3. Yea not only was Hierome of the same Judgement anent Episcopacy with Aërius but also as even the Jesuite Medina acknowledges the most of the Greek and Latine primitive Doctors and in special Ambrosius Augustinus Sedulius Primasius Chrysostomus Theodoretus Oecumenius Theophilactus This their Opinion saith Medina was first condemned in Aërius then in the Waldenses and lastly in Wicklef but this Doctrine was either dissembled or tolerated by the Church in them for the Honour that was had to them while on the other hand it was always condemn'd in these Men as Heretical because in many other things they swerv'd from the Church Many Papists and other Prelatists cannot away with this Medina's free dealing and use many shifts to refute him and draw these Fathers to their Party But to use the Words of Rivet Whosoever shall consider their Answers collested by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth lib. 6. annot 319 323 324. they shall presently perceive that all their Distinctions are most pitifull Elusions and that indeed all these Fathers were no less Presbyterian than Aërius although they accommodat themselves to the Custom then received least for a Matter not contrary to the Foundations of Religion they should have broken the Vnity of the Church What do our Opposits herein but espouse what the Romanists in whom any ingenuity remains have long since disowned § 4. But tho' Epiphanius were the mouth of all Antiquity and the only fit Judge in this Controversie the Triumph of our Adversaries should be very small for Aërius to Prove the Idenity of the two having adduced a parallel of many particulars Epiphanius denieth nothing of these to belong to Presbyters except only Imposition of Hands he yeelds therefore that both of them equally have Power to Baptize to occupy the Chair and finally to perform all Divine Worship Our Antagonists therefore offering to vouch the Prelacy they plead for by the Authority of Epiphanius promise much more then they can perform for what pray is this Power of Imposition of Hands or Ordination compared with what they covet and pretend to support by Epiphanius his Authority I mean the both great and many Differences between Bishop and Presbyter § 5. In the mean while Epiphanius his unjust dealing towards Aërius is most palpable for he sticks not to give out that Aërius his Judgement of the Identity of Bishop Presbyter was look'd on by the whole Church as an intolerable Heresie condemned by the Word of God when
in a Letter to the English Bishops and Pastors being moved thereto by John Knox if Spotswood speak truth expresly among many other things to this purpose say If Surplice Corner-cap and Tippet have been the badges of Idolaters in the very act of their Idolatry what have the Preachers of Christian Liberty and the Rebukers of Superstition to do with the dregs of that Roman Beast yea what is he that ought not to fear either to take in his hand or fore-head the Print Mark of that odious Beast c. See store to this purpose in Heylin's History of the Presbyterians whereby 't is most evident that this Author endeavour'd nothing more earnestly than to perswade the World that Knox was a self-repugnant Idiot It sufficed if before that celebrious Assembly he answer'd to the Question and gave some one reason that shewed he could not comply with them tho' he declar'd not all the grounds of his dislike of their Practice As to the matter of Francfort which this Author mentions drawing from it the like Consequences there was no Bishop there nor any mention of the necessity thereof but only a busâ—e made by some superstitious Bigots for their Popish Ceremonies or Fooleries as Calvin calls them and so there was no occasion of venting himself in this matter and tho' there had he sufficiently declar'd his mind while publickly in a Sermon he alledged that nothing ought to be thrust upon any Congregation without the warrant of the Word of God Yea if we may believe Le Strange Knox and his Associats sufficiently discover'd themselves to be of the Consistorian or Presbyterian Perswasion § 10. He adds that Knox in his Appellation c. plainly supposes the lawfulness of the Episcopal Office I deny 't But all alongst throw it saith he Knox appeals to a lawfull general Council snch a Council as the most ancient Laws and Canons approve and who knows not that the most ancient Laws and Canons made Bishops the chief if not the only Members of such Councils Knox says if the Popish Clergy his Adversaries are for it he 's content that matters in Controversie between him and them be determin'd by the Testimony and Authority of Doctors and Councils three things being granted him whereof these are two 1. That the most ancient Councils nearest to the primitive Church in which the learned and godly Fathers examined all Matters by God's Word may be holden of most Authority 2. That no Determinations of Councils or Men be admitted against the plain verity of God's Word nor against the Determinations of the four chief Councils Would Knox if he had been Presbyterian have agreed so frankly to have stood by the Determination of these four chief Councils Could he have expected they would have favoured the Divine Right of Presbyterian Parity Will any scotish Presbyterian now adays stand to the Decision of these four chief Councils But all our Author here infers is by Knox prevented and cut off while in the first place he requires that no Determinations of Councils nor Men be admitted against the plain Verity i. e. without the expressed commandment of God's Word We chearfully appeal in the present Controversie and provoke our Adversaries to this Rule which most of 'em I have hitherto met with expresly acknowledge to contain nothing in their favours Secondly The Actions of the first four Councils were of two sorts Creeds viz. and Canons Now as John Knox and all the Presbyterians in cordial subscribing to the former viz. The Symbols of these Councils are confessedly not behind any part of the Christian World so part of the latter sort I mean the Canons are rejected by Episcopals no less than by Presbyterians As for example the Constantinopolitan Council appoints that reduced Hereticks and Schismaticks must be anointed on the Fore-head Eyes Nose Mouth and Ears And in the Council of Chalcedon 't is permitted only of all the Church-men to the Lectors and Cantors to Marry Yea that none of the Clergy after that manner should Marry was statuted by the Council of Nice And they were also to have separated from their Wives the Church-men who were in Wedlock already had they not been restrani'd by the grave admonition and solide reason of Paphnutius Now 't is true indeed Presbyterians admit not of these Decrees But dare they say that Knox imbrac'd them Or do our present Adversaries themselves receive them Knox therefore spoke of the Symbols Our Author introduces him and gives out as if he had spoken of their Canons to the end he may deceive the vulgar Reader for none that look into the Councils can be obnoxious to this his Fraud The same conclusion viz. That Knox supposes the innocency and lawfulness of the Episcopal Office he would deduce from Knox's following words You may in a peaceable manner without Sedition withhold the fruits and profits which your false Bishops and Clergy most unjustly receive of you untill such time as they shall faithfully do their Charge and Duties which is to preach unto you Christ Jesus truly rightly to minister the Sacraments according to his Institution and so to watch for your Souls as is commanded by Christ c. But might not Knox had he been there giv'n the like admonition to the Romans concerning their Bishop and Clergy should he thereby have suppos'd the Lawfulness and Innocency of the Papacy and Power the Romanists gave to the Pope Secondly Does not Knox admonish the People concerning the rest of the Clergy wherein there was comprehended the Abbots Priors and all the rest of the Romish rout no less then concerning the Bishops Did therefore Knox suppose the Innocency and Lawfulness of all these Offices Thirdly Knox utterly baffles all our Author's Sophistry and sufficiently preserves himself from his abuses and depravations while he places the Office of all true Bishops in truly preaching of Christ Jesus rightly ministring the Sacraments and watching for Souls Which I hope is equally the Office and Duty of all Christ's Ministers So true is it we observ'd from Beza's Letter that Knox look'd on all Lordly Diocesan Prelats as false Bishops And all they pretend to beside what is common to every Pastor under whatsoever Name or Profession they go as unwarrantable and unjust But saith our Author Knox's great Work in his Admonition to the Professors of England was to enumerat at the Causes which in God's righteous Judgement brought Queen Maries Persecution on them But he quite forgot to name the Sin of Prelacy as one Ergo c. And did he enumerat and reckon up all things he judg'd to be Errors or Sins wherefore God was pleading with the English and had sent among them that Persecution The truth is the main design of that Admonition is not to give an accurat enumeration of the Causes of the Persecution but to give comfort to the Faithfull under it But abstracting what Knox thought to be the Causes of that Persecution and
so much or been altogether silent thereof neither of which they did but gave to the World solemnly as the Confession of their Belief that Christ gave to to all Pastors equal and the same power and yet if we believe this Interpreter this that Christ gave may according to the Authors of that Confession be relinquish'd when Men will and Inequality it 's quite contrary introduced in the place thereof Is not this too like the dealing of the Romanists who when they are compell'd to acknowledge that the Apostles gave the Cup to the People yet pretend that they may deprive them of what Christ and his Apostles gave them Divers indeed have said that Church Government was among the Adiaphora and things indifferent But these were more wary then to say as he would have the Authors of these Confessions to say that Christ gave equal and the same Power to all Pastors yea such used not to grant that Christ gave either Equality or Inequality of Power but left all to the Churches management Moreover as he does us no dammage so I 'm sure he does the present Hierarchicks as little service for if this Hypothesis that no kind of Church Government is juris divini stand then the jus divinum of Episcopacy is lost and therefore I 'm sure they shall give him as little thanks as we 'T is also observable that when ever the Authors of these Confessions or other Divines of their Perswasion said that Communion with Churches of a different Government was not to be broken or any thing of that kind he presently inferrs that they judg'd any other form no less agreeable to the word of God than their own And here I cann't but take nottice of what I have met with somewhere in M. Claude's historical defence of the Reformation for at present I have not the book viz. that Diocesan Episcopacy is no less condemnable than Pilgrimages Purgatories or some such Romish dotages which he there names and how averse he was from Diocesan Episcopacy is observed by the Prefacer to the English Translation and yet if we believe some he gave large Testimonies of his great affection to the Diocesan cause And this brings to mind another Artifice for when any Protestant Divines considering the great Power of Popish Bishops and vehemently desiring Peace for the free Preaching and Propagation of the Gospel strain'd their Judgement and seem'd at any time to do or say somewhat that appear'd to comply with Episcopacy our Prelatists anone Infer that such Divines were great Lovers of their Hierarchy Thus for Example they abuse the Words and Actions of Melancton but they should remember that sometimes driving the same Design some of these Divines seem'd no less to comply with the Papacy it self as appear'd at the pressing of the Interim The same end drove Melancton when in a Conference at Ausburg as Osiander relates he seem'd to yeeld somewhat of Jurisdiction to Bishops for be hop'd that if Jurisdiction were granted them they would not so much oppose the Gospel But Philip consider'd not continues Osiander that the Fox may change his hair not his Temper Melancton granted also to the Pope provided he would admit the Gospel a superiority over other Bishops founded only on humane right and yeelded for procuring of the Peace of Christendom Thus Melancton through his extream desire of Peace forc'd his own Judgement for with Luther and the rest he subscribes the Smalkaldick Articles wherein as we have heard the Scriptural Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter is most clearly asserted But what ever they say to perswade us that these or other such Divines favour them we are little oblig'd to believe it for they believe it not themselves and these of our Adversaries that speak out their mind freely tell us that all the transmarine reformed Churches are really Presbyterian It were too much I 'm sure to transcribe what D. Heylin says of this for he freely grants it and then through a whole large Folio as such bespatters with the blackest of Railings and Calumnies every one of the reformed Churches in particular No less positive is Howell who makes Calvin the first Broacher of the Presbyterian Religion And a little after Thus saith he Geneva Lake swallowed up the Episcopal See and Church Lands were made secular which was the white they levell'd at This Geneva Bird flew thence io France and hatch'd the Huguenots which make about the tenth part of that People it took wing also to Bohemia and Germany high and loe as the Palatinate the land of Hesse and the confederat Provinces of the States of Holland Yea Bellarmine being to write against Presbytry lays down in the entry as undeniable that ' t is the common doctrine of both Calvinists and Lutherans § 5. To these may be added all such as were valiant for the truths of God and stoutly oppos'd themselves to Antichrist before Luther as the Waldenses and Albigenses of whom Alphonsus de Castro relates that they deny'd any difference between Bishop and Presbyter and herein differ'd nothing from Aërius This same may be learn'd from Thuan who compares them with the English Non-conformists So far from truth was D M. when he says that these only declaimed against the corrupt Manners of the Church of Rome but never declaim'd against the subordination of one Priest unto another This same doctrine held Wicklef and his followers denying that there is any difference between Bishop and Presbyter The Waldenses and Wicklef were in this as in the rest of their Articles follow'd by J. Huss and his Adherents who also asserted that there ought to be no difference between Bishop and Presbyter or among Priests Yea so Catholick and universall hath this doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter still been that it hath all along by the Romanists been justly reck'n'd a prime doctrine of Romes Opposers Nor shall yow readily find one before Luther for of such I now speak of Truth 's Witnesses who condemn'd not all distinction between Bishop and Presbyter § 6. And even in England it self after the Reformation the famousest Bishops and lights of that Church as Hooper Latimer and others could not without great difficulty and reluctancy admitt the exercing of the Episcopal Office the using of their Priestly vestments c to be in any sense lawfull so far were they from believing a Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy But as Voëtius observes the use of it was excus'd rather than defended The first or at least the Standard-bearer among the first that either in England or any where else in the reform'd World had the brow to assert its Divine Right appear'd in the latter part of Queen Elizabeths Reign neither was he a Native of Britain but a Flemming I mean Hadrian Saravia once a Pastor in the reform'd Netherlands but as Maresius witnesses reject'd by them as being an Enemy to both their Church and State Neither was
the better be believ'd in this Matter viz. Jos. Walker Translator of L'arroque's History of the Eucharist who describing the Life of L'arroque which he prefixes to his Translation tells us that at the request of some Persons favouring Episcopacy he did not finish this his second Piece From these Authors it 's sufficiently evident that the issue of this Debate concerning Ignatius his Epistles was neither advantagious nor honourable to the Favourers of Episcopacy seeing by such doings they acknowledg'd their Adversary so formidable that except by powerfull Sollicitations and charms the Storm were diverted nothing less than the utter ruine of their Cause was to be feared Now by these their dealings so dishonest both first and last judge if such Men don't at once bewray extream want of candour and diffidence in their Cause And this much was meet here to be premis'd in favours of many who may have been â—â—umbled at the great Name of Ignatius and yet altogether Strangers to the thoughts of the more learn'd and ingenuous concerning the Epistles that bear his Name § 8. In this Ignatius the Patrons of the Hierarchy wonderfully please themselves and triumph as if from thence Prelacy receiv'd a most sufficient support and proof well nigh infallible of its divine Institution and that if these Epistles be his Presbytrie's undone For if we believe them Ignatius is for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or genuinness of these Epistles above the smallest suspicion of Forgery for Antiquity and Vicinity to the Apostles above possibility of being mistaken and finally for clearness in the Episcopal Cause above doubt or scruple Now seeing so far as I know little or nothing of this Subject is yet in English and the ears of many who know no other Tongue are perpetually beaten deafned with a mighty noise as if all the lofty Titles and Honours of Prelacy were adopted by a genuine and Apostolick Ignatius it shall neither be improfitable nor unacceptable if with a convenient brevity we ouerthrow the principal Pillars of so proud a Structure and render the Weapons in the estimat of our Adversaries so keen and weighty compleatly unserviceable to their Cause § 9. I therefore with no less confidence deny what they so boldly affirm I deny that the Epistles ascribed to Ignatius whether of the elder or later Editions are throughly genuine and so free of Forgeries that no chaff hath been thrown into and hudl'd amongst the grains of Wheat that may remain therein I deny that the Antiquity of the true Ignatius was able to secure him from all Lapses and Mistakes or that in his time some Churches might not be itching after several Novelties I deny finally that he is so clear and positive in the Matter of Episcopacy as to denude Presbyterians of all rational Defence should they acquiesce in his Judgement and herein join with their Adversaries who still appeal to Ignatius his Bar. But I shall not rest in Denials but shall turn them to so many contrary Positions and demonstrat each of 'em in particular Section II. The first Hypothesis viz that Ignatius is interpolated MY first Assertion therefore is that the Epistles ascrib'd to Ignatius whether of the Elder or Later Editions are not throughly genuine nor so free of Forgeries that no Chaff hath been thrown into and hudl'd amongst the grains of Wheat that may remain therein As the Writings pretended to come nearest in time to the Scriptures of the Old Testament carry notwithstanding evident Characters of a quite other time and Parent than these whereto they are falsly ascrib'd so also the Pieces that pretend greatest proximity to these of these New Testament afford no less just ground of suspicion Of this kind are Barnabas Hermas and others all which are generally either shroudly suspected as meer Forgeries or at least as not being without manifest corruption and interpolation Yea Clemens Romanus who doubtless is by far the most choice and virgin Monument of Antiquity has nothwithstanding fall'n into the like adulterous hands as the story of the Daughters of Danaus and Dirce there recounted among the Christian Sufferers makes manifest And herein Divine Providence is to be ador'd and extoll'd For had such Writings as plead for the first place after these of either Old or New Testament not under-ly'n such impeachments the great proximity thereof to the Prophetick and Apostolick Writings had certainly allur'd many to take these for Canonical whereas now they serve in some measure for a rampier and hedge about the Holy Scriptures and by the manifest corruption of the Apocryphal Writings we are taught to distinguish betwixt divine and humane Letters wherefore it should be a Paradox and a Wonder had Ignatius escap'd all such infectious Touches But there 's no ground for such admiration For that Ignatius whither of the Elder or Later Edition is not throughly genuine and so free of Forgery and Interpolation a few Examples shall make evident § 2. For in his Epistle to the Smyrneans he thus discourseth them All of you follow after the Bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father and the Presbytry as the Apostles Reverence the Deacons as the Commandment of God Let no Man without the Bishop do any of these things that ought to be done in the Church Let that Worship or Thanks be accounted lawfull which is either perform'd by the Bishop himself or permitted by him Wheresoever the Bishop appears let there also the Multitude be present even as where Christ is there is also the Catholick Church Without the Bishop it 's neither lawfull to Baptize nor Celebrate the Lord's Supper or Love-feasts but whatsoever he approves is acceptable to God And again in his Epistles to Polycarp Attend to the Bishop as God doth to you my Soul for such as obey the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons and with such let me have my Portion in God And in his Epistle to the Ephesians I write not to you as if I were of any account For altho' I be bound in the Name of Christ yet I am not perfect in Christ Jesus For now I begin to learn and speak to you as my Teachers And again in the same Epistle If I in so short a time have had such familiarity with your Bishop not Humane I say but Spiritual how much more do I pronounce you blessed being join'd together as the Church to Jesus Christ as Christ to the Father so that all things are in a harmonis Vnity Let none be deceiv'd whosoever is not within the Altar is deprived of the Bread of God For if the Prayers of one or two be of much weight how much more these put up by the Bishop and the whole Church Whosoever therefore cometh not into the same place he is proud and hath condemn'd himself for it 's written God resisteth the Proud Let us make hast therefore not to resist the Bishop to the end that we may obey God And the more silent any Man perceive the Bishop let him
Authority of Peter and Paul for the quite contrary Doctrine I have oftentimes much admir'd how either of these Parties if we consider either Sincerity or Vicinity to the Apostles were liable to any Mistake of this kind I believe scarce any Man now living shall be able to give any rational account of the Cause thereof yet that one of them was mistaken and that the Apostles did not keep up a perpetual observation of contrary Practices one to another is to me and to as many as truly acknowledge the Scriptures among the things of highest certainty and if either of them strayed if sufficiently serves our turn and is an ocular Demonstration that not only the clearest Lights and nearest to the Apostles might relinguish some part of the Apostolick Purity and fall into Rites and Customes never countenanced by the Apostles but also be accompanied by no small part of the Church therein § 7. Yea I dare avouch and sustain that both Parties equally swerved from the Truth seeing both of them had equal Means to have inform'd themselves and were alike nigh to the Apostles so that many were certainly alive of both Parties who had been conversant with them hence there 's no reason to believe either of the Parties that ever the Apostle enjoined or allowed the observation of Anniversary weekly or monthly times either in the same time with or so near to the Judaical and then buried Ceremonies excepting the Sabbath only the observation whereof had been expresly enjoin'd in a clear and Moral Precept Neither in this Assertion shall we remain alone but be supported by the suffrages of the choicest of the Ancients No less Irenaeus in Eusebius intimats while he tells us that this Difference did not arise first in his Age but long before in the time of their Fore-fathers who as is probable being negligent in their Government delivered to their Posterity a Custome which had only crept in thro' Simplicity and â—gnorance And Socrates a grave and solid Author averrs that neither more Ancient nor Later who inclined to follow these Jewish Rites had any cause to raise so great Contention And that the keeping of Easter and such Holy Days were altogether Legal the observation whereof is not at all injoin'd in the Gospel for continues Socrates they did not consider that after the Jewish Religion was changed into that of the Chrstians the strick observation of Moses Law and the shaddows of future things were wholly abolished which by a most sure proof may be thus evinced For by no Law of Christ is it granted to Christians to observe Jewish Customes yea the Apostle did expresly forbid it not only rejecting Circumcision but admonishing moreover that about Feast Days there should be no Contention wherefore in writing to the Galatians he thus speaks tell me ye who desire to be under the Law do ye not hear the Law And after he had discoursed a little concerning these Matters he shews the Jews to be under Bondage but that those who had followed Christ Jesus were called unto Liberty he Exhorts furthermore that Days Months or Years in no ways be observed Moreover writing to the Collossians he clearly asserts that such observations are but a meer Shaddow Wherefore saith the Apostle let no Man judge you in Meat or Drink or in respect of an Holy Day of the New Moon or of the Sabbath days which are a shaddow of things to come But in the Epistle to the Hebrews confirming the same matter he thus speaks For the Priesthood being changed there is also a necessity of the change of the Law surely the Apostles and the Evangelists did never impose a Yoak upon these that became obedient to the Doctrine of Faith but Easter and other days were left to the choise and equity of those who in such days had received the Benefits wherefore seeing Men love Holy Days because they bring them some respite of their Labours divers Men in divers places following their particular Inclinations did according to certain Custome celebrate the memory of our Saviour's Passions for neither our Saviour nor his Apostles did by any Law ordain that it should be observed neither did the Gospels nor the Apostles threaten us with a Mulct Punishment or Curse as the Law of Moses was wont to do to the Jews This and much more are we taught by Socrates from all which it's most clear that in this Dispute concerning the Celebration of Easter both Parties were equally culpable as building upon a false Supposition viz. that Christ and his Apostles had appointed some of these Days anniversarily to be kept which yet never came into their mind And here 't is most observable how even in these ost early times they heap'd Falshood upon Falshood and supported one Forgery with another the Fable of Peter's being at Rome and conjuring of Simon Magus there was even then beginning to obtain whereof the Romans made their Advantage and began to ascribe to him some Head-ship over the rest and then averred that he had appointed them not only to celebrate Easter but also had determin'd the particular day of its Celebration and injoin'd them to keep it on the fifteenth and not on the fourteenth day of the Moneth as did the Eastern Churches Now that they might be even with the Romans and meet with them after their own Fashion and arts the Asians invented the like Legends of the Apostle John who as they alledged died at Ephesus and enjoyn'd them to keep Easter but by no means on the fifteenth but on the fourteenth day of the Moneth and the better to set off the Fable Polycrates of Ephesus in his Letter to Victor harangues in the Praises of John that thereby he might prefer him to Peter and sticks not to assert that John was a Priest and wore a High-Priests Golden Crown or Breast-plate And yet as is acknowledged John was not at all of the Priestly Race far less was he the High-priest to whom only of all the Priests such a Crown was peculiar Therefore Valesius imagines that the first Christian Priests as he speaks wore such a Crown for a Sign of Honour in imitation of the Jews As if the Christians of these times had ever dream'd of retaining the very marrow of Judaisme which was then abolished by the coming of Christ the substance But this Antichristian dottage being so gross to be dejested by any real Protestant the learned Le Moyn says that Polycrates spoke metaphorically of John ' s supereminent Knowledge and Gifts But if this be true with how great caution are these Ancients to be read without which we shall be led into the belief of the greatest falshhoods In the mean while I see no ground for this gloss in Polycrates his words either as they are related by Eusebius or by Hierome and Rufine And Epiphanius gives another such golden Crown to James which is no less true than that he was Diocesan Bishop of Jerusalem
as that of Planting the first Christian Churches Lastly I appeal to all Protestants if his ascribing to every Bishop a Power of authorative preventing of Heresies i. e. a Power of making Canons that lean only on the Bishop's own Will and which he 's not oblig'd to prove from Scripture otherwise every Minister of Christ hath a Power and Authority by publick preaching and reasoning from the Word of God to prevent and overthrow Heresies and so D. M. speaks not to the purpose hath not a rank savour of what is no better than the grossest of Popery The Romanists give such an authoritative Power to one Pope but from a perswasion of his Infallibility this Author will have it unto every single Bishop tho' as yet he has not adventured to ascribe to each of 'em such a Priviledge and to explain if need were what he means by this authoritative preventing of Heresies § 2. Look but on page 95 et seq and you shall see him make every Bishop an Apostle in the strickest sense and priviledg'd with no less Power over the Church-Officers and People in his Diocess than an Apostle ever had or could exercise viz. a Power to Govern the Churches to give Rules and Directions to inflict Censures to communicat his Authority to others to hear Complaints to decide Controversies to Confer the Holy Ghost viz. the Gifts of the Holy Ghost that must needs attend the authoritative Ministry of holy Things and therefore that the Office of an Apostle is altogether ordinary and permanent The Apostolical Office saith he being essentially no other than this the ordinary Necessities of the Church require that it should continue till the second coming of our Saviour But the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost the Power of Miracles of Languages were only extriasick Advantages and not peculiar to the Apostles And to affirm otherwayes and say that the proper Apostolick Office is now ceased he makes proper to Presbyterians and Socinians But so far is he from speaking Truth here that the ceasing of the proper Apostolick Office and Power is asserted by the Body of Protestants even Episcopal no less than Presbyterian in opposition to the Jesuites his Masters who as he doth to his Diocesan Bishop arrogate an Apostolick Office and Power to their Pope Spanhem F. a fervent Apologist of the Hierarchicks assigns many Characters of the Apostolate as an extraordinary Calling either immediat or equivalent thereto Infallibility of Doctrine transcendent Efficacy and energy in Preaching admirable success therein the Gift of Tongues and of working Miracles all which things altho' some of 'em might have been in some measure in others were saith he in a more Divine and Eminent manner in the Apostles And he affirms that every one who was endued with a true and proper Apostolick Power had and could give such visible Proofs and ocular Demonstrations thereof and then concludes against the Pope thus let the Pope now descend from the Capitol let him as did the Apostles declare that he has the Gift of Tongues Divinely infused let him bring visibly the Gifts of the Holy Ghost from Heav'n let him work like the Apostles such illustrious Miracles and then we shall yeeld that he has Apostolick Authority and so shall we to the Diocesans when they adduce these Proofs of their Apostleship He asserts that they 're much deceiv'd who would bring the Apostles down to the Order of particular Bishops and demonstrats against Hammond that they were not at all call'd Apostles on the account that they were Bishops consequently that Apostle and Bishop are quite different things In short the very Sum and Substance of Spanhemius his Disputation is nothing save an Approbation and Confirmation of that common Sentiment of Protestants express'd by Beza The Churches saith he being once constitute this Office of the Apostle-ship was of necessity taken away he is a Tyranne therefore who does now profess himself an Apostle in the Church by Succession And by this one Observation viz. that whereever the proper Apostolick Power was they could give ocular and undeniable Proofs and Demonstrations thereof the Protestants for ever silence and baffle the Jesuites and their Progeny D. M. and such Companions ascribing a Power properly Apostolick to their Roman Antichrist and their Diocesan Prelats and fully remove all thier Quibbles on this Theme as Dr. Scot's Quirk the Substance whereof is there 's no mention in Scripture of the taking away of this Apostolick Office and therefore it yet remains But I forgot that for the permanency of a Power properly Apostolick D. M. cites Mat. 28. 20. And lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World As if not to mention Protestants even the more ingenuous Romanists as Lyra did not understand this place of Christ's assistance given to all Doctors of the Church without any Discrimination Moreover all his Exceptions and pretended Instances to the contrary are impertinent and severals of 'em false in matter of Fact as for Example nor is it necessary saith D. M. to make up an Apostle that he be immediatly call'd to the Apostolate by our Saviour for Matthias was not immediatly ordain'd by our Saviour but by the Apostles But Spanhemius tells these Jesuites that the Lot that fell upon Matthias was really the voice of God no less than was that of the Division of Canaan of the Scape-goat c. And indeed as I said that the Office and Power properly Apostolick is long since ceas'd is the common Doctine of Protestants as Calvine None saith Sadeel against Turrian the Jesuite but he who is an Ignoramus in Divinity will confound an Apostle with a Bishop I assert therefore that God's immediat calling and choosing to preach the Gospel is essential to the Office of an Apostle But these say you were Presbyterians I deny 't not however they were then pleading the common Cause of Protestants and were never opposed herein by any save down-fight Papists only till that now we have to do with real Jesuites who yet mask themselves and will not acknowledge the name In the mean while I do not think they 'll say Spanhemius Fil. is a Presbyterian nor yet Nilus ' Bishop of Thessalonica who saith the Pope is not an Apostle the Apostles did not ordain other Apostles but only Doctors and Teachers Of this mind is also Willet Bellarmine saith Whitaker seems to say the Pope succeeds Peter in his Apostle-ship but none can have Apostolick Power but he who is properly and truly an Apostle for the Power and Office of an Apostle constitute an Apostle But that the Pope is neither truly nor properly an Apostle is prov'd by these Arguments whereby Paul proves his Apostle-ship as that he was not call'd by Men c. Gal. 1. 1 and 12. and Ephes. 3. 3. and 5. 1 Cor. 9. 1. Altho' saith Sutlivius the ancient Bishop of Rome succeeded Peter in Doctrine
the Menaces utter'd in the Old Testament against Tyre and her King had for their Object Parmenianus the schismatical Bishop of the Donatists who lived at Carthage that had once been a Tyrian Colony but in the time of Parmenianus was inhabited by Romans who had either quite extirpated or expelled thence the whole Race of the Tyrians With no less lightness but more danger did Justine Martyr long before Optatus endeavour to perswade the Gentiles that all Mankind were Partakers of Christ because they were Partakers of Reason and Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which also signifies Reason Where we see that Justine leans only on a pitifull Equivocation the deceit of which could not be unknown to him who natively spoke Greek Neither were Origenes Methodius and others as Hierome witnesseth more solide in their Writings Yea Hierome himself distinguisheth between Progymnasticks and Dogmaticks alledging that in the former of these a Disputant hath liberty to muster up many Arguments in which he hath no confidence § 4. To these we may add both their Homilies and Expositions wherein it 's not easily determined when they spoke their own minds or when they gave us only Transcripts of others to believe and defend which they held themselves but little obliged Yea Hierome oftner than once tells us that it was the common Practice of the Writers of these times to give the Expositions of others and yet conceal the names of the Authors and so involve the Reader and make him take for their judgement the things they never believ'd § 5. If we search into the causes of so strange dealing we have heard out of Hierome that one of 'em was meer sloath and neglect See much more to this purpose in Dallaeus de usu Patrum Another Cause why they both spoke wrote and practised otherways than they knew could be warranted by Scripture was their unjustifiable Compliance with both Jews and Pagans good perhaps intentionally being out of design the better to Proselyte them but eventually proved as unhappy as its Practice was unwarrantable and destitute of Scripture ground Hence their Deacons were named Levites their Bishops Priests and High-Priests the Lord's Table the Altar and the Lord's Supper a Sacrifice and at length Diocesan Bishops and arch-Arch-Bishops were instituted in imitation of the Pagan Flamines and Protoflamines Another Cause thereof which especially takes place in their Homiles and Expositions was the multitude of Alterations and Corruptions well grown before any of these Homilies and Commentaries we now enjoy were extant these were too deeply rooted to be opposed and therefore they believed themselves under a kind of necessity to accommodat their Comments and Declamations thereto at least so to temper and compose them that they should not thwart therewith Of this sort of Conduct we have a clear instance in Augustine who sometimes commends and praises several unscriptural Ceremonies But elsewhere speaking his Mind more freely disapproves them as both unwrantable and burdensome He indeed there intimats that some things commonly observ'd throw the World tho' they were not written yet might be kept as having come from the Apostles or general Councils such as was the Observation of the Lord's Passion Resurrection and Ascension But even this as is most probable he yeelded out of humane Weakness and Fear to oppose the then prevailing Innovations for the needlesness of such preterscriptural Observations he evidently declares elsewhere saying that all things which belong either to Faith and Manners are plainly contain'd in Scripture From all which is clear that we cannot at all be sure if the Fathers Commenting on the places in hand either knew their true meaning or if they did sincerely gave us what themselves believed § 6. And that in their Explications of these Texts we have not their genuine Sentiments is to me evident First because they gave such Reasons of their Exposition as the greatest Prelatists count stark nought Thus Bellarmine rejects and overturns the Grounds of every one of these Expositors in particular except these of Chrysostome only who yet hath nothing of any moment above the rest for Chrysostome exponing Philip. 1. 1. alledges only in defence of his Exposition that the sole Title and Name of Bishop was common to both Orders but this is refused by Dr. Hammond and others and as we shall hear by Chrysostome himself But the Jesuite intending to retain that Exposition thought himself obliged to embrace some of their Defences whereas in truth they themselves never believ'd them to be solide but only the growing Corruptions being too strong to be opposed and some of 'em having got an Episcopacy which was then creeping in and which they depending on the Churches Authority thought they might retain they believ'd that for the fashion they might so gloss the Scriptures whereby Episcopacy is wounded that the People should not perceive the unwarrantableness thereof Secondly The main ground common to all these Expositions why they expone any of these Texts as if they condemn'd not a Diocesan Bishop is a sufficient evidence that they were far from being in earnest in their Glosses for they still alledge that there behoved to be a Bishop above these Bishops in Philippi whom Paul salutes because there might not be Plurality of Bishops in one City This Practice indeed was for the most part current in this time tho' not universal as we learn from Epiphanius informing us that even in these times there used to be a Plurality of Bishops in one City Yet quite contrary to this Text which they either carelesly or timourously shuffl'd They judged saith Dr. Stillingfleet the Practice of the Apostles by that of their own times as is evident by Theodoret and the rest of the Greek Commentators assigning that as the reason why the Presbyters spoken of in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus were not Bishops in the sense of their Age because their could be but one Bishop in a City And Petavius grants that many true Bishops were sometimes at once in one City And altho' the Episcopal Order be of Divine Right yet at 's not of Divine Right that there should be only one Bishop in one City this was only brought in by the Authority of the Church and Councils and accordingly Hierome and Ambrose are to be understood By what Law saith J. Taylor speaking of Philippi and that not as a Metropolis may there not be more Bishops than one in a proper sense in one Diocess Where 't is not unpleasant to hear so great a Prelatist by one Interrogation overthrowing the whole Episcopal Cause and propugning the main Plea of the Presbyterians viz. that in Philippi alone there were many who had not only the power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments but also of Ordination and Jurisdiction and were every way Bishops in a proper sense Thirdly Some of these Expositors proclaim what we alledge for OEcumenius who like the rest intimats as if
one Ordination for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is first so that every Bishop is a Presbyter not every Presbyter a Bishop for he 's the Bishop who is first among the Presbyters Finally the Apostle shews that Timothy was ordain'd a Presbyter but because he had no other Presbyter before him he was a Bishop And from thence he shews how Timothy can Ordain a Bishop for 't was not lawfull for the Inferiour to Ordain a Superiour § 2. Hence appears the perverseness of Bellarmine affirming that Hilary says only there was no need of a new Election but denies not saith he the necessity of a Consecration or Episcopal Ordination A flat Contradiction of Hilary's express saying that there 's but one Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter and that even Timothy was of no higher Order than that of a Presbyter whose whole primacy consisted in his meer being the first Presbyter in respect of age or time of his Ordination as Hilary hath taught us And so as he doth also all-along thro' the fore-cited Passages explains fully his calling the Bishop Prince of Priests which the Cardinal also objects and shews that thereby we 're to understand only such a Dignity as either meer priority of Ordination or Seniority yeelds Thus Hierome also understands this Title who calls Peter Prince of the Apostles and yet asserts that any Priority Peter had was given to his Age only which in that very place he makes as good as nothing Informing us that the Church was equally founded on all the Apostles and that the rest no less than Peter received the Keys Take but another place of Hilary By Angels saith he the Apostle means the Bishops as we learn in the Revelation of John who being Men are challeng'd for not reproving the people or commended for their Vertues And because Sin entred by the Woman she ought to have this token that in the Church for the reverence to the Bishop her head ought not to be free but cover'd with a vail and she has not power to speak because the Bishop represents Christ's person she ought therefore because of the Original of Transgression appear subject before the Bishop as before the Judge because he is the Lord's Vice-gerent Here we see that according to Hilary there was a Bishop over every Congregation and in every place of publick Worship frequented by Men and Women and that the Apocalyptick Angels were only such Congregational Pastors From which we may well gather that when any in these early times had the name Bishop more peculiarly giv'n them yet the Primacy could be but only of Order and nominal which is fitly illustrated by the Athenian Archons Petavius therefore to shield his Cause from so deadly blows does his outmost to discredite these Commentaries and make their Author some obscure fellow and to prove they belong not to Hilary the Luciferian he brings two passages thereof that shew their Author to have been of the Roman Communion which Hilary deserted But might he not have been of that Communion when he wrote the commentaries and yet deserted it afterward This the Jesuit attempts not to disprove But whosoever this Author was or by whatsoever name known neither are we hurt nor the Hierarchicks helped thereby his Authority is unquestionably great being cited by the Councils of Paris and Ayx no mean Conventicles under the name of Ambrose afterward the learn'd as Bellarmine and the Divines of Lovain gave these Commentaries to Hilarie a Roman Deacon and stout Opposer of the Arrians the Foundation of which Opinion is strong For Augustine oftner than once attributes these Commentaries to Hilarie And it 's likely that Petavius knew that the Authority of this Writer was not to be shaken with all his Cavills but only at that time he had found nothing else to say wherefore he afterwards excogitats more Quibbles to darken and deprave this Author and chiefly strives to make Hilary speak nothing for the Right of Seniority and against the Election of a Successor to any deceasing Bishop He says therefore that when Hilary tells us that one dying the next or following succeeded we must not understand it in respect of Years or Ordination but any of 'em indefinitly taken who was notwithstanding afterward to be elected by the Clergy but all the Presbyters in time becoming unworthie of the Episcopal Honour the Method was altered and another not out of the Colledge of Presbyters but out of some other Order according to their desert was admitted unto that Office To support which Gloss he brings Hierome's saying that the Presbyters of Alexandria named one elected from among themselves Bishop as if Hierome were not speaking of Alexandria alone and to instance therein that Prelacy came not soon to any growth or as if Hierome and Hilary could not agree in its being of humane Original and yet differ in the circumstances of its rise The rest of his prolix Discourse on this Theme is only a train of meer Cavills and Clouds too thin and airy to feed a very Chamaeleon all which are quite dissolv'd and disappear if we but look into one small parcell of Hilary's words where he tells us that after the Method was altered then the Bishop whose desert raised him was constitute by the Judgement or Votes of many Priests or Presbyters For this Clause being of design inserted by Hilarie to shew the Opposition between the latter and the former Method of coming to the Primacy proclaims that as after the Change Suffrages and Election were used so before this Change there had been no such Custome With this the Jesuite darrs not ingage nor with Hilary's making the Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter the same his making Timothy only a Presbyter his placing all the Essence or Constitutive of a Bishop in being the first Presbyter of the Colledge his giving a Bishop to every Congregation c. These I say he never adventures once in the least to handle wherefore surely he was conscious to himself that he spent both Pains and Brains for the sole production of a bulkish nothing § 3. To Hilary I add Chrysostome which Theoplylact his real Epitomator transcribes After saith he the Apostle had discoursed concerning the Bishops and described them declaring what they ought to have and from what they ought to abstain omitting the order of Presbyters he descends to the Deacons and why so But because between Bishop and Presbyter in a manner there is no difference seeing that also to the Presbyters the Care or Government the Church is committed and whatsoever he said of Bishops agrees also to the Presbyters in Ordination alone they are Superiour and they seem to have this onlie more than the others Where he clearly overthrows all their Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter notwithstanding that to some he may seem to give the Power of Ordination to Bishops above Presbyters For First The words are most
Feet ye onght also to Wash one anothers Feet that every Apostle yea and every Believer is Lord and Master of the rest § 8. And writing to Euagrius I hear saith Hierome there is one so mad as to preferr the Deacons to the Presbyters that is to the Bishops For seeing the Apostle clearly teaches that Bishops and Presbyters are one and the same how can a Server of Tables and Widows proudly preferr himself to these at whose Prayers the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood is consecrated you will require a Proof hear a Testimony Paul and Timothy to all the Saints in Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons would you have another Example in the Acts of of the Apostles Paul thus speaks to the Presbyters of one Church Take heed to your Selves and the whole Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Rule the Church c. And that none may contentiously plead that in one City there were many Bishops here also another Testimony wherein it 's most evidently proved that both Presbyter and Bishop were one and the same and then produces the 1 to Titus and 1 to Timothy 4. 8. 14. neglect not with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytry And 1 Peter 4 and 1. 2 John 1. 3 John 1. And all these to prove that he had undertaken viz that both Bishop and Presbyter were one and the same Now it 's most observable that that he inferrs this Conclusion not only from Scriptures written long after the first Epistle to the Corinthians where it 's said I am of Paul c. but even from the last Epistle of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles And therefore no less notticeable is D. M's extream stubborness and aversion from Truth who would force Hierome to introduce Bishops presently after that Schism mention'd 1 Cor. 1. And accordingly as his bad Cause oblig'd him to do with this and the rest of Hierome's Testimonies wholly smuther'd it And indeed all hitherto who have adventur'd to graple therewith have been conquer'd thereby yea even Bellarmine himself is compell'd to give up the Cause Hierome indeavours saith the Jesuite to conclude the equality of Bishops and Presbyters from the Epistle to Titus to the Philippians and from the Epistles of Peter and John which were written after the first Epistle to the Corinthians Neither can the Jesuite find another way to be even with Hierome but by arraigning him as fraughted with self-repugnancy levity and instability in this Matter and all the Arguments he brings to prove Hierome a Favourer of Episcopacy are only so many fruitless Attempts to make that appear But let us go on with Hierome But saith he the reason why after this viz. the writing of both the Epistles of John one was chosen and set over the rest was that there might be a remedy of Schism least every one drawing the Church of Christ to himself should divide it For in Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist even to Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters still gave to one elected from amongst themselves and placed in a higher seat the Name of Bishop as if an Army should creat a General or the Deacons should chuse one of themselves whom they know to be industrious and name him Arch-Deacon On these words D. M. triumphs The Custome was saith he even from the days of St. Mark the Evangelist that a Presbyter was chosen who Governed the whole Society this in the Opinion of St. Hierome cuts off that imaginary Interval wherein the Chruch is said to have been Governed by a Parity of Presbyters Where he forgeth a Gloss no way contain'd in the words of Hierome whose Example of an Army and Deacons are only adduc'd to shew the manner of that Presbyter or nominat'd Bishop's entrance and not at all the measure of his Power over his Collegues And that no Power over the rest can be collected from this place is beyond Scruple clear from Hierome's present Scope who introduces this Ancient Alexandrian Practice to clear and prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter which according to him remain'd in the Church for a while after the Writings of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles Had D. M. perused Dr. Stillingfleet he had taught him that both Election and Ordination of this Alexandrian Bishop was only performed by his Fellow Presbyters that the Original of Hierome ' s exsors potestas any Power he mentions in Bishops over Presbyters is by Hierome attributed not to any Episcopal Institution but to the free choice of the Presbyters themselves for what doth a Bishop continues Hierome except Ordination which a Presbyter may not do Here the Jesuites and their Follower D. M. dream they find a fine Distinction made by Hierome between Bishop and Presbyter but first they must make an unseasonable Antiptosis and compell Hierome to speak contrary to the express words of this place which are in the present Tense contrary to the scope and design of this Epistle which is professedly to shew the great Dignity of Presbyters yea even their Identity with Bishops and thereby to reach a sharper reproof to the petulant Deacon And contrary finally to Hierome's most clear and most frequently repeated Doctrine of the Scriptural Identity of both Offices Were it not madness then to dream with the Jesuits that in these words Hierome makes any Distinction between the Scripture Bishop and Presbyter who is here only asserting that in all places Rome excepted where the Presbyters were more depressed and the Deacons more raised than in other Churches even then in his time a Presbyter was allow'd by the Canons and Constitutions of the Churches to do ought that a Bishop might do save Ordination alone This his Design of holding forth the most great dignity of Presbyters yea even their equality with Bishops which Bellarmine acknowledges that he may the better compesce the Insolency of the Deacons Hierome all along this Epistle prosecutes and having again cited the Epistles to Timothy and Titus to prove that a Presbyter is contain'd in i. e. is one and the same with a Bishop otherwayes a Deacon is also in a Bishop and so Hierome had crossed his own Design by the very Argument wherewith he minded to compass it and having added some other Topicks to the same purpose thus concludes his Epistle And that we may know that the Apostolick Traditions are brought from the Old Testament that which Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons claim in the Church Nunc animis opus Aenaeae nunc pectore firmo All the Jesuites and their Complices will presently be about our Ears But Solamen nobis Soeios habuisse malorum Their Attaques are no less on Hierome than us wherefore this is one of the chief places brought by Bellarmine to involve Hierome in a maze of self-contradiction and make him propugn Prelacy who is followed by others of the Hierarchicks but
a profitable departure for they are not afrai'd least any thrust them out of their places into others For we see that you have cast some from their Charge which they perform'd with honour It 's base Beloved yea very base and unworthy of a Conversation that is in Christ Jesus to hear that the most stable and ancient Church of Corinth for the sake of one or two should raise sedition against the Presbyters And If I be the Cause of Contention schism and sedition I 'le depart and be gone whithersoever ye will and do what the People shall command providing only that the sheepfold of Christ with the Presbyters appointed over it may have peace And And you therefore who were the Authors of this Division subject your selves to your Presbyters Hence Observe First that he never names or so much as insinuats that in Corinth there was any Bishop Superintendent over the rest of the Pastors But as the Apostle to the Hebrews had done before him honours equally all their Pastors with the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these that bear Rule over them Secondly That in imitation of the same Apostle Paul he names only Bishops and Deacons as the only Orders of Divine Institution by whom the whole Gospel-Service was to be perform'd Therefore afterward when he names Presbyters in distinction from the Flock and as Rulers over it he cann't be understood as Petavius and Pearson would force him to speak of Presbyters with Relation and Respect only of their Age but to give them this Demonstration as a peculiar Designation of a Church-Office and so the word Presbyter most of necessity with Clement coincide in its meaning with the word Bishop and both of 'em become Synonymous Terms to hold forth but one and the same thing Thirdly That the Apostles did not as we find afterward Decreed by the Synod of Sardica and admonish'd by Pope Leo chuse out only the greater Cities and neglect and forbear to place Bishops in lesser Villages that the name of Bishop hereby might not fall into Contempt but indifferently and without distinction of places every where settled them according as there was a probability they might serve the great end of their calling therein Fourthly That to found the Distinction and number of these Orders if we believe Clement the Apostles had no eye unto the Jewish Church-Polity so as to make it a Pattern for that of the Christian but only to what was prophecied and foretold by the Prophets concerning a new frame of the New Testament Church and thus Clement really contradicts all the Patrons of the Hierarchy who would still found their triple Orders on that of the High-Priest Priests and Levites of the Temple Fifthly That in Corinth it was attempted to throw out a plurality of real Bishops and cast them from their Charge and that the Sedition was not moved against one only but divers Bishops in that Church Many other things might be observed but these serve sufficiently to prove that there was a plurality of true Bishops of Corinth who were in nothing distinguished from Pastors of particular Flocks or preaching Presbyters § 2. Petavius notwithstanding cann't abide any such Inference from the words of Clement Wherefore he scrapes together several things whereby to ward off the force of these Passages and alledges that Clemens his silence of the Bishop of Corinth makes nothing for us For Pope Siricius saith he in his Epistle to the Church of Millain maketh no mention of their Bishop altho' in that mean time Ambrose occupied the Chair But the vast Difference between the Cases and the Circumstances of the Churches of Corinth and Millain quite nullifies the Jesuites Instance The People of Millain jointly both Clergy and Laity had thrust out Jovinian few or none of them for ought we hear being prosylited to his Doctrine wherefore Siricius had nothing to do but shew them in General that he had excommunicated Jovinian with two or three others who had fled to Rome for Sanctuary So there was no special Ground or Cause why particular mention should be made of Ambrose the Bishop or any other whether of the Clergy or Laity the whole Body thereof for ought now known being without any Schism earnest enough for the expulsion of Jovinian and only expecting what the Bishop of Rome which they acknowledged as the first See and whether Jovinian had fled would do in this Matter Whereas one the other hand Clemens writes to a Church cut in pieces with a Schism in their own Bowels infected with Sedition of no small part of the People against their Pastors broken with as appears plain a division of the very Pastors themselves and this grown to such a hight that some of the Pastors were thrust from their places and driv'n out now in this Case the Bishop had either the best of it and so the seditious part merited a severe and special reprimand on the account of their Opposition to and Separation from their Bishop and thus he should certainly have been mentioned or else he was the Cause of the Division or at least joined with the injurious and therefore should have been particularly reproved or admonished Clement it 's true names none but the influence which the good or evil Carriage the Bishop had and could not but have in such a Matter had certainly obliged Clement either to mention his name of give some signification of him if there had been any Diocesan Bishop existent in Corinth Clemens speaks of several Pastors of Flocks which I think none will deny intimats the diversity of their Carriage in that Business and gives Directions accordingly How can it be apprehended that he should pass over the chief Pastor and go to the rest without so much as the least Direction unto him the least mention of him yea or the least insinuation that there was in Corinth any such thing Petavius's next Attempt is on these words of Clement where he tells that the Apostles instituted Bishops and Deacons And the Jesuite contends that two distinct Orders are not here mean'd but that the word Deacon is only explicative of the former word Bishop and cites several places where the word Deacon is taken in a signification of Honour and applied to the Apostles and Civil Magistrates And afterward terms Salmasius ridiculous for saying that Clemens nam'd only Bishops and Deacons without mention of Presbyters For saith the Jesuite Presbyters are more frequently mention'd by Clement than either Bishops or Deacons But certainly these Orders are again and again mention'd by Clement without adding any thereto ordetracting therefrom when he appears to reckon up all the Church-Officers that are of Divine Institution And altho' the word Deacon be sometimes taken for the Designation of a higher Office Yet as Petavius himself else where observes It is with the addition of such a word or phrase as guides our Judgement and gives us to learn that by it is not understood this
lower Order of Church-Officers as Rom. 13. the Magistrate is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Minister of God But there is no such explicative word or particle in Clement to alter the common Signification thereof on which account we 're not lightly to resile therefrom But that which utterly overthrows the Jesuite's Cause is Clement's closs Conformity to the Apostle in his account of Church-Orders who 1 Tim. 1. 3. beyond all Scruple of any Party takes these words in the sense we plead for to Clement and makes not at all the word Deacon exegetick and explicative of the word Bishop but by it designs a distinct Order of Church-Officers from what is signifi'd by the other For doubtless Clement Paul's Fellow-Labourer took the words in the same signification and meaning wherein the Apostle had understood them And accordingly Clement for Confirmation hereof adduces the words of Isaiah 60. 17. which place as he then certainly found it in the Septuagint contains the words Bishops Deacons exactly as Paul expresseth distinguisheth Church-Officers and on this Ground Clement goes when he intimats that the Apostles in their Institution of Church-Officers had an eye to these words of the Prophet In vain therefore labours Petavius to disprove the Copy of Isaiah used by Clement and brings the Hebrew Hierome and others taking the word in a different signification for thus he hath not Salmasius or any other modern Defender of Presbytry but Clement himself whom he pretends to vindicate for his Adversary seeing we Dispute not concerning the Greek Copy Clement used but of the thing he inferr'd from these words of Isaiah according to the Copy he then cited Neither is it more to the Jesuite's advantage that the word Presbyter is several times found in Clement For seeing as is plain yea and the Jesuite himself not only grants but proves that it frequently there denotes not a degree of Age but a Church-Officer it must of necessity be a Term altogether Synonymous with the word Bishop For they themselves plead not for the Equipolency thereof with the word Deacon wherein Petavius himself shall afford us no small assistance who having but to no purpose seeing never Man denied it shewed that with Clement the word Presbyter is sometimes taken appellatively to denote old Age but no Church-Officer subjoins these remarkable words At other times Clement so uses the word Presbyter as thereby to signifie a certain Function and publick Office in the Ministry and a certain Dignity in the Church which he calls an Episcopacy or the Office of a Bishop From this plain Testimony of a Man in learning and love to Prelacy second to none that ever undertook its Defence it 's clear as the Light it self that with Clement the word Bishop and the word Presbyter when he takes it for a Church-Function are Terms altogether Synonymous For if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Episcopacy or the Office of a Bishop be competent to Clement's Presbyter and things as they ought receive Denominations from Forms wherewith they 're cloathed then this Presbyter in the Judgement of Clement is really a Bishop and indeed this is superlatively clear to any who but with an open and unprepossess'd Mind reads the places of Clement we have already produced Howbeit the Testimony of such an Adversary gives no small additional Confirmation to the Truth thereof Yea the same Adversary in the same place acknowledges that even then the Title of Bishop was also common and in after times only appropriated to one And again It 's clear saith Petavius from this place that there was a Council or Ecclesiastick Senate ordain'd by the Apostles at Corinth whose Dignity and Office Clemens calls Episcopacy and the chiefest of the Clergy he names Presbyters as also from this which Clement afterward writes It 's base Beloved yea most base c. And he names the same Presbyters Pastors and Church-Governours of the Christian Sheepsold And now judge how the Jesuite after these Concessions could yet say that it follows not from hence that in Corinth or at other Cities there was no peculiar Bishop § 3. And here again we find D. M. at his old filching Trade transcribing Petavius his Perversions of Clement or bringing what is no more serviceable to either Cause or Credit as that Clement comprehends all the Jewish Clergy under the name of Priests and Levites Therefore Inferrs D. M. It follows not from Clement his naming only Bishops and Deacons that Bishops and Presbyters are not in Clement distinct Offices But D. M. should remember that Clement not only Dichotomizes but Trichotomizes the Jewish Clergy into three Parts But does he any where so divide the Christian Clergy He not only names the two Kinds of Offices but so names them as to identifie and take for one and the same Bishop and Presbyter which Petavius and D. M. and their Brethren by all means labour to make him distinguish But St. Clement saith D. M. exhorting the Corinthians to order sets before them the subordination under the Temple-Service how the High-Priest Priests and Levites were distinguish'd by their proper Service and immediatly recommends to them that every one of them should continue in his proper Order Now continues D. M. when we consider the primitive Method of reasoning from Jewish precedents St. Clement had never talked at this rate if the Jurisdiction of one over many Priests had been abolished under the New Testament But why does he mutter for it if he can bring ought for his purpose he must also Inferr from this passage of Clement that as there was a High-Priest over all the Jewish Church so there must be another High-Priest over all Christians And that all Christians must bring Oblations and Sacrifices to the Temple at Hierusalem for from these Topick does Clement exhort the Corinthians to Harmony Whether then D. M. be a Romanist or a Jew may be a Question for unquestionably his way of reasoning symbolizes with both of them The Truth is nothing can be inferr'd from this place of Clement but that as under the Old Testament every one whether Church-man or Laick was to abide in his own Order without raising Schism or Confusion so it ought to be under the New Testament St. Clement himself continues D. M. distinguishes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An express untruth and I challenge D. M. and his Complices to prove it Nor can it be adds D. M. an Objection of any weight that the first who were their Spiritual Governours are mention'd in the plural number since this was an Encyclical Epistle addressed to Corinth as the principal City and from thence transmitted to its dependencies c. By which words if he speaks sense he intimats that there were in the Apostolick age Metropolitan Cities in an Ecclesiastick sense whose Bishops according to the Civil Dignity of these Cities were Metropolitan and had their numbers of inferiour and dependent Bishops A most nauseous and
hatefull Hypothesis of some giddy Papaturiants which as we have heard even the more candide of the Episcopalls disclaim and explode I shall shut up all concerning Clement with the Suffrages of two illustrious Names neither whereof I 'm sure did ever favour Presbytry I mean Grotius and Stillingfleet Had Episcopacy saith the Doctor been instituted on the occasion of the Schism at Corinth certainly of all places we should the soonest have heard of a Bishop at Corinth for the remedying of it and yet almost of all places these Heralds that derive the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times are the most plunged whom to six on at Corinth And they that can find any one single Bishop at Corinth at the time when Clemens writ his Epistle to them about another Schism as great as the former which certainly had not been according to their Opinion if a Bishop had been there before must have better Eyes and Judgement than the deservedly admired Grotius who brings this in his Epistle to Bignonius as an Argument of the undoubted Antiquity of that Epistle quod nusquam meminit exsortis c. that Clement no where mentions that singular Authority of Bishops which by Church custome after the Death of Mark at Alexandria and by its Example in other places began to be introduced but Clemens clearly shews as did the Apostle Paul that then by the common Council of the Presbyters who both by Paul and Clement are called Bishops the Churches were governed § 4. I proceed next to the Vindication of Polycarp Subject your selves saith he to the Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Christ and as Virgins walk with a pure Conscience let the Presbyters be simple or innocent mercifull in all things turning all Men from their Errors visiting all who are weak not neglecting Widows Orphans and those that are Poor but alwayes providing such things as are good in the sight of God and Men. Here we learn that the highest Office then in the Church of Philippi was that of a Presbyter and that there was a Plurality to whom the Philippians were to be subjected without the least mention of a particular Bishop governing those Presbyters And which deserves no overly Consideration we here see that as when Clement gives an account of Church Orders he named two only so we have the same number expressed by Polycarp but they altered their Denomination of the former Order and they whom Clement calls sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters Polycarp calls still Presbyters It 's most observable also how both Paul and Polycarp subject the Church of one single City Philippi to a Plurality or Multitude of Pastors whom Paul calls Bishops and Polycarp Presbyters From all which the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter most inevitably results § 5. And indeed this Passage of Polycarp so much gravells the Hierarchicks that Dr. Pearson is driven to his last Leggs and compelled to present us with a shift unworthy of its Author Who can prove saith he that the Bishop of Philippi was then alive who can shew us that the Philippians asked not Counsel at Polycarp for this cause that they then enjoyed not a Bishop for thus Polycarp bespeaks them These things Brethren I write not of my self to you concerning righteousness but you have moved me thereunto Thus Pearson and indeed it 's enough here to return the Question inverted who is able to prove if there had been a Bishop in Philippi that he was not alive For seeing he affirms it he or his Advocats are obliged to instruct what they say That which he pretends to from these words of the Epistle wherein Polycarp saith he was moved thereto by the Philippians themselves affords him not the least support there not being therein one syllable concerning the vacancy of the Bishops Seat or the Church Government during this Defect or how to fill the Chair Of all or any of these nec vol◠nec vestigium but only as is evident from Polycarp they seem to have desir'd of him some Direction concerning the blameless walk of any Christian. And indeed the Bishop within a very few lines fairly yeelds the Cause really acknowledging that he had said nothing to the purpose But seeing saith he these things are uncertain we have no certainty from the Discourse of Polycarp Well then it must follow for ought he knew that Polycarp knew no Diocesan Bishop in Philippi that he had never heard of his Death seeing nothing hereof can be gathered from him And that he had never heard of his Life or Being we may well conclude from this that he devolves the whole Church-Affairs upon a Plurality of Presbyters But once again Is it at all credible but that if Polycarp had written to the Philippians after the death of their Bishop and during the vacancy of the Chair he had comforted them after this so considerable a Loss and giv'n them Directions for chusing of a worthy Successor especially if as Pearson would have they had ask'd his counsell concerning this very Matter Had ever a Pastor like Polycarp neglected so seasonable an Office His profound silence therefore of the Death of any such Bishop in Philippi sufficiently demonstrats that this Dr. Pearson's Invention was only the product of a desperate Cause and that there was left here no doore of Escape And here let me observe that Philippi is no less fatal to the Episcopals than its neighbouring plains were to the Pompeians for they are stung and confounded with the very first words of Paul to that Church and as we have heard amongst their other wild shifts they answer that the Bishop was often absent But there was a good number of years between the writing of Paul and that of Polycarp to the Philippians and yet we see the Bishop is never come home Why taryeth the wheel of his Lordship's Chariot Hath he not sped at Court And having supplanted some of the Nobility made a prey of the Office of Chancellour or Treasourer that after so long absence there is no news of his return Nor are we ever like to hear any more of him for now say they he 's dead I had perhaps believ'd them were 't not impossible for one to die who was never alive But enough of this for such Answers would really tempt one to think that their Authors studi'd nothing more than to ridicule their oun Cause and afford Game to their Reader § 6. And here I cann't but nottice the ill-grounded vapouring of D. M. who from the inscription of the Epistle Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him concludes that he was vested with Episcopal jurisdiction and eminency amongst these Presbyters And so much he pretends to bring out of Blondel as as his forc'd Confession which is so far from being true that it 's brought in by Blondel as an Objection and silly Conjecture of the Episcopals which he diverse ways overthrows And indeed never was there a more wretch'd deduction fram'd
seeing as Blondel at large shews the phrase natively yealds only this sense viz. Polycarp and the rest of the Presbyters of that Colleage And thus D. M. may as well inferr Peter's Superiority and Power over the rest of the Apostles from Acts 2. 37. To Peter and to the rest of the Apostles Moreover Blondel demonstrats how on diverse accounts Polycarp without any Eminency and Power over the rest may be particularly nominated rather than others as because he was first in Order and Years But I insist not herein but referr to Blondel who hath nervously baffl'd this their pitifull Coujecture D. M. adventures to ingage with nothing of what he saith and yet is not asham'd to bring to the Field so blunted a weapon I pass also D. M.'s two Arguments for Polycarp's Diocesan Episcopacy drawn from the pretended Succession of Diocesan Bishops in Smyrna and the Epistles of Ignatius mention'd by Polycarp having overthrown both of 'em already and proceed to the Testimony of Hermas who thus speaks Thou shalt write two Books thou shalt send one to Clement and one to Graptes and Clement shall send it to foraign Cities for to him this is permitted and Graptes shall admonish the Widows and Orphans but thou shalt read it with or relate it unto the Presbyters in this City who govern the Church Where we see that not any one Bishop but a Colledge of Presbyters call'd doubtless afterward by the same Author Bishops govern'd the Church of one City Yet D. M. pretends to find here a palpable Evidence of Episcopacy For saith he the sending of the Encyclical Epistle to foraign Cities is insinuated to be the peculiar Priviledge of Clement then Bishop of Rome But if he conclude from this place of Hermas that Clement had any Power over these to whom he was to send that Book or Epistle as for Clement's being Bishop of Rome it 's so far from being insinuated here that the quite contary is from this very place most evident he may as well inferr from Col. 4. 16. that they had Power over the Laodiceans whither they were to send and cause to be read the Apostle's Letter Secondly D. M. ascribing to the Bishop of Rome Power over foraign Cities erects a Pope rather than a Bishop But I 'll assure him he came not in so early for seeing there was undoubtedly one Bishop at least in every particular City so soon as there were any in the World this place of Hermas if it bear D. M's Inference and give a Power to Clement over foraign Cities insinuats nothing of a Bishop's Dignity above Presbyters but of the power of one Bishop over another or rather of a Pope over other Churches A falshood most unanimously exploded by Cyprian Jerome Augustine and the rest of the Ancients D. M. seeks also for his Prelacy in these words of Hermas viz. The Earthly Spirit exalts it self and seeks the first seat Some contend for Principality and Dignity But what if Hermas had said that some contended to get an Empire and Popedome over the whole Church would D. M. hence conclude that it was lawfull or then practised in the Church or when the Apostles contended who should be the greatest Had Christ before that time assured them of the lawfulness of such an Office and told them that they were to have one to be a Prince over the rest By no Logick therefore can it be inferred for Hermas his words that a chief Seat or Principality for both are one and the same with Hermas was then either exercised or held lawfull Again tho' both had been then in Custome no Power of one over the rest can be hence concluded seeing the chief Seats are given to the Moderators of Synods and other Presidents of Assemblies who have no primacy of Power but only of Order And again The polished and white Stones saith Hermas are the Apostles and Bishops and Doctors and Deacons who walked in the Clemency of God aâ—d exercised the Office of a Bishop and taught and served And Such are some Bishops that is Governours of the Churches and these who have the Charâ—e of the Services § 7. In both places saith Blondel he makes only two Degrees that of the Bishops who governed the Churches and that of the Deacons who had the charge of the Services for it 's acknowledged by all that the Doctors are all one with the Bishops when they are said to have performed the Office of a Bishop and that the Apostles as they are opposed to Bishops were placed above the whole Clergy This repons D. M. is Tergiversation with a Witness and a fraudulent Trick in Blondel since Presbyters in the primitive Church are frequently distinguished by the Name of Doctors and Blondel's Commentary is a manifest violence offered to the Text for Doctors are not said to have performed the Office of a Bishop but to have taught and this is very agreeable to their Character being so much imploy'd by their respective Bishops in teaching the Catechumeni and the natural position of these words will allow of no other meaning Which Answer D. M. hath learned from the Practice of our late Bishops during whose Epocha the Buffund might have hid himself well nigh the whole year from the Bishop's fury in the Bishop's pulpit seeing he scarce ever came thither to play the Doctor or ought else As for the Ancient and true primitive Bishops they perpetually preach'd or taught saith Le Moyn Moreover the Fathers generally take Pastor Bishop and Doctor for one and the same as Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret Sedulius and after them Aquinas Haymo Benedictus Justinianus with others on Ephes. 4. 11. Of the same mind are Hierome Augustine and Anselm and the pretended Clemens Romanus cited by Gratian and Benedictus Justinianus and the Fathers of the Council of Carthage Of the same Mind are the ablest of our Episcopals as Field Hammond and Heylen So truly did Blondel say that Bishop and Doctor is universally taken for one and the same Neither was ever the Presbyter either in Cyprian or any other Ancient called Doctor in opposition to the Bishop but to other Ecclesiastick Presbyters who taught not of whose existence as was before touched we have most sufficient assurance But D. M. in contradiction to the Apostle would have a Bishop who is no Teacher or Preacher like the Droll who said he mett with Priests who were no Clerks And seeing with Hermas there are but two Orders of Church-men and Bishops and praesides Ecclesiarum Church Governours are reciprocal Terms taken for one and the same and seeing that his Presbyters are expresly term'd Church-Governours it 's most evident that he takes Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same and that the word Doctor is purely exegetick or explicative of the word Bishop and that both of them which I 'm sure is not unfrequent in all sorts of Authors evidently signifie one and the same thing § 8. I now
contrary to the holy Canons And thus he acted suitably to his purpose seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing more than of Domination and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City Decreed also That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome Let us honour say they the Memory of St. Peter that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose but if he approve of what 's already done and think not fit to call it into Question then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable Thus these Fathers many whereof otherwise were excellent Men the first I think that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope 't was not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council Hence it 's to be noted that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors unto a few whom they named Bishops a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers but also in subjecting of the Presbyters yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the City but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities and so on till at length not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder all centred in Rome Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries Moreover Optatus asserts that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop But to proceed these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages so speaks the Council of Antioch He say these Fathers i. e. Paulus Samosatenus suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies Dr. Maurice answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch and near to one another and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks yea were not at all Christians could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie That saith he which next occurrs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops settled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also Ordain'd Among the Jews wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there settled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the Port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth mett there Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes and then proceeds saying Therefore it 's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it 's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett They were pretty throng in Asrick for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present and one hundred and twenty absent and sixty Sees were then Vacant which make in all four hundred sixty and six there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops Thus he And now not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter it 's most certain that at least for upwards of the three first Centuries you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but it had also its proper Bishop I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet no not by Dr. Maurice or any other been or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy good proofs of this Truth may be adduced For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop as Justine Martyr gives to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as we have seen already was purely a Parish Pastor And the 39 Canon saith Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop for to him the Lord's People is committed and for their Souls he must give an Account Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd a Bishop was there and was the Dispenser thereof The High-Priest saith he that is the Bishop preaches to all Men the true Gospel every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries desires to be led to the High-Priest and he brings him to the High-Priest who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders praises the bountifull prinple by which all are
Plea for the Distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter tho' its Ground were no less solide than it 's naught and slippery becomes really of no subserviency at all to their Hierarchick Cause and so on this account is truly exhausted for providing the Pastor of any Parish or Congregation be constantly imployed in Preaching and Edifying the People we shall not envy him others so far as is requisite to assist him the People may be instructed the better Don't therefore Dr. Maurice and the Men of that stamp while they pretend that tho' there be allowed to every Congregation its proper Bishop yet there 's a most different and momentuous Controversie behind about the Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter seek as the Proverb is a Knot in the Rush and triffle with a witness Give them moreover out of sole kindness that the Apostolick Power and Office is permanent and to be transmitted to all Bishops yet on Supposition of these Truths viz. that every Congregation had yea or may have its proper Bishop and that all Bishops are equal they shall be compelled to desert the whole of their Plea and acknowledge the sure Foundation and Lawfullness of what they call Presbyterian Parity Secondly Eusebius plainly says that it cannot be known who were the Successors of the Apostles to feed the Churches they had planted save what is to be collected from the words of the Apostles and so break the Chain at the Top where it should be strongest and shews that their best twisted Cords become Ropes of Sand to which as we already noticed the learn'dest of their own Writers subscribe Thirdly To come to Rome in particular altho' 't was the Head of the World and indeed the Head and Fountain from whence all the Hierarchicks draw their best support no Man of Reason whoever look'd into the divers yea and contrary Accounts given by the Ancients of the first pretended Successors of Peter can ever inferr that the Romans had in these early times of Christianity one peculiar Diocesan Bishop over the rest of the Pastors yea indeed Cletus Clemens Linus all whom if you compare the best Accounts they have you shall find to have been at one and the same time Bishops of Rome and Successors of Peter are a good evidence that he had no singular Successor at all This was so made out by the Protestant Writers that for ought I know the Romanists were despairing of any plausible Answer altho' I doubt not but they take Heart since some among the Protestants have used prodigious Endeavours to gratifie them and reconcile real Contradictions and fix the singular Successors of Peter I can scarce light on any of the Books they cite and yet I 'm at no great loss For 4 ly It 's certain that Peter was never at Rome which at once dispatches the grand Plea of all the Hierarchicks The whole stream of Writers who record Peter's Voyage thither either relate or suppose that his Errand was to oppose Simon Magus so that the Truth of both these Relations must stand or fall together But Simon Magus if we belive Origenes was never there Simon saith he the Smaritan and Majician endeavour'd by Sorcery to destroy some and I belive deceived many with his delusions But now throw all the World you shall scarce find thirty who follow him and I perhaps have called them more than they are Indeed there are some few in Palestine but in the rest of the Regions of the World his very Name is not heard off altho' he mainly desired that his Fame might be spread abroad and if perhaps there be any report of him at all it 's only to be learned from the Acts of the Apostles And Time which often has discovered things commonly taken for Truth to be altoger False hath verifi'd the words of Origenes For the Statue which gave the occasion of the fixion is now found to be the Image an old Sabin King or fictitious Deity called by the Romans Semo Sangus Sancus or Sanctus which Justine Martyr throw his unskilfulness of the Latine Tongue and a Cheat put upon him by some Samaritans took for Simon Magus as is acknowledged even by the learned Romanist Valesius The Inscription of this statue is Semoni Sango Deo Fidio Now according to the Genius of the Age the fraud prevail'd and Simon Magus must be brought to Rome made to effect monstruous Prodigies and therefore Simon Peter his old Adversary must also be sent thither to Conjure and Baffle him a second time And this is the prime Source of Peter's imaginary Journey to Rome and his fictitious Roman Episcopacy and the whole Papal Structure For as Simon Magus his coming to Rome is mention'd by none before Justine and by him only on this false Ground so Peter's Journey thither is before that time mention'd by none save Papias if he may be said to mention it for if at all he does it very obscurely And tho' he had been never so positive in this Matter it 's of small Consequence for as Eusebius already told us tho' elsewhere he forgets himself he was of so little Wit so fabulous and given to believe everything he heard that his Testimony merites little or no Credit Irenaeus indeed says that Papias was a hearer of the Apostles and himself also intimats so much but again clearly denyes it while he says that he used when he met with any who had been acquainted with the Elders to enquire what Andrew Peter Philip Thomas James John Matthew and the rest of Christ's Disciples had been wont to say And this he intimats had been his Practice only when he was a young Man and so gives us clearly to understand that when he wrote there was not one of the Hearers of the Apostles alive So far was Papias from being their Disciple 'T was he also who gives out that Mark wrote not his Gospel by Divine Inspiration but only by the help of his Memory 'T was he also who was the Father of the carnal and gross Chiliasts and the first who abused the Scriptures turning them all to Allegories and had not so much as the knowledge to distinguish Philip the Apostle from Philip the Evangelist The same Papias is the first Author of the report of Peter's Journey to Rome providing it may be said that he reportes it at all which mistake as Eusebius intimates flow'd from his misunderstanding of 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Church that is at Babylon c. And seeing that by Babylon in the Apocalyps Room is mean'd he and many of these times thro' their want of skill to distinguish between the Prophetick Mystick and Epistolick plain Phrase and Stile concluded that in Peter also Room is to be understood But this Gloss is so forraign and absurd that even the most learn'd of the Romanists as Petrus de Marca Bishop of Paris acknowledges that these Words of Peter are not to be
Did the primitive Church use Organs in Divine Worship Were they not first introduced in the seventh Century by Pope Vitalian And yet it is doubtfull if they were so soon received For Aquinas dislikes and condemns them Or where pray in the true primitive Church shall they find the Surplice Corner-Cap and Tippet Or where to name no more shall they find the Bishop allowed to involve himself in secular cares Civil and State Offices or Imployments Some used indeed when they pleased the Christian Emperor allowing it to make the Bishops Arbiters of their private Debates but to all the good Bishops as Augustine complains this was a most weighty Grievance But in more early times even this was not permitted for Cyprian condemns as altogether unlawfull that any Church-man should be so much as a testamentary Tutor to any Pupil And mark the ground he goes on For saith he whosoever are honoured with the Divine Priest-Hood or have a place in the Clergy ought only to serve at the Altar and spend their time in Prayer and Supplication For 't is written no Man that warreth intangleth himself with the Affairs of this Life that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a souldier Thâ—â— is such a clear and inevitable Condemnation of the Practice of the Hierarchicks that the Learned Annotators Pamelius and the Bishop of Oxford finding nothing wherewith to elude it skipp it over with deep silence And now judge if Cyprian was of one mind with the Bishop of Five Churches who will have the meaning of Paul's words cited by Cyprian to be that every Christian ought to abstain from those things which are repugnant to Christian Profession which are sins only and will not have the Apostle to speak any thing of Church-men in particular or if Cyprian would have expon'd the sixth of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles as doth Heylyn who makes the Canon only to mean that Bishops or inferiour Clergy-Men might not be Consuls Praetors Generals or undergoe such publick Offices in the State of Rome as were most sought for and esteemed by the Gentiles there Heylen is here somewhat intricat and his cause required it However the sum of his drift is that the exercising of these or the like Offices is allowed to any Pastor by the Canon Now altho' ' tallowed it not when the Empire was Pagan and he would prove something of this kind from 1 Cor. 6. where he must count all Magistrats thro' the Christian World Pagans and Unbelievers for otherways none shall ever prove from this Scripture so much as the lawfullness of a Bishop or Pastors judging and determining any difference between any two that referr themselves to his Arbitration And tho' he should prove it pray what is this to the exercising the Office of Consul General Praetor Chancellour Treasurer or the like pieces of such temporal Power and Grandor Judge moreover were there no more but Paul his words to Timothy 1. 4 13 14 15. And 2 Tim. 4. 2 5. If there be Leasure left any Pastor to be either Consul General or ought else of this nature and consequently if all the shifts they use on this head be not sufficiently overthrown by these Scriptures only But I had almost forgotten to notice how they torment themselves that they may torment and detort Cyprian For Saravia says that the Canon Cyprian speaks off was but particular and provincial only for the Church of Carthage But Heylen refutes Saravia his comment and says Cyprian spoke so because the Church was then almost destitute and unprovided of Presbyters As if Cyprian had not spoken of Chruch-men absolutely and without the least intimation of any such restriction and grounded his saying on a Scripture which whatsoever it speaks of Church-men confessedly says it of the mall be they many or few or in whatsoever time and place they live Moreover it 's most certain that in Matthew 20. 25 26 27 28. The Princes of the Gentiles c. And Mark 10. 42 43 44 45. And Luke 22. 25 26 27. All Pastors of Flocks are prohibited to exercise Dominion secular and state Dignity and a parity of the Apostles amongst themselves and in them a parity of all ordinary Pastors or Ministers of the Gospell among themselves is enjoyned D. M. pretends to engage with the latter part of this Inference but first he mis-states the question as if from these Texts we pleaded for a perfect equality of all the Officers of Christs house without distinction between extraordinary and ordinary Ministers or between Pastors and other Officers and so his saying that the Apostles exercised Jurisdiction over other Ecclesiasticks whether true or false is nothing to the purpose But saith D. M. Our blessed Saviour supposeth degrees of Subordination amongst his own Disciples as well as other societies and therefore he directs the Ecclesiasticks who would climb up to the highest places in the Church to take other methods then these that are most usual amongst the Grandees of the World He that deserved preferment in the Church was to be the servant of all Which answer he steals from the Jesuite Bellarmine who answers that Christ only directs ecclesiastick Princes teaches that as such they ought to rule their subjects not as do Kings and Lords but as Fathers and Pastors To whom Junius replyes that all this is quite contrarie to both Christs words and scope The sons of Zebedie saith he desired a Dominion this Christ rejects and refuses to give them again the falshood of this answer is demonstrated positively by Christs following words who in stead of this Dominion which they desired enjoyns them a humble Ministry and Service Wherefore there is a clear opposition between Dominion and Ministry the former belonging the World the latter to the Church Bishops are not saith Bellarmine here forbidden to exercise a dominion like that of godly Kings but only like that of Tyrranical Kings who know not God We deny replyes Junius that there is any such restriction neither can it be proved And accordingly Junius refutes and bafles all the Sophistrie that Bellarmine and after him our Prelatists ordinarly bring to prove that only tyrrany and not all sort of principality or superiority is by our Saviour in these Texts prohibited And with Junius joyns the whole stream of Protestant Writers But our Saviour saith D. M. did that himself among them which he now commanded them to do to one another and therefore the doing of this towards one another in obedience to the command now under consideration could not inferr a Parity unless that they blasphemously infer that Christ and his Apostles were equal For our Saviour recomends what he enjoyns from his own constant and visible practice among them viz that he himself who was their Lord and Master was their sevant and therefore it becomes the greatest among them in imitation of him to be modest calm and humble towards all their
fear him the more for whomsoever the Lord of the House sends to Govern it we ought to receive him as him that sends him Let us manifest that we ought to receive the Bishop as the Lord. And again in the same Epistle thus I know who I am and to whom I write I 'm condemn'd ye live in Peace I 'm in danger ye sure ye are a Passage to these who are slain in the Lord The Condisciples of Paul sanctifi'd and made Martyrs worthy blessed under whose footsteps let me be found when I enjoy God And to the Magnesians Because I was found worthy to see you in your Bishop Damas and your worthy Presbyters Bassus and Apollonius and my Fellow servant the Deacon Sotion whom let me enjoy because he 's subject to the Bishop as to the Grace of God and to the Presbyters as to the Law of Christ. And again Study to do all things in the Concord of God the Bishop presiding in the Place of God the Presbyters in the Place of the Confession of the Apostles and my most sweet Deacons having committed to their Charge the Service of Christ. And within a few lines Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father being one with him neither by himself nor by his Apostles so do ye nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters And to the Philadelphians So many as belong to God in Christ Jesus these remain with the Bishop And in the same Epistle I cryed in the midst of the Congregration I spoke with a loud voice take heed to the Bishop the Presbytry and the Deacons Some-body thought that I spoke these things foreseeing a Division but he in whom I am bound bears me witness that I had this knowledge from no Man bnt the spirit preached saying without the Bishop see ye do nothing And in his Epistle to the Trallesians Whom I Salute in fullness and an Apostolick Character And again For when ye are subject to the Bishop ye seem not to Walk according to Men but according to Jesus Christ. And in an other place of the same Epistle And in like manner let all Men reverence the Deacons as the command of Jesus Christ and the Bishop as Jesus Christ who is the Son of the Father and the Presbytry as the Council of God and Senat of the Apostles without which there is not a Church and thus I counsel you to esteem of them for I have gotten an Example of your Charity and retain the same with me in your Bishop whose very composition is a great deal of Discipline and his mansuetude Power whom I believe the very wicked reverence And afterward in the same Epistle Can I not write unto you Heavenly Things But I sear that I should thereby endammage you being but Children and forgive me least not being able to comprehend them you be strangl'd For I am not bound in every respect but can be able to know things Heavenly the Orders of Angels their Constitutions Principalities things visible and things invisible And again Thus shall it be unto you if ye be not Proud and remain unseparable from God the Bishop and Apostolick Orders And again in the same Epistle Farewell in Christ Jesus if ye be subject to the Bishop as to the command of God and in like manner to the Presbytry But I 'm weary and did never translate more of any Author with less delight or pleasure not because I 'm in the least gravell'd by what is here said concerning Bishops altho' the whole strength of what the Episcopals deduce from Ignatius be wrapt up in these Passages yea I 'm perswaded that from these very Places the Hierarchy's wounded under the fifth Rib. But because the most part of what we have quoted as also no small part of what is behind is altogether insulfe putide and more tasteless than the white of an Egg and the Reader may easily perceive by these Examples that the Spirit and genius of this Author is quite different from what can be looked for in Ignatius a prime Martyr of the primitive Church In all these Epistles 't is clear as the Noon-sun that a head-strong Passion and a furious Zeal of enslaving all Christians under an illimited and blind Obedience to all Church-men as so many Romish Holinesses did intirely possess and reign in the Author of these Epistles The Apostle indeed sometimes admonishes the Churches of the Duties and Esteem Christians should pay to Church-Officers but withall uses but rarely to handle that Subject and with the brevity and modesty that became him ascribing to them only the Titles of Watch-men and Labourers Bishops or Pastors and the like which best became the simplicity of the Gospel whereas on the other hand the pretended Ignatius so far swerves from this humble and Apostolick strain that none tho' they search the Writings of the most corrupt Ages shall be able to find any that in exaltation of the Clergy and depressing and subjecting of the Laity out did him How secure should Basilides and Martial two Spanish laps'd Bishops have been had their Flocks believed this Ignatian Doctrine who having consulted Cyprian If they might not desert these and chuse new Bishops were by him resolved in the affirmative and admonish'd to chuse other Pastors but had they believ'd this pretended Ignatius it had been with them the blackest impiety to have separated from their Bishop or attempted so to do on whatsoever account The Apostles frequently both to Pastors and Churches inculcat the diligent perusal and understanding of the Holy Scriptures as a special Duty that by them as a sure Rule all Mens Doctrines and Injunctions without any exception may be tryed but in liew hereof this their Ignatius has only Mens Persons in admiration perpetually deafening his Hearers or at least wearying his Readers with Injunctions of absolute and blind Obedience as if all and every one of his Bishops Dictats were to be receiv'd without the least Examination a Priviledge that even Christ and his Apostles tho' they might have done it never assumed to themselues but still remitted their Hearers to the Scriptures for the tryal thereof this cann't but in the estimat of all the judicious be a Fault altogether unworthy of the True Ignatius I hope that all honest Men shall give more Charity to this choice Martyr than to believe that he 's guilty of so gross Idolatry for I can call it no better and fantastick and impious doting on the person of any Man whatsoever in which unworthy Work this Author I will not say Ignatius spends no smal part of these Epistles Therefore altho' the asserting of all therein to be genuine be so far from assisting our Adversaries that their Cause is by the very Passages they alledge for its confirmation mortally wounded I can never perswade my self but they have fall'n into the wicked hands of Forgers who tainted with the common Vice of the Ages subsequent
to that of Ignatius foisted in a great many Passages wherein nothing but the illimited Power of all Church-men is depredicated and the blind Obedience of the Laity is enjoin'd and commended I 'm confirmed in my sentiment by Ignatius his Epistle to the Romans who certainly had as truly a Bishop as the Smyrneans Magnesians or any other saluted by Ignatius but of the Roman Bishop or of the Honour and Obedience due to him in all this Epistle we find not a syllable Certainly had this servile Obedience to the Clergy been such a fundamental Article of the Christian Religion as all along through these other six Epistles he makes it he had not failed to have inform'd the Romans thereof seeing nothing I believe can be alledg'd to exime the Romans more than other Churches from paying such Honour to their Clergy 'T is vain to repone that he was then on his Journey to Rome and was shortly to see that Church and might on this account forbear seeing they may after this manner of arguing prove the whole Epistle spurious or at least superfluous this Duty of Obedience to Church-men if we believe these six Epistles being so necessary a part of the Christian Religion that 't is never to be forgotten but at all times with the greatest zeal and fervency to be inculcated § 3. Yet in defence of all these most dangerous Injunctions of his Ignatius Dr. Pearson saith That there could be no fitter remedy against Heresies then that the Churches should adhere to the Pastors whom Ignatius knew to be Orthodox But such an adherence as these Epistles every where command is so far from being a Remedy against Heresies and Schisms that as the sad instance of the Romanists witness it has been the greatest Augmentation and the most deadly humour in all the Disease But why did he not acquaint the Romans with this Remedy Did he suspect their Bishop as unsound Or thought he that every Roman Christian was above danger and infallible And indeed the scarce paralellable extolling of Church-men through all the former six Epistles the perpetual silence thereof in that to the Romans loudly proclaim that either they were write by different Authors or else that they have undergone no few Additions and Corruptions which his Epistle to the Romans had escaped seeing I think they will scarce adventure to say that the Epistle to the Romans sometime had in it such Injunctions of Obedience to the Roman Clergy which by some chance or other were afterward obliterate § 4. Again what can we make of that proud boasting in his Epistle to the Trallesians as if he had been the only Muster-Master to the Angels But Pearson tells us That it 's not strange tho' Ignatius a Bishop who had long conversed with the Apostles could write something concerning Heavenly Things which are so often mention'd by the Apostles and he stiffly denies in opposition to Daille That such knowledge is not giv'n to Mortals and perhaps saith Pearson we know not well what Ignatius mean'd when he wrote these things concerning Angels and yet who will say but that he knew them himself And then he acknowledges that Ignatius discourses of his Know not giv'n to any Mortal seeing for the proof hereof it 's enough to repone the words of Elephas to which of the Saints wilt thou turn thee Surely not to Paul seeing it can never be made evident that he either taught others or ascribed to himself the knowledge of these Ignatian or rather Pseudo-Ignatian Mysteries Altho' therefore we know not the meaning of these his words we shall I believe incurr little hazard thereby and if he knew them himself I shall not debate Certainly if we judge of the Author by his Work we shall have little ground to apprehend that his Judgement was of the greatest reach for remove a very few flowers this so much celebrated Garden shall be nothing but a den of weeds neither can better be expected where any intrude into the things they have not seen as the Author of this Passage appears to have done boasting of that wherein neither the Pen-men of the Holy Scriptures nor the primitive Christians profess'd themselves to be skillfull for altho ' the Ancients acknowledged that there were or might be such Dignities Distinctions among Angels yet who before the Impostour that borrowed the name of the Areopagite adventured to profess their acquaintance with the particulars thereof But most of all I admire that he for his purpose alledges Irenaeus as if the Mysteries of God were nothing else but a convertible term with the Politicks or Tacticks of Angels With how much more reason may we understand the Mysteries mention'd by Irenaeus to be these magnifi'd by the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. 16. which without Controversie are equaly great and proffitable Lastly as to Chrysostome he cites no where wherfore I cann't so easily make a judgement concerning him otherwise ' tseems he may be understood of a greater measure of knowledge of the Mysteries frequently spoken off by the Apostle And withall I observe that Dr. Pearson still insinuates and intimates as if Ignatius and other primitive Christians receiv'd from the Apostles other mysterious Doctrines not to be committed to writing different from what is comprehended in the holy Scriptures wherein notwithstanding the whole Counsel of God is delivered which Opinion is much fitter for a Jewish Cabalist or Romish Traditionary than a Protestant Doctor § 4. M. Du Pin imbraces and only contracts Pearson's Answer saying that the knowledge of the Orders Offices and Stations of Angels might be affirmed by an ancient Bishop all Christians knew Heavenly Things And Ignatius says nothing of Angels but what had been said by St. Paul But herein he palpably contradicts himself and affirms what he had before deni'd for to prove the Forgery of these Books that bear the Areopagites name Du Pin gives us this Argument He viz. the Author of these Books distinguishes the several Orders of Angels and observes their difference things that were unknown to the ancient Writers and concerning which they were not sollicitous to be informed as S. Irenaeus assures us in lib. 2. ch 55. He opposes also Dr. Pearson who as we have heard deduced from this same Irenaeus a quite contrary Doctrine § 5. Thus far I had proceeded secure of any other Controversie concerning this Passage when I was surpris'd to find Dr. Wake the Englisher of these Epistles make Ignatius together with his language change his Doctrine and speak quite contrary to what he had delivered either in Greek or Latine for thus he Englishes the now controverted words of Ignatius For even I my self altho' I am in bonds yet am not therefore able to understand Heavenly Things as the description of the Places of the Angels and the several Companies of them under their respective Princes the things visible and invisible but in these things I am yet a Learner But this Version is by no
called who are called at all The High-Priest dips him thrice The High-Priest himself having made a holy Prayer at the Divine Altar and beginning to Offer goes round about the whole Chore and the High-Priest praising the Holy Divine Actions sacrifices the most Divine Thing and taking and delivering the Divine Communion he ends with a Holy Thanksgiving Do nothing saith the Pseudo-Ignatius to Hero a Deacon of Antioch without the Bishops for they are Priests thou their Deacon they Baptize Sacrifice or Dispense the Lord's Supper impose Hands thou serves them as St. Stephen in Jerusalem administred to James and the Elders From which place it 's most evident that all Pastors or Priests as the Author speaks are true Bishops that on the account of such things as are common to all Pastors they receive the prime Episcopal Honour and Deference that there was a Colledge of true Bishops in the single City of Antioch accordingly that the rest of the Elders with James at Jerusalem were really true Bishops no less than he I don't say that Bishops and Congregations were reciprocal every-where in the fourth or fifth Century when these Impostors wrote only being to personat Apostolick Men they saw themselves obliged to mix into their Legends some shreds of true Antiquity The stuff they invented themselves was of a far different and contrary Mettal and far from being so conform and like to the Apostolick and prime Primitive Church § 14 And here it 's to be added that as every Bishop had once which continued in very many places for a good space one Congregation only so all Bishops whatsoever are of the same Dignity and Equal with one another For Cyprian calls all Bishops Collegues adding we force none we give Laws to none seeing every Governour in the Administration of the Church hath Power to do according to his own Will for which he is to give God an Acconnt And for none of us is a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Power can force his Collegues to Obedience c. And Hierome saith wheresoever Bishops be at Rome or Eugubium Constantinople Rhegium Alexandria or Tanis they are all of the same Dignity and Priest-hood Riches and Poverty make not a Bishop either higher or lower they are all the Successors of the Apostles Which is also Augustine's Mind and must be granted by all who acknowledge the Equality of the Apostles and that Bishops were their Successors Now the Truth of these two Things viz. the allowableness of a Bishop to every Congregation yea the primitive Reciprocalness of a Bishop and a Congregation and the Equality of Bishops among themselves being supposed which indeed is undoubtable to all the Ingenuous their whole Hierarchy turns to nothing And now I hope that which some pretend to be a mighty Prejudice viz. that Episcopacy still de facto has been and from the earliest times of Christianity we hear of Bishops is many ways removed and that by this time it has clearly appeared that either profound Ignorance Osscitancy or the masly beam of Interest in Mens Eyes has been the true Source of this Prejudice Moreover suppose that it could not be easily told when this Corruption which is like the Tares sown during the sleeping of the Husband-man crept into the Church Can they tell when all other Corruptions made their first Entry As for Example can they give a distinct account when the use of Oyl in Baptism whereof Tertullian speaks as of a thing constantly practised among Christians came first in Fashion The like I may say of Exorcization and many other things altogether uncertain as to their Beginning and yet by all Lovers of the Truth of Christianity to be Corruptions whereof see store in Chamier's Panstratia Secondly I trust also that by the foregoing Discourses the Weapon the Papists and other Hierarchicks use against the Reformed Churches to prove that they have no Ministers because of the want of a Succession of Bishops is sufficiently blunted And this minds me of an Objection I was assaulted with from a Gentleman of that Perswasion 't was that these Episcopal Men who ordained our Pastors gave them the Power of Ordination neither in express Terms nor yet intentionally Ergo not at all I Repon'd that tho' they did not give it them intentione Operantis yet notwithstanding intentione Operis in so much as they ordain'd the Ministers of the Gospel all whom we sustain to be true Bishops I add this is to a hair like Becan the Jebusites arguing against Luther's Call to be a Protestant-Minister Luther saith he had no lawfull Calling to the Ministry he exercised after his Defection for then he began to oppugn the Catholick Church abolish Feasts Monastick Vows and Prayers for the Dead these things he could not do by the Power which he had received in the Catholick Church for the Bishop who ordained him gave him no Power for the Destruction of the Church § 15. But there yet remains a great Prejudice and no wonder for it comes from a great City Rome say they and other such vast Cities which certainly contain'd many Congregations have been always ruled by their particular Bishops as the Catalogues yet extant evinc◠But tho' 't were so seeing it 's at least no less certain that in other places Bishops and Congregations were Reciprocal we are even with them and their Argument quite evanishes and Antiquity allows us to give a Bishop to every Congregation no less than it warrands their giving a multitude of Parishes to any one Bishop And Dr. Maurice acknowledges he never yet heard of any Man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under him And he 's so far in the right herein that during prime Antiquity 't was never so much as dream'd that 't was either essential or any way requisite for a Bishop to have a plurality of Congregations It 's not saith he the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes one a Bishop but the Order There are saith Saravia and have been Bishopricks so small that their Bishops had only one or two Presbyters for we measure not a Bishoprick by the number of the Clergy or by the amplitude of the City or Diocess the magnitude of Riches but by the Authority of the Episcopal Degree altho' the Bishoprick be included in one small Parish alone And some of the most Episcopal amongst them acknowledge that any of our Ministers tho' they have but one Parish want nothing to make them Bishops but only the Episcopal Consecration whereby they at once yeeld the whole Plea destroy their Hierarchy and withall discover their preterscriptural and therefore antiscriptural Superstition And now seeing there is all the warrant and allowance that either can be desir'd or thought on that a Bishop and a Pastor of one single Flock or Congregation is one and the same and that every Congregation may have its own proper Bishop their