their courses in making such breaches in Christ's Vineyard and Sheepfold that lets in the Foxes and Wolves and to be disposing our own minds into such a gentle temper that notwithstanding all past provocations and all the advantages we have from the Laws and Law-givers yet we may be willing to yield even to the peevish weakness and unaccountable scruples of these that separate from us as far as can be without giving just occasions of scandal on the other hand But to give them such advantages as this Discourse does is that which I cannot reconcile to the common Rules of Prudence and Edification I wish this Writer had also considered how unjust a way of reasoning it was to argue from the indecencies and abuses any may be guilty of in the use of some of the Ceremonies that they ought to be taken away Alas at that rate the most sacred and solemn things shall not escape since all things when they fall into the hands of mortal men are subject to such abuses He did also very much forget himself when he reckoned the Bowing to the Altar one of the Ceremonies of the Church which has never enjoyned it neither by Canon nor Rubrick for in it all are left to their freedom So that this can furnish none with so much as a pretence to excuse their separation For his long Discourse about Church-men and their Qualifications and labours chiefly about Preaching iâ— certainly deserves great consideration and in it we cannot steer by a better Rule than those most excellent constitutions Antiquity has left us which are indeed so divine and pure that if this Age could bear such a Reformation I know no greater blessing could befal us But it is more to be wished than hoped for to see Plato's Commonwealth built upon the ruines and dregs of Romulus We ought to converse much with the writings the Ancients have left us concerning the Qualifications and Employments of the Clergy such as Nazianzen's Apollogetick Chrysostome's Books of the Priesthood and Gregory the Great 's Books of the Pastoral care But whatever defects we may charge our selves with this is so far from contributing to our Schism that it is rather the effect and consequence of it for where there is bitter zeal and strife there is confusion and every evil work and so it was not needful to put this in a Book concerning Union Nor have these that divide from us any reason of insulting over us whatever we may have to humble our selves for those things and least of all for Preaching which perhaps is at this day come to such perfection that if all our other defects were as much mended as these of Preaching are we might on all accounts be esteemed the best and most excellent Church that ever was since the Ages of Miracles In a word to end all that needs be said on these Heads the grounds of our communicating with any Church being chiefly the purity of their Doctrine and Worship and that their order and Rules are such that they hinder the exercise of no Christian virtue but very much advance it no personal failings or defects how publick and gross soever ought to make any to separate from such a Society For till I be involved in some guilt which no other Man's faults can do by joyning in Communion with a Church I ought still to abide in it This must either be laid down for a Principle otherwise Schisms and Rents shall be endless for as long as men are men personal failings and corruptions are unavoidable And now having thus far examined the most considerable parts of that discourse except what relates to Bishops and Priests about which you desire chiefly to be satisfied and upon which the Authour has laid out his utmost strength I come at last to consider that which I shall do with that candour and calmness I have carried along with me hitherto His opinion is That the Bishops Precedency over the rest of the Clergy with Authority to ordain to exhort to rebuke to judge and censure as he found cause is of Apostolical institution and hath been continued in the whole Church of God ever since so that nothing but necessity if that can excuse those that set up another Form of Government therefore this Government ought to be still kept in the Church But after all this he thinks the Bishops and Priests are one and the same order so that by their Ordination they have no more power conferred on them than Presbyters have This he studies to prove 1. From the silence of the Scriptures that do not mention two such orders 2. Because he finds but one Ordination which he thinks cannot confer two Characters 3. Because the Apostles call themselves Presbyters and no where Bishops 4. Because St. Clement in his Epistle speaks only of Bishops and Deacons 5. Justin Martyr calls the Bishop only President 6. St. Cyprian calls himself Praepositus 7. Because the Form of ordaining Elders is the same with which Christ ordained the Apostles Receive ye the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye forgive they are forgiven them 8. The bad consequences of admitting this difference of Order are great for it will condemn all the other Reformed Churches Upon these reasons he rejects the Difference of Order and instead of that says the Apostles ordain'd all equally to be Bishops or Presbyters but some having more eminent gifts than others the Apostles did by Commission empower and constitute These to be Overseers and Bishops over the rest from which beginning this practice has been kept up in the Church ever since Therefore he thinks Priests ought not to ordain other Priests but yet having done it it is valid and may without a crime be done by a Priest that were by shipwrack or any such chance cast into a Countrey where no Person can be had that is thus commissionated to ordain This is a full and clear account of his opinion and of the reasons that led him to it I shall now examine both and First let us see what all this will amount to This must signifie little or nothing to the composing differences among us but will rather inflame them For a Presbyterian may upon this supposition very reasonably plead that since by his order he has the same Authority that a Bishop hath he ought not to be obliged or limited in the exercise of it That any such Commission the Apostles gave some extraordinary men must have been but temporary for their lives for if they had judged this a thing needful to be kept up in the Church they had given such lasting directions about it constituting it a distinct order as might have preserved it still in the Church but since they did not that we have no reason to acknowledge any such Power now And therefore if Priests see their Bishop doing what they think amiss they may assume that Power their Order has given them and judge and depose him too if need be I am confident that
subject to them This did very much compense the defects of other Church-men who though not so well qualified to govern yet being willing to obey and able to follow Directions they might by that means become very useful in the Gospel Now there are two things that must be annexed to that superiour inspection without which we cannot imagine that it could be managed or have force the one is that all to be ordained should receive their orders from such Bishops Otherwise obedience could not be expected from them nor could the superiour be any way accountable for them if he did not convey their Authority to them It was also necessary that in all matters of indifference the superiour Governour or Bishop must be looked on as having Authority to rule and command and so the inferiour judge himself bound to obey And indeed if in those days of persecution when the Church had no assistance but all possible opposition from the civil powers there had not been very positive rules of obedience and order left by the Apostles it had not been possible for them to have been kept in any order or under any Government But the rules of superiority and subjection were without doubt formally left by the Apostles Thence it was that the whole Precinct of a Bishop's charge was called his Parish in which he had the care of Souls and for his assistance did chuse out and ordain some of the more eminent and ancient Christians to assist him in teaching the flock and administring Sacraments who were in all things directed by him and upon his death one of these was presented by the Election of the Clergy and people to the superiour Bishop of the Province who did ordain him Now though the writings of the first Ages are for the greater part lost yet there are abundant evidences to shew this Authority was set up by the Apostles I need not take pains to prove it against this Authour for he acknowledges it But because some may perhaps read this Letter that have not studied this point in the larger and more learned works of the Asserters of this order I shall say as much on this subject as I think may very justly and reasonably satisfie any Man and shall wave St. Ignatius his Epistles though the Authority of those is made good with the astonishing labours of the Incomparably Learned Bishop of Chester But being to give a short hint of the uncontested authorities that may be brought to prove this I shall begin with Ireneus to whom we may very well give credit in a matter of Fact he knew St. Polycarp and was instructed by him and he tells us that He was constituted by the Apostles Bishop in the Church of Smyrna So that we find from him that St. Polycarp was ordained by the Apostles Bishop of the Church of Smyrna Now that great Saint and Martyr must have taken his Notion of a Bishop from no other original but that which he saw in his first Instructor and yet we clearly see he judged the Bishop was more than the President for he reckoning the Tradition of the Faith counts it by the Bishops that had been in Rome from the Apostles days from whence it appears he considered them as the chief depositaries of the Faith And in his Epistle to Victor Bishop of Rome wherein he condemned his severity in excommunicating the Eastern Bishops for observing Easter on the 14. day of the Moon he lays the whole blame of it upon Victor though Damasus tells us it was done upon a Consultation Victor held about it with his Presbyters and Deacons Now the blame was not to be laid on Victor if it had not been the received practice of the Church at that time for the Bishops to have the jurisdiction chiefly in their hands So that we clearly see what Ireneus understood a Bishop to be and if that had not been consonant to what he knew in St. Polycarp who had instructed him we cannot in reason imagine he would have consented to such a tyrannical excess of power Tertullian reckons the Origine of the Bishop's power from the Apostles from whom they derived their succession The same Writer also tells us that neither Priests nor Deacons had right to baptize but upon a power from the Bishop He also says they received the Sacrament from no hands but their Presidents or Bishops Firmilian that was St. Cyprian's contemporary tells us the Bishops whom he there calls Majores natu and from the other parts of that Epistle it is plain he means Bishops did preside in the Church and had the power of Baptizing Confirming and ordaining and even Ierome himself tells us that neither Priest nor Deacon had a right to Baptize without the Bishop's command And St. Denis of Alexandria who was undisputed one of the greatest Persons in his Age in his Letter to Fabius Bishop of Rome tells him that upon the difficulty was raised how to deal with those that died before they had compleated their penitence He had given a command that the peace of the Church should be given them Where it is clear the Authority of commanding and not only presiding rested with the Bishop And in fine when the Christian Church came out of the fire of persecution she decreed in the Council of Nice that the ancient Customes should be in force concerning the power of Metropolitans and Patriarchs we must acknowledge there were many very ancient men in that Council so that they who were within 200. years of the Apostolick time and among whom we may reckon many that were 80. years of Age or near it could not esteem any thing Ancient that had not been derived from the Apostolical institution I shall not insist on any thing that was decreed afterwards where we may suspect power and cunning might have gone a great way to have east the Church into such a mould as might best agree with the constitutions of the Empire There might be also other Political reasons to have made the Bishops after that time aspire to Power and Precedence But I have only vouched the Writers of the former Ages witnesses in a matter of Fact wherein we have no just cause to suspect them to depose to us what was the successive Government of the Church from the Apostles days Upon all which I desire that you and every honest man will in your Consciences consider a few particulars 1. Whatever we find generally received in those Ages about a thing that was visible and in which none could mistake we may safely think it came from the Apostles days We may indeed imagine that when some of the Apostles to gain upon the Jews did observe the Christian Easter on the 14. day of the Moon others might have mistaken this compliance as if the Apostles had judged that the 14. was the right day We may also reasonably enough think that when they heard St. Iohn mention the
Authour will not allow of this and yet it is visible that it arises naturally out of what he has set down But suppose he could avoid that what does all he has said contribute to the re-uniting our Dissenters and us again somewhat he may say as to the foreign Churches and yet I hope to shew that may be done another way A little may be also said to such as were ordained before by Priests in the time of the late Usurpation who are now but a small number and yet even these by his Principles did a very ill thing who out of no necessity but in a wanton sedition against their Bishops threw them off by the strength and force of a prevailing Army And if such Persons ought not to be marked by some censure or at least not admitted to any sacred Employments till they have been sensible of their fault and repent of it I leave it to every body to consider But for the rest of our Dividers as long as the Bishops have such an Authority over their Priests by what Title or conveyance soever they possess it it is all one to them And indeed the weaker their Title is they will think they have the stronger Plea So that this Notion were it ever so true cannot go a great way towards the settling matters among us but on the contrary will rather widen the breach I go next to examine his opinion in it self that there are many contradictions in his Discourse is apparent For if Bishops have Authority to ordain to exhort to rebuke to judge and censure as they find cause and if this Authority was given by the Apostles Is not here a distinct Order all Ecclesiastical Functions are but so many Commissions from God of which the conveyers were the Apostles for what is the order of Priesthood but a Commission from God which was first issued out by the Apostles giving such Persons authority to Preach and to administer Sacraments and can any think that the Apostles could have given any such Commissions but 1. They must have had the direction of the Holy Ghost that assisted them in all they went about 2. They must have conferred such a measure of the Holy Ghost as was necessary for the discharge of such a Commission for they that conferred the Holy Ghost on all they laid their hands on would have done it much more on those they did commissionate for so high a trust 3. This must have been done by imposition of hands so we find they laid hands on Paul and Barnabas when they were sent to the Gentiles though they were endued with extraordinary power before and were Apostles according to what St. Paul says of himself in the beginning of his Epistle to the Galatians God had also by name marked them out for that service yet hands were laid on them and so they were sent out by the Holy Ghost 4. If these Persons commissionated with such Authority were empowered by the Apostles then all the rest of the Priests were bound to submit to that Authority and whatever power they might have pretended before that then since latter deeds do vacate and invalidate former ones that power being conferred on another who is acknowledged vested with the Authority the former must be supposed divested of it and bound to subject themselves to it Nor could they except in cases of simple necessity re-assume it without rejecting the Authority of the Apostles themselves according to that maxime of our Saviour's He that rejecteth me rejecteth him that sent me 5. Either the Apostles did declare this was only temporary that for the present exigency such extraordinary persons were vested with such Authority or that this constitution should continue still in the Church He cannot chuse the former for then that order must have determined with these mens lives in whose hands it was entrusted which is against what that Authour pleads for So that he must say they declared that such Commissions must continue to the end of the World otherwise there were no obligation lying on the Church to continue them which yet he acknowledges 6. After the Apostles were dead either these Commissions were to be renewed on the account of what the Apostles had appointed or only by a voluntary delegation of the Priests and People if the former then our Bishops at this day act by vertue of a Commission from the Apostles If the latter be true then 1. This delegation may be given or not as they please and so the order may vanish 2. They may limit or enlarge it as they please and so may very much change it 3. Those who are ordained Bishops without such Commissions cannot be Bishops at all For if that Power be only a Commission then it cannot be seated in any person that has got no such Commission therefore there being no such thing asked as a delegation of such Authority from the Priests for the Election of the Dean and Chapter relates only to the Person but not to the Power and Office none are now truly Bishops since they have no such Commissions nor does the Metropolitan and the other consecrating Bishops give any such Commissions but only ordain a Bishop to the Work and Office so committed to him by the imposition of their hands in which it is clear as also from the whole Office of the Consecration of Bishops that they suppose there is a standing Power and Authority in the Office and therefore do believe it does not depend upon any Commission they can give all they do being to ordain him to the Office to which the Authority is necessarily annexed So that it is clear that either we have no Bishops at all or the Commission for this Authority is annexed to the Office and the Church does not constitute the Office but only admit or ordain a person duly elected and qualified unto an Office already constituted From all these particulars which necessarily follow upon that Authour's Hypothesis I may well assume that by his principles Bishops were empowered for ordination and jurisdiction by the Apostles they being directed in it by the Holy Ghost and laying their hands on them and conferring the Holy Ghost by such imposition of hands upon which all the rest both Clergy and Laity were bound to submit to them and that the Apostles intended this order should be still continued in the Church So that all succeeding Bishops act by that Power then conveyed by the Apostles to the first Bishops and continued with their successors to the end of the World And if this does not state the distinct Office of Bishops and Priests let every Reader judge There is a different power lodged with the Bishops another Commission ratified by an imposition of hands which is to continue in a succession for ever So that that Hypothesis destroys it self establishing so many different things that contradict one another But before I go to answer his arguments I shall premise somewhat of the Office of Bishop