Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	apostle_n	bishop_n	timothy_n	4,167	5	10.7647	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39854	Two sermons the first preached in Christ-Church, Dublin, Feb. 19, 1681, at the consecration of the Right Reverend Fathers in God, William Lord Bishop of Kildare, William Lord Bishop of Kilmore, and Richard Lord Bishop of Kilalla : the other, preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Patrick, at the primary visitation of the most Reverend Father in God, Francis Lord Arch-bishop of Dublin, Apr. 24, 1682 / by S. Foley ...	Foley, Samuel, 1655-1695.; Moreton, William, 1641-1715.; Sheridan, William, 1636-1711.; Tenison, Richard, 1640?-1705.; Marsh, Francis, 1627-1693.	1683 (1683)	Wing F1400; ESTC R2994	25,191	58

TWO SERMONS The First Preached in Christ-Church Dublin Feb. 19. 1681. AT THE CONSECRATION Of the Right Reverend Fathers in God WILLIAM Lord Bishop of Kildare WILLIAM Lord Bishop of Kilmore AND RICHARD Lord Bishop of Kilalla The Other Preached in The Cathedral Church of St. Patrick At the Primary Visitation of the Most Reverend Father in God FRANCIS Lord Arch-Bishop of Dublin Apr. 24. 1682. By S. FOLEY A.M. Fellow of Trinity Colledge near Dublin and Chaplain to His Grace LONDON Printed for Moses Pitt● at the Angel in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1683. To the Right Reverend Fathers in God WILLIAM Lord Bishop of Kildare WILLIAM Lord Bishop of Kilmore AND RICHARD Lord Bishop of Kilalla My Lords THE Sermon which I had the Honour to Preach at the Consecration of Your Lordships I do now Publish in hopes that it may give a little Satisfaction to some mistaken People who may happen to read it and I dedicate it to Your Lordships in hopes that Your Lordships will demonstrate that that is feasible which I say will be expected from and that that Respect is deserved by which I say is due to those of Your Lordships Order I am my Lords Your most dutiful and humble Servant SAMVEL FOLEY A Consecration SERMON PREACHED In christ-Christ-Church Dublin Feb. 19. 1681. The beginning of the Epistle appointed by the Church for this Service being 1. Timothy iii. 1. This is a true Saying if a man desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth a good work ST Paul having in the preceding Chapters given Timothy some general Account of the true Faith and suitable Worship of God as a necessary means for the continuing and extending of the one and for the becoming performance of the other proceeds in this to treat of the Government of the Church And by way of Introduction to what relates to the particular Offices of those persons who were to be respectively concern'd in it He makes a Declaration to this purpose That whosoever desires to be invested with that Power and Authority which of Right belong to the highest and most eminent of them he desires an Employment worthy and honourable an Office by which he may be enabled to do some Service to his great Creator be a publick Blessing to the Age he lives in a Dispenser of God's Favours to men and as it were an Agent to maintain and keep up a Correspondence between Earth and Heaven For this I judge a Paraphrase not strained on the Apostles words This is a true Saying c. Being to speak before this great and honourable Audience upon this Occasion and Subject I shall humbly beg leave to make a modest Enquiry into these following particulars First Whence our present Bishops have their Authority Secondly Whether Episcopacy hath any Advantages above other Forms of Church-Government Thirdly What may be justly and reasonably expected from Persons entrusted with that Sacred Authority Fourthly What Honour and Respect is due from us to them By what I shall say in resolution hereunto 't will I hope be plain enough That he desires a good Work who desires the Office of a Bishop I begin with the First Enquiry Whence our present Bishops have their Authority That ever since these Nations have pretended to Adore Jesus Christ as their Lord and Redeemer They have in Obedience to him Worshipped God after a way not known before is denied by none That all who have agreed in this belief and way of Worship have reputed themselves in that respect a Community different from Civil Bodies Politick is as evident from their Exercising and Submitting to an Authority distinct from all Civil Power That Bishops have been the Chief meerly Spiritual Governours of this Society from the very first Constitution of it here and that those Venerable Persons whom we now call Bishops have receiv'd the Spiritual Authority they claim from others of that Order and Title who received the same from their Predecessors and so in a continued series from the first entertainment of that Religion in these Islands were it necessary might with much ease be clearly made out So that the Question will be reduc'd to very narrow Terms What Authority and from whom the first planters of Christianity among us were intrusted with to Communicate to others For more full Satisfaction in this matter it being liable to many mistakes of evil consequence I shall lay down what I have to say concerning it in these distinct and plain Propositions 1. That Our Blessed Saviour had Power and Authority to Institute and Form a Society over the whole World to be governed by such Laws and such Officers as he should appoint This is evident both from the Prophecies concerning the (a) Isaiah ix 6. Messiah in the Old Testament That the Government should be upon his Shoulders and the like and also from what is said of Jesus Christ in the New That (b) Acts x. 38. Hebr. iii. 1. 1 Pet. ii 25. Mat. xxviii 18. Proprie Episcopus Dominus Jesus est Origen on Mat. xxiv God Annointed him with the Holy Ghost and as it were Consecrated him to be Vniversal Pastour and the great Apostle and High Priest of our Profession and Bishop of our Souls and that he had all Power both in Heaven and in Earth and that he did in his own Person Rule and Govern make Laws and constitute Governours and not only did he declare Gods Will to Mankind but did also take order that such Persons should be admitted into that his Society by Baptism as were willing to submit to the Rules and Constitutions of it 2. That Our Saviour committed the Government of this Society to those who in the Evangelists are call'd Apostles This appears from the tenour of the Commission which he gave them when he breathed on them the (c) John xx 21 22. Holy Ghost As my Father sent me so send I you Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever Sins ye retain they are retained 3. The same Authority which was given to the Apostles to Govern this Society excepting those attendants of Gifts as of Tongues doing Miracles and the like Extraordinary Helps and Supplies which the Necessity of the Primitive Church requir'd till it came in the Vnity of the Faith unto a perfect Man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ as St. Paul expresses it was for ever to continue to their Successors This appears from the very Nature and Design of that Government which Christ appointed it being so absolutely necessary to the preservation (d) Ephes iv of his Society and consequently of his Religion that such a Society could not subsist without it and therefore as necessary to continue that Society as first to form it Some will think more necessary in succeding Ages than at that time when our Saviour's Miracles were so fresh in their remembrance their Devotion so new and their Zeal so warm and vigorous We likewise find this plainly intimated

who did oppose the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters was Aerius almost 330 Years after our Saviour a very Proud Humorsome Man who because he could not obtain a Bishoprick which he aimed at as Epiphanius informs us (p) Epiphanii Haeress 56. seu utalii 75. Speaking of Aerius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Afterwards Eustathius made him a Presbyter and Master in the Hospital in P●ntus but for all this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he after much shew of discontent quitted the Place and led many poor people after him telling them that a Presbyters was as good as a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he resolv'd that a Bishop was not above a Presbyter and for his he was by the good Men of those days condemn'd of Heresie and therefore we cannot but suspect that there is a little too much assurance in the Men of our Times who desire to be thought most Pure and Orthodox and yet will undertake against the whole Church of God for many hundreds of Years to defend a Notorious Infamous Heretick a Heretick who had no Sober Man in those Ages to Countenance him For as for Medina who says That St. Hierome Sedulius and others were of his Heresie the Most Learned Arch-Bishop of Spalato do's prove him (q) In his Second Book De Republ. Eceles cap. 3. Of the difference between the Opinions of St. Hierons and Aerius See the Learned John Forbes his Irenicum Lib. 2. cap. 11. to be very impudent for saying so But all this and much more of this nature makes but little with some in this Cause For when by Learned Men it was demonstrated That Bishops were above Presbyters in the very First and Purest Ages of the Church They whose Passions or Interests had render'd them Enemies to that Order made this Reply That Diotrephes sought the Preheminence in the Apostles times and the Mystery of Iniquity did then begin to work Among others this is the Answer of a Presbyter of great Fame and Repute among his Followers who were deeply Engag'd in the Late Troubles Alezander Henderson (r) Henderson 's First Paper Pag. 157. Of the Edit Anno 1649. and his Second Paper Pag. 170. I wind together Diotrephes and the Mystery of Iniquity the one as an Old Example of Church-Ambition which was also too palpable in the Apostle themselves and the other as a Cover of Ambition afterwards discovered which two brought forth the great Mystery of the Papacy at last in a Letter to the Late King of Blessed Memory and in his First Paper he had the modesty to call our Bishops The (s) His First Paper Pag. 154. It is too well known That the Reformation of Hen. VIII was most imperfect in the Essentials of Doctrin Worship and Government and although it proceeded by some degrees afterwards yet the Government was never Reformed the Head was Changed Dominus non Dominium and the whole Limbs of the Antichristian Hierarchy retained upon what Snares and Temptations of Avarice and Ambition the great Enchanters of the Clergie I need not express Limbs of the Antichristian Hierarchie I shall not positively Charge him with what a Reverend Divine who had been a Member of the Synod of Dort tells us (t) Bishop Hall Of Episcopacy Pag. 52. was Reported of him That when he was Moderator of that famous Assembly at Glasgow (u) See the Large Declaration about the Troubles in Scotland Pag. 237. he said That St. Paul himself by Appointing Bishops was a Worker in that Mystery of Iniquity But 't was not long after that this Answer was Applauded That the Socinians Independents and Anabaptists took confidence from he Example and termed the Mystery of the Holy Trinity the Power of inflicting Ecclesiastical Censures and the Baptizing of Infants The Mystery o Iniquity And truly some Learned Men think that there cannot be more said for the Baptizing of Infants nay for the Cannon of the Scripture and for the Observation of the Lord's Day it self than for Episcopacy However shall we think that our Saviour would be so unkind to his Church as to deliver it up wholly to the Management of Antichrist for fifteen hundred years together Nay if Bishops because Bishops must be Antichrists how can we avoid reckoning St. James himself the Brother of our Lord the Antichrist of Jerusalem Timothy the Antichrist of Ephesus and Titus of Creet And St. John should not have directed his Epistles to the Seven Angels but in our New Stile to the Seven Antichrists of the Churches of Asia Shall we think that Christ's Apostles themselves who Lived to See and to Establish Episcopacy as to the Essential Parts of it as it now stands would betray his Church into the hands of Antichrist and help to exalt the Man of Sin and that many of the most Godly and Faithful Servants of Jesus Christ the Blessed Martyrs of the Primitive Church would be themselves Limbs of Antichrist and rejoyce in him far be it from us to entertain such horrid Imaginations But to take no farther Notice of odious Terms and ill Language Did Christ's Apostles behave themselves Unfaithfully in their Charge and when they had Converted Persons enough to make a Church did they Establish any other Form of Government than what they had receiv'd Commission from their Master to Establish and which was to Endure to the End of the World all which Time we see he has promised his special Presence and Assistance to their Legal Successors And as to those who succeeded the Apostles shall we suspect that such good Men that Men who died for the Gospel durst presume to set up a Government contrary to it and so unanimously agree in so wicked a Contrivance They were doubtless Holy Conscientious and Mortified Persons very Humble and Devout and therefore we cannot honestly say as some would have the first devisers of Episcopacy to have been That they were Covetous Proud Ambitious Tyrannical and Usurpers Was it Honour Riches State and Grandeur that those Humble Patient Men who were always under Persecution could be Corrupted and Allured with in those Days when as the famous Petrus de Marca upon occasion (w) Pet. de Marc. de Concord Tom. 2. Pag. 81. Sect. 4. of Pope Leo his Letter to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica truly observes That Episcopatus erat veluti gradus quidam ad crudelissima supplicia a Bishoprick intituled the Possessour only to the Priviledge of being more Barbarously Tormented than othes Nay after that Age the Bishops themselves were so good Men so excellent (x) Calvin's Instit Printed at Geneva 1550. cap. 8. Sect. 53. that Calvin says and we may venture to take his word when he speaks well of any of that Order that a bad Bishop would have been esteemed instar portenti as a strange prodigious thing shall we suppose that these Men would be so abominably ungrateful to their Lord and Saviour as most Sacrilegiously to violate his own Institution and so injurious to their

in the Commission which Christ gave his Apostles (e) Mat. xxviii 18 20. Go and teach or make Disciples in all Nations and lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World Now they themselves were not to live so long and therefore this special Presence and Assistance must be understood to have been promised to their Successors also Farther Christ sent them as his Father sent him that is with such Authority to Ordain others and to Institute Ecclesiastical Discipline and so to make Successors and to communicate to them of that Spirit which he breathed on them as Moses did to Joshua (f) Deut. xxxiv 9. the Spirit of Wisdom by laying their hands upon them And hence it was that St. Paul told the Bishops of Asia upon whom he had lay'd his hands when upon his Summons They met him at Miletus (g) Acts xx 28. That the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers or Bishops over the Church of God I may add that all Disputers in this Cause and all Pretenders to different Forms of Church-Government do Acknowledge some Form to be always necessary and consequently Authority to Rule and Govern for ever to reside in some Persons or other 4. That Bishops be the true extent of their Authority what it will are declar'd to be in Scripture and were look'd upon in the first Ages h of the Church as Successors to the Apostles and so Authoriz'd by Christ to Govern this Society Thus far we have but little Controversie with the main Opposers of Episcopacy For they cannot deny but that our Bishops are Presbyters and therefore if as they will have it Presbyters were the Antient Bishops and are Successors to the Apostles our Bishops upon that account are so If therefore we be satisfied that Our Saviour gave some Power and Authority to his Apostles with a design that They should leave it to others to be transmitted through all Ages (h) St. Cyprian Epist 75. p. 225. Edit Oxon. Potestas peccatorum remittendorum Apostolis data est Ecclesiis quas illi à Christo missi Constituerunt Episcopis qui eis Ordinatione Vicariâ successerunt successively to some fit persons for the Exigencies of the Church and that our Bishops are Successors to those Apostles which one Party of our Churches Adversaries are obliged to own by virtue of their being Presbyters and which the other have no pretence to deny here in Ireland whatever Fables (i) For Confutation of which See Mason's Vindiciae Ecclesiae Anglicanae Primate Bramhali's Works and the Second Part of Dr. Burnet's History of the Reformation they have invented to disparage the English Consecrations we being able to prove That our present Bishops of Ireland were Consecrated by (k) For Instance His Grace the Most-Reverend Father in God Michael Boyle the present Lord Arch-Bishop of Armagh and Primate of all Ireland together with Dr. Margetson the Late Primate of Ireland the truly Learned and Pious Dr. John Parker late Lord Arch-Bishop of Dublin Dr. Pullen then Arch-Bishop of Tuam and the present Lord Arch-Bishop of Cashell and Seven other Bishops who died since were Consecrated Jan. 27. 1660. By Dr. John Bramhall Arch-Bishop of Armagh who was Consecrated May 26. 1634. by Primate Vsher who was Consecrated Anno 1621. by Primate Hampton who was Consecrated May 5. 1613. by Dr. Thomas Jones who was Consecrated by Adam Lostus Arch-Bishop of Dublin 12. May 1584. who was Consecrated by Hugh Curwin Anno 1562. who was Consecrated Arch-Bishop of Dublin Septemb. 8. 1555. being the Third Year of Queen Mary together with James Turberville Bishop of Exceter and William Glin Bishop of Bangor This appears out of our Records and by this may any of the present Lords Bishops of Ireland Justifie their Consecration such Bishops as receiv'd their Consecration from other Consecrated Bishops and so on to before the Reformation from Records never in the least question'd or suspected we must Acknowledge that what Authority our present Bishops have They have from Christ Jesus The way being thus far clear'd before I proceed to the main thing behind to wit To demonstrate that Bishops are a distinct Order from and above Presbyters by that Authority They have receiv'd from Christ I shall deduce some few Corollaries from what has been said such as 1. 'T is evident from hence That when the Apostles Ordained Bishops they did it by Authority given them by our Saviour and not only in pursuance of a Jewish Custom of creating Elders which the famous Mr. Selden so much contends (l) Selden de Synedriis Lib. 1. Cap. 14. for Had they not done it upon an Account peculiar to Christianity St. Paul when a Jew and a most violent Persecutor of Christs Church had had as full Authority to make Bishops as when a Apostle and must have deriv'd it not from the Holy Ghost as he constantly Affirms but from his Master Gamaliel 2. Hence it follows That Bishops have not their Authority from the Civil Magistrate There is a great difference between the designation of a Person to an Office and the giving him Authority in it Thus a Mayor of a Corporation is Chosen by the Burgesses of it but receives his Authority from the King alone and so in many other instances And therefore this Assertion of ours cannot be suspected as any way prejudicial to our Princes Antient Right of Electing Bishops The Church is a Society and Body Politick distinct from that of the Common-wealth which appears from hence That it did subsist when separated from and persecuted by all Civil-Powers it is founded upon Principles different from the Law of Nature and common Notions of Mankind and settled by Divine Positive Laws and consequently the Government of it must be proportionable And they who resolve to hold the contrary Opinion may take its Foundation along with it and believe the Gospel it self to be no Law but as Enacted by the Civil Magistrate 3. We may hence infer that all other Bishops are not merely Substitutes of the Bishop of Rome and that he in the Right of St. Peter is not the Only Bishop who hath his Authority from Christ so that all must receive theirs from him This was with much Vehemence and equal Applause defended in the (m) Hist Council of Trent Lib. 7. pag. 574. of the last Edition Engl. Council of Trent by Father Laynez General of the Jesuits and Friar Simon a Florentine did there likewise maintain That the Institution of Bishops in the Apostles was only Personal and ended with them But this as the good Bishop of Paris then said is a Novel Doctrine first invented by Cajetane to gain a Cardinalship and as such was Censured by the Doctors of the Sorbonne and Richerius a (n) Richerius Cap. 10. Sect. 11. Sorbonne Doctor in his History of General Councills lately Printed has made it out That in Antient Times the very Italian Bishops themselves did subscribe Bishops Dei Gratia

it was not to the Seven Churches themselves is evident from his Saving That the seven Churches were the Seven Candlesticks but the Seven Stars (c) Rev. i. 20. St. Austin says by the Angel is meant Praepositus Ecclesiae St. Hierom Angeli Ecclesiis Praesidentes This Sense is allow'd by Bullinger and Beza were the seven Angels which did shine in them That the Angel of each of those Churches was not a Synod of Presbyters but a Single Person appears from this that the Reproofs and Charges given there are Personal We cannot say for instance that all the Elders of the (d) Acts xx 17 18. Church of Ephesus where St. Paul settled many could agree in all those Qualifications and Defects mentioned by St. John from whence it follows that each of those Churches in St. John's days was Governed by Single Persons But tho' there be some who will have nothing esteemed of momen in this Concern but what is found in Scripture or in some System of Divinity yet I hope we may be allowed to make recourse to Ecclesiastical History For we are not to seek in the Scriptures for what was done after that they were written and the Fathers who were the Successors of the Apostles can best tell what they who were next before them did To shew the unreasonableness of the contrary Opinion I shall propose a like Case If a Question were now made how Alexander the Great his Empire was disposed of after his Death and any one would take upon him to dictate with great Confidence That we ought not to consult Diodorus Siculus Plutarch and others who wrote of those Transactions but to apply our selves wholly to Aristotles Politicks or which is indeed much nearer to the prudent Advice of some of our Anti-Episcopal writers to take the words of some now alive and to send for certain Sober Good Able Men to whom they can recommend us who perhaps have never much troubled themselves with that useless Study of History but yet having profoundly studied Politicks can from their own Models and Principles best inform us how those matters went then we should I presume beg their Pardon and upon the very same grounds we must so now and address our selves to Antiquity for a Resolution Now we cannot find one word in Ecclesiastical History of which it is not improbable that they are well aware that from the days of the very Apostles any Church was otherwise Governed than by a Single Person till after the beginning of the Sixteenth Century But it would not be proper here to prosecute this matter largely and therefore I shall only propose a few instances out of the most early Christian Writers The eldest of the Fathers we have is Clemens Romanus and he in his excellent Epistle to the Corinthians shews plainly that he was of Opinion that as it was actually in his Time the Apostles themselves did by Divine Inspiration continue a Government in which Bishops and Presbyters were no less distinguished than they are now I cannot stay to consider what is weakly Objected out of him but must refer to others particularly to the two Learned Annotators upon him and to the Worthy and Learned Defender (e) Dr. Beveridge Codex Can. Vindic. Cap. 11. of the Codex Canonum St. Ignatius the Martyr who Lived with the Apostles and was afterwards Bishop of Antioch himself in many places of his Epistles shews that the Church was Governed by Bishops and that he means by a Bishop (f) That St. Ignatius does not term the Order of Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Rivet and Salmasius will have it See Dr. Hammond's Dissert Pag. 77. the same that we do And indeed his Testimony in this Controversie is so full and positive that they who desire that what he Affirms should not be true and yet pretend some Respect for so Apostolick a man have no shift but to deny that these Epistles are Genuine But that they are has been as fully demonstrated as any thing of that nature can possibly be formerly by several other worthy Persons particularly by that Prodigie of Learning and Piety the most Excellent Primate Vsher a Person one would think sufficient to reconcile Men who were Lovers of either to that Order and since by a Reverend and Learned Prelate (g) The Reverend Bishop of Chester now Living in England That Bishops were above Presbyters in the Second Century is expresly Asserted by (h) Clemens Alexandr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 3. cap. 12. pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 More clearly Stromat Lib. 6. Pag. 667. Clemens Alexandrinus by (i) Orig. in Hieremiam Homil. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he was then himself a Presbyter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By whom undoubredly is meant the Bishop and it plainly shews That he was above the Presbyters Edit Huet Rothomag Anno 1668. Pag. 114. Huetius guesses that Origen understands either Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea or Babylas Patriarch of Antioch Observat Pag. 14. Origen likewise on Mat. Ch. xix Pag. 363. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On Cap. 21. pag. 442. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen and (k) Tertullian de Baptismo cap. 17. Dandi quidem habet jus Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi non tamen sine Episcopi Auctoritate propter Ecclesiae Honorem quo salvo salva pax est Tertullian Of Heraclas who was afterwards Bishop of Alexandria Origen (l) Apud Euseb Hist Eccl. Lib. 6. Cap. 19. Pag. 180. Edit Paris Anno 1678. testifies That he was first a Presbyter of the same Church That Irenaeus was first a Presbyter afterwards Bishop of Lions appears from Eusebius (m) Euseb Hist Lib. 5. Cap. 4. 5. Hi ron in Catal. Scriptor Eccl. ad Script 64. speaking of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and St. Hierom Dionysius Alexandrinus in an Epistle to Dionysius Romanus shews that he was then a Presbyter afterwards Eusebius and St. Hierom inform us (n) Euseb Lib. 7. Cap. 7. Hieron in Gatal Script 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he was a Bishop Irenaeus and Eusebius Socrates and Theodoret do furnish us with Catalogues of the Bishops in their respective Sees from the very Time of the Apostles to their days And St. Hierom says (o) Hieron in Epist ad Evagrium quae incrpit Legimus in Isaiah 'T is his Eighty Fifth Epistle Nam Alexandriae à Marco Evangelistâ usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos Presbyteri semper unum ex se electum in excelsiori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant That from the time of St. Mark there was a Bishop always above Presbyters in the Church of Alexandria And all this is so very clear that none were they not most perversely biass'd by Prejudice or Interest if they be acquainted with Antiquity would question it The first Man that ever we can hear of

without any mention of the Pope or Apostolick See 4. We may likewise hence conclude That Bishops have not nor ought to have their Authority from the People That they had in the Apostles days was held by Mr. Hobbes (o) Leviathan Cap. 22. and he says 'T is so declar'd in Scripture But 't is plain that he makes it the same thing to Elect and to Ordain which the (p) Acts vi 5. The whole Multitude Chose Stephen and Philip c. Vers 6. Whom they set before the Apostles who when they had Prayed lay'd their Hands on them Scriptures make very different As to what relates to the People it does indeed appear from Antiquity that They were somewhat concern'd in the Election of Bishops (q) Of this matter see a full and satisfactory Account in the History of the present Separation by the Worthy and most Learned Dr. Stillingfleet Part 3. Sect. 24.25 but 't was only by way of Approbation and that St. Paul's Rule might be the better observ'd That a Bishop be Blameless and of Good Report And that they were of Good Report the People could best testifie But this occasion'd many disturbances so that Christian Magistrates were forced sometimes to interpose and at last upon prudent Considerations 't was quite dis-used Having setled these matters I come now to prove that Bishops by vertue of this Authority which they have from Christ are above Presbyters I must desire to be excused that I do not make the Enquiry Whether Bishops be of a distinct Order from that of Presbyters Jure Divino or not Which by the Advantage of Ambiguous expressions made use of by some unwarily by others on purpose and by the motives of Interest and Envy has been made the subject of much dispute and of many Books in this last Age. This I have designedly declin'd medling with For unless we be willing Eternally to wrangle and dispute and to make the Controversy to last as long as the Order it self even to the end of the World We must state the Question plainly and after some sort that we may find a clear decision of it some way or other And I know none more fair than this Whether the Apostles before their Martyrdoms committed the Authority which Christ gave them of Governing his Church and the inferior Officers of it and of Ordaining others in every Church to single Persons or to several in Conjunction To determine this Let us first consult the Holy Scriptures We find that the first Successor to any of the Apostles who was made by them was Matthias who when Judas had fallen away though he was a Disciple by the direction of the Holy Ghost (r) Acts i. was assm'd to a higher degree to the dignity of an Apostle (s) The Apostles were above the 70 Disciples Philip did Preach Baptise did Miracles and Converted the Samaritans but his Converts did not receive the Holy Ghost till that St. Peter and St. John came down from Jerusalem and laid their hands upon them Acts. viii 14.15 And that Matthias before he was made Successor to Judas was one of the 70. Disciples Vid. Eusebii Hist Eccl. Lib. 1. Cap. 12. St. Peter says To take Judas his Bishoprick We find St. James who was not (t) That James the Brother of our Lord was not one of the Twelve Valesius shews at large in his Notes on the same Chapter Not. Pag. 20. of the Twelve and whom all Ecclesiastical Histonias reckon Bishop of Hierusalem that he resided constantly there and that any matter of importance which hapned was communicated unto him That the Presbyters attended on him that when St. Peter was deliver'd out of Prison by an Angel he bade them whom he first met (u) Acts xii 17. to go and shew those things unto James and unto the Brethren and that St. Paul as soon (w) Acts xxi 18. as he came to Hierusalem after his Fourteen Years Preaching to the Gentiles went in unto James and all the Elders were present Though the Presbyters were all there he made his Application in a particular manner to St. James And in the First Council held there upon occasion of a Controversie about keeping the Law of Moses St. James determin'd as one in Authority in these words (x) Acts. xv 19. Wherefore my Sentence is St. Paul committed his Authority at Ephesus to Timothy we find him give him in Charge That he should not receive an Accusation against a Presbyters but confirm'd by two or three witnesses (y) 1 Tim. v. 19 20. and him that sinned to Rebuke before all that others also might fear So by his Place we see that he might receive an Accusation and summon Witnesses before him and Examine them and give Sentence against Presbyters which he could not have done had they been his Equals Besides he was charged with a solemn adjuration (z) Vers 21. before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the Elect Angels to do these things without Partiality which shews that by his Authority he was able to shew favours to some Presbyters above others and that his Partiality would have been of great Consequence The same St. Paul made Titus Metropolitan of Creet gave him Authority (a) 1 Titus v. To Ordain Elders in every City And as to what cencerns the rest of the Apostles we may beleive They endeavour'd that there should be Uniformity in all Churches which 't is plain (b) 1 Cor. vii 17. 1 Cor. xiv 33. St. Paul labour'd much after and Uniformity could not be had they instituted different Forms of Government in them But no considering Person will think it strange that the particular Form of Government is not more expresly described in the Relation we have in those Sacred Books of what was done by the Apostles immediately after our Saviours Ascension They could not of a sudden settle all matters nor was it necessary that They should appoint Successors long before they were to leave them Besides the Account which we have of what they did is very short St. Luke was the only Person who Compos'd and left to Posterity Commentaries o their Acts. In them we find little of St. Peter but what was transacted within a Year or two after his Masters Ascension little of St. Paul but his Conversion and what St. Luke saw him do in his several journeys less of any other of the Apostles And as to St. Paul's Epistles they do rather suppose the then Establishment whatever it was sufficiently known than undertake to describe it And after all those Books were finish'd we have reason to believe that the Church being so very much enlarged by the Accession of New Converts that they made their form of Government more exact than before Comported with the Circumstances of Affairs However One thing we find in the Revelations which seems plain enough in this matter Our Saviour Commanded St. John to write to the Angels of the Seven Churches of Asia That

Brethren as to rob them of the Authority given them by their Master and yet if we hold either Presbytery or any other way than what they then used to be of Christ's Institution we must conclude these Martyrs these Holy Devout Self-denying Men to have been so Covetous so False so Ambitious such Tyrants such Usurpers One might tremble to think that to maintain a New Conceit and the Credit of some Popular Men among us in a wicked degenerate Age we should labour to prove those Worthies the Basest Falsest Villains that ever lived among Men. But if they were so could they have Agreed all the World over in this Knavery for it admits not of a softer expression were all the rest so tame as to submit to it And why did not the Presbyters then as some of ours did of late rise up against them and say they were Anti-Christian Upon the whole we see that for a Bishop to be above the Presbyters is not late Usurpation but Practis'd in the Purest in all the Ages of the Christian Church not invented by Antichrist nor part of the Mystery of Iniquity but an Apostolick Constitution conformable to our Saviour's own And who can shew a better Title to any Priviledges or Estates upon Earth than a Possession of above Sixteen Hundred Years without the least Fraud or Violence at the beginning This therefore being manifest that in the Ages immediately following the Apostles the Churches were Govern'd by Single Persons who pretended to derive their Authority from them and that we have all the reason imaginable to believe that they would not nay that they could not have pretended so had it been false we may safely conclude That they had and consequently that they who are their Legal Successors now have their Authority from the Apostles and so from Christ I shall just mention a few inferences which we may make from what hath been said and then proceed 1. Hence we see upon what Foundation that part of the Establish'd Doctrine of the Churches of England and Ireland is built which asserts that Episcopal Power in the Sense in which we understand it was exercised by the Apostles and by their Successors made by them by vertue of the Commission which they receiv'd from Christ This we find in the Book of Consecration which is Approv'd of by the Articles of our Churches Art 36. Confirm'd by Act of Parliament and Subscribed to by all who have taken Holy Orders 2. We see what reason the Reformed Churches abroad had to speak so honourably of our English Episcopacy as they have frequently done for which at large I may refer to Dr. Durell's View of the Government of those Churches and to his later Defence of the Church of England in Latin As to their own Practice To urge their having no Bishops which their Superiours who are of another persuasion will not allow of as an Argument against our Bishops is as unreasonable as it would be to perswade us now to Assemble for the Publick Worship of God in Caves and Dens because the good Old Christians being not permitted by their Persecutors to have Churches were forced to do so And we may say to them what a most Reverend Prelate of ours did write to one of their Ablest Divines Non culpa vestra sed injuria temporum abesse Episcopatum (y) Bishop Andrew's Letter to Du Moulin inter Opera Posth You have no Bishops not because you would not but because ye (z) When at the Synod of Dort the Bishop of Landaff had intimated That the want of Episcopacy had occasioned those divisions in the Netherlands Bogerman the President of the Synod stood up and in good allowance of what had been spoken said Domine nos non sumus adeo felices So Bishop Hall cannot have them 3. Hence we see how little foundation there is in Scripture or in Antiquity for any other Forms of Church-Government For to say that the Classical or that the Congregational way which some think Socinus invented was used by the Apostles and by their immediate Successors and yet not the least appearance of them in the Acts or Epistles and that they should never be heard of for Fifteen Hundred Years together is an Assertion so very strange that one might with as much modesty and reason go about to perswade us that the Caesars whom we have hitherto taken for other kind of Officers were but Masters of the Corporations of Rome or Chairmen of their Committees Fourthly and Lastly From hence we may conclude how highly insolent and presumptuous it would be in us to prefer any new fangled Scheme of Government before that which was founded by Christ and exercised by his Apostles and by the whole Church to our days And certainly Generations to come will look upon this last as a very wild Age in which so many People (a) The Solemn League and Covenant Art 2. That without Respect of Persons They would endeavour to Extirpate Papacy Prelacy that is the Government Ecclesiastical by Arch-Bishops Bishops c. bound themselves by an Oath to Extirpate such a Government But yet allowing a great part of what hath been discoursed Two things are supposed by some to make a great difference between ours and the Primitive Episcopacy Their Temporal Jurisdictions and their Titles and Estates To which I shall only say that our Bishops do Claim no Temporal Jurisdiction by an inherent Right as Bishops and Exercise it only by the Favour and Authority of the King And to suppose that a Princes giving great Titles and Honours and Estates to Bishops do's render them not Christian and Apostolical Bishops is very like supposing that the fairly Binding up and Guilding and Enamelling a Bible do's make it cease it to be the Word of God Having discoursed thus largely in order to a Resolution of the First Enquiry Time will not allow that I speak so fully to those that are behind and therefore I shall contract what I conceive necessary into as little compass as I can The Second Enquiry was concerning the Advantages of this sort of Government above others And here two very considerable Advantages are obvious to us both from Reason and Experience First In reference to the Peace of the Church St. Hierom of all the Fathers least favourable to Episcopacy having as he thought been unkindly dealt with by the Bishop of Hierusalem does plainly profess That the Peace of Particular Churches cannot be preserved without this Government His words are (b) In his Dialogue adversus Luciferianos Ecclesiae salus in summi Sacerdotis dignitate pendet cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur potestas tot in Ecclesiis efficientur schismata quot Sacerdotes Take away the Dignity of the Bishop and you ruin the Church and if you will not allow him a Power above all and in which they have no share you shall have as many Schisms made as there be Presbyters 'T is St.