and the Chair yet they succeeded him not in his Apostle-ship but the latter Bishops in neither c. And Lightfoot a renown'd Divine of the Church of England proves that the Apostle-ship was an Order for ever unimitable in the Church The Apostles saith the same Author could not ordain as Apostle by Imposition of Hands as they could ordain Elders but they are forced to use a Divine Lot which was as the immediate Hand of Christ imposed on him that was to be ordained that Opinion took little notice of this circumstance that hath placed Bishops in the Place of the Apostles by a common and successive Ordination Dr. Barrow whose Works are publish'd by Bishop Tillotson and therefore are to be lookt on as his is copious on this Subject Apostles also saith he did Govern in an absolute manner according to Discretion as being guided by infallible assistance to the which they might on occasion appeal and affirm it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicat it They did indeed appoint standing Pastors and Teachers in each Church they did assume fellow Labourers or Assistents in the Work of Preaching and Governance but they did not constitute Apostles equal to themselves in Authority Priviledges or Gifts for who knoweth not saith St. Austine that Principate of Apostle-ship to be preferr'd before any Episcopacy And the Bishops saith Bellarmine have no part of the true Apostolical Authority And now judge of the Spirit of these Men who are glad most falsly to brand these famous Bishops and others the most eminent Doctors of that Perswasion as being guilty of the most abominable Crime of Socinianism providing they can thereby bespatter and make odious the Presbyterians Judge also of D. M's Query whether the Apostolical Power as to it 's permanent necessary and essential Branches was not in its nature Perpetual and Successive and by them transmitted in solidum as they receiv'd it from our blessed Saviour to single Successors in particular Sees and not to a Colledge of Presbytsrs in the modern Notion As to the last part of his Query and his Presbyters in the modern Notion I know none such if 't be not these of the Hierarchicks their half Ministers for which there is no ground in Scripture And accordingly it's certain that the Apostles left the managing of the Church to neither Bishops nor Presbyters in his sense both of them being Chimera's but to Colledges of Bishops who are also Presbyters both being one in Scripture during the Apostolick age But tho' we should grant them all the Query seeks supposing which all the Ancients affirm the equality of all Bishops who at the beginning were reciprocated with Congregations he 's yet but where he was and has really done nothing for the establishing of his Hierarchy Judge lastly of that doughty Argument of the Papists and our Hierarchicks for Prelacy to wit that Bishops succeed to the Apostles and Presbyters to the 70 Disciples which has been generally reckon'd by Protestants among Rome's dotages and as such refuted in their Popish Controversies and to name no others by Iunius and Willet who answers that not only Bishops but all faithfull Pastors are the Apostles Successors and that even according to the Pope's Decrees not Bishop but Priests succeed the Apostles and Deacons not Presbyters succeed the 70 Disciples And now to go on with D. M. and his Fellows all their cavilling to make Timothy and Titus Hierarchick Bishops is but the product of a late Popish Dream For the Fathers when they so called them or the Apostles mean'd not of Bishops in this sense § 3. Wherefore Willet Answers that it is most like Timothy had the Place and Calling of an Evangelist and that the Calling of Evangelists and Bishops which were Pastors was diverse This Answer which so approv'd a Divine of the Church of England gave the Papists D. M. calls a ridiculous subterfuge For saith he the Work of an Evangelist has nothing in it opposite to or inconsistent with the Dignity of a Bishop c. A most disingenuous tergiversation and sliding from the Office of the opponent or probant to that of the defendent seeing this was one of his special Scripture-Arguments whereby to establish his Hierarchy and it 's sure that if Timothy and Titus might do what they did under another Notion and Capacity than that of a Diocesan Prelate his Argument goes to wrack As does also his perversion of 2 Tim. 4 5. for he insinuats that from Timothy's being injoined to do the Work of an Evangelist it will no more follow that he deserved the Name than Daniel's saying Ch. 8. 27. that he did the King's Work will prove him a King But had he ever considered the rest of the Epistle the context of the place and the Signification and Notation of the Word Evangelist he had clearly seen that the Apostle so adapts this Work of an Evangelist to Timothy that the Name and Character properly belongs unto him He adds That any who now convert Jews or Pagans are as properly Evangelists as any so called in the primitive Church and thus insinuats that Evangelists such as Timothy and Titus were no extraordinary Officers which except a few Novelists wedded to their Fancies is condemned by all Men. § 4. And that there was such a Function by which some in the days of the Apostles were raised far above the rank of ordinar Pastors or Doctors and placed in the very next degree to the Apostles themselves whose Office was mostly ambulatory going from Church to Church in the exercise thereof is in part intimated by Sedulius and Theodoret and others upon Ephes. 4. 11. but more fully by Eusebius who informs us that even after the Death of the Apostles divers remained who were in a far higher rank than the rest of their Successors who being saith he the admirable and divine Disciples of so great Men built up the Churches the Apostles had founded promoving the preaching of the Gospel and sowing Seed of the Kingdom of Heaven far and wide thro' the whole World for many of these Disciples that were yet living whose Minds the Divine Word had inflammed with a vehement desire of Wisdom fullfilling our Saviour's Command and dividing their Goods among the Poor and thus leaving their Country exercised the Office of Evangelists among these who had not yet heard the Doctrine of Faith by most diligent preaching of the Gospel and furnishing their Hearers with the Holy Scriptures these so soon as in any remot and barbarous Country they had laid the Foundations of Faith and ordained Pastors and had committed to these Pastors the care of this New Plantation being content therewith and accompanied by the Grace and Power of God hast'ned to other Countries for even to that time the Divine Power of God's Spirit wrought Miracles by these Men so that at the first hearing of the Gospel
62 Knox alloweth no Prelacy to England 66 He exhorts the English to embrace a Church-government and Discipline altogether Antiprelatical 67 The Assemblies letter 1566. vindicated from this Author 's pretended allowance of Prelacy 69 Knox acknowledged by the fiercest Prelatists to be truly Presbyterian 70 Superintendents in Scotland a temporary expedient The nullity of this Author's reasons to the contrary detected 72 The falsness of his Gloss of our first Book of discipline largely demonstrated 76 Superintendency not really inconsistent with parity This Authors unchristian rallery his overthrowing of the great principle of Hierarchicks are discovered and his bottomless cavills enervated 77 The stock of Prerogatives he pretends to have belonged to Superintendents evinced to be unserviceable to his design of giving Superintendents a superiority over their Pastors 81 He at once yields the whole cause and clasheth with himself Our first Reformers their opposition to and hatred of Prelacy's being damnable demonstrated The Helvetian and other 〈◊〉 Churches opposite to Prelacy as beeing destitute of Scripture-foundation 86 SECT IX The forraign Reformed Churches truly Presbyterian The Judgement of Luther and Lutherans 89 The mind of Calvin and those called Calvinists both in their private capacities and confessions of the most famous Churches 90 Specimens of the chiefest objections adduced and removed where the uncandide dealing of our Adversaries is unfolded 91 Who yet are forced to acknowledge the truth of our assertion 95 The eminent Opposers of Popery before Luther truly Presbyterian 96 The first Reformers and body of the Church of England at that time for no divine right of Prelacy where some of Saravia's qualities are noted Ibid. SECT X. Some of the manifold Inconveniences attending Prelacy briefly mentioned A Spirit of Persecution still attended it 98 The Principles of Prelacy and practise of Prelatists most Schismatical Ibid. It 's native tendency to introduce Popery 99 And to a Papal Domination and enslaving of the Kingdom 100 The spite and hatred the Hierarchicks shew against our Reformation from Popery their impiety and affection to Popery Ibid. Dr. Burnets exceptions from the Regulars theâ—r trampling on the Bishops and the dealing of the Papalines at the Council of Trent enervated 102 Another exception or retortion of this Author cashier'd 105 Lousness and Prophanity the constant attendent of Prelacy 106 PART II. SECT I. Of Ignatius and his Epistles Papists and other Hierarchicks make a fairer appearance from humane than from Divine Writings 109 A short account of Ignatius and of the Epistles bearing his name 110 Various Editions thereof Ibid. Our Adversaries now acknowledge to be spurious that they once gave out for genuine where of the Florentine Copy 111 Debates among the Learned concerning it Ibid. The unhandsome arts of our Adversaries to free themselves of further dispute 112 The great Confidence they place in Ignatius 113 Three Hypothese laid down according to each whereof Ignatius becomes unserviceable to the Prelatists Ibid. SECT II. The first Hypothesis viz. that Ignatius is at best interpolated Writings pretending to greatest proximity to either Old or New Testament carry most manifest signs of spuriousness in which Divine Providence is observed 114 Their Epistolick Ignatius's want of Apostolick Gravity and Humility his enslaving of the People and flattering yea deifying of all Church-men 115 Dr. Pearsons Exceptions removed 119 Du Pin's self-repugnancy 121 Dr. Wake 's Error discovered 122 A brief sum of the Arguments evincing our assertion 124 Other things very early falsly father'd on Ignatius Ibid His Journey to Rome uncredible 125 SECT III The second Hypothesis viz. That the Antiquity of the true Ignatius could not secure him from all Lapses or Escapes nor serve to prove that there were no declension in his time Whole Churches suerving during the life of the Apostles themselves They grew worse after their death 126 Papias's mistakes and multitude of Followers 127 The failings of Justine Martyr and Irenaus Ibid. The influence they had on the Church The common mistakes of these times in Practicks no less than in Dogmaticks which is instanc'd in their debate about Easter 128 Both parties went contrare to the Apostolick practice which is proved by clear Testimonies of Iranus and Socrates 129 Their strange conduct in managing this debate who Metamorphosed some Apostles into Jewish High-Priests 130 The Credulity and Oseitancy of Hegesippus 131 We are to hearken to God before the chiefest of Men. Divine providence observable in the mistakes of the Ancients 132 SECT IV. The third Hypothesis that there is no real disagreement but a true concord betwixt the Doctrine of Ignatius and that of the present Presbyterians They are reconcil'd by sustaining the Hypothesis of ruling Elders which Office is vouched to be of greatest Antiquity and where Ambrose or Hilary is vindicated against Dr. Field 134 Ignatius most express for the reciprocation of a Bishop and a Pastor of one Congregation 136 Our Adversaries yield the whole Controversy where Dr. Maurice's Mist is dispelled 138 Vindiciae Ignatianae destroy their Authors ultimate design 140 SECT V. The Objections they pretend to bring from Scripture against the Doctrine now deduced from Ignatius removed D. M's reasonings for the Diocesan Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus annihilated 140 No power properly Apostolick ordinary and permanent in the Church 143 Willet's answer to the Iebusites vindicated against their Advocat D. M. 147 The Office and nature of an Evangelist declared out of the Ancients 148 D. Mâ—s mutilation and perversion of Eusebius 149 That Timothy Titus were Evangelists and not Diocesan Bishops made out from Scripture Ibid. Apostles and Evangelists degraded by the Hierarchicks 150 Their Arguments for Timothy and Titus their Diocesan-ship houghed by the very Authors in whom they most confide both ancient and modern Ibid. Their Argument from the Asian Angels several ways overthrown and D. M's shifts and perversions expunged 151 Malach. 2. 7. vindicated against Dr. Hammond 153 His Correction of the receiv'd Greek Coppy of Rev. 2. 24. corrected D. M's strange and wild Gloss. Ibid. Salmasius vindicated against him and the mind of Presbyterians concerning Apocalyptick Angels fully sustain'd by Scripture and Fathers 154 The best of our Adversaries really acknowledge Episcopacy destitute of Scripture warrant Dr. Hammond wholly destroys Episcopacy while he attempts to establish it 155 SECT VI. Our meaning of Ignatius confirmed from the writings of the Apostles his immediate Ancestors Acts 20. v. 17 28 vindicated against Dr. Maurice and others who are by the ears among themselves 157 Philippians 1. 1. vindicated where the Diocesanists their Digladiations are exposed 158 Philippi no Metropolis where Dr. Maurice his weakness is detected the fiction of the existence of Metropoles in the Apostolick age exploded by the Hierarchy's truest friends Dr. Maurice's slippery dealing 159 The first to Timothy 3. vindicated against Bellarmine and his Friend D. M. 162 As is also Titus 1. 164 SECT VII The grand objection taken from the Commentaries of the Ancients The primitive Doctors
a number for the whole Kingdom yet at that time they thought it expedient to establish no more and tho' when the Church should be sufficiently provided with Ministers it would be highly reasonable that the Superintendents should have Places appointed them for their continual residence yet in that juncture 't was necessary that they should be constantly travelling throw their districts to Preach and Plant Churches c. To establish his gloss he says the Compilers of the first Book of Discipline viz. Mr. J. Winrame John Spotswood J Willock J. Douglas J. Row and J. Knox were still of prelatical Principles But tho' this were as true as 't is false the quite contrary would rather follow viz. that they had resolv'd to change afterward the Superintendents for Diocesan Bishops To prove they were Prelatists he says three of them were Superintendents begging the Question as if Superintendent and Bishop were one and the same But Douglas died Arch-bishop of St. Andrews But is 't strange that he who in favours of a Tulchan Bishoprick had a stomach able to deject Simoniacal Pactions and durty Bargains made no bones of sacrificing his former Principles to his interest But Spotswood was a constant Enemy to Parity as appears from his Son's account of him But his Son says not so much Moreover which quite spoils our Author's Cause he makes without naming any other John Knox the Author of that Book of Policy yea he averrs that in his Father's Judgement the Old Policy was undoubtedly the better than the New John Row defended the lawfulness of Episcopacy at the Conference appointed by the General Assembly 1575. But J. Row no less then the other Collocutors in their Report to that Assembly tho' for the iniquity of the time not in so many words yet really condemn'd Prelacy and was also a Member of that Assembly which with one voice found and declar'd the Office unlawfull in it self Judge then of his confidence who yet adventures hence to conclude that he was a Prelatist He adds out of Knox that Superintendents and Overseers were nominated that all things in the Church might be carried with Order and well which reason for establishing Superintendents saith our Author will continue to hold so long as the Church continues But let him once prove that Knox speaks of the constant and ordinary Church regimen and guidance and not of the settling and ordering of a Church little more then in fieri and as yet not all sufficiently constitute otherwise we have a meer Paralogism At the Admission of Spotswood continues he John Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents and Overseers as well as Ministers the necessity I say not the bare expediency in the juncture The words are first was made a Sermon in the which these Heads were handled first the necessity of Ministers and Superintendents or Overseers c. We have indeed here the necessity of Superintendents mention'd but that it arose above an expediency we do not hence learn That Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents as well as Ministers or an equal necessity of the one and the other can by no means be inferr'd Yea who can with our Author believe that tho' any People had aboundance of sufficient and lawfully ordain'd Ministers yet in Knox's Judgement if Superintendents were wanting such a People could no more be counted a Church than if they had no Minister at all He brings also some Expressions out of the first Book of Discpiline as After the Church shall be established and three years are past no Man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years given a Proof of his faithfull Labours in the Ministry of some Church Such passages indeed suppose some continuance of Superintendents tho' no perpetuity For our Reformers could never think that within three years or thereabout the Church should be fully established few or no Churches to be planted unto which full settlement the forecited passage of the Book of Policy allows the use of Superintendents This Book of Discipline saith our Author supposeth that Superintendents and Colledges were to be of equal continuance for the Superintendent was still to be at the choosing and installment of Principalls and Rectors c. But this his Argument he himself overthrows The Assembly saith he May 27. 1561. addresseth to the Council that special and certain Provision might be made for the maintainance of the Superintendents Ministers Exhorters and Readers c. Now who sees not that this Address speaks after the same manner concerning all these so that using our Author's way of arguing we should inferr that our Reformers thought the Exhorter which confessedly was a kind of Function purely temporary was no less to be perpetual than the Superintendent yea or the Minister And the Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1565. appointed Mr. Knox to pen a comfortable Letter in their Name to encourage Ministers Exhorters and Readers to continue in their Vocation c. From these and the like Acts he may as well conclude the equal duration of Exhorters and Ministers as he inferrs from the Book of Policy the equal duration of Superintendents and Colledges He would next prove from the account of the Election and Admission of Superintendents prefix'd to the old Psalms that according to our Reformers this was an Office distinct from that of other Pastors of Divine Institution and so perpetual The Order and Form saith he for admitting a Superintendent and a Minister was all one and there was nothing in it importing the one Office to be temporary more than the other But therefore there 's nothing elsewhere importing so much is a clear non sequitur In the mean while from what he grants 't is plain that the Superintendent wanted the very specific difference of a Diocesan Bishop wherefore tho' they us'd this Phrase The Office to which God call'd him and this Question to the People Will ye not acknowledge this your Brother for the Minister of Christ Jesus your Overseer and Pastor Will ye not maintain and comfort him against all such as wickedly would rebell against God and his Holy Ordinance And that Petition Send unto this our Brother whom in thy name we have charged with the chief care of thy Church within the bounds of L. c. They can thereby mean no other Office no other Ordinance of God and for kind no other Charge than what 's giv'n to every particular Pastor For we find mention'd the chief of the Apostles in Labour viz and Care who yet were all equal Neither is it strange that they thus set apart him who was for the time found needfull in these dark times and places to plant and erect Churches preach perpetually where there were none and in a word in several things compleatly to imitate the ancient Evangelist Thus Paul and Barnabas were separated with a solemnity of Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands And yet the Work or
the perpetual Practice of these times frees us from further debate herein I can never find that the Romans brought Christians from Asia or such remote places to be executed at Rome but still to the nearest seats of Justice as is clear in Polycarp and other most famous Bishops or Pastors And truly saith Dr. Stillingfleet the story of Ignatius as much as it 's defended with his Epistles doth not seem to be any of the most probable For wherefore should Ignatius of all others be brought to Rome to suffer when the Proconsuls and the Praesides provinciarum did every where in time of Persecution execute their Power in punishing of Christians at their own Tribunals without sending them so long a Journey to Rome to be martyr'd there And how came Ignatius to make so many and such strange Excursions as he did by the Story if the Souldiers that were his Guard wers so cruel to him as he complains they were Now all these uncertain and fabulous Narrations as to Persons then arising from want of sufficient Records made at those times make it more evident how incompetent a Judge Antiquity is to the certainty of things done in Apostolical times And now from what is said jude if D. M. had any good ground to query whether there 's any good and solid Argument brought by the Presbyterians against the Authority of St. Ignatius his Epistles that is not already sufficiently answered Section III. The second Hypothesis viz. that the Antiquity of the trne Ignatius could not secure him from all Lapses or Escapes in Doctrine or serve to Prove that there was no Declension in his time MY second Assertion is that the Antiquity even of the true Ignatius was not able to secure him from all Lapses and Mistakes and that in his time some Churches not only might but actually were itching after several Novelties Which Assertion if once demonstrated renders Ignatius of little or no use to our Antagonists their Inference is that if Ignatius spoke positively in favours of Episcopacy and lived in a closs vicinity to the Apostles then there 's no doubt but the Apostles established such a Government which consequence like the Aples of Sodom resolves anon into smoake our Assertion being prov'd which I now come to demonstrate The Apostles of our Lord had not chang'd their earthly Tabernacle for that which is not made with hands when to their inexpressible sorrow they beheld not only particular Persons but even the greater part of some Churches they themselves had either planted or watered in stead of Grapes to bring forth will Grapes and in place of being the Repositories of the precious Truths of the Gospel become nests and cages of the most abominable Errors Other Churches there were that holding fast the Foundation of the Apostolick Doctrine but raising thereupon a structure of the stubble and hay of either Judaism or Paganism in one of which all of them had been educated had well nigh made up an Edifice of most Hetrogeneous Materials Hence it is that the Apostle is at such pains to Correct them in their Abuses of the Sacrament in their Superstition concerning Meat and Drink and their unwarrantable observation of Times that wanted all Divine Sanction § 2. But these infallible Guides being at length possessed of their Master's Joy Affairs grew yet worse for then the grand Enemy of the Church did in greater abundance and with more security sow his tares Hence it was that not only those who are justly branded for Arch-Hereticks and Schismaticks but even those who persisted Orthodox in the main Principles of Christianity were drawn into neither few nor inconsiderable Mistakes § 3. I 'm sure Papias Bishop of Hierapolis was a Man both in respect of his Antiquity and Authority among the primitive Christians little inferiour to Ignatius 't was he notwithstanding who either greedily imbrac'd or first of all hatch'd the gross Fancy of the Saints their corporal Kingdom for a thousand years after the Resurrection Moreover saith Eusebius speaking of Papias the same Writer alledges something as from unwritten Tradition viz. some strange Parables and Doctrines of our Saviour and some other fabulous things and amongst the rest he saith that after the Resurrection there shall be a thousand years wherein Christ shall reign on Earth bodily But to me he seems through misunderstanding of the Apostle's Discourse to have taken what was spoken mysteriously in a quite other sense from its true meaning For he was os a very weak Judgement as his Writings sufficiently declare He was notwithstanding the Author of this Opinion to the most part of the following Ecclesiastical Writers for they look'd only to his Antiquity as Irenaeus and whosoever else favoured his Opinion We see here a Man of no little Antiquity and Repute drawing the greatest Lights of the Church and consequently the rest of the Christians to a Doctrine destitute of all countenance from the Word of God § 4. Another Conceit no less Ancient but more wild was that of the Angels their carnal Knowledge of Women This was hugg'd by Justin Martyr who lived in the same Century with yea and not many years after Ignatius The Angels saith he transgressing their Order by carnal Copulation with Women fell from their primitive State aud begot Children who are now called Devils He was follow'd notwithstanding by Irenaeus Athenagoras the most famous Writers of their Age as also the stream of these that flourished in the succeeding Centuries Irenaeus also with a great many others held that the beatifick Vision is not enjoy'd untill the day of Judgement Now beyond peradventure such Leaders as these had the most part of the Churches at that time for their Fellows and Followers in these Opinions § 5. And seeing both such Pillars and the rest that lean'd on them were ready to swerve in Matters of Speculation or Opinion they were no less capable of straying in things belonging to Practice for there 's no more security promised to the Church from the one than the other Neither did the closs Vicinity to the times of the Apostles preserve the Churches from evident Lapses of this nature Was not the mixing of the Sacramental Wine with water a matter of Practice and altogether destitute of warrand from Scripture in which we hear of nothing but the Fruit of the Vine drunken by Communicants And yet Justin Martyr informs us that the mixing of the Sacramental Wine with water was the Practice of his time § 6. Another Instance of the most early Declension of the primitive Church in Matters of the same kind viz. the external Rites and Ecclesiastick Ceremonies was their observation of Easter concerning which the Controversies first arose between Polycarp and the Churches of the East on the one hand and Anicetus and the western Churches on the other Polycarp alledg'd John the Evangelist whose Disciple he had been for the Author of his Opinion but Anicetus and the Romans pretended the
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
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
went thro' the World for the Commodity of that Church and was never absolutely ordain'd a Bishop by the Apostles for James himself was an Apostle Of the same Mind is Salmasius that James resided not at Jerusalem as one of their Hierarchick Bishops but as an Apostle And yet D. M. is not asham'd to tell his Reader as the Concession of Salmasius that we have a Diocesan Bishop establish'd in the person of St. James the Just in the City of Jerusalem Now that Hierome understood James's Episcopacy in the sense giv'n by Junius and Salmasius against the Jesuites is most apparent especially if we consider how the Ancients us'd to speak of the Apostles and Apostolick extraordinary Church-Officers in the Stile of their own times and how positive Hierome was for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter during the Apostolick age and first primitive Church Add hereto that Hierome as he shews in his Preamble to Dexter was altogether uncertain of much of what he wrote in his Catalogue of Writers which is yet more clear from his account of Paul for the writes that he was a Native of Gischalis and during the Wars between the Jews and Romans sted with his Parents to Tarsus when Gischalis was taken Which I 'm sure Hierome a Man so well acquaint with the Affairs of the Jews who had no Wars with the Romans for many years after the time wherein the Fabler whom Hierome transcribes suppos'd these Wars to have been commens'd and Gischalis taken could never believe but only because he could light on no better transcrib'd things as he found ' em Which removes tho' no more could be said D. M's Objection from Hierome's mentioning of Ignatius his Epistles whereon D. M. with no small Ostentation insists He follows also Bellarmine objecting that Hierome makes Bishops the Apostles Successors But Junius Replies that Hierome denies not this to be also the priviledge of Presbyters It 's also objected by Dr. Pearson that Hierome in his Epistle to Heliodorus speaks of the Deacons as the third Order And seeing this of all the passages of Hierome produc'd by the Papists to involve him in self-repugnancy is most plausible take it at full length If a Man saith Hierome desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good Work These things we know but add what follows A Bishop then must be blameless c. and having express'd the rest of the things which there follow concerning a Bishop the Apostle uses no less diligence in setting forth the Duties of the third Degree saying Likewise let the Deacons be grave c. But passing that he was scarce more than a Child when he wrote that Epistle and wrote clearly for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter in his riper years it 's certain he pretends no Divine Warrant for this Tripartition Yea from the very words they would now detort it 's most evident that tho' Hierome following the Custome of his Age mentions a third Degree he notwithstanding takes both Paul's Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same thing Moreover in this same Epistle Hierome makes all who had the Power of Dispensing the Sacraments Successor to the Apostles which the Jesuites and their Supporters appropriat to Bishops hence they are baffl'd with the very places of Hierome they endeavour to abuse § 7. But I return to Hierome Philippi continues he is a single Town of Macedonia and truly in one City there could not be called are they as moe Bishops But because at that time they called the same Men both Bishops and Presbyters therefore he spoke indifferently concerning both Bishops and Presbyters From these words saith Petavius It can be evidently demonstrated that Hierome believed that Bishops and Presbyters were not one and the same Order yea even in the Age of the Apostles For had he so believ'd he had never said that there could not be a plurality of Bishops in one City when surely there was a plurality of Presbyters As if Jerome's whole discourse scope and conclusion were not directly opposite to what the Jesuite impudently fathers on him who in the words Petavius abuses only meets with some Wranglers as he elsewere terms them who to elude the proof Jerome brought for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter from Philippians 1. 1. absurdly contended that in the City of Philippi alone there were a multitude of Bishops distinguish d from and superior to other Pastors But yet this may seem doubtfull continous Jerome to some except it be confirmed by another Testimony It is written in the Acts of the Apostles that when the Apostle was come to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and called for the Elders of that Church to whom amongst other things he said take heed to your selves and to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of Christ. And observe this diligently how the Apostle calling the Elders of Ephesus which was but one City afterwards names them Bishops if any receive the Epistle which under Paul's Name is written to the Hebrews there also the care of the Church is equally divided amongst a plurality For he writes to the People Obey your Governours and be subject to them for they watch And Peter who received his Name from the strength of his Faith saith in his Epistle The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder We have enlarged on these things that we might shew that among the Ancients Bishops were all one with Presbyters Hierome then never as Petavius and his Followers impudently pretend thought that there had hapned no alteration or that Bishops bore greater bulk in his time than they had done in the Age of the Apostles but by little and little to the end the seeds of Schism might be remov'd the whole care was devolv'd upon one wherefore as the Presbyters know that by the Custome of the Church they are subject to their prefect so let Bishops know that rather by Custome than by the Truth of Christ's Institution they are greater than Presbyters and ought to Rule the Church in common with them imitating Moses who when he alone had Power to Rule the Israelites chused other Seventy with whom he might judge the People Here say they is a proof of Superiority of Bishops by Divine Right but they should remember that Hierome here undertook to prove the quite contrary And it 's most injust to fish and search for self-contradictions in any Author when with ease he may be understood otherways as the Matter is here Hierome is arguing a majori ad minus from Moses his Practice who tho' he had sole Authority by Divine Right yet shar'd it with others to that which ought to have been done by the Bishops of his time whom only Church Custome not Christ's Appointment had raised over other Pastors And indeed they might on equal grounds inferr from John 13. 14. If I then your Lord and Master have washed your
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
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
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
that is Elders These ordered and determined every thing that concern'd the synagogues or the persons in it Next them were the three PARNASSIN or Deacons whose charge was to gather the Collections of the rich and to distribute them to the poor All the Presbyters saith the Learned Le Moyne took not on them the burden of preaching and exponing the scriptures some were taken up in serving at the administration of the Sacraments searching into scandals visiting the sick strengthning the weak and providing for the Churches profit but the business of preaching belonged only to the Apostles the Bishops and the first Presbyters Hence in times of the ancient Church the Bishops perpetually preached which the inferior Presbyters did not except they were admitted thereto by the Bishops and chief Presbyters Most memorable to this purpose are the words of the learned Jesuite Sirmundus Anciently saith he the Bishops only and no others preached the word of God for this was their proper province and work 't was afterwards tho' not alike soon every where allowed to the Presbyters to preach this was soonest begun in the East as is clear from the practice of Pierius Chrysostome and others who preached while they were only Presbyters And now judge tho' nothing else had been adduced but what is just now brought from these profoundly learn'd and most unsuspected Arbiters if the Regimen and Way of the true primitive Church was not according to the Gospell Humility and Simplicity most opposite to a terrene Domination Prelaticall Grandor and Power over other Pastors and the vanity of preterscripturall and superstitious Ceremonies if she then enjoy'd not Bishops or Pastors Ruling Elders and Deacons if then whosoever had power to dispense the Word and Sacraments with the Charge of any particular Flock or Congregation was not reciprocally one and the same with a Bishop and finally if the primitive Way was not entirely one with that of our Church of Scotland and others of the reformed Churches which is now known by the name of Presbytry Hence it 's carefully to be noted how odd and grievous Alterations were made both as to the use of Terms and in the Offices they had primitively signifi'd in Scripture In yea even after the Apostolick Age we find that the word Bishop whereever it holds forth an ordinary Church-Officer alwayes signifying a Labourer in the Word and Doctrine and Dispenser of the Srcraments Pastor of a Flock or Congregation We find also the Word Presbyter taken as its equivalent denoting this very thing elsewhere as is now made evident the word Presbyter signifies no Pastor of a Flock but only one who was to assist him in Ruling and Guidance thereof some also of this latter kind of Presbyters designing the Ministry there beeing then few or no Theological Schools were trained up for the Office under the Inspection of Bishops or Parochial Pastors and accordingly whiles assisted them therein But this was only accidental to the Office of a ruling Presbyter Afterward there was a new kind of Church Office invented whose chief work was not to feed any Flock or Congregation and yet was reputed the Pastor of many Flocks which was a compleat Contradiction His Province was mainly to rule and domineer over a multitude of both Pastors and Flocks him they called the Bishop Another Office epually new and unknown to Scripture and prime Antiquity was a kind of semipastor or half Minister who was to do all the Ministeriall Work and yet was so far from having any Pastorall Power that on the contrary he was only the subject and substitute of another and him they called the Presbyter As for the other sort of Presbyters they came in time to be well nigh intirely abolished and forgotten The like Chrysostome observes of the Deacons saying that in his time such Deacons as the Apostles ordained were not in the Church Hence it 's not strange if the Ancients while sometimes they violent the Scriptures to make them favour what in their oun times was obtaining and at other times while either out of design and freedome or casually they light on the true Meaning of the Scriptures speak most perplexedly of Bishops and Presbyters and afford no small ground of Wrangling and Disputation to all that are exercised in this Controversy In the mean while such Immutation was not made in a day 't was sloe and apparently plausible like the weed which at lenth you may see that it is groun up yet its act of growing ye shall never perceive This Alteration as even Spanhemius F. no enemy to the Hierarchy observes began first in great Cities and beside the generall occasions or rather pretexts for it which we already noted there was this colour more peculiar to great Cities in Rome for example tho there were Christians sufficient to make up severall ordinary Congregations yet at some special times all or most of these used to meet at one place and accordingly were accounted but one Church This might occasion the making of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or one particular Moderator among the Pastors who got some primacy of Order and at these more solemn meetings of the People appeared spake most and in time got the appropriation of the name Bishop all this was notwithstanding only a meer prostasy he must nixt have a power over his Collegues in the City the Bishops the parochial Pastors of the Country and lesser Cities are next to be invaded This Fermentation which had small beginnings and still grew untill all was soured suelled especially and was most operative in a time of peace whereof in the third Century they had a good space even from the Death of Valerian untill Dioclesian's Persecution The Emperors themselves saith Eusebius then so much favoured them that they not only gave them Liberty of the publick Exercise of their Religion but also made some of them their Chamberlains and Governours of Provinces In this time the alteration of both Government and Worship was certainly not a litle promoved For nothing then reign'd among the Christians but contention ambition They were not content continous he with the former Edifices but builded large Churches from the foundation But when thro' too much liberty we fell into sloath and negligence when every one began to envy and backbite another when we managed as 't were an intestine warr amongst our selves with Words as with Swords Pastors against Pastors and People against People being dashed one on another exercised flrife and tumult when deceit and Guile had grown to the highest pitch of wickedness When being void of all sense we did not so much as once think how to please God yea rather on the other hand impiously we imagined that human Affairs are not at all guided by Divine Providence we dayly added Crimes to Crimes when our Pastors having despised the Rule of Religion strove mutually with one another studying nothing more then how to outdoe one another in strife
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
yet the quite contrary is so plain in the Writings of the Ancients down from the very Apostles that even Epiphanius himself could not be ignorant thereof Neither are his Deductions from Scripture more solid than his Allegation of the Suffrages of the Catholick Church is true all he brings from Scripture being 1 Tim. 5. 1. and 19. but he so grossy abuses these Scriptures that even Spalatensis himself and the ablest Patrons of Prelacy are ashamed of these Inferences But Epiphanius had less exposed himself had he as he did in the Matter of Lents set Fasts Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and other such his dear and beloved Doctrines pretended only to Tradition and so the Lettice should have been fitted for the Lips and also his miserable weakness have been less apparent § 6. And though in the last place to render Presbytry more odious they still upbraid us with the Arrianism of Aërius we need be little concern'd therewith seeing we have the greatest Opposers of Arrians intirely Aërians to speak in the stile of our Opposits in the matter of Presbytry as we have already shewed But I must here add that it is upon no good Ground believed that ever Aërius was Arrian all the Schisms and Divisions though but very small among the Arrians themselves are diligently described by the Historians of these times as Ruffinus Socrates Sozomen Theodoret Theodorus Lector Philostâ—rgius and others but none of these or any others mention a word of the Schism of Aërius which if we believe Epiphanius was a Schism among the Arrians themselves for he tells us that Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia in Pontus from whom Aërius made the separation was a down-right Arrian and persisted therein till his Death Add hereto that Augustine and others who in their Catalogues of Hereticks mention Aërius still in their Preambles intimat that their Author is Epiphanius I name Augustine on the vulgar supposition that he is the Author of that tract de Heresibus which yet is very doubtfull seeing it 's altogether improbable that he ever heard off far less read Epiphanius his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It 's altogether unprobable that they were then translated and it 's certain that Augustine was utterly unable to understand them in the Original Moreover we have in that Tractat Relations of the Nestorian and Eutichian Heresies not broached till after Augustine's Death Which Relations altho' some alledge to have been added by another to the rest which they think to be really Augustines yet seeing they are no less then the rest handed down under his Name tho' they now stand there as an Appendix for in the end of the Pelagian Heresie which is the last before the Appendix he promises more make a good proof that it 's not easie to discern the genuine part of that Tractat from the Spurious However this be from what is said the matter of Aërius resolves into this Issue that we have only the report thereof from Basilius and Epiphanius § 7. But that discourse of Basilius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which Aërius is mention'd is suspected well nigh condemn'd by Erasmus And to confirm what he asserts Robert Cock in his Censure of the Fathers adds divers Reasons as I am inform'd by Rivet for I have not perus'd Cock himself neither need I seeing in all that Tractat there is not the least mention of Aërius The ground of somes mistake was that instead of Aëtius who indeed was a most noted and pernicious Arrian by the escape of the Printer or some other accident the word Aërius had crept into Erasmus his Translation thereof But in the Original printed at Paris Anno MDXVIII there is Aëtius not Aërius They have saith he a certain old Quibble from Aëtius the head of his Heresie And indeed Basil could never have term'd Aërius or any thing said by him ancient seeing he was scarcely so old as Basil himself As for Epiphanius if we consider the Passion wherewith he manages the Debate with Aërius and his great credulity of whatever might favour his own Cause and his many Mistakes in Historical Matters he deserves little Credit in this Matter A mighty Tide of Passion which both blinds Mens eyes and opens their Ears to false Reports visibly appears in Epiphanius his whole conduct of the Dispute with Aërius and that he was most credulous believing the most light and groundless Reports and in matters of Fact of all men most frequently fell into Mistakes is attested not only by Melchor Canus and Baron in many places of his Annals among the Papists but also by the learnedest of the Protestants as Casaubon whose words are Epiphanius was a great Man but as is very evident he did most easily believe every most silly and groundless Report To which also the learned Rivet assenteth § 8. One Instance whereof appears in his Relation of the Donatists whom either out of misinformation or some other weakness he accuses also of Arrianism and tells us that they agreed with Arrius in Doctrine and that one Refutation would serve for both § 9. Augustine indeed speaks as if some of them believed the Son to be less than the Father But as appears from the same Author they erred rather in expression than reality for he presently absolves them from the Charge and informs us that between the Church and them there was no Question concerning this Matter And elsewhere he imputes this dangerous Expression to Donatus their Leader who had used it in some of his Writings but tells us with all that his Party follow him not herein Neither saith Augustine shall ye readily find one among them all who knows that Donatus had any such Opinion And Optatus plainly declares that in the great Foundations of Christianity there was no difference between the Orthodox and Donatists And indeed it is acknowledg'd by all except Epiphanius that the Donatists were only guilty of Schism not of Heresie § 10. But Aërius they may object his Arrianism is sufficiently attested by what is recorded of Eustathius his Friend and Bishop and indeed Basil accuses Eustathius of Arrianism but for ought I remember the Historians of these times differ from Basil. § 11. They accuse Eustathius of Levity Deceit Macedonianism or the denial of the Holy Ghost's Divinity a most damnable Heresie yet different from Arrianism And herein also they represent him rather variable and unfixed than intirely wedded to this Heresie He once subscrib'd to the Orthodox Doctrine and was approv'd as such by Liberius the Bishop of Rome then Orthodox and other Catholick Christians But they write that he relapsed In the mean while when he was most for the Macedonians he said as he would not call the Holy-Ghost God so he durst not call him a Creature hence he may rather be counted among these who were most dangerously shaken than a down-right Macedonian and may for all is said of his
and other places no small number of excellent Men to Scotland who doubtless did no small service to God therein and especially in the time of Fincormachus when as all observe a great many fled hither who were famous both for Life and Doctrine yea long before this even in the time of Tertullian our Church was well known to much of the Christian World as appears from his clear Testimony The places of Britain saith he to which the Romans could not yet pass are notwithstanding subject to Christ. And if any have called Scotland barbarous or not well reform'd before the coming of Palladius Sir George learn'dly refutes them and names severals and among them even Stannihurst otherways an enemy to our Nation who have done it and he well observes that the reason why some speak of us as then not well enough reform'd was because of our want of agreement with the Church of Rome § 6. As to the last part of the Bishop's discourse saying that it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with the matters of the Church c. And wherein he is seconded by St. Asaph who falls foul on Presbyterians on this account as if they were darkners of all Church History c. They should know that as our Historians call'd these Monks they also call'd them Priests sometimes Presbyters or Bishops or Doctors and frequently Culdees Our people saith Boeth also began most seriously at that time to embrace the Doctrine of Christ by the guidance and exhortation of some Monks who because they were most diligent in Preaching and frequent in Prayer were call'd by the Inhabitants Worshippers of God which name took such deep root with the common People that all the Priests even to our time were commonly without difference call'd Culdees i. e. Worshippers of God Elsewhere this Author call'd these Teachers and Guides indifferently Priests Monks and Culdees Thus also speaks the best of our Historians some of whom we have heard calling them Presbyters and Admistrators of the Sacraments Hence 't is clear that when they call them Monks the word is not to be taken in the later Popish sense for a Layhermite for these our primitive Pastors were only call'd Monks by reason of their strictness of life and frequent retirement to Devotion when the publick work of the Ministry did permit it and perhaps also divers of them abstain'd from Marriage that they might keep themselves free from the World and its care without urging this on others as was the practice of the famous Paphnutius in the council of Nice From all which I conclude that before the coming of Palladius we had a settl'd Church without the least umbrage of their Hierarchy § 7. I add that long after that it had but very slender footing here seeing according to Spotswood they had no distinct Titles or Dioceses whose words are neither had our Bishops auy other Title then that of Scotorum Episcopi or Scotish Bishops whereby they were distinguish'd before the days of Malcomb the III who first divided the Country into Dioceses appointing to every Bishop the limits c. Yea after most strict search for a long time posterior to Palladius he can scarce find the least footsteps of Episcopacy And again long it was after the distinction of Dioceses before they were admitted to any civil Places or Votes in Parliament Hence nothing is more certain than that for many Ages the Church of Scotland knew nothing of their Hierarchy the first Rudiments whereof were bronght from Rome which was sent packing thither again when we renounc'd our obedience to Anti-christ § 8. Take but one other particular and I take leave of the Advocat he 's much displeas'd with St. Asâ—ph terming him a Caresser of Fanaticks for affirming that in consequence of this our Argument taken from the confess'd Practice of our primitive Church we might reasonably conclude that when we covenanted against Episcopacy we had only us'd our own right and thrown out that which was a confess'd Innovation in order to the restoring of that which was our primitive Government A notable and never to be forgotten Concession of so learn'd an Adversary as is this Bishop Let 's hear what the Advocat returns him It will not follow saith he that because our Church in its infancy and necessity was without Bishops for some years therefore it was reasonable for Subjects to enter into a solemn League and Covenant without and against the Consent ef their Monarch and to extirpat Episcopacy settl'd then by Law and by an Old Prescription of 1200 years at least But this most unfair Representation of our Arguments antecedent is I trust now sufficiently discover'd wherefore I have nothing to do here with it not yet am oblig'd to evince the consequence he denies seeing 't is not to be accounted ours but his own who made the antecedent Of the Grounds why the Nation entred into a Covenant I also discours'd already In the mean while I can't but take notice of his settling Episcopacy by Prescription a Romish Argument which whatever it may do in Law has no place here His Prescription I 'm sure essentially differs from that of Tertullian against the Heresies of his time seeing he liv'd in a very early Age when especially if ever Prescription could have place in the Church and the Doctrines which he defended were generally and uninterruptedly held by the Pastors even from the Apostles times and more ancient than the Heresies against which he prescribes whereas in the present case all things are clean contrary For as the Advocat himself here supposes the original of Scotish Episcopacy is several Ages posterior to that of the Apostles so that if the Argument could militat for either Party it serv'd well the Church of Scotland against Prelacy and not at all e contra But tho' things had been quite otherwise there had been no fear of harm from their Prescriptions seeing as Vincentius Lerinensis admonishes In refutation of inveterat Errors we must recurr to the sole authority of the Scriptures And Optatus Milevit plainly asserts that Christ's Testament abundantly suffices to determine all and every particular Controversie among Christians Thus we see how pleasant a spectacle these two Champions afford us the Bishop forms the Major Proposition and asserts on supposition of the Antiquity of our Royal Line and veracity of our Historians that our Church acted with reason enough and was only recovering her own Right when she cashier'd Prelacy The Advocat in attempting to disprove this the Bishop's Proposition has only giv'n such prevarications and elusions as most strongly confirm all the dis-interested of the truth thereof As for the Minor Proposition that our ancient Royal Line is not forg'd but real and our historical Monuments most true and credible the Advocat himself to the conviction of all the unbyass'd in both his Books makes appear It remains therefore as a conclusion of undoubted verity that our Church was
our Reformers believed it to be an indispensible part of the Christian Religion positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures Do not therefore his saying establishing however no such thing as Parity c and the rest of his Discourse mutually give the lie and flee in the face of one another And indeed he here at once overthrows whatsoever he said on this Subject and now for ever to silence all reasonable men and stop them from such desperat adventures as this of our Authors take the following Argument Whatsoever our Reformers believed to be without the express and positive Testimony of the Scriptures that they believed to be a damnable Corruption in Religion and as such to be avoided This the major is put beyond scruple by what we have brought from the first Book of Discipline Knox and the Confessions of our Author Now I subjoin But they believed that Episcopacy was altogether without any express or positive Testimony yea or any Warrant or Ground from the Word of God the Books of the Old and New Testament Ergo c. The minor is no less evident from what is already adduc'd and moreover from the latter Helvetian Confession which was all save the allowance of the remembrance of some Holy Days which they expresly disprov'd approv'd and subscribed by our whole General Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1566. For in that Confession mark it pray carefully and by no means forget that our Church and Reformers who approv'd and subscrib'd this Confession firmly believ'd that whatsoever is without the express Commandment of God's Word is damnable to Man's Salvation they say There 's giv'n to all Ministers in the Church one and the same Power or Function And indeed in the beginning Bishops and Presbyters ruled the Church in common none preferr'd himself to another or usurped any more honourable Power or Dominion to himself over his fellow Bishops But according to the words of the Lord who will be first among you let him be your Servant they persevered in Humility and helped one another by their mutual Duties in Defending and Governing the Church In the meantime for preserving Order some one of the Ministers did call the Assembly and proposed these things that were to be consulted in the Meeting He did also receive the Opinions of others and finally according to his Power he took care that no confusion should arise so S. Peter is said to have done in the Acts of the Apostles who notwithstanding was never set over the rest nor indu'd with greater power and honour but the beginning took its rise from Vnity that the Church might be declared to be one And having related Hierome's Doctrine of the Idenity of Bishop Presbyier thus they conclude Therefore none may lawfully hinder to return to the ancient Constitution of the Church of God and embrace it before human Custome Thus far the Authors of that most famous Confession who both in the Title page and after the Preface expresly assert that our Church of Scotland together with the Churches of Poland Hungary Geneve Neocome Myllhusium and Wiend approved and subscribed this their Confession From all which it 's easie to gather and perceive with how black a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our first Reformers and whole primitive Church Protestant branded Prelacy or Imparity amongst Pastors Section IX The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian BUT let 's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers and Reform'd transmarine Churches Gerard a famous Lutheran divine altho' for Orders sake he admit of some kind of Episcopacy which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter The Papists saith he especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot And all along this Question he strongly proves that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary But we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines Luther himself being the mouth to the rest in the Articles of Smalcald It 's clear say they even from the Confession of our Adversaries that this Power to wit of preaching dispensing the Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution is common to all that are set over the Churches whither they be called Pastors Presbyters or Bishops Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter but that every Pastor was a Bishop Here Hierome teaches that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor was only appointed by humane Authority And the matter it self continues Luther and his Associats declares no less for on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor § 2. As for Calvin his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry for he asserts the Idenity of Bishop Presbyter Pastor and Minister and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7 as Hierome had done long before him and Presbyterians do now And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles he tells us that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters but was among them what the Consul was in the Senat and his Office was to propone Matters enquire the Votes preside in Admonition and moderat the Action and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator And that even this saith he was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza who every where is full sufficiently to our purpose both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus And were there any doubt concerning these as indeed there 's none their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd our very Adversaries being Judges sufficiently discuss it and prove them to be truly Presbyterian and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers Systematicks Controvertists and Commentators As for Example the famous and learn'd Musculus asserts and proves from
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
he better look'd on as himself acknowledges by the rest of the reform'd Churches abroad And I think every true Protestant will yeeld that they had reason so to do seeing he dares make not only Bishops but also Arch-Bishops Metropolitans yea and Patriarchs to be of Divine Right And over all these he places the Bishop of Rome as the Supream in Order and Honour He contends moreover that one Man may be lawfully enough both a Bishop and a Civil Magistrat and exerce one of these Offices by himself and another by his Substitutes The vast Rents of Prelates the external Pomp of Honours Titles and train like that of the greatest secular Nobles agree well enough with the simplicity of a Gospel-Ministry They may lawfully enough in their Grandor and multitude of Servants imitat the greatest Earls and Dukes All this is sufficiently warranted by Christ while he chus'd twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples If you tell him that Christ riding to Jerusalem had no train of Servants no Noble-men attending him adorn'd with golden Chains and riding on trapped Horses he answers that Christ did so throw the necessity of that time least he had been suspected as affecting an earthly Kingdom and that his want of such Splendor was the fault of Herod and such Princes as knew him not This Argument continues Saravia that they make against the Popish Prelats and ours is frivolous for it 's deduc'd from the Deeds of the Infidels and hath no place among Christians Tho' Bishops have Bands of arm'd Men to guard 'em and Noble-men adorn'd with golden Chains constantly to Page and attend them this ought to offend no Body And whatsoever he says for covering this Scandal that such superlative Grandour Pomp and Vanity give to every sober Beholder his Reader shall find to be nothing else save what 's commonly brought to palliat the Offence which the World so justly takes at the Luciferian Pride and Arrogance of the great Antichrist yea even long after that time notwithstanding of all the endeavours of Saravia and his Complices so great a Stranger was this Doctrine even there that T. Holland the King's Professor at Oxford branded Laud with publick infamy for asserting the divine right of Episcopacy Section X. Some of the manifold inconveniences and noxious Qualities of Prelacy briefly mention'd I Might in the next place enlarge on its Concomitants and Qualities a few whereof I shall only name One of these was a direfull Spirit of Persecution which still rag'd during the Prelatical Government the sad effects whereof through no small part of this Kingdom on both Bodies and Consciences of the best part of Protestants therein and that for their refusal of the very things which many of the Urgers acknowledg'd to be altogether indifferent are but too well known § 2. Another of its Qualities little better than the former is their Schismatical Practice and Principles as for instance at the last return of Prelats the Church of Scotland whatsoever Differences might have been therein yet was but one and not Altar against Altar did they not then become the Authors of a compleat National Schism while they broke the whole Church into Parties to the end only they might establish such things as many of themselves acknowledg'd to be indifferent Again their re-entry into Scotland was so far from being Legal that it wanted the very colour of all Order Law for no General Assembly of whatsoever kind introduc'd them Seeing then this Church has ever since her return from Rome held General and National Assemblies for her supream Judicatory and Prelats were extruded by full National Assemblies they ought for their re-entry without the like Authority to be accounted by all true Members of the Church of Scotland manifest Violators of all her Laws and Authority And while they upbraid us with the Crime of Separation are exactly like these who having overturn'd all fundamental Laws of a Society and ruin'd all both Officers and Members cleaving thereto should moreover reproach them upon this very account that they would not subscribe to the overthrow of their fundamental Laws and Constitution But marvel not tho' they made so wide a Breach here for they give but too much ground to judge that they have separated themselves from the Body of the reform'd Churches as appears amongst other things in their Doctrine and Practice of Re-ordaining all who come over unto them from these Churches Some indeed would perswade us that they hold this but as a small Ceremony but yet it 's such an one as for ought I can learn they will never quite with notwithstanding of all the Scandals giv'n or taken thereby And the most earnest Asserters of Episcopacy have their Episcopal Ordination in such esteem that they account none true Ministers without it and so look on most of the Reform'd Churches as being without all true Ministers consequently without either true Preaching or true Sacraments And is not this too like a Donatistick Schism And is it strange then that our Church did still with greatest care and vigor tho' on this account only oppose Prelacy and Prelatists they being generally leaven'd with such dangerous Principles And here observe that all the Heats and Debates that were in our Church since her Reformation from Popery owe their Original either more directly to Prelacy while she strove to keep or drive it out of Scotland or more indirectly while some if on good ground or otherwise I determine not greatly feared that some Persons or Practices would prove introductive thereof and therefore against the mind of others sought to have them laid aside And thus Prelacy whither present or absent hath still been the bane of this Church And there 's little doubt but that they were so wise in their Generation as both to kindle and blow at the fire of any Division that happen'd § 3. And as they give but too evident signs of their separating from the Body of the reform'd Churches so in too many things they but too nigh approach the Romanists Their Government and Hierarchick Scale is one and the same save one roundle with that of Rome All their Arguments they bring either from Scripture or Antiquity are learn'd from Bellarmine and such Romanists and admit no less improvement for the evincing a papal Authority than the Episcopals have made thereof for the establishing of their prelatical Power The Romanists affirm that the Apostles and Evangelists were Prelats of particular Diocesses and that a power properly Apostolick still remains in the Church In these and other such Positions too many of our Episcopal Men are ready to follow them But leaving the Apostolick times descend to the subsequent Ages call'd Antiquity there they 're Pylades and Orestes mutual Supporters of one another and have in arguing from this Fountain so great a resemblace that you shall scarce know with whither of the two ye are dealing Neither as we have already touch'd in the
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
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
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
some whole Peoples readily imbraced the Christian Religion Behold Reader how plainly and fully Eusebius relates the thing we plead for viz. that those Officers were altogether extraordinary unfixed and temporary § 5. Wretch'dly therefore does D. M. castrat this full and plain discourse while he only says that an Evangelist in the Notion of Eusebius was a Person that preached the Gospel to those that had not heard of it or resisted it and thus dissembles the whole matter in question which Eusebius clearly determines And according to this Relation of Eusebius 2 Timothy 4. 5. he is enjoined to do the Work of an Evangelist and never made a long stay at one place for even after the time of his pretended Ordination to the Bishoprick we find him not rarely with the Apostle Paul as his Attendant or Fellow Labourer which not only his joint Superscriptions to the second Epistle to the Corinthians and these to the Philippians Colossians both his Epistles to the Thessalonians and to Philemon but also the long Journeys and Peregrinations wherein we find Timothy still imployed irrefragably make manifest for after he is supposed to have been Bishop of Ephesus he was accompanying Paul in his Voyages Acts 20. 4. and was with him Prisoner at Rome as is probable from Philippians 1. and 1. Heb. 13. 23. as also frequently imployed in long Voyages to several Churches and that in Businesses which could not be expeded in a day as is evident 1 Cor. 4. 17. 1 Cor. 16. 10. Philip. 2. 19. Heb. 13. 23. 2 Tim. 4. 21. So that if he was Bishop of Ephesus he will prove a sufficient Patern for non-residence Most of which things may be supposed of Titus whose frequent long Journeys are mentioned by the same Apostle Yea they have just as good ground in 2 Tim. 4. 10. to fix Titus his Episcopal Chair in Dalmatia which was the Fancy of Aquinas and others as they can ever shew for their dream of its being among the Cretians And indeed the very Phrase from which they gather the Prelacy of Titus as we have already observed of Timothy gives real ground to conclude the contrary For this Cause saith he I left thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in Order the things that are wanting and ordain Elders From which place any ingenuous Man shall be compell'd to inferr that Titus was only left there to supply some present want and to return again much rather than that he was the fixed Arch-Bishop of Crete § 6. It 's amazing then that in defiance of so clear Antiquity yea and so clear and full Scripture evidence some dare to transform Timothy and Titus unto ordinary and fixed Officers why they see that among the ordinary and fixed Church-Officers they cannot find what they covet the Scriptures making Bishop Pastor and Presbyter one and the same but yeelding no place to their Diocesan Bishop a Lord and Ruler over other Bishops or Pastors They are compell'd therefore in imitation of the Romanists who degrade the Apostle to find the Bishop of Rome and Antioch just so to handle the Evangelists that Peter be not alone but may find other degraded Companions if he shall by chance in his Journey from one of his Sees to another visit Crete or Ephesus § 7. But more strange is that most precarious Assertion of D. M. that Philip the Evangelist had no Power of Ordination But it 's yet more admirable how to establish Timothy a Bishop he can adduce the eleventh Act of the Council of Chalcedon surely had he read the learned Stillingfleet who hath for ever baffl'd them in this their Allegation he had blush'd at the very mentioning thereof And we learn from Hierome that Titus after he had given some Instruction to the Churches of Cret◠was to return again to the Apostles and to be succeeded by Artemas or Tychicus for comforting of these Churches in the absence of the Apostle Judge Reader if Hierome thought Titus was fix'd Arch-Bishop of Crete It 's questionable saith Chrysostome if the Apostle had then constituted Timothy Bishop there for he saith that thou might'st charge some that they teach no other Doctrine Thus he without a word more for solution of this his Doubt Judge therefore if from the very Scripture whereon alone they would found Timothy's being Bishop of Ephesus he really concludes not the quite contrary Doctrine It 's doubtfull saith a most earnest Prelatist Salmeron the Jesuit if Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus for altho' he preach'd and ordain'd some to the Ministry there it follows not that he was the Bishop of that place for Paul preach'd also there above two years and absolv'd the Penitents and yet he was no Bishop Add that now and then the Apostle call'd him away unto himself and sent him from Rome to the Hebrews with his Epistle And in the second Epistle he commands him to come to him shortly Timothy was also an Evangelist of that Order Eph. 4. He gave some Apostles c. So that Dorotheus says in his Synopsis that Timothy preach'd through all Grecee but he stayed at Ephesus not to be Bishop but that in the constitute Church of Ephesus he might oppose the false Apostles c. It appears therefore that he was more than a Bishop altho' for a time he preached in that City as a Pastor and ordain'd some to the Ministry Hence it is that some call him Bishop of Ephesus And to conclude this matter the celebrated Stilling fleet ingenuously grants that Timothy and Titus were no fixed Bishops or Pastors but Evangelists notwithstanding saith he all the opposition made against it as will appear to any who will take an impartial survey of the Arguments on both sides § 8. As for the Apocalyptick Angels tho' with Beza we should affirm that by one of 'em one single Moderator is mean'd we yeeld them nothing but e contra cut the sinews of their Argument With this D. M. ingages not only he calls the Alterableness of the Moderator which Beza holds as defensible ridiculous which is said without proof and tho' it were so touches not the marrow of our Answer But they shall find their Foundation yet weaker for such a structure so soon as they shall with attention read over the contexts of the place now in Controversie The seven Stars which are the seven Angels are said to be held in God's right hand whereby without peradventure is signified the great care our Lord had of the Pastors of these Flocks in order to the promoting of the great Gospel-Design the gaining of Souls to himself But Bishops I mean Diocesans as such and distinct from other Pastors are not at all Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments by whom mostly this Gospel-design is effected Moreover how few should they be to whom this care was extended and how small comfort should the bulk of the Labourers in the Word and Doctrine be able to reap from the
Ephesus alone is not only so clear from the 17 verse that the repeating of the word Ephesus would really prove a redundancy wherefore the Syriack omits it in the former part of the verse and expresses it in the latter and called for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus but also all the Ancients either affirm as Hierome or suppose that these Elders belonged only to Ephesus which even Dr. Maurice yeelds against Dr. Hammond and says that then properly speaking there might not be a Bishop amongst them all for they are Presbyters belonging not to several Congregations but to one Church and might have a Bishop But not only the promiscuous attributing to them the Names Bishop and Presbyter their being and that without any insinuation of their Subjection to a superiour Bishop enjoin'd by the Apostle to Oversee and feed the Flock and finally the very Repetition of this Fiction of their Hierarchy in the Apostolick Age sufficiently refute it Who continues he the Ancients thought was Timothy And thus all resolves into the fictitious Episcopacy of Timothy already overthrown Now 't is observable how they contradict one another and by halfs acknowledge to be false all they plead for for some as Dr. Maurice perceiving that the Ancients affirm and the Scriptures proclaim all these Elders to belong to the Church or City of Ephesus acknowledge these could be no Diocesan Bishops Others as Dr. Hammond in locum alibi and Petavius seeing that these are not only dignifi'd with the name of Bishop but intrusted with the care of the Flock and that without Paul ' s mentioning of any superiour Bishop when if ever there was ground to have mention'd him yeeld that of necessity these Elders must be Bishops or more than simple Presbyters Whence is all this Contradiction and Confusion of Tongues but from the force of Truth before which Men must either bow or break and be compell'd tho' after never so much interpolation and disguise to express what they would fainest conceal The matter is their Diocesan Bishop their simple Presbyter their distinction between Bishop and Presbyter are meer Antiscriptural Figments in the sustaining of which against this and the like Scriptures they are obliged to confront one another and in the throng of their blunderings intirely yeeld the Controversie § 2. The same line of confusion runs along their Answer to Philip. 1. 1. with the Bishops and Deacons c. whence 't is clear that there were in one City many Bishops who were no other thing than Presbyters and that these were no distinct Orders the Deacons being immediatly subjoin'd these were the Bishops of the several Cities of Macedonia under Philippi the Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond in locum 't is denied by Dr. Maurice I could never find reason saith he to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Philippi was a Metropolis because a Colonie saith Dr. Hammond but that this will not follow is acknowledged by Dr. Maurice Thus they are still by the ears But saith Dr. Hammond the Apostle might retain the Episcopal Power in his own hands and tho' absent might exercise it by Letters but they can give no ground why the like may not be said of the Apostle in reference to the rest of the Churches and so Timothy and Titus shall be dethron'd and our Adversaries endeavouring to Answer one of our Arguments loss two of their own yea all of them for it being no less presumable that John would keep the Episcopal Power over the Churches of Asia in his own hand then that Paul kept that of Philippi there shall be no ground nor colour to Metamorphose the Apocalyptick Angels into Diocesan Bishops Or it 's possible continues Dr. H. that then the Bishop's Chair was vacant But if so and a Diocesan so necessary as they pretend without peradventure the Apostle had not only mention'd it but also spent some part of his Epistle in directing and giving them Rules in order to their choice of a fit Successour Or the Bishop saith he might be absent and Epaphroditus by the Ancients judged Bishop of Philippi appears to have been then with Paul But this Dream of Epaphroditus his being Bishop of Philippi the Doctor in that very place condemns and overthrows and so frees us of further trouble about it § 3. Yea in none of these Answers does Dr. H. rest but as is said in this pretext that Philippi was a Metropolis over many subject Bishops leaning mainly on Acts 16. 12. whose Arguments were examined by Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Clerkson Dr. Maurice tho' a grand Enemy to Hammond's grand Principle undertakes notwithstanding the defence of some of these Arguments against the latter but medles not with the former and saith that Beza ' s Manuscript hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath also the Syriack and Arabick But OEcumenius and Theophilact and even Chrysostome yea and the received Greek Copy which Translators generally follow read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But seeing as the learned Stillingfleet demonstrats Philippi was not then a Metropolis in the Civil sence which is the Foundation of all their Structure 't is impossible that it can be call'd by Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first in respect of Dignity but only either must be mean'd as Luke may well be understood that it was the first Colony they mett with coming from Samothrace or in respect of Situation it being scarce within the Bounds of the proper Macedonia but on the Thracian side of the River Strymon the Boundary between Thrace and Macedonia yet it might be nearer to the proper Macedonia than was Neapolis and therefore is rather to be reckon'd a part of that Country than Neapolis could be wherefore on both at least certainly on one of these accounts appears the nullity of Dr. Maurice his Answer while he says that not Philippi but Neapolis was the first in Situation Of the same kidney is his saying that Philippi might be more considerable in Luke ' s time than in the time of P. Aemilius seeing this is a mean begging of the Question for he brings nothing from any Records which a Matter of this kind requires to make in the least probable the growth of Philippi between the time of Aemilius and Luke and Chrysostome speaking of Luke's time tells us that it was no great City Moreover Dr. Stilling fleet ex abundanti clearly shews through the several periods of time that Philippi was of no greater Dignity in the time of Luke than in the time of P. Aemilius Dr. Maurice adds as a proof of Philippi's Metropolitan-ship in Luke's time that the Bishop of Philippi is mention'd as Metropolitan in Liberatus the Council of Ephesus Sedulius and in an old Notitia To which I Answer with Dr. Stillingfleet in the like Case But what validity there is in such Subscriptions or Allegations in the latter end of the
And The Apostles retain'd the Phraseology of the Jews who spoke of Priests and Levites as two distinct Orders without mentioning the High Priest And When the Ancients Dichotomiz'd the Clergy they in other places plainly reckon up three distinct Orders of Bishop Presbyter and Deacon But is there never in all the Scriptures any Title Distinction or Marks of Eminence giv'n to one Priest which were not communicable to all of ' em Got ever all of 'em promiscuously the Title of High Priest or such distinctive Appellations Did the Apostles so retian the Phraseology of the Jews as that they sometimes make a Bipartite and sometimes a Tripartite Division of ordinary Church-Officers and give to any one ordinary Pastor sometimes at least a distinguishing Title and Marks of Eminence which are at no time communicable to all ordinary Pastors promiscuously As to the Ancients their sometimes Dichotomizing sometimes Trichotomizing the Clergy it 's most certain that in their Dichotomies they ey'd the prime primitive Church and in their Trichotomies their own times But Christ saith D. M. is call'd an Apostle a Bishop the Apostles Presbyters and Deacons But was Christ so call'd an Apostle that he had no other peculiar titles or marks of Eminence or that on the other hand the name Christ was giv'n promiscuously to all Apostles or ever giv'n to any of ' em Lastly was the Apellation of Apostle equally communicable to all Presbyters or ordinary Pastors as to the twelve and some few else extraordinary Officers All which he must swallow else he gives no relief to his Friend Bellarmine We Argue that seeing to no ordinary Pastor is giv'n any peculiar Appellation Character or Description but what is equally common to all there must be an Equality and Parity amongst all of 'em and this they can never get over Moreover among the Evangelists yea and among the Apostles Officers superior to ordinary Pastors the reformed Churches being Judges there was a compleat Parity as was also among the Deacons their Inferiours notwithstanding of all which the Hierarchicks must plead for certain Stories of Preheminence among the ordinary Pastors in favours whereof ne gry quidem they can bring from the Word of God the only Rule of Faith and Doctrine § 6. Add hereto Tit. chap. 1. where we not only find the Apostle using indifferently and promiscuously the two words Bishop and Elder but also he alledgeth the necessity of fit Qualifications in the one to prove that the same are required in the other the Presbyters that were to be Ordain'd must be blameless c. because a Bishop must be so wherein either we have an ocular Demonstration of the Identity of these two Officers or else which I abhorr to think the Apostles reasoning is more pitifull than the most equivocant Paralogism their being not so much as a nominal Connexion betwixt the Antecedent and Consequent and no less ridiculous than if one should reason that every Captain of a single Company must be able to guide and manage a whole Army because such Qualifications are required in a General Now seeing these Scriptures already vindicated to name no others evidently declare that there was no such thing as a Diocesan Bishop that there 's a compleat Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter and consequently a Parity of all ordinary Pastors they of necessity condemn the Hierarchick and Diocesan Imparity for I 'm perswaded these who alledge that they find in Scripture a Distinction between these Offices will judge that they may with reason enough conclude the Divine Right of Episcopacy Hence judge of D. M's fifth Query where and in what places of Scripture the superiority and jurisdiction of one Priest above another is forbidden And if it be not plainly forbidden then the Fancy of a Jus Divinum in favours of Presbytry such as is exclusive of all other Forms of Ecclesiastical Government is groundless and Chimerical From all which I conclude that if the Ignatian Bishop and Presbyter most be understood in the Notion of our Adversaries he then quite crosses the Apostles so his Doctrine is stark nought or which is a far more charitable Sentiment his Epistles have suffer'd no small interpolation Section VII The grand Objection taken from the Commentaries of the Ancients remov'd BUT the Fathers as our Adversaries pretend glossing on these Texts went quite cross to our Doctrine To the Bishops and Deacons saith Chrysostome What means that What was there a Plurality of Bishops in one City Not at all for at that time the Name was yet common so that a Bishop was also nam'd a Deacon that is a Servant And adds that both Timothy and Titus were Bishops Of the same mind say they were Hilary Epiphanius Theodoret OEcumenius and others which harmonius Consent of Ancients cann't but be the true meaning of the places in Controversie But as these and such Fathers confess and their Works proclaim they were like others subject to humane Weakness and Corruption fell into compliance with the growing Errors into immoderat heat prevarication and self-repugnancy and negligence to search for the Scriptures their meaning How loudly sounded the debate concerning rebaptizing between Stephen and Cyprian which â—ore almost the whole body of Christians into a pair of Factions With what heat was it prosecuted And which is most lamentable how pitifully was the truth on both hands deserted For altho' it be commonly believ'd that Stephen only held the truth and Cyprian and his fail'd yet Stephen and the Romans did no less betray it On the other extream while they asserted the sufficiency of Baptism altho' administred by the grossest Hereticks and capital Enemies of the Fundamentals of Christianity How great both before and after that time were the Contests about Easter How scandalous were the Contests between Chrysostome Epiphanius and Theophilus and between Hierome and Ruffine Not to name others in all which it is apparent how little they believed one another and how much many of 'em prevaricated in favours of their particular Fancies § 2. But their Contradictions to one another are less to be admired when we clearly perceive that one and the self same Author either out of negligence or some other weakness hath given us quite contrary Doctrines Justine Martyr which Sculteâ— observes in one place ascribes the whole Work of Regeneration to free Grace and in another destroyes what he had builded and places free Will in the room thereof And Clemens Alexandrinus as the same Scultet observes following Justine Martyr delivers the like inconsistencies about the same Theme he sometimes ascribes our Salvation wholly to Faith and again tells us that we may purchase it with the Treasure of our Works § 3. Of the same kind are their polemick Discourses wherein their study was much more directed to bespatte their Antagonists and alure the vulgar Auditor than solidly to support the Truth I shall never believe that Optatus believed himself when he maintain'd that all
capable of another Translation Thus only in the Matter of Ordination they have got up or set themselves above them Secondlie Of the Power of Ordination it 's being proper to Bishops he speaks most doubtfully 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they seem c. saith he Thirdly Had he believ'd that the Power of Ordination by Divine Right belong'd to Bishops above Presbyters he had never said that there 's notwithstanding in a manner nothing between them surely Epiphanius thought the Power of Ordination made a most large and notable Difference Once again I shall with our Adversaries suppose that Chrysostome allows that Power of Ordination by Divine Appointment was appropriated to Bishops they cann't with reason deny but that in all other things to a hair he asserts the Equality yea the Identity of Presbyters with Bishops Now will they stand to Chrysostome herein Surely they will not for thus they should be oblig'd to let go all the Prerogatives and Priviledges Bishops both claim and exerce over their Pastors all their Power Paramount of Governing the Church and her Pastors all their exorbitant Wealth Grandeur Pomp and Splendor and in a word whatsoever renders to them the Hierarchie amiable or desireable and so should be really reduc'd to the condition of an ordinary Parish-pastor And were things so little I 'm sure would they care or stickel for upholding of any Distinction between these Officers hence let them blush any more to pretend to Chrysostome's Patrociny seeing all they can with the least colour plead for being giv'n not granted he really subverts their Cause and levells their Diocesan Prelat with a parochial Pastor § 4. Bellarmine Answers that Chrysostome and others while they say that onlie in Ordination a Bishop is above a Presbyter speak onlie of such things which no way agree to Presbyters for Iurisdiction and Confirmation may be performed by Presbyters by vertue of Commission from the Bishop But thus he really makes Chrysostome contradict himself Chrysostome said they differ'd nothing save in Ordination Bellarmine compells him to say that they have another Difference no less conspicuous than is between the King and his Commissioner who can do many regall Acts being warranted by him thereto Does such a Power lodg'd in the Bishop which agrees to none of the Presbyters make no Distinction between him and them Or rather does it not make up the far greater and more conspicuous part of the prelatical Eminency above the rest of the Clergy Add hereto Chrysostome's Books of the Priest-hood wherein altho' he expresly professes he was to treat of the Office of a Bishop yet in these Books there 's nothing but what concerns a congregational Pastor nothing but what concerns publick prayer dispensing of the Word and Sacraments and such Duties that terminat on the People alone but not a word of the Duties of the Bishop or Prelat over inferiour congregational Pastors as their Object which is a sure Demonstration that with Chrysostome Bishop Priest and Pastor were Synonymous Terms § 5. To these add Pelagius a grand Heretick indeed but never branded as such for ought he said of Church-Government who restricts all Church-Officers to Priest and Deacon And asserts that Priest without any Discrimination or Restriction are the Successors of the Apostles And Here saith he by Bishops we understand Presbyters for there could not have been more Bishops in one Citie but we have this Matter also in the Acts of the Apostles Where it 's clear that Pelagius altho' in conformity to the introduc'd Custome of distinguishing Bishops from preaching Presbyters he endeavour'd accordingly to expone this place with as little dammage thereto as is possible deduceth nothwithstanding the Ground of the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter from the Churches latter Custome of having but one Bishop in one City and not from any Scripture-Warrant and indeed when he brings to clear his Comment the 20. of the Acts 17. and 28. he plainly intimats that even when he and others of that Age seem most clearly to hold forth a Difference betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter they then believ'd no such thing to flow from Divine Institution And There is a Question saith he why the Apostle made no mention of Presbyters but comprehended them under the Name of Bishops because answers he this is the second yea in a manner the very same Degree with that of Bishops as the Apostle writes in the Epistle to the Philippians To the Bishops and Deacons when yet one City cann't have more Bishops than one and in the Acts of the Apostles Paul being to go to Hierusalem and having gathered the Elders of the Church saith among other things take heed to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops Hence it 's most evident that he believed both Offices to be by Scripture-Warrant one and the same and not a meer Communication of Names only But the thing most observable here is that to prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he brings Philip. 1. and hereby shews us that some of the Ancients from whose accustom'd Phrases he departed not while he exponed it when they seem to inferr from that place only a Community of Names did really believe no such thing but were perswaded that Philip. 1. 1. quite overthrows all Distinction betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter And Sedulius asserts and proves the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters and concludes from the Example of the Ephesian Elders or Bishops that there were many Bishops in one City contrary to the Practice of his Age and that among the Ancients Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same And Primasius proposeth the Question why the Apostle comes to the Deacons without any mention of the Presbyters And Answers in the very words of Pelagius Thus it 's clear even these whom the Hierarchicks take for the prime Pillars of Prelacy being Judges that there 's no Divine Warrant for Diocesan Episcopacy and that a Bishop and Presbyter in Scripture in Apostolick times are one and the same For saith Augustine with whom I begin tho' Younger than Hierome being longer to insist on the other tho' according to these Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now brought in fashion the Office of a Bishop be greater than that of a Presbyter yet in many things Augustine is below Hierome where we see that the whole Difference was in Expression rather than reality and that even that was only by Custome not by Divine Appointment These words hath now brought in fashion answers Bellarmine are not opposed to the ancient time of the Church but to the time before the Christian Church so that the sense is before the times of the Christian Church these Names Bishop and Presbyter were not Titles of Honour but of Office and Age but now they are Names of Honour and Dignity D. M. follows his Master Bellarmine in this wretch'd Detortion and adds that this was but a
Hierome leave them as being altogether useless for support of the Pomp and Splendor of their Hierarchy To these add the Jesuite Celâ—otius who after a thousand Meanders and serpentine windings to elude and deprave these clear Testimonies of Hierome at length seeing all would not do rejects them all as the Forgeries of unlucky Aërian hands never written by Hierome For which Cellotius is chastised even by Petavius and others of the Loyolites themselves Into such Discord Confusion and Torment do Men usually throw themselves so soon as they obstinatly resolve to wage War with so clear and irradiant Verities And here it 's observable that in all times and in all Churches the Authority of Hierome has been exceeding great and above most of the primitive Writers which came not to pass without a special Divine Providence that he and in him the whole primitive Church whose Judgement in these Matters he most clearly delivers might remain as an unsuspected and an uncontroverted witness against some of latter Ages pretendedly Catholick but really Sectarian Novelists Among the great Services he did to the Church two Pieces are more especially notticeable viz. his most clear asserting and acurat distinguishing the Canonical Books from the Apocryphal above all who handled or wrote of that great and most necessary Article and which is the Matter in hand his Antiprelatick Doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter these not only Hieronymian but also truly Catholick Doctrines are with equall fierceness impugn'd by the Romanists and I appeal to the impartial Reader if their Exceptions against this latter be a whit more solide than these which are advanced against the former viz. Hierome's Judgement of the Canonical Scriptures which are to be found collected and learn'dly refuted by Dr. Cosin And indeed these Sophisters endeavouring to subvert these Catholick Doctrines of Hierome dash only on an Adamantine Rock for as never any Articles were better founded so notwithstanding of whatsoever practical Aberrations therefrom were fall'n into none were more universally imbrac'd receiv'd and handed down for to speak of the Matter of our present concern this Hieronymian Doctrine all following Church Writers ratifie and approve the bulk of subsequent Commentators Writers of Offices and of other Treatises as Salvianus Isidorus Hispalensis Amalarius Rabanus Maurus yea and intire Councils as that 2 of Sevil which ascribes the whole Difference and Sâ—periority only to Church-Canons and late Constitutions and after them Gratian and Lombard who affirm that in the primitive Church there was only Presbyters and Deacons and his Expositors among whom is Aestius who very fairly quites the Scriptures and tells us that this Superiority is not very clear from Scripture which is nothing but a Confession of the Truth of Hierome's Doctrine forced from this great Prelatist and School-man Yet adds Aestius this may be sufficiently proved another way To which words Dr. Stillingfleet occurrs Ingenuously said saith he however but all the difficulty is how a Jus Divinum should be prov'd when Men leave the Scriptures But in the recounting and transcribing of such Confessions or Testimonies I will not inlarge And now having rescued the principal Scriptures our Antagonists detort in favours of their Distinction between Bishop and Presbyters and vindicated some places commonly adduc'd for the Identity thereof as also evinced that the most celebrated of the Ancients did no otherways understand these Scriptures nor derive the Original of Prelacy from Divine Institution I may with confidence conclude that Ignatius had none before him of the Judgement that he if we believe the Hierarchicks so passionately favour'd Section IX The Testimonies of Ignatius's contemporaries disproving what our Adversaries would force him to speak and confirming what we have prov'd to be his mind viz. that he cashiers a Diocesan Prelacy HAving viewed the Apostolick Writings and dived into their most ancient Commentators and primitive Doctors and having found that in the time of the Apostles the immediat Ancestors of Ignatius there was in the Church no such thing as a Diocesan Prelate Let us next look unto what remains of his Contemporaries or these who lived near Ignatius's time and we shall have ground to deduce the same Inference And first it's observable that these Writers such as Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians for the rest that bear his Name are undoubtedly spurious Polycarp to the Philippians Hermas or Pastor Justine Martyr tho' they as occasion offers frequently mention Pastors Doctors Bishops Presbyters indifferently taking all of 'em for on and the same Office yet of a Diocesan Prelat or one set over other Pastors or over these that had Power of Dispensing the Word and Sacraments in all their Writings have not a syllable Which Argument against a Diocesan Prelat tho' negative is not to be slighted if we consider these Authors their closs Vicinity to the Apostles the occasion they had to have mention'd him had he been then existent their more than a Pythagorick silence concerning him Yea the same kind of negative Argumentation Eusebius uses while he disproves and explodes some Writings forg'd in the Name of John Andrew and other Apostles because saith he no ancient Ecclesiastick Writers mention these Books We shall find moreover that they positively disclaim Diocesan Prelacy I begin with Clemens Romanus who writing to the Corinthians commends their former carriage in these words Ye walked in the commands of God and being obedient to these that had the rule over you and giving your Elders due honour ye were wont to admonish the younger with Moderation to seek after things that are honest And again Wherefore the Apostles preaching the Word thro' the severall regions and proving by the Spirit the first fruits thereof ordain'd Bishops and Deacons for these who should believe neither was this a new Ordinance for many ages before it was written concerning Bishops for so in a certain place saith the Scripture I will appoint their Bishops in Righteousness and their Deacons in Faith And Our Apostles by Jesus Christ our Lord knew that there would arise Contention concerning the Name of a Bishop and therefore being endew'd with a perfect Fore-knowledge they ordain'd the fore-said Officers and left unto us describ'd the particular services of both Ministers and Offices to the end that approv'd Men might succeed in the place of the defunct and execute their Office These therefore who are ordain'd by them or by other famous men with the Consent of the whole Church who blamelesly serv'd the Sheepfold of Christ with humility and quietness without baseness and who for a long time had a good Testimony from all These I say cann't be justly thrust out of their Office for we commit no light sin if we cast out these from the Bishops Office who holyly and blamelesly perform'd it Blessed are these Presbyters or Pastors who have perfited their journey and are dead and who have obtain'd
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
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
the very same Officers the very same Men that he means by the name Bishops rather than e contra see Pray the Letter it self apud Flav. Vopis in Saturnino § 11. 'T were easie to shew divers succeeding Fathers to have been of Justine's Mind and Strangers to Diocesan Episcopacy ignoring all Discrimination between Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor I shall only here with one Chamier against Bellarmine and the rest of the Jesuites assert against their Successors and Defenders under whatever Name they be known that according to Irenaeus the Churches were committed to the Presbyters no less than to the Bishops that these who are now reckoned Popes High-Priests universal Bishops are only Presbyters in the Judgement of Irenaeus and that in him Presbyters are not so much as once distinguished and far less separated from Bishops From what is said appears the vanity of D. M's Popish Query Whether all things duly considered a more evident and universal Tradition for the Superiority and Jurisdiction of a Bishop above a Presbyter can be reasonably demanded and whether the Argument from universal Tradition be not in this Case the most proper and most necessary And whether the Tradition for the Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter be not more universal unanimous and uncontradicted in the Primitive Ages than many other Traditions that are unquestionably received What these his other Traditions are we are not ignorant The Doctrine certainly of the morality of the Sabbath of Baptism and of the Holy Trinity and the like these they think lean only on Tradition and that the Institution of their Diocesan Prelats Metrapolitans and Arch-Prelats and other such Effects and Inventions of a degenerating and apostatizing Church are better founded than these most Scriptural Catholick and necessary Doctrines Section X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy AND now in the next place I would gladly learn how they will describe or whereon they can found their Romish or which is all one their Hierarchick Diocesan Bishop For as Augustine well observes it is a name of Labour and Travel not of Honour and Dignity and indeed it imports only Watchfullness Labour and Care as its most native and proper Signification and on this account only the King gets the name of Bishop in Hesychius as he gets the name of Pastor in Homer And Hesychius gives it no less to every Watchman Thus the word Bishop denotes a vigilant Watchman in Suidas where he tells us that some bearing this Name were sent by the Athenians to observe the Affairs of their subject Cities who were called Watchmen So is the same word understood to denote only Care and Labour by Jullius Pollux whereas on the other hand the word Presbyter when taken for a Function or Office natively imports Rule and Honour A Presbyter acknowledges even Saravia is a Name of Honour and was given to the more honourable and to the Magistrats among the Jews in the Old Testament and was thence transferred to signifie the Governours of the Churches of Christ in the New Testament but they are called Bishops from their watchfull Care which is a Name of Work and Labour The name Presbyter saith Dr. Stillingfleet as the Hebrew ZAKEN tho' it originally import Age yet by way of connotation it hath been looked on as a Name both of Dignity and Power among the Jews in the times of the Apostles it is most evident that the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imported not only Dignity but Power the Presbyters among the Jews having Power both of Judging and Teaching given them by their Semicha or Ordination Now under the Gospel the Apostles retaining the Name and the manner of Ordination but not conferring that judiciary Power by it which was in use among the Jews to shew the Difference between the Law and the Gospel it was requisite some other Name should be given to the Governours of the Church which should qualifie the importance of the word Presbyters to a sense proper to a Gospel state which was the Original of giving the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Governours of the Church under the Gospel a Name importing Duty more than Honour and not a title above Presbyter but rather used by way of Diminution and Qualification of the Power imply'd in the name of Presbyter c. The Hierarchicks therefore should act much more rationally if they turn'd the Tables and gave the name of Presbyter to their Diocesan and that of the Bishop to their inferiour Curats who usually do most of the Pastoral Work In the mean while it 's sure from what we just now learned out of these Authors that during sounder Antiquity before men equally abused Names and Things a Bishop could never be either ane Order or Degree or any thing else above a Prsbyter But from Names if we pass to things and look into Scripture and sounder Antiquity we shall find the ancient Bishop so different from the present Diocesan that the very Idea's and notions of the two are diametrically opposite one to another The Apostles themselves Acts 6. 2 4. following the Commandment of their Master found it their Duty so assiduously to labour in Preaching and Prayer that they thought it unreasonable to be diverted even by the Distribution of the Collections and Care of the Poor which otherwayes was a Work both lawfull and pious And to Timothy who if we believe the Hierarchicks was ane Arch-Bishop of a vast Diocess it 's injoyn'd as his proper Task to Preach the Word to be instant in season and out of season to reprove to rebuke exhort with all Long-suffering and Doctrine I need not here multiply Texts read and read over again the whole New Testament and you shall find that the Exercise of Prayer Dispensing the Word and Sacraments was the main Duty and perpetual Imployment of every Pastor or Minister of Christ. Look on the other hand to the bulk of the Hierarchick Lord-Bishops they haue a quite different Work and Exercice and if any of 'em happen to spend some time in the Ministerial Duties how are they commonly gaz'd on and depredicated as Men of extraordinary Condescension superlatively stuping to a piece of Service far below the Episcopal Grandeur and unusual to the Order Are they not then quite another thing than the Apostolick and Scripturall Bishops This Apostolick Example the Conscientious Primitive Bishops or Pastors clossly follow'd not so much as once dreaming that any who was ordain'd a Minister of the Gospell and intrusted with a Flock might on whatsoever pretext neglect to exercise himself perpetually in Prayer and Dispensing the Word and Sacraments This they judg'd his constant Imployment and this was the Practice of all the sincere Bishops even after the Distinction of Degrees was introduc'd as appears in the weekly and sometimes the dayly Homilies and Lectures of Chrysostome and Augustine which are yet extant And it 's already
observed how Hilary makes the Bishop a sedulous Dispenser of the Words of suture Life And indeed all the Hierarchick Grandeur and Domination whereby a Bishop was intirely Metamorphosed into a quite other thing than what he had once been could never notwithstanding obliterate and blot out of thinking Mens Minds the true Scriptural Notion and Idea thereof The Episcopal Dignity consists in Teaching saith Balsamon And the fourth Council of Carthage decrees that a Bishop shall not be imployed in caring for his houshold Affairs but shall wholly occupy himself in Reading and Praying aud Preaching the Word § 12. 'T were endless to alledge all that may be produc'd to this purpose neither could any Man who ever seriously read the Bible have any other Notion of a true Bishop than what is common to every Pastor of a Congregation seeing the Apostle's Description of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. agrees equally to all of them And here it 's observable that still where Bishops are spoken of in Scripture not only is the Work and Office which is injoin'd them that of Teaching and Feeding but also the Name is correlative to the Flock and not to a Company of Clergy-men as Acts 20. 28. Take heed to your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Feed the Church of God 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof or Bishoping it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly as we have oftner than once demonstrated over every particular Congregation there was a Bishop This Assertion may be strongly confirmed from the undoubted Practice of the Church in the fourth Century even when she was fall'n into no small Declension from the Primitive Purity For the Council of Sardica Decrees that a Bishop may not be placed in a Village or small Town where one Presbyter may suffice Dr. Maurice says that this Canon is justified by the Arrians their great multiplication of Bishops to strengthen their Party But the Council it self assigns a quite different Ground that moved them to make this Decree viz. that the Name and Authority of a Bishop fall not into Contempt Where we see the Design of abolishing the Primitive and Apostolick Custome of giving a Bishop indifferently to every Congregation whether in City or in Countrey was the Introduction of a secular Pomp and Grandeur into the Church which finally resolv'd into a Papal Slavery However this Sardican Canon had not so good effect but that about twenty years after a new Sanction thereto was found needfull for the Council of Laodicea Decrees that it shall not be lawfull to place Bishops in little Villages or Countrey Places but only Visitors and that the Bishops who were already placed in these little Villages and Countrey Places should for the future do nothing without the knowledge of the Bishop of the City Mark how a pace the mild and fraternal Church Regimen is turn'd into a Worldly Domination and Dignity to pave the way for a papal Tyranny These rural Bishops or Countrey-parish Pastors for they can be call'd nothing else whom Dr. Beverige acknowledges for real and true Bishops were also assaulted and the subjecting and inslaving of them to the Prelates and Clergy in the greater Cities design'd by other Councils as that of Ancyrum and of Neocesaria and of Antioch there they are called Chorepiscopi i. e. Countrey Bishops And it has been disputed if these were real true Bishops But the same Dr. Beverige not only yeelds but at large pleads for the Affirmative He pretends in the mean while that anciently Bishops were ordained in Cities only many whereof had according to the model of the Empire such ample Territories that 't was impossible for the Bishop of the City his alone to visit and sufficiently to guide them and so it seem'd needfull for such Bishops to have according to the amplitude of their Bishopricks one or two Coajutors in some Region without the City who might disburden them of some parts of the Episcopal Function which could not be done but by some consecrated Bishops Hence 't was that some of these great Bishops Ordain'd in some part of their large Provinces these Bishops but with this provision that these without their leave should do nothing of moment seeing these Regions also belonged to the Care of the City Bishop which we learn continues he from the tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch where it 's expresly Decreed that no Country Bishop Ordain Presbyter or Deacon without the Bishop of the City to which he and his Region is subject But indeed there 's no such thing to be learn'd from that Canon it only says that the Chorepiscopus and his Region was subject to the City as they really were in a Civil Sense not to the Bishop of the City and tho they had said so it 's no proof of his Conclusion seeing they usually pretended Antiquity for the greatest Innovations How far either in or nigh to the Time of the Apostles the Church was from giving to the Bishop such a Princely Dignity as he pretends or from allowing him to do the Work proper to himself by substitute Vassals none acquainted with what remains of these Ancient times can be ignorant and is already oftner then once evinc'd And now I 'm sorry to find a Protestant of sence and Learning lean on that shamefull and most exploded Falshood viz. that the Apostles took the Government of the Empire for their Pattern of Church-Government and darring to publish such gross Falshoods whereof even the more ingenuous Romanists are ashamed The Ecclesiastical Degrees saith Suave were not Originally Instituted as Dignities Preheminencies Rewards or Honours as now they are and have been many hundred years but with Ministery and Charges otherwise called by St. Paul Works and those that exercise them are called by Christ our Lord in the Gospel Workmen and therefore no Man could then enter into cogitation to absent himself from the Execution thereof in his own Person and if any one which seldom happend retired from the Work 't was not thought reasonable he should have either Title or Profit And tho' the Ministeries were of two sorts some Anciently called as now they are with care of Souls others of temporal things for the sustenance and service of the Poor and Sick as were the Deaconries and other inferiour Works all held themselves equally bound to that Service in Person neither did any think of a substitute but for a short time and for great Impediments much less to take another Charge which might hinder that § 13. Bnd now to go on these Countrey Bishops or Pastors could not yet by all these Councils be Un-bishoped And therefore Pope Damasus must next fall on them and authoratively define that they were stark nought in the Church their Institution wicked and
no Inhabitant there no place for my L. Bishop's grace nothing whereon to exercise the Episcopal power save rubbish and desolation In none of the Churches saith Dr. Stilling fleet most spoken of is the succession so clear as is necessary For at Jerusalem it seems somewhat strange how fifteen Bishops of the Circumcision should be crouded into so narrow a room as they are so that many of them could not have above two years time to rule in the Church And it would bear an inquiry where the seat of the Bishops of Jerusalem was from the time of the destruction of the City by Titus when the walls were laid even with the ground by Musonius till the time of Adrian I shall yet in the last place adduce a few passages and I intreat my Reader seriously to weigh them and from whom they came for I am sure they will give great light and satisfaction to all the truly conscientious and disinterested The sixt Anathematism saith a Romanist was much noted in Germany in which an Article of Faith was made of HIERARCHY which word and signification thereof is aliene not to say contrary to the holy Scrsptures and tho' 't was somewhat antiently invented yet the Author is not known and in case he were yet he is an Hyperbolicall Writer not imitated in the use of that Word nor of others of his Invention by any of the Ancients and following the Stile of Christ our Lord and the Holy Apostles and primitive Church it ought to be named not Hierarchy but Hierodiaconia or Hierodoulia And Dr. Heylen who like to Balaam blessing Israel when he would fainest have cursed them uses to establish a Presbyterian Parity of Pastors while he is most desirous to destroy it makes the Bishop in Justine Martyr ' s time all one with the President of the Congregation and ordinary Preacher of God's Word and Celebrator of the Eucharist therein And pleads that in Tertullian's mind Baptism was a work most proper to the Bishop in regard of his Episcopacy or particular Office And the Doctor contends out of Tertullian that in his time Christians receiv'd the Eucharist only from the Bishop's hands and so there were no fewer Bishops than Congregations who mett for hearing of the Word and Celebration of the Sacraments What shew of reason can be given saith Dr. Stilling-fleet why the Apostles should slight the Constitution of the Jewish Synagogues which had no dependance on the Jewish Hierarchy and subsisted not by any Command of the Ceremonial Law The Work of the Synagogue not belonging to the Priests as such but as Persons qualifi'd for instructing others And We are to take nottice that the Rulers of the Church under the Gospell do not properly succeed the Priests and Levites under the Law whose Office was Ceremonial and who were not admitted by any solemn Ordination into their Function It is then a common Mistake to think that the Ministers of the Gospell succeeded by way of Correspondence and Analogy to the Priests under the Law which Mistake hath been the Foundation and Originall of many Errors For when in the primitive Church the name of Priests came to be attributed to Gospell-Ministers from a fair Complyance as was thought then of the Christians only to the name used both among Jews and Gentiles in process of time corruptions increasing in the Church those names that were used by the Christians by way of Analogy and Accommodation brought in the things themselves primarily intended by these names so by the metaphoricall names of Priests and Altars at last came up the Sacrifice of the Mass without which they thought the names of Priests and Altars were insignificant This Mâ—stake we see run all along thro' the Writers of the Church as soon as the name Priests was apply'd to the Elders of the Church that they derived their Succession from the Priests of Aaroâ—'s Order In short he still contends that the model of Governing the Christian Church was an exact imitation of that of the Synagogues which were no other thing than the particular parish Churches among the Jews and in every one of which there was a a Bishop paralell to him who in the Apocalypse is the Angel of the Church And Dr. Lightfoot is of the same mind The Apostle saith he calleth the Minister Episâ—opus from the common and known title of the CHAZAN or Overseer in the Synagogue And Besides these there was the publick Minister of the Synagogue who pray'd publickly and took care about reading the Law and sometimes preached if there were not some other to discharge this Office This person was called SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church and CHAZAN HAKENESETH the Chazan or Bishop of the Congregation The Aruch gives the reason of the name The Chazan saith he is SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church or the publick Minister and the Targum renders the word ROVEH by the word HOSE one that oversees For it 's incumbent on him to oversee how the Reader reads and whom he may call cut to read in the Law The publick Minister of the Synagogue himself read not the Law publickly but every Sabbath he called out seven of the synagogue on other days fewer whom he judged fit to read He stood by him that read with great care observing that he read nothing either falsly or improperly and calling him back and correcting him if he had failed in any thing and hence he was called CHAZAN that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Bishop or Overseer Certainly the signification of the word Bishop and Angel of the Church had been determined with less noise if recourse had been made to the proper fountains and men had not vainly disputed about the signification of words taken I know not whence The service and worship of the Temple being abolished as being Ceremonial God transplanted the worship and publick adoration of God used in the synagogues which was moral into the Christian Church to wit the publick Ministry publick prayers reading God's Word and preaching c. Hence the names of the Ministers of the Gospel were the very same the Angel of the Church the Bishop which belonged to the Ministers in the synagogues There were also three Deacons or Almoners on whom was the care of the poor c. Among the Jews saith Dr. Burnet he who was the chief of the synagogue was called CHAZAN HAKENSETH the Bishop of the Congregation and SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church And the Christian Church being modelled as near the form of the synagogue as they could be as they retained many of the Rites so the form of the government was continued and the names remained the same And In the synagogues there was first one that was called the Bishop of the Congregation Next the three Orderers and Judges of every thing about the synagogue who were called TSEKENIM and by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
mannerly Complement to Augustine A piece of immodesty proper to D. M. not arriv'd at by the Jesuite Augustine then was only some frenchisi'd Spark that intended not to speak as he thought but I reply with Junius that this their Answer is clean contrary to Augustine ' s mind and intention for he was not so mad as to compare things so hetrogeneous as were the Rites and Customes of the Gentiles and these of the Church if it be said that he spoke of the Church of the Jews where pray is there any mention of Bishops in all the Old Testament and History of the Jewish Church I add that if this had been Augustine's meaning he had too much drepress'd and in too unworthy Terms express'd Christ's Institution to busk a Complement for Hierome But Augustine saith D. M. reasons from the Succession of Bishops This Romish Cavill is a 1000 times baffl'd and by none more sufficiently than by Dr. Stillingfleet who shews that from such Reasonings of the Fathers and their mentioning of Successions of Bishops it can never be proved that Bishops were of a higher Order or had any other Power over Presbyters nor that in all places there was so much as any Difference at all between them nor that they mean'd ought save a Succession of Doctrine and that no less is said of Presbyters Lastly Bishop Jewel advanceth this very passage of Augustine and thereby proves the Identity of Bishop and Priest or Presbyter And he thus Englishes Augustine's words The Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now obtain'd § 7. Let us saith Hierome attend diligently to the words of the Apostle saying that thou should'st Ordain Elders in every City as I appointed thee and what kind of Presbyter ought to be ordain'd he declares in the following Discourse If any saith he be blameless the Husband of one Wife c. and after he Inferrs For a Bishop must be blameless as the Steward of God Therefore both Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same And before that by Sathan's instigation there were Divisions about Religion and it was said in the Churches I am of Paul I of Apollo and I of Cephas the Church was govern'd by a common Council of Presbyters But after that whomsoever any had baptized were by them counted their own not Christs it was Decreed thro' the whole World that one Chosen out of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom all care of the Church should belong and the Seeds of Division be removed But you may think that this is our Mind and not the Mind of the Scriptures that a Bishop and a Presbyter is one and the same thing and that the one is a Name of Age and the other of Office Let them read over the words of the Apostle to the Philippians where as Hierome professedly asserts the Presbyterian Thesis so he clearly proves it by the Presbyterian Arguments And I would fain learn wherein as touching the Scriptural Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he differ'd from Aërius They differ'd as much answers Bellarmine as Heaven and Hell For Hierome still held that a Bishop was greater than a Presbyter as to the point of Ordination and that doubtless by Divine Right Bellarmine is herein follow'd only by some of the more impudent of his Brethren as Bayly the Jesuite and Petavius and last of all appears their perpetual shadow D. M. with whom Hierome is a grand Asserter of the Episcopal Hierarchy and Aërius a grand Heretick But Junius answers to both the Jesuites and their Genuine Issue that Hierome when he said what doth the Bishop except Ordination which a Presbyter does not understood it only of his oun time But Bellarmine saith Junius confounds the time as doth D. M. that he more easily may deceive the Simple We have heard already that many of the greatest Lights of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists have exploded this shamefull and Jesuitical Attempt of making Hierome for the Divine Right of Prelacy or for any Difference between Bishop and Presbyter To which add Dr. Stillingfleet For saith he as to the Matter it self I believe upon the strickest Enquiry Medina ' s Judgement will prove true that Hierome Austine Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were all of Aërius ' s Judgement as to the Identity of both Name and Order of Bishops and Presbyters in the primitive Church c. Of what Church then shall we count D. M. and his Brethren who only scrape together these most dishonest and a thousand times baffl'd depravations and perversions of the Jesuites and being plum'd with the feathers of so unlucky Birds can appear without any more shame and blushing than as if they were the innocent penns of a Dove But Hierome subjoins Bellarmine who is transcrib'd by D. M. acknowledges that the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter as also the Princely Prerogatives of Bishops was introduc'd by the very Apostles when 't was said I am of Paul c. But it 's answer'd by Junius that the former of these can never be prov'd from Hierome and the latter Hierome denies while he saith when these whom any baptiz'd were counted their own c. Where saith Junius Hierome shews that 't was not when this Evil was at Corinth only but when 't was spread thro' the whole Churches And the latter of these continues Junius Paul denies while he reproves this Evil in the Corinthians and yet neither in the first nor in the second Epistle makes ever the least mention of setting up a Bishop over them They who use this Argument saith Dr. Stillingfleet among many other Answers far better than ever such a Cavill deserv'd are greater Strangers to St. Hierome ' s Language then they would seem to be whose Custome it is upon incidental Occasions to accommodat the Phrase and Language of Scripture to them as when he speaks of Chrysostome ' s Fall cecidit Babylon cecidit of the Bishops of Palestine multi utroque claudicant pede All which Instances saith the Doctor are produc'd by Blondel but have the good fortune to be pass'd over without being taken nottice of And now judge whether there was more Ignorance or Impudence in D. M's following Query Whether the Opinion of St. Hierome be not disingenuously represented by the Presbyterians since he never acknowledg'd nor affirm'd any intervall after the Death of the Apostles in which Ecclesiastical Affairs were govern'd communi Presbyterorum consilio Bellarmine objects also as doth his Epe D. M. that Hierome says James was made Bishop of Jerusalem presently after the Death of our Saviour But both are repell'd by Iunius who shews that the common reading of that place of Hierome ' s Catalogue is corrupted And Answers that James was only left while the Apostles