last Period All the hesitancy is about the first and yet upon a deliberate reflexion the matter will be beyond dispute This is made up of three Centuries the first of which must necessarily be resigned to the Apostles and their Delegates who undoubtedly did exercise an Episcopall Authority as we have before demonstrated S. John the last of them who lived to the end of it and wrote his Revelation about the ninety seventh Year describes the Churches of Asia every one with his tutelary Angel to superintend and govern all as well Teachers as People and left them in Trajans time under this imparity As for the third Century we have undoubted instances of a like inequality In the Church of Alexandria Hierom. in Apol ad Ruff. Ep. 79. Pam. Epist 38. ad Caldon c. Demetrius the Bishop excommunicated Origen a Presbyter In the Church of Carthage Cyprian passed the same censure upon Felicissimus His taking up a resolution not to act without the counsel of his Presbyters was but a voluntary and prudent accommodation to some circumstances which were peculiar to him in his Election and no prejudice to his Hierarchicall Power which he abundantly asserts to be vested in him by a Divine Institution In the Church of Antioch Eus H. E. l. 7. c. 22. the deportment of the Bishops towards Paulus Samosatenus in suppressing his Heresie is an evident demonstration of the existence of such Persons at that time In the Church of Rome Eus c. 6. c. 35. Novatianus a Presbyter his procuring three Bishops to consecrate him that he might be in a capacity upon equall terms to enter the lists with Cornelius assures us that they had then a Consecration distinct from the Ordination of Elders Dionysius's confining the Presbyters to particular Congregations Platin. in vita Dionys and setting out the just limits of their Parishes can evince no less then a Superiority over them In the last part of the second Century he that reads the contest betwixt Victor and the Asian Bishops about the celebration of Easter the interposals of Polycrates B. of Ephesus Eus H. l. 5. c. 23 24. and Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in order to the making a composure must do a great deal of violence to his own understanding before he will be able to perswade himself that there was not at that time such an order of Men very well known in the World This is so evident that Blondell himself doth freely acknowledge an Episcopall Power to be lodged in a single Person about the fortieth year of the second Century So that granting that the Apostles and their Suffraganes did retain the Regiment of the Church in their own hands during the first which cannot be denied by any who impartially peruse the records of the New Testament the question which hath given so much Molestation to the Christian World will be reduced to this state Whether the Church for the space of sixteen hundred years and upwards hath been without the Apostolicall or Episcopall Government for the space of Forty onely Should we grant that which can never be proved namely that the Stream of Apostolicall Authority did like the river Guadian in Spain conceal it self and run under ground for this little time this would no more be an argument to induce us to believe that the use of it is to be superseded then it was to the Israelites that the Regall power was to be laid aside because of the interregnums which did frequently put a demurr upon the succession But secondly it doth not appear that there hath been any such interregnum in the Church and Kingdom of Christ Notwithstanding the obscurities of the History of that time yet there are catalogues extant of the chiefest Cities as Jerusalem Antioch Alexandria Rome wherein are named the single Persons as distinct from and superior to Presbyters who were interested in the Power of Inspection during the space which is spoken of and if it was thus in the greater Cities it is not hard to divine how it was in the less The Unity of the Church includes a Uniformity of Government The first who leads the Van in the catalogue is either an Apostle or Evangelist as S. Peter in that of Antioch S. Mark in that of Alexandria who undoubtedly were vested in an Episcopall Jurisdiction Those who conclude it are acknowledged by all to have the same Power why it should be denied to those in the middle no good reason can be produced they being represented as having an equall share in the Succession which cannot be except they were in the fruition of the same Power A succession but not in the same thing is like a Resurrection but not of the same Body which is no resurrection at all Let us suppose amongst the nine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at Athens one of them the first Year to be vested in a Superiority over his Colleagues as an Apostle or an Evangelist was over the Elders and the next the constitution to be metamorphized into a Parity and to continue for forty Years as Blondell conceives the Ecclesiasticall equality did and then after the expiration of that Term the former imparity to be introduced again It would be an incongruity scarcely to be paralleled to represent the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the second Year as a Successor to him of the first he enjoying nothing of his Power or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the forty first to him of the fortieth hē enjoying a Power paramount which the other was never acquainted with This would be as inconvenient as if we should make a list of the Kings of Rome and after Tarquinius Superbus place Junius Brutus who was next to him in power but of a very different nature the Government being changed and the Community now under Consuls It is true there may be catalogues of single Persons succeeding one another in a Priority of Order as well as of Power but this is nothing to our present case Here are lists before us and all in them represented to be upon equall terms as having a fruition of the same Immunities and the first and last are confessed to have a Superiority of Power over their Colleagues from whence a computation may be easily made what we may conclude concerning the rest Those who say though the Apostles stand at the head of the Catalogues yet they are not included in them contradict the sense of primitive Antiquity which accounts all in the lists to be Successours to the Apostles A Successour a Predecessour being relatives which go always together if the Successour be in the roll the Predecessour must necessarily be so It will not be easie to disappoint the prevalency of this argument if the Catalogues may be admitted as Authentick and why they should not I see no just reason The variations in them are not uncapable of a reconciliation and they argue strongly that they are not the fictions of a private Invention Forgeries use
vulgar Contempt by the munificence of Princes do no more make it of a different species from what it was in the Apostolicall age then the royall apparel put upon Mordecai did constitute him a man specifically distinct from him who use to sit in the gate Moses when advanced in Pharaohs Court was the same person with him who was exposed in the Ark of Bulrushes A child when dressed by the nurse is the same with that which was born naked The ornamentall favours of Kings and Queens which are nursing Fathers and Mothers to the Church make no greater an alteration Those who endeavour to demonstrate an Essentiall difference by asserting that Bishops and Presbyters had the same Ordination in the Apostolicall age and by consequence were then of the same Order whereas now it is otherwise will find reason to alter their thoughts and to believe that the Ordination then was as distinct as it is now if they please to take these few steps The names Bishop Presbyter and Deacon in Scripture are ambulatory and not always confined to the same order of men Those who have attempted to evidence that the word Presbyter signifies always a Bishop or the word Bishop a Presbyter have been more curious then really advantagious to their own cause The Characteristicall names of the superior Clergy are Apostles Prophets Evangelists The primary Governours were known by the first their Suffragans and Coadjutors by the two last yet so as by reason of their being invested in a Power whereby they were inabled to do what a primary Apostle might they are likewise frequently stiled Apostles Upon this account we read of the Apostles of the Churches 2 Cor. 8.23 Epaphroditus is stiled an Apostle of the Philippians c. 2. v. 25. Andronicus and Junias are said to be of note among the Apostles Rom. 16. v. 7. Eusebius says L. 1. Ecc. H. c. 12. that besides the twelve there were many others who were called by that name For this reason S. Mark Vales in Eus H. tom 1. p. 21. Luke Philemon Titus and Timothy have this title in the Greek Menology These had a jurisdiction over Presbyters Timothy was vested in a power to convent an Elder and receive an accusation against him but we never read of any such Power in an Elder over an Evangelist or an Apostle This Power was not arbitrary and assumed at pleasure but communicated to them by Commission The Apostles did nothing in a tumultuary way but were agreeable in their practice to that pattern and order which they had received This Commission was given at their Ordination This was the usuall way in the Synagogue whereby any were admitted to a participation of the Government and we read of no other in the Church Therefore when S. Paul writes to Timothy how to govern he put him in mind of the gift which he received at the laying on of hands 1 Tim. 4.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greek Scholiast speaks which plainly intimates that his gift or faculty to superintend did not derive its originall from any Commission but what he received by the imposition of Hands Now if their Power was distinct their power by Commission their commission by Ordination the rules of discourse will oblige us to conclude that their Ordination was distinct the same Ordination cannot produce two different Powers Upon this account we find the Apostles who were at first ordained by Jesus Ghrist to preach the Gospel Mark 3.14 when they came to be invested with the Government and sit upon their thrones were ordained anew Joh. 20. v. 21. Matthias and Barnabas two of the Seventy and by consequence set apart before Eus H. l. 1.12 Luke 10. v. 1. were consecrated again when they were made Apostles Acts 1. v. 22 26. c. 13. v. 3. Stephen Philip Prochorus Nicanor c. if we may give credit to Epiphanius Adver Hoer l. 1. p. 50. par were of the same number and yet when they were made Suffragans to the Apostles they had a new imposition of hands Acts 6. v. 6. There is some reason to believe that Timothy himself was twice Ordained The first time about the seventh Year of Claudius by the Apostles own hands immediately after he had circumcised him For his design being to take him along with him to preach the Gospel no doubt as he circumcised him that he might not offend the Jews so he ordained him that he might not offend God in breaking his Law No man taketh this honour to himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron Of this we have mention 2 Tim. 1.6 Stir up the gift of God which is given thee by the laying on of my hands The second time about the thirteenth Year of Claudius when he was left at Ephesus to be Bishop there When the Apostle writes to him how to behave himself in that Church he puts him in mind of the gift or faculty which he received at his Consecration Neglect not the gift which was given by Prophesie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4.14 These words import an Ordination distinct from the former for that was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. by the laying on of the Apostles hands alone This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a Prophet or Prophets accompanied in the imposition of hands by other Bishops As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysostome Oecumenius and Theophilact expound it and confirm their gloss with this reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Prophets The Hellenisticall stile in which the New Testament was written is no stranger to this signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 raise up Prophets in thy name Ecclesiast c. 36. v. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vulgar Lat. renders successor Mosis in Prophetis 46.1 As S. Paul and Barnabas were at Antioch ordained by Prophets and other Bishops Acts 13. v. 1 2 3. so was Timothy in the Church of Ephesus If the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did onely import a prediction of his aptitude to execute this Sacred Function the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would not have been joined with it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in the 1 Tim. 1. v. 18. Timothy being young and by consequence wanting the circumstance of Age to commend him to this grave and ponderous Imployment The Prophet or Prophets who foretold his fitness for it and the felicity of the Church under his Superintendency that they might farther contribute to her assurance were mingled with the rest of his Ordainers in the imposition of hands All this may give us some competent assurance of the Practice of the universall Church From this practice the deduction of the Divine pleasure concerning the perpetuity of this Government will be very familiar and easie It cannot be imagined that it should have so universall an entertainment in all
Prelates and to sink them into the same Order with Presbyters but at the bottom no kindness is intended Their design being to advance the B. of Rome they make him and not Christ the immediate Fountain of that Authority which the Governours of the Church are vested in and Transubstantiation being the highest mystery of their Religion and Presbyters undoubtedly interested in it they are unwilling to allow any Order in the Church superior to them believing that such a Concession may lessen the dignity of that Mystery Hitherto I have spoken of the Disease both in general and particular which is supposed in the Text. And now I shall pass on to the Remedy namely an Apostolicall or Episcopall Authority and Inspection What S. Paul and S. Barnabas did was not an act of Charity onely but Authority This was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Primitive age which was used in order to the preventing and healing Distempers As our blessed Lord retained the Power in his own hand during his residence upon the Earth so likewise did his Apostles And therefore as he is stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 2.25 so their Office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 1.10 The Inspection of the Churches within a certain precinct was committed to them S. James was settled betimes at Jerusalem for this Sacred purpose S. Paul at his first coming Gal. 1.18 19. found him residing upon his Episcopall Charge at his last both him and his Elders in a most solemn Assembly Acts 21.18 The Brethren came from him to Antioch as their Bishop about Ecclesiasticall Concerns Gal. 2.12 Although others of the Apostles were present at Jerusalem Acts 15.20 yet the Canon of the Council was drawn up in his words Eusebius saies Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 19. p. 265. par that the Chair which was peculiar to him was preserved unto his time This settlement was made immediately after the Passion of our Lord as a pattern for the rest of the Apostles to imitate in their severall Plantations As the Gospel was dispersed through all Nations beginning at Jerusalem Luke 24.27 so likewise the Law whereby the converted Nations were to be governed Isa 2.3 Therefore S. Paul in order to the Reforming some abuses at Corinth tacitely makes an appeal to it as the place from which the Word of the Lord first came 1 Cor. 14.36 There being an impossibility that all things in every place should come to a fulness of growth and be ripened into an exactness of Order in a moment Divine providence settled at first this sensible rule for all who were interested in the Regiment of the Church to operate by and come up unto as the circumstances of every place would permit And therefore in a Conformity to it we read of Titus being left in Crete and Timothy at Ephesus Their not residing always in those places can be no more an argument of their not being Bishops there then it would be that Richard the First was not King of England because our Chronicle represents him sometimes in Cyprus sometimes in Germany sometimes in the Holy Land Agreeable likewise to this pattern are the seven Angels enthroned in the Churches of Asia by the approbation of our blessed Lord as is manifest by his letters to them in which he commends those Vertues which did appear in the discharge of their Function His right hand was the firmament in which those Pleiades were fixed They cannot as some would perswade us signifie seven Churches The Churches are stiled Candlesticks the Angels Stars So long as Stars are of a nature distinct from Candlesticks the Angels must import some thing different from the Churches Neither can they be seven Colleges of Elders for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly denotes one individual This is the constant import of it in all other parts of holy Writ and there is nothing in the Context which may oblige us to depart from the customary signification The plurall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2. v. 24. hath no necessary relation to the Angel of Thyatira but may without any incongruity be referred to those who are mentioned v. 23. I will give to every one of you according to his works that is you who have received the doctrine of Jezebel shall receive punishment according to the merit of your crime and then it follows but I say unto you and to the rest which have not this Doctrine It is a received Rule that we are not to desert the proper import of any word and flie to an improper but where those things which stand in conjunction put a necessity upon us Neither can the seven Angels be seven Pastours of so many particular Congregations For all which did adhere to the Doctrine of Christ in the Lydian Asia are contained under the Seven Churches and it will be very difficult for any to believe that there were no more Congregations within that Compass In Ephesus alone where it is said that the Word of the Lord mightily grew Acts 19.20 there could be no fewer then that number Oratories and places of Convention could be of no great capacity in those times when Christians were hindred from building by continuall storms of Persecution Therefore there is nothing left for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie but one Individuall Person having the care and inspection of divers Congregations The best Records next unto the Scripture inform us that Polycarp one undoubtedly invested in a power of this Latitude was the Angel of the Church of Smyrna From whence we may easily compute what we are to determine concerning the rest all the seven Stars being represented without any disparity in their Magnitude Timothy and Titus with these Seven must not be looked upon as Presidents or Chairmen onely having a Primacy of Order among the Presbyters It is most evident that they had not onely a power to Visit and govern the Laity but the Deacons and Elders themselves 1 Tim. 3.10 5.22.17 19. These they did examine ordain provide for their maintenance had Authority to receive an accusation against them Tit. 1.11 8.10 1 Tim. 5.21 stop the mouths of such who did teach false doctrine reject the Hereticall and are charged in their severall Consistories to prejudice no man nor to be byassed with any partiall regards Rev. 2.2 Rev. 2.20 The Angel of Ephesus is commended for trying those who pretended to be Apostles of Thyatira reproved for suffering such as did teach and seduce the people which can argue no less then a Superiority vested in them over the Pastours and Teachers of those Churches If the power had not been in these Persons alone why is the Charge directed to them commendation given when performed reprehension when neglected without the least mention of any coordinate Society Had they been in the quality of Chairmen onely whose office is to preserve Order in the Convention without any conclusive power in themselves the doing of the things
to be too harmonious and uniform in every punctilio They were collected by a skilfull hand Euseb who had great advantages to possess himself with the true sense of the Monuments of Antiquity His acknowledgement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was not easie to make some of them L. 3. c. 4. is no discredit to their Authority The difficulty in demonstrating some propositions in Euclide is no just exception against their certainty The Infallible Oracles are not without their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 3. c. 3. They were so clear in Irenaeus's time that he asserts he was able to number the very Persons which did lineally descend from the Apostles and in Tertullians that he challengeth the Hereticks to shew the like successions If they had been of a dubious Authority it had not been agreeable to the prudence of those learned Fathers to value the cause which they undertook to maintain so much upon their account as it is plain they did to all who peruse their writings It might be added as no prejudice to their Reputation that they were begun by the Apostles themselves as is evident by Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians P. 57. Pat. jun. In order to the quieting those tumults which did occasion his writing he tells them that the Apostles did understand by our Lord Jesus that there would be a contention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the name or dignity of Episcopacy and therefore having a perfect foresight did constitute Bishops and gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a roll or catalogue of some approved Persons to succeed and execute their Office after their decease This testimony as it assures us that the Catalogues we treat of were begun by the Apostles so likewise that Bishops in Clemens's time who lived within the intervall under debate were such as are properly so stiled to wit Persons vested in a Superiority over Elders We never read of rolls or catalogues of meer Presbyters as lineally deduced from the Apostles considered in that state in which they died L. 3. c. 2. Indeed Irenaeus mentions the successions of Presbyters L. 4. c. 44. but he who will give himself leasure to ponder the Context will easily discern that he means no others then Bishops the promiscuous use of those words being not totally laid aside in his time If it should be granted that he understands such as are now usually known by that Name no prejudice would redound to our assertion The Apostles may be considered in a twofold capacity either as they were before the Resurrection when they were ordained to Preach but not to Rule or after when they were invested with their Episcopall Power If Presbyters be represented as Successours to the Apostles in any ancient Record the Apostles are considered in the first capacity and not in the last which Clemens speaks of Epist ad Mag. This is fully expressed by Ignatius who asserts that the Bishop succeeds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place of Christ who is God the Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place of the Bench of the Apostles namely as they were when Christ was their Bishop upon earth and they as Presbyters subject to his appointments as their proper directory It is an ungrounded presumption that Clemens by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understands nothing but an Elder P. 54 55. because when he mentions the custom of the Apostles which was to set apart 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their first fruits he names onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the product of their Ordination These two words comprehend all who were concerned in the Primitive Government The Apostles and Elders were Bishops the Elders over the Laity the Apostles over the Laity and Elders too The Evangelists and those who did minister to the Elders were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first to the primary Apostles and are in the modern stile called suffragan Bishops Stat. 26 Hen. 8.14 the second to the Presbyters they upon all occasions helping them as the Evangelists did the Apostles If the Canons of the Apostles or Ignatius might be permitted to speak in this case a sudden period would be put to this Controverisie And truely why a liberty of Speech should be denied to the first seeing they say nothing in this particular but what is incorporated into the Canons of Oecumenicall Synods and was the practice of all subsequent Ages or to the Second after so perspicuous and learned a vindication Vindic. Epist S. Igna. as hath been lately made of his Authority I see no reason at all S. Jerom In Epist ad Tit. whom Blondell professeth to follow if throughly considered will be found to have no favourable aspect upon his opinion All that he speaks amounts to no more then this The Apostles and their Delegates during their abode in the world did hold the Government of the Church in their own hands These in every City constituted Elders which were promiscuously called by the name of Presbyters and Bishops to rule in a Subordination to themselves As the primary Apostles and those who were ordained by their Hands to succeed them began to wear off there sprang up a Schism among the People not much unlike unto that which disquieted the Church when S. Paul wrote to the Corinthians every one adhering to him as his Apostle or primary Bishop by whom he had been baptized Unusquisque eos quos baptizaverat suos esse putabat The controversie was not whether one should have the Power over them the practice of the Apostles in ordaining single Persons to succeed them was so evidentiall and fresh in their memories that there could be no hesitancy in that particular but who was to be the Person In order to the healing this Schism toto orbe decretum est it was universally decreed whereas before Presbyters did communi consilio in a subordination to the Apostles govern the Church that now One should be chosen out of their own number and have a Superintendency over the rest as the Apostles and their Delegates use to have This is the sum of what Jerome doth design The Person thus set over had not onely the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but a Primacy of Jurisdiction For before this change in the College of the Presbyters there must necessarily be One who in the absence of the Apostles had jus primae Cathedrae This is essentiall to all regular Conventions no Order can be maintained without it therefore by this new Decree something being conferred which none of the Presbyters did enjoy before it can be nothing but primatus jurisdictionis This Constitution was made long before the fortieth year of the second Century Epist 85. Evagrio S. Jerome calls it an Apostolicall tradition which cannot be true in any proper sense except it began in the age in which the Apostles lived and as an evidence of his mind that he did not speak improperly
he gives an example of the practise of it in the Church of Alexandria from the death of S. Mark which was in the eighth Year of Nero above seventy Years before Blondells aera If Blondels Apology had been permitted to see the light with that conclusion which he himself put to it Durell Appen p 339. we should have needed no other refutation of his Opinion For there he did acknowledge Episcopacy to be an Apostolicall Constitution which he could not with reason have asserted except he had believed that its Epocha was higher and more early then the fortieth Year of the second Century In order to the overthrow of the Universality of Prelacy it is usually alledged that the Gothick Churches were governed without it for seventy Years till Ulphilas's time The Scottish by the Culdei who were Presbyters onely till Palladius that the transmarine Churches which are reformed according to the primitive Standard are now without it and lastly that the Hierarchy amongst us is not the same with primitive Episcopacy For the first the best Authority we have is Philostorgius Ex lib. 2. parag 5. p. 470. Vales whose words when summed up will amount to no more then this That the Goths made an inrode upon some places in Europe and Asia where Christianity was planted and took many captives amongst which were some o the Clergy These being mingled in their converse with that barbarous People were instrumentall to convert them to the Faith of Christ and governed them till Ulphila's time their first Bishop In all this there is nothing really prejudiciall to our Position It doth not appear that these Presbyters did all this while any thing which was peculiar to a Bishop When any of them died new ones might be ordained by some neighbour Prelate However the matter went of which we have but a very defective account by reason of the paucity of Records the deportment of a few Captives in a case of necessity can be of no such Authority as to prejudice the Universality of Ecclesiasticall practice It would be but a weak argument to prove that the Laws of Moses were not universally owned by the Jews because during their seventy years Captivity they were forced to forbear the practice of some of them as not reconcileable with the circumstances of Exile As for the Scottish Church those which report the matter speak nothing which may be a disservice to our Assertion The sum is that many of the Britains who embraced Christianity fearing the cruelty of Dioclesian fled into Scotland where by their solitary and pious life they did commend themselves in such a degree to the opinion of that Nation that they were usually called Culdci that is Cultores Dei Worshippers of God Primor Brit. Ecc. p. 638. p. 640. These chose a Person out of their own number to govern them in their Divine Concernments Here is plainly a Bishop elected onely by his Clergy who notwithstanding any thing in the Record might receive his Consecration by some duly qualified in our Nation where Hierarchy was undoubtedly settled before this period If any formality was wanting in him the defect is not to be charged upon their wills but necessity as appears by the ready entertainment Palladius found amongst them who wanted no formality which the Bishop of Rome could conferr upon him As for the transmarine Churches which are of the Reformation it is very well known that all of them are not without Episcopacy as in Denmark Norwey Sueden Germany Those which are alledge necessity as the reason of their first Constitution The Reformation being begun amongst them not by Bishops but the Laity and inferior Clergy onely there was good cause to believe if they had set up Bishop against Bishop in the same City the result would have been nothing but confusion and sanguinary contests which have no propitious aspect upon the design of the Gospel The duty of avoiding these mischiefs being grounded upon a natural precept the form of Government upon a positive they did presume it was not the will of the Lawgiver that the positive Injunction should oblige them in those circumstances but rather yield and give place to the superior Command This necessity which was the ground of their constitution they have pathetically desired the removal of and that their condition might become reconcileable with the introduction of an Imparity When one of the Prelates of our Church at the Synod of Dort had represented Episcopacy as a fit expedient for the suppression of Schism and Heresie the answer of the President in the name of the whole Assembly is very well known Dur. 118. Domine non sumus adeò foelices Lastly where the first reason hath failed and the Bishop of the place been converted to the reformed Religion there they have put their desires into execution and expressed a readiness to submit to his Regiment Dur. p 120. as is manifest by the deportment of the Protestants in the Province of Campagne towards the Bishop of Troyes when he renounced the Church of Rome and professed an adherence to the reformed Religion Those who affirm the present Hierarchy not to be the same with primitive Episcopacy must make the difference either rationall modall or essentiall A difference of reason being the contrivance of imagination is not materiall in the present Debate A modall considering the various condition of Times the Church in the Apostolicall age being under affliction now in prosperity then under Heathen Princes now under Christian then seperated from the civil Community now incorporated into it may be admitted without any prejudice to our Assertion Some variation in the exercise of Jurisdiction the quality of Instruments doth not alter the nature of Government As the civil Regiment is not changed when a Prince makes an Ecclesiasticall Person his Chancellour so neither is the Ecclesiasticall when a Bishop constitutes a Civil In the age in which the Church began to have her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were persons of the same Moment designed to expedite matters which might be too great an avocation from religious Worship to which the Clergy are principally devoted she did not dream of any diversity from the Primitive Government but continued with the same degree of confidence to stile her Bishops the Apostles successours These civil Helps did make them no more different from what they were before then a staff in the hand of a man makes him distinct from himself when he hath none in it As for an essentiall difference those who are most inquisitive will never be able to discover any Primitive Episcopacy was nothing but theregiment of Churches within a certain precinct committed to one single Person with a sufficient Authority as well over the Clergy as Laity Jurisdiction in an Apostle was authoritative In the Elders concomitant and subordinate Prelacy now in the substance of it is of the same importance Those accessions with which it is beautified and raised above the reach of
Places where there was no Oecumenicall Council to command it no secular Power to enforce it no want of Pride and Ambition to controul it had it not been commended to their reception and made currant by a Divine Signature No arbitrary contrivance checked with difficulties and destitute of all externall advantages to promote the Propagation of it even found so sudden uniform and generall an Establishment Had it been a Usurpation upon the rights and immunities of Presbyters it being it matter not latent but apert and manifest no doubt some would have been so just to themselves as to have stood up in their own Defence and so zealous as to have encountered it with a direct opposition yet we read nothing of this nature till three hundred Years after in Aerius's time and then all the recompence which he received was the infamy of Heresie Heresie being an errour in the Foundation and the foundation being inclusive of that which relates to Practice and Government as well as Doctrine in Religious government as well as Civil there is something which is Fundamental he advancing an opinion diametrically opposite to what was then reputed the basis of Ecclesiasticall Policy did take a compendious course to expose himself to this imputation His separation from the Communion of the Church was not the reason of this charge that being if we may be allowed to speak properly Schism and not Heresie Nor his Arianism S. Austin and Epiphanius assign him in their Catalogues a place distinct from that which is appropriated to Arius And it will be difficult to find a more authentick Testimony for the identity of their Heresie than those two have given for the diversity Had the Episcopall Constitution been in any respect a defection from the institution of the Apostles how comes it to pass that they themselves should give countenance to it by the performance of many acts peculiar to a Prelate as hath been already declared If their practice was not designed for imitation how came the best of Men in the second and third Century not to understand so much but fall so roundly to a Conformity and without the least hesitancy stile their Bishops the Apostles Successours as most evidently appears by Irenaeus and Tertullian Adv. Har. l. 3. c. 3. de praes c. 32. Though a desire to prove a Succession in Apostolicall doctrine gave occasion for what they assert in this particular yet upon this occasion they plainly own a Succession in Power and Authority Irenaeus proves that the Apostles would not conceal any of the Mysteries of Christian Religion from them because they left them to be their Successours suum ipsorum locum magisterii tradentes delivering to them the same Power Authority they themselves had It will hardly gain belief in the thoughts of those who are acquainted with the consequences of Reason that they who made it their election to endure the greatest torments rather then to violate the least of the Precepts of Christ should so soon as He and his Apostles had left the World erect a government contrary to his Institution that those who were willing to die for the Mystery of Godliness should make it their choice to live under a branch of the Mystery of Iniquity I know the Israelites in a short time in the absence of Moses and after the death of Joshua made a notorious revolt yet this is no argument that these pious and holy Men did the same after the death of the Apostles What the Israelites did was known to be a defection because it was opposite to the practice of Moses and Joshua and encountred with opposition from the Best of men then living But this which some think fit to stile a defection in the Primitive Christians is exactly conformable to Apostolicall practice and was submitted to by those heroick Spirits who by Martyrdom gave the World an undoubted assurance of their Sincerity and Goodness If the practice of the universall Church must be totally set aside as a matter of no consideration in order to the conducting of us into an understanding of the Mind of God one pillar of our Belief will be very much shaken I mean the Authority of some particular Books of Holy Writ for the knowledge of which we are without controversie in no mean degree indebted to it No small diminution will be made in our assurance that Clemens's Epistle to the Corinthians is no part of the Canon and that S Paul's is that Ecclesiasticus is Apocryphall and Ecclesiastes not If custom be of no signification it is strange that S. Paul should appeal to it as no unfit Arbitrator to put a period to those contentions which did molest the Church 1 Cor. 11.16 Indeed it is said that of whatsoever consequence it may be in other cases yet in this before us it cannot be safe to deduce the Divine Will from it because those who were ingaged in it did not look upon themselves as obliged thereunto by any Divine Precept but on the contrary by enlarging the Church's power as the Churches did enlarge by conforming Ecclesiasticall Government to the Civil by managing Spirituall concerns according to the Canons of Synods by acknowledging a Subordination to the civil Power they did manifest that they were acted not by the influence of a Supernall command but by some occasionall and prudentiall considerations To all which I reply in order 1. The Regiment we contend for was universall acknowledged to have its basis in a Divine right as most evidently appears by the twenty ninth Canon of the fourth generall Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to depress a Bishop down to the degree of a Presbyter is Sacriledge It will be very difficult to explain how the Synod could pronounce this to be sacrilegious except there was a generall belief that the difference betwixt a Bishop and Presbyter was made by a Sacred Institution Upon this account the Author of the Book of Questions in S. Quae. vet Nov. Test Q. 97. tom 4. p. 775. Frob. Austin affirms Nemo ignorat c. no man is so ignorant but he knows that our Saviour appointed Bishops over Churches for before his Ascension into Heaven he putting his hands upon the Apostles ordained them to be Bishops S. Epist 27. Cyprians words are of the same importance Lege divina fundatum c. it is founded upon a divine Law that every act of the Church should be governed by Bishops Apostolos id est Epist 65. Episcopos Praepositos Dominus elegit Our Lord hath chosen Apostles that is Bishops and Church-governours This is the reason why Prelates in after-ages are sometimes stiled Apostles as Epiphanius in the epistle of Acacius and Paulus and Athanasius in the Coptick Calendar Tom. 1. Petav. Seld. de Synâ—d l. 3. c. 15. This name was used with a design to preserve the memory of the Primitive Institution 2. The enlarging Church-power as the Church did encrease is no argument against the