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
contrary to the holy Canons And thus he acted suitably to his purpose seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing more than of Domination and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City Decreed also That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome Let us honour say they the Memory of St. Peter that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose but if he approve of what 's already done and think not fit to call it into Question then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable Thus these Fathers many whereof otherwise were excellent Men the first I think that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope 't was not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council Hence it 's to be noted that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors unto a few whom they named Bishops a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers but also in subjecting of the Presbyters yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the City but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities and so on till at length not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder all centred in Rome Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries Moreover Optatus asserts that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop But to proceed these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages so speaks the Council of Antioch He say these Fathers i. e. Paulus Samosatenus suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies Dr. Maurice answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch and near to one another and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks yea were not at all Christians could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie That saith he which next occurrs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops settled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also Ordain'd Among the Jews wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there settled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the Port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth mett there Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes and then proceeds saying Therefore it 's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it 's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett They were pretty throng in Asrick for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present and one hundred and twenty absent and sixty Sees were then Vacant which make in all four hundred sixty and six there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops Thus he And now not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter it 's most certain that at least for upwards of the three first Centuries you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but it had also its proper Bishop I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet no not by Dr. Maurice or any other been or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy good proofs of this Truth may be adduced For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop as Justine Martyr gives to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as we have seen already was purely a Parish Pastor And the 39 Canon saith Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop for to him the Lord's People is committed and for their Souls he must give an Account Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd a Bishop was there and was the Dispenser thereof The High-Priest saith he that is the Bishop preaches to all Men the true Gospel every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries desires to be led to the High-Priest and he brings him to the High-Priest who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders praises the bountifull prinple by which all are
of Mentz who only informs us that the Heresie of Aërius consisted in despising Sacrifices for the Dead From all which to me it 's more than probable that there 's no ground to believe that ever Aërius Arrianiz'd Section VII No Diocesan Bishops in several Ancient Churches THo' their Argument brought from Antiquity be already satisfi'd we shall yet give some Instances of Churches which for several Centuries were really without Diocesan Bishops St. Patrick the Irish Apostle is commonly said to have ordain'd several hundreds of Bishops in Ireland who I 'm sure could not be Diocesans Dr. Maurice being displeas'd with this Instance rejects Nennius the Author from whom we have the account of St. Patrick's ordaining 365 Bishops as fabulous But it 's not in their accounts of the numbers of Bishops but of the Deeds and Miracles wrought by Bishops and others of their Saints that the fabulousness of the Writers of these times is commonly to be observ'd He next quarrels with the common reading of that Author alledging that He speaks only of the Bishops in France and Britain in communion with St. Patrick not of his Irish Bishops But I think we may in such critical Learning give Bishop Vsher the Preference who neither judg'd this Book fabulous nor its common reading to be suspected And this account of the great number of Ancient Irish Bishops is strongly confirm'd by what Clarkson cites out of Bernard and Baron shewing that there were well nigh as many Bishops as Churches This the Doctor passes over in silence which was scarce fair enough dealling Neither can the Doctor 's ordinary salvo viz. that the Practice was not generally approv'd nor of primitive Constitution here serve them for whatsoever differ'd from the Roman Model was presently made a Novelty And tho' Bernard and Lanfranc dislike the Practice of having so many Bishops yet they adventure not to instance any time wherein the Irish had been rul'd by a few Diocesans And lastly the Authors most regardable herein inform us that this Practice of having so many Bishops had place even in St. Patrick's time and meer infancy of the Irish Church § 2. Most visible footsteps of this also appear in the African Church during the time of Cyprian for in that Council of Carthage where he presided there was no smal number of Bishops conveen'd tho' doubtless there were many moe Bishops in Africk who could not be all Diocesans seeing few then were Christians in Africk save a small part of the Roman Colonies only Yea the hamlets and villages these Bishops had for their Jurisdictions are so obscure that the learn'd Pamelius is at a stand where to place them And long after in the time of the Vandalick Persecution as Victor Vticensis relates there were in the Zeugitan or proconsular Province alone 164 Bishops others reckon moe Now this was but a small part of what the Romans possess'd in Africk and few beside the Roman Colonies were at that time Christian for the Moors or old Africans who beside what they had in the Cities possess'd almost the whole Country are by the same Victor without exception call'd Gentiles and many of the Romans themselves had not yet imbrac'd Christianity Now subduce from that small number of the Zeugitan Province who were Christians the many Arrians and other Hereticks and Schismaticks whom these Bishops did not reckon as a part of their Flocks and surely there shall scare be found so many as to make up above 164 Parishes Dr. Maurice tells us that all the African Bishops in Cyprian's time could not have suppli'd the Dioceses of one Province in the V or VI Century Which if true is a strong Confirmation of what we plead for viz. that they then were nothing less than Diocesans seeing as is now evident there were even in the fifth Century but a very small number of Christians in Africk compar'd with the rest of the Inhabitans And in Cyprian's time it may well be judg'd that there were some hundreds of Bishops in the Roman Africk But in such Cases not the extent of Bounds but number of Souls is to be considered Wherefore he should be a wild Reasoner that should conclude from Africa's having a dozen or such a number of Bishops or Pastors for surely there were but few at the entry of Christianity that there needed be no more afterward and so make that number the Standard to discern how many Bishops by primitive Right were to be plac'd in all Africa And this is a Kin to what he says elsewhere that tho' there were Bishops in small Towns this was not the primitive State of the Church it may be indeed nor yet at the first entry of the Gospel were there Bishops in most part of the great Towns but was this for fear of Multiplication of Dioceses no surely but these few were all could be then gotten The substance of his Answer here is that Africa was most large fertile popolous The first of which is readily granted but the second not so easily much of these Regions being more fertile of sand and Serpents than of Corn and Wine and this in part discredits the third seeing so much as was barren is not to be suppos'd Popolous wherefore it 's surprising to find him making the Old Roman Africk more Popolous than France is now He supposes that Africk had but 500 Bishops and yet might have 40000 villages But I answer that if the villages were considerable and had Christian Inhabitants for otherways this is nothing to this purpose then had Africk 40000 Bishops for H. Thorndick acknowledges that Bishops in Africk were so plentifull that every good village must needs be the Seat of an Episcopal Church Which words of H. Thorndick are cited by Clarkson but dissembl'd by the Doctor In the mean while I can find nothing which can shake what I have said above or overturn as for example what I have noted from Victor's words and oblige me to lessen my substraction Add to what is said the words of Dr. Burnet In St. Augustin's time saith he it appears from the journals of a Conference he had with the Donatists that there were about five hundred Bishopricks in a small tract of ground But we need not cross Seas in pursuit of ancient Churches free of Diocesans seeing our Country Scotland affords us so luculent a proof of our Assertion The words of Prosper Aquitanicus in his Chronicle annex'd to that of Eusebius and Hierome are most clear and cogent Palladius saith he is ordain'd by Pope Coelestine for the Scots that had already believ'd in Christ and is sent to them to be their first Bishop Never was a passage of any Historian more universally believ'd than this of Prosper which Beda◠and a MS. Chronicle of Scotland in the Library of Glasgow yea the whole stream of Historians repeat and approve but none more amply and plainly than Cardinal Baron whose words are
All Men agree that this Nation viz. Scotland had Palladius their first Bishop from Pope Coelestine And again thus you are instructed how to refuse these who alledge that Sedulius the Christian Poet whom Pope Gelasius so much extolls had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots for seeing even Sedulius himself lav'd in the time of Theodosius the Emperor how could he have had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots seeing there was no Arch-bishop yet ordain'd in Scotland and Palladius is without debate affirm'd to have been the first Bishop of that Nation This is yet more plainly express'd by the most learn'd Antiquaries of our Country all of them agree in this that before Palladius the Church was rul'd and guided without any Diocesan Bishops For as Fordun hath it before the coming of Palladius the Scots following the Custom of the primitive Church had Teachers of the Faith and Dispensers of the Sacraments who were only Presbyters or Monks And Iohannes Major saith the Scots were instructed in the Faith by Priests and Monks without Bishops And Hector Boethius Palladius was the first of all who exercis'd any Hierarchical Power among the Scots being ordain'd their Bishop by the Pope whereas before their Priests were by the suffrages of the People chosen out of the Monks and Culdees Add hereto the known Testimony of Buchanan and of Sir Thomas Craig To pass over saith he that most silly ' Fable of the three Archflamins and the twenty eight Flamins it 's plain that there was no Bishop in Britain before Palladius who is by the English themselves call'd the Bishop of the Scots or if either the Brittons or English have any let them name them and at what time they flourish'd § 3. Yea so clear is this Truth that the most learn'd of our Adversaries have found no better way to elude when they cannot clide it than as Torniellus in another case said of Bellarmine to endeavour the penetrating of a most firm wall and cast the History about fourty of our ancient Scotish Kings as a forg'd legend Among these is Loyd Bishop of St. Asaph but both he and Dr. Stillingfleet are nervously refuted by the learn'd Sir George Mâ—kenzie Advocat and that their main purpose and undertaking was utterly desperat he makes soon appear And tho' saith he this Author could prove that we were not settl'd here before the year 503 yet that could not answer the Argument viz. that is brought against Episcopacy from the Scotish primitive Church-government for the Culdees might have been settl'd before that time And thus in a few syllables he demonstrats that the Bishop as to his ultimat design had only his labour for his cost But Sir George being too sagacious not to foresee that from the mutual strugglings between himself and the Bishop any man might easily conclude that Presbytry was the primitive Government of the Church of Scotland and having been one of the prime Instruments to put in execution the prelatical Fury judg'd himself concern'd in credit to say somewhat in favours of Episcopacy and attempt the stoping of such an Inference Wherefore to this purpose in a Letter to the Earl of Perth prefix'd to the defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland He makes several assayes The first whereof is That this is one of the meanest Arguments that ever were us'd by a Presbytâ—rian And that it is a weak Argument saith he appears from this that I have met with very few Laicks in all our Countrey who had heard of it nor with one even of these few who had valu'd it But be it so that the Argument seem mean we gain notwithstanding a most sufficient Argumentum ad hominem seeing our ablest Adversaries value it so much yea Sir George himself clearly acknowledges this while he saith and what can the Presbyterians think of their other Arguments which they value much since this which they valu'd so little is thought of such force by a learn'd Bishop as to deserve a whole book the cutting off of 44 Kings and the offending a Nation of Friends But it 's nothing tho' the Laicks had neither valu'd nor heard it seeing as himself grants Blondel with whom join the rest of the Presbyterian Writers urg'd it Hence appears that this Argument is by both Parties judg'd to be of great force and consequence for the solution whereof the Advocat brings nothing save what is altogether unworthy of any ingenous man As for example since saith he it cannot be deni'd but that these who ordain'd our Presbyters were Bishops it necessarly follows that Episcopacy was settl'd in the Christian Church before we had Presbyters or Culdees Wherein as to the solution of our Argument which was the scope of his Letter he only begs the Question and gives us what is impertinent thereto and contradicts moreover these our Historians whose credit he so excellently vindicats seeing as we heard they plainly tell us that our ancient Anti-diocesan practice was the very custom of the primitive Church And when our Historians say that the Abbots of Icolm-kill had Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of the Province that is to be understood as Beda observes more inusitato after an unusual manner And yet he compares this practice of the Abbot to that of a King who makes one a Bishop and to the practice of a Mother who makes her Son a Church-man now if it be any strange or surprising thing for a King by his Congé d'eslire to make one a Bishop or for a Mother to educate her Son in order to be a Church-man and procure some place for him let any man judge And later Historians saith the Advocat meeting with these ambigous words in our Annals Designatus Electus Ordinatus were by a mistake induc'd to appropriat these words to the formal Ceremony of Ordination and Imposition of hands As if any man in his wit could take these words to mean any other thing than Ordination providing they be as they are in our Annals spoken of one Church-man in relation to another Moreover he knew sufficiently that the best Records of our Country expresly say that our Church was rul'd by Presbyters without Bishops and so leave not the least room for tergiversation Bede is one of these Authors who creat them so much vexation for speaking of Icolm-kill the Isle saith he still uses to have for its Rector an Abbot who is a Presbyter to whose Jurisdiction the whole Province and even the Bishops themselves after an unusual manner ought to be subject according to the example of their first Teacher who was no Bishop but a Presbyter Hence it 's clear that even in Bede's time Bishops were but of smal note here and their power much less than in other Churches They are therefore much pain'd with Bede's words and chiefly St. Asaph who amongst other odd things he excogitats tells us that the Superiority this Presbyter had
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
than the rest assert that it is founded on the Example and Institution of Christ or his Apostles § 3. This Discourse therefore shall weigh the Advantages alledged to flow from Episcopacy that it may appear if it have such Effects as they Promise As also inquire if the Hurt and Dammage does not preponderat all the Good they can pretend to be linked to their Hierarchy Neither shall we neglect to examine if what the most Learned of that Perswasion bring from Ecclesiastick Antiquity be subservient to their Cause Section II. The Aphorism No Bishop No King discuss'd A Chief Argument whereby they would prove the necessity of Prelacy they bring from the great Support which they say it affords to Monarchy Hence with them No Bishop No King is an axiomatick Aphorism which cannot be readily granted seeing to name no more the charges the Hierarchy stood the King and Kingdom made a dear Bargain Much was spent in their stated Revenues but more by their clandestine Exactions and other sinistrous means of draining the Country and places of their pretended Jurisdictions throw which there are Incorporations that even at this day groan under the Debts they then contracted And yet more by sustaining Standing-forces to be Janizaries to the Prelates and their Complices and persecute the sincerer part of Protestants for else there was then no use of such numbers Yet their Maxime may be thus far granted that Prelacy may much contribute to the introduction of a Despotick and Arbitrary Government And indeed the great Power they usurped and manifold Influences they had over both Cities and Country either to wheedle or menace them to elect such Members of Parliament as pleased them and to Cajole or awe these Parliament-men to speak in their own Dialect And the being of a good number of them prime Lords of the Articles whereby they had either the mediat or immediat Flection of the rest made them well nigh able to effect no less Which kind of Government no Wise and Paternal Prince will desire § 2. Moreover that Princes have no great reason to be fond of them is apparent from their great unfitness to manage Politick and State-Affairs There are two Ways whereby one may be fitted for being a Statesman either when Natural induements are extraordinary which I doubt if many of our Prelats could affirm of themselves Or else that of Education and continued Industry whereby to be fitted for State-imployments but so far were they from any thing of this that during their greener years they had quite other Studies and Imployments being designed for the Ministry and so were obliged to prosecute hard the Study of Divinity which I am sure will give any Man his handsfull of Work who makes earnest of it From this they are taken to feed some Flock which at least will give them no less exercise Now how these Men can be fit for managing State-affairs or how they can be well kept from falling into Solecisms therein whose skill is so small is not very discernable But though they were never so well fore-armed for such high State-imployments how find they leisure to exercise them Is not the Ruling and Governing so many Ministers and Churches which they alledge themselves to be entrusted with a Work heavy enough to exercise if not to bruise any one Man Or where have they found Warrant to relinquish the Ministry and turn themselves to Offices of State when offered or to undertake both together Do they not believe that either of them is heavy enough Know they not that not only the Apostle but also the ancient Canons and to name no others these which though not truly are called the Canons of the Apostles most clearly condemn this their Practice Let neither say they a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken upon him any secular Business otherways let him be cast out off his Office Hence we may learn if it be out of Conscience that these Men plead for Antiquity when they palpable contemn and trample what themselves count the most venerable Precepts thereof Moreover it 's observable how they so far as their Interest led them still studied the ruine of those to whom they owed their Being as Bishops Thus the Roman Prelats studied the Ruine of both the Eastern and Western Emperours Thus the Bishops of Scotland brought no small Vexation to both King and Nobility in the Reign of Alexander the III. And so Becket of Canterâ—ury and his Faction handled Henry the II of England But worse did their Successours treat Richard the II whom in his Absence they deprived of his Kingdom It 's vain to repone that these were Papists seeing the ambition of Prelats is well enough known of whatever Name they be Yea such also have been the Practices of Prelats who acknowledged no Pope as divers of the Greek Patriarks who helped not a little to Dethrone their Emperour And the English Bishops as Sir Francis Knols complains in a Letter to Secretary Cicil encroached not a little upon the Priviledges of the Crown kept Courts in their own Name and still give out that the Complex of their Office i. e. the civil part of it as well as the other without any Distinction was not from the King but from Jesus Christ. Which Encroachments are really Imperium in Imperio On which account this their usurped Power as being dangerous and of a Romish Original was abolished in the first Parliament of Edward the VI. The Substance of what Dr. Sanderson either insinuats or more clearly expresseth in Answer hereto is that this was a Corruption in Edward 's Reformation And that some other Courts in England as well as these of the Bishops are not kept in the King's Name But sure it 's not very credible that this was a Corruption seeing nothing else since Edward's Days hath been done during the succeeding Reigns for that Church's further Reformation but 't is an odd Paradox if we consider the Author for it was Mary who Abolished this Act of Edward and restored their Power when she brought back the rest of Popery And though other Courts as he says be not kept in the King's Name yet reason teacheth and former experience proves how dangerous it was to give Ecclesiasticks ought that looks like an Absolute power and worldly Grandure whereby like the Pope they may by his Artifices arrive at length to a real Independency And indeed B. Laud made large steps towards it who as Roger Coke relates copt with the King himself and maugre both his Will and Authority must visit Colledges not as his Commissioner but by his own Metropolitan right and plumed thus saith the Author in his own Feathers all black and white without one borrowed from Caesar whereby the more he assumes to himself the less he leaves to the King he now soars higher And notable here is Dr. Sanderson's disingenuity who always gives out that the Marian Act which he still compares with yea prefers to that of Edward was
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
Presbyters elected and ordain'd their Bishop There is nothing saith D. M. said by Boethius but that the Bishops were elected from among both the Priests and Monks And true it is there is no more said in the words D. M. cites but 't is as true that elsewhere Boethius expresly says that the Pastors Priests or Culdees themselves by common suffrage elected this Pontificem or Prefect Add hereto that if Boethius have said ought inadvertantly or obscurely he is to be correct'd or explain'd by the harmonious and most express Testimonies of Fordun Major Buchanan Craig and other such most learn'd of our Antiquaries all of whom are beyond scruple most positive for what we affirm § 11. Next he assaults Prosper's Testimony alledging that according to Baron Palladius was not sent to the Scots in Britain Baronius saith D. M. never thought that Palladius was sent by Pope Coelestine to the Scoto-Britanni but rather to the Irish. And whatever the Testimony of Prosper be Spondanus and Baronius leave the Vindicator for they understood Prosper ' s words of Palladius his mission to Ireland and not to that part of Britain which is now call'd Scotland To prove this his Assertion he adduces but which was his wisdom untranslated these words of Baron that he viz. Palladius was brought also into the Isle of Ireland but was soon taken away by Death is related by Probus who wrote the Deeds of St. Patrick Egregiously reason'd Probus saith that Palladius went once into Ireland therefore Baron thought the words of Prosper not at all to be understood of his coming into Scotland Surely this Author may be allow'd a chief place in their next Book of Sports for the Sabbath Yea these words that he was brought also c. seem clearly to hold forth that he was sent to another place beside out of which he came into Ireland and what place this was the immediatly preceeding words evince the same year and in the time of the same Consuls St. Prosper saith that Palladius was sent to the Scots being ordain'd the first Bishop That he continues Cardinal Baron was brought also into the Isle of Ireland c. Where 't is most evident that Baron distinguishes the Scots to whom Prosper saith Palladius was sent from the Inhabitants of Ireland But to cut off all further debate of this matter the Cardinal clearly demonstrats what we plead for while he expresly says that they highly honour Palladius his Relicts which are buri'd in the Mernes a Province of Scotland And the Cardinal continuing his Discourse of the same Scots whose first Bishop in his Judgement Prosper makes Palladius to have been saith that their late Queen viz. Mary was the Glory of the Catholick Faith and a Martyr but I insist not on a matter so evident the Advocat hath learn'dly made it out and prevented all such attempts of D. M. and the like Enemies of our Countrey § 12. He having thus abus'd Baron prepares next for the depravation of Prosper himself telling us that all that can be inferr'd is that Palladius was the first Bishop of the Roman mission But Prosper's words are clear and without any such limitation Palladius saith he is ordain'd by Pope Coelestine for the Scots that had already believed in Christ and is sent to them to be their first Bishop Behold our very Assertion and why we should yeeld it and in lieu thereof imbrace its contrary I am yet to learn He adds that as soon as the Pope aspired to his unlimited and universal Supremacy there were several Bishops sent to other Churches already constituted not to introduce Episcopacy which was the Government of the universal Church but rather a subjection to and uniformity with the Roman See But tho' all this were as true as some of it is false it 's nothing to the purpose except he find good Authors wherein a Bishop sent to a People who not only were Christians but also govern'd by Bishops before he came is called without restriction their first Bishop And Boethius continues D. M. understood the History of Palladius in this sense Which tho' 't were yeelded stands him in little stead seeing all the Historians Antiquaries of our Countrey and as we have heard from Card. Baron with whom joins our learn'd Advocat all men every-where else understand Prosper in the sense we plead for believing that there was no Bishop in Scotland before Palladius But 't will not satisfie D. M. to wrest Prosper's words except he also at once overthrow his whole Chronicle telling us that it is not thought by the learned to be the genuine Work of Prosper All he brings for this is a conjecture of Petrus Pithoeus fancying that the Chronicle ascrib'd to Prosper appended to that of Eusebius Hierome is of a different stile from that of a confus'd fragment which he took for a part of the true Prosper's Chronicle wherein there is nothing concerning Palladius But why the meer conjecture of one man should be enough to discredit that Chronicle so universally ascrib'd to Prosper I leave to the Judgment of the learned Vossius indeed mentions this fragment but if it be preferable to the vulgar Copy determines not neither for ought I know did ever any save D. M. embrace this faint Conjecture of Pithoeus and indeed there must be brought incomparably better Arguments before that confus'd fragment either be preferr'd to or vye with the universally receiv'd Copy immemorially under Prosper's name affixed to Hierome's Chronicle Moreover seeing this Schred is most disordered and the words now under debate most universally believ'd to have been written by Prosper 't is highly probable on supposition that this fragment is a part of the true consular Chronicle that it once contain'd that passage tho' throw mutilation and either negligent or malicious transcribing it hath now lost it however the matter be we are at no loss for never was there a sentence more unanimouâ—ly ascrib'd to any Author than this concerning Palladius is to Prosper and is by all both ancient and modern acknowledg'd so that all their endeavours to prove this passage supposititious and that it belongs not to Prosper or some else of equall Antiquity and Authority are the last efforts of meer desperation And indeed had they not in defiance of the whole Christian World and Truth it self resolv'd per fas aut nefas to maintain that there was never a Church without Diocesan Bishops before the time of Calvine and Beza they had never adventur'd their skulls on what is so hard firmly bottom'd and so universally believed Have we not already heard fully how the most knowing and zealous for Prelacy while they sustain'd the truth of our Countrey Histories and yet labour'd to disprove what we now plead for gave only in favours of their latter Assertion triffles so empty and prevarications so apparent that 't is most presumable they believ'd nothing of what they said how the
a particular reference to the Flock or People and seeing finally so many things spoken by Ignatius of these Bishops can agree only to Congregational Pastors I conclude that by these Ignatian Bishops not Diocesan Prelats but Pastors of particular Flocks not only may but of necessity must be understood And it 's further observable that Preaching Visiting of particular Persons and the rest of the Pastoral Work is either injoin'd unto or clearly intimated to belong to the Bishop only but nothing to the Presbyters save sitting in Council with him Now if our Opposites insist on their contrary Argument from the largeness of the Cities and from this that Ignatius still speaks but of one Bishop therein and hence conclude that he must be Diocesan the result of all must be a sharper Conflict between Ignatius and himself and so a fuller proof of the spuriousness of these Epistles it being evident from what is adduc'd that this Bishop was only a Pastor of a single Congregation yea so evident that it hath puzl'd the learn'dest of our Opposites § 4. Of this mind is Joseph Mede For speaking of these Ignatian Epistles It should seem saith he that in these first times before Dioceses were divided into those lesser and subordinate Churches we now call Parishes and Presbyters assigned to them they had not only one Altar in one Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the Company or Corporation of the Faithfull united under one Bishop or Pastor and that was in the City and Place where the Bishop had his See and Residence like as the Jews had but one Altar and one Temple for the whole Nation united under one High-Priest And yet as the Jews had their Synagogues so perhaps might they have more Oratories than one tho' their Altar were but one there namely where the Bishop was On Sunday saith Justin Martyr all that live in Towns or in the Country meet together in one Place namely as he there tells us to celebrate and participate the Holy Eucharist Why was this but because they had not many places to celebrate in And unless this were so whence came it else that a schismatical Bishop was said to set up another Altar and that a Bishop and an Altar are made Correlatives See St. Cyprian Ep. 40. 72. 73. Et de unitate Ecclesiae And thus perhaps is Ignatius also to be understood in that forequoted Passage of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Where 't is clear that Mr. Mede well perceived the thing we now plead for in Ignatius viz. that this Bishop was only the Pastor of a single Flock Indeed fear to offend his Friends or something else made him say so little as he could and something that he ought not to have said while he would parallel this Altar with that of the Jews yet he 's express enough that all subject to the Bishop met in one place for Participation of the Sacraments and consequently for hearing of the Word and moreover really acknowledgeth that Dioceses then were only what Parishes are now and if so tho' they had other Oratories 't is nothing to the purpose of our Opposits which yet his perhaps proves him afraid to assert For he knew well enough that seeing as he grants all under his Charge took their Communion with the Bishop at his Church which as every one knows was then Celebrated at least every Lord's day any other Oratories for publick Worship had been altogether unnecessary with which superfluities the Church in these early and tempestuous days was not at all acquainted In vain therefore Dr. Maurice that he may at once abuse both Mede and Ignatius tells us that Altar in the primitive sense signified not only the Communion Table but the whole Place where the Chair of the Bishop and the Seats of the Presbyters were placed and in this sense there was but one Altar in one Diocess as there is now but one Consistory as is clear from Ignatius and Usher And to be in one Altar which is Ignatius his Phrase is only to be in Communion with the Bishop And this Dr. Maurice would have to be Mede's meaning thereof But the falshood of this is not only evident from Ignatius who all along as we have seen reciprocats his Bishop with the Pastor of a particular Flock but also from Mede's express words as we have already observed from them I pass as scarce good sense Dr. Maurice his saying that Altar not only signified the Communion Table but the whole place of the Bishop's Chair c. The Dispute not being what place or thing in a Church Altar signifi'd but if thereby in Ignatius one or more places for publick Worship be meaned yea this my sense of Ignatius Doctor Wake seems to grant while he says speaking of these Ignatian times that none officiated but either the Bishop himself or he who was appointed or allow'd by him and that they had in every such Place of their Assembling one Table or Altar at which they performed this Service We have heard already Mede rightly observing out of Ignatius that the Altar or Communion Table was only at the Bishop's Residence and where he officiated And we see from Dr. Wake that in every place of solemn Worship they had an Altar or Communion Table The Conclusion then is which we also already heard Mede acknowledging that there were then no fewer Bishops than Places of publick Worship which is the Truth and what we conclude from Ignatius And to these add the words of one who is neither unskillfull in these Matters nor yet Partial in favours of Presbytry In the beginning saith he the Bishops whole Charge was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the strain of Ignatius his Epistles especially that to Smyrna it would appear that there was but one Church at least but one Place where there was one Altar and Communion in each of these Parishes for he saith there was one Bishop one Church and one Altar And now judge of the symphony of this Assertion with the Principles of the Author or how he could averr that if these Epistles be Genuine the Cause of Presbytry will be undone But of all things most strange and unaccountable is Dr. Pearson's Conduct in the Dispute who with indefatigable pains and vast learning wrote his Defence of Ignatius to the end as he pretends he might well nigh infallibly establish a Diocesan Bishop and yet has proved so far from hitting the white at which he ultimately levell'd that on supposition of the sufficiency of his Vindiciae he most sufficiently demonstrats the Identity of Bishop and parochial Pastor during the time of Ignatius and thus inavoidably ruines what he most earnestly intended to repair And now behold the vast Fabrick and Engine wherewith they threaten the utter Ruine of Presbytry turning upon and shattering to pieces their Dio cesan Hierarchy Nec enim Lex justior ulla Quam necis Artifices