not in all the Churches of Christendom but neither approved nor known by the Primitive Church wherefore I require what you produce should be both Primitive and Universal and this to interpret some place of Scripture doubtful in it self not plain Now as to the business in hand I can't yield that the Scripture is very doubtful in it or scarce doubtful at all for though in Scripture 't is not in terminis said Presbytery and Episcopacy are both one and the same Order yet the circumstantial expressions are as I have shewed so strong and many that they are equivalent to a cleer expression in terminis Secondly this is not a matter of any indifferency but of vast and dangerous consequence if mistaken That a Church without such Bishops as you require can't be truly call'd a Church and so we shall exclude many Godly Reformed Churches For if Bishops be of such a superiour and distinct order as you pretend if the power of Ordination be inherent in them only Then where no Bishop no true Priests ordained where no Priests no Sacraments where no Sacraments no Church Wherefore I humbly beseech you be not too positive in this point lest thereby you do not only condemn all the Reformed Churches but the Scripture and St. Paul also who tells us That the Scripture is sufficient to make us wise unto Salvation both in matters of faith and works also to instruct and throughly furnish us to every good work and will any deny this of Ordination to be both a good and necessary work seeing that the powerful preaching the Word and administration of the Sacraments depend upon it Wherefore I dare not by any means suspect the Scripture defective in this weighty affair Yet to shew you our willingness to hear all things let us hear what you can tell us from Antiquity The first you bring is Epiphanius three hundred years after the Apostles from whom the main Objection is drawn against the Indentity of Order and shot as a Cannon Bell against us beyond all possible resistance but you will find it to be a meet Tennis Ball. Epiphanius making a Catalogue of Hereticks puts in Aertius for one who was an Arian and moreover held that Bishops and Priests were all of one Order and of equal Dignity and Authority and that a Presbyter had power to Ordain Confirm and in short to act any thing equal with a Bishop That he was an Heretick is apparent being an Arrian nay I shall not scruple to yeeld unto you that he was an Heretick in this his assertion concerning Episcopacy and Presbytery as we now understand them I say the Assertion contains Heresie in one part but not in every part viz. That the Bishop and other Presbyters are of equal authority and power to act this may in some sense be called Heresie for it is against Apostolical Constitution declared in Scripture therefore an Heresie and if you can shew me from Scripture as much against Identity of Order I shall brand him for an Heretick in that also but being sure there is no such thing in Scripture there can be no Heresie in affirming the Identity I fully agree with Tertullian we can make no judgment de rebus fidei nisi ex literis fidei of matters of Faith but from the writings of Faith that is the Scripture and therefore I shall never be pulled from this Pillar of Truth The Scripture is our compleat Rule of Faith no Opinion is heretical and damnable which is not against that Now Good Reader I pray take notice that Epiphanius was a very godly Bishop in the main but yet a very cholerick Man as appears in that his fierce contest with Iohn Bishop of Constantinople and his bitter expressions therein which I do not mention in disparagement of this holy Man but only to give the Reader a caution to remember that passionate Men do sometimes censure more severely than there is cause Epiphanius being a Bishop and finding the authority and dignity of Episcopacy much disparaged by Aerius being an Arrian Heretick falls upon him sharply for this his Opinion also wherein he was in part much to be condemned as I freely confest before but not in the very Point now in question nor doth Epiphanius himself condemn him in this particular as an Heretick but only in the gross to which I freely give my vote But you will tell me that a Man of a far milder temper St. Austin doth also enrol Aerius among Hereticks I know it well but I desire you to know that St. Austin doth not lay this to his charge as an Heresie for he saith only thus Aereus also was an Heretick for he fell into Arrian Heresie and he added some Opinions of his own then St. Austin recounts several of his Opinions whereof this was one That he affirmed there was no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter where I pray you observe St. Austin gives us the reason why he ranks him with Hereticks viz. because he fell into the Arrian Heresie then follows And he added some Opinions of his own St. Austin calls these Opinions not Heresies for he doth not say he added more Heresies of his own Secondly I pray you observe St. Austin makes no mention of his affirming the Identity of Order but only this That there was no difference at all between Bishop and Presbyter wherein I will condemn Aerius as well as you But as for the Identity of Order 't is well known that St. Austin is noted by Medina a Papist Writer and others to encline to this Opinion but for my part I think the words quoted from St. Austin do not express any Opinion one way or other to this purpose but are only a Complement to St. Hierom who was but a Prespyter yet in humility St. Austin being a Bishop acknowledges him to be his superiour in many things But I desire you to take notice of another very remarkable and most worthy passage of St. Austin who tells us plainly that we are not to read him or any other Author ever so holy or ever so learned with any obligation to submit to his or their Opinions unless they prove their Opinions by Scripture or convincing Reasons So then had Aerius been declared both by Epiphanius and St. Austin also to have been an Heretick in this very particular of Identity of Order yet they bringing neither Scripture nor any reason at all but meerly a bare narrative of Aerius and his Opinions not so much as calling his Opinion in this particular Heresie much less offering proofs for it by St. Austin's rule we may with great civility to them and great confidence in the truth still affirm the Identity of Order But how will I answer that Objection taken out of St. Hierom who say you was as great a leveller of Bishops with Priests as any and therefore whatever comes from him you may be sure is extracted from him by the powerfulness of undeniable truth yet he confesses that
Bishops have the authority of Ordination more than Presbyters A Man may smile to see this used as an Argument for the preheminency of Bishops which is directly against it for St. Hierom having discourst of the equality and Identity of Presbyters and Bishops and having brought many Arguments from Scripture to prove that Bishop and Presbyter was only two names for one and the same Office for a further confirmation hereof asks this question I pray what doth a Bishop do more than a Presbyter except Ordination plainly intimating thereby that this could make no such distinction of eminency in them above Presbyters I beseech you consider Do not Presbyters perform Offices of a higher nature than Ordination Presbyters are ordained Embassadors for Christ to preach his Holy Gospel for the Salvation of Souls they are under Christ Mediators between God and the People to make intercession for them they administer the Sacrament of Baptism wherein the Children of Warth are regenerated and made the Children of God and Heirs of eternal Life yea they administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper also the most transcendent act of Religion and Christian Dignity whereby we are made partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ And what doth a Bishop more than these except Ordination which being no Sacrament sure is inferiour in dignity to the other mentioned Acts and therefore cannot elevate them to a higher degree Judge now I beseech you whether this question makes pro or con Are not such questions always tending to disparagement When any Man is boasting his Power and Authority should I come and ask What can you do more than others unless it be in this or that poor business not worth speaking of would he not take this as an affront Wherefore it cannot enter into my head that St. Hierom intended by this Question to express any superiour Order above the Priesthood but plainly the contrary v z. That Bishops having no other power distinct from Priests but Ordination this could be no Argument for a distinct and superior Order And now I desire my Reader if he understand Latin to view the Epistle of St. Hierom to Evagrius and doubtless he will wonder to see Men have the confidence to quote any thing out of it for the distinction between Episcopacy and Presbytery for the whole Epistle is to shew the Identity of them Before I chanced to read this Epistle I was of the crroneous Opinion that Bishops were a distinct Order but so convinc'd by this Epistle as I was forced to submit to a change And I farther desire my Reader to observe the various fate of St. Hierom and Aerius Aerius is reviled as an Heretick for affirming this Identity of Order Hierom passes for a Saint and a great Doctor of the Church though he affirms the very same as fully as Aerius or any Man can do and therefore it may be my fate to be reviled as Aerius was but our Saviour bids us rejoyce and be exceeding glad when we are reviled for his Names sake or for his Words sake sure all is one for great is our Reward and so I proceed But there lies yet a great Objection made by our good Bishop Hall he tells us how that Collutbus a Presbyter of Alexandria took upon him to ordain others and that afterwards in a Council of a hundred Bishops in Aegypt their Ordination was declared null because ordained by a Presbyter From this and some other such Instances the Bishop would prove that the Order of Presbyters is not capable to ordain therefore Bishops are a distinct Order I am sorry so good a Man had no better a proof for his intended purpose It seems he quite forgot how that the famous Council of Nice consisting of above three hundred made a Canon wherein they declare That if any Bishop should ordain any of the Clergy belonging to another Bishop's Diocess without consent and leave had of that Bishop to whose Diocess they did belong their Ordination should be null You see then the irregular Ordination of a Bishop is as null as the irregular Ordination of a Presbyter therefore the irregular Bishop and the irregular Presbyter are of the same Order of the same Authority neither able to Ordain Is it not most evident by this that 't is not their Order but Commission that makes them capable to Ordain sure an irregular Bishop is of the same Order with the regular Is the Line of his Diocess like a Conjurers Circle within it he is a Bishop without it he is none No but within it he hath Commission given him to Ordain without it no Commission no nor to act in his own Diocess beyond his Commission which is to ordain only the Clergy of his own Diocess and within his own Diocess Can any thing be plainer Cellutbus then being but a Presbyter and under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria his taking upon him to ordain Presbyters was highly irregular and insolent and therefore most justly declared null I desire the Papistical School-Divines with their manifold indelible Characters to observe here how easily the Councils dasht out the indelible Character of Presbyter imprinted on the Souls of these Men irregularly ordained they made a clear rasure not one tittle of it left And could they so easily cancel the Gift of the Holy Ghost I leave my Schoolmen to find out how this rare feat was done And I proceed to add a Canon taken from a Council at Antioch concerning Chorepiscopi much to our purpose When the Apostles had settled Bishops in every City with authority of ordaining and governing the several Churches or Congregations within the Circuits of those Cities some were very large and therefore in process of time when more were converted to the Faith and the Congregations encreased more in number and at greater distance than the Bishop himself could well have the overfight of the Bishop chose some principal Men for his assistance and dividing his great Circuit into several lesser Circuits placed these Men as Overseers under him and these were called Chorepiscopi that is Country Bishops and were much after the manner of our Rural Deans Those Chorepiscopi Country Bishops being thus setled in authority to govern the Pastoral Priests in their Circuits took upon them to ordain more Priests when occasion required which the chief Bishops took very ill at their hands as a great lessening to their Supream Authority And to prevent it for the future a Canon was made in the Council of Antioch about the year 340. to forbid these Country Bishops to ordain any Priests Now I pray you observe These Chorepiscopi were either really ordained in the Order of the Chief Bishop or not if they were as full Bishops as he as really they were why might they not ordain Priests as well as he The Chief Bishop answers Because he gave them no Commission Whereby you see that the power of ordaining Priests was annexed no more to Bishops than to Priests
when able and holy Bishops were elected and therefore reverenced and obeyed in all Spiritual matters by the greatest as well as by the least These diligently and publickly before the Congregation at set-times in the year chiefly at Easter examined all those who had been converted to the faith from infidelity that year and all those who baptized in the faith desired admittance to the Lords Table and upon approbation and confirmation of the Bishop fit persons only were publickly Baptized by him and at the Church door assoon as Churches were built where the Baptistery was placed and then brought into the Church and admitted to the Lords Table And no inferiour Minister did either baptize or administer the holy Communion unless it were by the Bishops order on urgent occasions These things are very well known to the Learned who are conversant in Ignatius his Epistles Iust in Martyr Tertullian Cyprian and other succeeding Writers And in short nothing was dore of any moment as is plain in Ignatius but by the Bishops directions But at length the number of Christians growing great and multitudes of Children daily Born and an Opinion growing up also that it was absolutely necessary for the salvation of Children not only to be baptized but also to receive the Holy Communion before death it was impossible for the Bishop to be at hand to perform all or to give particular order for all Necessity forced every Priest in his Cure to perform these Offices Yet in process of time the opinion of the necessity for Children to receive the Holy Communion before death declining and few or none admitted till the age of discretion and the necessity of Baptism for Children still continuing the Bishops suffered still all Ministers to Baptize but resumed to themselves again the power of Confirming and Licensing youth to the Holy Communion And Bishops only for a long time executing this Office it grew by degrees into an Opinion that Bishops only were capable to do it and that Confirmation was a Sacrament and such a Sacrament as inferiour Priests supposed then also to be of an inferiour Order were not to meddle with What errors will Men yea learned Men carried along with a croud slide into not willing to stand in opposition with a multitude especially when countenanced by the Bishop their Superiour And then succeeding learned Men having in their Infancy sucked in the error continue it in their riper learned years and endeavour to desend it as a certain truth and at last it passeth for an Article of Faith necessary to be believed Thus have I laid out before you the true State and Progress of this business of Confirmation Now I pray consider first Suppose Confirmation to be a Sacrament and to be administred by the Bishop only and none to be admitted to the Lords Table till Confirmed How is it possible for a Bishop of so large a Diocess as some of ours are some extended three or fourscore miles many forty or fifty personally to Confirm half the Youth in a Diocess if he duly examine each one as is most fit and necessary We see how this is performed in their Triennial Visitations not a quarter of those who are admitted ever come to the Bishop and yet the croud is great What is then done to those that come They are asked by the Bishop whether they believe and will perform those things their God-fathers and God-mothers affirmed and promised for them at their Baptism they answer Yes and so are confirmed But what those things are whether they understand and can give a good account of those things not a word of this Oh but the Curate who presents those Children to the Bishop assures him that they are fully instructed for it this is the thing we complain of and desire to be redressed that it may not be left to the discretion and care of every Curate seeing what pittiful Creatures are by them admitted And do we not see sometimes the Curate desiring to please the fond Mother Children confirmed so young as cannot without a Miracle be of a capacity to understand those divine Mysteries Besides it may often happen that a pious Child well fitted for the Holy Sacrament and perchance being weak earnestly desires it before his death yet must stay some years 'till next Visitation or take a long Journey to the Bishop for which he may want strength or means to support him But in the Primitive Times the Bishops confirmed every year their Diocess also was very narrow so that access to him was quick and easie and the work was as easie to the Bishop yea and easie also to the inferiour Curate to instruct and prepare them for Parents and Masters did then according to their bounden duty the great neglect whereof in these days will find some punishment at the last day made it their chief care to instruct their Servants and Children from their infancy in the Principles of Religion You see how impossible it is for a Bishop in a large Diocess and Triennial visitation to perform this necessary work as it ought and therefore in the second place consider how necessary it is for the Bishop to appoint some discreet conscientious Ministers as our Dean Rurals should be in several Circuits to examine and license to the Lord's Table For I pass it as granted that Confirmation is no Sacrament and if it were why may not Priests not Bishops perform it Certainly there is not one word in Scripture forbidding it or any colourable pretence against it nor can I discover the least ground of reason to forbid it inferior Ministers performing other Offices superior to it and certainly equal to it though it were a Sacrament which our Church denies There is nothing in the World can be pretended but that in the beginning Bishops did only perform it To this I answer That from the very beginning there were no other Priests but Bishops as I have shewed you and then Bishops did all other Ministerial Duties Preach Pray Baptise Catechise and in succeeding Ages when there were several inferior Priests not Bishops all but Confirming was ever transmitted to them and to Deacons also Preaching Praying and Baptizing nay Baptizing tolerated in necessity to Midwives I would gladly see any such thing in Antiquity and shall Confirming the meanest of all these be denyed Priests You will tell me there have been Decrees in some Councils to forbid it And will you be bound up to all the Decrees of Councils without Scripture or any reason for them If once we leave Scripture and hearken to the Doctrines of Men ever so holy ever so learned ever so Primitive we shall soon be wheedled into the Papists Religion and many other Errors which the Papists themselves now reject as I have declared at large before and therefore I forbear saying more now to this purpose but proceed to a third Consideration What will be the best means to prepare Youth for the receiving the holy Communion in every
unless the Bishops received a new Commission to ordain as well as a new Ordination If it be answered That these Chorepiscopi were meer Priests sent forth to have inspection only over other Priests Then I pray observe that these Chorepiscopi being meer Priests took upon them to ordain other Priests which certainly had been madness for them to do had they then such a Belief of Bishops as is now required They might as well have undertaken to create Stars in the Heavens For if Bishops only have received a Divine power from Christ and his Apostles to ordain Priests he that hath not this divine power of Ordination can no more ordain a Priest than a Man without the divine power of Creation can create a Star both are impossible in nature from whence it must follow that these Country Bishops were directly mad in undertaking to ordain Priests having received no such divine power from Christ his Apostles or their Successors But if we take these Country Bishops for sober Godly Persons in their right witts as doubtless they were being selected for that Office they must needs believe that being Priests alone they had power to ordain other Priests and also believed that the Bishops having made them Overseers and Governors in their little Circuits they had also received thereby Commission to ordain as well as to govern and were as little Bishops under an Arch-Bishop for such really they were so that I can't in charity censure them so much as of contumacy in taking upon them more then they thought at least they had Commission to act I doubt not but the chief Bishop would be wary enough not to employ any contumacious persons I conclude then first That it was only a meer mistake an easie and pardonable mistake of their Commission Secondly That in those Times it was not thought an impossible thing for bare Priests no Bishops to ordain other Priests for then certainly they would never have undertaken it And I confess my self of their opinion and can't but so continue till I see more reason to the contrary And I hope my Reader will see what weak proofs are brought for this distinction and superiority of Order no Scripture no Primitive General Council no general consent of Primitive Doctors and Fathers no not one Primitive Father of Note speaking particularly and home to our purpose Only a touch of Epiphanius and St. Austin upon Aerius the Arrian Heretick but not declared no not by them an Heretick in this particular of Episcopacy so that I my self declare more particularly against him then these Fathers do accusing him of Heresie in part of his affirmation concerning Bishops though not in every part I shall conclude this business by giving my poor Judgment drawn from the preceeding Arguments I find in Scripture that the Priesthood is a holy Order into which no man is to thrust himself unless he be called I do not find that Deaconship hath an inferiour part in it or Episcopacy above it but that it is compleat and entire in it self and that it may involve many administrrtions in one and the same Order and sometimes many in one and the same person St. Iohn was an Apostle an Evangelist a Prophet a Pastor a Teacher an Ordainer which we call Bishop all these Gifts he had by one and the same Spirit and in one and the same Priesthood Christ himself was of this Order a Priest for ever after the Order of Melcbisedek that is both King and Priest these were his Offices he is called also the Bishop of our Souls Was this in Christ a distinct and superiour Office or Order to his Priesthood who will presume to affirm this And Christ told his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you Christ therefore made them also Kings and Priests as St. Iohn tells us Rev. 1. Our Saviour's Kingdom was not of this World no more was that of the Apostles Our Saviour's Office of Priest and Bishop was one and the same so was that of the Apostles and they Ordained and sent others as Christ. Ordained and sent them there was no distinction or diversity of Order in Christ and his Apostles no more was there in those who were Ordained and sent by the Apostles though there might be diversity of Gifts or Administrations all were not Evangelists nor Prophets some had the gift of Tongues some of Prophesie some of Miracles some of discerning Spirits and some such Gift I conceive they might have whom the Apostles constituted superintendent Overseers Bishops over the rest endued especially with the Gift of Discerning and Judging of Men and therefore fit to be intrusted with the Ordaining of others for which there needed no new Order but the enlargement only of their Commission to Ordain to oversee and govern those that were Ordained And these as I said before being setled in this eminent manner over the rest were call'd by that name in Greek which signifies as much and which we in English call Bishop and by degrees this name was wholly appropriate to them In this order the Apostles left the Church at their death and in this order their Successors continued it as in duty sure they ought from time to time near one thousand five hundred years without any interruption Wherefore for any to alter this way of Government or to take upon them to Ordain not being chosen this way to it they would be guilty of great rashness and high presumption and I thank God I am as zealous for the preserving this Primitive way as any Man Yet I cannot by any means consent to them who would have Episcopacy to be a distinct Order for the Reasons before given nor can I think the Ordination of a Priest made by Priests invalid for though it ought not be done but only of necessity yet being done 't is valid and certainly may without any crime be done by any Priest by shipwrak or any such chance cast into a Country where there were none Commissionated to Ordain in such a case he might and ought to Ordain other fit Persons for the Service of God and Preaching of the Gospel For who can doubt but that the Substance is to be preferred before Ceremony And as St. Paul approved of the Preaching of Christ out of envy rather than no Preaching so doubtless to Ordain out of order is better than no Ordination and the Church of Christ be deprived of Preaching Praying and Administring the Sacraments and all other Pastoral Duties so great necessity may well excuse any irregularity Yet where Order can possibly be observed it ought to be for God is the God of Order Wherefore he that wilfully transgresses against Order transgresses against God and shall receive to himself damnation for if to resist the Ordinance of Man only in humane and temporal things be damnation much more is it to resist an Apostolick Ordinance in things Spiritual and Divine Concerning Deacons HAving thus stated and united the two pretended distinct