for it But in some Greek Copies the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are left out So that upon the whole matter the Eastern Churches have no quarrel against either of those * Combefis ad Man Calec not 59. Creeds All their contention with the Western in this case is about the true Reading of them †Symbolum fidei quod ipsi profitentur idem est atque illud quod Latini in Missa recitant Differunt in eo à Latinis quod ipsi de Spir. Sancto dicunt qui ex Patre procedit Latini qui ex Patre filioque procedit id cum Graeci non negent idem cum Latinis dicere existimandi sunt Leo All. de Cons l. 3. c. 10. Sect. 1. And therefore unless he had been more particular about that this first Branch of T. W's description may stand and yet neither the Greek or any Eastern Church be excluded Secondly To partake of the same Table 't is true T. W. did not mean the same individual Table as the Gentleman rightly supposes and yet he meant somthing more than barely the same Eucharist in Specie Hereticks and Schismaticks may deliver the same Eucharist in Specie and yet he that Communicates with either is not thereby in the Communion of the Saints Thirdly To joyn all in the same Holy Prayers and Supplications and giving of Thanks T. W. does not hereby Excommunicate all the rest of the World For although the Forms of Holy Prayer c. are different in several Countreys yet people joyning with the Church where they live in its Holy Devotions do answer this Branch of the Description and those Christians who refuse and separate from them are certainly Schismaticks Fourthly To be Subject and Obedient to our Spiritual Rulers and Governors who have derived their Authority from the Apostles by a due Succession in all things pertaining to godly Life Decency and Order He cannot except against this They are desirous to give due Honour and Obedience to their Spiritual Governors who derive their Authority from Christ but still he endeavours to justifie their Separation upon two accounts Vind. p. 32. First Because he thinks the Bishop ought not to Govern so many Congregations nor by such Rules and Officers as they do Neither Secondly By the nomination of the Civil Magistrate without the consent of the People or the Ministers within the Diocess and while he does so he is a Creature not to be found either in Scripture or in the Primitive Times and therefore can be no Spiritual Governor of theirs by Divine Right As to the Government of so many Congregations we think it not Essential to the Office of a Bishop It being not the greatness of the City he lives in or the extent of his Diocess or the Number of Congregations but the Ordination that makes him a Bishop We acknowledg with St. Ep. ad Evagr. Jerome that the poor Bishop of Eugubium had the same Order and Authority with him of Rome and that he of Tanis was equal in that respect to him of Alexandria Soz. l. 2. c. 14. and that Milles the Martyr in Sozomen who had never a Christian within his Diocess Ibid. l. 7. c. 19. was as truly a Bishop as he who had all Scythia under his care On the other hand to persuade us that the great Extent of a Bishops Diocess does make void his Office will be a task I am afraid too difficult for our Author to manage We have no such Doctrine in Sc ipture And this conceit as it is beyond the malice so it is below the Sence of all Hereticks and Schismaticks in former Times And if it were true the Apostles themselves must have been the greatest Usurpers They having a larger extent of Jurisdiction even according to this Author than any of their Successors But this Argument has been so Copiously and so lately managed by Doctor Maurice in his Learned Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy that I shall only need to refer the Reader thither Secondly As for the Officers used by our English Prelacy we think them such as are extreamly useful in order to the more regular and easy management of the Episcopal Charge The Chancellor is a Person well learned in the Canon and Civil Laws and consequently able to judg or assist the Bishop in his Judicial Proceedings Nor is it any great exception against him in my Opinion that he is a Layman while there is no Necessity for him Personally to perform any of those things which belong only to the Clergy Lyndew de Constit q. incontin Dec. Rural vid plura de judiciis c. 1. Dec. Rural The Dean Rural is a Temporary Officer under the Archbishop or Bishop ad aliquod ministerium exeâ—…cendum Constitutus Cujus Officium est in Causis ecclesiasticis citationes ei transmissas exequi cujus sigillum in talibus erit auctenticum The Rules they go by are the Canon and Civil Laws where the Laws and Canons of our own Kingdom have not expresly directed The Authority they have is from the Bishop and the Law So that he who disobeys them in the just and legal Exercise of their Authority disobeys both How Sacred and Certain that Authority is I wish these Gentlemen may consider And if it were purely a matter of Choice yet methinks Church-Affairs are more likely to be well manag'd under our English Prelacy by such Officers and Rulers than after the Independent Fashion by the Sudden and Arbitrary Determination of every Mean and Ordinary Pastâ—…r perhaps in a Consistory of Clowns who must Pole for that Truth and Equity which they do not understand And if either the Pastor or any body else happens to be wiser than the rest so as to judge right have Power to over-rule his Sence and Arguments either by Votes or Tumult Neither Thirdly Do we think the Consent of the People or of the Ministers of the Diocess Essential to thâ—… Office of a Bishop Our Saviour Constituted his Apostles without it We have no Command in Scripture for any such Consent The Practice of the Primitive Times was various and therefore we think it a Matter left wholly to the Discretion of the Church Matthias and Justus seem to be appointed by the People as well as the Apostles Acts 1.15 c. But the Apostleship was not determined by that Election but by the Lot which fell upon Matthias For Justus who was equally Sharer with him in that Act of the People was thereby no more an Apostle than he was before And perhaps the same way of Chusing by Lots might be us'd by St. John as Mr. Dodwell conjectures but was never Diss Cyp. p. 12. probably in Use after the Apostles Days though if it had been Necessary we cannot believe it would have been omitted in the following Ages The Seven Deacons we read were Elected by the People but receiv'd their Authorities and Office from the Apostles by imposition of Hands And these are I believe all
the dignity of a Doctor And altho' some of those ancient Heretics could dispense with Fornication yet they dissuaded People from Marriage teaching them that it was of the Devil That we ought to own our Saviour in times of the greatest persecution is a great Gospel-Truth Luke 12.9 and yet the Corinthian Schismatics taught and practis'd otherwise which Doctrin and Practice St. Paul is likewise thought to oppose chap. 3. ver 11 c. and went so far as to partake of the Idol Sacrifices according to their worldly wisdom that they might escape persecution which made the Apostle argue that point cap. 8. and to determin so peremptorily and severely cap. 10.21 Ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord and the Cup of Devils Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's Table and the Table of Devils I might give you several other instances of the Gnostick heresy too rife at that time in the Corinthian Church but these surely are sufficient to prove against Mr. H. that they were not all agreed in the great Gospel-Truths Now Heresy includes Schism as it breaks the unity of the Faith one of the indispensible requisites to the unity of the Church And therefore the Corinthian Hereticks being Schismatics likewise i.e. disjointed and loose from the body of the Church the Apostle bids 'em be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well-jointed and compacted in the Church Again in the same mind and in the same judgment i. e by uniting themselves to it both in affection and principles a work surely to be done while men are in this world and if it be not Mr. H. will find it too late when he enters into another I have only two things further to note under this particular First That the Apostle charging the Corinthians to be perfectly join'd together in the same mind and in the same judgment or opinion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is strange how Mr. H. could observe that they were not obliged to think the same thing And secondly That this Text relating so plainly to difference in apprehension even according to his own exposition it is no less unaccountable to me why it might not as well have been reduced under that head as any one of those which he alledged to that purpose Secondly We must enquire into the Corinthians miscarriage which occasioned this caution which he tells us we have v. 11 12. There were contentions among them v. 11. Now the contention was about their Ministers as Mr. H. assures us p. 11. But I would ask him first of all was there no miscarriage antecedent to that contnetion Yes surely their heretical and wicked opinions which occasioned the antecedent caution viz. That ye all speak the same things In these the Schism was founded and they were probably the occasion of their ascribing themselves to Paul and Apollos and Cephas and Christ For where difference in opinion occasions debates among people not only the merits of the cause but likewise the original of each party and the means of knowing what they pretend to teach others are very frequently enquired into Thus it was in our Saviour's case when he taught something new and extraordinary beyond the common rate of their ordinary Scribes Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works Is not this the Carpenters son Is not his Mother called Mary c And are not his Sisters all with us Whence then hath this man all these things Mat. 13.54 55 56. And there seems to be abundantly more occasion for the like enquiry in the case of the Corinthians as will appear if we consider the circumstances of those early times when this Epistle was written especially what means of knowledge the Corinthians then had and what proofs they might make use of to evince the truth or falshood of any Doctrine in debate They could not have the writings of the New Testament this Epistle being one of the first And it may reasonably be conjectured perhaps proved that of that little which was then written they had seen nothing For neither in their Epistle to St. Paul so far as St. Paul alludes to it neither in his to them is there the least intimation of any such thing And yet in the Epistles to the Thessalonians and the Gospel of St. Matthew which were of a prior date had they been in their hands they might have found the resolution of some of those cases which they put to the Apostle and therefore saved themselves the labour of that part of their appeal And as for the writings of the Old Testament there were two sorts of errors not to mention any more which were not easily confuted by their authority One was touching the Doctrine of the Resurrection which altho it might be proved from the Old Testament yet the Gnostics who denyed it may reasonably be supposed to have learnt from the Sadduces some of their first Masters how to evade those proofs and as for the other Judaizing Doctrines the Old Testament did so far seem to countenance them that it was not likely that every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be able to prove it otherwise And therefore it might become the skill and authority of the great Apostle himself to shew the contrary And as the Corinthians had not the assistance of the written rule either for information or proof in these cases so both must be derived from their Teachers either in word or writing For instruction besides what they had learned from our Saviour and his Apostles they had their Prophets and Evangelists continually among them who being endued with the Spirit were thereby qualified to instruct and educate the younger converts in the Doctrines of the Gospel and from these the Corinthians received their common Instructions But as the Orthodox Prophets had their true inspirations so the Heretical Teachers pretended to the same and as the former had their true miracles for the confirmation of their Doctrines so the latter had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their lying wonders for the confirmation of theirs to deceive if it were possible the very elect And that which made it still more difficult for the ordinary Corinthians to judge betwixt them was because both parties continued in the same communion the Heretics not daring to go out i. e. to separate from the Church till a considerable time after this when many of the Apostles were dead Now where both sides were equal in order pretended to the same inspirations the same miracles and lived in the same communion the proof of each Doctrine must depend upon the credit and authority of those persons from whom it was derived If from Christ it was the greatest if from the Apostles it was next if from one of the first Converts well learned in the Christian doctrines highly approved and dignified by the Apostles as Apollos was it was of the last great authority Thus St. Paul recommends the authority of the houshold of Stephanas as being the most early Converts in that Region
this Case the Line would be right enough and all that can be said is That there was One Vsurper in the Line of Jurisdiction who never was within the Line of Order and consequently could make no intercision in it And perhaps to prevent any Irregularity in the Succession of that Order the Apostles gave the Example and the Church enjoyn'd That a Bishop should be ordain'd by Three at least Apâ—…st c. 1. Con. Nican c. 4. Con. Areâ—… c. 21. Con. Laodic c. 12. Con. Paris 1. c. 6 c. and likewise that he should be Constituted with the Approbation of his Metropolitan and Com-Provincials which practices were certainly a very great security to the Right Succession it being not very likely That all the Bishops of a Province should be so extreamly careless to suffer an irregular Ordination and the Persons concern'd to Consecrate all void of that Character which they pretended to bestow After all That ever any Abbot that was no Bishop did ordain Bishops I do utterly deny Adamnanuâ—… in his Life of Columba Adamn Vit. Col. Vsh Primorâ—… makes mention of a Bishop in the Abby of Hy and that there was always one residing there is confirmed by Bishop Vsher out of the Vlsleâ—… Annals And perhaps the Bishop of Dâ—…nkeld as the Learned Bishop of St. Asaph conjectures joyn'd in the Consecration of Bishop Aldan Finan Bp. of St. Asaph of â—…h Gov. p. 102. and Colman had the like Ordination But Tuda the next in Succession was ordain'd a Bishop among the South Scots in Ireland So that should we allow his Instance true viz. That Aâ—…dan Finan and Colman were ordained by the Abbot yet that Succession at Lindisfarn in all likelihood fail'd in Colman and the Line of Order was right in Tuda and consequently his Marginal Instance is nothing to the purpose an Instance that has been frequently urg'd by the Nonconformists against Episcopacy and as often confuted from the most Authentick History of those Times by divers Learned Men Vind. C. E. cap. 9. Vind. Ignat. par 1. c. 10. Orig. Brit. Ch. Gov. c. 5. Barbos Past p. 2. All. 3. Num. 3.4 c. Maur. de Alz. de Prac. Episc Dig. p. 2. c. 5. Num. 6 7 8 9. Aquin. Sup. q. 38. ar 1. Res ad ter Vid. Victor in Sum. Num. 216. Sect. de Sac. Ord. Non facile credeâ—…em Victor in sum Num. 237. quem seq Vivald in Candel aureo p. 1. tit de Sacram. Ordin Num. 17. In fine asserenti se vidisse quandam Bullam Papae concedentem facultatem sacerdoti conferendi Diac. Sub. Diac. Barbos Past p. 2. Al. 3. N. 4. Ap. c. 67. Nicaen c. 19. Con. C. P. c. 4 Bishop Bramhâ—…ll Bishop Pearson the present Bishop of Worcester and St. Asaph and Mr. Dodwell have so fully Answer'd this business of Hy that a Man would wonder at the Confidence of this Gent. that he should still hope to impose the same Mistake upon the World Nor does the Church of Rome allow that an Abbot who is no Bishop should Consecrate a Bishop They are so far from allowing it that their Canonists generally declare that the Pope himself cannot impower any Presbyter to Ordain so much as a Deacon An Abbot who has Jus Mitrae Bacuâ—… a Cardinal or an Ordinary Presbyter by Commission from the Pope may confer the lesser Orders but not the greater or those which are called Sacred viz. those of Bishop Priest and Deacon nay even as to the lesser Thomas Aquinas Joh. Major and Paludanus Affirm that it is safer to receive the Order of Sub-Deacon from another than from such a priviledged Presbyter And altho Anguianus and some few more are of opinion that the Pope might Impower a Presbyter to confer the Higer Orders yet it never was the allowed practice of that Church And I challenge him to produce so much as one instance of any Abb t that was no Bishop who ever Consecrated a Bishop As for Sub-Deacons and such people who are sometimes Ordainâ—…d by Abbots the Gentileman knows well enough we have no occasion for 'em in England and therefore the Succession of our Bishops may be just and regular notwithstanding this first Case As to the Second viz. Whether this line of Ordina ion may be continued in a Schismatical Church We Answer 1st That such was the care of the Primitive Church so great a regard they had to a right Succâ—…ssion that they who thought the Ordination of certain Hereticks void such as the Paâ—…lianists and Montanists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. decreed 'em to be Ordained by a Catholick Bishop And it is likewise determin'd by the first Council of Constantinople concerning the Ordinations made by Maximus Cymicus that they are all null they neither allowing him to be a Bishop not those Ordained by him to enjoy any Function among the Clergy And in the Roman Church Bâ—â—n Tâ—m 9. p. 2â—4 Pâ—â—tin dâ— Vâ— Pont. p. 22.4 Contra â—â—ephanum III. alâ—s IV. Mabill in Ordiâ— Rom. Com. p. cxix particularly those ordain'd by Constantine the Lay-Invader of the Papal Chair were by a Council under Stephen the Third or Fourth to return to their former Orders unless they were in great Esteem with the People and in that Case they were to be re-ordain'd by the Church and for fear of laying the Foundations of a future Schism it was further decreed That none of 'em should be promoted to any higher degrees By these and many other Instances it is plain what Care the Church has taken to re-ordain or utterly silence those whose Orders they thought void And lest any such persons should creep into strange places and there invade that Office to which they had no Right No Man either of the Clergy or Laity Ap. 〈◊〉 12. con 〈◊〉 30 con 〈◊〉 c. 33. 〈…〉 C. 〈◊〉 c. 7. con 〈◊〉 c. 12. con Elizbeâ—â— c. 51. was to hold Communion with 'em under pain of incurring the Ecclesiastical Censures No Clergy Man was to go abroad without Commendatory Letters no bishop to be ordain'd without the Knowledge and Consent of his Metropolitan and the Neighbouring Bishops No Heretick to be admitted into Orders and if ordain'd to be depos'd No Man to ordain in another's Province By which and seveâ—â—l other Canons it became extreamly difficult for any such Hereticks or Schismaticks whose Orders they thought void to make any considerable intercision in the Line of Succession But I can see no Reason why the Line of Ordination may not pass through a Schismatical Church For although by Schism People are out of the Church and while they continue so cannot enjoy the benefit either of Ordination or Sacraments yet to say That â—â—â—h are absolutely destroy'd and nullify'd so that a â—â—â—â—…matick lâ—â—â— the Characters and can neither be a Christian 〈…〉 i. e. not the Subject of Apostolical Power 'till he be 〈◊〉 â—â—â— baptiz'd and ordain'd is an Assertion beyond all that I câ—â—â—…d ever yet meet with The