the supervising Care of many Churches as the Visitors had in Scotland and are so far Episcopi Episcoporum and Arch-bishops having no constraining Power of the Sword but a Power to admonish and instruct the Pastors and to regulate Ordinations Synods and all great and common Circumstances that belong to Churches for if one Form of Government in which some Pastors had such extensive Work and Power as Timothy Titus and Evangelists as well us Apostles had we must not change it without Proof that Christ himself would have it changed Let us compare this with Diocesan Episcopacy and see whether for all this mincing of the matter they will not amount to the same thing this supervising of many Churches does it not sound like having many Parishes under them And if this be impossible for a Diocesan how comes it to be otherwise in an Evangelist or an Apostle Nay how comes it to be allowed in a Scotch Visitor or Super-intendent The regulating Ordinations is no other in Scripture-Phrase than to appoint and ordain Elders in every Church and in every City the Diocesan Bishops desire no more in that point than to have such a Regulation and that it should not be accounted an Ordination that is done without or in Opposition to them The Evangelists might sometimes ordain Elders by their own single hands without the Assistance of any Presbyter sometimes together with the Presbytery our Diocesan Bishops never ordain any to that Order without the Assistance of their Presbyters the Evangelists and Apostles had the Direction of Church-censures 1 Cor. 5. 2 Cor. 2.9 10 11. 1 Tim. 5.19 20 21. Tit. 2.15 as appears from frequent Instances in the new Testament as also an Authority or Elders as well as the People to admonish and rebuke and punish those that were negligent or disorderly The Bishops claim no more it is the same Authority it is the same Office hitherto and this is the same of what the Bishops in all Ages of the Church have pretended to succeed to they of the Presbyterian way make all this Power of the Apostles as extraordinary as their Gifts and to expire together with them but for this they never offer any Reason and if this Notion should obtain it would follow that neither Presbyters nor Deacons could be succeeded in their Offices because they also were inspired with extraordinary Gifts as well as the Apostles But Mr. B. allows all this and that they ought to be succeeded even in this Eminence and Extent of Work and Power Why then does he find Fault and exclaim against that which he cannot deny to be of divine Institution and of perpetual Use under the name of Diocesan Episcopacy From these men the ancient Bishops derived their Title to this Authority they pretended to succeed Act. Conc. Tholi Euseb l. 5. c. 24. Polycrates reckons himself the sixth from Timothy and Irenaeus gives us the succession of the Roman Bishops from St. Peter to his time and if it had been necessary to his Purpose did undertake to shew the same of the Governours of the most considerable Churches in the World which afterwards Eusebius has collected out of their several Registers Comment 1 Ep. ad Timoth. Schol. Graec. Theodoret does admirably explain the Original of this Title by shewing that the Apostolick Power was fully convey'd to their Successors Those that are now call'd Bishops says he were in the Beginning called Apostles and the name of Bishop and Presbyter were then of the same Signification but in Process of time the Title of Apostle was appropriated to those who were Apostles indeed that is to the 12. And the name of Bishops was taken up by those that were before called Apostles Walo Mess p. 35. sequent Salmasius a man that never looks behind him or regards any Consequence runs away with this Passage as if he had found the greatest Treasure in the World that Bishop and Presbyter signified the same thing in the Apostles time and is so transported that he cannot take any notice that at the same time there is a Distinction made between the Office of Presbyter and Bishop for the Name they anciently bore shews the Nature and Eminency of their Office that they were Apostles in Authority but the Title being too great and invidious they laid it down for an humbler name and were content with the Stile that was common to Presbyters in the Apostles time Hitherto we have an exact Agreement between these three sorts of Episcopacy and find the Members of Mr. B's most compendious Distinction to be without Difference But it must not be dissembled that there are some things in which they seem to disagree especially-these two first That the Evangelists or Apostles were unfixt but Bishops are determined to a certain Diocess Secondly That the Apostles and Evangelists had Bishops under their Jurisdiction which Bishops do not pretend to As to this Unsetledness of the Apostles there are some that look upon travelling to be so essential to their Office that their Commission is in danger to expire if they should reside any considerable time in any certain place Walo Mess de Epise Presb. And Salmasius makes so acute a Remark upon the Inscription of St. John's two latter Epistles as comes within a small matter of deposing him Before those Epistles he stiles himself John the Presbyter or the Elder or it may be in English no more than John the aged and what would you imagine so great a Critick would observe from this That St. John having fixt his Residence at Ephesus for some considerable time had lost the Eminence of his Apostleship and sunk into the common Level of Presbytery and therefore stiles himself Presbyter only as if he had been conscious his Apostleship had departed from him But how comes St. Paul to remain three years in the same place and remain his Title and much longer yet at Rome where he dyed in the Exercise of his Apostleship Clemens Alex. speaking of St. John tells us he went about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In some places he appointed Bishops where they were wanting and none but Apostolick men could do it and in some places he himself govern'd the Church entirely i. e. as their Bishop and probably appointed another when he left them to succeed in the Charge Vales did not see the Import of this Phrase but rendred it Partim ut ecclesias integras disponeret formaret The last is a Comment that destroys the Sence of Clement who by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could not understand the setting of a Church under it's Officers which his former seems to imply but the ordering and governing of it by himself in Opposition to his setting up of Bishops in other places and though he had some Authority there by way of supervising the Bishops yet he did not take the Care of the whole which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now in whatsoever City they lived besides the general Care of
all the Churches they lookt upon that as their peculiar Charge and govern'd not as ordinary Presbyters but by Apostolick Authority as a Metropolitan who although he has the supervising of all the Diocesses within his Province yet may have his proper Diocess which he governs as a particular Bishop And the Office of an Apostle does not essentially consist in the governing of more Churches than one else St. Paul would never have vindicated his Apostleship from the particular Right he had over the Corinthians 1 Cor. 9.2 If I be not an Apostle to others yet doubtless I am to you for the Seal of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord. So that though he had had no more Churches to govern yet his Apostolick Authority might have been still exercised over that particular one of Corinth The Provinces of the Evangelists were not yet so large as those of the Apostles for these were either sent to such Cities or Parts whither the Apostles themselves could not go or left where they could not stay The Church of Ephesus was the Diocese of Timothy from whence although the greater Occasions of other Churches might call him away and require his Assistance yet his Authority was not Temporal nor would it have expired if he had resided a longer while at Ephesus so that these Apostolick men were not so because they were unfixt but because they had that Eminence of Authority which they might exercise in one or more Churches according as their Necessities did require or as the Spirit signified and that they did not settle in one place is to be ascribed to the Condition of their Times and not to the nature of their Office for the Harvest was now great and such Labourers as these were but few and therefore their Presence was required in several Places And as this Unsetledness is not essential to Apostolick Authority no more is it essential to Episcopacy to be determined to a certain Church Every Bishop is Bishop of the Catholick Church and that his Authority is confined to a certain district is only the positive Law of the Church that forbids one Bishop any Exercise of his Office within the Diocess of another and St. Paul seems to have given them the occasion who would not build upon another mans Foundation However in any case of Necessity this Positure Law is superseeded and a Bishop may act in any place by virtue of a general Power he has received in his Ordination so that this first Exception of the Apostles and the Evangelists being unfixt and Bishops determined to a particular Church can make no essential Difference As to the Visitors of the Church of Scotland they make evidently against Mr. B's Notion of an essential Difference between Bishops and Evangelists for first of all the Residence was fixt to certain Cities and their Jurisdiction confin'd within certain Provinces as the Superintendent of the Country of Orkney was to keep his Residence in the Town of Keirkwall Spotswood Hist Scot. l. 3. p. 158. he of Rosse in the Channory of Rosse and so the rest in the Towns appointed for their Residence Their Office was to try the Life Diligence and Behaviour of the Ministers the Order of their Churches and the Manners of the People how the Poor were provided and how the Youth were instructed they must admonish where Admonition needed and dress all things that by good Counsel they were able to compose finally they must take note of all hainous Crimes that the same may be corrected by the Censures of the Church So far of their Constitution as we find it in Mr. Knox's first Project of Church-polity Spotswood p. 258. and their practice was altogether the same with that of Diocesan Episcopacy as Bishop Spotswood describes it The Superintendents held their Office during Life and their Power was Episcopal for they did elect and ordain Ministers they presided in Synods and directed all Church Censures neither was any Excommunication pronounced without their Warrant And now let the Reader judge how the Constitution of Diocesan Episcopacy becomes a Crime and yet these Visitors of the Church of Scotland conformable to divine Institution As to the second Exception that the Apostles and Evangelists were Episcopi Episcoporum and had Bishops under their Jurisdiction which our Diocesans who are the Bishops but of particular Churches do not pretend to This makes no Difference at leastwise no essential one for the same person may have the Charge of a particular Church or Diocess and yet have the supervising Power over several others But in this point Mr. B. does but equivocate and impose upon his Reader for by his Episcopus gregis he means only a Presbyter and a particular Bishop may have Jurisdiction over such without any Injury or Prejudice done to the Office which from it's first Institution has been under the Direction of a superiour Apostolical Power if therefore these Presbyters do retain all that Power which essentially belongs to them under a Diocesan Bishop how are they degraded In short either this Order of Congregational Episcopacy is different from Presbytery or the same with it if the same how is it abrogated by Diocesan Episcopacy since Presbyters are still in the full Possession and Exercise of their Office If they are distinct how then comes Mr. B. to confound them as he does § 16. where he says That the Apostles themselves set more than one of these Elders or Bishops in every Church So then those Apostolick men as Bishops of the particular Churches wherin as they resided had Authority over Presbyters within the Extent of their Diocess and a general Supervising Care of several other Churches and so they were Episcopi Episcoporum in the first they are succeeded by Diocesan Bishops in the latter by Metropolitans which yet were never lookt upon as two orders essentially distinct But after all this we shall never come to a right Understanding of Mr. B's Episcopacy unless we take along with it his Notion of a particular Church which he sets down p. 6. § 19. There is great Evidence of History p. 6. that a particular Church of the Apostles setling was essentially only a Company of Christians Pastors and People associated for personal holy Communion and mutual help in holy Doctrine Worship Conversation and Order therefore it never consisted of so few or so many or so distant as to be uncapable of such personal Help and Communion but was ever distinguished as from accidental Meetings so from the Communion of many Churches or distant Christians which was held but by Delegates Synods of Pastors or Letters and not by personal Help in Presence Not that all these must needs always meet in the same place but that usually they did so or at due times at least and were no more nor more distant than could so meet sometimes Persecution hindred them sometimes the Room might be too small even independent Churches among us sometimes meet in diverse Places
became the Church Government and I believe it will be found to have preserv'd those Churches in as great peace and Unity if not more than those had that were Governed without Bishops The Churches of Sweden and Denmark never knew what Schism or Heresie was but by reading or hear-say and those of Germany though something more disquieted yet it was seldom from within but by Projects of Union with other Churches under a different kind of Polity as well as of different opinions in some points of Religion It is to be wish'd that the Churches of the Ausburg Confession as they took care to preserve the Antient form of Church Governmet had been also a little more careful in the point of Ordination For their Bishops though they have the same authority with Diocesans yet were at first ordain'd but by Presbyters and the Principles of those Churches touching the right of ordination are so loose that I believe those of the Presbyterian Discipline will hardly allow them Hunnius defending their Ordinations says the power is in the Church diffusive and that it may be conveyed not only by Bishops or Presbyters but by Deacons or any body else if the Church think fit and I am afraid the Practice of some of those Churches is not otherwise to be justifi'd But before this Lutheran Reformation was that of the Bohemians not that of the Calixtins only but the Vnitas fratrum Bohemorum whose Churches were govern'd by Diocesan Bishops and where Discipline was so far from being Impossible Commenii Hist Eccles Slav. p. 32. notwithstanding the Dioceses were very large that they were perhaps the best Govern'd Churches in the world Bucer speaking of this Government says haec verò est Coelestis potius quam Ecclesiastica in Terris Hierarchia and Calvin was so taken with this Government as well as Discipline that he looks upon their Governing and ordaining Pastors as no inconsiderable blessing Ep. ad Pastor Bohem. Neque Vero parvo est estimandum quod tales habent Pastores a quibus Regantur Ordinentur and those were their Bishops as may be seen in that Account they gave of themselves in Ratio Disciplinae Ordinisque Ecclesiastici in Vnitate fratrum Bohemorum printed at Lesna 1632. and afterwards at the Hague by Commenius 1660. Whoever would know more of these Episcopal Diocesan Churches may consult Lasitius or the short Accout of Commenius the then only Remaining Bishop of those Churches And these had such Bishops as were not only invested with the full Authority of Diocesans over several Churches but such as had been ordain'd according to the Canons of the Ancient Church Stephanus accito Episcopo altero c. Commen Hist p. 24. by the Bishops of the Waldenses who derived themselves by an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles It is time now to Return to the Principal Design which was to shew how no other form of Government can secure the Church from Heresie Schism and Contention any more than Episcopacy and that those Churches which put themselvs under new Models of Government and discipline have been excercis'd with Schism Heresie and Sedition no less than those under Episcopacy The Churches which follow'd the Reformation of Zuinglius had at first no Government nor discipline that was properly Ecclesiastical All authority rested in the Civil Magistrate and the Ministers did only preach and administer the Sacraments without excluding any It was from this practice I suppose that the Divines of that way came to speak generally so loosely of the power of the Keys making it all to consist in preaching without any regard to Ecclesiastical discipline But the Licentiousness that followed this defect of Discipline and Government soon open'd the eyes of the Ministers who Complain'd passionately of the Increase of Libertinism under pretence of Reformation and endeavour'd to make the people sensible that there is more required to make a true Protestant than to Renounce the Pope and Transubstantiation and that the Notion of a Church did imply something more than a Company of sound believers met together to hear a Sermon Calvin a person of extraordinary Abilities was one of the first that observ'd and Complain'd of this defect in the Reformation and endeavour'd to Remedy it in the Church where he was Pastour by Establishing an Ecclesiastical Government Baza vit Calv. and that perhaps not such as he thought most perfect and absolute but such as the Circumstances of the place would bear The people of Geneva were sufficiently prejudic'd against Episcopacy having turn'd out their Bishop who had likewise a title to be their Prince and to have talk'd of Introducing a Bishop there would have sounded as harsh as the mention of a King would have done to the Romans after the expulsion of Tarquin But suppose they could have been Reconcil'd to the name and the office upon assurance it should not exceed its proper bounds it is possible Calvin might look upon it as too Invidious a proposal to his Church for fear of being understood to recommend himself and to affect dominion over his Brethren Episcopacy then seeming Impracticable in that place he devised a form of Government that should be more popular and consequently more acceptable the Ministers were to be all of equal Authority and were in the first place to govern the Church and with them a certain number out of the Laity under the Title of ruling Elders were to have a share in the Church Government and this mix'd Council without any Bishop was to exercise all Ecclesiastical Censures and Jurisdiction One would think this would be unexceptionable but it proved otherwise for this frame was no sooner begun but it was presently broken in pieces and the Author banish'd But his Reputation abroad made them reflect upon this Treatment with shame and desire him to return With him this Government was restor'd which was so far from remedying all disorders that it became the occasion of some very great ones and the State of that Church as it is discrib'd by Calvin in his letters to his friends and by Beza in his life was most lamentably distracted and this Government was made odious in the beginning of it by very harsh and rigorous proceedings The Expulsion of Castellio a man of Great and Polite Learning was too Invidious The opposing of the Senate in the Election of a Minister to such a point of heat and Contention Beza vit Calv. as to endanger the peace of the City wanted little of Sedition Calvins quarrels with Perinus came to that height that the Council of the City had almost cut one anothers throats about it Siquidem eousque semel in ipsâ curiâ deventum est coactis Diacosiis pene exertis jam Ensibus parum abfuerit quin mutuis caedibus ipsam Curiam cruentarent And what was the reason of so dangerous a Contention No Article of the Creed was in danger It was not for any part of the faith that they contended so
an extraordinary Zeal for Religion and that oftentimes made them take Alarme when it was not in any extream danger and if their Knowledge and Discretion were not always proportionable to their Zeal surely among Christians it might be allowed to the Frailty of Humane Nature and the Sincerity of a good meaning If they differ'd sometimes among themselves and were warmer than is fit in their Disputes consider that the Apostles themselves had their Misunderstandings and their Contentions sometimes Peter was to be blamed and Barnabas was carried away The Churches founded by the Apostles were immediately divided about Opinions which were presently determined in Council and yet we do not find that the Controversie was at an end Should any one therefore so abridge the History of the Apostles as to represent nothing of them but their unhappy Contention and leave them under the odious Characters of Disturbers of the World and Dividers of the Church would it not justly pass for a Libel against Christianity It were disingenious and base even in an Enemy in a Christian I know not how to call it Having paid this duty to the honour of Religion by a general Vindication of it from such Consequences as might be drawn from this Church History against the Intention of the Author I come now to his design which is laid down page 27. To shew the Ignorant so much of the matter of Fact as may tell them who have been the Cause of all Church-Corruption Heresies Schisms Seditions c. And whether such Diocesan Prelacies and Grandure be the Cure or ever was But surely this is not the way of cureing Church-divisions thus to exasperate These Reproaches cannot serve to heal but to fret and inflame the Wound I have some hopes that I shall be able to shew the Reader so much of the matter of Fact too as may let him see how much he has been imposed on by this History and that all Corruptions and Schisms are very injuriously and against all Truth of History charg'd upon the Bishops Yet suppose the Charge be true is it such a Wonder that men of great Talents and great Authority do sometimes abuse them and by that means become the Cause of Church-Corruptions Private men though neither better nor wiser than the Bishops have not the Opportunity of doing so much either Good or Hurt and their Mistakes or Vices do not draw after them so great Consequences This Accusation though it may serve to render Bishops odious is yet of use to prove their Authority and their ancient possession of the right of governing the Church like his who would prove that they have troubled the World ever since the Apostles time If the abuse of this Power be sufficient reason to take it away or to render it odious what will become of preaching and writing Books What will become of Scripture and Conscience Let him still exclaim the Bishops have been the Authors of all Corruption and Schism were they not Christians and Men as well as Bishops and if a Heathen or a Jew should not lay such a Stress upon the name of Bishop but put that of a Christian in it's place and then make a great Outery wicked Christians turbulent Christians would not this reasoning hold as well as Mr. B's or if some of the graver Beasts should recover the Conversation they had in Aesop's days and talk judicially might not they bray aloud Horrible men Abominable men that will never agree or understand one another and then conclude with the Ass in the Satyr Ma foy non plus que nous l'home n'est qu'une bête Be the Bishops whose History Mr. B. writes as bad as he will have them how will this concern the rest of that order unless they will follow their Examples and own their Corruptions Machiavel was of Opinion that the greatest part of men were Rogues and Knaves but what is that to You and I let every man bear his own Burden But Mr. B. is resolved to cut off this Retreat and to level his Charge not so much against the Persons as the office of Bishops and to this effect he explains himself p. 22. There is an Episcopacy whose very Constitution is a Crime and there is another that seems to me a thing convenient lawful and indifferent and there is a sort which I cannot deny to be of divine Right Here we have three sorts of Bishops and this is pretty reasonable and compendious but in another Book which he refers to in this he gives no less than twelve Disput of Ch. Government p. 14. dividing was much in Fashion at that time though commonly it was without a difference and as they could make a sort of Seekers that neither sought nor found so he gives several sorts of Bishops that were no more so than he or I nay in this Abridgment of the great Division I believe the Members will be concident and that it is but a little artificial Illusion of Mr. B. that makes them appear several take away the little corner'd glass and that great multitude of pieces we saw are in a moment reduced to one poor Six-pence well let us see then what this criminal sort of Episcopacy is and what Mr. B. has to lay to it's Charge That Episcopacy which I take in it self to be a Crime is such as is afore-mentioned p. 22. which in it's very Constitution overthrows the Office Church and Discipline which Christ by himself and his Spirit in his Apostles instituted this is criminal indeed and a thousand Pities it should stand one Moment But where shall we find this Abomination it is not far of if his Judgment may be taken for Such says he I take to be that Diocesan kind ibid. which has only one Bishop over many Score or Hundred fixt parochial Assemblies Is this then their Crime that they have many fixt parochial Assemblies under their Government Had not the Apostles Had not the Evangelists so too And was that Constitution criminal Had not the Bishops of St. Jerom's Notion several fixt Assemblies That Father did indeed maintain that the poor Bishop of Eugubium was as much a Bishop as he of Rome but he little thought that he was more so or that the Extent of the Roman Diocess had chang'd the very Species of it's Church Government Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. he thought they were both of the same sort and that the single and small Congregation of the one and the numerous Assembly under the Inspection of the other had made no difference at all in the nature or constitution of their Episcopacy he communicated with and submitted himself in Questions of the highest moment to the Bishop of Rome Vid Hier. Ep. ad Damas which considering the Temper of the man and his Contempt of the World he would hardly have done if he had judged him an Usurper but would rather have joyned himself to the poor Bishop of Eugubium and done all possible
Countenance to that Primitive and Apostolick Constitution of Episcopacy But let St. Jerom think as he pleases Mr. B. is of another Opinion and now let us consider his Reasons By this means says he parochial Assemblies are made by them the Bishops no Churches p. 22. § 55. as having no ruling Pastors that have the Power of judging who to baptize or admit to Communion or Refuse but only of Chappels having Preaching Curates But must every Parish be an independent Church and exercise all Authority and Jurisdiction within it's self May not several Parishes associate under the Discipline of the same Bishop but that they must be unchurch'd If it be no Church that has no Bishop what will become of all Presbyterian Churches that are subject to Classes do not they unchurch Parishes as well as Bishops But they are made no Churches for want of governing Pastors this is a great Mistake every Parish with us has a governing Pastor but it is in Subordination to the Bishop and with Exception to some Acts that concern the general Union of all the Parishes associated Is he no Governour because he is not Independent Is he no Officer that is subordinate At this rate every Constable should be a King and every Captain a General But our Pastors Mr. B. says have not the Power of judging whom to Baptize this is a Calumny that has not the least Shadow of Truth and the contrary is notorious That they have no power to admit to Communion or Refuse is not true they have Power to admit any one that is not excommunicated or naturally incapable and they may likewise refuse the Communion to such as they judge notoriously unfit but must afterwards approve their reasons to the Bishop Several have used their Liberty and Discretion in this point without Offence however it is but fit that since the peace of the Church does greatly depend upon the right Application of Church-censures there should be a Restraint laid upon ordinary Ministers in this particular yet there is no Church-censure can have any effect without the Consent of the Minister of that Parish where he lives against whom it is directed The Ministers Refusal indeed may expose him to great Inconveniences and it is but just when his Refusal is only the effect of Opposition yet he has time and opportunity to produce his Reasons and why should he despair in a just Canse of convincing his Ordinary However though the Power of Church-censures be not allowed Parish Presbyters under Diocesan Episcopacy it is no Diminution of the right for neither under the Apostles nor the Primitive Bishops did they ever exercise it as principals or independent 2. Mr. B's second Reason against Diocesan Episcopacy is p. 22. That all the first Order of Bishops in single Churches is depos'd as if the Bishop of Antioch should have put down a thousand Bishops about him and made himself the sole Bishop of the Churches This reason goes upon the same Supposition with the other that every single Congregation had a Bishop the proof of which we will examine in due place The Bishops of great Cities had several Parishes or Congregations under them in the first times which never had any other Bishops but themselves and it was not this but the contrary that was the fault of great Bishops and Metropolitans of old for instead of deposing little Bishops they multiply'd them to strengthen their Party in Councils Vid. Collat. Carthag when they began to vye with one another in number of Suffrages as if the Archbishop of York should make every Town under his Jurisdiction an Episcopal Seat that he might have as many Suffrages as the Arch-bishop of Canterbury This I hope to prove in due place and to shew the Reader how far Mr. B. is mistaken in the Causes of Schism and that nothing contributed more to some of them than the multiplying the number of the lesser Bishops by their Metropolitans 3. His third Reason is That the Office of Presbyters is changed to Semi-presbyters What then is the Office of a Presbyter Is it not to preach and to be the mouth of the Congregation in publick Worship to administer the Sacraments to exhort to admonish to absolve the penitent to visit the sick This all Presbyters in the Church of England have full liberty to do and I wish all would take care to execute their Function as fully as it is permitted them 4. Discipline is made impossible p. 22. as it is for one General without inferiour Captains to rule an Army But are there not subordinate Officers in the Church as well as in the Camp How then is Discipline impossible If the General reserve to himself certain Acts of Jurisdiction does he by that means supersede the Commissions of all inferiour Commanders Mr. B. is much upon the point of Discipline's being impossible under Diocesan Episcopacy because one man he thinks cannot govern so many Parishes Admit in all things he may not nor is it necessary he should but in such Acts of Government that are reserved to him it is possible enough and has been practised from the days of the Apostles to this present time This Point you may find excellently discuss'd by Mr. Dodwel in his second Letter to Mr. B. which Mr. B. confutes briefly Cb. Hist 2. part by telling the Reader that if he will believe those reasons he has no hopes of him a short way of confuting and one would wonder that he that makes use of it should write so many and great Books of Controversie Yet this I must add that if it be impossible now 't is fit to let the World know who has made it so the Dissenters themselves have first weakned the Authority and obstructed the Execution of Discipline and when the subordinate Officers agitated caballed against their Superiour Commanders it is not wonder if Government be made impracticable However the Accusation sounds ill from those men by whose Mutiny and seditious Practises things have been brought to that evil Pass Mr. B. pursues his point further § 55. and adds Much more does it become then unlawful when first deposing all Presbyters from Government by the Keys of Discipline they put the same Keys even the Power of decretive Excommunication and Absolution into the hands of Laymen called Chancellors and set up Courts liker to the Civil than Ecclesiastical It is a Question I cannot easily resolve whether it be the King or the Bishop that governs by the Chancellor but whoever governs by them they neither have no nought to have the Power of Decisive Excommunication or the Power of the Keys but act only as Assistants and judges of matter of Fact and apply the Canons which determine what Offences are to be punish'd with Excommunication if they do any more I neither undertake the Defence nor will I suppose those that employ them own their Actions any farther However the Presbyterians fall under the same Censure with our Diocesans for
their Elders do directly excommunicate and yet are lay-men It would be much to the Advantage as well as the Reputation of our Dissenters if they would first agree and correct those Abuses among themselves which they so sharply exclaim against in our Church 2. When they oblige the Magistrate to execute their Decrees by the Sword be they just or unjust § 55. and to lay men in Goals and ruine them because they are excommunicated by Bishops Chancellors c. This is the Law of the State and not of the Church and therefore is not to be charged upon Diocesan Episcopacy besides now there are few that have reason to complain of this there are those Evasions found that render that Law insignificant but the Threatning Princes and Magistrates with Excommunications if not Depositions p. 23. if they do communicate with those whom the Bishops have excommunicated belongs not at all to our Diocesan Episcopacy let the Papists who hold this Dostrine or the rigid Scotch Presbyterians who seem to have outdone the Popes in their Claim of Authority over Sovereign Princes answer it if they can 3. Or when they arrogate the Power of the Sword to themselves as Socrates says Cyril did § 55. How far Socrates is to be credited in his account of that Bishop we shall consider in due place in the mean time this does not concern Diocesan Episcopacy as it is with us for our Bishops do not arrogate that Power if the King confer upon them any Authority extrinsecal to their Office Mr. B. has declared himself p. 23. § 59. that shall make no difference and that he will submit to them notwithstanding The next Paragraph I am loth to meddle with it is little else but Biitterness and Railing and this I have neither Skill nor Inclination to answer yet because it is set down as the highest Aggravation of Diocesan Tyranny I must say something to it lest I should be thought to be ashamed of the Cause and to desert it It becomes much worse § 56. continues Mr. B. by tyrannical Abuse when being unable and unwilling to exercise true Discipline and so many hundred Parishes they have multitude of Atheists Infidels gross Ignorants and wicked Livers in Church Communion yea compel all in their Parishes to communicate upon pain of Imprisonment and Ruine and turn their Censures cruelly against godly persons that dare not obey them in all their Formalities Ceremonies and Impositions for fear of sinning against God I am afraid there are too many wicked men in all Communions and the Communion or as they call it the Religion of the State will have the most for Reasons I need not mention but it is oftentimes a hard thing to know them and until they are discovered it can be no Reproach to the Discipline of the Church that they are in outward Communion but all sorts of People and these with the rest are forced into our Communion They are indeed obliged to come to Church and to receive the Sacrament three times in the year but all this is upon the Supposition of their being Christians if they declare to the contrary they are immediately exempted from all Church-Jurisdiction and for the Civil let them deal with it as well as they can It is the duty of every Christian to come to Church and receive the Sacrament and because all that have been baptised and have not renounced the Faith are presum'd to be Christians it is doubtless lawful to quicken them to that which is their Duty by Penalties upon the neglect of it As for the Atheists and Infidels declared if they are admitted to Communion it is an unexcusable fault of Discipline yet such as is to be charged on the Minister of the Parish that receives them rather than the Bishop and for the being of any such men amongst us that is not so much to be imputed to the defect of present Discipline as to the licentiousness of the late unhappy times and the Offence that was given to light and unsteady minds by such pretended Saints as made Religion their Warrant for all their barbarous Villanies they committed But wicked Livers he adds are forced into Church-Communion by the Bishops § 56. This is a great Mistake for the Bishop forces no such into the Church but obliges the Minister and Church-wardens of every Parish to present such if any there be that they might be separated from Communion till they shall have given some Satisfaction to the Church by their Repentance and good Hopes of their future Amendment and lastly that gross Ignorants are admitted to the Communion can be charged upon no other than the Minister of that place whose Duty it is to instruct them in the Principles of their Religion and the Bishops are so far from obstructing the Exercise of this Duty that there is hardly any thing which they press with greater Earnesiness As to those godly persons who dare not obey the Orders of Bishops in point of Church-Communion and cannot bring their Conscience to comply with Ceremonies and Formalities Whether it be their Fault or Misfortune I pity them heartily but I believe this ought not to be charg'd upon the Constitution of our Episcopacy for if the King and the great Senate of the Nation after Experience of former Troubles should think fit to impose this as a Test upon such as they thought the Government not secure of what is all this to Diocesan Episcopacy The next Paragraph concludes the Arraignment of Diocesan Bishops § 57. not with any Argument but a great many hard Words which suppose the Proofs that have gone before to have amounted to full Evidence I am not willing to repeat them here let them stand or fall with those Arguments they depend upon Now least you should take Mr. B. for an Enemy to Bishops for one sort he rejects he receives two the first such as St. Jerom says Was brought into the Church for a Remedy against Schism the Bishop of this Constitution was it preside over Presbyters and without him nothing of Moment was to be done in the Church § 58. These Presbyters that were under the Bishop had they several Parishes or Congregations or the same with their President If several then this is the Diocesan Prelacy that is a Crime in it's Constitution if the same then what did they do there For by old Canons it appears and Mr. B. makes use of them to serve his own Turn that a Presbyter was not to preach in the Presence of the Bishop what then Shall they only read the Offices of the Church This is to fall into worse than Diocesan Episcopacy and to make Presbyters not Preaching but what sounds much meaner reading Curates only to the Bishops There is another sort of Bishops that he dares not deny to be of divine Institution § 60. And they are such as succeed the Apostles in the ordinary part of Church-Government while some senior Pastors have
not stand in need of that Charity Some of them spoke loosely in compliance with a Platonick Notion of the Trinity not fore-seeing what Consequences might be drawn from their Expressions or how narrowly they should come afterwards to be examin'd Certain it is that the Fathers that followed the Nicene Council Athan. ad Afros Hist Tripart l. 2. c. 7. Socr. l. 5. c. 10. Sozom. l. 7. c. 12. took all the Ecclesiastical Writers before their time to be of their Opinion and Sisinnius the Novatian Reader afterwards Bishop is said to have confounded all the Arrian Disputants by putting the matter to this issue Whether they would stand to the Judgment of the Ancient Fathers in the Interpretation of such places of Scripture as were controverted between them Eusebius no Enemy to the Arrians Ep. ad Caesar Hist Tripart l. 2. acknowledges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be used by some Ecclesiastical Writers long before the Council of Nice the Creed of the Council of Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus has it Vid. Conâ— Antioch and several other things that shew how much the Doctrine of the Church at that time differ'd from that of the Arrians It would be a great Service to the Truth that seems now to labour under some Prejudice if some learned hand would take the Pains to shew which I believe is not impossible how Petavius has betray'd the constant Tradition of this Doctrine to establish it by the Authority of the Church and relieve the Memories of those holy Martyrs that he leaves charg'd with the Suspition of blasphemous Opinions concerning our Saviour Having done with the Nicene Council p. 50. §. 7. and all that related to it Mr. B. thinks it worth his labour to add the Sum of the History of the Audians out of Epiphanius Epiph. Haeres Audian That the World may percieve what Spirit the hereticating Prelates were then of and how some called Hereticks were made such or defamed as such and who they were that did divide the Churches and break their Peace The Author of this Sect was Audius a man severe in his Life and sound in his Principles but one that took great Liberty of Speech and reproved sharply whatsoever he found amiss though it were in the Bishops they in Revenge persecuted him and turn'd him out of the Church He is made Bishop of his own Sect and so exasperated as to abhor all Communion with the Bishops of the Catholick Church If all things were as Epiphanius represents them Audius had very hard Measure but it seems from Epiphanius his own account that there was not wanting just occasion against him for he held that God had Humane Shape a Doctrine if obstinately maintain'd and such bold men are not easily reclaim'd altogether intolerable But I am afraid Epiphanius had this Story from as bad hands as that of the Meletians for this Schism happening in a remote part of the World and being scatter'd afterwards into several Parts it is likely that some Audian might impose upon him l 4. Haeret. â—ah For it looks like the Story of one party and the more likely because Theodoret a man that lived in that Country where they first sprung gives an infamous Character of them That they held some of the Doctrines of the Manichees That God was not the Author of Fire and Darkness that they exercised Usury that they cohabited with Women without Marriage that they were great Hypocrites of a proud Pharisaical Spirit that cried Touch me not for I am holier than thou If Audius were like his Followers I know nothing so like him and them as Labady and his Disciples See Labady's Epist against Reformation This was a man very free in his Reproofs too he spoke sharply against the Vices of the Clergy where he lived though there were no Bishops amongst them and it may be one of his Followers may be able to perswade a learned man in Constantinople that he was banish'd only for his Liberty of Reprehension and out of Envy to his Virtue Page 52. Section 14. we have several shrewd Remarks upon some Canons of the Council of Nice As first That no Patriarchs are named there Secondly That they nullifie the Ordination of scandalous and uncapable men Can. 9.10 Which will justifie Pope Nicholas forbidding any to take the Mass of a fornicating Priest This fornicating Priest of Pope Nicholas is no other than a married one and whatsoever will justifie that Prohibition cannot but condemn Mr. B. who is himself married As for deposing scandalous Ministers there is none but wishes it but not in the manner he seems to insinuate by the Sentence of the people but by their lawful Superiors which these two Canons do suppose 3. That Rural Bishops were then in Vse and allowed by the Council Can. 8. And what can he infer from hence Not surely That every Country Parish had a Bishop but that such Cities as had larger Territories belonging to them had Ecclesiastical Visitors under the City-Bishop which were called Chorepiscopi Can. 57. Conc. Laodic Whether they were Bishops indeed or Priests with a delegated Episcopal Power is not agreed amongst Learned men Sure it is that they had this Obligation common to them with other Presbyters not to do any thing of Moment without the Advice and Approbation of the Bishop Conc. Carthag 4. 4. That no Bishop was to remove from one Church to another yet some other Councils allow this Translation and Gelasius understands it only of such as out of Covetousness or Ambition and by indirect means shall endeavour to translate themselves and the Practice of the Church was never very conformable to this Canon the most eminent Bishops in the World Socr. l. 7. c. 36. having transgres'd it 5. The Arabick Canons the fourth Si pâ—pulo placebit is a Condition of every Bishops Election Newer Translations render this Concurrence of the People Cum consensu Pepuli Populo consersum praevente which implies little more than that the Bishop ought to be such as the People should have nothing material to object against and not that they were to please themselves and to indulge their Fancies in the Election of their Bishops for that did belong to the Clergy Vid. loâ— ap Synod Bâ—â—â—r â—0 and particularly to the Metropolitan as the â—â—â—th Arabick Canon does expressly inform us 6. The fifth Arabick Canon in case of Discord among the People who shall be their Bishop or Priest refers it to the People to consider which is most blameless and no Bishop or Priest must be taken into anothers place if the former was blameless so that if Pastors be wrongfully cast out the People must not forsake them nor receive the obtruded Nothing can be more disingenuous than this Dealing The design of that Canon is that there should be but one Bishop in every City but if the People disagree and one party stand up for one and another for another
Mr. B. tells us that Treatise of Episc p. 1. p. 164. The Church of Scotland is an Eminent instance that Churches which have no Bishops have incomparably less Heresie Schism wickedness and more concord than we have here For the concord of that Church it was much greater while it continu'd under Superintendents and Bishops than it has been since Andrew Melvil diiturli'd it with the Perfection of the Geneva Discipline and Government For a long time after all the Disputes about Religion were reduc'd into one point of Ecclesiastical sovereign jurisdiction which they disputed against the King and the Government with such perpetual Seditions and Treasons as at last engag'd three Kingdoms in most unnatural and bloody Wars which ended in the slavery of them all and particularly of those that were the first Incendiaries through the wise and just judgment of God What Schism there arose in the late times between the disciplinarians and the rest and what disturbances the same sort of men have given of late is too well known to need a relation and the field Conventieles still witness But because Mr. B. would perswade us that there is such great concord to be found in Anti-Episcopal Churches and particularly in this I will give one Instance that shall let the reader see how far this way is from establishing a lasting Concord and withal how this parity that is pretended is really no more than a pretence the leading men against Bishops commonly assuming greater authority and exercising it with greater Absoluteness and more Impatient of being oppos'd and contradicted than any Bishops who are legally Invested with power There happen'd a great division in the Presbytery of St. Spotswood H. of Scot. 1.6 Andrews about preferring a Minister to the Church of Luchars There were two pretenders and Melvil with a few more was for one and the rest who were three times as many in number were for the other Melvil looking upon himself as an Apostle and disdaining to be overrul'd by the Majority of the Presbytery left the place and with his six Presbyters that follow'd him made another Synod by himself and both these Presbyters like Anti. Popes Issu'd out their several pleasures The Gentlemen of the Parish upon this were divided into factions some holding with one and some with the other which occasioned great scandal and the heats grew to that height that the Presbytery was forc'd to be divided one part of it to sit at St. Andrews the other at Couper the one under the Influence of Melvil and the other under that of Th. Buchanan so hard it was for one Presbyterial Diocese to hold two Topping Presbyters The observation that follows the relation of this difference in Spotswood is very remarkable Thus was that great strife pacifi'd which many held to be Ominous p. 386. and that the Government which in the beginning did break forth into such Schisms could not long continue for this every man noted That of all men none could worse endure Parity and lov'd more to Command than they who had introduc'd it into the Church This sort of men did afterwards make not only a formal Schism and insurrection against those Bishops plac'd over them by authority but after that Episcopacy was abolish'd in Scotland could be as little at peace among themselves They were in the first place divided about the receiving the King and the Conditions to be Impos'd upon him and in this they proceeded even to the Excommunication of one another After his Majesties Restauration when Episcopacy was again establish'd in the Church the Presbyterians who separated from the Communion of the Bishops were divided yet among themselves some accepting the Kings Indulgence and Licence to Preach others renouncing it as derogatory to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and upon this they parted Communion Nor could these resolute Renouncers of Indulgence agree yet among themselves about the measure of their Contempt of authority some were content to Conventicle and Preach against the Kings order and carry their Contempt no farther the others under Cameron were more fiercely Zealous and thought themselves oblig'd by the Covenant to attempt the deposing of the King as they manifested besides their several Writings to that effect by two formal Rebellions These are the fruits this the Peace and Unity that Presbytery and the Scotch Covenant produc'd the Covenant so much Idolz'd once by our Presbyterians of England and which notwithstanding all the Mischiefs that attended it here and do still issue from it in Scotland they are yet loth to renounce though required so to do by all the Authority in the Nation But what is all this to Congregational Episcopacy It is not Presbytery but this that Mr. B. Contends for He is for Bishops and would only pare off the superfluities of their Dioceses and reduce them to their first bounds To which I answer First That Mr. B.'s Congregational Bishop and Parish Presbyter is all one and he has taken so much pains to prove it in his Treatise of Episcopacy that it were an injury to his sincerity to question his opinion of it But Secondly That there was some necessity to say all this of Presbyterian Governments being subject to Heresies and Schisms as well as Episcopal because Mr. B. himself had made the comparison between them and charg'd all Schisms and Heresies upon Diocesan Episcopacy as the fault of the constitution it was therefore necessary to see how all sorts of Governments of the Church as well as of the State may be disturb'd by evil and factious men and are subject to great inconveniences when they fall into evil hands But then what Schisms can be imputed to this Congregational way This cannot well be answered without asking a question was this Congregational Episcopacy ever establish'd in any Churches If not it will be as hard a matter to shew what mischief it has occasion'd as it is to discover what Civil Wars happen'd in Plato's Common-wealth or to reckon the Differences of Sects of Philosophers in the College of Atlantis If this Government has been set up any where it is but naming the time and place and it may be that some account may be given of the Schisms and Heresies that molested it Mr. B. contends it was the first Apostolical and Scripture constitution and shews at large that a Church was but one Congregation and a Bishop could have but one Church Well but there were Schisms and Heresies then and St. Paul makes frequent complaints of them Or if this sort of Government continu'd for some Centuries after as Mr. B. would make it appear it must be likewise granted that there never were greater and more Blasphemous Heresies than in those times and for Schisms they could not be avoided it seems and though a Diocese were but one Congregation the Presbyters could not agree who should govern that but divided it into separate Assemblies But to this Mr. B. Answers 2 Dispute about Ordination p. 329. That
upon the multitudes said to be converted the number of Apostles and extraordinary Labourers commonly residing in this City the conjunction of Jews and Gentiles under the common title and profession of Christianity we must conclude that the Church of Antioch was too great for one Congregation especially before the place of assembly can be imagin'd very capacious and I believe Mr. B. does not imagine such vast Cathedrals as Pauls to be very Primitive Orat de S. Ign. But what ever number of Christians there might be at that time Ignatius his Bishop-rick was never the less Diocesan in its constitution and design or else Chrysostom mistakes one Topick of his commendation He reckons five things that were much to his honour whereof two bring him under suspition of Diocesan Prelacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of his Authority or Government 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of the City whereof he was Bishop The first I suppose refers to his metropolitan Power the second to his peculiar Diocess but if this Bishop were to have but one Congregation what would the greatness of the City signifie how many more would have the same honour with him Or what so great difference is there between a full Congregation in the heart of the City and another as full in Chelsey at leastwise what honour does the greatness of the City do the Minister of that single Congregation And now to pass by the Church of Corinth where St. Paul Preach'd for a Year and six Months upon a Divine assurance of extraordinary success and that God had much people in that place Acts 18.8 9 10 11. and where many effectually believed and were Baptized where Peter and Apollos Preached with that effect as to leave many Disciples 1 Cor. 3. who called themselves by their names And to say nothing of Ephesus where a numerous Church is said to have been gathered by St. Paul who preached there for two years and not only they that dwelled at Ephesus but all that dwelt in Asia Acts 19.10 heard the word of the Lord and the progress of the Gospel was so considerable that the shrine-makers apprehended the ruine of their Trade when they saw and heard that Paul not only at Ephesus but throughout all Asia had perswaded and turned away much people v. 26. To pass by these and several other eminent Churches Let us consider the Diocess of Rome as it was yet in the Apostles time It is very uncertain who laid the first Foundations of this Church though certain it is that before Pauls coming there the Gospel was not only received Rom. 1.13 15 17. seq but their Church was very considerable for St. Paul in his Epistle written long before his coming there as he himself witnesses sayes that their Faith was spoken of through the whole World and by the multitude of salutations in the end of that Epistle he makes appear the numbers of Christians in that City Salute Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16. Ostendit Congregationem Fidelium Ecclesiam nominari Hieron in loe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coetum Fidelium nec mirum est in tam am plâ Civitate distinctos fuisse Fidelium coetus Beza with the Church that is in their house This was one of the Congregations of that Church which is occasionly mentioned and it is not improbable that several that are mentioned with all the Saints that are with them may be the Officers of several Congregations For it appears that most of these were of the Ministry and such by whose means the Romans believed and that they were strangers come thither from other parts where Paul had known them Congregationem vert Eras Istos amats quos satutat intelligimus ex nominiâ—us suiffe peregrinos per quorum exemylum atque Doctrinam non absurde existimamus credidisse Romanes Hieron for as yet he had not seen Rome And this number was afterwards increased considerably by the coming of Paul who converted some of the Jews and afterwards received all that came whether Jews or Gentiles and Preach'd to them the Kingdom of God for the space of two whole years no man forbidding him And the progress of the Gospel in this City may be farther observed from the Persecution of Nero who is said to have put an infinite multitude of them to Death Ingens multitude hand perinde in Crimint ineendii quam odio bumani generis convicti sunt Tac. H. l. 15. upon pretence that they had fired Rome and the Heathen Historian sayes that they who confess'd were first laid hold on then a vast company were convicted by their indication where by the by besides the multitude of the sufferers we may take notice that the words seem to be mistaken generally as if the Christians some of them had confess'd the Fact and accused the rest Lipsius thus understanding the passage gives Tacitus the lye but he does not say they confessed the fact but they confessed without expressing the particulars but what did they confess then If it were this Crime that theâ— own'd themselves and charg'd others with how comes he to add that they were not convicted so much of this Crime by this Indication as by the hatred of all mankind therefore this confession was no more than owning themselves to be Christians and the hatred they were in made this sufficient conviction To these instances of the great numbers of Christians in some more considerable Cities Eccles Hist l. 2. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall add only the general account which Eusebius gives of the success of the Christian faith immediately after the first discovery of it That presently in all Cities and Villages Churches abounding with innumerable multitudes were assembled and the Granary of Christ was fill'd up to the top with the Wheat that was gather'd in Hitherto I have observ'd chiefly the growth of Christianity under the Apostles and that there was in some Cities such a number of Christians as could not meet together in one Assembly for personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship The next thing we must shew in order to Diocesan Episcopacy must be that such numbers of believers made but one Church Govern'd by one Bishop As to the Church of Jerusalem we have shew'd already from the most ancient Ecclesiastical writings that James the Just was Bishop of that Church i. e. of all the Believers in Jerusalem Nor is that Tradition without ground in the Scripture it self for St. Paul reckons James the Lords Brother among the Apostles of that Church Sal. 1.19 though he were none of the Twelve and in another place he mentions him as a person in Eminent place and authority there one that had sent several Brethren to Antioch before that certain Brethren came from James â— 12 Here we find the style of the Scripture to alter in favour of Episcopacy for hitherto the Messengers who were sent from one Church to another were
separation twenty years before seems to have made the first step towards this Congregational way Brown in the column intituled the state of Christians 50. Art 51. but he speaks of it something more obscurely Who have the grace and office of watching and guiding The Answer is Some have this Charge together which cannot be sundred Some have their several charge over many Churches some have charge but in one Church only 52. How have some their charge and office together Ans There be Synods or the meetings of sundry Churches where the weaker Churches seek for help to the stronger for deciding or redressing of matter or else the stronger look to them for redress Who have their several charge over many Churches Ans Apostles Prophets Helpers or Evangelists Nor does he determine whether any may succeed to this general inspection or no. Those that followed delivered themselves with greater clearness upon this point Confer with Egerton p. 43. Collection of certain Art 1590. Art 11. Barrow and Greenwood make all Ecclesiastical power to belong to every Congregation and call the Bishops Antichristian because they take upon them to oversee so many Pastors and Churches And in another treatise where they answer this Question whether the Queen may be excommunicated by the Presbyterie they say That they detest the power of any Person or Presbytery usurping Authority over the Church No Presbytery can do any thing of this kind without the consent of the whole Congregation but That the Congregation whereof the Prince is may Excommunicate him Ainsworth went the same way and declared himself in these words Ains Communion of Saints c. 24. We find no Authority committed to our Congregation over another for Excommunicating the same as every Church has over her own members Christ reserveth this power in his own hands Barrow affirms Bar. Refuttat of Gifford 137. that ordinary set Synods are as prejudicial to the Rights of the Church as the other i.e. Diocesan Episcopacy But Johnson was the first that cleared this point and treated of it particularly Johns Christian Plea Treat 3. He layes down two things as the foundation of Church Government and Unity 1. That all particular Churches with their Pastors do stand immediately under Jesus Christ their Arch Pastor without any other strange Ecclesiastical Power and Authority interposed between Whether of Prelates or their unlawful usurping Synods 2. That notwithstanding the estate and distinction aforesaid Treat 3. c. 6. p. 261.262 c. yet all the Churches and Ministers of them should be alwayes ready to advise and assist one another and in this manner might be had a lawful and profitable use of Synods classes c. Provided they do not usurp any unlawful jurisdiction or power over particular Churches This man goes yet farther and maintains Congregational Episcopacy and shews out of several places of Scripture and antiquity That there may be in a particular Church one Pastor or Angel of the Church properly and specially so called and divers teachers and ruling Elders joyned to this Pastor in the Ministry and Government of the same Church who may all of them generally be called Pastors yet so as one be specially distinguished from the rest in respect of place and function to be the Pastor so more particularly called under Jesus Christ the Arch Pastor Never did copy agree more exactly with the Original than Mr. Baxters doctrine about Church Government with this of Johnson the Brownist Vt sit tam fimilis sibi nec ipse It is easier to find a difference between Mr. B. and himself upon other occasions than to discern the least disagreement between him and Johnson in this Robinson whom Baylie makes the Father of the Independents though he left some tenets of the Brownists Diss p. 17. Robins Apol p. 17. continued still a separation in the Sacraments and Discipline and was as much for this Congregational way as any of the Brownists In his Apology he declares That every particular Congregation is intire without any relation to other Churches as Peter or Paul are perfect men without respect to others that these Congregations are Independent and under Christ only Therefore the Ancient bounds which the Apostles have laid are not to be removed under pretence of any human Prudence Antiquity or Vnity Upon this foundation the Independent Churches were built and continue to this day which though they may differ in points of Doctrine as their Pastors or leading men may be inclined yet this constitution of Government gives them a common Denomination And now having given this account of the Original of this way at leastwise in these last times the higher Antiquity of it we shall consider elsewhere I shall in the next place give some account of the success of this form of Government and shew what fruits of Peace and Truth it has yielded since its first planting by the Brownists Robert Brown Schoolmaster in Southwark Baylie diss Ch. 1. having seduced out of the Communion of the Church of England such a number of Disciples as made up a congregation for fear lest the severity of our Laws might dissipate this new Church resolved to remove it to a place of greater liberty and accordingly perswaded his followers to transport themselves and families into Middleborough Here they had not been long but they began to be shaken with intestine discords G. Johns Letter to Fran. Johns George Johnson sayes It was in great measure occasioned by Browns Wife and other Women of that banished Church which caused a mortal feud between Brown and Harison and some said it was the occasion of Harison 's death It was also the cause of Excommunicating Perriman And this new fashion'd Church in short broke all to pleces most turning Anabaptists and Brown at last seeing himself deserted returned with tears in his eyes into the Unity of the Church Conformed and was preferred to a living The next Congregation that was formed under this rule was by F. Johnson Diss p. 14. for Barrow was hanged before he could fill his Church and this finding the air of the English Government not to agree with it followed its Pastor to Holland and setled at Amsterdam a kind Soil for a young and tender sect But this Colony had no better success than that of Brown for in a little while it was diminished by the falling away of several to the Anabaptists who were Excommunicated by the Congregation they deserted But the dissensions that were raised among themselves afflicted them yet more for G. Johnson having disobliged his Brothers Wife by reproving her for the vanity of her Apparel and cited a Text of Scripture for it when he was candidate for the place of a Pastor in conjunction with his Brother G. Johnson discourse of some troubles c. 1603. was required to recant his Doctrine against fine Cloaths he on the other side drew Articles of Impeachment against the Busk Stomacher and Sleeves c.
here Independency became an Vniting Principle and bound up all sorts of Errors and Blasphemies in one and would â—ot disown any that would enter into their Constitution or interest let them believe as they please or believe nothing all but as to the Sects that Sprung out of them let us â—â—ar Bastwick 2. part of Indep Postscript p. 37. Before the Independents Apâ—â—ition in our Horison there were but three 〈◊〉 four Sects known among us and they were 〈◊〉 in number and well conditioned But out of the â—â—dependents lungs are Sprung above 40 several â—â—ts of straglers which before their coming were never known among us J. Lilburn related it unto me and that in the presence of others that returning from the Wars to London he not forty new Sects and some so pernicious that he had much a do to keep his hands off them though he was in his judgment for a Toleration of all Religions There are innumerable and Diabolical Sects and so prodigiously Impious that it is not for a Christian to name their opinions And Lastly these Congregational Bishops men of humble pretences that would not aspire at first beyond a single Congregation nor desire to govern that any otherwise than in Conjunction with and by the advice of all the members These men when they had an opportunity exercis'd so great and extensive a Tyranny as this Church had never felt under the most Insolent of Diocesan Bishops for P. Nye and H. Petâ—r the Arch-Bishops of those times whâ—â— Govern'd the Committee of Tryers 〈◊〉 no Law no Canons but their owâ— pleasures they rejected whom they pleas'd without giving themselves the Trouble 〈◊〉 the sufferers the satisfaction of the least reason and there was no relief no Quare Iâ—â—pedit against these Church Governours and their proceedings were so arbritrary that some stil'd that Committee The Case of A. S. The English Inquisition And this is the fair fruit oâ— Congregational Episcopacy among us Confusion Regicide and Slavery in the Common wealth Heresie and endless Sects and more than Papal Tyranny in the Church But surely Mr. B. is not for this Congregational Independent way but for a Temperament or Mixture of Church Government made up of this and Presbytery and Episcopacy Mr. B. tells us that he has not chang'd â—is opinion these forty years Treatise of Episc praef and if we may judge of it by what he has written since it must be either Independency or something so like it that an ordinary Capacity cannot distinguish from it For if to declare 〈◊〉 Church of Christs constituting to be but â—â—e Congregation joyn'd in personal Comâ—â—â—ion of Prayer and Sacraments and that â—â—ery such Congregation is Independent â—â—d hath all sort of Ecclesiastical power â—â—en it immediatly by Christ If to say that 〈◊〉 usurp Authority over several of these â—â—â—ches and to assume the power of cenâ—â— over their Members is contrary to the â—â—â—tolick Institution and unchurches all â—â—â—â—e Congregations and that no Synods 〈◊〉 more than Bishops have any Superioriâ—â— over any one or more of these Churches 〈◊〉 that a Church for Discipline cannot â—â—prehend a greater number than a Church 〈◊〉 Worship if this be Independency Mr. B. â—â—â—ds it or else he either does not mean as 〈◊〉 speaks for all these things he plainly â—â—â—ms or speaks so as no body can make 〈◊〉 other meaning of his words Yet how can this be for he is not against â—â—â—â—es and Synods no more are the Indepenâ—â—â— they have not condemn'd the use of â—â—ods as I have shew'd out of F. Johnson and the Independents Assembled in a Synod declare in the Preface to their Confession that this neglect of Synods and Consociation was the cause of those endless divisions their Churches ran into but still this is no more than a Neighbourly consultation and has no proper authority to impose any rule upon National Churches But Mr. B. is for Episcopacy so is Johnson and Mr. B. is for no other For he does expresly disown any Bishop that is appointed over many Churches But he is for Bishop Vshers Episcopacy It is true Mr. B. says so in several places and that Bishop Vsher and he had agreed the point in a quarter of an hour What might have been the result of Mr. B.'s conversation with that Learned Primate I cannot tell But that which Mr. B. so often referrs us to for Bishop Vshers opinion shews there is as great a distance between him and Mr. B. in this point as there is between Mr. B. and the Church of England There is a small Paper that bears the name of that Bishop Entituled The Reduction of Episcopacy which Mr. B. often mentions I will Transcribe the second Article that the reader may see how well his notion of Episcopacy does agree with Mr. B.'s Whereas by a Statute in the 26 year of K. Henry the Eight reviv'd in the first of Queen Elizabeth Suffragans are appointed to be erected in Twenty six several places of this Kingdom p. 6. the number of them might very well be conform'd unto the number of the several Rural Deanries into which every Diocese is subdivided which being done the Suffragans supplying the place of those who in the Ancient Church were call'd Chorepiscopi might every month Assemble a Synod of all the Rectors or Incumbent Pastors within the Precinct and according to the major part of their voices conclude all matters that should be brought into Debate before them To this Synod the Rector and Church-wardens might Present such Impenitent persons as by admonition and suspension from the Sacrament would not be Reform'd who if they remain Contumacious and incorrigible the sentence of Excommunication might be decreed against them by the Synod and accordingly be executed in the Parish where they liv'd Hitherto also all things that concern'd Parochial Ministers may be referr'd whether they did touch their doctrine or their Conversation The Diocesans were to remain as now only to Govern by a Synod of Suffragans and incumbents and their Decrees if occasion were to be revised by Provincial and Metropolitical Synods presided by the Metropolitans Now let us compare this with Mr. B.'s Doctrine of Church Government First then the Sâ—ffragans here mention'd as the Bishops of the first and lowest order are Diocesan for every one is to rule a Rural Deanry which consists of about 40 or 50 or sometimes more Parishes is not this the same species of Government with Diocesan if a Diocese of 50 Parishes be specifically distinct from one of 80 or a Hundred we must have several species amongst us too according to the different proportions of our Bishopricks the Diocese of Lincoln will be specifically different from that of Bristol and by this way it is possible at last to make out Mr. B.'s Twelve sorts of Episcopacy which he reckons in his Disputation of Church Government in short what kind of Episcopacy does Mr. B. reject Diocesan he says Treatise of Episc part
owed him still the duty of Children notwithstanding his absence and lastly that he would come to them shortly by way of Apostolical visitation and examine the power of those that entred into competition with him For as far as his Line or Diocess or Province did extend so far he pretended a peculiar Authority to govern Rom 15.19 2 Cor. 10.13 to 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dioecesis sive certus Pastorum Ecâ—lesiarum numerus Unit. Frat. Bohem. Sect. de Antist Regulam vocat Ditionem praescriptum Praedicationis Terminum Salmeron and exercised Diocesan jurisdiction upon all within his Rule But when this Line was so far extended that he neither was able to visit every part himself and his communication by Letters would not answer all the occasions of those Churches he had planted 1. Tim. 1.3 18. c. 2.14 15. c. 4.12 14. c. 5.21.22 Tit. 1.5 c. 2.15 he provides for them not by leaving every Congregation Independent and resigning all Authority into the hands of every particular Presbytery but by sending Persons endued not only with extraordinary gifts but with Apostolical power to ordain Elders to end disputes to censure the unruly and irregular whether of the Clergy or People to confute Hereticks to preach the Gospel and in short by all means to provide for thee welfare of those Churches committed to them And now as the Apostle had before ordained assistant Elders in the several Churches which he had planted for the ordinary attendance of the Congregation so now he takes to himself Assistants of another sort Suffragans for the Service of his Province which he distributed as he found most expedient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 1. c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod in 1 Tim. 3. Phil. 3.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acceperat in illis Apostolatus officium Hieron in locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anonym 〈◊〉 Phot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in Timoth. and these in the Apostles time were sometimes called Apostles or Evangelists Bishops Presbyters Fellow Labourers Helpers Deacons c. but their successors leaving greater and more invidious titles contented themselves with the name of Bishops which was common to them with ordinary Presbyters at first though the Offices were alwayes distinct Of this kind we have several mentioned in Scripture of St. Pauls Province as Barnabas Timothy Titus Crescens Epaphraditus Sosthenes and some others that had no relation to him as James the Just Mark Linus Clemens c. These exercised Episcopal jurisdiction in that district where they were appointed Ordained Presbyters received accusations against them Reprov'd and censur'd them as there was cause and in short govern'd those Churches over which they were appointed by full Apostolical power which was transmitted to their successors But the extraordinary abilities of some of these men and the occasions of several other Churches made their residence less constant in the Diocess where they were plac'd 2 Tim. 4.9 than otherwise might have been expected Phil. 2. and therefore Timothy the Bishop and Apostle of Ephesus is called to Rome by St. Paul to be imployed as the necessities of the Church should require Titus is sent to Dalmatia though Crete were his first Province but this concludes no more against their being Diocesans than the Voyage of Germanus and Lupus into Brittain to oppose the Pelagian Heresy would conclude against their being Bishops Now what care was taken for those Churches which these Apostolick Diocesans left whether they returned again to their Provinces is not mentioned in Scripture But Ecclesiastical Records shew an uninterrupted Succession from the Bishops in several Churches Nor do we find that they were all so unfixed as they are represented by the adversaries of Episcopacy for Mark who was the first Bishop of Alexandria remained in that Province Euseb Hist l. 2. c. 16. Niceph. l. 2. c. 43. Gelas in Conc. Rom. in decr de lib. Auth. planting Churches in the Country round about and governing them by Apostolical Authority which after his Martyrdom there was derived to his successuors in the same charge Now this order being of perpetual use and necessity in the Church to ordain Presbyters and Deacons to exercise discipline to preserve unity they were multiplyed according as the Apostles found most expedient for the Church and the most eminent Cities became the Residence of these first Bishops not because God takes greater care of Cities than he does of lesser Towns and Villages but because the Apostles thought it the most natural way to follow the distribution that was then in the more civilz'd part of the world St. John a little while before his death mentions seven in the Lydian Asia under the name of Angels of the Churches nor is it probable there were any more in that Province The Seven Churches being the same with all the Churches mentioned in the next Chapter Rev. 1.20.2.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Andr. Caesar Ego puto simul inveniri posse Angelum hominem bonos Ecclesia Episcopos Origen in Lucam Hom. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut Collegas moneat Beza Ad Episcopum loci dirigitur Paraus and Carolus à Sancto Paulo concludes the same thing out of St. John Cum in Asia septem tantum hisce temporibus essent Episcopi ut in Apocalypsi legere est nec majorem corum numerum in Ponto tunc fuisse probalile est Geogr. Sacra p. 289. Dissert 4. c. 5. Quod si de Angelis superiorum Coelorum non de praepositis Ecclesie intelligi vellet non consequenter diceret Laudatur sub Angeli nomine praepositas Ecclesiae Aug. Ep. 162. But Dr. Hammond makes all these Angels to be Metropolitans having several Bishops under them for the reasons I must refer the reader to his Dissertations Thus far the Scripture discovers the rise and progress of Diocesan Episcopacy which was the form of Church Government under the Apostles who had large Provinces to supervise and their suffragans such as are commonly called Evangelists had several Congregations to govern and this was undeniably the constitution of the Church in the first age the next thing we are to inquire is whether the Office expired with those Persons or was designed to be of perpetual use in the Church The Adversaries of Episcopacy are not all agreed as to this point the Presbyterians generally looking upon the offices of Apostles and Evangelists extraordinary as the persons were Mr. B. is something more scrupulous because he does not find any where that Christ design'd to have this alter'd and yet he condemns Diocesan Episcopacy as being altogether different from it I have said something to this already and therefore I shall answer here more briefly 1. That we have no reason to believe from Scripture that the Office of Apostles or Evangelists which concerned the Government of the Church was extraordinary and for a time only
titles are mentioned Besides the mentioning but these two sorts of Church Officers may be done only according to the distinction of the several imployments in the Church some being Ministerial others Governing though the latter may have a difference in the measure of their power in the administration of the same Government An evident instance of this we have in Clemens of Alexandria who notwithstanding he distribute the Clergy sometimes into Presbyters and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. strom l. 6. p. 283. Ed. Silburgii in 1 Tim. 1. as the Governing or Teaching and the Ministring Parts yet he does elsewhere acknowledg three Orders where he comes to speak more distinctly To the same effect are the words of the Greek Scholia collected out of the ancient Fathers that Bishops sometime in Scripture comprehend Presbyters too Because their offices are much alike 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sch. Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in 1 ad Tim. c. 3. Secundum Presbyterorum immo paene unum corum esse gradum Episcoperum they both administer the Sacraments they both teach and guide the Church and exercise discipline and the difference between them is not very great and what is that since they are both qualified for the same Acts Besides Ordination there iâ— hardly any thing but that they act in subordination to the Bishops in whom the principal Authority of Teaching and governing is placed and the Presbyters are the Assistants and supreâ—â— Council of the Bishop and both making as it were one Bench the directive governing part of the Church Salmasius would understand Chrysostom when he sayes the distance between Bishops and Presbyters was not great to speak of his own time only which is so impudent a construction that one would wonder how any man could be guilty of it since every one that has the curiosity to consult the place will discern the imposture and there is none of the Ancients that does more expresly distinguish between Bishops and Presbyters from the beginning than this eloquent Father and nothing can be more plain than that he speaks there of the constitution of Episcopacy and Presbytery without any regard to time for it is evident from him that he thought there was no difference in this particular between these orders of the Church in his time and that of the Apostles as any man may see that will but look into his comments upon Phil. 1.1 1 Tim. c. 1 Tom. 4. Ed. Savil. and c. 3. There are several other passages in that Epistle of Clemens that make mention of Presbyters appointed by the Apostles to guide the Church of the Presbyters of the Church of Corinth who were turned out by a faction but nothing that affords any argument against Episcopacy but such as the same answer may be extended to which I have given already to the allegations made from thence But to clear this business of the Church of Corinth as far as possible I will shew the state of it as it may be gathered from this Epistle and then take liberty to offer a conjecture concerning the form of its Government at that time and the occasion of the Schism The Church of Corinth in the first place is said here to be an Ancient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sound Church that for a long while had enjoyed all the benefits of peace and order and was had in great esteem and veneration of all those that knew it until at last having eat and drank and being enlarged and growing fat it lifted up the heel From this prosperity sprung all the evils of emulation and discord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaner sort setting themselves up against the better and silly men growing conceited and pragmatical set themselves against men of wisdom and experience But because in all the insolencies of the people against their Rulers there are commonly some persons of note that first animate the sedition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was no otherwise here a few ambitious discontented men and they too not very extraordinary Persons for knowledg or endowments instigated the common people against their Governours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having popular parts they knew how to insinuate themselves into the multitude and to manage the credulity and passions of the people to their own advantage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and prejudice of the publick Therefore Clemens aggravates this sedition by comparing it with that mentioned by St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they cryed some for him some for Cephas some for Apollos for they were two of them great Apostles and the other one highly esteemed by the Church But now sayes he consider by what manner of men you are perverted And now what could give occasion to all this disorder What would these troublesome men have this is not expresly set down but such hints are scattered as are sufficient to ground a probable conjecture 1. They are said to be great Zealots about things not material or requisite to salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hot disputants about such matters 2. They were such as magnified the power of the people and perswaded them that they had a right to turn out their Pastors therefore Clemens shews what course Moses took to establish the Priesthood and how the Apostles foreseeing there would be contentions about the name and office of a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appointed chosen men which the people cannot with any justice turn out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. These men were ambitious disobedient despisers of their superiors and yet such as would bear rule themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and lift themselves up above their brethren and their discontents arising from the ill success or opposition their ambitious pretensions met with were probably the occasion of this Schism and therefore Clemens advises them to be content with their statition and chuse rather to be inconsiderable in the Church than to be never so great out of it than to be the heads and Bishops of a Faction From which Circumstances one may conjecture 1. That the Church of Corinth at this time had no Bishop the See being vacant by the death of the last or otherwise 2. That this sedition was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a contention about this Bishoprick 3. That the Clergy and people were divided about it the people setting up some they had a favour for whom the Clergy did not approve and when they could not be prevail'd with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the people persisting in their kindness towards these persons broke out into extremities and turned out part of the Clergy that would not comply with their choice Which is yet further confirmed from the directions which Clemens gives upon this account that these men would go regularly to compass their design by just means that they would enter in at the right gate and
said to be sent in the name of the Church in General as the Church of Jerusalem sent John and Peter to Samaria Act. 8. In like matter the Church sent Barnabas to Antioch v. 11. But now it seems they come from James and the Acts of the Church pass in the name of the Bishop only although after this we find this Style to vary again and sometimes the Church of such a place sends to another without the mention of the Bishop though the letter be pen'd by the Bishop himself as the inscription of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians does inform us and Iastly as the authority of James appears by sending to the Church of Antioch so it does likewise from his speech in the Council of Jerusalem where he seems to preside and determines the question in dispute Act. 5. in the name of the whole Assembly All this consider'd together with the Testimonies of Hegesippus and Clemens there can be as little doubt that Dâ—ocesan Episcopacy was setled by the Apostles in the Church of Jerusalem as there is of any thing that is not expresly set down in Scripture and it cannot be deni'd without resecting the most Authentick records of Church History It is to be confess'd that the Scriptures have not left so full and perfect account of the constitution and Government of the first Churches as might be wish'd for the Acts of the Apostles the only Scripture History of those time relate mostly the victories of Christian Religion how several Cities were converted By what miracles by what Argument or exhortation but before the Holy Pen-man comes to give an account of the settlement of those new Conquests he carries away the Reader from thence to follow the Apostles to some other place where they begin to lay the Foundations of another Church Thus we have no more notice of the Churches of Samarid and of Judea Jerusalem excepted than that such were founded by the Apostles but of their Government and constitution we are not the least information and the prospect left of Antioch in Scripture is very confus'd as of a Church in fieri where a great number of Eminent persons labour'd together to the building of it up but after what form does not appear but only from Ecclesiastical Writers Eusel l. 3. c. 22. Chronnon Chrysost Orat. de Ignatio who report that this Church when it was setled and digested was committed to the Government of Evodius and after him to Ignetius and the succeeding Bishops Nevertheless we are not left destitute of all light in this particular even from the Scriptures the History of St. Paul as it is deliver'd by St. â—â—ke in the Acts of the Apostles and by himself scatteringly in his own Epistles informing us in some measure of the from of the Primitive Church Government in the Apostles times This Apostle of the Gentiles did commonly use this method informing those Churches he had converted as may be seen by consulting the Citations in the Margin When he came to any place where the Gospel had not been preached and he did not affect much to build upon another was foundation He preached first in the Synâ—gogues of the Jews Rom. 15.20 1 Cor. 3.10 Acts 9.20 13 14. Acts 13.46 and if they rejected the grace of God he turn'd to the Gentiles Assoon as he had converted a competent number he took care to improve them in the knowledge of the truth 1 Cor. 3.2 and for that purpose taught them constantly either at his own house Acts 28.30.19.9.20.20 or at some publick School as that of Tyrannus or any other convenient place where a good number might assemble together These converts as they were made Partakers of the same common Doctrine and Faith so they were to be perpetually united by a Communion in worship in Prayer and the Sacrament for it was not with the School of the Apostles as with those of this World Acts. 11.26 Heb. 10.25 which the Disciples leave when they conceive themselves to have learn'd what they came for But there was an obligation upon all these Scholars to Assemble themselves together Rom. 12.5 1 Cor. 12.13.12.22 Phil. 2.12 till they came to a perfect man which was not consummated till after this life Nor was the Relation between Christians dissolved when the Congregation was dissmiss'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origâ—câ—â—â— â—â—s 1.8 in fine but they were united farther into one Society or Corporation into a holy City under the Government of Christ their King and under Apostles and such other Officers of his and their appointment and so far to act and determine all things within themselves that they were not to appear before any Heathen Magistrate upon any difference but to referr it to the Brethren or to the Apostle under whose direction they were Thus far we may consider a Church without any other Officer than the Apostle who converted them but their numbers increasing in that place and much of his time being taken up in disputing with and preaching to unbelievers and gainsayers or this Apostle being call'd away to preach the Gospel in other places Acts 9.29.17.17.19.8 9. it was necessary to ordain such Church Officers as might take care of this Church in the Doctrine and Discipline of it 6.4 Acts 14.23 Phil. 2.12.20.17 and others to take care of the poor lest that Office taking up much time might be a hinderance to those who were to guide the Assembly in Doctrine and Worship Now this constitution does not take away the relation that was between this Church and the Apostle that founded it and these Officerâ— act in subordination to him whether present or absent and St. Paul therefore looks upon himself as the Apostle or Bishop of the Corinihians though he could not hold personal Communion with them 1 Cor. 5.3 Acts 15.36 for sometimes he goes a Circular visitation to examine the State of those Churches which he had planted or if the distance and oceasions of that Church where he resided or his imprisonment and other outward Circumstances would not admit this personal visitation he sends his letters and orders what is to be done If any open Scandal be permitted he sends his Excommunication to be publish'd in that Church whereof the offender was a member 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. Cum meo spiritu quipro me erat praesens sive in mearum literarum authoritate Hieroâ— he judges as though he were present he orders that when they are met together in his spirit they would deliver the Criminal to Satan And because some of the Teachers in the Church of Corinth began to set up themselves in opposition to the Apostle taking advantage of his absence 1 Cor. 4.18 19.9.1 2.5.19 and using all means to lessen him in the esteem of that people he is forced to assert his Authority and to justifie his Title to let them know that he was their Father their Apostle and that they