have either been Ordained before in the Catholick Church and have afterwards turned Perfsidious and Rebellious against the Church or have been Promoted by a Profane Ordination in a State of Schism by FALSE BISHOPS and Anti-Christs against our Lord's Institution that such if they shall return shall only be admitted to Lay-Communion c. By which Testimony you may clearly see 1. That all Ordinations of Presbyters as well as Deacons were performed by Bishops by True Bishoâ—â— in the Catholick Church and by False Bishops in a State of Schism 2. That to Ordain Presbyters and Deacons was so much and so acknowledged by the Bishop's Work and peculiar to him that herein even Schismaticks themselves oberved the Common Rule They found their Ordinations were indispensibly to be performed by Bishops that they might not be Obnoxious to the Charge of Invalidity So clear and full is St. Cyprian on this Head And not only he but Firmilian as I have cited him already Nay further yet Our Martyr's Practice was always suitable and correspondent to these Principles He not only Ordained Aurelius a Lector as I have shewed without either the Consent or Concurrence of his Clergy but also Saturus a Lector and Optatus a sub-Sub-Deacon Epst. 29. and Celerinus a Lector Ep. 39. In which we have also a most considerable Evidence of the Bishops Power in Ordinations in St. Cyprian's Discourse concerning Aurelius and Celerinus For there he tells his Presbyters Deacons and all his People and tell them in an Authoritative Stile in the Stile by which Superiours used to signifie their Will and Pleasure to their Subjects with a Be it known to you He tells them I say That tho he had only Ordained these two Lectors for the time because they were but young yet he had designed them for the Presbyterate and to sit with him as soon as their Years would allow of it And what can be more pat to this purpose than that uncontrolable Account we have of Novatianus his Promotion to the Presbyterate which we have in that so often mentioned Epistle written by Cornelius to Fabius of Aâ—tioch There he tells how Novatianus was Ordained a Presbyter meerly by the Favour of the then Bishop of Rome That all the Clergy and many of the People opposed it as being Unlawful considering that he had been Baptized while on the Bed of Sickness And that after much work the Bishop prevailed and Ordained him promising that he would not make a Precedent of it I refer you to the Testimony which I have transcribed faithfully on the Margin Consider it and tell me if any thing can be more clear than that the Bishop then had the sole Power of Ordination Neither do we read in all St. Cyprian's Works or in any Monuments of those Times of any Concurrence of Presbyters with Bishops in any Ordinations and far less that ever Presbyters Ordain'd without a Bishop 'T is true we read in St. Cyprian's 52d Epistle that Novatus made Felicissimus a Deacon And I read that several Learned Men understand it so as if he had Ordained him And Bloâ—del particularly because Novatus was nothing but a Presbyter conâ—ludes that this was a notable Instance of the Power of Presbyters in Ordinations But when one reads the whole Passage as St. Cyprian hath it and ponders all Things duly he cannot but think it strange that ever that Fancy should have been entertained For all that St. Cyprian says amounts to no more than this That Novatus turn'd a Schismatick in the time of Persecution and thereby became another Pâ—rsecution to the Church and that having thus given himself up to the Spirit of Schism he by his Faction and Ambition got Felicissimus made a Deacon without either St. Cyprian ' s knowledge or Allowance St Cyprian's Words I say do not import that Novatus Ordain'd Felicissimus They import no more than that Novatus his Ambition and Faction prevailed to get Felicissimus Ordain'd a Deacon thô himself did not Ordain him 'T is probable he was Ordained by some Neighbouring Bishop St. Cyprian being then in his Secession And 't is as evident as any thing can be made from what immediately follows that St. Cyprian designed them for no more For he goes on and tells in that same Breath That Novatus having done so and so at Carthage went next to Rome and attempted just the like things there only with this difference That as Rome by itâ—s Greatness had the Preâ—edency of Carthage so he attempted greater Wickedness at Rome than at Carthage For he says Cyprian who had made a Deacon at Carthage against the Church made a Bishop at Rome meaning Novatianus Now 't is certain that not Novatus but Three Bishops Ordained Novatianus and by consequence that St. Cyprian never meant that Novatus Ordain'd Felicissiâ—us This is irreâ—ragable But then suppose the worst Suppose Novatus had really Ordained Felicissimus what stress is to be laid on the Example of a Schismatick Especially when what he did was done Schismatically Antonianus asked of St. Cyprian what was Novatianus his Heresie And Cyprian answered It was no matter what he taught seeing he taught in Schism And may we not say with the same Reason That it matters not what Novatus did seeing what he did was done in Schism One Thing indeed we learn from this Matter and that is another Argument of the Bishop's peculiar Interest in the matter of Ordination For St. Cyprian most plainly imputes it to Schism that without his Allowance Novatus should have presumed to have got Felicissimus Ordained a Deacon One Word more The Bishops being thus possessed of the sole Power of Ordination in St. Cyprian's time and his Practising suitably was exactly agreeable to the Second of the Canons commonly called of the Apostles which is Let a Presbyter be Ordained by One Bishop as likewise a Deacon and the rest of the Clergy A Canon without doubt universally received then as Beveregius has fully proved and a Canon highly agreeable with the then current Principles which I have insisted on already viz. That a Bishop was the Principle of Unity and Supreme Ecclesiastical Magistrate within his District For what can be more suitable to or rather more necessary by all the Fundamental Rules of Society than that it should belong to the Supreme Power wherever it is lodged to promote and give Commissions to all Inferiour Officers 'T is one of the Rights of Majesty and one as intrinsick and unalâ—enable or incommunicable as any 'T is true a good many Years after St. Cyprian's time it was appointed by the 〈◊〉 That Presbyters should concurr with the Bishop in the Ordination of Presbyters But then I say it was many Years after St. Cyprian's time and it was for new emergent Reasons That Ordinations might be performed more deliberately or with the greater Solemnity or so but 't is evident that nothing of the substantial Validity of the Orders were to depend upon it And so much at
present for the Bishop's Power of Ordination But this is not all For Thirdly He had full Power without asking the Consent or Concurrence of either Clergy or People to settle Presbyters within his District Of this we have a most remarkable Instance of St. Cyprian's planting Namidicus a Presbyter of the City of Carthage Our Martyr wrote to his Presbyters Deacons and People to receive him as such probably he had been Ordained before and there was no more of it It was instantly done As we learn from the very next Epistle where we find the same Namidicus as a Presbyter of Carthage receiving a Commission for a Deputation to oversee such and such Things in St. Cyprian's absence So negligent shall I say Or so ignorant was St. Cyprian of Christ's Testament at least of his Leaving in it to his People by way of Legacy a Right a Grant a Priviledge of Choâ—sing their own Ministers What a Stranger has he been to all the Analogies and Principles of Presbyterian Government But I proceed Fourthly In St. Cyprian's time the Bishop had the disposal of all the Revenues of the Church All the Churches Incomes then were Oblations and Charitable Contributions The Civil Magistrate was Heathen and treated her commonly with Persecutions never with Encouragements Now the Bishop I say had the full Power of disposing of these Contributions and Oblations In the first place he had his own Quantitas Propria His proper Portion and t was no doubt a considerable One 'T is commonly reckoned to have been the Third The other Two belonged to the Clergy and the Poor but so as to be dispensed by the Bishop That he had his own Portion and that a Liberal One is evident from his 7th Epistle For there he tells how before he retired he gave the Trust of it to Rogatianus one of his Presbyters ordering that if there were any necessitous Strangers at Carthage they should have Maintenance out of it And it is observable that when St. Cyprian gives an account of Fortunatianus who had been Bishop of Assurae but had forfeited by Sacrificing in time of Persecuâ—ion and yet was earnest for all that to retain his Bishoprick he says expresly that it was upon the account of the Perquisites and not from any Love to Religion And it is not to be doubted that the same Reason moved Basilides to be so much concerned for the recovery of his Bishoprick after he had forfeited it also Indeed the Bishop's proper Portion was setled on him by the 40th of the Apostolic Canons And that he had the disposal of the rest particularly that which belonged to the Clergy is as plain For in his 41st Epistle he makes it an aggravation of Felicissimus's Guilt that contrary to the Duty which he owed to his Bishop he should have made such a Clutter about the Division of the Contributions And on the other hand he praises the Dutifulness of others who would not follow Fâ—licissimus his bad Example but continued in the Unity of the Church and were satisfied to take their Shares as the Bishop should please to dispense them And it is a most remarkable Instance of this his Power which we have in the aforementioned Case of Aurelius and Celerinus for thô he promoted them only to the Degree of Lectors yet he Entituled them to the Maintenance of Presbyters And as for that part that belonged to the Poor his Power in the Distribution of it is so evident from his Fifth and Forty first Epistles that I need not insist upon it Indeed this Power was expresly asserted to them by the Thirty eighth and Forty fiâ—st of the Apostolick Canons And we find Bishops in Possession of it long before St. Cyprian's time as is evident from Iustin Martyr's second Apology not far from the end Not now to mention that it seems fairly to be founded on express Scripture Indeed Fifthly He seems to have had a Power of imposing Charitable Contributions on all the Christians within his District for the Relief of Distressed Strangers whether Captives Prisoners or condemn'd to the Mines or Galleys c. Of this Power we have famous Instances in his 62d and 78th Epistles You may Consult them at your Leasure And long before St. Cyprian's time Soter Bishop of Rome as the Venerable Dionysius Bishop of Corinth cited for it by Eusebius tells us Managed this Power to excellent purpose as his Predecessors from the Apostles times had done before him Take his own Words for he was a very ancient Father having flourished about an Hundred Years before St. Cyprian They are in an Epistle of his to the Church of Rome in which he thus bespeaks them This has been your Custom from the beginning i. e. ever since the Church of Rome was planted to do manifold good Offices to the Brethren and send Supplies to most Churches in most Cities for sweetning their Poverty and refreshing those that are Condemned to the Mines You Romans observe the Custom of the Romans handed down to you by your Fathers which Custom your blessed Bishop Soter has not only observed but improved c. What can be more clear than it is from these Words That Soter as Bishop of Rome had the chief Management of the Charitable Contributions imposing them and disposing of them for the Relief of the Afflicted Christians of whatsoever Church And now that I have gone higher than St. Cyprian's time thô it was not necessary for my main Argument and to make use of it might swell this Letter to too great a Bulk Let me mention another Power which Tertuâ—lian who lived before St. Cyprian also in plain Terms appropriates to the Bishâ—p A considerable Power a Power that is a considerable Argument of the Episcopal Sovereignty And it is Sixthly The Power of Indicting Solemn Fasts as occasion required to all the Christians within his District You have his Words plain and home upon the Margin Sevâ—nthly A Bishop in St. Cyprian's time for now I return to it as such had the sole Power of Convocating his Presbyters and Deacons all those of his Clergy and People who either sat with him or standing gave their Suffrages as they were ask'd about any thing relating to the Church All Learned Men even Spanhemius himself our Author 's diligent Searcher into Antiquity confesses this Indeed this was a Point on which the Unity of the Church did so much depend that it could not but be a necessary Branch of his Prerogative who was the Principle of Unity to and was intrusted with the Supreme Government of the Church And agreeably we find Cornelius accounting about it in an Epistle to Cyprian For there he tells how the Presbyter and Confessors who had sided with Novatianus turning sensible of their Error came not streight to himself for it seems they had not the confidence to do that or rather they would not have been allowed that freedom so suddenly but to his
Presbyters acknowledging their Offences and humbly supplicating that they might be Pardoned and their Escapes forgotten How when all this was narrated to him He was pleased to Convocate the Presbytery How Maximus Urbanus Sidonius and Macarius being allowed to appear made their Acknowledgments and humble Addresses and then how after they were received in the Presbytery the whole matter was Communicated to the People and they again renewed their Acknowledgments before the People confessing as I shewed before viz. That they were convinced that Cornelius was chosen by the Omnipotent God and our Lord Iesus Christ to be Bishop of the most Holy Catholick Church and that they were not ignorant that as there was but One God One Christ our Saviour and One Holy-â—host so there ought to be only One Bishop in a Catholick Church Here I say was a Noble Instance of a Bishop's Power in Convocating his Presbyters at pleasure and managing the Affairs of the Church like a Chief Governour The whole Epistle is well worth perusing But I shall only desire you to take notice of one Thing by the way it is That Cornalius sought not the People's Consent for their Reception no he first received them again into the Communion of the Church and then acquainted the People with it I observe this because it is another Demonstration That what St. Cyprian determined from the beginning of his Episcopacy was meerly the effect of his own Choice and Arbitrary Condescension viz. To do nothing without his Peoples Consent This I say was not a Thing he was bound to do by the Rules of his Episcopacy for then Cornelius had been as much bound as he After these Persons were so solemnly Reconciled to the Church they themselves by a Letter gave an Account of it to St. Cyprian an Account I say which might bring more Light to the whole Matter if it needed any We are certain say they most dear Brother that you will rejoyce with us when you know that all Mistakes are forgotten and we are Reconciled to Cornelius OUR BISHOP and to all the Clergy to the Great Contentment and Good Liking of the whole Church But you may say Did not the Roman Presbytery Conveen during the Vacâ—â—cy after the Death of Fabianus And did not the Presbytery of Carthage meet frequently during the time of St. Cyprian's Secession How then can it be said That the Bishop had the sole Power of Convocating Presbyters I answer 'T is true it was so in both Cases But how To begin with the latter There was no Meeting of the Clergy at Carthage during St. Cyprian's Secession without his Authority And therefore we find when he retired he left a Delegated Power with his Presbyters and Deacons or an Allowance call it as you will to meet and manage the Affairs of the Church as occasion should require but still so as that they could do nothing of Moment without first Consulting him and nothing but what was of ordinary Incidence is Regulated by the Canons This we learn from many of his Epistles Thus in his Fifth Epistle directed to his Presbyters and Deacons Because he could not be present himself he required them Faithfully and Religiously to discharge both his Office and their own Which not only imports that they had distinct Offices from his but also in express Terms settles a Delegation on them He bespeaks them after the same manner in his 12th Epistle And more Authoritatively yet Ep. 14. where he not only Exhorts but Commands them to perform the Office of Vicars to him But then how warmly he reâ—ented it when some of them ventured beyond the Limits of the Allowance he had given them when they began to encroach on his Prerogatives when they presumed to meddle in Matters for which they had no Allowance and which were not in the common Road nor Regulated by the Canons you shall hear to purpose by and by And from what I have already said the other Case That of the Presbytery's Meeting in the time of a Vacancy may be easily cleared also for thô they might meet yet all they could do was to provide all they could for the Peace and Safety of the Church by determining in Ruled Cases just as may be done by inferiour Magistrates in all other Corporations or Societies in the time of an Inter-Reign but they could make no new Rules And there were several other Things they could not do as I shall also shew fully within a little In the mean time having mentioned how St. Cyprian in his Absence gave a Delegation to his Clergy and Constituted them his Vicars let me give you one Example of it which may well deserve to pass for another Instance of Acts that were peculiar to himself And that is Eighthly His Delegating not his Presbyters in common but two of them only viz. Rogatianus and Nâ—midicus with two Bishops Caldonius and Herculanus not only to consider the State of the Poor and of the Clergy at Carthage but to pronounce his Sentence of Excommunication against Felicissimus and Augendus and all that should joyn themselves to that Faction and Conspiracy Which Delegation was accordingly accepted of and the Sentence put in Execution as we learn by the Return which these four Delegates together with another Bishop called Victor made to our Holy Martyr I might have easily collected more Instances of Powers and Faculties which were peculiar to a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time and which could not be pretended to by Presbyters But these may be sufficient for a Sample especially considering that more perhaps may be discovered in the Prosecution of the next Thing I promised to make appear which was II. That in every thing relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church the Bishop had a Negative over all the other Church-Governours within his District He had the Supreme Power of the Keys No Man could be admitted into the Church no Man could be thrust out of the Church none Excommunicated could be admitted to Penance nor Absolved nor Restored to the Communion of the Church no Ecclesiastical Law could be made nor Rescinded nor Dispensed with without him In short all Ecclesiastical Discipline depends upon the Sacraments and neither Sacrament could be Administrated without his Allowance If this Point well proved does not evince That a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was a real Prelate and stood in a real Superiority above all other Church Officers I must despair of ever proving any thing And I must despair of ever proving any thing if I prove not this Point 1. To begin with Baptism the Sacrament by which Persons are admitted into the Church That no Man could be Baptized without the Bishop's Consent has as much Evidence as can be well required for any Matter of Fact For First St. Cyprian could not have expressed any thing more fully or more plainly than he has done this To omit that Testimony which he gives in his Exhortation to Marâ—yrdom
where he says Bishops by our Lord's Allowance give the first Baptism to Believers Let us turn over to Ep. 73. in which he insists directly to this purpose The Question was Whether Baptism performed by Hereticks or Schismaticks was Valid St. Cyprian affirmed it was not His Conclusion was such as required some other Argument to support it than his own Authority It was therefore needful that he should attempt to prove it and that from received and acknowledged Principles Now consider his Argument I shall give it in his own Words as near as I can Translate them 'T is manifest says he where and by whom the Remission of Sins can be given which is given in Baptism For our Lord gave first to Peter on whom he built his Church thereby instituting and demonstrating the Original of Unity that Power That whatsoever he should loose on Earth should be loosed in Heaven And then after his Resurrection he gave it to all his Apostles when he said As my Father hath sent me c. Joh. 20. v. 21 22 23. Whence we learn that none can Baptize Authoritatively and give Remission of Sins but the BISHOPS and those who are FOUNDED in the Evangelical Law and our Lord's Institution And that nothing can be Bound or Loosed out of the Church seeing there 's none there who has the Power of Binding or Loosing Further Dearest Brother we want not Divine Warrant for it when we say That God hath disposed all Things by a certain Law and a proper Ordinance and that none can USURP any thing against the BISHOPS all being subject to them For Corah Dathan and Abiram attempted to assume to themselves a Priviledge of Sacrificing against Moses and Aaron the Priest and they were Punished for it because it was unlaâ—ful Thus St. Cyprian argued and the force of his Argument lies visibly in this That Baptism performed by Hereticks or Schismaticks cannot be Valid because not performed by the Bishop nor with his Allowance Now whatever comes of his Inference sure it had been Ridiculous in him to have so Reasoned if his Antecedent had not been a received Principle Neither was St. Cyprian singular in this for Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia is as plain saying as I have cited him before That the Bishops who Govern the Church possess the Power of Baptism Confirmation and Ordination And Fortunatus Bishop of Thuraboris another of St. Cyprian's Contemporaries in his Suffrage at the Council of Carthage is as plain as either Cyprian or Firmilian Iesus Christ says he our Lord and God the Son of God the Father and Creator built his Church upon a Rock and not upon Heresie and gave the Power of Baptizing to Bishops and not to Hereticks c. Indeed before St. Cyprian's time we have Tertullian who spent most of his Days in the Second Century and who in his Book about Baptism against Quintilla to the Question Who may Baptize answers positively The High-Priest who is the Bishop hath the Power of Baptizing and after him or in Subordination to him Presbyters and Deacons but not without the BISHOP's AUTHORITY And before him we have the Apostolical Ignatius who spent almost all his Days in the First Century and who says in express Terms That it is not lawful to Baptize without the Bishop 2. A Bishop in St. Cyprian's time had as much Power about the Holy Eucharist No Presbyter within his District could Administer it without his Leave or against his Interdict St. Cyprian's Testimonies to this purpose are innumerable Let me give you only One or Two for Instance Thus in his 16th Epistle written to his Presbyters and Deacons he resents it highly that some of his Presbyters should have dared to admit the Lapsed to the Sacrament without his Allowance Such says he deny me the Honour of which by Divine Right I am possessed c. Indeed the 15th 16th and 17th Epistles are to this purpose And in his 59th Epistle having cited Mal. 2. v. 1 2. he Reasons thus against all such Presbyters as presumed to Celebrate the Eucharist without the Bishop's allowance Is Glory given to God when his Majesty and Discipline is so contemned that when He says He is Angry and full of Wrath against such as Sacrifice to Idols and when He threatens them with everlasting Pains and Punishments Sacrilegious Persons should presume to say Think not on the Wrath of God Fear not the Divine Iudgments Knock not at the Church of Christ That they should cut off Repentance and the Confession of Sins and PRESBYTERS CONTEMNING and TRAMPLING ON THEIR BISHOPS should preach Peace with Deceiving Words and give the Communion c. And 't is a Passage very remarkable to this purpose which we read in an Epistle of Dionysiâ—s of Alexandria to Fabius of Antioch both St. Cyprian's Contemporaries in which he tells how one Serapion an aged Man after a long Perâ—everance in the Christian Faith had first fallen from it in time of Persecution and then into a deadly Sickness How after he had been dumb and senseless for some Days recovering some use of his Tongue he called quickly for one of the Presbyters of Alexandria for he lived in that City that he might be Absolved and have the Sacrament being perswaded he should not die till he should be Reconciled to the Church And how the Presbyter being sick also sent the Sacrament to him But by what Right or Authority By Dionysius the Bishop For says he I had COMMAND that any Lapsed if in danger of Death especially if he was an humble Supplicant for it should be Absolved that he might go out of this World full of good Hopes c. He being Bishop of that City had given a COMMAND for it otherwise it could not have been done And all this was nothing more than Ignatius had told the World long before viz. That that is only to be deemed a firm and valid Eucharist which is Celebrated by the Bishop or by his Authority Let me only add one Testimony more from St. Cyprian concerning both Sacraments but such an one as ought not to be neglected It is in his 69th Epistle written to Magnus The great Purpose he pursues in it is to represent the Atrocious Guilt of Schism and the forlorn Condition of Schismaticks that they cannot have Valid Sacraments and that all their Acts are Nullities c. Amongst many Arguments to this effect he insists on that famous one Corah Dathan and Abiram were of that same Religion that Moses and Aaron were of and served the same God whom Moses and Aaron served But because they transgressed the Limits of their own Stations and Usurp'd a Power of Sacrificing to themselves in opposition to Aaron the Priest who was only legally Invested with the Priesthood by God's Vouchsafement and Appointment They were forthwith punished in a miraculous manner neither could their Sacrifices be Valid or Profitable being offered Unlawfully and Irreligiously and against
dearer to God and in a closer Communion with him and nearer Approximation to him than Christians of the common size And their Intercessions had been in use of being much regarded in former Persecutions These therefore as the only Persons whose Credit could be feasibly put in the Ballance with the Bishops Authority the Holy Man's Supplanters instigated to espouse the Quarrel of the Lapsed to become their Patrons for having themselves Absolved against the Bishop's Resolutions And truly some of them were so far wrought upon as to turn Zealous for it And armed with their Authority these discontented Presbyters adventured to Absolve and Lapsed and receive them to the Sacrament without the Bishop's Allowance Now consider what followed and speak your Conscience and tell me if St. Cyprian was not more than either Single Presbyter or Presbyterian Moderator Thô he was one of the mildest and most humble Men that ever lived yet so soon as this was told him where he was in his Retirement he was not a little alarm'd The Practice was surprizing and the Presumption new as well as bold The like had never been done before in any Christian Church And such preposterous Methods clearly tended to shake all the Foundations of Order and good Discipline And therefore he thought it high time for him if he could to give the Check to such irregular and unexampled Methods In short he drew his Pen and wrote Three notable Epistles one to the Martyrs and Confessors Another to his Clergy and a third to his Peoplâ— Insisting in each of them upon the Novelty and Unwarrantableness of the Course was taken the Dishonours and Indignities were done himself by it and the great Mischiefs and fatal Consequences might nay would unavoidably follow upon it if it were not forborn More particularly In that to the Martyrs and Confessors he told them That his Episcopal Care and the Fear of God compelled him to Admonish them That as they had devoutly and couragiously kept the Faith so they ought suitably to be observant of Christ's Holy Laws and Discipline That as it became all Christ's Soldiers to obey their General 's Commands so it was their Duty in a special manner to be Examples to others That he had thought the Presbyters and Deacons who were with them might have taught them so much But that now to his extream Grief he understood they had been so far from doing that that on the contrary some of them especially some Presbyters neither minding the Fear of God nor the Honour of their Bishop had industriously misled them He complain'd mightily of the Presumption of such Presbyters that against all Law and Reason they should have dared to Reconcile the Lapsed without his Consent That herein they were more Criminal than the Lapsers themselves That it was somewhat Excusable in the Lapsed to be earnest for an Absolution considering the uncomfortable State they were in so long as they were denied the Communion of the Church But it was the Duty of Office-bearers in the Church to do nothing rashly lest in stead of Pastors they should prove Worriers of the Flock c. And then he told these Martyrs and Confessors how far their Priviledges reached All they could do was by way of humble Supplication to Petition the Bishop for a Relaxation of the Rules of Discipline But they had neither Power to Command him nor Grant Indulgences without him Indeed this he told them frequently and that they went beyond their Line if they ventured any further In that to his Presbyters and Deacons he wrote in a yet more resenting Strain He told them He had long kept his Patience and held his Peace but their immoderate Presumption and Temerity would suffer him no longer to be silent For what a dreadful Prospect says he must we have of the Divine Vengâ—â—nce when some Presbyters neither mindful of the Gospel nor their own Stations nor regarding the future Iudgments of God nor the Bishop who for the time is set over them dare attempt what was never attempted before under any of my Predecessors namely so to Affront and Contemâ—â— their Bishop as to assume all to themselves And then he proceeds to tell them how he could overlook and bear with the Indignity done to his Episcopal Authority if there were no more in it But the course they followed was so wicked they were so injurious to the Lapsed whom they presumed to Reconcile so Uncaononically their Pride and Popularity were so apparent in their Method it was such a Crime so to Expose the Martyrs to Envy and set them at Variance with their Bishop c. that he could â—tifle it no longer In short all over the Epistle he wrote like a Bishop and concluded it with a Peremptory Threatning of a present Suspension from the Exercise of their Office and then an Infliction of further Censures when he should return from his Retirement if they should Persevere in such a Lawless Course In that to his People he proceeded on the â—ame Principles condemned these Presbyters who had acted so disorderly not reserving to the Bishop the Honour of his Chair and Priesthood Told them That those Presbyters ought to have taught the People otherwise Laid to their Charge the Affectation of Popularity and required such of the People as had not fallen to take Pains upon the Lapsed to try to bring them to a better Temper to perswade them to hearken to his Counsel and wait his Return c. Here were three Epistles written I think in plain Prelatick Stile sure neither in the Stile of Single Presbyter nor Presbyterian Moderator Especially if we consider the very next written to his Presbyters and Deacons upon the same Principles still He had written to them several times before from the Place of his Retirement but had received no Answer from them Now consider how he Resents this and Resenting it asserts his own Episcopal Authority his own Sovereign Power in Ecclesiastick Matters For thus he begins I wonder dear Brethren that you have returned no Answers to the many Letters I have sent you especially considering that now in my Retirement you ought to inform me of every thing that happens that so I may advisedly and deliberately give Orders concerning the Affairs of the Church Let any Man lay these four Letters together and weigh them impartially and then let him judge if St. Cyprian wrote in the Stile of Parity if he claim'd not a Sovereign Power a Negative to himself over all the Christians Presbyters as well as others living within his District But did not Cyprian shew too much Zeal in this Cause Possibly he attempted to stretch his Power a little too far as afterwards many did He was a Holy and Meek Man but such may be a little too High So I read indeed in a late Book But it seems the Author has found himself very sore put to it when he said so For how can one not be fore put to
those Times the Bishop was called the Praepositus the Ruler the Governour the Superiour of all the Christians within his District Clergy as well as Laity And they without Distinction or Exception were called His People his Flock his Subjects c. This may be seen almost in every one of his Epistles Thus Ep. 3. he says That Deacons ought to remember that our Lord chose his Apostles that is Bishops and Governours But the Apostles chose Deacons to be the Bishop's and the Churches Ministers And therefore a Deacon ought with all Humility to give Satisfaction to the Bishop his Superiour And Ep. 9. He praises the Roman Clergy for having the Memory of Fabianus who had been their Superiour in so great Honour And Ep. 13. writing to Rogatianus his Presbyter and the rest of the Confessors and praising God for their Faith and Patience he says That as all Christians were bound to Rejoyce when Christ's Flock was illuminated by the Examples of Confessors so he himsâ—lf in a special manner as being the Bishop seeing the Churches Glory was the Ruler's Glory And in that famous Passage which I have cited already from Ep. 16. he complains of it as an unexampled Petulancy that Presbyters should so contemn the Bishop their Sâ—periour And in another place We Bishops who have the Chief Power in the Church And Ep. 62. I who by the Divine Mercy Govern the Church have sent to you Januarius Maximus Proculus c. 100000 Sestercâ—s as the Charitable Contribution of my Clergy and People And Ep. 66. Hence spring Heresies and Schisms c. That the Bishop who is one and is set over the Church is Contemned c. Such was the Dialect of those Times I say and thus Bishops were called Rulers Governours Superiours c. and that in regard of all within their Districts making no Discrimination betwixt Clergy-men and Laicks and not only so but more particularly 2. It was as comon in that Dialect to call the Clergy The BISHOP'S CLERGY Thus for Example Ep. 14. It was my Wish that I might have saluted all my Clâ—â—gy safe and sound c. My Presbyters and Deacons ought to have taught you c. Because I cannot send Letters but by Clergy-men and I know that many of mine are absent Numidicus was preserved alive by God that he might joyn him my Clergy Urbanus and Sidonius came to my Presbyters If any of my Presbyters or Deacons shall turn precipitant I have sent you Copies of the Letters which I wrote to my Clergy and People concerning Felicissimus and his Presbytery And as I observed before when Maximâ—s a Presbyter and Urbanus c. returned from the Novatian Schism to Cornelius's Communion We are Reconciled say they to Cyprian to Cornelius OUR BISHOP and to all the Clergy Such was the Language of those Times Now I say by what Propriety of Speech could a Bishop have been called Praepositus Superiour to his Clergy Could they have been called HIS Clergy Could he have been said to have been Their Bishop Their Ruler Their Governour By what Rule of either Grammar or Rhetorick Logick or Politick could he have been said to have been set over them or they to have been his Subjects or Inferiours if he had no Power nor Iurisdiction over them If they were not Subjected to his Authority nor Obnoxious to his Discipline But let all this pass for meer Prolusion if you will I am not pinch'd for want of Arguments For 3. The three great Principles which I proved so fully before viz. That a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was the Principle of Unity to the Church which he Govern'd that he had a Supreme Power in it and that by the Principles which then prevailed he was the same in the Christian Church which the High Priest was in the Iewish and the last Thing I proved also viz. That he had a Negative over his Presbyters Each of these is demonstration for the present Conclusion and you need not Artificial Natural Logick is enough to let you see the Consequences Indeed 4. We find Cyprian all along both Reasoning and Practising to this purpose Thus he told Bishop Rogatianus Ep. 3. That the Case was plain between him and his Deacon Hâ— might punish him forthwith by his Episcopal Power and his Câ—thedral Authority He might make him sensible of his Episcopâ— Honour He might Exert the Power of his Honour against him either by Deposing or by Excommunicating him Nay He mighâ— Excommunicate all such as should Rebel against him For all these Censures his Sovereign Authority was competent Thus he praises Pomponius another Bishop for Excommunicating another Scandalous Deacon Ep. 4. p. 9. And did not he himself Suspend Philumenus and Fortunatus two Subdeacons and Favorinus an Acolyth from their Livings As we learn from his 34th Epistle But you may say These Instances extend no further than to Deacons or more inferiour Clergy-men but What is this to Presbyters Why Sir indeed the Instances are pat and home and you must acknowledge so much if you consider that by the Principles of those Times there was no Disparity between Prebyters and Inferiour Orders in this respect But the Bishop's Power extended equally to all just as a King can censure his Chancellor as well as a Sub-Collector of his Customs a Justice-General as well as a Justice of Peace Nothing clearer from the above-mentioned Principles But that I may leave you no imaginable Scruple I shall even account to you about Prebyters also 5. Then I have told you already how some of the Carthaginian Presbyters conspired against St. Cyprian and used their utmost Arts to hinder his Preâ—erment to the Bishoprick Now if we may believe either himself or Pontius in his Life whatever it was they did on that Occasion he might have punish'd them for it punish'd them not only with Deposition but with Excommunication had he pleased Take first his own Account in Ep. 43. there he tells his People That through the Malignity and Perfidiousness of some of his Presbyters he durst not adventure to return to Carthage so soon as he would And he describes those Presbyters thus That being mindful of their Conspiracy and retaining their old Grudges against his Promotion they reinforced their ancient Machinations and renewed their Attempts for Undermining him by siding with Felicissâ—mus in his Schism And then he proceeds thus I neither willed nor wished their Punishment for their Opposition to my Promotion yea I Pardon'd them and kept my Peace And yet now they have suffered Condign Punishment Thô I did not Excommunicate them then their own Guilty Consciences have done it now They have Excommunicated themselves c. Take it next from Pontius his Deacon Thô I am unwilling says he yet I must speak it out Some resisted his Promotion but how Gently how Patiently how Generously how Mercifully did he forgive them Did
THE PRINCIPLES OF THE Cyprianic Age With Regard to Episcopal Power and Iurisdiction Asserted and Recommended from the Genuine Writings of St. Cyprian himself and his Contemporaries By which it is made evident That the Vindicator of the Kirk of Scotland is obliged by his own Concessions to acknowledge that he and his Associates are Schismaticks In a Letter to a FRIEND BY I. S. LONDON Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in St. Paul's Church-yard MDCXCV SAnctissimae Matri Ecclesiae SCOTICANAE Sub pondere pressae Sed adhuc malis non cedenti Fidem Catholicam Unitatem Apostolicam Pietatem primaevam Fortiter propugnanti Adversus Blasphemias Calumnias Sacrilegia Ruinas Invicto quia verè Christiano animo Strenuè decertanti Cultu Fide Justitiâ In Deum Regem proximos Conspicuae Haereses omnes tam antiquas quam novas Armis Evangelicis perpetuâ Ecclesiae traditione Profliganti Undique Lachrymis suffusae Victrice tamen Cruce triumphanti Tam Archiepiscopis Episeopis Presbyteris Diaconis Quam universo Fidelium Coetui Veris suis Pastoribus vinculo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primigeniae Adhaerescenti Solâ spe Coelestis praemii inter clades miseras maximas Suffultae Hanc dissertationem Epistolarem raptim sermone Vernaculo conscriptam de Episcoporum aevi Cyprianici Eminentiâ Praerogativis Eâ quâ par est animi modestiâ reverentiâ Clientelae Censurae ergò D. D. D. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE Cyprianic Age c. SIR I Acknowledge you have performed your Promise The Author of the Defence of the Vindication of the Church of Scotland in Answer to an Apology OF he should have said FOR the Clergy of Scotland has indeed said so as you affirmed And I ask your Pardon for putting you to the trouble of sending me his Book and Pointing to Sect. 39. Page 34. where he has said so But now after all what thô he has said so And said so so boldly Do you think his bare saying so is enough to determine our Question Don't mistake it That which made me so backward to believe he had said so was not any dreadful Apprehension I had of either his Reason or Authority but a Perswasion that none of his Party would have been so rash as to have put their being or not being Schismaticks upon such a desperate Issue And that you may not apprehend my Perswasion was unreasonable I shall first take to Task what he hath said and then perchance add something concerning our main Argument His Words are these Arg. 5. Cyprian's Notion of Schism is when one separateth from his own Bishop This the Presbyterians do Ergo. A. All the strength of this Argument lieth in the sound of Words A Bishop in Cyprian's time was not a Diocesan with sole Power of Jurisdiction and Ordination If he prove that we shall Give Cyprian and him leave to call us Schismaticks A Bishop then was the Pastor of a Flock or the Moderator of a Presbytery If he can prove that we separate from our Pastors or from the Presbytery with their Moderator under whose Inspection we ought to be let him call us what he will But we disown the Bishops in Scotland from being our Bishops we can neither own their Episcopal Authority nor any Pastoral Relation that they have to us Thus he Now Sir if one had a mind to catch at Words what a Field might he have here For Instance Suppose the Word Diocess was not in use in St. Cyprian's time as applied to a particular Bishop's District Doth it follow that the Thing now signified by it was not then to be found Again What could move him to insinuate that we assign the sole Power of Iurisdiction and Ordination to our Diocesan Bishop When did our Bishops claim that sole Power When was it ascribed to them by the Constitution When did any of our Bishops attempt to Exercise it When did a Scotish Bishop offer e. g. to Ordain or Depose a Presbyter without the Concurrence of other Presbyters When was such a sole Power deem'd Necessary for Raising a Bishop to all the due Elevations of the Episcopal Authority How easie is it to distinguish between a Sole and a Chief Power Between a Power Superiour to all other Powers and a Power Exclusive of all other Powers Between a Power without or against which no other Powers can Act thô they may in Conjunction with it or Subordination to it And a Power destroying all other Powers or disabling them from Acting Once more How loose and Ambiguous is that part of his Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time in which he calls him The Pastor of a Flock May not a Bishop and his Diocess be called a Pastor and a Flock in as great propriety of Speech as a Presbyterian Minister and his Parish Sure I am St. Cyprian and his Contemporaries thought so as you may learn hereafter How easie were it I say for one to insist on such Escapes if he had a mind for it But I love not Jangle and I must avoid Prolixity And therefore considering the State of the Controversie between our Author and the Apologist and supposing he intended however he expressed it to speak home to the Apologist's Argument the Force and Purpose of his Answer as I take it must be this That an Argument drawn from such as were called Bishops in St. Cyprian's time to such as are now so called in Scotland is not good That a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was nothing like one of our modern Scotish Bishops i. e. a Church Governour superiour to and having a Prelatick Power over all other Church-Governours within such a District as we commonly call a Diocess That a Bishop then was no more than a Single Presbyter or Pastor of a single Flock such a Flock as could conveniently meet together in one Assembly for the Publick Offices of Religion such a Flock as the People of one single Parish are in the modern Presbyterian Notion of a Parish acting in Parity with other single Pastors of other single Flocks or Parishes Or at most That he was but the Moderator of a Presbytery taking both Terms in the modern current Presbyterian Sense i. e. as Moderator signfies One who as such is no Church Governour nor hath any Iurisdiction over his Brethren One whose Power is meerly Ordinative not Decisive To be the Mouth of the Meeting not to be their Will or Commanding Faculty To keep Order in the Manner and Managing of what cometh before them Not to Determine what is Debated amongst them And as Presbytery signifies such a Number of Teaching and Ruling Presbyters living and having their Cures within such a District meeting together upon Occasion and acting in Parity in the Administration of the Government and Discipline of the Church That therefore our Scotish Presbyterians cannot be called Schismaticks in St. Cyprian's Notion of Schism unless it can be proved That they Separate from their Pastor or
his Deacon Pontius Euâ—ebius and St. Ierome Thus our Holy Martyr tells us That Cornelius had made his Advances gradually through all the inferior Stations and so no doubt had been a Presbyter before he was a Bishop And yet we find when he was Promoted to the See of Rome he was Ordained by 16 Bisâ—â—ps Thus we find also in the Promotion of Sabinus to the Bishoprick from which Basilides had fallen that he was Ordained by the Imposition of the Hands of the Bishops who were then present at his Election Thus Fortunatus Achimnius Optatus Privationus Donatulus and Fâ—ix 6 Bishops Ordained a Bishop at Capsis Thus Heraclus was first a Presbyter under Demetrius in the Church of Alexandria and then succeeded to him in the Episcopal Chair Dionysius was first a Presbyter under Heraclas and then succeeded to him And Maximus who had been a Presbyter under him succeeded to Dionysius And before all these some 70 Years before St. Cyprian's time Irenaeus was first a Presbyter under Photinus and afterwards his Successor in the Bishoprick of Lions Nor is it to be doubted that each of these was Raised to the Episcopal Dignity by a new Ordinatioâ— The first of the Canons commonly called Apostolical which requires That a Bishop be Ordained by two or three Bishops was doubtless all along observed Nay this Necessity of a new Ordination for Raising One to the Episcopal Power was so Notorious and Received then that the Schismaticks themselves believed it indispensible And therefore Novatianus thô formerly a Presbyter as Cornelius tells expresly in that so often cited Epistle to Fabius when he Rival'd it with Cornelius for the Chair of Rome that he might have the shew at least of a Canonical Ordination he got three simple inconsiderate Bishops to come to the City upon pretence of Consulting with other Bishops about setling the Commotions of the Church And having them once in his Clutches he shut them up under Lock and Key till they were put in a scandalous Disorder and then forced them to give him the Episcopal Mission by an imaginary and vain Imposition of Hands as Cornelius words it Thus also when Fortunatus One of the Five Presbyters who joyned with the Schismatical Felicissumus against St. Cyprian tâ—â—ned bold to set up as an Anti-Bishop at Carthage He was Ordained by Five false Bishops And now Sir by this Accounâ— I think we have our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time fairly routed a second time For How could the Maxim of but One Bishop at once in a Church hold if that Bishop was nothing but a single Presbyter The Church of Rome was but One Church so was the Church of Carthage And yet in each of these Churches there were many single Presbyters Again If a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was no more than a single Presbyter in the Presbyterian Sense what needed so much work about him Why e. g. convene all the Presbyters of a Province such as Africa or Numidia was for the Election and Ordination of a single Presbyter in Carthage where there were Presbyters more than enough to have performed all the Business What needed the Church of Rome to make such work about supplying such a Vacancy as was there before Cornelius was Promoted Why a Convention of Sixteen Neighbouring Bishops to give him Holy Orders Might not the Forty Six who lived in Rome have served the turn Might not these Forty Six I say have filled Fabianus his Room with far greater Ease and Expedition If they made such work and had such Difficulties as we find they had about a Bishop in setling One single Brother Presbyter when according to our Author's Principles they had the full Power of doing it what had become of them if Thirty nay Twenty nay Ten of the Forty six had all died in one Year Sure they had never got so many Vacancies filled And then Were not Cornelius and Novatianus Presbyters of Rome before the former was the Trâ—e and the latter the False Bishop of that City If so what need of a new Election and a new Ordination for making them Presbyters of a Church of which they were Presbyters already Had it not been pretty pleasant in such a grave serious persecuted State of the Church to have seen two eminent Men already Presbyters of Rome making so much work about being made Presbyters of Rome And all the Clergy and Christians of Rome nay sooner or later of all the Christian World engaged in the Quarrel What had this been other than the very Mystery of Ridiculousness But this is not all The Premisses will as little allow him to have been a Presbyterian Moderator For to what purpose so much ado about the Establishment of a meer Moderator of a Presbytery Why so much stress laid upon only one Moderator in a City Why no Canonical Vacancy of his Moderatorial Chair unless in the case of Death Cession or Forfeiture Sure if they had then understood all the Exigencies and Analogies of Parity they would not have been so much in love with a constant Moderator no they would have judged him highly inconvenient and by all means to be shunned If he had been imposed on the Meeting it had been an Encroachment on their Intrinsick Power and so absolutely unlawful and Prelacy And thò Chosen by themselves fatal as having a violent Tendency to Lordly Prelacy And therefore they could never have yielded to have One with a Good Conscience Again How often did the Presbytery of Rome meet in the Interval between Fabianus his Death and Cornelius his Promotion How many excellent Epistles did they write to the Neighbouring Bishops and Churches and these about the most weighty and important Matters during that Vacancy They wrote that which is the Eighth in Number amongst St. Cyprian's Epistles to the Carthaginian Clergy and at the same time One to St. Cyprian then in his Retirement which is lost They wrote that notable Epistle which is the Thirtieth in Number in which they not only mention other of their Epistles which they had wrote to St. Cyprian and which are not now extant but also Epistles one or more which they had sent to Sicily They wrote also that considerable Epistle which is in Number the Thirty sixth It is not to be doubted that they wrote many more How many Meetings and Consultations had they during these Sixteen Months about the Affairs of the Church and particularly the Case of the Lapsi which was then so much agitated Is it probable that they wanted a Moderator a Mouth of their Meeting One to keep Order in the manner and managing of the Affairs were brought before them all that time and in all those Meetings How could they without one handle Matters with Order and Decency And what was there to hinder them from having one if they had a mind for him Might they not have chosen one as safely as they met
can refer it to our Author himself to Determine Whether the High Priest of the Iews bore no higher Character than that of a single Presbyter or a Presbyterian Moderator And so I proceed to another Head of Arguments which shall be FOURTHLY To give you in a more particular Detail some of the Branches of the Episcopal Prerogative in St. Cyprian's time And I think I shall do enough for my purpose if I shall prove these three Things I. That there were several considerable Acts of Power relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church which belonged solely to the Bishop's several Powers lodged in his Person which he could manage by himself and without the Concurrence of any other Church-Governour II. That in every Thing relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church he had a Negative over all the other Church-Governours within his District And III. That all the other Clergy-men within his District Presbyters as well as others were subject to his Authority and obnoxious to his Discipline and Jurisdiction I. I say there were several considerable Acts of Power relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church which belonged solely to the Bishop several Powers lodged in his Person which he could manage by himself and without the Concurrence of any other Church-Governour Take these for a Sample And First He had the sole Power of Confirmation of imposing Hands on Christians for the Reception of the Holy-Ghost after Baptism For this we have St. Cyprian's most express Testimony in his Epistle to Iubaianus where he tells It was the Custom to offer such as were Baptized to the Bishops that by their Prayers and the laying on of their Hands they might receive the Holy-Ghost and be Consummated by the Sign of our Lord i. e. by the Sign of the Cross as I take it And he expresly founds this Practice on the Paterm of St. Pater and St. Iohn mentiond Acts 8. 14. c. Firmilian is as express in his Epistle to Cyprian saying in plain Lanugage That the Bishops who Govern the Church possess the Power of Baptism Confirmation and Ordination 'T is true he calls them Majores Natu Elder But that he meant Bishops as distinguished from Presbyters cannot be called into Question by any Man who reads the whole Epistle and considers his Stile all along and withal considers what a peculiar Interest by the Principles of these Times the Bishop had in these three Acts he names But whatever groundless Altercations there may be about his Testimony as there can be none about St. Cprian's so neither can there by any shadow of Pretext for any about Cornelius's who in his Epistle to Fabius so often mentioned before makes it an Argument of Novatianus his Incapacity of being a Bishop that thô he was Baptized yet he was not Confirmed by the Bishop Secondly He had the sole Power of Ordination and that of whatsoever Clergy-men within his District Ordinations could not be performed without him but he could perform them Regularly without the Concurrence of any other Church-Officer This has been so frequently and so fully proved by Learned Men that I need not insist much on it Forbearing therefore to adduce the Testimonies of such as lived after St. Cyprian's time such as Ambrose Ierom Chrysostom c. I shall confine my self to St. Cyprian and his Contemporaries Toi begin with St. Cyprian 'T is true so humble and condescending he was That when he was made Bishop he resolved with himself to do nothing by himself concerning the Publick Affairs of the Church without consulting not only his Clergy but his People I call this his own free and voluntary Condescention It wa a thing he was not bound to do by any Divine Prescript or any Apostolical Tradition or any Ecclesiastical Constitution His very Words import so much which you may see on the Margin And yet for all that we find him not only in extraordinary Junctures Ordaining without asking the Consent of his Clergy or People but still insisting on it as the Right of all Bishops and particularly his own to Promote and Ordain Clergy-men of whatsoever Rank by himself and without any Concurrence Thus In his 38th Epistle having Ordained Aurelius a Lector he acquaints his Presbyters and Deacons with it from the Place of his Retirement Now consider how he begins his Letter In all Clerical Ordinations most dear Brethren says he I used to Consult you beforehand and to examine the Manners and Merits of every one with common Advice And then he proceeds to tell them How that notwithstanding that was his ordinary Method a Rule he had observed for the most part yet for good Reasons he had not observed it in that Instance In which Testimony we have these Things evident 1. That his Power was the same as to all Ordinations whether of Presbyters or others For he speaks of them all indefinitely In Clericis Ordinationibus 2. That he used only to ask the Counsel and Advice of his Clergy about the Manners and Merits of the Person he was to Ordain but not their Concurrence in the Act of Ordination not one word of that On the contrary That they used not to Concurr fairly imported in the very Instance of Aurelius 3. That it was intirely of his own Easiness and Condescension that he Consulted them in the Matter He USED to do it but needed not have done it He did it not in that very same Case Which is a demonstration of the Truth of what I said before viz. That his Resolutioâ— which he had made when he entred to his Bishoprick was from his own Choice and absolutely Free and Voluntary We have another remarkable Testimony to the same purpose in his 41st Epistle where he tells that Because of his Absence from Carthage he had given a Deputation to â—aldnius and Herculanus two Bishops and to Râ—gatianâ—s and Numidicus two of his Presbyters to examine the Ages Qualifications and Mâ—its of some in Carthage that he whose Province it was to promote Men to Ecclesiastical Offices might be well informed about them and Promote none but such as were Meek Humble and Worthy This I say is a most remarkable Testimony for our present Purpose for he not only speaks indefinitely of all Ranks or Orders without making Exceptions but he speaks of himself in the Singular Number as having the Power of Promoting them and he founds that Power and appropriates it to himself upon his having the Care of the Church and her Government committed to him We have a third Testimony as pregnant as any of the former in his 72d Epistle written to Stephen Bishop of Rome For representing to him what the Resolution of the African Bishops were concerning such Presbyters and Deacons as should return from a State of Schism to the Communion of the Church he discourses thus By common Consent and Aâ—thority Dear Brother we tell you further That if any Presbyters or Deacons who
not all the Presbyters of Carthage who were engaged in the Quarrel No Râ—gatianus Britius Numidicus and perhaps many more whose Names are not trasmited to us would never joyn with those of the Faction but still continued in their Duty to St. Cyprian And can we think they would not have joyned with their Brethren for the Maintenance of their own Rights and Priviledges if Cyprian had been the Usurper If he had been Claiming a Sovereign Power without any Pretence of Right to it If he had been driving at a Prelacy when the Government of the Church belonged to Presbyters acting in Parity We learn from St. Cyprian himself That in those Times it was a mighty Wickedness for Men to part tamely with their Rights and Powers in Divine Matters And can we think that Rogatianus Bâ—itius and Numidicus were ignorant of this Or supposing that should have had small Weight with them is Power such a gustless Thing that Men will easily part with it without any Reason But to go on 3. Even those very Presbyters and Deacons of the Faction came once to something like a Dutiful Submission in the Matter They lower'd their Sails and began to wave Apologies and knit Excuses for what they had done They endeavoured to put a fair Face upon the foul Steps they had made They wrote to Cyprian That they had done what they could to bridle the Heats of the Lapsed and oblige them to continue in their Penances till his Return from his Retirement but that they were so Ungovernable and Stiff and urged a present Absolution so eagerly and irresistibly that they were forced in a manner to comply with their Humours But now seeing they found that he their Bishop was so much displeased with what they had done they asked a FORM from him i. e. his Will and Pleasure in the Matter And now let any Man consider whether St. Cyprian or these Presbyters had been in the Wrong before Whether He or They had acted beyond their Lines But I have more to tell you For 4. These Presbyters who had thus transgressed the Bounds of their Station were generally Condemn'd for it by their Brethren Presbyters all the World over At least we have a most remarkable Instance in the Presbyters of Româ— Take it thus St. Cyprian being a Wise and Watchful as well as an Holy and Humble Prelate one who had still before his Eyes thâ— Conservation of the Order the Peace and the Unity of the Church Catholick and perceiving that the Controversie concerning the Restitution of the Lapsed might be of bad Influence on those great Interests if not prudently determined thought fit to acquaint his Brethren of the Episcopal Colledge with it and ask their Sentiments about it And because there was no Bishop then at Rome he wrote to the Presbyters and Deacons the Roman Presbytery The Epistle is the 20th in Number In which he deduced the whole Matter to them and told them particularly how he had Exerted his Episcopal Authority in its Vigour against such of his Presbyters as without his Leave had boldly and presumptuously Absolved the Lapsed and given them the Sacrament Now consider their Return to him You have it in the 30th Epistle They begin with the Acknowledgment of his Supream and Unaccountable Power within his own District which I observed before They impute it to his Modesty and Caution not to his Pride and Fetulancy that he had been pleased to communicate his Measures to them They approve the Course he had taken with the Lapsed They compare him to the Master of a Ship sitting at the Helm who if he steers not right and keeps not a steddy Course especially in a Storm endangers the Ship and runs her upon Rocks or Shelves And I think the Master of a Ship doth not act in Parity with the rest of the Mariners And further They compare those who at that time endeavoured to interrupt the Course of his Discipline Presbyters as well as others to the Tumbling Waves striving to shake the Master from the Helm and expose all to the Hazards of Shipwrack In plain Terms they condemn the Course of Reconciling the Lapsed so Undutifully and Rebelliously As for themselves they tell him and pray take notice of it That wanting a Bishop they could define nothing in the Matter They tell him I say That since the Death of Fabianus of most Noble Memory through the Difficulties of the Times and the Encumbrances of their Affairs they had not got a Bishop Constituted who only could define in these Matters and determine in the Case of the Lapsed with AUTHORITY and Counsel But withal they tell him That for their parts they were extreamly well pleased with the Course he had taken namely That he had resolved to do nothing rashly to take no sudden Resolutions in a Matter of such Consequence but to wait till God should grant him opportunity of Treating about it with others and determining with common Advice in such a ticklish Case Where observe by the way That they do not found the Wisdom of this his Resolution on any thing like the Incompetency of his Power for having determined by himself concerning the Lapsed within his own District No the Reason they give for it supposes his Power to have been fully Adequate and Competent for that Effect and that if he had given the final Stroke no body could have Quarrel'd it For they insist only on the Rules of Prudence which if I mistake not are quite different from the Rules of Power They tell him it might prove Invidious and Burdensom for one Bishop to Determine by himself in a Case in which all Bishops were concerned and that it was Providently done of him to dâ—â—ire the Confent of his Colleagues that his Decrees might be Approved and Confirmed That they might not be made void through the want of the Brotherly Ratification These are the Reasons I say for which they justifie his Caution and these Reasons suppose he had Power to have done otherwise thô not so wisely nor so warily And then they tell him over again That they had met frequently and canvassed the Matter seriously They had tossed it not only amongst themselves but with sevâ—ral Bishops far and near as they had occasion to be in the City and that still the Conclusion was That they should attempt no Innovations till a Bishop should be settled All they had Resolved was That thâ—se of the Lapsed whose Health might allow should continue in the State of the Penitents till God should grant them a Bishop Neither was this a meer Complement to our Holy Martyr Indeed in all this they gave him a true Account of their Real Sentiments and Principles as we learn from another Epistle of theirs wherein they had neither Occasion nor Temptation to Complement Bishops The Epistle is that which is the Eighâ—h amongst St. Cyprian's An Epistle written by them to the Presbyters and Deacons of Carthage to Persons
of their own Rank and Quality By consequence an Epistle in which had they understood it had the Principles of those Times allowed it they might have spoken their Minds very freely concerning the Power of Presbyters Never had Presbyters I am sure more Freedom or better Opportunity to have asserted their own Power and Vindicated Parity and Condem'd Prelatical Usurpations in an Epistle than they had on that Occasion for Fabianus Bishop of Rome was dead and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage was retired and so it was written by Presbyters who had no Bishop to Presbyters in the absence of their Bishop And yet in that Epistle they were so far from having any such Notions that they said expresly That both Themselves who wanted One and those of Carthage who wanted the Presence of One were only seemingly the Governours of those respective Churches and only kept the Flocks in stead of the respective Pastors the Bishops And â—urther telling what Pains they had been at to keep People from Apostatizing in the Day of Trial they account how they Treated those who had fallen particularly that they did separate them from the Flock indeed but so as not to be wanting in their Duty and Assistance to them They did what was proper for their Station They exhorted them to continue patiently in their Penances as being the most plausible Method for obtaining Indulgences from him who could give them That is without Controversie from the Bishop when he should be settled For so I read in an Epistle written at that same time by Celerinâ—s a Roman to Lucianus a Carthaginian and the 2Ist in Number among St. Cyprian's that when the Cause of Numeria and Candida two Female Lapsers was brought before the Presbytery of Rome the Presbytery commanded them to continue as they were i. e. in the State of Penitents till a Bishop should be Inthroned And now let any Man judge whether according to the Principles and Sentiments of the Presbyters of Rome St. Cyprian or his presuming Presbyters had taken too much upon them at Carthage But neither is this all yet for â— These Carthaginian Presbyters were also Condemned by the Roman Martyrs and Confessors who thâ— they were in Prison had learned the State of the Controversie from the Accounts St. Cyprian had sent to Rome two of them Moyses and Maximus being also Presbyters These Martyrs and Confessors wrote also to St. Cyprian and to the same purpose the Roman Clergy had done Their Epistle is the 3Ist in number In which they not only beg with a peculiar Earnestness That he being so Glorious a Bishop would pray for them They not only lay a singular stress upon his Prayers beyond the Prayers of others by reason of the Opinion they had of his Holy Virtues which I am apt to think such Men as they would not probably have done had they believed him to have been a Proud aspiring Prâ—late that is indeed a Limb of Antichrist as this Author would â—ain give him out to have been But also they heartily Congratulate his discharging so Laudibly his Episcopal Office and that even in his Retirement he had made it so much his Care to acquit himself that he had halted in no part of his Duty and particularly That he had suitably Censured and Râ—buked not only the Lapsed who little regarding the Greatness of their Guilt had in his Absence extorted the Churches Peace from his Presbyters but even these Presbyters for their profane Facility in giving that which was Holy to Dogs and casting Pearls before Swine without any Regard to the Gospel In short They Approve his whole Proceeding as having done nothing Unsuitable to his Character nothing Unbecoming either an Holy or an Humble Bishop Further yet 6. These same Carthaginian Presbyters resuming their former Boldness and Topping it over again with their Bishop were Excommunicated by him and his Sentence was Approved and Ratified by all Catholick Bishâ—ps in all Catholick Churches all the World over as shall be shewn you fully by and by And then 7. And lasty That in all this Matter St. Cyprian did nothing either Proudly or Presumptuously is evident from this That in his Time and long before his Time even from the Apostles Times it was not Lawful for Presbyters to Attempt any thing relating to the Church without the Bishop 〈◊〉 Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop's Allowance for 't is he to whom the Lord's People are committed and 't is he that must Account for their Souls is the 39th of the Canons called Apostolical And no doubt it was in force in St. Cyprian's time And this was no greater Power than was assigned him by the Apostolical Ignatius I cannot tell how many times Take these Testimonies for a Sample Let no Man do any thing that belongs to the Church without the Bishop He that hâ—noureth the Bishop is honoured of God but he that doth any thing in opposition to the Bishop serveth the Devil If any Man pretend to be wiser than the Bishop i. e. will have Things done against the Bishop's Will he is Corrupted Let us be careful not to resist the Bishop as we would be subject to God The Spirit hath spoken Do ye nothing without the Bishop 'T is necessary that you continue to do nothing without the Bishop And now let any of Common Sense determine Whether there was Ground or shadow of Ground for insinuating that St. Cyprian shewed too much Zeal in this Cause or attempted to stretch his Power a little too far indeed it had not been a little but very much nay monstrously too far had those of Parity been then the current Principles or was a little too high in this Matter But if there was no Ground to say so if it was contrary to all the then current Principles and to the common Sentiments of all Catholick Christians nay even to the Convictions of all Honest Orderly Dutiful and Conscientious Presbyters who then lived to say so If thus it was I say and 't is hard to prove any Matter of Fact more evidently than I have proved that it was thus then I think it follows by good Consequence not only that this Author was a little in the wrong to St. Cyprian when he said so but also that in St. Cyprian's time a Bishop had fairly a Negative over his Presbyters which was the Thing to be demonstrated And so I proceed to the next Thing proposed namely III. That all the other Church-Governours within his District Presbyters as well as others were in St. Cyprian's time subject to the Bishop's Authority and obnoxious to his Discipline I do'nt think you very sharp sighted if you have not seen this already Yet that I may give you all reasonable Satisfaction I shall insist a little further on it And I. This might appear sufficiently from this one Consideration thâ— no more could be produced for it That still in the Stile and Language of
of the One Church and they being her Supreme Governours they could not but be chiefly bound by the most Fundamental Laws of their Office to be Conscientious Conservators of these Great and Fundamental Interests And indeed so they believed themselves to be as will evidently appear from the following Considerations And I. They look'd upon themselves as bound indispensibly to maintain the Peace the Unity the Concord the Unanimity the Honour they are all St. Cyprian's Words of the College it self Every Error every Defect every Thing Disjoyâ—ted or out of Tune in it tended naturally to endanger the great Interests for the Conservation and Procuration of which it was instituted For this End 2. Because every Man by being Promoted to the Episcopal Dignity was Eo ipso a Principle of Unity to a particular Church and so a Member of the Episcopal College all possible Care was taken that a fit Person should be promoted and that the Promotion should be Unquestionable Therefore he was not to be Promoted as I have proved but where there was an Unquestionable Vacancy Therefore he was not to be Promoted if there was any thing Uncanonical or Challengeable in his Baptism or his Confirmation or his Prâ—motion to any former Order as I have â—hewn also in the Case of Novationus Therefore he was Solemnly Elected in the Presence of the People That either his Crimes might be detected or his Merits published because the People was best acquainted with every Man's Life and Conversation Therefore he was to be Solemnly Ordained in the Presence of the People also And that by two or three Bishops at fewest thô an Ordination perform'd by One Bishop was truly Valid Commonly there were more all the Bishops of the Province 3. Being thus Canonically Promoted his first Work was to send his Communicatory Letters to all other Bishops to give them thereby an Account of his Canonical Promotion his Orthodoxy in the Faith his Fraternal Disposition c. Thus Cornelius was no sooner Ordained Bishop of Rome than he instantly dispatched his Communicatory Letters to St. Cyprian And no doubt as the Custom was to all other Bishops at least to all Metropolitans by them to be Communicated to the Bishops within their Provinces I say to Metropolitans for nothing can be clearer than that there were Metropolitans in St. Cyprian's time He was undoubtedly One himself and Agrippiâ—â—s his Predecessor Bishop of Carthage was One long before him Spanhemius himself our Author's Diligem Searcher into Antiquity acknowledges it But to return from this Digression Novatianus also thô Illegally and Schismatically Ordained found it necessary to send his Communicatory Letters to St. Cyptian as if he had been Ordain'd Canonically and in the Unity of the Church So also Fortunatus when made a Schismatical Bishop at Carthage sent his Communicatory Letters to Cornelius Bishop of Rome Indeed this was never omitted 4. If there was no Competition no Controversie in the Caâ—e the Matter was at an end The Promoted Bishop's Communicatory Letters were sufficient and he was forthwith faithfully joyned with all his Collegues as St. Cyprian words it But if there was any Competitor any Debate then the rest of the College before they received him as a Collegue made further Enquiries Sometimes they sent some from the Neighbourhood to examine the Matter Sometimes the Ordainers were obliged to Account for the Person Ordained and the whole Procedure of the Ordination Sometimes both Methods were practised We have a famous Instance of both Methods in one Case the Case of Cornelius and Novationus Cornelius as I have said upon his Promotion wrote to St. Cyprian So did Novatianus Here was a Competition Cyprian therefore with his African Collegues sent Caldonius and Fortunatus two Bishops to Rome that upon the Place it self where they might have the surest Information they might enquâ—re into the Merits of the Cause and try the Competition And on the other hand the Sixteen Bishops who Ordain'd Cornelius wrote to St. Cyprian and the rest of the Bishops of Africa and satisfied them upon the whole Qvestion demonstrating Cornelius's Title and Condemning Novatianus Such Care was taken that none should be admitted Unworthily or Uncanonically into the Episcopal College But then 5. There was equal Care taken to purge him out of the College again if he turned either Heretical or Schismatical If he kept not close to the Laws of One Faith and One Communion If he swerv'd from these he was forthwith refused the Communion of the whole College Therefore says St. Cyprian to Stephen Bishop of Rome in the Case of Marcianus Bishop of Arles who had joyned with Novatianus The Corporation of Priests the Episcopal College is Copious being cemented by the Glue of Mutual Concord and the Bond of Unity that if any of the College shall turn Heretick or attempt to divide or waste the Flock of Christ the rest may interpose and as profitable and merciful Shepherds collect our Lord's Sheep and restore them to the Flock And this they were bound to do by the Fundamental Laws of One Church and one Communion for as our Martyr subjoyns Thô they were many Pastors yet they all fed but one Flock And therefore all the Bishops in the World were bound to give the desolate Christians of Churches whereof the Bishops had turned Heretical or Schismatical the Comfort of their Aid and Assistance 'T is true no Bishop was Superiour to another Bishop in point of Power or Iurisdiction but all stood Collateral as I have proved and so no Bishop as Superiour to another in a streight Linâ— could pass Sentence on him as they might have done to Presbyters Yet all being United into One College which College was the Principle of Unity to the Church Catholick it was necessary as well as natural that that College should be impower'd to take care of its own Preservation and by consequence they could do the Equivalent of a formal and authoritative Deposition they could refuse the Heretical or Schismatical Bishop their Communion and thereby exclude him from the Episcopal College And they could oblige all the Christians within his District to abandon his Communion and choose another Bishop as they valued the invaluable Priviledges of the One Church and the One Communion But then 6. So long as a Bishop worthily and legally Promoted kept the Faith and the Unity of the Church he was Treated he was Encouraged he was Consulted he was Corresponded with in a word Every way used as became the Head of a particular Church and a Fellow-Member of the College All the rest of the Members were bound by the Fundamental Laws of the College to Ratifie all his Canonical nay Equitable Acts of Priesthood Government and Discipline Whosoever was Baptized by himself or by his Clergy with his Allowance was to be owned as a Baptized Christian a True Denison of the Church and to have the Priviledges of such all the World
Teaching Presbyter who has such a Parish assigned to him for his Charge Or not from the Moderator of the Presbytery who is not but from the Presbytery which is the Principle of Unity with their Moderator This I say I take to be the Purpose of our Author's Answer to the Apologist's Argument on the Force whereof he ventures his Parties being or not being Schismatickâ— If I have mistaken his Meaning I protest I have not done it wilfully I am pretty sure I have not in the Definition of a Moderator for I have Transcribed it Word for Word from one whom I take to be a dear Friend of his intirely of the same Principles and Sentiments with him and whose Definitions I am apt to think he will not readily Reject I mean the Author of The Vindication of the Church of Scotland in Answer to the Ten Questions And doth not our Author himself in this same 39th Section part whereof I am now considering affirm That Fifty Years before the first Council of Nice i. e. some 17 or 18 Years after St. Cyprian's Martyrdom the Hierarchy was not in the Church And that however some of the Names might have been yet the Church-Power and Dominion signified by them was not then in Being Plainly importing that the Church then was Governed by Pastors acting in Parity after the Presbyterian Model In short what our Author hath said when duly considered will be found to be no Answer at all to the Apologist's Argument if it is not to be understood in the Sense I have represented Taking it for granted therefore that I have hit his Meaning I hope you will not deny that If I shall prove that a Bishop in Cyprian's time was more than a Pastor of a Flock or the Moderator of a Presbytery in the Presbyterian Sense of the Terms If I shall prove that a Bishop then had really that which cannot be denied to have been true Genuine Episcopal or Prelaiick Power If I can prove that he acted in a Real Superiority over not in Parity with other Church-Governours even Pastors If I shall prove these Things I say I hope you 'l grant our Author is fairly bound by his Word to acknowledge that he and his Brethren Presbyterians are Schismaticks Let us try it then And now Sir Before I come to my main Proofs consider if it may not be deemed a shrewd Presumption against our Author in this matter That generally the great Champions for Presbytery such as Chamâ—er Blondel Salmasius the Provincial Assembly of London c. do ingenuously acknowledge That long before St. Cyprian's time Episcopacy was in the Church even Spanhemius himself grants That in the Third Century Bishops had a manifest Preheminence above Presbyters and Deacoâ—s and a Right of Presiding Convocatiâ—g Ordaining c. By the way I have cited this Writer particularly because our Author not only builds much on his Authority but honours him with the great Character of being That diligent Searcher into Antiquiâ—y How deservedly let others judge for my part I cannot think he has been so very diligent a Searcher For in that same very Section in which he acknowledges the Episcopal Preheminence in the Third Century he says expresly That in that Age there were no Door-Keepers Acolyâ—ths nor Exorcâ—ss And yet I not only find express mention of Exorcism in the Venerable Council of Cartbage in which St. Cyprian was Praeses But both Cyprian and Firmilian expresly mention Exarcists And as for Acolyths how often do we find them mentioned in Cyprian's Epistles E. g. We have Narious an Acâ—lyth Ep. 7. Eavorinus Ep. 34. Nicephorus Ep. 45. Saturnus and Felicianus Ep. 59. Lucanus Maximus and Amantius Ep. 77. And doth not Corneius Bishop of Rome in his famous Epistle to Fabius Bishop of Antioch Recorded by Eusebius positively affirm That there were then in the Church of Rome 42 Acolyths and 52 Exorcists Lectors and Door-keepers But this as I said only by the way That which I am concerned about at present is That when these great Patrons of Presbytery these truly Learned Men whom I named have all so frankly yielded that there was real Prelacy in the Church in and before St. Cyprian's time yet our Author should affirm so boldly that there was no such Thing That there was no Hierarchy in the Church then nor for many Years after Has our Author been a more diligent Searcher into Antiquity than those great Antiquaries were that he was thus able to contradict their Discoveries I am not apt to believe it However as I said let this pass only for a Presumption against him I proceed to other Arguments And 1. I observe that in St. Cyprian's time every Church all the World over at least every Church Constituted and Organized according to the Principles which then prevailed had a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons by whom she was Ruled Thus for Example we find express Mention of the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons of the Church of Adrymetum for Cyprian tells Corneius That when He and Liberalis came to that City Polycarpus the Bishop was absent and the Presbyters and Deacons were ignorant of what had been Resolved on by the Body of the African Bishops about writing to the Church of Rome till the Controversie between Cornelius and Novatianus should be more fully understood Thus Cyprian was Bishop of Carthage and at the same time there were in that City 8 Presbyters at sewest For we read of three Rogatianus Britius and Numidicus who adhered to him And five who took part with Felicissimus against him when that Deacon made his Schism I hope I need not be at pains to prove that there were Deacons then in that famous Church Thus Cornelius in the afore-mentioned Epistle to Fabius tells him That while himself was Bishop of Rome there were in that City no fewer than 46 Preâ—byters and 7 Deacons c. A most flourishing Clergy as St. Cyprian calls it Whoso pleases may see the like Account of the Church of Alexandria in the same Times in Eusebius Indeed If we may believe St. Cyprian there was no Church then without a Bishop For from this Supposition as an uncontroverted Matter of Fact he Reasons against Novatianus His Argument is That there is but One Church and One Episcopacy all the World over and that Catholick and Orthodox Bishops were regularly planted in every Province and City and therefore Novatianus could not but be a Schismatick who contrary to Divine Institution and the Fundamental Laws of Unity laboured to super-induce false Bishops into these Cities where True and Orthodox Bishops were already planted And he Reasons again upon the same Supposition in the beginning of his 63d Epistle directed to Caecilius concerning the Cup in the Eucharist From this Supposition I say as from an uncontested Matter of Fact he Reasons in both Cases which is a Demonstration not only of the Credibility of his Testimony but that
the Matter of Fact was then so Notorious as to be undeniable He Reason'd from it as from an acknowledged Postulate 2. I observe that the Presbyters who in these Times were contra-distinguished from the Bishop and Deacons were Priests in the Language which was then current Pastors in the present Presbyterian Dialect i. e. not Ruling Elders but such as laboured in the Word and Sacraments They were such as were honoured with the Divine Priesthâ—od such as were Constituted in the Clerical Ministery such as whose Work it was to attend the Altar and the Sacrifices and offer up the Publick Prayâ—rs c. as we find in the Instance of Geminius Faustinus Such as God in his merciful Providence was pleased to raise to the Glorious Station of the Priesthood as in the Case of Numidicus Such as in the time of Persecution went to the Prisons and gave the Holy Eucharist to the Confessors Such as at Carthage as St. Cyprian complains to Cornelius presumed to curtail the Pennances of the Lapsers and gave them the Holy Sacrament while their Idolatry was so very recent that as it were their Hands and Mouths were still a smoaking with the warm Nidors of the Sacrifices that had been offered upon the Devils Altars Such as contrary to all Rule and Order absolved the Lapsers and gave them the Communion without the Bishops Licence Such as were joyned with the Bishop in the Sacerdotal Honour In a word They were such Presbyters as St. Cyprian describes to Stephen Bishop of Rome such as sometimes raised Altar against Altar and out of the Communion with the Church offered False and Sacrilegious Sacrifices Such as were to be Deposed when they did so such as thô they should return to the Communion of the Church were only to be admited to LAY-COMMUNION and not to be allowed thereafter to act as Men in Holy Orders seeing it became the PRIESTS and Ministers of God those who attend the Altar and Sacrifices to be Men of Integrity and Blameless Such Presbyters they were I say who were then contra-distinguished from the Bishop For as for your Lay-Elders your Ruling contra-distinct from Teaching Presbyters now so much in vogue there is as profound a Silence of them in St. Cyprian's Works and Time as there is of the Solemn League and Covenant or The Sanquhar Declaration And yet considering how much he has left upon Record about the Governours the Government and the Discipline of the Church if there had been such Presbyters then it is next to a Miracle that he should not so much as once have mentioned them 3. I observe that the Bishops Power his Authority his Pastoral Relation call it as you will extended to all the Christians within his District E. g. Cornelius was immediately and directly Superiour to all the Christians in Rome and they were his Subjects So it was also with Fabius and the Christians of Antioch Dionysius and the Christians of Alexandria Cyprian and the Christians of Carthage c. The Bishops prelation whatever it was related not solely to the Clergy or solely to the Laity but to both equally and formally How fully might this Point be proved if it were needful Indeed St. Cyprian defines a Church to be A People united to their Priest and A Flock adhering to their Pastor And that by the Terms Priest and Pastoâ— he meant the Bishop is plain from what immediately follows for he tells Florentius Pupianus there That from that common and received Notion of a Church he ought to have learned That the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop and that whoso is not with the Bishop is not in the Church And in that same Epistle chastising the same Florentius for calling his Title to his Bishoprick in question and speaking bitter Things against him he Reasons thus What Swelling of Pride What Arrogance of Spirit What Haughtiness is this That thou shouldest arraign Bishops before thy Tribunal And unless we be Purged by thee and Absolved by thy Sentence Lo these Six Years The BROTHERHOOD has had no BISHOP The PEOPLE no RULER The FLOCK no PASTOR The CHURCH no GOVERNOUR CHRIST no PRELATE And GOD no PRIEST In short He that bore the high Character of Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was called the Ruler of the Church by way of Eminence The Church was compared to a Ship and the Bishop was the Master He was the Father and all the Christians within his District were his Children He was the Governour the Rector the Captain the Head the Iudge of all within his Diocess He was the chief Pastor and thô Presbyters were also sometimes called Pastors yet it was but seldom and at best they were but such in Subordination Indeed the Presbyters of the Church of Rome during the Vacancy between Fabianus his Death and Cornelius his Promotion look'd only on themselves as Vice-Pastors saying That in such a juncture they kept the Flock in STEAD of the Pastor the Bishop I could give you even a Surfeit of Evidence I say for the Truth of this Proposition if it were needful Whoso reads St. Cyprian's Epistles may find it in almost every Page And I shall have occasion hereafter to insist on many Arguments in the Probation of other Things which may further clear this also Indeed there is no more in all this than Ignatius said frequently near 150 Years before St. Cyprian And now Sir thô the Monuments of the Cyprianic Age could afford us no more than these three Things which I have proved from them they would be of sufficient force to overthrow our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time as to both Parts of it and demonstrate to every thinking Man's conviction That he was neither The Pastor of the Flâ—ck nor The Moderator of a Presbytery in our Author's sense of the Terms 1. Not the Pastor of a Flock i. e. a single Presbyter having the Charge of a single Parish after the Presbyterian Model For a Bishop in those Times had many such Presbyters under him Cyprian himself whatever he had more had no sewer than Eight under him in the City of Carthage besides the adjacent Villages Cornelius was over Forty six in the City of Rome I know not how many Dionysius was over at Alexandria or Polycarpus at 〈◊〉 but it is certain they were in the Plâ—ral Number So it was all the Christian World over as I have proved A Bishop then in St. Cyprian's time was a Pastor indeed but it was of a Diocess i. e all the Christians within such a District were his Flock and he had a direct formal and immediate Pastoral Relation to them all thô at the same time within the same District there were many inferior Pastors who were subordinate and subject to him 2. He was as little a meer Moderator of a Presbytery in our Author's sense of the Terms A Presbyterian Moderator 〈◊〉
Baptism pestiferous and profane Their Sacrifices abominable They could not be Martyrs Their Company was to be avoided Whoso befriended them were Persecutors of the Truth Were Betrayers of Christ's Spouse to Adulterers Were Betrayers of Unity Were involved in the some Guilt with them In short Schismaticks by being such were Ipso facto Persecutors of the Church Enemies of Mercy Infatuated Salt and Cursed of God Such I say were the Notions the Holy Fathers in those early Times of the Church had of Schismaticks and such were the Names they gave them And certainly whoso seriously considers how much Schism is condemned in Holy Writ what an Enemy it is to the Peace the Power and the Propagation of Christianity and how much it stands in opposition to the Holy Humble Peaceable Patient Meek and Charitable Spirit of the Gospel Whoso considers that our Blessed Savious's great Errand into the World was to Unite all his Disciples here into one Body and one Communion that they might Eternally be Blessed in the full Enjoyment of one Communion with the Father Son and Holy-Ghost in Heaven hereafter Whoso I say considers these Things cannot but confess that Schism and Schismaticks deserve all these hard Names and answer all these terrible Notions Now 2. That for the Preservation of Unity and the Preventing of Schism in every particular Church all were bound by the Principles of St. Cyprian's Age to live in the Bishops Communion and to own and look upon him as the Principle of Unity to that Church of which he was Head and Ruler might be made appear from a vast Train of Testimonies But I shall content myself with a few Thus for Example when some of the Lapsed presumed to write to St. Cyprian and design themselves without a Bishop by the Name of a Church How did the Holy Man resent it Consider how he begins his Answer to them Our Lord says he whose Precepts we ought to Honour and Obey Instituting the Honour of a Bishop and the Contexture of a Church saith thus to Peter in the Gospel I say unto thee thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven c. From thence by the Vicissitudes of Times and Successions the Ordination of Bishops and the Frame of the Church are transmitted so as that the Church is built upon the Bishops and all her Affairs are ordered by them as the chief Rulers And therefore seeing this is God's appointment I cannot but admire the bold Temerity of some who writing to me call themselves a Church when a Church is only to be found in the Bishop the Clergy and the faithful Christians God forbid that a number of Lapsed should be called a Church c. Consider how he Reasons By Divine Institution there cannot be a Church without a Bishop The Church is founded on the Bishop The Bishop as Chief Ruler orders all the Affairs of the Church Therefore those Lapsed ought not to have called themselves a Church seeing they had no Bishop no Principle of Unity We have another notable Reasoning as well as Testimony of his in his 43d Epistle written to his People of Carthage upon the breaking out of Felicissimus his Schism God is One says he and Christ is One and the Church is One and the Chair is One be our Lord 's own Voice founded on St. Peter Another Altar cannot be reared another Priesthood cannot be erected besides the One Altar and the One Priesthood Whoso gathereth elsewhere scattereth Whatever Human Fury institutes against God's Appointment is Adulterous is Impious is Sacrilegious And a little after O Brethren Let no Man make you wander from the Ways of the Lord O Christians Let no Man rend you from the Gospel of Christ Let no Man tear the Sons of the Church from the Church Let them perish alone who will needs perish Let them abide alone out of the Church who have departed from the Church Let them alone not be with the Bishops who have Rebelled against the Bishops c. And as I observed before in his Epistle to Florentinus Pupianus he defines a Church to be a People united to their Priest and a Flock adhering to their Pastor c. and from thence tells Pupianus That he ought to consider that the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop So that if any are not with the Bishop they are not in the Church And how concernedly doth he Reason the Case in his Book of the Unity of the Church Can he seem to himself says he to be with Christ who is against Christ's Priests Who separates himself from the Society of Christ's Clergy and People That Man bears Arms against the Church He fights against God's Ordinance He is an Enemy of the Altar A Rebel against Christ's Sacrifice He is Perfidious and not Faithful Sacrilegious and not Religious He is an Undutiful Servant and Impious Son an Hostile Brother who can contemn God's Bishops and forsake his Priests and dares to set up another Altar and offer up unlawful Prayers c. Indeed in that same Book he calls the Bishop The Glue that cements Christians into the solid Unity of the Church And hence it is 3. That St. Cyprian every where makes the Contempt of the one Bishop or Undutifulness to him the Origine of Schisms and Heresies Thus Epist. 3. he makes this Observation upon the Undutifulness of a certain Deacon to Rogatianus his Bishop That such are the first Efforts of Hereticks and the Out-breaking and Presumptions of illâ—advised Schismaticks They follow their own Fancies and in the Pride of their Hearts contemn their Superiours So Men separate from the Church So they Erect profane Altars without the Church So they Rebel against Christian Peace and Divine Order and Unity And Ep. 59. he tells Cornelius That Heresies and Schisms spring from this only Fountain That God's Priest the Bishop is not obeyed And Men don't consider that at the same time there ought to be only One Bishop only One Iudge as Christ's Vicar in a Church And Ep. 66. to Florentius Pupianus That from hence Heresies and Schisms have hitherto sprung and do daily spring That the Bishop who is One and is set over the Church is contemned by the proud Presumption of some And he that is honoured of God is dishonoured by Men And a little after he tells him alluding clearly to the Monarchical Power of Bishops That Bees have a King and Beasts have a Captain and Robbers with all humility obey their Commander And from thence he concludes how unreasonable it must be for Christians not to pay suitable Regards to their Bishops And in another place Then is the Bond of our Lord's Peace broken then is Brotherly Charity violated then is the Truth
all conscience it ought it being scarcely possible to prove any thing of this Nature more demonstratively then be pleased only to consider the necessary Connexion that is betwixt this Principle and that which I am next to prove and that is SECONDLY That by the Principles of those Times a Bishop Cononically Promoted was Supreme in his Church immediately subject to Iesus Christ independent on any unaccountable to any Earthly Ecclesiastical Superiour There was no Universal Bishop then under Iesus Christ who might be the Supreme visible Head of the Catholick visiâ—le Church There was indeed an Universal Bishoprick but it was not holden by any One single Person There was an Unus Episcopatus One Episcopacy One Episcopal Office One Bishoprick but it was divided into many Parts and every Bishop had his shâ—re of it assigned him to Rule and Govern with the Plenitude of the Episcopal Authority There was One Church all the World over divided into many Members and there was One Episcopacy dâ—ffused in proportion to that One Church by the Harmonious Numerâ—sity of many Bishops Or if you would have it in other words the One Catholick Church was divided into many Precincts Districts or Diocesses call them as you will Each of those Districtâ— had its singular Bishop and that Bishop within that District had the Supreme Power He was subordinate to none but the Great Bishop of Souls Iesus Christ the only Universal Bishop of the Universal Church He was independent on and stood collateral with all other Bishops There 's nothing more fully or more plainly or more frequently insisted on by St. Cyprian than this Great Principle I shall only give you a short view of it from him and his Contemporaries And I. He lays the Foundation of it in the Parity which our Lord instituted amongst his Apostles Christ says he gave Equal Power to all his Apostles when he said As my Father hath sent me even so I send you Receive ye the Holy-Ghost c. And again The rest of the Apostles were the same that St. Peter was endued with an Equality of Power and Honour Now St. Cyprian on all occasions makes Bishops Successors to the Apostles as perchance I may prove fully hereafter Thus I say he founds the Equality of Bishops and by consequence every Bishop's Supremacy within his own Diocess And agreeably he Reasons most frequently I shall only give you a few Instances 2. Then in that excellent Epistle to Antonianus discoursing concerning the Case of the Lapsed and shewing how upon former Occasions different Bishops had taken different Measures about restoring Penitents to the Peace of the Church he concludes with this General Rule That every Bishop so long as he maintains the Bond of Concord and preserves Catholick Unity has Power to order the Affairs of his own Church as he shall be accountable to God Plainly importing that no Bishop can give Laws to another or call him to an Account for his Management To the same purpose is the conclusion of his Epistle to Iubaianus about the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks These Things most dear Brother says he I have written to you as I was able neither prescribing to nor imposing on any Man seeing every Bishop hath full Power to do as he judges most fitting c. The same way he concludes his Epistle to Magnus concerning that same Case of Baptism performed by Hereticks To the same purpose is the whole Strain of his Epistle to Florentius Pupianus And what can be more clear or full than his excellent Discourse at the opening of the Council of Carthage Anno 256 More than Eighty Bishops met to determine concerning that same matter of Baptism administred by Hereticks or Schismaticks St. Cyprian was Praeses and having briefly represented to them the Occasion of their Meeting he spoke to them thus it remains now that each of us speak his sense freely judging no Man refusing our Communion to no Man thô he should dissent from us For none of us costitutes himself Bishop of Bishops nor forces his Collegues upon a necessity of Obeying by a Tyrannical Terror seeing every Bishop is intirely Master of his own Resolutions and can no more he judged by others than he can judge others But we all expect the Judgment of our Lord Iesus Christ who alone hath Power of making us Governours of his Church and calling us to an Account for our Administrations 3. Neither did the Principle hold only in respect of this or the other Bishop but all without Exception even the Bishop of Rome stood upon a Level And for this we have as pregnant Proof as possibly can be desired For when the Schismatical Party at Carthage set up Fortunatus as an Anti-Bishop and thereupon sent some of their Partisans to Rome toi inform Cornelius of their Proceedings and justifie them to him Cyprian wrote to him also and thus Reasoned the Case with him To what Purpose was it for them to go to Rome to tell you that they had set up a false Bishop against the Bishops Either they continue in their Wickedness and are pleased with what they have done or they are Penitent land willing to return to the Churches Unity If the latter they know whither they may return For seeing it is determined by us all and withal 't is just and reasonable in it self That every one's Cause should be examined where the Crime was committed and seeing there is a Portion of Flock the Catholick Church assigned to every Bishop to be Governed by him as he shall be accountable to God our Subjects ought not to run about from Bishop to Bishop nor break the Harmonious Concord which is amonst Bishops by their subtle and fallacious Temerity But every Man's Cause ought there to be discussed where he may have Accusers and Witnesses of his Crime c. In which Reasoning we have these Things plain 1. That by St. Cyprian's Principles evey Bishop was judge of his own Subjects of all the Christians who lived within his District 2. That no Bishop no not the Bishop of Rome was Superior to another Bishop nor could receive Appeals from his Sentences And 3. That this Independency of Bishops this Unaccountableness of one Bishop to another as to his Superiour was founded on every Bishop's having his Portion of the Flock assigned to him to be Ruled and Governed by him as he should answer to God i. e. upon his visible Supremacy in his own Church his being immediately Subordinate to God only To the same purpose he writes to Stephen Bishop of Rome also For having told him his Mind freely concerning those who should return from a State of Schism to the Unity of the Church how they ought to be Treated and how Recceived c. he concludes thus We know that some are tenacious and unwilling to alter what they have once determined and that they will needs retain some Methods peculiar to themselves but still with
the Safety of Peace and Concord with their Collegues In which case we offer Violence we proscribe Laws to no Man seeing every Bishop has full liberty in the Administration of the Affairs of his Church as he will answwer to God And how do both St. Cyprian and Firmilian resent Stephen's Extravagance in threatning to refuse his Communion to those who had not the same Sentiments with himself about the Baptism of Hereticks Let any Man read St. Cyprian's Epistle to Pompeius and Firmilian's to St. Cyprian and he may have enough to this purpsoe Would you have yet more Then take a most memorable Acknowledgment from the Presbyters and Deacons of Rome St. Cyprian had written to them while the Bishop's Chair was vacant and given them an account of his Resolutions about the Lapsed those who had Sacrificed to the Heathen Idols in time of Persecution Now consider how they begin their answer to him Altho say they a Mind that 's without Checks of Conscience that 's supported by the Vigour of Evangelical Discipline and bears witness to it self that it has squared its Actions by the Divine Commandments useth to content it self with God as its only Iudge and neither seeks other Men's Approbations nor fears their Accusations yet they are worthy of doubled Praises who while they know their Conscience is subject to God only as its Iudge do yet desire that their Administrations should have their Brethrens Comprobations So clearly acknowledging St. Cyprian's and by consequence every Bishop's Supremacy within his own District and his Independency or Non-Subordination to any other Bishop that even Rigaltius himself in his Annotations on St. Cyprian thô a Papist confesses it And no wonder For 4. By the Principles of those Times every Bishop was Christ's Vicar within his own District Had a Primacy in his own Church Managed the Ballance of her Government Was by his being Bishop elevated to the sublime Top of the Priesthood Had the Episcopal Authority in its Vigour the Prelatick Power in its Plenitude A Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church And none could be called Bishop of Bishops Every Bishop was Head of his own Church and she was built upon him in her Politick Capacity He and he only was her visible Iudge and he did not stand Subordinate to any visible Superiour In short The Constitution of every particular Church in those Times was a Well-tempered Monarchy The Bishop was the Monarch and the Presbytery was in Senate all the Christians within his District depended on him for Government and Discipline and he depended on no Man So that I may fairly conclude this Point with that famous Testimony of St. Ierom's in his Epistle to Evagrius Wherever a Bishop is whether at Rome or Eugubium Constantinople or Rhegium Alexandria or Tani he is of the same Merit and the same Priesthood Neither the Power of Riches nor the Humility of Poverty maketh a Bishop higher or lower but they are all Successors of the Apostles 'T is true indeed St. Ierom lived after the Cyprianic Age But I suppose our Author will pretend to own his Authority as soon as any Father 's in the point of Church-Government Let me represent to you only one Principle more which prevailed in the Days of St. Cyprian And that is THIRDLY That whatever the High-Priest among the Jews was to the other Priests and Levites c. The Christian Bishop was the same to the Presbyters and Deacons c. and the same Honour and Obedience was due to him This was a Principle which St. Cyprian frequently insisted on and Reasoned from Thus in his Third Epistle directed to Rogatianu he tells him That he had Divine Law and Warrant for Punishing his Rebellious and Undutiful Deacon And then cites that Text Deut. 17. 12. And the man that will do presumptuously and will not hearken unto the Priest or unto the Iudge even that man shall die And all the people shall bear and fear and do no more presumptuously And confirms it farther by shewing how God punished Gorah Datham and Abiram for Rebelling against Aaroâ— Numb 16. 1. And when the Israelites weary of Samuel's Government asked a King to judge them The Lord said to Samuel Hearken unto the voice of the People in all that they say unto thee for they have not rejected thee but they have rejected me that I should not reign over them 1. Sam. 8. 7. Therefore he gave them Saul for a Punishment c. And when St. Paul was challenged for reviling God's High Priest he excused himself saying He wist not that he was the High Priest Had he known him to have been so he would not have Treated him so for it is written Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of they People Act. 23. 4 5. And. as he goes further on Our Lord Iesus Christ Our God King and Iudge to the very hour of his Passion paid suitable Honour to the Priests thô they neither feared God nor acknowledged Christ For when he had cleansed the Lâ—per he bade him go shew himself to the Priest and offer his Gift Matth. 8. 4. And at the very instant of his Passion when he was beaten as if he had answered irreverently to the High Priest he uttered no Reproachful Thing against the Person of the Priest but rather defended his own Innocence saying If I have spoken Evil bear witness of the Evil but if well why smitest thou me John 18. 22 23. All which Things were done humbly and patiently lby him that we might have a Patern of Patience and Humility proposed to us for he taught us to give all dutiful Honour to true Priests by behaving so towards false Priests Thus St. Cyprian Reason'd and these were his Arguments for obliging all Men Clergy as well as Laity to Honour and Obey their Bishops To the same purpose he wrote in his Fourth Epistle to Pomponius concerning some Virgins and Deacons that lived Scandalously Let them not think they can be saved says he if they will not obey the Bishops seeing God says in Deuteronomy and then he cites Deut. 17. 12 He insists on the same Arguments in his 59th Epistle directed to Cornelius when he is giving him an account of the Rebellion and Schismatical Practices of Fortunatus and Felicissimus the one a Presbyter and the other a Deacon He insists on them over again in his 66th Epistle to Florentius Papianus He insists largely on the Argument drawn from the Punishment inflicted on Corah and his Complices for Rebelling against Aaron and makes it the same very Sin in Schismaticks who separate from their lawful Bishop in his 69th Epistle directed to Magnus and in his 73d Epistle directed to Iubaianus And Firmilian also St. Cyprian's Contemporary insists on the same Argument Indeed the Names Priest Priesthood Altar Sacrifice c. so much used those Times are a pregnant Argument
of the Notions Christians had then of the Christian Hierarchy's being Copied from the Iewish Neither was it a Notion newly started up in St. Cyprian's time for we find it in express Terms in that notable Epistle written to the Corinthians by St. Clement Bishop of Rome who was not only contemporary with the Apostles but is by Name mentioned by St. Paul as one of his Fellow-Labourers whose Names are in the Book of LIfe Philip. 4. 3. For he perswading those Corinthians to lay aside all Animosities and Schismatical Dispositions and to pursue and maintain Unity and Peace above all things proposes to them as a proper Expedient for this that every Man should keep his Order and Station and then enumerates the several Subordinations under the Old Testament which sufficiently proves That the Hierarchy was still preserved in the New His Method of Reasoning and the Design he had in hand to compose the Schisms that arose amongst the Corinthians make this evident beyond all Contradiction That a Bishop in the Christian Church was no less than the High Priest among the Iews else he had not argued from the Precedents of the Temple to perswade them to Unity in the Church The High Priest saith he has his proper Office and the Priests have their proper Place or Station and the Levites are tied to their proper Ministeries and the Layman is bound to his Laick Performances Having thus demonstrated that these were three current and received Principles in St. Cyprian's time viz. That a Bishop was the Principle of Unity to his Church to all the Christians within his District That he was Supreme in his Church and had no Earthly Ecclesiastical Superiour and That he was the same amongst Christians which the High Priest was amongst the Iews Let me try a little if our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time can consist with them I am afraid it can consist with none of them singly much less with all these together I. Not with the first for if a Bishop then was the Principle of Unity to a Church in which there were many Presbyters as Cyprian e. g. was to the Church of Carthage and Cornelius to the Church of Rome and Fabius to the Church of Antioch and Dionysius to the Church of Alexandria c. If thus it was I say then to be sure a Bishop was another thing than a meer single Presbyter of a single Parish in the Presbyterian sense For if a single Presbyter could have been the Principle of Unity to a Church in which there were e. g. 46 single Presbyters he must have been it as a single Presbyter or as something else Not as a single Presbyter for then there should have been as many Principles of Unity in a Church as there were single Presbyters for Instance There should have been 46 Principles of Unity in the Church of Rome Which besides that 't is plainly Contradictory to the Notion of One Bishop at once in a Church what is it else than to make a Church such a Monster as may have 46 Heads Than by so multiplying the Principles of Unity to leave no Unity at all Than in stead of One Principle of Unity to an Organized Body to set up 46 Principles of Division Indeed what is it else than the very Extract of Nonsense and Cream of Contradiction A single Presbyter then if he could have been the Principle of Unity to such a Church mut have been it as something else than a meer single Presbyter But what could that Something else have been A Presbyterian Moderator Not so neither for by what Propriety of Speech can a Moderator of a Presbytery as such be called the Principle of Unity to a Church How can he be called the Principle of Unity to a Church who as such is neither Pastor Head nor Governour of a Church Who as such has no direct immediate or formal Relation to a Church Who as such is only the Chair-man the Master-Speaker not of the Church but of the Presbytery Nay who may be such and yet no Christian For however inexpedient or indecent it may be that an Heathen should on occasion be the Moderator i. e. the Master-Speaker of a Presbytery yet it implies no Repugnancy to any Principle of Christianity But however this is 't is certain that according to the Presbyterian Principles not the Moderator but the Presbytery is the Principle of Unity to the Church or rather Churches within the Bounds of that Presbytery And to do our Author Justice he seems to have been sensible of this as a I observed already And therefore he said not If he the Apologist can prove that we separate from our Pastors or from the Moderator of the Presbytery but from our Pastors or from the Presbytery with their Moderator Neither 2. Can our Author's Definition consist with the second Principle viz. That every Bishop was Supreme in his Church Independent and not Subordinate to any Ecclesiastical Superiour on Earth To have such a Supremacy such an Independency such an Unaccountableness is notoriously inconsistent with the Idea of either a single Presbyter or a Presbyterian Moderator How can it be consistent with the Idea of a single Presbyter acting in Parity with his Brethren Presbyters that of 46 for Example One should have a Primacy a Supremacy a Plenitude of Power the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church an Unaccountable and Eminent Power as St. Ierom himself calls it And all the rest should be Accountable and Subordinate to him What is this but reconciling Contradictions Besides the Independency of single Presbyters is notoriously inconsistent with the Presbyterian Scheme 'T is Independency not Presbytery And as for the Presbyterian Moderator In what sense can he be called Supreme or Independent or Unaccountable In what sense can he be said to be raised to the Sublime Top of the Priesthood Or to have an Exors Potestas an Unaccountable Power Or to be Accountable to God only Or to have the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church Is he as such raised to the Sublime Top of the Preisthood who as such may be no Priest at all For why may not a Ruling Elder be a Moderator How can he be said to have 〈◊〉 Unaccountable Power who can be Voted out of his Chair with the same Breath with which he was Voted into it How can he be said to be Accountable to God only who is Accountable to the Presbytery How can he be said to have the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church who as such is no Church Governour Has he a Supreme Power in a Society who as such has no imaginable Iurisdiction over any one Member of that Society 3. But what shall I say to the Consistency of our Author's Definition with the third Principle I named Even no more than that I have proved it to have been one of St. Cyprian's and one that was generally received in his time and that I
the Divine Ordinance And yet these Men had made no Schism They had not departed from the Tabernacle nor raised another Altar c. which now the Schismaticks do meaning the Novatians who dividing the Church and rebelling against Christ's Peace and Unity are bold to Constitute an Episcopal Chair and assume to themselves a Primacy an Episcopal Authority and a POWER OF BAPTIZING and OFFERING that is Celebrating the Holy Eucharist What can be more plain than 't is here That no Sacraments could be Administred but in dependance on the Bishop Indeed 3. Considering that as I have fully proved a Bishop was then the Principle of Unity to the Church that he was Chief Governour of the Church and that by consequence the Supreme Power of the Keys could not but belong to him Considering that the Church was a Visible Society that he was the Visible Head of that Visible Society and by consequence that it belonged to him as such to take care that Society might suffer no Detriment Considering these Things I say it was highly reasonable that he should have the Chief Power of Dispensing the Sacraments Such a Power as that neither might be dispensed without him What can be more Detrimental to a Society especially such a Society as a Christian Church than admitting Unworthy Persons to the Priviledges of it Or allowing them to continue in it Or restoring them to their Membership in the Society after they have been justly thrust from it without considering whether they have given any Evidences of a serious Reformation And who so proper to judge of these Matters as the Chief Governour of the Society And now Having thus made it evident that a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time had a Negative over all other Church-Officers within his District in the grand Concern of Dispensing both Sacraments and that neither could be Administred without him or against his Authority I might fairly supersede the trouble of making either a Minute or a laborious Demonstration of his Sovereign Interest in the Acts of Excommunication or injoyning Penances or reconciling Penitents or making or rescinding or dispensing with Ecclesiastical Laws or Canons in a word in every thing relating to the Government or Discipline of the Church All these Acts depend upon the Sacraments His Negative therefore about the Dispensation of the Sacraments had been in vain and to no purpose if he had not had a Negative likewise about all these Acts. Besides you will not readily say I think that he could have had a Greater Trust by having a Negative in any other Matter than in the Dispensing of the Sacraments Having that therefore he might well be intrusted with a Negative in all other Things either of equal if any such can be imagined or lesser Importance on which the Order the Subsistence the Unity the Peace the Purity the Prosperity or whatsoever Interest of the Church could any way depend Yet that I may give you all possible satisfaction I shall proceed a little further and give you by way of Historical Deduction such an account of Powers lodged e. g. in St. Cyprian's Person as you may fairly judge thereby concerning the Preheminences of Bishops in his Time The most current Account we have about him is that he was not Converted to Christianity at least not Baptized till the Year 246. That he was Ordain'd a Presbyter Anno 247 and Bishop of Carthage Anno 248. Chronologists do generally agree in this last Step of his Preferment Now as we learn both from himself and from Pontius his Deacon some of the Carthaginian Clergy were mighty Enemies to his Promotion Belike they took it ill that he so lately converted to the Faith so lately made a Presbyter should have been preferred to themselves However it was certain it is as I said that they appeared against him with all their might and main But the People were so Generally and so Zealously for him to have him their Bishop that these his Enemies were overpowered Made Bishop he was and he was a Person so well Qualified so Eminent in every Virtue and withal so Strict and Cautious in his Life and Government after he was made Bishop that it was not easie for the Mutineers to wreck their Malice on him But this was so far from softening them and bringing them to a better temper that on the contrary it imbittered them the more and made them the more watchful of all Opportunities to breed him Troubles and disturb his Government At last they catch'd hold of one and that a very dangerous one in the time of the Decian Persecution This Persecution beginning towards the end of the Year 249 and lasting for a full Year coming on the Church after a loâ—g Peace with a surprizing Violence had very sad Effects Vast numbers turned Apostates Renouncing the Holy Faith and Sacrificing to the Heathen Idols And Cyprian himself commanded by God had retired from Carthage till there should be some Relentment of the Fury of the Persecution Here I say his subtle Enemies found their so long wished Opportunity For the Lapsed so soon as the Hazard was over resumed their Christian Profession and turned mighty forward if not furious to be restored to the Communion of the Church ' Thô they knew full well that they were bound by the Canons to have continued for a long time in the state of Penitents yet they thought their Numbers and perhaps their Qualities might overpower the Canons and claim Indulgences and Dispensations With them struck in those Clergy-men who had still retained the old Grudges against St. Cyprian's Promotion encouraging their Presumptions They knew he was a Man of Principles and had a mighty Zeal for the real Interests of Christianity and by consequence that he would stand Resolutely by the Canons of the Church and be clear that the Lapsed should perfect their Terms of Penance They saw the Eagerness of the Lapsed to be sooner reconciled than the Canons allowed They resolved therefore to fall in with them thinking that thereby they should effectually put a Thorn in his Foot they should enflame the Lapsed and their Relations perchance the great Body of the People against him But this was not all It was not enough for them themselves to encourage the Lapsed in their Petulancies The Bishops Prelation over Presbyters was then so Notorious that as malicious as they were they had not Impudence enough to set up theirs in opposition to his Authority and Reconcile the Lapsed to the Church meerly upon the score of their own Credit against his Will and Orders and therefore they fell upon another Project If it was possible for any other to stand up against the Bishops Authority it was that of the Martyrs and Confessors These for their Faith and Patience their fervent Zeal and fragrant Graces their glorious Courage and good Example that they might Persevere themselves and others might be encouraged to follow their Patern were held in mighty Reputation They were reputed as
it when he cannot escape but by seeking for Refuge in a Reconciliation between Pride and Patience Superciliousness and Self-denial Huffyness and Humility Carnal Height and Christian Holiness But to let this pass Had that Author any solid Ground for saying so Or rather had it been possible for him to have said so had he had but an ordinary Acquaintance with St. Cyprian or his Epistles Charge Pride on the Humble Cyprian Cyprian who was so very Humble that from the Conscience of his own Nothingness he has still been looked upon as a Patern of Humility Cyprian whose Humility would not allow him almost to speak in the Stile of Authority even to Female Laicks Cyprian who was perswaded that God would hear none but the Humble and Quiet Cyprian who believed that none could be a Christian and withal be Proud and Haughty Who insisted on his own Humility in that very Epistle for which that Author charges him with Pride Who if in any thing Gloried most in his Humble and Bashful Modesty Who when accused of Pride could Appeal not only to all Christians but even to the Heathen Infidels as Witnesses of his Innocence Cyprian who had this Great Testimony from some of his Contemporaries That he was the Greatest Preacher the Most Eloquent Orator the Wisest in Counsel the Simplest in Patience the Most Charitable in Alms the Holiest in Abstinence the Humblest in Obligingness and the Most Innocent in every Good Action And from others That he had a Candid and a Blessed Breast c. In a word Cyprian whose Humility was such that if we may believe his Deacon Pontius He fled and lurk'd when they were going to make him a Bishop Such that when St. Augustine many years after was pressed with his Authority he came off with this The Authority of Cyprian doth not fright me because the Humility of Cyprian encourages me Such a Person was Cyprian And yet to Proud was he forsooth for doing his Duty for asserting his Episcopal Authority when most undutifully trampled on by his presuming Presbyters What I have said methinks might be enough in all conscience for defeating for ever that Uncharitable shall I say or Ignorant Suggestion That it was Pride perhaps that prompted Cyprian to write so Magisterially to the Carthaginian Presbyters yet because a farther Discussion of it may contribute not a little for clearing up the Bishop's Negative in St. Cyprian's time I shall not grudge to give it you St. Cyprian had three sorts of People to deal with in that Controversie which bred him so much Trouble He had the Lapsed themselves the Martyrs and Confessors and these Presbyters and Deacons who had encroached so much on his Episcopal Authority I am apt to think the Author himself with whom I have now to do will not be shy to grant That St. Cyprian without incurring the Reputation of either Proud or Presumptuous might have chided the Lapsed as we find he did They had Cowardly renounced their Christianity to save their Lives and Fortunes and the Canons subjected them to a strict and a long Penance for it And I think without the imputation of either Height or Humour one in St. Cyprian's Station might have put them in mind of the Respect they owed to the Canons of the Church and the Governours of it Indeed all the Lapsed were not engaged in the disorderly Course There were some of them who were sensible of their Duty and subjected themselves to their Bishop resolving to wait his time and intirely to depend upon him for their Absolution as we learn from his 33d Epistle His Difficulty was greater with the Martyrs and Confessors who appeared as Patrons to the Prejudicating Lapsed but neither need I insist on that nor how he conquered them in point of Right and Argument For this Author told Dr. Stilling fleet He was wholly out of the way in medling with that Matter seeing none ever imagined that every Martyr had Church Power Thô I must tell you Sir That whoso reads St. Cyprian's Works and particularly observes the State and Management of this whole Controversie about the Lapsed cannot but be convinced that the Reputation and Authority of Martyrs and Confessors made a far greater Figure in it than the Reputation or Authority of Presbyters To come therefore to that which is the main Point with this Author Let us try if St. Cyprian stretch'd his Power too far in his Treatment of the Presbyters who appeared against him in this Controversie Consider the following Steps and then judge I. Consider that St. Cyprian doth not fall a buffing or hectoring or running them down by Noise or Clamour No He Reasons the Case with them and Reasons all along from known and received Principles He tells them plainly indeed That in Presuming as they had done they had forgotten both the Gospel and their own Station That he was their Superiour That they did not pay him the Honour that was due to his Chair and Character That the like had never been attempted before by Presbyters under any of his Predecessor-Bishops That it was a Factious Selfish Temper and too great Love of Popularity that prompted them to Measures so in no wise Presidented That he knew the Secret of the Matter and that it was the old Grudge against his being preferred to the Bishoprick that byass'd them to their Insolencies That is belonged to him as having the Chief Power of the Keys as being Bishop i. e. as having the visible Sovereignty in Church Matters to straiten or slacken the Sinews of Discipline to prolong or shorten the Courses of Penance to grant Absolutions and reconcile Penitents c. That such Presumptions were Encroachments upon the very Foundations of the Church to the Subversion whereof their pretending to any Power in opposition to the Bishops tended In short That such Practices were against Christ's Institution and the Analogies of Government and all the Laws of Order Peace and Unity And they deserved the sharpest Censures for them These I say are a Sample of the Arguments St. Cyprian insisted on against those Presbyters and most of them were founded on Matter of Fact And now suppose St. Cyprian had had considerable Doses of Pride yet if you will but allow him withall to have had some Grains of Common Sense or Honesty can you so much as imagine he could have used such Arguments if they had wanted Foundation Would he not have been ashamed to have used them if he and not his Presbyters had been guilty of the Usurpations he was Condemning But what needs more Have I not fully proved already That a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was the Principle of Unity to all the Christians Presbyters as well as others within his District And that he was a Sovereign and Peerless Governour of the Church which he Ruled And were not all his Reasâ—nings founded on these Principles But this is not all for 2. Consider that they were
he not thereafter admit them to his most intimate Friendship and Familiarity to the Astonishment of many Indeed he therein shewed a Miracle of Clemency Lay these two Accounts together and then tell me if these Presbyters were not Obnoxious to his Discipline If his Power over them might not have extended to their very Excommunication for their old Tricks against him had he been willing to have put it in Execution But this is not all For Have I not accounted already How when they first Engaged in the Controversie concerning the Lapsed he threaten'd them that if they should continue to Absolve and Reconcile any more of them without his Allowance he would Suspend them from their Office and inflict severer Censures on them when he should return to Carthage And have I not justified him in this and made it manifest to a Demonstration that herein he did not stretch his Power too far That he took not too much on him Further yet When they resumed their Impudence and after a little Interruption would needs be Absolving the Lapsed thô he was then in his Retirement and by consequence had few or none of his Clergy to Consult with yet he gave out this plain and peremptory Order That if any of his Presbyters or Deacons â—â—ould prove â—o Lawless or Precipitant as to Communicate with the Lapsed before his Determination in the Matter and by consequence without his Leave that they should be forthwith Suspended from the Communion and should be more fully â—ried and Censured when he should return And then Lastly When they proceeded so far as to Commence the Schism with Felicissimus mark it well He not only gave a Delegation to Caldonius and Herculanus two Bishops and Rogatianus and Numidicus two of his own Presbyters to Judge and Excommunicate Feâ—icissimâ—s and his Partisans as I have shewed already but he likewise Excommunicated the five Presbyters who joyned with him and all who should adhere to them And he gave an Account of his Proceedings to all Catholick Bishops particularly to Cornelius Bishop of Rome and his Sentence was not only ratified by Cornelius and Felicissimus and all his Party refused his Communion but they met with the same Treatment St. Cyprian's Sentence was Approved and Confirmed by all Catholick Churches all the World over I might easily have proved this more fully but I think I have said enough And now Sir lay these three Things together viz. That there were several considerable Acts of Church Power peculiar to a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time and which those in the Order of Single Presbyters could not meddle with That a Bishop as such had a Negative over all the Presbyters within his District And That they were all Subordinate to him and Obnoxious to his Disâ—ipline And then I can refer it to your self to determine Whether a Bishop then was not quite another thing than either Single Presbyter or Presbyterian Moderator Thus I think I have sufficiently defeated our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time by giving a fair and just Account of him as he stood related to his own particular Church which he Govern'd I come now to consider him as he stood related to the Church Catholick And here also I am very much mistaken if I shall not find Matter enough for another Demonstration against him I shall endeavour to dispatch this Point with all possible Brevity I. Then by the Principles of the Cyprianic Age all Bishops were Collegues and made up One College St. Cyprian calls them so and speaks of the Episcopal or Sacerdotal College so frequently no fewer than 6 or 7 times in one Epistle and 4 or 5 times in another that I need not adduce Testimonies Indeed being all Men of the same Character the same Order the same Dignity being all of them equally Supreme and First in their own Churches and all standing Collateral to one another they were most properly called Collegues and their Society a College if we may rely on A. Gellius his Skill in the Latin Tongue or rather Messala's cited by him And it is observable to this purpose That St. Cyprian no where calls Presbyters his Collegues He calls none so but Bishops And the Notion of the Episcopal College had such an Impression on him it was so Common and Received in those Times that speaking even of Schismatical Bishops who run one course he calls them a College aâ—so 〈◊〉 quite different from the True College of Catholick and Orthodox Bishops Now 2. As the One Bishop was the Principle of Unity to a particular Church so this College of Bishops was the Principle of Unity to the Catholick Church And Iesus Christ was the Principle of Unity to the College of Bishops I hope not being a Romanist you will not require that I should prove the Highest Step of this Gradation All that remains then is to Explain how the College of Bishops by the Principles of those Times was the Principle of Unity to the Church Catholick or the One great Aggregated Body consisting of all the particular Churches all the World over whereof their particular Bishops were the particular Principles of Unity Neither needs this be a Laborious Task For all that 's necessary for it is To shew how they were so United into One College as to make them capable of being justly denominated One Principle of Unity Now they were thus United by the Great and Fundamental Laws of One Faith and One Communion That the One Holy Catholick Faith is Essential in the Constitution of the One Holy Catholick Church is even to this day a received Principle I think amongst all sober Christians But then I say That the Christians in St. Cyprian's time reckoned of the Laws of One Communion as every whit as forcible and indispensible to the Being of One Church as the Laws of One Faith It was a prime a fundamental Article of their Faith That there was but One Church and they could not understand how there could be but One Church if there was more than One Communion By their Principles and Reasonings a Multiplication of Communions made unavoidably a Multiplication of Churches And by consequence seeing there could be but One True Catholick Church there could be likewise but One True Catholick Communion All other Churches or Communions were False i. e. not at all Christian Churches or Communions These Principles and suitable Reasonings from them are so frequently and so fully insisted on in St. Cyprian's Writings that to Transcribe his Testimonies to this purpose were almost to Transcribe his Works Now from these Principles it follows clearly 3. That the Grand Concern of the Episcopal College was to Preserve and Maintain this One Communion To Guard against all such Doctrines as destroyed or tended to destroy the the One Holy Catholick Faith and all Schisms and Schismatiâ—al Methods which destroyed or tended to destroy the Unity of the One Church These being the Great and Fundamental Interests
Letters concerning the Publick Affairs of the Catholick Church or the Sacred College that Ruled the Catholick Church should have been Râ—ceived As that to him and to him alone all such Letters have been directed As that by the Circulation and Reciprocation of Letters betwixt him and his Collegues and their General Agreement upon any Thing by that Circulation and Râ—ciprocation Laws should have been given to the whole Catholick Church Canons as Binding and Obligatory as the Supreme Ecclesiastical Power on Earth could make them How could one raised to such a Post I say have been no other than a Single Presbyter or a Presbyterian Moderator Doth not his very bearing such a Part his having such a Trust his being Cloath'd with such an Eminence argue him Demonstratively to have been something other something Greater something Higher and more Honourable than either Thus I have considered a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time as he stood related to his own Particular and to the Church Catholick and in both respects have discovered a vast Discrepance betwixt him as he was really and our Author's Notion or Definition of him Let me only add one Consideration more and that is What Character he bore what Figure he made in the Eye of those who were without of the Heathen World especially the Roman Emperours and Magistrates And here I need not be at much Pains the Thing is Obvious The Christian Bishops as being the Chief Rulers the Supreme Governours the Heads of their respective Churches were the Chief Butts of all the Heathen Rage and Malice Take these few of many Evidences After St. Cyprian had retired from Carthage in the time of the Decian Persecution he wrote to his Presbyters and Deacons and told them how earnest he was to return to the City but Prudence would not let him When he considered the Publick Peace of the Church and how much he as Bishop was concerned to Provide for it and for the Quiet and Safety of the Brethren he found it necessary for him thô with mighty Grief to forbear returning for a time lest HIS PRESENCE should provoke the Rage and Fury of the Gentiles So he wrote I say in his 7th Epistle And in the 12th directed also to his Presbyters and Deacons I wish says he that my Station and Character would allow me to be present with you In his 20th Epistle directed for the Roman Presbyters and Deacons he Apologizes for his Retirement after this manner In compliance with our Lord's Commands pointing no doubt at Matth. 10. 23. so soon as the Persecution began and the Rabble with mighty Clamour pursued me I retired for a time not so much to save my self as for the publick Quiet of the Church and that the Tumult which was already kindled might not be the more inflam'd by MY OBSTINATE PRESENCE And to the same purpose he Apologizes to his own People for his so long Absence Ep. 43. Thô he had been long away yet he durst not return because of the Threats and Snares of these perfidious Men Felicissimus and his Fellow-Schismaticks Lest says he upon MY COMING there should be a greater Uproar and while as a Bishop ought in all Things to provide for Peace and Tranquillity I should seem to have added Fewel to the Sedition and to have imbittered the Persecution Here I think is clear Demonstration of the Episcopal Eminence in the Eye of the Heathen Persecutors It was a Grief a Burden a Torment a very Crucifixion to St. Cyprian's Soul to be separated from his Flock as himself words it But he was bound by the Laws of his EPSICOPAL PROVIDENCE by all means to study the Peace the Quiet the Tranquillity of the Church and his LOCUS and GRADUS his Station and Dignity were so Conspicuous and Eminent that HIS PRESENCE would have provoked the Gentiles and increased the Persecution and therefore he durst not return And yet this is not all Consider if what follows is not yet clearer In his 14th Epistle written to his Presbyters and Deacons he tells them That tho he had strong and pressing Reasons to hasten his return yet he found it more expedient and useful for the publick Peace to continue longer in his Lurking Places and Tertullus one whom they knew and could not but value had seriously advised him to be Calm and Cautious and not to commit himself rashly to the publick View especially of that Place where he had been so often lain in wait and made search for and therefore he Exhorts and Commands them his Presbyters and Deacons That THEY whose PRESENCE was nâ—ither so INVIDIOUS nor by far so DANGEROUS might perform the part of Vicars to him Here I think we have a full Evidence of a fair Discrimination was made betwixt him and his Presbyters by the Heathen Persecutors And not only so but. He tells Cornelius Bishop of Rome Ep. 59. That he was Proscribed in the Days of the Decian Persecution and that by Name as Bishop of the Christians in Carthage and that he was destin'd for the Lions c And again Ep. 66. he tells Florentius Pupianus That his Proscription ran in this Form If any Man holds or possesses any of the Goods of CAECILIUS CYPRIANUS BISHOP OF THE CHRISTIANS c. And thereby makes an Argument that it was Unaccountable in Florentius not to own him as a Bishop And Pontiuâ— his Deacon tells us That when he at last commenced Martyr in tâ—e Valerian Persecution in the very Sentence that was given out against him he was called SECTAE SIGNIFER the Ring-leader the Head the Chiftain of the Sect of the Christians in Carthage Would you have yet more Then Take it not about St. Cyprian's Person for I think we have enough of him already but in St. Cyprian's Words You have them Ep. 55. there he tells Antonianus That the Emperous Decâ—us from a Sense no doubt that as Heads of their respective Churches they were under God the great Supporters and Promoters of our Most Holy Faith had such a Spite such a Pique at the Christian Bishops that for Example He could have heard with greater Patience and Composure 〈◊〉 another â—mulous Prince should have Rival'd it with him for the Roman Empire than that a Bishop should have been settled in the City of Rome And doth not Eusebius tell us That the Emperour Maximinus in that Persecution of which he was the Author some 22 or 23 Years before St. Cyprian's Martyrdom Ordered that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Governours of the Christian Churches should only be put to Death as being the Authors of the Propagation of the Gospel So Eminent in those Times was the Episcopal Character such a Sense had the very Heathens of their being Bishops indeed so much as Bishops were they Obnoxious to the Fury and Malice of Persecutors and so much Reason had St. Cyprian to say That it mattered not whence whether from Heathens without or Schismaticks
within if they may be called any way within Terrors or Perils threatned a Bishop seeing as such he was still obnoxious to Terrors or Perils Meaning that in those Times Bishops as Bishops were still exposed to the first burnt of all Persecutions As on the other hand when the Human Galienâ—s who succeeded to Valerianus stop'd the Persecution which his Predecessor had begun he began his Imperial Râ—script thus The Emperour Publius Licâ—nius Galieâ—â—s c. To Dionysius Pinnas Demetrius and the rest of the BISHOPS c. and so went on telling them How he had ordered his Edict of Grace and Clemency to be Published all the World over allowing them to rely upon it as full Security against all Molestation for the future Thus I say that Heathen Emperour stopping the Current of a fierce Persecution and designing Favour and Security to Christians directed his Letters to the Christian Bishops as the Persons who were Heads of the Christian Churches and in all Persecutions had wont to be exposed to the greatest Hazards Thus Sir I have examined our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time and if I mistake not have demonstrated by many solid Arguments that he was neither Single Presbyter nor Presbyterian Moderator in the Presbyterian Sense of the Terms but a True Prelate in the strictest propriety of Speech Consider my Arguments thoroughly and weigh them only in the Ballance of Iustice without Prejudice and without Partiality and try whether Each of them singly and much more all together do not Conclude irrefragably against him And if they shall be found to be Concludent I leave it next to you to Determine whether our Author is not both fairly and formally bound by his Word to confess himself a Schismatick When I first put Pen to Paper I had in my Project to have proceeded further and made it appear as evidently as what I have now dispatched That the Episcopal Preheminence which was so notoriously and unquestionably Prelatical in St. Cyprian's time was no Novel Usurpation no Late Invention not at all the Production of the Cyprianic Age nor any Age later than the Apostles That St. Cyprian and all his Contemporaries firmly believed it to be of Divine Institution That they had not Entertained it having so little Temporal Encouragement nay so great and many Temporal Discouragements to Entertain it if they had not so believed That they had great Reason for this their Belief as fairly founded on our Saviour's own Ordinance and fully handed down to them in the constant Practice of the Universal Church from the First Plantation of Christian Churches That it pass'd amongst them as a common Principle That Bishops as I have represented them Bishops as they were then that is clearly contradistinct from Presbyters and Superiour to them Bishops as the Heads of and Principles of Unity to their respective Churches were the Rightful True and Genuine Successors of the Apostles in the Supreme visible Ecclesiastical Power of Governing the Churches whereof they were Bishops These Things I say I had once in my Prospect but this Letter has swell'd to such a Bulk already as perhaps may fright you from Reading it And you may Command me to Prosecute what is lest undone when you will And what I have written as I said seems to me sufficient in Point of Argument for bringing your Author to a Sense of his State as well as a Candid Confession of it when 't is thus plainly represented to him And therefore I Conclude with my Best Christian Wishes to you and him and all Men. March 28. 1695. FINISH Advertisement THere is now in the Press and will be Published by Michaelmas next An Enquiry into the New Opinions chiefly propagated by the Presbyterians in Scotland By A. M. D. D. a Ad Quest. 1. Sect. 5. b Episcoporum manifesta ubique 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seâ— jure praesidendi Convocandi Ordinandi c. Epit. Isag. ad Hist Eccles. Nov. Test. Saec. 3. Sect. 6. pag. miâ—i 117. c Sect. 32. p. 28. d Sed nec hujus aevi Ordines Minores quales Ostiariorum Copiatarum Acolythorum Exorcistarum p. 119. e Suffrag 1 8 31 37. f Ep. 23. p. 49. Ep. 69. p. 187. Ep. 75. p. 223. g Hist. Ecd. lib. 6. cap. 43. h Presbyteri Diaconi in Adrumâ—tina Consistentes Polycarpo Co-â—piscopo nostro absente ignorabant quid nobis in Commune placuissit c. Ep. 49. p. 91. i Ep. 43. k Ep. 59. l Ep. 59. p. 139. m H. E. lib. 7. cap. 11. n Cum sit a Christo una Ecclesia per totum Mundum in multa Membra divisa item Episcopatus unus Episcoporum multorum Concordi Numerositate Diffâ—sus ille post Dei traditionem post connexam ubique conjunctam Catholicae Ecclâ—siae Unitatuâ—m humanam conetur Ecclesiam facere per plurimas Civitates noves Apoâ—tolos suos mittat ut quaedam râ—câ—ntia institutionis suae fundamâ—nta constituat cumque jampridem per OMNES PROVINCIAS per URBES SINGULAS Ordinati sâ—nt Episcopi in aetate antiqui in â—ide integri in prâ—ssura probati in persecutione proscripti ille super eos 〈◊〉 alios pseudo-episcopos audâ—at Ep. 55. p. 112. o Quanquam sciam Frater Charissime Episcopos plurimos Ecclestis Dominicis in TOTO MUNDO divina dignatione praepâ—sitos c. Ep. 63. ab init p Divino Sacerdotio honorati in Claricis Ministeriis constituti non nist Altari Saâ—rificiiâ— de fervirâ— precibus atque Orationibus vacare debeant Ep. 1. P. 1. q Ut eum Clero nostro Dominus adjungeret desolatam per lapsum quorundam Presbyterii nostri copiâ Gloriosis Sacerdotibus adornarâ—t Ep. 40. p. 79. r Ep. 5. p. 11. s Ep. 59. p. 134. De Lapsis p. 128. t Ep. 15 16 17. susâ— u Ep. 61. p. 144 v 〈◊〉 plane ad 〈◊〉 Frater carissâ—me 〈◊〉 Authoâ—itate communi â—t etiam sâ— qui Presbyteri Contrâ— Altare unum atque diviâ—um Sacrificiâ— foris falsa Sacrilâ—gâ— offerre conati sinâ— cos quoque â—ac conditione suscipi cum revertuntâ—â— at COMMUNICENT LAICI Nec debere cos râ—vertentes eâ— apud nos Ordinationis Honoris arma retinere quibus contra nos Rebellaverunt Oportâ—t enim SACERDOTES qui Altari Sacrificiis deserviunt intâ—gros atque immaculatâ—s essâ— c. Ep. 72. p. 197. vv Christo sunt Ecclesia plebs Sacâ—rdoti adunata pastori suo Grex adhaerens Unde scire dâ—bes Episcopum in Ecclesiâ—m esse Ecclesia in Episcopo si qui cum Episcopo non sint in Ecclesia non esse Ep. 66. p. 168. x Quis namquâ— hic est superbiae tumor Quae arrogantia animi Quae mentis inflatio Ad cognitionem suam praepâ—sitos Sacerdotes vocare Ac nisâ— apud te purgati fucrimus sententia tua absoluti ecce jam sex annis nec fraternitas habuit Episcopum nec plâ—bs praepositum nec Grex