Office for which they were separated was neither new nor perpetual § 17. Having overthrown the Reasons of his Gloss it must yeeld to the Text expresly telling us they were erected only for that time and that for the paucity of Ministers endowed with singular Graces But this reason says he is nought For suppose we 20 30 40 Men in the Kingdom qualifi'd for the Office of the Ministry could not these have divided the Kingdom into a proportionable number of large Parishes And still as more Men turn'd qualifi'd could they not have lessen'd these greater Parishes But he with whom our Reformers were all most contemptible Idiots and more especially in Church-policy needs not wonder tho' they had fall'n into a much greater Solecism But he forgets that many in these most dark times were made Ministers who yet needed the Assistance and Direction of the better qualifi'd for a while in Church-policy and matters of such importance till they should be able to go hand in hand with them and that the main end of Superintendents was the perpetual Travelling Preaching and Instructing where there were no Pastors and planting of Churches As well continues he as our Presbyterian Brethren now unite Presbytries A strange mistake as if where Presbytries are united any Minister took for his proper Charge a multitude of Parishes He here insinuats that in the Superintendents there was established a Prelacy But the present Question is only about the sentiments of our Reformers and that they never thought the use of Superintendents croffed the Doctrine of Parity is most clear were there no more from their using Superintendent-commissioners even after they had declar'd Episcopacy unlawfull in it self But all this their jangle is the fruit of meer prejudice or worse for none near these times look'd on Superintendency as perpetual Not the Court Party seeing they endeavour'd to change Superintendents for Tulchan Bishops not the rest of the Church who as the necessity of them decreased suffer'd them to wear out And after that in an unanimous Assembly they had ordain'd that the whole Church should be divided in a competent number of Presbytries declar'd that Superintendents were no longer expedient And good ground had they even from that very Book of Policy so to do for if the whole tenor of that Head of Superintendents appointing them almost constantly to Travel to Preach thrice a week at least and beside that to examine the Life c. of the Ministers the Orders of the Kirks the manners of the People care how the Poor be provided how the Youth be instructed admonish where it 's needfull by good Counsel compose Differences note and delate to the Kirk hainous Crimes and all this because of the paucity of qualifi'd Ministers evidently proclaims not that this Superintendent was a kind of Evangelist expedient only at that juncture of the re-entry of the Gospel into Scotland I appeal to the candid Judgement of the impartial Moreover if 't were otherwise why should they not as punctually have described his Duties after the time of his perpetual Travels his Preaching thrice a week and other such vast Labours were ended for he grants these were to indure but for a time after which he insinuats that the Superintendents were to remain quiet in their chief Towns but no word in all the account we have of them of such distinctions of times of such perpetual rest not a word therefore of their perpetuity Lastly which he wisely i. e. sutably to his purpose omitted for like the Council ask'd at Abel it ends the matter see this Head of Superintendents Because say they we have appointed a larger Stipend to them that shall be Superintendents than to the rest of the Ministers we have thought good to signifie to your Honours such Reasons as moved us to make difference betwixt Preachers at this time Now pray may not he that runs read here that had it not been for some forcing Circumstances and Exigencies of the then present time they had made no difference at all between one Minister and another And then after a few lines they laid down their Reasons in the very words the sense whereof is now under Debate If the Ministers c. § 18. In the mean while we need not be much concern'd whether these Superintendents were to be temporary or perpetual there being nothing therein that made any real difference between the Church-government which was then and that which is now And indeed these vast Travels and Pains in preaching thrice a week c. are sure enough Tokens that the Superintendent could not be much distinguish'd from an ordinary Pastor save in these extraordinary Labours and was far from the Episcopal Eminency and Grandour seeing he was so far from the Episcopal ease and idleness without which the former but rarely obtains This and other such Proofs of the vast difference between the Superintendents and their Diocesans and of the likeness between the Government under the Reformers and that which is now our Author slides over with rallry saying it may be as well told them that Bishops wore black Hats and silk Superintendents blew Bonets and tartan as if most constant and hard labour in the Gospel were no more valuable for distinguishing one Minister from another than highland Plydes and blew Bonnets He meets you with the like Drollery if you mind him that the Superintendents had no Metrapolitan and Episcopal Consecration or Ordination but it 's risus sardonius And his Questions What is this to Parity or Imparity amongst the Governours of the Church Do these differences distinguish between Bishops and Superintendents as to preheminence of Power flow from deep dissimulation of the mortal Wound giv'n to his Cause seeing without Episcopal Ordination which was never requir'd to a Superintendent For Knox as for example who with our Author was only a Presbyter ordain'd or admitted as they then spoke Spotswood Superintendent there can be no Episcopal Power no not so much as the very essentials of a Bishop These Superintendents were also without any Civil Places power or emoluments that way which make up the far greater part of the Episcopal greatness and still subject and accountable to the General Assemblies And there was reason for it saith our Author supposing that General Assemblies as then constituted were sit to be supream Judicatories of the National Church For there was no reason that Superintendents should have been Popes Then surely either were our Prelats Popes or most vehemently covetted a papal Power seeing above all things they fear'd abhorr'd and studi'd the ruine of these our General Assemblies And no wonder if they did so and that our Author intimats his dislike of these our Assemblies For if this one thing viz. the subjection of the Superintendents to these Assemblies as they were then constituted be duely weigh'd it 's fair to â—et them on the very same levell with their Brethren For give him never so great a Power in the Province where
temporary Bishops Paroch-ministers by the first Book of Discipline head 8 were deposeable by the Superintendent and the Elders of their Parishes The Superintendent was to be Judged by the Ministers and Elders of the whole Province But the fraud is palpable the words of the Book of Discipline are that if a Minister be worthy of Deposition the Elders of his Parish may with consent of the Kirk and Superintendent depose him Where you see the Kirk or Minister and Elders of the Province are no less interested in the Deposition of a Minister than in the judging of a Superintendent He suppress'd therefore all mention of the Kirk which even Spotswood whom he cites expresses to the end he might make his Reader believe no Minister save the Superintendent only had any power in Deposition of Ministers But privat Ministers saith he were to be admitted by their Superintendents but the Superintendents by the Superintendents next adjacent and the Superintendents had the Power of Ordination The first Book of Discipline and several Acts of the Assemblies But had only the Superintendents the Power of Ordination yea not only was there no plurality of Superintendents present at the Action but also John Knox who was no Superintendent ordain'd or admitted Spotswood Superintendent of L. yea every particular Minister when commissionated by the Assembly had no less Power of Ordination or any other thing whatsoever than is either in the Book of Discipline or any where else giv'n to the Superintendent Neither might any one particular Minister while he was a Commissioner more than the Superintendent be translated from one district to another without the Counsel of the whole Church or Assembly neither were there meaner Qualifications requisite in any Commissioner And I think Knox who was never a Superintendent was in these not inferiour to any of ' em But he had a living five times so much as another Minister But then I 'm sure he had five times as much to do with it being perpetually to Travell Preach and Exhort far and wide c but if this Rule had been keep'd our Bishops had got five times less than any other Minister for rarely did they any such Duty either at home or abroad In the mean while The Power of Riches and the baseness of Poverty maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower But Superintendents saith he were constant Members of General Assemblies had Power to Visit and to try the like c. of the Ministers of all the Churches of the Diocess and were to try those who stood Candidates for the Ministry had Power of granting Collations on Presentations But whatsoever he had of these belong'd also to every particular Pastor when commissionated by the General Assembly but tho' the Superintendent or Commissioner is only nam'd in such Cases as in trial of the Candidats granting Collations Deposition of Ministers c. He is to be understood as the Moderator and mouth of the Synod where he Superintended for Example the Assembly in the case of transportation chargeth the Ministers to obey the Voice and Commandment of their Superintendent and yet by the very same Act none can be translated without the Consent of the most part of the Elders and Ministers of Kirks conveen'd in the Synodal Assembly and yet from this very Act he adventnres to conclude the Canonical Obedience of Pastors to their Superintendents But he had Power to nominal Ministers to be Members of the General Assembly For Assembly 1562. 't was ordain'd that no Minister leave his Flock for coming to the Assembly except he have Complaints to make or be complain'd off or at least be warn'd thereto by the Superintendent And the L. Glamis in a Letter to Mr. Beza saith that after the Reformation it fell out by custom that the Bishops and so many of the Ministers Pastors and Elders as the Bishops appointed came to the General Assembly But touching what he alledges as said by the L. Glamis I can find it no where save in the Works of Saravia and Beza's Answer to Glamis his second Question wherein these words are found neither meets with nor presupposes any such Clause But be it that L. Glamis said so what will they hence infer he says indeed that this came to pass after the Reformation but how long 't was after the Reformation before this was practis'd he says not ' T was saith he receiv'd by Custom by no Decree of the Church then or Acts of the Assembly And lastly he speaks of Bishops not of Superintendents And I never find that any about these times gave Superintendents the name of Bishops and so this makes nothing for our Author's purpose Wherefore if ever L. Glamis had any such Expression whereof I much doubt in my mind he mean'd it of the Tulchans who for some space after the Leith-convention made some steps toward such a Superiority otherwise all the accounts we have of these times and in special the Acts of our Assemblies demonstrat that there was no such Power or Priviledge giv'n to any then in Scotland yea so much our Author himself presently proves and overturns this his own Argument by citing another out of the Assembly July 1563 1568 he should have said viz. Anent the Order hereafter to be used in General Assemblies They all voted and concluded as followeth viz. that if the Order already received pleases not by reason of the plurality of Voices it be reformed in this manner First that none have place to Vote except Superintendents Commissioners appointed for visiting the Kirks and Ministers brought with them presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge with the aforenamed shall be joined Commissioners of Burghs and Shires together with Commissioners of Vniversities Secondly Ministers and Commissioners shall be Chosen at the Synodal-convention of the Diocess by the Consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal-convention c. From this Act 't is clear that the former in 1562. has only been mention'd never concluded or at least cass'd and repeal'd by some intervenient Assembly otherways there had been no place or ground for the Act of 1568. which presupposes that ev'n these that were not at all thus Chosen at the Synod were free to come and Vote at the Assembly So far was this liberty from being put in the Superintendent or Commissioner's Power And indeed from this Act 't is most evident and 't is left on Record also by the Vindicatour of Philadelphus that before the time of this Act all Ministers who pleased were free to Vote at the Assemblies yet with our Author Petrie must be a mixer of lies for saying so much But Calderwood saith our Author leaves out intirely these words brought with them i. e. with the Superintendents and Commissioners of Kirks presented as Persons able to reason and having knowledge to judge whereby the Power of Superintendents and Commissioners for visiting of
called who are called at all The High-Priest dips him thrice The High-Priest himself having made a holy Prayer at the Divine Altar and beginning to Offer goes round about the whole Chore and the High-Priest praising the Holy Divine Actions sacrifices the most Divine Thing and taking and delivering the Divine Communion he ends with a Holy Thanksgiving Do nothing saith the Pseudo-Ignatius to Hero a Deacon of Antioch without the Bishops for they are Priests thou their Deacon they Baptize Sacrifice or Dispense the Lord's Supper impose Hands thou serves them as St. Stephen in Jerusalem administred to James and the Elders From which place it 's most evident that all Pastors or Priests as the Author speaks are true Bishops that on the account of such things as are common to all Pastors they receive the prime Episcopal Honour and Deference that there was a Colledge of true Bishops in the single City of Antioch accordingly that the rest of the Elders with James at Jerusalem were really true Bishops no less than he I don't say that Bishops and Congregations were reciprocal every-where in the fourth or fifth Century when these Impostors wrote only being to personat Apostolick Men they saw themselves obliged to mix into their Legends some shreds of true Antiquity The stuff they invented themselves was of a far different and contrary Mettal and far from being so conform and like to the Apostolick and prime Primitive Church § 14 And here it 's to be added that as every Bishop had once which continued in very many places for a good space one Congregation only so all Bishops whatsoever are of the same Dignity and Equal with one another For Cyprian calls all Bishops Collegues adding we force none we give Laws to none seeing every Governour in the Administration of the Church hath Power to do according to his own Will for which he is to give God an Acconnt And for none of us is a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Power can force his Collegues to Obedience c. And Hierome saith wheresoever Bishops be at Rome or Eugubium Constantinople Rhegium Alexandria or Tanis they are all of the same Dignity and Priest-hood Riches and Poverty make not a Bishop either higher or lower they are all the Successors of the Apostles Which is also Augustine's Mind and must be granted by all who acknowledge the Equality of the Apostles and that Bishops were their Successors Now the Truth of these two Things viz. the allowableness of a Bishop to every Congregation yea the primitive Reciprocalness of a Bishop and a Congregation and the Equality of Bishops among themselves being supposed which indeed is undoubtable to all the Ingenuous their whole Hierarchy turns to nothing And now I hope that which some pretend to be a mighty Prejudice viz. that Episcopacy still de facto has been and from the earliest times of Christianity we hear of Bishops is many ways removed and that by this time it has clearly appeared that either profound Ignorance Osscitancy or the masly beam of Interest in Mens Eyes has been the true Source of this Prejudice Moreover suppose that it could not be easily told when this Corruption which is like the Tares sown during the sleeping of the Husband-man crept into the Church Can they tell when all other Corruptions made their first Entry As for Example can they give a distinct account when the use of Oyl in Baptism whereof Tertullian speaks as of a thing constantly practised among Christians came first in Fashion The like I may say of Exorcization and many other things altogether uncertain as to their Beginning and yet by all Lovers of the Truth of Christianity to be Corruptions whereof see store in Chamier's Panstratia Secondly I trust also that by the foregoing Discourses the Weapon the Papists and other Hierarchicks use against the Reformed Churches to prove that they have no Ministers because of the want of a Succession of Bishops is sufficiently blunted And this minds me of an Objection I was assaulted with from a Gentleman of that Perswasion 't was that these Episcopal Men who ordained our Pastors gave them the Power of Ordination neither in express Terms nor yet intentionally Ergo not at all I Repon'd that tho' they did not give it them intentione Operantis yet notwithstanding intentione Operis in so much as they ordain'd the Ministers of the Gospel all whom we sustain to be true Bishops I add this is to a hair like Becan the Jebusites arguing against Luther's Call to be a protestant-Protestant-Minister Luther saith he had no lawfull Calling to the Ministry he exercised after his Defection for then he began to oppugn the Catholick Church abolish Feasts Monastick Vows and Prayers for the Dead these things he could not do by the Power which he had received in the Catholick Church for the Bishop who ordained him gave him no Power for the Destruction of the Church § 15. But there yet remains a great Prejudice and no wonder for it comes from a great City Rome say they and other such vast Cities which certainly contain'd many Congregations have been always ruled by their particular Bishops as the Catalogues yet extant evinc◠But tho' 't were so seeing it 's at least no less certain that in other places Bishops and Congregations were Reciprocal we are even with them and their Argument quite evanishes and Antiquity allows us to give a Bishop to every Congregation no less than it warrands their giving a multitude of Parishes to any one Bishop And Dr. Maurice acknowledges he never yet heard of any Man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under him And he 's so far in the right herein that during prime Antiquity 't was never so much as dream'd that 't was either essential or any way requisite for a Bishop to have a plurality of Congregations It 's not saith he the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes one a Bishop but the Order There are saith Saravia and have been Bishopricks so small that their Bishops had only one or two Presbyters for we measure not a Bishoprick by the number of the Clergy or by the amplitude of the City or Diocess the magnitude of Riches but by the Authority of the Episcopal Degree altho' the Bishoprick be included in one small Parish alone And some of the most Episcopal amongst them acknowledge that any of our Ministers tho' they have but one Parish want nothing to make them Bishops but only the Episcopal Consecration whereby they at once yeeld the whole Plea destroy their Hierarchy and withall discover their preterscriptural and therefore antiscriptural Superstition And now seeing there is all the warrant and allowance that either can be desir'd or thought on that a Bishop and a Pastor of one single Flock or Congregation is one and the same and that every Congregation may have its own proper Bishop their
Stilling fleet And amongst many others these his wâ—ords are most observable for having taken notice that Eusebius makes it a most hard Matter to know who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches they planted adds say you so is it so hard a Matter to find out who succeeded the Apostles in the Churches planted by them unless it be mention'd the Writings of Paul What becomes then of our unquestionable Line of Succession of the Bishops of several Churches and the large Diagrams made of the Apostolick Churches with every one's Name set down in his Order as if the Writer had been Clarenceaulx to the Apostles themselves Is it come to this at last that we having nothing certain but what we have in Scriptures And must then the Tradition of the Church be our Rule to interpret Scriptures by An excellent way to find out the Truth doubtless to bend the Rule to the croocked stick c. Again it 's certain that for divers Centuries Bishops were nothing like what they are now either in exercising Civil Power or Jurisdiction over other Pastors or yet in the largeness of Dioceses so that the Term Bishop in respect of the two is little better than an equivocal It 's certain also that the ancient Church wanted not her own Blemishes which was well perceived by her Doctors who still look'd on the Word of God only as the Rule of Faith and Manners on which they never founded the Episcopal Superiority Hence this their Argument carries nothing of Cogency Section VI. The Instance of Aërius condemn'd by Epiphanius prov'd to be unserviceable to our Antagonists TO Illustrat and Corroborat this their Argument from Antiquity they adduce the Instance of Aërius who was for this his Judgement of Presbytry as well as for Arrianism condemn'd and counted Heretick by Epiphanius But it is certain that Epiphanius censur'd Aërius not only for his being Anti-episcopal and as he believ'd because Arrian but also for his rejecting of Lents set and Anniversary Fasts and for denial of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead Now either purer Antiquity join'd with Epiphanius in asserting of the necessity of Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and other such Fopperies or they did not and if they join'd with him therein then our Prelatists if they be Protestants are concern'd to reflect better of how little weight their Argument from the Ancients pressing their unwarrantable Additions can be unto them But if they say that sounder Antiquity consented not to Epiphanius while he urged Prayer and Sacrifice for the Dead and such Anti-scriptural Fictions we return that neither did the choicest of the Ancients agree with him in his Plea for Prelacy The Judgement of Hierom is so well known herein that the Bishop of Spalato acknowledges that Hierom can by no means yea not byforce be reconcil'd to their Cause Hierome's Judgement saith Saravia was private all one with that of Aërius and contrary to the Word of GOD wherefore we shall examine his Arguments And on this account he is much offended with Hierome accusing him of Vanity Self-contradiction and Prevarication And Alphonsus de Castro sharply reproveth Thomas Waldensis another Papist who had intended to pervert the Testimonies which are commonly alledg'd for Presbytry out of Hierome There De Castro having prov'd out of divers places of Hierome that he was truly for the Scriptural and Apostolick Idenity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter concludes against Waldensis that of necessity there must be another way taken to Answer the Passages alledg'd out of Hierome for Presbytry And at length flatly opposes himself to Hierome in this Matter and saith that we ought rather to believe the Decrees of Popes and Councils than the Doctrine of Hierome though both very Holy and Learn'd And Medina another Champion of the Hierarchy cited by Bellarmine asserts the same of Hierome saying He was of the same Judgement with Aërius in this Matter Bellarmine is very displeas'd with his Brother for his Ingenuity and therefore attempts to bring Hierome over to the Episcopal Party but instead of performing this Task he only fruitlesly endeavours to set Hierome at variance with himself The like success had another of the same Fraternity who like Bellarmine attempted to draw Hierome to his Faction Bayly the Jesuit And yet with these the most disingenous of the whole fry of Loyolites some called Protestants stick not warmly to join themselves and plead for a Patrociny to their Cause from Hierome § 3. Yea not only was Hierome of the same Judgement anent Episcopacy with Aërius but also as even the Jesuite Medina acknowledges the most of the Greek and Latine primitive Doctors and in special Ambrosius Augustinus Sedulius Primasius Chrysostomus Theodoretus Oecumenius Theophilactus This their Opinion saith Medina was first condemned in Aërius then in the Waldenses and lastly in Wicklef but this Doctrine was either dissembled or tolerated by the Church in them for the Honour that was had to them while on the other hand it was always condemn'd in these Men as Heretical because in many other things they swerv'd from the Church Many Papists and other Prelatists cannot away with this Medina's free dealing and use many shifts to refute him and draw these Fathers to their Party But to use the Words of Rivet Whosoever shall consider their Answers collested by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth lib. 6. annot 319 323 324. they shall presently perceive that all their Distinctions are most pitifull Elusions and that indeed all these Fathers were no less Presbyterian than Aërius although they accommodat themselves to the Custom then received least for a Matter not contrary to the Foundations of Religion they should have broken the Vnity of the Church What do our Opposits herein but espouse what the Romanists in whom any ingenuity remains have long since disowned § 4. But tho' Epiphanius were the mouth of all Antiquity and the only fit Judge in this Controversie the Triumph of our Adversaries should be very small for Aërius to Prove the Idenity of the two having adduced a parallel of many particulars Epiphanius denieth nothing of these to belong to Presbyters except only Imposition of Hands he yeelds therefore that both of them equally have Power to Baptize to occupy the Chair and finally to perform all Divine Worship Our Antagonists therefore offering to vouch the Prelacy they plead for by the Authority of Epiphanius promise much more then they can perform for what pray is this Power of Imposition of Hands or Ordination compared with what they covet and pretend to support by Epiphanius his Authority I mean the both great and many Differences between Bishop and Presbyter § 5. In the mean while Epiphanius his unjust dealing towards Aërius is most palpable for he sticks not to give out that Aërius his Judgement of the Identity of Bishop Presbyter was look'd on by the whole Church as an intolerable Heresie condemned by the Word of God when
he superintended and let him use it as he pleased yet neither can the Imparity be counted considerable not the harm he could do very hurtfull for within half a year at most for there was a General Assembly twice at least every year they had a prospect of a General Assembly to right their wrong wherein every Pastor was to have no less Power than any Superintendent and no less capable to sit judge and censure the Superintendent than the Superintendent was on the other hand to exerce the like Power over him yea any Minister in the Assembly such sometimes as were none was as fair to be chosen Moderator as any Superintendent By the frequency of these Assemblies it came to pass that few or no matters of importance were determin'd in the inferiour Synods but came thither for their final Decision Wherefore if we narrowly look on these times we shall find that the Superintendents were rather appointed as Observers and Delators of Matters to the Assembly than any proper Judges thereof save when a special command was giv'n him to cognosce on such and such particular Matters He was frequently also charged with execution of the Assemblies Determinations all which was common to him with other Commissioners to whom the Assembly gave the like Charge and sent them not rarely to these very Provinces where there were Superintendents with equal Power and Authority to that of the Superintendent Sometimes they ordain'd Causes to be handled by the Superintendent with the assistance of these Commissioners sometimes by the Commissioner with the assistance of the Superintendents which Commissioners were sometimes Ministers of another Province and sometimes of that Province wherein was the Superintendent with whom they were join'd with equal Power Authority From all which 't is evident how much they are taken with the humor of cavilling who dare to ascribe to the Superintendents any real Superiority or Power over other Pastors or any thing repugnant to a compleat Parity But there is yet more even in his own Synod he could do nothing contrary to the Majority for he was to act nothing without the Synods Consent neither could he impede ought done by the Majority for he had no negative vote Yea he was made subject to the Tryal and Censures of the Synod of the very province where he superintended And here our Author is compell'd to acknowledge that there was a considerable difference between Superintendents and Bishops and indeed 't was considerable with a witness and so considerable that it really sets them on even ground with each Pastor of the word He adds that this was a great wrong and error in the Constitution and on this ocasion has a long invective against our Reformers in speciall Knox counting them Children Idiots Ungovernable and of bad Principles and spares not to flegg at all Scots men or Scotch mettal as he speaks But this is but a kicking against the pricks He knows all this helps him nothing nor is to the present Question which is not de jure but de facto what our Reformers freely and joyntly did Not on what grounds they did so He next retorts that according to the book of Discipline the Elders are allow'd to admonish correct and with the consent of the Church and Superintendent depose their Minister But First tho our Reformers had spoken just alike of the Elders and Ministers as they did of the Synod and Superintendent their words will not bear the like inference the power they give to the Elders could certainly be a spurr to the Ministers and yet they might be sure the few Elders of one parish would never make so bold with their Minister as the whole Synod might with their Superintendent Secondly There is no such allowance giv'n to the Elders concerning their Minister as to the Synod over their Superintendent the former much act only with the consent of the Kirk and Superintendent but nothing of this injoyn'd to the latter Yea our Author himself will have the power of Deposition to be a prerogative of the Superintendent and no doubt he or the Commissioner did in the Churches name execute her sentence To Depose therefore here and that with allowance of the whole context of that 8 head of Discipline which he cites is nothing else than to delate to the Church and Superintendent the crimes of the Minister and in their own sphere assist them in that action He adds he hath no where found that de facto the Superintendent was judged by his own Synod And it may be so for litle do we find of any thing was then done by provincial synods every thing of moment being left to the General Assemblies which were then most frequent Such a Constitution adds he inferrs no such thing as Parity among Church-Offices Those who maintain that the King is inferior to his Subjects in their Collection are not yet so extravagant as to say he is not Superior to every one of them in their Distribution But where Superiors or Equalls can be gotten the Men of this Principle will freely yeeld that none who are Inferiours in the Distribution ought to judge the Actions of their Superiours providing other Judges can be had who in this Case cann't there being but one King only in a Kingdom Hence they believing that none may live lawless think the King's Actions are cognoscible by these who are his Inferiours but altering their capacity in the Collection But is it so in the Case of the Superintendent whereof there were severals not one only as there is one commonly King in a Kingdom Seeing then he was to be judged by the Synod notwithstanding that there were other Superintendents in the Church 't is evident they counted every Brother in the Ministry his equal § 19. But the Superintendents saith our Author had a stock of prerogatives above other Pastors But be it so yet notwithstanding hereof if we suppose which I trust at the narrowest search shall appear the truth of what we have now adduc'd and the self consistency of the actings of our Reformers whom he would fain set at variance with themselves whatsoever Prerogatives he has really brought can never prove that the Superintendent had any Dominion over other Pastors or that they acted not in a true and real Parity so that from what is now said these his pretended Disparities are prevented and remov'd For example he tells us that Superintendents had a larger district were nominated by the Council elected by the Nobility and Gentry 't was not so with the Paroch Ministers But the Commissioners had no less districts and were appointed by the General Assembly which I 'm sure is of no less weight in the case than the Councils Nomination even tho' the Gentlemens Election be added thereto and yet who in his Wit will take him for any other Officer than is every Parish-minister or fall into the rovery of our Author who calls these Commissioners
Kirks is quite stiffled and the whole sense of the Act perverted For what sense is it I pray to say that the Ministers were Chosen by Consent of the rest of the Ministers when you tell not who was to choose or who they were to whose choice or nomination the rest of the Ministers were to give that Consent But to stiffle the Power he pleads for to Superintendents was a Work impossible either to Calderwood or any man else the very Act it self most irrefragbly shewing they could have none save such as is in any meer Moderator of our Synods or Presbytries For be it which yet the Assembly expresses not that the Superintendents were to nominate Ministers for the Assembly yet they could do no more but only as the Synod by their Votes assented or choosed the nominated Persons whom if the Synod or its major part rejected these could not go to the Assembly yet some behov'd to go and consequently the Superintendent or Commissioner was to make a new Lite and name again and if these did not yet please another Lite and so on untill the Synod was satisfi'd and choosed some Persons or other according to their pleasure for the Assembly This much is undeniably contain'd in the Act and I 'm sure no Moderator of any Synod or Presbytry injoyes any less Power providing it deserve the name Seeing then Brought with them cannot possibly mean any peculiar Power I see not wherein Calderwood by ommitting them can be culpable Neither can he be accused of nonsense seing 't is sufficiently intelligible and plain how these Ministers and Commissioners could be chosen by the consent of the rest of his Brethren the Ministers and Gentle-men members of the Synod who by joynt and mutual consent chused them after the Superintendent or Commissioners nominating or liting which by a fraud too palpable he confounds with Election And here it 's observable in how much torment and perplexity this so clear an Act involves all of ' em Spotswood adduc'd it in his latine Pamphlet but is so soundly chastis'd by the Vindicator of Philadelphus that our Author finds not a syllable to say in his defence He pretends also to relate it in his History but with an essential Depravation for he leaves out these words Ministers and Commissirners of Shires shall be chosen at the Synodal Convention of the Diocy with consent of the rest of the Ministers and Gentlemen that shall conveen at the said Synodal Convention For he saw it quite spoil'd his Cause and really left the Superintendent no Power but what was equally in any of the rest and foists into the Text these such Ministers as the Superintendents should chuse in their Diocesan Synods Neither can our Author be blameless in suppressing the following words Commissioners of Burghs shall be appointed by the Council and Kirk of their own Towns none shall be admitted without sufficient Commission in write And least this should turn to perpetual Election of a few and certain Persons it is concluded Ministers and other Commissioners be changed from Assembly to Assembly Whereby appears the Churches great care that neither Superintendent nor any other might have ought like an Episcopal Power and that all fit Persons might have equal priviledge of Voting at the Assemblies There yet remain many of his pretended Disparities but are no more significative of eminency or superiour Office no less communicable to the rest of the Ministers when Commissioners than were the former as will be evident to any who reads the Acts of the Assemblies among which he reckons the Superintendent 's modifying to Ministers their Stipends as if because Judas had the Bagg and bare what was put therein he had been Bishop over the rest of the Apostles In the mean while the Superintendents could do nothing of this but only as Moderator of the provincial Synod Another Deduction of no better metall is that the Laird of Dun Superintendent of Angus not as such but by vertue of a particular Commission giv'n by the Assembly to him and others join'd with him deposed a Regent of Aberdeen a place intirely without the bounds of his Superintendency therefore Superintendents as such had a Power Paramount and Episcopal And was not such an arguer a man of sense I pass the rest of his thirty Disparities not without admiration that such a fertile brain could not invent one other for one and thirty used to carry the Game Add to all this that tho' some that had been Popish Bishops in Scotland and imbrac'd the Gospel as Mr. Gordon of Galloway a man of no contemptible Gifts were by our Reformers allow'd without any new Admission to dispence the Word aud Sacraments yet they were never allow'd to exercise what they counted their Episcopal Function or looked on as Bishops of these Dioceses yea Mr. Gordon tho' he earnestly sought for it could never be admitted to Superintend in Galloway which is a clear Demonstration that our Reformers looked on the Episcopal preheminence as a meer Popish Corruption otherways why did not Mr. Gordon verbi causâ remain in the Power and Character he had enjoyed while Romanist It 's most clear also from all the accounts we have of the Tulchan Bishops that all men of all parties look'd on a Bishop as a thing altogether diverse from a Superintendent § 20. And now at length hear him yeelding the whole Plea There was saith he a Principle had then got too much footing among some Protestant Divines viz. That the best way to reform a Church was to recede as far from the Papists as they could to have nothing in common with them but the essentials the necessary and indispensable Articles and Parts of Christian Religion whatever was in its Nature indifferent and not positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures if it was in fashion in the Popish Churches was therefore to be laid aside and avoided as a Corruption as having been abused and made subservient to Superstition and Idolatry This Principle John Knox was fond of and maintain'd zealously and the rest of our reforming Preachers were much acted by his influences In pursuance of this Principle therefore when they compil'd the first Book of Discipline they would not Reform the old Polity and purge it of such Corruptions as had crept into it keeping still by the main draughts and lineaments of it But they laid it quite aside and in stead thereof hammer'd out a new Scheme keeping at as great a distance from the old one as they could and as the essentials of Polity would allow them establishing no such thing however as Parity as I have fully proven And no wonder for as Imparity has obviously more of Order beauty and usefulness in its aspect so it had never so much as by dreaming entred their tboughts that it was a limb of Antichrist or a relict of Popery But was not Episcopacy in fashion in the Popish Churches And dare he yea or any mortal say that ever
our Reformers believed it to be an indispensible part of the Christian Religion positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures Do not therefore his saying establishing however no such thing as Parity c and the rest of his Discourse mutually give the lie and flee in the face of one another And indeed he here at once overthrows whatsoever he said on this Subject and now for ever to silence all reasonable men and stop them from such desperat adventures as this of our Authors take the following Argument Whatsoever our Reformers believed to be without the express and positive Testimony of the Scriptures that they believed to be a damnable Corruption in Religion and as such to be avoided This the major is put beyond scruple by what we have brought from the first Book of Discipline Knox and the Confessions of our Author Now I subjoin But they believed that Episcopacy was altogether without any express or positive Testimony yea or any Warrant or Ground from the Word of God the Books of the Old and New Testament Ergo c. The minor is no less evident from what is already adduc'd and moreover from the latter Helvetian Confession which was all save the allowance of the remembrance of some Holy Days which they expresly disprov'd approv'd and subscribed by our whole General Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1566. For in that Confession mark it pray carefully and by no means forget that our Church and Reformers who approv'd and subscrib'd this Confession firmly believ'd that whatsoever is without the express Commandment of God's Word is damnable to Man's Salvation they say There 's giv'n to all Ministers in the Church one and the same Power or Function And indeed in the beginning Bishops and Presbyters ruled the Church in common none preferr'd himself to another or usurped any more honourable Power or Dominion to himself over his fellow Bishops But according to the words of the Lord who will be first among you let him be your Servant they persevered in Humility and helped one another by their mutual Duties in Defending and Governing the Church In the meantime for preserving Order some one of the Ministers did call the Assembly and proposed these things that were to be consulted in the Meeting He did also receive the Opinions of others and finally according to his Power he took care that no confusion should arise so S. Peter is said to have done in the Acts of the Apostles who notwithstanding was never set over the rest nor indu'd with greater power and honour but the beginning took its rise from Vnity that the Church might be declared to be one And having related Hierome's Doctrine of the Idenity of Bishop Presbyier thus they conclude Therefore none may lawfully hinder to return to the ancient Constitution of the Church of God and embrace it before human Custome Thus far the Authors of that most famous Confession who both in the Title page and after the Preface expresly assert that our Church of Scotland together with the Churches of Poland Hungary Geneve Neocome Myllhusium and Wiend approved and subscribed this their Confession From all which it 's easie to gather and perceive with how black a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our first Reformers and whole primitive Church Protestant branded Prelacy or Imparity amongst Pastors Section IX The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian BUT let 's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers and Reform'd transmarine Churches Gerard a famous Lutheran divine altho' for Orders sake he admit of some kind of Episcopacy which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter The Papists saith he especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot And all along this Question he strongly proves that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary But we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines Luther himself being the mouth to the rest in the Articles of Smalcald It 's clear say they even from the Confession of our Adversaries that this Power to wit of preaching dispensing the Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution is common to all that are set over the Churches whither they be called Pastors Presbyters or Bishops Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter but that every Pastor was a Bishop Here Hierome teaches that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor was only appointed by humane Authority And the matter it self continues Luther and his Associats declares no less for on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor § 2. As for Calvin his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry for he asserts the Idenity of Bishop Presbyter Pastor and Minister and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7 as Hierome had done long before him and Presbyterians do now And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles he tells us that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters but was among them what the Consul was in the Senat and his Office was to propone Matters enquire the Votes preside in Admonition and moderat the Action and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator And that even this saith he was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza who every where is full sufficiently to our purpose both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus And were there any doubt concerning these as indeed there 's none their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd our very Adversaries being Judges sufficiently discuss it and prove them to be truly Presbyterian and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers Systematicks Controvertists and Commentators As for Example the famous and learn'd Musculus asserts and proves from
arte perire sua Section V. The Objections they pretend to bring from Scripture against the Doctrine now deduc'd from Ignatius removed ANd indeed Ignatius is encompast with so thick a Cloud of Witnesses who not only deny all support to but give most evident Depositions against the Diocesan Prelat that his Testimony in favours thereof should be a firm demonstration of the Bastardy of these Epistles The time of the Apostles was not far above that of Ignatius Now if we consult these we shall not only find our Adversaries destitute of their Suffrages but also overwhelm'd with their plain Testimonies against the Hierarchy 'T is true they alledge several things out of the Apostolick Writings for establishing their Cause as that Timothy and Titus as also the Angels of the Asiatick Caeurches were Diocesan Bishops The grounds wherein tâ—ey establish the Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus are that they are enjoined to Ordain Elders which in after Ages was the peculiar Province of Diocesan Bishops and that in the Postscrâ—pts of these Epistles they are both called Bishops But their later Topick is by the profound silence of the ancient Commentaries and many other tokens of Forgery and Novelty so baffl'd that Prelacy's present Agents and amongst others D. M are so wise as to suppress it And yet D. M. adventures to conclude Timothy his being made Bishop of Ephesus from Acts 20. 3 4 5. which Inference few I think beside the Author can gather compared with 1 Tim. 1. 3. I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other Doctrine From which even tho' it be compared with the other Scripture any Man in his Wit would much rather with Chrysostome inferr the very contrary and conclude that Timothy's stay at Ephesus was only temporary to expede the Business there mention'd but not to fix therein But saith he 1 Tim. 3. 14. 15. These things I write unto thee c. plainly insinuat his particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus But the many Scriptures informing us of Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus perswade that there was no such Relation neither does this place in the least insinuat it but only that Timothy if not sent for was to stay till Paul's return wherefore he begs the Question while he tells us that after he was in a particular manner established Bishop of the Church of Ephesus he might wait upon Paul Moreover this was an odd Attendance that scarce ever suffer'd Timothy to stay with his Flock and this shift too like that of the Romanists who in Answer to the Argument from Scripture-silence against Peter's being Bishop of Rome tell us that he was frequently abroad But here we have not only Scripture-silence but Scripture Testimony shewing Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus He essays also to bring Timothy's Episcopal Power and particular Relation to Ephesus from 1 Tim. 5. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 1. and 1 Tim. 5. 21. And that this was not temporary or transient but successive and perpetual he would prove from 1 Tim. 6. 13. 20. and 2 Tim. 2. 2. and adds that his Adversaries grant that the Power he pleads for to Bishops was exercised by Timothy But as for the particular Relation he speaks of he should have proved it seeing he knows it will not be granted except he bring more than the bare recitall of the places from which his fancy collects it and without such a particular Relation the Power Timothy exercised be what it will makes nothing for his purpose seeing it might be lodged in him alone as an Evangelist and thus most of his postulata prove useless Yet I will handle them particularly of which the first two are that the Power which Timothy exercised was in it self lawfull and that he practised it in Ephesus And 't is true none denies it but what then untill he first prove Timothy's particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus The third and fourth are that it was committed to him alone and not to a Colledge of Presbyters acting among themselves in Parity And that there 's no mention of any spiritual Power lodged in a Colledge of Presbyters to which Timothy was accountable But Willet an approved Divine of the Church of England shall answer for us Neither saith he can it be gathered by these words of the Apostle lay Hands suddenly upon no Man c. That Timothy had this sole Power in himself for the Apostle would not give that to him which he did not take to himself who associated unto him the rest of the Presbytry in Ordaining of Timothy I add that there 's no less mention of a spiritual Power in a Colledge of Presbyters c. than of Timothy's being fixed Bishop of Ephesus Hence his 5. postulatum viz. That the great and most eminent Branches of the Episcopal Power were lodged in Timothy ' s Person the ordination of such as were admitted unto the sacred Function the care of Widows the Censuring of Elders and his autoritative preventing of Heresies becomes unserviceable His VI is that this Authority was not in it self of temporary duration transient or extraordinary but such as the constant Necessities of the Church do make necessary in all Ages for he was commanded to commit it unto faithfull Men such as should be able to teach others and if there be nothing in it extraordinary why do they say that in the discharging of an ordinary trust there was need of an extraordinary Officer But First he corrupts the Apostles words 2 Tim. 2. 2. substituting it in stead of them that thereby he may force the Text to speak of a Power equal to that of Timothy which was to be derived unto succeeding Teachers when yet it plainly speaks of the Transmission of the Doctrine or things Timothy had heard and others were to teach but nothing of an equality of Timothy's Power to be derived in solidum to every subsequent Bishop or Teacher Now except this be proved D. M. saith nothing Yea Hammond expresly contradicts him Appoint them saith he as Bishops under thee Moreover Christ committed the things Paul here speaks of to his Apostles yet will D. M. say their Power was equall to Christ's Secondly In this his last postulatum there appears a strange kind of reasoning viz. the Things or Actions wherein Timothy and Titus were employed are perpetual and ordinary therefore they were not extraordinary Officers just as if one would Reason It 's ordinary for a skillfull Physitian to relieve a Febricitant therefore our Saviour relieving Peter's Wife's Mother was no extraordinary Physitian For their Method and Way of performing these Actions was extraordinary and temporary they having no special Power over or Relation to any one particular Congregation but such a Power and Relation as equally were extended over all the places whither they were sent Moreover others of their Actions and these which were properly Evangelistick were extraordinary such
and defended it against the Jesuite Petavius whom D. M. would patronize against both Protestants and Fathers The second of the Homilies ascribed to Augustine in Apocalypsin informs us that under the name of Angel not only Bishops but other Church-Rulers are likewise understood And again seeing Angel signifies a Messenger whosoever whether Bishop Presbyter or Laick frequently speaketh of God and declares how we may obtain eternal Life deservedly gets the name of an Angel of God And Aretas saith he calleth the Church it self the Angel And Primasius saith by these Angels of the Church are to be understood the Guides and Rectors of the People who ruling in particular Churches Preach the Word of Life to all Men for the name of Angel signifies a Messenger And again both Church and Angel is comprehended under the Person of the Angel And thus their main Scripture-Argument even the Fathers being Judges goes to ruine § 13. Yea the more sagacious of our Adversaries well perceive that neither this Scripture nor any other supports their Doctrine Wherefore Petavius never attempts to bring his Proofs from Scripture but only from Ecclesiastick Traditions Add hereto the words of Dr. Burnet As for the Notion saith he of the distinct Offices of Bishop and Presbyter I confess it is not so clear to me and therefore since I look upon the Sacramental Actions as the highest of sacred Performances I cannot but acknowledge these who are empower'd for them must be of the highest Office in the Church So I do not alledge a Bishop to be a distinct Office from a Presbyter but a different degree in the same Office to whom for Order and Vnities sake the chief inspection and care of Ecclesiastical Matters ought to be referred and who shall have Authority to curb the Insolencies of some factious and turbulent Spirits His Work should be to feed the Flock by the Word and Sacraments as well as other Presbyters and especially to try and ordain Entrants and to Oversee Direct and Admonish such as bear Office And I more willingly incline to believe Bishops and Presbyters to be the several degrees of the same Office since the names of Bishop and Presbyter are used for the same thing in Scripture and are also used promiscuously by the Writers of the two first Centuries Where he plainly contradicts Dr. Pearson who in favour of his Ignatius largely pleads for the accurat distinction of Bishop and Presbyter in the second Century denies Bishop and Presbyter to be distinct Orders and finally acknowledges that in the chiefest parts of the Ministerial Function they are equal and so really denudes the Bishop of all the degree he left him But more clearly elsewhere I acknowledged saith he Bishop and Presbyter to be one and the same Office and so I plead for no New Office-Bearers in the Church Next in our second Conference the Power giv'n to Church-men was proved to be double The first Branch of it is their Authority to publish the Gospel to manage the Worship and to dispence the Sacraments And this is all that is of Divine-Right in the Ministry in which Bishops and Presbyters are equal sharers both being vested with this Power But beside this the Church claims a Power of Jurisdiction of making Rules for Discipline and of appointing and executing the same all which is indeed suitable to the common Laws of Societies and to the general Rules of Scripture but hath no positive Warrant from any Scripture-Precept And all these Constitutions of Churches into Synods and the Canons of Discipline taking their rise from the Divisions of the World into the several Provinces and beginning in the end of the second and beginning of the third Century do clearly shew they can be derived from no Divine Original and so were as to their particular Form but of humane Constitution therefore as to the management of this Jurisdiction it is in the Churches Power to cast it in what mould she will A Presbyter acknowledges even Cornelius à Lapide is equal to a Bishop in the chiefest Order which is the Order of the Priest-hood § 14. To which add the Judgement of Dr. Hammond a Man so distemper'd with extreme Passion for the Hierarchy that he makes him that sat on the Throne Rev. 4. God the Father and the four and twenty Elders with their Golden Crowns an Image and Representation of the Metropolitan Bishop of Hierusalem and the four and twenty Bishops of Judaea in Council for Golden Crowns or Mitres he makes the Characters of the Episcopal Dignity Yet even he asserts on Acts 11. 30. Philip. 1. 1. that the Title of Presbyter in Scripture times belonged principally if not only to Bishops There being saith he no evidence that any of that second Order were then instituted but Bishops only and Deacons This he at large confirms and so really overthrows Prelacy when he would fainest establish it joining with the Presbyterians in their grand Antiprelatick Principle viz. that simple Presbyter as the Hierarchicks phrase it without Power of Ordination or Government or a distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter is a meer stranger without all Foundation in the Holy Scriptures From all which 't is clear that these Bishops or which is all one preaching Presbyters in Scriptures and during the Apostolick age were nothing save Pastors of particular Congregations Section VI. Our meaning of Ignatius confirmed from the Writings of the Apostles his immediat Ancestors MOreover nothing can be more clear for the Idenity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter than that known Scripture Acts 20. 17 28. They Answer that the Bishops of Asia not the Pastors of Ephesus were by Paul sent for which some would support from the 18 ver From the first day that I came into Asia c. But since as is clear ch 19. verse 10. from his coming into Asia he had been most in Ephesus he might truly say so much tho' the Ephesians only had been present but suppose he spoke to others beside we are at no loss the Question is if he gave not tho' amongst others the Title of Overseers or Bishops to these he sent for verse 17. And if these were not the Elders of Ephesus They yet object the words of Irenaeus viz. That Paul called together to Miletum the Bishops and Presbyters of Ephesus and the neighbouring Towns But as for his seeming here to distinguish Bishops from Presbyters this Scripture where they get both Names and which Iraeneus had then in his view and his frequent promiscuous using of these Names perswade me that he only respected the 17 and 28 verses and so took Bishop and Presbyter Synonimically for one and the same His adding of the neighbour Towns to Ephesus might flow from his inadvertency whereat no attentive Reader of Irenaeus will marvel and yet this is as likely to have crept into the Version for the Original of Iraeneus we have not because these Elders their belonging to
one Ordination for both of them are Priests but the Bishop is first so that every Bishop is a Presbyter not every Presbyter a Bishop for he 's the Bishop who is first among the Presbyters Finally the Apostle shews that Timothy was ordain'd a Presbyter but because he had no other Presbyter before him he was a Bishop And from thence he shews how Timothy can Ordain a Bishop for 't was not lawfull for the Inferiour to Ordain a Superiour § 2. Hence appears the perverseness of Bellarmine affirming that Hilary says only there was no need of a new Election but denies not saith he the necessity of a Consecration or Episcopal Ordination A flat Contradiction of Hilary's express saying that there 's but one Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter and that even Timothy was of no higher Order than that of a Presbyter whose whole primacy consisted in his meer being the first Presbyter in respect of age or time of his Ordination as Hilary hath taught us And so as he doth also all-along thro' the fore-cited Passages explains fully his calling the Bishop Prince of Priests which the Cardinal also objects and shews that thereby we 're to understand only such a Dignity as either meer priority of Ordination or Seniority yeelds Thus Hierome also understands this Title who calls Peter Prince of the Apostles and yet asserts that any Priority Peter had was given to his Age only which in that very place he makes as good as nothing Informing us that the Church was equally founded on all the Apostles and that the rest no less than Peter received the Keys Take but another place of Hilary By Angels saith he the Apostle means the Bishops as we learn in the Revelation of John who being Men are challeng'd for not reproving the people or commended for their Vertues And because Sin entred by the Woman she ought to have this token that in the Church for the reverence to the Bishop her head ought not to be free but cover'd with a vail and she has not power to speak because the Bishop represents Christ's person she ought therefore because of the Original of Transgression appear subject before the Bishop as before the Judge because he is the Lord's Vice-gerent Here we see that according to Hilary there was a Bishop over every Congregation and in every place of publick Worship frequented by Men and Women and that the Apocalyptick Angels were only such Congregational Pastors From which we may well gather that when any in these early times had the name Bishop more peculiarly giv'n them yet the Primacy could be but only of Order and nominal which is fitly illustrated by the Athenian Archons Petavius therefore to shield his Cause from so deadly blows does his outmost to discredite these Commentaries and make their Author some obscure fellow and to prove they belong not to Hilary the Luciferian he brings two passages thereof that shew their Author to have been of the Roman Communion which Hilary deserted But might he not have been of that Communion when he wrote the commentaries and yet deserted it afterward This the Jesuit attempts not to disprove But whosoever this Author was or by whatsoever name known neither are we hurt nor the Hierarchicks helped thereby his Authority is unquestionably great being cited by the Councils of Paris and Ayx no mean Conventicles under the name of Ambrose afterward the learn'd as Bellarmine and the Divines of Lovain gave these Commentaries to Hilarie a Roman Deacon and stout Opposer of the Arrians the Foundation of which Opinion is strong For Augustine oftner than once attributes these Commentaries to Hilarie And it 's likely that Petavius knew that the Authority of this Writer was not to be shaken with all his Cavills but only at that time he had found nothing else to say wherefore he afterwards excogitats more Quibbles to darken and deprave this Author and chiefly strives to make Hilary speak nothing for the Right of Seniority and against the Election of a Successor to any deceasing Bishop He says therefore that when Hilary tells us that one dying the next or following succeeded we must not understand it in respect of Years or Ordination but any of 'em indefinitly taken who was notwithstanding afterward to be elected by the Clergy but all the Presbyters in time becoming unworthie of the Episcopal Honour the Method was altered and another not out of the Colledge of Presbyters but out of some other Order according to their desert was admitted unto that Office To support which Gloss he brings Hierome's saying that the Presbyters of Alexandria named one elected from among themselves Bishop as if Hierome were not speaking of Alexandria alone and to instance therein that Prelacy came not soon to any growth or as if Hierome and Hilary could not agree in its being of humane Original and yet differ in the circumstances of its rise The rest of his prolix Discourse on this Theme is only a train of meer Cavills and Clouds too thin and airy to feed a very Chamaeleon all which are quite dissolv'd and disappear if we but look into one small parcell of Hilary's words where he tells us that after the Method was altered then the Bishop whose desert raised him was constitute by the Judgement or Votes of many Priests or Presbyters For this Clause being of design inserted by Hilarie to shew the Opposition between the latter and the former Method of coming to the Primacy proclaims that as after the Change Suffrages and Election were used so before this Change there had been no such Custome With this the Jesuite darrs not ingage nor with Hilary's making the Ordination of both Bishop and Presbyter the same his making Timothy only a Presbyter his placing all the Essence or Constitutive of a Bishop in being the first Presbyter of the Colledge his giving a Bishop to every Congregation c. These I say he never adventures once in the least to handle wherefore surely he was conscious to himself that he spent both Pains and Brains for the sole production of a bulkish nothing § 3. To Hilary I add Chrysostome which Theoplylact his real Epitomator transcribes After saith he the Apostle had discoursed concerning the Bishops and described them declaring what they ought to have and from what they ought to abstain omitting the order of Presbyters he descends to the Deacons and why so But because between Bishop and Presbyter in a manner there is no difference seeing that also to the Presbyters the Care or Government the Church is committed and whatsoever he said of Bishops agrees also to the Presbyters in Ordination alone they are Superiour and they seem to have this onlie more than the others Where he clearly overthrows all their Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter notwithstanding that to some he may seem to give the Power of Ordination to Bishops above Presbyters For First The words are most
chiefly the Jesuites And lastly in the rear comes D. M. concluding that the Hierarchy of the Christian Church is founded upon Apostolick Tradition and that the Apostles had the Modell of the Temple in their view when they erected this Plat-form But Junius Answers that their Conclusion is a non sequitur For saith he this comparison is not particular between each of these particular Officers under the Old Testament and these under the New but in common shewing that as they are all obliged to serve the Church of the Jews so all the Church-Officers under the New Testament ought to serve the Christian Church Moreover continues Junius tho' we should give that the Comparison were particular yet their Conclusion would not follow seeing Hierome speaks only of the Church Polity of his own time and the Question now is about Hierome's Sentiments of the Church Government and Polity in the Apostolick Age and first primitive Church And that this in Hierome's Mind was not Hierarchick but a meer Parity of Pastors Junius already evinced and Dr. Stillingfleet at more length overthrows this their Jesuitical Doctrine and Demonstrats that by Apostolical Tradition in Hierome only Ecclesiastick Custome of some Antiquity is mean'd asserts that it 's not imaginable that Jerome who had been proving all along the Superiority of a Presbyter above a Deacon because of his Identity with a Bishop in the Apostles times should at the same time say that a Bishop was above a Presbyter by the Apostles Institution and so directly overthrow all he had been saying before The plain meaning continues Dr. Stillingfleet then of Jerome is no more but this that as Aaron and his Sons in the Order of Priesthood were above the Levites under the Law So the Bishops and Presbyters in the Order of the Evangelical Priesthood are above the Deacons under the Gospel For the Comparison runs not between Aaron and his Sons under the Law and Bishops and Presbyters under the Gospel but between Aaron and his Sons as one part of the Comparison under the Law and the Levites under them as the other so under the Gospel Bishops and Presbyters make one part of the Comparison answering to Aaron and his Sons in that wherein they all agree viz. the Order of Priesthood and the other part under the Gospel is that of Deacons answering to the Levites under the Law The Opposition is not then in the Power of Jurisdiction between Bishops and Priests but between the same Power of Order which is alike both in Bishops and Presbyters according to the acknowledgement of all to the Office of Deacons which stood in Competition with them Hereby we see how unhappyly those Arguments succeed which are brought from the Analogy between the Aaronical Priesthood to endeavour the setting up of a Jus Divinum of a paralell Superiority under the Gospel All which Arguments are taken off by this one thing we 're now upon viz that the Orders and Degrees under the Gospel were not taken up from Analogy to the Temple Other passages of Jerome they also study to abuse but these now handl'd are the most specious But of such Allegatâ—ons out of Jerome hear the same Dr. And among all these fifteen Testimonies produced by a learned Writer out of Jerome for the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters I cannot find one that doth found it upon any Divine Right but only upon the conveniency of such an Order for the Peace and Unity of the Church of God But granting some passages may have a more favourable aspect towards the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters in his other Writings I would fain know whether a Man's Judgement must be taken from occasional and accidental Passages or from designed and set Discourses which is as much as to ask whether the lively Representation of a man by picture may be best taken when in hast of other business he passeth by us giving only a glance of his countenance or when he purposely and designedly sits in order to that end that his countenance may be truly represented He adds that Jerome in his Commentaries where he expresly declares not his own mind transcribes often out of others without setting down their names c. § 9. Most dishonest therefore is the conduct of the Loyolites and of others of the Prelatists their Associats in this Matter but above all men that of D. M. who beside all this his foul dealling following Bayly the Iesuite has scarce adventur'd to lay before his Reader in â—nglish so much as one scrape or particle of what the Reform'd bring from Jerome against the Romanists and such Hierarchick Advocats which in D. M. is the most certain product of both extream Disingenuity Diffidence But so great is the power of prejudice that they stick not to sacrifice both their Credit and whatsoever else they should reckon most estimable to such Dreams as even most of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists either acted by the love of the Truth or compell'd by its Power had condemn'd We have heard how Bishop Jewel Dr. Morton the Bishop of Spalato and Dr. Stillingfleet renounce and explode so palpable an untruth And Dr. Forbes is of the same Mind yeelding that Hierome is all one with Aërius in this that Bishops by Divine Right are not at all Superior to Presbyters And that these two are intirely of one and the same Mind we have heard also granted by the most learn'd of the Romanists as Alphonsus de Castro and Medina some whereof acknowledge that none could be of another Opinion concerning them And Benedictus Justinianus and other Romanists are of the same Mind How then were all these Doctors sitting in Council to determine of this very Matter should they chastise and brand these most partial and disingenuous Dealers we have now to do with Other Hierarchicks who would not confess so much in plain Terms yet sometimes discover both their disingenuity and true Sentiments so palpably as if they had expresly made the same Confession Dr. Pearson tho' he says nothing in his own Name yet acknowledges that Hierome hath said so much for the Authority of Presbytry and endeavoured so much to establish it that he is judged to make it well nigh equal to the Episcopal Order And Bellarmine tells us that Hierome was self repugnant and knew not what he said And Petavius tho' the most pertinacious wrangler of all the Society grants that Hierome makes Presbyters well nigh all one with Bishops but not the very same saith the Jesuite or intirely their Equalls being Inferior in so much as they want the Power of Ordination And that according to Hierome's Mind meer Custome and not the Lord 's Appointment gave to the Bishops above Presbyters any Power they have either in Ruling the Church or external Government And were things brought to this pass I 'm sure they should make but small account of the sory remainder Petavius makes
the very same Officers the very same Men that he means by the name Bishops rather than e contra see Pray the Letter it self apud Flav. Vopis in Saturnino § 11. 'T were easie to shew divers succeeding Fathers to have been of Justine's Mind and Strangers to Diocesan Episcopacy ignoring all Discrimination between Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor I shall only here with one Chamier against Bellarmine and the rest of the Jesuites assert against their Successors and Defenders under whatever Name they be known that according to Irenaeus the Churches were committed to the Presbyters no less than to the Bishops that these who are now reckoned Popes High-Priests universal Bishops are only Presbyters in the Judgement of Irenaeus and that in him Presbyters are not so much as once distinguished and far less separated from Bishops From what is said appears the vanity of D. M's Popish Query Whether all things duly considered a more evident and universal Tradition for the Superiority and Jurisdiction of a Bishop above a Presbyter can be reasonably demanded and whether the Argument from universal Tradition be not in this Case the most proper and most necessary And whether the Tradition for the Superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter be not more universal unanimous and uncontradicted in the Primitive Ages than many other Traditions that are unquestionably received What these his other Traditions are we are not ignorant The Doctrine certainly of the morality of the Sabbath of Baptism and of the Holy Trinity and the like these they think lean only on Tradition and that the Institution of their Diocesan Prelats Metrapolitans and Arch-Prelats and other such Effects and Inventions of a degenerating and apostatizing Church are better founded than these most Scriptural Catholick and necessary Doctrines Section X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy AND now in the next place I would gladly learn how they will describe or whereon they can found their Romish or which is all one their Hierarchick Diocesan Bishop For as Augustine well observes it is a name of Labour and Travel not of Honour and Dignity and indeed it imports only Watchfullness Labour and Care as its most native and proper Signification and on this account only the King gets the name of Bishop in Hesychius as he gets the name of Pastor in Homer And Hesychius gives it no less to every Watchman Thus the word Bishop denotes a vigilant Watchman in Suidas where he tells us that some bearing this Name were sent by the Athenians to observe the Affairs of their subject Cities who were called Watchmen So is the same word understood to denote only Care and Labour by Jullius Pollux whereas on the other hand the word Presbyter when taken for a Function or Office natively imports Rule and Honour A Presbyter acknowledges even Saravia is a Name of Honour and was given to the more honourable and to the Magistrats among the Jews in the Old Testament and was thence transferred to signifie the Governours of the Churches of Christ in the New Testament but they are called Bishops from their watchfull Care which is a Name of Work and Labour The name Presbyter saith Dr. Stillingfleet as the Hebrew ZAKEN tho' it originally import Age yet by way of connotation it hath been looked on as a Name both of Dignity and Power among the Jews in the times of the Apostles it is most evident that the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imported not only Dignity but Power the Presbyters among the Jews having Power both of Judging and Teaching given them by their Semicha or Ordination Now under the Gospel the Apostles retaining the Name and the manner of Ordination but not conferring that judiciary Power by it which was in use among the Jews to shew the Difference between the Law and the Gospel it was requisite some other Name should be given to the Governours of the Church which should qualifie the importance of the word Presbyters to a sense proper to a Gospel state which was the Original of giving the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Governours of the Church under the Gospel a Name importing Duty more than Honour and not a title above Presbyter but rather used by way of Diminution and Qualification of the Power imply'd in the name of Presbyter c. The Hierarchicks therefore should act much more rationally if they turn'd the Tables and gave the name of Presbyter to their Diocesan and that of the Bishop to their inferiour Curats who usually do most of the Pastoral Work In the mean while it 's sure from what we just now learned out of these Authors that during sounder Antiquity before men equally abused Names and Things a Bishop could never be either ane Order or Degree or any thing else above a Prsbyter But from Names if we pass to things and look into Scripture and sounder Antiquity we shall find the ancient Bishop so different from the present Diocesan that the very Idea's and notions of the two are diametrically opposite one to another The Apostles themselves Acts 6. 2 4. following the Commandment of their Master found it their Duty so assiduously to labour in Preaching and Prayer that they thought it unreasonable to be diverted even by the Distribution of the Collections and Care of the Poor which otherwayes was a Work both lawfull and pious And to Timothy who if we believe the Hierarchicks was ane Arch-Bishop of a vast Diocess it 's injoyn'd as his proper Task to Preach the Word to be instant in season and out of season to reprove to rebuke exhort with all Long-suffering and Doctrine I need not here multiply Texts read and read over again the whole New Testament and you shall find that the Exercise of Prayer Dispensing the Word and Sacraments was the main Duty and perpetual Imployment of every Pastor or Minister of Christ. Look on the other hand to the bulk of the Hierarchick Lord-Bishops they haue a quite different Work and Exercice and if any of 'em happen to spend some time in the Ministerial Duties how are they commonly gaz'd on and depredicated as Men of extraordinary Condescension superlatively stuping to a piece of Service far below the Episcopal Grandeur and unusual to the Order Are they not then quite another thing than the Apostolick and Scripturall Bishops This Apostolick Example the Conscientious Primitive Bishops or Pastors clossly follow'd not so much as once dreaming that any who was ordain'd a Minister of the Gospell and intrusted with a Flock might on whatsoever pretext neglect to exercise himself perpetually in Prayer and Dispensing the Word and Sacraments This they judg'd his constant Imployment and this was the Practice of all the sincere Bishops even after the Distinction of Degrees was introduc'd as appears in the weekly and sometimes the dayly Homilies and Lectures of Chrysostome and Augustine which are yet extant And it 's already
have Christ's Testament And having elegantly compar'd the Scripture to Man's Testament which is able to determine every Controversie that may arise among his Children adds He who leâ—t us this Testament is in Heaven let his Will therefore be sought for in the Gospel as in a Testament for the things which you now do Christ forsaw before they came to pass The same Justice and no more do we require in the present Case we require with Cyprian that Custom or Tradition which is without Scripture tho' otherways never so Old be thrown away as mouldy Errors Let not the Hope of Emoluments secular Grandeur or Power make Men rack their Wits to Dâ—prave and Detire the Truth and despise the Apostolick Humility and Parity Then saith Chrysostome speaking of these Apostolick Times and that by way of Opposition to his own Age Church-Government was not Honour or Grandeur but Watching and Care of the Flock Seeing it's evident saith Isidorus Pelusiota how vast a difference there is between the Ancient humble Ministry and the present Tyranny Why don't ye Crown with Garlands and Celebrate the Lovers of Parity or Equality Let not the gay Pageantry of foppish Ceremonies steal away our Hearts from the simplicity of the Gospel Is such trash worth the patronizing Nay rather Let the Sword of God Theâ—'re Jerome's words cut off every thing that men without the Authority and Testimony of the Scriptures have devised and pretend as if they had it by Apostolick Tradition Let all such things be broken in Pieces called Nehustan and finally sacrific'd to Truth and Peace Whatsoever thing God commands us let 's observe to do 't and neither add thereto nor diminish from 't This I'm sure is the old Path and the good Way wherein if we Walk we shall find rest to our Souls our Peace shall be as a River and our Righteousness as the Waves of the Sea we shall Dwell together in that Brotherly Vnity which is a true Antecedent of Life for evermore And thus I can freely say is the ultimat Design of Composing and Emitting the ensuing Treatise and is and still shall be the fervent Prayer of Will. Jameson Nazianzeni THE CONTENTS PART I. SECT I. The Scope of the ensuing Treatise The ancient Church for no Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy pag. 1. The ablest of its late Patrons of no other mind where Dr. Sandersone is noted 2 An examen of the Conveniencies and Inconveniencies of Prelacy undertaken 5 SECT II. The Aphorism No Bishop no King discuss'd Prelacy contributes not a little to introduce Tyranny ibid. Prelats severall ways most hurtfull to Princes 6 Presbytry well agrees with Monarchy where their Charge of Sedition and Disloyalty is largely vouch'd to be most unjust from the most applauded Writers of our Adversaries themselves 8 SECT III. Their Argument taken from Order weigh'd Their strange Improvement thereof 17 It equally serves Prelatists and Papists Ibid. SECT IV. The Plea for Prelacy drawn from Unity discuss'd Dissentions most frequent where Bishops bore sway 18 Unity and Parity harmoniously lodged in one and the same Assembly 19 SECT V. The Argument Prelatists bring from antiquity canvass'd Ibid. SECT VI. The Instance of Aërius condemn'd by Epiphanius prov'd to be unserviceable to our Antagonists They joyn with the most disingenous of Papists in using this Argument 21 The choicest of the Fathers for the Scriptural and Apostolick Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter 22 Epiphanius giveth little Patrociny to our Adversaries 23 His Injustice to Aerius in this matter ibid. If Aerius was Arrian largely disputed the affirmative whereof is rendred improbable by the profound Silence of those who were concern'd to have mention'd it 24 The Tractate ascribed to â—â—siliu◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is judgâ—d supposititious wherein there 's nothing to be found concerning Aerius This report of Aërius his Arrianism leans on Epiphanius's testimony alone whose great Levity and Credulity is universally noted 25 It is instanc'd in his dealing with the Donatists whom on no good ground he accuses of the same crime of Arrianism 26 They 're absolv'd by Augustine and Optatus Ibid. It 's objected that Aerius his commerce with Eustathius of Schastia may give countenance to the report of Epiphanius Ibid. Eustathius tho' a Heretick yet was not Arrian but a Macedonian who seems rather to have been dangerously shaken then intirely wedded to Macedonianism Ibid. But on supposition of the worst several reasons are brought making probable that nothing can be inferrâ—d from his commerce to prove Aërius Heretick 27. The loss of the Writings of the Ancient and traduced witnesses of truâ—h is lamentable Ibid. The Judgement of Philastrius concerning Aërius related against whom the Aërians are vindicated from the Crime of Encratitism 28 They were fiercely persecuted and why 29 Between Philastrius and Epiphanius no good agreement The negative testimony of both Philastrius and Rabanus Maurus against what is delivered by Epiphanius 30 SECT VII No Diocesan Bishops in several ancient Churches This Instanc'd in the Churches of Ireland of Africk and of Scotland 30 The ablest of our Adversaries brought to a sore pinch hereby 34 Sir George M ckenzie 's Epistolary Defence of Prelacy canvassed where Bede is vindicated against the Bishop of St. Asaph and Buchanan and Hector Boethius vindicated against Spotswood to whom the Advocat referred Ibid. That we had a constitute Church before the coming of Palladius evinced against both Bishop and Advocat 38 Our Primitive Doctors why called Monks The cavills of Spotswood and the Bishop of St. Asaph removed 39 Smal power of Prelats for a long time after Palladius 40 The most memorable result of the Combat between the Advocat and the Bishop of St. Asaph Ibid. D. M.'s exceptions removed His negative argument no argument 42 â—â—â—ndel vindicated 44 D. M's perversion of Baron's clear testimony detected Ibid. He in vain attempts to deprave and then to exauctorate Prosper himself 46 Other specimens of D. M's unhandsome dealing 47 SECT VIII Prelacy opposite to the Principles of our Reformers The Hierarchy is condemn'd by our Confession 49 Knox and his fellows are proved to have been most opposite to the Hierarchick Domination 50 The Author of the Fundamental Charter of Presbytry adventures not on our special Arguments Ibid. Against whom Knox's great aversness from Prelacy is evinced by vindicating of his Letter to the Assembly 51 And by vindicating of Knox's words and actions at the Installment of John Douglas 52 And from clear and unsuspected records where 't is also evinc'd that the bulk of both Ministers and People were then opposite to Prelacy 54 This Authors cavills from the meeting at Leith 7½ and from some expressions of the Assemblies canvass'd and annihilated 56 Knox's antiprelatical judgement demonstrated from Beza's Letter which is vindicated from this Authors exceptions 60 Who pretending to make Knox a Prelatist only labours to prove him and our other Reformers self-repugnant Bablers 61 His ridiculous Sophisms examin'd and expos'd
than the rest assert that it is founded on the Example and Institution of Christ or his Apostles § 3. This Discourse therefore shall weigh the Advantages alledged to flow from Episcopacy that it may appear if it have such Effects as they Promise As also inquire if the Hurt and Dammage does not preponderat all the Good they can pretend to be linked to their Hierarchy Neither shall we neglect to examine if what the most Learned of that Perswasion bring from Ecclesiastick Antiquity be subservient to their Cause Section II. The Aphorism No Bishop No King discuss'd A Chief Argument whereby they would prove the necessity of Prelacy they bring from the great Support which they say it affords to Monarchy Hence with them No Bishop No King is an axiomatick Aphorism which cannot be readily granted seeing to name no more the charges the Hierarchy stood the King and Kingdom made a dear Bargain Much was spent in their stated Revenues but more by their clandestine Exactions and other sinistrous means of draining the Country and places of their pretended Jurisdictions throw which there are Incorporations that even at this day groan under the Debts they then contracted And yet more by sustaining Standing-forces to be Janizaries to the Prelates and their Complices and persecute the sincerer part of Protestants for else there was then no use of such numbers Yet their Maxime may be thus far granted that Prelacy may much contribute to the introduction of a Despotick and Arbitrary Government And indeed the great Power they usurped and manifold Influences they had over both Cities and Country either to wheedle or menace them to elect such Members of Parliament as pleased them and to Cajole or awe these Parliament-men to speak in their own Dialect And the being of a good number of them prime Lords of the Articles whereby they had either the mediat or immediat Flection of the rest made them well nigh able to effect no less Which kind of Government no Wise and Paternal Prince will desire § 2. Moreover that Princes have no great reason to be fond of them is apparent from their great unfitness to manage Politick and State-Affairs There are two Ways whereby one may be fitted for being a Statesman either when Natural induements are extraordinary which I doubt if many of our Prelats could affirm of themselves Or else that of Education and continued Industry whereby to be fitted for State-imployments but so far were they from any thing of this that during their greener years they had quite other Studies and Imployments being designed for the Ministry and so were obliged to prosecute hard the Study of Divinity which I am sure will give any Man his handsfull of Work who makes earnest of it From this they are taken to feed some Flock which at least will give them no less exercise Now how these Men can be fit for managing State-affairs or how they can be well kept from falling into Solecisms therein whose skill is so small is not very discernable But though they were never so well fore-armed for such high State-imployments how find they leisure to exercise them Is not the Ruling and Governing so many Ministers and Churches which they alledge themselves to be entrusted with a Work heavy enough to exercise if not to bruise any one Man Or where have they found Warrant to relinquish the Ministry and turn themselves to Offices of State when offered or to undertake both together Do they not believe that either of them is heavy enough Know they not that not only the Apostle but also the ancient Canons and to name no others these which though not truly are called the Canons of the Apostles most clearly condemn this their Practice Let neither say they a Bishop Presbyter or Deacon taken upon him any secular Business otherways let him be cast out off his Office Hence we may learn if it be out of Conscience that these Men plead for Antiquity when they palpable contemn and trample what themselves count the most venerable Precepts thereof Moreover it 's observable how they so far as their Interest led them still studied the ruine of those to whom they owed their Being as Bishops Thus the Roman Prelats studied the Ruine of both the Eastern and Western Emperours Thus the Bishops of Scotland brought no small Vexation to both King and Nobility in the Reign of Alexander the III. And so Becket of Canterâ—ury and his Faction handled Henry the II of England But worse did their Successours treat Richard the II whom in his Absence they deprived of his Kingdom It 's vain to repone that these were Papists seeing the ambition of Prelats is well enough known of whatever Name they be Yea such also have been the Practices of Prelats who acknowledged no Pope as divers of the Greek Patriarks who helped not a little to Dethrone their Emperour And the English Bishops as Sir Francis Knols complains in a Letter to Secretary Cicil encroached not a little upon the Priviledges of the Crown kept Courts in their own Name and still give out that the Complex of their Office i. e. the civil part of it as well as the other without any Distinction was not from the King but from Jesus Christ. Which Encroachments are really Imperium in Imperio On which account this their usurped Power as being dangerous and of a Romish Original was abolished in the first Parliament of Edward the VI. The Substance of what Dr. Sanderson either insinuats or more clearly expresseth in Answer hereto is that this was a Corruption in Edward 's Reformation And that some other Courts in England as well as these of the Bishops are not kept in the King's Name But sure it 's not very credible that this was a Corruption seeing nothing else since Edward's Days hath been done during the succeeding Reigns for that Church's further Reformation but 't is an odd Paradox if we consider the Author for it was Mary who Abolished this Act of Edward and restored their Power when she brought back the rest of Popery And though other Courts as he says be not kept in the King's Name yet reason teacheth and former experience proves how dangerous it was to give Ecclesiasticks ought that looks like an Absolute power and worldly Grandure whereby like the Pope they may by his Artifices arrive at length to a real Independency And indeed B. Laud made large steps towards it who as Roger Coke relates copt with the King himself and maugre both his Will and Authority must visit Colledges not as his Commissioner but by his own Metropolitan right and plumed thus saith the Author in his own Feathers all black and white without one borrowed from Caesar whereby the more he assumes to himself the less he leaves to the King he now soars higher And notable here is Dr. Sanderson's disingenuity who always gives out that the Marian Act which he still compares with yea prefers to that of Edward was
All Men agree that this Nation viz. Scotland had Palladius their first Bishop from Pope Coelestine And again thus you are instructed how to refuse these who alledge that Sedulius the Christian Poet whom Pope Gelasius so much extolls had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots for seeing even Sedulius himself lav'd in the time of Theodosius the Emperor how could he have had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots seeing there was no Arch-bishop yet ordain'd in Scotland and Palladius is without debate affirm'd to have been the first Bishop of that Nation This is yet more plainly express'd by the most learn'd Antiquaries of our Country all of them agree in this that before Palladius the Church was rul'd and guided without any Diocesan Bishops For as Fordun hath it before the coming of Palladius the Scots following the Custom of the primitive Church had Teachers of the Faith and Dispensers of the Sacraments who were only Presbyters or Monks And Iohannes Major saith the Scots were instructed in the Faith by Priests and Monks without Bishops And Hector Boethius Palladius was the first of all who exercis'd any Hierarchical Power among the Scots being ordain'd their Bishop by the Pope whereas before their Priests were by the suffrages of the People chosen out of the Monks and Culdees Add hereto the known Testimony of Buchanan and of Sir Thomas Craig To pass over saith he that most silly ' Fable of the three Archflamins and the twenty eight Flamins it 's plain that there was no Bishop in Britain before Palladius who is by the English themselves call'd the Bishop of the Scots or if either the Brittons or English have any let them name them and at what time they flourish'd § 3. Yea so clear is this Truth that the most learn'd of our Adversaries have found no better way to elude when they cannot clide it than as Torniellus in another case said of Bellarmine to endeavour the penetrating of a most firm wall and cast the History about fourty of our ancient Scotish Kings as a forg'd legend Among these is Loyd Bishop of St. Asaph but both he and Dr. Stillingfleet are nervously refuted by the learn'd Sir George Mâ—kenzie Advocat and that their main purpose and undertaking was utterly desperat he makes soon appear And tho' saith he this Author could prove that we were not settl'd here before the year 503 yet that could not answer the Argument viz. that is brought against Episcopacy from the Scotish primitive Church-government for the Culdees might have been settl'd before that time And thus in a few syllables he demonstrats that the Bishop as to his ultimat design had only his labour for his cost But Sir George being too sagacious not to foresee that from the mutual strugglings between himself and the Bishop any man might easily conclude that Presbytry was the primitive Government of the Church of Scotland and having been one of the prime Instruments to put in execution the prelatical Fury judg'd himself concern'd in credit to say somewhat in favours of Episcopacy and attempt the stoping of such an Inference Wherefore to this purpose in a Letter to the Earl of Perth prefix'd to the defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland He makes several assayes The first whereof is That this is one of the meanest Arguments that ever were us'd by a Presbytâ—rian And that it is a weak Argument saith he appears from this that I have met with very few Laicks in all our Countrey who had heard of it nor with one even of these few who had valu'd it But be it so that the Argument seem mean we gain notwithstanding a most sufficient Argumentum ad hominem seeing our ablest Adversaries value it so much yea Sir George himself clearly acknowledges this while he saith and what can the Presbyterians think of their other Arguments which they value much since this which they valu'd so little is thought of such force by a learn'd Bishop as to deserve a whole book the cutting off of 44 Kings and the offending a Nation of Friends But it 's nothing tho' the Laicks had neither valu'd nor heard it seeing as himself grants Blondel with whom join the rest of the Presbyterian Writers urg'd it Hence appears that this Argument is by both Parties judg'd to be of great force and consequence for the solution whereof the Advocat brings nothing save what is altogether unworthy of any ingenous man As for example since saith he it cannot be deni'd but that these who ordain'd our Presbyters were Bishops it necessarly follows that Episcopacy was settl'd in the Christian Church before we had Presbyters or Culdees Wherein as to the solution of our Argument which was the scope of his Letter he only begs the Question and gives us what is impertinent thereto and contradicts moreover these our Historians whose credit he so excellently vindicats seeing as we heard they plainly tell us that our ancient Anti-diocesan practice was the very custom of the primitive Church And when our Historians say that the Abbots of Icolm-kill had Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of the Province that is to be understood as Beda observes more inusitato after an unusual manner And yet he compares this practice of the Abbot to that of a King who makes one a Bishop and to the practice of a Mother who makes her Son a Church-man now if it be any strange or surprising thing for a King by his Congé d'eslire to make one a Bishop or for a Mother to educate her Son in order to be a Church-man and procure some place for him let any man judge And later Historians saith the Advocat meeting with these ambigous words in our Annals Designatus Electus Ordinatus were by a mistake induc'd to appropriat these words to the formal Ceremony of Ordination and Imposition of hands As if any man in his wit could take these words to mean any other thing than Ordination providing they be as they are in our Annals spoken of one Church-man in relation to another Moreover he knew sufficiently that the best Records of our Country expresly say that our Church was rul'd by Presbyters without Bishops and so leave not the least room for tergiversation Bede is one of these Authors who creat them so much vexation for speaking of Icolm-kill the Isle saith he still uses to have for its Rector an Abbot who is a Presbyter to whose Jurisdiction the whole Province and even the Bishops themselves after an unusual manner ought to be subject according to the example of their first Teacher who was no Bishop but a Presbyter Hence it 's clear that even in Bede's time Bishops were but of smal note here and their power much less than in other Churches They are therefore much pain'd with Bede's words and chiefly St. Asaph who amongst other odd things he excogitats tells us that the Superiority this Presbyter had
as if what any man either by Fraud or Force is made seemingly to yeeld to were to be taken for his true and genuine Sentiments I thought this kind of reasoning had been peculiar to a Spanish Inquisitor or French Converter Or that they were bad Men continues he a hard construction For then Hierome of Prague who was forc'd and so many of the choice Fathers of the Council of Arminum who were trick'd to admit in appearance something contrary to their true Sentiments shall all be bad men That the Ministers at this Convention at Leith dealt most unwarily and some of 'em also with too little integrity is beyond scruple But that all of 'em or most of 'em were poor covetous Rogues c. neither Petrie nor any of his Perswasion ever affirmed He adds that the Courts Arguments for the Leith-establiment were mainly Politick for they turn'd not Theologues to perswade Episcopacy's Divine Institution from Scripture c. Well then there was little true Piety no consulting of Conscience or the Word of God in the Matter And if some of the Ministry as he says were taken with these politick and state Reasons they in so far fell from their own Principle viz. That in the Books of the Old and New Testament all things necessary for the instruction of the Church and to make the Man of God perfect are contain'd and sufficiently express'd But the Clergy saith he had found that the new Scheme of the first Book of Discipline had done much hurt to the Church As if the old Popish Scheme under which the Churches goods by God's Law destinated for the promoval of piety and learning and sustaining of the poor were consum'd and debauch'd in upholding the grandour and luxury of a spurious ecclesiastick Nobility could have been really more profitable to the Church than that of the Book of Discipline on of the prime designs whereof was the bestowing of the Church Revenues for these their true uses to which God's Law had appointed them Or as if Pastors Schools and Poor can in no place be provided for where the Romish Church-policy is wanting But The six Commissioners saith he that treated with the State at Leith were sensible Men and far from being Parity-men Just so far from being Parity-men that most of 'em in an Assembly 1580. July 12. deliberately found and declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self He intimats that the Courts motive for the Leith-establishment could not be their desire to possess the Churches Patrimony An untruth as we have now seen too bare fac'd to need more refutation His proof hereof is of the same stamp viz. Had the Clergy fall'n so suddenly from their constant claim to the Churches Revenues did that which moved them to be so earnest for this meeting with the State miraculously slip out of their minds Seeing not the Church but the Court-politicians as is evident with desire to circumveen her chiefly procur'd that meeting and if these Delegates were either the only or first men who by sinistrous Artifices fell into a bad Compact then let him exclaim with admiration of this matter what follows is yet odder viz. Was it not as easy for the Court to have possessed themselves of a Bishoprick an Abbacy a Priory c. when there were no Bishops as when there were For he 's to be pitied if he be ignorant that the Courtiers having no Law-title thereto had no hope save under covert of their own Creatours these titular Bishops of any peaceable and secure possession of the Churches Revenues But an undoubted Assembly saith he own'd the Leith convention as an Assembly and its Authority as the Authority of an Assembly and for several years after that establishment at Leith beside which there was no other fond for owning them for Bishops Bishops were present and as such were obliged to sit and vote in general Assemblies and many Acts of subsequent Assemblies put this matter beyond all probability of ever being controverted as the Assembly in August 1574. which petitioneth the Regent that Stipends be granted to Superintendents in all time coming in all Countries destitute thereof whether it be where there is no Bishop or where there are Bishops who cannot discharge their Office as the Bishop of St. Andrews and Glasgow And that his Grace would provide qualified Persons for vacant Bishopricks But this tho' it be his prime Argument is soon removed our Church knew that divers Ministers and others had been allur'd or aw'd to that agreement She knew that 't was only made for the Interim and for the Interim only did she tolerate it with a full resolution to have a more perfect Order And as for the words In all time coming there 's not a syllabe of them in the Act he cites Nor indeed any where else of all the Acts of these Assemblies She knew also that during that Interim 't was impossible to get that which had been the Revenues of Popish Bishops other Church Rents out of the Regent and other Courtiers their hands In the mean while the vast number of unplanted Churches weakness of the Ministry in divers parts and unsettlement even unto that time of the Churches Affairs allow'd for a space the continuance of Evangelistick Superintendents or Commissioners who were to be in almost perpetual motion and travels and therefore needed much larger maintainance then did fixed Pastors which large maintainance the Church being thus strip'd of her Patrimony could not afford to the number that was needfull On these and such Grounds the Church indulged to that Convention the name of an Assembly tolerated in these Tulchans the name of Bishops And seeing they had got more Rent then was giv'n to ordinary Ministers allowed them to exercise the Labour and Travel of Superintendents or Commissioners And thus the Church made the best she might of that their unlawfull Bargain And tho' which he also objects some Assemblies allow Bishops to conveen and proceed against delinquents command Ministers by their Letters to admonish concerning persons to be excommunicated it helps him nothing seeing the very Acts he cites give no less power to Superintendents yea to Commissioners whom yet the Church used even after she had declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self So far is our Churches tolerating for a space these Tulchans from being any Argument that she believ'd not the Divine Right of Parity But how appears't saith he that our Church receiv'd the Leith Articles only for an Interim out of a dislike to Episcopacy And there were other things in the Articles which required amendment But sure these Articles were without any exception receiv'd and tolerated only for the Interim and how well these Court-bishops were liked is already made manifest and our Churches subseqnent actings declare which never rested but still wrestled against the storms of both Power and Policy untill they were sent packing 'T is true as he says the Church met with Opposition but that this was
only from these titular Bishops and Rent-gatherers to the Courtiers supported with all the might Wit and Artifice of an awfull gripping politick Regent and no few other potentand subtile Courtiers driving their own ends as has already appeared and is most evident from the best accounts now extant of these Affairs and this is the undoubted Cause why the six Collocutors at the Assembly in August 1575. think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the Question of the Function of Bishops But he who stilleth the noise of the Seas the noise of their waves having restrain'd these impetuous Tempests how cordially did our Church proceed to the utter extirpation of Prelacy Forsamekle they are the words of the Assembly holden at Dundee Anno 1580. July 12. Sess. 4. as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realme hath no sure warrant authority or good ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but brought in by the folly and corruption of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God the whole Assembly of the Kirk in one voice after liberty given to all Men to reason in the matter none opponing themself in defence of the said pretended Office findeth and declareth the samine pretended Office used and termed as is above said unlawfull in the self as having neither fundament ground nor warrant in the word of God c. And in all this our Church as she clearly here expresses did nothing save what she was oblig'd to do by her own Principle in the first Book of Discipline which affirms that all thing necessary for the instruction of the Church is contain'd in the Books of the Old and New Testament And that whatsoever is without express commandment of God's Word is to be repress'd as damnable to Salvation Our Reformers therefore except our Adversaries say which even impudence it self dare not say that they believ'd the Hierarchy to be founded on the express command of God's Word were bound by this their Principle to oppose it as a manifest corruption and according to this Principle whensoever Prelacy by force of the secular arm and fraud of serpentine policy and as one well words it by terrors and allurements crosses and commodities banishment and benefices for by other means it could never be admitted overwhelm'd this Land and discover'd the Hypocrisie or Gallio-like Disposition of many all the true Lovers of our Reformation still then had in greater or lesser measure as their love was to this truly Protestant yea truly Catholick and Christian Principle of our Reformers their Feasts turned into Mourning their Songs into Lamentation their Tears for Meat and their Harps hang'd on the Willows And now suppose that our Reformers in that unstable condition of our Church and very first rudiments of Protestancy had in some of their Doings or Saying afforded some colour or appearance either for the scruples of the curious or the quirks and cavils of the captious does not pray this most unanimous most clear and every way most unexceptionable Act of our most full and free Generall Assembly that consisted for the far greater part of the very same Men who were the Actors and Promoters of our first Reformation most fully open our Remormers their minds shew their ultimat tendency and scope and finally for ever determine the present Controversie § 8. He hath more to say of John Knox I return therefore to attend him His next Plea is with Calderwood about Beza's Letter to Knox where he denies that Beza wrote being inform'd by Knox of the Courts intention to bring in Bishops and adds that if any thing of Knox ' s Sentiments can be collected from Beza ' s Letter it seems rather he was for Prelacy than for Presbytry For Beza saith he seems clearly to import that Knox needed to be caution'd against Prelacy Beza's Words are But I would have you my dear Knox and the other Brethren to Remember that which is before your eyes that as Bishops brought foorth the Papacy so false Bishops the relicts of Popery shall bring in Epicurism to the World They that desire the Churches good and safety let them take heed of this Pest and seeing ye have put that Plague to flight timously I heartily pray you that Ye never admit it again albeit it seem plausible with the pretence or colour of keeping unily which pretence deceiv'd the ancient Fathers yea even many of the best of ' em Where Beza without giving any proof thereof clearly supposes as a thing believed by Knox no less than by himself that the Bishops whom some were then labouring to introduce into Scotland were false Bishops the relicts of Popery which had already been once driv'n out of Scotland and on this supposition as any Orators use to do from Principles common to themselves and these to whom they are speaking he admonish'd him and the rest to beware of this Plague Certain it is then if we believe Beza that he knew if by a Letter from Knox or otherwise concerns not the matter in hand that Knox judg'd the Bishops then to be introduc'd to be no others than were the Popish Bishops whom Knox and his fellow Reformers had lately expuls'd Scotland and both sorts of Bishops to be equally false and Anti-christian And now consider this Letter of Beza written near the same time with that of Knox to the Assembly and the disinterested shall soon perceive that the former explains the latter and sufficiently shews what Knox meant by the Tyranny mention'd therein Moreover whosoever finds so much against Episcopacy in Beza even tho' it had been spoken by him without any relation or respect to Knox and remembers how universal and firm Concord was between these excellent Persons Qui duo corporibus mentibus unus erant will easily conclude that Knox bore but small kindness to Prelacy § 9. He comes next to prove Knox was not for Parity Had he been saith he so perswaded how seasonable had it been for him to have spoken out so mnch when he was brought before King Edward ' s Council The Question was then put to him whether he thought that no Christian might serve in the Ecclesiastical Ministration according to the Rites and Laws of the Realm of England Yet he answer'd nothing but that no Minister in England had Authority to separate the Lepers from the whole which was a chief part of his Office Plainly founding all the unlawfulness of being a Pastor of the Church of England not only the unlawfulness of the Hierarchy which he spoke not one word about but on the Kings retaining the chief Power of Ecclesiastical Discipline As if Knox had judg'd nothing in the Church of England unlawfull but the King 's retaining the Ecclesiastical Discipline in his own hand which all Men even Episcopals no less than Presbyterians know to be an arch and palpable untruth Does not as for example our Assembly Anno 1566.
Acts 20. Philip. 1. and the like Texts which we now use that Bishop Pastor and Presbyter are all one and the same and that in one Church there were at one time conjunctly many Bishops Of the same mind are all the Systematick Divines yea even Tilen himself while Orthodox We judge saith he not only with Hierome but also with Lombard Gratian Card. Cusan and others that the preferring one out of the Colledge of Pastors to the rest and giving him the name of Bishop was a humane Invention This Author indeed alter'd his mind concerning Church Government when he pelagianiz'd for then he turns altogether tho' to his cost a Hectorer of the Zelots of the Genevan Discipline Time would fail me in collecting Testimonies of this kind seeing there were ever few I may say none save a small handfull in Britain who have not asserted that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as any distinction between Bishop and Pastor or preaching Presbyter and that among these there was an intire equality To these we may add the Testimonies of the most and famousest of the reformed Churches in their Confessions whereof we have seen not a few already while we related the Testimony of the Helvetian Confession together with the approbations thereof no less illustrious and pregnant is the Testimony of the French Consession We believe say they that all true Pastors where ever they be are endu'd with equal and the same power under that one Head Christ the Chief and Vniversal Bishop To the same purpose also speaks the Dutch Confession We believe say they that this true Church ought to be governed by that spiritual Policy so that there be in it Pastors or Ministers that may purely dispense the Word and Sacraments that there be also Elders and Deacons c. § 3. The harmonius and Catholick Testimony of all the reformed Churches are to some like pricks in their eyes and thorns in their sides and therefore most various and hetrogeneous means are used to render it unserviceable And amongst other things we are told that many forraign Divines and Churches have a great likeing for their Diocesan Way and Zanchius say they counts all its Opposers Schismaticks But Maresius answers that Zanchius never allow'd of a Lord Bishop but only of such a one who is like a Rector of a Colledge whose Power I 'm sure is little or nothing above that of a Moderator Maresius adds that he can find in no place of Zanchius the words Prideaux had alledg'd And lastly as Maresius tells us Zanchius professes that he cannot but love the zeal of such as hate the names of Bishop and Arch-Bishop fearing least with these Names the ancient Ambition and Tyranny together with the destruction of the Churches should return Prideaux also alledges that Calvin writing to the King of Poland advises him to establish Bishops and Arch-bishops But has the same return from Maresius viz. that this is the Bishop's own Dream and that there is no such thing to be found in Calvin This dealing is not very laudable Neither are Means wanting to procure Advocats from Abroad one whereof brings many things either to defend or excuse the Hierarchy and to shew that it 's not ill link'd abroad and amongst other things saith that notwithstanding of what is in the Helvetian Confession its Authors condemn not the Liberty of other Churches as they manifest in their Preface protesting that in all this Confession they agreed with the Church of England But this Author cann't be ignorant that seeing according to that Confession Christ gave equal Power to all Pastors and according to what is alledg'd to be the Judgement of the present Church of England he did the quite contrary Their Preface can by no means prove that they allow of the Sentiments and Practice of the present English Church except he would have the Preface to contradict the Confession But all this he says is only to darken an evident Truth the meaning of the Preface being that between the Helvetians and the English there was no such fundamental Difference as prohibited mutual Charity one to another which many have given and may give to these who as they judge retain'd many Errors tho' not Fundamental The same Author objects that many Churches and amongst others that of the Helvetians have either Bishops over their Pastors or which is really the same Superintendents But to instance in the Helvetians they in their Confession saying that Christ gave a like Power to all Pastors c. and therefrom concluding that none may hinder to return to Christ's primitive Institution make most apparent that they intended no continuation of any Superiority amongst Pastors and consequently of no Bistops or their equivalent Superintendents but all this work he makes is dicis gratia for the fashion only for if in Helvetia or else where there be any umbrage of Bishops or Superintendents it 's really an Obtrusion and Erastian Usurpation and this we may learn from himself freely acknowledging that the chief legislative Power in the Church matters is in the hands of the supream Magistrat Otherways he confesses that the choisest of Writers and amongst others Hoornbeck make the Discipline of the Scots French Dutch and Helvetian Churches to be one and the same Moreover he sufficiently answers himself while he expresly grants that between the Superintendents or Bishops through Germany and these of England there is an infinit difference and that these in Germany have only a simple prerogative of Order but not at all of any Jurisdiction or any thing that can be properly term'd Power Thus he And I 'm sure that any Pâ—aeses of an Assembly hath no less Superiority than he here ascribes to these transmarine Superintendents or Bishops and indeed shortly to give an account of this Author besides as we have now seen he is oblig'd to pull back with the one hand what he had bestow'd on the Hierarchicks with the other his whole Discourse leans upon this Supposition that there is no certain Form of Church Government left by Christ in his Word on this depend his Glosses upon the passages we produced of the French and Dutch Confessions Vide inter alia part spec a pag. 171 ad pag. 189 where he all along presupposes and inculcats that tho' according to the Authors of the Confessions Christ gave equal Power c. to all Pastors yet in their Judgement if the Church will she may alter this kind of Government and change that Equality which Christ gave for an Inequality and give some Pastors a Power over the rest Which if it be not a Contradiction to these Confessions in stead of an Explication it looks as like it is one Crow can be like another For who can believe but that if the Authors of these Confessions had believ'd an indifferency of Equality or Inequality of Pastors they had either intimated
so much or been altogether silent thereof neither of which they did but gave to the World solemnly as the Confession of their Belief that Christ gave to to all Pastors equal and the same power and yet if we believe this Interpreter this that Christ gave may according to the Authors of that Confession be relinquish'd when Men will and Inequality it 's quite contrary introduced in the place thereof Is not this too like the dealing of the Romanists who when they are compell'd to acknowledge that the Apostles gave the Cup to the People yet pretend that they may deprive them of what Christ and his Apostles gave them Divers indeed have said that Church Government was among the Adiaphora and things indifferent But these were more wary then to say as he would have the Authors of these Confessions to say that Christ gave equal and the same Power to all Pastors yea such used not to grant that Christ gave either Equality or Inequality of Power but left all to the Churches management Moreover as he does us no dammage so I 'm sure he does the present Hierarchicks as little service for if this Hypothesis that no kind of Church Government is juris divini stand then the jus divinum of Episcopacy is lost and therefore I 'm sure they shall give him as little thanks as we 'T is also observable that when ever the Authors of these Confessions or other Divines of their Perswasion said that Communion with Churches of a different Government was not to be broken or any thing of that kind he presently inferrs that they judg'd any other form no less agreeable to the word of God than their own And here I cann't but take nottice of what I have met with somewhere in M. Claude's historical defence of the Reformation for at present I have not the book viz. that Diocesan Episcopacy is no less condemnable than Pilgrimages Purgatories or some such Romish dotages which he there names and how averse he was from Diocesan Episcopacy is observed by the Prefacer to the English Translation and yet if we believe some he gave large Testimonies of his great affection to the Diocesan cause And this brings to mind another Artifice for when any Protestant Divines considering the great Power of Popish Bishops and vehemently desiring Peace for the free Preaching and Propagation of the Gospel strain'd their Judgement and seem'd at any time to do or say somewhat that appear'd to comply with Episcopacy our Prelatists anone Infer that such Divines were great Lovers of their Hierarchy Thus for Example they abuse the Words and Actions of Melancton but they should remember that sometimes driving the same Design some of these Divines seem'd no less to comply with the Papacy it self as appear'd at the pressing of the Interim The same end drove Melancton when in a Conference at Ausburg as Osiander relates he seem'd to yeeld somewhat of Jurisdiction to Bishops for be hop'd that if Jurisdiction were granted them they would not so much oppose the Gospel But Philip consider'd not continues Osiander that the Fox may change his hair not his Temper Melancton granted also to the Pope provided he would admit the Gospel a superiority over other Bishops founded only on humane right and yeelded for procuring of the Peace of Christendom Thus Melancton through his extream desire of Peace forc'd his own Judgement for with Luther and the rest he subscribes the Smalkaldick Articles wherein as we have heard the Scriptural Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter is most clearly asserted But what ever they say to perswade us that these or other such Divines favour them we are little oblig'd to believe it for they believe it not themselves and these of our Adversaries that speak out their mind freely tell us that all the transmarine reformed Churches are really Presbyterian It were too much I 'm sure to transcribe what D. Heylin says of this for he freely grants it and then through a whole large Folio as such bespatters with the blackest of Railings and Calumnies every one of the reformed Churches in particular No less positive is Howell who makes Calvin the first Broacher of the Presbyterian Religion And a little after Thus saith he Geneva Lake swallowed up the Episcopal See and Church Lands were made secular which was the white they levell'd at This Geneva Bird flew thence io France and hatch'd the Huguenots which make about the tenth part of that People it took wing also to Bohemia and Germany high and loe as the Palatinate the land of Hesse and the confederat Provinces of the States of Holland Yea Bellarmine being to write against Presbytry lays down in the entry as undeniable that ' t is the common doctrine of both Calvinists and Lutherans § 5. To these may be added all such as were valiant for the truths of God and stoutly oppos'd themselves to Antichrist before Luther as the Waldenses and Albigenses of whom Alphonsus de Castro relates that they deny'd any difference between Bishop and Presbyter and herein differ'd nothing from Aërius This same may be learn'd from Thuan who compares them with the English Non-conformists So far from truth was D M. when he says that these only declaimed against the corrupt Manners of the Church of Rome but never declaim'd against the subordination of one Priest unto another This same doctrine held Wicklef and his followers denying that there is any difference between Bishop and Presbyter The Waldenses and Wicklef were in this as in the rest of their Articles follow'd by J. Huss and his Adherents who also asserted that there ought to be no difference between Bishop and Presbyter or among Priests Yea so Catholick and universall hath this doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter still been that it hath all along by the Romanists been justly reck'n'd a prime doctrine of Romes Opposers Nor shall yow readily find one before Luther for of such I now speak of Truth 's Witnesses who condemn'd not all distinction between Bishop and Presbyter § 6. And even in England it self after the Reformation the famousest Bishops and lights of that Church as Hooper Latimer and others could not without great difficulty and reluctancy admitt the exercing of the Episcopal Office the using of their Priestly vestments c to be in any sense lawfull so far were they from believing a Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy But as Voëtius observes the use of it was excus'd rather than defended The first or at least the Standard-bearer among the first that either in England or any where else in the reform'd World had the brow to assert its Divine Right appear'd in the latter part of Queen Elizabeths Reign neither was he a Native of Britain but a Flemming I mean Hadrian Saravia once a Pastor in the reform'd Netherlands but as Maresius witnesses reject'd by them as being an Enemy to both their Church and State Neither was
secular Clergy who were indeed become too secular and these were the Popes Agents and Emissaries who brought the World to receive the Mark of the Beast and wonder at her For before that time the Popes found more difficulty to carry on their Pretensions both from secular Princes and Bishops but these Regulars being warranted to Preach and Administer the Sacraments without the Bishops licence or being subject and accountable to him as they brought the Bishops under great contempt so they were the Popes chief Confidents in all their treasonable Plots against the Princes of Europe And when at the Council of Trent the Bishops of Spain being weary of the insolencies of the Regulars and of the Papal Yoke design'd to get free from it The great Mean they proposed was to get Episcopacy declared to be of Divine Right which would have struck out both the one and the other But the Papal Party fore-saw this well and opposed it with all the Artifice imaginable and Lainez the Jesuit did at large discourse against it and they carried it so that it was not permitted to be declared of Divine Right And by this judge if it be likely that the Papacy owes its rise to Episcopacy The emptiness of which discourse is apparent For First The tendency and nature of Prelacy and the Topicks whereon they Found it aiming no less at one Head over all then at one Prelat over a few Churches make evident that he touches not the Argument in hand only giving out that some time by one accident or other the humbling and depression of the Prelats prov'd the Popes exaltation Secondly Strange I 'm sure and most demonstrative must the Reasons be that make null clear Matters of Fact or perswade Men that such things have never been and 't is undeniable that the Councils and other Caballs which from time to time rais'd the Pope gradually to his present hight were all consisting of or manag'd by Bishops and if any hapen'd to spurn at his rising the Pope got still far more then a plurality to crush them and indeed 't was impossible the Pope should have risen by any other means the whole sway of Church Affairs and guidance thereof being then in the hands of Bishops wherefore if the Pope was rais'd to despotick Soveraignity whereby he might absolutely dispense of Church Affairs and trample at pleasure on the fairest mitres they only are to be blamed having themselves advanc'd him to this transcendental Preheminency Thirdly Neither are the Bishops less guilty of this the Popes exaltation upon the account of their profound sloth and negligence the Author well observes that they were become too secular and indeed they were so immers'd in Luxury and Ambition that providing they might wallow in their Lusts and obtain from the Pope a Domination over other Churches they little valued any thing else Fourthly But 't is yet more admirable how he can alledge that the Regulars brought the World to receive the Mark of the Beast as if the Bishops for this he must intimat or he says nothing had been innocent he 's too learn'd not to know that gross Papal Darkness had over-spread the World ere ever any such Exemptions were giv'n or the Regulars distinguished from Seculars 'T is true indeed that the swarms of Friers were amongst the most pestiferous Locusts the World hath been pestered withall but to lay all or the greatest share of this Guilt of exalting the Pope on their shoulders is a shrewd evidence of partiality nothing being more notour then that as the Bishops were the main Assistants and Supporters in every Innovation he decreed so they with the greatest care rigour and fury press'd them on both Clergy and People Fifthly That the wicked fraternities in the several Orders of Regulars were the Popes Agents in contriving and sometimes effecting the ruine of Kings and Princes is but too well known and evident enough yet that the Prelats were no less guilty and far more efficacious herein is no less deniable Were there no Bishops supporting the Pope in his War against the Emperour Barbarossa Did not a crew of the same Cattel join him in Dethroning Henry the IV And at a word where did ever the Pope make his impresses but he was strengthn'd by their arm and support Sixthly But tho' Episcopacy at the Council of Trent had been declar'd of Divine Right what great relief had this been either from the Papal Yoak or insolencies of the Regulars it might perhaps for the time have procur'd some more Honour to the Bishops for the Pope's Italians of other Orders but might not the Pope notwithstanding by his boundless Authority and Supremacy he pretends over all Bishops have continued to gall and oppress their Order and also send especially where the negligence of Prelats invited him his Missionaries through the World yea thus the Pope's power paramount had not once been touch'd at that Council or hurt by such a Declaration Was his infallibility ever there question'd by the Bishops Did they at all endeavour the removal of the unsupportable Burdens and Slavery the Church groan'd under And should it not have been a great benefite to the Church or diminishing the Pope's power tho' his Holiness had pleased to declare the Divine Right of their Office Seventhly But whatever it was the Bishops aim'd at in the Council of Trent I 'm not much concern'd only I would gladly know how from this their Action it follows that Bishops had never been the Men or Episcopacy one of the means whereby the Papacy had been brought into the World which is the Author's Inference and is just as one should reason thus some of Alexander's Macedonian Souldiers vex'd with his tyranny and insolence and his preferring of Strangers attempted his down-throw the like may be said of some of the Souldiers of Julius Caesar Galba Didius Julianus Maximinus and others therefore they had not contributed to the raising and absolute Supremacy of these Princes And should not such an one be reckon'd an admirable Logician And yet this Inference should be far more pardonable than the former in so much as the thing the Bishops aim'd at against the Papacy if it can be call'd any thing came infinitely short of what these Conspirators attempted upon the powers they deem'd unsupportable And by this judge if the most earnest efforts of their chiefest Authors make it in the least improbable that the Papacy owes its rise to Episcopacy and if such pitifull paralogisms proclaim not that they can really find nothing wherewith to cover Prelacy from the heavy but just imputation of being the certain introductive of Popery § 6. This odd reasoning of the Doctor minds me of another of his of his Essayes or Retorsions which is of Kin to this Argumentation May not one saith he that quarrells a standing Ministry argue on the same Grounds a Ministers Authority over the People gave the rise to the Authority Bishops pretend over Ministers and so the Minister will
fear him the more for whomsoever the Lord of the House sends to Govern it we ought to receive him as him that sends him Let us manifest that we ought to receive the Bishop as the Lord. And again in the same Epistle thus I know who I am and to whom I write I 'm condemn'd ye live in Peace I 'm in danger ye sure ye are a Passage to these who are slain in the Lord The Condisciples of Paul sanctifi'd and made Martyrs worthy blessed under whose footsteps let me be found when I enjoy God And to the Magnesians Because I was found worthy to see you in your Bishop Damas and your worthy Presbyters Bassus and Apollonius and my Fellow servant the Deacon Sotion whom let me enjoy because he 's subject to the Bishop as to the Grace of God and to the Presbyters as to the Law of Christ. And again Study to do all things in the Concord of God the Bishop presiding in the Place of God the Presbyters in the Place of the Confession of the Apostles and my most sweet Deacons having committed to their Charge the Service of Christ. And within a few lines Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father being one with him neither by himself nor by his Apostles so do ye nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters And to the Philadelphians So many as belong to God in Christ Jesus these remain with the Bishop And in the same Epistle I cryed in the midst of the Congregration I spoke with a loud voice take heed to the Bishop the Presbytry and the Deacons Some-body thought that I spoke these things foreseeing a Division but he in whom I am bound bears me witness that I had this knowledge from no Man bnt the spirit preached saying without the Bishop see ye do nothing And in his Epistle to the Trallesians Whom I Salute in fullness and an Apostolick Character And again For when ye are subject to the Bishop ye seem not to Walk according to Men but according to Jesus Christ. And in an other place of the same Epistle And in like manner let all Men reverence the Deacons as the command of Jesus Christ and the Bishop as Jesus Christ who is the Son of the Father and the Presbytry as the Council of God and Senat of the Apostles without which there is not a Church and thus I counsel you to esteem of them for I have gotten an Example of your Charity and retain the same with me in your Bishop whose very composition is a great deal of Discipline and his mansuetude Power whom I believe the very wicked reverence And afterward in the same Epistle Can I not write unto you Heavenly Things But I sear that I should thereby endammage you being but Children and forgive me least not being able to comprehend them you be strangl'd For I am not bound in every respect but can be able to know things Heavenly the Orders of Angels their Constitutions Principalities things visible and things invisible And again Thus shall it be unto you if ye be not Proud and remain unseparable from God the Bishop and Apostolick Orders And again in the same Epistle Farewell in Christ Jesus if ye be subject to the Bishop as to the command of God and in like manner to the Presbytry But I 'm weary and did never translate more of any Author with less delight or pleasure not because I 'm in the least gravell'd by what is here said concerning Bishops altho' the whole strength of what the Episcopals deduce from Ignatius be wrapt up in these Passages yea I 'm perswaded that from these very Places the Hierarchy's wounded under the fifth Rib. But because the most part of what we have quoted as also no small part of what is behind is altogether insulfe putide and more tasteless than the white of an Egg and the Reader may easily perceive by these Examples that the Spirit and genius of this Author is quite different from what can be looked for in Ignatius a prime Martyr of the primitive Church In all these Epistles 't is clear as the Noon-sun that a head-strong Passion and a furious Zeal of enslaving all Christians under an illimited and blind Obedience to all Church-men as so many Romish Holinesses did intirely possess and reign in the Author of these Epistles The Apostle indeed sometimes admonishes the Churches of the Duties and Esteem Christians should pay to Church-Officers but withall uses but rarely to handle that Subject and with the brevity and modesty that became him ascribing to them only the Titles of Watch-men and Labourers Bishops or Pastors and the like which best became the simplicity of the Gospel whereas on the other hand the pretended Ignatius so far swerves from this humble and Apostolick strain that none tho' they search the Writings of the most corrupt Ages shall be able to find any that in exaltation of the Clergy and depressing and subjecting of the Laity out did him How secure should Basilides and Martial two Spanish laps'd Bishops have been had their Flocks believed this Ignatian Doctrine who having consulted Cyprian If they might not desert these and chuse new Bishops were by him resolved in the affirmative and admonish'd to chuse other Pastors but had they believ'd this pretended Ignatius it had been with them the blackest impiety to have separated from their Bishop or attempted so to do on whatsoever account The Apostles frequently both to Pastors and Churches inculcat the diligent perusal and understanding of the Holy Scriptures as a special Duty that by them as a sure Rule all Mens Doctrines and Injunctions without any exception may be tryed but in liew hereof this their Ignatius has only Mens Persons in admiration perpetually deafening his Hearers or at least wearying his Readers with Injunctions of absolute and blind Obedience as if all and every one of his Bishops Dictats were to be receiv'd without the least Examination a Priviledge that even Christ and his Apostles tho' they might have done it never assumed to themselues but still remitted their Hearers to the Scriptures for the tryal thereof this cann't but in the estimat of all the judicious be a Fault altogether unworthy of the True Ignatius I hope that all honest Men shall give more Charity to this choice Martyr than to believe that he 's guilty of so gross Idolatry for I can call it no better and fantastick and impious doting on the person of any Man whatsoever in which unworthy Work this Author I will not say Ignatius spends no smal part of these Epistles Therefore altho' the asserting of all therein to be genuine be so far from assisting our Adversaries that their Cause is by the very Passages they alledge for its confirmation mortally wounded I can never perswade my self but they have fall'n into the wicked hands of Forgers who tainted with the common Vice of the Ages subsequent
all the esteem their alone § 2. Doctor Field tells us That these were not Lay-Elders Neither as they themselves well know do we so term them but did as the Ancients reckon them among the Ecclesiasticks And we assert that these very Lay-Elders as he calls them are understood by Hilary For first this Practice of the Christian Church is by Hilary deduced from the Synagogue wherein there were Elders distinct from the Doctors or Pastors Secondly He attributes to the Elders as their Office only the Power of Consulting and Deciding as being Assessors to the Doctors in the management of Church-Affairs without intimating ought of their Power to dispense the Word and Sacraments Thirdly He expresly distinguishes them from all Doctors or Teachers of the Church and therefore excludes them from all Power of Preaching or Administration of the Sacraments But Doctor Field saith that Ambrose by the name of Teachers whose sloth and pride he condemneth in this place might fitly understand the Bishop seeing none but Bishops have Power to preach in their own Right and others but only by Permission from them But this Answer supposes that the time was when Bishop Teacher and Doctor were reciprocal Terms and that whoever had the Charge of never so small a Flock was the Bishop thereof for who can believe that ever any receiv'd the Charge of a Flock to whom he was only to preach and dispense the Sacraments as a Journey-man to another Lastly When Hilary speaks in the preterit Tense that the Church had such tells that their Office consisted in being Assessors to the Teachers and says that the use of these was laid aside he clearly intimats that the Elders he speaks of were well nigh abolished and then scarce in Being Which by no means can be said of the preaching Presbyters For let Bishops be not only as proud as Dr. Field would have them but even as Lucifer himself yet most certain it is that long after Hilarie's time the Bishops in all weighty Affairs used at least to consult the Presbyters and that both then and still afterward preaching Presbyters were existent But herein I will not inlarge See their Glosses of both Scriptures Fathers whereby we vouch this Matter removed to name no others by Didoclavius to which I find nothing replyed This clear Proof that there were in the primitive Church other Elders distinct from those preaching Presbyters who in the time of the Apostles not much distant from that of Ignatius were dignifi'd with the name of Bishop furnisheth us with an Answer sufficient alone to solve whatsoever they can deduce from these Epistles Their only Argument is that Ignatius distinguishes between Bishop and Presbyter why then by Bishop may we not understand a Pastor of one Congregation and under the name of Presbyter a Ruling Elder They can only repone that Ignatius mentions but one Bishop of any City he wrote to which yet required more than one Pastor But one Man may be called the Bishop or Pastor of such a place altho' he be placed in a Colledge where a Plurality equally participats of the pastoral Charge and Honour and that this Answer may please them the better I shall give them Ignatius for my Patron herein who writing to the Romans expresly termeth himself Bishop of Syria to whose Charge even our Adversaries being Judges Antioch only one City thereof was committed 'T is moreover certain and granted by our Adversaries that there was even in one City frequently a Plurality of Bishops But tho' 't were yeelded that neither Scripture nor Antiquity favour these Ruling Elders and therefore that these Ignatian Presbyters must be something else we are yet where we were § 3. Our inquiry is after a Diocesan Bishop we 're sent to Ignatius to find him but all after the strickest search we meet with is only a Bishop or Pastor of one single Congregation as these ensuing Places proclaim Let none saith he do any of these things that ought to be practised in the Church without the Bishop let that Worship be counted Lawfull that is performed by him or which he at least has permitted wheresoever the Bishop is there let also the Multitude be present even as where Christ is there is also the Church it is not lawfull either to Baptize or Celebrate the Lord's Supper without the Bishop but whatsoever he alloweth that is acceptahle to God that whatsoever is done may be established From which Passage it 's evident that Ignatius supposes and allowes one of these Bishops to each particular Flock or Congregation without whose Presence the Word and Sacraments were not to be dispensed and altho' he adds that in some Case his Allowance or Approbation did warrant the practising thereof yet I 'm sure none can Infer any thing therefrom except that at some rare times when the Bishop happen'd to be absent from his particular Flock which uses to fall out to every particular Pastor another approved by him might untill his return to his Congregation discharge his Office And again Let there be saith he frequent Gatherings of your selves together or Congregations Inquire thou speaking to Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna or seek after every Man by his Name neglect neither servants nor hand-maids From whence it 's clear that this Ignatian Bâ—shop was particularly to be acquainted with and have particular Inspection of every one who was under his Charge which I'm sure cannot be easily performed by a Diocesan Bishop but is proper only to a Pastor of a particular Congregation or who can forbear to conclude as much from another Passage of the same Author where he saith Whosoever is not within the Altar is deprived of the Bread of God for if the Prayers of one or two have so much efficacy of how much weight must these be that are put up by the Bishop and the whole Church Sure I am the genius and ayr of this Passage proclaims Ignatius speaking of such a Bishop or Pastor as is under a Tye reciprocal between him and one particular Flock or Congregation And again In obedience to the Bishop break-Bread which is the Medicine of Immortality Neither is he a greater Friend to Diocesan Prelacy while he admonisheth the Church of Philadelphia in these words Children of the Light and of the Truth fly Divisions and Corrupt Doctrines and wherever the Pastor viz. the Bishop is thither you as Sheep follow him And again One Flesh of our Lord Iesus Christ and one Cup in the Vnion of his Blood one Altar and one Bishop Add to all this that Ignatius every where in these Epistles speaks to and of the Bishop as a correlative of and with respect unto the People or Flock and not Presbyters or inferiour Pastors as the proper Object of his Episcopal Office Seeing then all the Pastors of any Church he writes to might equally be term'd Bishop or Pastor of such a place seeing whatsoever he saith to or of Bishops hath
as that of Planting the first Christian Churches Lastly I appeal to all Protestants if his ascribing to every Bishop a Power of authorative preventing of Heresies i. e. a Power of making Canons that lean only on the Bishop's own Will and which he 's not oblig'd to prove from Scripture otherwise every Minister of Christ hath a Power and Authority by publick preaching and reasoning from the Word of God to prevent and overthrow Heresies and so D. M. speaks not to the purpose hath not a rank savour of what is no better than the grossest of Popery The Romanists give such an authoritative Power to one Pope but from a perswasion of his Infallibility this Author will have it unto every single Bishop tho' as yet he has not adventured to ascribe to each of 'em such a Priviledge and to explain if need were what he means by this authoritative preventing of Heresies § 2. Look but on page 95 et seq and you shall see him make every Bishop an Apostle in the strickest sense and priviledg'd with no less Power over the Church-Officers and People in his Diocess than an Apostle ever had or could exercise viz. a Power to Govern the Churches to give Rules and Directions to inflict Censures to communicat his Authority to others to hear Complaints to decide Controversies to Confer the Holy Ghost viz. the Gifts of the Holy Ghost that must needs attend the authoritative Ministry of holy Things and therefore that the Office of an Apostle is altogether ordinary and permanent The Apostolical Office saith he being essentially no other than this the ordinary Necessities of the Church require that it should continue till the second coming of our Saviour But the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost the Power of Miracles of Languages were only extriasick Advantages and not peculiar to the Apostles And to affirm otherwayes and say that the proper Apostolick Office is now ceased he makes proper to Presbyterians and Socinians But so far is he from speaking Truth here that the ceasing of the proper Apostolick Office and Power is asserted by the Body of Protestants even Episcopal no less than Presbyterian in opposition to the Jesuites his Masters who as he doth to his Diocesan Bishop arrogate an Apostolick Office and Power to their Pope Spanhem F. a fervent Apologist of the Hierarchicks assigns many Characters of the Apostolate as an extraordinary Calling either immediat or equivalent thereto Infallibility of Doctrine transcendent Efficacy and energy in Preaching admirable success therein the Gift of Tongues and of working Miracles all which things altho' some of 'em might have been in some measure in others were saith he in a more Divine and Eminent manner in the Apostles And he affirms that every one who was endued with a true and proper Apostolick Power had and could give such visible Proofs and ocular Demonstrations thereof and then concludes against the Pope thus let the Pope now descend from the Capitol let him as did the Apostles declare that he has the Gift of Tongues Divinely infused let him bring visibly the Gifts of the Holy Ghost from Heav'n let him work like the Apostles such illustrious Miracles and then we shall yeeld that he has Apostolick Authority and so shall we to the Diocesans when they adduce these Proofs of their Apostleship He asserts that they 're much deceiv'd who would bring the Apostles down to the Order of particular Bishops and demonstrats against Hammond that they were not at all call'd Apostles on the account that they were Bishops consequently that Apostle and Bishop are quite different things In short the very Sum and Substance of Spanhemius his Disputation is nothing save an Approbation and Confirmation of that common Sentiment of Protestants express'd by Beza The Churches saith he being once constitute this Office of the Apostle-ship was of necessity taken away he is a Tyranne therefore who does now profess himself an Apostle in the Church by Succession And by this one Observation viz. that whereever the proper Apostolick Power was they could give ocular and undeniable Proofs and Demonstrations thereof the Protestants for ever silence and baffle the Jesuites and their Progeny D. M. and such Companions ascribing a Power properly Apostolick to their Roman Antichrist and their Diocesan Prelats and fully remove all thier Quibbles on this Theme as Dr. Scot's Quirk the Substance whereof is there 's no mention in Scripture of the taking away of this Apostolick Office and therefore it yet remains But I forgot that for the permanency of a Power properly Apostolick D. M. cites Mat. 28. 20. And lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World As if not to mention Protestants even the more ingenuous Romanists as Lyra did not understand this place of Christ's assistance given to all Doctors of the Church without any Discrimination Moreover all his Exceptions and pretended Instances to the contrary are impertinent and severals of 'em false in matter of Fact as for Example nor is it necessary saith D. M. to make up an Apostle that he be immediatly call'd to the Apostolate by our Saviour for Matthias was not immediatly ordain'd by our Saviour but by the Apostles But Spanhemius tells these Jesuites that the Lot that fell upon Matthias was really the voice of God no less than was that of the Division of Canaan of the Scape-goat c. And indeed as I said that the Office and Power properly Apostolick is long since ceas'd is the common Doctine of Protestants as Calvine None saith Sadeel against Turrian the Jesuite but he who is an Ignoramus in Divinity will confound an Apostle with a Bishop I assert therefore that God's immediat calling and choosing to preach the Gospel is essential to the Office of an Apostle But these say you were Presbyterians I deny 't not however they were then pleading the common Cause of Protestants and were never opposed herein by any save down-fight Papists only till that now we have to do with real Jesuites who yet mask themselves and will not acknowledge the name In the mean while I do not think they 'll say Spanhemius Fil. is a Presbyterian nor yet Nilus ' Bishop of Thessalonica who saith the Pope is not an Apostle the Apostles did not ordain other Apostles but only Doctors and Teachers Of this mind is also Willet Bellarmine saith Whitaker seems to say the Pope succeeds Peter in his Apostle-ship but none can have Apostolick Power but he who is properly and truly an Apostle for the Power and Office of an Apostle constitute an Apostle But that the Pope is neither truly nor properly an Apostle is prov'd by these Arguments whereby Paul proves his Apostle-ship as that he was not call'd by Men c. Gal. 1. 1 and 12. and Ephes. 3. 3. and 5. 1 Cor. 9. 1. Altho' saith Sutlivius the ancient Bishop of Rome succeeded Peter in Doctrine
some whole Peoples readily imbraced the Christian Religion Behold Reader how plainly and fully Eusebius relates the thing we plead for viz. that those Officers were altogether extraordinary unfixed and temporary § 5. Wretch'dly therefore does D. M. castrat this full and plain discourse while he only says that an Evangelist in the Notion of Eusebius was a Person that preached the Gospel to those that had not heard of it or resisted it and thus dissembles the whole matter in question which Eusebius clearly determines And according to this Relation of Eusebius 2 Timothy 4. 5. he is enjoined to do the Work of an Evangelist and never made a long stay at one place for even after the time of his pretended Ordination to the Bishoprick we find him not rarely with the Apostle Paul as his Attendant or Fellow Labourer which not only his joint Superscriptions to the second Epistle to the Corinthians and these to the Philippians Colossians both his Epistles to the Thessalonians and to Philemon but also the long Journeys and Peregrinations wherein we find Timothy still imployed irrefragably make manifest for after he is supposed to have been Bishop of Ephesus he was accompanying Paul in his Voyages Acts 20. 4. and was with him Prisoner at Rome as is probable from Philippians 1. and 1. Heb. 13. 23. as also frequently imployed in long Voyages to several Churches and that in Businesses which could not be expeded in a day as is evident 1 Cor. 4. 17. 1 Cor. 16. 10. Philip. 2. 19. Heb. 13. 23. 2 Tim. 4. 21. So that if he was Bishop of Ephesus he will prove a sufficient Patern for non-residence Most of which things may be supposed of Titus whose frequent long Journeys are mentioned by the same Apostle Yea they have just as good ground in 2 Tim. 4. 10. to fix Titus his Episcopal Chair in Dalmatia which was the Fancy of Aquinas and others as they can ever shew for their dream of its being among the Cretians And indeed the very Phrase from which they gather the Prelacy of Titus as we have already observed of Timothy gives real ground to conclude the contrary For this Cause saith he I left thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in Order the things that are wanting and ordain Elders From which place any ingenuous Man shall be compell'd to inferr that Titus was only left there to supply some present want and to return again much rather than that he was the fixed Arch-Bishop of Crete § 6. It 's amazing then that in defiance of so clear Antiquity yea and so clear and full Scripture evidence some dare to transform Timothy and Titus unto ordinary and fixed Officers why they see that among the ordinary and fixed Church-Officers they cannot find what they covet the Scriptures making Bishop Pastor and Presbyter one and the same but yeelding no place to their Diocesan Bishop a Lord and Ruler over other Bishops or Pastors They are compell'd therefore in imitation of the Romanists who degrade the Apostle to find the Bishop of Rome and Antioch just so to handle the Evangelists that Peter be not alone but may find other degraded Companions if he shall by chance in his Journey from one of his Sees to another visit Crete or Ephesus § 7. But more strange is that most precarious Assertion of D. M. that Philip the Evangelist had no Power of Ordination But it 's yet more admirable how to establish Timothy a Bishop he can adduce the eleventh Act of the Council of Chalcedon surely had he read the learned Stillingfleet who hath for ever baffl'd them in this their Allegation he had blush'd at the very mentioning thereof And we learn from Hierome that Titus after he had given some Instruction to the Churches of Cret◠was to return again to the Apostles and to be succeeded by Artemas or Tychicus for comforting of these Churches in the absence of the Apostle Judge Reader if Hierome thought Titus was fix'd Arch-Bishop of Crete It 's questionable saith Chrysostome if the Apostle had then constituted Timothy Bishop there for he saith that thou might'st charge some that they teach no other Doctrine Thus he without a word more for solution of this his Doubt Judge therefore if from the very Scripture whereon alone they would found Timothy's being Bishop of Ephesus he really concludes not the quite contrary Doctrine It 's doubtfull saith a most earnest Prelatist Salmeron the Jesuit if Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus for altho' he preach'd and ordain'd some to the Ministry there it follows not that he was the Bishop of that place for Paul preach'd also there above two years and absolv'd the Penitents and yet he was no Bishop Add that now and then the Apostle call'd him away unto himself and sent him from Rome to the Hebrews with his Epistle And in the second Epistle he commands him to come to him shortly Timothy was also an Evangelist of that Order Eph. 4. He gave some Apostles c. So that Dorotheus says in his Synopsis that Timothy preach'd through all Grecee but he stayed at Ephesus not to be Bishop but that in the constitute Church of Ephesus he might oppose the false Apostles c. It appears therefore that he was more than a Bishop altho' for a time he preached in that City as a Pastor and ordain'd some to the Ministry Hence it is that some call him Bishop of Ephesus And to conclude this matter the celebrated Stilling fleet ingenuously grants that Timothy and Titus were no fixed Bishops or Pastors but Evangelists notwithstanding saith he all the opposition made against it as will appear to any who will take an impartial survey of the Arguments on both sides § 8. As for the Apocalyptick Angels tho' with Beza we should affirm that by one of 'em one single Moderator is mean'd we yeeld them nothing but e contra cut the sinews of their Argument With this D. M. ingages not only he calls the Alterableness of the Moderator which Beza holds as defensible ridiculous which is said without proof and tho' it were so touches not the marrow of our Answer But they shall find their Foundation yet weaker for such a structure so soon as they shall with attention read over the contexts of the place now in Controversie The seven Stars which are the seven Angels are said to be held in God's right hand whereby without peradventure is signified the great care our Lord had of the Pastors of these Flocks in order to the promoting of the great Gospel-Design the gaining of Souls to himself But Bishops I mean Diocesans as such and distinct from other Pastors are not at all Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments by whom mostly this Gospel-design is effected Moreover how few should they be to whom this care was extended and how small comfort should the bulk of the Labourers in the Word and Doctrine be able to reap from the
Ephesus alone is not only so clear from the 17 verse that the repeating of the word Ephesus would really prove a redundancy wherefore the Syriack omits it in the former part of the verse and expresses it in the latter and called for the Elders of the Church of Ephesus but also all the Ancients either affirm as Hierome or suppose that these Elders belonged only to Ephesus which even Dr. Maurice yeelds against Dr. Hammond and says that then properly speaking there might not be a Bishop amongst them all for they are Presbyters belonging not to several Congregations but to one Church and might have a Bishop But not only the promiscuous attributing to them the Names Bishop and Presbyter their being and that without any insinuation of their Subjection to a superiour Bishop enjoin'd by the Apostle to Oversee and feed the Flock and finally the very Repetition of this Fiction of their Hierarchy in the Apostolick Age sufficiently refute it Who continues he the Ancients thought was Timothy And thus all resolves into the fictitious Episcopacy of Timothy already overthrown Now 't is observable how they contradict one another and by halfs acknowledge to be false all they plead for for some as Dr. Maurice perceiving that the Ancients affirm and the Scriptures proclaim all these Elders to belong to the Church or City of Ephesus acknowledge these could be no Diocesan Bishops Others as Dr. Hammond in locum alibi and Petavius seeing that these are not only dignifi'd with the name of Bishop but intrusted with the care of the Flock and that without Paul ' s mentioning of any superiour Bishop when if ever there was ground to have mention'd him yeeld that of necessity these Elders must be Bishops or more than simple Presbyters Whence is all this Contradiction and Confusion of Tongues but from the force of Truth before which Men must either bow or break and be compell'd tho' after never so much interpolation and disguise to express what they would fainest conceal The matter is their Diocesan Bishop their simple Presbyter their distinction between Bishop and Presbyter are meer Antiscriptural Figments in the sustaining of which against this and the like Scriptures they are obliged to confront one another and in the throng of their blunderings intirely yeeld the Controversie § 2. The same line of confusion runs along their Answer to Philip. 1. 1. with the Bishops and Deacons c. whence 't is clear that there were in one City many Bishops who were no other thing than Presbyters and that these were no distinct Orders the Deacons being immediatly subjoin'd these were the Bishops of the several Cities of Macedonia under Philippi the Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond in locum 't is denied by Dr. Maurice I could never find reason saith he to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Philippi was a Metropolis because a Colonie saith Dr. Hammond but that this will not follow is acknowledged by Dr. Maurice Thus they are still by the ears But saith Dr. Hammond the Apostle might retain the Episcopal Power in his own hands and tho' absent might exercise it by Letters but they can give no ground why the like may not be said of the Apostle in reference to the rest of the Churches and so Timothy and Titus shall be dethron'd and our Adversaries endeavouring to Answer one of our Arguments loss two of their own yea all of them for it being no less presumable that John would keep the Episcopal Power over the Churches of Asia in his own hand then that Paul kept that of Philippi there shall be no ground nor colour to Metamorphose the Apocalyptick Angels into Diocesan Bishops Or it 's possible continues Dr. H. that then the Bishop's Chair was vacant But if so and a Diocesan so necessary as they pretend without peradventure the Apostle had not only mention'd it but also spent some part of his Epistle in directing and giving them Rules in order to their choice of a fit Successour Or the Bishop saith he might be absent and Epaphroditus by the Ancients judged Bishop of Philippi appears to have been then with Paul But this Dream of Epaphroditus his being Bishop of Philippi the Doctor in that very place condemns and overthrows and so frees us of further trouble about it § 3. Yea in none of these Answers does Dr. H. rest but as is said in this pretext that Philippi was a Metropolis over many subject Bishops leaning mainly on Acts 16. 12. whose Arguments were examined by Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Clerkson Dr. Maurice tho' a grand Enemy to Hammond's grand Principle undertakes notwithstanding the defence of some of these Arguments against the latter but medles not with the former and saith that Beza ' s Manuscript hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath also the Syriack and Arabick But OEcumenius and Theophilact and even Chrysostome yea and the received Greek Copy which Translators generally follow read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But seeing as the learned Stillingfleet demonstrats Philippi was not then a Metropolis in the Civil sence which is the Foundation of all their Structure 't is impossible that it can be call'd by Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first in respect of Dignity but only either must be mean'd as Luke may well be understood that it was the first Colony they mett with coming from Samothrace or in respect of Situation it being scarce within the Bounds of the proper Macedonia but on the Thracian side of the River Strymon the Boundary between Thrace and Macedonia yet it might be nearer to the proper Macedonia than was Neapolis and therefore is rather to be reckon'd a part of that Country than Neapolis could be wherefore on both at least certainly on one of these accounts appears the nullity of Dr. Maurice his Answer while he says that not Philippi but Neapolis was the first in Situation Of the same kidney is his saying that Philippi might be more considerable in Luke ' s time than in the time of P. Aemilius seeing this is a mean begging of the Question for he brings nothing from any Records which a Matter of this kind requires to make in the least probable the growth of Philippi between the time of Aemilius and Luke and Chrysostome speaking of Luke's time tells us that it was no great City Moreover Dr. Stilling fleet ex abundanti clearly shews through the several periods of time that Philippi was of no greater Dignity in the time of Luke than in the time of P. Aemilius Dr. Maurice adds as a proof of Philippi's Metropolitan-ship in Luke's time that the Bishop of Philippi is mention'd as Metropolitan in Liberatus the Council of Ephesus Sedulius and in an old Notitia To which I Answer with Dr. Stillingfleet in the like Case But what validity there is in such Subscriptions or Allegations in the latter end of the
the Menaces utter'd in the Old Testament against Tyre and her King had for their Object Parmenianus the schismatical Bishop of the Donatists who lived at Carthage that had once been a Tyrian Colony but in the time of Parmenianus was inhabited by Romans who had either quite extirpated or expelled thence the whole Race of the Tyrians With no less lightness but more danger did Justine Martyr long before Optatus endeavour to perswade the Gentiles that all Mankind were Partakers of Christ because they were Partakers of Reason and Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which also signifies Reason Where we see that Justine leans only on a pitifull Equivocation the deceit of which could not be unknown to him who natively spoke Greek Neither were Origenes Methodius and others as Hierome witnesseth more solide in their Writings Yea Hierome himself distinguisheth between Progymnasticks and Dogmaticks alledging that in the former of these a Disputant hath liberty to muster up many Arguments in which he hath no confidence § 4. To these we may add both their Homilies and Expositions wherein it 's not easily determined when they spoke their own minds or when they gave us only Transcripts of others to believe and defend which they held themselves but little obliged Yea Hierome oftner than once tells us that it was the common Practice of the Writers of these times to give the Expositions of others and yet conceal the names of the Authors and so involve the Reader and make him take for their judgement the things they never believ'd § 5. If we search into the causes of so strange dealing we have heard out of Hierome that one of 'em was meer sloath and neglect See much more to this purpose in Dallaeus de usu Patrum Another Cause why they both spoke wrote and practised otherways than they knew could be warranted by Scripture was their unjustifiable Compliance with both Jews and Pagans good perhaps intentionally being out of design the better to Proselyte them but eventually proved as unhappy as its Practice was unwarrantable and destitute of Scripture ground Hence their Deacons were named Levites their Bishops Priests and High-Priests the Lord's Table the Altar and the Lord's Supper a Sacrifice and at length Diocesan Bishops and Arch-Bishops were instituted in imitation of the Pagan Flamines and Protoflamines Another Cause thereof which especially takes place in their Homiles and Expositions was the multitude of Alterations and Corruptions well grown before any of these Homilies and Commentaries we now enjoy were extant these were too deeply rooted to be opposed and therefore they believed themselves under a kind of necessity to accommodat their Comments and Declamations thereto at least so to temper and compose them that they should not thwart therewith Of this sort of Conduct we have a clear instance in Augustine who sometimes commends and praises several unscriptural Ceremonies But elsewhere speaking his Mind more freely disapproves them as both unwrantable and burdensome He indeed there intimats that some things commonly observ'd throw the World tho' they were not written yet might be kept as having come from the Apostles or general Councils such as was the Observation of the Lord's Passion Resurrection and Ascension But even this as is most probable he yeelded out of humane Weakness and Fear to oppose the then prevailing Innovations for the needlesness of such preterscriptural Observations he evidently declares elsewhere saying that all things which belong either to Faith and Manners are plainly contain'd in Scripture From all which is clear that we cannot at all be sure if the Fathers Commenting on the places in hand either knew their true meaning or if they did sincerely gave us what themselves believed § 6. And that in their Explications of these Texts we have not their genuine Sentiments is to me evident First because they gave such Reasons of their Exposition as the greatest Prelatists count stark nought Thus Bellarmine rejects and overturns the Grounds of every one of these Expositors in particular except these of Chrysostome only who yet hath nothing of any moment above the rest for Chrysostome exponing Philip. 1. 1. alledges only in defence of his Exposition that the sole Title and Name of Bishop was common to both Orders but this is refused by Dr. Hammond and others and as we shall hear by Chrysostome himself But the Jesuite intending to retain that Exposition thought himself obliged to embrace some of their Defences whereas in truth they themselves never believ'd them to be solide but only the growing Corruptions being too strong to be opposed and some of 'em having got an Episcopacy which was then creeping in and which they depending on the Churches Authority thought they might retain they believ'd that for the fashion they might so gloss the Scriptures whereby Episcopacy is wounded that the People should not perceive the unwarrantableness thereof Secondly The main ground common to all these Expositions why they expone any of these Texts as if they condemn'd not a Diocesan Bishop is a sufficient evidence that they were far from being in earnest in their Glosses for they still alledge that there behoved to be a Bishop above these Bishops in Philippi whom Paul salutes because there might not be Plurality of Bishops in one City This Practice indeed was for the most part current in this time tho' not universal as we learn from Epiphanius informing us that even in these times there used to be a Plurality of Bishops in one City Yet quite contrary to this Text which they either carelesly or timourously shuffl'd They judged saith Dr. Stillingfleet the Practice of the Apostles by that of their own times as is evident by Theodoret and the rest of the Greek Commentators assigning that as the reason why the Presbyters spoken of in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus were not Bishops in the sense of their Age because their could be but one Bishop in a City And Petavius grants that many true Bishops were sometimes at once in one City And altho' the Episcopal Order be of Divine Right yet at 's not of Divine Right that there should be only one Bishop in one City this was only brought in by the Authority of the Church and Councils and accordingly Hierome and Ambrose are to be understood By what Law saith J. Taylor speaking of Philippi and that not as a Metropolis may there not be more Bishops than one in a proper sense in one Diocess Where 't is not unpleasant to hear so great a Prelatist by one Interrogation overthrowing the whole Episcopal Cause and propugning the main Plea of the Presbyterians viz. that in Philippi alone there were many who had not only the power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments but also of Ordination and Jurisdiction and were every way Bishops in a proper sense Thirdly Some of these Expositors proclaim what we alledge for OEcumenius who like the rest intimats as if
capable of another Translation Thus only in the Matter of Ordination they have got up or set themselves above them Secondlie Of the Power of Ordination it 's being proper to Bishops he speaks most doubtfully 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they seem c. saith he Thirdly Had he believ'd that the Power of Ordination by Divine Right belong'd to Bishops above Presbyters he had never said that there 's notwithstanding in a manner nothing between them surely Epiphanius thought the Power of Ordination made a most large and notable Difference Once again I shall with our Adversaries suppose that Chrysostome allows that Power of Ordination by Divine Appointment was appropriated to Bishops they cann't with reason deny but that in all other things to a hair he asserts the Equality yea the Identity of Presbyters with Bishops Now will they stand to Chrysostome herein Surely they will not for thus they should be oblig'd to let go all the Prerogatives and Priviledges Bishops both claim and exerce over their Pastors all their Power Paramount of Governing the Church and her Pastors all their exorbitant Wealth Grandeur Pomp and Splendor and in a word whatsoever renders to them the Hierarchie amiable or desireable and so should be really reduc'd to the condition of an ordinary Parish-pastor And were things so little I 'm sure would they care or stickel for upholding of any Distinction between these Officers hence let them blush any more to pretend to Chrysostome's Patrociny seeing all they can with the least colour plead for being giv'n not granted he really subverts their Cause and levells their Diocesan Prelat with a parochial Pastor § 4. Bellarmine Answers that Chrysostome and others while they say that onlie in Ordination a Bishop is above a Presbyter speak onlie of such things which no way agree to Presbyters for Iurisdiction and Confirmation may be performed by Presbyters by vertue of Commission from the Bishop But thus he really makes Chrysostome contradict himself Chrysostome said they differ'd nothing save in Ordination Bellarmine compells him to say that they have another Difference no less conspicuous than is between the King and his Commissioner who can do many regall Acts being warranted by him thereto Does such a Power lodg'd in the Bishop which agrees to none of the Presbyters make no Distinction between him and them Or rather does it not make up the far greater and more conspicuous part of the prelatical Eminency above the rest of the Clergy Add hereto Chrysostome's Books of the Priest-hood wherein altho' he expresly professes he was to treat of the Office of a Bishop yet in these Books there 's nothing but what concerns a congregational Pastor nothing but what concerns publick prayer dispensing of the Word and Sacraments and such Duties that terminat on the People alone but not a word of the Duties of the Bishop or Prelat over inferiour congregational Pastors as their Object which is a sure Demonstration that with Chrysostome Bishop Priest and Pastor were Synonymous Terms § 5. To these add Pelagius a grand Heretick indeed but never branded as such for ought he said of Church-Government who restricts all Church-Officers to Priest and Deacon And asserts that Priest without any Discrimination or Restriction are the Successors of the Apostles And Here saith he by Bishops we understand Presbyters for there could not have been more Bishops in one Citie but we have this Matter also in the Acts of the Apostles Where it 's clear that Pelagius altho' in conformity to the introduc'd Custome of distinguishing Bishops from preaching Presbyters he endeavour'd accordingly to expone this place with as little dammage thereto as is possible deduceth nothwithstanding the Ground of the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter from the Churches latter Custome of having but one Bishop in one City and not from any Scripture-Warrant and indeed when he brings to clear his Comment the 20. of the Acts 17. and 28. he plainly intimats that even when he and others of that Age seem most clearly to hold forth a Difference betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter they then believ'd no such thing to flow from Divine Institution And There is a Question saith he why the Apostle made no mention of Presbyters but comprehended them under the Name of Bishops because answers he this is the second yea in a manner the very same Degree with that of Bishops as the Apostle writes in the Epistle to the Philippians To the Bishops and Deacons when yet one City cann't have more Bishops than one and in the Acts of the Apostles Paul being to go to Hierusalem and having gathered the Elders of the Church saith among other things take heed to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops Hence it 's most evident that he believed both Offices to be by Scripture-Warrant one and the same and not a meer Communication of Names only But the thing most observable here is that to prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he brings Philip. 1. and hereby shews us that some of the Ancients from whose accustom'd Phrases he departed not while he exponed it when they seem to inferr from that place only a Community of Names did really believe no such thing but were perswaded that Philip. 1. 1. quite overthrows all Distinction betwixt Bishop and preaching Presbyter And Sedulius asserts and proves the Identity of Bishops and Presbyters and concludes from the Example of the Ephesian Elders or Bishops that there were many Bishops in one City contrary to the Practice of his Age and that among the Ancients Bishop and Presbyter was one and the same And Primasius proposeth the Question why the Apostle comes to the Deacons without any mention of the Presbyters And Answers in the very words of Pelagius Thus it 's clear even these whom the Hierarchicks take for the prime Pillars of Prelacy being Judges that there 's no Divine Warrant for Diocesan Episcopacy and that a Bishop and Presbyter in Scripture in Apostolick times are one and the same For saith Augustine with whom I begin tho' Younger than Hierome being longer to insist on the other tho' according to these Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now brought in fashion the Office of a Bishop be greater than that of a Presbyter yet in many things Augustine is below Hierome where we see that the whole Difference was in Expression rather than reality and that even that was only by Custome not by Divine Appointment These words hath now brought in fashion answers Bellarmine are not opposed to the ancient time of the Church but to the time before the Christian Church so that the sense is before the times of the Christian Church these Names Bishop and Presbyter were not Titles of Honour but of Office and Age but now they are Names of Honour and Dignity D. M. follows his Master Bellarmine in this wretch'd Detortion and adds that this was but a
went thro' the World for the Commodity of that Church and was never absolutely ordain'd a Bishop by the Apostles for James himself was an Apostle Of the same Mind is Salmasius that James resided not at Jerusalem as one of their Hierarchick Bishops but as an Apostle And yet D. M. is not asham'd to tell his Reader as the Concession of Salmasius that we have a Diocesan Bishop establish'd in the person of St. James the Just in the City of Jerusalem Now that Hierome understood James's Episcopacy in the sense giv'n by Junius and Salmasius against the Jesuites is most apparent especially if we consider how the Ancients us'd to speak of the Apostles and Apostolick extraordinary Church-Officers in the Stile of their own times and how positive Hierome was for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter during the Apostolick age and first primitive Church Add hereto that Hierome as he shews in his Preamble to Dexter was altogether uncertain of much of what he wrote in his Catalogue of Writers which is yet more clear from his account of Paul for the writes that he was a Native of Gischalis and during the Wars between the Jews and Romans sted with his Parents to Tarsus when Gischalis was taken Which I 'm sure Hierome a Man so well acquaint with the Affairs of the Jews who had no Wars with the Romans for many years after the time wherein the Fabler whom Hierome transcribes suppos'd these Wars to have been commens'd and Gischalis taken could never believe but only because he could light on no better transcrib'd things as he found ' em Which removes tho' no more could be said D. M's Objection from Hierome's mentioning of Ignatius his Epistles whereon D. M. with no small Ostentation insists He follows also Bellarmine objecting that Hierome makes Bishops the Apostles Successors But Junius Replies that Hierome denies not this to be also the priviledge of Presbyters It 's also objected by Dr. Pearson that Hierome in his Epistle to Heliodorus speaks of the Deacons as the third Order And seeing this of all the passages of Hierome produc'd by the Papists to involve him in self-repugnancy is most plausible take it at full length If a Man saith Hierome desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good Work These things we know but add what follows A Bishop then must be blameless c. and having express'd the rest of the things which there follow concerning a Bishop the Apostle uses no less diligence in setting forth the Duties of the third Degree saying Likewise let the Deacons be grave c. But passing that he was scarce more than a Child when he wrote that Epistle and wrote clearly for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter in his riper years it 's certain he pretends no Divine Warrant for this Tripartition Yea from the very words they would now detort it 's most evident that tho' Hierome following the Custome of his Age mentions a third Degree he notwithstanding takes both Paul's Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same thing Moreover in this same Epistle Hierome makes all who had the Power of Dispensing the Sacraments Successor to the Apostles which the Jesuites and their Supporters appropriat to Bishops hence they are baffl'd with the very places of Hierome they endeavour to abuse § 7. But I return to Hierome Philippi continues he is a single Town of Macedonia and truly in one City there could not be called are they as moe Bishops But because at that time they called the same Men both Bishops and Presbyters therefore he spoke indifferently concerning both Bishops and Presbyters From these words saith Petavius It can be evidently demonstrated that Hierome believed that Bishops and Presbyters were not one and the same Order yea even in the Age of the Apostles For had he so believ'd he had never said that there could not be a plurality of Bishops in one City when surely there was a plurality of Presbyters As if Jerome's whole discourse scope and conclusion were not directly opposite to what the Jesuite impudently fathers on him who in the words Petavius abuses only meets with some Wranglers as he elsewere terms them who to elude the proof Jerome brought for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter from Philippians 1. 1. absurdly contended that in the City of Philippi alone there were a multitude of Bishops distinguish d from and superior to other Pastors But yet this may seem doubtfull continous Jerome to some except it be confirmed by another Testimony It is written in the Acts of the Apostles that when the Apostle was come to Miletum he sent to Ephesus and called for the Elders of that Church to whom amongst other things he said take heed to your selves and to the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of Christ. And observe this diligently how the Apostle calling the Elders of Ephesus which was but one City afterwards names them Bishops if any receive the Epistle which under Paul's Name is written to the Hebrews there also the care of the Church is equally divided amongst a plurality For he writes to the People Obey your Governours and be subject to them for they watch And Peter who received his Name from the strength of his Faith saith in his Epistle The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder We have enlarged on these things that we might shew that among the Ancients Bishops were all one with Presbyters Hierome then never as Petavius and his Followers impudently pretend thought that there had hapned no alteration or that Bishops bore greater bulk in his time than they had done in the Age of the Apostles but by little and little to the end the seeds of Schism might be remov'd the whole care was devolv'd upon one wherefore as the Presbyters know that by the Custome of the Church they are subject to their prefect so let Bishops know that rather by Custome than by the Truth of Christ's Institution they are greater than Presbyters and ought to Rule the Church in common with them imitating Moses who when he alone had Power to Rule the Israelites chused other Seventy with whom he might judge the People Here say they is a proof of Superiority of Bishops by Divine Right but they should remember that Hierome here undertook to prove the quite contrary And it 's most injust to fish and search for self-contradictions in any Author when with ease he may be understood otherways as the Matter is here Hierome is arguing a majori ad minus from Moses his Practice who tho' he had sole Authority by Divine Right yet shar'd it with others to that which ought to have been done by the Bishops of his time whom only Church Custome not Christ's Appointment had raised over other Pastors And indeed they might on equal grounds inferr from John 13. 14. If I then your Lord and Master have washed your
Feet ye onght also to Wash one anothers Feet that every Apostle yea and every Believer is Lord and Master of the rest § 8. And writing to Euagrius I hear saith Hierome there is one so mad as to preferr the Deacons to the Presbyters that is to the Bishops For seeing the Apostle clearly teaches that Bishops and Presbyters are one and the same how can a Server of Tables and Widows proudly preferr himself to these at whose Prayers the Sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood is consecrated you will require a Proof hear a Testimony Paul and Timothy to all the Saints in Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons would you have another Example in the Acts of of the Apostles Paul thus speaks to the Presbyters of one Church Take heed to your Selves and the whole Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Rule the Church c. And that none may contentiously plead that in one City there were many Bishops here also another Testimony wherein it 's most evidently proved that both Presbyter and Bishop were one and the same and then produces the 1 to Titus and 1 to Timothy 4. 8. 14. neglect not with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytry And 1 Peter 4 and 1. 2 John 1. 3 John 1. And all these to prove that he had undertaken viz that both Bishop and Presbyter were one and the same Now it 's most observable that that he inferrs this Conclusion not only from Scriptures written long after the first Epistle to the Corinthians where it 's said I am of Paul c. but even from the last Epistle of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles And therefore no less notticeable is D. M's extream stubborness and aversion from Truth who would force Hierome to introduce Bishops presently after that Schism mention'd 1 Cor. 1. And accordingly as his bad Cause oblig'd him to do with this and the rest of Hierome's Testimonies wholly smuther'd it And indeed all hitherto who have adventur'd to graple therewith have been conquer'd thereby yea even Bellarmine himself is compell'd to give up the Cause Hierome indeavours saith the Jesuite to conclude the equality of Bishops and Presbyters from the Epistle to Titus to the Philippians and from the Epistles of Peter and John which were written after the first Epistle to the Corinthians Neither can the Jesuite find another way to be even with Hierome but by arraigning him as fraughted with self-repugnancy levity and instability in this Matter and all the Arguments he brings to prove Hierome a Favourer of Episcopacy are only so many fruitless Attempts to make that appear But let us go on with Hierome But saith he the reason why after this viz. the writing of both the Epistles of John one was chosen and set over the rest was that there might be a remedy of Schism least every one drawing the Church of Christ to himself should divide it For in Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist even to Heraclas and Dionysius the Presbyters still gave to one elected from amongst themselves and placed in a higher seat the Name of Bishop as if an Army should creat a General or the Deacons should chuse one of themselves whom they know to be industrious and name him Arch-Deacon On these words D. M. triumphs The Custome was saith he even from the days of St. Mark the Evangelist that a Presbyter was chosen who Governed the whole Society this in the Opinion of St. Hierome cuts off that imaginary Interval wherein the Chruch is said to have been Governed by a Parity of Presbyters Where he forgeth a Gloss no way contain'd in the words of Hierome whose Example of an Army and Deacons are only adduc'd to shew the manner of that Presbyter or nominat'd Bishop's entrance and not at all the measure of his Power over his Collegues And that no Power over the rest can be collected from this place is beyond Scruple clear from Hierome's present Scope who introduces this Ancient Alexandrian Practice to clear and prove the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter which according to him remain'd in the Church for a while after the Writings of John the longest Liver of all the Apostles Had D. M. perused Dr. Stillingfleet he had taught him that both Election and Ordination of this Alexandrian Bishop was only performed by his Fellow Presbyters that the Original of Hierome ' s exsors potestas any Power he mentions in Bishops over Presbyters is by Hierome attributed not to any Episcopal Institution but to the free choice of the Presbyters themselves for what doth a Bishop continues Hierome except Ordination which a Presbyter may not do Here the Jesuites and their Follower D. M. dream they find a fine Distinction made by Hierome between Bishop and Presbyter but first they must make an unseasonable Antiptosis and compell Hierome to speak contrary to the express words of this place which are in the present Tense contrary to the scope and design of this Epistle which is professedly to shew the great Dignity of Presbyters yea even their Identity with Bishops and thereby to reach a sharper reproof to the petulant Deacon And contrary finally to Hierome's most clear and most frequently repeated Doctrine of the Scriptural Identity of both Offices Were it not madness then to dream with the Jesuits that in these words Hierome makes any Distinction between the Scripture Bishop and Presbyter who is here only asserting that in all places Rome excepted where the Presbyters were more depressed and the Deacons more raised than in other Churches even then in his time a Presbyter was allow'd by the Canons and Constitutions of the Churches to do ought that a Bishop might do save Ordination alone This his Design of holding forth the most great dignity of Presbyters yea even their equality with Bishops which Bellarmine acknowledges that he may the better compesce the Insolency of the Deacons Hierome all along this Epistle prosecutes and having again cited the Epistles to Timothy and Titus to prove that a Presbyter is contain'd in i. e. is one and the same with a Bishop otherwayes a Deacon is also in a Bishop and so Hierome had crossed his own Design by the very Argument wherewith he minded to compass it and having added some other Topicks to the same purpose thus concludes his Epistle And that we may know that the Apostolick Traditions are brought from the Old Testament that which Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons claim in the Church Nunc animis opus Aenaeae nunc pectore firmo All the Jesuites and their Complices will presently be about our Ears But Solamen nobis Soeios habuisse malorum Their Attaques are no less on Hierome than us wherefore this is one of the chief places brought by Bellarmine to involve Hierome in a maze of self-contradiction and make him propugn Prelacy who is followed by others of the Hierarchicks but
that is Elders These ordered and determined every thing that concern'd the synagogues or the persons in it Next them were the three PARNASSIN or Deacons whose charge was to gather the Collections of the rich and to distribute them to the poor All the Presbyters saith the Learned Le Moyne took not on them the burden of preaching and exponing the scriptures some were taken up in serving at the administration of the Sacraments searching into scandals visiting the sick strengthning the weak and providing for the Churches profit but the business of preaching belonged only to the Apostles the Bishops and the first Presbyters Hence in times of the ancient Church the Bishops perpetually preached which the inferior Presbyters did not except they were admitted thereto by the Bishops and chief Presbyters Most memorable to this purpose are the words of the learned Jesuite Sirmundus Anciently saith he the Bishops only and no others preached the word of God for this was their proper province and work 't was afterwards tho' not alike soon every where allowed to the Presbyters to preach this was soonest begun in the East as is clear from the practice of Pierius Chrysostome and others who preached while they were only Presbyters And now judge tho' nothing else had been adduced but what is just now brought from these profoundly learn'd and most unsuspected Arbiters if the Regimen and Way of the true primitive Church was not according to the Gospell Humility and Simplicity most opposite to a terrene Domination Prelaticall Grandor and Power over other Pastors and the vanity of preterscripturall and superstitious Ceremonies if she then enjoy'd not Bishops or Pastors Ruling Elders and Deacons if then whosoever had power to dispense the Word and Sacraments with the Charge of any particular Flock or Congregation was not reciprocally one and the same with a Bishop and finally if the primitive Way was not entirely one with that of our Church of Scotland and others of the reformed Churches which is now known by the name of Presbytry Hence it 's carefully to be noted how odd and grievous Alterations were made both as to the use of Terms and in the Offices they had primitively signifi'd in Scripture In yea even after the Apostolick Age we find that the word Bishop whereever it holds forth an ordinary Church-Officer alwayes signifying a Labourer in the Word and Doctrine and Dispenser of the Srcraments Pastor of a Flock or Congregation We find also the Word Presbyter taken as its equivalent denoting this very thing elsewhere as is now made evident the word Presbyter signifies no Pastor of a Flock but only one who was to assist him in Ruling and Guidance thereof some also of this latter kind of Presbyters designing the Ministry there beeing then few or no Theological Schools were trained up for the Office under the Inspection of Bishops or Parochial Pastors and accordingly whiles assisted them therein But this was only accidental to the Office of a ruling Presbyter Afterward there was a new kind of Church Office invented whose chief work was not to feed any Flock or Congregation and yet was reputed the Pastor of many Flocks which was a compleat Contradiction His Province was mainly to rule and domineer over a multitude of both Pastors and Flocks him they called the Bishop Another Office epually new and unknown to Scripture and prime Antiquity was a kind of semipastor or half Minister who was to do all the Ministeriall Work and yet was so far from having any Pastorall Power that on the contrary he was only the subject and substitute of another and him they called the Presbyter As for the other sort of Presbyters they came in time to be well nigh intirely abolished and forgotten The like Chrysostome observes of the Deacons saying that in his time such Deacons as the Apostles ordained were not in the Church Hence it 's not strange if the Ancients while sometimes they violent the Scriptures to make them favour what in their oun times was obtaining and at other times while either out of design and freedome or casually they light on the true Meaning of the Scriptures speak most perplexedly of Bishops and Presbyters and afford no small ground of Wrangling and Disputation to all that are exercised in this Controversy In the mean while such Immutation was not made in a day 't was sloe and apparently plausible like the weed which at lenth you may see that it is groun up yet its act of growing ye shall never perceive This Alteration as even Spanhemius F. no enemy to the Hierarchy observes began first in great Cities and beside the generall occasions or rather pretexts for it which we already noted there was this colour more peculiar to great Cities in Rome for example tho there were Christians sufficient to make up severall ordinary Congregations yet at some special times all or most of these used to meet at one place and accordingly were accounted but one Church This might occasion the making of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or one particular Moderator among the Pastors who got some primacy of Order and at these more solemn meetings of the People appeared spake most and in time got the appropriation of the name Bishop all this was notwithstanding only a meer prostasy he must nixt have a power over his Collegues in the City the Bishops the parochial Pastors of the Country and lesser Cities are next to be invaded This Fermentation which had small beginnings and still grew untill all was soured suelled especially and was most operative in a time of peace whereof in the third Century they had a good space even from the Death of Valerian untill Dioclesian's Persecution The Emperors themselves saith Eusebius then so much favoured them that they not only gave them Liberty of the publick Exercise of their Religion but also made some of them their Chamberlains and Governours of Provinces In this time the alteration of both Government and Worship was certainly not a litle promoved For nothing then reign'd among the Christians but contention ambition They were not content continous he with the former Edifices but builded large Churches from the foundation But when thro' too much liberty we fell into sloath and negligence when every one began to envy and backbite another when we managed as 't were an intestine warr amongst our selves with Words as with Swords Pastors against Pastors and People against People being dashed one on another exercised flrife and tumult when deceit and Guile had grown to the highest pitch of wickedness When being void of all sense we did not so much as once think how to please God yea rather on the other hand impiously we imagined that human Affairs are not at all guided by Divine Providence we dayly added Crimes to Crimes when our Pastors having despised the Rule of Religion strove mutually with one another studying nothing more then how to outdoe one another in strife
that it was sufficient only to remove the cause of Absence which is that Bishops do busie themselves in the courts of Princes and in the affairs of the World being Judges Chanchellours Secretaries Counsellours Treasurers and there are but few Offices of state into which some Bishop hath not insinuate himself This is forbidden by St. Paul who thought it necessary that a Souldier of the Church should abstain from secular Employments Let God's command be executed and them forbidden to take any Charge Office or Degree ordinary or extraordinary in the affairs of the World and then their being no cause for them to remain at Court they will go to their residencie of their own accord without Command or Penalty and will not have any occasion to depart from thence In conclusion he desired that the Council could constitute that it should not be lawfull for Bishops or others who have care of souls to exercise any secular Office or Charge But all this was in vain for that Synagogue of Sathan was deaf like the Adder the Bishop of Five Churches who harang'd to the contrary eluded or neglected all his reasons telling the Council withall that if Aiace were follow'd their Church would anon become base contemptible was heard with applause of the the whole Conventicle tho' not without a self-contradiction as the Historian observes so that this ingenuous and Christian Discourse was slighted and contemned Neither can I find much ground to expect any fairer treatment from men of a Tridentine Spirit whose strenth lyes mostly in mean sophistry and unmanly snatching at colours and shaddous disimulation of the unsoundness of their Cause banter and Hectoring noise and ill founded claims to Antiquity From these I may look for unkind handling indeed but withall have some assurance to meet with better dealling from all the Admirers and Students of most true and only unspotted Antiquity the sacred Scripturers whom God hath quicken'd by his Precepts who know that serious and assiduous Meditation in God's Law and keeping his Precepts will make them understand more than even the Ancients and therefore rejoyce in the Way of his Testimonies as much as in all Riches and esteem the Words of his Mouth more than their necessary food to whom these are the Joy and Rejoyceing of their heart These I am somewhat confident will not be much displeased with what I have said My Antagonist if any happen or I 'm exceedingly mistaken will be of quite different Qualities I can sincerely affirm that I have not willingly or wittingly injured the Truth or any man's person and that the Love of sacred Verity moved me to publish these papers Others doubtless of suitable Abilities may soon advance things of far greater worth than what can come from we whose mite is so mean and inconsiderable and who beside the other disadvantages that environ me according to the good Pleasure of him that doth all things well from the very womb have laboured under the want of that noble Sence of SEEING and so am oblig'd to read with the Eyes and write with the Hands of others Yet tho' I be deprived of the sweet Light and pleasure of beholding the Sun it little moves me if so be I may see the infinitely more precious Light of the most glorious and dear SON of Righteousness and be illuminated and enlyven'd with that all healling Vertue which is in his Wings FINIS a Judgement given forth c. Page 12. b Ibid. c The Trial of Peter Boss c. Page 6. d Plea for the Innocent Page 12. e Pag. 11. f More Divisions amongst the Quakers Page 15. g Judgement given forth c. Page 17. and Append. to the History of the Quakers Pag. 16. h Ibid. pag. 12. i ibid. pag. 17. k ibid. pag. 20. l Inter Epist Augustini 25. m Adversus Hermâ—oâ—enem n De Doctrinâ— Christiana Lib. 2. Cap. 9. o Theodoret. Hist. Eccles. Lib. 1. Cap. 7. Hist. Tripâ—rtit Lib. 2. Cap. 5. p Lib. 5. q Epist. ad Pompejum r In Acta Apost Homil. 3. s In primum Haggaei a Iren. lib. 2. Caput 11. b Synop. pap conti 5. Quest. 3. Part 2. c Preface to his Ecclesiastical Policy p. 2. 19. and 20. d P. 131. e In Iren. f Apologiae Cathol lib. 1. p. 118. 119. 120. h Defence of the Apology of the Church of England pag. 121. i page 248. k Stillingfleet Iren. pag. 392. l Iren. pag. 393. m pag. 395. n Episcopacy not prejudicial to regal Power Page 13 14 15. b Canon 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Detection of the Court and State of England Vol. 1. Page 361. e Vol. 1. Pag. 361. d Pag. 368. f Memoires of the D. of Hamiltoun Pag. 29. 30. h Nalson's Collections Vol. 1. Page 247. i Memoires Page 29. k Hist. Page 447 453. l Memoires Page 47. alibi m Memoires Page 60. n Collections Vol. 1. Page 245. i Memoires Page 235 236. a De pontif Rom lib. 1. cap. 8. Praeterea exercitus non semper unum habet ducem c. a De pontif Rom. Lib. 2. Cap. 10. Nulla enim in Ecclesia Dei graviora excitata sunt Schismata nec Hereses exorta sunt ab ullo tetriores quam ab Episcopis a Iren. Part 2. Chap. 6. a De Repub. Ecclesiasticâ Lib. 2. Cap. 4. Numb 46. Sunt qui Hieronymum in rectam sententiam vel invitum velint trahere neque in hoc aut excusari satis potest aut c. b De diversis gradibus ministrorum Evangelii Cap. 23. Dico privatam fuisse Hieronymi opinionem consentaneam cum Aërio c. c Ibid. 27. d Exam. tract de triplici Episcopatû Page 25. e Ibid. Page 34. f Contra Hereses fol. 103. B. Sed revera fallitur Thomas Waldensis quoniam in toto illo decursu pâ—st verba proximè citata nihil aliud conatur Hieronymus quam ut ostendat ex Divina Institutione non esse differentiam inter Presbyterum Episcopum Et fol. 104. D. Nec etiam mirari quisquam debet quod Beatus Hieronymus Vir alioqui doctrissimus sic deceptus fuerit c. g De Cler. Cap. 15. Michaël Medina affirmat sanstum Hieronymum idem omnino cum Aërianis sensisse neque solum Hieronymum in ea Heresi fuisse sed etiam Ambrofium Augustinum Sedulium Primasium Chrysostomum Theodoretum OEcumenium Theophilactum atque ita inquit Medina isti Viri aliâ—qui Sanctissimi Sacrarum Scripturarum consultissimi quorum tamen sententiam prius in Aërio deinde in Waldensibus postremo in Johanne Vvicklefo damnavit Fcclesia Et infra Ergo in Hieronymo Gracis illis Patribus c. h Catechism tract 2. Quest. 23. i Cath. Orth. Tom. 1. Page 286. k Heresi 55. five 75. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l De repub eccles Lib. 2. Cap. 5. m Epistola ejus dedicatiora translationi suae praefixa n Critic Patrum Page 330. o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉