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
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
Office not upon Jus Dominicum the Law of God in the Scriptures but Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem the practice of the Church Add hereto that both Fathers and Councils equally in Opinion and Practice stuck no less to the lawfulness of Patriarchat than that of simple Episcopacy and yet I believe few among real Protestants will either assert the Divine Right of this Office of Patriarchat i. e. that it had any Warrant for it in the Word of God or yet that those Fathers and Councils so believed Which present Consideration furnisheth us with another Argument sufficient to evince that the ancient Châ—rch founded this Office only upon Custom and as they thought Christian Prudence and not at all upon the Books of the Old and New Testament § 2. Neither do the most Learned of the Modern Episcopals in the least swerve from this Opinion amongst whom I reckon D. Forbes who having for a while with the greatest tenderness and fear handled this Matter propones at length the Question If Episcopacy be of Divine Right And yet declares himself highly difficultated what to Answer for absolutly deny it he will not and positively assert it he dares not he therefore confounds it with a Synodical Moderatourship and then fairly tells us that it is of Divine Right because of the general Scripture-Precepts of Church-Order and Decency And indeed he carries himself all along in this Matter with so much nice Caution Ambiguity and Fear that he evinces the desperation of the Episcopal Cause to which so learned a Man could afford no better Defence than really to destroy what he pretends to vindicat Neither is the most Learned Bishop Vsser of another mind who has reduced it to a meer shadow and nonentity And Willet though he says that a difference is needfull for Church-Policy yet affirms that this cannot be proved by the Word of God and that in the Apostles times a Bishop and Presbyter were neither in Name nor Office distinguished And he at large answers all Bellarmine's Arguments to the Contrary See the Appendix to the second part of the forecited Question Of this same Judgement is their applauded Hooker viz. that there is no ground for their Hierarchy in the word of God while he declares himself against all particular Forms of Church-government and acknowledges that nothing for Diocesan Prelacy can be brought therefrom The necessity of Policy saith he and regimen in all Churches may be held without holding any one certain Form to be necessary in them all And the general Principles are such as do not particularly prescribe any one but sundry Forms of Discipline may be equally consonant unto the general Axioms of Scripture It hath been told them that Matters of Faith and in general Matters necessarie unto Salvation are of a different Nature from Ceremonies Order and the kind of Church-Government that the one are necessar to be expresly contained in the Word of God or else manifestly collected out of the same the other not so that it is necessarie not to receive the one unless there be something in Scripture for them the other free if nothing be alledged against them And the Learned D. Stilling fleet is at no smal pains to cashier and expunge among the rest of peculiar Forms of Government This Diocesan Prelacy out of Scriptural-Articles and not only acknowledges but also musters not a few Arguments whereby to Prove that it hath no Ground in Holy Scripture And Dr. Morton Though a zealous Defender of Episcopacy Asserts that Hierome made not the Difference between Bishop and Presbiter of Divine Institution he assâ—nts to Medina the Jesuite and asserts that there was no Difference in the matter of Episcopacy betwixt Hierome and Aerius He averres further that not only the Protestants but also all the primitive Doctors were of Hierome ' s mind And finally he concludes that according to the Harmonious Consent of all Men in the Apostolick Age there was no Difference between Bishop and Pesbyter but was afterward introduced for the removal of Schism And Jewel Bishop of Sarisburie a Man for Piety and Ability Second I am sure to few that ever filled an Episcopal Chair most expresly asserts the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter Here saith he Mr. Harding findeth great fault for that I have translated these words ejusdem Sacerdotii of the same Bishoprick and not as he would have it of one Priesthood God wott a very simple Quarrel Let him take whether he listeth best if either-other of these words shall serve his turn Erasmus saith id temporis idem erat Episcopus Sacerdos Presbyter these three Names viz. Bishop Priest and Presbyter at that time were all one And but what meant Mr. Harding here to come in with the Difference between Priests or Presbyters and Bishops Thinketh he that Priests and Bishops hold only by Tradition Or is it so horrible an Heresie as he maketh it to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and a Priest are all one Or knoweth he how far and unto whom he reacheth the Name of an Heretick Verily Chrysostom saith Inter Episcopum Presbyterum interest ferme nihil between a Bishop and a Priest which is all one with Presbyter in a manner there is no difference St. Hierome saith somewhat in a rougher sort Audio Quendam c. I hear say there is one become so Peevish that he setteth Deacons before Priests that is to say before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth us that Priests and Bishops be all one Thus far Jewel The Bishops and Priests saith the famous Bishop Cranmer were at one time and were not two things but both one Office in the beginning of Christ's Religion And In the New Testament he that is appointed to be a Bishop or a Priest needeth no Consecration by the Scripture for Election or Appointing thereto sufficient In the same MS. saith Dr. Stillingfleet it appears that the Bishop of St. Asaph Therleby Redman and Cox were all of the same Opinion with the Arch-Bishop that at first Bishops and Presbyters were the same and the two latter expresly cite the Opinion of Jerome with Approbation Thus we see by the Testimony chiefly of him who was Instrumental in Our Reformation that he owned not Episcopacy as a distinct Order from Presbytry but only as a prudent Constitution of the Civil Magistrat for the better governing in the Church And having proved that Whitgift and with him the whole Body of the English Episcopal Divines were of the same Judgement thus concludes By which Principles the Divine Right of Episcopacy as founded upon Apostolical Practice is quite subverted and destroyed Now judge if Dr. Sandersone spoke not without the allowance ye acontrary to the express Mind of his Brethren when he says that the Difference among the Advocats for Episcopacy is only Verbal and that all of them even those who yeeld that it is not of Divine Right no less
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
and the Chair yet they succeeded him not in his Apostle-ship but the latter Bishops in neither c. And Lightfoot a renown'd Divine of the Church of England proves that the Apostle-ship was an Order for ever unimitable in the Church The Apostles saith the same Author could not ordain as Apostle by Imposition of Hands as they could ordain Elders but they are forced to use a Divine Lot which was as the immediate Hand of Christ imposed on him that was to be ordained that Opinion took little notice of this circumstance that hath placed Bishops in the Place of the Apostles by a common and successive Ordination Dr. Barrow whose Works are publish'd by Bishop Tillotson and therefore are to be lookt on as his is copious on this Subject Apostles also saith he did Govern in an absolute manner according to Discretion as being guided by infallible assistance to the which they might on occasion appeal and affirm it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicat it They did indeed appoint standing Pastors and Teachers in each Church they did assume fellow Labourers or Assistents in the Work of Preaching and Governance but they did not constitute Apostles equal to themselves in Authority Priviledges or Gifts for who knoweth not saith St. Austine that Principate of Apostle-ship to be preferr'd before any Episcopacy And the Bishops saith Bellarmine have no part of the true Apostolical Authority And now judge of the Spirit of these Men who are glad most falsly to brand these famous Bishops and others the most eminent Doctors of that Perswasion as being guilty of the most abominable Crime of Socinianism providing they can thereby bespatter and make odious the Presbyterians Judge also of D. M's Query whether the Apostolical Power as to it 's permanent necessary and essential Branches was not in its nature Perpetual and Successive and by them transmitted in solidum as they receiv'd it from our blessed Saviour to single Successors in particular Sees and not to a Colledge of Presbytsrs in the modern Notion As to the last part of his Query and his Presbyters in the modern Notion I know none such if 't be not these of the Hierarchicks their half Ministers for which there is no ground in Scripture And accordingly it's certain that the Apostles left the managing of the Church to neither Bishops nor Presbyters in his sense both of them being Chimera's but to Colledges of Bishops who are also Presbyters both being one in Scripture during the Apostolick age But tho' we should grant them all the Query seeks supposing which all the Ancients affirm the equality of all Bishops who at the beginning were reciprocated with Congregations he 's yet but where he was and has really done nothing for the establishing of his Hierarchy Judge lastly of that doughty Argument of the Papists and our Hierarchicks for Prelacy to wit that Bishops succeed to the Apostles and Presbyters to the 70 Disciples which has been generally reckon'd by Protestants among Rome's dotages and as such refuted in their Popish Controversies and to name no others by Iunius and Willet who answers that not only Bishops but all faithfull Pastors are the Apostles Successors and that even according to the Pope's Decrees not Bishop but Priests succeed the Apostles and Deacons not Presbyters succeed the 70 Disciples And now to go on with D. M. and his Fellows all their cavilling to make Timothy and Titus Hierarchick Bishops is but the product of a late Popish Dream For the Fathers when they so called them or the Apostles mean'd not of Bishops in this sense § 3. Wherefore Willet Answers that it is most like Timothy had the Place and Calling of an Evangelist and that the Calling of Evangelists and Bishops which were Pastors was diverse This Answer which so approv'd a Divine of the Church of England gave the Papists D. M. calls a ridiculous subterfuge For saith he the Work of an Evangelist has nothing in it opposite to or inconsistent with the Dignity of a Bishop c. A most disingenuous tergiversation and sliding from the Office of the opponent or probant to that of the defendent seeing this was one of his special Scripture-Arguments whereby to establish his Hierarchy and it 's sure that if Timothy and Titus might do what they did under another Notion and Capacity than that of a Diocesan Prelate his Argument goes to wrack As does also his perversion of 2 Tim. 4 5. for he insinuats that from Timothy's being injoined to do the Work of an Evangelist it will no more follow that he deserved the Name than Daniel's saying Ch. 8. 27. that he did the King's Work will prove him a King But had he ever considered the rest of the Epistle the context of the place and the Signification and Notation of the Word Evangelist he had clearly seen that the Apostle so adapts this Work of an Evangelist to Timothy that the Name and Character properly belongs unto him He adds That any who now convert Jews or Pagans are as properly Evangelists as any so called in the primitive Church and thus insinuats that Evangelists such as Timothy and Titus were no extraordinary Officers which except a few Novelists wedded to their Fancies is condemned by all Men. § 4. And that there was such a Function by which some in the days of the Apostles were raised far above the rank of ordinar Pastors or Doctors and placed in the very next degree to the Apostles themselves whose Office was mostly ambulatory going from Church to Church in the exercise thereof is in part intimated by Sedulius and Theodoret and others upon Ephes. 4. 11. but more fully by Eusebius who informs us that even after the Death of the Apostles divers remained who were in a far higher rank than the rest of their Successors who being saith he the admirable and divine Disciples of so great Men built up the Churches the Apostles had founded promoving the preaching of the Gospel and sowing Seed of the Kingdom of Heaven far and wide thro' the whole World for many of these Disciples that were yet living whose Minds the Divine Word had inflammed with a vehement desire of Wisdom fullfilling our Saviour's Command and dividing their Goods among the Poor and thus leaving their Country exercised the Office of Evangelists among these who had not yet heard the Doctrine of Faith by most diligent preaching of the Gospel and furnishing their Hearers with the Holy Scriptures these so soon as in any remot and barbarous Country they had laid the Foundations of Faith and ordained Pastors and had committed to these Pastors the care of this New Plantation being content therewith and accompanied by the Grace and Power of God hast'ned to other Countries for even to that time the Divine Power of God's Spirit wrought Miracles by these Men so that at the first hearing of the Gospel
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
fourth or the time of the fifth Century to prove a Metropolis in the first let any-one judge that doth but consider how common a thing it was to alter Metropoles especially after the new Disposition of the Roman Impire by Constantine Yea Carolus à sancto Paulo who was most versant in these Matters and with him Dr. Stillingfleet believe that for the first six Centuries Philippi was no Metropolis § 4. But I will not enlarge in overthrowing a Fancy so wild and gross But in the end of the second Century saith Dr. Burnet the Churches were framed in another mould from the Division of the Empire and the Bishops of the Cities did according to the several Divisions of the Empire associat in Synods with the chief Bishop of that Division or Province who was call'd the Metropolitan from the Dignity of the City where he was Bishop And hence sprang Provincial Synods and the Superiorities and Precedencies of Bishopricks You see how the chiefest of Prelatists disown and disclaim this Metropolitan Fiction but none more fully than Dr. Stillingfleet who has nervously baffl'd all their Pretences prevented whatsoever Dr. Maurice advanced for I speak not of Mr. Clerkson who has also sufficiently done it and finally more particularly ruined all their Pretexts for Philippi's Metropolitan-ship either in a Civil or Ecclesiastick sense during the first Century or Apostolick age Judge therefore of Dr. Maurice his Candor which minds me of another piece of his Legerdemain to evite the force of Philippians 1. 1. For if saith he in Mr. Clerkson ' s Opinion the Bishops mention'd Philip. 1. 1. be no other than Presbyters then this place is impertinently alledged since many Presbyters are by all sides acknowledg'd to have belong'd to one Church but if he speak of Bishops in the common Ecclesiastical sense and then conclude from this Passage that there were many in the Church of Philippi his Opinion is as singular as that of Dr. Hammond which he endeavours to refute for my part I must profess I am not concern'd in this Dispute and I could never find reason to believe them any other thing than Presbyters Or were these Bishops only Presbyters ruling the Church of Philippi with common and equal Authority Then our Author must give up the Question and in stead of making many Bishops must own that there was none at all there but Presbyters only if he thus contend he will abuse his Reader with the ambiguity of a word which he takes in one sense and the Church in another That many Presbyters might belong to one Congregation none ever deni'd that many Bishops in the allowed and Ecclesiastical sense of the word had the oversight of one City sounds strange and incredible to the ancient Christians Where he sleely supposes as granted that Bishops in Philip. 1. 1. must either be understood of their simple Presbyters or of Diocesan Bishops and then equipps his horn'd Argument no other ways than if he had professedly declined all Dispute till once his Adversary had out of kindness yeelded the Question which is only about the Scriptural and Apostolick sense of the word and notion of the Office of a Bishop if that and the Office of a preaching Presbyter be not in Scripture one and the same and consequently if these at Philippi were not Scriptural Bishops no less than they were Presbyters Now that he concern'd not himself in this Dispute nor was in earnest in it I deny not his slippery dealings make it but too too apparent his simple intimation that these were only their simple Presbyters I pass having already blown off all their noticeable Depravations of Philip. 1. 1. I have yet mett with and observe that he following the Romanists insinuats that we cann't understand the Scripture's meaning untill we have their Churches Commentary His ambiguous and unhandsome conduct is no less apparent in these his Phrases common Ecclesiastical sense which he takes in one sense and the Church in another For either he may mean that the Church when she speaks of Bishops who were in after times understands by this Name only Diocesans and so touches not in the least contrary to what he insinuats the Churches received sense of this Text nor what Notion she had of Scriptural-Bishops Or his sense may be that when she speaks of Apostolick and Scriptural Bishops she then still means Diocesans and Rulers over their simple Presbyters and this he must mean if he speak to the Purpose And then I inquire what Church was of this mind Surely neither Primitive nor reformed Churches I except not that of England whose greatest Lights we have already heard disclaiming all Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy and identifying Bishop and Presbyter Yea many even of the Romanists are forc'd to confess so much There are Catholicks saith the Jesuite Justinianus who have stuck in the mud of Aërianism The Church then he means must be only a few factious Novelists who in despite of both Divine and Humane Records and the common Sentiment of Christians dare to obtrude on the World as a Fundamental of Religion their privat and wild Fancies Neither is it strange that so few imbrace this conceit of denying the Scripture-Identity of Bishop and Presbyter § 5. For beside these Scriptures now adduc'd let them but look unto 1 Tim. 1. 3. where they shall find a transition from Bishop to Deacons without any mention of intermediant Presbyters and consequently the Identity of these Offices Bellarmine Answers that the Apostle gives a general Instruction to the Clergy that under the name of Bishops Presbyters all the superior Clergy is comprehended But seeing they make a Distinction of these Offices so necessary it was requisite they had been handl'd in particular and not hudl'd up in a general seeing no where in Scripture there 's any more particular Distinction of Bishop and preaching Presbyter assigned but Bellarmine's main Answer to this and all such Scriptures is that the Names Bishop and Presbyter were then common to both Orders which Answer all the Hierarchicks and more particularly D. M. borrow from the Jesuite But I answer and argue with Junius against Bellarmine that seeing the Names were then common and a real community of Names imports a community of things which by these names are signifi'd it necessarily then follows that as the Names were then common so were the Offices design'd by these Names But to see the Reform'd conquering and the Jesuites foil'd some are much pain'd and in special D. M. who spends about 17 pages for the support of Bellarmine's Answer the substance whereof and of his first three Queries is that Still in the Pentateuch the High Priest is nam'd by the same Appellative without any distinction of Order or Jurisdiction that the other Priests were nam'd by and the title of a Priest was promiscuously apply'd without any distinction or marks of Eminence to the High Priest as well as to the Subordinat
And The Apostles retain'd the Phraseology of the Jews who spoke of Priests and Levites as two distinct Orders without mentioning the High Priest And When the Ancients Dichotomiz'd the Clergy they in other places plainly reckon up three distinct Orders of Bishop Presbyter and Deacon But is there never in all the Scriptures any Title Distinction or Marks of Eminence giv'n to one Priest which were not communicable to all of ' em Got ever all of 'em promiscuously the Title of High Priest or such distinctive Appellations Did the Apostles so retian the Phraseology of the Jews as that they sometimes make a Bipartite and sometimes a Tripartite Division of ordinary Church-Officers and give to any one ordinary Pastor sometimes at least a distinguishing Title and Marks of Eminence which are at no time communicable to all ordinary Pastors promiscuously As to the Ancients their sometimes Dichotomizing sometimes Trichotomizing the Clergy it 's most certain that in their Dichotomies they ey'd the prime primitive Church and in their Trichotomies their own times But Christ saith D. M. is call'd an Apostle a Bishop the Apostles Presbyters and Deacons But was Christ so call'd an Apostle that he had no other peculiar titles or marks of Eminence or that on the other hand the name Christ was giv'n promiscuously to all Apostles or ever giv'n to any of ' em Lastly was the Apellation of Apostle equally communicable to all Presbyters or ordinary Pastors as to the twelve and some few else extraordinary Officers All which he must swallow else he gives no relief to his Friend Bellarmine We Argue that seeing to no ordinary Pastor is giv'n any peculiar Appellation Character or Description but what is equally common to all there must be an Equality and Parity amongst all of 'em and this they can never get over Moreover among the Evangelists yea and among the Apostles Officers superior to ordinary Pastors the reformed Churches being Judges there was a compleat Parity as was also among the Deacons their Inferiours notwithstanding of all which the Hierarchicks must plead for certain Stories of Preheminence among the ordinary Pastors in favours whereof ne gry quidem they can bring from the Word of God the only Rule of Faith and Doctrine § 6. Add hereto Tit. chap. 1. where we not only find the Apostle using indifferently and promiscuously the two words Bishop and Elder but also he alledgeth the necessity of fit Qualifications in the one to prove that the same are required in the other the Presbyters that were to be Ordain'd must be blameless c. because a Bishop must be so wherein either we have an ocular Demonstration of the Identity of these two Officers or else which I abhorr to think the Apostles reasoning is more pitifull than the most equivocant Paralogism their being not so much as a nominal Connexion betwixt the Antecedent and Consequent and no less ridiculous than if one should reason that every Captain of a single Company must be able to guide and manage a whole Army because such Qualifications are required in a General Now seeing these Scriptures already vindicated to name no others evidently declare that there was no such thing as a Diocesan Bishop that there 's a compleat Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter and consequently a Parity of all ordinary Pastors they of necessity condemn the Hierarchick and Diocesan Imparity for I 'm perswaded these who alledge that they find in Scripture a Distinction between these Offices will judge that they may with reason enough conclude the Divine Right of Episcopacy Hence judge of D. M's fifth Query where and in what places of Scripture the superiority and jurisdiction of one Priest above another is forbidden And if it be not plainly forbidden then the Fancy of a Jus Divinum in favours of Presbytry such as is exclusive of all other Forms of Ecclesiastical Government is groundless and Chimerical From all which I conclude that if the Ignatian Bishop and Presbyter most be understood in the Notion of our Adversaries he then quite crosses the Apostles so his Doctrine is stark nought or which is a far more charitable Sentiment his Epistles have suffer'd no small interpolation Section VII The grand Objection taken from the Commentaries of the Ancients remov'd BUT the Fathers as our Adversaries pretend glossing on these Texts went quite cross to our Doctrine To the Bishops and Deacons saith Chrysostome What means that What was there a Plurality of Bishops in one City Not at all for at that time the Name was yet common so that a Bishop was also nam'd a Deacon that is a Servant And adds that both Timothy and Titus were Bishops Of the same mind say they were Hilary Epiphanius Theodoret OEcumenius and others which harmonius Consent of Ancients cann't but be the true meaning of the places in Controversie But as these and such Fathers confess and their Works proclaim they were like others subject to humane Weakness and Corruption fell into compliance with the growing Errors into immoderat heat prevarication and self-repugnancy and negligence to search for the Scriptures their meaning How loudly sounded the debate concerning rebaptizing between Stephen and Cyprian which â—ore almost the whole body of Christians into a pair of Factions With what heat was it prosecuted And which is most lamentable how pitifully was the truth on both hands deserted For altho' it be commonly believ'd that Stephen only held the truth and Cyprian and his fail'd yet Stephen and the Romans did no less betray it On the other extream while they asserted the sufficiency of Baptism altho' administred by the grossest Hereticks and capital Enemies of the Fundamentals of Christianity How great both before and after that time were the Contests about Easter How scandalous were the Contests between Chrysostome Epiphanius and Theophilus and between Hierome and Ruffine Not to name others in all which it is apparent how little they believed one another and how much many of 'em prevaricated in favours of their particular Fancies § 2. But their Contradictions to one another are less to be admired when we clearly perceive that one and the self same Author either out of negligence or some other weakness hath given us quite contrary Doctrines Justine Martyr which Sculteâ— observes in one place ascribes the whole Work of Regeneration to free Grace and in another destroyes what he had builded and places free Will in the room thereof And Clemens Alexandrinus as the same Scultet observes following Justine Martyr delivers the like inconsistencies about the same Theme he sometimes ascribes our Salvation wholly to Faith and again tells us that we may purchase it with the Treasure of our Works § 3. Of the same kind are their polemick Discourses wherein their study was much more directed to bespatte their Antagonists and alure the vulgar Auditor than solidly to support the Truth I shall never believe that Optatus believed himself when he maintain'd that all
mannerly Complement to Augustine A piece of immodesty proper to D. M. not arriv'd at by the Jesuite Augustine then was only some frenchisi'd Spark that intended not to speak as he thought but I reply with Junius that this their Answer is clean contrary to Augustine ' s mind and intention for he was not so mad as to compare things so hetrogeneous as were the Rites and Customes of the Gentiles and these of the Church if it be said that he spoke of the Church of the Jews where pray is there any mention of Bishops in all the Old Testament and History of the Jewish Church I add that if this had been Augustine's meaning he had too much drepress'd and in too unworthy Terms express'd Christ's Institution to busk a Complement for Hierome But Augustine saith D. M. reasons from the Succession of Bishops This Romish Cavill is a 1000 times baffl'd and by none more sufficiently than by Dr. Stillingfleet who shews that from such Reasonings of the Fathers and their mentioning of Successions of Bishops it can never be proved that Bishops were of a higher Order or had any other Power over Presbyters nor that in all places there was so much as any Difference at all between them nor that they mean'd ought save a Succession of Doctrine and that no less is said of Presbyters Lastly Bishop Jewel advanceth this very passage of Augustine and thereby proves the Identity of Bishop and Priest or Presbyter And he thus Englishes Augustine's words The Office of a Bishop is above the Office of a Priest not by Authority of the Scriptures but after the Names of Honour which the Custome of the Church hath now obtain'd § 7. Let us saith Hierome attend diligently to the words of the Apostle saying that thou should'st Ordain Elders in every City as I appointed thee and what kind of Presbyter ought to be ordain'd he declares in the following Discourse If any saith he be blameless the Husband of one Wife c. and after he Inferrs For a Bishop must be blameless as the Steward of God Therefore both Bishop and Presbyter is one and the same And before that by Sathan's instigation there were Divisions about Religion and it was said in the Churches I am of Paul I of Apollo and I of Cephas the Church was govern'd by a common Council of Presbyters But after that whomsoever any had baptized were by them counted their own not Christs it was Decreed thro' the whole World that one Chosen out of the Presbyters should be set over the rest to whom all care of the Church should belong and the Seeds of Division be removed But you may think that this is our Mind and not the Mind of the Scriptures that a Bishop and a Presbyter is one and the same thing and that the one is a Name of Age and the other of Office Let them read over the words of the Apostle to the Philippians where as Hierome professedly asserts the Presbyterian Thesis so he clearly proves it by the Presbyterian Arguments And I would fain learn wherein as touching the Scriptural Identity of Bishop and Presbyter he differ'd from Aërius They differ'd as much answers Bellarmine as Heaven and Hell For Hierome still held that a Bishop was greater than a Presbyter as to the point of Ordination and that doubtless by Divine Right Bellarmine is herein follow'd only by some of the more impudent of his Brethren as Bayly the Jesuite and Petavius and last of all appears their perpetual shadow D. M. with whom Hierome is a grand Asserter of the Episcopal Hierarchy and Aërius a grand Heretick But Junius answers to both the Jesuites and their Genuine Issue that Hierome when he said what doth the Bishop except Ordination which a Presbyter does not understood it only of his oun time But Bellarmine saith Junius confounds the time as doth D. M. that he more easily may deceive the Simple We have heard already that many of the greatest Lights of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists have exploded this shamefull and Jesuitical Attempt of making Hierome for the Divine Right of Prelacy or for any Difference between Bishop and Presbyter To which add Dr. Stillingfleet For saith he as to the Matter it self I believe upon the strickest Enquiry Medina ' s Judgement will prove true that Hierome Austine Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact were all of Aërius ' s Judgement as to the Identity of both Name and Order of Bishops and Presbyters in the primitive Church c. Of what Church then shall we count D. M. and his Brethren who only scrape together these most dishonest and a thousand times baffl'd depravations and perversions of the Jesuites and being plum'd with the feathers of so unlucky Birds can appear without any more shame and blushing than as if they were the innocent penns of a Dove But Hierome subjoins Bellarmine who is transcrib'd by D. M. acknowledges that the Difference between Bishop and Presbyter as also the Princely Prerogatives of Bishops was introduc'd by the very Apostles when 't was said I am of Paul c. But it 's answer'd by Junius that the former of these can never be prov'd from Hierome and the latter Hierome denies while he saith when these whom any baptiz'd were counted their own c. Where saith Junius Hierome shews that 't was not when this Evil was at Corinth only but when 't was spread thro' the whole Churches And the latter of these continues Junius Paul denies while he reproves this Evil in the Corinthians and yet neither in the first nor in the second Epistle makes ever the least mention of setting up a Bishop over them They who use this Argument saith Dr. Stillingfleet among many other Answers far better than ever such a Cavill deserv'd are greater Strangers to St. Hierome ' s Language then they would seem to be whose Custome it is upon incidental Occasions to accommodat the Phrase and Language of Scripture to them as when he speaks of Chrysostome ' s Fall cecidit Babylon cecidit of the Bishops of Palestine multi utroque claudicant pede All which Instances saith the Doctor are produc'd by Blondel but have the good fortune to be pass'd over without being taken nottice of And now judge whether there was more Ignorance or Impudence in D. M's following Query Whether the Opinion of St. Hierome be not disingenuously represented by the Presbyterians since he never acknowledg'd nor affirm'd any intervall after the Death of the Apostles in which Ecclesiastical Affairs were govern'd communi Presbyterorum consilio Bellarmine objects also as doth his Epe D. M. that Hierome says James was made Bishop of Jerusalem presently after the Death of our Saviour But both are repell'd by Iunius who shews that the common reading of that place of Hierome ' s Catalogue is corrupted And Answers that James was only left while the Apostles
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
Hierome leave them as being altogether useless for support of the Pomp and Splendor of their Hierarchy To these add the Jesuite Celâ—otius who after a thousand Meanders and serpentine windings to elude and deprave these clear Testimonies of Hierome at length seeing all would not do rejects them all as the Forgeries of unlucky Aërian hands never written by Hierome For which Cellotius is chastised even by Petavius and others of the Loyolites themselves Into such Discord Confusion and Torment do Men usually throw themselves so soon as they obstinatly resolve to wage War with so clear and irradiant Verities And here it 's observable that in all times and in all Churches the Authority of Hierome has been exceeding great and above most of the primitive Writers which came not to pass without a special Divine Providence that he and in him the whole primitive Church whose Judgement in these Matters he most clearly delivers might remain as an unsuspected and an uncontroverted witness against some of latter Ages pretendedly Catholick but really Sectarian Novelists Among the great Services he did to the Church two Pieces are more especially notticeable viz. his most clear asserting and acurat distinguishing the Canonical Books from the Apocryphal above all who handled or wrote of that great and most necessary Article and which is the Matter in hand his Antiprelatick Doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter these not only Hieronymian but also truly Catholick Doctrines are with equall fierceness impugn'd by the Romanists and I appeal to the impartial Reader if their Exceptions against this latter be a whit more solide than these which are advanced against the former viz. Hierome's Judgement of the Canonical Scriptures which are to be found collected and learn'dly refuted by Dr. Cosin And indeed these Sophisters endeavouring to subvert these Catholick Doctrines of Hierome dash only on an Adamantine Rock for as never any Articles were better founded so notwithstanding of whatsoever practical Aberrations therefrom were fall'n into none were more universally imbrac'd receiv'd and handed down for to speak of the Matter of our present concern this Hieronymian Doctrine all following Church Writers ratifie and approve the bulk of subsequent Commentators Writers of Offices and of other Treatises as Salvianus Isidorus Hispalensis Amalarius Rabanus Maurus yea and intire Councils as that 2 of Sevil which ascribes the whole Difference and Sâ—periority only to Church-Canons and late Constitutions and after them Gratian and Lombard who affirm that in the primitive Church there was only Presbyters and Deacons and his Expositors among whom is Aestius who very fairly quites the Scriptures and tells us that this Superiority is not very clear from Scripture which is nothing but a Confession of the Truth of Hierome's Doctrine forced from this great Prelatist and School-man Yet adds Aestius this may be sufficiently proved another way To which words Dr. Stillingfleet occurrs Ingenuously said saith he however but all the difficulty is how a Jus Divinum should be prov'd when Men leave the Scriptures But in the recounting and transcribing of such Confessions or Testimonies I will not inlarge And now having rescued the principal Scriptures our Antagonists detort in favours of their Distinction between Bishop and Presbyters and vindicated some places commonly adduc'd for the Identity thereof as also evinced that the most celebrated of the Ancients did no otherways understand these Scriptures nor derive the Original of Prelacy from Divine Institution I may with confidence conclude that Ignatius had none before him of the Judgement that he if we believe the Hierarchicks so passionately favour'd Section IX The Testimonies of Ignatius's contemporaries disproving what our Adversaries would force him to speak and confirming what we have prov'd to be his mind viz. that he cashiers a Diocesan Prelacy HAving viewed the Apostolick Writings and dived into their most ancient Commentators and primitive Doctors and having found that in the time of the Apostles the immediat Ancestors of Ignatius there was in the Church no such thing as a Diocesan Prelate Let us next look unto what remains of his Contemporaries or these who lived near Ignatius's time and we shall have ground to deduce the same Inference And first it's observable that these Writers such as Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians for the rest that bear his Name are undoubtedly spurious Polycarp to the Philippians Hermas or Pastor Justine Martyr tho' they as occasion offers frequently mention Pastors Doctors Bishops Presbyters indifferently taking all of 'em for on and the same Office yet of a Diocesan Prelat or one set over other Pastors or over these that had Power of Dispensing the Word and Sacraments in all their Writings have not a syllable Which Argument against a Diocesan Prelat tho' negative is not to be slighted if we consider these Authors their closs Vicinity to the Apostles the occasion they had to have mention'd him had he been then existent their more than a Pythagorick silence concerning him Yea the same kind of negative Argumentation Eusebius uses while he disproves and explodes some Writings forg'd in the Name of John Andrew and other Apostles because saith he no ancient Ecclesiastick Writers mention these Books We shall find moreover that they positively disclaim Diocesan Prelacy I begin with Clemens Romanus who writing to the Corinthians commends their former carriage in these words Ye walked in the commands of God and being obedient to these that had the rule over you and giving your Elders due honour ye were wont to admonish the younger with Moderation to seek after things that are honest And again Wherefore the Apostles preaching the Word thro' the severall regions and proving by the Spirit the first fruits thereof ordain'd Bishops and Deacons for these who should believe neither was this a new Ordinance for many ages before it was written concerning Bishops for so in a certain place saith the Scripture I will appoint their Bishops in Righteousness and their Deacons in Faith And Our Apostles by Jesus Christ our Lord knew that there would arise Contention concerning the Name of a Bishop and therefore being endew'd with a perfect Fore-knowledge they ordain'd the fore-said Officers and left unto us describ'd the particular services of both Ministers and Offices to the end that approv'd Men might succeed in the place of the defunct and execute their Office These therefore who are ordain'd by them or by other famous men with the Consent of the whole Church who blamelesly serv'd the Sheepfold of Christ with humility and quietness without baseness and who for a long time had a good Testimony from all These I say cann't be justly thrust out of their Office for we commit no light sin if we cast out these from the Bishops Office who holyly and blamelesly perform'd it Blessed are these Presbyters or Pastors who have perfited their journey and are dead and who have obtain'd
62 Knox alloweth no Prelacy to England 66 He exhorts the English to embrace a Church-government and Discipline altogether Antiprelatical 67 The Assemblies letter 1566. vindicated from this Author 's pretended allowance of Prelacy 69 Knox acknowledged by the fiercest Prelatists to be truly Presbyterian 70 Superintendents in Scotland a temporary expedient The nullity of this Author's reasons to the contrary detected 72 The falsness of his Gloss of our first Book of discipline largely demonstrated 76 Superintendency not really inconsistent with parity This Authors unchristian rallery his overthrowing of the great principle of Hierarchicks are discovered and his bottomless cavills enervated 77 The stock of Prerogatives he pretends to have belonged to Superintendents evinced to be unserviceable to his design of giving Superintendents a superiority over their Pastors 81 He at once yields the whole cause and clasheth with himself Our first Reformers their opposition to and hatred of Prelacy's being damnable demonstrated The Helvetian and other 〈◊〉 Churches opposite to Prelacy as beeing destitute of Scripture-foundation 86 SECT IX The forraign Reformed Churches truly Presbyterian The Judgement of Luther and Lutherans 89 The mind of Calvin and those called Calvinists both in their private capacities and confessions of the most famous Churches 90 Specimens of the chiefest objections adduced and removed where the uncandide dealing of our Adversaries is unfolded 91 Who yet are forced to acknowledge the truth of our assertion 95 The eminent Opposers of Popery before Luther truly Presbyterian 96 The first Reformers and body of the Church of England at that time for no divine right of Prelacy where some of Saravia's qualities are noted Ibid. SECT X. Some of the manifold Inconveniences attending Prelacy briefly mentioned A Spirit of Persecution still attended it 98 The Principles of Prelacy and practise of Prelatists most Schismatical Ibid. It 's native tendency to introduce Popery 99 And to a Papal Domination and enslaving of the Kingdom 100 The spite and hatred the Hierarchicks shew against our Reformation from Popery their impiety and affection to Popery Ibid. Dr. Burnets exceptions from the Regulars theâ—r trampling on the Bishops and the dealing of the Papalines at the Council of Trent enervated 102 Another exception or retortion of this Author cashier'd 105 Lousness and Prophanity the constant attendent of Prelacy 106 PART II. SECT I. Of Ignatius and his Epistles Papists and other Hierarchicks make a fairer appearance from humane than from Divine Writings 109 A short account of Ignatius and of the Epistles bearing his name 110 Various Editions thereof Ibid. Our Adversaries now acknowledge to be spurious that they once gave out for genuine where of the Florentine Copy 111 Debates among the Learned concerning it Ibid. The unhandsome arts of our Adversaries to free themselves of further dispute 112 The great Confidence they place in Ignatius 113 Three Hypothese laid down according to each whereof Ignatius becomes unserviceable to the Prelatists Ibid. SECT II. The first Hypothesis viz. that Ignatius is at best interpolated Writings pretending to greatest proximity to either Old or New Testament carry most manifest signs of spuriousness in which Divine Providence is observed 114 Their Epistolick Ignatius's want of Apostolick Gravity and Humility his enslaving of the People and flattering yea deifying of all Church-men 115 Dr. Pearsons Exceptions removed 119 Du Pin's self-repugnancy 121 Dr. Wake 's Error discovered 122 A brief sum of the Arguments evincing our assertion 124 Other things very early falsly father'd on Ignatius Ibid His Journey to Rome uncredible 125 SECT III The second Hypothesis viz. That the Antiquity of the true Ignatius could not secure him from all Lapses or Escapes nor serve to prove that there were no declension in his time Whole Churches suerving during the life of the Apostles themselves They grew worse after their death 126 Papias's mistakes and multitude of Followers 127 The failings of Justine Martyr and Irenaus Ibid. The influence they had on the Church The common mistakes of these times in Practicks no less than in Dogmaticks which is instanc'd in their debate about Easter 128 Both parties went contrare to the Apostolick practice which is proved by clear Testimonies of Iranus and Socrates 129 Their strange conduct in managing this debate who Metamorphosed some Apostles into Jewish High-Priests 130 The Credulity and Oseitancy of Hegesippus 131 We are to hearken to God before the chiefest of Men. Divine providence observable in the mistakes of the Ancients 132 SECT IV. The third Hypothesis that there is no real disagreement but a true concord betwixt the Doctrine of Ignatius and that of the present Presbyterians They are reconcil'd by sustaining the Hypothesis of ruling Elders which Office is vouched to be of greatest Antiquity and where Ambrose or Hilary is vindicated against Dr. Field 134 Ignatius most express for the reciprocation of a Bishop and a Pastor of one Congregation 136 Our Adversaries yield the whole Controversy where Dr. Maurice's Mist is dispelled 138 Vindiciae Ignatianae destroy their Authors ultimate design 140 SECT V. The Objections they pretend to bring from Scripture against the Doctrine now deduced from Ignatius removed D. M's reasonings for the Diocesan Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus annihilated 140 No power properly Apostolick ordinary and permanent in the Church 143 Willet's answer to the Iebusites vindicated against their Advocat D. M. 147 The Office and nature of an Evangelist declared out of the Ancients 148 D. Mâ—s mutilation and perversion of Eusebius 149 That Timothy Titus were Evangelists and not Diocesan Bishops made out from Scripture Ibid. Apostles and Evangelists degraded by the Hierarchicks 150 Their Arguments for Timothy and Titus their Diocesan-ship houghed by the very Authors in whom they most confide both ancient and modern Ibid. Their Argument from the Asian Angels several ways overthrown and D. M's shifts and perversions expunged 151 Malach. 2. 7. vindicated against Dr. Hammond 153 His Correction of the receiv'd Greek Coppy of Rev. 2. 24. corrected D. M's strange and wild Gloss. Ibid. Salmasius vindicated against him and the mind of Presbyterians concerning Apocalyptick Angels fully sustain'd by Scripture and Fathers 154 The best of our Adversaries really acknowledge Episcopacy destitute of Scripture warrant Dr. Hammond wholly destroys Episcopacy while he attempts to establish it 155 SECT VI. Our meaning of Ignatius confirmed from the writings of the Apostles his immediate Ancestors Acts 20. v. 17 28 vindicated against Dr. Maurice and others who are by the ears among themselves 157 Philippians 1. 1. vindicated where the Diocesanists their Digladiations are exposed 158 Philippi no Metropolis where Dr. Maurice his weakness is detected the fiction of the existence of Metropoles in the Apostolick age exploded by the Hierarchy's truest friends Dr. Maurice's slippery dealing 159 The first to Timothy 3. vindicated against Bellarmine and his Friend D. M. 162 As is also Titus 1. 164 SECT VII The grand objection taken from the Commentaries of the Ancients The primitive Doctors
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
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.
what not our Author must sustain that Knox reckon'd up whatsoever he judg'd to be Sins and Abuses in that Church otherwise he does nothing But dare he say that Knox there did so Spoke he ever a word of the Tippet Corner-cap and Surplice there being Badges of Idolaters and Marks of the odious Beast Hath he one syllable of Christmas Feasts and such holy Days which he also judged superstitious and sinfull Or of the Faults of their Service-book about which as all Men know fell out the Controversie at Francfort or the depriving Ministers of Power to separate the Lepers from the whole at which our Author grants Knox to have been offended But Knox calls Cranmer that reverend Father in God Ergo. Bellè As if forsooth Knox might not use a Phrase of the common stile of the times but he must be presently concluded a propugner of the Hierarchy Was not at the Assembly in Edinburgh March 1570. whereof John Knox was a Member one of the Heads of Adam Bishop of Orknay ' s Accusation which by the Assembly he was desir'd to redress that he stileth himself with Roman Titles as Reverend Father in God which pertaineth to no Ministers of Christ Jesus nor is giv'n them in Scriptures John Knox continues our Author said the false Religion of Mahomet is more ancient than Papistry yea Mahomet had established his Alcoran before any Pope of Rome was crown'd with a triple Crown c. Can any Man think subjoins our Author John Knox was so very unlearn'd as to imagine Episcopacy was not much Older than Mahomet Or knowing it to be Older that yet he could have been so ridiculous as to have thought it a relict of Popery which he himself affirm'd to be Younger than Mahometism But was Knox so very unlearn'd as not to know that divers Popish Errors and Dotages had generally obtain'd and got good footing before the time of Mahomet Do not these who know any thing know so much Have we not heard how he rejected as unwarrantable and unlawfull Christmas Feasts and such holy Days Will our Author acknowledge they obtain'd not before the rise of Mahomet or the Pope's triple Mitre I think he will not Have we not seen how good space before these times other Innovations as unction of Poenitents and Caelibacy of Church-men were coming in fashion and countenanc'd by the most famous Councils Knox had been unlearn'd indeed if he had not known so much he spoke therefore only of the maturity and more open appearance of the Man of Sin and as he expresses of his coming to his triple Crown and meant not at all that before Mahomet's time no Popish Doctrines were generally broach'd and imbrac'd yet so our Author otherwise he 's quite beside his purpose makes him to speak then which nothing more false and injurious to Mr. Knox can be express'd Hitherto we have been intertain'd with Sophistry so silly and Paralogisms so palpable that 't were unjustice done to this Gentle-man's Intellectuals not to believe that he sufficiently discern'd the Fallacies But he promiseth to make a mends for the future as yet he has only brought up his Rorarios and Velites but now the case is quite alter'd Ecce ferunt Troes ferrumque Ignesque Jovemque § 11. He has yet more to say yes more with a Witness Knox says in his Exhoatation to England Let no man be charg'd in preaching of Jesus Christ above that a man may do I mean that your Bishopricks be so divided that of every one as they are now for the most part may be ten and so in every City and great Town there may be plac'd a godly learned Man with so many join'd with him for Preaching and Instruction as shall be thought sufficient for the bounds committed to their Charge But the Reader impartially weighing what we have adduced must yeeld that 't is impossible either from this or any other place to make Knox a Prelatist except we involve him in manifest self-repugnancy which there is no necessity to do for any thing here said For tho' Knox considering how the English were wedded to something of a hierarchick Splendor had indulged them in a good deal thereof it had been only a parallel Action to that of his Friend Calvin who tho' sufficiently Anti-ceremonial yeelds notwithstanding for a time and for Peace's sake to that Nation some of their Ceremonies which he calls tolerable Fooleries unprofitable Triffles c. Yet I have met with none who on this score has taxed Calvin of Self-contradiction But this ex abundanti for they cannot from these Knox's words conclude that he favoured so much as the least grain of the substance of Prelacy of each of their Bishopricks he makes ten which I think will bring his Lordship comparatively consider'd to a very narrow compass But to shew that he put a definit number for an indefinit he gives not only to every City but to every great Town a Bishop Now of Cities and Mercat-towns in England which there are not inconsiderable there are odds of 600 But that none may justly cavill let 's make a large abatement of the number where they may be smaller and yet I 'm sure so many remain as there should be ordinary Presbytries in England providing it were so divided Moreover the great End and Work of this Bishop Knox makes to be the preaching of the Gospel and instructing of the People of his Dominion and Power over the Clergy not a syllable yea he gives not to him alone the Charge of the Flock 't is their Charge the Charge of the rest no less than the Bishop they are join'd with him not his Curats under him And we have heard him already making the Office of a Bishop nothing else but what is common to all Pastors And if his Doctrine and Practice in Scotland may be allow'd as an Explication of his Exhortation to England this Bishop was subject to the Admonition and Correction of the Presbytry wherein he was Bishop Nothing therefore can necessarily be drawn from Knox's words except that this Bishop was to have if Temporary or continued I dispute not for it touches not the present Question a meer presidency of Order or Moderator-ship nothing of Dominion or Power to Knox's Bishop Nothing therefore of imparity amongst Pastors can from the words in hand with any good consequence be deduced Lastly whatever 't was it appears clear from these words that he allow'd this only for a time during the rarity of Preachers § 12. But hear somewhat more of the same Exhortation Touching the Reformation of Religion saith he ye must at once so purge and expell all dregs of Papistry Superstition and Idolatry that thou O England must judge and hold execrable and accursed whatsoever God hath not sanctifi'd to thee by his blessed Word or by the Action of our Master Jesus Christ. The glistering beauty of vain Ceremonies the heaps of things pertaining nothing to Edification by whomsoever
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
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
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
in Philippi there had been a Bishop superior to the plurality of Bishops saluted by the Apostle Yet on Acts 20. and 17. gives this Paraphrase Because many are ignorant of the Manner especially of the New Testament whereby Bishops are call'd Presbyters and Presbyters Bishops This much may be observed both from this place and from the Epistle to Titus and to the Philippians and 1. to Timothy From this place therefore of the Acts we may arrive at the certainty of this Matter For thus it is written from Miletus he sent and called the Elders of the Church it is not said the Bishops And afterwards he subjoins over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to Feed or Rule the Church and from the Epistle to Titus that thou mightest appoint Elders in every City as I ordain'd thee and from the Epistle to the Philippians to all that are at Philippi with Bishops and Deacons and as I believe the same may be gather'd from the frist to Timothy If any Man saith he desires the Office of a Bishop he desires a good Work a Bishop therefore should be blameless And shortly after let not a Widow be taken into the number under threescore years which the Transcriber of OEcumenius hath out of negligence inserted from the 5. Chap. and 9. ver in stead of the 8. verse of the 3. Likewise let the Deacons be grave c. For this is the Church Canon directing what manner of Man such an one viz. the Deacon ought to be Thus far OEcumenius and not a word more to this purpose where having really proposed the now much tossed Question mustres up four of the chief Places from which the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter is commonly inferr'd and directs us to learn the Solution of this Doubt therefrom Hence 't is certain that OEcumenius no less than Hierome and Aërius of old and Presbyterians now believ'd the Scriptural Identity of Bishop and Presbyter seeing he having brought up these Scriptures which even in the Judgement of our Adversaries creat to the Hierarchicks a vexatious Scruple and pungent Objection is so far from glossing them as thereby to leave any room for a Diocesan Bishop that he plainly informs us that these Scriptures only suffice to dissolve all our Scruples and period the Dispute 'T is evident then that OEcumenius commenting on Philip. 1. 1. or wherever he seems to say nothing against a superiority of Diocesans spoke only out of compliance with the Custom of his time or some such weakness Neither is the matter less clear of Theodoret who altho' he ascribes an Episcopal Dispensation over the Philippians to Epaphroditus yet even then he looks on him as no ordinary or fixed Officer which is really yeelded by Petavius and is plain from Theodoret himself The Apostle saith he calls a Presbyter a Bishop as we shewed when we expon'd the Epistle to the Philippians Which may be also learn'd from this Place For after the Precepts proper to Bishops he describes the things that agree to Deacons omitting the Presbyters But as I said of old they call'd the same Men both Bishops and Presbyters but these who are now call'd Bishops they then call'd Apostles But afterward the name of Apostle was left to the real Apostles And the name Bishop giv'n to these that were of old call'd Apostles Thus Epaphroditus was the Apostle of the Philippians Thus was Titus the Apostle of the Cretians Timothy of the Asians Thus the Apostles and Presbyters at Hierusalem write to the Antiochians And on 1 Cor. 12. 28. first Apostles The Apostle saith not God hath sent onlie Twelve Apostles but also the Seventy And these who also received the like Grace For Paul himself after his Calling was of the same Order and Barnabas and many others And again he calls Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians Where 't is clear as the Sun that Theodoret by these his Bishops or Apostles understands only the real Apostles themselves together with Timothy and Titus and other such Evangelists and extraordinary Officers who never had any fixed Station And this was well perceiv'd by the Jesuite Medina who therefore really yeelds Theodoret with Hierome Aërius Augustine c. to the Presbyterians and warmly recented by Petavius who besides many other places spends at once near a whole Chapter to prove Theodoret a self repugnant blunderer Hence it 's clear that they cann't rent Theodoret from us untill Tullus-like they first rent him from himself Wherever therefore these Ancients so spoke as that they seemed not to oppose the Divine Right of Episcopacy 't is clear they did so out of carelesness or unwarrantable Compliance but mostly as may be gather'd from the handling Aërius mett with out of fear least they had derived on their Heads the hate of much of the then degenerating Church and secularizing Clergy Section VIII Moe clear Testimonies of the primitive Doctors against the Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy and for the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter produc'd and vindicated THE Bishop saith Ambrose or rather Hilary the ancientest Commentator save some Fragments of Origen now extant because he opens the hidden sense of the Scriptures is said to Prophecy chiefly because he dispenses the words of future hope Behold the very Idea the Ancients still retain'd of a Bishop and yet it 's nothing but the real Notion of every true Pastor or Dispenser of the Word and Sacraments Which Order may now be that of the Presbyters For in the Bishop are all Orders for he is the first Priest that is the Prince of Priests and Prophet and Evangelist And whatsoever else is for fullfilling the Office of the Church and Service of the Faithfull And The Apostle calls Timothy a Presbyter whom he had instituted a Bishop for the first Presbyters were called Bishops so that one Dying the next succeeded And lastly in Aegypt the Presbyters ordain in the Bishop's absence where we see what he means by the Prince of Priests and that with him a Bishop was nothing but the first either in Age or in respect of Ordination amongst the Colledge of Presbyters without any other Preheminence or Power over the rest but what these respects gave them Which I 'm sure exceeds not the Dignity of a Moderator of a Synod or Presbyter But because the following Presbyters were not found worthy of the first place this way was changed by a Council that none by his being first in order but by his desert might be made a Bishop and that by the Votes of many Priests least an unworthy Man should rashly usurp the Office to the offence of many There were born Priests under the Law of the Race of Aaron the Levite but now all are Priests according to the Apostle Peter and therefore Priests may be chosen out of the People And on 1 to Timothy 3. But after the Bishop he straight way subjoins the Ordination of a Deacon and why But because of Bishop and Presbyter there 's but
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
proceed to Justine Martyr who thus gives an account of the state of the Churches their particular and weekly Assemblies for receiving the Word and Sacraments After this Bread and Wine tempered with Water is brought to the Ruler or Governour of the Brethren which when he hath received he gives praise and glory to the Parent of all The Deacons give to all present Bread and Wine tempered with Water after they are Consecrated by Thanks-giving and carry them to such as are absent And on Snnday all who live either in Cities or in the Country come together into one place And when the Reader has ceas'd the Governour makes an exhortatory Sermon The voluntary Contribution is laid up with the Governour who distributes it to the Orphans c. Where it 's not only observable that Justine following not the pretended Ignatius but the Apostle Clement Polycarp Hermas mentions only two Orders of Church-men viz. Governours and Deacons but also that he gives a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop to every Congregation and that Justine's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with the Bishop who was then in being is yealded by the fiercest Hierarchicks Heylen who yeelds his whole Plea and says that Justine's President of the Congregation or Bishop ordinarily celebrated the Eucharist and Preach'd God's holy Word and Maurice Well then 't is all one how this ancient Church-Ruler be named whither Presbyter Governour or Bishop seeing there was one for every Congregation that mett for receiving the word and Sacraments the Controversy between us and the Hierarchicks which is not about Names but Things is fully ended if they stand to Justine's Decision § 9. Dr. Maurice would have Justine to be understood as speaking only of the Diocesan Bishops Church For saith he to carry the Bread and Wine to all absents in their severall Duellings was not convenient nor easy in numerous Congregations and they knew not well who were absent But this Perversion is too wretch'd palpable to wheedle any in in his right wit out of Justine's plain Meaning Dr. Maurice knew well enough that in these times of such Fervor and Love among Christians and such Veneration for the Lord's Supper they doubtless most exactly observ'd the Ordinances and absented not without speciall and weighty Causes And seeing the Custome of receiving the Elements at home when they could not come to Church was then in vigour and believed to be their Duty if these Elements were given to Absents as their proper Communion or were only the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the last remains of the Custume of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Love Feasts I now dispute not they took special care to signifie their Absence and Causes thereof by their Relations or Christian Brethren to their Deacons and such as were concerned to know it Neither if we consider the Church-Discipline of these times is it to be doubted that the Deacons had an exact List of all to whom they were each Lords Day to give the Sacrament and consequently by no means could be ignorant who were either absent or present Wherefore tho' the Deacons had been fewer than they were they could easily tho' the whole Congregation had been never so numerous carry the Elements to these very few whom sickness or other lawfull and weighty Reasons had confined to their Habitations all which Dr. Maurice well enough perceived and therefore he 's here no less feeble in his Actings than a man breathing his last and advances only such triffles as may make his Friends ashamed and confirm his Adversaries Neither do I wonder hereat seeing he undertook the Defence of a palpable untruth for not only speaks Justine of the Christian Assemblies in common without the least exception but clearly tells us that he speaks of the meatings of all the Christians for receiving the Word and Sacraments not only in Cities but in the Country a place too base for the Cathedral and Diocesan Bishops Chair and of all such Congregations as in the first day of the Week as the Apostle speaks made Collections or had Deacons for that end which belongs to every Congregation where the Word and Sacraments are dispensed Neither is this ought but what we have discover'd to be the Mind of their Ignatius himself and seconded with the Suffrages of the greatest Friends to Prelacy § 10. Wherefore most vain is D. M's Labour to prove that it follows not from Justine that there were then only two Orders of Church-men Seeing Justine giving a Governour or Bishop to every Congregation quite overturns Diocesan Episcopacy And more vain yet is this that as what he undertakes tho' proved is nothing to his purpose so the Reasons he brings prove nothing of what he undertakes For his first Reason viz. That Justine intended only to give a true account of what was ordinarly performed in the Christian Meetings in opposition to the abominable Stories propagated against them by their Enemies so that he had no occasion to reckon up the several Gradations of the Hterarchy is equally favourable to Prelatists and Papists who may as well use it for a Sanctuary to their Pope as they to their Prelats And indeed had there then either been a Pope over all or a Prelate with Princely Power as D. M. pleads for over a multitude of Churches the Christians seeing they were frequently reproached with an intended Rebellion had found themselves obliged in a special manner to apologize for their Princes and absolute Lords who would have been looked on as little less than the Emperour's Rivalls and Arch-Promoters and Heads of the supposed Insurrection Moreover which we have already noted and fully shews the nullity of D. M's Reason not only Justine but all the genuine Writings of them that went before him mention only like Justine these two Orders of Church-men D. M's second Reason viz. That the Christians were most shy to publish any thing relating either to the Mysteries of their Religion or the Constitution of the Church more than was absolutely necessary in their own Defence c. is another lurking place for Romanists when urg'd to shew the Antiquity of their Innovations and indeed if it do any thing it tends to prove that no Party can make any Advantage of ought spoken or written by the Fathers and if so have att the Foundation of Diocesan Prelacy its prime Advocats acknowledging that no Argument for it can be draun from Scripture but only from the writings of the Fathers His third Reason is that as the Offices so the names of Bishop and Presbyter were not only known to be distinguished in his days among the Christians but he brings no genuine Writer of that Age to prove this and that it is most false is already evinced but even the Heathens knew so much and cites Adrian's Epistle to Servianus but it 's highly probable that the Emperour if we allow him any knowledge of these Affairs understands under the name of Presbyters
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
observed how Hilary makes the Bishop a sedulous Dispenser of the Words of suture Life And indeed all the Hierarchick Grandeur and Domination whereby a Bishop was intirely Metamorphosed into a quite other thing than what he had once been could never notwithstanding obliterate and blot out of thinking Mens Minds the true Scriptural Notion and Idea thereof The Episcopal Dignity consists in Teaching saith Balsamon And the fourth Council of Carthage decrees that a Bishop shall not be imployed in caring for his houshold Affairs but shall wholly occupy himself in Reading and Praying aud Preaching the Word § 12. 'T were endless to alledge all that may be produc'd to this purpose neither could any Man who ever seriously read the Bible have any other Notion of a true Bishop than what is common to every Pastor of a Congregation seeing the Apostle's Description of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. agrees equally to all of them And here it 's observable that still where Bishops are spoken of in Scripture not only is the Work and Office which is injoin'd them that of Teaching and Feeding but also the Name is correlative to the Flock and not to a Company of Clergy-men as Acts 20. 28. Take heed to your selves and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Feed the Church of God 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof or Bishoping it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly as we have oftner than once demonstrated over every particular Congregation there was a Bishop This Assertion may be strongly confirmed from the undoubted Practice of the Church in the fourth Century even when she was fall'n into no small Declension from the Primitive Purity For the Council of Sardica Decrees that a Bishop may not be placed in a Village or small Town where one Presbyter may suffice Dr. Maurice says that this Canon is justified by the Arrians their great multiplication of Bishops to strengthen their Party But the Council it self assigns a quite different Ground that moved them to make this Decree viz. that the Name and Authority of a Bishop fall not into Contempt Where we see the Design of abolishing the Primitive and Apostolick Custome of giving a Bishop indifferently to every Congregation whether in City or in Countrey was the Introduction of a secular Pomp and Grandeur into the Church which finally resolv'd into a Papal Slavery However this Sardican Canon had not so good effect but that about twenty years after a new Sanction thereto was found needfull for the Council of Laodicea Decrees that it shall not be lawfull to place Bishops in little Villages or Countrey Places but only Visitors and that the Bishops who were already placed in these little Villages and Countrey Places should for the future do nothing without the knowledge of the Bishop of the City Mark how a pace the mild and fraternal Church Regimen is turn'd into a Worldly Domination and Dignity to pave the way for a papal Tyranny These rural Bishops or Countrey-parish Pastors for they can be call'd nothing else whom Dr. Beverige acknowledges for real and true Bishops were also assaulted and the subjecting and inslaving of them to the Prelates and Clergy in the greater Cities design'd by other Councils as that of Ancyrum and of Neocesaria and of Antioch there they are called Chorepiscopi i. e. Countrey Bishops And it has been disputed if these were real true Bishops But the same Dr. Beverige not only yeelds but at large pleads for the Affirmative He pretends in the mean while that anciently Bishops were ordained in Cities only many whereof had according to the model of the Empire such ample Territories that 't was impossible for the Bishop of the City his alone to visit and sufficiently to guide them and so it seem'd needfull for such Bishops to have according to the amplitude of their Bishopricks one or two Coajutors in some Region without the City who might disburden them of some parts of the Episcopal Function which could not be done but by some consecrated Bishops Hence 't was that some of these great Bishops Ordain'd in some part of their large Provinces these Bishops but with this provision that these without their leave should do nothing of moment seeing these Regions also belonged to the Care of the City Bishop which we learn continues he from the tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch where it 's expresly Decreed that no Country Bishop Ordain Presbyter or Deacon without the Bishop of the City to which he and his Region is subject But indeed there 's no such thing to be learn'd from that Canon it only says that the Chorepiscopus and his Region was subject to the City as they really were in a Civil Sense not to the Bishop of the City and tho they had said so it 's no proof of his Conclusion seeing they usually pretended Antiquity for the greatest Innovations How far either in or nigh to the Time of the Apostles the Church was from giving to the Bishop such a Princely Dignity as he pretends or from allowing him to do the Work proper to himself by substitute Vassals none acquainted with what remains of these Ancient times can be ignorant and is already oftner then once evinc'd And now I 'm sorry to find a Protestant of sence and Learning lean on that shamefull and most exploded Falshood viz. that the Apostles took the Government of the Empire for their Pattern of Church-Government and darring to publish such gross Falshoods whereof even the more ingenuous Romanists are ashamed The Ecclesiastical Degrees saith Suave were not Originally Instituted as Dignities Preheminencies Rewards or Honours as now they are and have been many hundred years but with Ministery and Charges otherwise called by St. Paul Works and those that exercise them are called by Christ our Lord in the Gospel Workmen and therefore no Man could then enter into cogitation to absent himself from the Execution thereof in his own Person and if any one which seldom happend retired from the Work 't was not thought reasonable he should have either Title or Profit And tho' the Ministeries were of two sorts some Anciently called as now they are with care of Souls others of temporal things for the sustenance and service of the Poor and Sick as were the Deaconries and other inferiour Works all held themselves equally bound to that Service in Person neither did any think of a substitute but for a short time and for great Impediments much less to take another Charge which might hinder that § 13. Bnd now to go on these Countrey Bishops or Pastors could not yet by all these Councils be Un-bishoped And therefore Pope Damasus must next fall on them and authoratively define that they were stark nought in the Church their Institution wicked and
threatning Emulation Hatred and mutual Enmity proudly usurping Principalities or Prelacys as so many places of Tyrannicall Domination To this time doubtless did the Nicene Fathers look in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ancient Customes that they mention which will be denyed by none who remember that even things of a very late date used then to be called ancient and which is yet more they were wont to pretend Apostolick Authority and Tradition for every one of their Innovations For this their Pride and Superstition and such Vices God sent a long and most grievous Persecution after which it might have been reasonably thought they would have returned to the Humility and Simplicity of the Gospell and Apostolick Age. But so far were they from this that the Gangren began faster than ever to consume the Vitals of Chrsitianity and having got a Christian Emperor to indulge and enrich them they quickened their Pace and in the gadiness of Pride and giddiness of Superstition extravaging without bounds in this Declension they piece and piece laid aside the Scripture and in the model of their Government and Worship eyed and followed three patterns the Jewish Policy Ceremonies and Temple where there was one High-Priest the magnificent and splendid Government of the Roman Empire over which there was one Head one Emperor And lastly the way of the Roman Pagan Priests in which there was also at Rome a Pontifex Maximus or High-Priest over all the many Degrees of Priests in the Empire and so in process of time it came to pass that he who by his first Institution was design'd to be a Pastor of a Flock or Congregation and to imitate the Apostolick Simplicity and Humility turned to be the great Antichrist the son of Perdition and grand Emissary and Lieutennant of the red Dragon and these who were ordain'd to be his Fellow-Pastors and Ministers of the Gospel became his Underlings and Slaves in that Apostacy and being martial'd into a thousand Ranks and Orders proved so many Squadrons of hellish Locusts so that scarce in any part of the Creation of God was there ever a more sad and direfull Depravation if it were not when our first Parents fell into the Cloutches of the old Serpent or when the Sons of God became his greatest Enemies and those morning Stars the beautifull Angels turned into infernal Firebrands black and abominable Devils Most observable notwithstanding yea and adorable is Divine Providence in this that even in the growth and increase of this black Apostacy the Church in Opinion and Doctrine at least still held fast the great and capital Articles of Christianity as the sufficiency of the Canonicall Books of Scripture the Doctrine of the holy Trinity of free Grace of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood c. Their great sin lay not in the Defect but in the Excess by superadding to these golden Foundations a heap of hay and stuble the wild Fancies of Apostatising Brains And in process of time equalizing yea and preferring them to these Divine and most necessary Truths comprehended in the Books of the Old and New Testament Then it was when tho' they still acknowledged the Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter or Pastor of a Congregation they must among'st the rest of their novell Foppereis raise one Bishop or High-Priest as they spoke over a number of other Pastors and Churches whose Ordination and Consecration must be accompani'd with a dale of Alloy suitable to this their humane and unwarrantable Institution He must have a Cudgell put in his hand to signifie his Rule and Authority over the People and a Ring to signifie his Pontifical Honour and the hidden Mysiereis wherewithall he is intrusted The Bishop being consecrated shaven and anointed it was his proper Work and Office to erect and consecrate Churches to make their Chrism or Holy Oyl For the Art of Besmearing was pretty early in the Church no later at least than their Diocesan and therewith to anoint the forehead Eyes and Ears of the Baptized to receive the Penitents and perform such greasy businesses about them These and the like Actions were reserved as the special Ornament and Badges of the High-Priest's Honour And indeed hitherto they acted congruouly for 't was but meet that their own Antichristian Inventions the Institution whereof never came into God's mind should be appropriated to their own Church-Officer whom God never appointed Caetera conveniunt sed non levis error in uno est For they debased and polluted God's Ordinance I mean the Ordination of Pastors which they threw in among their Trash and left likewise to their Bishop or High-Priest as a part of his peculiar Province Superstitionists sometimes for such Fooleries deprave the Scripture which Dr. Lightfoot one of the learn'd est of the Church-of England Divines observes and baffles Here saith he Episcopacy thinketh it hath an undenyable Argument for Proof of its Hierarchy and of the strange Rite of Confirmation c. And this is very like another Practice for Antiquity also not a white lower than their Diocesan they made another fixed Church-Officer whom they called an Exorcist His Office was to dispossess and cast out Devils Now surely such an ordinary Church-Officer was never appointed by God and therefore 't is most likely that some of those Exorcists needed some to have casten the Devils out of themselves or at least to have giv'n them a a round doze of Hellebore no less then did any of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Patients But seeing they made such a Church-Officer and the dispossessing of Devils was among'st the greatest and most miraculous Works that ever was practis'd even by the greatest Apostles It may be thought that this Exorcist was one of their highest Church-Officers a Metropolitan certainly Arch-Bishop or Patriarch but he was none of these yea he was no Bishop no Presbyter no Deacon no Sub-Deacon yea not so much as an Acolyth that is a Candle-carier for they us'd in fair-day-light and Sun-shine to light Candles in the Church to obey and fulfill as they said that Scripture John 1. 9. That was the true Light which lighteneth every Man that cometh into the World This Exorcist was yet a degree lower than their Candle-Carier and therefore was plac'd in the very rear and tail of all their Clergy So dangerous yea and unaccountable were many of their Actings but especially in the matter of Church-Office-bearing Moreover I appeal to all the judicious and conscientious if out of a conscientious desire of conforming to the primitive Church our Adversareis make such a horride noise bussle and Schism for their Hierarchy For suppose it to be as true as I hope by this time to all the unbyassed it 's manifested to be false that in all points they could vouch their Hierarchy to be warranted by the true primitive Church and the Government of the one intirely like that of the other yet do they not desert her in many other things
as themselves acknowledge were subject to many considerable lapses and escapes 165 The causes thereof 167 Several reasons demonstrating that if ever the Fathers so glossed these texts as not to hurt Diocesan Episcopacy they then gave not their genuine sentiments 168 SECT VIII Moe clear testimonies of the Primitive Doctors against the Divine right of Diocesan Episcopacy produced and vindicated The testimony of Ambrose or Hilary Bellarmine's perversion discovered 171 Petavius's vain attempts both to exauctorate and deprave Hilary 173 The testimonie of Chrysostome 174 He 's vindicated from Bellarmine's depravation 175 The testimonies of Pelagius Sedulius and Primasius 176 Augustine vindicated against Bellarmine and his Plagiary D. M. 177 Apart of Jerome's testimony on the epistle to Titus vindicated against the dishâ—nest dealing of Bellarmne and D. M. 178 No ground to think that ever Jerome accounted James Bishop of Jerusalem 180 All Dispensers of the Word and Sacraments are in Jerome's account the Apostles Successors 181 The rest of Jerome's testimony on the Epistle to Titus vindicated 182 His testimony out of the Epistle to Enagrius vindicated against Bellarmine and D. M. 183 This doctrine of Jerome most catholick and universally received 188 SECT IX The testimenies of Ignatius his Contemporaries and Suppars disproving what our Adversaries would force him to speak and confirming what we have prov'd to be his mind viz. that he cashiers a Diocesan Prelacy Negative testimonies 190 Clemens Romanuâ—'s positive and clear testimonies 192 Petaviuâ—'s exceptions met with 194 As are these of his Underling D. M. 197 The testimony of Polycaâ—p where Dr. Pearson's strange evasion is routed and D M â— ill gronnded vaporing exploded 199 The testimonies of Hermas where the vanity of D. M. â— Romish Cavills is discovered and Blondel vindicated 200 The testimonie of Justine Martyr where Dr. Maurice's perversions are detected as is also the unreasonableness of D. M's reasons against Justine Martyr's plaine meaning 204 Irenaeus identifies Bishop and preaching Presbyter 206 D. M's Popish querie 207 SECT X. Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy A Bishop is a name of labour a Presbyter a name of honor Ibid The true notions of the Apostolick and Hierarchick Bishop diametrically opposite one to another 209 The example of the Apostolick Bishop followed and the Idea thereof retained by all the true primitive Bishops or Doctors which is all one with the notion of a laborious Pastor of a Congregation Ibid. This is confirmed out of the Council of Sardica and others of these times where Dr. Maurice and Dr. Beverige their sly and perverse dealing is discovered 2â—0 The subjecting of one Pastor or Church to another finally resolved into a Romish slavery 213 Every Disepnser of the Word and Sacraments is a true Bishop 214 That in the least Village and meanest Countrie-places where there was a Congregation there was a true Bishop largely evinced where Dr. Maurice his exceptions is obviated Ibid. All Bishops equal among themselves hence their Hierarchy is overthrown 216 Their Romish argument from the pretendedly uninterupted succession of Diocesan Bishops enervated 217 The argument drawn from the lists of Bishops in Rome and such great Cities satisfied First From the positions already demonstrated which are further confirmed Secondly From the confessed uncertainty of these lists Thirdly From this that in Rome there was at once a plurality of Peter's pretended successors Fourthly From this that Peter was never at Rome which is largely demonstrated Fifthly from the evident falsity of the lists of the Bishops of Jerusalem 218 That the government of the prime primitive Church was truly Presbyterian made out from a cloud of most unsuspected Authors 225 A prostasy gradually turned into a Papal Tyranny 230 The Ancients kept fast the Foundations of Christianity but strayed exceedingly in superstitious additions 231 The Hierarchicks embraceing diverse novell Enormities desert the Primitive Church where Heylen's preversion of the Ancients is discovered Matthew 20 25 c. vindicated and D. M's Romanism and Judaism detected 223 The Bishop of Aiace his Christian Discourse unchristianly eluded and slighted by the Trent-Hierarchicks 239 ERRATA pag. lin read 2 7 r. this 4 23 r. thereto is sufficient 7 1 r. palpably 8 10 r. Jac. 14 1 r. the feares of the. 26 33 dele comma 32 penult r 158. Ibid ibid r 163. Ibid. ult r 53. 37 25 dele y 59 10 dele as 69 21 r hope of their 80 25 r is injoyn'd 82 32 r life 84 1 r Act. 85 13 r their 87 ult r disaprov'd 92 15 r liked 104 33 r from 125 7 r leanes 129 6 r Apostles 137 13 r breaking on bread 140 30 r whereon 150 28 r Apostles 168 21 r expositures 175 24 r other Pastors 178 5 r in 184 12 dele that 185 18 r Apostolical 186 28 r were 188 27 adde it 197 26 dele it 202 18 r from 207 1 r our 214 6 r or Ibid. 7 r of 216 ult r are 217 20 adde acknowledged Ibid. 31 r them Ibid. pen. r de cornu 219 20. r breaks 223 1 Babylon and is called a Persian i. e. a Parthian City and the Metropolis 237 16 r allowable 239 28 r would ADDENDA pag. 71. lin 21. But saith Heylen Cosmographie pag. 332. beeing once settled in an orderly and constant Hierarchy they held the same untill the Reformation began by Knox when he his Associats approving the Genevian Plat-form took the advantage of the Minority of King James the sixt to introduce Presbyterian Discipline and suppress the Bishops pag. 96. lin 9. What was the mind of the Waldenses Hussites saith Voetius speaking of the Opposers of Prelacy Polit. Eccles. part 2. pag. 833. is evident from their most accurat History written by Joh. Paulus Perrinus which is not extant save in their vulgar Tongues Nazianzeni Querela et Votum Justum OR The Fundamentals of the HIERARCHY examined and disproved Part I. Which briefly handles the prime Arguments for the Hierarchy as also some of its Concomitants and Qualities Section I. The Scope of the ensuing Treatise THE purpose of our present Discourse is not directly to handle that much tossed Debate if an Office in the Church for species or kind superiour to that of dispensing the Word and Sacraments hath any footing or warrant in the Word of God Neither will this be judged necessary by any who call to mind that many Treatises disproving the divine right of Episcopacy as Altare Damascenum and Rectius Instruendum have had so good success that for ought I know they stand intirely without any shadow of an Answer Yea the most learned that ever pleaded for the Lawfulness of Episcopacy will not blame us though we yeeld no Scripture-ground to it but only consider it in it self as a thing indifferent of which mind among the Ancients were not only those who denyed not the exercise of his Office to be Lawfull as Hierome but also the very Bishops themselves as Augustine all of them founding this