and therefore the first distribution of it was into several Congregations which in Scripture are called by the name of Churches as being similar parts of the Catholick Church even as every breath of Air is called Air and every drop of water water For thus those Believers who were wont to assemble in any one particular house to worship God together are frequently called Churches as for instances the Church in the house of Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16.5 The Church in the house of Nymphas 1 Cor. 16.19 The Church in the house of Philemon Col. 4.15 In which houses in all probability there was an upper Room Consecrated and set apart according to the Custom of the Jews for divine Worship in which upper Rooms not only the Believers of the Family but several other neighbouring Christians were wont to assemble for the publick exercise of Divine Worship And so where ever the Scripture speaks of several Churches in the same Country as for instances the Churches of Iudea Gal. 1.22 of Samaria and Galileâ— Acts 9.31 it is evident that by these Churches no more is meant but only the several Congregations of Believers in those several Churches But these Congregations growing numerous there was a second distribution made of them by which many of those Congregations neighbouring upon one another were collected into one body under one head or Bishop who was the common guide and Pastor of all the Members whether Lay or Clergy appertaining to them And these Collections of several Congregations under their several Bishops or Governours are in Scripture also frequently called Churches for thus for instance the Church of Corinth contained in it several Congregations and therefore though in the Dedication of his Epistle the Apostle calls it the Church of God in the singular number which is at Corinth 1 Cor. 1.2 yet in the Epistle he enjoyns that the women should keep silence in the Churches 1 Cor. 14.34 which is a plain Evidence that in that Church there were several Churches or Congregations and so also we read of the Churches of Asia and Syria Cilicia and Macedonia all which were large Countries and did without doubt contain in them several Congregations of Christians and thus also we read of the Church of Ierusalem in the singular number and so of Antioch Ephâ—sus c. which Churches doubtless consisted of several Congregations in and about thâ—se Populous Cities which were all united into one body under the care and inspection of one Bishop or Governour Now as the first distribution of the Catholick Church into distinct Congregations was made for the convenience of Worship it being impossible for the whole Church when it began to encrease and enlarge it self to celebrate the divine Offices by the Ministry of one and the same Pastor so this second dâ—stribution of it into particular Churches consisting of several Congregations was made for the convenience of Government and Discipline it being impossible for the whole Church to maintain its Order Government and Discipline under the single inspection of any one Bishop or Governour But yet notwithstanding thâ—se distributions the Churches unity still remains for as the Empire was but one notwithstanding that for the convenience of Society and Government it was distributed into several Cities and Regions and those into several Provinces because they were all incorporated together under one Civil head the Emperor so the Church is but one though for the convenience of Worship and Government it be distributed into several Congregations and those into several particular Churches or Episcopacies because they are all incorporate under one spiritual Head even Jesus Christ the supreme Bishop and Pastor of our Souls Sixthly It is the universal Society of all Christian People distributed into particular Churches under lawful Governours and Pastors and it is this indeed that constitutes them distinct Churches viz. their being joyned and united together under distinct Pastors and Governours For thus a single Congregation is a distinct Church because all the Members of it do locally Communicate together in all the Offices of Divine Worship administred to them by a distinct Pastor and so also a Collection of several Congregations is a distinct Church because they all participate together of the direction and conduct of a distinct Governour For as I shewed before the reason of these distributions of the Catholick Church first into single Congregations was the Convenience of Worship and then into several Collections of several Congregations was the Convenience of Government and therefore since that which serves the convenience of Worship is the having distinct Pastors to administer it and that which serves the convenience of Government is the having distinct Rulers to exercise it it hence necessarily follows that that which makes a Congregation a distinct distribution of the Catholick Church must be its worshipping together under a distinct Pastor and that which makes a Collection of Congregations a distinct distribution of the Catholick Church must be its being united together under a distinct Governour because without their Pastor or their Governour they want the formal reason of their being distributed into distinct Churches And indeed there is no Church whatsoever whether it be a single Congregation or a Collection of Congregations can act as a Church without a Pastor or Governour No Congregation can lawfully communicate in the publick Offices of Divine Worship without a lawful Pastor to administer it no Collection of Congregations can lawfully exert any act of Church-Government without having an authorized Governour to exercise it For the administration of all Church-Offices is committed by our Saviour into the hands of the Churches Officers it is to them that he hath given the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven i. e. Authority to admit or exclude or readmit men into the Communion of the Church It is they alone whom he hath made the Keepers of the Seals of the New Covenant viz. Baptism and the Lord's Supper they alone whom he hath authorized to teach the Gospel to bless the People and to offer up the Publick Prayers of Christian Assemblies And these are the proper acts of a Church considered as a Church so that without Pastors or Governours there is no Church can perform any of those acts that are proper to a Church and therefore since all action proceeds from the Essence of the Agent Pastors and Governours without which Churches as such cannot act must necessarily be essential to Churches and hence the Apostle tells us that the great purpose for which Christ ordained Apostles Prophets Evangelists and Pastors and Teachers was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the compacting or joyning together the Saints as one body in Church-Communion and Society Eph. 4.11 12. and hence also you find the Churches of Asia following the number of the Angels or Rulers of them Rev. 1.20 which plainly implies that therefore they were seven distinct Churches because they had seven distinct Rulers or Bishops and therefore though the Ordination of Pastors and
admonish Hereticks and in case of Pertinacy to reject them from the Communion of the Church chap. 3. vers 10. from all which it is evident that this Apostolate of Titus consisted in his Ecclesiastical Superiority which was the very same in the Church of Crete that the first Apostles themselves had in the several Churches that were planted by them And accordingly he is declared by the concurrent Testimony of all Antiquity to be the first Bishop of that Church so Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 4. affirms him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have received Episcopal Authority over the Churches of Crete So also Theodoret. in Argum. Ep. ad Tit. tells us that he was ordained by S. Paul Bishop of Crete and so also S. Chrysostom S. Ierom and S. Ambrose and several others of the Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers This Episcopal Authority therefore which S. Paul gave Titus over the Church of Crete is another plain instance of the Apostles making Apostles or deriving to others their Apostolick Power and Superiority over particular Churches The fourth and last Instance I shall give is that of Timothy who as it appears by S. Pauls Epistles to him had Episcopal Authority over the Church of Ephesus and this not only over the Laity to command and teach 'em 1 Tim. 4.11 to receive Widows into the Churches Service or reject and refuse 'em 1 Tim. 5.4.9.16 and to oblige the Women to go modestly in their Apparel and keep silence in the Church 1 Tim. 2.11 12. but also over the Clergy to take care that sutable provision should be made for 'em 1 Tim. 5.17 that none should be admitted a Deacon till after competent trial nor Ordained an Elder till after he had well acquitted himself in the Deaconship 1 Tim. 3.10.13 to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over 'em to receive Accusations against 'em and if he found 'em guilty to put 'em to open shame 1 Tim. 5.19 20. and S. Paul charges him to exercise this his Jurisdiction without preferring one before another and without partiality ibid. ver 21. which if he had no Jurisdiction over 'em had been very impertinent and as he had Jurisdiction over the Clergy concredited to him so had he also the Authority of Ordaining 'em for the due exercise of which S. Paul gives him that necessary rule 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay hands suddenly on no man neither be partaker of other mens sins And that this Authority of his in the Ephesian Church over both the Laity and Clergy was given by S. Paul for a standing form of Government there is evident from hence because it was conferred on him after the Presbytery was formed and setled in that Church for in planting and cultivating this large and populous Church which extended it self over all the Proconsular Asia S. Paul had laboured for three years together with incredible diligence which is a much longer time than he spent in any other Church and therefore by this time to be sure he had not only constituted a Presbytery in it as he did in all other Churches Acts 14.23 but also reduced it to much greater perfection than any other that so in the constitution of it it might be a pattern to all other Churches and if so then to be sure the Government which he had now at last established in it was such as he intended should continue viz. by a single Person presiding over both Clergy and Laity And that de facto it was so we have not only the Authority of S. Pauls Epistles to Timothy but also the concurrent Testimony of all Ecclesiastical Antiquity for so Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 4. tells us he was the first Bishop of the Province or Diocess of Ephesus and the Anonimous Author of his life in Photius that he was the first that acted as Bishop in Ephesus and that he was Ordained and Enthroned Bishop of the Metropolis of Ephesus by the great S. Paul and in the Council of Chalcedon twenty seven Bishops are said to have succeeded in that Chair from Timothy who was the first and Saint Chrysostom Hom. 15. in 1 Tim. 5.19 tells us that it is manifest Timothy was intrusted with a Church or rather with a whole Nation viz. that of Asia upon which account he is stiled by Theodoret in 1 Tim. 3.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Timothy the Apostle of the Asiatiques and to name no more of the great numbers of Authorities that might be cited in the Apostolical Constitutions we are expresly told that he was Ordained Bishop of Ephesus by S. Paul. This therefore is another evident instance of the Apostles deriving down their Apostolick Authority Other instances might be given but these are sufficient to shew that the Apostles did not look upon our Saviours institution of a superiour Order of Ecclesiastical Officers as a temporary thing that was to expire with 'em but as a standing Model of Ecclesiastical Government since they derived to others that superiority over the Churches of Christ which he communicated to them For from all these instances it is most evident both that the Apostolical Office did not expire with the Twelve but was transferred by 'em to others and that that which is now called the Episcopacy was nothing else but the Apostolical Office derived from the Apostles to their successors for in the Primitive Language of the Church Bishops are generally stiled Apostles for which no other reason can be assigned but that they succeeded in the Apostolical superiority Thus as hath been shewn before S. Iames Epaphroditus Titus and Timothy are stiled Apostles in Scripture and by the Primitive Writers Clemens Bishop of Rome who was a Disciple of the Apostles is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Clemens the Apostle vid. Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 4. and Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostle and Bishop by S. Chrysostom and Thaddaeus who was sent b◠S. Thomas to the Prince of Edessa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Eusebius and so are also S. Mark and S. Luke by Epiphanius and Theodoret lays it down for a general rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. those whom we now call Bishops were anciently called Apostles but in process of time the name of Apostle was left to them who were more strictly Apostles viz. the Twelve and the name of Bishop was restrained to those who were anciently called Apostles If therefore the practice of the Apostles proceeding upon the express institution of our Saviour be sufficient to found a Divine Right we have this you see to plead for a superiority and subordination of Ecclesiastical Offices since the Apostles did not only Ordain Presbyters and Deacons in the several Churches they planted but also Apostles or Bishops to preside over 'em and if their Ordaining of Presbyters be an argument of the perpetuity of the Office of a Presbyter as the Presbyterians themselves contend it is why should not their Ordaining Bishops also be as good an Argument of the perpetuity of the
universal conformity of the Primitive Church to the Episcopal Government it remains that if any credit may be given either to those Writers that lived in the Apostolick age or to those who immediately succeeded 'em it is evident from their unanimous Testimonies that the Episcopacy is nothing else but only the Apostolick superiority derived from the hands of the Apostles in a continued succession from one Generation to another and to reject their Testimony is not only very unreasonable there being at least as much reason why we should reject all ancient History but also of very dangerous consequence since 't is from thence that we derive the very Canon of Scripture and so we may as well reject it in this instance as in the other IV. And lastly That the rightful Government of the Church of Christ is Episcopal is evident also from our Saviours declared allowance and approbation of the Primitive practice in this matter viz. in those seven Epistles which he sent by S. Iohn to the seven Churches of Asia all which he directs particularly to the seven Angels of those Churches whom he not only stiles the seven Stars in his own right hand or the seven lights of those seven Churches Vid. Rev. 1.20 and Rev. 2.1 but in every Epistle particularly owns 'em for his Angels or Messengers if therefore we can prove that these seven Angels were at that time the seven Bishops that presided over both the Clergy and Laity of those seven Churches they will be an unanswerable instance of our Saviours allowance and approbation of the Episcopal Order In order therefore to the clearing this matter I shall shew First That they were single persons Secondly That they were persons of great Authority in those Churches Thirdly That they were the Presidents or Bishâ—ps of those Churches First That they were single Persons is evident because they are all along mentioned as such the Angel of the Church of Ephesus in the singular number the Angel of the Church of Smyrna and so of all the rest and so every where in the Body of the Epistles they are all along addrest to in the singular number I know thy works and thy labour nevertheless I have a few things against thee remember whence thou art fallen repent and do thy first works and the like in all which our Saviour plainly writes to 'em as to single persons It is true what he writes to them he writes not only to them personally but also to the People under their Government and inspection and therefore sometimes he mentions the People Plurally so Chap. 2. ver 10. The Devil shall cast some of you into Prison and so ver 13. and ver 23. but this is so far from arguing that these Angels were not single persons that it argues the quite contrary since if they had not what reason can there be assigned why our Saviour should not mention them plurally as well as the People I know it is objected that the Angel of the Church of Thyatira is mentioned Plurally Chap. 2. ver 24. but unto you I say and unto the rest of Thyatira where by you it is supposed must be meant the Angel and by the rest of Thyatira the People To which I answer that in the ancient Greek Manuscripts and particularly in that at S. Iames's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or and is left out and so the words run thus but unto you the rest of Thyatira or to the rest of you at Thyatira which is set in opposition to those of Thyatira that had been seduced into the Sect of Iezebel and therefore cannot be understood of the Angel who is all along mentioned in the singular number wherefore had he not been a single person no account can be given why he should be mentioned singly and the rest of Thyatira Plurally But then Secondly That these single persons were of great Authority in those Churches is evident not only by that honourable title of Angel that is given them which plainly shews them to be persons of Office and Eminence and that not only by our Saviours directing his Epistles to them to be communicated by them to their several Churches but also from that authority which the Angel of Ephesus exercised there and which the Angels of Pergamus and Thyatira ought to have exercised but did not For as for the Angel of Ephesus he is commended for trying them which said they were Apostles and were not and discovering them to be liars which words plainly denote a Iuridical Trial and Conviction of some person or persons who pretended to Apostolical Authority but upon examination were found to be Cheats and Impostors and then as for the Angel of the Church of Pergamus he is blamed for having in his Church those that held the Doctrine of Balaam or of the Nicolaitans which plainly shews that he had power to remedy it by casting them out of the Church for if he had not how could he have been justly blamed for suffering them And the same may be said of the Angel of the Church of Thyatira who is also blamed for suffering the woman Jezebel which was not in his power to prevent unless we suppose him to have Authority to eject her and her Followers But then Thirdly and lastly That these single persons were the Presidents or Bishops of those Churches is also evident from the most Primitive Antiquity for so in the Anonymus Tract of Timothy's Martyrdom recorded in Biblioth Pat. n. 244. we are told that when S. Iohn the Apostle returned from his Exile in Patmos which was two or three years after he wrote his Revelations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. that being assisted with the presence of the seven Bishops of that Province he assumed to himself the government of it Now that these seven Bishops were the same with those seven Angels he wrote to in his Revelations is evident because all those seven Churches in which those seven Angels presided lay within the Circuit of the Lydian or Proconsular Asia of which Ephesus was the Metropolis and therefore who else can we so fairly suppose these seven Bishops to be by whom he governed the Province of Ephesus as the seven Angels of those seven Churches which were all of them within that Province and S. Austin expresly calls the Angel of the Church of Ephesus the Proepositus Ecclesiae i. e. the Governour of the Church Ep. 162. and speaking of those seven Angels he stiles them Episcopi sive praepositi Ecclesiarum the Bishops or Governours of the Churches Comment in Revel so also the Commentaries under the name of S. Ambrose referring to these Angels in 1 Cor. c. 11. expresly tells us that by those Angels he means the Bishops and that they were so is most indubitably evident of the Angel of the Church of Smyrna in particular who could be no other than S. Polycarp who was most certainly made Bishop of Smyrna some years before the writing these Epistles and continued Bishop of
you keep bound or obliged to that Penalty I also will keep bound and obliged to this This is the Spirtual Iurisdiction which Christ hath established in his Church to bind or loose suspend or restore excommunicate or absolve and this he hath wholly deposited in the Episcopal Order For in all the above-cited places it was only to his Apostles that he derived this Iurisdiction they alone were the Stewards to whom he committed the Keys and Government of his Family and it was to them alone that he promised that they should sit upon twelve Thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel that is to Rule and Govern the spiritual Israel which is the Christian Church even as the Phylarchae or Chiefs of the Tribes governed the twelve Tribes of natural Israel Mat. 19.28 and hence in that Mystical representation of the Church by a City descending from Heaven Rev. 21. the Wall of it is said to have twelve foundations and upon them twelve names of the twelve Apostles ver 14. and those twelve foundations are compared to twelve precious stones to denote their power and dignity in the Church ver 19 20. and the Wall being exactly meted is found to be 144 Cubits that is twelve times twelve to denote that these twelve Apostles had each of them an equal portion allotted him in the Government and administration of the Church ver 17. This spiritual Iurisdiction therefore of governing the Church and administring the Censures of it being by our Saviour wholly lodged in the Apostolate none can justly claim or pretend to it but such as are of the Apostolick Order and accordingly in the Apostolick Age we find it was always administred either immediately by the Apostles themselves or by the Bishops of the several Churches to whom they communicated their Order for thus in the Church of Corinth it was S. Paul who pronounced the Sentence of Excommunication against the incestuous person for I verily as absent in body but present in spirit have judged or pronounced Sentence already as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed 1 Cor. 5.3 and what he orders them to do ver 4 5. was only to declare and execute his Sentence and 2 Cor. 13.2 he threatens them that heretofore had sinned that if he came again he would not spare them and that by his not sparing them he meant that he would proceed against them with Ecclesiastical Censures is evident from ver 1. In the mouth of two or three Witnesses shall every word be established which are the very words of our Saviour Matt. 18.16 when he instituted the power of Censuring and then ver 10. he tells them that he wrote these things being absent lest being present he should use severity according to the power which the Lord had given them to edification and not to destruction by which it is plain he means the power of Excommunicating and 1 Cor. 4.21 he threatens to come to them with a Rod that is to chastise them with the Censures of the Church and with this Rod as he himself tells he chastised Hymenoeus and Alexander two stickling Hereticks in the Church of Ephesus whom he delivered unto Satan that they might learn not to blaspheme 1 Tim. 1.20 and as he frequently executed the Censures of the Church in his own Person so he derived this spiritual Iurisdiction to Timothy and Titus whom he Ordained Apostles or Bishops of the Church of Ephesus and Crete for so he orders Timothy against an Elder Receive not an Accusation but before two or three Witnesses which plainly implies his Authority to examine and try the causes even of the Elders themselves when they were accused and to punish them if he found them guilty for so it follows Them that sin rebuke before all that others also may fear 1 Tim. 5.19 20. so also he exhorts Titus to exercise this his spiritual Jurisdiction A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Tit. 3.10 which plainly implies that he had an Authority inherent in him as he was the Apostle or Bishop of Crete to Cite Examine Admonish and Censure persons of erronious Principles and the same Authority it is evident was inherent in the Angels or Bishops of the seven Churches of Asia Thus the Bishop of Ephesus had Authority to try such as said they were Apostles and were not and to convict them for Liars Rev. 2.2 and the Bishop of Pergamus is blamed for tolerating the Sect of the Nicolaitans in his Church ver 14 15. and so also is the Bishop of Thyatira for suffering that woman Iezebel ver 20. which plainly implies that the Authority of curbing and correcting those profligate Sectaries was inherent in them else why should they be blamed any more than others for not restraining them From all which it is evident that the power of Christian Jurisdiction was Originally seated in the Apostolate and that throughout the Apostolick Age it was always exercised by such and only such as were admitted into that sovereign Order viz. either by the twelve Prime Apostles or by those secondary Apostles whom they ordained Bishops of particular Churches and accordingly we find in the Primitive Ages the Bishops were the sole administrators of this spiritual Iurisdiction and though ordinarily they administred it with the advice and concurrence of their Presbytery yet this was more than they thought themselves obliged to for thus S. Cyprian in the time of his recess did by his own single Authority Excommunicate Felicissimus Augendus and others of his Presbyters Ep. 38 39. and when Rogatianus a Bishop of his Metropolitick Church complained to him in a Synod of a disorderly Deacon he tells him that pro Episcopatus vigore Cathedrae authoritate i. e. by his own Episcopal authority without appealing to the Synod he might have chastised him And the fifth Canon of the first Nicene Council plainly shews that it was then the judgment of the Catholick Church that the power of spiritual Iurisdiction was wholly seated in the Bishops for it decrees that in every Province there should be twice a year a Council of Bishops to examine whether any person Lay or Clergy had been unjustly excommunicated by his Bishop which shews that then this Sentence was inflicted by the Bishop only though afterwards to prevent abuses it was decreed in the Council of Carthage that the Bishop should hear no mans Cause but in the presence of his Clergy and that his Sentence should be void unless it were confirmed by their presence but yet still the Sentence was peculiarly his and not his Clergies In some Churches indeed the Bishops did many times delegatâ— power to their Presbyters both to excommunicate and absolve as perhaps S. Paul himself did in the Church of Corinth but in this case the Presbyter was only the Bishops mouth and his Sentence received all its force from that Episcopal Authority he was armed with IV. Another peculiar Ministry of the Bishops and Governours of