only from these titular Bishops and Rent-gatherers to the Courtiers supported with all the might Wit and Artifice of an awfull gripping politick Regent and no few other potentand subtile Courtiers driving their own ends as has already appeared and is most evident from the best accounts now extant of these Affairs and this is the undoubted Cause why the six Collocutors at the Assembly in August 1575. think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the Question of the Function of Bishops But he who stilleth the noise of the Seas the noise of their waves having restrain'd these impetuous Tempests how cordially did our Church proceed to the utter extirpation of Prelacy Forsamekle they are the words of the Assembly holden at Dundee Anno 1580. July 12. Sess. 4. as the Office of a Bishop as it is now used and commonly taken within this Realme hath no sure warrant authority or good ground out of the Book and Scriptures of God but brought in by the folly and corruption of mens invention to the great overthrow of the true Kirk of God the whole Assembly of the Kirk in one voice after liberty given to all Men to reason in the matter none opponing themself in defence of the said pretended Office findeth and declareth the samine pretended Office used and termed as is above said unlawfull in the self as having neither fundament ground nor warrant in the word of God c. And in all this our Church as she clearly here expresses did nothing save what she was oblig'd to do by her own Principle in the first Book of Discipline which affirms that all thing necessary for the instruction of the Church is contain'd in the Books of the Old and New Testament And that whatsoever is without express commandment of God's Word is to be repress'd as damnable to Salvation Our Reformers therefore except our Adversaries say which even impudence it self dare not say that they believ'd the Hierarchy to be founded on the express command of God's Word were bound by this their Principle to oppose it as a manifest corruption and according to this Principle whensoever Prelacy by force of the secular arm and fraud of serpentine policy and as one well words it by terrors and allurements crosses and commodities banishment and benefices for by other means it could never be admitted overwhelm'd this Land and discover'd the Hypocrisie or Gallio-like Disposition of many all the true Lovers of our Reformation still then had in greater or lesser measure as their love was to this truly Protestant yea truly Catholick and Christian Principle of our Reformers their Feasts turned into Mourning their Songs into Lamentation their Tears for Meat and their Harps hang'd on the Willows And now suppose that our Reformers in that unstable condition of our Church and very first rudiments of Protestancy had in some of their Doings or Saying afforded some colour or appearance either for the scruples of the curious or the quirks and cavils of the captious does not pray this most unanimous most clear and every way most unexceptionable Act of our most full and free Generall Assembly that consisted for the far greater part of the very same Men who were the Actors and Promoters of our first Reformation most fully open our Remormers their minds shew their ultimat tendency and scope and finally for ever determine the present Controversie § 8. He hath more to say of John Knox I return therefore to attend him His next Plea is with Calderwood about Beza's Letter to Knox where he denies that Beza wrote being inform'd by Knox of the Courts intention to bring in Bishops and adds that if any thing of Knox ' s Sentiments can be collected from Beza ' s Letter it seems rather he was for Prelacy than for Presbytry For Beza saith he seems clearly to import that Knox needed to be caution'd against Prelacy Beza's Words are But I would have you my dear Knox and the other Brethren to Remember that which is before your eyes that as Bishops brought foorth the Papacy so false Bishops the relicts of Popery shall bring in Epicurism to the World They that desire the Churches good and safety let them take heed of this Pest and seeing ye have put that Plague to flight timously I heartily pray you that Ye never admit it again albeit it seem plausible with the pretence or colour of keeping unily which pretence deceiv'd the ancient Fathers yea even many of the best of ' em Where Beza without giving any proof thereof clearly supposes as a thing believed by Knox no less than by himself that the Bishops whom some were then labouring to introduce into Scotland were false Bishops the relicts of Popery which had already been once driv'n out of Scotland and on this supposition as any Orators use to do from Principles common to themselves and these to whom they are speaking he admonish'd him and the rest to beware of this Plague Certain it is then if we believe Beza that he knew if by a Letter from Knox or otherwise concerns not the matter in hand that Knox judg'd the Bishops then to be introduc'd to be no others than were the Popish Bishops whom Knox and his fellow Reformers had lately expuls'd Scotland and both sorts of Bishops to be equally false and Anti-christian And now consider this Letter of Beza written near the same time with that of Knox to the Assembly and the disinterested shall soon perceive that the former explains the latter and sufficiently shews what Knox meant by the Tyranny mention'd therein Moreover whosoever finds so much against Episcopacy in Beza even tho' it had been spoken by him without any relation or respect to Knox and remembers how universal and firm Concord was between these excellent Persons Qui duo corporibus mentibus unus erant will easily conclude that Knox bore but small kindness to Prelacy § 9. He comes next to prove Knox was not for Parity Had he been saith he so perswaded how seasonable had it been for him to have spoken out so mnch when he was brought before King Edward ' s Council The Question was then put to him whether he thought that no Christian might serve in the Ecclesiastical Ministration according to the Rites and Laws of the Realm of England Yet he answer'd nothing but that no Minister in England had Authority to separate the Lepers from the whole which was a chief part of his Office Plainly founding all the unlawfulness of being a Pastor of the Church of England not only the unlawfulness of the Hierarchy which he spoke not one word about but on the Kings retaining the chief Power of Ecclesiastical Discipline As if Knox had judg'd nothing in the Church of England unlawfull but the King 's retaining the Ecclesiastical Discipline in his own hand which all Men even Episcopals no less than Presbyterians know to be an arch and palpable untruth Does not as for example our Assembly Anno 1566.
Acts 20. Philip. 1. and the like Texts which we now use that Bishop Pastor and Presbyter are all one and the same and that in one Church there were at one time conjunctly many Bishops Of the same mind are all the Systematick Divines yea even Tilen himself while Orthodox We judge saith he not only with Hierome but also with Lombard Gratian Card. Cusan and others that the preferring one out of the Colledge of Pastors to the rest and giving him the name of Bishop was a humane Invention This Author indeed alter'd his mind concerning Church Government when he pelagianiz'd for then he turns altogether tho' to his cost a Hectorer of the Zelots of the Genevan Discipline Time would fail me in collecting Testimonies of this kind seeing there were ever few I may say none save a small handfull in Britain who have not asserted that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as any distinction between Bishop and Pastor or preaching Presbyter and that among these there was an intire equality To these we may add the Testimonies of the most and famousest of the reformed Churches in their Confessions whereof we have seen not a few already while we related the Testimony of the Helvetian Confession together with the approbations thereof no less illustrious and pregnant is the Testimony of the French Consession We believe say they that all true Pastors where ever they be are endu'd with equal and the same power under that one Head Christ the Chief and Vniversal Bishop To the same purpose also speaks the Dutch Confession We believe say they that this true Church ought to be governed by that spiritual Policy so that there be in it Pastors or Ministers that may purely dispense the Word and Sacraments that there be also Elders and Deacons c. § 3. The harmonius and Catholick Testimony of all the reformed Churches are to some like pricks in their eyes and thorns in their sides and therefore most various and hetrogeneous means are used to render it unserviceable And amongst other things we are told that many forraign Divines and Churches have a great likeing for their Diocesan Way and Zanchius say they counts all its Opposers Schismaticks But Maresius answers that Zanchius never allow'd of a Lord Bishop but only of such a one who is like a Rector of a Colledge whose Power I 'm sure is little or nothing above that of a Moderator Maresius adds that he can find in no place of Zanchius the words Prideaux had alledg'd And lastly as Maresius tells us Zanchius professes that he cannot but love the zeal of such as hate the names of Bishop and Arch-Bishop fearing least with these Names the ancient Ambition and Tyranny together with the destruction of the Churches should return Prideaux also alledges that Calvin writing to the King of Poland advises him to establish Bishops and Arch-bishops But has the same return from Maresius viz. that this is the Bishop's own Dream and that there is no such thing to be found in Calvin This dealing is not very laudable Neither are Means wanting to procure Advocats from Abroad one whereof brings many things either to defend or excuse the Hierarchy and to shew that it 's not ill link'd abroad and amongst other things saith that notwithstanding of what is in the Helvetian Confession its Authors condemn not the Liberty of other Churches as they manifest in their Preface protesting that in all this Confession they agreed with the Church of England But this Author cann't be ignorant that seeing according to that Confession Christ gave equal Power to all Pastors and according to what is alledg'd to be the Judgement of the present Church of England he did the quite contrary Their Preface can by no means prove that they allow of the Sentiments and Practice of the present English Church except he would have the Preface to contradict the Confession But all this he says is only to darken an evident Truth the meaning of the Preface being that between the Helvetians and the English there was no such fundamental Difference as prohibited mutual Charity one to another which many have given and may give to these who as they judge retain'd many Errors tho' not Fundamental The same Author objects that many Churches and amongst others that of the Helvetians have either Bishops over their Pastors or which is really the same Superintendents But to instance in the Helvetians they in their Confession saying that Christ gave a like Power to all Pastors c. and therefrom concluding that none may hinder to return to Christ's primitive Institution make most apparent that they intended no continuation of any Superiority amongst Pastors and consequently of no Bistops or their equivalent Superintendents but all this work he makes is dicis gratia for the fashion only for if in Helvetia or else where there be any umbrage of Bishops or Superintendents it 's really an Obtrusion and Erastian Usurpation and this we may learn from himself freely acknowledging that the chief legislative Power in the Church matters is in the hands of the supream Magistrat Otherways he confesses that the choisest of Writers and amongst others Hoornbeck make the Discipline of the Scots French Dutch and Helvetian Churches to be one and the same Moreover he sufficiently answers himself while he expresly grants that between the Superintendents or Bishops through Germany and these of England there is an infinit difference and that these in Germany have only a simple prerogative of Order but not at all of any Jurisdiction or any thing that can be properly term'd Power Thus he And I 'm sure that any Pâ—aeses of an Assembly hath no less Superiority than he here ascribes to these transmarine Superintendents or Bishops and indeed shortly to give an account of this Author besides as we have now seen he is oblig'd to pull back with the one hand what he had bestow'd on the Hierarchicks with the other his whole Discourse leans upon this Supposition that there is no certain Form of Church Government left by Christ in his Word on this depend his Glosses upon the passages we produced of the French and Dutch Confessions Vide inter alia part spec a pag. 171 ad pag. 189 where he all along presupposes and inculcats that tho' according to the Authors of the Confessions Christ gave equal Power c. to all Pastors yet in their Judgement if the Church will she may alter this kind of Government and change that Equality which Christ gave for an Inequality and give some Pastors a Power over the rest Which if it be not a Contradiction to these Confessions in stead of an Explication it looks as like it is one Crow can be like another For who can believe but that if the Authors of these Confessions had believ'd an indifferency of Equality or Inequality of Pastors they had either intimated
All Men agree that this Nation viz. Scotland had Palladius their first Bishop from Pope Coelestine And again thus you are instructed how to refuse these who alledge that Sedulius the Christian Poet whom Pope Gelasius so much extolls had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots for seeing even Sedulius himself lav'd in the time of Theodosius the Emperor how could he have had for his Master Hildebert the Arch-bishop of the Scots seeing there was no Arch-bishop yet ordain'd in Scotland and Palladius is without debate affirm'd to have been the first Bishop of that Nation This is yet more plainly express'd by the most learn'd Antiquaries of our Country all of them agree in this that before Palladius the Church was rul'd and guided without any Diocesan Bishops For as Fordun hath it before the coming of Palladius the Scots following the Custom of the primitive Church had Teachers of the Faith and Dispensers of the Sacraments who were only Presbyters or Monks And Iohannes Major saith the Scots were instructed in the Faith by Priests and Monks without Bishops And Hector Boethius Palladius was the first of all who exercis'd any Hierarchical Power among the Scots being ordain'd their Bishop by the Pope whereas before their Priests were by the suffrages of the People chosen out of the Monks and Culdees Add hereto the known Testimony of Buchanan and of Sir Thomas Craig To pass over saith he that most silly ' Fable of the three Archflamins and the twenty eight Flamins it 's plain that there was no Bishop in Britain before Palladius who is by the English themselves call'd the Bishop of the Scots or if either the Brittons or English have any let them name them and at what time they flourish'd § 3. Yea so clear is this Truth that the most learn'd of our Adversaries have found no better way to elude when they cannot clide it than as Torniellus in another case said of Bellarmine to endeavour the penetrating of a most firm wall and cast the History about fourty of our ancient Scotish Kings as a forg'd legend Among these is Loyd Bishop of St. Asaph but both he and Dr. Stillingfleet are nervously refuted by the learn'd Sir George Mâ—kenzie Advocat and that their main purpose and undertaking was utterly desperat he makes soon appear And tho' saith he this Author could prove that we were not settl'd here before the year 503 yet that could not answer the Argument viz. that is brought against Episcopacy from the Scotish primitive Church-government for the Culdees might have been settl'd before that time And thus in a few syllables he demonstrats that the Bishop as to his ultimat design had only his labour for his cost But Sir George being too sagacious not to foresee that from the mutual strugglings between himself and the Bishop any man might easily conclude that Presbytry was the primitive Government of the Church of Scotland and having been one of the prime Instruments to put in execution the prelatical Fury judg'd himself concern'd in credit to say somewhat in favours of Episcopacy and attempt the stoping of such an Inference Wherefore to this purpose in a Letter to the Earl of Perth prefix'd to the defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland He makes several assayes The first whereof is That this is one of the meanest Arguments that ever were us'd by a Presbytâ—rian And that it is a weak Argument saith he appears from this that I have met with very few Laicks in all our Countrey who had heard of it nor with one even of these few who had valu'd it But be it so that the Argument seem mean we gain notwithstanding a most sufficient Argumentum ad hominem seeing our ablest Adversaries value it so much yea Sir George himself clearly acknowledges this while he saith and what can the Presbyterians think of their other Arguments which they value much since this which they valu'd so little is thought of such force by a learn'd Bishop as to deserve a whole book the cutting off of 44 Kings and the offending a Nation of Friends But it 's nothing tho' the Laicks had neither valu'd nor heard it seeing as himself grants Blondel with whom join the rest of the Presbyterian Writers urg'd it Hence appears that this Argument is by both Parties judg'd to be of great force and consequence for the solution whereof the Advocat brings nothing save what is altogether unworthy of any ingenous man As for example since saith he it cannot be deni'd but that these who ordain'd our Presbyters were Bishops it necessarly follows that Episcopacy was settl'd in the Christian Church before we had Presbyters or Culdees Wherein as to the solution of our Argument which was the scope of his Letter he only begs the Question and gives us what is impertinent thereto and contradicts moreover these our Historians whose credit he so excellently vindicats seeing as we heard they plainly tell us that our ancient Anti-diocesan practice was the very custom of the primitive Church And when our Historians say that the Abbots of Icolm-kill had Jurisdiction over all the Bishops of the Province that is to be understood as Beda observes more inusitato after an unusual manner And yet he compares this practice of the Abbot to that of a King who makes one a Bishop and to the practice of a Mother who makes her Son a Church-man now if it be any strange or surprising thing for a King by his Congé d'eslire to make one a Bishop or for a Mother to educate her Son in order to be a Church-man and procure some place for him let any man judge And later Historians saith the Advocat meeting with these ambigous words in our Annals Designatus Electus Ordinatus were by a mistake induc'd to appropriat these words to the formal Ceremony of Ordination and Imposition of hands As if any man in his wit could take these words to mean any other thing than Ordination providing they be as they are in our Annals spoken of one Church-man in relation to another Moreover he knew sufficiently that the best Records of our Country expresly say that our Church was rul'd by Presbyters without Bishops and so leave not the least room for tergiversation Bede is one of these Authors who creat them so much vexation for speaking of Icolm-kill the Isle saith he still uses to have for its Rector an Abbot who is a Presbyter to whose Jurisdiction the whole Province and even the Bishops themselves after an unusual manner ought to be subject according to the example of their first Teacher who was no Bishop but a Presbyter Hence it 's clear that even in Bede's time Bishops were but of smal note here and their power much less than in other Churches They are therefore much pain'd with Bede's words and chiefly St. Asaph who amongst other odd things he excogitats tells us that the Superiority this Presbyter had
over the Bishops was only in respect of the royalty of the Isle which the King gave the Abbot As if ever Bede or any man else could have mark'd such a Superiority as strange and unusual it being nothing but what every Prince or Lord of any place still practises who altho' he subject himself to a Bishop in Spirituals yet in respect of Temporals and the Royalty uses to retain the Superiority But which ' utterly spoils the Bishop's comment Bede tells that all Columbanus got was the possession of a little Isle able to sustain about five Families for building of a Monastry without the least mention of his being invested with the Royalty thereof or any other Island and yet to him were all the Bishops of the whole Province all the Bishops of Scotland saith the Saxon Chronicle cited by the Bishop himself subjected so that this pretended Royalty of Columban over the Island becomes a vain dream tho' 't were real could do him no kindness the whole Prouince being certainly a far other thing than any such Island wherefore the Superiority this Presbyter had over these Bishops must needs have been in Ecclesiastick affairs and this was really remarkable and unusual But of this enough for whosoever believes that the errand of this most ancient Preacher and Propagator of Christ's Kingdom was to win an earthly Kingdom to himself and that the King shar'd with him his Soveraignity and Realm may as soon swallow the whole legend of Constantine's Donation to Sylvester But to return to the Advocat as in the things that he touches he wholly prevaricats so he never handles our main Argument which is taken from what is related of our Churches practice preceeding the coming of Palladius He only refers to Spotswood who says Buchanan is of opinion that before Palladius his coming there was no Bishop in this Church what warrant he had to write so I know not except he did build upon that which Joannes Major saith speaking of the same Palladius The Scots he says were instructed in the Christian Faith by Priests and Monks without any Bishops But from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith to conclude that the Church after it was gathered had no other form of Government will not stand with any reason For be it as they speak that by the Travels of fome pious Monks the Scots were first converted unto Christ it cannot be said that the Church was ruled by Monks seeing long after these times it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with matters of the Church nor were they reckon'd among the Clergy But it 's strange how he can alledge Buchanan to be supported by no Authors except Major for Palladius his being Scotland's first Bishop he could not but know that not only Major but also Fordun Bede with many others within the Isle Prosper Bergumensis and among the later Historians the Magdeburgenses Baron with many other Transmarines assert it And this last affirms that none can deny it § 4. It 's true Spotswood says that Boeth out of ancient Annals reports that these Priests were wont for their better Government to elect some one of their number by common suffrage to be Chief and Principal among them without whose knowledge and consent nothing was done in any matter of importance and that the person so elected was called Scotorum Episcopus a Scots Bishop or a Bishop of Scotland But they reap little advantage here for in Boeth's words y there is no mention as the Bishop without book affirms whether these Annals were ancient or modern But whatever they be Hector gives ground to believe that he had Annals declaring the contrary as appears by his words above cited where he homologated that common sentiment of Christians and told us that Palladius was our first Bishop and that none before him had any Hierarchical Power in Scotland To alledge therefore Boethius as espousing their cause here is ony to set him at variance with all Christians and by the ears with himself But grant it were as Spotswood says yet there should no small dammage accreu to their Cause seeing on supposition hereof it follows that the Episcopal Ordination was altogether wanting in the primitive Church of Scotland it not being supposeable that this one man could Ordain all the Pastors in Scotland yea that even this their great Bishop had no other Ordination himself but what he receiv'd from Presbyters § 5. The Bishop's following words from the instruction of the Scots in the Faith c. are altogether void of reason For it 's granted that after the coming of Palladius which is the time whereunto he must refer the gathering of the Church she then indeed began to have another Government and never man yet pleaded that because the Church of Scotland was not govern'd by Bishops before Palladius therefore 't was not really govern'd by them after his coming which is the Inference the Bishop's words seem to deny But I believe there is more in them for they are abstruse and judge their meaning to be that tho' we had no Bishops before Palladius yet this can be no ground to conclude that we ought to have none afterward our Church being then rude and in her infant state The Advocat is of the same mind saying that before Palladius his time our Church was constituenda or unsettl'd But who can believe it For first it 's generally suppos'd that Palladius came to free this Church from Pelagianism and not to establish Church-government Secondly Is 't credible that the Church of Scotland after so long a continuation and flourishing of Christianity had been rather than any other Churches without any certain form of Government This is certainly a thing unparalellable even according to our Adversaries who tell us that every Church very soon after its beginning had its Diocesan Bishops and so a certain form of Government Thirdly Yea altho' many other Churches had been without all Government for such a tract of time there is ground to believe that Scotland could not they lying most of this time under the persecuting Sword whereas we read of no persecution in our Church even while our Kings were Pagan and our King Donald the I the first crown'd Head in the World that ever subject'd it self to Jesus Christ very much encourag'd the Christians and was seconded herein by severals of his Successors And altho' some of 'em were vitious and their Reigns short or vex'd with Wars yet such trouble never struck directly against Christianity like the fury of the Pagans throngh the rest of the World and others were both excellent Men and had longer and peaceable Reigns as Findochus and Cratilinthus but especially Fincormachus an excellent man and a great promoter of Religion and therefore as is most presumable was a great Instrument under God for the settlement of our Church-affairs Add to all this Fourthly That the terrible Storm of Persecution through the Roman World drove then from the Brittons
he superintended and let him use it as he pleased yet neither can the Imparity be counted considerable not the harm he could do very hurtfull for within half a year at most for there was a General Assembly twice at least every year they had a prospect of a General Assembly to right their wrong wherein every Pastor was to have no less Power than any Superintendent and no less capable to sit judge and censure the Superintendent than the Superintendent was on the other hand to exerce the like Power over him yea any Minister in the Assembly such sometimes as were none was as fair to be chosen Moderator as any Superintendent By the frequency of these Assemblies it came to pass that few or no matters of importance were determin'd in the inferiour Synods but came thither for their final Decision Wherefore if we narrowly look on these times we shall find that the Superintendents were rather appointed as Observers and Delators of Matters to the Assembly than any proper Judges thereof save when a special command was giv'n him to cognosce on such and such particular Matters He was frequently also charged with execution of the Assemblies Determinations all which was common to him with other Commissioners to whom the Assembly gave the like Charge and sent them not rarely to these very Provinces where there were Superintendents with equal Power and Authority to that of the Superintendent Sometimes they ordain'd Causes to be handled by the Superintendent with the assistance of these Commissioners sometimes by the Commissioner with the assistance of the Superintendents which Commissioners were sometimes Ministers of another Province and sometimes of that Province wherein was the Superintendent with whom they were join'd with equal Power Authority From all which 't is evident how much they are taken with the humor of cavilling who dare to ascribe to the Superintendents any real Superiority or Power over other Pastors or any thing repugnant to a compleat Parity But there is yet more even in his own Synod he could do nothing contrary to the Majority for he was to act nothing without the Synods Consent neither could he impede ought done by the Majority for he had no negative vote Yea he was made subject to the Tryal and Censures of the Synod of the very province where he superintended And here our Author is compell'd to acknowledge that there was a considerable difference between Superintendents and Bishops and indeed 't was considerable with a witness and so considerable that it really sets them on even ground with each Pastor of the word He adds that this was a great wrong and error in the Constitution and on this ocasion has a long invective against our Reformers in speciall Knox counting them Children Idiots Ungovernable and of bad Principles and spares not to flegg at all Scots men or Scotch mettal as he speaks But this is but a kicking against the pricks He knows all this helps him nothing nor is to the present Question which is not de jure but de facto what our Reformers freely and joyntly did Not on what grounds they did so He next retorts that according to the book of Discipline the Elders are allow'd to admonish correct and with the consent of the Church and Superintendent depose their Minister But First tho our Reformers had spoken just alike of the Elders and Ministers as they did of the Synod and Superintendent their words will not bear the like inference the power they give to the Elders could certainly be a spurr to the Ministers and yet they might be sure the few Elders of one parish would never make so bold with their Minister as the whole Synod might with their Superintendent Secondly There is no such allowance giv'n to the Elders concerning their Minister as to the Synod over their Superintendent the former much act only with the consent of the Kirk and Superintendent but nothing of this injoyn'd to the latter Yea our Author himself will have the power of Deposition to be a prerogative of the Superintendent and no doubt he or the Commissioner did in the Churches name execute her sentence To Depose therefore here and that with allowance of the whole context of that 8 head of Discipline which he cites is nothing else than to delate to the Church and Superintendent the crimes of the Minister and in their own sphere assist them in that action He adds he hath no where found that de facto the Superintendent was judged by his own Synod And it may be so for litle do we find of any thing was then done by provincial synods every thing of moment being left to the General Assemblies which were then most frequent Such a Constitution adds he inferrs no such thing as Parity among Church-Offices Those who maintain that the King is inferior to his Subjects in their Collection are not yet so extravagant as to say he is not Superior to every one of them in their Distribution But where Superiors or Equalls can be gotten the Men of this Principle will freely yeeld that none who are Inferiours in the Distribution ought to judge the Actions of their Superiours providing other Judges can be had who in this Case cann't there being but one King only in a Kingdom Hence they believing that none may live lawless think the King's Actions are cognoscible by these who are his Inferiours but altering their capacity in the Collection But is it so in the Case of the Superintendent whereof there were severals not one only as there is one commonly King in a Kingdom Seeing then he was to be judged by the Synod notwithstanding that there were other Superintendents in the Church 't is evident they counted every Brother in the Ministry his equal § 19. But the Superintendents saith our Author had a stock of prerogatives above other Pastors But be it so yet notwithstanding hereof if we suppose which I trust at the narrowest search shall appear the truth of what we have now adduc'd and the self consistency of the actings of our Reformers whom he would fain set at variance with themselves whatsoever Prerogatives he has really brought can never prove that the Superintendent had any Dominion over other Pastors or that they acted not in a true and real Parity so that from what is now said these his pretended Disparities are prevented and remov'd For example he tells us that Superintendents had a larger district were nominated by the Council elected by the Nobility and Gentry 't was not so with the Paroch Ministers But the Commissioners had no less districts and were appointed by the General Assembly which I 'm sure is of no less weight in the case than the Councils Nomination even tho' the Gentlemens Election be added thereto and yet who in his Wit will take him for any other Officer than is every Parish-minister or fall into the rovery of our Author who calls these Commissioners
our Reformers believed it to be an indispensible part of the Christian Religion positively and expresly commanded in the Scriptures Do not therefore his saying establishing however no such thing as Parity c and the rest of his Discourse mutually give the lie and flee in the face of one another And indeed he here at once overthrows whatsoever he said on this Subject and now for ever to silence all reasonable men and stop them from such desperat adventures as this of our Authors take the following Argument Whatsoever our Reformers believed to be without the express and positive Testimony of the Scriptures that they believed to be a damnable Corruption in Religion and as such to be avoided This the major is put beyond scruple by what we have brought from the first Book of Discipline Knox and the Confessions of our Author Now I subjoin But they believed that Episcopacy was altogether without any express or positive Testimony yea or any Warrant or Ground from the Word of God the Books of the Old and New Testament Ergo c. The minor is no less evident from what is already adduc'd and moreover from the latter Helvetian Confession which was all save the allowance of the remembrance of some Holy Days which they expresly disprov'd approv'd and subscribed by our whole General Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1566. For in that Confession mark it pray carefully and by no means forget that our Church and Reformers who approv'd and subscrib'd this Confession firmly believ'd that whatsoever is without the express Commandment of God's Word is damnable to Man's Salvation they say There 's giv'n to all Ministers in the Church one and the same Power or Function And indeed in the beginning Bishops and Presbyters ruled the Church in common none preferr'd himself to another or usurped any more honourable Power or Dominion to himself over his fellow Bishops But according to the words of the Lord who will be first among you let him be your Servant they persevered in Humility and helped one another by their mutual Duties in Defending and Governing the Church In the meantime for preserving Order some one of the Ministers did call the Assembly and proposed these things that were to be consulted in the Meeting He did also receive the Opinions of others and finally according to his Power he took care that no confusion should arise so S. Peter is said to have done in the Acts of the Apostles who notwithstanding was never set over the rest nor indu'd with greater power and honour but the beginning took its rise from Vnity that the Church might be declared to be one And having related Hierome's Doctrine of the Idenity of Bishop Presbyier thus they conclude Therefore none may lawfully hinder to return to the ancient Constitution of the Church of God and embrace it before human Custome Thus far the Authors of that most famous Confession who both in the Title page and after the Preface expresly assert that our Church of Scotland together with the Churches of Poland Hungary Geneve Neocome Myllhusium and Wiend approved and subscribed this their Confession From all which it 's easie to gather and perceive with how black a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our first Reformers and whole primitive Church Protestant branded Prelacy or Imparity amongst Pastors Section IX The Forraign reform'd Churches truly Presbyerian BUT let 's hear the Judgement of the rest of the Reformers and Reform'd transmarine Churches Gerard a famous Lutheran divine altho' for Orders sake he admit of some kind of Episcopacy which really he makes as good as nothing above a Moderator-ship yet even for that umbrage allows nothing but humane Institution and will acknowledge no distinction by Divine Right between Bishop and Presbyter The Papists saith he especially place that superiour Power of Jurisdiction which they make to agree to Bishops in this that the Bishops can Ordain Ministers but the Presbyters cannot And all along this Question he strongly proves that during the Apostolick age there was no such thing as a distinction between a Bishop and a preaching Presbyter and enervats all the Arguments that both Romanists and other Prelatists commonly bring to the contrary But we need not insist on the Testimonies of particular Men we have the joint suffrages of the body of Lutheran Divines Luther himself being the mouth to the rest in the Articles of Smalcald It 's clear say they even from the Confession of our Adversaries that this Power to wit of preaching dispensing the Sacraments Excommunication and Absolution is common to all that are set over the Churches whither they be called Pastors Presbyters or Bishops Wherefore Hierome plainly affirms that there is no difference between Bishop and Presbyter but that every Pastor was a Bishop Here Hierome teaches that the distinction of degrees between a Bishop and a Presbyter or Pastor was only appointed by humane Authority And the matter it self continues Luther and his Associats declares no less for on both Bishop and Presbyter is laid the same Duty and the same Injunction And only Ordination in after times made the difference between Bishop and Pastor And by Divine Right there is no difference between Bishop and Pastor § 2. As for Calvin his judgement in this matter was altogether conform to his practice which by the very Adversaries themselves is made the very Patern of Presbytry for he asserts the Idenity of Bishop Presbyter Pastor and Minister and this Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter he founds on Titus 1. and 5. compared with the 7 as Hierome had done long before him and Presbyterians do now And when he descends to after times succeeding these of the Apostles he tells us that then the Bishop had no Dominion over his Collegues sc. the Presbyters but was among them what the Consul was in the Senat and his Office was to propone Matters enquire the Votes preside in Admonition and moderat the Action and put in Execution what was decreed by the whole Consistory All which exceeded little or nothing the Office of a Moderator And that even this saith he was introduced through the necessity of the time by humane consent is acknowledged by the Ancients themselves But I shall not insist in citing Calvine nor Beza who every where is full sufficiently to our purpose both of 'em being aboundantly vindicated and evinc'd to be Presbyterian in a singular tractat by the most judicious Author of Rectius Instruendum from the attempts of one who pretended to be Mathematico-Theologus but was in reality Sophistico-Micrologus And were there any doubt concerning these as indeed there 's none their Practice and that of the Church wherein they liv'd our very Adversaries being Judges sufficiently discuss it and prove them to be truly Presbyterian and to them subscribes the stream of transmarine Writers Systematicks Controvertists and Commentators As for Example the famous and learn'd Musculus asserts and proves from
arte perire sua Section V. The Objections they pretend to bring from Scripture against the Doctrine now deduc'd from Ignatius removed ANd indeed Ignatius is encompast with so thick a Cloud of Witnesses who not only deny all support to but give most evident Depositions against the Diocesan Prelat that his Testimony in favours thereof should be a firm demonstration of the Bastardy of these Epistles The time of the Apostles was not far above that of Ignatius Now if we consult these we shall not only find our Adversaries destitute of their Suffrages but also overwhelm'd with their plain Testimonies against the Hierarchy 'T is true they alledge several things out of the Apostolick Writings for establishing their Cause as that Timothy and Titus as also the Angels of the Asiatick Caeurches were Diocesan Bishops The grounds wherein tâ—ey establish the Episcopacy of Timothy and Titus are that they are enjoined to Ordain Elders which in after Ages was the peculiar Province of Diocesan Bishops and that in the Postscrâ—pts of these Epistles they are both called Bishops But their later Topick is by the profound silence of the ancient Commentaries and many other tokens of Forgery and Novelty so baffl'd that Prelacy's present Agents and amongst others D. M are so wise as to suppress it And yet D. M. adventures to conclude Timothy his being made Bishop of Ephesus from Acts 20. 3 4 5. which Inference few I think beside the Author can gather compared with 1 Tim. 1. 3. I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other Doctrine From which even tho' it be compared with the other Scripture any Man in his Wit would much rather with Chrysostome inferr the very contrary and conclude that Timothy's stay at Ephesus was only temporary to expede the Business there mention'd but not to fix therein But saith he 1 Tim. 3. 14. 15. These things I write unto thee c. plainly insinuat his particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus But the many Scriptures informing us of Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus perswade that there was no such Relation neither does this place in the least insinuat it but only that Timothy if not sent for was to stay till Paul's return wherefore he begs the Question while he tells us that after he was in a particular manner established Bishop of the Church of Ephesus he might wait upon Paul Moreover this was an odd Attendance that scarce ever suffer'd Timothy to stay with his Flock and this shift too like that of the Romanists who in Answer to the Argument from Scripture-silence against Peter's being Bishop of Rome tell us that he was frequently abroad But here we have not only Scripture-silence but Scripture Testimony shewing Timothy's almost perpetual absence from Ephesus He essays also to bring Timothy's Episcopal Power and particular Relation to Ephesus from 1 Tim. 5. 9. 1 Tim. 2. 1. and 1 Tim. 5. 21. And that this was not temporary or transient but successive and perpetual he would prove from 1 Tim. 6. 13. 20. and 2 Tim. 2. 2. and adds that his Adversaries grant that the Power he pleads for to Bishops was exercised by Timothy But as for the particular Relation he speaks of he should have proved it seeing he knows it will not be granted except he bring more than the bare recitall of the places from which his fancy collects it and without such a particular Relation the Power Timothy exercised be what it will makes nothing for his purpose seeing it might be lodged in him alone as an Evangelist and thus most of his postulata prove useless Yet I will handle them particularly of which the first two are that the Power which Timothy exercised was in it self lawfull and that he practised it in Ephesus And 't is true none denies it but what then untill he first prove Timothy's particular Relation to the Church of Ephesus The third and fourth are that it was committed to him alone and not to a Colledge of Presbyters acting among themselves in Parity And that there 's no mention of any spiritual Power lodged in a Colledge of Presbyters to which Timothy was accountable But Willet an approved Divine of the Church of England shall answer for us Neither saith he can it be gathered by these words of the Apostle lay Hands suddenly upon no Man c. That Timothy had this sole Power in himself for the Apostle would not give that to him which he did not take to himself who associated unto him the rest of the Presbytry in Ordaining of Timothy I add that there 's no less mention of a spiritual Power in a Colledge of Presbyters c. than of Timothy's being fixed Bishop of Ephesus Hence his 5. postulatum viz. That the great and most eminent Branches of the Episcopal Power were lodged in Timothy ' s Person the ordination of such as were admitted unto the sacred Function the care of Widows the Censuring of Elders and his autoritative preventing of Heresies becomes unserviceable His VI is that this Authority was not in it self of temporary duration transient or extraordinary but such as the constant Necessities of the Church do make necessary in all Ages for he was commanded to commit it unto faithfull Men such as should be able to teach others and if there be nothing in it extraordinary why do they say that in the discharging of an ordinary trust there was need of an extraordinary Officer But First he corrupts the Apostles words 2 Tim. 2. 2. substituting it in stead of them that thereby he may force the Text to speak of a Power equal to that of Timothy which was to be derived unto succeeding Teachers when yet it plainly speaks of the Transmission of the Doctrine or things Timothy had heard and others were to teach but nothing of an equality of Timothy's Power to be derived in solidum to every subsequent Bishop or Teacher Now except this be proved D. M. saith nothing Yea Hammond expresly contradicts him Appoint them saith he as Bishops under thee Moreover Christ committed the things Paul here speaks of to his Apostles yet will D. M. say their Power was equall to Christ's Secondly In this his last postulatum there appears a strange kind of reasoning viz. the Things or Actions wherein Timothy and Titus were employed are perpetual and ordinary therefore they were not extraordinary Officers just as if one would Reason It 's ordinary for a skillfull Physitian to relieve a Febricitant therefore our Saviour relieving Peter's Wife's Mother was no extraordinary Physitian For their Method and Way of performing these Actions was extraordinary and temporary they having no special Power over or Relation to any one particular Congregation but such a Power and Relation as equally were extended over all the places whither they were sent Moreover others of their Actions and these which were properly Evangelistick were extraordinary such
and 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
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
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
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
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
never repealed by any succeeding Parliament But we are informed by the same R. Coke d that by the 1. Tac. 25. the Marian Act was repealed and so that of Edward revived And now to see him who pretends to be a Minister of the Gospel whose Office is only Ministerial and spiritual exercised only in spiritual things without reaching Men's Bodies inflicting only Rebukes and such verbal punishments to see such I say keeping Courts altogether Civil and inflicting corporal mulcts and Punishments after the manner of Worldly Potentats but especially when all this is done in their own Name would really make the indifferent Beholder averre that such imitated to the Life his Romish Holiness and believed much better his Doctrine of his receiving both spiritual and temporal Sword than that of our Saviour whereby he prohited his Apostles and their Successours all such earthly Grandure and despotick Power as resembles the Lordship and Dominion of worldly Princes § 3. But their Maxime not only intimats that Prelacy well accordeth with Mouarchy but also that any other Form of Church-government is destructive thereof Which how they will evince I know not How they can shew that Presbytrie with which I am only here concerned is destructive of or in the least inconsistent with Monarchy I cannot perceive They can I am sure neither deduce their Inference from the Practice of Presbyterians nor the Principles of Presbytrie Not from the first for though they load them as if they had been the Cause of many Civil Broyls and Calamities and especially of these ensuing the Year 38. We may justly yea with the allowance of the Hierarchie's greatest Favourers reject the Charge and send it home to the Prelats who by their attempting to introduce into the Church a Mass of Romish Superstitions and their Pride and Tyranny exercised on all sorts were become unsupportable to both Nobility and People B. Laud Montegue and such Papaturients were then earnestly labouring the reintroduction of a Mass of Romish Leaven into England though there were but too much there already which had never been cast â—ut Take one Instance or two in the words of R. Coke a high Church-of-England-man and no Lover of Presbyterians I 'm sure The Bishops saith he of the Province of Canterbury in their own Names enjoin the removal of the Communion-table in the Paroch Churches Vniversities from the body of the Church or Chancel to the east of the Chancel cause Rails to be set about the Table and refuse to administer the Sacrament to such as shall not come up to the Rails receive it Kneeling that the book of Sports on Sundays be read in Churches and enjoin Adoration I do not find that Adoration was ever enjoined before nor any of the forenamed Injunctions in any Canon of the Church Our Bishops were of the same mettal with these Innovatours in England and their most docile Schollars Laud therefore and his Faction apprehending that we would make but a small resistance against them to whom England was likely to yeeld prepared for us all her Cup with some other additional Drugs more Romish than what was obtruded on the English Witness the Form in the Administration of the Sacrament which as R. Coke acknowledges was the same in the Mass. But seeing the knowledge of the state we were in when the Nation entred into a Covenant and opposed that Stream of Romish Abominations contributes not a little to repell their fierce charges of Rebellion and Sedition the Reader will pardon me though at some length I transcribe a Passage from one who is beyond suspicion of being partial in favours of Presbytrie Covenant or ought of that nature I mean Dr. Burnet The Bishops saith he therefore were cherished by him the King viz. with all imaginable expressions of kindness and confidence but they lost all their Esteem with the People and that upon divers Accounts The People of Scotland had drunk in a deep prejudice against every thing that savoured of Popery This the Bishops judged was too high and therefore took all means possible to lessen it both in Sermons and Discourses mollifying their Opinions and commending their Persons not without some reflections on the Reformers But this was so far from gaining their Design that it abated nothing of the Zeal was against Popery but very much hightned the rage against themselves as favouring it too much There were also subtile Questions started some Years before in Holland about Predestination and Grace and Arminius his Opinion as it was condemned in a Synod at Dort so was generally ill reported of in all reformed Churches and no-where worse than in Scotland but most of the Bishops and their Adherents undertook openly and zealously the Defence of these Tenets Likewise the Scotish Ministers and People had ever a great respect to the Lord's-day and generally the Morality of it is reckoned an Article of Faith among them but the Bishops not only undertook to beat down this Opinion but by their Practices expressed their neglect of that Day and after all this they declared themselves avowed Zealots for the Liturgy and Ceremonies of England which were held by the Zealous of Scotland all one with Popery Vpon these Accounts it was that they lost all their Esteem with the People Neither stood they in better Terms with the Nobility who at that time were as considerable as ever Scotland saw them and so proved both more sensible of Injuries and more capable of resenting them They were offended with them because they seemed to have more interest with the King than themselves had so that Favours were mainly distributed by their Recommendation they were also upon all Affairs nine of of them were Privy Counsellers divers of them were of the Exehequer Spotswood Arch-Bishop of S. Andrews was made Chancellour and Maxwell Bishop of Ross was fair for the Treasury and engaged in a high rivalry with the Earl of Traquair then Treasourer which tended not a little to help foreward their Ruine And besides this they began to pretend highly to the Titles and Impropriations and had gotten one Learnmonth a Minister presented Abbot of Lindoris and seemed confident to get that state of Abbots with all the Revenue and Power belonging to it again restored into the hands of Churchmen designing also that according to the first Institution of the Colledge of Justice the half of them should be Churchmen This could not but touch many of the Nobility in the quick who were too large sharers in the Patrimony of the Church not to be very seusible of it They were no less hatefull to the Ministry because of their Pride which was cried out upon as unsupportable Great Complaints were also generally made qf Simoniacal Pactions with their Servants which was imputed to the Masters as if it had been for their advantage at least by their allowance They also exacted a new Oath of Intrants besides what was in the Act of Parliament for obedience to
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
of Mentz who only informs us that the Heresie of Aërius consisted in despising Sacrifices for the Dead From all which to me it 's more than probable that there 's no ground to believe that ever Aërius Arrianiz'd Section VII No Diocesan Bishops in several Ancient Churches THo' their Argument brought from Antiquity be already satisfi'd we shall yet give some Instances of Churches which for several Centuries were really without Diocesan Bishops St. Patrick the Irish Apostle is commonly said to have ordain'd several hundreds of Bishops in Ireland who I 'm sure could not be Diocesans Dr. Maurice being displeas'd with this Instance rejects Nennius the Author from whom we have the account of St. Patrick's ordaining 365 Bishops as fabulous But it 's not in their accounts of the numbers of Bishops but of the Deeds and Miracles wrought by Bishops and others of their Saints that the fabulousness of the Writers of these times is commonly to be observ'd He next quarrels with the common reading of that Author alledging that He speaks only of the Bishops in France and Britain in communion with St. Patrick not of his Irish Bishops But I think we may in such critical Learning give Bishop Vsher the Preference who neither judg'd this Book fabulous nor its common reading to be suspected And this account of the great number of Ancient Irish Bishops is strongly confirm'd by what Clarkson cites out of Bernard and Baron shewing that there were well nigh as many Bishops as Churches This the Doctor passes over in silence which was scarce fair enough dealling Neither can the Doctor 's ordinary salvo viz. that the Practice was not generally approv'd nor of primitive Constitution here serve them for whatsoever differ'd from the Roman Model was presently made a Novelty And tho' Bernard and Lanfranc dislike the Practice of having so many Bishops yet they adventure not to instance any time wherein the Irish had been rul'd by a few Diocesans And lastly the Authors most regardable herein inform us that this Practice of having so many Bishops had place even in St. Patrick's time and meer infancy of the Irish Church § 2. Most visible footsteps of this also appear in the African Church during the time of Cyprian for in that Council of Carthage where he presided there was no smal number of Bishops conveen'd tho' doubtless there were many moe Bishops in Africk who could not be all Diocesans seeing few then were Christians in Africk save a small part of the Roman Colonies only Yea the hamlets and villages these Bishops had for their Jurisdictions are so obscure that the learn'd Pamelius is at a stand where to place them And long after in the time of the Vandalick Persecution as Victor Vticensis relates there were in the Zeugitan or proconsular Province alone 164 Bishops others reckon moe Now this was but a small part of what the Romans possess'd in Africk and few beside the Roman Colonies were at that time Christian for the Moors or old Africans who beside what they had in the Cities possess'd almost the whole Country are by the same Victor without exception call'd Gentiles and many of the Romans themselves had not yet imbrac'd Christianity Now subduce from that small number of the Zeugitan Province who were Christians the many Arrians and other Hereticks and Schismaticks whom these Bishops did not reckon as a part of their Flocks and surely there shall scare be found so many as to make up above 164 Parishes Dr. Maurice tells us that all the African Bishops in Cyprian's time could not have suppli'd the Dioceses of one Province in the V or VI Century Which if true is a strong Confirmation of what we plead for viz. that they then were nothing less than Diocesans seeing as is now evident there were even in the fifth Century but a very small number of Christians in Africk compar'd with the rest of the Inhabitans And in Cyprian's time it may well be judg'd that there were some hundreds of Bishops in the Roman Africk But in such Cases not the extent of Bounds but number of Souls is to be considered Wherefore he should be a wild Reasoner that should conclude from Africa's having a dozen or such a number of Bishops or Pastors for surely there were but few at the entry of Christianity that there needed be no more afterward and so make that number the Standard to discern how many Bishops by primitive Right were to be plac'd in all Africa And this is a Kin to what he says elsewhere that tho' there were Bishops in small Towns this was not the primitive State of the Church it may be indeed nor yet at the first entry of the Gospel were there Bishops in most part of the great Towns but was this for fear of Multiplication of Dioceses no surely but these few were all could be then gotten The substance of his Answer here is that Africa was most large fertile popolous The first of which is readily granted but the second not so easily much of these Regions being more fertile of sand and Serpents than of Corn and Wine and this in part discredits the third seeing so much as was barren is not to be suppos'd Popolous wherefore it 's surprising to find him making the Old Roman Africk more Popolous than France is now He supposes that Africk had but 500 Bishops and yet might have 40000 villages But I answer that if the villages were considerable and had Christian Inhabitants for otherways this is nothing to this purpose then had Africk 40000 Bishops for H. Thorndick acknowledges that Bishops in Africk were so plentifull that every good village must needs be the Seat of an Episcopal Church Which words of H. Thorndick are cited by Clarkson but dissembl'd by the Doctor In the mean while I can find nothing which can shake what I have said above or overturn as for example what I have noted from Victor's words and oblige me to lessen my substraction Add to what is said the words of Dr. Burnet In St. Augustin's time saith he it appears from the journals of a Conference he had with the Donatists that there were about five hundred Bishopricks in a small tract of ground But we need not cross Seas in pursuit of ancient Churches free of Diocesans seeing our Country Scotland affords us so luculent a proof of our Assertion The words of Prosper Aquitanicus in his Chronicle annex'd to that of Eusebius and Hierome are most clear and cogent Palladius saith he is ordain'd by Pope Coelestine for the Scots that had already believ'd in Christ and is sent to them to be their first Bishop Never was a passage of any Historian more universally believ'd than this of Prosper which Beda◠and a MS. Chronicle of Scotland in the Library of Glasgow yea the whole stream of Historians repeat and approve but none more amply and plainly than Cardinal Baron whose words are
and other places no small number of excellent Men to Scotland who doubtless did no small service to God therein and especially in the time of Fincormachus when as all observe a great many fled hither who were famous both for Life and Doctrine yea long before this even in the time of Tertullian our Church was well known to much of the Christian World as appears from his clear Testimony The places of Britain saith he to which the Romans could not yet pass are notwithstanding subject to Christ. And if any have called Scotland barbarous or not well reform'd before the coming of Palladius Sir George learn'dly refutes them and names severals and among them even Stannihurst otherways an enemy to our Nation who have done it and he well observes that the reason why some speak of us as then not well enough reform'd was because of our want of agreement with the Church of Rome § 6. As to the last part of the Bishop's discourse saying that it was not permitted to Monks to meddle with the matters of the Church c. And wherein he is seconded by St. Asaph who falls foul on Presbyterians on this account as if they were darkners of all Church History c. They should know that as our Historians call'd these Monks they also call'd them Priests sometimes Presbyters or Bishops or Doctors and frequently Culdees Our people saith Boeth also began most seriously at that time to embrace the Doctrine of Christ by the guidance and exhortation of some Monks who because they were most diligent in Preaching and frequent in Prayer were call'd by the Inhabitants Worshippers of God which name took such deep root with the common People that all the Priests even to our time were commonly without difference call'd Culdees i. e. Worshippers of God Elsewhere this Author call'd these Teachers and Guides indifferently Priests Monks and Culdees Thus also speaks the best of our Historians some of whom we have heard calling them Presbyters and Admistrators of the Sacraments Hence 't is clear that when they call them Monks the word is not to be taken in the later Popish sense for a Layhermite for these our primitive Pastors were only call'd Monks by reason of their strictness of life and frequent retirement to Devotion when the publick work of the Ministry did permit it and perhaps also divers of them abstain'd from Marriage that they might keep themselves free from the World and its care without urging this on others as was the practice of the famous Paphnutius in the council of Nice From all which I conclude that before the coming of Palladius we had a settl'd Church without the least umbrage of their Hierarchy § 7. I add that long after that it had but very slender footing here seeing according to Spotswood they had no distinct Titles or Dioceses whose words are neither had our Bishops auy other Title then that of Scotorum Episcopi or Scotish Bishops whereby they were distinguish'd before the days of Malcomb the III who first divided the Country into Dioceses appointing to every Bishop the limits c. Yea after most strict search for a long time posterior to Palladius he can scarce find the least footsteps of Episcopacy And again long it was after the distinction of Dioceses before they were admitted to any civil Places or Votes in Parliament Hence nothing is more certain than that for many Ages the Church of Scotland knew nothing of their Hierarchy the first Rudiments whereof were bronght from Rome which was sent packing thither again when we renounc'd our obedience to Anti-christ § 8. Take but one other particular and I take leave of the Advocat he 's much displeas'd with St. Asâ—ph terming him a Caresser of Fanaticks for affirming that in consequence of this our Argument taken from the confess'd Practice of our primitive Church we might reasonably conclude that when we covenanted against Episcopacy we had only us'd our own right and thrown out that which was a confess'd Innovation in order to the restoring of that which was our primitive Government A notable and never to be forgotten Concession of so learn'd an Adversary as is this Bishop Let 's hear what the Advocat returns him It will not follow saith he that because our Church in its infancy and necessity was without Bishops for some years therefore it was reasonable for Subjects to enter into a solemn League and Covenant without and against the Consent ef their Monarch and to extirpat Episcopacy settl'd then by Law and by an Old Prescription of 1200 years at least But this most unfair Representation of our Arguments antecedent is I trust now sufficiently discover'd wherefore I have nothing to do here with it not yet am oblig'd to evince the consequence he denies seeing 't is not to be accounted ours but his own who made the antecedent Of the Grounds why the Nation entred into a Covenant I also discours'd already In the mean while I can't but take notice of his settling Episcopacy by Prescription a Romish Argument which whatever it may do in Law has no place here His Prescription I 'm sure essentially differs from that of Tertullian against the Heresies of his time seeing he liv'd in a very early Age when especially if ever Prescription could have place in the Church and the Doctrines which he defended were generally and uninterruptedly held by the Pastors even from the Apostles times and more ancient than the Heresies against which he prescribes whereas in the present case all things are clean contrary For as the Advocat himself here supposes the original of Scotish Episcopacy is several Ages posterior to that of the Apostles so that if the Argument could militat for either Party it serv'd well the Church of Scotland against Prelacy and not at all e contra But tho' things had been quite otherwise there had been no fear of harm from their Prescriptions seeing as Vincentius Lerinensis admonishes In refutation of inveterat Errors we must recurr to the sole authority of the Scriptures And Optatus Milevit plainly asserts that Christ's Testament abundantly suffices to determine all and every particular Controversie among Christians Thus we see how pleasant a spectacle these two Champions afford us the Bishop forms the Major Proposition and asserts on supposition of the Antiquity of our Royal Line and veracity of our Historians that our Church acted with reason enough and was only recovering her own Right when she cashier'd Prelacy The Advocat in attempting to disprove this the Bishop's Proposition has only giv'n such prevarications and elusions as most strongly confirm all the dis-interested of the truth thereof As for the Minor Proposition that our ancient Royal Line is not forg'd but real and our historical Monuments most true and credible the Advocat himself to the conviction of all the unbyass'd in both his Books makes appear It remains therefore as a conclusion of undoubted verity that our Church was
most learn'd of the Episcopal Perswasion acknowledg'd the truth of our Assertion on supposition that any credit is to be given to our Historians with whom also joins the learn'd Dr Stillingfleet So saith he if we may believe the great Antiquaries of the Church of Scotland that Church was governed by their Culdei as they called their Presbyters without any Bishop over them for a long time He gives also instances of other ancient Churches without Diocesan Bishops § 13. It had been more manly therefore and honest for D. M. to have at least attempted a refutation of Dr. Stillingfleet than to have dar'd his Adversaries to bring but one example of Churches without Diocesan Bishops seeing he knew there were store already giv'n even by Episcopals no less than Presbyterians which hitherto stand unanswered Let them also chaw their cude on that famous and well known Distinction of a first and second primitive Church acknowledged by Semeca and others even Popish Divines notic'd by Vsher and embrac'd by Stillingfleet in the former whereof Diocesan Episcopacy was not yet come in fashion nor was any such thing as a Difference either in Name or Office between Bishops and Priests or preaching Presbyters then in Being From all which judge with what brow D. M compares the account of our ancient Church-government to a supposed Fiction of the King of China and his Presbyterian Lady And by this dealling of D. M. I am put in mind of another piece of his Art who averres that all brought by Salmasius and Blondel to prove that Hierome was for the Scriptural and Apostolick Identity of of Bishop Presbyter and whatsoever is said by them for Presbytry is refuted by D. Pearson in his Vindicâ—ae Ignatianae I must not saith D. M. transcribe the acurat and unanswerable Dissertations of several learned Men who have sufficiently exposed the Writings of Blondel and Salmasius on this head particularly the incomparable Bishop of Chester vind St. Ignat. But no where did ever Dr. Pearson ingage with these Authors on this subject nor does he any such thing only he has some few excursions which touch not the marrow of the Controversie and therefore is nothing to D. M's purpose whether the advantage be yeelded to Salmasius and Blondel or to Dr. Pearson He abuses also some passages of Hierome to prove him self-repugnant but all such depravations had been by Iunius and others against the Papists and by Stillingfleet in his Irenicum clearly discover'd the places unanswerably vindicated even before he wrote his Vindiciae which their vindications of Hierome as also many other defences of the same Author brought by Salmasius and Blondel he scarce once adventures to handle But he has vindicated Ignatius they will say and this is enough But suppose that he had as really evinced these Epistles to be the genuine Work of Ignatius as he 's groundlesly pretended to have don 't yet so far is their inference from being good that as we shall hear the quite contrary follows viz. that in the Ignatian age Bishops were all one with the Pastors of single Congregations Hence it appears that this was one of D. M's pious Frauds to skarr his vulgar Reader for others he could not hope to catch thereby from the New Doctrine of Presbytry Section VIII Prelacy opposite to the Principles of our Reformers I Said when we renounc'd our Obedience to Anti-christ we sent amongst the rest of the Romish leaven Prelacy packing thither which tho' we had no more Arguments our Confession of Faith compil'd by our Reformers clearly evinces We detest say they Antichrist's worldly Monarchy with his wicked Hierarchy Of which Hierarchy as is acknowledg'd by the Council of Trent Bellarmine the Bishops make a principal part And the Episcopal Office with its distinction belong solely to their Hierarchy otherwise they confess there 's no Difference between Bishop and Presbyter At them therefore these words of the Confession must especially level And his subtility who would save the Prelats from this blow by seeking the foundation of a distinction where 't is not as if by the word Wicked the Confession pointed at another Hierarchy which is Pious must be reckon'd by all the disinterested to nigh of kin to his pericranium who to save another part of Romanism made a fair distinction between Lawfull and Vnlawfull Idolatry I say it can be no otherwise here for to speak truth their Hierarchy is nothing save the Corruption of Church-government and pride of her Governours rais'd by certain stories and tending towards the Papacy as its highest pinacle whereof both name and notion owe their Original to one who indeed was not the Father of lies yet in lying came so near him as readily any copy to its Original I mean the false Areopagite whose whole Book may really be term'd a fardel of Fictions Moreover this Confession was compil'd in the year 1581. when Prelacy had been unanimously by the whole Assembly in the preceeding year cast out of the Church And for many succeeding Assemblies their Declaration of their dislike and hatred of Prelacy and approbation of this Confession went hand in hand with whom then in both of these the King's Majesty join'd For the Assembly at Glasgow 1581. consisting for the most part of such as voted and were present in the Assembly at Dundie in the preceeding year when Prelacy had in terminis been renounc'd and ejected declares that they meaned wholly to condemn the whole estate of Bishops as they are now in Scotland and that this was the meaning of the Assembly at that time The King's Commissioner presented to this Assembly the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before together with a plot of the Presbytries to be erected which is registrat in the Books of the Assembly with a Letter to be directed from his Majesty to the Noble-men and Gentle-men of the Country for the erection of the Presbytries consisting of Pastors and Elders and dissolution of Prelacies and with an offer to set forward the Policy untill 't were establish'd by Parliament The King's Letter subscribed by his hand to the Noble-men and Gentle-men was read in open audience of the whole Assembly This Assembly ordain'd also that the Confession of Faith be subscribed as being true Christian and faithfull And in the Assembly 1595. amongst other things of the same tendency it was cleared that Episcopacy was condemn'd in these words of the Confession His Wicked Hierarchy See store of irrefragable proofs of this our Assertion in the Acts of the Assembly at Glasgow 1638. Sess. 16. § 2. They only bewray their ignorance if not worse while they give out that our Church in her first Reformation had Bishops as the word is now taken under the name of Superintendents For tho' this were true all they shall gain hereby would only be the fastening of a self-contradiction on Mr. Knox and the rest of these most honourable Instruments
of our Freedom from Mystical Babylon our Adversaries acknowledging that Mr. Knox and his Fellow-labourers in the Church-policy did exactly follow the Genevan Model which these men use to make the Original of Presbytry It 's confess'd also that John Knox refus'd a Bishoprick in England on this account that it had Quid commune cum Antichristo Whereby tho' nothing else could be brought 't is clear as the Sun that Knox I may say the same of most of his Fellow-labourers in the Reformation was intirely averse from their Hierarchick Domination § 3. Wherefore the Author of a late Book call'd The Fundamental Charter of Presbytry examin'd and disprov'd quite skips over these Evidences of Knox's being Antiprelatick notwithstanding that the only design of the far greater part of his Book was directly to prove these out Reformers and Knox in special to have been of the prelatical Perswasion However let 's hear the chief of the Answers he gives to such other Proofs hereof as he adventures to engage with § 4. The first is a passage of Knox's letter to the Assembly viz. Vnfaithfull and Traitors to the Flock shall ye be before the Lord Jesus if that with your consent directly or indirectly ye suffer unworthy men to be thrust in within the Ministry of the Kirk under wâ—at pretence that ever it be Remember the Judge before whom ye must make an account and resist that Tyranny as ye would avoid Hell-fire To which our Author answers denying that Knox by Tyranny here means Episcopacy and saith that 't is impossible to make more of the Letter than that Knox deem'd it a pernicious and tyrannical thing for any Person whatsoever to thrust unworthy Men into the Ministry of the Church Which Answer evanishes so soon as we shall understand the occasion of Knox's Letter Some powerfull Courtiers had then sacrilegiously invaded a great part of the Churches Revenues and were greedily grasping the remainder to the great grief of all good Men and detriment of the Church which both in her Assemblies and otherways vehemently urged that these Revenues should be imploy'd on sustentation of Ministers many of whom being unprovided were ready to starve and on maintaining of Schools relieving the Poor and other such pious Uses These Courtiers therefore to free themselves of such unacceptable Monitors and secure them of what they had gotten plot the reduction of a kind of Diocesan Bishops Abbots Priors and other such Popish Orders with whom they were to make a sacrilegious Compact and to give these titular Church-men some small pittance of the Revenues the rest being possessed in their name by these Courtiers Now at the very time of the writing of Knox's Letter this was in agitation and a design laid to practise upon some of the Assembly as shortly thereafter at the Meeting in Leith appear'd at which and elsewhere in these times there were not wanting among the Ministers who moved with hope of Domination over their Brethren and some small augmentation of Rent made no bones of such simoniacal Pactions or to use the express words of the Confessions of their best Friends such durtâ— and vile Bargains And now judge what Knox mean'd by his Exhortation to keep out unworthy Men and resist Tyranny And 't is most presumable that Spotswood sufficiently saw that Knox's Letter goares Prelacy otherwise he had not mangl'd the same and wholly omitted all mention of Tyranny § 5. And that this Knox's Letter levell'd at the Bishops then about to be introduc'd is further evident from his refusal to inaugurat John Douglas Bishop of St. Andrews his denouncing an Anathema to the Giver and Receiver of the Bishoprick and his open professing his dislike of the whole Order At this our Author takes exception saying The certain Manuscript from which Calderwood says he had this relation is uncertain But he should have look'd into Petrie who names the Author William Scot that eminent Minister at Couper Now that 't is like enough that Knox who was then at St. Andrews said so and express'd suitable resentments of the durty Bargain between Morton and Douglas who by a simoniacal Paction got into the See is by our Author expresly acknowledg'd And indeed if we consider the indignity of the Crime and the Lyon-like boldness of Mr. Knox against such Vices 't is altogether incredible but that he vented his resentments with a Witness and to the noticing of all thinking Men then present yet all this is skipp'd over by Spotswood For he knew well enough that this Relation should have shew'd how little kindness Knox bore to their Hierarchy Moreover which is most noticeable in this matter these who then favour'd Prelacy being generally such simoniacal Pedlers were so far from writing the several Actions and Church-transactions of these times that they made it their care to suppress and destroy the publick Monuments of the Church Witness B. Adamsone one of the Articles of whose Confession to which as is acknowledg'd by Spotswood he subscrib'd was that not without his special allowance some leaves of the Books of the Assemblies were rent out and such things as made against the Bishops their estate were destroyed in Falkland before the Books were deliver'd to the King's Majesty Which considerations suffice to prove the truth of that historical Relation He alledges next that tho' we had reason to believe that Knox said and did so yet it follows not that he was for the Divine Right of Parity Adding That 't is like enough Knox said so for dreadfull Invasions were made upon the Patrimony of the Church But this Invasion was so linked with the introduction of Prelacy that they had both common Friends and Enemies so that Knox declaring against either must be judg'd equally averse from both And indeed the introduction of Prelacy was consequentially this very destruction and consumption of the Churches Goods against which Knox inveigh'd Or dare he say that it had satisfi'd him if they had been consum'd in sustaining the Luxury and Grandour of Bishops Abbots and Priors whom the Court was about then to introduce providing only these Church Revenues had been kept from the secular Nobility Moreover 't is evident to whosoever reads Knox's words that the Invasion of the Church-patrimony was far from being the sole Ground of the dislike he shew'd to Episcopacy The Matter in short is when John Douglas was made Tulchan Bishop of St. Andrews Mr. Knox refused to Ordain him denouncing Anathemaes to the Giver and to the Receiver and when John Rutherford Provest of the old Colledge had said that Mr. John Knox ' s repining had proceeded from male-contentment the next Lora's-day John Knox said in Sermon I have refus'd greater Bishoprick than ever 't was and might have had it with the favour of greater Men than he hath this but I did and do repine for discharge of my Conscience that the Church of Scotland be not subject to that Order This last Clause viz.
that the Church of Scotland be not subject to that Order he adventures not once to mention which yet is a reason of Knox's repining and so gives the meaning of his whole Discourse And seeing 't is of equal credit with his foregoing words being not only with the rest taken by Petrie out of that Historical Relation but related also by Calderwood fully scatters all his fogg and clearly determines the present Question somewhat else he hath here but of small moment As Knox when Douglas who was already Rector of the Vniversity and Provest of the old Colledge was made Bishop regrated that so many Offices were laid on an old Man which scarcely twenty of the best Gifts were able to bear Thence he Infers that Knox ' s resentment of Douglas his advance was not from any Perswasion he had of the unlawfulness of Prelacy As if Knox might not assert the unlawfulness of Prelacy and yet say so much for a a Superpondium to his other Grievances And to shew even on Supposition as they pretended of the allowableness of Episcopacy how little sence of Duty or Conscience was in either Givers or Receivers § 6. There was at this time saith M. D. Hume no small Contest and Debate betwixt the Court and the Church about Bishops and Prelats concerning their Office and Jurisdiction The Ministers laboured to have them quite abolished and taken away and the Court thought that form of Government to be agreeable and compatible with a Monarchical Estate and more conform to the Rules of Policy and Civil Government of a Kingdom Besides the Courtiers had tasted the sweetness of their Rents and Revenues putting in titular Bishops who were only their Receivers and had a certain Pension or Stipend for discharging and executing the Ecclesiastical part of their Office but the main profit was taken up by Courtiers for their own use Wherefore they laboured to retain at least these shadows of Bishops for letting of leases and such other things which they thought were not good in Law otherways There was none more forward to keep them up than the Earl of Morton for he had gone Ambassadour to England on his own privat Charges and to recompence his great Expenses in that Journey the Bishoprick of St. Andrews being then vacant was conferr'd upon him He put in Mr. John Douglass who was Provost of the New Colledge in St. Andrews to bear the Name of Bishop and to gather the Rents till such time as the Solemnity of Inauguration could be obtain'd for which he was countable to him This he did immediatly after he came home out of England Now he will have him to sit in Parliament and to vote there as Arch-bishop The Superintendent of Fyfe did inhibit him to sit there or to Vote under pain of Excommunication Morton commanded him to do it under pain of Treason and Rebellion The Petition giv'n in to the Parliament desiring a competent Provision for the maintaince of Preachers in which they complained of the wrong done unto them by the Courtiers who intercepted their means was cast over the Bare and rejected and by the most common report Morton was the first cause thereof Afterward Morton in a Meeting of some Delegats and Commissioners of the Church at Leith by the Superintendent Dune's means used the matter so that he obtain'd their Consent to have his Bishop admitted and install'd Wherefore the third of February he caus'd affix a schedul on the Church door of St Andrews wherein he charged the Ministers to conveen and admit him to the Place which they did accordingly but not without great Opposition For Mr. Patrick Adamson then a Preacher but afterward Arch-bishop there himself in a Sermon which he preached against the Order and Office of Bishops said there were three sorts of Bishops 1. The Lords Bishop to wit Christ's and such was every Pastor 2. My Lord Bishop that is such as Bishop as is a Lord who sits and Votes in Parliament and exercises Jurisdiction over his Brethren 3. And the third sort was my Lord's Bishop that is one whom some Lord or Nobleman at Court did put into the place to be his Receiver to gather the Rents and let Leases for his Lordship's behoofe but had neither the Means nor Power of a Bishop This last sort he called a Tulchan Bishop because as the Tulchan which is a Calves skin stuff'd with straw is set up to make the Cow give down her milk so are such Bishops set up that their Lords by them may milk the Bishopricks Likewise Mr. Knox preached against it the tenth of February and in both their hearings Morton's and his Arch-bishop to their Faces pronunced Athathema danti Anathema accipienti And We shewed before how in matters of Church-government he ever inclined as the most politique Course to the state of Bishops The Name was yet retained by Custom◠the Rents were lifted also by them as we have said more for other Mens use and profit than their own They had also place and vote in Parliament after the old manner and he would gladly have had them to have keeped their Power and Jurisdiction over their Brethren Master John Douglass being dead he fill'd the place by putting in Mr. Patrick Adamson his domestick Chaplain who then followed that Course tho before he had preach'd against it Many were displeas'd herewith all the Ministers especially they of the greatest Authority and all Men of Estates that were best affected to Religion And which he cites out of an English Historian Francis Botevill As touching his viz. Morton's setting up and maintaining the estate of Bishops whereof there had ensued great debate and contention betwixt him and the Ministry he said it did not proceed of an ill mind of any malice or contempt of them or their Callings but meerly out of want of better knowledge thinking that Form of Government to be most conform to the Rules of Policy and to be fittest for the times That if he had then known better he would have done otherways And He viz. Morton was also calm this appeared in his carriage toward Mr. Knox who had used him roughly and rebuk'd him sharply for divers things but especially for his labouring to set up and maintain the estate of Bishops Hence 't is most manifest how not only Knox but also the whole body of our Church disliked and hated the very first bud and likeness of Prelacy and how by meer force and fraud of the voracious Court-politicians upon the dishonesty of some but the unwariness and faintness of many moe of the Ministry These monstrous Tulchans for all men even our present Prelatists are ashamed of them got that minot's harbour in Scotland § 7. Our Author Answers for he insists long on this matter That the Question is not now how this was done but if it was done For if it was done it is an Argument that the Clergy then thought little on the iudispensibility of Parity Just
as if what any man either by Fraud or Force is made seemingly to yeeld to were to be taken for his true and genuine Sentiments I thought this kind of reasoning had been peculiar to a Spanish Inquisitor or French Converter Or that they were bad Men continues he a hard construction For then Hierome of Prague who was forc'd and so many of the choice Fathers of the Council of Arminum who were trick'd to admit in appearance something contrary to their true Sentiments shall all be bad men That the Ministers at this Convention at Leith dealt most unwarily and some of 'em also with too little integrity is beyond scruple But that all of 'em or most of 'em were poor covetous Rogues c. neither Petrie nor any of his Perswasion ever affirmed He adds that the Courts Arguments for the Leith-establiment were mainly Politick for they turn'd not Theologues to perswade Episcopacy's Divine Institution from Scripture c. Well then there was little true Piety no consulting of Conscience or the Word of God in the Matter And if some of the Ministry as he says were taken with these politick and state Reasons they in so far fell from their own Principle viz. That in the Books of the Old and New Testament all things necessary for the instruction of the Church and to make the Man of God perfect are contain'd and sufficiently express'd But the Clergy saith he had found that the new Scheme of the first Book of Discipline had done much hurt to the Church As if the old Popish Scheme under which the Churches goods by God's Law destinated for the promoval of piety and learning and sustaining of the poor were consum'd and debauch'd in upholding the grandour and luxury of a spurious ecclesiastick Nobility could have been really more profitable to the Church than that of the Book of Discipline on of the prime designs whereof was the bestowing of the Church Revenues for these their true uses to which God's Law had appointed them Or as if Pastors Schools and Poor can in no place be provided for where the Romish Church-policy is wanting But The six Commissioners saith he that treated with the State at Leith were sensible Men and far from being Parity-men Just so far from being Parity-men that most of 'em in an Assembly 1580. July 12. deliberately found and declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self He intimats that the Courts motive for the Leith-establishment could not be their desire to possess the Churches Patrimony An untruth as we have now seen too bare fac'd to need more refutation His proof hereof is of the same stamp viz. Had the Clergy fall'n so suddenly from their constant claim to the Churches Revenues did that which moved them to be so earnest for this meeting with the State miraculously slip out of their minds Seeing not the Church but the Court-politicians as is evident with desire to circumveen her chiefly procur'd that meeting and if these Delegates were either the only or first men who by sinistrous Artifices fell into a bad Compact then let him exclaim with admiration of this matter what follows is yet odder viz. Was it not as easy for the Court to have possessed themselves of a Bishoprick an Abbacy a Priory c. when there were no Bishops as when there were For he 's to be pitied if he be ignorant that the Courtiers having no Law-title thereto had no hope save under covert of their own Creatours these titular Bishops of any peaceable and secure possession of the Churches Revenues But an undoubted Assembly saith he own'd the Leith convention as an Assembly and its Authority as the Authority of an Assembly and for several years after that establishment at Leith beside which there was no other fond for owning them for Bishops Bishops were present and as such were obliged to sit and vote in general Assemblies and many Acts of subsequent Assemblies put this matter beyond all probability of ever being controverted as the Assembly in August 1574. which petitioneth the Regent that Stipends be granted to Superintendents in all time coming in all Countries destitute thereof whether it be where there is no Bishop or where there are Bishops who cannot discharge their Office as the Bishop of St. Andrews and Glasgow And that his Grace would provide qualified Persons for vacant Bishopricks But this tho' it be his prime Argument is soon removed our Church knew that divers Ministers and others had been allur'd or aw'd to that agreement She knew that 't was only made for the Interim and for the Interim only did she tolerate it with a full resolution to have a more perfect Order And as for the words In all time coming there 's not a syllabe of them in the Act he cites Nor indeed any where else of all the Acts of these Assemblies She knew also that during that Interim 't was impossible to get that which had been the Revenues of Popish Bishops other Church Rents out of the Regent and other Courtiers their hands In the mean while the vast number of unplanted Churches weakness of the Ministry in divers parts and unsettlement even unto that time of the Churches Affairs allow'd for a space the continuance of Evangelistick Superintendents or Commissioners who were to be in almost perpetual motion and travels and therefore needed much larger maintainance then did fixed Pastors which large maintainance the Church being thus strip'd of her Patrimony could not afford to the number that was needfull On these and such Grounds the Church indulged to that Convention the name of an Assembly tolerated in these Tulchans the name of Bishops And seeing they had got more Rent then was giv'n to ordinary Ministers allowed them to exercise the Labour and Travel of Superintendents or Commissioners And thus the Church made the best she might of that their unlawfull Bargain And tho' which he also objects some Assemblies allow Bishops to conveen and proceed against delinquents command Ministers by their Letters to admonish concerning persons to be excommunicated it helps him nothing seeing the very Acts he cites give no less power to Superintendents yea to Commissioners whom yet the Church used even after she had declared Episcopacy unlawfull in it self So far is our Churches tolerating for a space these Tulchans from being any Argument that she believ'd not the Divine Right of Parity But how appears't saith he that our Church receiv'd the Leith Articles only for an Interim out of a dislike to Episcopacy And there were other things in the Articles which required amendment But sure these Articles were without any exception receiv'd and tolerated only for the Interim and how well these Court-bishops were liked is already made manifest and our Churches subseqnent actings declare which never rested but still wrestled against the storms of both Power and Policy untill they were sent packing 'T is true as he says the Church met with Opposition but that this was
in a Letter to the English Bishops and Pastors being moved thereto by John Knox if Spotswood speak truth expresly among many other things to this purpose say If Surplice Corner-cap and Tippet have been the badges of Idolaters in the very act of their Idolatry what have the Preachers of Christian Liberty and the Rebukers of Superstition to do with the dregs of that Roman Beast yea what is he that ought not to fear either to take in his hand or fore-head the Print Mark of that odious Beast c. See store to this purpose in Heylin's History of the Presbyterians whereby 't is most evident that this Author endeavour'd nothing more earnestly than to perswade the World that Knox was a self-repugnant Idiot It sufficed if before that celebrious Assembly he answer'd to the Question and gave some one reason that shewed he could not comply with them tho' he declar'd not all the grounds of his dislike of their Practice As to the matter of Francfort which this Author mentions drawing from it the like Consequences there was no Bishop there nor any mention of the necessity thereof but only a busâ—e made by some superstitious Bigots for their Popish Ceremonies or Fooleries as Calvin calls them and so there was no occasion of venting himself in this matter and tho' there had he sufficiently declar'd his mind while publickly in a Sermon he alledged that nothing ought to be thrust upon any Congregation without the warrant of the Word of God Yea if we may believe Le Strange Knox and his Associats sufficiently discover'd themselves to be of the Consistorian or Presbyterian Perswasion § 10. He adds that Knox in his Appellation c. plainly supposes the lawfulness of the Episcopal Office I deny 't But all alongst throw it saith he Knox appeals to a lawfull general Council snch a Council as the most ancient Laws and Canons approve and who knows not that the most ancient Laws and Canons made Bishops the chief if not the only Members of such Councils Knox says if the Popish Clergy his Adversaries are for it he 's content that matters in Controversie between him and them be determin'd by the Testimony and Authority of Doctors and Councils three things being granted him whereof these are two 1. That the most ancient Councils nearest to the primitive Church in which the learned and godly Fathers examined all Matters by God's Word may be holden of most Authority 2. That no Determinations of Councils or Men be admitted against the plain verity of God's Word nor against the Determinations of the four chief Councils Would Knox if he had been Presbyterian have agreed so frankly to have stood by the Determination of these four chief Councils Could he have expected they would have favoured the Divine Right of Presbyterian Parity Will any scotish Presbyterian now adays stand to the Decision of these four chief Councils But all our Author here infers is by Knox prevented and cut off while in the first place he requires that no Determinations of Councils nor Men be admitted against the plain Verity i. e. without the expressed commandment of God's Word We chearfully appeal in the present Controversie and provoke our Adversaries to this Rule which most of 'em I have hitherto met with expresly acknowledge to contain nothing in their favours Secondly The Actions of the first four Councils were of two sorts Creeds viz. and Canons Now as John Knox and all the Presbyterians in cordial subscribing to the former viz. The Symbols of these Councils are confessedly not behind any part of the Christian World so part of the latter sort I mean the Canons are rejected by Episcopals no less than by Presbyterians As for example the Constantinopolitan Council appoints that reduced Hereticks and Schismaticks must be anointed on the Fore-head Eyes Nose Mouth and Ears And in the Council of Chalcedon 't is permitted only of all the Church-men to the Lectors and Cantors to Marry Yea that none of the Clergy after that manner should Marry was statuted by the Council of Nice And they were also to have separated from their Wives the Church-men who were in Wedlock already had they not been restrani'd by the grave admonition and solide reason of Paphnutius Now 't is true indeed Presbyterians admit not of these Decrees But dare they say that Knox imbrac'd them Or do our present Adversaries themselves receive them Knox therefore spoke of the Symbols Our Author introduces him and gives out as if he had spoken of their Canons to the end he may deceive the vulgar Reader for none that look into the Councils can be obnoxious to this his Fraud The same conclusion viz. That Knox supposes the innocency and lawfulness of the Episcopal Office he would deduce from Knox's following words You may in a peaceable manner without Sedition withhold the fruits and profits which your false Bishops and Clergy most unjustly receive of you untill such time as they shall faithfully do their Charge and Duties which is to preach unto you Christ Jesus truly rightly to minister the Sacraments according to his Institution and so to watch for your Souls as is commanded by Christ c. But might not Knox had he been there giv'n the like admonition to the Romans concerning their Bishop and Clergy should he thereby have suppos'd the Lawfulness and Innocency of the Papacy and Power the Romanists gave to the Pope Secondly Does not Knox admonish the People concerning the rest of the Clergy wherein there was comprehended the Abbots Priors and all the rest of the Romish rout no less then concerning the Bishops Did therefore Knox suppose the Innocency and Lawfulness of all these Offices Thirdly Knox utterly baffles all our Author's Sophistry and sufficiently preserves himself from his abuses and depravations while he places the Office of all true Bishops in truly preaching of Christ Jesus rightly ministring the Sacraments and watching for Souls Which I hope is equally the Office and Duty of all Christ's Ministers So true is it we observ'd from Beza's Letter that Knox look'd on all Lordly Diocesan Prelats as false Bishops And all they pretend to beside what is common to every Pastor under whatsoever Name or Profession they go as unwarrantable and unjust But saith our Author Knox's great Work in his Admonition to the Professors of England was to enumerat at the Causes which in God's righteous Judgement brought Queen Maries Persecution on them But he quite forgot to name the Sin of Prelacy as one Ergo c. And did he enumerat and reckon up all things he judg'd to be Errors or Sins wherefore God was pleading with the English and had sent among them that Persecution The truth is the main design of that Admonition is not to give an accurat enumeration of the Causes of the Persecution but to give comfort to the Faithfull under it But abstracting what Knox thought to be the Causes of that Persecution and
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
they were invented justifi'd or maintain'd ought at once to be removed and so troden under the obedience of God's Word that continually this sentence should be present in thy Heart and ready in thy Mouth not that which appeareth in thine own Eye shalt thou do c. Deut. 12. Let not then the King and his proceedings whatsoever they be not agreeable to the Lord 's Holy Word be a snare to thy Conscience Let God's blessed Word alone be the Rule and Line to measure his Majestie 's Religion What it commandeth let it be obeyed what it commandeth not let that be execrable because it hath not the sanctification of God's Word under what Title or Name soever it be published Halt no longer on both parts Let not these Voices prevail in your Parliament This to our Judgement is good and godly this the People cannot well bear this repugneth not to God's Word And But let his holy and blessed Ordinances by Christ Jesus commanded to his Kirk be within thy limits and bounds so sure and established that if Prince King or Emperour would enterprize to change or disannull the same that he be the reputed Enemy of God Which horrible Crimes if ye will avoid in time coming then must ye I mean the Princes Rulers and People of the Realm by solemn Covenant renew the Oath betwixt God and you That benefice upon benefice be heaped upon no Man but that a suffient Charge with a competent Stipend be assigned to the Work-men for O how horrible was that confusion that one Man should be permitted to have two three four five six or seven Benefices who scarcely in the year did so often preach yea that a Man should have the Charge of them whose faces he never saw For the great Dominions and Charge of your proud Prelats impossible by one Man to be discharged are no part of Christ's true Ministry but are the maintainance of the Tyranny first invented and yet retain'd by the Roman Antichrist That diligent heed be taken that such to whom the Office of preaching is committed discharge and do their Duties for it is not nor will not be the chanting nor mummelling over of certain Psalters the reading of Chapters for matines evening Song or of homilies only be they never so godly that can feed the Souls of hungry Sheep What efficacy the living voice hath above the naked letter which is read the hungry and thirsty do feel to their comfort But the other maketh for Mr. Parson's purpose who retaining in his hand a number of Benefices and appointed such in his place as are altogether destitute of the Gift of Preaching but let all such Belly-gods be whipp'd out of God's Holy Temple Let none that be appointed to labour in Christ's Vineyard be intangl'd with Civil Affairs except it be when the Civil Magistratand the Minister of the Word assemble together for Execution of Discipline which is a thing easie to be done without withdrawing any Person from his Charge if that which was before express'd be observed For as touching their yearly coming to Parliament for matters of Religion it shall be superfluous vian if God's true Religion be once so established that after it never be called in controversie And as touching Execution of Discipline that must be done in every City and Shire where the Magistrats and Ministers are join'd together without any respect of Persons So that the Ministers albeit they lake the glorious Title of Lords and the Divelish Pomp which before appear'd in proud Prelats yet must they be so stout and so bold in God's Cause that if the King would usurp any other Authority in God's Religion than becometh a Member in Christ's Body that first he be admonished according to God's Word c. Read pray the rest of this Exhortation and you shall find that never was light more opposite to darkness than Knox is to their Ceremonies and Hierarchy and in a word their whole way whatsoever they contend for in opposition to the Church of Scotland Now suppose which yet he is far from doing that Knox allow'd them some umbrage of imparity should they not notwithstanding providing they closed with what he saith here and elsewhere really relinquish what they call the Church-of England's way and come over unto us Yea were they according to Knox's Exhortation stript of the hope their exorbitant Gain Ease and Grandour c they should soon also send packing their Plea for Imparity this being a meer shrowd and pretext to cover these Enormities from which Knox so warmly dehorts and whieh with less colour of modesty can be sustain'd Add hereto that seeing Knox so zealously requires express and positive Warrant in the Word of God for every thing in the Worship Government and Discipline of the Church and seeing hitherto none hath darred to averr that he was for the Divine Right of Prelacy yea even our Author himself adventures not plainly to assert so much but only labours to make Knox to account it Lawfull and Innocent and to speak nothing against it it must undeniably follow that he was for a Divine Right of Parity § 13. Did not Knox continues our Author write and bear the Letter sent by the Superintendents Ministers and Commissioners of the Church within the Realm of Scotland to their Brethren the Bishops and Pastors in England Anno 1566 Did not he in that same Title of that same Letter acknowledge that these Brethren Bishops and Pastors of England had renounc'd the Roman Antichrist and professed the Lord Jesus in sincerity And doth not the Letter all alongst allow of the Episcopal Power and Authority of these English Bishops But had never a Protestant to do with an Abbot Prior or some other such Popish Officers whose Offices he did not allow Might he not therefore speak or write to him in such Terms without which he should either not have been understood or his Letter or his Discourse been altogether uneffectual Altho' then it could be prov'd they had given Bishops the distinguishing Titles they assume by no good Logick could it be inferr'd that they accounted the Office as it is distinguish'd from any other Pastor Lawfull which yet can never be prov'd nor any thing concluded from the Letter save that they took Bishop and Pastor for synonymous Terms Moreover 't will no more follow that they count Episcopacy Lawfull than that they esteem so of the Surplice Corner-cap and Tippet which yet in the same Letter they make the Marks of the odious Beast They there indeed acknowledge the English to have renounc'd the Roman Antichrist but so as notwithstanding to have retain'd divers of his Abominations whereof they name none but only the most notorious of these which the then present English Controversies gave occasion to mention The rest of his Discourse on this Head leans on this that our Superintendents were really Diocesan Bishops of whom more anon And well may I deny 't were there no more than the Doctrine
a number for the whole Kingdom yet at that time they thought it expedient to establish no more and tho' when the Church should be sufficiently provided with Ministers it would be highly reasonable that the Superintendents should have Places appointed them for their continual residence yet in that juncture 't was necessary that they should be constantly travelling throw their districts to Preach and Plant Churches c. To establish his gloss he says the Compilers of the first Book of Discipline viz. Mr. J. Winrame John Spotswood J Willock J. Douglas J. Row and J. Knox were still of prelatical Principles But tho' this were as true as 't is false the quite contrary would rather follow viz. that they had resolv'd to change afterward the Superintendents for Diocesan Bishops To prove they were Prelatists he says three of them were Superintendents begging the Question as if Superintendent and Bishop were one and the same But Douglas died Arch-bishop of St. Andrews But is 't strange that he who in favours of a Tulchan Bishoprick had a stomach able to deject Simoniacal Pactions and durty Bargains made no bones of sacrificing his former Principles to his interest But Spotswood was a constant Enemy to Parity as appears from his Son's account of him But his Son says not so much Moreover which quite spoils our Author's Cause he makes without naming any other John Knox the Author of that Book of Policy yea he averrs that in his Father's Judgement the Old Policy was undoubtedly the better than the New John Row defended the lawfulness of Episcopacy at the Conference appointed by the General Assembly 1575. But J. Row no less then the other Collocutors in their Report to that Assembly tho' for the iniquity of the time not in so many words yet really condemn'd Prelacy and was also a Member of that Assembly which with one voice found and declar'd the Office unlawfull in it self Judge then of his confidence who yet adventures hence to conclude that he was a Prelatist He adds out of Knox that Superintendents and Overseers were nominated that all things in the Church might be carried with Order and well which reason for establishing Superintendents saith our Author will continue to hold so long as the Church continues But let him once prove that Knox speaks of the constant and ordinary Church regimen and guidance and not of the settling and ordering of a Church little more then in fieri and as yet not all sufficiently constitute otherwise we have a meer Paralogism At the Admission of Spotswood continues he John Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents and Overseers as well as Ministers the necessity I say not the bare expediency in the juncture The words are first was made a Sermon in the which these Heads were handled first the necessity of Ministers and Superintendents or Overseers c. We have indeed here the necessity of Superintendents mention'd but that it arose above an expediency we do not hence learn That Knox asserted the necessity of Superintendents as well as Ministers or an equal necessity of the one and the other can by no means be inferr'd Yea who can with our Author believe that tho' any People had aboundance of sufficient and lawfully ordain'd Ministers yet in Knox's Judgement if Superintendents were wanting such a People could no more be counted a Church than if they had no Minister at all He brings also some Expressions out of the first Book of Discpiline as After the Church shall be established and three years are past no Man shall be called to the Office of a Superintendent who hath not two years given a Proof of his faithfull Labours in the Ministry of some Church Such passages indeed suppose some continuance of Superintendents tho' no perpetuity For our Reformers could never think that within three years or thereabout the Church should be fully established few or no Churches to be planted unto which full settlement the forecited passage of the Book of Policy allows the use of Superintendents This Book of Discipline saith our Author supposeth that Superintendents and Colledges were to be of equal continuance for the Superintendent was still to be at the choosing and installment of Principalls and Rectors c. But this his Argument he himself overthrows The Assembly saith he May 27. 1561. addresseth to the Council that special and certain Provision might be made for the maintainance of the Superintendents Ministers Exhorters and Readers c. Now who sees not that this Address speaks after the same manner concerning all these so that using our Author's way of arguing we should inferr that our Reformers thought the Exhorter which confessedly was a kind of Function purely temporary was no less to be perpetual than the Superintendent yea or the Minister And the Assembly at Edinburgh December 25. 1565. appointed Mr. Knox to pen a comfortable Letter in their Name to encourage Ministers Exhorters and Readers to continue in their Vocation c. From these and the like Acts he may as well conclude the equal duration of Exhorters and Ministers as he inferrs from the Book of Policy the equal duration of Superintendents and Colledges He would next prove from the account of the Election and Admission of Superintendents prefix'd to the old Psalms that according to our Reformers this was an Office distinct from that of other Pastors of Divine Institution and so perpetual The Order and Form saith he for admitting a Superintendent and a Minister was all one and there was nothing in it importing the one Office to be temporary more than the other But therefore there 's nothing elsewhere importing so much is a clear non sequitur In the mean while from what he grants 't is plain that the Superintendent wanted the very specific difference of a Diocesan Bishop wherefore tho' they us'd this Phrase The Office to which God call'd him and this Question to the People Will ye not acknowledge this your Brother for the Minister of Christ Jesus your Overseer and Pastor Will ye not maintain and comfort him against all such as wickedly would rebell against God and his Holy Ordinance And that Petition Send unto this our Brother whom in thy name we have charged with the chief care of thy Church within the bounds of L. c. They can thereby mean no other Office no other Ordinance of God and for kind no other Charge than what 's giv'n to every particular Pastor For we find mention'd the chief of the Apostles in Labour viz and Care who yet were all equal Neither is it strange that they thus set apart him who was for the time found needfull in these dark times and places to plant and erect Churches preach perpetually where there were none and in a word in several things compleatly to imitate the ancient Evangelist Thus Paul and Barnabas were separated with a solemnity of Fasting Prayer and Imposition of Hands And yet the Work or
so much or been altogether silent thereof neither of which they did but gave to the World solemnly as the Confession of their Belief that Christ gave to to all Pastors equal and the same power and yet if we believe this Interpreter this that Christ gave may according to the Authors of that Confession be relinquish'd when Men will and Inequality it 's quite contrary introduced in the place thereof Is not this too like the dealing of the Romanists who when they are compell'd to acknowledge that the Apostles gave the Cup to the People yet pretend that they may deprive them of what Christ and his Apostles gave them Divers indeed have said that Church Government was among the Adiaphora and things indifferent But these were more wary then to say as he would have the Authors of these Confessions to say that Christ gave equal and the same Power to all Pastors yea such used not to grant that Christ gave either Equality or Inequality of Power but left all to the Churches management Moreover as he does us no dammage so I 'm sure he does the present Hierarchicks as little service for if this Hypothesis that no kind of Church Government is juris divini stand then the jus divinum of Episcopacy is lost and therefore I 'm sure they shall give him as little thanks as we 'T is also observable that when ever the Authors of these Confessions or other Divines of their Perswasion said that Communion with Churches of a different Government was not to be broken or any thing of that kind he presently inferrs that they judg'd any other form no less agreeable to the word of God than their own And here I cann't but take nottice of what I have met with somewhere in M. Claude's historical defence of the Reformation for at present I have not the book viz. that Diocesan Episcopacy is no less condemnable than Pilgrimages Purgatories or some such Romish dotages which he there names and how averse he was from Diocesan Episcopacy is observed by the Prefacer to the English Translation and yet if we believe some he gave large Testimonies of his great affection to the Diocesan cause And this brings to mind another Artifice for when any Protestant Divines considering the great Power of Popish Bishops and vehemently desiring Peace for the free Preaching and Propagation of the Gospel strain'd their Judgement and seem'd at any time to do or say somewhat that appear'd to comply with Episcopacy our Prelatists anone Infer that such Divines were great Lovers of their Hierarchy Thus for Example they abuse the Words and Actions of Melancton but they should remember that sometimes driving the same Design some of these Divines seem'd no less to comply with the Papacy it self as appear'd at the pressing of the Interim The same end drove Melancton when in a Conference at Ausburg as Osiander relates he seem'd to yeeld somewhat of Jurisdiction to Bishops for be hop'd that if Jurisdiction were granted them they would not so much oppose the Gospel But Philip consider'd not continues Osiander that the Fox may change his hair not his Temper Melancton granted also to the Pope provided he would admit the Gospel a superiority over other Bishops founded only on humane right and yeelded for procuring of the Peace of Christendom Thus Melancton through his extream desire of Peace forc'd his own Judgement for with Luther and the rest he subscribes the Smalkaldick Articles wherein as we have heard the Scriptural Idenity of Bishop and Presbyter is most clearly asserted But what ever they say to perswade us that these or other such Divines favour them we are little oblig'd to believe it for they believe it not themselves and these of our Adversaries that speak out their mind freely tell us that all the transmarine reformed Churches are really Presbyterian It were too much I 'm sure to transcribe what D. Heylin says of this for he freely grants it and then through a whole large Folio as such bespatters with the blackest of Railings and Calumnies every one of the reformed Churches in particular No less positive is Howell who makes Calvin the first Broacher of the Presbyterian Religion And a little after Thus saith he Geneva Lake swallowed up the Episcopal See and Church Lands were made secular which was the white they levell'd at This Geneva Bird flew thence io France and hatch'd the Huguenots which make about the tenth part of that People it took wing also to Bohemia and Germany high and loe as the Palatinate the land of Hesse and the confederat Provinces of the States of Holland Yea Bellarmine being to write against Presbytry lays down in the entry as undeniable that ' t is the common doctrine of both Calvinists and Lutherans § 5. To these may be added all such as were valiant for the truths of God and stoutly oppos'd themselves to Antichrist before Luther as the Waldenses and Albigenses of whom Alphonsus de Castro relates that they deny'd any difference between Bishop and Presbyter and herein differ'd nothing from Aërius This same may be learn'd from Thuan who compares them with the English Non-conformists So far from truth was D M. when he says that these only declaimed against the corrupt Manners of the Church of Rome but never declaim'd against the subordination of one Priest unto another This same doctrine held Wicklef and his followers denying that there is any difference between Bishop and Presbyter The Waldenses and Wicklef were in this as in the rest of their Articles follow'd by J. Huss and his Adherents who also asserted that there ought to be no difference between Bishop and Presbyter or among Priests Yea so Catholick and universall hath this doctrine of the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter still been that it hath all along by the Romanists been justly reck'n'd a prime doctrine of Romes Opposers Nor shall yow readily find one before Luther for of such I now speak of Truth 's Witnesses who condemn'd not all distinction between Bishop and Presbyter § 6. And even in England it self after the Reformation the famousest Bishops and lights of that Church as Hooper Latimer and others could not without great difficulty and reluctancy admitt the exercing of the Episcopal Office the using of their Priestly vestments c to be in any sense lawfull so far were they from believing a Divine Right of Diocesan Episcopacy But as Voëtius observes the use of it was excus'd rather than defended The first or at least the Standard-bearer among the first that either in England or any where else in the reform'd World had the brow to assert its Divine Right appear'd in the latter part of Queen Elizabeths Reign neither was he a Native of Britain but a Flemming I mean Hadrian Saravia once a Pastor in the reform'd Netherlands but as Maresius witnesses reject'd by them as being an Enemy to both their Church and State Neither was
be concluded the first step of the Beast's Throne But this retorsion being once handl'd shall hurt us no more then what we have already removed for take a Gospel Ministry unconfounded with a papal Hierarchy and then there is not the least colour or pretext for any Man 's ascribing to it the first rise of Popery the parity we plead for among Pastors of Flocks secures a Gospel-Ministry from any force or appearance of reason in any such assault whereas on which I 'm not now to dwell the Topicks establishing Prelacy tend no less to assert a Papacy But again the belief of a Gospel-Ministry as a thing altogether necessary for the Being of a Church is so well and so universally rooted in the hearts of all Christians that they compar'd with the rest have scarce amounted to a handfull who had the holdness to deny it and so there 's little hazard to be fear'd from these few contemptible Objectors and tho' there seem'd to be and the Objection should appear never so pungent yet it could be really of no weight against so necessary and indispensible an Ordinance Whereas on the other hand there 's so little necessity of Prelacy that the far greatest and best part of its Abettors and in these the Author himself as in due time shall appear grants that 't is no different Order from Presbytry has no footing in the Word of God and in a word to the overthrow of his Principles confounds a Prelat with a parochial Pastor Another grand but just prejudice against the Hierarchy is the looseness and prophanity most frequently cleaving thereto how prophane and scandalous they and theirs were during former Prelacy has already appear'd of the latter the matter is no less evident for at such a height growth during their Government yea under their wings did prophanity abusing of God's blessed Name and such gross immoralities arrive that to abstain from such vices and follow piety was a Crime well nigh able to make a Man pass for a Whig and Phanatick and what hazard did enshew these Sir-names none is ignorant All this and much more was not only evident to the body of this Kingdom but was also notic'd abroad and amongst others by their Friend R. Coke Yea his Majesty whom Divine Mercy sent for our Relief well knew 't and accordingly in his Declaration for Scotland has amongst many others this most memorable Sentence Although saith He the Dissenters have just cause of distrust when they call to mind how some hundreds of their Ministers were driven out of their Churches without either Accusation or Citation the filling of many of whose Places with Ignorant and Scandalous Persons hath been one great occasion of all those Miseries which that Country for a long time hath groaned under They may pretend that such Enormities were only accidental to Prelacy which may fall out under any Government but none versant in Church Story is ignorant how much mischief and scandal this Hierarchy hath cast upon Christianity Let them read Socrates and other Records of these more ancient times and they shall find that the Prelats tho' but beginning to appear and by far not so degenerat from the simplicity of the Gospel as afterward by their swelling tympany and aspiring to Domination induc'd the People to commit the most lewd and vile Pranks readily imaginable to the doolfull scandalizing of Jew and Gentile and their utter abominating of Christianity it self as is clear from the miserable Havock Destruction and Slaughter the contrary Factions of Bishops in the Plea for the Episcopal See between Damasus and Vrsinus prompted the People to commit from the most scandalous Pranks of Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria the most unhumane and barbarous concomitants and consequents of the Deposition of Chrysostome with many other such open Impieties all caus'd and occasion'd by the Prelatick pride and insolency which publick and most scandalous Enormities had the Christian World retain'd the truly Primitive and Apostolick Parity we plead for could never have hapned for had the Superiority Riches and Grandour the very aples of these most unchristian Contentions been wanting and had every Pastor been kept at the earnest labour of Teaching Exhorting and Catechising a particular Flock or Congregation with only such a competent Stipend as suffic'd to secure him from the contempt of Poverty not to feed Luxury Grandour and such like Vices there had been no occasion of such lamentable Broyls This was observ'd by Nazianzen who himself was Bishop of Constantinople and therefore he earnestly wish'd that there had been no primacy of Place no Prelacy no Prerogative no Superiour or Inferiour Degrees of Pastors The marrow of Saravia's Answer to this most cogent place of Nazianzen is that he finds no fault with the Order of Degrees themselves but with Men and with the times wherein the ambition of the Arrians troubl'd the Church The common and blunt shift of the Romanists whereby to palliat the unlawfullness of their Papacy and a real and clear contradiction of Nazianzen's plain words And was not afterward the Papal and Prelatical pride and affectation of secular rule the prime source of the unspeakable Evils that reign'd all along before the Reformation and yet continue in the Papacy Is not that Kingdom where Prelacy is of most account fill'd with the most idle naughty and profain Clergy-men that are to be found at least in the Protestant World And how can it be otherwise seeing things or Offices retaining litle or nothing of what did primitively constitute them produce quite contrary effects to these design'd by the Authors thereof But nothing is more plain than that the simplicity of the Gospel-Ministry is alter'd into a secular Grandour more by far resembling the Princes of the Gentiles than the Apostles of our Meek and Lowly Jesus who came not to be ministred to but to Minister Now the best of things once degenerat become most noxious what can therefore be expected from such but that they should suit their Government and Policy change the Spirit of a Gospel-Ministry for that of Pomp and Secularity grow intirely Carnal and so become the source of Prophanity in stead of Holiness Part II. Wherein the Epistles of Ignatius are more particularly consider'd and the Plea of the Hierarchicks therefrom examin'd Section I. Of the Author and his Work IT is evident and clear to the more thinking and ingenuous part of the Christian World how Rome's Advocats while they Agent her Cause from the truly Canonical Writings of the Apostles and Prophets after some few struglings sorry evasions and feeble resistance are compell'd to give back and in reality abandon their Posts but were they permitted to use Apocryphal Writings which they say are Ancient enough and written not long after the Holy Scriptures were not these also pull'd out of their hands by demonstrating the spuriousness thereof they should perhaps make a greater appearance and keep the fields somewhat longer The same also is the fate
the perpetual Practice of these times frees us from further debate herein I can never find that the Romans brought Christians from Asia or such remote places to be executed at Rome but still to the nearest seats of Justice as is clear in Polycarp and other most famous Bishops or Pastors And truly saith Dr. Stillingfleet the story of Ignatius as much as it 's defended with his Epistles doth not seem to be any of the most probable For wherefore should Ignatius of all others be brought to Rome to suffer when the Proconsuls and the Praesides provinciarum did every where in time of Persecution execute their Power in punishing of Christians at their own Tribunals without sending them so long a Journey to Rome to be martyr'd there And how came Ignatius to make so many and such strange Excursions as he did by the Story if the Souldiers that were his Guard wers so cruel to him as he complains they were Now all these uncertain and fabulous Narrations as to Persons then arising from want of sufficient Records made at those times make it more evident how incompetent a Judge Antiquity is to the certainty of things done in Apostolical times And now from what is said jude if D. M. had any good ground to query whether there 's any good and solid Argument brought by the Presbyterians against the Authority of St. Ignatius his Epistles that is not already sufficiently answered Section III. The second Hypothesis viz. that the Antiquity of the trne Ignatius could not secure him from all Lapses or Escapes in Doctrine or serve to Prove that there was no Declension in his time MY second Assertion is that the Antiquity even of the true Ignatius was not able to secure him from all Lapses and Mistakes and that in his time some Churches not only might but actually were itching after several Novelties Which Assertion if once demonstrated renders Ignatius of little or no use to our Antagonists their Inference is that if Ignatius spoke positively in favours of Episcopacy and lived in a closs vicinity to the Apostles then there 's no doubt but the Apostles established such a Government which consequence like the Aples of Sodom resolves anon into smoake our Assertion being prov'd which I now come to demonstrate The Apostles of our Lord had not chang'd their earthly Tabernacle for that which is not made with hands when to their inexpressible sorrow they beheld not only particular Persons but even the greater part of some Churches they themselves had either planted or watered in stead of Grapes to bring forth will Grapes and in place of being the Repositories of the precious Truths of the Gospel become nests and cages of the most abominable Errors Other Churches there were that holding fast the Foundation of the Apostolick Doctrine but raising thereupon a structure of the stubble and hay of either Judaism or Paganism in one of which all of them had been educated had well nigh made up an Edifice of most Hetrogeneous Materials Hence it is that the Apostle is at such pains to Correct them in their Abuses of the Sacrament in their Superstition concerning Meat and Drink and their unwarrantable observation of Times that wanted all Divine Sanction § 2. But these infallible Guides being at length possessed of their Master's Joy Affairs grew yet worse for then the grand Enemy of the Church did in greater abundance and with more security sow his tares Hence it was that not only those who are justly branded for Arch-Hereticks and Schismaticks but even those who persisted Orthodox in the main Principles of Christianity were drawn into neither few nor inconsiderable Mistakes § 3. I 'm sure Papias Bishop of Hierapolis was a Man both in respect of his Antiquity and Authority among the primitive Christians little inferiour to Ignatius 't was he notwithstanding who either greedily imbrac'd or first of all hatch'd the gross Fancy of the Saints their corporal Kingdom for a thousand years after the Resurrection Moreover saith Eusebius speaking of Papias the same Writer alledges something as from unwritten Tradition viz. some strange Parables and Doctrines of our Saviour and some other fabulous things and amongst the rest he saith that after the Resurrection there shall be a thousand years wherein Christ shall reign on Earth bodily But to me he seems through misunderstanding of the Apostle's Discourse to have taken what was spoken mysteriously in a quite other sense from its true meaning For he was os a very weak Judgement as his Writings sufficiently declare He was notwithstanding the Author of this Opinion to the most part of the following Ecclesiastical Writers for they look'd only to his Antiquity as Irenaeus and whosoever else favoured his Opinion We see here a Man of no little Antiquity and Repute drawing the greatest Lights of the Church and consequently the rest of the Christians to a Doctrine destitute of all countenance from the Word of God § 4. Another Conceit no less Ancient but more wild was that of the Angels their carnal Knowledge of Women This was hugg'd by Justin Martyr who lived in the same Century with yea and not many years after Ignatius The Angels saith he transgressing their Order by carnal Copulation with Women fell from their primitive State aud begot Children who are now called Devils He was follow'd notwithstanding by Irenaeus Athenagoras the most famous Writers of their Age as also the stream of these that flourished in the succeeding Centuries Irenaeus also with a great many others held that the beatifick Vision is not enjoy'd untill the day of Judgement Now beyond peradventure such Leaders as these had the most part of the Churches at that time for their Fellows and Followers in these Opinions § 5. And seeing both such Pillars and the rest that lean'd on them were ready to swerve in Matters of Speculation or Opinion they were no less capable of straying in things belonging to Practice for there 's no more security promised to the Church from the one than the other Neither did the closs Vicinity to the times of the Apostles preserve the Churches from evident Lapses of this nature Was not the mixing of the Sacramental Wine with water a matter of Practice and altogether destitute of warrand from Scripture in which we hear of nothing but the Fruit of the Vine drunken by Communicants And yet Justin Martyr informs us that the mixing of the Sacramental Wine with water was the Practice of his time § 6. Another Instance of the most early Declension of the primitive Church in Matters of the same kind viz. the external Rites and Ecclesiastick Ceremonies was their observation of Easter concerning which the Controversies first arose between Polycarp and the Churches of the East on the one hand and Anicetus and the western Churches on the other Polycarp alledg'd John the Evangelist whose Disciple he had been for the Author of his Opinion but Anicetus and the Romans pretended the
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
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
Scripture which otherways is one of the most refreshing Cordials to the weary and fainting Labourers of Christ's Vineyard And if we consult the Epistles to these Churches how many things shall we find therein that argue beyond scruple that the Spirit is speaking to the collective Bodies of Church-Officers and not to one Man only Shall we believe that for the sin of one Diocesan Bishop who as such was scarce so much as a Preacher of the Gospel all the Candlesticks of the Gospel were to be removed from the whole Church and the Light thereof extinguished a grievous Punishment and too universal providing the Diocesan only were to be charged with Defection Yea have we not much better reason to judge that this declining and deserting of their first Love imputed to the Ephesian Angel had crept into at least the far greater part of the Church-Officers and so the sin charged upon them and the punishment threatned shall have a far greater correspondency Moreover the trial of false Teachers for which the same Ephesian Angel is commended is not the Work of any one Church-Officer but of the Ecclesiastical Senat which therefore must be the Angel who upon this account is here commended D. M. yeelds that the Heavenly Admonitions first address'd to these Angels were also communicated to the Churches but by the interposal of their Angels But were this as certain as from what is now said it appear◠precarious yea and uncredible yet this Angel or Bishop might be only a Praeses or Moderator so his Argument is not at all relieved Who continues he cann't be call'd a Colledge of Angels but one single Angel c. Which is a most flat begging of the Question And tho' saith he there be Instructions in these Epistles in which besides others the Angels are particularly admonished yet they are no less adress'd to single Angels than the Epistle to the Philippians is to that Church Tho' St. Paul uses particular Compellations Ch. 4. verse 2. 3. Where he perverts the state of the Question which is not If in any Epistle there may be Instructions that concern some beside these to whom they are chiefly directed But if what is here said to the Angel can agree to any one Man And beside what is instanced to what one Man in the World can that agree which is promised to the Philadelphian Angel viz. That the Hereticks were to come and Worship before his Feet Such a promise indeed is made to the Church Isai. 60. 14. but to one meer Man no where § 9 From all which 't is evident that by the Name of Angels not particular Men but at least the Ecclesiastick Senats are design'd which is not unfrequent in Scripture as Mal. 2. 7. where 't is said that the Priests lips should keep knowledge from whose mouth the Law was to be sought the reason of which is subjoin'd that he was the Messenger or Angel c. as the Seventy have it I know from the Passage Dr. Hammond on the Revelation attempts to conclude the quite contrary alledging that in this place the High-Priest only is to be understood but without any ground of his alledgiance this his Assertion further supposes that the High-Priest alone was the Cabine of Knowledge and the Peoples Teacher from whom the Law was to be learned quite contrary to 2 Chron. 17. 8 9. where we learn that amongst the rest of the Teachers sent through the Kingdom by Jehoshaphat were Elishamma and Jehoram Priests Moreover the 4 5 and 6. verses of the same second of Malachy where under the name of Levi in the singular Number all the Levites are undeniably to be understood and what 's said of Levi as of one Man is certainly mean'd of a Multitude evince that under the name of Priest in the following verse we must understand a Plurality § 10. But the 24. verse of the second Chapter Vnto you I say and to the rest of Thyatira puts this beyond Debate But Hammond excepts that in the Ancient Greek Mss. And particularly that at St. James 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is left out and the words read To you the rest or To the rest of you in Thyatira But be it so yet I think these will not serve to discredit the Vulgar and universally received Greek Copy in which this particle is found Yea 't is found in so many Greek Copies and these of so good Note that I doubt if any of all these who during eight or nine Score of years translated or expounded this Place has ommitted it and altho' some Copies of the Vulgar Latine want it yet there be no few that retain it and amongst other two Mss. in the Library of Glasgow And Aretas or rather Andreas who lived in the fifth Century above as I believe the age of most of the Mss. now in the World I except not that at St. James's notwithstanding of what is fabled to the contrary retains this Particle as a part of the then uncontroverted Copy And after him Beda to which we may yet add the ablest of the Romanists as Dionysius Carthusians Lyra the Glossa interlinearis and a Lapide no Friends to Presbytry § 11. But D. M. tells us that these words in the 24 v. But unto you I say c. cannot be applyed so properly to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira as to these mention'd in the end of the 23 verse the other Churches of Asia Which saith he because they are mentioned in the Speech directed to the Angel of the Church of Thyatria the immediat transition from him to them is easie But except we force the place nothing of this kind can be thence collected there being nothing in this Epistle spoken to or of the other Churches except the meer mentioning thereof the more to hold forth the greatness and conspicuousness of the Punishment denunced against the Strayers in Thyatira Yea the latter part of the 24 verse And to the rest in Thyatira proclaims that the former part of the verse is to be understood of the same People of Thyatira likewise In a word his gloss is so uncouth and strain'd that you cannot easily tell what to make of it And 't is at least no more odd than his Conduct all along § 12. And to instance in the present Theme he would fain ridicule Salmasius for affirming that under the names of the Angels the Churches themselves or the more pure and Angel-like parts thereof are to be understood According to Salmasius his Iterpretation inferrs D. M. the seven Stars must needs be the seven Churches of the seven Churches As if such Phrases were not frequent enough in Authors and yet not justly lyable to any such Inference or as if the more holy and spiritual part of the Church were the whole visible Church for except D. M. so affirm the Author of this Gloss cann't be accus'd of nonsense who yet is not Salmasius for he only learn'd it from Aretas or Andraeas and other Fathers
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
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
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
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
chiefly the Jesuites And lastly in the rear comes D. M. concluding that the Hierarchy of the Christian Church is founded upon Apostolick Tradition and that the Apostles had the Modell of the Temple in their view when they erected this Plat-form But Junius Answers that their Conclusion is a non sequitur For saith he this comparison is not particular between each of these particular Officers under the Old Testament and these under the New but in common shewing that as they are all obliged to serve the Church of the Jews so all the Church-Officers under the New Testament ought to serve the Christian Church Moreover continues Junius tho' we should give that the Comparison were particular yet their Conclusion would not follow seeing Hierome speaks only of the Church Polity of his own time and the Question now is about Hierome's Sentiments of the Church Government and Polity in the Apostolick Age and first primitive Church And that this in Hierome's Mind was not Hierarchick but a meer Parity of Pastors Junius already evinced and Dr. Stillingfleet at more length overthrows this their Jesuitical Doctrine and Demonstrats that by Apostolical Tradition in Hierome only Ecclesiastick Custome of some Antiquity is mean'd asserts that it 's not imaginable that Jerome who had been proving all along the Superiority of a Presbyter above a Deacon because of his Identity with a Bishop in the Apostles times should at the same time say that a Bishop was above a Presbyter by the Apostles Institution and so directly overthrow all he had been saying before The plain meaning continues Dr. Stillingfleet then of Jerome is no more but this that as Aaron and his Sons in the Order of Priesthood were above the Levites under the Law So the Bishops and Presbyters in the Order of the Evangelical Priesthood are above the Deacons under the Gospel For the Comparison runs not between Aaron and his Sons under the Law and Bishops and Presbyters under the Gospel but between Aaron and his Sons as one part of the Comparison under the Law and the Levites under them as the other so under the Gospel Bishops and Presbyters make one part of the Comparison answering to Aaron and his Sons in that wherein they all agree viz. the Order of Priesthood and the other part under the Gospel is that of Deacons answering to the Levites under the Law The Opposition is not then in the Power of Jurisdiction between Bishops and Priests but between the same Power of Order which is alike both in Bishops and Presbyters according to the acknowledgement of all to the Office of Deacons which stood in Competition with them Hereby we see how unhappyly those Arguments succeed which are brought from the Analogy between the Aaronical Priesthood to endeavour the setting up of a Jus Divinum of a paralell Superiority under the Gospel All which Arguments are taken off by this one thing we 're now upon viz that the Orders and Degrees under the Gospel were not taken up from Analogy to the Temple Other passages of Jerome they also study to abuse but these now handl'd are the most specious But of such Allegatâ—ons out of Jerome hear the same Dr. And among all these fifteen Testimonies produced by a learned Writer out of Jerome for the Superiority of Bishops above Presbyters I cannot find one that doth found it upon any Divine Right but only upon the conveniency of such an Order for the Peace and Unity of the Church of God But granting some passages may have a more favourable aspect towards the Superiority of Bishops over Presbyters in his other Writings I would fain know whether a Man's Judgement must be taken from occasional and accidental Passages or from designed and set Discourses which is as much as to ask whether the lively Representation of a man by picture may be best taken when in hast of other business he passeth by us giving only a glance of his countenance or when he purposely and designedly sits in order to that end that his countenance may be truly represented He adds that Jerome in his Commentaries where he expresly declares not his own mind transcribes often out of others without setting down their names c. § 9. Most dishonest therefore is the conduct of the Loyolites and of others of the Prelatists their Associats in this Matter but above all men that of D. M. who beside all this his foul dealling following Bayly the Iesuite has scarce adventur'd to lay before his Reader in â—nglish so much as one scrape or particle of what the Reform'd bring from Jerome against the Romanists and such Hierarchick Advocats which in D. M. is the most certain product of both extream Disingenuity Diffidence But so great is the power of prejudice that they stick not to sacrifice both their Credit and whatsoever else they should reckon most estimable to such Dreams as even most of the Church of England yea and of the Romanists either acted by the love of the Truth or compell'd by its Power had condemn'd We have heard how Bishop Jewel Dr. Morton the Bishop of Spalato and Dr. Stillingfleet renounce and explode so palpable an untruth And Dr. Forbes is of the same Mind yeelding that Hierome is all one with Aërius in this that Bishops by Divine Right are not at all Superior to Presbyters And that these two are intirely of one and the same Mind we have heard also granted by the most learn'd of the Romanists as Alphonsus de Castro and Medina some whereof acknowledge that none could be of another Opinion concerning them And Benedictus Justinianus and other Romanists are of the same Mind How then were all these Doctors sitting in Council to determine of this very Matter should they chastise and brand these most partial and disingenuous Dealers we have now to do with Other Hierarchicks who would not confess so much in plain Terms yet sometimes discover both their disingenuity and true Sentiments so palpably as if they had expresly made the same Confession Dr. Pearson tho' he says nothing in his own Name yet acknowledges that Hierome hath said so much for the Authority of Presbytry and endeavoured so much to establish it that he is judged to make it well nigh equal to the Episcopal Order And Bellarmine tells us that Hierome was self repugnant and knew not what he said And Petavius tho' the most pertinacious wrangler of all the Society grants that Hierome makes Presbyters well nigh all one with Bishops but not the very same saith the Jesuite or intirely their Equalls being Inferior in so much as they want the Power of Ordination And that according to Hierome's Mind meer Custome and not the Lord 's Appointment gave to the Bishops above Presbyters any Power they have either in Ruling the Church or external Government And were things brought to this pass I 'm sure they should make but small account of the sory remainder Petavius makes
a profitable departure for they are not afrai'd least any thrust them out of their places into others For we see that you have cast some from their Charge which they perform'd with honour It 's base Beloved yea very base and unworthy of a Conversation that is in Christ Jesus to hear that the most stable and ancient Church of Corinth for the sake of one or two should raise sedition against the Presbyters And If I be the Cause of Contention schism and sedition I 'le depart and be gone whithersoever ye will and do what the People shall command providing only that the sheepfold of Christ with the Presbyters appointed over it may have peace And And you therefore who were the Authors of this Division subject your selves to your Presbyters Hence Observe First that he never names or so much as insinuats that in Corinth there was any Bishop Superintendent over the rest of the Pastors But as the Apostle to the Hebrews had done before him honours equally all their Pastors with the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these that bear Rule over them Secondly That in imitation of the same Apostle Paul he names only Bishops and Deacons as the only Orders of Divine Institution by whom the whole Gospel-Service was to be perform'd Therefore afterward when he names Presbyters in distinction from the Flock and as Rulers over it he cann't be understood as Petavius and Pearson would force him to speak of Presbyters with Relation and Respect only of their Age but to give them this Demonstration as a peculiar Designation of a Church-Office and so the word Presbyter most of necessity with Clement coincide in its meaning with the word Bishop and both of 'em become Synonymous Terms to hold forth but one and the same thing Thirdly That the Apostles did not as we find afterward Decreed by the Synod of Sardica and admonish'd by Pope Leo chuse out only the greater Cities and neglect and forbear to place Bishops in lesser Villages that the name of Bishop hereby might not fall into Contempt but indifferently and without distinction of places every where settled them according as there was a probability they might serve the great end of their calling therein Fourthly That to found the Distinction and number of these Orders if we believe Clement the Apostles had no eye unto the Jewish Church-Polity so as to make it a Pattern for that of the Christian but only to what was prophecied and foretold by the Prophets concerning a new frame of the New Testament Church and thus Clement really contradicts all the Patrons of the Hierarchy who would still found their triple Orders on that of the High-Priest Priests and Levites of the Temple Fifthly That in Corinth it was attempted to throw out a plurality of real Bishops and cast them from their Charge and that the Sedition was not moved against one only but divers Bishops in that Church Many other things might be observed but these serve sufficiently to prove that there was a plurality of true Bishops of Corinth who were in nothing distinguished from Pastors of particular Flocks or preaching Presbyters § 2. Petavius notwithstanding cann't abide any such Inference from the words of Clement Wherefore he scrapes together several things whereby to ward off the force of these Passages and alledges that Clemens his silence of the Bishop of Corinth makes nothing for us For Pope Siricius saith he in his Epistle to the Church of Millain maketh no mention of their Bishop altho' in that mean time Ambrose occupied the Chair But the vast Difference between the Cases and the Circumstances of the Churches of Corinth and Millain quite nullifies the Jesuites Instance The People of Millain jointly both Clergy and Laity had thrust out Jovinian few or none of them for ought we hear being prosylited to his Doctrine wherefore Siricius had nothing to do but shew them in General that he had excommunicated Jovinian with two or three others who had fled to Rome for Sanctuary So there was no special Ground or Cause why particular mention should be made of Ambrose the Bishop or any other whether of the Clergy or Laity the whole Body thereof for ought now known being without any Schism earnest enough for the expulsion of Jovinian and only expecting what the Bishop of Rome which they acknowledged as the first See and whether Jovinian had fled would do in this Matter Whereas one the other hand Clemens writes to a Church cut in pieces with a Schism in their own Bowels infected with Sedition of no small part of the People against their Pastors broken with as appears plain a division of the very Pastors themselves and this grown to such a hight that some of the Pastors were thrust from their places and driv'n out now in this Case the Bishop had either the best of it and so the seditious part merited a severe and special reprimand on the account of their Opposition to and Separation from their Bishop and thus he should certainly have been mentioned or else he was the Cause of the Division or at least joined with the injurious and therefore should have been particularly reproved or admonished Clement it 's true names none but the influence which the good or evil Carriage the Bishop had and could not but have in such a Matter had certainly obliged Clement either to mention his name of give some signification of him if there had been any Diocesan Bishop existent in Corinth Clemens speaks of several Pastors of Flocks which I think none will deny intimats the diversity of their Carriage in that Business and gives Directions accordingly How can it be apprehended that he should pass over the chief Pastor and go to the rest without so much as the least Direction unto him the least mention of him yea or the least insinuation that there was in Corinth any such thing Petavius's next Attempt is on these words of Clement where he tells that the Apostles instituted Bishops and Deacons And the Jesuite contends that two distinct Orders are not here mean'd but that the word Deacon is only explicative of the former word Bishop and cites several places where the word Deacon is taken in a signification of Honour and applied to the Apostles and Civil Magistrates And afterward terms Salmasius ridiculous for saying that Clemens nam'd only Bishops and Deacons without mention of Presbyters For saith the Jesuite Presbyters are more frequently mention'd by Clement than either Bishops or Deacons But certainly these Orders are again and again mention'd by Clement without adding any thereto ordetracting therefrom when he appears to reckon up all the Church-Officers that are of Divine Institution And altho' the word Deacon be sometimes taken for the Designation of a higher Office Yet as Petavius himself else where observes It is with the addition of such a word or phrase as guides our Judgement and gives us to learn that by it is not understood this
lower Order of Church-Officers as Rom. 13. the Magistrate is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Minister of God But there is no such explicative word or particle in Clement to alter the common Signification thereof on which account we 're not lightly to resile therefrom But that which utterly overthrows the Jesuite's Cause is Clement's closs Conformity to the Apostle in his account of Church-Orders who 1 Tim. 1. 3. beyond all Scruple of any Party takes these words in the sense we plead for to Clement and makes not at all the word Deacon exegetick and explicative of the word Bishop but by it designs a distinct Order of Church-Officers from what is signifi'd by the other For doubtless Clement Paul's Fellow-Labourer took the words in the same signification and meaning wherein the Apostle had understood them And accordingly Clement for Confirmation hereof adduces the words of Isaiah 60. 17. which place as he then certainly found it in the Septuagint contains the words Bishops Deacons exactly as Paul expresseth distinguisheth Church-Officers and on this Ground Clement goes when he intimats that the Apostles in their Institution of Church-Officers had an eye to these words of the Prophet In vain therefore labours Petavius to disprove the Copy of Isaiah used by Clement and brings the Hebrew Hierome and others taking the word in a different signification for thus he hath not Salmasius or any other modern Defender of Presbytry but Clement himself whom he pretends to vindicate for his Adversary seeing we Dispute not concerning the Greek Copy Clement used but of the thing he inferr'd from these words of Isaiah according to the Copy he then cited Neither is it more to the Jesuite's advantage that the word Presbyter is several times found in Clement For seeing as is plain yea and the Jesuite himself not only grants but proves that it frequently there denotes not a degree of Age but a Church-Officer it must of necessity be a Term altogether Synonymous with the word Bishop For they themselves plead not for the Equipolency thereof with the word Deacon wherein Petavius himself shall afford us no small assistance who having but to no purpose seeing never Man denied it shewed that with Clement the word Presbyter is sometimes taken appellatively to denote old Age but no Church-Officer subjoins these remarkable words At other times Clement so uses the word Presbyter as thereby to signifie a certain Function and publick Office in the Ministry and a certain Dignity in the Church which he calls an Episcopacy or the Office of a Bishop From this plain Testimony of a Man in learning and love to Prelacy second to none that ever undertook its Defence it 's clear as the Light it self that with Clement the word Bishop and the word Presbyter when he takes it for a Church-Function are Terms altogether Synonymous For if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Episcopacy or the Office of a Bishop be competent to Clement's Presbyter and things as they ought receive Denominations from Forms wherewith they 're cloathed then this Presbyter in the Judgement of Clement is really a Bishop and indeed this is superlatively clear to any who but with an open and unprepossess'd Mind reads the places of Clement we have already produced Howbeit the Testimony of such an Adversary gives no small additional Confirmation to the Truth thereof Yea the same Adversary in the same place acknowledges that even then the Title of Bishop was also common and in after times only appropriated to one And again It 's clear saith Petavius from this place that there was a Council or Ecclesiastick Senate ordain'd by the Apostles at Corinth whose Dignity and Office Clemens calls Episcopacy and the chiefest of the Clergy he names Presbyters as also from this which Clement afterward writes It 's base Beloved yea most base c. And he names the same Presbyters Pastors and Church-Governours of the Christian Sheepsold And now judge how the Jesuite after these Concessions could yet say that it follows not from hence that in Corinth or at other Cities there was no peculiar Bishop § 3. And here again we find D. M. at his old filching Trade transcribing Petavius his Perversions of Clement or bringing what is no more serviceable to either Cause or Credit as that Clement comprehends all the Jewish Clergy under the name of Priests and Levites Therefore Inferrs D. M. It follows not from Clement his naming only Bishops and Deacons that Bishops and Presbyters are not in Clement distinct Offices But D. M. should remember that Clement not only Dichotomizes but Trichotomizes the Jewish Clergy into three Parts But does he any where so divide the Christian Clergy He not only names the two Kinds of Offices but so names them as to identifie and take for one and the same Bishop and Presbyter which Petavius and D. M. and their Brethren by all means labour to make him distinguish But St. Clement saith D. M. exhorting the Corinthians to order sets before them the subordination under the Temple-Service how the High-Priest Priests and Levites were distinguish'd by their proper Service and immediatly recommends to them that every one of them should continue in his proper Order Now continues D. M. when we consider the primitive Method of reasoning from Jewish precedents St. Clement had never talked at this rate if the Jurisdiction of one over many Priests had been abolished under the New Testament But why does he mutter for it if he can bring ought for his purpose he must also Inferr from this passage of Clement that as there was a High-Priest over all the Jewish Church so there must be another High-Priest over all Christians And that all Christians must bring Oblations and Sacrifices to the Temple at Hierusalem for from these Topick does Clement exhort the Corinthians to Harmony Whether then D. M. be a Romanist or a Jew may be a Question for unquestionably his way of reasoning symbolizes with both of them The Truth is nothing can be inferr'd from this place of Clement but that as under the Old Testament every one whether Church-man or Laick was to abide in his own Order without raising Schism or Confusion so it ought to be under the New Testament St. Clement himself continues D. M. distinguishes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 An express untruth and I challenge D. M. and his Complices to prove it Nor can it be adds D. M. an Objection of any weight that the first who were their Spiritual Governours are mention'd in the plural number since this was an Encyclical Epistle addressed to Corinth as the principal City and from thence transmitted to its dependencies c. By which words if he speaks sense he intimats that there were in the Apostolick age Metropolitan Cities in an Ecclesiastick sense whose Bishops according to the Civil Dignity of these Cities were Metropolitan and had their numbers of inferiour and dependent Bishops A most nauseous and
seeing as Blondel at large shews the phrase natively yealds only this sense viz. Polycarp and the rest of the Presbyters of that Colleage And thus D. M. may as well inferr Peter's Superiority and Power over the rest of the Apostles from Acts 2. 37. To Peter and to the rest of the Apostles Moreover Blondel demonstrats how on diverse accounts Polycarp without any Eminency and Power over the rest may be particularly nominated rather than others as because he was first in Order and Years But I insist not herein but referr to Blondel who hath nervously baffl'd this their pitifull Coujecture D. M. adventures to ingage with nothing of what he saith and yet is not asham'd to bring to the Field so blunted a weapon I pass also D. M.'s two Arguments for Polycarp's Diocesan Episcopacy drawn from the pretended Succession of Diocesan Bishops in Smyrna and the Epistles of Ignatius mention'd by Polycarp having overthrown both of 'em already and proceed to the Testimony of Hermas who thus speaks Thou shalt write two Books thou shalt send one to Clement and one to Graptes and Clement shall send it to foraign Cities for to him this is permitted and Graptes shall admonish the Widows and Orphans but thou shalt read it with or relate it unto the Presbyters in this City who govern the Church Where we see that not any one Bishop but a Colledge of Presbyters call'd doubtless afterward by the same Author Bishops govern'd the Church of one City Yet D. M. pretends to find here a palpable Evidence of Episcopacy For saith he the sending of the Encyclical Epistle to foraign Cities is insinuated to be the peculiar Priviledge of Clement then Bishop of Rome But if he conclude from this place of Hermas that Clement had any Power over these to whom he was to send that Book or Epistle as for Clement's being Bishop of Rome it 's so far from being insinuated here that the quite contary is from this very place most evident he may as well inferr from Col. 4. 16. that they had Power over the Laodiceans whither they were to send and cause to be read the Apostle's Letter Secondly D. M. ascribing to the Bishop of Rome Power over foraign Cities erects a Pope rather than a Bishop But I 'll assure him he came not in so early for seeing there was undoubtedly one Bishop at least in every particular City so soon as there were any in the World this place of Hermas if it bear D. M's Inference and give a Power to Clement over foraign Cities insinuats nothing of a Bishop's Dignity above Presbyters but of the power of one Bishop over another or rather of a Pope over other Churches A falshood most unanimously exploded by Cyprian Jerome Augustine and the rest of the Ancients D. M. seeks also for his Prelacy in these words of Hermas viz. The Earthly Spirit exalts it self and seeks the first seat Some contend for Principality and Dignity But what if Hermas had said that some contended to get an Empire and Popedome over the whole Church would D. M. hence conclude that it was lawfull or then practised in the Church or when the Apostles contended who should be the greatest Had Christ before that time assured them of the lawfulness of such an Office and told them that they were to have one to be a Prince over the rest By no Logick therefore can it be inferred for Hermas his words that a chief Seat or Principality for both are one and the same with Hermas was then either exercised or held lawfull Again tho' both had been then in Custome no Power of one over the rest can be hence concluded seeing the chief Seats are given to the Moderators of Synods and other Presidents of Assemblies who have no primacy of Power but only of Order And again The polished and white Stones saith Hermas are the Apostles and Bishops and Doctors and Deacons who walked in the Clemency of God aâ—d exercised the Office of a Bishop and taught and served And Such are some Bishops that is Governours of the Churches and these who have the Charâ—e of the Services § 7. In both places saith Blondel he makes only two Degrees that of the Bishops who governed the Churches and that of the Deacons who had the charge of the Services for it 's acknowledged by all that the Doctors are all one with the Bishops when they are said to have performed the Office of a Bishop and that the Apostles as they are opposed to Bishops were placed above the whole Clergy This repons D. M. is Tergiversation with a Witness and a fraudulent Trick in Blondel since Presbyters in the primitive Church are frequently distinguished by the Name of Doctors and Blondel's Commentary is a manifest violence offered to the Text for Doctors are not said to have performed the Office of a Bishop but to have taught and this is very agreeable to their Character being so much imploy'd by their respective Bishops in teaching the Catechumeni and the natural position of these words will allow of no other meaning Which Answer D. M. hath learned from the Practice of our late Bishops during whose Epocha the Buffund might have hid himself well nigh the whole year from the Bishop's fury in the Bishop's pulpit seeing he scarce ever came thither to play the Doctor or ought else As for the Ancient and true primitive Bishops they perpetually preach'd or taught saith Le Moyn Moreover the Fathers generally take Pastor Bishop and Doctor for one and the same as Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret Sedulius and after them Aquinas Haymo Benedictus Justinianus with others on Ephes. 4. 11. Of the same mind are Hierome Augustine and Anselm and the pretended Clemens Romanus cited by Gratian and Benedictus Justinianus and the Fathers of the Council of Carthage Of the same Mind are the ablest of our Episcopals as Field Hammond and Heylen So truly did Blondel say that Bishop and Doctor is universally taken for one and the same Neither was ever the Presbyter either in Cyprian or any other Ancient called Doctor in opposition to the Bishop but to other Ecclesiastick Presbyters who taught not of whose existence as was before touched we have most sufficient assurance But D. M. in contradiction to the Apostle would have a Bishop who is no Teacher or Preacher like the Droll who said he mett with Priests who were no Clerks And seeing with Hermas there are but two Orders of Church-men and Bishops and praesides Ecclesiarum Church Governours are reciprocal Terms taken for one and the same and seeing that his Presbyters are expresly term'd Church-Governours it 's most evident that he takes Bishop and Presbyter for one and the same and that the word Doctor is purely exegetick or explicative of the word Bishop and that both of them which I 'm sure is not unfrequent in all sorts of Authors evidently signifie one and the same thing § 8. I now
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
contrary to the holy Canons And thus he acted suitably to his purpose seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing more than of Domination and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City Decreed also That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome Let us honour say they the Memory of St. Peter that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose but if he approve of what 's already done and think not fit to call it into Question then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable Thus these Fathers many whereof otherwise were excellent Men the first I think that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope 't was not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council Hence it 's to be noted that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors unto a few whom they named Bishops a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers but also in subjecting of the Presbyters yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the City but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities and so on till at length not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder all centred in Rome Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries Moreover Optatus asserts that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop But to proceed these Chorepiscopi or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages so speaks the Council of Antioch He say these Fathers i. e. Paulus Samosatenus suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies Dr. Maurice answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch and near to one another and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks yea were not at all Christians could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie That saith he which next occurrs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops settled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also Ordain'd Among the Jews wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there settled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the Port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth mett there Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes and then proceeds saying Therefore it 's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it 's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett They were pretty throng in Asrick for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present and one hundred and twenty absent and sixty Sees were then Vacant which make in all four hundred sixty and six there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops Thus he And now not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter it 's most certain that at least for upwards of the three first Centuries you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but it had also its proper Bishop I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet no not by Dr. Maurice or any other been or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy good proofs of this Truth may be adduced For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop as Justine Martyr gives to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who as we have seen already was purely a Parish Pastor And the 39 Canon saith Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop for to him the Lord's People is committed and for their Souls he must give an Account Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd a Bishop was there and was the Dispenser thereof The High-Priest saith he that is the Bishop preaches to all Men the true Gospel every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries desires to be led to the High-Priest and he brings him to the High-Priest who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders praises the bountifull prinple by which all are
Plea for the Distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter tho' its Ground were no less solide than it 's naught and slippery becomes really of no subserviency at all to their Hierarchick Cause and so on this account is truly exhausted for providing the Pastor of any Parish or Congregation be constantly imployed in Preaching and Edifying the People we shall not envy him others so far as is requisite to assist him the People may be instructed the better Don't therefore Dr. Maurice and the Men of that stamp while they pretend that tho' there be allowed to every Congregation its proper Bishop yet there 's a most different and momentuous Controversie behind about the Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter seek as the Proverb is a Knot in the Rush and triffle with a witness Give them moreover out of sole kindness that the Apostolick Power and Office is permanent and to be transmitted to all Bishops yet on Supposition of these Truths viz. that every Congregation had yea or may have its proper Bishop and that all Bishops are equal they shall be compelled to desert the whole of their Plea and acknowledge the sure Foundation and Lawfullness of what they call Presbyterian Parity Secondly Eusebius plainly says that it cannot be known who were the Successors of the Apostles to feed the Churches they had planted save what is to be collected from the words of the Apostles and so break the Chain at the Top where it should be strongest and shews that their best twisted Cords become Ropes of Sand to which as we already noticed the learn'dest of their own Writers subscribe Thirdly To come to Rome in particular altho' 't was the Head of the World and indeed the Head and Fountain from whence all the Hierarchicks draw their best support no Man of Reason whoever look'd into the divers yea and contrary Accounts given by the Ancients of the first pretended Successors of Peter can ever inferr that the Romans had in these early times of Christianity one peculiar Diocesan Bishop over the rest of the Pastors yea indeed Cletus Clemens Linus all whom if you compare the best Accounts they have you shall find to have been at one and the same time Bishops of Rome and Successors of Peter are a good evidence that he had no singular Successor at all This was so made out by the Protestant Writers that for ought I know the Romanists were despairing of any plausible Answer altho' I doubt not but they take Heart since some among the Protestants have used prodigious Endeavours to gratifie them and reconcile real Contradictions and fix the singular Successors of Peter I can scarce light on any of the Books they cite and yet I 'm at no great loss For 4 ly It 's certain that Peter was never at Rome which at once dispatches the grand Plea of all the Hierarchicks The whole stream of Writers who record Peter's Voyage thither either relate or suppose that his Errand was to oppose Simon Magus so that the Truth of both these Relations must stand or fall together But Simon Magus if we belive Origenes was never there Simon saith he the Smaritan and Majician endeavour'd by Sorcery to destroy some and I belive deceived many with his delusions But now throw all the World you shall scarce find thirty who follow him and I perhaps have called them more than they are Indeed there are some few in Palestine but in the rest of the Regions of the World his very Name is not heard off altho' he mainly desired that his Fame might be spread abroad and if perhaps there be any report of him at all it 's only to be learned from the Acts of the Apostles And Time which often has discovered things commonly taken for Truth to be altoger False hath verifi'd the words of Origenes For the Statue which gave the occasion of the fixion is now found to be the Image an old Sabin King or fictitious Deity called by the Romans Semo Sangus Sancus or Sanctus which Justine Martyr throw his unskilfulness of the Latine Tongue and a Cheat put upon him by some Samaritans took for Simon Magus as is acknowledged even by the learned Romanist Valesius The Inscription of this statue is Semoni Sango Deo Fidio Now according to the Genius of the Age the fraud prevail'd and Simon Magus must be brought to Rome made to effect monstruous Prodigies and therefore Simon Peter his old Adversary must also be sent thither to Conjure and Baffle him a second time And this is the prime Source of Peter's imaginary Journey to Rome and his fictitious Roman Episcopacy and the whole Papal Structure For as Simon Magus his coming to Rome is mention'd by none before Justine and by him only on this false Ground so Peter's Journey thither is before that time mention'd by none save Papias if he may be said to mention it for if at all he does it very obscurely And tho' he had been never so positive in this Matter it 's of small Consequence for as Eusebius already told us tho' elsewhere he forgets himself he was of so little Wit so fabulous and given to believe everything he heard that his Testimony merites little or no Credit Irenaeus indeed says that Papias was a hearer of the Apostles and himself also intimats so much but again clearly denyes it while he says that he used when he met with any who had been acquainted with the Elders to enquire what Andrew Peter Philip Thomas James John Matthew and the rest of Christ's Disciples had been wont to say And this he intimats had been his Practice only when he was a young Man and so gives us clearly to understand that when he wrote there was not one of the Hearers of the Apostles alive So far was Papias from being their Disciple 'T was he also who gives out that Mark wrote not his Gospel by Divine Inspiration but only by the help of his Memory 'T was he also who was the Father of the carnal and gross Chiliasts and the first who abused the Scriptures turning them all to Allegories and had not so much as the knowledge to distinguish Philip the Apostle from Philip the Evangelist The same Papias is the first Author of the report of Peter's Journey to Rome providing it may be said that he reportes it at all which mistake as Eusebius intimates flow'd from his misunderstanding of 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Church that is at Babylon c. And seeing that by Babylon in the Apocalyps Room is mean'd he and many of these times thro' their want of skill to distinguish between the Prophetick Mystick and Epistolick plain Phrase and Stile concluded that in Peter also Room is to be understood But this Gloss is so forraign and absurd that even the most learn'd of the Romanists as Petrus de Marca Bishop of Paris acknowledges that these Words of Peter are not to be
no Inhabitant there no place for my L. Bishop's grace nothing whereon to exercise the Episcopal power save rubbish and desolation In none of the Churches saith Dr. Stilling fleet most spoken of is the succession so clear as is necessary For at Jerusalem it seems somewhat strange how fifteen Bishops of the Circumcision should be crouded into so narrow a room as they are so that many of them could not have above two years time to rule in the Church And it would bear an inquiry where the seat of the Bishops of Jerusalem was from the time of the destruction of the City by Titus when the walls were laid even with the ground by Musonius till the time of Adrian I shall yet in the last place adduce a few passages and I intreat my Reader seriously to weigh them and from whom they came for I am sure they will give great light and satisfaction to all the truly conscientious and disinterested The sixt Anathematism saith a Romanist was much noted in Germany in which an Article of Faith was made of HIERARCHY which word and signification thereof is aliene not to say contrary to the holy Scrsptures and tho' 't was somewhat antiently invented yet the Author is not known and in case he were yet he is an Hyperbolicall Writer not imitated in the use of that Word nor of others of his Invention by any of the Ancients and following the Stile of Christ our Lord and the Holy Apostles and primitive Church it ought to be named not Hierarchy but Hierodiaconia or Hierodoulia And Dr. Heylen who like to Balaam blessing Israel when he would fainest have cursed them uses to establish a Presbyterian Parity of Pastors while he is most desirous to destroy it makes the Bishop in Justine Martyr ' s time all one with the President of the Congregation and ordinary Preacher of God's Word and Celebrator of the Eucharist therein And pleads that in Tertullian's mind Baptism was a work most proper to the Bishop in regard of his Episcopacy or particular Office And the Doctor contends out of Tertullian that in his time Christians receiv'd the Eucharist only from the Bishop's hands and so there were no fewer Bishops than Congregations who mett for hearing of the Word and Celebration of the Sacraments What shew of reason can be given saith Dr. Stilling-fleet why the Apostles should slight the Constitution of the Jewish Synagogues which had no dependance on the Jewish Hierarchy and subsisted not by any Command of the Ceremonial Law The Work of the Synagogue not belonging to the Priests as such but as Persons qualifi'd for instructing others And We are to take nottice that the Rulers of the Church under the Gospell do not properly succeed the Priests and Levites under the Law whose Office was Ceremonial and who were not admitted by any solemn Ordination into their Function It is then a common Mistake to think that the Ministers of the Gospell succeeded by way of Correspondence and Analogy to the Priests under the Law which Mistake hath been the Foundation and Originall of many Errors For when in the primitive Church the name of Priests came to be attributed to Gospell-Ministers from a fair Complyance as was thought then of the Christians only to the name used both among Jews and Gentiles in process of time corruptions increasing in the Church those names that were used by the Christians by way of Analogy and Accommodation brought in the things themselves primarily intended by these names so by the metaphoricall names of Priests and Altars at last came up the Sacrifice of the Mass without which they thought the names of Priests and Altars were insignificant This Mâ—stake we see run all along thro' the Writers of the Church as soon as the name Priests was apply'd to the Elders of the Church that they derived their Succession from the Priests of Aaroâ—'s Order In short he still contends that the model of Governing the Christian Church was an exact imitation of that of the Synagogues which were no other thing than the particular parish Churches among the Jews and in every one of which there was a a Bishop paralell to him who in the Apocalypse is the Angel of the Church And Dr. Lightfoot is of the same mind The Apostle saith he calleth the Minister Episâ—opus from the common and known title of the CHAZAN or Overseer in the Synagogue And Besides these there was the publick Minister of the Synagogue who pray'd publickly and took care about reading the Law and sometimes preached if there were not some other to discharge this Office This person was called SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church and CHAZAN HAKENESETH the Chazan or Bishop of the Congregation The Aruch gives the reason of the name The Chazan saith he is SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church or the publick Minister and the Targum renders the word ROVEH by the word HOSE one that oversees For it 's incumbent on him to oversee how the Reader reads and whom he may call cut to read in the Law The publick Minister of the Synagogue himself read not the Law publickly but every Sabbath he called out seven of the synagogue on other days fewer whom he judged fit to read He stood by him that read with great care observing that he read nothing either falsly or improperly and calling him back and correcting him if he had failed in any thing and hence he was called CHAZAN that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Bishop or Overseer Certainly the signification of the word Bishop and Angel of the Church had been determined with less noise if recourse had been made to the proper fountains and men had not vainly disputed about the signification of words taken I know not whence The service and worship of the Temple being abolished as being Ceremonial God transplanted the worship and publick adoration of God used in the synagogues which was moral into the Christian Church to wit the publick Ministry publick prayers reading God's Word and preaching c. Hence the names of the Ministers of the Gospel were the very same the Angel of the Church the Bishop which belonged to the Ministers in the synagogues There were also three Deacons or Almoners on whom was the care of the poor c. Among the Jews saith Dr. Burnet he who was the chief of the synagogue was called CHAZAN HAKENSETH the Bishop of the Congregation and SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church And the Christian Church being modelled as near the form of the synagogue as they could be as they retained many of the Rites so the form of the government was continued and the names remained the same And In the synagogues there was first one that was called the Bishop of the Congregation Next the three Orderers and Judges of every thing about the synagogue who were called TSEKENIM and by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
Did the primitive Church use Organs in Divine Worship Were they not first introduced in the seventh Century by Pope Vitalian And yet it is doubtfull if they were so soon received For Aquinas dislikes and condemns them Or where pray in the true primitive Church shall they find the Surplice Corner-Cap and Tippet Or where to name no more shall they find the Bishop allowed to involve himself in secular cares Civil and State Offices or Imployments Some used indeed when they pleased the Christian Emperor allowing it to make the Bishops Arbiters of their private Debates but to all the good Bishops as Augustine complains this was a most weighty Grievance But in more early times even this was not permitted for Cyprian condemns as altogether unlawfull that any Church-man should be so much as a testamentary Tutor to any Pupil And mark the ground he goes on For saith he whosoever are honoured with the Divine Priest-Hood or have a place in the Clergy ought only to serve at the Altar and spend their time in Prayer and Supplication For 't is written no Man that warreth intangleth himself with the Affairs of this Life that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a souldier Thâ—â— is such a clear and inevitable Condemnation of the Practice of the Hierarchicks that the Learned Annotators Pamelius and the Bishop of Oxford finding nothing wherewith to elude it skipp it over with deep silence And now judge if Cyprian was of one mind with the Bishop of Five Churches who will have the meaning of Paul's words cited by Cyprian to be that every Christian ought to abstain from those things which are repugnant to Christian Profession which are sins only and will not have the Apostle to speak any thing of Church-men in particular or if Cyprian would have expon'd the sixth of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles as doth Heylyn who makes the Canon only to mean that Bishops or inferiour Clergy-Men might not be Consuls Praetors Generals or undergoe such publick Offices in the State of Rome as were most sought for and esteemed by the Gentiles there Heylen is here somewhat intricat and his cause required it However the sum of his drift is that the exercising of these or the like Offices is allowed to any Pastor by the Canon Now altho' ' tallowed it not when the Empire was Pagan and he would prove something of this kind from 1 Cor. 6. where he must count all Magistrats thro' the Christian World Pagans and Unbelievers for otherways none shall ever prove from this Scripture so much as the lawfullness of a Bishop or Pastors judging and determining any difference between any two that referr themselves to his Arbitration And tho' he should prove it pray what is this to the exercising the Office of Consul General Praetor Chancellour Treasurer or the like pieces of such temporal Power and Grandor Judge moreover were there no more but Paul his words to Timothy 1. 4 13 14 15. And 2 Tim. 4. 2 5. If there be Leasure left any Pastor to be either Consul General or ought else of this nature and consequently if all the shifts they use on this head be not sufficiently overthrown by these Scriptures only But I had almost forgotten to notice how they torment themselves that they may torment and detort Cyprian For Saravia says that the Canon Cyprian speaks off was but particular and provincial only for the Church of Carthage But Heylen refutes Saravia his comment and says Cyprian spoke so because the Church was then almost destitute and unprovided of Presbyters As if Cyprian had not spoken of Chruch-men absolutely and without the least intimation of any such restriction and grounded his saying on a Scripture which whatsoever it speaks of Church-men confessedly says it of the mall be they many or few or in whatsoever time and place they live Moreover it 's most certain that in Matthew 20. 25 26 27 28. The Princes of the Gentiles c. And Mark 10. 42 43 44 45. And Luke 22. 25 26 27. All Pastors of Flocks are prohibited to exercise Dominion secular and state Dignity and a parity of the Apostles amongst themselves and in them a parity of all ordinary Pastors or Ministers of the Gospell among themselves is enjoyned D. M. pretends to engage with the latter part of this Inference but first he mis-states the question as if from these Texts we pleaded for a perfect equality of all the Officers of Christs house without distinction between extraordinary and ordinary Ministers or between Pastors and other Officers and so his saying that the Apostles exercised Jurisdiction over other Ecclesiasticks whether true or false is nothing to the purpose But saith D. M. Our blessed Saviour supposeth degrees of Subordination amongst his own Disciples as well as other societies and therefore he directs the Ecclesiasticks who would climb up to the highest places in the Church to take other methods then these that are most usual amongst the Grandees of the World He that deserved preferment in the Church was to be the servant of all Which answer he steals from the Jesuite Bellarmine who answers that Christ only directs ecclesiastick Princes teaches that as such they ought to rule their subjects not as do Kings and Lords but as Fathers and Pastors To whom Junius replyes that all this is quite contrarie to both Christs words and scope The sons of Zebedie saith he desired a Dominion this Christ rejects and refuses to give them again the falshood of this answer is demonstrated positively by Christs following words who in stead of this Dominion which they desired enjoyns them a humble Ministry and Service Wherefore there is a clear opposition between Dominion and Ministry the former belonging the World the latter to the Church Bishops are not saith Bellarmine here forbidden to exercise a dominion like that of godly Kings but only like that of Tyrranical Kings who know not God We deny replyes Junius that there is any such restriction neither can it be proved And accordingly Junius refutes and bafles all the Sophistrie that Bellarmine and after him our Prelatists ordinarly bring to prove that only tyrrany and not all sort of principality or superiority is by our Saviour in these Texts prohibited And with Junius joyns the whole stream of Protestant Writers But our Saviour saith D. M. did that himself among them which he now commanded them to do to one another and therefore the doing of this towards one another in obedience to the command now under consideration could not inferr a Parity unless that they blasphemously infer that Christ and his Apostles were equal For our Saviour recomends what he enjoyns from his own constant and visible practice among them viz that he himself who was their Lord and Master was their sevant and therefore it becomes the greatest among them in imitation of him to be modest calm and humble towards all their