his Deacon Pontius Euâ—ebius and St. Ierome Thus our Holy Martyr tells us That Cornelius had made his Advances gradually through all the inferior Stations and so no doubt had been a Presbyter before he was a Bishop And yet we find when he was Promoted to the See of Rome he was Ordained by 16 Bisâ—â—ps Thus we find also in the Promotion of Sabinus to the Bishoprick from which Basilides had fallen that he was Ordained by the Imposition of the Hands of the Bishops who were then present at his Election Thus Fortunatus Achimnius Optatus Privationus Donatulus and Fâ—ix 6 Bishops Ordained a Bishop at Capsis Thus Heraclus was first a Presbyter under Demetrius in the Church of Alexandria and then succeeded to him in the Episcopal Chair Dionysius was first a Presbyter under Heraclas and then succeeded to him And Maximus who had been a Presbyter under him succeeded to Dionysius And before all these some 70 Years before St. Cyprian's time Irenaeus was first a Presbyter under Photinus and afterwards his Successor in the Bishoprick of Lions Nor is it to be doubted that each of these was Raised to the Episcopal Dignity by a new Ordinatioâ— The first of the Canons commonly called Apostolical which requires That a Bishop be Ordained by two or three Bishops was doubtless all along observed Nay this Necessity of a new Ordination for Raising One to the Episcopal Power was so Notorious and Received then that the Schismaticks themselves believed it indispensible And therefore Novatianus thô formerly a Presbyter as Cornelius tells expresly in that so often cited Epistle to Fabius when he Rival'd it with Cornelius for the Chair of Rome that he might have the shew at least of a Canonical Ordination he got three simple inconsiderate Bishops to come to the City upon pretence of Consulting with other Bishops about setling the Commotions of the Church And having them once in his Clutches he shut them up under Lock and Key till they were put in a scandalous Disorder and then forced them to give him the Episcopal Mission by an imaginary and vain Imposition of Hands as Cornelius words it Thus also when Fortunatus One of the Five Presbyters who joyned with the Schismatical Felicissumus against St. Cyprian tâ—â—ned bold to set up as an Anti-Bishop at Carthage He was Ordained by Five false Bishops And now Sir by this Accounâ— I think we have our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time fairly routed a second time For How could the Maxim of but One Bishop at once in a Church hold if that Bishop was nothing but a single Presbyter The Church of Rome was but One Church so was the Church of Carthage And yet in each of these Churches there were many single Presbyters Again If a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was no more than a single Presbyter in the Presbyterian Sense what needed so much work about him Why e. g. convene all the Presbyters of a Province such as Africa or Numidia was for the Election and Ordination of a single Presbyter in Carthage where there were Presbyters more than enough to have performed all the Business What needed the Church of Rome to make such work about supplying such a Vacancy as was there before Cornelius was Promoted Why a Convention of Sixteen Neighbouring Bishops to give him Holy Orders Might not the Forty Six who lived in Rome have served the turn Might not these Forty Six I say have filled Fabianus his Room with far greater Ease and Expedition If they made such work and had such Difficulties as we find they had about a Bishop in setling One single Brother Presbyter when according to our Author's Principles they had the full Power of doing it what had become of them if Thirty nay Twenty nay Ten of the Forty six had all died in one Year Sure they had never got so many Vacancies filled And then Were not Cornelius and Novatianus Presbyters of Rome before the former was the Trâ—e and the latter the False Bishop of that City If so what need of a new Election and a new Ordination for making them Presbyters of a Church of which they were Presbyters already Had it not been pretty pleasant in such a grave serious persecuted State of the Church to have seen two eminent Men already Presbyters of Rome making so much work about being made Presbyters of Rome And all the Clergy and Christians of Rome nay sooner or later of all the Christian World engaged in the Quarrel What had this been other than the very Mystery of Ridiculousness But this is not all The Premisses will as little allow him to have been a Presbyterian Moderator For to what purpose so much ado about the Establishment of a meer Moderator of a Presbytery Why so much stress laid upon only one Moderator in a City Why no Canonical Vacancy of his Moderatorial Chair unless in the case of Death Cession or Forfeiture Sure if they had then understood all the Exigencies and Analogies of Parity they would not have been so much in love with a constant Moderator no they would have judged him highly inconvenient and by all means to be shunned If he had been imposed on the Meeting it had been an Encroachment on their Intrinsick Power and so absolutely unlawful and Prelacy And thò Chosen by themselves fatal as having a violent Tendency to Lordly Prelacy And therefore they could never have yielded to have One with a Good Conscience Again How often did the Presbytery of Rome meet in the Interval between Fabianus his Death and Cornelius his Promotion How many excellent Epistles did they write to the Neighbouring Bishops and Churches and these about the most weighty and important Matters during that Vacancy They wrote that which is the Eighth in Number amongst St. Cyprian's Epistles to the Carthaginian Clergy and at the same time One to St. Cyprian then in his Retirement which is lost They wrote that notable Epistle which is the Thirtieth in Number in which they not only mention other of their Epistles which they had wrote to St. Cyprian and which are not now extant but also Epistles one or more which they had sent to Sicily They wrote also that considerable Epistle which is in Number the Thirty sixth It is not to be doubted that they wrote many more How many Meetings and Consultations had they during these Sixteen Months about the Affairs of the Church and particularly the Case of the Lapsi which was then so much agitated Is it probable that they wanted a Moderator a Mouth of their Meeting One to keep Order in the manner and managing of the Affairs were brought before them all that time and in all those Meetings How could they without one handle Matters with Order and Decency And what was there to hinder them from having one if they had a mind for him Might they not have chosen one as safely as they met
over Every Bishop of the Christian Church living at how great a distance soever was bound to Communicate his Dutiful Subjects duly attested by him and to Excommunicate his Excommunicates Thus for Instance Cornelius Bishop of Rome rejected Felicissimus and all his Retainers and Fortunatus and all his and would not grant them his Communion because Excommunicated by St. Cyprian And Cyprian rejected Novatianus and all his Party because not in Communion with Cornelius In short By the Laws of the College he that was Injurious Undutiful or Disobedient to his Bishop was such to all the Bishops on Earth He that set up an Altar against his Bishop's Altar set up his Altar against all the Altars of the whole College If a Bishop Deposed or Excommunicated any of his Presbyters or Deacons it was not lawful for any other Bishop to Receive him nor to Absolve him He was still to be reserved for that to his own Bishop so long as he lived He that was Reconciled to his Bishop whether he was of the Clergy or Laity and Restored by him to the Peace of the Church was thereby Restored to the Peace of all other Churches and by consequence of the Church Catholick And of this we have a remarkable Instance in St. Cyprian's time Therapius Bishop of Bulla in the Proconsular Province of Africa Absolved Victor who had been a Presbyter but had fallen in time of Persecution Prematurely and Uncanonically And yet by a Synod of Sixty six Bishops whereof Cyprian was One the Absolution was Ratified and Victor was allowed their Communion as we learn from their Synodical Epistle So Eminent and Considerable was a Bishop then as he stood related to the Catholick Church Let me only add one Thing more in pursuance of his Dignity as to this Relation and that is 7. That so long as Bishop continued a sound Member of the College all Informatory Consultatory Recommendatory Communicatory Congratulatory Apologetick Testimonial in a word all Letters concerning the Peace the Unity the Government the Discipline of the Church or the Concord the Correspondence the Harmony the Honour the Hazards or any other considerable Interest of the College were directed to him or received from him as having the Supreme Power of the Church which he Govâ—rn'd All the great Concerns of both the Catholick Church and the Episcopal College were in thâ—se Times transacted by Letters There was no possibility of General Councils then All that could be done was either to meet in Provincial Synods upon great Emergencies or if that could not be neither to transact Matters and bring them to a General Determination by particular Letters from Bishop to Bishop Provincial Synods were ordinarily kept twice a Year and by them in the ordinary Course all Matters of Moment were Determined and so by the Reciprocation of Synodical Letters Matters came sometimes to such a General Agreement and Determination as in the Result was fully Equivalent to the Definition of a General Council We have several Instances of such Transactions by Provincial Synods Thus in the Grand Case of the Lapsed in the time of the Decian Persecusion the Matter was so managed by Provincial Synods in Africa Rome Alexandria Antiâ—ch c. that at last as St. Cyprian tells us it was brought to this General Conclusion That the Lapsed should complete their Terms of Penance and should not be restored to the Peace of the Church before the Time appointed by the Canons unless it was in the case of Deadly Sickness Thus without doubt also that considerable Canon mentioned by St. Cyprian in the Synodical Epistle which is the 67th in Number amongst his Epistles viz. That the Lapsed however they might be restor'd to the Communion of the Church should never be received into Holy Orders And that other Canon mentioned by him also That no Clergy-man should be Tutor to Minors Thus also long before St. Cyprian the great Controversie concerning the Observation of Easter was managed in many Synods as Eusebius tells us And a few Years after his Martyrdom the Case of Paulus Samosatenus These Instances are only for a Sample When Provincial Synods could not be kept or emergent Matters of Consequence could not be conveniently determin'd in them then Recourse was had to the only remaining Method viz. particular Letters from Bishop to Bishop And to make this Method both sure and effectual all possible Pains was taken It was necessary that each Bishop should sign his Letter and send it not by every common Carrier but by a Clergy-man In short They had such Marks that it was not easie if possible to Counterfeit them And the Bishop who received it was bound by the Laws of the College to transmit it for his Share to the rest of the Members And so it went through and the whole College was acquainted with the Accident the Case the Controversie whatever it was that had Emerged we have many Instances and Evidences of this Method and Diligence in St. Cyprian's Writings Thus e. g. When Caldonius writes to Cyprian concerning some Lapsed within his District Cyprian returns him an Answer telling him He had written his Mind to that purpose already and so sends him Copies of five Epistles concerning the Case requiring him to transmit them to as many Bishops as he could adding this as the Reason That One Course One Resolution might be kept by all the College And so we find that the Letters written by him about that Controversie were trasmitted from hand to hand till they were dispersed all the World over Thus I say sometimes the greatest Affairs of the Church were managed And 't is plain this Method was every was Equivalent if not Preferable to a General Council So that the Christian Church might have still subsisted and its Unity been provided for and preserved in all Ages without such Councils as it was effectually during the First Three Centuries Now that which I am principally concern'd for in all this Matter is That all these Circular Letters of whatsoever Nature relating either to the great Interests of the Catholick Church or of the Episcopal College were regularly directed only to the Bishops as being the Heads and Principles of Unity to their respective Churches as well as written and sent by those of the same Order And we have a notable Account of this in St. Cyprian's 48th Epistle directed to Cornelius for there we learn That the Presbyters and Deacons of the Church of Adrumetum having received Cornelius's Communicatory Letters directed to Polycarpus their Bishop and seeing their Bishop was absent finding it necessary that they should return an Answer in his Name as having his presumed Allowance for it they wrote to Cornelius in the common Form acknowledging him as Bishop of Rome and subjoyning Polycarpus his Name to the Letter A clear Evidence That where there was a Bishop it behoved all the Letters that concerned the publick State of the Church to be subscribed
by him no other Name but his could give them Force and make them Current Well! but there was one Thing amiss St. Cyprian and the rest of the African Bishops having Intelligence of the Competition that was at Rome between Cornelius and Novatianus and being unwilling to do any thing rashly had determined to continue to write only to the Roman Presbyters and Deacons as before during the Vacancy till Cornelius his Title should be fully cleared to them This the Clergy of Adrumâ—tum were ignorant of when they wrote the above-mentioned Letter And being afterwards told it by Cyprian and Liberalis they directed their next Letter not for Cornelius but for the Roman Presbyters and Deacons Hereat Cornelius was not a little stumbled and according to the then current Principles interpreting it to be a disowning of him as Bishop of Rome he wrote a Letter of Complaint to Cyprian about it who was then Metropolitan of that Province In Answer to which our Holy Martyr wrote a full Apology to him shewing him what was true Matter of Fact Upon what Reasons the Bishops of Africa had taken the aforesaid Resolution How it was in consequence of that Resolution that the Clergy of Adrumetum had changed their Direction And how by the whole Method noâ—â—â—ng was less intended than to disown him as Bishop of Rome or Invalidate his Title And was there not here as clear an Evidence that Regularly and in the current Form all Letters were directed to the Bishop Shall I give you another History to clear this Matter further When Maximus and Nicostratus retaining to Novatianus and so separating from Cornelius did thereby cut themselves off from the Communion of the Church Cyprian wrote to them as well he might considering that his Design was to Reconcile them to their True Bishop Cornelius But how did he write Why so as that his Letter should not be delivered till Cornelius should see it and judge whether it was proper to deliver it Such a special regard was then paid to the Bishop of a Church as being Supreme in it and the Principle of Unity to it If all this doth not satisfie you then listen a little further and resist this Evidence if ye can Because by the Fundamental Principles of One Faith and One Communion every Heretical and Schismatical Bishop was ipso facto out of the Church and all who retain'd or adhered to him whether Bishops Clergy or Laicks did run the same Risque with him Therefore so soon as any Bishop turned Heretick or Schismatick the Catholick Bishops of the Province especially the Metropolitans formed Lists of all the True Orthodox and Catholick Bishops within their respective Provinces and sent them to other Metropolitans And so they were transmitted all the World over That their Communicatory Letters and theirs only might be received and their Communion and theirs only might be allowed and that all Heretical or Schismatical or Retainers to Heretical or Schismatical Bishops might be rejected and their Communion refused And for this we have two notable Testimonies from St. Cyprian the one is in his 59th Epistle directed to Cornelius where he tells him That upon Fortunatus his starting out of the Church and pretending to be Bishop of Carthage He had sent him the Names of all the Bishops in Africa who Govern'd their Churches in Soundness and Integrity and that it was done by common Advice But to what purpose That you and all my Collegues may readily know to whom you may send and from whom you may receive Communicatory Lettâ—s The other Testimony is in Ep. 68. where Cyprian having given his Sentiâ—ents fully concerning Marcianus that he had forfeited his Dignity and that it was necessary that another should be substituted in his room c. requires Stephen Bishop of Rome to give himself and the rest of the Bishops of Africa a distinct Account of the Person that should be Surrogated in Marcianus his Place That we may know says he to whom we may direct our Brethren and write our Letters I have only given you a Taste of the Methods and Expedients which were put in Practice in those Times for preserving the Unity the One Communion of the One Catholick Church and how nicely and accurately it was provided for by the Incorporation of all Bishops into Ouâ— College of all particular Principles of Unity of particular Churches into one Aggregated Principle of Unity proportioned to the Extent of all those Churches in their Aggregation And by the mutual Support of all Bishops one towards another It had been easie to have collected more Particulars as well as to have insisted more largely on these I have collected But from the small Collection I have made I think I have laid Foundation enough for another Demonstration against our Author's Notion of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time For How could either Single Presbyter or Presbyterian Moderator taking the Terms in the Presbyterian Sense have born such a Part in relation to the Unity of the Catholick Church and the Preservation of One Communion Besides that the College of Bishops in those Times is still considered and insisted on as consisting of Church Governours notoriously distinguished from Presbyters Besides that in all St. Cyprian's Writings or in any Monument of those Times you shall never so much as once find a Bishop calling a Presbyter his Collegue Besides that we have not the least Vestige of any such stated ordinary current Office in any Record of those Times as that of a meer Presbyterian Moderator Besides these Things I say How had it been consistent with the Principles or Analogies the Scheme or Plot of Presbyterian Parity to have committed to any Single Presbyter Moderator or other the bearing of such a Part as that He and He alone of God knows how many should have been Constituted a Member of a College which College and which alone had the Supreme Power of Preserving the Faith and the Unity and managing all the Affairs of the Church Catholick As that all his Admissions into the Church his Exclusions from the Church his Extrusions out of the Church his Suspensions his Abstentions his Excommunications his Injunctions of Penances his Absolutions his Ordinations his Degradations his Depositioâ—â— in a word all his Acts of Government and Discipline within his own District and his alone should have had Authority and been deemed Valid and merited a Ratification all the World over As that whosoever Presbyter or other within such a District in which there might have been many Decads of Presbyters was Disobedient to him or Top't it with him or Rebelled against him should have been reputed Disobedient to and Rebellious against the whole College of the Supreme Governours of the Church Catholick As that raising an Altar against his Altar and his only should have been deem'd Raising an Altar against all Catholick Christian Altars As that from him and from him only in the regular Course all Communicatory Informatory Conâ—olatory in short all
Teaching Presbyter who has such a Parish assigned to him for his Charge Or not from the Moderator of the Presbytery who is not but from the Presbytery which is the Principle of Unity with their Moderator This I say I take to be the Purpose of our Author's Answer to the Apologist's Argument on the Force whereof he ventures his Parties being or not being Schismatickâ— If I have mistaken his Meaning I protest I have not done it wilfully I am pretty sure I have not in the Definition of a Moderator for I have Transcribed it Word for Word from one whom I take to be a dear Friend of his intirely of the same Principles and Sentiments with him and whose Definitions I am apt to think he will not readily Reject I mean the Author of The Vindication of the Church of Scotland in Answer to the Ten Questions And doth not our Author himself in this same 39th Section part whereof I am now considering affirm That Fifty Years before the first Council of Nice i. e. some 17 or 18 Years after St. Cyprian's Martyrdom the Hierarchy was not in the Church And that however some of the Names might have been yet the Church-Power and Dominion signified by them was not then in Being Plainly importing that the Church then was Governed by Pastors acting in Parity after the Presbyterian Model In short what our Author hath said when duly considered will be found to be no Answer at all to the Apologist's Argument if it is not to be understood in the Sense I have represented Taking it for granted therefore that I have hit his Meaning I hope you will not deny that If I shall prove that a Bishop in Cyprian's time was more than a Pastor of a Flock or the Moderator of a Presbytery in the Presbyterian Sense of the Terms If I shall prove that a Bishop then had really that which cannot be denied to have been true Genuine Episcopal or Prelaiick Power If I can prove that he acted in a Real Superiority over not in Parity with other Church-Governours even Pastors If I shall prove these Things I say I hope you 'l grant our Author is fairly bound by his Word to acknowledge that he and his Brethren Presbyterians are Schismaticks Let us try it then And now Sir Before I come to my main Proofs consider if it may not be deemed a shrewd Presumption against our Author in this matter That generally the great Champions for Presbytery such as Chamâ—er Blondel Salmasius the Provincial Assembly of London c. do ingenuously acknowledge That long before St. Cyprian's time Episcopacy was in the Church even Spanhemius himself grants That in the Third Century Bishops had a manifest Preheminence above Presbyters and Deacoâ—s and a Right of Presiding Convocatiâ—g Ordaining c. By the way I have cited this Writer particularly because our Author not only builds much on his Authority but honours him with the great Character of being That diligent Searcher into Antiquiâ—y How deservedly let others judge for my part I cannot think he has been so very diligent a Searcher For in that same very Section in which he acknowledges the Episcopal Preheminence in the Third Century he says expresly That in that Age there were no Door-Keepers Acolyâ—ths nor Exorcâ—ss And yet I not only find express mention of Exorcism in the Venerable Council of Cartbage in which St. Cyprian was Praeses But both Cyprian and Firmilian expresly mention Exarcists And as for Acolyths how often do we find them mentioned in Cyprian's Epistles E. g. We have Narious an Acâ—lyth Ep. 7. Eavorinus Ep. 34. Nicephorus Ep. 45. Saturnus and Felicianus Ep. 59. Lucanus Maximus and Amantius Ep. 77. And doth not Corneius Bishop of Rome in his famous Epistle to Fabius Bishop of Antioch Recorded by Eusebius positively affirm That there were then in the Church of Rome 42 Acolyths and 52 Exorcists Lectors and Door-keepers But this as I said only by the way That which I am concerned about at present is That when these great Patrons of Presbytery these truly Learned Men whom I named have all so frankly yielded that there was real Prelacy in the Church in and before St. Cyprian's time yet our Author should affirm so boldly that there was no such Thing That there was no Hierarchy in the Church then nor for many Years after Has our Author been a more diligent Searcher into Antiquity than those great Antiquaries were that he was thus able to contradict their Discoveries I am not apt to believe it However as I said let this pass only for a Presumption against him I proceed to other Arguments And 1. I observe that in St. Cyprian's time every Church all the World over at least every Church Constituted and Organized according to the Principles which then prevailed had a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons by whom she was Ruled Thus for Example we find express Mention of the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons of the Church of Adrymetum for Cyprian tells Corneius That when He and Liberalis came to that City Polycarpus the Bishop was absent and the Presbyters and Deacons were ignorant of what had been Resolved on by the Body of the African Bishops about writing to the Church of Rome till the Controversie between Cornelius and Novatianus should be more fully understood Thus Cyprian was Bishop of Carthage and at the same time there were in that City 8 Presbyters at sewest For we read of three Rogatianus Britius and Numidicus who adhered to him And five who took part with Felicissimus against him when that Deacon made his Schism I hope I need not be at pains to prove that there were Deacons then in that famous Church Thus Cornelius in the afore-mentioned Epistle to Fabius tells him That while himself was Bishop of Rome there were in that City no fewer than 46 Preâ—byters and 7 Deacons c. A most flourishing Clergy as St. Cyprian calls it Whoso pleases may see the like Account of the Church of Alexandria in the same Times in Eusebius Indeed If we may believe St. Cyprian there was no Church then without a Bishop For from this Supposition as an uncontroverted Matter of Fact he Reasons against Novatianus His Argument is That there is but One Church and One Episcopacy all the World over and that Catholick and Orthodox Bishops were regularly planted in every Province and City and therefore Novatianus could not but be a Schismatick who contrary to Divine Institution and the Fundamental Laws of Unity laboured to super-induce false Bishops into these Cities where True and Orthodox Bishops were already planted And he Reasons again upon the same Supposition in the beginning of his 63d Epistle directed to Caecilius concerning the Cup in the Eucharist From this Supposition I say as from an uncontested Matter of Fact he Reasons in both Cases which is a Demonstration not only of the Credibility of his Testimony but that
the Matter of Fact was then so Notorious as to be undeniable He Reason'd from it as from an acknowledged Postulate 2. I observe that the Presbyters who in these Times were contra-distinguished from the Bishop and Deacons were Priests in the Language which was then current Pastors in the present Presbyterian Dialect i. e. not Ruling Elders but such as laboured in the Word and Sacraments They were such as were honoured with the Divine Priesthâ—od such as were Constituted in the Clerical Ministery such as whose Work it was to attend the Altar and the Sacrifices and offer up the Publick Prayâ—rs c. as we find in the Instance of Geminius Faustinus Such as God in his merciful Providence was pleased to raise to the Glorious Station of the Priesthood as in the Case of Numidicus Such as in the time of Persecution went to the Prisons and gave the Holy Eucharist to the Confessors Such as at Carthage as St. Cyprian complains to Cornelius presumed to curtail the Pennances of the Lapsers and gave them the Holy Sacrament while their Idolatry was so very recent that as it were their Hands and Mouths were still a smoaking with the warm Nidors of the Sacrifices that had been offered upon the Devils Altars Such as contrary to all Rule and Order absolved the Lapsers and gave them the Communion without the Bishops Licence Such as were joyned with the Bishop in the Sacerdotal Honour In a word They were such Presbyters as St. Cyprian describes to Stephen Bishop of Rome such as sometimes raised Altar against Altar and out of the Communion with the Church offered False and Sacrilegious Sacrifices Such as were to be Deposed when they did so such as thô they should return to the Communion of the Church were only to be admited to LAY-COMMUNION and not to be allowed thereafter to act as Men in Holy Orders seeing it became the PRIESTS and Ministers of God those who attend the Altar and Sacrifices to be Men of Integrity and Blameless Such Presbyters they were I say who were then contra-distinguished from the Bishop For as for your Lay-Elders your Ruling contra-distinct from Teaching Presbyters now so much in vogue there is as profound a Silence of them in St. Cyprian's Works and Time as there is of the Solemn League and Covenant or The Sanquhar Declaration And yet considering how much he has left upon Record about the Governours the Government and the Discipline of the Church if there had been such Presbyters then it is next to a Miracle that he should not so much as once have mentioned them 3. I observe that the Bishops Power his Authority his Pastoral Relation call it as you will extended to all the Christians within his District E. g. Cornelius was immediately and directly Superiour to all the Christians in Rome and they were his Subjects So it was also with Fabius and the Christians of Antioch Dionysius and the Christians of Alexandria Cyprian and the Christians of Carthage c. The Bishops prelation whatever it was related not solely to the Clergy or solely to the Laity but to both equally and formally How fully might this Point be proved if it were needful Indeed St. Cyprian defines a Church to be A People united to their Priest and A Flock adhering to their Pastor And that by the Terms Priest and Pastoâ— he meant the Bishop is plain from what immediately follows for he tells Florentius Pupianus there That from that common and received Notion of a Church he ought to have learned That the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop and that whoso is not with the Bishop is not in the Church And in that same Epistle chastising the same Florentius for calling his Title to his Bishoprick in question and speaking bitter Things against him he Reasons thus What Swelling of Pride What Arrogance of Spirit What Haughtiness is this That thou shouldest arraign Bishops before thy Tribunal And unless we be Purged by thee and Absolved by thy Sentence Lo these Six Years The BROTHERHOOD has had no BISHOP The PEOPLE no RULER The FLOCK no PASTOR The CHURCH no GOVERNOUR CHRIST no PRELATE And GOD no PRIEST In short He that bore the high Character of Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was called the Ruler of the Church by way of Eminence The Church was compared to a Ship and the Bishop was the Master He was the Father and all the Christians within his District were his Children He was the Governour the Rector the Captain the Head the Iudge of all within his Diocess He was the chief Pastor and thô Presbyters were also sometimes called Pastors yet it was but seldom and at best they were but such in Subordination Indeed the Presbyters of the Church of Rome during the Vacancy between Fabianus his Death and Cornelius his Promotion look'd only on themselves as Vice-Pastors saying That in such a juncture they kept the Flock in STEAD of the Pastor the Bishop I could give you even a Surfeit of Evidence I say for the Truth of this Proposition if it were needful Whoso reads St. Cyprian's Epistles may find it in almost every Page And I shall have occasion hereafter to insist on many Arguments in the Probation of other Things which may further clear this also Indeed there is no more in all this than Ignatius said frequently near 150 Years before St. Cyprian And now Sir thô the Monuments of the Cyprianic Age could afford us no more than these three Things which I have proved from them they would be of sufficient force to overthrow our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time as to both Parts of it and demonstrate to every thinking Man's conviction That he was neither The Pastor of the Flâ—ck nor The Moderator of a Presbytery in our Author's sense of the Terms 1. Not the Pastor of a Flock i. e. a single Presbyter having the Charge of a single Parish after the Presbyterian Model For a Bishop in those Times had many such Presbyters under him Cyprian himself whatever he had more had no sewer than Eight under him in the City of Carthage besides the adjacent Villages Cornelius was over Forty six in the City of Rome I know not how many Dionysius was over at Alexandria or Polycarpus at 〈◊〉 but it is certain they were in the Plâ—ral Number So it was all the Christian World over as I have proved A Bishop then in St. Cyprian's time was a Pastor indeed but it was of a Diocess i. e all the Christians within such a District were his Flock and he had a direct formal and immediate Pastoral Relation to them all thô at the same time within the same District there were many inferior Pastors who were subordinate and subject to him 2. He was as little a meer Moderator of a Presbytery in our Author's sense of the Terms A Presbyterian Moderator 〈◊〉
all conscience it ought it being scarcely possible to prove any thing of this Nature more demonstratively then be pleased only to consider the necessary Connexion that is betwixt this Principle and that which I am next to prove and that is SECONDLY That by the Principles of those Times a Bishop Cononically Promoted was Supreme in his Church immediately subject to Iesus Christ independent on any unaccountable to any Earthly Ecclesiastical Superiour There was no Universal Bishop then under Iesus Christ who might be the Supreme visible Head of the Catholick visiâ—le Church There was indeed an Universal Bishoprick but it was not holden by any One single Person There was an Unus Episcopatus One Episcopacy One Episcopal Office One Bishoprick but it was divided into many Parts and every Bishop had his shâ—re of it assigned him to Rule and Govern with the Plenitude of the Episcopal Authority There was One Church all the World over divided into many Members and there was One Episcopacy dâ—ffused in proportion to that One Church by the Harmonious Numerâ—sity of many Bishops Or if you would have it in other words the One Catholick Church was divided into many Precincts Districts or Diocesses call them as you will Each of those Districtâ— had its singular Bishop and that Bishop within that District had the Supreme Power He was subordinate to none but the Great Bishop of Souls Iesus Christ the only Universal Bishop of the Universal Church He was independent on and stood collateral with all other Bishops There 's nothing more fully or more plainly or more frequently insisted on by St. Cyprian than this Great Principle I shall only give you a short view of it from him and his Contemporaries And I. He lays the Foundation of it in the Parity which our Lord instituted amongst his Apostles Christ says he gave Equal Power to all his Apostles when he said As my Father hath sent me even so I send you Receive ye the Holy-Ghost c. And again The rest of the Apostles were the same that St. Peter was endued with an Equality of Power and Honour Now St. Cyprian on all occasions makes Bishops Successors to the Apostles as perchance I may prove fully hereafter Thus I say he founds the Equality of Bishops and by consequence every Bishop's Supremacy within his own Diocess And agreeably he Reasons most frequently I shall only give you a few Instances 2. Then in that excellent Epistle to Antonianus discoursing concerning the Case of the Lapsed and shewing how upon former Occasions different Bishops had taken different Measures about restoring Penitents to the Peace of the Church he concludes with this General Rule That every Bishop so long as he maintains the Bond of Concord and preserves Catholick Unity has Power to order the Affairs of his own Church as he shall be accountable to God Plainly importing that no Bishop can give Laws to another or call him to an Account for his Management To the same purpose is the conclusion of his Epistle to Iubaianus about the Baptism of Hereticks and Schismaticks These Things most dear Brother says he I have written to you as I was able neither prescribing to nor imposing on any Man seeing every Bishop hath full Power to do as he judges most fitting c. The same way he concludes his Epistle to Magnus concerning that same Case of Baptism performed by Hereticks To the same purpose is the whole Strain of his Epistle to Florentius Pupianus And what can be more clear or full than his excellent Discourse at the opening of the Council of Carthage Anno 256 More than Eighty Bishops met to determine concerning that same matter of Baptism administred by Hereticks or Schismaticks St. Cyprian was Praeses and having briefly represented to them the Occasion of their Meeting he spoke to them thus it remains now that each of us speak his sense freely judging no Man refusing our Communion to no Man thô he should dissent from us For none of us costitutes himself Bishop of Bishops nor forces his Collegues upon a necessity of Obeying by a Tyrannical Terror seeing every Bishop is intirely Master of his own Resolutions and can no more he judged by others than he can judge others But we all expect the Judgment of our Lord Iesus Christ who alone hath Power of making us Governours of his Church and calling us to an Account for our Administrations 3. Neither did the Principle hold only in respect of this or the other Bishop but all without Exception even the Bishop of Rome stood upon a Level And for this we have as pregnant Proof as possibly can be desired For when the Schismatical Party at Carthage set up Fortunatus as an Anti-Bishop and thereupon sent some of their Partisans to Rome toi inform Cornelius of their Proceedings and justifie them to him Cyprian wrote to him also and thus Reasoned the Case with him To what Purpose was it for them to go to Rome to tell you that they had set up a false Bishop against the Bishops Either they continue in their Wickedness and are pleased with what they have done or they are Penitent land willing to return to the Churches Unity If the latter they know whither they may return For seeing it is determined by us all and withal 't is just and reasonable in it self That every one's Cause should be examined where the Crime was committed and seeing there is a Portion of Flock the Catholick Church assigned to every Bishop to be Governed by him as he shall be accountable to God our Subjects ought not to run about from Bishop to Bishop nor break the Harmonious Concord which is amonst Bishops by their subtle and fallacious Temerity But every Man's Cause ought there to be discussed where he may have Accusers and Witnesses of his Crime c. In which Reasoning we have these Things plain 1. That by St. Cyprian's Principles evey Bishop was judge of his own Subjects of all the Christians who lived within his District 2. That no Bishop no not the Bishop of Rome was Superior to another Bishop nor could receive Appeals from his Sentences And 3. That this Independency of Bishops this Unaccountableness of one Bishop to another as to his Superiour was founded on every Bishop's having his Portion of the Flock assigned to him to be Ruled and Governed by him as he should answer to God i. e. upon his visible Supremacy in his own Church his being immediately Subordinate to God only To the same purpose he writes to Stephen Bishop of Rome also For having told him his Mind freely concerning those who should return from a State of Schism to the Unity of the Church how they ought to be Treated and how Recceived c. he concludes thus We know that some are tenacious and unwilling to alter what they have once determined and that they will needs retain some Methods peculiar to themselves but still with
of the Notions Christians had then of the Christian Hierarchy's being Copied from the Iewish Neither was it a Notion newly started up in St. Cyprian's time for we find it in express Terms in that notable Epistle written to the Corinthians by St. Clement Bishop of Rome who was not only contemporary with the Apostles but is by Name mentioned by St. Paul as one of his Fellow-Labourers whose Names are in the Book of LIfe Philip. 4. 3. For he perswading those Corinthians to lay aside all Animosities and Schismatical Dispositions and to pursue and maintain Unity and Peace above all things proposes to them as a proper Expedient for this that every Man should keep his Order and Station and then enumerates the several Subordinations under the Old Testament which sufficiently proves That the Hierarchy was still preserved in the New His Method of Reasoning and the Design he had in hand to compose the Schisms that arose amongst the Corinthians make this evident beyond all Contradiction That a Bishop in the Christian Church was no less than the High Priest among the Iews else he had not argued from the Precedents of the Temple to perswade them to Unity in the Church The High Priest saith he has his proper Office and the Priests have their proper Place or Station and the Levites are tied to their proper Ministeries and the Layman is bound to his Laick Performances Having thus demonstrated that these were three current and received Principles in St. Cyprian's time viz. That a Bishop was the Principle of Unity to his Church to all the Christians within his District That he was Supreme in his Church and had no Earthly Ecclesiastical Superiour and That he was the same amongst Christians which the High Priest was amongst the Iews Let me try a little if our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time can consist with them I am afraid it can consist with none of them singly much less with all these together I. Not with the first for if a Bishop then was the Principle of Unity to a Church in which there were many Presbyters as Cyprian e. g. was to the Church of Carthage and Cornelius to the Church of Rome and Fabius to the Church of Antioch and Dionysius to the Church of Alexandria c. If thus it was I say then to be sure a Bishop was another thing than a meer single Presbyter of a single Parish in the Presbyterian sense For if a single Presbyter could have been the Principle of Unity to a Church in which there were e. g. 46 single Presbyters he must have been it as a single Presbyter or as something else Not as a single Presbyter for then there should have been as many Principles of Unity in a Church as there were single Presbyters for Instance There should have been 46 Principles of Unity in the Church of Rome Which besides that 't is plainly Contradictory to the Notion of One Bishop at once in a Church what is it else than to make a Church such a Monster as may have 46 Heads Than by so multiplying the Principles of Unity to leave no Unity at all Than in stead of One Principle of Unity to an Organized Body to set up 46 Principles of Division Indeed what is it else than the very Extract of Nonsense and Cream of Contradiction A single Presbyter then if he could have been the Principle of Unity to such a Church mut have been it as something else than a meer single Presbyter But what could that Something else have been A Presbyterian Moderator Not so neither for by what Propriety of Speech can a Moderator of a Presbytery as such be called the Principle of Unity to a Church How can he be called the Principle of Unity to a Church who as such is neither Pastor Head nor Governour of a Church Who as such has no direct immediate or formal Relation to a Church Who as such is only the Chair-man the Master-Speaker not of the Church but of the Presbytery Nay who may be such and yet no Christian For however inexpedient or indecent it may be that an Heathen should on occasion be the Moderator i. e. the Master-Speaker of a Presbytery yet it implies no Repugnancy to any Principle of Christianity But however this is 't is certain that according to the Presbyterian Principles not the Moderator but the Presbytery is the Principle of Unity to the Church or rather Churches within the Bounds of that Presbytery And to do our Author Justice he seems to have been sensible of this as a I observed already And therefore he said not If he the Apologist can prove that we separate from our Pastors or from the Moderator of the Presbytery but from our Pastors or from the Presbytery with their Moderator Neither 2. Can our Author's Definition consist with the second Principle viz. That every Bishop was Supreme in his Church Independent and not Subordinate to any Ecclesiastical Superiour on Earth To have such a Supremacy such an Independency such an Unaccountableness is notoriously inconsistent with the Idea of either a single Presbyter or a Presbyterian Moderator How can it be consistent with the Idea of a single Presbyter acting in Parity with his Brethren Presbyters that of 46 for Example One should have a Primacy a Supremacy a Plenitude of Power the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church an Unaccountable and Eminent Power as St. Ierom himself calls it And all the rest should be Accountable and Subordinate to him What is this but reconciling Contradictions Besides the Independency of single Presbyters is notoriously inconsistent with the Presbyterian Scheme 'T is Independency not Presbytery And as for the Presbyterian Moderator In what sense can he be called Supreme or Independent or Unaccountable In what sense can he be said to be raised to the Sublime Top of the Priesthood Or to have an Exors Potestas an Unaccountable Power Or to be Accountable to God only Or to have the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church Is he as such raised to the Sublime Top of the Preisthood who as such may be no Priest at all For why may not a Ruling Elder be a Moderator How can he be said to have 〈◊〉 Unaccountable Power who can be Voted out of his Chair with the same Breath with which he was Voted into it How can he be said to be Accountable to God only who is Accountable to the Presbytery How can he be said to have the Sublime and Divine Power of Governing the Church who as such is no Church Governour Has he a Supreme Power in a Society who as such has no imaginable Iurisdiction over any one Member of that Society 3. But what shall I say to the Consistency of our Author's Definition with the third Principle I named Even no more than that I have proved it to have been one of St. Cyprian's and one that was generally received in his time and that I
can refer it to our Author himself to Determine Whether the High Priest of the Iews bore no higher Character than that of a single Presbyter or a Presbyterian Moderator And so I proceed to another Head of Arguments which shall be FOURTHLY To give you in a more particular Detail some of the Branches of the Episcopal Prerogative in St. Cyprian's time And I think I shall do enough for my purpose if I shall prove these three Things I. That there were several considerable Acts of Power relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church which belonged solely to the Bishop's several Powers lodged in his Person which he could manage by himself and without the Concurrence of any other Church-Governour II. That in every Thing relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church he had a Negative over all the other Church-Governours within his District And III. That all the other Clergy-men within his District Presbyters as well as others were subject to his Authority and obnoxious to his Discipline and Jurisdiction I. I say there were several considerable Acts of Power relating to the Government and Discipline of the Church which belonged solely to the Bishop several Powers lodged in his Person which he could manage by himself and without the Concurrence of any other Church-Governour Take these for a Sample And First He had the sole Power of Confirmation of imposing Hands on Christians for the Reception of the Holy-Ghost after Baptism For this we have St. Cyprian's most express Testimony in his Epistle to Iubaianus where he tells It was the Custom to offer such as were Baptized to the Bishops that by their Prayers and the laying on of their Hands they might receive the Holy-Ghost and be Consummated by the Sign of our Lord i. e. by the Sign of the Cross as I take it And he expresly founds this Practice on the Paterm of St. Pater and St. Iohn mentiond Acts 8. 14. c. Firmilian is as express in his Epistle to Cyprian saying in plain Lanugage That the Bishops who Govern the Church possess the Power of Baptism Confirmation and Ordination 'T is true he calls them Majores Natu Elder But that he meant Bishops as distinguished from Presbyters cannot be called into Question by any Man who reads the whole Epistle and considers his Stile all along and withal considers what a peculiar Interest by the Principles of these Times the Bishop had in these three Acts he names But whatever groundless Altercations there may be about his Testimony as there can be none about St. Cprian's so neither can there by any shadow of Pretext for any about Cornelius's who in his Epistle to Fabius so often mentioned before makes it an Argument of Novatianus his Incapacity of being a Bishop that thô he was Baptized yet he was not Confirmed by the Bishop Secondly He had the sole Power of Ordination and that of whatsoever Clergy-men within his District Ordinations could not be performed without him but he could perform them Regularly without the Concurrence of any other Church-Officer This has been so frequently and so fully proved by Learned Men that I need not insist much on it Forbearing therefore to adduce the Testimonies of such as lived after St. Cyprian's time such as Ambrose Ierom Chrysostom c. I shall confine my self to St. Cyprian and his Contemporaries Toi begin with St. Cyprian 'T is true so humble and condescending he was That when he was made Bishop he resolved with himself to do nothing by himself concerning the Publick Affairs of the Church without consulting not only his Clergy but his People I call this his own free and voluntary Condescention It wa a thing he was not bound to do by any Divine Prescript or any Apostolical Tradition or any Ecclesiastical Constitution His very Words import so much which you may see on the Margin And yet for all that we find him not only in extraordinary Junctures Ordaining without asking the Consent of his Clergy or People but still insisting on it as the Right of all Bishops and particularly his own to Promote and Ordain Clergy-men of whatsoever Rank by himself and without any Concurrence Thus In his 38th Epistle having Ordained Aurelius a Lector he acquaints his Presbyters and Deacons with it from the Place of his Retirement Now consider how he begins his Letter In all Clerical Ordinations most dear Brethren says he I used to Consult you beforehand and to examine the Manners and Merits of every one with common Advice And then he proceeds to tell them How that notwithstanding that was his ordinary Method a Rule he had observed for the most part yet for good Reasons he had not observed it in that Instance In which Testimony we have these Things evident 1. That his Power was the same as to all Ordinations whether of Presbyters or others For he speaks of them all indefinitely In Clericis Ordinationibus 2. That he used only to ask the Counsel and Advice of his Clergy about the Manners and Merits of the Person he was to Ordain but not their Concurrence in the Act of Ordination not one word of that On the contrary That they used not to Concurr fairly imported in the very Instance of Aurelius 3. That it was intirely of his own Easiness and Condescension that he Consulted them in the Matter He USED to do it but needed not have done it He did it not in that very same Case Which is a demonstration of the Truth of what I said before viz. That his Resolutioâ— which he had made when he entred to his Bishoprick was from his own Choice and absolutely Free and Voluntary We have another remarkable Testimony to the same purpose in his 41st Epistle where he tells that Because of his Absence from Carthage he had given a Deputation to â—aldnius and Herculanus two Bishops and to Râ—gatianâ—s and Numidicus two of his Presbyters to examine the Ages Qualifications and Mâ—its of some in Carthage that he whose Province it was to promote Men to Ecclesiastical Offices might be well informed about them and Promote none but such as were Meek Humble and Worthy This I say is a most remarkable Testimony for our present Purpose for he not only speaks indefinitely of all Ranks or Orders without making Exceptions but he speaks of himself in the Singular Number as having the Power of Promoting them and he founds that Power and appropriates it to himself upon his having the Care of the Church and her Government committed to him We have a third Testimony as pregnant as any of the former in his 72d Epistle written to Stephen Bishop of Rome For representing to him what the Resolution of the African Bishops were concerning such Presbyters and Deacons as should return from a State of Schism to the Communion of the Church he discourses thus By common Consent and Aâ—thority Dear Brother we tell you further That if any Presbyters or Deacons who
have either been Ordained before in the Catholick Church and have afterwards turned Perfsidious and Rebellious against the Church or have been Promoted by a Profane Ordination in a State of Schism by FALSE BISHOPS and Anti-Christs against our Lord's Institution that such if they shall return shall only be admitted to Lay-Communion c. By which Testimony you may clearly see 1. That all Ordinations of Presbyters as well as Deacons were performed by Bishops by True Bishoâ—â— in the Catholick Church and by False Bishops in a State of Schism 2. That to Ordain Presbyters and Deacons was so much and so acknowledged by the Bishop's Work and peculiar to him that herein even Schismaticks themselves oberved the Common Rule They found their Ordinations were indispensibly to be performed by Bishops that they might not be Obnoxious to the Charge of Invalidity So clear and full is St. Cyprian on this Head And not only he but Firmilian as I have cited him already Nay further yet Our Martyr's Practice was always suitable and correspondent to these Principles He not only Ordained Aurelius a Lector as I have shewed without either the Consent or Concurrence of his Clergy but also Saturus a Lector and Optatus a Sub-Deacon Epst. 29. and Celerinus a Lector Ep. 39. In which we have also a most considerable Evidence of the Bishops Power in Ordinations in St. Cyprian's Discourse concerning Aurelius and Celerinus For there he tells his Presbyters Deacons and all his People and tell them in an Authoritative Stile in the Stile by which Superiours used to signifie their Will and Pleasure to their Subjects with a Be it known to you He tells them I say That tho he had only Ordained these two Lectors for the time because they were but young yet he had designed them for the Presbyterate and to sit with him as soon as their Years would allow of it And what can be more pat to this purpose than that uncontrolable Account we have of Novatianus his Promotion to the Presbyterate which we have in that so often mentioned Epistle written by Cornelius to Fabius of Aâ—tioch There he tells how Novatianus was Ordained a Presbyter meerly by the Favour of the then Bishop of Rome That all the Clergy and many of the People opposed it as being Unlawful considering that he had been Baptized while on the Bed of Sickness And that after much work the Bishop prevailed and Ordained him promising that he would not make a Precedent of it I refer you to the Testimony which I have transcribed faithfully on the Margin Consider it and tell me if any thing can be more clear than that the Bishop then had the sole Power of Ordination Neither do we read in all St. Cyprian's Works or in any Monuments of those Times of any Concurrence of Presbyters with Bishops in any Ordinations and far less that ever Presbyters Ordain'd without a Bishop 'T is true we read in St. Cyprian's 52d Epistle that Novatus made Felicissimus a Deacon And I read that several Learned Men understand it so as if he had Ordained him And Bloâ—del particularly because Novatus was nothing but a Presbyter conâ—ludes that this was a notable Instance of the Power of Presbyters in Ordinations But when one reads the whole Passage as St. Cyprian hath it and ponders all Things duly he cannot but think it strange that ever that Fancy should have been entertained For all that St. Cyprian says amounts to no more than this That Novatus turn'd a Schismatick in the time of Persecution and thereby became another Pâ—rsecution to the Church and that having thus given himself up to the Spirit of Schism he by his Faction and Ambition got Felicissimus made a Deacon without either St. Cyprian ' s knowledge or Allowance St Cyprian's Words I say do not import that Novatus Ordain'd Felicissimus They import no more than that Novatus his Ambition and Faction prevailed to get Felicissimus Ordain'd a Deacon thô himself did not Ordain him 'T is probable he was Ordained by some Neighbouring Bishop St. Cyprian being then in his Secession And 't is as evident as any thing can be made from what immediately follows that St. Cyprian designed them for no more For he goes on and tells in that same Breath That Novatus having done so and so at Carthage went next to Rome and attempted just the like things there only with this difference That as Rome by itâ—s Greatness had the Preâ—edency of Carthage so he attempted greater Wickedness at Rome than at Carthage For he says Cyprian who had made a Deacon at Carthage against the Church made a Bishop at Rome meaning Novatianus Now 't is certain that not Novatus but Three Bishops Ordained Novatianus and by consequence that St. Cyprian never meant that Novatus Ordain'd Felicissiâ—us This is irreâ—ragable But then suppose the worst Suppose Novatus had really Ordained Felicissimus what stress is to be laid on the Example of a Schismatick Especially when what he did was done Schismatically Antonianus asked of St. Cyprian what was Novatianus his Heresie And Cyprian answered It was no matter what he taught seeing he taught in Schism And may we not say with the same Reason That it matters not what Novatus did seeing what he did was done in Schism One Thing indeed we learn from this Matter and that is another Argument of the Bishop's peculiar Interest in the matter of Ordination For St. Cyprian most plainly imputes it to Schism that without his Allowance Novatus should have presumed to have got Felicissimus Ordained a Deacon One Word more The Bishops being thus possessed of the sole Power of Ordination in St. Cyprian's time and his Practising suitably was exactly agreeable to the Second of the Canons commonly called of the Apostles which is Let a Presbyter be Ordained by One Bishop as likewise a Deacon and the rest of the Clergy A Canon without doubt universally received then as Beveregius has fully proved and a Canon highly agreeable with the then current Principles which I have insisted on already viz. That a Bishop was the Principle of Unity and Supreme Ecclesiastical Magistrate within his District For what can be more suitable to or rather more necessary by all the Fundamental Rules of Society than that it should belong to the Supreme Power wherever it is lodged to promote and give Commissions to all Inferiour Officers 'T is one of the Rights of Majesty and one as intrinsick and unalâ—enable or incommunicable as any 'T is true a good many Years after St. Cyprian's time it was appointed by the 〈◊〉 That Presbyters should concurr with the Bishop in the Ordination of Presbyters But then I say it was many Years after St. Cyprian's time and it was for new emergent Reasons That Ordinations might be performed more deliberately or with the greater Solemnity or so but 't is evident that nothing of the substantial Validity of the Orders were to depend upon it And so much at
not all the Presbyters of Carthage who were engaged in the Quarrel No Râ—gatianus Britius Numidicus and perhaps many more whose Names are not trasmited to us would never joyn with those of the Faction but still continued in their Duty to St. Cyprian And can we think they would not have joyned with their Brethren for the Maintenance of their own Rights and Priviledges if Cyprian had been the Usurper If he had been Claiming a Sovereign Power without any Pretence of Right to it If he had been driving at a Prelacy when the Government of the Church belonged to Presbyters acting in Parity We learn from St. Cyprian himself That in those Times it was a mighty Wickedness for Men to part tamely with their Rights and Powers in Divine Matters And can we think that Rogatianus Bâ—itius and Numidicus were ignorant of this Or supposing that should have had small Weight with them is Power such a gustless Thing that Men will easily part with it without any Reason But to go on 3. Even those very Presbyters and Deacons of the Faction came once to something like a Dutiful Submission in the Matter They lower'd their Sails and began to wave Apologies and knit Excuses for what they had done They endeavoured to put a fair Face upon the foul Steps they had made They wrote to Cyprian That they had done what they could to bridle the Heats of the Lapsed and oblige them to continue in their Penances till his Return from his Retirement but that they were so Ungovernable and Stiff and urged a present Absolution so eagerly and irresistibly that they were forced in a manner to comply with their Humours But now seeing they found that he their Bishop was so much displeased with what they had done they asked a FORM from him i. e. his Will and Pleasure in the Matter And now let any Man consider whether St. Cyprian or these Presbyters had been in the Wrong before Whether He or They had acted beyond their Lines But I have more to tell you For 4. These Presbyters who had thus transgressed the Bounds of their Station were generally Condemn'd for it by their Brethren Presbyters all the World over At least we have a most remarkable Instance in the Presbyters of Româ— Take it thus St. Cyprian being a Wise and Watchful as well as an Holy and Humble Prelate one who had still before his Eyes thâ— Conservation of the Order the Peace and the Unity of the Church Catholick and perceiving that the Controversie concerning the Restitution of the Lapsed might be of bad Influence on those great Interests if not prudently determined thought fit to acquaint his Brethren of the Episcopal Colledge with it and ask their Sentiments about it And because there was no Bishop then at Rome he wrote to the Presbyters and Deacons the Roman Presbytery The Epistle is the 20th in Number In which he deduced the whole Matter to them and told them particularly how he had Exerted his Episcopal Authority in its Vigour against such of his Presbyters as without his Leave had boldly and presumptuously Absolved the Lapsed and given them the Sacrament Now consider their Return to him You have it in the 30th Epistle They begin with the Acknowledgment of his Supream and Unaccountable Power within his own District which I observed before They impute it to his Modesty and Caution not to his Pride and Fetulancy that he had been pleased to communicate his Measures to them They approve the Course he had taken with the Lapsed They compare him to the Master of a Ship sitting at the Helm who if he steers not right and keeps not a steddy Course especially in a Storm endangers the Ship and runs her upon Rocks or Shelves And I think the Master of a Ship doth not act in Parity with the rest of the Mariners And further They compare those who at that time endeavoured to interrupt the Course of his Discipline Presbyters as well as others to the Tumbling Waves striving to shake the Master from the Helm and expose all to the Hazards of Shipwrack In plain Terms they condemn the Course of Reconciling the Lapsed so Undutifully and Rebelliously As for themselves they tell him and pray take notice of it That wanting a Bishop they could define nothing in the Matter They tell him I say That since the Death of Fabianus of most Noble Memory through the Difficulties of the Times and the Encumbrances of their Affairs they had not got a Bishop Constituted who only could define in these Matters and determine in the Case of the Lapsed with AUTHORITY and Counsel But withal they tell him That for their parts they were extreamly well pleased with the Course he had taken namely That he had resolved to do nothing rashly to take no sudden Resolutions in a Matter of such Consequence but to wait till God should grant him opportunity of Treating about it with others and determining with common Advice in such a ticklish Case Where observe by the way That they do not found the Wisdom of this his Resolution on any thing like the Incompetency of his Power for having determined by himself concerning the Lapsed within his own District No the Reason they give for it supposes his Power to have been fully Adequate and Competent for that Effect and that if he had given the final Stroke no body could have Quarrel'd it For they insist only on the Rules of Prudence which if I mistake not are quite different from the Rules of Power They tell him it might prove Invidious and Burdensom for one Bishop to Determine by himself in a Case in which all Bishops were concerned and that it was Providently done of him to dâ—â—ire the Confent of his Colleagues that his Decrees might be Approved and Confirmed That they might not be made void through the want of the Brotherly Ratification These are the Reasons I say for which they justifie his Caution and these Reasons suppose he had Power to have done otherwise thô not so wisely nor so warily And then they tell him over again That they had met frequently and canvassed the Matter seriously They had tossed it not only amongst themselves but with sevâ—ral Bishops far and near as they had occasion to be in the City and that still the Conclusion was That they should attempt no Innovations till a Bishop should be settled All they had Resolved was That thâ—se of the Lapsed whose Health might allow should continue in the State of the Penitents till God should grant them a Bishop Neither was this a meer Complement to our Holy Martyr Indeed in all this they gave him a true Account of their Real Sentiments and Principles as we learn from another Epistle of theirs wherein they had neither Occasion nor Temptation to Complement Bishops The Epistle is that which is the Eighâ—h amongst St. Cyprian's An Epistle written by them to the Presbyters and Deacons of Carthage to Persons
of the One Church and they being her Supreme Governours they could not but be chiefly bound by the most Fundamental Laws of their Office to be Conscientious Conservators of these Great and Fundamental Interests And indeed so they believed themselves to be as will evidently appear from the following Considerations And I. They look'd upon themselves as bound indispensibly to maintain the Peace the Unity the Concord the Unanimity the Honour they are all St. Cyprian's Words of the College it self Every Error every Defect every Thing Disjoyâ—ted or out of Tune in it tended naturally to endanger the great Interests for the Conservation and Procuration of which it was instituted For this End 2. Because every Man by being Promoted to the Episcopal Dignity was Eo ipso a Principle of Unity to a particular Church and so a Member of the Episcopal College all possible Care was taken that a fit Person should be promoted and that the Promotion should be Unquestionable Therefore he was not to be Promoted as I have proved but where there was an Unquestionable Vacancy Therefore he was not to be Promoted if there was any thing Uncanonical or Challengeable in his Baptism or his Confirmation or his Prâ—motion to any former Order as I have â—hewn also in the Case of Novationus Therefore he was Solemnly Elected in the Presence of the People That either his Crimes might be detected or his Merits published because the People was best acquainted with every Man's Life and Conversation Therefore he was to be Solemnly Ordained in the Presence of the People also And that by two or three Bishops at fewest thô an Ordination perform'd by One Bishop was truly Valid Commonly there were more all the Bishops of the Province 3. Being thus Canonically Promoted his first Work was to send his Communicatory Letters to all other Bishops to give them thereby an Account of his Canonical Promotion his Orthodoxy in the Faith his Fraternal Disposition c. Thus Cornelius was no sooner Ordained Bishop of Rome than he instantly dispatched his Communicatory Letters to St. Cyprian And no doubt as the Custom was to all other Bishops at least to all Metropolitans by them to be Communicated to the Bishops within their Provinces I say to Metropolitans for nothing can be clearer than that there were Metropolitans in St. Cyprian's time He was undoubtedly One himself and Agrippiâ—â—s his Predecessor Bishop of Carthage was One long before him Spanhemius himself our Author's Diligem Searcher into Antiquity acknowledges it But to return from this Digression Novatianus also thô Illegally and Schismatically Ordained found it necessary to send his Communicatory Letters to St. Cyptian as if he had been Ordain'd Canonically and in the Unity of the Church So also Fortunatus when made a Schismatical Bishop at Carthage sent his Communicatory Letters to Cornelius Bishop of Rome Indeed this was never omitted 4. If there was no Competition no Controversie in the Caâ—e the Matter was at an end The Promoted Bishop's Communicatory Letters were sufficient and he was forthwith faithfully joyned with all his Collegues as St. Cyprian words it But if there was any Competitor any Debate then the rest of the College before they received him as a Collegue made further Enquiries Sometimes they sent some from the Neighbourhood to examine the Matter Sometimes the Ordainers were obliged to Account for the Person Ordained and the whole Procedure of the Ordination Sometimes both Methods were practised We have a famous Instance of both Methods in one Case the Case of Cornelius and Novationus Cornelius as I have said upon his Promotion wrote to St. Cyprian So did Novatianus Here was a Competition Cyprian therefore with his African Collegues sent Caldonius and Fortunatus two Bishops to Rome that upon the Place it self where they might have the surest Information they might enquâ—re into the Merits of the Cause and try the Competition And on the other hand the Sixteen Bishops who Ordain'd Cornelius wrote to St. Cyprian and the rest of the Bishops of Africa and satisfied them upon the whole Qvestion demonstrating Cornelius's Title and Condemning Novatianus Such Care was taken that none should be admitted Unworthily or Uncanonically into the Episcopal College But then 5. There was equal Care taken to purge him out of the College again if he turned either Heretical or Schismatical If he kept not close to the Laws of One Faith and One Communion If he swerv'd from these he was forthwith refused the Communion of the whole College Therefore says St. Cyprian to Stephen Bishop of Rome in the Case of Marcianus Bishop of Arles who had joyned with Novatianus The Corporation of Priests the Episcopal College is Copious being cemented by the Glue of Mutual Concord and the Bond of Unity that if any of the College shall turn Heretick or attempt to divide or waste the Flock of Christ the rest may interpose and as profitable and merciful Shepherds collect our Lord's Sheep and restore them to the Flock And this they were bound to do by the Fundamental Laws of One Church and one Communion for as our Martyr subjoyns Thô they were many Pastors yet they all fed but one Flock And therefore all the Bishops in the World were bound to give the desolate Christians of Churches whereof the Bishops had turned Heretical or Schismatical the Comfort of their Aid and Assistance 'T is true no Bishop was Superiour to another Bishop in point of Power or Iurisdiction but all stood Collateral as I have proved and so no Bishop as Superiour to another in a streight Linâ— could pass Sentence on him as they might have done to Presbyters Yet all being United into One College which College was the Principle of Unity to the Church Catholick it was necessary as well as natural that that College should be impower'd to take care of its own Preservation and by consequence they could do the Equivalent of a formal and authoritative Deposition they could refuse the Heretical or Schismatical Bishop their Communion and thereby exclude him from the Episcopal College And they could oblige all the Christians within his District to abandon his Communion and choose another Bishop as they valued the invaluable Priviledges of the One Church and the One Communion But then 6. So long as a Bishop worthily and legally Promoted kept the Faith and the Unity of the Church he was Treated he was Encouraged he was Consulted he was Corresponded with in a word Every way used as became the Head of a particular Church and a Fellow-Member of the College All the rest of the Members were bound by the Fundamental Laws of the College to Ratifie all his Canonical nay Equitable Acts of Priesthood Government and Discipline Whosoever was Baptized by himself or by his Clergy with his Allowance was to be owned as a Baptized Christian a True Denison of the Church and to have the Priviledges of such all the World
present for the Bishop's Power of Ordination But this is not all For Thirdly He had full Power without asking the Consent or Concurrence of either Clergy or People to settle Presbyters within his District Of this we have a most remarkable Instance of St. Cyprian's planting Namidicus a Presbyter of the City of Carthage Our Martyr wrote to his Presbyters Deacons and People to receive him as such probably he had been Ordained before and there was no more of it It was instantly done As we learn from the very next Epistle where we find the same Namidicus as a Presbyter of Carthage receiving a Commission for a Deputation to oversee such and such Things in St. Cyprian's absence So negligent shall I say Or so ignorant was St. Cyprian of Christ's Testament at least of his Leaving in it to his People by way of Legacy a Right a Grant a Priviledge of Choâ—sing their own Ministers What a Stranger has he been to all the Analogies and Principles of Presbyterian Government But I proceed Fourthly In St. Cyprian's time the Bishop had the disposal of all the Revenues of the Church All the Churches Incomes then were Oblations and Charitable Contributions The Civil Magistrate was Heathen and treated her commonly with Persecutions never with Encouragements Now the Bishop I say had the full Power of disposing of these Contributions and Oblations In the first place he had his own Quantitas Propria His proper Portion and t was no doubt a considerable One 'T is commonly reckoned to have been the Third The other Two belonged to the Clergy and the Poor but so as to be dispensed by the Bishop That he had his own Portion and that a Liberal One is evident from his 7th Epistle For there he tells how before he retired he gave the Trust of it to Rogatianus one of his Presbyters ordering that if there were any necessitous Strangers at Carthage they should have Maintenance out of it And it is observable that when St. Cyprian gives an account of Fortunatianus who had been Bishop of Assurae but had forfeited by Sacrificing in time of Persecuâ—ion and yet was earnest for all that to retain his Bishoprick he says expresly that it was upon the account of the Perquisites and not from any Love to Religion And it is not to be doubted that the same Reason moved Basilides to be so much concerned for the recovery of his Bishoprick after he had forfeited it also Indeed the Bishop's proper Portion was setled on him by the 40th of the Apostolic Canons And that he had the disposal of the rest particularly that which belonged to the Clergy is as plain For in his 41st Epistle he makes it an aggravation of Felicissimus's Guilt that contrary to the Duty which he owed to his Bishop he should have made such a Clutter about the Division of the Contributions And on the other hand he praises the Dutifulness of others who would not follow Fâ—licissimus his bad Example but continued in the Unity of the Church and were satisfied to take their Shares as the Bishop should please to dispense them And it is a most remarkable Instance of this his Power which we have in the aforementioned Case of Aurelius and Celerinus for thô he promoted them only to the Degree of Lectors yet he Entituled them to the Maintenance of Presbyters And as for that part that belonged to the Poor his Power in the Distribution of it is so evident from his Fifth and Forty first Epistles that I need not insist upon it Indeed this Power was expresly asserted to them by the Thirty eighth and Forty fiâ—st of the Apostolick Canons And we find Bishops in Possession of it long before St. Cyprian's time as is evident from Iustin Martyr's second Apology not far from the end Not now to mention that it seems fairly to be founded on express Scripture Indeed Fifthly He seems to have had a Power of imposing Charitable Contributions on all the Christians within his District for the Relief of Distressed Strangers whether Captives Prisoners or condemn'd to the Mines or Galleys c. Of this Power we have famous Instances in his 62d and 78th Epistles You may Consult them at your Leasure And long before St. Cyprian's time Soter Bishop of Rome as the Venerable Dionysius Bishop of Corinth cited for it by Eusebius tells us Managed this Power to excellent purpose as his Predecessors from the Apostles times had done before him Take his own Words for he was a very ancient Father having flourished about an Hundred Years before St. Cyprian They are in an Epistle of his to the Church of Rome in which he thus bespeaks them This has been your Custom from the beginning i. e. ever since the Church of Rome was planted to do manifold good Offices to the Brethren and send Supplies to most Churches in most Cities for sweetning their Poverty and refreshing those that are Condemned to the Mines You Romans observe the Custom of the Romans handed down to you by your Fathers which Custom your blessed Bishop Soter has not only observed but improved c. What can be more clear than it is from these Words That Soter as Bishop of Rome had the chief Management of the Charitable Contributions imposing them and disposing of them for the Relief of the Afflicted Christians of whatsoever Church And now that I have gone higher than St. Cyprian's time thô it was not necessary for my main Argument and to make use of it might swell this Letter to too great a Bulk Let me mention another Power which Tertuâ—lian who lived before St. Cyprian also in plain Terms appropriates to the Bishâ—p A considerable Power a Power that is a considerable Argument of the Episcopal Sovereignty And it is Sixthly The Power of Indicting Solemn Fasts as occasion required to all the Christians within his District You have his Words plain and home upon the Margin Sevâ—nthly A Bishop in St. Cyprian's time for now I return to it as such had the sole Power of Convocating his Presbyters and Deacons all those of his Clergy and People who either sat with him or standing gave their Suffrages as they were ask'd about any thing relating to the Church All Learned Men even Spanhemius himself our Author 's diligent Searcher into Antiquity confesses this Indeed this was a Point on which the Unity of the Church did so much depend that it could not but be a necessary Branch of his Prerogative who was the Principle of Unity to and was intrusted with the Supreme Government of the Church And agreeably we find Cornelius accounting about it in an Epistle to Cyprian For there he tells how the Presbyter and Confessors who had sided with Novatianus turning sensible of their Error came not streight to himself for it seems they had not the confidence to do that or rather they would not have been allowed that freedom so suddenly but to his