and had conversed with him in his youth and had often heard him teach And as it were great uncharitableness to suspect the truth of his narration in a matter of fact so we cannot think he could have been mistaken in a matter of that importance But whatever jealousie may fix upon Irenaeus there is no shadow of ground for suspecting either the veracity or good information of the Church of Smyrna who giving an account of his Martyrdom in an Epistle inserted by Euseb. in his History lib. 4. cap. 14. call him Bishop of the Catholick Church of Smyrna All that can be alledged against this is that in their stile Bishop and Presbyter were one and the same thing But the contrary of this is clear from Iranaeus who speaks always of Bishops as distinct from Presbyters and tho he sometimes call Bishops Presbyters yet he never calls Presbyters Bishops which is also the stile of these few Writers of that age who sometimes call Bishops Presbyters Eusebius tells from the testimony of the Church of Lions how he was first a Presbyter in Lions under Pothinus after whose Martyrdom he succeeded him in the Chair and died Bishop there And if we will hear himself lib. 3. cap. 3. when he is reckoning up the tradition of the Faith from the Apostles he deduceth it by all the Bishops who did sit in Rome from the Apostolick times whence two things will follow one that he judged there had been still Bishops in that Church The other that he looked on the Bishop as the chief depositary of the faith Further Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 24. sets down his Epistle to Victor Bishop of Rome wherein he chides him for excommunicating the Eastern Bishops and there he lays the whole blame upon Victor without sharing it among the Presbyters and also commends the former Bishops of Rome for their greater gentleness whereby it plainly appears that he judged that the power of discipline lay chiefly in the Bishops hands Polycrates also apud Euseb. lib. 5. hist. cap. 23. vindicates the practice of their Church about the day of Easter not only from the example of the Apostles among them but of the seven Bishops who preceded him in his See From which we may not only infer that there was but one Bishop in a City from the days of the Apostles but that his authority was great since what they did passed for a precedent to their Successors And indeed the difference of Bishop and Presbyter is so evpress in Irenaeus that the most learned assertors of parity confess the change was begun before his time which was in the end of the second Century Now how this change could have been introduced when there was neither Council nor secular Prince to establish it when Churchmen were so pure Polycarp an Apostolical Man having died but about thirty years before besides many other Apostolical men who had long survived when the Church was in the fire of persecution and so less dross could be among them when there was no secular interest to bait them to it for on the contrary this subjected them to the first fury of the persecution seems strange And it is not easie to be imagined or believed how this could have been so suddenly received through all the Churches both Eastern and Western and that there was none to witness against it and that neither the sincerity of some Presbyters nor the pride of others should have moved them to appear for their priviledges against this Usurpation And how neither Heretick nor Schismatick save one and that about two hundred years after should have charged the Church with this on the contrary all of them having their own Bishops and how this Government continued in so peaceable possession through the succession of so many ages till of late that even fundamentals are brought under debate if this Superiority were either so criminal as some hold it to be or had not been introduced at least by some Apostolical men if not by the Apostles themselves will not be easily cleared In the next Century we have Tertullian speaking clearly of the difference of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons lib. de bapt Dandi quidem jus habet summus Sacerdos qui Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi non tamen sine Episcopi authoritate propter Ecclesiae bonum Idem de praescript advers haer cap. 32. Caeterum si quae praescriptiones se audent inserere aetati Apostolicae ut ita videantur ab Apostolis traditae Edant ergo origines Ecclesiarum suarum evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis viris qui tamen cum Apostolis perseverarent habuerit authorem antecessorem hoc enim modo Ecclesiae Apostolicae census suos deferunt sicut Smyrneorum Ecclesia habens Polycarpum à Ioanne collocatum refert sicut Romanorum à Petro Clementem ordinatum edit Proinde utique caeterae exhibent quos ab Apostolis in Episcopatu constitutos Apostolici seminis traduces habeant confingant tale aliquid baeretici He also lib. 4. cont Marcionem cap. 5. saith Ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus in Joannem stabit authorem By which we see that he both judged Bishops to be of an Apostolical origene and that he counted them different from Presbyters A little after him was Clemens Alex. who 6. Strom. p. 667. speaking of the Constitution of the Christian Churches saith there were among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he thinks was taken from the Angelick glory and from their Oeconomy and administration We shall also find through all Cyprian his Epistles this disparity so clear that it cannot be denied that yet we find him as condescending as any Epist. 6. writing to his Clergy he saith Solus rescribere nihil potui quando à primordio Episcopatus mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro sine consensu plebis meae pivata gerere sententia But even this looks like a yielding to a diminution of that plenitude of power to which he might have pretended Epist. 65. writing to Rogatian who had advised with him concerning a Deacon that had carried insolently toward him he writes Pro Episcopatûs vigore Cathedrae authoritate haberes potestatem qua posses de illo statim vindicari and about the end Haec sunt enim initia baereticorum ortus atque conatus Schismaticorum male cogitantium ut sibi placeant ut praepositum superbo tumore contemnant sic de Ecclesiâ receditur sic altare profanum foris collocatur sic contra pacem CHRISTI ordinationem atque unitatem DEI rebellatur Likewise we find Epist. 31. written to Cyprian by the Clerus Romanus the Seat being then vacant what sense they had of the Bishop's power when they say Post excessum nobilissimae memoriae Fabiani nondum est Episcopus propter rerum temporum difficultates constitutus qui
OBSERVATIONS ON THE FIRST and SECOND OF THE CANONS Commonly ascribed to the Holy Apostles WHEREIN An Account of the Primitive Constitution and Government of Churches is contained Drawn from ancient and acknowledged Writings GLASGOW By Robert Sanders Printer to the City and University 1673. The FIRST CANON 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Bishop shall be ordained by two or three Bishops A BISHOP THIS word is sometime taken for a Spy so Estathius ad Homeri K. sometime for a Defender so Hector was called Bishop of Troy by Homer Iliad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was among the Athenians a publick Office so called and in this sense it was also used among the Romans so Cicero ad Atticum Lib. 7. Epist. 11. tells That Pompey would had him to be quem tota compania maritima ora habeant Episcopum ad quem delectus summa negotii referatur ff de mun hon leg ult parag item Episcopi sunt qui praesunt pani caeteris rebus vaenalibus This term is sometime in the Old Testament And Clemens Romanus Epist. ad Rom. proves Bishop and Deacon to be no new terms from Isai. 60.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But in our Edition we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where on the way mark how different the present Edition of the Septuagint is from that which Clemens made use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also Psalm 109.8 Among the Iews he who was the chief of the Synagogue was called Chazan hakeneseth 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 could be as they retained many of the Rites so the form of their Government was continued and the names remained the same But more of this afterward Clemens Romanus in his Epistle speaks only of Bishops and Deacons Polycarp again in his Epistle speaks only of Presbyters and Deacons where some object that it would seem that both in the Church of Corinth to which Clement wrote and in that of Philippi to which Polycarp wrote there were but two Orders of Churchmen whom the one calls Bishops the other Presbyters But if Polycarp's Epistle be genuine then these of Ignatius which he there mentions must be so too and in them the matter is past Controversie Epiphanius lib. 3. baer 75. tells that at first there were only Bishops and Deacons which he saith he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that ubi Episcopi erant jam constituti scripsit Episcopis Diaconis Non enim omnia statim potuerunt Apostoli constituere Presbyteris enim opus est Diaconis per hos enim duos Ecclesiastica compleri possunt ubi vero non inventus est quis dignus Episcopatu permansit locus sine Episcopo Ubi autem opus fuit erant digni Episcopatu constituti sunt Episcopi cum autem multitudo non esset non inventi sunt inter ipsos qui Presbyteri constituerentur contenti erant solo Episcopo in loco constituto Verum sine Diacono impossibile est esse Episcopum So it seems that from these profound Histories which he had read it appeared that in some Villages there were only Presbyters and no Bishops because in those places none were found worthy of it But certainly these places were obliged to depend upon some place where there was a Bishop constitute For if none were worthy to be Bishops much less were they worthy to constitute a Church within themselves and independent It also appears that in some places at first they had no Presbyters And indeed where the number of Christians was so small as no doubt it was in many places at first a Bishop alone might well have served a whole City But where the Christians were more numerous there were need of more hands to assist the Bishop in his work As for that of Polycarp's naming no Bishop but only Presbyters and Deacons perhaps he wrote in the vacancy of the See so we find many Letters of Cyprian's ad Clerum Romanum when there was no Bishop Besides it is known that at first the names of Bishop and Presbyter were used promiscuously Presbyters were so called not from their age as they were men but from the age of their Christianity For a Neophite was not to be ordained and the Presbyters did jointly with the Bishop both rule and feed the flock But some do stretch this too far as if always the eldest Presbyter had been chosen Bishop The Commentaries upon the Epistles commonly called Ambrose's but truly Hilary the Deacons of which I shall say nothing it being now agreed among the Criticks that they are his upon the 4th of the Eph. After he hath at length shewn the difference which was betwixt the Churches in the Apostles times when they were not fully constitute and the ages that succeeded he tells how at first all in the Clergy baptized and preached and that on any day or where they had opportunity But afterwards Deacons were restrained in this and things were astricted to certain times and places Hinc est ergo saith he unde nunc neque Diaconi in populo praedicant nec Clerici nec Laici baptizant Ideo non per omnia conveniunt scripta Apostolica ordinationi quae nunc in Ecclesiâ est quia haec inter ipsa primordia sunt scripta Nam Timotheum à se creatum Presbyterum Episcopum nominat quia primi Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur ut recedente eo sequens ei succederet Denique apud AEgyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus sed quia coeperunt praesentes Episcopi indigni inveniri ad primatus tenendos immutata est ratio prospiciente Concilio ut non ordo sed meritum crearet Episcopum Multorum Sacerdotum judicio constitutum ne indignus temere usurparet esset multis scandalo And like to this is what he saith on 1 Tim. 3. from which words it would appear that he thought the Elder Presbyter without any Election or Ordination succeeded unto the Chair of the deceased Bishop But this is directly contrary even to what Ierome himself saith neither do we find any such constitution as that he mentions either in the Acts of the Council of Nice or of any other It is true Clemens Romanus saith That the Apostles ordained their first fruits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be the Bishops and Deacons of them who should afterward believe but he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trying them by the Spirit that of discerning spirits being among their extraordinary gifts and though they ordained no Neophyte yet there is no reason to believe that either they made the eldest Christians Presbyters or the eldest Presbyters Bishops The choice of Matthias and of the seven Deacons shews that it went not simply by age St. Iames the younger was Bishop of Ierusalem and Timothy was but young when ordained Yet the
got himself made his Successor being suspected of accession to his death could only get two Bishops to wit Joannes Perusinus and Bonus Ferentinus who with Andreas Presbyter of Ostia laid hands on him And here is a Presbyter laying hands on a Bishop The Church of Rome at this day ordinarily dispenseth with this so that one Bishop and two Abbots do often ordain Bishops The Areopagite loc cit gives the account of the Bishops Ordination whom he always calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus He who was to be ordained was brought to another Bishop and kneeling before the Altar the Gospels were laid on his head and the Bishops hand and so he was consecrated with a holy Prayer and then marked with the sign of the cross and last of all saluted by the Bishop and whole holy Order His Theory on this is Their coming to the Altar shews the subjecting of their whole life to GOD. Laying on of hands is as a Father's blessing of his Child The sign of the cross signifies that they are to follow CHRIST even to the cross Their salutation signifies their union one with another and the Gospel is laid on the Bishops head because he being the head of the Hierarchy is to illuminate the rest With this agrees the fourth Council of Carthage where the rules are at length set down for the tryals and qualifications of Bishops and Canon first at the end we have Cum in bis omnibus examinatus fuerit inventus plene instructus tunc cum consensu Clericorum laicorum conventu totius provinciae Episcoporum maximeque Metropolitani vel authoritate vel praesentiâ ordinetur Episcopus And Canon second Episcopus quum ordinatur duo Episcopiponant teneant Evangeliorum codicem super caput cervicem aliter verticem ejus uno super eum fundente benedictionem reliqui omnes Episcopi qui adsunt manibus suis caput ejus tangant And of this see Gratian dist 23. 77. where we find a Bishop was to be five years a Lector or Exorcist fourteen years an Acoluth or Subdeacon and five years a Deacon ere he be a Presbyter and then he may hope for the highest degree But in another Chapter it is said he must be ten years a Presbyter ere he can be a Bishop And in another Chapter none could be a Deacon under twenty five years of age But by the Civil Law the age both of Bishop and Presbyter is the same to wit thirty five These previous degrees were introduced and the years of tryal in them were appointed that all might be prepared and rightly formed before they were admitted to the government of the Church Among other ceremonies in the ordination of Bishops in some places they were anointed with the Chrisma Nazianz Orat. 20. tells that his father had so anointed Basile and Orat. 5. tells that himself was so ordained but it seems that that was a custom peculiar to that Country since we meet not with it so early elsewhere As for the elections of Bishops we have seen from Ierome and Eutychius how the Presbyters did choose the Bishop But in Africk the Synod with the Clergy and the people did it of which we have a full account from Cyprian epist. 68. De traditione divinâ Apostolicâ observatione tenendum est observandum quod apud nos quoque fere per Provincias universas tenetur ut ad ordinationes rite celebrandas ad cam plebem cui praepositus ordinatur Episcopi ejusdem Provinciae proximi quique conveniant Episcopus delegatur plebe praesente quae singulorum vitam plenissime novit uniuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexerit And a little before he saith Plebs ipsa maxime habet potestatem vel elegendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi And from that of Numb 10. where Moses stript Aaron and clothed Eleazer before all the Congregation he proves that it was of divine Authority that the sacerdotal ordinations should not be nisi sub populi assistentis conscientiâ ut plebe praesente vel detegantur malorum crimina vel bonorum merita praedicentur sit ordinatio justa legitima quae omnium judicio suffragio erit examinata And this course he saith held in the ordination both of Bishops Priests and Deacons And Epist. 33. he excuseth himself that he had ordained one a Lector without the consent of his people though he had been a Confessor in the persecution the Epistle is directed to the Presbyters Deacons and the whole people and begins In ordinationibus Clericis solemus vos ante consulere mores ac merita singulorum communi consilio ponderare All that we meet with concerning this in Scripture is the chusing of the Deacons by the people Acts 6. for that of Acts 14.23 is clearly misapplied 1 Tim. 3. a Deacon should be first approved and Titus 1.6 a Bishop must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and thereby it appears that certainly some enquiry was to be made into his Conversation which at least must have been a Promulgation before-hand So we find Conc. Chalc. can 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Lampridius in the life of Alexander Severus tells that he used such a course before he made any Governor of a Province Dicebatque grave esse non fieri in Provinciarum rectoribus cum id Christiani fudaei facerent in praedicandis Sacerdotibus qui ordinandi sunt But there were frequent disorders in these elections which occasioned the 13. Canon of the Council of Laodicea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the Canon goeth before that the election of Bishops is committed to the Bishops of the Province which was also established by the Council of Nice fourth and sixth Canon Likewise Justinian Nov. 123. cap. 1. excludes the people from the election of the Bishop but leaves it to the Clergy and the primores Civitatis to name a list of three out of which the Metropolitan was to choose one The Bishops were to be ordained in the presence of the People where every one might propose his exceptions why he might not be ordained which were to be examined before they proceeded to the Ordination So Conc. Antioch Canon 19. and Carthag Canon 49. and Iustinian tit 1. Nov. Const. 1 2.17 according to Photius in Nomocan tit 1. cap. 8. Yet these popular elections were not wholly taken away and at least the peoples consent was asked but there were great disorders in these elections Nazianz. Orat. 14. at his Father's Funeral instanceth them in two cases at Cesarea where his Father was present in which there were factions at the election of the Bishop In one of them it was that Basil was chosen Ammian Mercellin tells what tumults were at Rome in the elections of their Bishops of whom he saith Supra modum humanum ad rapiendam sedem Episcopalem ardebant So that at the election of Damasus the faction betwixt his electors and those that were for
more secret But many of the people flocked about him and with tears besought him to have compassion on them yet he finding the dissention about him growing hotter among the Bishops went again to the Council and charged them by the holy Trinity that they would compose their differences peaceably adding But if I seem the occasion of any dissention among you I am not more worthy than the Prophet Jonas throw me in the sea and these raging billows shall quickly be calmed since I shall choose any thing you please so if I be innocent for drawing you to agreement on my account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After which he went to the Emperor and with great earnestness begged his permission to retire which having obtained he called the Clergy and people together and with many tears took leave of them charging them to continue stedfast in the faith This being done he retired to Arianze a Village of Cappadocia which belonged to him by inheritance and continued in his retirement giving himself to his Poetry till he died in an old age That which next occurs to be considered is in what places Bishopricks were founded and Bishops setled We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted and Churches constituted that Bishops were also ordained Among the Jews where ever there were an hundred and twenty of them together there did they erect a Synagogue Compare with this Acts I. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church is the same So it is like where ever there was a competent number of Christians together that a Church was there setled Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops so there was a Bishop in Bethany And S. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea which was the port of Corinth It is true some think that the Church of Corinth met there So these of Philippi went out of the City by a River side to prayer Acts 16.13 But we find Acts 18. that there was a Synagogue in Corinth and that S. Paul stayed in the House of Justus near the Synagogue and therefore there is no reason to think that the Christians should have had their meeting without the City since there was no persecution then stirring and neither in the Acts nor in any of the Epistles is there mention made of their going out to Cenchrea Therefore it is probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness it is 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 set They were pretty throng in Africk for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donarists 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 seventy nine of the Donarists Bishops Sozom. lib. 7. hist. cap. 19. speaking how differently constituted some Churches were he tells how in Scythia though there were many Cities yet there was but one Bishop But in other Nations there were Bishops even in their Villages as he knew to be among the Arabians and Cyprians Theodoret tells that there were eight hundred Parishes within his Diocese Epist. 113. But it is to be observed that in those places where the Gospel was latest of planting the Bishopricks are fewer and consequently larger It is reported that in the vast tract of the Abyssin Churches there is one only Bishop at Abuna Balsamon on the 57. Canon of Laodicea tells that at that time in some Churches of the East it was neither safe nor expedient for them to have Bishops and they were supplied by Visiters sent them from other Bishops so that they had no Bishops of their own which was occasioned both by their poverty and the smalness of their number yet they were under the care and charge of other Bishops Some Churches lay long vacant and without Bishops In Carthage when Hunnerick invaded them they wanted a Bishop twenty four years and he offering them one providing the Arrians might have the free exercise of their Religion among them they answered that upon these terms Ecclesia non delectatur Episcopum habere so Victor lib. 2. pers V and. When Miletus was driven out of Antioch for ten years together Diodorus and Flavian two Presbyters ruled that Church Theodor. lib. 4. hist. cap. 23. Some places are alledged to have had the Gospel long before there were Bishops among them and particularly Scotland for Major lib. 2. cap. 2. faith per Sacerdotes Monachos sine Episcopis Scoti in fide eruditi erant The time of our conversion to the faith is reckoned to have been An. 263. And Palladius reckoned the first Bishop came not for an hundred and seventy years after that in the year 430. Fordown in his Chronicle lib. 3. cap. 8. faith Ante Palladii adventum habebant Scoti fidei Doctores Sacramentorum administratores Presbyteros solum vel Monachos ritum sequentes Ecclesiae primitivae These were called Culdes though in some Bulls they be Celli Dei Boethius thinks it is Culdei quasi cultores Dei but others judg that it is from the Cells wherein they lived which were held in great esteem and after their death were turned into Churches and from thence they think the name Kil is to this day so much used as Kilpatrick Kilmarnock Kilbride c. Of these Boethius saith That by common suffrage they made choice of one of their number to be chief over them who was called Episcopus Scotorum so lib. 6. fol. 92. This is contradicted by Buchanan lib. 5. who faith That before Palladius his coming Ecclesiae absque Episcopis per Monachos regebantur minori quidem cum fastu externâ pompâ sed majore simplicitate sanctimoniâ But all our old Manuscripts being gone it will not be easie to come to a decision about this matter The Gothick Churches are said to have been planted and constituted before Ulphilas their first Bishop came unto them for seventy years together In the beginning the Bishop's whole charge was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the strain of Ignatius his Epistles especially that to Smyrna it would appear that there was but one Church at least but one place where there was one Altar and Communion in each of these Parishes for he saith There was one Bishop one Church and one Altar And Cyprian phraseth the erecting of a Schism by the erecting of an Altar against an Altar which seems to import that there was but one Altar in the Bishops Parish While the number of the Christians was but small they might well have all met together in one place but as they increased and the persecutions grew upon them they must have had several
meeting places and consequently several persons to preside and officiate in these meetings But Damasus and Platina reckon that Evaristus who was Bishop of Rome about the 106 year was the first qui titulos in urbe Româ Presbyteris divisit so that before his time the Presbyters have all officiated here or there indefinitely according to the Bishop's appointment And Evaristus seems to have given them assignments to particular places As for the meaning of the word Tituli it is to be considered that the Christians met about the places where the Martyrs were buried and so their meeting places were called Memoriae Martyrum Now upon Burials some title or inscription being usually made it followed that the place of the burial or Gravestone was called Titulus among the Latins so Gen. 35.20 Jacob's erecting a Pillar upon Rachels Grave is rendred by the vulgar Latin erexit titulum super sepulchrum and Gen. 28.18 of Jacob's stone at Bethel it is said erexit in titulum and 2 Sam. 18. Absalom his Pillar is called Titulus Hence it is that Evaristus his dividing of the titles is to be understood of his giving particular assignments of several Churches to Presbyters The next thing to be examined is what were the actions appropriated to Bishops If we believe Ierome the Bishop did nothing which Presbyters might not do except Ordination By which we see that he judged Ordination could not be done without the Bishop Athanasius in his second Apology inserts among other papers an Epistle of the Synod of Alexandria mentioning that Ischyras his Ordination by Coluthus being questioned and examined and it being found that Coluthus had never been ordained a Bishop but that he had falsly pretended to that Title and Character all the Ordinations made by him were annulled and Ischyras with such others who were so ordained were declared Laicks Which is an undeniable instance that at that time it was the general sense of the Church that none but a Bishop might ordain Neither in any Author do we meet with an instance of any that were ordained by Presbyters save one that Cassian who was about the 500. year Collat. 4. cap. 1. gives of one Paphnutius a Presbyter in the Desert of Scetis who delighting in the Vertues of one Daniel ut quem vitae meritis gratiâ sibi parem noverat coaequare sibi etiam Sacerdotii ordine festinaret Eum Presbyterii honori provexit But what a few devout solitaries might do in a desert and undiscerned corner will be no precedent for a constituted Church else we may allow of Baptism with sand for that was once done in a Desert But Socrates had another Opinion of this who lib. 1. cap. 27. tells that Ischyras did a thin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the third Council of Toledo set down by Gratian dist 23. cap. 14. this Canon was made Quorundam Clericorum dum unus ad Presbyterium duo ad Levitarum ministerium sacrarentur Episcopus oculorum dolore detentus fertur manum suam super eos tantum imposuisse Presbyter quidam illis contra Ecclesiasticum ordinem benedictionem dedisse sed quia jam ille examini divino relictus humano judicio accusari non potest ii qui supersunt gradum Sacerdotii vel Levitici ordinis quem perverse adepti sunt amittant By which we see how far they were from allowing of any Ordination wherein a Bishop had not intervened It is further clear that the Bishop was looked upon as the Pastor of the Flock who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that Presbyters or Deacons could finish nothing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that he was to give an account of the Souls of the people and indeed in these days a Bishoprick was onus more than honos The common treasury of the Church was also committed to his care so infra Can. 4. And as the Offerings of the faithful were laid down at the Apostles feet Acts 4.3.4 so were the collectae and the other goods of the Church laid in their hands For all the goods os the Church and collectae were at first deposited in the Bishop's hand and distributed by him tho afterwards there was an OEconomus appointed for that work Ignatius Epist. ad Magnes tells that they were to do nothing without their Bishop And ad Smyrn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 5. Canon of Laodicea they might no nothing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem Can. 19. Arel 1. As for Baptism Tertull de bapt saith Dandi quidem jus habet summus Sacerdos qui Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi non quidem sine Episcopi authoritate propter Ecclesiae bonum quo salvo salva pax est alioquin laicis etiam jus est Firmilian ad Cyprianum which is reckoned the 75. among Cyprian his Epistles faith Majores natu and by what is a little after where he calls these Bishops it is clear he means not of Presbyters in Ecclesiâ praesidebant baptizandi manum imponendi ordinandi potestatem possidebant Pacian serm de Bapt. Lavacro peccata purgantur Chrismate spiritus super funditur utraque purgantur Chrismate spiritus super funditur utraque vero ist a manu ore Antistitis impetramus And even Ierome himself contra Luciferianos saith Sine Chrismate Episcopi jussione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus jus habent baptizandi By all which we see that Baptism was chiefly the Bishop's work and that the Presbyters did not baptize without his order As for the Eucharist Ignatius ad Smyrnenses saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iustin in his second Apol. giving the account of their Eucharist and whole service reckons all to have been managed by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Tert. de cor mil. Non de aliorum quam praesidentium manibus sumimus But all this is very unjustly applied by such as would pretend to the whole Ecclesiastical Authority but would exempt themselves from the great labor of it For it is clear that according to the primitive constitution the Bishop was the immediate Pastor of the flock and the Presbyters were assumed by him in partem sollicitudinis the greatest of the load still lying on his own shoulders and this might have been some way managed by him where the Dioceses were smaller But the enlarging of the Dioceses hath wholly altered the figure of Primitive Episcopacy All that the Bishop can now do being to try entrants well and oversee these that are in charge which ought not to be performed either by these overly visitations in Synods or by a pompous procession through the Diocese but by a strict and severe Examen both of their lives and labors performed in such visitations as are sutable to the simplicity and humility of the Gospel As for Preaching it was ordinary at first even for persons not ordained to preach not to mention that of the Corinthians where every one brought his Psalm his
collections of the Rich and to distribute them to the poor And these were called Septem viri boni Civitatis The term Elder was generally given to all their Judges but chiefly to these of the great Sanhedrin so we have it Matth. 16.21 Mark 8.31 14.43 and 15.1 And Acts 23.14 And for a fuller satisfaction to this I must refer you to such as have given an account of the Synagogue out of the Iewish Writers Next a great deal might be said to prove that the Apostles in their first constitutions took things as they had them modelled to their hand in the Synagogue and this they did both because it was not their design to innovate except where the nature of the Gospel Dispensation obliged them to it As also because they took all means possible to gain the Jews who we find were zealous adherers to the traditions of their Fathers and not easily weaned from these precepts of Moses which by Christ's Death were evacuated And if the Apostles went so great a length in complying with them in greater matters as Circumcision and other legal observances which appears from the Acts and Epistles we have good grounds to suppose that they would have yielded to them in what was more innocent and less important Besides there appears both in our Lord himself and in his Apostles a great inclination to symbolize with them as far as was possible Now the nature of the Christian Worship shews evidently that it came in the room of the Synagogue which was moral and not of the Temple-Worship which was typical and ceremonial Likewise this parity of Customs betwixt the Iews and Christians was such that it made them be taken by the Romans and other more overly observers for one sect of Religion and finally any that will impartially read the New Testament will find that when the forms of Government or Worship are treated of it is not done with such architectonical exactness as was necessary if a new thing had been instituted which we find practiced by Moses But the Apostles rather speak as these who give rules for the ordering and directing of what was already in being From all which it seems well grounded and rational to assume that the first constitution of the Christian Churches was taken from the model of the Synagogue in which these Elders were separated for the discharge of their imployments by an imposition of hands as all Iewish Writers do clearly witness So the Presbyters of the Christian Church were ordained by an Imposition of hands Their power was not only to preach which as I shewed already was common to others but also to administer Sacraments so that it is true which Ierome saith Communi consilio Presbyterorum res gerebantur We have already considered how necessary it was judged that no Ordination of Presbyters might be gone about without the presence and concurrence of the Bishop as the principal Person which was judged necessary as I suppose more upon the account of Unity and Order than from the nature of the thing in its self for taking things in themselves it will follow that whatever power one hath he may transmit to another and therefore there seems to be small reason why one who hath the power of preaching the Gospel and administring Sacraments may not also transmit the same to others and it seems unreasonable so to appropriate this to a Bishop as to annul these Ordinations which were managed by Presbyters where Bishops could not be had Maimonides saith Every one regularly ordained hath power to ordain his Disciples also There remains nothing to be cleared about this from Antiquity save the 13 Canon of the Council of Ancyra which runs thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Others read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now the difficulty raised about this Canon is this that if the reading be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then it will follow that the Presbyters of the City might have ordained without the Bishops presence if they had his warrant in writing Yea they also infer that it is probable that before that they ordained even without the Bishops warrant to which they were limited by this Canon and upon this Wallo Messalinus triumphs not a little But Blondel chused rather to read the Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if the meaning of it were that the Chorepiscopi could not have ordained either Presbyters or Deacons nor the Presbyters of the City without the Bishops Warrant in writing which will infer that they might have done it being so warranted It is true Binnius hath read it so so also hath Gentianus Hervetus as appears by his Latin version of this Council The Arabick Manuscript also favors this And it is directly asserted by Zonaras on this Canon and Aristenus But it is contradicted by the whole tract of Antiquity whom we find all concurring in this that the Chorepiscopi might neither ordain Presbyters nor Deacons without a Bishop as was cleared in its due place Fut for that of Wallo Messalinus it will appear to be ill grounded For first it is certain that the Chorepiscopi were a dignity above Presbyters It will be therefore unreasonable to think that Presbyters could do that which was unlawful to the other Besides how bad an Inference is it from one Canon of a Provincial Council of which there are such various readings to argue for a thing which is not only without any other ground but also contrary to the whole Current of Antiquity And it was but few years after this that in Alexandria the Ordinations given by Colutbus who was but a Presbyter and only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were annulled Now Ancyra being in Asia the lesser and divers Bishops out of Syria being there in particular the Bishops of Antioch and Cesarea who subscribed first how came it that there was no notice of this had at Alexandria to have prevented their severe Sentence in the Case of Colutbus But to consider the readings of the Canon Binius reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Iustellus it is true he hath on the margin aliter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hervetus hath translated it in alienâ Parochia Now if this be the true reading the meaning of it will run thus Whereas by a great many other Canons Presbyters were so tied to their Bishop that no Bishop was to receive the Presbyter of another Bishop without his Bishops Warrant and Licence and his literae pacificae and dimissoriae So here the Presbyters of the City are discharged to go and assist at Ordinations in other Parishes without a written Licence from their own Bishop But as this Canon is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by some so they seem to have added to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the meaning of it is that the Presbyters of the City might do nothing without the Bishop's Warrant and Licence in writing Thus have both
of age Mention is made of them by Pliny lib. 10. Epist 97. who writing to Trajan of the enquiry he was making of the Christians saith Necessarium credidi ex duabus ancillis quae ministrae dicebantur quid effet veri per tormenta quaerere They were received by an Ordination in Tertullian's time for he speaking of them saith De castit cap. 13. Ordinari in Ecclesia solent And ad uxorem lib. 1. cap. 7. Viduam allegi in ordinationem nisi univiram non concedit The 19. Canon of the Council of Nice reckons the Deaconesses among those that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but saith that they had no imposition of hands so that in all things they were reckoned among the Laicks but hints that they had a particular habit calling them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Balsamon's Gloss on this is that the Virgins who dedicated themselves to GOD continued in a Laical habit till they were forty years of age and were then if found worthy ordained Deaconesses by a particular imposition of hands To this Zonar as adds that the Virgins in the twenty fifth year of their age got a particular habit from the Bishop The 74 Canon of Nice according to the Arabick Edition appoints the Office of a Deaconess to be only the receiving of Women in Baptism Epiph. baeres 79. after he hath proved that a Woman is not capable of the publick service of the Church adds That the Order of the Deaconesses was instituted out of reverence to that Sex that when the Womans body was naked in Baptism they might not be so seen by the Priest And with this agrees the 12th Canon of the fourth Council of Cartbage Vidue vel sanctimoniales quae ad ministerium baptizandarum mulierum eliguntur tam instructae sint ad officium ut possint apto sano sermone docere imperitas rusticus mulieres tempore quo baptizandae sint qualiter baptizatori interrogatae respondeant qualiter accepto baptismate vivant This is also confirmed by the 6. Chap. of the 6. Novel which appoints the age both for Virgins and Widows to be fifty years Sicque sacram promereri ordinationem And their Office is denied to be adorandis ministrare baptismatibus aliis adesse secretis quae in venerabilibus ministeriis per eas rite aguntur And the rest of that Chapter gives divers other rules concerning them The 15. Canon of Chalcedon appoints a Deaconess not to be ordained till she were forty years of age it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Canon and it is appointed that it be done after a strict examination but that after she was ordained and continued some time in the Ministery if she gave her self in Marriage she as one that had reproached the grace of GOD was to be anathematized with her Husband Zonaras reconciles this age with the Apostle that the Apostle speaks of Widows and this Canon of Virgins tho it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Canon Yet it seems some of these Deaconesses have given scandal in the Church and perhaps proved like the Females among the Pharisees whom the Rabbins reckoned among these who destroyed the World And so we find the Western Church being scandalized at some miscarriages in this Order they are discharged to be ordained by the first Council of Orange Can. 26. Diaconissae omnimodo non ordinandae si quae jam sunt benedictioni quae populo impenditur capita submittunt And in the beginning of the sixth Century it seems they gave great scandal for Canon 22. Council Epaun. they are simply discharged Viduarum consecrationem quas Diacoâ—as vocant ab omni regione nostra penitus abrogamus solam eis poenitentia benedictionem si converti ambiant imponendo And Anno 536. Con. Aurel. 2. Câ—â— 17. Benedictio Diaconatus is said to be given to the Women contra interdicta Canonum And the next Canon of that Council is Placuit etiam ut nulli postmodum foeminae Diaconalis benedictio pro conditionis hujus fragilitate credatur Yet they are mentioned in the Council of Worms in the year 868. Canon 73. where the 15. Canon of Chalcedon is wholly insert One scandal we find occasioned by these Deaconesses was that they presumed to distribute the Elements in the Eucharist which Gelasius blames in his ninth Epistle written to the Bishops of Lucaniâ— Quod foeminae sacris altaribus ministrare ferantur And this it seems hath continued longer For we find Ratherius of Verona in the tenth Century appoints in his Synodal Epistle which in the Tomes of the Councils is printed as a Sermon of Pope Leo the fourths Nulla foemina ad altare Domini accedat And Matthaeus Blastaris in his Syntagma lit 1. cap. 11. concludes it to be unknown what the Office of the Deaconesses was Some judged that they ministred to Women who being in age received Baptism it being accounted a crime for a Man to see a Woman naked Others thought that they might enter to the Altar and exercise the Office of Deacons who proved this from many things particularly from some words of Nazianzen's Oration at his Sisters Funeral but that was afterwards forbidden 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet he doubts much the truth of that it not agreeing with reason that Women who were not suffered publickly to teach should be admitted to the Office of a Deacon whose duty it was by the ministery of the word to purifie these who were to be baptized And after that he gives an account of the form of their Ordination Mention likewise is made of them in the Council in Trullo Canon 14. A Deaconess was not to receive imposition of band 's before she was forty years of age Which is more expressly appointed in the 40. Canon where they decree that though the Apostle made the age 60. yet the Canons had allowed their Ordination at 40. because they found the Church was become firmer in the grace of GOD and had advanced forward and by the 48. Canon of that Council a Bishop's Wife when separated from her Husband by consent was to live in a Monastery and if found worthy might be made a Deaconess Basil by his 18. Canon allows Virgins to be received at the sixteenth or seventeenth year of their age but by his 24. he reckons it a fault to receive a Widow into the Order under 60 yet it seems that was not peremptorily observed For in his 44 Canon he speaks of Deaconesses found in Fornication who might not be allowed to communicate before seven years had been past in penitence Whence this Order failed in the Greek Church we know not but Balsamon on the 15. Canon of Chalcedon tells That in his time Deaconesses were no more ordained and his reason is because no Woman was suffered to enter unto the Altar though saith he some Women were abusively so called As for the inferiour degrees of Subdeacon Acolyth c. as they were only Iuris Ecclesiastici so they were not