those Times the Bishop was called the Praepositus the Ruler the Governour the Superiour of all the Christians within his District Clergy as well as Laity And they without Distinction or Exception were called His People his Flock his Subjects c. This may be seen almost in every one of his Epistles Thus Ep. 3. he says That Deacons ought to remember that our Lord chose his Apostles that is Bishops and Governours But the Apostles chose Deacons to be the Bishop's and the Churches Ministers And therefore a Deacon ought with all Humility to give Satisfaction to the Bishop his Superiour And Ep. 9. He praises the Roman Clergy for having the Memory of Fabianus who had been their Superiour in so great Honour And Ep. 13. writing to Rogatianus his Presbyter and the rest of the Confessors and praising God for their Faith and Patience he says That as all Christians were bound to Rejoyce when Christ's Flock was illuminated by the Examples of Confessors so he himsâ—lf in a special manner as being the Bishop seeing the Churches Glory was the Ruler's Glory And in that famous Passage which I have cited already from Ep. 16. he complains of it as an unexampled Petulancy that Presbyters should so contemn the Bishop their Sâ—periour And in another place We Bishops who have the Chief Power in the Church And Ep. 62. I who by the Divine Mercy Govern the Church have sent to you Januarius Maximus Proculus c. 100000 Sestercâ—s as the Charitable Contribution of my Clergy and People And Ep. 66. Hence spring Heresies and Schisms c. That the Bishop who is one and is set over the Church is Contemned c. Such was the Dialect of those Times I say and thus Bishops were called Rulers Governours Superiours c. and that in regard of all within their Districts making no Discrimination betwixt Clergy-men and Laicks and not only so but more particularly 2. It was as comon in that Dialect to call the Clergy The BISHOP'S CLERGY Thus for Example Ep. 14. It was my Wish that I might have saluted all my Clâ—â—gy safe and sound c. My Presbyters and Deacons ought to have taught you c. Because I cannot send Letters but by Clergy-men and I know that many of mine are absent Numidicus was preserved alive by God that he might joyn him my Clergy Urbanus and Sidonius came to my Presbyters If any of my Presbyters or Deacons shall turn precipitant I have sent you Copies of the Letters which I wrote to my Clergy and People concerning Felicissimus and his Presbytery And as I observed before when Maximâ—s a Presbyter and Urbanus c. returned from the Novatian Schism to Cornelius's Communion We are Reconciled say they to Cyprian to Cornelius OUR BISHOP and to all the Clergy Such was the Language of those Times Now I say by what Propriety of Speech could a Bishop have been called Praepositus Superiour to his Clergy Could they have been called HIS Clergy Could he have been said to have been Their Bishop Their Ruler Their Governour By what Rule of either Grammar or Rhetorick Logick or Politick could he have been said to have been set over them or they to have been his Subjects or Inferiours if he had no Power nor Iurisdiction over them If they were not Subjected to his Authority nor Obnoxious to his Discipline But let all this pass for meer Prolusion if you will I am not pinch'd for want of Arguments For 3. The three great Principles which I proved so fully before viz. That a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time was the Principle of Unity to the Church which he Govern'd that he had a Supreme Power in it and that by the Principles which then prevailed he was the same in the Christian Church which the High Priest was in the Iewish and the last Thing I proved also viz. That he had a Negative over his Presbyters Each of these is demonstration for the present Conclusion and you need not Artificial Natural Logick is enough to let you see the Consequences Indeed 4. We find Cyprian all along both Reasoning and Practising to this purpose Thus he told Bishop Rogatianus Ep. 3. That the Case was plain between him and his Deacon Hâ— might punish him forthwith by his Episcopal Power and his Câ—thedral Authority He might make him sensible of his Episcopâ— Honour He might Exert the Power of his Honour against him either by Deposing or by Excommunicating him Nay He mighâ— Excommunicate all such as should Rebel against him For all these Censures his Sovereign Authority was competent Thus he praises Pomponius another Bishop for Excommunicating another Scandalous Deacon Ep. 4. p. 9. And did not he himself Suspend Philumenus and Fortunatus two Subdeacons and Favorinus an Acolyth from their Livings As we learn from his 34th Epistle But you may say These Instances extend no further than to Deacons or more inferiour Clergy-men but What is this to Presbyters Why Sir indeed the Instances are pat and home and you must acknowledge so much if you consider that by the Principles of those Times there was no Disparity between Prebyters and Inferiour Orders in this respect But the Bishop's Power extended equally to all just as a King can censure his Chancellor as well as a Sub-Collector of his Customs a Justice-General as well as a Justice of Peace Nothing clearer from the above-mentioned Principles But that I may leave you no imaginable Scruple I shall even account to you about Prebyters also 5. Then I have told you already how some of the Carthaginian Presbyters conspired against St. Cyprian and used their utmost Arts to hinder his Preâ—erment to the Bishoprick Now if we may believe either himself or Pontius in his Life whatever it was they did on that Occasion he might have punish'd them for it punish'd them not only with Deposition but with Excommunication had he pleased Take first his own Account in Ep. 43. there he tells his People That through the Malignity and Perfidiousness of some of his Presbyters he durst not adventure to return to Carthage so soon as he would And he describes those Presbyters thus That being mindful of their Conspiracy and retaining their old Grudges against his Promotion they reinforced their ancient Machinations and renewed their Attempts for Undermining him by siding with Felicissâ—mus in his Schism And then he proceeds thus I neither willed nor wished their Punishment for their Opposition to my Promotion yea I Pardon'd them and kept my Peace And yet now they have suffered Condign Punishment Thô I did not Excommunicate them then their own Guilty Consciences have done it now They have Excommunicated themselves c. Take it next from Pontius his Deacon Thô I am unwilling says he yet I must speak it out Some resisted his Promotion but how Gently how Patiently how Generously how Mercifully did he forgive them Did
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 〈◊〉
Baptism pestiferous and profane Their Sacrifices abominable They could not be Martyrs Their Company was to be avoided Whoso befriended them were Persecutors of the Truth Were Betrayers of Christ's Spouse to Adulterers Were Betrayers of Unity Were involved in the some Guilt with them In short Schismaticks by being such were Ipso facto Persecutors of the Church Enemies of Mercy Infatuated Salt and Cursed of God Such I say were the Notions the Holy Fathers in those early Times of the Church had of Schismaticks and such were the Names they gave them And certainly whoso seriously considers how much Schism is condemned in Holy Writ what an Enemy it is to the Peace the Power and the Propagation of Christianity and how much it stands in opposition to the Holy Humble Peaceable Patient Meek and Charitable Spirit of the Gospel Whoso considers that our Blessed Savious's great Errand into the World was to Unite all his Disciples here into one Body and one Communion that they might Eternally be Blessed in the full Enjoyment of one Communion with the Father Son and Holy-Ghost in Heaven hereafter Whoso I say considers these Things cannot but confess that Schism and Schismaticks deserve all these hard Names and answer all these terrible Notions Now 2. That for the Preservation of Unity and the Preventing of Schism in every particular Church all were bound by the Principles of St. Cyprian's Age to live in the Bishops Communion and to own and look upon him as the Principle of Unity to that Church of which he was Head and Ruler might be made appear from a vast Train of Testimonies But I shall content myself with a few Thus for Example when some of the Lapsed presumed to write to St. Cyprian and design themselves without a Bishop by the Name of a Church How did the Holy Man resent it Consider how he begins his Answer to them Our Lord says he whose Precepts we ought to Honour and Obey Instituting the Honour of a Bishop and the Contexture of a Church saith thus to Peter in the Gospel I say unto thee thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven c. From thence by the Vicissitudes of Times and Successions the Ordination of Bishops and the Frame of the Church are transmitted so as that the Church is built upon the Bishops and all her Affairs are ordered by them as the chief Rulers And therefore seeing this is God's appointment I cannot but admire the bold Temerity of some who writing to me call themselves a Church when a Church is only to be found in the Bishop the Clergy and the faithful Christians God forbid that a number of Lapsed should be called a Church c. Consider how he Reasons By Divine Institution there cannot be a Church without a Bishop The Church is founded on the Bishop The Bishop as Chief Ruler orders all the Affairs of the Church Therefore those Lapsed ought not to have called themselves a Church seeing they had no Bishop no Principle of Unity We have another notable Reasoning as well as Testimony of his in his 43d Epistle written to his People of Carthage upon the breaking out of Felicissimus his Schism God is One says he and Christ is One and the Church is One and the Chair is One be our Lord 's own Voice founded on St. Peter Another Altar cannot be reared another Priesthood cannot be erected besides the One Altar and the One Priesthood Whoso gathereth elsewhere scattereth Whatever Human Fury institutes against God's Appointment is Adulterous is Impious is Sacrilegious And a little after O Brethren Let no Man make you wander from the Ways of the Lord O Christians Let no Man rend you from the Gospel of Christ Let no Man tear the Sons of the Church from the Church Let them perish alone who will needs perish Let them abide alone out of the Church who have departed from the Church Let them alone not be with the Bishops who have Rebelled against the Bishops c. And as I observed before in his Epistle to Florentinus Pupianus he defines a Church to be a People united to their Priest and a Flock adhering to their Pastor c. and from thence tells Pupianus That he ought to consider that the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop So that if any are not with the Bishop they are not in the Church And how concernedly doth he Reason the Case in his Book of the Unity of the Church Can he seem to himself says he to be with Christ who is against Christ's Priests Who separates himself from the Society of Christ's Clergy and People That Man bears Arms against the Church He fights against God's Ordinance He is an Enemy of the Altar A Rebel against Christ's Sacrifice He is Perfidious and not Faithful Sacrilegious and not Religious He is an Undutiful Servant and Impious Son an Hostile Brother who can contemn God's Bishops and forsake his Priests and dares to set up another Altar and offer up unlawful Prayers c. Indeed in that same Book he calls the Bishop The Glue that cements Christians into the solid Unity of the Church And hence it is 3. That St. Cyprian every where makes the Contempt of the one Bishop or Undutifulness to him the Origine of Schisms and Heresies Thus Epist. 3. he makes this Observation upon the Undutifulness of a certain Deacon to Rogatianus his Bishop That such are the first Efforts of Hereticks and the Out-breaking and Presumptions of illâ—advised Schismaticks They follow their own Fancies and in the Pride of their Hearts contemn their Superiours So Men separate from the Church So they Erect profane Altars without the Church So they Rebel against Christian Peace and Divine Order and Unity And Ep. 59. he tells Cornelius That Heresies and Schisms spring from this only Fountain That God's Priest the Bishop is not obeyed And Men don't consider that at the same time there ought to be only One Bishop only One Iudge as Christ's Vicar in a Church And Ep. 66. to Florentius Pupianus That from hence Heresies and Schisms have hitherto sprung and do daily spring That the Bishop who is One and is set over the Church is contemned by the proud Presumption of some And he that is honoured of God is dishonoured by Men And a little after he tells him alluding clearly to the Monarchical Power of Bishops That Bees have a King and Beasts have a Captain and Robbers with all humility obey their Commander And from thence he concludes how unreasonable it must be for Christians not to pay suitable Regards to their Bishops And in another place Then is the Bond of our Lord's Peace broken then is Brotherly Charity violated then is the Truth
adulterated and Unity divided then Men leap out into Heresies and Schisms When When the Priests are controlled when the Bishops are envied when one grudges that himself was not rather preferred or disdains to bear with a Superiour Indeed 4. By the Principles of those Times the Bishop was so much the Principle of Unity to the Church which he Governed the whole Society had such a Dependance on him was so Vircuaily in him and represented by him that what he did as Bishop was reputed the Deed of the whole Church which he Ruled If he was Oxthodox and Catholick so was the Body united to him reckoned to be If Heretical or Schismatical it went under the same Denomination If he denied the Faith whoso adhered to him after that were reputed to have denied it If he confessed the Faith the whole Church was reckoned to have confessed it in him Thus We find when Martialis and Basilides two Spanish Bishops committed Idolatry and so forfeited their Bishopricks and yet some of their People inclined to continue in their Communion St. Cyprian with other 36 Bishops tells those People That it behoved them not to flatter themselves by thinking that they could continue to Communicate with Polluted Bishops and withal themselves continue Pure and Unpolluted For all that communicated with them would be Partakers of their Guilt And therefore as they go on a People obeying and fearing God ought to separate from Criminal Bishops and be careful not to mix with them in their Sacrilegious Sacrifices And again in that same Synodical Epistle they say that it was a neglecting of Divine Discipline and an Unaccountable Rashness to Communicate with Martialis and Basilides For whosoever joyne◠with them in their Unlawful Communions were Polluted by the Contagion of their Guilt And whosoever were Partakers with them in the Crime would not be separated from them in the Punishment Indeed this is the great Purpose of that 67th Epistle as also of the 68th concerning Marcianus who by Communicating with Novatianus had rendred his own Communion Infectious and Abominable On the other hand when Cornelius Bishop of Rome confessed the Faith before the Heathen Persecutors St. Cyprian says the whole Roman Church confessed And when Cyprian himself having confessed received the Sentence of Death being then at Utica he wrote to his Presbyters Deacons and People at Carthage telling them how earnest he was to Suffer at Carthage Because as he Reasons it was most Congruous and Becoming That a Bishop should confess Christ in that City in which he Ruled Christ's Church That by confessing in their Presence they might be all Ennobled For whatever says he in the moment of Confession the Confessing Bishop speaks GOD assisting him he speaks with the MOUTH OF ALL. And he goes on telling them How the Honour of their Glorious Church of Carthage should be mutilated as he words it if he should Suffer at Utica especially considering how earnest and frequent he had been in his Prayers and Wishes that he might both for HIMSELF and THEM Confess in their Presence at Carthage And upon the same Principle it was that he so frequently call'd his People His Bowels His Body The Members of his Body And that he affirm'd that their Griefs were his Griefs Their Wounds his Wounds Their Distresses his Distresses c. Upon the same Principle it was also that Pontius his Deacon having accounted how our Holy Martyr was executed in presence of the People falls out into this Rapture O blessed People of the Church of Carthage that Suffered together with such a Bishop with their Eyes and Senses and which is more with open Voice and was Crowned with him For thô all could not Suffer in real Effect according to their common Wishes nor really be Partakers of that Glory yet whosoever were sincerely willing to Suffer in the sight of Christ who was looking on and in the Hearing of their Bishop did in a manner send an Embassy to Heaven by One who was a competent Witness of their Wishes 5. Neither was this of the Bishop's being the Principle of Unity to the Church which he govern'd a Novel Notion newly Minted in the Cyprianic Age For besides that Episcopacy was generally believed then to be of Divine Institution besides that St. Cyprian still Argues upon the Supposition of a Divine Institution as particularly in the same very Case of the Bishops being the Principle of Unity as may be seen in his Reasoning against the Lapsed which I have already cited from Ep. 33. and might be more fully made appear if it were needful Besides these Things I say we have the same thing frequently insisted on by the Holy Ignatius who was Contemporary with the Apostles in his Genuine Epistles Thus for Instance in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna he tells them That that is only a firm and solid Communion which is under the Bishop or allowed by him and That the Multitude ought still to be with the Bishop Plainly importing this much at least That there can be no True Christian Communion unless it be in the Unity of the Church and there can be no Communion in the Unity of the Church in opposition to the Bishop And in his Epistle to the Philadelphians These who belong to God and Iesus Christ are with the Bishops and these are God's that they may live by Iesus Christ who forsaking their Sins come into the Unity of the Church And again in that same Epistle God doth not dwell where there is Division and Wrath God only Pardons those who Repenting joyn in the Unity of God and in Society with the Bishops And he has also that same very Notion of the Bishops being so much the Principle of Unity that as it were the whole Church is represented in him Thus he tells the Ephesians that he received their whole Body in their Bishop Onesimus And in his Epistle to the Trallians he tells them that in Polybius their Bishop who came to him at Smyrna he beheld their whole Society 6. Indeed this Principle of the Bishop's being the Center of Unity to his Church was most reasonable and accountable in it self Every particular Church is an Organiz'd Political Body and there can be no Unity in an Organical Body whether Natural or Political without a Principle of Unity on which all the Members must hang and from which being separated they must cease to be Members And who so fit for being this Principle fo Unity to a Church as he who was Pastor Ruler Governour Captain Head Iudge Christ's Vicar c. in relation to that Church This was the True Foundation of that other Maxim which I insisted on before viz. That there could be but One Bishop at once in a Church Why so Why Because it was Monstrous for One Body to have Two Head for One Society to have Two Principles of Unity If what I have said does not satisfie you thô in
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
within if they may be called any way within Terrors or Perils threatned a Bishop seeing as such he was still obnoxious to Terrors or Perils Meaning that in those Times Bishops as Bishops were still exposed to the first burnt of all Persecutions As on the other hand when the Human Galienâ—s who succeeded to Valerianus stop'd the Persecution which his Predecessor had begun he began his Imperial Râ—script thus The Emperour Publius Licâ—nius Galieâ—â—s c. To Dionysius Pinnas Demetrius and the rest of the BISHOPS c. and so went on telling them How he had ordered his Edict of Grace and Clemency to be Published all the World over allowing them to rely upon it as full Security against all Molestation for the future Thus I say that Heathen Emperour stopping the Current of a fierce Persecution and designing Favour and Security to Christians directed his Letters to the Christian Bishops as the Persons who were Heads of the Christian Churches and in all Persecutions had wont to be exposed to the greatest Hazards Thus Sir I have examined our Author's Definition of a Bishop in St. Cyprian's time and if I mistake not have demonstrated by many solid Arguments that he was neither Single Presbyter nor Presbyterian Moderator in the Presbyterian Sense of the Terms but a True Prelate in the strictest propriety of Speech Consider my Arguments thoroughly and weigh them only in the Ballance of Iustice without Prejudice and without Partiality and try whether Each of them singly and much more all together do not Conclude irrefragably against him And if they shall be found to be Concludent I leave it next to you to Determine whether our Author is not both fairly and formally bound by his Word to confess himself a Schismatick When I first put Pen to Paper I had in my Project to have proceeded further and made it appear as evidently as what I have now dispatched That the Episcopal Preheminence which was so notoriously and unquestionably Prelatical in St. Cyprian's time was no Novel Usurpation no Late Invention not at all the Production of the Cyprianic Age nor any Age later than the Apostles That St. Cyprian and all his Contemporaries firmly believed it to be of Divine Institution That they had not Entertained it having so little Temporal Encouragement nay so great and many Temporal Discouragements to Entertain it if they had not so believed That they had great Reason for this their Belief as fairly founded on our Saviour's own Ordinance and fully handed down to them in the constant Practice of the Universal Church from the First Plantation of Christian Churches That it pass'd amongst them as a common Principle That Bishops as I have represented them Bishops as they were then that is clearly contradistinct from Presbyters and Superiour to them Bishops as the Heads of and Principles of Unity to their respective Churches were the Rightful True and Genuine Successors of the Apostles in the Supreme visible Ecclesiastical Power of Governing the Churches whereof they were Bishops These Things I say I had once in my Prospect but this Letter has swell'd to such a Bulk already as perhaps may fright you from Reading it And you may Command me to Prosecute what is lest undone when you will And what I have written as I said seems to me sufficient in Point of Argument for bringing your Author to a Sense of his State as well as a Candid Confession of it when 't is thus plainly represented to him And therefore I Conclude with my Best Christian Wishes to you and him and all Men. March 28. 1695. FINISH Advertisement THere is now in the Press and will be Published by Michaelmas next An Enquiry into the New Opinions chiefly propagated by the Presbyterians in Scotland By A. M. D. D. a Ad Quest. 1. Sect. 5. b Episcoporum manifesta ubique 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seâ— jure praesidendi Convocandi Ordinandi c. Epit. Isag. ad Hist Eccles. Nov. Test. Saec. 3. Sect. 6. pag. miâ—i 117. c Sect. 32. p. 28. d Sed nec hujus aevi Ordines Minores quales Ostiariorum Copiatarum Acolythorum Exorcistarum p. 119. e Suffrag 1 8 31 37. f Ep. 23. p. 49. Ep. 69. p. 187. Ep. 75. p. 223. g Hist. Ecd. lib. 6. cap. 43. h Presbyteri Diaconi in Adrumâ—tina Consistentes Polycarpo Co-â—piscopo nostro absente ignorabant quid nobis in Commune placuissit c. Ep. 49. p. 91. i Ep. 43. k Ep. 59. l Ep. 59. p. 139. m H. E. lib. 7. cap. 11. n Cum sit a Christo una Ecclesia per totum Mundum in multa Membra divisa item Episcopatus unus Episcoporum multorum Concordi Numerositate Diffâ—sus ille post Dei traditionem post connexam ubique conjunctam Catholicae Ecclâ—siae Unitatuâ—m humanam conetur Ecclesiam facere per plurimas Civitates noves Apoâ—tolos suos mittat ut quaedam râ—câ—ntia institutionis suae fundamâ—nta constituat cumque jampridem per OMNES PROVINCIAS per URBES SINGULAS Ordinati sâ—nt Episcopi in aetate antiqui in â—ide integri in prâ—ssura probati in persecutione proscripti ille super eos 〈◊〉 alios pseudo-episcopos audâ—at Ep. 55. p. 112. o Quanquam sciam Frater Charissime Episcopos plurimos Ecclestis Dominicis in TOTO MUNDO divina dignatione praepâ—sitos c. Ep. 63. ab init p Divino Sacerdotio honorati in Claricis Ministeriis constituti non nist Altari Saâ—rificiiâ— de fervirâ— precibus atque Orationibus vacare debeant Ep. 1. P. 1. q Ut eum Clero nostro Dominus adjungeret desolatam per lapsum quorundam Presbyterii nostri copiâ Gloriosis Sacerdotibus adornarâ—t Ep. 40. p. 79. r Ep. 5. p. 11. s Ep. 59. p. 134. De Lapsis p. 128. t Ep. 15 16 17. susâ— u Ep. 61. p. 144 v 〈◊〉 plane ad 〈◊〉 Frater carissâ—me 〈◊〉 Authoâ—itate communi â—t etiam sâ— qui Presbyteri Contrâ— Altare unum atque diviâ—um Sacrificiâ— foris falsa Sacrilâ—gâ— offerre conati sinâ— cos quoque â—ac conditione suscipi cum revertuntâ—â— at COMMUNICENT LAICI Nec debere cos râ—vertentes eâ— apud nos Ordinationis Honoris arma retinere quibus contra nos Rebellaverunt Oportâ—t enim SACERDOTES qui Altari Sacrificiis deserviunt intâ—gros atque immaculatâ—s essâ— c. Ep. 72. p. 197. vv Christo sunt Ecclesia plebs Sacâ—rdoti adunata pastori suo Grex adhaerens Unde scire dâ—bes Episcopum in Ecclesiâ—m esse Ecclesia in Episcopo si qui cum Episcopo non sint in Ecclesia non esse Ep. 66. p. 168. x Quis namquâ— hic est superbiae tumor Quae arrogantia animi Quae mentis inflatio Ad cognitionem suam praepâ—sitos Sacerdotes vocare Ac nisâ— apud te purgati fucrimus sententia tua absoluti ecce jam sex annis nec fraternitas habuit Episcopum nec plâ—bs praepositum nec Grex
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
of their own Rank and Quality By consequence an Epistle in which had they understood it had the Principles of those Times allowed it they might have spoken their Minds very freely concerning the Power of Presbyters Never had Presbyters I am sure more Freedom or better Opportunity to have asserted their own Power and Vindicated Parity and Condem'd Prelatical Usurpations in an Epistle than they had on that Occasion for Fabianus Bishop of Rome was dead and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage was retired and so it was written by Presbyters who had no Bishop to Presbyters in the absence of their Bishop And yet in that Epistle they were so far from having any such Notions that they said expresly That both Themselves who wanted One and those of Carthage who wanted the Presence of One were only seemingly the Governours of those respective Churches and only kept the Flocks in stead of the respective Pastors the Bishops And â—urther telling what Pains they had been at to keep People from Apostatizing in the Day of Trial they account how they Treated those who had fallen particularly that they did separate them from the Flock indeed but so as not to be wanting in their Duty and Assistance to them They did what was proper for their Station They exhorted them to continue patiently in their Penances as being the most plausible Method for obtaining Indulgences from him who could give them That is without Controversie from the Bishop when he should be settled For so I read in an Epistle written at that same time by Celerinâ—s a Roman to Lucianus a Carthaginian and the 2Ist in Number among St. Cyprian's that when the Cause of Numeria and Candida two Female Lapsers was brought before the Presbytery of Rome the Presbytery commanded them to continue as they were i. e. in the State of Penitents till a Bishop should be Inthroned And now let any Man judge whether according to the Principles and Sentiments of the Presbyters of Rome St. Cyprian or his presuming Presbyters had taken too much upon them at Carthage But neither is this all yet for â— These Carthaginian Presbyters were also Condemned by the Roman Martyrs and Confessors who thâ— they were in Prison had learned the State of the Controversie from the Accounts St. Cyprian had sent to Rome two of them Moyses and Maximus being also Presbyters These Martyrs and Confessors wrote also to St. Cyprian and to the same purpose the Roman Clergy had done Their Epistle is the 3Ist in number In which they not only beg with a peculiar Earnestness That he being so Glorious a Bishop would pray for them They not only lay a singular stress upon his Prayers beyond the Prayers of others by reason of the Opinion they had of his Holy Virtues which I am apt to think such Men as they would not probably have done had they believed him to have been a Proud aspiring Prâ—late that is indeed a Limb of Antichrist as this Author would â—ain give him out to have been But also they heartily Congratulate his discharging so Laudibly his Episcopal Office and that even in his Retirement he had made it so much his Care to acquit himself that he had halted in no part of his Duty and particularly That he had suitably Censured and Râ—buked not only the Lapsed who little regarding the Greatness of their Guilt had in his Absence extorted the Churches Peace from his Presbyters but even these Presbyters for their profane Facility in giving that which was Holy to Dogs and casting Pearls before Swine without any Regard to the Gospel In short They Approve his whole Proceeding as having done nothing Unsuitable to his Character nothing Unbecoming either an Holy or an Humble Bishop Further yet 6. These same Carthaginian Presbyters resuming their former Boldness and Topping it over again with their Bishop were Excommunicated by him and his Sentence was Approved and Ratified by all Catholick Bishâ—ps in all Catholick Churches all the World over as shall be shewn you fully by and by And then 7. And lasty That in all this Matter St. Cyprian did nothing either Proudly or Presumptuously is evident from this That in his Time and long before his Time even from the Apostles Times it was not Lawful for Presbyters to Attempt any thing relating to the Church without the Bishop 〈◊〉 Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop's Allowance for 't is he to whom the Lord's People are committed and 't is he that must Account for their Souls is the 39th of the Canons called Apostolical And no doubt it was in force in St. Cyprian's time And this was no greater Power than was assigned him by the Apostolical Ignatius I cannot tell how many times Take these Testimonies for a Sample Let no Man do any thing that belongs to the Church without the Bishop He that hâ—noureth the Bishop is honoured of God but he that doth any thing in opposition to the Bishop serveth the Devil If any Man pretend to be wiser than the Bishop i. e. will have Things done against the Bishop's Will he is Corrupted Let us be careful not to resist the Bishop as we would be subject to God The Spirit hath spoken Do ye nothing without the Bishop 'T is necessary that you continue to do nothing without the Bishop And now let any of Common Sense determine Whether there was Ground or shadow of Ground for insinuating that St. Cyprian shewed too much Zeal in this Cause or attempted to stretch his Power a little too far indeed it had not been a little but very much nay monstrously too far had those of Parity been then the current Principles or was a little too high in this Matter But if there was no Ground to say so if it was contrary to all the then current Principles and to the common Sentiments of all Catholick Christians nay even to the Convictions of all Honest Orderly Dutiful and Conscientious Presbyters who then lived to say so If thus it was I say and 't is hard to prove any Matter of Fact more evidently than I have proved that it was thus then I think it follows by good Consequence not only that this Author was a little in the wrong to St. Cyprian when he said so but also that in St. Cyprian's time a Bishop had fairly a Negative over his Presbyters which was the Thing to be demonstrated And so I proceed to the next Thing proposed namely III. That all the other Church-Governours within his District Presbyters as well as others were in St. Cyprian's time subject to the Bishop's Authority and obnoxious to his Discipline I do'nt think you very sharp sighted if you have not seen this already Yet that I may give you all reasonable Satisfaction I shall insist a little further on it And I. This might appear sufficiently from this one Consideration thâ— no more could be produced for it That still in the Stile and Language of