Vindication of the Dissertations Concerning Episcopacy, Chapter 3 · Section 1
Sect. 1.
The Teſtimonies of Clemens Romanus, Biſhops and Deacons the onelyonly offices at the firſt. Corinth Metropolis of Achaia. What foreign, ſignifie. The Apoſtles care to prevent contentions about Epiſcopacy. Hegeſippus's teſtimony of the contentions at Corinth. Clement a Biſhop.
SOme things there are yet behind in their Appendix, wherein I diſcerne my ſelfe to be concern'd, in ſome directly and immediately, in others by remoter obligation, as when ſome of thoſe teſtimonies of Antiquity, which are in the Diſſertations manifeſted to be perfectly reconcileable with our pretenſions, and ſome of them evident confirmations of them, are yet by theſe Writers crudely taken up, and made uſe of, as Teſtimonies on their ſide, without ever taking notice of that which is ſaid in the Diſſertations to cleare the contrary.
Of the former ſort, wherein I am more immediately pointed at, there are foure things. Firſt, Concerning one teſtimony of St. Hierome. Secondly, concerning Ignatius his Epiſtles in generall, and the appeales that I make to h…s authori…, which they will not allow to have force with them. Thirdly, concerning one teſtimony cited by them out of St. Ambroſe on Epheſ. 4. and anſwered by me▪ but that anſwer diſliked and rejected by them. Fourthly▪ concerning the Chorepiſcopi. Of the ſecond ſort, are the teſtimonies out of Clemens Romanus, Polycarpe, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, eſpecially the two former of them.
I ſhall therefore briefly ſurvey every one of theſe, and I ſuppoſe I have pitcht on the moſt convenient Method (and that which will give the Reader the cleareſt view both of the judgement of Antiquity concerning Epiſcopacy in generall (to which their Appendix profeſſeth wholly to be deſigned) and more particularly of the truth of thoſe two propoſitions which have been accuſed as Paradoxes in me, but will now appeare not to be ſuch) by taking theſe teſtimonies, as they lie in the order of time, wherein the Authors lived, and then that of St. Hierome, which happens to be firſt mentioned by them, p. 102. will fall to be one of the laſt to which we ſhall make reply.
Firſt then for Clemens, P. 104.they thus begin, ſure we are that Clemens, who lived in the firſt century, in his famous Epiſtle to the Corinthians (an undoubted piece of antiquity) makes but two Orders of Miniſtery, Biſhops and Deacons. And having ſet downe the place which teſtifies this, Clem, ad Corin. p. 54,* foreign, and rendered it thus, Chriſt Ieſus ſent his Apoſtles through Countries and Cities, in which they preached and conſtituted the firſt fruits (approving them by the spirit) for Biſhops and Deacons to thoſe who ſhould afterwards believe. From hence they obſerve, p. 105. That Biſhops and Deacons were the onelyonly orders of Miniſt…ry in the firſt Primitive Church. And that the Apoſtles appointed but two Officers (that is Biſhops and Deacons) to bring men to believe, becauſe when he had reckon'd up three Orders appointed by God amongst, the Jewes, High-Prieſt, Prieſts, and Levites: coming to recite Orders appointed by the Apoſtles under the Gospell, …e doth mention onelyonly Biſhops and Deacons.
And here one would think were little for the Preſbyterians advantage, even no more than one of my Paradoxes would have afforded them, which, from this very teſtimony and ſome other, concluded that which was then ſo ſtrange for them to heare (yet now can be confeſt by them) that the Apoſtles at their firſt plantations contented themſelves with Biſhops and Deacons, one of each, or perhaps more of the latter in every City.
But when theſe men thus grant the concluſion from this place, which I inferr'd, I have yet no reaſon to boaſt of their liberality, becauſe I ſuppoſe it their meaning, that by Biſhops Clemen… meant Pre…byters, though this they do not ſo much as ſay in twice repeating of their concluſion.
And yet certainly it needed more than ſaying, proving by ſome evidence or argument, that foreign Biſhops in that place ſignifies any thing elſe but Biſhops. All that they offer toward a reaſon for this, muſt be contained in theſe words of theirs that follow in the former place.
The occaſion of that Epiſtle ſeemes to be a new ſedition raiſed by the Corinthians againſt their Presbyters, p. 57. 58. Clemens to remove their preſent ſedition tells them how God hath alwayes appointed ſeverall orders in his Church, which muſt not be confounded; in the Jewiſh Church he appointed High-Prieſt, Prieſts and Levites, And then tells them for the time of the Gospell that Chriſt Jeſus ſent his Apoſtles as before, citing the words of Clement already ſet down.
But certainly this doth not prove Biſhops in that Epiſtle to be no more than Presbyters, but may as fitly be argumentative for me, that foreign Elders in that Epiſtle ſignifie Biſhops. The onelyonly imaginable medium of proofe, which can be uſefull for their turne, I ſhall ſuppoſe to be this, that Corinth was but one City, and therefore foreign Elders at, and of Corinth, muſt needs be Preſb…ters, becauſe according to our opinion there were not more Biſhops in one City.
But to this I anſwer, 1. That what Clemens ſaith in the teſtimony now produced, he ſpeakes not of Corinth peculiarly, but of the Cities, and Regions in generall, which the Apoſtles converted, and of them in the plurall number, foreign, through Regions and Cities, and then in thoſe many Cities, there may well be many Biſhops, and yet certainly no more than one in one City.
Secondly, that this Epiſtle of Clemens to the Corinthians was not to the Chriſtians of that one City, but to the whole Province of Achaia, of which Corinth was the Metropolis, and wherein the Proconſull of Achaia reſided, and kept his Courts, Act. 18. 12. 15. So the Title of the Epiſtle inclines, being inſcribed to the Church foreign, which denotes the whole Province, then called foreign, as when in Polycarps Epiſtle, the Church foreign] is not onelyonly that of the City Philippi, but of the Province belonging to it, and in the other part of the title of this Epiſtle, foreign, the Church of God dwelling about Rome,] in the Church of Rome, and all that belonged to that Metropolis, called by Ignatius foreign, the place of the Region of the Romans, i. e. the City, and the whole Region about it;*l. 4. c. 23. And ſo when Euſebius mentions Dionyſius the famous Biſhop of Corinth, he calls him Biſhop foreign, of the Province of, or about Corinth.
And that this is the truth of it, and no conjecture of mine may appeare by one character in the Epiſtle; He tells them that they had formerly received Epistles from St. Paul. This directs to reſolve that theſe to whom this Epiſtle was addreſt, were the ſame to whom St. Paul's were formerly ſent, And it is evident that thoſe were the Saints or Chriſtians in all Achaia, 2 Cor. 1. 1. And the ſame is doubtleſſe implied by the phraſe in every place, 1 Cor. 1. 2. not in every place ſimply of the World (for it was no Catholick Epiſtle, but a particular admonition for particular faults, inceſt, &c.) but in that whole Porvince or Region of Achaia. So that which Apollos is ſaid to have done among them (Apollos hath watered) 1 Cor. 3. 6. appeares by the ſtory Act. 18. 27. to have belonged to all Achaia. And ſo what the Apoſtle writes to them of ſending their offertory to Judaea, 1 Cor. 6. 1. 2 Cor. 8. and 9. doth appeare by Rom. 15. 26. to appertaine to all Achaia, Macedonia, ſaith he, and Achaia have pleaſed to make a contribution, and 2 Cor. 9. 2. I know your forwardneſſe, that Achaia hath been ready above a yeare agoe. Where the [foreign you] and [Achaia] muſt needs be of the ſame latitude, and ſo againe it is c. 11. 9. compared with v. 18. And ſo thoſe of St. Paul, and conſequently this of Clement was not to the City of Corinth alone, but to all the Churches of Achaia, and if among them there were more Biſhops than one, there will certainly be no newes in that, and if thoſe Biſhops (according both to the nature of the word, and the uſe of it in thoſe dayes before and after Clement) were ſtyled ſometimes foreign, ſometimes foreign alſo, then all is very agreeable to all that we contend for, that there was one Biſhop, not a College of Presbyters in Clements dayes in every City.
And this is directly the importance of Clements words, as they lie in the Epiſtle, foreign, ſaith he, foreign, Chriſt was ſent out from God, and the Apoſtles from Chriſt (As my Father ſent me, ſo ſend I you] And then to ſhew that the Biſhops were in the ſame manner ſent, i. e. commiſſionated by them, he addes, that they, i. e. the Apoſtles foreign foreign went out Preaching, foreign, &c. Therefore Preaching through Regions and Cities, they conſtituted their firſt fruits—for Biſhops and Deacons, Cities and Regions in the Plurall, and Biſhops and Deacons proportionable thereto.
And when he addes that they were thus made of their firſt fruits, i. e. of thoſe that were firſt converted by them, and to this end, that they might be officers of thoſe which ſhould after believe (ſuppoſing that there were not many now that did ſo) this is directly a deſcription of thoſe times, of which Epiphanius ſpeakes, ſaying, that when the Gospell began to be Preacht, there was yet no neede of Presbyters, but Biſhops and Deacons ſerved the turne.
And accordingly Deacons in thoſe dayes were immediately made Biſhops, as is ſufficiently knowne of Clement the Writer of this Epiſtle, who was St. Peters Deacon and Biſhop after him, as is cleared in Diſſert 5. c. 1. Sect. 11. And ſo much for that firſt teſtimony.
One thing onelyonly more from hence they are deſirous to conclude, that in the firſt and pureſt times the cuſtome was to chooſe Biſhops in Villages, as well as in great Cities, grounded upon this, that here the Apoſtles are ſaid to have appointed Biſhops foreign, as well as foreign.
But there is no ground of this concluſion in this teſtimony, For 1. here is no mention of villages, foreign is not Greek for them, but foreign, and 'tis the former, not the latter which here we finde. It is evident what is meant by foreign, when it is joyned with foreign Cities, viz. Provinces, which have each of them many Cities in them, and when it is joyned with foreign Villages, it ſitly denotes Regions, in which there are many Villages.
So ſaith*Geo. lib. 13. Strabo of Aſia, foreign, the Romans made that Region a Province, and ſo in the Eccleſiaſtical writings foreign is a Province made up of many Cities, each of which had a Biſhop over them, as when in the *Can. 2.Councel in Trullo. foreign, Cyprian is ſaid to be Archbiſhop of the Region of the Africanes, Region there ſignifying the whole Province under that Metropolitane, and ſo*Ep. 52. Cyprian himſelfe makes it his obſervation, Jampridem per omnes provincias & ſingulas urbes inſtituti ſunt Epiſcopi. Antiently through all the Provinces and each of the Cities, Biſhops were inſtituted. Where the Biſhops in the ſeveral Provinces, as thoſe differ from the Biſhops in each City, are undoubtedly Archbiſhops.
And if that place ſo very agreeable to this of Clemens may be allowed, to give us the meaning of it, we ſee what it will be, and how diſtant from theſe mens concluſion that the Apoſtles inſtituted Biſhops in every City, and in each Region or Province, and in the Metropolis or chiefe City of it, a Metropolitane or Archbiſhop.
But then 2. if foreign ſhould ſignifie, as they would have it, a company of villages or little townes lying neer together, ſo as to be here uſed in oppoſition to the Cities, yet could it not be from hence concluded, that the Apoſtles conſtituted Biſhops in thoſe villages. The words are, they preached through regions and Cities, and conſtituted their firſt fruits (earlyeſt converts) into Biſhops and Deacons, which will be perfectly true, though all the Biſhops and Deacons conſtituted by them, had their fixt ſeats of reſidence in the Cities; For that they conſtituted Biſhops in the Regions, is not here affirmed.
Much more might be ſaid in this matter, to ſhew that the utmoſt conceſſions that the adverſaries could demand from hence, would no way hinder or diſadvantage our pretenſions, but onelyonly give the Chorepiſcopi a greater Antiquitie in the Church, than either they or we have reaſon to thinke they had, of which whole matter the reader may ſee a full diſcourſe, Diſſert. 3. c. 8. Sect. 25. &c. and of it ſomewhat we ſhall anon have occaſion to repete from thence.
The ſecond Testimony of Clemens is ſet down by them in theſe words, That the Apoſtles knowing by Jeſus Christ,Pag. 57. that there would a contention ariſe, foreign about the name of Biſhop, & being indued with perfect foreknowledg they appointed the aforeſaid (that is, the aforeſaid orders of Biſhops and Deacons) &c. Here they require two things to be noted 1. that by name is not meant the bare name of Biſhop, but the honour and dignity, as it is taken, Phil. 2. 9. Epheſ. 1. 21. Heb. 1. 4. Rev. 11. ſo that foreign, The controverſie among the Corinthians was not about the name, but dignity of Epiſcopacy; for it was about the depoſition of their godly Presbyters, pag. 57. 58. 2. That the onelyonly remedy appointed by the Apoſtles for the cure of all contentions ariſing about Epiſcopacy, is, by committing the care of the Church to Biſhops and Deacons: Afterwards the Church found out another way, by ſetting up one Biſhop over another; But Clemens tells us, that the Apoſtles indued with perfect foreknowledge of things ordained only Biſhops and Deacons for a remedy of Schiſmes.
To this they adde (to ſuperſede farther citations our of this Epiſtle) It would be too long to recite all that is ſaid in this Epiſtle for the juſtification of our propoſition, let the Reader peruſe pag. 57. 62. 69. 72. and take notice that thoſe which are called Biſhops in one place are called Presbyters in another, and that they are foreign throughout the whole Epiſtle.
What this whole Epiſtle will yeild toward the proof of their propoſition, which is, [That after Chriſts Aſcenſion the Church of God for a certaine space of time, was governed by a Common Councel of Presbyters without Biſhops] I thinke it reaſonable for any that hath not read it, to conjecture by theſe two teſtimonies, which theſe, who aſſert the propoſition, and here undertake to prove it, have thought fit to cull out of it, having withall nothing more to collect for their turne from the reſt of the Epiſtle, particularly from the comparing thoſe foure pages, 57. 62. 72. but only this, that they which are called Biſhops in one place, are called foreign Elders in another.
Now this laſt they know is the very thing that I contend (as from the Scripture, ſo) from this and other antient writings, that foreign and foreign, [Biſhop and Elder] are words of the ſame importance, all the queſtion is, whether at the firſt both imported Biſhops or both Preſbyters in our moderne notion. That there is no one circumſtance ſo much as offered by them to conſideration, which may incline it their way, is evident by their owne words, neither of their two notes pretending to it, only their concluſion affirming, that they are foreign, words of the ſame importance. The whole matter therefore will ſtill divolve to this one Quaere, whether, when Clement ſaith of the Apoſtles that they constituted none but Biſhops and Deacons, by Biſhops a College of Preſbyters in every City be to be underſtood, or rather one Biſhop, with his Deacon or Deacons in every City.
For the clearing of this one difficulty (for this being evinced, all that their two notes affirme, is directly on our ſide againſt them) I ſhall here intirely ſet downe the whole place laſt produced, of which they have left out one halfe. It is thus, foreign. Our Apoſtles knew by our Lord Jeſus Chriſt (that muſt be by revelation from him) that there would contention ariſe upon the name or dignity of Epiſcopacie (i. e. about the authority of Biſhops in the Church, ſome oppoſing it, and caſting them out of their Offices, as here in the Church of the Corinthians, and through all Achaia was actually come to paſſe at this time, and occaſioned this Epiſtle to them) For which cauſe therefore the Apoſtles having received perfect foreknwoledge (that there would be ſuch contentions on this occaſion) did (for the preventing of them) conſtitute the forementioned (Biſhops and Deacons of thoſe which ſhould come in to the Faith in their new plantations) and after them (ſo foreign ſignifies in Barnabas's Epiſtle, Sect. 10. foreign the people that ſhould be after, and foreign, Act. 13. 42. that which ſhould follow the next after) gave a Series or Catalogue, or manner of ſucceſſion (i. e. ſet downe a note of them which in each Church ſhould ſucceed the preſent Incumbent) that when they dyed, other approved men might ſucceede to their office or miniſtery.
What can be more manifeſt, than that the dignity, which the Apoſtles conferred on the Biſhops in each City and Province, which in the former Teſtimony hath been cleared to belong to ſingle Biſhops, not to any College of Preſbyters, was by them foreſeen, that it would be matter of Contention, occaſion of Sedition in the Church: for the prevention of which, they uſed the probableſt meanes imaginable, named ſucceſſors to the preſent Biſhops in every Church, who ſhould ſupply the vacant places, as ſoon as they fell, and ſo prevent ſuing and contending for them, and were by the ſpeciall spirit of God directed, who thoſe ſucceſſors ſhould be; ſo that the oppoſing their ſucceſſion, or caſting them out afterwards, muſt be a great ſin, even of reſiſting the spirit of God, who had deſigned them to this inheritance. Which, next to Chriſt's bearing them in his right hand, Rev. 1. 20. is the greateſt character of dignity, and evidence of Chriſt's approving of the Order, and care of continuing it, as the originall of union (not diviſion) in the Church.
There is not by theſe men one word of objection offered againſt this concluſion, thus formerly deduced in the Diſſertations, and therefore I need adde no more for the vindicating this teſtimony, yet will it not be amiſſe here to interpoſe the words of Hegeſippus, one that was preſent at the time of that ſedition, and gives an account of it in*L. 4. c. 2…. Euſebius, foreign, ſaith he, foreign, The Church of the Corinthians continued in the right, untill Primus was Biſhop of Corinth. Which is a teſtimonie as antient as that of Clement, and tells us what Biſhops they were which Clement ſpeakes of, ſuch as Primus was at Corinth, i. e. one ſingular Governour in a City.
The ſame will be yet more manifeſt, if we conſider what by all Authors is affirmed of Clemens himſelfe, the writer, at the time of writing this Epiſtle, that having been Saint Paul's fellow-labourer, Phil. 4. 3. Saint Peter's Deacon (Ignat. in Ep. ad Trall.) he was no Biſhop of Rome, by the joynt ſuffrage of Irenaeus and all the Antients, even of Saint Jerome himſelfe in his Catalogue, and by him ſtyled an Apoſtolical perſon on Iſa. 52. a companion of the Apoſtles (in Interp. Com. Orig. in Rom.) and by Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom. lib. 4. an Apoſtle in the ſenſe that Theodoret ſaith, thoſe whom in his time they called Biſhops, had been at firſt called Apoſtles.
Accordingly of him, ſaith Irenaeus in his Catalogue of the ſucceſſive Governors of the Church, foreign, in the third place from the Apoſtles Clemens came to the Biſhoprick, Which how it is eaſily to be accorded with thoſe who truly make him Peters immediate ſucceſſor, ſee Diſſert. 5. c. 1. Sect. 6. &c.
Other teſtimonies there are producible from this Epiſtle of Clement, which are all to the ſame purpoſe with the former; As when he findes an image of the Eccleſiaſticall ſtate under Biſhops and Deacons, in the prophecie of Iſaiah, cap. 60. 17. where in the Greek tranſlation, then in uſe, he had read foreign, I will conſtitute their Biſhops in righteouſneſſe, and their Deacons in faithfulneſſe, ſpeaking of the Judges and their Miniſters and officers in every City.
And ſo againe when he exhorts them to give due honour to the Elders among them, talkes of their ſedition againſt their Elders, and caſting them out of their Epiſcopacy, in one place (foreign) and removing them from that honoured office (foreign) in another, and the like; All of the ſame importance, and to be interpreted by the former.