Vindication of the Dissertations Concerning Episcopacy, Chapter 1 · Section 8 – Section 9
Section VIII.
Of the ſingularity of each Angel. The objections from the uſe of the plurall number.
THeſe conſiderations being thus laid as their foundation (and I ſuppoſe being already removed from ſuperſeding or hindring our ſuperſtructure) The next part of their method is, having mentioned our objection from the ſingularity of each Angel's perſon, to whom Christ's meſſage or Epistle is ſent, and the concluſion of an high Prelatiſt from hence, that theſe Angels are not onelyonly Biſhops but Archbiſhops, to apply ſolid and every way ſufficient anſwers to this Objection.
2. In this propoſall of our Objection, I ſhall not need to inquire who this high Prelatiſt is; The former intimations and directions have perſwaded me that I am lookt on as this Objector, though it be ſufficiently knowne that the moſt Reverend Archbiſhop of Armagh, Lord Primate of Ireland, hath many yeares ſince deduced this concluſion in every part from this Text, and might, if they had pleaſed, have ſecured me from the opinion either of novelty, or ſingularity in the Aſſertion.
3. But I ſhall moſt willingly aſſume the burthen, and proceed to the view of the ſolid and every way ſufficient anſwers, which are ſaid to be given to this Objection, which though they be, it ſeemes to be fetcht out of Smectymnuus, &c. yet it happens well, that we ſhall (without need of conſulting thoſe larger volumes) find them here with more eaſe, reduced to two heads, One, that the word Angel ſignifies not a ſingular perſon, the ſecond, that if it did, it will not at all advantage the Epiſcopal cauſe.
4. Theſe two, I confeſſe, if either of them be ſolidly proved, will utterly drive us from our hold: The onelyonly queſtion at preſent is, whether in either part the proofes be ſolid, and of this we muſt now inquire, and firſt of the former of them.
5. This they thus propoſe, That the word Angel is not to be taken foreign but foreign, not individually, but collectively, for all the Paſtors and Miniſters of the respective Churches.
6. But before their proofes for ſuch an aſſertion (that the Angel of ſuch a Church, which is certainly an individual, as much as the Biſhop of ſuch a Dioceſe, is not yet to be taken individually) they firſt adde their confeſſion that this anſwer is called a poore ſhift, a vaine conceipt, &c. but promiſe ſuch reaſons for the juſtification of it, which cannot be anſwered.
7. To the view of theſe unanſwerable Reaſons therefore we ſhall now haſten; And the firſt reaſon is, becauſe our Saviour ſpeakes to the Angel often in the plural number, Rev. 2. 21. But unto you I ſay, and the reſt of Thyatira, and ſo Rev. 2. 10. and 13. By which, ſay they, it is evident, that by the word Angel is not meant one ſingular perſon, but the collective body of Rulers.
8. To this firſt reaſon I ſhall anſwer, by ſeparating that one text of Thyatira from the other two, and all that are of the ſame nature with them, and ſpeake firſt of theſe two, and remind them 1. that in an Epiſtl… unqueſtionably addreſt to a particular perſon, others under his care and charge may be, and are occaſionally mentioned, ſo in that to Titus, Paul…s owne Sonne, i. e. under the particular character of the beloved perſon converted by him; in the concluſion we finde theſe words, Grace be with you all, i. e. not with him as he muſt ſignifie a whole Presbyterie, but all the ſincere lovers of Chriſt, and Saint Paul, they that love us in the faith, in the former part of the verſe.
9. Secondly, that though the one Angel of the Church be the perſon to whom each part of the Epiſtle is addreſt, yet in it are ſet downe the ſins and fate of the whole Church,, i. e. of all the believers in it; Thus when the people of Iſrael or Judah were fallen into foule ſins and provocations againſt God, it was ordinary for God to ſend a Prophet to the King of either of them, and admoniſh him what reformations were to be wrought, and what judgements were a comming in caſe of neglect. In which kind of meſſages of the Prophet delivered to the King, 'tis certaine that the whole people were concerned, and ſo without queſtion was it here, Rev. 2. 10. the Devill ſhall caſt ſome of you, i. e. ſome Members of that Church, into priſon, &c. and ſo ver. 13. among you, i. e. among you of that Church or City.
10. And indeed if each of thoſe Churches had been governed by a Conſiſtory of co-equal Preſbyters, and thoſe (as is pretended by our adverſaries) ſignified by the Angel, yet there would be as little reaſon to doubt, but the ſins of the people, as well as the Clergy were here reprehended by Christ, and the judgement threatned to one as well as to the other, And to this can be no reaſon to inferre the Angel to be no ſingular perſon, the Church ruled by one, making up a multitude, as well as if it were ruled by a Presbytery.
11. As for the place, cap. 2. 24. concerning Thyatira, that hath a different appearance, For the Greek copie ordinarily reading it [foreign, But I ſay unto you (in the plural and to the reſt which are in Thyatira] the [you] in the plural, is by the Objectors thought neceſſarily to belong to the Angel of that City, as [the reſt] to the community of the people. To this place therefore we have formerly anſwered, that the reading in the Antient Manuſcripts, particularly in that belonging to the Kings Library at Saint James's, leaves out the [foreign, and] and reads thus, foreign, But to you I ſay the reſt which are in Thyatira] And this takes away all force from the objection, for the former part of the Epiſtle belonging to the Angel, who permitted Jezabel, and to them that committed fornication with her, the [But] in the front ſeparates the [foreign, you the reſt] from the Angel, and thoſe other formerly ſpoken to, and therefore the foreign, you, cannot poſſibly be the Angel, wherein all the ſtrength of the Objection conſiſts.
12. But this Anſwer, though taken notice of, is diſliked: For, ſay they, he that ſhall view the Antecedent and Conſequent, and conſider that ver. 23. it is ſaid, I will give to every one of you, &c. and then followes, but I ſay unto you, and then in the concluſion of the verſe, I will put upon you no other burthen, will confeſſe that the old copies are better than that which is ſaid to be Tecla's Manuſcript.
13. And here I ſhall deſire the Reader to beare me company in obeying their directions, and obſerve what the Antecedents and Conſequents can afford to the prejudice of that Antient copy. 'Tis moſt true, that v. 23. we read, I will give to every one of you, and that then it followes v. 24. But I ſay unto you, and in the concluſion of the verſe, I will put upon you— But I demand, what will they conclude from hence? That by the word [you] in all theſe places the ſame perſons are to be underſtood, and that thoſe perſons are the interpretation of the Angel v. 18? Theſe two things they muſt conclude, or elſe they will faile in their deſigne, which is to ſhew that by the word Angel the collective body of Rulers is meant. But the firſt of theſe is evidently falſe, whatſoever reading be retained, for beſides that the [foreign, But] doth clearly ſeparate the ſecond [you] from the firſt, and makes them diſtinct perſons, The very matter of the ſpeeches will convince it: For in the 23. v. the [you] are thoſe that were corrupted by Iezabel v. 20. 22. who are now to be exemplarily puniſht and destroyed, I will kill her (i. e. Iezebels) children with death (as alſo thoſe that had committed Fornication with her v. 22.) and all the Churches ſhall know that I am the ſearcher of hearts, and I will give to every of you according to your workes; But the ſecond [you] and ſo alſo the third, are the quite contrary to theſe, As many as have not this Doctrine, and who have not knowne theſe depths of Satan, and conſequently, who are not to be puniſhed, nor ſo much as admoniſhed, but onelyonly confirmed in their preſent practice, to hold faſt what they have already.
14. So contrary is it to all appearance of truth, that the Antecedent and Conſequent ſhould favour their pretenſion.
15. This matter is ſo evident (the contrary conditions and fates of the [you] in v. 23 and the [you] in v. 14.) that if the ordinary reading were to be retained [foreign] and that rendred [to you and the reſt in Thyat…ra] ſo as to difference [you] and [the reſt] another Antecedent to the Relative [you] muſt neceſſarily be ſought out, and then that can be no other but the Churches incidentally mentioned v. 23. who had not been charged for this crime. For as for the Angel v. 18. if hee were not ſo remote (6. verſes off) and if the ſingular number could be the Antecedent to the plurall [foreign, you] (as it cannot) yet ſtill he is charged for ſuffering the Woman Jezabel, and ſo is numbred among the gulity perſons, that are to repent or be puniſht, and not to have no other burthen laid on them, ſave only to hold faſt what they have, as is ſaid of the ſecond [foreign you] v. 24.
16. But the truth is, that of making the Churches the Relative is ſo inconvenient (and yet no other way imaginable to reconcile the ordinary reading) and the whole ſenſe is ſo much more cleare and current in the reading of the King's M S. [But to you the reſt in Thyatira (thoſe that had not beene guilty of the misbehaviours cenſured, and threatned in the former Verſes) that I profeſſe I cannot diſcerne any appearance of reaſon to queſion the truth of it, much leſſe to conceive that the ordinary copies are better, which yet however they read it, muſt oppoſe the [foreign you] to thoſe before mentioned, and ſo cannot apply it with any appearance of probability to the Angel, or conſequently pre-judge ours, or confirme their pretenſions.
Section IX.
Of the Elders at Epheſus Act. 20.
A Second reaſon to prove the Angel to be a collective body, is this, becauſe it is certaine that the Church of Epheſus was a collective body▪ and that there were many Presbyters to whom St. Paul, at his finall departure from them, committed the charge of that Church. And theſe Presbyters are called Biſhops, and were all of them Stars of the ſame magnitude, and Angels of the ſame order without a difference or diſtinction.
2. But this is a way of proving a thing which is denyed, by another which they know is equally denyed by him, againſt whom they diſpute, and therefore that argument can be of no force with us.
3. 'Tis moſt true indeed, what they begin with, that the Church of Epheſus was a collective body, for ſo 'tis certaine every Church is, whether governed by one or more Rulers; But the Church is not the Angel, any more than the candleſtickes are the Stars, but punctually diſtinguiſhed from them Rev. 1. 20. But this I ſuppoſe was a miſtake haſtily fallen from them, and I ſhall not purſue it any farther.
4. Their argument, I conceive, depends upon the plurality of Elders [foreign] which were at Epheſus Act. 20. when Paul takes his leave of them, and calls them Biſhops. But to this they know I have anſwered clearly, that as in other places of Scripture, ſo in that, the word foreign Elders, being all one with foreign, Biſhops, denote (not the many Preſbyters of the one City of Epheſus, but) the many Biſhops of that and other Cities of Aſia, which at that time by S. Paul's ſummons ſent to Epheſus, the chiefe Metropolis of Aſia, were called and met together at Miletus.
5. To this purpoſe*L. 3. c. 14. Irenaeus is a witneſſe beyond exception, who ſpeaking of theſe Elders or Biſhops, addes, ab Epheſo & proximis civitatibus convocatos eſſe, that they were aſſembled from Epheſus and the next Cities, in which as the faith was planted, as well as in Epheſus (even in all Aſia) ſo there is no reaſon to doubt but there were Biſhops in them, as well as in Epheſus (ſeven ſuch Churches we know are here mentioned in the Revelation) and that Paul was as carefull to take his leave of them (as many as could conveniently come to Miletus in his haſty progreſſe) as of the Biſhop of Epheſus hee is juſtly deemed to have been.
6. Other arguments and authorities I need not here accumulate for this notion of Elders Act. 20. becauſe here is no appearance of reaſon offered to prove their, or impugne our Aſſertion. This perhaps will be afterward attempted, and then I ſhall, as occaſion requires, farther enlarge: In the meane it ſufficeth that it yet no way appeares, that Epheſus was governed by many Presbyters, and not by one Biſhop, and therefore this ſecond offer of reaſon is as deficient as the firſt, to prove the Angel of that Church to have been a collective body.