The Fundamentals of the Hierarchy Examined and Disproved, Treatise · Part 2 · Section 10

The Fundamentals of the Hierarchy Examined and Disproved · Treatise · Part 2 · Section 10

p. 207Section X.

Other Observations and Arguments eversive of Diocesan Prelacy.

AND now in the next place, I would gladly learn how they will describe, or whereon they can found their Romish, or, which is all one, their Hierarchick Diocesan Bishop. For as Augustine p. 208aaDe civitate Dei. Lib. 19. Cap. 19. Exponere voluit quid sit Episcōpatus: quia nomen est operis non honoris &c.well observes, it is a name of Labour and Travel, not of Honour and Dignity: and indeed, it imports only Watchfullness, Labour and Care as its most native and proper Signification; and on this account, only the King gets the name of Bishop in Hesychius bbAd vocem.as he gets the name of Pastor in Homer ccIliad. ….. And Hesychius gives it no less to every Watchman. Thus the word Bishop denotes a vigilant Watchman in Suidas ddAd vocem.where he tells us that some bearing this Name were sent by the Athenians to observe the Affairs of their subject Cities who were called Watchmen. So is the same word understood to denote only Care and Labour by Jullius Pollux eeLib. 3. Cap. 21.whereas, on the other hand, the word Presbyter when taken for a Function or Office, natively imports Rule and Honour ffSuidas ad vocem, & Hesychius ad vocem.. A Presbyter (acknowledges even Saravia ggSaravia de diversis gradibus. Cap. 9.) is a Name of Honour, and was given to the more honourable, and to the Magistrats among the Jews in the Old Testament, and was thence transferred to signifie the Governours of the Churches of Christ in the New Testament, but they are called Bishops from their watchfull Care which is a Name of Work and Labour. The name Presbyter (saith Dr. StillingfleethhIren. Pages 285, and 286.), as the Hebrew ZAKEN tho' it originally import Age, yet by way of connotation it hath been looked on as a Name both of Dignity and Power among the Jews, in the times of the Apostles, it is most evident that the Name foreign imported not only Dignity but Power; the Presbyters among the Jews having Power both of Judging and Teaching given them by their Semicha or Ordination. Now under the Gospel the Apostles retaining the Name, and the manner of Ordination, but not conferring that judiciary Power by it, which was in use among the Jews, to shew the Difference between the Law and the Gospel, it was requisite some other Name should be given to the Governours of the Church, which should qualifie the importance of the word Presbyters to a sense proper to a Gospel state; which was the Original of giving the Name foreign to the Governours of the Church under the Gospel; a Name importing Duty more than Honour, and not a title above Presbyter, but rather used by way of Diminution and Qualification of the Power imply'd in the name of Presbyter &c. The Hierarchicks therefore should act much more rationally if they turn'd the Tables, and gave the name of Presbyter to their Diocesan, and that of the Bishop to their inferiour Curats, who usually do most of the Pastoral Work. In the p. 209mean while it's sure from what we just now learned out of these Authors that during sounder Antiquity, before men equally abused Names and Things, a Bishop could never be either ane Order or Degree or any thing else above▪ a Prsbyter.

But from Names if we pass to things, and look into Scripture and sounder Antiquity, we shall find the ancient Bishop so different from the present Diocesan, that the very Idea's and notions of the two are diametrically opposite one to another. The Apostles themselves Acts 6. 2, 4. following the Commandment of their Master, found it their Duty so assiduously to labour in Preaching and Prayer that they thought it unreasonable to be diverted even by the Distribution of the Collections, and Care of the Poor, which otherwayes was a Work both lawfull and pious. And to Timothy, who, if we believe the Hierarchicks, was ane Arch-Bishop of a vast Diocess, it's injoyn'd as his proper Task to Preach the Word, to be instant in season and out of season, to reprove, to rebuke, exhort with all Long-suffering and Doctrine. I need not here multiply Texts; read and read over again the whole New Testament, and you shall find that the Exercise of Prayer, Dispensing the Word and Sacraments was the main Duty and perpetual Imployment of every Pastor or Minister of Christ. Look, on the other hand, to the bulk of the Hierarchick Lord-Bishops, they hauehave a quite different Work and Exercice, and if any of 'em happen to spend some time in the Ministerial Duties how are they commonly gaz'd on and depredicated as Men of extraordinary Condescension, superlatively stuping to a piece of Service far below the Episcopal Grandeur and unusual to the Order? Are they not then quite another thing than the Apostolick and Scripturall Bishops?

This Apostolick Example the Conscientious Primitive Bishops or Pastors clossly follow'd; not so much as once dreaming that any who was ordain'd a Minister of the Gospell, and intrusted with a Flock, might on whatsoever pretext neglect to exercise himself perpetually in Prayer and Dispensing the Word and Sacraments. This they judg'd his constant Imployment, and this was the Practice of all the sincere Bishops even after the Distinction of Degrees was introduc'd, as appears in the weekly and sometimes the dayly Homilies and Lectures of Chrysostome and Augustine which are yet extant. And it's already observed how Hilary makes the Bishop a sedulous Dispenser of the Words of suture p. 210Life. And indeed all the Hierarchick Grandeur and Domination whereby a Bishop was intirely Metamorphosed into a quite other thing than what he had once been, could never notwithstanding obliterate and blot out of thinking Mens Minds the true Scriptural Notion and Idea thereof. The Episcopal Dignity consists in Teaching (saith Balsamon iiIn Can. Apost. 58. foreign.). And the fourth Council of Carthage decrees that a Bishop shall not be imployed in caring for his houshold Affairs, but shall wholly occupy himself in Reading and Praying, aud Preaching the Word kkCaranza summa Con. folio 118. Can. 20..

§. 12. 'Twere endless to alledge all that may be produc'd to this purpose; neither could any Man who ever seriously read the Bible have any other Notion of a true Bishop than what is common to every Pastor of a Congregation; seeing the Apostle's Description of a Bishop 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. agrees equally to all of them. And here it's observable, that still where Bishops are spoken of in Scripture, not only is the Work and Office which is injoin'd them, that of Teaching and Feeding, but also the Name is correlative to the Flock, and not to a Company of Clergy-men, as Acts 20. 28. Take heed to your selves, and to all the Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops foreign to Feed the Church of God. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Feed the Flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof or Bishoping it foreign; and accordingly, as we have oftner than once demonstrated, over every particular Congregation there was a Bishop.

This Assertion may be strongly confirmed from the undoubted Practice of the Church in the fourth Century, even when she was fall'n into no small Declension from the Primitive Purity. For the Council of Sardica DecreesllCan. 6. foreign. that a Bishop may not be placed in a Village or small Town where one Presbyter may suffice. Dr. Maurice mmPage 67.says that this Canon is justified by the Arrians their great multiplication of Bishops to strengthen their Party. But the Council it self assigns a quite different Ground that moved them to make this Decree, viz. that the Name and Authority of a Bishop fall not into Contempt. Where we see the Design of abolishing the Primitive and Apostolick Custome of giving a Bishop indifferently to every Congregation, whether in City or in Countrey, p. 211was the Introduction of a secular Pomp and Grandeur into the Church, which finally resolv'd into a Papal Slavery. However, this Sardican Canon had not so good effect, but that, about twenty years after, a new Sanction thereto was found needfull: for the Council of Laodicea nnCan. 56.foreign &c.Decrees that it shall not be lawfull to place Bishops in little Villages or Countrey Places, but only Visitors, and that the Bishops who were already placed in these little Villages and Countrey Places, should for the future do nothing without the knowledge of the Bishop of the City.

Mark, how a pace the mild and fraternal Church Regimen is turn'd into a Worldly Domination and Dignity to pave the way for a papal Tyranny. These rural Bishops or Countrey-parish Pastors (for they can be call'd nothing else) whom Dr. Beverige ooOn the 56 or 57 Canon of Laodicea. Ergo ante hoc foreign etiam revera Episcopi constituti sunt.acknowledges for real and true Bishops, were also assaulted, and the subjecting and inslaving of them to the Prelates and Clergy in the greater Cities, design'd by other Councils as that of Ancyrum ppCan. 13., and of Neocesaria qqCan. 14., and of Antioch rrCan. 10., there they are called Chorepiscopi i. e. Countrey Bishops. And it has been disputed if these were real & true Bishops. But the same Dr. Beverige not only yeelds, but at large pleads for the AffirmativessOn the 13 Canon of the Council of Ancyrum. Quibus etiam conficere non dubit amus veteros Chorepiscopos,—revera Episcopos fuisse—Enimvero cum Episcopi in Civitatibus solum antiquitus ordinati fuerint &c.. He pretends in the mean while that anciently Bishops were ordained in Cities only, many whereof had according to the model of the Empire, such ample Territories that 'twas impossible for the Bishop of the City his alone to visit and sufficiently to guide them, and so it seem'd needfull for such Bishops to have, according to the amplitude of their Bishopricks, one or two Coajutors in some Region without the City, who might disburden them of some parts of the Episcopal Function, which could not be done but by some consecrated Bishops. Hence 'twas that some of these great Bishops Ordain'd, in some part of their large Provinces, these Bishops, but with this provision, that these without their leave should do nothing of moment, seeing these Regions also belonged to the Care of the City Bishop, which we learn, (continues he) from the tenth Canon of the Council of Antioch, where it's expresly Decreed, that no Country Bishop Ordain p. 212Presbyter or Deacon without the Bishop of the City, to which, he and his Region is subject. But indeed there's no such thing, to be learn'd from that Canon, it only saysttforeign. that the Chorepiscopus and his Region was subject to the City (as they really were in a Civil Sense) not to the Bishop of the City: and tho they had said so it's no proof of his Conclusion, seeing they usually pretended Antiquity for the greatest Innovations. How far either in, or nigh to the Time of the Apostles the Church was from giving to the Bishop such a Princely Dignity as he pretends, or from allowing him to do the Work proper to himself by substitute Vassals, none acquainted with what remains of these Ancient times can be ignorant, and is already oftner then once evinc'd. And now I'm sorry to find a Protestant of sence and Learning lean on that shamefull and most exploded Falshood, viz. that the Apostles took the Government of the Empire for their Pattern of Church-Government; and darring to publish such gross Falshoods whereof even the more ingenuous Romanists are ashamed.

The Ecclesiastical Degrees (saith Suave uuHistory of the Council of Trent. Page 216. Et seq.) were not Originally Instituted as Dignities, Preheminencies, Rewards, or Honours, as now they are, and have been, many hundred years, but with Ministery, and Charges, otherwise called by St. Paul, Works, and those that exercise them, are called by Christ our Lord in the Gospel, Workmen; and therefore no Man could then enter into cogitation to absent himself from the Execution thereof in his own Person: and if any one (which seldom happend) retired from the Work, 'twas not thought reasonable, he should have either Title or Profit. And tho' the Ministeries were of two sorts, some Anciently called, as now they are, with care of Souls: others of temporal things, for the sustenance and service of the Poor and Sick, as were the Deaconries, and other inferiour Works, all held themselves equally bound to that Service, in Person; neither did any think of a substitute, but for a short time, and for great Impediments, much less to take another Charge, which might hinder that.

§. 13. Bnd now to go on, these Countrey Bishops or Pastors could not yet by all these Councils be Un-bishoped. And therefore Pope Damasus must next fall on them, and authoratively define xxCaranza Fol. 100. &c.that they p. 213were stark nought in the Church, their Institution wicked and contrary to the holy Canons. And thus he acted suitably to his purpose, seeing the enslaving the lesser and Country Churches to the Domination of these of the greater Cities made fair way for subjecting all to Rome, which on many Accounts was greater than any of the rest. He also hereby gratified and much obliged the Bishops of these great Cities who were desirous of nothing, more than of Domination, and accordingly they even at these times were giving him their mutual help for raising of the Papal Throne, yea before the time of Damasus this same Council of Sardica, which thought it too vile and base for a Bishop to Dwell out of a great City, Decreed alsoyyCan. 3. foreign &c. That if any Bishop thought he was injured in any Cause by his Comprovincials and ordinary Judges, it should in this Case be lawfull for him to appeal to the Bishop of Rome. Let us honour (say they) the Memory of St. Peter, that either these who examined the Matter or other neighbouring Bishops write to Julius Bishop of Rome, and if he think it fit then let the Matter be tried and judged again, and let him appoint Judges for the Purpose, but if he approve of what's already done, and think not fit to call it into Question, then the things already done shall be accounted firm and stable. Thus these Fathers, many whereof otherwise were excellent Men, the first, I think, that ever gave such Deference and Authority to the Pope, 'twas not therefore incongruous that both of these Decrees should proceed from one and the same Council.

Hence it's to be noted, that the Tympany of these times had not only exerted it self in separating the things God had conjoin'd, and in an holygarchick Confinement of the Power God had given equally to all Pastors, unto a few whom they named Bishops, a Name also equally belonging to all Christ's Ministers; but also in subjecting of the Presbyters, yea and even the Bishops of the Countrey to the very Presbyters of the CityzzNeocesar. Can. 13. & Ancyrum. Can. 13. but much more the Bishops or Pastors of the Countrey to the Bishops of the Cities, and these again to the Bishops of the greater Metropolitan Cities, and so on till at length (not to name the rest of the higher and lower roundles of this Hierarchick Ladder) all centred in Rome.

Yet in these very times it was notwithstanding firmly rooted in Mens p. 214Minds that whosoever dispensed the Word and Sacraments, and had a Flock or Congregation was a true Bishop, as I have made out to be the mind of Hilary, and many others of the fourth and fifth Centuries. Moreover Optatus assertsaaLib. 3. that Preaching or Exponing is the proper Province of a Bishop. But, to proceed, these Chorepiscopi, or Countrey Bishops of Parish Pastors were in the third Century called absolutely Bishops at the Countrey Places or Villages; so speaks the Council of Antioch, He (say these Fathers) i. e. Paulus SamosatenusbbEusebius Lib. 7. Cap. 30. foreign &c. suborn'd the Bishops of the neighbouring Countrey Villages and Towns, as also Presbyters his Flatterers to praise him in their Homilies. Dr. Mauriceccpag. 77. answers that it appears not hence that these were Parish Bishops for Chorepiscopi had many Congregations. As if these who dwelt not only in greater Towns, but also in the very Countrey Villages which were near to Antioch, and near to one another, and that even where the far greater part of the Inhabitants were not of their Flocks, yea were not at all Christians, could be by any in their Wit judged to be any thing else save Parish Bishops or Pastors. But let us hear one of the learn'dest of our Adversaries determining the Controversie.ddDr. Burnet's Observations on the first and second Canons commoaly ascribed to the Apostles, pag. 47, 48, & 49. That (saith he) which next occurrs to be considered is, in what places Bishopricks were founded, and Bishops settled. We find in all Cities where the Gospel was planted, and Churches constituted, that Bishops were also Ordain'd. Among the Jews, wherever there were an hundred and twenty of them together, there did they erect a Synagogue, and a lesser Sanhedrin the Court of twenty three Judges. Compare to this Acts 1. 15. where the number of those that constituted the first Christian Church, is the same. So it is like wherever there was a competent number of Christians together, that a Church was there settled. Yet in some Villages there were Churches and Bishops; so there was a Bishop in Bethany: and St. Paul tells of the Church of Cenchrea, which was the Port of Corinth. It is true, some think that the Church of Corinth mett there. Which Opinion he irrefragably Refutes, and then proceeds, saying, Therefore it's probable that the Church of Cenchrea was distinct from Corinth: and since they had Phebe for their Deaconness, it's not to be doubted but they had Both Bishops and Deacons. p. 215From the several Cities the Gospel was dilated and propagated to the places round about. But in some Countries we find the Bishopricks very thick sett. They were pretty throng in Asrick, for at a Conference which Augustine and the Bishops of that Province had with the Donatists, there were of Bishops two hundred eighty six present, and one hundred and twenty absent, and sixty Sees were then Vacant, which make in all four hundred sixty and six: there were also two hundred and seventy nine of the Donatists Bishops.

Thus he. And now, not to multiply Testimonies in so confessed and plain a Matter, it's most certain that, at least, for upwards of the three first Centuries, you shall not meet with the meanest Dorp, or countrey place where there was a Church or Congregation to hear the Word, and receive the Sacraments, but it had also its proper Bishop, I averr no Example to the contrary either has yet, no not by Dr. Maurice or any other, been, or can be brought from the gennine Monuments of these times. Yea even from the spurious Writings of Impostures the greatest Adorers of the Hierarchy, good proofs of this Truth may be adduced; For the thirty eight of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles, gives the care of the Ecclesiastick Goods to the Bishop, as Justine Martyr gives to his foreign who, as we have seen already, was purely a Parish Pastor. And the 39eeforeign Canon saith, Let the Presbyters and Deacons attempt nothing without the Bishop, for to him the Lord's People is committed, and for their Souls he must give an Account. Now I demand of all Men brooking either Conscience or Candor if Souls could be committed to any save him, who was their ordinary Feeder and Instructer. And the Pseudo-Dionysius clearly intimats, that wherever either Baptism or the Lord's Supper was administrat'd, a Bishop was there, and was the Dispenser thereof. The High-Priest (saith heffDe Hierarchia Eccles. Cap. 2. foreign &c.) that is the Bishop, preaches to all Men the true Gospel, every one that desires to Partake of these Heavenly Things, coming to one of the learned in these Mysteries, desires to be led to the High-Priest—and he brings him to the High-Priest, who receiving him with gladness as a Sheep on his shoulders—praises the bountifull prinple, by which all are called who are called at all—The High-Priest dips him thrice. The High-Priest ggCap. 3. foreign &c.himself having made a holy Prayer p. 216at the Divine Altar and beginning to Offer, goes round about the whole Chore—and the High-Priest praising the Holy Divine Actions, sacrifices the most Divine Thing—and taking and delivering the Divine Communion he ends with a Holy Thanksgiving. Do hhforeign &c.nothing (saith the Pseudo-Ignatius to Hero a Deacon of Antioch) without the Bishops for they are Priests, thou their Deacon: they Baptize, Sacrifice or Dispense the Lord's Supper, impose Hands: thou serves them as St. Stephen in Jerusalem administred to James and the Elders. From which place it's most evident, that all Pastors or Priests (as the Author speaks) are true Bishops, that on the account of such things as are common to all Pastors, they receive the prime Episcopal Honour and Deference, that there was a Colledge of true Bishops in the single City of Antioch, & accordingly that the rest of the Elders with James at Jerusalem were really true Bishops no less than he. I don't say that Bishops and Congregations were reciprocal everywhere in the fourth or fifth Century when these Impostors wrote, only being to personat Apostolick Men, they saw themselves obliged to mix into their Legends some shreds of true Antiquity. The stuff they invented themselves was of a far different and contrary Mettal, and far from being so conform and like to the Apostolick and prime Primitive Church.

§. 14 And here it's to be added, that as every Bishop had once, which continued in very many places for a good space, one Congregation only, so all Bishops whatsoever are of the same Dignity, and Equal with one another. For Cyprian ii(Mihi) Lib. 2. Epist. 1.calls all Bishops Collegues, adding, we force none, we give Laws to none, seeing every Governour in the Administration of the Church, hath Power to do according to his own Will, for which he is to give God an Acconnt. And,kkIn sententiis Episcoporum de Haereticis baptizandis. Page 334. for none of us is a Bishop of Bishops, or by a Tyrannical Power can force his Collegues to Obedience &c. And Hierome llEpist. 85.saith, wheresoever Bishops be, at Rome or Eugubium, Constantinople, Rhegium, Alexandria or Tanis, they are all of the same Dignity and Priest-hood, Riches and Poverty make not a Bishop either higher or lower, they are all the Successors of the Apostles. Which is also Augustine's Mind, and must be granted by all who acknowledge the Equality of the Apostles, and that Bishops were their Successors.

p. 217Now the Truth of these two Things, viz. the allowableness of a Bishop to every Congregation, yea the primitive Reciprocalness of a Bishop and a Congregation, and the Equality of Bishops among themselves being supposed, which indeed is undoubtable to all the Ingenuous, their whole Hierarchy turns to nothing.

And now I hope that which some pretend to be a mighty Prejudice, viz. that Episcopacy still de facto has been, and from the earliest times of Christianity we hear of Bishops, is many ways removed, and that by this time it has clearly appeared, that either profound Ignorance, Osscitancy, or the masly beam of Interest in Mens Eyes has been the true Source of this Prejudice.

Moreover, suppose that it could not be easily told when this Corruption, which is like the Tares sown during the sleeping of the Husband-man, crept into the Church: Can they tell when all other Corruptions made their first Entry? As for Example, can they give a distinct account when the use of Oyl in Baptism, whereof Tertullian mmDe Baptismo. Cap. 7. Exinde egressi de lavacro perunguimur benedicta unctione de pristina Disciplina, qua ungui oleo decorum in sacerdotium solebant.speaks as of a thing constantly practised among Christians, came first in Fashion? The like I may say of Exorcization, and many other things altogether uncertain as to their Beginning, and yet by all Lovers of the Truth of Christianity to be Corruptions, whereof see store in Chamier's Panstratia nnTom. 4. Lib. 5. Cap. 16..

Secondly, I trust also that by the foregoing Discourses, the Weapon the Papists and other Hierarchicks use against the Reformed Churches to prove that they have no Ministers, because of the want of a Succession of Bishops, is sufficiently blunted.

And this minds me of an Objection I was assaulted with from a Gentleman of that Perswasion, 'twas that these Episcopal Men who ordained our Pastors, gave them the Power of Ordination neither in express Terms, nor yet intentionally; Ergo not at all. I Repon'd, that tho' they did not give it them intentione Operantis, yet notwithstanding intentione Operis: in so much as they ordain'd the Ministers of the Gospel, all whom we sustain to be true Bishops. I add, this is to a hair like Becan ooCompen. Manualis Cap. 12. Paragr. 11.the Jebusites arguing against Luther's Call to be a Protestant-Minister, p. 218Luther (saith he) had no lawfull Calling to the Ministry he exercised after his Defection, for then he began to oppugn the Catholick Church, abolish Feasts, Monastick Vows, and Prayers for the Dead, these things he could not do by the Power which he had received in the Catholick Church, for the Bishop who ordained him, gave him no Power for the Destruction of the Church.

§. 15. But there yet remains a great Prejudice, and no wonder, for it comes from a great City, Rome (say they) and other such vast Cities, which certainly contain'd many Congregations, have been always ruled by their particular Bishops as the Catalogues yet extant evinc… But tho' 'twere so, seeing it's at least, no less certain, that in other places Bishops and Congregations were Reciprocal, we are even with them, and their Argument quite evanishes, and Antiquity allows us to give a Bishop to every Congregation, no less than it warrands their giving a multitude of Parishes to any one Bishop. And Dr. Maurice pppage 449.acknowledges, he never yet heard of any Man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under him. And he's so far in the right herein that, during prime Antiquity, 'twas never so much as dream'd, that 'twas either essential or any way requisite for a Bishop to have a plurality of Congregations. It's not (saith heqqpage 451.) the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes one a Bishop; but the Order. There are (saith Saravia rrExam. Tract. de triplici Episcopatuum Genere pag. 16.and have been Bishopricks so small that their Bishops had only one or two Presbyters; for we measure not a Bishoprick by the number of the Clergy or by the amplitude of the City or Diocess, the magnitude of Riches, but by the Authority of the Episcopal Degree, altho' the Bishoprick be included in one small Parish alone. And some of the most Episcopal amongst them acknowledge that any of our Ministers tho' they have but one Parish, want nothing to make them Bishops but only the Episcopal Consecration, whereby they at once yeeld the whole Plea, destroy their Hierarchy, and withall discover their preterscriptural, and therefore antiscriptural Superstition.

And now seeing there is all the warrant and allowance that either can be desir'd or thought on that a Bishop and a Pastor of one single Flock or Congregation is one and the same, and that every Congregation may have its own proper Bishop, their Plea for the Distinction between Bishop and preaching Presbyter, tho' its Ground were no less solide than it's naught and slippery, becomes really of no subserviency at all to their p. 219Hierarchick Cause, and so on this account is truly exhausted (for providing the Pastor of any Parish or Congregation be constantly imployed in Preaching and Edifying the People, we shall not envy him others, so far as is requisite, to assist him, the People may be instructed the better) Don't therefore Dr. Maurice ssPreface to his Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy.and the Men of that stamp, while they pretend that tho' there be allowed to every Congregation its proper Bishop, yet there's a most different and momentuous Controversie behind, about the Distinction between Bishop and Presbyter, seek, as the Proverb is, a Knot in the Rush, and triffle with a witness?

Give them moreover out of sole kindness, that thettSee Doctor Scot's Christian Life. Vol. 2. Chap. 7. and D. M. Page 98. Et seq. Apostolick Power and Office is permanent and to be transmitted to all Bishops, yet on Supposition of these Truths, viz. that every Congregation had, yea or may have its proper Bishop, and that all Bishops are equal, they shall be compelled to desert the whole of their Plea, and acknowledge the sure Foundation and Lawfullness of what they call Presbyterian Parity.

Secondly, Eusebius uuHist. Eccles. Lib. 3. Cap. 8. foreign &c.plainly says that it cannot be known who were the Successors of the Apostles to feed the Churches they had planted, save what is to be collected from the words of the Apostles, and so break the Chain at the Top, where it should be strongest, and shews that their best twisted Cords become Ropes of Sand, to which, as we already noticed, the learn'dest of their own Writers subscribe.

Thirdly, To come to Rome in particular, altho' 'twas the Head of the World, and indeed the Head and Fountain from whence all the Hierarchicks draw their best support, no Man of Reason, whoever look'd into the divers, yea and contrary Accounts given by the Ancients of the first pretended Successors of Peter; can ever inferr that the Romans had, in these early times of Christianity, one peculiar Diocesan Bishop over the rest of the Pastors: yea indeed Cletus, Clemens, Linus, all whom, if you compare the best Accounts they have, you shall find to have been at one and the same time Bishops of Rome, and Successors of Peter, are a good evidence that he had no singular Successor at all. This was so made out by the Protestant Writers, that for ought I p. 220know the Romanists were despairing of any plausible Answer, altho' I doubt not, but they take Heart, since some among the ProtestantsxxPearson suis posthumis & Dodwell. have used prodigious Endeavours to gratifie them, and reconcile real Contradictions, and fix the singular Successors of Peter. I can scarce light on any of the Books they cite, and yet I'm at no great loss. For, 4ly, It's certain that Peter was never at Rome, which at once dispatches the grand Plea of all the Hierarchicks. The whole stream of Writers yyArnobius. Lib. 2. Eusebius. Hist. Eccles. Lib. 2. Cap. 14. Epiphanius. Tom. 2. Page 59. Philastrius. Hieronymus Cat Script. Augustinus Tom. 6. Page 6. Sulpitius severus Lib. 2. and others.who record Peter's Voyage thither either relate or suppose that his Errand was to oppose Simon Magus, so that the Truth of both these Relations must stand or fall together. But Simon Magus, (if we belive Origenes zzContra Celsum Lib. 1.) was never there. Simon (saith he) the Smaritan and Majician endeavour'd by Sorcery to destroy some, and I belive deceived many with his delusions. But now throw all the World you shall scarce find thirty who follow him, and I perhaps have called them more than they are. Indeed there are some few in Palestine, but in the rest of the Regions of the World his very Name is not heard off, altho' he mainly desired that his Fame might be spread abroad, and if perhaps there be any report of him at all, it's only to be learned from the Acts of the Apostles. And Time, which often has discovered things commonly taken for Truth to be altoger False, hath verifi'd the words of Origenes: For the Statue which gave the occasion of the fixion is now found to be the Image an old Sabin King or fictitious Deity called by the Romans Semo Sangus, Sancus or Sanctus aaDionys. Halicar. Lib. 4. Ovidius Fast. Lib. 6. Livius Dec. 1. Lib. 8. Augustinus de civitate Dei. Lib. 13. Cap. 19.which Justine Martyr, throw his unskilfulness of the Latine Tongue, and a Cheat put upon him by some Samaritans, took for Simon Magus as is acknowledged even by the learned RomanistbbAnnot, in Euseb. Lib. 2. Cap. 13. Valesius. The Inscription of this statue is Semoni Sango Deo Fidio. Now according to the Genius of the Age the fraud prevail'd, and Simon Magus must be brought to Rome, made to effect monstruous Prodigies; and therefore Simon Peter his old Adversary must also be sent thither to Conjure and Baffle him a second time. And this is the prime Source of Peter's imaginary Journey to Rome, and his fictitious Roman Episcopacy, and the whole Papal Structure. For, as Simon Magus his coming to p. 221Rome is mention'd by none before Justine, and by him only on this false Ground, so Peter's Journey thither is before that time mention'd by none, save Papias, if he may be said to mention it, for if at all, he does it very obscurelybbEusebius lib. 2. cap. 15.. And tho' he had been never so positive in this Matter, it's of small Consequence, for, as Eusebius already told us, (tho' elsewherecclib. 3. cap. 36. he forgets himself) he was of so little Wit, so fabulous and given to believe everything he heard, that his Testimony merites little or no Credit. Irenaeus indeed says that Papias was a hearer of the Apostles, and himself also intimats so much, but again clearly denyes it while he saysddEuseb. lib. 3. cap. 39. foreign &c. that he used, when he met with any: who had been acquainted with the Elders, to enquire what Andrew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, John, Matthew and the rest of Christ's Disciples had been wont to say. And this he intimats had been his Practice only, when he was a young Man, and so gives us clearly to understand that when he wrote, there was not one of the Hearers of the Apostles alive. So far was Papias from being their Disciple. 'Twas he also who gives out that Mark wrote not his Gospel by Divine Inspiration, but only by the help of his Memory. 'Twas he also who was the Father of the carnal and gross Chiliasts, and the first who abused the Scriptures, turning them all to Allegories, and had not so much as the knowledge to distinguish Philip the Apostle from Philip the Evangelist. The same Papias is the first Author of the report of Peter's Journey to Rome (providing it may be said that he reportes it at all) which mistake, as Eusebius intimates eeHist. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 15., flow'd from his misunderstanding of 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Church that is at Babylon &c. And seeing that by Babylon in the Apocalyps Room is mean'd, he and many of these times, thro' their want of skill to distinguish between the Prophetick Mystick, and Epistolick plain Phrase and Stile, concluded that in Peter also Room is to be understood. But this Gloss is so forraign and absurd that even the most learn'd of the Romanists, as Petrus de Marca Bishop of Paris ffde Concordia Sacerd. & Imp. tom. 2. pag. 174.acknowledges that these Words of Peter are not to be understood of Rome, but of the eastern Babylon, where (saith the Bishop) Peter was settl'd hereditary Patiark. Some indeed understand them of a City bearing that name in Egypt, and this Spanhemius F. and Dr. Pearson ggPosth…m. de Success. Rom. Pontif, Dissert. 1. cap. 8.prefer to the Assyrian Babylon: p. 222the former because the old Chaldean Babylon was then desolate, the letter for this that after Anilaeus a chief man among the Jews in these parts had injured the Inhabitans, many of them were cut off and the rest driven from Babylon, who fled to Ctesiphon, the most part whereof notwithstanding in a combination made against them by the Assyrians and Greeks were either cut off or expell'd. Therefore he concludes that tho' Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision, yet he could expect no harvest of the Jews in these parts. Now, as to the ground Spanhemius goes on, it seems sufficient to prove that it could not be the old Chaldean Babylon: For it's certain from Scripture, and Plinius witnessesiilib. 6. cap. 26. Caetero in solitudinem rediit, exhausta vicinitate Seleuciae. that 'twas then reduced to a solitude. It seems therefore to be mean'd of the Principal City of the Parthian Impire which succeded to Babylon in name no less then in honour as is clear from that in Lucan kklib. 1.,

Cumque superba foret Babylon spolianda Trophaeis

Ausoniis.—

If this their chief City was Ctesiphon or Seleucia, may be a doubt Plinius llibid. Ctesiphontem—condidere Parthi quod nunc est caput Regni.calls Ctesiphon the Head of the Parthian Kingdom. But Strabo seems to be more clear in this matter, and to give light to Pliny, Tacitus, Herodianus, Am. Marcellinus, or otherwise to lay open the ground of their mistake. Seleucia (saith he)mmlib. 16. foreign &c. a City by the bank of Tigris, as Babylon was of old, is now the Metropolis of Assyria, near it there is a great Village Ctesiphon wherein the Parthian Kings used to winter, sparing Seleucia that it might not be spoiled by the warlike Scythians (by whom I understand their Auxiliary or guard Souldiers who were rude and ready to Mutany, aud therefore were not brought within their Chief and Treasure City) this Village is now arriv'd at even the power and greatness of a City. Where, as is evident, he so much prefers Seleucia to Ctesiphon that he makes the former the chief City of the Impire. Moreover Crassus when he design'd the conquest of Parthia and the possession of the Kings treasures being asked by the Messengers of Orodes King of Parthia why he broke the peace made with Pompey and Sylla, said he would answer them at SeleuciannFlorus lib. 3. cap. 11.—Seleucia se responsurum esse respondit. proudly insinuating that he would subdue and p. 223spoile their chief City. And this City expresly gets the name Babylon by Stephanus ooad vocem Babylon. foreign., and he confounds it with the old Babylon. Hence it appears that Seleucia was the chief City of the Parthian Impire, and commonly then got the name of Babylon, and that the very place of old Chaldean Babylon was not then known, for they were certainly in distant places; therefore, if Josephus seem to mention another Babylon distant from the chief City of the Parthians this is rather to be understood of the Country Babylonia then of the old Chaldean Babylon which then was ruined now tho' the Jews for a time might be compelled to leave that principal City of Parthia they might notwithstanding soon after be permited to return no less then these who were expelled Rome by Claudius, got Liberty shortly to come thither again. This Dr. Pearson allows and therefore cannot deny the probability of the other However this be, nothing is more certain then that by Babylon, which Peter mentions, the literal proper and well known Babylon, which was then the chief City of Parthia Seleucia, must be meaned, otherwayes the dispersion to which he writes had neither known where he was nor what Church saluted them, which is quite contrary to the Apostles Intention there. For at that time the Apocalypse was not written, and yet on this most false Supposition viz. that by Babylon Peter understands Rome, was his Journey thither founded and so must prove no less false in the matter of fact, and with it his Episcopacy and that of the earliest Popes his pretended Successors seeing all lean on his Journey thither. And 'its with no less confidence and concord averred and delivered then is either his, or his pretended Successors their Episcopacy, or ought else Subsequent to this his falsly supposed Voyage. And indeed the evidence of this our Assertion is so strong that it compell'd even the learned Romanists themselves to acknowledge the Truth thereof, as J. Bapt. Mantuanus, Michael Caefenas, Marsilius Patavinus, Joh. Aventinus, Joh. Lelandus, Car. Molinaeus, who are Cited by Spanhemius F. in his Golden Dissertation on that SubjectppPage 22.

In the mean while I cannot but wonder how this otherways accurat and learned Antiquaryqqpage 146. finds an Aegyptian Babylon in that distick of Martial rrLib. 14. Epigr. 15..

p. 224Haec tibi Memphitis Tellus dat munera, victa est

Pectine Niliaco jam Babylonis acus.

Th' Aegyptian slay gives Tapistry more fine

Than ever Babylon could sue or spin.

Where the Poet only preferrs the Aegyptain woven Cloath to the finest needle-work of the old Chaldaean Babylon; But, as it is most apparent, no more here either expesses or insinuats that there is a place named Babylon in Aegypt, thenssLib. 8. Ep. 28. where he comends a Gown bestow'd on him by Parthenius a gentle-man of Domitius's Chamber in this distick,

Non ego praetulerim Babylonica picta superbe

Texta, semiramiâ quae variantur acu.

It far excells the rich Embroideries

Of Babylon built by Semiramis.

Moreover Clemens Romanus speaking of the Death of Peter and Paul, intimates that he knew sufficiently where and by whom Paul was kill'd with other such Circumstances of his Death, but insinuats that he had no such knowledge of any such Circumstances of the Death of Peter. And it's colligible from Jerome ttin 23. Mat.that both Peter and Paul were not kill'd by the Romans but by the Jews, in, or not far from Palaestine.

'Twere easie to discover the Forgerie and Falshood of their other Catalogues of Bishops pretended to have been in the like great Cities, as for example that of the Bishops of Jerusalem whereof they fainuuEuseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. cap. 1. foreign. Euseb. hist. Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 32. & lib. 4. cap. 5. that the Apostles made James Bishop, and that on a ground to base and carnal, viz. because he was the Son of Joseph, and so related to Christ whom the Apostle Paul knew not according to the flesh. 2 Cor. 5. 16. and then make him and his pretended successor Simeon to continue Bishops of that See from a little after the death of our Savior to, I know not what year of Trajanus, between which time and Adrian Trajanus's immediat successor his rebulding of Jerusalem, they give to that Church thirteen Bishops, to all of whom little more than twenty years can be assingn'd; yea some three or four of these are cramm'd into one yearxxEuseb. Chronic. and yet we hear of none of these thirteen who died a violent death, but which yet more fully discovers the Forgery all along from the destruction of p. 225the City by Titus, untill 'twas rebuilt by Adrian there was no Inhabitant there, no place for my L. Bishop's grace, nothing whereon to exercise the Episcopal power save rubbish and desolation.yyIren. pag. 301. In none of the Churches (saith Dr. Stilling fleet) most spoken of is the succession so clear as is necessary. For at Jerusalem it seems somewhat strange how fifteen Bishops of the Circumcision should be crouded into so narrow a room as they are, so that many of them could not have above two years time to rule in the Church. And it would bear an inquiry where the seat of the Bishops of Jerusalem was from the time of the destruction of the City by Titus, (when the walls were laid even with the ground by Musonius) till the time of Adrian.

I shall yet in the last place adduce a few passages, and I intreat my Reader seriously to weigh them and from whom they came, for I am sure they will give great light and satisfaction to all the truly conscientious and disinterested.

The sixt Anathematism (saith a RomanistzzSuavis Hist. of the Council of Trent pag. 743.) was much noted in Germany; in which an Article of Faith was made of HIERARCHY, which word and signification thereof is aliene, not to say contrary to the holy Scrsptures: and tho' 'twas somewhat antiently invented, yet the Author is not known, and in case he were, yet he is an Hyperbolicall Writer, not imitated in the use of that Word, nor of others of his Invention, by any of the Ancients: and following the Stile of Christ our Lord, and the Holy Apostles, and primitive Church, it ought to be named, not Hierarchy, but Hierodiaconia, or Hierodoulia. And Dr. Heylen, whoaaHist. of Episcopacy, part 2. page 39. like to Balaam blessing Israel when he would fainest have cursed them, uses to establish a Presbyterian Parity of Pastors while he is most desirous to destroy it, makes the Bishop in Justine Martyr's time all one with the President of the Congregation and ordinary Preacher of God's Word and Celebrator of the Eucharist therein. And pleads that in Tertullian's mind Baptism was a work most proper to the Bishop in regard of his Episcopacy or particular Office. And the Doctor contends out of Tertullian that in his time Christians receiv'd the Eucharist only from the Bishop's hands bbpart 2 pag. 96, 97., and so there were no fewer Bishops than Congregations who mett for hearing of the Word and Celebration of the Sacraments. What shew of reason can be given (saith Dr. Stilling-fleet ccIren. page 257.why the Apostles should slight the Constitution of the Jewish Synagogues, p. 226which had no dependance on the Jewish Hierarchy, and subsisted not by any Command of the Ceremonial Law? The Work of the Synagogue not belonging to the Priests as such, but as Persons qualifi'd for instructing others. And ddpag. 264, 265.We are to take nottice, that the Rulers of the Church under the Gospell do not properly succeed the Priests and Levites under the Law, whose Office was Ceremonial, and who were not admitted by any solemn Ordination into their Function.—It is then a common Mistake to think that the Ministers of the Gospell succeeded by way of Correspondence and Analogy to the Priests under the Law; which Mistake hath been the Foundation and Originall of many Errors. For when in the primitive Church, the name of Priests came to be attributed to Gospell-Ministers from a fair Complyance (as was thought then) of the Christians only to the name used both among Jews and Gentiles: in process of time, corruptions increasing in the Church, those names that were used by the Christians by way of Analogy and Accommodation, brought in the things themselves primarily intended by these names: so by the metaphoricall names of Priests and Altars, at last came up the Sacrifice of the Mass; without which, they thought the names of Priests and Altars were insignificant. This M…stake we see run all along thro' the Writers of the Church, as soon as the name Priests was apply'd to the Elders of the Church, that they derived their Succession from the Priests of Aaro…'s Order. In short he still contends that the model of Governing the Christian Church was an exact imitation of that of the Synagogues, which were no other thing than the particular parish Churches among the Jews, and in every one of which there was a a Bishop paralell to him who, in the Apocalypse, is the Angel of the Church.

And Dr. Lightfoot is of the same mind; The Apostle (saith he) eeVol. 1. pag. 308.calleth the Minister Epis…opus, from the common and known title of the CHAZAN or Overseer in the Synagogue. AndffVol. 2. pag. 133. Besides these there was the publick Minister of the Synagogue who pray'd publickly and took care about reading the Law, and sometimes preached if there were not some other to discharge this Office. This person was called SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church, and CHAZAN HAKENESETH the Chazan or Bishop of the Congregation. The Aruch gives the reason of the name: The Chazan (saith he) is SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church (or p. 227the publick Minister) and the Targum renders the word ROVEH by the word HOSE one that oversees. For it's incumbent on him to oversee how the Reader reads and whom he may call cut to read in the Law. The publick Minister of the Synagogue himself read not the Law publickly but every Sabbath he called out seven of the synagogue (on other days fewer) whom he judged fit to read. He stood by him that read, with great care observing that he read nothing either falsly, or improperly and calling him back and correcting him, if he had failed in any thing, and hence he was called CHAZAN that is foreign i. e. Bishop or Overseer. Certainly the signification of the word Bishop and Angel of the Church had been determined with less noise if recourse had been made to the proper fountains and men had not vainly disputed about the signification of words taken I know not whence. The service and worship of the Temple being abolished as being Ceremonial, God transplanted the worship and publick adoration of God used in the synagogues, which was moral, into the Christian Church: to wit, the publick Ministry, publick prayers, reading God's Word, and preaching &c. Hence the names of the Ministers of the Gospel were the very same, the Angel of the Church, the Bishop which belonged to the Ministers in the synagogues. There were also three Deacons or Almoners on whom was the care of the poor &c. Among the Jews (saith Dr. Burnet ggObserv. on the 1 Can. page 2.he who was the chief of the synagogue was called CHAZAN HAKENSETH the Bishop of the Congregation and SHELIACH TSIBBOR the Angel of the Church. And the Christian Church being modelled as near the form of the synagogue as they could be, as they retained many of the Rites so the form of the government was continued, and the names remained the same, AndhhObs. on the 2 Can. page 83. In the synagogues there was first one, that was called the Bishop of the Congregation. Next, the three Orderers, and Judges of every thing about the synagogue who were called TSEKENIM, and by the Greeks foreign or foreign that is Elders. These ordered and determined every thing that concern'd the synagogues or the persons in it. Next them, were the three PARNASSIN or Deacons, whose charge was to gather the Collections of the rich, and to distribute them to the poor.

p. 228All the Presbyters (saith the Learned Le Moyne iiV…ria Sacra tom. 2. pag. 35. Nam non omnes Presbyteri onus concionandi & Verbum Dei enarrandi in se recipiebant &c.) took not on them the burden of preaching and exponing the scriptures, some were taken up in serving at the administration of the Sacraments searching into scandals, visiting the sick, strengthning the weak, and providing for the Churches profit, but the business of preaching belonged only to the Apostles the Bishops and the first Presbyters. Hence in times of the ancient Church the Bishops perpetually preached which the inferior Presbyters did not except they were admitted thereto by the Bishops and chief Presbyters.

Most memorable to this purpose are the words of the learned Jesuite Sirmundus kkapud Le Moyne pag. 36, ibid. Verbam Dei, soli olim in Ecclesia praedicabant Episcopi, quarum proprie id Munus erat. Post etiam id Presbyteris, sed non uno apud omnes tempore permissum &c.Anciently (saith he) the Bishops only and no others preached the word of God for this was their proper province and work 'twas afterwards, tho' not alike soon every where, allowed to the Presbyters to preach: this was soonest begun in the East, as is clear from the practice of Pierius, Chrysostome, and others who preached while they were only Presbyters.

And now judge, tho' nothing else had been adduced but what is just now brought from these profoundly learn'd and most unsuspected Arbiters, if the Regimen and Way of the true primitive Church was not according to the Gospell Humility and Simplicity, most opposite to a terrene Domination, Prelaticall Grandor and Power over other Pastors, and the vanity of preterscripturall and superstitious Ceremonies? if she then enjoy'd not Bishops or Pastors, Ruling Elders and Deacons? if then, whosoever had power to dispense the Word and Sacraments with the Charge of any particular Flock or Congregation, was not reciprocally one and the same with a Bishop, and finally, if the primitive Way was not entirely one with that of our Church of Scotland, and others of the reformed Churches, which is now known by the name of Presbytry?

Hence it's carefully to be noted how odd and grievous Alterations were made both as to the use of Terms and in the Offices they had primitively signifi'd in Scripture. In, yea even after the Apostolick Age we find that the word Bishop, whereever it holds forth an ordinary Church-Officer, alwayes signifying a Labourer in the Word and Doctrine, and Dispenser of the Srcraments, Pastor of a Flock or Congregation. p. 229We find also the Word Presbyter taken as its equivalent denoting this very thing: elsewhere (as is now made evident) the word Presbyter signifies no Pastor of a Flock, but only one who was to assist him in Ruling and Guidance thereof; some also of this latter kind of Presbyters designing the Ministry, there beeing then few or no Theological Schools, were trained up for the Office under the Inspection of Bishops or Parochial Pastors, and accordingly whiles assisted them therein. But this was only accidental to the Office of a ruling Presbyter. Afterward there was a new kind of Church Office invented whose chief work was not to feed any Flock or Congregation and yet was reputed the Pastor of many Flocks which was a compleat Contradiction. His Province was mainly to rule and domineer over a multitude of both Pastors and Flocks, him they called the Bishop. Another Office epually new and unknown to Scripture and prime Antiquity was a kind of semipastor or half Minister who was to do all the Ministeriall Work, and yet was so far from having any Pastorall Power that on the contrary he was only the subject and substitute of another, and him they called the Presbyter: As for the other sort of Presbyters they came in time to be well nigh intirely abolished and forgotten. The like Chrysostome llOn the 6 of the Acts hom. 14.observes of the Deacons, saying that in his time such Deacons as the Apostles ordained were not in the Church. Hence it's not strange if the Ancients, while sometimes they violent the Scriptures to make them favour what in their oun times was obtaining, and at other times while, either out of design and freedome, or casually they light on the true Meaning of the Scriptures, speak most perplexedly of Bishops and Presbyters, and afford no small ground of Wrangling and Disputation to all that are exercised in this Controversy.

In the mean while such Immutation was not made in a day, 'twas sloe and apparently plausible like the weed which at lenth you may see that it is groun up, yet its act of growing ye shall never perceive. This Alteration, as even Spanhemius F.mmIntroduct. ad Hist. Nov. Test. Pag. 166. no enemy to the Hierarchy, observes, began first in great Cities, and beside the generall occasions or rather pretexts for it, which we already noted, there was this colour more peculiar to great Cities; in Rome, for example, tho there were Christians sufficient to make up severall ordinary p. 230Congregations, yet at some special times all or most of these used to meet at one place, and accordingly were accounted but one Church. This might occasion the making of a foreign or one particular Moderator among the Pastors who got some primacy of Order, and at these more solemn meetings of the People appeared & spake most and in time got the appropriation of the name Bishop: all this was notwithstanding only a meer prostasy: he must nixt have a power over his Collegues in the City: the Bishops, the parochial Pastors of the Country and lesser Cities are next to be invaded.

This Fermentation, which had small beginnings and still grew untill all was soured, suelled especially and was most operative in a time of peace, whereof in the third Century they had a good space, even from the Death of Valerian untill Dioclesian's Persecution. The Emperors themselves (saith Eusebius mmHist. Eccles. Lib. 8. Cap. 1.—foreign.then so much favoured them that they not only gave them Liberty of the publick Exercise of their Religion, but also made some of them their Chamberlains and Governours of Provinces. In this time the alteration of both Government and Worship was certainly not a litle promoved. For nothing then reign'd among the Christians but contention & ambition. They were not content (continous he) with the former Edifices but builded large Churches from the foundation—But when thro' too much liberty we fell into sloath and negligence, when every one began to envy and backbite another, when we managed as 'twere an intestine warr amongst our selves with Words as with Swords, Pastors against Pastors, and People against People, being dashed one on another, exercised flrife and tumult, when deceit and Guile had grown to the highest pitch of wickedness—When being void of all sense we did not so much as once think how to please God; yea rather on the other hand impiously we imagined that human Affairs are not at all guided by Divine Providence, we dayly added Crimes to Crimes when our Pastors having despised the Rule of Religion strove mutually with one another, studying nothing more then how to outdoe one another in strife, threatning Emulation, Hatred, and mutual Enmity, proudly usurping Principalities or Prelacys as so many places of Tyrannicall Domination.

To this time doubtless did the Nicene Fathers look in their foreign Ancient Customes that they mention, which will be denyed by none who remember that even things of a very late datennVide sis Clementis Epist. Pag. 112. & Iren … verba ap…d Eusebium hist. Eccles. Lib. 5. Cap. 24. & Optatum Milevitanum Lib. 1. used then to be p. 231called ancient, and, which is yet more, they were wont to pretend Apostolick Authority and Tradition for every one of their Innovations. For this their Pride and Superstition and such Vices God sent a long and most grievous Persecution, after which it might have been reasonably thought they would have returned to the Humility and Simplicity of the Gospell, and Apostolick Age. But so far were they from this that the Gangren began faster than ever to consume the Vitals of Chrsitianity, and having got a Christian Emperor to indulge and enrich them they quickened their Pace, and in the gadiness of Pride and giddiness of Superstition, extravaging without bounds in this Declension they piece and piece laid aside the Scripture, and in the model of their Government and Worship eyed and followed three patterns, the Jewish Policy, Ceremonies, and Temple, where there was one High-Priest, the magnificent and splendid Government of the Roman Empire, over which there was one Head, one Emperor. And lastly, the way of the Roman Pagan Priests in which there was also at Rome a Pontifex Maximus or High-Priest over all the many Degrees of Priests in the Empire, and so in process of time it came to pass that he who by his first Institution was design'd to be a Pastor of a Flock or Congregation, and to imitate the Apostolick Simplicity and Humility, turned to be the great Antichrist, the son of Perdition. and grand Emissary and Lieutennant of the red Dragon, and these who were ordain'd to be his Fellow-Pastors and Ministers of the Gospel became his Underlings and Slaves in that Apostacy, and being martial'd into a thousand Ranks and Orders proved so many Squadrons of hellish Locusts, so that scarce in any part of the Creation of God was there ever a more sad and direfull Depravation, if it were not when our first Parents fell into the Cloutches of the old Serpent, or when the Sons of God became his greatest Enemies, and those morning Stars, the beautifull Angels turned into infernal Firebrands, black and abominable Devils.

Most observable notwithstanding, yea and adorable is Divine Providence in this, that even in the growth and increase of this black Apostacy, the Church in Opinion and Doctrine, at least, still held fast the great, and capital Articles of Christianity, as the sufficiency of the Canonicall Books of Scripture, the Doctrine of the holy Trinity, of free Grace, of Justification by Faith in Christ's Blood &c. Their great sin lay not in the Defect but in the Excess, by superadding to these golden p. 232Foundations a heap of hay and stuble, the wild Fancies of Apostatising Brains; And in process of time equalizing, yea and preferring them to these Divine and most necessary Truths comprehended in the Books of the Old and New Testament. Then it was when, tho' they still acknowledged the Identity of Bishop and preaching Presbyter, or Pastor of a Congregation, they must, among'st the rest of their novell Foppereis, raise one Bishop, or High-Priest (as they spoke) over a number of other Pastors, and Churches, whose Ordination and Consecration must be accompani'd with a dale of Alloy suitable to this their humane and unwarrantable Institution: He must have a Cudgell put in his hand, to signifie his Rule and Authority over the People, and a Ring to signifie his Pontifical Honour, and the hidden Mysiereis wherewithall he is intrustedmmIsidorus de Officiis lib. 2. cap. 6. The Bishop being consecrated, shaven, and anointed, it was his proper Work and Office to erect and consecrate Churches, to make their Chrism or Holy Oyl; For the Art of Besmearing was pretty early in the Church, no later at least than their Diocesan, and therewith to anoint the forehead, Eyes, and Ears of the Baptized, to receive the Penitents, and perform such greasy businesses about them. These and the like Actions were reserved as the special Ornament and Badges of the High-Priest's HonournnVide Con. Hispalense 2. Can. 7. apud Carranzam fol. 269. & Isidorum de Originib. lib. 7. cap. 12. & de Officiis Ecclesiasticis lib. 2. cap. 7. & Rabanum Maurum de Institut. Cler. lib. 1. cap. 6▪. And indeed hitherto they acted congruouly, for 'twas but meet, that their own Antichristian Inventions, the Institution whereof never came into God's mind, should be appropriated to their own Church-Officer whom God never appointed, Caetera conveniunt sed non levis error in uno est.

For they debased and polluted God's Ordinance, I mean the Ordination of Pastors which they threw in among their Trash, and left likewise to their Bishop or High-Priest as a part of his peculiar Province (Superstitionists sometimes for such Fooleries deprave the Scripture, which Dr. Lightfoot one of the learn'd est of the Church-of-England Divines, observes and baffles, Here (saith he)ooon Acts 8. 17.Acts 8:17 Episcopacy thinketh it hath an undenyable Argument for Proof of its Hierarchy, and of the strange Rite of Confirmation &c.) And this is very like another Practice for Antiquity also not a white lower than their Diocesan, they p. 233made another fixed Church-Officer whom they called an Exorcist. His Office was to dispossess and cast out DevilsppVide Isidorum de originib. Lib. 7. Cap. 12. & Rabanum Maurum de Institut. Clericorum Lib. 1. Cap. 10.. Now surely such an ordinary Church-Officer was never appointed by God, and therefore, 'tis most likely that some of those Exorcists needed some to have casten the Devils out of themselves, or at least, to have giv'n them a a round doze of Hellebore, no less, then did any of the foreign their Patients. But seeing they made such a Church-Officer, and the dispossessing of Devils was among'st the greatest and most miraculous Works that ever was practis'd even by the greatest Apostles. It may be thought that this Exorcist was one of their highest Church-Officers, a Metropolitan certainly, Arch-Bishop or Patriarch, but he was none of these, yea he was no Bishop, no Presbyter, no Deacon, no Sub-Deacon, yea not so much as an Acolyth, that is a Candle-carier, for they us'd in fair-day-light and Sun-shine to light Candles in the Church to obey and fulfill (as they said) that Scripture, John 1. 9. That was the true Light, which lighteneth every Man that cometh into the World qqVide Isidorum de originib. Lib. 7. Cap. 12. Rabanum Maurum de Institut. Lib. 1. Cap. 9.. This Exorcist was yet a degree lower than their Candle-Carier, and therefore was plac'd in the very rear and tail of all their Clergy. So dangerous, yea and unaccountable were many of their Actings, but especially in the matter of Church-Office-bearing.

Moreover I appeal to all the judicious and conscientious if out of a conscientious desire of conforming to the primitive Church, our Adversareis make such a horride noise, bussle and Schism for their Hierarchy. For, suppose it to be as true as I hope by this time to all the unbyassed it's manifested to be false, that in all points they could vouch their Hierarchy to be warranted by the true primitive Church and the Government of the one intirely like that of the other, yet do they not desert her in many other things? Did the primitive Church use Organs in Divine Worship? Were they not first introduced in the seventh Century by Pope Vitalian rrPlatina in Vitaliano & Volater. apud Onuphrium in Chronographia.And yet it is doubtfull if they were so soon received: For Aquinas dislikes and condemns them ssSecunda secundae Quest. 91. Articul. 2.. Or where, pray, in the true primitive Church shall they find the Surplice, Corner-Cap and Tippet? Or where, to name no more, p. 234shall they find the Bishop allowed to involve himself in secular cares; Civil and State Offices or Imployments? Some used indeed, when they pleased, the Christian Emperor allowing it, to make the Bishops Arbiters of their private Debates, but to all the good Bishops, as Augustine ttIn Psalmum 118.complains, this was a most weighty Grievance. But in more early times even this was not permitted, for Cyprian uuLib. 1 Ep. 9.—Cum singuli divino sacerdotio honorati & cuncti in clericali Ministerio constituti non nisi altari & sacrificiis deservire, & precibus atque orationibus vacare debeant. Scriptum est enim &c.condemns as altogether unlawfull that any Church-man should be so much as a testamentary Tutor to any Pupil. And mark the ground he goes on, For (saith he) whosoever are honoured with the Divine Priest-Hood or have a place in the Clergy ought only to serve at the Altar, and spend their time in Prayer and Supplication. For, 'tis written, no Man that warreth intangleth himself with the Affairs of this Life, that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a souldier. Th… is such a clear and inevitable Condemnation of the Practice of the Hierarchicks, that the Learned Annotators, Pamelius, and the Bishop of Oxford, finding nothing wherewith to elude it, skipp it over with deep silence. And now judge if Cyprian was of one mind with the Bishop of Five Churches, who will have the meaning of Paul's words cited by Cyprian to bexxHist. of the Council of Trent. pag. 490. that every Christian ought to abstain from those things which are repugnant to Christian Profession, which are sins only; and will not have the Apostle to speak any thing of Church-men in particular, or if Cyprian would have expon'd the sixth of the Canons ascribed to the Apostles as doth Heylyn, whoyyHistor. of Episcop. part 2. page 25. makes the Canon only to mean that Bishops or inferiour Clergy-Men might not be Consuls, Praetors, Generals, or undergoe such publick Offices in the State of Rome, as were most sought for and esteemed by the Gentiles there. Heylen is here somewhat intricat, and his cause required it. However the sum of his drift is, that the exercising of these or the like Offices is allowed to any Pastor by the Canon. Now, altho' 'tallowed it not when the Empire was Pagan, and he would prove something of this kind from 1 Cor. 6. where he must count all Magistrats thro' the Christian World, Pagans and Unbelievers, for otherways none shall ever prove from this Scripture, so much as the lawfullness of a Bishop or Pastors, judging and determining any difference between any two that referr themselves to his Arbitration. And tho' he should prove it, pray what is this topart. 2. pages 22, 23. p. 235part. 2. pag. 376. 377.the exercising the Office of Consul, General, Praetor, Chancellour, Treasurer or the like pieces of such temporal Power and Grandor? Judge moreover, were there no more but Paul his words to Timothy, 1. 4, 13, 14, 15. And 2 Tim. 4. 2, 5. If there be Leasure left any Pastor to be either Consul, General, or ought else of this nature: and consequently if all the shifts they use on this head be not sufficiently overthrown by these Scriptures only. But I had almost forgotten to notice how they torment themselves that they may torment and detort Cyprian, For Saravia says, that the Canon Cyprian speaks off was but particular and provincial only for the Church of Carthage. But Heylen refutes Saravia his comment and says Cyprian spoke so, because the Church was then almost destitute and unprovided of Presbyters. As if Cyprian had not spoken of Chruch-men absolutely and without the least intimation of any such restriction, and grounded his saying on a Scripture which, whatsoever it speaks of Church-men, confessedly says it of the mall, be they many or few or in whatsoever time and place they live. Moreover it's most certain that in Matthew 20. 25, 26, 27, 28. The Princes of the Gentiles &c. And Mark 10. 42, 43, 44, 45. And Luke 22. 25, 26, 27. All Pastors of Flocks are prohibited to exercise Dominion, secular and state Dignity, and a parity of the Apostles amongst themselves, and in them a parity of all ordinary Pastors or Ministers of the Gospell among themselves is enjoyned. D. M. aaPag. 16 & seq.pretends to engage with the latter part of this Inference, but first he mis-states the question as if from these Texts we pleaded for a perfect equality of all the Officers of Christs house without distinction between extraordinary and ordinary Ministers, or between Pastors and other Officers, and so his saying that the Apostles exercised Jurisdiction over other Ecclesiasticks, whether true or false, is nothing to the purpose. But saith D. M. Our blessed Saviour supposeth degrees of Subordination amongst his own Disciples as well as other societies, and therefore he directs the Ecclesiasticks who would climb up to the highest places in the Church, to take other methods then these that are most usual amongst the Grandees of the World: He that deserved preferment in the Church was to be the servant of all. Which answer he steals from the Jesuite Bellarmine bbDe Pontifice Lib. 5. Cap. 10.who answers that Christ only directs ecclesiastick Princes, & teaches that as such they ought to rule their subjects, not as do Kings p. 236and Lords, but as Fathers and Pastors, To whom Junius replyesccTom. 2. Col. 875, 876. that all this is quite contrarie to both Christs words and scope, The sons of Zebedie (saith he) desired a Dominion, this Christ rejects and refuses to give them; again the falshood of this answer is demonstrated positively by Christs following words, who in stead of this Dominion which they desired, enjoyns them a humble Ministry and Service. Wherefore there is a clear opposition between Dominion and Ministry, the former belonging the World, the latter to the Church. Bishops are not (saith Bellarmine) here forbidden to exercise a dominion like that of godly Kings, but only like that of Tyrranical Kings who know not God. We deny (replyes Junius) that there is any such restriction, neither can it be proved. And accordingly Junius refutes and bafles all the Sophistrie that Bellarmine, and, after him, our Prelatists ordinarly bring to prove that only tyrrany and not all sort of principality or superiority is by our Saviour in these Texts, prohibited. And with Junius joyns the whole stream of Protestant Writers. But our Saviour (saith D. M.) did that himself among them, which he now commanded them to do to one another, and therefore the doing of this towards one another in obedience to the command now under consideration, could not inferr a Parity, unless that they blasphemously infer that Christ and his Apostles were equal: For our Saviour recomends what he enjoyns from his own constant and visible practice among them, viz, that he himself who was their Lord and Master, was their sevant, and therefore, it becomes the greatest among them, in imitation of him, to be modest, calm, and humble, towards all their subordinate Brethren. A sturdy argument forsooth, as if our most blessed Master to quell his Disciples their ambition of aspiring to a preheminence over one another, and to render them more content with a humble and brotherly parity, could not adduce and urge his own most holy and meek example of his most wonderful condescending to take upon him the form of a Servant, and do the works of a Servant among his Apostles, and that so humblie, as if he had been only their Companion and nothing above them: but he must anone be concluded to degrade and throw down himself into a meer equality with his Disciples. Can any in the exercise of his wit make such a Collection? Neither can better befall him: for, as is his constant practice this wretched Paralogism he also borrows from another Jebusite Cornelius a Lapide, who at the same rate depraves this Text of Matthew to save from a mortal blow Peter's fictitious Primacy. But in the next place, which is little better, D. M. turns Jew on our hand: Let it be further considered (saith he) that p. 237the Hierarchy and Subordination of Priests was established by Divine Authority in the Jewish Church, and if our Saviour had pulled down that ancient Polity, and commanded an equality among the Presbyters of the New Testament, he would not have stated the Opposition between his own Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles, but rather between the Priests of the Mosaic Oeconomy and the Disciples of the New Testament. And agian, fearing least his J…daism and also his self-repugnancy should not have otherways been apparent enough, We do not (saith heddpage 27.) now plead, as some ignorant People may pretend, that there ought to be a Bishop above Presbyters, because that there was a High-Priest among the Jews, but rather thus, that the Hierarchy that obtained in the Patriarchal and Jewish Oeconomy was never abrogated in the new. Well then, is there on Earth a visible High-Priest over the whole Church the Levitical Orders, Rites, & Temple-service, the very things wherein the Jewish Hierarchy consisted, and shadows of Christ to come, now allowable. But to come to his cavill, and quiet this child of Ignorance, D. M. should know that beside the Disciples ambition to get up over one another, according to the carnal apprehension they then entertained of Christ kingdome (wherein our Hierarchick Lord Bishops are the Apostles successors indeed, and all Hierarchicks, men of Apostolick principles) they looked also for a great, worldly, and civil power and dominion, which was not at all comprehended in the Jewish Priesthood, nor was then possessed by any of the Priests; and so our Lord's stateing the opposition between his Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles, is by far more apt for his purpose than if he had stated it between them and the Priests of the old Oeconomy, which had been altogether lame, and doon scarce the half of his bussiness. In a word, the Romishness and Falshood of all these his Cavills is manifest, were there no more, from this only, that if they do any thing, they make for the defence of that new Romish Doctrine of Peter's Supremacy, which both the Fathers, and all sound Protestants, not only Presbyterians, but also Episcopals, yea some that otherwise deserve not the name of Protestants, as Dr. Heylen eeHist. of Episcopacy part 1 pag. 15. & seq., explode, & prove that there was a compleat Equality & Parity amongst the Apostles: And they deduce their Conclusion especially from this text of Matthew's Gospel and its parallels. And indeed if there be, as doubtless there are, any places of Scripture fit to prove it, p. 238these texts deservedly hold the first place. The Author of the Opus imperfectum, thought by some to be Chrysostome, saith, on this place of Matthew, Quicunque autem desiderat primatum in terrâ, inveniet confusionem in coelo, Whosoever desires a primacy on Earth, shall find Confusion in Heaven. Now suppose the truth of these words, and compare them with the words of the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. 1. If a man desires the Office of a Bishop, he desires a good work. And it's clear the Office of a Bishop is quite another thing than a Primacy; for to desire the former is lawfull and laudable, but to desire the latter is dangerous and damnable: and so much by the way, for I love not to transcribe the labours of others ffSee if you please for example Rectius Instruendum.. And so angry is D. M. at New Opinions, and for their sake at every thing that's New, that he scarce ever advances any Argument, Vindication, or Defence, but what is so frequently and soundly baffl'd, so bare and worn, as to vy even with the old ancient Garments of the Gibeonites. These Texts, as I said, prohibite also all Pastors of Flocks to exercise Dominion, Secular or State Dignities, which is irrefragably made out by our Writers against Bellarmine de Pontifice, and other Romanists. However foreign either the Possession or Hope of such Emoluments and Dignities, as also the glistering gayetie of gorgious and theatrick Ceremonies, close mens mouths, and keep them from acknowledging the Truth, for which even a PaganggPersius Satyrâ secundâ. may come in to reprove them,

O curvae interris animae, & coelestium inanes!

Quid juvat hoc templis nostros immittere mores?

Et bona Dijs ex hac scelerata ducere pulpa.

Dull earthy minds who know no heavenly thing,

What profites it into the Church to bring

Our own Inventions? or to dream that we

Can with Lust's fewel please the Deity.

Dicite Pontifices, in sancto quid facit aurum?

Speak out your minds ye Priests and do not lie,

Can gold your holy places sanctifie?

It's an old saying that the Church brought forth Riches, but the Daugter devoured the Mother, who when she had wooden Cups she p. 239had golden Priests, but afterward she got golden Cups and wooden Priests. Even their Pseudo-Clement hhEpist. ad Jacobum fratrem Domini.is prolix on this subject, exhorting the Bishop to be dis-engaged of all worldly cares and affairs, and perpetually imploy'd in Preaching and Prayer, and the like Ministerial duties. And indeed all Pastors of Flocks would carefully abstain from secular and state Offices, and every thing else that may abstract them from their Charges and Flocks, least their foreign procure them Functius's reward. But if our Hierarchicks will not hear our blessed Lord and his Apostles, if they will not hear the genuine writtings of the Ancients, nor yet these spurious pieces whose Authros were otherwayes sufficiently Hierarchick and Ceremonious, I think they might listen to the Bishop af Aiace, for he was a Member of the Council of Trent: John Baptista Bernard (saith Suave iihist. of the Council of Trent pag. 489.) Bishop of Aiace, who, th… he believed that residencie was de jure Divino, yet thought it not fit to speak of that question, delivered a singular speech, saying that, not aiming to establish one Opinion more then another, but only so to inforce residency, as that it may be really executed, he thought it vain to declare from whence the obligation came, or whatsoever else and that it was sufficient only to remove the cause of Absence; which is, that Bishops do busie themselves in the courts of Princes, and in the affairs of the World, being Judges, Chanchellours Secretaries, Counsellours, Treasurers, and there are but few Offices of state into which some Bishop hath not insinuate himself. This is forbidden by St. Paul, who thought it necessary that a Souldier of the Church should abstain from secular Employments. Let God's command be executed, and them forbidden to take any Charge, Office, or Degree, ordinary or extraordinary, in the affairs of the World; and then their being no cause for them to remain at Court, they will go to their residencie, of their own accord, without Command or Penalty, and will not have any occasion to depart from thence. In conclusion he desired that the Council could constitute, that it should not be lawfull for Bishops or others, who have care of souls, to exercise any secular Office or Charge.

But all this was in vain, for that Synagogue of Sathan was deaf like the Adder, & the Bishop of Five Churches who harang'd to the contrary & eluded or neglected all his reasons telling the Council withall, that if Aiace were follow'd their Church would anon become base & contemptible, was heard with applause of the the whole Conventicle (tho' not p. 240without a self-contradiction as the Historian observes) so that this ingenuous and Christian Discourse was slighted and contemned. Neither can I find much ground to expect any fairer treatment from men of a Tridentine Spirit, whose strenth lyes mostly in mean sophistry, and unmanly snatching at colours and shaddous, disimulation of the unsoundness of their Cause, banter and Hectoring, noise and ill founded claims to Antiquity. From these I may look for unkind handling indeed; but withall have some assurance to meet with better dealling from all the Admirers and Students of most true and only unspotted Antiquity, the sacred Scripturers, whom God hath quicken'd by his Precepts, who know that serious and assiduous Meditation in God's Law and keeping his Precepts will make them understand more than even the Ancients, and therefore rejoyce in the Way of his Testimonies as much as in all Riches, and esteem the Words of his Mouth more than their necessary food, to whom these are the Joy and Rejoyceing of their heart. These, I am somewhat confident, will not be much displeased with what I have said. My Antagonist, if any happen, or I'm exceedingly mistaken, will be of quite different Qualities, I can sincerely affirm that I have not willingly or wittingly injured the Truth, or any man's person, and that the Love of sacred Verity moved me to publish these papers. Others, doubtless, of suitable Abilities may soon advance things of far greater worth than what can come from we whose mite is so mean and inconsiderable, and who, beside the other disadvantages that environ me, according to the good Pleasure of him that doth all things well, from the very womb have laboured under the want of that noble Sence of SEEING, and so am oblig'd to read with the Eyes and write with the Hands of others. Yet tho' I be deprived of the sweet Light and pleasure of beholding the Sun, it little moves me, if so be I may see the infinitely more precious Light of the most glorious and dear SON of Righteousness, and be illuminated and enlyven'd with that all healling Vertue which is in his Wings.

FINIS.

End of the text · William Jameson, The Fundamentals of the Hierarchy Examined and Disproved (1697)