SECTION IV. St. James was bishop of Jerusalem, and therefore called "an apostle," appears by the often commemoration of his presidency, and singular emi The Succession into the ordinary Office of Aposto- nency in Holy Scripture. Priority of order is men late is made by Bishops. FOR although deacons and priests have part of these offices, and therefore, though in a very limited sense, they may be called "successores apostolorum," to wit, in the power of baptizing, consecrating the eucharist, and preaching; (an excellent example whereof, though we have none in Scripture, yet, | if I mistake him not, we have in Ignatius, calling the college of presbyters ouvdεoμov 'Aπоσтóλwr, "a combination of apostles;") yet the apostolate and episcopacy, which did communicate in all the power and offices which are ordinary and perpetual, are, in Scripture, clearly all one in ordinary ministration, and their names are often used in common, to signify exactly the same ordinary function. 1. The name was borrowed from the prophet David, in the prediction of the apostasy of Judas, and surrogation of St. Matthias ; Καὶ τὴν Ἐπισκοπὴν avrov λá¤oi érεpoc "His bishopric," that is, his apostolate," let another take." The same word, according to the translation of the Seventy, is used by the prophet Isaiah, in an evangelical prediction, Καὶ δώσω τοὺς ἄρχοντάς σου ἐν εἰρήνῃ, καὶ τοὺς ΕπισKÓTOVÇ σOU EV Čikauuoovvy "I will give thy princes κόπους σοῦ ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ in peace, and thy bishops in righteousness."Principes ecclesiæ vocat futuros episcopos," saith St. Jerome, herein admiring God's majesty in the destination of such ministers, whom himself calls princes. And to this issue it is cited by St. Clement, in his famous epistle to the Corinthians. But this is no way unusual in Scripture: for, 66 2. St. James, the brother of our Lord, is called "an apostle," and yet he was not in the number of the twelve, but he was bishop of Jerusalem. First: That St. James was called "an apostle" appears by the testimony of St. Paul: "But other apostles saw I none, save James, the Lord's brother." Secondly: That he was none of the twelve appears also, because among the twelve apostles there were but two Jameses, the son of Alpheus, and James, the son of Zebedee, the brother of John. But neither of these was the James whom St. Paul calls "the Lord's brother." And this St. Paul intimates, in making a distinct enumeration of all the appearances which Christ made after the resurrection: "First to Cephas, then to the twelve, then to the five hundred brethren, then to James, then to all the apostles." So that here St. James is reckoned distinctly from the twelve, and they from the whole college of the apostles; for there were, it seems, more of that dignity than the twelve. But this will also safely rely upon the concurrent testimony of Hegesippus, Clement, Eusebius, Epiphanius, St. Ambrose, and St. Jerome. Thirdly: That แ tioned, Gal. ii. even before St. Peter, who yet was primus apostolorum, naturâ unus homo, gratiâ unus Christianus, abundantiore gratiâ unus idemque primus apostolus," as St. Augustin; yet in his own diocess, St. James had priority of order before him, verse 9. And then, 1. James, 2. Cephas, and, 3. John, &c. First, James before Cephas and St. Peter. St. James, also, was president of that synod, which the apostles convocated at Jerusalem about the question of circumcision; as is to be seen, Acts xv.; to him St. Paul made his address, Acts xxi.; to him the brethren carried him, where he was found sitting in his college of presbyters, there he was always resident, and his seat fixed; and that he lived bishop of Jerusalem for many years together, is clearly testified by all the faith of the primitive fathers and historians. But of this here after. 66 3. Epaphroditus is called "the apostle of the Philippians." "I have sent unto you Epaphroditus,” συνεργὸν καὶ συστρατιώτην μοῦ, ὑμῶν δὲ ἀπόστ τολον, σε my compeer and your apostle." 'Gradum apostolatus recepit Epaphroditus," saith Primasius; and what that is, we are told by Theodoret ; dictus Philippensium apostolus à S. Paulo, quid hoc aliud nisi episcopus ?" "Because he also had received the office of being an apostle among them," saith St. Jerome upon the same place; and it is very observable, that those apostles to whom our blessed Saviour gave immediate substitution, are called ἀπόστολοι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “ apostles of Jesus Christ;” but those other men, which were bishops of churches, and called apostles by Scripture, are called άñóσTOλOL 'Ekkλŋotov, "apostles of churches," or sometimes "apostles" alone, but never are entitled "of Jesus Christ." "Other of the apostles saw I none, but James, the Lord's brother," Gal. i. There St. James, the bishop of Jerusalem, is called an “apostle" indefinitely. But St. Paul calls himself often "the apostle of Jesus Christ, not of man, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ." So Peter, an 66 'apostle of Jesus Christ;" but St. James, in his epistle to the Jews of the dispersion, writes not himself "the apostle of Jesus Christ," but dovλog Oɛou кàì'Inσov Xpɩσrov, “ James, the servant of God, and of the Lord Jesus Christ." 66 Further yet: St. Paul, although as having an immediate calling from Christ to the office of apostolate, at large calls himself the apostle of Jesus Christ; yet when he was sent to preach to the gentiles, by the particular direction indeed of the Holy Ghost, but by human constitution, and imposition of hands; in relation to that part of his office, and his cure of the uncircumcision, he limits his apostolate to his diocess, and calls himself, ̓Απόστολον ἐθνῶν, " the apostle of the gentiles ; "i as St. Peter, for the same reason, and in the same modification, is called 'Aróσroλoс TEρITоμns, that is, "the apostle of those who were of the circumcision."k And thus Epaphroditus is called "the apostle of the Philippians," who clearly was their bishop, (as I shall show in the sequel,) that is, he had an apostolate limited to the diocess of Philippi. "Paulatim verò tempore procedente, et alii ab his quos Dominus elegerat, ordinati sunt apostoli, sicut ille ad Philippenses sermo declarat, dicens, Necessarium autem existimo Epaphroditum," &c., so St. Jerome; "In process of time, others, besides those whom the Lord had chosen, were ordained apostles:" and particularly he instances in Epaphroditus, from the authority of this instance, adding also, that by the apostles themselves, Judas and Silas were called " apostles." 4. Thus Titus, and some other with him, who came to Jerusalem with the Corinthian benevolence, are called 'Aπóσrоλoι 'Ekkλŋσiwv, “the apostles of the churches: "m apostles, I say, in the episcopal sense. They were none of the twelve, they were not of immediate Divine mission, but of apostolic ordination; they were actually bishops, as I shall show hereafter. Titus was bishop of Crete, and Epaphroditus of Philippi; and these were the apostles; for Titus came with the Corinthian, Epaphroditus with the Colossian liberality. Now these men were not 'Arróσroλo, called "messengers" in respect of these churches sending them with their contributions. 1. Because they are not called the "apostles of these churches," to wit, whose alms they carried, but simply 'Ekkλŋoɩwv, "of the churches," viz. of their own, of which they were bishops. For if the title of apostle had related to their mission from these churches, it is unimaginable that there should be no term of relation expressed. 2. It is very clear that, although they did indeed carry the benevolence of the several churches, yet St. Paul, not those churches, sent them; "And we have sent with them our brother,"n &c. 3. They we called "apostles of the churches," not going from Corinth with the money, but before they came thither, from whence they were to be despatched in legation to Jerusalem: "If any inquire of Titus, or the brethren, they are the apostles of the church, and the glory of Christ." So they were "apostles" before they went to Corinth, not for their being employed in the transportation of their charity. So that it is plain, that their apostolate being not relative to the churches, whose benevolence they carried, and they having churches of their own, as Titus had Crete, Epaphroditus had Philippi, their apostolate was a fixed residence, and superintendency of their several churches. case; SECTION V. And Office. BUT in Holy Scripture, the identity of the ordinary office of apostleship and episcopacy is clearer yet. For when the Holy Spirit had sent seven letters to the seven Asian bishops, the angel of the church of Ephesus is commended for trying them, which say they are apostles, and are not, and hath found them liars.a This angel of the church of Ephesus, as antiquity hath taught us, was at that time Timothy, or Gaius; the first a disciple, the other had been an entertainer of the apostles, and either of them knew them well enough it could not be, that any man should dissemble their persons, and counterfeit himself St. Paul or St. Peter. And if they had, yet little trying was needful to discover their folly in such a and whether it was Timothy or Gaius, he could deserve but small commendations for the mere believing of his own eyes and memory. Besides, the apostles, except St. John, all were then dead, and he known to live in Patmos; known by the public attestation of the sentence of relegation "ad insulam." These men, therefore, dissembling themselves to be apostles, must dissemble an ordinary function, not an extraordinary person. And, indeed, by the concourse of story, place, and time, Diotrephes was the man St. John chiefly pointed at. For he, seeing that at Ephesus there had been an episcopal chair placed, and Timothy a long while possessed of it, and perhaps Gaius after him, if we may trust Dorotheus, and the like in some other churches; and that St. John had not constituted bishops in all other churches of the lesser Asia, but kept the jurisdiction to be ministered by himself, would arrogantly take upon him to be a bishop without apostolical ordination, obtruding himself upon the church of Ephesus ; so becoming ἀλλοτριο-επίσκοπος, "a busy man in another's diocess." This, and such impostors as this, the angel of the church of Ephesus did try, and discover, and convict; and in it he was assisted by St. John himself, as is intimated in St. John's third epistle, written to his Gaius, (ver. 9.) "I wrote unto the church," to wit, of Asia, "but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not." Clearly this eudoañóσroλoç would have been a bishop. It was a matter of ambition, a quarrel for superintendence and pre-eminence, that troubled him; and this also appears further, in that he exercised jurisdiction and excommunication, where he had nothing to do; (ver. 10.) "He forbids them that would receive the brethren, and casteth them out of the church." that here it is clear, this false apostolate was his ambitious seeking of episcopal pre-eminence and jurisdiction, without lawful ordination. λоπрwτεύων Διοτρεφής, that was his design; he loved to So a Apocal. ii. b Doroth. Synops. c Vide Constit. A post. per Clement. ubi quidem Johannes in Epheso Episc. post Timoth. collocatur. be the first in the church, "esse apostolum, esse episcopum ;" ;""to be an apostle, or a bishop." SECTION VI. Which Christ himself hath made distinct from Presbyters. BUT this office of the ordinary apostleship or episcopacy, derives its fountain from a rock; Christ's own distinguishing the apostolate from the function of presbyters. For when our blessed Saviour had gathered many disciples, who believed him at his first preaching, "Vocavit discipulos suos, et elegit duodecim ex ipsis quos et apostolos nominavit," a saith St. Luke: "He called his disciples and out of them chose twelve, and called them apostles." That was the first election. "Post hæc autem designavit Dominus et alios septuaginta-duos." That was his second clection; the first were called "apostles," the second were not, and yet he sent them by two and two. We hear but of one commission granted them, which when they had performed, and returned joyful at their power over devils, we hear no more of them in the gospel, but that their names were written in heaven. We are likely, therefore, to hear of them | after the passion, if they can but hold their own. And so we do. For after the passion, the apostles gathered them together, and joined them in clerical commission, by virtue of Christ's first ordination of them; for a new ordination we find none in Holy Scripture recorded, before we find them doing clerical offices. Ananias, we read, baptizing of Saul: Philip, the evangelist, we find preaching in | Samaria, and baptizing his converts; others also, we find, presbyters at Jerusalem, especially at the first council; for there was Judas, surnamed Justus; and Silas, and St. Mark; and John, (a presbyter, not an apostle, as Eusebius reports him,b) and Simeon Cleophas, who tarried there till he was made bishop of Jerusalem. These, and divers others, are reckoned to be of the number of the seventy-two, by Eusebius and Dorotheus. Here are plainly two offices of ecclesiastical ministries, apostles and presbyters; so the Scripture calls them. These were distinct, and not temporary, but succeeded to; and if so, then here is clearly a Divine institution of two orders, and yet deacons neither of them. Here let us fix awhile. SECTION VII. Giving to Apostles a Power to do some Offices perpetually necessary, which to others he gave not. THEN, it is clear in Scripture, that the apostles did some acts of ministry, which were necessary to a Luke x. 66 First: The apostles imposed hands in ordinations, which the seventy-two did not. The case is known, Acts vi. The apostles called the disciples, willing them to choose seven men, whom they might constitute in the ministration and oversight of the poor. They did so, and set them before the twelve apostles; so they are specified and numbered, verse 2, cum 6. " and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them." They, not the disciples, not the seventy-two, who were there actually present, and seven of them were then ordained to this ministry; for they were not now ordained to be diákovoi μvστηρίων, but τραπέζων, as the council of Constantnople calls them; and that these were the number of the seventy-two disciples, Epiphanius bears witness.e He sent other seventy-two to preach, v ἦσαν οἱ ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ τῶν χηρῶν τεταγμένοι, “ of which number were those seven ordained and set over the widows." And the same is intimated by St. Chrysostom, if I understand him right; Пolov dè apa ἀξίωμα εἶχον οὗτοι, καὶ ποίαν ἐδέξαντο χειροτονίαν ἀναγκαῖον μαθεῖν· ἄρα τὴν τῶν διακόνων; καὶ μὴν τοῦτο ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλὰ τῶν πρεσBUTέpwv ¿OTIV Oikovoμía. What dignity had these seven here ordained? Of deacons? No; for this dispensation is made by priests, not deacons ; and Theophylact, more clearly repeating the words of St. Chrysostom, "pro more suo," adds this: Tür πρεσβυτέρων οἶμαι τὸ ὄνομα εἶναι, καὶ τὸ ἀξίωμα αὐτῶν· ἀλλὰ τέως εἰς τοῦτο διακονεῖν τοῖς πιστοῖς τὰ πpòc rǹy Xpɛíav ¿xeɩporovýInoav. The name and dignity of these seven was no less, but even the dignity of presbyters, only for the time they were appointed to dispense the goods of the church for the good of the faithful people. Presbyters they were, say St. Chrysostom and Theophylact; of the number of the seventy-two, saith Epiphanius. But, however, it is clear, that the seventy-two were present; for the whole multitude of the disciples was as yet there resident; they were not yet sent abroad, they were not scattered with persecution, till the martyrdom of St. Stephen; but the twelve called the whole multitude of the disciples to them about this affair (verse 2). But yet themselves only did ordain them. Secondly: An instance parallel to this, is in the imposition of hands upon St. Paul and Barnabas, in the first ordination that was held at Antioch. "Now there were in the church that were at Antioch, certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon, and Lucius, and Manaen, and Saul. Aτουργούντων δὲ αὐτῶν, while these men were ministering, the Holy Ghost said to them, Separate me Barnabas and Saul." They did so; they "fasted, 66 SECTION VIII. And Confirmation. they prayed, they laid their hands on them, and | tion must be so continued to all ages of the church; sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the for the thing was not temporary, but productive of Holy Ghost, departed into Seleucia." This is the issue and succession; and, therefore, as perpetual story; now let us make our best of it. Here, then, as the clergy, as the church itself. was the ordination and imposition of hands complete; and that was said to be done by the Holy Ghost, which was done by the prophets of Antioch. For they sent them away; and yet the next words are, "so they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost." So that here was the thing done, and that by the prophets alone, and that by the command of the Holy Ghost, and said to be his act. Well! but what were these prophets? They were prophets in the church of Antioch: not such as Agabus, and the daughters of Philip the evangelist, prophets of prediction extraordinary, but prophets of ordinary office and ministration; προφήται, διδάσκαλοι, καὶ λείτουρYouνTES," prophets, and teachers, and ministers." More than ordinary ministers, for they were doctors or teachers; and that is not all, for they were prophets too. This, even at first sight, is more than the ordinary office of the presbytery. We shall see this clear enough in St. Paul,k where the ordinary office of prophets is reckoned before pastors, before evangelists, next to apostles; that is, next to such apostles, og avròç Edwкe, as St. Paul there expresses it; next to those apostles to whom Christ hath given immediate mission. And these are, therefore, apostles too; apostles "secundi ordinis;" none of the twelve, but such as St. James, and Epaphroditus, and Barnabas, and St. Paul himself. To be sure they were such prophets as St. Paul and Barnabas; for they are reckoned in the number by St. Luke; for here it was that St. Paul, although he had immediate vocation by Christ, yet he had particular ordination to his apostolate or ministry of the gentiles. It is evident, then, what prophets these were; they were, at the least, more than ordinary presbyters, and, therefore, they imposed hands, and they only. And yet, to make the business up complete, St. Mark was amongst them, but he imposed no hands; he was there as the deacon and minister, (verse 5.) but he meddled not. St. Luke fixes the whole action upon the prophets, such as St. Paul himself was, and so did the Holy Ghost too; but neither did St. Mark, who was an evangelist and one of the seventy-two disciples, (as he is reckoned in the primitive catalogues by Eusebius and Dorotheus,) nor any of the college of the Antiochian presbyters, that were less than prophets, that is, who were not more than mere presbyters. The sum is this: Imposition of hands is a duty and office necessary for the perpetuating of a church, "ne gens sit unius ætatis," "lest it expire in one age." This power of imposition of hands for ordination, was fixed upon the apostles and apostolic men, and not communicated to the seventy-two disciples or presbyters; for the apostles and apostolic men did so "de facto," and were commanded to do so, and the seventy-two never did so. Therefore this office and ministry of the apostolate is distinct, and superior to that of presbyters; and this distinc Prophetas duplici genere intelligamus, et futura dicentes, et scripturas revelantes.-S. AMBROS. in 1 Cor. xii. SECONDLY: The apostles did impose hands for confirmation of baptized people; and this was a perpetual act of a power to be succeeded to, and yet not communicated, nor executed by the seventy-two, or any other mere presbyter. That the apostles did confirm baptized people, and others of the inferior clergy could not, is, beyond all exception, clear, in the case of the Samaritan christians, Acts viii. For when St. Philip had converted and baptized the men of Samaria, the apostles sent Peter and John to lay their hands on them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost. St. Philip was an evangelist; he was one of the seventy-two disciples, a presbyter, and appointed to the same ministration that St. Stephen was, about the poor widows; yet he could not do this; the apostles must, and did. This giving of the Holy Ghost by imposition of the apostles' hands, was not for a miraculous gift, but an ordinary grace. For St. Philip could, and did do miracles enough; but this grace he could not give, the grace of consigning or confirmation. The like case is in Acts xii. where some people, having been baptized at Ephesus, St. Paul confirmed them, giving them the Holy Ghost by imposition of hands. The apostles did it; not the twelve only, but apostolic men, the other apostles. St. Paul did it. St. Philip could not, nor any of the seventy-two; or any other mere presbyters ever did it, that we find in Holy Scripture. Yea, but this imposition of hands was for a miraculous issue; for the Ephesine christians received the Holy Ghost, and spake with tongues, and prophesied; which effect, because it is ceased, certainly the thing was temporary, and long ago expired. First: Not for this reason, to be sure. For extraordinary effects may be temporary, when the function which they attest may be eternal; and, therefore, are no signs of an extraordinary ministry. The apostles' preaching was attended by miracles, and extraordinary conversions of people, ut in exordio," Apostolos divinorum signorum comitabantur effectus et Spiritûs Sancti gratia, ita ut videres unâ alloquutione integros simul populos ad cultum divinæ religionis adduci, et prædicantium verbis non esse tardiorem audientium fidem," as Eusebius tells, of the success of the preaching of some evangelists; yet I hope preaching must not now cease, because no miracles are done; or that to convert one man now, would be the greatest miracle. The apostles, when they cursed and anathematized k Ephes. iv. a S. Cyprian. ad Jubajan. b Lib. iii. Hist. c. 37. a delinquent, he died suddenly; as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira, whom St. Peter slew with the word of his ministry; and yet now, although these extraordinary issues cease, it is not safe venturing upon the curses of the church. When the apostles did excommunicate a sinner, he was presently delivered over to Satan to be buffeted, that is, to be afflicted with corporal punishments; and now, although no such exterminating angels beat the bodies of persons excommunicate, yet the power of excommunication, I hope, still remains in the church, and the power of the keys is not also gone. So, also, in the power of confirmation; which, however attended by a miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost, in gifts of languages and healing, yet, like other miracles in respect of the whole integrity of christian faith, these miracles at first did confirm the function and the faith for ever. Now then, that this right of imposing hands, for confirming of baptized people, was not to expire with the persons of the apostles, appears from these considerations. was First Because Christ made a promise of sending “Vicarium suum Spiritum," the Holy Ghost, in his stead; and this, by way of appropriation, is called "the promise of the Father." This was pertinent to all christendom, "Effundam de Spiritu meo super omnem carnem ;" so it was in the prophecy. "For the promise is to you and to your children, καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς εἰς μακράν, ὅσους ἂν προσκαλéonrai Kúpios, and to all them that are afar off, even to as many as the Lord shall call." d So it was in the first accomplishing. To all and this for ever; "for I will send the Holy Ghost unto you, and he shall abide with you for ever." For it "in subsidium," to supply the comforts of his desired presence; and must, therefore, ex vi in tentionis," be remanent till Christ's coming again. Now, then, this promise being to be communicated to all, and that for ever, must either come to us by, 1. Extraordinary and miraculous mission; or by, 2. An ordinary ministry. Not the first; for we might as well expect the gift of miracles. If the second, (as it is most certain so,) then the main question is evicted; viz. that something perpetually necessary was in the power of the apostles, which was not in the power of the inferior ministers, nor of any but themselves and their colleagues; to wit, "ministerium S. Spiritûs," or the ordinary "office of giving the Holy Ghost" by imposition of hands. For this promise was performed to the apostles in Pentecost, to the rest of the faithful after baptism; "Quod enim nunc in confirmandis Neophytis manus impositio tribuit singulis, hoc tunc Spiritûs Sancti descensio, in credentium populo donavit universis," saith Eusebius Emissenus.e Now we find no other way of performing it, nor any ordinary conveyance of the Spirit to all people, but this; and we find that the Holy Ghost actually was given this way. Therefore the effect, to wit, the Holy Ghost, being to continue for ever, and the promise of universal concernment, this way also of its communication, to Vide August. tract. vi. in 1. Epist. Johan. d Acts ii. 39. wit, by apostolical imposition of hands, is also "perpetuum ministerium," to be succeeded to, and to abide for ever. Secondly: This ministry of imposition of hands, for confirmation of baptized people, is so far from being a temporary grace, and to determine with the persons of the apostles, that it is a fundamental point of christianity, an essential ingredient to its composition; St. Paul is my author, "Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, faith towards God, the doctrines of baptism, and of laying on of hands," &c. Here is imposition of hands reckoned as part of the foundation and a principle of christianity in St. Paul's catechism. Now imposition of hands is used by name in Scripture but for two ministrations: first, for ordination; and secondly, for this, whatsoever it is. Imposition of hands for ordination does indeed give the Holy Ghost, but not as he is that promise which is called “the promise of the Father." For the Holy Ghost for ordination was given before the ascension, John xx. But the promises of the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, (the Paraclete, I say, not the Ordainer or Fountain of priestly order, that) was not given till the day of Pentecost; and besides, it was promised to all christian people, and the other was given only to the clergy. Add to this, that St. Paul having laid this in the foundation, makes his progress from this to "perfection," (as he calls it,) that is, to higher mysteries; and then his discourse is immediately of the priesthood evangelical, which is originally in Christ, ministerially in the clergy; so that, unless we will either confound the terms of his progress, or imagine him to make the ministry of the clergy the foundation of Christ's priesthood, and not rather contrary, it is clear, that by imposition of hands, St. Paul means not ordination, and therefore confirmation, there being no other ordinary ministry of imposition of hands, but these two, specified in Holy Scripture. For, as for benediction, in which Christ used the ceremony, and as for healing, in which Ananias and the apostles used it; the first is clearly no principle or fundamental point of christianity; and the second is confessedly extraordinary; therefore the argument is still firm upon its first principles. 3. Lastly: The primitive church did, "de facto," and believed themselves to be tied "de jure to use this right of confirmation and giving of the Holy Ghost after baptism. St. Clemens Alexandrinus, in Eusebius, tells a story of a young man whom St. John had converted and committed to a bishop to be brought up in the faith of christendom: "Qui," saith St. Clement, 66 eum baptismi sacramento illuminavit, posteà verò sigillo Domini tanquam perfectâ et tutâ ejus animi custodiâ obsignavit." The bishop first "baptized" him, then "consigned" him. Justin Martyr says, (speaking " pro more ecclesiæ," according to the custom of the church,) that when the mysteries of f Heb. vi. 2. g Lib. iii. Hist. cap. 17. |