which should be provisionary for villages; and that | Ecumenius, and Theophylact, no confident denial can ever break through, or escape conviction. is, of such men as had power to ordain, and power to send presbyters to what part of their charge they pleased. For since presbyters could not ordain other presbyters, as appears by St. Paul's sending Titus to do it there, where, most certainly, many presbyters before were actually resident; if presbyters had gone to villages, they must have left the cities destitute; or if they stayed in cities, the villages would have perished; and at last, when these men had died, both one and the other had been made a prey to the wolf; for there could be no shepherd after the decay of the first generation. f And now I know not what objection can fairly be made here; for I hope St. Titus was no "evangelist." He is not called so in Scripture, and all antiquity calls him "a bishop;" and the nature of his offices, the eminence of his dignity, the superiority of jurisdiction, the cognizance of causes criminal, and the epistle, proclaim him "bishop." But suppose awhile Titus had been an evangelist, I would fain know who succeeded him? or did all his office expire with his person? If so, then who shall reject heretics, when Titus is dead? Who shall silence factious preachers? If not, then still, who succeeded him? The presbyters? How can that be? For if they had more power after his death than before, and governed the churches, which before they did not; then, to be sure, their government in common is not an apostolical ordinance, much less is it a divine right, for it is But let us see further into St. Titus's commission, and letters of orders, and institution: "A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject." Cognizance of heretical pravity, and animadversion against the heretic himself, is most plainly concredited to St. Titus: for, first, he is to "admonish him," then to "reject him," upon his pertinacity, from the catholic communion. "Co-postnate to them both. gere autem illos videtur, qui sæpe corripit," saith St. Ambrose, upon the establishing a coactive or coercive jurisdiction, over the clergy and whole diocess. But I need not specify any more particulars; for St. Paul committed to St. Titus, nãσav éπırayỳν, "all authority and power." s The consequence is that, which St. Ambrose prefixes to the commentary on his epistle: Titum apostolus consecravit episcopum, et ideò commonet eum ut sit solicitus in ecclesiasticâ ordinatione, id est, ad quosdam, qui simulatione quâdam dignos se ostentabant ut sublimem ordinem tenerent, simulque et hæreticos ex circumcisione corripiendos." And now, after so fair preparatory of Scripture, we may hear the testimonies of antiquity witnessing, that Titus was by St. Paul made bishop of Crete. "Sed et Lucas," saith Eusebius, "in Actibus Apostolorum, Timothei meminit et Titi; quorum alter in Epheso episcopus; alter ordinandis apud Cretam ecclesiis ab eo ordinatus præficitur." That is it which St. Ambrose expresses something more plainly: "Titum apostolus consecravit episcopum;" "The apostle consecrated Titus, bishop; "i and Theodoret calling Titus, "Cretensium episcopum," "the bishop of the Cretans." And for this reason saith, St. Paul did not write to Sylvanus, or Silas, or Clemens, but to Timothy and Titus,k ört TOÚTOLÇ hồn ikkλnoías y ¿yrexeipikwc, "because to these he had already committed the government of churches." But a fuller testimony of St. Titus being a bishop, who'please may see, in St. Jerome,' in Dorotheus, in Isidore," in Vincentius,° in Theodoret, in St. Gregory, in Primasius, in Sedulius, Theophylact, and Nicephorus." To which if we add the subscription of the epistle, asserted from all impertinent objections, by the clearer testimony of St. Athanasius, St. Jerome," the Syriac translation, Tit. iii. 10. i Ubi suprà. m V 1 De Script. Eccles, in Tito. " De Vita et Morte S. Sanct. PApud Ecumen. in præfat, in Tit. et 1 Timoth. iii. In Pastor. part. ii. c. 11. | But if they had no more power after Titus, than they had under him, how then could they succeed him? There was, indeed, a dereliction of the authority, but no succession. The succession, therefore, both in the metropolis of Crete, and also in the other cities, was made by singular persons, not by a college; for so we find in the diadoxaì, recorded by Eusebius, that in Gnossus, of Crete, Pinytus was a most eminent bishop, and that Philip was the metropolitan at Gortyna; "Sed et Pinytus nobilissimus apud Cretam in episcopis fuit," saith Eusebius. But of this enough. KOV. SECTION XVI. St. Mark at Alexandria. My next instance shall be of one that was an evangelist indeed, one that writ the gospel, and he was a bishop of Alexandria. In Scripture we find nothing of him, but that he was an evangelist and a deacon; for he was deacon to St. Paul and Barnabas, when they went to the gentiles, by ordination and special designment, made at Antioch; συμπαραλαβόντες Ἰωάννην τὸν ἐπικληθέντα Μάρτ "They had John to be their minister; viz. John, whose surname was Mark." a But we are not to expect all the ordinations made by the apostles in their Acts, written by St. Luke, which end at St. Paul's first going to Rome; but many other things, their founding of divers churches, their ordination of bishops, their journeys, their persecutions, their miracles and martyrdoms, are recorded, and rely upon the faith of the primitive church. And yet the ordination of St. Mark was within the term of St. Luke's story; for his successor, "Ania Præfat. in 1 Tim. et in 2 Tim. i. s In 1 Tim. i. et in 2 Tim. i. 6. w Ad Paulum et Eustoch. a Acts xii. and xiii. t In 1 Tit. ▾ In Synopsis Sacr. Script. x Comment, ad Titum. * Lib. iv. c. 21. nus, was made bishop of Alexandria in the eighth | year of Nero's reign, five or six years before the death of St. Paul." "Igitur Neronis primo imperii anno, post Marcum evangelistam, ecclesiæ apud Alexandriam Anianus sacerdotium suscepit;" so the Latin of Ruffinus reads it, instead of " octavo." "Sacerdotium," Aεrovpyíav, that is, "the bishopric ;" for else there were many Aɛíroupyou and priests in Alexandria besides him; and how then he should be St. Mark's successor, more than the other presbyters, is not so soon to be contrived. But so the collecta of the chapter runs : "Quod post Marcum primus episcopus Alexandrinæ ecclesiæ ordinatus sit Anianus ;"" Anianus was consecrated the first bishop of Alexandria, after St. Mark." And Philo, the Jew, telling the story of the christians in Alexandria, called by the inhabitants, “Cultores," and Cultrices," "the worshippers," ," "Addit autem adhuc his," saith Eusebius; “ quomodo sacerdotes vel ministri exhibeant officia sua, vel quæ sit supra omnia episcopalis apicis sedes;" intimating that, beside the offices of priests and ministers, there was | an episcopal dignity, which was apex super omnia," "a height above all employments," established at Alexandria: and how soon that was, is soon computed; for Philo lived in our blessed Saviour's time, and was ambassador to the emperor Caius, and survived St. Mark a little. 66 66 66 Now, although the ordination of St. Mark is not specified in the Acts, as innumerable multitudes of things more, and scarce any thing at all of any of the twelve but St. Peter, nothing of St. James the son of Thaddæus, nor of Alpheus, but the martyrdom of one of them; nothing of St. Bartholomew, of St. Thomas, of Simon Zelotes, of St. Jude the apostle; scarce any of their names recorded; yet no wise man can distrust the faith of such records, which all christendom hitherto, so far as we know, hath acknowledged as authentic; and these ordinations cannot possibly go less than apostolical, being done in the apostles' times, to whom the care of all the churches was concredited, they seeing and beholding several successions in several churches before their death; as here at Alexandria, first St. Mark, then Anianus, made bishop five or six years before the death of St. Peter and St. Paul. But yet, who it was that ordained St. Mark bishop of Alexandria, (for bishop he was most certainly,) is not obscurely intimated by the most excellent man, St. Gelasius, in the Roman council, "Marcus à Petro apostolo in Egyptum directus, verbum veritatis prædicavit, et gloriosè consummavit marty | BUT in the church of Rome, the ordination of bishops by the apostles, and their successions during the times of the apostles, is very manifest, by a concurrent testimony of old writers. "Fundantes igitur, et instruentes beati apostoli ecclesiam Lino episcopatum administrandæ ecclesiæ tradiderunt. Hujus Lini Paulus in his, quæ sunt ad Timotheum, epistolis meminit. Succedit autem ei Anacletus, post eum tertio loco ab apostolis episcopatum sortitur Clemens, qui et vidit ipsos apostolos, et contulit cum eis, cum adhuc insonantem prædicationem apostolorum, et traditionem ante oculos haberet." So St. Irenæus. f "Memoratur autem ex comitibus Pauli Crescens quidam ad Gallias esse præfectus; Linus vero et Clemens in urbe Româ ecclesiæ præfuisse." g Many more testimonies there are of these men's being ordained bishops of Rome by the apostles; as of Tertullian, h Optatus, i St. Augustin, and St. Jerome. But I will not cloy my reader with variety of one dish, and be tedious in a thing so evident and known. SECTION XVIII. k St. Polycarp at Smyrna, and divers others. ST. JOHN ordained St. Polycarp bishop at Smyrna. "Sicut Smyrnæorum ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Johanne collocatum refert; sicut Romanorum Clementem à Petro ordinatum edit, proinde utique et cæteræ exhibent quos ab apostolis in episcopatum constitutos apostolici seminis traduces habeant." So Tertullian. "The church of Smyrna saith that Polycarp was placed there by St. John, as the church of Rome saith that Clement was ordained there by St. Peter; and other churches have those whom the apostles made to be their bishops." "Polycarpus autem non solum ab apostolis edoctus h De Præscript. k Epist. 165. a De Præscript. iLib. ii. cont. Parmen. 1 De Script. Eccles. b De Script. Eccles. lib. iii. c. 35. enumerare," to use St. Irenæus's expression. C It were an infinite labour to reckon up all those whom the apostles made bishops with their own hands, as Dionysius the Areopagite at Athens, Caius at Thessalonica, Archippuse at Colosse, Onesimus at Ephesus, Antipass at Pergamus, Epaphroditus at Philippi, Crescens among the Gauls, Evodiask at Antioch, Sosipater at Iconium, Erastus in Macedonia, Trophimus at Arles, Jason at Tarsus, Silas at Corinth, Onesiphorus at Colophon, Quartus at Berytus, Paul, the proconsul, at Narbona, besides many more whose names are not recorded in Scripture, as these fore-cited are, so many as Eusebius counts impossible to enumerate; it shall therefore suffice to sum up this digest of their acts and ordinations | in those general foldings used by the fathers, saying that the apostles did ordain bishops in all churches, that the succession of bishops, down from the apostles' first ordination of them, was the only argument to prove their churches catholic, and their adversaries, who could not do so, to be heretical. This also is very evident, and of great consideration in the first ages, while their tradition was clear and evident, and not so bepuddled as it since hath been with the mixture of heretics, striving to spoil that which did so much mischief to their causes. "Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum, evolvant ordinem episcoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus ille episcopus aliquem ex apostolis, aut apostolicis viris, habuerit auctorem et antecessorem, hoc modo ecclesiæ apostolicæ census suos deferunt," &c. And when St. Irenæus had reckoned twelve successions in the church of Rome from the apostles, "nunc duodecimo loco ab apostolis episcopatum habet Eleutherius. Hâc ordinatione," saith he, "et successione, et ea quæ est ab apostolis in ecclesiâ traditio et veritatis præconiatio pervenit usque ad nos; et est plenissima hæc ostensio unam et eandem vivatricem fidem esse, quæ in ecclesiâ ab apostolis usque nunc sit conservata, et tradita in veritate."" So that this succession of bishops from the apostles' ordination, must of itself be a very certain thing, when the church made it a main probation of their faith; for the books of Scripture were not all gathered together and generally received as yet. Now then, since this was a main pillar of their christianity, viz. a constant reception of it from hand to hand, as being delivered by the bishops in every chair, till we come to the very apostles that did ordain them; this, I say, being their proof, although it could not be more certain than the thing to be proved, which in that case was a Divine revelation, yet to them it was more evident, as being matter of fact, and known almost by evidence of sense, and as verily believed by all, as it was by any one, that himself was baptized, both relying upon the report of others. “Radix christianæ societatis per sedes apostolorum, et successiones episcoporum, certâ per orbem propaga c Euseb. lib. iv. c. 23. et lib. iii. c. 4. d Origen. lib. x. in Rom. x. e St. Ambrose, in Coloss. iv. f Ignatius epist. ad Ephes. et Euseb. lib. iii. c. 35. g Arethas in i. Apocal. h Epist. ad Philip. et Theodoret. ib. et 1 Tim. iii. | tione diffunditur," saith St. Augustin: "The very root and foundation of christian communion is spread all over the world, by the successions of apostles and bishops. And is it not now a madness to say there was no such thing, no succession of bishops in the churches apostolical, no ordination of bishops by the apostles, and so, as St. Paul's phrase is, "overthrow the faith of some," even of the primitive christians, that used this argument as a great weapon of offence against the invasion of heretics and factious people? It is enough for us that we can truly say, with St. Irenæus, "Habemus annumerare eos qui ab apostolis instituti sunt episcopi in ecclesiis usque ad nos:" We can reckon those, who, from the apostles until now, were made bishops in the churches;"> and of this we are sure enough, if there be any faith in christians. 66 SECTION XIX. So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolical Ordinance, of the same Authority with many other Points generally believed. THE sum is this. Although we had not proved the immediate Divine institution of episcopal power over presbyters and the whole flock, yet episcopacy is not less than an apostolical ordinance, and delivered to us by the same authority that the observation of the Lord's day is. For, for that in the New Testament we have no precept, and nothing but the example of the primitive disciples meeting in their Synaxes upon that day, and so also they did on the Saturday in the Jewish synagogues, but yet (however that at Geneva they were once in meditation to have changed it into a Thursday meeting, to have shown their christian liberty) we should think strangely of those men that called the Sunday-festival less than an apostolical ordinance; and necessary now to be kept holy with such observances as the church hath appointed. Baptism of infants is most certainly a holy and charitable ordinance, and of ordinary necessity to all that ever cried, and yet the church hath founded this rite upon the tradition of the apostles; and wise men do easily observe, that the` anabaptist can, by the same probability of Scripture, enforce a necessity of communicating infants upon us, as we do of baptizing infants upon them, if we speak of immediate Divine institution, or of practice apostolical recorded in Scripture; and therefore a great master of Geneva, in a book he wrote against the anabaptists, was forced to fly to apostolical traditive ordination, and therefore the institution of bishops must be served first, as having fairer plea, and i Euseb. lib. iii. c. 4. apud Gallias. So Ruffinus reads it. "In Galatia," so is intimated in Scripture, and so the Roman Martyrol. Ignatius Epist. ad Antioch. et Euseb. lib. iii. c. 22. In Martyrologio Roman. m Lib. iii. c. 37. n Lib. iii. cap. 3. P Ubi supra. Epist. 42. | clearer evidence in Scripture, than the baptizing of | omnia episcopalis apicis;" so Philo of that bishopinfants, and yet they that deny this are, by the just ric; "The seat of episcopal height above all anathema of the catholic church, confidently con- things in christianity." These are its honours. demned for heretics. Its offices these: τὰ λείποντα ἐπιδιορθῷσαι, ἐπιστομίζειν ἀνυποτάκτους, καὶ ματαιολόγους, &c. "To set in order whatsoever he sees wanting, or amiss; to silence vain prating preachers, that will not submit to their superiors, to ordain elders, to rebuke delinquents, to reject heretics," viz. from the communion of the faithful, (for else why was the angel of the church of Pergamus reproved for tolerating the Nicolaitan heretics, but that it was in his power to eject them? And the same is the case of the angel of Thyatira in permitting the woman to teach and seduce the people,) but to the bishop was committed the cognizance of causes criminal, and particularly of presbyters, (so to Timothy in the instance formerly alleged,) nay nãoα imirayn, "all authority," so in the case of Titus, and "officium regendæ ecclesiæ," "the office of ruling the church," so to them all whom the apostles left in the several churches respectively, which they had new founded. So Eusebius. For the bishop was έñì nãoɩ kabɛorùs, "set over all," clergy and laity, saith St. Clement. Of the same consideration are divers other things in christianity, as the presbyters consecrating the eucharist; for if the apostles in the first institution did represent the whole church, clergy and laity, when Christ said "Hoc facite," "Do this," then why may not every christian man there represented do that, which the apostles, in the name of all, were commanded to do? If the apostles did not represent the whole church, why then do all communicate? Or what place or intimation of Christ's saying, is there in all the four gospels, limiting "hoc facite," id est, "benedicite," to the clergy, and extending "hoc facite," id est," accipite et manducate," to the laity ? This also rests upon the practice apostolical and traditive interpretation of holy church, and yet cannot be denied that so it ought to be, by any man that would not have his christendom suspected. To these I add the communion of women, the distinction of books apocryphal from canonical, that such books were written by such evangelists and apostles, the whole tradition of Scripture itself, the apostles' creed, the feast of Easter (which, amongst all them that cry up the Sunday-festival for a Divine institution, must needs prevail as "caput institutionis," it being that for which the Sunday is commemorated). These, and divers others of greater consequence, (which I dare not specify for fear of being misunderstood,) rely but upon equal faith with this of episcopacy, (though I should wave all the arguments for immediate Divine ordinance,) and therefore it is but reasonable it should be ranked amongst the "credenda" of christianity, which the church hath entertained upon the confidence of that which we call "the faith of a christian,” whose Mater is truth itself. 66 SECTION XX. And was an Office of Power and great Authority. This was given to bishops by the apostles themselves, and this was not given to presbyters, as I have already proved; and for the present it will sufficiently appear in this, that bishops had power over presbyters, which cannot be supposed they had over themselves, unless they could be their own superiors. SECTION XXI. Not lessened by the Assistance and Counsel of 66 BUT a council, or college of presbyters might have jurisdiction over any one, and such colleges there were in the apostles' times, and they did "in communi ecclesiam regere," govern the church in common with the bishop;" as saith St. Jerome, viz. where there was a bishop; and where there was none, they ruled without him. This indeed will call us to a new account; and it relies upon the testimony of St. Jerome, which I will set down here, that we may leave the sun without a cloud.a St. Jerome's words are these: "Idem est enim presbyter quod episcopus, et antequam diaboli instinctu studia in religione fierent, et diceretur in populis, 'Ego sum Pauli, Ego Apollo, Ego autem Cephæ,' communi presbyterorum concilio ecclesiæ gubernabantur. Postquam verò unusquisque eos quos baptizabat, suos putabat esse, non Christi, in toto orbe decretum est, ut unus de presbyteris electus superponeretur cæteris, ut schismatum semina tollerentur." WHAT their power and eminence was, and the appropriates of their office so ordained by the apostles, appears also by the testimonies before alleged, the expressions whereof run in these high terms: Episcopatus administrandæ ecclesiæ in Lino:" "Linus's bishopric was the administration of the whole church." "Ecclesiæ præfuisse" was said of him and Clemens; they were both " prefects of the church," or "prelates;" that is the church-word. "Ordinandis apud Cretam ecclesiis præficitur," so Titus ; "He is set over all the affairs of the newfounded churches in Crete." "In celsiori gradu collocatus," " placed in a higher order or degree;" | so the bishop of Alexandria, chosen "ex presby- Then he brings some arguments to confirm his teris," "from amongst the presbyters." Supra saying, and sums them up thus: "Hæc diximus, b Ubi supra, apud Euseb. lib. iii. c. 23. 66 a Comment. in Ep. ad Titum. ut ostenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse presby- | but all driving to the same issue. To what? Not 66 This identity, then, which St. Jerome expresses of episcopus and presbyter, must be either in name or in jurisdiction. I know not certainly which he means, for his arguments conclude only for the identity of names, but his conclusion is for identity of jurisdiction: "Et in communi debere ecclesiam regere," is the intent of his discourse, If he means the first, viz. that of names, it is well enough, there is no harm done, it is " in confesso apud omnes;" but concludes nothing, as I shall show hereafter; but because he intends, so far as may be guessed by his words, a parity and concurrence of jurisdiction, this must be considered distinctly. to prove that presbyters are sometimes called presbyters; for who doubts that? But that bishops are so, may be of some consideration, and needs a proof, and this he undertook. Now that they are so callThe thing St. Jerome aims to prove, is the iden- ed, must needs infer an identity and a disparity in tity of bishop, presbyter, and their government of several respects. An identity, at least of names; the church in common. For their identity, it is for else it had been wholly impertinent. A disclear that St. Jerome does not mean it in respect of parity; or else his arguments were to prove “ idem order, as if a bishop and a presbyter had both one affirmari de eodem;" which were a business next to office "per omnia" one power; for else he contra- telling pins. Now, then, this disparity must be dicts himself most apertly; for, in his epistle ad either in order or jurisdiction. By the former proEvagrium "Quid facit ?" saith he, "episcopus ac- bation it is sure that he means the orders to be disceptâ ordinatione quod presbyter non faciat ?" "Aparate; if jurisdiction too, I am content; but the presbyter may not ordain, a bishop does;" which former is most certain, if he stand to his own prinis a clear difference of power, and by St. Jerome isciples. not expressed in matter of fact, but of right, "quod presbyter non faciat," not "non facit;" that a priest may not, must not, do that a bishop does, viz. he gives holy orders. And for matter of fact, St. Jerome knew that in his time a presbyter did not govern in common; but, because he conceived it was fit he should be joined in the common regiment and care of the diocess, therefore, he asserted | it as much as he could; and therefore, if St. Jerome had thought that this difference of the power of ordination had been only customary, and by actual indulgence, or encroachment, or positive constitution, and no matter of primitive and original right, St. Jerome was not so diffident but out it should come, what would have come. And suppose St. Jerome, in this distinct power of ordination, had intended it only to be a difference in fact, not in right, (for so some of late have muttered,) then St. Jerome had not said true according to his own principles, for "Quid facit episcopus exceptâ ordinatione quod presbyter non faciat?" had been 2. Where no bishops were constituted, there the quickly answered, if the question had only been "de apostles kept the jurisdiction in their own hands: facto;" for the bishop governed the church alone, "There comes upon me," saith St. Paul, "daily the and so in jurisdiction was greater than presbyters, care (or supravision) of all the churches." Not all and this was by custom, and in fact, at least, St. Je- "absolutely," for not all of the circumcision, but all rome says it, and the bishop took so much power to "of his charge," with which he was once charged, himself that "de facto" presbyters were not suffered and of which he had not exonerated himself by to do any thing" sine literis episcopalibus," "with-constituting bishops there, for of these there is the out leave of the bishop ;" and this St. Jerome com- same reason. And again: "If any man obey not plained of; so that "de facto" the power of ordi- our word, διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς τοῦτον σημειοῦσθε, nation was not the only difference. That then, (if signify him to me by an epistle;" so he charges the St. Jerome says true,) being the only difference be- Thessalonians, and therefore of this church, St. tween presbyter and bishop, must be meant " de Paul as yet clearly kept the power in his own hands. jure," in matter of right, not "human positive," So that the church was ever, in all the parts of it, (for that is coincident with the other power of ju- governed by episcopal or apostolical authority. risdiction, which, "de facto," and at least by a human right, the bishop had over presbyters,) but "divine;" and then this identity of bishop and presbyter, by St. Jerome's own confession, cannot be meant in respect of order, but that episcopacy is, by Divine right, a superior order to the presbyte rate. Add to this, that the arguments which St. Jerome uses in this discourse, are to prove that bishops are sometimes called "presbyters." To this purpose he urges Acts xx., and Philippians i., and the epistles to Timothy and Titus, and some others, bAd Nepotian. et de 7. Ordin. Eccles. 1, Then: In the first founding of churches, the apostles did appoint presbyters and inferior ministers, with a power of baptizing, preaching, consecrating, and reconciling, "in privato foro;" but did not in every church, at the first founding it, constitute a bishop. This is evident in Crete, in Ephesus, in Corinth, at Rome, at Antioch. с 3. For aught appears in Scripture, the apostles never gave any external or coercive jurisdiction in public and criminal causes, nor yet power to ordain rites or ceremonies, or to inflict censures, to a college of mere presbyters. The contrary may be greedily swallowed, and I know not with how great confidence, and prescribing prejudice; but there is not in all Scripture any commission from Christ, any ordinance or warrant from the apostles, to any presbyter, or college of presbyters without a bishop, or express delegation of apostolical authority," tanquam vicario suo," as to his "substitute," in absence of c 2 Thess. iii. 14. |