sent them to officiate in a village with ordinary or tibus episcopis suis, atque adstantibus in altari, presbyteros posse sacramenta conficere;" "Behold, I say that presbyters may minister sacraments in presence of the bishop:" so Gratian quotes it, indeed; P but St. Jerome says the express contrary, unless we all have false copies. For in St. Jerome it is not "ecce ego dico," but "nec ego dico." He does not say it is lawful for presbyters to officiate in the presence of their bishop. Indeed St. Jerome is angry at Rusticus, bishop of Narbona, because he would not give leave to presbyters to preach, nor to bless, &c. This, perhaps it was not well done, but this makes not against the former discourse; for though it may be fit for the bishop to give leave, the church requiring it still more and more in descent of ages, and multiplication of christians and parishes,—yet it is clear that this is not to be done without the bishop's leave; for it is for this very thing that St. Jerome disputes against Rusticus, to show he did amiss, because he would not give his presbyters license. And this he also reprehends in his epistle, "ad Nepotianum :" "Pessimæ consuetudinis est in quibusdam ecclesiis tacere presbyteros, et præsentibus episcopis non loqui:" "That presbyters might not be suffered to preach in presence of the bishop, that was an ill custom ;" to wit, as things then stood; and it was mended presently after, for presbyters did preach in the bishop's presence, but it was by license from their ordinary. For so Possidonius relates, that upon this act of Valerius, before mentioned, "Postea currente et volante hujusmodi famâ, bono præcedente exemplo, acceptâ ab episcopis potestate, presbyteri nonnulli, coram episcopis, populis tractare cœperunt verbum Dei:" "By occasion of this precedent it came to pass, that some presbyters did preach to the people in the bishop's presence, having first obtained faculty from the bishop so to do." And a little after it became a custom, from a general faculty and dispensation indulged to them in the second council of Vase. Now, if this evidence of church-practice be not sufficient to reconcile us to St. Jerome, let him then first be reconciled to himself, and then we are sure to be helped: for, in his dialogue against the Luciferians, his words are these: "Cui si non exsors quædam et ab omnibus eminens detur potestas, tot efficientur schismata quot sunt sacerdotes. Inde venit ut sine episcopi missione neque presbyter neque diaconus jus habeat baptizandi :" "Because the bishop hath an eminent All this is excellently attested in the example of St. Austin, of whom Possidonius, in his life, reports, that being but a presbyter, Valerius, the bishop, being a Greek born, and not well spoken in the Latin tongue, and so unfit for public orations: "Eidem presbytero," (viz. to Austin,) "potestatem dedit coram se in ecclesiâ evangelium prædicandi ac frequentissimè tractandi, contra usum quidem, et consuetudinem Africanarum ecclesiarum :" " He gave leave to Austin, then but presbyter, to preach in the church, even while himself was present; indeed against the use and custom of the African churches." And for this act of his he suffered soundly in his report, for the case was thus: in all Africa, ever since the first spring of the Arian heresy, the church had then suffered so much by the preaching of Arius, the presbyter, that they made a law not to suffer any presbyter to preach at all, at least in the mother church, and in the bishop's presence: Touro ἀρχὴν ἔλαβεν ἐφ' οὗ ̓́Αρειος τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἐτάραξε, saith Socrates; "Thence came this custom in the African churches." o But because Valerius saw St. Austin so able, and himself, for want of Latin, so unfit, he gave leave to Austin to preach before him, against the custom of the African churches; but he adds this reason for his excuse too; it was not, indeed, the custom of Africa, but it was of the Oriental churches. For so Possidonius proceeds: "Sed et ille vir venerabilis, ac providus in Orientalibus ecclesiis id ex more fieri sciens;" in the Levant it was usual for bishops to give presbyters leave to preach; "Dummodo factitaretur à presby-power, and this power is necessary; thence it comes tero quod à se episcopo impleri minime posse cernebat," which determines us fully in the business. For this leave to do offices was but there to be given "where the bishop himself could not fulfil the offices;" which shows the presbyters, in their several charges, whether of temporary mission, or fixed residence, to be but delegates and vicars of the bishop, admitted "in partem solicitudinis;" to assist the bishop in his great charge of the whole diocess. Against this it is objected, out of St. Jerome, and it is recorded by Gratian, "Ecce ego dico præsen o Lib. v. c. 22. that neither presbyter nor deacon may so much as baptize without the bishop's leave." This whole discourse shows clearly, not only the bishops to be superior in jurisdiction, but that they have sole jurisdiction, and the presbyters only in substitution and vicarage. SECTION XXXVIII. Reserving Church-Goods to Episcopal Dispensation. " a DIVERS other acts there are to attest the superiority of the bishop's jurisdiction over priests and deacons, as that all the goods of the church were in the bishop's sole disposing; and as at first they were laid at the apostles' feet, so afterwards at the bishops'. So it is in the forty-first canon of the apostles; so it is in the council of Gangra: and all the world are excluded from intervening in the dispensation, without express delegation from the bishop, as appears in the seventh and eighth canons, and that under pain of an anathema by the holy council. And, therefore, when, in success of time, some patrons, that had founded churches and endowed them, thought that the dispensation of those lands did not belong to the bishop; of this the third council of Toledo complains, and makes remedy, commanding," ut omnia, secundum constitutionem antiquam, ad episcopi ordinationem et potestatem pertineant." The same is renewed in the fourth council of Toledo: "Noverint autem conditores basilicarum, in rebus quas eisdem ecclesiis conferunt, nullam se potestatem habere, sed juxta canonum instituta, sicut ecclesiam, ita et dotem ejus ad ordinationem episcopi pertinere.' These councils I produce, not as judges, but as witnesses in the business; for they give concurrent testimony that " as the church itself, so the dowry of it too, did belong to the bishop's disposition by the ancient canons." For so the third council of Toledo calls it, "antiquam constitutionem," and itself is almost 1100 years old; so that still I am precisely within the bounds of the primitive church, though it be taken in a narrow sense. For so it was determined in the great council of Chalcedon, commanding that the goods of the church should be dispensed by a clergy steward, κατὰ γνώμην τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου, according to the pleasure or sentence of the bishop." " b of Constantinople in Trullo, cap. 17.; the censure there is, καθαιρεῖσθω καὶ αὐτὸς, “Let him be deposed that shall, without dimissory letters from the bishop," ἐν ἑτέρᾳ κατατάττεσθαι ἐκκλησίᾳ, “ fix himself in the diocess of another bishop;" but with license of his bishop he may : "Sacerdotes, vel alii clerici, concessione suorum episcoporum, possunt ad alias ecclesias transmigrare." But this is frequently renewed in many other synodal decrees; these may suffice for this instance. 66 " d But this not leaving the diocess, is not only meant of promotion in another church; but clergymen might not travel from city to city without the bishop's license; which is not only an argument of his regiment, "in genere politico," but extends it almost to a despotic; but so strict was the primitive church in preserving the strict tie of duty and clerical subordination to their bishop. The council of Laodicea commands a priest or clergyman, åvɛv κανονικῶν γραμμάτων μὴ ὁδεύειν, “ not to travel without canonical or dimissory letters." And who are to grant these letters is expressed in the next canon, which repeats the same prohibition, ortɩ ov | δεῖ ἱερατικὸν ἢ κληρικὸν ἄνευ κελεύσεως ἐπισκόπου odεver," a priest or a clerk must not travel without the command of his bishop;" and this prohibition is inserted into the body of the law, "De Consecrat. dist. 5. can. Non oportet," which puts in the clause of " Neque etiam laicum;" but this was beyond the council. The same is in the council of Agatho. The council of Venice adds a censure,h that those clerks should be like persons excommunicate in all those places whither they went without letters of license from their bishop. The same penalty is inflicted by the council of Epaunum, "Presbytero, vel diacono, sine antistitis sui epistolis ambulanti, communionem nullus impendat." The first council of Touraine, in France, and the third council of Orleans, attest the self-same power in the bishop, and duty in all his clergy. f i SECTION XL. And the Bishop had Power to prefer which of his Clerks he pleased. BUT a coercitive authority makes not a complete jurisdiction, unless it be also remunerative; and "the princes of the nations are called evɛpyέTαι, benefactors;" for it is but half a tie to endear obedience, when the subject only fears "quod prodesse non poterit," "that which cannot profit." And, therefore, the primitive church, to make the episcopal jurisdiction up entire, gave power to the bishop to present the clerks of his diocess to the higher orders and nearer degrees of approximation to himself; and the clerks might not refuse to be so promoted. "Item placuit, ut quicunque clerici vel diaconi, pro necessitatibus ecclesiarum, non obtemperaverint episcopis suis, volentibus eos ad honorem ampliorem in sua ecclesia promovere, nec illic ministrent in gradu suo, unde recedere noluerunt." So it is decreed in the African code: "They that will not, by their bishop, be promoted to a greater honour in the church, must not enjoy what they have already." a But it is a question of great consideration, and worth a strict inquiry, in whom the right and power of electing clerks was resident in the primitive church: for the right and the power did not always | go together, and also several orders had several manners of election; presbyters and inferior clergy were chosen by the bishop alone; the bishop by a synod of bishops, or by their chapter; and lastly, because, of late, strong outcries are made upon several pretensions, amongst which the people make the biggest noise, though of all, their title to election of clerks be most empty; therefore let us consider it upon all its grounds. 66 1. In the Acts of the Apostles, which are most certainly the best precedents for all acts of Holy Church, we find that "Paul and Barnabas ordained elders in every church," and "they passed through Lystra, Iconium, Antioch, and Derbe," XεporovýCartes avτоis πрεσbνтéρоve, "appointing them elders." St. Paul chose Timothy bishop of Ephesus, and he says of himself and Titus, "For this cause I sent thee to Crete," iva karaoтhons Karà Tóλiv πрεσ¤vréрovs, "that thou shouldst appoint presbyters or bishops" (be they which they will) "in every city." The word karaσrhons signifies that the whole action was his. For that he ordained them, no man questions; but he also appointed them, and that was, saith St. Paul, we έyú σoi dieταξάμην, as I commanded thee." b It was, therefore, an apostolical ordinance, that the bishop should appoint presbyters. Let there be half so much shown for the people, and I will also endeavour to promote their interest. There is only one pretence of a popular election in Scripture; it is of the seven that were set over the widows. But first, this was no part of the hierarchy: this was no cure of souls: this was no Divine institution: it was in the dispensation of monies: it was by command of the apostles the election was made, and they might recede from their own right: it was to satisfy the multitude: it was to avoid scandal, which, in the dispensation of monies, might easily arise: it was in a temporary office: it was with such limitations and conditions as the apostles prescribed them: it was out of the number of the seventy that the election was made, if we may believe St. Epiphanius, so that they were presbyters before this choice: and lastly, it was only a nomination of seven men; the determination of the business, and the authority of rejection, was still in the apostles, and indeed the whole power "whom we may appoint over this business:" and after all this, there can be no hurt done by the objection, especially since clearly and indubiously the election of bishops and presbyters was in the apostles own persons: ὁ πρῶτος ἐνεχείρισθη παρὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων τὴν ὑμετέραν προστασίαν, saith St. Ignatius of Evodias: "Evodias was first appointed to be your governor or bishop by the apostles ;" and themselves did commit it to others that were bishops, as in the instances before reckoned. Thus the case stood in Scripture. d 2. In the practice of the church it went according to the same law and practice apostolical. The people did not, might not, choose the ministers of Holy Church. So the council of Laodicea: IIɛpí τοῦ μὴ τοὺς ὄχλους ἐπιτρέπειν τὰς ἐκλογὰς ποιεῖσθαι τῶν μελλόντων καθίστασθαι εἰς ἱερατεῖον. "The people must not choose those that are to be promoted to the priesthood." The prohibition extends to their non-election of all the superior clergy, bishops, and presbyters. But who then must elect them? The council of Nice determines that; for in the sixteenth and seventeenth canons, the council forbids any promotion of clerks to be made, but by the bishop of that church where they are first ordained: which clearly reserves to the bishop the power of retaining or promoting all his clergy. 3. All ordinations were made by bishops alone, as I have already proved. Now let this be confronted with the practice of primitive christendom, that no presbyter might be ordained "sine titulo," without a particular charge, which was always custom, and at last grew to be a law in the council of Chalcedon: and we shall perceive that the ordainer was the only chooser; for then to ordain a presbyter was also to give him a charge; and the patronage of a church was not a lay inheritance, but part of the bishop's cure, for he had opovrida ruv ikkλniwv év tóλei, kaì xúpa," the care of the churches in all the diocess;" as I have already shown. And, therefore, when St. Jerome, according to the custom of christendom, had specified some particular ordinations or election of presbyters by bishops, as how himself was made priest by Paulinus, and Paulinus by Epiphanius of Cyprus, "Gaudeat episcopus judicio suo, cùm tales Christo elegerit sacerdotes:" "Let the bishop rejoice in his own act, having chosen such worthy priests for the service of Christ." e Thus St. Ambrose gives intimation, that the dispensing all the offices in the clergy was solely in the bishop: "Hæc spectet sacerdos, et quod cuique congruat, id officii deputet:" "Let the bishop observe these rules, and appoint every one his office, as is best answerable to his condition and capacity."f And Theodoret reports of Leontius, the bishop of Antioch, how, being an Arian, “ Adversarios recti dogmatis suscipiens, licet turpem habentes vitam, ad presbyteratûs tamen ordinem et diaconatûs evexit. Eos autem qui universis virtutibus ornabantur et apostolica dogmata defendebant absque honore deseruit." g "He advanced his own faction, but would not promote any man that was catholic and pious." So he did. The power, therefore, of clerical promotion was in his own hands. This thing is evident and notorious; and Epist. 61, et 62. Hieron. ad Nepotian. f Lib. i. Offic. c. 44. Tripart. Hist. lib. v. c. 32. public testimony and examination; for so it follows, "Et sit ordinatio justa et legitima, quæ omnium suffragio et judicio fuerit examinata." there is scarce any example in antiquity of either | the election is not in the people, nothing but the presbyters or people choosing any priest, but only in the case of St. Austin, whom the people's haste snatched, and carried him to their bishop, Valerius, entreating him to ordain him priest. This, indeed, is true, that the testimony of the people, for the life of them that were to be ordained, was by St. Cyprian ordinarily required: "In ordinandis clericis, fratres carissimi, solemus vos ante consulere, et mores ac merita singulorum communi consilio ponderare." "It was his custom to advise with his people concerning the public fame of clerks to be ordained;" it was usual, I say, with him, but not perpetual; for it was otherwise in the case of Celerinus, and divers others, as I showed elsewhere. 4. In election of bishops, though not of priests, the clergy and the people had a greater actual interest, and did often intervene with their silent consenting suffrages or public acclamations. But first; this was not necessary. It was otherwise amongst the apostles, and in the case of Timothy, of Titus, of St. James, of St. Mark, and all the successors, whom they did constitute in the several charges. 2. This was not by law, or right, but in fact only. It was against the canon of the Laodicean council, and the thirty-first canon of the apostles, which, under pain of deposition, commands that a bishop be not promoted to his church by the intervening of any lay power.h Against this discourse St. Cyprian is strongly pretended : "Quando ipsa [plebs] maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi: quod et ipsum videmus de Divinâ auctoritate descendere," &c. Thus he is usually cited: "The people have power to choose or to refuse their bishops, and this comes to them from Divine authority." No such matter. The following words expound him better: "Quod et ipsum videmus de Divinâ auctoritate descendere, ut sacerdos, plebe præsente, sub omnium oculis deligatur, et dignus atque idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur :" "That the bishop is chosen publicly, in the presence of the people, and he only be thought fit who is approved by public judgment and testimony;" or, as St. Paul's phrase is, "He must have a good report of all men :" that is indeed a Divine institution: and that to this purpose, and for the public attestation of the act of election and ordination, the people's presence was required, appears clearly by St. Cyprian's discourse in this epistle. For what is the Divine authority that he mentions? It is only the example of Moses, whom God commanded to take the son of Eleazar, and clothe him with his father's robes, "coram omni synagoga," "before all the congregation." The people chose not; God chose Eleazar, and Moses consecrated him, and the people stood and looked on: that is all that this argument can supply. Just thus bishops are and ever were ordained: "Non nisi sub populi assistentis conscientiâ: "In the sight of the people standing by :" but to what end? "Ut, plebe præsente, detegantur malorum crimina, vel bonorum merita prædicentur." All this while h Epist. 68. But St. Cyprian hath two more proofs whence we may learn either the sense or the truth of his assertion. The one is of the apostle's ordaining the seven deacons ; but this we have already examined; the other of St. Peter choosing St. Matthias into apostolate; it was indeed done in the presence of the people. But here it is considerable, that at this surrogation of St. Matthias, the number of the persons present was but one hundred and twenty, of which eleven were apostles, and seventytwo were disciples and presbyters; they make up eighty-three, and then there remains but thirty-seven of the laity, of which many were women, which I know not yet whether any man would admit to the election of an apostle, and whether they do or do not, the laity is a very inconsiderable number, if the matter had been to be carried by plurality of voices; so that let the worst come that is imaginable, the whole business was, in effect, carried by the clergy, whom in this case we have no reason to suspect to be divided, and of a distinct or disagreeing interest. Let this discourse be of what validity it will, yet all this whole business was miraculous and extraordinary; for though the apostles named two candidates, yet the Holy Ghost chose them by particular revelation. And yet for all this, it was lawful for St. Peter alone to have done it without casting lots. "An non licebat ipsi [Petro] eligere? Licebat, et quidem maxime; verum id non facit, ne cui videretur gratificari. Quanquam alioqui non erat particeps Spiritûs." For all "he had not as yet receiv ed the Holy Ghost, yet he had power himself to have completed the election." So St. Chrysostom.i So that now, if St. Cyprian means more than the presence of the people for suffrage of public testimony, and extends it to a suffrage of formal choice, his proofs of the Divine authority are invalid; there is no such thing can be deduced from thence; and then this his complying so much with the people, which hath been the fault of many a good man, may be reckoned together with his rebaptization. But truth is, he means no more than suffrage of testimony, viz. that he who is to be chosen bishop be, for his good life, a man of good fame, and approved of before God and all the people; and this is all the share they have in their election. And so indeed himself sums up the whole business, and tells of another "jus Divinum" too: "Propter quod diligenter de traditione Divinâ, et apostolicâ observatione, observandum est et tenendum, quod apud nos quoque, et ferè apud provincias universas, tenetur, ut ad ordinationes ritè celebrandas ad eam plebem cui præpositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem provinciæ proximi quinque conveniant, et episcopus deligatur plebe præsente, quæ singulorum vitam plenissimè novit:" "It is most diligently to be observed, for there is a Divine tradition and an apostolical ordinance for it, and it is used by us, and almost by all churches, that all the bishops of the province assemHomil. 3. in Act. bled to the making of right ordinations, and that a bishop be chosen in the face of the people, who best know their life and conversation." So that the bishops were to make the formal election, the people to give their judgment of approbation in this particular, and so much as concerned the exemplary piety and good life of him that was to be their bishop. Here we see in St. Cyprian is a "jus Divinum" for the bishop's choosing a colleague or a brother-bishop, as much as for the presence of the people, and yet the presence was all. And howsoever the people were present to give this testimony, yet the election was clearly in the bishops, and that by Divine tradition and apostolical observation, saith St. Cyprian; and thus it was in all churches almost. In Africa this was, and so it continued till after St. Austin's time, particularly in the choice of Eradius, his successor. It was so in the Greek church, as St. Chrysostom tells us. It was so in Spain, as St. Isidore tells us ; and in many other places, that the people should be present, and give acclamation and tumultuary approbation; but to the formal election of the clergy, made by enumeration of votes and subscription, the people never were admitted. 5. Although that in times of persecution, at first, and to comply with the people, who were, in all respects, to be sweetened, to make them, with easier appetite, swallow the bitter pill of persecution, and also to make them more obedient to their bishop, if they did, though but in a tumult and noise, cry him up in his ordination: "Ne plebs in vitâ episcopum non optatum, aut contemnat, aut oderit, et fiat minùs religiosa quàm convenit, cui non licuerit habere quem voluit," for so St. Leo expresses the cause: m yet the formality and right of proper election was in the clergy, and often so practised without any consent at all, or intervening act of the people. The right, I say, was in the bishops; so it was decreed in the Nicene council: 'EлiσкоTOν προσήκει μάλιστα μὲν ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐπαρχίᾳ καθίστασθαι "The bishop must be appointed or constituted by all the bishops of the province :" Τὸ δὲ κῦρος τῶν γινομένων δίδοσθαι καθ' ἑκάστην επαρχίαν τῷ μητροπολίτῃ· "It must be confirmed and established by the metropolitan." " n No presbyters here all this while, no people. But the excise of this power is more clearly seen in the acts of some councils, where the fathers degraded some bishops, and themselves appointed others in their rooms. The bishops in the council of Constantinople deposed Marcellus: "In cujus locum Basilium in Ancyram miserunt:" "They sent Basilius bishop in his room," saith Sozomen.o "Ostendat Bassianus si per synodum reverendissimorum episcoporum, et consuetâ lege episcopus Ephesiorum metropolis est constitutus," said the fathers of the council of Chalcedon:P 66 Let Bassianus show that he was made bishop of Ephesus by a synod of bishops, and according to the accustomed law." The law I showed before, even the Nicene canon: the fathers of which council sent a synodal epistle to the church of Alexandria, to tell them they had deposed Melitius from the office of a bishop, only left him the name, but " took from him all power:" "Nullam verò omnimodò habere potestatem, neque eligendi, neque ordinandi," &c. Neither suffering him to "choose" nor "to ordain clerks." It seems, then, that was part of the episcopal office in ordinary, "placitos sibi eligere," as the epistle expresses it in the sequel," to choose whom they listed." But the council deposed Melitius and sent Alexander, their bishop and patriarch, to rule the church again. And particularly to come home to the case of the present question, when Auxentius, bishop of Milan, was dead, and the bishops of the province, and the clergy of the church, and the people of the city, were assembled at the choosing of another, the emperor makes a speech to the bishops only, that they should be careful in their choice. So that although the people were present, quibus pro fide et religione etiam honor deferendus est," as St. Cyprian's phrase is; "to whom respect is to be had, and fair complyings to be used, so long as they are pious, catholic, and obedient;" yet both the right of electing and solemnity of ordaining was in the bishops; the people's interest did not arrive to one half of this. 66 6. There are, in antiquity, divers precedents of bishops who choose their own successors; it will not be imagined the people will choose a bishop over his head, and proclaim that they were weary of him. In those days they had more piety. Agelius did so, he chose Sisinnius; and that it may appear it was without the people, they came about him, and entreated him to choose Marcian, to whom they had been beholden in the time of Valens the emperor; he complied with them and appointed Marcian to be his successor, and Sisinnius, whom he had first chosen, to succeed Marcian. Thus did Valerius choose his successor, St. Austin; for though the people named him for their priest, and carried him to Valerius to take orders, yet Valerius chose him bishop. And this was usual; wç kaì ai äλλai móλeis, as Epiphanius expresses this case; it was ordinary to do so in many churches. 7. The manner of election in many churches was various; for although indeed the church had commanded it, and given power to the bishops to make the election, yet in some times and in some churches, the presbyters or the chapter chose one out of themselves. St. Jerome says they always did so in Alexandria, from St. Mark's time to Heraclas and Dionysius. St. Ambrose says, that at the first the bishop was not, by a formal new election, promoted, but "recedente uno, sequens ei succedebat:" "as one died, so the next senior did succeed him." In both these cases no mixture of the people's votes. 8. In the church of England, the people were never admitted to the choice of a bishop, from its first becoming christian to this very day: and, therefore, to take it from the clergy, in whom it always |