penitents without the advice of those to whom he writ; but from this we are fairly delivered by the title: "Cypriano, et compresbyteris Carthagine consistentibus; Caldonius salutem." It was not the epistle of Cyprian to his presbyters, but of Caldonius, one of the suffragan bishops of Numidia, to his metropolitan; and now, what wonder if he call it presumption to do an act of so public consequence, without the advice of his metropolitan. He was bound to consult him by the canons apostolical, and so he did, and no harm done to the present question, of the bishop's sole and independent power, and unmixed with the conjunct interest of the presbytery, who had nothing to do beyond ministery, counsel, and assistance. 3. In all churches where a bishop's seat was, there were not always a college of presbyters, but only in the greatest churches; for some time in the lesser cities there were but two: "Esse oportet, et aliquantos presbyteros, ut bini sint per ecclesias, et unus in civitate episcopus;" so St. Ambrose : "sometimes there was but one in a church.". Posthumianus, in the third council of Carthage, put the case: "Deinde qui unum presbyterum habuerit, numquid debet illi ipse unus presbyter auferri ?" The church of Hippo had but one; Valerius was the bishop, and Austin was the priest; and, after him, Austin was the bishop, and Eradius the priest. Sometimes not one, as in the case Aurelius put in the same council now cited, of a church that hath never a presbyter to be consecrated bishop, in the place of him that died; and once, at Hippo, they had none, even then when the people snatched St. Austin, and carried him to Valerius to be ordained: in these cases I hope it will not be denied but the bishop was judge alone; I am sure he had but little company, sometimes none at all. 4. But suppose it had been always done, that presbyters were consulted in matters of great difficulty and possibility of scandal, for so St. Ambrose P intimates, "Ecclesia seniores habuit, sine quorum consilio nihil gerebatur in ecclesia," understand in these churches where presbyters were fixed; yet this might be necessary, and was so, indeed, in some degree at first, which in succession, as it proved troublesome to the presbyters, so unnecessary and impertinent to the bishops. At first, I say, it might be necessary, for they were times of persecutions and temptation; and if both the clergy and people, too, were not complied withal in such exigence of time, and agonies of spirit, it was the way to make them relapse to gentilism; for a discontented spirit will hide itself, and take sanctuary in the reeds and mud of Nilus, rather than not take complacence in an imaginary security and revenge. Secondly: As yet there had been scarce any synods to determine cases of public difficulty; and what they could not receive from public decision, it was fitting they should supply by the maturity of a conciliary assistance and deliberation: for although, by the canons of the apostles, bishops were bound twice a year to celebrate synods, yet, persecution intervening, they were rather twice a year a diaonoρà than ovvódos, "a dispersion than a synod." Thirdly: Although synods had been as frequently convened as was intended by the apostles, yet it must be length of time, and a successive experience, that must give opportunity and ability to give general rules for the emergency of all particulars; and, therefore, till the church grew of some considerable age, a fixed standing college of presbyters was more requisite than since it hath been, when the frequency of general councils, and provincial synods, and the peace of the church, and the innumerable volumes of the fathers, and decretals of bishops, and a digest of ecclesiastical constitutions, hath made the personal assistance of presbyters unnecessary. 4. When necessity required not their presence and counsel, their own necessity required that they should attend their several cures. For let it be considered, they that would now have a college of presbyters assist the bishop, whether they think of what follows; for either they must have presbyters ordained without a title, which I am sure they have complained of these threescore years, or else they must be forced to non-residence; for how else can they assist the bishop in the ordinary and daily occurrences of the church, unless either they have no cure of their own, or else neglect it? And as for the extraordinary, either the bishop is to consult his metropolitan, or he may be assisted by a synod, if the canons already constituted do not aid him; but in all these cases the presbyter is impertinent. 5. As this assistance of presbyters was at first for necessity, and after by custom it grew a law; so now, “retrò," first the necessity failed, and then the desuetude abrogated the law, which before custom had established: "Quod quâ negligentiâ obsoleverit nescio," saith St. Ambrose : "he knew not how it came to be obsolete," but so it was; it had expired before his time: not but that presbyters were still in mother churches, (I mean in great ones,)" In ecclesiâ enim habemus senatum nostrum, actum presbyterorum;" "We have still," saith St. Jerome," "in the church, our senate, a college, or chapter of presbyters;" he was then at Rome or Jerusalem: but they were not consulted in church-affairs, and matter of jurisdiction; that was it that St. Ambrose wondered how it came to pass and thus it is to this day. In our mother churches we have a chapter, too, but the bishop consults them not in matters of ordinary jurisdiction; just so it was in St. Ambrose's time; and, therefore, our bishops have altered no custom in this particular; the alteration was pregnant, even before the end of the four general councils, and, therefore, is no violation of a Divine right; for then, most certainly, a contrary provision would have been made in those conventions, wherein so much sanctity, and authority, and catholicism, and severe discipline, were conjunct; and then, besides, it is no innovation in, practice which pretends so fair antiquity; but, however, it was never otherwise than voluntary in the bishops, and positive discipline in the church, and conveniency in the thing for that present, and counsel in the presbya Ubi suprà. ' In Isa. iii. ters, and a trouble to the presbyters' persons, and a disturbance of their duties, when they came to be fixed upon a particular charge. S One thing more before I leave: I find a canon of the council of Hispalis objected: "Episcopus presbyteris solus honorem dare potest, solus autem auferre non potest:" "A bishop may alone ordain a priest; a bishop may not alone depose a priest." Therefore, in censures there was in the primitive church a necessity of conjunction of presbyters with the bishop in imposition of censures. t | hand, and the presbyters had no share in it, but by delegation and voluntary assumption. Now I proceed in the main question. SECTION XLV. So that the Government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary. a We have seen what episcopacy is in itself; now, from the same principles, let us see what it is to us; and, first, antiquity taught us it was simply necessary, even to the being and constitution of a church: that runs high, but we must follow our leaders. St. Ignatius is express in this question: "Qui intra altare est, mundus est, quare et obtemperat episcopo et sacerdotibus. Qui vero foris est, hic is est, qui sine episcopo, sacerdote, et diacono, quicquam agit, et ejusmodi inquinatam habet conscientiam, et infideli deterior est:" "He that is within the altar, that is, within the communion of the church, he is 66 66 To this I answer, first, it is evident that he that can give an honour, can also take it away, if any body can; for there is in the nature of the thing no greater difficulty in pulling down than in raising up. It was wont always to be accounted easier; therefore this canon, requiring a conjunct power in deposing presbyters, is a positive constitution of the church, founded, indeed, upon good institution, but built upon no deeper foundation, neither of nature or higher institution, than its own present authority. But that is enough, for we are not now in question of Divine right, but of catholic and primitive practice. To it, therefore, I answer, that the conjunct hand-required to pull down a presbyter-pure, for he obeys the bishop and the priests. But was not the chapter, or college of presbyters; but a he that is without, that is, does any thing without company of bishops, a synodal sentence, and deter- his bishop and the clergy, he hath a filthy conscience, mination; for so the canon runs, "qui profecto nec and is worse than an infidel." "Necesse itaque est, ab uno damnari nec uno judicante poterint honoris quicquid facitis, ut sine episcopo nihil faciatis:" "It sui privilegiis exui: sed præsentati synodali judicio, is necessary, that whatever ye do, ye be sure to quod canon de illis præceperit definiri." And the do nothing without the bishop." Quid enim aliud same thing was determined in the Greeks' council of est episcopus," &c. "For what else is a bishop, Carthage. "If a presbyter or a deacon be accused, but he that is greater than all power?" So that their own bishop shall judge them, not alone, but the obeying the bishop is the necessary condition of with the assistance of six bishops more, in the case a christian and catholic communion; he that does of a presbyter; three of a deacon; Twv de Xov not is worse than an infidel. The same also he κληρικῶν τὰς αἰτίας καὶ μόνος ὁ ἐντόπιος επίσκοπος | affirms again: " Quotquot enim Christi, sunt pardiayνā kai meρarwon but the causes of the other tium episcopi; qui vero ab illo declinant, et cum clergy, the bishop of the place must alone "hear maledictis communionem amplectuntur, hi cum illis and determine them." So that by this canon, in excidentur :" "All they that are on Christ's side, some things, the bishop might not be alone, but are on the bishop's side; but they that communithen his assistants were bishops, not presbyters: in cate with accursed schismatics, shall be cut off with other things he alone was judge, without either, and them." If, then, we will be Christ's servants, we yet his sentences must not be clancular, but in open must be obedient and subordinate to the bishop. It court, in the full chapter, for his presbyters must be is the condition of christianity. We are not chrispresent; and so it is determined for Africa, in the tians else. So is the intimation of St. Ignatius. fourth council of Carthage :" "Ut episcopus nullius As full and pertinent is the peremptory resolution causam audiat absque præsentiâ clericorum suorum: of St. Cyprian, in that admirable epistle of his "ad alioquin irrita erit sententia episcopi nisi præsentiâ Lapsos;" where, after he had spoken how Christ clericorum confirmetur." Here is, indeed, a necesinstituted the honour of episcopacy, in concrediting sity of the presence of the clergy of his church, the keys to St. Peter and the other apostles, where his consistory was kept, lest the sentence "Inde," saith he, "per temporum et successionum should be clandestine, and so illegal; but it is vices episcoporum ordinatio, et ecclesiæ ratio denothing but "præsentia clericorum," for it is currit, ut ecclesia super episcopos constituatur, et tentia episcopi," "the bishop's sentence," and the omnis actus ecclesiæ per eosdem præpositos guberclerks' presence only; for μóvos ò ÉVTÓTIOS ÉTÍσKO-netur:" "Hence is it, that by several successions Tos, "the bishops alone might give sentence," in of bishops the church is continued, so that the the causes of the inferior clergy, even by this canon church hath its being or constitution by bishops, itself, which is used for objection against the and every act of ecclesiastical regiment is to be bishop's sole jurisdiction. disposed by them." "Cùm hoc itaque Divinâ lege fundatum sit, miror," &c. "Since, therefore, this is so established by the law of God, I wonder any a Epist. ad Tral. b Epist. ad Philadelph. Epist. 27. et alibi. 66 sen I know nothing now to hinder our process; for the bishop's jurisdiction is clearly left in his own t Can. 20. ⚫ Can. 6. u Can. 23. man should question it," &c. And, therefore, as in all buildings, the foundation being gone, the fabric falls, so "if ye take away bishops, the church must ask a writing of divorce from God, for it can nó longer be called a church." This account we have from St. Cyprian, and he reinforces again upon the same charge, in his epistle "ad Florentium Pupianum," where he makes a bishop to be ingredient into the definition of a church: "Ecclesia est plebs sacerdoti adunata, et pastori suo grex adhærens : " "The church is a flock adhering to its pastor, and a people united to their bishop:" for that so he means by "sacerdos," appears in the words subjoined: "Unde et scire debes, episcopum in ecclesiâ esse, et ecclesiam in episcopo, et si qui cum episcopo non sit, in ecclesia non esse, et frustra sibi blandiri eos, qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt, et latenter apud quosdam communicare se credunt," &c. "As a bishop is in the church, so the church is in the bishop; and he that does not communicate with the bishop, is not in the church; and therefore, they vainly flatter themselves, that think their case fair and good, if they communicate in conventicles, and forsake their bishop." And for this cause the holy primitives were so confident and zealous for a bishop, that they would rather expose themselves and all their tribes to a persecution, than to the greater misery, the want of bishops. Fulgentius telis an excellent story to this purpose. When Frasamund, king of Byzac, in Africa, had made an edict that no more bishops should be consecrate, to this purpose, that the catholic faith might expire, (so he was sure it would, if this device were perfected,) "ut arescentibus truncis absque palmitibus omnes ecclesiæ desolarentur," the good bishops of the province met together in a council, and having considered of the command of the tyrant, "Sacra turba pontificum qui remanserant, communicato inter se consilio, definierunt adversus præceptum regis in omnibus locis celebrare ordinationes pontificum, cogitantes aut regis iracundiam, si qua forsan existeret, mitigandam, quo facilius ordinati in suis plebibus viverent, aut si persecutionis violentia nasceretur, coronandos etiam fidei confessione, quos dignos inveniebant promotione." It was full of bravery and christian sprite. "The bishops resolved, for all the edict against new ordination of bishops, to obey God rather than man, and to consecrate bishops in all places, hoping the king would be appeased; or if not, yet those whom they thought worthy of a mitre, were in a fair disposition to receive a crown of martyrdom." They did so. "Fit repente communis assumptio," and they all strove who should be first, and thought a blessing would outstrip the hindmost. They were sure they might go to heaven, though persecuted, under the conduct of a bishop; they knew without him the ordinary passage was obstructed. speaking of them that calumniate and disgrace their bishops, endeavouring to make them infamous, They add," saith he, "evil to evil, and grow worse," "non intelligentes quòd ecclesia Dei in sacerdotibus consistit, et crescit in templum Dei:" "not considering that the church of God doth consist or is established in bishops, and grows up to a holy temple." To him I am most willing to add St. Jerome," because he is often obtruded in defiance of the cause: "Ecclesiæ salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet:" "The safety of the church depends upon the bishop's dignity." SECTION XLVI. For they are Schismatics that separate from their Bishop. THE reason which St. Jerome gives, presses this business to a further particular. "For if an eminent dignity, and an unmatchable power, be not given to him," "tot efficientur schismata, quot sacerdotes." So that he makes bishops therefore necessary, because without them "the unity of a church cannot be preserved;" and we know that unity and being are of equal extent; and if the unity of the church depends upon the bishop, then where there is no bishop, no pretence to a church; and therefore to separate from the bishop makes a man at least a schismatic. For unity, which the fathers press so often, they make to be dependent on the bishop. "Nihil sit in vobis quod possit vos dirimere, sed unimini episcopo, subjecti Deo per illum in Christo," saith St. Ignatius: 66 a Let nothing divide you, but be united to your bishop, being subject to God in Christ through your bishop." And it is his congé to the people of Smyrna, to whom he writ in his epistle to Polycarpus," "Opto vos semper valere in Deo nostro Jesu Christo, in quo manete per unitatem Dei et episcopi :" "Farewell in Christ Jesus, in whom remain by the unity of God and of the bishop." "Quantò vos beatiores judico, qui dependetis ab illo, (episcopo,) ut ecclesia à Domino Jesu et Dominus à Patre suo, ut omnia per unitatem consentiant:" "Blessed people are ye that depend upon your bishop, as the church on Christ, and Christ on God, that all things may consent in unity." "Neque enim aliundè hæreses obortæ sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quàm inde quòd sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, nec unus in ecclesiâ ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur :" "Hence come schisms, hence spring heresies, that the bishop is not obeyed, and admitted alone to be the high priest, alone to be the judge." The same St. Cyprian repeats again; d and by it we may see his meaning clearer: "Qui vos audit, me audit," C Pius the First, bishop of Rome, and martyr, | &c. "Inde enim hæreses et schismata obortæ sunt But against this it will be objected, first, that heresies, in the primitive catalogues, are of a large extent: and every dissent from a public opinion was esteemed heresy. Secondly, Aerius was called heretic, for denying prayer for the dead. And why may he not be as blameless in equalling a bishop and a presbyter, as in that other, for which he also is condemned by Epiphanius and St. Austin. Thirdly, he was never condemned by any council; and how, then, can he be called heretic? et oriuntur, dum episcopus, qui unus est et ecclesiæ | adds, at the conclusion of his catalogue," that he is præest, superbâ quorundam præsumptione contem- no catholic christian that assents to any of the forenitur, et homo dignatione Dei honoratus, indignus going doctrines;" amongst which this is one of the hominibus judicatur." The pride and peevish | principal. Philastrius does as much for him. haughtiness of some factious people that contemn their bishops, is the cause of all heresy and schism. And, therefore, it was so strictly forbidden, by the ancient canons, that any man should have any meetings, or erect an altar, out of the communion of his bishop, that if any man proved delinquent in this particular, he was punished with the highest censures, as appears in the thirty-second canon of the apostles, in the sixth canon of the council of Gangra, the fifth canon of the council of Antioch, and the great council of Chalcedon, all which I have before cited. The sum is this: the bishop is the band and ligature of the church's unity; and separation from the bishop is dixovoías σúμ¤olov, as Theodoret's expression is; a "symbol of faction ;" and he that separates, is a schismatic. e But how if the bishop himself be a heretic or schismatic? May we not then separate? Yes, if he be judged so by a synod of bishops; but then he is sure to be deposed too; and then in these cases no separation from a bishop. For till he be declared so, his communion is not to be forsaken by the subjects of his diocess, lest they, by so doing, become their judge's judge; and when he is declared so, no need of withdrawing from obedience to the bishop, for the heretic or schismatic must be no longer bishop. But let the case be what it will be, no separation from a bishop, " ut sic," can be lawful; and yet if there were a thousand cases, in which it were lawful to separate from a bishop, yet in no case is it lawful to separate from episcopacy; that is the quintessence and spirit of schism, and a direct overthrow to christianity, and a confronting of a Divine institution. 66 SECTION XLVII. And Heretics. Bur is it not also heresy? Aerius was condemned for heresy by the catholic church. The heresy from whence the Aerians were denominated was, “ sermo furiosus magis quam humanæ conditionis, et dicebat, Quid est episcopus ad presbyterum? nihil differt hic ab illo;'" a "A mad and unmanly heresy to say, that a bishop and a priest are all one." So Epiphanius: "Assumpsit autem ecclesia, et in toto mundo assensus factus est, antequam esset Aerius, et qui ab ipso appellantur Aeriani.” And the good catholic father is so angry at the heretic Aerius, that he thinks his name was given him by | Providence, and he is called Aerius, "aeriis spiritibus pravitatis;" for he was possessed with an unclean spirit: he could never else have been the inventor of such heretical pravity. St. Austin, also, reckons him in the accursed roll of heretics, and a Hæres. 75 e Act. iv. But I cannot agree it; they But yet they I answer, That dissent from a public or a received opinion was never called heresy, unless the contrary truth was indeed a part of catholic doctrine. For the fathers, many of them, did so; as St. Austin from the millenary opinion; yet none ever reckoned them in the catalogues of heretics; but such things only set them down there, which were either directly opposite to catholic belief, though " in minoribus articulis," or to a holy life. Secondly; It is true that Epiphanius and St. Austin reckon his denying prayer for the dead to be one of his own opinions, and heretical. help it, if they did; let him and them are able to answer for themselves. accused him also of Arianism; and shall we therefore say, that Arianism was no heresy, because the fathers called him heretic in one particular upon a wrong principle? We may as well say this as deny the other. Thirdly; He was not condemned by any council. No: for his heresy was ridiculous, and a scorn to all wise men, as Epiphanius observes; and it made no long continuance; neither had it any considerable party. But yet this is certain, that Epiphanius, and Philastrius, and St. Austin, called this opinion of Aerius a heresy, and against the catholic belief. And themselves affirm that the church did so; and then it would be considered, that it is but a sad employment to revive old heresies, and make them a piece of the new religion. And yet after all this, if I mistake not, although Aerius himself was so inconsiderable as not to be worthy noting in a council, yet certainly the onehalf his error is condemned for heresy in one of the four general councils, viz. the first council of Constantinople. Αἱρετικοὺς δὲ λέγομεν, τούς τε πάλαι τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀποκήρυχθέντας, καὶ τοὺς μετὰ ταῦτα ὑφ ̓ vuur avadeμarioévraç "We call all them heretics, whom the ancient church hath condemned, and whom we shall anathematize." Will not Aerius come under one of these titles for a condemned heretic? Then see forward. IIpòs de ToÚTOLÇ Kai τοὺς τὴν πίστιν μὲν τὴν ὑγιῆ προσποιουμένους όμο vyiñ λογεῖν, ἀποσχίζοντας δὲ καὶ ἀντισυνάγοντας τοῖς κανονικοῖς ἡμῶν ἐπισκόποις. Here is enough for Aerius and all his hyperaspists, new and old; for the holy council condemns them "for heretics, who do indeed confess the true faith, but separate from their bishops, and make conventicles apart from his communion.". Now this I the rather urge, because b Can. 6. an act of parliament, made tenth of Elizabeth, does | hominibus dederunt. Quo tempore quam quisque make this council, and the other three of Nice, voluisset placitam sibi sumebat potestatem. Et Ephesus, and Chalcedon, the rule of judging propterea quod quilibet, quodcunque visum esset, heresies. fidei insertum volebat, quamplurima defectorum, atque hæreticorum turba exorta est." It is a story worthy observation. "When any bishop died, they would have no other consecrated in succession; and, therefore, could have no more priests, when any of them died." But how then did they to baptize their children? Why, they were fain to make shift, and do it without any church-solemnity. But how then did they for the holy sacrament?-for that could not be consecrated without a priest, and he not ordained without a bishop. True: but therefore" they, while they had a bishop, got a great deal of bread consecrated, and kept a long time; and when Easter came, cut it into small bits, or crumbs rather, to make it go the further, and gave it to their people." And must we do so too? forbid. But how did they when all that was gone? for crumbs would not last always. The story "Eo-specifies it not, but yet I suppose they then got a bishop for their necessity, to help them to some more priests, and some more crumbs; for I find, in the council of Seville, the fathers saying, " Ingressus est ad nos quidam ex hæresi Acephalorum episcopus;" they had then, it seems, got a bishop, but this they would seldom have-and never, but when their necessity drove them to it. But was this all the inconvenience of the want of bishops? No: "for every man," saith Nicephorus, "might do what he list, and if he had a mind to it, might put his fancy into the creed, and thence came innumerable troops of schismatics and heretics." So that this device was one simple heresy in the root, but it was forty heresies in the fruit and branches; clearly proving, that want of bishops is the cause of all schism and recreant opinions that are imaginable. I end this particular with the saying of the council of Paris against the Acephali, (who were the branch of a crab-stock, and something like Aerius,) cited by Burchard: "Nullâ ratione clerici aut sacerdotes habendi sunt, qui sub nullius episcopi | disciplina et providentiâ gubernantur. Tales enim Acephalos, id est, sine capite, priscæ ecclesiæ consuetudo nuncupavit:" "They are, by no means, to be accounted clergymen, or priests, that will not be governed by a bishop. For such men the primitive church called arɛpáλovs, that is, 'headless,' witless people." This only. Acephali was the title of a sect, a formal heresy, and condemned by the ancient church, say the fathers of the council of Paris. Now if we can learn exactly what they were, it may, perhaps, be another conviction for the necessity of episcopal regiment. Nicephorus d can best inform us. dem tempore, et Acephali, quorum dux Severus Antiochenus fuit," &c. "Severus of Antioch was the first broacher of this heresy." But why were they called "Acephali ?"" id est, sine capite, quem sequuntur hæretici; nullus enim eorum reperitur auctor, quo exorti sunt," saith Isidore. But this cannot be, for their head is known: Severus was the heresiarch. But then why are they called "Acephali?" Nicephorus gives this reason, and, withal, a very particular account of their heresy : " Acephali autem ob eam causam dicti sunt, quod sub episcopis non fuerunt:" "They refused to live under bishops." Thence they had their name; what was their heresy? They denied the distinction of natures in Christ. That was one of their heresies; but they had more; for they were "trium capitulorum in Chalcedone impugnatores," saith Isidore; "they opposed three canons of the council of Chalcedon." One we have heard; what their other heresies were we do not so well know; but by the canon of the council of Paris, and the intimation of their name, we are guided to the knowledge of a second: they refused to live under the government of a bishop. And this also was 66 impugnatio unius articuli in Chalcedone;" for the eighth canon of the council of Chalcedon commands, that the clergy should be under episcopal government. But these Acephali would not, they were anti-episcopal men; and, therefore, they were condemned heretics; condemned in the councils of Paris, of Seville, and of Chalcedon. But the more particular account that Nicephorus gives of them, I will now insert, because it is of great use. "Proinde episcopis, et sacerdotibus apud eos defunctis, neque baptismus juxta solennem atque receptum ecclesiæ morem apud eos administratur, neque oblatio, aut res aliqua divina facta, ministeriumve ecclesiasticum, sicuti mos est, celebratum est. Communionem verò illi, à plurimo tempore asservatam habentes, feriis Paschalibus, in minutissimas incisam partes convenientibus ad se c Decret. lib. ii. c. 226. d Eccles. Hist. lib. xviii. c. 45. God I sum this up with the saying of St. Clement, h the disciple of St. Peter, "Si autem vobis episcopis non obedierint omnes presbyteri, &c. tribus, et linguæ non obtemperaverint, non solùm infames, sed extorres à regno Dei, et consortio fidelium, ac à limitibus sancti Dei ecclesiæ alieni erunt:" "All priests, and clergymen, and people, and nations, and languages, that do not obey their bishop, shall be shut forth of the communion of holy church here, and of heaven hereafter." It runs high, but I cannot help it; I do but translate Ruffinus, as he before translated St. Clement. |