An enquiry into the new opinions, chiefly propagated by the Presbyterians of Scotland together with some animadversions on a late book, entitled, A defence of The vindication of the kirk : in a letter to a friend at Edinburgh / by A.M., D.D. Monro, Alexander, d. 1715? 1696 Approx. 88 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 33 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A51155 Wing M2439 ESTC R7 13648237 ocm 13648237 100948 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A51155) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 100948) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 795:35) An enquiry into the new opinions, chiefly propagated by the Presbyterians of Scotland together with some animadversions on a late book, entitled, A defence of The vindication of the kirk : in a letter to a friend at Edinburgh / by A.M., D.D. Monro, Alexander, d. 1715? [12], 339, [1] p. Printed for Walter Kettilby, London : 1696. Attributed to Alexander Monro. Cf. BM. Errata: p. [11] Advertisement on p. [1] at end. Reproduction of original in Union Theological Seminary Library, New York. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Rule, Gilbert, 1629?-1701. -- Defence of The vindication of the Church of Scotland. Presbyterian Church -- Controversial literature. Church of Scotland -- History. Presbyterians -- Scotland -- Early works to 1800. 2005-05 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2005-07 Aptara Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2005-08 John Cords Sampled and proofread 2005-08 John Cords Text and markup reviewed and edited 2005-10 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion AN ENQUIRY INTO THE New Opinions ( Chiefly ) Propagated by the Presbyterians of Scotland ; Together also with some Animadversions on a Late Book , Entituled , A Defence of the Vindications of the Kirk : In a LETTER to a Friend at EDINBURGH . By A. M. D. D. Jeremiah 6.16 . — Ask for the Old Paths , where is the good way , and walk therein , and ye shall find rest for your Souls : but they said , we will not walk therein . LONDON : Printed for Walter Kettilby , at the Bishop's-Head in St. Paul ' s Church-yard , 1696. THE CONTENTS OF THIS TREATISE . THE Introduction , inviting all the true Sons of the Church ( especially the Afflicted Clergy ) to the most serious Exercise of true Repentance and Humiliation , P. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , &c. The Doctrines and Principles that we contend for against the later Sectaries are Primitive , Catholic , and Orthodox . p 9 , 10 , 11. CHAP. I. The Insufficiency of those Pleas and Arguments managed by the Presbyterians , against the Catholic Church , in Defence of their New Doctrine of Parity , p. 12 , 13 , 14. Their Arguments reduc'd to three general Heads , p. 15. 1. Their Pleas from the Pretended immediate Institution of our Saviour , considered , p. 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21. 2. Their Arguments from the Confusion of Names , observable in the New Testament , proved to be Vain and Sophistical , p. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , &c. 3. Their Arguments from the Testimony of Ecclesiastical Writters examined , p. 39 , 40. The Testimony of St. Clement the Apostolical Bishop of Rome , Vindicated from the Wilful Mistakes of Presbyterians , p. 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , &c. The Testimony of St. Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna and Disciple of St. John the Apostle , enquired into particularly , p. 49 , 50 , 51. The Testimony from Hermas impartially viewed , and the Disingenuity of Monsiour Blondel reproved , p. 52 , 53 , 54 , &c. Pope Pius his Epistle to Justus Viennensis Censured as Spurious ; and if it was Genuine , cannot serve the Presbyterian Design , p. 56. The Instance of Marcion the Heretic as unfit to support the New Doctrine , as the former Testimony from the Spurious Epistle of Pope Pius , p. 57. The Testimony from Justin Martyr impertinently alledged by our Adversaries , p. 58 , 59. The Testimony of the Gallican Martyrs , p. 62 , 63. The Testimony of St. Cyprian , p. 64. The Testimony from the Authority of St. Jerome , p. 65. The Error of St. Jerome discovered to be very different from the New Doctrine of the Presbyterians , p. 66. St. Jerome never acknowledged any Interval , after the Death of the Apostles in which Ecclesiastical Affairs were managed , Communi Presbyterorum Consilio . Ibid & Seqq. St. Jerome taught , that Episcopacy was the Apostolical remedy of Schism , from p. 65. to p. 80. The Testimony from the Authority of Saint Austin , examined . Saint Austin reasoned from the Succession of single Persons governing the Church of Rome from the days of the Apostles , and by this Argument overthrew the Doctrine and Schism of the Donatists , p. 81. to p. 94. CHAP. II. Of the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles , p. 94. Some Presbyterian Concessions preliminary to the true State of the Controversie , p. 95 , 96. The Apostolical Office considered , with regard to its Permanent and Essential Nature ▪ 2ly . As it was adorned with Extraordinary and miraculous Advantages . The First was to continue for ever in the Church , the Second was Transient and Occasional , with regard to the first Plantations of Christianity . The Apostolical and Episcopal Office the same in its Original Nature , Essence , and Design , p 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , &c. The true State of the Controversie , whether the Apostles left the Government of Particular Churches to single Successors , or to a College of Presbyters acting in Parity and Equality , p. 105 , 106 , The first is affirmed by all Records , whether we consider the inspired Writings of the Apostles , or the Ecclesiastical Histories of after Ages , p. 107 , &c. The true Notion of an Evangelist altogether different from the Permanent Office of Timothy or Titus , p. 111. Saint James the Just , Established Bishop of Jerusalem by the Apostles , and he in that City was the Centre of Unity , and Episcopal Succession in that See , p. 112 , 113. The Episcopal Power lodged in his person , ib. The Angels of the Asiatic Churches , Bishops in the strictest Sense , p. 114 , &c. The whole Question reduced to three Enquiries , p. 118 , &c. The Force of the Primitive Argument against Hereticks , from the Succession of single Persons , p. 123 , 124 , 125. The Ancients could not be deceived in an affair of this Nature , p. 128 , 129. The Impossibility of changing the Ecclesiastical Government from Parity to Prelacy , in the Primitive Ages , all things duly considered , p. 136 , 137. This proved at length from the Concessions of the Learned Presbyterians , Salmasius , blondel , and Bochartus , Ibid. The Peevishness of our Adversaries in this Controversie , p. 150. The Epistles of St. Ignatius overthrow the Pretences of Parity , even upon Salmasius his own Hypothesis , P. 152 , 153 , &c. The whole Controversie reduced to Nine plain Queries , p. 157 , 158 , 159 , 160. The Power of Bishops over the Subordinate Clergy and Lay-men , in the Primitive Ages , p. 161. The Presbyterian exception against large Diocesses discussed , p. 162 , 163 , 164. Saint James the Just , a Diocesan Bishop in the Strictest Sense , p. 164 , 165. CHAP. III. Of several other New Opinions propagated by the Presbyterians of Scotland , p. 168. Their Doctrine concerning the Holy-Days of our Saviour's Nativity , Resurrection , and Ascension , Ibid. Anniversary Solemnities not founded upon any Divine or Express Institution observed in the Jewish and Christian Church , p. 172 , &c. Presbyterian Exceptions removed , p. 175 , 176 , 177. This further Prosecuted from several other Considerations , p. 179 , 180 , &c. The Festivity of Christmas more particularly considered , p. 185. The Vindicator's Mistakes exposed , by the Anniversary Commemoration of the Martyrs , celebrated by the first Christians , p. 188 , &c. The New Explications of the Vindicator insisted on , p. 196 , &c. Some other ridiculous Fancies examined , viz , That Christmas was observed in honour of Julius Caesar , p. 205. The Testimony cited from Buchanan cannot serve the Presbyterian Design , p. 207 , 208. CHAP. IV. Of the Presbyterian Notion of Schism , and their fabulous Stories concerning a Presbyterian Church in Scotland , in the first Ages of Christianity , p. 211. Several Considerations proposed to prove our Scotish Presbyterians Schismaticks from the Catholic Church , in the strictest Sense of that Word , p. 213 , 214 , &c. A Particular Enquiry into that Fabulous Story propagated by our Adversaries , viz. That there was a Presbyterian Church in Scotland in the First Ages of Christianity , p. 228 , 229. The Authors cited by the Vindicator of the Kirk , to support this Dream , particularly considered , p. 230. The Authority of Prosper mistaken , and the Testimony cited by our Adversaries , from his Chronicon Consulare , more narrowly enquired into , p. 245 , &c. CHAP. V. The Presbyterian Doctrine concerning Rites and Ceremonies examined . p. 250 , 251. Their Notions contradict the Practice of all civiliz'd Nations , Ibid. The frequent Allusions to uncommanded significant Ceremonies practised in the Worship of God , that we meet with in the Holy Scriptures , prove such Ceremonies Lawful beyond all Contradiction , p. 254 , &c. Several Exceptions , offered by the Vindicator , removed , p. 256 , 257. The Orthodox Principle Prov'd from an Allusion to the Ceremony of Immersion , practis'd in the Apostolical Church of Rome , proved from Rom. 6.4 . pag. 265. Of Presbyterian Ordinations , and how little can be said in their Defence , p. 276 , &c. The Doctrine of Non-Resistance , truly Understood , is safe and Christian in it self , and in all its tendencies , p. 284 , 285. The Enthusiastic Singularities of the later Presbyterians , in rejecting all Publick Forms , in the Solemn Worship of God , reproved , p. 289 , 290 , 291 , &c. Calvin's three Arguments for Publick Liturgies are Solid and Unanswerable , p. 293 , 294 , 295. The Vindicator's usual Reproach , Viz , That the Clergy of our Church are Superstitious , examined , p. 295 , &c. The Nature of Superstition explain'd , and a Parallel insisted on , between the Superstitious Usages of the Ancient Hereticks , and the Modern Practices of the later Sectaries , p. 296 , 297 , 298 , &c. The Vindicator's Attempt to Justifie his Unaccountable Paradox forc'd upon the words of St. Jerome , from some Expositions offered by the Learned Grotius , Chastised and Exposed , and the Vanity of that Comparison demonstrated , p. 305 , 306 , 307. The Conclusion Exhorting all the true Sons of the Church to Pray for the Peace and Unity of its Members . It is expected the Reader will Pardon some Points and Comma's that are misplac'd . The Errors that disturb the Sense most , are these following . PAge 16. l. 20. r. New. p. 20. marg . r. locum . p. 55. l. 20. r. Praecipue . p. 60. marg . for Hadriani , r. Saturnini . p. 74. l. 21. r. genuine , p. 81. l. 26. r. needs . p. 84. l. 17. r. Hieronymo . p. 92. l. 15. r. Smectimnuus . p. 116. l. 3. after Angel , add , as it is render'd by the Septuagint . p. 138. l. 21. r. Centesimum . p. 159. l. 2. r. a. p. 162. l. 5. r. Saeculi , p. 182. l. 19. r. acuteness . p. 189. l. 7. r. accurate . p. 199. l 3. r. foppish . p. 253. l. 28. r. Treatises . p. 255. l. 25. after unguarded , add , and not Supported . p. 291. l. 13. after that , add , it . p. 319. l. 2. r. Shadow . AN ENQUIRY INTO THE New Opinions , &c. Sir , I Thought that our Enemies had made an end of their Libels , but I see that it is not so easie for them to forbear the practices that we complain of . The malignity of Faction is endless , and there is nothing so apt to be oppressed and reviled as Truth and Innocence . We must ( in these days of Atheism and Confusion ) arm our selves against Calumnies and Contradictions : and if we are not guarded by Resolution and Fortitude , we must desert ( not only the Peculiar Ministries of the Priesthood , but ) the Profession of Christianity it self . We are surrounded on all hands by the most ungenerous and spiteful Adversaries , the open and scandalous Sensualities of some , and the spiritual Raveries of others , lay siege to the Foundations of our Faith , and it is with great difficulty that the publick Worship of God is not quite extinguished , as it is indeed despised and ridicul'd : So grievous is our present Calamity , that the contending Parties amongst us do impute our Disasters to different Causes , and therefore we are the further remov'd from out true Cure. If we were so impartial as to acknowledge our Iniquities with Sorrow and Remorse , we would quickly find the Exercise of Contrition and Repentance more proper to remove the marks of God's Anger , than the other Methods that are most pleasing to Flesh and Blood. There is nothing more Essential to Natural Religion than the belief of God's wise and watchful Providence . It interposes in the meanest . Accidents of humane Life , and much more in the remarkable Ruins and Calamities of publick Societies and Churches : And if we do not hear the Voice of the Rod , and of him that hath appointed it , he hath still more terrible Plaues in reserve for us than the spoiling of our Goods , or the affronting of our Persons . Let us therefore draw near unto him by our fervent Prayers , and ingenuous Humiliations : for the most Innocent amongst us may find in the view of his Life several Actions and Omissions very displeasing to our Heavenly Father , as well as unsuitable to our Baptismal Vows and Engagements ; therefore the Hand of God is stretched out against us , and he is provoked to let loose amongst us a Spirit of Error and Confusion : and though we may be very Innocent as to the Accusations of those who have wickedly combin'd to defame us , yet who of us can understand his Errors ? If all things without us are in such disorder ; then is it high time for us to look within our selves , and to fix our Thoughts on their true Objects : If we are expos'd to the sadest Toslings and Uncertainties , we must endeavour to establish the Tranquillity of our mind ? If we know not where to lay our head , if we have no property upon Earth , the natural Conclusion is , to seek those things that are above . If here we are persecuted and oppressed , we must carry our thoughts and desires to that invisible Sanctuary that yields true Ease and Repose under all pressures and afflictions . It is worth our while to enquire why we , who have been dedicated to the services of the Altar , are more particularly struck at than others . It is not so much our business to complain of our Persecutors , as to look unto him that smites us : and if he ( by the discipline of so many crosses ) oblige us to consider more narrowly the frame of our Souls , we may with greater ease part with our , former Conveniencies . Let every one of us retire into himself , and open up the several foldings of his own Conscience , and endeavour hereafter to regulate our Actions by true and Christian Principles knowing that all things are naked and open to the Eyes of him with whom we have to do , and to whom we are shortly to give an account of our time and talents , and of all things that we have done in the body whether they be good or evil . If we must suffer , let us imitate the Captain of our Salvation : this is Edifying to the Church , and it establishes the Composure of our own mind . Let us canvass and examine the Doctrines and Practices for which we suffer , and enquire whether they be not the Principles of the Catholic and Primitive Church in her first and purest ages . We must not think that we are discharg'd from the peculiar Offices of our Ministry , because we are forc'd from our Residence , and exposed to all sorts of Indignities . We must firmly believe that all things work together for good to them that love God : and that our Patience and Meekness may be of greater use to the Church than if we had been allow'd to continue in our former Stations . We see how much holy things are contemn'd in our days , how triumphantly Atheism and Impiety lift up their Banners every where . Let us endeavour as much as is possible to preserve some Remains of Religion amongst the People . Let us assert the ancient Order and Piety that made the Christian Church so beautiful in former Ages . The Apostle informs us , that the time would come when men could not endure sound Doctrine , but after their own lust shall they heap to themselves Teachers having itching Ears , and they shall turn away their Ears from the truth , and shall be turned unto fables . The great Founder of our Religion sent his Apostles by found Doctrine to enlighten the World , and they convey'd this Spiritual Authority unto others who should transmit it by an orderly Succession ; and as their Mission was Heavenly in its Original , so their Doctrine was pure and holy in all its Tendencies . They considered themselves as the Ambas ▪ adors of Jesus Christ , and Delivered their Commission without any Mixture or Hypocrisy . They treated the People with all Humility and Tenderness , but in the mean time took great care to mortifie their Lusts and their Passions ; but when they grew wanton and headstrong , and thought themselves too wise to be led by their Spiritual Guides and Rulers , then they would have teachers of their own , Men chosen by themselves , such as were taught to calculate their Doctrines to popular Fancies and Humours , such as would prostitute the Gospel , to promote Error and Delusion , and make the Kingdom of Light subservient to that of Darkness , and instead of serving our blessed Saviour , they became Slaves to the People , by whom they were originally employed : and because they were so unhappily successful as to gratifie their Lusts , they were therefore voted the most edifying teachers . The Primitive Ministers of Religion had their immediate Commission from Heaven , accordingly they endeavoured by all means to restore the Image of God in the Souls of Men , to raise their Thoughts and Designs to that Happiness and Treasure which the World cannot give , which God truth promised and made sure by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead . The other had their authority from Men , and therefore they must needs please the People who sent them . They must reconcile the Rules and Morals of the Gospel to the Wicked Practices and designs of the World : they must change the strictest Maxims of the Evangel into looser Theorems , and the severe Discipline of the Ancient Church unto all Licence and Luxury , the true faith that works by love unto airy Notions and Mistakes . Thus the People were pleas'd , and the Gospel was defeated , the Church is ruin'd , and God dishonour'd . Every Man in his own station is obliged to contend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints . When the Foundations of Ecclesiastical Unity are shaken loose , and the Antient Constitutions trampled upon with great Insolence and Impiety , then the hedge of t●●e Religion is not only Invaded but Demolished , and without those Sacred Vehicles it must Evaporate into Giddiness and Enthusiasm ; the Extravagance of these last days is boundless as it Sceptical , and Christianity it self is more dangerously wounded by the Delusions of some that are Baptiz'd , than by the open Blasphemies of Infidels : The last may be assaulted by Reason , ( at least in their more Lucid Intervals ) but the first are altogether inaccessible : we must not presume to instruct them who pretend to extraordinary Illuminations , their Errors are made strong by their vanity , they plead a Divine Right to every New Opipinion , and if we approach them in the ancient Paths of Modesty and Humility , they look down upon us with Scorn and Indignation ; Nay , they are inflexible to the plainest and most convincing arguments . I have frequently , with Grief and Sorrow , considered the Decays of Religion , and the Difficulties of our Employment . We must pull down strong Holds and lofty Imaginations , and grapple with the rudest Oppositions ; the Avenues of Mens Souls are blockaded by passion and prejudices and they are fortified in their Error , not only by the Corruption of their Nature , but by the artifice of Seducers , their itching Ears are pleased , their Lusts are gratified , their Passions are made more unruly , their Envy , Hatred , and Malice are indulg'd ; and they are allow'd to distinguish themselves from all others by special Titles of Division and Singularity , by which alone they think to make their Calling and Election sure . Yet notwithstanding that we are thus resisted by the Multitude of their Follies and Delusions , we must not give over by Faintness and Despondency . We must plead with them , who have left the Unity of the Church , by the words of Truth and Soberness , and exhort others to continue in that Doctrine that was reveal'd by our Saviour , taught by his Apostles , and received by all Churches in the first and best Ages , that the present Generation may not rise in Judgment against us for our Silence , nor Posterity censure our Cowardice . We must not be ashamed of the truth , even when it is contradicted with all possible Violence and Fury . I address this short Treatise to you , with a design rather to assert the Truth , than to reply to what hath been lately published by the Vindicator of the Kirk of Scotland , against a certain Book , Entituled , Apology for the Clergy , &c. though I think it necessary to make some of his Mistakes a little more apparent . There are certain Practices and Rituals received by the Christian Church , in all Ages , which are not determin'd expresly in the Holy Scriptures in so many Letters and Syllables , yet by the plainest and most undeniable Consequences , are agreeable to its general Rules , and the Uniform belief of all Christians ; and they that deny those Usages , or the Lawfulness of those Rituals , venture upon untrodden Paths , and do foolishly condemn the Wisdom of all former Ages . The special Providence of God hath so watch'd over the Church , that , since the first Plantations of Christianity , we have preserved to us some Records and Monuments of its Doctrine and Practices . The Books of such as have been learn'd in every age do plainly demonstrate that the first Christians were agreed amongst themselves in the great Articles of Religion , and in the general Rules of Ecclesiastical Discipline and Order , and by this Uniformity of Doctrine and Rituals they strengthened themselves against Infidels and Hereticks . There is nothing more opposite to the spirit of true Religion than Stubborness and Petulance , and when we despise those Constitutions that have been universally received amongst Christians , we overthrow the Foundations of Peace and Charity , and consequently we exclude our selves from the visible fellowship of Christ's Houshold and Family . When we consider the Schisms and Tumults of particular Churches , the confusions of so many Revolutions , the shakings of so many Nations , the boldness and activity of Hereticks , we have reason to adore the Goodness of God , that so many Monuments of Ecclesiastical Antiquity are preserv'd ; and whatever is uniformly determin'd by the Wisest and the best of Christians ( their learn'dst Bishops and Presbyters ) must be received as the Infallible truth of God , else we have no certain Standard to distinguish the Catholic Church in former Ages from the combinations of Hereticks : these are new in their several Errors and Delusions , and upon that very account of their Novelty were expos'd and refuted by the Ancients : they neither agreed amongst themselves , nor with the Orthodox . But the Uniform Voice of Christendom in the first and purest Ages , is the best Key to the Doctrine and Practice of the Apostles and their Successors . If it appear then that the Opinions which we oppose , and are propagated by the Presbyterian Societies are such as were never entertain'd in the Christian Church for fourteen hundred Years after our Saviour's Incarnation , then I leave it to every sober Christian to consider , whether he may safely continue in the communion of that Party that despises the whole Catholic Church both Ancient and Modern . CHAP. I. The Novelty and Insufficiency of those Pleas and Arguments managed by the Presbyterians in defence of their New Doctrine of Parity . THE first Opinion that I charge with Error and Novelty amongst our Country-men , is this , That they affirm , upon all Occasions , that our Saviour hath appointed his Church , under the New Testament ( whether Provincial , National , or Oecomenic ) to be govern'd by the several classes of Presbyters acting in perfect Parity , and owning no Subordination to any higher Officer in the Ecclesiastical Senate above a Presbyter in the modern and current Notion of the word , Such a Doctrine must be of dangerous consequence , because it is altogether new , and never propagated in any part of the Christian Church until these last days of Separation and Singularity . In this Opinion they differ , not only from the Uniform testimony of Antiquity , but also from the first Presbyterians amongst ourselves , who declare in their Confession of Faith , that all Church-Polity is variable : so far they were at that time from asserting that indispensible , divine , and unalterable right of Parity . All that the first Presbyterians pleaded was , that their new form was allowable , and not repugnant to the Oeconomy of the New Testament and Primitive Institution ; and that it came very near to the Original Model of Churches , but they never thought to advance such a bold and rash Assertion as to affirm , That the Christain Church , by the Original Authority of our Saviour and his Apostles , ought to be govern'd in all Ages by a Parity of Presbyters ; or that there was no other Officer in the Church could pretend to any share of Ecclesiastical Government above a Presbyter . When a Society of Men set up for Divine , Absolute , and Infallible Right , they ought to bring plain Proofs for what they say , else they must needs be look'd upon as Impostors , or at least self-conceited and designing Men. To propagate a Doctrine under the notion of a probable Opinion ( though it should happen to be an Error ) is consistent with Modesty , and the practice of Learned Men in all Ages ; But to affirm a new Notion to be established by Divine Right , and to require Obedience to that Scheme , as a thing that is due to Supreme and Infallible Authority , is much worse than Speculative Enthusiasm . If a man only entertains himself with his Visions and Fancies , he alone suffers by it : but if I meet with a company of head-strong Fellows , who must needs persuade me that they see so many Armies in the Air fighting , and with the exactest Discipline of War ; nay , their Banners , the shape and colour of their Horses , their several Squadrons , and the whole order of their Encampment , and will certainly knock me in the head unless I take my Oath upon it that I see all this , who never saw any such thing in my Life . I think I have reason to complain that my Circumstances , are very unlucky , I had certainly rather fall into the hands of High-way-men , than amongst those Spiritual Robbers , who divest me of my Senses , and the exercise of my Reason . If you inform our Country men that their New Doctrine is thus represented , they will tell you that none but wicked men oppose their Government ; that it is Establish'd upon the express Institution of our Saviour , that it hath been asserted and prov'd by several Learned Men of their Party beyond contradiction . But if you ask by what particular argument you may be convinc'd of the Truth of their New Doctrine , then they begin to lead you into a Labyrinth of dark and intricate Consequences , obscure and perplext Probabilities ; several Texts of Scripture they will alledge , but sadly wrested and distorted from their genuine Meaning and Design , and the uniform Suffrages of all the Ancients : And if you are not satisfied with such proofs as they advance , you must be contented to submit to their Censure , and the New Discipline must be Obey'd where-ever their Power is equal to their Pretences . I can give you but a short History of their Arguments by which they endeavour to Establish their Divine Right of Parity . When you read their Books I think all their pleas of whatever kind or force may be reduc'd to these three heads . First , either they pretend that this Parity of Presbyters is expresly commanded by our Saviour ; or , secondly , They endeavour to support it by consequences from several Texts of Scripture ; or thirdly , from the Testimonies of the ancient Writers of the Church . First I say , they pretend that this Parity of Presbyters ( exclusive of the Superiority or Jurisdiction of a Bishop ) is expresly commanded by our Saviour . This indeed promises veryfair ; For if our Saviour hath plainly and positively Commanded that Ecclesiastical Affairs shall be managed in all Churches and Ages communi Presbytero'um consilio , and by such a College of Presbyters as excludes the Authority and Jurisdiction of a Bishop , then , without all Controversie , all Christians are oblig'd to submit to it . The Consequence is plain and undeniable ; and because our Country-men do insist upon this more frequently than any of the foreign Presbyterians , we ought to hear them calmly and deliberately ; and when they plead the Authority of our Blessed Saviour we must view those Texts with reverence and attention , and see if any thing can be inferred from them that may probably support the now Scheme of Presbytery . The Parallel Texts of Scripture are , Matth. 20. 25. But Jesus called them unto him and said , ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them , and they that are great exercise authority upon them . v. 26. But it shall not be so great among you , but whosoever will be great among you , let him be your Minister . V. 27. And whosoever will be chief among you , let him be your servant . v. 28 . Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministred unto but to minister , and to give his life a ransom for many . See also Mark 10. v. 42 , 43 , 44 , 45. and Luke 22. 25. From these parallel Places they plead , that the Officers of Chirist's House were by his own express . Command establish'd in a perfect Equality , even in such a Parity as excludes the Power and Jurisdiction of any higher Order than that of a Presbyter in the modern Notion . Let us now examine , whether there be any Foundation for their Inference in the Texts last mentioned . In the first place , we find that our Blessed Saviour supposes Degrees of Subordination amongst his own Disciples , as well as all other Societies , and therefore he directs the Ecclesiasticks , who would climb to the Highest Places in the Church , to take other Methods than those that are most usual amongst the Grandees of the World : He that deserved Preferment in the Church was to be the Servant of all , so that this Text refers to the Method of Promotion , and not to the Extirpation of their Jurisdiction . They were not to aspire to Honour and Dignity by Force and Violence , or the other Arts that are so fashionable in Secular Courts , but rather by all the Acts of Modesty , Humility , and Self-denial . Next , let me ask , whether the Apostles understood this Precept of our Saviour in the sense of our Adversaries or not . If they did , ( as it is alledg'd ) how came they to exercise Jurisdiction over all Subordinate Ecclesiasticks , during their Life time , in all the Churches they Planted ? Did they go cross to the Institution of our Saviour , who perfectly understood his meaning , and to whom the Precept was Originally delivered . But that which Baffles and Exposes this Argument to all Intents and Purposes , is this , that he did that himself among them , which now he commanded them to do to one another , and therefore the doing of this towards one another in Obedience to the Command now under consideration , could not infer a Parity , unless they Blasphemously infer that Christ and his Apostles were equal : for when you read the Text with attention , you see that our Saviour recommends what he Enjoyns from his own Constant and Visible Practice amongst them , viz. that he himself , who was their Lord and Master , was their Servant , and therefore it became the Greatest among them , in imitation of him , to be Modest , Calm , and Humble towards all their Subordinate Brethren , and this qualify'd them more than any other thing for Ecclesiastical Promotions . It is very sad that any should be so much Infatuated with their new Schems of Parity , as to alledge such Texts , which ( if understood in their Sense ) Degrades our Blessed Saviour to the Degree of one of his Disciples ; for what he Commanded the Apostles , he Practised among them himself . And this is the strongest Motive to engage their Obedience ; therefore I may reasonably infer , that whatever it was that our Saviour commanded in those places of Scripture , it must of necessity be toto coelo different from all Parity and Equality . He Commanded them , that they should not exercise their Jurisdiction as the Lords of the Gentiles did , by a Spirit of Pride and Domination , but rather by the more Christian and engaging Behaviour of Charity and Humility . He that was to be the Greatest among them , was to be their Servant , in Imitation of that Heavenly Patern that was set them by our Blessed Lord and Saviour . S. Paul thought himself oblig'd to answer his Episcopal Character after this manner , when the Care of all the Churches lay upon him , when he employ'd his Apostolical Power to promote the Edification of all Men : and all the Fathers of the Church , who were advanc'd above their Brethren to Ecclesiastical Power and Jurisdiction , had this Evangelical Notion of their Dignity , that they were the Servants of all others . From what hath been said one may easily see , that there is no Ground , no not a Shadow of any Argument for the New Doctrine in these Texts of Scripture . It is true , that Salmasius glances at this way of Reasoning in his Walo Messalinus , but he lays no great stress upon it . That which is most to our purpose is , that Beza himself , in his larger Notes upon the New Testament , asserts , that all kind of Jurisdiction is not forbidden in these Texts , but that only which is joyn'd with imperious Bitterness and Domination . Let it be further considered , that the Hierarchy and Subordination of Priests was Established by Divine Authority in the lewish Church : and if our Saviour had pull'd down that ancient Polity , and commanded an Equality amongst the Presbyters of the New Testament , he would not have stated the Opposition between his own Disciples and the Lords of the Gentiles , but rather between the Priests of the Mosaie Oeconomy and the Disciples of the New Testament . When he reprov'd the corrupt glosses that were introduc'd into the Church by the Scribes and Pharisees , and taught them Purer and more Heavenly Strains of Morality , he states the Opposition between the current Doctrine receiv'd amongst the Jews , and that which he himself Taught and Recommended ; and there is no doubt to be made , if he had forbidden the several Degrees and Subordinations of Priests , and Established a perfect Equality , he would have stated a plain Opposition between the Model of the Temple , and the other Plat-form that was to succeed in the Christian Church . As for the other Text that is ordinarily cited to serve the same design , 1 Pet. 5.2 , 3. It is but the Apostle's Commentary on our Saviour's Words and Commandment , and it forbids the Spirit of Pride and Insolence , as a thing very unsuitable to all Power and Authority in the Church . Thus such Texts have been understood from the beginning , and it is one strong Prejudice against the new Exposition , that it was never heard of until these latter days . Secondly , If the Presbyterians cannot Establish their Divine Right upon express Texts of Scripture , they will support it ( as they think ) by the Clearest and most immediate Consequence , and this is Equivalent to the most Positive Command and Institution . The Argument from the Identity of Bishop and Presbyter fill all their Books from top to bottom : And if this be in it self Lame and Sophistical , they must despair to Establish the pretended Equality of Presbyters in the Ecclesiastical Government . The Argument most insisted on in favour of their Parity , ( exclusive of Episcopal Jurisdiction ) is built upon the Homonomy of Bishop and Presbyter in the Language of the New Testament , or because the Clergy are Dichotomiz'd only into Bishops and Deacons in some Texts of Scripture , and in some Ancient Writers of the Primitive Church . Hence they exclude the Authority of a Bishop above a Presbyter , though the Offices themselves be as much distinguished as is possible in several Texts of the New Testament . And if this Argument alone appear Childish and Sophistical , they have not another Sanctuary to flee to ; so my present Business is to Examine the force of it . There is not one of their number with whom you Engage in this Controversie , but immediately he will tell you , that there is no distinction between Bishop and Presbyter in the Scriptures , and therefore they conclude that their Argument a Confusione Nominum against the Superiority of a Bishop is very Solid and Demonstrative . To this purpose they cite Act. 20. 17. 28. Philip. 1.1 . 1 Tim. 3. and several other places . Whether a Bishop be of a Higher Order than a Presbyter does not now fall under our Enquiry , nor is it in it self very material . Sometimes they might be consider'd of the same Order with regard to the Priesthood common to either , by which both Bishops and Presbyters were distinguish'd from the body of the People , and other Subordinate Officers of the Church , though at other times , when Authority and Jurisdiction is nam'd , the Bishop , ( with regard to his Dignity and Power ) is always reckon'd above a Presbyter . Here we are carefully to Observe , that when the Inspir'd Writers Dichotomiz'd the Clergy into two Orders , they but follow'd the Dialect and Example of the Jews , who thus divided their Ministers also into Priests and Levites , though the Highest Order was again Subdivided both by the Jews and the Christians , when the Priests were consider'd with regard to that Subordination establish'd among themselves , and without any regard to the Body of the People . This is very agreeable to the Language of the Ancient Jews , as well as to the Idiom of the Hellenistical Tribes of the Apostolical Age : The first confounded the name of the High Priest with that of a Priest , without any other distinguishing Charcteristic or Discrimination . For Proof of this see Levit. 1. 7 , 8. And the Sons of Aaron the Priest shall put fire upon the Altar , and lay the wood in order upon the fire . v. 8. And the Priests Aaron's Sons shall lay the parts , the head and the fat in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the Altar . Here we plainly find that in the first Establishment of the Mosaic Oeconomy ( in which the Patriarchal Subordination of Priests was still retain'd ) the High Priest is nam'd by the same appellative ( without any distinction of Order or Jurisdiction ) that the other Priests were nam'd by : and the Title of a Priest was promiseuously apply'd , without any distinction or marks of Eminence to the High Priest as well as to the Subordinate . Yet it was never question'd but that there were extraordinary Privileges and Dignities reserv'd to the High Priest amongst the Jews , though thus plac'd amongst the other Priests without any Nominal Distinction : nor do we find the Title of High Priest ever affix'd to the particular name of Aaron or Eleazar in all the Pentateuch , nor is the word High-Priest it self mention'd in the Books of Moses , but either twice or thrice , and that only with regard to the Administration of after days . Yet this Homonomy of names could not be reasonably pleaded then against the Subordination of other Priests to Aaron , nor against the Deference due to his Pontifical Character . Was it then to be expected that the Apostles or Apostolical Men ( when they occasionally mention'd the Presbyters of the New Testament ) might not make use of the currant Language and Pharaseology of their own Country-men , who divided their Clergy into Priests and Levites , as if there were no more but two Orders , even when the meanest of the Jews knew that the Dignity of the High Priest was very honourable and distinguish'd from all Subordinate Priests by all marks of Eminence and Authority ? It is true , that in the Hagiographical and Prophetical Writings , the High Priest is very frequently distinguish'd by his Proper and Special Character ; yet in the beginning of the Jewish Oeconomy neither Aaron nor Eleazar were called High-Priests when they are particularly nam'd , and if in those days any had been so mad as to have infer'd from this confusio Nominum an Equality between all Priests , he would certainly have been expos'd : for the Offices themselves were sufficiently distinguish'd by those Special Ministries and Jurisdictions that were peculiarly appropriated to the one , and deny'd to the other , such as were visible to the observation of the meanest among the Jews . We do not at all deny but that Bishops might be call'd Presbyters in the days of the Apostles , and justly so too , though they had other Presbyters under their Government and Inspection : for the use of the Word Presbyter was another thing then than now , if we consider it in its full Latitude and Extent ▪ With us it signifies such Priests as assist the Bishop in his Ecclesiastical Administrations , and are accountable to him for their Performances : And though all Presbyters are not Bishops , yet all Bishops are Presbyters ; and to infer an Equality of Offices from the promiscuous Use of Names , I think , is neither good Logick nor good History . We do not now Plead , ( as some Ignorant People may pretend ) that there ought to be Bishop above Presbyters because there was a High Priest among the Jews , but rather thus , that the Hierarchy that obtain'd in the Patriarchal and Jewish Oeconomy was never abrogated in the New ; and though we meet with the same Dichotomies of the Clergy in the New Testament , as are frequently seen in the Old , we ought not to conclude from thence , that there was an Equality among them of the Higher Order in that Division , no more than there was a Parity amongst the Priests of the Old Testment , for that same Highest Order , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , was again divided into two , viz. the Supream and Subordinate . And not only they , but the Jews also of the Apostolical Age divided their Clergy into two Classes when they spoke of them , only as in Opposition to the People , they made no other distinction amongst them than that of Priests and Levites : But then again , upon other Occasions they Subdivided the Priests into the Highest and Subordinate Order , when they consider'd the Hierarchy in it self , and distinguish'd every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Priesthood from one another , of this we have clear Instances from Philo the Jew . Was it not then reasonable , that the Apostles should speak the Language of the Age in which they lived , and that of their Predecessors ? Whether then the Clergy be divided into their several Classes by a Biparite or Triparite division , both is very Agreeable to the Custom of the Jews . If they compar'd the Priests amongst themselves , and reckon'd up their Distinctions and Subordinations to one another , then they were Divided by a Tipartite Division ; but if they spoke of them with regard to the People , then the Bipartite Division was more Convenient so that the Community of Names was very observable when the Offices themselves were as truly Separated and Distinguished a they could be . In like manner the first Presbyter , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the Apostolical Age , he that was Vested with a Prostasia , was a much above the Subordinate Presbyters as the High-Priest among the Jews was above other Priests , with whom nevertheless he was frequently Subordinate Presbuyters as the High Priest among the Jews was above other Priests , with whom nevertheless he was frequently Ranked , without any Nominal Distinction or Discrimination . Nay Salmasius himself grants , that even when the pretended Equality prevail'd , there was a Praeses to whom the Protocathedria , or Locus in Cosessu Primarius , was constantly due , and that during life . And there are such mainfest and palpable Evidences of this peculiar Honour and Jurisdiction due to the one of the Ecclesiastical Senate in the Apostolical Age , that the Learned'st Sticklers for Parity cannot deny it . The Apocalyptic Angels ( amongst whom we justly reckon S. Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna ) the Epistles to Timothy and Titus , and the Catalogues of Bishops suceeding the Apostles in several Sees , ( gathered at least towards the middle of the ( Second Century ) make it Evident beyond all Contradiction . It is impossible to let us see from any Ancient Record either Genuine or Suppositious , that there was ever any thing of Moment Canonically determin'd in the Ecclesiastical Meetings without their Bishop his particular Advice and Authority . And since Clemens Romanus , Origen , and S. Cyprian do compare the Evangelical Priesthood and Ministrations with the Aaronical , how is it that we can pretend to Conclude an Equality amongst the Presbyters of the New Testament from the Dichotomies us'd in Christian Writings , no more than we can Dream of a Parity among the Jewish Priests , because they are frequently Dichotomiz'd , especially since the Ancient who sometimes divide the Clergy only into two Orders , do again upon other occasions Subdivide the Highest Order , and distinguish the Bishop from all Subordinate Presbyters . It is true , that Clemens Romanus a Writer of the Apostolical Age , Divides the Clergy into two Orders , but so he Divides also the Jewish Ministers of the Sanctuary into Priests and Levites , which no Man will allow as a Proof of the Equality of Priests under the Old Testament ; but I shall have Opportunity hereafter to consider the Testimony alledg'd by Blondel from S. Clemens's Epistle to the Corinthians more particularly in its proper Place . I have formerly said , that the most Ancient Writers , who Dichotomize the Clergy when they speak of them with regard to the Laity , do yet distinguish them by a Tripartite Division , when the Hierarchy is consider'd in it self , and with regard to that Prostasia and Jurisdiction which distinguishes one Priest from another . Tertullian in his Book de Baptismo , hath these Words , Jus quidem dandi baptismum habet summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus , dehinc Presbyteri & Diaconi , non tamen sine Episcopi Authoritate , quâ salvâ salva pax est : Yet Monsieur Blondel runs away with another Testimony cited from his Apologeticks , as if he had found there a perfect Equality of Presbyters , because the Seniores are said to be in the Government , than which there cannot be a more absurd Consequence , for he neither affirm'd that those Seniores were all Equal among themselves , nor is it certain , whether by the Seniores he understood all Presbyters in General , or those only who were advanc'd to the Episcopal Dignity ; for it was no part of his Business in an Apology Address'd to the Heathens to insist on the Subordinations of one Priest unto another , for he only pleaded that there was nothing in the Christian Meetings contrary to the strictest Rules of Morality and Decency , and that they were Men of Approv'd and Exemplary Lives , who were advanc'd to any share of the Ecclesiastical Government . Clemens Alexandrinus is brought as a Witness to serve the same Design , but then unluckily he reckons up the three Orders of the Clergy , and calls them Imitations of the Angelical Glory , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Upon this Occasion it is needless to name S. Cyprian , who Asserts the Jurisdiction and Prerogative of the Episcopal Power upon all Occasions with great Courage and Assurance ; and S. Polycarp the Famous Doctor of the Asiatic Church , Bishop of Smyrna , and Disciple of Saint John , who flourish'd long before S. Cyprian , though he Divides the Clergy into two Orders in his Epistle to the Philippians , yet he honourably mentions and recommends the Epistles of S. Ignatius , in which the Apostolical Hierarchy of Bishop , Presbyter , and Deacon is so often and so expresly mention'd : and S. Polycarp in the Epigraphe of that Epistle distinguishes himself from his Subordinate Presbyters , according to the Modest and Usual S●ile of those days , Pelycarp and the Presbyters that are with him , who , if he had stood on a Level with those Presbyters , would never have distinguish'd himself from the Community of his Brethren by his proper Name plac'd at such a distance , yet with Visible ( but very Modest ) Marks of Distiction and Precedence , according to the humble Practice of those Glorious Martyrs . From what hath been said , it is very evident , that there can be nothing more Foolish and Extravagant than to conclude a Parity among Priests , because some Ancient Christians us'd the Jewish Phraseology , for even these upon other Occasions frequently Assert the Jurisdiction of one Bishop over many Presbyters : and Hermas , who was Contemporary with Clemens Romanus , reproves the Ambition of some in his own time , who strove for the first Dignity and Preferment . And if there was no such Precedence then in the Church , there was no ground for his Reprehension . The sum of these Reasonings amounts to this , that when the Hellenist Jews would distinguish the High-Priest from the Levites , they thought the common Name of a priest was sufficient , * as is evident from several places in Phylo the Jew . And as it was unreasonable to conclued from thence that he had not a singular Authority and Jurisdiction over subordinate Priests , so now-a-Days an Argument founded upon the same Topic , is equally Impertinent and Sophistical . When the priests were compar'd among themselves one with another , then their Dignities and Subordinations might be seasonably mentioned . If we compare the priests of the New Testament with the Deacons , we need say no more than Priests and Deacons ; but when we compare the Priests among themselves , we must acknowledge their several Subordinations . The Priests under the Old Testament were only allowed to offer the Sacrifices , and by their Offering of Sacrifices , were distinguish'd from the Levites : So under the New Testament , the Priests , both of the highest and subordinate Order , offer the Eucharistical Sacrifice , and by so doing , are sufficiently distinguish'd from Deacons ; yet this is no Argument against the Subordination of one Priest unto another . Thus we see there was the same Reason for those Dichotomies of the Clergy , both under the Old and New Testament . From what hath been said we may easily see that the Jews us'd such Dichotomies of their Clergy , both under the Mosaic Oeconomy , and in the Apostolical Age , when the superiority of the High-Priest was past all Contradiction : And there can be a very good account given of this Phraseology , and way of speaking from the different Considerations that engag'd both Jewish and Christian Writers to use the Bipartite or Tripartite Division of the Clergy ; for the very same Christian Writers , who only mentioned two Orders , do in other places reckon up the Hierarchy of Bishop , Presbyter , and Deacon , as plainly as is possible . From these Considerations , I say , we may easily perceive , that the Argument pleaded against Episcopacy , founded upon such Dichotomies , is not only weak , but very Foolish and Extravagant . Yet Blondel , Salmasius , and Daille , Men of great Learning and Reputation , imploy'd much Reading and Artifice to support their New Hypothesis by this Argument , and to wrest so many places of the Fathers , to promote an Opinion which was never heard of before the Days of Aerius ; thô it must be confess'd , that Men of extraordinary Learning have been impos'd upon by the same fallacies , particularly our Country-man , Sir Thomas Craig , in his Book de Success . Reg. Angl. But if he had read the ancient Monuments of Ecclesiastical Antiquity , with that accurate Attention wherewith he perus'd the vast Volums of Civilians , Canonists , and Historians , he had certainly been of another Mind . So visible is the Confusion of Names in the New Testament , that Apostle , Bishop , and Presbyter , are sometimes mentioned without any remarkable Distinction , yet so as the Government of one amongst many , is particularly Demonstrated . Our Saviour himself is call'd an Apostle , Heb. 3.1 . sometimes the Word seems to be restrain'd to the Number of Twelve , and Matthias , upon the Apostacy of Judas , is chosen to fill up the Number of the Twelve Apostles ; but in the same Apostolical Writings , the Name of an Apostle is bestow'd upon several others besides the Twelve , as S. S. Barnabas , Paul Andronicus , Junias , Epaphroditus , and others . Our Saviour is call'd a Bishop , 1 Pet. 2. 25. Again the Government of the Apostles is called their Episcopacy , 1 Act. 20. sometimes the Name of Bishop is attributed to such Priests as were of the first Order , invested with Apostolical Power and Jurisdiction , 1 Tim. chap. 3. Tit. 1. 7. these places are so understood by all the Fathers . Again the Bishops mentioned , 1. Philip. 1 are understood by St. Chrysostom , Oecumenius , Theophilact , and Theodoret , to be the Priests of the second Order ; for they concluded Epaphroditus to have been then Bishop of Philippi , as may be reasonably collected from Philip. 2. 25. Our English Version follows Beza , and understands it as if Epaphroditus had been a Messenger sent by the Philippians to S. Paul ; but Salmasius is much more ingenuous , and acknowledges , That the Word Apostle in the sacred Scriptures never signifies any other than legatum Dei ad homines . And this is very agreeable to the Opinion of Theodoret , who thought that when the Bishops were named in the Apostolic Age , so as to be distinguished from subordinate Priests , they were then called Apostles , thô upon other occasions they were promiscuously Named without any distinction . I only mention this transiently , not insisting upon it . My business at present is to prove that the Community of Names was so familiar in the Language of the Apostolical Age , that no Man can conclude from thence a Community of Offices . St. Peter calls himself a Presbyter , so St. John the Apostle , and the Presbytery mentioned in the first of Timothy , 4. 14. was a Senate compos'd of Apostles and other Presbyters , whether of the first or second Rank is not certain , but that S. Paul himself was one of them is evident from the second Epist . to Timothy , 1. 6. In the first , Timothy is exhorted not to neglect the Gift which was given him with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery . In the last he is put in mind to stir up the same Gift which he received by the laying on of St. Paul's Hands . And in the beginning of Christianity ( as S. Chrysostom Witnesseth ) both Bishops and Presbyters were sometimes call'd Deacons , which may be justly concluded from Coloss . 4. 17. and the Apostles themselves are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the first of the Acts , their Apostolical Ministry , to which Matthias was assumed , is called their Deaconship , 1 Act. 17. Now I take it for granted , that if any Man pretend to infer a Community of Offices , from the Community of Names , which we meet with in the Holy Scriptures ; he must needs confound the highest Order of the Church ( even the Apostolical Dignity ) with the lowest Rank of Ecclesiastical Officers . Yet this is certain that the several Offices were carefully separated in those Days ; thô the Humility of such as were uppermost , taught them not to be very forward to distinguish themselves from their subordinate Brethren , by Titles of Eminence and Jurisdiction ; and the Bishops in the second Century transcribed the same Copy in their Behaviour , who , thô they were careful to preserve the necessary Distinction between the Priests of the first and second Order , yet they studied the most modest Expressions of Humility and Condescension , as may be seen from the forecited Inscription of S. Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians , that Apostolic Martyr and Prince of the Asiatick Church . I have consider'd this Argument the more carefully , in that I find it over and over again in all the Writings of our Ecclesiastic Levellers , as their first and last Refuge to which they flee to ; and yet there is not any thing more Frivolous and Trifling ; for the Names of the lowest Officers in the Christian Church , were frequently assum'd by the highest , and distinction of Offices is rather inferr'd from their Practices , Peculiar Ministries , and Acts of Jurisdiction , than from any Names that we can fix upon . Thirdly , If they cannot establish their New Doctrine of Parity neither upon the express Commandment of our Saviour , nor upon the Consequences they manage a confusione nominum , they endeavour to support it by some Testimonies of the Primitive Fathers . When the Government and Revenues of the Church were sacrilegiously invaded by Atheists and Enthusiasts under Oliver Cromwel , the Learned Blondel employed all his skill to make the Ancients contradict themselves and all contemporary Records . When his * Book appeared , the Presbyterians concluded ( before ever they Read it ) that all was Pure and Undeniable Demonstration ; and our Country-men think they need return no other answer to any thing that is written against them , than to say that Episcopacy , and all that may be said in its defence , is quite Ruin'd and Destroyed by Monsieur Blondel , and Salmasius . And thô there are but very few of them that ever read them , and that every Line of their Writings , that hath the least colour of Argument , was frequently Answered and Expos'd , yet such is the Power of Prejudice and Partiality , that they shut their Eyes against the clearest Evidences that are produc'd by their Adversaries . It 's enough for them to say that Blondel hath written a Book in their Defence , of 549 pages ; and this in their Opinion may bar all Disputations of that Nature . When we bid them name the place that they think proves their New Doctrine most plausibly , they refuse any such close Engagement ; they will tell you that Jerome was of their Opinion , and that their Learned Champion Blondel has sufficiently prov'd that this antient Monk was a Presbyterian . I must not transscribe the Accurate and unanswerable Dissertations of several Learned Men , who have sufficiently expos'd the Writings of Blondel and Salmasius on this Head , particularly the incomparable Bishop of Chester , yet I may be allowed to examine some of the most remarkable Testimonies from Antiquity that are alleg'd by those Men to support their Doctrine of Parity , that the Reader may have a Sample of their Partialities and Prepossessions , and if none of the first Worthies of the Christian Church appear for the New Doctrine of Parity , we may safely infer , that there are little hopes to defend their cause by the Suffrages of after Ages . And in the next place I will particularly examine Blondel's Argument from the Authority of St. Jerome and Demonstrate that he mistakes or ( which is much more probable ) hides and misrepresents the Doctrine of that Learned Father ; and if St. Jerome be not his Friend , he and his Associates may despair of any other . First , I will examine some of the most remarkable Testimonies from Antiquity , and the first that is nam'd is S. Clement in his famous Epistle to the Corinthians . This is the Celebrated S. Clement , so Honourably mentioned by S. Paul himself , Philip. 4. 3. together with some others , whose Names are Written in the Book of Life , who was fellow Labourer with the Apostles , and Third Bishop of Rome by the Testimony of Irenaeus , and probably sat in the Chair of Rome from the Year 64 , until the Year 81 , or 83. He wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians , to compose the scandalous Divisions and Schisms that had risen among them by the Pride and Vanity of some turbulent Brethren , who valu'd themselves upon the miraculous Gifts of the Spirit , to the Contempt of their ordinary Ecclesiastical Governors . It is thought by some , that this Epistle was written towards the end of Nero's Persecution , before he was advanc'd to the See of Rome . It is very observable that Blondel before he produces any Testimony from S. Clement , acknowledges , that by the universal consent of the Ancients this very S , Clement succeeded S. Peter in the Government of the See of Rome ; and thô they vary as to his Order of Succession , yet all of them agree as to the thing it self . His first Argument for Parity is founded on S. Clement's Inscription of his Epist . to the Corinthians . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . From this Inscription he concludes that the Church of Rome was then Govern'd by a Colledge of Presbyters , because the whole Church of Rome wrote to the whole Church of Corinth , not mentioning the Distinction of the Clergy from the Laity ; when the Learned Blondel Reasoned at this rate , he design'd ( it seems ) to please the Independent Party , ( who were then most Numerous and Potent in England ) rather than the Presbyterians . For if his Argument proves any thing , it proves too much , viz. That the Laity hath an equal share of Jurisdiction in the Administration of Ecclesiastical Affairs ; with Bishops and Presbyters ? And thus he might conclude , that when S. Paul wrote an Epistle together with Sosthenes , Timotheus , Sylvanus , and all the Brethren that were with him , that he had no greater Authority in the Ecclesiastical Senate , than the meanest of the Laity . Our Learned Country-man Junius , gives a far more reasonable Account of this Ancient Simplicity , of the Writings of the Apostolical Age , than such Childish Reasonings ; and he tells us that St. Clement did not prefix his Name , ut modestiae & humilitatis posteris aetatibus exemplar imitandum proponeret , and this was very subservient to his Design , that he might Teach the Corinthians , ( whom he exhorts to Concord and Humility ) by his own Example , that true and undisguised Modesty , which was then so visible in the Practice of the first Christians , when both Clergy and Laity were of one Heart , and one Mind . The next attempt that Blondel makes to support his imaginary Parity in the Primitive Church , is from St. Clement's dividing the Clergy into Bishops and Deacons , according to the current Phraseology that prevail'd in the Apostolical Age. When they considered the Clergy only , in opposition to the body of the People . I have answered this already , when I examined their Argument , founded upon such Dichotomies : But when we consider this particular place of S. Clement , with regard to that Latitude , and Promiscuous use of Names , that was very current in those Days , the Word Deacon may be understood to comprehend all those Ministers of Religion ( whether Presbyters in the modern Notion , or Deacons , who by the first Institution , were obliged to attend upon Tables , ) and then his Argument vanishes into nothing ; nay rather it is a strong confirmation of that which he would most willingly destroy ; for by Bishops and Deacons , we may understand Apostles , Bishops , Presbyters , and Attendants upon Tables ; for the Word Deacons in the Language of the Holy Scriptures , is taken in the greatest Latitude that may be , not only for such as were appointed by the Apostles , particularly to the Ministry of Tables , but also the Apostles themselves , the highest Officers in the Christian Church , are called Deacons . Who then is Paul , and who is Apollos , but Deacons , by whom they believed , even as the Lord gave to every Man ? And again , who hath made us able Deacons of the New-Testament , &c. And upon other occasions they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. And those who were ordain'd to the special Ministry or Tables , were Originally constituted , that the Apostles themselves might not be diverted from the Ministry of Deaconship of the Word . And Tychicus is called a faithful Deacon , as also Timothy , so likewise . Arthippus is commanded to take heed to his Deaconship , thô it be not expresly determined , what room he held in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy , weather he was Bishop , Presbyter , or Deacons ; nay such was the Latitude of the Word Deacon , in the Apostolical Age , that it was applyed promiscuously to all the three Order of the Christain Hierarchy . So that if we understand St. Clement according to the current extent of the Word , we may safely judge him to have meant by Bishops , the Ecclesiastical Governors , and by Deacons , all subordinate Ministers of Religion , whether such as were promoted the Priesthood , or the Deacons who were confin'd to their Attendance upon Tables . What advantage then does Monsieur Blondel gain to his cause ; for though Presbyters in the modern Notion , are not perhaps the only Persons who may be understood by the Word Deacon , yet they may be comprehended as well as other Ministers of a lower Rank . Let it be observed also , that S. Clement speaks not of the Ecclesiastical Polity , such as it was brought to perfection after wards by the Apostles , but rather of the first beginnings of the Christian Church , immediatly after the Resurrection of our Saviour . For thô all the Degrees and Subordinations of the Apostolical Government , were founded upon divine Right ; yet they were not in one moment established in their True and Everlasting Figure , but had their beginning , as the Jewish Church went on from lessen steps to that more perfect Scheme that was to continue until the coming of the Messiah . This is certain , that before the Apostles left the World , they established such an Ecclesiastical Government as ought to continue in the Church , until the second coming of our Savioar . But let us suppose that where we meet with such Dichetomies in other Authors , such a Parity as is intended by the Presbyterians , may be understood ; yet when we view the Text of St. Clement more narrowly , we must not presume to make any such Inference , for the very same St. Clement Dichotomizies the Jewish Clergy who are known to have had their High Priest , Chief Priests , Priests , and Levites ; yet he comprehends them all in this short and Bipartite Division . For speaking of Jacob he hath these Words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And must we from hence conclude that there was a Parity amongst the Priests of the Old Testament , because they are thus distinguish'd from the Laity without mentioning the several Gradations of the Hierarchy amongst themselves ? Nay so little do our Adversaries gain by straining the Language of St. Clement , contrary to the Latitude and Simplicity of the Apostolical Age ; that the same Author comprehends all Ministers of Religion , under one general Word , whether Prophets , Apostles , Bishops , Presbyters , or Deacons , and not only does he thus speak of the Priests of the true Religion , but also of the * Egyptian Priests , who are known to have had their several subordinations . But that which is most material to our purpose , is that the same St. Clement , when he exhorts the Corinthians to Christian Order and Harmony , sets before them the beautiful Subordinations under the Temple-Service , how the High Priest , Priests , and Levites , were distinguished by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and immediatly recommends to the Corinthians , that every one of them should continue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Now when we consider the Primitive method of Reasoning from Jewish Precedents , St. Clement had never talked at this rate , if the Jurisdiction of one over many Priests , had been abolish'd under the New Testament , and Jerome himself ( on whose Writings M. Blondel endeavours to establish his Opinion ) in his Epistle to Evagrius , gives light to this place of St. Clements , Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri testamento quod Aaron & filii ejus atque Levitae in templo fuerunt , hoc sibi Episcopi & Presbyteri & Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia . For without all Controversie , those traditions descended from the Jewish Church to the Christian , as their true inheritance . Nay St. Clement himself expresly distinguishes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the last may signifie Office and Age , both together . Nor can it be an Objection of any weight , that the first ( who were there Spiritual Governors ) are mentioned in the plural Number , since this was an Encyclical Epistle Address'd to Corinth , as the principal City , and from thence transmitted to its dependencies . How considerable the City of Corinth was in those Days , every body knows ; and S. Chrysostom informs us , that it was Populous and magnificent , in regard of its Riches and Wisdom , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : So far was S. Clement from intending a Parity of Priests , by his promiscuous use of words , that he himself distinguishes plainly the spiritual Governors from the body of subordinate Presbyters ; and it is surprising to observe how much Men may be blinded with prejudice contrary to the Universal suffrage of the Ancients , who place S. Clement so early in the Apostolical Succession of the Chair of Rome ; the Reader may see them all in one view , prefixt to Junius his Edition of his Epistle to the Corinthians . A second Witness made to appear an evidence for Parity , is the venerable S. Polycarp , Bishop of Smyrna , who by * Ireneus Bishop of Lions , is said to have been taught by the Apostles , to have convers'd with many who had seen our Saviour , and that he himself saw him in his younger Days , and that he knew him to have been constituted Bishop of Smyrna , by the Apostles . This is he who by * S. Jerome is called totius Asiae princeps : One would think that when they name S. Polycarp , they had discovered some clear Testimony in his Writings to build their Hypothesis upon , but instead of this , nothing but a wretched consequence founded upon the Bipartite Division of the Clergy , mentioned in his Epistle to the Philippians . And yet the Epigraphe of S. Polycarp's Epistle clearly distinguishes him from his Presbyters , who were then with him , which runs thus , Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him to the Church of God which is at Philippi . And if he had not been vested with Episcopal Jurisdiction and Eminence , amongst those Presbyters , how was it agreeable to the primitive Modesty and self Denial , to have named himself only in the frontispiece of this Epistle , and to mention none of his Brethern , save only by the general name of Presbyters ? This is mighty uneasie to Blondel and the evidence of Truth forces from him the following words , id tamen in S. Martyris epistola peculiare apparet , quod eam pr. vatim suo & Presbyterorum nomine ad philippensium fraternitatem dedit ac sibi quandam supra Presbyteros 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , reservasse videtur ut jam tum in Episcopali apice constitutum reliquos Smyrnensium Presbyteros gradu superasse conjicere liceat . There are two things that baffle this shadow of an Argument brought from the Epistle of S. Polycarp . The first is that Irenaeus , who was intimately acquainted with him , and knew him to have been taught by S. John the Apostle , and by him ordained Bishop of Smyrna , does refute the Heresies of the Valentintans , from the unanimous Doctrine preserv'd amongst the single successors of S. Polycarp downwards to that very Period in which he wrote . For if the Ecclesiastical Power of the Church of Smyrna , had been equally lodg'd in the College of Presbyters , his Argument against the Hereticks , from the Succession of single Persons , teaching the same Doctrine first delivered by S. John , and convey'd by S. Polycarp to the following Bishops ; I say such an Argument so manag'd , could have no force , nor was it possible for Irenaeus to have us'd it . The next is this , that in the same Epistle of S. Polycarp to the Philippians , the Epistles of S. Ignatius are zealously recommended , and we need not inform the Reader how much the Divine Institution , Power , and Jurisdiction of Bishops above Presbyters is asserted in those Epistles of which I am to speak in due time . The Question then concerning S. Polycarp is , whether we are to believe S. Irenaeus Bishop of Lions , who was fully acquainted with the manner of his Education , Apostolical Doctrine , and promotion to the See of Smyrna , rather than the dark and groundless conjectures of later Ages . And from this single Instance alone , we see how inflexible and Stubborn the Power of prejudice is , how far it drives Men against Light and Conviction , and darkens all their Intellectuals in defiance of common Sense and Reason . A third Witness alledg'd by Blondel is Hermas , ( I only name some few of those that are nearest to the Apostles ) I do not now enquire into the Authority of this Book . It is most probable that it was written towards the end of the Apostolical Age ; and some of the Ancients of great Authority make him to be the same that is mention'd by S. Paul , Rom. 16. 14. It is without all Controversie , a Book of great Antiquity , as appears by the Citations out of him , still preserv'd in some Authentick Monuments , particularly Irenaeus , Clemens Alexandrinus , Tertullian , and Origen . There are two palpable evidences that Episcopacy was the Ecclesiastical Government that obtain'd in the Christian Church , when this Book was written . The first is from the second Vision of the first Book , where the sending of the Encyclical Epistle in exteras civitates , is insinuated to be the peculiar Priviledge of S. Clement , then Bishop of Rome . The other insinuation is from the second Book , and 12th Mandat . Paragr . 2. where he reproves the preposterous Ambition of such as would thrust themselves into the highest dignities , contrary to the Evangelical Methods of Humility and self-denial , exaltat enim se , & vult primam Cathedram habere . If there be no Power , there can be no Abuse of it , and therefore he reproves that insatiable thirst of Preferment that puts some amongst them upon Projects and Designs , contrary to the command of our Saviour who taught us , that he that deserv'd the Ecclesiastical Promotion was to be the Servant of all , and therefore many of the Primitive Bishops fled and hid themselves upon the first Motion of their being nam'd to the Episcopal Dignity . And the other Citation from Book the third , Similitud 8. insinuates the very same thing that I intend , viz. , a Principatus then established as the fixt Government of the Church which some were too too hasty to grasp . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A51155-e2450 2 Tim. 4. 3 , 4. Vid. Dickson in Matt. and Answer to the Irenicum , by G. R. vid. Bez. in 〈◊〉 . Vid. Smectim . Jus divin . Minister Anglican . The Unbishoping Timothy and Titus . Altare Damascen . Durh. Dissert . on the Revel . v. Cotel . Not. inpriorem Epist S. Clem. p. 96. in quibus fus● & solide dem●nstratur argumentum a confusione nominum nequaquam Jurisdictionem & Authoritatem Episcoporum supra Presbyteros labefactare posse . V. Doctiss . Bevereg . cod . canon Eccles . primit lib. 2 . c. 11. Vid. Clariss . Dodwell dissert . Cypr. p. 205. Walo Mess . Tertul. de Baptismo . Stromat . Lib. 6. Pastor Herma . * Apud clariss . Dodwell . disertat : Cyprian p. 205 ● Cotel in prie● Epist . Clemen . ad Corinth . 1 Cor. 15. 7. W●●● M●● . * Aplog . prosenten , Hieronym . Amstol . 1646. Vind. St. Ignat. Adversus Hereses , lib. 3. cap. 3. V. Doctiss . Cav . Hist . liter . p. 18. Blondel Apolog . p. 9. Plerique Latinorum ( Hieronymo teste ) secundumpost Petrum fuisse putaverunt ; ut ante annum Domini 65 , ad Romanae Ecclesiae clavum sedissenecesse sit . Apol. pro sent Hier. p. 9. page , 9. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Vid. doctiss , Bevereg . cod . Can. Eccles . Prim. lib. 2. p. 314. 1 Cor. 3. 5. 2. Cor. 3. 6. Acts. 6. 4. Coloss . 4. 7. 1 Thess . 3. 2. Coloss . 4. 17. Vid. etiam . Bevereg . ubi supra . Pag. ( mihi ) 40 , 41. Pag. 10. Edit . Jun. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . P● ( mihi ) 52 , 53. V. Cotel . Not. in Pr. S. Clemen . Epist . col . 95. Apud Jun. Not. in Clemen . p. 12. * Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. & Polycarpus aut●●●non solum ab Apostolis edoctus & conversatus cum multis excis , qui dominum nostrum viderunt , sed etiam ab Apostolis in Asia , in ea quae est Smyrnis Ecclesia constitututs Episcopus , qurm & nos vidimus in prima nostra aetate . * Catalog ●pt . Eccles . Apol. p. I● . Vid. Test . Veterum ad frontem editionis , Oxon .