his bishop part with him to supply the necessity of the neighbour widow-church?" Yea, that he must. But how then shall he keep ordinations, when he hath never a presbyter to assist him? That indeed would have been the objection now, but it was none then. For Aurelius told them plainly, there was no inconvenience in it; for though a bishop have never a presbyter, no great matter, he can himself ordain many, and then I am sure there is a sole ordination; but if a bishop be wanting to a church, he is not so easily found. Thus it went ordinarily in the style of the church, ordinations were made by the bishop, and the ordainer spoken of as a single person. So it is in the Nicene council', the council of Antioch, the council of Chalcedon, and St. Jerome, who, writing to Pammachius against the errors of John of Jerusalem, "If thou speak," saith he, " of Paulinianus, he comes now and then to visit us, not as any of your clergy, but ejus à quo ordinatus est,' that bishop's who ordained him.” So that the issue of this argument is this. The canons of the apostles and the rules of the ancient councils appropriate the ordination of bishops to bishops, of presbyters to one bishop, (for I never find a presbyter ordained by two bishops together, but only Origen, by the bishops of Jerusalem and Cæsarea,) presbyters are never mentioned in conjunction with bishops at their ordinations, and if alone they did it, their ordination was pronounced invalid and void 'ab initio.' To these particulars add this, that bishops alone were punished if ordinations were uncanonical; which were most unreasonable, if presbyters did join in them, and were causes in conjunction. But unless they did it alone, we never read that they were punishable; indeed bishops were, pro toto, et integro,' as is reported by Sozomen in the case of Elpidius, Eustathius, Basilius of Ancyra, and Eleusius. Thus also it was decreed in the second and sixth chapters of the council of Chalcedon, and in the imperial constitutions *. Since, therefore, we never find presbyters joined with bishops in ⚫ Cap. 19. Cap. 9. * Novell. Constit. 6. et 123, c. 16. "Cap. 2. et 6. commission, or practice, or penalty, all this while; I may infer, from the premises, the same thing which the council of Hispalis expresses in direct and full sentence: "Episcopus sacerdotibus ac ministris solus honorem dare potest, solus auferre non potest:" "The bishop alone may give the priestly honour, he alone is not suffered to take it away." This council was held in the year 657, and I set it down here for this purpose, to show that the decree of the fourth council of Carthage, which was the first that licensed priests to assist bishops in ordinations, yet was not obligatory in the West; but for almost three hundred years after, ordinations were made by bishops alone. But till this council, no pretence of any such conjunction, and after this council, sole ordination did not expire in the West for above two hundred years together; but for aught I know, ever since then it hath obtained, that although presbyters join not in the consecration of a bishop, yet of a presbyter they do; but this is only by a positive subintroduced constitution, first made in a provincial of Africa, and in other places received by insinuation and conformity of practice. I know not what can be said against it. I only find a piece of an objection out of St. Cyprian, who was a man so complying with the subjects of his diocese, that, if any man, he was like to furnish us with an antinomy: "Hunc igitur, fratres dilectissimi, à me, et à collegis qui præsentes aderant, ordinatum sciatis "." Here either by his colleagues' he means bishops or presbyters. If bishops, then many bishops will be found in the ordination of one to an inferior order; which, because it was, as I observed before, against the practice of Christendom, will not easily be admitted to be the sense of St. Cyprian: but if he means presbyters by 'college,' then sole ordination is invalidated by this example, for presbyters joined with him in the ordination of Aurelius. I answer, that it matters not whether by his colleagues he means one or the other; for Aurelius the confessor, who was the man ordained, was ordained but to be a reader; and that was no order of Divine institution, no gift of the Holy Ghost, and, therefore, might be dispensed by one, or more, by bishops or presbyters, and no way enters into the con Cap. 6. 2 Can. 2. et 3. a Epist. 33. sideration of this question, concerning the power of collating those orders which are gifts of the Holy Ghost, and of Divine ordinance; and therefore, this, although I have seen it once pretended, yet hath no validity to impugn the constant practice of primitive antiquity. But then are all ordinations invalid, which are done by mere presbyters, without a bishop? What think we of the reformed churches? 1. For my part, I know not what to think. The question hath been so often asked, with so much violence and prejudice, and we are so bound, by public interest, to approve all that they do, that we have disabled ourselves to justify our own. For we were glad, at first, of abettors against the errors of the Roman church; we found these men zealous in it; we thanked God for it, as we had cause; and we were willing to make them recompense, by endeavouring to justify their ordinations; not thinking what would follow upon ourselves. But now it is come to that issue, that our own episcopacy is thought not necessary, because we did not condemn the ordinations of their presbytery. 2. Why is not the question rather, what we think of the primitive church, than what we think of the reformed churches? Did the primitive councils and fathers do well in condemning the ordinations made by mere presbyters? If they did well, what was a virtue in them, is no sin in us. If they did ill, from what principle shall we judge of the right of ordinations? since there is no example in Scripture of any ordination made but by apostles and bishops; and the presbytery that imposed hands on Timothy, is, by all antiquity, expounded either of the office or of a college of presbyters; and St. Paul expounds it to be an ordination made by his own hands, as appears by comparing the two epistles to St. Timothy together; and may be so meant by the principles of all sides; for if the names be confounded, then presbyter may signify a bishop; and that they of this presbytery were not bishops, they can never prove from Scripture, where all men grant that the names are confounded. So that whence will men take their estimate for the rites of ordinations? From Scripture? That gives it always to apostles and bishops, as I have proved; and that a priest did ever impose hands for ordination, can never be shown from thence. From whence then? From antiquity? That was so far from licensing ordinations made by presbyters alone, that presbyters, in the primitive church, did never join with bishops in collating holy orders of presbyter and deacon, till the fourth council of Carthage; much less do it alone, rightly, and with effect. So that as, in Scripture, there is nothing for presbyters' ordaining, so in antiquity there is much against it; and either in this particular we must have strange thoughts of Scripture and antiquity, or not so fair interpretation of the ordinations of reformed presbyteries. But for my part, I had rather speak a truth in sincerity, than err with a glorious correspondence. But will not necessity excuse them, who could not have orders from orthodox bishops? Shall we either sin against our consciences, by subscribing to heretical and false resolutions in materiâ fidei,' or else lose the being of a church, for want of episcopal ordinations? Indeed if the case were just thus, it was very hard with good people of the transmarine churches; but I have here two things to consider. 1. I am very willing to believe, that they would not have done any thing, either of error or suspicion, but in cases of necessity. But then I consider that M. du Plessis, a man of honour and great learning, does attest, that at the first reformation, there were many archbishops and cardinals in Germany, England, France, and Italy, that joined in the reformation, whom they might, but did not, employ in their ordinations; and what necessity then can be pretended in this case, I would fain learn, that I might make their defence. But, which is of more and deeper consideration, for this might have been done by inconsideration and irresolution, as often happens in the beginning of great changes; but it is their constant and resolved practice, at least in France, that if any returns to them, they will re-ordain him by their presbytery, though he had, before, episcopal ordination, as both their friends and their enemies bear witness". 2. I consider that necessity may excuse a personal delinquency; but I never heard that necessity did build a church. Indeed no man is forced, for his own particular, to commit a De Eccles. c. 11. ⚫ Danæus, part. 2. Isagog. lib. ii. c. 22. Perron. Repl. fol. 92, impres. 1605. sin; for if it be absolutely a case of necessity, the action ceaseth to be a sin; but indeed if God means to build a church in any place, he will do it by means proportionable to that end; that is, by putting them into a possibility of doing and acquiring those things, which himself hath required, of necessity, to the constitution of a church. So that, sup posing that ordination by a bishop is necessary for the vocation of priests and deacons, as I have proved it is, and, therefore, for the founding or perpetuating of a church, either God hath given to all churches opportunity and possibility of such ordinations, and then, necessity of the contrary is but pretence and mockery; or if he hath not given such possibility, then there is no church there to be either built or continued, but the candlestick is presently removed. There are divers stories in Ruffinus to this purposed When Ædesius and Frumentius were surprised by the barbarous Indians, they preached Christianity, and baptized many; but themselves, being but laymen, could make no ordinations, and so not fix a church. What then was to be done in the case? "Frumentius Alexandriam pergit: et rem omnem, ut gesta est, narrat episcopo, ac monet, ut provideat virum aliquem dignum, quem congregatis jam plurimis Christianis in barbarico solo episcopum mittat." 'Frumentius comes to Alexandria to get a bishop.' Athanasius, being then patriarch, ordained Frumentius their bishop; "et tradito ei sacerdotio, redire eum cum Domini gratiâ unde venerat jubet: ex quo," saith Ruffinus, "in Indiæ partibus, et populi Christianorum et ecclesiæ factæ sunt, et sacerdotium cœpit "." The same happened in the case of the Iberians, converted by a captive woman: "Posteà verò quàm ecclesia magnificè constructa est, et populi fidem Dei majore ardore sitiebant, captiva monitis ad imperatorem Constantinum totius gentis legatio mittitur: res gesta exponitur: sacerdotes mittere oratur, qui cœptum erga se Dei munus implerent." The work of Christianity could not be completed, nor a church founded, without the ministry of bishops. Thus the case is evident, that the want of a bishop will not excuse us from Eccles. Hist. lib. x. c. 9. per Ruffinum. |