or else they contradict evidence of Scripture and catholic antiquity, and so are false, and die within their own trenches.

I end this argument of tradition apostolical with that saying of St. Jerome in the same place: "Postquam unusquisque eos quos baptizabat suos putabat esse, non Christi, et diceretur in populis, Ego sum Pauli, Ego Apollo, Ego autem Cephæ, in toto orbe decretum est ut unus de presbyteris electus superponeretur cæteris, ut schismatum semina tollerentur." That is a public decree issued out in the apostles' times, that in all churches one should be chosen out of the clergy, and set over them, viz. to rule and govern the flock committed to his charge. This, I say, was in the apostles' times, even upon the occasion of the Corinthian schism for then they said, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and then it was, that he that baptized any catechumens, took them for his own, not as Christ's disciples.' So that it was, tempore apostolorum,' that this decree was made; for in the time of the apostles,' St. James, and St. Mark, and St. Timothy, and St. Titus, were made bishops by St. Jerome's express attestation. It was also toto orbe decretum;' so that if it had not been proved to have been an immediate Divine institution, yet it could not have gone much less, it being, as I have proved, and as St. Jerome acknowledges, catholic and apostolic.

And all this hath been the Faith and Practice of Christendom. "BE ye followers of me as I am of Christ," is an apostolical precept. We have seen how the apostles have followed Christ, how their tradition is consequent of Divine institu tion: next let us see how the church hath followed the apostles, as the apostles have followed Christ. Catholic practice is the next basis of the power and order of episcopacy. And this shall be 'in subsidium' to them also that call for reduction of the state episcopal to a primitive consistence, and for the confirmation of all those pious sons of holy church, who have a venerable estimate of the public and authorized facts of catholic Christendom.

For consider we, is it imaginable that all the world should, immediately after the death of the apostles, conspire together to seek themselves, and not ea quæ sunt Jesu Christi;' to erect a government of their own devising, not ordained by Christ, not delivered by his apostles, and to relinquish a Divine foundation, and the apostolical superstructure, which, if it was at all, was a part of our Master's will, which whosoever knew, and observed not, was to be beaten with many stripes? Is it imaginable, that those gallant men, who could not be brought off from the prescriptions of Gentilism, to the seeming impossibilities of Christianity, without evidence of miracle, and clarity of demonstration upon agreed principles, should all, upon their first adhesion to Christianity, make an universal dereliction of so considerable a part of their Master's will, and leave Gentilism to destroy Christianity; for he that erects another economy than what the Master of the family hath ordained, destroys all those relations of mutual dependence, which Christ hath made for the coadunation of all the parts of it, and so destroys it in the formality of a Christian congregation or family.

Is it imaginable, that all those glorious martyrs, that were so curious observers of Divine sanctions, and canons apostolical, that so long as that ordinance of the apostles, concerning abstinence from blood, was of force, they would rather die than eat a strangled hen or a pudding, (for so Eusebius relates of the Christians, in the particular instance of Biblis and Blandina,) that they would be so sedulous in contemning the government, that Christ left for his family, and erect another.

To what purpose were all their watchings, their banishments, their fears, their fastings, their penances, and formidable austerities, and finally, their so frequent martyrdoms, of what excellency or avail, if, after all, they should be hurried out of this world, and all their fortunes and possessions, by untimely, by disgraceful, by dolorous deaths, to be set before a tribunal, to give account of their universal neglect, and contemning of Christ's last testament, in so great an affair, as the whole government of his church?

If all Christendom should be guilty of so open, so united a defiance against their Master, by what argument or

confidence can any misbeliever be persuaded to Christianity, which, in all its members for so many ages together, is so unlike its first institution, and in its most public affair, and, for matter of order, of the most general concernment, is so contrary to the first birth?

Where are the promises of Christ's perpetual assistance, of the impregnable permanence of the church against the gates of hell, of the Spirit of Truth to lead it into all truth, if she be guilty of so grand an error, as to erect a throne where Christ had made all level, or appointed others to sit in it than whom he suffers. Either Christ hath left no government, or most certainly the church hath retained that government, whatsoever it is; for the contradictory to these would either make Christ improvident, or the catholic church extremely negligent (to say no worse) and incurious of her 'depositum.' But upon the confidence of all Christendom, (if there were no more in it,) I suppose we may fairly venture: 'Sit anima mea cum Christianis.'

SECTION XXIII.

Who first distinguished Names, used before in common.

THE first thing done in Christendom, upon the death of the apostles, in this matter of episcopacy, is the distinguishing of names, which before were common. For in holy Scripture all the names of clerical offices were given to the superior order, and particularly all offices, and parts, and persons, designed in any employment of the sacred priesthood, were signified by presbyter' and 'presbyterium.' And therefore, lest the confusion of names might persuade an identity and indistinction of office, the wisdom of Holy Church found it necessary to distinguish and separate orders and offices, by distinct and proper appellations. "For the apostles did know, by our Lord Jesus Christ, that contentions would arise, ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς, about the name of epis copacy," saith St. Clement;" and so it did in the church of

Corinth, as soon as their apostle had expired his last breath. But so it was.

ὁ συμπρεσβύτερος, saith. St.

1. The apostles, which I have proved to be the supreme ordinary office in the church, and to be succeeded in, were called in Scripture #geoßúrego, elders' or ' πρεσβύτεροι, elders' or presbyters ;' πρεσβυτέρους τοὺς ἐν ὑμῖν παρακαλῶ Peter the apostle; "The elders or presbyters that are among you, I also, who am an elder or presbyter, do entreat ↳.” Such elders St. Peter spoke to, as he was himself, to wit, those to whom the regiment of the church was committed; the bishops of Asia, Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, and Bithynia, that is, to Timothy, to Tychicus, to Sosipater, to the Angels of the Asian churches, and all others, whom himself, in the next words, points out, by the description of their office, ποιμάνατε τὸ ἐν ὑμῖν ποίμνιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐπισκοποῦντες, &c. "Feed the flock of God as bishops," or being bishops and overseers over it;' and that to rulers he then spake, is evident by his μὴ κατακυριεύοντες, for it was impertinent to have warned them of tyranny,' that had no rule at all. The mere presbyters, I deny not, but are included in this admonition; for as their office is involved in the bishop's office, the bishop being bishop and presbyter too, so is his duty also in the bishop's; so that,' pro ratâ,' the presbyter knows what lies on him, by proportion and intuition to the bishop's admonition. But again: Ο πρεσβύτερος ἐκλεκτῇ κυρίᾳ, saith St. John the apostle; and ὁ πρεσβύτερος Γαίῳ τῷ ἀγαπητῷ. “ 'The presbyter to the elect lady; the presbyter to Gaius."

66

2. If apostles be called presbyters, no harm though bishops be called so too; for apostles and bishops are all one in ordinary office, as I have proved formerly. Thus are those apostolical men, in the college at Jerusalem, called presbyters, whom yet the Holy Ghost calleth ἄνδρας ἡγουμένους, ' principal men, ruling men,' and oi xanãs πgoeσtātes πpeoßútegoi, 'the presbyters that rule well.' By presbyters are meant bishops, to whom only, according to the intention and exigence of Divine institution, the apostle had concredited the church of Ephesus, and the neighbouring cities, “ut solus quisque episcopus præsit omnibus," as appears in the former discourse. The same also is Acts, xx. The Holy Ghost

1 Peţ, v. 1.

hath made you bishops; and yet the same men are called πρεσβύτεροι τῆς ἐκκλησίας. The one place expounds the other, for they are both ad idem,' and speak of elders of the same church.

6

3. Although bishops be called presbyters, yet, even in Scripture, names are so distinguished, that mere presbyters are never called bishops, unless it be in conjunction with bishops; and then in the general address, which, in all fair deportments, is made to the more eminent, sometimes presbyters are, or may be, comprehended. This observation, if it prove true, will clearly show, that the confusion of names of episcopus,' and 'presbyter,' such as it is in Scripture, is of no pretence, by any intimation of Scripture, for the indistinction of offices; for even the names in Scripture itself are so distinguished, that a mere presbyter alone is never called a bishop, but a bishop and apostle is often called a presbyter,' as in the instances above. But we will consider those places of Scripture, which use to be pretended in those impertinent. arguings from the identity of name, to confusion of things, and show that they neither interfere upon the main question, nor this observation : "Paul and Timotheus to all the saints which are in Christ Jesus, which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." I am more willing to choose this instance, because this place is of much consideration in the whole question, and I shall take this occasion to clear it from prejudice and disadvantage.

By bishops are here meant presbyters, because many bishops in a church could not be, and yet St. Paul speaks plurally of the bishops of the church of Philippi, and therefore must mean mere presbyters; so it is pretended.

1. Then Bybishops' are, or may be, meant the whole superior order of the clergy, bishops and priests;' and that he speaks plurally, he may, besides the bishops in the church, comprehend under their name the presbyters too; for why may not the name be comprehended as well as the office, and order the inferior under the superior, the lesser within the greater? for, since the order of presbyters is involved in the bishops' order, and is not only inclusively in it, but derivative from it; the same name may comprehend both persons, because it does comprehend the distinct offices and