CHAP. II. The foundation of the Church of Hierusalem under the Government of Saint James the Apostle, and Simeon, one of the Disciples, the two first Bishops of the same.

OUR Saviour Christ having thus Authorized his Apostles to Preach the Gospel over all the World, [ I] to every Creature; and given them power as well of mini∣string the Sacraments, as of retaining and remitting sins, as before is said; thought fit to leave them to themselves,* only commanding them to tarry in the City of Hieru∣salem until they were indued with further power from on high, whereby they might be fitted for so great a work.* And when he had spoken those things, while they beheld, he was taken up, and a Cloud received him out of their sight. No sooner was he gone to the Heavenly glories, but the Apostles with the rest, withdrew themselves unto Hieru∣salem, as he had appointed; where the first care they took was, to fill up their num∣ber, to surrogate some one or other of the Disciples in the place of Judas, that so the Word of God might be fulfilled,* which he had spoken by the Psalmist, Episcopatum ejus accipiat alter. A business of no small importance, and therefore fit to be imparted unto all the Brethren; not so much that their suffrage and consent herein was necessa∣ry, as that they might together joyn in prayer to Almighty God,* to direct the action, whose business indeed it was, and unto whom alone the whole election properly per∣tained. All that they did was to propose two men unto the Lord their God (Et statuerunt duos,* saith the Text) such as they thought most fit for so great a charge, and so to leave it to his providence, to shew and manifest which of the two he pleased to choose. In the appointment of which two, whether that statuerunt being a Verb of the Plural number, be to be referred to all the multitude, as Chrysostom is of opinion, or only unto the Apostles, and the Seventy, as some others think, it comes all to one. For the whole number being but an hundred and twenty,* and being that the Apostles with the Seventy (out of which rank the nomination of the two was made) made up the number of fourscore; it must needs be that the appointment in effect was in them alone. And though I rather do incline to Chrysostom, in this particular, that the appointment of these two was done by all the multitude in general;* yet I can yield by no means to the next that followeth. For shewing some politick and worldly reasons, why Peter did permit the people to have an interest in the business, he first asked this question, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; whether it were not lawful for Saint Peter to have chose the man. And then he answereth positively, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that it was most lawful, but that he did forbear to do it, lest he might seem to do it out of partiality. In this I must crave leave to dissent from Chrysostom. The power of making an Apostle was too high a priviledge to be intrusted unto any of the Sons of Adam.* Paul was not made Apostle, though an Abortive one, as he calls himself, either of men, or by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father. What priviledge or Page  197power soever Peter had as an Apostle of the Lord in making Bishops, or as a Bishop of the Church in ordaining Presbyters; he had no power to make Apostles. The Pope might sing Placebo, if it had been otherwise; and we should have Apostles more than ten times twelve, if nothing were required unto it, but Saint Peters Fiat.

But to proceed: This weighty business being thus dispatched,* and Matthias who before was of the Seventy, being numbred with the eleven Apostles, it pleased God to make good his promise of pouring on them in a plentiful and signal manner the gifts and graces of his holy Spirit. Not on the Twelve alone, or the Seventy only, but on the whole body of the Disciples, even on the whole 120. which before we spake of. I know that Beza and some others, would limit this effusion of the Holy Ghost to the Twelve alone. Why, and to what intent he doth so resolve it, though I may guess perhaps, yet I will not judge; but sure it is, he so resolves it.* Solis Apostolis propria est haec Spiritus sancti missio, sicut proprius fuit Apostolatus, as his own words are in his An∣notations on the Text. The same he also doth affirm in his Book de Ministrorum Evangelii gradibus, cap. 5. But herein Beza leaves the Fathers and the Text to boot. Saint Austin tells us, that the Holy Ghost came from Heaven,* & implevit uno loco sedentes centum viginti, and filled one hundred and twenty sitting in one place. Saint Chrysostom affirms the same, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. what (saith he) did it come on the twelve alone, not upon the rest? And then he answereth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not so by no means, it fell on all the 120 which were there Assembled. Nor doth he only say it, but he proves it also, alledging in defence of his assertion that very plea and argument which was used by Peter, to clear himself and his associates from the im∣putation of being drunken with new wine,* viz. Hoc est quod dictum fuit per Prophetam Joel, This is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, &c. Besides, the text and context make it plain enough, that this effu∣sion of the Holy Ghost was upon them all.* In the first Chapter of the Acts we find them all together (the whole 120.) with one accord: And in the first verse of the second Chapter, we find them all together with the same accord: And then it followeth that there appeared cloven tongues, like as of fire, seditque supra singulos eorum,* and sate upon each of them; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. If they were all together (as we found before) and all were filled with the Holy Ghost: No question but there were more filled with it than the twelve Apostles. And when as Peter with the eleven stood up, making an Apology for the rest, and saying, These men are not drunken,* as ye suppose; it must needs be that others, besides the twelve, and indeed all the company were suspected of it. Add, as by way of surplusage, and ex abundanti, that the Seven chosen by the multitude to serve the Tables, who questionless were of the number of the Seventy, are said to have been full of the Holy Ghost,* before that the Apostles had laid hands on them.

So then it is most evident, as I conceive it, [ III] that the Holy Ghost was given to every one of the Disciples, the whole number of them, to every one according to his place and station, according to that service and imployment, in which the Lord intended to make use of them. For unto one was given by the spirit the word of Wisdom,* to another the word of Knowledge, and to another the gift of healing by the same spirit; to another the working of Miracles, to another Prophesie, to another discerning of Spirits, to another divers kinds of Tongues, to another the interpretation of Tongues. Every one of them had their several gifts; the Apostles all 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* as we read in Chrysostom. Whatever was divided amongst the residue for the advancement of Gods glory, and the improvement of his Church, that was united in the persons of the holy Apostles, whom God had ranked as much above them in their gifts and graces, as they were in place. By means whereof it came to pass, that howsoever the Lord out of these 120 made choice of some to be Evangelists, some to be Prophets, and others to be Pastors, Presbyters, and Teachers; yet the Apostles still retained their superio∣rity, ordering and directing them in their several Ministeries to the best edifying of the Church. For thus we read how Paul disposed of Timothy and Titus, who were both Evangelists; sending them, as the occasions of the Church required, from Asia to Greece, and then back to Asia, and thence to Italy. How he sent Crescens to Galatia,* Titus to Dalmatia, Tychicus to Ephesus; commanding Erastus to abide at Corinth, and using the Ministery of Luke at Rome.* So find we how he ordered those that had the spirit of Prophecy, and such as had the gift of tongues, that every one might use his talent unto edification; how he ordained Bishops in one place, Elders or Presbyters in another, as we shall se• hereafter in this following story. The like we may affirm Page  198of Saint Peter also, and of the rest of the Apostles, though there be less left upon re∣cord of their Acts and Writings, than are remaining of Saint Paul; whose mouths and pens being guided by the Holy Ghost, have been the Canon ever since of all saving truth. For howsoever Mark and Luke, two of the Evangelists, have left be∣hind them no small part of the Book of God, of their own enditing; yet were not ei∣ther of their writings reckoned as Canonical in respect of the Authors, but as they had been taken from the Apostles mouths, and ratified by their Authority, as both Saint Luke himself,* and the Fathers testifie. And for a further mark of difference be∣tween the Apostles and the rest of the Disciples, we may take this also; that though the rest of the Disciples had all received the Holy Ghost, yet none could give the same but the Apostles only. Insomuch that when Philip the Evangelist had preached the Gospel in Samaria, and converted many, and Baptized them in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ; yet none of them received the Holy Ghost till Peter. and John came down unto them, and prayed for them, and laid their hands on them, as the Scriptures witness. That was a priviledge reserved to the Apostles, and to none but them. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* as it is in Chrysostom, And when the two Apostles did it, they did it without Philips help or co-operation, who joyned not in it, nor con∣tributed at all to so great a work, for ought we find in holy Scripture.

In this regard it is no marvel, [ IV] if in the enumerating of those ministrations which did concur in the first founding of the Church, the Apostles always have preheminence. First,* Apostles: Secondarily, Prophets: Thirdly, Teachers, &c. as Saint Paul hath ranked them. Nor did he rank them so by chance, but gave to every one his proper place,* 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, saith Saint Chrysostom, first placing that which was most excellent, and afterwards descending unto those of a lower rank. Which plainly shews, that in the composition of the Church there was a prius and posterius in regard of order, a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or more honourable, as the Father calls it, in re∣gard of power; as in the constitution of the body natural, to which the Church is there resembled, some of the members do direct, and some obey, some of them being honourable,* some feeble, but all necessary. The like may also be observed out of the 4. chap. of the same Apostle unto the Ephesians, where the Apostles are first placed and ranked above the rest of the ministrations, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers, of which some were to be but temporary in the Church of God, the others to remain for ever.* For as Saint Chrysostom doth exceeding well expound that Scripture, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, First, he doth name Apostles, as they in whom all powers and graces were united: Secondly, Prophets, such as was Agabus in the Acts: Thirdly, Evangelists, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such as had made no progress into many Countries, but preached the Gospel in some certain Regions, as Aquila and Priscilla; and then Pastors and Teachers, who had the government of a Country or Nation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such as were setled and employed in a certain place or City, as Timothy and Titus. If then a question should be made, whom S. Paul meaneth here by Pastors and Teachers; I answer, it is meant of Bishops, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Father hath it, such as were placed over some certain Cities; and that the Bishops were accounted in the ancient times the only ordinary Pastors of the Church, in the room and stead of the Apostles, we shall shew hereafter.* And this I am the rather induced to think, because that in the first Epistle to those of Corinth, written when as there were but few Bishops of particular Cities, S. Paul doth speak of Teachers only; but here in this to the Ephesians, writ at such time as Timothy and Titus, and many others had formerly been ordained Bishops, he adds Pastors also.* Certain I am that both Theophylact and Oecumenius do expound the words by Bishops only, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such Bi∣shops as both Timothy and Titus were by them accounted. Nay, even Saint Hierome seemeth to incline this way,* making the Prelates of the Church, or the Praesides Ecclesiae, as he calls them there, to be the Pastors and Teachers mentioned by Saint Paul, i.e. Pastores ovium, magistros hominum; Pastors in reference to their Flocks, Teachers in reference to their Disciples.

But to go on unto our story. [ V] Our Saviour having thus enabled and supplyed his labourers with the gifts and graces of his Spirit, it could not be but that the Harvest went on apace.* The first day added to the Church 3000 souls. And after that, God added daily to it such as should be saved. The miracle wrought by the hands of the two Apostles at the Beautiful gate,* opened a large door to the further increase thereof. For presently upon the same, and Peters Sermon made upon that occasion, we find that the number of the men which heard the word and believed,* was about five thousand. Page  199Not that there were so many added to the former number, as to make up five thou∣sand in the total; but that there were five thousand added to the Church more than had been formerly; S. Chrysostom and Oecumenius,* both affirming that there were more converted by this second Sermon of Saint Peters, than by the first. So that the Church increasing daily more and more, multitudes both of men and women being continually added to the Lord, and their numbers growing dreadful to the Jewish Magistrates;* it seemed good to the Apostles, [Vers. 26] (who by the intimation of the Spirit found that there would be work enough elsewhere) to choose one or other of their sacred number, to be the Bishop of that Church, and take charge thereof. And this they did not now by lots, but in the ordinary course and manner of election, pitching on James the Son of Alpheus,* who in regard of consanguinity is sometimes called in Scripture the Lords Brother; and in regard of his exceeding piety and uprightness, was surnamed the Just. Which action I have placed here, even in the cradle of the Church upon good Authority. For first, Eusebius tells us out of Clemens, that this was done 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* after the Ascension of our Saviour; Hierome more plainly, statim post passionem Domini, immediately upon his passion.* We may with good secu∣rity conclude from both, that it was done not long after Christs Ascension, as soon almost as the Believers were increased to a considerable number. And lastly,* that Ignatius hath made S. Stephen to be the Deacon, or subservient Minister to this James the Bishop of Hierusalem; and then we must needs place it in some middle time, between the Feast of Pentecost, and the 26. of December, when Saint Stephen was Martyred. So early did the Lord take care to provide Bishops for his Church, and set apart a special Pastor for his holy City.

'Tis true, there is no manifest record hereof in holy Scripture, [ VI] but then withal it is as true, that in the Scripture there are many pregnant circumstances, whereon the truth hereof may well be grounded.* Saint Paul some three years after his Conver∣sion, went up unto Hierusalem to see Peter, but found no other of the Apostles there, save only James the Lords Brother. Ask Hierome, who this James was, whom S. Paul then saw, and he will tell you that it was James the Bishop of Hierusalem,* Hic autem Jacobus Episcopus Hierosolymorum primus fuit, cognomento Justus. And then withal, we have the reason why Paul should find him at Hierusalem, more than the rest of the Apostles, viz. because the rest of the Apostles were dispersed abroad, according to the exigence of their occasions; and James was there residing on his Pastoral or Episcopal charge. Fourteen years after his Conversion,* being the eleventh year after the former interview, he went up into Hierusalem again, with Barnabas and Titus, and was toge∣ther present with them at the first general Council, held by the Apostles. In which, upon the agitation of the business there proposed, the Canon and determination is drawn up positively and expresly in the words of James.* Do you desire the reason of it, Peter and others being there? Chrysostom on those words of Scripture,* James an∣swered saying, doth express it thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, this James was Bishop of Hierusalem. And this no question was the reason, why Paul re∣citing the names of those with whom especially he had conference at his being there, puts James in the first place before Peter and John, viz.* because that he was Bishop there, as Estius hath noted on that Text. The Council being ended, Paul returneth to Antioch, and there by reason of some men that came from James, Peter withdrew, [Vers. 12] and separated himself, eating no longer with the Gentiles. Why takes the Apostle such especial notice that they came from James, but because they were sent from him, as from their Bishop, about some business of the Church; this James being then Bishop of Hierusalem,* [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] as both Theophylact and Oecumenius note upon the place. Finally, nine years after this, being the 58. of Christs Nativity, Paul makes his last journey to Hierusalem; still he finds James there.* And the day follow∣ing Paul went in with us unto James, &c. as the Text informs us.* Chrysostom notes up∣on the place, that James there spoken of was the Lords Brother, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and Bishop of Hierusalem. So that for 20 years together, we have appa∣rent evidence in Scripture of James residing at Hierusalem, and that as Bishop there, as the Fathers say.

For that Saint James was Bishop of Hierusalem, [ VII] there is almost no ancient Writer but bears witness of it. Ignatius, who was made Bishop of Antiochia,* within eight years after the Death and Martyrdom of this James in their account, who place it latest, makes Stephen to be the Deacon of this James, as Clemens and Anacletus were to Peter; which is an implication that James was Bishop of Hierusalem, out of which Page  200City we do not find that Stephen ever travelled. Egesippus, who lived near the Apo∣stles times,* makes this James Bishop of Hierusalem, as both Saint Hierom and Eusebius have told us from him. Clemens of Alexandria not long after him, doth confirm the same. And out of him and other monuments of antiquity, Eusebius doth assure us of him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he was the first that held the Episcopal throne or chair in the Church of Hierusalem. Saint Cyril,* Bishop of Hierusalem, speaks of him as of his Predecessor, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in that Church, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the first Bishop of that Diocess. And Epiphanius for his greater credit, makes him not only the first Bishop that ever was, Haeres. 29. n. 3. but Bishop of the Lords own Throne, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* and that too by the Lords appoint∣ment. S. Ambrose doth assign this reason, why Paul going unto Hierusalem to see Peter,* should find James there, quia illic constitutus erat Episcopus ab Apostolis, because that by the rest of the Apostles he was made Bishop of that place. Saint Hierom doth not only affirm as much, as for his being Bishop of Hierusalem, but also doth lay down the time of his Creation to be not long after our Redeemers passion, as we saw before. Saint Chrysostom,* besides what was alledged from him in the former Section, tells in his Homilies on S. Johns Gospel, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that Saint James had the Bishoprick of Hierusalem. Where by the way I cannot but take notice of a lewd forgery, or at the best a gross mistake of Baronius, who to advance the Soveraignty of the Church of Rome,* will have this James to take the Bishoprick of Hierusalem from Saint Peters hands, and cites this place of Chrysostom for proof there∣of. But surely Chrysostom saith no such matter; for putting the question, how James was made the Bishop of Hierusalem, since Pasce oves meas was said to Peter; returns this answer, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that Christ made Peter not the Pastor of a particular place, but of all the universe. That James received his Bishop∣rick from Peter, not one word saith Chrysostom: 'Tis true, the Latin reads it as the Cardinal doth; but such an undertaker as he was, should have sought the fountains. As for Saint Austin,* he agrees herein with the other Fathers, in his second book against Cresconius; where speaking of the Church of Hierusalem, he describes it thus, quam primus Apostolus Jacobus Episcopatu suo rexit, whereof S. James the Apostle was the first Bishop. Add here the joynt consent and suffrage of 289 Prelates in the sixth General Council of Constantinople,* affirming James the Lords Brother to be the first Bishop of Hierusalem; not to say any thing of Oecumenius and Theophylact, whom before we cited. Never was point in issue tried by a fuller evidence.

And yet one other circumstance occurs to confirm the point, [ VIII] which is, that till Eusebius time,* the Chair, or Cathedra Episcopalis, wherein S. James was said to be in∣throned, was very carefully preserved by his Successors, as a sacred Monument, and gladly shewed to all that desired to see it; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Author hath it. An evidence of no mean consideration, as being vouched by an Author that lived before the superstitious reverence and esteem of Reliques had been introduced into the world, or any Impostures of that kind put upon the people. Unto which testimony of Eusebius,* we may add that of Beda also, who in his Marty∣rologie doth place the memorial or commemoration of the Apostles inthronizing in that Chair or Throne upon the 27 of December; wherein I dare not joyn with him as unto the day, though I approve his observation of the fact or ceremony, as being every way conform to the ancient custom of the Church. One only thing I have to add and rectifie,* which concerns S. James, and is briefly thus. S. Hierome tells us out of Egesippus, huic soli licitum esse ingredi Sancta Sanctorum; that it was only lawful to S. James to enter into the Holy of Holies; whereas in truth it should not be huic soli licitum, but huic solitum. And this appears to be the true and ancient reading, by comparing the translation of Sophronius with S. Hieroms Text, wherein we have it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. that it was his custom so to do; the Jews permitting him to enjoy that priviledge in the declining times of their State and Temple, by rea∣son of the holiness of his conversation.* Finally, to conclude with Hierom, this blessed Man of God was Martyr'd in the 7 year of Nero (An. Chr. 63.) postquam triginta annos Hierosolymis rexerat Ecclesiam; after he had been Bishop of Hierusalem 30 year; that is to say 29 years compleat, and the 30 currant. By which account it must needs follow, that the making of this James Bishop of Hierusalem, was one of the first acti∣ons of the Apostles, after they were endued with the Holy Ghost.

James being dead, [ IX] Simeon another of the Lords Disciples was made the Bishop of that Church, Peter, and Paul, and John, and many other of the Apostles, being then alive, and all concurring in this choice, and consenting to it. Eusebius,* as he tells the story, makes it a very solemn business, scarce such another Precedent to be found in all antiquity. And he relates it thus, as followeth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. After the Martyrdom of James, and the taking of Hierusalem (by the Romans) it is affirmed that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord and Saviour which were yet alive, together with those of the Lords kindred after the flesh, many of whom continued living till that time, resorted thither. Their business was to enter into consultation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whom they should find most worthy to succeed in the place of James; and having well considered of it, they all with one accord, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, saith the Author, agreed on Simeon the Son of Cleophas, one of our Saviours kindred also, as fit and worthy to possess the Episcopal Throne,* and look unto the government of that Church or Diocess. So that in this election there did not only meet together the Lords kindred, who might perhaps desire to keep that holy honour in their own family; not the Disciples only of the lower rank, who might perhaps be easily induced to consent thereto, to gratifie the kindred of their Lord and Master: But there met also the Apostles, men guided and directed by the Spirit of God; and all of these coming from several parts and countries did, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with one accord, with one unanimous assent, agree upon the choice of this worthy man, to be the Bishop or chief Pastor of the mother City, which place he held until the time of Trajan, during whose Empire he received the Crown of Martyr∣dom, Anno 109.

Here then we have two Bishops of Hierusalem, [ X] made by the general and joynt con∣sent of the Apostles; and those two Bishops not in name and title, but in power and office, according to the Ecclesiastical notion of the word, and as the same is taken in the writings of the Fathers before alledged. I know the word Episcopus, in the primitive and proper notion doth signifie a Supervisor or Overseer, as it is rendred in our last Translation, Act. 20.4.* Such were the Officers of the Athenians whom Suidas speaks of, sent by that State to look into the Government of the Cities under their domi∣nion, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And these, saith he, were called Bishops and Guardians. In this last sense the word is often used by Plutarch,* as where he calleth Numa, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Bishop or Guardian of the Vestal Virgins; and their God Terminus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Overseer and preserver of peace and amity. Thus do we read in Sophocles of certain Officers called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such as took care about the dead; of others in the civil Laws, qui pani,* & caeteris rebus venalibus praesunt, which had the oversight of the markets, and those called Episcopi. And thus doth Tully tell us of himself,* Vult me Pompeius episcopum esse, &c. that Pompey had made him the Overseer or the Guardian of Campania, and the whole Sea-coast. This being the meaning of the word in its native sense, it pleased the Holy Ghost to make choice thereof, to signifie the Pastor or Superiour Minister, to whom the governance of the Church was trusted; one who was vested with a constant and fixed preheminence, as well over the Clergy as the Laity, committed to his charge; such as both Timothy and Titus are described to be in S. Pauls Epistles,* of whom we shall say more hereafter. S. Austin rightly understood the word, and the original of it, when he told us this, Graecum est enim, atque inde ductum vocabulum, quod ille qui praeficitur, eis quibus praeficitur superintendit, &c. The word, saith he, is Greek originally, and from thence derived, shewing that he which is preferred, or set over others, is bound to take the oversight and care of those whom he is set over. And so proceeding unto the Etymology, or Grammar of the word, he concludes it thus, ut intelligat se non esse Episcopum, qui praeesse dilexerit, non prodesse, that he deserves not to be called a Bishop, which seeketh rather to prefer himself, than to profit others. Saint Austin being himself a Bishop, knew well the meaning of the word, according to the Ecclesiastical notion and sense thereof. And in that notion, the Scriptures generally, and all the Fathers universally have used the same; out of which word Episcopus (whether Greek or Latine) the Germans had their Bischop, and we thence our Bishop. If sometimes in the holy Scripture, the word be used to signifie an ordinary Presbyter, it is at such times, and such places only, when as the Presbyters had the chief gover∣nance of the Flocks, next and immediately under the Apostles, and where there was no Bishop, properly so called, established over them, as we shall see hereafter in the Churches of S. Pauls plantation.

Having thus seen the sudden, [ XI] and miraculous growth of the Church of God, in, and about the City of Hierusalem; and seen the same confirmed and setled in Epi∣scopal government: our next enquiry must be made into the Clergy, which were to be subordinate to him, and to participate of the charge to him entrusted, according to his directions. And in this search, we first encounter with the Presbyters, the first, as well in time, as they are in dignity. The Deacon, though exceeding ancient, yet comes short in both. We shewed you in the former Chapter, how our Redeemer having chosen the Twelve Apostles, appointed other Seventy also, and sent them two and two before him,* to prepare his way. Of these the Lord made choice of some to be Evangelists, and others to be Prophets, some to be Pastors, and Teachers, and others to be helps in Government, according to the measure, and the purpose of his grace bestowed upon them, in the effusion of his Spirit. And out of these thus fit∣ted and prepared for the work of God, I doubt not but there were some chosen to assist S. James, in the discharge of the great trust committed to him, by the common Counsel, and consent of the Apostles. Such as were after added unto them, accord∣ing to the exigences of that Church. I take it to be all of Saint James ordaining: who being a Bishop, and Apostle, is not to be denied the priviledg of ordaining Pres∣byters, it being a thing which both the Apostle Paul did do in all the Churches which he planted, and all succeeding Bishops since have done in their several Dioce∣ses. Certain it is, that there were Presbyters in the Church of Hierusalem, before the election of the Seven:* Ignatius telling us that Stephen did minister, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. to James, and to the Presbyters, which were in Hierusalem. And certain also it is, that the Apostles first, and Bishops afterwards ordained Presby∣ters, to be assistant with them, and subservient to them, in their several charges: and this they did, according as the Fathers say, in imitation of our Lord and Saviour; who having chose his twelve Apostles,* appointed Seventy others of a lower rank, Se∣ciendos Christi Discipulos, as S. Hierom calls them. Not that the Presbyters of the Church do succeed the Seventy, who were not founded in a perpetuity by our Sa∣viour Christ,* as the Arch-Bishop of Spalato hath well observed: but only that they had a resemblance to them, and were ordained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as the Council of Neo-Caesarea affirmed before, as secondary and subservient Ministers in the Church of God, And this is that which Beda tells us in his Comment on the Gospel of Saint Luke,* that as the Twelve Apostles did premonstrate the Form of Bishops, so the Presbyters did bear the figure of the Seventy.

Another resemblance between the Presbyters and the Seventy may perhaps be this, [ XII] that as our Saviour in the choicing of these Disciples related to the number of the Elders in the state of Jewry: so the Apostles thought it fit to give unto the Ministers thus by them ordained (though they regarded not the number) the name of Elders, according to the custom of that State before. Presbyters, they are called in the Greek originals, which being often rendred Seniores in the vulgar Latin, occasioned that our first Translators (who perhaps looked no farther than the Latin) turned it into Elders: though I could heartily have wished they had retained the name of Pres∣byters, as the more proper, and specifical word of the two, by far. But for these Pres∣byters of the Church of Hierusalem (from whencesoever they may borrow or derive their name) we find thrice mention of them in the Book of the Acts, during the time Saint James was Bishop, viz. in the 11.15.21. In the first place we read, that when the Disciples which dwelt at Antioch,* had made a contribution for the brethren of Judaea, they sent it to the Elders there by the hands of Barnabas and Saul. Ask Oecumenius who these Elders were, and he will tell you 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that they were the Apostles. And like enough it is, that the Apostles may be comprehended in that general name;* they being indeed the elder brethren. Ask Calvin why this contribution was sent unto the Presbyters or Elders, being there were particular Officers appointed to attend the poor, as is set down in the 6. Chapter of the Acts; and he will tell you, that the Deacons were so appointed over that business, that notwithstanding they were still inferiour unto the Presby∣ters; nec quicquam sine eorum auctoritate agerent,* and were not to do any thing there∣in without their authority. So for that passage in the 21. S. Luke relates how Paul, at his last going to Hierusalem, went in unto James, and that all the Elders were present; and adds withal, what counsel and advice they gave him, for his ingratia∣ting with the Jews. Here find we James the Bishop attended by his Presbyters, at the reception of Saint Paul:* and they together joyning with him in the consultation then in hand, the business being great and weighty. And therefore Chrysostom ob∣serves, Page  203〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that James determined nothing in it, as a Bishop, of his sole authority: but took Paul into counsel with him: and that the Presbyters on the other side, carried themselves with great respect and reverence towards him, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] giving him an account, or reason of their following counsel. The Bishop never fist in a firmer Chair, than when his Chapter doth support it.

But that which is indeed the matter of the greatest moment, [ XIII] is that which occurs in the 15. Chapter of the Acts, touching the Council of Hierusalem: wherein the Presbyters are so often mentioned, as if without their presence and assistance, the Apostles had been able to determine nothing. Some would fain have it so perhaps, but it will not be, Saint Paul was so assured of the Doctrine by him delivered, as not to put it to the trial of a mortal man: and the Apostles of a spirit so infallible in the things of God, as not to need the counsel and assistance of inferiour persons. How many points of Doctrine did Saint Paul determine with∣out repairing to the Apostles? How many did the Apostles preach and publish with∣out consulting with the Presbyters? Somwhat there must be in it more than ordi∣nary, which did occasion this conjuncture; and is briefly this. Some of the Jews which had but newly been initiated in the faith of Christ, and were yet very zealous of their ancient Ceremonies, came from Hierusalem to Antiochia;* and there delivered Doctrines contrary unto those which Paul taught before. It seems there were some Presbyters amongst them, for it is said, they taught the people: and they pretended too, that they did teach no other Doctrine, than that which had been authorized by the Apostles. The Doctrine was, that except men would be circumcised after the man∣ner of Moses, they could not be saved. Paul might have over-ruled this case, by his own authority. But partly for the satisfaction of the Antiochians, and partly for the full conviction of these false Teachers, he was content, by Revelation of the Spirit,* to put the matter over to the resolution of such of the Apostles as were then abiding in Hierusalem: that by their general attestation, they might confirm his doctrine to be sound, and true. As for the Presbyters it concerned them to be present also, as well to clear themselves from authorizing any such false brethren to disturb the Church, as to prevent the like disorders in the time to come. This is the sum of the proceedings in this business. And this doth no way interest the Presbyters in the determination of points of faith, further than as they are concerned either in ha∣ving been a means to pervert the same; or for the clearing of themselves from the like suspicions. And yet I cannot but affirm withal, that pure and primitive anti∣quity did derive from hence the Form, and manner of their Councils: in which the Presbyters did oftentimes concur, both for voice and hand, I mean as well in giving of their suffrages, as the subscription of their names.* Certain I am that in the Council held in Arragon, Anno 490. or thereabouts, it was provided among other things, ut non solum à Cathedralibus, verum etiam de Diocesanis: that certain Pres∣byters should be chosen, as well out of the Diocesan, as the Cathedral Churches, to attend that service; and that the Metropolitan should send out his Letters unto that effect: according as is still observed in holding of the Convocation of the Church of England.

Next to the constituting of the Presbyters in time and order, [ XIV] was the election of the Seven; and this the Apostles did put over to the people only: not inter∣medling in the same at all, further than in commending them to the grace of God, that they might faithfully discharge the trust committed to them. The Church was then in that condition, that the Disciples lived in one place together, and had all things common: some of them selling their Estates,* and laying down the price thereof at the Apostles feet, that by them it might be distributed as occa∣sion was. But being it fell out, that some did think themselves neglected in the distribution, the Apostles, both to free themselves of so great a trouble,* as also to avoid suspicion of being partial in the business, required them to make choice of such trusty men, as they conceived most fit to be the Stewards of their goods,* and the dispensers of the common stock. This was the charge the Seven were called to by the people: which being no Ecclesiastical function, but a Civil trust; no dispensation of the Word and Sacraments, but a dispository power of the com∣mon Treasure: it was most consonant to the Rules of Reason, that the election of them should be left to the people only. I know these Seven are commonly both called, and accounted Deacons: but I find no such thing in the Texts, or story. Page  204Neither in that Chapter, nor in all the Acts, is the word Deacon to be found: nor find I either Stephen or Philip (of whom the Scripture is most copious) to be so entituled.* Philip indeed is called unus de septem, but no more, one of the Seven, but no such stile as Deacon added: which makes me think their Office was not such as it is conceived. And this I am the rather induced to think, because I find Saint Chrysostom,* and others of the same opinion. Saint Chrysostom putting it unto the question, what dignity or Office these men had, what Ordination they received, and namely, whether that of Deacons; makes answer first, that in his time the use was otherwise, the Presbyters being there intrusted with the di∣stribution of the Churches Treasure, and then concludeth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that it appeared not in his opinion, that they were ei∣ther Presbyters, or Deacons. The Fathers of the sixth Council in Constantinople building upon those words of Chrysostom,* do affirm the same; determining expresly that those Seven mentioned in the Acts, were not ordained to any ministration at the Lords Table, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but only to the service and attendance of the Common Tables.* In which regard Saint Hierom looking back unto the Primitive institution, doth call the Deacons of his time, mensarum & viduarum Ministros, in his Epistle to Euagrius. For howsoever I believe not, on my former ground, that the Seven spoken of in the Acts, had either the Of∣fice or the name of Deacons, as it was used afterwards in the Church of God: yet I deny not but the Church took some hint from hence, even in the times of the Apostles, to institute that holy Order, and to appoint it to some special ministery in Gods publick service: as doth appear both by the Epistles of Saint Paul, and the Records of Primitive and pure antiquity. That Philip did both preach the Gospel, and baptize the Converts, or that Stephen did both preach the Gospel, and convince the adversary: related not to any power or faculty which they received by the addition or access of this new Office. For being they, and all the residue were of the Seventy,* as the Fathers say: and that they had received the Holy Ghost before, as the Scriptures tell us: their preaching and baptizing, must relate to their former Calling. And it had been a degradation from their for∣mer dignity, being Presbyters at the least before, to be made Deacons now.

Thus have we seen the instituting of the several Orders of Bishops, [ XV] Presbyters, and Deacons, in the holy Hierarchie: according to those several names, which were in tract of time appropriated to their several functions in the Church of God. And certainly it did require some space of time, to estrange words from their natural to a borrowed sense, to bring them to an Ecclesiastical, from a Civil notion. So that it is no wonder, if at first the names and appellations of these several functions were used promiscuously, before that time had limited and re∣strained them to that express and setled signification which they still retain. That glorious name of an Apostle, which of it self did signifie a Messenger, (Graecè Aposto∣li,* Latinè Missi appellantur, as Saint Austin hath it) was given by Christ as a pecu∣liar name to his twelve Disciples. And yet we find it sometimes given to inferiour persons,* as to Andronicus and Junias, in the 16. Chap. to the Romans: sometimes reverting to its primitive and ancient use, as where the Messengers of the Churches are called Apostles,* as in the 2. to those of Corinth, Apostoli Ecclesiarum gloria Chri∣sti, the Messengers of the Churches are the glory of Christ. So was it also with that reverend and venerable Title of Episcopus, borrowed and restrained from its general use, to signifie an Overseer in the Church of God: one who was trusted with the Go∣vernment, and superintendency of the flock of Christ committed to him: according to the acceptation of the word in the most ancient Authors of the Christian Church.* And yet sometimes we find it given unto the Presbyters, as in the first of the Philippians in which Paul writing to the Bishops and Deacons, is thought by Bishops to mean Presbyters; partly because the Presbyters had then the government of that Church under the Apostle, and partly because it was against the ancient Apostolical constitution, that there should be many Bishops (properly so called) in one City. Thus also, for the Title Presbyter, which by the Church was used to signifie, not as before, an ancient Man, which is the na∣tive sense,* and construction of it; but one in holy Orders, such as in after times were called by the name of Priests: it grew so general for a while, as to include both Bi∣shops and Apostles also; as Beza notes upon the first Epistle of Saint Peter, Chap. 5. And that perhaps upon the reason given by Ambrose, Omnis Episcopus Presbyter, non Page  205tamen omnis Presbyter Episcopus, because that every Bishop was Presbyter, although not every Presbyter a Bishop. And yet sometimes we find in Scripture, that it re∣turned unto its primitive, and original use: as in the first to Tim. Cap. 5. v. 1. in which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is used to signifie an ancient Man. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an ancient Woman, as by the Text and context doth at full appear. The like occurreth some∣times also in the ancient Writers. Last of all, for the word Diaconus, which in it self doth signifie any common Minister, or domestick servant, the Church made use thereof to denote such Men, as served in the inferiour ministeries of the Congre∣gation; such as according to the Ecclesiastical notion of the word we now call Dea∣cons, as in the first of the Philippians, and in the ancient Writers passim.* Yet did it not so easily put off its original nature, but that it did sometimes revert to it again: as in the 13. of the Romans, in which the Magistrate is called Diaconus,* being the publick Minister of Justice under God Almighty; [Verse 1] and Phoebe in the 16. of the same Epistle, is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a servant of the Church of Cenchrea. Indeed the mar∣vel is not much that it should be so long before the Church could fasten and appro∣priate these particular names to the particular Officers of, and in the same; consi∣dering how long it was before she got a name unto her self. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is used in Scripture to denote the Church, doth signifie amongst the ancient learned Writers, a meeting or assembly of the people for their common business: as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Not to omit the Thracians to the common Council.* So in Aristophanes. The like we find also in Thucydides, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that having constituted the Assembly, they fell upon their alter∣cations. The first time that we find it used to denote the Church, is Matth. 16.18. and after frequently in holy Scripture: yet so, that it returned sometimes to its native sense, as in the 19. of the Acts, wherein we read, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that the assembly (of the Ephesians) was confused, ver. 32. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he dismissed the assembly, ver. 41. And therefore they which from identity of names in holy Scripture, conclude identity of Offices in the Church of Christ; and will have Presbyter, and Episcopus to be both one Calling, because the names are sometimes used promiscuously in the first beginnings: may with like equi∣ty conclude that every Deacon is a Magistrate, and every Presbyter an Apostle, or that the Church of Ephesus was nothing else than an assembly of the Citizens in the Town-Hall there, for the dispatch of business which concerned the Corporation.