A discourse of the right of the Church in a Christian state: by Herbert Thorndike.:

CHAP. III.

THat it is no new reason that here is rendred, p. 91. why the name of Epi∣scopus, under the Apostles, was com∣mon to those, that are since distinctly called Bishops and Presbyters, may appear by a passage in Amalarius de divinis Officiis, quo∣ted out of the supposed S. Ambrose upon the Epistles, produced by Salmasius, In Apparatu:

quia beatis Apostolis decedentibus, illi qui post illos ordinati sunt ut praeessent Ecclesiis, illis primis exaequari non poterant, neque miraculo∣rum testimonium par illis habere, sed in multis aliis inferiores illis esse videbantur, grave illis videbatur Apostolorum sibi vendicare nuncupa∣tionem. Diviserunt ergo nomina ipsa, & iisdem Presbyterorum nomen reliquerunt, alii verò Episcopi sunt nuncupati, hique Ordinationis praediti potestate, ita ut plenissimè iidem praepo∣sitos se Ecclesiarum esse cognoscerent. This is manifestly the very reason that I insist upon: For, saith he, because, the bles∣sed Apostles deceasing, those that were ordained to be over Churches after them, could not be equalled to those first, nor attain to the like grace of miracles, but appeared to be beneath them in many other things, it seemed too much for them to challenge to themselves the name of Apostles. Hereupon they divided the names, and left them the name of Presbyters, and the others were called Bishops, and they endowed with the Power of Ordaining, that they might know themselves to be set over the Churches, in the fullest right. I marvell what pleasure Salmasius had to allege this passage, which if it be admitted, is enough alone, to over∣throw all that he hath said in this point. For first, he supposeth, as the received Doctrine of the Church, that Bishops, in their seve∣rall

Churches, succeeded the Apostles: Se∣condly, he answers all S. Hieromes reasons, to prove that Bishops and Presbyters are all one, because they are called by the same name in the Scriptures, by giving another reason, even that which you have here: Last∣ly, he saith that Bishops are set over their Churches plenissimè, in the fullest right, and that therefore Ordination was reserved to them, which is to say, that, in all things they have a speciall Interesse, but especially Ordination is their peculiar. And with this reason agrees Theodoret, when he says, that, at such time as the name of Bishops was common to Presbyters, those who were called Bishops afterwards, were called Apo∣stles; extending the name of Apostles to others besides the Apostles of Christ. This is then a sufficient reason, why the name of Bishops, should be afterwards appropriated to that rank, wherein they succeed the Apo∣stles and Evangelists in their respective Chur∣ches, (because they could not be called by the same which their predecessors had born) though formerly common both to Bishops and Presbyters. And this is the meaning of those words of S. Augustine, which seemed difficult in the Councell of Trent, because, the opinion, which derived all the power of Bishops from the Pope, was so strong there:

Etsi secundum honorum vocabula quae jam Ec∣clesiae usus obtinuit, Episcopatus Presbyterio major sit, in multis tamen Augustinus Episco∣pus Hieronyme Presbyters minor est. Let not the humility of S. Augustine be drawn into consequence, and the property of his words shall enforce no more then I say. He knew well enough, how stiffely S. Hierome had ar∣gued, that a Bishop and a Priest is all one in the terms of divine Right, because the name of Episcopus is attributed to Presbyters by the Apostles. Is it to be presumed that S. Augustine acknowledges this to be his own opinion, because it is plain he intends not to crosse S. Hierome in it, having other diffe∣rences with him afore? On the contrary, it hath been shewed by other passages of his writings, that his opinion was otherwise. To use therefore that civility, which his meek∣nesse prompted him to condescend to S. Hie∣rome with, he granteth his premises, neither refusing, nor admitting the consequence, saying, Though, according to the titles of ho∣nour which now have prevailed in the Church, a Bishop be greater then a Presbyter, notwith∣standing, in many things Jerome the Priest is greater then Augustine the Bishop. Where, by naming the titles of Honour which now have prevailed in the Church, he insinuates the rea∣son, for which, I here maintain that they

were thus distinguished afterwards, and therefore supposes the ground of it: Other∣wise, he might as easily have granted S. Hie∣romes consequence, and pleased him more. And yet, I conceive, that, when he says a Priest may be greater then a Bishop, it may very well be admitted, not onely as a con∣descension of humility, but as an expression of truth, not onely in respect of learning, or other personall considerations, but of autho∣rity in the Church, by reason of the depen∣dence of Churches here premised. The state and government of Churches is very properly compared by Origen, contra Celsum VII. to the State of Greekish Commonal∣ties, the Bishop bearing the place of the Ma∣gistrate, and the Bench of Presbyters, of the Senate, as I have hitherto compared them to the Jews Consistories; and, as Pope Pius in his Epistle to Justus of Vienna, calls the Presbytery of the Church at Rome, Pauperem Senatum Christi in Vrbe Româ; The poore Se∣nate of Christ in the City of Rome. In this e∣state and condition, the eminence of the Bi∣shop above the Presbyters is visible, though not by the humility of Pope Pius, who per∣haps comprises both Bishop and Presbyters in the same quality of a Senate, yet by the comparison of Origen, the eminence of the Magistrate above his Councell, in all Com∣monalties,

being so visible as it is. But, when congregations come to be distinguished, as well as Churches, and a greater flock as∣signed to some Presbyters, then to Bishops in other parts of the Church, and those Presbyters to doe all Offices to their Flock, which those Bishops did, saving that they depended on the City Church, whereas those Bishops depended onely on the Church of the Mother City, (and therefore had Power to make Ordinations within their own Churches, which Presbyters ne∣ver could doe;) what hinders in this case, I say not S. Augustine (for I suppose he names himself but for an instance, being indeed Bi∣shop of an eminent City) to be lesse then S. Hierome, but, some Bishop to be lesse then some Priest, even for his lawfull authority in the Church? A consideration of great con∣sequence to the right constitution of Coun∣cels, especially the most Generall, and, for which, there is not wanting a valuable rea∣son, intimated in the proceedings of divers of the ancient Councels of the Church, that is, that the Church cannot be reasonably concluded by number of present votes, as the Councell of Trent imposes upon us, but, by the consideration of Christian Nations, and Provinces of the Church, represented in those Councels. For, as we see, that, in the

ancient Councels, a few Bishops were many times admitted to act in behalf of their Pro∣vinces, as having Commission to conclude them, in which case, they must needs be con∣siderable, according to the Provinces for which they stood: So, in all things, which may concern the Whole, not onely every mans rank of Bishop, Presbyter, or Deacon is to be considered, but also, the eminence of the Church in which he bears the same. So that, by this reason, nothing hinders a Presbyter of some chief Church to be of more consideration to the Whole, then a Bishop of some mean Church, such as we spoke of in Africk. And therefore, it would be inconsequent, that the determinations of Synods should passe indifferently by the Votes of Bishops, unlesse we suppose, that consideration is had of the chief Churches; and this consideration answered, in the emi∣nence of that respect, which the Bishops of those chief Churches enjoy, inswaying the determinations of those Synods to which they concur. And this consideration might, perhaps, have served to take off part of S. Hieromes displeasure against Bishops, grounded upon the Power which their Dea∣cons had, by their means, above Presbyters, which he, in regard of the great difference be∣tween the two degrees in generall, thinks to

be so great an inconvenience, Epist. LXXXV ad Euagrium. For, though it is most true, in regard of the Presbyters and Deacons of the same Church, that it was a disorder, that Deacons, in regard of their neernesse to the Bishops, should take upon them above Pres∣byters, yet, if we compare the Deacon of a chief Church, with the Presbyter of a small country Parish, no man can say, that he is of lesse consideration to the Whole Church, in regard of his rank, unlesse he mean to make Steven or Philip, Titus or Timothy, (or any of those that waited on the Apostles in per∣son, and were properly their Deacons, as I have said, in assisting them to preach the Gospel where they came) to be meaner per∣sons in the Church, then one of those Pres∣byters, which Paul and Barnabas, Titus or Timothy Ordained, in the Churches of those Cities where they came.

To that which I say p. 92. to prove, that the word Angel, in the Epistle to the VII Churches, Apoc. II & III. being an obvious and proper metaphor to signifie a Bishop or Presbyter, cannot therefore be used to signi∣fie a College of Presbyters, the word being no collective, nor any construction inforcing it to be used for a collective, in all that Epi∣stle, I adde here the comparison of two pas∣sages, by which it may be gathered, for what

reason, and in what consideration, the Spirit speaketh to the Body of those Churches, in the Epistle directed to the Angels of them, and, by consequence, who those Angels are: The first is that of S. Paul to Titus II. 10. A man that is an Heretick after the first and se∣cond admonition avoid. For, is it S. Pauls purpose to command, that onely Titus avoid those whom he should declare Hereticks? Surely, that would be to no great effect, un∣lesse we understand, that, by virtue of this precept, both Titus is enabled to charge the Churches under him to avoid them, and they thereupon obliged to doe it. The other is the Epistle under the name of Ignatius to Polycarpus, wherein, after such advise as he thought fit for Polycarpus, without turning his speech from him to another person, he proceeds to exhort his people, with such in∣structions, as he found to bee most requi∣site. Which feems to be the reason why ma∣ny count that Epistle counterfeit, and none of Ignatius his own, though, for my part, I confesse, I am not yet perswaded to think so, not onely because of the character, both of the matter and language of it, which seem∣eth to me to carry the stamp of Apostolicall upon it, as the rest of Ignatius, but also par∣ticularly, because of the example of this E∣pistle of S. John to the VII Churches,

wherein, it is plain, he involves both Pastor and flock in the same praises, reproofs, ad∣vises, and exhortations, the reasons being the same in both, because both sent to be read to the People in the Church, as the E∣pistle to the Colossians and the Laodiceans, Coloss. IV. 15. and, as the Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians, Eusebius says, was wont to be read in that Church in his time. Now, if the instructions concerning the people be addressed to Titus and Polycarp, is it not be∣cause of some eminence of authority in them, by which they might be brought into effect among their people? How much more that which is addressed unto the Angels of VII Churches, being a style apt to signifie a person of eminent authority over others, but never used to signifie a Body of persons, much lesse, with parallel authority among themselves?

It is commonly conceived, that the Souls under the Altar, which we reade of Apoc. VI. 10. were seen by S. John, lying under the Altar of Burnt Sacrifices, at the foot where∣of, the rest of the blood that was not sprink∣led on the Altar was poured out, and, the blood being the life or Soul of living crea∣tures, in the language of the Scriptures, that therefore, the souls of those that were slain for the profession of Christianity, are seen by

S. John under the Altar. Against this ap∣prehension I allege, p. 95. that it is not the Altar of burnt Sacrifices, but the Altar of In∣cense, (within the Tabernacle, but without the Vail) which is represented in these Visi∣ons, correspondent to the Primitive fashion of Churches, where, the Communion Ta∣ble, (called also the Altar, because of the Sa∣crifice of the Crosse represented upon it) stood in the midst of that compasse, which the Seats of the Bishop and Priests did en∣close. For, though, in the Temple, the people prayed without the Sanctuary, the Priest whose Office it was, at the same time offering Incense with their Prayers, yet in the Church, where all the people are within the Sanctuary, as Priests, the XXIV Pres∣byters are described with golden Vials full of Incense, which is the peoples prayers, as David saith, Let my prayer be set forth in thy presence as the Incense, Apoc. V. 8. and be∣sides, the Angel puts Incense upon his Cen∣ser, to the prayers of the Saints, Apoc. VIII. 3. therefore his fire is from the Altar of In∣cense, within the Tabernacle, though with∣out the Vail. Besides, it is not imaginable, how the souls of those that were slain, could appear to S. John in Vision of Prophesie, lying under the Altar of Burnt Sacrifices▪ where the bloud of Sacrifices was poured

out, and that in such a multitude, as we know there was of the Primitive Martyrs: Espe∣cially, seeing the circumstances of the Text inforces, that they are the same Souls, which, first, cry for vengeance, and have long white Robes given them because they are not pre∣sently satisfied, Apoc. VI. 9, 10, 11. and, which are afterwards described, standing and prai∣sing God in the white Robes that were given them afore, Apoc. VII. 9. And therefore, when they are said to be seen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the meaning is not that they were seen lying under the Altar of Burnt Sacrifices, but, standing in the lower part of the Sanctuary, beneath the Altar of Incense. Unlesse we take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here for the Sanctuary, as I shew that it is taken in the Apocalypse, p. 115. and then 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉—is for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

The name of Ministers, when it answers the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Scriptures, if it be put absolutely, without any addition, sig∣nifies the Rank and Office of those that are ever since called Deacons in the Church: But many times it is put with the additions here mentioned p. 99. of Ministers of the Word, Ministers of the Gospel, of the New Testament, of the Church, which serve as circumlocuti∣ons and descriptions of the Office of Apo∣stles to the whole Church, or their Depu∣ties

and Commissioners the Evangelists, as when S. Paul writes to the Colossians, I. 23, 25. that he was made a Minister of the Gospel, or, of the Church, according to the dispensati∣on of God which is given me towards you, to fulfill the Word of God, that is, the Mystery that hath been hidden from generations and ages, and now is manifested to his Saints: It is here manifest, that he cals himself a Minister of God, or of the Church, in regard of pub∣lishing the Gospel, and planting the Church, which belongs not to the Presbyters of Churches, whose name and office is respe∣ctive to their particular Churches. And this notion of the word is almost always to be ga∣thered, by the text and consequence of those passages where it is found. Therfore the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when it is absolutely put 1 Tim. III. 8 stands in relation to Bishops and Presbyters mentioned afore, in the notion of Waiting up∣on them, (whereas, when it is put with the ad∣dition here specified, it stands in relation to God, making as much difference, between Ministers of the Word, and barely Ministers, as between executing the immediate com∣mands of God, as Apostles doe, and execu∣ting the commands of Bishops, in regard of whom, mentioned afore, they are called, barely, and without any addition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Ministers in that place.) And so the VII

at Jerusalem were first constituted to wait upon the Apostles, by doing that Service, which they did themselves at the first, for the Church: whereupon, it was afterwards a custome in the Church, that there should be VII Deacons in every Church, as there were at Jerusalem, Concil. Neocaesar. Can. XIV. And therefore, the Author of the Questions of the Old and New Testament in S. Augustines Works Q. CI. having obser∣ved, that the Apostles call Presbyters their fellow Presbyters, addeth, Nunquid & Mi∣nistros condiaconos suos diceret Apostolus? Non utique, quia multo inferiores sunt. Et turpe est judicem dicere primicerium. Would the A∣postle call Deacons his fellow Deacons? Surely no, for they are much inferiour. And it is ab∣surd to call a Pronotary a Judge. Where, he makes the same difference, between Presby∣ters and Deacons, as Christian between Judges and Ministers of Courts, and that, according to the Originall custome of the Synagogue, as well as of the Church, as by and by it shall appeare. Notwith∣standing, the Office of Bishops is called a Ministery very anciently, by Pope Pius, in his Epistle to Justus of Vienna, as also the Office both of Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons, Concil. Eliber. Can. XIX. but in another notion, in opposition to the co∣active

power of the World, as proceeding, originally, not by constraint, but by consent: and so they are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and their office 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Greek, because their of∣fice is for the behoof of the people; and in their stead: But they cannot therefore be called Ministers of the People, as Deacons are Ministers of Bishops and Presbyters, be∣cause, then, they should be ruled by the peo∣ple, and execute that which they prescribe, (as the Apostles, being Ministers of God in Preaching the Gospel, are bound to execute his Commission, and nothing else) which, the Clergy of Christian Churches may not doe.

That it may be beyond any Power upon earth, to abolish the Order of Bishops out of the Church of England, without abolishing the Church also, as is said here p. 129. I prove Chap. V. to wit, that no Secular Power can take away Ecclesiasticall Power, from them that lawfully have it, according to the in∣stitution of the Apostles, though not by vir∣tue of it.

To shew, that, in the judgement and pra∣ctise of the Primitive Church, all Power of baptizing was derived from the Bishop, as is said here p. 136. we have but to remember the custome of the Church, mentioned in so many Canons, of sending the Chrism to all

Parish Churches, from the Mother Church, once a year. By which Ceremony it appea∣red, that the Bishop trusted his authority of admitting to the Church by Baptism, with the respective Pastors of the same. And therefore, it is not unreasonably judged, that this custome of Chrisming was, many times, in stead of Confirmation, to those Chur∣ches that used it. Besides, in that, from the beginning, no Ecclesiasticall office was to be ministred by any but the Bishop in his pre∣sence, the dependence of all Ecclesiasticall authority, whereby the same are ministred, upon the Bishop, is evidenced to us. Thus, in the passage of Eusebius, concerning Origens Preaching before he was of the Clergy, men∣tioned p. 106. it is further to be observed, that the instances there alleged seem to shew, that the Primitive Bishops, did many times admit those that were of no degree in the Clergy, to preach in their own presence. Which, that it was a further privilege, then onely to preach, may appear by that which is related out of the life of S. Augustine, in the Primitive government of Churches, p. 113. that he was imploied by the Bishop his prede∣cessor, to preach to the people in his pre∣sence, and stead, because he had seen it so practised in the East, though in those parts it were not done. In like manner, it is manifest

by many Records of the Church, that none might Baptize, Celebrate the Eucharist, or reconcile the Penitent, in the Bishops pre∣sence, but himself: for of Confirmation and Ordaining, I need say nothing.

The fourth reason against the vulgar rea∣ding of the XIII Canon of the Councell at Ancyra. p. 141. will be more clearly under∣stood, by setting down the effect of the LVI Canon of Laodicea, which, comming after that of Ancyra, and, taking Order, that, for the future, there should be no Country Bi∣shops made any more, provides further, that those which were already constituted, should do nothing without the consent of the Bi∣shop, as likewise the Presbyters to doe no∣thing without the same. Which, being the provision which the latter Canon establish∣eth, leaveth it very probable, that the other, going afore, and intending to take order in the same particulars, should consist of two clauses correspondent to the same.

That there were other Churches, and Bi∣shops, in Aegypt, besides that of Alexandria, before the time of Demetrius, besides that which hath been said p. 142, 143. stands more probable by the Emperour Adrians Epistle, related by Vopiscus in the life of Saturninus; Illi qui Serapin colunt Christiani sunt; Et devoti sunt Serapi, qui se Christi Episcopos

dicunt. Nemo illic Archisynagogus Judaeorum, nemo Samarites, nemo Christianorum Presby∣ter, non mathematicus, non aruspex, non aliptes. Here he names Bishops at Alexandria; to wit, such as resorted thither, from other Ci∣ties of Aegypt. And, though a man would be so contentious, as to stand in it, that the name Episcopus might then be common to Bishops and Presbyters both, yet, when he speaks of Presbyter Christianorum in the very next words, he cannot reasonably be thought to speak of Presbyters in those that went a∣fore. And when Tertullian saith, that Valen∣tine, the Father of the Valentinians, expected to have been made a Bishop for his wit and eloquence, and, because he failed of it, ap∣plied his minde to make a Sect apart; where∣of himself might be the Head, adversus Va∣lentin. cap. IV. unlesse we suppose more Bi∣shops then one in Aegypt at that time, we tie our selves to say, that he would have been Bishop of Alexandria: Which, had it been so, Tertullian, probably, would have expres∣sed, for the eminence of the Place.

The correspondence between the Office of Deacons in the Synagogue and the Church, mentioned p. 156. may thus ap∣pear: Judges and Officers shalt thou appoint thee in all thy Gates, that is, in all thy Cities; saith the Law, Deut. XVI. 18. joyning toge∣ther

Judges and Officers in divers other pla∣ces, Num. XI. 16. Deut. I. 15, 16. These Offi∣cers the Greek translateth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and sometime 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Vulgar Latine Doctores, for what reason, I doe not see that any man hath declared. By the Tal∣mud Doctors they are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which seems to import Appparitores Synago∣gae, which Maimoni describes to be young men, that have not attained the years and knowledge of Doctors; And, the punish∣ment of scourging, he saith, was executed by these. He reporteth also an old saying of their Talmud Doctors, that the reason why Samuels sons would not ride circuit as their Father did, was, because they would inflame the Fees of their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, their Ministers, or Apparitors, and Scribes, or Clerks. And Buxtorfe, in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, re∣ports another of their sayings, That, at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, the Wise were imbased to the learning of Appa∣ritors, and Apparitors to that of Clerks. So then, they were next under their Wise men or Doctors, but above Scribes or Clerks, by this account: But, seeing there was no more difference between them, it is no marvell, if sometimes it be not considered. Maimoni, in the Title of learning the Law, sheweth, that the Jews had every where Schoolmasters

appointed to teach yong children to read, of the condition of whom he writeth there at large cap. III. these are they, whom the Vul∣gar Latine meaneth, by Doctores, as appears by the supposed S. Ambrose, upon 1 Cor. XII. 25. who would have those, whom S. Paul there cals Doctors, to be the very same. And therefore they are the very same, that the LXX meant by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Jews say that they were of the Tribe of Si∣meon, and, that, so, the Prophesie of Jacob was fulfilled, Divide them in Jacob, and scat∣ter them in Israel; the Levites being disper∣sed throughout all the Tribes, to take Tiths at the barn door, and the Simeonites, to teach to write and reade. S. Hierome Tradit. Heb. in Genesin, Jarchi in Gen. XLIX. 7. And indeed, the name by which the Scripture calleth them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, though the Originall of it be not found in the Scriptures, (as how should any language be all found in so small a Vo∣lume?) yet, in the Jews writings, and also in the Syriack Testament, the word from whence it is derived signifieth contracts, as Coloss. II. 14. So that, by their name, they must be such as write contracts, that is, Clerks or Notaries. Therefore, if the Jud∣ges and Doctors of the Jews Consistories are correspondent to the Presbyters of Chri∣stian Churches, which by many arguments

hath been declared, then, the Apparitors and Notaries of the same, must, by consequence, be answerable to our Deacons. And so Epi∣phanius, in the Heresie of the Ebionites, ma∣keth the Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons of the Christians to be the same, that, among the Jews, were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Rulers of Syna∣gogues, Presbyters and Deacons: For, as the Deacons were wont to minister a great part of the Service in the Church, so still, the Service in the Synagogue is performed by him, whom, still, they call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Minister of the Synagogue.

To this III Chapter I must adde two con∣siderations: The one is of the scope of that little Piece, of the Right of the People in the Church, which the learned Blondell hath late∣ly added to Grotius his Book, De Imperio Summarum Patestatum in Sacris. Which is, in brief, to derive the right and Title of Lay Elders from the people, and, from that In∣teresse, which, by the Scriptures, it appears that they had from the beginning, under the Apostles, in Church matters. Whereby, he hath given us cause to cry aloud, Victory, as quitting the reason and ground upon which the bringing of Lay Elders into the Church, was first defended, and is hitherto maintained among us, to wit, that onely Text of 1 Tim.

V. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double Honour, especially those that labour in the Word and Doctrine. For, this Scripture being abandoned, the rest that are pretended, are so far from concluding, that they cannot stand by themselves. Now, that this Text cannot be effectuall to prove that purpose, he argueth there upon the same rea∣son which here I have advanced, p. 123. to wit, because the same Honour, that is, main∣tenance, is thereby allowed to those that la∣bour in the Word and Doctrine, and those that doe not: Whereupon, it must needs appear, to him that knows a great deal lesse of the Antiquity of the Church then Blon∣dell does, that they are Clergy men, whose maintenance is provided for by the Apostle. Now, to comply with him, that hath so in∣genuously yeelded us the Fort, I doe avow, that he hath reason to beleeve, that, (there being so great difference between the State of the Church, since whole Nations professe Christianity, and that which was under the Apostles, and, the confusion appearing so endlesse, and unavoidable, that must needs arise in Church matters, by acquainting all the People with the proceeding of them, and expecting their satisfaction and consent in the same) it cannot be contrary to Gods Law, to delegate the Interesse of the People,

to some of the discreetest and most pious of them, chosen by them, to concur in their Right. For, in this quality, doe those Elders of the People, of which Justellus writeth, act in Ecclesiasticall matters, as you may see by that which I have said, in the Apostolicall Form of Divine Service, p. 96. and in all other the particulars which he allegeth. And, if this be it which the Presbyterians demand, in behalf of their Lay Elders, let them first accord themselves with those of the Con∣gregations, concerning the due Interesse of the People in Church matters, and my opi∣nion shall be, that the Church may safely joyn issue with them, not to yeeld a double number of Votes to Lay Elders, in the pro∣ceeding of all Church matters, as the Ordi∣nance for establishing the Presbyteries ap∣points, (which is to make the Clergy truly Ministers, not of God, but of the People) but to grant them a right of Intercession, in be∣half of the People, (when as the proceeding may be argued to be contrary to Gods Law) grounded upon the practice recorded in the Scriptures, and continued under the Primi∣tive Church, by which the people were satis∣fied, even of the proceedings of the Apo∣stles themselves in Church matters. For, by this Right and Interesse, the Acts of the Church shall not be done by any Vote of

the People, but, the Rule of Christianity, and the Constitution of the Church accor∣ding to Gods Law, shall be preserved, which are the inheritance of Christian people.

The second is, concerning the different in∣teresse of Clergy and People, in judging the causes of Christians, before any State pro∣fessed Christianity, supposing that which hath been proved in the first Chapter, that our Lord and his Apostles ordain, that they goe not forth of the Church, to be judged in Heathen Courts, upon pain of Excommu∣nication to them that carry them forth. For, S. Paul seems to appoint, that the least esteemed of the Church be constituted Jud∣ges in those causes, 1 Cor. VI. 4. and there∣fore, not Bishops, nor Presbyters, nor Dea∣cons, which must needs be of most esteem in the Society of the Church, but the sim∣plest of the people. Which, though it must needs be said by way of concession, or sup∣position, that is, that they should rather ap∣point such men, then carry their Causes to Secular Courts (otherwise, it were too grosse an inconvenience, to imagine, that the Apo∣stle commandeth them to appoint the sim∣plest to be their Judges) yet, seeing the truth of his words requires, that the supposition be possible, so that it might in some case come to effect, it seems that his injunction

comes to this, that, in case the chief of the Church, the Clergy, were so imploied, that they could not attend to judge their contro∣versies within themselves, they should make Judges out of the People. Which seemeth not sutable to the rest of the Interesse of the Clergy, hitherto challenged. This difficul∣ty is to be answered, by distinguishing, as the Romane Laws distinguish, between Ju∣risdiction, and Judging, though in far lesse matters. For Jurisdiction, is sometimes de∣scribed in the Romane Laws, to be the Pow∣er of appointing a Judge, because it was ne∣ver intended, that the Magistrate, which was endowed with Jurisdiction, should judge all in person, but, should give execution and force, to the sentences of such Judges as him∣self should appoint. So that, the advise of the Apostle, supposeth indeed, that some of the People might be appointed to judge the Causes of Christians within the Church, but leaves the Jurisdiction in those hands, by whom they should be appointed Judges. Which, though it be attributed to the Church indistinctly by the Apostle, yet, see∣ing, by our Lords appointment, the sentence was to be executed by Excommunication, therefore, of necessity, the appointing of Jud∣ges must proceed upon the same difference of Interesses, as it hath been shewed that

Excommunication doth. And though Saint Paul suppose, that there might be cause to have recourse to Lay-men, for the sentencing of differences in the Church, (as indeed, the life of S. Peter, in the Pontificall Book, re∣lateth, that he did Ordain, or appoint certain persons, to attend upon this businesse, that himself might be free for more spirituall im∣ploiment, which seemeth to be meant of Lay-men constituted Judges) yet, by the Apostolicall Constitutions, we finde, that it was usually done by the Clergy, II. 47. And Polycarpus, in his Epistle to the Philippians, exhorting the Presbyters, not to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, rigid in judgement, must needs be thought to have respect to this Office. And, besides many more instances that might be produced of good antiquity in the Church, it is manifest, that this is the beginning of Bi∣shops Audiences.