Part 74

He pursues the same argument, with great point, in his famous Epistle to Evagrius, asserting and proving from the Scriptures, that in the beginning and during the Apostles’ days, a Bishop and a Presbyter were the same thing. He then goes on: “As to the fact, that AFTERWARDS, one was ELECTED to preside over the rest, this was done as a remedy against schism; lest every one drawing his proselytes to himself, should rend the church of Christ. For even at Alexandria, from the Evangelist Mark to the Bishops Heraclas and Dionysius, the Presbyters always chose one of their number, placed him in a superior station, and gave him the title of Bishop: in the same manner as if an army should MAKE an emperor; or the deacons should choose from among themselves, one whom they knew to be particularly active, and should call him ARCH-DEACON. For, excepting ordination, what is done by a Bishop, which may not be done by a Presbyter? Nor is it to be supposed, that the church should be one thing at Rome, and another in all the world besides. Both France and Britain, and Africa, and Persia, and the East, and India, and all the barbarous nations worship one Christ, observe one rule of truth. If you demand authority, the globe is greater than a city. Wherever a Bishop shall be found, whether a Rome, or Eugubium, or Constantinople, or Rhegium, or Alexandria, or Tanis, he has the same pretensions, the same priesthood.”[299]

Here is an account of the origin and progress of Episcopacy, by a Father whom the Episcopalians themselves admit to have been the most able and learned man of his age; and how contradictory it is to their own account, the reader will be at no loss to perceive, when he shall have followed us through an analysis of its several parts.

1. JEROME expressly denies the superiority of Bishops to Presbyters, by _divine right_. To prove his assertion on this head, he goes directly to the scriptures; and argues, as the advocates of parity do, from the interchangeable titles of Bishop and Presbyters; from the _directions_ given to them without the least intimation of difference in their authority; and from the _powers_ of Presbyters, undisputed in his day.

2. JEROME states it as an _historical fact_, that, in the original constitution of the church, before the devil had as much influence as he acquired afterwards, _the churches were governed by the joint counsels of the Presbyters_.

3. JEROME states it as an _historical fact_, that this government of the churches, _by Presbyters alone_, continued until, for the avoiding of scandalous quarrels and schisms, it was thought expedient to _alter_ it. “_Afterwards_,” says he, “when every one accounted those whom he baptized as belonging to himself, and not to Christ, it was _decreed throughout the whole world_, that one, chosen from among the Presbyters, should be put over the rest, and that the whole care of the church should be committed to him.”

4. JEROME states it as an _historical fact_, that this change in the government of the church—this creation of a superior order of ministers, took place, not at once, but _by degrees_—“_Paulatim_,” says he, “by little and little.” The precise date on which this innovation upon primitive order _commenced_, he does not mention; but he says positively, that it did not take place till the factious spirit of the Corinthians had spread itself in different countries, to an alarming extent. “_In populis_,” is his expression. Assuredly, this was not the work of a day. It had not been accomplished when the apostolic epistles were written, because Jerome appeals to these for proof that the churches were then governed by the joint counsels of Presbyters; and it is incredible that such ruinous dissensions, had they existed, should not have been noticed in letters to others beside the Corinthians. The disease indeed, was of a nature to spread rapidly; but still it must have time to travel. With all the zeal of Satan himself, and of a parcel of wicked or foolish clergymen to help him, it could not march from people to people, and clime to clime, but in a course of years. If Episcopacy was the _apostolic_ cure for schism, the contagion must have smitten the nations like a flash of lightning. This would have been quite as extraordinary as an instantaneous change of government:—No: the progress of the mischief was gradual, and so, according to Jerome, was the progress of the _remedy_ which the wisdom of the times devised.[300] We agree with them, who think that the experiment introduced more evil than it banished.

5. JEROME states as _historical facts_, that the elevation of one Presbyter over the others, was a _human contrivance_; was not _imposed_ by authority, but _crept in by custom_;—and that the Presbyters of his day, _knew_ this very well. _As, therefore_, says he, _the Presbyters_ KNOW _that they are subjected to their superior by_ CUSTOM, _so let the bishops know that they are above the Presbyters, rather by the_ CUSTOM OF THE CHURCH, _than by the Lord’s appointment_.

6. JEROME states it as an _historical fact_, that the first bishops were made by the _Presbyters themselves_; and consequently they could neither have, nor communicate any authority above that of Presbyters. “_Afterwards_,” says he, “to prevent schism, one was _elected_ to preside over the rest.” Elected and commissioned by whom? By the _Presbyters_: for he immediately gives you a broad fact which it is impossible to explain away. “At Alexandria,” he tells you, “from the evangelist Mark to the Bishops Heraclas and Dionysius,” i.e. till about the middle of the third century, “the Presbyters _always chose_ one of their number, ”_placed him in a superior station_, and gave him the title of _Bishop_.“

CHRISTIAN’S MAGAZINE.

Footnote 296:

We quote the words of one who was assuredly no friend to our cause, vid. Cave, _His. Litt. Script: Eccles._ p 171. Ed 1720. Fol.

Footnote 297:

Prosper, who was nearly his cotemporary, calls him _magister mundi_: i. e. the teacher of the world. _Ib._

Footnote 298:

“Qui qualis Presbyter debeat ordinari, in consequentibus disserens hoc ait: Si quis est sine crimine, unius uxoris vir,” et cætera: postea intulit, “Oportet. n. Episcopum sine crimine esse, tanquam Dei dispensatorem.” Idem est ergo Presbyter, qui et Episcopus, et antequam _diaboli instinctu_, studia in religione fierent, et diceretur in populis: “Ego sum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego autem Cephæ:” _communi Presbyterorum consilio_ ecclesiæ gubernabantur. Postquam vero unusquisque eos, quos baptizaverat, suos putabat esse, non Christi: _in toto orbe decretum est, ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur cœteris, ad quem omnis ecclesiaœ cura pertineret_ et schismatum semina tollerentur. Putet aliquis non scripturarum, sed nostram, esse sententiam Episcopum et Presbyterum unum esse; et aliud ætatis, aliud esse nomen officii: relegat Apostoli ad Philipponses verba dicentis: Paulus et Timotheus servi Jesu Christi, omnibus sanctis in Christo Jesu, qui sunt Philippis, cum Episcopis et Diaconis, gratia vobis et pax, et reliqua. Philippi _una_ est urbs Macedoniæ, et certe in una civitate _plures_ ut nuncupantur, _Episcopi esse non poterant_. Sed quia _eosdem Episcopos illo tempore_ quos et _Presbyteros_ appellabant, propterea indifferenter de Episcopis quasi de Presbyteris est locutus. Adhuc hoc alicui videatur ambiguum, nisi altero testimonio comprobetur. In Actibus Apostolorum scriptum est, quod cum venisset Apostolus Miletum, miserit Ephesum, et vocaverit Presbyteros eccslesiæ ejusdem, quibus postea inter cætera sit locutus: _attendite vobis, et omni gregi in quo vos Spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos, pascere ecclesiam Domini quam acquisivit per sanguinem suum_. Et hoc diligentius observate, quo modo _unius civitatis_ Ephesi _Presbyteros_ vocans, postea eosdem _Episcopos_ dixerit—Hæc propterea, ut ostenderemus _apud veteres_ eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos et Episcopos. _Paulatim_ vero, ut dissensionum plantaria evellerentur, ad _unum_ omnem solicitudinem esse delatam.—Sicut ergo Presbyteri _sciunt se ex ecclesiœ consuetudine_ ei, qui sibi propositus fuerit, esse subjectos, ita Episcopi noverint se _magis consuetudine quam dispositionis dominicœ veritate_, Presbyteris esse majores. _Hieronymi Com: in Tit: I. 1. Opp. Tom._ VI. p. 168, _ed. Victorii, Paris, 1623. Fol._

Footnote 299:

_Vid. Blondel. Apol. pro Sent. Hieron._

Footnote 300:

Our opponents, who contend that nothing can be concluded from the promiscuous use of the scriptural titles of office, are yet compelled to acknowledge that _Bishop_ and _Presbyter_ were _afterwards_ separated and restricted, the former to the superior, and the latter to the inferior order of ministers. We would ask them _when_ and _why_ this was done? If it was not necessary to distinguish these officers by specific titles in the apostles’ day, what necessity was there for such a distinction afterwards? The church might have gone on, as she began, to this very hour; and what would have been the harm? Nay, there _was_ a necessity for the distinction; and Jerome has blown the secret. When one of the Presbyters was set over the heads of the others, there was a _new officer_ and he wanted a _name_. So they appropriated the term _Bishop_ to him; and thus avoided the _odium_ of _inventing_ a title unknown to the scripture. The people, no doubt, were told that there was no material alteration in the scriptural order; and hearing nothing but a name to which they had always been accustomed, they were the less startled.

Footnote 301:

_See Page 522, ante. Some, indeed, choose to say, that persons that stand more immediately related to their respective churches, are pastors in the catholic church, though not of it; which, if the words be rightly understood, does not militate against what we assert._ Ο που δι ο ποιμην εστιν εκει ως προβατα ακολουθειτε. Ignat. epist. ad Philad. p. 42.

Footnote 302:

Συνκατεψηφισθη μετα των ενδεκα αποστολων, _which Beza renders_, Communibus calculis allectus est cum undecem Apostolis.

Footnote 303:

Χειροτονησαντες αυτοις πρεσβυτερους κατ εκκλησιαν, Cum ipsi per suffragia creassent per singulas ecclesias Presbyteros. _The learned Dr. Owen, in his True Nature of a Gospel-church_, &c. _Page 68-71. proves that the word_ χειροτονεω, _in several Greek writers, is used to signify the choice of a person to office by suffrage, or vote, which was done by lifting up the hand. And he observes, that all our old English translations render the words, in this text, ordaining or creating elders by the suffrage of the disciples. And he farther observes, that the word is but once more used in the New Testament_, viz. _in 2 Cor._ viii. _19. where it is rendered, he was chosen_, &c. _See more to this purpose in the place but now mentioned._

Footnote 304:

Χειροτονεω signifies, to hold out the hand. It is compounded of Χειρ, the hand, and Τεινω, to extend. The action, holding out the hand, is expressive of choice and resolution. It marks a _decision of the will_, whether intimated or executed.

The word προχειροτονεω, is used to signify divine appointment. Acts x. 41. χειροτονεω, Human choice, however expressed. 2 Cor. viii. 19. And 3dly, it signifies to elect to office, by holding up the right hand. “At Athens, some of the magistrates were called Χειροτονητοι, because they were elected by the people in this manner.” Parkhurst.

The _right of choosing_ spiritual rulers, is in the christian people; the _power of ordination_, in those who are already ordained. Χειροτονησαντες, Acts xiv. 23, embraces election and consequent ordination of elders in the church.

The hand is the instrument of power. Χειρ is used in scripture for ministerial action. Acts xiv. 3. Luke iv. 11.

Hence, imposition of hands is a communication of power. This significant action was known to the patriarchs. Gen. xlviii. 14.

The presbyters of the synagogue were ordained by the laying on of hands. In its scriptural usage, this action is universally expressive of some communication from him who lays on the hand, to him upon whom it is laid. In any other sense, it is a common, and not a religious action.

1. It is a mean of communicating bodily vigour. Mark vi. 5.

2. It is a communication of special blessing. Gen. xlviii. 14. Mark x. 16.

3. It is a mean of imparting the power of miracles—the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Acts viii. 17.

4. And it is a communication of ministerial authority. Numb. xxvii. 18. 23. Deut. xxxiv. 9. 1 Tim. v. 22. Physical strength, special blessing, miraculous power, and moral authority, have, according to divine appointment, been communicated by the laying on of hands. These things have also been otherwise communicated. God selects means adequate to the end.

All the communications mentioned in scripture as made by the imposition of hands, are of an extraordinary kind, except one—that of authority. This is alone capable of being regulated by ordinary agency.

M’LEOD’S ECCL. CAT.

Footnote 305:

_See the True Nature of a Gospel church, Page 78-83. where it appears, from Ignatius, Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian, that this was practised in the three first centuries; and from Blondel’s Apology, which he refers to, that it was continued in some following ages._

Footnote 306:

_Vid. Aug. de Bapt. contr. Donat. Lib. III. cap. 6. Quid est aliud manus impositio quam oratio super hominem?_

Footnote 307:

_Vid. Greg. Naz. Epist. 42. ad Procop._

Footnote 308:

_Near the latter end of the second century, Pantænus was a celebrated catechist, in the school supported by the church at Alexandria; and Clemens Alexandrinus was his first scholar, and afterwards succeeded him in the work of a teacher; and Origen was Clement’s scholar, and was afterwards employed in the same work in that school. And, in the fourth century, Athanasius, who strenuously defended the faith, in the council of Nice, against Arius, had his education in the same school; and Didymus, who flourished about the middle of that century, was a catechist therein, and Jerom and Ruffinus were his scholars._

Footnote 309:

_So the vulgar Latin translation renders the word_ Κατηκουντι, Ei qui se catechizat.

Footnote 310:

_Vid. Hieron. in Ephes. iv. 11. Non ait alios pastores, and alios magistros; sed alios pastores, et Magistros, ut qui pastor est, esse debeat & magister; nec in ecclesiis pastoris sibi nomen assumere, nisi posset docere quos pascit. & Aug. epist. 59. pastores & doctores eosdem puto esse, ut non alios pastores alios doctores intelligamus, sed ideo cum prædixisset pastores subjunxisse doctores ut intelligerent pastores ad officium suum pertinere doctrinam._

Footnote 311:

_The particle_ και _seems to be exegetical, and ought to be rendered_ even. _See the note in Vol. I, page 318. The words are_, εδωκε τους ποιμηνας και διδασκαλους.

Footnote 312:

_Vid. Tertull. de bapt. baptizandi habet jus episcopus, doctrinæ presbyteri & diaconi._

Footnote 313:

CHRIST has not lodged church-power in the hands of _diocesan bishops_, that bear rule over preaching presbyters. (1.) The scriptures expressly forbid all _lordly_ dominion in the church, 3 John 9. 1 Pet. v. 3. Luke xxii. 25, 26. Matt. xx. 25, 26. Not _tyrannical_, but _lordly_ dominion, however mild, is here prohibited. The Greek word expressing it is used by the SEVENTY in Gen. i. 28. Psalm lxxii. 8. cx. 2. to express dominion, which none dare pretend to be _tyrannical_.—How absurd to imagine, that the mother of James and John asked a _tyrannical_ power for her sons from Christ! Or that he, who acknowledged Cæsar’s authority, Matt. xxii. 21. would represent all heathen rulers as _tyrants!_ (2.) Bishops and Presbyters are represented as the very same officers in scripture. Several _bishops_ or _overseers_ were at Ephesus, all of whom are called _elders_ or _presbyters_, Acts xx. 17, 28. Several bishops governed the church in Philippi, no great city, having no inferior officers but deacons, Phil. i. 1. 1 Tim. iii. 3. The reason why _elders_ or _presbyters_ must be of good report is, that _bishops_ must be blameless; which marks them the same, Tit. i. 5, 6. Elders must feed God’s flock EPISCOPOUNTES, _acting the part of bishops over them_, 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. Judas had a _bishopric_, Acts i. 20. Peter and John, not inferior apostles, were _presbyters_, 1 Pet. v. 1. 2 John i. (3.) The power of _ordaining pastors_, which diocesans claim for their distinguishing prerogative, is, by the scripture, placed in no standing church-officer, but in the presbytery, or _meeting of elders_. Nay, where elders were ordained, even the apostles did not by themselves ordain pastors, but concurred as members of the presbytery, 2 Tim. i. 6. 1 Tim. iv. 14.

To anticipate objections, it must be observed, (1.) That the TWELVE and the SEVENTY disciples whom Christ, before his death, appointed to preach the gospel, had all of them _equal_ power and authority, and but a _temporary_ commission, Matt. x. Luke x. 1-21. (2.) The apostleship for life bestowed on several after his resurrection, was an extraordinary office, in which they had no successors. (3.) That neither Timothy nor Titus were fixed diocesans, but _itinerant_ evangelists, who either travelled with the apostles, or were sent by them to supply their place, 1 Thess. i. 1. 2 Thess. i. 1. Rom. xvi. 21. Heb. xiii. 23. Col. i. 1. Phil. ii. 19. 2 Cor. i. 1. 1 Cor. iv. 17. xvi. 10. 2 Cor. i. 19. iii. 2. 1 Tim. i. 3. 2 Tim. iv. 9, 10. 12. Gal. ii. 3. 2 Cor. ii. 13. vii. 6, 7. viii. 16, 23. xii. 18. Tit. iii. 12. (4.) That the _angels_ of the Asian churches were not diocesan bishops, but their pastors in general: and hence one angel is sometimes addressed as _several_ persons, Rev. ii. 10, 24. (5.) That for the first three hundred years of the Christian church, such as moderated in their courts, or were more aged, or had more noted congregations, were often called _bishops_: and, in the last case, had other ordained preachers to assist them, and to officiate in case of their imprisonment or death. But we have no decisive proof of any diocesan lords. Nor do any, except the principal pastors of Rome, seem to have struggled hard for such a pre-eminence. (6.) That no Protestant church, except in England and Ireland, is governed by diocesan bishops, properly so called, though indeed the almost nominal ones of Sweden and Denmark would gladly be such. (7.) That almost all the noted primitive doctors of the Christian church grant that diocesan Episcopacy has no foundation in scripture. (8.) Scarcely one argument hath ever been produced for the support of diocesan Episcopacy, but hath been effectually overturned by some other learned prelatist; nor indeed can they combat the Popish government without destroying their own. (9.) Diocesan bishops, as such, have never been any honour to the church, or centre of unity: but have often been introducers and supporters of Popish abominations.

IF Christ has not lodged church-power in the _community of the faithful_, or in _magistrates_, or in _diocesan bishops_, he must have placed it in _officers of his own appointment_, Matt. xvi. 19. xviii. 18-20. 2 Cor. x. 8. Heb. xiii. 7, 17. 1 Tim. v. 17. 1 Thess. v. 12.—Some of these were EXTRAORDINARY, appointed for the first erection of the gospel-church. (1.) APOSTLES, who had an immediate commission from Christ equally extended to all nations, as occasions offered,—were privileged with an infallibility in their doctrine;—had a constant power of working miracles as directed by God, and of speaking languages which they had never learned;—had power to confer the miraculous influences of the Holy Ghost on others, and of sending forth evangelists, or by themselves ordaining presbyters and deacons, Mark xvi. 15-20. Acts i.-xxi. (2.) EVANGELISTS, who assisted the apostles in planting or watering churches, and, by their direction, ordained presbyters and deacons, and erected judicatories in infant churches. (3.) PROPHETS, who explained dark passages of scripture, and sometimes foretold future events, 1 Cor. xiv. 29-32. Acts xi. 28. xxi. 10, 11.

Others of these officers were ORDINARY, which are divided into BISHOPS, OVERSEERS or ELDERS, and DEACONS. Bishops or elders are subdivided into _pastors_, or _elders that labour in word and doctrine_, and _elders_ that only _rule well_. Their name BISHOP or OVERSEER marks their authority over and inspection of others. PRESBYTER or ELDER denotes their gravity, prudence, and experience, and their being but subordinate rulers under Christ to declare and execute his laws. Thus we have three distinct kinds of church-officers, PASTORS, RULING ELDERS, and DEACONS. The office of the first includes the power of the two latter; and that of the second the power of the last, but not the distinguishing power of the first; and the office of deacons includes no power peculiar to either of the two preceding offices.

I. The _pastoral office_ is a spiritual relation to the Christian church, empowering men to preach the gospel, dispense the sacraments, and concur in acts of governing church-members. Its divine institution is evident. (1.) God furnishes and appoints _pastors_, _teachers_, _bishops_ or _overseers_, in the church, 1 Cor. xii. 28. Eph. iv. 11. Acts xx. 28. Rom. xii. 6-8. (2.) The qualifications of such officers are _divinely_ prescribed, 1 Tim. iii. 1-8. v. 21, 22. Tit. i. 5-9. (3.) Such characters are, by the Holy Ghost, ascribed to them, as import authority and call to their word, as _pastors_, _teachers_, _rulers_, _stewards_, _preachers_, _heralds_, _ambassadors_, _bishops_, Eph. iv. 11. 1 Cor. xii. 28. 1 Tim. v. 17. 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2. Luke xii. 42. Rom. x. 15. 2 Cor. v. 19, 20. Acts xx. 28. 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. Rev. i. 20. 1 Thess. v. 12. Col. i. 7. Eph. vi. 21. Matt. ix. 38. (4.) The manner of their entrance on their office, by the call of the church and ordination of the presbytery, is divinely prescribed, Acts i. 15-26. xiv. 23. 1 Tim. iv. 14. (5.) The work which belongs to this office is divinely prescribed, 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. 1 Tim. iv. 14-16. Acts vi. 2, 4. 2 Tim. iv. 2. ii. 25, 26. 2 Cor. xii. 15. 1 Cor. 9, 16, 17. Ezek. xxxiv. 2, 4. Heb. xiii. 17. Acts xxvi. 17, 18. Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. 1 Cor. xi. 23-26. 2 Tim. ii. 2. Cor. v. 4, 13. Tit. iii. 10. 2 Cor. ii. 6, 7. (6.) People’s behaviour towards ministers is prescribed by God, 1 Thess. v. 12, 13. 1 Tim. v. 17. Heb. xiii. 7, 17. Gal. vi. 6. 1 Cor. ix. 7-19. 2 Thess. iii. 1. (7.) God has promised them encouragement in, and a reward of their work, 2 Cor. iii. 3, 5. 6. Rev. ii. 1. Matt. xxviii. 20. xvi. 19. John xx. 23. Matt. x. 40-42. Luke x. 16. John xiii. 20. 2 Tim. iv. 7, 8.