^^.'^^ #. Xj / vi^ ^LxJ^O:. s:;^ ^ 5^=^ 5:^ ,i^ ^^^.-^^^^ OF THK PRINCKTON, N. J. 8 x\ M U E I. A a N E W , (ly P H t L A l> K L P H I i , PA. Q4i>. ??aroad,'' (o neither do I cenfure them. It is not 1, but you. Sir, who charge them with irregularity, by confe^ing that they are different from that inftituted by Chrift •, for in no fenfe do I attribute irregulari- ty to any churches, but to thofe which zrc drfferenf from the Apoftolic, that is, the Church of Chrift's immediate jnllitutipn. You would have us believe that the reformed ffhurches in Germany, Holland, Sv/itzerland, Po- land, Hungary, Denmark, France and Scotland, are all Presbyterian •,— and roundly afTert that they ■ ' have none but Presbyterian Qrdipation amongft ^^ them."— ^eal without knowledge. Sir, in this inftance and a great many more, has carried you out of the preeinds of truth. -rrrExcufe me, when I aflc, are not the reformed churches of Poland, Hun- gary, and Denmark (I add Sweden) all Epifcopal ? -—Thofe of Germany, fome Epifcopal, and others not ?— Are not the Bohemians, and Moravians Epifcopalians ? — are not the Waldenfes, the re- mains of the ancient Gallic Churches Epifcopal ? and 15 not one third of the people of North Britain Epif- copal ? — On this eftimate. Sir, *' almoft all the il- Juftrious churches abroad" are againft you. As to the Prefbyterian churches in Holland, Germany, Switzerland, France, Scotland and America — hea- Ven is large cnougl; to cor*tain both them and the ( 7 ) Infinite number of Epifcopalians^ fcattered over ihz ■whole face of the earth, and we ought not to "fail out by the way thither." But yoii fay^ I " Candidly deprive tKem of all ** claim whatever to the promife, lo ! I am with you ** always unto the end of the world. "-^I afk on what ground do you fay fo ? — Becaufe fay you, " thefe ** have none but Presbyterian Ordination among r them." I faid— p. id. " it werejuft as eafy for one man ** or any number of men to create a new world, as "" toinftitutea new Church different from thatinfti- ** tuted by Chrift ; for none but that can juftly ** claim the privilege of the promife, I am wick ** you atways,' even unto the end of the world." Observe Sir,-^what method you have taken to J)rove that thefe churches are different from that in- ftituted by chrift j — and whatever fi(5litious depriva- tion enfues, it is th€ work of your own immaculate. Candor. i SAY — A church different from tha^ inftituted b^r! Chrift has no juft claim to the privile2;e of the promife, Lo 1 1 am with you, &c. But every church conformable thereto, has a juft claim to that promife. You SAY — That I candidly deprive alrtioft all the illuftrious proteftant churches abroad, &c. of aU claim whatever to the promife, Lo 1 1 am vvithi- you, &c. I REPLY — In faying fo, you virtually confef^ that they are really different from that inftituted by Chrift. Out of thine own mouth 1 condemn thee I The Church is the family of Chrift— he is her King — he is her Prophet aad her Prieft, He ( 8 ) hath given to her an outward form, and an invlfiblc and fpintual grace. No change of time can alt^r her ejiternal confti;ution, nor her internal habit of jxiind. The fame forrn of government, the fame ** forn^ of found words" are efKintial to her in every age and naition •, for God hath not left it optional to chdofe what form of Church government, or what form of dodrine, people may think proper. As the word of God abideth for ever— and that word is written " that the man of God may *' be fully furnifhed to every good word and " work" — -To the Church muft continue the fame for ever, in order to enjoy the blcflings of an cnchangable Gofpei. The Church then mull be, infomefenfe, like her divine author, *' th6 fame ** yei^erday, to day and for ev'er.'* And you v/ifely aflc— " If Chrift has inftitutedi •' a Church, where are we to look for an account of '* it, but in the Scriptures of the new New Teifta- ** ment? Where fhall we find an authority for the. " obfervanceof any rules or orders refpedlirtg it, if " we do not find them there ?'* Bishop Sanderfon* fays—" The main article of " the Chriftian Religion is, — the holy Scriptures " are a perfed ruic of faith and manners ; fo the *' very myiiery of Furitanifm is,— That no man '*'* may with a fafe confcience do any thing for which " there may not be produced either command or <* exami^Ie in fcripture."— We do find. Sir, in the holy Scriptures the Church of Chriftfufliciently de- lineated, — her doilrines recorded, and her govern- rnent dirtinillv fet forth for our example. Chrift is txprefsly denominated " the Bishop of our fouls j" which drcuhiftancefeemsftrongly to corroborate the * Preface to his Sermons. [ 9 } fa<5l, that the Government of the church from the very beginning was Epifcopal. The gbverntnfentof theChurch^-ahd the Church itfelf, are two diftinft things, and though we find the Church, as I faid above, fufficiently delineated in the New Teftament j it was by no meahs neceflary, that every part of her policy and government fliould be circumftantiated there alfo. It was neceffary that dodtrines (hould be committed to writing by the facred hiilorians ; but difcipline, in all it's branches^ needed no fuch records } for, being a matter of fen- fible perception, and open to the obfervation and knowledge of every chriftian, it could notpoflibly, be a controverted problem — whether there were, one, two, or three Orders in the Miniftry, whether equal or fubordinate, and whether of divine or hu- man eftabliHiment. Thefe things. Sir, came fully under the cognizance of people's hearing and feeing, and are not to be invalidated or fubftantiated by reafonings and inferences, but by the records of innumerable fees, and the authentic documents of the church univerfal. If you defire to read more upon this head I would recommend for your peru- fal, Biihop Potter on the government of the thurch. St. John fays, — *" There are alfo many othet ** things which Jefus did, the which, if they Ihould '* be written every one, I fuppofe that even the " w(>rld itfelf could not contain the books that *• fhould be written." It is no matter of wonder then, though feveral obfervanccs prevailed among the apofiles and their fuccefTors, for which we find no rule given by our Lord in any of the Gofpels, nor recorded by the Apoftles as having been givei) ■ I II I* *Chap. ax, v.2$. E >o 1 by him. Thus — There is no command in thi New Teftament for the obfervation of the chriftian Sabbith ; — and yet thatobfervance is indirpenfiblf ncceflary to the well-being,- nay even to the verf cxiftenceof the church. There is no comlri lad in the New Tertament to baptize infants •,-— and yet the univerfal church 'till the 14th century did uni- formly confider infants as fubjeds of that facrament. ■ — Neither is there any command to adminifiier ths holy Communion to women i-^and pray^ what clergyman would prefume to forbid that more pious part of our fpecies, the bread of life and the cup of* blefTmg ? Even the very canon of fcripture is not determined by its own internal evidence, for there is no facred hiftorian either of the legal or evangeli- cal difpenfation, who has enumerated the divinely infpired books. And this fame canon was authen- ticated and pronounced, " the unerring rule of faith " and manners" by a council of Bi/liops, long before the commencementof Prefbyterianifm. And it is certain that, had the compilers of the canon of Scripture confidered the holy volumes as advocates for parity in church government, they would have renounced all prelaticai fuperiority : but they conti- nued Bifhops all their days, and recommended the holy fcriptures to their fuccelfors, as the words of -(g||rnal life, and the charter of Epifcopal govern-' rnent in the church of Chnrt. A convincing proof that thofe men believed the {i:riptures to be Epifco- pal ; — and who more capable of determining the queftion, whether they contain Epifcopacy or Pref- byterianifm, than the compilers of the facred canon ? — Give me leave Sir — to fum up what more I might fay on this head, in the words of Archbifiiop Laud, (in his preface againft the Jefuit) " Whilft ** one fadion cries up the Church againft the fcrip- ** ture, and the other the fcripture to the negle<5l of *l the Church ; According to Chrift's inftitution,- [ " ] ** the fcripture' where it is p]ain fhould guide th<; " church, and the church, where there is doubt, 5* fhould expound the fcripture." Before you had lifted up your heavy hand, wantonly to fmite Patriarchs, Fathers, Pontiffs and Priefts, on the face, you ought to have ftudied what Solomon faith. — " He that wafteth his Fa- " thcr,' and chafeth away his mother, is a fon that *' caufeth rtiamc, and bringeth reproach."* " The " eye that* mockcth at his Father, and defpiftth to f^ obey his mother, the ravens of the valley fhall " pick it out, and the wild eagles fliall eat it." — I mention not thefe fayings of Solomon propheticallyp but as mementos to you in future. Confider, Sir, antiquity is venerable, and it is no fign of wildon^ to " dclpife one's mother, when ihe is ojd, or '* to laugh her to fcorn when fhe is grey headed." your pouring contempt upon Patriarchs, Fathers, Pontiffs, and Prieiis, is no great proof either of your good fenfe or immaculate candor •, — nor i$ your attempt to trample upon Altars, Veftments, Governm.ents and Rituals, fufficient to perfuade the world that you are a good chriftian or a peaceable member of fociecy. | But, Sir— have you no Patriarchs, no Fathers ? are you ecclefiaftically felf-begotten — or felf-crea- ted ? — Or are you a Paflor of a church who have taken that honor to yourfelf, without being fent of God ?— Have you no ancient ecckfiaftical progen- itors ? Whether you eftcem fucceflion necefiary ornot you favor us with Hpifcopal names from whom you ^ould have us believe that you are ecclefiaftically *Proverb8 19. v. 26. and cb. 30. v. 17. [ 12 ] defccnded : but could you raife thofe rt\en from th« qead to atteft the legitimacy of your claims ; cer- tain I am, that they would give you the fame reply that * Samuel made to Saul in the houfe of the witch of Endor, '* Why haft thou difquieted us to bring Its up ?" But if I miftakc not, Sir, your fyftem has fome Karnes, of whom I can fee no difficulty in granting the minifters of your order to be the defcendent^, "Thefe are Luther, Calvin, Melancthpn, Bucer, Bugenhagius and Knox^ — fathers only of yefterday. «— And it may not be improper to remark that yon have abundance of pricfts too. Pontiffs and Priefts are the fame thing ; and that your clergy arc priefts (efpficially in this ftate) is inconteftibly evi- dent, for the people call them Priefts, and therefore they muft be priejis, becaufc, according to your creed ^' vox populi f eft vox Dei." Your places pf public worfhip, within thefe few years have ob- tained the appellation of churches ♦,. and every grammar-fchoolboy knows that the latin word for Church is Tempkm, fo that you may call your placea of public worlhip Temples or Churches as yoi; pleafe ; — the former being a latin, and the other a greek name for one and the fame thing. Of altars, I believe your fyftem is entirely deftitute ; but were you a lineal defcendent of that Church of which St. Paul was anApoftle, ye would have altars—fop he exprefsly fays, " Jwe have an altar." Veftments are daily growing more faftiionabie among your cler- gy, for the tranfition from the academic to the eccle- fiaftic gown is eafy and natural. As to govern- ^i(yits i — all the anti-epifcopal Churches profefe t(| * I Sam. c. a8. v. 15. i The people'^ voice ij^ the voic^ of Go4c ■4: HEB. C. 13. V. 10. [ >3 3 Ijave fome fortof government or arfother; — for what fflfe are their Directories or Platforms ? — Nay far- ther, upon the comniencement of Podtor Seabury*8 Epifcopatc oyer the Diocefe of the ftate of Connec- ticut your mjnifters have adually aflumed the title of Bifhops. In thefe refpecfts Prefbyterianifni is jr.ore like to Epifcopacy, than you car.e to acknow- ledge. Because we reverence men who have been the lights of the world, in their feverai generations, and pay refpe4 ] always had a place in the Romifli offices of religion," 1 do not perceive that the E.ble and Lords prayer are onewhit the worfe for havirrr been fo long ufed in the church of Rome ; and whatever ill ufe peo- ple may put them to, (and the Devil you know once quoted fcripture) it is clear they will remain the fame word of God for ever. And if if ths is the cafe with regard to the Bible, why fhould it be other- wife with refped.to Epifcopacy ? Your 6th page contains a long quotation front brother Robinfon, of whofe acrimony, and diflike to a '* regular fucceflion'* and " the Hierarchy"* 1 fhall take no further notice at prefent, than to compliment him with the honorable appellation of True SON oftheSoLEMN* League and Covenant ! I will therefore haften to take a view of the Spirit, which makes fo a confpicuous a figure on the top and bottom of your 6th and 7th pages. That wc may know fomething of this wonder- ful apparition, you very condefcendingly inform us, that' " this|l fpirit was by no means peculiar to t.hat-j- ^* age V it has rolled along from Prieft, to Prieft •* thro' fucceeding generations : it went from Rome *' to England, glanced at Scotlond, and at length it ♦* came to America." Wonderful ! moft wonder- ful ! This difcovery is worth it's weight in gold ' it is a valuable acknowledgment — a precious truth • Set. 11. •' That we fHall in like manner, without ♦' refpe£l of perfon, endeavour the extirpation of Poperj, ♦ * Prelacy, that is church -goveinoient by Archbiftiops, *' Bifli.'p5, thfcir Chaneelkrs, and Con-< miff? ries, Deans, ''* Deans and Chapters, ArcuJeacons, and all other Ec« ** clcfiallical officers depending on that Hierarchy." [j Or the Hierarchy, •}■ Apostolic, or any fubfequcnt age you plcafc* t >5 3 tlhwittingly uttered by an avowed adverfary. Thus fealaam blefled the Jcwifli church, when he meant to curfe them. Remove Sir, the lubberly appear- ance yoii have given this fpirit, by making it rt///, for fpirit s flee, they are never known to roll^ efpeci- aily when making tranfmarine journeys : — corre<5t likewifc your error, in faying " it went from Rome to England," for Auguftinefays it was an inhabi- tant of Britain long before his arrival. — I fay, re- move that abfurdity, and corredl this error, and you will then have exhibited a tolerable good re- prefentation of that uninterrupted fucctffion in the Priefthood, of which fou and I think ^ very liitTcr- emly» Our firft New England planters (I had almoft faid Patriarchs) difcovered this fpirit of Epifcopacy, upon it's firft arrival in North America, in the perfons of two men whom, Aug. Sth, 1629, ^^' vernor ■*Bradford cited before him for " gathering ** a feparate company and reading common prayer*' and condemned to be fent home by the firft ihip bound for England. Notwithstanding the zealous efforts of thefe good puritans to keep Epifcopacy out of the coun- try — it found it's way back again, and fettled in this VVeftern world ; and however it may be mifre- prelented and fpoken evil of by fome people, ic prays H" tor unity, peace, and concord to all." « The JKings's Daughter" {the church) faith the Pfalmift " is all glorious within-, her clothing is " of wrought gold:" — but faith Mr. Blatchford — ** We have fcen it all monftrous as it is, in our own * See Prince's New-England Cronology, p. 191, 11 Church litan/. % Ps. 45. v. 13. [ «6 1 «* days." — Ism at a lofs to know, whether you meant monftrous ugly or fmcnjirous hauiiful.^-Until you give me further information, I will fuppofc that you meant monftrous ug!y.~^If (o^ whether am I to believe thefvveet linger of Ifrael, or yourfelf?' But ieit doubts (hould arife!, whether you had tsaliy fcen this mmfirous fpirit, as you call it^-^yoU cite me as an evidence, faying, p. 7,-^** for you, Sir^ *' have reprefented the government of the Churchy *' of Chritl to be a rediHed continuation of the " Jewifti." ♦ And I fay h fiill. The {iromifed Me^tiah, ^as fd be a light to lighten the Gentiles, as well as to ht the glory of the Jev/s ^-^with God there is no ref- pedt to perlcns. The Mefllah of the Jews is Mef- •iiah likewife pf the chriltians •,— for both Jews and C^riftians are members of his body, of his flefh and of his bones, and he is not afhamed to call them brethren. Born of the feed of Abraham^ circumci- fed the 8th day, Jefus bound himfelf over to fatisfy the demands of the law. Entering the rabinicai fchool at the age of 12 years, he engaged to ftudy the law and the prophets, and accordingly we read that *' he increafed in wifdom.**— Baptifed of John about his 30th year, he began to evange- • f Amongst the OfHcers of the Brltiih army ftatlon** ed at Newport (R. I.) during the American war, the T/ord monftrous had an Univerfal latitude ; about twice the meaning that we annex to the Word clever. With them it wao^-^monftrous goorl, monftrous bad; — mon- ftrous great, monftrous fmall ;— .-.monflrous ugly, mon- itrous beautiful, &c.— t-The great difference betweert monfcrous and clever is, that the one loves to aflbciate tvith all adjedives ; the other wages a perpetual war with, iand feems determined to expiingc every one of them from the' viva voce Anglo—AiriericRa language ' t '7 i lize, ahd to *reform the Jewilli church, which {rt many refptdts was greatly dcbaled and corrupted ) as one of her own prophets had faid concerning her, ** thy -f^filvcr is become drofs-^-^thy wine mixt with •' water.** In this condition the Jewifh church ftood much in need of being. re earth, in the Holy Eucharift."— And thus, the Tabern?.c!e^ the temple and the church fupply to fallen man the place of Eden with its numerous bleflings, until all fh?dl be reftored at the reiurrec^ tion of the jult. In convimaljpn cf the evidence already adduced to fhew that the chrifiian church is a rediified con- tinuation of the'' Jew'ifh," pleafe, Sir, to liften to the words of the great Apoftle of the Gentiles. ** *If the firft fruit be holy, the lump isaifo holy ; ** and if the root be holy, fo are the branches. *' An'd if (ome cF the branches be broken off, and *' tkou being a %vtld olive tree, were grafted in ** amongft them, find wim them paitakeft of the ** root and fntnefs of the olive tree •, hcajl noi, ** ag^Jnft the Iranches : for, if then boaft, thou ♦* beartji not the root •, but ihe root ihee.'* Having tbns fuily evinced the propriety of my calling *' the Chriflian church a rcAified continua- '* tionof the jciwlAi," and at the fame time, given *Rom. C;. XI. V, 16, J 7, 6c 18. [ 23 J a circumftantial proof of your unr.cquaintec'ners with the light, which the Old and New • TeftameiiC mutual ly re fled upon each OLhcr, and • upon the Unity of theXhurch of Chrlft from the bcghmir.g to the end off time •, I come now to rcm.irk your very odd ejacuiatiop, — " And we are ftill it feems ** under High Fricfts, Pricfts, and Levites !'* From the days of * Adam down to the incarna- tion, the church of God hath been in feme fenfe, continually under High FricBs, Frieih and Levites, and will continue under Bifnops, Priefts and Deacons *till Chrill's. fecond coming at the end of the world. Jefus being an unch.ingeable High Prieft, there mufi: of neccffity be Priefts and Leviies under him, {o long as his priefthood {ball con- tinue ; — and we know that his pnel^hood will con- tinue urJil he deliver up the mediatorial kingdom to his Fother : and therefore the priefthood muft and will continue among men 'till the day of judgment. In a note, you fay—'' The Dodior gravely in- ** forms us that Jehovah prcncunced the Deca- '* logue ; 1. e. the ten command ments from the " midft of the burning, but unconfumed bulh on ♦• Mount Sinai !" * Biiliop Horn's fermon on Gen. c. h. v. 8. — " The *• true God hunfelf who iuftituted in ParacUie a facred •* garden or gvove ; ordained Aua.m to be the High *' Priest of it, and confecrated in it uvo trees for a pub-. ** lie teflimony of religion." t Heb. c. vii. v. 24. Aparr.bnton, non, tranfuoriam vel perpetuum, i. e. not tran/hcry — perpetual^ nevcc ending •, and therefore aparabatcn ichtri tea ievuiuaen, maybe render he hath " a perpetual prieP.htoJ ;" than. is ■}. priefthood which palTeth not fr&m hiai to an/ otliec pcrfcn. Tbe leyiricaf prieftUo.oJ htwl palled from'Aaron to Jefus and was now bccoa^ei thje . CaiiUUn Pyieft, hpotj. t H 1 1 Will not fay what ideas this piece of infofmdtio/i brought upon the broad theatre of your undcrftand- ing ; but I know this is no nelxf dodtrine among Epifeopalians. WiiEtt Moies kept the flock of Jcthro hii father-in-law, " the angel of the Lord appeared ta «* him in a * flame of fire out of the midft of A " bu(hi and he looked, and behold, the bufh buriied •* with fire and the bulh was not confumed."^-Td give the law^ the fame divine perfon " came down •' upon Mount f Sinai, on the top of the Mount.- *' And Mount Sinai was altogether on a fmokc^ •< becaufe the Lord defcendcd upon it in fire/* A Jewifh writer fays " this rtiountain is called " Sene, which in Abrabic is a thorn bufti." If then this mountain derives its name from a bufli of thorns growing on its top, and Jehovah's firfl: mani- fcftation to Mofes was in the midft of this burning but uKcon/uniedbuih :— may it not thenCe be inferred, without any imputation of ignoraficc^ that God fpake the decalogue underafimilarmanifeftation,efpecially as fcripture fays nothing to the contrary ? But, Sir, if you can prove that atgiving the Iaw,the cloud was not in conta(5l with Mount bmai, and confequently did not envellope the bufti $ I engage to fl:and cor- reded by your fup^rior biblical knowledge. 'Til! fiach time as you do this, I muft infift upon faying what I have faid— '*' that Jehovah gave the deca- ff lOgue from the burning but unconfumed bufh." If this really was the cafe, (arid I can lee (10 rea^ fon at prefent for thinking it was otherwife,) and if the angel of the covenant in the form of God gave * Exod. c. iii. v. a. — Exod. c. xix. v. i8, % I Cor. C. XT. Vr H» t 25 1 the law, 0n Sinai's fpiry top, " out of the midl^ of a «' burning but unconfumed bu(h" o? thorns •,— and the fame perfon aftersvards in the form of maV, ielevated on a crofs on Mount Calvary, furrcunded With darknefs, and crowned with thorns, died to at- tone for the violation of thofe laws'—himfelf being ,both legiflator and redeemer — what reafon have \vc to admire the wonderful CEConomy of our redemp- tion, and to meditfite frequently on the words of ths jp rophet,—" In all our afflidions he was affliaeda " and the angel of his preferiCe faved us !'* Your next quarrel with me is about a hcbrew root. " In order (you fav) to make a Chriii^aa *' biOiop *.rvnoJiimous with a Jewilh High Prieft, *' you tell us, that in the Engiiih Bible'we read ** High Prieft, but in the Greek, (and the fame iii •' the Hebrew Bible) it is Bilhop.'' I «5oNTEND n(it. Sir, for the rendition of m word in queftioni by the word High Prieft j—buS I fay, that the words feoDOL Cohen comprehend in them the idea of the word Pekudath, and confe- quently that every High Prieft is a Biiliop. Cohei* is a name common to every facerdotal (^'ctr, — and denotes Aaron himfelf, as well as any of his fons ; but none of the inferior prieftsare ever denominated GoDoL Cohen, megas iereus or Arcbiercus, Hi^i\ or Great Prieft. This title belonged exclufnelv to the Mipeked, Eptfcopos^ Bilhop, over ai! the reft, and therefore the words High Prieft and Bifhop ar« precifely fynonimous. We fh.all afcertain this * Qnod Aaron et Filii fju3, atoue Levir^ in Tern- plo fuerunt j hoc fibi Epifcopi, Fre~bvtcri et Diaconi Vindicent in Ecclefi=e Hieron. Ep. ad Evagr I. e. What Aaron, his fonSf and the leviteti were in ihfe Temple ; that, bllhops, priefls and deacons arc ip ibc t^bufch. [ 26 ] point with farther precifion, if we attehd to the radical meaning of the words in difpute. The word COHEN denotes the excellency, or facrednefs of the office conneded with the idea of its pontifical veftments of glory and beauty 5— and is not fo much a name oi office as oi facrednefs and dignity. But the word MEPLKED, and all the derivatives of plked^ rendered Epifcopos^ Epiftates^ Prcjlates, Archon. Toparchcs, KosmarcheSy denote the aftive exercife of the office lb denominated, whether it be a prefidencjr in church or ftate. Cohen is rendered iereu^, facerdos, priefts, from ieros, facer, facred -, fo, godol COHEN, in the feptuagint iereus meg as, and in the New Teftamcnt arghiereus, magnus facerdos, or great confecrated perfon ;-— and denote only the faa'cdnefs of the chief eccicfiaftic among the jews f whereas Episcopus the greek ecclefiaftic word for Peked is purely of an official and active nature i— *• an * o'/erfecr^ fuperior^ prelate, or bijhop 'o rule and direct all per fins and things under his immediatfi cognizance or Epifcopate. You acknowledge that the wordfpEKUDAtH uni- formly implies fuperiority, and that the feptuagint has rendered it tpiscopor, and our Englifh tranf- Jators overseers. But this is not always the cafe. There is one inftan'»:e at leaft in which oiir tranfla- tors have rendered one of the flexions of that word by Bilhoprick. The 9th verfe of the 109th Pfalm Is quoted (Ads i. v. 20) by St. Peter, who renders * PEKUDATH re£le fignificat grzeci epifcopein, alibi cpifcopcn ; quoque vifitatio (vel funftio, prsefe6lura, immeratio, recordatio) cuftodicntium. Pooli Syn. in verbum. t I did not infinnate that the words godol cbiiEif were to be found in the text referred to, for I had in my eye not the facrednefs, hat the execution of the office, — aal that ide« is full/ exprefied in the text I quoted. E ^7 ] the word pekudathu by episcopen, the word uftd by the Septuagint, — and our Englifh tranflaters have rendered it by the word Bifhpprick-r-" his, *.' Bifhoprick let another take.'* From all which I infer that as every godol COHEN was a peked ; that is every High Prieft was a Bilhop over the Hebrew Church ; — it is neither contrary to truth nor gramnjar, tp fay that they are virtually the fame. But ** would it not look a little aukward (you *' fay) to make Eleazar a Bi(bop for oil for the " light, and of the incenfe, and of the vefiels o^' " the fandtuary ?" By no means (I reply) no man can appear auxward in doing the duties of his office unlefs he does them in an aukward manner. If ic was a part of Eleazar's office, to fee that all things belonging to the Temple were kept in proper order^ as v.e are informed it was -, inftead of appearing aukward in attending to the rainutefi parts of his, office,— he deferved applaufe if he fuffered nothing to efcape his watchful eye. It was certainly as pro- per that Eleazar took cognizance of the lamps,, cenfers and other utenfils of the Sanduary, as that a Biffiop ffiould take care of the facred utenfils belong- ing to his own particular church or diocefe. And if, to preferve the temple from pollution, ot to ex- pedite any work about that facied edifice, certain levities had a fpecial appointment •, it ought to be remembered, that whatever fuperintendency or ovcrfight was committed to them, they were ac- countable to fome one who was tbcir fuperior or or Epifcopus. And Eleazar was their fuperior, for he is denominated *' chief over the * chief of the Levites." I can therefore fee no appearance of * Nmn. 0. iii, y. 33. r s8 3 aukwardnefs in Eleazar's efpifcopal juriYdri^io.rt comprehending every perfon and thing conneded ythh the Temple and its. various miniftrations. ^* For the honor of prelacy," you ask me^ " would ^* you noc rather let him remain what he has al- ** ways been confidered a fqperintendent or overfeer ** of the tabernacle and of the vefTels of the fane- *' tu^ry, &c. ?'^ Had your fentence been com- •pleated, and not left with an indefinite et castera to be filled up as the reader plqafed, my reply would have been given it\ a moment. But if you intended ^hat EIei2icr fhould be a fuperindendent or overfeer only of the things foecified, and have no overiight orfuperiofity over the other priefts, as being their proper High Priert:— I fhouM have objedlions tpiee him fo much degraded.— Why Sir, this is making a lay presbyterian deacon of him — a degradation, to which neither any of Eleazar's kindred or thg i'riends of Prelacy, will readily accede. After many fruitlefs attempts to perfuade us. Sir, that you are the dh/ine, and that wifdom fhaJl die with you : you next proceed to infornfi us of the great impropriety of calling m'tnijlers under the gof- pel difpenfation^ by the cppellation oi priejls, Jesus Chrifl is the great minifter of the gofpel difpenfntion -, and his prieflhood abidcth for ever : ^' he livctb for ever to make interceflion for us." IntercelTion then is the chara6terifl:ic employment of the Chriiiian Priellhood. But you fay---*' thii f- charadc'i* {ihs priellly chara:t£r) had always a ** foecial reference to t^Q fliying and offering up ot '* facrjfi.ces, whicii was the proper and diftinguifh- f* ing buimefa of the Prielts under the law.** This truly was not the eai'e, for the unbloodv cblatiuqs wtiiwh they oiixied were tar more numerous t 29 ] thm thofc of a fanguinary kind. Every thing of- fered ^o God, whether liying creature, firit fruits, bread, wine and oil— acd ths calves of their lip? were denominated facrifice •, and we ought by no jneans to confine the rneaning of the word facrifice to fanguinary oflrerings. For, bcfjdes attending upon the various facrifices and fervice (Liturgy) of the Temple, the Priefts had a great many other duties to perform. They had the charge of * in- ftru6ting the people j deciding controverfies ; dif- tinguifhing the fcveral forts of f leprofy ; the caufes of divorce : the watersof Jjealoufy ; vowsj all caufes relating to the law -, uncieanneffes con- ^raftcd leveral ways. All thefe things were brought ^fore the prieft. '* For the Priejis lipsjbould keep. " knowledge^ and they jhould feck the law at hfs •' mouth : for he is the mejfenger of the Lord of hofls** The Priefts publickly || blefied the people in the pame of the Lord. In time of wat, their bufinefs was to carry the ^ Ark of the Covenant, to ** con- sult the Lord, to found the holy ff trumpets, and to pronounce thefe words at the head of the army^^ '* Jf Hear, O Ifracl, you are now going to B^ht with ?* "your enemies, but fear not, for the Lord is in the " midft of you -, he will figl^t for you, and defen4 *' you from all danger.-* Thus Sir, it appears that the Prieftly Office un- fier the Law was very cxtenJive in point of duty and influence •, and we are equally certain that as alj "^ Hof. c. iv. V. 6. Mai. c. ii. v. 7. t Levit. c. xiii. v. 14. X Numb. c. V. V. 14 & 15. I) Nnm. c. vi. v. 23. 24. 25. % Deut c. X. V. 8. ** Num. c. xxvii. v. ji. ft Numb. c. X. V. 8. 9. %X S^ Calmet on the word Prief?'. I 30 3 its facrificial miniftrations derived their merit--rfQ all its laccrdotal powers originated from their and our great High Prieli;, Chrilt Jelus. To him all the facrifices, ceremonies and fervices under the law dire£led the eye of faith, both ia prielt and people. And fincc he has once offered up himiclf withoyt fpot to God,— you infer that *^ there remaineth no farther occafion for any other *■ facrifices, and the office of Pnejis among men i^ ^no longer neceiTary»or to be confidered as a divim *' inllitution." Astonishing 1 what Sir, do you mearn toabol- iili all prayer, — and even the holy communion it- fclf, which is a facrific.e of praife and thankfgiving ^ Would you join with the devotees of German * illuminatifm, in extirpating the prieftood, and of courie cutting off chriltianity ! Take care, left you be found fighting againft God ! Does not fcripture fay, touch not mine anointed and do my prophets no harm ?---and wholoever delpifeth yac defpiieth w^-r-and he whu dcfpifeth me^ defpifeth himihsLt {cnzme ?---However mean and defpicable you may confider the Evangelical priefthood and facrifice j-'-thcy will never be the lels regarded by pious and devout people, who will always look up- on their clergy, as *' men who Cncvj unco them the " vyay of falvation ;*'-— and upon the holy com- munion as " a facrifice of praiie and ihankfgiving, •' flievving forth" their Rt deem^'r's " death until '* his fccond coming/' to glorify all *' his f faints *' who have made a covenant with him bv facri- « ficc.'* * See Robinfon's Proofs of " Confpiracy againft all. the Religions aikl Go^-eruments cf Europe." [ 31 3 Jesus, ybii acknowledge to be a High Prieft,-- ^ and that he made an oblation of himiclf to the Father. He facriftced hiailirlf in the ad of inlbtut- ing the Eucharift, and that he did fo is the fenle of the whole primitive church, Theodorire fays— " He (St. Paul) J reminded tliem of that holy '* facrcd night, in which Chrift put ahend to the •* typical palToverj and exhibited the archetype ** thereof, and opened the doors of the falutary ** myftcry.'* The archetype of the paffjver is, iii the apotllc's language, " Chrift our paffover facrt- •' ficed for us."--'^ On the fame table fays \\ St; *» Chrifoftom,'* there are bodi pafibvers, that of the TYPc, and that of the verity : as painters on the "fame table firft draw the lincs,and thencaft th6 " fhade and after that add to it the proper colours : " fo did Chrift ; he firll reprefcnted the typical *' pafTover, and then added the true one." To *' this purpofe the words of St. Gregory Nyflen are peculiarly remarkable.—" Chrift, f whofc *' oeconomy regulates all things according to his «* fovereign authority^ ftays not 'till he was under " a necefiity by being betrayed and 'till the Jcwa " had feizcd him by violence, or 'till Pilate had *' unjuftly condemned him, and fo their malice had *' proved the principal cccafion, and caufe of the " falvation of mankind ; but by his oeconomy hd ** prevents their feizure of him •, and by a method •* of facrifice, which was ineffable, and invifible to *'• men, he offered himfclf an oblation and vtflini ** for us •, being himfelt at the fame time both the " Prieft and the Lamb of God, who t;?kech away *' the fins of the world. When was this ? Wheji *' he made his own dodv eatable^ and his blood *' potable, to thofe who were with him. JFor this is % In prim.epifl. ad cor. cap. 9. p. 175, || De pruJitiop.e Judce. t Oratio de ReiUi^rea. Chrifti. f.ve Pafcha prima* [ la j ** manifeft to all, that the Lamb could not be eat- ** en by men, if the flaughter had not made way for ** the manducation of it. He therefore, that gavfe ** his body for food to his difcipleS, manifcftly de- « monllrates, that a facrifice was abfolutely made *< under the figure of the lamb; For the body of *' the facrifice had not been fit for manducation, " if it had been alive -, therefore when he gave his •' BODY to his difciples to be eaten, his body was ^* already facrificed ineffably, and invifibly, accord- *' ing to the will and pleafitreof him, who had the ** ceconomy of this myltery.** I MiOHY adduce innumerable authorities to th^ fame purpofe 5 kt thefe fuffice, to fhew that it wasi fat: judgment of the primitive church that Chrift facrificed himfelf inefl^ably and invifibly when he inftituted the Eucharift, or communion of his body and blood. Our bleflcd Redeemer not only offered up him* felf a facrifice and propitiation for us, but command- ed the apoftels, faying " this do in remembrance" (or for a memorial,) ^' of me." And thus -fEufe- bius writes, " Our Saviour Jefus, the Chrift of " God, does even to this prefent time celebrate •* facrifice among men, by his minifters after the ^* manner of Melchifedeck j for as he, being at «■* pricft of the Gentiles, no where appears to have *• ufcd corporeal facrifices ; but bJefied Abraham ** in bread and wine •, in the fame manner, firft our " Saviour and Lord, and afterward sal I prielis from " him, celebrating the fpiritual facrifice in bread ** and wine, do reprefent his body and blood in rf ^' myllcry.'* t Demonflr« Evdng. Lib. 5. c. L 33 J St. Cyprian fays—*" We celebrate the Rcfur- ** reflion of our Lord in the morning ; and becaufe *' in all our facrifices,we make a ccminernoradon o^ " his palTion (for the paflion of our Lord is the " facrifice which we oficr) we ought to do nothing *' but what he did. As often therefore, as wc offer " the cup in commemoration of our Lord, &c.'* And Iren.^us calls the Eucharifl", '* the f oblation of " the church, which our Lord directed us to offer " through the whole world, which is, accounted by ** God a pure famjicet and is acceptable to him." Ascending in the feries of evidence tp prove that priefts are in fome fenfe facrificers, and that the holy Euchariil: is a facrifice, — a reprefentaiive facrifice, jhcwing forth or exhibiting thrift's death, I next quote from St. Clement, who was intjmaceiv acquainted with the apoftles,' a fellow lahomer with theni, and an eminent and authentic witnefs of the. primitive Eucharift. /' VVe % ought (fays thaC " apofiolic man) to do all things in order, whatfc- '' ever our t.ord hath commanded us to obferve ; '' to celebrate the oblations and liturgies at the ap- " painted times, as he has commanded them to be " iiQTit\ not \n a vain diforderly manner ; but, at "^ rppointed times and feafcns. He himfeif has '-'■ determined where and by ic/jjw he would have '-'- tbevn celebrated, by his fovereign authority «, that " fo £..;! thinr;;3 being done in a holy and v/eiUpleaf- = ' ins manner, may be acceptable to his will. They <* ther-cfore, \rho offer their oblations at the ftated '-' tiiv.es are acceptable and bltfTed \ for following *^'' the infcimtcs of their Lord, they tranfgrefs not. ■' For there are proper liturgies deliverrd to the ^^ Cypr, . F-n, <- ' '■'i' , CceQil io. V Tien. hh. 4C. 24. ; Cl-ra .% , ad Cor. c :. 40. li [ S4 ] *' *HiCH I'RlEST -, and a proper place afiigncd fof " die -| PRIESTS •, and there are proper miniftra- *' tions incumbent on the J levites •, and the *' LAYMAN is under the obligation of fuch injunc- " tions as are incumbent on layman. Let every " one of you my brethren, celebrate the Eucharift *' to God in his proper ftation, with a good con- *' feience, with gravity, not tranfgrefling' the canon *' of his liturgy. Perpetual facrifices, vows, farri- " fices for fin, and trefpafs offerings, are not offered ** every where, my brethren, but at Jerufalem on- " ly ', and the oblation is made, not in every place ** there neither, but before the fandluafy, and at " the Altar." St. Paul taught th'^ |l Galatians that the holy Eucharitl was a facnfice reprelcnting ChriiVs body broken and his blood fh-;d, when hord liimfelf tho' he does not expref&ly fay that he defired to have an altar in his church, yet firongly implies as much, when lie fays, to his followers — . ," Jf thou bring thy gifc to the altar, &c." — this ccrtjinly' implies a material gift^ that might be left before the altar •, as well as a material altar^ before Avhich the g^Jt might be left. St. Paul fays ejipreff- Iv, we have an altar. And his fucceffors to the fame pufpofe — '' We bci.'ig-f- many are one body ; \^ this is the facrifice which the church often repeats' '* in the facrament of the altar.'* " The feafi: of ** our Lord is the unity of his body, not onlv in *' the facrament of the alfar, but in the bond of *' peace." Eufebius J fays—" That Chrift ere6t- •' ed alters and caufed- dedication of churches." — And again be fays, [j " There is an abfolute ne- *' cefTity that an altar of unbloody rational facrifice?, \\ according io the new n-iylleries of the new cove-' 1^' nant, beereded'thro' thb whole h:^bitablc world. •J- St. AuguPflnus Tom VII. De Civ. Dei L. lo. c. c. % Epift. acl Bojiifjciu-n. ■ • - ij De Vita Conllantini lib. 4. c 41. % Dwaualtr. Evaus^. lib. i. c. 6. [ S7 3 ff to the only Lord." St. Cyprian calis the LordvS " table, altar, ten times in his epiftles. Irenaeus " fays, the * apoftles of our Lord inherit neither *' lands nor houfes, but always attend God and the " altar.'* St. Ignatius four feveral times calls thti Lord's table the altar. — f" One Eucharift, one " fiefti of Chrift, one cup, one altar, one biftiop.' • And, he fays to the Magnefians, " run J to one *' tempie, one altar, one Jefus Chrift."—*' He that " is within the altar, 1) is clean" — by the altar, " meaning the altar-room or chancel. And again he fays, ^' He that is not within the ^ altar, or al- *' ter room is deprived of the bread of God." And St. Clement fays, as before quoted, that " facrifice *' is not to be offered every where, but at the al° " tar." It docs not appear that the Lord^s table was ever called a ial^ie fimply in the three firft centuries, ex- cept once, and that was by Dionyfius of Alexandria Xyftus of Rome, about the year 250, or 60. Fro\: all which it appears that altar is a very proper name for that facrcd piece of ecclcfiaftical furniture •, and evangelical priefts the proper offer- ers of the reprefentative facrifxCe inflituted by the great High Prieit: of our profeirion. You fay—'; The doftrine of the facrifice of the *' mafs, and of a real facrif.ce in the Eucharill, arQ " both now generally rejeded by proteftants." ' I AM equally oppofed to the dodrine of ■ ■ ' I ' < m • * Lib. 4. c. 20. f Ep. ad Philad. t Epif. ad Mag. c. 7. f) Ep. ad Tia]. c. 7. % Ei>if. ^d Eph. c. 5. [ 3^ ] tranfubflantlation, as to that of ccnrubftantiatloii e.ich of them being to me equally uninrei- Jigible. You may fay of the doflrine of the niafs what you pleafe j let fame romanili: defend it, but the real facrifice in the Euchariil-, as it ftands upon quite another ground, i"o 1 have never yet learned that it has been genrrally vcjeulcd by protef- tjnts. Indeed it is fo far orher wife, that almoft all the celebrated diviivzs of the church of England, from the reformation down to the pref^nt time, do sdually maintain that the Eucliarift is a repre{enta- tive Kicniice, fhewing forth Chrift's death, 'uil his fecoiid coming. One bifliop and one altar has been confidered as the diftinguilhing motto of the apoftolic chufch ever fince the days of St. Ignatius •, and if you really fuppofe that the altar and facrifice 1 contend for, are modern contrivances of the church of Rome, 1 mait take the liberty of faying, great is your mlf- take. The altar and lacrifice 1 contend for, and by God's help ever will defend ; are the aitar and iacri- tice of S. S. Cyprain, irini-eus, Ju'flin Martyr, Ig- natius:, Clement, the Apoitles, and of jefus Chnil himfelf. This altar and iacnhce (lands high at this very day in the eftimation of the moft eminent clergy and laity of the church of England, and of the protertant epifcopai church in the United States ot America. Having fhewn a d::p:jiUon to blot out the -prieft' hood, CO break down every altar facred to Jefus, and to reduce the reprefeatative facrifice of the holy KucharJll to a bare not of faith or memory in the recipient J you f urn up all your benevolent inten- tions toward chriftianity, bv fiying— "' we may be " well content to rcf gn tb.e iacerdotal charader to *' others, neither any longer calling our miniiUrs, *' pi i-.fls, nor our commujiion tables altars." Con- [ 39 J tent to refign the facerdotal ch?.ra(51er to others \ Pray in what charafter do you ndt ar prefent ? Don'c vcmr people call you a prieft ? — -Or if thty do, why don't: you difciaim all ti'le to that aDpeiiatio.. — by telling them who and what vcu really are, a mere lay- man ? I fuppofe your people are timple enoii2;h to thinic thev fee Tome traces of lacrediicfs in fhe charader of their prieft, honever -VLiUing and well-pleaf^d you nuiy be to refign the factraotal charcMer. There is fio medium, Sir, between the facerdotal and the lay charafter ; and if yoa had rather be confidered as a lay-man than an eccltrfnftic, vvhy don'c you in plain englifh fay fo ? — -why do yoo perfevere in making your praclice uive the lie to your wifhes ? If you confider yourfelt fent by a proper authority to miniftdr in divine offices, and withal exprefs a contentednefs to refign the facerdotal charsder •, we miift fuppofe that you have lefs regard for the miniitry now, than v;hen you firft entered into it ; or that you are confcioiis all the pov^er vou a6t under, Is a mere human authority. If this is the; cafe, it is honorable to undeceive your parifnioner?, to tell them that you are not a paftor by dhine^ but by human appointment ; and perhaps they wiii Jove you the better. Betwixt a niiniiler of God,- and a: minii'er of the people there is a wide difference ; the facerdotal cha'ra6ter is divine and indelible, the popular is human, and may be laid afide,- or rctign- ed at pleafure. On your own principles. Sir, yoii 2^e porTelTed of no facredotal chc.racUr^ — why da you then talk of refigniug a character to jvhich yoii have no title ? A man ciinnot pcfiibly refign wh.it he never was put in poffcfiich of. And as you have rer»ounced the idea of fucctifion in the apoilo- l?c line up to Jefus Chrill — and put the pecpli: in- 'kad of Jlsus Christ at the \\t:j\ of the Church, [ 40 ] the ordinations in your church flowing from the people, muft be of a different lort entirely from thofe thai are derived from our bleffed Redeemer. A certain Mr. D — an anabaptifl teacher from O. England, three or four years fince, attempting afettlement in N. P. R. I, preached for a while with great applaufe, and prayed with vT\UQh freedom in- deed ; but unluckily the fecret tame out, that, tho* pretending to teach others, he had not been baptiz- ed, was no communicant-^an tinordained perfon. But to the praife of his integrity be it fpoken •, con- fcious that he had no facerdotal charader to refign^ he contentedly laid afide all pretences to it, and fat down in the city of New- York, in his natural and true charadter, that of an honeft tradefman. I men- tion not this viith any nuufion to your particular ^afe, Sir, but as a proper climax for a period. \ do remember. Sir, " the Hiory ^f ;i fond " mother," and her tv^o Tons. It was a convmoa expedation among the tv/clve, that Jcfus would, fome time or another, probably after his refurrec- tion, " reftore the regal fovercignty to ifraei," and full of this idea, this fond mother and her two fon: made their fuit, " Uiat the one fiiouui fit on hi:: '^ right handj and the oilier on \\h lef;:," when hin Kingdom fnould commence, as formeriy Jofcuh and Judah had been eminent among the heads o^ the tribes of lirael MittrJiing the nature of iheir Redeemer's Kingdor;. They rimed at a temporal fupcriority over their bi-ethren— ind confefiucn'Jy incurred iheir difplealure. To reconcile them to their offended brethren— and alfo to corredl their opinions about the natne of his kingdom, Jefus call-d them ai! unto him and [ 41 ] iaid, " Ye * knov/ that the princes of the Gentiles *'• exercife dominion over ihim ; and they thar ire ** great exercifc; authorily urjO[-\ them y tut it fh;ill " not be fy amongd you -, but uhoroevcr will be '' great among \ou let him -be vour (diakcnos *' deacon) miniirer, and whofoevcr will be chief a- " among yon, let him be your k". yant ; even as the ''' fon of man came not to he miniftered unto, but to " mmiiter, and to give his life a ranfom for many." Hence you Infer that Chrid nsver defigned to edabliih a fuperior order of clergymen, and that confequently it is unlawful for one ecclefiaftic to cxercife juri{di6lion over another. That this is an error is manifePi from theft con- fideratiot s ; viz, ift. The pre-eminence James and John aimed at uas merely temi'or.d, and againlt this fort of ambition, the words d-jmhiion ^x\<\ auihjru^ tv oj -primes and grtat men among lYizGitiUles^ are evidently dired'ted. 2d. " Even as the fon of man (faith jefiis) *• came not to be minirtcred unr , but to mirdltc] j'* or in St. Luke's words — -' I am among you ** as he that fervcth." From thele words, Sir, vou mult affirm that Chriil excrcifed ho fpiritual j^o^er over his apofi:l£;s, or prove that if he d;d exercife any, he inhibited theni Jfom the exercifi cf a fimilar power ,ov(r others, in due(5t'<;on'trad'C- tipn to t'le words " As my tether hu'th fent me' — "- ..c ye n fo ll n d I y o u . '^ i^d. Having forbidden iKem' to'' roo^f6'r*tehiporal dominion, our Lord pointed oiitto them, in what itate * St. Mark, c. XX. v.y4--28.— St. Li4e, ^- ^rii, ▼ -a;. — ,'ir. Lult'e'c. iii'if'v.'Vrj'. 3b. ' \- -- '-'■ ' > ■■■ F ' [ 42 ] of things they ought to look for their promotion—^ fayir.g, " And 1 appoint to you a Kingdom, as my '* Father hath appointed unto mc ; that ye may *' eat and drink at my table, in my kingdom, and •* fit on thrones judging the twelve tribcsof Ifiael/* The words *' I appoint Unto you a kingdom as " my Faihcr hath appointed (it) unto me" merit our mod ferious attention. 1 he Kingdom of Chrift is his Church— commenced here in grace, and hereafter to b© confummated in glory. As the Father fent ihr Son to be King, Friell and Prophet to his Church — lb he fent or appointed the twelve to prefidc in the church, in that threefold charadicr^ to govern — to intercede for, and to teach all the fub- jfrds of his kingdom the duties they owe to God, their neighbour and thenjfeives. Nor was his kingdom to be like the kingdoms of this world mutable in its government, and liable to total fub- verfton •, *' His kingdom is an everlajling kingdom ; *' and his dominion endure th from generation to genera- ** tion.''* This everlafting kingdom was appointed to the twelve, as the Father had appointed it to the Son : but by reafon of death the twelve could not enjoy it beyond the limits of their natural life. — What then became of the regency of this kingdom after the demife of the apofties ? Did it revert to the Son } or reft in the hands of the fubjeds ? It did neither. It defccnded by tranfmiffion in the perfons of thofe who fucceeded the apoftles j for our Lord promifed to the apoftles and in them to their fucceirors, that he would be " with them even *' to the end of the world." Our Lord fpafce not the words, " I appoint an- *' to you a Kingdom, as my Father hath appointed *' unto me," — neither gave he the promlfe *' lam '^ with you always even unto the end of the world,' ^ [ 43 1 io the f eve ft iy^ but to the apojlks only ; and there^ fore undoubtedly theapodles even before the refur- region were defigned to be, what our Lord really conftituted them after he rofe from the dead, a fupf-rior order of ccclefiaftics. Thus your doctrine of p4r:iy, however it may hide itlelf under certain dc. allied pieces of fcripture, when called forth and examined, will always be found to be in circum- ftances fimilar to thofe, which induced Adam to hide himfelf after his apoftacy. Our Lord indeed inhibited the twelve frona being called " Kabbi"— an appropriate title of the Dodors of the Jewilh law •,— but he gave them, fully as high and honorable an appellation, that of cpojlles. i he title of opDlile, our Lord never gave to the fevcnty, nor do we find any of them fo de- nominated, until admitted into the number of the apoftolic college. St^n in this point of view the feventy are as much inferior to the apoftles in the chriftian church, as they who only fat at the feet of Gamaliel, \^ere to the Rabbins of the Jewifh. If you extend your argu.7ient againft the ufe of the word Rabbi or Mailer far enough, you will kindly conduvT: us into one of the pleafant walks of Quakerifm, teaching us neither to bow the head^ nor to take off the hat to fupefiors in church or flate ! And accordingly (you fay) p. lo — the firfl (late of the church was that oi popular freedom, a fimpie fyflem oi fraternal crder. Mr. Kohinlon in his re- ff arches (you fay) had proved that this was the (late of the primitive church ; but whether was the church then epifcopal or presbyterian .^ By the definition civen ic was neither, it was purely popular^ a fimpie fyftem oi fraternal order. Popular free- dom ! fraternal order \ among all th« rebeHlpns [ 44 ] ivhich have difgraceJ the character of the Jew;{h h tcioh, this fame piiaciple o{ popular freedom^ ftands the m Oil prominent. "Corah a fid Co. full of love for fraternal order y ayid defirous ot eftabhrning ^o- pular freedom in i'S,full«:;i^L I'intude, incurred the dilplcafure of that ;» ill est,, before whofc prefence Che ciir:h and all the 'works" that are therein ihall one day "be burnt up. The hutory of this terrible tataflrophe "is recorded on the lacred page, {or our admonition, " left any of us fluuld engage in the '• gainiayin^ ol Corah." The church a'ccordjng to Bochmej- has changed her confticution and coinp'exipn; three times. She lirft appeared fraternal^ decked in the robes of pcpuliir 'fr^du?n is a deceitful and dangeroas, expreflion \ and if once admitted mro co- mon ufe; its attendant conf< qu-nces wdi ^-le mobs^ infurrecUdns^ h'urning of chief m''g'Jl''ates inefigy^ in one word» every fpecies of contempt for, un i rebellion agiinlV the laws and conftituted authorities, both in chuich and ftate. Liberty and anarchy, like the tree of life and the tree or the knowledge of good and evi), riiay alwavs be feen growing near to-one another — and frequently are the fruits ot the one taken for thofe of the other. ^> Evil firft found its way into the World under the feigned appearance of goodnefs j and all' unlawful auchoritv affetis to gain the ap- probation ot men under the notion oi popular fne-^ dom, • ■ ■ Not lefs deftruftive is the notion (j^ fraternal cr- der. There can be noon'er where there is no go- vernment, and there can be no government whiKl; the intoxicating cup of perfect equality is held to the lip. The wine in this cup may fparkle, and " give '* Its * colour ; but at the lalT: it biteth like a ferpenc " and ftingeth like an adde'-." — Look bryond the. atlantic, and tee ho'^ a. deified popular ivzQ^Qmh^s bitten and ftung nations not a few, and troddeni them down like mire in the ftrcet ! Look how a blalphemous body of men leagued in fraternal order as lineal dcfcendents of the ancient f Titans, are engaged in 'a war againft God Almighty himfcif j * Prov, c. xxiii. v. 32. t See Dr. Pezron's Antiquities of Nations, ch. i & 2. L 46 3 blotting out the Sabbath day, extir,pating ths. clergy, and burning the holy fcriptures i as prepa- ratpry fteps for the iubverfion of all human coytrn- menrs, and exaltation to honor and wealth upon the wreck and mifery of millions ill From luch fraternal q'^der and fcfular freedcm^ good Lord deliver us. Amen. Pace uth, you fay-:*" In the third century, Jewifh theology drew off the attention of chriftians^ from the finiplicity of Jefus and the gofpel, ancj fixed it on an hierarchy, particularly in the great and wealthy churches of Konie, Antioch, Alexan- dria and Carthage, This introduced by degrees a fecond period, and anew fyrtem'of ecclcftaftical government named by B.ochaicr, //'^ ^^P^J;^^P^U!>J^P^ of church law.'* ..■..■ ^ But who t^ld all this to Bochmer---whence cam a the fpirit thnt inftruded him in matters unknown to all the churches he fpeiiks of ? It is very ftrange that notliinr?; of iW\s fraternal order ^ popular freedom and rifeot epifcopacy can be found m any of the an- cient hiftories of thofe churches. * Blondel fuppofes Epifcopacy ;?roj,e at Jerwfalem about the year 135, and at Alexandria about the year 1 40. +Salmahus fays that the diliindioa of the order of bifhops from that of presbyters was fo very ancient, that he only excepts the times of the apoftles. J CJiamier gives the fams account of the origin of Epifcopacy, ia faying, " 'r'liatius, Irenaeus and Tertuiiian prove that hicquaiaj\& moft ancient, and next neighbour to. the times of the apoftles, which v.e readily grant.'* And Bjx:(T thus conftfTes " that there w?rq * See his preface. f Walfo. Meff. p. 7, Tom. n. Lib. 10. c. 6. % Dr. Chii; idler's Ajp. farther defended p. 32. i: 47 ] te bifhops In die' clays of one of the apofl'es ', that neither the apoftlcsi nor any of thdr uilciples nor any chrl^ian, or heretic in the world, fpakc or wrote a word againft li'pifcopacy 'till long after it was generally fettled in the churches. Upon thefe concefiions^ the great ChilHngworth (whofe name occli;-s twice in your letter) has raifcd what he fcruples not to call a demon (Iration, that tpifcopacy is not only ancientj and Catholic^ buc alio Aportoiical j thus — *' So grt;at a change as between Prrsbvtcriiin government and b'pifcopnl could not pwflioly have happened all the vvorld over, in a little time. Had Kpifcopal government been an ahberration from, or a cor*-ii]j;ion of 'he goverij- ment left in the churches by the i*.po(iits, it h:id been very ftrange, that it fliouid have been received in any one church fo fuddenlvj or th?.t itlliould have prevailed in all for fo many ages after. For what Univerfal caufe can be aligned or feigned for this univerlal apodacy ? Can it enter into our hearts ro think, that all the presbyters and oth(,-r Chrittians then, being the apoftle's fchoiars, fliouid be gene- rally ignorant of the will of Chrift, touching ths nccelTity of a Presbyterian govern men i: i? Or dare we think them fo wicked all the world over, as a- gainft knowledge and confcicnce to confpiie againll it ? Imagine the fpirit of Diotreplics i;ad entered in- to fome of the presbyters, and pcJIckTcd them with an ambitious dehre of a forbidden fuperiority ; Was it pofTibie they fhould aitempt or atchieve it at onct: veithout any oppoCtion cr contradiclion ? And be- fides, that the contagion of the ambition, iLould ipread itfelf, and prevail without itop or controui, Day, without any noife or norice taken of it, through .ALL ihe churches in the world — all the watchmen, in ihi meantime, beirg \q fait ,',flec-p, and all [ 48 ] the dofTs To dumb, that not (o much as one {hpuld open his mouth aguinfl it." ** When I (hall fee all the democracies and ariftocracits in the world lie down and fleep, and iiwake into monarchies •, then will 1 begin to be- lieve, .that presftyterian government,' having con- tinv;e.l in ih,e church during the apofties* times, il)Guld prefcntly arter (acramft the apoftles* doc- trine and the will of Chrift be whirled about like a icene in a maqoe and be transformed into FpiTco- pacy. In the mean time, while thefe things remain incredible, and to human reafon impoffibk,! hope f fhal| have leave to conclude thus. *' Fpiscopal government is acknowledged, to have been univeifally received in the church pre- fently after the apoltles* times. " Between the Apoflles times, and that^r^- fenlly after, there was not timx enough for, nor poffibiiity of, fo great an alteration. . *• An.d therefore there was no fuch alteration as is pretended. And therefore, Epifcopacy being confelTed to be fo ancient and catholic, muft. be granted to be alfo apostolic." — Q^ E. D. Now, Sir, here is a dcmonftration fo clear, fo perfuafive, that 1 fhall thank you to ihew me one propofition in Euclid that has its Q^ E. D. more fairly made out, or more regularly and convincing- ly enunciated. Episcopacy, fays your oracle Bochmer, extended from *' the latter end of the 3d century to the time of Charlemagne i" i.e. until the year ooo, for on ths chrilima-s of that year, hei was crowned in [ 49 3 Sc. Peter's Church at Rome, by Pope Leo Hid. But we have Ce^n It demonft rated to be coeval %vith the Apoftles-— and therefore Bochmcrs tefti- iDony to the contrary is of no avail, it is a mere •' ens rationis." , " The third fyHem called the Pap?.l v/as intro- duced," (your learned author fays) " when the Bilhop of Rome arofe above law, and became the fole Arbiter of all Ecclefiaftical affairs •, — when he claimed to himfelf authority over his brethren,' and all fpiritual government was made to iflue from him, as from a common, though polluted fource.'* ^ Pray Mr. Blatchford, wZ?^^ was this, when did the Bifhop of Rome arife above Law ?— What do you mean by Law, the law of God or the law of man ?-^Why do you deal thus in ambiguities ?— If you had faid *' Law of God — or Law of man, I could have underftood your meaning ;' as the word {lands, I confefs I do not.— '' Became the Arbiter of all Ecclefiaftical affairs.*' — 'That was noC fo much his fault, as the f^auit of thofe who faw fit to yield to his arbitrations. -^No man, not even a Bifhop of Rome can become an Arbiter unlefs ap- pealed to by contending parties. In this refpedt the Pope's charadler is clear, but not fo in the next part of the account — ** when he claimed to himfelf all authority over his brethren." — He claimed this univerfai fupremacy long before the time of Charle- magne, and in the Council of Trent, exerted all his influence, to have Epifcopacy declared to ht jUri . di^'ino (by divine right) ortly in the Biil:iop of Rome. But the Bifhops in that council were too' tenacious of their own privileges to fuffer the claims of an ambitious Pope, to receive the fandion of a 6 L 50 ] decree, riowever', by a ft range exertion or yu^^l authority, foon after, the order of Regulars was efi-abhfhed. Priefts, exempted from thejurifdidion of their refpet^ive Sifhops, were ere^ed into a body, with a fuperior of their own nomination and the Pope's appointment, for the very, exprefg purpofe of deprefling the anthority of Bilhops, and exalting the power of Popes ; who have ever fince endeav- oured to force a belief among the churches of the Romifh and Greek communion, that all Ecclefiafti- ca! power does ifTue from the UiccefTors of St. Peter. Tihis claim of papal fuperiority was one of the great caufes which made the Greek Church break off communion with the See of Kome, and gave an ef- fec5lual fpring to the Engliih Reformation. And however difpleafing. Sir, thefollowlrig truth may be to you and fome others — I cannot but re- ir.ark, that the very fame arguments, which the Jefuits, on the Pope's part, have always ufed to de- cry the divine right of Epilcopacy have been adopt- ed, and are ftill applied to the fame purpole, by Fresbyterians. So that I may well fay, the Church of England and her Daughter the Proteftant Epif- ccpal Church in America, are " in perils among falfe brethren 1" The account which Bochmer gives us of the fpoufe of Chrift is not one iota more favourable than- what Horace gives of woman in general — ' *' Ficmina femper varium et mutabile"*— always changing, for ever inconftant. To Bc^hmcr's three fyftems, viz. Faternal, Epif- copal and Popifli, you might have added a fourth, and informed us boi:^ it commenced, ".vhcre and by whom •, but this you have not thought proper to do. Neglecting this, Sir, you have ablblutely don« I i! J violence to your title page :— -Presbyterianlfai h there laid to be the burden of your fong. Permit me therefore to write dovvn here what Dr. Moilieim (fays in the 98ch page I think of vol. i.) " The fourth" and laft opinion is that of the PresbyterianSj who affirm, that Chrift's intention was, that ths dp6tors and minifters iliould all enjoy the fame rank and authority, without any fort ot pre-tminence or irubordination» any diftin(5tion of riohts or privi- It-ges."— Thus, Sir, we may hthold ^fourib facs tQ the church. If this be a true pid-ure of the Church, you may call her aU monfirous as you fay the fpirit was, which " rolled from Rome to Eng- land, glanced at Scotland and then came to Ame- rica." And pray Sir, excufe me, I write for informa- tion, if the church wore the face o{ popilar freedam zn^ fraternal order 'till the end of the third century, then changed it for the Zi/z/rc^^/ countenance, with which you fay fhe appeared, 'till the Popes claimed the fole prerogative of all fpiritual government, then put on the ■popijh afpecft (but was not that cpijcopal too ?) and appeared i.n this felf fame countenance, 'till Calvin pretcntsd her witji a Preshierian face— at this rate how many years will the Geneva counte- nance laft before it is worn out ? Episcopalians, Sir, \ovt crder^ famentfs and «;;/- forniity \ " the Bi/h.-.pcf cur Souls" is the fame yejlcr- 4ayy to day, and for ever "jsithout any variahlenefs or Jhadow of turning. Nothing hurts more, than a fuppofed Ihiftingand changing the government, and' doitrine of the church : the enemies of chriftianity count .up how many feds have arifen from the con - vuifions occafioned by Luther and Calvin, and tell us our religioa cannot be a good one, when there is •^Jijcha general ^yant of unity among uss Thuik. [ 52 3 with yourfelf, Sir, at whofe door this charge lies j ivhether at the door of thofe who have continued iii the. faith tranfmitted to them through a long Imeof Spiritual anceftors ; or at the door of thole, who left their father's hoiifc, to make a new religion for themfclves, and who, b/ daily increafing differences, revive all the old hereiies and deluge the world with feils and errors not to be numbered. In the concluding fentence of the paragraph which exhibits your tliird or Papal fyiftem, as yoii call it — you kindly jog me on the elbow, laying *' You forget that you are a proteftant by profet^ iion, and are unwarily forward to give ftabiiity to the dying life of a church you have renounc- bd." ' '•■ ■ '■ The dying life of a church !. Do you mean the approaching >:;xci(ion of the Romifh church ? It appears to me frotrs '.he malevolent temper and the Unbecoming exprefTions which you make ufe of, a- gainft that church, that you dcfire nothing' lefs than her utter extirpation \ Thefe are not the fentiments lior wiHies of Epifcopalians j it is with us an' in- variable principle to pray that God may * bring into the "u^ay of truth allfiuh as have erred dud are deceived^ nnd that he may have mercy upvn all raen. And we truft our prayers will be heard, becaufe we know that Qoddifireth not the'death of afnmer^ but rather that he iiiay turn from his wickednefs and live.^* T he (^eatli of the Church of Rome is net what we wil"h for — it h her reformation; CopyiNG the manner and tranfcribing into your phamplet a great deal more from Towgood than you acknowledge, ' you rail at the Church of Rome, ■■ . '■ — ' ■■ " '■'■i<^.- * See the church Litany r L 53 i calling her in that gentleman's elegant language *• old withered bag, bloody and adulterous woman, who has been fo often drunk with the blood of the idints :" but what have you written to point out her errors and to lead her to reformation ? — So far are the Clergy of the Church of England and the Epifcopal Church of Scotland from being *' un- warily forward to give JiabiUty. to the dying life of the Church of Rome," that they are and ever have been the only bulwark and impregnable defence of the reformation. And who, defire to know, have more ftrenuouily and conftantly oppofed the extra- vagant claims of the Roman Pontiffs, than our. Bifhops, and the learned men of our Communion ? The keeneft difpleafure of the Romanics hath ever been againft the Epifcopacy of Britain, becaufe from thence they have always received the moft forcible repulfes. Tell me but one of your brethren that hath flood up to ward off the Romifh affaults upon the reformat/on — who hath not dealt more in icoidi- ing than argument ! — Your furmifes, Sir, that cur church favours Popery are direilly tajfe. But this has been your way from the beginning, and therefore longfince, Bifhop Morton, in his let- ter to the nonconformifls of his day, thus wrote ; " Belides your notorious fcandals given to the Church of God itlelf, you have brcken the hedgg of peace, and opened the gap for the wild boar out of the Romifh forreft to enter in and root out that goodly Vine, which many Pauls (induflrious Bifh- ops) many A polios (faithful Martyrs) have planted and watered. Whilfl Presbyterianifm \t daily crumbling into fadions, biting and devouring one another, breaking communion daily one with another ; in nothing do thefe fefts fo cordially unite as in reviling, and labouring to deftroy the Epilcu- L 54 ] pal reformed church. Down with it — down w'uh it even to the gronnd, has ever been the language of Presbytc^rians and Papills." And " it is very well known (faith I^ifliop Saunderfon in the preface to his Sermons) what rtjoictng that vote for pull- ing down Epifcopacy brought to the Romifh party j hovy in Rome itfelf they fang their lo P.f:ANS upon the tidings thereof, and faid triumphantly— -the DAY IS OURS.'* So that, what Nathan faid to David upon another occafion, is perfedly applicable to yourfclf in the prefent inftance in regard to the Church of Rome-;^ " Thou art the man.'* " That there is a divine appointment to the o|5ce of the miniftrvj is an important truth." — Indeed it is not only highly important, but indifpenfibly neceira- ry to the due performance of public worfhip, and the valid adminiftration of the Sacraments. And you add, p. 12. " It is adidtateof * natural light and common reafoq that there fhould be fome ap- pointed to iead in the public offices of devotion, &c." This obfervatiqn will, hold gpod with thofe churches who ufe liturgical forms, v^here the minif- ter realiy ", leads in the public offices of devotion ;'*. but furely it, cannot apply to your pradlice, in which I have never learned that there were any public offices of religion, unlefs you call preaching and free prayer fuch. But even io thcfe you do not, 7W— you go alone ; no man f.iys a word after you, nor even Jm-'n when you have done. All the lead- ing i can perceive, is among your choriftcrs j one * External light may be of ufe To yonder iicrd of fools, 1^-Uerr.ul light is what dire^s Philofophers and — owls. 'Skinner bn Dr. Beattie's ElTay on innate idea:;. [ 55 ] fttts the pfalm and the others follow him. If joii fay, that you lend in what you C2l\\ free prayer, and the people follow you, and accordingly may be faid' to pray •, upon this principle Sir, all the people who hear you preach, follow you as much as the/ ^do in prayer, and accordingly may be faid to preach; This is certainly fair reafoning, and the inference 1 deduce from it is, that if is much nhorfe eligible to have public cfices of deijotion in which the minif^er i}iaylead; than to fubjed a whole congregation to' the neceffity of addrelfrng God in whatever manner their minifter pleafes ; unlefs they were fully af- certained of his infallibility. Your words ** continitance of the office to the end of the world," (hould here he commented uport were it not that I think they will appear more to advantage, when contrafted with a pafiage in the 29th pjige of your Letter. The diffindion you make, Sir, between extrmr- dinary and ordinar'y officers in the firft days of the church, is extremely confL'fed-, for all the Apoftles,- Prophets, Evangeli(ls, Paftors and Teachers of thac period had extraordinary powers conferred up- on them, though not upon all in the fame degree. If you mean by the v;oj"d extraordinary, the poA'er of tongues and working miracles, as appropriated to the Apoftles, Prophets and Evangelifts, even here your inaccuracy is manifefl: •, for we find feveral of the Paftors and Teachers evidencing their extra- ordinary gifts '* by dikerning of fpirita •," wl^.ich to me appears not lefs remarkable than feveral of the miracles performed cvea by the Apoftlei thcoi- felves. Now>--SIr--the grand queftion f L 56 ] You fay—-** Thefe officers in the church are frcqaently called BiJhopSjSiT Overfecrs^ Preslyters or EUers •, nor does any diftindion between thefe two appear in the New Teftament, nor do we find the jatter reprefented as an order of men fubordinatc and inferior to the former.** You might have faid thefe officers are frequently caijed Biihops, or Ovcrfeers, Presbyters and El- der s-- -and Di^acons, and therefore they are all on: order -, which had been equally tjfue With what you have faid. Mr-. NELsoij in his hook of Fads and Fefti'/als— - 6n the queftion---" How were the Bifliops called in the Apoftolic age'*— Anfwers thus •, '* Thofe whom we now call Bifhops were in the firft age of the chuVch ftyled Apofiks, and by St. John in the Reve- lation Angels, And the word Bijhop and Presbyter in the fame age were ufed often promifcuoufly to de- note the fame order and generally that which we now* call the order of Priefts. But in the fucceeding ag6, and that whilft St. John was alive, the governors of the church abijanined from the nameof Apoftles and were content with that of Bifhops -,' and then the fecond order were called altogether Presbyters. And that the^ title of Bifhop was appropriated thenceforward to thofe that had the power ordaining^ tonfirming^ d.nd gcverniug, is plain from the eccl'efiai- tical writers of that age. So that it is not fo much the NAME, as the diftindl powers which we contend for.** But you fay the New Teftamient makes no dif- tindion, never reprefents Elders as an order of mni [ubordinate and irij trior to Bi/ljops, I READ in St. Mark c. iii. v. u. ." And he [ 57 ] (jfefus) ordained twelve, that they Hiould be with him, and that he might fend them iouh lo preach 5 and to have power to heal Jlckneffcs^ and to cr^Jt ciit devils.^* : After this— St. Luke c. 10. v. i. " The Lord appointed other jeventy alfo, anci fent them two and two before his face, into every city ai.d place, whither he himfcif would come; go your ways : behold I fend you forth *.s lambs among wolves i V. 8. Into whatfoever city ye enter, heal the fick that are therein, and fav unto them, the kingdom of God is nigh at hand." , I WILL grant that the Apoftles and the feventy by this ordination, fland exadly in the fame ra[ik, call it by what name you pleafe. But, to the or- dination of the Apoftles which 1 have new mention- ed, we find another fuperadded, when Jc[us after his Refurredlion," came ^ and jpake unto them, Joy- ing^ all power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go, ye, therefore, and teach (Di/aple) all nations, bap-1 tizing thetn in the Name of the Father and of tie ^cn^ and of the Holy Ghvfl : teaching them to cbferve all things whatfoever 1 have commanded )GU; and lo I 1 am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,—- Amen. By this ordination fuperadded to that which they had formerly received, the Apoliles certainly ft;-0(i fiiperior to the feventy, who had not received any fuch additional ordmation. Alter the afcennon, the Twelve (not the feventy) by prayer and impofi- tion of hands, on feven men confvred the oider ot deacon. Thus we behold the facred hierarchy, or three orders ot the priefthood> and that upon th-c St. Matth. c. a8, V, iS. 10. [ 53 ] moft fummary and fcriptural evidence ; — viz. * the Ap'Jiles^ the Seventy, and the Deacons -, corres- ponding as wc apprehend to Bijhops^ Prujis and Deacons. And accordingly St. Paul faith, *' God hath fet fome in his church, fjr/i /^fojiles, Jecondly Prcfhets^ thirdly 'teachers'^ It may be eaHly pif-oved Sir, that iri the church of Jerufalcm, there were three prders of miniiiers, from the very beginning. Three •\ years after St. Paul's converfion he went up to Jerufalem to fee Feter, for he had never feeri any of the Apoftles ex- cept James the Lord's brother. Fourteen years afrer his converfion, Paul and Barnabas were fgnt by the church at :j: Antioch to obtain the judgment of the Apoftles and Elders at Jerufalem concerning the obfervance of circuiticifion and other rites of the Mofaic difperffation. In determining this queftion the fentence oijavies was decifive. Nine' years afttr this, 'i] about A. D. 58, St. Paul makes his laft journey to Jerufaleni, where he ftill finds James — " Pdul went in with us unto** J am es^ and all the Elder s or Presbyters %vereprejent.'* From fcripture then it appears that James vtMcdi for tvven'tv years together at Jerufalem as the Eccle- ftfljlical fuperior of the Vresbyt€rs---and Deacons^ of that province. For the Apollles had ordained feven de;.coiis at Jerufalem •, of whom Stephen was the ^rft Martyr ; Philip went to Samaria, and for ought that we know t'o the contrary the other five contin- ued at Jerufalem. * A£ls c. vi. V. 6. f Gal. c. i. V. 19. I Aifl-s c. XV. y Gal. c. ii. V. I. ** Ads c. xxi. V. 18. [ :9 ] Now Sir» I come to vour Seven confidentlons, ,which you fay—" I think fo important and fatisfac- tory that I hope I fhall not be deemed wanting cither in candor or fanity vjintelk^, if I view them to be unanfwerable." Give rne leave, Sir to remark, that if your ctindoY and fan'-ty of intsUeii^ depend upon the irrefutabili- ty of thefe ^ [even confiderations, 1 would not give Jeven q^rnts for all the (lock you have of either.— 'But let us examine thefe confiderations, and lee how Itrong the pillars are, on which you red the fabric of your candor and inteP.eftual fanity. A ftrong man leaned upon certain pillars, ^ long fince — and— - Consideration ifl. " In the firfl: of Timothy, 3d, chap, the Apoftle lays down the qualifications of Bifhops and Deacons, without faying any thing of Presbyters ; whom it is not at all likely he would have emitted, had they been a dififcrent fort of per- ions from thofe intended by Bilhops.'* ' In anfwer to this, hear the words of Clemens Romanus. " Chiiit f v^as fent from God, and the Apoftles from Chrift, and they went about preaching the gofpel. They therefore predched through regions and cities, and conliituted (ordain- ed) their firftfruitr, (firll: converts) into Bi{ho[)S and Deacons of thofe that (hould afterwards believe.'*. Agreeably to this account, Epiphanius thus writes, * N. B. 1 hefe conllderations may be feen in a lefs muiilated form in the 198 and 199 pages of Mr. Towgood's book, for which Mr. B. has given no credit. But popular freedom and tra'rernal or- der fandion fuch plagiarifms, among brethren. V Clem. Rom. Ep. i. ad ^or. [ Co ] " At the beginning of the *Apoftles' preaching," when there was none fit or worthy to be B'lbop; the place remained void without any •, but where ricked required,' and there were tholb that were fit for ir, Bilhops were conftituted y but while there v,-?r. no nidkirude of chrilbans, there were found r^o-.£ among ♦■htm to be conftituted Presbyters, and they cunt'jDird themfelves with a Biiliop alone iri t very place, but wiihv)Uta deacon 't was impoflihle f or a Bii'hopto be, and therefore the Apolne toolc covr^ that a Bifhup iliould have his Deacon tominiU tcr to him," Tfius It may be eafily accounted for, why St: Paul gives directions concerning Bifhops and Deacor.s, omitting the order of Presbyters. " In- ter gradum infirnum et fupremum, gradus medius cjntinet'jr." CoxsiD. 2d, " The church at Philippi had but i'Ao ojders of church officers among them, viz. Lj/'i^^s and Deacom^' ' ' To this fecond confideration hear what Theodorit fi' 3..." Paul then wrote to the Presbyters and i);.MCons of that city, becaufe their Bifhop -f 5l{ .Tphroditus, whom he ftiles his brother and com- ^^ .■ ion in iabor,'and fellow foldier, and their Apof- ' - was then with him at Rome." That he was then With M.. Pant at Rome, appears from the poflfciipt ecute this part of his Epifcopal cfiice, when he fays — *' them that fm, "^ rebuke before all, that others aljo may fear " But there is not one word of diredion given to the Presbyters how they were to order the punilhment of offending brethren'. In addition to all thefe, St. Paul gives to Timo= thy another very foiemn charge in thefc words— " 1 give thee charge in the light of God, who quickeneth all things and before Jefus Chrift, who before Pontius Pilate, wkneiTed a good confefTion, that thou keep this commandrntnt, without fpoc unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jeius Chrift.'L In the ordinary courfe of nature, St. Paul had noreafon toexpedt that Timothy would be alive at Chrift's fecond coming ; this charge therefore was r»ot givtn to Timothy exclufiveiy ', but in the per- fon of Timothy, to all who fhould fucceed him ia his Epifcopal office, by a regular inveftituie, even unto the end of the world. That this is a ^air ftate- ment of the cafe, and that St. Paul deemed a regular fuccfjfion indifperfibly necejjkry to perpetuate the minif- try, is evident .from thefe words, *' Keep this com- mandment — without fpot — unrebukable— until the appearing of our Lord Jefus Chiift" — compared with this other injundion of the fame Apoftk— f ' the things which thou hatt heard of me among; 1 Tim. ver. 20. t (-5 ] raany witnefrcs, the fame * commit thou to faith- ful men, who ihall be able to teach otkrs alfo." Thus Sir, I hope you fee that all the power of ^oicrning and ordainhig in ihe church of Ephefus belonged to timothy during his life time — and that no part thereof was claimable by the Presbyters., and confequently that they were an order of ecciefiaftics inferior tp him — -call them by what name or title you pleafe. 1 have infifted the more upon this coH- fideration, both with a view of correcVmg your owni erroneous ideas on the fubjedl, and of pointing cut to others the fallacy of the inference you deduce from the fgcred text. . Whenever you can make it appear Sir, that St," Paul gave the very fame charge to the coHedlive body of the Ephefian £/i^rj, that he gave to Timothy in- dividually — you fhall have ample credit for the dif- covery — and we (hall henceforth confider t*resby- terian Ordination valid and Apoftolical : unfil yoii do 'his, or fome one does it for you, our judgment. concerning your power to ordain muft continue the fame it now is and ever has been. , CoNsiD. 5th. ". However amufing (you tell me,. p. 15 ) vour account of Jefus Ghrift--as holding the Epifcopate during his continuance. in the world, and of his Difciples bemg elevaced to ih at Juperior order. after his afcenfion into Heaven, . vtho, previous to it, were Presbyters, it appenrs that one of them ac leaft was altogether unacquainted v\ith it, or elfe' had moft unaccountably foro;OL it. i Pet. v. i. 7. {Pr c shut eri Otis) the Presbyters among you I exhort, Sumpresbttttros^ who alfo am a Presb\ter •, ftfed the ftockot God among you. ading the part of iiilhopSj 2 Tim. c.l\. V. a. i [ 66 j lipfcopomtes. They were todifcharge the Epifco-' pal office, and to perform all the dutits belonging to it." ^' However amufirig, &c. ! It is truly fhock-^ ing in a lay-man to annex the idea of amufemenJ to any thing relative to our bleffed Redeemer •, but it is highly Criminal in either a real or fuppofed Ec-* clefiaftic-i^thus to write : biit perhaps it is not fo criminal in you, as it would be in others, who have not as yoa have done, exprefTed a wiilingnefs " to refign the facerdotal charader to others." Any how the expreffion is very indecenC and inconfiftcnt with that reverence which is due to the prefcnt Re- deemer and future judge of the world. If you think, becaufe Peter faid " The Presby- ters among you I exhort, who alfo am a Presbyter," that he had forgotton that he was an Apoftle — you pay no great compliment, either to his memory or his veracity : and if you infer from the promifcuous ufe of the v/ords Presbyter and Bifhop, that they «re one and the rame-^you may with a greater fhew of rcafon afiert that an Emperor and a general are the fame, becaufe the old Romans exprefled both thefe characters by the frrme word^^Imperator. Hiding a fubjedl under the prcmifcuous ufe cf names or of words of an apparently limllar import, you may cb- fcnrc, but can never elucidate it. But perhaps your fyftem cannot well bear the light, anci therefore you deal fo much in amb'guiries ; luch as the defcription you give of the primitive church in page lo. We readily acknowlcge that all the Apoftlea were i^resbyters-^but we deny that all Presbyters were Apoflks. St. John calls himlelf a Presbyter, beth ir* his fecond and third Epiftie : and m cho i: (>! 3 text immediately under confiderarion, St. Petei? ftiles himfelf a fellow-presbyter of the presbyters to whom his firll: Epiftle was written. Were Peter and John nothing more than Presbvters ? Or were thofe presbyters all Apollles, poflcfled of Apoftolic powers to govern the churches and ordain their mini(^ers ? There is nothing remaii^able in the Apoftlcs calling themfclves presbyters, when they condefcend even to ftile themfelves Deacons, an cccleiiaftical title confefiedly inferior to presbyters. For'inftance— " Who then is * Paul, ancl who is AppoUos, but Diakonoiy Deacons, Minifters by ■whom ye believed ?"— Who hath made us able rf- Dw;^j»o/, Deacons, Minifters of the New Tefta- jnent." — '' Tiicn the twelve, &c. we will give ourfelves continually to prayer and to the j DLikonia Deaconlliip, miniltry of the word." " We lent Timotheus our brother and (j Diakonon, Deacon, Minifter of God, and car fellow-labourer in the Gofpel."— ." Whereof I (Paul) was made a Diako- nos, ** Deacon, a Minifter according to the gift of the grace of God." And Clemens of Alexandria writes that all the Minifters of the Chriftian Church ate contained under the names of f f Presbyters and Deacons ; and yet fpeaks of JJBifhops, Priefts and Deacons, as three diftind order? And thus your fifth confidcration^ as it proves to® much, proves nothing, in favor of parity, unlefs you choofe to admit that Apoftles, Presbyters and Deacons are but one order ; which I prefume you * I Cor. c. iii. v, 5. f 2 Cor. c. iii. v. 6. X Ads c. vi. V. 4. II I Thcf. c. iii. v. 2. ** Eph. c. iii. V. 7. ft Clem. R.oai. Epift. c. 32 and 45. tJ: Idem. Strom, p. 667. [ 68 ] Will fcardelv venture to do for fear of the con(eV qucnces. But Sir, you may Dmiife yourfclf witK ^he fuppoficion that they are all one^ provided your ©mufemcnt intrudes not upon the ferious hours of iothers. " '■ " ' CoNsiD. 6th. You fAy— " Agreeably to which we find that Timothy had the mrnifterial office con- ferred on him by*the laying on of the' hands of the Presbytery, or company of Presbyters or Elders j f. e. miniliers. and doubtlefs. Presbyters (who are the only gofpei minifters and paftors by divine sp- pointmenc) are in all fucceeding ages impowered arid au'-hoiiied to fet apdrt qualified perfons to the facrcd tofBce, there being no one duty enjoined upoti Bi/hops, from which Presbyters are feduded." This grand afTcmblage of words is highly worthy of being called a confideration indeed— if a jumble of contradidions abfurdlties and nonfenfe can merit that title. ■ Firft you fay Timothy was ordained by a company of Presbyters, or Elders, that is minif- ters. Now the word miniiler is the fame as deacon; and from the conilrudion you have given to thd fencence, Timothy v/as ordained by a company of presbyters, not in their Presbyterial, but in theit Diaconate capacii:y, thereby changing Presbyterian- ifm into Diaconifm. I Iw all your illuilrations of the favourite fubjed, ou avoid perlpicuity, by keeping baclc fomething rom the puDiic eye : here you fay Timothy was or- dained by a company of mini ile rs-^bi it you do not tell t:s, what forr of minifters they were — or whether there was any Apollle prefent to take the lead at this ordination, if you had knovvn ■how to rtop St. Paul's mouth, ybii would have told us, it was per- fotnuid by a company of mtxt prnhstirs^ without: r 69 ] • i^he authority of any one Apoftle -, but had you at- tennpted to do this, the Oratoi' who made Fcliic tremble would have ftood up to condemn youf boldnefs. For St. Paul addrclTing Tirnothy after his ordination — faid thus, "' I put thee in remem- brance that thou ftir up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands.^^ St. Paul thert was the fuperior of the Prcsbyterv-*-and being him* felf an Apoft!e claims exclufively the power of or- dination, however he may have admitted the hands of the attendant presl>ycers alio. Paul by Ictyhig Ui ewn bands ordained Timothy-, the Presbyters /^_y layiNg on of their hands gave their afient and approba- tion. SdthatTmiothy's ordination was not as you "Would have the world to believe it to have been— ■ by mere Presbyters j but by the hands of the great St. Paul, who was an Apoftle — and therefon^ pure- ly Epifcopal, as being performed by the higheft order in the church. And doubtlefs (you fay p. 15) Presbyters, who are the only gofpel minifters and paftors by divine appointment, &c." This is a bold ftroke upon the Apoilles ; for if it be as you fay, it is not the brder of Apoftles, but the order of Presbyters thac is of divine appointment ! If a divine appointment ever belonged to any claf? of minifters whatfoeyer, it was conferred upon the tvielve,not in their jcirw^y- ferirJ, nor in their diaccnate capacity,' but purely in their /JpfioUc charadler. To them in that charac- ter Jei'us faid, " As my Father bath Jmt me, even fi Jend I youy. " There being no one duly enjoined upon Bifii- ops, from which Presbyters are fecluded." This may be true among felf-created Bifhops; but is diainetrically the reverfe to truth among Apoftolic and Chriilian Bifhops. "We will appeal f 7° 1 to men who lived nearer to the days of primitive purity than any of our modern informants, and hap- py Aiall I be if you and others of your way of think- ing would ^''abrnit more to their judgment than yoq jdo. Oigen fays, " More is * required from a Presbyter than from a deacon j more fropi a deacon than frorna lay-man ; but from him who amongft US, has (archen auten ten eklcelefiafliken) the chief ecclefiaitical authority committee to him, more ftill is required.'* And Tertullianfays--'* Ihe f chief prielt, that is the Bifliop has the power of giving (Uaptifm ;) rJter him, or next to hirn, the Prcsbyr ters and the Dsncons." And St. Paul faith—that *' the j care of ail the churches was upon him Clailv." Our Lord authorized the Apoftlts to or- dain others as the Father had ordained him ; he appointed unto then? a Kingdom as his Father had appointed unto hijii ; but this kingdom and the Authority of appointing its governors, he never com- mitted to the ieventy. He breathed on the Apoftles qnd faid ** Whofeioevcr fins ye remit, &c.*' but V«'e read not of any fuch power lodged with the feventy. The Apoftles ordain ed the feven deacons, without the aHiftance of the feventy. God is a Go4 of order, and every officer in his church mutl: c'q the duty aliigned him according to his ftition there- in. GoNsiR. 7rh. *' Paul and Barnabas (yow fay p. \6) were themfdves ordained by certain prophets, and teachers, in the church of A^ntioch, and net by any Biflnp didinguiflied as fuch : and can you Sir, leconcitc it to yourfelf that Paul and Barnabas were irreguiaily ordained ?" * Orjf'cn on Jcr. horn. 2. i Tcr. de Eap. c. 17. 1 a Cor. c, iLj. V. 2^,. C 7' ) ** i know Sir, that Paul (and I fl-ippofe that thr-^ iabas v\RS exaiflly of St. Paul's mind,) was fo weli inftruded in the lav/ and the prophets, and confe- iqucntly in the nature and dc^fign- cf the JewiiK Hierarchy, that he would never have fuhmifted to any ordination but what was purely of divine au- thority. But let D5 attend to this pitce of ecclc.fial- tical hiilory as we find it recorded at full length ifi the ift, 2d, jd arid 4th verfes of the i^th chi^pter of the Ads. *' Now there were in ihe church that was at Antioch, certain propbeis and teachers 5 as Barinabas^ and Simeon x\\;s.t was called Niger, and Lucius of Syrene, and Manoan^ who had been bro'c up with Herod the Tetrarch, arid Saul. As thev miniftereJ to the Lord, and failed, the Holy Ghojl faid, feparatc me Barnalas and ::aul, for the v.'ork whereunto I have called therti. And when they had fafted arid prayed, and laid thair hands on them, they fent them away. So they being fenfr forth by the Holy Ghoji^ departed, &rc. By your ftatenfienC, it would appear that Paul and Barnabas were only lay candidarts for ordinati- on, and as fuch preiented themfelves before " cer- tain prophets and teachers in the church cf Anti- och." But I am no lefs afioniihed at yotjr precipi- tancy in hazarding fuch an afi'ercion, than at your unacquaintedntls with this portion of fcripture wh-ercon, as being the very ape of your objt6^i6ris to Epiruopacy, you feem ro have erected the frotid- }y waving banners of Presbyteriariilrn. In this fcripture— Paul and B-arnabas at'e reckoned in the niimlcr ox ihefe prophets and teachers-- Barnabas lirft and Paul laft. It is ftrange how this cfcapcd your notice -, however this (fnall 1 call it aden-rnedj miflnke tends to prove one thing, that yoii arepL^r fas cHi 7iffas determined to maiucain the darling fi.'hem?. [ 72 ] The queftion en this text, 1 prefume, is, whether jpuul and Barnabas had threir ordination from! Simeon, Lucius and Manean---or whether this lay- ikg on ot hands, was not a vaKedidtory ad j a folemni ^;^rewell. The church pf Jerufalem, upon informatjcn tha^ the people of Antioch hat;) received th^ g^oipd, fent ^arnabas to theoi, wh.> foon afcer his arrival, went to Tarfus, zhd broushr Paul with him to Antioch; ami a whole year Bamalas and Paul ojf'rnbkd them* fehcs wi!b ike churchy and taught mitcb people. About this time the Antiochcanchriitians determined to fend relief to their fuffering brethren in Judea— find fent their charitable contribution by the hards pf Barnabas and Saul. This is the time, when yoyr fuppofcd ordination of Paul and Barnabas jtook place. But to plpafe you Sir, 1 will fuppofc ic yvasa r^^/ ordifiation, and mark the conftqnences of the hypothefis. If Simeon, Lucius, and Man- ean were prophets, fo were Paul and Barnabas j if thofe were teachers, (q were tLcfe ; if thofe were presbyters, fo were thefe ; there being the fame fcripture evidence for the one as the other. If this was a real ordination j it was an ordination fuper- ^dded to that under which they had officiated formerly, which v/ould be making two orders in the fniniftry ; for prior to this fuppofed ordination, all the five prophets and teachers were equal. And fuppofing thefe five prophets, and teachers were all presbyters prior to laying their hands on two of their number---wi!l you be willing to acknowlege that they promoted Paul and Barnabas to the office of Bifhop, and fet this down as the acra of the com- niencement of Epifcopacy ? But Crifoflchl fays— '^.Presb^ters do not ordain Biflkps: 5 Horn, in Tim. c. iv. v. 14V [ n 1 It does not appear that this was an ordinatfoit as you fuppofe ; it was an adion fimiiar to that re- corded in ihe 2d chap, of St. Paul's epiltie lo the Galatians ; " When Jamts^ Cephas and Jchn^ who feemed to he pillars^ perceived the grace that waa given t'nto Fatd^ tht-y gave to him and BurnabaSi the right hand of fellow (hip ; that they fnouid gO eis ta cchne, unto the gentiles, the heathen." As to St. Paul's ordination — either in point of validity and regularity, I never had the leaft reafon to be doubtful, after the account which he has given of it himfclf. He folemnly declares that he receiv- ed his commidion neither fiom men— ncr by manj but immediately from JefusChrift, who perfonalW appeared to him for that purpofe ; and he farther aflurcs us, that the gofpdof the uncircunuifion was com- mitted to hm^ as the gojpel of the circumnfi.n ivas to Peter. On this account he culls himfelf " the jipojlk of the G entiles :\ I am therefore under no anxiety cf mind con- cerning the validity of St. Paul's ordination-^it be- ing in the very higheft degree Epifcopa! — derived to him from Jcfus the exalted and now glorious head of his church and Bilhop of our fouls. Thus Sir, I have beftowed feme attcrticn on your feven confiderations — weighed ihtm in the balance, and found every one cf them wanting. You fay they are taken from the higheft authority ; I fay they are partly taken trcm Itripture, and partly from Towgccd's letters. By mixing \o much human opinion with fcripture, )cu have greatly perverted it from its ori^-inal meaning ; hut releafed from the chair.s you have put upon if, \t will fpeak fur itfelf, and its voice is ihe voice of truth. In connedicn with th^ words of truih^ 1 K [ 74 ] have already declared-— and will repeat it again—- that '" it is juft as eitfy for one man or any number of men fo create a new ivorld, as to injiitute a new church different from that inflituted by Chrift \—for none hut thai canjuflk cbim the privilege of the promife—l am iviihycu always^ even unto the end of the world** You virtnally admit (p. lo) in cohnedbion with Chillingworth's exclamation, the firft half of the j(entence by which you fay I excommunicate all Presbyterian churches \ and if you do admit my words as far as you have quoted them, 'till the I femibolon ; I do not fee how you can poiTibly avoid ' the confequence. For if Chrift formed a church and appointed its government and docflrine •, and annexed a promife of his perpetual prefence to the adminiftration of that government and the preach- ing that dodrine ♦, it is a natural and necefliiry con* fequence, that in fo far as men depart from that go- •verhment and flight that dodrine, thty denude themfelves of a claim to the promife which Chrift annexed to their due obiervance. If you iay, I hereby unchurch all the presbyterian churches ; I reply, by no means, if they rtri? unchurched ; it is iiot I but themfelves who have done /'/ : and if they ii,re difl-crent from the church which Chrift eftablifli- ed, they may ealily be made the fame, by becorh- ing Rpifcopilian. Calvin, Knox and ibme others put them out of humor with their mother, and pre- vailed upon them to leave her •, but moft cordially does fbe invite them to return, and if they lend a deaf ear to hsr intreaties, if they are ftill angry and will not come in, what can ihe do but continue her invitations ? And you are angry, and doubt whether ever Tertullian faid, that was a presbyter to pretend to ordain, he would be reckoned a madman. Quoting E 75 1 tbefe words memoriter, and having at prefent neith- er time or inclination to turn over every, leaf he hath written fimply to obtain a reference, I reqneft your attention to the hiftory of Aerius in the fjurth century, v/ho for afferting that Bifhops and Presby- ters were all one--and that Presbyters might or- dain as well as Bifhops, was condemned by the voice of the univerfal church, aad pronounced *Manoides, a madman. And I confefs that there appears to me, little appearance of faniry of intellefb in advocating a caufe in the eighteenth century, for the broaching of \yhich in the fourth, a man was univerfally pronounced a madman. But Sir, as you feera in various parts of your let*» ter, to be fo much afraid that any imputation of want of candor of fanity of inteiled (hould be laid at your door j to give you all the foothing fatis- fadlion in my power, and ample proof that 1 vvifh to accufe no man falsly, I will here prefent you with the opinion which even Calvin aad Beza once enter- tained of Epifcopal government. Calvin in his Epiftle to Cardinal Sadoiet, fays that he fhould reckon thofe men who fhould rt]tCi fuch aa Hierarchy (as the Church of England) *' nulla non anathemate dignos," worthy of the higheft degree of excommunication. And Beza, fpeaking of the fame church, f3y«;, " Let her * enjoy that lingular blefling of God, which I wifh may be perpetual to her." And in the firft chapter of the fame book, he exprefles his doubts -, (doubts very different from yours) whether any man could rejed: the order of Bifhops in fuch a reformed church ; " If (/ays he) there be fuch, God forbid that any man in his witi fhould afTent to the mahefs of thofe men.'* * Epiph. hares. 55 75. f Ad Tradl. de aaia. c. 18, [ /<* I If tlien, the univerfal church condemned and pronounced Aerius a madman for broaching pref- byterianirm in the fourth century ; and Beza and Calvin in the fifteenth pronounced thofe mad and "jjorthy of bemg anathematized^ who fhould dare to revile the Hierachv and defpife Epifcopal ordinati- jon in the chu ch of Englapid \ little reafon can you have for dpi:btir4g whether Tertullian ever faid " he would be reckoned a mad man who would attempt 3t/' in his days. But, let not all your anger blaze pnly againft: Tertullian and me-- 1 pray you let fomeof it$ fparks reach the border of Calvin*s gar- ment i you know he Ipved fise -, and loved to communicate fire to others, you know that he was the caufe of *H>urning Servetus ! Tp put you into fomc degree of good hutDCur, Sir, I will now lowijr jny language and exchange the word mad man for the word dreamer - — {z more gentle apd pacific v/ord to be furc ;) and join with Bifhop Beveridge faying, •' from the davs of the -j-Apofiies, no body ever dreamt that Bifhops and Presbyters were of the spime order.'* Whei^ you have adduced the evidences of St. Paul, Chryfortom, Jerome, Ambrofcj Auilin, Th?- odorus, Primafius, Theophiiail, Oecomenius, Aenfclm, Gregory, Oratian, he. to prove that Biih- pps and Presbjters arc in all rcfpc^s the fame— it will be proper to attend to your quotations ', intlie mean tinie, 1 will, take the liberty of making a few remarks upon what yon^ (echoing Mr. I'owgood*? words)--'Ca!l a ^' well ^nown acknowieged, inccn- teftiblc fad), that Presbyters in the celebrated church ©f Alexandria ordained tvqn thpir own bilhops, fqr '» Notes on Cotel. Ap. Fathers, f For oppofmg the doclrinc of the Trinity Scrvctu: was burnt alive at Geneva, 1553. [ n \ more than two hundred years, in the earlled ages of chriftianity.** Mr. Towgood refers to the teftimony of Ej- tychius, a Patriarch of Alexandria who wrote in the tenth century, nearly nine hundred years after the eftablifliment of that church ; and no writer ^i the firft five centuries gives us the leait hint of anv fuch pradice. When Amrus hbnol took Alexandria, he burnt all the books in the city- -an irreparable lofs to the literary world : " What *ee.ard then is due to an author (as the Kev. Dr. ^iJowden fays) who quotes no authorities, and lived too late, to know any thing of the church of Alexandria, but what is to be derived from the primitive writers ?'* EuTYCHius* ignorance of the early times of the Alexandrian church is exceedingly confpicuous in the account he gives of Origen--the moft celebrat- ed Ecclefiafkic ot the age he lived in ; he lays, V In the time off the Emperor Juftinian there was one Qrigen, Bifhop of the Manbagonfes, who aflerted the (lo<3:rine of the tranfmigration of fouls,and deni- ed the refurre<5lion ; that Juftinian fenc for Origen to Conftantinopie, and that Eutychius, the bifliop of that city, excpmfnunicated him." Every woM of this is falfe ; for Origen never was a bifhop ; and he lived in the end of the fecond and beginning of the third centuries •, and the Em- peror Juftinian in the fifth. Eutychius alfo fays, that three biihops were excommunicated at the fame time with Origen, viz. Iba, bifhop of Roha, Thad- deus, bifhop of MafTiinenfa, and Theodoret, biftiap of Ancryra : but all thefe bilhops were dead before * See his fecond letter to Dr. Styles, pages 98, 9^^ t Eufcb. Eccl. hift. Lib. 2, [ 78 i the time of Jufl:inian. What credit then is due to. you, or to Mr. Towgood, or to Eutychius, for a piece of hiftory built upon £o fabulous a founda» tion ? The ftory of the Alexandrian Presbyters ordain- ing their own bifliops receives no fmall degree of corre<5lion from the following quotation from *Eva- grius, who informs us that " John one of the pres- byters of Alexandria, made a journey to Conllanti- nople, being fent on an embafly to make an addrefs to the emperor, that whenever it fhould happen that their bifhop fnould die, the inhabitants of Al- exandria might have the liberty of ek5Iing one to prefide over their church whom they Ihould have a mind to." Upon which, Valefius makes the fol- lowing remark. " The power of ekciing. their bilhops had been taken from the clergy and people of Alexandria, and'the emperor had removed the privilege of nominating the bifhop of Alexandria to himfelf, as is apparent from this place 5 the which we deny not was done by force, and againft the ec- clefiaftic laws. Neverthelefs the roman emperors, not without reafon, challenged that power to them- felves, after the murder of Proterius the Alexandri- an Bifhop, in regard to the city of Alexandria, by its own inclination prone to feditions, had feveral times raifed vehement difturbances in the deRion of Bifhops." The Alexandrian * Presbyters^ when they cledl- * Alexandriae a marco Evangelifta wfque ad Herarkm et Dionyfium Epifcopos, Presbyters fem- per unum ex fc eledum, in excelfiofi gradu colloca- tiim Lpiicopiim nominabant ; quomodo (i exercit- vs imperarorem faciat. Hieron. Ep. 85 adEvagr, dianifins confec. 2^7. obiet 267. [ 79 ] ed a blfhop condu(?\ed him to the Eplfcopal throne,' and placing him on it, proclaimed him BiJJjop ek5l : and no hiftorian but Eutychius ever faid that they proceeded to perform any ad of confecration. The fame hiftorian in his account of the ordina» tion of Timothy Aelurus furniflies us with a dupli- cate of a letter fent to the Emperor Leo, by the Egyptian Biftiops and clergy, which militates I think very much againft yoUr well kno'U}?; /"<7^?.— • They write thus " Timothy taking with him two Bifhops who had been legally depofed, as if he could have received ordtnation from two Bifhops, not fo much as one of the orthodox Bijhops^ throughout the Egyptic Biocefe being there^ who are always wont to be prefent at Juch ordinations of the Bijhsp of the Aleii'_ mdrians" As I confider this as an evidence ojdbme irrt- portance, 1 (hall prefent you with theorigmial latin, left it fhould be thought that 1 had given an un- favourable tranilation. You may find the words^ Part 3. c. 22. of the Counc. Chale. Edit. Paris. 1671. Col. 893. "- Aflumens fecum Timotheus jafte condemnatos duos Epifcopos, vt clericos iimiliter qui (ficut diximus) in exilio fuerant habi- tare damnati, tanquam manus impofitionem fufcep- turus a duobus, nullo penitus Orthodoxorum Epif- coporum ex Discefi Aegyptica prsefente, ut mos efi in talibils Alexandrinorur.i R-piJcoporum Ordinationibus ititerejfe,*' — Dupin fays that ths uncanonical ordi- nation of this "Egyptian Bidiop, by two Biftiops, (the Canons requiring three Bilhops to confecrate the Eleft) happened A. D. 457 three days before Eailer. That there is not even the fliadow of truth in your well knovjUf acknowkgd^ inconlefiikk fad, that E 80 ] for 206 years the Alexandrian presbyters ordained their own Bifhop, is manlfeft : neverthelefs to eluci- date the fuhjcd one degree more, I fubjoin the fol- lowing a.ccount of St. Athanaims' promotion to the See of Alexandria, in the year 326 taken from the Synod Ep. Council. Alex, the translation by Dr. Cave—" No fooner was Alexander (their former Bifliop)dead, but the people of Alexandria became pafTionately clamorous for Athanafius to fucceed^ univerfaily flocking to the church, and publickly putting up their petitions to God, in that behalf, continuing in their devotions day and night ; yea, and foiemniy adjuring the Bijhups who were come to town, to fettle a new Billu)p in that See, to con- fecrate and ordain him, 'till when, they would neither leave the Church thenifcives, nor fufFer the Bijhops to depart. Which was no fooner done, buc it was entertained with the univerfal joy and fatisfac- tion, bo^k^i xhz Clergy 2indi People, manifcfted by all open ligns of feftivity and rejoicing, cheerful looks, general confluences to behold the man, and common gratulations and thanks to God, for fo great a bicfTing." There ♦s nothing here that looks like the preci- Qus hiftory you depend fo much upon ; nor can 1 find the ieuft hint ot it, in any author but Eutychius. Will you then, Sir, be fo obliging as come to par- ticulars, fpecify the time when thefe two hundred years of Egyptian presbyterianifm commenced — inform us how many Bifhops (and their names) re- ceived this fort of confecration — and how it came to pafs, that all at once, at the expiry of the 200 years of presbyterianifm, the Egytians reverted to Epifcopacy. Do this Sir, and you will furnilh the world with a very convincing proof that you know more of the tranfaiSions of the Egyptian Diocele [ 8i ] during the firft five centuries than all the hiftorians of Egypt, Greece and Rome put together. Now Sir, having pafled through tot dijcrimind i-erwn — you kindly introduce me to Dr Lardncr's Deacons, " whofe peculiar work, accorciin i'. IfHrit of intolerance and perfecution. But this fyftem, which you fo earneflly contend for, fecms not to be properly underftood even a- mong youiTcives ; ferae of your brethren fay it is thcfaine with Hpiicopacy, Bifhop and Prieft being the iamfr thing, and others that it is different. Some fay it ;'j a diVine, and others, a human inftitutiooo Some fay fuccenijn is necciTary, -others not.. Sopc fay their fu-cefTion h derived in the Vmcof Pr^sbyiers fince tiie retbrrnation — others (and I may include yburfelfin the number) f^y it is in the iiue of the people. You fay, :** fucctfllon is no?: more necefiary to you, than to me, nor is it necefiary to cither." How can thefi contradidory accounts be reconcil- ed ?, Why Siir-your fyflcm outproieufes Proteus himfelf ! Mr, C/iLAMY differs from you exceedingly on the arlicV? of fuccenifjn in the miniftry, when he fays the reafoin vvliy we and our brethren " are willing %o keep ?:'A a * Jucci/Jjcn of nninjif'/s is, ' that cur ivorfliip muy net. ceuic, nor fcrious religion die a- mcng us, nor oi-ir principles want fome to defend them." ii!.: does not however fay from what origi- jTiiii fouicc 'their faccefiion is derived, but it may he ^ Def. p.\i-t I. p;ge 190. [ ^7 ] traced up as far as It can go—and that is hv.t a fliffrt way. Perhaps, Sir, it may not be dilplcaHng, if 1 here introduce the hiftory of an ordination to which it is probable all fubfequent ordinations in the pref- bytcrian line, in this country, have an iiiviT.ediare reference. Mr. Prince in his New I'^ngknd Chronology informs us, that a Mr. vSkekoii and a Mr. Higginlbn who had been ordained MiniR'ers in the Church of England, abjhring the ordination they had from Bilhops, fubmitted to be ordained in a manner for which ecclefiaftical hiltory has no name. Biit that I may not be thought to belie the caufe, I will q«cte the very words of my aiuhor; *' July 2oth A. D. 1629, governor * Endicot at Salem fets apart this day for folemn prayer with fading, and the trial and choice of a pallor and teacher : the forenoon they fpend in prayer and teaching ; the afternoon, about their trial und eke- tic-n : chufing Mr, Skelton paftor, Mr. HigginfoQ teacher J and they accepting -, Mr. Higginfon with three or four more of the graveft members of the church lay their hands on Mr. Skelton v/ith folema prayer •, then Mr. Skekoi;, &c. the like upon Mr, Higginfon : and Thurfday, Auguft 6, is appointed another day of prayer and fading, for the choice of ciders and deacons and ordaining them." " August 6, being Thurfday the ^appointed day being come : afcer the prayers and fcrmons of the two mimjien ; in th i end of the day, the faid con feffion and covenant being read in the public antrii- biy, are folemnly confented to : & they immediateiy proceed 10 ordain their }}2in:Jfersi asalfoMr. Hough- ton a ruling elder j being feparated to rheiv fevcral t N. E. Chron. page. i89.-«Tli!> ordioatioa took place 169 years finr e. ' N. K. ChroD. .p. 190. [ 88 ] jcfiiGes by the impofition of the hands of fome of the bretiiien i^puointed by the church thereunto." I confers, all this /oc/^i X\'kQ popular freedom or fra - tervai order : but it this is the fort of ordination whofd validity you are advocating — much good may it do you. Here is a re-ordainirg, a reciproca! ordaining, a clcrico — iaico ordaining ' the moft ab- furd and heterogeneous of all the mixtures which ever were occafioned by any fortuitous con<:ourfe of atoms j the -f image which Nehachadnezzar faw in his dream is a merejeit compared to it ! How- ever, all this Babylonifh confufion tends to fatisfy and pleafe the people, by making them joint par- takers in thefcheme ofdeluiion. " The prophets prophecy deceits, and the people love to have it fo." Changing the fcheme from the reciprocal and mixt ordination of Meftrs. Skelton.and Higginfori at Salem, to the Apoflolip and canomical confecra- tion of bifhop Jar vis at New- Haven, you cannot avoid being a little envious j and I fufpe " prophane beyond all prophanenefs is the doc- trine of thofe who contend that the Apoftlcs them- (clves, much Icls that any of their fallible fucceflbrs had a difcretionary power of forgiving (ins !" And Mr. Calamy full of the xame fpirit which irfpired Dr. Clark — fays — " I could hot help reckoning any modern that fiiould ufe fuch language, as iit. I Dan. c. ii. t. 31—35. I «9 ] Ignatius does, as one out of his wits or a blaf- phemer !" Dr. Clarke, Sir, was an avowed Arian— it was therefore highly inconfiftent with his principles to fiipporc that there was any power inherent in Jefus of Nazareth, or committed by him to his Apoftles, adequate to the remiflion of fin. He was an op- pofer of the divinity of Jefus, and his creed a col- \c6t\on of cold, dark^ naked Negatives ! But fuch Epif- copalians as he was, fuit beli when a helping hiind h wanted to pull down Epifcopacy. Chrift'i worft enemies are thofe of his own hotihold ! " Delegating an authority (you fay p. i8) to dufl: and alhes like themlelves, of forgiving and retaining the fins of whomfoever they pleafe !" Had you taken the pains Sir, to read over our daily and eucharirtic abfolutions, you would not have fo pointedly belied us, in faying that our bifliops claim- a power " of forgiving and retaining thr fins of whomfoever they pleafe '* Is not our morning and evening abfolution worded thus — " Almighty God the father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, who de- •fireth not the death of a finner, but rather that he; may turn from his wickedncf and live, hath ^'ivea power and commandment to his minifters to declare and pronounce to his people being penitent the abjolutU on and remrjjion of their fins. He [viz. God) par- doneth and abjolveth all thofe who truly recent ^ and unfeignedly believe his HJy (jojpel. Therefore, let us belcech him to grant us true repentance, and his holy fpirit •, that thofe things may pleafe him which we do at this prtfent, and that the reft of our life hereafter may be pure and holy •, fo that at the laft, wc may come to his eternal joy, through Jefus Chnlt ow- Lord." Amen. M [ 9° 1 In the Euchariftic form of abfo'ution there is nd moxe djfiretionary pcirdcn of J?nSy than in the daily i let it Ipeak for itleif-^" Almighty God our heav- enly Father, who of his great mercy, haih pn mi fed forgivenefiojftns to all thofc who, with hearty reptn- tance'^tiditrui faith \.ViXx\ \M\X.^\\\vi\\ hdvc mercy up- on you^ pnrdo?! and deliver you from ail your fins, icrfirm ■i^M\ firefigthen sou in all goodnefs, and hrin^ you to everlaftjng life, throngh Jefu^ Chtift- our l.ord.'* Amen, For the fake of fuch of my readers as have not prayer bcolis at hand to examine for themfelves, i have put down our eftablilhed forms of abfolutiort, that every^perfon may fee how fcandaloufly you be- fie us. Tell me Sir, I hereby challenge you to tell mt^ in which of our offices, grdnti?ig remijfton to^ ot fttaining ihe fins of whomfoevit ijbe fleafe^ is to be found ! fpeak out — our offices will bear the h'ght — they fliun nor invefligation-^they are not of fuch a nature as to require the ffecrefy of the boforh, nor depend they upon the infallibility of extemporane- ous elTufion. In one word, they bid defiance to the tongue of flander— and the frequent attemptd to deaden their luilre only tend to heighten it. , Calumiiy Sir,isa hf^n6iisCrIrhe,hewhb faid, "thou fiialt not i3ear falfc witnefs againft thy neighbour,'* faid alfc — " wholefoever fins thou doft retain, they are retained— and whofefoever fins thou doll reniit, th'jy are remitted unto them." Who will fay that thefe words were fpoken without a meaning ? Who will lay that they (hall return unto the fpcaker void, tinable to tffecl; the end for vvhich they were fpok- en ? His word is wjth life and power — nay his word sbideth for ever. God pardoreth no man without true repentance and unfeigned belief of his holy gofpt;! > and it is only to fuch that we proclaim thi [ 91 } pardon of fin — not of ourfelves, but by the orQ;ait of our lips, the Almighty caufing his voice to be heard. Was you indeed ignorant of all this ? if you was, you ought to have enquired — our miniftrattons are not performed in a corner ; " a difcretionary power of forgiving fips," is neither a part of our creed nor of cur pra^ice ! I whifper not this into your ear ; I proclaim upon the hpufe l:op, and I trul): I fpeak to wife men, and invite them, to bear witnefs to what I fay, that we n^ay be no more troubled at the voice of the Handerer, or the abule of the calum- niator muttering from the duft and laying " pro- phane t beyond al) prophanqnefs is the dodlrine o^ thofe who contend that the Apoftles themlelves, much lefs that any of their fallible fuccefibrs h^-d ^ difcreUonary power of forgiving fins,'* I cannot difmifs this fedtion of your letter, vvith- out remarking Sir, what artifice you have ufed to make your readers prejadge the queilion ; Grilling in the aid of the moft horrible exclamations. ''Oh! the horror of tliat worm, &c. •" " Eternal burn- ings who can bear !" as if you wifhed to v/aken the pafiions and preclude the underftandjng •, and en- joyed more fatisfadlon in contemplating the punifii- ments prepared for the wicked and impenitent, than in admiring and adoring that ineffable mercy which " defireth not the death of a finntr, but rather that he may turn from his wickednefs and live.'* A fiafh of affecled oratory employ j-d to d.iikcn and brinp into contempt " the miniftry of repentance an( remiffi m of fins,'* is no index of your being ar evangelical Boanerges, but rather of your having a Jmall portion of that fpirit, which breathes only peac^ f Page 19 of your Letter, [ 92 ] on earth, good will to aU men, and implores mercy for itfelf. Howrver, indulging yourrelf in mifre- prefenting and belying the offices of our church, and in the exuberance of your contempt for Epif' copacV, crying out " favoured mortals ! what facri- fice can I make to enjoy your friendfhip / Like the ambafladors of Palermo at the feet of Pope Martin IV. behold me before you, adopting their Innguage as well as their pofture, thrice repeating~/^ff« ihat iakeji away the fins of the world have mercy upon us ;** you rather es-citc our pity, than our contempt. It is not the qneftion, Sir, whether the Roman Pontiffs required fuch homage and fupplication a» the ambafladors of Palermo ofFered to Martin IV ; ror am I concerned to make aniwer whether that addrefs and afl of adoration were made to the Pope, or to that Being, whofe High Prieft they believed him to be: the queftion is, with what degree of propriety can you thus p-etend to offer a fort of mock adoration to our Bifhops and Clergy, who confider God as the alone hearer of prayer, the fole objed of woriTiip, and who alone can forgive fin ? Shame flufh that cheek that can thus deal in folemii mockery ! furely that tongue is no " tree of life,'' t^'hich can thus throw its fpittle upon the faces of thofe men who are divinely appointed to (hew unto others the way of falvation ! Are you not really afh^medSir, nay are you not even confcience ftruck for uttering fuch a grofs faflchood, that our ordina- tion office intends to " confer upon duft and aflies, adifcretjonarv power of forgiving and retainino- the fins of whomfoever thi-y pleafe ?" Did notthl'pen quiver in your hand reludant to obey, when you compelled it to delineate fuch words of falfehood and injuftjce ? Repent, 1 intreat you Sir, of your un- charitable condua towards us, and we will not fail to pray that God may pardon you. You and I [ 93 } are i)ow in the prefence of our God, and before th^ bar of the public j hereafter we fhall (land befor^ the throne of judgment aad in the prefence of men 9nd angels ; will you hold up your head then and repeat whac you now fay concerning the church of Chrift ? if it fball then appear, that I have been a falfe witneis for the church, tellifying that it is Epifcopal in its government, whereas God eftahlini- ed it at firft upon the Presbyterian model j witnefs againft me, I ftand or fall at the mercy of that judge in whofe fervicc, I never will employ the tongue or pen of falfchood ! According to promife, 1 will now introduce Mr. Robinfon, whofe aid has been very beneficial to your prefenc compofition. This Mr. Robinfon, you know perfonaily I prefume, and I have fome reafon to believe that he was your Gamaliel. This anabaptlft teacher at Cambridge, O. E. publifhed in the year i/7S,a Syllabus of Ledures upon the principles of Non conformity. In one of thofe Lectures, ••' he fpeaks in * the perfon of Jefus Chrift, upon the tribunal of Judgment at the laft clay, and fuppoks him prefencing to the world on that tremendous occafion, Ki-i faithful fervantSy the r^on-conformift minifters',as the great objeds of his favour ; and at the larne time fending otf thofe holy tyrants, the hifiiopsof the church of England, into evcrlatling firej with that dreadful fentcnce — ^art /" " And what are they to be damned for ? B.d- caufc they could not approve o( Non conformity I a religion of negatives ! They faw enough of its fruits to diflike it in former times, from its firfl: appear- ance in this kingdom : but they did not fee, as we * S'y^ an effay ouih" churctj, p. 64. [ 94 ] do now, that its end is fidelity -, to which it hath been tending for many years part, and hath now at- tained it in the writings of Dr. Prieftly, and the Unitarian aflbciation. Thofe Ledures, with this dreadful feriterice of damnation to the Bifhop, by brother Robinfon, were approved by the Ecfier Af- fociation at EJfex, at Harlow, and recommend to t\\Qftjter churches by order of all, June i8th, 1778. Of what charadcr muft thefe fjfter churches be, if they are of tlie fame fpirit with Brother Robinfon ? farely they are not chajie virgins, prefentable to a ( itieek and mercifui Saviour, who prayed for his mur-^" tierers ; but unmerciful — — — , curfino; and damnina i}\z eftablii'h.ed church tor retaining Epifcopacy, Had there been no Non-conformity, the poor bifh- ops nrl^^ht have ^fcaped like other men ; and have been entitles to their chance of mercy, through the merits of their Redeemer, who died for them, and for all men, and fciit forth the firft Bifhops by Wit 6i\vn inamediftLe auihority," In another note, the author of the eflay on thp church, writes thus, " But the moft fuperlative in- ftance of fanatic malignity I ever yet faw, is to be found in the work's o^ Milton, v;hofe malignity was rendered more mahgnant by the deprefled and affliaed condition to which the church was then re- duced. He was a man of a bright and perfedl im- agination, and gifted with a wonderful choice of beautiful and defcriptive expreHions. But the v;eapon is the worfe for its {harpnefs, when malice hvJa the handling of it : and imagination is a mirror which can reflecSl the fires cf hell as well as the lights of heaven ;' of which I think, we have an example in the following inved:iye againft the bifti- ops of fhe church of England. ^" But they — thait by the impairin;^ and diminution of the true fajth, the dillrejTtis and fervitude of their country, afpire to [ 95 ] high dignity, rank, and promotion here, after « ihameful end in this life, (which God grant them,) Hull be thrown down eternally into the darkeft an4 deepeft gulph of hell i where under the defpiteful concroul, the trample and fpurn of all the other damned, who, in the anguilli of their torture, fhall have no other eafe than to exercife a raving and beaftial tyranny over them, as their flaves and ne- groes, they fnall remain in that plight for ever, the bafeil, the lowermoft, the nioft dejeded, moft un^ derfoot," and down trodden vaffils of perdition.'* " Condufion of Milton's Treatife on Reformati- on, 'vol. I. p 274. If it were put to my option, (fays the author of theeffay) whether I would be ani idcot, without a fingle faculty of mind, or a fingle fcnfe of the body ; or whether I would have Mil** ton's imagination attended with this fiery fpirit of fanatacifm j 1 fiiould not hefitate one moment to determine. I have heard much about your preaching and praying and the frequent ufe of hell-fire, everlafting burnings, &c. and that you frequently in public iddrefs God in prayer thus, " O God, what is hell? making a very long paufe, as if you meant to give the hearer of prayer time to anfwer your very ex- traordinarv queftion ! It is therefore with me no matrer of v^onder, that you (how fo much malignity .tgainft a church, uhofe care is not fo frighten her. children by ccntinually preaching up the terror of the Lord, but to draw them by the cords of love, and invite them by the voice of affcdlion to lay hold On everlafting life. Let us fee next v.-hat you advance agalnfl oui* form of cdination. In quoting my words, there is a manifeft inaccuracy, but whether it proceeded irom inattention, or a defign cf making your readers t 9(' 3 judge according to your ftatement of the cafe, 1 will not determine, i ou do mie the honor of quoting the exceptionable kntence fairly and at full lengtR in your I9ch page \ again in p. 21, you prefent it mangled and diflorted, " The Ju.cejfsrs oftBe Apof- iles however have always faid 2it an ordination, receivi. ibou the Holy Gb.jl; &?f.'* Excufe me Sir, I faid as you have quoted in p. 19. " So in like manner the Apoftles and their fucceflbrs always have done, do at this day,6<: will do to the end of the world, fay- ing at the inftant of their laying*on of hands, after 'the example and by the authority of Jefus their Lord,' " Rec'etve thou the Holy Ghoji, C^c.'* There is a manifeft difference between aJ'Wayi have done, and fo in like manner. The former im- ply the ufe of the indentical words of Jefus at the ordination of the Apoftles ; the latter, that thofc words are the Formula, according to which all fu- ture ordinations have been, and vvill be performed. However varioufly expre/Ted the forms are, which Morinus hath collected, they arc more or iefs ac- cording to that ufed by our Lord. As appeared moll eligible in the judgment of thofe ecclefiaftics who had the charge from time to tim'e of corredling the Roman MifTal, the forms and attendant cere- monies were varied— as in charity we are bound to" believe, with a view to render them more and more perfefi. And I think. Sir, that it is highly proba- ble, although we have not fcripture evidence for it, (but at the fame time there, is none again il it) that the Apoftles did actually convey the divine right of Apoftolic fuccciTion in the very manner, that , Jefus had conveyed it to themfelvea. Nor is it likely that the Apoftles' immediate fucceffbrs would take upon thera to change that form into any d- thcr i unkfs they did it upon the fame principle that they difcontinued the ufe of the name Apoftlej [ 91 ] and were content to be called fimply Bifkop??. Tfi the fourth century, when Aerlus adding- to ArianilVti his own conceit, that B (hops and Presbyters were all one — probably tor the fake of peace and rriuiual condefcenfion, the form of ordination was firli re- duced from the fublimitv of the Apcrlolic to a lefs authoratative mode of didion. In the firil centurv innumerable herefies and fchifms obfcured the face of the church both in the eaft and well — and at this period Morinus' colledion commences, and this you call the adrlieji ages of the church • but there were four centuries anterior to this, and confcquent-. \y all earlier than your eariicft. The Biihops of thefirft, feccnd, and third centuries faw no neceffity for committing to parchment the form of orGina- tion which they daily ufed— it beincf already in the books of the Evangelifts ; and it is highlv prefum- able, that- in the fourth century, the firft form that was committed to writing, was the firft ftep of de- parture from the original fcHpture form. I cannot fay what degree of credit may attend my COMJeflures concerning the ufe of the fcrip'ure fprni of ordination down to the 4th century — but that you fliould reprobate our church for ufing the Evangdical form of ordaining biftiops, when yo'u and your brethren protefs to do nothing but what you find enjoined word for word in Icripture ; appears impoflible to be accounted tor,' except upon the fcheme of contraries, -^o ^^k r^ .But let that be as it may ; what objeflions cVt5 you have againft our B'llhops receiving the Bc!y Ghoft ? or to their faying at the conlecration' of a Bifhop Elea— Receive thou the Holy Ghoft? Had you been ^t baniaria, when Peter and John' laid their hands upon the bclitvmg Samaritans— WOUid you have entered a proteft dgaioit their re- N t 9« ] Ceiving the Holy Ghoil, by ^he mediunrt of that fignificanc ceremony ? Or had you been prefent when Jefus ordained the Apoftleff, and faid unto them, Keceive ye fhe Holy Ghoft, &c. would you i?ave ifiterpofed your wifdom and prefcribed a more proper way of ordination-^a mere precatory form ; conveying nO authority at all ? Such aa ordination perhaps would fuit beft for the eftabliihing a fyllera ot popular freedom and fratefnal ordet ; bm would a- vail little in " reducing every thing that oppoCeth ic- felf to the obedience of tfie Gofpel." Chrift is the- fupreme governor of his church— ^and tho* abfent in body yet is he (pirituaHy prefent with it always and ^very where ; his church is no temporary fociety, nor is the government and dodirincs thereof to be altered by the whim, and caprice of any man. He «/ho " hangeth the * earth upon nothing, and by his fpirit hath garnifhed the heavens", knows beft pn what foundations, whether angelic or human, ic is proper to build his church j and ift what manner to breathe into her his Holy Spirit. — The example of Jefus, in fending the Apoftles is more to be re- garded by them and their fuccefliofif than the joint opinion of all the rational world (could we ftrppofe th^m to give an opinion) to the contrary, " As jny Father hath fent me, even fofend I you," faith Jefus to the Apoftles. Ow the human nature of Jeius the Holy Spirit was poured out without mea- sure i on the Apoftles he breathed— and faid re- ceive ye the Holy Ghort, &c. " Unto every one of us is jnven grace according to the meafurc of the gift of Chnit." The meafure for perfonal fandifi^a- lion, and the ecelefiaftical meafure are different*—' fuited to the particular cafe and employment of each— like the manna of old, " he that gathered much had nothing over, arid he that gathered little * Job. c. XXVI, V. 7 and i^. [ 99 J hid fi6 lack.'* It becomes every man to tound and in prifon for offend- ing againft human fociety v how can we fuppofe that ther^ is no binding, nor Iq^ng from offences comf- mitted againft the fociety of which God himfelf i^ the inftitutor and governor ? God carries on his works of nature and of grace by the inllrumentality of fecond caufes. From the Peity we receive nothing but through the medium of the man Chrift Jefus. Through him we are to be loofed from the burden of our fins and >vhcnfoever the miniiterof Jefus pronounces liberty to the captive he does it in the perfon of Chrift. ii\ this manner St. Paul par- E JOO ] doped the penitent Corinthian — " If I * forgave ^- py thing, to whom I forgave it, for your fakes for- give I It, en prof opoo Chrirtou, in the f.iCQy or in J:he ferfon of Chriji. It was not Paul in his indivi- dual capacity who pardoned the Corinthian, it was iCh rift, who by the hpsof Paul pronounced his abfo- Jution. St. John Chryfoftom fays, ^\ Heaven waits and expe(fts the prieft's fentence upon earth •, the Lord follows the fervant, and what the fervant YP^htly binds or loofcs here upon earth., tint the Lord confims in Heaven." The Saxon, Bohemi- an -f and Auguftrin conRflions thus fay, " if our confcfiion is feriou? and hearty, the abfolution pro- nounced by man, duely appointed, is as efFedual as if God did pronounce it from Heaven." And Dr. Hammond thus comments on the words " What- foever ye (the governors of the church) (hall bind on earth, fliali be bound in Heaven" — that is, whom- iRiever (thus negleding J your determinations) you fhall call out; of the church on earth, fhall, without repentance, and fubmiffion to your cenfures, and re- formation upon them, and fincere defire to recon- cile and approve thcmfelves to you, are by me ex- cluded from Heaven. Thefe cenfures of yours in- fl:ded by this commifTion from me, Ihall be backed by ME, And further, that this authority might not be claimed by whomfoever had a mind to it — but that it might be fixt and known to belong to a cer- tain order of men, our Redeemer told his Apoftles " \Vhen II the fon of man (hall lit on the throne o£- his glory, ye alfo fhall fit upon twelve thrones, judg- ing the tvyelve tribes of Krael.", Thereby, (as the author of Lay-baptifm invaled, fays) making therp * 2 Cor. c. ii. V. lo. f Chr. 5. Horn, on If. X See thefe Confellions. II St. Matt. c. xix. V. 28c [ lOI ] and their fucceflbrs the Biflioos, his fplrifual vice- roys, enthroning them in their Epifcopai ch.iirs^ •>vhichthe fcripture here, & the primitive chriftians in conformity therjsto, call thrones, and giving them power and authority to be the fupreme fpiriru.il rulers and judges over his whole fpuitual Kingdom, the Church Militant, ier/relencs;d here by the twelve tribes of Ifrael. I hope Sir. that I have fufficiently anfwered your queftion — whether 1 believe that Blfhop Jarvis can forgive fin. You next add another qutcre naturally arifing out of the foregoing — " on your dying bed, would abfolution from any mortal calm the puturbatlons of confcience,and pofll-fs your mind with a fortitude equal to the t^ruggle ?" 1 thank you Sir, for this queftion, as it will give me an opportunity of mak- ing <2^(?tf^ confejfton before many brethren. Daily tranfgreflions call for daily repentance and daily abfolution ; and I defire by the help of God not to. defer repentance to the la ft verge of life : however often 1 confefs and forfake my fins, fo cftea is my confcience purged from guilt and attendant perturbation of mind j becnufe 1 know that "• God is faithful and juft to forgive me my fins and to cleanfe me from all unrighteoufaefs.*' I believe my growth in grace is progrelFive ; and as from a child I continued advancing until I became a man, fo I defire to rnake progrefs in the w ays of godlinefs un- til 1 come to the ftature of a perfcd man in Chrift Jefus. This progrefs meets wiih many lets and im- pediments"— -for the bert of men " are fore let nnd hindered in running the race that is fet before them •," but I pray that God's " bountiful grace 2nd mercy may fpeeuily help and deliver me through [ 102 ] Ihe fatisfaAIoh of his Son, ray Lord" anc! Saviour ^ and (o I can proceed from one degree of grace unto another"—" prefling forward toward the mark ^Ot the prices of the high calling of God in Chrift Jefus-' ibiy Saviour, who died that 1 might live. I look for- ward then to death ; when I ihall commit the charge of my family to Hini who hath given them '* th^ promife of the life that now is and of that life which is to come j" I look forward to death, 1 fay, as I would to the end of my journey — the enterancc into the reft prepared for the people of God. " Per- turbation of confcience," I truft will ihen be to pie a ftranger j noiv I have to lament and mourn for my fins ; and whillt I am preaching to and praying for others, I have to take care " left I myfelf be a caft-away,'*' Copying after the example of th$ Apoftle of the Gentiles, I truft, nay am cotifidcnf, that at my approaching diflblution rejoicing ifi hope I ihall be able to fay, *' I have fought a ^ good fight, I have^mjhed my courfe, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteoufnefs, which the Lord the righte- pus Judge Ihall give me at that day ; and not td me only, but unto all them atfq that love his ap^ pearing.'* To that day I Ipok forv/ard without an- ticipating " perturbations of confcience;" or feel- ing the leaft.fortafte of the ftruggle you fpeak of, I ani no ftranger to death, 1 have bee i leveral times on the very confines of the grave ; but God faw proper to prolong my life, he *' had need of* me to do foir.e more work for him, and I do it joyful- ly, not thereby expedingto merit heaven as a debt, but to prepare myfclf to receive it as a mercy. ThJs * " There is no order, no peace in the church wbe#e it may nor be h\rfiil to judge of its own nriembers an<^ retain within due bounds their iicentio«s humours."-** Synod of JDort, I 103 ] U my way of thinking — they are my honis— yo^ fee how ftrong the foundation 13 on which tliey ftand. From my infancy I have been taught to detcft eve- ry thing that is gloomy and hypocritical— and to admire and love a religion which is all love, all comfort, all joy in the Holy Ghoft ; and never to Separate the ufe of the means of grace from the hopes Qf Glory. Preferving the teftimony of a good con- fcience that in uprightnefs and godly fincerity llhave had my converfation in the world j neither adulterat- ing the word of God with human philofophy ; nor keeping back any part of his counfel ffom my peo- ple ', nor fpeaking fmocth things, nor prophefyipg- deceits in the name of the Lord ; nor negligent of the duties I owe to focial connexions, though ofteft perplexed with worldly cares, and much obftruftedi by human weafcnefs, I confider death as the gate by which I am to enter into blifs : and as I have ad- miniftered the holy Viaticum to others, to their comfort, at the hour of their death, fo the fame ad- ininiftered to myfelf by a biftiop or pricft duely au, thorifed, immediately before my departure hence^ would not only be highly confolotory, but I fhould ^cifider it an endearing token and pledge of the rc- furredlion of my body, and of that everlafting life fo Hear in profpedl. In this frame of mind, 1 coulcl triumphantiv fing— -** O death where is thy fting, O grave where is thy vi(5lory ? The Aing of death is fin, and the ftrength of fin is the law, but thanks, thanks, thanks be to God, whq giveth me the viAo- ry through Jefus Chrift my Lord." • ThvsjI willjoyfully take the fpoiling ofmyearthly (abern. cle, expeding foon to join the fociety of the (piritsotjuft men made perfedl ! And 1 believe ihat there are infinite numbers of Epifcopalians, aH over the earth, who would make you the fame anf* wer as 1 now have done. Marvel not at this Sir, [ 104 3 our religion is lovely, its foundation is ancient and immuveable ; it is the fanie yefterdav to day and for ever, it is ApoQioiic, it is divine -, ^e know in whom. we have bcheveu — nq clduds of doubt or Uncer- tainty hang over our faith, our creeds make an ef- feariai pare in our m;^rning and evening devotions, vjt pray as our Kfdeemer hath taught Us, and we are prepared ar a 1 tini^s to *' give any man who asketh us, a rcafon of the hope that is in us/* Now Sir, I am rea^y to attend to your further re- marks and cenfures upon Epiix;opacy. It is not a little aftonifhing to obferve with how much ignorance and virulence you make your re- peated attacks upon the l-'roteflant Epiicopal Church ! What injury has our church done to yoU or to your Forefathers, that you fo furioufly bfand- ifh the fpear of revenge againft her ? If the church of Rome has at any time done you a diiTervice — for that we are by no means accountable : but the Lord have mL-rcy upon ^^r B fhopi,Prieits, & Dea- tonsy (hould they at any time be brought under the povi'er of your hand ! By your way of reckoning, e- ven a good adion done by a papift, becomes a fin ; and an evil adion tends to promote the glory. ©£ God, if done by one of Mr. Baxter's * faints. As the only way to give validity to your own pr- dination, you ftr uggle hard to decry ours -, but if * Mr. Baxter in two editions of his Saints eiserlalling rtfi, printed before t1)e year i66o, inftead of the /Cm^ A>CT of tieaven^ as it is in the fcriptures, calls it the FarLament of Heaven (and, if like their o\t^n, it rnult have been a Y^x\\-d.\x\ii.\\t voithout a King) and into this Parliament he puts fome of the Regicides, and other like Sxiints, who were the^ dead.— Glaredon's Wil, vol. i, Ct vi. p. 114* [ 105- ] our ordination in the line of Eilhrps Isimperfed^a yours 13 ten thouland times more fo as runnirg in the line of Presoyters who had their ordination from thofc very Biihops, whofe fuccelli )n you v\;.(h to in- validate. But, as a preliminary to your leading propcifition— that a vaHd ordination cannot be rranlmittcd by an * iir.puie church ; let me call up- on your attention to diftinguifh holinefs of office * '* Denying the church of Rome the being of a church, which feme protellants lafhly and ignorantly, rigidly and uncharitably have done, hath been a great hindrance of reformation. And I verily believe the op-- pinion of moft Papifts are kept in, that the religion of. Protellants is a irew religion, is not of littlfe force to make them averfe from it to this day," Cafaubon's Neceffity for Reformation p. 145. Not Tong fince, an Epifcopal Clergyman in the fiate of New-Jeifey, in a fcrmon exprefled a charitable hope; that in thechuichof Rome there were many lincere and goodchriftians, and that many of that communion v.'ou'd find admiffion into the manfions of everlafting life ; this dodrine gave offence to fome perfons prefent, who deem- ed it impolTible that the gates of biifs coultl be open- ed to admit a papift. The feffion of Oi anger^ile entered a complaint againft this clergyman and his doctrine, be- fore the presbytery of New-York, who accordingly took up the matter (although the preacher Vi'as amenable be- fore quite a different tribunal) and pronounced a fen- lence of condemnation againfl both him ard his do£lrine of which they made an entry on their records. To ihefe records I appeal, to prove or difprove the fa£l. But Dr. Luther one of the principal Fathers of the reformation, after all his bitter declamations againfl: the church of Rome, in his book againft the anabaptiils ac- knowledges that, " under the Papacy are many gord chriltian things, yea all that is good in chri.'ianity.and that proteftants have it from thenoe. I fay, moreover, that under the Papacy is true chriftianity, even the Very kernel of chriftianity." o [ io6 ] from hoilnefs of perfon. This diilIn<5lion is fo ete-^ gantly and convincingly pointed out by the learn- ied and evangelical Biihop Home, in his fermon bli the unfpealcable gift, that I fhall not only h^ve my- readers pardon but their thanks tor inferring it here; "Persons are feparated froi-ri a cchimon condition £6 holy offices, that by their miniftration fouls may bt feparated from the pollution of (in to holinefs of life. So that holineis of office is as diflin(5l fromi liohnefs of life, as the caufe from the effcdl j one is givv n to the mmiftry, that the other may be produ- ced in the people. And though al! that are not in holy offices ough^ to lead holy lives, and it Ihould be a part of our daily prayers to God that he would enable them fo to do, yet a failure in duty is noti forfeiture of authority. The vices of a miniftcr make not void the adls of his miniftry 5 dominion in this cafe, as in all others, not being founded on grace, but on a pofitive commiffion given by him^ ^vho is impowered to give it, and contihuing in force *tiH he takes it away. It is with aii officer of the church as with an officer of the ftate : a mifde- ir.eanor does not vacate his office, or entitle another to ftep into it. If this necellary diftindhion between holinefs of office and holinefs of /^r/l7« be not kept up, the end tor which a miniftry was appointed will not be attained •, all will be teachers, and no hear- ers ; all governors, and no fuhje<5ls ; the church, as a fociety, will be diffclvcd, and a confufion in- troduced into the fpiritual fyltem, like that which prevailed in the nrwural, when the earth was ivith- cut [Gnn and void, and darknejs lay upon the face of the deep.'' Thus far this moft excellent prelate. Qualifications for an office can give no title or right to execute the duties thereof : Jet a man be ever fo well fkilled in the law •, he is not tkeret^ [ 107 1 made a counfellor -, or fuppofe a man converfant with every book of the holy fcriptures, that know- lege cannot conftitute him a minifter of the evangeli- cal difpenfation. The bible of itfelf can no more create a minifter of Jefus Chrift, than the laws of the land, a juftice of the peace. No man taketh hi§ honor to himfclf, and no man or body of men can convey it to another, unlefs authorized io to do, by th& original grantor of the commifTion. You very politely fay, that our fucceflion is a mere broken * rcDe of J and •, and the proof of this curious afTertion is \ you fay that we are defcended from the church of Rome. The impoflibility of deriving a fuccefTion through the channel of the church of Rome, is founded up- on the hypothefis that no fountains can flow, but fuch as are pure. If this were true, our fucceffion •were indeed " a mere broken rope of fand •," for none are pure, none are perfedtly holy, neither ec- clefiaftic nor laic. In your erroneous method of arguing upon this fubjed, you have fuffered your- felf to be greatly confirmed, by not attending duely to the di6tion of the 19th atide of the church of England i (quoted p. 25) which declares " the true church of Chrift to be a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure word of God is preached, &c.'» Now Sir, pleafe to reve^fe th^s dcfcriptionand fay, an iw;>«r and their fprings flowed no more ? Whatever yoa may think of this matter, they.ac- tuaUy did convey Apoftolic powers to many othier perfons, even after they had thus ceafed to be pure ; for they never made any claim to impeccability. Look into the Apocaliptic hiftory of the churches of ARa Minor and you will find five of the fcveil criminate r for one thing or another : would you th'^n infer, that their impurity rendered them in- capible ol tranfmitting a valid ecclefiaftical Cuccefli' on ? — I hope not. .. ' " Without a bluGi Sir, we acknowlege that our fucctu*oh x^u partly in the channel of the church of Rome from the days of Auguftin to thofe of the Re- formation •,. but if the church of Rome before, or during the time of our copnedibn with hc;r, h4d. de- parted from her Ol igioal purity, what is that to you or me ? If our forefathers have. eaten fouj- grapes are their children's teeth to be cverlaftii?gly kept [ 109 ] on edge ? — If that church erred in many things, flill fhe was a church, retaining all the eflentiali both of difcipline and doctrine ; and if her fine gold was alloyed with much adventitious matter, ftill fhe preferved and did not throw it away. Whatever crimes you lay at the door of the church of Rome, fhe was a faithful guardian of the holy fcriptures ; fhe always preferved a firm belief in the dodlrine of the Trinity,and kept an honeft record of the ordina- tions of her bifhops, priefts and deacons. It is no more than natural jufticc, to make acknowlegments where they * are due ; and if that church hath oc- cafioned a great deal of trouble in Chriftendom., (he bathamidft all that evil done a great deal of good. What is good let us efleem,what is evil let us avoid, and rather allow God to be her judge than afTume that prerogative to ourfelves. We are no more refponfible for the fins of our natural parents, than for thofe of our fpiritual : 'and to affirm that our ecclefiaflical defcent from the Apofties was interrupted by any real or fiflitious immoralities or ufurpations of the Popes or other Bifhopsof the Romidi communion, is not one iota lefs abfurd and void of truth, than if you had faid, that the aft of eating the fordidden fruit interrupt- ed the filial fucceflion of the human fpecies, and ren- dered the line of defcent from Adam downward a " mere broken rope offand." And if fo — it is no more necefTary that all the Bifhops of the church of Home fhould have been pure and perfe^^ in order Dr. Berkley preaching before a convention of the Epifcopal Clergy of N. England, in Trinity Church, Newport, on the rife and progrefs of the feveral fchiftns y^hich have happened in Europe fince the r«formation, introduced Calvin as a principal ador in the fchifmaiic jlrama, and concluded with faying, " his due, John Calvin was a gvcai aian. t MO 1 to the tranfmlflion of gn vininterrupted and valid ordination ; than that yoir father and grand father, &:c. up to Adam, ^ouid have iivcd ail their days without a bruife or a headache to, enable them to produce your reverence. Bodily (and even mental) diftempers no. more affedt a man's natural pedigree, than errors or im- moralities of the Romifh* Biiho^s affecftour fpirit- Val : tor as alteratives and rtftoratives,, vyith the biefling of God, can remove the ditlempers of the tody, and rcdore the man to the perfedl foundnefs and heakh of his moil remote progenitors i fo, >yith " • The Church of England maintaineth that the Roman Church, much irore the Greek Church, erreth not in the artl- <:!es we accouat fundamental, becaufe explicitly they confers them." Mr. Mede's 77 EpilUe. " We have not divided from the church of Ronie in aH things ; [faith Zmchy] but in th.ofe things only, m which (he bath (eparated ironi the ApoHolic Church, and indeed from herfelf as flue was ajiciently pure- Neither have we departed with any other purpofe, than if fl\e will return amended to her primitive forin, we alio will return to her, that we may have communion with her in her afl'emblies : which thatoBce it may be, with all our hearts wc bclesch Chri^ Jelus,, I Kierom Zanchy, aj^cd feventy years, with all my family, have thisatceited to the whole Church of Chrift to all eternity. For we left them as one (hould leave his father's houfe when it is infected, with a hearty dcTire to return again, (q fopn as it \t deanled.*' Zanchy's conftfBon Aft. 89. ♦* Touching tbofe main parts of chriftian truths, wherein ihey conftasiuy itilipevHit, we gladly acknowlege them [the church of Rome) to i.^ ilie family of Je.ijs Chrift. And our hearty prayer 10 Almighty God is, that being conjoined io i?.r forth vvi.:h th.m, ibey may £t length (ifit be his will), fo yield and reform thcmfelves, that no Oillradion remain in any thinp, but 'har we may all with one heart and voice glorify <^od, the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, whofe church \ye ^r^."-_Huoker's £cci. Pel. B. 3, kt\. 1. [ "it i the help of that fpirit which was given to the Apor** ties. *' to bring all things to their remembrance,'* t)ie fpiritual man may throw off his ficknefs, and be- come as healthy and pure as his firft fathers in Chrift. That fuch a r^floration took place in the mothei' cduntry, under the guidance of the pure and peace- able fpirit of moderation, when that once captive daughter of Zion, the church of England, arofe and pm on her original garments of glory and beauty, is telHiie'') even by fume of the rhoft eminent foreign reformers. " I am certain, (faith Grocius) thac the EngUfii * Liturgy, the ceremony of confirma- tion, Epifcopal governmchr, Presbyteries confift- ing of Paitors only, with many other things of a like nature are perfe6tly conformable to the ufage of the pi imitive church •, from which we muft needs confefs that there is a departure both in France and in Belgium." " Among others that have reformed theif churches, (f^ith Saravia) I have f often admired the wifdom of thofe who reftored the true worfhip of God to the Church of England, who fo temper- ed themfelves, that they cannot be reproved for hiving departed from the ancient and primitive cullom of the Church of God, and that moderation they have ufed, that by their example they have in- vitei others to reform, and deterred none." Again, " That alteration J which hath been in England, • " Certum eil mihi Liiurghm AngHcanam, item morpni imponendi adolircentibus in memcriam b.iptifmi, authcruatein Epi'coijorom, Presb/teria ex lolis Pafioribus compofua mul- taque alia ejus modi fatis congruere inuitoti,; vttuliioris Ec- clefr,? ; a qoibus iu Gallia et Belgio reccffum raegare noa pcTomus." — Grot. Ep. ad Boetium. f Sarac. defin. Praef. t Europse Spec, qavto. p. 314, 215. [ "2 1 was brought about with peaceable and orderly prOJ ceeding, by genera! confent of the Realm repiefen- tativcly alTembled in ^Parliament ; a great part of their own clergy according and conforming them- felves thereunto. No L«ther, no Calvin, the Square of faith. The fuccefiion of Bifhops, and vocation of minifters continued, the dignity and (late of the clergy preferved, and the more ancient ufages of the church not cancelled." To thefe let me add the words of Calvin already rehearfed, " Let her * enjov that fingular blcffingof God (i be Hierarchy) which I wifh may be perpetual to her." And again in histreatife en reformation, anfw.er- ing the obje(5lions of the Romaniits, he fays, " If they would give us fach a Hierarchy, wherein the Bifhops fhould be fo eminent, as not to refufe to be fubjed: to Chrift, and to depend on him as their on- ly head, &c. then I would think no anathemas too fireat for them, who would not receive them and lubmit to them with all obedience." In the fame treatife he has thefe words — '* If there be any fo unreafonabl'e, as to refufe the communion of a church, that is (o pure in its woi-fhip and dodlrine, under a pretence that it had retained Epifcopacy,' qualified as yours (the Englifh) is, there would be ho cenfure, or rigor of difcipline, that ought not to' be exercifed upon them." Mr. Le Moyfie, profeHbr of divinity at Leyden, in his letter to the Bifhop of London, after faying the moft favourable things cf the church cf Eng-. land — adds thtfe words—" this ought to oblige all' good men not t> feparate from it, but to look upon the church of England as a very orthodox church. Thus all tHe Proteftants of France do j thofe of * Calv. ad Troc. de min. evang; cap. i8'. [ "3 ] (j^cneva ; thole of Switzerland and Germany, and thofe of Hollarid too. To divide fr^m the church of England, is to divide from all the ancient churches, and from all the protcftant churches.'* I fliall conclude the foreign evidence in favour of the church of England with the tcllimonv of Ludovicus Capells profcflbr of divinity and Hebrew at Saumur. " When the reparation was made from the church of Rome ; the facred liturgy was purged of all that Popifli fuper^ition and idolatry, and all fuch things as did ' contribute but littie or nothing to the edification cf the church ; and there were framed and prtfcribed, in feveral places, divers- fet forms of holy liturgies, by the fc:veral authors of the reformation in Germany, France, England, Scotland, and the Netherlands, &c, differing as lit- tle as poffible from the ancient fet forms of the |)rimitive church. Which fet forms, the reformed have hitherto u fed with happinefs and profit, eacli of them in their ievcral nations and diftrids j *till at laft, of very late, there did arife in England, a frow- ard, fcrupulous', and over-nice generation of men,' unto wh(.m it hath ftemed good, for many reafoi'is, but thofe very light and of no moment at all,^ not only to blame, but to calTiier, and aboliih the Titurgy vifed hitherto in that church, togcher vvith thes Whole * hierarchical government of their bifhops.'* Hence I infer that however meanly you may think of Epifcopacy, it was honorable among thbife foreign divines and learned men. Trace back our cccleliaftical pedigree to its fource, and you will find ir centering in the great St. Paul, according to the judgment of the inquili- * Thef. Salcm. de Lilurg. part 3, t 11+ J tiVe Bidiop Stillingfle^t and many .others. Sr; ,Ciement (about the year 65) teftified " that * St. Paul had preached to the urmoft bounds of the ■'W.eft" This mull have been fometime between' the dates of his firfl: and fecond imprifonment at Rome, .of thole three years we have no account in the book of the Adts of the Aooftles. Eufcbius and Theodoret afTure us that feme of the Apoftles Converted the Britons from heathenifm -, and Bifh- op t Newton fays that " ihere is abfotute artainty, that chrijf-ianity was planted m this country {Britain) in the days of the Apo files, kfifre the d^ftru^ion of Jerufalm " Lucius % King of the Britons (the £r(t chrillian king;) was baptized A. D. i56--built St Peter's Cornhill -, and coi.ftituted it the Arch- epifcopal See of the Province of London, whicit continued (o for 400 years before Rome had ariy power over the church in that country— that is b,e- Yore the arrival of Auguftin. Tertullian an African writer of A. D. 192, ■fays,'*^' the \ Britifti Nation, that could not be fubdued by the Romans, yet willingly yielded their ^ecjcs to the yoke of Chrift." From Origen an Egyptian writer of A. D. 230 — we learn ** that in his time chriiliamty/v/«r^^^i ia ;^fitain. In a. D. 306 Conftantius the Emperor died at ^ork, and th,r f;:m.e year is ("on Conftamine declared liimfelf a chriRian in prefencc of his whole army : fo that chriftianity had his fandion in Britain before * Bede lib. i. C. 4. -t On Pronh. vol. 2. p. 258 .$ See PagYus Hifl. of the Britiflb Church. [| Ter. cont. Judaeos c. 7. ** Orig, in Etch, ham. 4. etin LticuaxbQOn.*^. [ '15 3 it had tBe fame privilege i'n Rome itfelf— thougli tlie feat of the Emperors. In the year 314 there were in Britain upwards of twenty Diocefan Biftiops with Fiiffts and Deacons under each of them". Of whom * three Bifhops, niamed Eborius^ Reftitutus and Adelphius, witH" one Presbvter and one Deacon attended the coun- sel of Ailes called th^i year by Conftantine. Cne^ of thofe Bifhops, named Rcftitutus was the tv/eitK f Arch Bifhop of London j and by conrcquencc there mult have been n-.any arch bifhops of that See prior to the intrufion of Auguftin. Indeed it ap- pears to be a well authenticated h&y that at the" time of the above mentioned council of Aries *' there were much the fame -f number of Bifhops ia Britain that there are now." About the year J 407, chrif^ianity in Britain be- gan to degenerate exceedingly, for the Fefagairi herefy both obfcured the luminous face of religion, and occaffoned much divifion among the Britifl> clergy and people. The bond of charity being broken by eccleiiaftical commotions, the peace oF their country quite deftroyed b'y Tnteiline difcord — - invaded by their ancient enemies the Fids and Scots inhabiting the northera parts of the Ifland, the unhappv Britons were driven to the irrefiffibld rectflity of defiring the aid of the Englifn Saxons in Hoiftien and Jutland. Nofooner were the Scots and Pi(5ls fubdued, and quieted by a treaty, but the vidlorious Saxions drove the Britons with thd moft unlenting fury out of their * Ccneil. Afelet. Subfcrip. port Canones. + Sir Walter Raleigh's Hift. p. 295. % Chamberl. prefent (late of Great Britaia. II SeeBedelib. 2 S>i z- b]d fcttlements into the mountains of Wales &Cornii wall i carrying little clfe with them but their chrif^ tianity, arid leaving their country the prey of Jieathenifm and idolatry. " ' Happy had it been for them and their defend- ants, could the Saxons have perluaded themfelves^ to receiy ^ chriftianity' from the Britons ; but dif- daining the thought, tl^at a people whom they had conquered and even nearly extirpated fh)uld appear in any refpe(5l their fuperiors— »:hey chofc to con- tinue in their ftate of heathenifm for near 150 years, until A. D. 596, that Auguftin with forty monies was ferit among them by Pope Gregory. ' ' After Auguftin had obtain permiffion of Aedil- berd King of Kent, to fettle at a pkce he called Cantia,but which was afterwards called Canterbury ; lie defiled an interview vvith the Britiih Clergy—' which was held in the open air, at a place called -j: N. B. Auguftin was ordained a BiOiop, not hy the Pope, but bj the Archbifhop of Aries in France A,. D: 597, above 206 years before the Gallican church became f'abjefl to the See of Rome. And, if we raufl trace oiit Epifcjpal fuccelian through the perfbn cif Auguftinfe, \ve Ih ill even then keep clear of the Cf^urch ofRome, hy deriving it from a fource which continued independent of the Popes until the ^th or (jth century. ' > Within about 75 years after Augul^in's arrival, thft- Kingdoms of the Heptarchy became chriftian , the Ifle tof Wight continued longer in heathenifm. Bede Lib. 4. C. 16. ■' o ■ ■ ■ '■ The Gallican church fubmitte^ to B.ome in the 8th ©r 9thce!ituiy--'till then it was independent of the Romi£k Pontiffs. IVIoflieim's Eccl. Hiil. p. 245—307 — and Dr. jCave's Church Gov. p. 2io, . -, f JB«de Lib. a. c. a. [ M7 3 Auguftine's Oak. OiF^n led at betn» defirdd tp relinqaifh thrir ancient ecclefitical cu'^oms, parti- cularly th A'e which reliteJ to their o -jfe vance *of the Eafter Fettival, and become conf')fmi(ls to Rome, the B'itifh Clc^y abr iptly left the Synod. Soon after this, Aairuitin c^llei an>th'r Synod, at whjch Ccv&n Britifh BiTi)ps give artendance. A- gain he addrefle I tnern as fbim;rly, and in addition to his former claims demanded their acknowleg- mcnt of himfelf ?i% their ecdefi^Jiical juperinr. But a ittidil all the calamities infi;cted t.Paternus — Bangor 5 Chefter, Hereford, and VVigorn ; in Synod conven- ed A. D. 601 ;— at which the Archbifhop of Caer- leogn did not attend, probably becaufe he confider- ed Auguftin as an intruder into the National Church — and his convoking a Synod within his jurifdiflion, as an infringement of his mctropolitical rights. • I^equifcto Au^udini et Kt(oIutio Epifcoporum Bri- tonum. " Dicebat autem eis. Sec. See Bede lib. 2. c. 2. In Englifli, " Vou pradice in many things contrary to the caitora of the Univerfal church. And yeti( ye will comply with me in cheie three things ; that ye keep Eafter at ih§ right lime ; that ye perform the ofHce of bapdz'ng (by which we are regenerated unto God) according to th? cuitom of the holy Roman church, and the Apoilolic church ; and that ye to- S!ih»r with us do preach the word ot the Lord to the nation of - e Eng ilh : we wiJi bear patiently with al; the other fhing» which ye prscllc contrary to our cuftoms. But they anUver- ei that th'-y would do none of thefe things, nor cwQ him lor their Archbifh'>p," *■ (4) Bede Lib. *i Note Septexn. I "8 1 For lion compliance with the demands of the I^omifli minTionary, and refufing him their ecclefiaf- tical fiibmiHion, the clergy and remains of the an- ciieht Britons fuffered a terrible overthrow. For ac the inftigation of Auguftin, an army was immedia- tely feric againfl: them, and about * 1 200 Clergy and . Laity -who had (hut themfelves up in the great Mo- jiaftery of fiangor were cut oiFto a man ! Bede calls this mafl*acre, *' Gentis ftrages — et Sacerdotium, caedes j" Slaughter of the nation and murder of iheir clergy ! If was no doiibt Au^uftine's intention to remove- * Vide Bede ut Supra. Taken from Bede. Appendix KoT. X. Refponflo Abbatis Bangor ad Auguftinum MoH- acbum pretenteai Subjef^ionem Ecclefiae Rotnanae. ** Sit notum et certum vobts, quod fumus nos omnes efe rfagull obeaentes et fubdlte Ecclefiae D«i et Paprac Romae fimul Lindisfarcruai ac MediKcraosoxuBlt [ 120 } Epircopacy among the Saxons during that remote- period ; for Bede informs us chat three Bifiions of Scottifh ordination fucceflively prefided in theKing- dom of Merch, and others in various places ot the Heptarchy. , And there can be reafon affigned, why it fliouid be otherwife, for the Auguftine Bifh- 6ps teftify that their Epifcopacy, dodrine and vfages were the (^) fame as thole of the ancient Bricofis; The Britifli church differed from the Romi^ iri. ifhany things, particularly in regard to the time of keeping Eafter ; but if the Britons had received their EpifcopacY, or which is the fame thinjg their thrifiianity, from Rome-j this difference would not have exiftcd i and when Auguftin came to demand ecclefiaftical homage from the Britiih Clergy, he would have founded his claim upon the original Ordination. But we find no mention of a Romifli 6'rdinatiort originally given to the Britiih church, and therefore we may lafely infer that none had been giv^n— and that fhewas one af the original and Apbltolic churches. ^ After the F^apal intereft got confirmed, ftill the Britiih church retained teftimonies of her original independency ; the national cufloms never entirelj^ gave way to the Popifh ; the Bilhops of the Old luccclTiori were watchful to prefervc their line — and AnglcrOm, faflras eft Diuma, ut fupra diximus, qai apud rtiediterraneos angles derurflus ac {cpultus eft : Iccundcs Ckllach, qui rclefto Epifcopatus officio vivens ad S'iotiam rcdiit, uterque de genere Scoctorum : tertits Trum HiR t» dc natione quideni anglorum, fededoC^uset ordinatusa Scottish qui, &c/' («) Bede lib. t. v. 4. " Sccttos vero per Dagannm Epif- COpuiB, 8:c. nihil difcrepare a Britonibos in eorum converfatioff didicimu?." t 121 ] as far as they poffibljr could, prevented all that came from Rome from .getting into the vacant Sees, And unlefs we can fuppofc. Sir, that every one of the Bifliops of the natioiial line had been cut off, and jPopifii Bifhops put in their place, and the voice of hiitory proclaims the abfurdity of any fuch fuppofi- iioh •, we muft needs aiX^n that our Epifcopacy is not derived through the channel of Popery, buC through the line of the original Britiih and ScociiU fucceifion. , It does not appear to me, that ever the church of England when mofl obfcured by popery was fo fub- miflive to the claims of Rome as fome other hatf- bns i ihe feemed to be continually looking out for. ibme favourable opportunity, to arifc and brake off jier chains, and reafllime her original appeirance and Apoftolic charadlcr. And this fhe did at the .sera of the reformation. Zealous to vindicate her .rights, and privileges, fhc refuted to admit (a) four- teen Bifhops, who were ordained at Rome and lent to England to put a flop to the keformation. Thcfe Roman pontiffs, difappointed of their aim, return- ed to Rortie from whence they came. The BifHops who effeded the reformation ''derived (h) their pow- er by a regular fucceflion of ordinations, from the ancient Britifh Bifhops" — and by their hands ths Epifcopate has been tianfmitted down to their fat- cefTors. Of this, Godwin's chronology — the re- cords of the Englifn Sees •, and many other aijcllien-^ tic documents are flanding evidences. And as Dr. Leaming again write*?, In the elevehtPi page of his fecond Defence of Epifcopacy, " The Bilhops that ordained our Bifhops, derived their (aj Burnet's hjft. of the Reform. \lj See Dr. Lcaminjj's Defence of Rp. Govcrnajcnl; [ 122 ] fuccefllon through the hands of other Bifhops, wh& %vere hrn, educated^ and ordained in Britain. Even in the times of the Popes yfurpation, our ordina- tions are capable of a folid defence, being always performed in Britain, and by our own Bifhops -, fof thefe reafons I am inclined to be of opinion, that there is not a particular church now in being, that can better fupport the fucceflion and validity of their ordination, than the Briciili church. Oi this opinion were Bilhops Bramhal, Mafon, and F'ern j fo that if I am an enthufuft, I am in good^ com- pany." As a farther confirmation of the regularity of out eccicfiaftical fucceffion hear the words of thd au- thor of the Clergyman's Vade Mecum. " Chrift Jefus has taken more abundant care to afcertain the fucceffion of Paftors in his church, than ever was taken in relation to the Aaronili Priefthood. This lall defcended by inheritance, or traducflion, frorA Father to Son •, and the right that any prieft or levite had to his office depended on the honefty of a woman, and the vaii'Hty of tlieir miniftrations upon the legitimacy of their birth. And how could the fons of Aaron adiually know that they were his pof- teriiy ? or how could they be able to demonftrate ft toothers? Certainly, upon no principles but what are more dubious than ihofe upon which we believe our Bilhops to be the fucccfibrs of the Apoftles, in an uninterrupted line. For in this cafs, the fuc- ctffi)n is tranfmitted from Seniors to Juniors, I'ly the n>oit public and folemn rvdlion, or rather pro- cefs of actions, that is ever performed in the chrif- tian church •, an adion done in the face of the {\:iny and attefted by great numbers of the moll authentic wimeiies, as confecrations always wers^. And I *Vo!. n. Preface p. 87, [ 123 ]. fuppofe it cannot bear any difpute, but that it is now more eafy to be proved, that the Archbiihop* of Canterbury was canpnically ordained, than that any one perlbn now living is the fon of him who is called his Father ; and that the fame might have been faid of any Archbifnop or Billiop that ever fat in that or any other Epilcopai See, during the time of his being Bifliop. Nor is it eafy to fee by what method providence could have made the fuccelfion of paftors marc dear an-^ indubitable^ than by this which has adually been ufed," From all which I infer that the fame arguments will apply to the fucccffive * Bifhops in the church of Chrift, as to the fucceflive copies of holy fcrip- ture : & if you Sir, will be (o good as to (hew when^ ho'W,where,&nd by whcm^ the Hpifcopal or Apottolic fucceflion hath been either Iqfi or broken ; 1 will en- gage to prove from your own arguments that the pre- fent copies of the bible are not genuine tranfcripts of thofe which were di<51:ated originally by the Holy Ghoft, Un'til you adduce thefe proofs, we muft believe that the Epifcopal fucceflion has never been, anJ never can be broken — and the promife " 1 am with you even to the end of the world," as it has not yet * Take away this fucceffion, and the clerry may bo as well ordained by one perfon as another : a number of women may as well give them a divine commifTion i but they are no moie priefts of God, than thofe who pre- tend to ma'rce them fo. If we had loft tlie fcriptures, it would be vciy well to make as good books as we could and come as near them as poflible : but then it would not only be folly, but prefumption, to call them the word of God." See the Hd. Letter to the Bilhop o£ l^angor — poftfcript. f '^4 1 ^iled—fo it never will, but continue in full force to the conlummation of all things. Platina, through a papift, no doubt has yout warmert thanks tor the pretty and interefting narra- tive he has given of the immoralities of the Homaii l*ontiffs, and the amours of the fifler proftitutesl I am not immediarely interefted in thefe blackened characters ; thouj^h to a cfjaritable mind, it is by no ineans difficult to afcertain what degree of credit is really due to what a man fays, when he writes under the combined influence of difjppointment and re- venge. Look into the biographical didionary, apd you will find fuch an account of Platina, and his hifbory of the lives of the Popes, as is fufficient to make orse believe, that he writes more under thei influence of revenge, than obedient to ihe voice of truth. ' . ■ You ask mevj'hether I believe all the ftories yo\i quote from him. I ask you in return, do you be- lieve that all the minifters of a certain Presbytery in $corland, by mutual agreement flent with one another's wives, in the houfe of a Mr. F- s j who had taken fome pains to bring about this Jra~ iertiar fretdom among the holy brothers and iifters ?-— If you will engage to believe the one, I >vill promife to believe the' other. Jf Platina in- formed you of the amours and crimes of the l*opes-^a Col. R-m-y told me of this lovely inter- view among five or fix infallibles of your own or- <3er. ^ For niy parr, 1 arn not difpofed to believe e- vilcf any body, unlefs evidence Compels me. If I v;as told that a minifter, defcribing his' fjreaching and the efTeds of it, fhould fay.— '^ 1 made them cry like the very devij ;" ought I to believe that he faid To, fhould it even be aiTerted by one of kH own ¥aipily? - ■- - E J-5 ] It is an unerring fign of a bad caufe, when a mit\ goes about to defend it, by deltroying or blacken- ing the cbaraSfer of thole, who happen to be in his way. The Popes of Rome and you are not per- fonally acquainted. And I fuppofe, that in all the converfations you have had with Mr. D— die, a relpedable ronian catholic, you never complimented his church with the epithet of old wiibered ha_^—' nor pierced his ear with the amours of IVlarozi^iS* granufon, nor with the cruelties of Benedid, Sylvef- ter, and Gregory. And though he w is a fon of, and warmly attached to this fame old zvithered hag^ yet, Sir, you was obferved to frequent his company more than that of all your/^if^^^/^^ presbytetian trethren puttogether. "Fowls of a feather flock to- jgether !" In page 26 — You ask — " Sir, are not you a wanton * fchilmaiic in protefting againft a church *vhofe authority you acknowledge ?" This is a foolifh queftion, for a man may protefl againft the errors of the church of Rome without denying her authority j in like manner as a clergy- man in a Presbytery or Synod may protell againft fome vote of the body, without calling in queftion their authority to hold fuch a Presbytery or by nod. In the fame page you exclaim — " Strange in- deed ! that you dare boaft, that from this idolatrous, this antichriftian church, you derive, by ordination, your miniflerial powers, and talk of your defcent in * " There being only one Church, andoNE Episco- pacy all over the world, and orthodox and Pious Bifhops being already regularly ordained through all the pro- vinces of the Pvoman empire, and in every cit}', he mufl needs be Si/cbi/matic, who labours to fet ap Ja^/e Btjhopi in oppofition to them." Cypr. Epift. i^^ [ 126 J an umufePtupted line from this old "dithered hag \ this bloody & adulterous woman> who has been \, I do not underttand •yvhat fort of minil^ry )Ours is. One fays it is »c/ this i another it is r.ot that ; snd s third it is r,ot a third thing ; but none of you fay exactly and pre- cil'ely wliat it is, lo as to be underftood. .} have h^ard of fome of your prdiiiations performed by L '27 ] laying the han.I upon tlie * fhoiiider ; others by laying the f covered hand upon the hear^ ar.d o- thers (nnd this one of your brethren told me lately Was the moft common vvay^ wiihout laying on hands at all merely by prayer, and without any pre^'-^cc of conveying ecckfiiaftical authoricy cr fucctOioni You call your ordination, Prssl/yterian^ in ccntra- diftiniftion to Ep''fcopal : tell me then is this thr- fore 6f ordination which Chrift eRab'ifhed ? If you un* derfland the word Presbyter in 5ts icy fignrfication; ^s fenior, alJer?nnn or fuch like, it may do very well tbCTiW vour ordinations Presbyterian^ for they chief- ly (land upon a lay foundation : bat if yOii under- ftand that word in an ecclefiiaftical fenfe, I do not fee with what hcz you can call your ordira-io.S Presbyterian, unlefs you accede to the idea O fuc- teffi'jn. And however much you and feme others ii'iriv have departed from the notion of fncccOion, finding that ground not tenabie, Mr. Ca^amy J a pVincipnl champion in the diiTentlng ccufe thus taught ; ** As for Luther^ Zui'tigUiis, Bucer, Occolant' padius and many others {repeating the zuprds of ii'hita- ker) they wire authorized teachers in the church of Rome^ and they mi^ht therefore war rant ably (et others ever the churches. I make the fame reply to thofe who inquirdy how we came by our call to the minijtry ? Ma- ny of thofe whom they in 1662, thought fit to cafi out of the public churches^ were ordained in the church of England by Eif.jops ; and though others were not fo, yet thiir crdainers were. That they who fet apart o- 'thers for the mlnifiry by a folemn invcfliturey be duely ■cuthori'z.ed, is a thing that we lay aftrejs upon.** If this be any part of your prefent creed 5 pr.>y :j: Def. part i. p. 71. * This is called the Bum-bailifF Ordination and \ thi^ tiie leather luiitea ordinatioQ. £ 12S ] tell us by what mode of rearoning you can prove thnt ordination by Fopifh Bifhops is invalid, whilft ordinatjon bv popifli presbvters is ^«r^, hol)\znd /ipojiolic. Whv all this caviling then about our ordinations — for every argument adduced to invali- date Epifcopal ordinations, but proclaim more ].;udly the nullity of thofe called Presbyterian.— *' We require * you then to find out but one church upon the face of the whole earth, that hat-h been ordered by your difcipline, or hath not beeni ordered by curs -, that is to fay, by Epifcopal Regimentj lince the time that the blefled ApoftleJ^ ^cre here eonverfant.'* In pjige 27-^you fayj that " ChillingwortK knev- better than to claim under the idea of an ««- interrupted line of defreht ; he faw the abfurdi;i6s ini which liich a claim would involve him, and he wife- ly avoidetl them.'* Certain I am Sir, that Dean Swift's old womarr tould never have found out the meaning of the *<^ordg, ". to claim under the idea df an uninternt-pied line of defient''' — ri^ey wiJl do well enougn however to introduce Chillingworth's argument agaihft a" Romanift, witn the view of making it apply to the reformed church ot England and her daughter cf America. Bat there are three confideiations which' feem to unirc in defeasing this vvell me-iht purpofe ;' In xhc Jirjl place, the whole of Chillirgworth's feafonir.g is built upon an hypothecs. " Take on- 1) one (la\s he) in the whole train and fueceOi'on pf ort'ainer-sand Juppo/e h\m by r6afon of any defeat, Oniy ajuppc/dd and not a true prieft ; then accord- ing to your do^irine^ he could not give a true, but Oi-ly ii fuppc/ed pntilhoodii &c. And howeyer h« * Huoker*s Eccl. Pol. prcf. p. 19. [ 129 ] might applv this hypothefis to the churrh of Rome, it was not dircdled atiainft the church ot Hngland— for they were never yi> blended as to be huz cne. In the fecofjd phce — th.s letter is addrcffed to a Jefuic of the Romifti communion, and therefore it con- cerns not me or any clergyman (four church to confidcr one word of it as addrcffvd to himfcif — nor is one of us bound to mike a reply to any deduc- tions that may be made fiom it. And in the ibird p!a^e — the demonltration in favour of Epifcopacy (that regular uninterrupted apoftolical form of church government for which I coni-erd) which Chillingworth has made, and which you may find in the 47 and 48th paizes of this letter iS fo plenary an enunciation of his E-ifcopal prmciples, that eve- ry inference to the contrary drawn from this reply to the Jefuit are to be eltcemed as a mere non entity. But *' a drawing man will even catch at a ftraw.'* The remaining pages of vour letter are a ftrange farrago of fenl'e and nonfenfe, of truth and false- hood ! You erroneoufly fuppofe that we reckon our Ecclefiaftical defcent through the bo'JVfls of the Church of Rome -, on this hypothefis you build a diredl falfehold — when you fay j " why th-n *^ir, you are not ecclefiajttcally fprung^ you prove yourfelf and ail your brethren, the Bilhops, the Preshyters^^ and the Deacons, of your church, to be merely Layman," Perhaps, Sir, you. wifh to have us in the fame predicament with yourfelf. The church of Rome feems to have taken fu.h faft hold of your imagination that you cannot move? one lUp in your reafonings, (or rather I ought to call them defamations) coi.cerning our Epilcopacy, without blending her errors with our reformation — and mi^^aking a Britijh for a Romrjh line of fuccef- fion in the mother country. The Britiih Epifcopat« K i 130 ] ifTas rtever extirpated, and though blended with thcf Romifh-^ftili had an exiftence and may be eafily traced beyond the aera of the popifti intrufion, in the perfon of Auguftin. Like the river Nile, tho* its tributary dreams canriot be diftinguilhed when mixed in one body of waters, yet its fountains are not loft, but may be eafliy traced op to their original fource. This circumftance you eitheir overlook, or v^iflt to forget; and thcrefcre you fuppofe the Britifti Church to be a creature of Rom ' ; and that we are indebted to her for what ordination we have •, and that whenever Ihe pleafes (he may take it away. Nothing can be more childifh than this Way of rea- foning ; for we are neither ecdejiajlically fprung frorri Rome, nor dependent on her for our ordination-^' nor amenable to her for what fteps we have taken to regain our ar>cient independency. Romifht Bulls of excommunication no more afFecfl Us, than other churches ; and we know that, every maunday, thurfday, excommunications are pronounced upon all churches which are not in communion with her. Rome hath always been liberal in diftributing her excommunications among the churches who would not fubmit to her imperial mandates ; ^nd if you fuppofe that her anathemas affe6t us, you muft confefs that your fyftem fhares in the fame condem- nation, unlefs you are willing to acknowledge that you are in communion with that imperious ma- tron. In page 29, you fay, "^ Thofe ^hogHie, youvTlll allow have power to take away" This may hold good in many cafes— but not in all. In the prefent — it will by no means apply, for as the church of Rome neither gave us our Epifco- t 131 1 jpacy nor our chrlftianityT— (he cannot deprive us of either ; and every pretence or attempt to do fo, is founded in error and unchaiitablenefs. Bccaufp the Pope pretended to excommunicate the Britifli church at the reformation, and repeats that excom- munication yearly, does it follow that our churcfl originated from fome of his anceftors ? He has {hewn the fame line of condufl toward the Greek and African churches, for fcveral centuries, are they therefore dependent on his wil!~or was Roma the fource from whence their Epifcopacy was deriv- ed? Rome may excommunicate all the Oriental and Englifh, and American F.pifcopalians yearly, and we are nothing the worfe for it. If the church of Home excommunicates a church or nation, it is not bccaufe they are Epifcopal, but becaufe they will not acknowledge her luperiority, and that the divine right of Epifcopacy lodges folely with the Romaa Pontiffs — and farther Sir, if your knowlege of Ec- clefiaftical hiftory is any wife extenfive you mull: know that there is not one Oriental Church that bows to Rome, or ever confulred her in their ad- miniftrations. And the Greek church, more numerous than all the Papijls and Presbyterians on earth, obferve an annual fellival, in commemorati- on of the folemn refufal which their fore fathers made, to acknowlege the Romaa Pontiff to be uni- verfal patriarch. The Pope Sir, never was fo great a man as you would have us believe him to be ; heathen Rome never entirely conquered Britain and Chriitiari Rome never had the entire homage of that Iflmd. The year 1535 gave no (hock to our Apoftolicfuc- ceffion — it futfered a great deal mors in th^ year that Auguftin fet his foot upon the Ifland. To hold up the idea that the Englifli Epifcopacy [ 13^ 1 is founded upon the King and Parliaftient, y'^u quote the teftimony of Bfhop Burnet, and then fay* " This Sir, is the foundation of your true claims, you claim under the authority of a hay man, &c.'* That I dtny, tor I have in my fermon declared that all the men upon earth could not make a ftew church i nor make one Bifliop, or Prieft, or Deacon, T hefe officers are of Chrift's creation -, he created all fucceeding officers of his church in the perfon of the Apoitles, when he breithedon them and gave them a divine power, and the promife of his perpe- tual prtfc-nce j as he breathed unto the body of A- dam and endowed him with a power of procreating his likenefs to the end o^ the v/orld. The church is founded upon the Apo'iles and Prophets, Jcfus Ch-ift beinp; the chief corner ftone — -neither upon the KingsHor the people at large. The Church as a fpiniual fociety is the fame, whether it enjoys the fmiie, or experiences the frown of civil authority. It is true, that Henrv VI II did feize upon the titl$ nf head of the church of England, and it is well linown what purpoie it was made to anfwer ; but facriiegio'.is as H.;nry was, he never ftept into th« Pnefts office or afTumed the power of ordination Or of adminiftring the iacraments. If the King of England is the head of the church, it is in a circum- fcribea and limited fenle ; as being the chief ma- giilriire -, a d thtref ire all fi.» jedls civil as well a ecclefurtical are amenable before the authoritic conUitutcd undei him. The King fandlions eccic fiadical proceed-ngs, not as fpiritual ads, but a. a(5ls incorporated with the civil government or nati onal jurirprudence ; becaufe withouL fuch fandions a national church could not exirt. In daysofper- fecution the church felt not the foftering hand of the civil magiftrate, but when the nations became chriitim, governments took the church under their proteilion, giving its iids a legal fandion, and en- [ »33 3 faring to it the bleflings of peace, prote36 ) You cli'.llenge mc Sir, " to produce documents that its foundation hath ever been altered for the battery or fettled upon the authority of fcriptare or divine injiitu- What documents do you require ; if you are a reafonable man the documents of realbn. argument and Icripturc will fatisfy you *, if to thefe you will not lilien, we muft commit the caufe to other hands* ScRiPT[5RE faith '' the foundation of th? church is fure and fledfafl:.^' But what is that Cure and i^edfaft foundation ? Diilenters fay, " the Church of England is built upon the foundation of fhe Lords and Commons. " The King himfelf being, the chief corner ftone !^' But fcripturc teftificth that " the church of Chrift is bui!t upon the foun- dation of the Prophets and Apoftles, Jefus Chrid himfelf being the chief corner ftone. If then, there is the fame degree of credit due to the voice of difTenters, as to the voice of the fcriptures, the church of England is not a church of Chrift. Thi& confequence is of importance and leads us to enquire v/hether the King Lords and Commons adlually did inflitute the Englifh Church. Tell me what King of England ever ordained twelve A- poilles to be with him, or feventy to go before his face ; and to fecure this Apoftolate, ftrengthened it with a promife of his perpetual prcfence ! or authorized peer or commonor to preach the gofpel and adminiller facraments in his name I or inftitut- t'd facred rites and ceremonies commemorative of fpiritual blefTing!-; derived through him ! The Eng- lifh monarchs never contemjlated fuch things, they claim, not the honnor of commencing, but of protedling the church ; not of inftituting, but of co-operating with him who hath promifed to be with her to the end of the world. Therefore the church it '37 ! of England is not biiilt upon the King n6r the Parliament. And if Ihe is not built upon the King and Parliament-, on whom is fhe built ? — If~Ihc is built upon the chriftian foundation, fhe is incapable of being alterdd for the better : and if al- tered for the worfe, fhe ceafes to be what Chrift made her. You mud acknowledge that it is necefiary that a church hold the Apoftolic government and doc- trine, to conilitute her a church of Chrift. That the Apoftolic government was Epifcopal, the confent of fcripture and of ail chriftian nations for 1500 years, and of by far the major part of the world at this day ; is an irrifragable evidence. The church of England always has been, and is at this day Epifcopal : fhe has then one efTential mark of her divine original. The dos and <:onJiituliQrj in the church, as de- pend thereupon, if they fhould therefore be takea away, would peradventure leave neither /^zf^ nor mmory o^ church to continue Icn:^ in the v/orld, the world efpeciaiiy being fuch as now it is." With patience I fnall wait for the evidence which ycU propofe to adduce from Clement, Igna- tius, ^c, in favor of Presbyterianifm. Thefc •Fathers('eleven in number & I know not how many more) you fay, p. 32, " held the idenity cf the omce of Presbyter and Bifhop, in the Apoftolic sges i that fome of them account for the rije of Epifcopacy ; fpcak of it as a fiovslty •, defend it for txhe honor cf the thing, and place its eftablifhment to curtom ?.nd not to divine inUitution.'* I do not know v;hat edition of the Fathers you have got, but certain I am the moll authentic copies Ipeak quite a different language. As t'> the rjje of Epifcopacy, ^ou muft date that when and where you can — only in your endeavors bepieafedtok|epChilIingworth's t HO ] Hemonftration in remembrance, left It rife up ill judgment againft vour calculation. Your expreffi- on " defend it for the honor of the thing" — militateg ilrongly againft your fcheme of parity •, for if ever Epifcopacy had any thing honourable about it, it has the fame ftill. " And indeed fo honourable an * order has Epifcopacy ever been accounted, even when there have been no vifible advantages, either of riches or grandeur to attend it, as there were not in the more early ages of chriftianity, that perfons of the greateft birth and fortunes have not thought of it btlovv them to exchange the civil iri- hmal for the Biihop's 'Thrcne^ and to lay down the public rods and axes^ to take up the Crofier et pedum paftoraie." You add, '^ and place its eftabiifhrnent to cuftom, and not to divine inftitution." And pray. Sir, tell Vf-. when did this cuftum commence, by whom, and where ic was /r/t introduced. Be particular, and fpecify time and place and per/on^ and you will make VIS all your difciples. From the complexion of this fentence. Sir, I am lead to fuppofe you are giving the fentiments of Mr. Calamy, with regard to the novelty of Epifcopacy. That gentleman produces the 7th canon of the 2d council of Sevil, which was held in the 7th century, to prove, that the prohibit- lns[ priefts to ordain was a new thing. And here obierve how his integrity and knowlege of antiquity hugg each other ! This abridgment of the canon. IS — " Let the priefts know, that vhe power of or- daining priefts and deacons, is forbidden them by the Apoftolical See, by virtue of novel conftitutions to bear up the dignity of the Bifhops." No\y Sir, vou can change the word thing into Bijhops, and try how the fentence will read. In Mr. Calamy's * K. Ecci. lib, 8. c. 6 p. 541. I «4' 3 abridgment he has omitted a very important part^ viz. quaedam authoritale v»ieris legis" that is, feme- fhings are forbid by the authority of the eld law."—^ But that I may not be thought to falfify or mutilate the canon as your good friend Calamy has done— • I will prefect it whole and intire thus—" Mofes alone^ at the command of the Lordy ereSJed an aitar ; he alone anointed^ becaufe he wa^ the High Priejt of God^ as it is written, Mofes and Aaron among his Priefis -, what is only enjoined the chief Priejis, of which Mojes and Aaron were a figure, let not the Priefis, who^ are reprefented by the fons of Aaron, affumetothemr fehes. For tho^ the di/penfation of myjleries is for the mofl part in common between them and the Rifhops -, yet fome things are forbidden them hy the authority of the old law, fome by Novels and Ecclefftafiical canons -, cs the confecration of Priejis, Deacons, and virgins ; ai the eretiion of an altar, benedictions and unSiions. For it is not lawful for them to eonfecrate a church or altar, or to confirm or reconcile penitents at Mafs, nor to fend formal letters ; becaufe they are not in the fummit of the Priefihood. ^he canons permit bifhops only to do this, that the difference of degree, and fummit of the facerdotal dignity may appear. Nor mufi priefis baptize in a Bijhop's prefence, nor eonfecrate the Eucharijls, nor preach, nor bhfs the people; all which is fofbiddcfi them by the Aprfiolical See:' From thefe words one may eafily fee the differ- ence between Biftiops and Presbyters — and that what was forbidden to Priefts by the authority of new Laws, had alfo been forbidden them by the authority of the mod ancient conftitutions. In triumph you conclude, with faying " could a Presbyterian minifter fay more ?'■ more than what ? more rhai>.you hzvtmade Chryfoftom fay. '* The Apoftle having difcourfed concerning the Bifliops, t Hi J ^nd defcribed them, declaring what they ought t» )iave, and from what they ought to abftain, omitting the order of Presbyters, defcends to the Deacons j and whiy fo, becaufs between Bifhops and Presbyters there is no great diiterence, and to them is com- jnitted both the inftrudion and prefidency oi the church; and whatever he faid ofBilhops agrees al- io to Presbyters. In ordination alone they have gone beyond, and in this only they feem to defraud the Presbyters'^. But did Chryfoftom really fay fo in greek ; or have yoivor your tranflator made him iay fo in Englifli ? — In greek, he faid ** te gar cheirofonia mone hupeibibekafi, kal toutoo monoti dokoiifi plioniktein tons Presbuteroiis," which literally is — In ordination alons they are fuperior -, in ibis only they arspojfejcd of more power than Presley ters^ If you will pardon the liberty of corredling your tranflation, I will prefent you with an elegant and faithful verfion, v/hich with the original you will find in ihc i8S page of Bifliop Potter's Difcourfe pf church government. *^ The; reafon, why the Apofile, having delivered rules for the behavior of jBilhops immediately proceeds to the Deacons, >vithout mentJQni.'^g the inteimediate order of Pref- byters, was this : That there was not a great dif- ference between Bifhops and Presbyters ; for even Pres;:)}'fers are entrufted to teach, and prefide over the church, fo that the fame rules vyhich are pre- fcribe.: f'ir Bifhops, m^y alio ferve for Presbyters ; there heir/'; fcarce any tid of the Epifccpal office which may not be exercifcd by Presbyte.s, except h)pofition cfhr.nds,'^ So that, in ihis Fathers opin- ion, the ojder c F Biihops was diuind from that of Presbyters, whi n St. Paul wrote his ift Epiftle to Tira-thy, hovever their names might nq|,th.'.'n con- JS-antly be difdnguimcd. And the impofttion of kauds, ('or crcb:.Uion) which he makes the Bifhops [ MS } prerogative, as all o*her ancient Fathers doy was id. hisjudgment a thing of fuch vaft confcfquence, that he calls it, in his i6th homily on the ill Epiftleof Timothy, " pantoon malifta kuriootaton, kay o malifta funichii ten EkkleHanjto toon chiirotonioon,*' *' the d'ief and principal of all Ecclefiaftical powers^ and that which chiefly maintains and hclds together the chriitian church." And could an Archbilhop of Conftantinopl© faylefs? Commending you to God and the power of his grace, which is able to guide your feet into ch* paths of truth and peace. lam Reverend Sir» Yours, &c, WILLIAM SMITH, Norwalk, July lO, 'p8. P. S. In page 6th, you fay, " this fpirit, &c, glanced at Scotland, Sec." The Venerable Eede a/Tures us that from the es(rlieft times, the government and do<5lrines oi — p. 95. for tenor r. terrors — p. 97. 1. 7, for firfl r. fifth — p. 98. I. 23, for fuc- celTion v. jHc.:eJJors—''p' 103. 1. 1, for xhcy r . thefe — p. 103. 1. ■33, for confoiotory r. conjo'.atory — p. 105, Note * 1. del. of— p. 107. !. 6, for his r. this— p. in. Note * 1. 5, for megarer. mgare — p. 1 13. 1. 7, for Capells r. Capellus — p. it 4. I. 3 inf. for is r. his — p. US- I. 25, for northera r. northern— p. 1 16. 1. I4> for obtain r. obtained—^. 117, Note * for Requifeto r. Jiequifitio — p. 1 18. Note * for pretentfi.ni r. petentum, for obe- dences r. ebedienies, for fubdite r.yaW//;', for Paprae r. Papae, for gradn r. gradu, for Uieam r. U/cam — p. 119. 1. 9. for Hiptarchy r. Heptarchy — p. 119, Note [a) for mitteuturr. tiilttereniur, for piflatis r. pietatis, for a pud r. apud — p. 1 20. for be reafon r. be no reafan—^. 120, Note for relefto r. relive— p, 122. 1. 18, for Aaronili r. Aarenitic — p. 123. 1. 2. for Arch- bilhops r. Arcbb:pop—p. 124. I. 3. for through r. though— p, ii6.\.y, for legitimately r. illegitimately — p. 128. 1.6. for proclaim r. proclaims — p. i 28. 1. 3. inf. for defeat, r. defeQ— p. 132. 1. 12, tor unto r. into— p. 133. 1. ult. for it r. her. N- B. The reader is requefled to make the corre£lions ac- corJin? to the above errata, as the diflance between Norwalk aid NewfieiJ made it impoffible for the author to attend and correct the prefs. W. S. / »i^W ^^^ r^^i