C6

true churches. But so do not our Bishops and "Archbishops, which is a notable difference between the Bishops of the Popish church, and of "the Reformed churches. Wherefore, as we con"demn not those Reformed churches which have "retained another form of ecclesiastical govern

166

ment; so neither are they to censure our church "for holding still the ancient regimen of Bishops, "purged from the ambitious and superstitious in"ventions of the Popish prelacy." p. 276.

Bishop Bilson, in his work against Seminaries, Lib. I. p. 318. delivers it as his opinion, and confirms it by quotations from Jerome, that "the "church was at first governed by the common coun"cil of Presbyters; that therefore Bishops must "understand that they are greater than Presbyters, "rather by custom than the Lord's appointment ; and that Bishops came in after the Apostle's "time."

Dr. Holland, the King's Professor of Divinity in the University of Oxford, at a public academical exercise, in the year 1608, in answer to a question formally and solemnly proposed-An Episcopatus sit ordo distinctus a Presbyteratu, eoque superior jure divino? i. e. Whether the office of Bishop be different from that of Presbyter, and superior to it, by Divine right, declared that "to affirm that there is "such a difference and superiority, by divine right, " is most false, contrary to Scripture, to the Fath“ ers, to the doctrine of the church of England, yea to the very Schoolmen themselves."

Bishop Moreton, in his Catholic Apology, addressed to the Papists, tells them, "That the power of "Order and Jurisdiction which they ascribe to Bish

ops, doth, by divine right, belong to all other Pres"byters; and that to ordain is their ancient right." The same Prelate, when he was urged by the Archbishop of Spalato, to re-ordain a clergyman from one of the foreign Reformed churches, that he might be qualified for preferment in England, according to law, declined it, saying that "it could not be "done but to the scandal of the other Reformed "churches, wherein he would have no hand.”

Bishop Jewel, one of the most illustrious advocates for diocesan Episcopacy, in the Defence of his Apology for the Church of England, against Harding, p. 248, has the following remarkable passage. "But “what meant M. Harding to come in here with the "difference between Priests and Bishops? Think"eth he that Priests and Bishops hold only by tra"dition? Or is it so horrible an heresy as he mak"eth it, to say, that by the Scriptures of God, a

Bishop and a Priest are all one? Or knoweth he "how far, and to whom he reacheth the name of "an heretic? Verily Chrysostom saith, "Inter "Episcopum, et Presbyterum interest fere nihil. i. e. "Between a Bishop and a Priest there is, in a "manner, no difference.' St. Jerome saith, some"what in rougher sort, Audio, quendam in tantam แ eripuisse vecordiam, ut Diaconos Presbyteris, id est, Episcopis anteferret: cum Apostolus perspicuè doce"at, eosdem esse Presbyteros quos Episcopos. i. e. I

"hear say, there is one become so peevish, that he "setteth Deacons before Priests, that is to say, "Bishops; whereas the Apostle plainly teacheth

that Priests and Bishops be all one." St. Augustin also saith, Quid est Episcopus nisi primus Presbyter, hoc est summus sacerdos? i. e. What "is a Bishop, but the first Priest, that is to say, the

highest Priest?' So saith St. Ambrose, Episcopi “et Presbyteri una ordinatio est ; uterque, enim, Sa"cerdos est, sed Episcopus primus est. i. e. There' "is but one consecration of Priest and Bishop; for "both of them are Priests, but the Bishop is the "first. All these, and other more holy fathers, together with St. Paul, the Apostle, for thus saying, by M. Harding's advice, must be holden for he"retics*."

66

· Dr. Whitaker, a learned divine of the church of England, and Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge, in his Treatise against Campion, the Jesuit, affirms, that Bishop and Presbyter are, by divine right, all one. And, in answer to Dury, a zealous hierarchist of Scotland, he tells him "That, "whereas he asserts, with many words, that Bishop "and Presbyter are divers, if he will retain the cha

*

It ought to be kept in mind, that Bishop Jewel's Apology for the Church of England was laid before the public on the avowed principle, that it contained the doctrine of that Church: and that the work from which the above quotation is made, was ordered to be suspended by a chain, in all the churches in the kingdom, and to be publicly read as a standard of theoFogical instruction. Strype's Annals, II. 100.

»

racter of a modest divine, he must not so confi

dently affirm, that which all men see to be so evi" dently false. For what is so well known, says he, as " this which you acknowledge not? Jerome plain

ly writeth that Elders and Bishops are the same, “and confirmeth it by many places of Scripture.' The same celebrated Episcopalian, in writing against Bellarmine, says, “ From 2 Tim. i. 6, we “ understand that Timothy had hands laid on him

by Presbyters, who, at that time governed the church “ in common council ;" and then proceeds to speak severely of Bellarmine and the Romish church for confining the power of ordination to Bishops exclusively of Presbyters.

The authority of few men stands higher among the friends of Prelacy, than that of Bishop Hall, who wrote, and otherwise exerted himself, in favor of the divine right of diocesan Episcopacy, with as much zeal and ability as any man of his day. Yet this eminently learned and pious divine, acknowledged the Reformed church of Holland, where there never have been any diocesan Bishops, to be a true church of Christ; accepted of a seat in the Synod of Dort, in which the articles of faith, and form of government of that church were settled ; recognized the deputies from all the Reformed churches on the continent, none of whom had received Episcopal ordination, as regular ministers of Christ; and, when he took leave of the Synod, declared that "there was no place upon earth so like Hea“ ven as the Synod of Dort, and where he should

"be more willing to dwell." Brandt's Hist. Sess. 62. The following extract of a Sermon which he delivered in Latin before that venerable Synod, contains a direct and unequivocal acknowledgment of the church of Holland as a true church of Christ. It was delivered Nov. 29, 1618; and founded on Eccles. vii. 16. "His serene majesty, our King

66