B I S 



cl«ar to me, and tlicrcfore fince I look upon the facramen- 

 tal aftions as the hi^^hell of facrcd peifmmanccs, I cannot 

 but acknowledge thole who are ennpowercd for them mull 

 be of tlic hi^hift office in the church." 



Although, in the apollohc times, bidiops and prefbyters 

 were fynonymous, and co-ordinate with rcfpcft to tlieir mi- 

 nillerial powers, and they were ordained to thiir office by 

 piayer, accompanied witli i'npofition of hands ; yet a certam 

 priority, or prtlidentlhip, for the fake of order, or in defe- 

 rence either to fenjority or to diilingnifhed talents, was al- 

 lowed to one of their number. But he feems to have been 

 only a kind of moderator in their aflemblies, and to have 

 had no more power than that of giving a fingle vote in com- 

 mon with the rell of his brethren. By tliofc who adopt this 

 reafjiiing, aud who trace the original of the dillindl order of 

 bilhops, which was introduced in the fecond and third cen- 

 turies, to this praAice, it is allowed that pallors were from 

 the beginning veiled with a fuperintendency over the con- 

 gregation or church merely in fpiritual matters; and it is 

 alleged, that fome of the titles that are thus given them in 

 Scripture, fuch as r)-«/i!voi, r»oir»/i!>o>, guides and governors, 

 imply this kind of fuperintendence. But at this time feveral 

 things relating to the church were conduced in common by 

 the paflors, the deacons, and the whole congregation. To 

 this clafs we may refer all matters of fcandal and offence, 

 and alfo the elcdlion of their pallors and their deacons. Ac- 

 coidinglv, Clement, in the fore-cited epiltle, ch. xliv. fpeak- 

 ing of the pallors, ufcs this expreffion : " Thofe who were 

 conflituted by the apolUes, and afterwards by other eminent 

 men, with the confent of the whole congregation." It ap- 

 pears alfo, by the epillles of Cyprian, written about the 

 middle of tiic third centurv, that for the firll three ages 

 of the church, no final rcfolution was taken in any affair 

 of moment, without communicating it to the people, and 

 obtaining their approbation. In the fecond century a fet- 

 tled diilintlion obtained, in feveral refpefts, between the 

 pre'ident, chofen by a plurality of votes, and diftinguifhed 

 by tlie appropriate title of bilhop, which had before been 

 common to all the prcfbyters, and the other prefbyttrs. 

 Many other titles, befidco that of bifhop, which they had 

 all enjoyed in common, were rcftricled to him who was re- 

 garded as their head, fuch as t)y«^=vo,-, ■jr^otrnu s-jaloxaSsJ^o;, 

 ir{oi(-a;.c!»o,-, iroiu.n, and feme others. Thefe titles, inde- 

 pendently of the talents, virtues and fervices that attended 

 them, claimed refpeA and deference. The concurrence of 

 the prcfident thus honoured, was conlidered as a neceffary 

 fanftion to all ecclefiallical refolutions and mcafures ; and 

 by degrees every aft became valid which bore the llamp of 

 Lis authority. Thofe who prefided over churehes, which 

 were tftablilhcd in fome of the principal cities, were ho- 

 noured with peculiar preeminence, and to this advancement 

 analogy to the civil government did not a little contribute. 

 It is not improbable, that the church of Jcrufalem, when it 

 bceamc numerous, and was deprived ot the minillry of the 

 apoftles, w!io were gone to inftruft the other nations, was 

 the firll which chofe a prefident or bilhop ; nor is it lefs 

 probable, that the other churches followed by degrees 

 this example. 



The firll ancient author who mentions bifhop, prelbyter, 

 and deacon, as three dillinft orders in the church, is, as we 

 have already obferved, Ignatius, who is fuppofed to have 

 written about the i6th year of the fecond century. But as 

 feveral of the epidlesafcribed to him, are fptirious, no great 

 ilrefs can be laid upon his authority. However, he feems, 

 with peculiar earneftnefs, to inculcate obedience and fubjtc- 

 lion to the bifhop, as well as to the prefbyters and deacons. 

 Mr. Dodwell accounts for his zeal in eflabhfliing the bifliop's 



B I S 



authority, by fiippofing that it was at that time a new thing, 

 totally unknown in t!ie church ; and, accordmg to this opi- 

 nion, he fays, that it is in vain to look for any trace of ep.f- 

 copal authority in the New Teftament, Ircna;us, whu is 

 fnppofed to have written about the middle of the fecond 

 century, fometimes ufes the nanr.cs bifhop and prefbyter in- 

 difcriminat--lv, and at other times v.'ith fome kind of dillinc- 

 tion ; but it 'is not eafy to determine, whether by thefe two 

 appellations he means the fame order, or two diflerent orders. 

 Ur. Pearion admits that there names are often interchanged 

 by this f.ithcr, and others of his time, even to the end of the 

 century ; but he affirms at the fame lime, th:it in regard to 

 their own contemporaries, the offices of individuals are ne- 

 ver thus confounded, infomuch that a perfon, who was in 

 their time a bifliop, is not cal'ed a preibyter, nor is a pref- 

 byter calhd a bilhop. It is allowed, that the diflinftion of 

 thefe orders began about this time generally to prevail, 

 though the diffei ence was not nearly fo confiderable as it be- 

 came afterwards. Another author, by whom t\w three orders 

 feem to be dlfcriminated, and wliofe ttlllmony is commonly 

 adduced in fupport of their apoftolical inft'tiition, is Pius, 

 bifhop of Rome, who is fuppofed to have written before the 

 middle of the fecond century, but after Ignatius and Poly- 

 carp : he ufes an exprelfion, however, which does not indi- 

 cate any high opinion of the fuperiority of the bifhop in his 

 time ; " Let the prefbyters and deacons reverence thee (the 

 bilhop), not as their fuperior, but as Chrilt's miniller." 

 Clement of Alexandria, at the clofe of the fecond century 

 (fee his Strom. 1. I.), Itrongly marks the dillinftion between 

 prefbyter and deacon ; but he feems to intimate, that the 

 dillinftion between bifhop and prefbyter was, even in his 

 days, comparatively not worthy of his notice. At this time, 

 however, every church had its own pallor, or bifhop, and 

 only one under this appellation, and every bifhop had only 

 one congregation or church. Sir Peter, afterwards lord, King 

 (ubi infra) has proved thefe afTertions by a variety of citations 

 f on ancient writers ; he has alfo fliewn, that a bilhop's dio- 

 c.fe did not exceed the bounds of a n-.odern paiifli. See Dio- 

 ctsE. The prefbyters, according to this writer, were the cu- 

 rates and affiitants of the bifliop, and though inferior to them 

 in degree, yet they had the fame inherent right with the bi« 

 fh ip3,and were equal to them in order. " A bilhop," fays this 

 author, " preached, baptized, and confirmed, fo did a pref- 

 byter ; a bilhop excommunicated, abfoivcd, and ordained, 

 fo did a prcfljyter ; w'hatever a bifhop did, the fame did a 

 prefbyter ; the particular afts of their office were the fame." 

 In the age of Cyprian, about the middle of the third centu- 

 ry, it appears that the prefljyters were confidered as veiled 

 with the power of conferring orders. (Cyp. Epill. 5. and 

 75.) In the age of Hilary, about the middle of the fourth 

 century, it appears, that the whole dillinftion of the epif- 

 copate is afcribed by him to feniority in the miniflry, with- 

 out either election or fpecial ordination. When the bifhop 

 died, the fenior colleague fucceeded of courfe. As to ordi- 

 nation, it was the fame in both ; and bifhop meant no more 

 than firll among the prefbyters, or fenior prefbyter. Jerome, 

 wl.o wrote about the end of the fourth and beginning of the 

 fifth century, fays (In Titum. 1. 5. Op. vol. x. p. 1700.) 

 that, among the ancients, priefts and bifhops were the 

 fame ; but that by degrees the care of a church was affign- 

 ed to one perfon, in order to prevent diffenfion. In ano- 

 ther place (Op. vol. vl. p. 198.) he fayis, " Let the bifhops 

 know, that they are above priells more by cuilom than by 

 the appointment of Chrilt." He alio obferves (Anecdotes, 

 p. 24, 54.), that at the beginning, churches were governed 

 by the common council of prefljyters, like an ariltocracy ; 

 but afterwards the fuperintendency was given to one of the 

 7 prefbyters, 



