As for Bishops (viz.) a Diocesan,1 ruling all the Presbyters, but leaving the Presbyters to rule the People, and consequently taking to himself the sole, or chief power of Ordination, but leaving censures and absolution to them, except in ⟨p. 47⟩case of Appeal to himself; I must needs say, that this sort of Episcopacy is very ancient, and hath been for many Ages of very common reception through a great part of the Church— And if I lived in a place, where this government were established, and managed for God, I would submit thereto, and live peaceably under it, and do nothing to the disturbance, disgrace or discouragement of it. (You may see how far Mr. Vines and Mr. Baxter did agree in the notion of a Bishop over many Presbyters.)2 Of which Grotius in his Commentary on the Acts, and particularly chap. 17. saith, that as in every particular Synagogue, many of which were in some one City (in Jerusalem 480.) 3there was [Greek or Hebrew], such was the Primitive Bishop. And doubtless the first Bishops were over the community of Presbyters, as Presbyters, in joint relation to one Church or Region; which Region being upon the increase of Believers divided into more Churches, and in after-times, those Churches assigned to particular Men; yet he the Bishop, continued Bishop over them still. For that* you say, he had a negative Voice, that is more then ever I saw proved, or I think ever shall, for the first 200 Years; and yet I have laboured to enquire into it. That makes him Angelus Princeps, not Angelus Praeses, as Dr. Reinolds saith. Calvin denies that, and makes him Consul in Senatu, or as a Speaker in the House of Parliament, which, as I have heard that D. B. did say, was but to make him foreman of the Jury. As touching the Introduction of ruling Elders, such as are modelled out by Parliament, my judgment is sufficiently known. I am of your Judgment in the point, There should be such Elders, as have power to Preach as well as Rule. On this Mr. Baxter reflects, p. 353. Though Mr. Vines here yield not the negative Voice to have been de facto, in the first or second age, nor to be de jure; yet he, without any question yielded to the stating of a President, durante vitâ, if he prove not unworthy, which was one point that I propounded to him; and I make no doubt, but he would have yielded to a voluntary consent of Presbyters, de facto, not to ordain without the President.
As for Bishops (viz.) a Diocesan,1 ruling all the Presbyters, but leaving the Presbyters to rule the People, and consequently taking to himself the sole, or chief power of Ordination, but leaving censures and absolution to them, except in ⟨p. 47⟩case of Appeal to himself; I must needs say, that this sort of Episcopacy is very ancient, and hath been for many Ages of very common reception through a great part of the Church— And if I lived in a place, where this government were established, and managed for God, I would submit thereto, and live peaceably under it, and do nothing to the disturbance, disgrace or discouragement of it. (You may see how far Mr. Vines and Mr. Baxter did agree in the notion of a Bishop over many Presbyters.)2 Of which Grotius in his Commentary on the Acts, and particularly chap. 17. saith, that as in every particular Synagogue, many of which were in some one City (in Jerusalem 480.) 3there was 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, such was the Primitive Bishop. And doubtless the first Bishops were over the community of Presbyters, as Presbyters, in joynt relation to one Church or Region; which Region being upon the increase of Believers divided into more Churches, and in after-times, those Churches assigned to particular Men; yet he the Bishop, continued Bishop over them still. For that* you say, he had a negative Voice, that is more then ever I saw proved, or I think ever shall, for the first 200 Years; and yet I have laboured to enquire into it. That makes him Angelus Princeps, not Angelus Praeses, as Dr. Reinolds saith. Calvin denies that, and makes him Consul in Senatu, or as a Speaker in the House of Parliament, which, as I have heard that D. B. did say, was but to make him foreman of the Jury. As touching the Introduction of ruling Elders, such as are modelled out by Parliament, my judgment is sufficiently known. I am of your Judgment in the point, There should be such Elders, as have power to Preach as well as Rule. On this Mr. Baxter reflects, p. 353. Though Mr. Vines here yield not the negative Voice to have been de facto, in the first or second age, nor to be de jure; yet he, without any question yielded to the stating of a President, durante vitâ, if he prove not unworthy, which was one point that I propounded to him; and I make no doubt, but he would have yielded to a voluntary consent of Presbyters, de facto, not to ordain without the President.
- 1Five Disp. p. 20.
- 2P. 352.
- 3Sigonius de Repub. Heb. l. 2. c. 8.
- *Mr. Baxter.
