Sect. 57. To this I reply: 1. Hierom here undertakes to tell us, how Bishops were made at Alexandria; but maketh not the least mention of other Ordination or Consecration, then these words express as done by the Presbyters: And therefore till they prove it, we must take the affirmation of another Ordination to be but the groundless presumption of the Assertors. 2. Hierom doth purposely bring this as an argument, to prove the identity first, and the nearness afterward, of Bishops and Presbyters, that [Presbyters made Bishops:] which would have been no argument, if it was not Presbyters but Prelates that made them, and if the Presbyters only chose them; for, 3. The people may choose a Bishop, as well as the Presbyters, and ordinarily did it: and yet this proveth not that the people were near the Bishop in degree; that which the people themselves may do, and frequently did, is not the only thing that Hierom here ascribeth to the Presbyters: but such is the Election of a Bishop: therefore, &c. 4. It is the Original or first making of Prelates at Alexandria that Hierom here speaks of▪ which he shows was from the Presbyters consent. This appeareth plainly in his ⟨p. 217⟩words (though some can make the plainest words to signify what they would have them) For 1. He begins with a [Presbyteris, id est Episcop•s, 1] and 2. proceedeth from many scripture passages, to prove them in scripture times the same: and that not only quoad nomen, but officium; for 3. When he had done with the Testimonies of Saint John in his two Epistles, he immediately addeth [Quod autem postea unus electus est, qui caeteris praeponeretur &c.] where note, both that [unus qui caeteris praeponeretur] is more then the bare name: and also that [Postea] referreth to the date of Johns Epistles, and therefore he plainly averreth, that it was after Johns Epistles, that [one was chosen to be before the rest.] 5. And to the Answer I further reply, that here is all that was done, and all that was needful to be done, ascribed to the Presbyters: For 1. They elected one. 2. They did in excelsiori gradu electum collocare, place him in an higher degree, and 3. Episcopum nominabant: they named him the Bishop (by way of excellency.) And if Election and placing him in the Degree, and giving him peculiarly the name, be not Ordination, then Ordination is but some Ceremony; for these contain the substance. 6.
Sect. 57. To this I reply: 1. Hierom here undertakes to tell us, how Bishops were made at Alexandria; but maketh not the least mention of other Ordination or Consecration, then these words express as done by the Presbyters: And therefore till they prove it, we must take the affirmation of another Ordination to be but the groundless presumption of the Assertors. 2. Hierom doth purposely bring this as an argument, to prove the identity first, and the neerness afterward, of Bishops and Presbyters, that [Presbyters made Bishops:] which would have been no argument, if it was not Presbyters but Prelates that made them, and if the Presbyters only chose them; for, 3. The people may choose a Bishop, as well as the Presbyters, and ordinarily did it: and yet this proveth not that the people were neer the Bishop in degree; that which the people themselves may do, and frequently did, is not the only thing that Hierom here ascribeth to the Presbyters: but such is the Election of a Bishop: therefore, &c. 4. It is the Original or first making of Prelates at Alexandria that Hierom here speaks of▪ which he shews was from the Presbyters consent. This appeareth plainly in his ⟨p. 217⟩words (though some can make the plainest words to signifie what they would have them) For 1. He begins with a [Presbyteris, id est Episcop•s, 1] and 2. proceedeth from many scripture passages, to prove them in scripture times the same: and that not only quoad nomen, but officium; for 3. When he had done with the Testimonies of Saint Iohn in his two Epistles, he immediately addeth [Quod autem postea unus electus est, qui caeteris praeponeretur &c.] where note, both that [unus qui caeteris praeponeretur] is more then the bare name: and also that [Postea] referreth to the date of Iohns Epistles, and therefore he plainly averreth, that it was after Iohns Epistles, that [one was chosen to be before the rest.] 5. And to the Answer I further reply, that here is all that was done, and all that was needfull to be done, ascribed to the Presbyters: For 1. They elected one. 2. They did in excelsiori gradu electum collocare, place him in an higher degree, and 3. Episcopum nominabant: they named him the Bishop (by way of excellency.) And if Election and placing him in the Degree, and giving him peculiarly the name, be not Ordination, then Ordination is but some Ceremony; for these contain the substance. 6.
- 1Alphonsus à Castro doth maintain that H•eroms opinion was indeed the same that from his plain and frequent expressions we aver it to be, and rebuketh them that pretend the contrary. Hector Boethius (before cited) saith (Sco•. Histor. l. 7. fol. 128. b.) that Ante Palladium Populi suffrag•is ex Monachis & Culda•is pontifices assumerentur. No Bishop then ordained them but Presbyters. And Balaeus (Centur. 14. c. 6.) saith [Habebant antea Scoti suos Episcopos ac Ministros ex verbi Divini Ministerio plebium suffragiis electos, prou• Asianorum more fieri apud Britanaos videbant.Alphonsus à Castro doth maintain that H•eroms opinion was indeed the same that from his plain and frequent expressions we averr it to be, and rebuketh them that pretend the contrary. Hector Boethius (before cited) saith (Sco•. Histor. l. 7. fol. 128. b.) that Ante Palladium Populi suffrag•is ex Monachis & Culda•is pontifices assumerentur. No Bishop then ordained them but Presbyters. And Balaeus (Centur. 14. c. 6.) saith [Habebant antea Scoti suos Episcopos ac Ministros ex verbi Divini Ministerio plebium suffragiis electos, prou• Asianorum more fieri apud Britanaos videbant.
