Five disputations of church-government and worship

And Hierom expressly resembleth this action of the Presbyters to an Armies making an Emperor or General; as if he had said, As the Army makes an Emperor (Imperatorem faciat) so Presbyters made the Bishop: but the Army so made the Emperor, that they left it not to another power to make him (and to them only.) So that it is both [Making a Bishop] that is here ascribed to the Presbyters, and [such a making] as leaveth him not unmade, to the making of another. 7. And he resembleth it to the making of an Arch-deacon, supposing that the Deacons do 1. Elect. 2. Judge of the person (quem industrium noverint.) 3. And give him the name (& Archi-diaconum vocent.) 8. And he affirmeth this to be (semper) the constant custom of the Alexandrian Presbyters, till the days of Heraclas and Dionysius: intimating that then the custom changed: but what custom was then changed? Not the Election of a Bishop by the Presbyters, (with the people) for that continued long after: and therefore it must be the Constitution, which afterward was done by Neighbour Bishops in Consecration, but till then by the Election, Collocation, and nomination of the Presbyters of that City-Church. ⟨p. 218⟩9. Having showed thus, that Bishops and Presbyters were the same, and in the beginning called them by the same name, he affirms that [Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt] that is, All these Bishops. 10. And he plainly affirms that the difference is made by Riches and Poverty: He is the greater that is the richer, and he is the inferior that is the poorer. [Potentia divitiarum & paupertatis humilitas, vel sublimior•m, vel inferiorem Episcopum facit.] Let any impartial Reader peruse the Epistle it self, and consider of these ten passages, and then believe if he can, either that Hierom did imply that other Bishops made these Alexandrian Bishops, and not the Presbyters, or that these Presbyters altered but the name, and gave not the Bishop his new degree, or that this was not a thing that was now de novo in remedium schismatis contrived or performed by them. There is evidence enough against these conceits.

And Hierom expresly resembleth this action of the Presbyters to an Armies making an Emperour or General; as if he had said, As the Army makes an Emperour (Imperatorem faciat) so Presbyters made the Bishop: but the Army so made the Emperour, that they left it not to another power to make him (and to them only.) So that it is both [Making a B•shop] that is here ascribed to the Presbyters, and [such a making] as leaveth him not unmade, to the making of another. 7. And he resembleth it to the making of an Arch-deacon, supposing that the Deacons do 1. Elect. 2. Judge of the person (quem industrium noverint.) 3. And give him the name (& Archi-diaconum vocent.) 8. And he affirmeth this to be (semper) the constant custom of the Alexandrian Presbyters, till the dayes of Heraclas and Dionysius: intimating that then the custom changed: but what custom was then changed? Not the Election of a Bishop by the Presbyters, (with the people) for that continued long after: and therefore it must be the Constitution, which afterward was done by Neighbour Bishops in Consecration, but till then by the Election, Collocation, and nomination of the Presbyters of that City-Church.