"when every one began to think that those whom he baptized were rather his than CHRIST's." This is the substance of what you produce from Jerome; and then you say, 'I appeal to your candour, my brethren, whether any thing can be plainer or more decisive than this language. I appeal to your candour, whether the man who is capable of saying that these are obscure and doubtful passages can be safely trusted, either as a discerning man, or an impartial judge.a

Now, Sir, let us calmly examine this point. .

1. Jerome says, "that Bishops and Presbyters were the same under the Apostles." This I grant. But does it follow, that there was no officer superior to this order? As a logician, you certainly will not say it does. Well then, who was the superior officer? I answer, an Apostle. This, if I mistake not, I shall fully prove; and I shall do it in the words of the author of An original Draught, &c.

"The Scriptures," says he, " teach us, that when the Apostles had founded Churches they ordained Elders for them; entrusted those Elders to administer the word and sacraments amongst them, or (to use St. Paul's words to the Elders of Miletus) to take care to themselves and all the flock over which the HOLY GHOST (by orders and commission from the Apostle's hands to be sure) had made them overseers, (which, in our translation, is rendered bishops,) and to feed the Church of GoD, as good shepherds ought to do. The titles, doubtless, suited with the charge and ministry they were trusted with; and as they were ecclesiastical officers, and commonly not novices in years besides, they were as properly called Presbyters of the Church too; and, accordingly, we find both these terms indefinitely applied to them then. Yet all this while, nothing is plainer in Scripture, than that the Apostles reserved to themselves the prerogative of a ruling power over them; kept a rod of discipline in their own hands; censured such as deserved it; delivered unto Satan the disorderly amongst them: that they excommunicated their members; and expected whole Churches to be obedient to them in all things: in short, had the sovereign care of all the Churches in their own hands; moreover, all the Elders we read of, who were ordained in any Church, had the Apostle's hands laid upon them. This great prerogative of power then (before Timothy's and Titus's special commission) the Apostles retained still; and no specious titles of Presidents, Governors, Bishops, Pastors, or the like, attributed to the Presbyters or Elders under them in the New Testament, lessened it in the least, or brought it into question: their superior character amongst them was owned by all. So that, during their lives or personal government over them, these titles might safely and properly enough

a Continuation, Letter V. p. 177, 178, [p. 328, 329, 2d ed.]

1 Cor. iv. 21, c 1 Cor. v. 3. d 1 Tim. i. 20. e 2 Cor. ii. 9. f 2 Cor. xi. 28.

be promiscuously used for any of their subordinate ministers, whereof they ordained many in particular Churches."

This is a correct and scriptural account of the superior order of the Apostles; and, therefore, by necessary consequence, there were three orders in the Church during the time of the Apostles, viz. Apostles, Presbyters, sometimes called Bishops, and Deacons. Jerome knew all this perfectly well; and, therefore, he could not mean that there were but two orders in the Church; nor, indeed, does he give any hint of the kind.

What does Jerome say next? That before there were, by the devil's influence, parties in religion, the Churches were governed by the common council of Presbyters.' Here Jerome must mean one of three things; either that the Presbyters governed the Churches independently of the Apostles, or in conjunction with them, with equal powers, or in subordination to them. He could not mean either of the two first; for then he would contradict the Scriptures flatly; and we certainly ought not to lay that to his charge, unless his words were so express that there would be no possibility of avoiding it; and, in that case, he would not be worth minding. He must then mean, that the Presbyters governed their respective Churches in subordination to the Apostles; and that secures the apostclical pre-eminence. Jerome says also, Before there were, by the instigation of the devil, parties in religion, and it was said among the people, I am of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, the Churches were governed by the common councils of Presbyters,' under the control of the Apostles, as has been shown above. Afterwards, says Jerome, after this distraction at Corinth, to prevent the seeds of schism, one of the Presbyters was set over the rest. Now, as Jerome tells us, that the object of placing one of the Presbyters above the rest was to prevent schism, surely, if we allow him to have possessed common sense, it cannot be supposed that he meant to assert, that the remedy was not applied till two or three hundred years after the disease began. Long before that period the Church might have been torn to atoms by schism. And what shameful disregard to the interests of the Church would the Apostles have discovered, if, when they had a remedy in their hands, they did not apply it, but left it to after ages to apply it or not? This is such an account of the Apostles as would have indelibly marked their characters with folly.

From these observations, which to me appear highly reasona ble, and perfectly conclusive, the change which Jerome speaks of, must have taken place (supposing him to be right with respect to a change at all) soon after the schism at Corinth. And then the institution of episcopacy is founded on apostolic authority.

But what shall we say to Jerome's assertion, that fixed Bishops, as a superior order of clergy, were introduced by 'little and

g SLATER'S Original Draught, p. 208.

·

little?' I say, this is perfectly consistent with the notion of the highest Episcopalian in the world. As the labours of the Apostles increased, and it became impracticable for them to superintend the numerous Churches which they planted, or as the time of their departure drew near, they gradually placed men over the Churches with the same majority of power which they themselves had exercised.

This point is also well illustrated by the author of the Original Draught, &c. "Before," says he, "the Apostles died, or when Providence removed them from a personal visitation of their several Churches in this or the other province, we read in the earliest records of the Church, that they ordained many single persons (taken notice of without any fellow Presbyters besides) over large cities and Churches, as (according to Tertullian) St. John placed Polycarp in the Church of Smyrna, and St. Peter ordained Clemens in the Church of Rome; and Tertullian adds, that the rest of the Churches could prove their Bishops to be derived from the Apostles in the same manner; and calls those episcopal sees the Apostles' chairs; as Irenæus also tells us that the Apostles delivered the Church to those single Bishops, and their locus magisterii," or place of government, with them; and the Scripture tells us plainly enough, that Timothy was ordained such a singular governor for Ephesus, where there were many Presbyters before, and Titus for Crete; for it is plain they had a special commission to ordain Elders (1 Tim. iii. 15, 2 Tim. ii., 2 Titus i. 5) to rebuke and censure them as well as others, (1 Tim. v. 19,) and that with all authority (Tit. ii. 15;) to judge of doctrine and reject heretics; in a word, to set in order the things which were wanting (Tit. i. 5), the very claim of Apostolical power, in St. Paul's express words for it (1 Cor. xi. 34;) and all this so personal a charge, that the Apostle conjured Timothy (and no others with him) before GOD and the LORD JESUS CHRIST, and the elect angels, that he observed these things without partiality (1 Tim. v. 21;) and as a specialreason for his investing him with all this fulness of power now, and for enjoining him so strictly to watch and make a full proof of this his ministry, he concludes thus, ' For I am ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand;' as if he had further said, And now this former care of mine must be yours."

""Tis manifest, I think, from hence, that these singular Presidents of the several Churches had sundry parts of the Apostles' reserved sovereign power conferred upon them, never imparted to Presbyters of any denomination before, as far as Scripture and primitive antiquity can inform us. These consecrated Presidents then take possession of the Churches assigned to them, either by the Apostle's personal induction of them (as the

h Rom. xv. 23.

i See Bishop PEARSON's proof of the time when Timothy was left at Ephesus.

sure.

case of many of them was) or with their full credentials to be In all, or most of those great Churches, which this apostolical institution had allotted for them, they must find Presbyters ministering at that time, in such capacity as they all along had done, with entire subordination to the Apostles' supremacy over them. These ministering Presbyters, then, together with the whole Church, receiving such new commissioned Presidents amongst them, must manifestly see by those reserved apostolical powers of ruling, ordination, censure, and the like, (expressed in Timothy's and Titus' commissions to the full, and no doubt of it, signified sufficiently to every Church by the Apostles themselves, who thus placed them there,) that they had an authentic and unquestionable right of succeeding in the ordinary jurisdiction and prerogatives of their departing Apostle over them." "And this," says Slater, "is a plain and natural reason why the first order of ecclesiastics in the primitive Church were so familiarly called the Apostles' successors. "k

Thus you see, Sir, that Jerome's little and little,' is the very doctrine of Episcopalians; or, in other words, that fixed Bishops, with the ordinary reserved supremacy of the Apostles, were gradually, as the occasions required, placed over the Churches by the Apostles themselves.

This being the fact, as appears from Scripture and antiquity, we, of course, acknowledge that Jerome is perfectly correct on this point; but when you want to make this little and little' begin after the apostolic age, you not only make Jerome contradict the Scriptures, but himself also; for he says this episcopal pre-eminence was 'decreed throughout the whole world. Now, there certainly was no authority competent to the making of such a decree after the death of the Apostles, till the establishment of Christianity in the fourth century; for you yourself will readily acknowledge, that there was no general council before that period, and surely nothing less could have produced such a change, if that could have done it. Further: As Jérome lived in that age, he could not have been at a loss to name the council; but we hear nothing of that. He must then have meant an apostolic decree. This is perfectly consistent with his 'little and little.'

We have now, I think, taken a fair view of Jerome's assertions; and to show that either the view is fair, or he contradicts himself, I shall examine the passages which I quoted in my first volume.

At your glosses on those passages, I am thrown ino astonishment. That such observations should have dropped from the pen of a man of sense and learning, can be accounted for in no other way, than that you were hard pushed, and thought it better to say any thing than nothing.

After quoting what I had produced from Jerome, you observe Original Draught, p. 209, 210, 211,

These are all the passages which Dr. B. cites with so much exultation, and which he considers as pointedly asserting the apostolic institution of prelacy. But I will venture to pronounce, that there is not one of those passages, which can be considered by an impartial reader as furnishing the least solid ground for such a conclusion; and only one of the whole number which bears even the semblance of argument to this effect."

Let us try those passages. I. "That we may know that the apostolical traditions were taken from the Old Testament; that which Aaron, and his sons, and the Levites, were in the Temple let the Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons claim to themselves in the Church." Now what is your answer to this? It is as follows-'When he (Jerome) speaks of this parallel as an apostolic tradition, we can only infer from his language the well known fact, that in his day, high churchmen were fond of comparing the Church ministry with the Jewish priesthood; of endeavouring to show that the former succeeded to the grades, titles, and privileges, of the latter; and of pleading apostolic tradition for this doctrine.' According to this amusing account, Jerome spoke the language of high churchmen, when, if you are right, he was a Presbyterian, or something very near it. He was, by consequence, a shameless hypocrite, as every man is who thinks one thing and speaks another. And as he did not believe an original imparity in the ministry, and yet asserts that the Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons of his day had a right to claim the grades in the Christian Church, which the High Priest, Presbyters, and Levites, held in the Jewish by divine institution, then he asserted a palpable falsehood. And this was, you tell us, 'the fashionable doctrine and language of his time; it was natural for him to adopt that language, when he was not particularly called to speak of the system actually established by the Apostles.' So then, Jerome played the hypocrite, and told lies, merely to be in the fashion-it was very 'natural for him to adopt that false and deceptive language.' To the quotation from Jerome's 51th Ep. viz.-"With us the Bishops hold the place of the Apostles; with them the Bishop holds the third place." To this I do not perceive that you make any reply, and therefore shall take it for granted, that you were not able to give us any thing amusing on this point. In the age of Jerome, you acknowledge that there were three orders, and the Bishop was accounted the first, For what reason? Because, according to Jerome, the Bishop of his day held the place of the Apostles. Then of course the Apostles held the first rank; and we know there were under them Presbyters and Deacons. So that Jerome clearly asserts the apostolic institution of episcopacy in this quotation, as he did its divine institution in the last.

To the words, "Without the Bishop's command, neither Presbyter nor Deacon has a right to baptize," you say, 'he 1 Continuation, p. 180. [p. 220, 2d ed.]