PART II.

CENT, ceedings. It must, at the same time, be carefully III. observed, that the rights and privileges of these primitive bishops were not every where accurately fixed, nor determined in such a manner as to prevent encroachments and disputes; nor does it appear, that the chief authority in the province, was always conferred upon that bishop who presided over the church established in the metropolis. It is further to be noticed, as a matter beyond all dispute, that the bishops of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, considered as rulers of primitive and apostolic churches, had a kind of pre-eminence over all others, and were not only consulted frequently in affairs of a difficult and momentous nature, but were also distinguished by peculiar rights and privileges.

The power and dignity

shop of

II. With respect, particularly, to the bishop of of the bi- Rome, he is supposed by Cyprian to have had, at this time, a certain pre-eminence in the this centu- church [p]; nor does he stand alone in this opiry; what? nion. But it is to be carefully observed, that

Rome in

even those, who, with Cyprian, attributed this pre-eminence to the Roman prelate, insisted, at the same time, with the utmost warmth, upon the equality, in point of dignity and authority, that subsisted among all the members of the episcopal order. In consequence of this opinion of an equality among all Christian bishops, they rejected, with contempt, the judgment of the bishop of Rome, when they thought it ill founded or unjust, and followed their own sense of things with a perfect independence. Of this Cyprian himself gave an eminent example, in his famous controversy with Stephen bishop of Rome, concerning the baptism of heretics, in which he treated the arrogance of that imperious prelate with a noble indignation,

[p] Cyprian, Ep. lxxiii. p. 131. Ep. lv. p. 86. Ib. De Unitate Ecclesia. p. 195. edit. Baluzii.

III.

PART II.

dignation, and also with a perfect contempt. CENT. Whoever, therefore, compares all these things together, will easily perceive, that the pre-eminence of the bishop of Rome, was a pre-eminence of order and association [g], and not of power and authority. Or, to explain the matter yet more clearly, the pre-eminence of the bishop of Rome, in the universal church, was such as that of Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, was in the African churches. And every one knows, that the precedence of this latter prelate diminished in nothing the equality that subsisted among all the African bishops, invalidated in no instance their rights and liberties; but gave only to Cyprian, as the president of their general assemblies, a power of calling councils, of presiding in them, of admonishing his brethren in a mild and fraternal manner, and of executing, in short, such offices as the order and purposes of these ecclesiastical meetings necessarily required [r].

of the

generates

III. The face of things began now to change The goin the Christian church. The ancient method of vernment ecclesiastical government seemed, in general, still church de to subsist, while, at the same time, by imperceptible steps, it varied from the primitive rule, and narchical degenerated towards the form of a religious mo- form. narchy. For the bishops aspired to higher degrees of power and authority than they had formerly possessed; and not only violated the rights

of

[q] So I have translated Principatus ordinis et consociationis, which could not be otherwise rendered without a long circumlocution. The pre-eminence here mentioned signifies the right of convening councils, of presiding in them, of collecting voices, and such other things as were essential to the order of these assemblies.

[r] See Steph. Balusii adnot. ad Cypriani Epistolas, p. 387. 389. 400. Consult particularly the seventy-first and seventy-third epistles of Cyprian, and the fifty-fifth, addressed to Cornelius, bishop of Rome, in which letters the Carthaginian prelate pleads with warmth and vehemence for the equality of all Christian bishops.

III.

PART II.

CENT. of the people, but also made gradual encroachments upon the privileges of the presbyters. And that they might cover these usurpations with an air of justice, and an appearance of reason, they published new doctrines concerning the nature of the church, and of the episcopal dignity, which, however, were, in general so obscure, that they themselves seem to have understood them as little as those to whom they were delivered. One of the principal authors of this change, in the government of the church, was Cyprian, who pleaded for the power of the bishops with more zeal and vehemence than had ever been hitherto employed in that cause, though not with an unshaken constancy and perseverance; for, in difficult and perilous times, necessity sometimes obliged him to yield, and to submit several things to the judgment and authority of the church.

The vices of the ⚫lergy.

IV. This change in the form of ecclesiastical government, was soon followed by a train of vices, which dishonoured the character and authority of those to whom the administration of the church was committed. For, though several yet continued to exhibit to the world illustrious examples of primitive piety and Christian virtue, yet many were sunk in luxury and voluptuousness, puffed up with vanity, arrogance, and ambition, possessed with a spirit of contention and discord, and addicted to many other vices that cast an undeserved reproach upon the holy religion, of which they were the unworthy professors and ministers. This is testified in such an ample manner, by the repeated complaints of many of the most respectable writers of this age [s], that truth will not permit us to spread the veil, which we should otherwise be desirous to cast over such enormities among an

order

[s] Origen. Comm. in Matthæum, par. I. opp. p. 420. 441. 442. Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. lib. viii. cap. i. p. 291, &c.

many

red up

essed

addicte

ed rept

ere the

is testin

peated

III.

order so sacred. The bishops assumed, in many CENT. places, a princely authority, particularly those who had the greatest number of churches under their PART II. So inspection, and who presided over the most opulent assemblies. They appropriated to their evangelical function the splendid ensigns of temporal majesty. A throne, surrounded with ministers, extalted above his equals the servant of the meek and Humble Jesus; and sumptuous garments dazzled the eyes and the minds of the multitude into an ignorant veneration for their arrogated authority. The example of the bishops was ambitiously imitated by the presbyters, who, neglecting the sacred duties of their station, abandoned themselves to the indolence and delicacy of an effeminate and luxurious life. The deacons, beholding the presbyters deserting thus their functions, boldly usurped their rights and privileges; and the effects of a corrupt ambition were spread through every

ĥ

rank of the sacred order.

ders.

V. From what has been now observed, we may Hence the come, perhaps, at the true origin of minor, or lesser lesser ororders, which were, in this century added every where to those of the bishops, presbyters, and deacons. For, certainly, the titles, and offices of subdeacons,acolythi,ostiarii, or door-keepers, readers, exorcists, and copiata, would never have been heard of in the church, if its rulers had been assiduously and zealously employed in promoting the interests of truth and piety, by their labours, and their example. But when the honours and privileges of the bishops and presbyters were augmented, the deacons also began to extend their ambitious views, and to despise those lower functions and employments which they had hitherto exercised with such humility and zeal. The additional orders that were now created to diminish the labours of the present rulers of the church, had functions allotted

to

III.

PART II.

CENT. to them, which their names partly explain [t]. The institution of exorcists was a consequence of the doctrine of the New Platonists, which the Christians adopted, and which taught, that the evil genii, or spirits were continually hovering over human bodies, towards which they were carried by a natural and vehement desire; and that vicious men were not so much impelled to sin by an innate depravity, or by the seduction of example,

[t] The subdeacons were designed to ease the deacons of the meanest part of their work. Their office, consequently, was to prepare the sacred vessels of the altar, and to deliver them to the deacons in time of divine service; to attend the doors of the church during the communion service, to go on the bishop's embassies with his letters or messages to foreign churches. In a word, they were so subordinate to the superior rulers of the church, that, by a canon of the council of Laodicea, they were forbidden to sit in the presence of a deacon without his leave.— The order of acolythi was peculiar to the Latin church; for there was no such order in the Greek church during the four first centuries. Their name signifies attendants; and their principal office was to light the candles of the church, and to attend the ministers with wine for the eucharist. The ostiarii or doorkeepers were appointed to open and shut the doors, as officers and servants under the deacons and subdeacons, to give notice of the times of prayer and church assemblies, which in time of persecution required a private signal for fear of discovery; and that probably, was the first reason for instituting this order in the church of Rome, whose example, by degrees was soon followed by other churches.-The readers were those that were appointed to read the scripture in that part of divine service to which the catechumens were admitted. The exorcists were appointed to drive out evil spirits from the bodies of persons possessed; they had been long known in the church, but were not erected into an ecclesiastical order until the latter end of the third century. The copiatæ, or fossarii, were an order of the inferior clergy, whose business it was to take care of funerals and to provide for the decent interment of the dead. In vain have Baronius and other Romish writers asserted, that these inferior orders were of apostolical institution. The contrary is evidently proved, since none of these offices are mentioned as having taken place before the third century, and the origin can be traced no higher than the fourth.