there hath been these orders of Ministers in the Christian Church. Bishops, Priests, and Deacons," are the same as they were in King Edward's ordinal, and therefore have the same interpretation, for there is nothing declared to the contrary in the Revision of 1662. The question here then can be only as to the sense of the term order. Now we have seen that the FATHERS used it for a distinction of Persons in the church, without any reference to DIVINE RIGHT for that distinction. The Reformers were familiar with the

writings of the Fathers. The proper interpretation then, is, that they mean, that from the Apostles' times such distinctions as Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons had existed; NOT that the office or duties of a Bishop were by Divine Institution incompatible with the office of a Presbyter as a Presbyter; for they expressly affirmed the contrary. That some distinction did exist even in the Apostles' time, we do not deny. We only deny that the powers and authority of Bishops and Presbyters were incompatible with each other as such, by divine right. There is considerable proof, as was shewn in section 3, that Presbyters were superior in honor and duties to Bishops, perhaps as much so as Rectors are to Curates; yet not so as to constitute authority and powers incompatible with the office of Bishops.

Additional evidence will arise both to the above interpretation of the Book of Orders, and to the general question, by the testimony of Bishop Jewel. Jewel was Bishop in Elizabeth's time, considerably after the publishing of the Book of Ordering Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. He stands in the very first class of Reformers for talent, piety, and learning; and for the ability with which he defended the Church of England against the Papists. His Apology, says Dr. Randolph, has "had the sanction of publick authority, and may therefore be relied on as containing the final and decided opinion of our Reformers, approved in the general by the church at large." (m) The Apology was published in 1562. Harding, a Jesuit, published a Confutation of it. Jewel replied in a Defense of his Apology. This Defense, embodying the Apology also, was in such universal and high repute that it was placed in the Parish Churches to be read by all as giving the best view of all the matters therein contained, corroborated by the authorities of Scripture and the Fathers of the first six centuries. Many have probably seen this huge folio, fastened with chains to a reading desk, in the church. The edition from which I quote has a large strong iron plate at the bottom, with a hole through it, where the chain had been formerly fastened. In his Apology, he says, "That the Catholic church is the kingdom, the body, and spouse of Christ; that Christ is the only prince of this kingdom; that there are in the church divers orders of Ministers; that there are some who are Deacons, others who are Presbyters, and others who are Bishops, to whom the instruction of the people, and the care and management of religion are committed." Part 2, § 6. Now here is the distinction of Bishops, and (m) Preface to Dr. Randolph's "Enchiridion Theologicum."

Presbyters and Deacons, called " divers orders." Does this great writer, and champion of the church of England, then, mean that Bishops are an order, by divine right, with powers and authority incompatible with Presbyters as such? Let him explain himself in his Defense. Harding it seems, for the sake of cavilling, had introduced the question of the difference between Priests and Bishops, or "The distinction of a Bishop and a Priest," as he himself expresses it. Bishop Jewel says, "Here to weigh down the AUTHORITY OF GOD'S HOLY WORD, Mr. Harding hath brought in a heap of ordinary stale quarrels of the difference between Priests and Bishops: of Lent: of the Communion Book: of the Homilies; of the order of Service; and of the perpetual virginity of our Ladie. His WHOLE DRIFT herein is to bear us in hand, that there is very little or NO AUTHORITY in the Scriptures; and that the WHOLE credit and certainty of our FAITH resteth ONLY in the Church of Rome. But what means Mr. Harding here to come in with the difference between Priests and Bishops ? Thinketh he that* Priests and Bishops hold only by TRADITION? Or is it so horrible a heresy as he maketh it, to say that by the Scriptures of God, a Bishop and a Priest are ALL ONE? Or knoweth he how far, and unto whom he reacheth the name of heretic? Verily Chrysostom saith, 'between a Bishop and a Priest in a manner there is no difference.' St. Hierome saith, somewhat in rougher sort, I hear say there is one become so peevish, that he setteth Deacons before Priests, that is to say, before Bishops whereas the Apostle plainly teaches us, that Priests and Bishops be ALL ONE.' Augustin saith, 'What is a Bishop but the first Priest,—that is the highest Priest.' So saith St. Ambrose, 'There is but one consecration of Priests and Bishops: for both of them are Priests, but the Bishop is the first. All these, and other more holy Fathers, together with St. Paul the Apostle, for THUS SAYING, by Mr. Harding's advice, must be holden for hereticks." (n) He quotes Augustin in another place, "Augustin saith 'the office of a Bishop is above the office of a priest' (not by authority of the Scriptures, but) after the names of honor which the CUSTOM of the church hath now obtained." p. 100. The words "Not by authority of Scripture," are Jewel's own words, put in to explain Augustin's sense. Jewel we see perfectly agrees with Cranmer, and the rest of the Bishops and Divines who formed the Constitution, Government, and Book of Ordination, of the Church of England. He believes "Bishops and Presbyters, by the Scriptures of God, are ALL ONE;" that as Augustin saith "the office of a Bishop is above the office of a Priest (NOT by authority of the Scriptures, but) after the names of honor which the CUSTOM of the church

*He does not here mean the distinction only, but the things themselves also: for his (Harding's) whole drift, and the whole drift of Popery, is " to bear us in hand that there is very little or no authority in the Scriptures; and that the whole credit and certainty of our Faith resteth only in the Church of Rome."-A Remark which no Protestant should ever forget. To accomplish this, some of their greatest men have exerted all their learning and ingenuity.

(n) Page 202, fol. ed. 1609.

hath obtained." His mention, as we have seen, in his Apology of "Divers orders, Deacons, Presbyters and Bishops," does not imply that the order of Bishops has, by "Authority of Scripture," prerogatives incompatible with Presbyters, but that, whilst by the Scriptures, as to rights and authority, they are one, yet they are there distinct names, and that the Bishop is the first Priest or Presbyter, and above the other Presbyters by the names of honor which the CUSTOM of the church hath obtained. So meant the Reformers, and so means the Ordination service.

Hooker appears to maintain the very same view in his fifth Book of Ecclesiastical Polity, a work of the very highest authority with the church of England, and for its reasoning, its language, and its learning, the admiration of all. The 6, 7, and 8th books are of NO AUTHORITY; they were not published by himself and are acknowledged to have been altered much by other hands; so that no confidence whatever can be placed in them as Hooker's. In the 5th Book, § 78, he says, "Touching the ministry of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the WHOLE body of the Church being divided into Laity and CLERGY, the Clergy are either PRESBYTERS OF DEACONS." Now where are Bishops? Nowhere, except they be one and the same as Presbyters. Nothing can be plainer. "For of PRESBYTERS, some were GREATER, some LESS in power, and that by our Saviour's own appointment; the GREATER, they which received fulness of spiritual power, and the LESS, they to whom less was granted." Let the reader carefully attend, and he will see that by the greater Presbyters he means the first Apostles endowed with power of miracles, &c., and by the less or inferior Presbyters, he means all other ordinary Christian Ministers without distinction. He goes on-" The Apostles' peculiar charge was to publish the gospel of Christ unto ALL Nations, and to deliver them his Ordinances received by immediate revelation. WHICH PREEMINENCE EXCEPTED, to ALL other offices and duties incident to their" (i.e. the Apostles') order, it was in them to ordaine and consecrate whomsoever they thought meet, EVEN AS our Saviour did himself assign seventy others of his own disciples INFERIOR PRESBYTERS, whose commission to preach and baptize was the same which the Apostles had." Here then ALL are INFERIOR Presbyters, EXCEPT the Twelve Apostles, who received greater fulness of spiritual power, and delivered Ordinances by immediate revelation; and, which preeminence excepted, to ALL other OFFICES and DUTIES, incident to the order of the twelve Apostles, ALL the inferior Presbyters were ordained and consecrated by the Apostles. ،To these two degrees" (as above-mentioned) appointed of our Lord and Saviour Christ, his Apostles soon after annexed deacons."-It appeareth therefore how long these three degrees of ecclesiastical order have continued in the church of Christ," (1.) "the highest and largest, that which the Apostles," (2.) "the next that which the Presbyters," (3.) "the lowest, that which Deacons, had."—" Evangelists were Presbyters, of principal sufficiency"—

"Pastors, what other were they than Presbyters also."—"I beseech them, therefore, which have hitherto troubled the church with questions about DEGREES and OFFICES of ECCLESIASTICAL calling, because they principally ground themselves upon two places (1 Cor. ii, 28.-Ephes. iv. 7-12,) that ALL PARTIALITY laid aside, they would sincerely weigh and examine whether they have not misinterpreted both places, and all by SURMISING INCOMPATIBLE OFFICES where nothing is meant but sundry graces, gifts, and abilities which Christ bestowed."—" It clearly appeareth, that Churches Apostolike did know but three degrees in the power of Ecclesiastical Order, at the FIRST" (1) "Apostles," (2) " Presbyters," and (3) Deacons; AFTERWARDS, instead of Apostles, Bishops, concerning whose order we are to speak in the seventh Book." This he never published. But the matter is clear. Presbyters and Bishops in Apostolic churches were one and the same order and office; AFTERWARDS, by human, prudential arrangements, a class of Presbyters had Superintendency given them over Ministers as well as people; this Superintendency resembled the office of the first Apostles in visiting churches, &c.; and to this class of men the term Bishop as a term of honor, became in process of time exclusively appropriated. Hooker understood the Constitution of the English Church, and was second to none in its defence. He says, ALL the ordinary powers and offices of Apostles belong to all Gospel Ministers, whom he calls, COMPARED with the twelve Apostles, "INFERIOR PRESBYTERS." The powers of Ordination were among those powers, and therefore belong equally to them, by divine right, with Bishops. They were all one and the same in " APOSTOLIKE CHURCHES." Bishops, as Superintendents over other Ministers, were NOT in the Apostolike Churches; they arose afterwards.

Hooker's design was not to establish the DIVINE RIGHT of the Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church of England, but to shew that they were lawful, i. e. NOT antiscriptural, not sinful. So the 36th Article"The Book of Consecration of Archbishops, &c. doth contain all things. necessary to such consecration and ordering; neither hath it any thing, of itself is superstitious or UNGODLY." Many of the Puritans and rigid Presbyterians denied this; and were utterly opposed to an Order of Bishops at all, even as a human arrangement, as perpetual governors of Ministers as well as of people. This arose from what they had seen of it in Popery, and and in some who abused it in their day. Though Popery did not maintain the Divine right of Bishops, yet the Pope gave them rights, power, and jurisdiction; and the Bishops, in return, took a solemn oath to be FAITHFUL to the POPE; they joined their authority to RIVET THE CHAINS of PRIESTLY TYRANNY and bondage upon the church. The name of Bishop, therefore, as well as that of Pope, had generally become hateful at the Reformation and afterwards.

One observation more shall conclude this section. Some may suppose,

M

that if the power of orders or ordaining, does not belong solely to Bishops, and so constitute them by divine right a superior order, yet that the power of Jurisdiction does. By jurisdiction is meant the Bishop's power of governing and judging both Ministers and people. As to the fact, the Bishops of the Church of England have this power each in his own Diocese. But by what right or law? If Episcopacy, as a superior order, with the high prerogatives claimed for it, be of Divine right, THIS JURISDICTION must also be of Divine right; but if there should be express acknowledgment in the constitution of the Church of England that their JURISDICTION is of merely HUMAN origin, this will be another clear proof that, according to this church, Bishops have, by Divine right, none of these prerogatives over Presbyters, but are by the Scriptures one and the same office. Whatever views may be entertained as to the scriptural right of the King of England to be Supreme Head of the Church, it is certain the Church of England maintains it as a fact; and here we have only to do with FACTS. Now the Act of Parliament in the 26th year of Henry VIII, declares that the King "shall have full power and authority from time to time, to visit, repress, redress, reform, order, correct, restrain, and amend such errors, HERESIES, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities, whatsoever they be, which by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction, ought or may lawfully be reformed." This was in 1535. According to the full power here given, Commissions were issued to those who had bishopricks, giving them a License for their jurisdiction as Bishops; and they only held their jurisdiction on good behaviour, and at the King's pleasure. They are as follows: "Henry the VIII, King of England and France, Defender of the Faith, Lord of Ireland, and, under Christ, Supreme Head of the Church on earth, to the Reverend Father in Christ, Edmund, Bishop of London, Peace, Seeing ALL the Authority of JURISDICTION, and every kind of jurisdiction, as well that which is called secular, as that which is called ECCLESIASTICAL, EMANATES primarily from the Kingly Power as from a Supreme head, &c. We, desiring to accede to your humble supplication for this purpose, commit our office and authority to you in the manner and form hereafter described, and declare you to be licensed and appointed, therefore, to ordain to Holy Orders, &c. Also to make such visitations, &c. as the Bishops of London, your predecessors, in past times, might exercise, by the laws of this realm, and not otherwise, &c. And to do every thing that in any way concerns Episcopal authority and jurisdiction, over and above those things which are known to be committed unto you by authority of the Scripture, in our stead, name, and authority. Having great confidence in your sound doctrine, purity of conscience, integrity of life, and faithful industry in the performance of your duties, &c. WE LICENSE YOU, by these presents, during our pleasure, &c. to answer before us as to your duty, at your bodily peril; admonishing you in the mean time to exercise your office piously, holily