lam fchifma defkexire comperti faint, fed intra Catholic.¢ & Apofiolice Ecclefie fines aberroris labe vacuos fe continuerint, attthoritatem habeant tamMini(fros ordinandi, tum eos qui clero dignifuerint nominandi, tune denique amnia ex lege& inflituto Eccicfiafiico libere exequendi ] Now ordaining Minihers and nominating men for the Clergy, are as which, ifany, thew Presbyters to be Rulers in the Church. Obj. i. Perhaps it is Bops ordained by Meletius that are herefpoIZen of: or Bithops with thePresbyters refpefiively. Anfw. There is no more in the Text but this, [ They decreedfurther touching fetch as were entred into holy Orders by his laying on of hands, that they, after con- firmation with more myflieal laying on ofhands fheuld be admitted into thefellowthip of the Church, with this condition that they fhould enjoy their dignity and degree of Miniftry,.yet that they be itferiour to all the Pa(iors throughout every province and Church --- Moreover that they have no authority to eleti the Miriffers approved by their cenfures,no notfomuch as to nominate them which areto execute the Ecclefiajtical fitnitions, nor to intermeddle with any thingtouching them that are within Alexan- ders jurifdiflion, without the confect ofthe Bifhop of the Catholick. Church. ] And then they add as afore, that thofe that fell not into Schifm (as they did ) retie/00: (hall have authority to Confecrate 1blinifters, and nominate fetch asfhall be thought not that worthy of theClergy. Now that it is Presbyters and not Bithops that are here theywere fpokenofappeareth o. In that it is without any note of eminency Paid to be not to cony [fuch as were entredinto Holy Orders.] a. In that it is fuch as fo entred by the et,"`" a-t Laying on of Meletius's hands : Wherereas a Bishop muii be ordained by the tonewitorat hands ofthree Bifhops. And the Schifmof one of the three, would not have the Bifhop. fruhiated the Ordination, if theother two flood firm in the Catholick Union. 3. Becaufe it is the priviledge of Presbyters that is denyed them : Though they be not degraded, they are to be .below all other Pahors in every Church : which cannot be, that they (hall be Bishops below all Presbyters. 4. Becaufe the confent of the Bishop of the Catholick Church ( where they(hall come) is neceffary to their officiating. But if it could have been proved that Bithops had been here included, yet while Presbyters alto are included, it will not invalidate the teflimony. But indeed here is no fuch proof. I confefs that Nicephorus (a lofs credible Author ) feemeth to .apply it toBithopsOrdained by Meletits : But no fuch thing can be gathered out of So- zomen, either Tripart. lib. a. c. IS. where he defcribeth Meletius and his party, or Tripart lib. 2. c. I a. where he reciteth the fame Epifilethat Socrates Both. But I would pretend to no more certainty than is evident. II. Pita Epifcop. Roman. in Biblioth. Pat. Tom. 3.p. 15. Epiri. fuffo Epifiopo inquit, [ Presbyteri & Diaconi nonut Majorem, fed at MinfJtrum Chriflite obfer- vent fàlutat te'natsu pauperChrifli aped Komam conftitutus.: fàluta omne Collegiumfratrumqui ¡emufont in Domino -- -- And epá'. prima eidem7uffo, he reckoneth Timothy and Mark with the Presbyters educated by the Apofiles. Now if theywere ofthe Senate, the Coil/edge, and the fame naine Presbytersas &hops had,wehave no reafon tothink that they had not thepower of the keys. O III. Teriullian.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=