35 / 504
A
Preface
to theReader.
degree
it
leaf/ from
that
height
whereto
he
would
exalt
ir.
For
the
firft
of
there
,
he tells
you that Philippi
was
the
Metropolitan Church
of
the
Province
of
Macedonia;
that the reft
of
the
Churches,
which had every one
theirfeveral
Bi
/bops
(
Dioce
/an
we muft fuppofe) were
all
comprifed
in
the
mentioning
of
Philippi
:
fo
that
though the
Epiftle
be
precifely
diret`.ted
a
¡çzyiot5
t7c
;al
ü
otAíw
cis ,
yet
the
El/hops
that
were
with them
,
muft be fuppofed to
be
Bi-
Jhops
ofthe
whole Province
of
Macedonia; becaufe
the Church
of
Philippi
was
the
c7'(etropoli-
tan
:
The whole country
mull:
have
been fuppofed
to
be converted
(and who
that
knowes any
thing of
Antiquity
will difpute
that)
and
fo
divided with Diocefan
s ,
as
England
of
late
Was:
the
Arch-
7101s
to beeing
at Philippi
:
but how came it
then to
pals
, that
here
is
mention
made
of
Bslhops,,
and
Deacons
only
,
without
any oneword
of
a
third order, or ranke
of
men
diftinâ
from them called Presbyters
or
Elders?
To this
he
Anfwers,
zly
,
That
when
the
Church was
firft planted
,
before any great number were converted
,
or
any
fit
to
be
made
Presbyterr,there
was
only thole two orders inflituted
Bithops
and Deacon:
fo-that
this Church
at
Philippi
feemes
to
have
been
a Metropolitical Infant.
The truth
is
if
ever
theDoflour
be
put
upon reconciling
the Contradictions
of
his anfwers
one
to another,not
only
in
this,but
almoh
inevery particular
he
deales
withal)
(an
entanglement which he
is
thrown into
,
by
his
bold
and groundlefs conjectures
)
he will find it to
be as
endlefs,as fruitlels
:
but it
is
not
my
pre-
feat
bufinefs
to interpole
in
his
quarrels, either with
himfelfe,
or
Presbytery. As
to the
matter
under
confideration
,
I
delire
only to
be refolved
in
ihefe
few
Queries.
I
If
there
were in
the
times
of
Clement
no Presbyters in
the
Churches,
not
in fo
great and
flourifhing
a
Church
,
as
that
of
Corinth; and
if
all the
places
in the Scripture, where there
is
mention
of
Elders
,
do
precifely
intend
BiJbops
,
in a
dittinaion
from them
who are
only
Descons,and
not
Bifhops
alto
,
as
he afferts,when,by
whom,
by
what Au thority,were Elders,
who
are
only
fo
inferior
to
a3ifhòps,
peculiarly
fo
termed,inftituted and appointed
in
theChur-
ches
?
And how it comes
to
pals
that
there
is
fuch
exprefs
mentionmade
of
the
Office
of
Dea-
cons
,
and the continuance
of
it, none
at all
of
Elders, who
are
acknowledged
to
befuperionr
to
them
,
and on whole fhoulders
in all
their own Churches,liesthe great weight and burden
of
all
Ecclefiaflical Adminiftration.
As we
fay
of
their
Bifheps,
fo
shall we
of
any Presbyter,
not
inftituted and oppointed
by
theAuthority
of
Jefus
Chrift
in the Church
,
let them
go to
the place
from
whence they came.
z
I
defire
the
DoElour
to
informe me,
in
what
fenfe
he
would
haveme
to underhand
him:
Differ.
z.
cap.
29.2I,22:
where
he
difputes
that
thofe words
of
Hierom. Antequàm
fludia
ix
Religion
fierent
,
&
diceretur inpopulis ,
Ego
fum
Pauli,
ego Cephee
communi
Presbyterorum
confenfu
ecclefiagubernabantur, are
robe
underf/ood
of
the
times
of
the Apof/les
,
whenthe
firft
Schifme was in
the Church
of
Corinth,when it
feemes
that
neither tben,nor a good while
after,there
was any
loch
thing
as
Presbyters in
the Church
of
Corinth,nor
in
any
other
Church
as
we
can hear
of
:
As
alto to tell
us
whether all thole Presbyters,
were
Bi/hops
properly
fo
called;
diftinel from
Elders
who are only
fo
,out
of
whom one man
is
chofen
to
be
a Bithop
properlyfo
called.
To
thefe enquiries
I
fhall only adde.
sly, That
whereas in
the
Scripture
,
we
find
clearly
but
of
two
forts
of
Church-
Officers
mentioned
,
as
alfo in this
E'piflle
of
Clement;
the third
that
was
afterward introduced
, be
it
what
it
will,or
fall
on whom it
will,that
we
oppofe. This (faith
the
Dohleur)
is
that
of
Pres-
bytery,
give us
the Churches inflituted according
CO
the word
of
Chrift
,
give
us
in every
Church,
Bithops,
and
Deacons,
(
rather
then
we will
quarrel
give us
a
Bithop
,
and
Deacons
)
let
thofe
Bifhops
attend
the particular
Hock, over
Which they
are appointed,
preaching
the word
and adminiftring the
holy
ordinances
of
the Gofpel
,
in
and
to
their own
flock:
And
I
dare
undertake for
all
the Contendersfor
Presbytery in
this
nation, and
much more for
the
indepen-
dents
,
that there
{hall be an
end
of
this quarrel;
that
they
will
not
f/rive
with
the
Dofleur,
not
any
living,
for
the introduction
of
any
third
fort
,
of
perlons
(
though
they
fhould
be called
Presbyters) into Church Office and goverment.
Only this
I
muft
adde,that the
Scripture more
frequently
termes this lecond
fort
of
men Elders,
and Presbyters,then it
doth
Bifhops,and
that
word having
been
appropriated to a third fort peculiarly
,
we delire leave
of
the
Dot-lour
and
his
affociates,
if
we alfo
mop
frequently
call
them fo, no
wales
declining the
other
Appellati-
on
of
Ripops
fo
that
it be applyed
to
hgnify
the
fecoad.,
and
not third
ranke
of
men:
But
of
this
whole
bufinefs
with
the nature
conlitution
,and
frame
of
the firft Churches and the
fad
miftakes,
that
mea
have by
their own
prejudices been ingaged
into
,
in this delineation
of
them,a fuller
opportunity
(
if
God.will
)may
eare
long,be afforded.
To
returne then to
our
Ignatiue
I
even
upon
this confideracion
of
the
difference,
that
is
between
the
e
piffles
afcribed
to
him , and
the writings
of
one
of
the
fame
time
With
him,
or
not
D
z
long