66

the slightest proof of ordination by any claiming superiority of office. They were equally teaching bishops. The principal design of the appointment of both, was the planting of churches, or, as it is expressed in the First Book of Discipline, "the establishment of the kirke;"' neither being suffered to live, as our reformers say, as your idle bishops have done.” 2 They were not distinguished from others, under any pretence of divine authority, but by man, merely for expediency. Thus the superintendents are described only as one class of preachers. Hence the compilers of the Book of Discipline say ; "We have thought good to signifye to your honours such reasons as moved us to make difference betwixt preachers at this time." Although, during several successive reigns, the crown still endeavoured to restore the hierarchy which had existed before the Reformation, it was still keenly opposed; and on every opportunity which the body of the nation had of expressing their inclinations, a national, (may I not say?). an hereditary, antipathy to this form of government was unequivocally manifested.

3

'Fisrt Book of Discipline. VI. 3.

2 Ibid. VI. 2.

3 Ibid. VI. 1.

CHAPTER XV.

Objections considered.-The supposed Inconsistency of the Monks of Iona sending Bishops, or Improbability of their being applied to for such a Mission, if unfriendly to the Order ;—The Culdees said to have been merely the Episcopal Chapter of the Diocese in which they resided.-Asserted, that there were never any Culdees at Iona, or within the Territories of the ancient Scots; and that they made their first Appearance at St Andrews.

In the progress of this investigation, I have considered the principal exceptions to the arguments brought to prove, that the ecclesiastical power, established at Iona, bore a striking analogy to the presbyterian form. Before leaving the subject, it may be necessary to advert to some of the objections that have been made to this hypothesis.

1. It may seem a powerful objection to this scheme, that, when application was made, on different occasions, by the

I

Saxon princes to the monastery of Iona, for bishops, those who resided there had no scruple to ordain and give a mission to pastors of this description. On the other hand, it may appear inconceivable, that "the English would, onceand again, have concurred so heartily with those who wanted to abolish the episcopal order in Scotland, while they still kept it up among themselves."

So little weight is there in the last part of this objection, that it scarcely merits a reply. Those, who made application to the seniors at Iona, were principally concerned about the preaching of the word of faith; and it may naturally be supposed, that, in the first instance, at least, they scarcely. passed a thought about the form of ecclesiastical government. With the same propriety might it be argued, that they would not have applied to those who were schismatical as to the mode of observing Easter; because the Angles, when they submitted to the authority of Rome, viewed the Scottish clergy in this light. By the use of the appellation English, an ignorant reader might be led to suppose, that the correspondence had been maintained even after this became the general designation of the inhabitants of South-Britain. But the intercourse with Iona was long previous to this time; and was maintained only for about thirty years. The influence of Rome at length so far prevailed, that none were received from this island, who refused submission to papal authority.

Of this we have a striking proof from the conduct of Wilfrid, a Saxon monk, who carried on the debate with Colman, Bishop of Lindisfarne, about the time of observing Easter. Bede merely says, that king Alchfrid sent the presbyter Wilfrid to the King of France, who caused him to be consecrated a bishop. But the good man was, perhaps, ashamed of the real reason of this mission. Wilfrid was so violent, that he would not submit to Scottish ordination. William of Malmesbury speaks it fairly out: "But he persisted in refusing to be ordained by Scottish bishops, or by those whom the Scots had ordained, because the apostolical see scorned to have any fellowship with them."

The other branch of the objection deserves more attention. No pastor can have any reasonable prejudice merely against the name of Bishop. For it is of scriptural authority; and was originally given, in common with that of Presbyter, or Elder, to all who were overseers of the flock. Our excellent translators were well assured, that there was a number of Elders in the church of Ephesus; and that not only the Apostle Paul gave them all, without exception, the designation of Bishops, but that "the Holy Ghost had made" them all "bishops." But here carnal policy prevailed over conviction. They could not but know, that if they translated the term exоs,

Hist. iii. 28.

Sed perstitit ille [Wilfridus] negare, ne ab Episcopis Scottis, vel ab iis quos Scotti ordinaverunt, consecrationem susciperet, quorum communionem sedes aspernaretur apostolica. De Gest. Pontif. Angl. Lib. iii.

as they did every where else, in its proper sense, as being the very origin of our word bishop, they would give a fatal stab to the divine right of episcopacy; and therefore, according to the dictates of worldly prudence, they substituted over

seers.

The objection is solely to the abuse of the name. In early ages, such was the piety of the ministers of religion, such their humility, that no idea of pomp was attached to this designation. This was eminently the character of "the family of Hij:" and they could scarcely form the apprehension, that one of their own number, merely because he received the name of Bishop, would lord it over his fellows who had conferred on him this character. For, after the most impartial investigation of this subject, of which I am capable, I have not found a shadow of proof, that any of those, sent forth as bishops from that island, were ordained by such as claimed a dignity superior to that of presbyter.

1. I am much disposed, indeed, to think that all the difference which they, in a more early age at least, admitted between presbyter and bishop, was, that they conferred the latter title on those only who were delegated to a particular charge, as to that of planting a church among the Angles, or who were to have a pastoral relation to a certain people; whereas the presbyters, although they by themselves dispensed ordinances in the vicinity of their monastery, or assisted the bishop on his mission in preaching and baptising, were