would have been used by Clemens, had he known that this univerfally was the conflitution of the church, it naturally follows, that, at that period at leaft, the people must have been strangers to that degree of power which Independents contend fhould now be granted to them in ecclefiaftical government.

66

Jerome alfo, who was not long pofterior to Clemens, exhibits a teftimony no lefs ftrong and explicit against Independency, in his Remarks upon Titus, chap. i "Antequam (fays he) diaboli inftinetu, ftudia in religione fierent, et diceretur in populo, ego fum Pauli, ego Apollo, ego vero Cephæ, communi prefbyterorum confilio ecclefiæ gubernabantur," &c.; i. e. " Be"fore, through the fuggeftion of the devil, factions "arofe in religion, and it was faid among the people, I "am of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, the "churches were governed by a common council of pref"byters." Upon which the learned Chamier, in his Treatife de Ecumen. Pontif. lib. x. cap. v. fect. xxii. in reply to Bellarmine, remarks, " Refpondeo ad primum "etiamfi aristocratia non fit totidem fyllabis nominata, "tamen certo fignificatam his verbis communi prefby"terorum confilio ecclefiæ gubernabantur," &c. And fubjoins, "Bonam autem fuiffe id regiminis formam, inde "fequitur, quod ab initio fuiffe dicat (Hieronymus) cum "in ecclefia id fit optimum quod veriffimum, id autem "veriffimum quod primum:-Dicit enim (Hieron.) "fuiffe ex inflitutionis Dominica veritate." But if, as is justly obferved by Chamier, we are inftructed by this father, that in the apoflolic times, and in the ages which immediately fucceeded that period, the churches were governed, agreeably to the injunction of Chrift himself, by a council of prefbyters, is it not obvious that originally the people cannot have been admitted to parity of power, in every congregation, with their elders and office-bearers? Had it univerfally been the practice of the New-Tefta

ment churches, and of the congregations at large in every country which were afterwards formed, to allow their members to judge and vote upon every cause; nay, as the members were more numerous, had it generally been known that every Christian society was more really governed by the former than by the latter; how could Jerome err fo egregiously in a matter of fact, and affert, in oppofition to the knowledge of all, and at the risk of inftant and univerfal contradiction, that, till factions had begun to arife in the church, every congregation was governed by a council of elders? It would appear then, from this clear and ftriking declaration of one who, from antiquity and fuperior information, was eminently qualified to judge upon this fubject, that, in the apoftolic times as well as the fubfequent ages, the people were not permitted to vote and determine in ecclefiaftical matters, but that the churches were administered, as at prefent among Prefbyterians, by a council of office-bearers.

To thefe quotations might be added the words of Ignatius, an apoftolic father (Epift. ad Trallianos, edit. Oxon. p. 66.), who calls the prefbyters or elders of his times, the covedgrov sov, or the fanhedrin or council of God: « Οι δε πρεσβύτεροι ως συνεδριον Θεου,” &c. But upon what ground could he distinguish them by the name of the fanhedrin, the common appellation of the Jewifh ecclefiaftical judicial court, if they did not conftitute a correfponding court in the Chriftian church? With this, too, might be mentioned the words of Origen, who, in his Seventh Homily upon Joshua, orders "one who "had been thrice admonifhed, and was unwilling to re"pent, to be cut off from the church by its prefidents -"or elders:-Tertio admonitum refipifcere nolentem "jubet ab ecclefiæ corpore defecari, per ecclefiæ præ"fides." And to this might be fubjoined the declaration of the authors of the Magdeburgen, Centuriæ, a work of the highest credit and authority for its accurate

representations of ecclefiaftical antiquity: "Jus (fay "they, Cent. iii. cap. vii. p 151.) tractandi de excom“municandis, aut recipiendis publice lapfis, penes feni"ores ecclefiæ erat ;" i. e. “The right of deciding re"specting such as were to be excommunicated, or of "receiving, upon their repentance, fuch as had fallen "from the profeffion of Chriftianity, was vefted in the "elders of the church" and, in proof of this, they refer us to Tertullian's Apology. They indeed remark (Cent. ii. cap. vii. p. 134.), "Ceterum fi quis probatos autores "hujus feculi perfpiciat, videbit formam gubernationis "propemodum Anuoxgarias fimilem fuiffe;" but, in the following words, they fufficiently explain their meaning: "Singulæ enim ecclefiæ (fay they) parem habebant

poteflatem verbum Dei pure docendi, facramenta admi"niftrandi, abfolvendi et excommunicandi hæreticos et "fceleratos, et ceremonias ab apoftolis acceptas exer❝cendi, aut etiam pro ratione ædificationis novas con"dendi, miniftros eligendi, vocandi, ordinandi, et juftif"fimas ob caufas iterum deponendi." From this it is evident, that though, in the former fentence, they had faid that the government of the Christian church, in the fecond century, was almoft like a democracy, they intended only that it resembled it in this individual circumftance, that all its congregations had an equality of power; and, as Wood obferves, p. 383, "that no par❝ticular church was to have any authoritative and juri"dical fuperiority over other particular churches, as the "Prelaticall men pleaded for authoritative fuperioritie "in their cathedrall churches, over all particular churches "in the diœcefe, and the Papalins for an universal} "fuperioritie and fupremacie in the church of Rome, 66 over all other churches in the world." "Besides," as he adds, "it is to be observed that among other things "which they reckon up as parts of the church-govern"ment, which they fay was much like democracie, they

"put in the preaching of the word, and adminiftration "of facraments, which themselves before fay (and no

man of found judgment will deny) are acts proper to "the called minifters of Chrift: Whence also, it is "manifeft that they mean not a democracie properly fo "called, which putteth the formall power and exercise " of government in the hands of all and every one "of the multitude, which the Independent brethren "plead for."

On the whole, even Cyprian, whom Independents have fo frequently represented as affirming that the government of the church was purely popular, ufes expreffions by no means confiftent with such a supposition., He tells us for inftance, in his Epiftle to Quintus, de Hæreticis Baptizandis, p. 140. that the perfons who "governed the "church of the Lord in the province of Africa and "Numidia, at the period to which he refers, were 66 Agrippinus, a man of worthy memory, and his fellow "bishops or minifters. Quod quidem et Agrippinus, "bonæ memoriæ vir, cum cæteris coepifcopis ejus, qui "illo tempore in provincia Africæ et Numidiæ ecclefiam "Domini gubernabant, ftatuit, et librato confilii commu"nis examine firmavit." That the power of ordination alfo, that most important act of ecclefiaftical government, was intrufted only with the minifters, in the days of this father, is no lefs evident. In his Fifty-fecond Epiftle, for example, while he says that Cornelius was chofen to be a bishop by the vote of the people, he declares moft exprefsly, that he was ordained only by the ministers or clergy." Et factus eft (fays he, p. 75.) epifcopus a "plurimis collegis noftris qui tunc in urbe Roma aderant "qui ad nos literas honorificas, et laudabiles, et teftimonio "fuæ prædicationis illuftres de ejus ordinatione miferunt, "Factus eft autem Cornelius epifcopus de Dei et Chrifti " ejus judicio, de clericorum pene omnium teftimonio, "de plebis, quæ tunc affuit fuffragio, et de facerdotium

"et bonorum virorum collegio;" i. e. in fubftance, "He was made a bishop by many of my colleagues who "were then in Rome, according to the judgment of "God and Chrift, the teftimony of almost all the clergy"men (who belonged to that church), the vote of the "people who were then prefent, and the college of "ancient priests and worthy men." And he fays of Novatian (p. 81.), that "he was made a bifhop by "fixteen of his fellow minifters or bishops." "Nifi fr "epifcopus tibi videtur, qui epifcopo in ecclefia a fe"decim coepifcopis facto, adulteratque extraneus epifco "pus fieri a defertoribus per ambitum nititur," Not only, moreover, were they the only perfons who communicated ordination, but they alone determined every thing relating to the conduct and duties of the clergy after they had been invefted with their office. Hence Cyprian, in his Sixty-fixth Epistle, p. 126. reprobates one Victor, because, in oppofition to the decrees of a council of minifters, he had appointed Fauftinus, a prefbyter of the church, one of the trustees of his teftament. “Gra"viter commoti fumus ego et college mei qui præfentes "aderant, et comprefbyteri noftri qui nobis affidebant, "fratres chariffimi, cum cognoviffemus quod Geminius

* See also Epift. lxxv. p. 159. “ Sed et cæteri quique hæretici, " fi fe ab ecclefia Dei fciderint, nihil habere poteftatis aut gratiæ

poffunt, quando omnis poteftas et gratia in ecclefia constituta "fit, ubi præfident majores natu, qui et baptizandi et manum "imponendi et ordinandi poffident poteftatem ;" i. e. “But the "other heretics alfo, if they feparate from the church, can have

no power or grace, since all power and grace are placed in the "church, where elders prefide, in whom is vefted the power of "baptizing, and impofition of hands and ordination." And it is obvious that thefe elders must have been the minifters of the church, and not merely laymen advanced in age, for they are faid alfo to baptize as well as ordain, and none we know could perform that act, but such as were recognized as office-bearers or prefbyters.