time." Here there is clearly a distinction of orders and ordinations, and assumptious to them respectively, all of the same distance and consideration; and Theodoret ", out of the synodical epistle of the same council, says, that they complained that some from Arianism were reconciled, and promoted from deacons to be presbyters, from presbyters to be bishops, calling it μɛíŝova Balμòv,' a greater degree,' or 'order:❜ and St. Gregory Nazianz., in his Encomium of St. Athanasius, speaking of his canonical ordination and election to a bishoprick, says, that he was chosen being aávarros, "most worthy,” and πᾶσαν τὴν τῶν βαθμῶν ἀκολουθίαν διεξελθών, “ coming through all the inferior orders." The same commendation St. Cyprian gives of Cornelius: "Non iste ad episcopatum subito pervenit, sed per omnia ecclesiastica officia promotus, et in divinis administrationibus Dominum sæpè promeritus ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis religionis gradibus ascendit; et factus est episcopus à plurimis collegis nostris, qui tunc in urbe Româ aderant, qui ad nos literas de ejus ordinatione miserunt." Here is evident, not only a promotion, but a new ordination of St. Cornelius to be bishop of Rome; so that "now the chair is full," saith St. Cyprian; "et quisquis jam episcopus fieri voluerit, foris fiat necesse est, nec habeat ecclesiasticam ordinationem," &c.: "No man else can receive ordination to the bishoprick."

SECTION XXX.

There being a peculiar Manner of Ordination to a Bishoprick. 2. THE ordination of a bishop to his chair was done' de novo,' after his being a presbyter; and not only so, but in another manner than he had, when he was made priest. This is evident in the first ecclesiastical canon that was made after Scriptures. Ἐπίσκοπος χειροτονείσθω ἀπὸ ἐπισκόπων δύο ἢ τριῶν· πρεσβύτερος ὑπὸ ἑνὸς ἐπισκόπου χειροτονείσθω, καὶ διάκονος, καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ κληρικοί : “ A priest and deacon must be ordained of one bishop, but a bishop must be ordained by two or three at least." And that we may see it yet more to be apostolical,

:

b Lib. v. c. 8.

e Epist. 52.

a Can. Apost. 1. et 2.

St. Anacletus, in his second epistle, reports, " Hierosolymitarum primus episcopus B. Jacobus à Petro, Jacobo, et Johanne apostolis est ordinatus." Three apostles went to the ordaining of St. James to be a bishop, and the self-same thing is in words affirmed by Anicetus : "Ut in ore duorum, vel trium stet omnis veritas ;" and St. Cyprian observes, that when Cornelius was made bishop of Rome, there happened to be many of his fellow-bishops there," et factus est episcopus à plurimis collegis nostris, qui tunc in urbe Româ aderant." These collega' could not be mere priests; for then the ordination of Novatus had been more canonical than that of Cornelius, and all Christendom had been deceived; for not Novatus, who was ordained by three bishops,

but Cornelius, had been the schismatic, as being ordained by priests, against the canon. But here I observe it for the word 'plurimis,' there were 'many' of them at that ordination.

66

In pursuance of this apostolical ordinance, the Nicene fathers decreed, that a bishop should be ordained vπò távτwv τῶν ἐν τῇ παροικία, by all the bishops in the province," unless it be in case of necessity; and then it must be done by three being gathered together, and the rest consenting; so the ordination to be performed. The same is ratified in the council of Antioch 4, Ἐπίσκοπον μὴ χειροτονεῖσθαι δίχα συνόδου, καὶ παρουσίας τοῦ ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει τῆς ἐπαρχίας· “ A bishop is not to be ordained without a synod of bishops, and the presence of the metropolitan of the province." But if this cannot be done conveniently, yet however it is required, μετὰ τῆς τῶν πλειόνων παρουσίας, η ψήφου γίνεσθαι τὴν κατάστασιν : "the ordinations must be performed by many." The same was decreed in the council of Laodicea, can. 12., in the thirteenth canon of the African code, in the twenty-second canon of the first council of Arles, and the fifth canon of the second council of Arles, and was ever the practice of the church; and so we may see it descend through the bowels of the fourth council of Carthage to the inferior ages. "Episcopus quum ordinatur, duo episcopi ponant, et teneant evangeliorum codicem super caput, et cervicem ejus, et uno super eum fundente benedictionem, reliqui omnes episcopi q adsunt, manibus suis caput ejus tangant."

Epist. Unica.

c Cau. 4.

d Can. 19.

e Can. 12.

The thing was catholic and canonical. It was "prima, et immutabilis constitutio;" so the first canon of the council of Epaunum calls it; and, therefore, after the death of Meletius, bishop of Antioch, a schism was made about his successor, and Evagrius's ordination condemned &; because præter ecclesiasticam regulam fuerit ordinatus:" "it was against the rule of Holy Church." Why so? "Solus enim Paulinus eum instituerat, plurimas regulas prævaricatus ecclesiasticas. Non enim præcipiunt ut per se quilibet ordinare possit, sed convocare universos provinciæ sacerdotes, et præter per tres pontifices ordinationem penitus fieri interdicunt." Which because it was not observed in the ordination of Evagrius, who was not ordained by three bishops, the ordination was cassated in the council of Rhegium. And we read, that when Novatus would fain be made a bishop, in the schism against Cornelius, he did it "tribus adhibitis episcopis," saith Eusebius: " he obtained three bishops," for performance of the action .

Now, besides these apostolical and catholic canons and precedents, this thing, according to the constant and united interpretation of the Greek fathers, was actually done in the ordination of St. Timothy to the bishoprick of Ephesus: 'Neglect not the grace, that is in thee by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." The Latin fathers expound it abstractly, viz. to signify the office of priesthood, that is, 'neglect not the grace of priesthood, that is in thee by the imposition of hands;' and this Erasmus helps, by making 'presbyterii' to pertain to gratiam,' by a new interpunction of the words; but however, presbyterii,' with the Latin fathers, signifies presbyteratus,' not 'presbyterorum;' and this presbyteratus' is, in their sense, used for 'episcopatus' too. But the Greek fathers understand it collectively, and πρεσβυτερίου is put for πρεσβυτέρων, not simply such, but bishops too, all agree in that, that episcopacy is either meant in office, or in person. Πρεσβυτέρους τοὺς ἐπισκόπους φησίν ; so Ecumenius and St. Chrysostom, où gì пgeσbutépwv now ἐνταῦθα, ἀλλὰ περὶ ἐπισκόπων: so Theophylact; so Theodoret. The probation of this lies upon right reason and catholic tradition; for,

A. D. 509.

Theodoret, lib. ix. c. 44.

h Cap. 1, 2. Hist. lib. vi. c. 33.

SECTION XXXI.

To which Presbyters never did assist by imposing Hands.

3. THE bishop's ordination was peculiar, in this respect, above the presbyter's; for a presbyter did never impose hands on a bishop. On a presbyter they did, ever since the fourth council of Carthage; but never on a bishop. And that was the reason of the former exposition. By the 'presbytery' St. Paul means bishops,' où vàg oi @pεobúτepoi έxeigoτόνησαν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον : “ presbyters did not impose hands on a bishop," and, therefore, 'presbyterium' is not a college of mere presbyters, for such could never ordain St. Timothy to be a bishop. The same reason is given by the Latin fathers, why they expound 'presbyterium' to signify' episcopacy.' For, saith St. Ambrose," St. Paul had ordained Timothy to be a bishop; unde, et quemadmodum episcopum ordinet, ostendit. Neque enim fas erat, aut licebat, ut inferior ordinaret majorem" so he; and subjoins this reason," Nemo enim tribuit quod non accepit." The same is affirmed by St. Chrysostom, and generally by the authors of the former expositions, that is, the fathers both of the east and west. For it was so general and catholic a truth, that priests could not, might not, lay hands on a bishop, that there was never any example of it in Christendom till almost six hundred years after Christ, and that but once, and that irregular, and that without imitation of his successors, or example in his antecessors. It was the case of Pope Pelagius the First: "Et dum non essent episcopi, qui eum ordinarent, inventi sunt duo episcopi, Johannes de Perusio, et Bonus de Ferentino, et Andreas presbyter de Ostiâ, et ordinaverunt eum pontificem. Tunc enim non erant in clero, qui eum possent promovere ;" saith Damasus : " It was in case of necessity, because there were not three bishops, therefore he procured two, and a priest of Ostia to supply the place of the third," that three, according to the direction apostolical, and canons of Nice, Antioch, and Carthage, make episcopal ordination. The church of Rome is concerned in the business to make

a A. D. 553.

b In Libr. Pontificali. Vit. Pelag. I.

fair this ordination, and to reconcile it to the council of Rhegium, and the others before mentioned, who, if asked, would declare it to be invalid. But certainly, as the canons did command three to impose hands on a bishop, so also they commanded that those three should be three bishops; and Pelagius might as well not have had three, as not three bishops; and better, because, so they were bishops, the first canon of the apostles approves the ordination if done by two, ἐπισκόπων δύο, ἢ τριῶν. And the Nicene canon is as much exact, in requiring the capacity of the person, as the number of the ordainers. But let them answer it. For my part, I believe that the imposition of hands by Andreas, was no more in that case than if a layman had done it; it was xep änupos, and though the ordination was absolutely uncanonical, yet it being in the exigence of necessity, and being done by two bishops, according to the apostolical canon, it was valid ' in naturâ rei,' though not in forma canonis,' and the addition of the priest was but to cheat the canon, and cozen himself into an impertinent belief of a canonical ordination. Ἐπίσκοποι ἐπισκόπους καθιστᾷν ὀφείλουσιν, saith the council of Sardis: "Bishops must ordain bishops :" it was never heard that priests did, or, ' de jure,' might.

These premises do most certainly infer a real difference, between episcopacy and the presbyterate. But whether or no they infer a difference of order, or only of degree; or whether degree and order be all one or no, is of great consideration in the present, and in relation to many other questions.

66

1. Then it is evident, that in antiquity' ordo' and 'gradus' were used promiscuously. Baduòs was the Greek word, and for it the Latins used' ordo,' as is evident in the instances above mentioned; to which add, that Anacletus says, that Christ did" instituere duos ordines, episcoporum et sacerdotum." And St. Leo affirms: Primum ordinem esse episcopalem, secundum presbyteralem, tertium Leviticum;" and these among the Greeks are called Tges Balμoì,' three degrees.' So the order of deaconship in St. Paul is called καλὸς βαθμὸς, “ a good degree ;” and βαθμοῦ ἐκπίπτειν, &c. is a censure used alike in the censures of bishops, priests, and t * Epist. 84. c. 4.

Can. 9. Concil. Sardic.

d Epist. 3.