cation of the primitive church against Baxter, 1682;* " from which books, says the learned Dr. Brett, any that desires it, may receive full satisfaction on this subject, i. e. whether the ancient bishoprick's were only single and independent congregations. For he has most learnedly and clearly refuted all the citations of his adversaries, and plainly shown how they have falsely represented a multitude of testimonies. of ancient writers, to countenance their dream of congregational episcopacy: and that they have shamefully perverted the author's sense, some times leaving out, or puting in a word, to make a passage serve their purposes."

As St. James had Jerusalem and the adjacent country, for his diocese, so the other apostles (though each had a general authority in, and concern for the whole church) had certain places for their districts also, and exercised a particular authority over the churches which they had planted. Thus, St. PETER had the care of the Jewish christians, whom he calls the strangers scattered through Pontus, Galatia, &c. and JAMES, PETER and JOHN, of the Gentile christians. The apostle BARNABAS seems, upon his separation from St. Paul, to have settled himself in Cyprus his native country, Acts 15. 39.-1, 36. St. PAUL had the particular care of many churches which he founded, and was their proper bishop himself, till he saw fit to commit the care of some of them to others. That he exercised this presbyters is manifest from his sending for the presbyters of Ephesus, to come to him at Miletus, Acts 20. 17. and giving them a charge to perform their duties faithfully, as our bishops do in their visitations. And in another place, Acts 15. 36. he visits the churches wherein he had ordained presbyters before; "let us return," says he to Barnabas," and visit our brethren in all cities, where we preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do." And again, "besides those things which are

power over

* See also, Dr. Sherlock's confutation of Owen's origin of churches, in defence of Stillingflect, from page 297 to 421; and Sleater's original draught, &c. in answer to Sir Peter King's enquiry; 3d. edition, Dublin, 1723. The "Enquiry" has met with great approbation from Dr. M'Dowel in his late pamphlet on presbyterianism; but surely Dr. M'Dowel has never seen Mr. Sleater's learned answer to it, which, it is well known, Convinced Sir Peter of his errors.

without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches," and that he judged himself to have no spiritual superior or equal in spiritual matters, within his own district, "the measure of the rule which God had given to him," 2 Cor. 10. 13. is no less manifest from what he writes to the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 4. 15. where he says, "though ye have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet ye have not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you, through the gospel. Wherefore

I beseech you, be ye followers of me," Cor. 9. 1. "and am I not an apostle? if I am not so to others, yet. doubtless I am to you." I Cor. 4. 19.

Thus for some time this episcopal authority was exercised by the apostles themselves, but because the number of the faithful daily increased, and least the church should be destitute of this authority at their deaths, they invested others with this power, that they might ordain presbyters, and govern the congregations committed to their charge.

That the apostolic office was intended by Christ, not for a temporal but a perpetual institution, is evident from the commission given to them by our Saviour after his resurrection. For having singled the eleven apostles, “out of above 5-0, to whom he appeared after his resurrection, he spake to them, saying, all power is given to me in heaven and earth; go ye therefore, and disciple all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world, Amen." In which words he plainly shows that their office was intended to be continued, even unto the end of the world, and he confirms this promise with Amen, testifying that he would verily and indeed fulfil it. And that the promise was made to the office or order with which he had invested them, and not to their persons, is evident, because otherwise his promise must have failed at their deaths, and consequently he was so far from continuing with them to the end of the world, in the discharge of this office, that he did not continue with them an hundred years, for these eleven apostles were dead in less than that time. Therefore, this promise must ne cessarily extend to others, who should succeed them in

this office, and consequently implies a power in them, to elect and set apart others to the discharge of the office, and those, others in a continued succession.

For we

For our better understanding this, we must consider what it is properly to be an apostle of Christ, or wherein the office purely apostolic, consisted. must know, that those whom the scriptures call apostles, had many extraordinary privileges granted to them, as, an immediate call and ordination by Christ himself, infallibility, tongues and a power of working miracles, &c. which were designed only for the first plantation and propagation of the gospel. Now these are what our bishops never pretended to, for they were extraordinary gifts and privileges, and not necessary for the perpetual government of the church of Christ, but were transient and temporary; so neither did they peculiarly belong to the apostolic office, because these qualifications were possessed by other ministers of the church, who were not apostles, (see 1 Cor. 12 & 13 Chapters.) Besides these could not possibly be esteemed any parts of the apostolic office, being only extraordinary gifts bestowed on them, the better to enable them to perform that office.*

:

But there are other things which are ordinary and essential to the apostolic office, without which they could not have been apostles, and which are necessary to the government of Christ's church till his second coming. This is the power which I affirm to be permanent and perpetual by this the apostles were distinguished from all subordinate officers in the christian church. Now therefore, that which particularly distinguished the apostles from all other subordinate officers, and which was the true characteristic of an apostle, was the supreme spiritual power and authority, and a power of ordaining, i, e. of transmitting this authority unto others, according to the commandment of our Saviour. These powers were not to be temporary, for he promised his apostles, to " be with them to the end of the world." And therefore to make the apostolic office temporary, is to defeat our Saviour's promise, which could not be accomplished, if those offices had not remained in the church, without which it could

Dr. Barrow's mistakes (in his Supremacy, p. 93,) on this head, (which some late writers have fallen into,) are ably rectified by Drury against Boyse.

neither be nor continue. Whatever belonged to them as apostles, or officers of Christ's church, was to be de rived from them to other officers of the church for ever; unless we can suppose that men may be christians without having the seal of christianity; that men may become priests and ambassadors for God, without being sent by such men as he gave power and commission to.

But before I proceed, I must remind the reader, that the extent of a diocese is not essential to a bishoprick; and when I say that the bishops succeed the apostles, I do not mean that it is necessary that they sl:ould succeed to this or that particular district, but in their power and jurisdiction. When therefore, presbyterians, upon all occasions make so much noise about diocesan bishops, and diocesan churches, it is only to darken the cause; for the question is not about a diocese, but whether the apostles left the plenitude of their ecclesiastical power to some single persons, who were called apostles, afterwards bishops, or whether they gave it in commis sion to every presbyter. If they left it to some single persons, as it is evident they did, it signifies nothing to the question in debate, whether they exercised that power in a large diocese, or in a single congregation, for this is wholly owing to compact and agreement ;* which gives a very easy and natural resolution of that question, why St. Paul besought Timothy to abide at Ephesus, 1 Tim. 1. 3. because as he was a bishop of the church of Christ, the exercise of that power could not be limited to Ephesus, or any other particular district, unless he had agreed to it himself; and therefore St. Paul did not command, but beseech him to abide at Ephesus, and exercise his apostolic jurisdiction and power there.

It has already been intimated, that as the apostles by the plenitude of their ecclesiastical power were superior to other Presbyters whom they ordained, so they chose out some of those presbyters, to whom they communicated all the branches of the pastoral office, who might supply their places when they were gone, and be superior in power to other presbyters. And this argument that the apostolic office was really succeeded in, entirely overthrows the conceit of its being personal and

* Cracanthorp, Def. Ecc: Anglic. p. 175. Lond. 1625.

temporary; and this I shall prove by several instances from scripture; and first, the instances of Matthias and Barnabas. As for MATTHIAS, his apostleship is recorded in Acts 1. where we read, that immediately after our Saviour's ascension, the apostles and disciples met together to elect one into the office of the apostle Judas. The necessity of this is urged with great earnestness by Peter, who tells them it could not be neglected, du it must be done; and for this reason, he calls it xλnger της διακονίας και Αποστολή, 66 part of the ministry and the apostleship," i. e. such a part of the churches patrimony as was not to be alienated, or suffered to go to decay; and likewise mentions, that "it is written in the book of psalms, let his habitation be desolate, and his bishopric let another take." From all this it is evident, that the apostolic office was not personal, for then Judas who was one of them, could have had no successor. And since Matthias did succeed Judas in his apostleship, it is no absurdity to say that the rest of the apostles may be succeeded, as well as Judas. The apostleship of BARNABAS, who was one of the seventy, is also evident, for he had a formal ordination to the apostolic office, at the same time that St. Paul was ordained; they were both separated to the same work, by imposition of hands, and by prayer, Acts 13. 2, 3. And theyare both called apostles, Acts 14. 14. And to confirm this, he is constantly employed in the same apostolic works with St. Paul; for they ordained presbyters," Acts 14. 23. See also 1 Cor. 9. 4, 5, 6. Hence it is evident that St. Barnabas was really an apostle as well as St. Paul or St. Matthias; and therefore the apostolic office was not li mited to those twelve, whom our Saviour named, but that it might be succeeded in, and others might be added to it, as there was occasion.

There are also several other examples in scripture, of men succeeding in the apostolic order. Beside Epaphroditus, whom St. Paul calls the "Apostle," Phil. 2. 25. and the ancient fathers affirm to have been bishop of the Philippians; and others, whom St. Paul calls apostles, and the ancient fathers do for that reason speak of as bishops of the churches, 2 Cor. 8. 23. we have a remarkable example in TIMOTHY, who was Bishop, or chief governor of the church of Ephesus, planted by St. Paul. The authority which Timothy exercised in