"they are such as have believed, and some of them have been "bishops, that is, presidents of the Churches. Then such as have "been set over inferior ministries, and have protected the poor, " and the widows," &c.*

From one of the foregoing extracts, it is evident that Hermas resided at Rome; that he had a particular reference to the Church in that city; and that the period at which he wrote was, when Clement, before mentioned, was one of the bishops or presidents of that Church. From a comparison of these extracts, it will also appear that Hermas considered bishops and elders as different titles for the same office. He speaks of elders as presiding over the Church of Rome; he represents a plurality of elders as having this presidency at the same time; having used the word Bishops, he explains it as meaning those who presided over the Churches; and immediately after bishops, (without mentioning presbyters,) he proceeds to speak of Deacons, that is, those who are intrusted with the protection of the poor and of the widows.

On one of the passages quoted above, some zealous friends of episcopacy have laid considerable stress. It is this. "The "square and white stones, which agree exactly in their joints, are "the apostles, and bishops, and doctors, and ministers, who, "through the mercy of God," &c. On this passage, Cotelerius, a learned Roman Catholic editor, has the following note. "You have "here the distinct orders of the hierarchy, in apostles, in bishops, "exercising episcopacy, in doctors, or presbyters, teaching, and in "deacons ministering." In language of the same import, some protestant friends of prelacy have commented on the passage. It is really amusing to find grave and sober men attempting to make so much of a passage, in every respect, so little to their purpose. For, to say nothing of the evidently loose and fanciful nature of the whole comparison; it is not a warrant for three, but for four orders of clergy; and, of course, if it proves any thing, will prove too much for the system of any protestant Episcopalian.

The epistle of Polycarp to the church at Philippi, written early in the second century, stands next on the roll of antiquity. This venerable martyr, like Clemens, speaks of only two orders of

* Vision, II. 4. III. 5, 6. Similitude, IX. 27.

9

church officers, viz. presbyters and deacons.* He exhorts the Philippians to obey these officers in the Lord. "It behoves you," says he, "to abstain from these things, being subject to the presbyters and deacons as to God and Christ." And again: "Let the presbyters be compassionate and merciful towards all; "turning them from their errors; seeking out those that are weak; "not forgetting the widows, the fatherless, and the poor; abstaining "from all wrath, respect of persons, and unrighteous judgment; "not easy to believe any thing against any; nor severe in judg"ment; knowing that we are all debtors in point of law." The word bishop is no where mentioned in his whole epistle; nor does he give the most distant hint as if there were any individual or body of men vested with powers superior to presbyters. On the contrary, he speaks of the presbyters as being intrusted with the inspection and rule of the church; for, while, on the one hand, he exhorts the members of the church to submit to them, he intreats the presbyters themselves to abstain from unrighteous judgment, and to have no respect of persons.

Perhaps it will be asked, Is not Polycarp spoken of, by several early writers, as bishop of Smyrna? And does not this fact alone establish the principle for which Episcopalians contend? I answer, by no means. Polycarp is indeed called by this name. So also is Clement called bishop of Rome, and Ignatius of Antioch. Nor, perhaps, have we any reason to doubt that they were so. But in what sense were they bishops? We say, they were scriptural, primitive bishops, that is, pastors, or among the pastors, of particular congregations. And in support of this assertion, we produce the testimony of scripture, and the uniform language of the truly primitive church. But whatever kind of bishop Polycarp was, we shall presently see that a contemporary father exhorts him to be personally acquainted with every member of his flock; to seek out all by name; and not to overlook even the servant men and maids of his charge. Whether the minister who could do this, was more than the pastor of a single congregation, I leave every man of common sense to judge.

* It is worthy of remark, that the apostle Paul, in writing to the same church about 50 or 60 years before, also speaks of their having only two orders of officers, viz. bishops and deacons. See Philip i. 1. But those whom Paul styled bishops, Polycarp afterwards calls presbyters, the names in the time of Polycarp, as well as in the time of Paul, being still common.

M

The fourth place, in the list of apostolical fathers, belongs to Ignatius. The epistles which go under the name of this venerable christian bishop, have been the subject of much controversy. That some copies of them were interpolated, and exceedingly corrupted, in the dark ages, all learned men now agree.* And that even the "shorter epistles," as published by Usher and Vossius, are unworthy of confidence, as the genuine works of the father whose name they bear, is the opinion of many of the ablest and best judges in the protestant world.

These epistles were first published at Strasburg in the year 1502. And, although only seven are now received as genuine, they were then eleven in number. In an edition published a few years afterwards there appeared twelve; and not long after that, fifteen; together with an additional letter from the Virgin Mary to Ignatius. Nor did they alter thus in number merely; for in some of those editions, several of the epistles were nearly twice as large as in others. Accordingly, archbishop Wake, in the preface to his translation of these epistles, remarks: " there have been "considerable differences in the epistles of this holy man, no less ❝than in the judgment of our Latin critics concerning them. To CC pass by the first and most imperfect of them, the best that for a "long time was extant, contained not only a great number of "epistles falsely ascribed to this author; but even those that were "genuine, so altered and corrupted, that it was hard to find out "the true Ignatius in them. The first that began to remedy this "confusion, and to restore this great writer to his primitive sim<< plicity, was our most reverend and learned Archbishop Usher, "in his edition of them at Oxford, Anno 1644." The venerable Archbishop of Armagh, found two copies of six of these epistles in England; not in the original Greek, but in very barbarous Latin translations. In 1646, the learned Isaac Vossius found in in the Medicean Library, a copy in Greek, containing seven epistles, and published it soon afterwards in Amsterdam. From

* It is even agreed that some of these interpolations were made with the express view of furnishing support to the ambitious claims of bishops. Speaking of some of the interpolations, Dr. Hammond, a zealous Episcopalian, represents them as "immoderate," "extravagant," and "senseless;" and concludes that they are evidently the work of some "impostor."

these three copies Archbishop Wake has formed his English version, adopting from each what he thought most likely to be correct. Usher had much doubt of the genuineness of the seventh epistle, to Polycarp. "Nor," observes Archbishop Wake," does Isaac "Vossius himself deny but that there are some things in it, which may seem to render it suspicious." Yet, on the whole, he published it, and Wake adopted it as genuine, with the other six. From the time of Usher to the present, there has been unceasing controversy concerning the genuineness of these epistles. The great body of Episcopal writers have felt so much interest in their supposed importance as witnesses in favour of prelacy, that they have generally contended for them as the genuine remains of the pious father whose name they bear. But it is believed, that a large majority of the learned of other Protestant denominations, for nearly two centuries have been of the opinion that they could not be relied upon, and ought never to be quoted as the unadulterated work of Ignatius: but that they bear manifest marks of having been interpolated long after the martyrdom of their reputed author. The following judgment of a learned and zealous Episcopalian, who writes in the Christian Observer, an English periodical, conducted with great ability by members of the established Church is worthy of notice. "Could six of the seven epistles, usually ascribed to Ignatius be "cited with the same undoubting confidence which has accompa"nied the foregoing quotations, the controversy concerning the "early existence of Episcopacy would be at an end. But, after "travelling so long in comparative obscurity, after being compelled "to close and strongly directed attention, in order to pick up three "or four rays of scattered light, we are in a moment oppressed and "confounded by the brightness of the mid-day sun. For in these

"epistles we have the three orders of bishops, priests, and dea"cons, marshalled with unseasonable exactness, and repeated with "importunate anxiety. There appear, moreover, so many symp"toms of contrivance; and such studied uniformity of expression, "that these compositions will surely not be alleged by any capable "and candid advocate for primitive episcopacy, without great "hesitation by many they will be entirely rejected. I do not

mean to insinuate that the whole of these six epistles is a forgery; "on the contrary many parts of them afford strong internal evi"dence of their own genuineness: but with respect to the particu

"lar passages which affect the present (the Episcopal) dispute, "there is not a sentence which I would venture to allege. The "language, at the earliest, is that of the fourth century."* When a zealous advocate of prelacy can write thus, there is surely ground for utter distrust of these epistles, when quoted as testimony on the subject before us.

But, instead of entering into this controversy, I will take for granted that the shorter epistles of Ignatius, (and they alone are now quoted among Protestants) are genuine, and worthy of implicit confidence. On this supposition let us examine them. And I will venture to affirm that instead of yielding to the cause of diocesan episcopacy that efficient support which is imagined, they do not contain a single sentence which can be construed in its favour; but, on the contrary, much which can only be reconciled with the primitive, parochial episcopacy, or Presbyterian government, so evidently pourtrayed in scripture, and so particularly defined in my first letter.

The following extracts from these epistles are among the strongest quoted by Episcopal writers in support of their cause.† Epistle to the church of Ephesus. Sect. v. "Let no man "deceive himself; if a man be not within the altar he is deprived "of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two be of such

"force, as we are told

;

how much more powerful shall that of the "bishop and the whole church be? He, therefore, that does not "come together into the same place with it, is proud, and has "already condemned himself."

Epistle to the church of Magnesia. Sect. 2. "Seeing then, "I have been judged worthy to see you, by Damas, your most "excellent bishop, and by your worthy presbyters, Bassus and "Apollonius, and by my fellow servant, Sotio, the deacon-I "determined to write unto you." Sect. 6. "I exhort you that

'ye study to do all things in divine concord; your bishop presid"ing in the place of God; your presbyters in the place of the "council of the apostles; and your deacons most dear to me, being

* Christian Observer, Vol. ii. p. 723.

To cut off all occasion of doubt, as to the fairness used in translating these extracts, I think proper to state, that I adopt the translation of Archbishop Wake.”