" right of choice is taken away from the particu"lar Churches, and the right of judging in the 66 case from the college of Pastors; and this would "be to profane the whole of the sacred discipline "of the church. But the answer is easy. Every "thing was not entrusted to the will of Titus as an "individual, nor was he allowed to impose such 66 66 Bishops on the Churches as he pleased; but he was commanded to preside in the elections, as a "Moderator, as it is necessary for some one to do. "This is a mode of speaking exceedingly common. "Thus a Consul, or Regent, or Dictator is said 66 to create Consuls, because he convenes assein"blies for the purpose of making choice of them. "So also Luke uses the same mode of speaking "concerning Paul and Barnabas, in the Acts of the Apostles; not that they alone, authoritatively ap"pointed Pastors over the Churches, without their being tried or approved; but they ordained suitable 66 men, who had been elected, or chosen by the people. We learn also, from this place, that there was 66 not, then, such an equality among the ministers of "the Church, as was inconsistent with some one presiding in authority and council. 66 This, how *The original of this sentence is as follows-Discimus quidem ex hoc loco, nan eam fuisse tunc equalitatem inter Ecalesiæ ministros quin uus aliquis autoritate et consilio præesset. Dr. Bowden and Mr. How both quote this sentence, both undertake to translate it for the benefit of their readers, and both concur in giving the following translation-" Hence we "learn that there was not any equality among the ministers “of the Church, but that one was placed over the rest in ever, is nothing like the tyrannical and unscriptu"ral prelacy which reigns in the Papacy. The "plan of the Apostles was extremely different." 66 66 On the 7th verse of the same chapter, he thus expresses himself" Moreover this place abundantly "teaches us that there is no difference between "Presbyters and Bishops; because the Apostle now calls promiscuously by the second of these names, those whom he had before called Presby66 ters; and indeed the argument which follows, " employs both names indifferently in the same "sense; which Jerome hath observed, as well in "his commentary on this passage, as in his Epistle to Evagrius. And hence we may see how much more has been yielded to the opinions of men "than was decent: because the style of the Holy 66 Spirit being abrogated, a custom introduced by "the will of man, prevailed.-I do not, indeed, LL disapprove of the opinion, that, soon after the com"mencement of the Church, every college of Bi"shops had some one to act as Moderator. But "that a name of office which God had given in common to all, should be transferred to an indi 66 "authority and council." This is one of the principal quotations from Calvin on which they found the assertion that he believed in the Apostolical origin of Episcopacy! Instead of saying what they ascribe to it, it asserts directly the contrary. It declares that there was an official equality among the ministers of the primitive Church; but, at the same time, an equality by no means inconsistent with one being Moderator. This is precisely the Presbyterian doctrine and practice. 91 "vidual alone, the rest being robbed of it, was both "injurious and absurd. Wherefore so to pervert "the language of the Holy Spirit, as that the same expressions should convey a meaning to us different from that which he intended, partakes too "much of profane audacity.” 66 In his commentary on 1 Peter v. 1. written in 1551, and dedicated to Edward VI, of England, the following passage occurs. "Presbyters. By "this title he designates Pastors, and whoever "C were appointed to the government of the Church. "And since Peter calls himself a Presbyter, like "the rest, it is hence apparent that this name was 66 common; which, indeed, from many other pas"sages appears still more clearly. Moreover, by "this title he claimed to himself authority; as if he "had said, that he admonished Pastors in his own "right, because he was one of their number; for "among colleagues there ought to be this mutual "privilege. Whereas if he had enjoyed any pre"eminence of authority among them, he might "have urged that, and it would have been more "pertinent to the occasion: But although he was an Apostle, yet he knew that this gave "authority over his colleagues; but that he was "rather joined with the rest in a social office." him no Calvin's exposition of the first Epistle to Timothy was written in the year 1556, and dedicated to the Duke of Somerset, Lord Protector of England. In his remarks on the fifth chapter and seventeenth verse, of that Epistle, he speaks thus." From "this passage we may gather that there were then "two kinds of Presbyters, because they were not "all ordained to the work of teaching. For the "words plainly mean, that some ruled well, to "whom no part of the public instruction was com"mitted. And verily there were chosen from among the people, grave and approved men, who, "in common council, and joint authority with the "Pastors, administered the discipline of the church, "and acted the part of censors for the correction "of morals.This practice Ambrose complains "had fallen into disuse, through the indolence, or "rather the pride of the teaching Elders, while "they wished to be alone distinguished." I will only add, that, in his commentary on Acts xx. 28, written in 1560, a short time before his death, he expresses himself thus-" Concerning "the word Bishop, it is observable, that Paul gives "this title to all the Presbyters of Ephesus: from "which we may infer, that according to Scripture, "Presbyters differed, in no respect, from Bishops : "but that it arose from corruption, and a departure 66 from primitive purity, that those who held the "first seats in particular cities, began to be called "Bishops. I say that it arose from corruption, not "that it is an evil for some one, in each college of "Pastors, to be distinguished above the rest; but because it is intolerable presumption, that men, "in perverting the titles of Scripture to their own "humour, do no hesitate to alter the meaning of "the Holy Spirit.” But, in spite of all these repeated and positive declarations of Calvin, Dr. Bowden and Mr. How still insist, that he acknowledged the Apostolical institution of Prelacy, and offered the plea of necessity for adopting the Presbyterian government in Geneva. To prove this, they produce two extracts from his writings, which have really nothing to do with the subject; but which, ever since the time of the ignorant or disingenuous Durell, have been trumphantly quoted by high-church-men, for a similar purpose. The first of these extracts is from Calvin's famous letter to Cardinal Sadolet, and is in the following words. "We do not deny that we want a "discipline such as the ancient Church (Vetus Ec-. "clesia) had. But with what justice can we be "accused of subverting discipline, by those very 66 men (the Papists) who alone have entirely de"stroyed it; and who, when we endeavoured to "restore it, have hitherto prevented us? But "with respect to doctrine, we are willing to be (6 compared with the ancient Church*." How far this extract really goes towards proving the point intended to be established by it, will appear from the following analysis of the Letter. Calvin, in his reply to Sadolet, pursues the method which the Cardinal had adopted in arranging his charges against the Church of Geneva. He * Ad Sadoletum Responsio CALVINI. Tractatus Theologici : p. 125. |