other shall take his Bishoprick. And as Christ, by sending his Apoftles and their Successors as he was sent by the Father, plainly gave them Authority to make and ordain Bishops; so he also as plainly gave them the Power to judge and declare when a Bishop was fallen from his Bishoprick by Transgression. Thus (k) Peter and the other Apostles judged and declared in the Case of Judas. It is true, Judas was then dead, and so his Bishoprick vacant another Way; but they did not declare the Vacancy to have accrued from his Death, but from his Transgression: That was sufficient to have made his Place vacant, though he had been still alive. Here then is a Rule in the Sacred Writings for deposing of Bishops; no one has Authority to depose a Bishop arbitrarily or without just Cause, but when he is guilty of fuch Tranfgreffon as justly makes a Vacancy of his Bishoprick; then the College of Bishops are to declare and judge concerning the Matter, and put another into his Place. §XLIV. Another Query is, Was not the judging and depofing of Bishops by Provincial Synods in the Beginwing, a Prudential, no Divine Institution, such a one as the Church thought to be best in their Circumstances; as was the Division of the whole Church into Districts, called in our Modern Terms, Dioceses and Provinces, after the Plan of the Civil Empire ? It may be answered, That I have already shewed, that the Division of the Church into Districts, which we now call Dioceses or Provinces, was made by the Apostles themselves, and that not meerly upon Prudential Reasons, as is here suggested, but by the Directions of the Holy Ghost; and therefore St. Paul (1) calls his District, the Meafure of the Rule or Line which God had diftributed to him. And if herein they followed the Plan of the Civil (k) At. i. 13, 15. (1) 2 Cor. x. 13. Empire, Empire, what follows from thence? Only that they ław no Occasion to make new Measures and Boundaries for the World when they saw it already well bounded to their Hand. But still they did not go to the Civil Magistrate to know which Province he would be pleased to allot to each Apostle. They first made S. James the Bishop of Ferusalem, allotting to him that City and its Territory; and the other Apostles dispersed themselves into the other Parts of the World, each taking such a Province or Number of Provinces as was thought proper among themselves. And when any of them had made such a Multitude of Converts as were too many for his own fingle Inspection and Government, then he ordain'd some other Person to be Bishop or chief Spiritual Ruler of such a District or Diocese within his Province as he thought fit to commit to his Charge; and they took care that no one should meddle in another's District, or (m) stretch himself beyond his Measure. Thus the whole Church was divided into Districts or Dioceses by the Apostles, as appears from the Sacred Writings; and therefore this was a Divine, not an Humane Institution, as the Querist pretends, made upon Prudential Reasons or by an Humane Authority, the Apostles in this, as in the other Settlements of the Church, following the Directions of the Holy Ghost. So also the Meeting of Provincial Synods, that is, Synods of Neighbouring Bishops, to judge and determine concerning the Affairs of the Church, was not a meer Prudential Institution, but derived from the Practice of the Apostles, who, by the Directions of the Holy-Ghost, fettled that Method for determining suchi Controverfies as might arise. Thus, when a Controversy arose concerning Circumcifion, (n) the Apostles met in Council at Jerusalem to determine the Question. And that they acted herein not upon Prudential Reasons only, but by Divine Appointment, is evident from the Decree then made; wherein they say, (o) It seemed good to the Holy-Ghost and to us. And if the Holy Ghost had not directed them to that Method of ending this Matter, they would not have enforced their Decree with his Authority. Is the Holy-Ghoft to be made the Author of a meer Prudential Constitution? They had also an express Warrant from Chrift thus to determine Controver sies of the Church by meeting together in Synodical. Assemblies; and he had promised, (p) That where two or three should so meet together in his Name, he would be in the midst of them. Not only to determine Matters of Faith, Doctrine or Practice, such as are mention'd to have been determin'd in the Apoftolical Synod, but to hear and determine Differences between Mart and Man, (q) and to examine Witnesses, consequently to judge of all Matters wherein the Church may be concerned. And therefore as the Church is concerned to know whether a Bishop is fallen from his Bishoprick by Transgression or not, they must thereby receive a Power to determine that also. For since the Scriptures teach us, that the Apostles and their Succeffors the Bishops, were sent by Christ even as he was sent by the Father, that is, were appointed to govern the Church under him as the fupreme Head, for so the Words must mean, or they mean nothing; and he had before directed, that in Matters of Spiritual Judicature, they should meet two or three, or more, to hear and determine such Causes, and promised to be in the midst of them to ratify and confirm their Judgment when so met in his Name, (r) and to bind or loose in Heaven what they should at such (0) Αθ. xv. 28. (p) Matt. xviii. 20. (F) Matt. xviii. 18. Meetings Meetings bind or loose on Earth, it is plain thất hế authorized them to meet in Synods Provincial, National or Oecumenical, according as they conveniently might do, to judge all Spiritual Causes. And whether a Bishop has been guilty of fuch a Tranfgression as may forfeit his Bishoprick, is certainly a Spiritual Cause, and which the Apostles did judge in the case of Judas; it is evident then that the Judging and Depofing of Bishops by Provincial Synods in the Beginning, was not a meer Prudential, but a Divine Institution, as was also the Division of the whole Church into certain Dis strict's called in our Modern Terms Dioceses and Provinces, after the Plan of the Civil Empire. As I have already proved. § XLV. It is also asked, Did not the Emperors when they became Christian, yield the Causes of Bishops, as for merly to Synods, out of meer Favour, and as looking upon them to be abler Fudges of Matters that concerned the Faith and Discipline of the Church than the Heathen Magistrates, who were then mostly pessessed of those Offices under the Christian Emperors? I have already proved in the Answer to the former Question, that Bistops had a Divine Right, or a Right by Divine Institus tion, given by Christ himself, to meet in Synods, to hear and determine Spiritual Causes. And therefore when Christian Emperors confirmed that Right by their Civil Laws, it was not a Matter of meer Favour, but what they were obliged to as Christians; if they had not done it, but had gone about to have taken that Right from them, they would in that particular ✓ have rejected the Authority of Christ, who gave themt that Right some hundreds of Years before there was a Christian Emperor. For he made them, and not the Emperor and his Officers, whether Heathen or (r) Mat. xviii. 186 Chriftiani, Christian, the only Judges of what concerned the Faith and Discipline of the Church. Chrift and his Apostles fettled the Faith and Discipline of the Church without the Emperor or any other Civil Magistrate whatsoever: And(s) committed the same to faithful Men; the Bishops and Pastors whom they appointed to succeed them, who should be able to teach others aljo. And when the Emperors became Christian they received and embraced the Faith and Discipline thus fettled by Chrift and his Apostles, and conveyed down to them by the Bishops who succeeded them. Therefore the Christian Emperors yielding the Causes of RiShops to Syrods, as to what concerned the Faith and Difcipline of the Church, was no matter of meer Favour, but a Right which they received from Christ. But their yielding the Causes of Bishops concerning Civil Matters to Synods, was, I confefs a Matter of meet Favour, and that the first Christian Emperors did, as judging it not so proper to permit the Heathern Officers to be Judges of Bishops in any Matters. And many Governors of the Provinces were Heathen long after there were Christian Emperors. And this Distinction will help to folve the next Question. Which is, : 1 § XLVI. Did not the Christian Emperors however, when they saw Reason, interpose in the Causes of Bishops, and determine them in another Way from the first Provincial Plan? Did not Constantine for Instance, the first Christian Emperor, order the Cause of S. Athanafius, Metropolitan of Egypt, to be heard by certain Eastern Bishops, whom he appointed, and at a Place remote frons the Province of Athanafius? To this it may be answer'd, That a Civil Cognisance of all Causes, even the most Spiritual that can be imagined belongs to (s) 2 Tim. ii. 2. 1 |