Ca?. X�.] oaaa? 471 as well as to another. And so I conclude this point, with that saying of Saint Augustine to the Donatist bishops, Tenet? ?uod tm?tis, &c. Expo?it. 2, in Psalm xxi: ' l-1old that which you hold: you have your sheep, ! have my sheep: be not troublesome to my sheep, l am not troublesome to yom?.' So may we say to our sisters, the reformed churches, and they likewise to us: let them hold that government they have; we do not molest them in their course, neither let them molest u8 in ours." (5.) It is readily admitted that there was a priority among the apos- tles themselves, although they were, in point of jurisdiction and order, equal. And in like manner there may be a priority of office and duty and oversight granted to some of the ministers of Christ in every age, and that too in accordance with Scripture. So Peter first openly con- leased Christ, and he therefore was the first to open the door of faith to the Jews and Gentiles. So James, Cephas, and John were pillars. Paul was the apostle of the uncircumcision, as Peter was of the cir- cumcision. The same may occur among Christian ministers. See 1 (3or. xii, 28. (6.) Though it may be admitted, that to avoid schism and to pro- mote union a difference of rank may be allowed in the ministr?r, yet the princely dominion of the Church of Rome cannot be admitted. It is contrary to the express declaration of Christ: "And there was alas a strife among them which of them should be accotinted the great- est. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lord- ship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be ?o: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve," Luke xxii, 24-26. Here our Saylout forbids that there should be any such princely and pompous pre-eminence among ecclesiastical persons, as there was among civil rulers. St. Peter is expressly against it: "Feed the flock of C. vod which is among you; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ?nsamples to the flock," 1 Pet. v, 2, 3. And are they not lords over the flock who challenge to be princes ? The identity and equality existing between bishop8 and elders in the apesties' time, as is manifest from the following texts of Scripture, are at variance with the usage of the Roman (3atholic C3hurch. Acts xx, 17, 28; Tit. i, �; Acta xv, 6. ' (7.) If, in the former ages of the church, the bishops were in office and dignity superior to presbyters, there must have been three distinct orders of clergy, namely, bishops, presbyters, and deacons. But there were only two distinct orders of clergy distinguished in those times, namely, presbyters, or bishops and deacons. phil. i, 1. St. Paul, in his episde to Timothy, mentions only bishops and deacons. 1 Tim. v, 2, 8. In like manner Polycarp, in his epistle is the Philippians, says, "Be subject to the presbyters and deacons, as to God and (3hrist. n Justin Martyr, in his Apology, says, "Afte, r the bishop gives thanksMthose who are called deacons among us." Thus both Scripture and the ear- liest antiquity make mention only of two grades of church officers, namely, the pastors, who were called bishops or presbyters, and dea?on8. (8.) The testimony of the ancient fathers is against the lordly pre- eminence of the Romish prelates. I
�
