peal, with so much confidence, to the powers exercised by Timothy, they ought also to have agreed as to the office and rank of that eminent man. Yet it is a disputed point among them, at this hour, whether he was simply Bishop of Ephesus, having jurisdiction over his presbyters; or an archbishop, having bishops under him; or the lord primate of Asia, above them all. If you ask the advocates of these several opinions, what was precisely his authority? some cry one thing, and some another for the assembly is confused; and their voices unite only in this, Great is Timothy of the Ephesians! We cannot refrain from transcribing a few remarks of the powerful and eloquent JEAN Daille.

66

Here," we translate his own words, "Here the hierarchs, having their imagination full of their grand prelatures, of their bishoprics, their archbishoprics, and their primacies, do not fail to dream of one in these words of the Apostle. That he besought Timothy to abide still at Ephesus, signifies, if you believe them, that he made Timothy bishop of the church of Ephesus; and not only that, but even Metropolitan, or archbishop of the province; and even primate of all Asia. You see how ingenious is the passion for the crosier and the mitre; being able, in so few and simple words, to detect such great mysteries! For where is the man, who, in the use of his natural understanding without being heated by a previous attach

ment, could ever have found so many mitres-that of a Bishop, that of an Arch-bishop, and that of a Primate, in these two words, Paul besought Timothy to abide still at Ephesus? Who, without the help of some extraordinary passion, could ever have made so charming and so rare a discovery ?* and imagine that to beseech a man to stay in a city, means, to establish him bishop of that city, Archbishop of the province, and primate of all the country? In very deed, the cause of these gentlemen of the hierarchy must be reduced to an evil plight,† since they are constrained to resort to such pitiful proofs."‡

Our readers will hardly blame Daillé for applying the epithet "pitiful,” to the argument of the hierarchy for Timothy's Episcopate, when they see that her ablest and most resolute champions are at irreconcileable variance with each other on this very point: some maintaining it as perfectly con

* Deviner une chose si belle & si rare ?

A de mauvais termes.

DAILLE Exposition de la premiere epitre de l'Apotre Saint Paul à Timothée; en 48 sermons prononcés à CHARENTON. Serm. I. p. 22, 23. a Geneve 1661. 12mo.

*

This is that identical Monsieur DAILLE' whom Mr. BINGHAM and, from him, Dr. HOBART have represented as friendly to Episcopacy. This is that JEAN DAILLE! The prelatical commentators have played tricks with the French preacher; which, if we feel in a humour for it, we may one of these days expose.

* HOBART'S Apology, p. 94, compared with p. 99. BINGHAM's Christian Antiquities. Vol. II. p. 799.

clusive; others rejecting it as weak and frivolous. The mere fact of this variance is a strong presumption against the former, and in favour of the latter. For although vigorous, cultivated, and candid minds may be so far warped by their wishes as to lay more stress upon an argument for them than it deserves; yet it is hardly to be supposed that such minds will attribute to an argument which, if sound, secures them the victory, much less importance than it possesses. If, then, there are to be found among the advocates of Episcopacy, men second to none of them in learning, force, and sagacity, who fairly give up the plea from Timothy and Titus, the conclusion is, that their concession is extorted against their prejudices and interest.

As a specimen of the collision which takes place, on this subject, between the most zealous supporters of prelacy, we transcribe a part of the seventh section of the Appendix to AYTON's Original Constitution of the Christian Church. It has not been in our power to compare all his quotations with the authors, but we have examined a number and they are correct.

"The chief plea and argument of the Episcopalians is taken from Timothy and Titus. But however much this is boasted of by some, as a conclusive proof for a diocesan form of church government, and superior power of Bishops to that of Presbyters; yet there is nothing adduced by them that is more violently opposed by others of them, and in which they are more egregiously divided. For some of them pretend, that the

Apostle, in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus, uses the terms Bishop and Presbyter promiscuously, only to express such officers as are now called Presbyters. Of this opinion I take Bishop Hoadley to be, Dr. Whitby, Mr. Dodwell, and many others might be named.

"But how contradictory to this is the judgment of Bishop Pearson, Vindicia. Lib. 2. Cap. 13. Bishop Taylor, Episc. assert. P. 85. Bishop Burnet, in his History of the Right of Princes, Prefac. p. 15. and p. 4, 5. of the Book: and Dr. Hammond, in a variety of places. I say, how contradictory are these sentiments of those prelates to this above named? seeing they hold, that all those whom they were to ordain were proper bishops, nay, Dr. Hammond's opinion is, that Timothy and Titus were Archbishops, and had their suffragans under them; and with him bishop Bull seems to agree, when he calls Timothy Archbishop, Serm. on 2 Tim. iv. 13. And to these I could add others of the same mind. But, then as Dr. Hammond reckoned, that the Apostles ordained no mere Presbyters at the first, but only Bishops, Annot. on Acts xi. 6, 14. so Dodwell, Paranes, p. 54. p. 13. and p. 102. p. 33. must certainly contradict him in this, when he maintains, that the Apostles at the first ordained no Bishops, but simple Presbyters only; and that there is no mention of Episcopal government in the New Testament, and that it was not established till Anno 106. But then, according to both these Doctors, there is one office in the church without scripture warrant-Presbyters, according to Dr. Hammond; and Bishops, according to Mr. Dodwell. But how will they answer to what is advanced by Bishop Burnet, which equally contradicts them both, Vindic. of the Church of Scotland, p. 355. That without Scripture warrants no new office may be instituted? Besides Dr. Hammond's conceit against Presbyters not being instituted in the New Testament, is opposed with all freedom by Mr. Maurice, Defens. p. 27. and by Bishop Hoadley, Brief Defence, p. 113. Is it possible to behold such wrangling,

without being affected with a mixture both of indignation and compassion? Is it not matter of indignation, that men of judgment and learning should have such a fondness to maintain a cause that is so precarious, as to drive them into so many schemes to defend it, and every one of them contradictory to one another? And can it miss to beget compassion in the breast of every sincere Christian, that men of abilities should bestow so much time to perplex themselves and others, when their labours, rightly employed, might prove much more beneficial to the Protestant world?

"But that we may give the world a view, how inconclusive all these schemes and models are, which are taken from Timothy and Titus, I shall give some account of the minds of the Episcopalians at some length, who, when adduced, will leave no room for the Presbyterians to be in any perplexity in the defence of their establishment. The first I shall bring on the stage is the famous Willet, Synops. Papism. p. 236. 'It is most like Timothy had the place and calling of an evangelist: and the calling of evangelists and bishops, which were pastors, was divers.' To him let us join the learned Stillingfleet, who says, Irenic. p. 340. 'Such were the evangelists, who were sent sometimes into this country to put the church in order there, sometimes into another; but wherever they were, they acted as evangelists, and not as fixed officers. And such were Timothy and Titus, notwithstanding all the opposition made against it, as will appear to any who will take an impartial survey of the arguments on both sides,' &c. Nay, the jesuit Salmeron, is ashamed of this argument, for he says, Disput. 1. on 1 Tim. It is doubtful if Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus: for though he preached and ordained some to the ministry there, it follows not that he was the Bishop of that place; for Paul preached also there above two years, and absolved the penitents, and yet was not Bishop. Add that now and then the apostle called him away unto himself, and sent him from Rome to the Hebrews with his epistle; and in the second Vol. III. 23