CHAP. II.

FROM 1642 TO 1645.

ON

N the 3d of November in the year 1640, that parliament assembled which accomplished the subversion of the monarchical and episcopal governments. One of its first acts was the impeachment of Taylor's great patron, Archbishop Laud, who was committed to the custody of the gentleman usher on Friday the 18th of the ensuing December, and on Monday the 1st of May following was finally conveyed to the tower.

The situation of the archbishop, opposed by powerful and vindictive enemies, must have deeply affected the susceptible and ardent mind of Taylor and the danger which he saw impending over the ecclesiastical government, called for those exertions which his knowledge and ability were so highly calculated to supply. These produced his "Episcopacya asser

a

* The Bishop of Exon (Hall) led the way in defence of episcopacy, (says Heylin in his Life of Laud) presenting

ted against the Aerians and Acephali new and old;" which was published at the king's com

“An humble remonstrance to the high court of Parlia"ment, in behalf of liturgy and episcopacy," which presently was encountered with an answer, wherein the origi nal of liturgy and episcopacy is pretended to be discussed. This answer framed by a junto of five Presbyterian ministers, in or about the city of London, the letters of whose names being laid together made up the word Smectymnuus. The bishop replies in a " Vindication ;" which vindication had a rejoinder, by Smectymnuus. And at the same time a discourse was published by Sir Thomas Ashton. In the first part of which he gives " A survey of the inconve"niences of the Presbyterian discipline, and the inconveni"ences thereof with the constitution of this state." And in the second," The original institution, succession, and "jurisdiction of the ancient and venerable order of bishops." This last part was seconded within the compass of this year (1641) by the History of Episcopacy, first published as the work of Theophilus Churchman, and not till many years after owned by the author's name. The next year brought forth a book by Dr. Taylor, called "Episcopacy "asserted," and the Aeriomastix of John Thyer, &c. All of them backed, and the two last encouraged by many petitions to his Majesty, and both houses of Parliament, not only from the two Universities, whom it most concerned, but from several counties of the kingdom. Fol. p. 465.

Aerius, from whom this sect is denominated, was a Presbyter of Sebastia. He separated from the church, because Eustathius was raised to the bishopric of Sebastia in preference to himself, about 385. Taylor adopts the supposition of some persons, that he was the founder of the Presbyterians.

mand. It was brought out at Oxford in the year 1642 in quarto, and was printed by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University. In the title page, he stiles himself "Jer. Taylor, late Fellow of All Soules in Oxon," whence we infer that he had not then been admitted to the degree of Doctor in Divinity, and that the publication of this work was not later than the autumn of that year.

In this treatise he employs consummate learning, and adduces powerful evidence to demonstrate that Christ instituted a government in his church, which was first committed by him to the apostles, with a power of joining others and appointing successors in the apostleship; that this succession into the ordinary office of apostleship is continued in the order of bishops: for the apostle and bishop are the same as well in name and person, as in office; which Christ himself has made distinct from that of Presbyters:-conferring on apostles some powers, which he did not give to others; as of ordination, confirmation, and superiority of jurisdiction: so that bishops are successors in the office of apostleship according to the general tenor of antiquity. He then proceeds to shew that the institution of episcopacy as well as the

apostleship is expressed to be divine, by primitive authority that in pursuance of the divine institution, the apostles ordained bishops in several churches; as St. James at Jerusalem, and after him Simeon; Timothy at Ephesus; Titus at Crete; Mark at Alexandria; Polycarp at Smyrna, and many others. So that episcopacy is at least of apostolical ordinance; resting on the same foundation with many other points generally believed; and was an office of great weight and power. That this office was not lessened by the assistance and council of presbyters; and that such has been the faith and practice of Christendom. He then points out that the first thing done in the christian church, upon the death of the apostles, was the distinguishing of names, which before were used in common, appropriating the word epis. copus or bishop to the supreme church officer, calling the bishop, and him only, the pastor and doctor of the church. That this was a distinct order from the rest, to which the presbyterate was but a degree, there being a peculiar manner of ordination to a bishopric, at which presbyters never assisted by imposition of hands. For bishops had a power distinct, and superior to that of presbyters: as of ordination, confirmation, and jurisdiction; this was ex

pressed in attributes of authority, which required universal obedience to be given to bishops by clergy and laity; appointed them to be judges of the clergy and spiritual causes of the laity; forbad presbyters to officiate without episcopal licence, reserved church-goods to episcopal dispensation; and forbad presbyters to leave their own diocese, or to travel without leave of the bishop. He shews, that the bishop had power to prefer which of his clerks he pleased, and that bishops only voted in councils, and neither presbyters nor people: that the bishop had a propriety in the persons of his clerks and that the jurisdiction of bishops was over many congregations, or parishes; which was aided by presbyters, but not impaired; so that the government of the church by bishops was believed necessary. For they are schismatics and heretics that separate from their bishops; and bishops were always in the church men of great honour, and trusted with affairs of secular interest. On this account they were forced to delegate their and put power others in substitution. But these were always clergymen for there never was any lay-elder any church office heard of in the church.

in

Such are the contents of this learned and