Ca?,. XV.] oJ?Dns. 481 been made in dLis matter. The Council of Trent decreed that, "Who- soever shall sa.?-, that orders conferred by' bishops, without the consent or call of the people or secular magistrate, are void, let him be ac- crued. '*e 8. Cma?ra?m. There is much controversy concerning the hum= her o4 ? hi, hops necessar? to ordain another bishop. Some say three are necessary', and others say more; while some nmintain that one is suf/icient.t 9. From the foregoing it appears that Roman Catholics differ from Protestants in several points respecting the superiority and powers bishops. They' maintain that hi,holm are not only, in a higher degree of sttperiority, over other ministers, but they, are as princes of' the clergy, and ministers are in all things subject to them. They, nmintaln that bishops only, are properly, pastors, and that to them only, it doth apper- tain properly, to preach. They, also maintain that not principally, or chiefly, but solely, and wholly,, it belongs to them to confer ordination. 'Fheir powers embraced under the two divisions of orders and jurisdic- tion, or government, invest them with such a pre-eminence as to de- prive beth the people ?nd the regular pastors or presby?ters of almost all those ecclesiastical privileges and prerogatives by which the disci- pline of the gospel can be successfully, exercised. Properly, speaking, the principal Powers of' the pastor, such as receiving and expelling members, and the preaching of the word, are assumed or restrained by the bishop of the dieess, so as to lead to a dereliction of' the Scripture rules on these Points. And the Powers of the people, in judging of the proper character of their fellow-members, and of having at least some deference paid to their wishes and interests in the choice of' ministers, are principally' engrossed by the princely, prelates of the Church of l?ome. We will first examine those Scripture proofs and arguments by which they, maintain their positions; and next we will adduce the testimony, of Scripture and of' early, antiquity, against the high claims el' their prelates. ?'ir.?t, we w?11 examine the Scripture proofs and arguments. by, which they maintain their positions. (1.) For the princely, authority, of' their prelates, whom they* would have obeyed in all things, they, adduce several passages of Scripture. 'Fhay, quote the following: "Against an elder receive not an accu- sation, but before two or three witnesses," 1 Tim. v, 19. Here Timo- thy, they, say,, as bishop of Ephesus, is made judge of the el?iers, therefore he possessed such Power as their bishops promess. To this we reply*: 1. Timothy, had no such princelike authorit? as they, con- ten?l for, becaus? he is restrained and limited by, a rtt? which is here set down by, the ape,de, and which he is bound to observe. 2. The power of judging others does not alway,s argue pre-eminence. In- deed, trial tr? jury*, or by, one's pee?'s, is acknowledged by, the most enlightened nations to be the most equitable. And many ecclesiasti- cal cases from the present and former ages could be adduced, where the person acting as judge was of' precisely' the same or inferior
- f?e?. ?3, can. 7. See Bailly, tom. v, p. 517. Al?o Ferrazis, ertlcte E!?opus
vol. iii, p. 184. f See Bailly, de Ordine, c. 5, tom. v, p. 493. Also Ferrer;- on the word Epbco. pus, ?rt. ii, N?. 1-13, tom. iii, p. 184. 1
�
