he says that any number of individuals, who meet together under the influence of the Spirit, constitute a Church; which is not a number of Bishops, but is the Spirit itself acting through the instrumentality of a spiritual man (πνευματικός as opposed to ψυχικός)—that is, of a man who believed in the revelations and prophecies of Montanus.

At the same time that Tertullian bears testimony to the existence of a distinction between the Clergy and Laity, he bears testimony also to the existence of a distinction of orders among the Clergy. One of his charges against the Heretics is, that they neglected 15 With them," he says,

this distinction.

66

66

one

man is a Bishop to-day, another to-morrow: he who is to-day a Deacon, will be to-morrow a Reader; he who is a Priest to-day, will to

tentiâ, c. 10. In uno et altero Ecclesia est; Ecclesia vero Christus. De Fugâ in Persecutione, c. 14. Sit tibi in tribus Ecclesia; where Pamelius supposes that by the three who were to constitute a Church, Tertullian meant Montanus and his two prophetesses. But there is not the slightest ground for the supposition; and there is no necessity to invent absurdities for our author, who has to answer for so many of his own. Again in the Tract de Baptismo, c. 6. Quoniam ubi tres, id est, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, ibi Ecclesia quæ trium corpus est.

15 Itaque alius hodie Episcopus, cras alius: hodie Diaconus qui cras Lector: hodie Presbyter, qui cras Laicus. De Præscript. Hæreticorum, c. 41.

17

morrow be a Layman." In the 16 Tracts de Baptismo and 1de Fugâ in Persecutione, the three orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are enumerated together; and in the former the superior authority of the Bishop is expressly asserted.

The episcopal office, according to Tertullian, was of Apostolic institution. In the 18 Tract de Præscriptione Hæreticorum, he throws out the following challenge to the Heretics. "Let them shew," he says, "the origin of their Churches; let them trace the succession of their Bishops, and thus connect the individual who first held the office, either with some Apostle, or some Apostolic man who always remained in communion with the Church. It is thus that the Apostolic Churches shew their origin. That of Smyrna traces its Bishops in an unbroken line from Polycarp, who was placed there by St. John: 19 that of Rome from

17

18

c. 11.

c. 32.

See also de Præscriptione Hæreticorum, c. 3. See also the Tract de Fugâ in Persecutione, c. 13. Hanc Episcopatui formam Apostoli providentius

condiderunt.

19 Irenæus, L. iii. c. 3. says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, Anacletus the second, and Clemens the third; and that the Church of Rome was founded jointly by St. Peter and St. Paul. Bingham reconciles this difference by supposing that Linus and Anacletus died whilst St. Peter lived, and that Clemens was also ordained their successor by St. Peter. L. ii.

Clemens, who was placed there by St. Peter: and every other Church can point out the individual to whom the superintendance of its doctrine and discipline was first committed by some one of the Apostles." The same statement is repeated 20 in the fourth Book against Marcion.

But how clearly soever the distinction between the Bishops and the other orders of Clergy may be asserted in the writings of Tertullian, they afford us little assistance in ascertaining wherein this distinction consisted. 21 In a passage to which we have just referred,

L. ii. c. 1. Sect. 4. Had the works of Irenæus and Tertullian proceeded from Semler's Roman Club, this apparent contradiction would probably have been avoided.

20 c. 5. sub. in. Among other statements contained in the passage is the following: Habemus et Joannis alumnas Ecclesias. Nam etsi Apocalypsin ejus Marcion respuit, ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus in Joannem stabit Auctorem. Sic et cæterarum (Ecclesiarum) generositas recognoscitur. The words in Italics, Bingham has translated, "The Order of Bishops, when it is traced up to its original, will be found to have St. John for one of its authors." L. ii. c. 2. Sect. 3. We do not deny that this inference may be legitimately drawn from Tertullian's words. But by the expression Ordo Episcoporum, he did not mean the Order of Bishops, as distinct from Priests and Deacons, but the succession of Bishops in the Churches founded by St. John.

21 See note 16. Dandi (baptismum) quidem habet jus summus Sacerdos, qui est Episcopus; dehinc Presbyteri et Diaconi, non tamen sine Episcopi auctoritate, propter Ecclesiæ honorem. De Baptismo, c. 17.

24

the right of the Priests and Deacons to baptise is said to be derived entirely from the authority of the Bishop; who is styled Summus Sacerdos, the Supreme Priest. 22 Bingham says that Tertullian commonly gives to Bishops the title of presidents or provosts of the Church; but the passages to which he refers, scarcely bear him out in the assertion. 23 One of them we have already considered. ** In another, Tertullian says that the communicants received the eucharist only from the hands of the presidents; and 25 in a third, that a digamist was not allowed to preside in the Church. But in neither case is it certain that Tertullian meant to speak exclusively of Bishops, since Priests might administer the sacraments; and he 26 says that he had himself known instances of Priests who had been degraded for digamy. The Bishops doubtless presided when they were present: but in their absence the office devolved upon one of the presbyters.

22 L. ii. c. 2. Sect. 5.

23 In note 3 of this Chapter. The passage is in the Apology, c. 39.

Eucharistiæ Sacramentum

24 De Coronâ Militis, c. 3. nec de aliorum manu quam de Præsidentium sumimus.

25 Ad Uxorem, L. i. c. 7, also quoted in note 3. Quum digamos non sinit præsidere.

26 De Exhort. Castit. c. 7, quoted in note 6. Quum ipsi Sacerdoti Digamo facto auferatur agere Sacerdotem.

The regulation of the internal economy of each particular Church was certainly vested in the hands of the Bishop. 28 He appointed, for instance, days of fasting, whenever the circumstances of the Church appeared to call for such marks of humiliation.

30

The passages already alleged sufficiently prove that, in Tertullian's estimation, all 29 the Apostolic Churches were independent of each other, and equal in rank and authority. 50 He professes indeed a peculiar respect for the Church of Rome: not, however, because it was founded by St. Peter, but because both that Apostle and St. Paul there sealed their testimony to the Gospel with their blood, and St. John was there thrown into the cauldron

of burning oil. 31 From a passage in the Tract

27 De Virginibus velandis, c. 9.

28 Bene autem quod et Episcopi universæ plebi mandare jejunia assolent, non dico de industriâ stipium conferendarum ut vestræ capturæ est, sed interdum et ex aliquâ solicitudinis Ecclesiasticæ causâ. De Jejuniis, c. 13.

29 We have seen that in one sense our author called all orthodox Churches apostolic.

30 De Præscriptione Hæreticorum, c. 36.

31

c. 21.

De tuâ nunc sententiâ quæro unde hoc jus Ecclesiæ usurpas. Si quia dixerit Petro Dominus: Super hanc petram, &c. idcirco præsumis et ad te derivâsse solvendi et alligandi potestatem, id est, ad omnem Ecclesiam Petri propinquam, qualis es evertens atque commutans manifestam Domini intentionem personaliter hoc Petro conferentem? Super te, inquit, ædificabo Ecclesiam meam, et dabo tibi

claves,