who
ordained the subordinate presbyters and deacons, and administered the
rite of confirmation. Such, without exception, was the government of the
church for nearly sixteen hundred years; and during that period scarce
any objections were started against its utility. What St. Paul appointed
Timothy to be at Ephesus, and Titus in Crete, that was Clement at Rome,
Ignatius at Antioch, and Polycarp at Smyrna; each the ecclesiastical
superintendent of his respective congregation, and a bond of union among
dispersed societies of Christians.

As to the hardship of the terms of communion required by the Church, and
the unscriptural tendency of some of her forms, Dr. Beaumont wished that
the objectors would agree in stating what they wanted to have altered,
in such a manner that unity might indeed be promoted. "But while," said
he, "every one conceives himself at liberty to find fault, and no two
agree in what you would have changed; while some of your most learned
and pious bring forth new liturgies[4], framed according to their own
peculiar fancy, without the least reference to ancient forms, or any
even plausible pretence why their inventions should supplant what has
been long in use; while others run into metaphysical subtleties and nice
definitions of abstract doctrines[5]; and others inveigh against all
forms as subversive of Christian liberty, are we not justifiable in
retaining what we have till you agree in producing something better? And
as to the multiplicity of our institutions, even with our fearful
example to teach you brevity and simplicity, you have not found the
drawing up of the constitution of a church so simple a thing. The
Directory which was fashioned by your divines took almost a day to read
over; and it is with a bad grace that you object to our using words not
found in holy writ, which we say are rendered necessary by the present
state of theological controversy, when your divines adopted many
new-coined, indefinite words, for which neither Scripture, precedent,
nor significance, could be pleaded."

Mr. Barton forbore replying to many points in dispute; he acknowledged
that the assembly of divines "had disappointed the hopes of their
employers;" but, recurring to episcopacy, he said, that admitting the
existence of a superintending order among the primitive clergy, how
could we reconcile the poverty and lowliness of the antient bishops with
the splendour, wealth, and temporal power of their successors?