and therefore very unlikely this should be spared But if any have so strong a Faith to believe what is reported of this great Wonder-worker Gregory he may possibly think that he had sufficient power to restrain Dioclesian's Agents and defend the Church he built For Baronius at the Year 253. num 135 136 137. relates what power he had over Devils to cast them out of their Temples and drive them out of any place whither he pleased and restore them also at his pleasure which he did to shew his power to one in writing under his hand saith Baronius in these words Gregorius Satanae ingredere Gregory to Satan enter in that was into his Temple again And Bellarmine relates another Miracle of him upon this very Argument c. 4. de cultu Sanct. saying That when he would have built a Church and wanted room by reason of a Rock that border'd on the place where he would build it he by his prayers removed it away Mr Mede was wiser than to mention this for Gregory's building of Churches And indeed none can imagine how much prejudice such fabulous Miracles and lying Legends decryed and detested even by many sober and Learned Papists hath done to Christianity Let but any one read a Pamphlet Printed this very Year of a Conference between a Jew and a Jesuite at Amsterdam concerning Christ being the true Messiah which this undertaking to prove by his Miracles was replied upon by the other with a Number as great out of many Popish Authors insomuch that the Jew quite confounded the Jesuite And wheras Mr. Mede notes that a litle before the persecution of Decius which was A. D. 252. the Christians erected Oratories in the Name of Christ I desire Baronius may be consulted and then let any one judge how improbable it is that Christians had publick Churches with such distinction of places as is mentioned or built such Publick Oratories as our Adversaries say For Decius gave express order to forbid all Christian assemblies upon pain of Death threatning accurate observing them because many Heathens were converted thereby to Christianity As appears by Aemilianus his writing to Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria in Euseb l. 7. c. 9. vel 10. and Baronius ad A. D. 260. Num. 17. who further relates how their very Coemateria or burying places which were Vaults under ground called cryptae as Baronius shews A. D. 259 num 16. usually a Mile or more from their Cities which were often after some time discovered and then how dangerous it was to meet there he shews A 255 were now strictly forbidden them in particular as well as in the general all other places whatsoever Cyprian contemporary with Gregory is next alledged for Christian Oratories 1 In his book de Opere and Eleemosynis by the Name of Dominicum brought also by Bellarm. c. 4 de cultu Sanct. 2 In 55 Epistle by the Title of Ecclesia We never doubted but Christians had from the first Oratories or places of Meeting And that in this Century some publick which as the Church increased were inlarged But that even in Cyprian's time their assembling were in subterraneous Vaults both at Alexandria as we have shewn and Rome as is clear by Pope Cornelius's Letter to the Bishop of Vienna as Baronius testifies A. 255. n. 47. and here at Carthage in Africa A. 260. n. 37. Where the Proconsul urged Cyprian himself with the Emperors Edict ne in aliquibus locis conciliabula fiant nee caemeteria ingrediantur that the Christians should not meet in any places nor enter into their Coemeteries In which they usually celebrated the holy Mysteries which Pameltus calls the Sacrifice but Goulartius the Word Sacraments and Prayers performed only when the Church assembled Nor is the opposition mentioned of any force as we shew'd on 1 Cor. 11.22 Another Contemporary cited is Dionysius Alexandrinus in 's Epistle to Basilides declaring his Opinion That Women during the time of their Separation ought not to enter into the Church which he calls the House of God By which we learn saith Mede not only the Christians had their Houses of Worship but a religious respect also to difference them from common places To this we say as formerly That Christians had always places for meeting in but still whether in private Houses or in publick lies the question And if but a Chamber in a private House where they worshipped God it was sufficient to denominate it the House of God as well as a Cathedral And that their Assemblies then were very private appears in that they were forbidden on pain of death as we have shewn and yet where this is related by Eusebius Dionysius testifies that nevertheless they kept them But surely not in the usual places where they had easily been discovered to the loss of their lives but in all likelihood often changed the places for their security And whether every such was thereby so sanctified that it was unlawful for a menstruous Woman to enter thereinto let any one judge Nor was this a Canon as Mede calls it Baronius hath made apparent against Balsamon and by the equity of a contrary course taken by Pope Gregory in regard that legalia or ceremonials are now abdicated And if it were in force it relates not to the Place simply but the Offices there performed and the time thereof which suppose the Congregation present from which such an one was to be excluded whether the meeting was on a Mountain or in an House or under Ground in Caves and Dens of the Earth Nor need Mr. Mede tell us such places were known to the Gentiles and called worshipping places For when the Christians were grown so numerous before this time of A D. 260. as Tertullian thinks near to equalize the Heathens their Assemblies could not possibly be concealed whether above or under the Ground especially when they enjoyed any tollerable freedom from Persecution as appears by two Rescripts of Gallienus in Euseb Hist l. 7. c. 12. one for restoring all places in general to the Christians and the other their Coemiteries in particular Nor doth Aurelian's Speech in Vopiscus evince a publick place nor the opposition between the Capitol and Church imply the place but the Congregation rather that stands in congruous opposition to the Sibyls Oracles For they might be Masters of the Christian Oratories when they pleased and there consult of what they list even of setting forth the Books of the Sibyls But Mr. Mede thinks his cause is supported by that of Eusebius l. 7. relating how Paulus Samosatenus being deposed by the Council Aurelian decreed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the House of the Church should be taken from him c. This Bellarmine c. 4. de cultu sanctorum and also our Fuller alledge to the like purpose Yet both ours confess that some interpret it of domum Epifcopalem the Bishops House Belike Christopherson tho a Popish Bishop in Queen Maries days and zealous for the Opinion of our Opponents So Baronius
whoever spake in any Language was understood by all because this makes the Miracle to be in the Hearers and not the Speakers who were inspired for preaching the Gospel abroad in the Nations whose Languages they were ignorant of before Consider also that hot Persecution that presently followed the year after in the 8th of the Acts and whether this did not necessitate them often to change the places of their assembling it being neither safe to meet in great multitudes nor always in the same place It 's probable also from v. 3. by Saul's entring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into their several Houses was either when or where they assembled for into every House as we render it of so many Christians as were in Jerusalem seems to me improbable I pass over the fabulous Traditions and fictitious Glosses on Acts 10.9 and 18.22 especially as unworthy the Author and the least consideration And can grant him that which follows of some giving whole Houses for sacred Assemblies as the multitude of Believers increased tho this cannot be proved in the two first Centuries As also that at length they built Structures in the Coemeteries of Martyrs which yet Platina and Polid. Virgil say were but Sacella Chappels and those in secret and unknown places SECT 6. We shall now proceed to examine their Testimonies which Mr. Mede having most fully gathered and regularly of all our Opponents ranked throughout the 3 first Centuries We shall therefore follow his order and paticularly consider them as he represents them Altho we think it not necessary to express all his words his Works by many Editions being in most Scholars hands He begins with Eusebius's relating a passage out of Philo the Jew concerning the Essenes whose manner of Life and Worship Philo describes p. 376. c. and more fully in his following Book de vita contemplativa p. 893. c. of last Edition 1691. Which place in Eusebius l. 2. c. 17. Hist Bellarmine before him had alledged c. 4. de cultu sanctorum tho they both knew Eusebius's being generally censured for his accommodating it to the Christians For its plain to any that peruses Philo that he speaks of a Sect of Jews who were Monks and had each their proper place for Worship called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or common wherein they assembled for Worship every 7th day Whereas the Christians neither withdrew into Cells nor observed the 7th but the first day of the Week from Christ's Resurrection and the day of Pentecost which fell on the first and after as appears by Scripture And however confident Mede is of Eusebius being of his Opinion the contrary appears in 's Book de prepar Evangel l. 7. c. 6. l. 13. c. 13. and Philo's Book of the Cherubims shews he was not of Mede's mind His next Argument is from the Apostles Salutations of several Persons and the Church in his or their House Which he understands not of Families as he grants 't is commonly taken but the Congregation of Saints Whence he infers appropriate Places and their Dedication by their Owners to be Oratories for the Church in their several Cities And he cites Lucian's Philopatris for their Description To which we reply 1. That this proves no more than that Christians had meetings in private Houses which none denies which yet were often interrupted not only in Dioclesian's time when they were examined if they kept their meetings in their Houses as appears in the Acts of Martyrs but in Tertullian's time also 2. The Place in their Houses was but a caenaculum or Dining-Room as Mede grants which as it was incapable of salutation so of containing the whole Church in most of those Cities For who can think their Houses much less one room so large seeing Aquila was but a Tent-maker banished from Rome by Claudius after whose Death he returned before St. Paul's Epistle to the Church there wherein c. 16. v. 5 he salutes the Church in their House And not only at Rome but at Philippi or Ephesus also the Church that was in his House as 1 Cor. 16.19 And what the rest were that had Churches in their Houses we read not 3. The Church in their Houses is considered as distinct from themselves that were Masters and Owners and thus it is fairly applied to their Families But if to the whole Congregation the Persons whose Houses they were being Members thereof as well as any others it were very improper For so when St. Paul bids the Church of Rome Salute the Church in Aquila and Priscilla's House Rom. 16.5 his meaning is that the Romans should salute themselves So in wishing the Colossians 4.15 to salute the Church in Nymphas's House he desires them to salute themselves And so of the rest Now to say these Masters of Houses bestowed some part or place thereof to the Churches use needs no proof for none can lawfully enter into another man's House without his allowance but that they Dedicated them doth For if Dedication was then used of which hereafter yet surely not by a private person And whereas some singular thing must be meant saith Mede he concludes this of the whole Church in their House must be it Which is inconsequent And tho it be unreasonable to demand a reason of anothers actions which himself conceals yet something may be gathered for this from the Apostle As for Aquila and Priscilla from Rom. 16.3 4. and Acts 18.26 And as they were his helpers in Christ Jesus that is in reference to the promoting the Gospel so were Nymphas also and Philemon whom Paul calls his fellow labourer As for Lucian cited also by Baronius for proof of Houses separate Vedelius answers 1. That the Dialogue Philopatris is none of Lucian's sed alterius alicujus scioli and 2. That the place may as well be understood of a private as a publick House His 3d proof is from Tradition That Theophilus to whom St. Luke inscribes his Gospel and Acts converted his House into a Church derived from the Traditions of Clemens As Indens likewise mentioned 2 Tim. 4.21 a Roman Senator and Martyr from the Acta Pudentis This of Theophilus mentioned by Bellarmine c. 4. de cultu sanct from Clements Recognit l. 10. and Baronius A. D. 58. num 32. that had not found who he was but in Clements Recognitions Vedelius answers in Epist Ign. ad Magnes scriptis quae citat Baronius tantum deferendum est quantum citanti To the Writings cited by Baronius we are to give as much credit as to the Citer See the judgment of Papists concerning these Recognitions in Coci censura Scriptorum p. 20. of Pererius Sixtus Senensis Driedo yea Baronius himself A. D. 51. num 53. who saith That out of these Books as out of a dirty Sink are taken such prodigious Lies and mad Dotages as are not only to be reproved but extreamly rejected by the Learned c. His last Testimony is from Clemens's Epistola
curse Christ And if they confest were certainly condemned to Punishment which was of several kinds most usually Death Altho no other Crime was alledged or proved then their Christianity Their Christian Constancy termed inflexible obstinacy was judged sufficient ground for their Condemnation Of which the Primitive Fathers Apologies and Pliny's Epistle to Trajan inform us sufficiently And if they were brought to a Publick Tryal where less Tumultuousness and more legal Proceedings were used Yet how little Hopes they could have of escaping the utmost Severities of the Laws against them may be easily imagined seeing all that Tryed them as well as those that Accused them were their implacable Enemies For when an Accusation was brought in the Pretor in Rome and the Proconsul or Supream Governour in the Provinces having appointed the Time of Tryal then came and sate on the Tribunal and the Judges chosen by Lot more or fewer according to the Quality of the Cause sate on Benches And all the Favour the Accused had was to Object against those he thought good as we are wont in England of the Juries which the Accuser had likewise Liberty to do and the number of those rejected being again supplied by Lot the Cause was pleaded and the Judges gave Sentence by Capital Letters in Tables A. absolvebat absolved C. condemnabat condemned N. L. non liquet It s not manifest As our Juries pronounce Guilty or Not Guilty or Ignoramus I know the manner of the Grecians passing Sentence was otherwise by casting small stones into an Urne the White and whole signifying Absolution the Black and Holed Condemnation But this only by the by Having thus laid down so many Considerations to support our Assertion I submit them to the Judgment of all impartial Readers if they do not preponderate our Opponents Reasons for theirs and proceed in the last Place to produce several Testimonies for Defence of the Truth we have laid down and undertaken to prove SECT 11. We come now to alledge several Testimonies to make good our Position which we shall take from such Authentick Authors as are beyond all Exceptions and not such spurious ones as several that have been brought against us And for the more distinct proceeding herein we shall reduce them to these three General Heads 1. Such as speak of the Persecution of the Primitive Churches whereby any one may judge whether they were in a Condition suitable to the injoyment of certain appropriate Places call them Oratories Churches or as some of our Opponents falsly Temples for that Name came not in for them till the fourth Century if you please much less to build such publickly in the first Ages for their constant worshipping in 2. Such as declare that for two hundred Years at least they had no such as our Adversaries avouch 3. What kind of Places they then assembled in Which were the most Private they could find or contrive for their Security As to the first of these concerning the Persecution of the Primitive Church mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles we have spoken something already in the second Section and shall therefore proceed to that part of Nero's Reign that immediately Succeeds For St. Paul's coming to Rome about the fifth of that Emperour and Imprisonment there for the space of two Years concludes the Acts. There he found a flourishing Church as appears by c. 1. v. 8. of that admirable Epistle he had Written to them between two and three Years before Whether Founded by those Strangers of Rome that were at Jerusalem in the Day of Pentecost Acts 2.10 Or by those mentioned in the 16. Chapter of his Epistle or joyntly by them all I determine not But that it was not by Peter who had not as yet been there is apparent by the Series of History During his Imprisonment he wrote several of his excellent Epistles as that to the Galatians a People inhabiting Tanium pessinunt and Anoyra in Asia the Ephesians Philippians Colossians Philemon and as most think even those that were last as that to the Hebrews and those to Timothy Tho' Dr. Cave and others Judge the first to Timothy was written in 's return to Rome and the second in the Year following For both some Places of Scripture and many Ancient Fathers testifie that being released after two Years by Nero he went and Preached the Gospel in the East Italy France and Spain for about four Years and being apprehended and brought again to Rome was there Beheaded For Nero now inraged at the increase of the number of Christians and the decrease of the Worshippers of the Idol Gods made that bloody Decree Quisquis Christianum se confitetur tanquam generis humani convictus hostis sine ulteriore sui defensione capite Plectitor Whosoever confesseth himself to be a Christian shall as thereby a convicted Enemy of Mankind without any further Defence of himself loose his Head And Orosius l. 7. c. 7. Primus Nero Romae Christianos supplicits mortibus affecit ac per omnes Provincias pari Persecutione execruciari imperavit ipsumque nomen extirpari conatus c. Nero was the first at Rome that punished the Christians and put them to Death and commanded that through all the Provinces they should be tormented with like Persecution and endeavoured to extirpate the very Name of Christians Where Note that tho' all Authors generally make him the first Persecutor of the Christians it must either be understood as first of the Emperors or the first general Persecution after the Constitution of Churches amongst the Gentiles which is usually reckoned from our Saviours Ascension the Time of twenty five Years to Nero. For that both particular Persons and the Church at Jerusalem were persecuted before Nero's Time is manifest in the Acts of the Blessed Apostles There is a Passage in Tacitus Annals l. 15. c. 44. transcribed by Sulpicius Severus l. 2. Hist very remarkable for Congruity with Scripture and clearing some Places therein Which I shall therefore tho' somewhat large relate and improve Having set forth the burning of Rome attributed to Nero Abolendo rumori subdidit reos quaesitissimis paenis affecit quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Christianos appellabat Auctor nominis ejus Christus qui Tiberio Imperitante per Proconsulem Pontium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat Repressaque in Praesens exitiabilis Superstitio rursus erumpebat non modo per Judaeam originem ejus mali sed per urbem etiam quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque Igitur primo correpti qui fatebantur deinde judicio eorum multitudo ingens haud perinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt Et pereuntibus addita ludibria ut ferarum tergis contecti leniatu canum interirent aut crucibus affixi aut flamandi atque ubi defecisset dies in usum nocturni luminis uterentur Hortos sui ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat Nero to extinguish the Rumor of