setting down 〈◊〉 exemplarâ— among the Jewes I cannot yet discerne how I have â—…ndâ—… in it No man can doe two things at once and I was free to choose my owne Method as long as 〈◊〉 neither omitted nor put off as the Prefacer hath often done and so now againe in the last words of this Paragraph he doth to some other occasion that which was so necessary to be proved there 10. As for his summarie account of my discourse againe it is very much varied from that which those foure Sections yeild which is no more than this that as by Gods appointment to Moses there were many inferiour and superiourâ—ourt â—ourt many in the several Cities of Judea and one at Ierusalem to which the inferiour related as the Mother and prime and as in the Temple about the Levites there were heads of the Levites and heads of those heads so it would be â—…ctly parallel in the Apostles to institute Bishops in every City Church and Metropolitanes in the chiefe Cities which as it is no argument at all to prove the matter of tact that indeed it was so nor by me designed for such proposed onely as an exemplar or parallel not as a proofe and accordingly induced with ad hanc imaginem after this image Sect. 9. an as and so not a therefore and so there was no consequence in it capable of being denyed so againe such as it was it very much differed from that which is here set downe in Italick letters as if it were the English of my Sections which againe were never set downe in English till now that this advantage might be gain'd by it 11. This manner of dealing what it imports I shall not judge but leave the Prefacer to passe his owne animadversions on it Sect. 6. Of Antioch the Metropolis of Syria Acts 15. What the dependance of Inferiour Churches to their Metropolis The reference to Jerusalem made by the Church of Antioch The decrees delivered to other Churches Ierusalem the grand Metropolis Philos Testimony Ignatius Pastor Bishop of Syria The Epistle to the Antiochians A Testimony thence NuÌ„ 1. NOw then he proceeds to the examination of my proofs If it might have been foreseen that there were any such the last Paragraph might certainly have beene spared 2. But saith he the Doctor proceeds to prove that indeed the Apostles did dispose of the Churches in this frame and oâ—de according to the patterne of the civill government of the Roman Empire and that instituted of God among the Jewes The ninth section wherein he attempts the proof of this assertion is as followeth Ad hanc imaginem Apostoloâ— Ecclesias ubique disponendas curasse in omnbus plantationibus suâ—… minorum ab â—mâ—…ioribus civitatibus dependentiam subordinationem constituisse exemplis quidem plurimiâ— monstrari possit illud in Syriâ Cilicia patet Act. 6. 4 cùâ—â—nim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illud c. 15. 2. Hierosolymas referrâ—tur ab Ecclesià 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antiochiâ— Cap. 14 26 15. 3. deâ— etum ab Apostolis dâ—…ò ad eos mitteretur v. 22. in Epistolâ quâ decretum illud coâ—tinâ—batuâ— â—imul cum Antiochensibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comprehensos videmus v. 23. Deâ—… Epistolâ 〈◊〉 Antiochâ—… Eccleâ—iâ— redditâ v. 30. Paulâ—s tandem Sylas Syriam Ciliâ—iam peragrâ—…tes v. 41. c. 16. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 singulis civitatibus observanda tradiderunt ut quae ad hanc Antiochiae Metropolin ut â—â—tidem subordinaâ—â— Ecclesiae pertinerent ut ipsa Antiochia ad Hierosâ—lyâ—…as primariam tam latae ut ex Phâ—lone p aediximus Provinciae Metropolin pertinebat ad â—am ad â—…imenâ—am litem istam se conferebat This being all that the Doctor hath to produce from the Scripture to his purpose in hand I have transcribed it at large for this being removed all that follows will fall of its own accord 1. Then the dependance on and subordination of lesser cities to the greater is asserted â—s an Apostolical institution Now because I suppose the Doctor will not assert nor doth intend a civil dependance and subordination of Cities as such among themselves nor will a dependance as to counsell advice assistance and the like supplies which in their mutual communion the lesser Churches might receive from the greater and more eminent serve his turne but an Ecclesiastical dependance and subordination such as whereby many particular Churches with Inferiour Officers residing in them and with them depended on and were in subjâ—ction to some one person of a superiour order commonly residing in some eminent City and many of these Governours of a superiour order in the greater Cities were in subordination unto some one of high degree termed a Metropoliâ—aâ— and all this by Apostolicall institution is that which he aymeth aâ— which being a most gallant adventu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a waking generation we shall doubtless find him quitting himselfe â—â—ke a man in his undertaking 2. Then he tells you that the question abâ—ut Mosaicall Rites and necessity of their observation was reffered to Jerusalem by the single Church of Antioch But how does the Doctour make good this first step which yâ—… if he could would doe him no good aâ—…all It is true that Paul was now come to Antioch Ch. 14. 26. and aâ—… that he was brought on his way by the Chuâ—ch Chap. 15. 3. Buâ— yeâ— that he breth 〈…〉 who were tâ—ugâ—t the Doctrine contested about v. 〈◊〉 were only of the Church of Antioch when it is most certaine from the Epâ—…s of Paul to the Galatians Coloâ—â—ians Romanes and others that great disturbance was raised faâ—… and wide in all the Churches of the Gentiles about this conâ—…veâ—sy no â—ing is offered It seems indeed that their disputes grew to the greatest heights at Antioch whither brethren from other parts and Churches did also câ—me whilest Barnabas and Paul abode theâ—e but that thaâ— single Church â—eâ—erred the determining of that controversie to them at Ierusalem exclusively to others the Doctor proves not And it is most evident from the returne of the answers sent by the Apostles from Jerusalem ver 23. that the reference was from all the Churches of the Gentiles yea and all the scattered brethren perhaps as yet not brought into the Church order not onely at Antioch but also throughout Syâ—…a and Cilicia It is then granted what he next observes viz. that in the answer returned from Jerusalem with them at Antioch those in Syria and Cilicia are joyned the reason of it being manifest namely their trouble about the same controversie being no lesse than theirs at Antioch It is also granted that as Paul passed through the Cities that he delivered them the decrees to keep that were ordeined by the Apostles and Elders cap. 16. 4. and that not onely to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which he left cap. 15. 41. but also to those throughout Phrygia and the regioâ—s of Galâ—tia ver 6. What now follows out of all this What
but that Antioch by Apostolical institution was the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia Good Doctor doe not be angry but tell us how this may be proved Why doubtlesse it was so as Antioch belonged to the Metropolitan Church at Jerusalem as he â—old us out of Philo who was excellently acquainted with Apostolical institutions what Jerusalem was to the whole Church and Nation of the Jewes while the name of God was fixed there we know But what was the primitive estate of the Churches of Iesus Christ made of Iewes and Gentiles tied neither to City or Mountaine I must be pardoned if I cannot finde the Doctor making any tender of manifesting or declaring The reasons of referring this controversie unto a determination at Jerusalem the Holy Ghost acquaints us with Act. 15. 2. That we have no need of this Metropolitical â—igment to informe us in it And now if we will not not onely submit to Diocesan Bishops but also reverence the grave Metropolitans standing upon such clear Apostolicall institution It is fit that all the world should count us the arrantest Schismaticks that ever lived since Pope Boniface his time The summe then of this doubty argument for the Apostolical institution of Metropolitans that none might ever more dare to call Diocesans into question hereafter is this Paul who was converted about the third or fourth yeare of Caligula five or sixe yeares after the ascension of Christ having with great successe for three years preached the Gospell went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas upon the persecution raised against him at Damâ—scus Act. 9. 22. whence returning to the worke he went first to Tarsus Act. 9. 30. thence to Antioch where he abode one whole yeare Act. 11. 25. 26. and was then sent to Jerusalem with the collections for the Saints about the fourth yeare of Claudius ver 30. thence returning againe to Antioch he was sent out by the command of the Holy Ghost more eminently and peculiarly than formerly for the conversion of the Gâ—â—tileâ— Act. 13. 1 2 3 in this undertaking in the space of a yeare or two he preached and gathered Churches whereof expresse mention is made at Salamis Act. 13. 5. in the Isle of Paphos ver 6. at Perga in Pamphylia ver 13. at Antioch in Pisidia ver 14. aâ— Icoâ—ium cap. 14. 1. at Lyâ—tra and Derbe ver 6. and at Perga 26. in all these places gathering some believers to Christ whom before they returned to Antioch he visited all over the second time and setled Elders in the severall congregations Chap. 14 21 22 23. in this journey and travel for the propagation of the Gospell he seems in all places to have been followed almost at the heels by the prosessing Pharisees who imposed the necessity of the observation of Mosaical Ceremonies upon his new Converts for instantly upon his return to Antioch where during his absence probably they had much prevailed he falls into dispute with them Chap. 15. 1. and that he was not concer'd in this controversie onely upon the account of the Church of Antioch himselfe informes us Gal. 2. 4. affirming that the false brethren which caused those disputes and dissensions crept in to spye out his liberty in his preaching the Gospell among the Gentiles ver 2. that is in the places before mentioned throughout a great part of Asia For the appeasing of this difference and the establishing of the Soules of the Disciples which were grievously perplexed with the imposition of the Mosaical yoke It is determined that the case should be resolved by the Apostles Act. 15. 2. partly because of their authority in all the Churches wherein those who contended with Paul would be compelled to acquiesce and partly because those Judaiâ—ing teachers pretended the commission of the Apostles for the Doctrine they preached as is evident from the disclaimuâ—e made by them of any such commission or command ver 24. Upon Pauls returne from the assembly at Jerusalem wherein the great controversie about Iewish Ceremonies was stated and determined after he had in the first place delivered the decree and Apostolical salutation by Epistle to the Church at Antioch he goes with them also to the Churches in Syria and Cilicia â—xpressed in the letter by name as also to those in Pamphilia Pisiâ—ia Derbâ— Lystra Iconium c. Châ—p 16. 1 2 3 4. and all the Churches which he had gathered and planted in his â—ravels through Asia whereunto he was commanded by the Holy Ghost Act. 13. 1 2. Things being thus stated it necessarily followes that the Apostles had instituted Diocesan and Metropolitan Bishops For though the Churches were so small and thin and few in number that seaven years after this may we believe our Doctor the Apostles had not instituted or appointed any Elders or Presbyters in them viz. When Paul wrote his Epistle to the Philippians which was when he was Prisoner at Rome as appeares cap. 1. 7 13 14. cap. 4. 22. about the third yeare of Nâ—ro yet that he had fully built and setled the Hierarchicall fabrick contended for who once dares question Audacia Creditur à multis â—iducia But if this will not doe yet Ignatius hits the nayle on the head and is ready at hand to make good whatsoever the Doctor will have him say and his testimony takes up the sense of the two nâ—xt following Sections whereof thâ— fiâ—st is as follows Hinc dicti Igâ—atiani ratio constat in Epistolâ ad Romanos ubi ille Antiochia Epâ—…scopus se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pastâ—â—em Ecclâ—siae quae â—st in Syria appâ—lleâ—â—um ad Antiochiam sâ—il ut ad Meâ—…opolin suâ—m tota Syria pertineret Sic Author Epistolae ad Antioâ—heâ—os 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cam iâ—scribâ—â—s totam â—yriam â—jus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse concludâ—t But yet I feare the Doctor will finde he hath need of other weapons and other manner of Assistance to make good the cause he hath undertaken The words of Ignatius in that Epiâ—â—â—e to the Râ—mans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he recommenâ—s to them that particular Church in Syria wch by his imprisonment was deprived of its Pastor therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Arch-bishop Tityâ—e tu pâ—… c. But the Doctor is resolved to carâ—y his causâ— therefore being forsaken of all faire and honest meanes from whence he might hope for assistance or successâ— he tryes as Saul the wiâ—ch at Enâ—â—â— the counterfeit sâ—…ious title of a counterfeit Epistle to the Antiochians to see if thaâ— will speake any comforâ—able words for his relief or no. And to make sure worke he causes this Gentleman so to speake as if he intended to make us believe that Syria was in Antioch not Antiâ—ch in Syria as in some remote pâ—rts of â—he world they say they inquire whether London be in England or England in London What other sence can be made of the words as by the Doctor transcribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders for Bishops T it 1. 5 7. is by me acknowledged though not of Bishops for Presbyters which conceit is as largely elswhere confuted 8. And for the two large and expresse places here transcribed out of Clemens they had before been particularly produced by me and found perfectly to consent and accord with the notions which out of Scripture I had received and which by Epiphanius were vouched 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the profoundest Records And for Blondel's collection to the contrary I shall hope that to other men my answers will appear more than verbal and though I have here somewhat an unkind character given me of them viz. that they that approve them may one day think it needfull to distinguish between words and things yet I am not quite discouraged being competently assured that if he that said so had had any thing else to say any more than words to object against them he would not have been so reserved or sparing of his pains as to have denyed it place in his Animadversions 9. Lastly 'T is evident what he saith that I doe not deny Clement's owning but two sorts of Officers in a Church Bishops sometimes called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders and Deacons But it is as evident by my words what I mean by Clement's words that I mean as he doth viz. that at the Apostles first preaching and planting the Faith in Cities and Regions before any multitude of Believers came in they constituted in each City no more but a Bishop and one or more Deacons after the exemplar in Jerusalem where James the Lord's Brother soon after our Saviours ascension was constituted Bishop there and seven Deacons Act 6. to attend him but as yet no Presbyters of any middle order between them and him 10. This I have cleared concerning those first times out of Epiphanius and taken notice of the causes of it intimated both by Clemens and him 1. The paucity of fit men for that office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were not found among them men fit to be constituted Presbyters and 2. The no need of any more at that time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bishop in each City or Region served the turn onely he could not be without a Deacon which is the more manifest because the Bishops and Deacons which were then instituted were as in the former of these testimonies from Clemens appeares the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first fruits of their labours their first converts and the flock assigned them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that should afterwards believe 11. To this if the words of Lombard would agree as they will so far as here cited if only by Ecclesia Primitiva we understand the first age or infancie of the Church at the time of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first preaching of the Apostles then that testimony would by me be fully subscribed also meaning by the duos ordines the Bishops truly so called and by him styled Episcopos Presbyteros and Deacons concerning whom and whom onely 't is true praeceptum Apostoli nos habere that we have the precept of the Apostle viz. St. Paul in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus But the truth is Lombard's words belong to another matter a nicety that is gotten into their schools that Episcopacy and Presbyterie are not diversi ordines but diversi gradus not different orders but onely different degrees of the same one order of Sacerdotium or Priesthood upon a phansie that Sacerdo is so called from sacra do delivering or imparting holy things so faith he expresly Ideo autem etiam Presbyteri sacerdotes vocantur quia sacrum dant Presbyters are also called Priests because they give holy things In which matter as it is of little importance which way the question is decided as long as the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters is agreed on to be such as hath some Powers reserved to the one which are not common to the other so if Lombard's words should by any be thought farther extensible as founded in that opinion that first Presbyters ruled in common and that beside them there were none then but Deacons I must then think it as reasonable for me to be permitted to forsake Lombard in this as the Prefacer will deeme it for him to depart from him in other matters 12. For though it be here set down as an argument of the evidence and clear conviction and so of much more than of the bare truth of the position that Lombard himselfe confesseth it which I suppose is not an acknowledgement that all that Lombard saith is true but an insinuation that this of Bishops as maintained by me is for the matter a Popish Doctrine and yet is in this particular rejected and the contrary confest by Lombard an eminent Popish Doctor yet I must crave leave to interpose my exceptions to this way of arguing or concluding 13. 1. That neither I nor any true member of the Church of England owe or pay any observance to the bare dictates of Lombard or indeed farther than he hath reasons or proofs of Scripture or Antiquity to confirm them 14. 2. That in this point which must be waged by Testimonies there are none produced I shall adde producible by him out of Scripture to prove that ever there was a time when there were in the Church none but those two orders of Presbyters in our modern notion and Deacons I may without immoderate confidence assume that all that can be offer'd to this purpose are consider'd and answer'd in the Dissertations 15. 3. That the principal Testimonies of Antiquity on which in this matter some Papists build being some obscure words of St. Hierome the Presbyter which yet must be so understood as to be reconciled with his making the three orders to be of Apostolical tradition the result must be this that though they are mistaken in some circumstances yet they maintaine with us the more substantial truth that Bishops are instituted by the Apostles 16. So 't is elswhere made made evident of Panormitan who though he affirme that immediately after the death of Christ all the Presbyters in common ruled the Church yet postmâ—dum saith he ordinaverunt Apostoli ut â—rearentur Episcopi certa Sacramenta eis reservarent illa interdicendâ— simplicibus Presbyteris Within a while the Apostles ordained that Bishops should be created and reserved certain Sacraments to them Confirmation and Ordination and forbade them to be meddled with by simple Presbyters And accordingly it is also in the forecited place of Lombard in the beginning of that 24 Dist Presbyteri licet sint Sacerdotes tamen Pontificatus aepicem non habent sicut Episcopi quia ipsi nec chrismate frontem signant nec Paracletum dant quod solis deberi Episcopis lectio Actorum Apostolorum demonstrâ—t Presbyters though they be Priests yet have not that superior part of the Pontificate which the Bishops
Apostles and their successors not by the people or the whole congregation cannot finde entrance with him And secondly from the recurring of such kind of Rhetorick as this so soon I might very probably conclude that his whole confidence was placed in this one Topick which is ordered both to lead the van and also to bring up the reere to be the reserve as well as the forlorne hope And then upon this view of his reply I desire it may be indifferently considered whether my arguments were not as valid to confirme my answer as his mirth and repetitions and bare negations without any attempt of proof were of force to assert the contrary 20. Next he promises to attend to my arguments but cannot hold his countenance againe they must be styled learned arguments â—orsooth to have spoken as he thought had been more like a serious person that meant to attend to arguments And the first that he attends to is that Corinth was the Metropolis of Greece in a politicall sense and acceptation of the word where the Proconsull had his residence and this he grants but for my consectary from thence that Epistle inscribed to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be conceived sent to the Christians of all Aâ—haia all the strength thereof saith he from the insinuatian of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in question 21. But first certainly this cannot be that fallacy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the begging of the question It is the â—…erring of that which is there proved both before and after before both as that signifies long before and immediately before long before viz. Dissert 4. c. 5. the erection of Metropoles and Metropolitanes in the Church had been demonstrated Immediately before it had been mentioned as a praecognâ—scendum that Corinth was such an one which if granted it must follow that there was a Metropolitan Arch-bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependent So againe this was proved after by the consent betwixt this and Paul's Eâ—istles those were written to all the Christians of all Achaia and then why should not this be resolved to be so written also And how then can the question be here said to be begged by me If this of Corinth's being a Metropolis in the politicall sense were not sufficient to inferr this conclusion first that might then have been said the consequence denied and traill made what was or what could be farther said to prove it but that method was not here thought safe it was easier to say the strength of the consectary is nothing but a pure begging of the question which yet I never heard said of a conclusion inferred from praemisses and after farther undertaken to be proved I desire to consult Aristotle in his discourse of that fallacie and he shall finde it was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on my side a begging of the question but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on his a denying the conclusion 22. This for the forme of his reply Secondly then as to the matter of it I did and still doe thinke it a concluding argument which I there used and being briefly set downe 't will be more explicitely this An Epistle addrest to a Metropolitical see under the title of the Church adjacent to such a chiefe City or Metropolis is addrest to all the Cities and Churches that relate to that Metropolis But Corinth was such a City and this Epistle was so addrest to it That Corinth was such a Metropolis was apparent and is not denyed as to the politicall acceptation of it And if it were so also in the Ecclesiastick there is no farther difficulty And if my supposing and not farther proving of this in that place were the infirme part of the discourse and begging of the question I must answer that I had no reason to expect it should be esteemed so having long before on occasion of the Angels in the Revelation entre 〈◊〉 into a discourse of Metropolitical Cities and shewed that not onely in the political but Ecclesiastical acceptation there were such in the Apostles and so in Clement's time 23 This was there manifested in many instances 1. in Antioch the Metropolis of Syria and Cilicia and all the Churches of those regions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Antioch and dependent on that Secondly in Rome the Metropolis of the Roman Province or Vrbicarian region Thirdly in Alexandria the Metropolis of Egypt whereupon Marke is said by Eusâ—bius to have lonstituted Churches in the plural there all which under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the province of or belonging to Alexandria as here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were by Saint Mark committed to Anianus or Ananias and the Government administred by him all the rest of the Churches there planted by Mark relating to this as to the Metropolis Fourthly in Gortyna the prime Metropolis of Crete the Arch-Bishop whereof in the Epistle of Dionysius Bishop of Corinth Ann Ch 175. is styled Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church adjacent to i. e. the province of Gortyna and of all the rest in Crete Fifthly in Philippi the Metropolis of one Province of Macedonia Act. 16. 12. to which purpose it is that in the Epistle said to be written by Ignatius to them of Tarsus we finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Churches in the plural of the Philippians salute you Sixthly in the several Churches of Asia mentioned Rev. 1 each of them a Metropolis over some other â—ities and Ephesus the prime of all the Proconsular Asia And this forme or this state of things in the Church of God is there by three Canons of the three great Councels Nice Antioch Ephesus testified to be the ancient primitive Apostolical state 24. This being then done at large and thereby the Primitive constitution of Metropolitical Churches competently asserted it seemed to me sufficient but to re-mind the Reader that Corinth was one such Metropolis of Achaia or Greece and accordingly that upon that account in the Ecclesiastical as well as Political acceptation the Epistles of Paul inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Corinthians were meant to all the Churches of Achaia and not onely to that one of Corinth And what error I have committed herein I confesse I am not yet able to discerne or divine or what there is behinde that wants farther proof 25. The onely thing I can yet thinke of is that in this Praefacer's judgement I have not made it sufficiently appeare by that one evidence of Corinth's being a Metropolis where the Proconsul of Achaia kept his residence Act. 18 12 15. i. e. a Metropolis in the Political acceptation that it was also a Metropolis in the Ecclesiastical notitiae and then it may be fit perhaps farther to adde something to cleare that and put it out of question not onely in thesi that the Church generally thus corresponded with the state according
exprest my self to think but that this was the most commodious meaning to be affixt to Hierom's words ad Euagrium so as they might be reconcileable with the many other testimonies brought out of him which concluded it his opinion also that the three orders were of Apostolical institution But if I am now asked my sense expresly whether I thinke thus it was as Hierome I thinke conceived it I answer positively that I thinke Hierome was mistaken in that circumstance and that Clemens Romanus and the Records that Epiphanius citeth are much a more competent authority for the contrary that Bishops were first instituted whensoever any Apostle in his travaile planted a Church in any Citie and retein'd not the Government in his own hands Yet if by any Record it shall be made to appear that before any such Citie was left by the Apostle and so before any Bishop were instituted in it the Elders or as those may signifie the chief believers a name of age as well as of power were trusted by them for some short time of their absence as I mention'd it there sect 20. as a possible thing there will then be some ground of Hierom's mistake in that circumstance But this I confesse more than yet hath any way appear'd to me and therefore I am content to part with it as a phansie or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to help St. Hierome and not so much as a conjecture And so much for his Quaeries 22. As for his addition by way of Corollarie to his questions the answers to thâ— quâ—stions have already perfectly supersedeâ— it The three orders â—…ignatius have already appeared to be of Apostolical iâ—stituâ—… and the very frame of the first Churches though there was no need of the second of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the first plantation in every City And it will not be easie for any man which hath looked into antient writings to be perswaded the contrary It being the universal affirmation of all that speak of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignatius to St. Hierome and for many hundred years downward though there be some difference in some few circumstances St. Hierome thinking that Presbyters first ruled in common before the singular Bishop was brought in over them for the avoiding of Schismes that the three orders were all instituted in the Church by the Apostles appointment And if this be the sad mistake and prejudice from which he will shortly deliver us I may have leave to advise him the one method of attempting it that cheaper of setting Antiquitie aside in the delineation and not the more costly of professing to make his appeale to it as in this Preface he hath adventured to doe 23. One thing he here thinks farther necessarie for him to adde that the Scripture more frequently terms this second sort of men Elders and Presbyters than it doth Bishops wherein there be but these three misadventures 1. That this second sort of men are frequently mention'd in Scripture 2. That this second sort of men are sometimes call'd Bishops in Scripture 3. That they are frequently call'd Elders there No one of which he will ever be able to justifie Let him please to turn to the Vindication of the Dissert from the Exceptions of the London Ministers capâ— and if against what is there said or before in the Dissertations he thinke himselfe able to evince any one of these three propositions I shall willingly acknowledge my selfe his Disciple being also sure that unlesse both Bishops and Elders signifie nothing but Piesbyters in every place their signifying most frequently so is the giving the question the yielding the whole cause to the Prelatist 24. As for the taskes of the Bishops office and his performance of them I shall willingly grant him my suffrage let them discharge them and I beseeâ—h all who have any way hindred them at length to let and quietly permit them On condition he will doe this as cheerfully as I I shall never câ—ntend with him concerning the nature of theâ—â— task â—e it as he â—aith their attending their particular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they are appointed the Bishop of Oxford over that Flâ—ck or portion to which he was and is a pâ—inted and so all others in like manner be it their preaching and administring the holy Ordinances of the Gospel in and to their own flock and whatsoever else of duty and râ—tiâ—e officii belongs to a rightly â—onstituted Bishop And let all that have disturbed this course so duly setled in this Church and in all the Churches of Christ since the Apostles planting them discern their error and return to that peace and unity of the Church from whence they have so causelesly and unexcusably departed and let none be so uncharitable as to surmise that he which thus exhorts them hath any other design in doing it than that which alone he professeth to have their timely and now if ever seasonable Reformation CHAP. VI. Of Testimonies in Ignatius deemed to favour the Congregational way Sect. 1. The Prefacer's pretensions avoyded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His Hypothesis confutable from Ignatius The power of prejudice Of Popish Churches Chorepiscopi Metropoles Conformity of Ecclesiastick with Civil distributions The Ignatian Churches phansied by the Prefacer The Gnostick haeresie no deflowring of the purity of the Church The several branches of the phansied Model how well grounded in Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Catholick a National a Metropolitical a Diocesan Church in Ignatius Num. 1. BUT we are from Clemens once more brought down to Ignatius again and of the great prejudices and mistakes and unjust apprehensions which we Prelatists have had in reading and bringing testimonies from him we are now to be admonished in these words as followeth 2. To return then to our Ignatius even upon this consideration of the difference that is between the Epistles ascribed to him and the writings of one of the same time with him or not long before him as to their language and expression about Church-Order and Officers it is evident that there hath been ill favour'd tampering with them by them who thought to prevaile themselves of his authority for the asserting of that which never came into his mind As I intimated before I have not insisted on any of those things nor doe on them altogether with the like that may be added as a sufficient foundation for the total rejection of those Epistles which goe under the name of Ignatius There is in some of them a sweet and gracious spirit of Faith Love Holinesse Zeal for God becoming so excellent and holy a witnesse of Christ as he was evidently breathing and working Neither is there any need at all that for the defence of our Hypothesis concerning the non-institution of any Church-Officer whatsoever relating to more Churches in his office or any other Church than a single particular Congregation that we should so reject them For although many passages usually insisted on and carefully collected by D. H. for the proof of such
To the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Aâ—tioch now if thiâ— be so I shall confesse it is possible we may bâ— in more errors than one and that we much wâ—nt the learned Doctors assistance for oâ—r information the words themselves as they are used by the worshipâ—ull writer of that Epistle will scaâ—ce furnish us with this learned and raâ—e notion they are at length 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foâ— so he â—iâ—st opens his mouth with a lye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wâ—at is here more expressed than that thâ— lâ—tter passage is â—estâ—â—ctâ—ve of what went beâ—ore was spoken of its â—esidence iâ— Syâ—iâ— wiâ—â— reference to the name of Christian fiâ—st given to the Dâ—sciples in thâ—… place I know not and therefore it is most certaine that the Apostles in stâ—…uted Metrâ—politan Archbishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. The large transcripts of the Latine sections being the foundation of his whole insuing discourses it is a litle necessary they should be made intelligible to all to whom the confutation of them is addrest This I shall be content to doe foâ— him and the plaine English is this 4. According to the image of the civil government among the Jewes and the like againe in their Temple foremention'd the Apostles appeare to have disposed of Churches every where and in all their plantations to have constituted a subordination and dependance of the Churches in the inferâ—…r Cities to those in the Chief or Metropoles An example of thâ—â— we have in the story of the Acts concerning Syria and Ciâ—â—cia and the severall Cities thereof in relation to Aâ—tioch tâ—â— Metropolis For when the question Act. 15. 2. was referred and brought to Jerusalem from the Church peculiarly of Antioch â—ap 14. 26. and 15 3. and the decree of the Councel returned to them by whom the question was proposed i. e. to the Church of Antioch ver 22. yet in the Epistle in which that decree was contained we finde the brethren through Syria and Cilâ—cia i. e. all the Christians of that Province to be expressâ—d and joyned with those of Antioch ver 23. And after when that Decretal Epistle was delivered to the Church of Antiâ—ch ver 30. Paul and Sylas went over Syria and Cilicia ver 41 42. and as they went they delivered to every City the Decrees of the Councel c. 16. 4. which is an evidence that the Churches of those Cities related either immediately to Antioch or as Antioch it self did to Jerusalem and were in subordination to it as to the principal Metropolis of so wide a Provincâ— according to that of Philo that Ierusalem was in his time the Metropolis not of Judea alone but of many other regions in respect of the Colonies which is sent out of the Jewes that dwelt in theâ—… naming Syria Cilicia divers others 5. What is here said may be divided into two branches one concerning the Cities of Syria as relating to Antioch the other concerning Antioch it selfe and other Cities relating to Jerusalem The latter is mentioned incidentally the former is it which was proposed for the example to testifie the Apostles distributions and the plaine story of the Acts seemed to me to manifest it fully that the Churches of the inferior Cities of Syria c. related to Antioch as to the Metropolis And the matter also being farther cleare by all Ecclesiastick writers which make Antioch the Metropolis of Syria I gave a tast thereof out of Ignatius's Epistle to the Romanes who being the known Bishop of Antioch setled there by the Apostles calls himself Pastor as elsewhere Bishop of the Church in Syria And so the Antient writer of the Epistle to the Antiochians under Ignatius's name but none of those which we receive from Polycarps collection hath these words in his inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God which is at Antioch lying together in Syria making Syria to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province of which Antioch was the Metropolis 6. The same is after manifested of other chief Citâ—es Rome Alexandria Gortyna in Crete and the seven Churches of Asia and the plain words of the three Councels forementioned which devolve the whole businesse oâ— the rights of Metropoles to their first plantations And of all these there is not one word replyed save onely what concernes Rome and Alexandria To those two we shall come in the next Section But in this I am to consider what he hath to object to the severaâ— proofes concerning the Church of Antioch being as I conceive it manifest a Metropoliticall Church in the Apostles times 7. And first it seems I must define what I meane by this dependence and subordination of inferiour Churches to their Metropolis And I shall doe it in my owne words not in his for they are very obscure 1. I meane by inferiour Churches the severall Churches in the severall lesser Cities with the region adjoyning administred and governed each of them by the Bishop of each such lesser City-Church and his officers under him 2. By the Metropolis I meane the Church of the chiefe City of that Region or Province and such say I was the Church of Antioch in respect of Syria 3. By the subordination and dependence of the inferiour to the Metropolis I meane not any inferiority of order and dignity nor a dependence onely as to counsel and advice and mutual Communion but an inferiority of powâ—r in many things which the Apostles left not to the Bishops of the inferiour Cities but reserved to the Metropolitanes To this purpose the 34th Apostolick Canon is cleare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishops of every Nation must know their Primate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Zonaras and account him as the head of them and the powers that thus belong to him are knowne in the antient Councels by the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privileges and praeeminencieâ— which are proper to such and for which even immemorial and Apostolical tradition and custome is vouched by them Such as receiving accusations against and appeales from inferiour Bishops ordeining of them as Tituâ— is appointed to doe through Crete and as the sixth Canon of Nice saith that he that is made Bishop without the Metropolitan shall not be deemed a Bishop For this I againe referre the Reader to the Discourse of Schismâ— pag. 60. c. and there to that ninth Canon of the Councel of Anâ—ioch the same in effect with the 34th Apostolical â—anon forementioned where the Bishops of inferiour Cities are interdicted doing without the Metropolitan any thing which is there styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. as is there explain'd where in more Churches than one are concerned equally The Bishops power extending to the administration of affaires in his owne Diocesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever belongs to his Diocesse say both those Canons but things of a more forraigne nature which belong not to the particular Bishop ratione officii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
from evidencing the contrary I grant nay I make it matter of observation that when the Question was sent to Jerusalem by Antioch peculiarly the Decretal Answer of the Council is addrest not onely to Antioch but also to all the Christains of Syria and Cilicia and what reason can there be for that when the Question was not as farre as appeares proposed by them but onely this that those Regions depended on and related to that Church from which the Question was sent i. e. to Antioch which if it be but possible much more if by other evidence that out of Ignatius it be proved to be more than possible even perfectly true it must thence follow that the argument drawne from the Council's answer being addrest to Syria and Cilicia as well as to Antioch will no way conclude that the Question was referr'd by all those when the Text which is the onely ground of affirming ought in this matter mentions none but the Church of Antioch in the referring of the question and this other reason is so ready at hand for the mention of more in their giving answer to it 16. Fourthly Whereas he addes that the Apostles delivered these Decrees not onely to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which Paul left c. 15. 41. but also to those throughout Phrygia and the Regions of Galatia ver 6. 1. 't is no where said that they did so in Phrygia and the regions of Galatia for the mention of the delivering the Decrees being ver 4. no way belongs to Phrygia and Galatia which are not mention'd till ver 6. nor can be farther extended than to Dâ—rle and Lystra foremention'd ver 1. which we know were Cities of Lycaonia Act. 14 6. and neither of Phrygia nor Galatia Nay 2. it is not necessary that the delivering of the Decrees mentioned chap. 16. 4. should belong to all the Cities which had by that time been mention'd Sâ— Lakâ—'s words will be true that as they went through the Cities they delivered them the Decrees to keep though it should be affirmed that they delivered them onely to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which they are said to confirme cap. 15. 41. as here to establish in the Faith cap. 16. 5. But these two things having been said onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shew how farre the Prefacer is from speaking demonstratively when he is censuring others for want of that In the third place I shall acknowledge it very possible and most probable that St. Paul did deliver these Decrees of Jerusalem to other Churches beyond Syria and Cilicia where he came particularly to the Churches of Lycaonia Derbe and Lystra yea and to the Churches of Phrygia and Galatia which no way disturbs my pretensions because as Paul that planted those Churches might reasonably have care to uphold them in the truth so in the latitude of Philo's speech all these even Phrygia and Galatia also in respect of the Jewish inhabitants dispersed among them might in the secular account refer to Jerusalem as their grand Metropolis 17. For so saith Philo it was the Metropolis of most whither it had sent Colonies naming Aegypt Phoenice Syria and Coelosyria and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others farre distant Pamphylia Cilicia and a great deal of Asia as far as Bithynia and Pontus and Lycaonia c. are sure within this distance nearer to Jerusalem than some here named and then by the contemperation we speak of of the Ecclesiastick to the Civil distributions why should not they all relate to the Metropolitical Church at Jerusalem also 18. And St. Paul's delivering them these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees to keep and doing it not upon his own authority as his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his private Apostolical judgement but as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judged and conciliarly determined by the Council at Jerusalem this sure is an evidence that St. Paul that planted these Churches set them in subordination to and dependance on the grand Metropolis of those parts that at Jerusalem Which is the thing I was to prove that these distributions were made by the Apostles that planted Christianity 19. But then it must still be remembred that the Cities of Lycaonia and Phrygia and Galatia were not named in the Councils Epistle but onely Syria and Cilicia and accordingly this of c. 16. 4. is no proof I acknowledge that these Churches did belong and were subordinate to Antioch That was to be proved not by this passage c. 16. 4. thus understood but from the inscription of the response of the Council to the brethren of Antioch and Syria and Cilicia as it was before explained and cleared and farther from Ignatius his styling himself Pastor of Syria who we know was no otherwise so than as he was Bishop of Antioch the Metropolis of Syria And so still I hope the conclusion now regularly follows out of these premisses there shortly set down but here more largely evidenced to inferre that Antioch was by Apostolical institution the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia And so sure I have no temptation to be angry nor ever discovered any part of that passion to the Prefacer and so needed not have been besought so affectionately not to fall into it at this time when there is no rub in my way no difficulty to oppose or provoke the least degree of it in the most ragefull 20. What follows by way of scoffe at the citation from Philo as if I took him for a person well acquainted with Apostolical Institutions might also as now appeares very well have been spared I had brought in that Testimony seasonably enough sect 6. when I was speaking of the exemplar among the Jews and by it shewed that Jerusalem was the Metropolis to all those regions in the Iewish account and now all that I concluded in reference to that citation was that Antioch was in the number and then the appeale which Antioch made to the Council at Ierusalem and not the Testimony of Philo was the argument on which I inferr'd the Conclusion that the Church of Antioch was now subordinate to the Church or Council at Ierusalem which if it were must be by the Apostles institution as all Syria in Philo was to the Sâ—nhedrim at Ierusalem 21. To which I shall now farther adde If it were not so why did the Church send up Paul and Barnabas thither Why did not Paul who planted Christianity there finally determine the controversie Why did the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Elderâ— whosoever they were the Bishops of Iudaea I suppose but it will be much more strange if they were but the Presbyters of Ierusalem joyne with the Apostles in making Decrees whereby those of Antioch and all through Syria should be bound if all this while the Church of Ierusalem were not their Metropolis and so had no manner of power over them 22. As to that which he saith that the Holy Ghost Acts 15. 2. acquaints us with the reasons of referring
that of Calvin and of the Centuriators there are mentioned some exceptions to these Epistles to which our present Copy may still seem lyable I will not omit to make him my return though ex abundanti and extra orbitam to those also 8. And first for that of Calvin that they which attribute any thing to Ignatius's authority must first prove that the Apostles made any law for observing Lent It is easily answer'd without entring into any dispute concerning the antiquity of that Fast in the Church of Christ by observing but these two things that the place ordinarily produced to that purpose being out of the Epistle to the Philippians in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dishonour not the Feasts despise not the quadragessimal Fast for it contains an imitation of Christs conversation 1. This Epistle is none of the seven certainly genuine which we have from Polycarp's collection or which we adhere to in our account or plea for Ignatius 2. That the Author of that Epistle whosoever he was doth not make Lent to stand by any Law or Institution of the Apostles but onely as an act of imitation of Christ who fasted forty daieâ— in the wilderness 9. Nay when the Book of Constitutions which is thought to bear such Analogy with the Epistles affixt to Ignatius speaks of the same matter and addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Legislation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it contains a commemoration of Christs conversation and Law-giving I doe not believe that this at all referres to any command or institution of Christ or his Apostles in this matter of observing of Lent but that as Christs fasting in the Wildernesâ—… Mat. 4. was a preparative to his entring on his Prophetick office Mat. 5. where in that divine Sermon on the Mount he gave Evangelicall laws to his Disciples the Holy Ghost having formerly descended on him consecrated him to it Mat. 3. so the Quadrigessimal Fast was observed in the Church to commemorate both these the Laws that he gave as wel as the Fast that he prepared for them And so no part of the suggestion from Mr. Calvin holds against our pretensions the Epistle is not by us reckoned as Ignat Epist nor the Institution of Lent said by that supposititious Epist to be instituted by the Apostles and so that is sufficient security to us from that first exception 10. Next for those exceptions of the Centuriators I shall take them in order as they lye The first is that almost in all the Epistles the occasion of writing them is â—mitted nor can any man divine why he should send Letters to this or that Church rather than any other 11. To this I answer that to my understanding the occasions of every of his Epistles are as evidently legible and discernible in them as in most of the Apostles Epistles they are In them they are not set down by way of syllabus at the beginning nor in any more visible grosse way of transition but are closely coucht in the manner that the Authors of them thought fittest and are discernible to a carefull observant reader and so are they here also 12. The first that to the Church of Smâ—rna is to confirme them in the Faith against the infusions of the Gâ—osticks which by this time as appears by St. John's first Epistle oppugned the reality of Christ's birth and death and resurrection to whom he therefore confronteth the true doctrine vindicated in every branch and vehemently inculcates the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 truly and in the flesh against the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bare appearing to suffer c. which faith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some unbelievers or unfaithfull Apostate Christians evidently the Gnostiâ—k haereticks affirmed and taught 13. And here by the way appears more fully the injustice of that suspition which at the beginning of his view of Antiquitie the Author of this Preface was willing to infuse into the Reader as if haeretical corrupt doctrine would be found to have crept into the writings of the first times that remain to us whereas the plain truth is that those heresies which so earlâ— were gotten into the Church and began 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to oppose the truth were by those first writers as punctually confuted as reality and in the flesh can be thought to be opposed to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bare appearance 14. To the same head of discourse it pertains which so lâ—ws that these haereticks reject the Eucharist upon the same grounds not believing the reality of Christs death And that the one compendious way of arming the Orthodox against all their poysonous infusions was to adhere to their Bishop and Officers of the Church under him and not to doe any thing in Ecclesiastical matters without his direction or commission It being certain that these Haereticks attempted to move the setled Faith and practises and that the Governours of the Church were by the Apostles instituted to preserve unity and true doctrine and had their rules and grounds of faith deposited with and committed to them 15. To this he addes things very particular both to him and to that Church of Smyrna that he took notice of their prayers for the Church of Syria that he was now hastening to his Martyrdome being at the writing hereof at Troas on his journey to Rome that in his coming from Antioch the whole tempest and rage of the persecutors having fallen upon him the Churches of Syria had now obtain'd their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a peaceable enjoyment of the Christian Assemblies 16. A thing particularly taken notice of in Histories that whilst Trajan now stayed at Antioch to consult of his affairs and war with the Parthians upon the Letter of Tiberianus President of the prime Nation of Palestine Trajan gave order to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he should leave off killing the Christians so â—aith Johannes Antiochenus adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he gave the same order to all the rest of the Governours and concluding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Christians had some truce from their persecutions So Suidas in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trajan gave the Christians some truce cessation of punishment dating it from the time of Tiberiana's Letter which was certainly at this time of Trajans being at Antioch and Ignatius on his journey toward Rome though being already condemned the mercy extended not to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—aith he from hence forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trajan forbad all under him to punish the Christians So Zonaras in the story of that time takes notice of this cessation produced by the suffering of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Emperour hearing of the multitude of Chrstians that had been butchered gave order for more mercy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so the persecution became more moderate which is farther evident by Trajan's Rescript to Pliny and Tertullian's
but Bishops Presbyters and Deacons as â—hree distincct Orders in the Church from the Scripture we know not Neither did Clemenâ— in his Epistle to the Corimbâ—ans know any more than we doe which a few instances will manifest Saith he speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops and Deacons as in the Church at Philippi this man knows but the 〈◊〉 Order he is utterly unacquainted withall And that the difference of this mans expressions concerning Church Rulers from those in the Epistle under consideration may the better appear and his asserting of Bishops and Presbyters to be one and the same may the more clearly be evidenced I shall transcribe one other passage from him whose length I hope wiâ—l be â—xcused from the usefulnesse of it to the purpose in hand Page 57 58. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so it seems was the manner of the Church in his daies that their Officers were appointed by the consent of the whole Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Bishops of whom he was speaking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And suâ—dâ—y other discoveries are there in that Epistle of the like nature It is not my design nor purpose to insist upon the parity of Bishops and Presbyters or rather the Identity of the Office denoted by sundry appâ—llations from these and the like places This work is done to the full by Blondellus that out labour in this kind were that the purpose in hand is prevented He that thinks the arguments of that Learned man to this purpose are indeed answered throughly and removed by D. H. in his fourth Dissertation where he proposes them to consideration may one day think it needfull to be able to distinguish between words and things That Clemens owns in a Church but two sorts of Officers the first whereof he calls sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters the other Deacons the Doctor himself doth not deny That in the judgement of Clemens no more were instituted in the Church is no lesse evident And this carries the conviction of its truth so clearly with it that Lombard himself confesses Hos solos ministrorum duos ordines Ecclesiam primitivam habuisse de â—is solis praeceptum Apostoli nos habere lib. 4. sent D. 24. 2. To supersede a conclusion not magisterially dictated that were the confidence quarreld at in me but regularly inferr'd from premises there can be no more necessary than to discover the falsenesse of the premises or their weaknesse and incompetency to induce that conclusion And this being already done particularly and at large 't is impertinent to give any further answer to or account of this conclusion I shall onely lightly pass through the several steps of it and acknowledge of his conclusion as much as either here or from the premises I find any reason to acknowledge and briefly touch at the reasons before more largely rendred why other parts of it may not be consented to 3. And 1. what he saith of these Epistles that they seem like the children of the strange wives speaking part the language of Ashdod and part the language of the Jews hath perfect truth in it being applyed to the former corrupt Editions of Ignatius but none at all nor any appearance of any as it is applyed to that volume by which we desired to be judged in the businesse of Episcopacy 4. Secondly what is by these Epistles as they are in our more emendate Copies affirmed of Bishops is very agreeable to what is by the Scripture by Clemens by Polycarpe said of the same subject all which under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like describe their office and require subjection and obedience to be payd to them 5. Thirdly for the three orders particularly for the second of those three which antiently and still but either rarely or not at all in the Scripture are called Presbyters but may most distinctly be styled Presbyteri secundarii or partiarii Elders of a second rank admitted to the exercise of some parts of the Episcopal office but not to all and so distinguisht from Bishops or Elders of the first rank These the Prefacer cannot but know that I doe not undertake to find either in the Scripture or in Clement's or in Polycarp's Epistle and that though I have reasons to assure me that when the namber of believers increased so far that there was both need of them and competent store of fit persons to undergoe that office then such Presbyters were ordained to bear part of the burthen with the Bishop as the seventy Elders with Moses and I have compent reasons to perswade me that this was done in some places before the departure or decease of all the quire of Apostles particularly that St. John instituted such in Asia when he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet this was not so universally done thus early as that either the Writers of the Scripture could or after them Clement at Rome should be required to make mention of it And for Polycarpe though I suppose and doubt not but he lived to see such in the Church yet there was no necessity that in that one Epistle of his he should mention them or use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders of any others but Bishops it being certain that after the secundarie Presbyters were instituted the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 still continued common to Bishops and was not presently appropriated to Presbyters as is elswhere made clear out of Iraeneus Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian Dissert 4. c. 22. and in the vindication of them from the exceptions of the London Ministers 6. It remains therefore that the Epistles of Ignatius are the best records of Primitive Antiquity on which to build this second Order of Secundarie or Partiarie Presbyters which if they were instituted personally by St. John or if they were designed by the other Apostles and not ordained in their times onely because thus early 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Epiphanius's style there was no need of them their Institution will still be Apostolical though not mentioned in the Apostles writings as in the Answer to the London Assemblers hath been shewn also 7. Fourthly concerning the title of Pastorsâ—nd â—nd Doctors or Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scripture he cannot but know the account given by me viz. that by all and each of those Bishops are to be understood as hath been shewed Dissert 4 c. 14 15. and nothing being here said to disprove it 't is but petitio principii to suppose the contrary So also of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers I have spoken at large Dissert 4. c. 13. The like of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they have none but Deacons joyn'd with them Phil. 1. 1. and 1 Tim. 3. All which are perfectly agreeable to my hypothesis that there are no single Presbyters or middle order of Officers betwixt Bishops and Deacons that I discern mention'd in Scripture So the use
have because they neither Confirm nor Ordain which that it belongs to the Bishop onely the reading of the acts of the Apostles demonstrates Where whatever his opinion was concerning that nicety of distinction betwixt Degree and Order it is evident that hee gives the superiority of degree to Bishops and reserves to them those two Powers and foundeth this in the Apostles times and practise 17. 4. That though this may seem at the first but a slight difference in these men from that which the Antients have more generally taught viz. that the Apostles first instituted Bishops and Deacons not simple Presbyters and Deacons as beside the plain words of Clemens and St. Paul the sense whereof may possibly be controverted the testimonie of Epiphanius and of the profoundest monuments of History irrefragably inforceth yet their interests for the magnifying of the Papacie upon the score of succession to St. Peter doe clearly discover themselves in this way of decision and so make Papists very incompetent witnesses in this matter 18. For upon this conceit that there was a time in the first plantation of the Gospel when the power of Bishops and Priests lay confused though afterward separated by the Apostles themselves the conclusion aimed at and when occasion requires deduced by them is evident that this later though Apostolical institution may be altered by the Poâ—e out of the supereminence of his power as he is the Vicar of CHRIST though they pretend not that he may lawfully attempt to overthrow the primarie and fundamental Sanction And so though Priesthood may not be taken out of the Church yet the tenure by which Bishops hold is not so firm but must stand wholly at the pleasure of the Pope 19. The defence of which conclusion being none of the Interests of the Cause which I assert I shall no farther be obliged to hearken to the premises as they are here but intimated by Lombard and frequently repeated and built upon by sundry of that party than they shall be able regularly to prove them Which being not here attempted but only the specious but fallacious argument proposed from the confession of Lombard himself whose confessions are no obligations to all other men I have no more occasion to inlarge on this particular 20. Which if it were seasonable I might easily doe in observing other particulars among the Popish Writers wherein they shew themselves far from passionate espousers of Episcopacy The Pope forsooth must be the fountain of all Ecclesiastical authority and all other Rivulets must runne in a weake streame and then also derive all they have from him And so much on occasion of this testimony from Lombard and much more than was necessary to have said if I had lookt no farther than his Testimony CHAP. IIII. Concerning the power of the People in appointing Bishops and Deacons and other Ecclesiastical affairs Sect. 1. Clement's words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 considered and vindicated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first Bishops designed particularly by God When this way of designation ceased Num. 1. UPon occasion of the former citation of some words out of Clemens the displeasure is for a while removed from Ignatius and another matter of discourse is sprung concerning the power of the people in appointing Bishops and Deacons to their office in those dayes To this we shall now attend as it follows in these words 2. It seemes moreover that those Bishops and Deacons in those dayes as was observed were appointed to the office by anâ— with the consent of the people or whole body of the Church no less doe those words import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Doctor indeed â—enders those words apâ—lâ—udenâ—â— aut congratulenâ—e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and addes â—atis pro imperio uiâ—â—l â—ic dea ceptationâ— otius Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 qâ—â—â—p sâ—…os Diaconos ab Apostolis â—pâ—stoliâ—is viâ—… hoc lâ—co concludit Bâ—ondâ—â—lus quâ—si qui ex Deâ—jâ—ssu appâ—obatione constâ—…nâ—ur populi etiam acceptatione indigere putandi essent Dissent 4. 〈◊〉 7 8 〈◊〉 And who dares take that confidence upon him as to affirm any moâ—e whâ—â—â—g 〈◊〉 a Doctor hath denved Though the scope of the place the nature of the thing and first most common sense of the word here useâ— being willingly to consent as it is also used in the Scripture for the most part Acts 〈◊〉 1. 1 Cor. 7. 12. to a thing to be done or to the doing of it yet here it must bee taken to applaud or congratulate or what else our Doctor pleases because he will have it so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also must be viri Apostolici mâ—n with Apostolical power when they are only the choice men of the Church where such a Constitution of Officeâ—s is had that are intended because it is ouâ— Doctors purpose to have the words so rendred Ex jussu Dei approbatione is added as though any particular command or approbation of God were intimated for the constitution of the Bishops and Deacons mention'd beyond the institution of the Lord Jesus Christ that Elders should be ordained in every Church because this would seem to be exclusive wholly of the consent of the people as any way needfull or required to their Constitution which yet as it is practically false no such thing being mention'd by Clemens who recounteth the way and means whereby Officers were continued in the Church even after the decease of the Apostles and those first ordained by them to that holy employment so also it is argumentatively weak and unconcluding God appointed designed Saul to be King approving of his so being and yet he would have the people come together to choose him So also was it in the case of David Though the Apostles in the name and the authority of God appointed the Deacons of the Church at Jerusalem yet they would have the whole Church look out among themselves the men to be appointed And that the ordaining of the Elders was with the peoples Election Acts 14. 23. It will ere long be manifested that neither our Doctor nor any of his Associates have as yet disproved This poor thing the people being the peculiar people of Christ the heritage of God and holy Temple unto him c. will one day be found to be another manner of thing than many of our great Doctors have supposed But he informs us cap 4 sect 3. from that testimony which we cited before that the Apostles in the appointment of Bishops and Deacons for so the words expresly are are sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith he Revelationibus edoâ—toâ— esse quibus demùm baec dignitas commâ—â—icanda esset that is that they appointed those whom God revealed to them in an extraordinary manner to be so ordained and this is the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And why â—oâ—â—he holy Ghost orders concerning the appointment of Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 3. 10. That those who are to be taken into office and power in the Church had
〈◊〉 nutu sed à multitudinis pâ—aeceptis pâ—pendisse But let not our Doctor bee angry nor câ—y out out so fast of Prodigies a little time will manifest that many things may not be prodigious which yet are contrary to sundry of his exceptions and apprehensions I cannot but acknowledge him to be provoked but withall I must say that I have found very commonly that reasons usher'd in by such loud clamours have in examination proved to have in examination proved to have stood in need of some such noises as might fright men from the consideration of them What is in the next Sections set up to shield the children of Episcopacy from being affrighted with this prodigy may perhaps be of more efficacy thereunto than the exclamations before mention'd He therefore proceeds Sect. 5â— Certè saith he si sâ—râ—òreâ— egerit D Blondellus de Presbyteris suis non de Episcopis nostriâ— actum plaâ—e triumphatum crit nec enim ab universo aliquâ— Presbyterorum Collegâ—o quod ille tam afflâ—ctim ardet sed à multitudinis solius arbitâ—io tum contendentes de Episcopo tum siideles omneâ— Corinthio pepeâ—disse aequè concludendum crit If any man in the world hath manifested more desperate affection towards Preâ—bytery than this Doctor hath doâ—… toward Episcopacy for my paâ—â— solus habeto But though neither Clemens nor Blondellus speak any one word about the ordering of things multitudinis solius arbitrio yet here is that said by them both as is sufficiently destructive not onely to the Episcopacie the Doctor contends for as a thing wholly inconsistent with the power and liberty â—ere granted the people but of any such Presbytery also as shall undertake the ordering and disposing of things in the Church of God without the consent and concâ—… suâ—frage of the people Such a Presbytery it seems Blâ—ndellus does not defend But yet neither the Doctor 's ouâ— cry as at a prodigy nor this retortion upon Presbytery is any answer to the testimony of Clemens nor indâ—ed is there the â—ast possible reflection upon an orderly Gospel Presbytery in any Church and over it by what Clemens here professeth to be the power of the people all appearance of any things is from the terme solius â—…ysted into the Discourse of Blondellus by the Doctor in his taâ—ing or it up to retort Clemens in the very next words secures us from any thought that all things depend à multitudinis solius arbitrio His very next words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Doctors and Masters having stuâ—t their imaginations with the shape and lineaments of that hierarchical fabâ—ick which the craft policy subâ—â—ty avarice pride ambition of many ages succesâ—ively had formed and â—â—amed according to the pattern they saw in the Mount of the World and the governments therein upon the first hearing of a Church a sâ—â—ck of Christ walking in orderly subjection to their own Elders concuâ—â—ing with them and consenting to them in their rule and government instantly as mâ—n amazed cry out a prodâ—gâ— It is not imaginable into what ridiculous contemptible miscarriages pride prejudice and selâ—ulnesse doe oftentimes betray men otherwise of good abiliâ—iâ—s in their waies and commendable industry But Section the sixth the Doctor comes closer and gives his reason why this testimony of Clemens is not of any efficacy to the purpose in hand saith he At quâ—â— sodâ—s à fidelibus de Episcopatu ut aâ—s â—â—ntra ipsos ab Apostolis constâ—â—atos contendâ—…bus quis à populo contraprincipâ—â—â— suum â—umultus tiente quâ—s verbis ad retundendum seditionem ad plebeâ— factis argumenta ad Authoritatem populo adjudâ—â—andum principi derogandum duci posse â—xistiSavitâ— Though many words follow in the next Section yet this is all of answer that is given to this signal testimony of Clement's I know the Doctor for the most part meeâ—s not onely with favourable Readers but also partial Admirers or else certainly his exclamation would scarce pass for an invincible argument nor such Rhetorical diversions as this be esteemed solid Answers There is not by Blondellus any argument taken from the faithfuls tumultuating against the Bishops that of appointed by the Apostles which is thâ—ust in taken for the persons of those Bishops is against the expresse restimony of Clemens in this Epistle nor from the peoples seâ—…sly rebelling against their Prince nor from any word sopken to the people to represse their sedition neither was any thing of this nature urged in the least by Blondellus nor is there any colour given to such a collection from any thing in the words cited from the Epistle or the Context of them It is the advice of the Church of Rome to the persons whether already in office or aspiring thereunto about whom the contention and division was in the Church of Corinth that is insisted on It is not the words nor plea of them who were in disorder there is noâ— any reprehension given to the body of the Church the multitude or people who are supposed to tumultuate to quiet them but a direction given as was said by the Church of Rome to the persons that occasioned the difference how to behave themselves so that a timely issue might be put to the division of the Church To this end are they advised to observe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Orders Precepts Decrees or Appointments of the multitude as from Act. 15. the body of the Church is called It is not that they should yield to their tumultuating but to yield obedience to their orderly precepts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are by him approved and had it not been lawfull for them with the Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in affairs of the Church Clemens writing this Epistle to the whole Church could not possibly have led them into a greater snare It is a sad thing to consider the pitifull entanglements and snares that some men run into who will undertake to make good what they have once engaged for let what will come against them 3. In this Section again the usage is as formerly very extraordinary First I am put under Discipline to teach me that which was antiently accounted a very high pitch propè res una but these times may be able to advance one to which is but of ordinary parts the Nil admirari to see and hear the most portentous things and to admire at nothing I must not be permitted to say of any though never so strange unreasonable a collection of Blondel's that it is instar prodigii but I am censured as angry and guilty of loud clamours out-cries exclamations noises and these designed to fright men from consideration of my reasons as after on as little cause of desperate affection to Episcopacy of forgerie or foysting in the word solius into Blondel ' s discourse and if this be not enough for my humiliation there is a reserve of ridiculous contemptible miscarriages such as it is not imaginable men should be betray'd to
acknowledges contenders was sure to be no good argument when they against whom they are by him supposed to contend being the Bishops of Corinth those Bishops were say I constituted by the Apostles This was but a light circumstance yet that which I thought would be some farther prejudice to his argument when the words from whence he inferr'd his conclusion were supposed to be spoken by the contenders those again contenders against Bishops and those Bishops constituted by the very Apostles 20. And then for Clement 't is most certain whatsoever the Prefacer is pleased to affirm to the contrary that he expresly saith this of these Bishops whom they contended against and ejected that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituted by the Apostles or after by other esteemed men some immediately both designed and ordain'd to the Office by the Apostles personally others designed and nominated or put upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the list of succession by the Apostles and as places were vacant actually ordaiâ—'d by the imposition of the hands of those esteemed or eminent men the successors of the Apostles such as were also themselves call'd Apostolical men by Blondel and by the antients Apostoli secundarii secundarie Apostles 21. This is most evident again by what was cleared in the last Section And so the Parenthesis had as little of Justice in it as the main period and might have been spared also if the Prefacer had so pleased 22. What follows after in this place It is the advice of the Church of Rome is for the most part true and I have suggested nothing against it nor am now a whit concerned in the contents of it and therefore though there be some infirme parts in it also and many more in the former words yet having vindicated my selfe I shall not trouble the Reader to pursue this matter any farther what he hath mistaken he may if he please rectifie by what hath been said and particularly informe himselfe of his doubts that they to whom the advise is given and on occasion of whom the sedition was raised are not they that were in danger of being derected from their office as at the beginning of this Section he thought it possible nâ—r consequently they as toward the end he saith which were already in office but they for whom the people contended to have them advanced to the Bishops seats they that were the occasion and the subject matter of the contention and as we may conclude from some passages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ring-leadâ—râ— of the sedition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that laid the foundation of it 23. And that bring me to the second strange part of Blondels collection Communi Presbyteros consilio Ecclesiam rexisse eosdem nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attentâsse sed multitudinis dicto obedientes fuisse that the Presbyters by Common Councel ruled the Church and that the same Presbyters in the text of Clemens were obedient to the command or saying of the multitude But that certainly could not be hence concluded the persons into whose mouth Clemens put these words being not Presbyters nor Bishops neither but those whom the people would have Bishops and to that end raised this sedition and cast the true Bishops out of the Church And so they of whom this sage observation is made that they did nothing imperiously but depended on the commands of the multitude are but these unruly fellow-believers not really vested with any power in the Church onely one part of a seditious multitude exhorted by him to indeavour to pacifie another and to indeavour to rescue the legall Bishops from suffering in this tempest yea though the same popular tumult would have put them into their places others being resolved to shake the whole Church rather than they would misse of their designe of raising those that they thought fit to admire 24. And for any such words used or by Clemens advised to be used betwixt one part of this multitude and the other I still desire it may be considered whether it be possible that an argument can be regularly drawn from them on which to found the right or power of the people in ordering Ecclesiastical affaires when besides all that hath formerly been said 't is certaine the speech was made to that part of the people which were in open rebellion against their superiors and was onely a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or mollifying plaster applyed to the part which was at that present most inflamed embrocation to allay the paroxysme 25. I might now joyne issue with the Prefacer and examine the truth of his positive affirmation that in this saying of Clemens there is that laid which is sufficiently destructive to the Episcopacie that I contend for and also of any such Presbyterie as shall undertake the disposing of things in the Church of God without the consent concurrent suffrage of the people or that the Episcopacie I contend for is wholly inconsistent with the power and liberty here granted to the people But there is not one syllable here produced for the defence of this affirmation And I thinke it competently appears by this time how farre that bare text of Clement is from founding it and therefore I have now nothing more to contend with my contrary affirmation that no such thing is yet concluded will certainly be true and fit to be confronted to and balanced with it and if I should farther improve it into this that nothing is conclusible I thinke having already seen the utmost that two such skilfull artificers Blondel and the Prefacer have beene able to produce toward it it would not be thought any grand insolence 26. One thing onely I cannot omit that when he speaks of the power of the people he calls it their concurrent suffrage once and after joynes them with the Presbyters in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commanding or ordeining in the affaires of the Church But I shall demand can any thing like that be drawn out of the place in Clement Is it not certaine that the multitude whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordinances he there speaks of had cast out their Bishops or Elders out of the Church and those that are to speak to them and joyne with them are not Presbyters but those whom they would have exalted to that office and raised their tumult about it And how then can the Presbyters in that place be supposed to joyne with the people in this ordeining 27. I shall not make my observations from hence but leave the Prefacer to examine himselfe with what justice he hath managed his replies to me or reproacht my answers to D. Blondel And so indeed as he saith It is a sad thing to consider the pittifull intanglements and snares c. And so much for this Section also The imployment is so dry to me and the profit to the Reader so thin from such kinde of debates that I should be glad it were the last of them
CHAP. V. Of the plurality of Elders in Clements Epistle Sect. 1. The difference betwixt Ignatius and Clement in the enumeration of Officers in the Church Clements Epistle to the Churches of Achaia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pauls Epistles to those Metropolitical Churches in the Apostles times Answer to a charge concerning Grotius Num. 1. IN the next place this digression concerning the power of the people being absolved I am called back againe to Ignatius and in him to that of his asserting the three Orders in the Church which is thought fit to be considered a while by comparing it with Clements doctrine in this matter who is acknowledged to name but two And then his charge against Ignatius and against me is thus managed 2. To returne then it is evident that in the time of Clement there were but two sorts of Officers in the Church Bishops and Deacons whereas the Epistles of Ignatius doe precisely in every place where any mention is made of them as there is upon occasions and upon none at all insist on three orders distinct in name and things With Clement it is not so Those whom he calls Bishops in one place the very same persons he immediately calls Presbyters after the example of Paul Act. 20 28 and Tit. 1. 5. 7. and plainly asserts Episcopacie to be the office of Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Because they were in no danger to be cast from their Episcopacie And whereasth fault which he repâ—oves in the Chuâ—ch of Corinth is their division and wanâ— of due subjection to their spirituall Governors according to the order which Christ hath appointed in all the Churches of the Saints he affirmes plainly that those Governours were the Presbyters of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in all places throughout the whole Epistie wâ—iting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that particular Church of Corinth the Saints dwelling there walking in the order and fellowship of the Gospell where he treats of these thiâ—gs he still intimates a plurality of Presbyters in the Church as theâ—e may nay there ought to be in every single Congregation Act 20 28. without the least intimation of any singular person promoted upon any accâ—unt whatever above his follows So in the advise given to the persons who occasioned the division before mentioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Had there been a singular Bishop at Corinth much more a Met opolitan such as our Doctor speaks him to have been it had been impossible that he should be thus passed by in silence But the Doctor gives you a double answer to this observation with the severall parts wheâ—eof I doubt not but that he makes himself meâ—â—y if he can suppose that any men are so wedded to his dictates as to give them entertainment for indeed they are plainly jocular But learned men must have leave sometimes to exercise their â—ansies and so sport themselves with their owne imaginations 1. Then For the mention that is made of the many Presbyters in the Church of Corinth to whom Clement in the name of the Church of Rome exhorts to give all due respect honour obedience He tells you that by the Church of Corinth all the Churches of Achaia are meant and intended The Epistle is directed onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the least intimation of any other Chuâ—ch oâ— Churches The difference it is written about was occasioned by one or two persons in that Church onely it is that Church alone that is exhorted to order and due subjection to their Elders from the beginning to the end of the Epistle there is not one word apâ—… or â—ittle to intimaâ—e the designation of it to any Church or Churches beyond the single Church of Corinth or that they had any concernement in the difference spoken to The Fabrick of after-ages lyes so close to the Doctors imagination that there is no entrance for the true frame of the Primitive Church of Christ and therefore every thing must be wrested and apportioned to the conceit of such an Episcopacie as he hath entertained Whereas he ought to crop off both head and heels of his owne imagination and the Episcopacy of the later dayes which he too dearly affects he chooseth rather to stretch and torture the antient Government of the Church that it may seem to answer the frame presently contended for But let us a little attend to the Doctors learned arguments whereby he endeavours to make good his assertion 1. He tels you that Corinth was the chiefe City of Achaia the Metropolis in a politicall sense and acceptation of the word of Greece where the Proconsull had his residence Diss 5. cap. 2. Sect. 3. Let us grant this to our Learned Doctor lest we finde nothing to gratifie him withall and what then will follow Hence saith he it will follow Sect. 4. that this Epistle which was sent Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non ad unius Civitatis Ecclesiam sed ad omnes totius Achatae Christianos per singulas civitates regiones sub Episcopis aut Praefectis suis ubique collocatas missa existimetur But pray Doctor why so We poore creatures who are not so sharpe sighted as to discerne a Metropolitan Arch-Bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependant nor can finde any instituted Church in the Scripture or in Clement of one denomination beyond a single Congregation cannot but thinke that all the strength of this consectaâ—y from the insinuation of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in question which will never be granted upon such câ—mes Yea but he addes Sect. 5. that Paul wrote his Epistle not onely to the Church of Corinth but also to all the Churches of Achaia therefore Clement did so also At first view this argument seems not very conclusive yea appears indeed very ridiculous the inforcement of it which insues may perhaps give new life and vigour to it How then is it proved that Paul wrote not onely to the Church of Corinth but to all them in Achaia also why saith he in the 2 Ep. 1. Chap 1. ver it is so exprest he writes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Very good It is indispurably evident that Paul wrote his second Epistle to the Church of Corinth and all the rest of Achaia for he expressely affirmes himselfe so to doe and for the first Epistle it is directed not only to the Church of Corinth 1. Ch. 2. v. but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is saith our Doctor in the whole region of Achaia So indeed sayes the Doctors great friend Grotius to whom he is beholding for more than one rare notion I say it not in any way of any reproach to the Doctor onely I cannot but thinke his carefull warding of himselfe against the thoughts of men that he should be beholding to Grotius doth exceedingly unbecome
the Doctors gravity and selfe-denyall This is complained of by some who have tried it in reference to his late Comment on the Revelation And in this Differtation he is put by his owne thoughts I will not say guilâ—y to an Apologie cap. 1. Sect. 24. Quâ in re suffra gium suum tuâ—â—sse Hâ—gonem Grotium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—x Annotationibus poâ—… nuper â—ditis postquam haec omn a Typographo transcripâ—a essent curâ—… perlectis edoctum gratulor Let not the Reaâ—er thinke that Doctor Ham had transmitted his papers full of raâ—e conjectures to the Prinâ—eâ— before Gâ—…us his Annotations on the Revelation were published but onely before he had read them The Doctor little thinkâ—s what a flye this is in his pot of Oyntment nor how undecent with all impartiall men such Apologies subservient to a frame oâ— spirit in bondagâ—… a mans owne esteeme and reputation appeare to be but let this passe and let the Saints that call upon the name of Jesus Christ in every place be the Saints in every part of Aâ—…a though the Epistle it selfe written indeed upon occasion takâ—n from the Church of Corinth yâ—â— was given by inspiration from God for the use not onely of all Saints in the whole world at that time wherein it was written but of all those who were to believe in any part or place of the world to the end thereof although the assertion of it be not built on any tolerable conjâ—cture but may be rejected with the same facility wherewith it is tendred what now will â—ence ensuâ— why hence it follows that Clement also wrote his Epistle to all the Churches in Aâ—haia Very good Paul writing an Epistle intituled chiefly to the Corinthians expresly and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 directs iâ— to all the Saints or Churches of Achaia yea to all that call upon the name of God in every place so that his Epistle being of Catholick concernment is not to be conâ—ined to the Church of Corinth onely although most of â—e particular things mentioned in that Epistle related onely to that particular Church Therefore Clement directing his Epistle to the Church of Corinth onely not onâ—â— mentioning nor insinuaâ—ing an intention of extending it to any other handling in it onely the peculiar concernment of that Church and a difference about one or two persons therein mâ—st be supposed to have wâ—iâ—en to all the Churches of Achaia And if such arguments as these will not prove Episcopacy to be of Apostolicall constitution what will prevaile with men so to esteeme it Si Pergama dextrâ defendi possent etiam hac deâ—ensa faissent And this is the â—ause of naming many Elders or Presbyters in one Church For my part I suppose the Doctor might more probably have adhered to a former conjecture of his Dissert 4. cap. 10. Sect. 9. concerning two sundry different Churches where were distinct Officeâ—s in the same City Primò saith he respondeo non usquequaque verum est quod pro concesso fumitur quamvis enim in unâ Ecclesiâ aut 〈◊〉 plures simul Episcopi nunquam fuerint pray except them mentioned Act. 20. 28. and those Act. 14. 23. nihil tamen â—…are quin in eadem civitate duo aliquando â—…us diâ—â—erminati fuerint He might I say with more shew of probability have abode by this observation than to have rambled over all Greece to relieve himselfe against his adversaries But yet neither would this suffice What use may or will be made of this concession shall elsewhere be manifested 3. That which is extended to this length in this part of the Prefacers discourse may briefly be summ'd up into these four heads 1. a briefe touch of the difference betwixt Clemens and Ignatius the one mentioning but two the other three Orders in the Church 2. His asserting the Bishops mentioned in Clemens to be bare Presbyters concluding that from the number of them many in that 〈◊〉 Church of Corinth 3. a taking notice of a first answer of mine to that argument and indeavouring to invalidate it 4. a reproach of my vaine-glory in borrowing notions from Grotius and being unwilling to be thought to doe so Which last though it hang loose from the matter in hand being perfectly extrinsecall to our Controversie whether about Ignatius Epistles or Episcopacie because 't is certaine that one that hath received help from Grotius is not for that the more likely to be in the wrong or to be unable to maintaine his assertions and because he that hath faults in his manners the vaine-glorious and ingratefull may yet by so good a guide as Grotius fall upon some truth yet I shall afterward punctually reply to and dispatch that also and shew how little happy the Prefacer is in all his acts of severity But as the order and the rule before me directs I must begin with the more materiall parts 4. And first for the difference betwixt Clement and Ignatius it was farre from being any observation of the Prefacers or usefull to him against us It is knowne to be a principal ingredient in the foundation on which I build and assert Episcopacie viz. that in the times of the Scriptures and of Clemens there appear to have been two and not above two Orders in the Church of Christ Bishops and Deacons that these Bishops were promiscuously styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops and Elders the nature of each word agreeing to denote a singular Governor and the use of it both in Scripture and Clemens no way inclining to determine it to a number or College of Presbyters in each Church ruling in Common Councel That Saint Paul Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 7. 1 Tim 3. expresly sets downe this course under the two plaine heads of Bishops and Deacons that Clemens is as expresse that the Apostles at their first preaching constituted or ordained their first converts to be Bishops and Deacons of those that should after believe that Epiphanius voucheth it out of the profoundest Histories the antientest Records that while the paucity of Christians was such as neither to need more than a Bishop and his Deacons in each Church nor to afford much choise of persons for any more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were contented every where with these two Lastly that when the number of believers was greatly increased and so permitted and required it then a second order under Bishops and above Deacons was erected in each Church by Apostles and Apostolical men particularly as may probably be collected by Saint John in Asia toward the end of his dayes and accordingly that Ignatius's Epistles written some yeares after John's death are the first that mention that second order 5. All this in every branch hath been distinctly cleared both in the Dissertations and since in the Vindication of them from the London Assemblers and not one word is here pretended to invalidate any one part of it any farther than as it will fall under
one of the two following heads of discourse and therefore I am now to hasten to them Onely to be sâ—re to have neglected nothing that can expect to be considered in the least It is here presently visible 1. how causelesly Ignatius is quarrell'd with for mentioning the Orders of the Church upon no occasion when the designe of his Epistles being to preserve truth and peace among the Churches he had no better and more compendious way to doe it than by requiring their subjection to their Governors and thereupon he so constantly inculcates it and this is a very important occasion and that which alwayes makes it very seasonable and pertinent whensoever it is done by him 6. Secondly How fallaciously the discourse proceeds which supposeth Clemens to call those Presbyters which ought to signifie as among us the word now signifies collegues and fellow-rulers in the same Church whom before he had called Bishops adding that he plainly asserts Episcopacy to be the office of Presbyters and that their Spirituall Governors were the Presbyters of the Church and a plurality of Presbyters in the same Church whereas all this while he knowes that Clement saith that the Apostles instituted Bishops and Deacons in all Cities and Regions and that these are by us cleared to be singular Bishops and that to prevent contentions they left a list of successors to that singular office in each Church and that these singular Bishops are oft called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders not onely before but after Clemens even by those that appeare and are acknowledged to assert the three Orders and consequently that Clement may well be allowed to style them so in whose time for ought appears there were none of that second order now vulgarly called Presbyters yet erected either at Rome from whence or at Corinth or in all Achaia to which he wrote this Epistle 7. Thirdly How infirme a way of arguing it is to say that Clement doth not in the least intimate any singular person promoted above his fellows and that had there been any such at Corinth it had been impossible he should be thus pass'd by in silence when he knowes that the Apostles constituting Bishops and Deacons and what followes on that account is by us insisted on and confirmed to be more than an intimation of it and when the whole purport of the Epistle is to preserve the authority of the Governors of the severall Churches under that Metropolis whom he knowes we contend and prove to be the singular Bishops and must not forgoe that pretension till it be confuted 8. To proceed to the second head of discourse his asserting the Bishops mentioned in Clemens to be bare Presbyters For this it is certaine that he makes no tender of any other argument or appearance of proofe but onely the mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he renders Presbyters in the plural whom therefore he concludes to be many Presbyters in the same Church But 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elder signifies Bishop in Scripture in Clemens in Polycarpe in those of the Antients after them that are knowne to assert the singular Bishop above Presbyters in each Church And this having been said and cleared in the Dissert is not in the least attempted to be disproved by him 9. Secondly These many Elders are not all or more than one said or intimated by Clement to be in one City For the Epistle as was shewed in the Dissert is I suppose most certainly may have been addrest by Clement not to the single Church of that one City of Corinth but to the Churches of all Achaia or Greece of which Corinth was the chiefe being the Metropolis 10. That it was not so is barely said but largely proved in that place Dissert 5. cap. 2. first from the title of the Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it is on each part the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or whole province as of Rome so of Corinth the Region and territory that belonged to either of those Metropoles which in that age was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the adjacent region exprest by Ignatius by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the place of the region of the Romans by Polycarpe in the same kind speaking of Philiâ—pi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church adjoyning or belonging to Philippi and by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Province belonging to Corinth of which Dionysius was Bishop or Metropolitan 11. Secondly this was proved by the analogie held between this Epistle of Clemens and the Epistle of Saint Paul inscribed to the Corinthians For I demand was not this Epistle of Clement written to the same Church or Churches to whom Saint Paul's two Epistles had been addressed That it was is more than probable by the Common title and other Characters in the Epistle it selfe incline to it As that he refers them to the Epistles of Saint Paul written to them and that upon the like occasion of divisions and factions so early crept in among them So pag. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Take saith he the Epistle of Saint Paul consider what he saith to you in the beginning of his preaching to you certainely it was by inspiration from God that he wrote to you concerning himselfe and Cephas and Apollos because that then ye had partialities and inclinations to one more than to another but that partiality brought lesse sinne unto you Here still it is the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you that before and now were guilty of this sinne of carnality admiration of person faction and now at length sedition and so the same Churches now and then to whom these Epistles on that occasion were addrest and there is no circumstance producible that restrains one more than the other 11. Now of the Epistles of Paul it is evident they were not confined to the one City of Corinth but to all the Churches of Achaia so it is specified of the secondâ— of them 2 Cor. 1. 1. To the Church of God which is at Corinth with all the Saints which are in all Achaâ—a And though this be not expresly said of or in the first Epistle or in this of Clement yet the relation that one hath to the other will conclude it of those also and the phrase which there we find superadded to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to all that are called by the name of Christ all Christians in every place and the like forme at the conclusion of this The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and with all every where that are called by God hath in all probability the same importance for that being universal and extended beyond Corinth must not yet be interpreted of all Christians in the world for that would make each of these a Catholick Epistle and would conclude the Apostle to have received an Epistle from the Catholick Church to which this returne was made c. 7. 1. and
so likewise the particular sins sinners both there and here to which they apply their exhortations the inâ—est the going to Law before heathen judicatures the seditions c. doe evidently restrain it from that latitude which two circumstances being balanced on each side will certainly leave it in the middle betwixt the one Church of Corinth on the one side and the universal Church of the whole world on the other and so leave it commensurate and applyable to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the coasts of Achaâ—a Thus when 1. Cor. 3. 5. it is said of Apollos that he hath watered them as the Minister by which they to whom he wrote believed and so in this of Clemens that they had beene factiously inclined to Apollos it is evident by the story in the Asts that this belonged not onely to Corinth but to Achaia indefinitely Act. 18. he resolved to go into Achaia and coming thither he contributed much to those that believed v. 27. 12 To these are added these farther indications that in the Epistle to the Romans sent from Corinth the salutations are sent from the Churches of Christ in the plural Rom. 16. 16. mention is made of the Church which is at â—enchrea which is one of these Churches v. 1. so what the Apostle writes in these Epistles concerning the collection for Judea 1 Cor. 16. 1. and 2 Cor c. 8. and 9. evidently belongs to all Achaia Rom. 15. 26. Macedonia and Achaia have pleased to make a certaine contribution and I know your forwardnesse Achaia hath been ready or prepared 2 Cor. 9. 2. and so when c. 1. 9. he had said when I was present among you and wanted I burthened no man it fâ—llowes v. 10. this boasting shall not be shut up against me in all the regions of Achaia Where still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you and Achaia are all one and if that liberty be but allowed in this Epistle the whole difficulty is at an end for then as there were many cities and Episcopâ—l sees in Achaia the chief of which was Corinth and what was sent to that Metropolis was from thence to be communicated as it belonged to all those others so the Bishops of each of these might very fitly be called by Clement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders and not the Elders of that one Church or City of Corinth but all that related to that Metropolis 13 This I may have leave to hope will be lookâ— on as a â—irmer foundation on one side to conclude that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders which is also the title of Bishops in this Epistle being also called Bishops here a title which as is elsewhere shewed at large as farre as the Scriptures never was applyed to a bare Presbyter were the several Bishops or singular Governors of the many cities of Achaia than the bare number or multitude of them without any other circumstance to inforce it will be sufficient to infer that they were the many Presbyters in one city 14. To come therefore to the third thing the taking notice of this answer and his endeavouring to invalidate it I shall briefly examine whatsoever is said by him in pursuit of that attempt And his first Method is that of the Scoffer to prepare his reader to look on this answer as ridiculous he doubts not but the Doctor makes himselfe merry if he can suppose any so wedded to his dictates as to give it intertainment for it is plainly jocular and againe I must in the same Scophick humor be styled a learned man so to be allowed to excercise my phansie to sport with my owne imaginations 15. But 1. truly Sir I was neither then nor am now at so much vacancy which might call for sport If I were I would finde out more Christian-like divertisements 2. I could never think that what was thus confirmed by Arguments and this had bin done in the Dissert on the same grounds of probation which have here been mentioned could be liable to the censure either of Dictates on one side or of jocular on the other and 3. If he had been as well able to confute my answer or confirmations of it as he was to scoffe and cry â—…cular c. he must needs have thought it more like a Christian and a Scholar and a propugne of truth to have insisted wholly on the former and omitted the latter Lastly I learn from hence wherein my crime consisted when I said of one of Blondel's observations from Clement that it was instar prodigii It seemes I should have said that it was plainly â—ocular have smiled instead of wondring and all had been very well 16. Having thus answered his proeme I come to his narration And there truly I finde no one argument of force to countenance or justifie his mirth A cumulus there is but that will signifie nothing unlesse some one of the particulars of which it consists do so And that they cannot do being by him known to be denied by me before they are mentioned and yet no proof added to support them 17. As 1. that the Epistle is directed to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the least intimation of any other Church or Churches and after in the like words a little varied that there is not an apex or tittle to intimate the designation of it to any but the Church of Corinth This is a negative unproved and concluding nothing whereas it is evident to him that the very phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken by me for more than an intimation that it was the whole 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province which he wrote to and that the consent betwixt this and S. Paul's Epistles intimated them to be addrest to the same and so to the Churches of all Achaia 18. So 2. when he saith the difference it was written about was occasioned by one or two persons in that Church onely and that it was that Church onely that is exhorted to order and due subjection to Elders that is petitio principii and that which no way appeares in the Epistle one or more of these might be in other Churches of Achaia and those other Churches might be all exhorted to order and subjection to their severall Bishops 19. 3. When he falls back so soon into his first Topick again that of Contumelie the fabrick of after-ages lies so close to the Doctor 's imagination that there is no entrance for the true frame and therefore every thing must be wrested c. and yet more that whereas I ought to crop off head and heeles a phrase that I have not met with cropping off heels I chose to stretch and torture 1. It is evident how easily this might be retorted thus that the fabrick of this last part of this last age in this Island of ours lies so close on my Monitor's imagination that the frame in Clement's time of a Church governed by Bishops ordeined by the
Elders or Presbyters here mention'd were properly those whom he calls Bishops Diocesans men of a third order and rank above Deaâ—ons and Presbyters in the Church Administrations and Government And for those who are properly called Presbyters there were then none in the Church To give colour to this misrable evasion Diss 4. c. 10 11. He discourseth about the government and ordering of Church affairs by Bishops and Deacons In some Churches that were small not yet formed or compleated nor come to perfection at the first planting of them how well this is accommodated to the Church of Corinth which Clement calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which himself would have to be a Metropolitical Church being confessedly great numerous furnished with great and large gifts and abilities is seen with half an eye How ill also this shâ—ft is accommodated to help in the case for whose service it was first invented is no lesse evident It was to save the sword of Phil. 1. 1. from the throat of Episcopacie he contendeth for That Epistle is directed to the Saints or Church at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons Two things doe here trouble our Doctor 1. The mention of more Bishops than one at Philippi 2. The knitting together of Bishops and Deacons as the onely two orders in the Church bringing downâ—… Episcopacie one degree at least from that height whereto he would exalt it For the first of these he tells you that Philippi was the Metropolitane Church of the Province of Macedonia that the rest of the Churches which had every one their severall Bishops Diocesan we must suppose were all comprised in the mentioning of Philippi so that though the Epistle be preciselyâ—… directed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet the Bishops that were with them must be supposed to be the Bishops of the whole Province of Macedonia because the Church of Philippi was the Metropolitane The whole Countrey must have been supposed to be converted and who that knowes any thing of Antiquity will dispute that and so divided with Diocesans as England of late was the Arch-Bishops so being at Philippi but how came it then to pâ—sse that here is mention made of Bishops and Deacons onely without any word of a third order or ranke of men distinct from them called Presbyters or Elders To this he answers secondly that when the Church was first planted before any great number were converted or any sit to be made Presbyters there was onely those two orders instituted Bishops and Deacons and so that this Church of Philippi seems to have been a Metropoliticall Infant The truth is if ever the Doctor be put upon reconciling the contradictions of his answers one to another not onely in this but almost in every particular he deals withall an intanglemen which he is throwne into by his bold and groundlesse conjectures he will finde it to be as endlesse as fruitlesse but it is not my present businesse to interpose in his quarrells either with himselfe or Presbyterie As to the matter under consideration I desire onely to be resolved in these few Queries 1. If there were in the time of Clement no Presbyters in the Churches not in so great and flâ—urishing a Church as that of Corinth and if all the places in Scripture where there is mention of Elders doe precisely inten Bishops in a distinction from them who are Deacons and not Bishops also as he asserts when by whom by what Authority were Elders who are only so inferiour to Bishops peculiarly so termed instituted and appointed in the Churches And how comes it passe that there is such expresse mention made of the office of Deacons and the continuance of it none at all of Elders who are acknowledged to be superiour to them and on whose shoulders in all their own Churches lies the great weight and burthen of all Ecclesiasticall administration As we say of their Bishops so shall we of any Presbyter not instituted and appointed by the authority of Jesus Christ in the Church let them goe to the place from whence they came 2. I desire the Doctor to informe me in what sense he would have me to understand him Diss 2. cap. 20 21 22. Where he disputes that these words of Hicrome Antequam â—ludia in Religione fierent diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli ego Cepbae communi Presbyterorum consensu Ecclesia 〈…〉 be understood of the times of the Apostles when 〈…〉 Church of Corinth when it seems that neither 〈…〉 such thing as Presbyters in the 〈…〉 we can 〈…〉 As 〈…〉 Presbyters were Bishops properly so 〈…〉 who are they so 〈◊〉 of whom 〈◊〉 〈…〉 to be a 〈…〉 so called To 〈…〉 I 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 in the Scripture we 〈…〉 of Church 〈…〉 This 〈…〉 Doctâ—… is that of 〈…〉 give us 〈…〉 of Christ give us in every Church Bishops and Deacons 〈◊〉 than we 〈…〉 let those Bishops attend the 〈…〉 over which they â—…ching the 〈◊〉 and administâ—… O 〈…〉 in and to their 〈…〉 And I 〈◊〉 〈…〉 all the Comenders for Presbytery in this Nâ—â—ion and much 〈…〉 the Independents that there shall be a â—end of this quarrel that they will 〈…〉 with the Doctor not any living for the â—…duction of any 〈◊〉 soâ—t of persons though they should be 〈…〉 Presbyters into Church office and Government Onely this I must 〈…〉 this second sort of men 〈…〉 Presbyters than it doth Bishops and that word having been 〈…〉 third 〈…〉 we desire leave of the Dâ—ctor and his 〈…〉 if we also most frequently call them so no wayes declining the other application of Bishops so that it be applyed to signifie the second and not third 〈◊〉 of men But of this 〈◊〉 businesse with the nature conâ—… and frame of the first Churches and the 〈◊〉 mâ—stâ—k 〈…〉 men have be their owne prejudices been ingaged into in this dâ—… of them a 〈…〉 opportunity if God will may 〈◊〉 long be aâ—…ded 3. Here first I shall demand whence it appeares that I accommodated a double answer to the multiplication of Elders in Clemens c. Truly I doe not yet know or remember that I did This certainly was all and this can amount if to any but to one answer that which we have vindicated already that the Elders in the Epistle of Clemens were all the Bishops of Achaia This indeed when it was proposed was more distinctly set down by 4. steps or degrees but then again those are no more two than foure answers 1. that the Epistle was addrest to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to the whole Province Secondly that to make it capable of that title Corinth was knowne to be the Metropolis of Achaia Thirdly that Saint Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians belonged to all the Churches of Achaia not onely to Corinth and so in any probability Clements was to doe also being written to the same and inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore Fourthly that these many Elders were the singular Bishops in the severall Cities
or dislike in them And seeing he now professeth against the total reâ—ecting of them and gives them many good words in testimony of a sweet and gracious spirit breathing in them if he shall now be pleased to direct me to any way of procuring a yet more emendate Edition such as may perfectly accord his language with all others of his time or not long before him particularly with Clemens I shall acknowledge it a great obligation and a discovery worth his undertaking But as far as my eyes yet serve me there is little hope of this and therefore as it is I must be content to think as the evidences before me exact from me that though Clemens saith truly that the Apostles at their first preaching placed no more but a Bishop and Deacon in each Citie yet before Ignatius's time there was a middle order constituted in the Churches of Asia and that also by the appointment of the Apostles and that this is a very fair account of all the difference of their language and expression about Church Order and Officers 4. In the next place he hath very ingenuously discovered upon what account it is that he hath bestowed so many of his good words at last upon Ignatius because forsooth he hath no need for the defense of his Hypothesis totally to reject them and because there are expressions in all or most of them that will abundantly manifest that he who was their Author never dreamt of any such fabrick of Church-order as in after ages was insensibly received But 1. I think not this the right way of judging mens works whether they be theirs or no the due motive of receiving or rejecting any antient writing by comparing them with our own Hypotheses and observing which way our necessities oblige us This we were wont to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serving and requiring all others to serve and minister to the wants of our Hypothesis 5. Secondly If it should really appear what is here pretended that there should be expressions in these Epistles which would abundantly manifest that their Author never dreamt of our modern Hierarchie how easie would it be for one that would transcribe copies from our Prefacer to reply that such and such places were interpolated and inserted by some later hand who meant unkindly to Episcopacy and then what security could be found to ascertain those passages to be genuine which would not as reasonably serve our turn to retain those which we think define for Episcopacie 6. Thirdly Whereas he addes that the fabrick we plead for being not yet dreamt of in Ignatius ' s dayes was in after ages insensibly received why may not that also minister to us an excuse in case we should not have been able to answer one of his former questions to set down distinctly at what time Presbyters the second or middle order came first into the Church it being as easie to imagine and as credible to be affirmed that after the Clement's one before the writing of Ignatius's many Epistles this order was brought in but so as to us at this distance of so many Centuries it is not now senible or discernible 7. All this may again be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to shew that it is no hard matter to write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Animadversions on the Author of the Animadversions At the present I am to take notice what the Prefacer's Hypothesis is which he hath undertaken to defend viz. That there never was any Church-Officer instituted in those first times relating to more Churches in his Office or to any other Church than a single particular Congregation The very same indeed that my memory suggests to me out of the Saint's Belief printed twelve or fourteen years since where instead of that Article of the Apostolick Symbole the Holy Catholick Church this very Hypothesis was substituted But then it must be remembred that the Dissertations being written in answer to Blondel were not obliged to be confronted to this Hypothesis and that though Ignatius should be found to say as little as I against this yet he might yield competent testimonies against Blondel for the superiority of Bishops above Presbyters which was all that I there indeavoured because all that I was there required to evince from them 8. But then secondly Ignatius is not perfectly silent in this matter neither for as in his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans beside the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or multitude under a particular Bishop there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Catholick Church which sure is more than a single particular Congregation so the National Church of Syria under the Metropolis of Antioch of which Ignatius himself is styled the Bishop and Pastor is frequently mention'd in those Epistles In the Epistle to the Ephesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pray for the Church which is in Syria the Church of that whole Nation put under that one denomination of which yet certainly there were â—ivers assemblies and so twice in the Epistle to the Magnesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church in Syria and in the Epistle to the Philadelphians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church of Syria which is at Antioch joyning them all under Antioch the Metropolitical Church And let this serve for a taste of Ignatius's judgement of our Prefacer's Hypothesis 9. What again here follows of the hyperbolical and little short of blasphemâ—â—s passages in these Epistles of their impertinency of their remotenesse from the way and manner of expression in the Divine Writings and those which follow'd after I have formerly wearied my selfe and the Reader with the account of them severally and I think given him reason to believe with me that they needed not here again have been heaped up so soon by way of repetition 10. The next larger portion of this Section endeavours to shew what prejudice or the fulnesse of a mans own apprehension is able to doe in the reading and citing Testimonies out of Authors and this is by me so fully granted and in part experimented in this Prefacer particularly in his fetching the power of the people in Ecclesiastical affairs from Clement's bidding the generous person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sacrifice his owne prosperitie and possessions to the peace of the People as when a King ventures his life or Moses saith Blot me out of thy book in order to the same end that truly I needed not the instance of the Papist fetching his doctrine of Transubstantiation out of the Antients to convince me of it As it is I have no exceptions to his evidence nor to the conclusion inferr'd by it in general of men full of their own apprehensions Onely I crave leave to interpose before it be thought applicable to me For unlesse he can prove that Ignatius's plain mentions so oft repeated that it is become a charge of impertinence against him of the three Orders in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons are as little able
man if he shall but put the premises and conclusion together thus It was Ignatius's command to the Magâ—â—siâ—ns that no man must do any thing â—n his own head without the Bishop and Presbyters but when they assemble together they must have one prayer one supplication adding one mind one hope in charity in joy unblameable therefore in Ignatius's time there was no other Officer instituted in the Church which related to more Churches in his office or to any other Church than a single particular congregation 27. If this be the manner of concluding Church-models from antient Writers I shall not wonder that the Prâ—latists wayes of inference have been disliked for I acknowledg they beare no proportion with this For certainly 1. if he had spoken of some single congregation which constantly met in the same place within the same walls and bid them when they thus met they should have one prayer one supplication as one mind one hope this would onely conclude that there were such particular congregations and so we know among us every Parish Church is where none but the publick Liturgie is used but this would no way conclude as the hypothesis doth that there is no other but such A particular affirmative hath no power of excluding all but it's self Ignatius's speaking of a single house cannot conclude it his opinion that there is no Town no City no Province no World made up of all these nor consequently that he which is Ruler of that house may not also be placed in office in the City in the Nation c. 28. But then secondly 't is manifest that in this place where he talks of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he talks also of the Bishop and Presbyters and the Prefacer hath not yet told me that his particular congregation will bear all those a Bishop and Deacon or Deacons he said he could allow but then that Bishop was to be but a Presbyter whatsoever he was call'd And therefore I may suppose that a Bishop and Presbyters in Ignatius's sense such as he makes two orders superiour to Deacons and all three in that Church of the Magnesians to which he speaks will not be born by his particular Congregation and therefore even that which Ignatius here speaks of was not such 29. Thirdly They that live under a Bishop and Presbyters and doe every one of them somewhere or other assemble with other Christians in some one place as whosoever assemble in any place must assemble in one may yet all of them make up above one single congregation the several Christians of the City of Oxford may live obediently under the Bishop of Oxford and uuder the Presbyters of that Citie and every one assemble 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 partake constantly of the Church-meetings some at St. Peters others at Allhallows and every one at some or other and yet all those make up many particular Congregations and the Bishop govern them all and so relate in his office to them all and by the several Presbyters ordain'd and instituted to the several charges administer and order all 30. Nay fourthly the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might fitly be rendred no more but unanimous â—rayer all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 continue in concord and in prayer one with another in the Epistle to the Trallians and that may equally be done whether they meet all in one or in many places And so still he hath not gain'd so much as his particular affirmative from hence that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here spoken of by Ignatius referr'd to a single congregation which yet if it did were farre enough from concluding the none but such 31. Lastly It is farther evident from Ignatius 1. that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Catholick Church 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church in Syria joyned under himself as their one Pastor i. e. a National Church and thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church of Syria at Antioch a Metropolitical Church and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church which presided in the place of the Region or Province of the Romans a Metropolitical and Provincial Church again And fourthly in every Epistle a Church under a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons which the world hath hitherto call'd a Diocesan Church consisting of many single congregations 32. It is not easie to reckon up all the inconsequences of this inference whereby the Prefacers hypothesis is concluded from this Testimony of Ignatius These may at the present suffice till farther discovery be made by him what medium will be chosen to draw this conclusion out of these premises which seem not at all inclin'd to it And so though we are not come much nearer to a conclusion of this controversie there is yet no season of adding more to the debating of it and therefore so much for this Section also Sect. 2. The mysterie of iniquitie Clement's argument for the allaying the sedition Proofs of the Congregational way invalid The contrary more than intimated by Ignatius The Ecclesiastick distributions contemper'd by the Apostles to the Civil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ignatius Num. 1. THat which next follows is the telling us three things that he will not insist on and onely one fourth that he will and me-thinks that should not detain us long He thus begins 2. Being unwilling to goe too far ouâ— of my way I shâ—ll noâ— 1. Consider the severals instanced in fâ—r the proof of Episcopacy by the Doctor seeing indeâ—iâ—blâ— the interpâ—etation must follow and be prâ—poâ—tioâ—ed by the generall issue or that state of the Church in the daâ—es wherein those Epistles weâ—e wâ—… or are pretended so to be if that appear to be such as I have mention'd I pâ—â—sume thâ— Doctor himself will confesse thaâ— his witnesses 〈◊〉 worâ— to his businesse for whoâ—e confirmation he doth produce them Nor 2. Shall I insist upon the degeneâ—ation of the institutions and appointments of Jesus Christ concerning Church-Administrations in the mannagement of the succeeding Churches as principled and â—pirâ—ted by the operative and efficaciâ— us mysterie of iniquity occasion'â— and advantaged by the accommodation of Ecclesiasticall affaires to the civill â—istâ—ibuâ—ions and aloâ—ments of the poâ—â—tical state of things in those dayes nor 3. Insist much farther on the exceeding dissimiliâ—ude and inconfâ—â—mity that is between the expressions concerning Church Officers and 〈…〉 these Epistles whence ever they come and those in the wâ—â—tings of unquestionable credit immediately before and after them as also the uâ—ter silence of the Scripture in those things wherewith they so abound The Epistle of Clemens of which mention was made before was wriâ—ten for the composing and quieting of a division and distemper that was fallen out in the Church of Corâ—nâ—h Of the cause of that dissention that then miserably rent that congregation he informes us in that complaint that some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were wrongfully cast from the Ministry by the multâ—â—uâ—e and he tells you that these were good honest men
and faithfull in the discharge of their duâ—y for saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though they were unblameable both in their conversation and Ministry yet they removed them from their office To reprove this evil to convince them of the sinfulnesse of it to reduce them to 〈◊〉 right understanding of their duty and order walâ—…ing in the feâ—lowâ—hip of the Gospel what course doth he proceed in what arguments doth he use He minâ—s them of one God one Châ—â—st one Bâ—dâ— one Faith tels them that wicked men alone use such wayes and practices bids them read the Epistle of Paul formerly written to them upon â—ccâ—sion of another division and to be subject to their own Eldeâ—s and all of them leave off contending quietly doing the things which the people oâ— the body of the Church commanded Now had this person wâ—iâ—ing on this occasion using all soâ—ts of arguments artificial oâ— inâ—râ—â—ficial 〈◊〉 his purpose been baptised into the opinion and esteem of a single Episcopal â—uperintendent whose exultation seems to be the design of much which is said in the Epistles of Ignatius in the sense wherein his words are usually taken would yet never once so much as bid them be subject to the Bishop that resemblance oâ— God the Father supplying the place of Chrrst nor oâ—… them hâ—wâ—…erâ—ibâ—e a thing it was to disobey him nor pawâ—d his soul â—or theirs that should submit to him that all thâ—â— obeyed him wâ—r safe all that disobeyed him were rebellious cuâ—sed and separated â—…m Gâ—d What Apology 〈◊〉 be made for the weaknesse and ignoraâ—ce of that Holy Mâ—…yr if we shâ—ll supposâ— him to have had apprehensions like those in there Epistles of â—hâ—â— sacred order for omitting those all-conqâ—eâ—ing â—eâ—sons which they would have supplyed him withâ—ll to his purpose in hanâ— and pâ—â—ching on arguments every wâ—y lesse usefull and câ—gent But I say I shall not insist on any such things as these but onelâ— 4. I say there is not in any of the Doctor 's Ex eâ—pâ—a from those Epistles not in any passage in 〈◊〉 any mention or the least intimation of any Church wherunto aâ—y Bishop was related but such an one as whose members met altogeâ—her in one place and with thâ—iâ— Bishop dispâ—sed and ordered the 〈◊〉 of the Church Such was that whereunto the hâ—lâ— Martyr was relaâ—ed such were those neighbouâ—ing Churches that sent Bishops and Eâ—…s to that Church And when the Doctor proves the contrary â—rit mâ—hâ—…magnâ—â— Apollo From the Churches and their statâ— and constitution is the state and condition of their Officers and their â—â—lation to them â—…en Let that be manifested to be such from the appointment of Jesus Christ to his Apostles or de facto in thâ— dâ—yes â—f Ignatius oâ—… beâ—ore the contempeâ—aâ—ion oâ— Ecclesiastical â—ffâ—iâ—es occasionaâ—â—y or by châ—…ce to the civil constitution of Cities â—nd Provinces in these dayes as woul◠〈◊〉 possibly câ—uld beare a 〈…〉 Diocesan Metropoliticaâ— Hierarchiâ— and this controversie will be at an end When this is by any attempted to be demonstrated I desire iâ— may not be wiâ—h sucâ—â—â—ntences as that uâ—ged by our Doctor from Epist ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The expression in it concerning Christ being unsound unscriptural concerning Bishops unintelligible or ridiculous 3. How unwilling the writer of this Preface therein to shew the judgement of Antiquity concerning Perseverance hath been to goe out of that his way the large Animadversions which he hath afforded Episcopacie Ignatius and me will sufficiently demonstrate As it is the sooner he shall now return to his rode againe the more tolerably easie it will be for the Reader and me and therefore I shall endeavour to make as much haste as he and neither take any notice of what hath been said in the Dissertations for proof of Episcopacie but yield that if it appear that there were none but particular Independent Congregations in Ignatius's time I have then produced no testimony from him by which the Prefacer may be concluded though as far as concerns Blondel who went upon distant hypotheses all that I said may have been in full force against them 4. His second consideration concerning the degenerating of Christs institutions concerning Church Administrations in the management of succeeding Churches and the principle of that degeneration the working of the mysterie of iniquity and the occasion of that again the accommodation of Ecclesiastical affairs to the civil distributions which is in effect that the Apostles erecting Mother-Churches in chief Cities where they first preacht as at Jerusalem to all Judaea Antioch to all Syria c. was a special occasion of and advantage to the working of the mysterie of iniquitie is that which in the several degrees of it might yield large discourse the mysterie of iniquity in St. Paul being remote enough from this and distributions of Churches such as were most commodious far enough from having either iniquity or mysterie in them But I shall readily transcribe his patterne as he hath not neither shall I infist on it 5. The third on which he will not insist much farther was competently insisted on before in comparing Clement's two orders in the Church and the like in St. Paul with Ignatius's three But the design of returning to it again was to offer one argument more which had not formerly been made use of and I must not let that fall to the ground It is this that if the Bishop had been in that esteem in Clement ' s time in which these Epistles set him out as the resemblance of God the Father he would certainly have bid them be subject to him and used that as an argument to compose the sedition of which he wrote unto them 6. But 1. it is certain that negative arguments prove nothing there might be Bishops in Clement's dayes and the power due to them as great as that which would intitle them to the image of God the Father and yet the sedition being raised against the Bishops themselves and the question being not concerning the Order but the Persons who should be advanced to it the mention of the dignitie of the Order or of the due subjection to it might be no proper way of appeasing that sedition nor as such chosen to be made use of by Clement 7. Secondly We know that next the obligations to peace c. the first and principal argument used by Clemens was the institution of these their Bishops by the Apostles and the dignity of that Order being such that the Apostles foresaw the contentions that would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the dignity or name of it he tels them that the Apostles had made a list of successors in each Church presuming and not needing more particularly to tell them that this was an high aggravation of their crime in throwing those out whom God had thus particularly set over them And I know not that Ignatius would or could upon his hypotheses have argued stronger to his purpose 8.
What the Prefacer addes by way of flourish I shall not need to attend to By this brief account 't is cleare though Clemens mentions but two Orders and Ignatius three yet Bishops may have been in equal esteem with both of them And that is all that I need reply to that which he saith is one of the such things which he will not insist on 9. The fourth thing on which he is resolved to insist and inlarge his digression is that which I had thought had been already newly insisted on and I hope compently answerâ—…d that in all the Epistles there is no intimation of any Church whereunto any Bishop related but such an one as whose members met altogether in one and with their Bishop disposed and ordered the affairs of the Church And so on to the same purpose and I shall be Magnus Apollo if I shew him any 8. Now I am perswaded 1. that it already appears sufficiently that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the members of each Church meeting together in prayer is no proof that to them bel â—ged in the least to dispose and order the affairs of the Church and yet besides that nothing hath yet been pretended for it out of Ignatius unlesse it be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing on their own heads in the same place which is much remoter from that purpose 9. Beyond this it hath appear'd farther that the office of all members under the Bishop was by Ignatius's doctrine to obey their superiours to live under subjection and that is not to dispose or order And the places so long insisted on out of Clemens also have I hope appear'd to infer nothing to that purpose 10. Secondly 'T is as certain that I have already performed this task laid on me by him and shew'd him that Ignatius as Bishop of Antioch the Metropolis is call'd Bishop and Pastor of the Church of Syria and some other the like passages which directly inferre what he requires me to inferre and so that I have thus much title to his favour and should not be put off to a Poetical expression for my reward 11. As for the condition he interposeth that I must shew this before the contemperation of affairs to the civill constitutions of Cities Provinces I confesse that to be a rigorous condition and such as unlesse I be released from that restraint I shall be utterly disabled to perform my task For he cannot but know that it is my affirmation that at the first planting of the Churches the Apostles thus contemper'd the Ecclesiastick to the Civil distributions of Citieâ— and Provinces having no power of making new Cities or Provinces any more than of constituting new Nations and yet planting their Churches and constituting Bishops in â—ities and thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every City and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in every Church is all one in the sacrea style which must necessarily inferre that the Ecclesiastical agreed with the civil distributions And truly how the Church was order'd before the Apostles planted it I have not the curiosity to inquire 12. A second condition he is also pleased to lay on me by way of farther restraint to make my obedience yet more difficult That my proofs must not be such as is that Testimony urged by me from the Epistle to the Ephesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This passage it seems hath not found favour with him the first part of it is saith he unâ—ound and unscripturall the second unintelligible or ridiculous 13. But I cannot yeild to his censure in either part For the first Let it but be considered that Christ came to reveale the will of his Father that whatsoever he taught he taught from his Father there can be no unsoundness in the expression to say that Christ is the sentence of his Father any more than that he is the word or the wisdome of his Father meaning thereby that what he delivered was his Fathers sentence or good pleasure for so in the title of the Epistle to the Philad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Christs sâ—…e is explained immediately by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to his owne will 14. And for the second let him but read it as he may finde Vossius and the Arch-Bishop of Armâ—gh read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the appointment or sentence or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 owne will of Christ and sure it is very intelligible and far from ridiculous even no more than this that the Bishops ordeined in all regions by the Apostles were appointed by or by appointment of Christ as the same matter is in the Epistle to the Philadelphians set downe in a parallel phrase where the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 designed by the appointment of Jesus Christ Or if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be leâ—t out then reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subscriâ—tum as the old Latine Sententia will beare it is directly all one with the former Or if in the third place it be read in the nominative case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the figure is very intelligible that these Bishops are Christs â—pâ—…intment Christs sentence Christs will i. e. are appointed or determined or willed by him And so I hope there is yet nothing so very unintelligible or at all ridiculâ—… in Ignatius or my testimonies from him that I should need this câ—â—tion to be interposed against I produce more CHAP. VII Of Metropoles and Metropolitans Sect. 1. Some account of the probations produced for Episcopacie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The power of Metropolitans Their relations to more Churches than one An enumeration of Prymates and Metropolitans Num. 1. HAving made this solemne promise that I should be so highly rewarded in case I produced any intimation to prove that there was any other but single particular Congregations It was now timely remembred that I had done somewhat like this already in proving the seven Angels of the seven Churches in the Revelation to be Metropolitans and to the consideration of that he now next proceeds and that brings in an examination of what I have said of Metropoles and Metropolitans And it begins thus 2. But it may be said what need we any more writing what need we any truer proof or testimony The learned Doctor in his Dissertations Dissert 4. cap. 5. hath abundantly discharged this worke and proved â—he seven Bishops of the seven Churches mentioned Revâ—l 2. 3. to have been Metropolitans or Arch-Bishops so that no just cause remaines why we should farther contend Let then the Reader pardon this my utmost excursion in this digression to whose compasse I had not the least thoughts of going forth at the entrance thereof and I shall returne thither whence I have turned aside Dissert 4. cap. 5. The Doctor tells us that Septem Ecclesiarum Angeli non taâ—tum Episcopi sed Metropolitae i e. Archi-Episcopi statuendi sunt i. e
principelium urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad quos provinciae integrae in iâ— multarum inferiorum â—…bium Ecclesiae earumque Epâ—scopi tanquam ad Archiâ—pâ—scopum aut Metropolitanum pertinebant The Doctor in this Chapter commences per saltum and taking it for granted that he hath proved Diâ—cesan Bishops sufficiently before though he hath scarce spoken any one word to that purpose in his whole book for to prove one superintending in a Church by the name of a Bishop others acting in some kinde of subordination to him by the name of Elders and Presbyters upon the account of what hath been offered concerning the state of the Churches in those dayes will no way reach to the maintenance of this presumption he sacrifices his paines to the Metropoliticall Archiâ—piscopall dignity which as we must suppose is so clearly founded in Scripture and Antiquity that they are as blind as Bars and Moles who cannot see the ground and foundation of it But first be it taken for granted that the Angels of the seven Churches are taken for the Governors of those Churches then that each Angell be an Individuall Bishop of the Church to which he did belong 2 be it also gâ—anted that they were Bishops of the most eminent Church or Churches in that province or Roman politicall distribution of those Countreys in the management of the government of them I say Bishops of such Churches not uâ—bium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Doctor termes them what aâ—…ce is maâ—e by all this to the Assertation of a Metropoliticall Archiepâ—…pacy I cannot as yet â—…isâ—…vâ—r That they were ordinary officers of Christs institution relâ—…ing in their office and ordinary discharge of it not oneâ—y to the particular Churches wherein they were placed but to many Churches also no lesse committed to their charge than these wherein they did reside the Officers Rulers Go â—…ors of which Churches depended on them not onely as to their advice and counsell but as to their power and jurisdiction holding their place and employment from them is some part of that which in this undertaking is incumbent on our Doctor to make good if he will not be supposed to prevaricate in the cause in hand 3. Being here called out anew to the maintaining of what I had said in the Dissert concerning Metropoliticall Churches and Bishops and having so lately been ingaged in the same taske by the exceptions of the London-Ministers and many objections which here in the processe of this discourse are lightly proposed being by them formerly made and accordingly answer accommodated to them and yet farther the maine thing which is here done being to set downe many Latine passages out of the Dissert and to deem them confuted by the bare recitall of them upon these grounds I doe not foresee that there will be any necessitâ— of making any large returnes to this last but not concisest part of his digressâ—on What had been returned to the London-Ministers the Reader will finde in that Vindication Cap. 1. Sect. 16 of which number by the fault of the â—…rinter â—e will meet with two Section and so on for the three subsequent Sections and to the Dissertationâ— themselves and that viâ—…ication of them I shall willingly referre this matter Yet shall I not oâ—…t to gather up whatsoever I shall here finde â—…ggested which was not there punctually spoken to and of that nature here are foure things in this Paragraph 4. First that in the 5. Ch. of Diss 4. I commence per saltum taking it for granted that I had proved Diocesan Bishops before though saith he I had scarce spoken one word to that purpose in my whole Booke To this I answer that as in the first Dissertation had answered one sort of objections against Episcopacy and in the whole second Diss asserted it out of Ignatius and Saint Hierome himselfe so in the third I had deduced it from Christ and the Apostles and I suppose laid those grounds and by all antiquity confirmed and by answer of Blondel's objections vindicated them so that they were competently fitted to beare that structure of Episcopacie which I had laid upon them and then having in the fourth Diss added to this the visible practice of this in the hands of single Governors whether the Apostles in their severaâ—l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or their successors the first Bishops called secundarie Apostles mentioned in the Scripture and yet more particularly in the Angels of the seven Churches which being acknowledged to be the Governors of those Churches were proved to be single Governors of them which was the onely thing in question betwixt Blondel and me I had some reason to hope that I might be allowed to have spoken some one word to that purpose in that Booke before I came to prove those Angels to have been Metropolitans which he knowes was not attempted tâ—ll all this of Episcopacie had been premised by me 5. The reason which he addâ—s in a parenthesis why he affirmes thus expresly that I had scarce spoken one word to prove a Diocesan Bishop in that Booke is the second thing I am to reply to For saith he to prove one superintending in a Church by the name of Bishop others acting in some kinde of subordination to him under the name of Elders and Presbyters will no way reach to the maintenance of this presumâ—tion 6. To which I answer that the question lying as there it did betwixt Blondel and me there can be no doubt but if I have evinced the power in every Church to have been in the hands of a single Bishop and either no college of Presbyters in that Church or else those Presbyters subordinate to the Bishop meaning by subordinate subject to his power and authority over them I have also evinced the cause against Blondel And this I may have leave to hope is there done till the contrary be made appeare and here being no offer of that but onely a mention of the account of what hath been offered by the Prefacer concerning the state of the Churches in those dayes 1. that account hath already been shewn to have no force in it 2. if it had it belongs not to the controversie as it lay betwixt me and Blondel but is as contrary to Blondelâ— pretensions as to mine and so still I cannot see how I fell under his Animadversion in this matter or how I commenced per saltum in doing what there I did as regularly as I could imagine 7. The third thing is that I call the Bishops of the most eminent Churches urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he will have called Bishops onely But of this there can be no Controversie the fitnesse and propriety of words being to be judged from the use of them and the case being cleare that a Metropolitan especially a Primate was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the antient Councels and Church-writings and from them and not from Scripture which useth no higher style for them than of
〈◊〉 which respect the common state of the Church as Zonoras interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being reserved and perteining to the care of the Metropolitan 8. This I suppose sufficiently expresses what subordination I meane the very same which the most Antient Canons of the Vniversal Church expresse to be due from the Bishop to the Metropolitan and then I shall not trouble my selfe to inquire what he meanes by some eminent Cities and Governors of a superior order in greater Cities which I should have thought had been Metropoles and Metropolitans had I not found them all placed by him in subordination to some one of high degree termed a Metropolitan And by that Character being assured that by the former he must meane no more but Bishops of inferior Cities I must be content not to understand the mysterie why they should yet be styled eminent and greater Cities and so briefly passe to the next thing 9. Secondly then he will examine my plea from that passage in the Acts cap. 15. and the thing he dislikes is my makâ—ng the question sent for resolution to Jerusalem to be referred to them by the single Church of Antioch This â—aith he 〈◊〉 doe not prove though if I could prove it it would doe me no good at all And yet to see in the processe of the discourse he severally grants all the rest And onely desires me not to be angry but to prove that Antioch by Apostolical institution was the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which is in effect to deny or bid me prove the conclusion without offering to deny above one proposition which therefore I must assume will if it be proved inferre the conclusion and so doe me all the good which I pretend to expect from it 10. Now truly that this question thus referred to Jerusalem was at this time Act. 15. 1. referred to it by the single Church of Antioch but that as Metropolis of all Syria I thought sufficiently proved by the text it selfe first cited cap. 14. 26. and 15. 3. In the former of these places the Apostles were come to Antioch as that signifies Antioch the great to difference it from another City of that name v. 21. the same which is by Plinie placed in Pisidia as here also it is ver 24. that City peculiatly where the Scripture saith they were first called Christians and whereof Euodius and Ignatius were constituted Bishops by Peter and Paul one of the Jewish the other of the Gentile Christians And being there they gathered the Church together ver 17. that I suppose to be the Church of the City of Antioch or if any more those certainly as some way relating and subordinate to Antioch which againe inferres Antioch to be their Metropolis Then of Antioch it followes that there they abodâ— v. 28. And then cap 15. 〈◊〉 certaine men which came downe from Iudea infused the Iudaical ritual doctrine into the brethren who are those but the Christians of Antioch where then they were And upon the dispute had with those Iudaiâ—â—rs v. 2. they determined that sure must still be the Church of Antioch peculiarly that Paul and Barnabas should goe to Jerusalem about this question and then ver 〈◊〉 they are brought on their way by the Church What Church is this still but the Church cap. 14. 27. i. e. the Church of Antioch 11. This was my way of proofe designed to lay the foundation of that argument of Antioch's being the Metropolitical See that this question was referred to Ierusalem from the Church peculiarly of Antioch And I must hereby thinke it competently proved unlesse some weake part be discovered in it or some absurdity or repugnancy be objected to it None of which I see is here done 12. For 1. as to that which is offered at by his saying that I have not proved that the brethren that taught the doctrine contested about ver 1. were onely of the Church of Antioch sure that is of no force For as I doubt not but the same doctrine might be and was infused into many others in Galatia Colosse yea and Rome it selfe as he truly â—aith and never conceived that the poyson was confined to or inclosed within Antioch so all that is needfull to my â—urâ—e is this that at this point of time noted Acts 15. 1. the Iudaizers pretensions were sollicited at Antioth and that on that particular occasion of the dispute betweene Paul and them the question was by them peculiarly referred to Ierusalem And that sure might be done by them alone though others farre distant as well as they either at that or some other time were disturb'd with the like scruples 13. That which the Prefacer here confesses that the disputes grew to the greatest height in Antioch is a very sufficient account in this matter why Antioch peculiarly should send up to Ierusalem about this question when others who were not so much concern'd in it did not doe so And moreover the convenience of such Messengers Paul Barnabas who could say so much from the successe they had had among the Gentiles toward the deciding of the question might both qualifie and incite them to doe it rather than any others at this time And so still there is more reason why I should conceive the question referred to Ierusalem peculiarly or alone by Antioch and not so by Colosse or Rome or Galatia and no appearance of any thing yet produced to the contrary 14. Secondly He addes then to Antioch brethren from other parts and Churches also came whilst Paul and Barnabas abode gâ—ere To what purpose this is urged by him I know not but this I know that there is no mention in that story of any such but onely of those which ver 1. came from Iudea and taught the necessity of Iudaizing And of them 't is not probable that they joyned with the Antiochians to referre the question to Ierusalem or if they did I am sure the Decretal Epistle from the Councel was not addrest to them but to the Gentile Christians ver 19. 23. and takes no other notice of them than as of seducers ver 24. And so still it appeares not of any that they thus referred the question but onely of the Antiochians 15. Thirdly Whereas he concludes it most evident from the Councel's answer ver 23. that the reference is made from all the Churches of the Gentiles if he meane it of all other Gentile Churches beside Syria and Cilicia as Phrygia Galatia c. Which he after mentions and Rome and Colosse which before he had mentioned there is no appearance of truth in it the text saying expressely that it was sent to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia But if he means it of all not absolutely but all of Syria and Cilicia and not onely of Antioch then as that is the very thing observed by me to prove that Antioch was the Metropolis of Syria and Cilicia so certainly it is far
had gone through Phrygia and Galatia they came to Mysia c. So that he could not well have multiplyed more mistakes in so few words and all to make up his hypothesis that the Decree of Ierusalem had no more reference to Antioch and the regions whereof that was the Metropolis than to all those other Churches which yet if it be extended no farther than to Asia it selfe will by Philo's words be interpretable of the Province subordinate to Ierusalem 30. What remains to this head is made up of contumelie and reproach of my audaciousnesse with reflexion onely upon a supposition of mine that after this time the Churches were small and thinne and few in number and so that of Philippi was seven yeares after this which is designed as a prejudice to my hypothesis concerning Metropolitan Churches so early But to the former of these the reproaches I have nothing to return but my thankes to the latter I have answered formerly that the smallnesse of the number of Christians nothing hinders the dependence of one Church upon another See Vindic. to Lond. Minist chap. 1. sect 16. numb 14. And so much for the evidence out of the Acts. 31. Next he comes to my proof out of Ignatius who say I being Bishop of Antioch doth yet in the Epistle to the Romans call himself Pastor of the Church of Syria The words wherein he so styles himselfe he sets down in the Greek and instead of translating them as they should be translated Remember in your prayers the Church of Syria which in stead of me hath Christ for their Pastor viz. now that he was carryed from them to his Martyrdome he takes advantage of the Readers unskilfulnesse in that language and formes my proof into a ridiculous argument Because he recommends to them that particular Church in Syria which by his imprisonment was deprived of its Pastor therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Bishop and then is very pleasant with his Tityre tâ—… patâ—… 32. But would not a little sadnesse and justice have done better and then it had been most cleare that Ignatius his saying that Christ was now their Pastor instead of him must necessarily imply that he was formerly their Pastor and whose Pastor was hee expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Pastor of the Church in Syria where it is evident that the whole Church in Syria not that particular Church onely of Antioch is by him supposed to be under his Pastorall care the same thing being before in the same Epistle exprest in words no way lyable to misunderstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath vouchsafed or dignified the Bishop of Syria calling himself Bishop of Syria and so not of Antioch onely This hath been formerly cleared against all exception and need not be here farther repeated 33. There remains the testimony of the Author of the Epistle to the Antiochians which I vouched not as the genuine writing of Ignatius but onely as an antient Writer according to the genuine in this matter Hence I am cryed out on as forsaken of all faire and honest means and like Saul trying the Witch of Endor c. But this is but ordinary style a flourish of his Rhetorick and need not stay us to consider it that which follows is more to the purpose that I make this counterfeit speak as if Syria were in Antioch not Antioch in Syria and here askes What other sense can be made of the words as by me transcribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Antioch and then triumphs in this discovery 34. But certainly the Witch was not so contrary to a wise woman the counterfeit author so perfect a changeling as here he is set out to be Certainly the Greek as transcribed by me lyes thus in the construction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God which is at Antioch with this farther denomination added to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adjacent or lying together in Syria or allowing them the same position in English which they have in Greek To the Church of God lying together in Syria the Church or that which is at Antioch but taking all the words together of which I there onely gave the abstract to the Church pitied by God chosen by Christ lying together in Syria which first received the sirname of Christian the Church which is at Antioch And so he may discerne it possible to make sense of these words a very little skill in that language being sufficient to enable one to joyne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the not very remote as well as with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the immediate Antecedent And so this leaves it clear as the day 1. That Antioch was believed by that Author to be in Syria not Syria in Antioch and 2. That Syria was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province belonging to Antioch the Metropolis and that is a proof as far as his authoritie will bear that the Apostles instituted Metropolitans and so of the very thing in earnest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was to be demonstrated 35. And if this authority were not so great as the former of the true Ignatius had been yet first he was an antient Writer and so acknowledged and secondly one that imitated antient style and calls himself Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the known title of Ignatius by which he was condemn'd by Trajane and so though he feign'd a person yet did it decently and so testifies his opinion that this was the style of Ignatius's dayes or else would not have discovered himself by using it Thirdly his testimony added to Ignatius's and in concord with it will not certainly take off the forâ—e from Ignatius's And fourthly if this be finally reprobated there be several more behind of Scripture and the Antients concerning Gortyna in Crete and seven Metropolitical Churches in Asia and a reference to the Archbishop of Armagh's discourse on that subject and passages collected out of the Canons of the Antient Vniversal Church and no one word offer'd to be replyed to all this which makes it very impertinent to goe about farther to confirme this assertion which else I might doe and for brevities sake referre the Reader to Frigevillaeus Gautius Par. 1. c. 4. the subject of which Chapter is Primates esse jure Divino That Primates are by Divine right Sect. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Casaubon's Censure of that phrase Numb 1. NExt he comes to examine Sect. 11. and that one small testimony from the inscription of Ignatius's Epistle to the Romans Before I proceed to which I shall confesse to the Prefacer that he hath mâ—st an opportunitie of great rejoycing For the truth is in the end of sect 10. there lay a passage wherein though I affirm'd not but onely past my conjecture crediderim c. yet I now by a last reading over of Ignatius's Epistles discern my self to have mistakenâ— For in
repeated or inlarged on 7. In the close he is pleased to adde that by this time i. e. in Ignatius's time who suffer'd in Trajan's time and survived St. Iohn very little some alteration was attempted and if that were so meant by him as to belong to the jurisdiction of the Church of Rome over other Churches which the discourse is upon this truly might passe for prâ—ttie antient being scarce distinguishable from Apostolical and so if what was attempted were attain'd also 't will be very like the yielding that which I contended from that testimony Sect. 8. Alexandria a Patriarchate instituted by St. Mark This proved and vindicated The Essens in Alexandria Christians Bishops among them Num. 1. IN the next and last place he will passe his judgement on the evidence drawn from the storie of the Church of Alexandria thus 2. The exâ—mpâ—e of Alexandria is urged in the next place in these words idâ—â— de 〈◊〉 de qua Eusebius Marâ—um 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesias in plurali primum in Alexandriá instituisse Haâ— omnes ab eo sub nomine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 administrandas susâ—episse Anianum Neronis anno octavo idem Eusebius affiâ—…t quibus patâ—t primariam Alexandriae Patriarchalem Cathedâ—â—m fiâ—…sse ad quam reliquae Provinciae illâ—us Ecclesiae à Marco plantatae ut 〈◊〉 Met opâ—…ticaâ— suam pertinebant doubtlesse for 1. There is noâ— any passage iâ— any aâ—…ent Author more clearly discovering the uncertainty of many things in Antiquity than this pointed to by the Dâ—ctoâ— in Eusebius Fâ—… 〈◊〉 the sending of Mark the Evangelist into Aegypt and his pretching theâ—e at Alexandria what he had written in â—hâ— Gospel is but a Repâ—â—â— Men said so but what ground they had for their saying so hâ—…elatâ—s noâ— And yet we know what a foundation of many aâ—â—eâ—tions by following Wâ—…s his uâ—â—or oâ— report is made to be 2. In the very next woâ—â—â— the Author affiâ—mes and insists lâ—ng upon it in the next Chapâ—er that Phâ—lo's bâ—ok 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was written concerning the Câ—… convâ—râ—ed by Mark 's preaching at Alexandria when it is notoriously known that it treateth of the Essens a Sect among the Jew amongst whose observances many things were vain superstirious and foolish uâ—worthy to be oâ—ce appâ—â—uded as the practice of any Christian in those day s that 〈◊〉 Phâ—lo â—s far as can be gâ—thered living and dying in the Jewish Religion having been employed by them with an Apology to Rome in the dayes of Caligâ—lâ— But 3. supâ—â—se that Mark were at Alexandria and preached the Gospel there which is not improbable and â—…ed many Chuâ—ches in â—â—at great and populous City of Jewes and Gentiles and that as an Evangelist the care of those Churches was upon him in a â—eculiar manner â—ay and adde farther thâ—â— after his death as Hieromeâ—ssuâ—â—s â—ssuâ—â—s us the Elders â—nd Presbyters of those Churches câ—oâ—â—e ouâ—…ne among themselves to preside in their Convocations and meetings I I say â—l â—his be supposed what will ensue wâ—y then it is manifest thaâ— theâ— was fixed at Alexandria a Paâ—…chaâ— Chaiâ— and a Metropolitical Church according to the appointment of Jesus Christ by his Apostles Si hoâ— non sit probationum satis nescio quid sit satis If some few Congregations live together in love and communion and the fellowship of the Gospel in a City he is stark blind that seâ—s not that to be an Archbishops See The reason is as clear as his in the Comâ—… for the freedom of his Wife Sy Utinam Phrygiam â—xâ—râ—m mâ—am â—â—à mecum videam lâ—beran Dem. Optiâ—aâ— muliereâ— qui lem â—y Et quidem nepoti tuo hujus filiâ— hodiâ— primam mammam ded haec Dem. Hercle vero sâ—…ò siquidem prioâ—am dedit ba dâ—dubium quâ—â— emâ—â—i Aequum sâ—â—t Mâ—â— Ob eaâ—â— rem Dem. Ob â—am And there is amend of the contest The Doctor indeed hath sundâ—y other Sections added to â—hâ—se foregoing whâ—… as they concern times more remote from those who first received the Apostolicaâ— Institutions so I must ingeniously professe that I cannot see any thing whereon to fastâ—n a suâ—piâ—ion of a proof so â—a re as to call it into examination and therefore I shall absolve the Reader from the penaâ—ty of this Dâ—gression 3. It is most true that I have deduced the Original of Metropolitans from the first plantation of the Faith in Alexandria the prime City of Aegypt and having before spoken many things of it I begin here with a reference to what had there been said And for the clearing of it it is not aâ—â—sse that I give the Reader a brief view of all 4. They that write the History of that Church and are thought to write it least favourably to Bishops doe yet aâ—… of the Records of that Church that St. Markâ—oundâ—â— â—oundâ—◠〈◊〉 and left Ananias or Anianus Patriarch there Of this Eusâ—b us thus speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Mark first erected â—hurches in Alexandri◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anianus received and ruled under thâ—â— tâ—â—o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Province of Alexandria adding that 〈◊〉 was such a multitude of them which upon St. Mark 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first onset received the Christian Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 most Philosophical or pious excellent mâ—â—ner 〈◊〉 living that Philo Judâ—us who lived at that time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—it to write a Book to describe their whole manner of 〈◊〉 5. That the same St. Mark constituted 〈◊〉 so in Pentapolis is affirmed by the Author of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accordingly the sixth Canon of the first 〈◊〉 Nâ—… appoints those Churches as also all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lybia to be subject to the Patriarch oâ— Alexandâ—◠〈◊〉 firming that so it was to be by the antient and primitive custome 6. Here it is evident that by Mark himself Alexandria was constituted a Metropolitical Patriarchal See in the hands and government of a Patriarch who by being Bishop of that had the care of the whole Province and many particular Churches in it and accordingly superintended in all of them And this the second Canon of the Council of Constantinople refers to when it decrees 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Bishop of Alexandria shall administer onely the affairs of Aegypt and this in their care 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to confound the Churches disturb the order antiently observed among them 7. The onely thing that I could foresee possible to be objected to this was the authority of Eutychius the Annalist affirming that till the time of Demetrius's Patriarchate there was no other Bishop in Aegypt but onely at Alexandria But to this authority it was sufficient to oppose the farre greater of Eusebius who speaking of that Demetrius saith that after Julian he undertook 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the government of the Dioceses there in the plural which cannot be imagined to be without Bishops over them And the same is
Contraremonstrant is but the old method of speaking all that is ill of those who differ from our opinions in any thing as the Dutch man in his rage calls his horse an Arminian because he doth not goe as hee would have him And this is all that can soberly be concluded from such suggestions that they are displeased and passionate that thus speak 14. As for the Annotations on Cassander c. and the consequent vindications of himself against Rivet those have with some colour been deemed more favourable toward Popery but yet I suppose will be capable of benigne interpretations if they be read with these few cautions or remembrances 15. 1. That they were designed to shew a way to peace whensoever mens minds on both sides should be piously affected to it Secondly that he did not hope for this temper in this age the humour on both sides being so turgent and extreamly contâ—…ary to it and the controversie debated on both sides by those qui aterna cupiunt esse dissidia saith he who desire to eternize and not compose contentions and therefore makes his appeal to posterity when this paroxisme shall be over Judicet â—qua posteritas ad quam maxime provoco 16. Thirdly That for the chief usurpations of the Paâ—acie he leaves it to Christian Princes to joyn together to vindicate their own rights and reduce the Pope ad Canones to that temper which the antient Canons allow and require of him aâ—d if that will not be done to reform every one within their own dominions 17. Fourthly That what he saith in favour of some Popish doctrines above what some other learned Protestants have said is not so much by way of assertion or justification of them as to shew what reasons they may justly be thought to proceed upon and so not to be so irrational or impious as they are ordinarily accounted and this onely in order to the peace of the Christian world that we may have as much charitie to others and not as high animosities live with all men as sweetly and amicably and peaceably and not as bitterly as is possible accounting the Wars and Seditions and Divisions and Rebellions that are raised and managed upon the account of Religion far greater and more scandalous unchristian evils than are the errors of some Romish doctrines especially as they are maintain'd by the more sober and moderate men among them Cassander Picherel c. 18. Fifthly What he saith in his Discussio of a conjunction of Protestants with those that adhere to the Bishop of Rome is no farther to be extended than his words extend it 1. That there is not any other visible way to the end there mention'd by him of acquiring or preserving universal unity 2. That this is to be done not crudely by returning to them as they are submitting our necks to our former yâ—ke but by taking away at once the division and the causes of it on which side soever adding onely in the third place that the bare Primacie of the Bishop of Rome secundùm Canones such as the antient Canons allow of which hath nothing of supreme universal power or authority in it is none of those causes nor consequently necessary to be excluded in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citing that as the confession of that excellent person Phil. Melancthon 19. So that in effect that whole speech of his which is so solemnly vouched by Mr. Knot and lookt on so jealously by many of us is no more than this that such a Primacie of the Bishop of Rome as the antient Canons allow'd him were for so glorious an end as is the regaining the peace of Christendome very reasonably to be afforded him nay absolutely necessary to be yielded him whensoever any such Catholick union shall be attempted which as it had been the expresse opinion of Melancthon one of the first and wisest Reformers so it is far from any design of establishing the usurpations of the Papacie or any of their false doctrines attending them but onely designed as an expedient for the restoring the peace of the whole Christian world which every disciple of Christ is so passionately required to contend and pray for 20. So that in a word setting aside the prudential consideration and question as whether it were not a hopelesse designe that Grotius ingaged himself in expressing desires of an universal reconciliation when there was so little hope on either side that the extream parties would remit so much as to meet in the middle point to which also the expressing of his no hopes of it at this time and the making his appeal to more impartial posterity is a satisâ—…orie answer all that this very learned man was guilty of in this matter was but this his passionate desire of the unitie of the Church in the bands of peace and truth and a full dislike of all uncharitable distempers and impioâ—s doctrines whether those which he deemed destructive to the practice of all Christian virtue or which had a particularity of ill inâ—luence toward the undermining of Government and publick peace wheresoever he met with them 21. All which notwithstanding the temper of that learned man was known to be such as rendred him in a special manner a lover and admirer of the frame and moderation observed in our Church of England as it stood shaken but not cast down in his life time desiring earnestly to live himselfe in the Communion of it and to see it copied out by the rest of the world 22. And so much for this large digression which if it be no necessary return to the Prefacer may yet tend to the satisfaction of some others and to the vindicating the memory of that Learned man Sect. 3. Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Clemens How many Orders there were in Corinth at the writing this Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Metropolitical Churches at the first Philippi a Metropolis at the first as Canterbury at Augustines first planting the Faith The Institution of Presbyters when by what authority St. Jerome's opinion The use of the word Presbyters in Scripture The Bishops task Num. 1. THE Prefacer now proceeds to take notice of a second answer of mine to the objection from the plurality of the Elders in Clement and this yields him also matter for many questions and great appearance of triumph It is managed in these words 2. But the Doctor hath yet another answer to this multiplication of Elders and he mention of them with Deacons with the eminent identity that is between them and Bishops through the whole Epistle the same persons being unquestionably intended in respect of the same office by both these appelations Now this second answer is founded up on the supposition of the former a goodly foundation namely that the Epistle under consideration was written and sent not to the Church of Corinth onely but to all the Churches of Achaia of which Corinth was the Metropolitane Now this second answer is that the
of Achaia in each of which the Apostles had instituted a Bishop And this is all that is there said in that second Chap. of Diss 5 And yet farther no part of this adapted as an answer to that objection of the plurality of Elders or any other but as things thought fit to be premised concerning that Epistle of Clâ—… before the taking into consideration any testimony produced out of it 4. This might spare me the paines of fâ—rther considering what is here replyed to this supposed second answer But I have not hitherto been so thristy as might now justifie any such hasty dismission of him I shall therefore 〈◊〉 diâ—pâ—se the matter orderly before me which is a lâ—ttle disordered and iâ—…led by the Prefacers hasty handling and then give answer to every appearance of scruple mentioned by him 5. There are two things to the businesse of 〈◊〉 â—…ly observable in this Epistle of 〈◊〉 First what he saâ—th of the Apostles constitutiâ—â— of Bishops and Deacons at their first preaching of the Gospel and this â—…lly considered through all Regions and Câ—…s where they preached without any restraining of their speech to the whether Church of Corinth or Churches of Achaia This is considered in Diss 5. cap. 10. and reference made in the margent to a former discourse Diss 4. cap. 10. where out of the most antient Records it had been cleared that at the first the Apostles had constituted no more in every Church than here were mentioned a Bishop and one or more Deacons And so to this 〈◊〉 practice of the Apostles it is that that referres which is here by the Prefacerâ—iscalled â—iscalled the colour of this second answer which he farther styles a miserable evasion and so evidently it belongs not to the plurality of Elders in Corinth c. 6. The second thing there discernible is the plurality of Bishops styled also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders among those to whom he there writes And those say I are the Bishops of all Achaia as that is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province perteining to that Metropolis 7. Now these things ought thus to have been severed and then having competently vindicated the former of these Chap. 3. Sect. 4. that there were indeed at the first but two orders shewing when the middle order of Presbyters came in viz. most probably in Saint John's time in Asia and so lately as I was required manifested the second that of the Bishops of Greece being meant by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders I might as I said have reasonably been spared from being so speedily called out againe to the same exercises 8. But as it is I shall now attend him and first when he objects that what was discoursed of some Churches small and not yet formed or compleated at the first planting cannot be accommodated to the Church of Corinth which Clement calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most firme and antient and which I affirme to have then been a Metropoliticall Church being confestly great numerous To this I answer 1. That I have no where affirmed this Church to be in Clements time small unformed c. nor had any occasion or temptation to doe so 2. That I no where accommodate to this Church at that time what I had before observed of the Church indefinitely at the first planting These two are but effects of the Prefacers hast without any foundation in any words of mine 3. That if I am now asked whether at this time of Clement's writing there were any more than two orders in Corinth and the other Cities of Greece I must say as formerly that though 't is probable there were none yet I finde no foundation in this Epistle either for denying or affirming it 9. The chiefe occasion of writing the Epistle was the sedition against the Bishops or Governors of the first order on designe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cast out of their Bishopricks some of those whom the Apostles had placed over them and either for Prsbyters the second or Deacons the third order there was no such contention but only as saith he the Apostles foresaw 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the name or dignity of Bishop and so there is no occasion to mention any but their Bishops which yet is far from concluding that there were not any other for Deacons we are sure there then were no Bishop being ever without such 10. Again that Bishops continued to retain the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders even after there was a second sort ordained whom we now call Presbyters hath elswhere appeared from Polycarp Papias Irenaeus and Tertullian who certainly lived to see them in the Church and yet call Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Seniores and so the Bishops being call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Clement is no indication that there were at that time no second order of Presbyters in that Church 11. And yet on the other side Clement's death falling not far from St. John's which was in the third of Trajan 't is as possible and I confesse to me much more probable that there might be yet no Presbyters ordain'd at Corinth or in the rest of Achaia at the time of his writing this Epistle And so there lies no obligation on me whose conjectures are wont to bring me so little thanks from the Prefacer to interpose them in this matter where I have so little light to see by Onely I am sure that the Prefacer's objection here mention'd would be of no force against me in case I should deny that there were then any Presbyters at Corinth because as the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Clemens affirmes of it can be no more than this that this Church was founded and establisht by the Apostles themselves and so was kept upright by them till the time of this sedition which Hegesippus tels us was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Primus being Bishop of Corinth so that concludes nothing for their having Presbyters ordain'd among them And when I said that at the first preaching of the Apostles they instituted none but Bishops and Deacons I never granted or implyed or believed that as soon as ever that was done they instituted more viz. Presbyters also 12. And whereas he phansies my observation to be made of some Churches onely that were small and not yet formed c. this is another mistake for I take Clement's and Epiphanius's words universally of all Churches at their first planting the fuller as well as the thinner plantations As at Jerusalem where all the Antients tell us there was a Bishop presently upon Christ's Ascension and the-number of Believers so great that there were seven Deacons instituted to attend him yet neither in Scripture nor in the Antients finde we any footsteps of this middle order of Presbyters in that Citie at that time or soon after And the reason is clear that though in some Cities there were more in some fewer converts and so comparatively to others