are transcribed out of Mr. Baxter with little of Improvement or Addition One would think a diligent Man might find good Gleaning after Mr. B. but Dr. O's Book it seems is answered already by an unknown Hand But there is a later Book published under the Title of No Evidence for Diocesan Churches c. in the Primitive Times in Answer to the Dean of St. Paul 's Allegations out of Antiquity for such Churches c. But no Reply being yet made that I know of to those Exceptions I shall endeavor to take off such of them as may concern me 1. I have endeavored to prove that the Church of Carthage in Cyprian's Time was Diocesan and among other things urge for it the Multitude of Presbyters that belong'd to that Church even in the time of Persecution when the greatest part of the Clergy was fallen off The Author above-mentioned excepts against this where it is alleadg'd by the Dean of S. Paul's and offers two things in Answer 1. A Passage out of Bishop Downham That indeed at the first Conversions of Cities the whole Number of the People converted being sometimes not much greater than the Number of Presbyters plac'd among them were able to make but a small Congregation But this Allegation can be of little Vse because 1. This was not the Case of the Church of Carthage it was not a new converted Church but settled long before and in a flourishing Condition 2. Many more Presbyters may be ordain'd in a City than is necessary for the first Beginnings of a Church with respect to future Encrease and for the Service of such as afterwards should believe So that tho' there might be in a new gather'd Church almost as many Presbyters as there are People yet the Design of that number of Officers may be for several Congregations when the Believers of that place should become so numerous as not to be contain'd in one 3. The Multitude of Presbyters belonging to one Congregational Church might be occasioned by the uncertain Abode of most of the Apostles and their Commissioners who are the Principal if not the only Ordainers of Presbyters mentioned in Scripture Therefore they might ordain more than were just necessary for the present Occasions of a Church because they could not be present to ordain as often as the Increase of a Church or Vacancies or other Necessities of it should require But that any Church fix'd and settled having its Bishop always present should multiply Presbyters beyond Necessity in the Circumstances of the Primitive Christians before Constantine is altogether incredible For the necessary Expences of the Church were very great the Poor numerous the generality of Christians not of the Richest and the Estates they had being at the Discretion of their Enemies and ruin'd with perpetual Persecution Is it credible that persons in this Condition would multiply Officers without Necessity who were to be maintain'd out of the Public Stock as Cyprian affirms the Presbyters of Carthage were And lastly if this Opinion of Bishop Downham had any certain Ground in Antiquity We should probably hear of it with both Ears and we should have it recommended upon Ancienter Authority than His But the first which this Author cites is Nazianzen who complains of the Multitude of Presbyters in his Time This has been already alleadg'd by Mr. Baxter and has received Answer and he that cannot answer it to himself from the great difference between the Condition of the Church in Cyprian and in Nazianzen's Time has a fondness for the Argument beyond my Skill to remove The next Instance of the number of Presbyters belonging to the great Church of C. P. St. Sophia the greatest perhaps in the World will do as little Service as the complaint of Nazianzen Justinian says that Gentleman Observing that Officers in Churches were multiply'd beyond reason and measure takes order that they should be reduc'd to the numbers of the first Establishment but in the great Church at C. P. he would have the Presbyters brought down to Sixty And what follows from this That the Number of Presbyters was become extravagant in Justinian's Time but what is this to their Number in Cyprian's For this very Edict of Justinian shews that this multiplying of Church-Officers was an Innovation and therefore would have them reduc'd to the first Establishment but that first Establishment it seems admitted great Numbers for one Church had Sixty True but it must also be noted first that these sixty were to serve more than one Church For there were three more besides St. Sophia to be supply'd by those Presbyters as may be seen in the Constitution Nov. 3. c. 1. viz. St. Mary's Church and that of Theodorus the Martyr and that of Helena as some but of Irene as others read Yet after all there is no Argument to be drawn from this Number for these were Canons of a particular Foundation design'd for the Service of a Collegiate Church and no measure to be taken from hence concerning the Numbers of Presbyters belonging to the Diocess This is evident from the Preface of the said Novel whither I refer the Reader But I must confess that what this Gentleman adds concerning the Church of Constantinople is something surprizing No doubt says he they the Presbyters were more numerous in C. P. in Constantine's Time who endeavor'd to make that City in all things equal to Rome and built two Churches in it Soz. l. 2. c. 2. yet in the latter end of his Reign after the Death of Arrius the Christians there could all meet together for Worship It is said expresly that Alexander Bishop of that Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Constantine built two Churches in C. P. Sozomen does not say but that he built many and very great Churches there Soz. l. 2. c. 3. Ed. Vales. Euseb de vit Const l. 3. c. 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the same manner Eusebius says that he adorn'd the City that he called after his own Name with many Churches and great Temples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some within the City and in the Suburbs of it Nor can we imagine that two Churches much less one could suffice all the Christians in C.P. when the City of Heliopolis being converted to Christianity requir'd more and Constantine built several for them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soc. l. 1. c. 18. i. e. Having built several Churches he ordered a Bishop but one for all those Churches and Clergy to be ordain'd there Socrates indeed says that Constantine built two Churches in C. P. and names them but does not say either that there were no more there in his Time or that he built no more but these being remarkable for the Magnificence of the Structure are perhaps upon that account only mention'd by this Author But we have shew'd already from other Writers of as good or better Credit That this Emperor built there very many and very Great Churches Nor were these only for State and
all the Churches they lookt upon that as their peculiar Charge and govern'd not as ordinary Presbyters but by Apostolick Authority as a Metropolitan who although he has the supervising of all the Diocesses within his Province yet may have his proper Diocess which he governs as a particular Bishop And the Office of an Apostle does not essentially consist in the governing of more Churches than one else St. Paul would never have vindicated his Apostleship from the particular Right he had over the Corinthians 1 Cor. 9.2 If I be not an Apostle to others yet doubtless I am to you for the Seal of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord. So that though he had had no more Churches to govern yet his Apostolick Authority might have been still exercised over that particular one of Corinth The Provinces of the Evangelists were not yet so large as those of the Apostles for these were either sent to such Cities or Parts whither the Apostles themselves could not go or left where they could not stay The Church of Ephesus was the Diocese of Timothy from whence although the greater Occasions of other Churches might call him away and require his Assistance yet his Authority was not Temporal nor would it have expired if he had resided a longer while at Ephesus so that these Apostolick men were not so because they were unfixt but because they had that Eminence of Authority which they might exercise in one or more Churches according as their Necessities did require or as the Spirit signified and that they did not settle in one place is to be ascribed to the Condition of their Times and not to the nature of their Office for the Harvest was now great and such Labourers as these were but few and therefore their Presence was required in several Places And as this Unsetledness is not essential to Apostolick Authority no more is it essential to Episcopacy to be determined to a certain Church Every Bishop is Bishop of the Catholick Church and that his Authority is confined to a certain district is only the positive Law of the Church that forbids one Bishop any Exercise of his Office within the Diocess of another and St. Paul seems to have given them the occasion who would not build upon another mans Foundation However in any case of Necessity this Positure Law is superseeded and a Bishop may act in any place by virtue of a general Power he has received in his Ordination so that this first Exception of the Apostles and the Evangelists being unfixt and Bishops determined to a particular Church can make no essential Difference As to the Visitors of the Church of Scotland they make evidently against Mr. B's Notion of an essential Difference between Bishops and Evangelists for first of all the Residence was fixt to certain Cities and their Jurisdiction confin'd within certain Provinces as the Superintendent of the Country of Orkney was to keep his Residence in the Town of Keirkwall Spotswood Hist Scot. l. 3. p. 158. he of Rosse in the Channory of Rosse and so the rest in the Towns appointed for their Residence Their Office was to try the Life Diligence and Behaviour of the Ministers the Order of their Churches and the Manners of the People how the Poor were provided and how the Youth were instructed they must admonish where Admonition needed and dress all things that by good Counsel they were able to compose finally they must take note of all hainous Crimes that the same may be corrected by the Censures of the Church So far of their Constitution as we find it in Mr. Knox's first Project of Church-polity Spotswood p. 258. and their practice was altogether the same with that of Diocesan Episcopacy as Bishop Spotswood describes it The Superintendents held their Office during Life and their Power was Episcopal for they did elect and ordain Ministers they presided in Synods and directed all Church Censures neither was any Excommunication pronounced without their Warrant And now let the Reader judge how the Constitution of Diocesan Episcopacy becomes a Crime and yet these Visitors of the Church of Scotland conformable to divine Institution As to the second Exception that the Apostles and Evangelists were Episcopi Episcoporum and had Bishops under their Jurisdiction which our Diocesans who are the Bishops but of particular Churches do not pretend to This makes no Difference at leastwise no essential one for the same person may have the Charge of a particular Church or Diocess and yet have the supervising Power over several others But in this point Mr. B. does but equivocate and impose upon his Reader for by his Episcopus gregis he means only a Presbyter and a particular Bishop may have Jurisdiction over such without any Injury or Prejudice done to the Office which from it's first Institution has been under the Direction of a superiour Apostolical Power if therefore these Presbyters do retain all that Power which essentially belongs to them under a Diocesan Bishop how are they degraded In short either this Order of Congregational Episcopacy is different from Presbytery or the same with it if the same how is it abrogated by Diocesan Episcopacy since Presbyters are still in the full Possession and Exercise of their Office If they are distinct how then comes Mr. B. to confound them as he does § 16. where he says That the Apostles themselves set more than one of these Elders or Bishops in every Church So then those Apostolick men as Bishops of the particular Churches wherin as they resided had Authority over Presbyters within the Extent of their Diocess and a general Supervising Care of several other Churches and so they were Episcopi Episcoporum in the first they are succeeded by Diocesan Bishops in the latter by Metropolitans which yet were never lookt upon as two orders essentially distinct But after all this we shall never come to a right Understanding of Mr. B's Episcopacy unless we take along with it his Notion of a particular Church which he sets down p. 6. § 19. There is great Evidence of History p. 6. that a particular Church of the Apostles setling was essentially only a Company of Christians Pastors and People associated for personal holy Communion and mutual help in holy Doctrine Worship Conversation and Order therefore it never consisted of so few or so many or so distant as to be uncapable of such personal Help and Communion but was ever distinguished as from accidental Meetings so from the Communion of many Churches or distant Christians which was held but by Delegates Synods of Pastors or Letters and not by personal Help in Presence Not that all these must needs always meet in the same place but that usually they did so or at due times at least and were no more nor more distant than could so meet sometimes Persecution hindred them sometimes the Room might be too small even independent Churches among us sometimes meet in diverse Places
or Deacons that were ordained in their Dioceses without their consent and that by simple Presbyters who were never Chorepiscopi or had any character to distinguish them from other Presbyters Therefore the case ought not to be reckoned so hard as it is commonly represented by the more moderate Nonconformists who pretend this point of Reordination the only bar that keeps them out of the Church since there was never any other Church not any in Ancient times would have received them upon any other terms and they must have remained Nonconformists under Basil Athanasius and all the ancient Bishops whose names are and alwayes have been had in veneration with all Christians not one of these would have ever been perswaded to own a Pastor that his Presbyters had ordained in opposition to him nay hardly could they have been prevailed with to admit such as any other Bishop should Ordain within their Diocess so extream punctilious they were in this matter and there is hardly any one thing that caused so frequent and dangerous contentions between them as the point of Ordination Nor was this Province singular in the extent of its Bishopricks or the manner of their Administration but all the parts of the Christian World went by the same Rule as to Diocesan Episcopacy and most of them had much larger Dioceses than these we have been speaking of The Frontier Provinces of the Empire towards the East being more remote from the contentions that afflicted the Church were not cantoned into so small Dioceses as other Countries and being likewise less divided in their Civil Condition because it might render them less defensible against Invasion the Ecclesiastical Dioceses likewise remained intire in the the measure of their first Constitution The Diocess of Edessa seems to be of extraordinary extent Conc. Chal. Act. 10. even at the time of the Council of Chalcedon when the ambition of some Metropolitans and the contentions of Hereticks and Schismaticks had reduced Bishopricks to be very small For 1. some of the misdemeanors charged upon Ibas Bishop of this place shew that Diocess to be extreamly rich 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Collection for redemption of Captives amounted to fifteen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and tho' it is not easy to reduce that summ to our money yet we must conclude it to be a considerable sum when we reflect upon another accusation of Daniel Brother to Ibas as if he had bestowed on Calloa the money of the Church for she had let out to use two or three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which must be a considerable summ since it 's taken notice of as an argument of her wealth Besides the Church of Edessa had six thousand more of these Numismata besides its ordinary Revenues and one of its Mannors called Lafargaritha is mentioned there and two hundred pound weight of Church Plate 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The City of Battina was in the Diocess of Edessa for Ibas is accused of having endeavoured to make one John Bishop of it who was suspected of Magick But Ibas his Arch-Deacon of that place opposed it 3. Maras who was one of Ibas his accusers was Excommunicated by another Arch-Deacon of his 4. The Clergy of the City of Edessa was above two hundred persons not reckoning that of the Country within his Diocess and this was a Diocesan Bishop to purpose who besides a large Diocess had Excommunicating Arch-Deacons and a great Revenue And if Mr. B. or his Brethren had been of that Diocess we might have found them among his accusers The Diocess of Cyrus whereof Theodoret was Bishop was yet larger Theodor. Ep. 113. containing eight hundred Churches as he writes to Leo Bishop of Rome The exceptions which Mr. B. makes against this Epistle are so fully answered by the incomparable Dean of Pauls that nothing can be added But if Mr. B. should quarrel with any writings of this time for mentioning great Dioceses we must have a new Critick and disgrace a great deal of the Fathers that have hitherto been received by a general consent It is a very hard matter to convince men that imagine all that time for them whereof we have little or no account and reckon silence of Antiquity for consent and then if any thing shall appear against what they have once fanfi'd though it be never of so good credit it is spurious it is all Imposture because it makes against them who would ever be convicted if it shall be Defence enough to say the Evidence is a Lye Petavius mistaking a passage in Epiphanius Not. in Epiph Haeres Arr. Epiph. Ep. ad Joh. Hieros ap Hieron thought the Dioceses of Cyprus to be very small but from Epiphanius his Letter to John Bishop of Jerusalem it appears that his Diocess was of good extent John had a quarrel with him for having Ordained a Presbyter in his Diocess though it was only for the use of a Monastery and he excuses himself by shewing how common a thing this was and how frequently it was done in his own Diocess and he was so far from taking offence at it that he thought himself obliged to some of his neighbouring Bishops for using that liberty and therefore commends the good nature and meekness of the Cyprian Bishops who never quarrelled with one another upon this account and then adds That many Bishops of our Communion have Ordained Presbyters in our Province that we could not take because they fled from us on purpose to avoid that honour which was the modesty of those times Nay I my self desired Philo of blessed memory and Theophorbus that they would Ordain Presbyters in those Churches of Cyprus which were near them O vere benedicta Episcoporum Cypri mansuetudo bonitas multi Episcopi communionis nostrae Presbyteros in nostra ordinaverunt Provincia quos nos comprehendere non poteramus ipse cohortatus slim b. m. Philonem sanctum Theophorbum ut in Ecclesiis Cypri quae juxta se grant ad meae autem Parochiae videbantur Ecclesiam pertinere to quod grandis esset late patens Provincia ordinarent Presbyteros and belonged to my Diocess because my Province i.e. my Docess was very large Now that this Province which is here said to be of so large extent was no other than his Diocess appears from the nature of the thing For if we shall imagine that it was his Province as Metropolitan the words will have no sense for then are not there Bishops enough dispersed through this great Province who may Ordain within their respecture Dioceses and to them belonged the Ordination of Presbyters and not to the Metropolitan If we shall take this Province for a Civil division there will be yet greater absurdity for there may be other Metropolitans as well as he and by what Authority could he dispose of their Dioceses or Provinces In short there he gives leave to Ordain Presbyters where the right of Ordaining them belonged to
Ornament but the Number of Believers in that City did require many Churches for their Assemblies And the Passage of Theodoret above cited does not import the contrary Therefore to clear this point I will endeavor to shew the State of the Church of C. P. about the later end of Constantine's Reign and how it was impossible for them to meet All in one place 2. I will shew that the words before cited do not conclude that all the Believers of C. P. were assembled in one Congregation with Alexander their Bishop 1. As to the State of this Church it could not but be very numerous when we consider what care the Emperor took to bring Inhabitants to it from all Parts some from Rome some from other Provinces and it is more than probable that much the greatest part of those that came to inhabit the first Christian Emperor's Favorite City were Christians 2. His care for rendering this City great and suitable to the Magnificence of so mighty a Prince had that Success that it did not only equal Old Rome but excell'd it as well in Greatness of its Wealth as the Multitude of its Inhabitants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Sozom. L. 2. c. 3. And the same Author adds that the Piety of the Emperor and of the Citizens and their Charity towards the Poor was the reason of its mighty Increase from the whence may be judg'd what Religion the Generality of the City did profess 3. The Success of that Charity did not only add to the Number of the Citizens but very considerably to the number of Christians For the same Author writes that it had so good effect there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. That many of the Jews and almost all the Heathens were converted and became Christians 4. The same Author to make it altogether a Christian City writes farther that it was never polluted with any Heathen Temples or Sacrifices unless it were in the Time of Julian the Apostate 5. The Provision which Constantine made for the Burial of the Dead shews the number of the Church of C. P. to be far too great for one Congregation For he alloted to that charitable Vse no less than Nine Hundred and Fifty Shops or Work-houses whose Profits were to be employed in burying the Poor decently which Shops were to be free from all Tax and Duty to the Prince As you may see by comparing these several places in the Body of the Civil Law N. 59. with N. 43. and with N. L. 12. And Honorius in the Year 409. considering the Number of the Decani the small Officers that attended Funerals to have grown inordinate reduces them to Nine Hundred and Fifty probably the first Establishment of Constantine the Great See Justinian's Code l. 1 T. 2 4. And if after all this all the Christians in C. P. could meet together in one Church towards the latter end of Constantine's Reign we must conclude some wonderful Mortality to have happen'd and that these Decani had had extraordinary Employment and bury'd in a manner the whole City But let them believe that can comprehend For my part I can as soon imagine that Homer with all his Scholiasts can be put into a Nut shell or that a Witch can turn her self in a Key-hole as that all the Christians in C. P. made but one Congregation But notwithstanding the Number of Christians in C. P. might be much too great for one Congregation yet the major part might be Hereticks or Schismaticks such as came not to the Bishops Church and therefore all that adher'd to him might be no more than could meet in one Assembly To which I answer towards the latter end of Constantine's Reign it was so far from being the Case of the Church that the number of Hereticks and Schismaticks was inconsiderable and most of those were forc'd to come to Church and that there may be no Difficulty remaining in this point I will give some farther account of the number of the Catholick Christians in comparison with Hereticks and Schismaticks Constantine the Great having set his Heart upon Christian Religion to settle and adorn it he thought nothing more effectual than the Vnity and Concord of Christians to promote which he resolv'd to proceed against all Hereticks and Dissenters by a severe Law and to reduce them to the Vnity of the Church The Doctrine of Arrius tho it began to be favour'd in several places had not yet made a formal Seperation L. 2. c. 32. says Sozomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. All came to Church and communicated together but the Novatians and some old Hereticks Against these the Emperour made an Edict whereby he took away their Churches and ordered them to be joyn'd to the Churches of the Catholicks He told them it was better for them to communicate with the Catholick Church and advis'd them to come over to it The Success of this Law we find in the very same place That by this means 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The memory of those Heresies was in a manner extinguish'd for they came all to Church for fear of that Law against their Conventicles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. And those that persisted in their Opinion having no opportunity to Conventicle nor to corrupt the minds of men died at last and left none to succeed them in their Opinions Only the Novatians remain'd who says the Author did not suffer much by this Edict being befriended by the Emperor who had an esteem for their Bishop of C. P. upon the account of his Holiness and therefore his Church there was not much endammag'd tho' the Historian speaks this very mincingly and says only that it was probable that so it was and likely had no other reason for it than the Opinion which the Novatians had of that Bishop and that their Church was not altogether extirpated then like those of other Hereticks But he confesses that every where else they suffer'd the same measure with others unless it were in Phrygia and some Bordering Provinces And now to allow the Novatians a Conventicle in Constantinople towards the later end of Constantine's Reign which is more than Sozomen durst affirm yet I hope the Catholicks will be still too numerous to meet all of them in one Congregation But Theodoret affirms they were no more than could meet in one Church and that they did actually do so I answer That Theodoret does not say so and that the Passage cited does not conclude it therefore to clear this difficulty let us examine it After the Death of Arrius says Theodoret those of Eusebius's Faction were much out of Countenance and bury'd him but on the other side L. 1. c. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Valesius renders thus B. autem Alexander cum gaudio totius Ecclesiae collectas celebravit piè orthodoxe simul cum Universis fratribus Deum orans impense glorificans Now he takes the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a
these Bishops who are said to be in Regione Hipponensi were not the Bishops of that Region but some Bishops of the Province met together there as had been done before upon the like Occasion as may be seen in the same Epistle Facto Concilio placuit ut conveniremini 2 It appears from the Inscription and Stile of this Epistle Clerici Catholici Regionis Hipponensium and yet speaking of the Bishop of Hippo they call him their Bishop not one of their Bishops which they must have said if they had had more but Conventus ab Episcopo nostro Proculeianus non est Conquestus Episcopus noster c. So that notwithstanding these Bishops mention'd in the Region of Hippo the Body of that Clergy own but one who was properly their Diocesan And this is farther clear'd by comparing this passage with that of St. Austin mentioned a little before where he assumes to himself the Church belonging to the Regio Hipponensium From the Diocess of Hippo we pass to that of Alexandria of which I have spoke particularly enough before but here the same Author offers a great many things p. 32. which I cannot answer at this time very particularly yet something I shall say as briefly as I can The Instance of Maraeotis he says little to he insinuates as if Maraeotis might not have Number enough of Christians to have a Bishop But this Athanasius does sufficiently shew to be a Groundless Conjecture and even before Athanasius the Generality of the People there were Christians He farther finds one Dracontius made a Bishop in the Territory of Alexandria possibly a Chorepiscopus or at least-wise it is manifest from the Epistle to him that it was the extraordinary Favor of the People towards him that compell'd him to accept a Bishoprick And the Danger of their falling to Arrianism was the reason which Athanasius makes use of to press him to accept it This was an extraordinary Case and allowing this man a Country Bishoprick that of Alexandria would be a great deal to big for the Congregational Measure After this we have Instances of several Cities that had Bishops and lay very near one the other and what does this conclude Might not these Dioceses be yet much larger than one Congregation Suppose the Chief Cities of Holland had each a Bishop yet I conceive they would be Diocesans though those Cities lie very close together And now after all this though we have several Instances out of Egypt how near Cities were together in some parts yet upon the whole account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ath. Ap. 2. the Dioceses do appear to be large enough from the Number of them For in Athanasius his Time there were not a Hundred Bishops in all Egypt Libia and Pentapolis The next thing I shall take notice of is the Defence of Mr. Baxter's Allegation out of Athanasius to shew that all the Christians of Alexandria could meet in one Church It is to be confess'd that the Expressions of that Father do seem to favor him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Church did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hold all c. Now suppose that all the Christians in Alexandria the Catholicks at least-wise could meet together in that Great Church yet all the Diocess could not there were some parts of it at a good Distance and they could not conveniently come so that the Diocess of Alexandria will exceed the measure of the Congregational Way 2. Suppose this Great Church could receive all the Multitude yet if that Multitude was too great for Personal Communion it is insignificant For if that be a Congregational Church that can possibly meet between the same Walls this Congregational Church will be as indefinite as a Diocess 3. Before this the Church of Alexandria met in distinct Congregations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we are told that these places were very small short and streight places So I suppose they were in respect of the Multitude of Christians which they did scarcely receive But that they were such Chappels or Churches as some of our Parishes in England have as great a number as Alexandria is hardly credible because 1. The Church of Alexandria was very numerous from the beginning and if they met all in one place it must consequently be very large Nor is it likely they should divide till they were grown too numerous for the biggest Meeting-place they could conveniently have 2. Tho' before the Empire was converted they might be confin'd to little places and forc'd to meet severally yet after Constantine became Christian it is not likely that the Alexandrians would content themselves with small and streight Chappels when every ordinary City built very Great and Magnificent Cathedrals And 3. Some of these Churches had been built with a Design of receiving as many as well could have Personal Communion in Worship together as Theonas is said by Athanasius to have built a Church bigger than any of those they had before And yet this and all the rest were but few and streight in comparison of the great Multitude of Catholicks that were in Alexandria But I conceive after all this that the Expressions of Athanasius do not conclude that all the Christians in Alexandria were met in that Great Church All that came it may be found Room but that all did come is not easily imagin'd For the Tumultuous manner in which they come to their Bishop to demand a General Assembly makes it probable that not only Women and Children would be glad to absent themselves but many more either apprehensive of the Effect of this Tumultuous Proceeding or of the danger of such a Crowd would willingly stay away Mr. Baxter tho' he thought the main Body of the Catholicks might meet here yet he would not conclude that all did and even these that did assemble here were too many for one Congregation and was an Assembly more for solemnity and ostentation than for Personal Communion in Worship and the proper Ends of a Religious Assembly But that we may not wonder how the Catholicks should be so few in Athanasius his Time we are told farther that the Arrians and other Dissenters might make much the Major part Nay it may be the Arrians alone were more numerous How true this is we may learn from Athanasius who speaking of the Catholick Party makes them the Major part of the Alexandrians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All these were Catholicks and their business was to desire Sirianus and Maximus not to disturb their Churches till they might send to the Emperor And that they were the greatest part might be yet farther clear'd from several Circumstances of that time which I cannot insist upon in this place without being too tedious to the Reader To conclude this not only Alexandria and the other Cities of Egypt had several Congregations compriz'd in the same Diocess but the Meletians had some Bishops of several Titles who had more Cities than one in their Diocesses as may be seen
govern'd by a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons was but one Congregation for every such Church had but one Altar This Observation of one Altar in one Episcopal Church he confirms by Mr. Mede who propounds it with great Modesty and onely as a Conjecture and M. B. has added nothing to his Reason more than his own Confidence If he had but taken leisure to consider and not have run away with that onely which seems to make for his purpose he might have found enough in those very Passages cited by Mr. Mede to have undeceived him The Matter in short is thus The Principal Church or Meeting-place in every City belong'd to the Bishop where his Chair was set up with a Bench of Presbyters on every side circling the Communion Table this whole place was called Altare Sacrarium and within the Jurisdiction of a single Bishop it is probable there was no more than one the Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons represented the Unity of the Church although it might be divided into several Congregations and every Congregation might have a Communion Table so that one Bishop one Altar signifies indeed the Unity of the Church as being the place of its common Councel and solemn Tribunal and to set up an Altar is not to have two Communion Tables in a City but to have distinct Governments Mr. B's Dispute of Church Government p. 90. The Ancients ordinarily call the Lords Table and the place where it stood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say the Table and the Sacrarium or place of it's standing And so says Bishop usher in his Notes upon the passage before cited Altare apud patres mensam Dominio eam passim denot at apud Ignatium Polycarpum Sacrarium quoque and opposite Bishops and Presbyters this is confirmed by a Passage of Ignatius in his Epistle to the Magnesians cited by Mr. B. Omnes adunati ad templum Dei concurrite sicut ad unum Altare If this reading which he uses were right it would distinguish between Christian Temples and imply that some of them had not Altars which is not likely to be true if Altar and Communion-table were the same But to speak ingeniously neither Temple nor Altar here does signifie what Mr. B. would have it for the Florentine Copy has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which refers only to the Jewish Temple and Altar wherein consisted the Unity of the Jewish Church notwithstanding they were divided into many Synagogues and Congregations But that one Altar for every Church so frequently mention'd by Ignatius does not signifie every Communion-table but that eminent one together with the Bishops Chair and the bench of the Presbyters appears from diverse Passages in his Epistles In that to the Magnesians he alledges to this Ecclesiastical Consistory about the Altar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That well-platted Crown of our Presbyters alledging to the Figure in which they sate and then follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Counsel of the Altar or Sacrifices And in his Epistle to the Ephesians he speaks to this Effect Unless a man be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 within the verge of the Altar he is no partaker of the bread of God and this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he explains in his Epistle ad Trallenses he that is within the Altar is clean wherefore he obeys the Bishops and the Presbyters he that is without is such a one that does any thing without the Bishop and the Presbyters so that Obedience to the Bishop or Presbyter is an Explication of that Phrase of being within the Altar and this might consist with the Division of the Church into several distinct Congregations But St. Cyprian in his fifty fifth Epist makes this yet clearer where speaking of the Insolence of such as having sacrificed to Idols thrust themselves into Church-Communion without doing any Pennance he breaks out at last into this passionate Aggravation what then remains but that the Church should yield to the Capital and that the Priests withdrawing themselves and taking away the Altar of our Lord Images and Idol-Gods together with their Altars should succeed and take Possession of the place proper to the sacred and venerable bench of our Clergy the bench of the Clergy then belongs to the Altar that is the Communion-table of the Principal and Episcopal Church to which all other Congregations did belong in as much as the Presbyters they joyn'd with appertain'd to that Altar and so there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet several Assemblies under his Direction and within the Communion of that Altar This Usage of one Altar and several Communion-tables depending upon it continu'd a long while after in the Church Innocent I. in his Letter to Decentius mentions the sending of the consecrated Symbols from the Episcopal Church Altar to the depending Parishes upon solemn times and long after that all the Parishes of a Diocese paid Homage to the Episcopal Church by sending some of their principal Members to communicate there upon Solemn Festivals as appears by several Canons that are cited and examined more particularly hereafter and here in England there have been Footsteps of the same Custom till of late in Comparison though from the first beginning of the Gospel we have not the least hint of Congregational Episcopacy in this place The next thing he alledges is a passage out of Justin Martyr Just Martyr Ap. 2. p. 97. Ed. Paris 98.99 where he describes the manner of the Christian Assemblies in his time where the Eucharist is said to be celebrated by the Bishop 1 Dispute p. 92. and that on Sunday all the Christians that liv'd either in Cities or in the Country came together prayed with and received the Sacraments at the hand of the Bishop and those that were absent had it sent to them by the Hand of the Deacons but what shall we conclude from hence That all that came together could come to one place or because the Congregation of the Bishop as being the most eminent is here only described must we conclude that there was no more than one in any City This account is only General and serves only to shew what they did when they came together and the Principal Assembly was surely the most proper instance and not in how many places they might be Assembled Disp p 33. The Story of Gregory Thaumaturgus makes the next Proof who being made against his will Bishop of Ne-Caesarea found but seventeen Christians in the whole City this was indeed a small Congregation and hardly numerous enough to make a Church but if Mr. B. had been so ingenious 〈…〉 as to have mentioned the Success of that Bishop's Ministry he might have spared any one else the Labour of answering this Instance for the same Bishop out of those contemptible Beginnings did so far enlarge the Church of that place that when he dyed he left but seventeen in the whole City that were not Christians if
him which I wonder as much he should believe as that he be satisfied with another Friend's Computation of the Christians in Alexandria in Strabo's time 't is in short this That he though his Voice was none of the lowdest yet he preacht to a Congregation judg'd to be about ten thousand men 2 part of Ch. Hist in one place he has but 6000. but in another he comes up again to 10000. and that they all hear'd him I am afraid that this Friends Calculation exceeds as much as the other falls short for we reckon now that three thousand makes an extraordinary Congregation and it may be possible for a mighty Voice to speak to a thousand more but it may be that the World is degenerated since and that our Lungs are no more in Comparison with those of the times he speaks of than they were compared to those of the Eastern Preachers At last to make sure work he concludes that though Jerusalem might have many Assemblies and yet but one Church p. 81. 82. and after the dispersing of the Apostles but one Bishop yet this is no Precedent This I must needs say is something more than the Independents would adventure to say they minced the matter and told us that Jerusalem being the first born Church and nursed up by the joynt care of all the Apostles might arrive to an extraordinary Stature and look gigantick in Comparison of the rest yet they durst not say it had more than one Congregation and was no Precedent What shall we judge then That the Apostles built the Church of Jerusalem after one model and those of other Cities after another or if they did surely they were both lawful does that overthrow the Church and Discipline of Christ's Institution that is according to the practice of his own Apostles Or can a Conformity to the Discipline of the Mother-church of Jerusalem become in it's self a Sin Wherein shall we be saved if the Imitation of the Apostles do not secure us But Mr. B. says the Office of a Bishop supposes him to have no more than one Congregation since he must hold personal Communion with all in Preaching and Administration of the Sacraments visiting the Sick relieving the Poor and the like but must all these Acts be performed by himself in Person Must he have no Assistance Is nothing to be done within his Congregation without his Presence May not he do all this occasionally as the Apostles and Evangelists did Every Bishop had Presbyters in the first times and if he were so indispensably oblig'd to do all himself what use were they of and yet appoint Elders for the ordinary and constant Performance of the Ministry whom he shall supervise and direct It is very strange that the Bishops should have been so many hundred years in an Office which it was impossible for them to discharge and yet this be never discover'd by themselves or others However the generality of Bishops you say for a long while after the Apostles had but one Congregation to govern what then If all the Believers in and about a City would hardly make a Congregation that is to be ascribed to the Condition of those times and not to be reckon'd essential to the Office all things have their Beginning but are not confin'd to the Measures of their Infancy and if the Beginnings of the Church were but small even the greatest Cities it cannot be a prejudice to the Governour of it if the number of Believers should increase since they are appointed in Clemens Opinion for the Government not only of those that have already Ep. ad Corinth but of such as shall afterwards believe The Practice of the universal Church is evidently on our side for who has ever heard of two Bishops in one City though it were never so great unless in time of Schism and it is strange when the number of Believers did encrease beyond all Possibility of personal Communion that none should ever discern the necessity of dividing into several Churches and learn this Wisdom from the Example of Bees But the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria by their Affectation of Empire became evil Examples to others by their first Corruption of Church Discipline It is strange then that among all the Quarrels of the Bishops and in all their Accusations of one another that this Crime of so high a Nature should never be objected that no good man could never complain of this Corruption that there should never be laid to their Charge this usurping of Authority over whole Cities and multitudes of Congregations But supposing this an Usurpation in the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria how is it credible that all the great Cities in the World should be carryed away with their Example that there should be not one honest Bishop left that understood the nature of his Office or the just bounds of his Diocess Or suppose the Bishops so far prejudiced with self-Interest as to have neglected a Duty that redounded so much to the Diminution of their Power yet were the People who in those times had some part in their Election ignorant of this great Secret would not they right themselves and not have suffer'd their several Congreations to become Chappelries c. Dependencies upon the Bishops Church Would not they have govern'd themselves rather than become as it were a Province to the Bishop or if the People were ignorant of this was there no Priest that was ambitious enough to be Bishop that could inform them of their Right in Expectation that they would be grateful to the Discoverer of their Priviledges And lastly was there no Schismatick learned enough to justifie his setting up of an Altar against an Altar by this Argument that there were more Believers than could hold personal Communion with the Bishops Altar that there was work enough for more Bishops than one and that in populous Cities there ought to be several Churches yet they were all so dull as never to think of this way but on the contrary every one pretended that there ought to be but one Bishop in a City and that himself had the Right and the other was the Usurper In short since the Nature of the Church requires that it should swarm when Believers grew too numerous for one Assembly and send out new Colonies under Independant-officers Is it not very strange that it should so far forget it's Nature as never to have done this and to leave not one poor instance upon whose Authority the Independency of Congregations might relye It is upon this that the present Question turns and not whether Bishops at first had but single Congregations for if there were no more Believers within or belonging to the City they could have no more but after they were multiplyed into several Congregations still they had but one Bishop and Mr. B. does not as much as pretend to any Evidence of History to the contrary unless it be when the Church was divided
see will be stiffly deny'd though the Scripture Testimonies already alledg'd are sufficient to perswade any reasonable man that the Church of Jerusalem was more than a Congregation and consequently the Bishop of it a Diocesan according to Mr. B.'s definition But besides we have as ancient Testimonies from Church History too of the greatness of that Church as of any other whatsoever For Hegesippus among several commendations of him sayes that several of the Jewish Sectaries who believed neither a Resurrection nor Judgment to come were converted by James And that when a great number of the Rulers and and principal men of the City Apud Euseb l. 2. c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were by his Ministry brought to believe the Gospel the Jews made an uproar the Scribes and Pharisees saying that it was to be feared that all the people would turn Christians would they fansie themselves in so great danger if the Christians in so vast and populous a City should have but one single Congregation Suppose they had one Synagogue of four or five hundred is that such a dreadful proportion as to fright people out of their wits as if they were immediately to be overrun with Christianity and what should give them so great disturbance The Christians had alwayes had one Congregation there and surely a pretty full one from the time of Christs Death and if their meeting places were not increased and Synagogues with their Rulers and Officers had not deserted the Jewish Church and professed Christianity there had been no protence for such an apprehension as if all Jerusalem were about to change the Law for the Gospel it was more than a poor Congregational Church and Bishop that must give cause to these apprehensions It was not long ere this Church of Jerusalem that was grown so formidable to the Jews that they were afraid lest in a little while it might swallow up all their Synagogues was removed thence and by a special warning snatch'd from the destruction that was shortly to fall upon that wicked City There is an ancient Tradition that the Christians of Jerusalem forsook it before the last Siege and went to Pella Euseb Hist l. 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a City of beyond Jordan and because the obscurity of the place may make one suspect that the numbers of the Church of Jerusalem were not so great if this Town could receive them all We must understand that Town to be their Metropolis or seat of their Bishop but the believers were all scattered through that whole Country Epip Haer. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 3. c. 11. as Epiphanius writes and his way of expressing himself makes Pella only the principal residence of the Church and here it is probable their Bishop liv'd for after the death of James and the Destruction of Jerusalem the Apostles and Disciples and such of our Savious kindred as remained met together to appoint a Successour to James when this Church was departed from Jerusalem and it must needs be more than an ordinary charge to occasion so solemn a meeting to consult about the Person that should succeed in it It was more surely than the oversight of one single Congregation Id. l. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And his Government added yet greater numbers to that Church many thousands of the Circumcision receiving the Christian Faith at that time and among the rest Justus who succeeded in the Bishoprick of Jerusalem Now from this account of the Church of Jerusalem it appears manifestly 1. That it was Episcopal from the beginning and some of the Authors that attest it liv'd in that time when the Apostolical Church Government is pretended to be chang'd into Episcopacy by Blondel and it shews no less the vanity of Mr. B.'s conceit about the Original of Bishops 2. That the Bishops of Jerusalem were Diocesan's having the oversight of several Congregations which is necessarily inferr'd from the express numbers of Converts from general expressions of wonderful accessions from the jealousy of the Scribes and Pharisees who apprehended from the progress Christianity made that all Jerusalem would soon become Christians from the farther accounts of its increase and of the innumerable multitudes that were added to it and this is sufficient to shew the weakness of Mr. B.'s conjecture who makes Rome and Alexandria to be the first patterns of Diocesan Episcopacy and that not till after the beginning of the third Century Nor was the Church of Jerusalem singular in its constitution but all other Churches of the Apostles planting were of the same kind and design'd for the like and yet farther increase The beginnings of them as of all other things were but small the Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of Mustard Seed which is yet capable of prodigious improvement and the slip when first planted is but single yet afterwards it shoots out several branches which though never so mnumerous and at some distance one from the other yet communicate all in the same same body and root The design of the Gospel is not like those of the Authors of Sects or Religious orders to have only a select company of followers that are much at leisure but great and comprehensive and suited to the whole World There is no Sex no Capacity no condition but is design'd to be brought into the Church and to be digested the most commodiously that may be so that there may be one fold under one Shepherd Christ the Universal Pastor The Schools of the Philosophers and the Synagogues of the Jews were to narrow foundations for such a building as that of the Christian Church which are to be larger in proportion to the greatness of the Fabrick and it is no less the strength than beauty of the whole to have its Stones and Timber the parts of which it consists of something a greater magnitude than those of private and ordinary building nor can it yet stand without there be some kind of coherence and connection at least wise where the people that are members of the Church are likewise united in a political communion this connection ought particularly to be regarded which the Apostles in their first planting of the Gospel had an eye to as shall be observed farther in the course of Diocesan Episcopacy which after this digression I am going to pursue The first Persecution that was raised against the Church of Jerusalem was by the good Providence of God turned into the happy occasion of planting several other Churches and that storm which was designed to quench that fire that came down from Heaven scattered the sparks of it into all the Regions round about Samaria was the first place we read of that entertained the Gospel when it had been forced out of Jerusalem Acts 8.1 v. 4. v. 5 6. v. 12. Philip the Deacon Preached Christ unto them and the people with one accord gave heed to those things that were spoken by him and when
upon the multitudes said to be converted the number of Apostles and extraordinary Labourers commonly residing in this City the conjunction of Jews and Gentiles under the common title and profession of Christianity we must conclude that the Church of Antioch was too great for one Congregation especially before the place of assembly can be imagin'd very capacious and I believe Mr. B. does not imagine such vast Cathedrals as Pauls to be very Primitive Orat de S. Ign. But what ever number of Christians there might be at that time Ignatius his Bishop-rick was never the less Diocesan in its constitution and design or else Chrysostom mistakes one Topick of his commendation He reckons five things that were much to his honour whereof two bring him under suspition of Diocesan Prelacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of his Authority or Government 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of the City whereof he was Bishop The first I suppose refers to his metropolitan Power the second to his peculiar Diocess but if this Bishop were to have but one Congregation what would the greatness of the City signifie how many more would have the same honour with him Or what so great difference is there between a full Congregation in the heart of the City and another as full in Chelsey at leastwise what honour does the greatness of the City do the Minister of that single Congregation And now to pass by the Church of Corinth where St. Paul Preach'd for a Year and six Months upon a Divine assurance of extraordinary success and that God had much people in that place Acts 18.8 9 10 11. and where many effectually believed and were Baptized where Peter and Apollos Preached with that effect as to leave many Disciples 1 Cor. 3. who called themselves by their names And to say nothing of Ephesus where a numerous Church is said to have been gathered by St. Paul who preached there for two years and not only they that dwelled at Ephesus but all that dwelt in Asia Acts 19.10 heard the word of the Lord and the progress of the Gospel was so considerable that the shrine-makers apprehended the ruine of their Trade when they saw and heard that Paul not only at Ephesus but throughout all Asia had perswaded and turned away much people v. 26. To pass by these and several other eminent Churches Let us consider the Diocess of Rome as it was yet in the Apostles time It is very uncertain who laid the first Foundations of this Church though certain it is that before Pauls coming there the Gospel was not only received Rom. 1.13 15 17. seq but their Church was very considerable for St. Paul in his Epistle written long before his coming there as he himself witnesses sayes that their Faith was spoken of through the whole World and by the multitude of salutations in the end of that Epistle he makes appear the numbers of Christians in that City Salute Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16. Ostendit Congregationem Fidelium Ecclesiam nominari Hieron in loe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coetum Fidelium nec mirum est in tam am plâ Civitate distinctos fuisse Fidelium coetus Beza with the Church that is in their house This was one of the Congregations of that Church which is occasionly mentioned and it is not improbable that several that are mentioned with all the Saints that are with them may be the Officers of several Congregations For it appears that most of these were of the Ministry and such by whose means the Romans believed and that they were strangers come thither from other parts where Paul had known them Congregationem vert Eras Istos amats quos satutat intelligimus ex nominiâ—us suiffe peregrinos per quorum exemylum atque Doctrinam non absurde existimamus credidisse Romanes Hieron for as yet he had not seen Rome And this number was afterwards increased considerably by the coming of Paul who converted some of the Jews and afterwards received all that came whether Jews or Gentiles and Preach'd to them the Kingdom of God for the space of two whole years no man forbidding him And the progress of the Gospel in this City may be farther observed from the Persecution of Nero who is said to have put an infinite multitude of them to Death Ingens multitude hand perinde in Crimint ineendii quam odio bumani generis convicti sunt Tac. H. l. 15. upon pretence that they had fired Rome and the Heathen Historian sayes that they who confess'd were first laid hold on then a vast company were convicted by their indication where by the by besides the multitude of the sufferers we may take notice that the words seem to be mistaken generally as if the Christians some of them had confess'd the Fact and accused the rest Lipsius thus understanding the passage gives Tacitus the lye but he does not say they confessed the fact but they confessed without expressing the particulars but what did they confess then If it were this Crime that theâ— own'd themselves and charg'd others with how comes he to add that they were not convicted so much of this Crime by this Indication as by the hatred of all mankind therefore this confession was no more than owning themselves to be Christians and the hatred they were in made this sufficient conviction To these instances of the great numbers of Christians in some more considerable Cities Eccles Hist l. 2. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall add only the general account which Eusebius gives of the success of the Christian faith immediately after the first discovery of it That presently in all Cities and Villages Churches abounding with innumerable multitudes were assembled and the Granary of Christ was fill'd up to the top with the Wheat that was gather'd in Hitherto I have observ'd chiefly the growth of Christianity under the Apostles and that there was in some Cities such a number of Christians as could not meet together in one Assembly for personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship The next thing we must shew in order to Diocesan Episcopacy must be that such numbers of believers made but one Church Govern'd by one Bishop As to the Church of Jerusalem we have shew'd already from the most ancient Ecclesiastical writings that James the Just was Bishop of that Church i. e. of all the Believers in Jerusalem Nor is that Tradition without ground in the Scripture it self for St. Paul reckons James the Lords Brother among the Apostles of that Church Sal. 1.19 though he were none of the Twelve and in another place he mentions him as a person in Eminent place and authority there one that had sent several Brethren to Antioch before that certain Brethren came from James â— 12 Here we find the style of the Scripture to alter in favour of Episcopacy for hitherto the Messengers who were sent from one Church to another were
est curam Parochiae habere Hispani Episcopi docent Baptizare posse Mendoza where it is ordered That if a Deacon who has the government of a Congregation or Parish without a Bishop or Presbyter shall Baptize any the Bishop shall perfect it by Confirmation or if in the mean time the party dyes we are to hope well of him The Council of Neocaesarea in like manner does signifie the same distribution of Dioceses into several Parishes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Conc. Neocaes c. 13. where the Country Presbyters are distinguished from those of the City and the former are forbid to officiate in the Citie 's Cathedral in the presence of the Bishops or Presbyters belonging to them Now when Constantines conversion had made so great and happy a change in the affairs of the Church when the Civil power that hitherto used all means possible to destroy it took it not only into its protection but to special favour and kindness and studyed all means possible to render it great and honourable the number of Bishops and Dioceses were so far from being diminished that they soon after were exceedingly encreased partly by the Emperors multiplying Metropoles partly by the unhappy Divisions that soon after afflicted the Church as will appear by the progress of this deduction When Constantine Indicted the Council of Nice it appears from Eusebius that he us'd all means to have as great an Assembly of Bishops as could well come together Euseb â—e vita Constant l 3. c. 6. for which purpose he furnish'd many of them especially such as were at a great distance with convenience for Travail and there is no doubt but as many as could have any means of going would be carri'd thither by their curiosity to see and enjoy the Presence of a Christian Emperor that new Miracle that God had wrought in favour of his Church and accordingly they came from all parts of the Roman Empire and some from the Nations beyond it The Countries that lay next to Nice did doubtless send the greatest part of their Bishops as may be inferr'd by comparing the subscriptions of the Bishops of Palestine Phoenice Coelosyria Egypt and some other Countries either with the Ancient Notiâ—â—â— of the Dioceses of those Countries or the subscriptions of following Councils and it is observable that the Province of Bithynia where this Council was held had but 13 Bishops Present though the principal Bishop of the Province were extreamly concern'd and at last condemned by this Synod therefore we cannot but conclude that that Province had very few more Yet after all this care to make a full assembly the number of Bishops scarce exceeded 250. as Eusebius who was present does affirm 232. according to the MS. cited by Mr. Selden in Eutich 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Sandius takes to be Sabinus often mention'd by Socrates and one that exposed this Council as consisting of poor Illiterate men and Eustatius Bishop of Antioch reckons but 20 more though the Common opinion reckons 318. and yet how small a number is this in comparison of some succeeding Councils where we find without half the Apparatus that belong'd to the Nicene Council double the number meet together The Council of Sardica on the part of the Catholicks had near 300. the Hereticks had great numbers at the same time in Philippopolis the Arrian Council of Sirmium had 300 Western Bishops besides those of the East that of Ariminum had 400. Bishops from the Western parts of the Empire for in the East there was another Council called at Seleucca and lastly that of Chalcedon had no less than 600. There can be no reasonable account given of this difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Const l. 3.17 but that the multitude of Dioceses was strangely increas'd for Constantine design'd the Council of Nice to be as great and Magnificent as was possible and yet it was nothing in comparison with those that followed nay was outdone by some Provincial Councils of Africk And as the number of the Council of Nice shews that Dioceses in those times were not so many nor small as they became afterwards so the Canons of the same Council do suppose Bishopricks to be very large and forbid the dividing of them for one Canon orders that every Bishop should be ordained by all the Bishops of his Province Can. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And considering how large Ecclesiastical Provinces were then they cannot suppose all the Pastours of every Congregation to meet nor indeed the Ministers of every good Town or substantial Village which in several Provinces would amount to several thousands without making such an Assembly more numerous than any general Council that ever was in the world Can. â— another Canon provides against the dividing of Dioceses in case a Novatian Bishop shall happily be willing to be reconcil'd to the Church but that he should be content with the place of Presbyter unless the Catholick Bishop should think fit to leave him the title of a Bishop if not Inveniat eâ— locum ut sit in Parochia Chorepiscopus then to make him a Chorepiscopus i. e. the Rector of a Country Parish in his Diocese or a City Presbyter lest there should be two Bishops in the same City The African Councils took another course as we have seen and divided the Diocese in such a Case but when they consider'd the Authority of this Council we find them changing their Practice for Augustin when he had design'd his Successour yet would not suffer him to be ordain'd in his life time because he would not violate this Canon although his Predecessor had permitted his Ordination while he was alive August Ep. but Augustin makes his excuse that he did not know of this Canon then and yet his Diocese was large enough to hold two but he understood this one City with all its dependencies and thought that by vertue of this Canon there ought not to be two Bishops together in the Diocese of Hippo that was above forty miles in length The Diocese of Constantinople to which Constantine was so great a Patron 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 46. was very considerable in his time for it had so far outgrown the measure of one Congregation that the Emperor thought it necessary to build a great many Churches and very large Temples or Martyria because they were dedicated to the memory of Martyrs and this not only within the City but in the Suburbs that is in the language of that time the Territory belonging to it And it is great pity there was no Bishop or Presbyter that could inform the welmeaning Emperor that this was mistaken devotion to submit all these Churches to one Bishop The Council of Antioch supposes Bishops to have large Dioceses An. Ch. 341. Can. 8. and therefore provides that Country Presbyters shall not give Canonical Epistles not so much as to the
in the Funeral Oratition of his friend where besides this new Bishoprick he shews that seâ—â—â—al others were erected upon that contention and that the Church had this advantage that By the increase of Bishops there would be a more exact and particular care taken of Souls and every City should be governed in all Ecclesiastical affairs within it self which before in that Country it seems they were not used to And Lastly That by this means the strife endeds After what manner he does not say perhaps this increase of Bishops carried the cause for Basil against Anthimus and so the controversy ended However Nazianzen commends Basil here for multiplying Dioceses yet in the Verses before cited he makes it a very unnecessary innovation for him to set up a Bishop at Sasima having no less than fifty Suffragan Bishops in his Province already 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet if we consider how far Sasima was probably from Caesarea we must conclude the Diocess of Basil out of which this is expresly said to be taken to have been very large for that this place was at some good distance from Basil we may perceive from Nazianzen's complaint as if he had been banished by this promotion into some remote place 2. If any guess may be made by comparing the itinerary from Constantinople to Jerusalem Printed â—â—th that of Antonius with the Tabulae Peuterigeranae Apud Itinerarium Antonini Sasus in finibus Ciliciae But this cannot be the same with Sasime in the other Itinerary the distance must be as great at least as between Hippo and Fussala for in that Itinerary there is reckoned sixteen miles from Sasima to Andavalis which in Peutingers tables is a great way from Caesarea 3. Sasima in the Ancient Greek Notitiae Printed with others by Carolus â S. Paulo Ordo Metropolitarum prout descriptus est in Chartophylacio is set down in the second Cappadocia which was under the Metropolis of Thyana and therefore it is not likely to be very near Caesarea the Metropolis of the other Cappadocia And one may observe that the Dioceses of Cappadocia notwithstanding this division were yet very considerable and far from being reduced into Congregational Churches It is plain from Nazianzen that Cappadocia had but fifty Bishops for so many he sayes Basil had under him and no doubt he owned him as Metropolitan of the whole Province and considering the extent of that Country the Dioceses must needs be large for the Country as Strabo computes Strab. l. 12. is near four hundred miles in length and little less in breadth as Causabon restores the reading of one thousand eight hundred furlongs in the twelfth book by a passage in the second where the breadth is made two thousand eight hundred And in this compass Bishops may contrive fifty Dioceses of very competent extent and not inferior to many of ours Basil writing to the Presbyteâ—â— of Nicopolis Salutes the Clergy of the City and the Clergy of the Diocess And in a Letter to the Citizens of the same place Bas Ep. 592. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desires them to shew a good example of affection towards their new Bishop to the rest of the Diocess Ep. 94. And in another to the Brethren of Colonia whence Euphronius was chosen to Nicopolis he tells them that he who was their Chorepiscopus before may take care of them still and continue to be their Bishop The same Father in another Epistle Ep. 72. Evasenis shews that Ancyra was a Diocess of good extent for Eustathius passing through the Territory of that City is said to have overthrown the Altars of Basilides the Bishop of it and to set up his own Tables which supposes several Country Churches under the jurisdiction of that Diocesan Bas Ep. 406. Amphilochio sub nomine Hâ—racleidae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And Lastly when Basil directs Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium to constitute Bishops in the Province of Isauria which at that time was it seems distitute upon what occasion I know not he enters upon a comparison between the convenience of large and small Dioceses and debates for sometime whether it were best to Ordain one Bishop of the Metropolis Seleucia I suppose who shall take care of the whole Province and Ordain more Bishops as he shall find expedient or else appoint a number of lesser Bishops first And here he confesses that if he could find one that would answer the character of St. Paul that were a workman who needed not to be ashamed such a one would go a great way and be worth many little Bishops would be of greater use to the Church and by that means we might with less hazard undertake the care of the Souls of the Province But if this cannot be done then let there be made Bishops in the lesser Cities and Villages where there were Bishops before and the matter be so ordered that the Bishop of the Principal City may not disturb us hereafter in point of Ordinations By which it appears that Isauria was then part of Basils Province and we may perceive the reason why he chose rather to Ordain the Country Bishops first to form an interest in the first place and to diminish the strength and power and to prevent the usurpations of the Bishop of the chief City Nor were these Chorepiscopi Country Bishops other than Diocesan as to the extent of their Church which consisted of many Congregations and those at a good distance one from the other for these were not as Rectors of a single Parish but Visitors of several Churches to the proportion it may be of our Rural Deaneries though like them they were more immediately related to a certain Parish or Town But their Episcopacy was in relation to the association of several Churches So Basil sayes he sent to the Chorepiscopus of those places not of one Country Town 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Ep. 355. and therefore the Council of Laodicia calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visitors and where Cities were not very thick some of them had the inspection of a large Territory But yet these were but the Deputies or Surrogates of the City Bishops in point of jurisdiction for they were to do nothing of moment without their Bishop and several Councils provide against their Usurpations Basil whose Diocess and Province we come from giving an account of is so resolute upon his prerogative that he will not endure they should ordain as much as the inferior Clergy as Deacons Subdeacons Readers and several others which the Church of that time reckon'd among the Clergy without his consent Bas 181. and if they do let them know sayes he that whosoever is admitted without our consent shall be reputed but a Layman What would he have said if they had pretended to ordain Presbyters or Bishops in opposition to them The Bishops of the Church of England desire no more than S. Basil assumed That none should be reputed Priests
him and that being in his particular Diocess only it follows that this great Province was no other than his own Diocess or Parochia as he calls it also in the same passage Nor were the Dioceses of the West generally any thing inferior to those we have been speaking of Italy indeed had the smallest not only by reason of the great multitude of Cities there but by the policy of the Bishops of Rome who having alwayes had some Authority over the greatest part of the Country strengthened themselves by making as many Bishops as they could within the dependance of their City and by that means secured themselves from all such dangers as might threaten them from general Councils having a strong party of Bishops at hand to send whither the Popes occasions should require their service What effect this policy of multiplying Bishops in Italy had we see in the History of the Council of Trent whither several Bishops came from France Spain and Germany with design of reforming most of the grossest abuses in the Church and to moderate if not wholly to remove that insupportable Yoke of the Papacy But the Italian Pensioners being too many for the well-meaning Bishops that Yoke was setled more grievous than before and weight added to the oppression No remedy being left but vain complaints and Dudithius makes a very lamentable one to the Emperor and then submission Yet after all this the Italian Dioceses were never reduced to a single Congregation and some of them remain still of a very considerable extent The Bishopricks of Spain were at first very large as may be observed from the small numbers of Bishops that met in the Councils of that Country The Council of Eliberis had but nineteen Bishops and the first of Toledo had the same number Hinc colligo Nationale fuisse Concilium cum to tempore sedeâ— Toletana tot Suffraganeos non haberet Episcopos Similiter de Eliberitano statuo cum eodem Episcoporum numero fuisset celebratum adde etiam quod in subscriptionibus Marcellus subscribit qui suit Episcopus Hispalensis Gar. Loyasa from whence Garsias Loyasa infers that these were general Councils of all Spain because the Province of Toledo sayes he had not so many Suffragans at that time and that Marcellus Bishop of Sevil who was a Metropolitan of another Province was there But the extent of the Spanish Dioceses does appear not only from the number of Bishops in their Councils but also from the Canons made in them As that of the Council of Toledo is very express about the making of Chrism that it belonged only to the Bishop Quamvis paene ubique custodiatur ut absque Episcopo Chrisma nemo conficicat tamen quia in aliquibus locis vel Provinciis Presbyteri dicuntur Chrisma conficere placuit ex hac die nullum alium nisi Episcopum Chrisma facere per Dioecesin destinare ita ut de singulis Ecclesiis ad Episcopum ante Diem Paschae Diaconi destinentur ut confectum Chrisma ab Episcopo destinatum ad diem Paschae possit occurrere Conc. Tolet. 1. Can. 20. Fratri autem Ortygie Ecclesias de quibus pulsus fuerat pronunciavimus esse reddendas Exemplar Defin. sent and that all the Churches of his Diocess should send before Easter every year for it to the Bishop who was to be put in mind of it by the Arch Deacon And in the same Council there is a definitive sentence whereby Ortygius is restored to his Bishoprick out of which he had been unjustly ejected that shews that his Diocess consisted of several Churches for so the Sentence runs That he be restored to his Churches Nor can any one think it strange that these should be general Councils of all Spain when he considers the numbers that usually met in Provincial Synods of that Country For the Council of Saragossa had but twelve and that number is extraordinary compared with some following Councils Concilium Gerundense had but seven Bishops that of Ilerda eight whereof one was present but by Proxy that of Valentia seven And lest we may imagine the Bishops of Spain neglected their Synods the sixth Canon of the Council of Arragon which consisted of ten Bishops Orders That if any Bishop having received Summons from his Metropolitan Si quis Episcoporum commonitus à Metropolitano ad Synodum nulla gravi intercedente necessitate Corporali venire contempserit sicut statuta Patrum sanxierunt usque ad futurum Concilium cunctorum Episcoporum Charitatis Communione privetur Conc. Tarracon c. 6. shall neglect to come to Council being not hindred by sickness shall according to the Decrees of the Ancient Fathers be excluded the communion of the other Bishops untill the next Council following And the same Council by another Canon signifies the extent of the Dioceses in Spain Multorum casuum experientia magistrante reperimus non nullas Dioecesanas Ecclesias esse destitutas ob quam rem hac constitutione decrevimus ut Antiquae consuetudinis Ordo servetur annis vicibus ab Episcopo Dioeceses visitentur siqua Basilica reperta fuerit destituta Ordiâ—atione ipsius reparari praecipiatur c. Can. 8. where it Orders every Bishop once in a year to visit his Dioceses according to the ancient usage of that Church and see what Churches there were out of repair and ordered them to be repaired out of the Revenues of those Churches there being a third part reserved for that purpose by ancient custom and tradition and the thirteenth Canon of the same Council makes a distinction between the Presbyters of the Cathedral and those of the Diocess Non solum è Cathedralis Ecclesiae Presbyteris verum etiam de Dioecesanis ad Concilium trabant Can. 13. and that the Metropolitan take care to summon some of both sorts to the Council of the Province And this was the state of the Dioceses in Spain from the time of the first Council of Nice to the latter end of the fifth and the beginning of the sixth Century The Churches of France as they had a near correspondence with those of Spain in several other things Bona de Reb. Litur l. 1. c. 12. and as Bona conjectures had anciently the same Liturgy before Pipin's time so they were not unlike in the extent of their Dioceses For Gallia before the time of the Council of Nice seems to have had but very few Bishopricks although it is to be supposed the number of Christians there was much greater than in any other part of the Empire Constantius the Father of Constantine the Great having favoured the Christians in the Provinces under his Government Euseb de vit Const l. 1. c. 13. while his Collegues used all manner of Violence and Arts to root them out every where else vid. Conc. Arelat 1. apud Sirmond Conc. Gall. Yet when Constantine the Great called a Council at Arles to resume the cause of the Donatists the Gallican
general Sence which I suppose was spoken with respect to that particular Congregation in which Arrius was to have been reconciled if he had lived but one Night longer and that the Author intends only to say that that Service was performed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Joy of that Church which the Bishop apprehended would be the occasion of great Trouble to it and that with all the Brethren there present not all the Believers of Constantinople for that he does not say he pray'd to and prais'd God for what had happened unless you will say that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signifie their Personal Presence but only their Vnanimity * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aquila as that of David Ps 33.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To conclude this point then Theodoret could not think that all the Believers of C. P. could come together to the Bishop's Church for he cites a Letter of Constantine a little after this where he gives an Account of the great Increase of that Church c. 16. In the City that is call'd by my Name says he by the Providence of God an infinite Multitude of People have joyn'd themselves to the Church and all things there wonderfully increasing it seems very requisite that more Churches should be built understanding therefore hereby what I have resolv'd to do I thought fit to order you to provide Fifty Bibles fairly and legibly written c. which he signifies in the same place to be design'd for the Service of the Churches there Now where Christians were so multiplied that it was necessary to build more Churches and to make such Provisions for the Multitude of their Assemblies it could not be that they should all make but one Congregation It would swell this Preface to too great a Bulk if I should answer the rest so particularly Therefore I shall be more brief but as plain as I can p. 10 11 12. This Author gives several Instances of several Bishops being in one City at the same time in Answer to the Dean of Pauls who affirm'd That it was an inviolable Rule of the Church to have but one I have endeavored to shew that it was the Rule of the Church to have no more than one So Cornelius affirms that in a Catholick Church there ought to be no more and the Council of Nice finds Expedients even against the shew and appearance of two Bishops being together in one place Jerusalem is the first Instance which is said to have had several Bishops together in the time of Narcissus I wonder to find a man of Learning cite this Passage than which nothing can be more disadvantageous to his Cause For 1. Narcissus having retired and the People not knowing what had become of him the Neighboring Bishops ordain'd Dius in his place who dying in a short time was succeeded by Germanicio In his Time Narcissus returns and was desir'd by the Church to resume his Office What became of Germanicion is not said probably he resign'd or died presently For the next thing we find is that Narcissus being very old an Hundred and Sixteen Years of age took Alexander into a Participation of the Charge He was indeed the Bishop and Narcissus retain'd but the Title and Name only as we may gather out of Alexander's Letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 6. c. 11. i. e. Who was Bishop before me and who now joyns with me in Prayers The Administration was it seems wholly in the Hands of Alexander For the Historian says of Narcissus before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was not able to officiate by reason of his great Age And Valesius confirms this in his Notes upon the place Hoc enim sibi-vult Alexander Narcissum in Orationibus duntaxat non in reliquo Episcopali munere sibi collegam fuisse and then Ex quibus apparet Alexandrum non tam adjutorem quam Episcopum in locum Narcissi utpote jam decrepiti factum fuisse Narcissum verò nudum nomen Episcopi atque honorem retinuisse The next instance is of Theotecnus and Anatolius who were for some time Bishops of Caesarea together Anatolius was a person of extraordinary Learning and Abilities and Theotecnus designing to make him his Successor says the Historian ordained him Bishop in his Life time Euseb l. 7. c. 32. and as it were his Coadjutor or Episcopus designatus Afterwards Macarius and Maximus were Bishops at once in that Church He means that of Jerusalem tho' that of Caesarea was the last he mention'd and this Instance is of the same nature with the other For Sozomen writes that first of all he was secretly design'd by the People to succeed Macarius after his Death And to make sure of his Succession with the Consent and Concurrence of their Bishop they brought it about that he should stay at Jerusalem and assist Macarins in the Episcopal Office Soz. l. 2. c. 20. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. After his Death to govern that Church whereas before he did only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. assist in the Divine Service and Offices of the Church Epiphanius continues this Gent. alleadg'd by Grotius for this purpose signifies that other Cities had two Bishops and excepts but one Alexandaia had never two Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His meaning cannot be as a great Antiquary would have it that Alexandria was never so divided as that several parties in it should have their respective Bishops there for so it was divided in the time of Epiphanius when the Catholicks had Athanasius the Arrians had Gregorius and then Georgius and afterwards the one had Peter the other Lucius and the Novatians had their Bishops successively in that City Soc. l. 7. c. 7. till Cyril 's time To which I answer as briefly as I can 1. That Epiphanius cannot mean that all other Cities had had two Bishops at a time For the contrary is too notorious and the Cases above alleadg'd are extraordinary when the Bishop or People of a City had a mind to secure the next Succession to some Extraordinary Person He was made the Assistant and Coajutor of that Bishop he was to succeed If Alexandria had never done this and it might be the reason why Athanasius was not ordained then when he was design'd by Alexander I do not see what advantage can be made of this Passage the practice of those other Churches has been already considered However I do not see why that Learned Antiquary's Opinion may not be maintain'd against this Gent's Objections He says that Alexandria was divided before Epiphanius his Time between several Bishops It cannot be denied but that is not the thing Epiphanius speaks of but that before the Election of Theonas against Athanasius who was before appointed by Alexander with the Approbation of the Church there were never two opposite Bishops as in other Churches the Instances are all later than this Fact and therefore are insignificant Vnless it be that
Countenance to that Primitive and Apostolick Constitution of Episcopacy But let St. Jerom think as he pleases Mr. B. is of another Opinion and now let us consider his Reasons By this means says he parochial Assemblies are made by them the Bishops no Churches p. 22. § 55. as having no ruling Pastors that have the Power of judging who to baptize or admit to Communion or Refuse but only of Chappels having Preaching Curates But must every Parish be an independent Church and exercise all Authority and Jurisdiction within it's self May not several Parishes associate under the Discipline of the same Bishop but that they must be unchurch'd If it be no Church that has no Bishop what will become of all Presbyterian Churches that are subject to Classes do not they unchurch Parishes as well as Bishops But they are made no Churches for want of governing Pastors this is a great Mistake every Parish with us has a governing Pastor but it is in Subordination to the Bishop and with Exception to some Acts that concern the general Union of all the Parishes associated Is he no Governour because he is not Independent Is he no Officer that is subordinate At this rate every Constable should be a King and every Captain a General But our Pastors Mr. B. says have not the Power of judging whom to Baptize this is a Calumny that has not the least Shadow of Truth and the contrary is notorious That they have no power to admit to Communion or Refuse is not true they have Power to admit any one that is not excommunicated or naturally incapable and they may likewise refuse the Communion to such as they judge notoriously unfit but must afterwards approve their reasons to the Bishop Several have used their Liberty and Discretion in this point without Offence however it is but fit that since the peace of the Church does greatly depend upon the right Application of Church-censures there should be a Restraint laid upon ordinary Ministers in this particular yet there is no Church-censure can have any effect without the Consent of the Minister of that Parish where he lives against whom it is directed The Ministers Refusal indeed may expose him to great Inconveniences and it is but just when his Refusal is only the effect of Opposition yet he has time and opportunity to produce his Reasons and why should he despair in a just Canse of convincing his Ordinary However though the Power of Church-censures be not allowed Parish Presbyters under Diocesan Episcopacy it is no Diminution of the right for neither under the Apostles nor the Primitive Bishops did they ever exercise it as principals or independent 2. Mr. B's second Reason against Diocesan Episcopacy is p. 22. That all the first Order of Bishops in single Churches is depos'd as if the Bishop of Antioch should have put down a thousand Bishops about him and made himself the sole Bishop of the Churches This reason goes upon the same Supposition with the other that every single Congregation had a Bishop the proof of which we will examine in due place The Bishops of great Cities had several Parishes or Congregations under them in the first times which never had any other Bishops but themselves and it was not this but the contrary that was the fault of great Bishops and Metropolitans of old for instead of deposing little Bishops they multiply'd them to strengthen their Party in Councils Vid. Collat. Carthag when they began to vye with one another in number of Suffrages as if the Archbishop of York should make every Town under his Jurisdiction an Episcopal Seat that he might have as many Suffrages as the Arch-bishop of Canterbury This I hope to prove in due place and to shew the Reader how far Mr. B. is mistaken in the Causes of Schism and that nothing contributed more to some of them than the multiplying the number of the lesser Bishops by their Metropolitans 3. His third Reason is That the Office of Presbyters is changed to Semi-presbyters What then is the Office of a Presbyter Is it not to preach and to be the mouth of the Congregation in publick Worship to administer the Sacraments to exhort to admonish to absolve the penitent to visit the sick This all Presbyters in the Church of England have full liberty to do and I wish all would take care to execute their Function as fully as it is permitted them 4. Discipline is made impossible p. 22. as it is for one General without inferiour Captains to rule an Army But are there not subordinate Officers in the Church as well as in the Camp How then is Discipline impossible If the General reserve to himself certain Acts of Jurisdiction does he by that means supersede the Commissions of all inferiour Commanders Mr. B. is much upon the point of Discipline's being impossible under Diocesan Episcopacy because one man he thinks cannot govern so many Parishes Admit in all things he may not nor is it necessary he should but in such Acts of Government that are reserved to him it is possible enough and has been practised from the days of the Apostles to this present time This Point you may find excellently discuss'd by Mr. Dodwel in his second Letter to Mr. B. which Mr. B. confutes briefly Cb. Hist 2. part by telling the Reader that if he will believe those reasons he has no hopes of him a short way of confuting and one would wonder that he that makes use of it should write so many and great Books of Controversie Yet this I must add that if it be impossible now 't is fit to let the World know who has made it so the Dissenters themselves have first weakned the Authority and obstructed the Execution of Discipline and when the subordinate Officers agitated caballed against their Superiour Commanders it is not wonder if Government be made impracticable However the Accusation sounds ill from those men by whose Mutiny and seditious Practises things have been brought to that evil Pass Mr. B. pursues his point further § 55. and adds Much more does it become then unlawful when first deposing all Presbyters from Government by the Keys of Discipline they put the same Keys even the Power of decretive Excommunication and Absolution into the hands of Laymen called Chancellors and set up Courts liker to the Civil than Ecclesiastical It is a Question I cannot easily resolve whether it be the King or the Bishop that governs by the Chancellor but whoever governs by them they neither have no nought to have the Power of Decisive Excommunication or the Power of the Keys but act only as Assistants and judges of matter of Fact and apply the Canons which determine what Offences are to be punish'd with Excommunication if they do any more I neither undertake the Defence nor will I suppose those that employ them own their Actions any farther However the Presbyterians fall under the same Censure with our Diocesans for
be ask'd in whose Chair he sits he must say where Bonifacius Ballitanus sate before him and he where Victor Garbiensis who was the first Donatist Bishop in Rome and there the Succession ends he having none to succeed to Filius sine Patre Tyro sine Principe Hospes sine Hospitio Pastor sine Grege Episcopus sine Populo non enim Populus aut Grex appellandi fuerant pauci qui intra quadraginta quod excurrit basilicas locum ubi colligerent non haberent It is plain then that Optatus does not speak of the state of Rome as it was in his own time but of Victor Garbiensis the first Donatist Bishop when this was is not easie to fix There is no greater Argument for a great number of Congregations under the Bishop of Rome than what Mr. B. observes of their Churches before Dioclesian's time that they were but like our Tabernacles as to the capaciousness Euseb l. 8. I suppose as well as the manner of their Structure and therefore the lesser they were the greater Number there must be of them and the Church must grow too big for his Definition since there must be more than could in those circumstances have personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship When the Diocess of Rome is reduced within the narrow Bounds of a single Congregation what other Church can pretend to more And if the Imperial City need not be excepted Alexandria cannot hope for Exemption therefore he proceeds to shew that Alexandria the greatest and most populous City in the World next to Rome had no more Christians than could meet together in one Congregation and of this he offers a bold Proof that it was so in the time of Athanasius Athan. T. 1. p. 531. Ch. Hist 9. whose words he cites where he excuses himself for having celebrated Easter in the great Church of Alexandria and drawn together such a multitude as gave great occasion of Jealousie to the Emperour but his Plea is that the other Churches were so narrow that they would have been in danger of suffering by the crowd and as if this Church would have held all the People he adds that it was better for the whole Multitude to meet in the Great Church and to have the concurrence of the people with one Voice c. This Church was newly built by Constantius and we may suppose it very large though not yet so great as to be able to contain all the Believers in Alexandria nor does Mr. B. desire it should but only the Generality Ch. Hist p. 10. yet granting that it received all it would follow indeed that the Church of Alexandria then was but one Congregation but what was it before this great Church was built when they had no possibility of personal Communion were not they then made congregational Churches under one Bishop And Athanasius in the same place confesses the multitude was so great that all the other Churches in the City could not hold it Besides the Orthodox were probably much more numerous before the building of that Church and the Banishment of Athanasius and if this vast Fabrick could not receive the party of Athanasius what Church shall we imagine could have been large enough for all the Christians in Alexandria before they were divided by Arrius and before they were governed by Gregory and George the Arrian Bishops He adds to this of Athanasius p. 10. § 30. another Argument given him by a learned Friend which I will take the liberty to examine The City of Alexandria says Strabo is like a Souldiers Cloak c. and by Computation about ten Miles in Compass a third or forth part of this was taken up with publick Buildings Temples and Royal Palaces thus is two Miles and a half or three and a quarter taken up I will not say this learned Friend has impos'd on Mr. B. but there is a very great Mistake betwixt them suppose Temples and Royal Palaces should take up such a part of the City must there therefore be no Inhabitants in those Palaces or no Christians amongst those Inhabitants But he believes this to be that Region call'd Bruchium which Epiphanius speaks of in his time as destitute What all the publick Buildings of the Town in one Region and that an outer Skirt too as it is described by the Greek Martyrology in Hilarion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the Life of Apollonius Discolus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Epiphanius says was destitute of Inhabitants in his time and not unlikely and perhaps destitute of publick Buildings too for it was destroyed after an obstinate Siege in the reign of Aurelian as Ammianus Marcellinus or of Claudius l. 22. as Eusebius would have it However the City must be reckon'd by so much the less In Chronico neither is there any Necessity of this for they might enlarge upon another Quarter being it may be forbid to build in Bruchium because it was divided from the rest of the City and too favourable a Refuge of Rebellion to which that People was too much addicted they might dwell closer than before and so their Multitude be undiminisht However certain it is that this City long after the Destruction of Bruchium retainrd it 's ancient Greatness and is represented by no Writer as diminisht either in Number or Wealth but to let this pass let us see what becomes of the rest he adds A great part of the City was assign'd to the Jews so Strabo indefinitely as Josephus quotes him others tell us more punctually that their Share was two of the five Divisions Ush Annals p. 859. though many of them had their Habitations in the other Divisions yet they had two fifth parts entire to themselves which he might have found as punctually in Strabo as in Bishop Vsher and this continues he is I suppose the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Josephus says the Successors of Alexander set apart for them thus we see how six or seven Miles of the ten are disposed of And by the same rule he might have disposed of all at once and concluded out of Strabo's Division of the Town that there was not one Christian it it For Strabo liv'd in Augustus his time when it was a hard matter to find a Christian in Alexandria unless we will take in Justin Martyr's old Christians such as Socrates i.e. all virtuous good men and then I am afraid they would be too few to make a Congregation The number of these Jews was much lessened within a little while after Strabo by an Insurrection of the Alexandrians against them the Civil Wars afterwards under Trajan and his Successor had almost extirpated them and yet even at this time Alexandria was as populous as ever and frequented by almost all the Nations of the Earth as Dion Chrysostomus represents the flourishing State of it in his time but no matter what number of Jews or Heathens it had in Strabo's days the Question is whether many
of both were not converted to the Christian Faith and that very early There remains now but three or four miles to be disposed of between the Heathens and the Christians ibid. and much the lesser part will fall to the share of the latter 't is kindly done to provide for the Christians before they were in Being surely Strabo who makes the Distribution and Bishop Vsher who cites it out of him never intended the Christians one Foot of ground in all that Division and this learned Friend might have spared his little Town of eight or ten Furlongs which he so liberally bestows upon the Bishop of Alexandria before our Saviour was born What he adds about Alexander and Meletius I wonder it could escape him p. 11. there being nothing more notorious than that Alexandria had now several fixt Parishes or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and every one govern'd under the Bishop and by it's proper Presbyter and his remark upon two Bishops living quietly in Alexandria is so disingenious a Suggestion that he has reason to be ashamed of it See Epiph. in Hares Miletian for while Miletius lived quietly and did not set up Altar against Altar all was well but a little before his Death the schismatical Humour returned upon him again and he ordain'd Priests and other Church-officers every where in Opposition to Alexander he may find as many or more Bishops living peaceably in London though there be but one Bishop of the place as there was in Alexandria Now because Mr. B. has endeavour'd to represent the Church of Alexandria so inconsiderable even after Constantine's days it will not be impertinent to give the Reader a View of that Churches Greatness even from the first Foundation of it In St. Mark 's time Alexandria had several Churches Euseb l. 2. c. 16 Niceph. l. 2. c. 15. Euseb l. 2. c. 24. though but one Bishop for that same Evangelist is said to have preacht the Gospel there first and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to have founded several Churches or Congregations there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet for all this the whole was but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which Annianus succeeds St. Mark and Eusebius in the Chapter before cited tells us that the number of Christians was so great in Alexandria even at the beginning that Philo vouchsafes to take notice of them but as for the Essaei which he there describes whether they were Jews or Christians it is not very material though this is observable not only of them but of all the Jews of Alexandria that their Principles had prepar'd them for Christianity above all other People for by their moralizing of the Law and making Virtue and Holiness to be the Design and meaning of all those Observances they were coming as it were to meet the Gospel and like the Centurion our Saviour commends were not far from the Kingdom of Heaven In Adrian's time Vopiseg in Saturn they were it seems so considerable as not only to be mention'd by that Emperour but to be set at the Head of all the Sects of Religion in Alexandria and they are named first for that Emperour in his Letter to Servianus reproaching the Egyptians with inconstancy and lightness sayes those that worship Serapis are Christians and there are that call themselves the Bishops of the Christians that devote themselves to Serapis all these it seems were Christians by inclination though sometimes they were forc'd by the Egyptians to worship their Gods for he that has the least tincture of Christianity can have no great Devotion for Serapis and the Patriarch himself ibid. when he comes into Egypt is forc'd by some to worship Serapis by others to worship Christ It is not material to our purpose whether this Patriarch were Bishop of Alexandria as Casaubon and Salmasius will have him or rather the chief Governour of the Jews called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Claudius Josephus Antiqu. l. 19.4 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Philo it is enough that the Christians then were so powerful as to be able to oblige him to worship Christ there is no doubt but that Adrian does the Christians wrong in this point for they never forc'd any to their Religion not after they were uppermost unless we should judge those of Alexandria to be more violent than the rest however this Account certainly represents them as very considerable and equal to any Sect or Religion in Alexandria Vnus illis Deus est Hunc Christiani Hunc Judaei omnes venerantur Gentes Salmasius understands Serapis by this one God Casaubon looks upon this Passage as spurious and added afterwards by a Christian hand in the Margin from thence by an ignorant Scribe transferr'd into the Text. But 't is most probable that that one God which the Christians and Jews are said in the first place to adore is the true God which both worship'd although after different manner And now by the preaching of the Christians the greatest part of the Alexandrians might possibly be brought over if not to a perfect Acknowledgment yet to some Veneration and Esteem of the true God The great Catechists of Alexandria as Panteus Clemens Origen and Heracles did not a little advance the growth of Christian Religion in that place and Origen's School particularly was so frequented one Company coming still after another from Morning till Night that he had hardly time to take breath and was forc'd to take Heraclas into his Assistance to instruct the more ignorant sort Dionysius who gives an account of Valerian's Persecution in Egypt represents the Christians as well of Alexandria as of other Cities extraordinary numerous the concourse of them to him when he was banish'd to Chebron was so great that he was forc'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and afterwards when he was removed from thence to Coluthio Euseb l. 7. c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 8. which was nearer Alexandria he comforts himself with this that those of his Flock could come to him and stay with him and meet there in several Congregations as it were in remoter Suburbs Valesius observes from hence that Suburbs that is in this sense Villages of the dependance of any City had their particular Congregation and were not obliged to come to the City Church which he believes was but one even in Alexandria in Dionysius's time but how that is deducible from this passage I cannot see Under the Persecution of Dioclesian what numbers of Christians might be at Alexandria may be judged by the multitude of Martyrs that suffer'd at Thebes Eusebius was an Eye-witness of what he relates concerning them he saw great multitudes suffer together some dayes ten some twenty some sixty and sometimes an hundred and this continued not for a few dayes onely or a short space of time but for several years The division of Alexandria between several Presbyters as it were into so many Parishes although it be not mention'd
they differ'd widely from the doctrine of Nestorius But though some few men might be transported and mistake one another in the heat of their contention it is strange that all the world should be so blind and undiscerning that no man before our Author should find out this undiscover'd agreement between the contending Bishops and not one have the fortune to stumble upon this observation Mr. B. does endeavour to satisfie this doubt by shewing that besides the factiousness of the generality of the Bishops there were but few among them that had any learning p. 92. and this he offers to make out by several arguments 1. That the Fourth Council of Carthage did forbid Bishops to read any Heathen Authors Mr. B. mistakes it for the 6th But how should this Prohibition make ignorant Bishops in the East where it had no force Nor do we find any such prohibition there unless that of Julian the Apostate to bring Christian Religion into contempt by making the professors of it ignorant of all humane learning 2. When no Bishop was to be remov'd from place to place but they were made in every Church out of an inferiour degree why should this keep them in ignorance since they had the freedom of liberal education and the lower degrees of the Church did no more incapacitate men for learning than they did for Episcopacy 3. Vniversities were rare therefore no wonder if learned Bishops were so rare If University education be so necessary for learning our Author I believe must keep these ignorant Bishops company and he will help them to more if others heed what he writes of the Universities But yet Philosophy Schools were not so rare as he fansies in the Eastern Church for there was hardly a considerable City that had not one and besides all this the great learning of the world being easily intelligible to the Eastern part of the World as being written in their common language they had the less need of Professors and a man might go a great way with his own private Reading 4. When Nectarius must be the great Patriarch that was no Christian and when Synesius because he had Philosophical knowledge is chosen Bishop even before he believ'd the Resurrection Learned men were very scarce he would inferr but it is hard to do so from these instances for 1. I do not find any where that Nectarius was made Patriarch for his learning Socr. l. 5. c. 8. Socrates indeed says he was noble by descent and a Prator by office that he was of a sweet obliging temper and an extraordinary and admirable person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which rendred him very popular and the Multitude in a fit of kindness would force him to be their Bishop There is not a word of his learning or of the scarcity of learned men that might justifie this extraordinary and irregular election of a Catechumen into the second Bishoprick of the World and if any one should yet fansy that to be the reason let him consult Sozomen l. 7. c. 8. who gives a more particular account of this action and different from Socrates He is so far from thinking that there was no Christian of learning and abilities equal to that dignity that he tells us there was great variety and that several Bishops of the Council that then sate propos'd many as fit for that Charge Diodorus Tarsensis happen'd to be strangely taken with Nectarius his Countrey man and the circumstances if true make it look something like a miracle He propos'd him to the Bishop of Antioch as a sit person for that high charge the Bishop wonder'd at the fancy and to comply with Theodorus puts his name among several others that he offer'd to the Emperour but in the last place little expecting he should be return'd Bishop The Emperour by an unaccountable impulse pass'd all by till he came to his name and fix'd there and nominated him Bishop He was no Christian says our Author He was not yet baptiz'd indeed but he was a Catechumen and a very good man and wanted nothing but that consummation which was Constantine's condition till within a month before his death and now let the shrewdest guesser in the world consider whether the small number of learned Bishops was the reason why Nictarius was chosen to be the great Patriarch Synesius his promotion concludes the ignorance of Bishops no more than that of Nectarius For Synesius besides his learning had a peculiar eloquence and besides that was a person of an extraordinary life and reputation so that it was not his Philosophical learning was the only reason of his preferment but he did not believe the Resurrection and surely there must be a great want of able men when a person under that and several other unqualifying circumstances should be forc'd into a Bishoprick But Theophilus understood the meaning of it that this was but a fiction to avoid being Bishop for his Letter to his Brother was not design'd as a secret Syn. Ep. 105. but as he suggests there that it might be shew'd and become a remedy against that fondness the people had of him and in another to the Presbyters of Ptolemais after he was made Bishop Ep. 11. he does acknowledge that he had us'd all the arts and stratagems that he could devise to escape it Evagrius and Nicephorus did take him at his word Vid. Bar. An. 410. Luc. Holst dissert de fug Ep. and represented him to posterity as he had characterized himself and excuse those that ordain'd him by saying that they had hopes that afterward he would believe more Orthodoxly and correct those errours he confess'd It was not then for want of able men that he was made Bishop but it was the extraordinary affection of Theophilus and the people of Ptolemais and the great reputation he had in the world having been sent long before by the City of Cyrene to Arcadius and deliver'd that noble Oration de Regno that alone were enough to make all ingenious men in love with him for his eloquence and his gravity and to render him eminent in the most learned age of the World though Mr. B. in the second Part of his Church-History part 1. p. 169. affirms That there are divers poor men Weavers Plowmen and others of the Church of Kederminster that can Pray and Teach and Write as methodical pious weighty tractates as Synesius notwithstanding he was a Philosopher and as well as any Eusebius extoll'd as famous Bishops of the second and third age c. not to say of Clemens Ignatius Irenaeus Cyprian yea even as Holy Macarius Ephrem Syrus Synesius Isidore Pelus By this you may judge how well our Author is acquainted with those Ecclesiastical Writers The last thing by which he proves the scarcity of learned Bishops is the ignorance of Nestorius which Socrates that knew him does affirm But here our Author does Socrates wrong for he does not say that Nestorius was ignorant but
on by evil men that were Bishops and others but Optatus derives it from two Presbyters Botrus and Geleusius and one Lucilla a woman of great interest and very whimsical But the Sect that most afflicted this Age and divided almost subdu'd all the World was that of Arius Arius But Arius by good providence was no Bishop but a Priest of Alexandria who taught that Christ was not of the same substance with the Father and that he was not Eternal This Doctrine first divided the Church of Alexandria and then all the World some few Bishops taking his part but the generality being against him The Original and Occasion of this Heresie is variously related though all agree in the Author Haer. 68 69. Epiphanius makes Meletius the Schismatick to be the first discoverer though afterwards his Sect if not he himself joyn'd with these Hereticks just as our Dissenters joyn Interests with the Papists to ruine the Church of England I would not be so bold to say it if Mr. Baxter who knows it much better than I had not observ'd this before if it be otherwise they must be satisfy'd by him who I suppose may be able to give a good account of that matter When the Bishop of Alexandria had been inform'd that one of his Presbyters and the Divinity Reader of that City for so Arius was taught dangerous doctrines denying in effect the Lord that bought us he calls him to answer this charge in the presence of his Fellow-Presbyters and Arius owning his Doctrine was condemn'd This I should not give so great credit to upon the word of Epiphanius who is unaccountably mistaken in several things relating to this Heresie unless the Letter of Constantine did confirm it Euseb de vit Constant l. 2. who blames Alexander for proposing this question which it seems by this story he could not avoid since this Schismatick not perhaps out of any good will to the faith but as is usual with the separating Spirit to reproach the Church with countenancing Heresie had given him notice of this Intolerable Doctrine and the Industry and Application us'd by Arius to promote it The occasion was the Ambition of the Heretick Theod. Haer. Fab. l. 4. c. 1. who could not endure to see Alexander in the Bishops Chair for which he had been his Competitor after the death of Achillas Sand. Hist Eriml l. 2. p. 159 160. Sandius impudently affirms without any proof that it was after Achillas had been put out by Alexander I cannot but warn the Reader against the intolerable dealing of that Arian Historian For he has so little shame as to cite Sozomen and the Tripartite History to prove that Achillas was turn'd out by his successour whereas there is not one word of it there but on the contrary the whole story is much to the disadvantage of the Arian cause For there Arius is said to envy the promotion of Alexander Sozom. l. 1. c. 15. Hist Tripart l. 1. c. 12. and to be so impatient as not to live under the tedious expectation of the Bishops death in probable hopes of succeeding him but to seek out any occasion of quarrel and then to set himself up The passage is so very plain that it is hardly possible to mistake it and to apply that to Alexander which is manifestly said of Arius The same Historian tells us Sandius Ibid. that Achillas was of the same opinion with Arius and refers to the same place but without the least shadow of Truth I suppose he took Achillas the Priest that revolted with Arius to be the same with the Bishop who he says was depos'd but who was indeed dead before that time And Epiphanius his placing Achillas after Alexander Epiph. Haer. 68. is a strange unaccountable mistake as divers other things are in his relations of this matter But let it be as Epiphanius says it can give no countenance to Sandius his opinion For this Achillas that Sandius speaks of had revolted with Arius but he whom Epiphanius mentions was Orthodox and set up by that party against the Arians In the next place it is not likely that the Achillas that joyn'd with Arius was in Alexandria when Alexander dy'd Socr. l. 1. c. 6 8. Soz. l. 1. c. 21. Theod. l. 1. for the Council of Nice condemn'd Arius and his adherents and the Emperour having banish'd him as some say or only forbid him to return to Alexandria as others the Presbyters of Alexandria that joyn'd with him were probably remov'd for quietness sake at leastwise if they did not conform Lastly Though Achillas might recant and remain in Alexandria yet considering the Arian party was now condemn'd by all the world it is not likely that one of the first promoters of it should be chosen Bishop of so eminent a Church and much less probable that being chosen he should resign to Athanasius a young man and but a Deacon and what is more than all that one devoted to the cause of Alexander and one of the Champions of it in the Council of Nice What Sandius says after this out of Philostorgius of Arius his modesty in preferring Alexander to the Bishoprick of Alexandria Philost l. 1. t. 3. is altogether improbable not one of all those Historians that give an account of this matter saying any such thing Theod. l. 1. Hist Ed. id Haeret. Fab. l. 7. Vid. Gotofr Dissert but several of them the quite contrary But that Arian Historian mistook his Index and put l. 3. for the first and the third paragraph which would not have been an easie mistake if he had look'd into the book that he cited But to return where we left Arius who was the cause of all the mischiefs that follow'd that Controversie was no Bishop and his first followers were not Bishops neither Socr. l. 1. c. 6. Sozom. l. 1. c. 21. Some Presbyters and Deacons of Alexandria first took his part and two Bishops that call'd themselves so being of Meletius his setting up and who were indeed no Bishops as being ordain'd Schismatically Arius when he left Alexandria made his Application to several Bishops and was rejected by most Eusebius of Nicomedia at last undertook his Protection and prevail'd with some few more to joyn with him and the greatest part as appears by the Letters sent to Alexander only out of Moderation and to endeavour to compose the difference between the Heretical Presbyters and their Bishop But this way encreasing the difference instead of healing it a General Council was agreed upon where there were but seventeen Bishops that so much as favour'd the cause of Arius and but five that refus'd to subscribe who were afterwards banish'd Had Constantine preserv'd the Rule which that Council had establish'd and not tamper'd with it in compliance with the Arians and by an Indulgence and comprehension endeavour'd to bring those under a Rule that were enemies to it and to joyn such doctrines as were
fiercely the greatest occasion of all this stir was some Recreations as Dancing which the People of Geneva were addicted to and Calvin forbad upon pain of Excomunication this bred the first discontents Perinus being Captain of the people and perhaps a lover of Liberty began to oppose this Tyranny and to charge Calvin with false Doctrine two of the Ministers joyn'd with him and were turn'd out as Scandalous and Seditious and so by degrees the Contention was improv'd to that desperate point that the Common Council of the City had almost destroyed one another I might add a great many more instances of the Tumults occasion'd by this Discipline and shew how distracted the condition of Geneva was during the time of Calvin meerly upon the account of this form of Ecclesiastical Government But whoever desires to see more may have Recourse to Calvin's life written by Beza But as to the Rigours of that Discipline I suppose the Highest Tyranny of Epilcopacay can hardly match them One was put to death at Geneva for Libelling Calvin I wish the Majesty of Kings were so Sacred to the men of this way Another was banished the City for preaching against Predestination a hard punishment for weakness of understanding Servetus was burn'd for Heresie by the Instigation of Calvin and the Minsters of Geneva and such others of the Neighbour hood as they could engage in that cause which occasioned no small disputes between them and some other more Moderate Divines the Case of Ithacius and the bloody Bishops as Mr. B. calls them was not half so odious for this Heretick Servetus was burn'd for opinions only the Priscillianists for lewd abominable Practices besides Nor did Geneva only feel the evil effects of this unepiscopal Government but it had in a little while an unhappy Influence upon the Neighbouring Churches of Suitzerland Erastus having published his Theses of Excommunication was confuted by Beza yet there remain'd still several Ministers dissatisfi'd as Bullinger Gualter and diverse others This occasion'd very great jealousies between the several Parties and it had almost come to a Rupture The Churches of the Palatinate were no less shaken with this new Controversie Vid. Bullingeri Epcum Erasti Thes Editas and the zealots for this Government and discipline took all occasions publickly to maintain them but the Prudence of that Prince prevented the mischiefs which threatned his Churches from this question Bullinger in a Letter dated March. 10. 1574. and Gualter in some Letters of his to the Bishops of London and Ely and several other eye-witnesses do sufficiently testifie the Lamentable condition of those Reformed Churches and the Confusion which Presbyterian Government brought upon them From Geneva this Government was brought into the Churches of France But what success it had there the Miserable distractions and wars that presently follow'd do sufficiently declare I do not charge all that Tragedy upon this Government but it seems it cannot prevent Tumults and Sedition and War any more than Episcopacy For with what violence the Reformation was carried on in many parts of that Kingdom is not unknown to any that has but look'd into the Histories of those times There were some very wise men who understood the condition of that Kingdom of opinion that had the Reformation there proceeded with more Moderation and been content to have left the Ancient Government and some observances of unquestionable Antiquity that Kingdom was in a great disposition to receive it and in probability all the following Wars and bloodshed about Religion would have been prevented That the Reformed Churches of France had no considerable differences between them is owing not so much to the Constitution of their Government as to their Common danger which United them closer than all the bands of Discipline and Government Besides when they obtained some Edicts in favour of their Religion they Extended them only to such as their Churches would own and so every dissenter from them was left to the Rigour of the Laws against Hereticks and enjoy'd no benefit of that Protection which the Reformed Churches were to have Upon this account the Lutherans of whom there were many in that Kingdom in the beginning of the Reformation were oblig'd either to Conform to the Rule of those Churches or to leave the Country and these necessities kept them along while Undivided Besides this the affairs of that Reformation were manag'd not so much by their Ministers as by the great Persons who were the Heads of that party and their Synods were imploy'd not so much in making Ecclesiastical Canons as in taking effectual measures for their mutual defence and preservation in receiving assurances of Protection from foreign Princes La vie de Mr. Dis Plesses Mornay p. 119 120 123 124 231 280 345. in making Alliances in providing for Peace and War so that they might be more properly call'd Parliaments than Synods although they had their Politick Assemblies besides And yet they were not without their differences about Religion among themselves Some Ministers starting new and unprofitable questions in Divinity their remedy was no other than that of the Ancients to condemn such opinions as they judged to be dangerous by the Authority of their Synods and they descended to take notice of very trifling subtilties some times such being unregarded would perhaps have died of themselves The Synod of Saumur condemned a Minister of Poictou for questioning the Humanity of Christ when he lay in the Grave and the same Assembly condemned the Doctrine of a Suiss not under their jurisdiction about justification by works after Regeneration a Controversie meerly about words another Synod at Gap declared against the Doctrine of Piscator about Justification which Alarm'd some of the Reformed Churches but the Prudence of Du Plessis prevented any mischief that might have ensu'd by stopping the proceedings of that Synod P. D. Moulin and Tilenus happen'd to have some difference of a dangerous nature about the Mystery of the Incarnation and notwithstanding these great Professours had learning and distinctions enough which Mr. B. says the Ancients that first mov'd this Controversie wanted yet they could by no means agree about it and disputes about Person Nature Properties had like to have endanger'd the peace of those Churches But how was it prevented The Litigants were too considerable to be pass'd by with Contempt and the subject of the difference was of so high a nature that it ought not to be left to the hazard of so slight a remedy How then was this Controversie decided Not by Niceness of Distinction noâ— by distingushing nature into 9 sorts or spliting of Notions But the wise Du Plessis having got their Papers into his hands burn'd them altogether and the fire without making distinction between the Orthodox and Heretical sence put an end to that Controversie Vidâ— Du Pless p. 388. But yet it was not quite ended for it began to revive afterwards oâ—â— of its own Ashes and so made some little
owed him still the duty of Children notwithstanding his absence and lastly that he would come to them shortly by way of Apostolical visitation and examine the power of those that entred into competition with him For as far as his Line or Diocess or Province did extend so far he pretended a peculiar Authority to govern Rom 15.19 2 Cor. 10.13 to 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dioecesis sive certus Pastorum Ecâ—lesiarum numerus Unit. Frat. Bohem. Sect. de Antist Regulam vocat Ditionem praescriptum Praedicationis Terminum Salmeron and exercised Diocesan jurisdiction upon all within his Rule But when this Line was so far extended that he neither was able to visit every part himself and his communication by Letters would not answer all the occasions of those Churches he had planted 1. Tim. 1.3 18. c. 2.14 15. c. 4.12 14. c. 5.21.22 Tit. 1.5 c. 2.15 he provides for them not by leaving every Congregation Independent and resigning all Authority into the hands of every particular Presbytery but by sending Persons endued not only with extraordinary gifts but with Apostolical power to ordain Elders to end disputes to censure the unruly and irregular whether of the Clergy or People to confute Hereticks to preach the Gospel and in short by all means to provide for thee welfare of those Churches committed to them And now as the Apostle had before ordained assistant Elders in the several Churches which he had planted for the ordinary attendance of the Congregation so now he takes to himself Assistants of another sort Suffragans for the Service of his Province which he distributed as he found most expedient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 1. c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod in 1 Tim. 3. Phil. 3.25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acceperat in illis Apostolatus officium Hieron in locum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anonym 〈◊〉 Phot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in Timoth. and these in the Apostles time were sometimes called Apostles or Evangelists Bishops Presbyters Fellow Labourers Helpers Deacons c. but their successors leaving greater and more invidious titles contented themselves with the name of Bishops which was common to them with ordinary Presbyters at first though the Offices were alwayes distinct Of this kind we have several mentioned in Scripture of St. Pauls Province as Barnabas Timothy Titus Crescens Epaphraditus Sosthenes and some others that had no relation to him as James the Just Mark Linus Clemens c. These exercised Episcopal jurisdiction in that district where they were appointed Ordained Presbyters received accusations against them Reprov'd and censur'd them as there was cause and in short govern'd those Churches over which they were appointed by full Apostolical power which was transmitted to their successors But the extraordinary abilities of some of these men and the occasions of several other Churches made their residence less constant in the Diocess where they were plac'd 2 Tim. 4.9 than otherwise might have been expected Phil. 2. and therefore Timothy the Bishop and Apostle of Ephesus is called to Rome by St. Paul to be imployed as the necessities of the Church should require Titus is sent to Dalmatia though Crete were his first Province but this concludes no more against their being Diocesans than the Voyage of Germanus and Lupus into Brittain to oppose the Pelagian Heresy would conclude against their being Bishops Now what care was taken for those Churches which these Apostolick Diocesans left whether they returned again to their Provinces is not mentioned in Scripture But Ecclesiastical Records shew an uninterrupted Succession from the Bishops in several Churches Nor do we find that they were all so unfixed as they are represented by the adversaries of Episcopacy for Mark who was the first Bishop of Alexandria remained in that Province Euseb Hist l. 2. c. 16. Niceph. l. 2. c. 43. Gelas in Conc. Rom. in decr de lib. Auth. planting Churches in the Country round about and governing them by Apostolical Authority which after his Martyrdom there was derived to his successuors in the same charge Now this order being of perpetual use and necessity in the Church to ordain Presbyters and Deacons to exercise discipline to preserve unity they were multiplyed according as the Apostles found most expedient for the Church and the most eminent Cities became the Residence of these first Bishops not because God takes greater care of Cities than he does of lesser Towns and Villages but because the Apostles thought it the most natural way to follow the distribution that was then in the more civilz'd part of the world St. John a little while before his death mentions seven in the Lydian Asia under the name of Angels of the Churches nor is it probable there were any more in that Province The Seven Churches being the same with all the Churches mentioned in the next Chapter Rev. 1.20.2.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Andr. Caesar Ego puto simul inveniri posse Angelum hominem bonos Ecclesia Episcopos Origen in Lucam Hom. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut Collegas moneat Beza Ad Episcopum loci dirigitur Paraus and Carolus à Sancto Paulo concludes the same thing out of St. John Cum in Asia septem tantum hisce temporibus essent Episcopi ut in Apocalypsi legere est nec majorem corum numerum in Ponto tunc fuisse probalile est Geogr. Sacra p. 289. Dissert 4. c. 5. Quod si de Angelis superiorum Coelorum non de praepositis Ecclesie intelligi vellet non consequenter diceret Laudatur sub Angeli nomine praepositas Ecclesiae Aug. Ep. 162. But Dr. Hammond makes all these Angels to be Metropolitans having several Bishops under them for the reasons I must refer the reader to his Dissertations Thus far the Scripture discovers the rise and progress of Diocesan Episcopacy which was the form of Church Government under the Apostles who had large Provinces to supervise and their suffragans such as are commonly called Evangelists had several Congregations to govern and this was undeniably the constitution of the Church in the first age the next thing we are to inquire is whether the Office expired with those Persons or was designed to be of perpetual use in the Church The Adversaries of Episcopacy are not all agreed as to this point the Presbyterians generally looking upon the offices of Apostles and Evangelists extraordinary as the persons were Mr. B. is something more scrupulous because he does not find any where that Christ design'd to have this alter'd and yet he condemns Diocesan Episcopacy as being altogether different from it I have said something to this already and therefore I shall answer here more briefly 1. That we have no reason to believe from Scripture that the Office of Apostles or Evangelists which concerned the Government of the Church was extraordinary and for a time only
offering themselves to death he sends them back again desiring them if they had such a passion to dye that they would hang themselves because he had not Executioners enough And at Carthage the number of Christians was so great that they could not have been destroyed without making the City desolate as Tertullian tells Stapula the Governour of the Province If thou shouldest go about to destroy the Christians here what wouldst thou do with so many thousands of people when men and women of all degrees of all ages should offer themselves to the Executioners how many Swords Tertull. l. ad Scap. c. 5. Hoc si placuerit hic furi quid facies de tantis millibus hominum tot viris ac foeminis omnis Sexus omnis â—tatis omnis dignitatis offerentibus se tibi quantis ignibus quantis gladiis opus erit paree tibi si non nobis parce Carthagini si non tibi what fires would be necessary for the Execution of so great a multitude Spare the City by sparing us Nor are we to imagin Carthage to abound more with Christians than the rest of the Empire for the same Author tells us that the whole world was oversprend with Believers and that the Heathen cryed that they had ever run the City and the Country Obsessm vociserantur Civitatem in agris in Castellis in Insulis Christianos omnem sexum 〈◊〉 aâ—â—m dignitatem transgredi ad hoc nomen quasi detrmento moerent Apol. c. 1. and every place was full of Christians that persons of all conditions sexes and age was over to this name Nay so great were their numbers that it was not want of strength but want of will that hindred them from becoming masters of the Empire Loyalty was part of their Religion and that was the reason why they did not force the Government to a Toleration of or a submission to it The barbarous Nations that over-ran the Empire were not near so numerous Plares nimirum Mauri Marcomanni ipsique Parthi omnia vestra implevimus urbes insulas castella municipia contillabula castra ipsa Tribus Decarias Palaâ—ium Senatum forum The Christians had filled all Places their Cities their Towns their Councils their Tribes the Court the Senate and what not and though they had been yet inferiour in number and force yet their contempt of death would render them a very formidable Enemy Nay without Rebellion we might easily ruine our Persecutors should we but withdraw Potuimus inermes nec Rebelles sed tantummodo discordes solius divortii invidia adversus vos dimicasse si enim tanta vis hominum in aliquem orbis remoti sinum abrupissemus à nobis suffudisset vestram dominationem tot qualiumcunque Civium amissio imo etiam ipsa destitutione punisset proculdubio expavissetis ad solitudinem vestram ad silentium rerum stuporem quendam quasi mortuae urbis quaesissâ—tis quibus in ea imperassetis plures bosles quam Civis remansissent nunc autem pauciores hostes habetis prae multitudine Christianorum pene Omnium Civium peâ—e Omnes Cives Christianos habeâ—do Apol. c. 37. and retire to any corner of the World the loss of so many subjects of any kind would unavoidably ruin the Government How you would be astonished at the strange solitude our departure should cause at the silence and stilness of your City as if it had expired by our departure you would be to seek for Subjects to govern and wore enemies than Citizens would remain with you but now your enemies are more inconsiderable by reason of the great multitude of Christians who are your Citizens and almost all your Citizns are Christians And because the Heathens complained that Christian Religion was an enemy to trade and that it would destroy the commerce of the East which depended upon the consumption of Frankincense and Spices in the Temples the Apologist answers that the Arabians sell more for the Christian funerals than they do to the Heathen Temples and the Christian Charity spent more in a street than the Heathen superstition did in a Temple Sciant Sabaei pluris charioris suas merces Christianis sepeliendis profligari quam diis fumigardis Interim plus misericordia nostra insumit vicatim quam vestra Religio Timplatim c. 42. Now the largeness of the Dioceses of those times will appear by comparing the vast multitude of Christians and the small number of Bishops and first no City how great soever had more than one Bishop this is so well known that it would be great impertinence to go about to prove it by instances and I have shewed already how the Fathers were of opinion that there ought to be no more Besides the Bishops of most Cities if not all had a considerable Territory belonging to their jurisdiction which was commonly the Country lying round about their City So Alexandria besides the Ager Alexandrinus which was of very large extent had likewise all the Region called Mareotes containing above an hundred and fifty Villages as Athanasius rightly understood computes them For every Presbyter had ten or more Villages under him Athan. Apol. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Singuli autem Presbyteri pâ—â—prios habent pages â—osque maxemos denos interdum aut plâ—res ex bis apparet singulâ—s Mareotice pages non habuisse snum Presbyterum sed unicum Presbyterum denos pages rexisse atque interdum plures Valesius and probably some Assistants or Curates to take care of some of them This Region alwayes belonged to the Diocess of Alexandria and never had as much as a Chorepiscopus But I have before given a particular account of Rome and Alexandria and therefore I shall say no more here than that there being but one Bishop in each of those Cities his Diocess must be very large and contain several distinct Congregations The African Dioceses which Mr. B. fansies to be no bigger than our Parishes were at first very large till the Schism of the Donatists had divided that Church into small pieces the manner and the reason of this change I shall shew in due place and even then it will appear that there were some very large Bishopricks in Africk Carthage in Tertullians time had an infinite multitude of Christians as we have shewed already and Cyprian who was made Bishop there not long after gives us hints enough of the greatness of his Diocess Tempestas maxima ex parts plebem nostram prostravit ita ut cleri portionem sua strage perstringeret Ep. 6. Multi adbuc de Clero absentes 28. Presbyteri qui illic apud confessores offerunt singuli cum singulis Diaconis per vices alternent quia mutatioâ—ersonarum vicissitudo convenientium minuit invidian Ep. 5. The number of the Clergy there even in time of persecution when he confesses several of them to have fallen away yet even then there were so many Presbyters left in the City that he advises them to
But a Synod held at Rome about the same subject had but fourteen Bishops and several other Synods about this Controversy had not many more That of Jerusalem under Narcissus had but fourteen Papa Victor direxit Authoritatem not the language of that time Praecepta it aque authoritate praedictus Episcopus nonsolum de sua Provincia sed de diversis Regionibus omnes Episcopos evocavit And the famous Council under Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea had but twelve besides him Eusebius makes but one of both these Bede represents it as an extraordinary great Assembly for the Preface to it I conceive to be his he makes him to assemble not only the Bishops of his own Province but from several other parts The Council of Lyons under Irenaeus made up but fourteen That of Corinth under Bachillus eighteen That under Pasna or Palma the same number That of Osroena eighteen but the President of it is not known That of Mesapotamia which follows had the same number and it may be was the same Synod as that of Rome which follows is it may be the same with that which is mentioned before to have had the like number and the occasion of such mistakes as these is that when men find a Synod cited upon several accounts although it might be the same meeting that determined several things they are apt to conclude they were several Synods However it is plain from hence that there were but few Bishops in comparison of what they grew to within an hundred years after and that I take to be an argument of the largeness of their Dioceses But you will say there were but few Christians in these Parts The countrary is notorious to all the Word for these parts where most of these Councils were held were the best planted and furnished with Christians of any in the World But it may be there were but few in the world at this time It is not long after this that Tertullian wrote his Apology and what number of Christians there were then we have shewed already How then can this be imagined for every City if it have a Church must have a Bishop there is no absolute necessity of that that it should have its peculiar Bishop for we have seen already one Bishop as that of Milevis had more Cities than one in his Diocess and it had been so from ancient time or rather from the beginning antiquitus pertinuit And in this time we are now speaking of it is likely the Apostolick constitution of Bishopricks which in the beginning as Rabanus Maurus observed were very large did hold and it was the best suited to the infancy of the Church when one general visit our should take care of several Churches scattered as yet and incoherent and because a persecution might overthrow these little beginnings it was necessary there should be one whose office it should be to cultivate these new Plantations and where they were rooted up to set anew and to confirm those that were shaken with a competent district But when Christians multiplyed every where and most Cities had such numbers belonging to them as must be distributed into several Congregations the Diocess of the first constitution became too great and every City with some of the Territory belonging to it became a Diocess and had its proper Bishop And this seems to be most agreeable both to the Scripture History of the Church which we have made a deduction of before and to the progress of the Church in succeeding ages and particularly to the numbers of Bishops which are found in the first Synods But to proceed The Synod at Rome under Victor wherein Novatus was condemned was much more numerous than any mentioned before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 43. and consisted of sixty Bishops besides Priests and Deacons and Eusebius speaking of this observes the number to be very extraordinary consisidering the circumstances of those times and the numbers assembled in foregoing Synods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Libellus Synodicus reckons but eighteen which it may be was a small Synod previous to this greater one mentioned by Eusebius The Eastern Synods about Rebaptizing Hereticks were reckoned as for those times very numerous Euseb l. 7. c 5. Plurimi tractavimus Firmil Ep. ad Cypr. contra Crescon l. 3. c. 3. and yet that of Iconium the greatest of those of the East consisted of but fifty Bishops and these met together out of several Countries as Galatia Cappadocia Cilicia and other neighbouring Provinces St. Augustin despises the smalness of their numbers though Dionysius confesses these were mighty Synods in his time or rather before his time for they seem to be earlier than Baronius places them But what were these against so many thousand Bishops as were in the world then sayes Augustin I believe it would have been a very hard matter to have found so many thousand Bishops at that time I am sure the Acts of the Church discover no such multitudes of them and they must be very negligent if they should be so many and yet suffer things to be carried any way in Councils by a very few persons that Father judged of former ages by his own when Dioceses were exceedingly multipyed even to be the grievance and complaint of the African Church But Baronius goes to mend the matter by telling us that this opinion could find but fifty to countenance it among all the Bishops of the East One would imagine by this that the Councils of Iconium and Synadae An. Ch. 258 were but a small number of Bishops protesting against the general suffrage of their neighbour Bishops But if this were true Stephen Bishop of Rome had acted very extravagantly and upon ill information when upon the account of those publick resolutions taken by fifty Bishops he goes to excommunicate all the Bishops of Cilicia Galatia Euseb l. 7. c. 5. Cappadocia and the bordering Nations What number of Bishops France had at this time appears from the Council Vita 5. Pauli ap Bosquet Hist Eccl. Gal. par 2. where Paul Bishop of Narbonne was accused of in continence Evocatis paucis Episcopis Galliae quia nondum erant plures having called a few Bishops together for at that time Gallia had not many Nor do we find that Dioceses were much multiplyed in Spain as yet the famous Council of Illiberis which decreed so many things relating to Communion and such as all the Churches there must be supposed to consent to had but nineteen Bishops a number so small that Baronius takes occasion from hence to despise the Authority of the Assembly But what ever may be inferred from the smalness of their number surely one must infer that their Dioceses were Divided into Parishes from Canon seventy seven Siquis Dia conus regens plebem sine Episcopo vel Presbytero aliquns baptizaverit c. Conc. Illib c. 77. Hic regere posse plebem Diaconum hoc
next neighbouring Bishop but the Chorepiscopi may send such as were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for friendly correspondence and concord And the next Canon about the power of Metropolitans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 9. where it is forbid any Bishop to do any thing of great moment that may concern the whole Province without the concurrence of the Metropolitan does notwithstanding allow that he may govern his own Church and all the Regions under his jurisdiction Another Canon supposes more than one City in a Diocess and therefore Orders That a Bishop shall not Ordain a Presbyter or a Deacon in another City than his own * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Can. 22. or that is not subject to him Concil Agrippin An. 346. Non opinione sed veritate cognovi pro finitimi loci conjuncta Civitate The Council of Colen discovers the Dioceses thereabout to be very large for the Bishops assembled had most of them their Seats at a great distance from Colen Sêrvatius Bishop of Tongres in his Subscription adds something concerning his own knowledg of Euphratas Bishop of Colen and he gives for his reason that he was his next neighbour and yet their Cities are fifty or sixty English miles distant one from the other and the extent of the Diocess of Colen appears from the same Council where not only the people of the City exhibite their complaint against him but of all the Towns of the second Germany Subscriptio Servatii Cumque recitata fuisset Epifiola plebis Agrippinensis sed omnium Castrorum Germaniae secundae Ap. Conc. acta Provincia Germaniae secundae Metropolis Civitas Agrippinens Colozia Libel Provinciar whereof Colen was Metropolis and most of them belonged to that Diocess The Council of Sardica considering what course the Arians took to strengthen their party by increasing the number of Bishops as the instance of Ischyras Presbyter of Mareotes shews who was Ordained Bishop of a Village by the Arian Council of Tyre thought fit to declare against such proceedings as derogating from the dignity of a Bishop and therefore Decree That no Village or inconsiderable City shall have a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Con. Sard. c. 6. or any place where a Presbyter may suffice and lest you may imagine this an innovation to favour the growing greatness of the Bishops they add immediately That the Bishops of a Province shall Ordain Bishops in those Cities where there were any before which supposes that there were several Cities after the Empire became Christian that had never yet had Bishops Nay they add farther That when a City grows very populous so as to be fit to receive a Bishop it may have one To the same purpose is the Decree of the Council of Laodicea held after that of Sardica and much later than is generally pretended That Bishops ought not to be made in Villages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visitatores qui circumtant Isid Merca. or in the Country but Visitors who by the name they bear appear to be Diocesans because they have several Congregations under them which they are to visit and as for such Country Bishops as are already they must take care to act nothing of moment without the advice and privity of the City Bishops Yet all this while Dioceses do multiply against all means used to prevent it as we may perceive by the extraordinary numbers that met in Councils Acciti atque tracti 400 à mplius Episcopi Sul. Sev. l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Synod ap Athan. de Synod exceeding very much the greatest of those that had gone before Extraordinary numbers met at Sirmium and Ariminum at the latter all the Bishops of the West are said to have met for the Emperperors Officers were sent all over Illyricum Italy Africk Spain France to summon the Bishops to meet at Ariminum and all the Bishops are said to come thither from all the Cities of the West And now as we may observe the number of Bishops and Dioceses to increase so we may make some judgment concerning the occasion from that little light that is left in this particular We have but a very obscure account of the erecting of Bishopricks how and when most of them were founded but those instances that are preserved are sufficient to make us comprehend how the numbers came to increase so sensibly after the breaking out of the Arian controversy and in Egypt some time before upon the occasion of the Meletian Schism Epiph. Her 68. Meletius having left the Communion of the Catholick Church formed a separate faction and Ordained Bishops and Presbyters in every Country and in every place through which he passed nor was he content to set up only one Altar against another but to erect several in the same Diocess Nor is there yet any end of dividing Dioceses but these increase in proportion to the divisions of the Church Meletius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiph. Haer. 68. and as the Meletian Schism multiplyed Bishops in Egypt the Author of that Sect Ordaining Bishops in every Region and in every place that he passed through several in the same Diocess and as the Arian Controversy made Bishops where there never were any before so it is not to be doubted but the Controversies which followed Athan. Ap. 2. multiplyed Dioceses no less than these But besides this the multiplying of Metropolitans by the Christian Emperors contributed no less to multiply Bishops We have an eminent instance of this in the Province of Cappadocia in the time of Basil the Great The province being divided between two Civil Metropoles the Bishop of Tyana the new Metropolis thought that accordingly all that part of the Country that belongeâ—â—o the Civil jurisdiction of his City became no less subject to him as his Ecclesiastical Province which occasioned great disputes and animosities between the two Metropolitans Basil complains of the Bishops of the second Cappadocia that they presently renounced him in a manner Ep. 259. and when he made any difficulty of Ordaining any Bishop belonging to his Province Anthimus was ready to admit him as it happened in the case of Faustus Therefore to oppose the power of this new Usurping Metropolitan he betakes himself to the ordinary relief of making more Suffragans that by this means he might have some remedy from a Provincial Synod Epist 58. 195. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. de Vit. suâ Ep. 22 23. To this purpose Sasima a small Town belonging to Caesarea is made an Episcopal Seat and Gregory Nazianzen is preferred to it much against his will as a Person that might be of use to him against his Antagonist which he complains of in his Epistles to Basil and in his account of his own life and so sensible was he of Basil's ingaging him in this quarrel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Or. de Basil that he cannot forbear expressing his resentments even
the number of Christians at his first Entrance was hardly enough to make a Congregation towards his latter end it was surely too great for one for the multitude of people in the City and the Country that belong'd to it Ubi supra it is said by Gregory Nysser to be infinite The Testimony of Tertullian Apolog. chap. 39. is as little to his purpose his words are these p. 93. Where a Body compacted by the Knowledge of the same Religion the Vnity of Discipline and the League of Hope do come together into one Congregation Conus ad deum Ed. Rigalty and not in caeum Congregationem to offer up Prayers to God we meet for the hearing of the holy Scriptures we feed our Faith with those holy words we raise up our hope we fix our Confidence 〈◊〉 confirm Discipline by the inculcating of 〈◊〉 â—ours Precepts there are likewise there Exhortations as being done in the presence of God that is lookt upon as an Anticipation of future Judgment if any one has so offended as to be banish'd from the Communion of Prayer and the Assembly and of all holy Commerce most approv'd Elders do preside Now let the Reader judge whether Mr. B. has Reason to be so confident of this Passage as to say pag. 94. If I be able to understand Tertullian it is here plain that each Church consisted of one Congregation and yet out of the words there can be nothing brought to favour it unless it be this that Christians used in those days to assemble for Prayer and reading of the Scriptures but whether one or more such Assemblies were under the Discipline of the Bishop and Presbytery is not signified in the least That Elders are said to preside does not at all prejudice the Right of the Bishop for either those are Bishops that are said to preside and so every particular Church will have many which if it be not against Mr B's Notion of Episcopacy is confessedly against the practice of the Church in those times when one Church had no more than one Bishop if they were Presbyters then 't is probable there was more than one Congregation But it appears by what follows that these Presidents were all the Officers of the Church where they are distinguish'd from the people and said to live out of the common Stock and the Deacons as well as Priests did assist at the Sacrament and the Bread and Wine was distributed by their hands aâ—â— shall endeavour to prove in due place 〈◊〉 cites out of the same Author De Corona Militis to put his meaning out of all doubt concludes nothing less than what he would have him to say his words are to this effect Presidentium c. 3. That we must receive the Eucharist at all times but from no other hand but those that preside That those were not Bishops appears from the next passage which he cites out of the same place This Mr. B. mistakes Ch. Hist p. 7. when he says that they took not the Lord's Supper but only Antistitis manu I suppose his Memory deceiv'd him 〈◊〉 where Tertullian speaking of Baptism mentions the form of renouncing the World and the Devil Sub manu Antistitis where we may observe that he uses another Word as well as another Number yet since it is said that Christians ought not to receive the Sacrament but from the hands of those Presidents we must not conceive the Bishop to be excluded but by that general Name to be comprehended together with his Bench of Presbyters but will not this Circumstance of Baptism serve to evince that a Bishop had then but one Congregation and every one to be baptized was to make his Renunciation under the Bishops Hand nothing less for many more might be baptized by a Bishop in the compass of few years than there are in the greatest Diocese in the World Paulinus could not well wish a greater number in his Diocess than he baptized in seven and thirty days Bed l. 2. chap. 14. Pamelius did labour to prove that Antistes is the same with Seniores Presidentes and that Presbyters might baptize as well as Bishops but that is not the thing in Question nor does this Passage suppose every baptism performed by the Bishop but the Renunciation of the Devil c. which was preparatory to it to have been made in his presence he might have a very large Diocess and be at Leisure for this especially when we consider that the generality of Christians in those times had such an awe of that Sacrament and the strict Obligation it lay upon them of more than ordinary Sanctity that they deferr'd it till the last and were baptized on their Death-bed and that not by the Bishop but by any other Presbyter or Deacon nor can we find in all the History of the times we now speak of that Children had any part in the solemn and publick Baptism but they might be privately baptized in case of Necessity and eminent danger of Death without the assistance of the Bishop And long after these times we find in the largest Dioceses where a great many Congregations are affirmed to be under the same Bishop One Baptistry to a Church sufficient for several Congregations there were but three days in the year appointed for solemn Baptism and the Bishops were so far from being unequal to the Multitude that they complain of the general Neglect of the Sacrament and of their not being fully employed at those times so that supposing this Antistes to be the Bishop and every one that was solemnly baptized past under his hand it is far from making out Mr. B's Notion that there was but one Congregation under him The next thing he makes use of to confirm his Conception of Congregational Church is the Consent of the people Disp 95. in the Margin Ch. Hist p. 7. as well in the Election of their Bishops as in several other Ecclesiastical Acts but this â—e rather hints by the Bye than insists upon and I suppose did not value much since he takes no care to improve it whoever will take the pains to examine those passages will find that the people never polled at the Election of their Bishops which was principally the act of the Clergy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but approved it commonly by a general and confused Voice of the Multitude that was present and the Phrase Vniversa Plebs does not denote every particular Christian of the Church but onely a general Assembly and Congregation of as many as could come together or of the most considerable Persons of the Diocese or rather as it is usually express'd all the People that were present at the Action Cornelius elected plebis quae tunc adfuit Suffragio Cypr. l. 4. c. 2. I shall not forget to answer this Argument more particularly hereafter when we shall meet with it confirmed by any Canon of Councils or other passages in his History Basil Ep.
194. ad Pleb Nicop As for Nynius's History of St. Patrick and the three hundred and sixty five Bishops which he planted in Ireland I suppose 't was invented by some learned Monk to fill up the Irish Calender and to leave no day in the year so forlorn but that the name of one of these Bishops could vindicate it from Prophaneness That which follows of Scotlands having no Bishops before Palladius Disp 1.97 Yet England had Bishops long before as may be seen in the Subscriptions of the Councils of Orleance and Nice but that the people there were instructed by Priests and Monks makes nothing at all to our present purpose though the Authority of Henricus Major and Johannes Fordorius were unquestionable for there is no account of setled Churches or Discipline but only that some good men out of their Zeal for Religion did endeavour to propagate it among the Scots and that these were not Bishops But Buchanan stretches this point higher than it will bear and will have it that the Churches of Scotland were governed by Presbyters and Monks the first time I believe in Story we meet with Monks amongst the Orders of Church-Government but I believe that the Story it self may be easily disproved and we may expect shortly a fuller account of this and other things relating to the ancient British Church by the hand of one of the greatest Masters of Antiquity in this Nation The last part of Mr. B's Evidence has some of the Canons of ancient Councils but I must needs say he does not cite with that accuracy that one would expect from a person that advances so singular a notion The first is the fourteenth of the Council of Adge Can 1. the Sum of it is this that if any man should desire a Chappel of Ease for the benefit of his Family he might be gratified in it but with this Proviso that upon the most solemn Feasts he should hear divine Service in Parochiis aut Civitatibus Mr. B. makes Parochia signifie a Diocese because the word is used frequently in that sense by Eusebius and other Ancients but does not consider that the Import of it is changed by this time and is taken for a Parish in the fifty third Canon of the Council of Adge whose Title is de Presbyteris parochianis rei Ecclesiae distrahentibus cap. 2. vass 3. There is express Difference made where a Presbyter is allow'd to preach Non solum in Civitatibus sed in omnibus Parochiis 47. The next is the thirtieth Canon of the same Council Benedictionem super plebem fundere aut poenitentem in Ecclesia benedicere presbytero poenitus non licebit to which he adds the thirty first 47. Missas die dominico saecularibus totas audire speciali ordine praecipimus ita ut ante benedictionem sacerdotis egredi populus non presumat quod si fecerit ab Episcopo publicè confundatur From whence he infers that all the people were oblig'd to come to the Bishops Church because they were to stay till the Benediction which it was lawful for the Bishop only to give but if Mr. B. had considered these two Canons he must have observed that either they contradict one another or the same thing is not meant by the Benediction of the Priest and the Bishop by the first which is reserv'd to the Bishop Confirmation must in all probability be understood By the second the Priests Benediction that which is pronounced at the dismissing the Congregation or if he will understand a Bishop by Sacerdos the Canon forbids it in making a Distinction between them ab Episcopo confundatur whereas if by Sacerdos they would have understood a Bishop it is not likely they would have either chang'd the Term or repeated it but have added ab eo confundatur But why should we insist upon this since nothing can be more notorious than that Presbyters had Churches now distinct from Bishops and every Diocess almost a great number of Parishes and there are few Councils of that Age but oblidge the Bishop to visit all these Churches once a year To these he adds the thirty eighth Canon of the same Council Disp p. 99. Cives qui superiorum solemnitatum id est Paschae Natalis Domini vel Pentecostes festivalibus cum Episcopis interesse neglexerint quum in Civitatibus communionis vel Benedictionis accipiendae causa positos se nosse debeant triennio communione priventur Ecclesiae It is not to be denyed but it was the ancient Custom for all the Parishes or places depending upon any Episcopal Church on certain times to repair to it not so much for personal Communion as for Homage but we are not therefore to conceive that every Soul under a Bishops Charge was to appear before him on those solemn times but only the most considerable persons of every Division and this Canon means no more Sirmond could never find any more than 47 Canons of this Council the rest were taken out of Conc. Epaonense from whence the true Reading of this Canon is to be sought for there is Cives superiorum natalium not solennitatum and so it is corrected in the best Edition of the Council of Agde and Communionis is left out which restoring of this Canon overthrows all the use that M. B. would make of it since all are neither obliged to be present nor to personal Communion but what Cives superiorum Natalium signifies we must learn from other Councils of this Age in the 14 chap. of the Councel of Arvern we have it thus explained that together with all the Presbyters and Deacons of a Diocese Quicunque sunt etiam Cives natu majores pari modo in Vrbibus ad Pontifices suos in praedictis Civitatibus veniant And the third Canon of the fourth Council of Orleans obliges onely the Principal Citizens to assist the Bishops on these Solemn Times Quisquis de prioribus Civibus Pascha extra Civitatem tencre voluerit sciat sibi à cuncta Synodo esse prohibitum which is no other than if the Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen the Liveries and most considerable Citizens were obliged on certain High Festivals to come to Church to St. Pauls The next of the Canons he produces are either to the same effect with what he has already alledged or not directly to his purpose so that I believe upon a Review he will judge as well as I that there is no necessity of a Reply Mr. B. has heretofore excepted the Churches of Rome and Alexandria Ch. Hist p. 7. § 23. and has despair'd of bringing them ever to comply with his Model but now it seems he has found a means to reduce them to a Congregation he revokes his former Concessions and declares that he finds no reason to believe that ever the two chief Cities of the Empire had so long that is for two hundred years after Christ more than some London Parishes or near half so
many it is Pity these great London Parishes should ever be divided they are so serviceable to Dissenters on all Occasions for if a Conventicle is to be kept up the Greatness of St. Martin's or St. Giles Parish will justifie it those Churches will not hold a tenth man that ought to repair to them and surely better set up a meeting against the Law than that the People go unedified And again when Rome or Alexandria are to be reduced to a single Congregation then it is but comparing them to these great Parishes and the work is done It is not likely that for two hundred years Rome it self had near so great a number of Christians as one of these Parishes Suppose they had not the Question is not whether the Church of Rome was more numerous than that of St. Martins but whether they could meet in one Congregation for suppose they were but half or a quarter so big if they could not meet in one place to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but must resolve into several Assemblies for to do it it is no matter what proportion they held to our London Parishes But what Evidence is there out of History that the Church of Rome made but one Congregation for two hundred years after Christ is it that the People are said to consent to the Election of the Bishops or to concur in several Ecclesiastical Acts But how shall we be assured that every Believer was obliged to be present or that Matters were carried by Vote and not by general and confused Approbation Besides though all that had the right of Electing Church Officers might possibly meet in one place yet they were not the fifth part of the number that had right to Congregation and Personal Communion for Women and Children and Servants must be supposed to be excluded together with the Poor and the more inconsiderable Persons or if this practice of approving the Election of Church-Officers be any Argument for a Churches being no more than a single Congregation it will follow that Rome had but one Congregation for many hundred years after for the People were very long in possession of that right after the whole City was become Christian and surely then they were too numerous for one Congregation Anton. de Dom. l. 4. c. 11. makes a long deduction of the Election of the Bishops of Rome and proves that they were chosen by the People until Innocent the Second for 1100 years and that he was the first that alter'd the ancient way of Election Now if any one can believe that for eleven Centuries there was but one Congregation in Rome much good may it do him As for the Peoples Right to chuse which Mr. B. does so much insist upon and seems to give the People Encouragement to revolt from those Bishops which they never chose I shall give a more particular Account of it towards the latter end of this Treatise Mr. B. makes a Computation of the Church of Rome in the time of Cornelius and finds it to fall much short of one of our great Parishes for when Novatian divided that Church it had but forty six Priests seven Deacons and as many Sub-deacons forty two Acoluti Exorcists Readers and Porters fifty two Widows and Poor that were disabled and lived upon the Charity of the Church fifteen hundred upon which we compute thus Suppose the Poor the tenth part of the whole Church as St. Chrysostom calculated the number of the Church of Antioch the Product then would be fifteen thousand and not ten thousand five hundred as Mr. B. reckons or the Printer mistakes and even thus would they be too many for one Congregation We cannot imagine any five Churches of such as the Christians might be supposed then to have Ch. Hist p. 7. capable of holding them all Euseb l. ◠c. 43. but if we consider this Passage more narrowly we shall find Mr. B.'s Computation to be extreamly short for these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were not only poor but sick and disabled for so the word is explain'd in the Epistle of the Roman Clergy to the Clergy of Carthage upon the subject of Cyprians retiring Ap. Cyr Sive Viduae sive Thlebomeni qui se exhibère non possunt sive qui in Carceribus sunt sive exclusi à sedibus suis utique habere debent qui eis ministrent So then these poor were such only as were not able to help themselves that were not able to come abroad and such as these surely are not the fortieth part of any people unless it be in the time of Plague or extraordinary Sickness In the next place let us consider the number of the Priests what use can there be of forty six in one Congregation For they were neither to preach nor administer the Sacraments in the Presence of the Bishop for the first Mr. B. urged it elsewhere to prove no more than one Congregation belong'd to one Bishop and I hope he will not be so disingenious as to cast it off as soon as he has serv'd his turn of it For the Administration of the Sacraments Justin Martyr is very clear in his Description that the Bishop consecrated and gave it the Deacons to be distributed among the Congregation ubi supra so that unless there were distinct Congregations at that time those 46 Presbyters could hardly find how to employ themselves But Mr. B. does endeavour to remove this Objection Ch. Hist p. 8. by shewing the Church-Officers were very much multiplyed in those days to the end that as many as had any useful Gifts might be employ'd in the Service of the Church For this Orat. 1. p. 45. he brings in Nazianzen as a credible Witness shortly after complaining of the Excess in this part that the Church Rulers were almost more than the Subjects but how shortly after would you have judg'd this to have been spoke No longer than about a hundred and fifty years and after one of the greatest Revolutions that happen'd in the Church in Cornelius's time the Christians as Mr. B. remarks were not of the greatest and richest and therefore it is not likely that the publick Charge should be multiplyed without Necessity and forty six Presbyters be appointed for one Congregation But in Nazianzen's time the Church was in a prosperous and flourishing Condition the Governours were now become Christians and great Priviledges and Wealth were added to the Clergy which made it then so desireable a thing But in Cornelius's time the greatest Dignity was Martyrdom and the Clergy was particularly aim'd at by the Heathen Persecutors their Portion was Labour and Danger they were to come and assist the Brethren in the Prison and at the Stake and the Office was so unpleasant that Novatian the Author of that Sect which Mr. B. speaks so favourably of desired to be eased of the Burden Euseb l. 6◠c. 43. and renounced his Priest-hood besides the same Epistle of Cornelius