had gone through Phrygia and Galatia they came to Mysia c. So that he could not well have multiplyed more mistakes in so few words and all to make up his hypothesis that the Decree of Ierusalem had no more reference to Antioch and the regions whereof that was the Metropolis than to all those other Churches which yet if it be extended no farther than to Asia it selfe will by Philo's words be interpretable of the Province subordinate to Ierusalem 30. What remains to this head is made up of contumelie and reproach of my audaciousnesse with reflexion onely upon a supposition of mine that after this time the Churches were small and thinne and few in number and so that of Philippi was seven yeares after this which is designed as a prejudice to my hypothesis concerning Metropolitan Churches so early But to the former of these the reproaches I have nothing to return but my thankes to the latter I have answered formerly that the smallnesse of the number of Christians nothing hinders the dependence of one Church upon another See Vindic. to Lond. Minist chap. 1. sect 16. numb 14. And so much for the evidence out of the Acts. 31. Next he comes to my proof out of Ignatius who say I being Bishop of Antioch doth yet in the Epistle to the Romans call himself Pastor of the Church of Syria The words wherein he so styles himselfe he sets down in the Greek and instead of translating them as they should be translated Remember in your prayers the Church of Syria which in stead of me hath Christ for their Pastor viz. now that he was carryed from them to his Martyrdome he takes advantage of the Readers unskilfulnesse in that language and formes my proof into a ridiculous argument Because he recommends to them that particular Church in Syria which by his imprisonment was deprived of its Pastor therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Bishop and then is very pleasant with his Tityre tâ—… patâ—… 32. But would not a little sadnesse and justice have done better and then it had been most cleare that Ignatius his saying that Christ was now their Pastor instead of him must necessarily imply that he was formerly their Pastor and whose Pastor was hee expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Pastor of the Church in Syria where it is evident that the whole Church in Syria not that particular Church onely of Antioch is by him supposed to be under his Pastorall care the same thing being before in the same Epistle exprest in words no way lyable to misunderstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath vouchsafed or dignified the Bishop of Syria calling himself Bishop of Syria and so not of Antioch onely This hath been formerly cleared against all exception and need not be here farther repeated 33. There remains the testimony of the Author of the Epistle to the Antiochians which I vouched not as the genuine writing of Ignatius but onely as an antient Writer according to the genuine in this matter Hence I am cryed out on as forsaken of all faire and honest means and like Saul trying the Witch of Endor c. But this is but ordinary style a flourish of his Rhetorick and need not stay us to consider it that which follows is more to the purpose that I make this counterfeit speak as if Syria were in Antioch not Antioch in Syria and here askes What other sense can be made of the words as by me transcribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Antioch and then triumphs in this discovery 34. But certainly the Witch was not so contrary to a wise woman the counterfeit author so perfect a changeling as here he is set out to be Certainly the Greek as transcribed by me lyes thus in the construction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God which is at Antioch with this farther denomination added to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adjacent or lying together in Syria or allowing them the same position in English which they have in Greek To the Church of God lying together in Syria the Church or that which is at Antioch but taking all the words together of which I there onely gave the abstract to the Church pitied by God chosen by Christ lying together in Syria which first received the sirname of Christian the Church which is at Antioch And so he may discerne it possible to make sense of these words a very little skill in that language being sufficient to enable one to joyne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the not very remote as well as with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the immediate Antecedent And so this leaves it clear as the day 1. That Antioch was believed by that Author to be in Syria not Syria in Antioch and 2. That Syria was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province belonging to Antioch the Metropolis and that is a proof as far as his authoritie will bear that the Apostles instituted Metropolitans and so of the very thing in earnest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was to be demonstrated 35. And if this authority were not so great as the former of the true Ignatius had been yet first he was an antient Writer and so acknowledged and secondly one that imitated antient style and calls himself Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the known title of Ignatius by which he was condemn'd by Trajane and so though he feign'd a person yet did it decently and so testifies his opinion that this was the style of Ignatius's dayes or else would not have discovered himself by using it Thirdly his testimony added to Ignatius's and in concord with it will not certainly take off the forâ—e from Ignatius's And fourthly if this be finally reprobated there be several more behind of Scripture and the Antients concerning Gortyna in Crete and seven Metropolitical Churches in Asia and a reference to the Archbishop of Armagh's discourse on that subject and passages collected out of the Canons of the Antient Vniversal Church and no one word offer'd to be replyed to all this which makes it very impertinent to goe about farther to confirme this assertion which else I might doe and for brevities sake referre the Reader to Frigevillaeus Gautius Par. 1. c. 4. the subject of which Chapter is Primates esse jure Divino That Primates are by Divine right Sect. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Casaubon's Censure of that phrase Numb 1. NExt he comes to examine Sect. 11. and that one small testimony from the inscription of Ignatius's Epistle to the Romans Before I proceed to which I shall confesse to the Prefacer that he hath mâ—st an opportunitie of great rejoycing For the truth is in the end of sect 10. there lay a passage wherein though I affirm'd not but onely past my conjecture crediderim c. yet I now by a last reading over of Ignatius's Epistles discern my self to have mistakenâ— For in
parallel remains compleat betwixt Clement's one Epistle set out from the King's Library and Ignatius's seven set out from the Medicaean Greek and our old Latine Copies 14. And for Polâ—carpe and him the comparison will be more easie by viewing the testimonies by the Lord Primate produced out of the Ancients concerning each of them prefixt before the one common volume of both their Epistles And indeed of them two the advantage is clearly on Ignatius's side because as generally they that make mention of the one joyn the other with him with the same reverence onely giving the precedence to Ignatius St. Hierome ad Helvidium may stand for many Can I not saith he summon the whole Catalogue of antient Writers Ignatius Polycarpe So Polycarpe himself in his Epistle gives his testimony and commendations of Ignatius and his Epistles and from him it is that originally we fetch our collection and just esteem of them I hope I shall not need to adde more to justifie my conâ—idence in that matter 15. Secondly For my affirming that Salmasius and Blondel were the first that thought these Epistles of Ignatius to be feigned and counterfeit which is the one thing that must bear all the weight of my accusation for confidence in asserting confidence in imposing upon Readers oscit ancie or contempt in considering them my account will bee soon given by viewing my periods on which this charge is layd and they are three two set down in his Text one in his Margent The two former are fully and truly cited by him That in the Margent is set down imperfectly and lyes thus in the Dissert it should be c. 23. sect 3. In his quiâ—pe Rebus in EcclesiaÌ„ primaevâ gestis ut an Ignatius Epistolas scripserit unicum D. Blondellum aut alterum fortassis inter omnes mortales Walonem Messalinum rectius judicare quam patres universos This is to conclude that in matters of fact done in the first Ages of the Church one Blondel or perhaps his second Salmasius passe a righter judgement than all the Fathers 16. The plain sense and drift of these words is this that when there was a Copie of Ignatius produced which had in it the several sentences which the Fathers all without exception of one cited from Ignatius by which it appears that those Fathers universally gave credit to these Epistles in this form in which D. Blondel and Salmasius reject them and when this was taken notice of by Blondel as an objection against his discourse his ipsis Epistolis Patres fidem adhibuisse That the Fathers gave credit to these very Epistles and that answered by Blondel with a Quid tum Quam multa minimè suspicaces ac imparatos fefellerunt semper quotidie fallunt What matter for that How many things both have alwaies deceived and doe daily deceive persons that are not suspicious and upon their guard From this answer of Blondels I conclude that if he hath reason on his side in it then the judgement of one or two Modern Writers Blondel and Salmasius is to be preferred before all the Fathers and that in a matter of story a narration of things done in the Primitive times wherein the Fathers lived and from whence these others are so many hundred years distant 17. This conclusion of mine as it is most undeniably deduced from Blondel's words and is I think a competent evidence of the unreasonableness of his proceedings for it is obvious to all men who are the most competent Judges or Witnesses of matters of fact sure they which are neerest the times and have the most uniform consent of others that speak of it not they that are but singular Affirmers and at a vast distance from it so it is a full interpretation of my meaning not that Blondel and Salmasius were the first of men which ever opposed any Volume of Ignatius's Epistles or that thought them I mean again any that goe under that name or any volume of such set out by any feigned or counterfeit but that they were the first which rejected those more emendate Copies found upon tryal to accord with all that the Fathers cite from them and so which are by themselves confest to be the very Epistles which the Father 's used and own'd as Ignatius's 18. An evidence of the truth of this I shall produce from Blondel's own words in his Preface p. 40 where mentioning how greedily he laid hold of the Laurentian Copy lent him by Vossius in Manuscript how he transcribed it with his own hand collated it diligently with the places cited from these Epistles by the Antients and if it were done studiosè diligently those Antients must be Polycarpe Irenaeus Origen Eusebius Athanasius Hierome Chrysostome Theodoret c. at length he confesses se gratulatum seculo nostro quod illud ipsum exemplar quo ante 1300 annos usus erat Eusebius novam ipsi propediem affulsuram lucem sponderet that he congratulated our age that that very Copie which Eusebius used 1300 yeares agoe promised now to bestow new light upon the Age. 19. Here it appeares that in his dispassionate impartial judgement founded on prudent consideration and his having used the best means of judging this Copie which Blondel rejected was the Copie that the Antients own'd particularly Eusebius And of his rejecting this Copy not any other formerly published among us it is most evident that I speak in all the places of the Dissertations and consequently that unlesse some other man can now be named which rejected this Copy the Laurentian I mean set out by Vossius to which the old Latine one publisht by the Lord Primate is answerable though a barbarous translation or the Copy which Eusebius and the Fathers used before Blondel and Salmasius rejected it I have affirmed that which is exactly the truth and am guilty neither of confidence nor imposing nor oscitancy nor contempt of the Reader 20. And then I pray how was I concerned in the negations and arguments of the Vir doctissimus which Vedelius answered which must needs belong to the Epistles then extant and carried about in Ignatius's name could not by divination be confronted to this Edition of Vossius or to the Laurentian or our old Latine Manuscripts which may well be presumed to have never been heard of by him or Vedelius either and yet are the onely volume of Ignatius's Epistles there spoken of by me and of which my affirmation proceeds As for this vir Doctissimus I have now been able to consult Vedelius and * there I first find that he hath neither Name nor Book delivered to us and that in all probability he never publisht any word to that purpose And for what hath past betwixt private men in more private Letters I know not that I was obliged to take any notice if I had remembred that Anonymus ineditus vir doctissimus 2 That this unus quidam vir doctissimus is mentioned as the onely person and
of Jesus Christ our Saviour which suffered for our sins which the Father raised up All the difference is but this that where Theodoret reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they receive not the Eucharist and oblations Our Copy of the Epistle to the Church of Smyrna reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they recede from the Eucharist and the prayer which is to the same sense which soever be the truest reading and greater differences there oft are discernable in citation of places of Scripture in the Fathers and then how could hee thinke fit to adde which words you will scarcely finde in that Epistle to the Church of Smyrna from whence they were taken I cannot yet make any conjecture what he should aim at in thus affirming contrary to every mans sight which shall but read that Epistle and therefore I cannot farther apply fit remedy to it 13. The case is evident These words are wanting in the corrupt Copies of Ignatius and yet are cited by Theodoret out of him This concludes that there were more perfect Copies in Theodoret's time than our former had been and now the Copies lately publisht have these words in them which is an evidence of the accord between these Copies and that which Theodoret used and so being an argument for the incorruptness of these Copies and the very thing which caused the Lord Primate to make search in our English Libraries for those Copies because he found this particular place cited by three antients of this Nation Wodeford Robert Lincolniensis and Tissington it was not either very reasonably or very luckily produced as an evidence against them 14. The full importance of the speech it self hath been formerly intimated viz. that the haereticks which denyed the reality of Christs death and Resurrection did consequently to their hypothesis reject the Eucharist and prayers or oblations of the Church wherein that death of his was solemnly commemorated and the flesh of the crucified Saviour Sacramentally offered and received and so maintained to be by the Orthodox believers 15. The other speech said to be cited from Ignatius by St. Hierome may also well be his saying though I find it not in these Epistles Our Saviour we know spake many things which are not written in the Gospels and some of them are recited afterwards by the Apostles in the Acts and some recorded by the Writers that followed the Apostles And so well enough may some periods delivered to Ignatius be preserved to us not in his own Writings but in the Writings of other men and this far from prejudicing the Epistles which have been transmitted to us which may well be genuine though all that was such be not come down to us As for the audactâ—r that it was a bold saying in him that sayd it I have little reason to be disturbed by that because if Ignatius sayd it it is not my interest to inquire or examine how boldly and if he did not say it then nothing can be inferr'd from his saying it But then after all this Christ we know call'd and chose one of his Disciples from the Toll-booth where they that sate were proverbially called sinners and generally accounted such beyond all other men their very trade was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 filthy and sordid saith Artemidorus and fit to be joyn'd with that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 theeves and cheaters and in Theophrastus in his Characters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whoremongerâ— and Publicans as in Scripture Publicans and Harlots goe together and accordingly when Theocritus was asked what was the cruellest beast he answer'd Of those in the Mountains the Bear and Lyon but of those in the City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Publicans and Sycophantâ— and as of them the Poet concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are all generally all Robbers so the Jews are wont to cry out of them that they are all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thieves wicked sinners And then what boldnesse is there in saying of Christ who chose such that he chose those who were sinners above all other men It being no way to the dishonour of Christ to have chosen such who from the chief of sinners blasphemers and persecutors and injurious as St. Paul saith of himselfe converted and became the most zealous servants and Disciples of their Master Sect. 2. The style and barbarous words in these Epistles Varietie of styles Exuberance of affection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignatius's title an indication of the language of that age Compositions and new formes in Scripture The four Latine words in these Epistles parallel'd by Hegesippus The Church of Smyrna and many more in the New Testament Num. 1. THE next objection against these Epistles is taken from the style and the use of barbarous words in Ignatius and it begins thus 2. The style of these Epistles doth not a little weaken the credit of them being turgent swelling with uncouth words and phrases affected manner and wayes of expression new compositions of words multiplying titles of honour to men exceedingly remote and diâ—â—ant from the plainness and simplicity of the first Writers among the Christians as is evident by comparing these with the Epistles of Clement before mention'd that of Polycarpus in Euscbius the Churches of Vienna and Lyons in that same Author and others Instances for the confirmation of this observation are multiplyed by Blondellus my designed work will not allow me to insiâ—â— particulars In many good words this charge is waved by affirming that the author of these Epistles was a Syrian and near to Martyrdom and that in the Scripture there are sundry words of as hard a composition as these used by him Ham. Dissert 2. c. 3. And as he sayes from this kind of writing an argument of sufficient validity may be drawn to evince him to be the Author of these Epistles Hierome was of another mind speaking of Dydimus Imperitus saith he sermone est non scientia Apostolicum virum ex ipso sermone exprimens tam sensum nomine quam simplicitate ver borum But seeing Ignatius was a Syrian and near to Martyrdome though he writes his Epistles from Troas and Smyrna which without doubt were not in his way to Rome from Antioch and yet every where he saith he is going to Rome ad Ephâ—s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the close he affirmes he wrote from Smyrna whither he was had to his Martyrdome what is it to any man what style he used in his writings what swelling titles he gave to any or words he made use of Who shall call those writings especially Ignatius being a Syrian into question But perhaps some farther question may here arise and which hath by sundry been already started about the use of divers Latine woâ—ds in those Epistles which doubtless cannot be handsomly laid on the same account of the Author being a Syâ—ian and nigh to Martyrdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are usually instanced
words to which no Romanâ— Customs Observations Orders nor Rules of Government doe administer the least occasion Of these the Doctor tels you he wonders onely that in so many Epistles there are no more of this kind And why so the Epistles are not so large a volume a very few houres will serve to reade them over and yet I am perswaded that in all that compasse of reading in the Greek Fathers which our Doctor ownes he cannot give so many instancâ—s of woâ—ds barbarous to their language no way occasioned by the meanes before mentioned as have been given in these Epistles But he wonders that there are no more and some wonder that all are not of his mind But he farther informes us that a diligent reader of the Scripture may observe many more Latine words in the New Testament than aâ—â— used in these Epistles and for a proof of his diligence and observation reckons up out of the end of Passor's Lexicon sundry words of that kind made use of by the Sacred Writers I feare unto some men this wiâ—l scâ—â—ce be an Apologie prevalent to the dismission of these Epistles from under the cenâ—ure of being at least foulely corrupted Of the whole coâ—lection of words of that sort made by Pâ—ssor among which are those especially cull'd out by our Doctor to confirmâ— his Observations there is scarce one but either it is expressive of some Roman Office Custome Money Oâ—der or the like words of which nature passe as proper names as one of those mentioned by the Doctor is and no otherwise used in the New Testamen from one Country and Language to another or are indeed of a purâ— Gâ—eek Original or at least were in common use in that age neither of which can be spoken of the words above mentioned used in the Epistles which were never used by any before or after them nor is theâ—e any occasion imaginable why they should Parvas habâ—nt spâ—s Epistolae si talâ—s habent I would indeed gladly see a faire candiâ— and ingenious defensative of the style and manner of writing used in these Epistles departing so eminently from any thing that was customaâ—y in â—he writings of the men of those dayes or is regular for men in any generation in Repetitions affected Compositions Barbarismes Rhyming expressions and the like for truly notwithstanding any thing that hitherto I have been abâ—â— to obtain for help in this kind I am inforced to incline â—o Vâ—…s his answers to all the particular instances given of this nature this and that place is corrupted this is from Clement's constitutions this from this or that Tradition which also would much better free those Epistles from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the sense whereunto it was applyed by the Valentinians long after the death of Ignatius than any other Apologie I have as yet seen for the securing of its abode in them 3. The total of this double objection against turgencie of style and barbarousnesse of words is this The objections formerly drawne by D. Blondel from those two heads and punctually answered by me Dissert 2 c. 3. are againe call'd up and some general heads of my answers slightly repeated and scoffed at and put into as disadvantageous a dresse as he could choose for them and then the old answered arguments may stand good againe and all must be rejected as supposititious which hath any of this turgent style or these barbarous words in it 4. In full answer to this I that know best the force of my own answers and wherein their strength lyes shall very briefly give the Reader that is not at leisure to turn to the Dissertations a view of them and vindicate them from any appearance of reply which here is made to them 5. Three things are more distinctly objected by Blondel on this head turgency of style new forms of compounded words and a few viz. four Latine words made Greek 6. To the first of these my answer is 1. that the styles of men in the same age are oft very different I adde as different and discernable to a curious observer as their hands or characters or as their countenances several lines and features and airs as it were several dashes and forms visibly observable in them Accordingly we read of Caesar that if any passage were brought to him for Cicero's which was not Cicero's he would constantly reject it And the same could Servius doe if any verse in the name of Plautus were recited to him which was not his And we know it is the part of an Aristarchus or skilfull Critick and the common way of discerning such or such a writing whether it be his whose it pretends to be or not diligently to observe the style or character which could not be any probable way of judging if all others which wrote in the same age wrote the very same style And so that which is here added of comparing Ignatius his style with that of Clement and Polycarp and the Church of Vienna is a very strange argument just as if one should say he that ownes this Preface is not the Author of it and bind him for the justifying that he is to demonstrate the agreement of his style with all men that have written in this last age in our language 7. 2ly When Blondel saith that the Author of these Epistles doth nimis Rhetoricari too much rhetoricate I answer that it is hard to define the bounds of Eloquence within which it is obliged to contein it self Cicero in his Institution of an Orator commending that plenty cui aliquid amputari possit where there is somewhat to spare which is an evidence that that Master of Eloquence is no way displeased with all exuberance And to this particular it was that peculiarly I added the mention of his being neer his Martyrdome and his flagrant desire of it which might enflame his soule and that send out those warmer breathings or expressions which might be as much above the ordinary simplicity of speech as he was at that time above the ordinary cold temper of other men And against this there is not the least word here objected by this Praefacer 8. For the second part of the objection the new formes of compounded words observable in these Epistles my answer is that though Blondel set down 17. of such words yet many of them are of the same kind compounded of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so arise by the same analogie that fewer would do and consequently the multitude of them signifies no more than a smaller number of the same And of these it is observable that the title by which Ignatius was vulgarly known at that time was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that carried God and when Trajan condemned him to death it was upon this point and in this forme that he owned that name Ignatium praecipimus in seipso dicentem circumferre Crucifixum
have because they neither Confirm nor Ordain which that it belongs to the Bishop onely the reading of the acts of the Apostles demonstrates Where whatever his opinion was concerning that nicety of distinction betwixt Degree and Order it is evident that hee gives the superiority of degree to Bishops and reserves to them those two Powers and foundeth this in the Apostles times and practise 17. 4. That though this may seem at the first but a slight difference in these men from that which the Antients have more generally taught viz. that the Apostles first instituted Bishops and Deacons not simple Presbyters and Deacons as beside the plain words of Clemens and St. Paul the sense whereof may possibly be controverted the testimonie of Epiphanius and of the profoundest monuments of History irrefragably inforceth yet their interests for the magnifying of the Papacie upon the score of succession to St. Peter doe clearly discover themselves in this way of decision and so make Papists very incompetent witnesses in this matter 18. For upon this conceit that there was a time in the first plantation of the Gospel when the power of Bishops and Priests lay confused though afterward separated by the Apostles themselves the conclusion aimed at and when occasion requires deduced by them is evident that this later though Apostolical institution may be altered by the Poâ—e out of the supereminence of his power as he is the Vicar of CHRIST though they pretend not that he may lawfully attempt to overthrow the primarie and fundamental Sanction And so though Priesthood may not be taken out of the Church yet the tenure by which Bishops hold is not so firm but must stand wholly at the pleasure of the Pope 19. The defence of which conclusion being none of the Interests of the Cause which I assert I shall no farther be obliged to hearken to the premises as they are here but intimated by Lombard and frequently repeated and built upon by sundry of that party than they shall be able regularly to prove them Which being not here attempted but only the specious but fallacious argument proposed from the confession of Lombard himself whose confessions are no obligations to all other men I have no more occasion to inlarge on this particular 20. Which if it were seasonable I might easily doe in observing other particulars among the Popish Writers wherein they shew themselves far from passionate espousers of Episcopacy The Pope forsooth must be the fountain of all Ecclesiastical authority and all other Rivulets must runne in a weake streame and then also derive all they have from him And so much on occasion of this testimony from Lombard and much more than was necessary to have said if I had lookt no farther than his Testimony CHAP. IIII. Concerning the power of the People in appointing Bishops and Deacons and other Ecclesiastical affairs Sect. 1. Clement's words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 considered and vindicated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first Bishops designed particularly by God When this way of designation ceased Num. 1. UPon occasion of the former citation of some words out of Clemens the displeasure is for a while removed from Ignatius and another matter of discourse is sprung concerning the power of the people in appointing Bishops and Deacons to their office in those dayes To this we shall now attend as it follows in these words 2. It seemes moreover that those Bishops and Deacons in those dayes as was observed were appointed to the office by anâ— with the consent of the people or whole body of the Church no less doe those words import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Doctor indeed â—enders those words apâ—lâ—udenâ—â— aut congratulenâ—e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and addes â—atis pro imperio uiâ—â—l â—ic dea ceptationâ— otius Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 qâ—â—â—p sâ—…os Diaconos ab Apostolis â—pâ—stoliâ—is viâ—… hoc lâ—co concludit Bâ—ondâ—â—lus quâ—si qui ex Deâ—jâ—ssu appâ—obatione constâ—…nâ—ur populi etiam acceptatione indigere putandi essent Dissent 4. 〈◊〉 7 8 〈◊〉 And who dares take that confidence upon him as to affirm any moâ—e whâ—â—â—g 〈◊〉 a Doctor hath denved Though the scope of the place the nature of the thing and first most common sense of the word here useâ— being willingly to consent as it is also used in the Scripture for the most part Acts 〈◊〉 1. 1 Cor. 7. 12. to a thing to be done or to the doing of it yet here it must bee taken to applaud or congratulate or what else our Doctor pleases because he will have it so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also must be viri Apostolici mâ—n with Apostolical power when they are only the choice men of the Church where such a Constitution of Officeâ—s is had that are intended because it is ouâ— Doctors purpose to have the words so rendred Ex jussu Dei approbatione is added as though any particular command or approbation of God were intimated for the constitution of the Bishops and Deacons mention'd beyond the institution of the Lord Jesus Christ that Elders should be ordained in every Church because this would seem to be exclusive wholly of the consent of the people as any way needfull or required to their Constitution which yet as it is practically false no such thing being mention'd by Clemens who recounteth the way and means whereby Officers were continued in the Church even after the decease of the Apostles and those first ordained by them to that holy employment so also it is argumentatively weak and unconcluding God appointed designed Saul to be King approving of his so being and yet he would have the people come together to choose him So also was it in the case of David Though the Apostles in the name and the authority of God appointed the Deacons of the Church at Jerusalem yet they would have the whole Church look out among themselves the men to be appointed And that the ordaining of the Elders was with the peoples Election Acts 14. 23. It will ere long be manifested that neither our Doctor nor any of his Associates have as yet disproved This poor thing the people being the peculiar people of Christ the heritage of God and holy Temple unto him c. will one day be found to be another manner of thing than many of our great Doctors have supposed But he informs us cap 4 sect 3. from that testimony which we cited before that the Apostles in the appointment of Bishops and Deacons for so the words expresly are are sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith he Revelationibus edoâ—toâ— esse quibus demùm baec dignitas commâ—â—icanda esset that is that they appointed those whom God revealed to them in an extraordinary manner to be so ordained and this is the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And why â—oâ—â—he holy Ghost orders concerning the appointment of Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 3. 10. That those who are to be taken into office and power in the Church had
CHAP. V. Of the plurality of Elders in Clements Epistle Sect. 1. The difference betwixt Ignatius and Clement in the enumeration of Officers in the Church Clements Epistle to the Churches of Achaia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pauls Epistles to those Metropolitical Churches in the Apostles times Answer to a charge concerning Grotius Num. 1. IN the next place this digression concerning the power of the people being absolved I am called back againe to Ignatius and in him to that of his asserting the three Orders in the Church which is thought fit to be considered a while by comparing it with Clements doctrine in this matter who is acknowledged to name but two And then his charge against Ignatius and against me is thus managed 2. To returne then it is evident that in the time of Clement there were but two sorts of Officers in the Church Bishops and Deacons whereas the Epistles of Ignatius doe precisely in every place where any mention is made of them as there is upon occasions and upon none at all insist on three orders distinct in name and things With Clement it is not so Those whom he calls Bishops in one place the very same persons he immediately calls Presbyters after the example of Paul Act. 20 28 and Tit. 1. 5. 7. and plainly asserts Episcopacie to be the office of Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. Because they were in no danger to be cast from their Episcopacie And whereasth fault which he repâ—oves in the Chuâ—ch of Corinth is their division and wanâ— of due subjection to their spirituall Governors according to the order which Christ hath appointed in all the Churches of the Saints he affirmes plainly that those Governours were the Presbyters of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in all places throughout the whole Epistie wâ—iting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that particular Church of Corinth the Saints dwelling there walking in the order and fellowship of the Gospell where he treats of these thiâ—gs he still intimates a plurality of Presbyters in the Church as theâ—e may nay there ought to be in every single Congregation Act 20 28. without the least intimation of any singular person promoted upon any accâ—unt whatever above his follows So in the advise given to the persons who occasioned the division before mentioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Had there been a singular Bishop at Corinth much more a Met opolitan such as our Doctor speaks him to have been it had been impossible that he should be thus passed by in silence But the Doctor gives you a double answer to this observation with the severall parts wheâ—eof I doubt not but that he makes himself meâ—â—y if he can suppose that any men are so wedded to his dictates as to give them entertainment for indeed they are plainly jocular But learned men must have leave sometimes to exercise their â—ansies and so sport themselves with their owne imaginations 1. Then For the mention that is made of the many Presbyters in the Church of Corinth to whom Clement in the name of the Church of Rome exhorts to give all due respect honour obedience He tells you that by the Church of Corinth all the Churches of Achaia are meant and intended The Epistle is directed onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the least intimation of any other Chuâ—ch oâ— Churches The difference it is written about was occasioned by one or two persons in that Church onely it is that Church alone that is exhorted to order and due subjection to their Elders from the beginning to the end of the Epistle there is not one word apâ—… or â—ittle to intimaâ—e the designation of it to any Church or Churches beyond the single Church of Corinth or that they had any concernement in the difference spoken to The Fabrick of after-ages lyes so close to the Doctors imagination that there is no entrance for the true frame of the Primitive Church of Christ and therefore every thing must be wrested and apportioned to the conceit of such an Episcopacie as he hath entertained Whereas he ought to crop off both head and heels of his owne imagination and the Episcopacy of the later dayes which he too dearly affects he chooseth rather to stretch and torture the antient Government of the Church that it may seem to answer the frame presently contended for But let us a little attend to the Doctors learned arguments whereby he endeavours to make good his assertion 1. He tels you that Corinth was the chiefe City of Achaia the Metropolis in a politicall sense and acceptation of the word of Greece where the Proconsull had his residence Diss 5. cap. 2. Sect. 3. Let us grant this to our Learned Doctor lest we finde nothing to gratifie him withall and what then will follow Hence saith he it will follow Sect. 4. that this Epistle which was sent Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non ad unius Civitatis Ecclesiam sed ad omnes totius Achatae Christianos per singulas civitates regiones sub Episcopis aut Praefectis suis ubique collocatas missa existimetur But pray Doctor why so We poore creatures who are not so sharpe sighted as to discerne a Metropolitan Arch-Bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependant nor can finde any instituted Church in the Scripture or in Clement of one denomination beyond a single Congregation cannot but thinke that all the strength of this consectaâ—y from the insinuation of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in question which will never be granted upon such câ—mes Yea but he addes Sect. 5. that Paul wrote his Epistle not onely to the Church of Corinth but also to all the Churches of Achaia therefore Clement did so also At first view this argument seems not very conclusive yea appears indeed very ridiculous the inforcement of it which insues may perhaps give new life and vigour to it How then is it proved that Paul wrote not onely to the Church of Corinth but to all them in Achaia also why saith he in the 2 Ep. 1. Chap 1. ver it is so exprest he writes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Very good It is indispurably evident that Paul wrote his second Epistle to the Church of Corinth and all the rest of Achaia for he expressely affirmes himselfe so to doe and for the first Epistle it is directed not only to the Church of Corinth 1. Ch. 2. v. but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is saith our Doctor in the whole region of Achaia So indeed sayes the Doctors great friend Grotius to whom he is beholding for more than one rare notion I say it not in any way of any reproach to the Doctor onely I cannot but thinke his carefull warding of himselfe against the thoughts of men that he should be beholding to Grotius doth exceedingly unbecome
Apostles and their successors not by the people or the whole congregation cannot finde entrance with him And secondly from the recurring of such kind of Rhetorick as this so soon I might very probably conclude that his whole confidence was placed in this one Topick which is ordered both to lead the van and also to bring up the reere to be the reserve as well as the forlorne hope And then upon this view of his reply I desire it may be indifferently considered whether my arguments were not as valid to confirme my answer as his mirth and repetitions and bare negations without any attempt of proof were of force to assert the contrary 20. Next he promises to attend to my arguments but cannot hold his countenance againe they must be styled learned arguments â—orsooth to have spoken as he thought had been more like a serious person that meant to attend to arguments And the first that he attends to is that Corinth was the Metropolis of Greece in a politicall sense and acceptation of the word where the Proconsull had his residence and this he grants but for my consectary from thence that Epistle inscribed to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be conceived sent to the Christians of all Aâ—haia all the strength thereof saith he from the insinuatian of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in question 21. But first certainly this cannot be that fallacy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the begging of the question It is the â—…erring of that which is there proved both before and after before both as that signifies long before and immediately before long before viz. Dissert 4. c. 5. the erection of Metropoles and Metropolitanes in the Church had been demonstrated Immediately before it had been mentioned as a praecognâ—scendum that Corinth was such an one which if granted it must follow that there was a Metropolitan Arch-bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependent So againe this was proved after by the consent betwixt this and Paul's Eâ—istles those were written to all the Christians of all Achaia and then why should not this be resolved to be so written also And how then can the question be here said to be begged by me If this of Corinth's being a Metropolis in the politicall sense were not sufficient to inferr this conclusion first that might then have been said the consequence denied and traill made what was or what could be farther said to prove it but that method was not here thought safe it was easier to say the strength of the consectary is nothing but a pure begging of the question which yet I never heard said of a conclusion inferred from praemisses and after farther undertaken to be proved I desire to consult Aristotle in his discourse of that fallacie and he shall finde it was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on my side a begging of the question but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on his a denying the conclusion 22. This for the forme of his reply Secondly then as to the matter of it I did and still doe thinke it a concluding argument which I there used and being briefly set downe 't will be more explicitely this An Epistle addrest to a Metropolitical see under the title of the Church adjacent to such a chiefe City or Metropolis is addrest to all the Cities and Churches that relate to that Metropolis But Corinth was such a City and this Epistle was so addrest to it That Corinth was such a Metropolis was apparent and is not denyed as to the politicall acceptation of it And if it were so also in the Ecclesiastick there is no farther difficulty And if my supposing and not farther proving of this in that place were the infirme part of the discourse and begging of the question I must answer that I had no reason to expect it should be esteemed so having long before on occasion of the Angels in the Revelation entre 〈◊〉 into a discourse of Metropolitical Cities and shewed that not onely in the political but Ecclesiastical acceptation there were such in the Apostles and so in Clement's time 23 This was there manifested in many instances 1. in Antioch the Metropolis of Syria and Cilicia and all the Churches of those regions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Antioch and dependent on that Secondly in Rome the Metropolis of the Roman Province or Vrbicarian region Thirdly in Alexandria the Metropolis of Egypt whereupon Marke is said by Eusâ—bius to have lonstituted Churches in the plural there all which under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the province of or belonging to Alexandria as here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were by Saint Mark committed to Anianus or Ananias and the Government administred by him all the rest of the Churches there planted by Mark relating to this as to the Metropolis Fourthly in Gortyna the prime Metropolis of Crete the Arch-Bishop whereof in the Epistle of Dionysius Bishop of Corinth Ann Ch 175. is styled Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church adjacent to i. e. the province of Gortyna and of all the rest in Crete Fifthly in Philippi the Metropolis of one Province of Macedonia Act. 16. 12. to which purpose it is that in the Epistle said to be written by Ignatius to them of Tarsus we finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Churches in the plural of the Philippians salute you Sixthly in the several Churches of Asia mentioned Rev. 1 each of them a Metropolis over some other â—ities and Ephesus the prime of all the Proconsular Asia And this forme or this state of things in the Church of God is there by three Canons of the three great Councels Nice Antioch Ephesus testified to be the ancient primitive Apostolical state 24. This being then done at large and thereby the Primitive constitution of Metropolitical Churches competently asserted it seemed to me sufficient but to re-mind the Reader that Corinth was one such Metropolis of Achaia or Greece and accordingly that upon that account in the Ecclesiastical as well as Political acceptation the Epistles of Paul inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Corinthians were meant to all the Churches of Achaia and not onely to that one of Corinth And what error I have committed herein I confesse I am not yet able to discerne or divine or what there is behinde that wants farther proof 25. The onely thing I can yet thinke of is that in this Praefacer's judgement I have not made it sufficiently appeare by that one evidence of Corinth's being a Metropolis where the Proconsul of Achaia kept his residence Act. 18 12 15. i. e. a Metropolis in the Political acceptation that it was also a Metropolis in the Ecclesiastical notitiae and then it may be fit perhaps farther to adde something to cleare that and put it out of question not onely in thesi that the Church generally thus corresponded with the state according
Elders or Presbyters here mention'd were properly those whom he calls Bishops Diocesans men of a third order and rank above Deaâ—ons and Presbyters in the Church Administrations and Government And for those who are properly called Presbyters there were then none in the Church To give colour to this misrable evasion Diss 4. c. 10 11. He discourseth about the government and ordering of Church affairs by Bishops and Deacons In some Churches that were small not yet formed or compleated nor come to perfection at the first planting of them how well this is accommodated to the Church of Corinth which Clement calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which himself would have to be a Metropolitical Church being confessedly great numerous furnished with great and large gifts and abilities is seen with half an eye How ill also this shâ—ft is accommodated to help in the case for whose service it was first invented is no lesse evident It was to save the sword of Phil. 1. 1. from the throat of Episcopacie he contendeth for That Epistle is directed to the Saints or Church at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons Two things doe here trouble our Doctor 1. The mention of more Bishops than one at Philippi 2. The knitting together of Bishops and Deacons as the onely two orders in the Church bringing downâ—… Episcopacie one degree at least from that height whereto he would exalt it For the first of these he tells you that Philippi was the Metropolitane Church of the Province of Macedonia that the rest of the Churches which had every one their severall Bishops Diocesan we must suppose were all comprised in the mentioning of Philippi so that though the Epistle be preciselyâ—… directed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet the Bishops that were with them must be supposed to be the Bishops of the whole Province of Macedonia because the Church of Philippi was the Metropolitane The whole Countrey must have been supposed to be converted and who that knowes any thing of Antiquity will dispute that and so divided with Diocesans as England of late was the Arch-Bishops so being at Philippi but how came it then to pâ—sse that here is mention made of Bishops and Deacons onely without any word of a third order or ranke of men distinct from them called Presbyters or Elders To this he answers secondly that when the Church was first planted before any great number were converted or any sit to be made Presbyters there was onely those two orders instituted Bishops and Deacons and so that this Church of Philippi seems to have been a Metropoliticall Infant The truth is if ever the Doctor be put upon reconciling the contradictions of his answers one to another not onely in this but almost in every particular he deals withall an intanglemen which he is throwne into by his bold and groundlesse conjectures he will finde it to be as endlesse as fruitlesse but it is not my present businesse to interpose in his quarrells either with himselfe or Presbyterie As to the matter under consideration I desire onely to be resolved in these few Queries 1. If there were in the time of Clement no Presbyters in the Churches not in so great and flâ—urishing a Church as that of Corinth and if all the places in Scripture where there is mention of Elders doe precisely inten Bishops in a distinction from them who are Deacons and not Bishops also as he asserts when by whom by what Authority were Elders who are only so inferiour to Bishops peculiarly so termed instituted and appointed in the Churches And how comes it passe that there is such expresse mention made of the office of Deacons and the continuance of it none at all of Elders who are acknowledged to be superiour to them and on whose shoulders in all their own Churches lies the great weight and burthen of all Ecclesiasticall administration As we say of their Bishops so shall we of any Presbyter not instituted and appointed by the authority of Jesus Christ in the Church let them goe to the place from whence they came 2. I desire the Doctor to informe me in what sense he would have me to understand him Diss 2. cap. 20 21 22. Where he disputes that these words of Hicrome Antequam â—ludia in Religione fierent diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli ego Cepbae communi Presbyterorum consensu Ecclesia 〈…〉 be understood of the times of the Apostles when 〈…〉 Church of Corinth when it seems that neither 〈…〉 such thing as Presbyters in the 〈…〉 we can 〈…〉 As 〈…〉 Presbyters were Bishops properly so 〈…〉 who are they so 〈◊〉 of whom 〈◊〉 〈…〉 to be a 〈…〉 so called To 〈…〉 I 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 in the Scripture we 〈…〉 of Church 〈…〉 This 〈…〉 Doctâ—… is that of 〈…〉 give us 〈…〉 of Christ give us in every Church Bishops and Deacons 〈◊〉 than we 〈…〉 let those Bishops attend the 〈…〉 over which they â—…ching the 〈◊〉 and administâ—… O 〈…〉 in and to their 〈…〉 And I 〈◊〉 〈…〉 all the Comenders for Presbytery in this Nâ—â—ion and much 〈…〉 the Independents that there shall be a â—end of this quarrel that they will 〈…〉 with the Doctor not any living for the â—…duction of any 〈◊〉 soâ—t of persons though they should be 〈…〉 Presbyters into Church office and Government Onely this I must 〈…〉 this second sort of men 〈…〉 Presbyters than it doth Bishops and that word having been 〈…〉 third 〈…〉 we desire leave of the Dâ—ctor and his 〈…〉 if we also most frequently call them so no wayes declining the other application of Bishops so that it be applyed to signifie the second and not third 〈◊〉 of men But of this 〈◊〉 businesse with the nature conâ—… and frame of the first Churches and the 〈◊〉 mâ—stâ—k 〈…〉 men have be their owne prejudices been ingaged into in this dâ—… of them a 〈…〉 opportunity if God will may 〈◊〉 long be aâ—…ded 3. Here first I shall demand whence it appeares that I accommodated a double answer to the multiplication of Elders in Clemens c. Truly I doe not yet know or remember that I did This certainly was all and this can amount if to any but to one answer that which we have vindicated already that the Elders in the Epistle of Clemens were all the Bishops of Achaia This indeed when it was proposed was more distinctly set down by 4. steps or degrees but then again those are no more two than foure answers 1. that the Epistle was addrest to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to the whole Province Secondly that to make it capable of that title Corinth was knowne to be the Metropolis of Achaia Thirdly that Saint Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians belonged to all the Churches of Achaia not onely to Corinth and so in any probability Clements was to doe also being written to the same and inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore Fourthly that these many Elders were the singular Bishops in the severall Cities
member of the Church doe ought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that belongs to the Church without the Bishop But if the meaning of the demand be either that the Bishop with his Presbyters who are indeed members of the Church shall doe nothing without the concurrent consent of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or people which was the thing he contended for out of Clemens this I am able to assume will never be inferr'd from that place or out of these Epistles and for any other inference he will draw from hence in order to the no other Church but a single particular Congregation which we find in his hypothesis this I shall speak to in answer to his last demand where he recurres to this place again 23. Fourthly he demands a Church that being so gathered together in one place doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acting in Church things in its whole body under the rule presidence of its officers Here if acting in its whole body denote any power againe of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or whole body of the people or any more than their regular obedience to the lawfull commands of the Bishop over them I shall be able to demonstrate that the words of Ignatius sound nothing toward it They are in the Epistle to the Magnesians and are a plaine exhortation to unity and concord and that to be evidenced in their actions and the rule of that obedience to their Bishop presiding saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place of God as the Presbyters in the place of the College of Apostles and the Deacons intrusted with the Ministerie of Jesus Christ from whence he concludes with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 paying reverence to one another i. e. according to the meaning of that phrase in S. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5. 5. to the Bishop c. their superiors and besides mutual love and care of avoiding divisions to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. being united to the Bishop and thâ—se that are set over them for a patterne and doctrine of incorruption or Orthoâ—oxe Religion in opposition to the infections and corruptions of the Gnostick Heresies And then what analogie beares this with the hypothesis of the Prefacer what unkinde aspect hath it on the Prelatist's pretensions 24. Fifthly he demands a Church walking in order and not as some who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he renders such as calling the Bishop to the Assemblies yet doe all things without him Here it was a little news to me to see a piece of Greek Englished This being I thinke the first time that the Prefacer hath done so I shall not attempt to guesse at the reason of it But indeed it was much more so to finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendred calling the Bishop to the Assemblies Doth he meane that the people had the â—ower of calling Assemblies or calling the Bishop to them I shall not againe detaine the Reader with my conjectures of his sense This I am sure of 1. that there is no mention of Assemblies but that those words to the Assemblies are perfectly interpolated by the Prefacer 2. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more than they call him Bishop allow him the name or title but as he addes doe all without him subject not their actions to his directions or command as in the words immediately precedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being onely called Christians and being truly such are set as extreamely contrary or as in the same Ep. ad Magnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calling Jesus Christ is opposed to true Christâ—â—ity and sure doth not signifie calling Jesus Christ to their assemblies and then of them that doe thus Ignatius may be allowed to adde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they dâ—e not assemble validity according to the command all actionr of such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having no kinde of validity in them and by so adding he passes no sentence upon the Prelatist unlesse he be onely nominally such plead for Bishops and disobey them 25. Lastly saith he give us such a Church and let us câ—me to them when they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. all in the same place assembled together in prayer such as â—he Churches in the dayes of Ignatius appeare to have been and are so rendred in the quotations taken from his Epistles by the Doctor for the confirmation of Episcopacie To this I answer 1. that if the Church he would have be set down by me as he desires in the quotations from Ignatius then I needed not have been called to for the giving him his Churches back againe I had it seems either never detained them or else rendered them already Secondly for this last passage the most that I have quoted toward it is from the Epistle to the Magnesians And the whole passage lyes thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be ye united to the Bishop and strait 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As the Lord therefore being in union with did nothing without his Father neither by himselfe nor by his Apostles so neither doe ye any thing without the Bishop and his Preâ—byters nor attempt to account any thing reasonable which appears so to you privately but in the same place let there be one prayer one supplication one mind one hope in love and joy unblameable 26. This whole plaee I did not conceive what it imported save onely perfect agreement and submission to the judgement of their superiors in opposition to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that entertain'd private doctrins which were not left in the Church by the Apostles together with all mutual unity charity conjunction in prayer of all sorts for supply of wants pardon of sins in the same hâ—pe and joy But I now suppose that the thing here designed to be inferred from this in the close as from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 toward the beginning of his demands is the establishment of his grand hypothesis foremention'd the nâ—…institution of any Church Officer whatever relating to more Churches in his Office or any other Church than a single particular congregation And this it seems he was so willing to have competently testified here that one and the same testimonie a little disâ—uised is 〈◊〉 to appear twice to the same purpose and so becomes a double witness a military trick which officers sometimes use when their companies are not fuâ—… to muster the same souldier twice under several names And so we see that which truly I have attended for all this while and could not really think it designed by him til this repetition of the testimony shewâ—d me that special weight was layd on it that this one place of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is again inserted to help the inference must conclude the â—…institution of any Church Officer relating to any but a single particular congregation The reasonablenesse of which will be judged by any
and faithfull in the discharge of their duâ—y for saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though they were unblameable both in their conversation and Ministry yet they removed them from their office To reprove this evil to convince them of the sinfulnesse of it to reduce them to 〈◊〉 right understanding of their duty and order walâ—…ing in the feâ—lowâ—hip of the Gospel what course doth he proceed in what arguments doth he use He minâ—s them of one God one Châ—â—st one Bâ—dâ— one Faith tels them that wicked men alone use such wayes and practices bids them read the Epistle of Paul formerly written to them upon â—ccâ—sion of another division and to be subject to their own Eldeâ—s and all of them leave off contending quietly doing the things which the people oâ— the body of the Church commanded Now had this person wâ—iâ—ing on this occasion using all soâ—ts of arguments artificial oâ— inâ—râ—â—ficial 〈◊〉 his purpose been baptised into the opinion and esteem of a single Episcopal â—uperintendent whose exultation seems to be the design of much which is said in the Epistles of Ignatius in the sense wherein his words are usually taken would yet never once so much as bid them be subject to the Bishop that resemblance oâ— God the Father supplying the place of Chrrst nor oâ—… them hâ—wâ—…erâ—ibâ—e a thing it was to disobey him nor pawâ—d his soul â—or theirs that should submit to him that all thâ—â— obeyed him wâ—r safe all that disobeyed him were rebellious cuâ—sed and separated â—…m Gâ—d What Apology 〈◊〉 be made for the weaknesse and ignoraâ—ce of that Holy Mâ—…yr if we shâ—ll supposâ— him to have had apprehensions like those in there Epistles of â—hâ—â— sacred order for omitting those all-conqâ—eâ—ing â—eâ—sons which they would have supplyed him withâ—ll to his purpose in hanâ— and pâ—â—ching on arguments every wâ—y lesse usefull and câ—gent But I say I shall not insist on any such things as these but onelâ— 4. I say there is not in any of the Doctor 's Ex eâ—pâ—a from those Epistles not in any passage in 〈◊〉 any mention or the least intimation of any Church wherunto aâ—y Bishop was related but such an one as whose members met altogeâ—her in one place and with thâ—iâ— Bishop dispâ—sed and ordered the 〈◊〉 of the Church Such was that whereunto the hâ—lâ— Martyr was relaâ—ed such were those neighbouâ—ing Churches that sent Bishops and Eâ—…s to that Church And when the Doctor proves the contrary â—rit mâ—hâ—…magnâ—â— Apollo From the Churches and their statâ— and constitution is the state and condition of their Officers and their â—â—lation to them â—…en Let that be manifested to be such from the appointment of Jesus Christ to his Apostles or de facto in thâ— dâ—yes â—f Ignatius oâ—… beâ—ore the contempeâ—aâ—ion oâ— Ecclesiastical â—ffâ—iâ—es occasionaâ—â—y or by châ—…ce to the civil constitution of Cities â—nd Provinces in these dayes as woul◠〈◊〉 possibly câ—uld beare a 〈…〉 Diocesan Metropoliticaâ— Hierarchiâ— and this controversie will be at an end When this is by any attempted to be demonstrated I desire iâ— may not be wiâ—h sucâ—â—â—ntences as that uâ—ged by our Doctor from Epist ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The expression in it concerning Christ being unsound unscriptural concerning Bishops unintelligible or ridiculous 3. How unwilling the writer of this Preface therein to shew the judgement of Antiquity concerning Perseverance hath been to goe out of that his way the large Animadversions which he hath afforded Episcopacie Ignatius and me will sufficiently demonstrate As it is the sooner he shall now return to his rode againe the more tolerably easie it will be for the Reader and me and therefore I shall endeavour to make as much haste as he and neither take any notice of what hath been said in the Dissertations for proof of Episcopacie but yield that if it appear that there were none but particular Independent Congregations in Ignatius's time I have then produced no testimony from him by which the Prefacer may be concluded though as far as concerns Blondel who went upon distant hypotheses all that I said may have been in full force against them 4. His second consideration concerning the degenerating of Christs institutions concerning Church Administrations in the management of succeeding Churches and the principle of that degeneration the working of the mysterie of iniquity and the occasion of that again the accommodation of Ecclesiastical affairs to the civil distributions which is in effect that the Apostles erecting Mother-Churches in chief Cities where they first preacht as at Jerusalem to all Judaea Antioch to all Syria c. was a special occasion of and advantage to the working of the mysterie of iniquitie is that which in the several degrees of it might yield large discourse the mysterie of iniquity in St. Paul being remote enough from this and distributions of Churches such as were most commodious far enough from having either iniquity or mysterie in them But I shall readily transcribe his patterne as he hath not neither shall I infist on it 5. The third on which he will not insist much farther was competently insisted on before in comparing Clement's two orders in the Church and the like in St. Paul with Ignatius's three But the design of returning to it again was to offer one argument more which had not formerly been made use of and I must not let that fall to the ground It is this that if the Bishop had been in that esteem in Clement ' s time in which these Epistles set him out as the resemblance of God the Father he would certainly have bid them be subject to him and used that as an argument to compose the sedition of which he wrote unto them 6. But 1. it is certain that negative arguments prove nothing there might be Bishops in Clement's dayes and the power due to them as great as that which would intitle them to the image of God the Father and yet the sedition being raised against the Bishops themselves and the question being not concerning the Order but the Persons who should be advanced to it the mention of the dignitie of the Order or of the due subjection to it might be no proper way of appeasing that sedition nor as such chosen to be made use of by Clement 7. Secondly We know that next the obligations to peace c. the first and principal argument used by Clemens was the institution of these their Bishops by the Apostles and the dignity of that Order being such that the Apostles foresaw the contentions that would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the dignity or name of it he tels them that the Apostles had made a list of successors in each Church presuming and not needing more particularly to tell them that this was an high aggravation of their crime in throwing those out whom God had thus particularly set over them And I know not that Ignatius would or could upon his hypotheses have argued stronger to his purpose 8.
but that Antioch by Apostolical institution was the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia Good Doctor doe not be angry but tell us how this may be proved Why doubtlesse it was so as Antioch belonged to the Metropolitan Church at Jerusalem as he â—old us out of Philo who was excellently acquainted with Apostolical institutions what Jerusalem was to the whole Church and Nation of the Jewes while the name of God was fixed there we know But what was the primitive estate of the Churches of Iesus Christ made of Iewes and Gentiles tied neither to City or Mountaine I must be pardoned if I cannot finde the Doctor making any tender of manifesting or declaring The reasons of referring this controversie unto a determination at Jerusalem the Holy Ghost acquaints us with Act. 15. 2. That we have no need of this Metropolitical â—igment to informe us in it And now if we will not not onely submit to Diocesan Bishops but also reverence the grave Metropolitans standing upon such clear Apostolicall institution It is fit that all the world should count us the arrantest Schismaticks that ever lived since Pope Boniface his time The summe then of this doubty argument for the Apostolical institution of Metropolitans that none might ever more dare to call Diocesans into question hereafter is this Paul who was converted about the third or fourth yeare of Caligula five or sixe yeares after the ascension of Christ having with great successe for three years preached the Gospell went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas upon the persecution raised against him at Damâ—scus Act. 9. 22. whence returning to the worke he went first to Tarsus Act. 9. 30. thence to Antioch where he abode one whole yeare Act. 11. 25. 26. and was then sent to Jerusalem with the collections for the Saints about the fourth yeare of Claudius ver 30. thence returning againe to Antioch he was sent out by the command of the Holy Ghost more eminently and peculiarly than formerly for the conversion of the Gâ—â—tileâ— Act. 13. 1 2 3 in this undertaking in the space of a yeare or two he preached and gathered Churches whereof expresse mention is made at Salamis Act. 13. 5. in the Isle of Paphos ver 6. at Perga in Pamphylia ver 13. at Antioch in Pisidia ver 14. aâ— Icoâ—ium cap. 14. 1. at Lyâ—tra and Derbe ver 6. and at Perga 26. in all these places gathering some believers to Christ whom before they returned to Antioch he visited all over the second time and setled Elders in the severall congregations Chap. 14 21 22 23. in this journey and travel for the propagation of the Gospell he seems in all places to have been followed almost at the heels by the prosessing Pharisees who imposed the necessity of the observation of Mosaical Ceremonies upon his new Converts for instantly upon his return to Antioch where during his absence probably they had much prevailed he falls into dispute with them Chap. 15. 1. and that he was not concer'd in this controversie onely upon the account of the Church of Antioch himselfe informes us Gal. 2. 4. affirming that the false brethren which caused those disputes and dissensions crept in to spye out his liberty in his preaching the Gospell among the Gentiles ver 2. that is in the places before mentioned throughout a great part of Asia For the appeasing of this difference and the establishing of the Soules of the Disciples which were grievously perplexed with the imposition of the Mosaical yoke It is determined that the case should be resolved by the Apostles Act. 15. 2. partly because of their authority in all the Churches wherein those who contended with Paul would be compelled to acquiesce and partly because those Judaiâ—ing teachers pretended the commission of the Apostles for the Doctrine they preached as is evident from the disclaimuâ—e made by them of any such commission or command ver 24. Upon Pauls returne from the assembly at Jerusalem wherein the great controversie about Iewish Ceremonies was stated and determined after he had in the first place delivered the decree and Apostolical salutation by Epistle to the Church at Antioch he goes with them also to the Churches in Syria and Cilicia â—xpressed in the letter by name as also to those in Pamphilia Pisiâ—ia Derbâ— Lystra Iconium c. Châ—p 16. 1 2 3 4. and all the Churches which he had gathered and planted in his â—ravels through Asia whereunto he was commanded by the Holy Ghost Act. 13. 1 2. Things being thus stated it necessarily followes that the Apostles had instituted Diocesan and Metropolitan Bishops For though the Churches were so small and thin and few in number that seaven years after this may we believe our Doctor the Apostles had not instituted or appointed any Elders or Presbyters in them viz. When Paul wrote his Epistle to the Philippians which was when he was Prisoner at Rome as appeares cap. 1. 7 13 14. cap. 4. 22. about the third yeare of Nâ—ro yet that he had fully built and setled the Hierarchicall fabrick contended for who once dares question Audacia Creditur à multis â—iducia But if this will not doe yet Ignatius hits the nayle on the head and is ready at hand to make good whatsoever the Doctor will have him say and his testimony takes up the sense of the two nâ—xt following Sections whereof thâ— fiâ—st is as follows Hinc dicti Igâ—atiani ratio constat in Epistolâ ad Romanos ubi ille Antiochia Epâ—…scopus se 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pastâ—â—em Ecclâ—siae quae â—st in Syria appâ—lleâ—â—um ad Antiochiam sâ—il ut ad Meâ—…opolin suâ—m tota Syria pertineret Sic Author Epistolae ad Antioâ—heâ—os 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cam iâ—scribâ—â—s totam â—yriam â—jus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse concludâ—t But yet I feare the Doctor will finde he hath need of other weapons and other manner of Assistance to make good the cause he hath undertaken The words of Ignatius in that Epiâ—â—â—e to the Râ—mans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he recommenâ—s to them that particular Church in Syria wch by his imprisonment was deprived of its Pastor therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Arch-bishop Tityâ—e tu pâ—… c. But the Doctor is resolved to carâ—y his causâ— therefore being forsaken of all faire and honest meanes from whence he might hope for assistance or successâ— he tryes as Saul the wiâ—ch at Enâ—â—â— the counterfeit sâ—…ious title of a counterfeit Epistle to the Antiochians to see if thaâ— will speake any comforâ—able words for his relief or no. And to make sure worke he causes this Gentleman so to speake as if he intended to make us believe that Syria was in Antioch not Antiâ—ch in Syria as in some remote pâ—rts of â—he world they say they inquire whether London be in England or England in London What other sence can be made of the words as by the Doctor transcribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
this controversie to a determination at Jerusalem so that he hath no need of this as he will style it Metropolitical figment to informe him in it I confesse I cannot reach him in it for all that that verse informes us is that upon occasion of that dispute between Paul and Barnabas on the one side and the Iudaizers that came from Iudaea on the other side the Church determined to send up to Ierusalem about this Question This onely informes us of the occasion of referring the question whereon there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no small dispute such as it seems they could not so convincingly decide within themselves but this renders no account why they sent and referr'd it to Ierusalem peculiarly and not to any other Church unlesse we here suppose as I do that Ierusalem was lookt upon as their Mother Church 23. What reason it is which the Prefacer findes in that second verse or by what medium it comes to have the force of a reason he is not here pleased to communicate but onely saith the Holy Ghost hath there acquainted us with the reason But in the next page he is more liberall gives us the reasons of their sending to Ierusalem partly because of the authority of the Apostles which were there in all the Churches wherein those who contended with Paul would be compellâ—d to acquiesce partly because those Iudaizing Teachers pretended the commission of the Apostles for their doctrine 24. As for the first of these I suppose that taken alone cannot be the reason because there being but two Apostles there at that time Peter and Iohn 1. there might be so many in some other City 2. Paul and Barnabas being before this separated by Gods command to the Apostolick Office were in this respect of equal authority with them and so in this sence the words of St. Paul have truth in relation to them Gal. 2. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they added nothing to me 3. The reference is made Act. 15. 2. not to the Apostles alone but to the Apostles and Elders i. e. the whole Council at Ierusalem at this time 4. The cause of the reference was not onely the contention of those who came out of Iudaea but the Antiochian Christians being taught i. e. seduced by them c. 15. 1. and accordingly the Decree respected them peculiarly And so this first reason is of no force 25. For the second 't is true indeed and 't is affirm'd ver 1. that certaine men which came down from Jerusalem taught the brethren and said except ye be circumcised ye cannot be saved and that may seem to be set down as the reason of their making this reference to Ierusalem because the men came from Iudaea which made it fit to inquire whether the Apostles and Council there were of these mens opinions But then even this will very little advance his or prejudice our pretensions For this goes upon a ground which will be usefull not disadvantageous to me viz. that if these certain men which came from Iudaea had been truly sent or commissionated by the Church of Ierusalem then this would have been of some force at Antioch which it could not be if Antioch were perfectly Independent from Ierusalem and accordingly in the Epistle from the Council ver 24. we have these words For as much as we have heard that certain which went out from us have troubled you c. to whom we gave no such commandment or commission so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally signifies It seemed good unto us c. 26. Where it is apparent that any such former commission being disclaim'd now they send their expresse decree not their bare counsel or advice or assistance which the Prefacer would allow but I say a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a conciliarie dogmatical definition by which as it appears by the consequents all were deemed to be obliged which were within the circuit of which Ierusalem in the Iewish account was the Metropolis And so still this reason if any such be discernable Act. 15. 2. confirmes my assertion instead of invalidating it 27. That which next follows in the Prefacer as the summe of my argument is very farre from being what he saith it is either my argument or the summe of it My argument it is not being quite a distant thing a recapitulation of the whole story of St. Paul from his conversion to his coming this time to Jerusalem from Antioch whereas I collected nothing from any part of the whole story but onely from this particular the reference from Antioch to Jerusalem And then what is so much larger than the particulars diffusively taken is sure very unlikely to be the summe of them And yet 't is a little strange that that which is so over large a recitation should choose to omit the one thing whereon the whole force of my argument lyes i. e either the reference made to Jerusalem from Antioch to inferre the dependence and subordination of Antioch to Jerusalem or the style of the Epistle from the Council taking in Syria and Cilicia as well as Antioch when the reference had been made and the Messengersâ—ent â—ent from Antioch peculiarly 28. And when he saith that for the appeasing of the difference it was determined that the case should be resolved by the Apostles that sure is unduly suggested for c. 15. 2. the reference is not made either to the Apostles indefinitely wheresoever they were or to the Apostles that were at Jerusalem at that time and to none but such but in expresse words to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders comprehending under the word Apostles James the Bishop of Jerusalem which was none of the twelve and yet pronounceth the decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I judge or my sentence is v. 19. and by the word Elders as I suppose all the Bishops of Iudaea sitting in Councel with him And so still this is to the Church of Ierusalem as the Metropolis of Iudaea and in an eminent manner of Syria also and not onely to the Apostles alone or peculiarly to be resolved by them 29. The Prefacer here in his haste saith that Paul goes with the decrees to the Churches in Pamphylia Pisidia and by name Iconium citing c. 16. 1 2 3 4. and all the Churches which he had gathered through Asia Whereas 1. there is no mention of Pisidia or Pamphylia in those verses nor since c. 14. 24. for what is said of Mark 's departing from them from Pamphylia c. 15. 38. belongs to the former story nor of any City but of Derbe and Lystra which are known to be in Lycaonia Secondly That there is no mention of their passing through Iconium nor of the very name of the City but once incidentally that Timothy was well reported of by the brethren that were at Iconium ver 2. Thirdly That for Asia the Text saith expresly ver 6. that they were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia and that therefore when they
the Epistle to the Magnesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ephesians from Smyrna are not as I conceived it possible the Smyrnaeans called Ephesians because Ephesus was the prime Metropolis but the Ephesians which together with some of the Church of Smyrna were sent with him from Smyrna such as Burrhus mention'd in the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans who appeares to be a Deacon of the Church of Ephesus in the Epistle to them and yet is said to be sent with him by the Smyrnaeans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with other of the Ephesians also This I desire the Reader now to correct in the Dissertations by blotting out that last part of Sect. 10. which concerns that matter 2. I come now to his view of the Testimony from the Epistle to the Romanes and it is set downe in these words 3. But to make all suâ—e thâ— lâ—…ctor will noâ— so give â—ver but Sect. 11. hee addes that â—he Epigraph of the Epistle to the Romans gâ—ants him the whole case â—hat is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex qua saith he Eâ—â—lisiae Romanae ejusque Episcopo suoâ—… Eâ—…iis omnibuâ— in urâ—…riâ— regione aut pâ—oviâ—câ—â Romaâ— a contâ—ntiâ— pâ—aefeâ—… compâ—…e vide â—uâ— Although I havâ— spent some time in the consideration of mens conjectures oâ— those subâ— bicarian Churches that as is pâ—…nded 〈◊〉 here pointed to and the rise of the Bishop of Romes juâ—â—sdiction â—ver those Churches in a correspondencie to the civill Government of the Prefect oâ— the City yet sâ— great a Câ—itick in the Greek â—ongue as Casaâ—â—oâ— Exâ—…c â—6 ad Ann. 150. having professed that expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to â—e barbarous and uâ—inteâ—…gâ—… I shall not coâ—… about it For the presidency me â—…ioned of the Church iâ— or at Rome that it was a presidency of juâ—isdiction and not onely in eminence of Fâ—…h and Holynesse that is in ended â—he Doctor thinks it not incumbent on him to prove Those with whom he hath to â—o are of another mind altâ—ough by this time some a teraâ—… mign be attempted yea â—here was as elâ—where shall be shewed And so much foâ— Ignatiusâ—is â—is Archieâ—…e 4. This Testimony it seemes must be throwne off upon the one score of Casaubon's Censure that the expression was barbâ—rous and unintelligible I must therfore examine his words which I find Exerc. 16. sect 150. though not ad Ann. 150. that whole book of Exercitations against Baronius extending no farther than the Life of Christ 5. Casaâ—bon's words are these speaking of Bellarmine's collection of the Roman domination from thence Rogandi sunt ut barbaram locutionem prius nobis explicent quam ullum ex iis verbis argumentum ducant quae ne ipsi quidem intelligant They that endeavour to draw these words to this purpose are to be intreated first to explain to u a barbarous expression before they draw any argument from those words which they themselves dâ—e not indeed understand Here it 〈◊〉 true thâ—t Casaubâ—n saith of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is barbara locutio but for the unâ—… which the Prefacer addes and which seems to be exprâ—…n these words also it is possible it may be a mistakâ— Isaâ—c Casaubone conceived himself to have observed by many indications that Cardinal Bellarmine understood no Greek he calls him a little before hominem Graecarum literarum prorsus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man utterly unskill'd in the Greek learning adding that all his works especially that which hee last wrote demonstrate it And why may not the ne ipsi quidem intelligunt be thus meant by him that Bellarmine was very unsit to make collections out of a Greâ—… which 't was certain he did not understand 〈…〉 I am sure he had before said of him expresly concerning the writings of Dionysius Areopagita Est quidem ridicula plane res It is a very ridiculous thing for one that hath nâ— Greek to â—ffer to judâ—e of a Greek Author Which being granted of that Cardinal I should yet well have hoped that the Prefacer who hath so much Greek in this Preface and very little of it translated might himselfe have been able to understand such plaine words for of the words it is that Casaubone speaks not of the full importance of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which presides in the place of the Region of the Romans 6. But then secondly there will be little reason to doubt what the full sense also of these words is For without disputing what Casaubone saith that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not proper oâ— vulgar style but in some respect barbarous I shall yet suppose it put by Ignatius being joyned with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presidence for the Latine sedes seat or see which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 place will without any forcing signifie as when the Gallican Church in their Epistle to Eleutherius saith of Iraeneus Archbishop of Lyons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If we knew that place would purchase righteousnesse to any the meaning is if his being Bishop of so eminent a City and Province would commend him and accordingly Peter Halleix would here have it read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throne or seat but hath no Manuscriptâ—o â—o favour his conjecture Nay if we shall observe the antient Latine forms we shall have no reason farther to deem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 barbarous than as it directly answers to the Latine usage of locus place and that sure may be allow'd Ignatius in an Epistle to the Romans For in the second Epistle of Anacletus to the Bishops of Italy we have these words In capite Provinciarum ipsis quoque in civitatibus vel locis nostris Patriarchias vel Primates c. In the head of Provinces and in our Cities or places Patriarchs or Primates were constituted The authority of that Epistle may sure be sufficient to manifest the use of a word and then our City and our place is all one and that properly of a chief City or Metropolis such as here Rome is contested to be And then the sense will be as plaine as the words intelligible that the Church to which that Epistle was addrest was the presiding Church in the place or seat of the region of the Romans i. e in the chief place or seat or City of that Region commonly called the suburbicarian Region And thus hath Jacobuâ— Gâ—ttâ—fredâ—… a learned Lawyer and Critick exprest himself to understand it meaning by the suburbicarian region all that in the civile notâ—tiae was under the administration of the Prefect of the City of Rome answerable to which circuit was the Primitive Province of the Roman Bishop And here being nothing offer'd against it I have no occasion to give farther answer For as to that of Jurisdiction what degree of that belonged to the Primate in every Province over and above that which belonged to a Bishop of an ordinary Citie and territory that hath oft been spoken to already and need not be again