an extraordinary Zeal for Religion and that oftentimes made them take Alarme when it was not in any extream danger and if their Knowledge and Discretion were not always proportionable to their Zeal surely among Christians it might be allowed to the Frailty of Humane Nature and the Sincerity of a good meaning If they differ'd sometimes among themselves and were warmer than is fit in their Disputes consider that the Apostles themselves had their Misunderstandings and their Contentions sometimes Peter was to be blamed and Barnabas was carried away The Churches founded by the Apostles were immediately divided about Opinions which were presently determined in Council and yet we do not find that the Controversie was at an end Should any one therefore so abridge the History of the Apostles as to represent nothing of them but their unhappy Contention and leave them under the odious Characters of Disturbers of the World and Dividers of the Church would it not justly pass for a Libel against Christianity It were disingenious and base even in an Enemy in a Christian I know not how to call it Having paid this duty to the honour of Religion by a general Vindication of it from such Consequences as might be drawn from this Church History against the Intention of the Author I come now to his design which is laid down page 27. To shew the Ignorant so much of the matter of Fact as may tell them who have been the Cause of all Church-Corruption Heresies Schisms Seditions c. And whether such Diocesan Prelacies and Grandure be the Cure or ever was But surely this is not the way of cureing Church-divisions thus to exasperate These Reproaches cannot serve to heal but to fret and inflame the Wound I have some hopes that I shall be able to shew the Reader so much of the matter of Fact too as may let him see how much he has been imposed on by this History and that all Corruptions and Schisms are very injuriously and against all Truth of History charg'd upon the Bishops Yet suppose the Charge be true is it such a Wonder that men of great Talents and great Authority do sometimes abuse them and by that means become the Cause of Church-Corruptions Private men though neither better nor wiser than the Bishops have not the Opportunity of doing so much either Good or Hurt and their Mistakes or Vices do not draw after them so great Consequences This Accusation though it may serve to render Bishops odious is yet of use to prove their Authority and their ancient possession of the right of governing the Church like his who would prove that they have troubled the World ever since the Apostles time If the abuse of this Power be sufficient reason to take it away or to render it odious what will become of preaching and writing Books What will become of Scripture and Conscience Let him still exclaim the Bishops have been the Authors of all Corruption and Schism were they not Christians and Men as well as Bishops and if a Heathen or a Jew should not lay such a Stress upon the name of Bishop but put that of a Christian in it's place and then make a great Outery wicked Christians turbulent Christians would not this reasoning hold as well as Mr. B's or if some of the graver Beasts should recover the Conversation they had in Aesop's days and talk judicially might not they bray aloud Horrible men Abominable men that will never agree or understand one another and then conclude with the Ass in the Satyr Ma foy non plus que nous l'home n'est qu'une bête Be the Bishops whose History Mr. B. writes as bad as he will have them how will this concern the rest of that order unless they will follow their Examples and own their Corruptions Machiavel was of Opinion that the greatest part of men were Rogues and Knaves but what is that to You and I let every man bear his own Burden But Mr. B. is resolved to cut off this Retreat and to level his Charge not so much against the Persons as the office of Bishops and to this effect he explains himself p. 22. There is an Episcopacy whose very Constitution is a Crime and there is another that seems to me a thing convenient lawful and indifferent and there is a sort which I cannot deny to be of divine Right Here we have three sorts of Bishops and this is pretty reasonable and compendious but in another Book which he refers to in this he gives no less than twelve Disput of Ch. Government p. 14. dividing was much in Fashion at that time though commonly it was without a difference and as they could make a sort of Seekers that neither sought nor found so he gives several sorts of Bishops that were no more so than he or I nay in this Abridgment of the great Division I believe the Members will be concident and that it is but a little artificial Illusion of Mr. B. that makes them appear several take away the little corner'd glass and that great multitude of pieces we saw are in a moment reduced to one poor Six-pence well let us see then what this criminal sort of Episcopacy is and what Mr. B. has to lay to it's Charge That Episcopacy which I take in it self to be a Crime is such as is afore-mentioned p. 22. which in it's very Constitution overthrows the Office Church and Discipline which Christ by himself and his Spirit in his Apostles instituted this is criminal indeed and a thousand Pities it should stand one Moment But where shall we find this Abomination it is not far of if his Judgment may be taken for Such says he I take to be that Diocesan kind ibid. which has only one Bishop over many Score or Hundred fixt parochial Assemblies Is this then their Crime that they have many fixt parochial Assemblies under their Government Had not the Apostles Had not the Evangelists so too And was that Constitution criminal Had not the Bishops of St. Jerom's Notion several fixt Assemblies That Father did indeed maintain that the poor Bishop of Eugubium was as much a Bishop as he of Rome but he little thought that he was more so or that the Extent of the Roman Diocess had chang'd the very Species of it's Church Government Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. he thought they were both of the same sort and that the single and small Congregation of the one and the numerous Assembly under the Inspection of the other had made no difference at all in the nature or constitution of their Episcopacy he communicated with and submitted himself in Questions of the highest moment to the Bishop of Rome Vid Hier. Ep. ad Damas which considering the Temper of the man and his Contempt of the World he would hardly have done if he had judged him an Usurper but would rather have joyned himself to the poor Bishop of Eugubium and done all possible
Diocesan Prelacy a distinction without ground or foundation as I have already shew'd and will be yet more fully made out The main design or Mr. B.'s History is 1. To charge the Bishops with all Schisms Heresies Corruptions c. 2. To shew p. 27. §. 7.4 that Diocesan Prelacy and grandeur is not the Cure nor ever was And to this purpose are level'd all the particulars of his Church-History In this Chapter I will endeavour to take off the first general Charge That some Bishops have abus'd their Office and Authority and have been the cause of Heresie or Schism cannot be deny'd but Priests Deacons and Laymen have been so too and therefore if the miscarriage of any particular man becomes a prejudice to his Office and the Order must suffer for the personal faults of those that are of it we must have neither Priests nor Deacons in the Church since some of them have been Authours of Heresies c. But this is not all our Author tho' he speaks indefinitely that â—he will shew the ignorant and he must be very ignorant that knows no better who have been the cause of Church Corruptions Heresies Schisms Sedition yet he means they were the Authors of all these evils as he is pleas'd to explain himself p. 72. Next we have a strange thing a Heresie rais'd by one that was no Bishop and then as if that were impossible he shews that was no Heresie and so the Bishops remain under the whole charge of raising all Heresies I wish he had left Schism and Sedition out of this charge for if he can perswade the Ignorant Readers that the Bishops were the cause of all these too they will never be perswaded that any Presbyterians are to be found in Church-History For if they had been in the world they must have had their share with the Bishops in Schism and Sedition It is a heavy charge to accuse the Bishops of all the Heresies and Schisms that have afflicted the Church and if it were true would go near to stagger the Reverence that one might have for the Order For though Bishops as well as other men may be subject to Miscarriages they might be allowâ—d the frailty of Humane nature from which no dignity can exempt us But to be found the cause of All the Evils that have befallen the Church would argue such a malignity in the Constitution as would shew plainly that God never design'd them for good But I believe this can be no more prov'd against them by matter of fact than that Bishops invented Gun-powder or Hand-Granadoes or were the Authors of the Scotch Covenant or the late Rebellion of the Field Conventiclers in Scotland Let us then trace the Heresies and Schisms that have torn the Church in pieces in several ages of it to their first original and examine who were the Authors of them and if it appear out of Church-History that Bishops rais'd them All or the greatest part I will give up the Cause and believe every thing in Mr. B.'s History and for penance read over all the fourscore Books that he tells us he has written Where then shall we begin If the Bishops should be convicted by the first Instance it would be ominous However because it shall appear that I deal impartially I will begin with the first All Ecclesiastical Writers do agree that Simon Magus was the Author of the first Heresie in Christian Religion Simon Magus Epiphanius indeed reckons up about a score of Heresies before this Epiph. Haer. 21. but they are Heathen or Jewish Heresies and I hope Mr. B. will be so kind as to allow that the Bishops had nothing to do with these That Simon was a Heretick all are agreed in though the Scripture say no such thing and though Epiphanius confess that his Sect cannot truly be reckon'd among Christians Haer. 21. p. 55. Ed Pet. This man did teach very strange and if there be any such damnable doctrines But that he was a Bishop no man ever yet affirm'd Justin Martyr thought he had seen an Inscription at Rome to this Simon which own'd him a God though it is possible this might be a mistake But that ever any Writing or Tradition called him a Bishop I have not heard It is true indeed he had a great mind to be a Bishop that is to have power of Confirmation and that every one on whom he should lay his hands should receive the Holy Ghost And he bid fair for it For he offer'd Peter Money says the Text And the Repulse perhaps disgusted him so that he resolv'd to leave the Communion of the Church since he could not be a Bishop in it and it has been the disease of several other Hereticks to scorn to be any other Member of the body but the Head The next that Epiphanius mentions is Menander Menander Epiph. Har. 22. who as Irenaeus and out of him the rest says was Simon Magus his Disciple but neither Irenaeus nor Eusebius nor Epiphanius nor Philastrius nor Theodoret and in short no man that has given any account of Hereticks or any Historian whatsoever that has been yet heard of has given the least Intimation that he was a Bishop Saturnius Basilides Iren. l. 1. c. 22 23. Epiph. Her 23 24. Euseb l. 4. c. 7. August Ep. ad Quodlib Philastâ— Haer. 3 4. Theod Haer. Fab. l. 1. 〈…〉 Saturninus and Basilides follow next and neither of them were either Bishops or of any other Order in the Church that we can find The next is the Heresie of the Nicolaitans which is generally fathered upon Nicolas the Deacon Irenaeus l. 1. c. 27. seems to he positive in this Nicolaitâ— autem Magistrum quidem habent Nicolaum unum ex septem qui primi ad Diaconium ab Apostolis Ordinati sunt Nicolas one of the seven Deacons was the Master of the Nicolaitans or at leastwise they look'd upon him as their Master Epiph. Haer. 2â— Epiphanius follows Irenans and enlarges the story shewing how he was a good man at first and did contribute much to the futherance of the Gospel but that afterward the Devil enter'd into him Philastr Haer. 5. Bibl. Patr. M. de la Rigne T. 4. p. 10. Philastrius follows the Authority of Epiphanius But for all this I believe Nicolas the Deacon may be acquitted of this imputation for there are Witnesses of very good Antiquity that endeavour to Absolve him 1. Ignatius Interpolated in two several places warning those he writes to Ign. Ep. ad Trall Philadelph Interpol to have a care of the Nicolaitans calls 〈…〉 â—â—â—â—uns and 〈◊〉 i. e. those that falsâ—y call themselves by the name of Nicolas Sycophants and Impostors The old Latin Interpreter explains this farther and adds Non 〈◊〉 talis fuit Apostolorum Minister Nicolaus Clemens of Alexandria is more particular in the Vindication of Nicolas Clem. Alex. l. 2. Strom. c. 3. whose name these Gnosticks abus'd to countenance their lewdness
disturbance but all that love peace should surely cleave to their Bishop For his interest as well as duty oblige him to maintain peace and Unity for he is unavoidably a loser by the Quarrel and cannot rationally be suppos'd to have any design but to preserve things as they are But the Pretences of others though never so plausible are to be suspected of design where the separation is manifestly to the prejudice of the people as well as of the Bishop and to the advantage of him only that perswades it Now as the Bishops are under the least Temptation to make a disturbance and what Governour will raise a Sedition against himself so in fact likewise they are sound to be very few that being Bishops have rais'd any Heresie or Schism Let any man consult the Catalogues of Ancient Heresies and Compute how many of the 60 reckon'd by Epiphanius or of the 88. of St. Austin or of the greater number of Philastius and the more confus'd account of Theodoret How many of them I say were Bishops when they turn'd Hereticks and he shall find very few if any one in all those numbers But if any after they had Debauch'd the people from their Rightful Pastors were by subreption made Bishops of their Party They were never look'd upon as Bishops but only as heads of a Faction So that I believe the reader may by this time easily perceive what truth there is in Mr. B.'s General Charge that the Bishops were the causes of the Heresie and Schism and that it was so wonderful a thing that a Heresie should be begun by one that was no Bishop Besides this charge of Heresie and Schism Mr. B. accuses the Bishops of having been the cause of Church corruptions and Sedition As to the first if he means that the Bishops first introduc'd these corruptions into the Church I believe he will be never able to prove it as to the latter we shall examine it in due place The Corruptions of Christian Religion whether in Doctrine or Worship have crept unperceivably into the Church and by such degrees that it is a hard matter to ace their Original and we are so far from nowing the first Authors of them that we are ignorant even of the age wherein some of them were introduc'd Mr. B. charges considently but proves nothing But the most probable conjecture I think can be made of the rise and Progress of these is 1. That most of the corruptions in Doctrine crept in together with the Heathen Philosophy For great Philosophers especially the followers of Plato turning Christians still retain'd something of their former Notions which not appearing to be any way prejudicial to Christianityl but on the Contrary rendering it more acceptable to the wiser part of Heathens were by degrees own'd among the more learned sort in their Disputations with Heathens and pass'd without contradiction But afterwards busie men building farther consequences upon this foundation Improv'd the corruption till at last it grew Gross and intolerable Hence came the Invocation of Saints and Angels Plat. Pot. l. 5. Orig. adv câ—ll l. 8. Hieron descript Eccl. in Orig. Euseb Praep. Ev. l. 12. Virg. Georg. 6. Somn. Scip. c. and the opinion of their knowledge of Humane affairs Hence Prayer for the Dead and the opinion of Purgatory Hence proceeded many other curious Questions about the nature of God and his Attributes of the Fatal determination of events of free will and the like And as to the more sordid superstitious corruptions in Worship If any one sort of men are to be charg'd with them I believe the Monks will bid fairest The Cross and Reliques that came first from Judea are owing as far a I can observe to Melania and her Monks Paulin Epad Sulp. Sever. and I do believe the story of the finding of the Cross is of no ancienter standing Who has fill'd all the world with fictitious Reliques and fabulous Revelations concerning them Who Debauch'd the reason and common sense of men by their fulsome Legends and fictions of Miracles By whose means in short had Superstition overspread the face of the Christian world Were not the Monks the manifest Authors and Promoters of all this Superstition was born and brought up first in Monasteries and as Monks came into the Church they brought it along with them and the opinion the people had of the piety of these Retir'd men made every thing current that they advanc'd What so devoted Instruments had the Papal usurpation as the Monks that pretended exemption from the jurisdiction of their Bishops and subjected the Episcopal Authority to it And for Transubstantiation though the Grossness of the conceit were enough to prove it Monkish yet besides it is found by matter of fact to be theirs Paschasius Radbertus being the first that broach'd this Doctrine All this that I have but just mentioned in the General may be made out by a deduction of the rise and Progress of Superstition but a particular account would exceed too much the Proportion of this book This I must add that the Bishops who are charg'd with these Corruptions by Mr. B. were the only opposers of them that we find in Antiquity as we may see in the Canons of the African Church and that of Spain and other Countreys The first Picture we read of in a Christian Church was torn in pieces by Epiphanius a Bishop the first Councils about Images condemn'd the Idolatrous use of them with great zeal but at last superstition being still advanc'd by the Popularity of the Monks and the ignorance of the Age and some of the Emperors joyning with them prevail'd against the Bishops and so Idolatry was brought for a help to Christian Devotion And if at last the Bishops joyn'd in the superstitions it is no more a wonder than that they were engag'd in Heresie For when any number of people are corrupted whether with superstition or false Doctrine they will find Teachers to their own mind not that their Bishops will comply with every popular wind of doctrine but because men will make themselves Pastors after their own hearts and as long as there is a Heretick or an Ambitious man who will be any thing for applause or preferment they will never want Bishops and heads of their faction or if the Clergy have no Judas they will find Teachers amongst themselves and give them what Titles they please The last branch of the Charge is Sedition and this is as grievous as any of the other Suppose the matter of fact in the first place true that several Bishops had been Seditious does this proceed from their Constitution or any Principle the Bishops maintain that is inconsistent with the people where they live This I suppose cannot be pretended Or is Diocesan Episcopacy such an enemy to the peace of the Government We have had the experience of it for many ages and find but few that were so troublesome But because as the case stands now we are
they were banish'd for quietness and peace sake Of these we have spoken more particularly elsewhere It was not long before this that the Priscillianists sprang up in the West a Sect made up of a mixture of Manichees and Gnosticks It was a lewd infamous Heresie But the Author of it was no Bishop For whether we trace the original of it to Egypt and to that Marcus who first brought it to the West Sever. l. 2. in sin It does not appear that he was so much as a Clergy-man Priscillianus his Scholar who gave name to the Sect was a Lay-man when he was condemn'd in the Council of Saragossa There are two Bishops indeed that are condemn'd by the same Council but such as were drawn in by the fair pretences of Priscillianus and accessories only to his crime but he that gave them the name is call'd by the same Author Princeps Malorum whom after he was condemn'd those of his party to give greater credit to their cause made Bishop of Abila But Mr. B. on this occasion does not find fault with the Bishops as Authors or promoters of this Heresie but for calling the civil Sword to their assistance and procuring great severities to be us'd towards the Authors of it The Pelagian Heresie had no Bishop either for its Author or Promoter Aug. Haer. 88. Pelagius who gave it its name and being was a Monk and Julianus and Coelestius his Disciples were never Bishops or if this Heresie be deriv'd from Ruffinus Jovinian Evagrius Ponticus Hieron in Jerem. l. 4. praef or lastly from Origen as St. Jerome derives its Pedigree It is evident that Bishops had no hand in it none of these being Bishops but most if not all of them Presbyters Nestorius who gave the name to a Heresie was not the first Author of it as I have shew'd before but fell into it by engaging himself in the defence of Anastasius his Presbyter who first preach'd down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but as to Heresie Mr. B. does acquit him Eutyches was a Monk and impos'd upon the Council of Ephesus as we have shew'd before or they conniv'd at his errours and were not willing to examine his doctrine to the bottom for reasons before mention'd This Heresie was preserv'd chiefly among the Eastern Monks who made such fearful disturbances about it after the Council of Chalcedon Petrus Fullo who invaded the Bishoprick of Antioch was indeed a great promoter of Eutychianism and a very wicked troublesome man but the comfort is he was a Heretick long before For being a Priest of the Church of Chalcedon Theod. Lect. Coll. l. 1. he was put out for his crimes or as others say more expresly for Heresie which Liberatus sufficiently discovers Liberat. in Breviar c. 18. when he tells us that this person seiz'd upon the Bishoprick of Antioch per vilissimâ—â—n papulum Haereticum Alex. Ser. de S. Barn His Heresie was the thing that recommended him to the Rabble that made him a Bishop The Eatychians in the East were reviv'd or new modell'd by one Jacobus Zanzalus no Bishop but an obscure mean man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niceph. l. 18. c. 52. In Haer. 3. Maxim cum Disput Pirrho Theod. An. 633. says Nicephorus upon which account he was call'd Zanzalus that is a pitiful mean fellow Matthew Paris gives a more particular account of him which is lyable to several exceptions which it is not necessary to urge in this place The Heresie of the Monothelites though an unavoidable consequence of Entyches his Doctrine yet it is generally father'd upon Cyrus Bishop of Alexandria Sergius of C. P. Cyrius Bishop of Phasis and Theodorus Pharanatarius Baronius lays it mostly upon the first and shews how he came to fall into this mistake he had a charitable design of uniting the Divisions of the Church by devising some project that should comprehend all parties he thought one Will and one Operation would not be so harsh as one Nature which had been for so long time the subject of Contention But with the same success that usually all such designs have when the Rule is changed the Church is immediately all to pieces and those that were united under that Rule divide into parties and factions which will hardly ever unite again Now because in the following ages of the Church the Devil had another game to play and started up but few Heresies until these last ages let us see what sort of men the Authors of them have been The Swenkfeldians Anabaptists Menonists The Family of Love Quakers Ranters and the rest of the Modern Sects did these derive themselves from any Bishops Servetus whom the Ministers of Swisserland prosecuted as far or further than Idacius ever did the Priscillianists was he a Bishop Socinus was he a Prelate or the Racovian Divines were they a Council of Bishops how then comes it to be so great a wonder as our Author professès it to be that a Heresie should be rais'd by one that was No Bishop It is much a greater wonder that any one that makes Conscience of what he says should against all truth of History and against his own knowledge charge the Bishops with all the Heresies in the World that a person that seems to be so sensible of approaching judgement as frequently to put himself in mind of it in his Writings and even force the belief of good charitable men by such professions of Sincerity should yet advance so malicious and so groundless an Accusation There is no dallying with the all-seeing God and if every idle word will be accounted for what plea shall be made for whole books full of Calumny and Detraction What for blasting the memory of so many Holy men for ought he knows that are dead What for aspersing so many faithful Servants of God for ought he knows that are living What for defaming the whole Order from which he receiv'd his Ministry and to which he owes Honour and Subjection as he will surely find in that day when he comes to give account of all the hard things that he has written against it But if you would have the True Causes of Schism Heresie c. You must not look upon this or that Order of Men but go up to the first Original of such things These Mischiefs as all other disturbances of the World proceed from our Lusts which war in our Members and do not flow from any particular Institution or Order but from the General Corruption of Humane Nature by which means all conditions and degrees of men have had the misfortune to have some that have been wicked and infamous The Apostles had a Judas the Bishops a Paulus Samosatenus the Presbyters a Novatus and an Arius the Deacons an Actius and in short there is no Office in the World Sacred or Civil but has been in the possession of infamous persons who have been a reproach and scandal to it Now although the passions of men move
said enough before Some time after when they quarrelled among themselves they called a Council of three hundred and ten Bagatense against Maximianus The Catholicks observing what advantage this reputation of having a great number of Bishops gave their adversaries Conc. Carth. 2. c. 5. Codex integ can Eccles Afr. c. 53.98 thought it necessary to make use of the same course themselves and to make as many Bishops as they could therefore they order that where part of a large Diocess should be willing to have a Bishop of its own if the Bishop under whom they were should consent a new Bishoprick might be erected But it was commonly at the cost of the Schismaticks that they multiplyed Dioceses for where there were two Bishops in a Diocess the one a Catholick and the other a Donatist and the Donatists would return to the unity of the Church Codex Can. 118. the Diocess was to be equally divided between them and that with so much exactness that if the number of the Towns happened to be odd the odd Town was adjudged who it should belong to nor was this all but where the Donatists had driven out or perverted all the Catholicks there they set up a Bishop as soon as ever they had any party and sometimes in the same Donatist Diocess there were three or four Catholick Bishops This is made out so clearly in the conference at Carthage that I need only cite some passages out of it and leave them to the Reader without farther inference or application Petilianus Episcopus dixit sapientissimè ac praescie ommá pravidisti vir nobilis Collatlo Carthag Cogn Primae gesta 65. nam in Plebe mea i.e. in Civitate Constantmensi adversarium habeo Fortunatum in medio autem Dioecesis meae nunc institutum habeo imo ipsi habent Delphinum pervidet jam hinc prastantiatua duos in unius plebe fuisse imaginarie constitutos ut numerum augeant tamen plebium numerus non sit qui sit illarum scilicet Personarum hoc Argumenti est maximi ut videantur nos hoc genere superare si duâ— contra unum constituti sunt vel tres Nam etÃam in plebe praesentis sanctissimi Collegae ac fratris mei Adeodati i. e. in Civitate Milevitana ita commissa res est ut unum ibidem habeat Adversarium alterum in Tuncensi Civitate qui ad hujus scilicet plebem antiquitus pertinet ante biennium esse videtur constitutus Tertius vero sit in loco qui dicitur Ceramussa Ergo cum unus sit Civitatis Milevitanae Episcopus à partibus nostris tres videntur ab his constituti fuisse ut illorum numerus augeretur aut fortasse excederet numerum veritatis Requirendum est igitur quando auctus est illorum numerus quam Originem haâ—â—eâ—it utrumhoc novitas fecerit an dederit Antiquitas utrum ut ita dixerim contra vetustatem canam vitium hâ—câ— fuerit novitatis Petilianus Donatist Bishop of Constantina said Noble Sir you have wisely foreseen all things for in my Diocess i. e. in the City of Constantina I have Fortunatus an opposite Bishop and in the middle of my Diocess I have nay they have Delphinus another Bishop Your excellence may perceive by this how they have set up two imaginary Bishops in the Diocess of one to increase their number and yet the number of Dioceses will not be so great as that of their Bishops and this is a great argument that they would seem to out do us in this kind if they do but set up two or three against ones for in the Diocess of my worthy câ—llegue Adeodatâ—s who is here pesent i. e. in the City of Milevis the matter is so ordered that he has one Anti Bishop there in the City another in the City of Tunca which has belonged of old to his Diocess and it is not above two years since he is set up there a third is in a place called Ceramussa Therefore whereas there is but one Bishop of Milâ—â—is of our party they have three that they may increase their number and perhaps exceed the number of the truth or of the True Church we ought therefore to ask them when their number increased thus what was the Original of it Whether this be an innovation or Reverend Antiquity or rather whether this novelty has not been irregularly introduced against reverend Antiquity And what Answer is there to all this No other than that it was impertinent it was nothing to the business of the conference which was to dispute the cause of the Church whether it were to be found among the Catholicks or only amongst the Donatists Fortunatianus Episcopus Ecclesia Catholica dixit Multiloquio Ecclesia causam agi non debere perspicit mecum tua dignationis sensus Cognitorum optime Fortunatianus Bishop of the Catholick Church said Best of Jndges you perceive as well as I that the cause of the Church ought not to be maintained by much impertinent talk Therefore the Catholicks could not deny the matter of fact but despised the argument and perhaps looked upon it as a credit to their cause to be so watchful and industrious in it and since Schism would needs divide the Church they thought it allowable to return them the same measure and devide Schism too by parcelling their Dioceses between several Catholick Bishops And that we may not think this instance singulaâ— Col. Carth. Cogn 1.117 I will proceed to cite some more passages to the same effect Petilianus Episcopâ—s dixit in una Plebâ— Janâ—â—riâ— Collegae nostuâ— praeferâ—is in una dicâ—cosi quâ—â—icor sunt constuenti contra ipsâ—â—n 〈◊〉 numerâ—â— stilicet augeretur Petilianus said In the single Diocess of my Brother Januarius there are no less than four Bishops set up against him that their number may be increased To this and some other little reffections the Answer of Marcellinus the President was Hac ad praesentem non pertinent actionem These things are not to the purpose And these checks were the cause why we have not many more particulars of the divisions of Dioceses in Africk yet for all this some could not forbear making their complaints when it came to their turn to speak Verissimus Episcopus dixit Agnosco illum Coll. Carth. Cog. 1.121 quatuor sunt in plebe mea Datianus Aspidius Fortunatus Octavianâ—s Verissimus said I know him for before the Conference the subscriptions were to be examined and the Donatist Bishops were to confront the Catholicks i. e. the Bishop of each City his opposite Bishop there there are four Bishops in my Diocess and names them Now that we may not think this way was taken up by the Catholicks only to increase their party In ipsa antem Ecclesia Mustitana apparuit ipsos Episcopâ—â— alium antiqua Cachedrae addidisse bot in allis locis se fuisse poâ—â—â—â— doclaratâ—m 25. Breâ— Col. they when it comes to their
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
Vid. loc they ought to consider the Justice of the Cause and he that is already Bishop ought to continue so if they have nothing material to lay to his Charge and that be not evidently proved so we see plainly that this Disagreement is only between the People who have no Power to depart from the rightful Bishop and factiously to set up another against him but that the People should stand by their Pastor when he is canonically ejected by his Superiours assembled in Synod is very far from being any meaning of this Canon though Mr. B. would force it to that purpose Besides all this though any of these Arabick Canons should directly favour either his Notion of a Church or the cause of Dissenters or disallow the Practice of our Church in any thing they scruple it would give them but very small Relief since there is no Church and much less ours that ever receiv'd them nor were they ever heard of till the last Age. 7. Those ordained by Meletius were to be received into the Ministry where others dyed if by the Suffrage of the People they were judged fit and the Bishop of Alexandria design'd them Whither this tends is not hard to conjecture but it would spoil the Drift if one should observe maliciously First That these Meletians were Episcopally ordain'd Secondly That they were receiv'd into the Ministry upon the Supposal of their Submission to the Canons and Orders of the Church Thirdly That in that same place Sozomen declares in the Name of the Council that it is not lawful for the People to elect whom they please Page 53. l. 1. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cir. Ath. Ep. ad Strap The Council of Gangrae he has nothing to object against that of Tyre is manifestly Arrian and abhorr'd by the Catholick Church that of Jerusalem is of the the same Stamp but here Mr. B. goes along with the common Mistake that Arrius was here receiv'd into Communion whereas Athanasius affirms him to have died out of the Communion of the Church And it is plain that comparing Socrates Sozomen and Athanasius Arrius the Author of that Heresie was dead before the Council of Jerusalem and it is observable that Athanasius in his account of that Council every where expresses himself thus Ep. Synod Con. Hiero◠ap Athan. l. de Synod That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were there receiv'd into Communion See Vales his Annot. Ecclesiast in Socrat. Sozom. The next of any Note p. 54. § 21. is the Council of Antioch of near a hundred Bishops of which thirty six were Arrians the most Orthodox and the holy James of Nisybis one yet they depos'd Athanasius and the Arrians it 's like by the Emperour's Favour carry'd it Thus far Mr. B. Many have wonder'd how the major part of this Council being Orthodox Athanasius should be condemn'd by it Mr. B. who does not seem much to favour him because he was not kind to the Nonconformist Meletians insinuates a base complyance of these Orthodox Bishops with the Emperours Inclination a moderate man and always for the most charitable Construction However Pope Julius's Letter is express that he was condemn'd but by thirty six Bishops whether they were Arrians or no he does not say Athanasius reckons ninety Hilary ninety seven Sozomon ninety nine and be they never so many it seems the lesser number carry'd it and if the Emperour made that a Law the Orthodox Dissenters ought to be absolved Certain it is that this Council lay under the Imputation of Arrianisin for when it was objected to Chrysostom that he resum'd his Place after that he had been ejected without the Authority of a Synod to restore him which the Canons of this Council did require his Defence was that this was not a Canon of the Church but of the Arrians Sozomen makes them all Arrians The Faction of Eusebius saith he with several others that favour'd that Opinion in all ninety seven Bishops assembled at Antioch from several places under Colour of consecrating a Church but indeed as the Event prov'd to abrogate the Decrees of the Nicene Council Athanasius rejects them as sworn Enemies to him and the Faith so that there is no likely-hood that the majority was Orthodox since Constantius and Eusebius had the contriving of this Synod and by it's means the Ruine of Athanasius But how came this Opinion of thirty six only being Arrians and yet carrying the Cause Some say that they acted secretly and did not admit the Orthodox to vote with them for so the Condemnation of Athanasius past at Tyre or that they might be impos'd upon by their specious Pretence of disowning Arrius but because there is no account of any Difference between the Arrians and Orthodox in this case no Protestation enter'd nay if any such thing had been it cannot be imagin'd but that Sozomen must have mention'd it where he speaks of the Bishop of Jerusalem absenting himself on purpose lest he should be drawn in a second time to subscribe to the Condemnation of Athanasius we must conclude That these were all of a Party and pack'd together upon that design And perhaps the reading of thirty six in Julius's Epistle may be a mistake of Transcribers it being easie to mistake the Greek figure of 90 for 30 unless we shall judge the contrary to be the true Reading for the two ancient Latin Translations of Dionysius Exiguus and Isidorus Mercator conclude consenserunt subscripserunt 30 Episcopi and the Greek Synodical Epistle wants but one of just thirty Subscriptions Sozomen mentions another Synod at Antioch of just thirty Bishops and confounds the Acts of it with those of this first but whether it be his mistake or the old Translators that might confound the second with the first I am not able to determine and the matter is too confus'd to be extricated here Though the Authority of this Council was not great yet it seems the Canons of it were so wisely suited to the condition of a distracted Church and to the depressing of Schism that they were adopted afterwards by General Councils Mr. B. mentions several that are most of them levell'd against Dissenters and yet they are such as the Dissenters themselves that own any Discipline cannot find fault with and when they are in any Power find necessary to observe The fifth forbids any Priest or Deacons to gather Churches or Assemblies against the Bishop's will and if any did and did not desist upon admonition he was to be deposed and if he went on to be opprest by the exteriour Power as seditious The word opprest it seems is Emphatical and has indeed an old Version to favour it but what may be Oppression in his sense with the Council was Legal Punishment and the Greek word it uses signifies not so much the Penalty as the End for which it was to be inflicted the reduction of Schismaticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And
and dignity With respect to which opinion Cyril presses the unity of nature and makes use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hypostasis indiscriminately And lastly Nestorius denys Christ to be truly and properly God in his first Anathema in answer to those of Cyril saying Si quis Christum verum deum non Immanuel dixerit i. e. Whosoever shall call him True God let him be Anathema which shews that the Union he meant was not personal but that Christ was no more than what Cyril often charges Nestorius with holding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If those twelve Articles of Nestorius were extant in Greek they would likely discover more of his mind but as they are they have hardly any sense at all How far Nestorius dissembles his opinion by those plausible expressions of one person and two natures may be judg'd from what is already observ'd concerning him but our Author falls into a great passion against those that say Nestorius dissembled when he affirm'd two natures and one person I take them says he to be the Fire-brands of the World and unworthy the regard of sober men who pretend to know mens judgements better than themselves c. It cannot be unknown to any man that has read any thing in Ecclesiastical writings that Hereticks were us'd to take refuge in Equivocation and to shew a fair plausible doctrine to the first view but when this was narrowly examin'd and compar'd with other things that dropp'd from them either unawares or in greater confidence it was found to be nothing but deceit and illusion Thus the Arians frequently impos'd upon the Orthodox thus the Nestorians seem'd to own the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 changing only the accent which chang'd the signification of the Word from the Mother to the Child and off-spring of God and S. Paul who was not unacquainted with the arts of Hereticks gives this caution against them that they are not presently to be taken for what they appear Rom. 16.17 18. Now I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learn'd and avoid them for such serve not the Lord Jesus Christ but their own belly and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple But let them be accounted Firebrands of the World that will not put the most charitable interpretation upon the expressions of men of suspected doctrines I am content and I believe the Bishops will not be so much concern'd in this accusation I could wish our Author would look home and observe those Fire-brands that will make men of what Religion they please in despite of all Protestations and Oaths to the contrary Is it not strange that men who subscribe the Articles of the Church of England so destructive of all the errours of Popery which were the occasion of the Reformation that renounce Transubstantiation Popes Supremacy Idolatry Rebellion for the cause of Religion Adoration of Images and Saints and Angels that notwithstanding all this these men must be Papists and Popishly affected and let them say or believe what they will they must be accounted so What shall a man do to these men who instead of pulling down Popery strengthen it by reckoning so many learned and godly persons of that side and whilest they endeavour to dishonour these persons by so odious a name do no small honour to the Papists by making the most eminent party of men both for learning and integrity that perhaps is now in the World to be favourers of their way hoc Ithacus velit The Jesuites indeed are apt to feign several death-bed Reconciliations to their Church to gain it credit by the accession of some eminent opposers of it but this they do sparingly as the easie people can swallow the cheat But these Papist-makers of ours will present them with thousands together and send them the Protestant Churches of three Kingdoms in one present If any be Fire brands of the World if any set up Popery under the disguise of Protestants they are surely these men that cry down all for Papists that they have any prejudice against and out of spight to their brethren assist that common enemy and become the most liberal Benefactors to the Church of Rome that ever it had since the Reformation nay not inferiour to the forgers of Constantine's Donation These men would deserve better of Rome than Francis or Dominick could they but make their words good Surely the Papists are not now to learn how to make the best use of a fictitious title they will not fail to boast of that strength which dissenters give them and have no reason to discover the falshood of a calumny that is so much to their credit and advantage I must beseech the Readers Pardon for this digression and Gods Pardon to these false accusers of their brethren that they may know in this their day the things that belong to their peace To return now to the business we left It will not suit the proportion of my design to dwell upon every particular expression of Cyril's that may be suspected and to detect the Heresie of Nestorius lurking under the disguise of Orthodox Expressions I hope that what has been already observ'd may be sufficient at least to suspend the Readers judgement from pronouncing Cyril a Heretick with Derodon or Nestorius who was condemn'd by almost all the world an Orthodox and sound believer until some abler hand undertake that matter and treat it more particularly Our Author though he make use of Derodon's citations to disparage the authority of these Councils yet he differs from him in conclusion and is loth to give in to that bold Paradox that Cyril so much celebrated in the Catholick Church for his defence of the faith should at last after twelve hundred years good credit prove down-right Heretick Therefore he endeavours to moderate the business and to make both parties Friends and Orthodox though they themselves were not sensible of it All this stir saith our Author proceeded only from misunderstanding and Cyril and Nestorius and the rest of the Bishops did not understand one anothers meaning It is not unpleasant to observe a man unacquainted with the language in which these disputes were pretend gravely to be Moderator and to perswade the World they did not understand the terms they quarrelled about though the language were vulgar to them all and by the strength of Hanmer's and other miserable translations to play the Critick but whether is most likely that these great and learned men should understand one anothers terms or persons remov'd from their times many hundreds of years and ignorant of the language in which they writ I leave the Reader to determine It is true that in this case there was great misunderstanding between Cyril and the Eastern Bishops yet we find that as soon as ever they came to debate the matter calmly they found they differ'd but in expression and yet both found
to find fault having given them leave to proceed But he coming to Ephesus shortly after and finding fault with the proceedings of Cyril became the occasion of great confusions which yet cannot be with any justice charg'd upon the Council John with his protesting Bishops countenanc'd the cause of Nestorius and condemn'd Cyril being drawn in by Candidianus who was a favourer of Nestorius Act. 1. prope finem and it is not unlikely that he had secret Orders from the Emperour to do Cyril all the ill offices that he could for the Emperour in his Letter to Cyril before this Council shews that he was not a little angry with him He pretends his writing to him Theodos Cyril p. 1. c. 31. and the Empresses about this question to have been the cause as if he had had a design to divide the Court as well as the Church and to sow discord in the Royal Family But whatever were the reason it is evident by his proceeding that he had a pique against Cyril who was oppos'd in every thing by the Emperours Officers A little Committee of about thirty Bishops with John and Candidianus at the head of them set up against the Council condemn'd Cyril and Memnon and gave the Emperour an account of what they had done he sent Johannes Comes with Order to depose Cyril Memnon and Nestorius This John gives a sad account of the confusion all things were in and of the heats of Bishops but is very much to be suspected For the tenour of his relation makes it evident that he was a partizan of the Eastern Bishops and therefore endeavours to lay all the blame upon Cyril and his party but sure I am that the confusion which he represents cannot be much greater than our Author makes in the sense of this John and the Bishops could not understand one another much worse than our Author did that Epistle They would have the Scriptures read says our learned Translator but they that favour'd Cyril said that the divine and terrible Scriptures were not to be read without Cyril the Bishops that were with John said that Cyril ought not to be present at the reading of the Scriptures One would imagine that this Officer would have read a Chapter of Job to recommend patience to these violent Bishops but it is quite another matter for these terrible Scriptures were nothing else but the Emperours Letter which in the language of those times was call'd Sacra and Sacra Scriptura in this place as every body knows that has any acquaintance with these times or has but read this Letter for the secret is discover'd within a few lines Augustarum literarum lectionem fecit in quibus depositi sunt Cyrillus Nestorius c. And now it is no wonder if all things were in confusion and all parties unless that small one of John of Antioch dissatisfy'd the Orthodox look'd upon the faith as involv'd in the condemnation of Cyril and to suffer in the same proscription with him and the greatest part of the Christian Church look'd upon it self as engag'd in the same cause therefore the Emperour considering better of it whether out of fear that all the world in a manner would oppose this sentence or being better inform'd concerning Cyril revok'd this decree but confirm'd the deposition and banishment of Nestorius and considering the party of John was but inconsiderable in respect of those that own'd the Council the Emperour who probably might have made use of them against Cyril commands them now to be reconcil'd to him to condemn Nestorius to receive the Council and Cyril was only desir'd to sacrifice his resentments of the injuries received at Ephesus to the peace and settlement of the Church and so at last Cyril and the Council of Ephesus prevail'd against all the little arts that were us'd to blast their reputation and by the means of Paulus Emissenus a perfect reconciliation was effected so sincere that the old contentions are chang'd into friendship and confidence and Cyril sends some of his books to John and Theodoret to revise and correct So far were they from thinking him a Fire brand and incendiary as long as they liv'd as our Author represents the matter But this reconciliation does as little please Mr. B. as their dissentions There is no thanks to the Bishops for this the Emperours threatning Letter cur'd them all of Heresie and good men they were all this while of one mind and did not know it It is some sign of good nature that they would submit to the powerful interposition of the Emperour but there is a temper which Mr. B. is acquainted with that is not to be prevail'd upon either by threats or promises from the Magistrate and seems to hate nothing so much as compliance with Superiours there are some that scorn to preach by the licence of the Government and place the Kingdom of Christ purely in opposition to Laws and Magistrates CHAP. VI. Councils about the Eutychian Heresie IT is the general weakness of our minds not to think we have sufficiently avoided one extreme unless we run into the other and to be still running away from what we dislike we care not whither without considering what inconveniences the contrary extreme may expose us to This is frequent among us not only in what relates to our passions and manners but to our faith Nestorius for fear of blasphemy dissolv'd the incomprehensible unity of the son and fell into blasphemy on the opposite side denying Christ to be Deus verus Anath 1 2. Eutyches abhorring this doctrine thought he was not safe till he had deny'd Christ to be verum hominem Brevic. de Hist Eutyc and this became the occasion of a great deal of stir and tumults in the Christian World This Eutyches who to our comfort was no Bishop but an Abbot having pleas'd himself some time with his notion concerning the person of Christ was not content to enjoy it himself but was ambitious to propagate it He therefore drew up a new Creed different from those which had been set forth by all the Councils before him and sent a Copy of this Confession into several Monasteries to desire Subscriptions Act. con C. P. This got wind and Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum having notice of this practice advises Eutyches as a friend to desist from such dangerous enterprizes and to acquiesce in the decrees of the Councils of Nice and Ephesus Eutyches pursues his course and Eusebius reports the whole matter to Flavian who having called a small Convention of Bishops at C. P. sends for Eutyches thither He at first refuses to come but afterwards being encourag'd by a favourite Eunuch he comes to the Council as if he had been going to a war guarded not only with his Monks but with Souldiers and the Emperours guards where after some tergiversation he discover'd his Heresie and the Council having admonish'd him to retract but without effect condemn'd him as a Heretick Our
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
them to be troublesome in any State or Circumstances yet there are some that qualifie them more for Mischief and others that dispose them for it There may be many wicked men that might be willing enough to make a disturbance but they may want parts and Abilities for the work Any man may pretend to a wicked opinion but every one cannot recommend it to others and there are few that care for being Hereticks by themselves But where Malice and an evil temper has the advantage of Natural and acquir'd endowments like Sulphur and Salt peter it does not only presently take fire but has likewise an extraordinary force and capacity to destroy It is observ'd by some of the Fathers that most of the Haeresiarchae the Authours of Heresies or Sects Aug. Com. in Psalm were men of great wit and accutness in Reasoning Non Enim putetis Fratres potuisse fieri Haereses per parvas quasdam animas non fecerunt Haereses nisi Magni Homines Do not think that Heresies were first rais'd by ordinary mean persons they were great men that set them up and within the same page he mentions several of them considerable men The same Observation St. Hierom makes Hieron Com. in Osâ—â— c. 9. Nullus enim potest Haeresim struere nisi qui Ardentis Ingenii est habet dona natura qua à Deo Artifice sunt Creata Talis Valentinus talis Marcion quos Doctissimos legimus Talis Bardesanes cujus etiam Philosophi admirantur Ingenium None but men of Great Parts are able to set up a Heresie Valentinus and Marcion we find were very learned men and Bardesanes was admired even by Philosophers Vincentius Lirinensis amplifies upon this subject with great art and passion he tells the great endowments of such as rais'd Heresie and reckons up particularly all the advantages they had to recommend themselves and their Doctrine and at last concludes they were a mighty Temptation enough almost to stagger the most confirm'd Orthodox Believe Vincent Lir. adv Haeres alluding I suppose to that of the Apostle that there must be Heresies that by that tryal or Temptation they who are approved might be made manifest It was a Question that puzzl'd the most understanding Heathen I think that ever was Cicer. how God should ever bestow Reason and wit upon such men as he foresaw would make use of the gifts against the Donor This Christian Religion renders more easie when it shews us the end of this permission the manifestation of those that are approv'd Now though these Qualifications of Malice and Wit where they are met in the same person do dispose and fit him for Disturbances yet he seldom breaks out into any extremity before some outward occasion of Discontent does inflame him There is indeed a Temper that no Fortune no Honours can content and render easy to it self or restrain from disturbing the world but this extravagancy is not Common and the Generality of men though not very quiet or peaceable in their Dispositions yet when they have gain'd their point and are possess'd of wealth and honour they are commonly willing to secure the enjoyment of those Possessions by letting things run in the ordinary course But if one of these men happens to labour under repulse and disappointments his patience is soon at an end Upon this account many of the Inferiour Clergy that have stood in Competition for a Bishoprick and lost it have broken off all Communion with their Bishops whose Competitors they were so Novatianus and several others became Hereticks sometimes growing impatient with waiting for the Death of their Bishop they have revolted against him and drawn the People after them Thus Arius and Macedonius became the heads of Sects sometimes despair of Promotion after long waiting and envy against those they saw preferr'd before them hath carri'd away unsteaddy men to set up for singularity and to make new Sects Thus Aetius Separated from the Arians and taught new Blasphemies of his own Sometimes vain men have been carri'd away with the applause and favour of the people that flock'd after them and through'd their Churches to set up themselves against their Bishop upon presumption of greater interest in the people This St. Austin makes a principal cause of Heresies Sic enim fiunt Haereses schismata Aug. de Bapt. cont Donat. prop. sin cum dicit plebs carnâ—lis quae in charitate dei fundate non est Ibo post Amatores meos cum quibus utique sive per fidei Corruptionem sive per elationem superbiae turpiter fornicantur Heresies and Schisms are caused by giddy People that have itching Ears and run after such Teachers as they fansie There is no doubt but these pretended greater Edification for an excuse of their Curiosity Yet this good Bishop did not like the reason and makes it the cause of all the mischiefs that befel the Church Nay the Apostle expresses no small dislike of those that heap themselves Teachers having Itching Ears Were that great Apostle and that Great Bishop alive now what would they say when they should hear men renounce all order and rule and profess to follow their fancy under the notion of greater Edification Yet this I must observe farther that how good soever the argument may be for separation It sounds not well from the Teachers whose Commendation is involv'd in the reason They might surely give the People leave to say it and that might have sav'd their Modesty without losing the argument To Conclude this Point Almost all the Heresies and Schisms that have distracted the Church have been no other than so many defections of the Discontented part of the Clergy and the more pragmatical part of the Laity from their Rightful Bishop Cyp Ep. 55 Non aliundè Haereses obortae sunt aut nata sunt Schismata quam inde quod Sacerdoti non Obtemperatur Ep. 69. Schisms and Heresies spring from no other cause than disobedience to the Bishop Inde Haereses obortae sunt dum Episcopus qui unus est Contemnitur All the disturbance of the Church is purely for want of observing that Precept of the Apostle Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they Watch for your souls as they that must give account i. e. Obey those that are Rightfully over you and submit to them not choosing your selves new Teachers and running after your own fancy Epad. Sâ—yr Which Ignatius seems to paraphrase as he is cited by Antiochus Let the people assemble where the Bishop is present The sheep ought not to go wandering whither they please but as the Shepherd leads them The people ought to follow the directions of their Bishop and conclude what he orders to be most pleasing to God And surely any one would think this the securest course Those that seduce the people into Faction they may have interests of their own to serve by making a breach and a
Prophet and such a one as spake immediately from God The Christian people of Thessalonica says Mr. B. rose and kill'd some of Theodosius his officers Theod. l. 5. c. 17. which provok'd him by his Souldiers to kill seven thousand of them for which Ambrose brought him to do open Penance The Christian people are much oblig'd to Mr. B. for giving them the honour of this Sedition But Theodoret whom he cites for this story says not one word of the mutineers being Christians Ruff. l. 1. c. 30. Ruffinus who is particular enough in relating it says nothing of their being Christians but has some circumstances that make for the contrary Niceph. Hist l. 32. c. 40. The occasion of this Sedition was about a Charioteer who had lewdly attempted one of the Governours Pages and was put in Prison for it but being expert at his calling the people interceded for his release to entertain them at the Publick races It is not likely the Christians would have concern'd themselves for such a villain or for his Performance at those publick spectacles It being forbidden by the Canons of the Church to be present at them and extremely declaim'd against by the Bishops of those times 2. It is not likely they were Christians if we consider the method Theodosius took to revenge this outrage for as these Chariot Races were the occasion of the Sedition so he made them the opportunity of his revenge for having got a great number together to that sight the Souldiers put his orders in execution and slew 7000. in Ludis Circensibus Ruffin l. 11. c. 30. says Ruffinus 3. That the Generality of those that came to these spectacles and consequently of those that were there slain were not Christians may be gather'd from the arguments us'd by St. Ambrose to aggravate the Cruelty where there is not a word of their being Christians and his brethren but only of their bearing the Image of God and being men 4. Zosimus Theod. ubi sup Niceph. l. 12. c. 41. who omits nothing that is to the reproach of the Christians does not mention this Sedition which if it had been theirs he would have hardly pass'd But the Christians it seems are more beholden to that Heathen and profess'd enemy than to Mr. B. Lastly since there are so many Authors Christian and Heathen that mention this Sedition and not one of them say the Christians were concern'd in it Mr. B. is inexcusable for charging such a Barbarous Sedition upon those of our Religion as if he affected without any authority to render Christianity odious And though all this had been the fault of the Christians it is but an accidental Tumult and the Bishops are no way concern'd in it Our Author adds that to mention all the Bloodshed in Rome as at Damasus Election and else and at Constantinople and Alexandria would be tedious even that which was shed on the account of Bishops It cannot be deny'd but there were great and bloody Tumults upon the account of Bishops but there were not many Bishops that encourag'd them but on the contrary they us'd all means possible to prevent and remedy them by withdrawing by quitting their right and going into voluntary Banishment But almost all these Tumults were occasion'd by the Popular elections of Bishops which Mr. B. out of his love to peace doubtless and to save effusion of Christian blood would restore by his Reformation of Episcopacy Lucius he would say Lucifer Calaritanus was a pious Bishop says Mr. B. but so hot for separation from those that had been Arians that he is numbr'd for it with the Hereticks though an Orthodox Bishop And what is all this to Sedition The Novatians were Episcopal and so were the Donatists says Mr. B. and yet how have they been judged of for their Schism I need not tell They are very much to blame that say the Presbyterians or Independents troubl'd the Primitive Church It was impossible for them to be troublesome before they were at all it seems all the Sects and Schisms of that time thought they had no right to pretend to be a Church unless they had Bishops But these Anti-Episcopal Separatists were reserved it seems for the last times as the severest curse and judgment that could befal the Church Those Episcopal Schismaticks indeed divided the Church but these quite dissolve it Besides these Episcopal Schismaticks Mr. B. gives a small list of Bishops that were Anti-Hereticks Apollinaris father and son Paulus Samosatenus Nestorius Dioscorus Eusebius of Nicomedia Theodorus of Mopsuestia have been Arch-Hereticks and the cause of Tumults and Dissension There is much of this that is not true and some of it that Mr. B. does not believe to be so For 1. Apollinaris the Father was no Bishop Hieron de Script Apoll. Laodic Syria Ep. Patre Presbytero l. 6. c. 25. Gregor Nyss Ephr. Syrus Philost l. 8.15 Gottoffred Dissert in Philost and this was he that was the Arch-Heretick as Zozomen informs us and as much may be gathered from Gregory Nyssen who makes Apollinaris a very old man when he should have disputed with Ephraim Syrus Apollinaris the younger is said to have been a Bishop by Philostorgius though Photius adds that he knows not whence he had it But Jerom is express and that is the Common opinion Yet whether he were the Author of this Heresie or his father he was a Heretick before he was a Bishop while he was yet reader of the Church of Laodicea Socrat. l. 2. c. 46. and from Socrates and Athanasius writing against his Heresie it is plain that it was long before the younger Apollinaris was made Bishop if ever he were so Nicephorus makes the repulse of Apollinaris at Antioch which seems to be after he may be presum'd to have been Bishop from some expressions of that Historian Niceph. l. 12. c. 4. to have been the occasion of his Heresie but this manifestly contradicts all ancienter Historians and indeed the very story contradicts it self for Flavian upon the place convicts him of having been a Heretick before Sandius thinks he was not Bishop of Laodicea till after the Council of C. P. because Pelagius is found Bishop of Laodicea in the subscriptions of that Council though I believe this reason of small moment and the Acts of that Council shew him to have been Bishop of that place before However manifest it is that whether the father nor the son were Author of that Heresie he was not a Bishop at that time Nestorius Mr. B. himself has taken great pains to prove Orthodox yet now it seems his mind is changed The same he does with Dioscorus He was on their side against the Councils that condemn'd them but now from Advocate he is turn'd Accuser Eusebius of Nicomedia was no Heretick in the judgment of Valesius but if he were he was not an Heretick because he did not begin the arch-Heresie but followed Arius Theodorus of Mopuestia was an Orthodox Bishop as
Mr. B. owns out of Derodon and as Facundus proves at large though he had the ill fortune â—o be condemn'd by Later Councils upon 〈◊〉 misunderstanding this case I have discuss'd more Particularly in another place where Theodore Tarsensis his Doctrine was examin'd At last Bishops failing Mr. B. mentions Aerius who spake against Bishops because himself could not be Bishop so Pestilent a thing the desire of such Bishopricks have been And who can help it if men will be Ambitious and aspiring must there be no Government because it is the aim of ambition or may be the Possession of an evil man So there must be no Kings because many times a Crown became the occasion of Civil Wars There must be no reputation because Ambitious men affect it and grow Seditious to become Popular After this we have little hints of quarrels which were far enough from Sedition as that of Theodotus and Basil and of Eusebius and Basil the former was a particular humour and had no consequence Of the latter because Mr. B. says it was sad and scandalous I will give a more particular-relation that the Reader may discern the difference between the Temper of those good men that are here scandalously represented and that of our Separatists that Mr. B. compares with and prefers before them A difference happen'd between Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea and St. Basil then Presbyter of that Church Nazianz. Orat. de Basilio how or upon what occasion Gregory Nazian Was not willing to discover â—â—nking it not much for the honour of Reâ—â—gon to rip up the faults of Bishops But he says indeed that Eusebius though he was a very good man yet was in fault and seems to say that he envi'd Basil But when the falling out was known the Monks took Basils Part and drew many of the people with them and would have done him right upon his Bishop but this good man though he knew the Merit of his cause and of his person yet for peace's sake retir'd into the Widerness He might have said to his Monks that the people must stand by them and considering his Learning and Eloquence he might have presum'd to have edified more in a Coventicle than the Bishop could in the Church yet this good man had in humbler opinion of his gifts than to endanger the peace of the Church rather than forbear the exercise of them And after a long Banishment and silence he was not grown so resty and Irreconcileable but that when his Church was threatned by the Arian Pest he return'd voluntarily to assist his Bishop without desiring the Church Walls i. e. the Order and Discipline of it to be broken down that he might enter Triumphantly like a Conquerour He came of his own accord submitted to his Bishop and liv'd with him 'till he dy'd not only in peace and Charity but in the most entire friendship and confidence The Application of the Parable of the merciful Samaritan is not improper here Go thou and do likewise The contention between Basil and Euthomius Anthimus I suppose he means about the extent of their Diocese was no less Scandalous Any unreasonable Usuper may bring the meekest man upon earth into odious Debates so Saint Paul himself was put upon an Invidious vindication of his Authority and Jurisdiction The People of Casarea would have torn in pieces Eusebius the Emperor's the Empress he would have said own unkle for Basils sake if he had not hindred them And does not this shew the Loyalty Greg. Nazianz Orat 19. de Basil as well as the Authority of this Bishop But the People were Episcopal all people especially those of the meaner sort as these were are apt to be mov'd into disorder but it is much for the Honour of the Bishops authority and their Duty that they obey'd him so readily surely they are much more Tolerable than those that Assassin Bishops The difference between those of Neo Caesarea and Basil is not worth the mentioning because it contains nothing like Sedition and is only a quarrel about Psalmody and some new orders introduc'd among them The Antiochians for a Tax under Theodosius the Great did Tumultuate and kill the Magistrates and destroy'd the Statues of Flacilla the good Empress And what then What is this to the Bishops It does not appear that these mutineers were Christians The Heathens indeed were very Turbulent in this Emperors Reign because he had Order'd their Idols should be destroy'd Zozim l. 4. c. 38. and that they were the men principally concern'd in this uproar we may understand by the choice of their Delegates whom they sent to carry their submission to the Emperor Zozim l. 4. c. 42. Lybanius and Hilarius both Heathens The Church of Antioch I suppose was not in such want as to be forc'd to charge the enemies of their Religion with so great a trust nor could they have been so absurd as to commit their cause to such hands as they could not be assur'd of and they could not think they would be so acceptable to a zealous Christian Emperor who had so lately put out such severe Edicts against the Heathen superstition It shews a strange temper when a man to render Bishops odious will not stick to raise false accusations against Christians and charge them with the Sedition of Heathens In the worst says Mr. B. Good Ambrose at Milan was not silenc'd as we are but by an Orthodox Emperor desir'd and Commanded to deliver the Arians possession but of one Church and he refus'd to do it and to forsake that Church c. Whereas we left all our Churches at a word It is strange Mr. B. should take such delight to compare us with the Arians surely he would have his Reader believe we are as unsound in the Faith as those Hereticks or else all this discourse is but to amuse and impose upon him But there is great reason to value the peacable Resignation of the Nonconformists when we consider by what Usurpation and violence they were brought in and what a number of worthy Learned Ministers of the Church of England were turned out to make vacancies for these Men who were to instruct the people in new Mysteries of Religion which their old Pastours had not the Conscience or ability to Teach them that is of the Lawfulness of Rebellion We have several other instances of St. Ambrose his zeal against the Arians and some of his Charity in rescuing some of them from the fury of the multitude of his popularity c. But not a word of his sedition or his forcible resistance of the Emperour The harshest thing he did was the shutting of the Church against the Officers of the Emperour who would have delivered it to the Arians for a place to Blaspheme Christ under pretence of Worshipping him But at length after long straining Mr. B. has found out some Bishops in the same fault of owning and flattering Tyrants and Usurpers with himself and this because it
separation twenty years before seems to have made the first step towards this Congregational way Brown in the column intituled the state of Christians 50. Art 51. but he speaks of it something more obscurely Who have the grace and office of watching and guiding The Answer is Some have this Charge together which cannot be sundred Some have their several charge over many Churches some have charge but in one Church only 52. How have some their charge and office together Ans There be Synods or the meetings of sundry Churches where the weaker Churches seek for help to the stronger for deciding or redressing of matter or else the stronger look to them for redress Who have their several charge over many Churches Ans Apostles Prophets Helpers or Evangelists Nor does he determine whether any may succeed to this general inspection or no. Those that followed delivered themselves with greater clearness upon this point Confer with Egerton p. 43. Collection of certain Art 1590. Art 11. Barrow and Greenwood make all Ecclesiastical power to belong to every Congregation and call the Bishops Antichristian because they take upon them to oversee so many Pastors and Churches And in another treatise where they answer this Question whether the Queen may be excommunicated by the Presbyterie they say That they detest the power of any Person or Presbytery usurping Authority over the Church No Presbytery can do any thing of this kind without the consent of the whole Congregation but That the Congregation whereof the Prince is may Excommunicate him Ainsworth went the same way and declared himself in these words Ains Communion of Saints c. 24. We find no Authority committed to our Congregation over another for Excommunicating the same as every Church has over her own members Christ reserveth this power in his own hands Barrow affirms Bar. Refuttat of Gifford 137. that ordinary set Synods are as prejudicial to the Rights of the Church as the other i.e. Diocesan Episcopacy But Johnson was the first that cleared this point and treated of it particularly Johns Christian Plea Treat 3. He layes down two things as the foundation of Church Government and Unity 1. That all particular Churches with their Pastors do stand immediately under Jesus Christ their Arch Pastor without any other strange Ecclesiastical Power and Authority interposed between Whether of Prelates or their unlawful usurping Synods 2. That notwithstanding the estate and distinction aforesaid Treat 3. c. 6. p. 261.262 c. yet all the Churches and Ministers of them should be alwayes ready to advise and assist one another and in this manner might be had a lawful and profitable use of Synods classes c. Provided they do not usurp any unlawful jurisdiction or power over particular Churches This man goes yet farther and maintains Congregational Episcopacy and shews out of several places of Scripture and antiquity That there may be in a particular Church one Pastor or Angel of the Church properly and specially so called and divers teachers and ruling Elders joyned to this Pastor in the Ministry and Government of the same Church who may all of them generally be called Pastors yet so as one be specially distinguished from the rest in respect of place and function to be the Pastor so more particularly called under Jesus Christ the Arch Pastor Never did copy agree more exactly with the Original than Mr. Baxters doctrine about Church Government with this of Johnson the Brownist Vt sit tam fimilis sibi nec ipse It is easier to find a difference between Mr. B. and himself upon other occasions than to discern the least disagreement between him and Johnson in this Robinson whom Baylie makes the Father of the Independents though he left some tenets of the Brownists Diss p. 17. Robins Apol p. 17. continued still a separation in the Sacraments and Discipline and was as much for this Congregational way as any of the Brownists In his Apology he declares That every particular Congregation is intire without any relation to other Churches as Peter or Paul are perfect men without respect to others that these Congregations are Independent and under Christ only Therefore the Ancient bounds which the Apostles have laid are not to be removed under pretence of any human Prudence Antiquity or Vnity Upon this foundation the Independent Churches were built and continue to this day which though they may differ in points of Doctrine as their Pastors or leading men may be inclined yet this constitution of Government gives them a common Denomination And now having given this account of the Original of this way at leastwise in these last times the higher Antiquity of it we shall consider elsewhere I shall in the next place give some account of the success of this form of Government and shew what fruits of Peace and Truth it has yielded since its first planting by the Brownists Robert Brown Schoolmaster in Southwark Baylie diss Ch. 1. having seduced out of the Communion of the Church of England such a number of Disciples as made up a congregation for fear lest the severity of our Laws might dissipate this new Church resolved to remove it to a place of greater liberty and accordingly perswaded his followers to transport themselves and families into Middleborough Here they had not been long but they began to be shaken with intestine discords G. Johns Letter to Fran. Johns George Johnson sayes It was in great measure occasioned by Browns Wife and other Women of that banished Church which caused a mortal feud between Brown and Harison and some said it was the occasion of Harison 's death It was also the cause of Excommunicating Perriman And this new fashion'd Church in short broke all to pleces most turning Anabaptists and Brown at last seeing himself deserted returned with tears in his eyes into the Unity of the Church Conformed and was preferred to a living The next Congregation that was formed under this rule was by F. Johnson Diss p. 14. for Barrow was hanged before he could fill his Church and this finding the air of the English Government not to agree with it followed its Pastor to Holland and setled at Amsterdam a kind Soil for a young and tender sect But this Colony had no better success than that of Brown for in a little while it was diminished by the falling away of several to the Anabaptists who were Excommunicated by the Congregation they deserted But the dissensions that were raised among themselves afflicted them yet more for G. Johnson having disobliged his Brothers Wife by reproving her for the vanity of her Apparel and cited a Text of Scripture for it when he was candidate for the place of a Pastor in conjunction with his Brother G. Johnson discourse of some troubles c. 1603. was required to recant his Doctrine against fine Cloaths he on the other side drew Articles of Impeachment against the Busk Stomacher and Sleeves c.
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