accounted a Heretick was designed his Successor That the same Simplicius writing afterwards to the Patriarch Acacius concerning the Deprivation of the Heretical Bishops desires him to intercede with the Emperor That either the rejected Orthodox Bishops might be restored or at least new Orthodox Bishops created Whether old ones or new ones was to him upon the matter indifferent provided they were Orthodox That P. Felix III in his Synodical Epistles to the Emperor and Acacius concerning Mongus's his Promotion takes no notice at all of his being put into the place of one whom the Imperial Authority had depos'd but only complains of his Heresie That the same P. Felix in another Epistle in which he Excommunicates the Patriarch Acacius gives this as the chief Reason for it because he communicated with the Heretick Mongus And tho' at the same time he charges him with other Crimes yet he does not objâ—ct it to him as a Crime That he Communicated with one who was put into the place of another Unsynodically depriv'd Lastly That Talaias himself did not think it Unlawful for the People and Clergy of Aegypt to acknowledge another for their Patriarch provided he were a Professor of the Orthodox Faith He fled says Evagrius to Rome and raises there very great stirs affirming what not that another could not be own'd in his stead because he had not been Synodically depriv'd but that it was for his defending the Council of Chalcedon that he had been depos'd and that he that was put into his place was an Enemy of that Council He observes that Calendion the Patriarch of Antioch being depos'd without any Synod by the same Emperor they that refus'd to acknowledge Gnapheus his Successor pleaded nothing at all for their so doing but his Heresie He shews that Macedonius the Patriarch of C P. being violently depos'd by the Heretical Emperor Anastasius because he refused to condemn the Council of Chalcedon his Succsseor Timotheus was by all that did not reckon him a Heretick acknowledg'd as a true Patriarch as particularly by the two great B shops and Saints Elias and Flavianus Patriarchs of Ierusalem and Antioch tho' at the same time they declared Macedonius his Deprivation to be null and invalid and could not be induced by any Threats of the Emperor to subscribe to it That the Orthodox Party of C P. Communicated generally with him and that he was acknowledged by the Orthodox Monks of Palestine no less than 10000 in number tho' they too at the same time condemn'd what was done against Macedonius as invalid That the great Abbot of Studium refused to be consecrated by him whilst he thought him a Heretick but assoon as he had an assurance that he was not so without the least scruple concerning the Unjust and Unsynodical Deprivation of his Predecessor he readily yielded to be consecrated by him He further observes that Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch being violently depos'd by the same Heretical Emperor the only Reason assigned by the Orthodox Party why they would not communicate with his Successor Severus was his being an Enemy to the Orthodox Faith He likewise shews that Elias Bishop of Ierusalem being depriv'd by the same Emperor his Successor Iohn because he prov'd to be an Asserter of the true Faith was by all the Orthodox readily acknowledged by all the People of Ierusalem tho' they extreamly hated him as looking upon him to be one of the chief Instruments in Elias's Expulsion by those two great Saints Theodosius and Sabas with the rest of the Monks and Inhabitants of Palestine by Io. Cappadox Patriarch of C P. with all the Bishops that were under him That his Name was preserved in the Diptycks of the Church together with that of Elias and that he was honoured as well as he by that Church as a Saint That Cyrillus of Scythopolis speaking of him says he was adorned with a Divine Prudence and that in the Acts of the Council Sub Mennâ he is stiled more than once Archbishop of Jerusalem of holy Memory You may see it there prov'd that tho' St. Silverius Bishop of Rome was so violently and unjustly depos'd by Iustinian's General Belisarius yet his Successor Vigilius was own'd as true Bishop of Rome by the whole Catholick Church particularly by the 5th general Council and is reckon'd by all to this day as one of the true Popes That tho' Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem was depos'd by the bare Authority of the Emperor Iustinian yet his Successor Eustochius was own'd as a true Patriarch by the same 5th general Council and the whole Church Catholick That after that when Eustochius himself was depos'd by the same Authority Macarius being restor'd was acknowledged again as a true Patriarch He shews you that tho' Eutychius Patriarch of C P. was so unjustly deposed by the Lay-power and tho' he still laid claim to the See yet his Successor Iohn was received by all the Orthodox particularly by the Clergy and People of that City tho' at the same time they exceedingly lov'd Eutychius and accounted him unjustly depriv'd That Eustratius who wrote the Liâ—e of Eutychius though he was a great Enemy to the Patriarch Iohn and speaks very angrily of him yet he no where reflects on any for owning him as a true Patriarch That the Emperors Iustin and Tiberius tho' they had a great Veneration for the rejected Eutychius yet they did not think themselves obliged to restore him by deposing his Successor but stayed till his Successor was dead and then restored him That Eutychius himself tho' he never gave up his Right but look'd upon himself as the rightful Patriarch yet he did not break the Peace of the Church but continued to Communicate with those that acknowledged his Successor He shews you likewise that tho' St. Anastasius was depos'd from his See of Antioch by the Emperor Iustin without any Synodical Procedure and tho' he never gave up his Right but always look'd upon himself as the Rightful Patriarch yet this Successor Gregory was unanimously receiv'd by the whole Church by four of that Age who are honour'd by the Church with the Veneration of Saints St. Symeon Stylites Saint Gregory the Great St. Eulogius Patr. of Alexandria and St. Iohn Nestutes Patr. of C P. That St. Gregory the Great communicated frâ—ely with him tho' he own'd at the same time that St. Anastasius was invalidly Depriv'd and that he was still the Rightful Patriarch that he gives Anastasius the Title of Patriarch of Antioch and yet at the same time own'd his Successor Gregory to be a true Patriarch of the same See and gives him the same Title looking on the one as the Rightful Patriarch and acknowledging the other as the Patriarch in Possession He sends a Synodical Epistle to 'em both together with this Title which is very remarkable Gregorius Ioanni Episcopo C P no Eulogio Alexandrino Gregorio Antiocheno Anastasio Patriarchae Antiocheno à paribus And this is likewise observable that the Patr. Anastasius is
Compliances but of Men who in other Cases most stoutly oppos'd their Emperors and were ready to sacrifice all they had in the World to the honour of Religion No it is for Mr. Dodwel and the Men of the Remarkers Party to produce only some few Men What sort of Men they know some Men who through Crossness and ill Humour do not care tho' they rend the Church and disturb'd the Peace of it 'T will be worth our while to look a little on those Examples which the Dr. has produced and see who these some Men were who to get or keep their Preferments were guilty of such ill Compliances Lest you should not have the Drâ— Book by you I shall take so much pains as to draw out these ill Men before you The sight I dare say tho' it makes our Adversaries so apt to fall into Fits will in you raise the highest Respect and Veneration He begins with Abiathar the first High-Priest that appears to have been depos'd by the Lay-power and observes that after he was depriv'd by King Solomon Zadok who was put into his place was received as the true High-Priest by the Jewish Nation and his Services accepted of God Mr. Dodwel's Evasion that Abiathar was not the Supream High-Priest but Zadock is sufficiently confuted by the Scripture it self which tells us that Abiathar being depriv'd Zadock was Anointed in his stead Not to mention other things He has shewn that in after Ages when the High-priests were commonly depos'd by the bare Authority of the Secular Power their Successors were readily acknowledged as true High-Priests and that too tho' in other Cases the Jews were at the same time most zealous Defenders of their Laws He has shewn that our Saviour himself and his Apostles acknowledg'd and communicated with those who succeeded such as were depos'd by the Secular Governours as true High-priests This our Saviour would never have done if he had design'd that his Followers in after Ages should not do the same in Relation to their Bishops Had he shewn but only thus much he had sufficiently vindicated the present Practice of our Church But his History does not end here He has also shewn that the same was the Practice of the Church of Christ in all Ages whensoever a Bishop that was put into the place of another depos'd by the Civil Power was known to be Orthodox and otherwise unexceptionable He has shewn that P. Felix II. the first Orthodox Bishop that succeeded another depriv'd by the Secular Power was receiv'd and own'd by all the whole Church who accounted him Orthodox and is honoured to this day as a Saint tho' Liberius his Predecessor was not only depriv'd by the Secular Power but by a Heretick and for defending the Orthodox Faith He observes that when Lucius was made Bishop of Alexandria in the room of Peter whom the Heretical Emperor Valens had depriv'd the Reason why he was rejected by the Orthodox Party was only because he was an Arian not because he succeeded another whom the Emperor had violently depos'd The People having been nourished says Theodoret with the Doctrine of Athanasius when they saw that quite contrary Food was offered them kept off from the Churches He observes that Peter the rejected Bishop in the Epistle which he wrote to the Church-Catholick concerning his Deprivation tho' he endeavours with a great deal of Rhetorick to set forth the Crimes of his Successor and to excite in all the Church an Abhorrence of his Actions yet he raises no Objection against him on this account because he was made Bishop in his place whom the Emperor had violently depos'd Those Instances are of the 4th Age. He has shewn in the 5th that S. Briccius Bishop of Tours being violently depos'd and driven away by his People tho' he did not give up his Right but endeavoured to be restored yet Iustinian and Armentius who were successively put into his Place were own'd by the Church as true Bishops of that See and there was not any disturbance in the Church on his account That Gregory the Historian who himself was Archbishop of that See and afterwards a Saint acknowledges them as true Bishops and ranks them in the List of the Bishops his Predecessors That St. Briccius himself though he look'd upon himself to be still the Rightful Bishop yet he own'd them to be true Bishops and he gives Armentius the Title of his Brother the Bishop of Tours He observes that when Theodosius had got himself to be ordained Patriarch of Ierusalem by Violence and Murder in the room of Iuâ—enalis who had never been at all depriv'd the only Objection that the Great and Orthodox Abbot St. Euthimius when urged to Communicate with him was That he had been guilty of many Murders and was also a Heretick His Answer was no more than this God forbid that I should approve of his Murders and evil Opinions He observes withal that those Bishops that had been ordain'd by the Usurper Theodosius were never theless acknowledged by the Church as true Bishops and if their Predecessors were not still living were contained in their Sees He observes that Timotheus Aelurus being constituted Patriarch of Alexandria in the room of Salofaciolus whom Basiliscus the Heretick and withal a Vsurper had depos'd was rejected by P. Simplicius and Acacius Patriarch of C P. for this only Reason because he was a Heretick and Parricide When Simplicius had heard that Acacius had forbid Timotheus to enter into any of his Churches in the City of C P. he sent him his Thanks in these Words without taking any Notice of Salofaciolus's Unjust and Uncanonical Deprivation Thy constancy says he is praise worthy both in the sight of God and in ours in that thou wouldst not suffer that condemned Person to enter into any of the Churches of C P. not only because he was a Heretick but only because he was a Parricide He has shewn that Iohannes Talaias the Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria being depos'd by the bare Authority of the Emperor Zeno tho' after he was depos'd he still laid claim to his Right yet Mongus who was put in his place was own'd as a true Bishop of that See by as many as accounted him no Heretick particularly by Acacius that great and brave Patriarch of C P. and his Successor Fravitas as also by Martyrius Patriarch of Ierusalem with all the Eastern Bishops in general That the Bishops of Dardania and Calendion Patriarch of Antioch in their Allegations against him take no notice of his being put into the place of one so Depriv'd but only that he was a Heretick That Euphemius Patriarch of C P. and the Orthodox Party of Aegypt Communicated with him till they discovered him to be Heretical then broke off from his Communion That Simplicius himself Pope of Rome having received a Letter from the Emperor Zeno touching his design to depose Talaias was well enough satisfied and nothing displeased him till he found that one whom he
placed the last of all and after Gregory who stands in his proper place because he was a Patriarch only de jure and not in Possession And here I shall transcribe those words which Dr. Hody observes of the Learned Annotator on P. Gregory's Epistles Non satis hoc advertere videntur qui ad summos juris apices de re qualibet decernentes Schismatibus contentionibus viam parant zelo PRAECIPITI NEC SATIS CAUTO The Doctor 's History adds that when St. Martin Bishop of Rome was violently Depos'd by the Emp. Constance because of his adherence to the Orthodox Faith his Successor Eugenius was receiv'd by all as a true Pope And tho' he was put into the place of one so Depos'd and who never had given up his Right yet he 's honour'd by the Church as a Saint A Saint is Depos'd and a Saint accepts of his place And so far was that holy Man St. Martin from thinking it unlawful for his Clergy and People to submit to another Bishop that when he heard that there was another constituted in his Room he offer'd up to God his prayers both for Him and his People that their hearts might be established in the Orthodox Faith To these he adds many more Examples of the following Ages to shew that this was universally the Practice of the Catholick Church He shews how great and how worthy a Person the Patriarch Photius was who accepted of Ignatius's See whom the Emp. Michael had unjustly Depos'd And observes that the Metropolitans of the Province of CP tho' they own'd that Ignatius was unjustly depriv'd and had still a great honour for him and desired he might be restor'd yet because the Emperor would not suffer it to be done they peaceably yielded to Necessity and submitted to the present Possessor Such as these are those Sacred Instances with which Dr Hody has oblig'd us He has also shewn us that the same was the practice of the Antient Church whensoever any Bishop was unjustly Depriv'd by an Uncanonical or Heretical Synod if their Sentence was enforced by an uncontroulable Authority of the Secular Power By this time you see what those some Men are who to get or keep their Preferments were guilty of such Compliances Let us hear now what is said by a very great Prelate of our Church concerning this History of the Drs and the Instances he has given Dr Hody says he has fully ended the Argument that he had begun from the Practice of the Church and that in so convincing a Manner that matter of Fact seem'd not capable of a clearer proof But the not answering his Book is now excus'd upon this pretence Because he had promised another Treatise Of the Power of the Magistrate in such Cases which he has not thought necessary to enter upon till he sees what is said to his Book in which he has â—ully concluded the Argument upon which the Dispute fiâ—st began And the not publishing this is made an excuse for their not answering the other We know the true Reason why it is not answered is because it cannot be answered Mâ—n may wrangle on eternally in Points of Speculation but Matters of Fact are severe things and do not admit of all that Sophistry ' In another place says the same great Man We challenge them to shew us where ever a Schism was formed upon the Lay-Deprivation of a Bishop even when the grounds that it proceeded on were visibly unjust if the Faith of the Church was not pretended to be concerned in the Matter The Intruders into the High-Priesthood under the Iewish Dispensation and the many Instances in Church-History that Dr. Hody has cleared beyond a possibility of denying the Matter of Fact are so express and full on our side that their avoiding to answer them is plainly a giving up the Cause Their leaving the general Argument from the constant and uninterrupted Practice of the Church and betaking themselves to the Methods of Slander and Defamation is such an evident indication of a bad Cause and of a worse Management that it is not possible but that the generality of indifferent Men will soon discern how weak their Reasons and how strong their Passions are They have in all their other Writings built too much on the Authority and Practice of the Church to be able with any shame to reject this Argument and to say that they ought to be govern'd by Rules and not by Examples We must here take our leave of the Remarker and return again to the Learned Mr. Dodwel It is certain that these Words of the Bishop of Sarum and the challenge he gives them to Answer Dr. Hody's Book was that which awakened him and put him upon publishing those Papers which were casually seized and are now Reprinted It was necessary they saw that something should be published that at least might be called an Answer and they knew that that Name alone would do at least some good since the greatest part of Men look no deeper than the Title The challenge is to Answer the History and yet not a word in Mr. Dodwel's Answer concerning those Instances of the Practice of the Church which the Dr. principally insists on As I have already said he does not so much as pretend to Answer it And what is this avoiding to Answer it after such a challenge from so great a Man but more plainly a giving up the Cause Mr. Dodwel's Talent is History And if a Man of his Learning and Diligence is forced to give up the Cause as it plainly appears that he is we know not from whom to expect it As St. Austin says of St. Ierome Quod Hieronymus nescivit nullus mortalium unquam scivit so say I of the worthy Mr. Dodwel What he cannot do in a matter of History and after so long a time it is now somewhat more than five Years since The Case of Sees Vacant was published the rest of the Party tho' they are some of them Men of great Abilities and Learning will not think it a disparagement to themselves if we conclude it cannot be done I cannot but take notice that He is so far from undertaking to Answer the Dr's History that he presumes to tell the World that the Dr himself does not look upon those Instances which he has produced to be of any considerable Authority that the Dr. himself does not value ' em What The Dr himself not value the Instances which he has produced This must needs have been great News to him Lest you should suspect I might possibly mistake Mr. Dodwel's meaning I shall give you here his own words The Dr. says he professes beforehand his own unwillingness to be concluded by such Instances as himself has produced tho' they should appear to be against him Why so if there had been any reason that he should have been concluded by them Why so if he did not thereby own that the Reasons given by the Vindicator against the Argumentativeness
REFLEXIONS ON A PAMPHLET ENTITLED Remarks on the Occasional Paper Numb VIII Relating to the CONTROVERSY BETWIXT Dr. HODY and Mr. DODWELL And on another Entitl'd A Defence of the Vindication of the Depriv'd Bishops Some time since seiz'd and suppress'd by the Government and now Reprinted With an Answer to a Third call'd Historical Collections concerning Church Affairs LONDON Printed by T. Snowden for Iohn Everingham at the Star in Ludgate-street 1698. SIR THO' I do not at all know who are the Authors of the Occasional Papers yet I think so well both of the Performance and of the Prudence and Seasonableness of the Design as to be highly pleased to find 'em so acceptable to you Since I sent you the last which was Numb VIII there is come out a small Pamphlet called Remarks upon it in a Letter to the Author Which I here send you not for any thing considerable that I see in it but to gratifie your Curiosity There are a few things in it which I think sit to take a little notice of And the first is his blaming the Author of that Paper for charging the Vindicator of the deprived Bishops a little severely on the account of his Notions and Practice The Remarker tells ye that what the Vindicator has said and writ in defence of the Rights of the Clergy might one would have thought have secur'd him from the Pen of a Clergy-man The Temper of the Laity in this Age and Nation is such that few of 'em appear very forward to defend even the just Privileges of the Clergy and therefore when a Lay-man will write on their behalf they ought to be so true to their own Interests as at least to stand Neuters the mean while If the Learned Vindicator has writ any thing in defence of the Rights of the Church and the Just Privileges of the Clergy we own our selves much obliged to him But the Question is what are their Rights and what their Iust Privileges Did I see one of the best of my Friends endeavour to Rob another on my account I am a Knove if I stand Neuter and a greater if I side with him to deprive another of what is rightfully his I am oblig'd in Conscience and Equity to take his part whom my Friend would Wrong tho' it were for my own Profit It is no less honourable in a Clergy-man and no less his Duty to vindicate the Rights of the Laity when others would invade them than it is in a Lay-man to vindicate the Rights of the Clergy in opposition to Secular Usurpations And as it his Duty in the Point of Iustice and Honesty so it is also in the Point of Wisdom and Prudence For to grasp at more than one can well hold what is that but the ready way to lose what one has I must here observe how little the Clergy are oblig'd to Mr. Dodwell for promoting this as one of their Rights and Iust Privileges That for the sake of a Depriv'd Bishop they ought to bring a Persecution upon the Church go a begging themselves and ruine their whole Families This is one of Mr. Dodwell's very great Obligations and the chief of all those which with so much Kindness and Zeal he endeavours to lay upon us If it be one of the Rights of the Church that a Bishop ought not on any account to be Depriv'd by the Secular Power which I take to be utterly untrue Mr D. were he truly our Friend would allow us also this Privilege That whenever a Bishop is once so Depriv'd and we cannot avoid it we may peaceably submit to his Successor to secure our selves from that Ruin which must otherwise fall upon us and the Church from such a Concussion as would probably dissolve the whole Frame If he is not pleased to grant and to defend this Right of the Church and Iust Privilege of the Clergy I must freely profess my Opinion of his Services We have very little reason to thank him One notable piece of Service which the Learned Mr. D. has generously done both the Clergy and the Church I cannot here in Justice pass by and that his bestowing so sublime and worthy a Character upon our first Reformers and Martyrs particularly upon Arch Bishop Cranmer in his Preface to that Book which was sometimes since seized and suppressed by the Government A sort of Service which the greatest Enemies of our Church and Reformation will thank him heartily for Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Sanders will hereafter have the honour to stand both together as Witnesses against the Reformers and Martyrs of the Church of England I desire it may be Recorded and forever Remembred That as one was an open Enemy so the other when he wrote those black Declamations was no Member of our Church but was actually engag'd in a Schism against it What Thanks or Respect can that Man deserve from the Church who professing himself one of its Members does not study to maintain the Peace of it but only to advance his own Notions and prefers his Fondling Opinions to its Welfare and Tranquillity and endeavours to fix a black Character on its worthy Reformers and Martyrs The mention I made of a Book of Mr. Dodwell's which was seiz'd and suppress'd by the Government brings me to consider another Paragraph of the Remarks which wants a short Comment and ought to be set in a True Light I don 't at all doubt says the Remarker but that the Government had good Reasons to seize and suppress the Pamphlet you mention There were possibly some things in it which the Person by whose order it was suppressed did not think convenient should be expos'd to Publick view But yet since there was a Promise from one engag'd in the Controversie That he would secure whatever should be printed in that kind and since after it was seiz'd and before it was suppress'd there were offers made of striking out whatever was offensive and printing those Sheets over again it seems something hard it should after all be condemn'd to the Lining Trunks and Paper Boxes I confess I should scarce have understood this Paragraph if it had not been explained by another Book of the Party call'd Historical Collections concerning Church Affairs In the Preface of which there are these Words Why may we not suspect that these Papers will be seiz'd as well as the Learned Vindicators Answer was t'other day though Dr. Hody had dared him to make a Reply and promis'd him the Liberty of the Press in an unhandsom Letter which he sent him about August last and it was the only stroke in it which savoured of Decency and goods Manners I am apt to think that so great a Rudeness has not been offer'd to so Learned a Man before And if the Dr. does not make amends to his Reputation by finding some ways that the Sheets may be restored or by publickly declaring that it is not in his power to have it done he must his best Friends being
of such Facts were solid and concluding And how can he find in his heart to insist principally in his following Book on that very kind of Facts which he has acknowledged so unsafe to be relied on in his Preface He cannot pretend to argue ad Hominem when the Vindicator had so expresly enter'd his Exceptions against that whole Argument He cannot do it in his own Person when he professes himself unwilling to stand by the Consequences of it And how can he have the confidence to obtrude that upon us which he does not believe himself What ground in the Name of God! could he have for all this strange Talk He cites in the Margent these words out of the Dr's Preface Should our Adversaries be able to produce such an example as I think they will never be able 't will advantage their Cause but little especially if it be one of the later Ages since it is not agreeable to the Practice of the Church in general Is it really Mr Dodwel's mistake this Or did he intend to impose upon his Reader For my Life I cannot imagine how it was possible for a Man but of a common Capacity to be guilty of such a Mistake For all those Examples of the Church's peaceable Submission to the present Possessor in so many several Ages which are prov'd in The Case of Sees Vacant the Dr challenges Mr Dodwel and his whole Party and again the same challenge we here give them and desire they would take notice of it to produce him any one single Instance from the time of Aaron the first High-priest of the Jews to this very day of a High priest disown'd by the Jews or a Bishop disown'd by the generality of the Catholick Church for this Reason Because put into the place of another deposed by the Civil Authority And then he adds those words which you have read By which it is as clear as the Sun at high Noon that his meaning was no other than this That since the present Practice of the Church of England is warranted by the general Practice of the Church Catholick our Adversaries cannot be justified or excus'd by any one Instance on their side if they could produce one especially if it were one of the later and more degenerate Ages If the Dr does not look upon one Instance and that too in the more degenerate times to be conclusive against the general Practice of the Church and in the purer and more Learned Ages does he therefore not esteem the uniform Practice of the whole Church in general to be Conclusive To conclude this point and to satisfie Mr. D. how willing the Dr. is to be concluded by such a constant Vniformity of Practice in the Church I have leave to tell him That he prefers the Example of the Church which is so clearly made out in his Book to the Iudgment and Example of ten tho' I have leave to tell him yet I will not say how many Vindicators The Question betwixt Dr Hody and Mr. Dodwel is this Whether our Practice or the Practice of the Party be conformable to that of the Catholick Church in Ancient times 'T is expected that Mr. D. should either prove all the Instances which the Dr has produced to be false or produce as many and as good on his own side If he cannot do this much more if he cannot produce so much as one on his own side whatsoever he publishes with the Title of an Answer will be nothing but a Publick Declaration That they are not able to justifie themselves Time was as Mr D. well knows when the Practice and Example of the Church was of greater Authority with him When the Bishops were first depriv'd and their Sees fill'd all places that were honour'd with Mr Dodwel's presence as well publick as private rung aloud of Examples I have been often told by such as were at that time at Oxford and did themselves the honour to be often in Mr. Dodwel's company that till Dr Hody published his Baroccean Treatise Mr Dodwel constantly appeal'd to the Example and Practice of the Church It was this as I am very well assur'd that first put the Dr upon publishing that Treatise As soon as that was done then the usual Plea was quite alter'd Mr D. who before was so full of his History and Examples begins now not to esteem them And The Case of Sees Vacant when that was published made him utterly out of love with them He is now for Rules not Examples And he has good Reason for it for Rules he makes of his own but Examples he cannot When The Case of Sees Vacant first came out it was very well known that Mr D. and his whole Party presently fell upon a nice Examination of it I know my self a very intimate Friend of Mr Dodwels who examined the Quotations of a Chapter or two for him Who has freely acknowledged That he could not find any thing but what was rightly cited and fairly represented Had the History been found wrong the Examples and Precedents of the Church had been still looked upon by the Party as very good things But their great fault is They all make against them The Case is plainly this We are so much in love with our own Notions that we will not value any thing no not the Authority of the Catholick Church it self in opposition to them Of a piece with his other mistakes so I chuse to call them rather than disingenuitieâ— is that which he tells his Reader in several places in his last Treatise that Dr Hody owns the Invalidity of all Lay-deprivations Tho' the Dr had expresly told him in his Preface that he reserv'd the Vindication of the Authority of the Civil Power in such Cases for a particular Treatise I grant at present says the Dr that all Lay deprivations are Invalid The Learned Mr D. has it seems forgot the difference between dare and concedere It was not the Dr's business in The Case of Sees Vacant to concern himself with the Authority of the Civil Power His only business in that Treatise was to assert the Reasonableness of submitting to the present Possessor whether the other were validly depriv'd or not where the Power that depriv'd is irresistible and the Possessor otherwise unexceptionable It is easie to observe how desirous Mr D. and the Men of his side are to have another Cause call'd and to shift off that weight thet lies so pressingly upon them But to this the Dr keeps them And I think he does very well to hold them fast where he has them To what purpose should we who were not concern'd in the Deprivation of the Bishops concern our selves so much about that Question Whether it be lawful for the Civil Magistrate to deprive a Bishop or not since whether that be lawful or not this at least we know to be lawful The acknowledging the present Possessor if on all other accounts unexceptionable Whether it were the Doctrine of the
Church that Bishops may be depriv'd by the Lay-power for Political Crimes or not we are not obliged to know 'T is enough for us that we know that this at least was the Doctrine of the Church and we know it from it's constant and uniform Practice throughout all Ages That when once they are depriv'd tho' never so unjustly and we cannot avoid it it is lawful for peace-sake to own the Possessor Dr Hody may publish if he please his Vindication of the Authority of the Civil Power for the sake and satisfaction of those who concur'd in the Deprivation of the Bishops But we of the lower Form who were not at all concern'd in the matter we want no such Treatise to justifie our Practice Our Practice is sufficiently justified by what he has already written I will read it if it comes out as a matter of Speculation If it can have any influence on my Practice it will be only to vindicate those by whom the Bishops were depriv'd against the Ragingness of such as discharge their Choler in so liberal a manner against them which always turns back on themselves I ought not here to omit that that Book which I mentioned above called Historical Collections c. was design'd as a part of an Answer to The Case of Sees Vacant It s business is to shew that the Catholicks of the fourth Age who refused to Communicate with Felix Bishop of Rome who was put into the place of Liberius and with Gregory and George of Alexandria who were substituted in the place of St. Athanasius and with Meletius of Antioch who succeeded Eustathius did not refuse to acknowledge them on the account of Heresie but because their Predecessors had been Unjustly and Vncanonically thrust out And how is this prov'd Why they tell us that the Catholicks of that Age did not look upon the Eusebians as Hereticks but continued to Communicate with them till after the Deprivation of St Athanasius c. and therefore when after that they refused to Communicate with them it must be upon the account of the Uncanonical Deprivations and Successions I shall not wander after the foul-mouth'd and raving Collector in his long wild Maze of Impertinencies but shall give a full Answer to the whole in half as many Words as he has trifled away Pages The Eusebians of that Age who are commonly called Semi-arians were by some of the Orthodox accounted more tollerable by others downright Arians and Hereticks though they sometimes pretended to imbrace the Nicene Faith Sometimes the same Catholicks entertained a favourable Opinion of them at other times according as their Heresie shewed it self more visibly in their Practice they declined their Communion This was generally the case after the Persecution and Expulsion of St Athanasius 1. Athanasius himself calls the Eusebians his Persecutors every where Arians and Hereticks So does the Synodical Epistle of the Bishops of Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis and that of the Council of Sardica not to mention the Writers of the following Ages The Collector was aware that the Eusebians have every where the Title of Arians and therefore he tells you that the Arianism of the Eusebians was generally interpreted to amount to no more than their receiving a false succession of Bishops On this the main hinge of his whole Book turns The Margent will shew him to have been extreamly careless in his Reading and that they were therefore call'd Arians because they were believed to have embraced the Heresie and Opinions of Arius Athanasius in one place has these words The Eusebians seeing their Heresie going down wrote to Rome and to the Emperors Constantine and Constans against Athanasius but the Legates which were sent by Athanasius confuted their Lies and they were rejected with shame by the Emperours Thus he makes them to be Hereticks even before he was deposed 2. Gregory who was put into his place when he was first expell'd is well known to have been a notorious Heretick So he himself witnesses of him as does also St. Hilary The Council of Sardica declares him no Bishop and forbids the Catholicks to give him that Title and to have any manner of Communication with him and that partly for his other enormous Crimes but principally because he and his Party promoted the Arian Heresie against the right Faith And this is the Reason they give for their restoring Athanasius and the rest that were ejected by the Eusebians Athanasius observes that that Council were so far from calling him a Bishop that they did not think he was worthy the name of a Christian. 3. George of Laodicea who was constituted his Successor upon his second Expulsion had been formerly degraded from his Orders as an Arian by Alexander Bishop of Alexandria and had afterwards been deposed from his Bishoprick of Laodicea and again dâ—graded by the Sardican Council as an Arian for dividing the Father from the Son in the Holy Trinity and adulterating the Word of Truth and is every where branded as an Arch-Heretick Lucifer Calaritanus tells us that the Catholicks were so cruelly persecuted by the Emperor Constantius for what reason was it because they refused to own a Bishop who was put into the place of another Uncanonically depriv'd No 't was because they would not comply with George's Blasphemy And P. Iulius tells us concerning the former Persecution that it was brought upon the Orthodox for no other reason but because they would not Communicate with Gregory and his ARIANS Ruffinus tells us that the Reason why the Catholicks chose rather to suffer banishment than to subscribe to Athanasius's Deprivation was because they believed that through him the Catholick Faith was struck at 4. That Meletius of Antioch and P. Felix of Rome who were put into the places of Eustathius and Liberius were by some accounted Hereticks Dr Hody has already shewn And this was the Reason why they were by some rejected The Collector spends two or three pages to prove against the Dr that Liberius being depriv'd did not give up his Right and submit to Felix as Bishop of Rome Where for God's sake does the Doctor say he did On the contrary this makes directly for the Doctor 's Cause that though there was no Cession yet they that knew Felix to be Orthodox very freely recognized him But why was Liberius himself after he had subscribed to Athanasius's Condemnation looked upon by the Catholicks with so ill an eye Was it not for this because he had complied with a wrong Succession So the Collector says But 't is full as false as any thing is true The subscribing to Athanesius's Condemnation was look'd upon by many to be a Revolting to the Arian Heresie and besides it is certain that the Arians themselves boasted that Liberius had subscribed to their Doctrine So Sâ—zoâ—en expresly tells us And St. Ierom himself affirms that he actually did so And this
was the Reason why after he was restored and Felix rejected some would not acknowledge him but continued to adhere to Felix whom they knew to be truly Orthodox When Hosius of Corduba was pushed on through the violence of the times to Communicate with the Hereticks Valens and Ursacius what was the Reason that he never could be brought to subscribe to Athanasius's Condemnation Was it not because he accounted even Heresie it self a less fault than to comply with a wrong Succession No such matter If Hosius still stood firm in that Point it was because to subscribe to Athanasius's Condemnation was to own his belief of those Crimes for which he was depos'd which he could not do being in his Conscience so extreamly satisfied that he was not guilty He could not find in his heart to be guilty of so great a Lie and of so great Injustice to the injur'd Athanasius And so we are told by Athanasius himself that the Reason why the Catholick Bishops chose rather to suffer so cruel a Persecution than to set their Hands to his Deprivation was because they saw plainly that the Crimes with which he was charg'd were only the Forgeries of his Enemies Thus Flavianus and Elias the Patriarchs of Antioch and Ierusalem thoughâ— they own'd Timotheus as Patriarch of C P. yet they never could be perswaded to subscribe to the Deprivation of his Predecessor Macedonius because that would have been to own a belief of the Crimes that were laid to his charge and of the Iustice of his Enemies Proceedings I shall here inform the Collector that it appears by the Testimony of St. Hilary himself who suffered in the Cause of Athanasius that the Catholick Bishops offered to subscribe to his Deprivation if his Adversaries would but subscribe to the Doctrine of the Council of Nice And the same is likewise attested by Sulpitius Severus If his Adversaries would have done this the Catholicks would then have been convinced that the Crimes which they laid to his charge were not forged against him for the advance of the Arian Heresie but might possibly be true This they could not perswade themselves as long as they plainly saw that his Deposers were Enemies to the Orthodox Faith The Schism of the Meletians and the Paulinists of Antioch which the Collector so tediously insists on that was likewise founded in Heresie and makes not a whit for their Cause The Paulinists accounted Meletius and his Successors Arians or disown'd at least the validity of their Orders The Meletians on the other side accounted Paulinus a Sabellian and he was not put upon them by any Sovereign Coercive Power which the Collector cannot be made to take notice of but by Lucifer Calaritanus who had no Authority over them Dr Hody had asked what Authority he had to Constitute a Bishop of Antioch The Collector here takes him up and shews him in a Digression of several Pages if any thing may be call'd a Digression in that Book that where Heresie is concern'd a Catholick Bishop has Authority any where Very pertinently done As if the Dr could be ignorant of what every Body so well knows But how could Lucifer's Authority oblige those that accounted Meletius Orthodox to reject him for another What power irresistible had he to put a new Bishop upon them That which chiefly continued that unhappy Division was the Opinion which Lucifer had instill'd into his Party that the Orders of the other side were null as being Arian To conclude I have already challenged Mr Dodwel and the whole Party and in this I am only a Second to the Dr to produce me any ONE single Instance of a Bishop disown'd by the generality of the Catholick Church for this Reason because put into the place of another deposed by the Civil Power The generality is the only thing that can be of any Authority But I 'll now for a Trial of skill be so bold as to give one challenge more Instead of the generality in the fourth Age I challenge the Collector who takes himself to be so much a Master of the Story of that Age to shew me any one single Person throughout all that Age that actually stood out on that account There is not to be found and I am not afraid to affirm it so much as one single Person among all the Catholicks of that Age who actually refused to own any Bishop that was put in by an irresistible Power but it was for one of these Reasons either because he accounted him a Heretick or because he look'd upon his Orders to be null and invalid as being deriv'd either immediately or mediately from one whom he accounted a Heretick or because the Bishop communicated with Hereticks or lastly because he was for some other Crime Excommunicated The Donatists themselves can afford the Collector no Example For the Reason why they disown'd the Catholick Bishops who were back'd by the Imperial Power was because they accounted their Orders and their Baptism invalid as being deriv'd from such whom they believed to have been Traditors This Rule being observ'd you have a full and a clear Answer to all that Long and Verbose Collection More Labour and more Words to less purpose in my Life I never saw But it 's usual with Men of that size for the cleanlier conveyance of their Tricks and Shuffles to stare their Readers with Confidence in the Face and to overwhelm them with a long run of Words With this I leave the Matter the Collector and all together For the sake of some Reverend and Worthy Persons who are unhappily engaged in the present Division for whom I must avow I have all along had and shall always have a very great and distinguishing Respect I shall here lay down an Example that relates to our own Country which to Men of good Tempers may be of good use When Wlketulus the worthy Abbot of Croyland in the time of Will the Conquerour was unjustly depriv'd of his Abbey Ingulphus the Historian being nominated to it without any scruple accepted of it tho' he own'd his Predecessor to have been wrongfully dispossessed Wlketulus being a very pious and good Man and skilful in the Affairs of the Monastery Ingulphus invites him to come and live with him placed him always in his own Stall and honoured him as his Father and Copartner in the Government Thus the good old Abbot lived lovingly and contentedly with his Successor to his death and was very useful to the Monastery I have only a word or two more to add and that is to put you in mind that when-ever you meet with any thing that may be published as an Answer to The Case of Sees Vacant the Dr desires you would be pleased to Read both together If you think he is at leisure or of an inclination to Answer every little thing and especially of their Vnderworkmen that shall be published against him you will find your self mistaken The Phaenomena of History