near adjoyning made but one Church Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the word and sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastor the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters Now according to Dr. Field every Episcopal Church as laid out by the Apostles having so large extent as to require many Ministers and yet but one Pastor or Bishop was plainly not a Congregational Church but Diocesan Bishop Bilson (t) Bils Perpet Gov. c. 14. p. 295 298 306 321. is yet plainer against the purpose for which he is alledg'd We have says that learned Prelate one Bishop in a Church ty'd to the Laws of God the Church and the Prince you would have 300 in a Diocese and some more all of equal power and set at liberty to consult and determine at their pleasure Neither had the Jews that kind of Government which you would establish in the Church neither did our Lord and Master ever prescribe to the Gentiles the judicial part of Moses Law And again As the people did increase so did the pains in each place and consequently the number of Presbyters one man being no more able to serve the necessities of a great City than to bear the burden of the Earth upon his back and yet in each Church and City one chief among them that as principal Pastor of the place c. And to conclude you dislike a Bishop should have any Diocese or Church besides that one wherein he teacheth which nice conceit of yours not only condemneth the Primitive Church of Christ that assigned Dioceses to Bishops but contradicteth the very ground of Government which the Apostles left behind them (u) Prim. Ep. p. 48. Now in what places the Jews had their Synagogues if it were not plain Matth. 9.35 that they were far from being alway great Cities will appear from the seats of their Consistories I never yet heard of any who denied that the Jews had Synagogues in Villages as well as Cities But that the Village-Synagogues were independent and free from any subjection to the Cities in Ecclesiastical causes is now the question and our Author is wise in saying nothing of it For those who have taken his side of the question though men of good reading have not been able to produce any thing about it but their own affirmations It is not to be doubted but every good Village of the Jews had a Synagogue as every Parish with us hath a Church and great Cities had many Synagogues as our great Towns have many Parishes and Jerusalem particularly is said to have had 480. But that every Village-Synagogue had supream authority in matters Ecclesiastical and no dependance upon any other Court or the chief officers of the City Synagogues is very unlikely For so many Independent and Co ordinate Officers could never without a miracle have preserved themselves one year under one National communion And in those great Cities where the Jews had many Congregations it cannot well be conceived that every one had supream authority but that there must be some Chief or Council to which all those Synagogues were subject This is most likely because common order and National agreement cannot well subsist without it I know there are some great men (x) Grot. de jure sum pot c. 11. Gotof. in l. 2. de Cod. Theod. have been very positive on the other side and have asserted the Independence of every Synagogue that every such Assembly had a chief Officer answering to our Bishops and all co-ordinate and of equal authority But for all this no evidence is produced and when learned men speak without book about distant matter of fact their authority is but small for then they do not speak from their knowledge and learning but their affection The Scriptures of the old Testament give no directions concerning Synagogues and do not so much as mention those Assemblies From whence some have concluded that in those times there were no such religious Assemblies among the Jews In the new Testament we have frequent mention of them and sometimes their Officers are named but how they were ordered in respect of one another and of general Communion the new Testament does not give the least hint Nay as to this matter the writings of the Jews are not plain and though they were yet they taste too much of the fable to be depended upon Great men may guess and affirm according as they stand affected but when all is done this matter is still in the same obscurity for want of sufficient evidence After the establishment of Christian Religion we find general Officers of the Jews endued with the power of Excommunication and Absolution but that every Village or City-consistory had that power then we do not find and for ought appears they might have no more power than our Church-wardens and Vestries Nay in the complaint the Jews make to Arcadius and Honorius (y) L. 8. de Jud. Coeli Sam. l. 15. de Jud. l. 29. Codesh that the civil Officers had restor'd to Communion several whom the Primates of their Law had cast out without the consent of those Primates the power seems to belong chiefly to these and they too derived their Jurisdiction not from the Synagogues but from the Patriarchs by whom they were appointed And this Invasion of the Imperial Officers is represented not as an injury to the Vestries of Village or City Synagogues but only to these Primates whose office was of greater compass than the inspection of a single Synagogue as appears from the last of those Laws cited in the margin where we are informed that upon extinction of the Patriarchs these Primates succeeded to all their power But while I was thinking of the learned men who treat of this matter I had almost forgot our Author who tells (z) Prim. ep p. 48. us That something will appear from the seats of their Consistories Let us therefore attend In Cities of less than sixscore Families they plac'd their Consistories of three In Cities of more than a hundred and twenty Families the Courts of twenty three Maimon in Sanedr c. 1. Sect. 5. Seld. de Synedr l. 2. c. 5. And it is well known that many of our Country Towns with their Precincts have more than 120 Families and our lesser Villages are as great as the Cities in the lower account They must be very sore distress'd who repair to Rabbins for propriety of expression or evidence of Antiquity In Maimonides his language it seems a place that had not 120 Families was a City And what if it had but three It was sufficient to furnish a Triumviral Consistory and therefore may pass for a Rabbinical City But Cunaeus (a) Cun. de R. P. Hebr. l. 1. c. 13. Ego vero Aristoteli assentior ne quidem eam esse civitatem Civitas nomen amittit modus si defit who lov'd to
223. tells us that we ought to be cautious of charging one another with Schism for such things wherein the ancient Churches are like to be involved in the same Condemnation As tho ancient Churches had any thing parallel to the case of our Dissenters or indeed any other Church Sure I am that the instances alledged by Mr. Clerkson are very wide of it as I have shewed already For we charge no other Churches with Schism because they have not the same rites that we use nor do we so much as condemn the Dissenters upon that account But in this we charge them with Schism that they have departed from the Communion of our Church upon the account of rites and they indeed condemning us by their Separation upon that reason do truly involve the ancient Churches in the same condition To make the end answer the beginning Mr. Clerkson concludes with a manifest calumny Hereby says he (l) Prim. ep p. 226. it appears with what judgment and charity some among us will have none to be true Churches that want Diocesan Bishops they hereby blast all the Churches in the Apostles times and the best Ages after as no Churches Herein they are as wise and friendly as if one to secure the height of his own Turret should attempt to blow up all the Houses in the best part of the world nay they blow up their own too It is neither wise nor friendly to charge men with absurd opinions of which neither they nor perhaps any other were ever guilty What witness what evidence of this matter What Books or conversation ever betrayed so great a weakness I never yet heard of any man who made it essential to a Bishop to have many Congregations under them The Papists have several Bishops with a very small flock and such as one parish-Parish-Church may contain They have others who have not so much as one Congregation nor perhaps one Christian within their Diocese But we may guess at the men our Author intends they indeed distinguish with all the ancient Churches between a Bishop and a Presbyter But for the measure of Episcopal Churches They willingly subscribe to S. Jerom's (m) Ep. ad Evagr. judgment that the Bishop of Eugubium is no less a Bishop than he of Rome and the Bishop of Tanis is as much a Bishop as he of Alexandria since it is not the greatness of the City but the Ordination that makes a Bishop In the Primitive times and those next succeeding the extent of Dioceses were very different In Scythia (n) Soz. l. 7. c. 19. there was but one though many Cities and in some places there were Bishops in Villages Some Cities had very large Territories belonging to their Bishops others but small yet all this while these Bishops accounted themselves all of equal authority though their Dioceses might be very unequal and never broke Communion upon that account But if some Presbyters should attempt then to separate from their Bishops and to set up Altar against Altar they incurred the censure (o) Can. Ant. 5. of all Christian Churches and were shut out of Catholick Communion by universal consent As to matter of fact it is plain that in the Primitive times there were no Churches without Bishops such as were acknowledged different from Presbyters And Ignatius (p) Ign. Ep. ad Traâ— is bold to say that without a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons it cannot be called a Church But as for those who separate from their Bishops whose doctrin they acknowledge to be sound and set up Churches and make Ordinations in opposition to them and the whole establishment of a National or Provincial Church These I shall not scruple to Unchurch since in this I have not only the suffrage of antiquity but the consent of all Protestant Churches on my side In France while the Reformed Religion stood there if any departed from the established order of those Churches they were excommunicated and if they should attempt to set up separate Congregations they would have been accounted no Churches (q) Hist Eccles de Bez. T. 2. l. 6. How zealous they were of the Orders appointed in their Synods will sufficiently appear from the case of Morelli and the proceedings against him Nor is it otherwise in Holland or Germany or where-ever the Reformed Religion is received they unchurch all who upon such frivolous pretences as our Dissenters use against us would leave their Communion By this notion of Primitive Episcopacy Mr. Clerkson (r) Prim. Ep. p. 23â— thinks that some mistakes concerning Episcopal Ordinations of ill consequence may be rectified A Bishop in the best ages was no other than the Pastor of a single Church a Pastor of a single Congregation now is as truly a Bishop Why they should not be esteemed to be duly ordained who are set apart by a Pastor of a single Church now I can discern no reason after I have looked every way for it It is the hardest thing in the world for some men to see a reason that makes against them and the fear of finding it makes them commonly look where they are not likely to meet it However it does not seem to be so difficult a matter to assign a reason in the case proposed It is not the being Pastor of one or many Congregations that makes a Bishop but the Order For a Presbyter may be the Pastor of a Congregation and in the Primitive times there were many such but this does not make him a Bishop Nay the Chorepiscopi were Pastors of many Congregations and yet these were not Bishops If these in ancient times should have proceeded upon Mr. Clerkson's grounds and presumed to ordain Presbyters or Deacons or Bishops the Church of those times would have made no difficulty to pronounce the Ordinations null Ischyras pretended to be a Presbyter because Colluthus had ordained him but Athanasius represents it as monstrous that one should esteem himself a Presbyter who was ordained by one who died himself a Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria Nor was Ischyras so absurd as to think that the Ordination received from a simple Presbyter would be valid For in Truth that Colluthus was made a Bishop by Meletius and his name is still in the Catalogue of his Ordinations but renouncing his Schism and those Orders he was received into communion as Presbyter for so he was before he joyned with Meletius and in that degree he died Nor can I find in all Antiquity any one instance of Presbyters making Ordinations without a Bishop nay the Hereticks and Schismaticks of old among all their irregularities are not charged by any of this presumption In the Diocese of Alexandria there were many Presbyters who were the Pastors of single Congregations and so it was in most of the ancient Dioceses as we have shewed before In the Province of Scythia there must be yet a greater number of such Parish Pastors Yet none of these are found to have claimed any right to
manner to be dropped and all the difficulty now to remain concerning the bounds of the Bishops Territory and the numbers belonging to his Inspection yet in ancient times this made no difference For Sozomen (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 7. c. 19. observing the great inequality of ancient Dioceses and some other little usages in which the Churches of one Country differed from those of another commends the wisdom of ancient Bishops who looked upon it as a great piece of folly to divide communion about these matters The greatness or smallness of a Diocese making in their opinion no difference in the office The Synod assembled at Antioch in their Letter (b) Soz l. 3. c. 8. to Julius Bishop of Rome let him understand that they do not account themselves inferiour to him in authority though their Churches were not so great or populous as his but are far from disowning him to be of their Order because his Diocese did exceed theirs And Jerom (c) Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. declares himself freely upon this point that the greater or lesser compass of a Diocese made no alteration in the Episcopacy but the poor Bishop of Eugubium had the same authority and order with that of Rome Yet now it seems this difference is become fundamental And Mr. Clarkson contends that there is but one sort of Bishops to be endured such only who have the charge of no more than a single Congregation This we are told by him the Apostles intended this the first three or four Ages practised and within that space of time there was no other Episcopacy How well he hath performed this undertaking will appear from this Book in which I have been so far from dissembling or passing by any Testimony that might seem material that I am afraid to have incurred very just censure for being too minute and punctual in my answers beyond the merit of the Objections Yet for this I may be allowed to use the plea of Apuleius (d) Ne videar cuipiam si quid ex frivolis praeteriero id agnovisse potius quam contempsisse quod si forte inepta videbor oppido frivola velle defendere illis debet ea res vitio verti quibus turpe est etiam haec objectasse non mihi culpae dari cui honestum erit etiam haec diluisse Apul. Apol. on the like occasion that I have taken notice of many frivolous things least to some I might seem to decline them as unanswerable and not to omit them out of just contempt And if my answers to some mean and captious remarks may seem sometimes to tast of the futility of the Objections yet I hope this will be imputed to him who was not ashamed to offer such things in evidence and not to me who was concerned to disprove them Some may perhaps expect an Apology for delay that the Book came not out sooner But for this I am not solicitous for an excuse apprehending rather the contrary fault that it is come out too soon For I found in the Book I answer so many marks of haste and precipitation that I thought my self obliged to take warning though the design of that work seems to have taken up a great part of the Author's life In such variety of facts so remote and many of them so obscure there are too many things to be considered to admit of haste And after all the care and the leisure one can take it is neither easie nor usual in this kind of work to avoid oversights and omissions of some things very material The Author of the Preface may perhaps think himself neglected that he is not thought considerable enough to deserve an answer He promised himself it seems that the Epistle Recommendatory should find the same entertainment with the worthy Treatise of Mr. Clarkson But Diviners are sometimes disappointed For my part I am resolved to make a difference between the Book and the Recommendation And I hope Mr. Chauncey will see some reason why he should not take it ill I wish he had been able to have represented the references right But we must forgive where it is not to be had and I dare say the good man did his best But why should he be angry with Dr. Sherlock for defending Protestant Principles against the Papists upon the grounds of the Church of England Why did not he or some of his Brethren step out to vindicate Congregational Episcopacy against Father Ellis and his three Collegues who made but four Dioceses of this whole Kingdom For God's sake tell me who maintained Protestant Principles then upon the foundation of the Dissenters But the Serpent and the venomous Vermine are subtler than the other Beasts of the field for in hard weather they are not to be found on the face of the Earth but are crept into their holes but when a warmer season comes they crawl out to snap at the heels of those who had endured the severities of the winter If he expected the same Treatment with Mr. Clarkson he should have written intelligibly and writ sense But when he runs the Changes upon Jus Divinum Humanum and Apostolicum when he talks of Hermaphroditick Divinity of Office-Charge of Office Discrimination of Appendix-Courts and Vestments and Canons among the Heteroclites of his Divinity what can a man do but wonder and keep silence Believe me I would as soon dispute with a Paper-mill as undertake to answer a man of such amazing language But for the Heteroclites I may perhaps know what they may import it is when a thing changes its kind As for Example when a man leaves his shop and the business of his Calling to write Letters Recommendatory of what he does not understand Errata's which disturb the Sense PAge 18. Line 14. for Passover read Pentecost p. 31. l. 6. for disprove r. prove p. 37. l. 18. for future r. further p. 69. l. 6. for useful r. unfit p. 78. l. 20. for first r. fifth p. 98. l. 9. after Bishop of add the City p. 358. l. 27. for populously r. pompously p. 361. l. 16. after he does add not p. 406. l. 8. for Fermissus r. Telmissus A DEFENCE OF Diocesan Episcopacy c. IT is an easie matter for those who confine their Charity as they do their Primitive Episcopacy to a single Congregation to charge all who differ from them as Men wholly governed by Prejudice and Interest The fondness they have for their own Conceits renders them incapable of any Jealousie of their Truth or Evidence and if these Notions do not receive such Entertainment as the Indulgent Author is perswaded they deserve and Success do not answer (a) Mr. Clarkson's Primitive Episcopacy pag. 1. Opinion it must be ascrib'd to the unequal Encounter they had with Prejudice and Interest Things that do frequently baffle the best Evidence in Persons otherwise very discerning and judicious It is just indeed that they should bear the reproach of Insincerity
who refuse full or competent Evidence when the Proofs rise up to a Demonstration or are direct and suitable to the nature of the Matter But for Men to advance new Notions and Paradoxes concerning things at very great Distance of which the Proofs are obscure and the Evidence only conjectural and then to cry out upon those who are not convinc'd as Persons of no Faith or Equity argues a Confidence very unusual and rarely to be seen either in understanding or good Men. That for the space of the first three Centuries a Bishop was no more than a Pastor to a single Congregation is in the first place a Conclusion very new and never heard that I can learn before the last Age. The space of time intervening between the nearest point of the three Centuries assign'd and the Birth of this Notion wants little of Thirteen compleat Centuries and therefore the Evidence of a matter so remote ought to be positive and direct and it must be expected that some Ancient Witnesses who liv'd within the compass of that Term or in the next Age at least should be produced and have declared expresly that no Bishop had more than one single Congregation or that it was the Opinion of those Times that a Bishop ought to have no more If but one Author of Credit had left this Testimony the circumstantial Evidence might reasonably be admitted for Confirmation but when all the Proof of a Fact so distant consists only of Conjectures and Suspicions and unconcluding Circumstances I hope that in this time of Liberty an honest Man may refufe to believe so obscure and unnecessary Inferences without any Diminution of his Reputation It may be very true that some Villages had Bishops that several Cities were not greater than some of our Market-Towns that all the People may be said in an usual sense to be present at Church in the greatest Cities all this may be true and yet very far from proving the Point in Question The Conclusion Congregational Episcopacy may remain still at as great a distance from these Premises as the Primitive Times we speak of are from the present Age or as some gifted Mens Discourses are from the Text. When this fancy of Primitive Congregational Episcopacy came first into Mens heads the Diocesan way had been every where Establish'd and that we may not take this for a piece of Popery no Churches came nearer to the Congregational Standard than those that were under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome nor was it pretended that Diocesan Bishops were new they had an acknowledg'd Prescription of above twelve hundred years but the time of its rise was not so positively assign'd Cartwright pretended to trace some footsteps of the Congregational way in the two first Centuries but I do not find that he or the Dissenters of his Time had made the Conclusion so universal that no Bishop within that compass of Time had more than one Congregation Rome and Alexandria and the greatest Cities seem'd to stand out and remain'd Exceptions but now they too are taken in and reduc'd to the Congregational Model It is something hard to conceive how the Species of Church-Government should come to be chang'd and no Account of so important a Change be transmitted to Posterity Those who fancy Presbytery turn'd into Episcopacy in the former part of the second Century make some shew of Reply when they say that it is a very obscure Age and hath left little or nothing of its Story behind it But the Ages in which Primitive Episcopacy is pretended to have been transform'd into Diocesan were of another Character they abounded with Learning and Writers and a great many of their Books have been preserv'd but not the least hint of this Fundamental Alteration of Church-Government What! so just an Offence given by the Church and no Sectary no Schismatick to reproach her Those who were so minute and trifling in their Cavils could they overlook so obvious a Topick as this of Diocesan Innovation Nay these very Sects where their Numbers made them capable liv'd themselves under the Diocesan Way If then in times of so much Division Contention and Dispute such a change as this could be introduc'd without any Opposition and all Parties of different Opinions and Interest conform'd to it for my part I cannot see how it can be denied that it was done by Miracle For what greater Miracle can we well imagin than that so many sorts of Christians divided by Principles and mutual Aversions should conspire to receive this pretended alteration of Episcopacy So that those who deny it to be Primitive must allow it a higher Title since Miracle carries with it much greater Authority than Prescription Mr. Clerkson therefore had great reason to aprehend that it would appear a great Paradox to hear that a Bishop of Old was but the Pastor of a single Church or that his Diocese was no larger than one Communion Table might serve It does indeed seem very strange not only to those who take the Measures of Ancient times and things by their own or are much concern'd they should not be otherwise than they are now but most of all to those who have competent knowledg of those Times and who are qualify'd to make some Judgment of the State of the Primitive Church from the Testimonies of Ecclesiastical Writers It is a great weakness to take the measures of Ancient times by our own (a) P. 116. but I know none more unfortunate in this way of reckoning than the Author himself who measures the Ancient Territories of Greek and Roman Cities by Liberties that belong to Ours and demands with more Zeal than Knowledg How many Cities in the Roman Empire can be shâ—wn us where this Jurisdiction of the City Magistrates reach'd farther than it doth in our English Cities Vrbem quam dicunt Romam Melibaee puâ—avi Stultus Ego huic nostrae similem But of this in its proper place How great Advantages may be expected from a clear discovery of what the Author thinks to be true in this particular I cannot readily discern having not the assistance of his Prospective to discover things at so vast a distance much less can I see that it may contribute much to the deciding of the Controversies among us about Church-Government and bringing them to a happy Composure Now to deal liberally with this Notion of Primitive Episcopacy let us yield up the point at once and grant that no Bishop for the three first Centuries had more than one Congregation But at the same time let us take the Reason along with us that for so long time no City had more Christians then might meet in one Church no Bishop then could have more Congregations then all the Christians of his City and Territory did compose But the Controversies about Church-Government are still undecided for this does not preclude the Bishops from a right of having many Congregations under their inspections if more had been
our Saviour not to depart from Jerusalem in twelve years we must conclude the numbers of Proselytes must needs surpass the measure of a Congregation if the success of following years did in any proportion answer this beginning All the endeavours therefore of deduction from the numbers of Converts expressed by St. Luke can have no place in the Church of Jerusalem For 1. All that were converted on Pentecost are said to continue in the Apostles (a) Acts 2. Fellowship and breaking of Bread and in Prayer i. e. to stay with them in Jerusalem So that though they were not dwellers before upon this occasion they became such 2. The five thousand added to these according to the circumstances of the Story and the exposition of all the ancient Writers will afford no occasion for any deduction 3. The increase of which the numbers are not express'd may reasonably be presum'd no way inferior to the other where the number is set down but if we observe the Expressions seem to surpass them For when five thousand were converted it is said that many of those who heard the Word believed If the number had not follow'd this would have pass'd for a little matter with our Author but in other places it is said that great multitudes both of Men and Women a great number of Priests c. 4. While the Apostles continued in Jerusalem we have reason to believe the Church was still increasing and the People being generally of their side upon the account of the Miracles they wrought so as to give a check to the Rulers and to restrain them from persecuting the Apostles it cannot be well doubted but the Apostles improv'd this good disposition to a perfect conversion 5. Besides the preaching of the Apostles the influence of the Converts who were generally men upon their Families could not fail of having great effect and of making no small addition to the sum of Believers The Authority the Masters of families had over them among the Jews being very great and the submission of Wives and Children to them being in that Nation very implicit (a) Letter 17. from Baghdad It being the receiv'd custom of the East as De la Valle observ'd that the Women and Children should accomodate themselves to the Father of the family in matters of Religion though the Women had before they married been bred up in other Rules 6. That the Multitude converted could have no convenience in Jerusalem of meeting in one Assembly The Apostles went from House to House 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in several Houses there were several religious Assemblies and so consequently several Congregations so that the Multitude though it might in a very great Theater or Temple have come together yet for want of such accommodation began in the Diocesan way and dispersed into several Assemblies which still made up but one Church (b) Prim. Ep. p. 6. It is confessed says Mr. Clerkson that in those times and after there was more than one Bishop in a City and if the Christians in any City were but few and those divided betwixt several Bishops how small a Diocese would the share of each make up For this he cites Dr. Hammond on the Rev. c. 11. p. 662. It is true indeed D. H. was of opinion that the Believers of the Circumcision did for some time keep at some distance from the Gentile Converts and had their Assemblies and Officers apart and that the Apostles having no other remedy were obliged to manage the matter so tenderly as to connive for some time at this separation But this can by no means concern the case of the Church of Jerusalem within the time of her increase before the death of St. Stephen and the conversion of St. Paul for as yet no Gentile had been baptized Cornelius being the first and that some time after these many thousands had been converted in Jerusalem Besides were this allow'd that the Jews and Gentiles in each City had a distinct Bishop yet that makes nothing for the Congregational way for this happened upon another Account And after the ruin of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Jewish Commonwealth the Jews came to an accommodation and joyned with the Gentiles under the same Officers before the second Century and therefore can be of no consequence to the point in hand And if those Dioceses were small it was in order to greater increase that the Jews might be for a little while indulg'd and then united with the Gentiles in one Church But after all this matter of separate Churches is no more than the conjecture of some learned men and our Author himself is willing to dismiss it by saying (a) P. 7. That there is no need of this acknowledgment nor will he insist on the grounds on which he proceeds Nor is there any reason he should if he can make out what he affirms in the same place that there is evidence enough in Scripture for a plurality of Bishops in several Cities which may be easily vindicated from the attempts of some that would deface it His first instance is Phil. 1.1 To all the Saints that are at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons That these were Bishops of the Province as Dr. Hammond contends and not of the City of Philippi our Author will by no means allow nor will I be very importunate with him that he should But one thing I would learn of him what sort of Bishops he takes these to be For if in his opinion they are no other than Presbyters then this place is impertinently alledg'd since many Presbyters are by all sides acknowledg'd to have belong'd to one Church But if he speak of Bishops in the common Ecclesiastical sence and then concludes from this passage that there were many in the Church of Philippi his opinion is as singular as that of the Doctor he endeavours to refute For my part I must profess that I am not much concern'd in this Dispute between our Author and Dr. Hammond about these Bishops I could never find sufficient reason to believe them any other than Presbyters as the generality of Fathers and of the Writers of our own Church have done And tho' I have great reverence for the name and memory of Dr. Hammond yet where he is alone I may without any imputation of disrespect take the common liberty of leaving his opinion to stand or fall according to the strength of the Arguments upon which it is founded Yet there are some things in our Authors reply which may be taken notice of Dr. Hammond (a) 16 12. from a passage in the Acts where Philippi is said to be the first City of Macedonia and a Colony infers that it was a Metropolis To which our Author answers that it is first in Situation (b) P. 8. and not in dignity and preheminence This conjecture of Camerarius and Zanchius may after all be more ingenious than solid For Bezas M S. has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the head or chief not the first in Situation and the Syriack and Arabick Versions follo wit Now the most ancient Copy as it is suppos'd of the New Testament now extant confirm'd by two old Versions may weigh as much as a late conjecture Besides Philippi was not the first in Situation as is pretended but Neapolis And it would be something strange if Dover be indeed the first Town of England that he who pass'd that way should call Canterbury the first It might not be very considerable when Macedon was reduc'd by Paulus Aemilius but it might be the chief Town of that part of the Country when St. Luke wrote (c) Brev. c. 5 Liberatus mentions the Arch-Bishop of Philippi and in the Council of Ephesus the Bishop subscribes among the Metropolitans tho' it be express'd that he had the Proxy of the Bishop of Thessalonica In an old Notitia he is Metropolitan of the Province of Macedon And so Sedulius styles him and Tertullian (a) de Praescrip names it before Thessalonica Nor will I contend with our Author about the other Argument of Dr. Hammond which he rejects that Philippi was a Metropolis because it was a Colonie It does not indeed necessarily follow but yet Roman Colonies were generally placed in the principal Cities of Provinces and endow'd with the chief Dignities and Jurisdictions in the Countries where they were So Carthage Corinth Caesarea and many others might be nam'd But if it was the Head of that part of the Country and a Colony as Beza's old Copy has it this Dispute is over and nothing I am sure Mr. Clerkson has produc'd does make out that it was not a Metropolis when St. Paul was there Now this Debate concerning the Bishops of Philippi had soon been at an end if our Author had thought fit to explain himself and told us what he meant by Bishops For were they Pastors of single elect Congregations respectively in covenant Then there must have been several Churches or Congregations in that one City But on other occasions he will not allow more than one Congregation for three hundred years after Christ even in Rome it self But if we allow such an obscure place as Philippi to have many Churches so early we cannot avoid yielding to Alexandria and Antioch and other great Cities many more and what will prove worse than all those Churches must be acknowledg'd to be all under one Bishop Or were these Bishops only Presbyters ruling the Church of Philippi with common and equal Authority Then our Author must give up the Question and instead of making many Bishops must own that there was none at all there but only Presbyters Will he contend that there were no other Bishops than Presbyters This will be to abuse his Reader with the ambiguity of a word which he takes in one sense and the Church in another That many Presbyters might belong to one Congregation none ever deny'd that many Bishops in the allow'd and ecclesiastical sense of the word had the oversight of one City sounds strange and incredible to the ancient Christians Chrysostom observing this expression of the Bishops of Philippi seems to be startled with it What many Bishops in one City By no means it cannot be What then They were not Bishops properly so call'd but Presbyters The same poor Sophistry is carry'd on (a) Prim. Ep. p. 10. under the colour of another Text. (b) Acts 20.17 St. Paul from Miletus sent to Ephesus and call'd the Elders of the Church who are say'd v. 28. to be made Bishops by the Holy Ghost Now these Elders or Bishops belong'd to the city-City-Church of Ephesus as our Author contends and not to the Province and therefore there were several Bishops in the same City But if we demand here again what Bishops are here meant whether these were Bishops in the sense of the present question or Presbyters only The objection vanishes and leaves the Reader to wonder that any man should so solemnly undertake to prove what no man ever doubted that in Scripture-times there were many Presbyters over one Church But Dr. Hammond will have these Bishops to be Suffragans of Ephesus And Mr. Clerkson with all his force does endeavour to disprove them to have been City Bishops Now in the midst of this contention we may be very safe from the danger of Congregational Episcopacy For if Dr. Hammond's way prevail these Bishops must have each a City and Territory and be Diocesans either actually or in right If Mr. Clerkson carries it then properly speaking there might not be a Bishop among them all for they are but Presbyters belonging not to several Independent Congregations but to one Church and might have a Bishop to whom they were subject as the Ancients believ'd they had and thought Timothy to be the Person And here he musters up great forces against Dr. Hammond's opinion and affirms (a) Pr. Ep. p. 10 11. that the Text it self the Syriack Version Chrysostom Theophilact Oecumenius and Theodoret and the whole stream of Ancients are against this new sense not any favoring it but one among them all But what sense are these Ancients for that there were many Bishops of one city-City-Church Nothing less for they all declare the contrary and that these were no other than Presbyters But there hapned to be one for the Doctors new sense our Author does not name him it was Irenaeus and it seems something incongruous to call that sense new which is vouch'd by so ancient Authority For this Father is judg'd by (a) Diss 3. in Iraen Mr. Dodwel to be born in the later end of the first Century or the very beginning of the second He convers'd with Polycarp as himself declares whose Martyrdom according to the computation of Bishop (b) Diss Post 2. c. 14. et seq Pearson could not be later than the year 147. And therefore must have liv'd forty years of the first Century He was Bishop of Smyrna which was under the Jurisdiction of Ephesus and might understand from the Tradition of the place more of St. Paul's visitation than is recorded by St. Luke and so be more particular in noting the quality of the Persons that the Apostle call'd to him to Miletus and express'd himself therefore in that manner c having call'd together the Bishops and Presbyters of Ephesus and the other Neighbouring Cities Now if Authority go by weight and not by number Dr. Hammond's case will not appear so desperate for though many names are produced against him yet several of them are very light For Oecumenius and Theophilact may be discounted as Transcribers of Chrysostom who with Theodoret will scarce weigh down the credit of Irenaeus in a case of this nature for they speak only by conjecture whereas he might have nearer notices from Tradition Howe'er it were yet our Author should have call'd this sense any thing rather than new since it is
this diffidence and caution does that Learn'd Man propose his Opinion which together with the testimonies upon which it is grounded (a) Vindic. of the Prim. Ch. p. 34. and Seq has been considered at large in another place and I am not willing here to transcribe Yet that I may not seem to decline an Answer in this place I will give the sum of what is there answer'd and add something for future explication First then Altar in the primitive sense signify'd not only the Communion Table but the whole place where the Chair of the Bishop and the Seats of the Presbyters were plac'd and in this sense there was but one Altar in one Diocese as there is now but one Consistory This is explain'd by passages out of Ignatius Cyprian and Arch-Bishop Vsher and to be within the Altar which is Ignatius his phrase is no other than to be in Communion with the Bishop and his Clergy And the one Altar is no more than one Communion which may be held in different places and at several Tables Besides some passages cited out of Ignatius about one Altar are only allusive to the Jewish Temple and Altar and therefore are not to be urg'd too strictly Lastly the name of Altar might be appropriated to that of the Bishop's Church upon another account and that is in respect of the oblations of the Faithful which were presented there only and from thence distribution was made according to the occasions of the Church Among other oblations was the Bread and the Wine which were to serve for the Sacrament these were always bless'd at the Bishops Altar though not always consecrated there Concerning these oblations preparatory to the Sacrament Mr. Mede has given a judicious account in his Treatise of the Sacrifice where he shews these Offerings were in the nature of a Sacrifice and upon the account of these gifts the Table might receive its name of Altar For as the Jews had but one Altar on which their Sacrifices were offer'd and sanctify'd yet were they eaten at several Tables so the Bishops Altar might serve to the same purpose at least within the same City to receive those Oblations which were to be communicated in different places This was the practice of Rome in Pope Innocent (a) Innoc. Ep. ad Decent the first his time who sent the Bread allready consecrated to all the Churches of the City but did not send any to such Presbyters as were plac'd in remote Cemiteries since they might consecrate themselvs and as for Country Parishes he did not think it convenient the Holy Consecrated Bread should be sent to them for it was not fit it should be carry'd to places remote So all though not present in the same place did yet partake of one Altar and eat of the same Spiritual Bread And to this purpose perhaps may most commodiously be understood that noted passage of Justin Martyr concerning the administration of the Eucharist in Christian Assemblies where he says that the Deacons distribute it to all that are present and carry it to those who are not present For to all who were not present as they were dispers'd in their several dwellings it could not conveniently be carry'd by the Deacons besides that in numerous Congregations it was not easy to know who was not present Nor is Valesius (a) Annot. in Euseb l. 5. c. 24. his conjecture very probable who would send it to persons of other Dioceses So that it seems most probable that it was carry'd from the Bishop's Church to other Assemblies in the same City Nor will this look strange for those times that the Holy Bread should be sent from the Bishops Altar to other Churches of the same City when it was usual to send it into remote Countries and Dioceses as a symbol of Communion The old Bishops of Rome before (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 5. c 24. Victor's time us'd to send such presents and (c) Act. Lucian ap Metaph. 7. Jan. Lucian the Martyr sent them from his Prison So Paulinus (d) Paul Ep. 1. did to Severus This practice was forbid by the Synod (e) Can. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Ladicea that the holy Mysteries should not be sent abroad into other Dioceses which Zonaras observes to have been a very ancient custom And this forbidding it to be carry'd into other Dioceses seems to allow its being carry'd from the Bishop's Church to other places of the same Diocese After Mr. Mede (a) Prim. Ep. p. 16. Dr. Hammond is brought in a witness of this notion of one Altar (b) In re incomperta non est audacter nimis pronunciandum Ham. Diss 3. c. 8. s. 15. He mentions it indeed as the opinion of some learned Men but he himself makes no judgment concerning it leaving the matter as uncertain and declining to pronounce any thing in a point so obscure Bishop Taylor (c) Episc Assert is likewise forc'd to appear in this cause meerly because he cited Damasus in the life of Pope Marcellus who is said to have made twenty five Titles as so many Dioceses for Baptism and Penance From whence the Bishop is said (d) Prim. ep p. 16. to infer that there was yet no preaching in Parishes and but one pulpit in a Diocese And further Damasus and the Doctor out of him leaves us evidently to conclude that there was no Communion Table but in the mother Church And this three hundred and five years after Christ and at Rome too It is not very advisable to conclude any thing too hastily upon the authority of this pretended Damasus it costs such counterfeits nothing to build twenty Churches in a day and to consign them to what use they please But this Impostor as he had little wit so in this instance his luck was very bad to make so many Converts and to erect so many Titles in the year three hundred and five when the Roman Emperors were persecuting the Christians to utter extirpation and when there was not a Church or Title standing in Rome This was the third year of the Persecution according to (a) Baluz Chron. Mart. ex Lact. Dodw. Di. 8. Cypr. XI Lactantius or the second according to Eusebius and therefore a sorry time for Converts and making of Titles and Baptistries So that the relation being fabulous and forg'd by one who had no knowledg of those times the inferences made from it must drop It was surely not very well contriv'd to multiply Churches for Baptism and to leave but one Communion Table for all the Christians of Rome For one Baptistry may serve the greatest City because men are baptiz'd but once and that not all together but at several times and in ancient times no City had more unless where the magnificence of Emperors or Bishops made as it were many Cathedrals And at this time in the City of Florence (b) Pflaumern Merc. Ital. Lasselina reckon'd among
Churches of that (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 27. Socr. l. 4. 1. City So Socrates speaks of Alexander who was Bishop there in Constantin's time so Macedonius is said to possess himself of the Churches of that City Instances of this kind there are without number but I will conclude with (e) Greg. Naz. orat coram 150. Ep. in fine Gregory Nazianzen's Apostrophe to the Churches of Constantinople when he took his leave of them Farewel Resurrection thou auspicious name for thou hast rais'd up my speech when it was yet contemn'd thou happy field of common victory in which I first pitch'd my Tent. And thou that great and celebrated Temple now become a new accession to the faith and made greater by the doctrin preach'd in thee than by the vastness of thy pile which from a profane Jebus I have consecrated into a Jerusalem And all ye other Churches which after this adorn every part of this City by your several beauties and tye them together like so many bands each taking to its own proper resort that which is next to it You whom not I but the grace of God working by my weakness has fill'd beyond what could be hop'd Farewel you Apostles fair habitation masters of my labours although I have not often preach'd within your Walls This passage is too bright to need a comment and those who cannot discern the Parish-Churches of C. P. by these Expressions will scarce know a Church when they see it Carthage is known to have had a great number of Churches about the time of (a) Unreason of Separ p. 249. Epiphanius for we have several of their names in the titles of (b) Aug. Serm. 359. Ed. Ben. Praef. ad Hilar. fragm p. 49. Aug. Serm. 156. Serm. 26. vid. not Bened. in Ser. 156. Serm. 53. St. Augustin's Sermons And to those observ'd already by a learned hand we may add the Church call'd Florentia which Nicolaus Faber places in Carthage though the Benedictins seem to make some doubt of it There was Basilica Gratiani and Theodosiana and Honoriana and Tricillarum and many more doubtless of which there is no mention The Christians of Antioch were much to blame if they had not many Parish-Churches before Epiphanius his time for surely their numbers did require them For Julian the Apostate who was not forward to magnifie the strength of the Christians reproaches them for being in a manner all of them so (a) Julian in Misapogon Many of you I had almost said all the Senate the rich the people for the greater part or rather all together have chosen Atheism that is Christianity And that they had many Churches in Constantius his time appears by the discourse that happen'd between that Emperor and Athanasius in Antioch The Emperor desired of that Bishop that now upon his restauration he would allow one of those many Churches he had in Alexandria to such as were of the Arian perswasion (b) Soz. l. 3. c. 20. The Bishop reply'd That he was very ready to comply with his request provided the Orthodox might have the same favour in Antioch to have one Church of the many which are said to be there in the same place And (c) Socr. l. 3. c. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euzoius the Arian is said to be master of the Churches of Antioch while Paulinus had but one of the least within the Town And at the same time when (d) Theodor. Hist Relig. in Aphrate Meletius was driven out it is said that all the Clergy were likewise turn'd out of the sacred Temples and out of every Church And to come to Cities of a lower rank (e) Soz. l. 6. c. 8. Cyzicus had many Churches in Epiphanius's days and so had (f) Soz. l. 6. c. 18. Edessa so had (g) Soz. l. 5. c. 4. Caesarea in Cappadocia and many more especially such great Cities as are taken notice of for being altogether Christians of which I shall have occasion to speak in another place when I come to consider the evidence of our Author for the paucity of Believers even in the greatest Cities of the Empire In the mean while I hope I have sufficiently cleared this point that it could be no singularity in Alexandria in the time of Epiphanius to have many Parish-Churches (a) Prim. Ep. p. 17. The last Testimony our Author produces on this head is from (b) p. 27. Dr. Stillingfleet now Bishop of Worcester's Sermon against Separation Although when the Churches increased occasional meetings were frequent in several places yet still there was but one Church and one Altar and one Baptistry and one Bishop with many Presbyters assisting him All this may very well be and Diocesan Episcopacy remain primitive for one Bishop's Church may have several dependent Congregations one Altar may consist with many subordinate Communion Tables one Baptistry may serve the greatest City and one Bishop may supervise several Parishes and the occasional meetings spoken of might not be destitute of the priviledge of the Sacrament But I must remember my measure and not take upon me to explain the notion of so learned a person who might have many things in his view which I may not have observ'd Yet I cannot but take notice that the Champions of the Congregational way must needs be distressed when they betake themselves to that Sermon to make out the antiquity of their notion where it is exploded (a) p. 28. as a novel and late fancy that hath not age enough to plead prescription And the same learned (b) Unreas of Separ from p. 228 to p. 262. Prelate has made it sufficiently appear that even in Africk which was fancy'd to come nearest to the Congregational standard several Bishops had in ancient times and immemorially very large Dioceses In conclusion our Author comes to sum up his evidence and to assure his performance (c) Prim. Ep. p. 17. That this is not barely delivered by persons of excellent learning and intimate acquaintance with antiquity but prov'd by those records which are most venerable in their account and the evidence reaches not only the Apostles times but divers ages after What has been deliver'd or prov'd by the witnesses produced by him in this Chapter has been fairly laid down and considered and I desire that all may be judg'd by the merit and pertinence of the evidence and not by the confidence of the Advocate CHAP. II. SECT II. IT has pleas'd Mr. Clerkson to fancy that those who maintain Diocesan Episcopacy would be very much distress'd if he could prove that of old several Bishops had their seats in Villages and therefore observes (a) Prim. Ep. p. 19. That those who are concern'd to extend the ancient Bishops to the modern pitch will not endure to hear nor would they have any believe that it was usual of old to have Bishops in Villages And that
these therefore (b) D. D. l. 2. c. 7. Tayl. op Assert p. 304. tell their opponents That the most learned of them have not been able with great labour and hard study to produce above five instances thereof And yet more have been and may be produc'd for Bishops in Villages than some are willing to take notice of Altho' I profess my self concern'd for Diocesan Episcopacy because I believe it to be Apostolical and Primitive yet I do not find in my self any aversion to these instances of Village-Bishops nor can I find that they ever had any quarrel with or were irreconcilable to Diocesans Before the Conquest this Country (c) Malms l. 3. vil 1. had several Bishops seated in Villages who were afterwards translated to Cities but they were no less Diocesans before than after their translations And at this time in Wales there are four Bishops who are content with Villages for their Sees and yet have large Dioceses to govern Of old the Chorepiscopi who seem to have been rather Presbyters than Bishops had their residence in Villages but each of them had many Villages under his visitation What hurt then can these instances of Bishops in Villages do to the Diocesan way Or why are they represented so formidable to Episcopal Writers that they will not endure to hear of them Had every Village that might furnish a Congregation a Bishop residing it it Or those Bishops who were Seated in Villages were they only Parish-Pastors and confin'd within the bounds of their respective Villages If our Author had prov'd this there had been some ground to set Village-Bishops against Diocesan but since he has not thought fit to do this I may take leave to say that he has left his Argument imperfect and far short of the purpose for which it is produced To make this general Answer yet more plain let us suppose the bounds of our English Dioceses to become as much unknown to after-ages as those of the old Egyptian or Syrian Dioceses are now to us and that the Books of Mr. Baxter Mr. Clerkson and others against Diocesan Bishops in this Country should be lost for the Genius does not promise immortality Under this suppos'd ignorance of the present distribution of our Bishopricks if a dabler in antiquity finding that St. Davids Landaf and St. Asaph had been Bishops seats some ages before and that in elder times Dorchester and Selsea and Kirton and Elmham and Hexham and some other Villages in England had been honoured with Episcopal Chairs should upon this discovery entertain a conceit that our Episcopacy was parochial and that a Bishop in our time and many ages before us was no more than a Parish-Minister and write a Book to maintain this vainfancy Such an undertaking and such a work would be the exact copy of this Chapter of Village-Bishops It may perhaps seem a needless labour to examine the instances he has collected of Villages that were Episcopal seats since they reach not the point in question nor make the least colour of proof that the Bishops residing in Villages were but Pastors of a single Congregation But since he pleased himself so much with this performance that he seems to triumph and say That the instances of Bishops in Villages were more than some are willing to take notice of he has laid a sort of a necessity upon his Answerer not to pass them by lest his Disciples might mistake a just neglect of impertinence for a despair or diffidence of being able to reply I will therefore take notice of every instance he has produc'd upon this head tho' I may have just reason to apprehend the censure or contempt of my Readers for insisting so minutely upon the examination of things which to the first view sufficiently appear to be beside the purpose But I hope the defiance and importunity of my Adversary may excuse this digression tho' a matter of curiosity rather than of argument or of weight To begin then In the Diocese of Egypt we are told (d) Prim. Ep. p. 19. Hydrax and Palaebisca two Villages had their Bishops He should have said Bishop for they had but one as appears from the Epistle of Synesius (e) Synes Ep. 67. who had orders from the Bishop of Alexandria to ordein a Pastor for those Villages But from the account which was put into his hands by the people of that place we find that these †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes ep 67. Villages were far from being Primitive Bishopricks for at the time of which we are speaking which was about the year of Christ 400 thy had but one Bishop For by Apostolick authority as well as by the Law of the Country those Churches had ever belong'd to Erythros and were Parishes of that Diocese The people further declare That they were not divided from the Diocese of Erythros until the time of Valens the Emperor when all things were in confusion and that then one Syderius who came from Valens his Army was made Bishop there in a very unusual manner without the knowledg or approbation of the Bishop of Alexandria by the hands of one Bishop only i. e. Philo of Cyrene and all this done to engage the protection of Syderius who by the Commission he had from Court had it in his power to do much good or hurt to that Country (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 67. Before this they had no Bishop nor did any succeed him Wherefore they beseech Synesius in the most earnest and importunate manner in the world that he would not force them to chuse another but that they might be allow'd to continue in their former condition as Parishes and dependences (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes ibid. of Erythros for they had put themselves already under Paul the Bishop of that City and prayed they might not be made Orphans in their Father's life time nor be violently torn from their mother-mother-Church Especially since they had returned to their first estate by the approbation of Theophilus of Alexandria Judge then by this instance which was the Primitive Episcopacy of this place By Apostolick Authority and Prescription they were members of a Diocese and depended on a City but to have a Bishop of their own did in their opinion agree neither with the Apostles rule nor the usage of their Country It is pity some Independent had not liv'd in those days to have informed this people better concerning their Christian Priviledges and to let them know that every Parish not only might but ought to have a Bishop of their own Olbium (h) Prim. Ep. p. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep. 76. a Village in the same region had a Bishop After the death of Athamas Bishop there the election of a Bishop was needful and Antonius was chosen There is no mention either of this place or people any where else that I can find and from this (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
times even the Dioceses of that Country were large Besides the allowance of these erections was not from the fitness of the thing it self much less from any Apostolick rule but for reasons peculiar to that Country and those times For the Donatists had so distracted the Church of that Country that the Catholicks found themselves under a necessity of suffering many things though contrary to the old practice of that Church by way of temporary Oeconomy and Dispensation And the same Canon makes farther proof that even after these new Bishopricks permitted in Villages the old ones from which they were taken remain'd still Diocesan and therefore takes care that all the remaining Parishes or Dioceses for both words are used should belong to the first Bishop and that only (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that one district or Parish taken one of many should belong to the new Bishop (q) Prim. Ep. p. 33. For Europe and the more Eastern parts of it he gives some instances jumbled together as it were in haste and without marking the places where they are to be found But these are like the rest and if it were possible less to the purpose Melanicus is a Castle in Cedrenus but was no Bishoprick either in primitive or ancient times Tzulurum is a Castle in Zonaras but is not found to have had any Bishop before the seventh general Council or the second Nicene near eight hundred years after Christ Byzia and Macrontichos are likewise Castles in Aemylius Probus These instances are too early as the other are too late Alcibiades indeed is said by that Author in his Life to have built Castles in those places but that they ever after remain'd Castles or Villages no body has hitherto said But these places happen'd to become Cities without any notice given to our Author though he might have found it if he had consulted the book he sometimes quotes Biza is call'd a City of Thrace by Ptolomy (r) Ptol. l. 3. Stephanus (s) Steph. in Beza and Suidas and is joyn'd with Arcadiopolis in the subscriptions of the Council of Chalcedon those two Cities having immemorially belong'd to one Bishop according to the Testimony given by the Bishops of that Country in the first Ephesine Council And in the fifth general Council this place was a Metropolis So accurate is our Author in his account of his Episcopal Villages and Castles The other was a City before it could well have a Bishop For in Pliny's (t) Plin. l. 4. ◠11. time it was so accounted and called Bizantha Diabolis another of our Author's Castles in Nicephorus he says but tells us not which nor where for there are more writers than one of that name is to be found in no ancient Author and it therefore signifies little to the present purpose And if there were a hundred more Bishops in Castles in Europe there would be no danger to Diocesan Episcopacy nor can I think that any one of those Episcopal Forts could be brought to declare for the Congregational way It was well for the Bishops of some Countries that they had Castles in their Dioceses to retire to in the time of need And Gregory (u) Greg. Reg. l. 2. c. 12. the Great directs his Bishops to remove from their Cities into such places within their Dioceses as were fortified If they had been Bishops of single Parishes in Italy at that time this direction had not been very proper Alalcomenae no great Village of Baeotia in Pausanias is added to the Episcopal Villages yet I do not find any Bishop of it in ancient times although it be a City in Stephanus who follows perhaps some ancienter Author who speaks of it in its first and more flourishing estate And to conclude we have Cenchrea put upon us for a Bishop's seat out of Clemens (x) Clem. Const l. 7. c. 48. his Constitutions who speaking in the person of St. Paul pretends to have made Lucius Bishop of that place Such counterfeits as this when they once presume to personate the Apostles care not where nor whom they make Bishops But the world is now grown too wise to take Fable for History and Forgery for ancient Records Our Author y seems to be displeased with the Council of Sardica because it was the only Synod in Europe for 600 years after Christ that forbad the making of Bishops in small Towns and Villages Indeed there appears little reason from those parts in which the Synod was held given for such a prohibition For our Author could not find one Village-Bishop in those parts within the six hundred years he speaks of for his instances and his Authors are but late and improper vouchers of Antiquity Learned men are of opinion that the occasion of this Canon against making Bishops in Villages proceeded not from Europe but from Egyyt and that the Bishops had the case of Ischyras in their view when they made this order The Arians had begun a foul practice in Athanasius his Diocese taking away a part from it and erecting it into a new Bishoprick and perhaps this was not the only instance Wherefore the good Bishops in Sardica thought they had reason and authority sufficient to oppose such ill-intended Innovations that tended to overthrow all that had been setled of old time and to introduce endless confusion and dispute If our Author has a dislike to all things that tend to secure old Establishment he was in the true spirit of his party which is too active to endure any setled and perpetual order But our Author is half reconcil'd to this Synod and doubts whether this can be counted a Prohibition because in the (u) Prim. Ep. p. 34. Latin which is the Original the restraint is laid upon foreign Bishops that they shall not erect such Bishopricks in another Province Because our Author endeavours to raise a mist here about a very plain matter it may not be amiss to lay down the sum of that Canon (z) Can. Sard. 6. Gr. 5 6. Lat. and to rescue it from cavil The Bishops assembled at Sardica thought fit to order that if in a Province which had several Bishops there should happen to be left but one which cannot be supposed if such Bishops were but as Rectors of our Parishes and that sole remaining Bishop should refuse to ordain others such as the people should desire that then the people might apply themselves to the Bishops of the next Province And then it follows (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Licentia non est danda Vers Vet. that it shall be by no means lawful to ordain any Bishops in Villages or small Cities that the dignity of a Bishop may not grow contemptible from the meaness of the place Our Author then would have it that only Extra-provincial Bishops are concern'd in this prohibition But why is it because the dignity of a Bishop is less contemptible from a Village when strangers place him there then when those of
then but few Bishops because Christianity was not much advanced and their Churches were but few but the contrary is affirmed of this very time by Writers who lived then And Cyprian does expresly say (t) Jampridem per omnes Provincias per Urbes singulas ordinati sunt Episcopi Cypr. Ep. 55. that Bishops had long before this been setled in all the Provinces and in every City And how extraordinary this Synod must be esteemed at that time may be observed from another passage of the same Epistle where it is remark'd as no inconsiderable thing that sixteen or seventeen Bishops were present at the Consecration of Cornelius A poor business to be taken notice of if the Roman Province had then been so well stocked with Bishops as it is now And now we are taking our leave of Italy let us look back and from what has been observ'd make this General Conclusion that the number of Bishops has been increasing there in every age ever since the Primitive times excepting times of extraordinary desolation And what Vghellus observes of Clusium and some other Bishopricks is true of most of them that from one large Diocese it was crumbl'd into many small ones This City says he (u) Vghel Ital. Sal. T. 3. in old time was possessed of a very large Diocese which the Popes by degrees have dissipated and convey'd to other Cathedrals which they erected Nay some after the lopping off of several Branches still remain considerable as the same Author observes (x) Vghel Ital. 5. T. 1. of Asculum The Diocese that now remains though much diminish'd by the Erections of new Cathedrals is not very small for after all this it has retain'd 156 Parish Churches From Italy we are returning home by the way of Spain where notwithstanding the Inquisition and great Bishops who have very large Dioceses and take themselves under those Circumstances to be jure Divino as their Predecessors did at Trent our Author ventures to prosecute his design and makes enquiry after Village-Bishops (y) Prim. Ep. p. 37. In Spain the twelfth Council of Toledo (z) Anno 681. takes notice of one made a Bishop in Monasterio Villulae and another in Suburbio Toletano c. and of others in aliis vicis villulis It is true he adds that the Bishops there allow it not but order it otherwise for the future But for the satisfaction of the Reader it may not be amiss to add the Reasons of that Synod against this matter 1. (a) Res nobis novellae praesumptionis Usurpatione sese intulit pertractanda That it was an Innovation or a Novel Presumption 2. It was against the received Laws of the Church and Canonical Constitutions Canonica Constitutio id fieri omnimoda ratione refellit 3. That it was against Scripture and the order of St. Paul to Titus to make Bishops in Cities and then cites several Canons (b) Oportet in nullo Monasterio quemlibet Episcopum Cathedram collocare Conc. Carth. Frag. apd Mabillon Anal. p. 1. of Councils against it as that of Sardica and two African Canons and Concilium Tauritanum Title the second And in conclusion they null such Ordinations But what sort of Bishopricks they had anciently in Spain shall appear in due place To bring Episcopacy yet one step lower our Author (c) Prim. Ep. p. 38. finds Bishops not only in Villages but in Monasteries generally less then Villages and this he thinks will be a proof of the Question in hand What will these Bishops of Monasteries be proof of the Primitive way And are Monasteries of such Primitive foundation There could be surely no Bishop in the Monasteries before there were such places And we read not of any such till the fourth Century and of no Bishops in them till afterwards and those too as rare and extraordinary in ancient times as simplicity in Courts or sincerity and candor among Dissenters But let us consider what he brings (d) Prim. Ep. p. 38. Barses and Eulogius had (e) Soz. l. 6. c. 34 32. Ed. Val. a Monastery for their Diocese no City nor Territory and one Lazarus also If our Author had transcrib'd but two words more out of Sozomen he had spoiled all his his Argument But because nothing goes more against the Conscience of a Dissenter than Ingenuity out of tenderness to that Infirmity I will supply the omission Sozomen does indeed say (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that these were not made Bishops of any City but only for honour's sake and as it were by way of recompence for what they had done These then were Titular or Honorary Bishops according to this Historian and therefore of little use to prove what was the measure of Primitive Dioceses To these our Author says we may add those Monasticks which Epiphanius (g) Epiph. Expos Fid. p. 1095. speaks of one of them a Bishop in the Desart of Egypt the other in mount Sinai who having received Episcopal Consecration took upon them to do Episcopal Acts and to sit as Bishops He might if he had pleased have taken some notice that this reading is not only suspected but plainly faulty And Petavius has noted in the Margin that it should be read with a negative that these Monks having not received Ordination as Bishops did yet presume to act as such This is plain from what goes before for Epiphanius shewing the Extravagance of some Monks and men of severe lives says (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that one Zacchaeus being a Lay-man presumed to administer the Sacrament and then follow the two above-mentioned who took upon them the office of Bishops without being ordained For what extravagance or fault could it appear for persons who had been consecrated Bishops to administer the office committed to them But they are here censured (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as men who presum'd rashly and insolently to act as Bishops from I know not what dreams and as the sense must be without ordination I wonder our Author should think fit to dissemble this since it is more for the service of his party than any thing he has produced to have some ancient instance to countenance the practice of assuming the Pastoral office without Ordination The next instance (l) P. 38. of a Bishop of a Monastery is from the subscriptions of the Council of Chalcedon where we have Helpidius Bishop Thermensis Monasterij We own this Monastery to be a mistake not of our Author indeed but of the old Translator of those subscriptions who finding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek subscriptions render'd it Monastery whereas it signifies a Mansion or a Stage-Town in the publick Course or Post-road as we now speak In some Manuscripts we have both words Mansio and Monasterium some have Mansio only as that of Paris and Dijon which Baluzius (m) Baluz Nov. Coll. Conc. p. 1031. mentions and Berterius (n) Mansio Thermensis Berter Pithan
had met the like And the Theodosian Code makes frequent mention of these Mansions l. 21. de Decur Magistrates are appointed for those places out of the Cities in whose Territories they are Claudiopolis Tottas and Vordis are said to be Towns or Mansions in Bithynia l. 119. de Decur Cod. Theod. And this Thermae is mentioned in Antonin's Itinerary in the way from Tavia to Caesarea the first stage And one Elpidius a Bishop of this place subscribes the sixth General Council and calls it St. Agapius his Thermae in the second Galatia Of the same Creation is the Bishop of the Monastery of Studius which our Author (o) Prim. Ep. p. 39. produces out of Theodorus Lector after the decease of another who presided there For learned men have observed long ago that the word Bishop should be corrected and the word President put in its place And Valesius in his note upon that passage does agree to the amendment And that this may not seem to be done only from conjecture and the seeming necessity of sense Theophanes (p) Theoph. in Chron. p. 135. and Nicephorus (q) Niceph. H. E. l. 16. c. 25. do vouch it The same misfortune of faulty reading has made us Bishops of Monasteries here in England and it is upon no other ground that our Author (r) Prim. Ep. p. 39. is so positive that in Brittain there were commonly Bishops in Monasteries and such too as were in subjection to the Abbot of the Convent though a Presbyter as appears by the Synod of Hereford Vt Episcopi monachi non migrent c. Spelm. p. 153. Beda l. 4. c. 5. The word Episcopi in Mr. Wheelock's Edition of Bede is distinguished from the Text and the Saxon Version disowns it and Mr. Wheelock (s) Dele obsecro Episcopi pro Mss iâ—i lege ipsi in his Errata's takes care to advertise the Reader that this word must be corrected and ipsi put in its place For so he found it in all his Manuscripts that is ipsi This might be no news to our Author for my Lord Bishop of St. Asaph (t) Hist Account p. 68. had taken notice of it in his Historical account of the Church Government of Great Britain But Chifllet in his late (u) Anno 1681. Edition of Bede printed from an old Copy (x) Adorandum Antiquitatis optimaeque notae Codicem Chifl Praef. of S. Maximin's in Treves of reverend Antiquity has restored ipsi though he takes no notice of the Emendation It is possible that in this Book the word ipsi might be writ at length I have seen some Manuscript Copies that vouch this Emendation though the word be not written at length but with contraction Yet there is one very old Copy of the Cotton Library which has the word at length and without any abbreviation that puts an end to all further criticizing upon this passage Although I cannot but observe how unhappy our Author is in this particular who in confirmation of that multiplicity of Bishops which he vainly imagins was once in the Church of England hath chosen to instance in a time when there were indeed no more than seven Bishops in all the Saxon part of Britain In Spain it self says our Author (y) Prim. Ep. p. 39. Damium is an Episcopal seat Says Ortelius and it is a Monastery in Isidorus and Honorius Vnde Martinus Episcopus qui scripsit de quatuor Virtutibus cardinalibus oriundus It is true that St. Martin call'd the Apostle of Gallicia having converted Theodomir King of the Suevi or as others name him Chararacus from the Arian Heresie was made Bishop in that Monastery which he had built But that he had no other Diocese than his Monastry we have no reason to believe For in the Council (z) Aerae 607. A. Christi 569. Vid. Not. Gars Loyasae in Conc. Luc. apud Lucum Dumium is said to have Familia Regia belonging to it and in the distribution of Dioceses made by King Wamba the bounds of this Diocese are marked from Duma to Albia and from Rianteca to Adasa When this St. Martin was made Arch-bishop of Braga he ordain'd no other in Dumium but when he was dead to do honour to the Seat of so great a Man they might perhaps think for some time to appoint him a successor in Dumium as we find by the subscriptions of several Spanish Councils Yet even in the Gothick times this place was restor'd to Braga For in the 16th Council of Toledo Felix writes himself of Braccara and Dumium as Vasaeus (a) Vasaei Chron. c. 20. informs us from a M. S. copy of Canons in Rodericus Arch-bishop of Toledo Nay it may be question'd whether there ever was another Bishop of this Dumium after Martin For Luitprandus (b) Luitpr Advers informs us that there were two places of this name Episcopal Seats one in Asturia and the other in Gallicia which is the place of which we are speaking But to give this Instance a positive Answer A Monastery in the Suburbs of Braga made a Bishops seat about the middle of the sixth Century is no argument of Primitive Episcopacy but on the contrary this place had always till this time belong'd to the Bishop of a City 2. All this matter is extraordinary to do honour to a person who had so highly deserv'd of the Kingdom of Spain and therefore ought not to be drawn into a Precedent much less to prescribe what sort of places are to be made Bishops seats And after all it does not appear that there was not a Diocese of several Congregations belonging to it Those who are not acquainted with the state of the Ancient Church when they find instances of Bishops in Villages or in a Monastery may be apt to fancy That these might be the Remains of another sort of Episcopacy Therefore to prevent such mistakes I will briefly lay down the state of the Churches of Spain from which our Author has produc'd some instances from the oldest Records that remain of them In the Year 569. King Theadomir complains (c) Conc. Luc. Not. Garc. Loyasae that in the Province of Gallicia the Dioceses were so large that their Bishops were not able to visit them in a Year and therefore desires that they would take some order to remedy it Whereupon they erected several new Bishopricks and one new Metropolis yet all the Bishopricks of that great Province after this accession were but thirteen When the Bishops of all Spain met in the Synod of Valentia (d) Anno. 541. Luitpr Advers cum Episcopi totius Hispaniae convenissent they were in all but sixty four In the old Book of Sevil there are but 6 Arch-bishops and 67 Bishops in all the Kingdom of Spain In the old Book of Oviedo there are but 76 Bishops Under King Wamba (e) Anno. 666. according to the old Bood call'd Itacius of which Luitprandus makes frequent mention there
to some other Diocese it was not to be denied them Another time it is ordered that where a Diocese was divided between a Catholick Bishop and a Donatist and the later with his people returned to Catholick Communion (g) Aug. Gest cum Emer Cod. Afr. c 112. they might both be Bishops of that Diocese and upon the death of one the other was to succeed to the whole or if the people should be offended with this unusual sight of two Bishops in one Diocese then both should resign and the Diocese left to a new choice But after the Decree of Marcellinus and the confirmation of it by the Imperial Rescript the case was alter'd For then (h) Col. Carth. in fin Cod. Theod. l. 55. de Haeret. Anno 414. Cod. Afr. c. 12. Ed. Zon. 99. ap Bin. 102. Ed. Til. every Innovation of the Donatists was declared void and those Dioceses of theirs which had been branches of others and torn from them in the schism were now to revert to the first dependance The Donatists therefore are not to come into the number of the African Bishops by vertue of that Canon for at the end of the Canon it self the Imperial Law was afterwards added as an advertisement of its being repeal'd The Canon then was made before the Conference and consequently before the computation of S. Augustin But after the Conference and the Law the door was shut and the Donatist Bishopricks if they had been parts of others were restored to them and no provision made for the Bishops though they should happen to be converted After the time of S. Augustin we do not find the African Bishopricks much increased For within fifty years of the death of that Bishop we have an account (i) Not. Afr. apd Sirm. Miscel of all the Dioceses in that Country which amounted to 466. out of which must be deducted eight for Sardinia which did not belong to the Roman Africk But I am afraid the Proconsular Africk is imperfect in the Notitia if Victor Vitensis (l) Vict. Persec Vand. l. 1. his account may be taken or there be not some Error in the Copy But not to insist much upon small matters and uncertain let us calculate the Bishopricks of such Provinces of Africk of which we have a more distinct account In the two Mauritanias in the African Notitia we have 173 Bishopricks of which six were then void Now both these Provinces according to Pliny are 839 miles long and 480 broad The Country must surely be very ill peopled if every sorry Village had a Bishop nay if every Bishop had not 60 or 70 Villages in his Diocese Nay if we consider the extent of the whole Roman Africk we shall have little reason to conclude that Congregational Episcopacy should follow from the great number of Bishops in that Country Procopius (m) Proc. p. Vand. l. 1. who was acquainted with the Country having attended Bellisarius in his African Expedition tells us that the Roman Africk was ninety days Journey in length and that we might better understand his reckoning he tells us that a days Journey was 210 Stadia or 26 miles and a quarter which amounts to above 2360 miles The breadth was unequal in both the Mauritanias near five hundred miles in the Proconsular Africk two hundred This Province was so populous (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herodian l. 7. ss 9. and so fertile that Egypt cannot be thought to surpass it And for Bizacena the account Pliny (o) Iâ—in l. 5. c. 4. gives of its fertility is prodigious for the Husbandman there receiv'd a hundred-fold Now in this Country so vast and so populous let us take a low estimate of the number of Villages that might be there and reckon them at forty thousand and these divided into 500 Dioceses every Diocese will have fourscore Towns That this may not seem an extravagant Calculation let us compare it with other Countries France is not half so big as the Roman Africk and yet in Lewis 13 his time it had above two and thirty thousand Parishes as Bertius reckons And in Henry the third's time by a Tax laid on every Parish they were found (p) Bodin de Rep. to be near five and twenty thousand the Provinces of Burgundy and Poictou not reckoned which may make up the remainder Now it is well known that there as well as here there are many more Villages than Parishes and therefore I conceive I cannot over-reckon them when I set a Country for extent double to France and of which a great part was more populous at almost an equal number for Villages But suppose the number yet less by one half every Bishoprick will have forty Villages which is too much yet for the Congregational way especially since upon this reckoning Towns must be thin and at greater distance and so less fitted for personal Communion with their Bishop Nay though they had at last been reduced by the Iniquity of times and the Opposition of parties to the measure of our Parishes yet the condition of those Churches would move our pity rather than our desire of imitation and condition so different from all other Countries and so unlike that of Africk it self when Cyprian lived For all the African Bishops of his time could not have supplied the Dioceses of one Province at the time of which we are speaking But for all this when Mr. Baxter or Mr. Clerkson will have it so what is last must be primitive what sprung from the unfortunate divisions of one Country must be a Precedent to all And that must be received as Apostolick practice which was introduced by one of the most heady and desperate and Hypocritical Sects that ever divided the Church of Christ But I am afraid we may say with too much truth that our Country has out-done Africk in Monsters of this nature Yet after all this distraction there remain'd in Africk several large Dioceses which has been fully proved in other Books (q) Unreasonabl of Separ 249 250. and Sequ. Vindic. of Prim. Ch. p. 524 525. c. and needs not be repeated in this place though I shall not omit to take notice before I have done of those exceptions which Mr. Clerkson has made in another Book against the Evidence for Diocesan Episcopacy in Africk In the end of this Chapter our Author thinks fit to engage Bishop Taylor who answering an Objection concerning Asclepius (r) Gennad Catal. Script Bishop of a small Village in the Territory of Vaga or Baga shews that he was a Bishop of a Territory as well as of a Village and for this cites Trithemius (s) Trithem de Script Eccles I confess that the expression of Trithemius does not conclude either for the largeness or straitness of that Bishoprick which may be very large though the Episcopal seat be a Village or narrow though it have a City to give it denomination unless our Author thinks that because there were
Ordination The next exception against this Synod is (z) Prim. ep p. 62. that it was of little authority not admitted by the Greeks into their Code till the Trullan Council Nor by the Latins some ages after it was held c. Nor by the African Churches who rejected and would not be oblig'd by its Canons for Appeals to Rome How soon or late this Synod was generally receiv'd does little concern the Canon in dispute which does not establish any thing new but only affirms ancient Practice And if the matter of this Canon was generally observ'd where the Synod of Sardica was not yet owned it is plain that this matter depends upon better authority than the sanction of a Council immemorial Custom and the general agreement of Churches Without regard to this Canon the bounds of ancient Bishopricks were accounted sacred and not lightly to be changed Some Villages in Pentapolis accounted considerable enough to make a Diocese in troublesom times because they had immemorially been annex'd to the Episcopal City were judged by their poeple to have been settl'd in that condition by Apostolical Order and therefore the people of those places were earnest they should return again to their first dependance The Region Mareotes was large enough to make a good Diocese of it self yet when a Bishop was set up in one part of it Athanasius complains that it was done against ancient Tradition which in such cases as these was to take place Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria having made a Bishop in a mean place where there had been none before is blam'd as a violator of the establish'd Order of the Church So that if the Synod of Sardica was not received any where for many ages after it was held yet this Canon against making Bishops in small places where there had been none before was it seems generally approv'd at leastwise the matter of it was accounted equal and fit There are Orders of other Synods in the same age to the same effect and I do not know of any ancient Assembly or so much as a single Writer that ever made any exception against this Rule But on the contrary when Bishops were ordein'd in small places where there had been none before we find complaints against it as a violation of old establishment and even in Afric where such innovations grew frequent the complaints were loud on both sides In the Conference at Carthage the Donatists as well as Catholicks complaining of these violations of ancient limits (a) Prim. ep p. 62. Nor need I say that this Synod is misunderstood and that this restraint is laid on Bishops of another Province Our Author speaks reason for surely he needs not say what he had said already and to so little purpose nor need I repeat here what I have reply'd before But what he adds deserves consideration for the newness and singularity of the Argument It would be much says our Author for our satisfaction if we could understand punctually what numbers they thought sufficient for one Presbyter and we may have the best direction that can be expected in such a case from Chrysostom (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Or. in Ignat. who affirms that one hundred and fifty Souls was thought as much as one Pastor could well and more than he could without great labour discharge His words are It is a very laborious thing for one man to have the charge of a hundred and fifty How much this was to the satisfaction of Mr. Clerkson I will not enquire how little it is to the purpose will I hope sufficiently appear from what I am going to reply First then Chrysostom makes not the least mention of a Presbyter nor of the number sufficient for his cure but in general says It is a difficult thing for one man to take the care of a hundred and fifty only Whether one Presbyter or one Bishop or one Captain he does not say And this is clear that at the same time he makes such a little flock so formidable a charge he makes (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in Ign. T. 5. P. 501. the Apostles to commit a City of twenty myriads or two hundred thousand to the cure of Ignatius and therefore from thence gives an estimate of the person and of what talents he must be possessed to whom the Apostles would deliver so great a charge The design therefore of Chrysostom in that passage is to set out the character of Ignatius to advantage from the greatness of the City of which he was Bishop and to set off the City he compares it with the lowest or meanest Congregations but does not give the least intimation that no one Presbyter had greater or that a place of more inhabitants than a hundred and fifty requir'd the care of a Bishop If to commend the chief Magistrate of some very great City one should borrow this of Chrysostom and say that it is a difficult thing to govern a Family of twenty people or to keep good order in a Town of but two hundred inhabitants and therefore his endowments must be extraordinary into whose hands the government of so great a City is committed he would be thought a very strange Critick who from such a complement should remark that a Family ought to consist of no more than twenty or that a Constable ought not to undertake the keeping of the peace in a Village that has more than two hundred inhabitants and therefore where there is a greater number it requires a Mayor and Aldermen to undertake the charge Or if upon a Commemoration of some Bishop of London the Preacher should think fit to turn the greatness of the City into a Topic of that Bishops commendation and say that a cure of a hundred and fifty Souls is a great and difficult charge and great care to be us'd in providing even for such a place an able Pastor and therefore what wonderful abilities must he be thought master of who was judg'd capable of being the Pastor of so vast a City Would any man that is awake conclude from hence that there is never a Parish-Presbyter in England that had a greater cure So pertinent is that direction which our Author fancy'd to have found in Chrysostom for understanding punctually what numbers they anciently thought sufficient for one Presbyter To the same effect he proceeds to tell us (d) Prim. ep p. 63. that upon this account one Presbyter was not thought sufficient for a place that contain'd three or four hundred inhabitants For this we desire some proof but I am affraid we must expect long There is one thing more in our Authors remarks upon the Canon of Sardica that deserves to be taken notice of and that is that where one Presbyter is not sufficient there a Bishop ought to be ordein'd It is a rule he has made to himself by inverting the Canon of Sardica that forbids the making of a Bishop in a very little City where even
Carnalium multitudo August ep 29. Ed. Bened. had resolved to break that custom of Feasting in the Church on Ascension-day against the general inclination of his people it was objected that it was the practice of St. Peter's Church in Rome which he excuses from its distance from the Bishop As appears from one of his Epistles lately published by the French Benedictins To make proof of Diocesan Episcopacy in the first ages it is not requisite that all the World should be Christian nor that the greater part of every City where a Bishop was placed should consist of believers There were some Cities so populous that if but the twentieth part were Christians they must have divided into several Congregations and there were several others so great that a tenth part of them would have exceeded the measure of a Congregation And therefore where the proportion comes to rise nearer to an equality or to exceed it most Cities must have more than one assembly tho' they were confined to one Bishop Nor was the City all that appertained to the Bishops care but all the Christians of the territory were of his flock who were too numerous and too remote to come to the Bishop's Church upon all occasions of Religion Yet some Cities from the beginning others in the third and several in the middle of the fourth Century are known to have been entirely Christian Edessa (p) Holsten in Steph. was the metropolis of Osroena and the Seat of the Kings of that Country but is more renowned for being wholly Christian even from the beginning of Christianity and for this reason was avoyded by Julian in his Persian expedition Eusebius (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 6. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 2. c. 1. bears testimony of this place that from our Saviours time it had been altogether Christian and so continued to the age he wrote in And whether the story of Abgarus and the pretended Letter of our Saviour to him be true or false yet this is certain that this whole City was Christian very early and consequently had several Congregations and Churches under one Bishop as Sozomen (r) Soz. l. 6. c. 18. mentions it to have had Neocaesarea in Pontus was all Christian in the third Century And a little Town in Phrygia was destroyed upon that account in the beginning of the next In the reign of Julian Caesarea the greatest City in Cappadocia was entirely Christian and for that reason suffered not a little vexation from that Apostate who disfranchised it and confiscated all the goods belonging to the Churches of the City or Territory appertaining to it And this was an old grudg for he hated (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. l. 6. c. 4. this place mortally from the beginning as having long before destroyed the Heathen Temples Nisibis the noble bulwark of the Roman Empire a City so great and populous (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zoz l. 3. c. 33. that when Jovian had by a dishonourable Treaty with the Persians given it away the Citizens beseech him that they might defend themselves against all the power of Persia and they did not doubt but with their own force and at their own expence they might be able to preserve the the place (u) Ad defendendos penates se solos sufficere sine alimentis publicis milite ut experti sunt saepe Ammian Marc. l. 25. c. 9. as they had often done This City was altogether Christian and therefore Julian (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 5. c. 3. upon an irruption of the Persians threatned to leave them out of his law and protection and that he would never set his foot in such a profane place where his Gods were not worshipped And all other Cities that were generally Christian are said to have the same reception when they had any occasion to sue for favour Samosata (y) Samosata Civitas ampla illustris Ammian Marc. l. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joseph B. J. l. 7. c. 28. the greatest City and the Royal seat at Commagena was not only altogether Christian but all Orthodox and Catholick in Valens his time For (z) Theod. H. E. l. 4. c. 15. when Eusebius their Bishop was banished and one Eunomius an Arrian put in his place neither rich nor poor nor young nor old would go into his Church or have any communication with him Majuma the Port of Gaza was made a City by Constantine the Great and called Constantia because all (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 2. c. 5. the people turned Christians though before they were extreamly addicted to Idols And that we may not think this a mean place because it had always been dependant on a City the Church of that place is represented (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 5. c. 28. as very great from the multitude of people and wealth And that this place had several Churches and Altars belonging to it we are inform'd by one who was well acquainted with the place who tells (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 5. c. 3. us that when this Diocese was taken out of that of Gaza the bounds of their respective Territories were laid out and what Altars or Churches should belong to each Upon the same account of total conversion to Christianity in Constantine's time Constantina (d) Soz. l. 2. c. 5. in the same Country had its name and very many (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cities in the same manner of their own accord and without any compulsion from the Emperour left their Idols and became Christian pull'd down their Temples and built Churches In Antioch one of the greatest Cities of the world the generality of the people were Christians and for this we have a witness who cannot be suspected to magnifie their number it is Julian the Apostate (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Julian Misopog he had offended so many of that City he had almost said all the Senate the rich the common people and these were angry with him for the greatest part or rather all since they had chosen Atheism so the Apostate called the Christian Religion and all this because he adher'd to the the Gentile superstition And how universal the neglect of the Heathen rites was then in Antioch the same Author makes a sad complaint For when he had come upon the feast of Apollo to do sacrifice in Daphne the people of Antioch had provided no sacrifice for that occasion nor taken the least notice of the feasts and therefore chides (g) Id. Misopog with the Senat for putting such an affront upon their peculiar God And then bestows his raillery upon them as if they were grown so poor that they were not able to buy a sacrifice their wives having bestowed all upon the Galileans In short so small was the devotion of that great City towards their Patron Apollo that the
sometimes in his Sermons complains of the smallness of his auditory But this is not necessary For the language of a Preacher is not to be examined by the rules of an accountant nor when he exhorts every one to convert his man is he supposed to be telling of heads and comparing of parties But since the Jews would admit no publick exhortation then as they do endure in some places since for forms sake this zealour Preacher for the advancement of Christianity and the saving of Souls might direct his people as they have occasion to deal privately and apart with the Jews and to endeavour every one to gain his convert And this I have said to shew the inconclusiveness of Mr. Clerkson's arguments But in truth the whole is a down-right fraud For St. Chrysostom in the place cited directs not every Christian to convert his Jew but every zealous and faithful Christian to endeavour to reclaim or convert his brother and that whether Heathen or Jew or which he there chiefly intends negligent Christian A little before he had lamented the carelesness of Christian masters who permitted their wives or servants to frequent the Theaters or the Synagogues of the Jews when it was in their power to restrain them and by that influence which they had over them dispose them either to embrace the Christian Religion or more strictly live up to the rules of it if already embraced For this frequenting of the Jewish Synagogues in these persons arose not from the belief of the Jewish Religion but from the same vanity which induced them to frequent the Theaters that is the pleasure of seeing pompous and even theatrical ceremonies practised in them For so Chrysostom argueth with them Tell me what is it that you run to see in the Synagogue of the Jews To hear men sound with trumpets For it appears that the Jews retained that custom and strived to perform it with great art in their religious service which might draw great numbers of idle persons whether Christians or Heathens to hear them Such persons ought no more be supposed to have been Jews than all those to have been Papists whose vain curiosity tempted them to enter the Popish Chappels in the last reign As for the Jews dispersed over the Empire it does not appear they were in any City so numerous as to bear any near proportion to the inhabitants of the place Of old indeed in Alexandria and some Cities of Syria they were exceeding numerous But then they were original inhabitants of those places and not strangers But in the fourth Century of which we are now speaking tho' every where almost there were some yet were there not very many in any one place excepting their own Country We may judge by what we see now there is scarce any great Town of trade in Europe where there are not some Jews And in many Countries they may be said to be numerous but still they bear no proportion to the Natives And I do not know whether there be any City in Europe where they are so many in proportion to the other people as one to an hundred And this is so small a matter that it does not deserve any consideration It is as if in the computation of what water a river may discharge in a day a man should be scrupulous to make allowance for the drinking of a few Horses When he had brought Christians very low by great favour and partiality towards Heathens and Jews he thinks fit at last to divide this small party and with a true spirit of a Dissenter to draw away as many as he could from the Communion of the Bishop To this purpose therefore he tells (z) Prim. ep p. 81. us There remains another sort of people inhabitants of these Cities to be taken notice of whose numbers made the Christian assemblies thinner and the Bishops flocks less numerous Such as were called Hereticks or Sectaries these were many and had Bishops of their own So that there were several Bishopricks in one City There is scarce an age since the Apostles in which the Predictions of St. Peter and St. Paul that there would be Heresies were not sadly accomplished Yet it pleased the same providence that checks the increase of noxious and venemons Creatures to put likewise some stint to the growth and spreading of this evil and to lessen the mischief of these Wolves in sheeps cloathing by not permitting them to multiply into too great numbers So that St. Austin (a) Aug. de Util. Cred. even in the midst of Afric the most divided with Sects of any Christian Country in that age does not stick to affirm that the Catholick Christians were more than all the Sectaries put together And Sozomen (b) Sozom. l. 2. c. 32. observes that all other Hereticks but the Novatians from the very beginning were but few The Novatians therefore Mr. Clerkson chuses to insist on and from their number to let the Reader judge of the rest (c) Prim. ep p. 82. For by the multitude of them we may conjecture what all the rest put together would amount to Let us therefore try what deductions these may make from the Diocese of the Orthodox Bishop He tells us then that they were many from first to last And that they had a Diocese in Rome and Alexandria and Constantinople where it continued with publick liberty longer And to make short they had Bishops and Churches in many other places But to come near and to make some guess of their number he tells us at Constantinople their Churches were more confirmed and enlarged under one Chrysanthus their Bishop And in Rome Innocent took many Churches from them And Celestine deprived them of more And to conclude till that time they had mightily flourished at Rome having many Churches and great multitudes of People What had these Novatians then many Churches in one City I had almost been tempted to think by Mr. Clerkson's former discourse that one Church had been sufficient for all the Christians of the greatest City in the Empire and yet it seems one single Sect could not be content with one Church but they must have many under one Bishop Well then these were Dissenters and they may have what they please and yet we shall see in the next Chapter how hard he is towards Catholick Christians for these must be no more than may meet in one place even in Rome and Constantinople We expect no favour then but let us not be pressed to death while we are willing to plead There were he says in the fourth Century several Sects Of these the Novatians the most numerous These in Constantius his time had (d) Socr. l. 2. c. 38. three Churches in Constantinople under one Bishop The Catholick or established Christians before this time upon a very low computation were twenty times as many and these with all the Country Parishes of that Diocese had but one Bishop yet they are to have but one Church
and distinguish between the hypocrite and the sincere And Paulinus his case is very singular if his whole Church consisted of none but Penitents it must be thin indeed for these were scarce reckon'd within the Church So little to the purpose is this satisfactory instance and so far it is from proving that for which it was produced that the Bishop of Tyre had but so many under his charge as he could take personal notice of their souls (x) Prim. ep p. 85 16. Synnada is the next instance where our Author fancies that all the people were no more than one Church would contain which he thus endeavours to prove Agapitus the Macedonian Bishop on a sudden turns Orthodox and calling together the people under him perswades them to it This done with a great multitude (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 3. yea with all the people he hastens into the Church But with what people of the City Socrates says no such thing nor could they be aware of what was doing in the Macedonian meeting The people then that went with him were no other than those who were with him whom he perswaded to receive the true faith For as soon as he had done perswading them immediately he went out and it seems his perswasion was so effectual that a great multitude or rather the whole people went with him towards the Church This is what Socrates says and this is the most rational way of understanding him But tho' he should mean all the people of the Town or all the Christians yet he does not say that one Church could contain them but that this Bishop went with them towards the Church Whether they could all get in or joyn with him is still uncertain for any thing that Author says But the truth is though it should have been affirmed expresly of all the people of the City yet can it be understood no otherwise than such expressions generally are only for a great and unusual concourse And after all this Bishop was a Diocesan for he had many Churches belonging to him as is noted by Socrates (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 3. in the same place x Cyzicus follows as great a City says our Author as any in Asia for which he quotes Strabo and Florus to which I will add that it was no less considerable under Constantius For Gotofred's old Geographer (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Geogr. Vet. Gotofr says that for its greatness and situation it surpasses all praise Now it cannot but grieve one to think that such a noble City should be so disaffected to the Christian Religion that after the middle of the fourth Century it should seem to our Author (c) Prim. ep p. 87. that all the Christians in this City were no more than could meet together in one place to hear the recantation of Eleusius This is sad indeed but since our Author is apt to diminish Christians sometimes without reason let us examine this matter a little farther for possibly this may be no truer than the rest This Eleusius he says being frighted into a subscription to Arrianism declared before them all the force that was put upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coram universo populo in the hearing of all the people Socr. l. 4. c. 16. But this expression though translated into seventy languages will never prove that all the Christians in Cyzicus were present at this Recantation or that they could all meet in one Church Such phrases as these all the people all the multitude are to be always limited by the place and other circumstances expressed or supposed in the discourse When our Saviour spoke in the Temple (d) Luke 19.48 all the people are said to be (a) Prim. ep p. 86. very attentive and to hang upon him not all the people of Jerusalem surely but only the people there present So the woman who with a religious confidence touched the hem of our Saviours garment is said to declare to him before (e) Luke 8.47 all the people how she was healed When Boniface was chosen Bishop of Rome it is said (f) Acclamatione totius populi asseruimus Baron An. 419. n. 13. to be confirmed by the acclamation of the whole people It was now in the fifth Century and the Roman Christians too many to be any longer suspected for a Congregational Diocese When the people cryed Anathema upon Nestorius in the Church of Mocius in Constantinople it is said to be done (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Orthod ap Conc. Ephes by the united voice of all the people of the City And when (h) Ep. Syn. C. P. ad occid apud Theod. l. 5. c. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nectarius was chosen Bishop of Constantinople it is said to be done in the presence of the Emperour and by the suffrage of the whole City And now surely one Church could not hold all the Orthodox Christians of that City for at this time Gregory Nazianzen lets the Synod know that he had fill'd all the Churches of that City though now another reaped the crop for which he had laboured There may be instances of this kind produced without end for it is the common language of all the world to say a thing was done in the presence of all the people when only the people who are present are intended and not all the people of a City or of a Country or all the Christians of a place And it is seldom that any Writer uses any word of limitation upon these occasions as Cyprian (i) De plebis quae tunc adfuit suffragio Cypr. Ep. in one place doth speaking of the election of Cornelius that it was by the suffrage of the people that were then present when this is understood of course and needs no word of caution to suggest it So that all the people which our Author fancied to comprehend all the Christians of Cyzicus did signifie but those who were present without any regard to the number of Christians in that place And that they had more than could meet in one Church we may reasonably infer from the multitude of Churches said to be in that City at the same time For when Eleusius was put out and Eunomius thrust into his place he is said (l) Sozom. l. 6. c. 8. to possess himself not of one Church but of the Churches of Cyzicus Now to make it more likely that there were but few Christians in this great City he takes notice (m) Prim. ep p. 86. that in Julian 's time the greatest part of the Citizens were Heathen the City sending their Deputies to him as about other affairs so for the re-edifying of their Idol Temples This Act does not necessarily conclude the Heathen to be the major part Few men in place and countenanced by an Emperour may procure such a Petition as this in the name of a City when much the
house in which there is not one dead and I would to God there were but one dead in a house However we Christians cast out and persecuted and put to death even then kept the Feast For the place of every ones affliction was to him a place of solemn assembly the open field the wilderness the ship the inn the prison where each happened then to be in this time of dispersion was to him a Church If I had a mind to trifle I might urge this for proof that the Christians of Alexandria had several panegyrical assemblies if it may be said without solecism at the same time and in the several places mentioned by Dionysius But I have neither inclination nor forehead to follow our Author in this way of discourse nor is it in every ones power to recommend for fair probabilities what he cannot but know to be nothing to the purpose (a) Prim. ep p. 97. But Athanasius in his Apology to Constantius about Anno. 355 makes it evident beyond all contradiction he being accused for assembling the people in the great Church before it was dedicated makes this part of his defence That the confluence of the Pascal Solemnity was so great that if they had met in several assemblies the other Churches were so little and streight that they would have been in danger of suffering by the crowd And it was better for the whole multitude to meet in that great Church being a place large enough to receive them all together This passage hath been often urged and answered by several hands so that I might spare my self the labour of any farther reply than referring to those books in which it has been examined especially since our Author has thought fit to add nothing new but words of assurance and ostentation that it is evident beyond contradiction and to take notice of nothing that hath been offered to impeach this irrefragable evidence However to avoid cavil I am content here again to take it into examination And first tho' it should be yeilded to our Author that it is certain from this passage that all the Christians in Alexandria were present in this assembly yet will it not be of that service to his notion as he might imagin Suppose then the flock of Athanasius reduced so low that one great Church might receive it all If this should proceed from some late accident and be owing to such separations as had been lately made from the Communion of the Church it can be of no use either for the proving of Congregational Episcopacy in elder times or for the discovering of the proportion of Christians in other Cities Suppose the Dissenters should prevail so far in some one Diocese with us as to leave the Bishop no more people than might be crowded into one of the greatest Cathedrals of the Kingdom it would surely be but a sorry argument that the constitution of our Episcopacy is Congregational or that we have no Diocese greater than may assemble in one Church This according to Mr. Clerkson (b) No Evidence for Dioces Episc p. 47. was the case of Alexandria in Athanasius his time At the first breach Meletius had many more adherents than Peter and from that time to Athanasius the Meletians had such encouragements that their numbers were not like to be impaired And as for the Arrians if we may take the measure of the people by their Officers they were more numerous than the Catholicks in this City for (c) Theod. H. E. l. 4. c. 22. Soz. l. 1. c. 15. of nine it should be nineteen Presbyters and Deacons which the Church of Alexandria had eleven embraced Arrianism There are many mistakes in what is here advanced concerning the Meletians and the party of Arrius but the course of the argument must not be interrupted In these circumstances the Arrians might well out-vie the followers of Athanasius in numbers and these declined as the others increased Now if the party of Athanasius which in Mr. Clerkson's judgment was inferior in number to the Arrians was yet so great as to fill all the Churches in Alexandria and could not have met in any one Church before that vast fabrick was erected by Constantius the Arrians surely who are supposed to be the greater party must divide into many Congregations and live in the Diocesan way especially in the time of Gregory who seems to have joyned the Arrian and Meletian party for by Epiphanius (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 69. n. 2. he is stiled both Arrian and Meletian For tho' that Sect divided from the Church upon a point of Doctrin yet did they not pretend to make any alteration in Discipline and had but one Bishop in a City how great soever it might be So that our Author while he lessens the Catholicks of Alexandria does unawares make the Arrians not a Congregation but a Diocese Nor is it any advantage to the Congregational fancy to streighten the Catholick Christians within the walls of one Church while his indulgence to other Christian Sects permits them to increase beyond his Rule and to grow up into a Diocesan stature Having considered the consequence of this passage of Athanasius upon a kind supposition that it proved the thing for which it was produced I proceed to shew that this Testimony does not certainly evince that the Christians of Athanasius his Communion were no more than could meet or actually assembled in that great Church Mr. Baxter (e) Ch. Hist p. 10. is not so rigid in his inference from this Testimony as to contend that every Christian of Alexandria was present in that assembly I do not hence gather says he that every man woman and child was present And to him this only seemeth hence plain that the main body of them could meet and hear in one assembly But all things are not equally plain to all people For if all the other Churches in Alexandria could not receive this Congregation I am afraid they could not all hear unless it were the Amen which they all pronounced aloud and that indeed might be heard from far For in Alexandria besides this great Church Epiphanius (f) Epiph. Haer. 69. n. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names nine more and adds that there are other Churches besides which he had probably named with the rest if they had been but few Nor can they well be conceived much fewer than twenty for in Rome (g) Optat. l. 2. there were above forty in the beginning of Constantine's reign Suppose then a Congregation that twelve Churches could not contain which though much inferiour to this new Cathedral yet had some of them served the Bishop of the greatest City in the world after Rome and his Congregation It will be scarce possible to conceive how all that multitude should hear especially since I do not find that in those days any Church had scaffolds or galleries but all the people stood in the Area and nothing raised above the
old men a few years before such a poor juggle would not pass upon Children But in facts more remote there is a sort of men that take liberty and depend upon the ignorance of their Readers And this observation is an instance of that practice For in Dionysius the Bishop of Alexandria's time there happened first a fatal sedition in that City and an infinite number of people was slain the carcasses of these corrupted the air and the water and begot a Pestilence mortal beyond all example and this reduced the City so low as that Bishop then represents it But it soon recovered from that calamity as great Cities commonly do and maintained its rank for some time as the second City of the Empire In Antioch he observes (o) Prim. ep p. 99. the Christians in the first age were no more than could all meet together in the House of Theophilus as appears by the Author of the Recognitions which though falsly ascribed to Clemens is ancient nor will it be easie to find a reason why the following passage should be forged Theophilus domus suae ingentem Basilicam Ecclesiae nomine consecravit in qua omnis multitudo ad audiendum verbum conveniens c. l. 10. To some sort of people no evidence comes amiss Fable and Forgery grow Authentick if they seem favourable to their cause The Recognitions are on all hands given up for an idle forgery feigned without any aim or tolerable guess of the condition of the Apostolick times I have some reasons to suspect that this Book is not so old as it is generally imagined and it carries several marks of the fourth Century of which it is not necessary to take notice in this place But it is not easie to find a reason why this passage should be forged nor indeed why he has forged all the rest of his Book nor is it necessary For many will lie out of gaiety of humour and to please their fancy without any other reason to move them But he that has not reason enough to discern this to be a Fable has certainly very little to spare (r) Prim. ep p. 100. When Paulus Samosatenus was Bishop of this City our Author observes there was but one house (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Church did meet of which he would not give up the possession And this he contends was not the Bishops house but the house where the Church did meet and is presently after called (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 7. c. 30. the Church The Translator that he blames for calling it the Bishops house must be Christophorson or Musculus for Ruffinus and Valesius render it the House of the Church Now whether it were the Church or the House of the Bishop is not very clear nor very material For to be sure the Church had a House where the Bishop assembled and they might have twenty parish-Parish-Churches more for ought appears from this place But that which our Author infers that one House was then sufficient otherwise they might have had more proceeds from his usual acuteness The Church needed but one common House for the Bishops Assembly to which they all belonged but they might have many Houses appropriated to Parishes and certain regions of the Town which could not be called the Houses of the Church in general but only of such a part (u) Prim. ep p. 100. In the fourth Age all the Christians there could meet together for the choice of Eustathius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Theodoret l. 1. c. 7. This has been answered so often already that I am ashamed to repeat so obvious and plain an answer any more What proportion of Antioch was Christian in Eustathius his time may be guessed from the influence his deposition had upon that City which according to Mr. Clerkson was but four years after his being Bishop of that place The sedition says Sozomen (x) Soz. l. 2. c. 19. was so great that the whole City was in danger of being destroyed the Christians upon this occasion being divided into two parts If an Independent Congregation in London should happen to have such a difference about their Pastour it would scarce move a sedition in the City or endanger the safety of it in so high a manner After this our Author represents the low condition of the Orthodox Christians in Antioch while the Arrians were masters (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 3. c. 9. of the Churches that they made but a mean Congregation Yet all the while the Arrian Bishops there were Diocesan and had many Churches in that City which had belonged once to the Catholick Christians and did still of right appertain to them and before the end of that Century were actually recovered to the true faith and their old rightful Possessours (z) Prim. ep p. 103. Carthage next to the Cities forementioned was one of the greatest of the Empire Yet there were no more Christians in that Church about Anno. 220 than could meet together in one place for Church-administration For this he tells us there is evidence enough in Tertullian which at present I will not further take notice of than in the observation of a great Antiquary the Bishop of Orleans Our Author speaks of Tertullian in this place like one who had not looked in him for he has not one word of the Church of Carthage in that place on which Albaspineus makes his observation and what is worse that Bishop has not a word about Carthage All this is nothing but a vision that happened to our Author in the dark when he talked of Books without consulting them Tertullian (a) Tertul. ad Uxor l. 2. c. 4. disputing warmly against Christian Women marrying of Heathen Men proposes many great difficulties to which such Women will be exposed and what hindrance such a Marriage must needs be to all Christian Offices If the Wife purpose to perform the Station the Husband appoints a Bath If she ought to observe a Fast her Husband appoints an entertainment si procedendum est if she be to go abroad upon charitable and Christian visits to the poor and sick the business of her family is then extraordinary urgent It happened that some Papists laid hold on that word and fancied they had found their Procession in Tertullian which Albaspinaeus makes bold to expose shewing that in those days there was but one Church in a place and that generally a small one and without ornament Which I am very willing to grant for generally speaking so it was and most Towns had but one Church But for Carthage and Cities of that magnitude they might differ from the generality in this as they did in dimension and multitude of people That Carthage had many Christian assemblies in Tertullians time we need no other proof than the account he gives Scapula of the number of Christians in that City (b) Tertull. ad Scapulam If they should
that might be the chief of the division when it was first made To conclude Zela in Pontus was enlarged (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strab. l. 14. by Pompey by the accession of several Towns which he drew into it and to make this City compleat he added many Prefectures to its Territory I know it is a thing of ill same to put questions to the Dead and therefore I will not so much as return those demands of Mr. Clerkson that call for proof of one of the plainest things in the World That (m) Tria erant urbium spacia maenia pomaeria Territoria 1. Muris 2. Vicinia Murorum ultima jurisdictione civitatum fimebantur Gotofred in l. 5. de legat fund Cod. Th. the Jurisdiction of the Roman and Greek Cities reached farther than that of ours unless there may be a new scruple about the City Officers having authority over the Territory which I think can scarce happen to a Man that has read a Latin Author Nor is it evident only from a few Instances that some ancient Cities had large Territories but the largeness of it is implyed in the word it self For as Aristotle observes of a City that the very name signifies a competence of measure so is it in respect of the Territory that appertains to it By Ager which is the usual word for Territory We understand says St. Augustin (n) Agri autem nomine non Castella tantum verum etiam Municipia Coloniae solent vocari extra Civitatem quae caput quasi mater caeterarum Aug. de Consens Evang. l. 3. c. 24. not only Castles or Burgs but Municipia or Corporation Towns and Colonies without the City which is the head and as it were the Mother of the rest And the old Glosse (o) Territorium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gloss vet renders it by the Land of a Colony And whoever reads the (p) Autor de Re Agr. Ed. Rigalt Agrarian Writers will soon perceive though they speak only in the general that it is not a Parish or a few Villages they are dividing When Justinian divided Aquae in Dacia Ripensi from Meridianum he allows (q) Aquensis autem Episcopus habeat praesatam Civitatem omnia ejus Castella Territoria Ecclesias Nov. 11. the Bishop of Aquae not only his City but all the Castles or Burgs and Territories and Churches that belonged to it One would not easily imagin this to be the description of one of our Country Parishes And Plato and Aristotle (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist Pol. l. 7. c. ◠as oft as they mention what Territory is to be allowed require it should be not only sufficient for all the Inhabitants but that it should answer all publick occasions of peace and war and yield the Citizens such a competence that they might live at their ease For he forbids his Citizens to meddle with the plow but to leave (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that to be done by servants or Country people Nor were the proper parts of his City of Artizans neither but of Soldiers and Magistrates and such as were proper for Council And these being in his supposition to be numerous were to be supported from their estates in the Territory of the place which therefore must be supposed of great extent In short the general notion of the thing does not admit the narrowness of Mr. Clerkson's conceit and the word it self speaks something that is proportionable to the greatness and distinction of a City The difference between the constitution of ancient Cities and those of later ages in this part of the world will appear if we consider first that they were greater communities not confined within the walls of one Town but stretched over all the adjacent Country For the Jurisdiction of the City Magistrate reached as far as the community for the City was the head and supream part of it all the Magistrates within the Territory being subordinate Nor was this all but (ſ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dio. Chrys Or. 30. the Citizens were proprietors of that Territory who commonly lived in the City and left the Villages to their Slaves or to such Country people that were in the nature of Tenants under a servile Tenure The title was in the City though particular Citizens had the possession nor could any as I think have a right to possess any estate in that Territory who was not first free of the City The greater Villages which answer our Burroughs had Magistrates of their own but subordinate to those of the City and generally chose by the City as Frontinus (t) Frontin de limit Agr. p. 57. informs us and I think I have observed already upon another occasion And lastly the ancient Cities were greater in their design which was generally military and there was scarce any so mean that had not some provision for war The Greek Colonies in the midst of barbarous Nations were like so many Camps and the Romans filled all their conquests with Cities of their own people with a design of securing the Countries they had subdued Now as it is natural to all things to beget after their own likeness so the Greeks and Romans did in this respect For Greece consisting of many Cities independent propagated their kind as far as their Arms or their Ships carried them And Rome from a small City becoming mistress of a great part of the world planted every where little models of it self and shared the world between its Colonies as so many children And where they could not fill all the Country they preserved such Cities as they found and every where encouraged the people by their example to form themselves into such communities So that generally speaking all the Roman dominion was parcelled out into Cities and Territories that belonged to them whole Provinces were effectually represented by the Deputies of the Cities of it And though in some places there might be exempts yet in general thus the Roman Dominion was digested Upon this constitution Christianity was superinduced and the Churches of Christ being so many communities and having some resemblance to Cities so far as to take their name from the civil assemblies grew up according to the shape of those civil communities in which they were planted and had the same common bounds and measure with them So that when the whole lump was leavened and all the people were reduced to the obedience of faith the Church and the City in respect of their matter were the same The rules indeed and the ends of the City of man and the City of God were very different and stood as wide asunder as Heaven is from the Earth but the same people were both the Citizens and the Christians The Church and the City had one and the same Territory and as far as the Jurisdiction of the civil Magistrate reached so far was the Diocese of the Bishop extended Our Saviour having left no rule
about limits the Apostles made no new distributions but followed the form of the Empire planting in every City a compleat and entire Church that consisted not only of the Inhabitants of the City but of the Region belonging to it If any were converted and if their distance or number made them incapable of repairing to the City-Church upon all their Religious occasions they had Congregations apart and subordinate Officers to attend them as it was in the civil disposition our Saviour having appointed several Orders in his Church and the Apostles propagating those and appointing some new as occasion required Only as in greater causes the Country people sued in the City Courts so likewise in such causes of Religion that concerned the whole community such as that of receiving in and turning out of the communion the Christians of the Territory were under the authority of the City-Church Hence it is that the Canons of ancient Councils mention a Territory belonging to every City Bishop The thirty fourth Canon (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Ap. 34. of those called Apostolick forbids a Bishop to do any thing without the concurrence of his Metropolitan but what related to his own Diocese and the Territories under it And the ninth of Nice that provides so favourably for the Puritans when they should return to the communion of the Church supposeth Bishops to have a considerable Diocese besides their City For by this it is ordered that if a Bishop of the Puritans should embrace Catholick Communion and there were another Bishop of the Catholick Church in the same City that then (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Nicen. 8. the Puritan should either retain the title of a Bishop in the same City if the other did think fit or else be received as a Presbyter But least this may have the appearance of two Bishops in the same Town some place is to be provided for him that he may be either a Chorepiscopus or a Presbyter in the Country The Synod of Antioch forbids the Presbyters of the Territories to send Canonical letters and in another gives the Bishop of the City full authority (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 9. to order Ecclesiastical affairs not only in his City but in the whole Territory that belongs to it to ordain Presbyters and Deacons to exercise Jurisdiction within the extent of his Diocese And in the next Canon forbids (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 10. the Chorepiscopi to ordain Presbyters or Deacons in the Country without the consent of the Bishop of the City to which they and the Territory did belong The Council of Elvira speaks of Deacons (a) Diaconus regens plebem Can. Eliber 77. that had Country cures and that the Bishop to whom they belonged was to perfect those who were baptized by these Curees by confirmation Basil (b) Basil ep 192. salutes the Country Clergy of the Diocese of Nicopolis distinct from those of the City and Theodoret who had a Diocese forty miles square reckoned (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. ep 42. his Episcopacy of divine institution and that his large Territory as well as his City was committed into his hands by God Theodosius Bishop of Synnada is said to drive the Macedonian Hereticks not only out of his City but (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 3. out of all his Territories And Eustathius (e) Basil ep 73. overthrew all the Altars of Basilides in all the Territory of Gangrae And Synesius writing to the whole Church of Ptolemais addresseth to the people of the City and to those of the Country Parishes that belonged to it It would be an endless labour to alledge all the instances of this nature since nothing is more obvious and occurs more frequently in Ecclesiastical Writers I have shewed how great Territories belonged anciently to the Greek and Roman Cities how unlike their constitution was to ours and especially in this respect I have also shewed that the civil and Ecclesiastical Territories were the same and Mr. Clerkson confesses it His demands therefore concerning this matter receive a full answer and the proof which he (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes ep 11. required not without intimation of despair made good and beyond all reasonable exception To make this matter yet more clear I will instance in some Bishopricks whose extent are known or so much at leastwise as discovers them to be Dioceses consisting of many Country Parishes besides the City Churches I will begin with the Bishoprick of Theodoret because the limits of it have been described with greatest exactness and particularity The Diocese of Cyrus was forty miles in length and as much in breadth And Theodoret (h) Theod. ep 42. proceeds to describe it so minutely that he sets down the number of acres together with the condition and tenure of the land There were fifty thousand free from any service ten thousand belonging to the Fisc about fifteen thousand more subject to taxes but unable to pay according to the proportion then set So that this instance seems clear beyond all exception And as to the Ecclesiastical state of this Territory in his Epistle to Leo he says (i) Theod. ep 113. there were eight hundred Churches in it all belonging to his care Yet some have endeavoured to take off the evidence of this Epistle to Leo when it was urged by the learned Bishop of Worcester Mr. Baxter suspects it because it came from the Vatican Library and Mr. Clerkson (l) No evid of Dioc. Ep. p. 39. suggests the same suspition But this frivolous cavil hath been answered by the same hand that alledged the instance I will take the liberty to add only this that it happens fortunately to this Epistle that it hath an ancient voucher and a clear testimony in the next age after it was written For Liberatus (m) Quos secutus Theodoretus Papae suggessit quanta mala pertulerit rogans ut tali causae subveniretur Liber Brev. c. 12. makes mention of it and informs us that Theodoret wrote to Leo suggesting how much he had suffered of Dioscorus and desiring that for the remedy of these evils another Council might be called And (n) Constat ex ep p. 113 116. Garner in Liber p. 83. Garnerius in his observation upon this place directs us to this Epistle to Leo. Mr. Clerkson instead of eight hundred Churches constantly reads eighty without so much as giving notice that it is only his conjecture But be the number how it will we must lay aside all thoughts of Congregational Episcopacy in this Region Another exception against this instance is offered by Mr. Clerkson (o) No evid of Dioc. p. 39. that this was not a Diocese but a Province and that Theodoret was a Metropolitan And for this he quotes the learned Author whose testimonies he pretended to answer although he expresly says that this is not to be
understood of the Province but of the Diocese of Theodoret. The truth is Cyrus was no Metropolis nor was Theodoret Primate of the Province but under a Metropolitan as he affirms in one of his Epistles They sent says he (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. ep 16. letters of summons as to other Metropolitans so likewise to ours And this was Alexander Bishop of Hierapolis the Metropolis of Euphratesia who subscribes among the Metropolitans in the Oriental Synod (q) Act. Conciliab Ephes in Ephesus In those subscriptions all the Metropolitans have their quality marked and Theodoret subscribes as a simple Bishop Stephen the successour of Alexander subscribes in the Synod of Constantinople under Gennadius as Metropolitan of the Province of Euphratesia as I find in a Manuscript of the Bodley Library For the subscriptions of that Council are wanting in all editions and in that Manuscript there are but thirty four names whereas seventy three Bishops are said to be present and the same person is a subscriber to the Council of Chalcedon Theodoret (r) Hypomnest Theodoreti ad Alexand. Metrop ep 34. Ed. Garnerij ad Alexand. Prov. Euphr. Metrop ep 68. ut ubicunque jubeas conveniamus Theod. ep 81. ep 82. Omnes enim ut Patrem Dominum reveremur ep 89 does acknowledge Alexander for his Metropolitan in several of the Epistles published by Lupus and Garnerius and sends to him to appoint where the Bishops of his Province shall meet and an assembly of the Bishops of that Province make a profession of acquiescing in what he should propound and that they would observe him as their common Father and their Lord. And Andreas Bishop of Samosata speaking in the name of his Brethren of the Province owns (s) Licet enim instar capitis in omnibus nos praecellas Ep. 84. him as their head and that he had in all things a preheminence Long before this Hierapolis is named as the head of Commagena or Euphratesia for it is the same Province as Ammianus Marcellinus (t) Commagena nunc Euphratensis clementer adsurgit Hierapoli vetere Nino Samosata civitatibus amplis illustris l. 14. c. 8. observes In the Council of Chalcedon Theodoret was no Metropolitan as appears by his subscription (u) Theod. ep 94. 161. Ed. Lupi in the middle of the Bishops of the Province of whom the greater part were present So that this fancy of Mr. Clerkson that the passage of Theodoret in his Epistle to Leo is to be understood of his Province and not of his Diocese appears evidently to be destitute of all foundation Cyrus was indeed called Hagiopolis in later times but the Province never bore that name as it seems to do in the Greek Notitia of Car. a S. Paulo but the word was removed by the negligence of Copists from the City to the Province the City being in the Manuscript Copy as well as Print placed at the top of a column and having two names one of them was set higher than the line of the column and so joyned to the title of the Province But in that Notitia as well as in the description (x) Miraeus Not. Episc l. 3. p. 142. of the Empire by Hierocles Cyrrus is placed under Hierapolis In succeeding times indeed it came to be an Arch-Bishoprick but Honorary only and without any Suffragans as several other Cities of the same Province did The next instance shall be the Diocese of St. Augustin who mentions a Castle called Fussala with a Territory belonging to it forty miles from Hippo Regius which never had a Bishop of its own but belonged to the Diocese of Hippo. Against this clear testimony Mr. Clerkson (y) No evid of Dioc. p. 27. hath offered some exceptions which I shall examine St. Austin says he signifies plainly that there were more Bishops in the Territory of Hippo when (z) Ecce interim Episcopos nostros qui sunt in Regione Hipponensi convenite Aug. ep 68. Ed. Frob. he moved Januarius the Primate of the Donatists that they would meet together with the Catholick Bishops that were in the Territory Although it should be granted that there were several Bishops in that Region yet does not this make St. Austin's Diocese less than forty miles in length since he affirms (a) Ad Paraeciam Hipponensis Ecclesiae pertinebat expresly that this Fussala belonged to the Diocese of the Church of Hippo and it is very unlikely that there were other Dioceses between so that the Territory of Hippo on that side must belong to the Bishop of the City This exception then cannot impeach that testimony of St. Austin concerning the extent of his Bishoprick for it might be so long one way allowing more Bishops to be in the Region But after all this passage alledged by Mr. Clerkson does not prove that the Region of Hippo had any more Bishops than St. Augustin for the Bishops mentioned to be in that Territory were the Bishops of the Province who were at that time met there as they had done before (b) Vos modo conveniatis qui eorum Conventionem ante Ep. 68. A Council being assembled it was ordered you should be summoned to appear and again from the Council our Bishops sent to the Emperour The Donatists are intreated to meet the Catholick Bishops which before they neglected to do who being now assembled there again the Schismaticks are urged to come to a conference with them So that these Bishops were not in the Region of Hippo as in the place of their Residence but as in a place of Synodical meeting He excepts (c) No evid of Dioc. p. 29. likewise against Mutugenna which was produced as an instance of a Country Parish in the Diocese of Hippo because he finds a place of the same name to have two Bishops at the Conference of Carthage as though there might not be two places in Africk of a name whereas that Village of which St. Austin speaks is expresly challenged by him as belonging to his care and so had no other Bishop Another suggestion he offers against St. Augustin's being Bishop of the Region of Hippo because he does not say to Caecilian the President that he was Bishop of that Diocese which the Dr. represents as a Region of large extent but only that he had the Episcopal charge of Hippo. And was that Father obliged to reckon up all his Parishes to that President Or did not his being Bishop of Hippo suppose him likewise Bishop of all the Diocese belonging to it Or because he does not mention his Territory to this Person therefore he does not say upon any occasion that he was Bishop of the Diocese If he was Bishop of the Church of Hippo he was so consequently of all the Region appertaining to that Church And that there were Regions belonging to it he says plain enough though not to Caecilian yet to another Magistrate This will be most advantagious to the Catholick Church
says that holy Bishop (d) Aug. ep ad Marcellin 159. (d) Germanicenses ad curam humilitatis nostrae pertinent Aug. ep 251. Ed. Bened. or that I may not seem to pass the bounds of my own dispensation this will be most advantagious to the Church of the Diocese of Hippo. And speaking of a place called Germanicia in that Diocese affirms e that it belongs to his care and in another place that (f) Visitandarum Ecclesiarum ad meam curam pertinentium necessitate profectus sum Vide ep 74 212 236. he had Churches under his care which he was obliged to visit To diminish this Bishoprick of Hippo yet farther Mr. Clerkson shews that St. Austin was so far from having all the Region under his Jurisdiction that he had not the whole Town the Donatists had a Bishop there This indeed is true of the former part of St. Augustin's Episcopal administration but after the Imperial Rescript which followed the Conference at Carthage Hippo had no Donatists for all returned to the communion of the Church For so I think St. Austin in his Epistle to Vincentius may most commodiously be understood where speaking of his former opinion which was against using any compulsion for reducing men to the communion of the Church he confesseth that experience hath altered his judgment in that point (g) Aug. ep 48. The instance of my own City was urged against me which was once wholly Donatist but now converted to Catholick unity by the fear of the Imperial Laws which now so utterly detests your pernicious animosity that she might seem never to have been infected with it So that after all these exceptions St. Austin's Diocese remains undiminished Caesarea in Cappadocia had a Diocese of so vast extent that few of our Northern Bishopricks can equal it For Basil the Bishop of that City had (h) Greg. Naz. Carm. de viti sua fifty Chorepiscopi in his Diocese who were his deputies for the administration of discipline in lesser causes in the remoter part of his Diocese Cappadocia was (i) Strab. l. 12. about four hundred miles in length according to Strabo and above two hundred in breadth Caesarea was placed in the middle of this great Country and was at first the Metropolis of the whole and when the Country was divided into two Provinces the greatest share remained under the ancient and greatest Metropolis Yet in this tract which cannot be conceived less than two hundred and fifty miles there were but (l) Colligere feci Episcopos sub me constitutos sunt enim duo Ep. Capp pr. ad Leon. two Bishopricks besides that of Caesarea i. e. Thermae and Nyssa Basil (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas ep 264. excuses himself to Eusebius Bishop of Samosata for not writing to him by some great Persons who had been in Caesarea because he was then upon his visitation And in another place speaks of a Country Parish of his Diocese called Venesa where he ordained one Glycerius a Deacon to assist (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ep 412. the Presbyter of that Parish And he reproves the Chorepiscopi of his Diocese for suffering the Presbyters of Country Parishes to make what inferiour Church-officers they pleased and therefore orders (o) Ep. 181. a list of all the inferiour Officers of Country Churches to be brought to him and that none be made thereafter without his consent There is likewise another Village called Dacora mentioned by Sozomen (p) Soz. l. 7. c. 27. in the Territory of Caesarea where Eunomius (q) Philostorg l. 10. was born and buried and Julian ordered (r) Soz. l. 5. c. 4. a search to be made for all the goods not only of the Churches in Caesarea but of all the Churches of the Diocese Tyana the Metropolis of the second Cappadocia had a considerable Diocese belonging to it Euphrantas Bishop of that City mentions (s) Praedium autem quod dicitur Pasa duodecim milliarijs distat Tyanensis Metropoleos sub eadem Civitate est usque hodie Ap. Conc. C. P. 2. Coll. 5. one George of Pasa who lived in Gregory Nazianzen's time and notes that Pasa was a Country place twelve miles from Tyana and belongs to that City says he to this very day But this Diocese must be much more considerable than this passage speaks as well as the rest of Cappadocia The whole Country as I noted before was about four hundred miles in length and two in breadth which makes a summ of eight hundred square miles Now in all the Country there were in the middle of the fifth age but eleven Bishopricks and then it was all Christian So that every Bishop one with another may have a Diocese that wants not much of a hundred miles square which can be matched by but few in our Country besides Lincoln But because the division of Dioceses is generally unequal as the Territories of Cities were some of these will fall out to be vastly great and others but of moderate extent Nor is there any place for suspicion that Bishopricks were sunk or united in this Country for it was so far from that that several of these few were erected in the fourth Century Sasima was made a Bishoprick by Basil which before belonged to Caesarea or Tyana for Gregory's expression is ambiguous From Tyana it was two and thirty miles distant from Caesarea above a hundred And upon second thoughts it seems to me rather to belong to the first for it was nearer to it and within its Province and given up by Basil who desires (t) Bas ep 88. Anthimus the new Metropolitan to take care of it Nazianzus too was a Bishoprick raised in the fourth Century as we may learn from Nazianzen (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz. Or. 19. in Patr. who says that the place had but one Bishop before his Father In the Council of Ephesus one John subscribes (x) Johannes Episc totius Lesbi Iren. Traged Contest quorund Ep. sub 28. himself Bishop of all Lesbus The Island according to Strabo (y) Strab. l. 13. was eleven hundred furlongs which wants not much of seven score miles in compass Nor had this Bishop summed up all his titles for his Successour Florentius in the Council of Chalcedon writes (z) Florentius Episcopus Lesbi Tenedi Prosilenes Aegialorum per Euelpistum Chorepiscopum subscripsi Conc. Chalc. Act. 1◠himself Bishop of several other Islands Now if one City cannot have Territory enough in the judgment of the Congregational Antiquaries to make a large Diocese two ancient Cities with their Territories may surely yield a Diocese of many Congregations And in the Council of Ephesus (a) Conc. Eph. par 2. Act. 1. there were several Bishops who had two Cities within their Diocese Timothy was Bishop of Fermissus and Eudocias Athanasius was Bishop of Diveltus and Sozopolis And in Europa there are many instances of this nature and the Bishops of that Province
possession of his own people To this he adds a marvellous remark that the word (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which some will have him to understand a Diocese is frequently said to be in the City And of this expression he cites many examples as if this implied that out of the City there was no Diocese But let that instance of Alexandria answer for all the rest since it is produced to this purpose For besides the City Athanasius affirms the Bishop had Mareotes a Region containing many Country Parishes and that there never had been so much as a Chorepiscopus to govern those Churches but that they were under the immediate Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria We are farther told (g) Prim. ep p. 123. that the Apostles designed there should be such Bishops as they instituted in Country Towns and not in Cities only If he means by such Bishops Presbyters only then indeed not only every Church but every Congregation required such but the Bishops of the Apostles Ordination had the care of many Congregations And it is plain in Scripture that such general Officers they did appoint and they themselves were of that kind Some Prelatists he observes will have Bishop and City to be adequate but he will have it that Church and Bishop should be so for it is not the City as such requires a Bishop but because it had a Church in it It is true but the narrowness of the Independent spirit confounds a Church with a Congregation For as in the civil community of a City there were several subordinate Assemblies yet but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly so called which was endued with the authority of the whole Body So it might be in the Churches planted by the Apostles Where therefore there was one competent Church there was a Bishop but this might consist of several Congregations The Church of Jerusalem may be still mentioned to this purpose after all Mr. Clerkson's attempts to diminish it The number of Converts there was too great for one Congregation (h) Acts 11.22 yet they all made but one Church and so it was where ever Christians increased in the same proportion And therefore I hope to be excused if in this case I take the practice of the Apostles and of the Church in succeeding ages to be safer Interpreters of their design than the novel conjectures of men addicted to singularity The instance of Majuma the Port of Gaza is directly against the purpose for which it is brought for it had no Bishop till it was a City And one thing in this citation of Mr. Clerkson concerning it deserves to be noted For where Sozomen says that the bounds of each Diocese were appointed and what Altars should belong to each our Author thought fit to change the number and to write distinct Altar as agreeing better with his notion though this way does not agree well with common honesty and good faith The weak objection which he makes for Episcopal men and the suitable answer he returns to it are not worth notice For here he speaks only to himself and I do not wonder he should argue so weakly for us when his arguments against us are so harmless So the Mother of Sisera and her wise Ladies did doubt and reply and fancy Triumphs when the day was lost The difference between the modern and ancient models is apparent as Mr. Clerkson thinks in England and Ireland The ancient model of Episcopacy in England is something hard to find For the Saxons being Pagans when they subdued this Country and driving the old Inhabitants into the remote corners of it all the bounds of civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within this Kingdom were lost But the model he speaks of is that of Gregory the Great who had no more design to plant Congregational Episcopacy in England than he had to make it Independent He intended twelve Bishops for the Province of York as Mr. Clerkson observes but that might have been done and the Dioceses be large enough For that Province then reached from Humbre to the Frith of Edinburgh and about the year 681. had five Bishops however Mr. Clerkson affirms that for many ages it had no more than three and every one of them had Dioceses of very great extent Those in the South were not all so great but yet comprehended many Congregations and some of them as Canterbury London and Rochester do remain still under the same limits that were at first appointed them by Augustin the Archbishop How they stood before the coming of the Saxons is now beyond all memory and there is little hope left of making any new discovery in this matter which hath been treated by so many great men and diligent inquirers into the Antiquities of their Country Marcianus Heracleota (i) Peripl p. 92. reckons fifty nine Cities in Britain which I suppose he took out of Ptolomy (l) Ptol. l. 2. Many of these are placed in Scotland and about forty remain for England and Wales If they observed the general rule of the Church the number of their Bishops might be equal to that of their Cities and so their Dioceses would be much too wide for Mr. Clerkson's purpose But it seems this number was reduced afterwards For Bede (m) Bed H. E. l. 1. c. 1. mentions but twenty eight when he would set out the most flourishing condition of this Country in the Roman times As for the Canon of the Synod of Herudford for augmenting the number of Bishops which Mr. Clerkson insists on there was good reason for it For at that time there were no more than seven Bishops in all the Saxon part of Britain which then reaching to the Frith of Edinburg was as large as all England and Wales joyned together are now The ancient model in Ireland is as little known for the Legends of St. Patrick are but sorry evidence of the ancient state of the Irish Church and that Fable has been already examined In Phaenicia indeed the Latins did reduce the Bishopricks to a lesser number in the twelfth Century because the condition of that Country was much altered and most of the ancient Episcopal Cities destroyed or the people Mahometans But that it was the humour of that age instead of multiplying to reduce Bishopricks is only a fancy of Mr. Clerkson For I have shewed the practice of Italy at that time to be quite contrary where instead of reducing they raised a great number of new Bishopricks and have been increasing of them ever since Nor does it serve to any purpose to produce the Patriarchat of Antioch so different in the time of the Latins from what it had been anciently since the condition of those Countries had been much altered and the Christians were reduced to a very small number under the long and heavy Tyranny of the Mahometans Mr. Clerkson bestows a whole Chapter to confirm his notion of the smallness of ancient Bishopricks by repeating those observations he
the Church could have been ordered according to the principles desires and endeavours of the most pious and conscientious their Dioceses would not have been so execessively numerous in the fourth or fifth Ages above what they were in the third By Dioceses being numerous I suppose he means the number of people belonging to each Diocese for otherwise it will destroy what he contends for Dioceses being by so much more large as they are less numerous Chrysostom he says may satisfie us here What In his judgment and conscience was he against a large bishoprick bred in the Diocese of Antioch than which there were few greater in the world and receiving the orders of Deacon and Presbyter in that Church Afterwards removed from thence to be Bishop of the Imperial City having so many Congregations in the City so many Parishes in the Country such a number of Provinces under his Jurisdiction as made the better part of the Eastern Empire Does he express his conscience against a very large Bishoprick Surely a person of so exalted eloquence could not be guilty of such a solecism his Chair would have born testimony against him and refuted all his Sermon If this was his conscience why did he not divide Why did he not appoint one Bishop in Sycae another in Hestiae where Constantine had built a Church that might have become a Bishop Or if these places were too near why did he not erect new Bishopricks in the remoter part of his Territory or in his Provinces since as Patriarch he had sufficient authority to make what number of Bishops he pleased He deposed indeed a great number of unworthy Bishops and ordained others in their places but there is no account of any new erections of his in Market Towns and Villages And his friends make bold to censure Theophilus for making Bishops in small places where there had been none before It is therefore very marvellous that the conscience of so great and holy a person should declare against his own practice and condemn a large Bishoprick while himself was possessed of one of the largest in world without discovering the least desire or endeavour to part it between several Congregational Pastors As for his Principles he had no other in this matter than the rule and practice of the Church One City according to his principles could have but one Bishop and therefore he seems to be startled at St. Paul's direction to the Bishops and Deacons of Philippi What more Bishops than one says he in one City No by no means therefore he concludes they were received not Bishops in the sense of the word in his times but Presbyters only And therefore according to his principles if a City were never so great it ought to have but one Bishop However let us hear what Chrysostom says in the places cited by Mr. Clerkson Tell me says that excellent Bishop (z) Chrys in Act. 3. p. 655. Ed. Savil. what can a multitude avail us Wilt thou understand that the desirable multitude are the Holy not the many What care I for the multitude What advantage is in them But here is no comparison between a great Bishoprick and a small as such but between many bad and few good And in this case Chrysostom's judgment cannot be contested it is clear that we are to go by weight not by number The people of Constantinople as they were exceeding numerous so they were very dissolute and this holy Bishop flamed against the vices of the place with a zeal becoming his character He is not content only to reprove and to rebuke with authority but threatens to use the utmost of his spiritual censures against those that disgraced Christianity by their wicked lives In this Resolution of reforming his people he bids defiance to all discouragements and opposition Some urged the multitude of offenders against him that too rough dealing might drive them to joyn with Sectaries But this did not at all abate the resolution of the Bishop He scorns the multitude upon this account and cries what care I for a multitude It was far from his intention to cast off this multitude or to divide them into several distinct Congregations under other Bishops but his design was to reform their lives and to build up and adorn the Church committed to him with many that were good with a multitude not only numerous but approved And for this purpose he offers himself a sacrifice and is content to be cut off so that he might gain many to Christ If Chrysostom had proceeded upon the principles of Mr. Clerkson he must have given his discourse another turn and said that since one Bishop is not sufficient for so great a people and a hundred and fifty Persons are a charge more than one can well discharge it is fit that you chuse your selves Pastors after your own hearts and enter into Covenant with them For this great dissoluteness proceeds from the excessive greatness of the flock and the disproportion that is between it and the ability of a single Shepherd For this Diocesan way is an innovation and raised upon the ruin of ancient discipline Wherefore separate your selves for I will not undertake the charge of above a hundred and fifty souls To this effect he must have expressed his conscience if his principles had been the same with Mr. Clerkson's But he on the contrary lays claim to the whole flock numerous and disordered as it was he thought himself bound in conscience to endeavour the reformation of it and to use fullness of Episcopal authority to reduce them He does not complain that they are many but that they are unprofitable would they but reform their lives let them be as numerous as they please for the greater their number the greater would be his joy So far is Chrysostom from expressing his conscience against large Bishopricks in the places cited by Mr. Clerkson Nor do his other Arguments drawn out of the Sermons of Chrysostom come any thing nearer to the point The Episcopate says he (a) Prim. ep p. 203 204. is so called from the inspecting all He ought to be an Overseer of all bearing the burdens of all he had need of many thousand Eyes He ought to go the rounds night and day more than any Commander in an Army We must give account of all their souls when we have been defective in any thing I wonder if any Bishops can ever be saved considering the greatness of the threatning and their negligence All this is very true but not to our Author's purpose Bishops are certainly accountable for those who perish by their neglect of their proper Office But then the duty of a general overseer is not the same with that of a subordinate Office A Parish Presbyter will not be condemned for not performing the duty of a Master of a Family nor a Bishop for not doing the office of a Presbyter to all the particulars of his Diocese But these words are to be understood with
A DEFENCE OF Diocesan Episcopacy IN ANSWER to a BOOK OF Mr. DAVID CLARKSON Lately Published ENTITULED Primitive Episcopacy By HENRY MAURICE D. D. LONDON Printed by Hannah Clark for Iames Adamson at the Angel and Crown in St. Paul's Church Yard 1691. Imprimatur Carolus Alston R. P. D. Hen. Episc Lond. Ã Sacris Nov. 4. 1690. THE PREFACE AS in many of his Actions the Devil expresses an Emulation of the divine power and greatness and affects to resemble the most high In the production of Schism he tries to counterfeit the Creation For as God produced this world out of nothing his power operating without any matter So the Devil too creates a Schism from colour or the shadow of a pretence or whatever else may be thought to stand in a nearer degree to nothing Now it is the common way to judge of the nature of Schism by the quality of the pretence if this be slight and frivolous they conceive the other cannot be dangerous and must be in a near disposition to admit a Cure But common experience proves this to be a mistake For on the contrary where the occasion of difference seems to be most trifling there we may observe the animosities to be highest And the reason is plain enough for he who is resolved to force a quarrel will lay hold on any pretence and the more frivolous it is the more bitterness and rancour it discovers in that Spirit that lusteth to envy And at the same time it is a good testimony of the integrity and exactness of the party against which the quarrel is affected that those who were resolved to break are forced to take up with so mean Cavils When you have done all you can to remove occasion from those who seek offence the Prediction of our Lord and his Apostles will continue to be accomplished Offences will come and Heresies and Schisms must be and those who are sincere will be made manifest and those who are otherwise will not be hid The Enemy of Christian peace does confirm the Gospel while he endeavours to destroy it by divisions as the Jews fulfilled the Prophets by condemning the Messiah While the Church remained under the conduct of the Apostles in the simplicity of the Christian Faith and exactness of Discipline it might be expected there should be no Dissenters But those golden times for our comfort have left us their complaints that then there were railings evil surmises and perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth even then there were false Apostles deceitful Workers transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ Then as well as now there were some who separated themselves and forsook the Assemblies of the faithful S. Paul the popular and complying Apostle who became all things to all men had no small struggle with this spirit of Separation Some were such proficients in a free censoriousness as to think of him as though he walked according to the flesh some disparaged his Gifts and despised his bodily presence as weak and his speech contemptible detracting from him doubtless to add to themselves the character of more acceptable and more edifying Teachers Some were puffed up despised his authority and made divisions in the Churches under his care He who healed all manner of diseases who raised the dead and could cast out a Heathen spirit of Divination found it a harder matter to deal with the spirit of separation that operated in the such false Prophets as bore the forms and titles of Christianity The Divine providence permitted many Demoniacks in our Saviour's and the Apostles time when God conferred miraculous abilities to dispossess them but seems to have shortned the chain of evil Spirits in succeeding ages in the same proportion that he lessened the gifts by which they were mastered But the Spirit of separation was still suffered to practice his Arts of deluding and to break the peace of the Church by infinite variety of pretences Sometimes it was too pure for the mixed society of the Church sometimes it was exalted with new Revelations and those who would not receive them were carnal and in short was so diligent in inventing reasons and in snatching occasions of dividing Communion that all the Topicks of Schism seemed to be exhausted But this Spirit it seems will not be stinted nor confine its self within its own ancient Precedents For in these last times it is become nice in taking offence beyond former examples and beyond all measure acute in assigning causes of dissatisfaction The old Church-dividers swallowed many things that our Dissenters strain at as fundamental corruptions and most of the things which they object as the causes of their departure from us were never known before to have made any difference between Christians For who I pray before our Dissenters separated from a Church for having a set Form and Order of Divine Service Who before our times ever took offence at the use of the Prayer that Christ taught his Disciples What sect from the beginning forsook the Assemblies of the faithful for using the sign of the Cross as the common Ensign of the faith of Christ crucified upon the solemn admission of Church-members Who ever divided the Communion of any Church because it had a Bishop Aerius indeed pretended to see no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter but this was not the reason but only the effect of his separation for having no Bishop of his Communion he was forced to represent them as unnecessary though he durst not condemn their Institution It is strange that these blemishes should so long deform the Church and no Greek or Latin Sectary have the sagacity to discern them that so palpable motives of separation should escape the spirit of Maximilla and the acuteness of Tertullian that the Novatians reputed skillful men in observing faults should be so little perspicacious as not to discover such gross abominations Or that the Donatists should puzzle themselves so long with a story of Cecilian that they could never make out and leave such Topicks as these untouched I cannot think the people of former ages so gross as some of our Virtuosi may represent them From the principles they chose they reasoned as well as we and their Sectaries wanted no wit to find out such objections of Nonconformity as our Dissenters have advanced But as I am apt in some things to be favourable to Antiquity so in this case I cannot but commend the judgment of ancient Schismaticks for not using such frivolous pretences as must unavoidably expose them to the scorn of all discerning men who seeing through such miserable shifts must conclude that no ingenuous mind could use them and nothing but consummate and hardened Hypocrisie persist in them But of all the Pleas preferred by Dissenters against the Church of England none looks more new or more affected than that which concerns Diocesan Episcopacy The old quarrel about the preheminence of Bishops above Presbyters seems in a
ancienter than any thing he can produce to the contrary As to the (e) Iren. l. 3. c. 14. Text it self it determines positively on neither side and for the Syriack version if it be against the Dr. in Ephesus it must be remembred that it was for him at Philippi But after all the present question is not concern'd in this Dispute for tho' these Elders who are call'd Bishops were not of the Province but of the City of Ephesus yet it does not follow that there were several Bishops properly so call'd and distinguish'd from Presbyters at the same time in one Church And our Author's stream of Ancients are against him who understand these not to be proper Bishops but Presbyters I should dismiss this point about the Ephesine Bishops if our Author did not say he did insist upon another Argument as new and altogether his own The sum of it is this The Apostle Paul resolv'd to be at Jerusalem (a) Acts 20.16 at the day of Pentecost But he could not be there at the day if he stay'd long at Miletus And he could not Assemble the Bishops of Asia there if he stay'd not long there Ephesus was fifty miles from Miletus and so four days journey going and coming And if Paul stay'd longer than three or four days at the most at Miletus he could not be at Jerusalem at Pentecost Now the chief Cities of Asia he shews were at a great distance from Ephesus and at a greater from Miletus and therefore the Elders sent for could not be those of the several Cities of Asia but of Ephesus and then it cannot be deny'd but in that Church there was a plurality of Elders or Bishops That there was there a plurality of Elders or Presbyters has been often granted That these were Bishops in the Ecclesiastical use of the word is still denied Upon that the Question turns and our Author says not a word to it But this ruins Dr. Hammond's notion For the account given by St. Luke of the Apostle's Journey will not permit the Bishops of Asia to assemble at Miletus Should it be granted that this notion is not tenable Diocesan Episcopacy will not be much concern'd For it has been always maintain'd and may be so still without this support But yet after all this pains the Argument on which Mr. Clerkson does so much insist does it no hurt at all For what if the Apostle did not reach Jerusalem by Pentecost St. Luke does no where affirm it and no circumstance of his Journey or Arival does evince it Nay the very account of his Voyage makes it incredible Chrysostom reckons forty-two days from the days of Unleaven'd Bread when he was at Philippi to his arival (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Acts 21. Ser. 45. at Caesarea where he stay'd many days i. e. more than he tarry'd any where else which at lowest reckoning must be eight And so the Pentecost must find him at Caesarea as that Father affirms though (b) Annal. 58. S. 117. Baronius mistaketh his words and would understand them of Jerusalem And Chrysostom upon those words intending if it were possible to be at Jerusalem observes how the Apostle is mov'd after the manner of men (c) Chrys in Act. 21. Ser. 43. How he designs hom he hastens and yet often times misses of his end Which implies that in his opinion that he had not attain'd what he intended so earnestly i. e. to be at Jerusalem by Pentecost Nay so uncertain is this whole matter that to some Writers (a) Theophil in Acts 21. Paul seem'd to pass the Pentecost at Troas twelve days after he had set out By our Author's computation he has scarce two days left for seventy five miles which were between Caesarea and Jerusalem But our Author's reckoning has omissions For he makes no allowance between Tyre and Ptolemais which is thirty two miles The time in which Paul's company went before by Sea from Troas to Assos and Paul went by Land is not reckon'd For St. Luke speaks of the whole company (b) Acts 20.6 13 14. We abode there seven days And then we went before the ship and sayl'd to Assos And when he met with us at Assos What time this took up is uncertain as well as the distance between Troas and Assos Besides three or four days is something of the shortest allowance for his stay at Miletus that the Elders of Ephesus might be sent for and come to him The Journey took up four days and less than one day cannot be well allow'd them to confer The Voyage from Miletus to Tyre is of an uncertain time and five days seems something of the least What is to be allow'd for the many days stay at Caesarea is still uncertain And in common understanding of the phrase it cannot signify so few as would permit the Apostle to be at Jerusalem at Pentecost Bishop Pearson (a) Annal. Paulini A. 59. p. 16. therefore a person of great Exactness having considered this matter concluded that Paul could not be at Jerusalem till after Pentecost These are his words Venit Hierosolyma cum collectis post Pentecosten mense Junio ubi tumultu concitato c. If therefore this be all Mr. Clerkson has to insist on that St. Paul could not stay above four days at Miletus because he could not otherwise arrive at Jerusalem before Pentecost his proof amounts to little For it appears much more probable that the Apostle arriv'd not thither till after that Feast and therefore might have stay'd at Miletus as long as he had pleas'd But since Dr. Hammond allow'd St. Paul to reach Jerusalem within the time design'd I must confess that the Argument is good against him but not against his notion of the Bishops of Asia or the passage of Irenaeus unless we may suppose those Bishops assembled at Ephesus in expectation of St. Paul's coming thither and by that means in a readiness to meet him at Miletus This is all the account our Author thought fit to give out of Scripture concerning the plurality of Bishops in one City How well he has made good his Paradox let the Reader judge It is Acknowledg'd says he (b) Prim. Ep. p. 14. that both in Scripture-times and long after the Bishops Diocese was so small that one Altar was sufficient for it See Mr. Mede 's Proof of Churches in the Second Century p. 29. Nay more than this it should seem that in those first times before Dioceses were divided into the lesser and subordinate Churches we now call Parishes and Presbyters assign'd to them they had not only one Altar in one Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the Company or Corporation of the Faithful united under one Bishop and that was in the City and place where the Bishop had his residence It should seem says Mr. Mede and again thus perhaps is Ignatius to be understood and then however I here determine nothing With
the chief of Italy all the children are christen'd in one Font in the old Church of St. John Which Leandro Alberti (c) Gloss v. Baptisterium says was a Temple of Mars which Dufresne observes Tanquam veteris moris Institutum It being the old way for all who liv'd in or near the same City to be baptiz'd in one Church i. e. the Cathedral But the use of the Altar was more general and more constant for every Lord's day in the primitive times all the Faithful receiv'd the Sacrament And the administration of it does require more time and more room than any other office of Christian Religion For more may pray together or hear the Scriptures or a Sermon with convenience than can receive the Sacrament which was delivered (a) Eus H. E. l. 6. c. 43. with a form of words to every person that receiv'd it to which the receiver answered Amen So that in a numerous Congregation it must grow inconvenient and soon stand in need of several other Churches Wherefore it seems most probable that the Christian Assemblies were first parted on this account and Titles or parish-Churches erected as supplements of the chief Altar Let a man but consider the state of the Church of Rome under (b) Eus H. E. l. 6. c. 43. Cornelius when above fifteen hundred persons were maintain'd from the publick stock of the Church what numbers of believers there must be in that City and then let him conceive if he can how so many thousands could meet every Lord's day in one Church and receive the Communion at one Altar And in Lions c where in Severus his time there are said to have been eighteen thousand Christians it is not easy to conceive how one Altar could be sufficient We are told indeed that we have many thousands in a Parish that hath but one Altar but if our Communions (d) Irenaeus martyrizatus est cum omni populo Christianorum XVIII M. Thron S. Benig ap Dacher T. 1. were as frequent and as numerous as those of the Primitive Church many Altars I am sure would be necessary to such Parishes To conclude the words of the counterfeit Damasus now under debate do not deny to those Parish-Churches the administration of the Eucharist for when he appoints them for Baptism and Penance he doth not exclude all other Christian Offices such as Prayer reading of the Scripture or the Communion but names those of Baptism and Penance because even in his time they were not allow'd to every Parish-Church But this Damasus liv'd later than to think of a Church without Mass or without an Altar and he had taken care not only for such Churches but for the Sepulchres of Martyrs that they should have Altars raised over them and Masses celebrated long before the time of Marcellus and ascribes the ordering of that matter to (a) Pseud Damas in Felix 1. Felix 1. And (b) Baron An. 275. Baronius seems to be troubled that this Author had not done it sooner and therefore thinks fit to let the Reader know that all this had been provided before And lastly the expression quasi Dioceses referring to Baptism and Penance import that those services indeed belong'd only to a Cathedral and therefore the granting of those priviledges to Parishes made them seem like Dioceses whereas * Innoc. Ep. ad Dacen Aug. Conf. c. 2. vid. Euseb H. E. l. 7. c. 11. l. 9. c. 2. every Martyrium every Cemitery and common Title had the priviledge of the Communion That there was no preaching in the Parishes of Rome may very well be granted without reducing the Christians to a single Congregation For if (a) Soz. l. 7. c. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozomen was not misinform'd there was no preaching in any Church in Rome not in the Bishops for in Rome neither the Bishop nor any other taught in the Church And Valesius takes notice that we have no Homilies of any Roman Bishop before Leo 1. and to confirm this of the Historian he observes that Cassiodore who was well acquainted with the customs of the City had translated this passage which he would scarce have done and publish'd it in Rome it self if he had not known it to be true (b) Prim. Ep p. 16 17. To carry on this notion of but one assembly of Christians in the greatest Cities (c) Petav. Animad in Epiph. p. 276. Petavius is cited with an ample character that he had no superior for learning among the Jesuits nor any to whom Prelacy is more oblig'd But our Author is as much oblig'd to him as the Prelats if while other Witnesses speak doubtfully and with reserve He is positive that in the fourth Age there was but one Church or Title ordinarily in a City and proves it by Epiphanius who speaks of more Titles in Alexandria as a thing singular and peculiar to that City there being no instance thereof but in Rome I am willing to believe our Author did not read that place himself but took it upon trust For Petavius affirms there the direct contrary to that for which our Author makes him so positive For these are his Words You may guess says he that this was a singular manner of Alexandria or at leastwise in use in very few Churches that Epiphanius makes so particular mention of this way of Alexandria as if it had been peculiar to that Church but the same thing had been long before ordered elsewhere particularly in Rome I do not doubt but there were many Titles or Churches within the pomaeria of the greater Cities since the people could not all meet within the Walls of one Church and therefore had Presbyters appointed for those Churches into which the Christians were distributed In smaller and lesse populous Towns there was but one Church in which all were assembled together such as the Cities of Cyprus were upon which account Epiphanius observes the manner of Alexandria as an unusual thing and strange to his People This is what Petavius delivers there You may guess says he as our Author fancies that this was peculiar to Alexandria but the same thing was ordered elsewhere and he did not doubt but it was so in all the greater Cities But that Petavius should prove this also by the Council of Neocaesarea can 13. is an oversight yet stranger For though Petavius cites that Canon yet it is not to prove this or any thing like it but having entred into a discourse about Chorepiscopi he shews from that Canon that they were Bishops and not Presbyters because they had the priviledge of officiating in the city-City-Church in the presence of the Bishop or his Presbyters whereas that priviledge is expresly deny'd the Country-Presbyters But how our Author came to fancy this passage to be for his purpose I will not undertake to divine I have hitherto only shew'd what Petavius had observ'd concerning the Alexandrian Parishes but whether his Observation be just is another question
For my part I cannot find any reason to believe that all the Cyprian Cities were so small or if they were that Epiphanius would upon that account have made such a frigid Observation as to take notice of that as a singularity in Alexandria which was common to every great City That which was peculiar to Alexandria was this that the Parishes were assign'd to fix'd Presbyters which has been elsewhere observ'd (a) Vind. of Prim. ch p. 65 66. The Titles of Rome were serv'd by the Presbyters in common as (b) Val. Annot. in Sozom. l. 1. c. 15. Valesius observes out of Innocent 1. Epistle to Decentius And what he adds of his own as more proper to shew that in (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Ap. 2. T. 1. p. 739. Julius 1. his time there were Parishes appropriated to certain Presbyters has but a slight foundation For the expression of Athanasius though it may bear the sense of Valesius seems to be more naturally and simply render'd by Nannius that Vito the Roman Presbyter assembled fifty Bishops and not that fifty Bishops assembled in Vito 's Church or the place where he assembled the people This Periphrasis seems too frigid and affected when every Church had its proper name by which it was call'd It may perhaps seem strange that a Presbyter should assemble and preside over Bishops It were strange indeed if he should do it in his own right but when he acts as the Deputy of the Bishop of Rome this will be no wonder for the Legats of Bishops always sate in the place that belong'd to those they represented tho' themselves were but Presbyters or sometimes Deacons And that Vito should be appointed to preside in this Synod is answerable to the character and employments he had born before For he seems to be the person (a) Sozom. l. 1. c. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Ep. 1. de 7. Syn. Niceph Cal. l. 8. c. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sent by Sylvester to the council of Nice with Vincentius for though the Latin writers often call him Victor yet the Greeks constantly write Vito and the Latins sometimes Vitus the fittest person surely to moderate in a Synod where the Council of Nice was concern'd in which he had so eminent a part There is one thing more observable in the distribution of Parishes and Presbyters in Rome which I cannot omit because I do not know that hath been taken notice of by any It is that every Church in Rome had two Presbyters to attend it and not one only as the Churches of Alexandria This information we have from Hilary the Roman Deacon in his Comment on (b) Ambr. in 1 Tim. c. 3. Nunc autem septem Diaconos esse oportet aliquantos Presbyteros ut bini per Ecclesias unus in Civitate Episcopus Omni enim Hebdomada offerendum est etsi non quotidie peregrinis incolis tamen vel bis in Heb. domada etsi non desint qui prope quotidie baptizentur aegri 1 Tim. c. 3. which is published among the works of St. Ambrose but observ'd long since by learned men to be the work of this Luciferian Deacon This Author speaking of the order of the Roman Church and comparing it with part of the Jewish Temple notes that they had twenty four courses of Priests but now we must have but seven Deacons and Rome had no more as Sozomen (a) Sozom. l. 7. c. 19. observes whereas other Churches confin'd themselves to no definite number And besids these Deacons there must be such a number of Presbyters that there may be two for every Church For the inhabitants Communicate twice a week (b) Vid. Hieron Apol. adv Jovin et August Ep. 118. ad Januar. and their Sick are to be Baptiz'd almost every day who according to the practice of those times were to receive the Communion upon which account they are mention'd in this place But to put this matter beyond all doubt it is evident from several Writers cotemporary with Epiphanius that it could not be noted as a singularity in Alexandria to have many Parish Churches in it since the same thing is occasionally reported of most great Cities in that time in Rome (c) Opt. Milev l. 2. con Parnen Optatus informs us that there were above forty Churches when Victor Garbiensis came thither which was long before his time And it will be as much to our purpose if Optatus be understood of the state of Rome in his own time since he wrote under Valens (d) Hieron in Catal. in Opt. as St. Jerom informs us who dy'd in the year three hundred seventy eight But Optatus wrote about the year three hundred seventy as may be gather'd from his own words (a) Opt. l. 1. v. 3 where he reckons but sixty and odd years from the beginning of Dioclesian's Persecution to the time of his Writing But Epiphanius (b) Epiph. in prolog Panor began his work against Heresies in the year three hundred seventy four When he wrote of the Manichees (c) Epiph Haer. 66. n. 20. Anim. Petav. 1. it was the year seventy six The Arian Heresy comes afterwards at some distance where he speaks of this custom of Alexandria So that making the largest allowance that can be requir'd for Optatus his words he must be granted to have wrote before Epiphanius In Milan there were many Churches at the same time for St. Ambrose (d) Ambr. Ep. 33. id Ep. 85. names several for example Portiana Nova Vetus Ambratiana Romana Faustae In Constantinople we have an account of many Churches before Epiphanius his time (e) Euseb l. 3. de vit Const c. 48. for Constantine built there many Oratories and vast Churches as well within the City as the Suburbs (f) Socr. l. 1. c. 16. Socrates names two that of Irene and the Apostles the former was afterwards joyn'd to Sophia (g) Id. l. 2. c. 16. by Constantius tho' it was from a small Church rais'd by Constantine to be very magnificent and large yet his Son building a great Church hard by it concluded both in one enclosure and under one name (a) Theoph. in Chron. Niceph. Hist l. 7. c. 49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophanes and Nicephorus Calistus reckon others as three to the Honour of Christ under several denominations of Wisdom Peace and Power One bore the name of the Apostles And besides these he built Martyria for Mocius Acacius Agathonicus and Menas In (b) An. 342. Constantius his time there is mention of the Church of St. Paul in Constantinople (c) Socr. l. 2. c. 12. In short the Historians who speak of that City from Constantin the Great downward speak of the Churches of the City as familiarly as we should of those of London without taking any notice of it as an unusual thing So the Bishop of C. P. is sometimes styl'd from the Church sometimes from the
he was only a Monk but our Author in his haste was pleas'd to create him a Bishop But if he does too much honour to his person by one mistake he does as much disgrace his seat by another For though Stephanus make Hypselis a Village yet was it not so when Arsenius was Bishop there for this Arsenius the Meletian Bishop so famous in the story of Athanasius (s) Athan. Ap. 2. p. 786. T. 1. styles himself Bishop of the City of Hypselis Socrates speaking of the same person says (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 1. c. 32. that he subscrib'd the condemnation of Athanasius as Bishop of the City of Hypselis with the same right hand which was pretended to have been cut off by Athanasius and Epiphanius (u) Epiph. Haer. 66. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of this place gives it the same title For giving an account of Scythianus the Father of the Manichean doctrin he says that he came to Thebais to a City call'd Hypselis And to conclude Ptolomy (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 makes it the Metropolis of the Country call'd from it Hypseliotes (y) Prim. Ep. p. 21. Dracontius being made a Bishop in the territory of Alexandria could have no City for his seat (z) Athan. Ep. ad Drac Our Author pronounces too rashly from this passage for the Territory of Alexandria is the same with its Nomus or Prefecture and in the same Nomus there may be more Cities than one otherwise all Egypt must have but six and thirty Cities for into so many Nomi it was divided But that this Dracontius had a City for his seat our Author might have learnt from Athanasius (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Ep. ad Antioch in a place which is often cited in this chapter It was Hermopolis the lesser which Ptolomy (b) Ptol. l 4. Steph. places in the Alexandrian Region and the only place he mentions there besides Alexandria (c) Prim. Ep. p. 21. Secontaurus was a very small and contemptible Village that Ischyras was made Bishop of containing so few Inhabitants that there was never Church there before And is this then to be a model of Primitive Episcopacy But this place deserves a more particular consideration This Ischyras who pretended to be a Presbyter of Meletius or Colluthus his Ordination accus'd Athanasius of forcing his Church overthrowing his Communion-Table and breaking the Chalice although it was prov'd he never was a Presbyter nor had any Church for there never had been any in his Village For a reward of calumny this Hamlet was erected into a Bishop's seat by Constantius in opposition to the Catholick faith to the rules of the Church and to (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Ap. p. 802. p. 793. ancient tradition and usage of that Country Athanasius (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Ap. 2. p. 802. Socr. l. 1. c. 27. is very particular in his Description of this place which was made the scene of his Accusation and tells us that Mareotis the Region in which this Village was had always belong'd to the Bishop of Alexandria as part of his Diocese that here never had been a Bishop nor so much as a Chorepiscopus before Ischyras but the Villages were distributed to Presbyters some having ten some more of them to make up one Parish In this Region there were fourteen Parish Presbyters and thirteen Deacons as appears by their subscriptions to the Letter they sent to the Synod of Tyre on the behalf of their Bishop This was the state of that place and since our Author was not asham'd of urging this instance to countenance his notion I am content the whole cause should be try'd upon this issue and that it may be judg'd by this instance which Episcopacy was the primitive Diocesan or Congregational Here was a large Region that had many Churches and many more Villages so near Alexandria that they could not want Christians in the earliest times yet we are assur'd by a (f) Athan. Ap. 2. p. 792. competent Judge of this matter that this Region never had a Bishop of its own but was always under the Bishop of Alexandria who at certain times visited it in person But about three hundred years after St. Mark had planted the Church of Alexandria Constantius upon the Instigation of the Arians made one of the least of these Villages a Bishop's seat against all Rule and Prescription as Athanasius contends Judge then which is most ancient or most primitive in this place the Diocesan or the Parish Bishop And since the council of Sardica is obliquely tax'd by Mr. Clerkson as guilty of Innovation upon the account of forbidding Bishops to be made in Villages excepting such where Bishops had been formerly made This passage is sufficient to clear and justifie that Canon against frivolous reflections since it appears from hence that there was too much reason to put a check to the innovations of the Arians who for the encouragement and strengthning of the party took upon them to multiply Bishopricks contrary to the ancient tradition and practice of the Church (g) Prim. Ep. p. 21. That was little better where the (h) Gro. Alex. p. 110. Anon. 345. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 writers of the life of Chrysostom tell us Theophilus of Alexandria setled a Bishop How long shall we have Innovations urg'd upon us for proof of Primitive Episcopacy Theophilus is justly blam'd by all the writers of Chrysostom's life for erecting new Bishopricks against the Canons of the Church in places unseemly and where there had been no Bishop before And such wâ—â— this place which our Author has produc'd for an Episcopal seat it never had any Bishop before Theophilus ordain'd one there A happy place where primitive Episcopacy began about four hundred years after Christ when from the days of St. Mark to that time it had lain under the yoke of Diocesan Usurpation Having travell'd through Egypt not with the usual curiosity to see great Cities and Pyramids but with an humble inquisitiveness to look for Villages and the obscurest places that had been the seats of Bishops let us now sit down and recollect what we have observ'd We have found after great search that two Villages in Lybia where Cities are not very frequent once in distracted times had a Bishop though they had been Parishes belonging to Erythros for near four hundred years after Christ One Village we find had a succession of two Bishops but the circumstances of the place or people are altogether unknown Another Village we observ'd in Lybia that gave name to a people and had a considerable territory Four Cities we mistook for Villages not because they were small but for want of skill One Village wanted nothing of a City but the name and to make amends for this defect a large Country was joyn'd to it One was made a Bishops seat for private ends about the beginning of the
the title of Ordo Provincialis of which I must give a more particular account hereafter And for the Testimony of Sozomen it is to be observ'd that he mentions the ordaining of Bishops in Arabia and in Cyprus as a thing unusual and of rare example because he compares it with the practice of the Scythians who had but one Bishop for a Nation though they had many Cities But let us leave this wild Country and follow our Author whither he is pleas'd to lead (e) Prim. Ep. p. 21 22. In Syria Theodoret tells us of Paul a Confessor in the Persecution by Licinius one of the Fathers of the first Council of Nice and Bishop of Neocaesarea which he says is a Castle or a Fort near Euphrates Why this place should be reckon'd among Villages I can see no reason since the word (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 7. which he renders Castle or Fort signifies any fortify'd place for even Cities pass under this name as Gotofred (g) Etsi non sim nescius de omnibus munitis locis in quibus civitates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quoque dici Gotofr in l. 15. de Erog Mil. Annon has observed and those places which Eunapius (h) Eunap excerp leg calls Fortresses Ammianus Marcellinus (i) Ammian Marc. l. 18. p. 187. styles Cities and Pinaca a City of the Parthians upon the Tygris is styl'd by Strabo (l) Strab. l. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Fortress consisting of three Castles which made it in a manner a Tripolis i. e. three Cities It is not therefore fair to reduce this Town into the condition of a Village because it was a Garrison and a fortify'd place whereas notwithstanding this it might have been a City but I will not contend about words For though this place should have been no better than a Village yet are we never the nearer to know the extent of this Confessor's Bishoprick unless our Author would think fit to confine him within the walls for perhaps the bounds of this Diocese were laid out when the Castle was besieg'd (m) P. 22. Maronia is describ'd by Jerom to be a Village 30 miles from Antioch and we meet (n) Georg. Alex. vit Chrys p. 236. with a Bishop there and the name of him Timothy That there was such a Village Jerom (o) Hieron in vit Malchi Mon. tells us but that it had a Bishop neither he nor any body else ever said before our Author This little place indeed had a Church and was the possession of Evagrius a Kinsman of St. Jerom who was sometime Bishop of Antioch and probably this Village though distant 30 miles did belong to that City But George in the life of Chrysostom saith it had a Bishop named Timothy He says indeed that there was a Bishop of Maronia but that this was the place neither he nor any body else affirm'd before There were two Cities of this name one in the Syrian Chalcis and the other in Thrace both which Ptolomy (p) Ge. Ptol. l. 5. l. 3. mentions The Bishop of the latter in all probability was the person who suffer'd in the cause of Chrysostom for he was of his Province Thrace having long before been subject to Constantinople and in less then 30 years after we find one (q) Docimasius Diaecesis Thraciae Provinciae Rhodopes Civitatis Maroniae Conc. Eph. p. 535. Ed. Labb Docimasius Bishop of that City among the subscribers of the first Council of Ephesus and many ages before this Polybius (r) Polyb. Hist l. 5. makes mention of this City To proceed Athanasius (s) Athan. Ep. ad Solitar vit deg p. 812. T. 1. gives us the name of a Bishop in Calanae and of another in Siemium which were Villages or such obscure inconsiderable places as no Geographer takes notice of King James his Regulators were not more dangerous men to the Franchises of our Corporations than this Author is to ancient Cities for if there be but a letter amiss the Charter is forfeited and it sinks into an obscure Village This is the case of Calanae because there is a C. where there should be a B. our Author has dis-franchis'd it The place where Euphration was Bishop was Balanea so it is writ in Antonin's Itinerary 27 miles from Gabala and 24 from Antaradus Stephanus (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Steph. styles it a City of Phoenicia in his time call'd Leueas and adds that Epicrates had writ an Encomium upon it Ptolomy (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ptol. l. 5. names it next to Paltis and so does (x) Plin. l. 5. Pliny in the same order it lies in Athanasius But why must this be Euphration's Town Because the same Euphration among the subscribers of the first council of Nice writes himself Bishop of Balaneae but I have better proof than this it is because Athanasius himself makes him Bishop of that City For speaking of the Bishops who were depriv'd for adhering to him he says (y) Athan. Ap. 1. Initio that Balaneae mourns for Euphration For Siemium whether it be a Village or a City or any thing I cannot tell 't is possibly a mistake of the Copist for the name of some City For it is not likely that Athanasius who had Bishops of the principal Cities of all parts sufferers for his sake would think fit to omit so many of considerable and known titles and to name the Bishop of a place unknown to all Geographers Here may be room for conjecture but I dare not venture knowing the temper of my Adversaries to be too captious to make necessary allowance for critical divination But it is in vain it seems to contend (z) Prim. Ep. p. 22. for the Council of Antioch in their Synodal Epistle (a) Euseb H. E. l. 7. concerning Paulus Samosatenus mention (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops both in Country and Cities These Country Bishops who were the flatterers of Paulus Samosatenus Valesius (c) Chorepiscopos intelligere videtur eos enim distinguit Epistola ab Episcopis Urbium Vale. takes to be Chorepiscopi and the meaness of their behaviour makes it probable that they were of his own Diocese and had dependence upon him But whatever they were it does not appear from this or any thing else that they were Parish Bishops for even the Chorepiscopi had many Villages and Congregations under their superintendence Let it not seem tedious to the Reader that he is led on through Villages only and obscure places for it is in his way to the holy Land yet to mortify his curiosity he must not see either Jerusalem or Caesarea or any other City only he may if he please take notice that in Palestine Jamnia (d) Prim. ep p. 22. was a Village in Strabo's account so is Lydda in Josephus yet both Bishops seats in Tyrius his Catalogue so is Nais there and
the site of many of those places is at this time as uncertain as where Simon the Tanner's house stood in Joppa or Pilate's in Jerusalem and yet such things and many more as minute are shewn to Travellers who have more civility than to gain-say the Tradition of the Country of which the Inhabitants make no small gain And the reason why Geographers have not mention'd these places in Tyrius his late Catalogue was not for shame for they have many places as inconsiderable but because they were found only in a Catalogue and mention'd in no History From (a) Prim. Ep. p. 24. Palestine and the Patriarchat of Jerusalem we come to Cyprus where Sozomen (b) l. 7. c. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tells us it was usual to have Bishops in Villages as also in other Countries without regard it seems to any restraint which some Bishops endeavour'd to put upon that practice and thus it continues with the Cypriots to this age The first thing I shall take notice of is a little disingenuous Artifice of our Author in transposing these words in other Countries as if Sozomen when he had named Cyprus had added other Countries indefinitely and spoken of a thing usual in many Countries But that Historian shewing the different traditions and practice of several Nations observes that the Scythians though they had many Cities yet had but one Bishop In other Nations as in Cyprus and Arabia there were Bishops in Villages setting one unusual practice against another and intimating that he knew of no other Countries where they had village-Village-Bishops and therefore having no other Instances in the Catholick Church he takes notice of the Montanists and Novatians who in Phrygia had Bishops in Villages So that from this passage we ought rather to conclude that it was not usual in other Countries besides those specified in this passage to have Village-Bishops at least-wise that Sozomen knew no other or did not remember any when he wrote that passage Now though in Cyprus some Villages were Bishops seats yet may we not conclude that either all or the greatest part were such nor can we make any guess how many Villages went to make up a Diocese in Cyprus Gratian (c) De Bell. Cypr. p. 1. Bishop of Ameria tells us that in the Island there are 840 Villages and about two hundred thousand Souls The ancient state of this Island is not to be taken from the present calamitous condition under which it groans for in Trajan's time (d) Dio. Cass in Trajano there were more men destroy'd here by the Jews in one day than are now in all the Country Mr. Clerkson tells us without any Author that whereas there are betwixt twenty and thirty Bishops in that Island and it is likely the number has decreas'd there as in many other places there are but four of their seats which have the face of a City As to the present state of Cyprus (e) In Cypriana Provincia quatuor tantum Episcopi suffraganei numerantur Dr. Smith Graec. stat Hod. p. 71. there are but four suffragan Bishops in the whole Island and if Mr. Clerkson had consulted his Miraeus upon this occasion he had found there but four Greek Bishops and five Latins before it was taken by the Turks In Hierocles his Notitia it had fifteen Cities and yet in that of Leo the wise we find but thirteen Bishops nor can we find that ever it had more in elder times for Carolus a S. Paulo (f) Geogr. Sacr. p. â—06 could not find above twelve Bishops seats from the subscriptions of Councils and other ancient writings The Synodical letter (g) Baron Anal. A. 643. of the Cyprian Bishops to Pope Theodorus against the Monothelites has no subscriptions and so the number of them is unknown and what number the Synod (h) Socr. l. 6. c. 10. under Epiphanius that condemned the writings of Origen did consist of is as much in the dark But that Epiphanius (i) Vindic. of Prim. Ch. p. 554 555. had himself a large Diocese in Cyprus hath been already shew'd in another place In pursuit of Primitive Episcopacy we are carry'd from Cyprus to Armenia where the Catholick had above 1000 Bishops under his obedience as (a) l. 7. c. 32. Otto Frisingenses writes from the report of the Armenian Legates and after him (b) Ann. 1145. Baronius and our Brierwood (c) Prim. Ep. p. 24 25. Yet both the Armenia's in Justinian 's time who made the most of them made but four Provinces which had in all but twenty Cities If the Armenian Bishops had not amounted to above the twentieth part of the number yet more than one half of them must be Village-Bishops Since Brierwood is cited for voucher of these 1000 Bishops I am content to submit the whole matter to his Arbitration He (d) Brier Enq. p. 127. thought that Otho mistook perhaps Obedience for Communion as he verily believ'd he did for the Communion which the Armenians maintain'd with other Jacobites extended indeed very far but the jurisdiction of Armenia contain'd only four Provinces in which small Circuit that such a multitude of Bishops should be found is utterly incredible for all the Bishops of Armenia in Leo 's Novel and those of Cilicia in Guilelmus Tyrius put together exceed not the number of thirty And although I find that Justinian divided the two Armenia 's into four Provinces yet were not for that cause the number of Bishops increased any whit the more (e) Nov. 31. c. 2. Justinian when he made a new distribution of Armenia into four Provinces made an express provision (f) Quae vero ad Sacerdotia spectant volumus in eadem manere forma quantum ad ipsa nil penitus innovetur that the Ecclesiastical state of the Country should not be affected with this alteration of the civil forms and therefore we find in all Armenia that belonged to the Roman Empire but two Ecclesiastical Provinces in Leo's Diatyposis which was the ancient distribution of that Country Of these two Justinian made three and annexed to them some Cities from other Provinces which notwithstanding remain'd in their former dependance as to Ecclesiastical matters To these Provinces he added a fourth which was never before reduc'd into the form of a Province which was before divided into several Satrapies of barbarous names This is represented in Leo's Notitia (g) Nov. 31. c. 2. under the title of the higher Mesopotamia or fourth Armenia and divided into two parts In the first we have Martyropolis mention'd by Justinian and 33 Bishops seats more under the Metropolis of Amida And in the second part there are most of those barbarous names mention'd by Justinian Sophene Bilabitene Astianica Anzitene together with Cetharizan call'd by Justinian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Notitia if I mistake not styl'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though that pass'd with the Transcriber for the name of a Town In
this division there are 17 Bishops in all 52. At the bottom of this last division we have this Remark that this Armenia is Independent and belongs to no Patriarch upon the account of St. Gregory of Armenia and it has 200 Cities and fortify'd Towns So far were all the Armenia's from having 1000 Bishops in the ninth Century And before this about the middle of the fifth Century we find in the first Armenia but six Bishops subscribing to the Synodical Epistle (h) Conc. Chalced. Pars. 3. of that Province in confirmation of the Council of Chalcedon and in the second Armenia but three And yet the Metropolitans of each speak (i) Cum Sancto Concilio quod mecum est Ep. Arm. 1. Una cum Episcopis nostrae Provinciae Ep. Episc Arm. 2. of their Synod as entire So far is the most ancient state of Armenia from the fabulous pretences of those Legats Nor do the Armenian Legats say there were 1000 Bishops in Armenia but under the Armenian Catholick whose Jurisdiction might reach much farther than Armenia Some affirm that all the Christians in Cathaia and India were under this Armenian Patriarch So Josephus Indus (l) Jos Indi Nav. c. 133. p. 204. Muller Disque de Cathaia p. 89. and how many Bishops might be in those Countries in the twelfth Century will be something hard to be inform'd And even now that Catholick is not confin'd to Armenia though the condition of his Churches be very low For in a Catalogue (m) Hist Critique de la creance de rel du Levant p. 217. of the present Bishopricks under the Armenian Patriarch we find several in Persia and others in Cappadocia and others belonging to other Provinces and all together scarce make up an hundred Arch-Bishops and Bishops But to speak freely and to conclude this point the relation of the Armenian Legats seems to need confirmation For besides that there is no account of the tenth part of this number of Bishops belonging to the Catholick either before or since There is otherwise very little credit to be given to the report of these Legats For one of them (n) Baron A. 1145. 523. when the Pope said Mass affirm'd he saw a Sun beam of unusual brightness rest upon the Pope's head and two Doves ascending and descending in it How easie was it for these to make 1000 Bishops in a remote Country when they had the confidence to put such gross fictions upon the Court of Rome But both had one end to flatter the Pope who was now in some distress driven out of Rome and residing at Viterbo And therefore (o) Deficientibus Romanis Arnaldistis universus terrarum Orbis confluit Baron the new accession of so ample Communion as that of a 1000 remote Bishops was to comfort him for the undutifulness of those nearer home and it is the usual artifice of that See when its authority declines at home to dress up some Impostor who shall come from the ends of the earth to worship the Pope in the name of some great Patriarch or some numerous Eastern Sect. In Lazica Justinian (p) Nov. 28. finds seven Castles and but one City and that made so by himself (q) Prim. ep p. 25. Petravon Yet in the Diatyposis of Leo in Lazica there are fifteen Bishops belonging to one Metropolis It is a miserable thing to travel so far for an Argument and to bring back such a trifle Lazica in Justinian's time had but one City And in Leo the Wise his Reign i. e. 350 years after had 15 Bishops So long tract of time may have made great alteration in that Country and produce as many Cities as there were Bishops and therefore this Argument for so many Village-Bishops in that Country is but an humble begging of the Question and depends entirely upon the good nature of the Reader But the fact it self is as uncertain as the conclusion drawn from it For it does not appear that in Leo the Wise his time Lazica had so many Bishops For in the (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Notitia Printed by Car a S. Paulo and after him by Goar and last of all by Dr. Beveridge said to be made in that Emperors reign A. D. 890. Lazica had but 4 Bishops under the Metropolis of Phasis and in an old Notitia of the Patriarchat of C. P. we find the same number But that which our Author cites and commonly passes under the name of Leo's Diatyposis is of the later date as appears by several names of places later than Leo's time And even in that Lazica had not the same bounds as it had in Justinian's time partly mentioned in his Novel but more exactly by Procopius (s) Procop. B. Pers l. 2. For when Lazica had 15 Bishops they were under the Metropolis of Trapezus which belong'd to Pontus Polemoniacus and in the Ancient Notitiae placed under Neocaesarea but at a great distance from Justinian's Lazica and that exhibited in the old Notitiae For from Trapezus to Phasis Strabo (t) Str. l. 12. reckons 300 miles and we are told by Procopius (u) Probel Pers l. 2. that all that lyes off Lazica on the West of the River Phasis is but a days journey for a Footman These 15 Bishops therefore will do no service to the Congregational design since it is uncertain what sort of places they had for their Seats or what extent of Diocese each may have Only this will appear that supposing Trapezus the Metropolis in Leo's Diatyposis to be the remotest place of the Province Westward the length will be near 400 miles to be distributed between 15 Bishops I ought not to dismiss this instance without taking notice of the condescension of our Author in following the blundering Translatour of the Novels and putting Petravon or Petraeon (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Petra by the same Grammar as one might take the Nominative of London to be Londinensium In Lycaonia and the parts adjacent we have more instances hereof Here (z) Act. 14.2 3. the Apostles ordained Elders in every Church Those Elders were Bishops as they assure us who have modell'd the Principles by which Prelacy may be maintain'd with most advantage and without which whatever their Predecessours thought they judg'd it not defensible If one should be so peevish as to deny that these Presbyters were Bishops and oppose to the opinion of Dr. Hammond the stream of ancient and modern Interpreters an elaborate and hopeful argument would come to nothing But because it is so meek and harmless a thing let these Presbyters be Bishops by courtesie and let us abide the consequence (a) Prim. Ep. p. 26. The places where these Bishops were constituted are mention'd v. 20 21. Antioch Iconium Derbe Lystra lesser Towns or Country Granges and Villages Be it so But did the Apostles confine the care and authority of these Bishops wholly to these Villages in which
they were ordain'd Without this concession the argument will have no force and before we grant let us consider what our Author offers concerning these places Antioch was the Metropolis of Pisidia and a great City yet not so great but all the Inhabitants (y) Prim. Episc p. 25 26. in a manner could meet together to hear the word St. Luke (b) Acts 13.44 indeed says that the whole City almost came together to hear the word but that the Jews Synagogue would contain all the City he neither says nor can we reasonably believe For expressions of this nature have an allow'd favour of construction among all men and when a whole City is said to come together men understand only a great multitude without any rigorous computation what proportion such an assembly may bear to the whole City Moses is said (c) Deut. 31.30 to speak in the Ears of all the Congregation of Israel the words of his song (d) Deut. 32.45 and he made an end of speaking all these words to all Israel When Moses number'd the people they were above six hundred thousand men fit for service besides women and children which could not be less than three times as many And to speak in the ears of all these together had been one of the greatest miracles that ever Moses had done and such as the holy Ghost would not have passed unobserved (e) Theodoret. Hist Relig. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All the people of the great Antioch are said to come together to see Julian the Monk All the People of C. P. come daily to us say (f) Apud Conc. Ephes the Oriental Bishops who were stoped at Chalcedon by the Emperor's order And the Author of the life of Paul Bishop of C. P. says that the whole City of C. P. came to the Church call'd by the name of the Apostles And Cyrill (g) Phot. cod 257. says that all the people of the City of Ephesus attended him to the Council St. Jerom speaking of the Penance Fabiola did on Easter Eve for marrying while her first Husband whom she had divorc'd was alive (h) Tota spectante Urbe Romana Hier. Epit. Fabiolae saith that it was in the sight of the whole City of Rome and in the same Treatise says that all the people of Rome came to the funeral of that Lady And if the greatest Cities of the world may be thought so thin of people as to be able to furnish but one Assembly what shall we say to that expression (l) Tota ad funus ejus Palestinarum Urbium turba convenit Hieron Epit. Paula of Jerom that all the people of the Cities of Palestine came to the funeral of Paula Wherefore if our Author's remark may diminish Antioch in Pisidia to the Congregational measure because the whole City almost came together to hear the Apostles the greatest Cities in the world must shrink into a single Congregation because the same expression is used of them too and without any such guard or correction as almost or in a manner (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 13. which St. Luke thought fit to interpose It may seem very unnecessary to insist so much upon the proof of a matter so obvious to every Reader But the importunity and cavils of my Adversary who snatches at such expressions as these the whole Town all the People as arguments for his Congregational Episcopacy have oblig'd me to it And whoever (i) Totius Urbis populum ad exequias Congregabat Ibid. is once engag'd with a Caviller cannot well avoid the mean drudgery of descending to very jejune explanations (n) Prim. Ep. p. 26. Iconium in Strabo (o) Str. l. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a small Town but well built by which we may judge of those places which were Bishops seats under it There are fifteen of them in Leo's Diatyposis There is but little reason to fancy any of these Bishops seats to be Villages since in the civil Notitia of the Eastern Empire ascribed to Hierocles there are seventeen Cities under the Metropolis of Iconium And tho' it might not be a very great City in Strabo's time yet being made the Residence of the chief Roman Magistrate in that Country it may reasonably be thought to have received considerable increase and so it seems to have done For Pliny (p) Datur Tetrarchia Lycaonia civitatum 14. urbe celeberrima Iconio Plin. l. 5. c. 27. takes notice of a Tetrarchy of Lycaonia on that side where it joyns to Galatia in which there were fourteen Cities of which Iconium was the most renown'd Among other Cities belonging to the Metropolis of Iconium we find Homona or Homonada◠in the whole Territory there were no less than 44. fortify'd places in the time of Pliny (q) Ibid. It was not long when Strabo wrote since those Countries had been recovered from the Tyrants and Pirats who oppress'd them and Strabo (r) Pr. l. 12. tells us that he had seen Servilius Isauricus In Constantius his time Iconium belonged (s) Ammian Marc. l. 14. Oppidum Pisidiae to Pisidia but was then so considerable that it had an Amphitheatre and publick shews which were not ordinarily exhibited but in the place where the chief Governour of the Province resided And Basil (t) Bas ep 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accounts it to Pisidia and gives (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some intimation of the rise of it into a Metropolis that anciently it was the second City i. e. after Antioch But now it is become a Metropolis and presides over a part which being made up of several pieces makes up one Province And that Lycaonia was then under it the same (x) Bas Ep. 397. Basil intimates and what else at this distance we cannot tell since the Province belonging to it is said to be made up of several parcels So that Strabo's calling it a litle Town does not conclude it to be so in after-times when it was made a Metropolis nor lessen the Towns depending upon it And this way of reasoning is as if one should observe that in Julian the Apostate's time Paris is (y) Julian in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 call'd a little Town therefore by this we may judg what pitiful Towns those of France are now which are and have for a long time been subject to that royal City Nor does it always happen that the Metropolis is greater than all the Cities under her jurisdiction (z) Prim. Ep. p. 26. Derbe in Stephanus (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strab. l. 12. is a Fort or Castle of Isauria the seat of the Tyrant Antipater This Fort being the fittest receptacle for such a person this could not be populous because of no large compass This Derbe call'd a Fort by Stephanus out of some Ancient Author is by St. Luke (b) Acts 14.6 call'd a City of Lycaonia Nor does it diminish the
of Christ therefore they had none ever since But there is sufficient evidence that these Regions Melitene Cataonia and Isauritis had Cities not long after Strabo's time Stephanus (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Steph. says that Melitene was a City of Cappadocia Ptolomy (c) Ptol. l. 5. places it among the Cities of the lesser Armenia to which in the later distribution of the Empire it did belong and two other are named as Cities belonging to that Praefecture Lucas Holstenius (d) Postea tamen Melitene extitit urbs satis nobilis H. Vales in Euseb l. 5. c. 5. Holsten in Steph. says that the Romans built this City and confirms it by Salmasius (e) Salm. in Jul. Capitol in vit Marci Plin. exercit p. 630. who calls it a City of Cappadocia And Ammianus Marcellinus (f) Ammian Marc. l. 19 20. calls it a Town of the lesser Armenia in more than one place and the Bishop of this place is made one of the Standards of Catholick Communion by the edict of Theodosius (g) Cod. Theod. l. 3. de fide Cath. Soz. l. 7. c. 9. the great And to conclude the Notitia of Hierocles names it as the first City of Armenia the lesser When Justinian (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Novel 31. c. 1. made a new distribution of Armenia in that which he call'd the third but he saith was before the second i. e. the lesser Armenia This City is made the Metropolis and commended by the titles of ancient and renown'd and he placeth (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. six Cities under it which he there names and adds that there is no alteration as to this Province but before his time it consisted of six Cities All that is new in this Order is the raising the dignity of its Title and making it Spectabilis and styling the Governour Comes Justinianeus Eustathius (l) Eustath in Dion v. 694. gives the sum of this Edict but the Copist has writ Justin for Justinian in this and several other places As for the Praefecture of Cataonia it had several known Cities in Ptolomy (m) Ptol. l. 5. the Geographer's time Cabassus Cybistra Claudiopolis and several others less known are placed in that Region which we find in later Notitiae some belonging to Cappadocia some to Isauria And as for that part which was called Isauritis or Isauria Ptolomy mentions three Cities there Ammianus Marcellinus (n) L. 14. c. 8. names two as principal Cities Seleucia and Claudiopolis But in Hierocles his Notitia there are no less than 23. These bounds of Countries were frequently alter'd and therefore we find Cities sometimes ascrib'd to one sometimes to another Province Therefore these three Prefectures may be fairly dismiss'd having nothing to say for Village-Episcopacy and though there had been Bishops there without Cities their Dioceses might have been of no less extent than those where the Bishops had Cities for their seats And 't is hard to think that three Provinces having no City could not be capable of Diocesan Bishops (o) Prim. Ep. p. 28 29. In the other two Praefectures there was Doara which is a Village in Basil That this place had an Arian Bishop in Basil's time cannot be denied and as may be conjectured by comparing some passages (p) Bas 10. 39 5. Greg. Naz. Ep. 28 ad Simplic in Basil and Gregory's Epistles seem'd to have been erected by that faction in opposition to the Bishop of Nyssa to whom it seems to have been subject And if in a matter so obscure it may be allowed to guess this is the place of Simplicia to whom Gregory Nazianzen writes for a woman and she an Arian commanded in Doara and such was Simplicia that when the Arian Bishops dy'd Basil might ordain an Orthodox person to succeed there Now for the first and second Cappadocia we have a certain account of the number of their Bishops in the middle of the fifth Century For in the Synodical Epistle (q) Ep. Synod Cappad 1. ad Leon. in calce Conc. Chalced. of the first to Leo the Emperour Alypius Bishop of Caesarea says that he had two Bishops in his Province one he sent to the Emperour according to his Order the other was sick In the second Cappadocia the Bishop of Tyanae subscribes (r) Convocatis in unum Episcopis secundae Cappadociae c. Ep. Episc 2dae Capp ad Leon. Imp. with seven Suffragans and speaks in the name of all the Bishops of that Province which he says he call'd together upon that occasion among these the Bishop of Doara subscribes And though this place was but a Village as there were some more in the same Province yet I hope the Bishops had Dioceses large enough since so great a Province was divided between so few and of these scarce one half were primitive but known to be erected in the fourth Century (s) Ep. 406. Primit Ep. p. 29. Basil advises Amphilochius Bishop of Iconium to constitute Bishops for that Province in little Towns and Villages The Province there recommended is Isauria which Basil more than once challengeth as belonging to him By some accident not known this Country became destitute of Bishops it may be upon the recovery of those Churches from the Arians for it was once over-spread with that Heresie and the Council of Seleucia might contribute not a little towards it This Province then being destitute of Bishops Basil confers with Amphilochius about the best means of filling up the vacancies and deliberates whether it were more adviseable to ordain a Metropolitan only and refer the rest to him or else to ordain Bishops (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas Ep. 400. in lesser Cities or Villages where there had been any before That is in such Cities as were less than the Metropolis or in such as were rather to be styled Villages yet might have large dependances And the words in the Original tho' otherwise render'd by the Latin Translator seem to imply not little Cities or Villages but districts of little Cities or Villages The Bishops of these places were the Suffragans of Seleucia which is called the City by way of eminence being the Metropolis and the rest called little Cities in comparison of this So Nazianzen (u) Greg. Naz. Carm. de vita sua p. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calls the suffragan Cities of Cappadocia little Cities where they are mention'd with relation to their Metropolis Nor were all these to have Bishops but such as were Episcopal seats before These are sometines styl'd Cities as it were of courtesie Under that Title they pass in Hierocles his Notitia and some of them in Ptolomy Sometimes they are called Oppida as in Ammian Marcell and here expressed by Villages yet the chiefest places in those parts of the Country In the old Notitia so often cited this Country has 29 Bishops but of those Sees several belong'd
his Province do it The reason then of this prohibition is from the place and not the Ordainers altho' it might be more necessary to apply it to Foreigners than Provincials who would take greater care to preserve ancient bounds So that if this be not an absolute Prohibition it will be hard to know what is The reason is general and holds alike whoever may be the Ordainers But (b) Prim. Ep. p. 34 35. they except such places where there had been Bishops already and forbid it to none for the future but such for which one Presbyter is sufficient and so there is room enough for Bishops in large and populous Villages What our Author mincingly calls places where there had been Bishops already the Canon both in the Greek and Latin Edition calls Cities and when he says there is room left by this Canon for Bishops in populous Villages he knew the contrary to be true For the Canon (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Si qua talis aut tam populosa civitas mentions only the case of a City if a City shall be found very populous and worthy of a Bishop let it have one So that this Synod neither leaves room for Bishops in any Villages nor signifies that it was usual before this to have Bishops in small places unless such places were Cities What our Author has in his margin that this Synod decreed that where there were twelve families there was to be a Rector is a mistake (d) Vid. Crab. T. 1. p. 331. for in this Synod there was no such Decree (e) Prim. Ep. p. 35. In Creet they tell us more than once that there were a hundred Bishops yet Pliny and Ptolomy found but forty Cities there So that the far greatest part of Titus 's Suffragans must have their Thrones in Country-Villages He seemeth to take it for granted on all hands that Crete had indeed an hundred Bishops in Titus's time On the contrary I know some (f) Thorndike Prim. Goverm c. 4. who make Titus the sole Bishop of the Island and conceive the Churches of that place governed by Presbyters under that one Bishop This is indeed contradicted by several ancient Writers And some (g) Chrysost Oecum Theophil Theodoret. say expresly that the Apostle would not commit so great an Island to one man Eusebius (h) H. E. l. 3. c. 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seems to favour Mr. Thorndike's opinion and makes Titus Bishop of the Churches of Crete In the third Century we find two Bishops of this Island mentioned and each said (i) Ego consacerdotes mei to be a Bishop of Churches There might be many more though they are no where mention'd But in Leo the first 's Reign there seem to have been no more than eight for so many subscribe the Synodical Epistle (l) Epistola Synod ad Leon. Imp. apud Car. a S. Paulo Not. Ant. of that Island In an old Notitia of the Patriarchat of C. P. Crete has one and twenty Bishops and in Hierocles his civil Notitia this Island has twenty three In the Notitia of Nilus Doxopatrius (m) Leo Allat de consens Ecc. Orient c. l. 1. c. 24. Simon Hist Crit. de Levant Moine Adv. Sacra Crete has ten Bishops This Island according to Pliny l. 4. c. 12. was 270 miles in length and fifty in breadth and therefore the Dioceses one with another must be competent when the Bishops were most numerous and very large in old time when they were but few We are at last come to Italy and one would scarce imagine that any thing very Primitive should be found there and especially in the Pope's own Province Here our Author observes (n) Prim. ep p. 36. that every petit Town has a Bishop and he cannot discover that there are more Bishops now than of old nay in that call'd in special the Roman Province there are now fewer by many than anciently as Miraeus tells us is evident by comparing the old Provincial Code with the new l. 4. p. 160. This Roman Province of which our Author has taken upon him to speak without understanding the matter consists now of such Churches as were under the Bishop of Rome's immediate Jurisdiction a great part of which were in the Country that lay next to Rome but many are remote and situated in other Provinces Now these Churches our Author observes are now fewer than anciently If he speaks of all those under the peculiar Jurisdiction of the Pope it is a mistake for they are now more numerous than heretofore But if he mean only those Bishopricks that lie near Rome in the next adjoyning Provinces of those there are fewer indeed belonging to the Pope than did formerly not because the Bishopricks were sunk but many of them were made Archbishopricks and others thrown under another Jurisdiction Florence which was in the old Roman Province was made (o) Anno. 1421. an Arch-Episcopal See by Martin the fifth and had four suburbicary Bishopricks given to it for Suffragans besides as many more of newer erection Siena belonging to Rome anciently was made (p) Anno 1459. an Arch-Bishoprick by Pius II. and had Grosseto and Soano for two of its Suffragans which also belong'd to the Roman Province Vrbin was made (p) Anno 1459. an Arch-Bishoprick but in the last Century by Paul the third and had six Bishopricks out of the Roman Province annexed to it Fermo was made an Arch-Bishoprick by Sixtus the fifth and had five Suffragans given it all of new Erection So that in the two ages next preceding this within the Roman Province there were ten new Bishopricks made and fifteen taken from the immediate Jurisdiction of the Pope and subjected to new Arch-Bishopricks So that the Bishopricks remain tho' they are not in the same Province There were indeed about five old Bishopricks united to others in the Roman Province since the writing of the old Provincial but we have seen ten new rais'd to make amends and there are more yet unaccounted for if there were occasion But after all it signifies little to the present question whether the Roman Province at this time have fewer Bishops than it had when that old Provincial was made For that which our Author calls old is indeed but new in respect of Ecclesiastical Antiquity Baronius places it in the eleventh Century and that is (q) Ughell Ital. Sacr. Miraei Not. l 4. at least an age too high for there are several Bishopricks even in the oldest Copies of it that were not rais'd till the twelfth Century Viterbo was not made an Episcopal seat till the latter end (r) Anno 1189 or 1191. of that age and yet it is in all the Copies of that Provincial and Italy affords many instances of Bishopricks raised in that age which are all to be found there In England it has Ely and Carlile both made (s) Anno 1109 1133.
Rome and Constantinople Luitprandus (f) Luitpr Leg. ad Niceph. Phoc. in Acerentilas Acherunte Turrico Gravina Maceria Tricarico relates that Nicephorus Phocas ordered Polyectius Patriarch of Constantinople to raise Otranto to the dignity of an Arch-Bishoprick and that he would not permit the Latin service to be any longer us'd in Appulia and Calabria Whereupon the Patriarch sent the Bishop of Otranto a priviledge to consecrate Bishops in six Towns of that Country which are there named and are said to belong to the Bishop of Rome When the Western Emperours and at last the Normans got footing in the Greek Territories the Greeks were soon shut up in their Towns And thence it seems to come to pass that several Episcopal Towns there have no Diocese or Territory at all Not that it was always so while the Country was in the hands of the Greek Emperours but because this was the expiring condition of the Greek Churches in those parts the open Country being in possession of their Enemies and thrown into the neighbouring Latin Dioceses But Bishopricks were much thinner in Calabria an age or two before For in the Notitia publish'd by Goar (g) Hist Byz ad calc Codini and afterwards by Dr. Beveridge (h) Synodic T. 2. Calabria has but eight Bishops In the North of Italy the Dioceses are still large but have been much greater in ancient times For the Province of Milan though it was much larger than it is now in the middle (i) Anno 452. of the fifth Century had but nineteen Suffragans as appears from the subscriptions (l) Inter opera Leonis Pap. Ep. 52. of the Synod of that Province under Eusebius Bishop of Milan Among these is the Bishop of Regium and Brixellum and Placentia which belonged afterwards to Ravenna and are now under the new (m) Bologna Erected 1583. Metropolis of Bologna The Bishop of Turin was then a Suffragan but is since made a Metropolitan by Sixtus IV. and borrowed some Suffragans from the old Province Augusta now Aosta was then a Suffragan of Milan but now belongs to Tarantaise Genua was then a Suffragan but is since (n) Anno 1132. a Metropolis and took away Albingaunum along with it and Como that then belong'd to the Synod of Milan is now under Aquileia besides many new Bishopricks raised within this Province and taken out of the old Dioceses As Alexandria de Capaglia raised (o) Anno 1175. by Alexander the III. And Cazale raised (p) Anno 1474. by Sixtus the fourth who gave it sixty Castles or Burgs taken from the Jurisdiction of Aste and Vercelli yet Vercelli after this diminution has (q) Ughel Ital. Sac. T. 4. a very large Diocese remaining for it is forty miles in length and thirty-five in breadth In the Province of Aquileia there were but fifteen Bishopricks in the time of Gregory the Great when the controversie of the three points was so hot in Istria and they are all nam'd by Paulus Diaconus (r) Paul Diac. de Gest Long. l. 3. c. 12. l. 18. Cont. Eutrop. in t Rom. Script Many of the old Sees are still remaining several are chang'd but the number is still the same and the Dioceses are large To conclude the ancient Dioceses of Italy were large and not half so numerous as they are now For they have been increasing every age since the writing of the Provincial and even then they were exceedingly multiplied beyond what they had been in the first six or seven Centuries There are now in Italy 31 Arch-Bishops and 281 Bishops which makes up 312. Now if we look back but two ages we shall find the number much less for in Biondi's time who died in the year 1463 there were but 264 Cities or Episcopal seats in all Italy And Leandro Alberti (s) Leand. Alberti Descritt d' Ital. Praefat. who liv'd in the beginning of the fifteenth Century could not make out above 300. And since that time it seems there were twelve added The more ancient Copies of the Provincial fall short of Biondi's reckoning some having but 250 and the oldest of all not above 200. So much is the number of the Italian Bishopricks increased within five hundred years But if we go a little back we shall find yet fewer Bishopricks in Italy For in the Notitia publish'd by Dr. Beveridge (t) Notae in Synodic out of the Oxford Copy there are in all but fourscore Episcopal Sees Carolus a S. Paulo Bishop of Aurenches u had suppress'd this part in his edition giving notice that every thing was so corrupt and confused that he could make nothing of it He is tax'd by Dr. Beveridge as if this omission had proceeded from want of sincerity But whatever cause that French Bishop had to leave out this part yet the Notitia had been published (x) Goar ad Codin Int. Hist Byz Anno 1644. entire twenty years before the Dr's Edition and much more correctly for the Oxford Copy having fallen into the hands of a raw Transcriber came out with many more faults than its own In this Notitia the Suburbicary Province has but two and twenty Bishops Campania just so many Annonaria under Ravenna has one more than those and Aemylia has only three The Provinces of Milan and Aquileia are wholly left out It cannot be denied that this Notitia is imperfect and very confused and Salmasius (y) Salm. Prim. Pap. who had seen it before Goar's Edition gives that account of it And therefore let us examine yet ancienter Records to come to a more certain computation of the old Italian Bishopricks In a Roman Council (z) Conc. Rom. sub Agath Anno 689. apud Conc. Gen. 6. Act. 4. under Pope Agatho we have the subscriptions of the Italian Bishops by their Provinces and we may judge by the subscriptions of such Provinces as are best known as to the number of their old Dioceses such as Milan and Aquileia that this was a plenary Synod and all the Bishops of Italy present in it but such as age or necessity did excuse And the Pope calls (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it the Generality of the Synod yet all the Italian Bishops here were but about an hundred and twelve The first Roman Synod (a) Conc. Rom. 1. sub Sym. Anno 499. under Symmachus was of the Roman Province properly so called For no Metropolitan subscribed besides Symmachus nor any Bishop of any known Italick Province no Suffragan of Milan Aquileia or Ravenna In this there were 72 Bishops whose names and titles remain These subscriptions do sufficiently shew that the Roman Province at that time was much wider than the Jurisdiction of the City Prefect and reach'd a great way farther than a hundred miles from Rome For there were most of the Bishops of Campania Felix which was all of it beyond the Lapis Centesimus as Salmasius (b) Salm. Ep. de Reg. Suburb does allow Beyond this
yet there was the Bishop of Acheruntia in Calabria of Vibon in Brutia of Canusium in Apulia and on the other side of Rome there was the Bishop of Ariminum and several others whose seats were far beyond the Provinces assigned by Salmasius to the Roman Diocese A general Synod (c) Anastas in Symmach of Italy under the same Pope had 115 Bishops which is the only Synod besides that mentioned above that the Writer of his life takes notice of under that Pope (d) Syn. Rom. 4. sub Sym. but certainly the most remarkable for number of any then held It was this confirm'd Symmachus his Election and condemn'd his Competitor and his Guardians and the occasion being extraordinary it cannot be doubted but the greatest part (e) Totius fere Italiae Episcopi Ennod. Ticin 2. Synod Defensor of the Bishops of Italy were there And though the subscriptions be imperfect yet from those that are left we may find that there were some from every Province The greatest objection it seems which the Enemies of this Synod could make against it was (f) Testis est Roma si omnes Episcopi senes debiles convenerunt Ennod. that all the old and infirm Bishops were not there and then that all were not call'd by the King 's Writ attending to two or three only who were too far engaged in the cause to become Judges of it which Ennodius exposes rather as Cavils than Arguments Which he could not have done with any sincerity or modesty if much the greater part had not been assembled upon that occasion There is indeed a Synod (g) Synod 5. sub Symmacho under this Pope whose Title bespeaks 218 Bishops but there might have been as many more if borrowed subscriptions might pass muster this is the case For more than half the subscriptions of this Council are taken from that of Chalcedon and there are not a hundred of Italy the rest were discharged from the Synodical attendance and now no longer able to answer to their Names Under Damasus we have another general Council (h) Conc. Rom. sub Dam. Anno 369. Theod. H. E. l. 2. c. 22. Collect. Rom. Holsten p. 163. Vales Annot. in Soz. l. 6. c. 23. of Italy consisting of 93 Bishops in which Auxentius was deposed But besides Italians there were some Gallick Bishops in this Council and it cannot be doubted but Damasus assembled all he could in a cause that required the authority of the greatest number he could make since the Arians had for some time began to plead a majority And it is certain some came from far for the Bishop of Aquileia was there Under Julius the first we have a Roman Synod (i) Julii Epistola apud Athan. Ap. 2. that seems to be general in which above fifty Bishops were assembled where Vito presided as the Bishop of Rome's Deputy This seems to be the same Vito who was sent Legat to the Council of Nice Here Athanasius was received into Communion And Julius (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Letter to the Bishops of the East alluding to this Synod tells them that what he writ as in his own name was the judgment of all Italy Valesius would not have Vito preside in this Council but would render the words so that those Bishops assembled in Vito's parish-Parish-Church But I do not see any reason to depart from Nannius his Translation of this passage The Copy that he translated is very different from the Greek that is printed and may possibly have a relative which may take away the ambiguity of that Expression I have seen some Greek pieces of Athanasius in Manuscript varying often from the printed Copy but exactly answering Nannius his version in all those variations which I have mention'd here upon this occasion that the frequent variations of that Version from the Original may not be thought to proceed from affectation of liberty or mistake To return then to the purpose for which this passage was produc'd if the judgment of between fifty and sixty Bishops be represented as the sentence of all the Bishops of Italy surely in those days their number must be very much short of what they are at present I will conclude this Disquisition concerning the Bishopricks of Italy with the Roman Synod (m) Anno 251. under Cornelius which by Eusebius (n) Euseb l. 6. c. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called a very great Synod and by Cyprian (o) Cornelius cum plurimis Episc Cypr. Ep. 55. Ed. Ox. said to consist of very many Bishops They were in all sixty which could never have been observ'd as a very great Synod if every good Village or Town in Italy where there were some thousands of such had been provided of a Bishop But whether this were a Synod of the Province of Rome only or of all Italy is a question about which learned men are divided The words of Eusebius are ambiguous and not easie to be determined For he says that Cornelius sent Letters to Fabian Bishop of Antioch giving (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. an account of the Synod at Rome and the judgment of all in Italy and Africk St. Jerom speaking of these Letters of Cornelius says (q) De Synodo Romana-Italica Hieron de Script Eccles in Cornel. that he wrote about the Roman the Italick and African Synods as if besides that of Rome there had been another at the same time in some other place of Italy Now if Jerom had seen no more of Cornelius his Epistles than what Eusebius has excerpted this of the Italick Synod may be a mistake Bishop Pearson (r) Jo. Cestrens Annal. Cppr. p. 31. has demurr'd upon this matter and the Conclusion of that Chapter in Eusebius seems to make all clear At the end of his Letter he sets down the names of those who were present in the Roman Synod and their Dioceses and he sent likewise the names of the persons (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and of their places who came not to this Synod but signified their consent by Letters to what was there determined Here is no place left then to an Italick Synod for by this account all who were not at Rome consented by their Letters And that much the greater part of the Bishops of Italy appear'd in this Synod cannot well be doubted considering this assembly was for common direction in a case very difficult and nice and so nearly concerning the peace of the Church And he who observes it as an extraordinary thing that out of all Italy sixty Bishops should be assembled in one Synod could not but have taken notice of the number of the rest who approved the acts of this Council by their Letters if it had been any thing proportionable to this Therefore we have reason to conclude that at that time there were not very many more Bishops in all Italy I know it is suggested by some that there were
were in Spain 71 Bishops and 7 Metropolitans In a Controversy between the Arch-bishops of Toledo and Valentia it is said that Constantine had divided the Country into Provinces and Dioceses much to the same effect with what has been already produc'd with this agrees the observations of Luitprandus which are taken from the same Books For speaking of the 13th Council of Toledo he saith the number of the Bishops there were 76 of whom 27 subscrib'd by Proxies And in his Chronicon he gives notice of several new Bishopricks erected in Spain in the later end of the seventh Century The Dioceses of Spain must be very large then when so great a Country was divided between 70 or 80 Bishops and especially considering the Province of Narbon was then reckon'd to Spain At the time of the Council of Illiberis Spain seems to have but few Bishops For tho' we find by the Subscriptions that the Bishops had met there from all the Provinces of Spain yet were there in all but 19. And long before this (g) Anno. 254. in St. Cyprians time two Cities in Spain seem'd to belong to one Bishop as may be gather'd from the Inscription of St. Cyprians (h) Ep. 67. Epistle Foelici Presbytero plebibus consistentibus ad Legionem Asturicae Upon which Vasaeus (i) Vasaeus in Chron. Hisp Anno. 256. has this Remark Colligi videtur Legionenses atque Asturicenses eo tempore eidem Episcopo fuisse subjectos licet postea divisi Episcopatus fuerint Our Author (l) Prim. ep p. 40. cites Rabanus Maurus to very little purpose when he makes him to say that there were fewer Bishops at first but in process of time they were Ordain'd not only in Cities but in places where there was no need Which then is the most Primitive way the first or that which comes after After a tedious peregrination our Author (f) Anno. 305. Conc. Illib (m) Prim. ep p. 40. is very kind to let us come nearer home I need not tell you how few Cities there are in Ireland yet Primat Usher tells us out of Nennius that St. Patrick founded there 365 Churches and as many Bishops I hope no reasonable man will blame me as too difficult of belief if I refuse this fable for evidence The authority of Nennius may be question'd without imputation of scepticism and can never pass as long as men have judgment enough to distinguish between History and Legend But I take Nennius his way of writing to be a degree even below Legend But since this fabulous Calendar of Irish Bishops has pass'd without contradiction not that any body ever believ'd it but because it is too gross to be refuted and since it has been and is still urg'd for History in the behalf of Primitive Episcopacy I will endeavour to trace it to its Original and when the ground of the Story is understood it will do the Congregational way but very slender service Arch-Bishop Vsher (n) Antiquit. Eccl. Brit. p. 473. ult Ed. publish'd a Catalogue of old Irish Saints which is divided into three ranks which are distinguish'd one from another as well by time as by merit The first is the best they consisted all of Bishops and their number was 350 they were founders of Churches c. This Order of Saints lasted for four Reigns the last of which was Tuathail but they were not all Irish but Romans and Franks and Britans Now according to Arch bishop Vshers (o) Antiquit. p. 490. Ed. ult Chronology of those Reigns there is above a hundred years from the beginning of St. Patrick's Apostleship to the end of Tuathail only there is one King before him in that Chronological Table which the old Catalogue does not mention That these were the Bishops of St. Patrick's ordination we may find in Jocelin (p) Usher Antiq. p. 492. who says that St. Patrick ordain'd just so many with his own hand and founded 700 Churches To compleat the Irish Calendar Nennius increas'd their number to 365 a singular complement to a lazy Nation to make it holiday for them all the year round Now whether all these liv'd in Ireland or were all ordained by Patrick the Catalogue does not say But it says expresly That they were of several other Nations besides Irish So that this may rather represent the Communion of Patrick and the number of Bishops in Britain and France that kept Easter on the fourteenth of the Moon than his Suffragans of Ireland And the fewness of Bishops in succeeding times and under the second order seems to represent a great change not in the lives of the Bishops for if I mistake not it is the cause that is in the bottom of that Catalogue but in the observances which are there mention'd For whether the Franks by this time had taken another way and the Brittish Churches were under great calamities or Augustin the Monk had introduc'd the Roman customs there are but few Bishops in the second order But supposing these holy Bishops had been all of Ireland yet there is no need of so many Cathedrals for them for they lasted four Reigns which makes up a hundred years And though all the Bishops seats in Ireland had not been above fifty they might easily have afforded 350 Saints in the compass of a hundred years But because there are but sixty years allow'd for St. Patrick's Government in Ireland even in that and the surviving generation this number of Bishops might easily rise from fifty I mention this number because sometimes Ireland has had so many Dioceses or more as we may see in a copy of the Provincial publish'd by (q) Geogr. Sacr. S. Paulo which hath more Seats in it than that of which Cambden speaks After all I am not well satisfi'd but all St. Patrick's Bishops may be a fable and he himself only a Saint of imagination For who can tell but Patricius Arvernensis may have sunk a day lower in the Calendar and made the Irish a Patricius Hibernensis Or the Spanish Patrick (r) Luitpr Advers of Malaga who according to Luitprandus lays claim to that day might appear to the Irish in a Dream as St. George did to our Country-men and become their Protector and at last their Apostle For the Calendar is the ground upon which the Legendaries run divisions and as barren as it seems to be it has produced a world of devout Fables For in old time give a Monk but a name and he would quickly write a life Our Author taking S. Patrick's (s) Prim. Ep. p. 40. 365 fabulous Bishopricks for effective is not content but would increase their number about the twelfth Century Afterwards says he the number of Bishops increased in Ireland so that when Malachias went into Ireland near 600 years after S. Patrick Anno 1150. (t) Bern. vit Malach. Vnus Episcopatus non esset contentus uno Episcopo sed singulae paene Ecclesiae singulos haberent
Episcopos That Bishopricks were multiplied in Ireland in Malachy's time Bernard does indeed complain of but that before this increase they were 365 neither he nor any body else of that time does affirm Nor is it likely for a man less eloquent then S. Bernard could not have omitted it For what could have exposed this humour of multiplying Bishops more effectually than to have shewn that there were already in that Kingdom so many more Dioceses in proportion to the extent of it than in any Christian Country in the World Bernard (u) Bernard vit Malach. makes heavy complaint that it was a thing unheard of from the beginning of Christianity Bishops were chang'd and multiply'd without order and without reason Yet for all this storming his friend Malachy had a large Diocese to look after for he was not content says Bernard to go about his Episcopal City of Conneth but he went out into the Country and visited the Towns of his Diocese and all this on foot But within twenty years of the time we are speaking of we have a certain account of the Irish Dioceses For when Henry the second went (x) Anno 1171. over to Ireland there were (y) Joh. Brompton X. Script Col. 1070. but twenty-nine Bishops in all that Kingdom and four Arch-Bishops or thirty according to the reckoning of Gervasius (z) Cron. Gervasij X. Scr. Col. 1420. The former number is confirmed by Benedictus Abbas in the Life of King Henry II. And even of this number some were but lately erected For (a) Eadmer Hist Nov. l. 2. p. 36. in the year 1095. Murchertagh King of that part of Ireland with his Clergy and People desired leave of Anselm Arch-Bishop of Canterbury who was then Primate of all Ireland as well as England to found a new Bishoprick at Waterford complaining that in those parts they had hitherto wanted the presence of a Bishop requesting him to ordain Malchus for their Bishop whom they had sent over for that purpose which he did accordingly So far was Ireland from being overstocked with Bishops at that time The Copies of the Provincial are of little use to shew any thing of the ancient state of this Country for all of them are later than the year 1150 because they all have the four arch-Arch-Bishops the Irish Church having never had (ae) Matth. Par. in Steph. Anno 1151. Sim. Duwelm Anno 1152. Gervasi Chron. Anno 1171. any before that year though Arch-Bishop Vsher would have Armagh excepted When we had come so near home as Ireland I was in hopes our wandring after Village-Bishops had been at an end especially when he had come to the dregs of his evidence Nennius and the Irish Legends But I know not how a sudden fancy transports our Author to Afric and thither I must follow a proper place to look rarities and unusual sights It cannot indeed be denied that in this Country there were Bishops if not in Villages yet in Municipia or Burrough-Towns but that this was the primitive state of that Church we cannot allow And the multiplying of Bishops being occasioned there by the Schism of the Donatists cannot be alledged for a precedent since the Bishops of that time complained of it in the Conference of Carthage as a wrong and an innovation But of this there is a more particular account in another Book (c) Vind. of Prim. ch p. 516. which I am not willing to transcribe But yet what our Author would put upon us ought not to pass without Examination (d) Prim. Ep. p. 41. In five of the Provinces of the African Diocese he might have said six for so they are reckoned in the Conference of Carthage Tripolis being added to the other five there were in St. Austin 's time near 900 Bishops And this he proves by adding the Donatist Bishops to the Catholick there being 500 of the one and 400 of the other (b) Prim. Ep. p. 41. As for the Catholicks the utmost of St. Austin's account in the abstract of the Conference is but 465. And yet in another Book he reckons (e) Centum ferme Episcopi contr Don. post Coll. c. 24. not the Absents full a hundred which in his Abstract he sets at 120. And for the Donatists who are reckon'd 400 we are not so easily to admit their account S. Augustin never admitted it though our Author says he did not deny they were 400. It is true he does not positively deny it because he could not be certain of their number but he does every where suggest that they boasted without reason and made themselves more numerous than they were For when they pretended to have many absent and more than the Catholicks he turns the pretence into a jest What says he (f) Aug. post Coll. c. 24. had some Pestilence invaded them that a third part of their number should be sick together For they had acknowledged that they were all present excepting such whom age or sickness had detained And in all his accounts of the Conference he detects their frauds in subscribing for the absents as if they had made their appearance And among the subscriptions there was one found who had been some time dead and they could not deny it But be the number of those Schismaticks what they will it is not reasonable to admit them into the list of the Bishops of that Country since they set up Altar against Altar oftentimes in the same City and generally in the same Diocese where a Catholick Bishop was plac'd and sometimes set up three or four against one So there is no reason that these should swell the account of African Bishops We reckon a Parish with us to have but one Rector though an Independent or Anabaptist Teacher may set up in it a separate Assembly or though a speaking Presbyterian Elder the most forward and fiercest of all our Church-dividers should hold a Conventicle there for a Nursery to other Sects But we have reason our Author thinks to take the Donatists into the account since the Catholicks decreed that when the Donatists were reduc'd those places among them which had Bishops should continue to be Episcopal seats If he had thought fit to consider the order of time and how different the state of the African Church before the Conference at Carthage was from that which followed it this apparition of an Argument had vanished Before Marcellinus his Decree the Catholicks of Africk made several temporary Provisions for the reclaiming of the Donatists And that no encouragements might be wanting to invite either the People or their Bishops to be reconciled to the Church sometimes they order that if a Donatist Bishop should prevail with his people to leave their schism he should remain still their Bishop Sometime that the People who had a Bishop heretofore and were converted from the Donatists might without a new order from a Synod chuse a Bishop of their own or if they would chuse rather to be annexed
Jerusalem (i) Parochia est Episcopi qui Herosolyman tenet Sulp. Sev. Dial. 1. from which it was six miles distant In St. Jerom's (l) Presbyteris tuis obtulimus Praecepisti Bethlem Presbyteris tuis Hieron adv Err. Joh. Hieros time it was taken to have been immemorially a Parish belonging to that Bishop and was serv'd by Presbyters as our country Parishes are And Jerom (m) Qui longe in minoribus urbibus per Presbyteros Diaconos baptizati sunt Hieron Lucif in another place shews in general that in lesser Cities there were no Bishops but Presbyters and Deacons and these too at a great distance from the Bishops seats and cannot deny but that this is the Custom of the Churches that the Bishops go to confirm such as have been Baptiz'd in lesser Cities at a distance And speaking of the same places he (n) In Viculls aut Castellis aut locis remotioribus Ibid. calls them Villages or Castles and remote places which were visited by the Bishop and this by ancient and immemorial custom So that all our Authors diligence to confound Cities with Villages and to represent Cities as very small does at last no service to his Hypothesis since we find that long before St. Jerom's time many of these went to make up one Diocese and were under the visitation of one Bishop The instances alledg'd out of Josuah do little concern the present question yet that nothing may pass without reply they should be consider'd (o) Prim. ep p. 46. There are thirty eight Towns enumerated and call'd Cities Jos 15.21 Yet all the Cities are said to be but twenty nine v. 32. Masius and other Expositors remove the difficulty thus that the rest of the Towns tho call'd Cities were but Villages Yet there may be another way of removing this difficulty and Grotius (p) In loc proposes one that seems more probable that the nine Cities which remain'd over and above the twenty nine did not belong to the Tribe of Judah but of Simeon for (q) Jos 19.9 out of the portion of the Children of Judah was the inheritance of the Children of Simeon and they had their inheritance within the inheritance of them And many of the same places and at least the same names are recorded as belonging to both and sometimes in the same order But this is clear'd beyond all cavil 1 Chron. 4.28 and confirm'd by the observation of Jerom (r) Hieron Trad. Hebr. in Paralip in his Hebrew Traditions on the Chronicles To the same effect he observes (s) Prim. ep p. 46. that there are twenty three places reckoned by name and call'd Cities Josh 19. Yet v. 28. there are said to be but nineteen Cities They resolve it as the former This is a plain mistake of our Authors for there are but sixteen Cities nam'd to the Tribe of Naphthali tho' the sum is made nineteen But that which gave occasion to this mistake is the mentioning of the borders of this Tribe (t) Vid. Bonfrer but the places are not call'd Cities and perhaps did not belong to that Tribe but to some other that bounded it and of these sixteen we must deduct some if we follow the Septuagint It is an usual thing in the book of Josuah to have the sum to differ from the particulars sometimes it is less and sometimes it exceeds and this is not a place to attempt to reconcile them (u) Prim. ep p 46.47 There are four call'd Cities Jos 19.6 yet those in 1 Chron. 4.32 are Villages This too is a plain mistake occasion'd by the ill pointing of that passage of the Chronicles For the beginning of the 32 verse belongs to the verse going before and should be read thus (x) 1 Chron. 4 31.32.33 These were their Cities unto the reign of David and their Villages Then follows five names and in the end of that verse it is added that they were Cities and the verse following and all their Villages that were about the same Cities Thus the Syriack and Arabick Versions read and use a Preposition with their Villages and thus the sense requires that both the Hebrew and Septuagint should be read And the occasion of this difficulty proceeds from St. Jerom's (y) Trad. Hebr. in Paralip mistake which appears in his observation upon this place and the mistake was propagated by dividing the Hebrew Text and the version of 70 into verses according to the vulgar Latin Our Translatours were too bold in adding a verb in this place which is neither in the Original nor in any ancient Translation tho' they distinguish'd it from the Text by another Character From Scripture Mr. Clerkson (z) Prim. ep p. 47. appeals to other Authors for the proof of his observation that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Village When Polybius writes that Tiberius Gracchus ruin'd three hundred Cities in a part of Spain Possidonius says that Cities were alled Castles by him But Possidonius is so far from allowing the expression that he exposes the Author for it and shews it was to flatter Gracchus and that this way of speaking suited better with the pomps of a Triumph than the exactness of an Historian nay he sticks not to call this a Lie For For says he (a) Strabo l. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generals and Writers are easily carry'd to this Lie magnifying their actions beyond truth and reality (b) Prim. ep p. 47. Those who say that Spain hath more than a thousand Cities speak after the same figure giving great Villages the titles of Cities If vain men will call their geese swans it does not alter the species nor change the common language of the world Yet after all this loose way of speaking does by no means hurt the cause of Diocesan Episcopacy For every place which in complement might be called a City did not become a Bishops seat for in this very Country where more than a thousand Cities are said to have been after this favourable way of reconing there does not appear to have been a hundred Bishopricks in any age since the Apostles Aelian (c) Aelian var. Hist reckon'd in Italy eleven hundred and sixty six Cities Guido of Ravenna (d) Leandro Alberti Descritt d' Ital. Praefat. fol. 6. writes from Higinus who had made a Book of the Cities of Italy that in his time there were seven hundred Yet we cannot find that for 600 years after Christ there were so many as 150 Dioceses in all that Country But of this we have given some account already (e) Prim. Ep. p. 47. Ptolomy (f) Ptol. l. 5. c. 17. calls Avarum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Josephus (g) Jos Ant. l. 12. c. 13. Bethsura is called a City but in the page before it is only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Village And Justinian says of Petyus and Sebastopolis reckoned among the Cities of Pontus Polemoniacus that they were to be reckoned rather for
Castles than Cities It happens to Cities as it does to men some are born noble others rise up to it by gradual increase Some have been Cities and great from their first foundation as Alexandria Constantinople Antioch and many more others by industry and good fortune have grown up by slow degrees from Villages to be Cities and in their Progression when they are become equal to the generality of Cities in every thing but Title and Priviledge they are called Cities or Villages according to the pleasure of those who speak of them In the confines of child and man we are doubtful what name to use Tra giovane e fanciullo l'eta confine as Tasso expresses it Yet if a man should undertake upon this account to shew that man and child are words used promiscuously and that therefore whatever right or priviledge a man may have by Law or Custom belongs also to a child such a person would be thought not yet arrived to the judgment of a man and to stand in need of a School-master to teach him propriety of language But besides the childishness of the notion our Author hath been unfortunate in his instances for it is possible that the City and the Village which are called by the same name in Josephus may not be the same place For Jerom (h) Hieron de loc Hebr. takes notice of two Bethsura's in Judaea one in the way from Jerusalem to Hebron another within a mile of Eleutheropolis And Josephus when he speaks of these places does not use the same name for one (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a neuter and plural the other (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jos Ant. l. 12. c. 11. is a feminine I know the Books of Macchabees vary the name for the same place but Josephus when he speaks of the City Bethsura constantly useth the singular and the feminine Nor is it necessary to insist upon this for Josephus may speak properly though it should be granted that he spoke of the same place For before it was fortified by Judas Macchabaeus it might be but a Village but afterwards it is called a City and the strong and impregnable City And being the only safe retreat of the Jews of that part of the Country it must quickly grow populous enough to deserve the Title and to enjoy the priviledges of a City And now we are speaking of this place so renowned in the History of the Macchabees it may not be amiss to have it restored to its true Situation A faulty reading in the second Book of Macchabees (m) 2 Macch. 11.5 had brought this Fortress within less than a mile of Jerusalem and accordingly Adricomius placeth it in his Maps But this can by no means be reconciled with the relation which Josephus gives of several Actions in the Maccabean Wars When this City was besieged by Antiochus Eupator Judas left the Siege of the Cittadel of Jerusalem and advanced towards the Enemy who lay before Bethsura and having marched a considerable way and posted his men in a strait place called Bethzacharia he was then seventy furlongs from the Enemy and from Bethsura Besides in the Book of Macchabees it is said to be built against the Incursions of the Idumaeans which supposes it near their Borders as indeed it was for the Alexandrian Copy has clear'd this point For instead of five furlongs we read there that it was five Schaeni from Jerusalem Now a Schaenus according to Herodotus (n) Herodot l. 2. is sixty furlongs in Egypt Pliny reckons it but thirty And according to this reckoning the distance between Jerusalem and Bethsura will be near twenty miles as Jerom has placed it As for Pityus it was an ancient City and had been in reputation both for greatness and wealth Strabo (o) Strab. l. 11. in fin calls it the great Pityus and Pliny (p) Plin. l. 6. c. 5. gives it the character of a most wealthy Town but it was sacked by the Heniochi What if before Justinian's time the fortune of this place happened to run so low that it became little superiour to an ordinary Garrison Town yet surely it might retain its former Title of City without rendring it common to every Garrison or Castle in the Country Sebaste too was an old City and mentioned by Pliny among the chief of the Country and let me intreat our new Criticks that it may retain its old Title though fallen a little into decay without making way for every upstart Village to come in and claim the dignity of a City These instances I was willing to account to his misfortune but that of Avarum I must own as an act of dexterity This is represented as an ambiguous thing between a City and a Village And Ptolomy the great Surveyor of the world is made to speak doubtfully as if he were not able to distinguish the kind Ptolomy is of no kin to me but for Truth and Justice sake I am willing to do him right For to declare the truth that Author did never say that which Mr. Clerkson puts upon him When men are positive and quote Greek especially Fanaticks one may be apt to think they found it somewhere and never made the quotation But here I must confess it happens to be otherwise for poor Ptolomy is put upon For he does not say that Avara is a City or a Village but he places it in a part of Arabia among many other Towns and it is unaccountable how our Author should single it from all the rest At the head of the Chapter there is a general Title The Midland Cities and Villages of Arabia and at some distance this place is set down If the Title make it of an ambiguous kind all the rest that are named with it must be so too Nay most of the Towns in Ptolomy must be of the same nature because the Title is very frequent in him I was willing to suspect my Edition rather than the conscience of my Author who differed from the Church of England out of pure tenderness of mind But having examined other Editions I found the old Heathen Geographer was put upon by an Independent Saint Some blunt men may in their plain way call this manner of dealing forgery and falsifying but towards godly men we must avoid rudeness and let such tricks as these pass for Oeconomy and dextrous management of a cause (q) Prim. Ep. p. 49. Bishop Bilson (r) Bils Perp. Gov. c. 14. tells us as also Dr. Field (s) Field of the Ch. l. 5. c. 27. that the Apostles would have the City and places adjoyning to make but one Church and that herein they proposed the Jews as their exemplar who had their Synagogues in Cities How much Bishop Bilson or Dr. Field make for our Author's purpose let the Reader judge when I have laid the words before him They the Apostles says Dr. Field so sorted and divided out particular Churches that a City and the places
proportion they bear to our Villages and Market-Towns The walls of old Bizantium before they were pulled down by Severus were (b) Dionys Byz forty furlongs in circuit but when the walls are removed fifteen furlongs further the space may yield us a City much more than double to the old one and this new one was effectually so For its circuit is something short of thirteen miles according to Gellius c and they want but one furlong of fourteen miles according to the measure of Laonicus Chalcocondulas though in the common (d) P. Gell. C. P. p. 15. De la Vall. Lett. de C. P. p. 30. Spon Voyage T. 1. p. â—01 15. M. discourse of the people it pass for near twenty The present City has the same bounds with that of Constantine for when it was first built it fill'd that Isthmus (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it does now Themistius (e) Zosim l. 2. c. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Themist Or. 6. p. 162. Ed. Pet. speaking of the improvement of Byzantium by Constantine What was once says he the hem of the City is now the center and heart of it But Constantinople would not be confined within those walls as wide as they were but soon run out into Suburbs Syca which is now Pera was but a Suburbs to that City yet it was (f) Steph. de urb in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zosim l. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Topogr C. P. accounted it self a City in Justinian's time and called by his name Hebdomum was reckoned in the Suburbs though seven miles from the City P. Gellius does unfortunately make this a region of the City and Du Fresne has followed him in the mistake but they are refuted by the very Authors and instances they produce for their opinion Sozomen (g) Sozom. l. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says expresly it was seven miles from the City that Theodosius had built a Church there which bore the name of John the Baptist And Socrates (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 6. c. 12. speaking of that Church says it is seven miles from C. P. and not far from the Sea for Epiphanius as soon as he landed is said to have gone to St. John's Church In that place there was (i) Ammian Marc. l. 26. Idatij Chron. a Palace called Secundianae and a famous Tribunal where the Emperors or Caesars used to be declared Valesius (l) Vales in Addend Not. ad Ammian Marcell p. 672. has taken great pains to assert the situation of this place and has done it so effectually as to leave no farther place for doubt There were several other places that were out-parishes of Constantinople (m) Soz. l. 2. c. 3. Theodor. l. 5. c. 3. such as Marianae Pharmaceus or Therapea the port called Hieron Hestiae afterwards Michaelium which was about four miles from the City by water but twelve by land and Elaea where Sisinnius the Bishop of C. P. had been Parish-Priest for he was not Minister says Socrates (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 26. of any Church within the City but in the Suburbs of C. P. which is called Elaea To conclude such was the increase of this great City that Sozomen (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 2. c. 3. does not stick to prefer it even to old Rome and says that by general consent it was concluded to exceed Rome in wealth and multitude of Inhabitants These may seem perhaps prodigious and of no use in the present debate that takes in the generality of Cities yet these had respectively but one Bishop at a time except in time of schism and then both parties agreed in this that there ought of right to be but one Below these therefore we have another size of great Cities which may be reasonably thought equal to the greatest now in Europe Athens (p) Dion Halic l. 4. p. 219. l. 9. p. 624. was almost equal to Rome within the walls and if we put the long walls that joyned the City to Piraeus into the reckoning (q) Strab. l. 6. it will swell up the sum to above twenty miles Syracuse (r) Plut. in Nic. was 20 miles in circuit and equal to Athens accounted (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diod. Sic. l. 16. once the greatest of all the Greek Cities And though it had variety of fortune yet it continued for many ages the chiefest of Sicily Old Corinth before it was raz'd by Mummius was a great and wealthy City it was (t) Strab. l. 8. eighty five furlongs that is near eleven miles in circuit as Strabo reports not from vulgar estimate but from his own survey for he had traced and measured the old walls In Italy there were Cities that seem to surpass these Milan the next after Rome and therefore sometimes called the second Rome of Italy was not far inferiour to that imperial City in the judgment of Procopius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Proc. Gotth l. 2. and Ausonius (x) Nec juncta premit vicinia Romae Auson it still retains the Title of Great and is now ten miles in compass but much below its ancient greatness as the ruins of the old buildings without the walls do still witness but especially inferiour to the old for number of people For when it was taken by the Goths in Justinian's time (y) Procop. Gotth l. 2. p. 143. Ed. Haesch there were three hundred thousand men put to the sword the women not reckoned who were preserved and made a Present to the Burgundians for their service in that siege Next to this was Aquileia a City of superlative greatness (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Herod l. 8. c. 4. renown'd for being fatal to Tyrants The compass of the walls was twelve some say eighteen miles besides great Suburbs mentioned by Herodian Ravenna (a) Claver Ital. Ant. l. 1. c. 28. Leand. Alb. Descr d'Ital was about this size for it was made up of three Towns and therefore called Trigemina by Sidonius Apollinaris The Classis which was the port and Via Caesaris which was all built and three miles in length and Ravenna properly so called In Gaule there was Treves which Ausonius (b) Dudum celebrari Gallia gestet Treviricaeque Urbis solium Auson sets before Milan and yet intimates that it was rather postpon'd than put too forward Arles and Tholouze come into this number the later of which is commended (c) Coctilibus muris quam circuit ambitus ingens Quae modo quadruplices ex se cum effunderet urbes Non ulla exhaustae sensit dispendia plebis Muris Civibus ambitu tabernis Et Sidoni Te maris Eoi merces Iberica ditant Aus for the great circuit of its wall and number of Inhabitants so populous that when it had lately peopled four Cities it was not sensible of any loss of men In the same Country Narbo was
all their lives Now the priviledges of our Cities tho' they bear some resemblance to those of which I have been speaking yet are they much short of them in respect both of fulness and extent of jurisdiction which with us seldom reaches beyond the walls of the City whereas in the Greek and Roman way of Government a City had as it were a County belonging to it so that our Cities are but exempts from the County whereas those of ancient times were the Lords and the Judges of the Counties in which they were seated Such were the Cities of the Roman Empire when Christian Religion was first preach'd in them and the Apostles or their successours who planted Churches and appointed Bishops in the Cities where they preach'd did not think fit to prescribe any new bounds but accomodated themselves to the limits of the several Cities which as they were very unequal occasion'd the Christian Dioceses to become so too But this made no quarrel in ancient times for there were then neither Presbyterians nor Independents to call for new Agrarian Divisions in the Church of God That therefore which our Author (u) Prim. ep p. 54. affirms of ancient Cities that they were but priviledg'd Villages and that a wall or something as inconsiderable made the only difference must proceed either from ignorance of the state of ancient Cities or what is worse from an intention to deceive Nor yet do those who grant Bishops to lesser Cities leave themselves therefore without reason to deny them to Villages for the difference was more than a wall or a formality Our Author (x) Prim. ep p 54. goes on to confound Villages and Cities and observes that Bethlega is a Village in Josephus But Jonathan having wall'd it immediately after he calls it a City There were many Villages in the South of Judea and Arabia that were not only as populous as ordinary Cities but great Communities having a great number of Villages in their dependences as I have observ'd already Armena was an unwall'd place till the inhabitants in their wisdom incompass'd it with a wall to keep them warmer which may be the reason why to some it is a City to others a Village Solinus whom our Author cites for calling it a City does not so much as mention it Pomponius Mela and Pliny name it among the Cities and Towns of the Country but those who call it a Village speak more exactly notwithstanding it had a wall So Menippus in his Periplus or Voyage calls it and from him Strabo and the rest (z) Steph. in Armene Xenoph. Exp. l. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What our Author means by mentioning the wisdom of the people of this Village for building a wall about the Town I cannot easily imagin since of old it was proverbial for folly (a) Strab. l. 12. that those who built the walls of Armena had little to do After this he mentions Majuma the Port of Gura honour'd with the priviledg of a City for its forwardness in the Christian Religion Yet (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. l. 5. c. 3. even this very place had several country Parishes and Churches belonging to it and besides being an extraordinary case and late cannot be drawn into any consequence in the present question about the seats of the Primitive Bishops Cenchrea by mistake is call'd a City by Stephanus and our Author does worse than mistake when he cites (c) Prim. ep p. 55. Strabo calling Nelias and many other Towns both Cities and Villages in the space of three or four lines and uses this as an argument to shew what little difference there is between a City and a Village for these places had been Cities but Demetrius (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strab. l. 9. when he built a City which he call'd after his own name Demetrias he drew out the Inhabitants of Nelias and several other small Cities to people his new Town and so those places which were before Cities became Villages to Demetrias and when they chang'd their nature they might well change their names Our Author could not but see this yet alas it is given but to few Dissenters to be ingenuous and fair dealers That there were Bishops in small Cities is so well known that Mr. Clerkson might have sav'd himself the trouble of proving it and have presum'd so far upon the knowledge of his Reader but since by taking upon him to make unnecessary proof of so plain a fact he commits some gross mistakes I do not think my self obliged to conceal them Abydus says he (e) Prim. ep p. 55. is parva habitatio and for this cites Strabo (f) Strab. l. 17. but he had not the fortune to know that this Abydus in Egypt of which Strabo speaks was never a Bishop's seat at leastwise that it does not appear to have been though a City of that name on the Hellespont had a Bishop which I suppose was the occasion of our Author's mistake For he who confounds Cities and Villages together may well be allowed to confound two Towns of the same name Ascalon because it was in Strabo's time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and afterwards had a Bishop is brought among the mean Episcopal seats whereas this place had the fortune to improve so far that in Constantius his time (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Geogr. Anon. Gotofr it was one of the chiefest Cities of Phaenicia according to Gotofred's old Geographer He might have spared likewise those Cities that were raised from Villages since he has not the least intimation from ancient Writers whether they were great or small It is not likely that Constantine should (h) Socr. l. 1. c. 18. adorn a mean Town with his Mother's name and that Helenopolis (i) Conc. Chalced. Act. 13. the City should be no better than Drepana the Village or that Julian (l) Ammian Marcell l. 25. the Apostate should bestow his mothers name Basilima to dignifie a Village belonging to Nice and improve it no otherwise than by the Title of a City And if to be raised from a Village to a City imply that the place must be small then Constantinople must pass for a mean place because it was but a Village before Constantine raised it Now though these Cities had been all as small as our Author would suggest yet will they do him little service in promoting of Congregational Episcopacy because there were several Bishops of small Towns who had large Dioceses and particularly Theodoret (m) Theod. Ep. 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. Ep. 42. who confesses the meaness of his City that it was almost desolate and had but few Inhabitants yet had a Diocese forty miles square and 800 Churches under his care But of this I shall be more particular in a more proper place (a) Prim. Ep. p. 56. It is taken for a Rule says our Author that where there is a
Earthquake that destroyed this whole Century of Cities at once but he provided by this destruction that no body else should ever find them But Scaliger (p) Scal. Not. in Euseb Chron. p. 258. rebukes this extravagant destroyer and corrects the figures instead of a hundred directing us to read ten I shall add no more here since I have given an account already of the number of the Cretian Bishops and Cities (q) Prim. Ep. p. 60. For one Bishop in a great City there was ten sometimes twenty sometimes more in the lesser Towns and more there had been had not the ambition of following Ages with a non obstante to the Apostles rule judged a small place unbeseeming the honour and greatness of a Bishop That the lesser Cities were much more numerous than the great is readily granted that these lesser Cities were no bigger than the generality of our Market-Towns after all our Author has done requires farther proof We have indeed some Market-Towns that are not inferiour to Cities but then they are not for our Author's purpose for they have many Parishes and Churches and cannot be crowded into one Congregation Cities very small were likewise very rare and the generality were too great for a Congregational Bishop It was not the ambition of after-ages that forbad the making of Bishops in mean places but when a Bishop was a name of great honour and had many civil priviledges annexed to it it was the ambition of vain men that instigated them to endeavour to be Bishops though in a Village and places where there never had been any before and it was the wisdom of the Church to put a stop to that ambition and by that means to secure the unity of the Church and the possibility of a general Communion But our Author complains that in some such places where they had been settled they were extinguished and in other places they were united So Phulla was united to Sugdaea and so Tyropolis to Alania These Instances might have been spared for they are too new for our present purpose being of the twelfth or thirteenth Century And these were not joyn'd because the Dioceses were small For those of Bulgary to which the first instance appertain were very large without those Unions and in the other Alania is not the name of a Town but of a Nation But the question being about Primitive Dioceses it had been more to the purpose to have shewn of what extent they were for the first three hundred years and then to have inform'd us what alterations succeding ages had made as to the bounds of ancient Bishopricks how some came to be extinguish'd and others to be united But the ages that next followed the time to which our Author confines his Primitive Episcopacy were so far from sinking or uniting Bishopricks that they divided those old ones and made many of one and yet after all they were still of the Diocesan way as will appear hereafter The reducing of the Bishopricks of Sardinia to seven is likewise late and when they were most they were Diocesan and not Congregational And in the fifth Century (r) Not. Africae Ed. Sirmond they were not so many as they are now for they were but five As for the Bishopricks of Ireland and of Italy they have been already consider'd at large and may be dismiss'd without farther reply The Council of Sardica is once more arraign'd (s) Prim. ep p. 61. for forbidding Bishops in the least Cities but the equity of that Canon as well as of several others to the same effect has been already defended from the cavils of Mr. Clerkson and therefore ought in reason to be discharg'd from farther vexation Yet since these exceptions are made not only against this Canon but the Authority of that Synod for curiosities sake they may be examin'd (t) Prim. ep p. 61. I will not say that many of the Bishops there were Arrians tho' the Oriental Prelates present there shew'd themselves immediately after at Philippopolis and the Arrians were branded for not being contented with small Bishopricks Some men can use very crafty figures of speech when they have nothing to the purpose I will not say But why I pray There lies no Action of Scandalum Magnatum from those Bishops he might safely venture to say any thing of them that he knew to be true Yet the modest diffident man will not say they were Arrians No he will not say it forsooth But is there any ground for such a suspicion The good man will not say it Why then does he say that he will not say it Tho' the Oriental Prelates present there shew'd themselves presently after at Philippolis Yet for all this he will not say that many of them were Arrians A captious man may take this to be nonsense but I will not say it When a Dissenter mumbles after this manner it is not altogether for the elegance of the figure but when he knows that what he offers for an argument is either a lye or not to the purpose then such reserves as this serve to bring him off in case of detection for he would not say it then for all the World and this is the present case Our Author had a mind to disparage the Council of Sardica for this Canon that forbids the making of Bishops in Villages and such small Cities where there had been none before to take away their credit he intimates that many of the Bishops were Arrians Some Arrian Bishops came (u) Ep. Synod Sardic ap Theodor. l. 2. c. 8. indeed to Sardica but they had no more to do in making that Canon than Mr. Clerkson For they never joyn'd with the Western Bishops so far as to be present with them and (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 20. they refus'd so much as to confer or to speak with them unless they would first put Athanasius and Paul Bishop of C. P. out of their Communion and when they could not obtain that they left Sardica and went to Philippopolis And tho' our Author was not ignorant of this yet he could not forbear excepting against that Synod upon the account of those Arrians who he knew had not the least hand in any of the Canons made at Sardica Yet the close of this exception surpasses all the rest The Arrians were branded for not being contented with small Bishopricks By which observation our Author would suggest if the Reader will take it that these Arrians made that Canon which forbids Bishops to be ordein'd in small Cities because they were not content with small Bishopricks whereas this Canon was made against the Innovations of the Arrians who made Bishops in such small places where there never had been any before And Ischyras (y) Socrat. l. 2. c. 20 ordein'd in a small Village in Egypt was among the Eastern Bishops at Sardica and it may be imagin'd would not very readily subscribe to that Canon which condemn'd his
receive all the people Suppose therefore in Rome for instance a million of Souls which I think is the lowest estimate that was ever made of that People If for the three first ages but a tenth part was Christian not twenty Churches such as the Christians were provided of at that time could suffice In London tho' those of the Communion of the Church of England be much the greatest number and make up the gross of the People yet the Dissenters were they willing to joyn in one Congregation would not be able to meet in one place And their way of service makes them more capable of great Congregations than the Primitive Christians since generally speaking they seem to have no other publick act of Religious Worship but to hear Nay there is scarce any one Sect of them so mean but would think themselves Persecuted should all of that Sect within the compass of London be stinted to one place of meeting Amsterdam may exceed London in number of Sects tho' it be inferior to it in number of people the Jews there inhabit one good quarter the Papists are so numerous that I have heen inform'd they have near thirty Chappels within that City the Lutherans there have several Churches to say nothing of other Sects that are very numerous Yet those of the establish'd Religion are reckon'd the greater part and require many Churches for their Worship But to return to the Primitive Christians That we may better conceive the state of the Christians in the first three ages let us consider how it was possible for them to thrive and at last to become Masters of the Roman Empire under all those great discouragements to which they were all the while subject They had seldom any friends in Court and there are but two Reigns in all that time in which they had any countenance but were frequently set upon by the Emperors and persecuted with full intent of utter extirpation They could make no Faction in the State for the roots of popular government had been pluck'd up and the government of the Empire was too absolute to bear any thing of that nature They had no power in the Army for there were but few of them employ'd that way and generally speaking they did not like the service Yet for all this in less than three ages they possessed themselves of the Empire and gave laws to the Heathen Now if we speak humanly of this matter we can resolve it into no other cause than the great number of the Christians It must be confessed that the providence of God was wonderful in preserving and raising this meek and simple people but the means he chose were the same he had taken before in Egypt for the deliverance of Israel he increased them exceedingly and so made them stronger than their enemies The numbers of the Christians were great from the begining And what was said of our Saviour in Judaea became true in a great part of the World that all the World did run after him This Tacitus and Pliny do affirm early This Tertullian sets out with great ostentation towards the begining of the third Century But these Testimonies with several others have been urg'd already (r) Vindicat. Prim. ch p. 54. 55 458 499 500. c. and need not to be insisted on in this place I will add only one passage more to the same purpose out of Maximin's (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 9. c. 9. Letter to Sabinus where he sets out the occasion of that great Persecution under Dioclesian Dioclesian says he and Maximian my Fathers and my Lords seeing all people almost to have forsaken the worship of the Gods and to have joyned themselves to the Christians had rightly ordered that those who had forsaken the Religion of their Gods should undergo exemplary punishment Now this being the confession of an Enemy ought to have the greater weight and we cannot doubt but in the beginning of that Persecution the Christians were become the greater part of the Roman Empire And therefore in the great Cities they could not meet in one Assembly and in the chief Cities they could not have so few as twenty Congregations But you know the Fable the Toad could not conceive an Elephant any bigger than the stretch of his own skin Mr. Clerkson (t) Prim. ep p. 69. could meet with but one City small or great for three hundred years after Christ whose inhabitants were generally Christians and that was Neocaesarea of whose Conversion Gregory Thaumatargus was the instrument (u) P. 70. But for all this it does not appear that the Christians in that City were more than could meet together in one place And to make it probable that all the City made but one Congregation he offers two things First That we saw before that this place was not very populous And then that Gregory built but one Church there he would doubtless have erected more if more had been needful The first reason has been rejected already and they must be very easy that admit it because eleven Egyptian Bishops were banished to this place therefore it had no more people than could meet in one Church Yet as weak as this is the other is no wiser because Gregory built but one Church therefore there were no more Nay tho' he might have built several Parish-Churches yet the Cathedral which by the ancients is called the Church by way of Eminence might be only mention'd and in the great Cities where we are sure there were many Churches they speak of the Church that is the Bishops as if there were no other in the place and there was but one Church in any City for some uses of Religion that is for Baptism and Penance So that to speak properly and after the manner of ancient times there was in a City but one Church the other being but Parish-Chappels and Oratories Gregory therefore might build but one Church and yet his City might have many Parish-Congregations But for Neocaesarea we have greater probabilities that it was too populous for one Religious Assembly For first it was the Metropolis of Pontus and that long before it was converted by Gregory as Holstenius (x) Luc. Holsten in Steph. v. Neocaes proves by a Medal of Severus which had upon the reverse the age of this City In the next place it was eminent for liberal Studies which little Towns never were And Basil (y) Bas ep 64. relates with what earnestness the Magistrates pray'd him to take upon him the instruction of their Youth And lastly the character which the same Father gives (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil ep 75. it of being the most Illustrious of Cities cannot agree with that meaness under which Mr. Clerkson does represent it There is another City in Phrygia whose inhabitants are said to have been all Christians Euseb H. l. 8. c. 25. (a) C. 11. Ed. Vales and all with the City burnt together but
this was in the fourth Century in the Persecution raised by Maximian Anno. 312. That this was a small Town we have from Eusebius (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he notes farther that they had Magistrates but that it had a Bishop neither Eusebius nor Lactantius mention and for ought that appears it might belong to the Bishop of some other place However let the City be as little as it will the Bishop might be Diocesan though all his Town made but one Congregation c How predominant Heathenism was in the Cities of the Roman Empire before Constantine may be collected says our Author in and after his Reign If it was spreading and prevalent when the power of it was so much broken it will be easie to infer what it was before It cannot be denied that Christianity received very great increase by the favour and the zeal of Constantine yet it must be remembred that the desolations under Dioclesian and his Collegues were so great and the numbers of Christians destroyed and frighted out of their Profession so excessive that it must be a great while before the Christians could recover themselves to that condition in which the Persecution found them And though under Constantine and his Sons the Church had a great seeming increase yet many of the new Converts being induced by human considerations and arguments extrinsick to Religion made greater shew than strength and in Julian's reign when worldly advantages were on the Heathen side many of these turned again to their old superstitions and most of the instances which are brought by our Author to shew the number of Heathen after (d) Prim. ep p. 71. Constantine are in that reign Yet let us hear the particulars (d) Prim. ep p. 71. That we may afford the greatest advantage to Christianity let us instance principally in Palestine where the Gospel first moving may in reason be thought to have made the greatest progress Some are never to be more narrowly observed than when they pretend to offer favour and advantage I am apt to believe that if our Author had found any instances more to the advantage of his cause he might have wav'd this complement to Christianity Here he says the Gospel first mov'd and therefore should have made the greatest Progress But the great Revolutions that happened in that Country soon after the planting of the Gospel may possibly have rendred the condition of Christianity there much worse than it was some time after in other Countries nay worse than it was in some of the Cities of Palestine in the Apostles time For instance Sebaste which is Samaria is brought as an Example of a City much addicted to Heathenism after Constantine's time and yet at the preaching of Philip the Deacon all the City is said (e) Act. 8.6 8 10 12 14. to be converted Lydda was a City of Judaea called also Diospolis and St. Luke (f) Act. 9.32 33. affirms that it was all converted by S. Peter All that dwell'd at Lydda turned unto the Lord. Yet about three hundred years after Christianity had made so little progress that both Villages and Cities there were exceeding Heathenish But we must find no fault because he pretends to afford Christianity greater advantage by these Examples Gaza above all the rest is stigmatiz'd by all as most Heathenish yet as Heathenish as it was after Constantine's time the Bishops of it had many Congregations before for Silvanus who suffered Martyrdom in the last Persecution is styl'd by Eusebius (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 8. c. 13. Bishop of the Churches of Gaza Caesarea too in our Author's judgment seems not much better and yet there the Bishop had many Churches too in the former part of Constantine's reign as his letter to Eusebius (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. Const ad Euseb Theod. l. 1. c. 15. mentions In Palestine therefore our Author mentions many Cities where there were Heathens after Constantine's reign and instances chiefly in those where in Julian's time the Heathen Party raised tumults and committed many murders and barbarities but this does not prove them to be the major part For a small number under the countenance and instigation of the Emperour may do a great deal of mischief without opposition We have a fresh instance how insolent a small party may grow under the countenance of Authority not quite so absolute nor so implicitly obeyed as that of the Roman Emperours was And that the Christians were then when they endured these indignities much the greater number Sozomen who relates most of those tumults does plainly shew and that upon this very account Julian found himself obliged to use artifice rather than force in the restoring of his superstition Julian says that Historian (i) Soz. l. 5. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zealous to make Heathenism prevail was much greiv'd to see it overcome by the Christian Religion which was in the general esteem preferr'd to it and it troubled him to think that his Religion must sink as soon as he is dead For though the Temples were opened again and the old Rites restored yet he observed that the wives and children and servants even of the Heathen Priests were generally Christian From hence it is clear how the greater part and body of the People stood affected to Christianity And though here and there a City might abound with Heathen it is no wonder for where there is a mixture of Religions a party which to the whole does not bear the proportion of one to ten may in some few places happen to be predominant Phaenicia follows Palestine and these our Author (l) Prim. ep p. 72. observes from Theodoret were madd upon their Idols and idolatrous Rites and this observed by Chrysostom in Arcadius his reign That there were superstitious people in Phaenicia at that time I do not deny and perhaps more than in most places but that they were the greater part or near equal to the Christians there does not appear from any thing produced by our Author Nay the contrary appears from that relation of Theodoret how Chrysostom with the assistance of a few Monks pulled down the Heathen Temples of the Country In Syria our Author (m) Prim. ep p. 73. meets with Heliopolis a place singular for superstition and beastliness where not one would endure to hear the name of Christ and Arethusa he thinks was not much better furnished with Christians because they all joyn'd in the murdering of their Bishop Yet in the same Chapter Sozomen assigns the reason of the Bishops return when he had once fled because (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 5. c. 10. there were many like to be brought in danger upon his account Apamea is mentioned to the same purpose and this was a Metropolis says our Author here the multitude was only restrained through fear from hindering the demolishing of Jupiter 's Temple Theodor. l. 5. c. 21.
Prim. ep p. 76. In the West he offers but one instance or two In Turin the Heathen were so prevalent that the Christians were not suffered to choose a Bishop after Gratian's decease Greg. Turin l. 10. c. 43. This Turin is I suppose Tours in France And Gregory Bishop of that place does indeed in the last Chapter of the tenth Book of his History make a recapitulation of the Bishops of that City of whom Gratian was the first who according to that Author (y) Greg. Turon was sent thither from Rome in the first year of Decius which answers the year of Christ 253. according to Baronius (z) H. l. 10. c. 31. but 249 according to Bishop Pearson (a) Ann. Cypr. Anno. 249. When this Gratian dyed the See is said to have been void seven and thirty years but no reason is there assigned for so long a vacancy But Gregory seems to be affraid there should be many Christians in that part of Gaule before Martin came to convert the Country Yet in Gaule they could not but be exceeding numerous since they suffered (b) Lactant. de Mort. Persec ss 16. so little in Dioclesian's Persecution and must consequently become the common refuge of the Christians that fled from other places But to make short work and so offer all the rest in one In Rome it self in the fourth Century the Senate the Nobles and the greatest part of the people were given up to Heathenish Superstitions And for this he refers his Reader to the Centuriators They have indeed several instances to prove that there was a great party of Heathen in that City in the fourth Century But none of these make it evident that the greatest part of the Romans were then Heathen unless it be a passage of St. Jerom (c) Hoc errore pessima consuetudine vetustatis multarum provinciarum urbes laborant Ipsaque Roma orbis domina Ut tam intrantes quam exeuntes domos suas inoliti semper commoneantur erroris Hieron In Esa c. 57. which as it is produced by those Collectors would make them all Heathen For they make him say that the Image of the tutelar Deity is worshiped in every house in Rome But he seems to represent this as a relique of Heathen superstition that stuck in many places and was retained even among Christians and therefore brings it as a parallel instance to match the superstition of the Jews which they learned from their neighbours But that the greater part of the people of Rome were Christians towards the end of the third Century and the beginning of the fourth we have a plain testimony from Eusebius (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 8. c. 14. who speaking of Maxentius says that at first he counterfeited himself a Christian to please and flatter the people of Rome Yet Mr. Clerkson is of another opinion and tells (e) Prim. ep p. 76. us that a little before the Christians were but a small part of Rome when with general acclamations the people cried out Christiani tollantur duodecies c. Baron Anno. 301. ss 3. But this evidence falls short upon several accounts First the authority of it is not very good it is taken from the acts of Savinus of which Baronius published some part But they are entire in Baluzius (f) Baluz Miscel l. 2. p. 47. his Miscellanies Baronius (g) Anno. 301. 18. vouches them for sincere and good and Baluzius (h) Baluz Not. in Pass S. Savini p. 463. gives them the same character But there are some marvelous passages which may make one who is not very credulous to doubt such (i) Pass S. Savini ss 5. 9 10 11. as the breaking of the Idol of Jupiter made of Coral by this Martyr while he was under examination his restoring sight to the Nephew of Serena his healing and converting of Venustianus president of Tuscia and some other things that tast of Fable But to let these Acts pass for authentick it does not follow from the clamour of the people at the Circensian games against the Christians that the greatest part of Rome was Heathen For those who were present at those sports were generally Heathen The Christians thinking themselves forbid by their Religion to go to such shews So this allegation yeilds but a poor argument against the number of the Christians since the fact is not very certain and the consequence far from being good However our Author (l) Prim. ep p. 77. finds that long after this the Romans were generally Heathen For Constantine after he had been Emperour twenty years expressing his detestation of the Heathenish Rites Incurred the hatred of the Senat and People of Rome and was reproached in a manner by all the People Zosim l. 2. And this is assigned as the cause why he thought of transferring the Imperial Seat This indeed is said by Zosimus a zealous advocate for Gentile Superstition and the only design of whose History is to set up the Apostate Julian for a Hero and to disparage all the actions of Constantine and the Christian Emperours and to this purpose he has made a History as fabulous as his Religion especially where that is concerned And therefore it is no wonder if such a one stretch beyond truth in the magnifying his party and make all the Roman people of his side That he translated his Imperial Seat might not be occasioned by the prevalence of Heathenism in Rome for Dioclesian had done (m) Nicomediam studens urbi Romae coaequare Lact. de Mort. Pers ss 7. cum libertatem populi ferre non poterat prorupit ex urbe Id. ss 17. the same thing not long before and made a prodigious expence upon Nicomedia with a design to render it equal to Rome that had indeed disoblig'd him but it could not be by being too Heathenish but by that Liberty or rather Insolence which the People used towards their Emperours Now in Constantine whether it was pique or desire of glory to be the founder of a new Rome or a nobler design for the safety of the Empire to remove the Imperial Seat and consequently the best and quickest strength of it nearer to the Barbarous Nations that were then most powerful is not easy to say at this distance but for Christianity's sake we ought not to take the reason of an enemy and especially one of so profligate credit as Zosimus was But within less than twenty years of Constantine's reign the Christians of Rome had forty Churches as we are informed by Optatus (n) Optat. Milev l. 2. Bishop of Milevis a writer of that age And in the later end of that Century S. Augustin excuses the practice of St. Peter's Church in Rome which was objected against his Reformation in Hippo upon this account that it was remote from the Bishop For when St. Augustin (o) Quod remotus sit locus a conversatione Episcopi in tanta civitate sit magna
poor Heathen Priest was forced to bring his goose himself and to provide his own sacrifice Constantinople was a Christian City from its first foundation (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So◠l. 2. c. 3. having never been polluted with Idols and the generality of the Citizens being Christians required many Churches to assemble in Constantine built several and of the rest some were built by the Bishops others by the people of the place and the goodness and charity of the Christian inhabitants there were so great that they gained many of the Jews and almost all the Heathen to become Christians And even in Arabia where Mr. Clerkson could find few or no Christians in Valens his time the great and vast City Bostra for so Ammianus Marcellinus (i) Civitates ingentes Bostra c. Ammian Marc. l. 14. c. 2. calls it was at least half Christian as Titus the Bishop of the place gave out who is quoted for it by Julian (l) Julian Ep. ad Bostren the Apostate Nay some Countries are said to be generally Christian before the end of the third Century So Eusebius (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. E. l. 9. c. 8. represents the Armenians against whom Maximin declared War upon that account and while he endeavoured to force them to Idolatry instead of friends and confederates he made them enemies So wonderfully did the word of God prevail that to use the words of Eusebius (n) Euseb Praepar Ev. l. 1. p. 12 13. whole myriads of men and women and children of bond and free of Barbarians and Greeks in every place and City and Country in every Nation under Heaven learn the precepts of our holy doctrin and become the Disciples of Christ (o) Prim. ep p. 78. Nor is our Author contented to reduce the Primitive Christians to a small number and to render them a mean party in respect of the multitude of the Heathen even after they were become their masters but he brings in yet further abatements at the foot of his account for Jews and Hereticks The Jews says he were numerous in these Cities and there was no part of the Roman Empire without multitudes of them This he proves chiefly out of Josephus But all those Testimonies are too early for the present purpose and the Synagogues of Jews that S. Paul met with in allmost every City where he came were so far from diminishing the numbers of Christians that their increase was generally from hence Here the Apostles usually preached the Gospel till they had changed the Synagogues into Churches Under Trajan and Adrian the Jews were very numerous and their numbers might then tempt them to revolt but the destruction which they brought upon themselves was so great such numbers slain that they seemed to be near extirpation After this they were so low that for some ages they are not mentioned for any enterprize In the mean time the Christians increased daily till they prevailed over both Jews and Heathen And St. Austin (p) Plures enim jam Christiani sunt quam si Judaei simulacrorum cultoribus adjungantur Aug. de Util. Cred. makes the Christians in his time to be more numerous than Jews and Idolaters put together not confining his comparison within the Empire but making it general and consequently taking in all the barbarous Nations within his knowledge Yet in the fourth Century Mr. Clerkson brings an instance or two to shew that in some places the Jews were numerous In Constantine 's time says he (q) Prim. ep p. 80. they possessed Diocaesarea and Tiberias Diospolis also and many other Towns and were so numerous as to raise a war against the Emperour Soz. l. 4. c. 6. That the Jews were numerous in that age especially about Palestine cannot be denied and that they had several Towns entirely to themselves Socrates (r) Socr. l. 2. c. 3. and Epiphanius (s) Epiph. Haer. 30. ss 11. and other Writers affirm But then these Towns wholly inhabited by Jews are without this question for these make no abatement of the number of Christians in Cities where they had Bishops and Churches It will be of some use upon this occasion to clear a passage of Epiphanius which Petavius had mistaken In the relation which Epiphanius gives of Count Joseph the Jew among other things he makes him say that Ellal the Jewish Patriarch at the point of death sent for the Bishop of Tiberias and was baptized of him Whereas then there was neither Bishop nor Church nor Christian in Tiberias and therefore instead of Bishop of that place he should have rendered (t) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 4. a Bishop in the neighbourhood of Tiberias For it was there that the Patriarch resided and sent for some Bishop of a neighbouring Town And that the words are thus to be rendered will be clear from what the same Joseph says a little after When Constantine had conferred upon him the honour of a Count he bid him beg what favour he pleased but asked only this that he might have the Emperour's commission (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. n. 11. to build Churches in the Cities and Villages of the Jews where there were none because there was neither Heathen nor Samaritan nor Christian among them and especially in Tiberias and Diocaesarea and Nazareth and Capernaum For in these places they would not suffer any of another Nation to live among them Now as these places are not for Mr. Clerkson's purpose while they were wholly possessed of Jews so neither will the objection last long after Churches were built in them For (x) Aur. Vict. in Constantio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cedren ad an 15. Const these Jews revolting against Constantius and setting up a Tyrant of their own one Patricius were totally destroyed by Gallus and Diocaesarea razed to the ground But the Jews also were numerous in these Cities i.e. where the Heathen are supposed by him to be the major part and there was no part of the Roman Empire without multitudes of them The ancient instances out of Josephus I pass by as too early and not to the present purpose But one thing he offers that ought not to be omitted that (y) Prim. ep p. 81. Chrysostom seems to signifie that in his time they were as many as the Christians in that City i. e. in Antioch for he exhorts each of the Christians to reduce one Jew to the Christian profession To say the truth this inference does not so much as seem to be reasonable For first Chrysostom could not speak to all the Christians of Antioch together though his voice had been as great as his eloquence and to strain this expression to the utmost if it should suppose the Jews as many as those he addressed his discourse to yet would they be no more than one Christian Congregation which might possibly be two or three thousand when Chrysostom preached though that great man
if our Author may have his way Rome and Constantinople are a great way off and the times of which our Author speaks were very remote from ours But let us try whether we may not comprehend this matter without travel or much reading and make London the Scene of our Discourse for as great and populous as it is it may receive no disparagement by the comparison with old or new Rome Now in London there is a Sect or two ambitious of being thought to have some resemblance to the Novatians and that they may not be displeased let them be more numerous instead of three Churches let them have ten Meetings The other Sects who can speak of numbers too may have their assemblies as convenient as they please and not crush or hurt one another for want of room yet the Bishop of the place will scarce be able to assemble his flock even of the City in any one Church tho' Pauls were finished For if you should happen to be late on Sunday morning go to St. Clements and there 's no room go to St. Martins and its all full go to the Abby and you can scarce come within hearing and at St. Gile's you will be throng'd and if you walk to St. Andrews you may have no seat I might add near a hundred Congregations more within the lines of which many are as considerable as these I mentioned and all this in a City which is much inferior for number of people to those old ones of which our Author speaks You may see therefore by this how much thinner a multitude of Sects and some of them numerous will render the Bishops flock in such great Cities as we have been speaking of and what mighty abatements are to be made in the number of the Church Christians upon the account of three Conventicles of the Novatians in a City that wanted not much of a million of Souls But we have made no allowance for Heathen which in the fourth Century were numerous and now are grown rare But the sluggish and irreligious brutes in our greatest Cities may be reconed against them and our account remain as it was and I am afraid that about London there may be more of these than there were Heathens in Constantinople I need not shew says our Author (e) Prim. ep p. 83. how predominant Arrianism was in the greatest part of the Christian World Ingemuit totus orbis Arrianum se esse miratus est When it possessed the whole Orient having none to oppose it but Athanasius and Paulinus Adv. Joh. Hierosol That the Arrian party or faction was very great under Constantius and Valens is certain but that the Sect was very numerous I find no reason to believe I am sure the passage of St. Jerom which is much oftner cited than understood intends no such thing but the quite contrary For Jerom l speaking of the Council of Rimini endeavours to shew that the Bishops there were Orthodox that they confirmed the Nicene Faith that they condemned Arrianism that they left out the word Consubstantial not because they condemned the sense of it but for accomodation and because it seemed to give offence that they pronounced anathema on all those who denyed Christ to be eternal God or affirmed him to be made of nothing Wherefore thinking they had done well and wisely they return home in great hopes that the East and West were now reconciled and that this small alteration had begot an eternal Peace But when the Arrians had obtained their point and had excluded the word Substance out of the Creed they began to proclaim (g) Sine conscientia Haeretici ferebantur their Conquest and to triumph as if the Nicene Faith had been abolished Then the Bishops began to perceive the trick So that the whole World wondred to see it self become Arrian not that they were really so but only that they had been imposed upon by fair pretences to give the Arrians some advantage for which they were sensibly grieved and therefore as soon as they (f) Usiae nomen quia in Scripturis aiebant non invenitur multos simpliciores novitate sua scandalizat placuit auferri Non erat curae Episcopis de vocabulo cum sensus esset in tuto Hieron adv Lucif found their mistake some immediately joyned Communion with the Confessours in Banishment the rest as soon as they had opportunity renounced all Communion with the Arrians and were received into the Church not as Hereticks returned for they never had been Hereticks but as persons deceived by fair words to joyn with those who were indeed secretly Hereticks But their expressions (h) Sonabant verba pletatem nemo venenum insertum putabat Hieron adv Lucif bore a fair construction and their words were Catholick and it seemed (i) Cur damnassent eos qui Arriani non erant Id. unreasonable they should be condemned for Arrians who had never been so This passage then of Jerom is brought in by Mr. Clerkson directly against the intention of the Author Nor is it any more to the intent of the present question or any way serviceable to our Author's purpose which is to render the flocks of the Bishops of those times thinner for the flocks of these Bishops did all adhere to them and when (l) Cum omnes populi Sarcedotes suos diligentes paene ad lapides interemptionem deponentium eos convaluerint Hieron adv Lucif some persons of more zeal than discretion attempted to depose some of them and ordein others in their place their people were so concerned that they were ready to stone those obtruders The same answer is to be made to the other passage of St. Jerom that in the East there were but Athanasius and Paulinus to oppose the Arrians Not that all the rest or the greater number were Hereticks or would not oppose the Doctrin of Arrius but those two only did in an eminent manner oppose the designs of these Hereticks which were covered over with specious pretences of peace and sincerity of belief so as to impose in a manner upon the whole Church But the number of that Sect is no more to be taken from the party they once prevailed upon to joyn with them against a few Bishops whom they traduced as Authors of all those publick distractions which they themselves had caused and pretended that the Faith was not concerned than the numbers of our Sects are to be estimated from the interest which upon some occasions they can make against some great men who seem to stand most in their way and to give the greatest obstruction to their designs In all Constantine's time the Arrians had no separate Congregations excepting what the Author of the Sect made for a little while in Alexandria And when Bishops and whole Provinces took parties in this quarrel the separation was of one City or Province from another and not of the people from their respective Bishops and in a little time all
acquiesced in the Decree of Nice (m) Socr. l. 1. c. 26. which received no open contradiction during the reign of Constantine (n) Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 57. and prodigious accessions being made to the Church under that reign the Cities must be thronged with Christians and the generality of Bishops even in respect of the Towns where they resided must be Diocesan All Sects were very inconsiderable in his time being suppressed by publick authority and all their Meetings forbid by the Emperour's Edicts (o) Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 63 64 65 66. which had that effect that the greatest part joyned themselves sincerely to the Church and all the rest in appearance so that there remained no meeting of Dissenting Christians in all the Empire and even the Novatians were comprehended in the same Law Under the next reign the Arrians covered themselves with a pretence of owning no other Doctrin but that already established in the Church and laid all the blame upon Athanasius as a man of a restless and turbulent spirit that would not suffer the Church to be in peace Nor were there many separate Congregations upon this account the people generally following the Bishops set over them under a perswasion that they were sound as to the Faith and for those Bishops who were displaced care was taken that they should be thought to suffer not upon the account of their Faith but of some other high misdemeanors In some few of the greatest Cities there were tumults on this occasion but in general there was a submission to publick order and a great part of the World was carried away not by the doctrin but the dissimulation of the Arrians Yet still the Episcopal Dioceses remained as they were without any considerable seperations When Athanasius died it s said there were but few Arrians in (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 4. c. 22. Alexandria In (q) Basil ep 72. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil's time there were but very few in comparison of the whole infected with that disease At Rome there were scarce any And (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 2. in the West they were hardly known otherwise than by report till the Goths had planted themselves in that part of the Empire So that the Orthodox Bishops were not reduced to a single Congregation by the separation of the Arrians their Cities only being supposed to make up their whole Dioceses Our Author is liberal and will not insist upon the prevailing of the Donatists and therefore I need not say that the case of Afric was singular being torn into very small Dioceses and yet even in that there were some large some free from the Donatists and had no other Bishop but that of the established Church as appears by several answers of the Bishops in the Conference at Carthage Nor will he tell us how the Macedonians did abound in many places Nor will he so much as name the other numerous Sects which had their distinct Churches and Bishops so that there were sometimes four or five of several perswasions seated in that City I have I think made allowance enough for them all and yet in great Cities left more Churches for the Bishops than all the Conventicles of Sectaries thrice told would amount to Now to sum up this evidence and (s) Prim. ep p. 84. to draw this Discourse into an issue Suppose we a City forty furlongs in compass than which there were few bigger let us allow half to Heathens and a third or fourth to Jews and Novatians and the proportion left Christians will not exceed the dimensions of a small Town c. But we have taken notice of some Cities of more than forty furlongs that were wholly Christian I have mentioned others exceeding great in which there were but very few Heathen I have instanced in some that had no Dissenters or Sectaries and shew'd in general that all the World over those who were without the pale of the Church of all Sects were nothing so considerable as our Author would represent them And here we might conclude this Chapter but for the particulars which follow and require further examination When our Author had made the largest allowances for Heathens and Jews and Sectaries as if they had been all to poll for the Dissenters and left the Catholick Christians so destitute that there seemed to be no place left them in the greatest Cities he thought (a) Prim. ep p. 84. it might be more satisfactory yet to make this evident in some particular Cities and those of the greater nay some of the greatest Berytus he says was an eminent City and yet it had but one Church in Julian 's time which was then burnt by Magnus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not one of the Churches but the Church of Berytus Theod. l. 4. c. 20. If our Author had been a little better versed in the language of the ancient Church he could not have thought this instance or his deduction from it very satisfactory For the Church in Ecclesiastical Writers does not denote the only Church or signifie to the exclusion of any other but expresses only the Cathedral or Bishops Church And that this may be clear beyond all cavil I will offer some passages where the same expression is used in Cities known to have a great number of Churches Alexandria is allowed by all to have had many Churches in the beginning of the fourth Century and the testimony of Athanasius (b) Athan. Apol. 2. and Epiphanius (c) Epiph. Haer. 69. sets it beyond contradiction yet Gregory the Arrian Bishop is said (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 14. to be removed because he had become odious to the people for the burning of the Church He says not one of the Churches would our Author reason but the Church yet for all this there were many other Churches in that City To the same purpose when Athanasius was forced to fly from Alexandria the Soldiers are said (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Apol 2. p. 717. Socr. l. 2. c. 11. to encompass the Church without any distinction which it was and the Bishop said to be driven out of the Church intending only the principal Church and that which was called so by way of eminence which is sometimes styled the great Church So Theodorus Lector (f) Theod. Lect. l. 1. p. 553. Ed. Val. speaking of Gennadius Bishop of Constantinople takes notice that he was the first that appropriated to the City Parishes all the oblations that should be made in them whereas before the great Church carried away all And Nicephorus (g) Niceph. H E. l. 15. c. 22. speaking of the same thing calls it the Catholick Church In the same manner likewise is Epiphanius (h) Epiph. Haer. 69. understood by Valesius (i) H. Vales in Theodor. Lect. p. 162. when he speaks of the Catholick Church of
Alexandria And thus perhaps may Cornelius his expression in Eusebius be best understood that in the Catholick Church there ought to be but one Bishop For although in one City there may be many parish-Parish-Churches appointed for the use of the several quarters where they are placed yet is there but one common or general or Catholick Church in one City Rome had many Churches when the schism of Vrsicinus happened to divide it and long before that time there were no less than forty Yet Socrates (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 4. c. 29. speaking of the ordination of Vrsicinus observes that it was not done in the Church but in a private place of the Church called Sicine or Sicininus (m) Ammian Marcell l. 27. c. 3. that is in the Church of Sicininus which was but an obscure place in comparison of the great Church In Constantinople there were many Churches from the beginning Yet in Constantius his time Socrates (n) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. 16. speaks of the Emperours order to drive Paul out of the Church of that place and to put Macedonius into possession of it Wherefore (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. ibid. after Paul was sent to banishment the Prefect took Macedonius and brought him toward the Church and when they came near to the Church and the people strove to get into the Church Though all the while it is notorious (p) Socr. l. 2. c. 12. there were many Churches in the place though this was then the Cathedral Or if our Author may fancy this City still to have but one Church yet we have the same language long after even in Chrysostom's time who upon his return is said (q) Socr. l. 6. c. 16. Pallad Vit. Chrys p. 15 16 24 25. Chrys Ep. ad Innocent to be brought by the people to the Church And by this time sure there must be many Churches in that City or some unkown destruction must have befaln those magnificent houses of God in that place so much celebrated by some of the Writers of that age So the inference our Author draws from this expression the Church of Berytus to the exclusion of all other Churches proves a mistake But he proceeds to observe farther (r) Prim. Ep. p. 85. that Tyre was one of the most illustrious Cities of the East yet Paulinus Bishop there in Constantine's time had but so many under his Episcopal charge (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 276. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 285. as he could take a personal notice of their souls and accurately examine the inward state of every one acquainting himself thoroughly with the condition of all those souls that were committed to him And that you may be sure that all this is just and exact without Hyperbole he quotes his Author as the Panegyrist in Eusebius informs us l. 10. c. 4. It is usual in Panegyricks to raise things beyond nature and the strictness of truth and it is allowed as long as the proportions and resemblance of the things so represented are preserved What therefore if Eusebius by all this citation should intend only to commend the diligence and the penetration of that Bishop of Tyre that he had the gift of discerning spirits and of judging aright whose repentance was sincere and therefore to be received into communion whose conversion was unfeigned and therefore to be admitted to baptism who was best qualified for the respective offices of the Church If he should mean no more by these high expressions he would not exceed much the allowances given to such kinds of discourse and I think they are more to blame that would force a complement into a Syllogism It is scarce worth the while to say so much as is necessary for the illustration of this passage only to shew at last to how little purpose it was alledged Yet since this instance of Tyre comes in among the rest because he esteemed it more satisfactory than ordinary I m st beg the Reader 's patience to explain the matter Eusebius (t) Euseb E. H. l. 10. c. 4. p. 376. in his Panegyrick delivered at the Dedication of the Church of Tyre commends not only the fabrick but the spiritual Church or the Christians of that City And this Temple says the Panegyrist is very great indeed and worthy of God The inside of this Temple who can describe who can look into it but the great high Priest who alone has authority to enter into this Holy of holies and to search the secrets of the heart And happily it may be given to one more in the second place and by way of substitute that is to him who sits there the leader of this noble Army To him therefore as a high Priest after Christ it may be lawful to look into the most secret parts of your souls or as Mr. Clerkson translates to take a personal notice of your souls and to examine the inward state of every one Now Eusebius says not the least word that Paulinus had but so many under his charge that he could look into all their souls but (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 10. c. 4. p. 385. that it was lawful for him to do so to be an inspector or Bishop of their souls And this to be understood with respect to the Bishops office who received the publick confessions in the Church and was the Judge of the sincerity of the profession as far as Ecclesiastical Discipline was concerned And all this might be said although he had had forty Parish-Churches within his City Valesius mentions a marginal note of some Greek set against this place in a Manuscript that he had seen detesting it as a wicked and blasphemous passage He thought Eusebius had spoken those things of Christ which he directed to the Bishop But though there are some expressions below the majesty of Christ yet are there others that are something too high to be offered to man The other passage out of the same Oration that speaks of Paulinus as thoroughly acquainting himself with all those souls committed to him will appear as little to our Author's purpose if we do but observe what goes before it For Eusebius speaking to those who had defiled their consciences in the Persecution by complying with the wicked decrees of the Persecutors And you says he whose consciences a little while ago were polluted and overwhelmed by profane commands have your minds now cleansed by the terrours of God's law and are by him committed to the Bishop who as he is otherwise of excellent judgment so hath he a singular sagacity in judging of the thoughts of souls These words then are directed to such as had fallen in the late Persecution and were now in the state of Penitents or had lately been so And it is with respect to them that the discretion of the Bishops is commended that he can see into the very secret of their hearts
greater part might be far from liking it We have instances of this nature fresh in our remembrance and perhaps too odious to be mentioned Besides there were Jews and Novatians and Arrians here and so there might be very great numbers and yet twenty Churches not be sufficient to receive the Christians of the established Religion It must be confessed that all other Cities must be delivered up to the Congregational pretensions if Constantinople may be reduced to a single Church And Mr. Clerkson fancied he had discovered the weakness of the Christians of this place by a passage in Theodoret. (n) Prim. ep p. 87 88. In Alexander 's time the Christians were no more than could all meet together so Theodoret informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 1. c. 14. i. e. the Bishop of the place performed divine service with all the Brethren what with all the brethren of Constantinople No but with all the brethren there assembled The import of this expression has been considered already and this very passage has received (o) Vindicat. Prim. Ch. pref an answer long since But afterwards he observes many falling off to Arrianism the remainder made but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a little flock This does not prove but before this defection the Bishop of Constantinople's flock was very great and required many Churches to assemble in And after this defection the Arrian Bishop whom most of the Christians followed had many Churches and Congregations under him For the people in many places not understanding the danger of the Arrian Communion did not think it necessary to separate and therefore continued to repair to those Churches whither they used to resort before So that the Episcopacy of the place remained Diocesan though it happen'd to be placed in wrong hands And soon after the people were recovered from these wolves and delivered to faithful shepherds Yet even then Mr. Clerkson can find but one Congregation there for in the time of Theodosius Junior it seems all amounted to no more than one Church could contain if Socrates deceive us not l. 4. it should be the 7th c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. all the City became but one Church It is a dangerous thing I see to venture upon a figure if men will be such rigid exactors of litteral sense The Historian might fancy he had spoken eloquently when instead of saying that there was a great confluence of people to the Church he chose to express himself thus that the whole City became one Church But the poor man is taken up short at his word and if he do not make it out that the greatest City then in the world was not litterally one Congregation he must pass for an extravagant Writer and one that deceiveth us Yet though it should happen that all the City or all the Christians had not been there to a man it is not Socrates that deceives us while he uses a form of speech generally (p) Prim. ep p. 88. allowed and understood but it is Mr. Clerkson deceives himself when he snatcheth such expressions as this against all fair ways of understanding to give evidence to his notion Those who give themselves up to serve an opinion are apt to catch at any thing they meet for a weapon to defend it and this Tyrant is so absolute and the Slave so fond that there is no place left for examination or doubt nor can that pertinent question of the Prophet (q) Is 44.20 is there not a lie in my right hand obtain any hearing I have already shewed the greatness of this City which our Author would reduce to a single Congregation that even in Constantine's time it was equal to the greatest of the Empire I have shewed that this was a Christian City from the foundation and the people generally devoted to the Religion of their Founder That in Constantine's time Sectaries could not lessen the Church of the Bishop in that place since they were not only discountenanced in that reign but by the Edicts of the Emperour obliged to go to Church which they generally did observe some sincerely and the rest by outward compliance The Arrians or Eusebians had then no separate Congregations they made then indeed a faction but not a schism in the Church and laboured with all their interest to restore those to Communion who had been cast out by the censures of the Church upon the account of those opinions I have shewed how that Emperour built (r) Theod. H. C. l. 1. c. 6. very great and many Churches there because few were not sufficient to receive the multitude And now if so great a City so affected to Christianity can make but one Church after all what Preacher (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist Polit. l. 2. can there be found what voice sufficient for such an assembly what Temple capacious enough to receive it S. Sophia is accounted the greatest of Christian Churches that the Sun ever shined on And I remember to have (t) Sub Bajazethe triginta sex millia qui illud religionis ergo adirent numerata fuisse Ant. Maevanius autor est Geo. Dousa de Itin. C. P. no. p. 37. read that in Bajazets reign six and thirty thousand Turks visited that Church in one day though I can scarce believe as vast as that Church was that it could hold so many together Yet even this number comes far short of the Christians in Constantine's time and much shorter yet of the Christians of Constantinople under the younger Theodosius when Paganism was every where expiring if not quite extinguished and the Arrians and other sects reduced to the Church and that City arrived to its highest point of greatness yet even then our Author can afford the Bishop but one Congregation (u) Prim. ep p. 88. At Ancyra the chief City of Gallatia our Author takes notice that there were many sects by which that Church was torn in pieces All this may very well be and yet more than one Congregation remain to the Bishop The same thing may be said of several of our Cities inferior perhaps to Ancyra and yet those of the established Religion notwithstanding the variety of the Sects require many Churches to assemble in (x) Prim. ep p. 89. The like may be said of Caesarea the chief City in Mauritania the reason here is like the rest because St. Augustin desired a publick Conference with the Donatist Bishop of that place (y) Suis omnibus civibus praesentibus Possid vit Aug. c. 14. i. e. frequentissima plebe praesente Aug. gest cum Emer init all the Citizens being present I wonder our Author has not reduced all the World to a Congregation since it is usual to say that a thing is done before all the World in the face of the World and the like and therefore what need all our Independent Congregations since these expressions may reduce the whole World to a single Conventicle When our
Vigil all the people are said to answer Amen to the Prayer which Vigilius their Bishop made Pelagius is said in St. Peter's Church in Rome to have gone up into the Pulpit and satisfy'd (e) Satisfecit cuncto populo plebi quia nullum malum fecisset contra Vigilium Lib. Pont. in Pelag. all the people that he had done Vigilius his predecessor no harm Gregory the Great is said to be chosen by (f) Gregonium Diaconum plebs omnis elegit Greg. Turon l. x. c. 1. Joh. Diacon l. 1. c. 39. 40. all the people tho' at that time in Rome there were neither Heathen nor Sectaries to make any abatements in the Bishops flock Nay if our Author will insist rigidly upon this phrase all Israel in the time of Samuel was no more than could meet in one place to hear Samuel who is said (g) 1 Sam. 12.1.4 to speak to all Israel and they answer him that he had neither oppressed nor defrauded them But our Author proceeds (h) Prim. ep p. 92. They were no more after Anno. 250 than could all together in the Church importune Cornelius for the readmission of the Ordeiners of Novatian The whole people interceeding for him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 6. c. 43. Our Author according to his usual ingenuity has left out a word that spoiled his argument and limited this expression For Cornelius does not say that all the Christian people of Rome importuned him (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that all the people that was present with him did interceed They were no more than could concur in an Epistle to salute their Brethren at Carthage Salutant vos fratres tota Ecclesia Cypr. ep 3. As tho' the general salutation of a Church could not be sent without the actual concurrence of every member How many publick acts bear the name of the people tho' the twentieth part was not present when they were made Or shall we fancy that all the Citizens of Rome met in one Assembly to pass every order that bears the title of Senatus Populusque Romanus (l) Prim. ep p. 93. They were no more than Cornelius could read Cyprians Letters to in their numerous Assembly amplissimae plebi They were no more than could all be present about consultations about matters of concernment c. Consultis omnibus ipsis stantibus laicis Cypr. ep 26. A Bishop may communicate Letters and Propoposals concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline in a full Congregation and to all the people then present and yet this cannot imply that there are no more Christians or no other Congregation in that City Whatsoever is done in publick and before a Congregation that is unlimited is in the common way of speaking said to be done before all the Community I meet with nothing says our Author (m) Prim. ep p. 93. that makes any shew of a probability that their numbers were more at that time but Cornelius his Catalogue of Officers and the number of the poor which were fifteen hundred Euseb l. 6. c. 37. This passage has not hitherto received any answer that made so much as a shew of probability And that which our Author replieth to the number of Officers hath been long since (n) Vindic. prim ch p. 51. shewed to be frivolous As to the number of Officers the shew will vanish Mr. Clerkson fancies if it be considered that it was the custom of those ancient times to multiply Officers beyond what was necessary yea so much that as Nazianzen (o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz Or. 1. tells us the Officers were sometimes as many as they had the charge of It might be excusable in Mr. Baxter to confound times of persecution with times of settlement and the middle of the third Century with the latter end of the fourth for he was too hasty to be curious and looked not the date of the Fable so it happened upon a time or shortly after he was contented But from Mr. Clerkson something might be expected more exact what will this shew of probability vanish and no likelyhood that there were more Congregations in Rome than one remain from six and forty Presbyters in Cornelius his time because it was the custom of Nazianzen's times to multiply Officers beyond what was necessary Forty six Presbyters were never accounted necessary to one Congregation even in the most prosperous times of the Church nor can any instance be given of so many relating to one Assembly in any age accounted ancient tho' it might be fashionable then to multiply Church Officers But for this we are at a greater certainty for Cornelius (p) Euseb H.E. l. 6. c. 43. assures us that this number was not for state nor for form without use and necessity but exceeding necessary and that upon the account of an infinite and numberless people And if the multitude of Christians in Rome was then so great as to require forty six Presbyters we may make some guess at the proportion they might have to the people of Rome after it had been entirely converted in the fifth and sixth Centuries for in those times the Presbyters of Rome were scarce a third part more than those in the Catalogue of Cornelius as we may gather from the subscriptions of the Presbyters in the Roman (q) Synod Rom. 1. sub Symmach Subs Pres 67. Council Nay in one Synod (r) Cum Episc omnibus Rom. Eccl. Presbyteris Greg. Reg. l. 4. ep 44. under Gregory the Great there are but thirty four Presbyters that subscribe I do not intend to say that two thirds of that City was then Christian but the Christians of that place under Cornelius seem to be at least two thirds in respect of all Rome in after ages when it was much diminished from its ancient greatness and when it seems to have no more than seventy Parish Presbyters This number therefore of forty six Presbyters all necessary for so great a people as the Christians of Rome then were makes it evident notwithstanding the frivolous exception of our Author that the believers of that City could not all assemble together upon any religious occasion and that the Church there must consequently be distributed to several Parishes and Congregations (s) Prim. ep p. 94. As to the other how to compute the numbers of the Roman Church by the number of the poor I know no better way than to observe what proportion there was betwixt these in other places But the ground of this exception is a mistake For Cornelius does not say that the number of all the poor Christians in Rome was but fifteen hundred but that so many were maintained by the publick stock of the Church besides the necessary Officers Now there might be many more poor maintained some by Relations others by private Charities and it is plain from the account that Chrysostom gives of the poor of Antioch and the number in the Church-Book that those
floor but the Bishop and Presbyters seats and such places from whence any of the Church Officers spoke or read to the people It is not therefore so plain as it seemed to Mr. Baxter that all could hear in such an assembly as this Now where a multitude is so numerous that the greater part cannot be partakers of the service for which they are assembled it seems to be no longer one Congregation since it cannot attain that purpose which brings them together And therefore is a Congregation for shew and solemnity and not for edification and religious service Nor can any bounds be assigned to such an Assembly for a Nation may be brought together in that manner And therefore when a multitude though crowded together in one place becomes uncapable of attaining the end of Religious Assemblies it has out-grown the Congregational standard as much as if it were dispersed in forty distant places At a Coronation all the people in Westminster Abby may be thought but one Congregation yet the greatest part hear no more of what is said than those who are ten miles off They may joyn in one common acclamation as that Alexandrian Assembly did in an Amen so they might though they were twenty times as many So that such a notion of a Congregation runs on to infinite And that of which we are speaking being in all probability of this sort it exceeded the bounds of the pretended Primitive Episcopacy and is of no use in the present question However the whole multitude met in the great Church which was large enough to receive them all But what multitude all the Christians of the City No Mr. Baxter will not say that Or all that were willing or had opportunity to attend the publick devotions of the day Athanasius says not that neither but that there was so great confluence that the Parish-Churches could not hold them But there was no other Congregation of Athanasius his Communion in Alexandria on that Easter-day beside this great one for the universal Harmony and Concurrence of the people had not been so visible if (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they had met in parcels and therefore there were no such meetings Still the question recurs what people all the Alexandrians of his Communion Nothing he says can be extended so far or made to comprehend any more than the multitude assembled at that time with intention to be present with the Bishop This is all the people and all the multitude that he mentions in this part of his defence But these were all his flock for universal Harmony of all the people was visible This may be said of any general Congregation assembled from all parts though all individuals nor perhaps half of them do not appear For Leo the Great about the middle of the fifth Century speaks to his Congregation in the same manner though in all probability not the twentieth part of the Christians of Rome were present In you says he (i) In vobis pietatem Christianae unitatis agnosco sicut enim ipsa frequentia testatur Intelligitis enim honorem totius gregis celebrari per annua festa Pastoris Leo. Serm. Anniv 3. I can plainly see the piety of Christian unity as your confluence does declare and you understand that the honour of the whole flock is celebrated in the Anniversaries of the Pastor Now to make up this image of Christian unity it was not necessary all the people of the City should flow to the Bishops Church but only that the Congregation should be very great though not so as to exclude all others Notwithstanding this expression there might be several other Assemblies in that City at the same time Nor was it otherwise at Alexandria as we may judge by a passage in the Bishops Defence He was accused for having dedicated a Church which the Emperour had built without his order because the holding of the Pascal Assemby there was a sort of Dedication But the Bishop protests (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apol. ad Const p. 682. to the Emperour that he was so far from any such design that this very Assembly was altogether accidental for he had given the people no notice nor summons to meet there Now the Parish Presbyters of Alexandria cannot well be supposed to leave their Churches unsupplied upon a presumption that all the people would assemble with the Bishop and they could not but know that his Church could not hold a tenth part of them for all the Churches in the City could not receive them all and this new Church not yet finished or dedicated they could not think of Therefore in all probability they assembled their Parishes then as they did on other times unless we may fancy that on Easter they always attended the Bishop and so for all the Easters before this left much the greatest part of the people without any service on that solemn time For but few of them could crowd into the Bishops Church before that great one was built and the number of the Catholick Christians had been greater than were at this time of which we are speaking To conclude all the Alexandrians of the Catholick Communion were not present with their Bishop in the new Church Those that came made a very great multitude and such as the other Churches could not hold considering they had each a Congregation already These could not be dispersed in the other Churches without danger These were proper to represent Catholick unity and in short were a Congregation suitable to the time though it might not comprehend all the Christians of that great City Our Author goes on to prove the Church of Alexandria no more than could meet in one Congregation (m) Prim. ep p. 98. Alexander the Predecessour of Athanasius assembled the whole multitude in the Church called Theonas the other Churches being all strait and little But still this multitude is not said to be the whole of the Alexandrine Church but only of the Bishops Congregation There is yet another kind of proof which he thinks might be as satisfactory to some and refers to Mr. Baxter's Ch. History p. 9 10. Here I must own my self of his opinion for both are equally satisfactory and this to which he refers has been (n) Vindic. Prim. Ch. p. 58. sufficiently answered He thinks the Premises so evident that there is no need of Dionysius 's observation that Alexandria in his time was not by much so populous as of old the old men being more in number formerly than both old and young in his days If there was no need of this observation he is the more inexcusable for attempting to put upon his Reader without any necessity If any one should undertake to prove that London is not so populous now as it was a hundred years ago because a great Mortality happened there about five and twenty years since and at the end of that pestilence all sorts of Inhabitants might not then equal even the
to make this little Church yet more venerable places it in that spot of ground where the house stood in which the Apostles were assembled after the Ascension of our Lord. Our Author to be revenged of this Church of Jerusalem for growing so fast at the beginning and giving trouble to his Brethren of the Congregational way by those many thousand Converts which they could not conveniently bestow in one assembly resolves at last if not to extinguish it yet to reduce it to the next degree to utter dissolution by the Edict of Adrian (o) Prim. ep p. 108. which excluded all Jews not only from Jerusalem but all the territory round about it So that if the Church then at Jerusalem were either wholly or for the greatest part constituted of Jews it was either quite dissipated or greatly diminished And be it which he pleases so it be not taken for a judgment upon it for transgressing the bounds of the Congregational way and updoing a notion of Primitive Episcopacy It was certainly a great fault in the first Church in the World and at the very beginning to become Unprimitive To shew compassion he is willing (p) Prim. ep p. 109. to take the more favourable sense by which it is not quite dissolved but reduced to a very small compass and very few members those only of the believing Gentiles which were so few that they are not thought fit to be brought to account by him who gives the best account of the state of the Church in those days Now to what purpose is all this learned Discourse The Church of Jerusalem was either quite dissolved or much diminished by that Edict that forbid the Jews to come into that City What then Is this then an instance to judg other Churches by when the case is singular and common to it with no other Church What if he had thought fit to take the other opinion that it was quite dissipated must we have concluded that there had been no Christian Congregation in the World Yet in conclusion there is nothing produced to shew whether it had many or but one Assembly And in truth there is no mention made of it for some time which might not happen from the small number of Christians but the loss of Records For many Cities greater than Jerusalem of which there is little doubt to be made that they had Churches very early are in the same Case How many Bishops of Carthage do we know before Cyprian Nor is there any account given of that Church after his death until the Ordination of Caecilian It is not surely because the Christians there were so few as not to be thought fit to be brought into account (q) Prim. ep p. 109. 110. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 6. c. 9. It is like their numbers increased before Narcissus was Bishop there in the third age Yet then they were not so many but that the whole multitude could meet with their Bishop at the Pascal Vigil Altho' this expression the whole multitude do not import so universally as our Author would have it Yet here it is not used by Eusebius with any respect to the City but to the Congregation assembled with Narcissus For in a Pascal Vigil as the traditional story went the Oyl happened to fail whereupon the whole multitude was troubled i. e. the multitude present Whether it was great or little whether it consisted of all or not a fortieth part of the Christians of that City cannot be guessed from this passage (r) Prim. ep p. 110. Nay in Cyrill's time which was in the fourth age Anno 353 it seems they were no more than could assemble in one place For the people as Sozomen relates it astonished at an Aparition in the air all leave their houses and Men Women and Children meet in the Church Hist l. 3. c. 4. It should be l. 4. c. 5. Sozomen speaks there not of the Christians only but of all the people of the City for astonishment and fear seized upon all And if our Author would deal rigidly with him he must find a Church that may hold all the Inhabitants of a great and a populous City for such was it now grown by the kindness and devotion of the Christian Emperours and by the multitude of Christians who resorted thither from all parts to visit the Sepulcher and other places rendered venerable for having been the scene of some of the most important actions of our Saviour But I think it is easier to make some allowance to such general expressions than to find a Church in Jerusalem at that time capacious enough to receive all the men women and children of that City CHAP. VI. I Have followed the tract of Mr. Clerkson's discourse through Villages and Cities from the smallest to the greatest in search of Primitive Episcopacy and must confess that he has laboured hard partly by diminishing of ancient Cities and especially by lessening the Christians to prove that no Bishop had in his City a greater flock for three or almost four Ages than could assemble in one Church How well he hath performed this undertaking I dare not take upon me to say being too far engaged in the dispute to be a Judge of his performance Yet should all his Testimonies amount to a full evidence of the fact that the greatest Cities for so many Ages had no more Christians than might joyn with the Bishop in one Assembly he falls short of the main point which is not whether the Bishop had more Congregations than one in the place of his Residence but whether in his whole Diocese he had no more I know some Bishops who reside in places that can scarce furnish a decent Congregation and yet have more than a hundred within their Diocese And in some of our Cities I make no doubt but the whole people making common allowance for necessary Absents might be contained within the walls of the Cathedral yet this is but a small part of the Bishops flock If therefore in ancient times when Mr. Clerkson fancied there was another species of Episcopacy the case was the same or not very different all the pains he has bestowed in the reduction of Cities into a single Congregation and all the Earthquakes and Pestilences which he called to his assistance to lessen the number of the people might have been spared What Country or Territory the ancient Bishops had besides the City where they lived comes now under examination And if it shall appear by testimonies unexceptionable that the ancient Cities had large Territories and that these Territories were under the Bishop of the City and that the people there were too numerous and too far distant to be able to come to the Bishops Church then I hope we shall be no more troubled with this new way of measuring ancient Bishopricks by the compass of the City wall Here then lies the stress of the Question concerning Primitive Episcopacy And I cannot but observe
that Mr. Clerkson's diligence was not either so great in this part or nothing could be found to give so much as a pretence to streighten the bounds of those Territories which were under the Bishops Jurisdiction no less than the City where he lived Yet something he thinks fit to say to this point which I am now to consider (a) Prim. ep p. 110 111. It may be alledged that not only the City and but a large Territory belonging to it and the Villages therein made up the Bishops Diocese Answ If the Christians in the Villages increased them beyond the capacity of personal Communion it must be in the greatest Cities or else no where The consequence is not very evident for some very little Cities had great Territories as Cyrus where Theodoret was Bishop of which more anon And Capua that was a very great City had (b) Cic. Or. contr Rull once no Territory at all as it happened to some other Cities in Italy whose Territories the Romans took away However let us hear how it was It was not so at Carthage where all the People belonging to Cyprian met frequently which is plain by a hundred passages in his Epistles What all the people from the Country Parishes The Reader may depend upon it that there is not the least title either in the Epistles or any Tract of Cyprian to that purpose And those passages that he refers to are only general expressions all the people all the Brotherhood c. which have been already considered Nor can it be conceived possible for though we have not the measure of all the region belonging to Carthage yet are there some hints that are sufficient to disprove this A place ten miles distant from that City was reckoned (c) Procop. Vand. l. 2. not only in the Territory but in the Suburbs of it and from the distance was called Decimum And it is not very likely if there were any Christians there that they were obliged to go to Carthage upon all Religious occasions And that at this time the places that went under the name of Suburbs and were at some distance from the City had their Assemblies apart from the City Bishop to whom they belonged we may learn from the Testimony of Dionysius (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb H. l. 7. c. 11. Bishop of Alexandria and the note of Valesius (e) Ji qui in Suburbijs illis manebant non cogebantur ad majoris Ecclesiae conventus accedere Vales Anot. that the people who dwelled in remoter Suburbs were not obliged to go to the great Church i. e. of the City And Bethlehem which was but six miles from Jerusalem and belonged to the Bishop of that City did not go up to the Bishops Church so much as at Easter as we are informed by Jerom (f) Hieron adv Joh. Hierosol who on that feast did once present some Candidates for Baptism to the Presbyters of that place Yea in the fourth Age it was not so in Alexandria as our Author (g) Prim. ep p. 111. fancies and refers us to that panegyrical Assembly which Athanasius excuses to Constantius What all the Christians of the Diocese of Alexandria in that Church Those of (h) Strab. l. 17. Nicopolis equal to a City Those of (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Presb. Libell apud Conc. Chalc. Act. 3. Strab. l. 17. Canopus reckoned it self a City and twelve miles from Alexandria and within that Diocese What all the people of Mareotes (l) Athanas Apol. 2. p. 793. where there were fourteen Parish-Presbyters and thirteen Deacons These had some ten Villages some more within their respective Parishes so that we may reckon upon near a hundred Villages at least in this place It is very strange that all these places added as an Appendix to the Christians of Alexandria should not make more than one Congregation or that those people should travel so far to assemble with their Bishop when they could not promise themselves any room the City Churches being small and the great one not yet dedicated especially since we have shewed before that they were not obliged to it I am afraid if the notion which our Author served had required that all the Christians in Egypt should have been no more than could have met in one Assembly that he would have found some Panegyrical Assembly should have comprehended them all He tells us how he had shewed before that the Christians in such Cities were no more in the first Ages than the Inhabitants of an ordinary Town such as some of our Market-Towns when we know that not only those of the Town but many Villages sometimes near twenty belonging to it can and do meet together All he has shewed hath been examined And this which he adds of his own knowledge concerning Market-Towns with twenty Villages belonging to them I will take upon his credit though I think such instances very rare Yet after all this will not reach the point in question nor answer the Territories of ancient Cities which were much larger than Mr. Clerkson would have us believe they were Not content with this he thinks it advisable to add something for more satisfaction (m) Prim. ep p. 112. For first either the Territory was little and so it was indeed for the most part There are some will have it taken for granted that the Territories of Cities were very large and they had need presume it to be exceeding large so as it may bear some proportion to a Northern Diocese I do not desire to have a thing taken for granted which I can so easily prove and hope to do so effectually in this matter that there will be no place left for exception or cavil and I do not doubt but some Territories of ancient Cities will appear not inferiour to some of the Nothern Dioceses and to the generality of the Bishopricks of this kingdom which are not the least in this part of the world (n) Prim. ep p. 113. The Circuit of one of our Country Parishes yea of two together they will scorn as unworthy the repute or name of a Bishops Diocese yet the Territories of the Cities where the Apostles planted Churches amounted not to more if so much God forbid any should scorn those bounds which were set by the Apostles and first planters of Christianity Yet those upon whom Mr. Clerkson reflects have reason to scorn so undeserved an Imputation Some men are not well unless they can reproach their betters their choler works upward and must be vented at their mouth or else they cannot live But the present Question is how far those bounds extended that were set by the Apostles and their Successours (o) Prim. ep p. 113. Shall we take an estimate of the Territory of other Cities by that of the Levites Cities Why not since many of them were Royal Cities and may be supposed to have the largest allowance There are many reasons why
affirm that it had been so immemorially There is an old custom say they (b) Vetus mos viget in Provincijs Europae Olim ab initio Ecclesias illas nunquam praedictae Civitates proprios Episcopos acceperunt Conc. Ephes par 2. Act. 7. in the Provinces of Europa that every Bishop should have as it were two Bishopricks under him i. e. two Cities So one had Heraclea and Panium another Bizya and Arcadiopolis a third had Caele and Callipolis another had Subsadia and Aphrodisias They add that it had been so of old and from the beginning and desire the Council to prevent any Innovation which the Metropolitan might attempt out of displeasure against his Provincials who in that Synod happened to go against him Nice in Bithynia had several Regions belonging to it (c) Conc. Chalc. Act. 13. Tattaeus and Doris and that which was afterward called Basinopolis by Julian was till then accounted a part of the Diocese of Nice In Egypt the Territory of Alexandria hath been already mentioned and in Pentapolis Ptolemais had many Country Churches as I have already observed out of Synesius (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Catast p. 301. and he complains that all the Churches in Ampelitis that was under him were burned down distinguishing as I conceive the Ampelitis which was under him from that which belonged to Cyrene For there were two Regions in Pentapolis of that name as we are informed by Agrotas in Stephanus And Eutychius who is an Author in favour with those that reject Bishops says that Theophilus made one of the three Brothers who afterwards gave him so great trouble a Bishop (e) Episcopum in aliquot Egypti urbes constituit Eustych Annat p. 540. of several Cities in Egypt But the Bishop of Tomi surpasses all the rest for extent of Diocese his Bishoprick was made up of the whole Province of Scythia which had many Cities in it as we are told by Sozomen (f) Sozom. l. 6. c. 21. L. 9. c. 17. The Territories of many other Cities are mentioned by Christian Writers with respect to their Ecclesiastical as well as Civil dependance Bethelia was a Village in the Territory of Gaza very great and populous and by the account Sozomen (g) Sozom. l. 5. c. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 6. c. 32. gives of it might become a City It had many Churches and Monasteries in it built by the Ancestors of that Historian Another Village called Capharcobra is mentioned by the same Author belonging to this City And if the Bishop of Gaza had but one Church in his City he must have many in the Territory belonging to it for before Constantine's time Silvanus is styled Bishop of the Churches of or about Gaza In the same Country Eleutheropolis (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 9. c. 17. l. 6. c. 32. 7. 29. had a Territory and several Villages of it are mentioned Caphar and Besanduca where Epiphanius was born Cela once a City and Berath Satia where the bones of the Prophets Habakkuk and Micah are said to be found In the middle of the fifth Century Bishops were grown much more numerous than in the fore-going Ages and therefore their Bishopricks were of less extent Yet then in many Provinces of the Empire the Dioceses were very large which we may learn by comparing the number of the Bishops in several Provinces with the measure of the Country Labbe the Jesuit has published an ancient Copy of the subscriptions of the Council of Chalcecedon which he found among the Papers of Simond In that Copy the subscribing Bishops are digested according to their Provinces and the Metropolitans set down the names of all that were absent So that in several Provinces we have the whole number of Bishops And within a few years after this Council we have the Synodical Epistles of many plenary Provincial Councils If therefore we can have any certainty concerning the limits of those Countries we may easily find out a common measure for the Dioceses I have already shewed how large the Dioceses of Cappadocia were upon this foot and I have occasionally mentioned Crete the Circuit of the Island being known and the number of their Bishops Cyprus too hath been computed but it was by the Notitia of Leo which hath three Bishopricks more than were in the time of the Council of Chalcedon for then all the Bishops of that Island were but ten of whom six were present at the Council and three absent Yet about this time did Sozomen live who observed that in Cyprus there were Bishops in Villages Where nature hath made the bounds of Countries they remain always the same and a computation of the largeness of Dioceses in such places from the number of them will be certain But where limits are arbitrary and depend only upon the agreement of men they are frequently changed and a Country may still retain the same name though the limits have been often altered However in the present question which does not require exactness we have such notices of the distance of places left in ancient descriptions as give sufficient evidence of the greatness of ancient Dioceses in many Countries In the Province of Helenopontus there were but five Bishops as appears (i) Sancti itaque Provinciae nostrae Episcopi convenientes in unum Conc. Chalc. P. 3. by their Synodical Epistle to Leo yet was this Country of very great extent as we may judge by the distance of those Episcopal Cities For Sinope was (l) Strab. l. 12. a hundred and twelve miles from Amisus or a hundred and thirty according to Pliny (m) Plin. l. 6. c. 2. and that little less from Zela and that place as far from Amasea The Territory of this last City joyned to that of Zela and was above sixty miles in length that way as we have noted already Iborea seems to be on the borders of Cappadocia and to be the same with that mentioned by Gregory Nyssen (n) Greg. Nyss Or. in 40. Mart. So that the Bishopricks of this Province cannot come short of the Northern which Mr. Clerkson fancies to have no equals in ancient times In Pontus Polemoniacus there are but four Bishops subscribers (o) Ep. Synod Pont. Polem Conc. Chalc. P. 3. to the Synodical Epistle of that Province The Bishop of Trapezus who belonged to that Province was not there Now if we consider the distance between these Episcopal Cities the Dioceses must be judged unmeasurably great For from Polemonium to Trapezus there are (p) Plin. l. 6. c. 3. Ptolom l. 5. about two hundred miles Cerasus is in the middle between those two Cities Neocaesarea is above a hundred miles within the Land from which Comana is about sixty miles The Province of Europa (q) Conc. Ephes Act. 7. ep Synod took up the greatest part of Thrace yet the Bishops here were but few the Dioceses being very large as we have observed
the Parishes of the Territory had no Bishops but Presbyters under the Bishop of the City In the Prefecture of Arsinoe where Nepos had been Bishop there were many Country Parishes under Presbyters who belong to that Bishop as (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus H. l 7. c. 24. Dionysius of Alexandria relates And it is usual within the three first Centuries to mention many Churches belonging to one Bishop Mark is said (m) Euseb H. l. 2. c. 16. to have gathered several Churches in Alexandria and Julian one of the Bishops of that City is said (n) Id. l. 5. c. 9. to have had the over-sight of the Churches of Alexandria the same thing is said (o) Id. l. 6. c. 2. of Demetrius and Dionysius (p) Id. l. 6. c. 35. and Peter Bishops of that place So Basilides is stiled by Dionysius (q) Eus H. l. 7. c. 26. Bishop of the Churches of Pentapolis Silvanus Bishop (r) Id. l. 8. c. 13. of the Churches of Gaza and another of the same name of the Churches of Emesa and Meletius Bishop (s) Id. l. 7. c. 32. of the Churches of Pontus which stile cannot in any constructon suit a Bishop of a single Congregation After having cleared the main point in question it may seem needless to take any farther notice of Mr. Clerkson's Discourse For having little or nothing of fact to alledg farther he proceeds to draw Corollaries only from what he had said before and walks forward in great security and confidence that he had proved his point How different his fancy of antiquity is from the truth and reality of the matter does by this time I hope sufficiently appear However I will follow him still and when he offers any thing that has the countenance of an Argument it shall not pass without some notice taken of it (t) Prim. ep 116. If the Territory were large he fancies the Christians were but few in Villages because those were last of all converted Hence Heathen Idolaters were called Pagani But the Apostles preached and made Converts in the Country as well as the City according to Clemens And Tertullian boasting of the numbers of Christians affirms there was no Village nor place without them in his time But when the Cities became entirely converted the Heathen retired into the Country and tho' they were but few in comparison of the Christians yet there they were most numerous He tells us (u) Prim. ep p. 117. there were many Villages in the fourth age in which there were no Christians very many in which there were but few and but few in comparison in which all were Christians The affirmation of a man who is an humble servant to a new notion concerning distant matters of fact makes but bad payment Thus therefore he proves it If a Village wholly Christian had not been a rarity even in Jerom's time why does he make it a singular observation of Jethura (x) Hieron de Loc. Hebr. Villa praegrandis Jethura habitatoresque ejus omnes Christiani sunt Surely a reason may be assigned without making this matter such a rarity And St. Jerom in the same place does suggest it when he observes that it is situate in Daroma near Malatha For in that part it seems there were not many Pagans but Jews For in Daroma there was (y) Hieron de Loc. Hebr. in Eschemo a great Village of the Jews called Eschemo this being some remote part where it seems they retired and for that reason it might be observed of Jethura that it was all Christian (z) Prim. ep p. 117. When Christians in the territory were many yet being disposed as generally they were under other Bishops than him in the City his Diocese had no enlargement thereby How far this is from being true is sufficiently evident from the instances given of the Dioceses of City Bishops and Mr. Clerkson alledges nothing for proof but the Bishops of Hippo who only met there in a Synod as we have shewed before (a) Prim. ep p. 119. He mentions (b) Aug. Civ Dei l. 22. c. 8. a Bishop in the Castlâ— Syâ—ica near to Hippo but not in the Region for he expresly distinguishes and says it was near the Colony of Hippo. He mentions a few African Bishops in the Territories of Cities but we have already shewed that it was Schism erected those Bishops in Villages and that from the beginning it was not so Basinopolis whiâ—â— was once a Village and made a City was taken out of the Diocese of Nice and was no longer under the jurisdiction of the Nicene Bishop And so was Ely and Peterborough and Oxford taken from the Diocese of Lincoln and yet the remainder is still enormously great He tells us too of a Bishoprick raised in the Precinct of Caesarea in Cappadocia but at a great distance from it and half a dozen more Dioceses might have been well spared out of Caesarea At last he comes to (c) Prim. ep p. 121. the territory of Rome if that be it which was under the Provost of the City It was well he demurred upon this point for that indeed was not the Territory but the Province of the City and consisted of several Provinces And the Bishops there tho' they were many were not of the Congregational way Nor are all the Bishops he finds in the Roman Provincial in the Province of Rome within the distance of an hundred miles but of this a large account hath been given He notes farther That there was not one Parish or Church in the Territory of Rome that belonged to the City Bishop And for this he cites Innocent's Epistle to Decentius cum omnes Ecclesiae nostrae intra civitatem constitutae sunt If the Bishop of Rome had no Country Parish then the neighbouring Bishops had the more But we are not to conclude this too hastily for it is not very certain where that which he called the City ended nor yet what sort of Churches he speaks of for he had Presbyters in other places besides those in the Churches of Rome and such as consecrated the Sacrament themselves and consequently had Congregations for then there were no private Masses and to these he did (d) Nec nos per caemiteria diversa constitutis Presbyteris destinamus Et Presbyteri eorum Consecrandorum jus habeant Innoc. ad Decent Prim. ep p. 122. not send the Sacrament consecrated because they had authority to do it themselves and these as well as the other were in his Diocese To this he adds some instances of Bishops whose jurisdiction was confined within their Walls Some in Italy And that of Dublin when John Papyron the Popes Legat came over But all these are new and that of Dublin is so too (e) Usher's Relig. of the Irish p. 83. for that being a Norman Colony and the Irish possessing all without the walls of the City the Norman Bishops Jurisdiction could extend no farther than the
had already made That all the people should be present at the election of Bishops that the Bishop was to examine the state of the Penitents that he was to preach to all the Brethren that there was but one Communion table in a Diocese All these have been answered already and it is evident by many instances as well as the necessity of the thing it self that the Christians of the Country had distinct Congregations and setled Presbyters to attend them all in subordination to the City Bishop that their Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper were administred there by those Presbyters that as for Discipline and Confirmation the Bishop visited those places in person that those Congregations were not obliged to repair to the city-City-Church so much as on Easter or the most solemn Festivals These things are as plain as words can express Athanasius Basil Augustin and several others give an account of their visitations And Jerom (n) Hieron Cont. Lucif cannot deny it to be an ancient custom that the Bishop of the City should visit the Villages and Burroughs and remote places of his Diocese to confirm those who had been baptized there by Presbyters or Deacons There is nothing more precarious and more destitute of the appearance of truth than the deduction our Author makes of the progress of Diocesan Episcopacy and the rise of it from the destruction of the Congregational model (o) Prim. ep p. 191. A Bishop of a Country Parish would be striving to get another Parish under him The third Council of Carthage Can. 46. takes notice of such Bishops Nothing can be more directly against his purpose than that Canon by which it appears that such Country places as had Bishops were of new erection that they had been ever before parts of a greater Diocese (p) Quae exempta de fasce multarum sola meruit honorem Episcopatus suscipere Can. 46. and taken out of a multitude which belonged all to one Bishop that some of these new Bishops challenged other parts of the Diocese out of which their Bishoprick was taken besides that which was appointed them So that the design of Mr. Clerkson is defeated by his own evidence For whereas he would suggest that Dioceses did rise by the incroachment of the Bishop of one Parish upon another and by joyning Parish to Parish The quite contrary appears from the place alledged that the Bishop of one Parish as he calls him was raised by crumbling of ancient Dioceses and that the other Parish which he is said to challenge was not such a one as had a Parish Bishop to it self but was part of a Diocese consisting of many such and that this large Bishoprick was the ancient the small an innovation I perceive that conscience does not always operate alike in those who pretend so great niceness For while they take offence and start at a trifle they make no scruple of sins of unfaithfulness and represent that as truth and reality which in their own conscience they know to be otherwise (q) Prim. ep p. 191. When a Bishop had part of a City he was unsatisfied till he had got the whole Thus Flavianus at Antioch would not suffer a Bishop to be made to succeed Evagrius that he might have the City intire to himself One may be apt to imagine that in ancient time Antioch was divided between many Bishops and that this Flavianus was the first ambitious man who would have the City entire to himself Whereas before the Schisms that distracted the Church of that place the City had ever had but one Bishop But the Arrians having the possession of the publick Churches and being established there by authority the Catholick Party which was very low there at that time happened (r) Socr. l. 3. c. 6. 9. Soz. l. 7. c. 15. to be divided Meletius being Bishop of one part and Paulinus of the other This being against the rule and constant practice of the Church it was agreed to put an end to this irregularity by uniting all when one should die under the Survivor Flavianus broke this agreement for when Meletius died he procured himself to be made Bishop in his stead against Paulinus who was the Survivor And he likewise dying his party chose Evagrius in opposition to Flavianus who when that Competitor was dead endeavoured to hinder the ordination of a successour And this is the story which Mr. Clerkson thinks fit to bring as a proof how a Bishop of a part of a City was unsatisfied till he had the whole as if it were the rule or allowed practice of the ancient Church to divide a City between many Bishops (s) Prim. ep p. 192. When a Bishop had a great City yet some Village in the vicinity he could not endure should be exempt from his Jurisdiction Majuma found this to its trouble This had always been under Gaza until it was made a City by Constantine So that its separation from the Diocese of Gaza was the Innovation It s dependance upon that Bishop was its ancient and primitive state and the Bishop of the City did not desire to make a new accession to his Bishoprick but to recover what had been taken from it (t) Prim. ep p. 192. Not satisfied with one City some would have two So four Bishops in Europa a Province of Thrace got each of them two Cities under him Yet is it positively affirmed of those Cities that they had always belonged to one Bishop this was their primitive constitution It is possible some of them were but lately made Cities and having been Villages before in the Territory of another City they continued in their Ecclesiastical subjection after they were made Cities Yet these were afterwards parted so far were succeeding Ages from reducing the number of Bishopricks For Arcadiopolis which was joyned to Byzia in the Council of Ephesus and there affirmed to have been so immemorially under Justinian had a Bishop of its own as we find by the subscriptions (u) Not. Graec. Leon. in Append. Geogr. Sacr. of the fifth Synod Panium joyned to Heraclea was afterwards divided from it and made a distinct Bishoprick had a Bishop of its own in the Council under Menna (x) Conc. C. P. sub Menna Act. 2. So that this instance as well as the rest proves directly contrary to the purpose for which it is produced That which follows concerning the incroachment of one Metropolitan upon the Province of another I am not concerned to take notice of since it does not belong to the present question Having abused so many Testimonies of ancient Writers directly against the intention of the Authors to countenance his dream of Congregational Episcopacy he does not think fit to conclude without (y) Prim. ep p. 197. taking notice what thoughts some of the best and most eminent Bishops of the fourth and fifth Ages had of a very large Bishoprick And thereby he thinks he shall perceive that if
but that my Author continues to abuse his Reader after the same manner in another Chapter which conteins for the most part such allegations as he had produced before but something more being added it seemed necessary to add some brief reflections (e) Prim. ep p. 217. When the Bishop could not be content with a moderate charge but extended it to such a largeness that it became ungovernable by him This pretended ruling was no longer government but anarchy as Isidore speaks of a Bishop of his time l. 3. cap. 319. That this is said of a Bishop does by no means appear from that Epistle but the circumstances direct us to understand it rather of a Civil Judg than of a Bishop Vnder such a ones government says Isidore which was anarchy rather than government punishment went before accusation for being an unreasonable man it is no wonder he should act so preposterously and pervert all methods of Justice But that this was a Bishop or had a large Bishoprick and would not be content with a moderate charge but extended it to such a largeness to be ungovernable Mr. Clerkson did not find in Isidore but in his sleep for surely his Conscience must be a-sleep when he knowingly perverts the words of ancient Authors to impose upon the World With the same integrity he useth Basil 's words Through this ambition of governing all all Church government came to nothing de Sp. S. c. ult This governing all which makes the passage look as if it were directed against large Bishopricks is not in Basil but without this addition Mr. Clerkson might think the citation would not be to his purpose The place deserves to be taken notice of and when I have represented it as it is in the Author let the World judg who is most concerned in that reproach Every one says that Father (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will be a Divine tho his Soul be blemished with ten thousand spots Hence it is that those who are given to change strengthen their Faction Impatient ambition invades the high places of the Church without call or ordination despising the Oeconomy of the Holy Ghost and all the precepts of the Gospel (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hence it is that there is so much rushing upon the Offices of the Church every one intruding into those sacred places and through that ambition Anarchy hath seized the Church and the people are left without government Hence it is that the exhortations of the Bishops are vain and ineffectual because every one is more forward to rule others than to obey his ignorance and his pride possessing him with a vain opinion of his own abilities (h) Bas l. de Sp. S. c. 30. p. 225. Here is not the least notice taken whether the Bishopricks were litle or great much less is this confusion charged upon their too great extent It is ambition only that is here reproved and the impatience of those who when they could not in a regular way advance themselves to the government of the Church became Bishops of their own making Upon a supposition that a Primitive Bishop had but one Congregation Mr. Clerkson proceeds to shew that every Congregation which is always adequate to a Church in his notion had a right of ordering it self and appointing what rites it thought fit And to that purpose he observes out of Socrates and Sozomen that in several parts of the World there were different usages and customs But is there any instance in antiquity of people that separated from their Bishop and their own Church because they would not comply with the customs and rites received there For instance in Rome it was customary to fast on Saturday In other Countries they fasted the day before Now did any Roman Christian forsake his Church because they did not fast on Friday Or did any African part Communion because the Saturday was not observed there as it was in Rome S. Augustin's judgment in this point is well known and universally approved He directs every Christian to comply with the rites and customs of the Church where he happens to be tho he find some things different from the usage of his own Church The reverence which the Primitive Christians had for the Forms in which they were brought up raised in them some scruple when they came to observe those of other Churches to be different But as to their own particular rites and usages proper to each respective Country they were so peaceably and religiously observed that they were never made a pretence of Separation or so much as the occasion of a Controversy Some differences indeed did arise very early between Churches of different Countries about the time of Easter and rebaptizing of Hereticks but in the conclusion every one adhered to his own way which he thought the best and he was generally blamed who took upon him to prescribe to the rest Let us suppose therefore in this case an African Christian who had lived some time in Rome and taken a liking to the peculiar usages of that Church should after his return home disparage the received order of his own Church and to shew how much he had improved by Travel indeavour to introduce foreign Customs What treatment think you would such a one have received from S. Augustin or S. Cyprian Such a troubler of the peace and order of the Church would soon find himself cast out by the severest censures unless they might think it more advisable to send him to the Exorcist This was plainly the case between the Church of England and the first Dissenters Some of the English Exiles took I know not what fondness to the usages of some Protestant Churches abroad and a strange dislike to their own way They returned home with foreign manners and set them up in opposition to the order of their own Church and at last parted Communion upon this pretence It is not here a place to enquire into their reasons or to make a comparison between what they chose and what they rejected This only I may be bold to say that their Schism is without example either in ancient or later ages For who ever separated from the Church of Geneva in favour of some peculiarities he might have seen in Zurich Or what French-Man forsook the Communion of the French Churches because they had some Ceremonies different from those of Holland Or did a Hollander ever run out of the Church because the Preacher was uncovered out of pure zeal to the custom of France where the Preacher took the same liberty with the Congregation of being covered too Our Church does not pretend to prescribe to any other nor does she think it reasonable any other should prescribe to her but as all other Churches use their discretion in appointing what rites they think most meet so does she and is the only Church in the World that I know forsaken upon that account Yet Mr. Clerkson (i) Prim. ep p.
ordain and if any of them should have presumed against the rule of the Church in that particular the Church of those times would not only have declared the Ordination null but a prodigy and think that Antichrist was at hand and the world drawing towards an end when such new and unexampled confusions were permitted to arise What sentence shall we think would they have pronounced upon Presbyterian Ordinations when they did not stick (s) Can. Nic. 9 10 16. Can. Ant. 73. to rescind Orders conferred by Bishops against the Canons and established discipline of the Church and in some cases to (t) Nic. Can. 19. re-ordain Aerius who declared there was no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter is represented by Epiphanius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Haer. 74. n. 1. 3. as a prodigy and his opinion madness though there is no mention at all of his Ordinations But the case of the Ordinations of our Dissenters is peculiar and they do forreign Churches great wrong when they concern them in their quarrel For first the Independents have no root of Orders but their Pastors are of Lay Original extraction The Presbyterians have Ordination from Presbyters not only without but in opposition to Bishops against all the established rules of this Church against the Laws of the Country as well as practice of ancient Churches And if upon this account we pronounce them void we do no more than what all the Protestant Churches abroad would do in the like case If some Deacons or Lay-men would take upon them to ordain Pastors in the French Churches for separate Congregations in opposition to the received discipline setled in their general Synods I would appeal to any Minister of those Churches whether he held such an Ordination valid And yet by the principles of those Churches Lay-men may confer orders in some cases as appears (x) Hist Eccles T. 1. l. 2. by the first Ordination in Paris where there was no Presbyter present and by the confession of Beza (y) Hist Eccles T. 1. l. 4. in the Conference of Poissy Nay though a Presbyter deposed by their Synod should take upon him to ordain I still appeal to the Ministers of those Churches whether they would account the Orders valid If we therefore do judge such Ordinations here to be nullities because administred by subordinate Officers against the Laws of the Church in opposition to their superiours and against the practice and discipline of the Primitive Christians we cannot be thought singular in this judgment since all ancient Churches would have done the same thing and all the Protestant Churches in Europe in the like case would follow our example It is in vain to cite Jerom and Chrysostom to lessen the difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter because both may do almost all the same things Yet is Ordination still excepted and accounted the peculiar prerogative of the Bishop And though in some Churches Presbyters did assist the Bishop in ordaining Presbyters which is likewise the practice of our Church yet is there no instance of their ordaining without a Bishop FINIS Books Printed for James Adamson I. VIta Reginaldi Poli Cardinalis ac Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi Acta Disceptationis inter Legatos Angliae Galliae in Concilio Constantiensi de utriusque Gentis Dignitate Praerogativa in Conciliorum Tomis desiderata Libri Rarissimi olim quidem Editi sed paucis noti ac nullis facile obvii Octavo II. Pauli Colomesii Observationes sacrae Editio secunda auctior emendatior accedunt ejusdem Paralipomena de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Passio sancti Victoris Massiliensis ab eodem emendata Editio quarta ultima longe auctior emendatior Octavo III. The Travels of Monsieur de Thevenot into the Levant In three parts viz. 1. Into Turky 2. Persia 3. The East-Indies In Folio IV. Mr. Chillingworth's Book called The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation made more generally useful by omitting Personal Contests but inserting whatsoever concerns the common Cause of Protestants or defends the Church of England with an exact Table of Contents and an Addition of some genuine Pieces of Mr. Chillingworth's never before printed viz. against the Infallibility of the Roman Church Transubstantiation Tradition c. And an Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist with his Confutation of the said Motives In Quarto V. A Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy wherein its Rise and Progress are Historically considered Quarto VI. A Treatise proving Scripture to be the Rule of Faith writ by Reginald Peacock Bishop of Chichester before the Reformation about the Year 1450. VII Doubts concerning the Roman Infallibility 1. Whether the Church of Rome believe it 2. Whether Jesus Christ or his Apostles ever Recommended it 3. Whether the Primitive Church knew or used that way of deciding Controversies VIII A brief Historical Account of the Behaviour of the Jesuits and their Faction for the first twenty five Years of Queen Elizabeth's Reign with an Epistle of W. Watson a Secular Priest shewing how they were thought of by other Romanists of that time Quarto IX A brief Examination of the present Roman Catholick Faith contained in Pope Pius his new Creed by the Scriptures Ancient Fathers and their own Modern Writers In Quarto
Author observes that this was the chief City in Mauritania and might have taken notice that it was (z) Oppidumque ibi celeberrimum Caesarea Plin. l. 5. c. 2. a renowned place from its first foundation by Claudius and grew up to be one of the chiefest Cities in Afric and had (a) In Ecclesia majori congregat Aug. Gest cum Emer init at this time many Churches of the Catholick Communion he should have a little mistrusted such a phrase as this that implies no more than that the Conference should be publick and that all who would might be present at it Tiberias and Diocaesarea and Sepphoris which our Author mentions because they had each but one Church have been already considered They consisted only of Jews who would suffer no other Nation or Religion to mix with them (b) Prim. ep p. 86. At Diocaesarea in Cappadocia which in Nazianzen is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there was but one Church Ep. 49. But Nazianzen (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Ep. 49. says no such thing He uses all the credit he had with Olympius the Governor of that Province to spare this City which had extreamly offended him and to that degree that he was resolved to disfranchise and destroy it And among other arguments he makes use of his own liberality towards that City having lately built a Church there and therefore prayed that the Temple he had so lately erected there might not become a receptacle of wild Beasts But gives not the least intimation that this was the only Church in that great City (c) Prim. ep p. 90. At Constantia the Metropolis of Cyprus and other Cities of that Island there was no plurality of Churches For this he cites Petavius whose inference has been already examined and there is nothing new added here to require further reply At Neocaesaria and other Cities in those parts but one Church This he proves from the thirteenth Canon of Neocaesarea that forbids a Chorepiscopus to officiate in a City Church from which Petavius would infer the Cities had but one Church But there might be a hundred Churches there for ought that expression may imply We are at last come to the end of this Chapter in which our Author has taken all ways to diminish the Christians He has been very bountiful to Schismaticks and Hereticks that the Bishop's Flock might not increase beyond his new model But we must not wonder at his liberality towards these to the detriment of the Bishop But rather than any City should have more Congregations than one of the same Communion he gives the rest to the Devil And to that purpose he is beyond measure bountiful towards Heathen and Jews Heightens their number as if he were of the faction especially in Julian's time having perhaps some secret respect for them because they generally took the part of Schismaticks and Hereticks against the Catholick establish'd Church CHAP. V. THe unjust Steward in the Gospel being called to give up his accounts and then to be discharged provided for himself at the expence of his Lord and cutting off considerably from the summ owing to his Master procured himself a retreat among the debtors Yet in this unrighteous contrivance he observed some measure and reduced a hundred but to fourscore and fourscore to fifty But Mr. Clerkson in the account he makes of his Master's substance in ancient Cities is much more profuse towards the debters and in some places of a hundred does not leave ten But in this he has chosen to follow the injustice rather than the wisdom of the Steward for when his defalcations come to be so unlikely and extravagant it is impossible the reckoning should pass Had he insisted only on lesser Cities that for three or four ages the Christians in them might not exceed one Assembly the account might have passed without any suspicion tho' the evidence even for this be defective But when in the greatest Cities of the World he sets down but one Congregation to the account of Christ and will not allow scarce five of a hundred to belong to our Lord the misreckoning is too manifest and does not carry so much as the appearance of truth The increase of Christianity is represented by the Scripture of the New Testament and by the Writers of the ages immediately succeeding as wonderful and unexampled and considering the supernatural abilities it pleased God to confer upon the first Preachers it might be expected that their Doctrin should make a greater progress than those that come recommended only by ordinary and human means of perswasion Yet if we take Mr. Clerkson's reckoning of Christians for the three first ages and compare it with the growth of Sects among our selves within this last age we must conclude that there is scarce a Sect within our remembrance which has not proportionably to time and place made much better progress than the Christian Religion ever did Since in the greatest Cities there are few Sects but make several Assemblies for Worship tho' the greatest Cities with us are much inferior to the greatest in ancient times And if the Quakers a Sect scarce forty years standing in the World are yet grown so numerous that in London they have several places for meeting it would seem to be a strange and incredible disparagement to the Christian Religion not to have prevailed so much in Rome for the space of three hundred years tho' St. Paul preached there for a considerable time and there was a flourishing Church before he was brought thither However our Author to leave no exception against the Congregational Rule (a) Prim. ep p. 91. 92. finds enough to make it seem probable that the greatest of those Cities had no more Christians under one Bishop than are in some one of our Parishes And to begin with Rome about the year 236 (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the faithful in Rome did meet together in one place to chuse a Bishop in the place of Anterus Euseb l. 6. c. 29. I have already upon other occasions shewed the import of these expressions all the people all the brethren all the City c. and how unreasonable it is to require exactness of testimony from phrases of amplification If we must conclude that all the faithful in Rome without any allowance or exception did meet in one place in the third Century to chuse a Bishop and therefore there were no more than could Assemble in one place It will follow from the very same phrase that in the fourth fifth and sixth Centuries and so forward there was but one Congregation in Rome after it was become Christian For in the fourth age Felix and all the Roman Clergy (c) Praesente populo Romano Marcel Faustin L. 16. Prec in the presence of the people of Rome swore they would not chuse any other Bishop while Liberius lived In the next (d) Dataque oratione respondit omnis populus Amen Lib. Pont. in