of the Bishop We have proved that there was but one Bishop to a Church and one Church to a Bishop we have shewn the Bishop's Office and Function Election and Ordination what farther to add on this Head I know not For as for those other Acts which he performed jointly with his Flock we must refer them to another place till we have handled those other Matters which previously propose themselves unto us The first of which will be an Examination into the Office and Order of a Presbyter which because it will be somewhat long shall be the Subject of the following Chapter CHAP. IV. § 1. The Definition and Description of a Presbyter what he was § 2. Inferior to a Bishop in Degree § 3. But equal to a Bishop in Order § 4. The Reason why there were many Presbyters in a Church § 5. Presbyters not necessary to the Constitution of a Church § 6. When Presbyters began § 1. IT will be both needless and tedious to endeavour to prove that the Ancients generally mention Presbyters distinct from Bishops Every one I suppose will readily own and acknowledge it The great Question which hath most deplorably sharpned and sour'd the Minds of too many is what the Office and Order of a Presbyter was About this the World hath been and still is most uncharitably divided some equalize a Presbyter in every thing with a Bishop others as much debase him each according to their particular Opinions either advance or degrade him In many Controversies a middle way hath been the safest perhaps in this the Medium between the two Extremes may be the truest Whether what I am now going to say be the true 〈◊〉 of the Matter I leave to the Learned Reader to determin I may be deceived neither mine Years nor Abilities exempt me from Mistakes and Errors But this I must needs say That after the most diligent Researches and impartialest Enquiries The following Notion seems to me most plausible and most consentaneous to Truth and which with a great facility and clearness solves those Doubts and Objections which according to those other Hypotheses I know not how to answer But yet however I am not so wedded and bigotted to this Opinion but if any shall produce better and more convincing Arguments to the contrary I will not contentiously defend but readily relinquish it since I search after Truth not to promote a particular Party or Interest Now for the better Explication of this Point I shall first lay down a Definition and Description of a Presbyter and then prove the parts thereof Now the Definition of a Presbyter may be this A Person in Holy Orders having thereby an inherent Right to perform the whole Office of a Bishop but being possessed of no Place or Parish not actually discharging it without the Permission and Consent of the Bishop of a Place or Parish But lest this Definition should seem obscure I shall 〈◊〉 it by this following Instance As a Curate hath the same Mission and Power with the Minister whose Place he supplies yet being not the Minister of that place he cannot perform there any acts of his Ministerial Function without leave from the Minister thereof So a Presbyter had the same Order and Power with a Bishop whom he assisted in his Cure yet being not the Bishop or Minister of that Cure he could not there perform any parts of his Pastoral Office without the permission of the Bishop thereof So that what we generally render Bishops Priests and Deacons would be more intelligible in our Tongue if we did express it by Rectors Vicars and Deacons by Rectors understanding the Bishops and by Vicars the Presbyters the former being the actual Incumbents of a Place and the latter Curates or Assistants and so different in Degree but yet equal in Order Now this is what I understand by a Presbyter for the Confirmation of which these two things are to be proved I. That the Presbyters were the Bishops Curates and Assistants and so inferiour to them in the actual Exercise of their Ecclesiastical Commission II. That yet notwithstanding they had the same inherent Right with the Bishops and so were not of a distinct specifick Order from them Or more briefly thus 1. That the Presbyters were different from the Bishops in gradu or in degree but yet 2. They were equal to them in Ordine or in Order § 2. As to the first of these That Presbyters were but the Bishops Curates and Assistants inferiour to them in Degree or in the actual Discharge of their Ecclesiastical Commission This will appear to have been in effect already proved if we recollect what has been asserted touching the Bishop and his Office That there was but one Bishop in a Church That he usually performed all the parts of Divine Service That he was the general Disposer and Manager of all things within his Diocess there being nothing done there without his Consent and Approbation To which we may particularly add 1. That without the Bishop's leave a Presbyter could not baptize Thus saith Tertullian The Bishop hath the Right of Baptizing then the Presbyters and Deacons but yet for the Honour of the Church not without the Authority of the Bishop and to the same Effect saith Ignatius It is not lawful for any one to baptize except the Bishop permit him 2. Without the Bishop's permission a Presbyter could not administer the Lord's Supper That Eucharist says Ignatius is only valid which is performed by the Bishop or by whom he shall permit for it is not lawful for any one to celebrate the Eucharist without leave from the Bishop 3. Without the Bishops Consent a Presbyter could not preach and when he did preach he could not chuse his own Subject but discoursed on those Matters which were enjoyned him by the Bishop as the Bishop commanded Origen to preach about the Witch of Endor 4. Without the Bishop's Permission a Presbyter could not absolve Offenders therefore Cyprian severely chides some of his Presbyters because they dared in his absence without his Consent and Leave to give the Church's Peace to some offending Criminals But what need I reckon up particulars when in general there was no Ecclesiastical Office performed by the Presbyters without the Consent and Permission of the Bishop So says Ignatius Let nothing be done of Ecclesiastical Concerns without the Bishop for Whosoever doth any thing without the knowledge of the Bishop is a Worshipper of the Devil Now had the Presbyters had an equal Power in the Government of those Churches wherein they lived how could it have been impudent and usurping in them to have perform'd the particular acts of their Ecclesiastical Function without the Bishop's Leave and Consent No it was not fit or just that any one should preach or govern in a Parish without the permission of the Bishop or Pastor thereof for where Churches had been regularly formed under the Jurisdiction of their proper Bishops it
had been an unaccountable Impudence and a most detestable act of Schism for any one tho' never so legally Ordained to have entred those Parishes and there to have performed Ecclesiastical Administrations without the permission of or which is all one in Defiance to the Bishops or Ministers thereof for though a Presbyter by his Ordination had as ample an inherent Right and Power to discharge all Clerical Offices as any Bishop in the World had yet Peace Unity and Order oblig'd him not to invade that part of God's Church which was committed to another Man's Care without that Man's Approbation and Consent So then in this Sense a Presbyter was inferiour to a Bishop in Degree in that having no Parish of his own he could not actually discharge the particular Acts of his Ministerial Function without leave from the Bishop of a Parish or Diocess The Bishops were superiour to the Presbyters in that they were the presented 〈◊〉 and inducted Ministers of their respective Parishes and the Presbyters were inferiour to the Bishops in that they were but their Curates and Assistants § 3. But though the Presbyters were thus different from the Bishops in Degree yet they were of the very same specifick Order with them having the same inherent Right to perform those Ecclesiastical Offices which the Bishop did as will appear from these three Arguments 1. That by the Bishop's permission they discharged all those Offices which a Bishop did 2. That they were called by the same Titles and Appellations as the Bishops were And 3. That they are expresly said to be of the same Order with the Bishops As to the first of these That by the Bishop's permission they discharged all those Offices which a Bishop did this will appear from that 1. When the Bishop ordered them they preach'd Thus Origen in the beginning of some of his Sermons tells us That he was commanded thereunto by the Bishop as particularly when he preach'd about the Witch of Endor he says The Bishop commanded him to do it 2. By the permission of the Bishop Presbyters baptized Thus writes Tertullian The Bishop has the Right of Baptizing and then the Presbyters but not without his leave 3. By the leave of the Bishop Presbyters administred the Eucharist as must be supposed in that saying of Ignatius That that Eucharist only was valid which was celebrated by the Bishop or by one appointed by him and that the Eucharist could not be delivered but by the Bishop or by one whom he did approve 4. The Presbyters ruled in those Churches to which they belonged else this Exhortation of Polycarpus to the Presbyters of Philippi would have been in vain Let the Presbyters be tender and merciful compassionate towards all reducing those that are in Errors visiting all that are weak not negligent of the Widow and the Orphan and him that is poor but ever providing what is honest in the sight of God and Men abstaining from all Wrath Respect of Persons and unrighteous Judgment being far from Covetousness not hastily believing a Report against any Man not rigid in Judgment knowing that we are all faulty and obnoxious to Judgment Hence 5. They presided in Church-Consistories together with the Bishop and composed the executive part of the Ecclesiastical Court from whence it was called the Presbytery because in it as Tertullian says Approved Elders did preside 6. They had also the Power of Excommunication as Rogatianus and Numidicus Two Presbyters of Cyprian's Church by his Order join'd with some Bishops of his Nomination in the Excommunication of certain Schismaticks of his Diocess But of both these two Heads more will be spoken in another place 7. Presbyters restored returning Penitents to the Church's peace Thus we read in an Epistle of Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandria That a certain Offender called Serapion approaching to the time of his Dissolution Sent for one of the Presbyters to absolve him which the Presbyter did according to the Order of his Bishop who had before commanded That the Presbyters should absolve those who were in danger of Death 8. Presbyters Confirmed as we shall most evidently prove when we come to treat of Confirmation Only remark here by the way That in the days of Cyprian there was a hot Controversie Whether those that were baptized by Hereticks and came over to the Catholick Church should be received as Members thereof by Baptism and Confirmation or by Confirmation alone Now I would fain know Whether during the vacancy of a See or the Bishop's absence which sometimes might be very long as Cyprian was absent two years a Presbyter could not admit a returning Heretick to the Peace and Unity of the Church especially if we consider their positive Damnation of all those that died out of the Church If the Presbyters had not had this Power of Confirmation many penitent Souls must have been damn'd for the unavoidable Default of a Bishop which is too cruel and unjust to imagine 9. As for Ordination I find but little said of this in Antiquity yet as little as there is there are clearer Proofs of the Presbyters Ordaining than there are of their administring the Lord's Supper All Power and Grace saith Firmilian is constituted in the Church where Seniors preside who have the Power of Baptizing Confirming and Ordaining or as it may be rendred and perhaps more agreeable to the sense of the place Who had the Power as of Baptizing so also of Confirming and Ordaining What these Seniors were will be best understood by a parallel place in Tertullian for that place in Tertullian and this in Firmilian are usually cited to expound one another by most Learned Men as by the most Learned Dr. Cave and others Now the passage in Tertullian is this In the Ecclesiastical Courts approved Elders preside Now by these approved Elders Bishops and Presbyters must necessarily be understood because Tertullian speaks here of the Discipline exerted in one particular Church or Parish in which there was but one Bishop and if only he had presided then there could not have been Elders in the Plural Number but there being many Elders to make out their Number we must add the Presbyters to the Bishop who also presided with him as we shall more fully shew in another place Now the same that presided in Church-Consistories the same also ordained Presbyters as well as Bishops presided in Church-Consistories therefore Presbyters as well as Bishops Ordained And as in those Churches where there were Presbyters both they and the Bishop presided together so also they Ordained together both laying on their Hands in Ordination as St. Timothy was Ordained by the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery that is by the Hands of the Bishop and Presbyters of that Parish where he was Ordained as is the constant signification of the word Presbytery in all the Writings of the Ancients But 10. Though as to every particular act of the Bishop's Office it
must be understood of what was afterwards distinctly called Bishops and Presbyters So likewise we read in St. Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 14. of a Presbytery which in all the Writings of the Fathers for any thing I can find to the contrary perpetually signifies the Bishop and Presbyters of a particular Church or Parish And to this 〈◊〉 may add what Clemens Alexandrinus Reports of St. John that he went into the neighbouring Provinces of Ephesus Partly that he might constitute Bishops partly that he might plant new Churches and partly that he might appoint such in the number of the Clergy as should be commanded him by the Holy Ghost Where by the Word Clergy being oppos'd to Bishops and so consequently different from them must be understood either Deacons alone or which is far more probable Presbyters and Deacons CHAP. V. § 1. The Order and Office of the Deacons § 2. Subdeacons what § 3. Of Acolyths Exorcists and Lectors thro' those Offices the Bishops gradually ascended to their Episcopal Dignity § 4. Of Ordination First of Deacons § 5. Next of Presbyters 〈◊〉 Candidates for that Office presented themselves to the Presbytery of the Parish where they were Ordained § 6. By them examined about 〈◊〉 Qualifications viz. Their Age. § 7. Their Condition in the World § 8. Their Conversation § 9. And their Vnderstanding Humane Learning needful § 10. Some Inveighed against Humane Learning but condemned by Clemens Alexandrinus § 11. Those that were to be Ordain'd Presbyters generally pass'd thro' the Inferiour Offices § 12. When to be ordained propounded to the People for their Attestation § 13. Ordain'd in but not to a particular Church § 14. Ordain'd by the Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery § 15. The Conclusion of the first Particular concerning the Peculiar Acts of the Clergy § 1. NExt to the Presbyters were the Deacons concerning whose Office and Order I shall say very little since there is no great Controversie about it and had it not been to have rendred this Discourse compleat and entire I should in silence have pass'd it over Briefly therefore their original Institution as in 〈◊〉 6. 2. was to serve Tables which included these two things A looking after the Poor and an attendance at the Lord's Table As for the Care of the Poor Origen tells us that the Deacons dispensed to them the Churches Money being employed under the Bishop to inspect and relieve all the Indigent within their Diocese As for their Attendance at the Lord's Table their Office with respect to that consisted in preparing the Bread and Wine in cleansing the Sacramental Cups and other such like necessary things whence they are called by Ignatius Deacons of Meats and Cups assisting also in some places at least the Bishop or Presbyters in the Celebration of the Eucharist delivering the Elements to the Communioants They also preached of which more in another place and in the Absence of the Bishop and Presbyters baptized In a word according to the signification of their Name they were as Ignatius calls them the Churches Servants set apart on purpose to serve God and attend on their Business being constituted as Eusebius terms it for the Service of the Publick § 2. Next to the Deacons were the Subdencons who are mentioned both by Cyprian and Cornelius As the Office of the Presbyters was to assist and help the Bishops so theirs was to assist and help the Deacons And as the Presbyters were of the same Order with the Bishop so probably the Subdeacons were of the same Order with the Deacons which may be gathered from what we may suppose to have been the Origin and Rise of these Subdeacons which might be this That in no Church whatsoever was it usual to have more than Seven Deacons because that was the original Number instituted by the Apostles wherefore when any Church grew so great and numerous that this stinted Number of Deacons was not sufficient to discharge their necessary Ministrations that they might not seem to swerve from the Apostolical Example they added Assistants to the Deacons whom they called Subdeacons or Under Deacons who were employed by the Head or Chief Deacons to do those Services in their stead and room to which by their Office they were obliged But whether this be a sufficient Argument to prove the Subdeacons to be of the same Order with the Deacons I shall not determine because this Office being now antiquated it is not very pertinent to my Design I only offer it to the Consideration of the Learned who have Will and Ability to search into it § 3. Besides those forementioned Orders who were immediately consecrated to the Service of God and by him commission'd thereunto there were another sort of Ecclesiasticks who were employed about the meaner Offices of the Church such as Acolyths Exorcists and Lectors whose Offices because they are now disused except that of the Lector I shall pass over in silence reserving a Discourse of the Lector for another place only in general these were Candidates for the Ministry who by the due discharge of these meaner Employs were to give Proof of their Ability and Integrity the Bishops in those days not usually arriving per Saltum to that Dignity and Honour but commonly beginning with the most inferiour Office and so gradually proceeding thro' the others till they came to the supreme Office of all as Cornelius Bishop of Rome Did not presently leap into the Episcopal Throne but first passed thro' all the Ecclesiastical Offices gradually ascending to that Sublime Dignity The Church in those happy days by such a long Tryal and Experience using all possible Precaution and Exactness that none but fit and qualify'd Men should be admitted into those Sacred Functions and Orders which were attended with 〈◊〉 dreadful and tremendous a Charge And this now brings me in the next place to enquire into the Manner and Form of the Primitive Ordinations which I chuse to discourse of in this place since I shall find none more proper for it throughout this whole Treatise § 4. As for the various Senses and Acceptations which may be put on the Word Ordination I shall not at all meddle with them that Ordination that I shall speak of is this the Grant of a Peculiar Commission and Power which remains indelible in the Person to whom it is committed and can never be obliterated or rased out except the Person himself cause it by his Heresie Apostacy or most extremely gross and scandalous Impiety Now this sort of Ordination was conferred only upon Deacons and Presbyters or on Deacons and Bishops Presbyters and Bishops being here to be consider'd as all one as Ministers of the Church-Universal As for the Ordination of Deacons there is no great Dispute about that so I shall say no more concerning it than that we have the manner thereof at their first Institution in Acts 6. 6. which was that they were
began first with the lowermost Office of a Lector tho' by his extraordinary Merits he deserved those that were more sublime and honourable § 12. That this was their constant and unalterable Practice I dare not affirm I rather think the contrary as I might easily prove were it pertinent to my Design this that follows is more certain that whether they were gradually or presently Ordained Presbyters their Names were published or propounded to the People of that Church where they were to be Ordained that so if worthy of that Office they might have the Testimony and Attestation of the People or if unworthy and unfit they might be debarred and excluded from it by which course the Crimes of the Wicked were discovered the Vertues of the Good declared and the Ordination became Valid and Legitimate being examin'd by the Suffrage and Judgment of all § 13. If the People objected nothing against the Persons proposed but approved their fitness for that Office the next thing that followed was their Actual Ordination in that particular Church where they were so propounded not that they were only ordain'd for that particular Church but in it they were ordained Ministers of the Church Universal being at liberty either to serve that Church where they received their Orders or if they had a Legal Call to spend their Labours elsewhere in other Churches as Origen was a Presbyter of Alexandria tho' he was Ordained in Palestina by the Bishops of Caesarea and Jerusalem and Numidicus was a Presbyter of the Church of Carthage tho' he received his Orders elsewhere Hence the Presbyters of a Church were not confined to a set number as the Bishop and Deacons were but were sometimes more sometimes less as fit Persons for that Office presented themselves so were they Ordained some of whom still remained in the same Church where they received their Orders and others went and served other Churches every one going where the Providence of God did call him § 14. But now their formal Ordination was by Imposition of Hands usually of the Bishop and Presbyters of the Parish where they were Ordained For this there needs no other Proof than that Injunction of St. Paul to Timothy 〈◊〉 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which was given thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery As for Imposition of hands it was a Ceremony that was variously used in the Old Testament from whence it was translated into the New and in the Primitive Church used on sundry occasions to no purpose here to enumerate One of those Actions was Ordination of Church-Officers wherein I think it was never omitted Thus Novatian was Ordained a Presbyter by Imposition of Hands And the Bishops of Cesarea and Jerusalem Imposed Hands on Origen to make him a Presbyter The Imposition of Hands being the Completion of Ordination or the Final Act thereof for whosoever had past through the forementioned Examination and Attestation and consequently to that had received the laying on of Hands he was esteemed by all as legally Ordained and was ever after deemed to have sufficient Power and Authority to exert and discharge the Duty and Office of the Presbytership to which by those Actions he was advanced and promoted § 15. Here now I shall conclude what I designed to write with respect to the first Particular concerning the Peculiar Acts of the Clergy under which I have discoursed distinctly of the Office and Order of Bishops Priests and Deacons as also of several other things relating to their Charge and Dignity As for those other Acts of theirs which remain to be inquired into I shall not meddle with them here for tho' they may have some Rapport or Connexion to this Head yet they more properly and immediately respect the third unto which place therefore I shall refer their Discussion and Examination CHAP. VI. § 1. The Peculiar Acts of the Laity proposed to be discoursed of What were the Qualifications of Church-Membership § 2. The People in some Cases had Power to depose their Bishops § 3. The Conjunct Acts of the Clergy and Laity proposed to be discoursed of All Ecclesiastical Affairs were managed by their joint Endeavours § 1. HAving in the former Chapters treated of the Peculiar Acts of the Clergy I come now in this to speak something to the Peculiar Acts of the Laity and to enquire into those Actions and Powers which they exerted distinctly by themselves And here it may not be amiss first of all to make an Enquiry into the Constitution of the Laity that is how and by what means they were first admitted to be Members of a Church by Vertue of which Membership they were made Partakers of all those Powers which we shall hereafter mention Now for Answer hereunto in general all those that were baptized were look'd upon as Members of the Church and had a right to all the Priviledges thereof except they had been guilty of grofs and scandalous Sins as Idolatry Murder Adultery and such like for then they were cast out of the Church and not admitted again till by a Penitent and holy Deportment they had testified their Grief and Sorrow for their unholy and irregular Actions for as Origen saith We do our utmost that our Assemblies be composed of good and wise Men. So that none who are admitted to our Congregations and Prayers are vitious and wicked except very rarely it may happen that a particular bad Man may be concealed in so great a number But since the greatest part of Christians were adult Persons at their Conversion to Christianity and admission into Church-Fellowship and Society therefore we must consider the Prerequisites of Baptism since that Sacrament gave them a Right and Title to that admission or reception Now those Persons who designed to leave Heathenism and Idolatry and desired to be Members of a Christian Church were not presently advanced to that degree but were first continued a certain space of Time in the rank of the Catechumens or the Catechised ones These were Candidates of Christianity who were to stay some time in that Order for these two Reasons The one was That they might be catechised and instructed in the Articles of the Christian Faith from whence they were called Catechumens And the other was that they might give demonstrations of the reality of their Intentions by the Change of their Lives and the Holiness of their Conversations Whilst they were in this Estate or rather in a Preparatory thereunto they were first privately instructed at home till they understood the more Intelligible Principles of Christianity and then they were admitted into the first Rank of Catechumens who are called by Tertullian Edocti or those that are taught These were permitted to come into the Church where they stood in a place by themselves and were present at the Sermons which were adapted to their Capacities being Discourses of
he will contradict all other Writers it being avouched by all that Synods did depose all those Bishops that were guilty of criminal and scandalous Enormities as Privatus Bishop of Lambese was deposed by a Synod of Ninety Bishops for his many and heinous Crimes § 7. But now excepting these three Causes of Apostacy Heresie and Immorality it was Schism in a Parish to leave their Minister or to set up another Bishop against him for tho' they at first chose their Bishop yet their Bishop being on their Choice approved and confirmed by the neighbouring Bishops they could not dethrone him without truly assigning one of those forementioned Causes for this was to gather a Church out of a Church to erect a new Altar and a new Bishop which could not be in one Church for as Cyprian writes God is one Christ is one the Church is one the Rock on which the Church is built is one wherefore to erect a new Altar and constitute a new Bishop besides the one Altar and the one Bishop is impracticable whosoever gathers here scatters so to do is adulterous impious sacrilegious mad and wicked From hence says Cyprian Schisms do arise that the Bishop is not obeyed and it is not considered that there ought to be but one Bishop and one Judge in a Church at a time And this is the Rise and Source of Schismaticks that through their swelling Pride they contemn their Bishop and so they go off from the Church so they erect a profane Altar and so they rebel against the Peace of Christ and the Ordination and Vnity of God And again From thence proceed Schisms that the Bishop who is but one and presides over the Church is contemned by the proud Presumption of Men and he that was thought worthy by God is esteemed unworthy by Men. And again The Church is the People united to their Bishop and the Sheep adhering to their Pastour the Bishop is in the Church and the Church in the Bishop whosoever are not with the Bishop are not in the Church and those do in vain flatter themselves who having not Peace with God's Priests creep about and privately communicate with some as they think when the Catholick Church is not divided but connexed and coupled together by the Vnity of its agreeing Bishops Whosoever therefore should causelesly desert his Bishop and solicit others so to do was a true Schismatick since in so doing he divided a Portion of the Flock with the Bishop separated the Sheep from their Pastour and dissipated the Members of Christ. From these Quotations then it is apparent that the Primitive Schism respected only a particular Church and consisted in a Person 's Separation from Communion with his lawful Bishop without a just and authentick Cause when any one should set up a particular Church in a particular Church in opposition to the lawful Bishop thereof and should draw away the Inhabitants of that Parish from the Communion of their legal Minister setting up distinct Meetings and Conventicles as Cyprian calls them This was true Schism for as Ignatius says whosoever so assembled were not congregated legally according to the Command And whosoever officiated without the Bishop sacrificed to the Devil § 8. This Notion now of Schism gives us a clear Reason why we find in Ignatius so frequent and Pathetick Injunctions of Obedience to and Unity with our respective Pastours of avoiding all Divisions and closely adhering to them because a deserting of them or a separating from them was a Commission of this horrid and detestable Sin of Schism as will appear from these following Exhortations and Instructions of his with which every Leaf almost of his Epistles are fraught and furnished All you of the Church of Smirna obey your Bishop as Jesus Christ did the Father and the Presbytery as the Apostles and honour the 〈◊〉 according to the Command of God Let nothing of Ecclesiastical Services be done without the Bishop let that Communion only be esteemed valid which is performed by the Bishop or by one permitted by him Wherever the Bishop is there let the People be as where Jesus Christ is there the Catholick Church is it is not lawful without the Bishop or one permitted by him to baptize or celebrate the 〈◊〉 this is pleasing unto God that so whatsoever is done may be firm and Legal Have respect unto your Bishop as God hath respect unto you My Soul for theirs that obey their Bishop Presbyters and Deacons and with them let my part in God be Let us not resist our Bishop lest we be found Resisters of God I exhort you to do every thing in the Vnity of God the Bishop presiding in the place of God and the Presbyters in the place of the Council of the Apostles and the Deacons persorming the intrusted Ministry of Jesus Christ let there nothing be in you that may divide you but be united to your Bishop and Presidents As therefore Christ did nothing without the Father being united to him neither by himself nor by his Apostles so do you nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters nor privately withdraw from them but assemble together having one Prayer one Supplication one Mind and one Hope Flee all Division where the Pastour is there as Sheep follow for there are many 〈◊〉 Wolves that seek to carry you away but let them have no place in your Vnity Whoever are God's and Jesus Christ's they are with the Bishop and whosoever repenting shall come to the Vnity of the Church those shall be God's that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Be not deceived my Brethren if any one follows a 〈◊〉 or one that causeth Division and Separation he shall not inherit the Kingdom of God Respect the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons do nothing without the Bishop Keep your Flesh as the Temple of God Love Vnity Avoid Schisms be followers of Jesus Christ as he was of his Father Where Division and Wrath is God dwells not God therefore pardons all Penitents if they penitentially return to the Vnity of God and the Presbytery of the Bishop And some other such like Expressions there are in the 〈◊〉 of this Father which evidently demonstrate Schism to be nothing else than a causeless Separation from our Parish Bishop or Minister and a wandring after or an Adhesion to another false and pretended Pastour § 9. But for the clearer Proof that this was what the Father 's meant by Schism it may not be altogether unnecessary to add unto these Quotations an Example or two for Examples more convincingly 〈◊〉 than bare Testimonies and Citations And here let us first view the Schism of Felicissimus in the hurch of Carthage as it is related in the 38th 40th and 55th Epistles of Cyprian and we shall find it respecting only that particular Church or Parish When Cyprian was elected Bishop of Carthage Felicissimus and others of his Faction opposed him but
this Chapter and his Gospel with saying that when the Apostles went 〈◊〉 and Preached the Lord 〈◊〉 with them and confirmed the Word with Signs following So that these were extraordinary Actions 〈◊〉 promised to the 〈◊〉 and first 〈◊〉 of the Faith of Christ. But now it is evident from the forementioned Determination of Vincentius Bishop of 〈◊〉 that in his Age they apprehended them to be like Baptism ordinary and standing Administrations in the Church and so 〈◊〉 in the Sense of the fore-cited Text introduced for an ordinary and constant Practice that which was promised by Christ for an extraordinary and miraculous Gift Christ promised his 〈◊〉 the miraculous Power of casting Devils out of Bodies possessed by them But these Fathers understood this Promise of the common Spiritual Effects of the Gospel which where it is believingly received delivers that Person from the Desusion and Dominion of the Devil under which we all naturally are being by Nature Children of Wrath and for the Declaration of this invisible Freedom and Deliverance which they all thought to be in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptism they made use of this external Sign of Exorcism just before Baptism to declare thereby that now the unclean Devil with all his Power and Tyranny was cast out of that Person who was now going in and by 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 to the Service of a 〈◊〉 Master viz. of the Blessed Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost God blessed for evermore § 3. When 〈◊〉 was 〈◊〉 then came Baptism its self and the Person being ready to be Baptized the Minister by Prayer 〈◊〉 the Water for that use because it was not any Water but only that Water as Sedatus Bishop of Turbo writes which is sanctified in the Church by the Prayers of the Minister that 〈◊〉 away Sin It is true indeed as Tertullian writes That any Waters 〈◊〉 Sacramentum sanctificationis consequuntur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supervenit 〈◊〉 statim 〈◊〉 de Coelis Baptism p. 598. may be applyed to that use but then God must be first Invocated and then the Holy Ghost presently comes down from Heaven moves upon them and 〈◊〉 them 〈◊〉 saith Cyprian The Water must be first 〈◊〉 and sanctified by the Priest that by its washing it may wash away the Sins of Man that is Baptized § 4. The Water being Consecrated the Person was then Baptized in the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost So writes Justin 〈◊〉 They are baptized in the Name of God the Father Lord of all and of our Saviour Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost For as Clemens 〈◊〉 says The baptized Person by this Dedication to the Blessed Trinity is delivered from the corrupt Trinity viz. The Devil the World and the Flesh and is now Sealed by the Father Son and Holy Ghost This Baptizing in the Name of Trinity Origen terms The Invocation of the Adorable Trinity § 5. As for the 〈◊〉 of Water employed in Baptism that is whether they 〈◊〉 or dipped to me it seems evident that their 〈◊〉 Custom was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or dip the whole Body When St. Barnabas describes a baptized Person by his going down into the Water We go down saith he into the Water full of Sin and Filth but we ascend with Fruit and Benefit in our Hearts And so Tertullian represents baptized Persons as entred into the Water And as let down into the Water And Justin Martyr describes the same by being washed in Water and calls the place where they are baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a washing-place or a Bath whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against the Baptism of Hereticks condemns it as carnal and as being upon that account no 〈◊〉 different from the Baptism or washing of the Jews which they used as a common and ordinary Bath to wash away the 〈◊〉 of their Bodies § 6. But though Immersion was their usual Custom yet Perfusion or Sprinkling was not accounted unlawful but in cases of necessity that was used as in Clinic Baptism which was when sick Persons whose Deaths they apprehended were Baptized in their Beds as 〈◊〉 being sick and 〈◊〉 Death as was 〈◊〉 was Baptized in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perfusion or Pouring on of Water It is true indeed this Baptism was not generally esteemed as perfect as the more solemn Baptism for which Reason it was a Custom in some Churches not to advance any to Clerical Orders who had been 〈◊〉 Baptized an Instance whereof we have in the Church of Rome where the Ordination of Novatian to be a Presbyter was opposed by all the Clergy and by many of the 〈◊〉 as unlawful because of his Clinic Perfusion But yet that they held it not altogether or absolutely unlawful to be done appears from that on the Intreaties of the Bishop they consented that he should be ordained as he accordingly was And Cyprian in a set Discourse on this Subject declares that he thought this Baptism to be as perfect and 〈◊〉 as that done more solemnly by Immersion for when one Magnus writ to him 〈◊〉 his Opinion whether those were 〈◊〉 baptized who through their 〈◊〉 were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but only perfused or aspers'd he 〈◊〉 Nos quantum concipit mediocritas nostra 〈◊〉 in nullo mutilari 〈◊〉 posse divina beneficia nec minus aliquid illic posse contingere ubi plena tota 〈◊〉 dantis sumentis accipitur quod de divinis muneribus hauritur Neque enim sic in Sacramento Salutari delictorum contagia ut in lavacro carnali seculari 〈◊〉 cutis corporis 〈◊〉 ut aphronitris 〈◊〉 quoque adjumentis Solio Piscina opus fit quibus ablui mundari corpusculum 〈◊〉 Aliter pectus credentis abluitur aliter mens hominis per fidei merita mundatur In Sacramentis 〈◊〉 necessitate cogente Deo indulgentiam suam 〈◊〉 totum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divina compendia Nec quemquam movere debet quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 persundi videantur aegri cum gratiam dominicam 〈◊〉 quando 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per Ezechielem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aspergam super vos aquam 〈◊〉 mundabi mini ab omnibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab omnibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vos dabo vobis cor novum Spiritum novum dabo in vobis Item in Numeris homo qui 〈◊〉 immundus usque ad 〈◊〉 hic 〈◊〉 dietertio die septimo mundus erit si 〈◊〉 non suerit purificatus die tertio die septimo non erit mundus exterminabitur anima illa de Israel quoniam aqua aspersionis non est super eum sparsa Et iterum locutus est Dominus ad Moysen dicens accipe 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Israel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 purificationem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aqua purificationis iterum aqua aspersionis purificatio est Unde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quoque aquae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lavacri obtinere quando haec in ecclesia 〈◊〉 ubi sit dantis accipientis 〈◊〉 integra stare omnia
to the Gentiles declaring those glad Tidings to all Kingdoms and Provinces so that as the Apostle Paul said Rom. 10. 18. Their sound went into all the Earth and their words unto the ends of the World every one taking a particular part of the World for his proper Province to make known the joyful News of Life and Salvation through Christ therein Thus St. Andrew principally preach'd the Gospel in Scythia St. Bartholomew in India St. Matthew in Parthia St. John in the Lesser Asia and all the rest of the Apostles had their particular Provinces allotted them wherein they went forth preaching the Gospel and as they came to any City Town or Village they published to the Inhabitants thereof the blessed news of Life and Immortality through Jesus Christ constituting the first Converts of every place through which they passed Bishops and Deacons of those Churches which they there gathered So saith Clemens Romanus The Apostles went forth preaching in City and Country appointing the First Fruits of their Ministry for Bishops and Deacons generally leaving those Bishops and Deacons to govern and enlarge those particular Churches over which they had placed them whilst they themselves passed forwards planted other Churches and placed Governors over them Thus saith Tertullian Clemens was ordained Bishop of Rome by St. Peter and Polycarp Bishop of Smirna by St. John § 5. Whether in the Apostolick and Primitive days there were more Bishops than one in a Church at first sight seems difficult to resolve That the Holy Scriptures and Clemens Romanus mention many in one Church is certain And on the other hand it is as certain that Ignatius Tertullian Cyprian and the following Fathers affirm that there was and ought to be but one in a Church These Contradictions may at the first view seem Inextricable but I hope the following Account will reconcile all these seeming Difficulties and withal afford us a fair and easy Conception of the difference between the Ancient Bishops and Presbyters I shall then lay down as sure that there was but one Supreme Bishop in a place that was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishop by way of Eminency and Propriety The proper Pastor and Minister of his Parish to whose Care and Trust the Souls of that Church or Parish over which he presided were principally and more immediately committed So saith Cyprian There is but one Bishop in a Church at a time And so Cornelius Objects to Novatian That he did not remember that there ought to be but one Bishop in a Church And throughout the whole Epistles of Ignatius and the generality of Writers succeeding him we find but one single Bishop in a Church whose Quotations to which purpose would be fruitless to recite here since the 〈◊〉 Practice of the Universal Church confirms it and a great part of the following Discourse will clearly illustrate it Only it may not be impertinent to remark this by the way that by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Succession of Bishops from those Bishops who were Ordained by the Apostles the Orthodox were wont to prove the Succession of their Faith and the Novelty of that of the Hereticks Let them demonstrate the Original of their Churches as Tertullian challenges the Marcionites and other Hereticks Let them turn over the Orders of their Bishops and see whether they have had a Succession of Bishops from any one who was Constituted by the Apostles or Apostolick Men Thus the truly Apostolick Churches have as the Church of Smirna has Polycarp there placed by St. John and the Church of Rome Clement ordained by Peter and other Churches can tell who were ordained Bishops over them by the Apostles and who have been their Successors to this very day So also says Irenaeus We challenge the Hereticks to that Tradition which was handed down from the Apostles by the Succession of Bishops And in the next Chapter of the same Book the said Father gives us a Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome till his days by whom the true Faith was successively transmitted down from the Apostles in which Catalogue we find but one Bishop at a time and as he died so another single Person succeeded him in the Charge of that Flock or Parish So that this Consideration evidences also that there was but one Bishop strictly so called in a Church at a time who was related to his Flock as a Pastor to his Sheep and a Parent to his Children The Titles of this Supreme Church-Officer are most of them reckoned up in one place by Cyprian which are Bishop Pastour President Governour Superintendent and Priest And this is he which in the Revelations is called the Angel of his Church as Origen thinks which Appellations denote both his Authority and Office his Power and Duty of both which we shall somewhat treat after we have discoursed of the Circuit and Extent of his Jurisdiction and Superintendency which shall be the Contents of the following Chapter CHAP. II. § 1. As but one Bishop to a Church so but one Church to a Bishop The Bishop's Cure never call'd a Diocess but usually a Parish no larger than our Parishes § 2. Demonstrated by several Arguments § 3. A Survey of the extent of several Bishopricks as they were in Ignatius's days as of Smirna § 4. Ephesus § 5. Magnesia § 6. Philadelphia And § 7. Trallium § 8. The Bigness of the Diocess of Antioch § 9. Of Rome § 10. Of Carthage § 11. A Reflection on the Diocess of Alexandria § 12. Bishops in Villages § 13. All the Christians of a Diocess met together in one place every Sunday to serve God § 1. HAving in the former Chapter shewn that there was but one Bishop to a Church we shall in this evidence that there was but one Church to a Bishop which will appear from this single Consideration viz. That the ancient Diocesses are never said to contain Churches in the Plural but only a Church in the Singular So they say the Church of the Corinthians the Church of Smirna the Church in Magnesia the Church in Philadelphia the Church in Antioch and so of any other place whatsoever the Church of or in such a place This was the common name whereby a Bishops Cure was denominated the Bishop himself being usually called The Bishop of this or that Church as Tertullian saith That Polycarp was ordained Bishop of the Church of Smirna As for the Word Diocess by which the Bishops Flock is now usually exprest I do not remember that ever I found it used in this Sense by any of the Ancients But there is another Word still retained by us by which they frequently denominated the Bishops Cure and that is Parish So in the Synodical Epistle of Irenaeus to Pope Victor the Bishopricks of Asia are twice called Parishes And in Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History the Word is so applied in several hundred places It is usual
and consent Now how all these things could be done how all this Bishoprick could meet together in one place how the Bishop could personally know all the Members thereof by their respective Names even the meanest Serving-maids therein and permit none to be married without his Knowledge and Advice without reducing this Diocess to a single Parish I know not § 4. As for the Diocess of Ephesus there was but one Altar or Communion Table in its whole Territory at which they all communicated together whence they are said To break the one Bread and he that was without or separated from that Altar is said to want the bread of God The Members also of this Church could all meet together in one place to send up their joint Prayers to God in Christ And therefore Ignatius condemns all those of that Diocess who did not assemble together in that one place with the rest of the Members thereof to send up their Prayers to God as proud self-conceited and justly condemnable because thereby they 〈◊〉 themselves of that unconceivable Benefir that would accrew unto them by joyning in the Prayers of the whole Church For if the Prayer of one or two hath so great a force with God how 〈◊〉 more prevalent must the Prayer of the Bishop and the whole Church be So that if to communicate together and to pray together be the Marks of a Particular Church then this Bishoprick was one § 5. As for the Church of Magnesia they all assembled with the Bishop having but one Church and one Altar joyning all together in one Prayer because to have congregated elsewhere would have been against Conscience and Precept Now how large such a Church is where there is but one Meeting-place and one Altar where all communicate and pray together is no hard matter to determine § 6. Touching the Bishoprick of Philadelphia its Extent may be guessed at by this that the Members thereof could do nothing without the Bishop who being their Shepherd wherever he was they were to follow him like Sheep receiving the Sacrament all together from him at that one Altar belonging to their Diocess which they might well enough do since their Multitudes were not so great but that on other occasions they could meet all together as to chuse a Messenger to send to the Church at Antioch in Syria § 7. As for the Diocess of Trallium that could be no larger than the former ones since it had but one Altar in it which was correlate to its one Bishop so that to separate from the Altar was the same as to separate from the Bishop whence Ignatius says that He that is within the Altar is pure that is He that doth any thing without the Bishop Priests and Deacons is impure Now let any impartial Man judge whether all these Descriptions of those Ancient Diocesses do not forcibly constrain us to reduce them to the Rate of our modern Parishes And if these were no greater especially Ephesus at which place St. Paul preached three years we have no reason to imagin that other Bishopricks where the Apostles never were or at least never preach'd so long surmounted their Bulk and Largeness How long it was before these Diocesses swell'd into several Congregations is not my business to determin since it happened not within my prescribed time except in the Church of Alexandria the reason and manner whereof shall be shewn in a few Leafs more after that I have more fully evidenced this Point by demonstrating that the greatest Bishopricks in the World even in the Third Century were no more than so many single Congregations And if this can be proved it is the solidest Demonstration that can be given For the larger a Church was and the more time it had to settle and increase its self the greater Reason have we to expect that it should exceed all others in Numbers and Diffusiveness Now the four greatest Diocesses that in those days were in the World are Antioch Rome Carthage Alexandria The three former of which during the whole three hundred years after Christ never branched themselves into several particular Congregations though the latter did as shall be hereafter shewn § 8. As for the Diocess of Antioch its Members were not so many but that 265 years after Christ they were able to meet all in one place of which we have this memorable Instance that when Paulus Samosatenus the Heretical Bishop thereof was deprived by a Synod held in that place and Domnus substituted in his room he refused to resign the Churches House till the Emperor Aurelian forced him to resign that House So that for above 250 Years after Christ the whole Bishoprick of Antioch had but one Church to serve God in § 9. How large the Diocess of Rome was may be conjectured by that 1. All the People thereof could meet together to perform Divine Service as appears by that History of a certain Confessor called Natalis who returning from the Theodosian Heresy put himself into the Habit of a Penitent threw himself at the Feet of the Clergy and Laity as they went into their Publick Meeting-place and so bewailed his Fault that at length the Church was touched with Compassion towards him 2. In this Diocess there was but one Church or Meeting-place for when Bishop Anterus died All the Brethren met together in the Church to choose a Successor which distinction or nomination of place viz. That they met in the Church denotes that they had but one Church all for if they had had more Churches than one the Historian would have left us in the dark as to what Church they met in whether in St. James's St. John's or St. Peter's 3. In this Bishoprick also they had but one Altar or Communion-Table as appears from a Passage of Cyprian who describes the Schism of Novatian a Presbyter of this Church by his erecting a Profane Altar in opposition to the Altar of Cornelius his lawful Bishop 4. The whole Diocess could concur together in Salutations and Letters to other Churches Thus concludes a Letter of the Clergy of Rome to the Clergy of Carthage The Brethren which are in Bonds salute you and the Presbyters and the whole Church 5. Whatever Letters were writ to that Church were read before them all as it was the Custom of Bishop Cornolius to read all publick Letters to his most holy and most numerous Flock Lastly The People of this Diocess met all together to choose a Bishop when the See was vacant So upon the Death of Anterus All the Brethren met together in the Church to chuse a Successor where all the People unanimously chose Fabianus And so after the Death of Fabianus Cornelius was chosen Bishop of that Diocess by the Suffrage of the Clergy and People Now whether all these things put together whether their having but one Communion-Table in their whole
Diocess as also but one Church where they all usually met do not unavoidably reduce this Bishoprick to the Circumference of a modern Parish I leave every Man to judge § 10. The next Diocess to be considered is Carthage which next to Rome and Alexandria was the greatest City in the World and probably had as many Christians in it as either especially if that is true which Tertullian insinuates that the tenth part thereof was Christian for he remonstrates to Scapula the Persecuting President of that City that if he should destroy the Christians of Carthage he must root out the Tenth part thereof But yet how many soever the Christians of that Bishoprick were even some years after Tertullian's days they were no more in number than there are now in our Parishes as is evident from Scores of Passages in the Writings of Cyprian Bishop of that Church For 1. The Bishop of that Diocess could know every one therein 2. The Bishop of that Diocess was the common Curator of all the Poor therein relieving the Poor and Indigent paying of their Debts and aiding the necessitous Tradesmen with Money to set up their Trades As Cyprian when he was in his exil'd State sent Caldonius Herculanus Rogatianus and Numidicus to his Church at Carthage to pay off the Debts of the indebted Members thereof and to help those poor Mechanicks with a convenient Sum of Mony who were willing to set up their Trades If Cyprian's Diocess had consisted of scores of Parishes how many Thousand Pounds must he have expended to have paid off the Debts of all the insolvent Persons therein and to have 〈◊〉 every poor Trader with a sufficient Stock to carry on his Employment 3. All the Diocess was present when the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was administred So saith Cyprian We celebrate the Sacrament the whole Brotherhood being present 4. When Celerinus was ordained Lector or Clerk by Cyprian he Read from the Pulpit so that All the People could see and hear him 5. In all Ordinations all the People were consulted and none were admitted into Holy Orders without their Approbation as is assured by Cyprian Bishop of this Diocess who tells us that it was his constant custom in all Ordinations to consult his People and with their common Counsel to weigh the merits of every Candidate of the Sacred Orders And therefore when for extraordinary Merits he advanced one to the Degree of a Lector or Clerk without first communicating it to his Diocess he writes from his Exil'd State to his whole Flock the Reason of it 6. When that See was vacant all the People met together to chuse a Bishop Whence Pontius says that Cyprian was elected Bishop of this Diocess by the favour of the people And Cyprian himself acknowledges that he was chosen by the Suffrage of all his People 7. All the People of this Diocess could meet together to send Letters to other Churches an instance whereof we have in that gratulatory Letter still extant in Cyprian which they all sent to Lucius Bishop of Rome on his Return from Exile 8. All the People were present at Church-Censures and concurred at the Excommunication of Offenders Thus Cyprian writing from his Exile to the People of this his Diocess about the Irregularities of two of his Subdeacons and one of his Acolyths and about the Schism of Felicissimus assures them that as to the former when ever it should please God to return him in Peace it should be determined by him and his Colleagues and his whole Flock And as to the latter that then likewise that should be transacted according to the Arbitrament of the People and the common Counsel of them all 9. At the Absolution of Penitents all the People were present who examined the Reality of the Offender's Repentance and if well satisfied of it consented that they should be admitted to the Churches Peace Therefore when some Presbyters in a time of Persecution had with too great 〈◊〉 and Precipitancy assoyled some of those that through the Violence of the Persecution had succumbed Cyprian writes them from his Exile an objurgatory Letter commanding them to admit no more till Peace should be restored to the Church when those Offenders should plead their Cause before all the People And touching the same matter he writes in another place to all the People of his Diocess that when it should please God to restore Peace to the Church then all those matters should be examined in their Presence and be judged by them Lastly Nothing was done in this Diocess without the Consent of the People So resolved Bishop Cyprian from the first time I was made Bishop said he I determined to do nothing without the consent of my People And accordingly when he was exil'd from his Flock he writ to the Clergy and Laity thereof that when it should please God to return him unto them all Affairs as their mutual Honour did require should be debated in common by them Now whether all these Observations do not evidently reduce the Diocess of Carthage to the same Bulk with our Parishes I leave to every one to 〈◊〉 For my part I must needs profess that I cannot imagin how all the People thereof could receive the Sacrament together assist at the Excommunication and Absolution of Offenders assemble together to elect their Bishop and do the rest of those forementioned particulars without confining this Bishoprick within the Limits of a particular Congregation § 11. As for the Diocess of Alexandria though the numbers of the Christians therein were not so many but that in the middle of the Fourth Century they could all or at least most of them meet together in one place as I might evince from the Writings of Athanasius were it not beyond my prescribed time yet in the third Century they had divided themselves into several distinct and separate Congregations which were all subjected to one Bishop as is clearly enough asserted by Dyonisius Bishop of this Church who mentions the distinct Congregations in the extremest Suburbs of the City The Reason whereof seems to be this Those Members of this Bishoprick who lived in the remotest parts of it finding it incommodious and troublesom every Lord's Day Saturday Wednesday and Friday on which days they always assembled to go to their one usual Meeting-place which was very far from their own Homes and withal being unwilling to divide themselves from their old Church and Bishop lest they should seem guilty of the detestable Sin of Schism which consisted in a Causeless Separation from their Bishop and Parish Church as shall be hereafter shewn desired their proper Bishop to give them leave for Conveniency sake to Erect near their own Habitations a Chappel of Ease which should be a daughter-Daughter-Church to the Bishops under his Jurisdiction and guided by a Presbyter of his Commission and Appointment whereat they would
removed them from Earth to Heaven where they were made Priests to the most High and were infinitely remunerated for all their Pains and Sorrows and so leaving their particular Flocks on Earth to be sed and govern'd by others who should succeed them in their places which brings me in the next place to enquire How a vacant Bishoprick was supplied or in what manner a Bishop or Minister was elected to a Diocess or Parish § 3. Now the manner of electing a Bishop I find to be thus When a Parish or Bishoprick was vacant through the Death of the Incumbent all the Members of that Parish both Clergy and Laity met together in the Church commonly to chuse a fit Person for his Successor to whom they might commit the Care and Government of their Church Thus when Alexander was chosen Bishop of Jerusalem it was by the Compulsion or Choice of the Members of that Church And as for the Bishoprick of Rome we have a memorable Instance of this kind in the Advancement of Fabianus to that See upon the Death of Bishop Anterus All the People met together in the Church to chuse a Successor proposing several illustrious and eminent Personages as fit for that Office whilst no one so much as thought upon Fabianus then present till a Dove miraculously came and sate upon his Head in the same manner as the Holy Ghost formerly descended on our Saviour and then all the People guided as it were with one Divine Spirit cryed out with one Mind and Soul That Fabianus was worthy of the Bishoprick and so straightways taking him they placed him on the Episcopal Throne And as Fabianus so likewise his Successor Cornelius was elected by the suffrage of the Clergy and Laity Thus also with respect to the Diocess of Carthage Cyprian was chosen Bishop thereof by its Inhabitants and Members as Pontius his Deacon writes That though he was a Novice yet by the Grace of God and the Favour of the People he was elevated to that sublime Dignity which is no more than what Cyprian himself acknowledges who frequently owns that he was promoted to that Honourable Charge by the Suffrage of the People § 4. When the People had thus elected a Bishop they presented him to the neighbouring Bishops for their Approbation and Consent because without their concurrent Assent there could be no Bishop legally instituted or confirmed Thus when the fore-mentioned Alexander was Chosen Bishop of Jerusalem by the Brethren of that place he had also the common Consent of the circumjacent Bishops Now the Reason of this I suppose was lest the People thro' Ignorance or Affection should chuse an unfit or an unable Man for that sacred Office it being supposed that a Synod of Bishops had more Wisdom Learning and Prudence than a Congregation of unlearned and ignorant Men and so were better able to judge of the Abilities and Qualifications of the Person elect than the People were Hence we find that sometimes the Election of a Bishop is attributed to the Choice of the Neighbouring Bishops with the Consent and Suffrage of the People This Custom generally prevail'd throughout Africa where upon the Vacancy of a See The Neighbouring Bishops of the Province met together at that Church and chose a Bishop in the presence of the People who knew his Life and Conversation before which Custom was observed in the Election of Sabinus Bishop of Emerita in Spain who was advanc'd to that Dignity by the Suffrage of all the Brethren and of all the Bishops there present But whether the Election of a Bishop be ascribed to the adjoining Ministers or to the People of that Parish it comes all to one and the same thing neither the Choice of the Bishops of the Voisinage without the Consent of the People nor the Election of the People without the Approbation of those Bishops was sufficient and valid of it self but both concurred to a legal and orderly Promotion which was according to the Example of the Apostles and Apostolick Preachers who in the first Plantation of Churches Ordained Bishops and Deacons with the Consent of the whole Church § 5. A Bishop being thus elected and confirmed the next thing that followed was his Ordination or 〈◊〉 which was done in his own Church by the neighbouring Bishops as Cyprian mentions some Bishops in his time who went to a City called Capse to install a Bishop whither when they were come they took the Bishop Elect and in the presence of his Flock Ordained or Installed him Bishop of that Church by Imposition of Hands as Sabinus was placed in his Bishoprick by Imposition of Hands Therefore Fortunatus the Schismatical Bishop of Carthage got five Bishops to come and Ordain him at Carthage And so Novatian when he Schismatically aspired to the Bishoprick of Rome that he might not seem to leap in Uncanonically wheedled three ignorant and simple Bishops to come to Rome and install him in that Bishoprick by Imposition of Hands How many Bishops were necessary to this installing of a Bishop Elect I find not Three were sufficient as is apparent from the forecited action of Novatian whether less would do I know not since I find not the least footsteps of it in my Antiquity unless that from Novatian's sending for and 〈◊〉 just three Bishops out of Italy we conclude that Number to be necessary But if there were more than Three it was not accounted unnecessary or needless for the more Bishops there were present at an Installment the more did its validity and unexceptionableness appear Whence Cyprian argues the undeniable Legality of Cornelius's Promotion to the See of Rome because he had sixteen Bishops present at his Ordination And for this Reason it was that Fortunatus the Schismatical Bishop of Carthage falsely boasted That there were Twenty-five Bishops present at his Installment And thus in short we have viewed the Method of the Ancients in their Election of Bishops we have shewn that they were elected by the People approved and installed by the Neighbouring Bishops on which Account it is that Cyprian calls them Chosen and ordained § 6. It may not now be amiss to mention this Custom that when a Bishop was thus presented and advanced to a See he immediately gave notice of it to other Bishops especially to the most renowned Bishops and Bishopricks as Cornelius writ to Cyprian Bishop of Carthage an Account of his being promoted to the See of Rome betwixt which two Churches there was such a peculiar Intercourse and Harmony as that this Custom was more particularly observed by them insomuch that it was observed by the Schismatical Bishops of each Church Novatian giving notice to Cyprian Bishop of Carthage of his Promotion to the Church of Rome And Fortunatus advising Cornelius Bishop of Rome of his Advancement to the Church of Carthage § 7. Let what hath been spoken now suffice for the peculiar Acts
could not be proved particularly that a Presbyter did discharge them yet it would be sufficient if we could prove that in the general a Presbyter could and did perform them all Now that a Presbyter could do so and consequently by the Bishop's permission did do so will appear from the Example of the great Saint Cyprian Bishop of Carthage who being exil'd from his Church writes a Letter to the Clergy thereof wherein he exhorts and begs them to discharge their own and his Office too that so nothing might be wanting either to Discipline or Diligence And much to the same Effect he thus writes them in another Letter Trusting therefore to your Kindness and Religion which I have abundantly experienced I exhort and command you by these Letters that in my stead you perform those Offices which the Ecclesiastical Dispensation requires And in a Letter written upon the same Occasion by the Clergy of the Church of Rome to the Clergy of the Church of Carthage we find these Words towards the beginning thereof And since it is incumbent upon us who are as it were Bishops to keep the Flock in the room of the Pastor If we shall be found negligent it shall be said unto us as it was said to our careless preceeding Bishops in Ezekiel 34. 3 4. That we looked not after that which was lost we did not correct him that wandered nor bound up him that was lame but we did eat their Milk and were covered with their Wooll So that the Presbyters were as it were Bishops that in the Bishop's Absence kept his Flock and in his stead performed all those Ecclesiastical Offices which were incumbent on him Now then if the Presbyters could supply the place of an Absent Bishop and in general discharge all those Offices to which a Bishop had been obliged if he had been present it naturally follows that the Presbyters could discharge every particular Act and Part thereof If I should say such an one has all the Senses of a Man and yet also assert that he cannot see I should be judged a Self-contradictor in that Assertion for in affirming that he had all the Human Senses I also affirmed that he saw because Seeing is one of those Senses For whatsoever is affirmed of an Universal is affirmed of every one of its Particulars So when the Fathers say that the Presbyters performed the whole Office of the Bishop it naturally ensues that they Confirmed Ordained Baptized c. because those are Particulars of that Universal But now from the whole we may collect a solid Argument for the Equality of Presbyters with Bishops as to Order for if a Presbyter did all a Bishop did what difference was there between them A Bishop preached baptized and confirmed so did a Presbyter A Bishop excommunicated absolved and ordained so did a Presbyter Whatever a Bishop did the same did a Presbyter the particular Acts of their Office was the same the only difference that was between them was in Degree but this proves there was none at all in Order 2. That Bishops and Presbyters were of the same Order appears also from that originally they had one and the same Name each of them being indifferently called Bishops or Presbyters Hence we read in the Sacred Writ of several Bishops in one particular Church as the Bishops of Ephesus and Philippi that is the Bishops and Presbyters of those Churches as they were afterwards distinctly called And Clemens Romanus sometimes mentions many Bishops in the Church of Corinth whom at other times he calls by the Name of Presbyters using those two Terms as Synonimous Titles and Appellations You have obeyed saith he those that were set over you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Let us revere those that are set over us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are the usual Titles of the Bishops and yet these in another place he calls Presbyters describing their Office by their sitting or presiding over us Wherefore he commands the Corinthians to be subject to their Presbyters and whom in one Line he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishops The second Line after he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Presbyters So Polycarp exhorts the Philippians to be subject to their Presbyters and Deacons under the name of Presbyters including both Bishops and Priests as we now call them The first that expressed these Church-Officers by the distinct Terms of Bishops and Presbyters was Ignatius who lived in the beginning of the Second Century appropriating the Title of Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Overseer to that Minister who was the more immediate Overseer and Governour of his Parish and that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elder or Presbyter to him who had no particular Care and Inspection of a Parish but was only an Assistant or Curate to a Bishop that had the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bishop denoting a Relation to a Flock or Cure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Presbyter signifying only a Power or an ability to take the Charge of such a Flock or Cure the former implying an actual discharge of the Office the latter a power so to do This Distinction of Titles arising from the difference of their Circumstances which we find first mentioned in Ignatius was generally followed by the succeeding Fathers who for the most part distinguish between Bishops and Presbyters though sometimes according to the primitive Usage they indifferently apply those Terms to each of those persons Thus on the one hand the Titles of Presbyters are given unto Bishops as Irenaeus in his Synodical Epistle twice calis Anicetus Pius Higynus Telesphorus and Xistus Bishops of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Presbyters And those Bishops who derived their Succession immediately from the Apostles he calls the Presbyters in the Church and whom Clemens Alexandrinus in one Line calls the Bishop of a certain City not far from Ephesus a few Lines after he calls the Presbyter And on the other hand the Titles of Bishops are ascribed to Presbyters as one of the Discretive Appellations of a Bishop is Pastour Yet Cyprian also calls his Presbyters the Pastors of the Flock Another was that of President or one set over the People Yet Cyprian also calls his Presbyters Presidents or set over the People The Bishops were also called Rectors or Rulers So Origen calls the Presbyters the Governours of the People And we find both Bishops and Presbyters included under the common Name of Presidents or Prelates by St. Cyprian in this his Exhortation to Pomponius And if all must observe the Divine Discipline how much more must the Presidents and Deacons do it who by their Conversation and Manners must yield a good Example to others Now if the same Appellation of a thing be a good Proof for the Identity of its Nature then Bishops and Presbyters must be of the same Order because they had the same Names and Titles
Suppose it was disputed whether a Parson and Lecturer were of the same Order would not this sufficiently prove the Affirmative That though for some Accidental Respects they might be distinguished in their Appellations yet originally and frequently they were called by one and the same Name The same it is in this Case though for some contingent and adventitious Reasons Bishops and Presbyters were discriminated in their Titles yet originally they were always and afterwards sometimes called by one and the same Appellation and therefore we may justly deem them to be one and the same Order But if this Reason be not thought cogent enough the Third and last will unquestionably put all out of doubt and most clearly evince the Identity or Sameness of Bishops and Presbyters as to Order and that is that it is expresly said by the Ancients That there were but two distinct Ecclesiastical Orders viz. Bishops and Deacons or Presbyters and Deacons and if there were but these two Presbyters cannot be distinct from Bishops for then there would be three Now that there were but two Orders viz. Bishops and Deacons is plain from that Golden Ancient Remain of Clemens Romanus wherein he thus writes In the Country and 〈◊〉 where the Apostles preached they ordained their first Converts for Bishops and Deacons over those who should believe Nor were these Orders new for for many Ages past it was thus prophesied concerning Bishops and Deacons I will appoint their Bishops in Righteousness and their Deacons in Faith This place of Scripture which is here quoted is in Isa. 60. 17. I will make thine Officers peace and thine Exactors righteousness Whether it is rightly applyed is not my business to determin That that I observe from hence is that there were but two Orders instituted by the Apostles viz. Bishops and Deacons which Clemens supposes were prophetically promised long before And this is yet more evidently asserted in another passage of the said Clemens a little after where he says that the Apostles foreknew through our Lord Jesus Christ that Contention would arise about the Name of Episcopacy and therefore being endued with a perfect foreknowledge appointed the aforesaid Officers viz. Bishops and Deacons and left the manner of their Succession described that so when they died other approved Men might succeed them and reform their Office So that there were only the Two Orders of Bishops and Deacons instituted by the Apostles And if they ordained but those Two I think no one had ever a Commission to add a Third or to split One into Two as must be done if we separate the Order of Presbyters from the Order of Bishops But that when the Apostles appointed the Order of Bishops Presbyters were included therein will manifestly appear from the Induction of those fore-cited Passages in Clemens's Epistle and his drift and design thereby which was to appease and calm the Schisms and Factions of some unruly Members in the Church of Corinth who designed to depose their Presbyters and that he might dissuade them from this violent and irregular Action amongst other Arguments he proposes to them that this was to thwart the Design and Will of God who would that all should live orderly in their respective places doing the Duties of their own Stations not invading the Offices and Functions of others and that for this end that all occasions of disorderliness and confusion might be prevented he had Instituted Diversities of Offices in his Church appointing every Man to his particular Work to which he was to apply himself without violently leaping into other Mens places and that particularly the Apostles foreseeing through the Holy Spirit that contentious and unruly Men would irregularly aspire to the Episcopal Office by the Deposition of their lawful Presbyters therefore that such turbulent Spirits might be repressed or left inexcusable they ordained Bishops and Deacons where they preached and described the manner and qualifications of their Successors who should come after them when they were dead and gone and be rever'd and obeyed with the same Respect and Obedience as they before were and that therefore they were to be condemned as Perverters of the Divine Institution and Contemners of the Apostolick Authority who dared to degrade their Presbyters who had received their Episcopal Authority in an immediate Succession from those who 〈◊〉 advanced to that Dignity by the Apostles themselves This was the true Reason for which the fore-quoted Passages were spoken which clearly evinces that Presbyters were included under the Title of Bishops or rather that they were Bishops For to what end should Clemens exhort the Schismatical Corinthians to obey their Presbyters from the consideration of the Apostles Ordination of Bishops if their Presbyters had not been Bishops But that the Order of Presbyters was the same with the Order of Bishops will appear also from that place of Irenaeus where he exhorts us to withdraw from those Presbyters who serve their Lusts and having not the fear of God in their hearts contemn others and are lifted up with the Dignity of their first Session but to adhere to those who keep the Doctrine of the Apostles and with their Presbyterial Order are inoffensive and exemplary in sound Doctrine and an holy Conversation to the Information and Correction of others for such Presbyters the Church educates and of whom the Prophet saith I will 〈◊〉 thee Princes in Peace and Bishops in Righteousness Now that by these Presbyters Bishops are meant I need not take much pains to prove the precedent Chapter positively asserts it the Description of them in this Quotation by their enjoying the Dignity of the first Session and the application of that Text of Isaiah unto them clearly evinces it No one can deny but that there were Bishops that is that they were superiour in degree to other Presbyters or as Irenaeus styles it honoured with the first Session but yet he also says that they were not different in Order being of the Presbyterial Order which includes both Bishops and Presbyters To this Testimony of Irenaeus I shall subjoin that of Clemens Alexandrinus who tho' he mentions the Processes of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons from which some conclude the Bishops Superiority of Order yet the subsequent Words evidently declare that it must be meant only of Degree and that as to Order they were one and the same for he immediately adds That those Offices are an imitation of the Angelick Glory and of that Dispensation which as the Scriptures say they wait for who treading in the steps of the Apostles live in the perfection of Evangelick Righteousness for these the Apostle writes shall be took up into the Clouds Here he alludes to the manner of the Saints Glorification in 1 Thess. 4. 17. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the Clouds to meet the Lord in the Air and so shall we ever be with the Lord and there first as Deacons attend and then
according to the Process or next station of Glory be admitted into the Presbytery for Glory differs from Glory till they increase to a perfect man Now in this Passage there are two things which manifest that there were but two Ecclesiastical Orders viz. Bishops and Deacons or Presbyters and Deacons the first is that he says that those Orders were resembled by the Angelick Orders Now the Scripture mentions but two Orders of Angels viz. Archangels and Angels the Archangels presiding over the Angels and the Angels obeying and attending on the Archangels According to this resemblance therefore there must be but Two Ecclesiastical Orders in the Church which are Bishops or 〈◊〉 byters presiding and governing with the Deacons attending and obeying The other part of this Passage which proves but two Ecclesiastical Orders is his likening of them to the progressive Glory of the Saints who at the Judgment Day shall be caught up in the Clouds and there shall first as Deacons attend and wait on Christ's Judgment-Seat and then when the Judgment is over shall have their Glory perfected in being placed on the Celestial Thrones of that Sublime Presbytery where they shall for ever be blest and happy So that there were only the two Orders of Deacons and Presbyters the former whereof being the inseriour Order never sat at their 〈◊〉 Conventions but like Servants stood and waited on the latter who sat down on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Seats in the form of a Semicircle whence they are frequently called Consessus Presbyterii Or the Session of the Presbytery in which Session he that was more peculiarly the Bishop or Minister of the Parish sat at the Head of the Semicircle on a Seat somewhat elevated above those of his Colleagues as Cyprian calls them and so was distinguished from them by his Priority in the same Order but not by his being of another Order Thus the foresaid Clemens Alexandrinus distinguishes the Bishop from the Presbyters by his being advanced to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the first Seat in the Presbytery not by his sitting in a different Seat from them For thus he writes He is in truth a Presbyter of the Church and a Minister of the Will of God who does and teaches the things of the Lord not ordained by Men or esteemed just because a Presbyter but because just therefore received into the 〈◊〉 who although he be not honoured with the first Seat on Earth yet shall hereafter sit down on the Twenty and Four Thrones mentioned in the Revelations judging the People So that both Bishops and Presbyters were Members of the same Presbytery only the Bishop was advanced to the first and chiefest Seat therein which is the very same with what I come now from proving viz. That Bishops and Presbyters were Equal in Order but Different in Degree That the former were the Ministers of their respective Parishes and the latter their Curates or Assistants Whether this hath been fully proved or whether the precedent Quotations do naturally conclude the Premises the Learned Reader will easily determine I am not conscious that I have stretched any Words beyond their natural Signification having deduced from them nothing but what they fairly imported If I am mistaken I hope I shall be pardoned since I did it not designedly or voluntarily As before so now I profess again that if any one shall be so kind and obliging to give me better Information I shall thankfully and willingly acknowledge and quit mine Error but till that Information be given and the falsity of my present Opinion be evinc'd which after the impartialest and narrowest Enquiry I see not how it can be done I hope no one will be offended that I have asserted the Equality or Identity of the Bishops and Presbyters as to Order and their difference as to Preeminency or Degree § 4. Now from this Notion of Presbyters there evidently results the Reason why there were many of them in one Church even for the same Intent and End tho' more necessary and needful that Curates are now to those Ministers and Incumbents whom they serve it was found by Experience that variety of Accidents and Circumstances did frequently occur both in times of Peace and Persecution the Particulars whereof would be needless to enumerate that disabled the Bishops from attending on and discharging their Pastoral Office therefore that such Vacancies might be supplied and such Inconveniencies remedied they entertained Presbyters or Curates who during their Absence might supply their Places who also were helpful to them whilst they were present with their Flocks to counsel and advise them whence Bishop Cyprian assures us that he did all things by the Common Council of his Presbyters Besides this in those early days of Christianity Churches were in most places thin and at a great distance from one another so that if a Bishop by any Disaster was Incapacitated for the Discharge of his Function it would be very difficult to get a neighbouring Bishop to assist him To which we may also add that in those times there were no publick Schools or Universities except we say the Catechetick Lecture at Alexandria was one for the breeding of young Ministers who might succeed the Bishops as they died wherefore the Bishops of every Church took care to instruct and elevate some young Men who might be prepared to come in their place when they were dead and gone And thus for these and the like Reasons most Churches were furnished with a competent number of Presbyters who helpt the Bishops while living and were fitted to succeed them when dead § 5. I say only most Churches were furnished with Presbyters because all were not especially those Churches which were newly planted where either the Numbers or Abilities of the Belîevers were small and inconsiderable Neither indeed were Presbyters Essential to the Constitution of a Church a Church might be without them as well as a Parish can be without a 〈◊〉 now it was sufficient that they had a Bishop a Presbyter was only necessary for the easing of the Bishop in his Office and to be qualified for the succeeding him in his Place and Dignity after his Death For as 〈◊〉 writes Where there are no Presbyters the Bishop alone administers the two Sacraments of the Lord's Supper and Baptism § 6. As for the time when Presbyters began to me it seems plain that their Office was even in the Apostolick Age tho' by their Names they were not distinguished from Bishops till sometime after The first Author now extant who distinctly mentions Bishops and Presbyters is Ignatius Bishop of Antioch who lived in the beginning of the Second Century But without doubt before his time even in the days of the Apostles where Churches increased or were somewhat large there were more in Holy Orders than the Bishops of those Churches We read in the New Testament of the Bishops of Ephesus Acts 20. 28. and Philippi Philip. 1. 1. which
be absolved came into the Church mourning and weeping and expressing all external Indications of his Internal Sorrow As when Natalis a Roman Confessor was absolved for his joyning with the Theodotian Hereticks he came into the Church as it is related by an ancient 〈◊〉 Christian covered with Sackcloth and Ashes throwing himself at the Feet of the Clergy and Laity and with Tears in his Eyes begging their pardon and forgiveness It being looked upon as very proper that they should be admitted into the Church by Tears not by Threats by Prayers and not by Curses Hence at this time for the greater Demonstration of their Sorrow and Humility they were to make a publick Confession of their Sin styled by them Exomologesis which was as Cyprian saith A Confession of their great and heinous Crime and was a necessary Antecedent to Absolution inasmuch as it was the Source and Spring of all true Repentance For as Tertullian observes Out of Confession is born Repentance and by Confession comes Satisfaction And in many places of Cyprian the necessity of Confession is asserted for as Tertullian says Confession as much diminishes the Fault as Dissimulation aggravates it Confession is the Advice of Satisfaction Dissimulation of Contumacy And therefore he condemns those who thro' shame deferred from Day to Day the Publication of their Sin as more mindful of their shamefacedness than of their Salvation Like those who have a Disease in their Secret Parts through shame conceal it from the Chyrurgeons and so with their Modesty die and perish Confession therefore being so necessary the greatest Offenders were not exempted from it as when Philip the Emperor as Eusebius calls him or rather Philip a Prefect of Egypt would have joyned with the Faithful in the Churches Prayer Bishop Babylas denied him admission because of his enormous Crimes nor would he receive him till he had made a Publick Confession of his Faults And accordingly when one of those Bishops that Schismatically Ordained Novatian returned as a Penitent he came into the Church weeping and Confessing his Sin where we may observe that it is said in the singular Number his Sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which intimates that the Penitent's Confession was not only general or for all his Sins in the gross but it was particular for that special Sin for which he was censured consonant whereunto Cyprian as before quoted writes that the Penitent confessed his most great and heinous Sin that is that Sin for which he was so severely punished This Confession of the Penitents was made with all the outward Signs of Sorrow and Grief which usually so affected the Faithful as that they sympathized with them in mourning and weeping Whence Tertullian exhorts the Penitent not through shame to conceal but from a true Godly Disposition to confess his Fault before the whole Church and to weep and mourn for it since they being his Brethren would also weep with and over him And so from the same Consideration Cyprian exhorted the Lapsed to this Penitent Confession with our Tears saith he joyn your Tears with our Groans couple your Groans § 10. As soon as Confession was over then followed the formal Absolution which was thus The Person to be absolved kneeled down before the Bishop and the Clergy who put their Hands upon his Head and bless'd him by which external Ceremony the Penitent was declaratively and formally admitted to the Churches Peace Thus Cyprian writes that they received the Right of Communion by the Imposition of Hands of the Bishop and his Clergy And that no one can be admitted to Communion unless the Bishop and Clergy have imposed Hands on him This being accounted the third and last general Requisite for the reconciling of Offenders the two former being the undergoing a state of Penance and a publick Confession of their Sin all which three are frequently mentioned together as such by Cyprian as where he says Let Offenders do Penance a set space of time and according to the Order of Discipline let them come to Confession and by Imposition of Hands of the Bishop and Clergy let them receive the Right of Communion And in other places he complains of the irregular and unadvised Actions of some of his Presbyters that they admitted some of the Lapsed to Communion before they had undergone a duc Penance made a Publick Confession of their Sin and had Hands imposed on them by the Bishop and Clergy § 11. After the Penitents were absolved by imposition of Hands then they were received into the Communion of the Faithful and made Partakers again of all those Priviledges which by their Crimes they had for a while forfeited Only when an offending Clergy man was absolved he only was restored to Communion as a Lay-man but never re-admitted to his Ecclesiastical Dignity Thus when one of the Schismatical Bishops that Ordained Novatian returned to the Church he was deprived of his Ecclesiastical Office and admitted only to Lay-Communion So likewise Apostate or Lapsed Bishops were never restored again to their Office The Reasons whereof may be seen in the 64th Epistle of Cyprian And therefore Basilides a lapsed Bishop would have been extremely glad if the Church would but have permitted him to communicate as a Layman But yet I suppose that for every Fault Clergymen were not deprived of their Orders but only according to the Greatness of their Crimes and the Aggravation of them since I find that Maximus a Presbyter of the Church of Rome who had been deluded into the Schism of Novatian was upon his Submission restored by Cornelius to his former Office CHAP. VIII § 1. Of the Independency of Churches § 2. Of the Dependency of Churches § 3. Of Synods and the several kinds of them § 4. How often Synods were convened § 5. Who were the Members of Synods § 6. By whose Authority Synods were convened § 7. When convened the manner of their Proceedings a Moderator first chosen what the Moderator's Office was § 8. Then they entred upon Business which had relation either to Foreign Churches or their own with respect to Foreign Churches their Acts were only advising § 9. With respect to their own Churches obliging The End and Power of Synods enquired into § 1. TO that large Discourse of the Primitive Discipline which was the Subject of the preceding Chapter it will be necessary to add this Observation that all those judicial Acts were exerted in and by every single Parish every particular Church having Power to exercise Discipline on her own Members without the Concurrency of other Churches else in those places where there might be but one Church for several Miles round which we may reasonably suppose the Members of that Church must have travelled several if not Scores of Miles to have had the consent of other Churches for the Punishment of their Ofsenders But there is no need to make this Supposition
since it was decreed by an African Synod that every one's Cause should be heard where the Crime was committed because that to every Pastor was committed a particular Portion of Christ's Flock which he was particularly to rule and govern and to render an account thereof unto the Lord. And so another African Synod that decreed the Rebaptization of those that were Baptized by Hereticks thus conclude their Synodical Epistle to Pope Stephen who held the contrary Whereas we know that some Bishops will not relinquish an Opinion which they have embraced but keeping the Bond of Peace and Concord with their Colleagues will retain some proper and peculiar Sentiments which they have formerly received to these we offer no violence or prescribe any Law since every Bishop has in the administration of his Church free liberty to follow his own Will being to render an account of his Actions unto the Lord. After these two Synodical Determinations it might be thought needless to produce the single Testimony of Cyprian but that it shews us not only the practice of the Bishops of his Age but also of their Predecessors Amongst the ancient Bishops of our Province saith he some thought that no Peace was to be given to Adulterers for ever excluding them from the Communion of the Church but yet they did not leave their fellow-Fellow-Bishops or for this break the Vnity of the Catholick Church and those that gave Peace to Adulterers did not therefore separate from those that did not but still retaining the Bond of Concord every Bishop disposed and directed his own Acts rendring an account of them unto the Lord. Thus every Church was in this Sense independent that is without the Concurrence and Authority of any other Church it had a sufficient Right and Power in its self to punish and chastise all its delinquent and offending Members § 2. But yet in another Sense it was dependent as considered with other Churches as part of the Church Universal There is but one Church of Christ saith Cyprian divided through the whole World into many Members and one Episcopacy diffused through the numerous Concord of many Bishops A Particular Church was not the whole Church of Christ but only a Part or Member of the Universal one and as one Member of the natural Body hath a regard to all the other Members thereof so a particular Church which was but one Member of the Universal had relation and respect to the other Members thereof Hence tho' the Labours and Inspections of the Bishops were more peculiarly confined to their own Parishes yet as Ministers of the Church Universal they employed a general kind of Inspection over other Churches also observing their Condition and Circumstances and giving unto them an account of their own state and posture as Cyprian inspected that of Arles giving this as his Reason for it that altho' they were many Pastors yet they were but one Flock and they ought to congregate and cherish all the Sheep which Christ redeemed by his Blood and Passion And the Clergy of the Church of Rome thanked Cyprian that he had acquainted them with the state of the Church in Africa for say they We ought all of us to take care of the Body of the whole Church whose Members are distended through various Provinces If the Bishop of one Church had any difficult Point to determine he sent to another Bishop for his Advice and Decision thereof As when Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandria had a critical Cause to determine he sent to Xystus Bishop of Rome to know his Opinion and Counsel therein And so when there was some difference at Carthage about the Pacificatory Libels of the Martyrs Cyprian writ to the Church of Rome for their Advice therein For saith he Dearly beloved Brethren both common Reason and Love require that none of these things that are transacted here should be kept from your Knowledge but that we should have your Counsel about Ecclesiastical Administrations In these and in many other such like Cases which would be needless to enumerate there was a Correspondence between the particular Churches of the Universal one § 3. But that that chiefly deserves our 〈◊〉 was their Intercourse and Government by Synodical Assemblies that is by a Convocation of Bishops Presbyters Deacons and Deputed Lay-men of several particular Churches who frequently met together to maintain Unity Love and Concord to advise about their common Circumstances and Conditions to regulate all Ecclesiastical or Church-Affairs within their respective Limits and to manage other such like things of which I shall more largely treat in the end of this Chapter That which must be spoken of in this Section is the several kinds or sorts of Synods the most august and supreme kind whereof was an Universal or 〈◊〉 Synod which was a Congregation of the Bishops and Deputies of as many Churches as would please to come from all Parts of the World Of this sort I find but one within my limited space of the first three Hundred Years after Christ and that was the Council of Antioch that condemned Paulus Samosatenus Or if this will not pass for a General Council there was no such one before that of Nice which was held Anno 325. and so there was no one of this kind within that time to which I am confined But those Synods which were very frequent within my prescribed time were Provincial Synods that is as many particular Churches as could conveniently and orderly associate themselves together and by their common Consent and Authority dispose and regulate all things that related to their Polity Unity Peace and Order What extent of Ground or how many particular Churches each of such Synods did contain cannot be determined their Precincts were not alike in all places but according as their Circumstances and Conveniencies would permit so they formed themselves into these Synodical Assemblies and were governed in common by those Synods who were called the Synods of such or such a Province As we read in Cyprian of the Province of Arles and the Bishops therein And Cyprian frequently speaks of the Bishops of his Province as the Bishops 2 in our Province and 3 throughout our Province and throughout the Province And tells us that his Province was very large and that it was the custom of his Province and almost all other Provinces that upon the Vacancy of a Parish the neighbouring Bishops of that Province should meet together at that Parish to Ordain them a new Bishop § 4. How often these Provincial Synods were convened is uncertain since that varied according to their Circumstances and their 〈◊〉 Customs Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia writes that in his Province they met every Year And whosoever will consider the frequent Synods that are mentioned in Cyprian will find that in his Province they met at least once and sometimes twice or thrice a Year § 5. As for
the Members that composed these Synods they were Bishops Presbyters Deacons and Deputed Laymen in behalf of the People of their respective Churches Thus at that great Synod of Antioch that condemned Paulus Samosatenus there were present Bishops Presbyters Deacons and the Churches of God that is Laymen that represented the People of their several Churches So also we read in an ancient Fragment in Eusebius that when the Heresie of the Montanists was fix'd and preach'd the Faithful in Asia met together several times to examine it and upon examination condemned it So also when there were some Heats in the Church of Carthage about the Restitution of the Lapsed Cyprian writes from his Exile that the Lapsed should be patient till God had restored Peace to the Church and then there should be convened a Synod of Bishops and of the Laity who had stood firm during the Persecution to consult about and determine their Affairs Which Proposition was approved by Moses and Maximus and other Roman Confessors who liked the consulting of a Synod of Bishops Presbyters Deacons Confessors and the standing Laity as also did the whole Body of the Clergy of the Church of Rome who were willing that that Affair of the Lapsed should be determined by the common Counsel of the Bishops Presbyters Deacons Confessors and the standing Laity And thus at that great Council held at 〈◊〉 Anno 258. there were present Eighty Seven Bishops together with Presbyters Deacons and a great part of the Laity § 6. If it shall be demanded by whose Authority and Appointment Synods were assembled To this it will be replyed That it must necessarily have been by their own because in those Days there was no Christian Magistrate to order or determine those Affairs § 7. When a Synod was convened before ever they entred upon any Publick Causes they chose out of the gravest and renownedst Bishops amongst them one or sometimes two to be their Moderator or Moderators as at the Council held at Carthage Anno 258. Cyprian was Moderator or Prolocutor thereof And so we read of the Prolocutors of several Synods that were assembled in divers parts of the World to determine the Controversies concerning Easter As Victor Bishop of Rome was Prolocutor of a Synod held there Palmas Bishop of Amastris Moderator of a Synod held in Pontus and Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons of another in France Polycrates Bishop os Ephesus presided over a Synod of Asiatick Bishops and at a Convocation in Palestina there were two Moderators viz. Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea and Narcissus Bishop of Jerusalem The Office and Duty of a Moderator was to preside in the Synod to see all things calmly and fairly debated and decreed and at the conclusion of any Cause to sum up what had been debated and urged on both sides to take the Votes and Suffrages of the Members of the Synod and last of all to give his own All this is evident in the Proceedings of the Council of Carthage which are extant at the end of Cyprian's Works Cyprian being Moderator of that Council After all things were read and finished relating to the Question in hand sums up all telling the Synod what they had heard and that nothing more remained to be done but the Declaration of their Judgment thereupon Accordingly thereunto the Bishops gave their respective Votes and Decisions and last of all Cyprian as President gave in his § 8. When the Moderator was chosen then they entred upon the consideration of the Affairs that lay before them which may be consider'd in a two-fold respect either as relating to Foreign Churches or to those Churches only of whom they were the Representatives As for foreign Churches their Determinations were not obligatory unto them because they were not represented by them and so the chiefest matter they had to do with them was to give them their Advice and Counsel in any difficult Point which they had proposed to them as when the People of Astorga and Emerita in Spain had written to some African Churches for their Advice what to do with their two Bishops who had lapsed in Times of Persecution This Case was debated in a Synod held Anno 258 whose Opinion thereupon is to be seen in their Synodical Epistle extant at large amongst the Works of Cyprian Epist. 68. p. 200. § 9. But with respect unto those particular Churches whose Representatives they were their Decrees were binding and obligatory since the Regulation and Management of their Affairs was the general End of their Convening Various and many were the particular Ends of these Synodical Conventions as for the prevention of Injustice and Partiality in a Parish Consistory As suppose that such a Consistory had wrongfully and unrighteously censured one of their Members what should that censured Person do unless appeal to the Synod to have his Cause heard there as Felicissimus did who after he was excommunicated by his own Parish of which Cyprian was Bishop had his Cause heard before a Synod who ratified and confirmed the Sentence of Excommunication against him And therefore we may suppose it to be for the prevention of Partiality and Injustice that in Lesser Asia Offenders were usually absolved by the Synod which met every Year Synods also were assembled for the examining condemning and excommunicating of all Hereticks within their Limits that so the Faithful might avoid and shun them As Paulus Samosatenus was condemned by the Council of Antioch for resolving of all difficult Points that did not wound the Essentials of Religion or had relation unto the Discipline of the Church as when there was some Scruple about the Time of baptizing of Children a Synod of Sixty Six Bishops met together to decide it And so when there were some Disputes concerning the Martyrs Power to restore the Lapsed Synods were to be assembled to decide them But why do I go about to reckon up Particulars when as they are endless let this suffice in general that Synods were convened for the Regulation and Management of all Ecclesiastical Affairs within their respective Jurisdictions as Firmilian writes that in his Country the Bishops and Presbyters met together every Year to dispose those things which were committed to their charge Here they consulted about the Discipline Government and External Polity of their Churches and what means were expedient and proper for their Peace Unity and Order which by their common Consent they enacted and decreed to be observed by all the Faithful of those Churches whom they did represent He who denies this must be very little acquainted with the ancient Councils especially those which were held after the Emperors became Christians The reason why we find not more Synodical Decrees of the three first Centuries comes not from that they judicially determined none or required not the observance of them but from that either they were not careful or the Fury and Violence of the Times would
whatsoever and therefore neither an African Synod nor Antonius an African Bishop would communicate with the Legates of Novatian Nor would Cornelius joyn in Communion with Felicissimus a Schismatick of Carthage when he came to Rome but as he was excluded from Communion in his own Church so likewise was he in that of Rome 2. It was the Custom when any Bishop was Elected to send News of his Promotion to other Bishops as Cornelius did to Cyprian that so he might have their Confirmation and their future Letters to the Bishop of that Church to which he was promoted might be directed unto him as Cyprian did unto Cornelius which Custom of sending Messengers to other Churches to acquaint them of their Advancement to the Episcopal Throne was also observed by the Schismaticks and in particular by Novatian who sent Maximus a Presbyter Augendus a Deacon Machaeus and Longinus unto Cyprian to inform him of his Promotion to the See of Rome Now if any Bishop or Church did knowingly approve the Pretensions of the Schismatical Bishop they broke the Concord of the Church and became guilty of Schism as may be gathered from the beginning of an Epistle of Cyprian's to Antonius an African Bishop wherein he writes him That he had received his Letter which firmly consented to the Concord of the Sacerdotal Colledge and adhered to the Catholick Church by which he had signified that he would not communicate with Novatian but hold an Agreement with Bishop Cornelius And therefore when Legates came to Cyprian both from Cornelius and Novatian he duly weighed who was legally Elected and finding Cornelius so to be he approved his Election Directed his Congratulatory Letters unto him refused to communicate with the Schismatical Messengers of Novatian and exhorted them to quit their Schism and to submit to their lawfully elected Bishop So that in these two respects the Schism of a particular Church might influence others also involving them in the same Crime creating Quarrels and Dissentions between their respective Bishops and so dividing the Dischargers of that Honourable Office whom God had made one for as Cyprian says As there is but one Church throughout the whole World divided into many Members so there is but one Bishoprick diffused through the agreeing Number of many Bishops § 11. But now that we may conclude this Chapter the Sum of all that hath been spoken concerning Schism is that Schism in its large Sense was a Breach of the Unity of the Church Universal but in its usual and restrained Sense of a Church Particular whosoever without any just reason through Faction Pride and Envy separated from his Bishop or his Parish Church he was a true Schismatick and whosoever was thus a Schismatick if we may believe Saint Cyprian He had no longer God for his Father nor the Church for his Mother but was out of the Number of the Faithful and though he should die for the Faith yet should he never be saved Thus much then shall serve for that Query concerning the Churches Unity The next and 〈◊〉 thing that is to be enquired into is the Worship of the Primitive Church that is the Form and Method of their Publick Services of Reading Singing Preaching Praying of Baptism Confirmation and the Lord's Supper of their Fasts and Feasts of their Rites and Ceremonies and such like which I thought to have annexed to this Treatise but this being larger than I expected and the Discourse relating to the Primitive Worship being like to be almost as large I have for this and 〈◊〉 other Reasons reserved it for a particular Tract by its self which if nothing prevents may be expos'd hereafter to publick View and Observation FINIS THE SECOND PART OF THE ENQUIRY INTO THE Constitution Discipline Unity Worship OF THE Primitive Church That Flourished within the First Three Hundred Years after CHRIST Faithfully Collected out of the Extant Writings of those Ages By an Impartial Hand LONDON Printed for Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lyon and John Wyat at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1691. The Second Part of the Enquiry into the Constitution Discipline Unity and Worship of the Primitive Church CHAP. I. § 1. Of the Publick Worship of the Primitive Church § 2. In their Assemblies they began with Reading the Scriptures Other Writings Read besides the Scriptures § 3. Who Read the Scriptures from whence they were Read and how they were Read § 4. Whether there were appointed Lessons § 5. After the 〈◊〉 of the Scriptures there followed Singing of Psalms § 6. What Psalms they Sung § 7. The manner of their Singing § 8. Of Singing Men and of Church Musick § 9. To Singing of Psalms succeeded Preaching On what the Preacher discoursed How long his Sermon was § 10. The Method of their Sermons § 11. Who Preached usually the Bishop or by his Permission any other either Clergyman or Layman § 1. HAving in a former Treatise enquired into the Constitution Discipline and Unity of the Primitive Church I intend in this to enquire into the Worship thereof which naturally divides its self into these Two Parts Into the Worship its self and Into the necessary Circumstances thereof as Time and Place and such like both which I design to handle beginning first with the Worship its self wherein I shall not meddle with the Object thereof since all Protestants agree in the Adoring God alone through Jesus Christ but only speak of those Particular Acts and Services whereby in the Publick Congregations we honour and adore Almighty God such as Reading of the Scriptures Singing of Psalms Preaching Praying and the Two Sacraments every one of which I shall consider in their Order as they were performed in the Ancient Parish Churches And First § 2. When the Congregation was assembled the first Act of Divine Service which they performed was the Reading of the Holy Scriptures In our Publick Assemblies says Tertullian The Scriptures are Read Psalms Sung Sermons Preached and Prayers presented So also Just in Martyr writes that in their Religious Assemblies first of all The Writings of the Prophets and Apostles were read But besides the Sacred Scriptures there were other Writings read in several Churches viz. The Epistles and Tracts of Eminent and Pious Men such as the Book of Hermas called Pastor and the Epistle of Clemens Romanus to the Church of Corinth which were read in the publick Congregations of many Churches § 3. He that read the Scriptures was particularly destinated to this Office as a Preparative to Holy Orders as Aurelius whom Cyprian design'd for a Presbyter was first to begin with the Office of reading The Name by which this Officer was distinguished was in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Latin Lector both which signifie in English a Reader or as we now call him a Clark The Place from whence the Clark Read was an Eminency erected in the Church that so all
They had no need again to be Baptized saith he having been baptized by 〈◊〉 but only what was 〈◊〉 or lacking was performed by Peter and John which was that by Prayer and Imposition of Hands the Holy Ghost should be conferred on them which Custom as he there adds is now observed by us that those who are Baptized in the Church are offered to the Governours thereof by whose Prayer and Imposition of Hands they receive the Holy Ghost and are compleated with the Lord's Seal To this Practice also Firmilian refers that action of St. Paul in Acts 19. 5. Where on those who had been only Baptized by John's Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost by Imposition of Hands And Cyprian applies to Confirmation the Descent of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 10. 44. in miraculous 〈◊〉 and Gifts of Tongues on Cornelius and his Friends though they were not then Baptized So much now for the Reasons of Confirmation all that I shall do more is to add two or three Observations concerning it § 7. The first whereof is That Confirmation was an immediate Consequent of Baptism it was not deferred till many Years after but was presently administred as Tertullian writes As soon as we come out of the Baptismal Laver we are anointed and then we are confirmed Else if they had not been so soon confirmed they must notwithstanding their Baptism according to their Opinions as it hath been before demonstrated have continued graceless without the Adorning Gifts of the Holy Spirit a long time even as long as their Confirmation was delayed which to imagine concerning them is unreasonable and uncharitable Indeed in case of Necessity when they had neither time nor 〈◊〉 it was waved 〈◊〉 Immersion was with respect to Baptism but yet if the sick Person happened to recover he was then to be confirmed as is evident from the Case of Novatian whom 〈◊〉 accuses because that when he was restored to his Health again he was not confirmed according to the Canon of the Church But otherwise 〈◊〉 immediately or 〈◊〉 the same time followed 〈◊〉 § 8. From the former Observation there follows this that not only the Bishop but also his Presbyters or Curates did by his 〈◊〉 and in his Absence confirm For if Confirmation always succeeded Baptism then whenever Baptism was there was also Confirmation Now 〈◊〉 for Baptism we may reasonably suppose that in a Church there were some fit to be 〈◊〉 at least once a year and sometimes it might happen that either the See was 〈◊〉 or the Bishop through Persecution might be 〈◊〉 from his Flock so long a time as Cyprian was double the space and if so must no Persons have been Baptized within that time by reason of the Bishop's unavoidable Absence That seems a little hard since as was said before they esteemed Baptism and Confirmation necessary to Salvation and to deprive 〈◊〉 Souls of Salvation that died within that 〈◊〉 because they had not been confirmed by 〈◊〉 Bishop which was impossible would be too severe and uncharitable Besides that Presbyters did Baptize we have proved already and since Confirmation was done at the same time with Baptism it is very reasonable to conclude that he that did the one performed the other also But that Presbyters did confirm will appear most evidently from this very Consideration viz. That the Imposition of Hands 〈◊〉 Persons just after Baptism which we call Confirmation and the Imposition of Hands at the 〈◊〉 of Offenders which we call 〈◊〉 was one and the self same thing Confirmation and Absolution being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we make use of to distinguish the 〈◊〉 times of the Performances of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Ceremony The Thing or 〈◊〉 was not different Imposition of Hands was used both at one and 〈◊〉 other 〈◊〉 the same Mystical Signification viz. The Conferring 〈◊〉 the Holy Ghost and his Graces on that 〈◊〉 on whom 〈◊〉 were imposed Only now to distinguish the time of this 〈◊〉 of Hands whether after Baptism or at the 〈◊〉 of Offenders these two Terms of Confirmation and 〈◊〉 are used by us the former to signifie that used just after Baptism and the latter that 〈◊〉 was employed at This now viz. That Confirmation and 〈◊〉 were one and the self same thing I 〈◊〉 presently prove And then in the next 〈◊〉 I shall shew that with the Bishop and sometimes without the Bishop Presbyters did Absolve by Imposition of Hands And if these 〈◊〉 Points can be clearly manifested it will 〈◊〉 follow that Presbyters did confirm for if there was no difference between Confirmation and Absolution but only with respect to time and 〈◊〉 Presbyters at one time viz. at Absolution conferred the Holy Ghost by Imposition of Hands it is very unreasonable to deprive them of the same Power at the other time which was at Confirmation If Presbyters could at one Season bestow the Holy Spirit it is very probable that they could do the same at the other also Now as to the first Point viz. That there was no difference between Confirmation and Absolution but that they were one and the self same thing This will appear most evidently from the consideration of that famous Controversie touching the Validity of Hereticks Baptism between Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage or rather between the Churches of Europe and Africa the Sum whereof was this Stephen Bishop of Rome 〈◊〉 That those who were baptized by Hereticks and came over to the Catholick Church should be received only by Imposition of Hands Cyprian Bishop of Carthage contended that besides Imposition of Hands they should also be baptized unless that they had been before baptiz'd by the Orthodox in which Case Imposition of Hands should be esteemed sufficient Now this Imposition of Hands they sometimes term that which we 〈◊〉 Confirmation and sometimes Absolution 〈◊〉 using either of those Expressions and indifferently applying them according 〈◊〉 they pleased in one place giving it the Title of Confirmation and in another that of Absolution which that they did I shall endeavour to evince by shewing First That they called this Imposition of Hands Confirmation Secondly That they called it Absolution First I shall prove that they called it Confirmation unto which end let us consider these following 〈◊〉 Those says Cyprian which are baptized without the Church when they come unto us and 〈◊〉 the Church which is 〈◊〉 one they are to be baptized because the Imposition of Hands by Confirmation is not sufficient without Baptism for then they are fully sanctified and become the Sons of God when they are born 〈◊〉 both Sacraments 〈◊〉 as it is written 〈◊〉 a Man be born again of the Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God To the same effect says 〈◊〉 Bishop of 〈◊〉 Those 〈◊〉 greatly 〈◊〉 who affirm that they ought only to be confirmed by Imposition of Hands and so to be received since it is manifest they must be 〈◊〉 with both Sacraments in
the Catholick Church And Secundinus Bishop of Carpis determined that on Hereticks who are the Seed of Antichrist the Holy Ghost cannot be conferred by Imposition of Hands alone in Confirmation Stephen pleaded on his side That 〈◊〉 very Name of Christ was so advantagious to Faith and the Sanctification 〈◊〉 Baptism that in what place soever any one was baptized in that Name he immediately obtained the Grace of Christ. But unto this Firmilian briefly replies That if the Baptism of Hereticks because done in the Name of Christ was sufficient to purge away Sins why was not Confirmation that was performed in the Name of the same Christ sufficient to bestow the Holy 〈◊〉 And therefore it is thus eagerly argued by Cyprian Why 〈◊〉 they saith he meaning Stephen and his Party who received Hereticks by Imposition of Hands only patronize Hereticks and Schismaticks let them answer us have they the Holy Ghost or have they not If they have why then do they lay Hands on those that are baptized by them when they ceme over to us to bestow on them the Holy Ghost when they had received him before for if he was there they could confer him But if Hereticks and 〈◊〉 have not the Spirit of God and therefore we lay Hands on them in Confirmation that they may here receive what Hereticks neither have nor can give it is manifest that since they have not the Holy Ghost they cannot give remission of Sins That is since they cannot Confirmtherefore they cannot Baptize So that from these and some other Passages which to avoid tediousness I omit it is clear that both Stephen and Cyprian understood by Imposition of Hands that which we now call 〈◊〉 Secondly I now come to shew that they also termed it Absolution as will appear from these following Instances They says Cyprian meaning Stephen and his Followers urge that in what they do they follow the old Custom that was used by the Ancients when Heresies and Schisms first began when those that went over to them first were in the Church and baptized therein who when they returned again to the Church and did Penance were not forced to be baptized But this says he makes nothing against us for we now observe the very same Those who were baptized here and from us went over to the Hereticks if afterwards being sensible of their Error they return to the Church we only absolve them by the Imposition of Hands because once they were Sheep and as wandring and straying Sheep the Shepherd receives them into his Flock but if those that come from Hereticks were not first baptized in the Church they are to be baptized that they may become Sheep for there is but one Holy Water in the Church that makes Sheep But that this Imposition of Hands was the same with Absolution will most evidently appear from the Opinion or Determination of Stephen and from Cyprian's Answer thereunto Stephen's Opinion or Determination was If any shall from any Heresie come unto us let nothing be innovated or introduced besides the old Tradition which is that Hands be imposed on him as a Penitent Now unto that part of this Decree which asserts the Reception of Hereticks only by Absolution or the Imposition of Hands in Penance to be a Tradition descended down from their Predecessors Cyprian replies That he would observe it as a Divine and Holy Tradition if it were either commanded in the Gospel and the Epistles of the Apostles or contained in the Acts that those who came from Hereticks should not be baptized but only Hands imposed on them for Penance or as Penitents but that for his part he never found it either commanded or written that on an Heretick Hands should be only imposed for Penance and so he should be admitted to Communion Wherefore he on his side concludes and determins Let it therefore be observ'd and held by us that all who from any Herefie are converted to the Church be baptized with the one lawful Baptism of the Church except those who were formerly baptized in the Church who when they return are to be received by the alone Imposition of Hands after Penance into the Flock from whence they have strayed So that these Instances do as clearly prove that they meant by their Imposition of Hands Absolution as the former Instances do that they meant Confirmation and both of them together plainly shew and evidence Confirmation and Absolution to be the very self-same thing for since they promiscuously used and indifferently applyed these Terms and that very thing which in some Places they express by Confirmation in others they call Absolution it necessarily follows that there can be no essential or specifical difference between them but that they are of a like numerical Identity or Sameness But Secondly I now come in the next place to demonstrate that together with the Bishop and sometimes without the Bishop Presbyters did absolve by Imposition of Hands That they did it together with the Bishop several places of Cyprian abundantly prove Offenders saith he Receive the right of Communion by the Imposition of Hands of the Bishop and of his Clergy And No Criminal can be admitted to Communion unless the Bishop and Clergy have imposed Hands on him And that some times they did it without the Bishop always understanding his leave and permission is apparent from the Example of Serapion who being out of the Churches Peace and approaching the hour of Dissolution sent for one of the Presbyters to Absolve him which the Presbyter did according to the Order of the Bishop who had before given his Permission unto the Presbyters to absolve those who were in danger of Death And as the Bishop of Alexandria gave his Presbyters this Power so likewise did Cyprian Bishop of Carthage who when he was in Exile order'd his Clergy to confess and absolve by Imposition of Hands those who were in danger of Death And If any were in such condition they should not expect his Presence but betake themselves to the first Presbyter they could find who should receive their Confession and absolve them by Imposition of Hands So that it is evident that Presbyters even without the Bishop did absolve Offenders and formally receive them into the Churches Peace by Imposition of Hands Now then If the Imposition of Hands on Persons just after Baptism and the Imposition of Hands at the Restitution of Offenders was one and the self-same thing and if Presbyters had Power and Authority to perform the latter I see no reason why we should abridge them of the former both the one and the other was Confirmation and if Presbyters could confirm at one time why should we doubt of their Right and Ability to perform it another time If it was lawful for them to impose Hands on one occasion it was as lawful for them to do it on another § 9. From the precedent Observation of the Identity
we have Love one to another We may talk what we please of Religion and profess what we list the Word of God is plain that whosoever hath not Love and Charity is no Christian but to allude to that of Christ John 10. 1. He is a Thief and a Robber he hath not the Spirit of God abiding and dwelling in him for The Fruit of the Spirit is Love Joy Peace Long suffering Gentleness Goodness Faith Meekness Temperance And The Wisdom from above is peaceable gentle and easie to be entreated full of mercy and good Fruit. So that the very Soul and Spirit of Christianity consists in Unity Love and Amity Wherefore let my Intreaties be prevalent with you to endeavour for a mutual Compliance and Comprehension as you have any Regard to the Honour of God and the Credit of Religion as you would hinder the Growth of Damnable Errors and abominable Debaucheries and do what in you lies to prevent the Ruin and Damnation of Multitudes of poor Souls nay as you would secure your own Salvation and be able with Confidence to appear at the dreadful and impartial day of Judgment let me conjure you in the Name of God to love one another with a pure Heart forvently to follow after Righteousness Godliness Faith Love Patience Meekness to forget and pardon all former Injuries and Affronts doing nothing for the time to come through Strife or Vain-Glory but in lowliness of Mind each esteeming others better than themselves doing all things without Murmurings or Disputings avoiding all foolish and unlearned Questions knowing that they do but gender Strifes behaving your selves like the Servants of the Lord who must not strive but be gentle unto all Men apt to teach patient mutually complying with each other doing all things unto Edification labouring after Peace and Unity that so we may at length with one mind and one mouth glorifie God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. And for the Accomplishment of this blessed and glorious Design let us above all things avoid Pride and Vain-glory which as it is to be feared hath had no small share both in the causing and increasing of our Divisions We have been so stiff and self-conceited and stood so much upon the pitiful Punctilio's of Honour that we have refused to condescend to one another or to join in a way of Comprehension or mutual Relaxation which seems to be the only way left for Union and Agreement if ever we hope or intend to have it Wherefore let me address my self unto you in the Words of the Reverend and Moderate Bishop Hall Men Brethren and Fathers help for Gods sake put to your Hands to the Quenching of this common Flame the one side by Humility and Obedience the other by Compassion both by Prayers and Tears And as he so let me beg for Peace as for Life by your Filial Piety to the Church of God whose Ruins follow upon our Divisions by your Love of God's Truth by the Graces of that one blessed Spirit whereby we are all informed and quickened by the precious Blood of that Son of God which was shed for our Redemption be inclined to Peace and Love and though our Brains be different yet let our Hearts be one Let us all endeavonr by a Compliance and a Comprehension to promote Love and Charity Peace and Unity that so being Children of Peace and obedient Subjects of the Prince of Peace the God of Peace may Bless us with Peace Quiet and Serenity here and at the end of our Days receive us into his Eternal Peace and everlasting Rest which God of his infinite Mercy grant may be the Portion of us all through the Merits of his only Son our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen and Amen POSTCRIPT BEcause some Practises and Customs mentioned in the precedent Treatise were not from the first Plantation of Christianity but were afterwards introduced and others might not be universal but only followed in some particular Churches it will not be unnecessary to add a Table of the Names Age and Country of those Fathers and of their Contemporaries who have been cited by us that so we may guess at the time when such Customs were brought in and know the Places where they were chiefly practised Names Countries Age. Several Synods held in Africa between Anno Christi 250 260. Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem Anno 228 Anonymus apud Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 16. p. 182. Lesser Asia 170 Anicetus Bishop of Rome 154 The Synodical Letter of the Council of Antioch held Anno 265 Apollinaris Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Lesser Asia 170 Apollonius  200 Asturius Palastina 260 Aurelius Carthage 〈◊〉 Artemon  196 Babylas Bishop of Antioch 246 Saint Barnabas  50 Basilides the Heretick Alexandria 134 Basilides a Bishop in Spain 258 Celerinus Carthage 253 Letters of the Clergy of Rome to the Clergy of Carthage writ between Anno 250 〈◊〉 Clemens Bishop of Rome 70 Clemens of Alexandria 204 Cornelius Bishop of Rome 252 Crescens Bishop of Certa in Africa 258 Cyprian Bishop of Carthage 250 Dionysius Bishop of Corinth 172 Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria 260 Eusebius a Deacon of Alexandria 259 Fabianus Bishop of Rome Anno 236 Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea in Cap padoeia 250 Fortunatus a Schismatic in Africa 255 Fortunatus Bishop of Thucabori in Africa 258 Gregory Bishop of Neoearsarea 250 Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 109 Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons 184 Justin Martyr Samaria 155 Lucius Bishop of Thebeste in Africa 258 Names Countries Age. A Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne to the Churches of Asia Anno 177 Minucius Felix Rome 230 Martialis a Bishop in Spain 258 Natalis Rome 210 Nemesianus Bishop of Thubunic in Africa 258 Novatian Rome 252 Origen a Presbyter of Alexandria 230 Palmas Bishop of Amastris in Pontus 196 Paulus Samosatenus Bp. of Antioch 265 Plinius an Heathen  110 Polycarpus Bishop of Smirna 140 Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus 196 Pontius a Deacon of Carthage 260 Privatus Bishop of Lambese in Africa 254 Sabinus Bishop of Emerita in Spain 258 Sedatus Bishop of Turbo in Africa 258 Secundinus Bishop of Carpis in Africa 258 An Epistle of the Church of Smirna to the Church of Philomilium 168 Stephen Bishop of Rome 258 Tatianus Syria 180 Tertullian a Presbyter of Carthage 200 Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea in Palaestina 228 Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea in Palaestina 196 Victor Bishop of Rome 196 Victorinus Petavionensis Hungary 290 Vincentius Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Africa 258 Zoticus Bishop of Comane in Lesser Asia 168 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stromat lib. 2. p. 263. 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. cap. 2. p. 34. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 1. cap. 3. p. 36. 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Euseb lib. 6. c. 25. p. 226. 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apud Eus. l. 4. c. 15. p. 131. 5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epistad Herm. apud Euseb.
Authors mentioned in this Treatise together with those Editions that I have made use of are as follow S. Ignatii Epistolae Graeco-Latin Quarto Edit Isaci Vossii Amstelodam 1646. S. Barnabae Epistola Catholica Edit ad Calcem S. Ignatii Quarto Amstelodam 1646. S. Clementis Romani Epistolae Graeco-Latin Quaerto Edit Patricii Junii Oxonii 1633. S. Irenaei Opera Folio Edit Nic. Galasii Genevae 1580. S. Justini Martyris Opera Graeco-Latin Folio Coloniae 1686. Epistola Plinii Secundi Trojano Imperatori de Christianis in fronte Operum Justin. Martyr Colon. 1686. Clementis Alexandrini Opera Folio Edit Heinsii Lugdun Batav 1616. Tertulliani Opera Folio Edit Paris 1580. Novatiani De Trinitate De Cibis Judaicis inter Opera Tertulliani Edit Paris 1580. Cypriani Opera Folio Edit Sim. Goulart apud Johan le Preux 1593. Vita Cypriani per Pontium ejus Diaconum In fronte Oper. Cyprian Edit Goulart 1593. Fragmentum Victorini Petavionensis De Fabrica Mundi pag. 103 104. Histor. literar Dr. S. Cave Edit Folio Londini 1688. Minucii Felices Octavius Edit ad Calcem Tertullian Apolog. per Desiderium Heraldum Quarto Paris 1613. Origenis Commentaria omnia quae Graece Reperiuntur Edit de Huetii 2 Vol. Folio Rothomagi 1668. Originis contra Celsum Libri Octo ejusdem Philocalia Graeco-Latin Edit Quarto per Gulielm Spencer Cantabrigiae 1677. Originis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seu De Oratione Graeco-Latin Octavo Oxonii 1685. As for those other Works of Origen which are extant only in Latin I have made no use at all of those of Ruffin's Translation except his Creed since in them we know not which we read whether Origen or Ruffin and as for those which were translated by more faithful Hands I have used the Editions of Merlin or Erasmus without nominating the Page Eusebii Pamphili Ecclesiastica Historia Graeco-Latin Folio Edit Henric. Vales. Paris 1659. I have read only the Seven first Books of Eusebius's History because the three others go beyond my limited Time As for the Writings of S. Gregory of Neocaesarea they are but few and from thence I have taken nothing but his Creed so that there is no need to mention any Edition of his Works The same I may say also of the short Epistle of Polycarp which I have cited but once and therein have used the Version of Dr. Cave extant in his Apostolici pag. 127. There are vet some other Fathers whose remaining Tracts I have read as Theophilus Antiochenus Athenagoras c. who are not cited in this 〈◊〉 because I have found nothing in them 〈◊〉 to my Design An Enquiry into the Constitution Discipline Unity and Worship of the Primitive Church CHAP. I. § 1. The various Significations of the word Church § 2. A particular Church the chief Subject of the ensuing Discourse The constituent parts thereof Two-fold viz. Clergy and Laity § 3. Each of these had their particular Functions and both their joint Offices Three things on which a great part of the following Discourse depends proposed to be handled viz. The Peculiar Acts of the Clergy The Peculiar Acts of the Laity and the Joint Acts of them both § 4. The Peculiar Acts of the Clergy propounded to be discussed according to their several Orders First of the Bishops A View of the World as it was in a state of Heathenism at the first Preaching of Christianity necessary to be consider'd Where the Apostles planted Churches they appointed the first Converts to be Bishops thereof § 5. But one Bishop in a Church The Orthodoxness of the Faith proved from the Succession of the Bishops The Titles and Relation of the Bishop to his Flock § 1. THAT we may give the more clear and distinct Answer to this Important Query it is necessary that we first examin the Primitive Notion of the Word Church upon the due apprehension of which depends the Right Understanding of a great Part of our following Discourse This word Church as in our modern acceptation so also in the Writings of the Fathers is equivocal having different Significations according to the different Subjects to which it is applyed I shall not here concern my self about the Derivation of the Word or its Original Use amongst the Heathens from whom it was translated into the Christian Church but only take notice of its various Uses amongst the ancient Christians which were many as 1. It is very often to be understood of the Church Vniversal that is of all those who throughout the face of the whole Earth professed Faith in Christ and acknowledged him to be the Saviour of Mankind This Irenaeus calls The Church dispersed thro' the whole World to the ends of the Earth and The Church scattered in the whole World And Origen calls it The Church of God under Heaven This is that which they called the Catholick Church for Catholick signifies the same as Vniversal Thus Polycarp when he was seized by his Murderers prayed for The Catholick Church throughout the World And in this Sense Dionysius Alexandrinus calls the persecuting Emperour Macrianus A Warrior against the Catholick Church of God II. The word Church is frequently to be understood of a particular Church that is of a Company of Believers who at one time in one and the same place did associate themselves together and concur in the Participation of all the Institutions and Ordinances of Jesus Christ with their proper Pastors and Ministers Thus Irenaeus mentions that Church which is in any place And so Dionysius Alexandrinus writes that when he was banished to Cephro in Lybia there came so many Christians unto him that even there he had a Church Tertullian thinks that Three were sufficient to make a Church In this sense we must understand the Church of Rome the Church of Smyrna the Church of Antioch the Church of Athens the Church of Alexandria or the Church in any other such place whatsoever that is a Congregation of Christians assembling all together for Religious Exercises at Rome Antioch Smirna Athens Alexandria or such like places III. The word Church is sometimes used for the Place where a particular Church or Congregation met for the Celebration of Divine Service Thus Paulus Samosatenus the Heretical Bishop of Antioch ordered certain Women to stand in the middle of the Church and fing Psalms in his Praise So Clemens Alexandrinui adviseth that Men and Women should with all Modesty and Humility enter into the Church So the Clergy of the Church of Rome in their Letter to Cyprian concerning the Restitution of the Lapsed give as their advice That they should only come to the Threshold of the Church-door but not go over it And in this Sense is the Word frequently to be understood in Tertullian Origen and others to recite whose Testimonies at large would be both tedious and needless IV. I find the Word Church once used by Cyprian for
there to read of the Bishops of the Parish of Alexandria of the Parish of Ephesus of the Parish of Corinth of the Parish of Athens of the Parish of Carthage and so of the Bishops of the Parishes of several other Churches by that Term denoting the very same that we now call a Parish viz. a competent number of Christians dwelling near together having one Bishop Pastor or Minister set over them with whom they all met at one time to worship and serve God This may be evinc'd from the intent of the Word it self which signifies a Dwelling one by another as Neighbours do or an Habitation in one and the same place as the Church of Smirna writ to the Church that Parished in Philomelium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Epistle of Clemens Romanus is to the Church of God Parishing at Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is dwelling or living in Philomilium and Corinth so that a Parish is the same with a Particular Church or a single Congregation which is yet more evident from a Passage in the Differtations of Apollonius against Alexander a Cataphrygian Heretick wherein it is said That because that Heretick had been a Robber therefore that Parish to which he belonged would not receive him that is that particular Church or Congregation to which he appertained excluded him from Communion because of his Depredations and Robberies so that a Parish and a Particular Church are Synonimous Terms signifying one and the same thing and consequently a Bishop having but one Parish under his Jurisdiction could extend his Government no farther than one single Congregation because a single Congregation and a Parish were all one of the same Bulk and Magnitude § 2. But that the Bishops Diocess exceeded not the Bounds of a modern Parish and was the same as in Name so also in Thing will appear from these following Observations as 1. All the People of a Diocess did every Sunday meet all together in one place to celebrate Divine Service Thus saith Justin Martyr On Sunday all Assemble together in one Place where the Bishop preaches and prays for as Ignatius writes Where the Bishop is there the People must be and there is a necessity that we do nothing without the Bishop since it is unlawful to do any thing without him for where the Pastour is there the 〈◊〉 ought to follow wherefore as Christ did nothing without the Father so do you nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters but assemble into the same place that you may have one Prayer one Supplication one Mind and one Hope for if the Prayer of one or two have so great a force how much more prevalent must that be which is made by the Bishop and the whole Church He then that doth not assemble together is proud and hath condemned himself For it is written God resisteth the proud Let us not therefore resist the Bishop that we may be subject to God So that these Passages clearly prove That all the Members of the Bishops Church assembled together in one place to send up their common Prayers to the Throne of Grace and to discharge those other Religious Duties which were incumbent on them which convincingly evidences the Bishops Church to be no bigger than our Parishes for if it had been bigger it would have been impossible that the Members thereof should have constantly assembled together in one place as we see here they did 2. The Bishop had but one Altar or Communion Table in his whole Diocess at which his whole Flock received the Sacrament from him There is but one Altar says Ignatius as there is but one Bishop At this Altar the Bishop administred the Sacrament to his whole Flock at one time So writes Cyprian We celebrate the Sacrament the whole Brotherhood being present And thus it was in Justin Martyr's Days The Bishop's whole Diocess met together on Sunday when the Bishop gave them the Eucharist and if any were absent he sent it to them by the Deacons Certainly that Diocess could not be large where all usually communicated at one time and the Deacons carried about the Consecrated Eucharist to those that were absent which would have been an endless and painful Task for the Deacons had their Bishoprick contained more Christians in it than one Congregation would have held Tertullian writes that in his Time and Country the Christians received the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper from the hands of the Bishop alone Now in those days and places they communicated at least three times a week viz. Wednesdays Fridays and Lord's Days which had been impossible to have been done if the Bishop had had Inspection over more than one Congregation as is obvious to every ones Reason for the Bishop being Finite and Corporeal as well as others could not be present in many places at once but must be confined to one determinated fixed place in which alone he could administer and dispense the Eucharist And for this Reason it is that Ignatius exhorts the Philadelphians to use the one 〈◊〉 that is not to leave the Bishop and communicate elsewhere but to partake of that single Eucharist which was administred by him For as he proceeds to say in the same place There is but one Body of our Lord Jesus Christ one Cup one Altar and one Bishop As there was but one Bishop in a Church so there was but one Altar a Bishop and an Altar being Correlates So that to set up another Altar was a Periphrasis of a Schismatick or of one that causelesly separated from his lawful Bishop and sat up another which was that they called Schism as we shall shew in its proper place Thus Cyprian describes a Schismatick as one that contemns his Bishop leaves the Ministers of God and dares to set up another Altar And particularly he brands Novatian as such an one because he erected a profane Altar that is an Altar in opposition to the Altar of Cornelius his lawful Bishop For as he saith in another place No man can regularly constitute a new Bishop or erect a new Altar besides the one Bishop and the one Altar For which Reason he calls the Altar that is erected by Schismaticks against the One Altar of their lawful Bishops A profane Altar Which agrees with that of Ignatius that He that is within the Altar is pure but he that does any thing without the Bishops Priests and Deacons is impure and as he says in another place Whosoever is without the Altar wants the Bread of God 3. The other Sacrament of Baptism was generally administred by the Bishops alone within their Respective Diocesses So saith Tertullian Before the Bishop we renounce the Devil and the World For as Cyprian says The Bishops ought only to baptize And to the same effect writes Fortunatus Bishop of Thucabori that our Lord Jesus Christ
gave unto the Bishops the power of Baptizing So that the Bishops did ordinarily baptize all the Persons that were baptized in their Diocesses and if so it is not probable I may say possible that their Diocesses were extended beyond the bulk of single Congregations 4. The Churches Charity was Deposited with the Bishop who as Justin Martyr reports was the common Curator and Overseer of all the Orphans Widows Diseased Strangers Imprisoned and in a word of all those that were needy and indigent To this charitable Office Ignatius adviseth Polycarpus but of that Advice more shall be spoken in another place only let us here observe That that Diocess could not be very large where the Bishop personally relieved and succoured all the Poor and Indigent therein 5. All the People of a Diocess were present at Church Censures as Origen describes an Offender as appearing before the whole Church So Clemens Romanus calls the Censures of the Church the things commanded by the multitude And so the two offending Subdeacons and Acolyth at Carthage were to be tried before the whole 6. No Offenders were restored again to the Churches Peace without the knowledge and consent of the whole Diocess So Cyprian writes that before they were re-admitted to Communion they were to plead their Cause before all the People And it was ordained by an African Synod that except in danger of Death or an instantaneous Persecution none should be received into the Churches Peace without the knowledge and consent of the People 7. When the Bishop of a Church was dead all the People of that Church met together in one Place to chuse a new Bishop So Sabinus was elected Bishop of Emerita by the 〈◊〉 of all the Brotherhood which was also the custom throughout all Africa for the Bishop to be chosen in the Presence of the People And so Fabianus was chosen to be Bishop of Rome by all the Brethren who were met together in one place for that very end 8. At the Ordinations of the Clergy the whole Body of the People were present So an African Synod held Anno 258 determined That the Ordination of Ministers ought to be done with the knowledge and in the Presence of the People that the People being present either the Crimes of the wicked may be detected or the Merits of the good declared and so the Ordination may be Just and Lawful being approved by the Suffrage and Judgment of all And Bishop Cyprian writes from his Exile to all the People of his Diocess that it had been his constant Practice in all Ordinations to consult their Opinions and by their common Counsels to weigh the manners and merits of every one Therein imitating the Example of the Apostles and Apostolick Men who Ordained none but with the Approbation of the whole Church 9. Publick Letters from one Church to another were read before the whole Diocess Thus Cornelius Bishop of Rome whatever Letters he received from Foreign Churches he always read them to his most holy and numerous People And without doubt when Firmilian writ to all the Parish of Antioch they could all assemble together to read his Letter and return an Answer to it since we find that in those days one whole Church writ to another whole Church as the Church of Rome writ to the Church of Corinth And Cyprian and his whole Flock sent gratulatory Letters to Pope Lucius upon his return from Exile Lastly The whole Diocess of the Bishop did meet all together to manage Church-Affairs Thus when the Schism of Felicissimus in the Bishoprick of Carthage was to be debated It was to be done according to the will of the People and by the consent of the Laity And when there were some hot Disputes about the Restitution of the Lapsed the said Cyprian promised his whole Diocess that all those things should be examined before them and be judged by them And so also when they were to send a Messenger to any Foreign Church all the People could meet together to chuse that Messenger as they could in the Church of Philadelphia Now put all these Observations together and duly consider whether they do not prove the Primitive Parishes to be no larger than our modern ones are that is that they had no more Believers or Christians in them than there are now in ours I do not say that the Ancient Bishopricks had no larger Territories or no greater space of Ground than our Parishes have On the contrary it is very probable that many of them had much more since in those early days of Christianity in many places the Faithful might be so few as that for twenty or thirty Miles round they might associate together under one Bishop and make up but one Church and that a small one too But this I fay that how large soever their Local Extent was their Members made but one single Congregation and had no more Christians in it than our Parishes now have for that Diocess cannot possibly be more than one single Congregation where all the People met together at one time Prayed together Received the Sacrament together assisted at Church Censures together and dispatched Church Affairs together and yet the Members of the Primitive Diocesses did all this together as the preceding Observations evidently declare so that I might stop here and add no 〈◊〉 Proofs to that which hath been already so clearly proved § 3. But yet that we may more clearly illustrate this Point we shall demonstrate it by another method viz. By shewing the real Bulk and Size of those Bishopricks concerning whom we have any Notices remaining on ancient Records and manifest that the very largest of them were no greater than our particular Congregations are And for the Proof of this we shall quote the Writings of St. Ignatius in whose genuine Epistles there is such an account of the Bishopricks of Smirna Ephesus Magnesia Philadelphia and Trallium as manifestly evidences them to be but so many single Congregations As for the Diocess of Smirna its extent could not be very large since nothing of Church-Affairs was done there without the Bishop he baptized and administred the Eucharist and none else could do it within his Cure without his permission wherever he was his whole Flock followed him which they might without any Inconveniency do since they frequently assembled together as Ignatius advised Polycarp the Bishop of this Church To convene his Diocess to chuse a faithful honest Man to send a Messenger into Syria So that the Bishop of this Church could know his whole Flock personally by their Names carrying himself respectfully and charitably to all with all meekness and humility towards Serving-men and Serving-maids and charitably taking care of the Widows within his Diocess permitting nothing to be done there without his Privity Insomuch that none were married without his previous advice
usually meet tho' on some Solemn Occasions they would still all assemble in one Church with their one Bishop That for this Reason these separate Congregations were introduced at Alexandria seems evident enough because Dyonisius Alexandrinus saith that these distinct Congregations were only in the remotest Suburbs and the Christians hereof were not as yet arrived to those great numbers but that seventy years after they could meet all together in one and the same place as might be proved from that forementioned place of Athanasius So that these distinct Congregations were only for the Conveniency and Ease of those who lived at a great distance from the Bishop's Church being introduced in the third Century and peculiar to the Bishoprick of Alexandria All other Bishopricks confining themselves within their Primitive Bounds of a single Congregation as we have before proved the largest of them did even Antioch Rome and Carthage § 12. If then a Bishoprick was but a single Congregation it is no marvel that we find Bishops not only in Cities but in Country Villages there being a Bishop constituted where-ever there were Believers enough to form a competent Congregation For says Clemens Romanus the Apostles going forth and preaching both in Country and City constituted Bishops and Deacons there Much to which purpose Cyprian says That Bishops were ordained throughout all Provinces and Cities Hence in the Encyclycal Epistle of the Synod of Antioch it is said That Paulus Samosatenus had many Flatterers amongst the adjacent City and Country Bishops of this sort of Country-Bishops was Zoticus Bishop of the Village of Comane And we may reasonably believe That many of those Bishops who in the Year 258 were assembled at Carthage to the number of fourscore and seven had no other than obscure Villages for their Seats since we find not the least notice of them in Ptolomy or any of the old Geographers § 13. But let the Bishops Seats have been in any place whatever their Limits as hath been proved exceeded not those of our Modern Parishes I do not here mean as was said before that the Territory of some of them was no larger no I readily grant that for it is very probable that in those places where there were but few Believers the Christians for several Miles round met all 〈◊〉 at the greatest place within that Compass where probably there were most Christians whence both the Church and its Bishop took their Denomination from that Place where they so assembled But this is what I mean that there were no more Christians in that Bishoprick than there are now in our ordinary Parishes and that the Believers of that whole Territory met altogether with their Bishop for the Performance of Religious Services Thus it was in the Age and Country of Justin Martyr who describing their solemn Assemblies writes That on Sunday all the Inhabitants both of City and Country met together where the Lector read some Portions of the Holy Scriptures and the Bishop preached unto them administred the Eucharist and sent by the Deacons part of the Consecrated Elements to those that were absent So that the Inhabitants both of City and Country assembled all at the Bishop's Church hearing him and communicating with him following herein the Exhortation of Saint Ignatius to the Magnesians Let nothing saith he be in you that may divide you but be united to the Bishop and those that preside over you As therefore our Lord Jesus Christ did nothing without his Father neither by himself nor his Apostles so do you nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters but assemble into one Place and have one Prayer one Supplication one Mind and one Hope CHAP. III. § 1. What the Bishop's Office was § 2. Always Resident on his Cure § 3. How the Bishop was Chosen Elected or Presented by the Majority of the Parish § 4. Approved by the neighbouring Bishops § 5. Installed by Imposition of Hands How many Bishops necessary to this Installment § 6. When a Bishop was promoted he certified it to other Bishops § 7. A brief Recapitulation of the peculiar Acts of the Bishop § 1. THE Bishop's Flock having been so largely discussed it will now be necessary to speak something of the Bishop's Duty towards them and of the several Particulars of his honourable Office I shall not here be tedious since about this there is no great difference only briefly enumerate the several Actions belonging to his Charge In brief therefore the particular Acts of his Function were such as these viz. Preaching of the Word Praying with his People administring the two Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper taking care of the Poor Ordaining of Ministers Governing his Flock Excommunicating of Offenders Absolving of Penitents and in a word whatever Acts can be comprised under those three General Heads of Preaching Worship and Government were parts of the Bishop's Function and Office I have but just named these things because they are not much controverted and my Design leads me chiefly to the Consideration of those matters which have been unhappily disputed amongst us § 2. To the constant Discharge of those forementioned Actions did the Primitive Bishops sedulously apply themselves continually preaching unto their People praying with them and watching over them and to that end residing always with them which Incumbency or Residency on their Parishes was deem'd so necessary that Cyprian enumerating the Sins that brought the Wrath of God upon the Churches in that bloody Persecution of Decius mentions the Bishops Non-Residencies as one Their leaving their Rectories and deserting their Flocks and wandring about the Country to hunt after Worldly Gain and Advantage And therefore the said Cyprian writing to the Roman Consessors who were inveigled into the Schism of Novatian tells them that since he could not leave his Church and come in Person unto them therefore by his Letters he most earnestly exhorted them to quit that 〈◊〉 Faction so that he look'd on his Obligation of Residency at his Church to be so binding as that in no Case almost could he warrant the leaving of it which Determination of his might be the more fix'd and peremptory because that not long before he was so severely tax'd by the Roman Clergy and by many of his own Parish for departing from them for a while though it was to avoid the Fury of his Persecutors who had already proscribed him and would have executed him as a Malesactor had he not by that Recess from his Church escaped their murderous Hand So that the Primitive Apostolick Bishops constantly resided with their Flocks conscientiously applying themselves with the utmost Diligence and Industry to the Promotion of the Spiritual Welfare of those that were committed to their trust employing themselves in all Acts of Piety and Offices of Charity so leading a laborious and mortified Life till either a natural or a violent Death
he makes concerning it in one of his Commentaries How is it possible saith he that a Question either in Ethicks Physicks or Divinity should be understood as it ought without Logick You shall hear no Absurdity from those who are skill'd in Logick and diligently search out the signification of words whereas many times thro' our ignorance in Logick we greatly err not distinguishing Homonymies Amphibolies the different Vsages Properties and Distinction of Words as some from the Ignorance of the Homonymy of the word World have sell into wicked Opinions touching its Maker not diseerning what that signifies in 1 John 5. 19. The World lies in wickedness where they understanding by the World the frame of Heaven and Earth and all Creatures therein blaspheme the Creator thereof by affirming that the Sun Moon and Stars which move in so exact an Order lie in Wickedness So also thro' the same Ignorance they know not the true Sense of that Text in 1 John 30. This is the Lamb of God which taketh away the Sins of the World Neither of that in 2 Cor. 5. 19. God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself Wherefore if we would not err about the true sense of the Holy Scripture it is necessary that we understand Logick which art of Logick the foresaid Father thinks is recommended to us by Solomon in Prov. 10. 17. He that refuseth Reproof or Logick as he rendreth it erreth Clemens Alexandrinus also stifly asserts the Utility of Humane Learning where he says That it is profitable to Christianity for the clear and distinct Demonstrations of its Doctrine 1 in that it helps us to the more evident understanding of the Truth And in particular for Logick he gives it high Encomiums as that it is a hedge to defend the Truth from being prod down by Sophisters that it gives us great light duly to understand the Holy Scriptures that it is necessary to confute the Sophisms of Hereticks And in general for all sorts of Learning he tells us that it keeps the way of Life that we be not deceived or circumvented by those that endeavour to draw us into the way of sin So that he thinks Philosophy and the Liberal Arts came down from Heaven unto Men. But should I produce all the Passages in this Father concerning the Utility and Excellency of Humane Learning I must transcribe several Pages in Folio which if the Reader has a Curiosity to view he may especially take notice of these Places Stromat lib. 1. Pag. 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 and Stromat lib. 6. Pag. 471 472 473 474 475 476 477. § 10. It is true there were some in those days of whom Clemens 〈◊〉 complains who dreaded Philosophy lest it should deceive them as much as Children did Hobgoblins Because they saw by too lamentable experience that many Learned Mens Brains were so charmed or intoxicated with Philosophical Notions as that they laboured to transform them into Christian Verities and so thereby became Authors of most pestilent and damnable Heresies which is particularly observed by Tertullian with respect to the Hereticks of his time who in this account calls the Philosophers the Patriarchs of Hereticks Therefore they accused Philosophy it self as the Production of some evil Inventor introduced into the World for the ruin and destruction of Mankind Even Tertullian himself for this reason had an extream Pique against Philosophy and violently decry'd it especially Logick as inconsistent with true Christianity as may be seen at large in his Book De Prescriptione adversus Haereticos p. 70 71 But to this Objection Clemens Alexandrinus replies that if any Man had been deceived and misled by Philosophy that that proceeded not from Philosophy but from the wickedness of his Nature for whosoever has Wisdom enough to use it he is able thereby to make a larger and a more demonstrative Defence of the Faith than others And concerning Logick in particular he tells them that as for Eristick jangling Logick for impertinent and contentious Sophisms which he elegently calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Shadows of Reason he disliked it as much as they and frequently inveighs against it But as for the 〈◊〉 substantial part of it he could not but deem it profitable and advantagious since it helps us to find out the Truth enables us the better to understand the Scriptures and shews us how to refel the Sophisms and cunning arguments of the Hereticks But besides this sort of Objectors there were others of whom Clemens Alexandrinus speaks who condemned Learning on this account because it was humane unto whom that Father answers that was most unreasonable that Philosophy only should be condemned on this account and that the meanest Arts besides even those of a Smith and Shipwright which are as much Humane should be commended and approved that they did not rest here and go no farther but having got what was useful and profitable from it they ascended higher unto the true Philosophy making this humane Philosophy a Guide unto or a Preparatory for the true Philosophy These were the Sentiments of this Learned Father touching the Utility and Excellency of Humane Learning with respect to the Interpretation of Scripture the finding out and defending of the true Faith and Doctrine and such like things which were the very Heart and Soul of the Presbyters Function and Employ from whence we may rationally collect that it was needful amiable and profitable in a Presbyter I do not say that it was absolutely necessary for it is apparent that a great part of the ancient Presbyters were not skill'd in it but I say that it was very useful and advantageous and they prized and esteemed those Presbyters who were vers'd in it especially those of them who were Arch-Presbyters or Bishops who if possible were to be well read in those parts of Learning which were proper to confirm the Articles of Christianity and to confute the Enemies thereof This is plainly insinuated by Origen when he says That the Holy Scriptures exhort us to learn Logick in that place where it is said by Solomon He that refuseth reproof or Logick as he understandeth it erreth and that therefore he that instructeth others the Greek Word more particularly denotes the Bishop ought to be able to convince Gain-sayers § 11. Upon this Examination of the Candidates for the Ministry and their Approbation by the Presbytery the next thing that follow'd was their being declared capable of their desired Function to which they were very seldom presently advanced but first gave a Specimen of their Abilities in their discharge of other inferiour Ecclesiastick Offices and so proceeded by degrees to the Supreme Function of all as Cornelius Bishop of Rome did not presently leap into his Office but passing thro' all the Ecclesiastical Employments gradually ascended thereunto And as Aurelius a Member of the Church of Carthage
the Ordinary and less mysterious Truths of the Gospel If they behaved themselves well in this Rank then they were advanced to the Superior Rank of the Perfecti or Perfect as Tertullian calls them who stayed not only at the Lessons and Sermons but also at the Prayers which were the conclusion of the first Service and in a little time were baptized and tarried with the Faithful at the Celebration of the Eueharist or the Second Service This was the manner of 〈◊〉 amongst the Ancients none in those days were hastily advanced to the higher Forms of Christianity but according to their Knowledge and Merit gradually arrived thereunto being first instructed at home then admitted to the Didactick part of the Publick and then to the Supplicative part thereof It was the wicked Policy of the Hereticks Indifferently to pray and hear with all making no difference between the Faithful or the Catechumens But the True Church distinguished and permitted not the Catechumens to enjoy the Priviledges of the Faithful till they had in a Sense merited them which was when thro' a considerable time of Trial they had evidenced the sineerity of their Hearts by the Sanctity and Purity of their Lives and then as Origen saith we initiate them in our Mysteries when they have made a Proficiency in Holiness and according to the utmost of their power have reformed their Conversations When they had changed their Manners and rectified their Irregular Carriages then they were washed with the Water of Baptism and not before for as Tertullian saith We are not baptized that we may ceafe to sin but because we have already ceased As soon as they were baptized they commenced Members of the Church Universal and of that Particular Church wherein they were so baptized and became actual Sharers and Exerters of all the Priviledges and Powers of the Faithful § 2. Now what the distinct and separate Powers of the Faithful were must be next considered several of them to make the Discourse under the former Head complete we 〈◊〉 there as their Election and choice of their Bishops their Attestation to those that were Ordained and such like which will be unnecessary and tedious to repeat here and others of them cannot be well separated from their Conjunct Acts with the Clergy but must with them be discoursed of in the next Head so that there will be little or nothing to say here of their Discretive and Particular Acts save that as they had Power to elect their Bishops so if their Bishops proved afterwards scandalous and grosly wicked in Life or at least Heretical in Doctrine and Apostates from the Faith they had Power to depose them and to chuse others in their rooms This I must be forced also to mention in another place so that for the Proof of it I shall urge only the Case of Martialis and Basilides two Spanish Bishops who for Apostacy and Idolatry were deserted by their Parishes who Elected Felix and Sabinus Bishops in their steads After this Deposition Martialis and Basilides claim'd the Exercise of their Episcopal Authority but their Parishes denied it to them and that they might not seem to act by a Power which belonged not unto them they sent to several Bishops in Africa to know their Judgment thereupon who being convened in a Synod Anno 258 whereof Cyprian was President approved and commended their Proceedings assuring them That it was according to the Divine Law which was express that none but those that were holy and blameless should approach God's Altar That if they had continued to have communicated with their Profane Bishops they would have been Accessaries to their Guilt and Villany and would have contradicted those Examples and Commands in Scripture which oblige a People to separate from their wicked and ungodly Ministers That they had not acted irregularly in what they had done since as the People had the chief Power of choosing worthy Bishops so also of refusing those that were unworthy And many other such like Passages are to be found in that Synodical Epistle which 〈◊〉 assert the Peoples Power to depose a wicked and Scandalous Bishop But however tho' the People had such a Power appertaining to them yet being subject to be guided by Giddiness Envy or Pride where Churches were regularly associated and their Circumstances did permit it they did not by vertue of their power alone upon their own single Judgment depose their Bishop but that their Actions might be the more Authentick and Unquestionable they had their Complaints heard and the whole Affair examined by the Synod to which they belonged or by some other Bishops who if their Accusations were just and valid might concur with them in the Deposition of their Bishop and in the Election of a new one And from hence it is that we find the Power of Deposing Bishops ascribed to Synods as Paulus Samosatenus Bishop of Antioch was deprived by a Synod held in that place and Privatus Bishop of Lambese was deposed by a Synod of ninety Bishops The same Method being observed in the Deposition of a Bishop as in his Election As a Bishop was elected by the People over whom he was to preside and by the neighbouring Bishops so was he deposed by the same both which things seem to be intimated in that Passage of the forementioned Synodical 〈◊〉 wherein it is said That the People chiefly has Power either to chuse worthy Bishops or to refuse unworthy ones The word chiefly implying that besides the People some others were necessary to concur with them either in the Election or Deprivation of a Bishop and those were the neighbouring Bishops or to speak more properly that Synod to which they appertained of which Synods of their Power and Authority I shall discourse more largely elsewhere § 3. Having thus briefly dispatched the Second Head I now proceed to handle the Third which respects the Conjunct Acts of the 〈◊〉 and Laity In answer whereunto I find that in general all things relating to the Government and Policy of the Church were performed by their joint Consent and Administrations the People were to do nothing without the Bishop And on the contrary he did nothing without the knowledge and consent of his People When any Letters came from Foreign Churches they were received and read before the whole Church and the whole Church agreed 〈◊〉 common Letters to be sent to other Churches And so for all other matters relating to the Policy of the Church they were managed by the common advice and Counsel of the Clergy and Laity both concurred to the Discharge of those Actions to recite every particular Act whereof would be extremely tedious and fruitless Wherefore in speaking hereunto I shall confine my self to those of their Complex Acts that regarded the Discipline of the Church which being an Answer to the Second Part of our Enquiry viz. An Enquiry into the Discipline of the Primitive
Church shall be the Subject of the following Chapter CHAP. VII § 1. The Necessity Quality and Excellency of Discipline Six things propounded to be handled 1. For what Faults Offenders were censured 2. Who were the Judges that censured 3. The manner of their Censures 4. What their Censures were 5. The Course that Offenders took to be absolved 6. The manner of their Absolution § 2. Censures were inflicted for all sorts of Crimes especially for Idolatry § 3. The whole Church were the Judges that composed the Ecclesiastical Consistory The Executive Power lodg'd in the Clergy and the Legistative both in Clergy and Laity In difficult Points some neighbouring Bishops assisted at the Decision of them § 4 The manner of their Censures § 5. Their Censures consisted in Excommunications and Suspensions the dreadfulness thereof § 6. The Course that Offenders took to be absolved They first lay groveling and weeping at the Church Doors § 7. Then admitted into the Rank of the Penitents Their Behaviour during their time of Penance § 8. How long their Penance was In some Cases the fixed Period anticipated when ended the Penitents were examined by the Court and if approved then Absolved § 9. The manner of their Absolution They came into the Church with all Expressions of Sorrow publickly confessed the Sin for which they had been censured The Church was tenderly affected with their Confession § 10. After Confession they were absolved by the Clergies Imposition of Hands § 11. Then admitted to the Churches Peace The Clergy generally restored only to Lay Communion § 1. AS all Governments are necessitated to make use of Laws and other Political Means to preserve their Constitution So the Church of Christ which has a certain Government annexed to it that it may preserve its self from Ruine and Confusion has certain Laws and Orders for the due Regulation of her Members and Penalties annexed to the Breaches thereof But herein lies the difference between the one and the other The Penalties and Executions of the former are like its Constitution purely Humane and Carnal but those of the other are Spiritual as Religion was at first received by Spiritual and Voluntary and not by Carnal and Involuntary means for as Tertullian says It is not Religion to force a Religion which ought to be willingly not forcibly received So by the same means it was continued and the Penalties of the Breach of it were of the same Nature also The Churches Arms were Spiritual consisting of Admonitions Excommunications Suspensions and such like by the weilding of which she Governed her Members and preserved her own Peace and Purity Now this is that which is called Discipline which is absolutely necessary to the Unity Peace and being of the Church for where there is no Law Government or Order that Society cannot possibly 〈◊〉 but must sink in its own Ruins and Confusions To recite the numerous Encomiums of Discipline that are interspers'd in the Writings of the Ancients would be an endless Task Let this one suffice out of Cyprian Discipline says he is the Keeper of Hope the Stay of Faith the Captain of Salvation the Fewel and Nutriment of a good Disposition the Mistress of Vertue that makes us perpetually abide in Christ and live to God and tend towards the Heavenly and Divine Promises This to follow is saving but to despise and neglect is deadly The Holy Ghost speaks in Psal. 2. 12. Keep Discipline lest the Lord be angry and ye perish from the right way when his wrath is kindled but a little against you And again in Psal. 50. 16. But unto the Sinner God said What hast thou to do to declare my Law and to take my Judgments into thy Mouth Thou hatest Discipline and castest my Words behind thee And again we read in Wisdom 3. 11. He that casteth off Discipline is unhappy And by Solomon we have received this command from Wisdom in Prov. 3. 11. My Son forget not the Discipline of the Lord nor faint when thou art corrected for whom the Lord loveth he correcteth But if God corrects whom he loves and corrects them that they may amend Christians also and especially Ministers do not hate but love those whom they correct that they may amend since God hath also soretold our Times in Jer. 3. 15. And I will give you Pastors after mine own Heart and they shall seed you in Discipline Now this is that Discipline viz. The Power and Authority of the Church exerted by her for her own Preservation in the censuring of her offending Members that I am now to Discourse of for the clearer apprehension whereof these six Queries must be examined into 1. For what Faults Offenders were censured 2. Who were the Judges that censured 3. The manner of their Censures 4. What their Censures were 5. The Course that Offenders took to be Absolved And 6. The manner of their Absolution § 2. As to the first of these For what Faults Offenders were censured I answer for Schism Heresie Covetousness Gluttony Fornication Adultery and for all other Sins whatsoever none excepted nay the holy and good Men of those days were so zealous against Sin that they used the strictest Severities against the least appearances of it not indulging or sparing the least Branch of its pestiferous Production but smartly punishing the least sprout of it it s lesser Acts as well as those that were more scandalous and notorious Cyprian writes that not only Gravissimae extrema delicta The greatest and most heinous Crimes but even Minora Delicta The Lesser Faults were punished by their Ecclesiastical Courts so cutting off Sin in its Bud and by the Excision of its lesser Acts and Ebullitions preventing its more gross and scandalous Eruptions That particular Sin which they most severely punished and through the frequency of Persecutions had numerous Objects of was Apostacy from the Truth or a lapsing into Idolatry which Crime was always 〈◊〉 with the extremest Rigour of which Ninus Clementianus and Florus were sad Instances who tho' they had for some time couragiously endured their Persecutions and Torments yet at last thro' the violence thereof and the weakness of their Flesh unwillingly consenting to the Heathen Idolatries were for that Fault forced to undergo three years Penance and had it not been for their ancient Merits must have underwent it much longer as may be seen at large in the 53d Epistle of Cyprian And thus by these and such like severe and rigorous Courses those primitive Virtuoso's endeavoured to prevent sin and to make all the Professors of the Christian Religion truly holy and pious for as Origen saith We use our utmost Endeavours that our Assemblies be composed of wise and honest Men. § 3. As for the Judges that composed the Consistory or Ecclesiastical Court before whom offending Criminals were convened and by whom censured they will appear to have been the whole Church both Clergy and Laity
not the Bishop without the People nor the People without the Bishop but both conjunctly constituted that Supreme Tribunal which censured Delinquents and Transgressors as will be evident from what follows All the Power that any Church-Court exerted was derived from that Promife and Commission of Christ in Matth. 16. 18 19. Thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Now this Power some of the Ancients mention as given to the Bishops Thus Origen writes That the Bishops applyed to themselves this Promise that was made to Peter teaching That they had received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven from our Saviour that so whatsoever was bound that is condemned by them on Earth was bound in Heaven and whatsoever was loosed by them was also loosed in Heaven which says he may be Orthodoxly enough applyed to them if they hold Peter's Confession and are such as the Church of Christ may be built upon And so also says Cyprian The Church is founded upon the Bishops by whom every Ecclesiastical Action is governed Others of the Ancients mention this Power as given to the whole Church according to that in Matth. 18. 15 16 17 18. If thy Brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his Fault between thee and him 〈◊〉 if he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy 〈◊〉 but if he will not hear thee take with thee one or two more that in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every Word may be established and if he shall neglect them tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican Verily I say unto you Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven By the Church here is to be understood the whole Body of a particular Church or Parish unto which some of the Fathers attribute the Power of the Keys as Tertullian If thou fearest Heaven to be shut remember the Lord gave its Keys to Peter and by him to the Church And Firmilian The Power of remitting Sins is given to the Apostles and to the Churches which they constituted and to the Bishops who succeeded them Now from this different attribution of the Power of the Keys we may infer this That it was so lodged both in Bishops and People as that each had some share in it The Bishop had the whole Executive and part of the Legislative Power and the People had a part in the Legislative tho' not in the Executive As for the Executive Power by which I understand the formal Pronunciation of Suspensions and Excommunications the Imposition of Hands in the Absolution of Penitents and such like that could be done by none but by the Bishop or by Persons in Holy Orders Deputed and Commission'd by him as the Sequel will evince But as for the Legislative Decretive or Judicatorial Power that 〈◊〉 both to Clergy and Laity who conjunctly made up that Supreme Consistorial Court which was in every Parish before which all Offenders were tried and if found Guilty sentenced and condemned Now that the Clergy were Members of this Ecclesiastical Court is a thing so evidently known and granted by all as that it would be superfluous to heap up many Quotations to prove it so that I shall but just confirm it after I have proved that which may seem more strange and that is That the Laity were Members thereof and Judges therein being Sharers with the Clergy in the Judicial Power of the Spiritual Court And this will most evidently appear by the consideration of these following Testimonies The first shall be out of that place of Clemens Romanus where he writes Who will say according to the Example of Moses If Seditions Contentions and Schisms are hapned because of me I will depart I will go wheresoever you please and I will do what are enjoyned me by the People so the Church of Christ be in Peace So Origen describes a Criminal as appearing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Before the whole Church And Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandria in his Letter to Fabius Bishop of Antioch speaks of one Serapion that had fallen in the Times of Persecution who had several times appeared before the Church to beg their Pardon but no one did ever take any notice of him But Cyprian is most full in this matter as when two Subdeacons and an Acolyth of his Parish had committed some great Misdemeanors he professes that he himself was not a sufficient Judge of their Crimes but they ought to be tried by all the People And concerning Felicissimus the 〈◊〉 he writes to his People from his Exile that if it pleased God he would come to them after Easter and then that Affair should be adjusted according to their Arbitrement and Common Counsel And in another place he condemns the rash Precipitation of some of his Presbyters in admitting the Lapsed to Communion because of some Pacificatory Libels obtained from the Confessors and charges them to admit no more till Peace was restored to the Church and then they should plead their Cause before the Clergy and before all the People And concerning the same matter he writes in another Letter to the People of his Parish That when it should please God to restore Peace to the Church and reduce him from his Exile that then it should be examined in their Presence and according to their Judgment So that the Consistory Court was composed of the People as well as of the Bishop each of whom had a negative Voice therein On one side the Bishop could do nothing without the People So when several returned from the Schism of Fortunatus and Bishop Cyprian was willing to receive them into the Churches Peace he complains of the unwillingness of his People to admit them and the great difficulties he had to obtain their Consent as he thus describes it in his Letter to Cornelius Bishop of Rome O my dear Brother if you could be present with me when those Men return from their Schism you would wonder at what pains I take to perswade our Brethren to be patient that laying aside their Grief of Mind they would consent to the healing and receiving of those that are sick I can scarce 〈◊〉 yea I extort a Grant from my People that such 〈◊〉 received to Communion And on the other side the People could do dothing without the Bishop as when one of the three Bishops that 〈◊〉 Ordained Novatian came back to the Church and desired admission the People alone could not receive him without the Consent of the Bishop 〈◊〉 for else they would
not permit them to transmit them down to their Successors or through the length of time they are lost and scarce any thing besides the Names of such Synods are now remembred and of Multitudes neither Names nor Decrees are to be found But yet there is enough escap'd the Fury of Persecution and the length of time to convince us that those Synods did decree those things which they judged expedient for the Polity Discipline and Government of those particular Churches that were within their respective Provinces and required them to be observed by all the Members thereof Thus we find these following Canons determined by several Synods in Africa viz. That though a Delinquent had not endured the whole time of Penance yet if he was very sick and in danger of Death he should be absolved That at the approach of a Persecution penitent Offenders should be restored to the Churches Peace That Penance should not be hastily passed over or Absolution be rashly and speedily given That all lapsed and apostate Clergymen should upon their Repentance be only admitted to Communion as Lay-men and be never more capable of discharging or performing any Ecclesiastical Function That no Clergyman should be a Curator or Trustee of a last Will or Testament And many other such like Synodical Decrees relating to the Discipline and Polity of the Church are to be met with in Cyprian which were ever accounted Obligatory to all those Parishes who lived within those respective Provinces and had their Representatives in those respective Synods for to what purpose else did they decree them if it had been fruitless and ridiculous to have made frequent and wearisom Journeys with great Cost and Pains to have debated and determined those things which they judged expedient for the Churches Well-being if after all it was indifferent whether they were obeyed or not But that their Decrees were binding is adjudged by an African Synod of Sixty Six Bishops held Anno 254 who sharply 〈◊〉 a certain Bishop called Therapius for breaking the Canons of a Synod in absolving a certain Presbyter called Victor before the time appointed by that Synod was expired Probably the Breaker of those Canons was to have been Deposed or Suspended or some other severe Punishment inflicted on him since the Bishops of this Synod speak as if they had moderated the Rigour of the Canons against Therapius in that they were contented only with chiding him for his rashness and with strictly charging him that he should do so no more So another Synod in Africa decreed that if any one should name a Clergy-man in his last Will and Testament for his Trustee no Sacrifice should be offered for him after his Death What the meaning of this Offering of Sacrifice after his Death is I shall not shew here since I must treat of it in another place Accordingly when Geminius Victor Bishop of 〈◊〉 had by his last Will and Testament constituted Geminius Faustinus a Presbyter his Trustee Cyprian Bishop of Carthage writ unto the Clergy and Laity of Furnis touching this matter wherein he informs them That he and his Colleagues were very much offended that Geminius Victor had thus broke the Canons of the Synod but that since he had done it he hoped they would take care that he should suffer the Penalty annexed to the Breach thereof that in conformity thereunto they would not mention him in their Prayers or make any Oblation for him that so the Decree of the Bishops which was religiously and necessarily made might be observed by them To these two Instances we may add that of Martialis and Basilides two Spanish Bishops who for their falling into Idolatry in times of Persecution were deprived of their Ecclesiastical Functions and adjudged never more to be admitted to the Churches Communion in any other Quality than that of Laymen which rigorous Sentence an African Synod defends from the Authority of a General Council who had before decreed that such Men should only be admitted to Repentance but be for ever excluded from all Clerical and Sacerdotal Dignities CHAP. IX § 1. Of the Vnity of the Church of Schism defined to be a Breach of that Vnity The Vnity of the Church and consequently the Breach of it to be differently understood according to the various Significations of the Word Church § 2. The Vnity of the Church Vniversal considered Negatively and Positively Negatively it consisted not in an Vniformity of Rites nor in an Vnanimity of Consent to the non-essential Points of Christianity The Rigid Imposers thereof condemned as Cruel and Tyrannical § 3. Positively it consisted in an harmonious Assent to the Essential Articles of Faith The Non-agreement therein called Schism but not the Schism of the Ancients § 4. How the Vnity of a Church Collective was broken this neither the Schism of the Ancients § 5. The Vnity of a particular Church consisted in two things in the Members Love and Amity each towards other and in the Peoples close adherence to their Bishop or Parish Church The Breach of the former sometimes called Schism § 6. The Breach of the latter which was a causeless Separation from their Bishop the Schism of the Ancients In how many Cases it was lawful for the People to separate from their Bishop § 7. A Separation under any other Pretence whatsoever was that which the Fathers generally and principally meant by Schism proved so to have been § 8. Farther proved from Ignatius § 9. Exemplified in the Schism of Felicissimus and Novarian § 10. An Objection answered touching the Schism of Novatian How the Schism of one particular Church affected other Churches § 11. A Summary and Conclusion of this Discourse concerning Schism § 1. HAving in the precedent Chapters discoursed of the Constitution and Discipline of the Primitive Church I come now in this to treat of the Unity thereof which I had a very great Inclination to search into since by the due understanding thereof we shall the better apprehend the Notion of the Ancients concerning Schism because that Schism is nothing else but a Breach of that Unity as will 〈◊〉 evidently appear from the Quotations that we shall be forced to make use of in this Chapter Now that we may know what the Breach of the Unity of the Church was it is absolutely necessary first to know what the Unity its self was for till we understand its Unity it is impossible that we should understand the Breach thereof Now for the distinct apprehending hereof we must remember the various Acceptations of the Word Church as they are related in the beginning of this Treatise and according to the different Significations thereof so must its Unity be diversified or be differently understood and according to the different manner of its Unity so must we apprehend the Breach thereof § 2. If in the first place we reflect upon the Word Church as signifying the Church Universal or all those who throughout
the whole Earth profess Faith in Christ then we may consider its Unity in this Sense either Negatively wherein it did not consist or Positively wherein it did consist Negatively It consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Customs for every particular Church was at liberty to follow its own proper Usages One Church was not obliged to observe the Rites of another but every one followed its own peculiar Customs Thus with respect to their Fast before Easter there was a great Diversity in the Observation of it in some Churches they fasted one Day in others two in some more and in others forty Hours but yet still they retained Peace and Concord the diversity of their Customs commending the Vnity of their Faith So also the Feast of Easter its self was variously celebrated The Asiatick Churches kept it on a distinct Day from the Europeans but yet still they retained Peace and Love and for the diversity of such Customs none were ever cast out of the Communion of the Church So likewise writes Firmilian That in most Provinces their Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places and that for this no one ever departed from the Peace and Vnity of the Catholick Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Usages Neither in the next Place did it consist in an Unanimity of Consent to the Non-essential Points of Christianity but every one was lest to believe in those lesser matters as God should inform him Therefore Justin Martyr speaking of those Jewish Converts who had adhered to the Mosaical Rites says that if they did this only through their Weakness and 〈◊〉 and did not perswade other Christians to the observance of the same Judaical Customs that he would receive them into Church-fellowship and Communion Whosoever imposed on particular Churches the observance of the former of these two things or on particular Persons the belief of the latter they were esteemed not as Preservers and Maintainers but as Violaters and Breakers of the Churches Unity and Concord An Instance of the former we have in that Controversie between the Churches of the East and West touching the time when Easter was to be celebrated For when Victor Bishop of Rome had Excommunicated the 〈◊〉 Churches because they continued to observe that Feast on a different time from the Churches of the West not only the Bishops of the adverse Party but even those of his own side condemned him as rash heady and turbulent and writ several Letters about this Affair wherein as the Historian writes they most sharply censured him As for the Latter we have an instance thereof in the Controversie that was between Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage touching the Validity of Hereticks Baptism For when Stephen Anathematized Cyprian because he held the Baptism of Hereticks to be null and void other Bishops condemned Stephen as a Breaker and Disturber of the Churches Peace And amongst others Firmilian a Cappadocian Bishop vehemently accuses him as such because that he would impose upon others the Belief of such a disputable Point which says he was never wonted to be done but every Church followed their own different ways and never therefore broke the Vnity and Peace of the Catholick Church which now saith he Stephen dares to do and breaks that Peace which the ancient Bishops always preserved in mutual Love and Honour And therefore we find in the Acts of that great Council of Carthage convened to determine this matter that when Cyprian summ'd up the Debates thereof he dehorts his Fellow-Bishops from the imposing Humour and Temper of Stephen It now remains saith he that every one of us declare our Judgments concerning this matter judging no Man or removing any one from our Communion if he think otherwise than we do for let none of us make himself a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Terror compel his Colleagues to the necessity of obeying So that the forcing a Belief in these lesser matters was Cruelty and Tyranny in the Imposers thereof who for such unreasonable Practices were look'd upon as Enemies to and Violators of the Churches Concord being the true Schismaticks inasmuch as they were the Cause of Schism and Division unto whom therefore may be applyed that Saying of Irenaeus That at the last Day Christ shall judge those who cause Schisms who are inhumane not having the fear of God but prefering their own advantage before the Unity of the Church for trivial and slight Causes rent and divide the great and glorious Body of Christ and as much as in them lies destroy it who speak Peace but wage War truly straining at a Gnat and swallowing a Camel § 3. But Positively The Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an Harmonious Assent to the Essential Articles of Religion or in an Unanimous Agreement in the Fundamentals of Faith and Doctrine Thus 〈◊〉 having recited a Creed or a short Summary of the Christian Faith not much unlike to the Aposiles Creed immediately adds The Church having received this Faith and Doctrine although dispersed through the whole World diligently preserves it as tho' she inhabited but one House and accordingly she believes these things as 〈◊〉 she had but one Soul and one Heart and consonantly preaches and teaches these things as tho' she had but one Mouth for altho' there are various Languages in the World yet the Doctrine is one and the same so that the Churches in Germany France Asia AEgypt or Lybia have not a different Faith but as the Sun is one and the same to all the Creatures of God in the whole World So the Preaching of the Word is a Light that enlightens every where and illuminates all Men that would come to the knowledge of the Truth Now this Bond of Unity was broken when there was a Recession from or a Corruption of the true Faith and Doctrine as Irenaeus speaks concerning Tatian the Father of the Encratites that as long as his Master Justin Martyr lived he held the found Faith but after his Death falling off from the Church he shaped that new Form of Doctrine This Unity of the Church in Doctrine according to Hegesippus continued till the Days of Simeon Cleopas Bishop of Jerusalem who was Martyred under Trajan but after that false Teachers prevailed such as the 〈◊〉 Marcionists 〈◊〉 and others from whom sprung false Christs false Apostles and false Prophets who by their corrupt Doctrines against God and his Christ divided the Unity of the Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an agreement of Doctrine and the Corruption of that Doctrine was a Breach of that Unity and whoever so broke it are said to divide and separate the Unity of the Church or which is all one to be Schismaticks So Irenaeus writes that those that introduced new Doctrines did divide and separate the Unity
of the Church And Cyprian writes that the Devil found out Heresies and Sehisms by which he might subvert the Faith corrupt the Truth and divide the Unity But now for Distinctions sake the Breach of this Unity was commonly called Heresie and the word Schism generally applyed to the Breach of the Churches Unity in another sense of which more in the other Sections § 4. If in the next place we consider the Word Church collectively as denoting a Collection of many particular Churches in which Sense it is once used in Cyprian Then its Unity may have consisted in a Brotherly correspondence with and affection toward each other which they demonstrated by all outward Expressions of Love and Concord as by receiving to Communion the Members of each other as Irenaeus mentions was observ'd between the Churches of Rome and Asia in mutually advising and assisting one another by Letters or otherwise of which there are frequent instances in the Ancients and especially in Cyprian's Epistles and in manifesting all other Marks and Tokens of their Love and Concord Now this Unity was broken when Particular Churches clash'd with each other when from being possess'd with Spirits of Meekness Love and Charity they were inflamed with Hatred Rage and Fury against each other A sad Instance whereof we have in that Controversie betwixt Cyprian and Stephen or rather between the Churches of Europe and Africa touching the Validity of Heretical Baptism wherein those good Men were so far transported with Bitterness and Rancour against each other that they interchangeably gave such 〈◊〉 Language and invidious Epithets as are too odious to name which if the Reader be curious to know he may find too much of it in Cyprian's Epistles Or if several particular Churches had for the promotion of Peace Unity and Order regularly disposed themselves into a Synodical Government and Discipline as was always done when their Circumstances and Conveniencies would permit them then whoever broke or violated their reasonable Canons were censured as turbulent and factious as it hath been evidenced in the former Chapter and needs no farther Proof in this because that the Schism of the Ancients was not a Breach of the Churches Unity in this Sense viz. as denoting or signifying a Church Collective § 5. But Schism principally and originally respected a particular Church or Parish tho' it might consequentially influence others too Now the Unity of a particular Church consisted in the Members Love and Amity toward each other and in their due Subjection or Subordination to their Pastour or Bishop Accordingly the Breach of that Unity consisted in these two things either in a Hatred and Malice of each other or in a Rebellion against their Lawful Pastour or which is all one in a causeless Separation from their Bishop and those that adhered to him As for the first of these there might be Envies and Discords between the Inhabitants of a Parish without a formal Separation from Communion which Jars and Feuds were called Schism an Instance whereof we find in the Church of Corinth unto whom St. Paul objected in 1 Cor. 11. 18. When ye come together in the Church I hear that there be Divisions or as it is in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schisms amongst you Here there was no separate Communion for they all came together in the Church and yet there were Schisms amongst them that is Strifes Quarrels and Discords And as far as I can perceive from the Epistle of Clemens Romanus which was writ to appease another Schism in the same Church of Corinth there were then only Turmoils and Differences without any actual Separation But on this I shall not enlarge because it is not what the Ancients ordinarily meant by Schism § 6. But that which they generally and commonly termed Schism was a Rebellion against or an ungrounded and causless Separation from their Lawful Pastour or their Parish-Church Now because I say that a causless Separation from their Bishop was Schism it will be necessary to know how many Causes could justifie the Peoples Desertion of their Pastour and these I think were two or at most three the first was Apostacy from the Faith or when a Bishop renounced the Christian Faith and through fear of Persecution embraced the Heathenish Idolatries as was done in the case of Martialis and Basilides two Spanish Bishops and was justified by an African Synod as is to be seen throughout their whole Synodical Epistle still extant amongst those of Cyprian's The second Cause was Heresie as Irenaeus saith We must fly far off from all Hereticks And Origen allows the People to separate from their Bishop if they could accuse him of false and 〈◊〉 Doctrine A third Cause was a scandalous and wicked Life as is asserted by an African Synod held Anno 258. whose Exhortations and Arguments to this purpose may be seen at large in their Synodical Epistle still extant in Cyprian Epist. 68. p. 200. out of which several Passages pertinent to this occasion have been already cited in the sixth Chapter of this Treatise to which I must refer the Reader Of this mind also was Irenaeus before them who writes That as for those Presbyters who serve their Pleasures and have not the fear of God before their Eyes who contumeliously use others are lifted up with Pride and secretly commit wickedness from 〈◊〉 such Presbyters we ought to separate Origen indeed seems to be of another mind and thinks that the Bishops Immorality in Life could not justifie his Parishes Separation He saith he that hath a care of his Soul will not be scandalized at my Faults who am his Bishop but considering my Doctrine and finding it agreeable to the Churches Faith from me indeed he will be averse but he will receive my Doctrine according to the Precept of the Lord which saith The Scribes and 〈◊〉 sit on Moses his Chair whatever therefore they say unto you hear and do but according unto their Works do not for they say and do not That Scripture is of me who teach what is good and do the contrary and sit upon the Chair of Moses as a Scribe or Pharisee the Precept is to thee O People if thou canst not accuse me of false Doctrine or Heretical Opinions but only beholdest my wicked and sinful Life thou must not square thy Life according to my Life but do those things which I speak Now whether Irenaeus or an African Synod or Origen be to be most credited I leave the Learned to judge tho' I think they may be both nearer reconciled than they seem to be Irenaeus and that Synod affirming that the People of their own Power and Authority might immediately without the concurrent Assent of other Churches upon the Immorality and Scandal of their Bishop leave and desert him Origen restraining the People from present Execution till they had the Authority of a Synod for so doing for thus he must be understood or else
finding themselves too weak and not powerful enough to balance his interest they yielded to his Promotion but yet still retained an Hatred against his Person and waited for a more favourable opportunity and a plausible Pretence to separate from him It pleased God that Cyprian some time after his Advancement was forced by reason of the Persecution to withdraw and absent from his Flock during which Absence that Faction made use of all means to lessen his Interest till they had made their Party indifferently strong and then they broke out into an open Separation from him forming themselves into a distinct Meeting creating a new Bishop erecting a new Altar and constituting a new Church Now all this was acted in and respected only the particular Parish of Carthage without causing or attempting any Separation in any other Church or Parish and yet this Cyprian calls Schism and Excommunicates the Actors in it as Schismaticks and Breakers of the Unity of the Church of his Church Actually and of all the other Churches of the Church Universal Virtually who like the Members of the Natural Body are affected with the Pains and Convulsions of each other So also the famous Schism of Novatian respected only the particular Church of Rome being no other than his causeless Separation from Cornelius his lawful Bishop and his erecting separate Conventicles against him as may be read at large in those Epistles of Cyprian that treat of this Affair and in his Book De Vnitate Ecclesiae § 10. But I foresee an evident Objection against this restrained Notion of Schism and in particular from the Schism of Novatian which I cannot well pass over without resolving since the Solution thereof will inform us in the manner how the Schism of one particular Church did affect other Churches Now the Objection may be this If Schism respected only one particular Church whence then comes it to pass that we read of Novatian Bishops not only at Rome where that Schism first began but in several other Churches and Parishes besides Now to this I answer That we must distinguish between the Schism and the Heresie of Novatian had Novatian been only guilty of Schism in all probability his Schismatical Actions as well as all other Schisms before would have ended in the same Church where they began and have proceeded no farther but he having once engaged in his Schism and willing to continue it that he might have some pretence for those enormous Practices he accused his Bishop of remitting and loosing the Reins of Discipline in communicating with Trophimus and others that had Sacrificed to Idols as may be amply seen in the 55th Epistle of Cyprian consequently for the Justification of this Accusation he added this Doctrine as the Characteristick Dogma of his Party That the Church had no Power to absolve those who lapsed after Baptism but were to leave them to the Tribunal of God This was an Error in Doctrine invidious to the Mercy of God and injurious to the Merits of Christ as Cyprian shews at large in his 55th Epistle Every Error in Doctrine was called Heresie Accordingly Novatian is branded for this as an Heretick whence the Confessours in their return from his Party confessed that in adhering to them they had committed Schisms and been the Authors of Heresies And in the same Epistle they call Novatian an Heretick and a Schismatick So Cyprian also accuses the said Novatian of heretical Pravity and calls his Error a Schismatical and Heretical Error So that Novatian's Schism was accompanied with Heresie which as usual was called after the Name of its Author and having many eminent Persons to abet it and a specious shew of Sanctity and Mortification it is no wonder that it spreads its self into many other Churches besides that where it was first hatched unto which we may also add their Industrious Endeavours to proselyte Men unto their Party running about as Cyprian writes from House to House and from Town to Town to gain Companions in their Obstinacy and Error For many of them really thinking themselves to be in the right and believing others to be in the wrong conceived it to be their bounden Duty to leave their Bishop if he would not leave his Heresie as they apprehended it to be And probably several Bishops of the Orthodox who were the legal Pastours of their respective Parishes were through their own Ignorance and those Men's fair Pretences deluded into the same uncharitable Error with them Of denying the Lapsed any Pardon But we need not guess at this as only probable since we have an Instance of it in Martian the lawful Bishop of Arles concerning whom Cyprian writes to Stephen Bishop of Rome that he had received Advice from the Bishops of that Province That Martian of Arles had joyned himself unto Novatian and had departed from the Vnity of the Church and the Concord of the Bishops holding that Heretical Severity that the Consolations of Divine Pity and Fatherly Lenity should be shut against the penitent and mourning Servants of God who knock at the Church with Tears Sighs and Groans so that the wounded are not admitted to have their Wounds healed but being left without any hope of Peace or Communion are thrown out to the Rapine of Wolves and Prey of the Devil So that it was not Novatian's Schism but his Heresie that was diffused through other Churches his Schism respected only his own Church but his Heresie which was a Breach of the Unity of the Church Universal respected other Churches also so that in answer to the forenamed Objection we need only say this That there was no such thing as the Objection supposes that is that there were no Bishops or Followers of Novatian's Schism in other Churches but that those that were discriminated by his Name were the Bishops and Followers of his Heresie But however let us suppose the worst viz. That all Schismaticks had been Orthodox and sound in every Point of Faith had been exemplary and pious in the discharge of every Duty had been guilty of no Crime but their Schism from their Bishop and Parish and yet their Schism might have influenced other Churches and Parishes too and that I think these two ways 1. If one or more Churches had admitted to Communion those that were Excommunicated by their own Church for Schism that Church or Churches made themselves Partakers of those Mens Crimes and involved themselves in the same Guilt of Division and Schism with them as Martian Bishop of Arles was adjudged by Cyprian as a Schismatick Because he had joined with Novatian when he had been before Excommunicated I do not here mean that a Bishop or Parish to make themselves guilty should actually or personally communicate with the Author of the Schism himself much less in the Church where he began his Schism but it was enough if they joyned with his Legates or Messengers or any of his Followers in any Church
the People might see and hear him which was called Pulpitum or a Pulpit from which Pulpit he read the Scriptures alone and not others alternatively with him it being his Office only to Read whilst the Congregation listned to him as Cyprian writes that Celerinus a Lector Read the Law and the Gospel to all the People Celerinus only read whilst all the People attended and therefore when this Duty was ended it is described only by the Lectors ceasing to Read and not by the Peoples ceasing so to do § 4. How much the Lector read at a Time is uncertain since they varied according to the Circumstances of their Condition So writes Tertullian that they Read the Scriptures according to the Quality of their present Times And to the same purpose says Justin Martyr that the Clark read until it was sufficient § 5. When the Readended then followed the Singing of Psalms So says Tertullian 〈◊〉 Scriptures are Read and Psalms Sung This was a considerable Part of the Christians Service who as Pliny writes met together before Day to sing an Hymn to Christ it being useful to elevate the Mind in Heavenly Raptures of Praise and Adoration and to raise a Pious Soul into greater Degrees of Admiration of God's Love and Bounty whence such a Soul is described by Clemens Alexandrinus to be continually Blessing Praising Singing and presenting Hymns to God the Lord of all being assisted by the Holy Spirit of God without whose Aid it was impossible to Sing either in good Rhime Tune Metre or Harmony The Christians in those Days condemned only the debauched Bacchanalian Singing and Roaring but commended the Blessing and Praising of God by Thanksgiving and Singing of Psalms Inasmuch that it was made one 〈◊〉 Distinction of a Christian As Tertullian inveighs against the Marriage of a Believing Woman with an 〈◊〉 because thereby she would be hindred from discharging the Ordinances of the Gospel amongst which he enumerates Singing of Psalms for then says he What would her Husband sing to her or What would she sing to her Husband And a little after he describes the happy Condition of that Couple who were both Christians in that they did both joyn together in and exhort one another to the vigorous Performance of God's Worship Psalms and Hymns sound between those two and they mutually excite one another who shall sing unto God best it being their daily Employment and recurring as often as they eat their Meat Thus faith Clemens Alexandrinus a good Christians Life is a continued Festival his Sacrifices are Prayers and Praises Reading of Scriptures before Meat and Singing of Psalms and Hymns at Meat Hence in their Feasts and Banquers When they drank to one another they Sung an Hymn therein blessing God for his unexpressible Gifts towards Mankind both as to their Bodies and Souls I confess indeed that most of these Quotations respect only Private Singing of Psalms and so they may seem to be somewhat alien from my purpose on which Account I should not have mentioned them but have wholly passed them over in silence had it not been to have satisfied those who hold it unlawful to Sing any Psalms at all in what manner soever for if singing in private was usual and commendable then no doubt publick Singing was so also § 6. What those Psalms or Hymns were that the Primitive Christians sung may be a Question necessary to be resolved which I take to be two-fold either such as were taken out of the Holy Scriptures and particularly out of the Book of Psalms or such as were of their own private composing So writes Tertullian that after the Celebration of the Lord's Supper Every one Sung an Hymn out of the Bible or of his own composing As for the Singing of David's Psalms the same Father particularly mentions the 133d Psalm as Sung in his Days O how good and pleasant it is for Brethren to dwell together in Vnity This thou canst not easily sing unless when thou suppest with many As for the Hymns that were of Private Men's Composition it was one of the Accusations of Paulus Samosatenus the Heretical Bishop of Antioch that he abolished those Psalms which were wont to be Sung to the Honour of the Lord Jesus Christ as Novel and composed by Modern Authors and that he appointed Women on Easter Day in the middle of the Church to sing Psalms in his Praise And in the Fragment of an Anonymous Author extant in Eusebius we find the Heresie of Artemon who denied the Divinity of Christ 〈◊〉 not only by the Scriptures and the Writings of the precedent Fathers but also by the Psalms and Hymns of the Brethren which were formerly composed by them wherein they praised Christ by making him a God Such a private composed Hymn was that which Clemens Alexandrinus mentions as one commonly known among the Christians in his Days beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hail Light Protreptic p. 52. § 7. As for the manner of the Primitive Singing it was in good Tune and Concent all the People bearing a part in it but whether all together or Antiphonally cannot well be determined every Country probably following its own Mode Singing only in General being commanded not the particular manner or fashion of it In a Precedent Quotation mention is made of Singing in Concent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or with Voices altogether In other Places the Alternative Method of Singing seems expresly to be used as Pliny writes That the Christians in his time met together before Day to Sing an Hymn to Christ by course or one against another And so in that forecited Passage of Tertullian What will an Vnbelieving Husband sing to a Believing Wife Or what will a Believing Wife sing to an Vnbelieving Husband § 8. As for Singing Men and Singing Women I find that Paulus Samosatenus the Heretical Bishop of Antioch abolished the old usual Hymns and appointed certain Women on Easter Day in the middle of the Church to sing Psalms in his Praise But whether these Singing Women were first Instituted by this Heretical Bishop or were before his Time I cannot tell As for Church-Musick for Organs and the like those Primitive Ages were wholly ignorant of them for it cannot rationally be conceived that in those Days of continual Persecution or Violence they could either use or preserve them all that they look'd after was to Sing in Rhyme Metre Tune and Concent to offer up unto God the Praises of their Voices Lips and Mouths which Clemens Alexandrinus thinks was Emblematized or shadowed forth by those Musical Instruments mentioned in the 150th Psalm where saith he We are commanded to praise God on the Psaltery that is on the Tongue because the Tongue is the Psaltery of the Lord and to praise him on 〈◊〉 Harp by which we must understand the Mouth and to praise him on the
loud sounding Cymbals by which the Tongue is to be understood which sounds or speaks through the knocking or coition of the Lips § 9. When the Singing of Psalms was ended then succeeded the Preaching of the Word So writes Tertullian Scriptures are read Psalms sung and then Sermons pronounced As for the Subject of the Preacher's Sermon it was usually a Commentary or Explication of the Lessons that were just before read So it was in the Time and Country of Justin Martyr who writes that when the Reader had ended the Bishop made a Sermon by way of Instruction and Exhortation to the Imitation of those excellent things which had been read Whence Origen calls their Sermons Explanations of the Lessons And such Explanations are all his Sermons or Homilies as whosoever reads them will easily see and he himself intimates as much in several of them As for the Length of their Sermons they usually preach'd an Hour as Origen complains of his abundance of Matter that if he should throughly handle every part of it it would require not only the one Hour of their Assembly but several Therefore when the Lessons were long and copious which sometimes consisted of several Chapters as the Lesson which was the Subject of Origen's 15th Homily on Jeremiah reached from the 15th Chapter and 10th Verse to the 17th Chapter and 5th Verse The Preacher passed over some of the Matter unmentioned and handled the most important or the most curious part therein Thus in the beginning of a Sermon of Origen's we find that the Chapters that were read were the 25 26 27 and 28th Chapters of the first Book of Samuel which he complains were too large and 〈◊〉 to be all handled at once and therefore he would only discourse of the 28th Chapter touching the Witch of Endor and those things related there 〈◊〉 her § 10. As for the manner of their Sermons we may observe this Method in those of Origen's that he first began with a short 〈◊〉 and then explained Verse after Verse or Sentence after Sentence 〈◊〉 the Natural and Literal Signification of the Words and then the Spiritualized or Mystical meaning of them and concluded with a suitable Application of all either by way of Exhortation to Piety and Vertue or by way of Dehortation from Vice and Impiety Always accommodating their Discourses to the Capacities of their Hearers Is their Auditors were prudent and understanding then they scrupled not to treat of the profound Mysteries of the Gospel but if they had attained no great measure of Knowledge and had need of Milk as the Apostle stiles it then they concealed from them those deep and recondite Points § 11. As for the Preacher himself it was usually the Bishop of the Parish So saith 〈◊〉 Martyr The Bishop Preaches by way of Instruction and Exhortation to the Imitation of those excellent things which we Or else he desired a Presbyter or some other fit Person to preach in his room without his Consent it had been Schism and Violence in any Person whatsoever to have usurped his Chair but with his Permission any Clergyman or Layman might Preach in his Pulpit Now that Clergymen Preach'd no one will question though it will be doubted whether Laymen did But that they did so appears from a memorable History concerning Origen who going from Alexandria into Palestina by the Desire of the Bishops of that Country publickly Preach'd in the Church and expounded the Holy Scriptures although he was not yet in Holy Orders At which Action when Demetrius Bishop of Alexandria was offended Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem and Theoctistus of Caesarea writ to him in defence of it as follows Whereas you write in your Letter that it was never before seen or done That Laymen should preach in the presence of Bishops therein you wander from the Truth for wheresoever any are found that are fit to profit the Brethren the Holy Bishops of their own accord ask them to Preach unto the People So Evelpis was desired by Neon Bishop of Laranda and Paulinus by Celsus of Iconium and Theodorus by Atticus of Synnada our most blessed Brethren and it is credible that this is likewise done in other Places though we know it not But yet though Laymen Preach'd it was not every one that did so but only those that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fit to prosit the Brethren and though they were never so fit yet they did not irregularly or disorderly run about a Preaching or discharge that Sacred Office till they were desired by the Bishop of a Parish to do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but stayed for the Permission and Approbation of such an one for without that their Sermons and Discourses would have been but so many Acts of Schism and Faction CHAP. II. § 1. After Preaching all the Congregation rose up to joyn in Publick Prayers § 2. They prayed towards the East Their Reasons for that Custom § 3. They lifted up their Hands and Eyes towards Heaven § 4. Whether the Minister that Officiated wore a Surplice and therein of Ministers Habits § 5. Whether they Sung their Prayers and whether they used Responsals § 6. Of prescribed Liturgies The Lord's Prayer not always but commonly used by them § 7. To the Lord's Prayer they added other Prayers of their own Choice or Invention proved so to have been § 8. Whether their Prayers were divided into several Collects § 1. AS soon as the Sermon was ended then all the Congregation rose up to present their Common and Publick Prayers unto Almighty God as Justin Martyr writes that when the Preacher had finished his Discourse They all rose up and offered their Prayers unto God Standing being the usual Posture of Praying at least the constant one on Sundays on which Day they esteemed it a Sin to kneel whence the Preacher frequently concluded his Sermon with an Exhortation to his Auditors to stand up and pray to God as we find it more than once in the Conclusion of Origen's Sermons as Wherefore standing up let us beg help from God that we may be blessed in Jesus Christ to whom be Glory for ever and ever Amen And wherefore rising up let us pray to God that we may be made worthy of Jesus Christ to whom be Glory and Dominion for ever and ever Amen And again Standing up let us offer Sacrifices to the Father through Christ who is the Propitiation for our Sins to whom be Glory and Dominion for ever and ever Amen § 2. Accordingly the whole Congregation stood up and turned their Faces towards the East it being their Custom and Manner to pray towards that Quarter as Tertullian writes We pray towards the East Now the Reasons that I meet with for this Usage may be reduced to these Three or Four I. Out of Respect and Reverence to their Lord and Master Jesus Christ they prayed towards the East because the East is a
one but all Men ought to be admitted to the Grace of Christ as Peter saith in the Acts of the Apostles that the Lord said unto him that he should call no Man common or unclean But if any thing can hinder Men from Baptism it will be hainous Sins that will debar the Adult and Mature therefrom and if those who have sinned extremely against God yet if afterwards they 〈◊〉 are baptized and no Man is prohibited 〈◊〉 this Grace how much more ought not an Insant to be 〈◊〉 who being but just born is guilty of 〈◊〉 Sin but of Original which he 〈◊〉 from Adam Who ought the more 〈◊〉 to be received to the remission of Sins 〈◊〉 not his own but others sins are remitted to him Wherefore dearly beloved it is our Opinion that from 〈◊〉 and the Grace of God who is merciful kind and benign to all none 〈◊〉 to be prohibited by us which as it is to be observed and followed with respect to all so especially with respect to Infants and those that are but just born who deserve our Help and the Divine 〈◊〉 because at the first instant of their Nativity they beg it by their Cries and Tears Apud Cyprian 〈◊〉 59. § 2 3 4. p. 164 165. So that here is as Formal Synodical Decree for the Baptism of Infants as possibly can be 〈◊〉 which being the Judgment of a Synod is more 〈◊〉 and cogent than that of a private Father it being supposable that a 〈◊〉 Father might write his own particular Judgment and Opinion but the Determinations of a Synod or Council denote the common Practice and Usage of the Whole Church § 3. It is evident then that Infants were baptifed in the Primitive Ages and as for the Baptism of the Adult that being own'd by all it will be needless to prove it These were 〈◊〉 grown in Years able to judge and 〈◊〉 for themselves who relinquished Paganism and came over to the Christian Faith What Qualifications were required in them previous or antecedent to Baptism I need not here relate since I have already handled this Point in the Sixth Chapter of the former Treatise to which I refer the Reader In short such as these were first instructed in the 〈◊〉 Faith continued some time in the Rank of the 〈◊〉 till they had given good Proofs of their Resolutions to 〈◊〉 a pious religious Life and had protested their Assent and Consent to all the Christian Verities and then they were solemnly baptized Which brings 〈◊〉 to the third thing proposed 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 of Baptism which for the main was as 〈◊〉 § 4. The Person to be baptized was first asked several Questions by the Bishop or by him that Officiated unto which he was to give his Answer concerning which Baptismal Questions and Answers Dionysius 〈◊〉 speaks in his Letter to Xystus Bishop of 〈◊〉 wherein he writes of a certain sorupulous Person in his Church who was exceedingly troubled when he was present at Baptism and heard the Questions and Answers of those that were Baptized Which Questions Firmilian styles the lawful and usual Interrogatories of Baptism Now these Questions and Answers were two-fold First Of Abjuration of the Devil and all his Works And Secondly Of a Firm Assent to the Articles of the Christian Faith First Of Abjuration The Minister proposed this Question to the Party baptized or to this Effect Do you renounce the Devil the World and the Flesh To which he answered Yes So writes 〈◊〉 When 〈◊〉 are baptized 〈◊〉 renounce the World the Devil and his Angels And with 〈◊〉 Mouth we have vowed to renounce the World the 〈◊〉 and his Angels And We have renounced the Devil and his Angels And Thou hast 〈◊〉 to renounce the World the Devil and his Angels And We were called to the Warfare of the Living God when we promised in the Words of Baptism To the same effect also says Cyprian When we were baptized we renounced the World And We have renounced the World its Pomps and Delights And The Servant of God has renounced the Devil and the World And We have renounced the World and by the Faith of Spiritual Grace have cast off its Riches and Pomps And We 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Devil and the World And so likewise saith Clemens Alexandrinus that in Baptism we renounced the Devil The Second Question was Whether the Party to be Baptized did believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith to which he answered Yes as Justin Martyr writes that those who were to be baptized were to give their Assent to the things that were 〈◊〉 and held by them So Cyprian writes that at Baptism they asked the Baptised Person 's Assent to this Creed Whether he believed in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost remission of Sins and eternal Life through the Church And that at Baptism they asked Dost thou believe 〈◊〉 Life everlasting and remission of Sins through the Holy Church These Articles of Faith to which the Baptized Persons gave their Assent are called by Cyprian The Law of the Symbol And by Novatian The Rule of Truth § 5. And here since we have mentioned the Symbol it will be no unuseful Digression to enquire a little into the Ancient Creeds for as for that Creed which is commonly called the Aposties all Learned Persons are now agreed that it was never composed by them neither do I find it within my prescribed Time But though they had not that yet they had other Creeds very like thereunto which contained the fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith 〈◊〉 which all Christians gave their Assent and 〈◊〉 and that publickly at Baptism whence as before it is called by Cyprian The Law of the Symbol and by Novatian The Rule of Truth This Creed was handed down from Father to Son as a brief Summary of the necessary Scripture Truths not in ipsissimis verbis or in the same set Words but only the Sense or Substance thereof which is evident from that we never find the Creed twice repeated in the same Words no not by one and the same Father which that it may the more manifestly appear as also that we may see the Congruity and Affinity of the Ancient Creeds with our Present Creed commonly call'd the Apostles I shall 〈◊〉 in their Original Language all the whole Creeds and Pieces of Creeds that I find within my limited Bounds which together with the Authors wherein they are to be 〈◊〉 are as follows § 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat. Epist. ad 〈◊〉 p. 52. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 1. c. 2. p. 35 36 〈◊〉 in unum Deum fabricatorem 〈◊〉 ac 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae in eis sunt per Christum Jesum Dei Filium qui propter 〈◊〉 erga Figmentum suum dilectionem 〈◊〉 quae esset ex Virgine generationem 〈◊〉 ipse per se hominem adunans Deo passus sub Pontio Pilato resurgens
the Greek Creeds read it in one 〈◊〉 the Father in opposition to the Polytheism of the Heathens and in Jesus Christ his only 〈◊〉 Son our Lord I believe in the Holy 〈◊〉 the Resurrection of the Body and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lasting For in the Days of the 〈◊〉 as well 〈◊〉 afterwards it was the Practice at Baptism to demand the baptized 〈◊〉 assent 〈◊〉 the fundamental Articles of the 〈◊〉 Faith us Philip did the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst which Fundamentals we may be 〈◊〉 they reckoned the Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 because they were baptized in the Name and Dedicated to the Service of the 〈◊〉 and that of the Unity of the Godhead because it was the great 〈◊〉 and design of their Preaching to overturn the Pagans multiplicity of Deities and that of the Resurrection of the 〈◊〉 and the Life everlasting because that was the Characteristick or Peculiar Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 Religion by which it was eminently 〈◊〉 from other Sects and Opinions and was the only Comfort and support of the Christians under their Sufferings and Martyrdoms according to that of St. Paul 1. 〈◊〉 15. 29. If the Dead rise not at all why are they then baptized for the Dead As for the other Articles of the Creed viz. Such as are predicated of Christ as His being conceived of the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary c. and those other two The Holy Catholick Church and The Forgiveness of Sins I conceive them to be introduced the second way viz. in opposition to Heresies as they sprung up in the Church as was conceived by the Holy Ghost in opposition to the 〈◊〉 Ebionites and Cerinthians who taught that Christ was born in the ordinary and common way as other Men and Women are Was born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate c. in contradiction to the Docetae Simonians and others who affirmed Christ to be a Man not really but only Phantastically or in appearance of which Hereticks 〈◊〉 speaks and 〈◊〉 them his forementioned Creed seems particularly to be levelled The Remission of Sins against the Basitidians who held that not all Sins but only involuntary ones would be remitted or rather against the Novatians who denied remission to the Lapsed The Holy Catholick Church to exclude thereby all 〈◊〉 and Schismaticks from being within the Pale thereof By these two ways then was the Creed composed and by the latter hereof were those two Articles introduced of Christ's Descent into Hell and of the Communion of Saints The Communion of Saints was brought in last of all The Descent into Hell towards the 〈◊〉 end of the Fourth Century into the manner and occasion whereof as also the intent and meaning of this Article I had designed once to enquire having made some Collections concerning it but finding I should be then forc'd to pass the Limits of my prescribed time I have thought it expedient to omit it and to return to those Points from whence I have so long digressed CHAP. IV. § 1. Of Godfathers § 2. 〈◊〉 preceded Baptism The Form and Reason thereof § 3. Next came Baptism its self The Sacramental Water 〈◊〉 by Prayer § 4. The Person Baptized in the Name of the Trinity § 5. 〈◊〉 or dipping generally used § 6. Sometimes Perfusion or Sprinkling The Validity thereof considered § 7. After Baptism followed Prayers § 1. HAving in the former Chapter made a little Digression I now return to the matter that first occasioned it which was the Questions proposed to the Persons to be Baptized unto which Adult Persons answered for themselves and Susceptors or Godfathers for Children Of these Susceptors or Sponsors 〈◊〉 speaks where he thus adviseth the delay of Childrens Baptism What necessity is there that Sponsors should expose themselves to danger who through Death may 〈◊〉 of the Performance of their Promises or may be deceived by the wicked Disposition of those they promise for Whether the use of Sponsors was from the Apostles Days I cannot determine unless the Negative may be conjectured from Justin 〈◊〉 Tertullian's Senior by Fisty Years who when he enumerates the Method and Form of Baptism says not one Word of Sponsors or Godfathers as may be seen in his Second Apology Pag. 93 94. § 2. When these Questions and Answers were ended then followed Exorcization the manner and end whereof was this The Minister put his Hands on the Persons Head that was to be Baptized and breathed in his Face implying thereby the Exorcization or expelling of the Devil or Evil Spirit from him and a preparing of him for Baptism and Confirmation when and where the good and holy Spirit was conferred and given This Practice I find mentioned by Clemens Alexandrinus who speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Exorcism before Baptism but more fully by some of those Bishops that were present at that famous Council of Carthage held Anno 258 in whose Determinations Exorcization is required as previous and antecedent to Baptism Thus in that of Crescens Bishop of Cirta I judge saith he that all Hereticks and Schismaticks who would come to the Catholick Church are not to be admitted till they have been first Exorcized and 〈◊〉 So also said Lucius Bishop of 〈◊〉 It is my Opinion that all Hereticks are to 〈◊〉 exorcized and baptized And thus more clearly Vincentius Bishop of Thibaris We know Hereticks to be worse than 〈◊〉 If therefore they would turn and come to the Lord we have a Rule of Truth which the Lord commanded the 〈◊〉 saying Go in my 〈◊〉 lay on Hands and cast out Devils Mark 16. 17. And in another place Go and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Matth. 28. 19. Therefore first let them come by Imposition of Hands in Exorcism and then by the Regeneration of Baptism that so they may be made Partakers of Christ's Promises but otherwise I think they cannot From this last Determination we may observe the Reason of these Exorcisms which arose from a misunderstanding of Christ's Valedictory Speech to his Disciples in Mark 16 17 c. In the 16th Verse of that Chapter 〈◊〉 them to go forth preaching the Gospel and to Baptize which was to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perpetual Ministration to the end of the World Then he proceeds to tell them v. 17 18. that for the speedier propagation of the Gofpel and that the Heathens 〈◊〉 the more readily embrace it he would confer on them and the first Preachers 〈◊〉 of the Gift of working Miracles that in 〈◊〉 Name they should cast out Devils and speak with new Tongues as they most 〈◊〉 did at the Day of Pentecost That they should take up Serpents as Paul did at 〈◊〉 without receiving any Injury and if they 〈◊〉 any deadly thing it should not hurt them They should say Hands on the Sick and they should recover All which they did as Ecclesiastical Histories 〈◊〉 testifie and St. Mark closes
sufficient Quantity of that Bread and Wine was presented to the Bishop or to him that officiated to be employed for the Sacramental Elements whose Consecration next succeeded which in the main was after this following Manner § 4. It is very likely that in many places the Minister first began with an Exhortation or Discourse touching the Nature and end of that Sacrament which the Congregation were going to partake of that so their Hearts might be the more elevated and raised into Heavenly Frames and Dispositions This may be gathered from the History of an Exorcist Woman related by Firmilian who took upon her to per. form many Ecclesiastical Administrations as to Baptize and Celebrate the Lord's Supper which last she did without the wonted Sermon or Discourse Which seems to intimate that in those days it was customary in Lesser Asia and perhaps at Carthage too for the Minister to make a Speech or Exhortation before the Participation of the Sacrament But whether this Practice was universal or more ancient than 〈◊〉 I cannot determin this that follows was viz. A Prayer over the Elements by him that Officiated unto which the People gave their Assent by saying Amen This Prayer is thus described by Justin Martyr Bread and Wine are offered to the Minister who receiving them gives Praise and Glory to the Lord of all through the Son and the Holy Ghost and in a large manner renders particular Thanks for the present Mercies who when he hath ended his Prayers and Praise all the People say Amen And when the Minister hath thus given Thanks and the People said Amen the Deacons distributed the Elements And again Bread and Wine are offered to the Minister who to the utmost of his Abilities sends up Prayers and Praises and the People say Amen and then the Consecrated Elements are distributed From this Description by Justin Martyr of the Sacramental Prayer we may observe these few things pertinent to the matter in hand I. That there was but one long Prayer antecedent to the Distribution of the Elements For he says That the Minister having received the Bread and Wine he offered up Prayers and Praise unto God in a large manner and when he had ended the People said Amen II. That this long Prayer consisted of two Parts viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he calls them that is Petition and Thanksgiving in the former they prayed for the Peace of the Church the Quiet of the World the Health of their Emperors and in a Word for all Men that needed their Prayers as it is represented by Tertullian We pray saith he for the Emperors for all that are in Authority under them for the State of the World for the Quiet of Affairs and for the Delay of the Day of Judgment In the latter they gave God thanks for sending Christ and for the Institution of that comfortable Sacrament desiring his Blessing on and Consecration of the Elements then before them III. That by this one Prayer both the Elements were consecrated at once for he says That the Minister took both Elements together and blessed them and then they were distributed He did not consecrate them distinctly but both together § 5. After Prayer was ended they read the Words of Institution that so the Elements might be consecrated by the Word as well as by Prayer Whence Origen calls the Sacramental Elements The Food that is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer And that is hallowed by the Word of God and Prayer And 〈◊〉 writes That when the Bread and Wine perceive the Word of God then it becomes the Eucharist of the Body and Blood of Christ. § 6. The Elements being thus Consecrated the Minister took the Bread and brake it The Bread which we break or or the broken Bread as it is styled by Irenaeus and then gave it to the Deacons who distributed it to the Communicants and after that the Cup which the Deacons in the like manner delivered So it was in Justin Martyr's time and Country The Element saith he being blessed the Deacons give to every one present of the Consecrated Bread and Wine But in Tertullian's Time and Country the Minister and not the Deacons distributed the Elements We receive saith he from no ones Hands but the Bishops And yet at the same Place not many years after The Deacons offered the Cup to those that were present So that herein there was a Diversity of Customs in some places the Deacons delivered the Elements in others the Bishop or the Minister that consecrated them But whether it was done either by Bishop or Deacons it seems probable that which of them soever did it they delivered the Sacramental Bread and Wine particularly to each Communicant I find but one Example to the contrary and that was in the Church of Alexandria where the Custom was to permit the People to take the Bread themselves from the Plate or Vessel wherein it was consecrated as is insinuated by Clemens Alexandrinus but in most other Churches it is likely that the Elements were particularly delivered to every single Communicant So it was in the Country of Justin Martyr where the Deacons gave to each one of the consecrated Bread and Wine So at Carthage in the time of Cyprian The Deacons offered the Cup to those that were present In the time of which Father it was usual for Children and Sucking Infants to receive the Sacrament unto whom it was necessary particularly to deliver the Elements since it was impossible for them to take it orderly from the Hands of others And therefore when a little sucking Girl refused to taste the Sacramental Wine The Deacon violently forc'd it down her Throat So it was also at Rome as appears from what Cornelius reports of his Antagonist Novatian that when he administer'd the Sacrament and divided and gave to each Man his part with his two Hands he held those of the Receiver saying to him Swear unto me by the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ that thou wilt never leave my Party to return to that of Cornelius so forcing the miserable Receiver instead of saying Amen to say I will not return to Cornelius § 7. As for the Posture of receiving at Alexandria the Custom was to stand at the Table and receive the Elements which may be supposed to have been 〈◊〉 this manner The Bread and Wine being consecrated the Communicants came up in order to the Communion Table and there standing received the Elements and then returned to their places again But whether this was universal I know not or whether any other postures were used I cannot determin only as for kneeling if the Sacrament was Celebrated on the Lords Day as usually it was or on any other Day between Easter and Whitsontide then no Church whatsoever kneeled for as Tertullian writes On the Lords Day we account it a
Sin to worship kneeling which custom we also observe from Easter to Whitsontide § 8. The Elements being thus blessed distributed and received they afterwards sung an Hymn or Psalm to the Praise and Glory of God as Tertullian writes Then every one sings an Hymn to God either of his own Composition or out of the Holy Scriptures Then followed for a Conclusion a Prayer of Thanksgiving to God Almighty for his inestimable Grace and Mercy as the same Tertullian saith Prayer concludes this Feast To which was subjoined a Collection for the Poor When as Justin Martyr reports Every one that was able and willing gave according to his Ability and that that was gathered was committed to the care of the Bishop who relieved therewith the Orphans and Widows the Sick and Distressed Prisoners Travellers Strangers and in a Word all that had need thereof CHAP. VII § 1. Of the Circumstances of Publick Worship § 2. Of the Place thereof In Times of Peace fixed Places for that end metonymically called Churches § 3. How those Churches were built § 4. No Holiness in those Places § 5. Of the Time of Publick Worship § 6. The First Day of the Week an usual Time § 7. Celebrated with Joyfulness esteemed holy and spent in an holy manner § 8. Their Reasons for the Observation of this Day § 9. The usual Title of this Day The Lord's Day § 10. Sometimes called Sunday but never the Sabbath-Day § 11. Saturday another Time of Publick Worship § 1. HItherto I have spoken of the several particular Acts of the Publick Worship of the Ancients I now come according to my propounded Order to enquire into the necessary Circumstances thereof By which I mean such things as are inseparable from all humane Actions as Place and Time Habit and Gesture As for Habit as much of that as is Controverted I have spoken to already in that Chapter where I discoursed of the Ministers Habit in Prayer And as for Gesture I have already treated of Worshipping towards the East And of their Posture at the Reception of the Lord's Supper There is nothing more disputed with reference thereunto besides the bowing at the Name of Jesus and the worshipping towards the Communion Table but both these being introduced after my prescribed time viz. above three hundred years after Christ I shall say nothing to them but pass on to the Discussing of the two remaining Circumstances of Publick Worship viz. Place and Time § 2. First As for Place This all will readily grant to be a necessary Circumstance of Divine Worship for if we serve God it is impossible but that it must be in one place or other Now one Query with respect hereunto may be Whether the Primitive Christians had determined fixed Places for their Publick Worship Unto which I answer That usually they had though it is true indeed that in times of Persecution or when their Circumstances would not permit them to have one usual sixed Place they met where-ever they could in Fields Deserts Ships or Inns Yet in times of Peace and Serenity they chose the most setled convenient Place that they could get for the Performance of their Solemn Services which place by a Metonymy they called the Church Thus at Rome the place where the Christians met and chose Fabian for their Bishop was the Church At Antioch Paulus Samosasatenus Bishop thereof ordered certain Women to sing Psalms to his Praise in the midst of the Church At Carthage the Baptized Persons renounced the Devil and all his Works in the Church And thus Fertullian very frequently calls their definite places for Divine Worship Churches § 3. As for the Form of these Churches or the Fashion of their Building I find this Description of them in Tertullian The House of our Dove like Religion is simple built on high and in open View respecting the Light as the Figure of the Holy Spirit and the East as the representation of Christ. The meaning whereofis that their Churches were erected on high and open places and made very light and shining in imitation of the Holy Ghost's Descent upon the Apostles at the Day of Pentecost who came down with Fire or Light upon them and that they were built towards the East in resemblance of Christ whom they apprehended in Scripture to be called the East concerning which Title and the reason thereof I have already discoursed in that Head concerning praying towards the East unto which place to avoid repetition I refer the Reader § 4. But tho' they had these fixed Places or Churches for Conveniency and Decency yet they did not imagin any such Sanctity or Holiness to be in them as to recommend or make more acceptable those Services that were discharged therein than if they had been performed elsewhere for as Clemens Alexandrinus writes Every place is in Truth holy where we receive any knowledge of God And as Justin Martyr saith Through Jesus Christ we are now all become Priests to God who hath promised to accept our Sacrifices in every or in any part of the World And therefore in times of Persecution or such like Emergencies they scrupled not to meet in other places but where-ever they could securely joyn together in their Religious Services there they met though it were in Fields Deserts Ships Inns or Prisons as was the Case and Practice of Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria So that the Primitive practice and Opinion with respect to this Circumstance of Place was That if the State of their Affairs would permit them they had fixed Places for their Publick Worship call'd Churches which they set apart to that use for Conveniency and Decencies sake but not attributing unto them any such Holiness as thereby to sanctifie those Services that were performed in them I know nothing more with respect to Place that requires our Consideration I shall therefore now proceed to enquire into the Time of Publick Worship under which will be comprehended the Primitive Fasts and Feasts § 5. Time is as necessary a Circumstance to Religious Worship as Place for whilst we are in this World we cannot serve God at all times but must have some determinate time to serve him in That God's People therefore under the Law might not be left at an uncertainty when to serve him it pleased the Almighty to institute the Sabbath the Passover and other Feasts at which times they were to congregate and assemble together to give unto God the Glory due unto his Name And for the same end under the Evangelical Administration there are particular Days and Seasons appointed for the Publick and Solemn Worship of the Glorious and Eternal Lord according to the Sayings of Clemens Romanus God hath required us to serve him in the appointed times and seasons For which Reason we ought to serve him at those determinated times That so worshipping him at those Commanded Seasons we may be blessed and accepted by
him § 6. Now the principallest and chiefest of these prescribed Times was the first Day of the Week on which they constantly met together to perform their Religious Services So writes Justin Martyr On the Day that is called Sunday all both of the Country and City assemble together where we preach and pray and discharge all the other usual parts of Divine Worship Upon which account those parts of God's Publick Worship are styled by Tertullian The Lord's Days Solemnities Aurelius who was ordained a Lector or a Clark by Cyprian is described in the Execution of his Office by reading on the Lord's Day And Victorinus Petavionensis represents this day as an usual time wherein they received the Lord's Supper Which was observed by the Heathen in Minucius Felix who mentions the Christians assembling to eat on a Solemn Day And Pliny reports that the Christians in his time met together on an appointed day to sing Praises unto Christ as a God and to bind themselves by a Sacrament § 7. This was the Day which Clemens Alexandrinus calls the Chief of Days our Rest indeed Which they observed as the highest and supremest Festival On Sunday we give our selves to Joy saith Tertullian And before him St. Barnabas We keep the Eighth Day with Gladness And Ignatius We observe the Lord's Day banishing every thing on this day that had the least tendency to or the least appearance of Sorrow and Grief inasmuch that now they esteemed it a Sin either to fast or kneel Even the Montanists themselves those rigid Observers of Fasts and Abstinences Abstained from Fasting on this most glad and joying day This day they accounted Holy as Dionysius Bishop of Corinth in his Letter to the Church of Rome saith To day being the Lord's Day we keep it holy The way wherein they sanctified it or kept it holy was the employing of themselves in Acts of Divine Worship and Adoration especially in the Publick Parts thereof which they constantly performed on this day as has been already proved and in that forementioned Letter where Dionysius Bishop of Corinth writ unto the Church of Rome that that day being the Lord's Day they kept it holy The manner of sanctifying it is immediately subjoined In it saith he we have read your Epistle as also the first Epistle of Clemens And Clemens Alexandrinus writes That a true Christian according to the Commands of the Gospel observes the Lords Day by casting out all 〈◊〉 Thoughts and entertaining all good ones glorifying the Resurrection of the Lord on that day § 8. The Reafon why they observed this Day with so much Joy and Gladness was that they might gratefully commemorate the glorious Resurrection of their Redeemer that happened thereon So writes St. Barnabas We keep the eighth day with gladness on which Christ arose from the Dead So says Ignatius Let us keep the Lord's Day on which our Life arose through 〈◊〉 And so says Clemens Alexandrinus He that truly observes the Lord's Day glorifies therein the Resurrection of the Lord. Justin Martyr relates that On Sunday the Christians assembled together because it was the first Day of the Week on which God out of the confused Chaos made the World and Jesus Christ our Saviour arose from the Dead for on Fryday he was Crucified and on Sunday he appeared to his Apostles and Disciples and taught them those things that the Christians now believe And to the same purpose Origen adviseth his Auditors to pray unto Almighty God especially on the Lord's Day which is a Commemoration of Christ's Passion for the Resurrection of Christ is not only celebrated once a year but every seven days § 9. From hence it was that the usual Appellation of this Day both by the Greek and Latin Churches was The Lords Day So it is styled by Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lords Day And amongst the Latins by Victorinus Petavionensis Dies Dominicus the Lords Day As also by an African Synod And by Tertullian Sometimes it is simply called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dominicus that is the Lords without the addition of the Word Day as it is thus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Ignatius And Dominicus by Cyprian § 10. So that the Lords Day was the common and ordinary Title of this blessed and glorious Day though sometimes in compliance with the Heathens that they might know what Day they meant thereby they called it in their Phrase Sunday so termed because Dedicated to the Sun Thus Justin Martyr informing the Heathens of the Time and Manner of the Christians Assemblies tells them That on the Day called Sunday they met together for their Religious Exereises And That on Sunday they assembled together And so Tertullian upon the same occasion lets the Heathens know that the Christians indulged themselves on Sunday to Mirth and joyfulness But though they so far complyed with the Heathens as to call this Sunday yet I do not find that they ever so far indulged the Jews as to call it the Sabbath Day for through all their Writings as may be especially seen in Tertullian and Justin Martyr they violently declaim against Sabbatizing or keeping the Sabbath Day that is the Judaical Observation of the Seventh Day which we must always understand by the Word Sabbatum in the Writings of the Ancients not the Observation of the first Day or the Lords Day for that was constantly celebrated as it has been already proved and by those who condemn the Observance of the Sabbath Day the Sanctification of the Lord's Day is approved and recommended as by Justin Martyr and Tertullian in those Passages already cited unto which we may add that clear Passage of Ignatius Let us no longer Sabbatize but keep the Lords Day on which our Life rose Or as it is more fully expressed in his interpolated Epistle Instead of Sabbatizing let every Christian keep the Lords Day the Day on which Christ rose again the Queen of Days on which our Life arose and Death was conquered by Christ. § 11. So that their not Sabbatizing did not exclude their keeping of the Lords Day nor the Christian but only the Judaical Observance of the Sabbath or Seventh Day for the Eastern Churches in compliance with the Jewish Converts who were numerous in those Parts performed on the Seventh Day the same publick Religious Services that they did on the First Day observing both the one and the other as a Festival Whence Origen enumerates Saturday as one of the four Feasts solemnized in his time though on the contrary some of the Western Churches that they might not seem to Judaise fasted on Saturday as Victorinus Petavionensis writes We use to fast on the Seventh Day And It is our custom then to fast that we may not seem with the Jews to observe the Sabbath So that
besides the Lord's Day Saturday was an usual Season whereon many Churches solemnized their Religious Services As for those other times in which they Publickly assembled for the Performance of Divine Worship they will fall under the two General Heads of Times of Fasting and Times of Feasting of which in the following Chapters CHAP. VIII § Of the Primitive Fasts two-fold Occasional and Fix'd Of Occasional Fasts what they were and by whom appointed § 2. Of fixt Fasts two-fold Weekly and Annual Wednesdays and Fridays weekly Fasts till what time of the Day observed and why observed § 3. One necessary Annual Fast viz. Lent Why they fasted at Lent and how long lasted § 4. Of the manner of their Fasts Three sorts of Fasts viz. Statio Jejunium and Superpositio What those several Kinds were and at what times observed § 1. IN this Chapter I shall make an Enquiry into the Primitive Fasts which may be considered in a two-fold respect either as Occasional or Fixt Occasional Fasts were such as were not determined by any constant fixed Period of Time but observed on extraordinary and unusual Seasons according as the Variety and Necessity of their Circumstances did require them Thus in Times of Great and Imminent Danger either of Church or State when by their Sins they had kindled God's Wrath and Fury against them that they might divert his Vengeance and appease his offended Majesty they appointed set Days and Times for the Abasing of themselves before the Lord for the seeking of his Face by Prayer and Fasting abstaining from the Food of their Bodies and practising all external Acts of Humiliation as so many Indications of the internal Contrition of their Hearts and Souls So Cyprian in the time of a sharp Persecution advised his Flock To seek to appease and pacifie the Lord not only by Prayers but by Fastings and by Tears and by all kind of Intreaties And when the same Father foresaw an approaching Persecution he writ to Cornelius Bishop of Rome That since God was pleased in his Providence to warn them of an approaching Fight and Tryal they ought with their whole Flocks diligently to fast and watch and pray to give themselves to continual Groans and frequent Prayers for those are our Spiritual Arms that make us firmly to stand and persevere Tertullian jeers the Heathens That in times of Danger or great necessity after they had voluptuously and sensually glutted themselves they then ran to the Capitol and with all outward Signs of Humility deprecated Gods Judgments and implored his mercy whilst in the mean time they were Enemies unto him But says he We on such Emergencies and Occasions abstain from all things give our selves wholly to fasting roll our selves in Sackcloth and Ashes thus incline God as it were to repent to have Mercy and Compassion upon us for by this way God is honoured These Occasional Fasts were appointed by the Bishops of every Church as they saw fit and necessary So writes Tertullian The Bishops are wont to ordain Fasts for their Churches according as the Circumstances of the Churches require § 2. The next sort of Fasts were set or fixed ones that is such as were always observed at the same Time and Season and these again were two fold either Weekly or Annual First Weekly These were kept every Wednesday and Friday as Clemens Alexandrinus relates that they fasted on every Wednesday and Friday These Fasts were commonly called Stations in allusion to the Military Stations or the Soldiers standing when on the Guard Thus Tertullian mentions Their Stationary Days And writes that Wednesdays and Fridays were Stations On these Stationary Days their Fasts ended at three a Clock in the Afternoon whence they are called by Tertullian The half Fasts of Stations Though some on Fridays lengthened out their Fasts till Evening Why they fasted on Wednesday rather than on any other Day of the Week I cannot find but on Friday they chose to fast because Christ was Crucified thereon § 3. The next sort of fixed Fasts is such as are annual of which kind they had but one viz. Lent And indeed besides this they had no other necessary fixed Fast 〈◊〉 Weekly nor Yearly the Faithful were not strictly obliged to the observation of any other as will be evident from what follows It is true they fasted Wednesdays and Fridays but this was ex Arbitrio of their own Free Will and Choice not ex imperio of Command or Necessity For when the Montanists began to impose as a Duty other stinted Fasts they were for so doing branded as Hereticks Who saith Apollonius concerning Montanus is this new Doctor His Works and Doctrin evidently declare him this is he that teaches the Dissolution of Marriages and prescribes Fasts And for the same Practice they were accused by the Orthodox for Galaticising or committing the Error of the Galatians in observing Days and Months and Years But that the Ancients esteemed Lent to be the only necessary fixed Fast and any other even the Stationary Days to be indifferent will appear most evidently from this ensuing Passage of Tertullian Tertullian being now a Montanist and defending their prescribed Fasts against the Orthodox thus jeeringly exposes the Opinions of his Adversaries with respect to the necessary determined times of Fasting Forsooth saith he they think that according to the Gospel those days are to be prescribed Fasts wherein the Bridegroom was takeu away i.e. Lent and those to be the only Fasts of Christians the Legal and Prophetical Fasts being abolished and that for others we may indifferently fast according to our Will not out of necessity or command but according to our Circumstances and conditions and that so the Apostles abserved commanding no other fixed and common Fasts besides this no not the Stationary Days which indeed they keep on Wednesdays and Fridays and do all observe but yet not in obedience to any Command or to the end of the Day but Prayers are concluded at three a Clock in the Afternoon according to the Example of Peter in the Acts. So that from hence it is evident That the Orthodox apprehended themselves to be free from the necessary Observation of the Stationary Fasts and to be only strictly obliged to fast on those Days wherein the Bridegroom was taken away or on Lent from which Periphrasis of Lent we may collect both the Reason and the Duration thereof First the Reason thereof or the Ground on which they founded the necessity of this Fast and that was on that saying of Christ in Matth. 9. 15. The Days will come when the Bridegroom shall be taken from them This they imagined to be an Injunction of Christ to all his Followers to fast at that time when the Bridegroom should be taken away The Bridegroom they esteemed to be Christ the time when he was taken away his Crucifixion Death and continuing under the Power of Death to the instant of his
other Churches kept it the Lords Day after This Diversity of Customs created a violent Disorder and Confusion amongst the Christians for the Church of Rome would impose their Usages on the Churches of the Lesser Asia unto which the latter peremptorily refused to submit To appease these Heats and Storms Polycarp Bishop of Smirna came to Rome to confer with Anicetus Bishop of that Church about it who 〈◊〉 that every Church should be left to follow its own Custom as accordingly they were to the times of Pope Victor who revived this Controversie and was so turbulent and imperious as that he excommunicated the Asiaticks for refusing to comply with the Church of Rome in this matter condemning them as Hereticks loading them with the long and frightful Name of Tessareskaidekatitae or Quartodecimani so called because they kept their Easter Quarta Decima Luna upon the Fourteenth Day after the appearance of the Moon or at the Full Moon on what Day soever it happened But however the Asiaticks stood their Ground and still maintained their old Custom till the Council of Nice Anno 325. by their Authority decided this Controversie decreeing that throughout the whole Christian World Easter should be observed not on the Day on which the Jewish Passover fell but on the Lord's Day ensuing as it was ever after observed and followed § 3. The next Feast that was observed was Whitsunday or Pentecost in Commemoration of the Holy Ghosts Descent on the Apostles which also was very ancient being mentioned several times by Tertullian and reckon'd by Origen for one of the four Festivals observed in his time the other Three being Sundays Saturdays and Easter § 4. As for Christmass or the time of Christs Nativity there is a Passage in Clemens Alexandrinus which seems to intimate that it was then observed as a Festival For speaking of the Time when Christ was born he says that those who had curiously search'd into it affixed it to the 25th Day of the Month Pachon But the Basilidian Hereticks held otherwise who also observed as a Feast the Day of Christs Baptism From which Words who also if that be the meaning of the Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one might be apt to infer that the meaning of Clemens Alexandrinus was that the Basilidians not only feasted at the time of Christs Nativity but also at the time of his Baptism But whether this Interpretation will hold I leave to the Learned Reader to determin On the contrary there are other Considerations which more strongly insinuate that this Festival was not so early solemnized as that when Origen reckons up the Feasts observed in his Age he mentions not one Syllable of Christmas and it seems improbable that they should Celebrate Christs Nativity when they disagreed about the Month and Day when Christ was born Clemens Alexandrinus reckons from the Birth of Christ to the Death of Commodus exactly one hundred ninety four Years one month and thirteen days which years must be computed according to the Nabonassar or Egyptian Account who varied from this in our year in that they had only 365 days in a year never taking notice of the odd Hours or Quadrant of a Day that every fourth Year makes a whole Day and are accordingly by us then added to the Month of February which maketh the Bissextile or Leapyear So that though the Egyptians always begun their Year with the first day of the Month Thoth yet making no Account of the Annual odd Hours that Month wandereth throughout the whole Year And whereas now the first Day of that Month is the first Day of our March about Seven Hundred Years hence it will be the first of September and after Seven Hundred Years more or near thereabouts it will come to the first of March again Wherefore that we may reduce unto our Style this Calculation of Clemens Alexandrinus we must deduce for those odd Hours which are not accounted one Month and Eighteen Days and so reckoning the Birth of Christ from the Death of Commodus which happened on the first Day of January to be One Hundred Ninety Four Years wanting five or six Days it will appear that Christ was born on the 25th or 26th of the Month of December according to the Julian Account which is the Epoch we follow But as the same Father farther writes in the same place There were some who more curiously searching after the Year and Day of Christs Nativity affixed the latter to the 25th of the Month Pachon Now in that Year in which Christ was born the Month Pachon commenced the twentieth Day of April So that according to this Computation Christ was born the 16th Day of May. Nay there were yet some other ingenious Men as the same Father continues to write that assigned Christ's Nativity to the 24th or 25th of the Month Pharmuthi which answers to our 16th or 17th of April So that there were Diversities of Opinion concerning the Time of Christs Birth which makes it very probable that there was then no particular Feast observed in Commemoration of that Glorious and transcendent Mercy § 5. There is yet another Feast called by us Epiphany wherein there is a Commemoration of Christs Baptism which I find to have been peculiarly Solemnized by the Basilidian Hereticks For thus Clemens Alexandrinus reports it to be a particular Custom of theirs to keep as a Festival the day of Christs Baptism The Day on which Christ was baptized they said to be the fifteenth of the Month Tyby in the fifteenth Year of the Reign of the Emperor Tiberius which answers to our One and Thirtieth of December or as others imagin'd it On the Eleventh of the Month Tyby which was the Seven and Twentieth of our December § 6. Besides these forementioned Festivals there were none others observed to the Honour of the blessed Jesus nor of the Virgin Mary nor of the Holy Apostles and Evangelists and which may be a little observable it is very seldom if ever that the Ancients give the Title of Saints to those Holy Persons but singly style them Peter Paul John c. not St. Peter St. Paul or St. John § 7. But now there was another sort of Festivals which every Church Celebrated in the Commemoration of its own Martyrs which was on the Anniversary Day of their Martyrdoms They assembled together where they recited the Martyrs Glorious Actions exhorted to an Imitation of them and blessed God for them So says Cyprian The Passions of the Martyrs we Celebrate with an Anniversary Commemoration And so writes Tertullian Vpon the Annual Day of the Martyrs Sufferings we offer Thanks to God for them When this Practice began cannot certainly be determined it is first found mentioned in the Letter of the Church of Smirna to the Church of Philomilium touching the Death of Polycarp wherein they write That they had gathered up his Martyr'd Bones and buried them in a
many Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places but yet saith he never any one for this broke the Peace and Vnity of the Church One Church or Bishop did not in those days Anathematize another for a disagreement in Rites and Customs except when Victor Bishop of Rome through his Pride and Turbulency excommunicated the Asiatick Bishops for their different Observation of Easter from the Church of Rome which Action of his was very ill resented by the other Bishops of the Christian Churches and condemned by them as alien from Peace and Unity and contrary to that Love and Charity which is the very Soul and Spirit of the Gospel even the Bishops of his own Party that celebrated Easter on the same Day that he did censured his 〈◊〉 and violence as unchristian and uncharitable and writ several Letters wherein they severely checkt him as Eusebius reports in whose time they were extant all which are now lost except the Fragment of an Epistle written by Irenaeus and other Bishops of France wherein they affirm that Victor was in the right with respect to the time of Easter that it ought to be celebrated as he said on the Lords Day but that yet he had done very 〈◊〉 to cut off from the Vnity of the Church those that observed it otherwise that it had never been known that any Churches were excommunicated for a disagreement in Rites 〈◊〉 of which there was not only in the time of Easter 〈◊〉 self but in the Fast that preceded it Some fasted one day others more some forty hours which variety of Observations began not first in our Age but long before us in the times of our Ancestors who yet preserved Peace and Vnity amongst themselves as we now do for the Diversity of 〈◊〉 commended the Vnity of Faith And as for this 〈◊〉 concerning the time of Easter the Bishops which governed the Church of Rome before Soter viz. Anicetus Pius Higynus Telesphorus and Xystus they never celebrated it the same time with the 〈◊〉 neither would they permit any of their People so to do but yet they 〈◊〉 kind and 〈◊〉 to those who came to them from those 〈◊〉 where they did otherwise observe it and never any for this Cause were thrown out of the Church even your Predecessors though they did not keep it yet they sent the Eucharist to those that did keep it and when in the times of Anicetus blessed Polycarp came to Rome and there were some Controversies between them they did not seperate from one another but still maintained Peace and Love And though Anicetus could never perswade Polycarp nor Polycarp Anicetus to be of each others mind yet they communicated one with another and Anicetus in Honour to Polycarpus permitted him to Consecrate the Sacrament in his Church and so they departed in mutual love and kindness and all the Churches whether observing or not observing the same Day retained Peace and Vnity amongst themselves § 4. But though one Church could not oblige another to a Conformity in Rites and Customs yet a particular Church or Parish could enforce its own Members to such a Conformity an instance whereof we meet with in that famous Controversie about the Time of Easter It was the Custom of the Asiaticks to celebrate that Feast at the Full Moon or at the same time with the Jewish Passover on whatsoever day of the Week it happened It was the manner at Rome to observe it the Lords Day after and both these Churches quietly followed their several Usages without imposing them on each other But yet the Churches of Asia permitted none of their Members to solemnize it after the Roman manner neither did the Churches of Rome or of the West license any of their Inhabitants to celebrate it after the Asiatick manner for if either of them had granted any such thing there must have ensued Confusion and Disorder to have seen Easter differently observed in one and the same Church whilst some Members of a Parish where Fasting to behold others Feasting would have been a perfect Ataxy and Irregularity Therefore though Anioetus Bishop of Rome retained Peace and Unity with Foreign Churches that differed from him as to the Time of Easter without obliging them to a Compliance with the Roman Custom yet he peremptorily required it of the Members of his own Church and would never permit them to Solemnize that Feast on the same time with the Asiaticks So that though every Church had the Liberty to use what Rites she pleased yet every particular Member had not but was obliged to observe the Manners and Customs of that Church where he lived or where he occasionally communicated A Church Collectively or the Majority 〈◊〉 a Church with their Bishop could change their old Customs and introduce new ones as was done in the Affair of Easter the Asiaticks at length submitting to the Roman Usage but till that was done every particular Member was required to follow the old Customs of that Church to which he belonged and not to bring in any Innovations or new Rites because as was said before that would beget Tumults and Disorders and the Persons so acting would be guilty of that Strife and Contention which is condemned by those Words of the Holy Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 16. But if any Man seem to be contentious we have no such custom neither the Churches of God Which is as if the Apostle had said If any Men either to shew their Wit or to head and strengthen a Party will contradict what we have said and affirm it to be decent and comely either for Men to pray covered or Women uncovered This should silence such Contentious Opposers that there is no such Rite or Custom in any of the Churches of God but their Practice is the very same with what we have directed unto and therefore to that they ought peaceably and quietly to submit and yield Thus now I have finished this Enquiry and have as far as I could search'd into what was first proposed If I have not illustrated any Point as clearly as might be expected the reason is because I found nothing farther pertinent thereunto in those Writings to which I am confined if I had I should freely have mentioned it Whether I have been mistaken in the Sense and Meaning of any Passage I must leave unto my Readers to judge all that I can say is that I am not conscious to my self of any wilful and designed Mistakes having throughout this whole Discourse endeavoured deavoured to find out the plain and naked Truth without being byass'd to any Party or Faction whatsoever and that if any one shall be so kind and favourable as to convince me of any Slips or Errors which I may have committed through Inconsideration or want of a due Understanding I shall thankfully acknowledge them and willingly renounce and leave them § 5. What hath been related concerning the Constitution Discipline Unity and Worship of the Primitive
not have so earnestly press'd him 〈◊〉 his permission as we find they did Thus then we have viewed the Members of the Spiritual Court and have proved that they were all the Members or the whole Body of the Church Clergy as well as Laity and Laity as well as Clergy 〈◊〉 one without the other but both together But now forasmuch as the People were encumbred with earthly business and it was not possible that they could constantly give their attendance and narrowly search into every thing that should be brought before them Therefore we may suppose that the Members of the Presbytery who as was said before under the Head of Ordination were to be free from all Worldly Cares and Employments were appointed as a Committee to prepare matters for the whole Court An instance whereof we meet with in Maximus Vrbanus Sidonius and some others that had joined in the Schism of Novatian who being sensible of their Fault Came into the Presbytery and desir'd the Churches Peace the Presbytery accepted of their Submission and proposed it to the whole Church who readily embraced it So that the Presbytery prepared matters for the whole Court which Court was the Supreme Tribunal within the Limits of that Parish before whom all matters that there occurred were tried and by whom all were judged only when any great and difficult points were decided 't is probable it was the custom to desire the Bishops of the neighbouring Parishes to come over and assist there in presence that so their Censures might be the freer from any imputation of Partiality or Injustice Thus when a nice Affair was to be determined at Rome Cornelius desired five Bishops to assist that so what they did might be firm and indisputable § 4. Having thus found out the Members of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal the next thing to be consider'd is the manner and Form of their Proceedings in the Exercise of their Judicial Power and Authority which by Tertullian is described to be after this manner When at their general Assemblies the other parts of Divine Worship were ended then followed Exhortations Reproofs and a Divine Censure for the Judgment is given with great weight as amongst those that are sure that God beholds what they do and this is one of the highest Preludiums and Forerunners of the Judgment to come when the Delinquent is banished from the Communion of Prayers Assemblies and all Holy Commerce Approved Elders preside there who obtained that Honour by Testimony not by Price So that when the Consistory was sat the Bishop and his assisting Presbyters here called Approved Elders but commonly the Presbytery presided and moderated all things there proposed and debated Then the Offenders if possible were actually brought before them tho' the non-appearance of the Criminals was no impediment to their Proceedings for notwithstanding they condemned them and censured them not only for those Crimes for which they were cited to appear but also for their Contumacy and Stubbornness as Cyprian writes the Proud and Obstinate are killed with the Spiritual Sword whilst they are cast out of the Church and those that are stubborn and fear not God but go off from the Church let no Man accompany But yet I say if possible the Offenders personally appeared that so their Crimes might be objected to them to which they were to plead as Cyprian says that the Lapsed were to plead their Cause before the Clergy and the whole Church Then the Court consider'd the Defendant's Plea as Cyprian writes that all things were debated in common amongst them And if the Bishop and Majority of the Court judged their Defence insufficient they were voted by their common Suffrage to be condemned and censured as Cyprian writes that whoever was excommunicated it was by the Divine Suffrages of the People The Delinquent being thus cast or found Guilty the next thing that succeeded was the formal Declaration of the Sentence of the Court which was pronounced as Tertullian intimates in that fore-quoted Passage by one of the presiding Elders that is either by the Bishop or a Presbyter Commission'd by him the manner of which Pronunciation seems also from that Passage to be thus He that passed the formal Sentence on the Criminal first began with Exhortations that is as we may reasonably suppose he exhorted the Faithful to use all diligent Care and Fear to avoid those Sins and Crimes which had brought the Offenders before them to so lamentable and fatal Condition Then followed Reproofs which were sharp Rebukes and Reprehensions to the Delinquents for their foul Miscarriages and enormous Practices setting forth the Evil Villany and Misery of them That they were provoking to God grievous to the Faithful scandalous to Religion and in fine ruining and pernicious to themselves in that it rendred them obnoxious to that Divine Censure which then immediately as the Conclusion of all he formally pronounced on them Which brings me to the Consideration of the Fourth Query viz. What the Primitive Censures were of which in the following Section § 5. Now in answer hereunto as the Church so her Arms were Spiritual her Thunderbolts 〈◊〉 in Suspensions and Excommunications in ejecting and throwing out of the Church her scandalous and rotten Members not permitting a re-induction of them till by visible signs of Repentance they had satisfied for their Crimes and Villanies Various are the Appellations that are given to the Sentence of Excommunication in the Writings of the Ancients By Dionysius Alexandrinus it is called A driving away from the Church By Tertullian A casting out from the Churches Communion and a driving from Communion By Cyprian A Separation from the Church An Ejection out of the Church A killing with the Spiritual Sword and many other such like Terms occur in the Fathers all tending to describe the Fearfulness and Misery of an Excommunicated State So tremendous was it that whosoever was in that condition was look'd upon as accursed by God and really was so by Men who esteem'd him as a Limb of Satan and a Member of the Devil shunning his Company as they did the Plague or any other infectious Disease Those says Cyprian that are Proud and fear not God but go off from the Church let no Man accompany And therefore Irenaeus speaking concerning the Hereticks who were all Excommunicated says that according to the Command of Paul we must avoid them and John forbids us so much as to wish them God speed since by so doing we communicate with their Evil Works And Tertullian in that forementioned place writes That the Delinquent was banished from the Communion of Prayers Assemblies and all holy Converse being look'd upon as one unworthy of humane Society cast out of the Church of God here and if impenitently dying in that condition as certainly excluded the Kingdom of God hereafter For as Origen writes on Matth. 18. 18. on which Text Excommunication is founded