AN ANSWER TO THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE DISSERTATIONS TOUCHING IGNATIVS'S EPISTLES and the EPISCOPACIE in them asserted By H. HAMMOND D. D. LONDON Printed by J. G. for Richard Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1654. AN ANSVVER TO THE ANIMADVERSIONS on the Disputations concerning EPISCOPACY THE INTRODVCTION Nu. 1. I Had thought I had concluded the Readers trouble and mine own when I had gotten to an end of the Assemblers Exceptions but by that time I had transmitted those debates to the Printer and from him received one Sheet of the Impression I found my self called out anew by a Preface to a Book of a very distant subject The Saints verseverance wherein is inserted a Discourse touching the Epistles of Ignatius and the Episcopacy in them asserted and some animadversions on Dr. H. H. his Dissertations on that subject And this Preface and these contents of it leâ—t it might be less discernable thought fit to be exprest in the Title page and subscribed by John Owen servant of Jesus Christ in the work of the Gospel 2. And although the speedy return of such tasks is not overgratefull to me yet because 1. I conceive it is his pleasure that we should enter this commerce And 2. because the work of the Gospel is so glorious an employment that I cannot be averse or flow to the giving all possible satisfaction to any which professeth to labour in it And 3. because if the Reader so consent this discourse may be annext to the former debates with the Provincial Assembly being likely to be on the same heads which are there spoken to I shall not doubt thus speedily to undertake the labour of it and if his Animadversions prove any way usefull to me I shall acknowledge by whom I have profited retract most readily what he shall give me cause to retract and never multiply any debates which may be thus more compendiously ended being confident that no miscarriage of mine of which yet I am not conscious to have committed any in the Book of Dissert will be able to prejudice the main truth which is there defended the Institution of Bishops by the Apostles CHAP. I. Of the Apostolical Canons Sect. 1. The Controversie about them The Codex Canonum What is meant by Apooryphal and so by Genuine Canons The two mistakes of the Praefacer which produceth his Animadversion What is meant by the title Apostolical Canons The Praefacers ungrounded suggestion against the writings of the first times Numb 〈◊〉 TO set out then with all speed that may be on this new Stage not knowing of what length it may prove the first Animadversion I finde my self concern'd in is in these words The first Writings that are imposed on us after the Canonical Scriptures are the eight Books of Clement commonly called The Apostles Constitutions being pretended to be written by him at their appointment with the Canons ascribed to the same persons These we shall buâ— salute for besides that they are but faintly defended by any of the Papists disavowed and disclaimed as Apocryphal by the most learned of them as Bellarmine de Script Eccles in Clem. who approves onely of fifty Canons of eighty five Baronius An. Dom. 102 14. who addes thirty more and Biâ—ius with a little inlargement of Canons in Tit. Câ—n. T. 1. Con. p. 17. and have been throughly disproved and decryed by all Protestant writers that have had any occasion to deal with them their folly and falsity their impostures â—…triflings have of late been so fully manifested by Dallaeus de Pseudepigrapâ—iâ— Apost that nothing need be added thereunto Of him may Dr. H. H. learn the truth of that insinuation of his Dissert 2 c 6. sect 3. Canone Apostolico secundo semper inter genninos habito but of the confidence of this Author in his assertions afterward 2. I am not here much surprised 1. with this charge of untruth and 2. this promise that my confidence in asserting shall be discovered knowing that it was one of Aristotles insinuations in his Elenchs at the beginning of a Dispute to endeavour to put the Respondent in passion and then he might easily have fallacies imposed on him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If this were his design I have more reasons than that one to hope his pardon if I do not thus gratifie him And although there be not one word said in this place to prove either of these charges but I am appointed to learn one from Mr. Daillé whose book I have not been so curious as to see and to expect the other afterwards from the Prefacer yet being concerned to know that veracity and humility are my duties as I am a Christian and that I ought not to live one minute under the scandal of having offended against either of them and having yet no motive to retract that expression in the Dissert I am obliged to render an account of my using it And it is this 3. In the second Canon of the Council in Trullo An. 681. I find a conciliarie affirmation of eighty five Canons under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Canons of the holy and honourable Apostles before us And what was there confirmed is farther ratified by the second Council of Nice An. 787. which cites the 53d of those Canons And this I take for a testimonie of the Eastern Churches reception of that number of 85 Apostolical Canons at that time Whereas in the Western Churches both before and after this time although the Canons of the Apostles were by the Eastern communicated to them yet that number was not received but in a Council of seventy Bishops at Rome under Pope Gelasius somewhat before 500 years after CHRIST the Book of the Apostles Canons was defined to be Apocryphal By Apocryâ—hal here I conceive to be meant such as are not obligatorie wâ—…ch are not so owned or received by the Church as to be entered into Codex ordinarily known by the name of Corpus Canonum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Phâ—tiâ—s his stile The body of Synodical Canons their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Justiniaâ—… their Rule of Discipline in like manner as the Books of Canonical Scripture to which Justinian added the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or definitions of the four first General Councils made up their Rule of Doctrines That there was such a Codex we find in the fourth General Council that of Chalcedon when the Book of Canons as well as the Bible was solemnly brought in at the opening of the Council and * call'd for to be read before them as occasion required And 't is sufficiently known what Justellus observes That the Christian Church was ruled of old by a double Law Divine the Books of the Canonical Scripture and Canonical the Codex of Canons And those Canons that were not received into that Codex though they might hold the authority due to antient pieces be esteemed worthy the reading and observing were yet stiled Apocryphal i. e. usefull though not obligatory
Bishops of the Antient Church who were called saith Tertullian de Praseript Apostolici viri Apostolical men Apostolicorum primum Canones dein nonnullorum Latinorum ignorantia aliquoâ— literarum detractione Apostolorum dicti sunt They were first callâ—d the Canons of the Apostolicks after by the ignorance of some Latine Writers and by the taking away of a few Letters they were called the Canons of the Apostles 13. Among Protestants I might instance in the Archbishop of Armagh here cited under the name of the Learned Vsher who by stiling the fifty Veteres Canones Ecclesiasticos â—b antiquitatem Apostolicos doctos the old Ecclesiastical Canons for their Antiquity stiled Apostolical and distinguishing them from the thirty five nova Capitula novitii Canones new Chapters and novice Canons clearly justifies all that I have said But I have no reason to goe any farther than Dr. Blondel himself with whom I had then to doe and I am sure 't is ordinary with him to cite these Canons under the title of Apostolick and so to yeeld them their authority yet I suppose is not thought by his Colleague Mr. Daillé to have made the Apostles themselves the Authors of them you may see it twice together in two lines Apol. pro sent Hieron pag. 96. Anno Dom. 363. Laodicano Canone 56. secundum Apostolicum 38. cautum fuit Care was taken by the Council of Laodicaea Can. 56. according to the 38th Apostolical Canon calling it first an Apostolick Canon and then affirming it the rule by which the Laodicaean Canon was made and so clearly giving it a greater Antiquity than that Council And immediately again Apostolico 33d longè antequam Ancyrae conveniret Synodus in the 33d Apostolick Canon long before the Synod met at Ancyra which we know was in the year 314 and what was acknowledged to be long before that must be of a pretty antiquity although it were not written by the Apostles 14. 'T is true indeed some have thought fit to use greater exactness of speech as the Council of Paris Anno 580. calling them Canones quasi Apostolicos the Canons as it were Apostolick and Dionysius Exiguus and Isidorus Mercator Canones qui dicuntur Apostolicorum the Canons said to be the Apostles And Hincmarus Rhemensis saith they were A primis temporibus traditione viritim Apostolicorum virorum mentibus commendati From the first times by tradition of Apostliocal persons commended to the minds of men from man to man and a devotis quibusque collecti collected by all devout men See Concil Gallic l. 2. p. 473 474. And as for those which pretend the whole 85. as well as the Constitutions to have been peun'd by Clemens there is little doubt but they did by so doing indeavour to impose false ware upon the Church but still this praejudgeth not my affirmation of the former fiftie that they were alwayes accounted genuine Not meaning thereby that they were written by the Apostles or at their appoint-ment by Clemens I say not a word that so much as insinuates either of those to be my sense and I can justly affirm it was not but genuine i. e. truly and without contradiction as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are taken for Synonyma's in this matter what they were by the Church generally taken to be i. e. Canons of antient Bishops before the times of the General Councils of Apostolical persons successâ—rs of the Apostles in Churches where they praesided called Apostolical Churches 15. I adde no more of a matter so clear yet before I proceed I shall desire the Author of this Animadversion to consider how unjustly his Censure hath fallen in the page immediately praecedent on the Writings of the first times immediately after the Apostles fell asleep His words are these I must be forced to preface the nomination of them the first Writers with some considerations The first is that known passage of Hegesippus in Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Setting out the corruption of the Church as to Doctrine immediately after the Apostles fell asleep whereof whosoever will impartially and with disengaged judgements search into the writings that of those dayes doe remain will perhaps finde more cause than is commonly imagined with him to complain 16. Here is a â—ad jealousie raised against all Antiquity even of the purest times next the Apostles and indefinitely without any limitation on the writings of those dayes that remain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. all that are extant in one common masse and yt besides that one saying of Hegesippus no one word added to found it on but onely dubious suspicious expressions will perhaps find more cause than is commonly imagined to warn all how they give any trust to the purest Antiquitie Whereas all that Hegesippus there saith is onely this which they that pay most reverence to Antiquity take as much notice of as he could wish viz. that the poyson of the Heretical or Apostatical or Atheistical Gnosticks in express words the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sect of the Gnosticks falsly so called the same that had been mentioned by St. Paul to Timothy and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Atheistical seducers did openly set up against the truth of Christ as soon as ever the Apostles were dead Which being by Hegesippaâ— terminated in the known despisers and persecuters of the true Church and Orthodox professors the grievous Wolves that worried the flock and those constantly resisted and combated with preacht against and written against by the Fathers and antient Writers and never observed by any man to have gainâ—d on them or infused any the least degree â—f their poyson into them or their Writings which are come to us which to undertake to make good against any opposer is no high pitch of confidence again to be censured in me It is a sad condition that the just and the unjust the false Teachers and the Orthodox Professors should fall under the same envy be involved under the same black censure those that watched over the flock as Shepheards and oft laid down their lives for the Sheep be again defamed and martyred by us their unkind posterity under pretence forsooth that they were in the Conspiracie of the Wolves also I leave this to his and the Readers consideration and so proceed to the next charge CHAP. II. Of Ignatius's Epistles Sect. 1. The comparison betwixt them and the Epistles of Clement and Polycarpe Of Salmasius and Blondel being the first that rejected them Of the Vir doctissimus answered by Vedelius Of Bishop Mountague's censure of Vedelius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of Salmasius's Contumely Title of Learned Grammarian Illecebre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consnlting Authors to serve our own turns Numb 1. THE next charge I find in the eighth page of this Preface in these words A late learned Doctor in his Dissertations about Episcopacy or Dispute for it against Salmasius and Blondellus tels us that we may take a taste
Apostles and their successors not by the people or the whole congregation cannot finde entrance with him And secondly from the recurring of such kind of Rhetorick as this so soon I might very probably conclude that his whole confidence was placed in this one Topick which is ordered both to lead the van and also to bring up the reere to be the reserve as well as the forlorne hope And then upon this view of his reply I desire it may be indifferently considered whether my arguments were not as valid to confirme my answer as his mirth and repetitions and bare negations without any attempt of proof were of force to assert the contrary 20. Next he promises to attend to my arguments but cannot hold his countenance againe they must be styled learned arguments â—orsooth to have spoken as he thought had been more like a serious person that meant to attend to arguments And the first that he attends to is that Corinth was the Metropolis of Greece in a politicall sense and acceptation of the word where the Proconsull had his residence and this he grants but for my consectary from thence that Epistle inscribed to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be conceived sent to the Christians of all Aâ—haia all the strength thereof saith he from the insinuatian of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in question 21. But first certainly this cannot be that fallacy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the begging of the question It is the â—…erring of that which is there proved both before and after before both as that signifies long before and immediately before long before viz. Dissert 4. c. 5. the erection of Metropoles and Metropolitanes in the Church had been demonstrated Immediately before it had been mentioned as a praecognâ—scendum that Corinth was such an one which if granted it must follow that there was a Metropolitan Arch-bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependent So againe this was proved after by the consent betwixt this and Paul's Eâ—istles those were written to all the Christians of all Achaia and then why should not this be resolved to be so written also And how then can the question be here said to be begged by me If this of Corinth's being a Metropolis in the politicall sense were not sufficient to inferr this conclusion first that might then have been said the consequence denied and traill made what was or what could be farther said to prove it but that method was not here thought safe it was easier to say the strength of the consectary is nothing but a pure begging of the question which yet I never heard said of a conclusion inferred from praemisses and after farther undertaken to be proved I desire to consult Aristotle in his discourse of that fallacie and he shall finde it was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on my side a begging of the question but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on his a denying the conclusion 22. This for the forme of his reply Secondly then as to the matter of it I did and still doe thinke it a concluding argument which I there used and being briefly set downe 't will be more explicitely this An Epistle addrest to a Metropolitical see under the title of the Church adjacent to such a chiefe City or Metropolis is addrest to all the Cities and Churches that relate to that Metropolis But Corinth was such a City and this Epistle was so addrest to it That Corinth was such a Metropolis was apparent and is not denyed as to the politicall acceptation of it And if it were so also in the Ecclesiastick there is no farther difficulty And if my supposing and not farther proving of this in that place were the infirme part of the discourse and begging of the question I must answer that I had no reason to expect it should be esteemed so having long before on occasion of the Angels in the Revelation entre 〈◊〉 into a discourse of Metropolitical Cities and shewed that not onely in the political but Ecclesiastical acceptation there were such in the Apostles and so in Clement's time 23 This was there manifested in many instances 1. in Antioch the Metropolis of Syria and Cilicia and all the Churches of those regions the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Antioch and dependent on that Secondly in Rome the Metropolis of the Roman Province or Vrbicarian region Thirdly in Alexandria the Metropolis of Egypt whereupon Marke is said by Eusâ—bius to have lonstituted Churches in the plural there all which under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the province of or belonging to Alexandria as here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were by Saint Mark committed to Anianus or Ananias and the Government administred by him all the rest of the Churches there planted by Mark relating to this as to the Metropolis Fourthly in Gortyna the prime Metropolis of Crete the Arch-Bishop whereof in the Epistle of Dionysius Bishop of Corinth Ann Ch 175. is styled Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church adjacent to i. e. the province of Gortyna and of all the rest in Crete Fifthly in Philippi the Metropolis of one Province of Macedonia Act. 16. 12. to which purpose it is that in the Epistle said to be written by Ignatius to them of Tarsus we finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Churches in the plural of the Philippians salute you Sixthly in the several Churches of Asia mentioned Rev. 1 each of them a Metropolis over some other â—ities and Ephesus the prime of all the Proconsular Asia And this forme or this state of things in the Church of God is there by three Canons of the three great Councels Nice Antioch Ephesus testified to be the ancient primitive Apostolical state 24. This being then done at large and thereby the Primitive constitution of Metropolitical Churches competently asserted it seemed to me sufficient but to re-mind the Reader that Corinth was one such Metropolis of Achaia or Greece and accordingly that upon that account in the Ecclesiastical as well as Political acceptation the Epistles of Paul inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Corinthians were meant to all the Churches of Achaia and not onely to that one of Corinth And what error I have committed herein I confesse I am not yet able to discerne or divine or what there is behinde that wants farther proof 25. The onely thing I can yet thinke of is that in this Praefacer's judgement I have not made it sufficiently appeare by that one evidence of Corinth's being a Metropolis where the Proconsul of Achaia kept his residence Act. 18 12 15. i. e. a Metropolis in the Political acceptation that it was also a Metropolis in the Ecclesiastical notitiae and then it may be fit perhaps farther to adde something to cleare that and put it out of question not onely in thesi that the Church generally thus corresponded with the state according
To the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Aâ—tioch now if thiâ— be so I shall confesse it is possible we may bâ— in more errors than one and that we much wâ—nt the learned Doctors assistance for oâ—r information the words themselves as they are used by the worshipâ—ull writer of that Epistle will scaâ—ce furnish us with this learned and raâ—e notion they are at length 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foâ— so he â—iâ—st opens his mouth with a lye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wâ—at is here more expressed than that thâ— lâ—tter passage is â—estâ—â—ctâ—ve of what went beâ—ore was spoken of its â—esidence iâ— Syâ—iâ— wiâ—â— reference to the name of Christian fiâ—st given to the Dâ—sciples in thâ—… place I know not and therefore it is most certaine that the Apostles in stâ—…uted Metrâ—politan Archbishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. The large transcripts of the Latine sections being the foundation of his whole insuing discourses it is a litle necessary they should be made intelligible to all to whom the confutation of them is addrest This I shall be content to doe foâ— him and the plaine English is this 4. According to the image of the civil government among the Jewes and the like againe in their Temple foremention'd the Apostles appeare to have disposed of Churches every where and in all their plantations to have constituted a subordination and dependance of the Churches in the inferâ—…r Cities to those in the Chief or Metropoles An example of thâ—â— we have in the story of the Acts concerning Syria and Ciâ—â—cia and the severall Cities thereof in relation to Aâ—tioch tâ—â— Metropolis For when the question Act. 15. 2. was referred and brought to Jerusalem from the Church peculiarly of Antioch â—ap 14. 26. and 15 3. and the decree of the Councel returned to them by whom the question was proposed i. e. to the Church of Antioch ver 22. yet in the Epistle in which that decree was contained we finde the brethren through Syria and Cilâ—cia i. e. all the Christians of that Province to be expressâ—d and joyned with those of Antioch ver 23. And after when that Decretal Epistle was delivered to the Church of Antiâ—ch ver 30. Paul and Sylas went over Syria and Cilicia ver 41 42. and as they went they delivered to every City the Decrees of the Councel c. 16. 4. which is an evidence that the Churches of those Cities related either immediately to Antioch or as Antioch it self did to Jerusalem and were in subordination to it as to the principal Metropolis of so wide a Provincâ— according to that of Philo that Ierusalem was in his time the Metropolis not of Judea alone but of many other regions in respect of the Colonies which is sent out of the Jewes that dwelt in theâ—… naming Syria Cilicia divers others 5. What is here said may be divided into two branches one concerning the Cities of Syria as relating to Antioch the other concerning Antioch it selfe and other Cities relating to Jerusalem The latter is mentioned incidentally the former is it which was proposed for the example to testifie the Apostles distributions and the plaine story of the Acts seemed to me to manifest it fully that the Churches of the inferior Cities of Syria c. related to Antioch as to the Metropolis And the matter also being farther cleare by all Ecclesiastick writers which make Antioch the Metropolis of Syria I gave a tast thereof out of Ignatius's Epistle to the Romanes who being the known Bishop of Antioch setled there by the Apostles calls himself Pastor as elsewhere Bishop of the Church in Syria And so the Antient writer of the Epistle to the Antiochians under Ignatius's name but none of those which we receive from Polycarps collection hath these words in his inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God which is at Antioch lying together in Syria making Syria to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province of which Antioch was the Metropolis 6. The same is after manifested of other chief Citâ—es Rome Alexandria Gortyna in Crete and the seven Churches of Asia and the plain words of the three Councels forementioned which devolve the whole businesse oâ— the rights of Metropoles to their first plantations And of all these there is not one word replyed save onely what concernes Rome and Alexandria To those two we shall come in the next Section But in this I am to consider what he hath to object to the severaâ— proofes concerning the Church of Antioch being as I conceive it manifest a Metropoliticall Church in the Apostles times 7. And first it seems I must define what I meane by this dependence and subordination of inferiour Churches to their Metropolis And I shall doe it in my owne words not in his for they are very obscure 1. I meane by inferiour Churches the severall Churches in the severall lesser Cities with the region adjoyning administred and governed each of them by the Bishop of each such lesser City-Church and his officers under him 2. By the Metropolis I meane the Church of the chiefe City of that Region or Province and such say I was the Church of Antioch in respect of Syria 3. By the subordination and dependence of the inferiour to the Metropolis I meane not any inferiority of order and dignity nor a dependence onely as to counsel and advice and mutual Communion but an inferiority of powâ—r in many things which the Apostles left not to the Bishops of the inferiour Cities but reserved to the Metropolitanes To this purpose the 34th Apostolick Canon is cleare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishops of every Nation must know their Primate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Zonaras and account him as the head of them and the powers that thus belong to him are knowne in the antient Councels by the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privileges and praeeminencieâ— which are proper to such and for which even immemorial and Apostolical tradition and custome is vouched by them Such as receiving accusations against and appeales from inferiour Bishops ordeining of them as Tituâ— is appointed to doe through Crete and as the sixth Canon of Nice saith that he that is made Bishop without the Metropolitan shall not be deemed a Bishop For this I againe referre the Reader to the Discourse of Schismâ— pag. 60. c. and there to that ninth Canon of the Councel of Anâ—ioch the same in effect with the 34th Apostolical â—anon forementioned where the Bishops of inferiour Cities are interdicted doing without the Metropolitan any thing which is there styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. as is there explain'd where in more Churches than one are concerned equally The Bishops power extending to the administration of affaires in his owne Diocesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever belongs to his Diocesse say both those Canons but things of a more forraigne nature which belong not to the particular Bishop ratione officii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
repeated or inlarged on 7. In the close he is pleased to adde that by this time i. e. in Ignatius's time who suffer'd in Trajan's time and survived St. Iohn very little some alteration was attempted and if that were so meant by him as to belong to the jurisdiction of the Church of Rome over other Churches which the discourse is upon this truly might passe for prâ—ttie antient being scarce distinguishable from Apostolical and so if what was attempted were attain'd also 't will be very like the yielding that which I contended from that testimony Sect. 8. Alexandria a Patriarchate instituted by St. Mark This proved and vindicated The Essens in Alexandria Christians Bishops among them Num. 1. IN the next and last place he will passe his judgement on the evidence drawn from the storie of the Church of Alexandria thus 2. The exâ—mpâ—e of Alexandria is urged in the next place in these words idâ—â— de 〈◊〉 de qua Eusebius Marâ—um 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesias in plurali primum in Alexandriá instituisse Haâ— omnes ab eo sub nomine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 administrandas susâ—episse Anianum Neronis anno octavo idem Eusebius affiâ—…t quibus patâ—t primariam Alexandriae Patriarchalem Cathedâ—â—m fiâ—…sse ad quam reliquae Provinciae illâ—us Ecclesiae à Marco plantatae ut 〈◊〉 Met opâ—…ticaâ— suam pertinebant doubtlesse for 1. There is noâ— any passage iâ— any aâ—…ent Author more clearly discovering the uncertainty of many things in Antiquity than this pointed to by the Dâ—ctoâ— in Eusebius Fâ—… 〈◊〉 the sending of Mark the Evangelist into Aegypt and his pretching theâ—e at Alexandria what he had written in â—hâ— Gospel is but a Repâ—â—â— Men said so but what ground they had for their saying so hâ—…elatâ—s noâ— And yet we know what a foundation of many aâ—â—eâ—tions by following Wâ—…s his uâ—â—or oâ— report is made to be 2. In the very next woâ—â—â— the Author affiâ—mes and insists lâ—ng upon it in the next Chapâ—er that Phâ—lo's bâ—ok 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was written concerning the Câ—… convâ—râ—ed by Mark 's preaching at Alexandria when it is notoriously known that it treateth of the Essens a Sect among the Jew amongst whose observances many things were vain superstirious and foolish uâ—worthy to be oâ—ce appâ—â—uded as the practice of any Christian in those day s that 〈◊〉 Phâ—lo â—s far as can be gâ—thered living and dying in the Jewish Religion having been employed by them with an Apology to Rome in the dayes of Caligâ—lâ— But 3. supâ—â—se that Mark were at Alexandria and preached the Gospel there which is not improbable and â—…ed many Chuâ—ches in â—â—at great and populous City of Jewes and Gentiles and that as an Evangelist the care of those Churches was upon him in a â—eculiar manner â—ay and adde farther thâ—â— after his death as Hieromeâ—ssuâ—â—s â—ssuâ—â—s us the Elders â—nd Presbyters of those Churches câ—oâ—â—e ouâ—…ne among themselves to preside in their Convocations and meetings I I say â—l â—his be supposed what will ensue wâ—y then it is manifest thaâ— theâ— was fixed at Alexandria a Paâ—…chaâ— Chaiâ— and a Metropolitical Church according to the appointment of Jesus Christ by his Apostles Si hoâ— non sit probationum satis nescio quid sit satis If some few Congregations live together in love and communion and the fellowship of the Gospel in a City he is stark blind that seâ—s not that to be an Archbishops See The reason is as clear as his in the Comâ—… for the freedom of his Wife Sy Utinam Phrygiam â—xâ—râ—m mâ—am â—â—à mecum videam lâ—beran Dem. Optiâ—aâ— muliereâ— qui lem â—y Et quidem nepoti tuo hujus filiâ— hodiâ— primam mammam ded haec Dem. Hercle vero sâ—…ò siquidem prioâ—am dedit ba dâ—dubium quâ—â— emâ—â—i Aequum sâ—â—t Mâ—â— Ob eaâ—â— rem Dem. Ob â—am And there is amend of the contest The Doctor indeed hath sundâ—y other Sections added to â—hâ—se foregoing whâ—… as they concern times more remote from those who first received the Apostolicaâ— Institutions so I must ingeniously professe that I cannot see any thing whereon to fastâ—n a suâ—piâ—ion of a proof so â—a re as to call it into examination and therefore I shall absolve the Reader from the penaâ—ty of this Dâ—gression 3. It is most true that I have deduced the Original of Metropolitans from the first plantation of the Faith in Alexandria the prime City of Aegypt and having before spoken many things of it I begin here with a reference to what had there been said And for the clearing of it it is not aâ—â—sse that I give the Reader a brief view of all 4. They that write the History of that Church and are thought to write it least favourably to Bishops doe yet aâ—… of the Records of that Church that St. Markâ—oundâ—â— â—oundâ—◠〈◊〉 and left Ananias or Anianus Patriarch there Of this Eusâ—b us thus speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Mark first erected â—hurches in Alexandri◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anianus received and ruled under thâ—â— tâ—â—o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Province of Alexandria adding that 〈◊〉 was such a multitude of them which upon St. Mark 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first onset received the Christian Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 most Philosophical or pious excellent mâ—â—ner 〈◊〉 living that Philo Judâ—us who lived at that time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—it to write a Book to describe their whole manner of 〈◊〉 5. That the same St. Mark constituted 〈◊〉 so in Pentapolis is affirmed by the Author of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accordingly the sixth Canon of the first 〈◊〉 Nâ—… appoints those Churches as also all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lybia to be subject to the Patriarch oâ— Alexandâ—◠〈◊〉 firming that so it was to be by the antient and primitive custome 6. Here it is evident that by Mark himself Alexandria was constituted a Metropolitical Patriarchal See in the hands and government of a Patriarch who by being Bishop of that had the care of the whole Province and many particular Churches in it and accordingly superintended in all of them And this the second Canon of the Council of Constantinople refers to when it decrees 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Bishop of Alexandria shall administer onely the affairs of Aegypt and this in their care 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to confound the Churches disturb the order antiently observed among them 7. The onely thing that I could foresee possible to be objected to this was the authority of Eutychius the Annalist affirming that till the time of Demetrius's Patriarchate there was no other Bishop in Aegypt but onely at Alexandria But to this authority it was sufficient to oppose the farre greater of Eusebius who speaking of that Demetrius saith that after Julian he undertook 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the government of the Dioceses there in the plural which cannot be imagined to be without Bishops over them And the same is
reverenced for their Antiquity but not allowed the power or title of Laws as the body of the Canons is known to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we observe them as Laws saith Justinian and they are thence called Nomocanon and Canon Law 〈…〉 That this is the meaning of the word Apocryphal I shall conclude from the story of the fact for soon after this sentence of that Council of Rome within very few years we know that they were set up and received in that very place where they had been thus lookt on as Apocryphal For Dionysius Exiguus about the year 527. made a collection of Canons ex Graecis exemplaribus Canones Ecclesiasticos composuit quos â—odie usu celeberrimo Ecclesia Romana complectitur out of the Greek copies he composed Ecclesiastical Canons which at this day the Church of Rome embraceth and useth most honourably as Cassiodore his contemporarie and consort saith of him Divin Lect. c. 23. In this collection he set fifty of these in the front under the title of Apostolical Canons prefacing this concerning them In principio Canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum de Graeco transtulimus quibus quia plurimi consensum non praebuere facilem hoc ipsum ignorare vestram noluimus sanctitatem quamvis postea quâ—dam constituta Pontificum ex ipsis Canonibus assumpta esse videantur In the beginning we have translated out of Greek the Canons which are said to be the Apostles to which because very many have been hard to give assent we have thought fit to mention so much to you though afterward some constitutions of Bishops seem to have been taken out of these very Canons Here it is evident 1. that what was a few years since lookt on as Apocryphal is within a while received into their Codex celâ—berrimo usu said Cassiodore at that very time And 2. whilst it was not in the Codex yet Constitutions of the Bishops were taken â—…ut of them which argues to me that they were not to be rejected as to be disliked but onely so as not to be obligatorâ—… any farther than as some new Decrees of the Church should give them their authority So again in Mercator's Collection he prefaceth thus Propter â—orum authoritatem câ—teris concilâ—…s praeposâ—imus Canones qui dicuntur Apostâ—lâ—rum licâ—t a quibusdam Apocrypha dicantur quoniam plures eos recipiunt sancti Patres eorum sententias Synodali authoritate roboraverunt inter Canonicas posuerunt constitutiones In respect of their authority we have before the rest of the Councils past set down the Canons of the Apostles so called though by some they are said to be Apocryphal because more receive them and the holy Fathers have confirmed them by authority of Council and placed them among Canonical Constitution Where the opposition is clear betwixt Apocryphal on one side and confirmed by Councils and placed among Canonical constitutions on the other side 5. One thing onely I can foresee to bee by Mr. Daille or any man objected against this viz. the Censure that Isidore Hispalensis hath past upon the Apostolike Canons in these words which I see are thought by some learned men to refer to that Council at Rome under Gelasius but whether by Mr. Daillé I know not Eodem nec sedes Apostolica recepit nec sancti patres illis assensum praelucerunt pro co quod ab haereticis sub nomine Apostolorum compositi dignoscuntur The Apostolike See received them not and the holy Fathers have not allowed them their assent because they are discerned to be framed by haereticks under the name of the Apostles Here I shall offer my conjecture and submit it to better judgements that Isidore speaks not of the first fifty Canons which were certainly before his time who was a member of the Council of Toledo in Spain An. 633. received into the Romane Codex as hath already appeared nor consequently refers to the Synod under Gelasius which upon other reasons I acknowledge spake even of those fifty but of the whole number of 85 for in those latter 35 it is and not in the first fifty that the Apostles are praetended to be the Authors of them viz. Can. 82. Where they call Philemon's servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Onesimus and Can. 85. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Acts or Canons of us the Apostles whereas no such thing is so much as intimated in the first fifty For as for those words in the fiftieth Canon which refer to the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the sentence of Christ and our constitution by the spirit 't is evident that they are in Turrian's Edition inserted and added to that Canon after the words with which Dionysius Exiguus his old collection and translation ended And so in the former part of the Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he said not unto us as if the Writers were the Apostles 't is certain that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to us is inserted And accordingly in Balsamon's Text and Comment which I have before me the Canon is intire without either of those insertions To all which I may adde that the matter of all those first fiftie Canons and the very form of words is such as gives not the least occasion to think them composed by haereticks certainly not put under the Apostles names by those haereticks as Isidore affirms of those of which he speaks 6. This is to my understanding the meaning of the Controversie concerning the number and authority of these Canons which were to be accounted Apocryphal and which not and so likewise which Genuine and which not and to this Controversie it is that my insinuation and my words refer and the second Canon being one of those former 50 which though they have been counted Apocryphal in one sense were yet Genuine in another i. e. none of the later addition of 35. which are called by learned men novitii and adulterate I thought I had reason and cannot but still think it to say that that second Canon was semper inter genuinos habitus alwayes accounted genuine i. e. received and acknowledged among the Canons of the Antient Church by those who controverted and rejected the other 35. 7. Thus much may perhaps suffice to remove the two mistakes which by some indications I conceive to have produced this Animadversion For 1. when in the words immediately precedent he saith they are disavowed and disclaimed by the most learned Papists as Apocryphal this I suppose must be his meaning either that by that Synod at Rome under Pope Gelasius they were defined to be Apocryphal and then as there is truth in that so I may be permitted to have told him what I conceive meant by Apocryphal in that place those that were not yet received into their Codex or else that the rest besides the first 50 are disclaimed by the most learned Papists so I learn from my Lord Primate that they are by Humbert in his Answer to Nicetas
I defend as the genuine Epistles should produce testimonies out of these Epistles to invalidate their authority and yet never but once consult these Copies to which I appeal but gather up the off-scourings of the corrupt Editions which even now he had call'd the very garbidge of the beast when if he had pleased he might have entertained himself and the Reader with much wholeâ—omer diet in the volumes set out by Vossius and the Lord Primate 6. As it is the task lyes more truly burthensome on me who must now be faine to survey very unnecessarily all the testimonies here set down and demonstrate that it is unjustly suggested by the Prefacer that the Author of these Epistles he ought to mean those which he with whom he disputes takes for his exalâ—s Bishops with titles of honour to the greatest Potentates on earth 7. For the first testimonie then taken from the Epistle to the Trallians he might onely have corrected the reading out of the emendate Copies and so have read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then as the testimony had been more Grammatical sense not whatsoever things you doe do nothing but it is necessary as already you practise to doe nothing without the Bishop so the reasonablenesse and moderation of that speech had been discernable enough being both the ordinary language of the antient Canons alwaies thought necessary to the unity of the Church and peculiarly usefull at that time to be inculcated to keep out the poyson of the haeretical and schismatical Gnosticks as hath at large been formerly demonstrated both in answer to Blendel and again to the London Assemblers and need not now be repeated here 8. The second testimony which concerns Deacons and is not conceived to be reconcileable with their institution Act. 6. is in our Copies both in words and sense different from that which is here cited out of the corrupt and hath nothing of high or strange in it It is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Deacons being Ministers of the Mysteries of Jesus Christ ought to please all men for they are not dispensers of meat and drink i. e. not onely or especially such but officers of the Church of Christ they ought therefore to keep themselves from accusations as from fire What is there in this above the proportion of moderate and sound doctrine 9. But the third testimony is an immoderate one indeed and gives him I confesse a supereminent jurisdiction in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But by good hap there is not a word of it in our Editions and so we are not farther concern'd to vindicate or examine it 10. So for the fourth from the Epistle to the Magnesians the immoderate height whereof is argued from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used of God Heb I suppose it should be 10. 31. I need say no more again but that there is no part of it in our Copies nor any thing instead of it above this moderate pitch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the honour of God whose pleasure it is it becomes us to obey the Bishop without any hypocrisie 11. Of the fift there is onely thus much in our Copies by way of caution against Schisms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be united to your Bishop and those that are set over you for a copy and doctrine of incorruption Which by the way sets down the plaine reason of his so frequent inculcating obedience to and union with their Bishop just as in our Vindication to the London Assemblers and elswhere hath oft been said because the true doctrine being by the Apostles before their decease deposited with these as their successors in every Church and because having particular knowledge of the Orthodoxalness of Damas in this and the like of other Bishops and Presbyters under them in the other Churches there was no way so prudent and so compendious to preserve them from the corruptions of the haereticks who were then creeping in clancularly as their keeping themselves exactly close to the Bishop and their Superiours under him And accordingly it follows As therefore the Lord being united to his Father did nothing without him either by himself or by his Apostles so neither doe ye any thing without the Bishop and the Presbyters nor indeavour to account any thing reasonable which is private or of your own devising Which again differs from the reading that is here offered and tels us clearly what is meant by the comparison betwixt God the Father and the Bishop Christ and the rest of the Church even no more than Christ means when he said Learn of me for I am meek Christ did all by commission from and nothing without his Father and so betwixt them unity was preserved And in like manner the Members of the Church must obey and doe nothing without their Governour and so union may among them be preserved also But of this intire place we have formerly spoken in the Vindication to the London Assemblers c. 3. sect 3. n. 42. 12. The sixt place is of some weight indeed from the Epistle to the Philadelphians requiring all of what sort soever not onely Presbyters Deacons and the whole Clergy but all the People Souldiers Princes Caesar himself to perform obedience to the Bishop And here I acknowledge there is a testimony and evidence of the charge of extolling Bishops above the greatest Potentates for sure Caesar was such and if Ignatius had thought fit to use such language and done it at a time when Caesar was heathen and he by Caesars sentence already condemn'd and within a while to be brought forth to the Amphitheatre I might have justly deserved a severe Animadversion for moving tongue or pen in defence of this rebellious extravagant senslesse doctrine But I need not take pains to examine the place my memory as ill as it is assures me there is no such thing in the Epistles own'd by us Prelatists and upon consulting the place I find there are almost eight pages together inserted by some Impostor of all which there remains not above one page in our Editions which certainly is an evidence that some Reformation was wrought some degree of purity restored to these Epistles by this so fiery a purgation And 't is very strange that this Prefacer could not take notice of it 13. So again the seventh in the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans is advanc'd to the same pitch of Insolence placing the Bishop betwixt God and the King and that by way of correction of the words of Scripture My sonne fear God and the King and all the several branches of that place here cited are every word vanisht out of our volume of Epistles And so the Prefacer hath onely had an opportunity to betray his mistake in affirming of Ignatius at the time of writing that Epistle that he was going upon an accusation to appear before the Emperour whereas it is certain he had
Bishops and Angels it is that I borrowed that appellation 8. The last thing that I must if I will not be supposed to prevaricate make good is that the Angels of the Churches related in their office not onely to the particular Churches wherein they were placed but to many Churches also no lesse committed to their charge than these wherein they did reside and that to power and jurisdiction c. 9. That they related to other Churches besides their owne even to all that belonged to their Province I suppose my selfe obliged to make good and the 34. Apostolick Canon is alone able to doe it in generall as shall anon appeare Then more particularly that they had power of ordeining Bishops and of judging them also is Saint Chrysostome's affirmation of Titus whom I suppose to be such a Metropolitan in Crete That if any were made Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the judgement and liking of the Metropolitan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He ought not to be a Bishop is the sixth Canon of the first Councel of Nice And what is there defined of the Metropolitan's rights besides that 't is done by 318. Bishops the most select of the whole Christian world and in an age very competent to passe a â—udgement of an Apostolical custome it is also vouched by them expresly as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the antient immemorial customes of the Church And much more to the same purpose is evident by the antient Canons of the uniâ—ersall Church as hath in some measure been set downe and as farre as I can be concerned to make good either against the Presbyterian or Congregational or Pâ—pist way in a tract of Schisme Chap. 3. Sect. 11 c. 10. To this the story of those first tunes exactly accords telling us that Irenaeus by being Metropolitan of Lyons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was Bishop that sure must be interpreted Metropolitan or Primate of the Diocesse sand so Bishops that pertaine to France and againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he had the Government of the Brethren i. e. the Christians that belong to France And this 〈◊〉 the Scholar of Polycarpe auditor of the Apostles theâ— Demetrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undertooke the administration of the Dioceses belonging to Alexandria and both these at the same time in Commodâ—…'s reigne And that whole Chapur in Eusebius is but the enumeration of severall such Metropolitans by name who were all at the same time of the Church of the Antiochians Sâ—rapâ—â—n the eighth from the Apostles of the Church of Elâ—…us's successor Victor of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as he phraseth it in the next Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophilus of the Church in Jerusalem Narâ—â—ssas of the Church of Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Banchyllus and of Ephesus or as he phraseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Polycrates of whom he after saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was chiefe as Prime or Ruler of the Bishops of Asia In the same manner as afterward Saint Cyprian Bishop of Carthage in the Councel of Constantinople in Truâ—… styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Archbishop of the Region or Province of Africk which is as to the matter of it own'd by himselfe Epist 40. and 45. where he mentions his Province and the extent of it Sect. 2. Of Churches in the pâ—â—ral and a Church in the singular in the Scripture 〈◊〉 1. IN pursuit of this matter of Metropolitanes he proceeds next to take notice of one observation of mine in these words 2. To this end he informâ—… sect 2. that in the New Testament there is in sâ—ndry places mention maâ—e of Church 〈…〉 â—umber aâ— Gal. 1. 21. 1 Thes 2. 14. Acts 9 35 Act 〈…〉 Gal. 〈◊〉 Rev. 1. 11. sometimes of Church onely 〈…〉 as Acts 8. 1 15. 4. 22. Acts 1. 〈…〉 Heb. 16. 1. 1 â—or 〈◊〉 2 â—or â—1 1. Thes 1. 1. Rev. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 8 1â— 18 Now this is 〈…〉 beholding to the Doctor for iâ— no moâ—e I suppâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—und to be to it when the reason of it shall be a liâ—…e wâ—…d â—…ed The summe is that the name Church in the singâ—…r 〈…〉 but where iâ— relates to the single congregation in or oâ—â—…e Câ—â—y or Town Thâ—â— of Churches respecting â—he several Churchâ—… Congregations that were gathered in any Country or Province Manifest then it is from hence that there is in the New Testament no Church of one denomination beyond 〈◊〉 single Congregation And where there are more they are alwayâ—s called Churches How evidently this is destructive to any Dioceâ—… Metropolitical Officer who hath no Church left him thereby of Christ's institution to be related to another opportunity will manifest 3. Here is but one thing done by the Prefacer a recital of my observation in the words just as I set it that there is in the New Testament mention sometimes of Churches in the plural sometimes of a Church in the singular 4. For this observation he saith he is not beholding to me and I shall imitate him thus far in replying that neither is he the first that hath mistaken it the London Ministers had done before him just what now he thinks fit to doe For having duly recited the observation when he comes to give the summe of it that summe is very different from the particulars just as by the London Ministers it had been before viz. that my observation is that the word Church is never used in the singular but when it relates to a single congregation 5. Here I must interpose as to the London-Ministers I did and to the Vindication there I referre the Reader for it and shall here recite it no farther than onely thus that I onely say the word Church was so used in the singular for the Church of one City meaning still as I there expresse and I alwayes doe when I speak of a Citie-Church with the territorie adjoyning whether again that be a territorie of more Cities when that which is spoken of is a Metropolis as many of those which I there mention were Corinth Ephesus all certainly except Cenchrea being near unto and an Haven-City of Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Stephanus Byzantinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or whether the villages adjacent when it is not a Metropolis But that the word Church in the singular is never used but when it thus relates to the single congregation in or of one City Metropolis or not Metropolis that I never said nor thought nor was it usefull to me to observe oâ— suggest any such thing 6. And so being mistaken in his ground his inference must also suddenly vanish which he affirm'd to be so manifest and so likewise all the advantage which when opportunity should serve he meant to have made of it Sect. 3. The meaning of Provinces Philippi a Metropolis Dionysius's Epistle to Gortyna Philip Bishop of all the Churches in Creet
〈◊〉 which respect the common state of the Church as Zonoras interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being reserved and perteining to the care of the Metropolitan 8. This I suppose sufficiently expresses what subordination I meane the very same which the most Antient Canons of the Vniversal Church expresse to be due from the Bishop to the Metropolitan and then I shall not trouble my selfe to inquire what he meanes by some eminent Cities and Governors of a superior order in greater Cities which I should have thought had been Metropoles and Metropolitans had I not found them all placed by him in subordination to some one of high degree termed a Metropolitan And by that Character being assured that by the former he must meane no more but Bishops of inferior Cities I must be content not to understand the mysterie why they should yet be styled eminent and greater Cities and so briefly passe to the next thing 9. Secondly then he will examine my plea from that passage in the Acts cap. 15. and the thing he dislikes is my makâ—ng the question sent for resolution to Jerusalem to be referred to them by the single Church of Antioch This â—aith he 〈◊〉 doe not prove though if I could prove it it would doe me no good at all And yet to see in the processe of the discourse he severally grants all the rest And onely desires me not to be angry but to prove that Antioch by Apostolical institution was the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which is in effect to deny or bid me prove the conclusion without offering to deny above one proposition which therefore I must assume will if it be proved inferre the conclusion and so doe me all the good which I pretend to expect from it 10. Now truly that this question thus referred to Jerusalem was at this time Act. 15. 1. referred to it by the single Church of Antioch but that as Metropolis of all Syria I thought sufficiently proved by the text it selfe first cited cap. 14. 26. and 15. 3. In the former of these places the Apostles were come to Antioch as that signifies Antioch the great to difference it from another City of that name v. 21. the same which is by Plinie placed in Pisidia as here also it is ver 24. that City peculiatly where the Scripture saith they were first called Christians and whereof Euodius and Ignatius were constituted Bishops by Peter and Paul one of the Jewish the other of the Gentile Christians And being there they gathered the Church together ver 17. that I suppose to be the Church of the City of Antioch or if any more those certainly as some way relating and subordinate to Antioch which againe inferres Antioch to be their Metropolis Then of Antioch it followes that there they abodâ— v. 28. And then cap 15. 〈◊〉 certaine men which came downe from Iudea infused the Iudaical ritual doctrine into the brethren who are those but the Christians of Antioch where then they were And upon the dispute had with those Iudaiâ—â—rs v. 2. they determined that sure must still be the Church of Antioch peculiarly that Paul and Barnabas should goe to Jerusalem about this question and then ver 〈◊〉 they are brought on their way by the Church What Church is this still but the Church cap. 14. 27. i. e. the Church of Antioch 11. This was my way of proofe designed to lay the foundation of that argument of Antioch's being the Metropolitical See that this question was referred to Ierusalem from the Church peculiarly of Antioch And I must hereby thinke it competently proved unlesse some weake part be discovered in it or some absurdity or repugnancy be objected to it None of which I see is here done 12. For 1. as to that which is offered at by his saying that I have not proved that the brethren that taught the doctrine contested about ver 1. were onely of the Church of Antioch sure that is of no force For as I doubt not but the same doctrine might be and was infused into many others in Galatia Colosse yea and Rome it selfe as he truly â—aith and never conceived that the poyson was confined to or inclosed within Antioch so all that is needfull to my â—urâ—e is this that at this point of time noted Acts 15. 1. the Iudaizers pretensions were sollicited at Antioth and that on that particular occasion of the dispute betweene Paul and them the question was by them peculiarly referred to Ierusalem And that sure might be done by them alone though others farre distant as well as they either at that or some other time were disturb'd with the like scruples 13. That which the Prefacer here confesses that the disputes grew to the greatest height in Antioch is a very sufficient account in this matter why Antioch peculiarly should send up to Ierusalem about this question when others who were not so much concern'd in it did not doe so And moreover the convenience of such Messengers Paul Barnabas who could say so much from the successe they had had among the Gentiles toward the deciding of the question might both qualifie and incite them to doe it rather than any others at this time And so still there is more reason why I should conceive the question referred to Ierusalem peculiarly or alone by Antioch and not so by Colosse or Rome or Galatia and no appearance of any thing yet produced to the contrary 14. Secondly He addes then to Antioch brethren from other parts and Churches also came whilst Paul and Barnabas abode gâ—ere To what purpose this is urged by him I know not but this I know that there is no mention in that story of any such but onely of those which ver 1. came from Iudea and taught the necessity of Iudaizing And of them 't is not probable that they joyned with the Antiochians to referre the question to Ierusalem or if they did I am sure the Decretal Epistle from the Councel was not addrest to them but to the Gentile Christians ver 19. 23. and takes no other notice of them than as of seducers ver 24. And so still it appeares not of any that they thus referred the question but onely of the Antiochians 15. Thirdly Whereas he concludes it most evident from the Councel's answer ver 23. that the reference is made from all the Churches of the Gentiles if he meane it of all other Gentile Churches beside Syria and Cilicia as Phrygia Galatia c. Which he after mentions and Rome and Colosse which before he had mentioned there is no appearance of truth in it the text saying expressely that it was sent to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia But if he means it of all not absolutely but all of Syria and Cilicia and not onely of Antioch then as that is the very thing observed by me to prove that Antioch was the Metropolis of Syria and Cilicia so certainly it is far
had gone through Phrygia and Galatia they came to Mysia c. So that he could not well have multiplyed more mistakes in so few words and all to make up his hypothesis that the Decree of Ierusalem had no more reference to Antioch and the regions whereof that was the Metropolis than to all those other Churches which yet if it be extended no farther than to Asia it selfe will by Philo's words be interpretable of the Province subordinate to Ierusalem 30. What remains to this head is made up of contumelie and reproach of my audaciousnesse with reflexion onely upon a supposition of mine that after this time the Churches were small and thinne and few in number and so that of Philippi was seven yeares after this which is designed as a prejudice to my hypothesis concerning Metropolitan Churches so early But to the former of these the reproaches I have nothing to return but my thankes to the latter I have answered formerly that the smallnesse of the number of Christians nothing hinders the dependence of one Church upon another See Vindic. to Lond. Minist chap. 1. sect 16. numb 14. And so much for the evidence out of the Acts. 31. Next he comes to my proof out of Ignatius who say I being Bishop of Antioch doth yet in the Epistle to the Romans call himself Pastor of the Church of Syria The words wherein he so styles himselfe he sets down in the Greek and instead of translating them as they should be translated Remember in your prayers the Church of Syria which in stead of me hath Christ for their Pastor viz. now that he was carryed from them to his Martyrdome he takes advantage of the Readers unskilfulnesse in that language and formes my proof into a ridiculous argument Because he recommends to them that particular Church in Syria which by his imprisonment was deprived of its Pastor therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Bishop and then is very pleasant with his Tityre tâ—… patâ—… 32. But would not a little sadnesse and justice have done better and then it had been most cleare that Ignatius his saying that Christ was now their Pastor instead of him must necessarily imply that he was formerly their Pastor and whose Pastor was hee expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Pastor of the Church in Syria where it is evident that the whole Church in Syria not that particular Church onely of Antioch is by him supposed to be under his Pastorall care the same thing being before in the same Epistle exprest in words no way lyable to misunderstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God hath vouchsafed or dignified the Bishop of Syria calling himself Bishop of Syria and so not of Antioch onely This hath been formerly cleared against all exception and need not be here farther repeated 33. There remains the testimony of the Author of the Epistle to the Antiochians which I vouched not as the genuine writing of Ignatius but onely as an antient Writer according to the genuine in this matter Hence I am cryed out on as forsaken of all faire and honest means and like Saul trying the Witch of Endor c. But this is but ordinary style a flourish of his Rhetorick and need not stay us to consider it that which follows is more to the purpose that I make this counterfeit speak as if Syria were in Antioch not Antioch in Syria and here askes What other sense can be made of the words as by me transcribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Antioch and then triumphs in this discovery 34. But certainly the Witch was not so contrary to a wise woman the counterfeit author so perfect a changeling as here he is set out to be Certainly the Greek as transcribed by me lyes thus in the construction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God which is at Antioch with this farther denomination added to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adjacent or lying together in Syria or allowing them the same position in English which they have in Greek To the Church of God lying together in Syria the Church or that which is at Antioch but taking all the words together of which I there onely gave the abstract to the Church pitied by God chosen by Christ lying together in Syria which first received the sirname of Christian the Church which is at Antioch And so he may discerne it possible to make sense of these words a very little skill in that language being sufficient to enable one to joyne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the not very remote as well as with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the immediate Antecedent And so this leaves it clear as the day 1. That Antioch was believed by that Author to be in Syria not Syria in Antioch and 2. That Syria was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province belonging to Antioch the Metropolis and that is a proof as far as his authoritie will bear that the Apostles instituted Metropolitans and so of the very thing in earnest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was to be demonstrated 35. And if this authority were not so great as the former of the true Ignatius had been yet first he was an antient Writer and so acknowledged and secondly one that imitated antient style and calls himself Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the known title of Ignatius by which he was condemn'd by Trajane and so though he feign'd a person yet did it decently and so testifies his opinion that this was the style of Ignatius's dayes or else would not have discovered himself by using it Thirdly his testimony added to Ignatius's and in concord with it will not certainly take off the forâ—e from Ignatius's And fourthly if this be finally reprobated there be several more behind of Scripture and the Antients concerning Gortyna in Crete and seven Metropolitical Churches in Asia and a reference to the Archbishop of Armagh's discourse on that subject and passages collected out of the Canons of the Antient Vniversal Church and no one word offer'd to be replyed to all this which makes it very impertinent to goe about farther to confirme this assertion which else I might doe and for brevities sake referre the Reader to Frigevillaeus Gautius Par. 1. c. 4. the subject of which Chapter is Primates esse jure Divino That Primates are by Divine right Sect. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Casaubon's Censure of that phrase Numb 1. NExt he comes to examine Sect. 11. and that one small testimony from the inscription of Ignatius's Epistle to the Romans Before I proceed to which I shall confesse to the Prefacer that he hath mâ—st an opportunitie of great rejoycing For the truth is in the end of sect 10. there lay a passage wherein though I affirm'd not but onely past my conjecture crediderim c. yet I now by a last reading over of Ignatius's Epistles discern my self to have mistakenâ— For in
Sancti Patres Canones Apostolorum numeraverunt inter Apocrypha exceptis capitulis quinquaginta quae decreverunt regulis Orthodoxiae adjungenda The Holy Fathers have numbred the Canons of the Apostles among Apocryphal writings except onely fifty Canons which they have decreed to be annext to the rules of the true doctrine i. e. to the Book of Canons received by them Where again by the way the notion of Apocryphal is evident as opposed to those which are received into the Codex Regulis Orthodoxiae adjungenda And so by Bellarmine whom he names in the front of those most learned Papists and of him saith expresly and truly that he approves onely of 50 Canons of 85 de script Eccles in Clâ—m And then again I have now minded him of that which was before evident that the second Canon which was cited by me was one of those fifty and so not disproved by that learned Papist As for the other two Baronius and Binius whom he names to the same purpose as those who have disavowed and disclaimed them as Apocryphael I shall not accuse his confidence but must think he was in some haste that he could doe so Baronius being by him acknowledged to adde 30 more and Binius to have made a little inlargement of Canons which sure doth not intimate that they disavowed or disclaimed the fifty 8. So when he saith of them that they are faintly defended by any of the Papists I shall desire to know among many others Bovius Lamb. Gruterus Stapleton Haleander c. what he thinks of Turrian whether he were a Papist or no and whether he were a faint defender of them nay whether Monsieur Daillé take no notice of his zeal for them If he doe not I shall very much wonder at it If he doe I shall have the more reason for my question how he that sends me to be taught by M. Daillé had not learned so much from him that there was some Papist by whom they were not faintly defended So again when he saith that they have been throughly disproved and decryed by all Protestant writers that have had any occasion to deal with them I might certainly mind him of more Protestants than one that have been far from decrying them I shall not mention as I might the severall Bishops of our Church since the Reformation and our Divines in their writings that make their Appeals to them frequently and with as pompous forms of citations as I have done semper inter genuinos habito I shall not adde the learned Hugo Grotius because I know not whether any or all of these may not be deemed by him to be no Protestants Onely what doth he think of Frigevillaeus Gautius He certainly An. 1593. in his second part of his Palma Christiana dedicated to Queen Elizabeth c. 1. 2. was far from disavowing and decrying those Canons How little short he came of Turrian himself I shall not now tell him lest he be disavowed as no Protestant for so doing but leave him at his leisure to inquire whether one such example might not have taken off from the generalitie of the affirmation decryed by all Protestants or indeed whether D. Blondel's vouching them in the manner which I shall by and by set down might not have had some force in it if he had taken notice of such things But all this by the way as an Essaâ— that some other men as well as H. H. may be confident in asserting 9. Secondly When immediately after his Animadversion on my words he mentions his Exceptions to the Books of Apostolical Constitutions and Canons taken out of Daillé and the learned Vsher 't is apparent that these all belong to the Books under Clement's name called the Apostles Constitutions But then it must be remembred that that Book of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Constitutions is another thing clearly distinct from the Book called the Apostles Canons and there is but one way imaginable to involve the later under the censure that belongs justly to the former and it is this That in some Copies the Constitutions and Canons are put together into one Volume and that 〈◊〉 Photius his time and that in the end of the Canons there is a solemn confirmation of the Constitutions But then it must be remembred again that these are later Copies which so confound them and I take not them to be genuine and that Canon is the eightie fifth of that Book and so no part of the first fiftie which I suppose to be the onely genuine Canons and consequently that none of the ridiculous things in the Constitutions is imputable to that former Collection but indeed on the contrary that one expression in that eightie fifth Canon which prescribes the keeping them close because of some mysterious passages in them is justly thought by learned men to betray them both the later 35 Canons and the Constitutions so magnified by them to be of a much later Edition than that which they pretend to 10. And thus I hope I have vindicated my self and given the grounds of my Assertion And for the confidence I did not I confess expect to be charged with any immoderate degree of it from any nor doe I yet discern how those few words in the Parenthesis semper inter genuinos habito could be deem'd so criminously guilty of it or that hee that undertook to be my Monitor having in so short a time proved so much more guilty of it should in any reason think himself the most competent for that office 11. To help him to any appearance of reason and so to qualifie him thus to charge me some want of observation of vulgar stile must be necessary either in not adverting what is ordinarily meant by their title of Apostolick Canons or some other the like That he takes the meaning of that title to be their pretension to be written by the Apostles or by Clement at their appointment I conclude from the words with which he begins that Paragraph The first writings that are imposed on us after the Canonical Scriptures are the eight Books of Clement commonly called the Apostles Constitutions being pretended to be written by him at their appointment with the Canons ascribed to the same persons and if according to this his notion he conceive me by the word genuine to affirm that they are rightly so ascribed he is mistaken 12. That those Canons whether to the number of 85. or but of 50 were written by the Apostles I never meant but neither is that the meaning of those that cite them and call them as I have done by the vulgar name of Apostolick Canons If there be any doubt of this I shall prove it by competent testimonies whether among Papists or Protestants Of the former in stead of many I instance only in that account which Gabriel Albispine in his Observations rendreth of it that some of these Canons the fifty he means being made by the Successors of the Apostles the