Salvation Eusebius Euseb l. 6. c. 43. who had seen all this and a great deal more relating to the Novatians and in all Probability had read several of their Books understood this to be their Doctrine for Novatus saith he so he calls Novatian a Presbyter of the Roman Church puff'd up with Insolence and Pride against the laps'd as if there remain'd to them no hopes of Salvation although they should perform all things that are requisite to a sincere Conversion became Author of that Sect who arrogantly assume the name of Puritans These Witnesses are so express and full that Socrates takes off nothing of the force of their Testimony for he says only this That they remitted Sinners to God who was only able to forgive them but they never give the least hope that he will do so or that any Salvation is to be attain'd out of the Communion of the Church so that this is to be lookt upon rather a Shift or a put off to divert Envy and Clamour than to give any Comfort or Encouragement to the penitent As to M. B's 2d Observation That the Authors of this Heresie did not deny Pardon to other great Sinners but only to those that laps'd to Idolatry or denying Christ and that it was their Followers long after that extended it to other hainous Crimes Socrates expressly confutes it in the place above cited where speaking of Novatian's Letters to several Churches upon the occasion of his Schism adds That several were offended at the Severity of that Rule that admitted none to Communion who had sinn'd mortally after Baptism The word there indeed is Sinn'd unto Death but that he did not understand that particular one of Apostacy by it appears by what follows in the same Chapter That some took part with Novatian others with Cornelius according to their several Inclinations and Course of Life the looser and more licentious sort favouring the most indulgent Discipline the other of more austere Lives inclining most to the Novatian Severity which implies that all Sins in the Opinion of these Schismaticks were equally irremissable And a little before in the same Chapter Novatian confesses as much where he remits the forgiving not only of this Sin of Apostacy but all Sins in general to God alone which is fuller confirm'd by St. Ambrose l. â— de Poeâ—it c. 1. who charges them with the Stoical Opinion that all Sins are equal Now let us see whether the Council of Eliberis dâ—es favour this Doctrine and whether Mr. B. had any reason to admire how that Council should be received as Orthodox and yet the Novatians be accounted Hereticks p. 39. He notes in his Margin that Abbaspinaeus has learnedly made the best of it so has Mendoza in his large Defence of this Council who vindicates this Canon by great numbers of Instances of the same nature in other Councils He must be a great Stranger to the ancient Discipline of the Church that has not heard of Penitents not being received into full Communion at the hour of Death but this is far enough from being Novatianism for such although they were not receiv'd into the Lord's Supper or within the Congregation were yet upon their Repentance received into the Order of Penitents who though they were not admitted into all the Priviledges and Familiarity of the Communion yet they were received into the Charity and Unity of the Church they had the Benefit of the Churches Prayers and at last were reconciled by Imposition of hands though not by the receiving of the Sacrament which was the more usual way We do not find that this Sect was much more mortified than it's Neighbours unless it were in Phrygia where Socrates saith In the place last cited l. 1. de paenit The People were naturally averse to Pleasures But at Constantinople their Bishop Sisinnius was so gay and luxurious as to give Offence to the Orthodox Party and Saint Ambrose objects the same thing to the whole Sect. Lastly they were no less Enemies to Peace than they were to Truth though Mr. B. commends their Moderation in one Instance for the Catholicks in time of common Persecution frequented their Churches and would have made up the old Breach Socr. l. 2. c. 38. but the Novatians would not comply but kept to their ancient rule of Seperation and refused to unite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doctor Forbes intended a particular History of the Novatians to shew the Nature and Method of Schism it is Pity that great man did not live to perform what he design'd Steph. Keuchelius writ a Book of the Novatian Heresie so he makes it Strasburg 1651. Quarto CHAP. III. Of the Council of Nice and some that followed it THE great Council of Nice gives Title to Mr. B's third Chapter Ch. Hist p. 45. § 1. He cannot deny but the Controversie about which it was called was of great Moment and that it was brought to a happy end but lessens as much as he can the Credit of the Bishops and ascribes very little to their Prudence and Judgment I do not envy Constantine the Reputation of having heal'd the Differences of the Church and there is no doubt but he contributed much to the stilling that Controversie for a while yet it seems he did not judge the Bishops and Councils to be of so little use as Mr. B. would represent but was at great Pains and Expence to bring an extraordinary number of them together and he knew no other way of composing Differences about Religion than by getting a Consultation of the most learned and eminent of those that had the Direction of the Church Some of these indeed had their Grievances to represent and complaints against each other but the Modesty of Constantine put an end to their Quarrels and Disputes burning all their Accusations without reading them It is no wonder if in so great a number assembled from all the Provinces of the Roman World considering their great Dissentions about Religion that there should be some that might retain the Sense of Injuries received and complain of such as had done them wrong but these were but few and the matter soon accommodated Mr. B. adds That Eusebius Nicomed and Arrius were brought but to counterfeit Repentance § 1. which satisfied Constantine though not Athanasius who refusing to receive Arrius into Communion upon Constantine's Request caused much Calamity afterwards This is an oblique Accusation of that great Champion of the Christian Faith and seems to charge him with all the Calamities which that unhappy Controversie brought upon the Church but how justly we will refer to Mr. B's own Words who calls Arrius's Recantation A counterfeit Repentance and Consent to the Nicene Faith If Athanasius saw through this Dissimulation why is he yet blamed for not admitting him into the Church before he had sincerely corrected that Fault for which he was justly cast out Socr. l. 1. c. 27. And it was no hard matter
their Elders do directly excommunicate and yet are lay-men It would be much to the Advantage as well as the Reputation of our Dissenters if they would first agree and correct those Abuses among themselves which they so sharply exclaim against in our Church 2. When they oblige the Magistrate to execute their Decrees by the Sword be they just or unjust § 55. and to lay men in Goals and ruine them because they are excommunicated by Bishops Chancellors c. This is the Law of the State and not of the Church and therefore is not to be charged upon Diocesan Episcopacy besides now there are few that have reason to complain of this there are those Evasions found that render that Law insignificant but the Threatning Princes and Magistrates with Excommunications if not Depositions p. 23. if they do communicate with those whom the Bishops have excommunicated belongs not at all to our Diocesan Episcopacy let the Papists who hold this Dostrine or the rigid Scotch Presbyterians who seem to have outdone the Popes in their Claim of Authority over Sovereign Princes answer it if they can 3. Or when they arrogate the Power of the Sword to themselves as Socrates says Cyril did § 55. How far Socrates is to be credited in his account of that Bishop we shall consider in due place in the mean time this does not concern Diocesan Episcopacy as it is with us for our Bishops do not arrogate that Power if the King confer upon them any Authority extrinsecal to their Office Mr. B. has declared himself p. 23. § 59. that shall make no difference and that he will submit to them notwithstanding The next Paragraph I am loth to meddle with it is little else but Biitterness and Railing and this I have neither Skill nor Inclination to answer yet because it is set down as the highest Aggravation of Diocesan Tyranny I must say something to it lest I should be thought to be ashamed of the Cause and to desert it It becomes much worse § 56. continues Mr. B. by tyrannical Abuse when being unable and unwilling to exercise true Discipline and so many hundred Parishes they have multitude of Atheists Infidels gross Ignorants and wicked Livers in Church Communion yea compel all in their Parishes to communicate upon pain of Imprisonment and Ruine and turn their Censures cruelly against godly persons that dare not obey them in all their Formalities Ceremonies and Impositions for fear of sinning against God I am afraid there are too many wicked men in all Communions and the Communion or as they call it the Religion of the State will have the most for Reasons I need not mention but it is oftentimes a hard thing to know them and until they are discovered it can be no Reproach to the Discipline of the Church that they are in outward Communion but all sorts of People and these with the rest are forced into our Communion They are indeed obliged to come to Church and to receive the Sacrament three times in the year but all this is upon the Supposition of their being Christians if they declare to the contrary they are immediately exempted from all Church-Jurisdiction and for the Civil let them deal with it as well as they can It is the duty of every Christian to come to Church and receive the Sacrament and because all that have been baptised and have not renounced the Faith are presum'd to be Christians it is doubtless lawful to quicken them to that which is their Duty by Penalties upon the neglect of it As for the Atheists and Infidels declared if they are admitted to Communion it is an unexcusable fault of Discipline yet such as is to be charged on the Minister of the Parish that receives them rather than the Bishop and for the being of any such men amongst us that is not so much to be imputed to the defect of present Discipline as to the licentiousness of the late unhappy times and the Offence that was given to light and unsteady minds by such pretended Saints as made Religion their Warrant for all their barbarous Villanies they committed But wicked Livers he adds are forced into church-Church-Communion by the Bishops § 56. This is a great Mistake for the Bishop forces no such into the Church but obliges the Minister and Church-wardens of every Parish to present such if any there be that they might be separated from Communion till they shall have given some Satisfaction to the Church by their Repentance and good Hopes of their future Amendment and lastly that gross Ignorants are admitted to the Communion can be charged upon no other than the Minister of that place whose Duty it is to instruct them in the Principles of their Religion and the Bishops are so far from obstructing the Exercise of this Duty that there is hardly any thing which they press with greater Earnesiness As to those godly persons who dare not obey the Orders of Bishops in point of Church-Communion and cannot bring their Conscience to comply with Ceremonies and Formalities Whether it be their Fault or Misfortune I pity them heartily but I believe this ought not to be charg'd upon the Constitution of our Episcopacy for if the King and the great Senate of the Nation after Experience of former Troubles should think fit to impose this as a Test upon such as they thought the Government not secure of what is all this to Diocesan Episcopacy The next Paragraph concludes the Arraignment of Diocesan Bishops § 57. not with any Argument but a great many hard Words which suppose the Proofs that have gone before to have amounted to full Evidence I am not willing to repeat them here let them stand or fall with those Arguments they depend upon Now least you should take Mr. B. for an Enemy to Bishops for one sort he rejects he receives two the first such as St. Jerom says Was brought into the Church for a Remedy against Schism the Bishop of this Constitution was it preside over Presbyters and without him nothing of Moment was to be done in the Church § 58. These Presbyters that were under the Bishop had they several Parishes or Congregations or the same with their President If several then this is the Diocesan Prelacy that is a Crime in it's Constitution if the same then what did they do there For by old Canons it appears and Mr. B. makes use of them to serve his own Turn that a Presbyter was not to preach in the Presence of the Bishop what then Shall they only read the Offices of the Church This is to fall into worse than Diocesan Episcopacy and to make Presbyters not Preaching but what sounds much meaner reading Curates only to the Bishops There is another sort of Bishops that he dares not deny to be of divine Institution § 60. And they are such as succeed the Apostles in the ordinary part of Church-Government while some senior Pastors have
him which I wonder as much he should believe as that he be satisfied with another Friend's Computation of the Christians in Alexandria in Strabo's time 't is in short this That he though his Voice was none of the lowdest yet he preacht to a Congregation judg'd to be about ten thousand men 2 part of Ch. Hist in one place he has but 6000. but in another he comes up again to 10000. and that they all hear'd him I am afraid that this Friends Calculation exceeds as much as the other falls short for we reckon now that three thousand makes an extraordinary Congregation and it may be possible for a mighty Voice to speak to a thousand more but it may be that the World is degenerated since and that our Lungs are no more in Comparison with those of the times he speaks of than they were compared to those of the Eastern Preachers At last to make sure work he concludes that though Jerusalem might have many Assemblies and yet but one Church p. 81. 82. and after the dispersing of the Apostles but one Bishop yet this is no Precedent This I must needs say is something more than the Independents would adventure to say they minced the matter and told us that Jerusalem being the first born Church and nursed up by the joynt care of all the Apostles might arrive to an extraordinary Stature and look gigantick in Comparison of the rest yet they durst not say it had more than one Congregation and was no Precedent What shall we judge then That the Apostles built the Church of Jerusalem after one model and those of other Cities after another or if they did surely they were both lawful does that overthrow the Church and Discipline of Christ's Institution that is according to the practice of his own Apostles Or can a Conformity to the Discipline of the Mother-church of Jerusalem become in it's self a Sin Wherein shall we be saved if the Imitation of the Apostles do not secure us But Mr. B. says the Office of a Bishop supposes him to have no more than one Congregation since he must hold personal Communion with all in Preaching and Administration of the Sacraments visiting the Sick relieving the Poor and the like but must all these Acts be performed by himself in Person Must he have no Assistance Is nothing to be done within his Congregation without his Presence May not he do all this occasionally as the Apostles and Evangelists did Every Bishop had Presbyters in the first times and if he were so indispensably oblig'd to do all himself what use were they of and yet appoint Elders for the ordinary and constant Performance of the Ministry whom he shall supervise and direct It is very strange that the Bishops should have been so many hundred years in an Office which it was impossible for them to discharge and yet this be never discover'd by themselves or others However the generality of Bishops you say for a long while after the Apostles had but one Congregation to govern what then If all the Believers in and about a City would hardly make a Congregation that is to be ascribed to the Condition of those times and not to be reckon'd essential to the Office all things have their Beginning but are not confin'd to the Measures of their Infancy and if the Beginnings of the Church were but small even the greatest Cities it cannot be a prejudice to the Governour of it if the number of Believers should increase since they are appointed in Clemens Opinion for the Government not only of those that have already Ep. ad Corinth but of such as shall afterwards believe The Practice of the universal Church is evidently on our side for who has ever heard of two Bishops in one City though it were never so great unless in time of Schism and it is strange when the number of Believers did encrease beyond all Possibility of personal Communion that none should ever discern the necessity of dividing into several Churches and learn this Wisdom from the Example of Bees But the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria by their Affectation of Empire became evil Examples to others by their first Corruption of Church Discipline It is strange then that among all the Quarrels of the Bishops and in all their Accusations of one another that this Crime of so high a Nature should never be objected that no good man could never complain of this Corruption that there should never be laid to their Charge this usurping of Authority over whole Cities and multitudes of Congregations But supposing this an Usurpation in the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria how is it credible that all the great Cities in the World should be carryed away with their Example that there should be not one honest Bishop left that understood the nature of his Office or the just bounds of his Diocess Or suppose the Bishops so far prejudiced with self-Interest as to have neglected a Duty that redounded so much to the Diminution of their Power yet were the People who in those times had some part in their Election ignorant of this great Secret would not they right themselves and not have suffer'd their several Congreations to become Chappelries c. Dependencies upon the Bishops Church Would not they have govern'd themselves rather than become as it were a Province to the Bishop or if the People were ignorant of this was there no Priest that was ambitious enough to be Bishop that could inform them of their Right in Expectation that they would be grateful to the Discoverer of their Priviledges And lastly was there no Schismatick learned enough to justifie his setting up of an Altar against an Altar by this Argument that there were more Believers than could hold personal Communion with the Bishops Altar that there was work enough for more Bishops than one and that in populous Cities there ought to be several Churches yet they were all so dull as never to think of this way but on the contrary every one pretended that there ought to be but one Bishop in a City and that himself had the Right and the other was the Usurper In short since the Nature of the Church requires that it should swarm when Believers grew too numerous for one Assembly and send out new Colonies under Independant-officers Is it not very strange that it should so far forget it's Nature as never to have done this and to leave not one poor instance upon whose Authority the Independency of Congregations might relye It is upon this that the present Question turns and not whether Bishops at first had but single Congregations for if there were no more Believers within or belonging to the City they could have no more but after they were multiplyed into several Congregations still they had but one Bishop and Mr. B. does not as much as pretend to any Evidence of History to the contrary unless it be when the Church was divided
by Schism I thought my self obliged to consider Mr. B's Notion of a Church and Episcopacy as it lyes scatter'd in his first Chapter and explain'd more at large in his first Disputation of Church Government partly because he insists so much upon it and bends the whole course of his History to favour it as much as is possible partly because he makes it a plea to justifie his Railings against Bishops and Councils as if those he dishonoured in this History had departed from the ancient use of Church Government and Discipline and their Usurpation had drawn after it all those evil Consequences and Calamities which he relates throughout this Book It is time now to enter upon his History and to examine how truly and how fairly he has represented the Actions of Bishops and Councils I shall go along with him as far as the end of the Council of Chalcedon and endeavour to vindicate the Reputation of the four first general Councils which our Church receives from those injurious Representations which Mr. B. has made of them in his History In the next place I shall endeavour to shew how little Truth there is in that general Accusation which this History is intended to make out that Bishops have been the Authors of all Heresies Schisms and Corruptions Thirdly that the way to remedy this is not by multiplying Bishops and that this Expedient is so far from being the Cure of Church Divisions that nothing has contributed more to widen the Breach and to render Peace and Concord impossible within any considerable Compass Fourthly That though Bishops and Councils have been guilty of great Miscarriages they ought not to be imputed to the Order but the Men and if Bishops brought in several Corruptions as well in Doctrine as Discipline after the four general Councils Bishops have likewise reformed the Church from them and have maintained and do still maintain and justifie their Reformation Lastly that latter models of Church-Governments without Bishops have been subject to all the Miscarriages that are charg'd upon the Bishops and have not been able to prevent or remedy the Mischiefs of Heresies and Schisms and that the Independent model is of all other the most unlikely to remedy these Mischiefs and is justly charg'd by the Presbyterians to have given the occasion to all those Confusions in Religion those monstrous Doctrines and endless Separations under which we still labour and almost despair to see a Remedy for them CHAP. II. Of Heresies and the first Councils THE design of general Councils being chiefly to preserve the Unity of the Faith Ch. Hist c. 2. p. 28 29 30. and to reject and discredit all such dangerous doctrines as appear destructive of the fundamental Principles of Religion Mr. B. thought fit before he enter'd upon the History of these Councils to give us some account of Errors which they were designed to remedy his Discourse is very favourable to the Mistakes of men and considering the common Frailty it is but fit that we should forbear as far as is possible with each others Infirmities yet still there are such Errors as are not to be endured and corrupt the very Vitals of Christianity these when they were obstinately maintained were stigmatized by the Church with the name of Heresies a word which Mr. B. has no Fancy to and yet St. Paul and St. Peter made use of it to signifie the worst and most dangerous sort of Errors and such as are not to be tolerated within the Communion of the Church Tit. 3.10 It is Saint Paul's charge to his Son Titus an Heretick after the first and second Admonition reject Galat. 5.12 and reckoning up the works of the Flesh that excluded from Salvation he puts in Heresie and St. Peter 2 Pet. 1.1 to render it the more frightful joyns with it the Epithete of damnable saying that wicked men should come who should bring in damnable Heresies Now since we are warned before hand that Heresies there must be that wicked men will endeavour to introduce wicked Doctrines the Church would be left in an evil condition had it been provided with no Authority no means to remedy those Mischiefs that would certainly overthrow the very Foundations of that Faith upon which it was built Now what defence shall she make against these Assaults Arms she has none but Prayers and Tears and even those may return empty if the Heretick will be perverse and obstinately fortifie himself in his Errors must she then suffer this Cancer to eat up her very â—â—wels is there no way of stopping the Progress of this Plague or to interpose between the sound and the infective Surely it cannot be left so destitute so forlorn so helpless there is nothing of Nature or Society but has some means as well as Inclination to preserve it self and the Church being a Society united upon the Terms of a common Faith and Charity must be supposed to have so much Power within it self as to refuse the Use and Benefit of it's Communion to such as violate the Terms upon which they are associated corrupt the Doctrine destroy Holiness and indanger the Attainments of the ends and Benefits of Religion not only to themselves but to those that converse with them They had Power to reject a Heresie to put away from them wicked Persons and to refuse to receive into or shut out of their Communion such as would not submit to the Laws of their Society The great condition of their Admission into the Church was a Profession of the Christian Faith and they had no right to remain in it any longer than they kept up to that Profession if they brought in Doctrines that were inconsistent with it and did persevere in their mistakes using all endeavours to propagate them it is but just and equal it is but natural that such should be turn'd out of the Fellowship of the Church and it is but reasonable after a sad experience of the mischiefs that attend these Doctrines to endeavour to prevent the liâ—â— for the future by guarding diligently the Entrances of the Church and by taking Security of such as enter into it and if not of all such as enter into it yet at leastwise of those that are admitted to teach or govern the People that they will not revive those dangerous Doctrines 'T is this that Mr. B. finds so much fault with and ascribes all the mischiefs that have befallen the Church to an ignorant zeal against Heresie There is no doubt but this has been the occasion of great Calamities the greatest Hereticks persecuting the Truth under the name of Heresie p. 31. §. 15. p. 32. the Arrians were exceeding violent against the Orthodox Believers and used all manner of Cruelties to reduce them from the right way which they called Heresie they on the other side returned the infamous name though not the barbarous treatment upon their Enemies and what shall we infer from hence that there is no Heresie because
Truth is sometimes so miscall'd that no Doctrines are damnable because men have condemned one another for some that are not so Is there no Truth because Contradictions lay claim to it and because that every man honours his mistake under speciousness of that Title for all these confusions of terms the things are the same and a real Heresie is damnable and ought to be reproved and cast out of the Church nothwithstanding that under this pretence the greatest Truths have been discredited Mr. B. gives such an account of those Controversies that exercised the four first General Councils as seems in great measure to excuse those Heresies which were condemn'd by them and to blame their condemnation calling the Bishops in derision Hereticators and Damners because they pronounced Arrius Macedonius Nestorius c. Hereticks men of dangerous Principles and not to be tolerated in the Communion of the Church yet for all this I belive Mr. B's own Rule will absolve them for in his Book called The true and only way of Concord pag. 291. seq he makes a Catalogue of such Errours which men ought to be restrain'd from preaching and propagating now all those Errours condemn'd by the four first General Councils are laid down there not only in the Sense but in the very Terms they were condemn'd in these Doctrines are by him own'd to be dangerous and by no means to be suffered to be preach'd But what if men grow incorrigible and will preach them notwithstanding these Prohibitions and Restraints his Resolution is very moderate that every one should not be ejected or silenced that holdeth or preacheth any one such Errour what then must he be suffer'd to propagate the Infections and to teach these Opinions that are so confessedly dangerous nor that neither for there follows such an Exception in this Toleration as wholly overthrows it for those are to be cast out who consideratis considerandis are found to do more harm than good Now what if the Orthodox Bishops did find that consideratis considerandis those Hereticks they condemned did more hurt than good that they destroy'd with one hand much more than they edified with the other and that the propagating of one of these dangerous Doctrines was not compensated by all the other Truths that they preach'd there is no variety of wholsom food can countervail the Mischiefs of one envenom'd bit and that Physician is not to be trusted that puts in any one dangerous Ingredient though the rest of the Composition were very innocent and this was the Rule they went by the Hereticks in their Opinions were dangerous men they were obstinate in their Opinions industrious in propagating them and were mostly upon the vindication of these controverted Doctrines it was therefore necessary since they did more hurt than good that they should be cast out of the Church Nor is he less displeas'd with the Form than the Matter of this Condemnation and therefore he gives the Bishops the Titles of Hereticating Cursing Damning Bishops but what Antichristian words are these that can move a moderate healing-man to so great Indignation Anathema esto is the usual form of condemnation in Councils which he so frequently calls Cursing and Damning the word is St. Paul's 1 Corintâ— 16.22 If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema-maran-atha and he had borrowed it from the Jews which signifies no more than the separation of any thing from common Use and is used sometimes in a good sometimes in a bad sense In the first he denotes any thing consecrated or devoted to God in the latter any thing which we abhorr and separate our selves from for fear of Pollution so that the addition of it to those Errours which they condemn is dangerous As for Instance If any man shall say that there was a time when Christ was not let him be Anathema imports no more than that we declare our abhorrence of such Doctrines and will have nothing common with those that profess them but Mr. B. I know not out of what Dictionary translates it God damn you and calls it the Religion of the Bishops and their Councils Nay though this did imply so much they may plead the Example of St. Paul even in that case since they do no more than apply his general Sentence which he repeats more than once Gal. 1 9. If any man preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received let him be accursed And that you may not think that this other Gospel does directly overthrow that which he had preach'd and teach men to deny and renounce our Saviour Jesus Christ we must understand that all this relates to the Legal Observances which some would introduce into the Churches of Galatia and their compliance with those Teachers is by the same Apostle called a turning away unto another Gospel and the preaching of those men the Perverting of the Gospel and so warm is the same Apostle against those Disturbers of the Church that he wishes that they were even cut off which troubled them chap. 5.12 Yet the Councils did not go so far in their Anathema's they did but declare the Leprosie as the Priest under the Law turn'd out the Diseas'd and gave warning to all People of the danger of the Infection and it was but fit that such should remain without the Camp till the Disease was heal'd lest it should spread and the whole Church become an Abomination and Anathema to him whose Faith it had suffer'd to be corrupted This was the Design of the Bishops and their Councils to this end they directed their Anathema's and if they have not always met with the Success that were to be wish'd we must not judge uncharitably and undervalue or deride their Endeavours And now let us consider their Acts and see what it is that they have done The first Councils about the time of the Observation of Easter he passes over with only mentioning for there is little of them remaining Pope Victor was doubtless to be blam'd for endangering the Peace of the whole Church Euseb l. 5. c. 24. upon so light an occasion Ch. Hist p. 34. Whether Victor did actually excommunicate the Churches of Asia or only threatned and endeavour'd to do it is not very clear from the Relation of Eusebius Valesius is of opinion and it seems the most probable that this proceeded no farther than Letters of Accusation Vales in locum which he sent to most Churches to represent the Asiaticks as unworthy of Communion but the generality of Bishops not approving it and advising to Peace it is likely the business went no farther so Schism was avoided by the peaceable counsel and disposition of the Bishops The Councils of Carthage Labese under Agrippinus and that of Arabia under Origen he does but just mention that of Rome c. 2. p. 35. after the death of Fabian held by the Roman Clergy in the Vacancy he makes some Remarks upon
that are grounded upon a mistake for this is rather to be counted a Consultation than a Council and as if they had wanted Authority to determine any thing in that ticklish point of receiving the lapsed into Communion they only agreed this ap Cypr. Ep. 31. That nothing should be changed before the Election of their next Bishop as appears by their Letter to the Clergy of Carthage the Bishops that were here present were such as came to assist and advise the Roman Clergy in a time of so great danger and not to determine any thing authoritatively in Council much less to be presided and govern'd by the Roman Presbyters After this says he p. 35. § 26. there was another Council in Carthage two in Rome and one in Carthage about the same Controversie These he passes over very lightly and the Schism that was the occasion of some of them because it was impossible to charge it upon any Bishop Cyprian behaved himself like a prudent good man and an indulgent Father and yet all this could not prevent Schism and Conventicles Faelicissimus Priest of Carthage makes the first breach whom Mr. B. mistakes for Felicissimus the Deacon § 26. who joyn'd himself afterwards with Novatus against the good Bishop Cyprian Novatus an African Presbyter improved this difference and not content to disturb his own Church went to Rome and kindled Discord and Dissention there Baronius would have this Novatus to be a Bishop because he is said by Cyprian to have ordained Felicissimus a Deacon but it is plain as well out of Cyprian as the Chronicle of Eusebius that he was but Priest Novatus Presbyter Cypriani Romam veniens Ep. 49. c. saith Eusebius and Cyprian after he had shewed what manner oâ— man he was adds that being conscious of such horrid Crimes he must expect non 〈◊〉 Presbyterio excitari tantum sed Communicatione prohiberi and as for the Ordination oâ— Felicissimus Cyprian in the same Epistle shewâ— it to have been done against all Rule and Order because he says that he did it nec pâ—mittente me nec sciente but sua factione ambitione which plainly shews that Novatâ—â— was Cyprian's Presbyter and ought not to have ordained a Deacon unless it were in Conjunction with him or by his Permissionâ— whereas if he had been a Bishop his right to the ordaining of Deacons would have been unquestionable This was the Author of that Schism Mr. B. favours so much throughout his whole History and claims Kindred with them as the Puritans and Nonconformists of those Times yet having known what manner of man he had been he might have been ashamed of such a Progenitor who if Cyprian be to be believed was always restless arrogant proud perfidious a Flatterer and an Incendiary that carried a tempest with him wheresoever he went and was a sworn Enemy to Peace and Settlement he robb'd the Orphans cheated the Widows purloin'd the Treasures of the Church he suffer'd his Father to starve and would not as much as bury him when dead he kick'd his Wife being great with Child and caused sudden Abortion and this was the great Saint and Puritan that could find no Church no Bishop holy enough for his Communion this was the severe Judge that would not admit Repentance and represented God cruel and implacable as himself for it was really his Opinion as I shall shew in due place that there was no pardon for the lapsed no not with God and that Mr. B. mistakes when he affirms this Rigour to extend no farther than to refuse an outward Reconciliation with the Church The next is another Council of Carthage p. 36. under Cyprian where one Victor is condemned for making a Priest Guardian of his Children and intangling a man devoted to the Service of the Altar in the Affairs of this World All that he has to except against this is the Rigor of the Sentence that forbids his name to be mentioned in Prayer for the dead and that there should be no Oblation made for his Rest but this shews that the ancient praying for the dead was intended rather as an honourable Remembrance of them than any act of Charity toward the Soul departed else it is not likely so good and indulgent a man as St. Cyprian was would have been so cruel in his Intentions as to deprive a poor Soul of any Relief he had judg'd necessary for it p. â—5 § â—8 After this he gives a short account of several Councils called upon the subject of Rebaptization of Hereticks and here to do him Right he is just enough in his Remarks The Generality of the World was for rebaptizing Hereticks and considering what manner of men the first Hereticks were it is probable they had Tradition as well as Reason on their side However Mr. B. endeavours fairly to excuse these Differences and speaks of the Bishops with Honour and respect allowing them to be men of eminent Piety and Worth Had he used the same Candour towards others who were no less eminent it would have been no Disparagement to his Judgment or Sincerity but his contrary unequal Dealing is not much for the Reputation of his Charity and Modesty There is a mistake § 29. where he make Eus bius to speak that in his own Person 〈…〉 which he cites not of Dionysius Alexandrinus That he does not condemn the rebaptizing of Hereticks Euseb l. 7 c. 6. which was a Tradition of so great Antiquity The Councils of Antioch that condemn'd Paulus Samosatenus are in effect acquitted by Mr. B. when he acknowledges him that was rejected by those Councils a gross Heretick That infamous meeting of Traditors at Cyrta p. 36. § 37. A meeting of 12 evil men that were Bishops lib. 1. contra Parmen was rather a Conspiracy than a Council and I am sorry Mr. B. has not done that Right to the Catholick Church as to shew who these men were Opatus Milev reproaches his Donatist Adversary with these Progenitors amongst these was Donatus Masculitanus Victor Rusicciadiensis Marinus ab aquis Tibilitanis Donatus Calumensis and the Murtherer Purpurius Limatensis the great Promoters of the Schism of the Donatists and as it were the Apostles of that Sect yet these men tho they were confessed Traditors became of so tender Consciences soon after as to abhor Communion with Cecilianus because he was ordained by Felix whom they suspected of the same Crime that they had pardoned one another The Church is so unconcerned with the crimes of these men that they are in some measure her Vindication they went out from us because they were not of us and they left the Communion of the Church because their crimes made them despair of enjoying it The next Council he mentions c. 2. § 38. is that of Sinuessa one of the most nonsensical pieces of Forgery that ever I saw three hundred Bishops are said to meet together to judge Pope Marcellinus and could find no better
had all Wheat and no Tares were great Calumniators of Bishops and the honest Clergy that took their part they gave great Jealousie to the Civil Government and spoke Disrespectfully of Princes I will not say that any of our Separatists do resemble them in any of this The succeeding Councils of Ancyra Neocaesarea and two of Alexandria escaped with pretty good Quarter the Acts of some not displeasing him and of others being lost The next is that of Laodicea p. 42. § 49. They were so few that without Contention they made divers good Canons of 32 Bishops not so few but they could have fallen out if they had been so disposed three Canons of this Council he cites in favour of his congregational Church The forty sixth requires That those that are to be baptized and not already baptized as Mr. B. translates should learn the Creed and repeat it to the Bishop or Presbyters on the Friday of the last Week i. e. of the Lent or any other next preceeding the day of solemn Baptism By this saith Mr. B. You may conjecture how large a Bishoprick then was They might be as large as ours for all this For though the Bishop may not hear them all himself upon the same day yet the Presbyters of his Diocess may and the Canon is satisfied with that And Canon 56 forbids the Presbyters to go into the Church before the Bishop but with him and Mr. B's Inference from hence is That every Church had a Bishop though some Chappels afar off had but Presbyters only But I cannot see what Service this Remark does him for 't is confessed that no Bishop had but one Cathedral and that is the Church meant here in the Canon for it is added Nec sedere in Tribunalibus which were put up only in the Episcopal Church but that there were other Parish Churches supplied by Presbyters and those far from the Cathedral is acknowledged by Mr. B. I will not contend with him about their Title whether they were Churches or Chappels it is sufficient to disprove his Notion that they were several Congregations Canon 57. It is order'd that Bishops should not be ordain'd in Villages and Hamlets The Canon does not distinguish between the small and great putting Villages indefinitely but instead of Bishops they were to have Visitors i. e. qui circum eant that should go about and visit them § 49. which Expression imports that there was no small number of them under the same Association and yet all these were under the Bishop of the City upon which they depended and their Visitor was to do nothing without his Knowledge or Privity which Mr. B. translates Conscience Sine Conscientia Ep. nibil faciant But least he should have forgot the thirteenth Canon or taken no notice of it I would recommend it to his consideration it is but short Quod non sit permittendum turbis Electionem eorum facere qui sunt ad sacerdotium provehendi which shews that the Peoples Right of electing Bishops or Ministers is not so general as to have no Exception in Antiquity That great Roman Council of two hundred seventy five Bishops p. 43. p. 53. this is confess'd to be partly false if not all which Mr. B. mentions out of Crabb is of so little Credit as either not to be taken notice of by the following Compilers or else as is most probable is set down elsewhere for Crabb sets them down twice It is uncertain says Mr. B. whether it was before or after the Nicene Council for my part I believe it was neither before nor after but just the same time with the other great Roman Council that follows next to it of 284 Bishops which is said to be held after that ibid. Constantine was baptized by Sylvester A hundred and twenty nine Bishops came to this latter from the City of Rome and not far from it How big were Bishopricks then says Mr. B. But had there been no more Bishops in Italy than were in this Council they would not have exceeded the number of Christians in Alexandria when Strabo described it After this he finds fault with several things in this imaginary Synod first Because men are curs'd for being ignorant of the time of the Moon and then he congratulates the Makers and Improvers of the English Liturgy he should have said the Almanack-makers that they did not live in those severe times For alas one year they mistook the time of Easter and this is one of the things for which two thousand Ministers are silenc'd for not declaring Assent Consent and Approbation of yea and the use of it and so to keep Easter at a wrong time The silenc'd Ministers have little Reason to thank him or any body else that gives this reason of their Separation nor do I believe they would be thought such strict Observers of Times and Festivals and it is strange this should trouble their Consciences who care no more for Easter than they do for Christmas but only that it falls upon a Sunday and if the old observance of Easter in this Country upon the fourteenth day of the Moon had continued we must have expected to have had as many Arguments against the Feast of the Resurrection as we have had against that of the Nativity After this he quarrels with several other Canons of this Council and at last ends in these Exclamations O brave Pope and Clergy O patient Council that subscribed to one man and pretended to no Judgment O humble Constantine that subscribed to all this and said nothing and a Womans Subscription perfecteth all and O credulous Reader that believeth this Why then does he speak so modestly that the Fiction is but uncertain Why does he make Advantage of the number of these imaginary Bishops Why does he find Fault and aggravate and exclame if after all this is but a dream and his Reader a Fool to believe it Before I close this Chapter I must give an account of Mr. B's Favourite Sect the Novatians whom he speaks so favourably of as often as he has occasion to mention them The Original of their Schism he slubbers over p. 35. after this manner And Novatus and Novatian as 't is said being against their taking i. e. the laps'd into Communion at all the Councils excommunicated them all as Schismaticks One would imagine by this account that Novatus and Novatian had been thrust out of the Church and that their Schism was an Effect of their Excommunication but the contrary is notorious Ep. 39. for Cyprian charges Novatus with having first departed from the Vnity of the Church and drawn away several Brethren from the Communion of their Bishop and the Reason of all this was his Consciousness of those horrid Crimes he had committed which he foresaw would unavoidably bring the Censures of the Church upon him as soon as ever the Persecution was over This was the tender Conscience of the Author of the ancient Sect of
the Puritans Euseb l. 6. c. 43. Novatian in like manner withdrew from the Communion of the Church before he was excommunicated and the reason of his being renounced by the Church was because he had first renounced their Communion this Pharisaical Saint could not vouchsafe to enter into the same Church with Sinners and if it were not purged of all Dross and Corruption it must be unworthy of his Communion yet this severe Refiner of all others had least reason to exact this Purity whose Entrance into the Church as well as the Ministry was by extraordinary Dispensation and Indulgence he was baptized in his bed in great danger of Death he neglected to be confirmed by the Bishop he was made Priest against Ecclesiastical Laws that forbid Clinicks to have any share in the Government of the Church by the intercession of the Bishop who promis'd the People who were generally against his Admission that this Act should never be drawn into Precedent Being made Priest he became no great credit to his Friends that promoted him for in time of Persecution being desired to assist some of the Brethren that were in distress he renounc'd his Office and Religion saying that he would be Priest no longer and had an inclination to betake himself to another sort of Philosophy than the Christian this is the man that was so rigid and cruel as not to receive the Repentance of such as had fallen in time of Persecution but insinuating himself into the good opinion of the Confessors such as had endured the fiery Tryal he began to bring them into a dislike of the Church since it did receive those that had abjured that Religion for which the Confessors had so gloriously suffered and equalled them to these holy Martyrs in all the Priviledges of Communion Some of these good men were carried away with his dissimulation to do countenance to the Schism and their Authority brought off several others from the Communion of the Bishop but these at last discovering the Wolf in Sheeps clothing forsook the Impostor and return'd to the Unity of the Church he in the mean time uses all diligence to widen the breach and to make it perpetual by setting up himself for a Bishop which then was thought necessary to the Being of a Church although he had sworn solemnly before never to take the Office upon him To compass his Design he sends some of the subtilest of his Agents to three plain ignorant Bishops to invite them to Rome under pretence that this wretched Schism might be ended by their good Offices These good men suspecting no trick came and overcome with his good Entertainment with too much Wine and Perswasion were forc'd at last to lay their hands on him and consecrate him a Bishop and not thinking himself secure enough yet under this Title he makes every one of his Congregation engage himself by Oath never to forsake him or to return to Cornelius and this in a manner so Solemn that the relation of it is sufficient to strike a horrour on the mind of the Reader for when he administred the Sacrament after Consecration he made every one that received when the Bread was in his hand to swear to him by the Body and Blood of our Saviour that they would never forsake him or return to their former Bishop These were the men these were the means by which the Schism of the Novatians was begun and carried on a Schism no less execrable in the Conduct of it than infamous in its Authors and which is yet worse than all this most blasphemous in its Doctrines Mr. B. is too favourable in his representation of the Novatian Doctrine for in the place above-cited he makes these two Observations in favour of them First that Novatus did not deny the laps'd pardon of Sin with God p. 39. but only Church-Communion Secondly That he did not deny this to other great Sinners repenting but only to those that laps'd to Idolatry or denying Christ but the Novatians long after extended it to other heinous Crimes as upon suppos'd parity of Reason As to the first lib. 4. c. 28. Socrates does endeavour to excuse them by saying that those who had sacrificed to Idols in times of Persecution were to be exhorted to Repentance though not to be admitted to Communion and as to the Pardon of their Sin they were to leave that to God who alone has power to forgive Sins It must be confess'd that Socrates is an Historian of good credit and it seems well acquainted with the History and Doctrine of the Novatians who probably in his time might have grown more moderate in their Opinion concerning Remission of Sin but nothing can be more evident than that the Authours of that Schism denied not only the Communion of the Church but God's Pardon to those who had sinned after Baptism for this all the Writers of that time who must be suppos'd to understand their Tenets do unanimously affirm Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived the same time with Novatian and writ to him to advise him to return and be reconcil'd to the Church and lay down that Honour of a Bishop which he pretended was forc'd upon him this ancient Writer gives us this account of their Doctrine Euseb l. 7. c. 8. Novatian sayes he I justly abhor because he has divided the Church and drawn aside several Brethren into Impiety and Blasphemy and brought in a most wicked Doctrine concerning God representing our most merciful Saviour as cruel and void of pity Besides this be evacuates holy Baptism and overthrows the Faith that was before him And lastly He banishes the Holy Ghost irrevocably from those in whom there is great reason to hope that either it Remains still or may return to them again So far Dionysius Cypr. ad Nov. Haer. S. Cyprian argues in several places upon the same Supposition and looks upon their Severity in not admitting Penitents to Communion as the Effect of a more cruel Doctrine that God would never receive them into favour idem ad Anton. l. 4. ep 2. This was the main Argument against the lapsed He that denies me before men him will I deny before my Father which is in Heaven and consequently they denied them Communion because they believed Christ would finally reject them This the same Father uses great diligence to explain and confutes their Inference from it by the Example of St. Peter who deny'd his Master and yet was received into Grace He does acknowledge indeed frequently that Novatus did exhort those to Repentance he refused to receive but then he urges that nothing can be more impertinent than to press men to repent and yet to take away from them all hopes of Pardon and therefore he notes this as a pernicious Effect of their Doctrine That it frighted men out of their Religion and made them turn Heathen upon despair of Mercy and cast away all thoughts of Repentance since it would not avail them to
Vid. loc they ought to consider the Justice of the Cause and he that is already Bishop ought to continue so if they have nothing material to lay to his Charge and that be not evidently proved so we see plainly that this Disagreement is only between the People who have no Power to depart from the rightful Bishop and factiously to set up another against him but that the People should stand by their Pastor when he is canonically ejected by his Superiours assembled in Synod is very far from being any meaning of this Canon though Mr. B. would force it to that purpose Besides all this though any of these Arabick Canons should directly favour either his Notion of a Church or the cause of Dissenters or disallow the Practice of our Church in any thing they scruple it would give them but very small Relief since there is no Church and much less ours that ever receiv'd them nor were they ever heard of till the last Age. 7. Those ordained by Meletius were to be received into the Ministry where others dyed if by the Suffrage of the People they were judged fit and the Bishop of Alexandria design'd them Whither this tends is not hard to conjecture but it would spoil the Drift if one should observe maliciously First That these Meletians were Episcopally ordain'd Secondly That they were receiv'd into the Ministry upon the Supposal of their Submission to the Canons and Orders of the Church Thirdly That in that same place Sozomen declares in the Name of the Council that it is not lawful for the People to elect whom they please Page 53. l. 1. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cir. Ath. Ep. ad Strap The Council of Gangrae he has nothing to object against that of Tyre is manifestly Arrian and abhorr'd by the Catholick Church that of Jerusalem is of the the same Stamp but here Mr. B. goes along with the common Mistake that Arrius was here receiv'd into Communion whereas Athanasius affirms him to have died out of the Communion of the Church And it is plain that comparing Socrates Sozomen and Athanasius Arrius the Author of that Heresie was dead before the Council of Jerusalem and it is observable that Athanasius in his account of that Council every where expresses himself thus Ep. Synod Con. Hiero◠ap Athan. l. de Synod That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were there receiv'd into Communion See Vales his Annot. Ecclesiast in Socrat. Sozom. The next of any Note p. 54. § 21. is the Council of Antioch of near a hundred Bishops of which thirty six were Arrians the most Orthodox and the holy James of Nisybis one yet they depos'd Athanasius and the Arrians it 's like by the Emperour's Favour carry'd it Thus far Mr. B. Many have wonder'd how the major part of this Council being Orthodox Athanasius should be condemn'd by it Mr. B. who does not seem much to favour him because he was not kind to the Nonconformist Meletians insinuates a base complyance of these Orthodox Bishops with the Emperours Inclination a moderate man and always for the most charitable Construction However Pope Julius's Letter is express that he was condemn'd but by thirty six Bishops whether they were Arrians or no he does not say Athanasius reckons ninety Hilary ninety seven Sozomon ninety nine and be they never so many it seems the lesser number carry'd it and if the Emperour made that a Law the Orthodox Dissenters ought to be absolved Certain it is that this Council lay under the Imputation of Arrianisin for when it was objected to Chrysostom that he resum'd his Place after that he had been ejected without the Authority of a Synod to restore him which the Canons of this Council did require his Defence was that this was not a Canon of the Church but of the Arrians Sozomen makes them all Arrians The Faction of Eusebius saith he with several others that favour'd that Opinion in all ninety seven Bishops assembled at Antioch from several places under Colour of consecrating a Church but indeed as the Event prov'd to abrogate the Decrees of the Nicene Council Athanasius rejects them as sworn Enemies to him and the Faith so that there is no likely-hood that the majority was Orthodox since Constantius and Eusebius had the contriving of this Synod and by it's means the Ruine of Athanasius But how came this Opinion of thirty six only being Arrians and yet carrying the Cause Some say that they acted secretly and did not admit the Orthodox to vote with them for so the Condemnation of Athanasius past at Tyre or that they might be impos'd upon by their specious Pretence of disowning Arrius but because there is no account of any Difference between the Arrians and Orthodox in this case no Protestation enter'd nay if any such thing had been it cannot be imagin'd but that Sozomen must have mention'd it where he speaks of the Bishop of Jerusalem absenting himself on purpose lest he should be drawn in a second time to subscribe to the Condemnation of Athanasius we must conclude That these were all of a Party and pack'd together upon that design And perhaps the reading of thirty six in Julius's Epistle may be a mistake of Transcribers it being easie to mistake the Greek figure of 90 for 30 unless we shall judge the contrary to be the true Reading for the two ancient Latin Translations of Dionysius Exiguus and Isidorus Mercator conclude consenserunt subscripserunt 30 Episcopi and the Greek Synodical Epistle wants but one of just thirty Subscriptions Sozomen mentions another Synod at Antioch of just thirty Bishops and confounds the Acts of it with those of this first but whether it be his mistake or the old Translators that might confound the second with the first I am not able to determine and the matter is too confus'd to be extricated here Though the Authority of this Council was not great yet it seems the Canons of it were so wisely suited to the condition of a distracted Church and to the depressing of Schism that they were adopted afterwards by General Councils Mr. B. mentions several that are most of them levell'd against Dissenters and yet they are such as the Dissenters themselves that own any Discipline cannot find fault with and when they are in any Power find necessary to observe The fifth forbids any Priest or Deacons to gather Churches or Assemblies against the Bishop's will and if any did and did not desist upon admonition he was to be deposed and if he went on to be opprest by the exteriour Power as seditious The word opprest it seems is Emphatical and has indeed an old Version to favour it but what may be Oppression in his sense with the Council was Legal Punishment and the Greek word it uses signifies not so much the Penalty as the End for which it was to be inflicted the reduction of Schismaticks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And
give some occasion of Dissention the prudentest way was to take him at his Word and so end the Quarrel But it seems Gregory did resent the Injury and did not bear the Deprivation of his Bishoprick with the same Generosity he propos'd which made him a little more sharp than was decent in his Representation of the Bishops but from hence to conclude against the Bishops as the Disturbers of all the World would argue as little Judgment as it would Charity for Orators draw something bigger than the Life and Satyrists love to aggravate The Age though wicked enough may not be as wicked as a zealous Preacher might represent it all men are Lyars says David in his Haste and St. Paul when he was neglected by his own Friends concluded generally All seek their own and not the things that are Christ's and what wonder if this holy man sharpen'd with Discontent should exclame with somewhat too great a Passion against the Administration of the Church which he had been forc'd to quit His Censure of Councils that he knew none of them have any happy End was not the fault of the Expedient for ending of Differences but of the men and particularly of the Hereticks that were uppermost most part of his time for he does frequently profess a great Veneration for the Council of Nice and was one of the greatest Champions for it in his time The Case of Meletius and Paulinus p. 69. § 9. both Orthodox Bishops of Antioch was something nice and determined very tenderly that both should be allow'd equally the Administration of that Church Socr. l. 5. c. 5. Sozom. l. 7. c. 3. but with a Provision that this Indulgence should never be drawn into a Precedent and that the Surviver should govern alone Flavianus and ambitious Socr. l. 5. c. 10.15 popular Presbyter after Meletius his Death is elected Bishop in opposition to Meletius which was the occasion of much Trouble in the Church The Expedient so extraordinary shew'd the Moderation that was us'd to end the first Schism but Flavianus can have no excuse who against the Canons and the Interest and Peace of the Church and against his own Oath set up himself against his lawful Bishop Mr. B's Observation is That even good Bishops cannot agree nor escape the Imputation of Heresie which refers to Lucifer Calaritanus It is much to be lamented that good men cannot rightly understand one another but so it has ever been and the Apostles themselves had misunderstandings but this is no more incident to Bishops than to any other good men it is the effect of Humane Frailty from which no Dignity no Title can ever free us The History of the Priscillianists is related by Mr. B. with his usual Ingenuity p. 70. § 13. for all along he observes this Rule to be very favourable to all Hereticks and Schismaticks be they never so much in the wrong and to fall upon the Orthodox Party and to improve every miscarriage of theirs into a mighty Crime Aug. de Haer. c. 70. These Priscillianists joyn'd the monstrous Opinions and Practices of the Gnosticks and Manichees into one Heresie and besides their blasphemous Conceits concerning this World's being created by the Devil and our Saviour's descending gradually through the several Spheres of Heaven they were monstrous in their lewdness and promiscuous Fornications men of no Faith whose Principle was this Jura perjura Secretum prodere noli These men after they had been condemn'd by some Councils and very justly I hope got by the means of some Mercenary Courtiers Sulp. Sev. l. 2. prope fin the Emperour's Protection and his Order to be restor'd after they had been banish'd Ithacius and some other Bishops the most zealous Opposers of this Sect applied themselves to Maximus the Tyrant desiring him to suppress these Hereticks by the Sword In short Priscillian and several others after they had been condemn'd by the Council of Bourdeaux were put to death at Treves by Maximus his Order and how justly let the Reader judge by this Relation of Sulpitius Severus l. 2. Priscillianum gemino judicio auditum convictumque maleficii nec diffitentem obscoenis se studuisse doctriuis Nocturnos etiam turpium foeminarum egisse Conventus nudumque orare solitum nocentem pronunciavit But notwithstanding the Sentence were most just and Severus confesses that these Hereticks were Luce indignissimi yet all good men were offended that Bishops should procure their death and concern themselves in Bloud Whereupon Theognostus excommunicates Ithacius in a Council at Treves as Baronius tells us Bar. An. 385.29 an 386.25 ubi supra though Severus brings in Maximus perswading St. Martin to joyn with Idacius who had been condemn'd by none but Theognostus and that upon a private Quarrel St. Martin Ch. Hist p. 71. sayes Mr. B. renounced the Communion of the Bishops and their Synods One would imagine that now Martin the Saint were become Martin Marr-Prelate and turn'd Presbyterian but no such matter he renounc'd only the Communion of Ithacius his Party and that others did as well as he Amb. Ep. 58.76 Conc. Taur c. 5. Theognostus Ambrose Studius and several others scrupled Communion with these men polluted with Blood how justly I will not pretend to determine but Mr. B. cannot complain if he calls to mind how often he reproaches and derides the Tenderness of the Bishops that are content to enjoyn Penance upon great Malefactors that had taken Sanctuary in the Church There he pleads with Idacius that it is pity they should live and that the Gallows should be deprived of its due However forgetting himself he makes this a Plea for Separation and which shews a Divine justification for Separation from the Bishops and Synods of such a way yea p. 72. § 19. though of the same Religion with us and not so corrupt as the Reformation found the Roman Papacy and Clergy This Divine Justification is the Angel's Reproof of Martin for having communicated with the Ithacians once Sulp. Sev. Vit. Mart. to save the Lives of some Eminent Persons How far the Historian is to be credited in these marvellous Relations of St. Martin I am as loth to determine as Mr. B. but sure it is that all things confider'd though St. Martin may pass for a great Saint yet several of his actions shew more Simplicity and Zeal than Knowledge or Discretion for though it were much to his credit to be sollicited to an Emperour's Table Sever. yet it was a great want of Duty to prefer his own Priest to the Emperour and Nobles in outward expressions of respect and though it was great Devotion in the Empress to condescend to be his Cook and Serving-maid yet it was no great sign of Humility in him to accept the service For my part I must confess I should be very loth to separate from the Communion of a Church whose Doctrines I could not except against merely upon this Divine
Justification and the Example and Miracles of St. Martin But this Instance could become no man worse than Mr. B. who in a Letter to Dr. Hill confesses himself to have been a man of Blood and therefore despairs of the honour of ever being instrumental in the Peace of the Church If St. Martin was so far in the right why does not M. B. imitate him why does he not renounce Communion with those bloody men that instigated the Long Parliament and People to rebell that pressed the King's death and defended it when it was done why does he not renounce these especially since they never gave the least sign of Repentance These were the men that applied themselves to the Maximi of this Nation to persecute not Priscillianists but a great many Worthy Honest Men And I need not call to Mr. B's remembrance who were the sordid Compliers with these Usurpers who compar'd Cromwel to David Disput 1. Ep. Ded. to R. Cromwel and his wise Son to Solomon but this has transported me a little too far and to say truth who can forbear where men have the confidence to suggest those things against others that they stand most notoriously guilty of themselves The next thing worth Reflection is his Remark upon the Council of Capua §. 20. This Council sayes he had more wit than many others and order'd that both Congregations Flavian 's and Evagriu 's being all good Christians should live in loving Communion O that others had been as wise in not believing the Prelates that perswaded the World that it is so pernicious a thing for two Churches and Bishops to be in one City as Peter and Paul are said to be at Rome Whatever Wit this Council had it seems Mr. B. shews little in mistaking it so grossly for the Council of Capua never order'd that the two opposite Bishops and Congregations at Antioch should joyn in loving Communion but only that the Eastern Bishops that had divided themselves upon that occasion some taking part with Flavianus others with Evagrius Conc. Cap. that these should be received into the Communion of the Catholick Church if they were Orthodox in the Faith so that if the Schism at Antioch could not be compos'd the Mischief should not go any further or divide the Catholick Church Ambros Theoph. Ep. 78. as St. Ambrose writes to Theophilus Alex. Cui bonae pacis naufragio Synodus Capuensis tandem obtulerat possum tranquillitatis ut omnibus per totum Orientem daretur Communio Catholicam confitentibus fidem duobus estis tuae sanctitatis Examen impertiretur And now Mr. B's violent Exclamation against those who would perswade the World that it is so pernicious a thing to have two Bishops in the same City might have been spar'd but this is to be pardon'd when we consider that a Gun makes the same noise whether it hit or miss the mark But this Council condemn'd a new Heresie Hereticating was in fashion viz. of one Bishop Bonosus Ch. Hist § 21. p. 72. denying Mary to have continu'd a Virgin to her death Here Mr. B. makes himself pleasant with his own Dream for surely no man with his Eyes open ever saw this Condemnation of Bonosus by the Council of Capua which determines only that the neighbouring Bishops should judge between him Bonosus and his Accusers Ambr. Ep. 79. sed cum hujusmodi fuerit Concilii Capuensis judicium ut finitimi Bonoso atque ejus accusatoribus Judices tribuerentur praecipuè Macedones qui cum Episcopo Thessaloniensi de ejus factis cognoscerent advertimus quod nobis judicandi forma competere non posset Next sayes our Author we have a strange thing § 23. a Heresie raised by one that was no Bishop but the best is it was but a lit-Heresie that of Jovinian But how is it so strange a thing that a Heresie should be raised by one that is no Bishop or did he not turn Heretick because he was not made one Cerinthus Ebion Marcion Valentinus Artemon Arrius c. were they Bishops I suppose it will be a hard matter to find any Bishops to have been the Authors of any Heresie for a long while after Christ and even those that gave names to Heresies were not the first that gave them being as we shall shew more particularly hereafter It is strange sayes Mr. B. that Binnius vouchsafes next § 24. to add out of Socrates when he hereticates him also a Council of the Novatians And why should it be so strange since Binnius sets down a great many more Councils that were Heretical in his opinion But let Mr. B. enjoy his wonder when he is in the fit he must give others leave to wonder a little too at the Transports of a man that pretends so much to moderation that would say as loud as I can speak if all the proud ambitious hereticating part of the Bishops had been of this mind O what Sin Ch. Hist p. 73. § 24. what Scandal and what Shame what Cruelties Confusions and Miseries had the Christian World escap'd And what is all this about The leaving Easter indifferent i. e. Whether it be to be observ'd with the Jews or the Christian Church And yet Mr. B. in this very Paragraph finds fault with silencing of Ministers that would not keep it at the wrong time If all times be indifferent to observe it in what time is wrong and who changes the nature of things indifferent the Bishops or those that make a Conscience of Observing it upon a mistaken time He is very much here in the Commendation of the Novatians as if none had ever observ'd this Moderation but these Schismaticks Did not Irenaeus and many other good Bishops shew the same moderation before Novatian was born But these Hereticks than whom there never was a more proud Pharisaical sort of men must have the Honour of it when it was their necessity that put them upon this Indulgence one towards another and that you may understand how peaceably they behav'd themselves in this present case take this short account of it out of Socrates and Sozomen who if they were not Novatians as most Learned men both Protestants and Papists are of Opinion were too great Favourers of that Sect as all complain of them The Novatians Socr. l. 5. c. 20. Sozom. l. 7. c. 18. in the time of Valens the Emperour did think fit for Reasons unknown to change the Rule for the Observation of Easter which by the Decree of the Council of Nice was become in a manner Universal It may be they would have no Observance common with the Catholick Church and especially at that time when they were all under the same Persecution and the Catholicks desir'd a Reconciliation with them and therefore they flew off as much as they could to avoid such a Conjunction However this Innovation did not so generally obtain among the Eastern Novatians but that the contrary Usage prevail'd almost every
Diocesan Prelacy a distinction without ground or foundation as I have already shew'd and will be yet more fully made out The main design or Mr. B.'s History is 1. To charge the Bishops with all Schisms Heresies Corruptions c. 2. To shew p. 27. §. 7.4 that Diocesan Prelacy and grandeur is not the Cure nor ever was And to this purpose are level'd all the particulars of his Church-History In this Chapter I will endeavour to take off the first general Charge That some Bishops have abus'd their Office and Authority and have been the cause of Heresie or Schism cannot be deny'd but Priests Deacons and Laymen have been so too and therefore if the miscarriage of any particular man becomes a prejudice to his Office and the Order must suffer for the personal faults of those that are of it we must have neither Priests nor Deacons in the Church since some of them have been Authours of Heresies c. But this is not all our Author tho' he speaks indefinitely that â—he will shew the ignorant and he must be very ignorant that knows no better who have been the cause of Church Corruptions Heresies Schisms Sedition yet he means they were the Authors of all these evils as he is pleas'd to explain himself p. 72. Next we have a strange thing a Heresie rais'd by one that was no Bishop and then as if that were impossible he shews that was no Heresie and so the Bishops remain under the whole charge of raising all Heresies I wish he had left Schism and Sedition out of this charge for if he can perswade the Ignorant Readers that the Bishops were the cause of all these too they will never be perswaded that any Presbyterians are to be found in Church-History For if they had been in the world they must have had their share with the Bishops in Schism and Sedition It is a heavy charge to accuse the Bishops of all the Heresies and Schisms that have afflicted the Church and if it were true would go near to stagger the Reverence that one might have for the Order For though Bishops as well as other men may be subject to Miscarriages they might be allowâ—d the frailty of Humane nature from which no dignity can exempt us But to be found the cause of All the Evils that have befallen the Church would argue such a malignity in the Constitution as would shew plainly that God never design'd them for good But I believe this can be no more prov'd against them by matter of fact than that Bishops invented Gun-powder or Hand-Granadoes or were the Authors of the Scotch Covenant or the late Rebellion of the Field Conventiclers in Scotland Let us then trace the Heresies and Schisms that have torn the Church in pieces in several ages of it to their first original and examine who were the Authors of them and if it appear out of Church-History that Bishops rais'd them All or the greatest part I will give up the Cause and believe every thing in Mr. B.'s History and for penance read over all the fourscore Books that he tells us he has written Where then shall we begin If the Bishops should be convicted by the first Instance it would be ominous However because it shall appear that I deal impartially I will begin with the first All Ecclesiastical Writers do agree that Simon Magus was the Author of the first Heresie in Christian Religion Simon Magus Epiphanius indeed reckons up about a score of Heresies before this Epiph. Haer. 21. but they are Heathen or Jewish Heresies and I hope Mr. B. will be so kind as to allow that the Bishops had nothing to do with these That Simon was a Heretick all are agreed in though the Scripture say no such thing and though Epiphanius confess that his Sect cannot truly be reckon'd among Christians Haer. 21. p. 55. Ed Pet. This man did teach very strange and if there be any such damnable doctrines But that he was a Bishop no man ever yet affirm'd Justin Martyr thought he had seen an Inscription at Rome to this Simon which own'd him a God though it is possible this might be a mistake But that ever any Writing or Tradition called him a Bishop I have not heard It is true indeed he had a great mind to be a Bishop that is to have power of Confirmation and that every one on whom he should lay his hands should receive the Holy Ghost And he bid fair for it For he offer'd Peter Money says the Text And the Repulse perhaps disgusted him so that he resolv'd to leave the Communion of the Church since he could not be a Bishop in it and it has been the disease of several other Hereticks to scorn to be any other Member of the body but the Head The next that Epiphanius mentions is Menander Menander Epiph. Har. 22. who as Irenaeus and out of him the rest says was Simon Magus his Disciple but neither Irenaeus nor Eusebius nor Epiphanius nor Philastrius nor Theodoret and in short no man that has given any account of Hereticks or any Historian whatsoever that has been yet heard of has given the least Intimation that he was a Bishop Saturnius Basilides Iren. l. 1. c. 22 23. Epiph. Her 23 24. Euseb l. 4. c. 7. August Ep. ad Quodlib Philastâ— Haer. 3 4. Theod Haer. Fab. l. 1. 〈…〉 Saturninus and Basilides follow next and neither of them were either Bishops or of any other Order in the Church that we can find The next is the Heresie of the Nicolaitans which is generally fathered upon Nicolas the Deacon Irenaeus l. 1. c. 27. seems to he positive in this Nicolaitâ— autem Magistrum quidem habent Nicolaum unum ex septem qui primi ad Diaconium ab Apostolis Ordinati sunt Nicolas one of the seven Deacons was the Master of the Nicolaitans or at leastwise they look'd upon him as their Master Epiph. Haer. 2â— Epiphanius follows Irenans and enlarges the story shewing how he was a good man at first and did contribute much to the futherance of the Gospel but that afterward the Devil enter'd into him Philastr Haer. 5. Bibl. Patr. M. de la Rigne T. 4. p. 10. Philastrius follows the Authority of Epiphanius But for all this I believe Nicolas the Deacon may be acquitted of this imputation for there are Witnesses of very good Antiquity that endeavour to Absolve him 1. Ignatius Interpolated in two several places warning those he writes to Ign. Ep. ad Trall Philadelph Interpol to have a care of the Nicolaitans calls 〈…〉 â—â—â—â—uns and 〈◊〉 i. e. those that falsâ—y call themselves by the name of Nicolas Sycophants and Impostors The old Latin Interpreter explains this farther and adds Non 〈◊〉 talis fuit Apostolorum Minister Nicolaus Clemens of Alexandria is more particular in the Vindication of Nicolas Clem. Alex. l. 2. Strom. c. 3. whose name these Gnosticks abus'd to countenance their lewdness
please But the best of it is that if God permitted a Bishop of so eminent a Church as that of Antioch to fall into Heresie he on the other hand rais'd up Godly and Orthodox Bishops to oppose him and to vindicate not only the Christian Religion but the Order of Episcopacy also which he had dishonour'd For the Neighbour Bishops assembled in the Second Council of Antioch Condemn'd and Depos'd him Dionysius of Alexandria being now very old and unfit for Travel could not be there but writ to him says Theodoret Theod. Haer. Fab. l. 1. Eus l. 7. c. 30. Eusebius cites the Epistle of this Synod that expresly denys that saying that Dionysius of Alexandria had writ to the Council but had not vouchsafed so much as to salute Paulus From which passage Valesius concludes that the Letter of Dionysius to that Heretick Bishop in the Bibliotheca Patrum is forg'd Vales Annot in Eus l. 7. c. 30. notwithstanding Baronius receives it for genuine Now because Mr. B. promises to shew not only Who have been the cause of Heresies c. but also How It will not be impertinent to shew briefly how this Bishop also fell into Heresie It was in short by the way of Comprehension for Zenobia Queen of Palmyrene after her Husbands death being very considerable in the East and being Proselyted to the Jewish Religion for which reason likely Lâ—nginus her Favourite speaks so favourably of Moses this Paul Bishop of Antioch thought that by reducing Christ to be a meer man he might reconcile both Religious and take away the Partition-wall that divided the Jews and Christians nothing being so great an offence to the Jews as that Christ was own'd by his Disciples to be God And thus compliance and vain projects of Comprehension made this man a Heretick But Philastrius is not to be regarded Phil. Haer. 17. Ap. Biblieth Patr. who charges this Bishop with being turn'd Jew and teaching Circumcision and bringing over Zenobia to Judaism Before this time there is another Bishop reckon'd by some Collectors of Heresies as the Author of one Nepos Nepos an Egyptian Bishop who taught out of the Revelation of St. John as he pretended Euseb Hist l. 7. Theod. Haer. Fab. l. 3. that the Saints should live a Thousand years of pleasure here on Earth If this be a Heresie it was much older than this Nepos Just Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 307. Ed. Par. For it was so ancient and so general an opinion that Justin Martyr did not believe they were perfectly Christians that did not believe it For all that were Orthodox did look for the Restauration of Jerusalem and that Christ should reign there gloriously with his Saints a thousand years which he endeavours to prove out of the Revelations and the Book of the Prophet Isaiah Iren. l. 5. c. 33 34 35. Ireneus endeavours to prove the same thing at large and derives the Doctrine from Papias and by him from St. John the Beloved Apostle So that if Nepos prove Heretick for this he is like to find very good company but Author of it he cannot be It is some favour to him that Epiphanius and Philastrius pass him by for I do not remember that either of them mention him However you will say that though he was not the first that taught this Doctrine yet he was the first that divided the Church about it And that is a heavy fault that Mr. B. charges upon the Bishops that they divide the Church about unnecessary nice Speculations But this Nepos is as far if not farther from the Imputation of Schism than that of Heresie For Dionyfius charges him not with Schism but only with writing a book for the Millenary opinion which others afterwards laid a great stress upon and by that means several Churches were divided and some entirely carried away and all this after Nepos his death They might have done the like with Justin Martyr or Irenaeus if they had pleas'd and made the same stir and yet those Fathers not at all concern'd in the Schism this is manifestly the present case there is no account of any Schism made about this point till after this Nepos his death And Dionysius who writes against him thinks himself oblig'd to make his Apology before hand saying that he honour'd the man for many great good qualities and was sorry that he was forc'd to write against his Brother in the defence of Truth And as to the matter of fact it was thus He found in the Region of Arsinoe several Churches distracted about this matter so that they began to make Schisms in several places The Bishops surely must be concern'd where there is any Schism or Heresie they must have a hand in it But here by good fortune no such thing appears Euseb l. 7 here is mention only of Presbyters and Teachers whom this Bishop assembled Presbyters of the Villages and these after some Dispute he at last perswaded to Peace But what became of the Bishop of that Region will you say It may be he was dead and that this Nepos was the man unless one may imagine the Diocess of Alexandria to extend so far for the Country adjoyning to the Lake Mareotes and call'd by that name was part of the Alexandrian Diocess as we have shew'd before out of Athanasius and the Arsinoeites was the next Region to that But however this be our point is sufficiently clear'd that this Nepos was neither Heretick nor Schismatick Nor does it appear that any Bishop was concern'd in that difference save only Dionysius of Alexandria who by his Prudence and Authority did compose it To conclude For the first three hundred years after Christ there is but one Bishop found who was the Author or rather the Reviver of a Heresie and yet Mr. B. looks upon it as a strange thing that there should be a Heresie rais'd by one that was No Bishop The following Ages were not so happy but as Christians generally degenerated so did the Clergy too but yet not so much as our Author would make it appear The beginning of the fourth Century was very unhappy to the Church not only by reason of a most violent Persecution rais'd against it from without but also of Heresies and Schisms from within Meletius an Egyptian Bishop Meletius and the first of that Order that began a Schism forsook the Communion of the Church because they that fell from the Faith under Persecution were receiv'd into it Epiph. as Epiphanius tells his story though others of better Authority give other Reasons that this Bishop had himself deny'd the Faith and being condemn'd by a Synod of Bishops he set up a Schism But of this we have said enough elsewhere Athan. Ap. 2. About the same time started up the Schism of the Donatists Donatus named so from one of their Bishops Aug. de Haeâ—es that lived a good while after the rise of that Faction this was carried
flattering but was compos'd again by the same Person to whose prudence the Unity of that Church is in great measure to be ascribed as the Instrument of the Divine goodness towards them for after his death the peace of those Churches was very much endangered by a new Controversie about Universal Redemption and the Nature of Original sin and the Dissention was not far from a Schism Cameron though he had clear'd himself of all suspition of Heterodoxy at his promotion to the Professourship of Saumur had the bad fortune after his death to fall into suspition of Heresie and his Scholars and followers were brought into no small troubles What had been allow'd by the Synod of Dort as sound Doctrine in the English Divines was now call'd in question in France and what was approv'd in Camero while he was alive Acts Authentiques per Blondel became dangerous and Heretical after his death It is hardly to be imagin'd what great contention this little and to some Imperceptible difference did create or how many Synods it employ'd Amyraldus Dallee Blondel and several others were look'd upon as little better than Hereticks and their Doctrine about Original sin condemn'd in a National Synod at Charenton and an Abjuration of it requir'd by all those that were to enter into holy orders and a stricct Injunction was layd on all Ministers upon pain of all the Censures of the Church not to preach any other wise of this point than according to the Common opinion And all this stir as Blondel deduces it p. 50. was rais'd from little private quarrels between some of the Profesours and from the discontents of the University of Montauban that they of Saumur should be favour'd too much in the distribution of such Pensions as the Churches furnish'd for the maintenance of their Universities and they thought themselves wrong'd and undervalued because their Salaries were less We see that lesser matters than a Bishoprick can sometimes disturb the Church and that others as well as Bishops shops can prosecute their private piques to the hazard of the Publick peace and that there will be contentions where there is no Episcopacy If we Consult the History of the Reform'd Churches in the Vnited Netherlands We shall be farther confirm'd that Heresie Schifm and contention may arise under other forms of Church Government as well as Episcopal and the parity of Ministers cannot remove all occasions of Strise and Disturbance and many eminent men of that Church are said to be very sensible of this truth and to look upon Episcopacy as the most effectual remedy in the world for their Divisions The Church Government of that Country was not establish'd without great trouble and difficulty and occasion'd no small disturbance the Ministers taking an authority to themselves of setling the Church as they thought fit without the consent and Concurrence of the Magistrates The first Synod they held was at Dort assembl'd without the permission of the Civil Authority Brandt Hist vande Reform l. xi where the Heidelberg Catechism was impos'd upon all Ministers and they were farther obliged to subscribe the Netherland Confession and to submit themselves to the Presbyterian Government It seems the Bishops are not the only Church Governours in the world that require subscriptions and Canonical obedience Nor were the Ministers only bound to subscribe but all the Lay Elders and Deacons were to declare Assent and Consent to the Articles of Discipline The Civil Magistrate was very much offended with these Proceedings and would by no means confirm no not so much as take into Consideration the acts of this Synod but said they would take care of Religion themselves and appoint Commissioners to put in and put out Preachers as they should think Expedient and as for their Consistories and Classes they declared they knew of no Power they had The Ministers on the other side Preach'd up their own authority and vilifi'd the States calling them in derision Stakes But the effect of this Contention about Presbyterian Government was very sad for while they were quarreling about Jurisdiction the Spaniards made great Advances and took several Towns in Holland The Synod of Middlebrough An. 1581. Bâ—and 13. was held likewife without the Magistrates leave and the Historian observes that the Eccleslasticks were thought by several to have extended their Jurisdiction here a little too far and to the prejudice of the Civil power Here they distributed their Churches throughout the Country digesting them into Classes and Classes into Synods Here likewise they excluded the Magistrates from any share in the Election of Church Officers and oblig'd all Ministers Elders Deacons Professors of Divinity and School-masters to subscribe the Netherland Confession which was little so known there that several members of this Synod had never seen it and began to enquire what Confession of 37 Articles it was that they talk'd of They order'd likewise that the form of Excommunication should be I deliver thee up to Satan something more harsh than the Anathema's of Bishops and their Councils Here also they condemn'd Kaspers Colhaes Minister of Leyden for unsound Doctrine But he would not stand to the judgment of this Synod that was Judge and Party both and this occasion'd strange disorders in the Church of Leyden which continu'd still a kindness for their Pastor notwithstanding this condemnation and the Excommunication of the Synod at Harlem However prevail'd they so far that he was turn'd out of his Ministry and forc'd to betake himself to a mean employment This caus'd great discontents among the Common people many of them fell off to other opinions and there was no Communion administred in that City for a year and a half and when there was a Communion in the year 82 there were not a hundred persons present at it If these Synods had been Episcopal what Clamour might we have expected What Animadversions But others can disturb the Church as well as Bishops The Synod held at Harlem did but encrease their confusion For by the Excommunication of Colhaes and other proceedings they brought all things to that confusion that the Prince of Orange told the States roundly that unless they took some care to settle the Church which was daily more and more distracted by the Presbyterial Synods they must expect that the Reform'd Religion and their Country would be unavoidably lost They according to his advice empower'd Commissioners to settle the affairs of Religion which establishment the North Holland Ministers in a Synod at Amsterdam publickly protested against At Dort Herman Herberts Minister of the place was accused of having caus'd a Book of D. George to be be printed which he absolutely deny'd and the proceedings were so extraordinary that one of the Commissiners that sate with the Classes upon that occasion said that he had read much of the Spanish Inquisition H. van Nespen but that he never was in any place where he saw so lively and effectual a representation of it as
here An. 1586. A National Synod was call'd to sit at the Hague by the order of the Earl of Leicester without the States and here they insisted upon their Ecclesiastical authority and excluded the Magistrate from any voyce in the chusing of Church Officers That a National Synod should meet every third year without the Magistrates leave and subscription was more strictly press'd upon the Ministers under pain of being turn'd out of their Churches But these were but slight differences in respect of that which follow'd that fatal Schism I mean occasion'd by the Arminian Controversie The seeds of it had lain in that Church from the beginning and Colhaes â—uyrhuis Herberts I'o â—hert and divers oâ—hers had declared themselves against the received confession and Catechism of those Churches long before Arminius But his authority and learning bore up against the Current of the contrary Doctrine that had overborn such as before that had oppos'd it See the preface to the Acts of the Synod of Dore. and now the condition of those Churches was most deplorable for several years together there was nothing but perpetual Dispute and Claâ—rour Conference after Conference and Synod after Synod Appeal upon Appeal At last it came to Tumult and Sedition to Confusion and blood-shed Ministers were turn'd out of their charges some Banish'd Vid. vit Episcopii others set upon by the Rabble and in danger to be torn in pieces Nothing can be imagined more distracted than the state of those Churches was for a long whâ—le together At last after all the interposing and good offices of other Reform'd Churches but without effect a general Synod was resolved upon where the Remonstrants were condemn'd and the Civil Magistrate seconded this sentence by another more severe whereby they Banish'd the Ministers that would not subscribe many of them were imprison'd and in short Bâ—shops could not have procur'd greater rigour and severity which here seem'd to be more grievous where every body else had liberty of Conscience and Jews were allow'd a publick exercise of their Religion And yet these very points in difference that not only rent these Churches in pieces but shook those of France who confirm'd the Decrees of the Synod of Dort and turn'd out such Ministers as favoured the condemn'd Doctrine and requir'd subscriptions to the contrary opinions of such as were to be admitted into the Clergy these points I say have not had the same unhappy influence upon some other Churches that were Episcopal Men in our Church have taught very differently of these matters and yet the Unity of the Church hath been still preserv'd notwithstanding this difference of opinions which shews that Episcopal government is not so subject to Schism as Mr. B. would make the world imagine and to say the truth ours has been troubled with no other such difference but what hath been made in opposition to the very form of Government it self and there is no wonder if it seems so difficult to heal it since the Church can no otherwise satisfie these men than by destroying the whole frame of its Government and order and it is strange any should expect it that did not believe all those under the rule of the Church to be Hypocrites These men talk much of Ceremonies and Liturgy but this is the least of the difference though it be most pretended because most useful to render the Governours of the Church odious for shutting men out of it for such Circumstances as these This makes most noise as a false Alarm commonly does but the real design is upon the Government Therefore those that fancy any Accomodation practicable upon any allowances in this part seem to my apprehension to mistake the disease for Alas It is not accomodation but Victory that these men aim at But to return to the Churches of Holland whose Schism gave occasion to this digression After the Synod of Dort though all means were us'd to suppress the Remonstrants yet they remain still in separate Assemblies and the unhappy breach continues to this day without any probability of being made up Vid. Spanbmite Ep. ad Amie When they had tir'd themselves and the world with this Controversie they were diverted with new matter of dispute the names of Voetius and Cocceius rather than any difference between their Doctrine disturb'd again the peace of those Churches And though the ground of the quarrel is scarce perceivable yet it is hardly to be imagin'd how great the Animosities are This indeed never came to a formal Schism yet it has divided those Churches into formal parties and in some occasions the quarrel seems of more than ordinary consequence and has great influence upon the Promotions of the Ministry and the Affections of several Cites are determin'd to this or that party And as these Presbyterian Churches have been afflicted with Schism and contentions so they have been sensible of the mischiefs of Heresie and labour more than any part of the Christian world under the Infamy of them Here the Ministers have no great Revenues nor dignities nor Power and here are no Patriarchs nor Bishops and yet Heresies makes a shift to thrive Arians Socinians Menonists Labadyists and diverse others they are neglected no general Councils disturb the enjoyment of their errors and yet they abound and are pertinacious Nor is it a wonder they take such deep root in Presbyterian Churches for of late like Storks they have affected a republican Church above all others and it is observable that in these last ages there have been no Hereticks that have not been likewise Anti-Episcopal and at the same time that they become enemies of the truth they declare war against the Bishops who are the Guardians of it If it be objected that our Country swarms with this Vermin too it ought to be considered from whence they came to be so rife among us It was the taking away of Episcopacy that opened such a door to errors and there were more Heresies started here in the space of four years after Bishops had been laid aside if Edwards reckons right than have been known in the Universal Church from the foundation of it to that time And those that fall into Herefie here do it commonly by degrees They begin with Schism and end in Enthusiasm and madness first they are Presbyterians and then if that dispensation be not spiritual enough they are improv'd in to Independents and from thence to the fifth Monarchy or Quakerism All the extravagant Heresies among us are but the spawns of the first Schism and the consequences of those Principles of Separation that draw them from the Communion of the Bishop The Church of Scotland has felt the Distractions occasion'd by this Parity of Ministers more than any of her Neighbours and though it has not been divided by a formal Schisin 'till of late yet from the first setting up of this Government it has been exercis'd with perpetual contentions and Tumults and Sedition about Church Discipline
the Multitude of Sects and Heresies that sprung up in the first and second and third ages of the Church was no dishonour to the form of Government then us'd in the Church as should encourage any man to dislike or change it Why then does he endeavour to dishonour Diocesan Episcopacy upon this very reason and why does he reproach it with the Schisms and Heresies that happen'd under that government But no man can reason against Mr. B. better than himself does in the very same Paragraph it is but taking away the word Prelacy and putting in the stead of it Congregational Episcopacy and then nothing can be more full to our purpose If it was Congregational Episcopacy that was us'd then Swarms of Sects and Heresies may come in notwithstanding Congregational Episcopacy even in better hands than yours But if it was not Congregational Episcopacy that was then the Government but Diocesan Episcopacy Heresies are no more a shame to that Government now I wish Mr. B. had consider'd this place when he conceiv'd the first design of his Church History perhaps he might have seen the Inconsequence of his design to dishonour Bishops and their Councils from a long deduction of Schisms and Heresies which he lays at their door and have forborn giving this just offence to all that have any real concern for the Honour of Christian Religion which is no less concern'd in all these disgraces than Episcopacy Yet I shall willingly discharge Congregational Episcopacy from any Imputation of those evils that disturb'd the Church in the first times and be content Mr. B. should lay it all to the account of Diocesan Government which I shall shew at large in the next Chapter to have been the Constitution of the Primitive Churches in the mean time I must enquire a little farther after the Glorious fruit of this Congregational Episcopacy If the Ancient Church was quite a stranger to this kind of Episcopacy it will be a harder matter to find it in latter ages since Mr. B. tells us that Bishopricks were enlarged so enormously in process of time that several Cathedrals were turn'd into Chapels and instead of one Congregation every Bishop had several Scores and Hundreds And the Reformation where it retain'd Bishops made them all Diocesans and set them over several Congregational Churches thus the Bohemians Denmark Sweden and some parts of Germany besides these three Kingdoms Where they Abolish'd Episcopal Government they threw away the Titles too so that if Mr. B.'s kind of Episcopacy obtain'd any where it must be under another name therefore that we may discover it it will be necessary to give a short desoription of it and then we may possibly find it to have acted under the disguise of another name This Congregational Bishop then Treatise of Ep. which Mr. B. makes so much a do about is the same thing with an Elder as he tells us and takes great pains to prove it 2. This Elder has no necessity of any ordination by any Bishop or Elders but having abilities and inclination to exercise them in the service of the Church 2. Disp p. 164.165 he may Interpret it to be sufficient authority to preach Administer the Sacraments c. Nay is oblig'd to do the Office of a Bishop or Elder 1. Disp 〈◊〉 throughout Treatise of Ep. p. 33. 3. That this Elder can Govern but one Congregation and there may be more than one of such Bishops belonging to that one Congregation 4. That this Congregation is not to be so great as that of Israel that had 600000 men but is to be restrain'd to the compass of personal Communion in hearing praying and receiving the Sacraments 5. That this Church and Bishop is independent and is invested with all Ecclesiastical power within it self 3. Disp p. 347. So that no other Bishop or Synod has any power or Superiority over it but by its own consent and then consequently no particular Congregation is obli'd to enter into any association at all but may refuse to submit to any Synod nay if it be left in this liberty and Independence by Christ it ought not to engage with any associations as should be prejudicial to that original liberty and consequently set and determin'd Synods are to be avoided and since they are only prudential means of preserving good correspondence between neighbour Churches it is enough they should be occasional And what is all this but the Picture of Independency and the Congregational Episcopacy upon Examinations proves nothing else but Congregational Eldership What a Healing constitution this is I shall shew first by matter of fact Secondly I shall shew the natural tendence of such a Government to endless discord and division that the Schisms and Heresies that it has hatch'd were not accidental but proceeded from the nature of the Government it self 1. Some derive this Congregational way from Socinus Case of the Church of Engl. p. 249. who perhaps thought it the most suitable to his design of spreading the poyson of his Heresie and to prevent all dangers that might threaten it from the condemnation of Synods Especially considering the late Union that had been made between all the Reform'd Churches of the Greater and lesser Poland in the Synod of Sendomiria Others deduce it from Ramus and Morellus who plac'd all Ecclesiastical authority in the people and by making the Government of the Church to be a Democracy made way for Congregational Independence This put the French Churches to the trouble of several Synods Thorndykes right of the Ch. p. 67. which condemned this Doctrine as pernicious to the Unity of Christian Churches and derogating from the honour of Religion Mr. Thorndyke conjectures that it came over hither with Ramus his Philosophy And that his credit in our Vniversities was the first means to bring this conceit in Religion among us For about the time that he was most cryed up in them Brown and Barrow published it And R. Baly who indeavours to relieve the English Presbyterians from the imputation of having begot this ill-faced Child Disswasive p. 12.13 as he calls it would fain also Father it upon Morellius who as he thinks learned from the Disciples of Munster this Ecclesiastical Anarchy But whoever were the Authors of it and none of those yet named can give it any great reputation it is certain that the Fruits of it are to be found only amongst our selves where it happened to take root and grow up into something considerable The Brownists or those of the separation laid the first Foundations of Independency among us and though they had so few followers at first not exceeding one Congregation so as not to have any occasion of entering into any measures of a general Unity yet they declared for the independence of Congregations and that no Diocesan Prelacy or Presbytery had any Authority over Congregational Churches Rob. Brown who gave the name to the Brownists though Bolton had led that way to
of his Sister in Law and the contention grew so sharp that the Pastor Excommunicated his Brother notwithstanding all the mediation of the Presbytery and afterwards his father too upon the same quarrel I must confess I never saw any thing more extravagant than this contention as it is related by the sufferer with great particularity the Impertinence the Childishness of the whole Transaction is so extraordinary that a man cannot reflect upon it without compassion as men would the strange and extravagant humours of Bedlam After this breach follow'd another between F. Johnson the Pastor and Ainsworth the Doctor of the Church who divided it yet once more and excommunicated one the other Johnson and his party quit the place and go to Embden where this Church dissolv'd and the other part at Amsterdam after the death of Ainsworth remain'd a long while destitute of any Officers Smith who had transported a new Church to Leyden left it and turn'd Anabaptist and these Congregational Churches were every where just expiring when Robinson revived them with new and more Commodious principles though the Government were still the same And now part of Robinson's Church with his new amendments being carried over to New England in a short time over-spread the whole Country for the old Planters having almost lost all sence as well as neglected all exercise of Religion did easily give into this new Model and so the whole Country i. e. as many as were of any Communion submitted to this form though the greater part were of no Church at all by reason of the difficulty of admittance into this yet what were the fruits of this Congregational Episcopacy in this flourishing condition 1. The neglect of Converting the Pagans which their Minsters own without any shame or remorse which seems to have proceeded not so much out of their principle to make all Saints which should be admitted to their Communion though that was pretended by them for a reason against general Conversion as out of the nature of their constitution for the Pastor of a Congregation thought it not worth his while to go and gather Congregations over whom he was to have no authority and such as must be committed to he knows not whom Nor were these Soveraign Congregations Short story of the rise p. 32.13 2. much more useful for the preservation of truth and Unity than they were for the Propagation of the Gospel For they soon fell into horrid kinds of errours and blasphemies that the Holy Ghost personally dwelt in them That their own Revelations of particular events were as Infallible as the Scriptures That sin in a child of God should never trouble him That souls were mortal that the Resurrection of the dead was not to be understood literally with several such hideous doctrines Some extravagant women as Hutchinson and Dyer did affront these Churches and drew several of these Congregational Bishops and the leading men among them unto their party and to countenance their errors that were no less Monstrous than the births they are said to have had These began to affect purer ordinances and despis'd their setled Churches as legal Synagogues Williams and several others declar'd they could not conform and would have the benefit of Separate Congregations But after all these men had no better remedies against Schism and Heresie than those they rail'd at so much here the Sword and power of the Civil Magistrate Williams was banish'd and makes woful complaints of his hard usage Hutchinson and her company being also forc'd farther into the Country was with her followers slain by the Indians nay some have been so Barbarous as to destroy Quakers upon the account of their Religion and in short there is no place nor Trade nor dealing for those that oppose their Churches and their Excommunication is rendred terrible even to those who are not of their Churches upon the account of the Civil deprivation that attends it From New-England this Congregational way return'd back again to Holland where notwithstanding all the advantages it might have had by some farther experience in New-England and the late amendments yet had no better success than when it was planted there under the name of Brownism The first Independent Church there was at Rotterdam setled by H Peters an Apostle suitable to the constitution Bailies Diss Chap 4. to him succeeded Bridges and Ward but Simpson coming thither and renouncing his Ordination and reducing himself to the state of a private member was not long satisfi'd the Pastors not allowing the private members sufficient liberty of Prophesying Whereupon Simpson erects a new Congregation of his own and the contentions between these Congregations were extream fierce and Scandalous Ward is turn'd out for favouring Simpson in his pretensions to Liberty of Prophesying and at last with much ado the business is made up by the interposing of 4 Brethren of other Congregations which they call'd a Synod but that peace lasted not long for some time after they were all dissipated and at this time I do not know of any one Congregation of this way in all that Country At Arnheim where they setled a small Congregation they had no better success for they fell into strange Heresies and Extravagances setting up Chiliasm and Blasphemy That God is the author of sin and the like and now their remains not the least footstep of their Church or Doctrine in that place But no place can furnish a more Tragical History of this Congregational Episcopacy than England for this opinion taking new root here about the beginning of the late Wars produc'd such confusion as nothing but the miraculous hand of God could have ever reduc'd to any settlement or order He that would see the Influence it had on the Civil Government the growth and prevailing of it in the Army the Slavery of the Nation which immediately follow'd the Murder of the late King and the Abolition of Kingly Government the Shedding of so much Innocent blood under the formality of Justice though against all the Laws of this Land and those of God and man he that would see how they set up an Usurper and when he was remov'd by a happy providence how they oppos'd all the means of Union and settlement may find enough to entertain his wonder in Walkers History of Independency and the Histories of those times But for the Influence it had upon Religion there would be no end of relating the strange confusions the Heresies and Schisms that this way brought amongst â—s Vid Ed. Gangraena Tho. Edwards gives some account of them for about 4 years and reckons near two hundred several strange opinions with which they infected this Kingdom nor did they only beget Heresies but learn'd to Cherish them us Baylies Diss p. 93. for though this kind of Church Government did open the way to Anabaptism Antinomianism Familism and many more Heresies yet the Independents commonly disown'd and Excomunicated such as fell â—â—to them But
the deprivation of Communion is a sorer punishment to those who have known the value of the Ordinances of Christ and have tasted the grace of God in them than any other that can be inflicted on mens bodies or estates And here can be no other relief but by Separation and Schism 2. When a Pastor is turned Heretick and has seduc'd his Congregation into a good opinion of his Doctrine they have no relief because they have no judge to examine the Doctrine and to remove the evil from among them 3. If a Congregation shall conspire to be wicked turn Libertines and Antinomians who shall censure them for it the Magistrate may not be a Christian or may not take notice of it But the inconveniences of this way may be farther observ'd by looking into the several forms whereby this Congregational Supremacy either is or may be Administred 1. Suppose the Pastor invested with this whole power without any appeal to be made from his sentence what temptation would this independence be to abuse that unaccountable power since no superior Court could revise his Acts And if this man sâ—â—uld prove imprudent and wilful in the Administration of so great a power what peace could be expected And yet we must expect this power should fall often into the evil hands and it must be a wretched constitution that should not make some provision against it But in the Congregational way the first thing is extremity But I will not urge this because the Independents will not allow the Pastor any such power and therefore let us consider this way as managed by the Pastor and a select Presbytery the inconveniences are rather greater For 1. In many Congregations the Church power must come into the hands of such as have little capacity or experience and by that means would become contemptible 2. Suppose they should not all agree upon a Sentence of Excommunication must the majority conclude it and against the opinion of the Minister This would be something hard for him to pronounced sentence against his own judgment and condemn a person he believes to be innocent if he does refuse then he resists the Authority of the Church and that must needs produce a Rupture 3. They of the select Presbytery must be supposed to have a mixture with the rest by way of dealing and commerce and this begetting differences and feuds between them it cannot be â—voided but that Church censures will be abused to revenge private Animosities and those upon whom they are to be executed will be more loth to submit when they recollect that they proceed from persons they had disoblig'd and instead of reflecting upon their guilt they will be apt to ascribe all to private grudge upon which reason in common Law he that is supposed to be judged by his neighbours has the liberty to reject any with whom he has had any falling out 4. This would probably degenerate into a civil Tyranny when a poor man should refuse to comply with some of his Ecclesiastical Judges to his own disadvantage they would find some advantage against him and by disgracing him in the Congregation ruine him consequently in his livelyhood 5. The exercising of such censures within so little compass as that of a Congregation by the members of it one on the other must in a little while ingage the whole body in parties and factions without any hopes of uniting the sufferers will be discontented and when they grow numerous will not conceal their resentments but bend them to the disturbance of that Congregational unity But lastly if we suppose the whole Congregation concerned to declare it self in every act of Excommunication few of the inconveniences before mentioned will be removed and there will be others yet greater For 1. It cannot well be avoided but upon many causes the Congregation will be divided and when it happens to be upon the subject of removing from or restoring to Church communion such differences do lead them into Schism for since there is no judge between them every party will likely stand by its own opinion and will hardly submit their judgments to the majority of the other side that out-votes them but by a few voices Those that were fierce for turning a Member out of Church fellowship because they are offended with him will likelier quit the Congregation and set up for themselves than endure the Communion of that which they cryed out upon as so great a scandal 2. The wisest and best men who are generally the fewest will be of no use for they will be overborn with number 3. It will make a constant trade of Faction and making of parties To conclude therefore If the Church hath been afflicted with Schisms and Heresies under Diocesan Bishops we have seen that it has suffered the same things under other sorts of Government but that which Mr. B. offers as a remedy of disorders has been the least able to preserve the Church from divisions nor were those infinite breaches accidental only as the best Government in the world cannot prevent all inconveniences but were the natural fruit of that constitution which would not be able to preserve peace between the Churches of one City how much less between the numerous Congregations of a Kingdom and is such a form as destroyes it self and pulls even particular Congregation in pieces by unavoidable feuds and factions first and then by formal Schism and Separation CHAP. II. Of the Rise and Progress of Diocesan Episcopacy Mr. Baxter in a Book published since his Church History Treatise of Episc Part 1. c. 3. gives us such an account of the Original of Bishops and Diocesans as would make one suspect he had had some late Revelation for he speaks so particularly of such things which no body else ever heard of and shews all the first causes of the rise of Episcopacy after so new a manner that it must be either new Revelation or some new Authors found out But because nothing of these appears in the Margin I am apt to believe it was rather a Dream For he tells us That in the beginning there were but few Scholars and Philosophers converted who were able to Preach and these men of parts Overtop'd the rest and where such as these were found they were highlier esteemed than the rest and these in some time became Bishops being made first Arbitratours and then as more learned Judges of true and false Doctrine nay being wiser than all the rest it was fit he should have a negative voice and Fourthly they understood their own value well enough and that made them proud and desire preheminence And Lastly one Bishop was set over some Churches for want of more able men and he having got the start of the others that came after made them truckle to him Mr. Blondel had a quite contrary dream and for my part I do not know a better way of Answering one Dream but with another he Dream'd I say for he had
next neighbouring Bishop but the Chorepiscopi may send such as were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for friendly correspondence and concord And the next Canon about the power of Metropolitans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 9. where it is forbid any Bishop to do any thing of great moment that may concern the whole Province without the concurrence of the Metropolitan does notwithstanding allow that he may govern his own Church and all the Regions under his jurisdiction Another Canon supposes more than one City in a Diocess and therefore Orders That a Bishop shall not Ordain a Presbyter or a Deacon in another City than his own * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Can. 22. or that is not subject to him Concil Agrippin An. 346. Non opinione sed veritate cognovi pro finitimi loci conjuncta Civitate The Council of Colen discovers the Dioceses thereabout to be very large for the Bishops assembled had most of them their Seats at a great distance from Colen Sêrvatius Bishop of Tongres in his Subscription adds something concerning his own knowledg of Euphratas Bishop of Colen and he gives for his reason that he was his next neighbour and yet their Cities are fifty or sixty English miles distant one from the other and the extent of the Diocess of Colen appears from the same Council where not only the people of the City exhibite their complaint against him but of all the Towns of the second Germany Subscriptio Servatii Cumque recitata fuisset Epifiola plebis Agrippinensis sed omnium Castrorum Germaniae secundae Ap. Conc. acta Provincia Germaniae secundae Metropolis Civitas Agrippinens Colozia Libel Provinciar whereof Colen was Metropolis and most of them belonged to that Diocess The Council of Sardica considering what course the Arians took to strengthen their party by increasing the number of Bishops as the instance of Ischyras Presbyter of Mareotes shews who was Ordained Bishop of a Village by the Arian Council of Tyre thought fit to declare against such proceedings as derogating from the dignity of a Bishop and therefore Decree That no Village or inconsiderable City shall have a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Con. Sard. c. 6. or any place where a Presbyter may suffice and lest you may imagine this an innovation to favour the growing greatness of the Bishops they add immediately That the Bishops of a Province shall Ordain Bishops in those Cities where there were any before which supposes that there were several Cities after the Empire became Christian that had never yet had Bishops Nay they add farther That when a City grows very populous so as to be fit to receive a Bishop it may have one To the same purpose is the Decree of the Council of Laodicea held after that of Sardica and much later than is generally pretended That Bishops ought not to be made in Villages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visitatores qui circumtant Isid Merca. or in the Country but Visitors who by the name they bear appear to be Diocesans because they have several Congregations under them which they are to visit and as for such Country Bishops as are already they must take care to act nothing of moment without the advice and privity of the City Bishops Yet all this while Dioceses do multiply against all means used to prevent it as we may perceive by the extraordinary numbers that met in Councils Acciti atque tracti 400 à mplius Episcopi Sul. Sev. l. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. Synod ap Athan. de Synod exceeding very much the greatest of those that had gone before Extraordinary numbers met at Sirmium and Ariminum at the latter all the Bishops of the West are said to have met for the Emperperors Officers were sent all over Illyricum Italy Africk Spain France to summon the Bishops to meet at Ariminum and all the Bishops are said to come thither from all the Cities of the West And now as we may observe the number of Bishops and Dioceses to increase so we may make some judgment concerning the occasion from that little light that is left in this particular We have but a very obscure account of the erecting of Bishopricks how and when most of them were founded but those instances that are preserved are sufficient to make us comprehend how the numbers came to increase so sensibly after the breaking out of the Arian controversy and in Egypt some time before upon the occasion of the Meletian Schism Epiph. Her 68. Meletius having left the Communion of the Catholick Church formed a separate faction and Ordained Bishops and Presbyters in every Country and in every place through which he passed nor was he content to set up only one Altar against another but to erect several in the same Diocess Nor is there yet any end of dividing Dioceses but these increase in proportion to the divisions of the Church Meletius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Epiph. Haer. 68. and as the Meletian Schism multiplyed Bishops in Egypt the Author of that Sect Ordaining Bishops in every Region and in every place that he passed through several in the same Diocess and as the Arian Controversy made Bishops where there never were any before so it is not to be doubted but the Controversies which followed Athan. Ap. 2. multiplyed Dioceses no less than these But besides this the multiplying of Metropolitans by the Christian Emperors contributed no less to multiply Bishops We have an eminent instance of this in the Province of Cappadocia in the time of Basil the Great The province being divided between two Civil Metropoles the Bishop of Tyana the new Metropolis thought that accordingly all that part of the Country that belongeâ—â—o the Civil jurisdiction of his City became no less subject to him as his Ecclesiastical Province which occasioned great disputes and animosities between the two Metropolitans Basil complains of the Bishops of the second Cappadocia that they presently renounced him in a manner Ep. 259. and when he made any difficulty of Ordaining any Bishop belonging to his Province Anthimus was ready to admit him as it happened in the case of Faustus Therefore to oppose the power of this new Usurping Metropolitan he betakes himself to the ordinary relief of making more Suffragans that by this means he might have some remedy from a Provincial Synod Epist 58. 195. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. de Vit. suâ Ep. 22 23. To this purpose Sasima a small Town belonging to Caesarea is made an Episcopal Seat and Gregory Nazianzen is preferred to it much against his will as a Person that might be of use to him against his Antagonist which he complains of in his Epistles to Basil and in his account of his own life and so sensible was he of Basil's ingaging him in this quarrel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naz. Or. de Basil that he cannot forbear expressing his resentments even
these Bishops who are said to be in Regione Hipponensi were not the Bishops of that Region but some Bishops of the Province met together there as had been done before upon the like Occasion as may be seen in the same Epistle Facto Concilio placuit ut conveniremini 2 It appears from the Inscription and Stile of this Epistle Clerici Catholici Regionis Hipponensium and yet speaking of the Bishop of Hippo they call him their Bishop not one of their Bishops which they must have said if they had had more but Conventus ab Episcopo nostro Proculeianus non est Conquestus Episcopus noster c. So that notwithstanding these Bishops mention'd in the Region of Hippo the Body of that Clergy own but one who was properly their Diocesan And this is farther clear'd by comparing this passage with that of St. Austin mentioned a little before where he assumes to himself the Church belonging to the Regio Hipponensium From the Diocess of Hippo we pass to that of Alexandria of which I have spoke particularly enough before but here the same Author offers a great many things p. 32. which I cannot answer at this time very particularly yet something I shall say as briefly as I can The Instance of Maraeotis he says little to he insinuates as if Maraeotis might not have Number enough of Christians to have a Bishop But this Athanasius does sufficiently shew to be a Groundless Conjecture and even before Athanasius the Generality of the People there were Christians He farther finds one Dracontius made a Bishop in the Territory of Alexandria possibly a Chorepiscopus or at least-wise it is manifest from the Epistle to him that it was the extraordinary Favor of the People towards him that compell'd him to accept a Bishoprick And the Danger of their falling to Arrianism was the reason which Athanasius makes use of to press him to accept it This was an extraordinary Case and allowing this man a Country Bishoprick that of Alexandria would be a great deal to big for the Congregational Measure After this we have Instances of several Cities that had Bishops and lay very near one the other and what does this conclude Might not these Dioceses be yet much larger than one Congregation Suppose the Chief Cities of Holland had each a Bishop yet I conceive they would be Diocesans though those Cities lie very close together And now after all this though we have several Instances out of Egypt how near Cities were together in some parts yet upon the whole account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ath. Ap. 2. the Dioceses do appear to be large enough from the Number of them For in Athanasius his Time there were not a Hundred Bishops in all Egypt Libia and Pentapolis The next thing I shall take notice of is the Defence of Mr. Baxter's Allegation out of Athanasius to shew that all the Christians of Alexandria could meet in one Church It is to be confess'd that the Expressions of that Father do seem to favor him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Church did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hold all c. Now suppose that all the Christians in Alexandria the Catholicks at least-wise could meet together in that Great Church yet all the Diocess could not there were some parts of it at a good Distance and they could not conveniently come so that the Diocess of Alexandria will exceed the measure of the Congregational Way 2. Suppose this Great Church could receive all the Multitude yet if that Multitude was too great for Personal Communion it is insignificant For if that be a Congregational Church that can possibly meet between the same Walls this Congregational Church will be as indefinite as a Diocess 3. Before this the Church of Alexandria met in distinct Congregations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we are told that these places were very small short and streight places So I suppose they were in respect of the Multitude of Christians which they did scarcely receive But that they were such Chappels or Churches as some of our Parishes in England have as great a number as Alexandria is hardly credible because 1. The Church of Alexandria was very numerous from the beginning and if they met all in one place it must consequently be very large Nor is it likely they should divide till they were grown too numerous for the biggest Meeting-place they could conveniently have 2. Tho' before the Empire was converted they might be confin'd to little places and forc'd to meet severally yet after Constantine became Christian it is not likely that the Alexandrians would content themselves with small and streight Chappels when every ordinary City built very Great and Magnificent Cathedrals And 3. Some of these Churches had been built with a Design of receiving as many as well could have Personal Communion in Worship together as Theonas is said by Athanasius to have built a Church bigger than any of those they had before And yet this and all the rest were but few and streight in comparison of the great Multitude of Catholicks that were in Alexandria But I conceive after all this that the Expressions of Athanasius do not conclude that all the Christians in Alexandria were met in that Great Church All that came it may be found Room but that all did come is not easily imagin'd For the Tumultuous manner in which they come to their Bishop to demand a General Assembly makes it probable that not only Women and Children would be glad to absent themselves but many more either apprehensive of the Effect of this Tumultuous Proceeding or of the danger of such a Crowd would willingly stay away Mr. Baxter tho' he thought the main Body of the Catholicks might meet here yet he would not conclude that all did and even these that did assemble here were too many for one Congregation and was an Assembly more for solemnity and ostentation than for Personal Communion in Worship and the proper Ends of a Religious Assembly But that we may not wonder how the Catholicks should be so few in Athanasius his Time we are told farther that the Arrians and other Dissenters might make much the Major part Nay it may be the Arrians alone were more numerous How true this is we may learn from Athanasius who speaking of the Catholick Party makes them the Major part of the Alexandrians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All these were Catholicks and their business was to desire Sirianus and Maximus not to disturb their Churches till they might send to the Emperor And that they were the greatest part might be yet farther clear'd from several Circumstances of that time which I cannot insist upon in this place without being too tedious to the Reader To conclude this not only Alexandria and the other Cities of Egypt had several Congregations compriz'd in the same Diocess but the Meletians had some Bishops of several Titles who had more Cities than one in their Diocesses as may be seen
an extraordinary Zeal for Religion and that oftentimes made them take Alarme when it was not in any extream danger and if their Knowledge and Discretion were not always proportionable to their Zeal surely among Christians it might be allowed to the Frailty of Humane Nature and the Sincerity of a good meaning If they differ'd sometimes among themselves and were warmer than is fit in their Disputes consider that the Apostles themselves had their Misunderstandings and their Contentions sometimes Peter was to be blamed and Barnabas was carried away The Churches founded by the Apostles were immediately divided about Opinions which were presently determined in Council and yet we do not find that the Controversie was at an end Should any one therefore so abridge the History of the Apostles as to represent nothing of them but their unhappy Contention and leave them under the odious Characters of Disturbers of the World and Dividers of the Church would it not justly pass for a Libel against Christianity It were disingenious and base even in an Enemy in a Christian I know not how to call it Having paid this duty to the honour of Religion by a general Vindication of it from such Consequences as might be drawn from this Church History against the Intention of the Author I come now to his design which is laid down page 27. To shew the Ignorant so much of the matter of Fact as may tell them who have been the Cause of all Church-Corruption Heresies Schisms Seditions c. And whether such Diocesan Prelacies and Grandure be the Cure or ever was But surely this is not the way of cureing Church-divisions thus to exasperate These Reproaches cannot serve to heal but to fret and inflame the Wound I have some hopes that I shall be able to shew the Reader so much of the matter of Fact too as may let him see how much he has been imposed on by this History and that all Corruptions and Schisms are very injuriously and against all Truth of History charg'd upon the Bishops Yet suppose the Charge be true is it such a Wonder that men of great Talents and great Authority do sometimes abuse them and by that means become the Cause of Church-Corruptions Private men though neither better nor wiser than the Bishops have not the Opportunity of doing so much either Good or Hurt and their Mistakes or Vices do not draw after them so great Consequences This Accusation though it may serve to render Bishops odious is yet of use to prove their Authority and their ancient possession of the right of governing the Church like his who would prove that they have troubled the World ever since the Apostles time If the abuse of this Power be sufficient reason to take it away or to render it odious what will become of preaching and writing Books What will become of Scripture and Conscience Let him still exclaim the Bishops have been the Authors of all Corruption and Schism were they not Christians and Men as well as Bishops and if a Heathen or a Jew should not lay such a Stress upon the name of Bishop but put that of a Christian in it's place and then make a great Outery wicked Christians turbulent Christians would not this reasoning hold as well as Mr. B's or if some of the graver Beasts should recover the Conversation they had in Aesop's days and talk judicially might not they bray aloud Horrible men Abominable men that will never agree or understand one another and then conclude with the Ass in the Satyr Ma foy non plus que nous l'home n'est qu'une bête Be the Bishops whose History Mr. B. writes as bad as he will have them how will this concern the rest of that order unless they will follow their Examples and own their Corruptions Machiavel was of Opinion that the greatest part of men were Rogues and Knaves but what is that to You and I let every man bear his own Burden But Mr. B. is resolved to cut off this Retreat and to level his Charge not so much against the Persons as the office of Bishops and to this effect he explains himself p. 22. There is an Episcopacy whose very Constitution is a Crime and there is another that seems to me a thing convenient lawful and indifferent and there is a sort which I cannot deny to be of divine Right Here we have three sorts of Bishops and this is pretty reasonable and compendious but in another Book which he refers to in this he gives no less than twelve Disput of Ch. Government p. 14. dividing was much in Fashion at that time though commonly it was without a difference and as they could make a sort of Seekers that neither sought nor found so he gives several sorts of Bishops that were no more so than he or I nay in this Abridgment of the great Division I believe the Members will be concident and that it is but a little artificial Illusion of Mr. B. that makes them appear several take away the little corner'd glass and that great multitude of pieces we saw are in a moment reduced to one poor Six-pence well let us see then what this criminal sort of Episcopacy is and what Mr. B. has to lay to it's Charge That Episcopacy which I take in it self to be a Crime is such as is afore-mentioned p. 22. which in it's very Constitution overthrows the Office Church and Discipline which Christ by himself and his Spirit in his Apostles instituted this is criminal indeed and a thousand Pities it should stand one Moment But where shall we find this Abomination it is not far of if his Judgment may be taken for Such says he I take to be that Diocesan kind ibid. which has only one Bishop over many Score or Hundred fixt parochial Assemblies Is this then their Crime that they have many fixt parochial Assemblies under their Government Had not the Apostles Had not the Evangelists so too And was that Constitution criminal Had not the Bishops of St. Jerom's Notion several fixt Assemblies That Father did indeed maintain that the poor Bishop of Eugubium was as much a Bishop as he of Rome but he little thought that he was more so or that the Extent of the Roman Diocess had chang'd the very Species of it's Church Government Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. he thought they were both of the same sort and that the single and small Congregation of the one and the numerous Assembly under the Inspection of the other had made no difference at all in the nature or constitution of their Episcopacy he communicated with and submitted himself in Questions of the highest moment to the Bishop of Rome Vid Hier. Ep. ad Damas which considering the Temper of the man and his Contempt of the World he would hardly have done if he had judged him an Usurper but would rather have joyned himself to the poor Bishop of Eugubium and done all possible
Countenance to that Primitive and Apostolick Constitution of Episcopacy But let St. Jerom think as he pleases Mr. B. is of another Opinion and now let us consider his Reasons By this means says he parochial Assemblies are made by them the Bishops no Churches p. 22. § 55. as having no ruling Pastors that have the Power of judging who to baptize or admit to Communion or Refuse but only of Chappels having Preaching Curates But must every Parish be an independent Church and exercise all Authority and Jurisdiction within it's self May not several Parishes associate under the Discipline of the same Bishop but that they must be unchurch'd If it be no Church that has no Bishop what will become of all Presbyterian Churches that are subject to Classes do not they unchurch Parishes as well as Bishops But they are made no Churches for want of governing Pastors this is a great Mistake every Parish with us has a governing Pastor but it is in Subordination to the Bishop and with Exception to some Acts that concern the general Union of all the Parishes associated Is he no Governour because he is not Independent Is he no Officer that is subordinate At this rate every Constable should be a King and every Captain a General But our Pastors Mr. B. says have not the Power of judging whom to Baptize this is a Calumny that has not the least Shadow of Truth and the contrary is notorious That they have no power to admit to Communion or Refuse is not true they have Power to admit any one that is not excommunicated or naturally incapable and they may likewise refuse the Communion to such as they judge notoriously unfit but must afterwards approve their reasons to the Bishop Several have used their Liberty and Discretion in this point without Offence however it is but fit that since the peace of the Church does greatly depend upon the right Application of Church-censures there should be a Restraint laid upon ordinary Ministers in this particular yet there is no Church-censure can have any effect without the Consent of the Minister of that Parish where he lives against whom it is directed The Ministers Refusal indeed may expose him to great Inconveniences and it is but just when his Refusal is only the effect of Opposition yet he has time and opportunity to produce his Reasons and why should he despair in a just Canse of convincing his Ordinary However though the Power of Church-censures be not allowed Parish Presbyters under Diocesan Episcopacy it is no Diminution of the right for neither under the Apostles nor the Primitive Bishops did they ever exercise it as principals or independent 2. Mr. B's second Reason against Diocesan Episcopacy is p. 22. That all the first Order of Bishops in single Churches is depos'd as if the Bishop of Antioch should have put down a thousand Bishops about him and made himself the sole Bishop of the Churches This reason goes upon the same Supposition with the other that every single Congregation had a Bishop the proof of which we will examine in due place The Bishops of great Cities had several Parishes or Congregations under them in the first times which never had any other Bishops but themselves and it was not this but the contrary that was the fault of great Bishops and Metropolitans of old for instead of deposing little Bishops they multiply'd them to strengthen their Party in Councils Vid. Collat. Carthag when they began to vye with one another in number of Suffrages as if the Archbishop of York should make every Town under his Jurisdiction an Episcopal Seat that he might have as many Suffrages as the Arch-bishop of Canterbury This I hope to prove in due place and to shew the Reader how far Mr. B. is mistaken in the Causes of Schism and that nothing contributed more to some of them than the multiplying the number of the lesser Bishops by their Metropolitans 3. His third Reason is That the Office of Presbyters is changed to Semi-presbyters What then is the Office of a Presbyter Is it not to preach and to be the mouth of the Congregation in publick Worship to administer the Sacraments to exhort to admonish to absolve the penitent to visit the sick This all Presbyters in the Church of England have full liberty to do and I wish all would take care to execute their Function as fully as it is permitted them 4. Discipline is made impossible p. 22. as it is for one General without inferiour Captains to rule an Army But are there not subordinate Officers in the Church as well as in the Camp How then is Discipline impossible If the General reserve to himself certain Acts of Jurisdiction does he by that means supersede the Commissions of all inferiour Commanders Mr. B. is much upon the point of Discipline's being impossible under Diocesan Episcopacy because one man he thinks cannot govern so many Parishes Admit in all things he may not nor is it necessary he should but in such Acts of Government that are reserved to him it is possible enough and has been practised from the days of the Apostles to this present time This Point you may find excellently discuss'd by Mr. Dodwel in his second Letter to Mr. B. which Mr. B. confutes briefly Cb. Hist 2. part by telling the Reader that if he will believe those reasons he has no hopes of him a short way of confuting and one would wonder that he that makes use of it should write so many and great Books of Controversie Yet this I must add that if it be impossible now 't is fit to let the World know who has made it so the Dissenters themselves have first weakned the Authority and obstructed the Execution of Discipline and when the subordinate Officers agitated caballed against their Superiour Commanders it is not wonder if Government be made impracticable However the Accusation sounds ill from those men by whose Mutiny and seditious Practises things have been brought to that evil Pass Mr. B. pursues his point further § 55. and adds Much more does it become then unlawful when first deposing all Presbyters from Government by the Keys of Discipline they put the same Keys even the Power of decretive Excommunication and Absolution into the hands of Laymen called Chancellors and set up Courts liker to the Civil than Ecclesiastical It is a Question I cannot easily resolve whether it be the King or the Bishop that governs by the Chancellor but whoever governs by them they neither have no nought to have the Power of Decisive Excommunication or the Power of the Keys but act only as Assistants and judges of matter of Fact and apply the Canons which determine what Offences are to be punish'd with Excommunication if they do any more I neither undertake the Defence nor will I suppose those that employ them own their Actions any farther However the Presbyterians fall under the same Censure with our Diocesans for
all the Churches they lookt upon that as their peculiar Charge and govern'd not as ordinary Presbyters but by Apostolick Authority as a Metropolitan who although he has the supervising of all the Diocesses within his Province yet may have his proper Diocess which he governs as a particular Bishop And the Office of an Apostle does not essentially consist in the governing of more Churches than one else St. Paul would never have vindicated his Apostleship from the particular Right he had over the Corinthians 1 Cor. 9.2 If I be not an Apostle to others yet doubtless I am to you for the Seal of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord. So that though he had had no more Churches to govern yet his Apostolick Authority might have been still exercised over that particular one of Corinth The Provinces of the Evangelists were not yet so large as those of the Apostles for these were either sent to such Cities or Parts whither the Apostles themselves could not go or left where they could not stay The Church of Ephesus was the Diocese of Timothy from whence although the greater Occasions of other Churches might call him away and require his Assistance yet his Authority was not Temporal nor would it have expired if he had resided a longer while at Ephesus so that these Apostolick men were not so because they were unfixt but because they had that Eminence of Authority which they might exercise in one or more Churches according as their Necessities did require or as the Spirit signified and that they did not settle in one place is to be ascribed to the Condition of their Times and not to the nature of their Office for the Harvest was now great and such Labourers as these were but few and therefore their Presence was required in several Places And as this Unsetledness is not essential to Apostolick Authority no more is it essential to Episcopacy to be determined to a certain Church Every Bishop is Bishop of the Catholick Church and that his Authority is confined to a certain district is only the positive Law of the Church that forbids one Bishop any Exercise of his Office within the Diocess of another and St. Paul seems to have given them the occasion who would not build upon another mans Foundation However in any case of Necessity this Positure Law is superseeded and a Bishop may act in any place by virtue of a general Power he has received in his Ordination so that this first Exception of the Apostles and the Evangelists being unfixt and Bishops determined to a particular Church can make no essential Difference As to the Visitors of the Church of Scotland they make evidently against Mr. B's Notion of an essential Difference between Bishops and Evangelists for first of all the Residence was fixt to certain Cities and their Jurisdiction confin'd within certain Provinces as the Superintendent of the Country of Orkney was to keep his Residence in the Town of Keirkwall Spotswood Hist Scot. l. 3. p. 158. he of Rosse in the Channory of Rosse and so the rest in the Towns appointed for their Residence Their Office was to try the Life Diligence and Behaviour of the Ministers the Order of their Churches and the Manners of the People how the Poor were provided and how the Youth were instructed they must admonish where Admonition needed and dress all things that by good Counsel they were able to compose finally they must take note of all hainous Crimes that the same may be corrected by the Censures of the Church So far of their Constitution as we find it in Mr. Knox's first Project of Church-polity Spotswood p. 258. and their practice was altogether the same with that of Diocesan Episcopacy as Bishop Spotswood describes it The Superintendents held their Office during Life and their Power was Episcopal for they did elect and ordain Ministers they presided in Synods and directed all Church Censures neither was any Excommunication pronounced without their Warrant And now let the Reader judge how the Constitution of Diocesan Episcopacy becomes a Crime and yet these Visitors of the Church of Scotland conformable to divine Institution As to the second Exception that the Apostles and Evangelists were Episcopi Episcoporum and had Bishops under their Jurisdiction which our Diocesans who are the Bishops but of particular Churches do not pretend to This makes no Difference at leastwise no essential one for the same person may have the Charge of a particular Church or Diocess and yet have the supervising Power over several others But in this point Mr. B. does but equivocate and impose upon his Reader for by his Episcopus gregis he means only a Presbyter and a particular Bishop may have Jurisdiction over such without any Injury or Prejudice done to the Office which from it's first Institution has been under the Direction of a superiour Apostolical Power if therefore these Presbyters do retain all that Power which essentially belongs to them under a Diocesan Bishop how are they degraded In short either this Order of Congregational Episcopacy is different from Presbytery or the same with it if the same how is it abrogated by Diocesan Episcopacy since Presbyters are still in the full Possession and Exercise of their Office If they are distinct how then comes Mr. B. to confound them as he does § 16. where he says That the Apostles themselves set more than one of these Elders or Bishops in every Church So then those Apostolick men as Bishops of the particular Churches wherin as they resided had Authority over Presbyters within the Extent of their Diocess and a general Supervising Care of several other Churches and so they were Episcopi Episcoporum in the first they are succeeded by Diocesan Bishops in the latter by Metropolitans which yet were never lookt upon as two orders essentially distinct But after all this we shall never come to a right Understanding of Mr. B's Episcopacy unless we take along with it his Notion of a particular Church which he sets down p. 6. § 19. There is great Evidence of History p. 6. that a particular Church of the Apostles setling was essentially only a Company of Christians Pastors and People associated for personal holy Communion and mutual help in holy Doctrine Worship Conversation and Order therefore it never consisted of so few or so many or so distant as to be uncapable of such personal Help and Communion but was ever distinguished as from accidental Meetings so from the Communion of many Churches or distant Christians which was held but by Delegates Synods of Pastors or Letters and not by personal Help in Presence Not that all these must needs always meet in the same place but that usually they did so or at due times at least and were no more nor more distant than could so meet sometimes Persecution hindred them sometimes the Room might be too small even independent Churches among us sometimes meet in diverse Places
and one Parish has diverse Chappels for the aged and weak that are unfit for Travel Every one of these Churches then had one Bishop and was in his Opinion all the Diocess of apostolical and ancient Bishops If in any City or Town the number of Christians should exceed what might meet in one Congregation that then they were to imitate the Commonwealth of Bees who when they grow too numerous for one hive send out new Colonies commanded by their own Officers so when Christians grew too many for personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship they must resolve themselves into several Churches and have as many independent Bishops as they have Congregations But this model of a Church I am afraid is like to please no Party for the Dissenters are of Opinion we have too many Bishops already but this Project would make more Bishops in this one City than are now in the three Kingdoms Mr. B. has elsewhere endeavoured to take away this Prejudice Disp 1. of Ch. Gov. Ch. Hist part 2. by saying that those many Bishops he is for are not of the same sort with ours 't is true indeed Dioceses are not to be so large yet their Power within their own Church is to be equal to the others within their Diocess and the Church would fare no better in this Case than the Empire did in the times of Galienus when the People generally discontented with his Government because it was too remiss found themselves immediately enslaved by no less than thirty Tyrants The Presbyterians would never endure that the Power of their Classes and Synods should be settled in congregational Bishops and the Independent's Principles will as little admit this Project the Erastian Party will allow this Bishop no Power of Censures or Church Discipline Lewis Moulin Paraenesis who seems to speak in the name of all the English Independents explodes the use of Excommunication in a Christian State and will have no Ruler but the Civll and some of the greatest men of that party in their Recommendations before his Book though they speak something cautiously yet do not disapprove his Notion What some others of them have writ of the Nature of a Church is so mysterious and seraphical that one must be verè adeptus to understand it the plainest thing I believe can be made of it is that they are above Ordinances and that these Saints on Earth have as little need of Discipline and Censures as those in Heaven The Episcopal men are content with the present Form and do not desire the Bishops should be multiplyed at least not according to this Project for this in their Judgment would lie heavier than the Burden of Issachar So that I cannot see what party or principles this would suit besides the Authors own nor since he is so subject to Change is it likely to please him long However if it be the Primitive Platform it is Reason that all Churches notwithstanding their Prejudices should conform to it and therefore it is not equal it should be rejected though all the World were against it before that great Evidence of History which he alledges in Favour of it is consider'd For this Evidence he refers us to another Book of his 1 Disput of Ch. Government and Worship p 1659. and dedicated to R. Cromwel p. 87. Grotius his Opinion he rejects himself p 6. Edict Vossii Disp p. 88. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 22. where the Proofs are set down at large the first Authority he mentions there after the Scriptures is that of Clemens Romanus who mentions only Presbyters and Deacons but this is besides the present Question As for the Pseudo Clement which Mr. Thorndike mentions and is alledg'd by Mr. B. though it may be to the Purpose yet 't is of no Authority The next and the plainest as he confesses is Ignatius out of whom he cites several Passages the first out of his Epistle ad Smyrn Vbi itaque apparet Episcopus illic multitudo sit quemadmodum utique ubi est Christus Jesus illic Catholica Ecclesia as in B. Vshers old Translation with which Vossius's Greek Copy does agree from whence Mr. B. urges That this Plebs or Multitudo is the Church which he ruleth and not only one Congregation among many that are under him for this does without distinction bind all the people one as well as another to be where the Bishop is or appeareth viz. in the publick Assembly for Communion in Worship It is plain therefore there that there were not then many such Assemblies under him otherwise all save one must have necessarily disobey'd this Command To which I answer first That Antiochus cites this Passage quite differently and more at large than it is in the Text and to this Effect § Wherever the Bishop appears Antioch Ser. 124. there let the Multitude be as wheresoever the name of Christ is call'd there let a Church be assembled it is not permitted the Flocks of young Lambs to go whithersoever they please but whither the Sheepherds lead them those that remain out of the Flock the wild Beasts destroy and devour all that which goes astray which Words do not at all imply whether there were one or more Congregations under that Bishop and their design is to prove that Christians ought not to assemble themselves where they please without the Leave of or in Opposition to their Bishop this appears plainly from the Context to which Mr. B. does refer us these are the Words that immediately precede the Passage alledg'd Nullus sine Egiscopo aliquid operetur eorum quae conveniunt in Ecclesiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illa firma gratiarum actio reputetur quae sub ipso est vel quam utique ipse concesserit So that here is a plain distinction between a Congregation under the Bishop that is where he is personally present and a Congregation assembled by his Permission and Allowance and these Expressions of Ignatius can have no other Occasion than the Usage of the Church even in his time to have several Congregations under one Bishop The next Proof is out of Ignatius's Epist to the Philadelphians where he exhorts them to come all to the same Eucharist and these are his Motives Vna enim Caro Domini nostri Jesu Christi unus Calix in Vnionem Sanguinis ipsius unum altare unus Episcopus cum Presbyterio Diaconis conservis meis Disp p. 89. And thus the old Translation which is word for word according to the Florentine Greek Copy The Passage as Mr. B. cites it is in this Epistle interpolated but making more for his purpose he preferr'd it to the Genuine Reading where there is no mention of unus Panis unus Calix toti Ecclesiae but that which he lays his greatest stress upon is Vnum Altare unus Episcopus and this all Copies do agree in from whence he concludes Here it is manifest that the particular Church which in those dayes was
govern'd by a Bishop Presbyters and Deacons was but one Congregation for every such Church had but one Altar This Observation of one Altar in one Episcopal Church he confirms by Mr. Mede who propounds it with great Modesty and onely as a Conjecture and M. B. has added nothing to his Reason more than his own Confidence If he had but taken leisure to consider and not have run away with that onely which seems to make for his purpose he might have found enough in those very Passages cited by Mr. Mede to have undeceived him The Matter in short is thus The Principal Church or Meeting-place in every City belong'd to the Bishop where his Chair was set up with a Bench of Presbyters on every side circling the Communion Table this whole place was called Altare Sacrarium and within the Jurisdiction of a single Bishop it is probable there was no more than one the Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons represented the Unity of the Church although it might be divided into several Congregations and every Congregation might have a Communion Table so that one Bishop one Altar signifies indeed the Unity of the Church as being the place of its common Councel and solemn Tribunal and to set up an Altar is not to have two Communion Tables in a City but to have distinct Governments Mr. B's Dispute of Church Government p. 90. The Ancients ordinarily call the Lords Table and the place where it stood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say the Table and the Sacrarium or place of it's standing And so says Bishop usher in his Notes upon the passage before cited Altare apud patres mensam Dominio eam passim denot at apud Ignatium Polycarpum Sacrarium quoque and opposite Bishops and Presbyters this is confirmed by a Passage of Ignatius in his Epistle to the Magnesians cited by Mr. B. Omnes adunati ad templum Dei concurrite sicut ad unum Altare If this reading which he uses were right it would distinguish between Christian Temples and imply that some of them had not Altars which is not likely to be true if Altar and Communion-table were the same But to speak ingeniously neither Temple nor Altar here does signifie what Mr. B. would have it for the Florentine Copy has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which refers only to the Jewish Temple and Altar wherein consisted the Unity of the Jewish Church notwithstanding they were divided into many Synagogues and Congregations But that one Altar for every Church so frequently mention'd by Ignatius does not signifie every Communion-table but that eminent one together with the Bishops Chair and the bench of the Presbyters appears from diverse Passages in his Epistles In that to the Magnesians he alledges to this Ecclesiastical Consistory about the Altar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That well-platted Crown of our Presbyters alledging to the Figure in which they sate and then follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Counsel of the Altar or Sacrifices And in his Epistle to the Ephesians he speaks to this Effect Unless a man be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 within the verge of the Altar he is no partaker of the bread of God and this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he explains in his Epistle ad Trallenses he that is within the Altar is clean wherefore he obeys the Bishops and the Presbyters he that is without is such a one that does any thing without the Bishop and the Presbyters so that Obedience to the Bishop or Presbyter is an Explication of that Phrase of being within the Altar and this might consist with the Division of the Church into several distinct Congregations But St. Cyprian in his fifty fifth Epist makes this yet clearer where speaking of the Insolence of such as having sacrificed to Idols thrust themselves into church-Church-Communion without doing any Pennance he breaks out at last into this passionate Aggravation what then remains but that the Church should yield to the Capital and that the Priests withdrawing themselves and taking away the Altar of our Lord Images and Idol-Gods together with their Altars should succeed and take Possession of the place proper to the sacred and venerable bench of our Clergy the bench of the Clergy then belongs to the Altar that is the Communion-table of the Principal and Episcopal Church to which all other Congregations did belong in as much as the Presbyters they joyn'd with appertain'd to that Altar and so there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet several Assemblies under his Direction and within the Communion of that Altar This Usage of one Altar and several Communion-tables depending upon it continu'd a long while after in the Church Innocent I. in his Letter to Decentius mentions the sending of the consecrated Symbols from the Episcopal Church Altar to the depending Parishes upon solemn times and long after that all the Parishes of a Diocese paid Homage to the Episcopal Church by sending some of their principal Members to communicate there upon Solemn Festivals as appears by several Canons that are cited and examined more particularly hereafter and here in England there have been Footsteps of the same Custom till of late in Comparison though from the first beginning of the Gospel we have not the least hint of Congregational Episcopacy in this place The next thing he alledges is a passage out of Justin Martyr Just Martyr Ap. 2. p. 97. Ed. Paris 98.99 where he describes the manner of the Christian Assemblies in his time where the Eucharist is said to be celebrated by the Bishop 1 Dispute p. 92. and that on Sunday all the Christians that liv'd either in Cities or in the Country came together prayed with and received the Sacraments at the hand of the Bishop and those that were absent had it sent to them by the Hand of the Deacons but what shall we conclude from hence That all that came together could come to one place or because the Congregation of the Bishop as being the most eminent is here only described must we conclude that there was no more than one in any City This account is only General and serves only to shew what they did when they came together and the Principal Assembly was surely the most proper instance and not in how many places they might be Assembled Disp p 33. The Story of Gregory Thaumaturgus makes the next Proof who being made against his will Bishop of Ne-Caesarea found but seventeen Christians in the whole City this was indeed a small Congregation and hardly numerous enough to make a Church but if Mr. B. had been so ingenious 〈…〉 as to have mentioned the Success of that Bishop's Ministry he might have spared any one else the Labour of answering this Instance for the same Bishop out of those contemptible Beginnings did so far enlarge the Church of that place that when he dyed he left but seventeen in the whole City that were not Christians if
many it is Pity these great London Parishes should ever be divided they are so serviceable to Dissenters on all Occasions for if a Conventicle is to be kept up the Greatness of St. Martin's or St. Giles Parish will justifie it those Churches will not hold a tenth man that ought to repair to them and surely better set up a meeting against the Law than that the People go unedified And again when Rome or Alexandria are to be reduced to a single Congregation then it is but comparing them to these great Parishes and the work is done It is not likely that for two hundred years Rome it self had near so great a number of Christians as one of these Parishes Suppose they had not the Question is not whether the Church of Rome was more numerous than that of St. Martins but whether they could meet in one Congregation for suppose they were but half or a quarter so big if they could not meet in one place to hear the Word and receive the Sacraments but must resolve into several Assemblies for to do it it is no matter what proportion they held to our London Parishes But what Evidence is there out of History that the Church of Rome made but one Congregation for two hundred years after Christ is it that the People are said to consent to the Election of the Bishops or to concur in several Ecclesiastical Acts But how shall we be assured that every Believer was obliged to be present or that Matters were carried by Vote and not by general and confused Approbation Besides though all that had the right of Electing Church Officers might possibly meet in one place yet they were not the fifth part of the number that had right to Congregation and Personal Communion for Women and Children and Servants must be supposed to be excluded together with the Poor and the more inconsiderable Persons or if this practice of approving the Election of Church-Officers be any Argument for a Churches being no more than a single Congregation it will follow that Rome had but one Congregation for many hundred years after for the People were very long in possession of that right after the whole City was become Christian and surely then they were too numerous for one Congregation Anton. de Dom. l. 4. c. 11. makes a long deduction of the Election of the Bishops of Rome and proves that they were chosen by the People until Innocent the Second for 1100 years and that he was the first that alter'd the ancient way of Election Now if any one can believe that for eleven Centuries there was but one Congregation in Rome much good may it do him As for the Peoples Right to chuse which Mr. B. does so much insist upon and seems to give the People Encouragement to revolt from those Bishops which they never chose I shall give a more particular Account of it towards the latter end of this Treatise Mr. B. makes a Computation of the Church of Rome in the time of Cornelius and finds it to fall much short of one of our great Parishes for when Novatian divided that Church it had but forty six Priests seven Deacons and as many Sub-deacons forty two Acoluti Exorcists Readers and Porters fifty two Widows and Poor that were disabled and lived upon the Charity of the Church fifteen hundred upon which we compute thus Suppose the Poor the tenth part of the whole Church as St. Chrysostom calculated the number of the Church of Antioch the Product then would be fifteen thousand and not ten thousand five hundred as Mr. B. reckons or the Printer mistakes and even thus would they be too many for one Congregation We cannot imagine any five Churches of such as the Christians might be supposed then to have Ch. Hist p. 7. capable of holding them all Euseb l. ◠c. 43. but if we consider this Passage more narrowly we shall find Mr. B.'s Computation to be extreamly short for these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were not only poor but sick and disabled for so the word is explain'd in the Epistle of the Roman Clergy to the Clergy of Carthage upon the subject of Cyprians retiring Ap. Cyr Sive Viduae sive Thlebomeni qui se exhibère non possunt sive qui in Carceribus sunt sive exclusi à sedibus suis utique habere debent qui eis ministrent So then these poor were such only as were not able to help themselves that were not able to come abroad and such as these surely are not the fortieth part of any people unless it be in the time of Plague or extraordinary Sickness In the next place let us consider the number of the Priests what use can there be of forty six in one Congregation For they were neither to preach nor administer the Sacraments in the Presence of the Bishop for the first Mr. B. urged it elsewhere to prove no more than one Congregation belong'd to one Bishop and I hope he will not be so disingenious as to cast it off as soon as he has serv'd his turn of it For the Administration of the Sacraments Justin Martyr is very clear in his Description that the Bishop consecrated and gave it the Deacons to be distributed among the Congregation ubi supra so that unless there were distinct Congregations at that time those 46 Presbyters could hardly find how to employ themselves But Mr. B. does endeavour to remove this Objection Ch. Hist p. 8. by shewing the Church-Officers were very much multiplyed in those days to the end that as many as had any useful Gifts might be employ'd in the Service of the Church For this Orat. 1. p. 45. he brings in Nazianzen as a credible Witness shortly after complaining of the Excess in this part that the Church Rulers were almost more than the Subjects but how shortly after would you have judg'd this to have been spoke No longer than about a hundred and fifty years and after one of the greatest Revolutions that happen'd in the Church in Cornelius's time the Christians as Mr. B. remarks were not of the greatest and richest and therefore it is not likely that the publick Charge should be multiplyed without Necessity and forty six Presbyters be appointed for one Congregation But in Nazianzen's time the Church was in a prosperous and flourishing Condition the Governours were now become Christians and great Priviledges and Wealth were added to the Clergy which made it then so desireable a thing But in Cornelius's time the greatest Dignity was Martyrdom and the Clergy was particularly aim'd at by the Heathen Persecutors their Portion was Labour and Danger they were to come and assist the Brethren in the Prison and at the Stake and the Office was so unpleasant that Novatian the Author of that Sect which Mr. B. speaks so favourably of desired to be eased of the Burden Euseb l. 6◠c. 43. and renounced his Priest-hood besides the same Epistle of Cornelius
be ask'd in whose Chair he sits he must say where Bonifacius Ballitanus sate before him and he where Victor Garbiensis who was the first Donatist Bishop in Rome and there the Succession ends he having none to succeed to Filius sine Patre Tyro sine Principe Hospes sine Hospitio Pastor sine Grege Episcopus sine Populo non enim Populus aut Grex appellandi fuerant pauci qui intra quadraginta quod excurrit basilicas locum ubi colligerent non haberent It is plain then that Optatus does not speak of the state of Rome as it was in his own time but of Victor Garbiensis the first Donatist Bishop when this was is not easie to fix There is no greater Argument for a great number of Congregations under the Bishop of Rome than what Mr. B. observes of their Churches before Dioclesian's time that they were but like our Tabernacles as to the capaciousness Euseb l. 8. I suppose as well as the manner of their Structure and therefore the lesser they were the greater Number there must be of them and the Church must grow too big for his Definition since there must be more than could in those circumstances have personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship When the Diocess of Rome is reduced within the narrow Bounds of a single Congregation what other Church can pretend to more And if the Imperial City need not be excepted Alexandria cannot hope for Exemption therefore he proceeds to shew that Alexandria the greatest and most populous City in the World next to Rome had no more Christians than could meet together in one Congregation and of this he offers a bold Proof that it was so in the time of Athanasius Athan. T. 1. p. 531. Ch. Hist 9. whose words he cites where he excuses himself for having celebrated Easter in the great Church of Alexandria and drawn together such a multitude as gave great occasion of Jealousie to the Emperour but his Plea is that the other Churches were so narrow that they would have been in danger of suffering by the crowd and as if this Church would have held all the People he adds that it was better for the whole Multitude to meet in the Great Church and to have the concurrence of the people with one Voice c. This Church was newly built by Constantius and we may suppose it very large though not yet so great as to be able to contain all the Believers in Alexandria nor does Mr. B. desire it should but only the Generality Ch. Hist p. 10. yet granting that it received all it would follow indeed that the Church of Alexandria then was but one Congregation but what was it before this great Church was built when they had no possibility of personal Communion were not they then made congregational Churches under one Bishop And Athanasius in the same place confesses the multitude was so great that all the other Churches in the City could not hold it Besides the Orthodox were probably much more numerous before the building of that Church and the Banishment of Athanasius and if this vast Fabrick could not receive the party of Athanasius what Church shall we imagine could have been large enough for all the Christians in Alexandria before they were divided by Arrius and before they were governed by Gregory and George the Arrian Bishops He adds to this of Athanasius p. 10. § 30. another Argument given him by a learned Friend which I will take the liberty to examine The City of Alexandria says Strabo is like a Souldiers Cloak c. and by Computation about ten Miles in Compass a third or forth part of this was taken up with publick Buildings Temples and Royal Palaces thus is two Miles and a half or three and a quarter taken up I will not say this learned Friend has impos'd on Mr. B. but there is a very great Mistake betwixt them suppose Temples and Royal Palaces should take up such a part of the City must there therefore be no Inhabitants in those Palaces or no Christians amongst those Inhabitants But he believes this to be that Region call'd Bruchium which Epiphanius speaks of in his time as destitute What all the publick Buildings of the Town in one Region and that an outer Skirt too as it is described by the Greek Martyrology in Hilarion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the Life of Apollonius Discolus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Epiphanius says was destitute of Inhabitants in his time and not unlikely and perhaps destitute of publick Buildings too for it was destroyed after an obstinate Siege in the reign of Aurelian as Ammianus Marcellinus or of Claudius l. 22. as Eusebius would have it However the City must be reckon'd by so much the less In Chronico neither is there any Necessity of this for they might enlarge upon another Quarter being it may be forbid to build in Bruchium because it was divided from the rest of the City and too favourable a Refuge of Rebellion to which that People was too much addicted they might dwell closer than before and so their Multitude be undiminisht However certain it is that this City long after the Destruction of Bruchium retainrd it 's ancient Greatness and is represented by no Writer as diminisht either in Number or Wealth but to let this pass let us see what becomes of the rest he adds A great part of the City was assign'd to the Jews so Strabo indefinitely as Josephus quotes him others tell us more punctually that their Share was two of the five Divisions Ush Annals p. 859. though many of them had their Habitations in the other Divisions yet they had two fifth parts entire to themselves which he might have found as punctually in Strabo as in Bishop Vsher and this continues he is I suppose the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Josephus says the Successors of Alexander set apart for them thus we see how six or seven Miles of the ten are disposed of And by the same rule he might have disposed of all at once and concluded out of Strabo's Division of the Town that there was not one Christian it it For Strabo liv'd in Augustus his time when it was a hard matter to find a Christian in Alexandria unless we will take in Justin Martyr's old Christians such as Socrates i.e. all virtuous good men and then I am afraid they would be too few to make a Congregation The number of these Jews was much lessened within a little while after Strabo by an Insurrection of the Alexandrians against them the Civil Wars afterwards under Trajan and his Successor had almost extirpated them and yet even at this time Alexandria was as populous as ever and frequented by almost all the Nations of the Earth as Dion Chrysostomus represents the flourishing State of it in his time but no matter what number of Jews or Heathens it had in Strabo's days the Question is whether many
before Arrius's time Epiphan Haeres Melet Arrian who was the fixt Minister of one of them call'd Buchalis are to be supposed to have been instituted before for Epiphanius though he observe this as singular in the Alexandrian Church at that time yet says nothing at all of its Novelty which he would not probably have omitted and Sozomen seems to imply Soz. l. 1. c. 15. that it was an ancient Custom Petavius mistakes Epiphanius's his words and imagines in Epiph. that these Divisions of Alexandria are therefore said by him to be singular and different from the Usage of other Churches because says he those which Epiphanius had seen were but small and might have but one Congregation but it is plain from Epiphanius his words that what he look'd upon as singular was not their having several distinct Assemblies but because they had certain and fix'd Presbyters and therefore he adds as an Effect of that Custom that every one would be denominated from his Pastor as the Corinthians did when one cry'd I am of Paul I am of Apollos and this indeed was so singular that perhaps no other Church in the World had it besides Vales Annot in Sâ—zom l. 11. c. 15. not that of Rome and Valesius infers from the same Passage of Pope Innocent's Epistle to Decentius which Petavius brings to prove the contrary that although there were several Titles or Churches in Rome then and had been long before yet none of them was as yet appropriated to any Presbyter but they were served in common as greater Cities in Holland and some other Reformed Countries that have several Churches and Ministers who preach in them all by their turns Lastly and to conclude this account of the Church of Alexandria it is evident out of Athanasius how the Bishop of that City had from the Beginning several fix'd Congregations under him Athan. T. 1. p. 802. particularly those of Mareotes who though they must be suppos'd to receive the Faith almost as early as Alexandria yet never had a Bishop before Ischyrias if he were to be reckon'd one Mareotes says Athanasius is a Countrey belonging to Alexandria wherein there never was a Bishop not so much as a Chorepiscopus but all the Churches of that place were subject to the Bishop of Alexandria And now let the Reader judge whether the Bishop of Alexandria had more Congregations than one under him or no more than could conveniently meet in one place I have hitherto examin'd Mr. B's Evidence of History for his Congregational Churches let us now see whether there be not as good Evidence to the contrary The growth of the Church of Jerusalem was so sudden and so great as to exceed the measure of one or two Congregations St. Peter's first Sermon brought over three thousand another five thousand Acts 2.41 then the Sacred Historian as if the Multitude had grown too great to be numbred mentions the other Accessions in gross and indefinitely but with such Expressions as imply they much exceed the numbers aforementioned Multitudes both of Men and Women were added to the Church and the number of the Disciples multiplyed in Jerusalem greatly and a great number of the Priests were obedient to the Faith Act. 6.7 Now let us seriously consider whether all these Converts could meet together in one place for personal Communion Doctrine and Worship or whether they could find a room spacious enough to meet in all together we find but two sorts of places they met in the Temple and from House to House the Temple cannot be supposed the ordinary place of their Assembly since the generality of the Priests and People did oppose them and though the Apostles preacht there it was no otherwise than they did in the Synagogues acd Market-places and other places of concourse to gain new Proselytes and not to instruct those they had converted when they preacht from House to House the fifth or tenth part of them can hardly be supposed to have convenience for personal Communion and it is certain they did break Bread no otherwise than from House to House from whence it is plain that it was not possible for them all to hold personal Communion in the principal part of Christian Worship i. c. the holy Eucharist which is made by Mr. B. as necessary to the Individuation of a Church as Communion in Doctrine The Presbyterians prest this Instance very unmercifully upon those of the congregational way who made use of all Shifts and most of them very poor ones To elude the force of the Argument sometimes they turn the Temple into a Church another while they send the greatest part of them home to the country and whatsoever other means they could find to diminish their number they laid hold of them and this way not succeeding in their own Opinion they found a Secret in the Ayr Grand Debate Answer of the Assembly to the Reasons of the dissenting Br. p. 27. ibid. which they fancied to be much more pure and shine in Jerusalem than our Northern Climates and so more proper to convey a Voice to a greater Distance whereas our dull unyielding Fog arrests the Voice in every point as it passes However the Assembly of Divines resolved they would not be paid with this piece of Philosophy and undertook to shew the Argument to be as thin as the Ayr they talkt of and the Lord Bacon relieves them in this Distress who was of Opinion that a Voice could be heard much farther in a gross than a pure Ayr the Resistance perhaps preserving it longer as Opposition serves to lengthen a Discourse and to make Disputes endless p. 81.82 but in the second part of Ch. Hist takes it up again but Mr. B. in his first Disputation of Church-Government summing up the Exceptions of the Independents against the Presbyterian Argument drawn from the Church of Jerusalem prudently leaves out this of the Ayr but finds another Expedient as proper for his purpose and that is that men had much stronger Voices in those times and places which they may believe that can fancy Nature to decay and that our Fore-fathers were Giants For my part the next thing I expect is that they should believe with Kirker that the Ancients knew the use of Sir Samuel Morland's speaking-trumpet for Kirker had a Vision of some old Manuscript that no body else ever saw which revealed to him that Alexander the Great could speak to his whole Army together by the help of a Trumpet and who can tell but in this vast Congregation of Jerusalem such an Engine might be made use of However since Dioceses are to be no larger than the Sphear of a man's Voice it will be an useful Instrument to a Preacher of weak Lungs to stretch out the Bounds of his Diocess and be as serviceable to the Church as it is to the Camp Disp of Ch. Gov. p. 81. But Mr. B. tells us one thing more which a Friend told
place than a Cave where they could meet but fifty at a time like the Prophets that were fed by Obadiah in the time of Jezebel's Persecution and these Judges when they came together durst not be so presumptuous as to judge a Pope but desired him to condemn himself and when the poor man is perswaded to pass his own Sentence Melchiades pronounces these Words Justè ore suo condemnatus est nemo enim unquam judicavit Pontificem nec praesul sacerdotem suum quoniam prima sedes non judicatur à quoquam and yet for all this Mr. B. declares that whether this be true or forg'd is too hard a Controversie Just as hard as that concerning St. Vrsula and her eleven thousand Virgins or the travelling Chappel of Loretto or the History of the seven Champions The Council of Illiberis follows next that has many very good Canons and some have need of a favourable Interpretation it is very severe in some cases denying Communion even at the hour of Death but this is not the thing which was condemn'd in the Novatians as we shall shew hereafter The Council of Carthage follow'd that began the Schism of the Donatists p. 39 § 40. upon the occasion of Cecilianus his Election Thus says he the doleful Tragedy of the Donatists began by Bishops divided about the Carthage Bishop Tho it cannot be denyed but that Bishops had a hand in carrying on this Schism Opt. lib. 1. contra Parmen yet 't is not true that it was begun by them for Optatus makes Botrus and Caeleusius the first Authors of this Schism for these desiring themselves to be Bishops of Carthage and disappointed of their Hopes by the unanimous Election of Cecilianus left the Communion of the Church and drew Lucilla a rich and potent Lady into their Party Et sic tribus convenientibus causis personis factum est ut malignitas haberet effectum Schisma igitur illo tempore confusâ mulieris iracundia peperit ambitus nutrivit avaritia roboravit These three invited those Traditors of the Council of Cyrta to Carthage to judge the cause of Cecilianus who they pretended was ordained by a Traditor and these inveigled a great many others by a plausible pretence of Zeal against the Betrayers of Religion so Cecilianus was condemn'd and Majorinus put into his place The Donatists says Mr. B. were so call'd from Donatus § 40. a very good Bishop of Carthage heretofore and not from Donatus à Casis nigris 'T is true the former gave them the name but I wonder where Mr. B. finds that he was so good a Bishop (a) De script Eccles in Donat. St. Jerom makes him an Arrian (b) Optat. lib. 3. contra Parmen Optatus represents him as the most arrogant proud man that ever was that he exacted such a Submission even from Bishops as to make them worship him with no less Regard than God himself that he suffer'd men to swear by his name (c) Aust in Joh. tract 3. prop. Friem St. Austin makes him an Impostor that he made his party believe that when he pray'd God answer'd him from Heaven and the civil Magistrate found him no less turbulent than the Church his contumelious Language to the Emperours and their Lieutenants shewing sufficiently what Spirit he was of Gregori Macula Senatus dedecus Praefectorum Lastly He mistakes the time of this Council with Binnius and Baroneus placing it in the year of Christ 306. But Optatus making this Election of Cecilianus subsequent of the Toleration granted the African Churches by Maxentius who had not reduced Africa Valesius de Schismate Donatist c. 1. § 41. till about five years after it is clear that this Council could not be before An. 308. Another Council was held at Carthage where no less than two hundred and seventy Donatist-Bishops The Bishops now begin to multiply Schism the occasion for Moderation agreed to communicate with penitent Traditors without rebaptizing them and so did for forty years This looks liker a piece of Policy than Moderation for it had no tendence to Peace but to strengthen the Schism For the number of Bishops in this Council we have only the Authority of Tychonius Aug. Epist ad Vincentiam a Donatist who probably as the humour of those Schismaticks was might magnifie the strength of his Party and stretch it a point beyond what it really was The time of this Council is likewise very much mistaken as appears by what we have said of the Council going before and it is probable that it was held in the time of Donatus Vales de Schism Donat. c. 3. Schismatick Bishop of Carthage and immediate Successor of Majorinus St. Jerom in his Chronicle sets his Promotion in the year 331. Donatus agnoscitur à quo per Africam Donatiani And it cannot be well imagin'd that Schism should spread so suddenly as in the very beginning of it to have two hundred and seventy Bishops of their Party especially considering that Constantine the Great used all his Endeavours to suppress them It is observable that before this time we do not meet any very numerous Councils either in Africk or any where else the greatest falling much short of a hundred which shews that Bishops were not yet so much multiplied and that their Bishopricks were of a larger Extent but these Schismaticks having divided the Church made Bishops in every Village to strengthen their Party and to out-number the Orthodox besides that they had set up an Altar p. 4. § 44. and made them Bishops in every City where they could get the least Congregation to joyn with them Mr. B. complains upon this Occasion That some Popish Persons liken the Separatists among us to the Donatists who those Popish Persons are I will not pretend to ghess However this I am sure that the word Heresie of old was never worse abus'd than that of Popery is now for whomsoever men have a mind to render odious to the People it is sufficient to call him Popish and then he is baited under that infamous name as the Christians anciently were in the Skins of Beasts But if a man had a mind to make odious Comparisons Mr. B's Defence of our Separatists from the Imputation of being like the Donatists would render them but little Service For his first Exception of our Separatists having no Bishops which the Donatists had makes them differ not only from that Sect but from all the Sects and Churches in the World◠till the last Age and his second Exception of their being the lesser number signifies as little for so were the Donatists at first and so may they long continue or rather may the name of Separation cease and all return into one Flock under one Shepherd But the Donatists divided the Unity of the Church appointed Bishops against Bishops and Altar against Altar pretended to a greater Purity than the Orthodox and boasted that their Church
Alex. Can. 4. Argument Canon such were never to be admitted to full Communion no not at the hour of Death Is any man like to find fault with this Bishop for being too indulgent Is this any great Encouragement to Apostates It would be strange after all this that men should depart from his Communion for being too much prostituted to the Betrayers of Religion If all this does not satisfie Mr. B. but that he will still believe those holy Martyrs as unmortified in Prison as the Priests and Jesuits heretofore were at Wisbich let him enjoy his Fancy and contempt of ancient Bishops and be bound to believe all the Stories in Epiphanius Mr. B. confesses that Epiphanius seems not to be very accurate in his Disputes nor his Narratives why then does he maintain him here against the Authority of Athanasius and all Sense and Reason He does acknowledge some Passages in this History to be mistaken as that the Meletians joyned with the Arrians before the Death of Alexander and in his Instance of the time of Arrius's death placing it before the Councel of Nice Besides these there are other Mistakes no less gross which Mr. B. swallows down as true History as first that Constantine the Great banish'd Athanasius into Italy where he remain'd twelve or fourteen years till after the Death of Constantine If Athanasius himself be to be believ'd or Socrates out of him Constantine banish'd him into Gallia and Treves was the place where he abode nor is there any Likelihood that he saw Italy during his first Banishment But the account of the time of it Euseb de Vit. Constant for twelve or fourteen years is intolerable for the Councel of Tyre was not assembled till the thirtieth year of Constantine Epist Praef. Marâ—ot Constantius and Albinus being Consuls which agrees with the three hundred thirty fifth year of our Saviour according to Baronius's Computation Athanasius his Banishment is plac'd the year after Constantine dyes the year ensuing and presently after his death Athanasius is recall'd Baronius places his return in the year 338 but Valesius proves from the style of Constantine junior's Letter in the behalf of Athanasius who was then but Caesar that Athanasius return'd the very same year that Constantine dyed So that the twelve or fourteen years do hardly amount to so many Months which I believe was the true writing of Epiphanius and that Years are put in instead of Months by the mistake of the Copies Theodoret computes his Banishment to be two whole Years and Baronius follows him There are several other things in the same Author no less absurd as that Athanasius is charged with the murther of Arsenius in Constantine's time that Eusebius baptized Valens the Emperour though Eusebius was dead many years before Valens came to the Empire that Constantine was the Son of Valerian that George was put into Athanasius's place in the time of his first Banishment that Achillas succeeded Alexanaer in the See of Alexandria Dallè l. 4. de Imagin p. 394. Epiphanius planè aliter Schisma Meletianum narrat quam rei veritas poscebat and many other such Oversights in History and one would wonder so great a man as Epiphanius could be guilty of or that any one that pretends to Church-History should follow him in those gross mistakes which they may correct out of any Historian that does but make mention of the same things and Times Mr. B. strangely confounds Gregory and George the Arrian Bishops of Alexandria for page 47 he tells us That when Constans had compell'd his Brother Constantius to restore him Athanasius he was again banish'd For George that had been made Bishop by the Arrians and by Constantius was kill'd by the Heathen People in Julian's time and his Corps burnt and the ashes scatter'd into the Wind which increased the suspition of Tyranny against Athanasius I hope George's murther in Julian's time did not bring Athanasius into suspition of Tyranny under Constantius But pag. 62. Sect. 45. this George is call'd Gregory Gregory the Bishop being as is aforesaid murther'd by the Heathen and burnt to ashes We no where read that this Gregory was either murder'd or burn't but that he was turn'd out of the See of Alexandria because he was odious to all and to the Arrians themselves and that George Socr. l. 2. c. 14. who was afterwards murther'd was put in his place Where he says Constans compell'd his Brother Constantius to restore Athanasius he mistakes Constans for his Brother Constantine who was the Author of Athanasius his first restauration for it was long after his first banishment and after the Council of Sardica that Constans threatned his Brother with War if he did not restore Athanasius and Paul into their Churches Page 48. § 4. He gives an account of the Heresie of Arrius and I think heartily condemns him if these words be his own He that denies the Deity of Christ denies his Essence and he that denies his Essence denies Christ and is no Christian Yet he excuses this Doctrine in comparison of Socinianism and that very justly At last after a short sum of the Arrian Doctrine he concludes this was the dangerous Heresie of Arrius I must confess he is so much given to Figures that I can't tell whether he be in earnest here or speaks only Ironically but sure I am that what he sayes in the next Paragraph is very much to the disadvantage of the Doctrine of the Trinity And to say truth Petavius has done it no great kindness by his Defence of it 'T is true that some of the Fathers before the Nicene Council seem'd to speak sometimes in favour of that Doctrine which was afterwards taken up by the Arrians but that they did cadem sentire is more than ought to be granted Before some Controversies have been started men have spoke less warily whom afterwards Disputation has brought to be more Cautious in their Expressions Dallè de usu Patr Dallè makes the Ancient Fathers to be of little Use in the Controversies between us and the Papists because though they may seem to favour sometimes one side sometimes another yet they speak loosly and without any regard to our Controversies which were not then in being Several Passages extolling Communion with the Bishop of Rome were little intended to set him up for an infallible Judge and others speaking with great Veneration of the Eucharist may seem to favour Transubstantiation c. If any such Opinion had then been in the Church their words in probability had been more decisive It is a commendable Charity of Mr. B. to say that it is enough to believe those Fathers to be saved p. 49. though we may not believe them to be without Errour Though that Errour by his confession is very dangerous as implying a denial of Christ yet he adds that God is merciful and requires not knowledge of all alike ibid. But for my part I believe they do
not stand in need of that Charity Some of them spoke loosely in compliance with a Platonick Notion of the Trinity not fore-seeing what Consequences might be drawn from their Expressions or how narrowly they should come afterwards to be examin'd Certain it is that the Fathers that followed the Nicene Council Athan. ad Afros Hist Tripart l. 2. c. 7. Socr. l. 5. c. 10. Sozom. l. 7. c. 12. took all the Ecclesiastical Writers before their time to be of their Opinion and Sisinnius the Novatian Reader afterwards Bishop is said to have confounded all the Arrian Disputants by putting the matter to this issue Whether they would stand to the Judgment of the Ancient Fathers in the Interpretation of such places of Scripture as were controverted between them Eusebius no Enemy to the Arrians Ep. ad Caesar Hist Tripart l. 2. acknowledges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be used by some Ecclesiastical Writers long before the Council of Nice the Creed of the Council of Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus has it Vid. Conâ— Antioch and several other things that shew how much the Doctrine of the Church at that time differ'd from that of the Arrians It would be a great Service to the Truth that seems now to labour under some Prejudice if some learned hand would take the Pains to shew which I believe is not impossible how Petavius has betray'd the constant Tradition of this Doctrine to establish it by the Authority of the Church and relieve the Memories of those holy Martyrs that he leaves charg'd with the Suspition of blasphemous Opinions concerning our Saviour Having done with the Nicene Council p. 50. §. 7. and all that related to it Mr. B. thinks it worth his labour to add the Sum of the History of the Audians out of Epiphanius Epiph. Haeres Audian That the World may percieve what Spirit the hereticating Prelates were then of and how some called Hereticks were made such or defamed as such and who they were that did divide the Churches and break their Peace The Author of this Sect was Audius a man severe in his Life and sound in his Principles but one that took great Liberty of Speech and reproved sharply whatsoever he found amiss though it were in the Bishops they in Revenge persecuted him and turn'd him out of the Church He is made Bishop of his own Sect and so exasperated as to abhor all Communion with the Bishops of the Catholick Church If all things were as Epiphanius represents them Audius had very hard Measure but it seems from Epiphanius his own account that there was not wanting just occasion against him for he held that God had Humane Shape a Doctrine if obstinately maintain'd and such bold men are not easily reclaim'd altogether intolerable But I am afraid Epiphanius had this Story from as bad hands as that of the Meletians for this Schism happening in a remote part of the World and being scatter'd afterwards into several Parts it is likely that some Audian might impose upon him l 4. Haeret. â—ah For it looks like the Story of one party and the more likely because Theodoret a man that lived in that Country where they first sprung gives an infamous Character of them That they held some of the Doctrines of the Manichees That God was not the Author of Fire and Darkness that they exercised Usury that they cohabited with Women without Marriage that they were great Hypocrites of a proud Pharisaical Spirit that cried Touch me not for I am holier than thou If Audius were like his Followers I know nothing so like him and them as Labady and his Disciples See Labady's Epist against Reformation This was a man very free in his Reproofs too he spoke sharply against the Vices of the Clergy where he lived though there were no Bishops amongst them and it may be one of his Followers may be able to perswade a learned man in Constantinople that he was banish'd only for his Liberty of Reprehension and out of Envy to his Virtue Page 52. Section 14. we have several shrewd Remarks upon some Canons of the Council of Nice As first That no Patriarchs are named there Secondly That they nullifie the Ordination of scandalous and uncapable men Can. 9.10 Which will justifie Pope Nicholas forbidding any to take the Mass of a fornicating Priest This fornicating Priest of Pope Nicholas is no other than a married one and whatsoever will justifie that Prohibition cannot but condemn Mr. B. who is himself married As for deposing scandalous Ministers there is none but wishes it but not in the manner he seems to insinuate by the Sentence of the people but by their lawful Superiors which these two Canons do suppose 3. That Rural Bishops were then in Vse and allowed by the Council Can. 8. And what can he infer from hence Not surely That every Country Parish had a Bishop but that such Cities as had larger Territories belonging to them had Ecclesiastical Visitors under the City-Bishop which were called Chorepiscopi Can. 57. Conc. Laodic Whether they were Bishops indeed or Priests with a delegated Episcopal Power is not agreed amongst Learned men Sure it is that they had this Obligation common to them with other Presbyters not to do any thing of Moment without the Advice and Approbation of the Bishop Conc. Carthag 4. 4. That no Bishop was to remove from one Church to another yet some other Councils allow this Translation and Gelasius understands it only of such as out of Covetousness or Ambition and by indirect means shall endeavour to translate themselves and the Practice of the Church was never very conformable to this Canon the most eminent Bishops in the World Socr. l. 7. c. 36. having transgres'd it 5. The Arabick Canons the fourth Si pâ—pulo placebit is a Condition of every Bishops Election Newer Translations render this Concurrence of the People Cum consensu Pepuli Populo consersum praevente which implies little more than that the Bishop ought to be such as the People should have nothing material to object against and not that they were to please themselves and to indulge their Fancies in the Election of their Bishops for that did belong to the Clergy Vid. loâ— ap Synod Bâ—â—â—r â—0 and particularly to the Metropolitan as the â—â—â—th Arabick Canon does expressly inform us 6. The fifth Arabick Canon in case of Discord among the People who shall be their Bishop or Priest refers it to the People to consider which is most blameless and no Bishop or Priest must be taken into anothers place if the former was blameless so that if Pastors be wrongfully cast out the People must not forsake them nor receive the obtruded Nothing can be more disingenuous than this Dealing The design of that Canon is that there should be but one Bishop in every City but if the People disagree and one party stand up for one and another for another
where in a short time Sabbatius a Convert Jew ordain'd Priest by Marcianus the Novatian Bishop of C. P. began to favour the Jewish time of observing Easter established in the Council of Pazus and for this and the pretence of greater Purity began to separate from the Church He is call'd upon to shew the Reasons of his Separation and declares his greatest Grievance is about Easter The Novatian Bishops perceiving this was but a Pretence and that his real Disease was the desire of being a Bishop were resolv'd to take away this Excuse and leave it indifferent for every one to observe Easter when he thought fit And what was the Issue He seem'd to be satisfied for some time till he found he had some Followers and an Opportunity to set up a Congregation for himself and then notwithstanding his Compliance turn'd Schismatick so little good does Concession do with men that are set upon Separation So that though you should take away all Rule and all Order yet there is a sort of men that a Wantonness of Spirit has made restless that would never be satisfied the Disease is fed by Concession and then it is most violent when they know not what they would have A great Council says our Historian was call'd at Hippo p. 73. § 25. and Augustin yet a Presbyter was there Good men will do well and most of the African Councils were the best in all the World And why would you judge Because their Bishopricks were but like our Parishes and they strove not who should be the Greatest or domineer I am content he should like any Councils or Bishops but I am afraid this good Opinion will not continue long for the Reason of his good Liking is a great Mistake that they were Bishops according to his own Model Whose Dioceses were no bigger than our Parishes But surely this cannot be for all Africa from Tangier to Aegypt had but four hundred sixty six Bishopricks Notitia Affr. which were thus divided according to the Provinces 1. Proconsularis 54. 2. Numidia 125. 3. Provincia Bizac 107. Sees without Bishops 006. 4. Maurit Caesar 120. without Bishops 006. 5. Maurit Sitifens 044. 6. Tripolis 005. 7. Sardinia 008. There is some Difference between the Sum in gross and the Particulars which will not agree though you should deduct the twelve vacant Sees for then the Particulars will not come up to the Sum of four hundred sixty six And now judge whether the African Bishopricks were not bigger than our Parishes by comparing the vast Extent of Africk with our England which is not near so big as some of those Provinces and yet the Bishopricks of Africk were multiply'd thus occasionally as we shall shew hereafter and cannot prescribe to other Countreys Nor could the Churches of Africk notwithstanding the Multitude of their Bishops and Narrowness of their Dioceses keep themselves in Peace any more than their Neighbours but were divided as soon as any and their Divisions were as long and irremediable as their Neighbours And indeed Schism came over from hence into the other parts of the World with Novatus and who taught the Roman Presbyters first to set up against their Bishops In short there was no where a greater Breach nor more extravagant Schismaticks who oppos'd themselves not only against the Discipline of the Church but the Civil Government too Now lest this may put our Author out of Conceit with the Bishops and Councils of Africk as well as the rest I must put him in mind of his own Remark That good men will do well whether they be Bishops or not whether they have large or small Dioceses and a very good man in a very great Diocess will do an extraordinary deal of good A Donatist Council at Bagai S 29. p. 73. had three hundred and ten Bishops who condemn'd Maximianus and upon this Council Mr. B. makes two observations 1. How great a number the Donatists were and upon what Pretence as over-voting them they call'd others Hereticks and Schismaticks Very unjustly no doubt for they were Hereticks and Schismaticks themselves still notwithstanding their Increase Multitude may render a Sect formidable but it is but a poor Argument of Right 2. How small Bishopricks then were the number tells us not so small as our Parishes though the Donatists did use all means in the World to multiply them and to strengthen their Party The Council of Turin order'd p. 74. § 30. That Communion should not be deny'd Felix one of Ithacius his Party and not the contrary according as the false Reading of Binnius Vid. Conc. Sirm. So Sirmond in loc Male enim in vulgatis qui Felici non communicant abest enim in Manuscriptis Negatio Another Carthage Council § 31. call'd the second which Binnius saith was the last is plac'd next and so our Author takes it This Mistake Binnius takes from Baronius Conc. T. 2. p. 1158. as Labbe shews Erravit post Baronium Binnius verè enim hoc Concilium celebratum fuit Anno 390. Sub Genethlio decessore Aurelii cujus nomen necnon Alypii exulat à MS. optimae notae The Canons that Mr. B. instances from hence in favour of his Congregational Church will not comply with his Design ibid. That the Bishops only had the Power of making Crisme and all the Priests were to receive it from him that the Bishop alone was to reconcile Penitents publickly this may consist with a great many Congregations and the Canon Can. 3. Reconciliare quemquam in publicâ Missâ Presbytero non licere may probably extend only to the Cathedral Service and that the Priest should not do this in the Presence of the Bishops as he is forbid several other Acts which he is supposed to do apart and in the Bishops Absence but with the Supposition of his Consent Can. 4. The fourth Canon expresses the Absolution of Penitents by Reconciliare sacris Altaribus the plural tho it must be confess'd it is improper for there was but one principal Altar that was properly so call'd though several Communion-Tables depending upon the great Altar there might be in the same Diocess unless the reconciling to one Church be reckon'd a Reconciling to all other parts of the Catholick Church The fifth Canon is disingeniously cited by Mr. B. thus Can. 5. When Christians were multiply'd they that desir'd a Bishop in a place that had none before might have one but he leaves out the Consent of the Bishop out of whose Diocess that other is taken which is made absolutely necessary Dioeceses quae nunquam Episcopos habucrunt non habeant illa Dioecesis quae aliquando habuit habeat proprium si accedente tempore crescente fide Dei populus multiplicatus desideraverit proprium habere rectorem ejus videlicet voluntate in cujus potestate est Dioecesis constituta habeat Episcopum Which is confirm'd by the third Council of Carthage where it is added
that as Mr. B. sayes a Bishop had the priviledge of a had Physician he might murder and not be hang'd c. This Decree is I believe hardly so ancient as the fore-mention'd Epistle for we have only the Authority of Gratian for it a man little to be depended upon unless he find Vouchers that are ancienter than himself but any thing will serve Mr. B's turn that will give him occasion to ease his Spleen against Bishops CHAP. V. Of the First Council of Ephesus c. OUr Author in the beginning of this Chapter p. 84. §. 3. to prejudice his Reader beforehand against the Acts of the Council of Ephesus gives the worst account of Cyril who was the President of it that he could patch up out of all the libels and accusations of his Enemies The first thing he is charged with is the oppression of the Novatians This was enough with Socrates or Sozomen to paint him as ugly as men do the Devil Socr. l. 7 or Antichrist and therefore there is no great credit to be given them in these relations as manifestly espousing the cause and quarrels of the Novatians But suppose he had us'd severity towards these Schismaticks it may be they deserved it and being Schismaticks and Alexandrians it is not unlikely that they were very troublesome and seditious Socrates makes it part of his charge that he took upon him the government of temporal affairs Socr. l. 7. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a little before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This was not the usurpation of the Bishop but the indulgence of the Emperour and the Truth is that the Church and State being now united and the Schisms of the one causing inevitable seditions in the other the Civil Magistrates for the greater security of their Government did think it expedient to invest the Bishop with a coercive power since their Spiritual authority was contemn'd to the dishonour of Religion and no less to the disturbance of the State And it was it seems a crime in Cyril to accept this Commission or to act in pursuance of it though our Author elsewhere professes that he shall not dishonour such p. 23. sect 59. nor disobey them But besides the suppressing of the Novatian Conventicles he is charged with executing some Jews and banishing others which Orestes took ill as an incroachment upon his office who was Governour of the Province Socr. l. 7. c. 13. But as to this he cannot be very much blamed for the Jews conspired against the Christians and resolved to destroy them all in one night they gave the alarm that one of their Churches was on fire and as the Christians ran out to quench the fire they were murdred by those Villains Perhaps Cyril did not think this a time to complement the Governour to the assistance of the Christians when the danger they were in was sufficient to call him away but animated the people to make their defence and to go in quest of these Murderers and it was a sign of his Moderation that there were but some executed and that all were not put to the Sword after so barbarous an attempt This or something else offended the governour Socr. l. 7. c. 14. so that he became irreconcileable to Cyril The Bishop like a good man endeavoured by all means to procure a reconciliation but without effect and why is a Bishop to be worse thought of if a man of quality become his implacable enemy without cause Five hundred Monks came from Mount Nitria in a fit of wild zeal to take the Bishops part and Socrates cannot say that he sent for them they light on the governour and assault him he is wounded and hardly escapes with life But how could Cyril help this or how can he be charg'd with the extravagance of those Monks that he had no knowledge of till they had committed it But one of those Mutineers says Socrates that wounded the governour being executed for his crime was honour'd by Cyrill as a Martyr I do very much suspect this story from the circumstance of changing the criminals name to Thaumasius and the most probable conjecture that I can make of it if there be any ground at all for the story is that the memory of a Martyr of that name might be honoured by him which his enemies interpreted to be the Criminal But this changing of name is a thing without precedent and without reason for either this disguise was put on that it might not be observ'd and he was ashamed of doing it openly and then it will not be easie to be certain that this Thaumasius was that Ammonius who was executed or if he was the same and Cyril confest it then it is impossible to imagine a reason why he should use that disguise But there are men in the world that honour such as Martyrs that were executed not for Wounding a Governour but Murdering a King after a most unexampled manner witness the worthy Martyrologies of Harrison Speeches and Prayers Printed A. D. 1660. Carew Cook Peters c. and of Barkstead Okey Corbett with this Motto in the Frontispiece these dyed all in Faith and innumerable other things that justifie their horrid crimes and make them Martyrs by the cause of their suffering Printed 1662. I hope they were neither Bishops nor Episcopal men that were so fond of Canonizing these Murderers for Martyrs Another thing which our Author cites from the professed enemies of Cyril to render him odious was the Murder of Hypatia the famous She-Philosopher She it seems was barbarously murder'd but by whom or upon what occasion is not certain Socrates makes the occasion to have been this Socr. l. 7. c. 15. That she being frequently with the Governour was suspected to do Cyril evil offices and to disswade the Governour from being reconciled to him therefore some Zealots watched her and barbarously Murder'd her among whom was one Peter a Reader of the Church and an admirer of Cyril And this continues the same Historian brought a great reproach upon Cyril and the Church of Alexandria But he cannot charge the Bishop of being by any means conscious to it and though it were done upon his account by violent heady Zealots yet he could be no further guilty than he contributed to it by his countenance or consent Suidas in Damascius Damascius in the life of Isidore the Husband of this Hypatia charges Cyril directly with this Murder but his credit signifies very little as being in the first place a Heathen and a violent enemy of the Christians and secondly being more remote from these times for he liv'd in the reign of Justinian Vales Annot in Socr. l. 7. c. 15. Valesius cites the passage at large out of him and promises to publish much more of him than we have had hitherto This is taken out of Suidas who I believe cites the whole out of this Author In the beginning he makes it dubious
that he was unacquainted with the Fathers and Ecclesiastical writers which made him condemn the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 7. c. 32. which was us'd by Athanasius and several others and that he did not vouchfafe to read the Ancients As for Philosophy perhaps he had too much and his writings do shew that he had no confus'd illogical Pen So that this proves the ignorance of the Bishops of those times no more than the rest The truth is our Author has the worst luck in the world in his observations where he ventures to dictate out of his own head and to speak something new He could not have likely pitch'd upon such another age in all the History of the Church as this for multitude of eminent and learned Bishops and I believe I may say there is none that has recommended it self to Posterity by so numerous and substantial Monuments of learning What shall we think of Hierom Ruffinus Augustin the two Cyrils Theodoret what shall we say of Synesius Isidore Pelus and infinite others were these ignorant times that yielded such eminent lights such renown'd Champions and Ornaments to the Church of Christ One may say with great truth that it was not till now that learning was become general among Christians and especially in the East Yet alas say our Author how few Bishops could distinguish then as Derodon and cur conimon Metaphysicks do now between Individuum prima substantia natura suppositum persona and distinguish between a right essence and hypostasis or subsistence c. and have defin'd all these Nature says Derodon is taken in nine senses but the sense was not here agreed on before they disputed of the matter Alas indeed this was a wonderful ignorance They simple men did not understand the art of splitting a good six-pence into two bad groats or of evaporating all good substantial sense by multiplying impertinent distinctions but for my part I value them not a farthing the less for not knowing nine sorts of natures any more than for not knowing the four sorts of Seekers or our Authors twelve species of Episcopacy What our Author speaks of the turbulence and factiousness of the Bishops â—bid that blinded them so as not to distinguish between the Abstract and the Concrete and between the qui quà Deus It is after his wonted candour It is no wonder if good men are vehement when they think their faith is going to be overthrown and if heat and passion is in any thing to be excus'd it is surely here where the concern is so very great and easiness and moderation look like the betraying of the cause of God But there needs no other answer to our Author than the words of our Saviour Mat. 7.5 First cast out the beam out of thine eye and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brothers eye If the Bishops were turbulent here it was for the faith but there are those that have been and still are more turbulent for the circumstances of Religion I wish our Author would think of it There remains yet one considerable Objection against Cyril which I have reserv'd on purpose to the last place that I might answer it more at large and I hope it will give great light unto the subject we have in hand The objection is this That Cyril father'd the doctrine of Nestorius about the Incarnation upon his Master Theodorus Tarsensis and Theodorus Mopsuestenius But Theodore Tars dy'd in the Communion of the Church and was own'd by it not only as a sound Member but as an eminent Champion for the truth I will take notice at this time of this Theodore only whose discrple Nestorius was Facundus takes great pains to vindicate him and does it very effectually but as for this charge of Cyril he does not well know what to say sometimes he is in doubt of the matter of fact whether Cyril did condemn his doctrines and write against him because in doing so he must depart not only from the rest of the Fathers but from himself too For in some of his writings he is very high in his commendation Scripti sunt à Magno Theodore says Cyril ap Fac. l. 8. t. 6. p. 349. adversus Arrianorum Eunomianorum Haereses viginti forte ampliùs libri elia prater hac Evangelica Apostolica Scripta interpretatus est hos quidem labores nullus est ausus increpare sed dextrò decreto honorare studium rectorum dogmatum quod in cis est And therefore he makes it a doubt concerning Cyril sive scripserit aliquid adversus Theodorum sive non But there is no question to be made about the matter of fact For Cyril's Epistle to Successus where he accuses Theodore as the Father of Nestorianisme was never question'd that I know and another of his to Acacius Melitenus mentions not only his dislike of Theodore but that he had writ against him because he conceived he had writ against our Saviours incarnation and yet Theodore did expresly maintain two natures in one person So that Cyril in opposing this must either be a Heretick or he must mistake the meaning of those he wrote against Now for the clearing of this matter we must observe that though Theodore was no Heretick yet there was Heresie among his writings foisted in by the followers of Apollinaris and this is the very Heresie for which Cyril condemns him I will set down Theodore's own words as they are cited by Facundus Fac. l. 10. c. 1. Ante triginta enins hos annos de Incarnatione Domini Codicem conscripsinus usque ad 15. versum pertingentem in quae Arris Eunomii de hâc re delicta nee non etiam Apolinarii vanam prasumptionem per totum illud opus examinavi ut nihil sicut mea fert opinio praterirem ex his quâ—â— ad firmitatem Ecclesiastica Orthodoxia pertinerent ad convincendam corum impietatem Sed hi qui omnia facillime praesumunt praeterea rursum ab Apolinario qui princeps hujus haeresis fuerat instituti omnibus quidem similiter sentientibus opus nostrum manifestum fecerunt siquo modo aliqua invenirent valentia ad convincendum ea quae in eo sunt scripta quoniam verò nullus contra certamen Scriptis suscipere praesumebat imitati sunt infirmos Athletas callidos qui duni non possunt contra fortiores certare insidiis eos machinamentis quibus possunt conantur evertere Scripserunt enim ipsi inter se proculdubio quaedam inepta quae à nobis unqnam minimè dicerentur denique haec ipsa in medio Scriptorum nostrorum in quadam parte interposuerunt suis familiaribus demonstraverunt aliquando etiam nostris qui per facilitatem suam omnia pronis animis audiebant Et hoc quasi documentum ut putabant nostrae impietatis videntibus praebebant Vnum autem ex his Scriptis erat
this p. 109 110 111. sect 32 c. What Concard did these late Councils procure to the Churches From that time most of the Christian World was distracted into Factions Hereticating and killing one another The Alexandrians murder'd Proterius their Bishop chosen by the Council of Chalcedon And to aggravate the cruelty Mr. B. says they spar'd not to tast his Entrails with their Teeth like Dogs Gustare more Canum The miracle of tasting with Teeth would be much greater than the cruelty and go a great way to justifie the barbarity of the Action if it were true But what shall we say to these lamentable consequences of these Councils Was it the misfortune or the fault of these only not to be able to heal the differences of the Church Or else was the defect in the Councils or the blame to be imputed to those obstinate men that oppos'd the Rule establish'd by them These were not the first Councils that have miscarried as to their design of Universal Reconciliation The Council of Jerusalem under the Apostles that determined the Controversie about Circumcision did not presently silence all Disputes about that Question For the Church of Galatia was presently after divided about it The Council of Nice though it quieted the Arian Controversie for a while yet it was not able to prevent those lamentable Contentions which the same question afterwards occasioned Or if Bishops and their Councils could provide no effectual Remedies for the violent distempers of the Church let us see what Presbyterian Synods have done The Synod of Dort condemn'd the Arminians and Subscrib'd certain Articles declaring their Doctrine in the points in Controversie yet the disease was so far from abâ—ting that it grew more violent and the Civil Magistrate was oblig'd to second the determinations of the Synod by inflicting Imprisonment and Exile upon such as would not subscribe and yet all this would not do for the same breach remains unclos'd unto this day Our Author in his meek Answer to the Dean of Pauls Sermon says very kind things of the Assembly of Divines and yet these with their Catechisms Directory and Annotations and Overthrowing of the Episcopal Church Government upon which they charg'd all the Miscarriages and Divisions of the Church were so far from Reconciling the people that after this they were distracted into innumerable Schisms Never was there so lamentable a face of things never such variety of Heresie and such wantonness and Extravagance in Blaspheming God under pretence of Religion and Conscience and this is the state whither the same manner of Men are driving again Experience they say is the Mistriss of Fools but they are Fools to be begg'd whom even experience so dearly purchas'd is not able to make wiser But to return to the success of these Councils Now since Councils whether of Bishops or Presbyters have oftentimes so bad success what is to be done What other remedies shall we find more effectual The Papists have left the use of General Councils of late He who had among them the chief authority of summoning such Councils being grown jealous of that way and the Condition of the Ecclesiastical Roman Empire has been for some ages not unlike that in which Livy represents the Heathen Roman Empire in his time nec vitia nostra ferre possumus nec remedia At last a great part of the Western Church weary of expecting relief by a General Council from that Tyranny and Corruption under which it labour'd was forc'd to use extraordinary means to reform themselves and what they could not do all together they did severally as they had Opportunity It was the good fortune of our Church to Reform it self with the countenance and assistance of the Civil Magistrate and therefore they could do it by degrees and with greater Moderation than other Churches who must contend with the Civil power about it and who had no other strength than the zealand Resolution of the People As soon as this Reformation began to take root deep enough here the Clergy Assembled in a National Synod establish'd a rule for Unity and peace and to prevent disputes as much as was possible This rule comprehended the Doctrine Worship and Discipline of this Church which was at first receiv'd with universal joy and approbation None but Papists opposing it But some time after some few discontented men under pretence of Zeal against Popery took the part of the Papists against this rule and it is observable that as one faction grew up and gather'd strength so did the other that one's right and left hand can hardly grow in evener proportion so that one would fancy that either they advanc'd by some secret consent or were nourish'd from the same Common Stomach It may be from him that Palavicini calls the Stomach as well as the Head of the Church the Pope And what shall be at last done for these Protestants as they call themselves Shall every one be left to himself without any rule The effect of this will be that in a little time we shall have no Religion at all Shall this rule be alter'd We can have no assuance that when it is alter'd we shall find any Conformity to it then more than now and this as it is has the advantage of any innovation if for nothing else yet for its standing and that it is an Antient Establishment In short these that Cry out against this rule seem to have a great respect for the Protestants of Queen Elizabeths time and that Reign is counted the Golden age of this Kingdom Let us consider then what was 〈…〉 their Rule whether 36 or 39 Articles and that Rule that made them so happy may if preserv'd entire keep us so still CHAP. VII Of the Authors of Heresies Schisms and Corruptions and whether they were all Bishops I Have hitherto gone along with Mr. B. step by step conceiving it necessary to make a more particular Vindication of the Church in these times as well because they were the best that the Christian World has had for true piety and zeal as also because our Church Professes to receive the four first General Councils and lastly because all sober moderate Christians have always had and still retain a great esteem and veneration for many of those persons that are represented so odiously in Mr. B. 's Church-History I do not pretend to justifie every thing that was done by all the Bishops and Councils of those times There have been wicked men and wicked Bishops in all times and the Church under the Apostles nay their own Order was not so happy as to have none but good men of it But I hope I have shewed sufficiently that things were not as Mr. B. represents them and that most of his particular Accusations are void of all truth and ingenuity I must deal with him hereafter more Summarily and Answer the drift and design of his Book which is to render Episcopacy Odious under the more invidious name of
Prophet and such a one as spake immediately from God The Christian people of Thessalonica says Mr. B. rose and kill'd some of Theodosius his officers Theod. l. 5. c. 17. which provok'd him by his Souldiers to kill seven thousand of them for which Ambrose brought him to do open Penance The Christian people are much oblig'd to Mr. B. for giving them the honour of this Sedition But Theodoret whom he cites for this story says not one word of the mutineers being Christians Ruff. l. 1. c. 30. Ruffinus who is particular enough in relating it says nothing of their being Christians but has some circumstances that make for the contrary Niceph. Hist l. 32. c. 40. The occasion of this Sedition was about a Charioteer who had lewdly attempted one of the Governours Pages and was put in Prison for it but being expert at his calling the people interceded for his release to entertain them at the Publick races It is not likely the Christians would have concern'd themselves for such a villain or for his Performance at those publick spectacles It being forbidden by the Canons of the Church to be present at them and extremely declaim'd against by the Bishops of those times 2. It is not likely they were Christians if we consider the method Theodosius took to revenge this outrage for as these Chariot Races were the occasion of the Sedition so he made them the opportunity of his revenge for having got a great number together to that sight the Souldiers put his orders in execution and slew 7000. in Ludis Circensibus Ruffin l. 11. c. 30. says Ruffinus 3. That the Generality of those that came to these spectacles and consequently of those that were there slain were not Christians may be gather'd from the arguments us'd by St. Ambrose to aggravate the Cruelty where there is not a word of their being Christians and his brethren but only of their bearing the Image of God and being men 4. Zosimus Theod. ubi sup Niceph. l. 12. c. 41. who omits nothing that is to the reproach of the Christians does not mention this Sedition which if it had been theirs he would have hardly pass'd But the Christians it seems are more beholden to that Heathen and profess'd enemy than to Mr. B. Lastly since there are so many Authors Christian and Heathen that mention this Sedition and not one of them say the Christians were concern'd in it Mr. B. is inexcusable for charging such a Barbarous Sedition upon those of our Religion as if he affected without any authority to render Christianity odious And though all this had been the fault of the Christians it is but an accidental Tumult and the Bishops are no way concern'd in it Our Author adds that to mention all the Bloodshed in Rome as at Damasus Election and else and at Constantinople and Alexandria would be tedious even that which was shed on the account of Bishops It cannot be deny'd but there were great and bloody Tumults upon the account of Bishops but there were not many Bishops that encourag'd them but on the contrary they us'd all means possible to prevent and remedy them by withdrawing by quitting their right and going into voluntary Banishment But almost all these Tumults were occasion'd by the Popular elections of Bishops which Mr. B. out of his love to peace doubtless and to save effusion of Christian blood would restore by his Reformation of Episcopacy Lucius he would say Lucifer Calaritanus was a pious Bishop says Mr. B. but so hot for separation from those that had been Arians that he is numbr'd for it with the Hereticks though an Orthodox Bishop And what is all this to Sedition The Novatians were Episcopal and so were the Donatists says Mr. B. and yet how have they been judged of for their Schism I need not tell They are very much to blame that say the Presbyterians or Independents troubl'd the Primitive Church It was impossible for them to be troublesome before they were at all it seems all the Sects and Schisms of that time thought they had no right to pretend to be a Church unless they had Bishops But these Anti-Episcopal Separatists were reserved it seems for the last times as the severest curse and judgment that could befal the Church Those Episcopal Schismaticks indeed divided the Church but these quite dissolve it Besides these Episcopal Schismaticks Mr. B. gives a small list of Bishops that were Anti-Hereticks Apollinaris father and son Paulus Samosatenus Nestorius Dioscorus Eusebius of Nicomedia Theodorus of Mopsuestia have been Arch-Hereticks and the cause of Tumults and Dissension There is much of this that is not true and some of it that Mr. B. does not believe to be so For 1. Apollinaris the Father was no Bishop Hieron de Script Apoll. Laodic Syria Ep. Patre Presbytero l. 6. c. 25. Gregor Nyss Ephr. Syrus Philost l. 8.15 Gottoffred Dissert in Philost and this was he that was the Arch-Heretick as Zozomen informs us and as much may be gathered from Gregory Nyssen who makes Apollinaris a very old man when he should have disputed with Ephraim Syrus Apollinaris the younger is said to have been a Bishop by Philostorgius though Photius adds that he knows not whence he had it But Jerom is express and that is the Common opinion Yet whether he were the Author of this Heresie or his father he was a Heretick before he was a Bishop while he was yet reader of the Church of Laodicea Socrat. l. 2. c. 46. and from Socrates and Athanasius writing against his Heresie it is plain that it was long before the younger Apollinaris was made Bishop if ever he were so Nicephorus makes the repulse of Apollinaris at Antioch which seems to be after he may be presum'd to have been Bishop from some expressions of that Historian Niceph. l. 12. c. 4. to have been the occasion of his Heresie but this manifestly contradicts all ancienter Historians and indeed the very story contradicts it self for Flavian upon the place convicts him of having been a Heretick before Sandius thinks he was not Bishop of Laodicea till after the Council of C. P. because Pelagius is found Bishop of Laodicea in the subscriptions of that Council though I believe this reason of small moment and the Acts of that Council shew him to have been Bishop of that place before However manifest it is that whether the father nor the son were Author of that Heresie he was not a Bishop at that time Nestorius Mr. B. himself has taken great pains to prove Orthodox yet now it seems his mind is changed The same he does with Dioscorus He was on their side against the Councils that condemn'd them but now from Advocate he is turn'd Accuser Eusebius of Nicomedia was no Heretick in the judgment of Valesius but if he were he was not an Heretick because he did not begin the arch-Heresie but followed Arius Theodorus of Mopuestia was an Orthodox Bishop as
is home to the purpose and seems to parallel his Dedications to R. Cromwel We have the story at length and set out with all the advantage of Remarks and comparisons and thus it begins And because the late Revolutions in England are made by some Prelates The pretence for the Silencing of 1800 Ministers of whom one in ten never meddled with Wars being fallen again on this case of Maximus Let it be Noted how like he was to Cromwel saving that it was not the Sectaries but the Bishops that he studied to please and rise by How just the pretence was Mr. B. can tell better than I if he would speak-out And whether he will or no others perhaps will have the Courage and the Honesty to do it How like Cromwel was to Maximus I do not find by Mr. B. though he desires it should be Noted They were both Usurpers but as unlike in their circumstances as they could well be imagined For First Cromwel Usurped a Kingdom setled in one Family by a long and unquestionable Descent upon a King of undoubted right Maximus Usurped an Elective Empire at the disposal of Armies being chosen by his own Army and that of Gratian Sulp. Sev. de vit Mart. c. 23. Aur. vict Socr. Sozom as he said against his will Gratian against whom Maximus Rebelled was kill'd indeed by Andragathius an Officer of this Tyrant by his order as most suppose but as he himself protested without his knowledg However it was in pursuit in open Field in a posture of Resistance and at the head of some of his Troops Zozim l. 4. c. 37. But Cromwel murdered the late King in cold blood after the formality of a Tryal with all the pomp and ostentation of insolence and cruelty Maximus when he had done this though he entred by Treason Ambr. ep 27. Sozom. l. 7. c. 13. Zozim ubi supra yet afterwards had his Title confirmed by Treaties concluded with Valentinian and Theodosius the great who ordered their names should be joyned together in all publick forms and that his Statues should be every where set up So that those who lived in the Provinces under Maximus could not now reject him without Rebellion He being their Prince and no other having any right or making any claim And had he been contented with his first conquest it is not likely Theodosius had ever armed against him But Cromwel as he entred without any colour of right according to the constitution of this Kingdom so while he enjoyed it the right Heir was still in being to whom he and all the people in Conscience still owed Allegiance and whose interest the invincible Loyalty of some of his subjects did still promote and therefore they were not so excusable that complyed with this Tyrant as those that closed with Maximus Lastly Maximus did pretend something of Title by Descent as being related to Constantine the Great Baron An. 383.1 But Cromwel never pretended to be of the Royal Family So that here was a vast difference between these two persons before us But Mr. B. can find no difference but this That Maximus studied to please the Bishops and rise by them and not by the Sectaries If there had been any Sectaries in those dayes of the same Principles with some of ours He understood his interest too well to have neglected them But how is it the Bishops fault that he studied to please them That he studied to rise by them is more than any body has said before Mr. B. And if Maximus had such a design upon the Bishops he was surely disappointed for we do not find any where that any Bishop did ever contribute in the least to the raising of him But besides to what would he rise He was Emperour already before we find him take the least notice of the Bishops And if after this success of his Army to establish himself in his new conquest he indeavoured to oblige all sorts of people and amongst the rest the Bishops who were popular men in those dayes I cannot understand how it can be any great reproach to them Sometimes wicked Men may reverence that Vertue and goodness in others that they will not practise themselves Sometimes their guilty Consciences and their just fear of reproof makes them stand in awe of men of severe conversation and to indeavour to please them Sometimes their interest leads them to oblige those that have any influence or Authority over the people And one would think this would hardly be objected by way of reproach to them that innocently received the obligation Well But what did this Usurper do to please the Bishops And how far were they instrumental to his advancement Mr. B. tells us When Gratian the Emperour befriended the Priscillianists Maximus to please the Bishops persecuted them to death But by this if he pleased some Bishops he displeased several others who were extreamly dissatisfied with these proceedings although they all were of opinion those Hereticks were not fit to live Sulp. Sev. l. 2. in sin And in the account which Severus gives of this proceeding he intimates that the Bishops were generally dissatisfied that Ithacius to avoid their prosecution did lay down his Bishoprick that Theognostus and a Synod condemned him for it Yet another Synod to prevent a Schism in all likelihood received him into their Communion But to proceed saith Mr. B When Valentinian Sulp. Sev. de vit mar Baron Ar. 385.29 by Justina the Empresses's means did persecute or trouble Ambrose for refusing to deliver a Church to the Arians and also other Orthodox Bishops as well as Ambrose Maximus gave to Ambrose and the Bishops the honour of keeping him out of Italy and wrote his Letters to Valentinian for the Orthodox Bishops telling him how grievous a thing it is to persecute the Ministers of God and when under his Father they went for faithful Ministers Vpon this message of Maximus he saith that Valentinian being afraid of him the persecution ceased and Ambrose must be sent upon an Embassage to Maximus to stop him As to the when Mr. B. mistakes the time in the first place Soâ—r l. 5. c. 1. l. Soâ—â—◠〈…〉 with Socrates and Sozomen Socrates makes this persecution of Ambrose to be before the Death of Gratian which that Historian sayes so frighted Justina that she left off troâ—â—â—â— that good Bishop any longer But Ambrose himself contradicts it Ep. 33. Baron An. 383.19 and shews plainly that this happened after his first Embassy and after his obtaining a peace of Maximus In the next place Maximus is said to have given Ambrose and the Bishops the honour of keeping him out of Italy It was certainly a great Honour to Ambrose for other Bishops there were none concerned in it But I much question whether ever Maximus designed it as such Gloriosum est mihi hoc pro salute pupilli Imperatoris Amb. Ep. 27. who as we shall shew presently not out of
the newer Models of Church Polity have obtain'd but in a small part even of the Reform'd Churches and that in some places under Persecuting Princes who more effectually keep under the Tares in the field of the Church prevent excesses and Unite the suffering Church than any sort of Church Government or Discipline whatsoever yet the Histories even of these Churches can furnish too many instances of Tumult and disorder of Heresies Schisms and contentions of Wars and Desolations and if this cannot be drawn into any argument against the Presbyterian way there is less reason it should be urg'd against Episcopacy that for so long time obtain'd over the Universal Church which under this constitution had pass'd through fire and water and then was brought into a wealthy place through distresses and Persecutions through all the encouragements of wealth and power And in short through all the Tryals that can be made by all the differences of outward condition and Circumstances They who fancy a time when the Church had no Bishops do represent it as then full of discord and Distraction I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas So that as they say it was necessary for the preservation of peace and Unity to appoint one person over the rest and if the Presbyterian parity had any place in the Primitive times as some do imagine it must needs have been an intolerable kind of Government since all on the sudden it was Universally abolish'd it must have given strange occasion of offence when all the Christian Churches in the world should conspire to Abrogate this Polity and to destroy all the memory and footsteps of it so that in the lamentable distractions which the Church fell into afterwards under Bishops none should so much as propose this way of relief by returning to their Ancient Government and the people that were so harrass'd with perpetual contentions about their Bishops must either think that there could be no Church where there was no Bishop or else that Presbyterian parity or a Popular Church Government would occasion yet greater mischiefs than those they suffer'd That the inconveniences are not less will appear from the experience of such Churches as have cast off Episcopacy some of which at leastwise a good number of very understanding men in them do at time this wish that they might be govern'd by Bishops and conceive it to be the only remedy for their divisions Beza in vitâ Calvini J. Lassitius de Discip Frat. Bohem. Calvin Ep. ad fratr Bohem. Eccles Bohem ad Ang. Paraenes In the beginning of the Reformation those Eminent Instruments whom God was pleas'd to employ in that work were so wholly taken up with preaching and writing against those gross errors and superstitions which had cover'd the face of Christianity that they had little or no leisure to look after Discipline or Government and did do the work of Evangelists rather than Governours of the Church But when they saw to what mischiefs the want of Government and discipline expos'd the Reform'd Churches and were thereby convinced that there must be building up as well as pulling down then they began seriously to consider of some Ecclesiastical Polity For many had joyn'd with them in pulling down Superstition and Papal Tyranny who when they began to discover their opinions more particularly became intolerable and advanc'd such doctrines as did not only destroy Christianity but all Government and society Muntzer Swenckfeld c. These by good providence were neither Bishops nor Episcopal men but against all sort of Church Government and order and while there is any of this leaven remaining let what sort of Government you please obtain there will never be an end of Schism and Sedition For if Episcopacy be Abolish'd what ever is establish'd in its Room will be accounted by such men every whit as Antichristian and Presbyterian Glasses and Synods or Congregational Episcopacy will have no fairer quarter for these will admit no Government no Law but that which will permit every one to do what he pleases and that will set up a State of Grace just like Hobbs his state of nature It is very much to be fear'd that this is the most prevailing principle among our Anti-Episcopal Dissenters And if out of such inconsiderable beginnings they increas'd so fast when the fences of our Church had been once taken away as not only to ruin all projects of unity and Establishment but to possess themselves of the Government what may we expect now when they are form'd into considerable parties and out-number those of the Classical and Parochial Presbyterians that is all that are for any sort of settlement that may be suited to the Circumstances of this Nation What may we not have Reason to fear if the Laws which give check to their Insolences were once taken away And if they should be taken in under the Notion of Protestants A dishonour from which it has pleas'd God hitherto to preserve that name according to the prayers of the first Reformers who dreaded the growth of Sects no less than the return of Popery it self But besides that Heresie may spring where there are no Bishops as there were none in the Reformation when those Monsters first appear'd There can be also bitter contentions about Religion where Bishops have nothing to do Luther and Carolostadius were no Bishops M. Adams in vit Carolost and yet they could quarrel and disturb the Reformation they had in hand with their Jarres Carolostadius in Luthers Absence Reform'd the Church of Wittenborg took away Images Auricular Confession c. Which Luther took offence at as being done without his Authority or advice which was the beginning of the Sacramentarian War and M. Adams blames them both in these words visus est uterque cupidior Gloria Luther was angry that any body should set up himself a new master in a place where he was so much concerned and could not indure Ordinationes suas in Populo pressâ mea authoritate erigi And this contention was so Exasperated that after a Conference Carolostadius was Banished from Turingia by the Elector of Saxonie's order and the instigation of Luther and some other Ministers were turn'd out of their places upon the same Account and the sufferer did not spare to render all this Treatment as Invidious as he could and therefore writes a Letter to the people of Orlamund Subscribed A. Bodenstein non Auditus non Convictus à Martino Luthero Ejectus If Bishops or their Councils had been concern'd in this what Bitter Reflections should we have upon the Prelatical persecuting Spirit But it seems other men as well as Bishops have passions and may disturb the Church Yet we are not to aggravate but to cover as much as we can the frailties of great persons and to retain still a Reverence for the Authority of their Offices and their Personal Excellences But whereever the Lutheran Reformation was received Diocesan Episcopacy soon
became the Church Government and I believe it will be found to have preserv'd those Churches in as great peace and Unity if not more than those had that were Governed without Bishops The Churches of Sweden and Denmark never knew what Schism or Heresie was but by reading or hear-say and those of Germany though something more disquieted yet it was seldom from within but by Projects of Union with other Churches under a different kind of Polity as well as of different opinions in some points of Religion It is to be wish'd that the Churches of the Ausburg Confession as they took care to preserve the Antient form of Church Governmet had been also a little more careful in the point of Ordination For their Bishops though they have the same authority with Diocesans yet were at first ordain'd but by Presbyters and the Principles of those Churches touching the right of ordination are so loose that I believe those of the Presbyterian Discipline will hardly allow them Hunnius defending their Ordinations says the power is in the Church diffusive and that it may be conveyed not only by Bishops or Presbyters but by Deacons or any body else if the Church think fit and I am afraid the Practice of some of those Churches is not otherwise to be justifi'd But before this Lutheran Reformation was that of the Bohemians not that of the Calixtins only but the Vnitas fratrum Bohemorum whose Churches were govern'd by Diocesan Bishops and where Discipline was so far from being Impossible Commenii Hist Eccles Slav. p. 32. notwithstanding the Dioceses were very large that they were perhaps the best Govern'd Churches in the world Bucer speaking of this Government says haec verò est Coelestis potius quam Ecclesiastica in Terris Hierarchia and Calvin was so taken with this Government as well as Discipline that he looks upon their Governing and ordaining Pastors as no inconsiderable blessing Ep. ad Pastor Bohem. Neque Vero parvo est estimandum quod tales habent Pastores a quibus Regantur Ordinentur and those were their Bishops as may be seen in that Account they gave of themselves in Ratio Disciplinae Ordinisque Ecclesiastici in Vnitate fratrum Bohemorum printed at Lesna 1632. and afterwards at the Hague by Commenius 1660. Whoever would know more of these Episcopal Diocesan Churches may consult Lasitius or the short Accout of Commenius the then only Remaining Bishop of those Churches And these had such Bishops as were not only invested with the full Authority of Diocesans over several Churches but such as had been ordain'd according to the Canons of the Ancient Church Stephanus accito Episcopo altero c. Commen Hist p. 24. by the Bishops of the Waldenses who derived themselves by an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles It is time now to Return to the Principal Design which was to shew how no other form of Government can secure the Church from Heresie Schism and Contention any more than Episcopacy and that those Churches which put themselvs under new Models of Government and discipline have been excercis'd with Schism Heresie and Sedition no less than those under Episcopacy The Churches which follow'd the Reformation of Zuinglius had at first no Government nor discipline that was properly Ecclesiastical All authority rested in the Civil Magistrate and the Ministers did only preach and administer the Sacraments without excluding any It was from this practice I suppose that the Divines of that way came to speak generally so loosely of the power of the Keys making it all to consist in preaching without any regard to Ecclesiastical discipline But the Licentiousness that followed this defect of Discipline and Government soon open'd the eyes of the Ministers who Complain'd passionately of the Increase of Libertinism under pretence of Reformation and endeavour'd to make the people sensible that there is more required to make a true Protestant than to Renounce the Pope and Transubstantiation and that the Notion of a Church did imply something more than a Company of sound believers met together to hear a Sermon Calvin a person of extraordinary Abilities was one of the first that observ'd and Complain'd of this defect in the Reformation and endeavour'd to Remedy it in the Church where he was Pastour by Establishing an Ecclesiastical Government Baza vit Calv. and that perhaps not such as he thought most perfect and absolute but such as the Circumstances of the place would bear The people of Geneva were sufficiently prejudic'd against Episcopacy having turn'd out their Bishop who had likewise a title to be their Prince and to have talk'd of Introducing a Bishop there would have sounded as harsh as the mention of a King would have done to the Romans after the expulsion of Tarquin But suppose they could have been Reconcil'd to the name and the office upon assurance it should not exceed its proper bounds it is possible Calvin might look upon it as too Invidious a proposal to his Church for fear of being understood to recommend himself and to affect dominion over his Brethren Episcopacy then seeming Impracticable in that place he devised a form of Government that should be more popular and consequently more acceptable the Ministers were to be all of equal Authority and were in the first place to govern the Church and with them a certain number out of the Laity under the Title of ruling Elders were to have a share in the Church Government and this mix'd Council without any Bishop was to exercise all Ecclesiastical Censures and Jurisdiction One would think this would be unexceptionable but it proved otherwise for this frame was no sooner begun but it was presently broken in pieces and the Author banish'd But his Reputation abroad made them reflect upon this Treatment with shame and desire him to return With him this Government was restor'd which was so far from remedying all disorders that it became the occasion of some very great ones and the State of that Church as it is discrib'd by Calvin in his letters to his friends and by Beza in his life was most lamentably distracted and this Government was made odious in the beginning of it by very harsh and rigorous proceedings The Expulsion of Castellio a man of Great and Polite Learning was too Invidious The opposing of the Senate in the Election of a Minister to such a point of heat and Contention Beza vit Calv. as to endanger the peace of the City wanted little of Sedition Calvins quarrels with Perinus came to that height that the Council of the City had almost cut one anothers throats about it Siquidem eousque semel in ipsâ curiâ deventum est coactis Diacosiis pene exertis jam Ensibus parum abfuerit quin mutuis caedibus ipsam Curiam cruentarent And what was the reason of so dangerous a Contention No Article of the Creed was in danger It was not for any part of the faith that they contended so
Mr. B. tells us that Treatise of Episc p. 1. p. 164. The Church of Scotland is an Eminent instance that Churches which have no Bishops have incomparably less Heresie Schism wickedness and more concord than we have here For the concord of that Church it was much greater while it continu'd under Superintendents and Bishops than it has been since Andrew Melvil diiturli'd it with the Perfection of the Geneva Discipline and Government For a long time after all the Disputes about Religion were reduc'd into one point of Ecclesiastical sovereign jurisdiction which they disputed against the King and the Government with such perpetual Seditions and Treasons as at last engag'd three Kingdoms in most unnatural and bloody Wars which ended in the slavery of them all and particularly of those that were the first Incendiaries through the wise and just judgment of God What Schism there arose in the late times between the disciplinarians and the rest and what disturbances the same sort of men have given of late is too well known to need a relation and the field Conventieles still witness But because Mr. B. would perswade us that there is such great concord to be found in Anti-Episcopal Churches and particularly in this I will give one Instance that shall let the reader see how far this way is from establishing a lasting Concord and withal how this parity that is pretended is really no more than a pretence the leading men against Bishops commonly assuming greater authority and exercising it with greater Absoluteness and more Impatient of being oppos'd and contradicted than any Bishops who are legally Invested with power There happen'd a great division in the Presbytery of St. Spotswood H. of Scot. 1.6 Andrews about preferring a Minister to the Church of Luchars There were two pretenders and Melvil with a few more was for one and the rest who were three times as many in number were for the other Melvil looking upon himself as an Apostle and disdaining to be overrul'd by the Majority of the Presbytery left the place and with his six Presbyters that follow'd him made another Synod by himself and both these Presbyters like Anti. Popes Issu'd out their several pleasures The Gentlemen of the Parish upon this were divided into factions some holding with one and some with the other which occasioned great scandal and the heats grew to that height that the Presbytery was forc'd to be divided one part of it to sit at St. Andrews the other at Couper the one under the Influence of Melvil and the other under that of Th. Buchanan so hard it was for one Presbyterial Diocese to hold two Topping Presbyters The observation that follows the relation of this difference in Spotswood is very remarkable Thus was that great strife pacifi'd which many held to be Ominous p. 386. and that the Government which in the beginning did break forth into such Schisms could not long continue for this every man noted That of all men none could worse endure Parity and lov'd more to Command than they who had introduc'd it into the Church This sort of men did afterwards make not only a formal Schism and insurrection against those Bishops plac'd over them by authority but after that Episcopacy was abolish'd in Scotland could be as little at peace among themselves They were in the first place divided about the receiving the King and the Conditions to be Impos'd upon him and in this they proceeded even to the Excommunication of one another After his Majesties Restauration when Episcopacy was again establish'd in the Church the Presbyterians who separated from the Communion of the Bishops were divided yet among themselves some accepting the Kings Indulgence and Licence to Preach others renouncing it as derogatory to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and upon this they parted Communion Nor could these resolute Renouncers of Indulgence agree yet among themselves about the measure of their Contempt of authority some were content to Conventicle and Preach against the Kings order and carry their Contempt no farther the others under Cameron were more fiercely Zealous and thought themselves oblig'd by the Covenant to attempt the deposing of the King as they manifested besides their several Writings to that effect by two formal Rebellions These are the fruits this the Peace and Unity that Presbytery and the Scotch Covenant produc'd the Covenant so much Idolz'd once by our Presbyterians of England and which notwithstanding all the Mischiefs that attended it here and do still issue from it in Scotland they are yet loth to renounce though required so to do by all the Authority in the Nation But what is all this to Congregational Episcopacy It is not Presbytery but this that Mr. B. Contends for He is for Bishops and would only pare off the superfluities of their Dioceses and reduce them to their first bounds To which I answer First That Mr. B.'s Congregational Bishop and Parish Presbyter is all one and he has taken so much pains to prove it in his Treatise of Episcopacy that it were an injury to his sincerity to question his opinion of it But Secondly That there was some necessity to say all this of Presbyterian Governments being subject to Heresies and Schisms as well as Episcopal because Mr. B. himself had made the comparison between them and charg'd all Schisms and Heresies upon Diocesan Episcopacy as the fault of the constitution it was therefore necessary to see how all sorts of Governments of the Church as well as of the State may be disturb'd by evil and factious men and are subject to great inconveniences when they fall into evil hands But then what Schisms can be imputed to this Congregational way This cannot well be answered without asking a question was this Congregational Episcopacy ever establish'd in any Churches If not it will be as hard a matter to shew what mischief it has occasion'd as it is to discover what Civil Wars happen'd in Plato's Common-wealth or to reckon the Differences of Sects of Philosophers in the College of Atlantis If this Government has been set up any where it is but naming the time and place and it may be that some account may be given of the Schisms and Heresies that molested it Mr. B. contends it was the first Apostolical and Scripture constitution and shews at large that a Church was but one Congregation and a Bishop could have but one Church Well but there were Schisms and Heresies then and St. Paul makes frequent complaints of them Or if this sort of Government continu'd for some Centuries after as Mr. B. would make it appear it must be likewise granted that there never were greater and more Blasphemous Heresies than in those times and for Schisms they could not be avoided it seems and though a Diocese were but one Congregation the Presbyters could not agree who should govern that but divided it into separate Assemblies But to this Mr. B. Answers 2 Dispute about Ordination p. 329. That
separation twenty years before seems to have made the first step towards this Congregational way Brown in the column intituled the state of Christians 50. Art 51. but he speaks of it something more obscurely Who have the grace and office of watching and guiding The Answer is Some have this Charge together which cannot be sundred Some have their several charge over many Churches some have charge but in one Church only 52. How have some their charge and office together Ans There be Synods or the meetings of sundry Churches where the weaker Churches seek for help to the stronger for deciding or redressing of matter or else the stronger look to them for redress Who have their several charge over many Churches Ans Apostles Prophets Helpers or Evangelists Nor does he determine whether any may succeed to this general inspection or no. Those that followed delivered themselves with greater clearness upon this point Confer with Egerton p. 43. Collection of certain Art 1590. Art 11. Barrow and Greenwood make all Ecclesiastical power to belong to every Congregation and call the Bishops Antichristian because they take upon them to oversee so many Pastors and Churches And in another treatise where they answer this Question whether the Queen may be excommunicated by the Presbyterie they say That they detest the power of any Person or Presbytery usurping Authority over the Church No Presbytery can do any thing of this kind without the consent of the whole Congregation but That the Congregation whereof the Prince is may Excommunicate him Ainsworth went the same way and declared himself in these words Ains Communion of Saints c. 24. We find no Authority committed to our Congregation over another for Excommunicating the same as every Church has over her own members Christ reserveth this power in his own hands Barrow affirms Bar. Refuttat of Gifford 137. that ordinary set Synods are as prejudicial to the Rights of the Church as the other i.e. Diocesan Episcopacy But Johnson was the first that cleared this point and treated of it particularly Johns Christian Plea Treat 3. He layes down two things as the foundation of Church Government and Unity 1. That all particular Churches with their Pastors do stand immediately under Jesus Christ their Arch Pastor without any other strange Ecclesiastical Power and Authority interposed between Whether of Prelates or their unlawful usurping Synods 2. That notwithstanding the estate and distinction aforesaid Treat 3. c. 6. p. 261.262 c. yet all the Churches and Ministers of them should be alwayes ready to advise and assist one another and in this manner might be had a lawful and profitable use of Synods classes c. Provided they do not usurp any unlawful jurisdiction or power over particular Churches This man goes yet farther and maintains Congregational Episcopacy and shews out of several places of Scripture and antiquity That there may be in a particular Church one Pastor or Angel of the Church properly and specially so called and divers teachers and ruling Elders joyned to this Pastor in the Ministry and Government of the same Church who may all of them generally be called Pastors yet so as one be specially distinguished from the rest in respect of place and function to be the Pastor so more particularly called under Jesus Christ the Arch Pastor Never did copy agree more exactly with the Original than Mr. Baxters doctrine about Church Government with this of Johnson the Brownist Vt sit tam fimilis sibi nec ipse It is easier to find a difference between Mr. B. and himself upon other occasions than to discern the least disagreement between him and Johnson in this Robinson whom Baylie makes the Father of the Independents though he left some tenets of the Brownists Diss p. 17. Robins Apol p. 17. continued still a separation in the Sacraments and Discipline and was as much for this Congregational way as any of the Brownists In his Apology he declares That every particular Congregation is intire without any relation to other Churches as Peter or Paul are perfect men without respect to others that these Congregations are Independent and under Christ only Therefore the Ancient bounds which the Apostles have laid are not to be removed under pretence of any human Prudence Antiquity or Vnity Upon this foundation the Independent Churches were built and continue to this day which though they may differ in points of Doctrine as their Pastors or leading men may be inclined yet this constitution of Government gives them a common Denomination And now having given this account of the Original of this way at leastwise in these last times the higher Antiquity of it we shall consider elsewhere I shall in the next place give some account of the success of this form of Government and shew what fruits of Peace and Truth it has yielded since its first planting by the Brownists Robert Brown Schoolmaster in Southwark Baylie diss Ch. 1. having seduced out of the Communion of the Church of England such a number of Disciples as made up a congregation for fear lest the severity of our Laws might dissipate this new Church resolved to remove it to a place of greater liberty and accordingly perswaded his followers to transport themselves and families into Middleborough Here they had not been long but they began to be shaken with intestine discords G. Johns Letter to Fran. Johns George Johnson sayes It was in great measure occasioned by Browns Wife and other Women of that banished Church which caused a mortal feud between Brown and Harison and some said it was the occasion of Harison 's death It was also the cause of Excommunicating Perriman And this new fashion'd Church in short broke all to pleces most turning Anabaptists and Brown at last seeing himself deserted returned with tears in his eyes into the Unity of the Church Conformed and was preferred to a living The next Congregation that was formed under this rule was by F. Johnson Diss p. 14. for Barrow was hanged before he could fill his Church and this finding the air of the English Government not to agree with it followed its Pastor to Holland and setled at Amsterdam a kind Soil for a young and tender sect But this Colony had no better success than that of Brown for in a little while it was diminished by the falling away of several to the Anabaptists who were Excommunicated by the Congregation they deserted But the dissensions that were raised among themselves afflicted them yet more for G. Johnson having disobliged his Brothers Wife by reproving her for the vanity of her Apparel and cited a Text of Scripture for it when he was candidate for the place of a Pastor in conjunction with his Brother G. Johnson discourse of some troubles c. 1603. was required to recant his Doctrine against fine Cloaths he on the other side drew Articles of Impeachment against the Busk Stomacher and Sleeves c.
1. c. vii and what is that By a Diocese we Nonconformists mean only a large Circuit of Ground with its Inhabitants containing many particular Parishes and by a Diocesan Church we mean all the Christians within this Circuit who have but one Bishop over them though they be of mary Parishes And what Episcopacy does Mr. B. approve Bishop Vshers Episcopacy Reduc'd and what is this It is a Bishop over many Parishes a Bishop of a Rural Deanry that contains a great many Parish Churches It is manifest therefore that Mr. B. says and unsays and Condemns himself in that which he approves 2. Bishop Vsher's Reduction overthrows the Foundations of Mr. B.'s Church the Essence and Individuation of it for he defines a Church by a Congregation for personal Communion in Worship and Discipline and denies that one Church can be any farther extended in respect of its Government and Discipline than it may in respect of Worship which he expresses thus I think many of them i e. the Presbyterians do with Rutterford distinguish between a Worshipping Church and a Govern'd Church And sadling the Horse for Prelacy to mount on do affirm that many about Twelve of these Worshipping Churches like our Parishes may make but one Govern'd or Presbyterial Church But Bishop Vshers Project makes 40 or 50 Worshipping Churches but one Govern'd Church 3. Bishop Vshers Reduction deposes Parish Bishops and turns their Churches into Chapels because they are allow'd no exercise of the Keys but only admonition and suspension from the Sacrament 'till the Bishop and Synod is made acquainted with it Art 1. and this any incumbent in the Church of England is allow'd to do But Mr. B. rejects Diocesan Episcopacy for this fault of turning Churches into Chapels and Pastors into Preaching Curats and yet approves all that he Condemns by yielding to Bishop Vshers Reduction It is something strange he should be a Non Conformist to himself as well as to Diocesan Episcopacy and upon the very same reasons too Lastly This Project of Church Government in which there is one thing not so agreeable to the practice of Antiquity which is the Major part of the Presbyters concluding the Bishop who alwayes had a Negative voice and nothing ever becoming an Act without his consent and Approbation this I say may perhaps be of some use to make an accommodation between Presbyterian Government by Classes and Synods c. and Diocesan Episcopacy but it wholly overthrows Mr. B.'s Congregational way however qualifi'd by the Independent Principles of Consociation beyond which Mr. B.'s Notion of Church Government and constitution does not extend Therefore to leave this Episcopacy of Bishop Vshers as destructive of Independence why may not they of the Congregational way prevent such inconveniences as they have fallen into by some quallifying Principles in favour of Consociation and some abatement in their Punctiliousness of admitting into full Communion and Church-membership And thus far no doubt Mr. B. does comply to which I answer That the Fundamental Principle of this Congregational way does dispose it to all manner of confusion which I undertook to shew in the last place I shall say nothing to such Principles of our Independents as have no necessary Connexion with the nature of their Church Government as those of separation from every defect in ordinances and the like they are besides my purpose and the mischief and unreasonableness of them have been shew'd already with so much light and advantage by the Incomparable Dean of Pauls as to be able to convince any men who did mistake in good earnest as to that part therefore I will suppose them satisfi'd in point of Conscience though not perhaps in point of Honour and consider only the mischiefs of their Government abstracted from their other opinions The Independent or Congregational constitution is founded upon these two Principles 1. That Christ and his Apostles instituted Congregational Churches and endued them with all the Power that is given the Church as of censures Excommunication and the like without any dependence one on another or of several upon one General Pastor and that the single Congregations planted at first in several Cities when they came to encrease beyond the possibility of Personal Communion were to Imitate Bee-hives and to send out Colonies under their proper Officers without any dependence on the mother Hive 2. That what was thus instituted by Christ and his Apostles must so continue it not being in the power of man or the Church to alter it This is the foundation of Independent Government and if you abate any thing of these Principles the whole Fabrick must fall to pieces If you deny the first that Christ or his Apostles did not institute such Churches the Congregational way has no pretence or if you will say that the first that were planted were indeed of this kind but accidentally there being no more believers in any City than might meet in one Congregation it equally destroys it for when Christians were multipli'd into several Congregations they might put themselves under another form more commodious for preserving Unity among them If you deny the second that though the Apostolical Churches were of this Model yet that it was not necessary and unalterable it will remove all just reason of contention about it for the Church having made use of its liberty in the change of that Government which it is suppos'd to have power to do as it saw occasion nothing can be more unreasonable than to tear it in pieces upon this occasion unless it has done something that it had no authority to do and so alter'd the Government Establish'd by Christ with out his leave in short if the Apostles did not found Congregational Churches there is no reason why we should set them up if they did found them at first but did design they should continue no longer than till the numbers of Christians should exceed one Congregation the success of the Gospel has chang'd that form If they were founded at first and then the matter left to the discretion of the Church to frame it self according to its best convenience the Church has already determin'd it there can be no Controversie So that if any of these Principles be deni'd the Congregational Government must fall of course Independency therefore being founded upon a firm belief of those Fundamental Principles which cannot be left but the whole frame must sink I shall proceed to shew the unavoidable mischiefs that belief exposes these Congregational Churches to 1. Of the mischiefs that this way occasisions by rendring any Union between particular Churches Impossible 2. The mischiefs it produces in particular Churches or Congregations 1. Of the Impossiblity of preserving any Unity between Independent Churches These Churches like so many little Soveraignties crowded together within the same Territory and a great number of them within the Walls of the same City their Vicinity and Cohabitation gives them opportunities and begets a necessity of a
see will be stiffly deny'd though the Scripture Testimonies already alledg'd are sufficient to perswade any reasonable man that the Church of Jerusalem was more than a Congregation and consequently the Bishop of it a Diocesan according to Mr. B.'s definition But besides we have as ancient Testimonies from Church History too of the greatness of that Church as of any other whatsoever For Hegesippus among several commendations of him sayes that several of the Jewish Sectaries who believed neither a Resurrection nor Judgment to come were converted by James And that when a great number of the Rulers and and principal men of the City Apud Euseb l. 2. c. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were by his Ministry brought to believe the Gospel the Jews made an uproar the Scribes and Pharisees saying that it was to be feared that all the people would turn Christians would they fansie themselves in so great danger if the Christians in so vast and populous a City should have but one single Congregation Suppose they had one Synagogue of four or five hundred is that such a dreadful proportion as to fright people out of their wits as if they were immediately to be overrun with Christianity and what should give them so great disturbance The Christians had alwayes had one Congregation there and surely a pretty full one from the time of Christs Death and if their meeting places were not increased and Synagogues with their Rulers and Officers had not deserted the Jewish Church and professed Christianity there had been no protence for such an apprehension as if all Jerusalem were about to change the Law for the Gospel it was more than a poor Congregational Church and Bishop that must give cause to these apprehensions It was not long ere this Church of Jerusalem that was grown so formidable to the Jews that they were afraid lest in a little while it might swallow up all their Synagogues was removed thence and by a special warning snatch'd from the destruction that was shortly to fall upon that wicked City There is an ancient Tradition that the Christians of Jerusalem forsook it before the last Siege and went to Pella Euseb Hist l. 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a City of beyond Jordan and because the obscurity of the place may make one suspect that the numbers of the Church of Jerusalem were not so great if this Town could receive them all We must understand that Town to be their Metropolis or seat of their Bishop but the believers were all scattered through that whole Country Epip Haer. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 3. c. 11. as Epiphanius writes and his way of expressing himself makes Pella only the principal residence of the Church and here it is probable their Bishop liv'd for after the death of James and the Destruction of Jerusalem the Apostles and Disciples and such of our Savious kindred as remained met together to appoint a Successour to James when this Church was departed from Jerusalem and it must needs be more than an ordinary charge to occasion so solemn a meeting to consult about the Person that should succeed in it It was more surely than the oversight of one single Congregation Id. l. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And his Government added yet greater numbers to that Church many thousands of the Circumcision receiving the Christian Faith at that time and among the rest Justus who succeeded in the Bishoprick of Jerusalem Now from this account of the Church of Jerusalem it appears manifestly 1. That it was Episcopal from the beginning and some of the Authors that attest it liv'd in that time when the Apostolical Church Government is pretended to be chang'd into Episcopacy by Blondel and it shews no less the vanity of Mr. B.'s conceit about the Original of Bishops 2. That the Bishops of Jerusalem were Diocesan's having the oversight of several Congregations which is necessarily inferr'd from the express numbers of Converts from general expressions of wonderful accessions from the jealousy of the Scribes and Pharisees who apprehended from the progress Christianity made that all Jerusalem would soon become Christians from the farther accounts of its increase and of the innumerable multitudes that were added to it and this is sufficient to shew the weakness of Mr. B.'s conjecture who makes Rome and Alexandria to be the first patterns of Diocesan Episcopacy and that not till after the beginning of the third Century Nor was the Church of Jerusalem singular in its constitution but all other Churches of the Apostles planting were of the same kind and design'd for the like and yet farther increase The beginnings of them as of all other things were but small the Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of Mustard Seed which is yet capable of prodigious improvement and the slip when first planted is but single yet afterwards it shoots out several branches which though never so mnumerous and at some distance one from the other yet communicate all in the same same body and root The design of the Gospel is not like those of the Authors of Sects or Religious orders to have only a select company of followers that are much at leisure but great and comprehensive and suited to the whole World There is no Sex no Capacity no condition but is design'd to be brought into the Church and to be digested the most commodiously that may be so that there may be one fold under one Shepherd Christ the Universal Pastor The Schools of the Philosophers and the Synagogues of the Jews were to narrow foundations for such a building as that of the Christian Church which are to be larger in proportion to the greatness of the Fabrick and it is no less the strength than beauty of the whole to have its Stones and Timber the parts of which it consists of something a greater magnitude than those of private and ordinary building nor can it yet stand without there be some kind of coherence and connection at least wise where the people that are members of the Church are likewise united in a political communion this connection ought particularly to be regarded which the Apostles in their first planting of the Gospel had an eye to as shall be observed farther in the course of Diocesan Episcopacy which after this digression I am going to pursue The first Persecution that was raised against the Church of Jerusalem was by the good Providence of God turned into the happy occasion of planting several other Churches and that storm which was designed to quench that fire that came down from Heaven scattered the sparks of it into all the Regions round about Samaria was the first place we read of that entertained the Gospel when it had been forced out of Jerusalem Acts 8.1 v. 4. v. 5 6. v. 12. Philip the Deacon Preached Christ unto them and the people with one accord gave heed to those things that were spoken by him and when
upon the multitudes said to be converted the number of Apostles and extraordinary Labourers commonly residing in this City the conjunction of Jews and Gentiles under the common title and profession of Christianity we must conclude that the Church of Antioch was too great for one Congregation especially before the place of assembly can be imagin'd very capacious and I believe Mr. B. does not imagine such vast Cathedrals as Pauls to be very Primitive Orat de S. Ign. But what ever number of Christians there might be at that time Ignatius his Bishop-rick was never the less Diocesan in its constitution and design or else Chrysostom mistakes one Topick of his commendation He reckons five things that were much to his honour whereof two bring him under suspition of Diocesan Prelacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of his Authority or Government 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greatness of the City whereof he was Bishop The first I suppose refers to his metropolitan Power the second to his peculiar Diocess but if this Bishop were to have but one Congregation what would the greatness of the City signifie how many more would have the same honour with him Or what so great difference is there between a full Congregation in the heart of the City and another as full in Chelsey at leastwise what honour does the greatness of the City do the Minister of that single Congregation And now to pass by the Church of Corinth where St. Paul Preach'd for a Year and six Months upon a Divine assurance of extraordinary success and that God had much people in that place Acts 18.8 9 10 11. and where many effectually believed and were Baptized where Peter and Apollos Preached with that effect as to leave many Disciples 1 Cor. 3. who called themselves by their names And to say nothing of Ephesus where a numerous Church is said to have been gathered by St. Paul who preached there for two years and not only they that dwelled at Ephesus but all that dwelt in Asia Acts 19.10 heard the word of the Lord and the progress of the Gospel was so considerable that the shrine-makers apprehended the ruine of their Trade when they saw and heard that Paul not only at Ephesus but throughout all Asia had perswaded and turned away much people v. 26. To pass by these and several other eminent Churches Let us consider the Diocess of Rome as it was yet in the Apostles time It is very uncertain who laid the first Foundations of this Church though certain it is that before Pauls coming there the Gospel was not only received Rom. 1.13 15 17. seq but their Church was very considerable for St. Paul in his Epistle written long before his coming there as he himself witnesses sayes that their Faith was spoken of through the whole World and by the multitude of salutations in the end of that Epistle he makes appear the numbers of Christians in that City Salute Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16. Ostendit Congregationem Fidelium Ecclesiam nominari Hieron in loe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coetum Fidelium nec mirum est in tam am plâ Civitate distinctos fuisse Fidelium coetus Beza with the Church that is in their house This was one of the Congregations of that Church which is occasionly mentioned and it is not improbable that several that are mentioned with all the Saints that are with them may be the Officers of several Congregations For it appears that most of these were of the Ministry and such by whose means the Romans believed and that they were strangers come thither from other parts where Paul had known them Congregationem vert Eras Istos amats quos satutat intelligimus ex nominiâ—us suiffe peregrinos per quorum exemylum atque Doctrinam non absurde existimamus credidisse Romanes Hieron for as yet he had not seen Rome And this number was afterwards increased considerably by the coming of Paul who converted some of the Jews and afterwards received all that came whether Jews or Gentiles and Preach'd to them the Kingdom of God for the space of two whole years no man forbidding him And the progress of the Gospel in this City may be farther observed from the Persecution of Nero who is said to have put an infinite multitude of them to Death Ingens multitude hand perinde in Crimint ineendii quam odio bumani generis convicti sunt Tac. H. l. 15. upon pretence that they had fired Rome and the Heathen Historian sayes that they who confess'd were first laid hold on then a vast company were convicted by their indication where by the by besides the multitude of the sufferers we may take notice that the words seem to be mistaken generally as if the Christians some of them had confess'd the Fact and accused the rest Lipsius thus understanding the passage gives Tacitus the lye but he does not say they confessed the fact but they confessed without expressing the particulars but what did they confess then If it were this Crime that theâ— own'd themselves and charg'd others with how comes he to add that they were not convicted so much of this Crime by this Indication as by the hatred of all mankind therefore this confession was no more than owning themselves to be Christians and the hatred they were in made this sufficient conviction To these instances of the great numbers of Christians in some more considerable Cities Eccles Hist l. 2. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall add only the general account which Eusebius gives of the success of the Christian faith immediately after the first discovery of it That presently in all Cities and Villages Churches abounding with innumerable multitudes were assembled and the Granary of Christ was fill'd up to the top with the Wheat that was gather'd in Hitherto I have observ'd chiefly the growth of Christianity under the Apostles and that there was in some Cities such a number of Christians as could not meet together in one Assembly for personal Communion in Doctrine and Worship The next thing we must shew in order to Diocesan Episcopacy must be that such numbers of believers made but one Church Govern'd by one Bishop As to the Church of Jerusalem we have shew'd already from the most ancient Ecclesiastical writings that James the Just was Bishop of that Church i. e. of all the Believers in Jerusalem Nor is that Tradition without ground in the Scripture it self for St. Paul reckons James the Lords Brother among the Apostles of that Church Sal. 1.19 though he were none of the Twelve and in another place he mentions him as a person in Eminent place and authority there one that had sent several Brethren to Antioch before that certain Brethren came from James â— 12 Here we find the style of the Scripture to alter in favour of Episcopacy for hitherto the Messengers who were sent from one Church to another were
said to be sent in the name of the Church in General as the Church of Jerusalem sent John and Peter to Samaria Act. 8. In like matter the Church sent Barnabas to Antioch v. 11. But now it seems they come from James and the Acts of the Church pass in the name of the Bishop only although after this we find this Style to vary again and sometimes the Church of such a place sends to another without the mention of the Bishop though the letter be pen'd by the Bishop himself as the inscription of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians does inform us and Iastly as the authority of James appears by sending to the Church of Antioch so it does likewise from his speech in the Council of Jerusalem where he seems to preside and determines the question in dispute Act. 5. in the name of the whole Assembly All this consider'd together with the Testimonies of Hegesippus and Clemens there can be as little doubt that Dâ—ocesan Episcopacy was setled by the Apostles in the Church of Jerusalem as there is of any thing that is not expresly set down in Scripture and it cannot be deni'd without resecting the most Authentick records of Church History It is to be confess'd that the Scriptures have not left so full and perfect account of the constitution and Government of the first Churches as might be wish'd for the Acts of the Apostles the only Scripture History of those time relate mostly the victories of Christian Religion how several Cities were converted By what miracles by what Argument or exhortation but before the Holy Pen-man comes to give an account of the settlement of those new Conquests he carries away the Reader from thence to follow the Apostles to some other place where they begin to lay the Foundations of another Church Thus we have no more notice of the Churches of Samarid and of Judea Jerusalem excepted than that such were founded by the Apostles but of their Government and constitution we are not the least information and the prospect left of Antioch in Scripture is very confus'd as of a Church in fieri where a great number of Eminent persons labour'd together to the building of it up but after what form does not appear but only from Ecclesiastical Writers Eusel l. 3. c. 22. Chronnon Chrysost Orat. de Ignatio who report that this Church when it was setled and digested was committed to the Government of Evodius and after him to Ignetius and the succeeding Bishops Nevertheless we are not left destitute of all light in this particular even from the Scriptures the History of St. Paul as it is deliver'd by St. â—â—ke in the Acts of the Apostles and by himself scatteringly in his own Epistles informing us in some measure of the from of the Primitive Church Government in the Apostles times This Apostle of the Gentiles did commonly use this method informing those Churches he had converted as may be seen by consulting the Citations in the Margin When he came to any place where the Gospel had not been preached and he did not affect much to build upon another was foundation He preached first in the Synâ—gogues of the Jews Rom. 15.20 1 Cor. 3.10 Acts 9.20 13 14. Acts 13.46 and if they rejected the grace of God he turn'd to the Gentiles Assoon as he had converted a competent number he took care to improve them in the knowledge of the truth 1 Cor. 3.2 and for that purpose taught them constantly either at his own house Acts 28.30.19.9.20.20 or at some publick School as that of Tyrannus or any other convenient place where a good number might assemble together These converts as they were made Partakers of the same common Doctrine and Faith so they were to be perpetually united by a Communion in worship in Prayer and the Sacrament for it was not with the School of the Apostles as with those of this World Acts. 11.26 Heb. 10.25 which the Disciples leave when they conceive themselves to have learn'd what they came for But there was an obligation upon all these Scholars to Assemble themselves together Rom. 12.5 1 Cor. 12.13.12.22 Phil. 2.12 till they came to a perfect man which was not consummated till after this life Nor was the Relation between Christians dissolved when the Congregation was dissmiss'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origâ—câ—â—â— â—â—s 1.8 in fine but they were united farther into one Society or Corporation into a holy City under the Government of Christ their King and under Apostles and such other Officers of his and their appointment and so far to act and determine all things within themselves that they were not to appear before any Heathen Magistrate upon any difference but to referr it to the Brethren or to the Apostle under whose direction they were Thus far we may consider a Church without any other Officer than the Apostle who converted them but their numbers increasing in that place and much of his time being taken up in disputing with and preaching to unbelievers and gainsayers or this Apostle being call'd away to preach the Gospel in other places Acts 9.29.17.17.19.8 9. it was necessary to ordain such Church Officers as might take care of this Church in the Doctrine and Discipline of it 6.4 Acts 14.23 Phil. 2.12.20.17 and others to take care of the poor lest that Office taking up much time might be a hinderance to those who were to guide the Assembly in Doctrine and Worship Now this constitution does not take away the relation that was between this Church and the Apostle that founded it and these Officerâ— act in subordination to him whether present or absent and St. Paul therefore looks upon himself as the Apostle or Bishop of the Corinihians though he could not hold personal Communion with them 1 Cor. 5.3 Acts 15.36 for sometimes he goes a Circular visitation to examine the State of those Churches which he had planted or if the distance and oceasions of that Church where he resided or his imprisonment and other outward Circumstances would not admit this personal visitation he sends his letters and orders what is to be done If any open Scandal be permitted he sends his Excommunication to be publish'd in that Church whereof the offender was a member 1 Cor. 5.3 4 5. Cum meo spiritu quipro me erat praesens sive in mearum literarum authoritate Hieroâ— he judges as though he were present he orders that when they are met together in his spirit they would deliver the Criminal to Satan And because some of the Teachers in the Church of Corinth began to set up themselves in opposition to the Apostle taking advantage of his absence 1 Cor. 4.18 19.9.1 2.5.19 and using all means to lessen him in the esteem of that people he is forced to assert his Authority and to justifie his Title to let them know that he was their Father their Apostle and that they
Apostles which were those Bishops he had given a Catalogue of before And Lastly speaking of the Bishops to whom the Apostles committed the government of those Churches they had planted he makes them much ancienter than those Hereticks that disturbed the Church and draws an argument from their Apostolick institution and their constant succession in that office against those that brought in new Doctrines Tertullian makes use of the same Argument Quapropter eis qui in Ecclesia sant Presbyteris obandire oportet his qui successionem habent ab Apostolis sicut oftendimus qui cum Episcopatus successione Charisma veritatis certum acceperunt l. 7. c. 42. and requires of the Hereticks a succession from the Apostles and Origen speaking of Bishops makes them likewise to succeed the Apostles in their office Omnes enim ii valde posterieres quam Episcopi quibus Episcope Ecclesias tradiderunt In short it was the opinion of all the Ancients And Aerius is looked upon by Epiphanius if not as a Heretick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 1. yet at least as an innovator for maintaining an equality between Bishops and Presbyters For if the Bishop were only the first Presbyter and the opinion of the Church was at that time that there was no Original difference between the Orders Haeres 75. Epiphanius could not have observed this as a singularity in Aerius therefore the common opinion then being contrary to this notion they must apprehend Episcopacy to be the Apostolical Order derived from the Apostles by a succession First to those Assistants we have been speaking of and from them to the Succeeding Bishops I shall conclude with the testimony of Theodoret whose judgment and knowledg of Ecclesiastical Antiquity was greater than ordinary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also Clemens is said to be an Apostle by Clemens Alexand. Strom. l. 4. He makes Bishops at first to be called Apostles and Presbyters to be called Bishops and from such Apostles as Epaphroditus who was Bishop of Philippi Bishops are descended according to his opinion but that out of modesty the Succeeding Bishops changed the title of Apostles for that of Bishops and this for some time after was common to them with Presbyters though the offices then were manifestly distinct All this considered I cannot but wonder that the conjecture of St. Jerom concerning the Original of Episcopacy against all the sense of Antiquity and the traditions of particular Churches concerning the Succession of their Bishops gathered by Eusebius should obtain not only among the professed Adversaries of that Order but even among many that retain it therefore for a further Confirmation of what we have said concerning the Original of Bishops I shall indeavour to remove that prejudice which the Authority of Jerom has done it who has advanced a singular notion in this particular which I shall first set down as briefly as I can and afterwards examine the grounds of it St Jerom observing the name of Bishop and Presbyter used in Scripture promiscuously and without distinction concludes Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus antequam Diaboli instinctu studia in Religione fierent communi Presbyterorum Concilio Ecclesiae gubernahantur Postquam vero unisquisque eos quos Baptizaverat suos put a bat esse non Christi in toto Orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus caeteris superponeretur ad quem omnis Ecclesiae cura pertineret Schismatum Semina tollerentur Hieron in Titum c. 1. that the Office was not not then distinct but that Bishop and Presbyter were but two names to signifie the same order but when divisions were occasioned in the Church by this parity between the Presbyters the Churches who were governed before by a Colledg of Presbyters for to remedy that evil consented that one should be chosen out of the rest who should be set over them and be called more peculiarly their Bishop to whom the care of the whole Church should appertain that all the seeds and occasions of Schism might be taken away But that St. Paul and the Ancients make Bishops and Presbyters to signifie the same thing This is in short the opinion of St. Jerom I will in the next place examine the ground of it Apud veteres idem Episcopi Presbyteri erant idem Ep. ad Ocean Cum Apostolus perspicue doctat cosdem esse Presbyteros quos Episcopos id Ep. ad Evagr. It is manifest by the allegations of Jerom in defence of his opinion that it was grounded chiefly upon those places of Scripture where Bishops are called Presbyters or Presbyters Bishops and then from the synonomy of the names concludes to an Identity of the Office and then he adds One may perhaps think this to be my sence and not that of the Scripture Phil. 1.1 let him read the Apostles words to the Philippians his salutation of that Church with the Bishops and Deacons which he confirms by Acts 20.27 28. Heb. 13.17 1 Pet. 5.1 And now suppose all this is granted that Presbyters are called Bishops and they again Presbyters yet I am afraid it will hardly follow that they are the same and some of those texts cited by St. Jerom are sufficient proofs to the contrary for that of Peter The Elders or Presbyters among you who am my self an Elder 1 Pet. 1.5 if the reasoning of St. Jerom hold will prove likewise that Apostles were no more than ordinary Presbyters and if Peter were but a Presbyter we shall be at a great loss to find any Bishops in Scripture that were superior to Presbyters and to the same purpose Jerom cites those texts of St. John The Elder to the elect Lady 2 John 1. 3 John 1. The Elder to his beloved Gaius which plainly overthrows his Argument for if an Apostle were of an office superior to a Presbyter properly so called and yet is called Presbyter in Scripture then Bishops might be of a superior degree to Presbyters though they might some time be so called or if it be replyed that these Presbyters again are called Bishops it does not alter the case at all for so some Messengers of Churches are called Apostles as Andronicus and Junia who were of note among the Apostles Rom. 16. Besides there were several of the Fathers that observed this Synonomy of Bishop and Presbyter as well as Jerom but could not observe the necessity of his inference that therefore there were then no Bishops but Presbyters Chrysost in Ep. ad Phil. c. 1. Chrysostom confesses the titles were confounded but he takes notice likewise that all other Ecclesiastical titles were so as well as these that Bishops were sometimes called Deacons and that Timothy being a Bishop was commanded to fulfil his ministry or his Deaconship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor did he wonder at this at all since in his own time the Bishops when they wrote to Presbyters or Deacons
owned them as Brethren and called them their fellow Presbyters or fellow Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he did not take at all to derogate from the dignity of their Order no more than the modesty of the Apostles calling themselves Presbyters or Deacons could be a prejudice to the Preheminence of their Apostleship which they took care to vindicate when they were forced to it by the ambition of some teachers that entred into competition with them Theodor. ubi supra in Ep. ad Phil. ad Tim. Tit. Theodoret observ'd the same promiscuous use of Bishop and Presbyter but could yet see that there were Bishops then superior to Presbyters and in that time properly called Apostles The Greek Scholiast Theophylact and Oecumenus saw the same but were still of opinion that the Episcopal office was alwayes distinct from the Presbyters so that the ground upon which Jerom built his conjecture was rejected by the current of Ecclesiastical writers who could discern the preheminence of Bishops above Presbyters notwithstanding the names were confounded And yet this is the foundation upon which that conceit doth wholly stand all Jeroms allegations are to this effect all the additional confirmations of Salmasius and Blondel are no other than from the phrase of some of the Ancients who do not alwayes distinguish between Bishops and Presbyters but speak in the phrase of the Scriptures and yet there is nothing more evident than that at that time when these Authors writ Bishops and Presbyters were distinguished and excepting only Clemens Romanus Blondel and Salmasius do both acknowledg it But to return to Jerom Let us considet the account he gives of the Original of Episcopacy something more particularly Before there were factions in Religion the Church was governed by Presbyters of equal Authority But what factions were these that gave birth to Episcopacy What time was that when the Church was under Presbyterian government He informs us in the following words Before it was said I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas If we understand this according to the letter we must conclude this to be very early For this Epistle to the Corinthians where that division is mentioned was written in the year of Christ 52 And then this notion will do little service against Episcopacy for this will make it of Apostolick institution Besides I do not see how it can be true for the Church was now Governed by Apostles and not by Presbyters and if in most Cities there were no particular Bishop ordained yet it was because the Apostles were their Bishops and visited them to establish good order to ordain officers to punish the disorderly as they had opportunity and when they were not able to be present they sent their orders in writing and exercised Episcopal Authority at a distance But Blondel contends earnestly against the literal understanding of that passage and shews that Jerom could not mean this of the Church of Corinth but of some following Schism that sprung up after the example of this of Corinth His reason is that the passages whereby Jerom confirms his opinion of Bishops and Presbyters being the same were written after that Epistle to the Corinthians I have shewed before how probable it is that Jerom spoke without a figure and I need not repeat it here But these things you will say cannot cannot consist It may be so and it is not certain that Jerom when he wrote this passage did consider in what order of time St. Paul's Epistles were written what if it was an oversight for want of stating the Chronelogy of the New Testament If it be replyed that Jerom a man of that great learning and diligence and particular knowledg also in Chronology as we may conclude from his translating of Eusebius his Chronicon could hardly commit such a mistake It is to be considered that according to Blondels computation who makes him to speak of the second Century he will be as inconsistent with himself for suppose w◠should say that Jerom pointed to the year 135 as the precise time when the Presbyterian Government was changed how shall we reconcile Jerom to himself For in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical writers he reckons several Bishops long before that time he makes James to be Bishop of Jerusalem statim post Ascensionem presently after the Ascension of Christ He calls Timothy Bishop of Ephesus he makes Anianus to succeed Mark in Alexandria in the eighth year of Nero. How shall we make all these things to consist did he think James to be no more than a simple Presbyter or Timothy could he fansie him to have no superiority over the Elders he was to ordain or to govern it is not possible or shall we say that in these relations he only transcribes out of others and that he does not speak his own opinion Well suppose this Either he must have some Authority for his opinion greater than that of such Authors he follows in that Book or not if he had none why should we believe him against all Antiquity Nay why should we believe so uncharitably of him as that he would deliver those things he did not believe without the least warning to the reader or that he would believe any matter of fact against all the tradition and History of the Church and yet have no Authority for it Or if he had any Authority from Ecclesiastical writers to ground his opinion upon why are they not produc'd Nay we may be assured in this point that he had none from that Catalogue of writers we are speaking of since he had seen none but what Eusebius had seen before him and cites as we have shewed before for the contrary opinion to confirm Episcopacy to be Apostolical and to have begun long before this time which Blondel would have Jerom thought to assign for its Original So that what way soever Jerom be understood of the Original of Episcopacy he is either manifestly inconsistent with himself or with Scripture and Antiquity But his Scripture Authorities you will say do sufficiently prove that Episcopacy was not yet introduced into the Church Nothing less unless they can prove that those Presbyteries were not governed by the Apostle that established them or by some Assistant or Suffragan or unless they can make out that Timothy Titus and divers others of that rank were no more than simple Presbyters After this time whensoever it was St. Jerom adds It was decreed over all the world that one of the Presbyters who governed before in common should be set over the rest In what Church in the whole world was this Decree Registred Who ever heard of it before St. Jerom What general Council passed it What Authority made it Authentick Or by what means did all the Churches in the World agree to this change What was there no opposition made against this alteration of the Apostolical Government What did all the little Ecclesiastick Aristocracies submit without dispute to this innovation We
titles are mentioned Besides the mentioning but these two sorts of Church Officers may be done only according to the distinction of the several imployments in the Church some being Ministerial others Governing though the latter may have a difference in the measure of their power in the administration of the same Government An evident instance of this we have in Clemens of Alexandria who notwithstanding he distribute the Clergy sometimes into Presbyters and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. strom l. 6. p. 283. Ed. Silburgii in 1 Tim. 1. as the Governing or Teaching and the Ministring Parts yet he does elsewhere acknowledg three Orders where he comes to speak more distinctly To the same effect are the words of the Greek Scholia collected out of the ancient Fathers that Bishops sometime in Scripture comprehend Presbyters too Because their offices are much alike 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sch. Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in 1 ad Tim. c. 3. Secundum Presbyterorum immo paene unum corum esse gradum Episcoperum they both administer the Sacraments they both teach and guide the Church and exercise discipline and the difference between them is not very great and what is that since they are both qualified for the same Acts Besides Ordination there iâ— hardly any thing but that they act in subordination to the Bishops in whom the principal Authority of Teaching and governing is placed and the Presbyters are the Assistants and supreâ—â— Council of the Bishop and both making as it were one Bench the directive governing part of the Church Salmasius would understand Chrysostom when he sayes the distance between Bishops and Presbyters was not great to speak of his own time only which is so impudent a construction that one would wonder how any man could be guilty of it since every one that has the curiosity to consult the place will discern the imposture and there is none of the Ancients that does more expresly distinguish between Bishops and Presbyters from the beginning than this eloquent Father and nothing can be more plain than that he speaks there of the constitution of Episcopacy and Presbytery without any regard to time for it is evident from him that he thought there was no difference in this particular between these orders of the Church in his time and that of the Apostles as any man may see that will but look into his comments upon Phil. 1.1 1 Tim. c. 1 Tom. 4. Ed. Savil. and c. 3. There are several other passages in that Epistle of Clemens that make mention of Presbyters appointed by the Apostles to guide the Church of the Presbyters of the Church of Corinth who were turned out by a faction but nothing that affords any argument against Episcopacy but such as the same answer may be extended to which I have given already to the allegations made from thence But to clear this business of the Church of Corinth as far as possible I will shew the state of it as it may be gathered from this Epistle and then take liberty to offer a conjecture concerning the form of its Government at that time and the occasion of the Schism The Church of Corinth in the first place is said here to be an Ancient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sound Church that for a long while had enjoyed all the benefits of peace and order and was had in great esteem and veneration of all those that knew it until at last having eat and drank and being enlarged and growing fat it lifted up the heel From this prosperity sprung all the evils of emulation and discord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaner sort setting themselves up against the better and silly men growing conceited and pragmatical set themselves against men of wisdom and experience But because in all the insolencies of the people against their Rulers there are commonly some persons of note that first animate the sedition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was no otherwise here a few ambitious discontented men and they too not very extraordinary Persons for knowledg or endowments instigated the common people against their Governours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having popular parts they knew how to insinuate themselves into the multitude and to manage the credulity and passions of the people to their own advantage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and prejudice of the publick Therefore Clemens aggravates this sedition by comparing it with that mentioned by St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they cryed some for him some for Cephas some for Apollos for they were two of them great Apostles and the other one highly esteemed by the Church But now sayes he consider by what manner of men you are perverted And now what could give occasion to all this disorder What would these troublesome men have this is not expresly set down but such hints are scattered as are sufficient to ground a probable conjecture 1. They are said to be great Zealots about things not material or requisite to salvation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hot disputants about such matters 2. They were such as magnified the power of the people and perswaded them that they had a right to turn out their Pastors therefore Clemens shews what course Moses took to establish the Priesthood and how the Apostles foreseeing there would be contentions about the name and office of a Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appointed chosen men which the people cannot with any justice turn out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. These men were ambitious disobedient despisers of their superiors and yet such as would bear rule themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and lift themselves up above their brethren and their discontents arising from the ill success or opposition their ambitious pretensions met with were probably the occasion of this Schism and therefore Clemens advises them to be content with their statition and chuse rather to be inconsiderable in the Church than to be never so great out of it than to be the heads and Bishops of a Faction From which Circumstances one may conjecture 1. That the Church of Corinth at this time had no Bishop the See being vacant by the death of the last or otherwise 2. That this sedition was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a contention about this Bishoprick 3. That the Clergy and people were divided about it the people setting up some they had a favour for whom the Clergy did not approve and when they could not be prevail'd with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the people persisting in their kindness towards these persons broke out into extremities and turned out part of the Clergy that would not comply with their choice Which is yet further confirmed from the directions which Clemens gives upon this account that these men would go regularly to compass their design by just means that they would enter in at the right gate and
go to the Confessours in Prison by turns to Administer the Communion to them that the changing of the Persons and the seeing of new faces daily may render it less envied or observed Besides when four of his Presbyters and those probably living at some distance from Carthage had writ to him about something relating to the Church he tells his Clergy that he was resolved from the time he was made Bishop Ad id vero quod scripserunt mihi Compresbyteri nostri Donatus Fortunatus Gordias Novatus solus rescribere nihil potui quando à primordio Episcopatus mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro sine consensu plebis meae privatae sententia gerere sed cum ad vos venere in commune tractabimus Ep. 6. Decipientes quosdam fratres ex plebe nostra Ep. 28. to determine nothing without advising with his Clergy which intimates that they were not of the Clergy residing at Carthage for it is not likely that four persons would pretend to write to their Bishop about any publick concern of the Church without consulting their Brethren if they lived together with them and met daily at the same Altar and Cyprian's speaking of them with this strangeness makes it improbable that they were among this Clergy to whom he wrote concerning them Besides we have express mention of one Country Presbyter and Deacon belonging to the Diocess of Carthage Gaius Diddensis Presbyter who from several passages of that Epistle appears to have been near the City and under its jurisdiction and it is not improbable that this is one of those Presbyters Cyprian complains of in another place for their presumption in receiving the lapsed into communion Quorundam immoderata praesumptio plebis universae tranquillitatem turbare conetur aliqui de Presbyteris nec sibi praepositum Episcopum cogitantes quod nunquam omnino sub Antecessoribus nostris factum est cum contumelia contemptu Prapositi totum sibi vendicent Interim prohibeantur offerre acturi apud nos apud confessores ipsos apud universam plebem causam suam Ep. 10. without consulting their Bishop or the Clergy and the nature of their fault makes it evident that there were several Congregations now in Carthage for this could never have been done by a few in the Episcopal Church in the presence of all the Presbytery it is not probable they would have indured it or if they had then they had been all in equal fault which Cyprian does by no means lay to their charge but layes it upon a few and orders they should be suspended from their office by the rest of the Presbyters and their cause reserved to be tryed before him and the whole Church at his return Beside this the Charity of the Diocess of Carthage towards the redemption of the Numidian Captives was so considerable that it cannot be supposed to be gathered in one oâ— a few Congregations Misimus autem Sestertia centum millia nummum quae istic in Ecclesia cui de Domini indulgentia praesuâ—us cleri plebis apud nos consistentis collatione collecta sunt And if the like should happen again he makes no doubt but his Diocess will relieve them libenter largiter Subsidia praestare ad hoc opus tam necessarium Fratres Sorores prompte libenter operati sunt Ep. 60. LL. S. centum millia LL. centum as Pamelius corrects it though without the Authority of any MS S. Potest inter caeteros qui alimentis Ecclesia sustinentur hujus Histrionis necessitas adjuvari Si illic Ecclesia non sufficit ut laborantibus prâ—stet alimenta poterit se ad nos transferre hic quod sibi ad victum vestitum necessarium fuerit accipere especially when we consider that Cyprian when he sends it to the Bishops of Numidia with a Letter and particulars does not take notice of it as any extraordinary matter and all the observation he makes of the Contributions of his flock is that they were done prompte libenter readily and willingly and he promises that they will be as ready upon any such occasion 2. The Ordinary charge of that Church was so great for the support of the Bishop Presbyters and a very numerous Clergy besides poor who were plentifully relieved and especially in dangerous times besides the maintenance of such as when they became Christians were obliged to quit their former callings as inconsistent with that holy profession and the extraordinary charge of Messengers that passed perpetually between them and other Churches This ordinary charge was so great that the summ collected in this Diocess for the redemption of those Câ—ptives at the lowest computation must suppose a considerable Diocess to furnish it especially so soon after a terrible persecution as that which this is supposed to follow Lastly the Diocess of Carthage is not extraordinary in all these circumstances but the rest of Africk were some of them distributed into several Parishes For Caldonius an African Bishop makes mention of one Felix Faelix qui Presbyterium subministrabat sub Decimo proximus mihi vicinus plenius câ—gnevi â—â—ndem Cum ergo universi pacem preterent quamvis mihi videaâ—tur debere pacem accipere tamen ad consultum vestrum â—â—s dimisi â—e videar aliquid temere praesumere Caldon Ep. ad Cypr. 19. who did the office of a Presbyter under one Decimus another Presbyter of Caldoniuâ—'s Diocess as will appear from some passages of that Epistle though Goulartius be of opinion this Decimus was a Bishop and Felix his Presbyter But Pamelius his conjecture is much better grounded who makes him the Vicar or Curate of Decimus For 1. If he and his wife Victoria had belonged to another Bishop why do they make their Application to Caldonius to reconcile them to the Church Why do not they go to their own Bishop Decimus or if he were dead and no other yet ordained in his place Why not to the Presbytery there who ought to have reconciled them and in a vacance took care of Ecclesiastical Discipline as the Clergy of Rome declare that at such a time they are to take care of the Church Cum nobis incumbat Ap. Cypr. ep 3. qui praepositi esse videmur vice Pastoris custodire gregem But their making their application to Caldonius makes it clear that he was their Diocesan that the Cure in which Felix officiated was in his Diocess 2. Caldonius his remitting them to Cyprian as the first Bishop makes it probable that he was their Ordinary for what else had he to do to meddle with or remit the cognizance of any persons belonging to another Church to any other than their own Clergy and let them remit them to the Primate if they judged the case difficult Therefore it is much more probable that Caldonius was the Bishop of the Suppliants and that the Priest mentioned exercised his charge in some Village or Town in
in order to establish a general consent about communicating with Cornelius which was to be done in a full Council of all the Provinces the same that we have set down here from the Libellus Synodicus Another African Council whose Epistle to Fidus about the Baptism of Infants is still extant Ap. Cypr. Ep. 59. Aug. â—â—â—tr duâ—â— Ep. â—th l. 4. c. â— had sixty six Bishops as St. Augustine reports and names the number as extraordinary to add greater Authority to their Testimony That concerning Basilides and Martialis had but a very small number and the first about the validity of Baptism by a Heretick had no great number as we may conclude from the Inscription of it which shews that the Bishops of Numidia were not there and that it consisted only of the Province of Africa properly so called Cyp. Ep. 68.70 Ep. ad Januarium caeteros Episcopos Numidas And Cyprian though he mentions this Council in several places yet he sayes nothing of the number nay though he mentions it in the very same period with that which followed upon the same account yet he does not say any thing of the multitude of Bishops there but expresses that of the other because he thought it remarkable considering the number of Bishops at that time when we had met together the Bishops of Africa and Numidia seventy one in number Quid in Concilio cum complures adessemus decreverimus Et nunc quoque cum in unum convenissemus tam Provinciae Africae quam Numidiae Episcopi septuaginta unus Ep. 73. And this Council as if it had not been full enough is confirmed by another of greater extent and number Cum in unum convenissent Episcopi plurimi ex Provincia Africa Numidia Mauritania Sententiae 87. Episâ—c ap Cypr. T. 2. c. 15 consisting of eighty seven Bishops assembled out of the Provinces of Africa Numidia Mauritania and of these eighty seven two left their suffrages with Proxies and this is the most numerous of all the Councils in Cyprians time and the last of that Country we have any account of in that age This was the state of the Church of Africk and the number of their Bishops which if we compare with the vast increase of Christians there described by Tertullian and the Accession we may probably conceive to have been made after by the care and ministry of those good Bishops that governed that Church we must conclude the African Dioceses to be very large and to contain each of them not only a very great number of Believers but those also dispersed throughout a great extent of Country But it may be objected that all the Bishops of Africk might not meet in these Councils and therefore there is no computation to be made of their number from this observation To which I answer first that it is possible every individual Bishop might not be present yet the greatest part was and none was to absent himself without absolute necessity as of sickness or the like and the number of such would be inconsiderable And the Canons of that Church are very strict in this point in after times Codex Canon Afric c. 53. vid. Conc. Carth. 3. c. 43. and give strange incouragements to such as have otherwise but ill titles to their Bishopricks to hold them to the prejudice of him who has the juster title if the one frequent their Councils and the other neglect them On the otherside neglect of duty in this particular is made liable to deprivation Carth. 4. c. 21. Episcopus ad Synodum irâ— non sine satis gravi necessitate inhibâ—atur fic tamen ut in sua persona â—egatum mittat 2. In Cyprians time when the African Bishops had no dependance one upon another and no subordination to Metropolitans and the Decrees of their Synods did and could oblige only such as were present and consented to them it was necessary that all should come together or send their Proxy in order to establish that Unity among them which was the design of these Councils and yet all the number even of their most solemn Councils is not great 3. The practice of the African Church within half an à ge after this time confirms this inference from the number of the Bishops at Councils to the number of Dioceses in that Country for we find presently as Bishopricks were multiplyed by the Schism of the Donatists so Councils became much more numerous and whereas ninety was the greatest number that ever met there before this Schism afterwards we find several hundreds But however this inference will hold it is some comfort to find some others of great knowledge and judgement in antiquity to hold the conclusion that the number of Bishopricks was not great in Cyprians time which is assigned as a reason why his Province was so large Aucto numero sedium Episcopalium adeo ut omnibus invigilare haud facile esset Carthagâ—nensi Episcâ—po Carol. à S. Paulo Geogr. sacr p. 84. But to make this point clear beyond all exception I will indeavour to shew from unquestionable testimonies how Bishopricks came to be multiplyed in Africk more than in any other part and then notwithstanding this I will make it evident that those Bishops were Diocesans and some of them after the crumbling of that Church into small pieces had yet very large Dioceses not inferiour to most of ours for extent of Territory The Schism of the Donatists though it broke not forth with any violence till after Caecilianus was made Bishop of Carthage yet it was hatching long before in the time of Mensurius Aug. Ep. 163. when the faction was kept up under hand and had its Agents in several places But being grown ripe it took occasion from the promotion of Caecilianus to declare it self Secundus Tisnigensis being called to Carthage with his Numidian Bishops to set up another He came accordingly with about seventy Bishops all the strength he could make and perhaps more than his own Province could afford him These declare they would not communicate with Caecilianus and therefore set up Majorinus against him and in like manner where ever they could make the least party imaginable they appointed a Schismatical Bishop and not content to equal the number of the Catholicks they divided the ancient Dioceses and erected several new Episcopal seats that by the number of their Bishops at least they might appear to be Catholicks as they afterwards laid claim to the title upon that account It was not long after this breach Aug. Ep. 48. but we hear of unusual numbers of Bishops met in Council and one of the Donatists of Carthage according to Tychonius his relation vid. Valesii Dissert de Schism Donat had no less than two hundred and seventy Bishops which if it be true shews this change to have been very sudden though it cannot be so soon as Balduinus and out of him Baronius would understand it to be but of this I have
said enough before Some time after when they quarrelled among themselves they called a Council of three hundred and ten Bagatense against Maximianus The Catholicks observing what advantage this reputation of having a great number of Bishops gave their adversaries Conc. Carth. 2. c. 5. Codex integ can Eccles Afr. c. 53.98 thought it necessary to make use of the same course themselves and to make as many Bishops as they could therefore they order that where part of a large Diocess should be willing to have a Bishop of its own if the Bishop under whom they were should consent a new Bishoprick might be erected But it was commonly at the cost of the Schismaticks that they multiplyed Dioceses for where there were two Bishops in a Diocess the one a Catholick and the other a Donatist and the Donatists would return to the unity of the Church Codex Can. 118. the Diocess was to be equally divided between them and that with so much exactness that if the number of the Towns happened to be odd the odd Town was adjudged who it should belong to nor was this all but where the Donatists had driven out or perverted all the Catholicks there they set up a Bishop as soon as ever they had any party and sometimes in the same Donatist Diocess there were three or four Catholick Bishops This is made out so clearly in the conference at Carthage that I need only cite some passages out of it and leave them to the Reader without farther inference or application Petilianus Episcopus dixit sapientissimè ac praescie ommá pravidisti vir nobilis Collatlo Carthag Cogn Primae gesta 65. nam in Plebe mea i.e. in Civitate Constantmensi adversarium habeo Fortunatum in medio autem Dioecesis meae nunc institutum habeo imo ipsi habent Delphinum pervidet jam hinc prastantiatua duos in unius plebe fuisse imaginarie constitutos ut numerum augeant tamen plebium numerus non sit qui sit illarum scilicet Personarum hoc Argumenti est maximi ut videantur nos hoc genere superare si duâ— contra unum constituti sunt vel tres Nam etÃam in plebe praesentis sanctissimi Collegae ac fratris mei Adeodati i. e. in Civitate Milevitana ita commissa res est ut unum ibidem habeat Adversarium alterum in Tuncensi Civitate qui ad hujus scilicet plebem antiquitus pertinet ante biennium esse videtur constitutus Tertius vero sit in loco qui dicitur Ceramussa Ergo cum unus sit Civitatis Milevitanae Episcopus à partibus nostris tres videntur ab his constituti fuisse ut illorum numerus augeretur aut fortasse excederet numerum veritatis Requirendum est igitur quando auctus est illorum numerus quam Originem haâ—â—eâ—it utrumhoc novitas fecerit an dederit Antiquitas utrum ut ita dixerim contra vetustatem canam vitium hâ—câ— fuerit novitatis Petilianus Donatist Bishop of Constantina said Noble Sir you have wisely foreseen all things for in my Diocess i. e. in the City of Constantina I have Fortunatus an opposite Bishop and in the middle of my Diocess I have nay they have Delphinus another Bishop Your excellence may perceive by this how they have set up two imaginary Bishops in the Diocess of one to increase their number and yet the number of Dioceses will not be so great as that of their Bishops and this is a great argument that they would seem to out do us in this kind if they do but set up two or three against ones for in the Diocess of my worthy câ—llegue Adeodatâ—s who is here pesent i. e. in the City of Milevis the matter is so ordered that he has one Anti Bishop there in the City another in the City of Tunca which has belonged of old to his Diocess and it is not above two years since he is set up there a third is in a place called Ceramussa Therefore whereas there is but one Bishop of Milâ—â—is of our party they have three that they may increase their number and perhaps exceed the number of the truth or of the True Church we ought therefore to ask them when their number increased thus what was the Original of it Whether this be an innovation or Reverend Antiquity or rather whether this novelty has not been irregularly introduced against reverend Antiquity And what Answer is there to all this No other than that it was impertinent it was nothing to the business of the conference which was to dispute the cause of the Church whether it were to be found among the Catholicks or only amongst the Donatists Fortunatianus Episcopus Ecclesia Catholica dixit Multiloquio Ecclesia causam agi non debere perspicit mecum tua dignationis sensus Cognitorum optime Fortunatianus Bishop of the Catholick Church said Best of Jndges you perceive as well as I that the cause of the Church ought not to be maintained by much impertinent talk Therefore the Catholicks could not deny the matter of fact but despised the argument and perhaps looked upon it as a credit to their cause to be so watchful and industrious in it and since Schism would needs divide the Church they thought it allowable to return them the same measure and devide Schism too by parcelling their Dioceses between several Catholick Bishops And that we may not think this instance singulaâ— Col. Carth. Cogn 1.117 I will proceed to cite some more passages to the same effect Petilianus Episcopâ—s dixit in una Plebâ— Janâ—â—riâ— Collegae nostuâ— praeferâ—is in una dicâ—cosi quâ—â—icor sunt constuenti contra ipsâ—â—n 〈◊〉 numerâ—â— stilicet augeretur Petilianus said In the single Diocess of my Brother Januarius there are no less than four Bishops set up against him that their number may be increased To this and some other little reffections the Answer of Marcellinus the President was Hac ad praesentem non pertinent actionem These things are not to the purpose And these checks were the cause why we have not many more particulars of the divisions of Dioceses in Africk yet for all this some could not forbear making their complaints when it came to their turn to speak Verissimus Episcopus dixit Agnosco illum Coll. Carth. Cog. 1.121 quatuor sunt in plebe mea Datianus Aspidius Fortunatus Octavianâ—s Verissimus said I know him for before the Conference the subscriptions were to be examined and the Donatist Bishops were to confront the Catholicks i. e. the Bishop of each City his opposite Bishop there there are four Bishops in my Diocess and names them Now that we may not think this way was taken up by the Catholicks only to increase their party In ipsa antem Ecclesia Mustitana apparuit ipsos Episcopâ—â— alium antiqua Cachedrae addidisse bot in allis locis se fuisse poâ—â—â—â— doclaratâ—m 25. Breâ— Col. they when it comes to their
But a Synod held at Rome about the same subject had but fourteen Bishops and several other Synods about this Controversy had not many more That of Jerusalem under Narcissus had but fourteen Papa Victor direxit Authoritatem not the language of that time Praecepta it aque authoritate praedictus Episcopus nonsolum de sua Provincia sed de diversis Regionibus omnes Episcopos evocavit And the famous Council under Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea had but twelve besides him Eusebius makes but one of both these Bede represents it as an extraordinary great Assembly for the Preface to it I conceive to be his he makes him to assemble not only the Bishops of his own Province but from several other parts The Council of Lyons under Irenaeus made up but fourteen That of Corinth under Bachillus eighteen That under Pasna or Palma the same number That of Osroena eighteen but the President of it is not known That of Mesapotamia which follows had the same number and it may be was the same Synod as that of Rome which follows is it may be the same with that which is mentioned before to have had the like number and the occasion of such mistakes as these is that when men find a Synod cited upon several accounts although it might be the same meeting that determined several things they are apt to conclude they were several Synods However it is plain from hence that there were but few Bishops in comparison of what they grew to within an hundred years after and that I take to be an argument of the largeness of their Dioceses But you will say there were but few Christians in these Parts The countrary is notorious to all the Word for these parts where most of these Councils were held were the best planted and furnished with Christians of any in the World But it may be there were but few in the world at this time It is not long after this that Tertullian wrote his Apology and what number of Christians there were then we have shewed already How then can this be imagined for every City if it have a Church must have a Bishop there is no absolute necessity of that that it should have its peculiar Bishop for we have seen already one Bishop as that of Milevis had more Cities than one in his Diocess and it had been so from ancient time or rather from the beginning antiquitus pertinuit And in this time we are now speaking of it is likely the Apostolick constitution of Bishopricks which in the beginning as Rabanus Maurus observed were very large did hold and it was the best suited to the infancy of the Church when one general visit our should take care of several Churches scattered as yet and incoherent and because a persecution might overthrow these little beginnings it was necessary there should be one whose office it should be to cultivate these new Plantations and where they were rooted up to set anew and to confirm those that were shaken with a competent district But when Christians multiplyed every where and most Cities had such numbers belonging to them as must be distributed into several Congregations the Diocess of the first constitution became too great and every City with some of the Territory belonging to it became a Diocess and had its proper Bishop And this seems to be most agreeable both to the Scripture History of the Church which we have made a deduction of before and to the progress of the Church in succeeding ages and particularly to the numbers of Bishops which are found in the first Synods But to proceed The Synod at Rome under Victor wherein Novatus was condemned was much more numerous than any mentioned before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb Hist l. 6. c. 43. and consisted of sixty Bishops besides Priests and Deacons and Eusebius speaking of this observes the number to be very extraordinary consisidering the circumstances of those times and the numbers assembled in foregoing Synods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Libellus Synodicus reckons but eighteen which it may be was a small Synod previous to this greater one mentioned by Eusebius The Eastern Synods about Rebaptizing Hereticks were reckoned as for those times very numerous Euseb l. 7. c 5. Plurimi tractavimus Firmil Ep. ad Cypr. contra Crescon l. 3. c. 3. and yet that of Iconium the greatest of those of the East consisted of but fifty Bishops and these met together out of several Countries as Galatia Cappadocia Cilicia and other neighbouring Provinces St. Augustin despises the smalness of their numbers though Dionysius confesses these were mighty Synods in his time or rather before his time for they seem to be earlier than Baronius places them But what were these against so many thousand Bishops as were in the world then sayes Augustin I believe it would have been a very hard matter to have found so many thousand Bishops at that time I am sure the Acts of the Church discover no such multitudes of them and they must be very negligent if they should be so many and yet suffer things to be carried any way in Councils by a very few persons that Father judged of former ages by his own when Dioceses were exceedingly multipyed even to be the grievance and complaint of the African Church But Baronius goes to mend the matter by telling us that this opinion could find but fifty to countenance it among all the Bishops of the East One would imagine by this that the Councils of Iconium and Synadae An. Ch. 258 were but a small number of Bishops protesting against the general suffrage of their neighbour Bishops But if this were true Stephen Bishop of Rome had acted very extravagantly and upon ill information when upon the account of those publick resolutions taken by fifty Bishops he goes to excommunicate all the Bishops of Cilicia Galatia Euseb l. 7. c. 5. Cappadocia and the bordering Nations What number of Bishops France had at this time appears from the Council Vita 5. Pauli ap Bosquet Hist Eccl. Gal. par 2. where Paul Bishop of Narbonne was accused of in continence Evocatis paucis Episcopis Galliae quia nondum erant plures having called a few Bishops together for at that time Gallia had not many Nor do we find that Dioceses were much multiplyed in Spain as yet the famous Council of Illiberis which decreed so many things relating to Communion and such as all the Churches there must be supposed to consent to had but nineteen Bishops a number so small that Baronius takes occasion from hence to despise the Authority of the Assembly But what ever may be inferred from the smalness of their number surely one must infer that their Dioceses were Divided into Parishes from Canon seventy seven Siquis Dia conus regens plebem sine Episcopo vel Presbytero aliquns baptizaverit c. Conc. Illib c. 77. Hic regere posse plebem Diaconum hoc
or Deacons that were ordained in their Dioceses without their consent and that by simple Presbyters who were never Chorepiscopi or had any character to distinguish them from other Presbyters Therefore the case ought not to be reckoned so hard as it is commonly represented by the more moderate Nonconformists who pretend this point of Reordination the only bar that keeps them out of the Church since there was never any other Church not any in Ancient times would have received them upon any other terms and they must have remained Nonconformists under Basil Athanasius and all the ancient Bishops whose names are and alwayes have been had in veneration with all Christians not one of these would have ever been perswaded to own a Pastor that his Presbyters had ordained in opposition to him nay hardly could they have been prevailed with to admit such as any other Bishop should Ordain within their Diocess so extream punctilious they were in this matter and there is hardly any one thing that caused so frequent and dangerous contentions between them as the point of Ordination Nor was this Province singular in the extent of its Bishopricks or the manner of their Administration but all the parts of the Christian World went by the same Rule as to Diocesan Episcopacy and most of them had much larger Dioceses than these we have been speaking of The Frontier Provinces of the Empire towards the East being more remote from the contentions that afflicted the Church were not cantoned into so small Dioceses as other Countries and being likewise less divided in their Civil Condition because it might render them less defensible against Invasion the Ecclesiastical Dioceses likewise remained intire in the the measure of their first Constitution The Diocess of Edessa seems to be of extraordinary extent Conc. Chal. Act. 10. even at the time of the Council of Chalcedon when the ambition of some Metropolitans and the contentions of Hereticks and Schismaticks had reduced Bishopricks to be very small For 1. some of the misdemeanors charged upon Ibas Bishop of this place shew that Diocess to be extreamly rich 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Collection for redemption of Captives amounted to fifteen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and tho' it is not easy to reduce that summ to our money yet we must conclude it to be a considerable sum when we reflect upon another accusation of Daniel Brother to Ibas as if he had bestowed on Calloa the money of the Church for she had let out to use two or three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which must be a considerable summ since it 's taken notice of as an argument of her wealth Besides the Church of Edessa had six thousand more of these Numismata besides its ordinary Revenues and one of its Mannors called Lafargaritha is mentioned there and two hundred pound weight of Church Plate 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The City of Battina was in the Diocess of Edessa for Ibas is accused of having endeavoured to make one John Bishop of it who was suspected of Magick But Ibas his Arch-Deacon of that place opposed it 3. Maras who was one of Ibas his accusers was Excommunicated by another Arch-Deacon of his 4. The Clergy of the City of Edessa was above two hundred persons not reckoning that of the Country within his Diocess and this was a Diocesan Bishop to purpose who besides a large Diocess had Excommunicating Arch-Deacons and a great Revenue And if Mr. B. or his Brethren had been of that Diocess we might have found them among his accusers The Diocess of Cyrus whereof Theodoret was Bishop was yet larger Theodor. Ep. 113. containing eight hundred Churches as he writes to Leo Bishop of Rome The exceptions which Mr. B. makes against this Epistle are so fully answered by the incomparable Dean of Pauls that nothing can be added But if Mr. B. should quarrel with any writings of this time for mentioning great Dioceses we must have a new Critick and disgrace a great deal of the Fathers that have hitherto been received by a general consent It is a very hard matter to convince men that imagine all that time for them whereof we have little or no account and reckon silence of Antiquity for consent and then if any thing shall appear against what they have once fanfi'd though it be never of so good credit it is spurious it is all Imposture because it makes against them who would ever be convicted if it shall be Defence enough to say the Evidence is a Lye Petavius mistaking a passage in Epiphanius Not. in Epiph Haeres Arr. Epiph. Ep. ad Joh. Hieros ap Hieron thought the Dioceses of Cyprus to be very small but from Epiphanius his Letter to John Bishop of Jerusalem it appears that his Diocess was of good extent John had a quarrel with him for having Ordained a Presbyter in his Diocess though it was only for the use of a Monastery and he excuses himself by shewing how common a thing this was and how frequently it was done in his own Diocess and he was so far from taking offence at it that he thought himself obliged to some of his neighbouring Bishops for using that liberty and therefore commends the good nature and meekness of the Cyprian Bishops who never quarrelled with one another upon this account and then adds That many Bishops of our Communion have Ordained Presbyters in our Province that we could not take because they fled from us on purpose to avoid that honour which was the modesty of those times Nay I my self desired Philo of blessed memory and Theophorbus that they would Ordain Presbyters in those Churches of Cyprus which were near them O vere benedicta Episcoporum Cypri mansuetudo bonitas multi Episcopi communionis nostrae Presbyteros in nostra ordinaverunt Provincia quos nos comprehendere non poteramus ipse cohortatus slim b. m. Philonem sanctum Theophorbum ut in Ecclesiis Cypri quae juxta se grant ad meae autem Parochiae videbantur Ecclesiam pertinere to quod grandis esset late patens Provincia ordinarent Presbyteros and belonged to my Diocess because my Province i.e. my Docess was very large Now that this Province which is here said to be of so large extent was no other than his Diocess appears from the nature of the thing For if we shall imagine that it was his Province as Metropolitan the words will have no sense for then are not there Bishops enough dispersed through this great Province who may Ordain within their respecture Dioceses and to them belonged the Ordination of Presbyters and not to the Metropolitan If we shall take this Province for a Civil division there will be yet greater absurdity for there may be other Metropolitans as well as he and by what Authority could he dispose of their Dioceses or Provinces In short there he gives leave to Ordain Presbyters where the right of Ordaining them belonged to
Conc. Carth. 3. Can. 42. Codex Int. Eccles Affr. c. 53. Conc. Affr. c. 20. That since upon this occasion many ambitious Priests did seduce some Congregations to desire them for their Bishops for this very Reason Propter malos eorum cogitatus pravè concinnata Concilia hoc dico non debere rectorem accipere eam plebem quae in Dioecesi semper subjacuit Integ Cod. Can. 98. Conc. Affr. 65. nec unquam proprium Episcopum habuit This is made yet more difficult by other Canons that require that no People that have before had Bishops should have any but by the Approbation of a full Provincial Council with the Consent of the Primate and the Bishop of the Diocese He mentions several other Council of Carthage some whereof Ch. Hist p. 74. are Collections of Canons which Binnius mistook for particular Councils but there is little that he cites out of them that favours either his Model of Episcopacy or his design to disgrace Bishops some however I am oblig'd to take notice of as first That the Bishop's Cottage should not be far from the Church the Word is Hospitiolum not quite so poor as a Cottage for it was to be the Refuge of the Poor and the Inn of Strangers and a place fit for Hospitality but it is not hard to guess why this is particularly noted in the Margin for it may be that he may have a great Passion to have this Canon executed Envy is a Passion may slay the silly one but it is much more comfortable to be the Object of his Envy than Contempt There are others that order the Bishops to regard the Presbyters as his Brethren and they are much to blame that do not but there are others innumerable that command the Presbyters to observe their Bishops as their Governours as their Fathers as the Vicegerents of Christ 52. is something odd and shews the Poverty of the African Church that a Clerk or Clergy-man how learned soever in God's Word must get his Living by a Trade this is contrary to the usage of all other Churches even in their lowest times and to the third Council of Carthage Can. 15. which forbids it Item placuit ut Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vel Clerici non sint conductores neque procuratores neque ullo turpi vel in honesto negotio victum quaerant quia respicere debeant scriptum esse nemo militans Deo implicat se negotiis saecularibus This same Canon in some ancient Books runs thus Ut Episcopi Presbyteri Diacones non sint conductores aut Procuratores privatorum neque ullo negotio tali victum quaerant quo eos peregrinari vel ab Ecclesiasticis officiis avocari necesse sit And that we may not judge that this Canon only forbids them dishonest ways of Living which might be understood by Turpe inhonestum the Greek Translation does explain it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from any way that is mean or dishonourable but of this more than enough The Story of Theophilus § 73. p. 75. the great Patriarch of Alexandria comes next whom the succeeding Ages of the Church honour'd as a Saint but Mr. B. is in a strait whether he shall believe him to be a downright Knave or credible nay most credible Socrates and others gross Lyars p. 77. Yet there is no necessity of either for these Historians might be impos'd upon by false Reports and the Monks that were the Authors of them were it may be downright Knaves I must crave the Reader 's patience whilst I endeavour to relieve the Memory of this Great man from the Imputation of Knavery which Socrates and Sozomen Palladius and some others fasten upon it and with them Mr. B. who sets up their Evidence and Authority Sozomen having written this Story most particularly I will Translate those two Chapters out of him that contain the Accusation of Theophilus and add out of Socrates what the other has omitted The Story is thus At that time there was a Question disputed in Egypt Soz. l. 8.11 which had been started not long before Whether God ought to be conceived under a Humane shape Most of the Monks understanding those Places of Scripture which ascribe to God Eyes and Face and Hands grosly and literally fancy'd him as a man others who could penetrate farther into the meaning of those figurative Expressions were of the contrary Opinion and judg'd the other Party to speak blasphemously and unworthy of God Theophilus taught publickly in the Church that this Opinion of the Anthropomorphites ought by no means to be embrac'd and in his Paschal Epistle which he writ as his Custom was every year he declar'd That God ought to be conceiv'd Incorporeal and void of Humane shape The Egyptian Monks understanding this came to Alexandria and having got together made an uproar and would have murder'd the Bishop He comes out to them and endeavours to appease the Tumult by saying I see you as the Face of God This saying did a little asswage the Tumult and the Monks having abated something of their rage reply'd If thou think'st as thou speakest condemn Origen's Books that teach men to think otherwise of God This reply'd Theophilus I intended to do long ago and most willingly comply with you in for I dislike Origen's Opinions no less than you And having thus cajol'd those Monks he appeas'd the Tumult There is no downright Knavery in all this for those words Gen. 33.10 I see you as the Face of God are the words of Jacob to his Brother Esau and his condemning of Origen though not for that which these giddy-headed Monks fancy'd was nevertheless very just here was no Lye though there was a Deceit and the Danger he was in the Examples of Holy men in Scripture and Ecclesiastical History will Justifie or Excuse him And now let us pursue the rest of the Story This Controversie would likely have been at an end Soz. l. 8. c. 12. if Theophilus had not reviv'd it upon a Design of ruining Ammonius dioscorus Eusebius and Eutychius who were sirnam'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 long or tall These were Brothers and very eminent among the Monks of Scetis as we have shew'd before These of all the Monks of Egypt were the greatest Favourites of Theophilus who entertain'd them frequently at his House with great kindness and Familiarity Dioscorus he made Bishop of Hermenopolis but the ground of his Quarrel with them was his hatred of Isidorus whom heretofore he had endeavoured to have made Bishop of Constantinople after the death of Nectarius Socr. l. 6. c. 7. Some say that when a certain Woman had come over to the Church from the Heresie of the Manichees and had been receiv'd to Communion before she had made an abjuration of her former Heresie Theophilus charg'd the Arch-Presbyter with this Neglect but he had a grudge against him before upon another account Peter for that was his name
affirm'd that the Woman was receiv'd Regularly according to the Law of the Church and with the consent of Theophilus himself and that Isidore could testifie all this which he did at his return from Rome whither he then was sent Theophilus excommunicated both as having done him wrong and bely'd him This some say But I have heard from a very credible Person who convers'd familiarly with those Monks at that very time who said that there were two Reasons of Theophilus his falling out with Isidore the one common to him and Peter because they refus'd to witness for Theophilus his Sister that a certain Person had made her his Heir the other particular to Isidore because he being Overseer of the Poor and having a considerable Sum of Money in his disposal refus'd to re-imburse the Bishop what he laid out upon the Building of Churches saying That it it was far better to refresh the Bodies of the Poor for whom that Treasure was intended and which were properly the Temples of God than to lay it out upon the building of Churches But whether it were for these or for other reasons so it was that Isidore was excommunicated and came to Scetis to his old Friends the Monks Ammonius taking some of them along with him goes to Theophilus and desires him to be reconcil'd to Isidore which he is said then readily to have promis'd but after some time when nothing was done and they saw plainly that Theophilus did intend to put them off they come again and renew the Request with greater earnestness requiring a performance of his Promise He takes one of the Monks and puts him in the common Prison for a terrour to the rest but this would not do for Ammonius with the rest of the Monks that came with him under pretence of bringing Relief to the Prisoners got into the Prison and resolv'd to stay there with their Companion Theophilus hearing this sends for them but they at first desir'd him to come himself and fetch them out for it was not fit they said that since the Affront they had receiv'd was publick they should privately be dismissed yet afterwards they were prevail'd upon to come to him and he sent them away after he had begg'd their pardon and promised never to molest them more However he fretted and was vexed in himself and cast about how he he should do them a mischief and since they despis'd every thing in the World but their Philosophical Life he resolves to attack them in that part and to disturb their Peace and Quietness for understanding by the Discourse he had had with them and the Complaints they were us'd to make to him of the Anthropomorphites that they were Favourers of Origen he kindled a deadly feud between them and the Monks of the contrary Opinion which was blown up by their undecent wranglings and Disputes in which they left the Question and instead of arguing reproach'd one another So they that believ'd God Incorporeal were call'd Origenists those of the contrary Perswasion Anthropomorphites So far Sozomen Socrates differs something in the relation of this matter from Sozomen though as to the greatest part one has copy'd out of the other yet so as to leave it a very hard Question to determine which is the Original and which the Copy Socrates sayes nothing of Isidor's being the occasion of this Quarrel Socr. l. 6. c. 7. but only that those Monks disliking the Covetousness of Theophilus would live with him no longer but return'd to their solitude and when Dioscorus was had in great Veneration of the Monks Theophilus envying him and being angry with his Brethren resolv'd to ruin them by stirring up the Anthropomorphites against them that he wrote to the Monks against Dioscorus accusing him with holding God to be Incorporeal and that he had no Members like men as the Scriptures describe him and by this means he set them all together by the Ears Isidor Pelusiota confirms Sozomen Isid Ep. l. 1. Ep. 152. so far as to make Isidor to be the ground of this Quarrel without any particulars but treats Theophilus very outragiously calling him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if we examine these Relations impartially we may observe several things that are very improbable almost impossible to conceive All these men that are said to be persecuted unjustly by Theophilus were such as he had an Extraordinary kindness for and therefore it is not very likely without special Provocation he should ever endeavour to ruine those he took so much pains to set up And 1. As to the Story of Isidore it is altogether improbable for this was the man he opposed to Chrysostom as Competitor for the Bishoprick of C. P. This was he that was intrusted with the great Secret upon which his Life and Dignity did depend he that had receiv'd double Orders and Letters to present him that should overcome whether Theodosius or Maximus And is it likely he should fall out with this man so desperately about a punctilio of reconciling a Heretick Woman or witnessing that himself must know not to be truth Is it likely a Person so Eminent in Place and Reputation of an extraordinary Fortune too should suborn two the most considerable men in the Church of Alexandria to forswear themselves in favour of his Sister Surely he must know them too well after so long an acquaintance and experience to hazard his Reputation upon so unlikely a Project He must know them to be very Evil men before he would attempt them in that nature nor is it very likely that Isidore considering his Obligations to Theophilus should have refus'd him any Money to carry on and support his Magnificence in Publick Buildings However suppose all this true they must be only private Reasons such as Theophilus kept secret to himself but he must find some other plausible Pretence to justifie his Excommunication of these persons that were so considerable in their Place and Reputation in the World He could not be so brutish as to excommunicate a man because he would not forswear himself or rob the Poor to serve him There must be something for a Colour and that these Impartial Credible Historians did both forget for I suppose the Monks from whom they had this Relation did not care much to insist upon that point which would make a man suspect that Theophilus his Cause might be something justifiable and surely it was very plausible when all the World in a manner did approve it Thus every Malefactor will give out that he is persecuted out of Envy and Malice and such a one they had disobliged in this manner and another became their Enemy upon another Account but not a word of the Crimes laid to their Charge or of the Evidence against them No poor men though they talk'd Sedition or Treason blasphem'd God or the King and the Fact be notorious yet they fall innocent Victims to the Malice or Covetousness of their Judges Sozomen unawares discovers