Persecution than the Remonstrants They will have the Fundamental Error of the R. Church to consist in this We must not saith Episcopius in a Writing inserted by Mr. Limborg in the Preface of this Work consider Popery in some of its parts but in its whole not in this Doctrine nor in that which is accused of Heresie for it is almost the same thing on both sides the one is mistaken in one point and the other in another ..... We must look upon the whole Body of the Roman Church which is a composition of ignorant ambitious and tyrannical Men I call them ignorant not because they are not very Learned for sometimes they are too much so but because they know not and are obliged to know only what is prescribed unto them often against their Conscience against Reason and Divine Law It is the most pernicious of all Ignorances because it is a servile one which is upheld only by the Authority of the Pope and Councils and which is the source of the many Sophisms they are constrained to make to maintain such Opinions they have ingaged themselves into whether they find them true or false It extends its Empire as well upon the Practice as Belief because they are both tyed to the Foundations which they are always to suppose unshaken without freeing themselves by examining the solidity thereof Thence Tyranny is form'd It is this which makes it impossible ever to come back from this ignorance and which produceth Idolatry and ridiculous thoughts of the Divine Worship It is the Poyson of true Religion because it leads Men to serve God not according to his Will or by a Principle of Knowledg and Conscience but after that manner which the Pope liketh So that it is in vain to say that in this Church are many things which are good or sufferable this availeth nothing seeing they hold not what is good because it is good but because they are obliged to acknowledge it for such The Remonstrants have upon this establisht Principles which are very opposite to those of the Roman Church They not only believe with other Protestants that Scripture contains clearly all that is necessary to be known to believe to hope to do and to be saved and that all those who read it with an attentive mind and without prejudice may acquire by this reading a perfect knowledge of the Truths contain'd in it and that there is no other Divine Rule of our Faith but they admit also and maintain the necessary consequence of this Principle upon which many Divines expound not themselves distinctly enough Thence it followeth saith Mr. Limborg in this Preface 1. That no Man whoever he be no Assembly how considerable soever its Authority is and how Learned soever its Members are have not a Right of prescribing to the Faithful as necessary to Salvation what God hath not commanded as such in his Word 2. That from the Communion are to be excluded those only whom God hath clearly revealed he will exclude from Heaven 3. That to know certainly Damnable Errors and wholsome Doctrines we must see if in Scripture God hath promised Salvation to those who shall believe these Doctrines or threatned with Damnation those who shall embrace these Errors 4. That the only means to procure the Peace of the Church it to suffer those who retain the Fundamental Doctrines although according to us they are mistaken in things which God hath not commanded nor prohibited expresly under the condition of Salvation or Damnation 5. That if this rule was followed all Christians who have quitted the Roman Church would soon agree in Fundamental Points and differ but in Tenets which have neither been commanded nor prohibited under this condition 6. That consequently none have a right of imposing the necessity of Believing under pain of Damnation these non-essential Tenets 7. That no other means can procure a true Christian Union because constraint may tye the Tongue but not gain the Heart This is the drift of the Preface to come to the Work it self It is composed of three Letters and of a small Treatise of William Bom a Roman Catholick with as many Answers and some other Letters of Episcopius concerning the Infallibility of the Church The matter we see is of the utmost consequence and it is sufficiently known after what manner Episcopius was able to treat thereof Bom was a Priest who was no great Grecian as he confesseth himself and who besides was ingaged in the weakest Hypothesis which the Doctors of Rome ever embraced it is that which makes the Infallibility of the Church reside in the Pope's Person So that although he hath exposed pretty well the common reasons of his Party it may be said of him in relation to his Adversary Par studiis aevique modis sed robore dispar The occasion of this Dispute was a Conference which Bom and Episcopius had at the coming from a Sermon which the last had Preached Some of those who had been present thereat declared That Bom had been reduced to silence upon which he being willing to shew how much these reports were false Writ to two common Friends to put them in mind of the Reasons he had said and added to that a Writing to prove that St. Peter was established chief of the Catholick Church Episcopius at first made some difficulty of Answering this Priest because there is nothing more tedious and more unprofitable for a Protestant than to enter into dispute with a Catholick seeing that as it is an Article of Faith with him that his Church is Infallible so he believes himself obliged in Conscience not to confer with Hereticks but in the design of instructing them and not to have even the thought of receiving any instruction nor any light from them It is not possible without ingaging ones self into an excessive prolixity to relate all the reasons which have been said on each side in this dispute we shall only stop at some of the principal proofs and those which are not so commonly met withal in Books of Controversie Episcopius failed not at first to ask of his Adversary in what place of the Gospel Iesus Christ had appointed any body to be Soveraign Judge of Controversies and to decide without Appeal all the differences which should arise in the Church after the death of the Apostles As there are not in Scripture passages sufficiently express for this institution Bom had recourse to the Practice of the Church upon which Episcopius alledged to him three Acts of the Ecclesiastical History which agrees not well with the Belief of the Infallibility of the Pope 1. The first is drawn from the dispute which fell out towards the middle of the Second Age concerning the day in which the Passover should be celebrated Victor Bishop of Rome Excommunicated the Churches of the Diocess of Asia because they Celebrated this Feast the Fourteenth day of March and not the Sunday following according to the Custom of Rome Palestine and
Christ which according to Calvin descends not from Heaven The vertue of the Mind being sufficient to penetrate through all impediments and to surmount the distance of Places He cites several other places of Beza of Martyr and many English Doctors by which it appears that they did not believe the Body of Iesus Christ properly descended from Heaven into the Eucharist or is in divers places at the same time though they say we are nourished hereby through Faith but after an incomprehensible manner Yet it must be granted that if these Great Men understood nothing by nourishing our selves by the flesh of Iesus Christ but to believe that we are saved by his Sacrifice and to feed our selves with this hope or to receive his Spirit it was not necessary to tell us of a miraculous Union of our Spirits with the Body of Iesus Christ notwithstanding the distance of places the Spirit of God being every where and Faith having no relation to local distance there 's nothing in the Spiritual eating of the Body of Iesus Christ taken in the sense we have above-mentioned of Miraculous nor of Incomprehensible more than in other acts of Piety and other Graces which God gives unto us Whether we suppose this or any other method to expound the eating of the Body of Iesus Christ there would be no danger to the Reformation to say that these Learned Men have not had an Idea altogether distinct thereupon or that their Expressions are not exact Although it were granted that they mistook in some things it would not follow that the Romish Church could have justly rejected all their Doctrines or that Protestants are in the wrong by inviolably retaining their Sentiments as far as they are conformable to Holy Scripture and to abandon that wherein they might be deceived We do not make a profession of believing that those who err in one thing are deceived in all or of rejecting every thing they have said because they have not perceived the truth clearly enough in some things Thus all the Objections of this nature might be ruined without undertaking to defend indifferently all that the Reformers may have said seeing it 's agreed on that the Protestant Religion is not founded upon their Authority and that they might be mistaken in inconsiderable things without its being in danger But Dr. Wake thought not convenient to act in this manner He believes that the Reformed never changed their Opinions hereon and for the Divines of Edward and Elizabeth he maintains that they were perfectly of the same opinion which he proves by a passage of the History of the Reformation by Dr. Burnet In the Second Part which is wholly included in the 3d Chapter he answers first to what Mr. Walker affirms to have been allowed by Protestants and maintained against him that he hath not well understood the words of some of the Authors whom he cited that say very well that in Communicating Iesus Christ ought to be Adored but not as Corporally present under the Species of Bread and Wine As for Forbes and Marc-Antony de Dominis it is agreed on that the desire they had of reconciling Religions made them say too much Thorndyke speaks not less vigorously but upon a Hypothesis quite different from that of the Roman Church seeing he believed that the Bread is called the Body of Iesus Christ and the Wine his Blood because by the Consecration they are Hypostatically united to the Divinity of Iesus Christ as well as to his Natural Body It was spoken of in the First Part. To oppose to the Catholick Author Doctors of his own Party they say that Thomas Paludanus and Catharin maintains that it was an enormous Idolatry to Adore the Sacrament without believing Transubstantiation Thus although it is agreed on that if a Consecrated Host is truly Adorable one would not be guilty of Idolatry if one Adored one which should not be Consecrated thinking it once would be so It 's incredible that the Reformed Religion can receive so much prejudice hereby as the Authority of the Catholick Doctors who have been cited because the Reformed deny that a Host can be Adored whether it be Consecrated or not As to the Grounds of this Subject he sends us in his Preface to a Book Entituled A Discourse concerning the Adoration of the Host Printed at London 1685. In the Second place The Catholick Doctrine is briefly examined but as there is none who hath not read divers Treatises upon this Subject we shall insist no longer upon it ORIGINES BRITANNICAE Or the Antiquities of the British Churches with a Preface concerning some pretended Antiquities relating to Britain in vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph by Dr. Stillingfleet London 1685 in Fol. p. 364. WE should speak of the Preface of this Work wherein the Author refutes the Opinion of the Scots concerning the Antiquity of their Kings if there had not been an Extract made of a Book wherein it is already done and the Principal reasons related with much fidelity It shall suffice to say in general that our Prelate in it defends the Bishop of St. Asaph who in his Relation of the Antient Ecclesiastical Government in Great Britain and in Ireland hath shewn 1. That the Scots could not be in Great Britain so soon as they say 2. That the Historians from whom this is maintain'd are not of sufficient validity for one to rely upon As the Scots may be pardoned the zeal they have for their Country their Neighbours likewise may be suffered to endeavor the refuting them if it be necessary It 's a contestation which as Dr. Stillingfleet observes will not be decided neither by a Combat nor a Process and which hath no influence in matters of Religion or State That which concerns the Antiquities of the British Churches is more considerable by the connection which this matter hath with the important Controversies as it will appear hereafter This nevertheless is but the Proof of a greater Work where the Author endeavors to clear the most important difficulties of Ecclesiastical History Judging that to Write a compleat Ecclesiastical History is a design too great for one Man to accomplish he hath only undertaken to clear some parts thereof and thought he was obliged to begin with that which concerns the Antiquities of the Church whereof he is a Member This Book is divided into Five great Chapters the Abridgment of which you have here 1. It hath been believed for a long time in England that the Gospel was Preached here in Tyberius's Reign But if the short time be considered betwixt the Resurrection of our Lord and the death of this Emperor and that 't is thought during a long while the Apostles Preached the Gospel only to the Iews it will be hard to suppose that in this little distance persons came from Iudea into Britain to Preach the Gospel Some of the Learned of the Church of Rome have by the same Reason refuted the Fabulous Tradition which
rest of the People till they were visited by the Priests and declared Lepers And this Inspection was neither made upon the Sabbath nor Holy-day that Devotion and Publick Rejoycings might not be hindered It is not likely that People should tarry so long a time to separate the Pestiferous 4. The Gentiles who were not Proselytes and who lived in Canaan were not obliged to shew themselves to the Priests though they were Leprous and yet they were not hindered to converse with all the World 5. Those who were suspected to be Lepers were shut up in the Field or even in the Town and there were only those who were judged Lepers that were obliged to go out which if they recovered were not suffered to enter till after many washings and other Ceremonies which they were to observe 6. According to the Judgment which the Priest pronounced a Man was looked upon to be clean or unclean and so he was conversed with or his company shunned But it is not likely that this Sentence rendered a Man more or less Contagious 7. The general Leprosie which covered the whole Body did not render a Man unclean because they were declared clean who had all their Body covered with White Leprosie and in whom there was not a bit of Live flesh to be seen Naaman the Leper had several to serve him and he himself was Minister to the King of Assyria which could not be if his Distemper was Contagious Also the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tame which is spoken of polluted and unclean People marks only a legal impurity and is not applyed to them who are Infected with a Contagion The Heptades are followed by a small Treatise entituled Sciagraphia Biblica seu specimen Oeconomiae Patriarcharum It is as it were a Historical Abridgment of Divinity disposed according to the order that is contained in Holy Writ This Treatise is not ended because it begins at the Creation and ends at the Punishment of Sodom The Letters of Mr. Alting are one of the most considerable Pieces of this Volume being all full of Moderation and Learning In the Second he proposes some difficulties to Mr. Wetstein Professor at Basil who said in one of his Dissertations that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were Synonyms in St. Iohn The Author on the contrary will have the terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shew not only That the Word was in the beginning of all things but supposeth also that he was in being before whereas the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shew that this word is destined to the Office of Mediator which was done since or at the beginning God having Promised the Messia who was to bring Life to Men and that immediately after the first Sin In the Third Letter which is Written to Buxtorf the Son Mr. Alting to shew that the Sabbath was a Ceremonial Institution which Figured Iesus Christ and the Gospel thus Translates a passage in Isaiah 58.13 If thou call the Sabbath a delight 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Likdosâ—h Iehova mecubbad the Holy of the Lord. He pretends that this Holy of the Lord is the Messia who is called the Holy One of God Mark 1.24 Luke 4.34 And that the Father hath sanctified and sent him into the World John 10.36 The Author Answers in the 4 5 and 6th Letters some difficulties which were made upon the Explication of this passage and upon Iob 11.7 In the Ninth is sought the Origine of this Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basar vedam Flesh and Blood which is common in the Rabbins and Writings of the new Testament The Author believes that the Iews did not begin to make use of it until after the Prophets times when Philosophy began to be brought in amongst them They saw some Pagan Philosophers define a man a compound of Body and Soul and searching in their own Tongue for familiar Terms which would answer this Definition they added to the word Basar Flesh by which the Scripture commonly marks Man that of Dam Blood Besides the passages of Genesis 9. and Levit 17. where it is said That the Blood is the Soul of Beasts there are many others by which it appears that the Soul and Blood are Synonymous with the sacred Writers so they say in some places the Messia has given his Blood and in other places he has given his Soul to ransom many There is in the 16.50 a Judgment which deserves our observation but to know the importance of it we must know the dispute upon which it was delivered about the end of the Year 1655. There arose a dispute amongst the Mennonite Ministers of Amsterdam about the external State of the present Christian Church from Conferences they came to Writings whereof there were several Copies soon made and as soon printed The first which appeared upon this Subject was signed by Gallenus and David Spruit who put it into the hands of their Brethren The 11 th of Ianuary 1657. it was digested in Nineteen Articles wherein these two Ministers expounded their Opinion touching the Church which is to this purpose 1. That there is but one Church which is called the Spouse and Body of Iesus Christ and that it was to that alone that the promises of Iesus Christ were made 2. That Iesus Christ has established in this Church Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Doctors and hath given them the Gifts of the Holy Ghost which guide them infallibly so that they and their Hearers might be assured they did not err 3. That not only the Apostles but even the inferiour Ministers of the Apostolical Church and even the Deans and Antients after receiving the imposition of hands were endowed with miraculous Gifts which were necessary for the Exercise of their Charge 4. That so the first Ministers had a Right to call themselves Embassadors of Iesus Christ and that the People were obliged to receive them in that Quality 5. That the Church should fall into an entire Apostacy that this Prediction should be accomplished soon after the Death of the Apostles seeing that from the time of St. Paul and St. Iohn the mystery of Iniquity began to increase since there were already several Antichrists One must have but a small insight of Ecclesiastical History to know that the Zeal of Christians cooled a little after and that they fell from a Remissness into a corruption of Manners from a corruption of Manners into that of Doctrine and that instead of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost there was nothing seen to Reign in the Church but the Spirit of Superstition of Tyranny over Consciences of Schism and Excommunication 6. That those who undertook in these late Ages to reform the Church had neither miraculous Gifts nor an Express not extraordinary Vocation from Iesus Christ. 7. That to prove that the Assemblies which were held are the true Church they have only some Arguments drawn from passages of Scripture explained according to the weak Lights of their own reason or
Chatechumenes consisted in shewing them what there was that was good in the Heathen Philosophy and so insensibly conducted them to Christianity which they were in a much better way of embracing after having received several of his Maxims drawn from Natural Light and distributed through the Writings of Philosophers for whom they saw all the World had a respect If they were immediately told that they must renounce all their Opinions and look upon all the rest of Mankind not only as Men who were in an Error but such a had said nothing that was true As Labourers cast Seed into the Earth but not 'till after they have water'd it So saith Clement We take from the writings of the Greeks that which is necessary to water what we final Earthy in those we Instruct that they may afterwards receive the Spiritual Seed and that they may be in a mâ—re likely way to make it spring up more easily In effect the light of the Gospel supposes that of Nature and destroys it not We do not see that Iesus Christ and his Apostles have undertaken to give us a compleat System of all the Doctrins that have any reference to Religion they supposed that we were already prevented with divers thoughts established amongst all Nations upon which they Reasoned otherwise it would have been requisite for example that they should have exactly defined all the Vertues which they have not done because in respect to this they found Idea's in the minds of Men which tho imperfect were yet very true so they were satisfied to add what was lâ—cking or to cut off what evil Customs might have injuriously established therein Besides the Office of Catechist Clement was raised to the Priesthood at the beginning as 't is believ'd of the Empire of Severus because Eusebius in his History of the Events of CXCV gives to Clement the title of Priest It was about that time that he undertook to defend the Christian Religion against Heathens and Hereticks by a Work which he Entituled Stromates which we shall afterwards speak something of because in this Work in making a Chronological Computation he descends not lower than the Death of Commodus whence Eusebius concludes that he compos'd it under the Empire of Severus who succeeded this Emperour Severus enraged against the Christians because perhaps of a Rebellion of the Iews with whom the Heathens confounded those that professed Christianity began to Persecute them violently This Persecution arising at Antioch reached unto Egypt and obliged several Christians to withdraw from their Habitations where they were too well known to escape the Violence of the Persecution This seems to have given occasion to Clement of proving it was lawful to fly in time of Persecution After having said that Martyrdom purified them from all Sins and exhorting them to suffer if they were called to it he says that Persons ought to testifie that they are perswaded of the Truth of the Christian Religion as much by their Manners as Words After that he Expounds this Passage of the Gospel When you are Persecuted in one City flee into another The Lord saith he commands us not to flee as if it were an Evil to be Persecuted and bids us not to shun Death by flight as if we should fear it He will have us neither ingage in or assist any one to do Evil c. Those who obey not are Rash and throw themselves without reason into manifest Dangers If he who kills a Man of God Sinneth he also is guilty of his own Death he who presents himself to the Tribunal of the Jugde c. he assists as much as is capable the Wickedness of him by whom he is Persecuted If he exasperates him he is effectually the cause of his own Death as much as if he endeavoured to vex a wild Beast who afterwards devoured him A little while after the Apostles Persons were observ'd to covet Martyrdom but some after desiring the Executioners scandalously falling from Christianity at the sight of the Torments this Conduct was thought dangerous and those were condemned for it who offered themselves freely to be Martyr'd as appears by divers Passages of the Ancients and by that of Clement which we have related As Men ought not to shun Martyrdom when it cannot be avoided except by renouncing Christianity or a good Conscience so they ought to preserve their Lives as much as they can whilst there is any likelihood of serving the Christians rather to prolong it by flight than lose it by staying in Places where the Persecution is so violent and whence they may get away without ceasing to make Profession of Truth Those who blame or make some difficulty of absolving some Protestant Pastors because they came from a Kingdom where they could not tarry without an eminent Danger should first prove that another Conduct would have been more advantageous to Christianity than their Retreat hath been Here depends the Solution of this Question which hath been disputed of late If they have done well in withdrawing Clement seems then to have quitted Alexandria seeing we find that he made some Abode at Ierusalem with Alexander who was soon after Bishop of this City and to whom he dedicated his Book Entituled The Ecclesiastical Rules against those who follow the Opinions of the Jews During his Abode there he was very useful to this Church as appears by a Letter to Alexander to the Church of Antioch whereof Clement was bearer where this Bishop saith that he was a Man of great Virtue as the Church of Anitoch knew and would still acknowledge him so and that he being at Ierusalem by an effect of Divine Providence had confirmed and encreased the Church of the Lord. From Antioch Clement returned to Alexandria where it is not known how long he lived All that can be said is that he survived at least some Years after Pantenus and that he was not old when he composed his Stromates seeing he saith himself that he did them to serve him for a Collection in his old Age when his Memory should fail him History teacheth us nothing concerning his Death but it may be believed his Memory was blessed at Alexandria if these words of the Bishop of Ierusalem be considered which we have spoken of who in another Letter to Origen saith That they both acknowledged for Fathers these blessed Men who had quitted this Life before them and with whom they would soon be to wit blessed Pantenus and pious Clement from whom they had drawn great Succours Amongst several Works which Clement compos'd we have but Three remaining which are considerable The First is An Exhortation to Pagans where he refutes their Religion and endeavours to induce them to imbrace Christianity The Second is Entituled The Paedagogue where he forms the Manners of Youth and gives them Rules to behave themselves Christianly where he mixeth Maxims very severe and far from the Customs of this day The Third are the Stromates that is to say Tapistries which he
the Syriack Tongue did insensibly mix with the Hebrew Dialect and became common to the Iews and hath since been called the Hebraick Language IV. He Examins in the Fourth Article the Works of many Authors who make mention of the Old Testament as those of Philon Iosephus Iustus c. in speaking of the Writers of the New Testament he Remarks after St. Ierom that the last Chapter of the Gospel of St. Mark is but in a very few Copies and that we may reject it almost with all the Greeks because it seems to mention several things contrary to those which are spoken of by the other Evangelists Besides he assures us upon the Credit of this Father that that which obliges St. Iohn to write his Gospel after all the rest was that having read the rest he remarked that they had only confined themselves to write the History of one Year of the Life of Jesus Christ viz. from the Imprisonment of St. Iohn the Baptist to the death of our Saviour and thereupon he resolved to give the Church an account of what happned in the preceeding Years He does not precisely find in the Acts of the Apostles the time when St. Paul changed his Name from Saul Mr. Du Pin conjectures that it was after the Conveâ—tion of Sergius Paulus because he says it was the custom of the Romans to give their own Names in Testimony of Friendship It might also be said as Budeus proves in his Pandects that it was to honour their Patrons and Benefactors for these they had obliged to take their Names He ends this Dissertation with the Books of the New Testament which were at first doubted but that were soon after placed in the Canon of Holy Writ by the consent of all Churches to wit the Epistle to the Hebrâ—ws the Epistle of St. Iames the Second Epistle of St. Peter the Second and Third of Saint Iohn that of Saint Iude and the Apocalypse The Bibliotheque it self he begins with Criticisms upon the Letters of Agbar to Iesus Christ and Iesus to Agbar which he shews to be Supposititious as well as the Gospel according to the Egyptians The Gospel according to the Hebrews and many other pieces that some wou'd have to pass under the name of the Apostles There were Persons in St. Ierom's time that pretended the Gospel according to the Hebrews was originally that of St. Matthews because it was written in Syraick and Chaldaick Characters Mr. Du Pin proves here that they were different not only by the passages of this Gospel according to the Hebrews which has nothing in it like the History of the Adulterous Woman in Saint Matthew But also because Eusebius and after him St. Ierom absolutely distinguisheth them that this last had translated the Gospel according to the Hebrews whereas the Author of the Version of St. Matthew is wholly unknown and that in the Gospel according to the Hebrews the Scripture is cited there after the Hebrew and St. Matthew in his follow'd the Translation of the Septuagint Yet there is room to doubt of this last Argument since the same St. Ierom which distinguishes these Two Gospels here confounds them in another place according to the relation of our Author in the 39. pag. of his Dissertation And it is not only Contradiction of that Father which he has observ'd Always saith Mr. Du Pin when St. Jerom Treats expresly of Canonical Books he rejects as Apocryphal all those that are not in the Iews Canon but when he speaks without making any reflection he often cites these same books as Holy Scripture Ib. p. 72. speaking diversly by Economie and according to the Persons with whom he had to do The Epistle of St. Barnabas which we have also an entire Latin Translation of and great part of the Greek Original is certainly his since we see in it the same passages that St. Clement of Alexandria Origen Eusebius and St. Ierom cite out of it But says he if this Letter was really St. Barnabas's it ought not to be added to the other Books of the New Testament That follows not according to our Author for if 't is true that a Book is Canonical when we are certain 't was writ by an Author who had the Authority of making it Canonical Who is it that hath said St. Barnabas must be of this Number rather than St. Clement or Hermas 'T is the business of the Church to declare it and it 's sufficient that it has not done it therefore his Letter is look'd upon as Apocryphal altho ' 't was certainly his own He adds that this Letter is unbecoming this Saint being full of all Stories and Allegories But we must know a little the Genius of the Iews and the first Christians who were nourisht and brought up in the Synagogue to believe that these kind of Opinions cou'd not come from 'em On the contrary this was their Character they Learned from the Iews to turn all the Seripture into Allegories and to make Remarks upon the Properties of Animals which the Law had forbidden 'em to eat of We must not be surprised then if St. Barnabas who was Originally a Iew writing to the Iews has Allegorically explain'd many passages since every body knows that the Books of the first Christians were full of these sorts of Fables and Allegories He rejects the Liturgies attributed to the Apostles Because he cou'd not but make a little Reflection upon what is read in the Celebration of the Eucharist in the First Epistle to the Corinthians and upon what St. Iustin and the first Fathers of the Church have said to perswade us that the Apostles and those which succeeded them have celebrated the Sacrifice of the Mass with great simplicity He only relates a small Number of Orisons but by little and little he adds some Prayers and a few External Ceremonies to Render the Sacrifice more venerable to the People In fine the Churches have regulated all abuses in the Sacrament and wrote down the way of celebrating it as may be found in the Liturgy The Apostles Creed the Canons and Apostolick Constitutions are none of theirs Ruffinus was the first and only Author of the Fifth Age who wrote that the Apostles composed the Creed and he only advanced it as a popular Tradition Mr. du Pin to confirm his Opinion and prove that the Creed was not the Apostles as to the Words and Form gives us a Table of the Four ancient Creeds the Vulgar the Aquilean the Eastern and Roman where one might compare them together and observe considerable Differences between them for Instance the Terms Catholick Communion of Saints and Life everlasting which are in the Vulgar or Common Creed are wanting in the other Three As for the Canons which are attributed to the Apostles he defends the opinion of Aubespinus and Beoregius who believ'd 'em very ancient and who pretend that they were properly a Collection of many Councels held before that of Nice the
Judges that were not suspected of Partiality and desired them to go to the places where these Judges should be with the Informations they had taken against Athanasius The Bishops of the East would not hearken to it whereupon those of the West received Athanasius Marcellus and other Bishops of their Party into their Communion Those of the East were extreamly affronted at it there were many Complaints on each side and at last the two Emperours Constantius and Constantine agreed to call a General Council at Sardis to decide this Difference There went Bishops to it from all parts but the Western Bishops were willing that the deposed Bishops should be admitted to the Communion and take place in the Council the Eastern would not suffer it and withdrew to Philippopolis where they protested against the Proceedings of Sardis as contrary to the Canons of Nice The Bishops of the West notwithstanding continued their Session and made new Canons to justifie their Conduct The Eastern Bishops complained that the Discipline established at Nice was manifestly violated and the Western Bishops said That there was Injustice done to the deposed Bishops that Athanasius had not been heard in Aegypt and that it was just that all the Bishops of the Empire should re-examine this Affair The Bishops of Sardis had no respect to the reasons of their Brethren they renounced not the Communion of Athanasius and made divers Canons the chief of which are the III. the IV. the V. which concern the Revisal of the Causes of Bishops In the third they declared that the causes should first come before the Bishops of the Province and if one of the Parties was grieved by the Sentence he should be granted a Revision Our Author makes divers Remarks upon two Canons of the Council of Antioch to which its commonly believed that that of the Council of Sardis has some affinity which we have spoken of our Author discovers the Irregularities of the Councils of Antioch and Tyre He also remarks that to obtain the Revision of an Ecclesiastial cause an Address was made to the Emperor who convocated a greater number of Bishops to make this new Examination The Council of Sardis made an Innovation in this for it seems that it took away as much as it could the Right of reviewing these sorts of Causes from the Emperor to give it to Iulius Bishop of Rome in honour to St. Peter He might by the Authority of this Council if he thought fit Convocate the Bishops of the Province to revise the Process and to add Assistant Judges to them as the Emperor used to do Besides this the Fourth Canon enjoyn'd that no Bishop should enter into a vacant Bishoprick by the deposition of him who was in it nor should undertake to Examin a-new a Process until the Bishop of Rome had pronounced his Sentence thereupon The Fifth Canon signifies That if he judges the Cause worthy of Revising it belongs to him to send Letters to the Neighbouring Bishops to re-examine but if he thinks it not fit the Judgment pronounced shall stand This is the Power which the Council of Sardis grants to the Pope upon which our Author makes these Remarks 1. That there was somewhat new in this Authority without which these Canons would have been useless Thus de Marca and he who published the Works of Pope Leo have established this Power of the Pope upon the Canons of the Council of Sardis But an Authority given by a particular Council in certain Circumstances as appears by the name of Iulius which is inserted in the Canon cannot extend it self to the following Ages upon the whole this Authority has changed nature so much that now it passeth for an Absolute and Supream Power founded upon a Divine Right and not upon the Acts of one Council 2. These Canons do not give this Bishop the Right of receiving Appeals in quality of Head of the Church but transport only unto him the Right of a Revision which the Emperor enjoyed before It is a great question if the Council of Sardis had the Power of so doing but there is a great likelihood that the Protection which Constantius granted the Arian Party engaged it thereunto 3. These Canons cannot justifie the conduct of those who should carry Causes to Rome by way of Appeal because they return the second Examination to the Bishops of the Province 4. The Council of Sardis it self took knowledge of a Cause which had been decided by the Bishop of Rome 5. This Council could not be justified by the antient Canons in that it received Marcellus to the Communion he who before had been Condemned for Heresie as also afterwards even by Athanasius himself 6. The Decrees of this Assembly were not universally received as it appeared by the Contestations of the Bishops of Africk against that of Rome seeing the first knew nothing of it some years after as our Author sheweth IV. Arianism being spread every where and afterwards Pelagius and Celestius being gone out of England the Clergy of this Isle were accus'd of having been Arians and Pelagians in those Ages Our Author undertakes to justifie them from these suspicions and afterwards describes the Publick Service of the British Churches But as the Ecclesiastical Antiquities of England afford no great matter he hath supplyed them by digressions He immediately refutes I know not what Modern Author who hath been mistaken in some facts concerning the History of Arianism since the Council of Nice at which we shall not make a stay After that there is an Abridgment of this History until the Council of Rimini The Arians being condemned at Nice and vainly opposing the term of Consubstantial thought they could not better save themselves than by yielding to the times They also suffered themselves to be condemned by the Council and to be Banished by the Emperor Arius with Theones and Secondus his Friends Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nice Chief Heads of the Arian Faction Signed as the rest yet without changing their Opinion Afterwards they in like manner endeavoured to hide themselves under Equivocations The Circumstances of this History may be seen as Dr. Stillingfleet relates them in the Tenth Tome of the Vniversal Bibliotheque p. 447. and the following ones Yet there are these differences that our Bishop is larger in Reflections drawn from St. Athanasius concerning the Address of the Arians who expressed themselves almost as the Orthodox of that time to deceive the simple Moreover the Relation which we have cited was not made on design to justifie the Orthodox and to get those of the Arians Condemned but to give an Idea of these confusions without taking any Party whereas the design of our Author is to inform the Publick against the Arians without reprehending any thing whatever in the conduct of their Adversaries And our Author hath not applyed himself so much to the order of years which he doth not mark as hath been done in the Life of Eusebius of Caesarea
Dr. Stillingfleet goes also further then any seeing the History of Arianism was left off at the death of Eusebius Here is an Abstract of what he adds and which is chiefly drawn from St. Athanasius The Falsities of the Arians were not discovered until after the Council of Rimini and it was chiefly at the Council of Seleucia where they declared themselves more openly It was then that the Followers of Basil of Ancyre who rejected the word Consubstantial as well as the Arians would separate themselves from them But the Arians had still recourse in this occasion to their old Artifices and consented to Sign any Creed whatever excepting that of Nice They caused Athanasius to be banished a second time but he was soon re called and his greatest Enemies were obliged to make him Reparation if he may be believed A little while after the Persecution began against him and all the rest who professed the Faith of Nice as our Author describes at large until the Council of Rimini whose Bishops were constrained to abandon the Terms of Hypostasis and Consubstantial The Orthodox Bishops would willingly depose all those who refused to Sign the Symbol of Nice and the Arians did not treat their Adversaries better when they could not prevail with them so that they ceased not Persecuting each other reciprocally Councils declared both for the one and the other which makes our Author reasonably conclude that we must not yield to the Authority of any Council whatever till having well examined the reasons of its Conduct If it was not lawful to do it in times past the Faith of Nice could not be re-established which would have received an irreparable breach at Rimini if the Orthodox Bishops were not restored to their Churches after the death of Constantius and had not re-established in smaller Assemblies what so numerous a Council had destroyed We find a remarkable example hereof in the Fragments of St. Hilary where we see that a Council Assembled at Paris declares that it abandons the Council of Rimini for assenting to that of Nice Dr. Stillingfleet conjectures that the British Churches did as much because St. Athanasius St. Ierome and St. Chrysostom do in divers places praise their Application to the Orthodox Faith Sulpicius Severus speaking of the Bishops of the Council of Rimini saith they refused to be entertained by the Emperor excepting those of England who were to poor too bear this charge Thereupon Dr. Stillingfleet makes divers Reflections whereof these are the Principal 1. That it followeth from thence that what Geoffrey of Monmouth saith of Riches which King Lucius gave the Church of England is false 2. That it is notwithstanding strange that the Bishops of England should not have wherewithal to maintain them at Rimini since before Constantine the Churches had divers Funds besides the Offerings of the People which were considerable in the numerous Churches and since Constantine had granted them great Priviledges as is shewn at length by divers Edicts of this Emperor which are in the Theodosian Codicil and elsewhere He comes thence to the Accusation of Pelagianism which Beda and Gildas had before raised against the Clergy of England He remarks first that Pelagius and Celestius were both born in Great Britain and not in the Armorick Britain as some have believed and Refutes at the same time some places of F. Garnier who hath spoken of Pelagius in his Notes upon Marius Merâ—ator 2. That the Monastick History makes him Abbot of the Monastery of Bangor but that there is little likelyhood that Bangor had had a Monastery famous in that time because the Convents of England are no antienter than the time of St. Patrick and if Pelagius was a Monk he was of such an Order as were Pammachius Paulinus Melanius and Demetriades who were pious persons withdrawn from the Commerce of the World but without Rule 3. That the Occupation of these Men after the Exercises of Piety consisted in the study of Scripture and that it was in such a Retreat that Pelagius Writ his Commentary upon the Epistles of St. Paul and his Letters to Melanius and Demetriades 4. That since he was accused of Heresie he was imployed to defend himself and that after having been Condemned in Africk and Banished he was yet Condemned in a Council at Antioch under Theodotus as Marius Mercator tells us and all that because the Sentiments of Pelagius were not well understood as the Bishop of Worcester justly saith 5. That wretched Pelagius passed the remnant of his Life in obscurity and dyed according to all likelihood without returning into England 6. That without the extraordinary cares of the Bishops of Africk Pelagianism would have been established by the Authority of the See of Rome Though Pelagius had been Condemned by the Emperor and the Councils Agricola Son to Severian Bishop who had embraced Pelagianism brought it into England It was perhaps the severe Edict of Valentinian III. Published in CCCCXXV against the Pelagians who were amongst the Gauls which drove him thence Prosper witnesseth that there were several of them in England which made some believe that Celestius was returned hither but our Author shews that this Opinion has no ground The Adversaries of the Pelagians not being able to defend themselves against so subtil Controvertists sent to demand aid of the Bishops of the Gauls who sent them Germain and Loup two Bishops of great Reputation but suspected to be Semi Pelagians the first being a great Friend to Hilary of Arles and the second being brother to Vincent of Lerins Semi Pelagians It 's found in a certain Writing that is attributed to Prosper Disciple of St. Augustin that it was Celestinus Bishop of Rome who sent him but our Author shews that there is reason to suspect this to be the writing of some other Prosper and that though it were his we have reason to believe that he was deceived Germain and Loup being arrived in England had a publick Conference at Verulam and acted so that they left England in the old Opinions as they believed but they were forced to return sometimes after Our Author relates no Head of the Doctrine of St. Germain and Loup by which we may know whether they Taught Semi Pelagianism or the Predestinarionism in England to free themselves from the suspicions which might be had of them He passeth to the Justification of Fastidius an English Bishop suspected of Pelagianism and of whom there is yet a Book de vita Christiana published by Holstenius It is not so easie to justifie Faustus of Riez from Semi Pelagianism though in his time he passed for a Saint and that he was Prayed to in this quality during many Ages in the Church of Riez Sidonius Apollinaris gives him this fine Encomium Cui datum est soli melius loqui quam didicerit vivere melius quam loquatur To whom alone it hath been given to speak better than he had Learned and to Live better