near adjoyning made but one Church Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the word and sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastor the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters Now according to Dr. Field every Episcopal Church as laid out by the Apostles having so large extent as to require many Ministers and yet but one Pastor or Bishop was plainly not a Congregational Church but Diocesan Bishop Bilson (t) Bils Perpet Gov. c. 14. p. 295 298 306 321. is yet plainer against the purpose for which he is alledg'd We have says that learned Prelate one Bishop in a Church ty'd to the Laws of God the Church and the Prince you would have 300 in a Diocese and some more all of equal power and set at liberty to consult and determine at their pleasure Neither had the Jews that kind of Government which you would establish in the Church neither did our Lord and Master ever prescribe to the Gentiles the judicial part of Moses Law And again As the people did increase so did the pains in each place and consequently the number of Presbyters one man being no more able to serve the necessities of a great City than to bear the burden of the Earth upon his back and yet in each Church and City one chief among them that as principal Pastor of the place c. And to conclude you dislike a Bishop should have any Diocese or Church besides that one wherein he teacheth which nice conceit of yours not only condemneth the Primitive Church of Christ that assigned Dioceses to Bishops but contradicteth the very ground of Government which the Apostles left behind them (u) Prim. Ep. p. 48. Now in what places the Jews had their Synagogues if it were not plain Matth. 9.35 that they were far from being alway great Cities will appear from the seats of their Consistories I never yet heard of any who denied that the Jews had Synagogues in Villages as well as Cities But that the Village-Synagogues were independent and free from any subjection to the Cities in Ecclesiastical causes is now the question and our Author is wise in saying nothing of it For those who have taken his side of the question though men of good reading have not been able to produce any thing about it but their own affirmations It is not to be doubted but every good Village of the Jews had a Synagogue as every Parish with us hath a Church and great Cities had many Synagogues as our great Towns have many Parishes and Jerusalem particularly is said to have had 480. But that every Village-Synagogue had supream authority in matters Ecclesiastical and no dependance upon any other Court or the chief officers of the City Synagogues is very unlikely For so many Independent and Co ordinate Officers could never without a miracle have preserved themselves one year under one National communion And in those great Cities where the Jews had many Congregations it cannot well be conceived that every one had supream authority but that there must be some Chief or Council to which all those Synagogues were subject This is most likely because common order and National agreement cannot well subsist without it I know there are some great men (x) Grot. de jure sum pot c. 11. Gotof. in l. 2. de Cod. Theod. have been very positive on the other side and have asserted the Independence of every Synagogue that every such Assembly had a chief Officer answering to our Bishops and all co-ordinate and of equal authority But for all this no evidence is produced and when learned men speak without book about distant matter of fact their authority is but small for then they do not speak from their knowledge and learning but their affection The Scriptures of the old Testament give no directions concerning Synagogues and do not so much as mention those Assemblies From whence some have concluded that in those times there were no such religious Assemblies among the Jews In the new Testament we have frequent mention of them and sometimes their Officers are named but how they were ordered in respect of one another and of general Communion the new Testament does not give the least hint Nay as to this matter the writings of the Jews are not plain and though they were yet they taste too much of the fable to be depended upon Great men may guess and affirm according as they stand affected but when all is done this matter is still in the same obscurity for want of sufficient evidence After the establishment of Christian Religion we find general Officers of the Jews endued with the power of Excommunication and Absolution but that every Village or City-consistory had that power then we do not find and for ought appears they might have no more power than our Church-wardens and Vestries Nay in the complaint the Jews make to Arcadius and Honorius (y) L. 8. de Jud. Coeli Sam. l. 15. de Jud. l. 29. Codesh that the civil Officers had restor'd to Communion several whom the Primates of their Law had cast out without the consent of those Primates the power seems to belong chiefly to these and they too derived their Jurisdiction not from the Synagogues but from the Patriarchs by whom they were appointed And this Invasion of the Imperial Officers is represented not as an injury to the Vestries of Village or City Synagogues but only to these Primates whose office was of greater compass than the inspection of a single Synagogue as appears from the last of those Laws cited in the margin where we are informed that upon extinction of the Patriarchs these Primates succeeded to all their power But while I was thinking of the learned men who treat of this matter I had almost forgot our Author who tells (z) Prim. ep p. 48. us That something will appear from the seats of their Consistories Let us therefore attend In Cities of less than sixscore Families they plac'd their Consistories of three In Cities of more than a hundred and twenty Families the Courts of twenty three Maimon in Sanedr c. 1. Sect. 5. Seld. de Synedr l. 2. c. 5. And it is well known that many of our Country Towns with their Precincts have more than 120 Families and our lesser Villages are as great as the Cities in the lower account They must be very sore distress'd who repair to Rabbins for propriety of expression or evidence of Antiquity In Maimonides his language it seems a place that had not 120 Families was a City And what if it had but three It was sufficient to furnish a Triumviral Consistory and therefore may pass for a Rabbinical City But Cunaeus (a) Cun. de R. P. Hebr. l. 1. c. 13. Ego vero Aristoteli assentior ne quidem eam esse civitatem Civitas nomen amittit modus si defit who lov'd to
Ordination The next exception against this Synod is (z) Prim. ep p. 62. that it was of little authority not admitted by the Greeks into their Code till the Trullan Council Nor by the Latins some ages after it was held c. Nor by the African Churches who rejected and would not be oblig'd by its Canons for Appeals to Rome How soon or late this Synod was generally receiv'd does little concern the Canon in dispute which does not establish any thing new but only affirms ancient Practice And if the matter of this Canon was generally observ'd where the Synod of Sardica was not yet owned it is plain that this matter depends upon better authority than the sanction of a Council immemorial Custom and the general agreement of Churches Without regard to this Canon the bounds of ancient Bishopricks were accounted sacred and not lightly to be changed Some Villages in Pentapolis accounted considerable enough to make a Diocese in troublesom times because they had immemorially been annex'd to the Episcopal City were judged by their poeple to have been settl'd in that condition by Apostolical Order and therefore the people of those places were earnest they should return again to their first dependance The Region Mareotes was large enough to make a good Diocese of it self yet when a Bishop was set up in one part of it Athanasius complains that it was done against ancient Tradition which in such cases as these was to take place Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria having made a Bishop in a mean place where there had been none before is blam'd as a violator of the establish'd Order of the Church So that if the Synod of Sardica was not received any where for many ages after it was held yet this Canon against making Bishops in small places where there had been none before was it seems generally approv'd at leastwise the matter of it was accounted equal and fit There are Orders of other Synods in the same age to the same effect and I do not know of any ancient Assembly or so much as a single Writer that ever made any exception against this Rule But on the contrary when Bishops were ordein'd in small places where there had been none before we find complaints against it as a violation of old establishment and even in Afric where such innovations grew frequent the complaints were loud on both sides In the Conference at Carthage the Donatists as well as Catholicks complaining of these violations of ancient limits (a) Prim. ep p. 62. Nor need I say that this Synod is misunderstood and that this restraint is laid on Bishops of another Province Our Author speaks reason for surely he needs not say what he had said already and to so little purpose nor need I repeat here what I have reply'd before But what he adds deserves consideration for the newness and singularity of the Argument It would be much says our Author for our satisfaction if we could understand punctually what numbers they thought sufficient for one Presbyter and we may have the best direction that can be expected in such a case from Chrysostom (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Or. in Ignat. who affirms that one hundred and fifty Souls was thought as much as one Pastor could well and more than he could without great labour discharge His words are It is a very laborious thing for one man to have the charge of a hundred and fifty How much this was to the satisfaction of Mr. Clerkson I will not enquire how little it is to the purpose will I hope sufficiently appear from what I am going to reply First then Chrysostom makes not the least mention of a Presbyter nor of the number sufficient for his cure but in general says It is a difficult thing for one man to take the care of a hundred and fifty only Whether one Presbyter or one Bishop or one Captain he does not say And this is clear that at the same time he makes such a little flock so formidable a charge he makes (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in Ign. T. 5. P. 501. the Apostles to commit a City of twenty myriads or two hundred thousand to the cure of Ignatius and therefore from thence gives an estimate of the person and of what talents he must be possessed to whom the Apostles would deliver so great a charge The design therefore of Chrysostom in that passage is to set out the character of Ignatius to advantage from the greatness of the City of which he was Bishop and to set off the City he compares it with the lowest or meanest Congregations but does not give the least intimation that no one Presbyter had greater or that a place of more inhabitants than a hundred and fifty requir'd the care of a Bishop If to commend the chief Magistrate of some very great City one should borrow this of Chrysostom and say that it is a difficult thing to govern a Family of twenty people or to keep good order in a Town of but two hundred inhabitants and therefore his endowments must be extraordinary into whose hands the government of so great a City is committed he would be thought a very strange Critick who from such a complement should remark that a Family ought to consist of no more than twenty or that a Constable ought not to undertake the keeping of the peace in a Village that has more than two hundred inhabitants and therefore where there is a greater number it requires a Mayor and Aldermen to undertake the charge Or if upon a Commemoration of some Bishop of London the Preacher should think fit to turn the greatness of the City into a Topic of that Bishops commendation and say that a cure of a hundred and fifty Souls is a great and difficult charge and great care to be us'd in providing even for such a place an able Pastor and therefore what wonderful abilities must he be thought master of who was judg'd capable of being the Pastor of so vast a City Would any man that is awake conclude from hence that there is never a Parish-Presbyter in England that had a greater cure So pertinent is that direction which our Author fancy'd to have found in Chrysostom for understanding punctually what numbers they anciently thought sufficient for one Presbyter To the same effect he proceeds to tell us (d) Prim. ep p. 63. that upon this account one Presbyter was not thought sufficient for a place that contain'd three or four hundred inhabitants For this we desire some proof but I am affraid we must expect long There is one thing more in our Authors remarks upon the Canon of Sardica that deserves to be taken notice of and that is that where one Presbyter is not sufficient there a Bishop ought to be ordein'd It is a rule he has made to himself by inverting the Canon of Sardica that forbids the making of a Bishop in a very little City where even
manner to be dropped and all the difficulty now to remain concerning the bounds of the Bishops Territory and the numbers belonging to his Inspection yet in ancient times this made no difference For Sozomen (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. l. 7. c. 19. observing the great inequality of ancient Dioceses and some other little usages in which the Churches of one Country differed from those of another commends the wisdom of ancient Bishops who looked upon it as a great piece of folly to divide communion about these matters The greatness or smallness of a Diocese making in their opinion no difference in the office The Synod assembled at Antioch in their Letter (b) Soz l. 3. c. 8. to Julius Bishop of Rome let him understand that they do not account themselves inferiour to him in authority though their Churches were not so great or populous as his but are far from disowning him to be of their Order because his Diocese did exceed theirs And Jerom (c) Hieron Ep. ad Evagr. declares himself freely upon this point that the greater or lesser compass of a Diocese made no alteration in the Episcopacy but the poor Bishop of Eugubium had the same authority and order with that of Rome Yet now it seems this difference is become fundamental And Mr. Clarkson contends that there is but one sort of Bishops to be endured such only who have the charge of no more than a single Congregation This we are told by him the Apostles intended this the first three or four Ages practised and within that space of time there was no other Episcopacy How well he hath performed this undertaking will appear from this Book in which I have been so far from dissembling or passing by any Testimony that might seem material that I am afraid to have incurred very just censure for being too minute and punctual in my answers beyond the merit of the Objections Yet for this I may be allowed to use the plea of Apuleius (d) Ne videar cuipiam si quid ex frivolis praeteriero id agnovisse potius quam contempsisse quod si forte inepta videbor oppido frivola velle defendere illis debet ea res vitio verti quibus turpe est etiam haec objectasse non mihi culpae dari cui honestum erit etiam haec diluisse Apul. Apol. on the like occasion that I have taken notice of many frivolous things least to some I might seem to decline them as unanswerable and not to omit them out of just contempt And if my answers to some mean and captious remarks may seem sometimes to tast of the futility of the Objections yet I hope this will be imputed to him who was not ashamed to offer such things in evidence and not to me who was concerned to disprove them Some may perhaps expect an Apology for delay that the Book came not out sooner But for this I am not solicitous for an excuse apprehending rather the contrary fault that it is come out too soon For I found in the Book I answer so many marks of haste and precipitation that I thought my self obliged to take warning though the design of that work seems to have taken up a great part of the Author's life In such variety of facts so remote and many of them so obscure there are too many things to be considered to admit of haste And after all the care and the leisure one can take it is neither easie nor usual in this kind of work to avoid oversights and omissions of some things very material The Author of the Preface may perhaps think himself neglected that he is not thought considerable enough to deserve an answer He promised himself it seems that the Epistle Recommendatory should find the same entertainment with the worthy Treatise of Mr. Clarkson But Diviners are sometimes disappointed For my part I am resolved to make a difference between the Book and the Recommendation And I hope Mr. Chauncey will see some reason why he should not take it ill I wish he had been able to have represented the references right But we must forgive where it is not to be had and I dare say the good man did his best But why should he be angry with Dr. Sherlock for defending Protestant Principles against the Papists upon the grounds of the Church of England Why did not he or some of his Brethren step out to vindicate Congregational Episcopacy against Father Ellis and his three Collegues who made but four Dioceses of this whole Kingdom For God's sake tell me who maintained Protestant Principles then upon the foundation of the Dissenters But the Serpent and the venomous Vermine are subtler than the other Beasts of the field for in hard weather they are not to be found on the face of the Earth but are crept into their holes but when a warmer season comes they crawl out to snap at the heels of those who had endured the severities of the winter If he expected the same Treatment with Mr. Clarkson he should have written intelligibly and writ sense But when he runs the Changes upon Jus Divinum Humanum and Apostolicum when he talks of Hermaphroditick Divinity of Office-Charge of Office Discrimination of Appendix-Courts and Vestments and Canons among the Heteroclites of his Divinity what can a man do but wonder and keep silence Believe me I would as soon dispute with a Paper-mill as undertake to answer a man of such amazing language But for the Heteroclites I may perhaps know what they may import it is when a thing changes its kind As for Example when a man leaves his shop and the business of his Calling to write Letters Recommendatory of what he does not understand Errata's which disturb the Sense PAge 18. Line 14. for Passover read Pentecost p. 31. l. 6. for disprove r. prove p. 37. l. 18. for future r. further p. 69. l. 6. for useful r. unfit p. 78. l. 20. for first r. fifth p. 98. l. 9. after Bishop of add the City p. 358. l. 27. for populously r. pompously p. 361. l. 16. after he does add not p. 406. l. 8. for Fermissus r. Telmissus A DEFENCE OF Diocesan Episcopacy c. IT is an easie matter for those who confine their Charity as they do their Primitive Episcopacy to a single Congregation to charge all who differ from them as Men wholly governed by Prejudice and Interest The fondness they have for their own Conceits renders them incapable of any Jealousie of their Truth or Evidence and if these Notions do not receive such Entertainment as the Indulgent Author is perswaded they deserve and Success do not answer (a) Mr. Clarkson's Primitive Episcopacy pag. 1. Opinion it must be ascrib'd to the unequal Encounter they had with Prejudice and Interest Things that do frequently baffle the best Evidence in Persons otherwise very discerning and judicious It is just indeed that they should bear the reproach of Insincerity
conclude Hecataeus to have over-reach'd till I can be sure there is no fault in the Copies of Josephus or that our Author did rightly understand him For first (d) Jos B. J. l. 5. c. 13. Josephus does not seem to agree with himself in this matter when in the same Chapter giving an account of the three Walls that encompassed the City he makes the third to have ninety Towers (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 each of twenty cubits Diameter and between every one these Towers a curtain of two hundred cubits which being sum'd up make near fifty furlongs in compass Or if we take (a) Appar Vrb Templi p. 1. l. 2. c. 21. Villalpandus his reckoning who allows but four hundred Cubits to a Furlong we shall have fifty Furlongs compleat Nor was this the whole compass of the City for this Wall was not drawn round the other two on every part but where the City ended in inaccessible precipices (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jos ub sup there was but one Wall and then it must be by so much more than fifty Furlongs So the particulars and the sum total of this Author not agreeing there must be some mistake in the Calculation But several Learned Men have endeavour'd to reconcile these passages among whom Villalpandus (c) Appar l. 2. c. 4. seems to have succeeded best who having shew'd the right order and situation of the three Walls out of Josephus against the mistakes of Adricomius and others concludes with great probability that the City which is said to have been thirty three Furlongs about was the old City contain'd within the first Wall of sixty Towers and if the distance between these was equal to that of the third Wall the sum will be exactly according to Josephus his measure Now to confirm this conjecture it must be observ'd that the Town about which Titus drew his Vallum was only the Old for the lower Town and two of the three Walls were taken by the Romans and ruin'd before that Circumvallation was begun which was according to Josephus thirty nine Furlongs and it was this which was properly call'd the (a) Villalp App. l. 2. c. 10. Ant. Jud. l. 15. c. ult City the other accessions being accounted for Suburbs and so call'd by Josephus Nor can we imagine either that the Romans would leave so great a part of the City as that which was destroy'd in the possession of the Jews or contrive their Vallum which was to keep them in at so great a distance from the remaining Wall or place of Attack as it must needs be if the Circumvallation encompass'd that part which was before ruin'd by the Romans and quitted by the Jews Now if Josephus be thus understood he is not only reconcil'd to himself but to that character of Greatness which Pliny (b) Hierosolyma longe clarissima Vrbium Orientis non Judeae modo Plin. l. 5. c. 4. gives Jerusalem of being far the most famous City not only of Judea but of all the East (c) Arist de 70 Inter. Aristeas if he deserve any credit makes it Forty Furlongs about and there are (d) Miambourg Croissa l. 3. who represent it as quadrangular three Miles in length and something less in breadth which is indeed the most liberal of all Calculations but has no great authority to vouch it However by the reckoning of Josephus Jerusalem was more than fifty Furlongs in Compass and the Precipices being reckon'd where there was but one Wall many Furlongs more may remain to be added even to that sum What is suggested to lessen the number of the People of Jerusalem (e) Jos B. J. l. 4. c. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the complaint made to the Idumaeans that they had destroy'd in one night almost all the People when there was but twelve Thousand slain is not exact enough to ground any Calculation For the Idumaeans slew above twenty perhaps above forty Thousand while they were in Jerusalem as (a) Jos l. 4. c. 17. c. 18. c. 19. Josephus reckons For the first night the Idumaeans were let in they slew eight thousand five hundred Persons not in the City but about the Temple And not content with this Slaughter they turn'd upon the City and kill'd every one they met Nor did it end thus but they still went on and butcher'd the People like a herd of unclean Beasts these without number But afterwards taking many persons of Condition and young Men they bound and put them into (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 custody hoping to gain them to their side but they all chose rather to die than joyn with their Enemies whereupon they were tortur'd and kill'd Those who were taken in Custody in the day were slain and cast out in the night to make room for others the day following who were also destroy'd in the same manner and the number of those young People of quality destroy'd in that manner is said (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be twelve thousand Such was the slaughter made by the Idumaeans in Jerusalem that it is no wonder if those who had a mind to be rid of their company should represent the whole People as destroy'd and considering the prodigious numbers slain by the Factions in that City it is a wonder there should be any more remaining for new calamities and yet after this loss the People of Jerusalem were so formidable that Josephus commends the conduct of (a) l. 4. c. 21. Vespasian for not adventuring to attack it at that time when his Officers urged him to march his Army thither that so the Factions might have yet more leisure to weaken one another whereas if the people were in a manner all kill'd he had no reason to apprehend any opposition Now should all this Calculation be allowed and Jerusalem reduc'd to the narrowest Circuit and the lowest Reckoning yet I cannot see what benefit can redound to the Notion of Congregational Episcopacy For we do not read of any great accession of Proselytes to the Christian Faith on any of the three Feasts except one on that of Pentecost when three thousand Souls were gain'd but since that there were many added daily to the Church There were five Thousand converted at a time and after this (b) Acts 5.14 Believers were the more added to the Church multitudes both of Men and Women And after this (c) Acts 6.7 The Word of God increas'd and the number of the Disciples multiply'd in Jerusalem greatly and a great company of the Priests were obedient to the Faith These Accessions are no where said to consist of out-lying Jews nor to come in upon solemn times but daily and all this to fall out within the compass of a year And if there be any truth in the Tradition which (d) Eus H. E. l. 5. c. 18. Apollonius an ancient Writer cites from Thraseas who suffer'd Martyrdom in his time that the Apostles were commanded by
our Saviour not to depart from Jerusalem in twelve years we must conclude the numbers of Proselytes must needs surpass the measure of a Congregation if the success of following years did in any proportion answer this beginning All the endeavours therefore of deduction from the numbers of Converts expressed by St. Luke can have no place in the Church of Jerusalem For 1. All that were converted on Pentecost are said to continue in the Apostles (a) Acts 2. Fellowship and breaking of Bread and in Prayer i. e. to stay with them in Jerusalem So that though they were not dwellers before upon this occasion they became such 2. The five thousand added to these according to the circumstances of the Story and the exposition of all the ancient Writers will afford no occasion for any deduction 3. The increase of which the numbers are not express'd may reasonably be presum'd no way inferior to the other where the number is set down but if we observe the Expressions seem to surpass them For when five thousand were converted it is said that many of those who heard the Word believed If the number had not follow'd this would have pass'd for a little matter with our Author but in other places it is said that great multitudes both of Men and Women a great number of Priests c. 4. While the Apostles continued in Jerusalem we have reason to believe the Church was still increasing and the People being generally of their side upon the account of the Miracles they wrought so as to give a check to the Rulers and to restrain them from persecuting the Apostles it cannot be well doubted but the Apostles improv'd this good disposition to a perfect conversion 5. Besides the preaching of the Apostles the influence of the Converts who were generally men upon their Families could not fail of having great effect and of making no small addition to the sum of Believers The Authority the Masters of families had over them among the Jews being very great and the submission of Wives and Children to them being in that Nation very implicit (a) Letter 17. from Baghdad It being the receiv'd custom of the East as De la Valle observ'd that the Women and Children should accomodate themselves to the Father of the family in matters of Religion though the Women had before they married been bred up in other Rules 6. That the Multitude converted could have no convenience in Jerusalem of meeting in one Assembly The Apostles went from House to House 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in several Houses there were several religious Assemblies and so consequently several Congregations so that the Multitude though it might in a very great Theater or Temple have come together yet for want of such accommodation began in the Diocesan way and dispersed into several Assemblies which still made up but one Church (b) Prim. Ep. p. 6. It is confessed says Mr. Clerkson that in those times and after there was more than one Bishop in a City and if the Christians in any City were but few and those divided betwixt several Bishops how small a Diocese would the share of each make up For this he cites Dr. Hammond on the Rev. c. 11. p. 662. It is true indeed D. H. was of opinion that the Believers of the Circumcision did for some time keep at some distance from the Gentile Converts and had their Assemblies and Officers apart and that the Apostles having no other remedy were obliged to manage the matter so tenderly as to connive for some time at this separation But this can by no means concern the case of the Church of Jerusalem within the time of her increase before the death of St. Stephen and the conversion of St. Paul for as yet no Gentile had been baptized Cornelius being the first and that some time after these many thousands had been converted in Jerusalem Besides were this allow'd that the Jews and Gentiles in each City had a distinct Bishop yet that makes nothing for the Congregational way for this happened upon another Account And after the ruin of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Jewish Commonwealth the Jews came to an accommodation and joyned with the Gentiles under the same Officers before the second Century and therefore can be of no consequence to the point in hand And if those Dioceses were small it was in order to greater increase that the Jews might be for a little while indulg'd and then united with the Gentiles in one Church But after all this matter of separate Churches is no more than the conjecture of some learned men and our Author himself is willing to dismiss it by saying (a) P. 7. That there is no need of this acknowledgment nor will he insist on the grounds on which he proceeds Nor is there any reason he should if he can make out what he affirms in the same place that there is evidence enough in Scripture for a plurality of Bishops in several Cities which may be easily vindicated from the attempts of some that would deface it His first instance is Phil. 1.1 To all the Saints that are at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons That these were Bishops of the Province as Dr. Hammond contends and not of the City of Philippi our Author will by no means allow nor will I be very importunate with him that he should But one thing I would learn of him what sort of Bishops he takes these to be For if in his opinion they are no other than Presbyters then this place is impertinently alledg'd since many Presbyters are by all sides acknowledg'd to have belong'd to one Church But if he speak of Bishops in the common Ecclesiastical sence and then concludes from this passage that there were many in the Church of Philippi his opinion is as singular as that of the Doctor he endeavours to refute For my part I must profess that I am not much concern'd in this Dispute between our Author and Dr. Hammond about these Bishops I could never find sufficient reason to believe them any other than Presbyters as the generality of Fathers and of the Writers of our own Church have done And tho' I have great reverence for the name and memory of Dr. Hammond yet where he is alone I may without any imputation of disrespect take the common liberty of leaving his opinion to stand or fall according to the strength of the Arguments upon which it is founded Yet there are some things in our Authors reply which may be taken notice of Dr. Hammond (a) 16 12. from a passage in the Acts where Philippi is said to be the first City of Macedonia and a Colony infers that it was a Metropolis To which our Author answers that it is first in Situation (b) P. 8. and not in dignity and preheminence This conjecture of Camerarius and Zanchius may after all be more ingenious than solid For Bezas M S. has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
had met the like And the Theodosian Code makes frequent mention of these Mansions l. 21. de Decur Magistrates are appointed for those places out of the Cities in whose Territories they are Claudiopolis Tottas and Vordis are said to be Towns or Mansions in Bithynia l. 119. de Decur Cod. Theod. And this Thermae is mentioned in Antonin's Itinerary in the way from Tavia to Caesarea the first stage And one Elpidius a Bishop of this place subscribes the sixth General Council and calls it St. Agapius his Thermae in the second Galatia Of the same Creation is the Bishop of the Monastery of Studius which our Author (o) Prim. Ep. p. 39. produces out of Theodorus Lector after the decease of another who presided there For learned men have observed long ago that the word Bishop should be corrected and the word President put in its place And Valesius in his note upon that passage does agree to the amendment And that this may not seem to be done only from conjecture and the seeming necessity of sense Theophanes (p) Theoph. in Chron. p. 135. and Nicephorus (q) Niceph. H. E. l. 16. c. 25. do vouch it The same misfortune of faulty reading has made us Bishops of Monasteries here in England and it is upon no other ground that our Author (r) Prim. Ep. p. 39. is so positive that in Brittain there were commonly Bishops in Monasteries and such too as were in subjection to the Abbot of the Convent though a Presbyter as appears by the Synod of Hereford Vt Episcopi monachi non migrent c. Spelm. p. 153. Beda l. 4. c. 5. The word Episcopi in Mr. Wheelock's Edition of Bede is distinguished from the Text and the Saxon Version disowns it and Mr. Wheelock (s) Dele obsecro Episcopi pro Mss iâ—i lege ipsi in his Errata's takes care to advertise the Reader that this word must be corrected and ipsi put in its place For so he found it in all his Manuscripts that is ipsi This might be no news to our Author for my Lord Bishop of St. Asaph (t) Hist Account p. 68. had taken notice of it in his Historical account of the Church Government of Great Britain But Chifllet in his late (u) Anno 1681. Edition of Bede printed from an old Copy (x) Adorandum Antiquitatis optimaeque notae Codicem Chifl Praef. of S. Maximin's in Treves of reverend Antiquity has restored ipsi though he takes no notice of the Emendation It is possible that in this Book the word ipsi might be writ at length I have seen some Manuscript Copies that vouch this Emendation though the word be not written at length but with contraction Yet there is one very old Copy of the Cotton Library which has the word at length and without any abbreviation that puts an end to all further criticizing upon this passage Although I cannot but observe how unhappy our Author is in this particular who in confirmation of that multiplicity of Bishops which he vainly imagins was once in the Church of England hath chosen to instance in a time when there were indeed no more than seven Bishops in all the Saxon part of Britain In Spain it self says our Author (y) Prim. Ep. p. 39. Damium is an Episcopal seat Says Ortelius and it is a Monastery in Isidorus and Honorius Vnde Martinus Episcopus qui scripsit de quatuor Virtutibus cardinalibus oriundus It is true that St. Martin call'd the Apostle of Gallicia having converted Theodomir King of the Suevi or as others name him Chararacus from the Arian Heresie was made Bishop in that Monastery which he had built But that he had no other Diocese than his Monastry we have no reason to believe For in the Council (z) Aerae 607. A. Christi 569. Vid. Not. Gars Loyasae in Conc. Luc. apud Lucum Dumium is said to have Familia Regia belonging to it and in the distribution of Dioceses made by King Wamba the bounds of this Diocese are marked from Duma to Albia and from Rianteca to Adasa When this St. Martin was made Arch-bishop of Braga he ordain'd no other in Dumium but when he was dead to do honour to the Seat of so great a Man they might perhaps think for some time to appoint him a successor in Dumium as we find by the subscriptions of several Spanish Councils Yet even in the Gothick times this place was restor'd to Braga For in the 16th Council of Toledo Felix writes himself of Braccara and Dumium as Vasaeus (a) Vasaei Chron. c. 20. informs us from a M. S. copy of Canons in Rodericus Arch-bishop of Toledo Nay it may be question'd whether there ever was another Bishop of this Dumium after Martin For Luitprandus (b) Luitpr Advers informs us that there were two places of this name Episcopal Seats one in Asturia and the other in Gallicia which is the place of which we are speaking But to give this Instance a positive Answer A Monastery in the Suburbs of Braga made a Bishops seat about the middle of the sixth Century is no argument of Primitive Episcopacy but on the contrary this place had always till this time belong'd to the Bishop of a City 2. All this matter is extraordinary to do honour to a person who had so highly deserv'd of the Kingdom of Spain and therefore ought not to be drawn into a Precedent much less to prescribe what sort of places are to be made Bishops seats And after all it does not appear that there was not a Diocese of several Congregations belonging to it Those who are not acquainted with the state of the Ancient Church when they find instances of Bishops in Villages or in a Monastery may be apt to fancy That these might be the Remains of another sort of Episcopacy Therefore to prevent such mistakes I will briefly lay down the state of the Churches of Spain from which our Author has produc'd some instances from the oldest Records that remain of them In the Year 569. King Theadomir complains (c) Conc. Luc. Not. Garc. Loyasae that in the Province of Gallicia the Dioceses were so large that their Bishops were not able to visit them in a Year and therefore desires that they would take some order to remedy it Whereupon they erected several new Bishopricks and one new Metropolis yet all the Bishopricks of that great Province after this accession were but thirteen When the Bishops of all Spain met in the Synod of Valentia (d) Anno. 541. Luitpr Advers cum Episcopi totius Hispaniae convenissent they were in all but sixty four In the old Book of Sevil there are but 6 Arch-bishops and 67 Bishops in all the Kingdom of Spain In the old Book of Oviedo there are but 76 Bishops Under King Wamba (e) Anno. 666. according to the old Bood call'd Itacius of which Luitprandus makes frequent mention there
were in Spain 71 Bishops and 7 Metropolitans In a Controversy between the Arch-bishops of Toledo and Valentia it is said that Constantine had divided the Country into Provinces and Dioceses much to the same effect with what has been already produc'd with this agrees the observations of Luitprandus which are taken from the same Books For speaking of the 13th Council of Toledo he saith the number of the Bishops there were 76 of whom 27 subscrib'd by Proxies And in his Chronicon he gives notice of several new Bishopricks erected in Spain in the later end of the seventh Century The Dioceses of Spain must be very large then when so great a Country was divided between 70 or 80 Bishops and especially considering the Province of Narbon was then reckon'd to Spain At the time of the Council of Illiberis Spain seems to have but few Bishops For tho' we find by the Subscriptions that the Bishops had met there from all the Provinces of Spain yet were there in all but 19. And long before this (g) Anno. 254. in St. Cyprians time two Cities in Spain seem'd to belong to one Bishop as may be gather'd from the Inscription of St. Cyprians (h) Ep. 67. Epistle Foelici Presbytero plebibus consistentibus ad Legionem Asturicae Upon which Vasaeus (i) Vasaeus in Chron. Hisp Anno. 256. has this Remark Colligi videtur Legionenses atque Asturicenses eo tempore eidem Episcopo fuisse subjectos licet postea divisi Episcopatus fuerint Our Author (l) Prim. ep p. 40. cites Rabanus Maurus to very little purpose when he makes him to say that there were fewer Bishops at first but in process of time they were Ordain'd not only in Cities but in places where there was no need Which then is the most Primitive way the first or that which comes after After a tedious peregrination our Author (f) Anno. 305. Conc. Illib (m) Prim. ep p. 40. is very kind to let us come nearer home I need not tell you how few Cities there are in Ireland yet Primat Usher tells us out of Nennius that St. Patrick founded there 365 Churches and as many Bishops I hope no reasonable man will blame me as too difficult of belief if I refuse this fable for evidence The authority of Nennius may be question'd without imputation of scepticism and can never pass as long as men have judgment enough to distinguish between History and Legend But I take Nennius his way of writing to be a degree even below Legend But since this fabulous Calendar of Irish Bishops has pass'd without contradiction not that any body ever believ'd it but because it is too gross to be refuted and since it has been and is still urg'd for History in the behalf of Primitive Episcopacy I will endeavour to trace it to its Original and when the ground of the Story is understood it will do the Congregational way but very slender service Arch-Bishop Vsher (n) Antiquit. Eccl. Brit. p. 473. ult Ed. publish'd a Catalogue of old Irish Saints which is divided into three ranks which are distinguish'd one from another as well by time as by merit The first is the best they consisted all of Bishops and their number was 350 they were founders of Churches c. This Order of Saints lasted for four Reigns the last of which was Tuathail but they were not all Irish but Romans and Franks and Britans Now according to Arch bishop Vshers (o) Antiquit. p. 490. Ed. ult Chronology of those Reigns there is above a hundred years from the beginning of St. Patrick's Apostleship to the end of Tuathail only there is one King before him in that Chronological Table which the old Catalogue does not mention That these were the Bishops of St. Patrick's ordination we may find in Jocelin (p) Usher Antiq. p. 492. who says that St. Patrick ordain'd just so many with his own hand and founded 700 Churches To compleat the Irish Calendar Nennius increas'd their number to 365 a singular complement to a lazy Nation to make it holiday for them all the year round Now whether all these liv'd in Ireland or were all ordained by Patrick the Catalogue does not say But it says expresly That they were of several other Nations besides Irish So that this may rather represent the Communion of Patrick and the number of Bishops in Britain and France that kept Easter on the fourteenth of the Moon than his Suffragans of Ireland And the fewness of Bishops in succeeding times and under the second order seems to represent a great change not in the lives of the Bishops for if I mistake not it is the cause that is in the bottom of that Catalogue but in the observances which are there mention'd For whether the Franks by this time had taken another way and the Brittish Churches were under great calamities or Augustin the Monk had introduc'd the Roman customs there are but few Bishops in the second order But supposing these holy Bishops had been all of Ireland yet there is no need of so many Cathedrals for them for they lasted four Reigns which makes up a hundred years And though all the Bishops seats in Ireland had not been above fifty they might easily have afforded 350 Saints in the compass of a hundred years But because there are but sixty years allow'd for St. Patrick's Government in Ireland even in that and the surviving generation this number of Bishops might easily rise from fifty I mention this number because sometimes Ireland has had so many Dioceses or more as we may see in a copy of the Provincial publish'd by (q) Geogr. Sacr. S. Paulo which hath more Seats in it than that of which Cambden speaks After all I am not well satisfi'd but all St. Patrick's Bishops may be a fable and he himself only a Saint of imagination For who can tell but Patricius Arvernensis may have sunk a day lower in the Calendar and made the Irish a Patricius Hibernensis Or the Spanish Patrick (r) Luitpr Advers of Malaga who according to Luitprandus lays claim to that day might appear to the Irish in a Dream as St. George did to our Country-men and become their Protector and at last their Apostle For the Calendar is the ground upon which the Legendaries run divisions and as barren as it seems to be it has produced a world of devout Fables For in old time give a Monk but a name and he would quickly write a life Our Author taking S. Patrick's (s) Prim. Ep. p. 40. 365 fabulous Bishopricks for effective is not content but would increase their number about the twelfth Century Afterwards says he the number of Bishops increased in Ireland so that when Malachias went into Ireland near 600 years after S. Patrick Anno 1150. (t) Bern. vit Malach. Vnus Episcopatus non esset contentus uno Episcopo sed singulae paene Ecclesiae singulos haberent
which the least was two parasangs the other four Now a parasang (b) Herodot l. 5. containing thirty furlongs the least of these was seven miles and an half in compass the other double Dicaearchus (c) Dicaearch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ex. Haeschel p. 172. gives the measure of Thebes in Baeotia and makes it seventy furlongs i. e. near nine miles in compass and is so particular in giving the figure of the City and the nature of the soyl about it that there is no doubt but he was an eye witness of what he relates Yet there is another fragment that goes under the name of the same Author and is written in verse that makes (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 166. it but forty three furlongs about which better suits with its condition in latter times which was far below its antient greatness and what it was in the age of Dicaearchus who was Aristotles Scholar Chalcis in Eubaea was likewise seventy furlongs in circumference as the same Author (e) Dicaearch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 176. reports which agrees well with what Strabo (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strab. l. 10. relates of this place at the time of which Dicaearchus speaks For about the time of Alexander's expedition into Asia the Citizens of Chalcis enlarg'd their walls and took in Canethus and Eurypus But to return to our Author (g) Prim. ep p. 66. 67. Such great Cities seeing the largness assign'd them was thought sufficient to make one Metropolis they were very few What he takes for an extraordinary measure was so far from being accounted so that it is to be rather accounted little than great and what he fancies to be rare was but the size of ordinary Towns Those which were any thing remarkable for greatness having above double the compass and many reckon'd no prodigies having four times as much But the remark that follows deserves pity rather than discussion That whereas there was but one Metropolis in a Province there were twenty sometimes forty more inferior Cities under it And the Council of Chalcedon (h) Conc. Chalc. Act. 12. declares it to be against the Ecclesiastical Rules to have two Metropoles in one Province But what Council was ever so vain as to Order that there should be but one great City in a Province or if a Metropolis should happen not to be very large that no City within its resort should presume to be greater than the mother Town Nice was (i) Strab. l. 12. the old Metropolis of Bithynia yet Nicomedia was (l) Dio. Or. ad Nicom much the greater City and in time carry'd away the Metropolitical preheminence Caesarea (m) Conc. Chalc. Act. 13. was the Metropolis of Palestine and yet Aelia or the Gentile Jerusalem was not inferior to it Nor did (n) Arrian Exp. Alex. l. 2. p. 159. Gaza and Azotus and in Constantius his reign (o) Geogr. vet Gotofr Lydda and Ascalon cease to be great Cities because they were not Metropoles Old Byzantium (p) Herodian l. 3. Codin l. 1. c. 20. Parochia Heracliensis Ecclesiae Gelas Epist 13. ad Ep. Dardan was under Heraclea at least wise in Ecclesiastical affairs and yet it was accounted then the greatest City of Thrace Antioch was the Metropolis of Syria (q) Strab. l. 16. and yet the Cities of that Province were generally very great and populous tho' not equal to their Mother City There were but very few Metropoles so small as those Mr. Clerkson has pick'd out but he is willing the Reader should imagin that this is the greatest size of Cities To very little purpose he observes that Lesbus was Metropolis of thirty Cities and is forc'd to strain the words of Strabo (r) Strab. l. 13. without any occasion or doing any service to his cause For that Author says that Lesbus and Cuma were as it were the Mothers of thirty Cities i. e. all the Cities of Eolis which had been about thirty but before Strabo's time many of them were lost And to what end is all this Were they then all inferior to Lesbus because it was their Mother What did not Syracuse outgrow Corinth and Carthage surpass Tyre and Marseilles exceed Phocaea Was it not usual for Colonies to excel their mother Cities And even of these thirty Cities who can tell how few remain'd to be Bishops Seats or how large they were Nor does this notion of a Metropolis concern the present point which is only about the chief Cities of Provinces But the greediness of snatching any thing that to a hasty view may have some resemblance of an argument is apt to carry Learned Men sometimes very far from their purpose To as much purpose he takes notice (s) Prim. ep p. 67. that in Phrygia there were above sixty Cities yet the same Author mentions but two that were great Strabo does indeed mention two as the greatest Cities of the greater Phrygia but this does no more imply that the rest were little than he who should say that Amsterdam and Leyden were the greatest Cities in Holland would imply that the rest of the Cities of that Province were but small and like our Burroughs or Market-Towns In Laconica he notes that there were thirty Cities in Strabo's time all little Towns save Sparta He had noted this before and I have shew'd that these were in effect but Villages belonging to Sparta and of all these thirty there were scarce three of them Bishops Seats in the middle of the fifth Century nor does it appear there ever had been any more (t) Prim. ep p. 67. Some of those great Cities had but few Inhabitants And he instances in Laodicea which had but few Inhabitants in Strabo's time because it was subject to Earthquakes and then reckons up several Cities of the East subject to the same calamity and twelve famous Cities that in Tiberius his Reign were in one night destroy'd by Earthquake in those parts I am very sorry to find a man who pretends to be serious trifling with the most dreadful of God's Judgments He might with as much reason have brought in as many more that had been dispeopl'd by the Plague and then urge that some great Cities were not populous It is not long since Naples shook yet he would be thought a strange kind of reasoner that should thence infer that it is not a populous City Antioch hath been several times in a manner totally overthrown with Earthquakes yet still was soon after fill'd with Inhabitants and these Countries which our Author chooseth for his instances were famous for their fecundity and their people and were not forsaken tho' it pleas'd God sometimes to chastise them with Earthquakes And what part of the World is there where men can be safe from that danger nay the most populous and fruitful parts of the World have been most afflicted with this evil Whether we must look for the reason in the nature of the
acquiesced in the Decree of Nice (m) Socr. l. 1. c. 26. which received no open contradiction during the reign of Constantine (n) Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 57. and prodigious accessions being made to the Church under that reign the Cities must be thronged with Christians and the generality of Bishops even in respect of the Towns where they resided must be Diocesan All Sects were very inconsiderable in his time being suppressed by publick authority and all their Meetings forbid by the Emperour's Edicts (o) Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 63 64 65 66. which had that effect that the greatest part joyned themselves sincerely to the Church and all the rest in appearance so that there remained no meeting of Dissenting Christians in all the Empire and even the Novatians were comprehended in the same Law Under the next reign the Arrians covered themselves with a pretence of owning no other Doctrin but that already established in the Church and laid all the blame upon Athanasius as a man of a restless and turbulent spirit that would not suffer the Church to be in peace Nor were there many separate Congregations upon this account the people generally following the Bishops set over them under a perswasion that they were sound as to the Faith and for those Bishops who were displaced care was taken that they should be thought to suffer not upon the account of their Faith but of some other high misdemeanors In some few of the greatest Cities there were tumults on this occasion but in general there was a submission to publick order and a great part of the World was carried away not by the doctrin but the dissimulation of the Arrians Yet still the Episcopal Dioceses remained as they were without any considerable seperations When Athanasius died it s said there were but few Arrians in (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 4. c. 22. Alexandria In (q) Basil ep 72. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil's time there were but very few in comparison of the whole infected with that disease At Rome there were scarce any And (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 2. in the West they were hardly known otherwise than by report till the Goths had planted themselves in that part of the Empire So that the Orthodox Bishops were not reduced to a single Congregation by the separation of the Arrians their Cities only being supposed to make up their whole Dioceses Our Author is liberal and will not insist upon the prevailing of the Donatists and therefore I need not say that the case of Afric was singular being torn into very small Dioceses and yet even in that there were some large some free from the Donatists and had no other Bishop but that of the established Church as appears by several answers of the Bishops in the Conference at Carthage Nor will he tell us how the Macedonians did abound in many places Nor will he so much as name the other numerous Sects which had their distinct Churches and Bishops so that there were sometimes four or five of several perswasions seated in that City I have I think made allowance enough for them all and yet in great Cities left more Churches for the Bishops than all the Conventicles of Sectaries thrice told would amount to Now to sum up this evidence and (s) Prim. ep p. 84. to draw this Discourse into an issue Suppose we a City forty furlongs in compass than which there were few bigger let us allow half to Heathens and a third or fourth to Jews and Novatians and the proportion left Christians will not exceed the dimensions of a small Town c. But we have taken notice of some Cities of more than forty furlongs that were wholly Christian I have mentioned others exceeding great in which there were but very few Heathen I have instanced in some that had no Dissenters or Sectaries and shew'd in general that all the World over those who were without the pale of the Church of all Sects were nothing so considerable as our Author would represent them And here we might conclude this Chapter but for the particulars which follow and require further examination When our Author had made the largest allowances for Heathens and Jews and Sectaries as if they had been all to poll for the Dissenters and left the Catholick Christians so destitute that there seemed to be no place left them in the greatest Cities he thought (a) Prim. ep p. 84. it might be more satisfactory yet to make this evident in some particular Cities and those of the greater nay some of the greatest Berytus he says was an eminent City and yet it had but one Church in Julian 's time which was then burnt by Magnus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not one of the Churches but the Church of Berytus Theod. l. 4. c. 20. If our Author had been a little better versed in the language of the ancient Church he could not have thought this instance or his deduction from it very satisfactory For the Church in Ecclesiastical Writers does not denote the only Church or signifie to the exclusion of any other but expresses only the Cathedral or Bishops Church And that this may be clear beyond all cavil I will offer some passages where the same expression is used in Cities known to have a great number of Churches Alexandria is allowed by all to have had many Churches in the beginning of the fourth Century and the testimony of Athanasius (b) Athan. Apol. 2. and Epiphanius (c) Epiph. Haer. 69. sets it beyond contradiction yet Gregory the Arrian Bishop is said (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 2. c. 14. to be removed because he had become odious to the people for the burning of the Church He says not one of the Churches would our Author reason but the Church yet for all this there were many other Churches in that City To the same purpose when Athanasius was forced to fly from Alexandria the Soldiers are said (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. Apol 2. p. 717. Socr. l. 2. c. 11. to encompass the Church without any distinction which it was and the Bishop said to be driven out of the Church intending only the principal Church and that which was called so by way of eminence which is sometimes styled the great Church So Theodorus Lector (f) Theod. Lect. l. 1. p. 553. Ed. Val. speaking of Gennadius Bishop of Constantinople takes notice that he was the first that appropriated to the City Parishes all the oblations that should be made in them whereas before the great Church carried away all And Nicephorus (g) Niceph. H E. l. 15. c. 22. speaking of the same thing calls it the Catholick Church In the same manner likewise is Epiphanius (h) Epiph. Haer. 69. understood by Valesius (i) H. Vales in Theodor. Lect. p. 162. when he speaks of the Catholick Church of
about limits the Apostles made no new distributions but followed the form of the Empire planting in every City a compleat and entire Church that consisted not only of the Inhabitants of the City but of the Region belonging to it If any were converted and if their distance or number made them incapable of repairing to the City-Church upon all their Religious occasions they had Congregations apart and subordinate Officers to attend them as it was in the civil disposition our Saviour having appointed several Orders in his Church and the Apostles propagating those and appointing some new as occasion required Only as in greater causes the Country people sued in the City Courts so likewise in such causes of Religion that concerned the whole community such as that of receiving in and turning out of the communion the Christians of the Territory were under the authority of the City-Church Hence it is that the Canons of ancient Councils mention a Territory belonging to every City Bishop The thirty fourth Canon (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Ap. 34. of those called Apostolick forbids a Bishop to do any thing without the concurrence of his Metropolitan but what related to his own Diocese and the Territories under it And the ninth of Nice that provides so favourably for the Puritans when they should return to the communion of the Church supposeth Bishops to have a considerable Diocese besides their City For by this it is ordered that if a Bishop of the Puritans should embrace Catholick Communion and there were another Bishop of the Catholick Church in the same City that then (x) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Nicen. 8. the Puritan should either retain the title of a Bishop in the same City if the other did think fit or else be received as a Presbyter But least this may have the appearance of two Bishops in the same Town some place is to be provided for him that he may be either a Chorepiscopus or a Presbyter in the Country The Synod of Antioch forbids the Presbyters of the Territories to send Canonical letters and in another gives the Bishop of the City full authority (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 9. to order Ecclesiastical affairs not only in his City but in the whole Territory that belongs to it to ordain Presbyters and Deacons to exercise Jurisdiction within the extent of his Diocese And in the next Canon forbids (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. Antioch 10. the Chorepiscopi to ordain Presbyters or Deacons in the Country without the consent of the Bishop of the City to which they and the Territory did belong The Council of Elvira speaks of Deacons (a) Diaconus regens plebem Can. Eliber 77. that had Country cures and that the Bishop to whom they belonged was to perfect those who were baptized by these Curees by confirmation Basil (b) Basil ep 192. salutes the Country Clergy of the Diocese of Nicopolis distinct from those of the City and Theodoret who had a Diocese forty miles square reckoned (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. ep 42. his Episcopacy of divine institution and that his large Territory as well as his City was committed into his hands by God Theodosius Bishop of Synnada is said to drive the Macedonian Hereticks not only out of his City but (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Socr. l. 7. c. 3. out of all his Territories And Eustathius (e) Basil ep 73. overthrew all the Altars of Basilides in all the Territory of Gangrae And Synesius writing to the whole Church of Ptolemais addresseth to the people of the City and to those of the Country Parishes that belonged to it It would be an endless labour to alledge all the instances of this nature since nothing is more obvious and occurs more frequently in Ecclesiastical Writers I have shewed how great Territories belonged anciently to the Greek and Roman Cities how unlike their constitution was to ours and especially in this respect I have also shewed that the civil and Ecclesiastical Territories were the same and Mr. Clerkson confesses it His demands therefore concerning this matter receive a full answer and the proof which he (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes ep 11. required not without intimation of despair made good and beyond all reasonable exception To make this matter yet more clear I will instance in some Bishopricks whose extent are known or so much at leastwise as discovers them to be Dioceses consisting of many Country Parishes besides the City Churches I will begin with the Bishoprick of Theodoret because the limits of it have been described with greatest exactness and particularity The Diocese of Cyrus was forty miles in length and as much in breadth And Theodoret (h) Theod. ep 42. proceeds to describe it so minutely that he sets down the number of acres together with the condition and tenure of the land There were fifty thousand free from any service ten thousand belonging to the Fisc about fifteen thousand more subject to taxes but unable to pay according to the proportion then set So that this instance seems clear beyond all exception And as to the Ecclesiastical state of this Territory in his Epistle to Leo he says (i) Theod. ep 113. there were eight hundred Churches in it all belonging to his care Yet some have endeavoured to take off the evidence of this Epistle to Leo when it was urged by the learned Bishop of Worcester Mr. Baxter suspects it because it came from the Vatican Library and Mr. Clerkson (l) No evid of Dioc. Ep. p. 39. suggests the same suspition But this frivolous cavil hath been answered by the same hand that alledged the instance I will take the liberty to add only this that it happens fortunately to this Epistle that it hath an ancient voucher and a clear testimony in the next age after it was written For Liberatus (m) Quos secutus Theodoretus Papae suggessit quanta mala pertulerit rogans ut tali causae subveniretur Liber Brev. c. 12. makes mention of it and informs us that Theodoret wrote to Leo suggesting how much he had suffered of Dioscorus and desiring that for the remedy of these evils another Council might be called And (n) Constat ex ep p. 113 116. Garner in Liber p. 83. Garnerius in his observation upon this place directs us to this Epistle to Leo. Mr. Clerkson instead of eight hundred Churches constantly reads eighty without so much as giving notice that it is only his conjecture But be the number how it will we must lay aside all thoughts of Congregational Episcopacy in this Region Another exception against this instance is offered by Mr. Clerkson (o) No evid of Dioc. p. 39. that this was not a Diocese but a Province and that Theodoret was a Metropolitan And for this he quotes the learned Author whose testimonies he pretended to answer although he expresly says that this is not to be