the Church at Corinth and through Achaia might be numerous both Paul and Peter having labour'd there succesfully yet for some tâ—me there were not any where so many but that the Bishop and his Deacon or Deacons might be sufficient for them 13. So likewise the being a Metropolis is no argument that there should be Presbyters by this time constituted there for supposing as I doe and my grounds have been largely set down that the Apostles conformed their models to the Governments and forms among the Nations where they came at their first planting the Faith in any region it must follow that the Church of Corinth as soon as it was formed into a Church with a Bishop over it was also a Metropolitan Church in relation to all other Cities of Greece which either then did or should after believe as Jerusalem was to all the Cities of Judea or as Philippi being a prime Citie or Metropolis of Macedonia and the first where Paul planted the Faith was straightway a Metropolitical Church how few or how many Christians there were in it it matters not 14. And therefore for his change of the scene from Corinth and Clement's to Philippi and St. Paul's Epistle it will bring him no advantage The case between them is exactly parallel There was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Province of Macedonia saith St. Luke of which Philippi was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Metropolis just as Corinth was of Achaia and this Citie being the first in that region wherein St. Paul planted the Faith it was certainly a Metropolitical Church and Epaphroditus was the Metropolitan of that Province the first day he was Bishop of it The truth of which is so evident that the jeere of the Metropolitical Infant might seasonably have been controverted into a more serious and decent expression there being no reason imaginable why if the Apostles did institute Metropolitical Churches as here is not one serious word of objection against all that hath been said to assert it those Churches should not at their first institution call it their infancie if you will be Metropolitical Churches For as to that of the whole countries being supposed to be converted and divided into Dioceses that is not consequent or necessary to my assertion for as Clement saith of the Biâ—hop and Deacon in each City at the first planting of the Faith that they were constituted in relation to them not onely which did but expresly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who should afterward believe so the Church and Bishop in the Metropolis when that was first converted might very well be Metropolitical in respect of the other Cities of that Province which should afterward receive the Faith 15. As we know when Augustin came first over into England and preacht the Faith and converted Christians first at Ethelbert's seat and the Metropolis of that Province he was by being made Bishop there made Metropolitan also That sure was Bede's meaning when he saith of it lib. 1 c. 27. Venit Arelas ab Archiepiscopo ejusdem civitatis Ethâ—rio Archiepiscopus Genâ—i Anglorum ordinatus est He came to Arles in France and by Etherius Archbishop of that Citie was ordained Archbishop to the Nation of the English and if as a learned Antiquarie thinkes Bede spake after the use of his own time and that the word Archiepiscopus was not in use here then at Augustine's coming hither yet for the substance of the thing wherein I make the instance and all that I contend from thence there can be no doubt but that he being at first made Bishop of the Metropolis was thereby made also Metropolitan 16. As for the divisions into Dioceses how little force that hath against all that I have said or thought in this businesse whether of Bishops or Metropolitans I have spoken enough to that in the Vindication to the London Ministers c. 1. sect 19. and to that I refer the Prefacer 17. And so still I am free enough from quarrelling with my self in the least or from being ingaged in any endlesse labour to reconcile the contradictions of my answers which as farre as my weak understanding can reach are perfectly at agreement with one another If the labour of shewing they are so prove fruitlesse I know to whom I am beholding for it even the Task-master whom I have undertaken to observe and in that guise of obedience shall now proceed briefly to answer every of his questions and I hope there cannot now need many words to doe it 18. To the first concerning the Institution of the second order that of Presbyters for the when I answer I know not the yeare but evidently before the writing of Ignatius's Epistles in Trajan's time and in all probability after the writing all the Bookes of Scripture and for ought I can discerne of Clement's Epistle as farre as concerns either Rome or Corinth 19. For the by whom and by what authority I answer I think they were first instituted by St. John in Asia before his death and shall adde to my reasons elswhere given for it this farther consideration that Ignatius in all his Epistles to the Churches of Asia Ephesus Smyrna Trallis Magnesia Philadelphia makes mention of them within few years after John's death though in his Epistle to the Romans he doth not And if this be so then also it appears by what authority viz. such as John's was Apostolical Or if this should not be firmly grounded as to the person of St. John yet the reason why they were not at first instituted as well as Deacons being but this because there was no need of them yet and the power given by the Apostles to the first Bishops being a plenarie power so far that they might communicate to others what was committed to them either in whole or in part and those accordingly in the force thereof constituting Presbyters in partem officii the authority still by which they were instituted will be Apostolical and so if as this Prefacer gives order they be let goe to the place from whence they came they will not be much hurt they are but remitted to the society of the Apostles and Apostolical persons by this 20. To the second concerning the meaning of my words Diss 2. c. 29 21. when I say that Hierom's words of Churches being governed by common consent of Presbyters are to be understood of the times of the Apostles and whether all those Presbyters were Bishops properly so called I answer that my meaning was that if Hierome be reconcileable to himself that must be his meaning that in the Apostles times the Churches were first governed by common consent of Presbyters and after in the Apostles times too upon the rising of Schismes a Bishop was every where set over them that according in Hierome's notion all those Presbyters were not Bishops but such as out of whom after one was chosen in every Church to be a Bishop 21. That this was the truth of the fact I no where
principelium urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad quos provinciae integrae in iâ— multarum inferiorum â—…bium Ecclesiae earumque Epâ—scopi tanquam ad Archiâ—pâ—scopum aut Metropolitanum pertinebant The Doctor in this Chapter commences per saltum and taking it for granted that he hath proved Diâ—cesan Bishops sufficiently before though he hath scarce spoken any one word to that purpose in his whole book for to prove one superintending in a Church by the name of a Bishop others acting in some kinde of subordination to him by the name of Elders and Presbyters upon the account of what hath been offered concerning the state of the Churches in those dayes will no way reach to the maintenance of this presumption he sacrifices his paines to the Metropoliticall Archiâ—piscopall dignity which as we must suppose is so clearly founded in Scripture and Antiquity that they are as blind as Bars and Moles who cannot see the ground and foundation of it But first be it taken for granted that the Angels of the seven Churches are taken for the Governors of those Churches then that each Angell be an Individuall Bishop of the Church to which he did belong 2 be it also gâ—anted that they were Bishops of the most eminent Church or Churches in that province or Roman politicall distribution of those Countreys in the management of the government of them I say Bishops of such Churches not uâ—bium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Doctor termes them what aâ—…ce is maâ—e by all this to the Assertation of a Metropoliticall Archiepâ—…pacy I cannot as yet â—…isâ—…vâ—r That they were ordinary officers of Christs institution relâ—…ing in their office and ordinary discharge of it not oneâ—y to the particular Churches wherein they were placed but to many Churches also no lesse committed to their charge than these wherein they did reside the Officers Rulers Go â—…ors of which Churches depended on them not onely as to their advice and counsell but as to their power and jurisdiction holding their place and employment from them is some part of that which in this undertaking is incumbent on our Doctor to make good if he will not be supposed to prevaricate in the cause in hand 3. Being here called out anew to the maintaining of what I had said in the Dissert concerning Metropoliticall Churches and Bishops and having so lately been ingaged in the same taske by the exceptions of the London-Ministers and many objections which here in the processe of this discourse are lightly proposed being by them formerly made and accordingly answer accommodated to them and yet farther the maine thing which is here done being to set downe many Latine passages out of the Dissert and to deem them confuted by the bare recitall of them upon these grounds I doe not foresee that there will be any necessitâ— of making any large returnes to this last but not concisest part of his digressâ—on What had been returned to the London-Ministers the Reader will finde in that Vindication Cap. 1. Sect. 16 of which number by the fault of the â—…rinter â—e will meet with two Section and so on for the three subsequent Sections and to the Dissertationâ— themselves and that viâ—…ication of them I shall willingly referre this matter Yet shall I not oâ—…t to gather up whatsoever I shall here finde â—…ggested which was not there punctually spoken to and of that nature here are foure things in this Paragraph 4. First that in the 5. Ch. of Diss 4. I commence per saltum taking it for granted that I had proved Diocesan Bishops before though saith he I had scarce spoken one word to that purpose in my whole Booke To this I answer that as in the first Dissertation had answered one sort of objections against Episcopacy and in the whole second Diss asserted it out of Ignatius and Saint Hierome himselfe so in the third I had deduced it from Christ and the Apostles and I suppose laid those grounds and by all antiquity confirmed and by answer of Blondel's objections vindicated them so that they were competently fitted to beare that structure of Episcopacie which I had laid upon them and then having in the fourth Diss added to this the visible practice of this in the hands of single Governors whether the Apostles in their severaâ—l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or their successors the first Bishops called secundarie Apostles mentioned in the Scripture and yet more particularly in the Angels of the seven Churches which being acknowledged to be the Governors of those Churches were proved to be single Governors of them which was the onely thing in question betwixt Blondel and me I had some reason to hope that I might be allowed to have spoken some one word to that purpose in that Booke before I came to prove those Angels to have been Metropolitans which he knowes was not attempted tâ—ll all this of Episcopacie had been premised by me 5. The reason which he addâ—s in a parenthesis why he affirmes thus expresly that I had scarce spoken one word to prove a Diocesan Bishop in that Booke is the second thing I am to reply to For saith he to prove one superintending in a Church by the name of Bishop others acting in some kinde of subordination to him under the name of Elders and Presbyters will no way reach to the maintenance of this presumâ—tion 6. To which I answer that the question lying as there it did betwixt Blondel and me there can be no doubt but if I have evinced the power in every Church to have been in the hands of a single Bishop and either no college of Presbyters in that Church or else those Presbyters subordinate to the Bishop meaning by subordinate subject to his power and authority over them I have also evinced the cause against Blondel And this I may have leave to hope is there done till the contrary be made appeare and here being no offer of that but onely a mention of the account of what hath been offered by the Prefacer concerning the state of the Churches in those dayes 1. that account hath already been shewn to have no force in it 2. if it had it belongs not to the controversie as it lay betwixt me and Blondel but is as contrary to Blondelâ— pretensions as to mine and so still I cannot see how I fell under his Animadversion in this matter or how I commenced per saltum in doing what there I did as regularly as I could imagine 7. The third thing is that I call the Bishops of the most eminent Churches urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom he will have called Bishops onely But of this there can be no Controversie the fitnesse and propriety of words being to be judged from the use of them and the case being cleare that a Metropolitan especially a Primate was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the antient Councels and Church-writings and from them and not from Scripture which useth no higher style for them than of
before this received his condemnation from Trajan the Emperour at Antioch and was now carrying to Rome for his execution and that is all he hath gained by producing this testimony 14. And so you see I have no reason to make any further answer to what the Prefacer here justly addes concerning the unreasonablenesse and unchristiannesse of these expressions whether in these insertions published once under Ignatius his name or the like in the Constitutions fathered also upon Clemens I am as perfectly of his opinion concerning the impiety of them as he could wish and am thereby obliged to value our new Editions the more for freeing an innocent Martyr and his Reader from such Impostures 15. Onely I wonder that over and above all those that are by that Impostor appointed to obey the Bishop the Prefacer as if the other had been too wary should think fit to make a further insertion and to the Catalogue of the Bishop's subjects adde All Popes when the Greek cited by him hath onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he truly renders Priests in the words following What is this but to corrupt the sink to help the Garbidge to get a stronger savour to go beyond the Artificer at his own weapon to phansie a command to the Bishop to obey himself to Pope Clemens to be subject to Clemens the Pope If the supposititious Clemens had written at that rate he had certainly never imposed on any But I must not advise my Monitor else he should have rendred the Greek in plain English and spared that whether paraphrase or insertion All Popes 16. The last place produced out of the testimonies cited in the Dissertations is indeed to be found in Vossius's edition and the Medicean Copy of our Epistles And the producing of that from thence and mentioning it as produced by me is an evidence that the Prefacer knew the way if he had pleased to make use of it to have cited none but Genuine Testimonies For all such as far as the uncorrupted Copies would afford were by me set down to his hand But that method was not it seems for his turn the Reader could not have been so amuzed with a multitude of odious passages out of Ignatius if this as fairer so easier course had been taken 17. For this one place then where the genuine Ignatius bids them or rather exhorts Polycarâ— the Bishop to advise them to give heed to the Bishop that God may attend to them and adds my soul for theirs who obey the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons though I cannot wonder that in these daâ—es there are some who are not well qualified to say Amen to it yet being taken as it was meant by that holy man there is certainly nothing in it to be startled at or improbable to be written by the Saint Ignatius 'T is in the Epistle to Polycarp and it concerns the Church under him And at that time it appears the Gnostick haereticks were infusing their poyson there and their first artifice of insinuation was taking upon them to understand or know more than their Bishop or Teacher did though he the most famous Doctor of all Asia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostolike and Prophetike and illustrious Doctor saith the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna concerning him This is set downe in the words precedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a man assume and bâ—ast of his knowledge take upon him to know more than the Bishop by this you may know that he hath imbibed and suckt in that Gnostick poyson that makes him so swell presently And in opposition to these it is and upon perfect knowledge of their Bishop that he thus proceeds to exhort and conjure them to attend to their Bishop and not to such assuming Corehs and to doe it more effectually offers to jeopard his soul for theirs that they shall suffer no damage for so doing And supposing the Bishop to be in the right Orthodox and carefull to build them up in the truth and that the haereticks which advanced themselves above the Bishop design'd that which would be their ruin and perdition if they succeed in their attempt as it is certain that this must at this time in this matter be supposed what danger was Ignatius in by venturing his soul in this manner This certainly he might doe as far as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reacheth no more than this that he durst or would be content to venture it though his soul nay more than his life which he now more than ventured was not his own to dispose of Sect. 4. Of the three Orders in the Church Of the Order of Presbyters when it came in No mention of it in Clemens Romanus or Polycarpe but in Ignatius Lombard words of the two Orders The Popish Doctrine concerning Bishops Num. 1. FRom these premises thus layd and I suppose by this time removed out of the way from being occasion of stumbling to any he now proceeds to inferre his conclusion thus 2. Upon these and many more the like accounts doe the Epistles seem to me to be liâ—e the children that he Jews had by their strange wives Nâ—h â—3 who spake part the language of Ashdod and part the language of the Jews That there are in them many footsteps of a gracious spirit every way worthy of and bee ming the great and holy personage whose they are esteemed so there is evidently a mixture of the working of that worldly and carnal sâ—â— it which in his dayes was not so let loose as in after times For what is there in the Scripture what is in the genuine Epistle of Clemens that gives countenance to those descriptions of Episcopacy Bishops and the subjection to them that are in those Epistles as now 〈◊〉 have them so insisted on What Titles are given to Bishops What Soveraignty Power Rule Dominion is ascribed to them I â—here any thing of the like nature in the Writings of the Apostles In Clemens the Epistle of Poâ—ycarpus â— â—r any unquestionable legitimate off-spring of any of the first Worthies of Christianity Whence have they their â—hree Orders of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons upon the distinct observation of which so much weight is laid Is there any one word iota tittle or syllable in the whole Bâ—oâ— of God giving countenance to any such distinctions Eph 4. 11. We have Pastors and Teachers Rom. 12 7 8. Hâ—m that teacheth him that exhorteth him that ruleth and him that sheweth mâ—â—cy Phil. 1. 1. We have Bishops and Deacons and their Institutions with the order of it we have at large expressed 1 Tim. 3. 1 2. Bishops and Deacons without the interposition of any other Order whatsoever Deacons we have appointed Act. 7. and Elders Act. 14 23. those who are Bishops we find called Presbyters Tit. 1. 5 7. And those who are Presbyters we find called Bishops Act. 20. 28. So that Deacons we know and Bishops who are Presbyters or Presbyteâ—s who are Bishops we know
have because they neither Confirm nor Ordain which that it belongs to the Bishop onely the reading of the acts of the Apostles demonstrates Where whatever his opinion was concerning that nicety of distinction betwixt Degree and Order it is evident that hee gives the superiority of degree to Bishops and reserves to them those two Powers and foundeth this in the Apostles times and practise 17. 4. That though this may seem at the first but a slight difference in these men from that which the Antients have more generally taught viz. that the Apostles first instituted Bishops and Deacons not simple Presbyters and Deacons as beside the plain words of Clemens and St. Paul the sense whereof may possibly be controverted the testimonie of Epiphanius and of the profoundest monuments of History irrefragably inforceth yet their interests for the magnifying of the Papacie upon the score of succession to St. Peter doe clearly discover themselves in this way of decision and so make Papists very incompetent witnesses in this matter 18. For upon this conceit that there was a time in the first plantation of the Gospel when the power of Bishops and Priests lay confused though afterward separated by the Apostles themselves the conclusion aimed at and when occasion requires deduced by them is evident that this later though Apostolical institution may be altered by the Poâ—e out of the supereminence of his power as he is the Vicar of CHRIST though they pretend not that he may lawfully attempt to overthrow the primarie and fundamental Sanction And so though Priesthood may not be taken out of the Church yet the tenure by which Bishops hold is not so firm but must stand wholly at the pleasure of the Pope 19. The defence of which conclusion being none of the Interests of the Cause which I assert I shall no farther be obliged to hearken to the premises as they are here but intimated by Lombard and frequently repeated and built upon by sundry of that party than they shall be able regularly to prove them Which being not here attempted but only the specious but fallacious argument proposed from the confession of Lombard himself whose confessions are no obligations to all other men I have no more occasion to inlarge on this particular 20. Which if it were seasonable I might easily doe in observing other particulars among the Popish Writers wherein they shew themselves far from passionate espousers of Episcopacy The Pope forsooth must be the fountain of all Ecclesiastical authority and all other Rivulets must runne in a weake streame and then also derive all they have from him And so much on occasion of this testimony from Lombard and much more than was necessary to have said if I had lookt no farther than his Testimony CHAP. IIII. Concerning the power of the People in appointing Bishops and Deacons and other Ecclesiastical affairs Sect. 1. Clement's words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 considered and vindicated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first Bishops designed particularly by God When this way of designation ceased Num. 1. UPon occasion of the former citation of some words out of Clemens the displeasure is for a while removed from Ignatius and another matter of discourse is sprung concerning the power of the people in appointing Bishops and Deacons to their office in those dayes To this we shall now attend as it follows in these words 2. It seemes moreover that those Bishops and Deacons in those dayes as was observed were appointed to the office by anâ— with the consent of the people or whole body of the Church no less doe those words import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Doctor indeed â—enders those words apâ—lâ—udenâ—â— aut congratulenâ—e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and addes â—atis pro imperio uiâ—â—l â—ic dea ceptationâ— otius Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 qâ—â—â—p sâ—…os Diaconos ab Apostolis â—pâ—stoliâ—is viâ—… hoc lâ—co concludit Bâ—ondâ—â—lus quâ—si qui ex Deâ—jâ—ssu appâ—obatione constâ—…nâ—ur populi etiam acceptatione indigere putandi essent Dissent 4. 〈◊〉 7 8 〈◊〉 And who dares take that confidence upon him as to affirm any moâ—e whâ—â—â—g 〈◊〉 a Doctor hath denved Though the scope of the place the nature of the thing and first most common sense of the word here useâ— being willingly to consent as it is also used in the Scripture for the most part Acts 〈◊〉 1. 1 Cor. 7. 12. to a thing to be done or to the doing of it yet here it must bee taken to applaud or congratulate or what else our Doctor pleases because he will have it so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also must be viri Apostolici mâ—n with Apostolical power when they are only the choice men of the Church where such a Constitution of Officeâ—s is had that are intended because it is ouâ— Doctors purpose to have the words so rendred Ex jussu Dei approbatione is added as though any particular command or approbation of God were intimated for the constitution of the Bishops and Deacons mention'd beyond the institution of the Lord Jesus Christ that Elders should be ordained in every Church because this would seem to be exclusive wholly of the consent of the people as any way needfull or required to their Constitution which yet as it is practically false no such thing being mention'd by Clemens who recounteth the way and means whereby Officers were continued in the Church even after the decease of the Apostles and those first ordained by them to that holy employment so also it is argumentatively weak and unconcluding God appointed designed Saul to be King approving of his so being and yet he would have the people come together to choose him So also was it in the case of David Though the Apostles in the name and the authority of God appointed the Deacons of the Church at Jerusalem yet they would have the whole Church look out among themselves the men to be appointed And that the ordaining of the Elders was with the peoples Election Acts 14. 23. It will ere long be manifested that neither our Doctor nor any of his Associates have as yet disproved This poor thing the people being the peculiar people of Christ the heritage of God and holy Temple unto him c. will one day be found to be another manner of thing than many of our great Doctors have supposed But he informs us cap 4 sect 3. from that testimony which we cited before that the Apostles in the appointment of Bishops and Deacons for so the words expresly are are sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith he Revelationibus edoâ—toâ— esse quibus demùm baec dignitas commâ—â—icanda esset that is that they appointed those whom God revealed to them in an extraordinary manner to be so ordained and this is the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And why â—oâ—â—he holy Ghost orders concerning the appointment of Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 3. 10. That those who are to be taken into office and power in the Church had
of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders for Bishops T it 1. 5 7. is by me acknowledged though not of Bishops for Presbyters which conceit is as largely elswhere confuted 8. And for the two large and expresse places here transcribed out of Clemens they had before been particularly produced by me and found perfectly to consent and accord with the notions which out of Scripture I had received and which by Epiphanius were vouched 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of the profoundest Records And for Blondel's collection to the contrary I shall hope that to other men my answers will appear more than verbal and though I have here somewhat an unkind character given me of them viz. that they that approve them may one day think it needfull to distinguish between words and things yet I am not quite discouraged being competently assured that if he that said so had had any thing else to say any more than words to object against them he would not have been so reserved or sparing of his pains as to have denyed it place in his Animadversions 9. Lastly 'T is evident what he saith that I doe not deny Clement's owning but two sorts of Officers in a Church Bishops sometimes called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders and Deacons But it is as evident by my words what I mean by Clement's words that I mean as he doth viz. that at the Apostles first preaching and planting the Faith in Cities and Regions before any multitude of Believers came in they constituted in each City no more but a Bishop and one or more Deacons after the exemplar in Jerusalem where James the Lord's Brother soon after our Saviours ascension was constituted Bishop there and seven Deacons Act 6. to attend him but as yet no Presbyters of any middle order between them and him 10. This I have cleared concerning those first times out of Epiphanius and taken notice of the causes of it intimated both by Clemens and him 1. The paucity of fit men for that office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were not found among them men fit to be constituted Presbyters and 2. The no need of any more at that time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bishop in each City or Region served the turn onely he could not be without a Deacon which is the more manifest because the Bishops and Deacons which were then instituted were as in the former of these testimonies from Clemens appeares the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first fruits of their labours their first converts and the flock assigned them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that should afterwards believe 11. To this if the words of Lombard would agree as they will so far as here cited if only by Ecclesia Primitiva we understand the first age or infancie of the Church at the time of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first preaching of the Apostles then that testimony would by me be fully subscribed also meaning by the duos ordines the Bishops truly so called and by him styled Episcopos Presbyteros and Deacons concerning whom and whom onely 't is true praeceptum Apostoli nos habere that we have the precept of the Apostle viz. St. Paul in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus But the truth is Lombard's words belong to another matter a nicety that is gotten into their schools that Episcopacy and Presbyterie are not diversi ordines but diversi gradus not different orders but onely different degrees of the same one order of Sacerdotium or Priesthood upon a phansie that Sacerdo is so called from sacra do delivering or imparting holy things so faith he expresly Ideo autem etiam Presbyteri sacerdotes vocantur quia sacrum dant Presbyters are also called Priests because they give holy things In which matter as it is of little importance which way the question is decided as long as the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters is agreed on to be such as hath some Powers reserved to the one which are not common to the other so if Lombard's words should by any be thought farther extensible as founded in that opinion that first Presbyters ruled in common and that beside them there were none then but Deacons I must then think it as reasonable for me to be permitted to forsake Lombard in this as the Prefacer will deeme it for him to depart from him in other matters 12. For though it be here set down as an argument of the evidence and clear conviction and so of much more than of the bare truth of the position that Lombard himselfe confesseth it which I suppose is not an acknowledgement that all that Lombard saith is true but an insinuation that this of Bishops as maintained by me is for the matter a Popish Doctrine and yet is in this particular rejected and the contrary confest by Lombard an eminent Popish Doctor yet I must crave leave to interpose my exceptions to this way of arguing or concluding 13. 1. That neither I nor any true member of the Church of England owe or pay any observance to the bare dictates of Lombard or indeed farther than he hath reasons or proofs of Scripture or Antiquity to confirm them 14. 2. That in this point which must be waged by Testimonies there are none produced I shall adde producible by him out of Scripture to prove that ever there was a time when there were in the Church none but those two orders of Presbyters in our modern notion and Deacons I may without immoderate confidence assume that all that can be offer'd to this purpose are consider'd and answer'd in the Dissertations 15. 3. That the principal Testimonies of Antiquity on which in this matter some Papists build being some obscure words of St. Hierome the Presbyter which yet must be so understood as to be reconciled with his making the three orders to be of Apostolical tradition the result must be this that though they are mistaken in some circumstances yet they maintaine with us the more substantial truth that Bishops are instituted by the Apostles 16. So 't is elswhere made made evident of Panormitan who though he affirme that immediately after the death of Christ all the Presbyters in common ruled the Church yet postmâ—dum saith he ordinaverunt Apostoli ut â—rearentur Episcopi certa Sacramenta eis reservarent illa interdicendâ— simplicibus Presbyteris Within a while the Apostles ordained that Bishops should be created and reserved certain Sacraments to them Confirmation and Ordination and forbade them to be meddled with by simple Presbyters And accordingly it is also in the forecited place of Lombard in the beginning of that 24 Dist Presbyteri licet sint Sacerdotes tamen Pontificatus aepicem non habent sicut Episcopi quia ipsi nec chrismate frontem signant nec Paracletum dant quod solis deberi Episcopis lectio Actorum Apostolorum demonstrâ—t Presbyters though they be Priests yet have not that superior part of the Pontificate which the Bishops
acknowledges contenders was sure to be no good argument when they against whom they are by him supposed to contend being the Bishops of Corinth those Bishops were say I constituted by the Apostles This was but a light circumstance yet that which I thought would be some farther prejudice to his argument when the words from whence he inferr'd his conclusion were supposed to be spoken by the contenders those again contenders against Bishops and those Bishops constituted by the very Apostles 20. And then for Clement 't is most certain whatsoever the Prefacer is pleased to affirm to the contrary that he expresly saith this of these Bishops whom they contended against and ejected that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituted by the Apostles or after by other esteemed men some immediately both designed and ordain'd to the Office by the Apostles personally others designed and nominated or put upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the list of succession by the Apostles and as places were vacant actually ordaiâ—'d by the imposition of the hands of those esteemed or eminent men the successors of the Apostles such as were also themselves call'd Apostolical men by Blondel and by the antients Apostoli secundarii secundarie Apostles 21. This is most evident again by what was cleared in the last Section And so the Parenthesis had as little of Justice in it as the main period and might have been spared also if the Prefacer had so pleased 22. What follows after in this place It is the advice of the Church of Rome is for the most part true and I have suggested nothing against it nor am now a whit concerned in the contents of it and therefore though there be some infirme parts in it also and many more in the former words yet having vindicated my selfe I shall not trouble the Reader to pursue this matter any farther what he hath mistaken he may if he please rectifie by what hath been said and particularly informe himselfe of his doubts that they to whom the advise is given and on occasion of whom the sedition was raised are not they that were in danger of being derected from their office as at the beginning of this Section he thought it possible nâ—r consequently they as toward the end he saith which were already in office but they for whom the people contended to have them advanced to the Bishops seats they that were the occasion and the subject matter of the contention and as we may conclude from some passages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ring-leadâ—râ— of the sedition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that laid the foundation of it 23. And that bring me to the second strange part of Blondels collection Communi Presbyteros consilio Ecclesiam rexisse eosdem nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attentâsse sed multitudinis dicto obedientes fuisse that the Presbyters by Common Councel ruled the Church and that the same Presbyters in the text of Clemens were obedient to the command or saying of the multitude But that certainly could not be hence concluded the persons into whose mouth Clemens put these words being not Presbyters nor Bishops neither but those whom the people would have Bishops and to that end raised this sedition and cast the true Bishops out of the Church And so they of whom this sage observation is made that they did nothing imperiously but depended on the commands of the multitude are but these unruly fellow-believers not really vested with any power in the Church onely one part of a seditious multitude exhorted by him to indeavour to pacifie another and to indeavour to rescue the legall Bishops from suffering in this tempest yea though the same popular tumult would have put them into their places others being resolved to shake the whole Church rather than they would misse of their designe of raising those that they thought fit to admire 24. And for any such words used or by Clemens advised to be used betwixt one part of this multitude and the other I still desire it may be considered whether it be possible that an argument can be regularly drawn from them on which to found the right or power of the people in ordering Ecclesiastical affaires when besides all that hath formerly been said 't is certaine the speech was made to that part of the people which were in open rebellion against their superiors and was onely a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or mollifying plaster applyed to the part which was at that present most inflamed embrocation to allay the paroxysme 25. I might now joyne issue with the Prefacer and examine the truth of his positive affirmation that in this saying of Clemens there is that laid which is sufficiently destructive to the Episcopacie that I contend for and also of any such Presbyterie as shall undertake the disposing of things in the Church of God without the consent concurrent suffrage of the people or that the Episcopacie I contend for is wholly inconsistent with the power and liberty here granted to the people But there is not one syllable here produced for the defence of this affirmation And I thinke it competently appears by this time how farre that bare text of Clement is from founding it and therefore I have now nothing more to contend with my contrary affirmation that no such thing is yet concluded will certainly be true and fit to be confronted to and balanced with it and if I should farther improve it into this that nothing is conclusible I thinke having already seen the utmost that two such skilfull artificers Blondel and the Prefacer have beene able to produce toward it it would not be thought any grand insolence 26. One thing onely I cannot omit that when he speaks of the power of the people he calls it their concurrent suffrage once and after joynes them with the Presbyters in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commanding or ordeining in the affaires of the Church But I shall demand can any thing like that be drawn out of the place in Clement Is it not certaine that the multitude whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordinances he there speaks of had cast out their Bishops or Elders out of the Church and those that are to speak to them and joyne with them are not Presbyters but those whom they would have exalted to that office and raised their tumult about it And how then can the Presbyters in that place be supposed to joyne with the people in this ordeining 27. I shall not make my observations from hence but leave the Prefacer to examine himselfe with what justice he hath managed his replies to me or reproacht my answers to D. Blondel And so indeed as he saith It is a sad thing to consider the pittifull intanglements and snares c. And so much for this Section also The imployment is so dry to me and the profit to the Reader so thin from such kinde of debates that I should be glad it were the last of them
an Episcopacy to have been received by them of old as is now contended for are exceedingly remote from the way and manner of the expressions of those things used by the Divine Writers with them also that follow'd after both before as hath been manifested and some while after the dayes of Ignatius as might be farther clearly evidenced and are thrust into the series of the discourse with such an incoherent impertinency as proclaims an interpolation being some of them also very â—idiculâ—us and so foolishly hyperbolical that they fall very little short of Blasphemies yet there are expressions in all or most of them that will abundantly manifest that he who was their Author whoever he was never dreamt of any such fabrick of Church-Order as in after Ages was insensibly received Men who are fuâ—l of their own apprehensions begotten in them by such representations of things as either their desirable presence hath exhibited to their mind or any after prejudicate presumption hath possâ—st them with are apt upon the least appearance of any likenesse unto that Church they fancie to imagine that they see the face and all the lineaments thereof when upon due examination it will easily be discovered thaâ— there is not indeed the least resemblance between what they find in and what they bring to the Auâ—hors in and of whom they make their inquiry The Papists having hatched and own'd by severall degrees that monstrous figment of Transubstantiation to instance among many in that abhomination a folly destructive to what ever is in us as being living creatures Men or Christians or whatever by sense reason or Religion we are furnished withall offering violence to us in what we hear what we see with our eyes and look upon in what our hands doe handle and our palaâ—s taste breaking in upon our understandings with vagâ—anâ— flying formes self-subsisting accidents with as many expresse contradictions on sundry accounts as the nature of things is capable of relation unto attended with more grosse Idolatry than that of the poor naked Indians who fall down and worship a piece of red cloth or of those who first adore their Gods and then correct them doe yet upon the discovery of any expressions among the Antients seeming to favour them which they now make use of quite to another end and purposâ— than they did who first ventured upon thâ—m having minds filled with their own abhominations doe presently cry out and triumph as if they had found the whole fardel of the Mass in its perfect dress and their breaden God in the midst of it It is no otherwise in the case of Episcopacie men of these later Generations from what they saw in present being and that usefulnesse of it to all their desires and interests having entertain'd though's of love to it and delight in it searching Antiquity not to instruct them in the truth but to establish their prejudicate opinion received by Tradition from their Fathers and to confute them with whom they have to doe whatever expressions they find or can hear of that fall in as to the sound of words with what is now insisted upon instantly they câ—y out viâ—imus Io-Peanâ— what a simple Generation of Presbyters and Independents have we that are ignorant of all Antiquity or doe not undersâ—… what they reâ—d and look upon Hence if we will not believe that in Ignaâ—tus's dayes there were many Parish Churches with their single Prâ—… 〈◊〉 subordination to a Diocesan Bishop either immediately or by the into posed power of a Chore-episcopus and the like and â—hose Diocâ—â—ans agâ—…n in the preciâ—cts of Provinces laid in a due subjection to their Metropâ—â—itans who took care of them as they of their Parish Priests every Individual Church having no Officer but a Presbyter every Diocesan Church having no Presbyter but a Bishop and every Metropolitan Church having â—…her Presbyter nor Bishop properly related unto it as such but an Archbishop we are worse than Infidels Truly I cannot but wonder whether it doth not someâ—imes â—nter into these mens thoughts to apprehend now â—…prible they are in their proofs for the fathering of such an Ecclesiastical distribution of Governors and Government as undeniably iâ— quâ—d after the civil divisions and constructions of the times and places wherein it was introduced upon thâ—se holy persons whose souls never oâ—ce entred into the secrets thereof Thus fares it with our Doctor and his Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall oâ—elâ— crave leave to saâ— to him a Augustulus of Quintilius Varus upon the losse of the Legions in Germany under his command Quintui Vare redde â—…giâ—res Domine Doctor redde Ecclesias Give us the Churches of Christ such as they were in the dayes of the Apostles and down to Ignatius though before that time if Hegisippus may be believed somewhat dâ—…ureâ— and our contest about Church-Officers and Government will be never at an end than pâ—â—h â—â—s you will readily imagine Give us a Church all whose membeâ—s are holy called sanctified justâ—fied â—â—ving stones Temples for the Holy Ghost Saints Believers united to Christ the 〈◊〉 by the Spiâ—it that is given to them and dwelleth in them a Church whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that doth nothing by its membeâ—s apâ—… that appertains to Church â—â—de but when it is gathered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Church that being so gathered together in one place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acting in Church things in iâ—s whole body under the 〈◊〉 and residence of its Officers a Church walking in oâ—â—er and not as some who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom saith Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as calling the Bishops to the Assemblies yet doe all things without him the manner of some in our â—ayes 〈◊〉 supposeth not to â—eep thâ— Assemblies according to the command of Christ give us I â—â—y â—uch a Church and let us come to them when they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as the Churches in the dayes of Ignatius appeare to have been and are so rendred in the Quotations taken from his Epistles by the learned Doctor for the confirmation of Episcopacie and as I said before the contest of this present digression will quickly draw to an issue 3. The first thing here assumed is the evidence of some ill favoured tampering with Ignaetius's Epistles deduced from the difference between them and Clement ' s in their expression about Church-Order and Officers But indeed if there were any such thing I hope it will not be imputed to me who have been as carefull as is possible to get an emendate copie of these Epistles and having first contented my self with that which had past Vedelius's tryal at Geneva which one might hope would burn up all the stubble which could be gotten in there toward the founding of Episcopacie I have since fallen upon Copies much more purified than that clensed from almost all the drosse every passage which this Prefacer hath thought fit to accuse
AN ANSWER TO THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE DISSERTATIONS TOUCHING IGNATIVS'S EPISTLES and the EPISCOPACIE in them asserted By H. HAMMOND D. D. LONDON Printed by J. G. for Richard Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1654. AN ANSVVER TO THE ANIMADVERSIONS on the Disputations concerning EPISCOPACY THE INTRODVCTION Nu. 1. I Had thought I had concluded the Readers trouble and mine own when I had gotten to an end of the Assemblers Exceptions but by that time I had transmitted those debates to the Printer and from him received one Sheet of the Impression I found my self called out anew by a Preface to a Book of a very distant subject The Saints verseverance wherein is inserted a Discourse touching the Epistles of Ignatius and the Episcopacy in them asserted and some animadversions on Dr. H. H. his Dissertations on that subject And this Preface and these contents of it leâ—t it might be less discernable thought fit to be exprest in the Title page and subscribed by John Owen servant of Jesus Christ in the work of the Gospel 2. And although the speedy return of such tasks is not overgratefull to me yet because 1. I conceive it is his pleasure that we should enter this commerce And 2. because the work of the Gospel is so glorious an employment that I cannot be averse or flow to the giving all possible satisfaction to any which professeth to labour in it And 3. because if the Reader so consent this discourse may be annext to the former debates with the Provincial Assembly being likely to be on the same heads which are there spoken to I shall not doubt thus speedily to undertake the labour of it and if his Animadversions prove any way usefull to me I shall acknowledge by whom I have profited retract most readily what he shall give me cause to retract and never multiply any debates which may be thus more compendiously ended being confident that no miscarriage of mine of which yet I am not conscious to have committed any in the Book of Dissert will be able to prejudice the main truth which is there defended the Institution of Bishops by the Apostles CHAP. I. Of the Apostolical Canons Sect. 1. The Controversie about them The Codex Canonum What is meant by Apooryphal and so by Genuine Canons The two mistakes of the Praefacer which produceth his Animadversion What is meant by the title Apostolical Canons The Praefacers ungrounded suggestion against the writings of the first times Numb 〈◊〉 TO set out then with all speed that may be on this new Stage not knowing of what length it may prove the first Animadversion I finde my self concern'd in is in these words The first Writings that are imposed on us after the Canonical Scriptures are the eight Books of Clement commonly called The Apostles Constitutions being pretended to be written by him at their appointment with the Canons ascribed to the same persons These we shall buâ— salute for besides that they are but faintly defended by any of the Papists disavowed and disclaimed as Apocryphal by the most learned of them as Bellarmine de Script Eccles in Clem. who approves onely of fifty Canons of eighty five Baronius An. Dom. 102 14. who addes thirty more and Biâ—ius with a little inlargement of Canons in Tit. Câ—n. T. 1. Con. p. 17. and have been throughly disproved and decryed by all Protestant writers that have had any occasion to deal with them their folly and falsity their impostures â—…triflings have of late been so fully manifested by Dallaeus de Pseudepigrapâ—iâ— Apost that nothing need be added thereunto Of him may Dr. H. H. learn the truth of that insinuation of his Dissert 2 c 6. sect 3. Canone Apostolico secundo semper inter genninos habito but of the confidence of this Author in his assertions afterward 2. I am not here much surprised 1. with this charge of untruth and 2. this promise that my confidence in asserting shall be discovered knowing that it was one of Aristotles insinuations in his Elenchs at the beginning of a Dispute to endeavour to put the Respondent in passion and then he might easily have fallacies imposed on him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If this were his design I have more reasons than that one to hope his pardon if I do not thus gratifie him And although there be not one word said in this place to prove either of these charges but I am appointed to learn one from Mr. Daillé whose book I have not been so curious as to see and to expect the other afterwards from the Prefacer yet being concerned to know that veracity and humility are my duties as I am a Christian and that I ought not to live one minute under the scandal of having offended against either of them and having yet no motive to retract that expression in the Dissert I am obliged to render an account of my using it And it is this 3. In the second Canon of the Council in Trullo An. 681. I find a conciliarie affirmation of eighty five Canons under the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Canons of the holy and honourable Apostles before us And what was there confirmed is farther ratified by the second Council of Nice An. 787. which cites the 53d of those Canons And this I take for a testimonie of the Eastern Churches reception of that number of 85 Apostolical Canons at that time Whereas in the Western Churches both before and after this time although the Canons of the Apostles were by the Eastern communicated to them yet that number was not received but in a Council of seventy Bishops at Rome under Pope Gelasius somewhat before 500 years after CHRIST the Book of the Apostles Canons was defined to be Apocryphal By Apocryâ—hal here I conceive to be meant such as are not obligatorie wâ—…ch are not so owned or received by the Church as to be entered into Codex ordinarily known by the name of Corpus Canonum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Phâ—tiâ—s his stile The body of Synodical Canons their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Justiniaâ—… their Rule of Discipline in like manner as the Books of Canonical Scripture to which Justinian added the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or definitions of the four first General Councils made up their Rule of Doctrines That there was such a Codex we find in the fourth General Council that of Chalcedon when the Book of Canons as well as the Bible was solemnly brought in at the opening of the Council and * call'd for to be read before them as occasion required And 't is sufficiently known what Justellus observes That the Christian Church was ruled of old by a double Law Divine the Books of the Canonical Scripture and Canonical the Codex of Canons And those Canons that were not received into that Codex though they might hold the authority due to antient pieces be esteemed worthy the reading and observing were yet stiled Apocryphal i. e. usefull though not obligatory
reverenced for their Antiquity but not allowed the power or title of Laws as the body of the Canons is known to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we observe them as Laws saith Justinian and they are thence called Nomocanon and Canon Law 〈…〉 That this is the meaning of the word Apocryphal I shall conclude from the story of the fact for soon after this sentence of that Council of Rome within very few years we know that they were set up and received in that very place where they had been thus lookt on as Apocryphal For Dionysius Exiguus about the year 527. made a collection of Canons ex Graecis exemplaribus Canones Ecclesiasticos composuit quos â—odie usu celeberrimo Ecclesia Romana complectitur out of the Greek copies he composed Ecclesiastical Canons which at this day the Church of Rome embraceth and useth most honourably as Cassiodore his contemporarie and consort saith of him Divin Lect. c. 23. In this collection he set fifty of these in the front under the title of Apostolical Canons prefacing this concerning them In principio Canones qui dicuntur Apostolorum de Graeco transtulimus quibus quia plurimi consensum non praebuere facilem hoc ipsum ignorare vestram noluimus sanctitatem quamvis postea quâ—dam constituta Pontificum ex ipsis Canonibus assumpta esse videantur In the beginning we have translated out of Greek the Canons which are said to be the Apostles to which because very many have been hard to give assent we have thought fit to mention so much to you though afterward some constitutions of Bishops seem to have been taken out of these very Canons Here it is evident 1. that what was a few years since lookt on as Apocryphal is within a while received into their Codex celâ—berrimo usu said Cassiodore at that very time And 2. whilst it was not in the Codex yet Constitutions of the Bishops were taken â—…ut of them which argues to me that they were not to be rejected as to be disliked but onely so as not to be obligatorâ—… any farther than as some new Decrees of the Church should give them their authority So again in Mercator's Collection he prefaceth thus Propter â—orum authoritatem câ—teris concilâ—…s praeposâ—imus Canones qui dicuntur Apostâ—lâ—rum licâ—t a quibusdam Apocrypha dicantur quoniam plures eos recipiunt sancti Patres eorum sententias Synodali authoritate roboraverunt inter Canonicas posuerunt constitutiones In respect of their authority we have before the rest of the Councils past set down the Canons of the Apostles so called though by some they are said to be Apocryphal because more receive them and the holy Fathers have confirmed them by authority of Council and placed them among Canonical Constitution Where the opposition is clear betwixt Apocryphal on one side and confirmed by Councils and placed among Canonical constitutions on the other side 5. One thing onely I can foresee to bee by Mr. Daille or any man objected against this viz. the Censure that Isidore Hispalensis hath past upon the Apostolike Canons in these words which I see are thought by some learned men to refer to that Council at Rome under Gelasius but whether by Mr. Daillé I know not Eodem nec sedes Apostolica recepit nec sancti patres illis assensum praelucerunt pro co quod ab haereticis sub nomine Apostolorum compositi dignoscuntur The Apostolike See received them not and the holy Fathers have not allowed them their assent because they are discerned to be framed by haereticks under the name of the Apostles Here I shall offer my conjecture and submit it to better judgements that Isidore speaks not of the first fifty Canons which were certainly before his time who was a member of the Council of Toledo in Spain An. 633. received into the Romane Codex as hath already appeared nor consequently refers to the Synod under Gelasius which upon other reasons I acknowledge spake even of those fifty but of the whole number of 85 for in those latter 35 it is and not in the first fifty that the Apostles are praetended to be the Authors of them viz. Can. 82. Where they call Philemon's servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Onesimus and Can. 85. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Acts or Canons of us the Apostles whereas no such thing is so much as intimated in the first fifty For as for those words in the fiftieth Canon which refer to the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the sentence of Christ and our constitution by the spirit 't is evident that they are in Turrian's Edition inserted and added to that Canon after the words with which Dionysius Exiguus his old collection and translation ended And so in the former part of the Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he said not unto us as if the Writers were the Apostles 't is certain that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to us is inserted And accordingly in Balsamon's Text and Comment which I have before me the Canon is intire without either of those insertions To all which I may adde that the matter of all those first fiftie Canons and the very form of words is such as gives not the least occasion to think them composed by haereticks certainly not put under the Apostles names by those haereticks as Isidore affirms of those of which he speaks 6. This is to my understanding the meaning of the Controversie concerning the number and authority of these Canons which were to be accounted Apocryphal and which not and so likewise which Genuine and which not and to this Controversie it is that my insinuation and my words refer and the second Canon being one of those former 50 which though they have been counted Apocryphal in one sense were yet Genuine in another i. e. none of the later addition of 35. which are called by learned men novitii and adulterate I thought I had reason and cannot but still think it to say that that second Canon was semper inter genuinos habitus alwayes accounted genuine i. e. received and acknowledged among the Canons of the Antient Church by those who controverted and rejected the other 35. 7. Thus much may perhaps suffice to remove the two mistakes which by some indications I conceive to have produced this Animadversion For 1. when in the words immediately precedent he saith they are disavowed and disclaimed by the most learned Papists as Apocryphal this I suppose must be his meaning either that by that Synod at Rome under Pope Gelasius they were defined to be Apocryphal and then as there is truth in that so I may be permitted to have told him what I conceive meant by Apocryphal in that place those that were not yet received into their Codex or else that the rest besides the first 50 are disclaimed by the most learned Papists so I learn from my Lord Primate that they are by Humbert in his Answer to Nicetas