the Doctors gravity and selfe-denyall This is complained of by some who have tried it in reference to his late Comment on the Revelation And in this Differtation he is put by his owne thoughts I will not say guilâ—y to an Apologie cap. 1. Sect. 24. Quâ in re suffra gium suum tuâ—â—sse Hâ—gonem Grotium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—x Annotationibus poâ—… nuper â—ditis postquam haec omn a Typographo transcripâ—a essent curâ—… perlectis edoctum gratulor Let not the Reaâ—er thinke that Doctor Ham had transmitted his papers full of raâ—e conjectures to the Prinâ—eâ— before Gâ—…us his Annotations on the Revelation were published but onely before he had read them The Doctor little thinkâ—s what a flye this is in his pot of Oyntment nor how undecent with all impartiall men such Apologies subservient to a frame oâ— spirit in bondagâ—… a mans owne esteeme and reputation appeare to be but let this passe and let the Saints that call upon the name of Jesus Christ in every place be the Saints in every part of Aâ—…a though the Epistle it selfe written indeed upon occasion takâ—n from the Church of Corinth yâ—â— was given by inspiration from God for the use not onely of all Saints in the whole world at that time wherein it was written but of all those who were to believe in any part or place of the world to the end thereof although the assertion of it be not built on any tolerable conjâ—cture but may be rejected with the same facility wherewith it is tendred what now will â—ence ensuâ— why hence it follows that Clement also wrote his Epistle to all the Churches in Aâ—haia Very good Paul writing an Epistle intituled chiefly to the Corinthians expresly and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 directs iâ— to all the Saints or Churches of Achaia yea to all that call upon the name of God in every place so that his Epistle being of Catholick concernment is not to be conâ—ined to the Church of Corinth onely although most of â—e particular things mentioned in that Epistle related onely to that particular Church Therefore Clement directing his Epistle to the Church of Corinth onely not onâ—â— mentioning nor insinuaâ—ing an intention of extending it to any other handling in it onely the peculiar concernment of that Church and a difference about one or two persons therein mâ—st be supposed to have wâ—iâ—en to all the Churches of Achaia And if such arguments as these will not prove Episcopacy to be of Apostolicall constitution what will prevaile with men so to esteeme it Si Pergama dextrâ defendi possent etiam hac deâ—ensa faissent And this is the â—ause of naming many Elders or Presbyters in one Church For my part I suppose the Doctor might more probably have adhered to a former conjecture of his Dissert 4. cap. 10. Sect. 9. concerning two sundry different Churches where were distinct Officeâ—s in the same City Primò saith he respondeo non usquequaque verum est quod pro concesso fumitur quamvis enim in unâ Ecclesiâ aut 〈◊〉 plures simul Episcopi nunquam fuerint pray except them mentioned Act. 20. 28. and those Act. 14. 23. nihil tamen â—…are quin in eadem civitate duo aliquando â—…us diâ—â—erminati fuerint He might I say with more shew of probability have abode by this observation than to have rambled over all Greece to relieve himselfe against his adversaries But yet neither would this suffice What use may or will be made of this concession shall elsewhere be manifested 3. That which is extended to this length in this part of the Prefacers discourse may briefly be summ'd up into these four heads 1. a briefe touch of the difference betwixt Clemens and Ignatius the one mentioning but two the other three Orders in the Church 2. His asserting the Bishops mentioned in Clemens to be bare Presbyters concluding that from the number of them many in that 〈◊〉 Church of Corinth 3. a taking notice of a first answer of mine to that argument and indeavouring to invalidate it 4. a reproach of my vaine-glory in borrowing notions from Grotius and being unwilling to be thought to doe so Which last though it hang loose from the matter in hand being perfectly extrinsecall to our Controversie whether about Ignatius Epistles or Episcopacie because 't is certaine that one that hath received help from Grotius is not for that the more likely to be in the wrong or to be unable to maintaine his assertions and because he that hath faults in his manners the vaine-glorious and ingratefull may yet by so good a guide as Grotius fall upon some truth yet I shall afterward punctually reply to and dispatch that also and shew how little happy the Prefacer is in all his acts of severity But as the order and the rule before me directs I must begin with the more materiall parts 4. And first for the difference betwixt Clement and Ignatius it was farre from being any observation of the Prefacers or usefull to him against us It is knowne to be a principal ingredient in the foundation on which I build and assert Episcopacie viz. that in the times of the Scriptures and of Clemens there appear to have been two and not above two Orders in the Church of Christ Bishops and Deacons that these Bishops were promiscuously styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops and Elders the nature of each word agreeing to denote a singular Governor and the use of it both in Scripture and Clemens no way inclining to determine it to a number or College of Presbyters in each Church ruling in Common Councel That Saint Paul Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 7. 1 Tim 3. expresly sets downe this course under the two plaine heads of Bishops and Deacons that Clemens is as expresse that the Apostles at their first preaching constituted or ordained their first converts to be Bishops and Deacons of those that should after believe that Epiphanius voucheth it out of the profoundest Histories the antientest Records that while the paucity of Christians was such as neither to need more than a Bishop and his Deacons in each Church nor to afford much choise of persons for any more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were contented every where with these two Lastly that when the number of believers was greatly increased and so permitted and required it then a second order under Bishops and above Deacons was erected in each Church by Apostles and Apostolical men particularly as may probably be collected by Saint John in Asia toward the end of his dayes and accordingly that Ignatius's Epistles written some yeares after John's death are the first that mention that second order 5. All this in every branch hath been distinctly cleared both in the Dissertations and since in the Vindication of them from the London Assemblers and not one word is here pretended to invalidate any one part of it any farther than as it will fall under
Elders or Presbyters here mention'd were properly those whom he calls Bishops Diocesans men of a third order and rank above Deaâ—ons and Presbyters in the Church Administrations and Government And for those who are properly called Presbyters there were then none in the Church To give colour to this misrable evasion Diss 4. c. 10 11. He discourseth about the government and ordering of Church affairs by Bishops and Deacons In some Churches that were small not yet formed or compleated nor come to perfection at the first planting of them how well this is accommodated to the Church of Corinth which Clement calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which himself would have to be a Metropolitical Church being confessedly great numerous furnished with great and large gifts and abilities is seen with half an eye How ill also this shâ—ft is accommodated to help in the case for whose service it was first invented is no lesse evident It was to save the sword of Phil. 1. 1. from the throat of Episcopacie he contendeth for That Epistle is directed to the Saints or Church at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons Two things doe here trouble our Doctor 1. The mention of more Bishops than one at Philippi 2. The knitting together of Bishops and Deacons as the onely two orders in the Church bringing downâ—… Episcopacie one degree at least from that height whereto he would exalt it For the first of these he tells you that Philippi was the Metropolitane Church of the Province of Macedonia that the rest of the Churches which had every one their severall Bishops Diocesan we must suppose were all comprised in the mentioning of Philippi so that though the Epistle be preciselyâ—… directed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet the Bishops that were with them must be supposed to be the Bishops of the whole Province of Macedonia because the Church of Philippi was the Metropolitane The whole Countrey must have been supposed to be converted and who that knowes any thing of Antiquity will dispute that and so divided with Diocesans as England of late was the Arch-Bishops so being at Philippi but how came it then to pâ—sse that here is mention made of Bishops and Deacons onely without any word of a third order or ranke of men distinct from them called Presbyters or Elders To this he answers secondly that when the Church was first planted before any great number were converted or any sit to be made Presbyters there was onely those two orders instituted Bishops and Deacons and so that this Church of Philippi seems to have been a Metropoliticall Infant The truth is if ever the Doctor be put upon reconciling the contradictions of his answers one to another not onely in this but almost in every particular he deals withall an intanglemen which he is throwne into by his bold and groundlesse conjectures he will finde it to be as endlesse as fruitlesse but it is not my present businesse to interpose in his quarrells either with himselfe or Presbyterie As to the matter under consideration I desire onely to be resolved in these few Queries 1. If there were in the time of Clement no Presbyters in the Churches not in so great and flâ—urishing a Church as that of Corinth and if all the places in Scripture where there is mention of Elders doe precisely inten Bishops in a distinction from them who are Deacons and not Bishops also as he asserts when by whom by what Authority were Elders who are only so inferiour to Bishops peculiarly so termed instituted and appointed in the Churches And how comes it passe that there is such expresse mention made of the office of Deacons and the continuance of it none at all of Elders who are acknowledged to be superiour to them and on whose shoulders in all their own Churches lies the great weight and burthen of all Ecclesiasticall administration As we say of their Bishops so shall we of any Presbyter not instituted and appointed by the authority of Jesus Christ in the Church let them goe to the place from whence they came 2. I desire the Doctor to informe me in what sense he would have me to understand him Diss 2. cap. 20 21 22. Where he disputes that these words of Hicrome Antequam â—ludia in Religione fierent diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli ego Cepbae communi Presbyterorum consensu Ecclesia 〈…〉 be understood of the times of the Apostles when 〈…〉 Church of Corinth when it seems that neither 〈…〉 such thing as Presbyters in the 〈…〉 we can 〈…〉 As 〈…〉 Presbyters were Bishops properly so 〈…〉 who are they so 〈◊〉 of whom 〈◊〉 〈…〉 to be a 〈…〉 so called To 〈…〉 I 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 in the Scripture we 〈…〉 of Church 〈…〉 This 〈…〉 Doctâ—… is that of 〈…〉 give us 〈…〉 of Christ give us in every Church Bishops and Deacons 〈◊〉 than we 〈…〉 let those Bishops attend the 〈…〉 over which they â—…ching the 〈◊〉 and administâ—… O 〈…〉 in and to their 〈…〉 And I 〈◊〉 〈…〉 all the Comenders for Presbytery in this Nâ—â—ion and much 〈…〉 the Independents that there shall be a â—end of this quarrel that they will 〈…〉 with the Doctor not any living for the â—…duction of any 〈◊〉 soâ—t of persons though they should be 〈…〉 Presbyters into Church office and Government Onely this I must 〈…〉 this second sort of men 〈…〉 Presbyters than it doth Bishops and that word having been 〈…〉 third 〈…〉 we desire leave of the Dâ—ctor and his 〈…〉 if we also most frequently call them so no wayes declining the other application of Bishops so that it be applyed to signifie the second and not third 〈◊〉 of men But of this 〈◊〉 businesse with the nature conâ—… and frame of the first Churches and the 〈◊〉 mâ—stâ—k 〈…〉 men have be their owne prejudices been ingaged into in this dâ—… of them a 〈…〉 opportunity if God will may 〈◊〉 long be aâ—…ded 3. Here first I shall demand whence it appeares that I accommodated a double answer to the multiplication of Elders in Clemens c. Truly I doe not yet know or remember that I did This certainly was all and this can amount if to any but to one answer that which we have vindicated already that the Elders in the Epistle of Clemens were all the Bishops of Achaia This indeed when it was proposed was more distinctly set down by 4. steps or degrees but then again those are no more two than foure answers 1. that the Epistle was addrest to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to the whole Province Secondly that to make it capable of that title Corinth was knowne to be the Metropolis of Achaia Thirdly that Saint Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians belonged to all the Churches of Achaia not onely to Corinth and so in any probability Clements was to doe also being written to the same and inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore Fourthly that these many Elders were the singular Bishops in the severall Cities
one of the two following heads of discourse and therefore I am now to hasten to them Onely to be sâ—re to have neglected nothing that can expect to be considered in the least It is here presently visible 1. how causelesly Ignatius is quarrell'd with for mentioning the Orders of the Church upon no occasion when the designe of his Epistles being to preserve truth and peace among the Churches he had no better and more compendious way to doe it than by requiring their subjection to their Governors and thereupon he so constantly inculcates it and this is a very important occasion and that which alwayes makes it very seasonable and pertinent whensoever it is done by him 6. Secondly How fallaciously the discourse proceeds which supposeth Clemens to call those Presbyters which ought to signifie as among us the word now signifies collegues and fellow-rulers in the same Church whom before he had called Bishops adding that he plainly asserts Episcopacy to be the office of Presbyters and that their Spirituall Governors were the Presbyters of the Church and a plurality of Presbyters in the same Church whereas all this while he knowes that Clement saith that the Apostles instituted Bishops and Deacons in all Cities and Regions and that these are by us cleared to be singular Bishops and that to prevent contentions they left a list of successors to that singular office in each Church and that these singular Bishops are oft called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders not onely before but after Clemens even by those that appeare and are acknowledged to assert the three Orders and consequently that Clement may well be allowed to style them so in whose time for ought appears there were none of that second order now vulgarly called Presbyters yet erected either at Rome from whence or at Corinth or in all Achaia to which he wrote this Epistle 7. Thirdly How infirme a way of arguing it is to say that Clement doth not in the least intimate any singular person promoted above his fellows and that had there been any such at Corinth it had been impossible he should be thus pass'd by in silence when he knowes that the Apostles constituting Bishops and Deacons and what followes on that account is by us insisted on and confirmed to be more than an intimation of it and when the whole purport of the Epistle is to preserve the authority of the Governors of the severall Churches under that Metropolis whom he knowes we contend and prove to be the singular Bishops and must not forgoe that pretension till it be confuted 8. To proceed to the second head of discourse his asserting the Bishops mentioned in Clemens to be bare Presbyters For this it is certaine that he makes no tender of any other argument or appearance of proofe but onely the mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he renders Presbyters in the plural whom therefore he concludes to be many Presbyters in the same Church But 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elder signifies Bishop in Scripture in Clemens in Polycarpe in those of the Antients after them that are knowne to assert the singular Bishop above Presbyters in each Church And this having been said and cleared in the Dissert is not in the least attempted to be disproved by him 9. Secondly These many Elders are not all or more than one said or intimated by Clement to be in one City For the Epistle as was shewed in the Dissert is I suppose most certainly may have been addrest by Clement not to the single Church of that one City of Corinth but to the Churches of all Achaia or Greece of which Corinth was the chiefe being the Metropolis 10. That it was not so is barely said but largely proved in that place Dissert 5. cap. 2. first from the title of the Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it is on each part the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or whole province as of Rome so of Corinth the Region and territory that belonged to either of those Metropoles which in that age was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the adjacent region exprest by Ignatius by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the place of the region of the Romans by Polycarpe in the same kind speaking of Philiâ—pi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church adjoyning or belonging to Philippi and by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Province belonging to Corinth of which Dionysius was Bishop or Metropolitan 11. Secondly this was proved by the analogie held between this Epistle of Clemens and the Epistle of Saint Paul inscribed to the Corinthians For I demand was not this Epistle of Clement written to the same Church or Churches to whom Saint Paul's two Epistles had been addressed That it was is more than probable by the Common title and other Characters in the Epistle it selfe incline to it As that he refers them to the Epistles of Saint Paul written to them and that upon the like occasion of divisions and factions so early crept in among them So pag. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Take saith he the Epistle of Saint Paul consider what he saith to you in the beginning of his preaching to you certainely it was by inspiration from God that he wrote to you concerning himselfe and Cephas and Apollos because that then ye had partialities and inclinations to one more than to another but that partiality brought lesse sinne unto you Here still it is the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you that before and now were guilty of this sinne of carnality admiration of person faction and now at length sedition and so the same Churches now and then to whom these Epistles on that occasion were addrest and there is no circumstance producible that restrains one more than the other 11. Now of the Epistles of Paul it is evident they were not confined to the one City of Corinth but to all the Churches of Achaia so it is specified of the secondâ— of them 2 Cor. 1. 1. To the Church of God which is at Corinth with all the Saints which are in all Achaâ—a And though this be not expresly said of or in the first Epistle or in this of Clement yet the relation that one hath to the other will conclude it of those also and the phrase which there we find superadded to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to all that are called by the name of Christ all Christians in every place and the like forme at the conclusion of this The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and with all every where that are called by God hath in all probability the same importance for that being universal and extended beyond Corinth must not yet be interpreted of all Christians in the world for that would make each of these a Catholick Epistle and would conclude the Apostle to have received an Epistle from the Catholick Church to which this returne was made c. 7. 1. and
Bishops and Angels it is that I borrowed that appellation 8. The last thing that I must if I will not be supposed to prevaricate make good is that the Angels of the Churches related in their office not onely to the particular Churches wherein they were placed but to many Churches also no lesse committed to their charge than these wherein they did reside and that to power and jurisdiction c. 9. That they related to other Churches besides their owne even to all that belonged to their Province I suppose my selfe obliged to make good and the 34. Apostolick Canon is alone able to doe it in generall as shall anon appeare Then more particularly that they had power of ordeining Bishops and of judging them also is Saint Chrysostome's affirmation of Titus whom I suppose to be such a Metropolitan in Crete That if any were made Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the judgement and liking of the Metropolitan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He ought not to be a Bishop is the sixth Canon of the first Councel of Nice And what is there defined of the Metropolitan's rights besides that 't is done by 318. Bishops the most select of the whole Christian world and in an age very competent to passe a â—udgement of an Apostolical custome it is also vouched by them expresly as one of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the antient immemorial customes of the Church And much more to the same purpose is evident by the antient Canons of the uniâ—ersall Church as hath in some measure been set downe and as farre as I can be concerned to make good either against the Presbyterian or Congregational or Pâ—pist way in a tract of Schisme Chap. 3. Sect. 11 c. 10. To this the story of those first tunes exactly accords telling us that Irenaeus by being Metropolitan of Lyons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was Bishop that sure must be interpreted Metropolitan or Primate of the Diocesse sand so Bishops that pertaine to France and againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he had the Government of the Brethren i. e. the Christians that belong to France And this 〈◊〉 the Scholar of Polycarpe auditor of the Apostles theâ— Demetrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undertooke the administration of the Dioceses belonging to Alexandria and both these at the same time in Commodâ—…'s reigne And that whole Chapur in Eusebius is but the enumeration of severall such Metropolitans by name who were all at the same time of the Church of the Antiochians Sâ—rapâ—â—n the eighth from the Apostles of the Church of Elâ—…us's successor Victor of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as he phraseth it in the next Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophilus of the Church in Jerusalem Narâ—â—ssas of the Church of Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Banchyllus and of Ephesus or as he phraseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Polycrates of whom he after saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was chiefe as Prime or Ruler of the Bishops of Asia In the same manner as afterward Saint Cyprian Bishop of Carthage in the Councel of Constantinople in Truâ—… styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Archbishop of the Region or Province of Africk which is as to the matter of it own'd by himselfe Epist 40. and 45. where he mentions his Province and the extent of it Sect. 2. Of Churches in the pâ—â—ral and a Church in the singular in the Scripture 〈◊〉 1. IN pursuit of this matter of Metropolitanes he proceeds next to take notice of one observation of mine in these words 2. To this end he informâ—… sect 2. that in the New Testament there is in sâ—ndry places mention maâ—e of Church 〈…〉 â—umber aâ— Gal. 1. 21. 1 Thes 2. 14. Acts 9 35 Act 〈…〉 Gal. 〈◊〉 Rev. 1. 11. sometimes of Church onely 〈…〉 as Acts 8. 1 15. 4. 22. Acts 1. 〈…〉 Heb. 16. 1. 1 â—or 〈◊〉 2 â—or â—1 1. Thes 1. 1. Rev. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 8 1â— 18 Now this is 〈…〉 beholding to the Doctor for iâ— no moâ—e I suppâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—und to be to it when the reason of it shall be a liâ—…e wâ—…d â—…ed The summe is that the name Church in the singâ—…r 〈…〉 but where iâ— relates to the single congregation in or oâ—â—…e Câ—â—y or Town Thâ—â— of Churches respecting â—he several Churchâ—… Congregations that were gathered in any Country or Province Manifest then it is from hence that there is in the New Testament no Church of one denomination beyond 〈◊〉 single Congregation And where there are more they are alwayâ—s called Churches How evidently this is destructive to any Dioceâ—… Metropolitical Officer who hath no Church left him thereby of Christ's institution to be related to another opportunity will manifest 3. Here is but one thing done by the Prefacer a recital of my observation in the words just as I set it that there is in the New Testament mention sometimes of Churches in the plural sometimes of a Church in the singular 4. For this observation he saith he is not beholding to me and I shall imitate him thus far in replying that neither is he the first that hath mistaken it the London Ministers had done before him just what now he thinks fit to doe For having duly recited the observation when he comes to give the summe of it that summe is very different from the particulars just as by the London Ministers it had been before viz. that my observation is that the word Church is never used in the singular but when it relates to a single congregation 5. Here I must interpose as to the London-Ministers I did and to the Vindication there I referre the Reader for it and shall here recite it no farther than onely thus that I onely say the word Church was so used in the singular for the Church of one City meaning still as I there expresse and I alwayes doe when I speak of a Citie-Church with the territorie adjoyning whether again that be a territorie of more Cities when that which is spoken of is a Metropolis as many of those which I there mention were Corinth Ephesus all certainly except Cenchrea being near unto and an Haven-City of Corinth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Stephanus Byzantinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or whether the villages adjacent when it is not a Metropolis But that the word Church in the singular is never used but when it thus relates to the single congregation in or of one City Metropolis or not Metropolis that I never said nor thought nor was it usefull to me to observe oâ— suggest any such thing 6. And so being mistaken in his ground his inference must also suddenly vanish which he affirm'd to be so manifest and so likewise all the advantage which when opportunity should serve he meant to have made of it Sect. 3. The meaning of Provinces Philippi a Metropolis Dionysius's Epistle to Gortyna Philip Bishop of all the Churches in Creet
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. to be praevious to their blamelesse officiating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to say their consent was needfull or required to their constitution as to the thing to be done for that also supposeth it praevious to it 19. This was a competent security to me that my rejecting Blondel's conclusion was no Magisterial dictate of mine But then the Circumstances of the context through the whose Epistle make it most evident that Blondel then was and this Praefacer now is mistaken 20. For to represse the furie of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seditions against their Bishops he had before immediately told them how these Bishops were placed among them viz. after this manner The Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knew or understood by Christ that there would be contention for the name of dignity of Bishops For which cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having received perfect fore-knowledge they constituted the foresaid Bishops and after left a list or roll of successors that when any dyed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Other approved persons should take up or succeed to their office 21. Here the Question may be What is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 approved persons and who had the approving them For if the People had then Blondel and the Prefacer are in the right but if not then still here is nothing to be pretended for them 22. And indeed another yet former fundamental place of Clement in this Epistle takes away all place of doubting and tells us punctually whose approbation it was The Apostles saith he preaching through regions and cities constituted their first converts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 examining or approving them by the spirit to be Bishops and Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those which should come into the Faith 23. Here 1. it is not imaginable how the examination and approbation could belong to the people or the whole Church when those over whom they were constituted were not yet come in they are made Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those which should afterward come in to the Faith And 2. if there had been a full Church to choose yet the matter in Clemens extending not onely to the Bishops of the present but also to the successors for the future age what right could the then present people have to choose not onely for their own but the future age and so deprive their successors of their Priviledge 24. But waving both these the matter is otherwise cleare They are the same persons which did preach and constitute and examine or approve i. e. the Apostles did every of these And doing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit by Revelation or direction of the Spirit in the same manner as they are said to know by Christ that there would be contention about this matter and that having received perfect fore-knowledge they constituted those Bishops it is evident they had no need of any act of the People in doing it and so that the examination and approbation was that of the Apostles and not of the People of the Apostles assisted and directed by the Spirit of God and not so much as advised that we heare of or instructed by the people 25. This farther appeares by another passage in that Epistle where this act of the Apostles approving by the Spirit and receiving perfect fore-knowledge what would fall out and what they should doe is by him illustrated by the example of Moses who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fore-knew i. e. certainly had it revealed to him by God that Aaron should be the Priest 26. Examples of such Revelations of God's in the first times I have set downe in the Dissertations As first of Matthias when God being prayd to that he would demonstrate or declare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of the two he had chosen he did by lot point him out to be the person Act. 1. 24. Secondly of Paul and Barnabas Act. 13. 2. Thirdly of Timothy to whom the Episcopal dignity was given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Prophesie 1 Tim. 4. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the prophesies which had before been delivered of him 1 Tim. 1. 18. Upon which Chrysostome and Theophylact make their observation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The dignity of Bishop which they there style of Doctorship and Priesthood being great wants God's direction that a worthy person may receive it And the same is affirmed by Clemens in Eusebius l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Bishops whom Saint John ordained in Asia that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified to him by the Spirit According to what Saint Paul had formerly said of the Bishops of Asia Act. 20. that the holy Ghost had set them to preside over the flock peculiarly 27. This I must think was and still is sufficient to cleare the difficulty and put it beyond question who they were by whom the Bishops in Clement are said to be approved certainly not the People but the Apostles that constituted them or yet higher the Spirit of God who signified or pointed them out unto them or by whose directions they approved them 28. I shall not now need more largely to insist on all the severalls here objected against me by the Prefacer By this clear setting down of the whole matter 't is certain all his exceptions must speedily vanish I shall but touch on them that have not yet so fully been taken notice of and prevented in passing 29. And 1. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were viri Apostolici though it was truly supposed by me yet was it not my magisteriall dictate but to my hand the plain affirmation of D. Blondel My words were regularly to be confronted to his conclusion in the very forme wherein he had produced it and so I was to set it by Apostolicis also 30. The Reader may if he will see my rendring of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally by illustribus viris and the putting of i. e. Apostolicis Spiritu Dei probatis into a Parenthesis signified Apostolicis to be no rendring of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but another character of the same men collected out of other parts of the Epistle 31. And so indeed it is most evident by the whole place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Bishops constituted by the Apostles and after them by other illustrious persons that those that are there called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illustrious men were the successors of the Apostles such as when they were gone constituted Bishops in the Church 32. And then what offence was there in my calling them Apostolicall persons Or what pretense for the Prefacer to say they were onely the choice men of the Church in opposition to my calling them Apestolicall Choice men of the Church I know they were for so must they be deemed who by the Apostles were left Rulers of it But such the Prefacer cannot meane when he sets it in opposition to me who
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
rest to the mention of that which Gortyna was the Metropolis must conclude him to comprehend all the other beside that which were in Crete and Philip which is there said to be Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of them in the plural not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that about Gortyna must needs be concluded Bishop of them all which he could not be any other way then as he was Bishop of the Metropolis to which those other related And then what could be more to my purpose than this I confesse I know not Against this there is no word of reason offered onely 't is said that it is not to my purpose and so I have nothing to which I can make reply in this matter Sect. 4. The Original of Metropolitical Churches Accommodation of the Ecclesiastick to the Civil distributions The Bishop of Romes greatnesse Num. 1. THe next thing he is pleased to examine he calls I shall not debate how fitly my application of the forementioned observation and from thence he expects some great advantage 2. Sect. 4. saith he Application is made of the forementioned observation Sect. 2. and the Interpretation given of it Sect. 3. in these words His sic positis illud statim seqâ—â—tur ut in Imperii cognitione in provinciâ— qual bâ—â— cum plure Urbes â—int una tamen primaria principalis câ—nsenda â—rat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ideo dicta cui itidem inferiores reliquae civitates subjiciebantur â—t â—â—vitat bus regiones fic inter Ecclesias Cathedras Episcopales unam semper primariam Metropoliticam fuisse In this Section the Doctor hath most ingenuously and truly given us the â—ise and occasion of his Diocesan and Metropolitical Praelates from the aimes of men to accommodate Ecclesiastical or Church-affaires to the state and condition of the civill government and distributions of Provinces Metropolitan Cities and chiefe Townes within the severall dependencies the neighbouring villages being cast in as things of no great esteem to the lot of the next considerable Towne and seat of Judicature did the Hierarchy which he so sedulously contendeth for arise what advantage were affâ—rded to the worke by the paucity of believers in the Villages and lesse Townes from which at length the whole body of Heaâ—henish Idolaters were denominated Pagans the first planting of Churches in the greater Cities the eminence of the Officers of the first Churches in those Cities the weaknesse of many rurall Bishops the multiplying and growing in numbers and persons of gifts abilities and considerable fortunes and employments in this world in the Metropolitan Cities with their fame thereby the tradition of the abode of some one or other of the Apostles in such Cities and Churches with the eminent Accommodation at the administration of civill Jurisdiction and other affaires which appeared in that subordination and dependency whereunto the Provinces chiefe Cities and territories in the Roman Empire were cast with which opportunities Satan got by these meanes to introduce their wayes state pompe words phrases termes of honour of the world into the Churches insensibly getting ground upon them and prevailing to their decâ—ension from the naked simplicity and purity wherein they were first planted some other occasion may give advantage for us to manifest for the present it may suffice that it is granted that the Magnifick Hierarchy of the Church arose from the accommodation of its state and condition of the Roman Empire and Provinces And this in the instances of alterâ—ages that might be pâ—oduced will easily be made yet faâ—ther evident in those shamefull or indeed rather shamelesse contâ—…s which fell out among the Bishops of the third Centuâ—ie and downward about precedency titles of Honour exâ—â—nt of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical subjection to or exemption from one another the considerablenesse of their Cities in the civill state of the Roman Empire where they did reside was still the mâ—st prevalent and cogent argument in their brawles the most notable brush that in all Antiquity we finde given to the great Leviathan of Rome who sported himselfe in those gatherings together of the wâ—ters of people and multitudes and Nations and Tongues or the generall Councels as they are called was from an a gument taken from theseat of the Empire being â—ixt at Conâ—lantinople making it become new Rome so that the Bishop of the Church there was to injoy equall priviledge with him whose lot was â—allen in the old imperiall City 3. The briefe summe of what he there quotes in Latine is this that as in the civil account the chiefe City where there are many in a Province is the Metroâ—olis to which the inferiour Cities are subjected and relate to it as the adjacent region to the City so the chiefe Church in a Province was by the Apostles designed which I hope is farre enough from Satans introducing it to be a Metropolitical Church on which the inferior Churches and their Bishops depended and observed concord and unitie with it This the Prefacer looks on as a speciall discovery and having threatned what some other occasion may give advantage to manifest he is not pleased to make any the least objection against it at this time or to indeavour to prove that it was not thus but is very well satisfied that it is granted that the Magnifick as he will style it Hierarchie of the Church arose from this accommodation of the Ecclesiastick to the civil formes of distributions 4. This indeed as far as concernes every nationall Church which by this meanes is best disposed for order and unity within it selfe is by me willingly and profestly granted and if the reasonablenesse that it should doe so doe not competently vindicate it yet supposing as the discourse there doth that the Apostles themselves did generally so designe it in every region I hope there will lye no charge against it And if farther then so the observing of it proved usefull as he saith it did to the reducing the Bishop of Rome to some moderate termes equalling another Bishop to him when the Empire was removed to another seate I know not still why this should be such a disobligation to the Prefacer who will hardly be able to give any more moderate or lesse Popish account of the immense greatnesse which that Bishop by prescription of some number of years did challenge than this of the Imperial seat having been fixt at Rome and these privileges accruing to him by that meanes not by any investiture from Christ by succession to Saint Peter as they plead nor by appointment of the Apostles in their first plantations which now we speak of 5. I have elsewhere spoken on this subject in the tract of Schisme in the latter part of Chap. 3. and to the London Ministers cap. 1. sect 16. and there briefly shewed the reasonablenesse of it And here being yet nothing but promises of objections against it it may suffice that I deferre the answering them till they be produced Sect. 5. The