his soule for theirs that should submit to him that all that obeyed him were safe all that disobeyed him were rebellious cursed and seperated from God What Apologie can be made for the weakness and Ignorance of that holy Martyr if we shall suppose him to have had Apprehensions like those in these Epistles of that sacred Order for omitting those all-conquering Reasons which they would have supplied him with all to his purpose in hand and pitching on Arguments every way less cogent and useful But I say I shall not insist on any such things as these but only 4 I say that there is not in any of the Doctor 's excerpta from those Epistles nor in any passage in them any mention or the least intimation of any Church whereunto any Bishop was related but such an one as whose members met altogether in one place and with their Bishop disposed and ordered the affaires of the Church Such was that whereunto the holy Martyr was related such were those neighbouring Churches that sent Bishops and Elders to that Church And when the Doctour proves the contrary erit mihi magnus Apollo From the Churches and their state and Constitution is the state and Condition of their Officers and their Relation to them to be taken Let that be manifested to be such from the appointment of Jesus Christ by his Apostles or de facto in the dayes of Ignatius or before the contemperation of Ecclesiastical Affaires occasionally or by choyce to the civil constitution of Citties and Provinces in those dayes as would or possibly could beare a rural Diocesan metro-political Hierarchie and this controversy will be at end When this is by any attempted to be demonstrated I desire it may not be with such sentences as that urged by our Doctour from Epist ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The expression in it concerning Christ being unsound unscriptural concerning Bishops unintelligible or ridiculous But it may be said what need we any more writing what need wee any truer proof or Testimony The Learned Doctour in his Dissertations Disser 4. cap 5 hath abundantly discharged this worke and proved the seaven Bishops of the seven Churches mentioned Revel 2. 3 to have been Metropolitans or Arch-Bishops so that no just cause remaines why we should farther contend Let then the Reader pardon this my utmost Excursion in this digression to whose compass I had not the least thoughts of going forth at the entrance thereof and I shall returne thither whence I have turned aside Dissert 4. cap. 5. The Doctour tells us that septem Ecclesiarum Angeli non tantum Episcopi sed Metropolitae i e Archi-Episcopi statuendi sunt i e principalium urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad quos provinciae integrae in iis multarum inferiorum urbium Ecclesiae earumque Episcopi tanquam ad Archiepiscopum aut Metropolitanum pertinebant The Doctour in this Chapter commences per saltum and taking it for granted that he hath proved Diocesan 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 Bishop others acting in some kind 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 Metropolitical Archi-Episcopacy dignity which as we must suppose is so clearly founded in Scripture and Antiquity that they are as blind as Bats and Moles who cannot see the ground and foundation of it But first be it taken for granted that the Angells of the seven Churches are taken for the Governours of those Churches then that each Angel be an Individual Bishop of the Church to which he did belong 2 Be it also granted that they were Bishops of the most eminent Church or Churches in that province or Romane political distribution of those countries in the management of the Goverment of them I say Bishops of such Churches not urbium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Doctour termes them what advance is made by all this to the Asserration of A Metropolitical Archi-episcopacy I cannot as yet discover That they were ordinary Officers of Christ's institution relating in their Office and ordinary discharge of it not only to the particular Churches wherein they were placed but to many Churches also no less committed to their charge then these wherein they did reside the Officers Rulers Governours of which Churches depended on them not only as to their advise and counsel 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 Doctour to make good if he will not be supposed to pre varicate in the cause in hand To this end he informes us Sect secundâ that in the new Testament there is in sundry places mention made of Churches in the plural number as Gal 1. 21. 1 Thes 2 14. Acts 9 31. Acts 15. 41. 1. Cor 16. 1. Gal 1. 2. Revel 1. 11 some times of Church only in the singular number as Acts 8. 1 15 4. 22. Acts 11. 26. Rom 16. 1. 1 Cor 1. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. 1 Thes 1. 1. Revel 2. 1. Revel 2. 8. Revel 2. 12 18. Now this is an Observation which as we are not at all beholding to the Doctour for it no more I suppose will there be found to be to it when the reason of it shall be a little weighed and considered The summe is that the name Church in the singular number is never used but when it relates to the single congregation in or of one City or Towne That of Churches respecting the several Churches or Congregations that were gathered in any Country or Province manifest then is it from hence that there is in the new Testament no Church of one denomination beyond a single congregation And where there are more they are alwaies called Churches how evidently this is destructive to any Diocesan or Metropolitical Officer who hath no Church left him thereby of Christ's Institution to be related to an other opportunity will manifest For the present let us see what use our Doctour makes of this observation Sect 3. Sayes he Judaea and the rest of the places where Churches are mentioned are the names of Provinces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quatenus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contradistinguntur But if the Doctour takes these words in an Ecclesiastical sense he beggs that which will upon such unworthy termes never be granted him If no more be intended but that Judaea Galatia and the like names of Countryes were Provinces wherein were many Churches Smyrna Ephesus of Townes and Citties wherein there was but one We grant it with him And how much that Concession of ours is to his advantage hath been intimated And this seemes to be his intendment by his
this Epistle to the whole Church could not possibly have led them into a greater snare It is a sad thing to consider the pittiful entanglements and snares that some men runne into who will undertake to make good what they have once engaged for let what will come against them To returne then It is evident that in the time of Clement there were but two sorts of Officers in the Church Bishops and Deacons whereas the Epistles of Ignatius do precisely in every place where any mention is made of them as there is upon occasions and upon none at all insist on three Orders distinct in name and things With Clement it is not so Those whom he calls Bishops in one place the very same persons he immediatly calls Presbyters after the Example of Paul Act 20. 28. And Titus 1. 5. 7. And plainly asserts Episcopacy to be the office of Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz Because they were in no danger to be cast from their Episcopacy And whereas the fault which he reproves in the Church of Corinth is their division and want of due subjection to their spiritual Governours according to the order which Christ hath appointed in all the Churches of the Saints he affirms plainly that those Governours were the Presbyters of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in all places throughout the whole Epistle writing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that particular Church of Corinth the Saints dwelling there walking in the order fellowship of the Ghospel where he treates of those things he still intimates a plurality of Presbyters in the Church as there may nay there ought to be in every single congregation Act 20. 28. without the least intimation of any singular Person promoted upon any account whatever above his fellowes So in the Advice given to the persons who occasioned the division before mentioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Had there been a singular Bishop at Corinth much more a Metropolitan such as our Doctour speakes him to have been it had been impossible that he should be thus passed by in silence But the Doctour gives you a double answer to this observation with the several parts whereof I doubt not but that he makes himselfe merry if he can suppose that any men are so wedded to his dictates as to give them entertainment for indeed they are plainly iocular But learned men must have leave sometimes to exercise their fancies and to sport themselves with their own imaginations 1 Then for the mention that is made of many Presbyters in the Church of Corinth to whom Clement in the name of the Church of Rome exhorts to give all due respect honour obedience He tells you that by the Church of Corinth all the Churches of Achaia are meant and intended The Epistle is directed only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the least intimation of any other Church or Churches The difference it is written about was occasioned by one or two persons in that Church only it is that Church alone that is exhorted to order and due subjection to their Elders From the beginning to the end of the Epistle there is not one word apex or tittle to intimate the designation of it to any Church or Churches beyond the single Church of Corinth or that they had any concernment in the difference spoken to The Fabrick of after Ages lies so close to the Doctour's imagination that there is no entrance for the true frame of the Primitive Church of Christ and therefore every thing must be wrested and apportioned to the conceit of such an Episcopacy as he hath entertained Whereas he ought to crop off both head heeles of his own imagination and the Episcopacy of the latter dayes which he too dearly affects he chooseth rather to stretch torture the antient goverment of the Church that it may seem to answer the frame presently contended for But let us a little attend to the Doctor 's learned arguments whereby he endeavours to make good his assertion 1 He tels you that Corinth was the chief Citty of Achaia the Metropolis in a political sense and Acceptation of the word of Greece where the Pro-Consul had his Residence Diss 5 cap 2. Sect. 3. Let us grant this to our learned Doctour least we should find nothing to gratify him with all what then will follow hence saith he it will follow Sect 4 that this Epistle which was sent Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non ad unius civitatis Ecclesiam sed ad omues totius Achaiae Christianos per singulas civitates regiones sub Episcopis aut praefectis suis ubique callocatas missa existimetur But pray Doctour why so We poor creatures who are not so sharp sighted as to discerne a Metropolitan Arch-Bishop at Corinth of whom all the Bishops in Greece were dependant nor can find any instituted Church in the Scripture or in Clement of one denomination beyond a single Congregation cannot but think that all the strength of this Consectary from the insinuation of such a state of things in the Church of God is nothing but a pure begging of the thing in Question which will never be granted upon such tearmes Yea but he adds Sect 5 That Paul wrote his Epistle not only to the Church of Corinth but also to all the Churches of Achaia therefore Clement did so also At first view this Argument seemes not very conclusive yea appeares indeed very ridiculous the inforcement of it which ensues may perhaps give new life and vigour to it How then is it proved that Paul wrote not only to the Church of Corinth but to all them in Achaia also why saith he in the 2 Epistle 1. chap 1. v it is so exprest he writes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Very good It is indisputably evident that Paul wrot his second Epistle to the Church at Corinth and all the rest of Achaia for he expresly affirmes himselfe so to do and for the first Epistle it is directed not only to the Church of Corinth 1 cap 2. verse but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is saith our Doctour in the whole Region of Achaia So indeed saies the Doctor 's great friend Grotius to whom he is beholding for more then one rare notion I say it not in any way of any reproach to the Doctour only I cannot but think his careful warding of himselfe against the thoughts of men that he should be beholding to Grotius doth exceedingly unbecome the Doctour's gravity and selfe denyal This is complained of by some who have tryed it in reference to his late comment on the Revelation And in this dissertation he is put by his own thoughts I will not say guilty to an Apology cap. 1. Sect. 24 Quâ in resuffragi msuum tulisse Hugonem Grotium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex annotationibus posthumis nuper editis postquam haec omnia Typographo transcripta essent cursim
following words provinciarum inquam in quibus plurimae civitates singulae singularum Ecclesiarum sedes comprehendebantur ideoque Ecclesiae in plurali istius sive istius provinciae dicendae well what then cum tamen unaquaeque civitas cum territorio sibi adjuncto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab Episcopâ— suo administrata singularis Ecclesia dicenda sit ideoque quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 factum dicitur Act 14. 25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri jubetur Tit 1. 5. that in every City there was a singular Church in those Provinces I speak of those where any number were converted to the faith I grant for the annexed Territories let the Doctour take care There being one Church at Corinth and an other at Cenchrea So that every single City had it's own single Church with it's Bishops in it as at Philippi The passage mentioned by the Doctour concerning the Epistle of Dionysius to the Church at Goryna in Creet is very little to his purpose neither doth he call Philip the Bishop of that Church the Bishop of all the other Churches in Creet as the Doctour intimates but the Bishop of them to whom especially and eminently he wrote Sect 4. Application is made of the fore-mentioned Observation Sect 2 and the Interpretation given of it Sect 3 in these words His sic positis illud statim sequitur ut in imperii cognitione in provinciâ qualibet cum plures Urbes sint una tamen primaria principalis censenda erat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ideo dicta cui itidem inferiores reliquae civitates subjiciebantur ut civitatibus regiones sic inter Ecclesias Cathedras Episcopales unam semper primariam Metropoliticam fuisse In this Section the Doctour hath most ingeniously and truly given us the rise and occasion of his Diocesan and Metropolitical Prelates from the aimes of men to accomodate Ecclesiastical or Church-affaires to the state and condition of the civil Goverment and distributions of Provinces Metropolitan Cities chief Townes within the several dependencies the neighboring 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 afforded to the worke by the paucity of Believers in the villages and less Towneâ— from which at length the whole body of Heathenish Idolaters were denominated Pagans the first planting of Churches in the greater Cities the Eminence of the officers of the first Churches in those Citties the weakness of many rural 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 same 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 civil Jurisdiction other Affaires which appeared in that subordination and dependency whereunto the Provinces chief Cities and Territories in the Romane Empire were cast with which opportunities Sathan got by these meanes to introduce their waies state pompe words phrases termes of honour of the world into the Churches insensibly getting ground upon them and prevailing to their declension from the naked simplicity 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 Hierarchie of the Church arose from the accommodation of it's state and condition of the Remans Empire and Provinces And this in the instances of after Ages that might be produced will easily be made yet farther evident In those shameful or indeed rather shameless Contests which fell out among the Bishops of the third Century and downward about precedency titles of honour extent of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical subjection to or exemption from one another the considerableness of their cities in the civil state of the Romane Empire where they did reside was still the most prevalent and cogent argument in their brawles the most notable brush that in all Antiquity we find given to the great Leviathan of Rome who sported himselfe in those gatherings together of the waters of people multitudes and nations and tongues or the general counsells as they are called was from an Argument taken from the seate of the Empire being fixt at Constantinople making it become new Rome so that the Bishop of the Church there was to enjoy equal priviledge with him whose lot was fallen in the old Emperial City but our Doctour addes Sect 5. Illud ex Judaeorum exemplari transcripsisse Apostoli videntur cum Mosaicâ id lege cautum esset ut judices ministri in qualibet civitate ordinarentur Deut 16. 18 illi vero in rebus dubiis ad judicem Mosis successorem synedrio Hierosolymitano cinctum recurrere tenerentur Cap 179 and in Section 6 he proves Hierusalem to have been the Metropolis of that whole nation Egregiam vero laudemâ— But 1 The Doctour I presume knowes before this that those with whom he hath to do will never give him the thing in question upon his begging or request That which alone falls in under our consideration and enquiry is whether the Apostles instituted any such model of Church-Order and Goverment as is by the Doctour contended for to this he tells you that the Apostles seem to have done it from the patterne of Mosaical institutions in the Churche of the Jewes But Doctour the Queston is not with what respect they did it but whether they did it at all or no this the Doctour thought good to let alone uncil another time if we would not grant him upon his petition that so they did 2 This then is the Doctours second argument for his Diocâ—san and Metropolitan Prelates His first was from the example of the Heathens in their civil Administration and Rule this second from the example of the Jewes Not to divert into the handling of the Church and Political state of the Jewes as appointed of God nor that dissonancy that is between the Institution of civil Magistrates and Evangelical administrations this is the summe of the Doctours reasoning in his 5 6 7 and 8 Sections God in the Church and among the people of the Jewes chose out one City to place his name there making it the place where all the Types ceremonies which he had appointed for the discovery and shadowing forth of the Lord Jesus Christ were visibly and gloriously to be managed acted and held forth sundry of them being such as whose Typicalness would have been destroyed by their multiplication and principally on this account making that place or City which was first Shilo the seat of the kingdome or habitation of the cheif Ruler for the administration of Justice who appointed Judges in all the land for the good and peace of the people therefore the Churches of Jesus Christ dispersed over the face of