this Enquiry with an earnest Perswasion to Peace Vnity and Moderation § 1. HAving in the precedent Chapters enquired into the several Parts of Divine Worship and the Circumstances thereof I now come to close up all with a brief Appendix concerning Rites and Ceremonies by which I mean two different things By Rites I understand such Actions as have an 〈◊〉 Relation to the Circumstances or manner of Worship As for Instance The Sacrament was to be received in one manner or other but whether from the Bishop or Deacon that was the Rite Lent was to be observed a certain space of Time but whether One Day or Two Days or Three Days that was the Rite thereof So that Rites 〈◊〉 necessary Concomitants of the Circumstances of Divine Worship Appendages to them or if you rather please you may call them Circumstances themselves By Ceremonies I mean such Actions as have no regard either to the Manner or Circumstances of Divine Worship but the Acts thereof may be performed without them as for instance In some Churches they gave to Persons when they were baptized Milk and Hony And Before they prayed they washed their Hands Now both these Actions I call Ceremonies because they were not necessary to the Discharge of those Acts of Divine Worship unto which they were affixed but those Acts might be performed without them as Baptism might be entirely administred without the Ceremony of giving Milk and Hony and Prayers might be presented without washing of Hands Now having explained what I intend by those two Terms of Rites and Ceremonies let us in the next place consider the Practice of the Primitive Church with reference thereunto And first for Ceremonies § 2. It is apparent that there were many of that kind crept into the Church of whom we may say that from the beginning they were not so For when the Quire of the Apostles was dead till which time as Hegesippus writes the Church remained a pure and unspotted Virgin then the Church was gradually 〈◊〉 and corrupted as in her Doctrin so also in her Worship an Infinity of Ceremonies by degrees insensibly sliding in very many of which were introduced within my limited time as the eating of Milk Hony after Baptism the abstaining from Baths the Week after the washing of their Hands before Prayer their sitting after Prayer and many other such like which through various ways and means winded themselves into the Church as some came in through Custom and Tradition one eminent Man perhaps invented and practised a certain Action which he used himself as Judging it fit and proper to stir up his Devotion and Affection others being led by his Example performed the same and others again imitated them and so one followed another till at length the Action became a Tradition and Custom after which manner those Ceremonies were introduced of tasting Milk and Hony after Baptism of abstaining from the Baths the whole ensuing Week of not kneeling on the Lords Day and the space between Easter and Whitsuntide of the Signing of themselves with the Sign of the Cross in all their Actions and Conversations concerning which and the like Tertullian writes That there was no Law in Scripture for them but that Tradition was their Author and Custom their Confirmer Of which Custom we may say what Tertullian says of Custom in general that commonly Custom takes its rise from Ignorance and Simplicity which by Succession is corroborated into use and so vindicated against the Truth But our Lord Christ hath called himself Truth and not Custom wherefore if Christ was always and before all then Truth was first and ancientest it is not so much Novelty as Verity that confutes Hereticks Whatsoever is against the Truth is Heresie although it be an old Custom Others again were introduced through a wrong Exposition or Misunderstanding of the Scripture so were their Exorcisms before Baptism and their Unctions after Baptism as in their proper places hath been already shewn Finally Others crept in through their Dwelling amongst the Pagans who in their ordinary Conversations used an Infinity of Superstitions and many of those Pagans when they were converted to the Saving Faith Christianiz'd some of their innocent former Ceremonies as they esteemed them to be either 〈◊〉 them deceut and proper to stir up their Devotion or likely to gain over more Heathens who were offended at the plainness and nakedness of the Christian Worship of which sort were their washing of Honds before Prayer their sitting after Prayer and such like Concerning which Tertullian affirms that they were practised by the Heathens So that by these and such like Methods it was that so many Ceremonies imperceptibly slid into the Ancient Church of some of which Tertullian gives this severe Censure That they are deservedly to be condemned as vain because they are done without the Authority of any Precept either of our Lord or of his Apostles that they are not Religious but Superstitius affected and constrained curious rather than reasonable and to be abstained from because Heathenish § 3. As for the Rites and Customs of the Primitive Church these were indifferent and arbitrary all Churches being left to their own Freedom and Liberty to follow their peculiar Customs and Usages or to embrace those of others if they pleased from whence it is that we find such a variety of Methods in their Divine Services many of which 〈◊〉 be observed in the precedent part of this Discourse as some received the Lords Supper at one time others at another Some Churches received the Elements from the Hands of the Bishop others from the Hands of the Deacons some made a Collection before the Sacrament others after some kept Lent one Day some two days and others exactly forty Hours some celebrated Easter on the same Day with the Jewish Passover others the Lords Day after and so in many other things one Church differed from another as Firmilian writes that at Rome they did not observe the same Day of Easter nor many other Customs which were practised at Jerusalem and so in most Provinces many Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places So that every Church followed its own particular Customs although different from those of its Neighbours it being nothing necessary to the Unity of the Church to have an Uniformity of Rites for according to Firmilian the Unity of the Church consisted in an unanimity of Faith and Truth not in an Uniformity of Modes and Customs for on the contrary the Diversity of them as Irenaeus speaks with reference to the Fast of Lent did commend and set forth the Vnity of the Faith Hence every Church peaceably followed her own Customs without obliging any other Churches to observe the same or being obliged by them to observe the Rites that they used yet still maintaining a loving Correspondence and mutual Concord each with other as Firmilian writes that in most Provinces
AN ENQUIRY INTO THE Constitution Discipline Unity Worship OF THE Primitive Church That Flourished within the First Three Hundred Years after CHRIST Faithfully Collected out of the Extant Writings of those Ages By an Impartial Hand LONDON Printed for Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lion and John Wyat at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-yard 1691. THE PREFACE TO THE READER THE Design of the following Treatise is in general to represent the Constitution Discipline Vnity and Worship of the Primitive Church that flourish'd within the first Three Hundred Years after Christ but more particularly and especially to describe their Opinions and Practices with respect to those things that are now unhappily controverted between those of these Kingdoms who are commonly known by the Names of Church of England-men Presbyterians Independents and Anabaptists for which reason it comes to pass that to those Points concerning which there is no difference amongst us I have not spoken so largely as otherwise I might have done and some other Customs of theirs I have not mentioned at all because now neglected and disused by us What I have written as to this Subject I have wholly collected out of the Genuine and unquestionably Authentick Writings of those Ages that are now extant making use of no other Writings whatsoever except the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius which was writ in the beginning of the Fourth Age and relates only those Affairs that were transacted in the Three former beyond the Period of which time this Enquiry doth not reach but is wholly limited thereby and confined thereunto That which hath been thus collected has been done I hope with the greatest Impartiality and Fidelity without any prepossession of Mind or any fraudulent dealing whatsoever which the Reader may the sooner believe and the easier be convinced of since for the clearer Demonstration of my Faithfulness and Vnprejudicedness herein I have taken care to print in the Margent the Original Words of all the Passages that I have cited at least of all that are necessary together with the very Pages whence I fetch'd them that so the Reader turning to the Pages mentioned in those Editions that I use which Editions I shall set down at the end of this Preface and finding it according to my Quotations may the more readily be perswaded that throughout this whole Tract I have been every way honest and unbyass'd And as I have faithfully and impartially collected these Observations so I have as modestly and unconcernedly represented them avoiding all Words or Speeches that might seem to carry the least sharpness or Reflection in them and have as nakedly expressed them declining all affected or pompous Expressions contenting my self with those Terms that most naturally serve to render the Truth more perspicuous and evident according to the Observation of Clemens Alexandrinus He that would deliver the Truth ought not studiously to affect an Elegancy of Expression but only to use such Words whereby he may render what he means intelligible Whether all or some or none of the following Primitive Customs may be changed by the Civil Magistrate or by a Convocational Assembly I pretend not here to handle my Design at present is only to search into matter of Fact to find out what were the Vsages of the Ancient Church within the first Three Hundred Years after Christ for as was said before no lower do I intend to go which after the most impartial and serious Enquiry I find to be according to the ensuing Treatise in the penning whereof I have avoided all Prolixity and Tediousness and for that end omitting to answer several Objections that I know may be made against several things which I have here asserted mine Intention being briefly and perspicuously to prove what I judge to be the true Practice of the Primitive Church as to those Points now disputed by us As for the Occasion of my Publishing this Treatise it cannot be imagined to proceed from a Spirit of Vanity or Ambition since I so far conceal my Name as that even my Bookseller knows not who I am much less I hope will it be construed by any to proceed from a Spirit of Contention and Animosity from an ill Design to foment and increase our present Feuds and Divisions since I assure the whole World our unnatural Quarrels do so much afflict and trouble me as that I would sacrifice not only this Book but also all that I either am or have if thereby I might be an happy Instrument to compose and heal them But amongst other Reasons these two were the chiefest that swayed me hereunto To inform others and To inform my self To inform others what the Practices of the Primitive Apostolick Churches were if any shall be inquisitive and desirous to know them or if I am mistaken as who is without his Errors to be better informed my self which I must needs confess was that which I chiefly designed in the Publication hereof wherefore without any Ostentation or challenging but unfeignedly and sincerely to prevent Mistakes in my younger Years I humbly desire if the Request be not too bold and shall heartily thank any Learned Person that will be so kind as to inform me if he knows me to have erred in any one or more Particulars which he may do either Publickly or if he thinks fit Privately by Letter to my Bookseller who will convey it safely to my Hands and if any one that finds me deceived in any one or more Points will favour me so far as to undertake such a trouble I should desire these few things of him That he would be pleased as I have done to use only those Writings that were composed within my prescribed time and if possible the same Editions and not only to form Objections against what I have written but also to answer or rather to give me another Sense of those Passages which I have cited and then I promise if my Mistakes are fairly shewn I will not pertinaciously and obstinately defend them but most willingly and thankfully renounce them since my Design is not to defend a Party but to search out the Truth I have but one thing more to add in this Preface and that is that when I first resolved on the printing of this Treatise I designed to have published my Observations on the fourth general Head propounded in the Title Page to be enquired into viz. The Worship of the Primitive Church as well as now I have done those on the three former but for some Reasons I have reserved this for a particular Tract by its self which probably though I do not absolutely promise it may in a little time more be also published and that the rather because in this Part I have made two or three References thereunto which I thought good to acquaint the Reader with that so if he cannot find some things that I have referred to in this Treatise he may be assured they are to be met with in the ensuing one The Primitive
of the Bishop We have proved that there was but one Bishop to a Church and one Church to a Bishop we have shewn the Bishop's Office and Function Election and Ordination what farther to add on this Head I know not For as for those other Acts which he performed jointly with his Flock we must refer them to another place till we have handled those other Matters which previously propose themselves unto us The first of which will be an Examination into the Office and Order of a Presbyter which because it will be somewhat long shall be the Subject of the following Chapter CHAP. IV. § 1. The Definition and Description of a Presbyter what he was § 2. Inferior to a Bishop in Degree § 3. But equal to a Bishop in Order § 4. The Reason why there were many Presbyters in a Church § 5. Presbyters not necessary to the Constitution of a Church § 6. When Presbyters began § 1. IT will be both needless and tedious to endeavour to prove that the Ancients generally mention Presbyters distinct from Bishops Every one I suppose will readily own and acknowledge it The great Question which hath most deplorably sharpned and sour'd the Minds of too many is what the Office and Order of a Presbyter was About this the World hath been and still is most uncharitably divided some equalize a Presbyter in every thing with a Bishop others as much debase him each according to their particular Opinions either advance or degrade him In many Controversies a middle way hath been the safest perhaps in this the Medium between the two Extremes may be the truest Whether what I am now going to say be the true 〈◊〉 of the Matter I leave to the Learned Reader to determin I may be deceived neither mine Years nor Abilities exempt me from Mistakes and Errors But this I must needs say That after the most diligent Researches and impartialest Enquiries The following Notion seems to me most plausible and most consentaneous to Truth and which with a great facility and clearness solves those Doubts and Objections which according to those other Hypotheses I know not how to answer But yet however I am not so wedded and bigotted to this Opinion but if any shall produce better and more convincing Arguments to the contrary I will not contentiously defend but readily relinquish it since I search after Truth not to promote a particular Party or Interest Now for the better Explication of this Point I shall first lay down a Definition and Description of a Presbyter and then prove the parts thereof Now the Definition of a Presbyter may be this A Person in Holy Orders having thereby an inherent Right to perform the whole Office of a Bishop but being possessed of no Place or Parish not actually discharging it without the Permission and Consent of the Bishop of a Place or Parish But lest this Definition should seem obscure I shall 〈◊〉 it by this following Instance As a Curate hath the same Mission and Power with the Minister whose Place he supplies yet being not the Minister of that place he cannot perform there any acts of his Ministerial Function without leave from the Minister thereof So a Presbyter had the same Order and Power with a Bishop whom he assisted in his Cure yet being not the Bishop or Minister of that Cure he could not there perform any parts of his Pastoral Office without the permission of the Bishop thereof So that what we generally render Bishops Priests and Deacons would be more intelligible in our Tongue if we did express it by Rectors Vicars and Deacons by Rectors understanding the Bishops and by Vicars the Presbyters the former being the actual Incumbents of a Place and the latter Curates or Assistants and so different in Degree but yet equal in Order Now this is what I understand by a Presbyter for the Confirmation of which these two things are to be proved I. That the Presbyters were the Bishops Curates and Assistants and so inferiour to them in the actual Exercise of their Ecclesiastical Commission II. That yet notwithstanding they had the same inherent Right with the Bishops and so were not of a distinct specifick Order from them Or more briefly thus 1. That the Presbyters were different from the Bishops in gradu or in degree but yet 2. They were equal to them in Ordine or in Order § 2. As to the first of these That Presbyters were but the Bishops Curates and Assistants inferiour to them in Degree or in the actual Discharge of their Ecclesiastical Commission This will appear to have been in effect already proved if we recollect what has been asserted touching the Bishop and his Office That there was but one Bishop in a Church That he usually performed all the parts of Divine Service That he was the general Disposer and Manager of all things within his Diocess there being nothing done there without his Consent and Approbation To which we may particularly add 1. That without the Bishop's leave a Presbyter could not baptize Thus saith Tertullian The Bishop hath the Right of Baptizing then the Presbyters and Deacons but yet for the Honour of the Church not without the Authority of the Bishop and to the same Effect saith Ignatius It is not lawful for any one to baptize except the Bishop permit him 2. Without the Bishop's permission a Presbyter could not administer the Lord's Supper That Eucharist says Ignatius is only valid which is performed by the Bishop or by whom he shall permit for it is not lawful for any one to celebrate the Eucharist without leave from the Bishop 3. Without the Bishops Consent a Presbyter could not preach and when he did preach he could not chuse his own Subject but discoursed on those Matters which were enjoyned him by the Bishop as the Bishop commanded Origen to preach about the Witch of Endor 4. Without the Bishop's Permission a Presbyter could not absolve Offenders therefore Cyprian severely chides some of his Presbyters because they dared in his absence without his Consent and Leave to give the Church's Peace to some offending Criminals But what need I reckon up particulars when in general there was no Ecclesiastical Office performed by the Presbyters without the Consent and Permission of the Bishop So says Ignatius Let nothing be done of Ecclesiastical Concerns without the Bishop for Whosoever doth any thing without the knowledge of the Bishop is a Worshipper of the Devil Now had the Presbyters had an equal Power in the Government of those Churches wherein they lived how could it have been impudent and usurping in them to have perform'd the particular acts of their Ecclesiastical Function without the Bishop's Leave and Consent No it was not fit or just that any one should preach or govern in a Parish without the permission of the Bishop or Pastor thereof for where Churches had been regularly formed under the Jurisdiction of their proper Bishops it
the whole Earth profess Faith in Christ then we may consider its Unity in this Sense either Negatively wherein it did not consist or Positively wherein it did consist Negatively It consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Customs for every particular Church was at liberty to follow its own proper Usages One Church was not obliged to observe the Rites of another but every one followed its own peculiar Customs Thus with respect to their Fast before Easter there was a great Diversity in the Observation of it in some Churches they fasted one Day in others two in some more and in others forty Hours but yet still they retained Peace and Concord the diversity of their Customs commending the Vnity of their Faith So also the Feast of Easter its self was variously celebrated The Asiatick Churches kept it on a distinct Day from the Europeans but yet still they retained Peace and Love and for the diversity of such Customs none were ever cast out of the Communion of the Church So likewise writes Firmilian That in most Provinces their Rites were varied according to the Diversities of Names and Places and that for this no one ever departed from the Peace and Vnity of the Catholick Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted not in an Uniformity of Rites and Usages Neither in the next Place did it consist in an Unanimity of Consent to the Non-essential Points of Christianity but every one was lest to believe in those lesser matters as God should inform him Therefore Justin Martyr speaking of those Jewish Converts who had adhered to the Mosaical Rites says that if they did this only through their Weakness and 〈◊〉 and did not perswade other Christians to the observance of the same Judaical Customs that he would receive them into Church-fellowship and Communion Whosoever imposed on particular Churches the observance of the former of these two things or on particular Persons the belief of the latter they were esteemed not as Preservers and Maintainers but as Violaters and Breakers of the Churches Unity and Concord An Instance of the former we have in that Controversie between the Churches of the East and West touching the time when Easter was to be celebrated For when Victor Bishop of Rome had Excommunicated the 〈◊〉 Churches because they continued to observe that Feast on a different time from the Churches of the West not only the Bishops of the adverse Party but even those of his own side condemned him as rash heady and turbulent and writ several Letters about this Affair wherein as the Historian writes they most sharply censured him As for the Latter we have an instance thereof in the Controversie that was between Stephen Bishop of Rome and Cyprian Bishop of Carthage touching the Validity of Hereticks Baptism For when Stephen Anathematized Cyprian because he held the Baptism of Hereticks to be null and void other Bishops condemned Stephen as a Breaker and Disturber of the Churches Peace And amongst others Firmilian a Cappadocian Bishop vehemently accuses him as such because that he would impose upon others the Belief of such a disputable Point which says he was never wonted to be done but every Church followed their own different ways and never therefore broke the Vnity and Peace of the Catholick Church which now saith he Stephen dares to do and breaks that Peace which the ancient Bishops always preserved in mutual Love and Honour And therefore we find in the Acts of that great Council of Carthage convened to determine this matter that when Cyprian summ'd up the Debates thereof he dehorts his Fellow-Bishops from the imposing Humour and Temper of Stephen It now remains saith he that every one of us declare our Judgments concerning this matter judging no Man or removing any one from our Communion if he think otherwise than we do for let none of us make himself a Bishop of Bishops or by a Tyrannical Terror compel his Colleagues to the necessity of obeying So that the forcing a Belief in these lesser matters was Cruelty and Tyranny in the Imposers thereof who for such unreasonable Practices were look'd upon as Enemies to and Violators of the Churches Concord being the true Schismaticks inasmuch as they were the Cause of Schism and Division unto whom therefore may be applyed that Saying of Irenaeus That at the last Day Christ shall judge those who cause Schisms who are inhumane not having the fear of God but prefering their own advantage before the Unity of the Church for trivial and slight Causes rent and divide the great and glorious Body of Christ and as much as in them lies destroy it who speak Peace but wage War truly straining at a Gnat and swallowing a Camel § 3. But Positively The Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an Harmonious Assent to the Essential Articles of Religion or in an Unanimous Agreement in the Fundamentals of Faith and Doctrine Thus 〈◊〉 having recited a Creed or a short Summary of the Christian Faith not much unlike to the Aposiles Creed immediately adds The Church having received this Faith and Doctrine although dispersed through the whole World diligently preserves it as tho' she inhabited but one House and accordingly she believes these things as 〈◊〉 she had but one Soul and one Heart and consonantly preaches and teaches these things as tho' she had but one Mouth for altho' there are various Languages in the World yet the Doctrine is one and the same so that the Churches in Germany France Asia AEgypt or Lybia have not a different Faith but as the Sun is one and the same to all the Creatures of God in the whole World So the Preaching of the Word is a Light that enlightens every where and illuminates all Men that would come to the knowledge of the Truth Now this Bond of Unity was broken when there was a Recession from or a Corruption of the true Faith and Doctrine as Irenaeus speaks concerning Tatian the Father of the Encratites that as long as his Master Justin Martyr lived he held the found Faith but after his Death falling off from the Church he shaped that new Form of Doctrine This Unity of the Church in Doctrine according to Hegesippus continued till the Days of Simeon Cleopas Bishop of Jerusalem who was Martyred under Trajan but after that false Teachers prevailed such as the 〈◊〉 Marcionists 〈◊〉 and others from whom sprung false Christs false Apostles and false Prophets who by their corrupt Doctrines against God and his Christ divided the Unity of the Church So that the Unity of the Church Universal consisted in an agreement of Doctrine and the Corruption of that Doctrine was a Breach of that Unity and whoever so broke it are said to divide and separate the Unity of the Church or which is all one to be Schismaticks So Irenaeus writes that those that introduced new Doctrines did divide and separate the Unity
Father for our Sins when we beg pardon for our Sins let us use the Words of our Advocate and since he says that whatsoever we shall ask of the Father in his Name he will give it us how much more efficaciously shall we prevail for what we beg in Christ's Name if we ask it in his Prayer To this Prayer it is that Tertullian gives this Encomium In the Compendium of a few Words how many Declarations of Prophets Evangelists and Apostles how many Speeches Parables Examples and Precepts are contained How many Duties towards God! Honour to God in the Preface Faith in the first Petition Hope in the Second Resignation in the Third Petition for Life in the Fourth Confession of Sins in the Fifth Watchfulness against Temptations in the Sixth What Wonder God alone could teach how he would be prayed to § 7. But tho' they frequently used the Lord's Prayer yet they did not only use that but other Prayers also for immediately to the foregoing Encomium of the Lord's Prayer Tertullian adjoyns That we may add thereunto and offer up Prayers unto God according to the Variety of our Circumstances and Conditions From which Passage of the said Father we may guess their usual Method of Prayer was first to begin with the Lord's Prayer as the Ground and Foundation of all others and then according to their Circumstances and Conditions to offer up their own Prayers and Requests Now that this Conjecture may appear to have some Foundation it will be necessary to translate at large this place of Tertullian and to shew the Introduction or Occasion of it which was this After this Father had as before Commented on summ'd up and magnify'd the Lord's Prayer he concludes that nevertheless We may add thereunto for since the Lord the Observer of all Humane Necessities has in another place after he had delivered this Prayer said Ask and ye shall receive And every one has particular Circumstances to beg for therefore having premised the lawful and ordinary Prayer there is place for accidental Requests and a Liberty of offering up other Petitions so as they do agree with the Precepts As far as we are from the Precepts so far are we from God's Ears the remembrance of the Precepts makes way for our Prayers to Heaven of which it is the chief Now these other Prayers which made up a great part of Divine Service were not 〈◊〉 and imposed Forms but the Words and Expressions of them were left to the Prudence Choice and Judgment of every particular Bishop or Minister I do not here say that a Bishop or Minister used no Arbitrary Form of Prayer all that I say is that there was none imposed Neither do I say that having no imposed Form they unpremeditately immethodically or confusedly vented their Petitions and Requests for without doubt they observed a Method in their Prayers but this is what I say That the Words or Expressions of their Prayers were not imposed or prescribed but every one that officiated delivered himself in such Terms as best pleased him and varied his Petitions according to the present Circumstances and Emergencies Or if it be more intelligible that the Primitive Christians had no stinted Liturgies or Imposed Forms of Prayer Now this being a Negative in Matter of Fact the bare Assertion of it is a sufficient Proof except its Affirmative can be evinced Suppose it was disputed whether ever St. Paul writ an Epistle to the Church of Rome the bare Negation thereof would be Proof enough that he did not except it could be clearly evidenced on the contrary that he did So unless it can be proved that the Ancients had fixed Liturgies and Prayer-Books we may very rationally conclude in the Negative that they had none at all Now as to these prescribed Forms there is not the least mention of them in any of the Primitive Writings nor the least Word or Syllable tending thereunto that I can find which is a most unaccountable Silence if ever such there were but rather some Expressions intimating the contrary as that famous controverted place of Justin Martyr who describing the manner of the Prayer before the Celebration of the Lord's Supper says That the Bishop sent up Prayers and Praises to God with his utmost ability 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that he prayed with the best of his Abilities Invention Expression Judgment and the like I am not ignorant that there is another Sense given of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or According to his Ability But I must needs say that I generally if not always found this Phrase to include personal Abilities Thus as to the Explanation of Scripture Origen writes that he would expound it according to his Ability 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that he would Comment on that Parable of the Blind Man that was healed near Jericho mentioned in Luke 18. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so on the Parable concerning the Husbandman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and on the Marriage of the King's Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that he would search out the Sense of the Gospel of St. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now what doth Origen intend by his searching out the Sense and expounding the meaning of the Scriptures to the utmost of his Power and Ability Is it a bare reading and transcribing of other Mens Works or an Employment of his own Abilities and Studies to find out the Sense and Meaning of them Certainly every one will think the latter to be most probable So as to the Argumentative Defence of the Truth Origen promises that he would answer the Calumnies of Celsus according to his Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that he would defend and confirm his Arguments against Celsus according to his Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and demonstrate the Reasonableness of the Christian Religion according to his Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and dispute against Celsus according to his Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now whether Origen's defending the Truth and disputing against Celsus according to his 〈◊〉 Ability and Power consisted in a reading or in a bare transcribing out of a Book the written Arguments of other Men or in an Employment of his own Abilities Inventions and Expressions is no difficult matter to determine I have not found one place wherein this Phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not comprehend personal Abilities and several scores more might I cite where it is so to be understood which I shall omit and mention only one more spoken by Origen with respect to this Duty of Prayer where it must of necessity imply personal Abilities and that is in his Book De Oratione where he prescribes the Method and Parts of Prayer the first whereof was Doxology wherein says he he that prays must bless God according to his Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie the Performer's Abilities of