have done being mov'd as I suppose at the indignity of the thing he desisted from writing and there was none afterwards found in France to maintain the Cause till of late the Author of the Book de Disciplina Ecclesiae started up who Dissertatione 1. Part. ultima says indeed that he defends Valesius's Cause against Launoy's whereas in reality he impugns and rejects it He understands the sixth Canon of the Council of Nice as referring to the Suburbicarian Churches only and restrains the bounds of the Roman Patriarchate within the limits of the Cities Vicariate thinking it most probable that only those Regions which were subject to the Vicariu Urbis were the Suburbicarian Churches to which the Patriarchal Right of the Bishop of Rome extended and to no others He denies Germany Spain France Britain Africa Illyricum and a great part of Italy to have been subject to the Jurisdiction of the Roman Patriarchate in former times and as if it had been but a small matter to shake off the Yoak of Patriarchal Authority he hath endeavour'd to destroy the Papal Power and to reduce the Primacy of Peter to a meer Dignity of Order amongst equals I am ashamed to think of those things which this Author deduces from such like Principles as these I shall treat of them in another place if I shall think it worth while In the mean time it will be enough to observe in brief that they are so absurd and disagreeable to the Doctrine of the Church Julius 1 Epist Synodica ad Orientales Antiochiae congregatos that they run the same Fortune as Julius the first tells us befell the Eusebian's Letters that all were so full of admiration that they could hardly be induced to believe such Writings should proceed from a man who desires to seem a Catholic The Eusebians contended that the Sentence of the whole Eastern Synod could no ways be retracted by the Bishop of Rome and when the Church was offended at that Error Julius the first wrote thus That it was better according to the Gospel that a Mill-stone were hanged about his neck and so he were drowned then that one of these little ones should be offended What then would that great Prelate say if he liv'd in our times and heard it maintain'd that not the Eastern Church only but the Bishops of one Diocess the Synod of one Province have Supream Authority and that their Sentence cannot be invalidated by any other Judge Dissert 2. ca. 1. Sect. 1 p. 97. What would he say if he should hear that not only the Causes of the Eastern but likewise of the Western Bishops were to be exempt from the Jurisdiction of the See Apostolic and that it is but a feign'd story that an Apostolical Authority was so given to Peter that it might descend to his Successors whereas it was granted to the rest of the Apostles only for their time This is fictitious Ibid. Sect. 2 p. 96. Seq says that Author because we have no reason nor testimony from Scripture or Tradition to prove that the Power of Peters Apostleship descended down to his Successors and that the rest of the Apostles did not seeing that the Bishops of the Apostolical Churches are equally said to be the Successors to those Apostles by whom their Churches were founded nay all Bishops are esteemed Successors of all the Apostles These are the consequences of this mans Principles which if they might take place farewell the sollicitude which in Obedience to the Divine Precept the Bishop of Rome has had over all Churches of the Catholic Communion throughout the whole World and which he still has as becomes the Primacy of his See although Quesnellio Dissert 1. p. 79. a late Author invents another story concerning the Churches of France supposing according to his Opinion that the Bishop of Rome hath not the Gallican Churches under his charge I am unwilling to insist any longer upon this expostulation but before I conclude this Preface two things are to be observ'd the former whereof hath relation to the favourable Reader whom I would not have to suspect that the Errors of this Book are to be ascribed either to the Sacred Faculty of Paris or to the most Illustrious Gallican Clergy For although the Author calls himself a Doctor of Paris and is a French-man yet it is not at all credible that this Work of his will either please the Sacred Faculty of Paris or the most Illustrious Gallican Clergy 'T is rather to be believed that all those of the French Nation that are eminent for Learning and Piety will judge it unfit that Book should ever have been publish'd The ancient Religion of the Gallican Church which never withdrew its subjection to the Apostolical Sea and hath often profess'd it never will obliges me to believe this It would be temerity therefore to censure the most Illustrious Gallican Church for the publishing of this Book Far be it from Men eminent for Learning far be it from Doctors educated in the Communion of the Apostolic See far be it from a Clergy and Bishops that maintain the Catholic Faith whilst they are earnestly endeavouring to root out one Heresie to consent to the Principles of another not remembring that saying which St. Avitus Bishop of Vienne St. Avitus Viennen Episcopus in Epist ad Faustum Symmachum Senaeores in the Name of the Gallican Church hath 1160 years since consecrated to the memory of Posterity If the Papacy be called in question not a Bishop but Episcopacy will seem to shake Si Papa Urbis vocatur in dubium Episcopatus jam videbitur non Episcopus vacillare The second thing concerns our English Author whom I would not have to boast that he hath found a Patron for his Cause amongst Catholics For since he is a Minister of the English Church and acknowledges a Metropolitical Authority he must necessarily own that the French Author is no less an Adversary to him than to us For since that Author not only denys Patriarchal Authority to be of Apostolical Institution but Metropolitical also that the Dean of St. Saul's may be able to defend the Hierarchy of the English Church to be of Apostolical Institution he ought to exclude out of it not only Patriarchs but Metropolitans also and first to constitute a Church consisting only of Bishops and their inferior Clergy This I say he ought to do if he follow the judgment of the late French Author which notwithstanding we will never subscribe to For we shall ever oppose those Opinions by which we see the Rights of Churches are destroyed the receiv'd Sanctions of Synods perverted the approv'd Writings of ancient Bishops ridicul'd the venerable Testimonies of the ancient Fathers despised and the solid foundations of Ecclesiastical Polity subverted And never admit Principles of Division and Schism to be Rules of Catholic Religion And so much concerning the Treatise of a late French Writer now I proceed to shew the Errors of
Head but also Autocephalic that is under its own proper Jurisdiction only and subject to no Patriarch from the time that the Faith first began to be planted there till the coming of Augustine the Monk. There are therefore two things which the Author hath undertaken to prove against me one that the Bounds of the Roman Patriarchate ought to be restrain'd so as not to extend to Britain the other that the Hierarchy of the English Church which acknowledges no Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan is Ancient 'T is chiefly for the Proof of these things the Author hath made use of his utmost Endeavours Industry and Ability not treading in the Foot-steps of the Ancients but walking in new Paths which lead from the Truth as I shall endeavour briefly to shew in this Dissertation For whereas this Author hath brought those things for the Proof of his Opinions which have been lately invented partly by him and partly by Launoy I thought it might be profitable to lay them before you and to shew in the following Discourse how far different they are from the true Discipline of the Church from the Judgment of the Ancient Fathers from the Decrees of Councils and from the Sense of all Antiquity I shall therefore divide this Dissertation into six Chapters in the four first of which I shall alledg those things which relate to the Origin of the British Church and the Patriarchal Rights over it in the two last I shall examine those things that the Dean of St. Paul's hath written to prove that the Metropolitical Authority is Supreme and confute them by the Testimonies of those very Authors which he alledges He thought that the Patriarchal and Papal Authority was unknown to the British Church in the six first Ages and that this was manifestly prov'd from the Answer of Dinoth the Abbot and the Sayings of the Monks of Banchor I shall shew that there was no doubt at all made concerning the Supreme Authority of the Bishop of Rome but that Britain did venerate the Authority of the Apostolic See from the time that King Lucius First embraced the Catholic Religion till the breaking in of the Saxons and the coming of Augustine the Monk. And when I shall have made this appear from several Monuments of the British Church and by the Histories of that Nation I shall conclude with an Exhortation to the Ministers of the English Church in which I shall plainly shew them how far those Err from the Truth who think that the Church fail'd thoughout the whole World and was afterwards found by a few Persons in a narrow Corner of the Earth I shall bring the Testimony of Optatus Milevitanus wherein he reproves the Donatists for the like Error because they heretofore reduc'd the Catholic Church to a small number and confin'd the large Extent of Kingdoms as it were to a narrow Prison I shall bring other Testimonies of the Ancients by which it will appear that the true Church is to be found diffused throughout the whole World because it is Catholic and that it is one because it agrees in the Society of one Communion under One visible Head and that none can obtain Salvation who is either divided from that Head by Schism or separated by Heresie So that St. Jerom did not write by way of Exaggeration as a certain Person of late hath rashly given out but truly to Pope Damasus I saith he following none but Christ in the first place do consociate in Communion with your Beatitude that is the See of Peter I know the Church is built upou that Rock Whoever eats the Lamb out of this House is prophane If any one is not in the Ark of Noah he shall perish when the Deluge reigns CHAP. I. That the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or his Successors 1. The Opinion of an English Author who contends that the British Church was instituted by Paul rather than Peter The Testimony of Gildas the wise is not alledged by him it may be because he foresaw that it proved the Institution of the British Church by Peter 2. The Testimony of Eusebius brought out of Metaphrastes by which it appears that the British Church owes its Institution to Peter The same thing is proved by Metaphrastes asserted by John V. and affirmed by Kenulphus King of the Mercians 3. The Testimonies of Eusebius Theodoret and S. Jerome are produced out of which the Author is confident he shall clearly prove that the Islands scituated in the Ocean were first instructed in the true Faith by Paul. 4. The foresaid Testimonies of Eusebius are weighed the two former of which make nothing for Paul's coming into Britain rather than Peter's and the third of Jerome intimates not that Paul preach'd the Faith from the Spanish to the British Ocean as our Author believes but from the Arabic to the Spanish Ocean which is nothing at all to the purpose 5. The Testimony of Clemens Romanus is cited in which it is asserted that Paul came to the Borders of the West it is not said that he came to Britain 6. The Opinion of Launoy who questions the Authority of this Epistle of Clemens is disapproved of and the Testimony of Severus Sulpitius is brought wherein it is said that the Religion of God was received more lately beyond the Alpes and the distinction of our Author for avoiding the difficulty mov'd from the Testimony of Severus is rejected 7. Venerable Bede agrees with Severus Sulpitius whilst he puts us in mind that King Lucius was converted to the Faith about the time Sulpitius tell us that the Faith was receiv'd beyond the Alps with whom Tertullian seems to concur in Opinion who liv'd almost at the same time that Luclus King of Britain was converted under Pope Elcutherius 8. Other Testimonies of the Ancionts concerning the Conversion of King Lucius are brought likwise the Opinion of our Author concerning the Embassie that Lucius sent to Pope Eleutherius at Rome viz. That this Embassie was sent to Rome because it was the Imperial City as he asserts out of Irenaeus 9. The Testimony of Irenaeus is cited and it is shewed that our Author miss-interprets him Irenaeus asserts that all the Faithful ought to consent to the Roman Faith not because of the more powerful Principality of the Roman City but of the Roman Church The Emperor Honorius 's Testimony concerning the Principality of the Imperial Seat and the Principle of Priesthood's being establish'd at Rome the Authority of Augustin is added who tells us that the Principality of the Apostolic See ever prevail'd at Rome which when our Author denies he opposes a manifest Truth IN treating concerning the Antiquities of the British Church its Primitive Institution is to be enquired after which Modern Writers have attributed to divers Apostles and divers Disciples of Christ I have not leisure to recite all their Opinions in this Dissertation but shall only weigh that of our Author who to exclude the
Church and receded as Schismatics from the center of Ecclesiastical Communion What else can we conclude but that God was willing to shew the falshood of the Schismatical Church of Britain by the Miracle which he wrought upon Augustine's intercession Do not the Acts of the British Synod recorded in Bede testifie that Augustine did by so manifest a Miracle demonstrate the truth of those things which he proposed to the Britains that they were forc'd to confess it was the true way of Justice which Augustine Preach'd If these things cannot be denied as it is most certain they cannot what do the modern English Authors mean when they object against Catholics the answer of the Britains and the Monks of Banchor Will they not at length be convinc'd that they oppose nothing but their own Errors which are the vain Forgeries of Men against that Truth which hath been confirm'd by a Divine Testimony and that the rest of the Church hath just reason to condemn them for having lost both Truth and Modesty at the same time I am weary of vainly spending my time in matters so clear so manifest so perspicuous and of being again forc'd when Religion is the subject to bring a new Evidence of that Truth which all the English Writers of former Ages all men that have been eminent in Britain for Sanctity and Learning and lastly even the Bishops who have been present in the several Councils that have been held in England Scotland and Ireland have acknowledg'd and defended I will therefore conclude my Discourse with the following Exhortation AN EXHORTATION TO THE MINISTERS OF THE English Church WHen Philo the most Eloquent of the Hebrews address'd his Oration to Caius the Emperor Philo in Oratione pro Gente Hebraeorum ad Caium Caligulam and the Roman Senate How long saith he shall we old Men be Children as to the Body gray indeed through Age but as to the Mind through want of Knowledge very Infants whilst we believe Fortune the most inconstant thing in the World to be stable but Nature to be unstable whereas it is most constant Pardon me I beseech you most excellent Ministers of the English Church if I make my Address to you in the Words of Philo tho somewhat alter'd How long will you who are ancient in Body be Children in Minds and meer Infants for want of knowledg of Religion whilst you think the Catholic Church unstable which is yet most constant and your own which is rent from the Body of the Catholic Church will be stable You have chang'd the true Estimate of things attributing that to a part which is only the Property of the whole and imagining with your selves that the Catholic Church is defectible Matthaei 16 cap. 1. ad Timoth 3. which the eternal Truth hath promised shall never fail and which the Doctor of the Gentiles hath called the Pillar and Ground of Truth You thought that the true Faith was lost in the Catholic Church spread over the Face of the whole World but found again by you in England little considering how truly that Objection might be made against you which Henry the Eighth your King in the Age before this made against Luther that like the Donatists you reduce the Catholic Church to a very small number whispering of Christ in a Corner It was the Judgment of the great Augustine and of St. Optatus Milevitanus Optat. Melcvit Lib. 2. contra Parmenianum Quasi in carcerem latitudo Regnorum that the Church was not to be shut up in some Corner but to extend it self to the utmost Bounds of the World the latter of these Holy Fathers Lib. 2. reprehends Parmenianus the Chief of the Donatists for endeavouring to make void that Promise of God the Father of giving to the Son the uttermost parts of the Earth for his Possession whereas he had confined the large Extent of his Dominions as it were to a narrow Prison Then he asserts the Church that it may be Catholic ought to be extended to all parts of the World and that the first Mark to distinguish it by was Vnity which consists in the Communion it holds with St. Peter's See which is but one and this he believ'd so manifest that he thought Permenianus himself could not deny it Negare non potes inquit loco supracitato Stire te in Vrbe Roma Petro Primo Cathedram Episcopalem esse callatam in qua sederit emnium Apostolorum Caput Petrus undè Cephas appellatus est in qua una Cathedra uni as ab â—mâ—â—bus servaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent ut jam schismaticus peccater esset qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collâ—caret Ergo Cathedra unica que est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus cui successit Linus enumerata longa Romanorum Pontificum serie usque ad Siricium sub quo scribebat Siriâ—â—us inquit hodie qui noster est Sociuâ— cum quo nobis totus Orbis commercio formatarum in una Communionis Societate concerdat You cannot deny saith he in the place above cited but that you know that the Episcopal See of the City of Rome was granted to Peter as the Chief in which Peter the Head of all the Apostles sate from whence he was called Cephas in which one See Unity was to be preserved by all least the rest of the Apostles should claim a Superiority to any of their Sees So that now he would be a Schismatic and a Sinner who should set up another See in opposition to this peculiar See. Therefore in this one See only which is its chief Dowry Peter first sate to whom Linus succeeded and so reckoning up a long Series of Roman Bishops till he came to Siricius in whose time he wrote who saith he is our Fellow-Bishop with whom the whole World agrees as we do in one Society of Communion by intercourse of Communicatory Letters There was then a true Church in time past which diffused throughout the whole World made Peter's one See the Center of its Vnity and communicated with the Roman Church as a Sign of one Faith and Religion by Communicatory Letters This was the Sentence of Optatus Milevitanus and the rest of the Fathers which because the Donatists durst not deny they had constituted a Bishop of their own in the City of Rome who as St. Augustine tells us was called Rupensis and Montensis a Rupe vel Monte from the Rock or Hill wherein he conceal'd himself If therefore the Popes Authority was so manifest in former Ages that the Schismatical Affricans themselves could neither be ignorant of it nor deny it how comes it to pass that you in England now do not at all acknowledg it was perhaps the Knowledge of it so obliterated in the latter Ages that it could not be discovered by your Ancestors when they separated from the Communion of the Apostolic See Henricus Octavus libro de 7.
Persons by whose means Lucius desired of Eleutherius to be instructed in the Faith and by whose aid Eleutherius did not only convert Lucius but also most of the Britains to the Faith and instituted a Church in that Country Our Author admits that Eluanus and Medroinus were sent by Lucius and he gives this Account of the Embassie Eluanus and Edwinus were British Christians themselves and therefore sent to Eleutherius Pag. 68. having been probably the Persons employ'd to convince King Lucius but he knowing the great Fame of Rome and it being told him not only that there were Christians there but a Bishop in that City the twelfth from the Apostles had a desire to understand how far the British Christians and those of Rome agreed and he might reasonably then presume that the Christian Doctrine was there truly taught at so little distance from the Apostles and in a place whither as Irenaeus argues in this Case a resort was made from all Places because of its being the Imperial City These were reasonable considerations which might move King Lucius and not any Opinion of St Peter's having appointed the Head of the Church there of which there was no imagination then 9. But since our Author confesses that Ambassadors were therefore sent by Lucius to Rome that they might perform that which the Faithful from all parts as Irenaeus testifies were then used to perform I would know this one thing of him where he finds that they observ'd this by reason of the Principality of the Roman City Certainly he could not find this in the Words of Ireneus Ireneus Lib. 3. Cap. 3. Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam inquit propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam which he mentions and which are taken out of his third Book Chap. 3. where this Holy Bishop of Lions directs all the Faithful to the Roman Church For to this Church saith he it is necessary that all Churches resort by reason of its more powerful Principality But where in that place doth Ireneus say that there must be resort made to Rome because of its being the Imperial City The Author here find that in the Words of Ireneus which that Father never in the least meant by them For Ireneus writes not that the City but the Church of Rome which was consecrated by the Blood of Peter and Paul was to be consulted in Controversies of Faith and that all the Faithful under Heaven ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its more powerful Principality not because of the Principality of the Imperial City its necessary saith Ireneus that resort be made to this Church by all other Churches that is by the Faithful from all parts because of its more powerful Principality Therefore the Supremacy of the Ecclesiastical Principality at Rome was the cause of Lucius's sending an Embassie thither not the Principality of the Imperial City For in the City of Rome that I may use the Words of Honorius the Emperor not only the Imperial Seat was planted but the Principle of the Priesthood And there also as * Honorius Imperator Epist ad Theodosium Augustum In urbe Roma non solum Romanum Principatum Domus Augusta obtinuit sed Principium quoque Sacerdotium accepit Augustine Epist 162. affirms The Principality of the Apostolic See ever prevail'd This Principality over the Church Christ gave to Peter and Peter left it to his Successors in the Roman See which when our Author denies he opposeth a Truth which Peron the Glory of France in his Answer to James King of England Chap. 23. proves from very many Canons of the Church and Testimonies of the Councils and Ancient Fathers I should cite more of them were not the present Question chiefly concerning the Roman Bishops Patriarchal Authority over the West not his Supremacy over the Catholic Church Divus Augustinus Epist 162. therefore that we may keep close to that which we have undertaken to treat of let us conclude with our Author that Lucius sent Embassadors to Eleutherius that they might be inform'd of him in Matters of Faith and let us acknowledg with Ireneus that the Britains no less than the Faithful in other parts of the World ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its greater Principality to which let us add with English Writers that Eleutherius the Roman Bishop made use of his Authority when he ordain'd those Legats who being sent into Britain baptised Lucius setled Churches and consecrated Bishops and from hence we may conclude that to be true which I have in the Title of this Chapter taken upon me to prove viz. That the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or by those whom his Successors ordained Priests CHAP. II. That the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West and therein even of England and that this follows from the British Church's having receiv'd her Institution either from him or from his Priests as is prov'd by the Testimony of Innocent 1. The Roman Patriarchate over the whole Western Church which is asserted in the 17th Canon of the Eight General Council our Author likes not His words are recited 2. He saith that the way of proving the Patriarchal right from the exercise of it and the exercise fromthe right is ridiculous although he confesses that it is of force against de Marca and other Catholics who admit that the Pope is Patriarch over the whole West against whom only I have used that way of proof so that it cannot be ridiculeus as I use it 3. Against such Heretics who deny the Bishop of Rome to be Patriarch over the West I have not used that but another way of proof viz. the perpetual Tradition of the Ancients which the very Schismatic Greeks themselves have not been so bold as to deny 4. One of the ancient Testimonies which I have brought for that Tradition is out of S. Augustine who hath plainly deliver'd that Innocent the First had not only a Supremacy of order and dignity over the Western Church but also of Jurisdiction 5. Another of them is that of Innocent the First himself who relates that Churches were Instituted through all France Spain Africa Sicily Italy and the interjacent Islands by Peter only or his Successors or else by those whom they ordain'd Priests and affirms that all these Countries ought to acknowledge the Apostolic See as the Head of their Institutions 6. How Paul having preacht at Rome and it may be in other of the Western parts proves nothing against this is shewed from Paul himself who reckons only such Churches amongst those which were instituted by his Preaching whom himself first taught the Faith of which sort the Roman is not as having been planted by Peter before Pauls coming into Italy the same may be said of other Western Churches supposing that Paul Preach'd in them 7. Two things are objected by our Author the first in relation to matter
in that of the Vatican which is eight hundred years old with which the Synodical Epistle agrees Censemus ergo Epistola Synodica Patrum Arelatonâ—â—â— Pascha Domini per Orbem totum una die observari We therefore think fit that Easter be observ'd on the same day throughout the whole World. But what will our Author deduce from this way of reading the Words in favour of his Opinion Perhaps that in the time of the Council of Arles it belong'd of right to Sylvester to publish Easter-day throughout the whole World and that at the time of the Council of Nice this Prerogative of Papal Jurisdiction was taken from him But the Nicene Fathers were so far from correcting any thing in reference to this Publication that the same Authority which the first Canon of the Council of Arles shews the Roman Bishop to have used about the Publication the same he continued still to use according to the Canons of the Council of Nice as St. Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria testifies in the Preface to his Paschal Cycle which Bucherius in Appendice ad Doctrinam temporum first published from the Manuscripts It is decreed saith Cyril Cyrillus Alexandrinus praefat ad Cyclum Vid. num XXVIII by the consent of the Synod of the Holy Fathers throughout the whole World that because there was such a Church found to be at Alexandria which was eminent for their Skill in finding out on what Day of the Kalends or Ides and in what Moon Easter ought to be celebrated this Church should every Year by their Letters intimate this to the Roman Church from whence by Apostolick Authority the universal Church might know without any further dispute the determin'd day of Easter throughout the whole World. Which rule being they had observ'd for many Ages and no one believed any writing concerning it c. so saith Cyril who having been Patriarch of Alexandria from the Year 412. could by no means be ignorant of what the Nicene Council had eighty seven Years before determin'd and enjoyn'd to his Predecessors in the said Patriarchate concerning the observation of Easter He testifies therefore that the computation of Easter was by the Nicene Council committed to the care of the Bishop of Alexandria and that he did yearly intimate the day to the Roman Church but that the Catholic Church throughout the whole World was to know the day not by the Authority of the Bishop of Alexandria but of the Apostolic See. 9. It is false therefore that the Nicene Council did any ways detract from the Roman Bishops Authority of publishing the Feast of Easter to be celebrated by all upon one and the same day The Council of Nice even after the computation was committed to the care of the Bishop of Alexandria left this Prerogative intire to the Apostolic See and that the Roman Bishops did for many ages make use of it is affirm'd by Cyril and taught by the Synod of Arles and Victor Pope and Martyr about the end of the second Age shews this in several Epistles in which he owns that the care of celebrating the Feast of Easter on the same day in all places belong'd to him 'T is to be lamented indeed that those Letters are lost but I cannot but think it a special Providence of God that an abstract of some of them has been preserv'd for us by a Priest of the Church of England who liv'd long since viz. Venerable Bede Fragmentum Synodi Palestinae apud Bedam Vid. num XXIX who Tomo 2. libro de Paschatis celebratione gives us a certain fragment of the Synod of Palestine in which are these words Then Victor Pope and Bishop of the City of Rome directed his Authority to Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea and Palestine that in that place wherein our Lord the Saviour of the World conversed when he was in the flesh there might be an useful order made for the Churches how Easter should be rightly celebrated by all Catholics The foresaid Bishop therefore having received this Authority assembled all the Bishops not only of his own Province but also from divers other Regions Where when that multitude of Prelates were convened Theophilus the Bishop produc'd the Authority that was delegated to him by Victor the Pope and shew'd them what was given him in charge to do So that here we have an evidence from one of the Epistles of Victor wherein he enjoyn'd Theophilus Metropolitan of Caesarea in Palestine to call a Council in which the Question concerning Easter should be discuss'd and that Polycrates Bishop of Ephesis obeyed the Authority of Victor appears by his writing back to him in this manner Polycrates Ephesinus Epist ad victorem I could likewise make mention of the Bishops who are with me whom you required me to assemble together as I have also done This Testimony of Polycrattes is extant in Eusebius Caesariensis who lib. 5. cap. 24. saith that Victor after Councils had been celebrated in several parts of the World set forth a Decree for the observation of Easter upon the same day every where and that he would have Excomunicated the Asiatics who refused to obey this Decree 10. Things being thus carried saith Eusebius Eusebius lib. 5. histor cap. Vid. num XXX Victor Bishop of Rome forthwith endeavours to cut off from the Catholic Communion all the Churches of Asia and the neighbouring Provinces as dissenters from the right Faith and by the Letters which he sent interdicts all the Brethren which were there and pronounces them to be wholly aliens from the unity of the Church The Letters which Eusebius hath here mention'd are lost to the great detriment of Ecclesiastical Learning For if they were extant it is probable it might be Collected from the very words of Victor how by vertue of his Supreme Pontifical Authority he Excommunicated Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus and other Asian Bishops or at least terrified them with the Sentence of Excommunication But whethersoever of these is ascribed to Victor it is certain that he exercised the Authority of his See concerning which no Catholic Bishop did then contend with him For Irenaeus and other Western Bishops did only exhort him that he would abstain from denouncing the Sentence of Excomunication or at least revoke it after it was denounc'd as I have shew'd elsewhere from Eusebius And let it suffice to have said thus much concerning the first Canon of the Council of Arles which is read two several ways in the Manuscripts in some thus that the Fathers of the Council of Arles refer the Decree to Sylvester for the celebration of the Feast of Easter upon one and the same day per omnem Vrbem through every City in others per omnem Orbem through the whole World. Our Author may make choice of which of these Readings he shall think fit for he cannot reasonably deny but that the Patriarchal or Papal Authority is proved from hence nay if he be wise he will admit of