The Doctrine of the Saints Perseverance, Preface (2 of 3)
Before we returne, let us look but a little further, and we shall have a little more light given us, into what was the conditon and power of the people in the Church in the daies of Clemens, speaking of them who occasioned the division, and schisme in the Church of Corinth, or them about whose exaltation into office, or dejection from it that sad difference fell out, he gives them this advice. foreign. It seemes the foreign, the multitude, or the people were not such poore inconsiderable things as they are reported to be, when he advises them to stop and stay the sedition, by yeelding obedience to the things by them appointed and commanded. If it were in it selfe evill, disorderly, and not according to the mind of Christ, that the people should order and appoint things in the Church, it had been simply evill for Clemens, to have advised any to yeeld obedience unto things by them so appointed. Where is now Ignatius his foreign & foreign. &c. Even those who are contending about Rule and Goverment in the Church, are advised to stand to the determination of the people, and to cry, foreign. This is also insisted on by Blondellus, who thence argues potestatem plebis Circa Sacra. Disser. 5. Cap. 8. Sect. 4. Ad verba haec (saith our Doctor) prodigii instar est quod notandum duxit Dav: Blondellus [potestatem Plebis Circa Sacra] (de quâ tandem integram dissertationem elucubravit) artificiis quibuscun que asserturus. Hic (inquit) nos monet Clemens fideles etiam de Episcopatu aut Presbyterio contendentes, non ab Episcopi singulari foreign nutu, sed à multitudinis praeceptis pependisse. But let not our Doctour be angry, nor cry out so fast of Prodigies: a little time will manifest, that many things may not be prodigious, which yet are contrary to sundry of his conceptions, and Apprehensions. I cannot but acknowledge him to be provoked; but with all must say, that I have found very commonly, that reasons ushered in by such loud Clamours, have in examination proved to have stood in need of some such noyses, as might fright men from the consideration of them. What is in the next Sections set up to sheild the Children of Episcopacy from being afrighted with this prodigy, may perhaps be of more efficacy thereunto, then the exclamations before mentioned: He therefore proceedes. Sect: 5. Certè (saith he) si serio rem ageret Da… Blondellus de Presbyteris suis (non de Episcopis nostris) actum planè & triumphatum erit, nec enim ab universo aliquo Presbyterorum Collegie, quod ille tam afflictim ardet, sed a multitudinis solius Arbitrio, tum contendentes de Episcopo, tum fideles omnes Corinthios pependisse aequè concludendum erit. If any man in the world hath manifested more desperate Affection towards Presbyterie, then this Doctour hath done toward Episcopacy, for my part solus habeto. But though neither Clemens, nor Blondellus speak any one word about the ordering of things, multitudinis solius arbitrio, yet here is that said by them both, as is sufficiently destructive, not only to the Episcopacy the Doctour contends for, as a thing wholly inconsistent with the power, and liberty here granted the people, but of any such Presbyterie also, as shall undertake the ordering and disposing of things in the Church of God, without the consent and Concurrent suffrage of the People. Such a Presbytery it seemes Blondellus does not defend. But yet neither the Doctours Out-cry as at a Prodigy, nor this retortion upon Presbytery, is any answer to the testimony of Clemens, nor indeed is there the least possible reflection upon an orderly Gospel Presbytery in any Church, and Over it, by what Clemens here professeth to be the power of the People, all the appearance of any such things is from the terme Solius, foysted into the discourse of Blondellus by the Doctour, in his taking of it up to retortat. Clemens in the very next words secures us from any thought, that all things depended à multitudinis solius arbitrio. His very next words are, foreign. Our Doctours and Masters having stuft their imaginations with the shape, and lineament of that Hierarchichal fabrick, which the Craft, Pollicy, Subtilty, Avarice, Pride, Ambition of many ages successively, had formed, and framed according to the Paterne they saw in the Mount of the World, and the goverments therin, upon the first hearing of a Church, a flock of Christ, walking in orderly subjection, to their own Elders concurring with them, and consenting to them, in their Rule and Goverment, instantly as men amazed, cry out a Prodigy. It is not imaginable into what ridiculous, contemptible miscarriages, pride, prejudice, and selfulness do often-times betray men, otherwise of good abilities in their waies, and very commendable Industry.
But Section the sixth, the Doctour comes closer, and gives his Reason why this Testimony of Clement is not of any efficacy to the purpose in hand, saith He! At quis (sodes) à fidelibus de Episcopatu (ut vis) contra ipsos ab Apostolis constitutos Episcopos contendentibus; quis à populo contra principem suum tumultus ciente; quis verbis ad retundendum seditionem ad plebem factis, argumenta ad Authoritatem populo adjudicandum principi derogandum duci posse existimavit? Though many words follow in the next Section, yet this is all of Answer that is given to this signal Testimony of Clement's. I know the Doctour for the most part meets, not only with favorable Readers, but also partial Admirers; or else certainly his Exclamation would scarce pass for an invincible Argument, nor such Rhetorical diversions as this, be esteemed solid Answers. There is not by Blondellus any Argument taken from the faithful's tumultuating against the Bishops (that if appointed by the Apostles which is thrust in, taken for the persons of those Bishops, is against the express Testimony of Clemens in this Epistle) nor from the peoples seditiously rebelling against their Prince, nor from any word spoken to the People to represse their sedition; neither was any thing of this nature urged in the least by Blondellus: nor is there any colour given to such a collection from any thing in the words cited from the Epistle, or the context of them. It is the advise of the Church of Rome to the persons (whether already in office, or aspiring thereunto) about whom the contention, and division was in the Church of Corinth, that is insisted on. It is not the words nor plea of them who were in disorder, there is not any reprehension given to the body of the Church, the multitude or people who are supposed to tumultuate, to quiet them, but a direction given (as was said) by the Church of Rome to the persons that occasioned the difference, how to behave themselves so, that a timely issue might be put to the division of the Church. To this end are they advised to observe the foreign, the orders, precepts, decrees, or appointments of the multitude, as (from Acts the fifteenth) the body of the Church is called. It is not, that they should yeild to their tumultuating, but to yeild obedience to their orderly precepts. foreign, are by him approved; & had it not been lawful for them, with the Presbyters foreign in the Affaires of the Church, Clemens writing 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. foreign (saith he) foreign: 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: foreign (saith he) foreign. And in all places throughout the whole Epistle, writing (foreign) 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; foreign. 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 foreign, 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 foreign, non ad unius civitatis Ecclesiam, sed ad omues totius Achaiae Christianos, per singulas civitates & regiones, sub Episcopis aut praefectis suis ubi que 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, foreign. 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 foreign: 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 foreign ex annotationibus posthumis, nuper editis, & postquam haec omnia Typographo transcripta essent, cursim perlectis edoctum gratulor. Let not the Reader think that Doctour Ham: had transmitted his papers full of rare conjectures to the Printer, before Grotius Annotations upon the Revelations were published, but only before he had read them. The Doctour little thinks what a fly this is in his pot of Ointment, nor how undecent with all impartial men, such Apologies, subservient to a frame of spirit in bondage to a man's own Esteem and Reputation, appear to be: but let this pass: and let the Saints that call upon the name of Jesus Christ in every place, be the Saints in every part of Achaia, though the Epistle it selfe (written indeed upon occasion taken from the Church of Co…nth, yet) was given by inspiration from God for the use not only of all the 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 conjecture, but may be rejected with the same facility wherewith it is tendred; what now will hence ensue? Why hence it followes that Clement also wrote his Epistle to all the Churches in Achaia. Very good? Paul writing an Epistle entituled cheifly to the Corinthians, expresly and foreign directs it to 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 confined to the Church of Corinth only, although most of the particular things mentioned in that Epistle related only to that particular Church; Therefore, Clement directing his Epistle to the Church of Corinth only, not once mentioning nor insinuating an intention of extending it to any other, handling in it, only the peculiar concernment of that Church, & a difference about one or two persons therein, must be supposed to have written to all the Churches of Achaia. And if such Arguments as these, will not prove Episcopacy to be of Apostolical constitution, what will prevaile with men so to esteem it? Si Pergama dextra defendi possent, etiam hâc defensa fuissent. And this is the cause of naming many Elders, or Presbyters in one Church: For my part I suppose the Doctour might more probably have adhered to a former conjecture of his, Dissert. 4tâ cap. 10. Sect: 9. Concerning two sundry different Churches, where were distinct officers in the same Citty: primo (saith he) respondeo non us que qua que verum est, quod pro concesso sumitur, quamvis enim in una Ecclesia aut caetu plures simul Episcopi nunquam fuerint (pray except them mentioned, Act: 20▪ 28: and those Act: 14 23) nihil tamen obstare quin in eadem civitate due aliquando caetus disterminati fuerint. He might (I say) with more shew of probability have abode by this observation, then 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 else where be manifested. But the Doctour hath yet another Answer to this multiplication of Elders, and the mention of them with Deacons, with the eminent identity that is between them, and Bishops through the whole Epistle, the same persons being unquestionably intended in respect of the same office, by both these appellations Now this second Answer is founded upon the supposition of the former: (a goodly foundation!) namely, that the Epistle under consideration was written and sent not to the Church of Corinth only, but to all the Churches of Achaia, of which Corinth was the Metropolitan.
Now this second answer is, that the Elders or Presbyters here mentioned, were properly those whom he calls Bishops, Diocesans: men of a third rank and order above Deacons, and Presbyters in the Church-Administrations and goverment. And for those who are properly called Presbyters, there were then none in the Church, to give colour to this miserable evasion, Disser: 4. chap. 10 11: He discourseth about the goverment and ordering of Church affaires 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 accomodated to the Church of Corinth which Clement calls, foreign: & which himselfe would have to be a Metropolitical Church, being confessedly great, numerous; furnished with great and large gifts, & abilties is seen with halfe an eye. How ill also this shift is accommodated to helpe in the case for whose service it was first invented, is no less evident. It was to save the sword of Phil: 1. 1. From the throat of the Episcopacy he contendeth for; That Epistle is directed to the Saints, or Church at Philippi, with the Bishops and Deacons. Two things do here trouble our Doctor. 1 The mention of move Bishops then one at Philippi. 2 The knitting together, of Bishops and Deacons, as the only two orders in the Church, bringing down Episcopacy one degree at least from that height whereto he would exalt it. For the first of these, he tells you that Philippi was the Metropolitan Church of the Province of Macedonia, that the rest of the Churches, which had every one their several Bishops (Diocesan we must suppose) were all comprised in the mentioning of Philippi: so that though the Epistle be precisely directed foreign, yet the Bishops that were with them, must be supposed to be Bishops of the whole Province of Macedonia; because the Church of Philippi was the Metropolitan: The whole country must have been supposed to be converted (and who tha… knowes any thing of Antiquity will dispute that) and so divided with Diocesan's, as England of late was: the Arch-Bishops so beeing at Philippi: but how came it then to pass, that here is mention made of Bishops, and Deacons only, without any one word of a third order, or ranke of men distinct from them called Presbyters or Elders? To this he Answers, 2ly, That when the Church was first planted, before any great number were converted, or any fit to be made Presbyters, there was only those two orders instituted Bishops and Deacons: so that this Church at Philippi seemes to have been a Metropolitical Infant. The truth is if ever the Doctour be put upon reconciling the Contradictions of his answers one to another, not only in this, but almost in every particular he deales withall (an entanglement which he is thrown into, by his bold and groundless conjectures) he will find it to be as endless, as fruitless: but it is not my present business to interpose in his quarrels, either with himselfe, or Presbytery. As to the matter under consideration, I desire only to be resolved in these few Queries.
1 If there were in the times of Clement no Presbyters in the Churches, not in so great and flourishing a Church, as that of Corinth; and if all the places in the Scripture, where there is mention of Elders, do precisely intend Bishops, in a distinction from them who are only Deacons, and not Bishops also, as he asserts, when, by whom, by what Authority, were Elders, who are only so inferior to Bishops, peculiarly so termed, instituted and appointed in the Churches? And how it comes to pass that there is such express 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 whole shoulders in all their own Churches, lies the great weight and burden of all Ecclesiastical Administration. As we say of their Bishops, so shall we of any Presbyter, not instituted and oppointed by the Authority of Jesus Christ in the Church, let them go to the place from whence they came.
2 I desire the Doctour to informe me, in what sense he would have me to understand him: Disser. 2. cap. 29. 21, 22: where he disputes that those words of Hierom. Antequàm studia in Religione fierent, & diceretur in populis, Ego sum Pauli, ego Cephae, communi Presbyterorum consensu ecclesiae gubernabantur, are to be understood of the times of the Apostles, when the first Schisme was in the Church of Corinth, when it seemes that neither then, nor a good while after, there was any such thing as Presbyters in the Church of Corinth, nor in any other Church as we can hear of: As also to tell us whether all those Presbyters, were Bishops properly so called, distinct from Elders who are only so, out of whom one man is chosen to be a Bishop properly so called. To these enquiries I shall only adde.
3ly, That whereas in the Scripture, we find clearly but of two sorts of Church-Officers mentioned, as also in this Epistle of Clement; the third that was afterward introduced, be it what it will, or fall on whom it will, that we oppose. This (saith the Doctour) is that of Presbytery, give us the Churches instituted according to the word of Christ, give us in every Church, Bishops, and Deacons, (rather then we will quarrel give us a Bishop, and Deacons) let those Bishops attend the particular flock, over which they are appointed, preaching the word and administring the holy ordinances of the Gospel, in and to their own flock: And I dare undertake for all the Contenders for Presbytery in this nation, and much more for the independents, that there shall be an end of this quarrel; that they will not strive with the Doctour, no… any living, for the introduction of any third sort, of persons (though they should be called Presbyters) into Church Office and goverment. Only this I must adde, that the Scripture more frequently termes this second sort of men Elders, and Presbyters, then it doth Bishops, and that word having been appropriated to a third sort peculiarly, we desire leave of the Doctour and his associates, if we also most frequently call them so, no waies declining the other Appellation of Bishops, so that it be applyed to signify the second, and not third ranke of men: But of this whole business, with the nature, constitution, and frame of the first Churches; and the sad mistakes, that men have by their own prejudices been ingaged into, in this delineation of them, a fuller opportunity (if God will) may eare long, be afforded.
To returne then to our Ignatius! even upon this consideration of the difference, that is between the Epistles ascribed to him, and the writings of one of the same time with him, or not long before him, as to their language, and expression about Church order and Officers, it is evident that there hath been ill-favour'd tampering with them, by them who thought to prevaile themselves of his Authority, for the asserting of that, which never came into his mind.
As I intimated before, I have not insisted on any of those things, nor do on them altogether, with the like that may be added, as a sufficient foundation for the total rejection of those Epistles which go under the name of sgnatius. There is in some of them, a sweet & gratious spirit of Faith, Love, Holiness zeale for God; becomming so excellent, & holy a witness of Christ as he was, evidently breathing and working. Neither is there any need at all, that for the defence of our Hypothesis concerning the non-institution of any Church officer what ever, relating to more Churches in his Office, or any other Church, then a single particular Congregation, that we should so reject them. For although many passages, usually insisted on, and carefully collected by D. H: for the proof of such an Episcopacy, to have been received by them of old as is now contended for, are exceedingly remote from the way, and manner of the Expressions, of those things, used by the Divine Writers, with them also that followed after, both before as hath been manifested, and some while after the dayes of Ignatius, as might be further clearly evinced, and are thrust into the series of the discourse with such an incoherent Impertinency, as proclaimes an Interpolation being some of them also, very ridiculous, & so foolishly Hyperbolical, that they fall very little short of Blasphemies, yet there are Expressions in all, or most of them, that will abundantly manifest that He who was their Authour (who ever he was) never dreamt of any such fabrick of Church-Order as in after ages was insensibly received. Men who are ful of their own apprehensions begotten in the… by such representations of things, as either their desirable presence hath exhibited to their mind, or any after prejudicate presumption hath possessed them with, are apt upon the least appearance of any likness unto that Church they fancy to imagine that they see the face & all the lineaments thereof, when upon due examination it will be easily discovered, that there is not indeed the least resemblance, between what they find in, and what they bring to the Authors, in and of whom they make their enquiry; The Papists having hatched, & owned by several degrees, that monstrous figment of Transubstantiation (to instance among many in that Abomination) a folly, destructive to whatever is in us, as being living Creatures, Men, or Christians, or what ever by sense, Reason, or Religion, we are furnished with all, offering violence to us in what we heare, in what we see with our eyes, and look upon, in what our hands do handle, and our palats tast, breaking in upon our understandings with vagrant flying formes, selfe subsisting Accidents, with as many express contradictions on sundry accounts, as the nature of things is capable of Relation unto, attended with more gross Idolatry then that of the poor naked Indians; who fall down and worship a peice of red Cloth, or of those who first adore their gods, and then correct them; do yet upon the discovery of any Expressions among the Antients, which they now make use of, quite to another End, and purpose, then they did who first ventured upon them, having minds filled with their own Abominations, do presently cry out, and triumph, as if they had found the whole far dell of the mass, in it's perfect dress, and their breaden God in the middest of it. It is no otherwise in the case of Episcopacy: men of these latter Generations, from what they saw in present being, and that usefulness of it to all their desires and interests, having entertained thoughts of love to it, and delight in it, searching Antiquity, not to instruct them in the truth, but to establish their prejudicate Opinion received by Tradition from their Fathers, and to consult them with whom they have to do, what ever Expressions they find, or can heare of, that fall in, as to the sound of words with what is now insisted upon, instantly they cry out, Vicimus Io▪ Paean … what a simple generation of Presbyters, and Independents have we that are ignorant of all Antiquity, or do not understand what they read and look upon. Hence if we will not believe that in Ignatius his dayes there were many Parish Churches with their single Preists, in subordination to a Diocesan Bishop, either immediatly, or by the interposed power of a Chore… Episcopus and the like, and those Diocesans againe in the precincts of provinces, laid in a due subjection to their Metropolitans, who took care of them, as they of their Parish Priests, every individual Church having no Officer but a Presbyter, every Diocesan Church, having no Presbyter, but a Bishop, and every Metropolitan Church having neither Presbyter, nor Bishop properly related unto it, as such, but an Arch-Bishop, we are worse then Infidels, truly I cannot but wonder whether it doth not sometimes enter into these men's thoughts to apprehend, how contemtible they are in their proofes, for the fathering of such …n Ecclesiastical distribution of Governours, and Goverment, as indeniably lacquied after the civil divisions, and constitutions of the times and places, wherein it was introduced, upon those holy persons whose soules never once entered into the secrets thereof.
Thus fares it with our Doctour, and his Ignatius: foreign; I shall only crave leave to say to him as Augustus of Quintilius Varus; upon the loss of his Legions in Germany under his command; Quintili Vare reade legiones: Domine Doctor redde Ecclestas: give us the Churches of Christ such as they were in the dayes of the Apostles, and down to Ignatius though before that time (if Hegesippus may be believed) somewhat deflowred, and our contest about Church-Officers, & Goverment, will be nearer at an end, then perhaps you will readily imagine. Give us a Church, all whose members are holy, called, sanctified, justified living-stones, Temples for the Holy Ghost, Saints, Believers, united to Christ the head by the Spirit, that is given to them, and dwelleth in them, a Church whose foreign, is foreign foreign, that doth nothing by it's members apart, that appertaines to Church-order, but when it is gathered foreign; a Church that being so gathered together, in one place foreign foreign, acting in Church things, in it's whole body under the Rule, and presidence of it's Officers. A Church walking in order, and not as some who foreign (of whom saith Ignatius foreign, such as calling the Bishops to the Assemblies, yet do all things without him, (the manner of some in our dayes) he supposeth no… to keep the Assemblies according to the command of Christ) give us, I say, such a Church; and let us come to them when they are foreign foreign, such as the Churches in the dayes of Ignatius appeare to have been, and are so rendred in the Quotations taken from his Epistles by the Learned Doctour, for the Confirmation of Episcopacy, & as I said before, the contest of this present digression, will quickly draw to an Issue. Being unwilling to go too far out of my way, I shall not,
1 Consider the severalls instanced in, for the proof of Episcopacy by the Doctour. Seeing indeniably the Interpretation must follow, and be proportioned by the General Issue of that state of the Church, in the dayes wherein those Epistles were writ, or are pretended so to be, if that appeare to be such as I have mentioned; I presume the Doctour himselfe will confess, that his witnesses speak not one word to his business, for whose confirmation he doth produce them. Nor
2ly, Shall I insist upon the degeneration of the Institutions, and Appointments of Jesus Christ, concerning Church Administrations in the mannagement of the succeeding Churches, as principled, and spirited by the operative and efficacious Mystery of Iniquity, occasioned and advantaged by the Accommodation of Ecclesiastical affayres to the civil distributions, and Alotments of the political state of things in those dayes, nor
3 Insist much farther, on the exceeding dissimilitude, and inconformity that is between the Expressions concerning Church-Officers, and a…aires in these Epistles (whence ever they come) and those in the writings of unquestionable credit immediatly before, and after them, as also the u…er silence of the Scripture in those things, wherewith they so abound. The Epistle of Clemens, of which mention was made before, was written for the composing, and quieting of a division and distemper that was fallen out in the Church of Corinth. Of the cause of that distention that then miserably rent that congregation, he informs us in that complaint, that some (foreign) were wrongfully cast from the ministry, by the multitude, & he tells you, that these were good honest men, & faithful in the discharge of their duty; for saith he, foreign foreign: though they were unblamable both in their conversation, & ministry, yet they removed them from their office; To reprove this evill, to convince them of the sinfulness of it, to reduce them to a right understanding of their duty, & order, walking in the fellowship of the gospel, what course doth he proceed in? what arguments doth he use? He minds them of one God, one Christ, one body, one faith, tells them that Wicked men alone use such waies & practises: bids them read the Epistle of Paul formerly written to them, upon occasion of another division, and to be subject to their own Elders: & all of them leave off contending quietly doing the things which the people, or the body of the Church delivered, & commanded. Now had this Person writing on this occasion, using all sorts of Arguments, Artificial, or inartificial for his purpose, been baptized into the opinion & esteem of a single Episcopacy superintendent, whose Exaltation seemes to be the design of much which is said in the Epistles of Ignatius in the sense wherin his words are usually taken, would yet never once so much as bid them be subject to the Bishop, that Resemblance of God the Father, supplying of the place of Christ, nor told them how terrible a thing it was, to disobey him, nor pawned 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: foreign. 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 foreign ad quos provinciae integrae & in iis multarum inferiorum urbium Ecclesiae, earum que 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 foreign, (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, foreign quatenus foreign 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 following words, provinciarum inquam in quibus plurimae civitates singulae singularum Ecclesiarum sedes, comprehendebantur, ideo que Ecclesiae in plurali istius sive istius provinciae dicendae. well, what then? cum tamen unaquae que civitas, cum territorio sibi adjuncto (foreign) ab Episcop… suo administrata, singularis Ecclesia dicenda sit: ideo que quod foreign factum dicitur, Act: 14. 25: foreign 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, foreign 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 Towne… (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 laudem… 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 Dioc…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 the whol world, freed from Obligations to Cities, or Mountaines, walking before God, in, and with a pure and spiritual worship, having no one Reason of that former institution, in common with the Church of the Jewes, must be cast into the same mould and figure: I hope without offence I may take leave to deny the Consequence, and what more I have to say to this Argument I shall yet deferre.
But the Doctour proceeds to prove, that indeed the Apostles did dispose of the Churches in this frame and order, according to the patterne of the civil goverment of the Romane Empire, and that instituted of God among the Jewes. The ninth Section, wherin he attempts the proof of this Assertion, is as followeth:
Ad hanc Imaginem, Apostoles Ecclesias ubi que disponendas curasse, & in omnibus plantationibus suit, minorum ab eminentioribus civitatibus dependentiam, & subordinationem constituisse exemplis quidem plurimis monstrari possit, illud in Syria, & Cilicia patet, Act: 16.4. cum enim foreign, illud, cap: 15. 2. Hierosolymas reforretur ab Ecclesia foreign Antiochiae, Cap. 14. 26, & 15. 3. & decretum ab Apostolis denuò ad eos mitteretur, v: 22. in Epistolâ, quâ decretum illud continebatur simul cum Antiochensibus foreign comprehensos videmus, v: 23. Dein Epistolâ istâ Antiochenae Ecclesiae reddita v: 30. Paulus tandem & Sylas Syriam & Ciliciam peragrantes, v: 4. cap. 16. 4. foreign, singulis civitatibus observanda tradiderunt, ut quae ad hanc Antiochiae Metropolin, ut totidem subordinatae Ecclesiae pertinerent; ut & ipsa Antiochia ad Hierosolymas, primariam tam latae (ut ex Philone pradiximus) provinciae Metropolin pertinebat, & ad eam ad dirimendam litem istam se conferebat.
This being all that the Doctour hath to produce from the Scripture to his purpose in hand, I have transcribed it at large; for this being removed, all that follows, will fall of it's own accord.
1 Then the dependance on, and subordination of lesser Citties, to the greater, is asserted as an Apostolical institution; Now because I suppose the Doctour will not assert, nor doth intend a civil dependance, and subordination of Cities, as such, among them selves, nor will a dependance as to Counsel, advice, assistance, and the like supplies which in their mutual Communion, the lesser Churches might receive from the greater and more eminent, serve his turne: but an Ecclesiastical dependance and subordination, such as whereby many particular Churches, with Inferiour Officers residing in them, and with them, depended on, and were in subjection unto some one person of a superiour order, commonly residing in some eminent City, and many of these Governours of a superiour order in the greater Cities were in such subordination unto some one of high degree, termed a Metropolitan, and all this by Apostolical institution is that which he aymeth at, which being a most gallant adventure, in a waking generation, we shall doubtless find him quitting himselfe like a man in his undertaking.
2 Then he tells you that the question about Mosaical Rites, and necessity of their observation, was referred to Jerusalem by the single Church of Antioch. But how does the Doctour make good this first step, which yet if he could, would do him no good at all? It is true, that Paul was now come to Antioch, ch: 14, 26: also that he was brought on his way by the Church, chap: 15. 3: but yet that the Brethren who were taught the Doctrine contested about, v. 1: were only of the Church of Antioch (when it is most certaine from the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians, Colossians, Romanes, & others, that great disturbance was raised farre and wide, in all the Churches of the Gentiles obout this controversy) nothing is offered. It seems indeed that their disputes grew to the greatest height at Antioch, whether Brethren from other parts and Churches did also come, whilest Barnabas and Paul abode there, but that that single Church referred the determining of that controversy, to them at Jerusulem, exclusively to others, the Doctour proves not. And it is most evident, from the returne of the Answer sent by the Apostles from Jerusalem, v: 23: that the reference was from all the Churches of the Gentiles, yea and all the scattered brethren, perhaps as yet not brought into Church Order, not only at Antioch, but also throughout Syria and Cilicia. It is then granted what he next observes, viz: that in the Answer returned from Jerusalem, with them at Antioch, those in Syria and Cilicia, are joyned; the reason of it being manifest, namely their trouble about the same Controversy being no less then theirs at Antioch. It is also granted, that as Paul passed through the Cities, that he delivered them the decrees to keep, that were ordained, by the Apostles and Elders, ch: 16. 4: and that not only to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia, which he left, c: 15. 41: but also to those throughout Phrygia, and the Regions of Galatia v: 6. What now followes out of all this? What? but that Antioch by Apostolical institution was the Metropolitan See of all the Churches of Syria and Cilicia. Good Doctour do not be angry, but tell us how this may be proved. Why doubtless it was so: as Antioch belonged to the Metropolitan Church at Jerusalem, as he told us out of Philo (who was excellently acquainted with Apostolical institutions.) What Jerusalem was to the whole Church, and Nation of the Jewes, whilest the name of God was fixed there, we know; But what was the primitive estate of the Churches of Jesus Christ made of Jewes and Gentiles, tyed neither to City, or Mountaine, I must be pardoned, if I cannot find the Doctour making any tender of manifesting or declaring. The reasons of referring this controversy unto a determination at Jerusalem, the Holy Ghost acquaints us with, Acts 15: 2. That we have no need of this Metro-political figment, to informe us in it. And now; if we will not, not only submit to Diocesan Bishops: but also reverence the grave Metro-Politans, standing upon such cleare Apostolical institution; It is fit that all the world should count us the arrantest Schismaticks that ever lived since Pope Boniface his time. The summe then of this doubty Argument for the Apostolical institution of Metropolitans (that none might ever more dare to call Diocesians into question hereafter) Is this; Paul who was converted about the 3 or 4th yeare of Caligula, 5, or 6 yeares after the Ascention of Christ, having with great success for 3 yeares preached the Gospel, went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, upon the Persecution rais'd against him at Damascus Act: 9 22: whence returning to his work, he went first to Tarsus, Act. 9. 30: thence to Antioch: where he abode one whole yeare. Act: 11. 25. 26: & was then sent to Jerusalem with the collections for the Saints about the 4th year of Claudius, Ver. 30: thence returning againe to Antioch, he was sent out by the command of the Holy Ghost more eminently, & peculiarly, then formerly, for the conversion of the gentiles, Act: 13. 1, 2, 3: in this undertaking in the space of a yeare, or two, he preached, & gathered Churches (whereof express mention is made) at Salamis Act 13. 5: in the Isle of Paphosv. 6: at Perga in Pamphilia 13: at Antioch in Pisidia. 14: at Iconium chap: 14. 1: at Lystra and Derbe. v: 6: and at Perga, 26: in all these places gathering some Believers to Christ, whom before they returned to Antioch he visited all over, the second time, and setled Elders in the several congregations, chap: 14. 21, 22, 23: in this journey and travel for the propagation of the Gospel, he seemes in all places to have been followed almost at the heeles, by the professing Pharisees, who imposed the necessity of the observation of Mosaical ceremonies upon his new Converts: for instantly upon his returne to Antioch, where during his absence, probably they had much prevailed, he falls into dispute with them, cap: 15. v. 1: and that he was not concerned in this controversy, only upon the Account of the Church of Antioch, himselfe informes us, Gal: 2. 4: affirming that the false Brethren, which caused those disputes & dissentions, crept in to spy out his liberty, in his preaching the Gospel among the Gentiles, 2. v: that is in the places before mentioned throughout a great part of Asia. For the appeasing of this difference, and the establishing of the soules of the disciples which were grieviously perplexed, with the imposition of the Mosaical yoake, It is determined that the case should be resolved by the Apostles, Act: 15. 2: partly because of their Authority in all the Churches, wherein those who contended with Paul would be compelled to acquiesce, & partly because those Judaizing Teachers, pretended the commission of the Apostles for the Doctrine they preached, as is evident from the disclaimure made by them, of any such commission or command, v: 24. Upon Paul's returne from the Assembly at Jerusalem, wherein the great controversy about Jewish Ceremonies was stated, and determined, after he had in the first place delivered the decree, and Apostolical salutation by Epistle to the Church at Antioch, he goes with them also to the Churches in Syria and Cilicia, expressed in the letter by name, as also to those in Pamphilia, Pisidia, Derbe, Lystra, Iconium &c. chap: 16. v: 1, 2, 3, 4: and all the Churches which he had gathred and planted in his travells through Asia, whereunto he was commanded by the Holy Ghost, Act: 13. 1. 2. Things being thus stated, it necessarily followes, that the Apostles had instituted Diocesan and Metropolitan Bishops. For though the Churches were so small, and thin, and few in number, that 7 yeares after this, may we believe our Doctour, the Apostles had not instituted or appointed any Elders or Presbyters in them. viz: when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Philippians, which was when he was Prisoner in Rome, as appeares, cap: 1, 7, 13, 14: chap: 4, 22: about the third yeare of Nero, yet that he had fully built and setled the Hierarchical fabrick contended for, who once dares question?
Audacia-
Creditur à multis fiducia.
But if this will not do, yet Ignatius hits the nayle on the head, and is ready at hand to make good, whatsoever the Doctour will have him say, and his Testimonie takes up the sense of the 2 next following Sections, whereof the first is as followes.
Hinc dicti Ignatianiratio constat in Epistolâ ad Romanos, ubi ille antiochiae Episcopus se foreign, pastorem Ecclesiae quae est in Syriâ appellet, cùm ad Antiochiam, sci: ut ad Metropolin suam tota Syria pertineret. Sic & Author Epistolae ad Antiochenos, foreign, Eam inseribens totam, Syriam ejus foreign esse concludit.
But yet I feare the Doctour will find he hath need of other weapons, and other manner of Assistance to make good the cause he hath undertaken. The words of Ignatius in that Epistle to the Romans are, foreign, Because he recommends to them that particular Church in Syria, which by his imprisonment was deprived of it's Pastor, therefore without doubt he was a Metropolitical Arch-Bishop: Tytere tu patulae &c: But the Doctour is resolved to carry his cause, and therefore being forsaken of all fair and honest meanes, from whence he might hope for assistance or successe, he tryes (as Saul the Witch of Endor) the counterfeit, spurious Title, of a counterfeit Epistle to the Antiochians, to see if that will speak any comfortable words, for his relief or no. And to make sure worke, he causes this gentleman so to speak, as if he intended to make us believe that Syria was in Antioch, not Antioch in Syria, as in some remote parts of the world, they say they enquire whether London be in England, or England in Londan. What other sense can be made of the words as by the Doctour transcribed? foreign. To the Church of God dwelling in Syria which is in Antioch: now if this be so, I shall confess it is possible we may be in more errours then one, and that we much want the Learned Doctour's assistance for our information; the words themselves as they are used by the worshipful writer of that Epistle will scarce furnish us with this learned and rare notion, they are at length. foreign (for so he first opens his mouth with a lye) foreign What is here more expressed, then that the latter passage, in Antioch, is restrictive of what went & before was spoken of it's residence in Syria, with reference to the name of Christian, first given to the Disciples in that place, I know not: and therefore it is most certaine, that the Apostles instituted Metropolitan Arch-Bishops foreign.
But to make all sure the learned Doctour will not so give over: But Sect: 11, he adds that the Epigraphe of the Epistle to the Romans, grants him the whole case that is, foreign, ex quâ (saith he) Ecclesiae Romanoe, eius que Episcopo super ecclesiis omnibus in urbicariâ regione, aut provinciae Romana contentis, praefecturam competiisse videmus.
Although I have spent some time in the consideration of mens conjectures of those suburbicarian Churches, that (as is pretended) are here pointed to, and the rise of the Bishop of Rom's jurisdiction over those Churches, in a correspondency to the civil goverment of the Prefect of the City, yet so great a Critick in the Greek tongue as Casaubon. Exerc: 16. ad An: 150: having professed that expression: foreign, to be barbarous and unintelligible, I shall not contend about it. For the presidency mentioned of the Church in, or at Rome, that it was a presidency of Jurisdiction, and not only an eminency of faith and holinesse that is intended, the Doctour thinks it not incumbent on him to prove: those with whom he hath to do, are of another mind: although by this time some Alteration might be attempted, yea there was, as else where shall be shewed: and so much for Ignatius his Archi-Episcopacy.
The example of Alexandria is urged in the next place in these words: idem de Alexandriâ, de quâ Eusebius. Marcum foreign, Ecclesias (in plurali) primum in Alexandriâ instituisse. Has omnes ab eo sub nomine foreign, administrandas suscepisse Annianum, Neronis anno octavo idem Eusebius affirmat: quibus patet primariam Alexandriae & Patriarchalem cathedram fixam esse, ad quam reliquae provinciae illius ecclesiae à Marco plantatae, ut ad metropoliticam suam pertinebant; doubtless. for 1 There is not any passage in any ancient Author, more clearly discovering the uncertainty of many things in Antiquity, then this pointed to by the Doctour in Eusebius. For first, the sending of Mark the Evangelist into Egypt, and his preaching there at Alexandria what he had written in the Gospel, is but a report. Men said so, but what ground they had for their saying so, he relates not. And yet we know what a foundation of many Assertions by following Writers, this Rumor or report is made to be. 2 In the very next words the Authour affirmes and insists long upon it in the next Chapter that Philo's book, foreign, was written concerning the Christians converted by Mark's preaching at Alexandria, when it is notoriously known that it treateth of the Essens, a Sect among the Jewes, amongst whole observances many things were vaine, superstitious, and foolish; unworthy to be once applauded as the practise of any Christian in those dayes: that same Philo, as far as can be gathred living and dying in the Jewish Religion, having been employed by them with an Apology to Rome in the daies of Caligula. But 3. Suppose that Marke were at Alexandria, and preached the Gospel there, which is not improbable, and planted sundry Churches in that great and populous City of Jewes and Gentiles, and that as an Evangelist the care of those Churches was upon him, in a peculiar manner, nay, and adde farther that after his death, as Hierome assures us, the Elders and Presbyters of those Churches, chose out one among themselves to Praeside in their convocations & meetings; If I say all this be supposed, what will ensue? why then it is manifest that there was fixed at Alexandria a Patriarchal Chaire, & a Metro-political Church, according to the Appointment of Jesus Chirst by his Apostles, Si hoc non sit probationum satis, nescio quid sit satis. If some few congregations live together in love, and communion, and the fellowship of the Gospel in a City, he is stark blind that sees not that to be an Arch-Bishops See. The reason is as cleare as his in the Comedian, for the freedome of his Wife. Sy: utinam Phrygiam uxorem meam unâ mecum videam liberam Dem: Optimam mulierem quidem. Sy: Et quidem nepoti tuo, hujus filio, hodiè, primam mammam dedit haec. Dem: herclè, verô, serio, siquidem primam dedit hand dubium quin emitti Aequam siet. Mic: ob eam rem? Dem: ob eam: and there is an end of the contest. The Doctour indeed hath sundry other Sections added to these foregoing, which as they concerne times more remote from those who first received the Apostolical institutions, so I must ingeniously profess that I cannot see any thing, wheron to fasten a suspition of a proof, so far as to call it into examination, and therefore I shall absolve the Reader from the penalty of this Digression.