The Antiquities of the British Churches, Book · Chapter 2

The Antiquities of the British Churches · Book · Chapter 2

p. 49CHAP. II. Of the Succession of the British Churches to the first Council of Nice.

THE Testimony of Tertullian concerning them cleared.

It extends onelyonly to Britains.

The National Conversion of the Scots under King Donald fabulous.

Of Dempster's old Annals.

Prosper speaks not of the Scots in Britain.

Tertullian to be understood of the Provincial Britains as well as others.

The Testimony of Sulpitius Severus examin'd.

Several Testimonies of Origen concerning the British Churches in his time.

The different Traditions about King Lucius.

The State of the Roman Province here, overthrows his being King over all Britain.

Great probability there was such a King in some part of it, and then converted to Christianity.

A Conjecture proposed in what part of Britain he reigned.

The most probable means of his Conversion, and the Story cleared from Monkish Fables.

Of Dioclesian's Persecution in Britain, and the stopping of it by the means of Constantius.

The flourishing of the British Churches under Constantine.

The reason onelyonly of three British Bishops present at the Council of Arles.

The great Antiquity of Episcopal Government here.

Of the Flamines and Archiflamines of Geffrey of Monmouth; how far agreeable to the Roman Constitution.

p. 50Maximinus set up a Pagan Hierarchy in imitation of the Christian.

The Canons of the Council of Arles not sent to the Pope to confirm, but to publish them.

HAving shew'd the great probability of the planting a Christian Church here in the Apostles time, and that by St. Paul; I am now to consider, the Succession of this Church; of which we have undoubted Evidence from the unquestionable Testimonies of Tertullian and Origen, who mention it as a thing so very well known, That they use it as an Argument against the Jews, to prove Christ to have been the promised Messias, because the uttermost parts of the Earth were given for his Possession. Tertullian flourished, as St. Jerome saith, under Severus and his Son; And in the time of Severus he wrote against the Jews, as (a)(a)Baron. A.D. 210. n. 4.Baronius proves from several Passages in that Book. In his time the Affairs of Britain were very well understood in other parts of the Roman Empire, especially by Men so learned and inquisitive as Tertullian. For Clodius Albinus having set up for the Empire in Britain, and being beaten by Severus, near Lyons, he took care to secure this Province by sending Virius Lupus, his Lieutenant, hither. But things growing troublesome here, Severus himself undertook an Expedition hither, and brought the Britains to such Terms, That they were contented to live beyond the Wall which Severus built; where Hadrian's Wall had been before. The part of Britain beyond the Wall was called Caledonia, as (b)(b)Dio in Sever.Dio saith. And it is apparent, that the Romans were at that time fully acquainted with the Condition of the Britains, both within the Province, and without; And therefore Tertullian cannot be supposed to speak at random about this matter; when (c)(c)Tertull. con. Judaeos, c. 7.he mentions the Nations of Gaul and the Britains, with as much assurance as he doth his Countreymen, the Moors, for receiving Christianity; And saith, The Kingdom of Christ was advanced among them, and that Christ was solemnly worshipped by them. Tertullian was a man of too much understanding to expose himself to the contempt of the p. 51Jews, by mentioning this as a thing so well known at that time, if the Britains were then known to be no Christians; Or, if they had been such, and were returned to Barbarism, the Argument would have been stronger against him. When therefore such a Passage doth not fall by chance from such a Writer, but the force of an Argument depends upon it, it is of so much greater weight. How ridiculous would it appear for a man to prove that Popery is the Catholick Religion, by instancing not onelyonly in Italy and Spain, as the Nations where it is universally received; but in Great Britain, and Denmark, and Sweden? No less was the absurdity then to prove Christ's universal Kingdom by enumerating Gaul and Britain with other Nations where Christ was worshipped, if there were no Christian Churches at that time in being among them.

But there are two Objections against this Passage of Tertullian, which must be removed. (1.) That he speaks of that part of Britain which was not under the Roman Power, and the Conversion of it is said to be later than to be here mention'd by Tertullian: For (d)(d)Fordon. l. 3. c. 35.Joh. Fordon and (e)(e)Maior de Gest. Scot. l. 1. c. 14.Joh. Maior, from an ancient Distick in both of them

(Christi transactis tribus annis atque ducentis

Scotia Catholicam coepit inire Fidem.)

say, That the Christian Religion was received in Scotland in A. D. 203. about the seventh of Severus. But this was so little a time before Tertullian's Writing, that it could hardly be so well known in Africa, as to afford strength to an Argument against the Jews.

To which I answer, That it is true, Tertullian doth add the greater Emphasis to his Argument by saying, Et Britannorum inaccessa Romanis loca, Christo vero subdita, The Gospel had access to those parts of Britain whither the Romans had none. Which doth prove, that Christianity was then received beyond the Wall, but not by the Scots, who were not yet settled in those parts; But by the old Britains, who were driven thither, as appears by the Account given by (f)(f)Xiphil. in Severo.Xiphilin p. 52out of Dio, who saith, that the Britains were divided into two sorts, the Maeatae and the Caledonii; The former dwelt by the Wall, and the latter beyond them. These were the Extraprovincial Britains, and were distinct both from the Picts and the Scots, saith (g)(g)Fordon. Scotichron. l. 3. c. 36.Joh. Fordon, who carefully distinguisheth these three Nations when he speaks of their Wars with the Romans; And he makes Fulgentius the Head of the Britains of Albany in the time of Severus; But he supposes both the Scots and Picts to have been in the Northern parts long before, and that the Scots received the Christian Faith in the time of Severus, Victor being then Bishop of Rome, who succeeded Eleutherius; To whom, saith (h)(h)Hector. Boeth. l. 5. p. 89.Hector Boethius, King Donald sent Embassadours, to desire him to send Persons fit to instruct them in the Christian Faith. And upon this, saith he, it was generally received in Scotland. **Dempster. Apparat. ad Hist. Scot. l. 1. c. 6. Hist. Eccles. l. 15. in Palladio.Sir 50:15Dempster, according to his custome, is very warm in this matter, and saith, all their Annals and Histories agree, that King Donald and the whole Kingdom of Scotland did then embrace Christianity; And is angry with Baronius for putting off their Conversion to the time of Palladius. But notwithstanding all his boasting of the consent of Annals and Histories, the Scotichronicon is the onelyonly Authority he hath to produce: And in his Preface he saith, That King Edward I. destroy'd all the Monuments of the Kingdom; and it is somewhat unreasonable to complain of the want, and to alledge the consent of them at the same time. And besides, he produceth something out of Fordon concerning Paschasius of Sicily, being sent by Victor into Scotland, and returning with a Message from King Donald, which is not to be found in Fordon. But, as (i)(i)Baron. A. D. 429. n. 2.Baronius observes, It is strange, that so remarkable a Conversion should be ommitted not onelyonly by Bede, but by Marianus Scotus, who mentions the Mission of Palladius. And (k)(k)Prosper. cont. Collator. in fine.Prosper saith, VponUpon the Mission of Palladius, who was made the first Bishop over the Scotish Christians, the People, who were barbarous before, were made Christians.

But it is urged by Dempster, not without shew of Authority, that Palladius was sent to those which were already Christians, and therefore Christianity must be p. 53planted among the Scots before the Mission of Palladius; and for this he quotes Beda, Ado Viennensis, Hermannus Contractus, Marianus Scotus, and others; and he blames Platina and Ciacconius who make him the Instrument of their Conversion, wherein he confesseth they follow Fabius Ethelwerd and Ingulphus; but he takes no notice, that Prosper himself, in his Chronicon, affirms the same thing, and the others have it from him. So that Prosper makes the Scots to be converted by Palladius, and to have been Christians before his time; which are inconsistent: But (l)(l)Nenn. c. 55, 56.Nennius seems to have hit upon the true account of this matter, viz. That Palladius was sent by Celestine to convert the Scots, but, finding no great success therein, he was driven on the Coasts of Britain, and there died: And after his death, St. Patrick was sent on the same Errand. And, if the Writers of his Life may be believed, Palladius did very little towards the Conversion of the Scots; And therefore what Prosper saith of Celestine's making a barbarous Nation Christian, must be understood of his Design and good Intention, and not of the Event, which came not to pass till some time after; and chiefly, by the means of St. Patrick, who went after the death of Palladius: Unless we understand the Words of Prosper, of those who were made Christians at the time of his Writing; the Design whereof being laid by Palladius is therefore attributed to him, when he wrote against Cassian, sometime after the death of Celestine: But when he wrote his Chronicon, in the time of Leo, The Scots being then converted; he saith, That Palladius was appointed to be Bishop over the believing Scots. Not that they did then believe before Palladius his coming, but that they did now believe when he wrote his Chronicon. For all the Testimonies of such as Preached there before Palladius are of very little Credit. But nothing of all this relates to the Scots in Britain; but to the original Scots in Ireland, who were uncapable of a National Conversion in Britain, so long before they came to settle in it, as will appear afterwards: So that if there were any Conversion of Scots before the Mission of Palladius, it cannot at all respect this Place of Tertullian, who speaks onelyonly of the Britains, and not of the Scots.

p. 54And Dio knew of none but Britains that lived Northward in that Expedition of Severus, although, he saith, he went to the utmost extent of the Island, and at last concluded a Peace with the Britains upon their quitting no small part of their Countrey, although they soon revolted; So that here was a great number of Britains to be converted in those Places where the Romans never had been before Severus his last Expedition: Which the Scotish Historians apply to the Conversion of their Nation, who were not yet come into Britain. But allowing that there were Churches planted among the Northern Britains, this doth not overthrow the continuance and propagation of the Christian Church among the Provincial Britains; For now, for a long time, the Christian Religion had a great Liberty of propagating it self; For, from the time of Hadrian to Severus, the Christians were generally free from Persecution, excepting what the Rage of the People brought upon them in some Places, without any Edict of the Emperours, as in the time of the Antonini both at Rome, in Gaul, and some parts of the East: But these Persecutions were neither general, nor continued so long as when the Emperours published Edicts on purpose; and therefore, the Persecutions under Trajan and the Antonini, ought in reason to be distinguished from those under Nero and Domitian, Decius and Dioclesian, when the Emperours made it their business to root out Christianity. But in the former Case, the Emperours restrain'd the People by their Edicts, but the People in some Places by false Suggestions frustrated the design of those Edicts, which Places excepted, the Christians enjoy'd a long time of Liberty; In which they neglected no opportunities to promote their Religion. And within this time the Christian Writers say, There was no Nation almost then known, where Christianity was not planted. So (m)(m)Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 345.Justin Martyr tells Trypho; so (n)(n)Euseb. l. 4.….67. l. 5. c. 21.Eusebius and Ruffinus speak;(o)(o)Ruffin. l. 4. …. 8. and (p)(p)Lactant. de Mo…t. Persec. c. 3.Lactantius saith, That Christianity spread it self into the East and West, so that there was scarce any Corner of the Earth so remote whither it had not pierced, no Nation so barbarous that was not reduced by it. As to Britain, Gildas affirms the continuance of a Church here, from the first Plantation of the p. 55Gospel, though not maintain'd with equal Zeal to the Persecution of Dioclesian; and even that was so far from destroying it, that it gained strength and reputation by the Courage of Confessours and Martyrs; and the heat of it was no sooner over, but, as (q)(q)Bed. l. 1. c. 8.Bede and (r)(r)Gild. § 8.Gildas both say, the Christian Church flourished again in great Peace and Vnity till the Arian Heresie gave it disturbance.

(2.) It is objected, That (s)(s)Sulpic. Sev. l. 2. p. 381.Sulpicius Severus, speaking of the Persecution of Christians in Gaul in the time of M. Aurelius Antoninus, saith, That Martyrdoms were then first seen in Gaul, the Christian Religion being more lately received beyond the Alpes. Which seems to overthrow the Antiquity of the Britannick as well as the Gallick Churches. But in my opinion (after so many Discourses written in a neighbour Nation about this Passage) we are to distinguish that which Sulpicius Severus absolutely affirms, viz. That there were no Martyrdoms in Gaul before that time; From that which he supposes to have been the reason of it, viz. That the Christian Religion was more lately received on this side the Alpes. The other he was certain of, there being no authentick Relation of any Martyrdoms there before; but that which he assigns as the reason of it, hath no such certainty in it; For the Christian Churches might have been planted there before, and have escaped that Persecution which befell the Churches of Lyons and Vienna in the time of M. Aurelius: He might as well have argued, that Christianity was not here received till a little before the Persecution of Dioclesian, because we reade of no Martyrdoms before those of St. Alban, Julius and Aaron, at that time. But if there were no Edict for Persecution of Christians for above an hundred years together, viz. from the Persecution of Domitian, Anno Dom. 92. to the Edict of Severus, Anno Dom. 204. then it was very possible that there might be Christian Churches in Gaul, and yet no Martyrdoms till the Persecution under M. Aurelius by a popular Tumult, which, as (t)(t)Euseb. l. 5. c. 1.Eusebius tells us, was the seventeenth year of his Reign. (u)(u)Baron. A.D. 104. n. 6.Baronius thinks that M. Aurelius sent private Edicts against the Christians. But (w)(w)Tertull. Apol. c. 5.Tertullian saith, none of their good Emperours ever persecuted the Christians, p. 56and instanceth in Trajan, Hadrian, Pius, Verus and M. Aurelius. (x)(x)Euseb. l. 3. c. 33.Eusebius saith, That Trajan abated the fierceness of the Persecution, but left the Laws in force upon information; l. 4. c. 9.That Hadrian, in his Rescript to Minutius Fundanus, Proconsul of Asia, forbad a general Persecution of any as Christians; c. 13.That, Antoninus Pius, not onelyonly pursued the same method, but threatned severe punishment to all Informers: the same he saith of M. Aurelius. In Commodus his time,l. 5. c. 5. he saith, the Christian Churches flourished very much in all parts;c. 21. So that till Severus his Edict there was no Persecution, by virtue of any Edict of the Emperours; by the account which Eusebius gives. And (y)(y)Lactant. del M…rt. Persec. c. 3.Lactantius hardly allows any Persecution at all from Domitian to Decius. Not but that the Christians suffered very much in some Places, through the Rage of the People, and the Violence of some Governours of Provinces; But there was no general Persecution countenanced by the Emperours Edicts, and therefore, where the People were quiet or intent upon other things, there might be Christian Churches where there were no such Martyrdoms as those of Lyons and Vienna.

It is certain that (z)(z)Iren. l. 1. …. 3.Irenaeus mentions the consent of the Celtick Churches, and those of Germany and the Iberi, with the Eastern and Libyan Churches. All the Question is, Whether this ought to be restrained to the Churches planted among the Celtae, as they were one Division of the Gauls in Caesar's time, or whether he took the Word in the larger sense, as comprehending all the Gauls. This latter seems much more probable, because Irenaeus, in none of the others mention'd by him, takes any particular Division of the People, but the general Name, as of the Germans and Iberi, and why not then the Celtae in as large a sense? Since (a)(a)Strab. l. 1, 4, 7.Strabo, (b)(b)Plutarch. in Caesare, in Crasso.Plutarch, (c)(c)Appian. 2. Civil. Bell.Appian, and others, call the Gauls in general by the name of Celtae; and Tertullian manifestly rejects that sense of Celtae for one Division of the Gauls, when he mentions the several Nations of the Gauls which had embraced Christianity. But I will not insist, as (d)(d)Pet. de Marc. Epist. ad. H. Vales.Petrus de Marca doth, That Tertullian by the Galliarum diversae Nationes means the four Provinces of Gaul into which Augustus p. 57did distribute it: But I say, that there is no reason to limit the sense of Tertullian to one Division of the Gauls, supposing the different Nations do comprehend those of Gallia Cisalpina and Transalpina; although I see no ground to understand Tertullian so, (e)(e)Launoy Ep. c. 7.since the name of Gallia Cisalpina was much difused; especially after the new distribution of the Empire by Hadrian. So that from the Testimonies of Irenaeus and Tertullian, we see no reason to question the greater Antiquity of the Celtick Churches than Sulpicius Severus intimates, much less to overthrow the Antiquity of the Britannick Churches. For, besides this Testimony of Tertullian concerning the British Churches; We have another of (f)(f)Origen. in Ezek. Dom. 4.Origen, not long after, who saith, When did Britain before the coming of Christ consent in the Worship of one God? Which implies, that the Britains were then known to be Christians; and, by being so, were brought off from the former Idolatry. And unless so learned a Man as Origen had been fully satisfied of the truth of this, having choice enough of other Instances, he would not have run as far as Britain to bring an Argument to prove, that all the Earth doth praise the Lord; Which, he saith, is fulfilled in the Christian Churches dispersed over the World. But I wonder what should make two such learned Antiquaries as (g)(g)Camd. Brit. p. 47.Mr. Camden and (h)(h)Godwin. de Praesul. p. 23.Bishop Godwin, so far to mistake the sense of Origen, to understand him as if he had said, That Britain, by the help of the Druids, always consented in the belief of one God, whereas it is very plain, That Origen speaks of it as a great alteration that was made in the Religion of the Britains after the coming of Christ. And Origen doth not onelyonly speak of the belief, but of the Worship of one God, which it is certain from Caesar, That the Druids did never instruct the People in. But the Christian Religion alter'd the whole Scheme of the Druids Worship, and instead of their Taranis and Hesus, and Teutates, and Belenus, and Andate, it taught them to believe and worship one true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent to be the Saviour of the World; Whose Power, (i)(i)Orig. in Luc. c. 1. ….Luke 1Origen saith elsewhere, was seen in Britain as well as Mauritania.

p. 58Thus far I have endeavoured to clear the Apostolical Succession of the British Churches, which those have rendred more doubtfull, who have derived our Christianity from King Lucius his Message to Pope Eleutherius, and the Persons he sent over to convert him and the whole Nation, as the Tradition goes, to the Christian Faith. But there is a considerable difference to be observed about this Tradition, not merely about the time of the Conversion of this King Lucius (of which (k)(k)Usser. de Primord. c. 3.Archbishop Vsher hath given so full an account, that to his diligence therein, nothing material can be added) but concerning the means and manner of his Conversion, and the Persons employ'd in it. For (l)(l)Pet. de Natal. l. 1. c. 24.Petrus Equilinus saith, That he was baptized by Timothy, a Disciple of St. Paul; and he had it from a much better Authour, for (m)(m)Notker. Martyrol. 8 Calend. Junii.Notkerus Balbulus saith, That King Lucius was baptized by Timothy; not the Timothy to whom Saint Paul wrote his Epistles; But the Brother of Novatus, whose Names are extant in the old Martyrology published by Rosweyd, 12 Cal. Julii; who were both, saith (n)(n)Baron. A.D. 166. n. 2.Baronius, Sons to Pudens a Roman Senatour; the same who is supposed to have been marryed to Claudia Rufina the Britain; and therefore his Son might not improbably be employ'd in this work of converting a British King. (o)(o)Naucler. Chron. Vol. 2. Gen. 6.Gen 6Nauclerus takes notice, That this Relation agrees best with the Tradition of the Church of Curia, a noted City of Rhaetia. And (p)(p)Pantal. de Viris illustrib. Germ. p. 1.Pantaleon calls Lucius the Disciple of Timothy; out of the Annals of that Church. From whence qqM. Velser. Rer. Vindel. l. 6.Marcus Velserus shews, that he did not die here in Britain, but went over into those parts of Rhaetia to preach the Gospel, and there suffer'd Martyrdom: or, at least, ended his days; For they are not agreed about the manner of his death. (r)(r)Tschud. Descript. Rhaet. c. 18.Aegidius Tschudus saith the former, who adds, that there is a place near Curia called Clivus S. Lucii still; and (s)(s)Munster. Cosmograph. l. 3. p. 518.Munster saith, near the Episcopal Palace, there is Monasterium Sancti Lucii. And (t)(t)Ferrar. Nova Topograph. p. 44.Ferrarius in his new Topography to the Martyrologium Romanum, reckons King Lucius of Britain one of the Martyrs of Curia, which the Germans call Chur, and the Italians Choira. And the (u)(u)Rom. Martyr. 3 Non. Dec.Roman Martyrology saith, That there his memory is still observed. (w)(w)Notker. Balbul. 8 Calend. Iunii.Notkerus Balbulus saith, That p. 59he converted all Rhaetia, and part of Bavaria. If so, they had great reason to preserve his Memory, and the British Church, on the account of King Lucius his converting their Countrey, hath as much right to challenge Superiority over Bavaria and Rhaetia, as the Church of Rome hath over the British Church on the account of the Conversion of Lucius by Eleutherius. If this Tradition hold good, the other cannot; which differs as to time, Persons, and the remainder of his Life, which our Writers say, was spent here; And (x)(x)Galfr. Monu. l. 2. c. 2.Geffrey, from the British History saith, That he died at Gloucester, and left no Heir to succeed him. Wherein he is follow'd by (y)(y)Fordon. Scotichron. l. 3…. c. 36.John Fordon, who saith, That after the death or disappearance of King Lucius the Royal Stock failed, and then the Romans appointed Governours instead of Kings. But, by that Expression, Vel non comparente, Fordon seems to doubt, whether he did not withdraw in his old Age, according to the German Tradition.

(z)(z)Nenn. c. 18.Nennius saith, That Anno Domini 164. Lucius, King of Britain, with all the inferiour Kings of Britain, were baptized upon an Embassy sent by the Roman Emperours and Pope Evaristus. But the old MS. in the Cotton Library hath it, Post 167 annos post adventum Christi. One of the Cambridge MSS. post 164 annos. In the margin whereof it is said, That Nennius is grievously mistaken, because Evaristus his time cannot agree to either of the Computations, Evaristus dying, according to the old Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome made about An. D. 354. when Trebonius Gallus and Metilius Bradua were Consuls, which, according to the Fasti both of Onuphrius Panvinius and Sir H. Savil, was Anno Dom. 109. But Archbishop Vsher observes, that in one Copy of Nennius he found the name of Eleutherius, therefore I pass it over: And yet the time of Eleutherius will not agree with either of these Computations: For he was made Bishop of Rome, according to the same Catalogue in the Consulship of Severus and Herennianus, which, according to those Fasti, is Anno Dom. 172. But it will be too hard to press the point of Chronology too far, when (a)(a)Bed. Hist. l. 1. c. 4. Epit. Histor.Bede, according to different Computations, sometimes puts Anno Dom. 156. and at another time Anno Dom. 167. p. 60But as long as it is generally agreed to have been in the time of M. Aurelius and Lucius Verus, and the beginning of Eleutherius his Popedom, I shall urge this matter no farther; since it must come within a very little compass, if the Characters of time must suit with it, which, Marianus Scotus saith, was when Pollio and Aper were Consuls, the sixteenth of M. Aurelius, and Anno Dom. 176. according to the Dionysian account, although Marianus follow another himself. Which falls out to be the year before the Persecution of the Churches of Lyons and Vienna, which, as (b)(b)Euseb. l. 5. c. 1.Eusebius saith, was the seventeenth of M. Aurelius, when Irenaeus was sent by them on a Message to Eleutherius. (c)(c)Baron. A. D. 183. n. 3.Baronius places the Conversion of Lucius somewhat later, in the beginning of Commodus, Anno Dom. 183. But therein, as Archbishop Vsher observes, he hath all the more ancient Historians against him; and it is onelyonly his own mistake in the Chronology of the first Bishops of Rome, which makes him say, the time of Eleutherius, will not agree to M. Aurelius and Lucius Verus, wherein he is too much followed by our (d)(d)Camd. Brit. p. 47.learned Antiquary.

Having then found no such inconsistency in the point of time, but that if there were such a King as Lucius in Britain then, he might well send to Eleutherius such a Message; I now proceed to consider, how far this Tradition of King Lucius can agree with the State of the British Affairs at that time. The Britains being impatient of the Roman Yoke in Hadrian's time, he comes over and brings new Legions with him; And settles the whole Province in quietness, and built his Wall, to keep the other Britains in order. Notwithstanding this, in Antoninus his time, the War broke out more fiercely; and not onelyonly the (e)(e)Capitol. in Antonin.other Britains forced their Passage into the Roman Province, but, as (f)(f)Pausan. in Arcad.Pausanias saith, The Brigantes rebelled, who, for that cause, had part of their Countrey taken from them. But Lollius Vrbicus being sent hither, he drove the Britains back, built another Wall farther Northwards, where Agricola formerly had placed his Garrisons, as appears by the (g)(g)Camd. Brit. p. 650, 699.Inscriptions there taken up: So that Lollius Vrbicus drove the Britains 100 miles Northward; For so much is the distance between the Walls of Hadrian p. 61and Antoninus. For all this, the Britains brake out again with so much violence in the beginning of (h)(h)Jul. Capitol. in M. Aurel.M. Aurelius Antoninus his Reign, that Calphurnius Agricola was sent against them, and from that time we reade of no disturbance here till the time of Commodus, when (i)(i)Dio in Commodo.Vlpius Marcellus was Roman Lieutenant. This being the true State of Britain at that time, what place is here left for such a King over Britain as Lucius is represented? He must either be over the Britains beyond the Wall, which overthrows one main part of the Tradition as to his settling the Churches here after his Conversion; or, he must be the Head of the Revolting Britains who were repressed by Calphurnius Agricola; or, he must be a subordinate King to the Romans, such as Cogidunus and Prasutagus had been. But then, how comes he to command all Britain? To have several Kings under him? To change the Affairs of Religion as he thought fit? Were these Privileges ever allowed to such Titulary Princes? It is very true, That the Romans did often suffer Kings to govern Provinces under them; But then they were Provinces wholly subdued and compassed about with the Roman Forces on all sides: But no Instance can be given where they suffer'd an Hereditary King of the same Countrey to enjoy full power over his Subjects, whilest a great part of the Countrey was in Arms against them, and ready to break out into a War, wherein the Romans were in continual fear, that the Natives within the Province should join with those without for their destruction. For them, in such a case as this, to trust such a King as Lucius with the Government of the Province, is to suppose them, to have utterly lost those Arts whereby they attained so vast an Empire. The Case of Antiochus in Asia, Herod and his Children in Judaea, Dejotarus in Galatia, Ariobarzanes in Cappadocia, and of many others that might be named, will not at all make it probable, where the Circumstances were so different, and especially in such an Island as Britain was then accounted, being incompassed with a Sea, which the Romans thought dreadfull and almost unpassable,

p. 62(k)(k)Catalect. à Jof. Scalig. ed.Semota & vasto disjuncta Britannia Ponto

Cinctáque inaccessis horrida Littoribus,

whither Supplies could not come without difficulty; and where the Inhabitants despised Death and Danger, as they found by so tedious a War, which was kept up so long here: And, after all, they were forced to keep out their Enemies by Walls from Sea to Sea, in several places: So that the Romans never had the whole Island in subjection. And therefore it is very improbable, that they should trust the Power over it in the hands of a Native of the same Countrey; Which Consideration makes me very hard to believe the Monkish Traditions concerning King Lucius.

But I do not deny, that there was such a Person in this Island, or that he had Royal Authority in some part of it, or that he was converted to Christianity at that time, or that the Christian Church here flourished by his means. That there was such a Person, who was a King and a Christian, is proved, besides the concurrence of so many Authours from Bede's time, from the two Coins mention'd by (l)(l)Usser. de Prim. p. 39, 40.Archbishop Vsher, one Silver, and the other Gold, having an Image of a King on them, with a Cross, and the Letters of LVC, as far as they could be discerned. But if it be farther asked in what part of Britain this King Lucius lived, I shall onelyonly propose my Conjecture, and leave it to the Judgment of others. It is well known that the Romans were so well satisfied with the fidelity of Cogidunus, that they bestow'd some Cities upon him. And Tacitus saith, he continued firm to the Roman Interest to his time. And where Kings were faithfull to them, the Romans were kind to their Posterity, and kept them up in the same dignity as long as they behaved themselves as they expected from them. Of this we have a clear instance in Herod's Posterity; For Archelaus, Herodes Antipas and Philip, his Sons, succeeded into their shares of his Kingdom. Then Herod Agrippa, his Grandchild by Aristobulus, was made King by Caius Caligula, whose Government was inlarged by Claudius, and his Brother Herod had the Kingdom of Chalcis given him: p. 63Sometime after his Father's death, Claudius bestow'd first the Kingdom of Chalcis upon his Son Agrippa, then the Tetrarchy of Philip, which was inlarged afterwards by Nero, and he continued till the War, and was the last King over the Jews. Now from hence we observe, That the Romans thought it no ill policy in some Cases to continue the same Royal dignity to the Children of those who deserved so well of them as Cogidunus had done. And it seems most probable to me, that where Ptolemy places the Regni, were the Cities which Cogidunus had the rule over; not from the Name, but from the Circumstances of those places, which have fewer Roman Monuments or Towns than any other in Britain, and therefore were most likely still under their own Prince, who kept up the British customs. Whereever the Romans inhabited, they may be traced by their Ways, by their Buildings, by their Coins, by their Urns, by their Inscriptions: But scarce any thing of this nature could be found in Surry or Sussex by the most diligent Enquirers. (m)(m)Leland. Itiner. p. 398.Leland indeed discover'd some Roman Coins near Kingston upon Thames, where others have been taken up since: (but Camden could hear of no Roman Antiquities thereabouts.) And (n)(n)Burton. on Antonin. Itiner. p. 77.some suppose the place where those Coins were taken up, to have been a Station of the Roman Souldiers under Asclepiodotus, when he marched that way from Portsmouth to London, in the Expedition against Allectus. If so, it was too late for the days of King Lucius. All that (o)(o)Camd. Brit. p. 213.Camden pretends to, is onelyonly a Military way near Ockley, which was necessary for the conveniency of the Roman Souldiers passing to the remoter parts of the Province,p. 216. and some Coins about Gatton; but as to his Noviomagus which he will have to be Woodcote in Surrey, (p)(p)Somner. Antiq. Canterb. p. 24.Mr. Somner hath well proved from the course of the Roman Itinerary, that it must lie in Kent, in the Road to Portus Rutupis: and Woodcote is as far from it as London. In all Sussex there is no remainder of any Roman Building, or Way, or Colony, or Coins yet discovered to the World, except towards the Sea side, which the Romans kept to themselves. In Antoninus Pius his time (q)(q)D. tit. ad. S.C. Trebell. l. 46.Seius Saturnius was Archigubernus in Classe Britannica; Which shews, p. 64that the Romans had then a Fleet here, and that he was Admiral of it. And in after-times, the Comes litoris Saxonici per Britanniam, had several Garrisons on the Sea side for Security of the Coasts, as appears by the (r)(r)Notit. Imper. Occid. c. 72.Notitia Imperii where the Places are set down, among which two were on the coasts of Sussex Anderida and Portus Adurni; By the former our learned Antiquaries (s)(s)Camd. Brit. p. 247.Camden and (t)(t)Selden. Mare claus. l. 2. c. 6.Selden understand Newenden in Kent, but that stands too much within Land. Mr. Somner in a MS. discourse of the Roman Ports and Forts in Kent, rather thinks it to be Pemsey in Sussex, or Hastings, as more agreeing with (u)(u)Gild. Epist. § 14.Gildas, who saith, that the Romans placed their Forts for Security of the Coasts in litore Oceani ad Meridionalem Plagam, upon the very Coasts; And so the rest of them stood, as Reculver, Richborough, Dover, Lim, which were all in Kent; and the Portus Adurni was Aldrington near Shoreham in Sussex. From hence it appears, that the Romans, being secure of the Coasts, and having their Souldiers dispersed in the Colonies about, and being so near the Metropolis at London, where the chief Governours of this part of Britain resided; They might better permit a British King to govern these parts of the Countrey. And this is the most probable account I can think of, as to this King Lucius within the Roman Province.

(w)(w)Spelman. Concil. To. 1. p. 36.Sir H. Spelman would bring him to his Iceni, but without any colour of Probability; Lucius, saith he, was the son of Coilus, Coilus of Marius, Marius of Arviragus. And what then? Some, he saith, would have him to be Prasutagus, who was King over the Iceni. But doth not (x)(x)Tacit. Annal. 14. c. 31.Tacitus say, that Prasutagus died before the Revolt of the Britains under Boadicea? And that he left Nero his heir, and his two Daughters, hoping thereby to secure his Kingdom? If he were Arviragus, he was dead before the Revolt of the Iceni. And if Marius were his Son, how comes he never to be mention'd in the Story afterwards; no, not in that most remarkable Battel between his Mother and Suetonius Paulinus? But Hector Boethius calls Arviragus one of the Iceni, as though his authority were to be mention'd against Tacitus, who was the Geffrey of Scotland, so many and so improbable are his Fictions. (y)(y)Baron. A. D. 183. n. 6.Baronius, after p. 65trying several ways to reconcile the Tradition of King Lucius with the Roman Story, concludes with that as the most probable, (z)(z)Baron. in Martyr. Rom. Maii 26.That he was a King under the Roman Power in Britain, such as Prasutagus was. But he was onelyonly King over the Iceni, and not over all Britain, and although among the Britains there were many Kings over particular Cities (as they then called the People under one Government) yet there was no one King over the whole Island. But in Cases of great difficulty they pitched upon one as Supreme, as on Cassibelan, upon the Invasion of Caesar: So that the old British Government was neither Popular as some pretend, nor under one Monarchy; but the People were govern'd by several petty Monarchs, as appears by the unquestionable Testimonies of (a)(a)Diod. Sic. l. 4.Diodorus Siculus, (b)(b)Strabo, l. 4.Strabo, and (c)(c)Mela, l. 3. c. 6.Pomponius Mela; Fert populos & Reges populorum, saith Mela; Olim Regibus parebant, saith (d)(d)Tacit. vit. Agric.Tacitus; which prove both the Antiquity and Number of British Monarchs. And what (e)(e)Dio in Severo.Dio saith of a Democratical Government among the Britains is onelyonly spoken of the Maeatae and Caledonii, in their great Confusion, when all the Reins of Government were cast off, and the People did what they list, as Tacitus describes them in his time, saying, That they were drawn off from their former obedience to their Kings, by the Heads of several Factions among them. So that although in the most ancient times here was Monarchical Government, yet it was not extended over all Britain, as the Monkish Tradition pretends concerning King Lucius, and I know not how many Predecessours of his, even from the coming of Brutus to his days. But neither our Religion, nor our Government need such Fictions to support them.

Supposing then that King Lucius succeeded Cogidunus, though not immediately, in the Government of that part of Britain committed to his care; I see no inconvenience in allowing, that King Lucius hearing of the Christian Doctrine, either by the old British Christians, such as Eluanus and Medwinus are supposed to have been; or by some of M. Aurelius his Souldiers coming hither, after the great deliverance of the Roman Army by the Prayers of the Christians (which had p. 66then lately happen'd and occasion'd great discourse every where, the Emperour himself, as (f)(f)Tertul. Apolog. c. 5. Euseb. l. 5. c. 5. Oros. l. 7. c. 15.Tertullian saith, giving the account of it in his own Letters) might upon this be very desirous to inform himself throughly about this Religion, and there being then frequent Intercourse between Rome and Britain, by reason of the Colonies that were settled, and the Governours and Souldiers passing to and fro, he might send Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius to be fully instructed in this Religion; And either the same persons alone, or two others with them (called Faganus and Duvianus commonly) coming into Britain, might have so great success as to baptize King Lucius, and many others, and thereby inlarge the Christian Church here.

The (g)(g)Monastie. Angl. vol. 3. p. 188.old Book of Landaff gives a much more modest account of this whole matter than either Geffrey of Monmouth, or any of his followers. There we find onelyonly that King Lucius sent Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius the twelfth Bishop of Rome, to desire that he might be made a Christian through his Instruction; Upon which he gave God thanks, that such a Heathen Nation did so much desire Christianity; And then, by the Advice of the Presbyters of the City of Rome, they first baptized these Embassadours; and, being well instructed, they ordained them, making Eluanus a Bishop and Medwinus a Teacher; And so they returned to King Lucius, who with the chief of the Britains were baptized; And then, according to the Instructions of Eleutherius, he settled the Ecclesiastical Order, caused Bishops to be ordained, and the Christian Religion to be taught. There is nothing in all this account but what seems to have great probability in it. The same account is in Capgrave, out of John of Tinmouth, in the Life of Dubricius, and this seems to have been the original Tradition of the British Church: Which Geffrey of Monmouth hath corrupted with his Flamins and Archiflamins; and others afterwards made an Epistle for Eleutherius to King Lucius, but could not avoid such Marks in the way of Writing as evidently discover the Imposture; and when the Monks hands were once in, they knew not how to give over. For some of them carry Faganus p. 67and Diruvianus (as some call him) to Glassenbury; others make them Consecrate the Church at Winchester, to which they say King Lucius had a particular kindness, and gave all the Lands and Privileges which the Flamins had, to the Bishop and Monks. (A Gift that would never make them the richer or the safer.) Others make King Lucius to found St. Peter's Church at Westmister, the Church in Dover Castle, St. Martin's by Canterbury, St. Peter's in Cornhill, where the Metropolitan Church, they say, was placed by him, and Theanus made the first Bishop, who was succeeded by Eluanus, who went on the Embassey to Eleutherius; and, besides these, they make him to found and endow so many Churches, with such unlikely Circumstances, as hath made others question, whether there was ever such a Person in the World as King Lucius: That being the common effect of saying much more than is true, to make what is really true more doubtfull and suspicious.

But there is one Difficulty yet to be cleared; For all this Story, in its best Circumstances, seems to imply, that there was no Christian Church here before. For, if there had been, what need he to have sent as far as Rome to be instructed? unless the Bishop of Rome were then known to be the Head of the Church, which were a sufficient Reason for it. To this I answer, That if the Contest lay be…ween these two things, Whether it be more credible, that Christianity was planted here before King Lucius; Or, that King Lucius was baptized by order from Eleutherius; I should very much prefer the former, because the Authority of Gildas, as to the British Christianity, is to be relyed on before the later Writers; and Gildas asserts the one; and although he had as much reason as Bede, or any after him; he never takes the least notice of King Lucius and Eleutherius. And, if a Negative Argument will hold any where, it is where a person hath as much reason to know as any that follow him; and as great occasion to discover what he knows; both which will hold in the case of Gildas compared with Bede or later Writers. It were worth while for us to know whence Bede had his first Information of this matter; for he p. 68professes to follow other Writers about the British Affairs, and in many places he follows Gildas exactly, but in this he passes by what Gildas saith about the Primitive Christianity of Britain, and instead thereof puts in this Story of King Lucius. (h)(h)Bal. de Script. Cent. 1. n. 27.Bale saith, that Eluanus Avalonius was a Disciple to those who were the Disciples of the Apostles, and that he preached the Gospel in Britain with good Success; But King Lucius, being persuaded by his Druids, would not come to any resolution; but to satisfie himself, lest he should be deceived by his Countreymen, he sent Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius. And Eluanus upon his return wrote a Book De Origine Ecclesiae Britannorum; Of the first beginning of the British Church. And Pits is sure to follow him where he hath no reason: But Leland never mentions this Book, nor the Writings of Medwinus Belgius, and of King Lucius himself, all relating to this matter: But (i)(i)Leland. de Script. in Eluano.Leland onelyonly takes notice, that Eluanus and Medwinus were employ'd upon an Embassey to Eleutherius, that by his means he might become a Christian, which, saith he, is very unreasonable to suppose, unless he were first informed what Christianity was, which he thinks was preached to King Lucius by them, being two of the old British Christians. And there he relates how by chance he met with an old MS. of the British Affairs joyn'd with Geffrey of Monmouth, wherein this Story is told exactly as it is in the Book of Landaff: and no mention is made of any other Persons sent back but those that went. And, as far as I can judge, Bede follow'd this old British Tradition, onelyonly leaving out the Names of the Persons sent, and the Establishment of the British Churches after the Baptism of King Lucius. For Bede saith as little as he well could that tended to the honour of the British Churches. So that according to this, which seems the truest account of this Embassey, Eluanus and Edwinus were British Christians themselves, and therefore sent to Eleutherius, 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 onelyonly that there were Christians there, but a Bishop in that City, the twelfth from p. 69the 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 (k)(k)Iren. l. 3. c. 3.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 to send this Embassy to Rome, and not any opinion of St. Peter's having appointed the Head of the Church there, of which there was no Imagination then, nor a long time after in the British Churches, as appears by the Contest of the British Bishops with Augustine the Monk; of which in its due place.

If any credit were to be given to King (l)(l)Caj. de Antiq. Cantabe. Acad. l. 1. p. 69.Arthur's Diploma to the Vniversity of Cambridge, this matter would be fully clear'd; For there it is expresly said, That King Lucius was converted by the preaching of the Doctours of Cambridge, for which reason he gave large Privileges to that University, which were confirmed by King Arthur. And in the MS. Annals of Burton it is said, That Anno Domini 141. nine of the Doctours and Scholars of Cambridge were baptized. I am not ignorant what Objections have been made by learned Antiquaries against both these Passages, and how hard it is to reconcile them to the Language and History of that time; Nor that this Passage in the Annals of Burton was put into the MS. Copy by another hand, as the learned (m)(m)Usser. de Prim. p. 51.Primate observed, by comparing the Copy of them in the Library of C. C. C. But on the other side, it is justly pleaded, that in the Bull of Honorius I. bearing date An. Dom. 624.20 Febr. there is mention made of the Privileges granted to the Vniversity of Cambridge by Pope Eleutherius; and that withall he takes notice of Doctours and Scholars there. And that this Bull of Honorius is allowed to be authentick in the Bull of Eugenius IV. upon the Controversie about Jurisdiction between the Bishop of Ely and the Vniversity of Cambridge, bearing date An. D. 1433. 14 Cal. Oct. Which is a sufficient Proof to all that rely on the Pope's Authority, that in the time of King Lucius and Eleutherius there might be a sufficient number p. 70of learned Men in Cambridge to have instructed King Lucius in the Christian Faith; And that it is not improbable, that Eluanus and Medwinus might be of that number, especially considering that Camboritum, or, as many Copies have it, Camboricum, was a Roman Colony, and mention'd in the best Copies among the 28 Cities of Britain, and the Roman Colonies had their Schools of Learning, wherein the several Professours of Arts and Sciences did instruct both the Roman and British Youth. Of which I may have occasion to discourse afterwards.

After this time, we meet with little concerning the British Churches, till the Persecution of Dioclesian, in which they had a considerable share, for the time it lasted here: For although the Names of no more are preserved than onelyonly of St. Alban, Aaron and Julius; yet both (n)(n)Gild. § 8.Gildas and (o)(o)Bed. l. 1. c. 6, 7.Bede say, That many more suffer'd Martyrdom then in Britain, as (p)(p)Baron. A.D. 3…3. n. 144.Baronius acknowledgeth. And although Dioclesian being a Prince of infinite Ambition, as appear'd by his commanding himself to be worshipped as God, and therefore had so great an Antipathy to Christianity, that his whole Reign might be called, as (q)(q)Velser. Com. in S. As…am.M. Velserus saith, One perpetual Persecution, yet he had so much Art, as to throw off the odium of it upon others; To which purpose he first made choice of Maximianus, a Brutish and Fierce Man, who stuck at nothing for the Shame or the Cruelty of it, as he is set forth by Eutropius and Victor; and therefore was a fit Instrument, as occasion served, to execute Dioclesian's Malice against the Christians; which he did not fail to perform, as appear'd by the Thebean Legion which suffer'd in the first Expedition against the Bagaudae, for refusing to take an Oath, to extirpate the Christians as well as the Rebels, as (r)(r)Sigon. de Occid. Imper. l. 1.Sigonius and (s)(s)Velser. Comment. in Convers. Afrae.Velserus relate the Story. But the great Persecution under Dioclesian, of which Gildas and Bede speak, did not certainly begin till Anno Domini 303. Dioclesian and Maximianus being one the eighth the other the seventh time Consuls, as (t)(t)Lactant. de Morte Persec. c. 12.Lactantius hath evidently made to appear: But in the next year, upon the Resignation of these two, Galerius Maximianus and Constantius Chlorus were declared Emperours; and p. 71it is generally said by the Ecclesiastical Writers, that Constantius stopt the Persecution in the Provinces under his Government. So that either the Persecution in Britain must be before the other, or it could continue but a little time. To solve this, (u)(u)Alford. Annales Eccl. A.D. 286. n. 5, &c.Alford saith, there is no other way, but to make this Persecution to have been in the third of Dioclesian and the first of Maximianus. At which time, (w)(w)Baron. A.D. 286. n. 30, 31.Baronius saith, a very sharp Persecution was begun against the Christians at Rome. Which was about the time when Maximianus began his Expedition into Gaul against the Bagaudae, and in his Passage over the Alpes, the Thebean Legion suffer'd. The Circumstances of which Story are so agreeable in all respects, that I see no reason to call in question the truth of it, it being not onelyonly preserved by Eucherius, but by Venantius Fortunatus, Helinandus, Beda, Vsuardus and Ado. But Maximianus made then no long stay in Gaul, and for several years after, both Dioclesian and he were so taken up in Warlike Expeditions, that they had no leisure for a sharp and long Persecution. And I can however see no ground for any Persecution in Britain about that time by Dioclesian or Maximian. For when he came against the Bagaudae, Carausius was employ'd to secure the Seas against the Franks and the Saxons; But, understanding Maximian's design to take him off, he watched his opportunity, and with a good Fleet and considerable Army comes for Britain, and takes possession of the Government here, and Maximian had no Fleet left to pursue him hither. This Revolt of Carausius happen'd within few years after Dioclesian and Maximian were joint Emperours, viz. An. Dom. 286.

But Alford saith, the old Writer of Saint Alban's Life pitches upon Anno Dom. 286. for this Persecution. And a MS. Copy of Beda which he had met with agrees with that time. But he urges farther, that after the Rebellion of Carausius, when Constantius was made Caesar, the Provinces beyond the Alpes were committed to him, and that was Anno Dom. 292. And if there were no Persecution under Constantius, this must be before he was Caesar. But, for any thing Alford saith, the Persecution might have been under Carausius, or Allectus, before Constantius came p. 72to the Possession of Britain. For Carausius, as appears by (x)(x)Aur. Victor. in Dioclesian.Aur. Victor and (y)(y)Eutrop. l. 9.Eutropius, was let alone with the Government of Britain; which, saith (z)(z)Oros. l. 7. c. 25.Orosius, he enjoy'd seven years, and after him Allectus, three years more; So that for several years after Constantius his being Caesar, he had no influence on the Affairs of Britain: At the end of those ten years, Allectus being killed, and his Army routed by Asclepiodatus, Constantius came over, as appears by (a)(a)Eumen, Paneg. n. 17, 19.Eumenius, in the very nick of time to preserve the City of London from being pillaged by the Franks, and then he was received with wonderfull joy by the Inhabitants, being delivered from the Tyranny they underwent in the times of Carausius and Allectus; And after his Death Medals were coin'd in London to testifie the City's gratitude to him; whereon was the Effigies of Constantius of one side, and on the other a Temple between two Eagles, with this Inscription, Memoria felix; and under the Temple P. L. N. Pecunia Londin. Notata, as some explain it. For by the Eagles and Inscription it appears that these Coins were intended for the Apotheosis of Constantius; And so Joseph Scaliger and Camden understand them. (b)(b)Zosim. l. 2.Zosimus saith, That Constantius, while he lived, had his chief residence in Britain; And if a Persecution happen'd here, he must be Accessory to it, which is contrary to what is constantly affirmed of Constantius. For (c)(c)Euseb. l. 8. c. 13. Vit. Constant. l. 1. c. 13.Eusebius saith, he never join'd with the other Emperours in destroying Churches. (d)(d)Sozom. l. 1. c. 6.Sozomen and (e)(e)Hist. Tripart. l. 1. c. 7.Cassiodore say, That he gave full liberty to the Christians, and that their Churches flourished under him; And (f)(f)Optat. l. 1.Optatus saith, That the Donatists made their Application to Constantine, to appoint Iudges out of Gaul, and give this Reason, Because there was no Persecution under his Father's Government. And accordingly the Council of Arles consisted of Bishops chiefly out of Gaul and Britain.

That which upon the whole matter appears most probable to me, is, That the Persecution was begun while Dioclesian and Maximianus had the Empire in their hands; and although Constantius and Galerius had the Titles of Caesars; yet the supreme Government was in the others hands, as appears by what Orosius p. 73saith of Dioclesian's usage of Galerius, upon his return from the Persian War; And by the Inscriptions in Spain (if they be authentick) produced by (g)(g)Baron. A.D. 304. n. 8.Baronius, (h)(h)Velser. Not. ad Conversion. Afr.Velserus and (i)(i)Gruter. Inscript. p. 280.4.Gruterus. In one of which Dioclesianus and Maximianus are onelyonly mention'd; And this must be after the Persecution, for there it is said, Nomine CHRISTIANORVM DELETO. And in the other SVPERSTITIONE CHRISTI VBIQ; DELETA. And there Dioclesian is onelyonly named Augustus, and Galerius as adopted by him. Baronius thinks such Inscriptions were set up every where, but time hath onelyonly preserved those in Spain. But if they were set up in Spain, under the Government of Constantius, it is an Argument, that while Dioclesian and Maximianus held the Empire, they did what they pleased in these matters: For although the name of Caesar carried in it something of supreme Authority, yet (k)(k)Victor. in Trajano.Aurelius Victor, when he takes notice of the first beginning of the difference of the Titles of Augustus and Caesar, He saith, Though they were both Titles of Sovereignty, yet they who enjoy'd them did not differ less in their Power than they did in their Titles. And therefore (l)(l)Lactant. de Mort. Persec. c. 9.Lactantius saith, when Dioclesian called Galerius by the name of Caesar after his Persian Victory, he cryed out, Quousque Caesar? How long should he continue Caesar? And the Impatience of this made him force Dioclesian to resign the Empire, as Lactantius, c. 18.who was upon the Place, assures us; Nay, when Dioclesian offer'd him, That all four should be declared Augusti, he refused for this reason, Because he knew, while Dioclesian continued in Power, he should have onelyonly the Name. And Lactantius farther saith,c. 15. That the Edict against the Christians was sent to Constantius without asking his consent; and he confesses, Constantius complied so far as to pull down their Churches. But his kindness, when declared Augustus, made them willing to forget the rest. So that the Persecution was general till their Resignation; But upon Constantius being declared Augustus, it ceased in all these parts; in which, (m)(m)Euseb. de Martyrol. Pal. c. 13.Eusebius affirms, it did not last two years, although it continued ten years in the East. And within that time the Persecution took away St. Alban, Aaron and Julius, and other Martyrs p. 74here, as Gildas and Bede relate, who give a more particular account of the Sufferings of the first, not without some mixture of Improbabilities or Interpolations; but, as to the rest, we have nothing but their Names preserved and the Places they belonged to. The first is said to have been a Roman Officer at the Municipium of Verulam, the first British Town which had Roman Privileges; and the other, Citizens of Caerleon, where there was a Roman Colony.

Constantius dying at York, his eldest Son, Constantine, was declared Caesar by the Army in Britain. For although Constantius did what in him lay to secure the Succession to him, as (n)(n)Euseb. Vit. Constant. l. 1. c. 9, 21.Eusebius saith, yet that did not signifie much without the Concurrence of the Legions. And (o)(o)Lactant. de Morte Persec. c. 24.Lactantius saith, That he commended him to the Souldiers, and so delivered the Empire to him. This Consent of the Army is express'd by (p)(p)Eumen. Paneg.Eumenius, and by the Emperour (q)(q)Julian. Orat. 1. ad Constant.Julian; and Aurelius Victor saith, All that were present promoted his being Emperour; But he was not declared Caesar by Galerius Maximianus till afterwards, as Baluzius hath clearly proved out of Lactantius and others, who, when he saw he could not help it, sent him the Purple Robe. Thus Constantine, being firmly settled in the Throne, took care in the first places of the Tranquillity of these parts, where he was proclaimed Emperour, and, as Lactantius saith, The first thing he did was, to secure full Liberty to the Christians. And now, we may well suppose, all that Gildas and Bede say, to have been accomplished, viz. That the Christians rebuilt their Churches, destroy'd to the ground, and therein celebrated their Holy Sacraments, and kept solemn Festivals in memory of so great a Deliverance. And from this time we may date the flourishing condition of this Church, which before must labour under great difficulties; the Governours of Provinces before Constantius, and the Generality of the People, being set against the Christians.

But the first Evidence we meet with of the settled Condition of the British Churches, is, the number of Bishops which went from Britain to the Council at Arles, Anno Domini 314. where we find three Bishops subscribing to it, Eborius, Bishop of York; Restitutus, Bishop p. 75of London; and Adelsius, de Civitate Colonia Londinensium: So it is in (r)(r)Sirmond. Concil. Gallic. To. 1. p. 9.Sirmondus his best Copy. And although (s)(s)Selden. in Eutych. p. 118.Mr. Selden seems to question the Antiquity of it, yet the other vouches it to be very good and ancient. But what then is the Civitas Colonia Londinensium? The Learned (t)(t)Usser. de Prim. p. 60, 195.Primate thinks it to be Colchester; that being called in Antoninus Colonia. (u)(u)Seld. in Eutych. p. 118, 119.Mr. Selden takes it to be Camalodunum, and so written Camalodon, which the ignorant Scribes made Col. Londinensium: (w)(w)Spelman. Concil. To. 1. p. 39.Sir H. Spelman likewise supposes it to be the old Colony of Camalodunum. But, I think, a far more probable sense may be given of it, if we consider the way of summoning Bishops to Councils at that time: For it is unreasonable to imagine that every Roman Colony or City sent a Bishop: For then every Council would have been as full as the Arabick Writers say the Council of Nice was (of which Mr. Selden hath discoursed at large) or at least as (x)(x)Epist. Hibern. 11.Cummianus and (y)(y)Ado in Chro.Ado thought this Council of Arles was, which they made to consist of 600 Bishops: An unreasonable number to be called together on such an occasion, as the giving way to the restless importunity of the Donatists to have their Cause heard over again. It is not to be presumed that Constantine would summon so great a number to make up a Court (Episcopale Iudicium St. Augustine often calls it) wherein the main thing to be done was, to hear the Parties and to give Judgment; And in the former Judgment but 19 Bishops were summoned. It is said, (z)(z)Augustin. ad. Ep. Parm. l. 1. c. 5.That St. Augustine makes the number of Bishops at Arles to be 200. But I see no sufficient ground to understand those words of this particular Council; but of all the Bishops which had condemned them in several Councils, among whom he reckons the Italian, Spanish and Gallick Bishops, who met at Arles. But when I compare the Subscriptions to that Council published out of the most ancient MS. with a Passage in Hilary, I am apt to believe, that excepting those that were very near about Arles, there were no more than a Bishop out of a Province with one or two Presbyters. So it is expresly in the (a)(a)Euseb. l. 10. c. 5.Summons to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse in Sicily, (the onelyonly one remaining, and which (b)(b)Baron. A. D. 31…. n. 43.Baronius thinks was the p. 76same that was to the rest) wherein he is required to come out of that Province, and to bring two Presbyters with him, as Valesius shews against Baronius and Sirmondus the words are to be understood. And (c)(c)Hilar. de Synod.Hilary, speaking of the Councils of his time, saith, That one or two Bishops were sent for out of a Province, and he instanceth in the Council of Ancyra, and the great Council at Ariminum: So here we meet with Chrestus out of the Province of Sicily, Quintasius out of the Province of Sardinia, and so in most of the rest, the distinct Provinces are set down out of which they came: And at that time there were 18 Provinces of Gaul and Britain, and so many Bishops appeared at Arles, besides Marinus the Bishop of the Place. But to supply the defect of some other Provinces there were more out of that Province wherein Arles stood than out of any other. In Britain there were then three Provinces according to the MS. Copy of Sextus Rufus saith Mr. Camden: therefore in all probability, since the other two Bishops were out of the other two Provinces, Maxima Caesariensis and Britannia Prima; The third Bishop was out of the third Province of Britannia Secunda, wherein there were two noted Colonies, the one called Colonia Divana in the Coin of Septimius Geta, and Civitas Legionum in (d)(d)Bed. l. 2. c. 2.Beda, now Chester; the other, Civitas Legionis ad Yscam, where was a Colony of the 11. Legion, which Province is sometimes called Britannica Secunda. And therefore this Bishop Adelphius came ex Civit. Col. Leg. 11. which the ignorant Transcribers might easily turn to ex Civit. Col. Londin. The onelyonly Objection is that which is suggested by the Learned (e)(e)Usser. de Prim. p. 96.Primate of Armagh, viz. That there were four Provinces of Britain at that time, and that Flavia Caesariensis was one of them; having its name from Constantine, who assumed the name of Flavius; But Goltzius his Copy deserves not to be so much preferr'd before (f)(f)Camd. Brit. p. 111.Camden's; And the name of Flavia Caesariensis might either be taken from Flavius Valentinianus, as (g)(g)Bert. Pithar. Diatr. 1. c. 5. p. 64.Berterius thinks, or from Fl. Theodosius, before whose time Camden saith we never met with Britannia Flavia.

There being then but three Bishops present at the Council of Arles, is so far from being an Argument that there were no more in Britain, that it is rather an p. 77Argument to the contrary; since it was the Custome to send but one or two out of a Province where they were most numerous. And I see no reason to question a Succession of Bishops here from the first founding of a Christian Church. To prove this, I shall not rely on the Testimony of the Anonymous (h)(h)Apud Patric. Jun. Not. ad Epist. Clem.Greek Authour of the Martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, who saith, Saint Peter here ordained Bishops, Priests and Deacons; But upon the Reason of the thing, there being no other Church in the Christian World which derived from the Apostles, which had not a Succession of Bishops from them too; And we cannot trace the History of other Churches farther than we can do that of their Bishops. As for instance. The first Conversion of the Churches of Africa is much in the dark, but as soon as we reade any thing considerable of them, we meet with a Council of Bishops, viz. of (i)(i)Cypr. Ep. 71.Agrippinus and his Brethren, out of the Provinces of Africa, Numidia and Mauritania, and he was not the immediate Predecessour of St. Cyprian, who suffer'd in the Persecution of Valerian, Anno Dom. 258. And (k)(k)Tertull. de Praeser. haeret. c. 32.Tertullian puts the proof of Apostolical Churches upon the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles: which were a sensless way of proceeding, unless it were taken for granted, that whereever the Apostles planted Churches, they appointed Bishops to take care of them. Although therefore, by the loss of Records of the British Churches, we cannot draw down the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles time (for that of the Bishops of London by Jocelin of Furnes is not worth mentioning) yet we have great reason to presume such a Succession; When upon the first summoning a Council by Constantine three British Bishops appear'd; one out of every Province; as they did in other Parts.

But some pretend to give a more punctual and exact account of the settling of our Church Government here, viz. That there were twenty eight Cities among the old Britains, That in these there were twenty five Flamins and three Archiflamins, in whose places, upon the Conversion of the Nation by King Lucius, there was the like number of Bishops and Archbishops here appointed; And for this, besides the Rabble of our Monkish Historians, p. 78who swallow Geffrey of Monmouth whole without chewing; I find two of my Predecessours, men considerable in their times, produced to the same purpose, viz. (l)(l)Mason. de Minister. Angl. l. 2. c. 3.Radulphus de Diceto, and Rad. Baldock. Others say, (m)(m)Animadvers. on Church Hist. of Brit. p. 18.That these twenty eight Cities were not all furnished with Bishops in King Lucius his time, but that the honour of it belongs to him because he began it: But this is making a new Story, and in effect denying the truth of the old Tradition. However I deny not, but that it is as certain that King Lucius settled Bishops here, as that he was converted by Eluanus and Medwinus; For the same Authours deliver both. But how far his Power extended, and consequently how many Cities had Episcopal Government then settled in them, is now impossible to be known. As to the twenty eight Cities among the Britains, the Tradition doth not depend upon the Credit of Geffrey or Nennius; For Bede and before him Gildas say the same thing, viz. That there were so many Cities among the Britains, while the Romans had Power here, which I see no cause to doubt but they were Cities made by the Romans, or by the Britains in imitation of them, as I shall prove in another Discourse. But that which follows from hence is, viz. That the Government here settled being in Roman Cities, the correspondence must not be to the British Druids, but to the Roman Colonies. That there was some Subordination among the Druids is unquestionable. For Caesar affirms, That there was a Prince of the Druids, and the last Age hath discovered a famous Urn of one Chyndonax, Chief of the Druids; concerning which whole (n)(n)Le Reveil de L'antique Tombs de Chyndonax. Licet. Resp. ad Quaest. per Epist. l. 1. ep. 25.Books have been written, and several Discourses published, without any great satisfaction to me; But it is not to any purpose to tell why, since I yield the thing it self. And it is improbable there should be a Prince of the Druids, without an intermediate Subordination, and the Druids being so far dispersed, it was a reasonable thing, That the superiour Druids should have their particular Limits assigned them, that they might the better understand and give account of those under them, and not interfere or intrench one upon another. As far then as we suppose them to be reasonable and prudent, these things may justly be supposed p. 79concerning them, so that setting aside the name of Flamins and Archiflamins, for which there is no foundation at all (as to either among the Druids, and not for the latter word among the Romans) yet the thing itself hath no such absurdity or improbability in it. But the Cities here being Roman, as I suppose, the Government must be suitable to that of Roman Colonies, and they that know any thing of the nature and constitution of them, do know that they exactly follow'd the Pattern of the City of Rome, having a Senate, Consuls, Praetors, Censors, Aediles, Quaestors, &c. And, besides the rest, they had their several Flamins and Pontifices too. But there were many of these Flamins in each City or Colony; thence (o)(o)Pacat. Paneg. § 37.Latinus Pacatus, in his Panegyrick to Theodosius, mentions, Reverendos municipali purpurâ Flamines, insignes apicibus Sacerdotes, speaking of a Roman Colony; But there can be no resemblance between a multitude of Flamins in a City, and one Bishop over a Diocese. The Flamins were the Priests of some peculiar Deity, from whom they took their denomination, as may be at large seen in Gruter's Book of Roman Inscriptions. But among them there was a certain order of Place and Dignity; for we reade of a Primus Flamen in (p)(p)Inscrip. 29, 12.Gruter. But (q)(q)Jac. Guther. de veteri Iure Pontificio, l. 1. c. 6.Jac. Gutherius hath an Observation which will tend to clear this matter. For among the Roman Inscriptions, we meet with one extraordinary of this kind, viz. (r)(r)Inscript. p. 359.3.490.2, & 31.Flamini Divorum omnium; Now saith he, The name Flamen was common to all the Priests in the Roman Cities; But the Flamen Divorum omnium was the Chief Priest among them. And so there is no such mighty absurdity as hath been imagined in supposing these Flamins to be put down, and the Christian Bishops to succeed in their Places; Especially if we could have made out that there were Flamines Provinciarum, as at first appearance seem'd very probable in the Roman Inscriptions. And (s)(s)Sertor. Ursat. Monum. Patav. l. 1. § 6. p. 239.Sertorius Vrsatus seems to make no doubt concerning it in this Inscription, DIVO AVGVSTO ALBINVS. ALB. F. FLAMEN DIVAE. AVG. PROVINCIAE LVSITAN.

p. 80But it is an easie mistake for a Flamen D. Aug. one of Augustus his Flamins, in that Province. Of which sort there are many Examples. But there are other (t)(t)Gruter. Inscript. p. 373.7, 8.Inscriptions wherein we reade of FLAMINICA PROVINCIAE LVSITANIAE

But all that Sertorius Vrsatus infers from hence is, That there were Temples dedicated to Municipia and to Provinces, and these Temples had their Flamines and Flaminicae. But this doth not prove, that the Flamins had any Jurisdiction over a Province; Which had been indeed to the purpose. Among the Romans, although there were none called Ar…hiflamines, yet there were Flamines majores & minores, as appears by Festus and others. The lesser are thought by some to be called Veflamines in the Inscriptions both of (u)(u)Gruter. Thes. p. 364.1.498.8.Gruter and (w)(w)Reines. Inscript. p. 385.Reinesius. Festus saith, the Majores Flamines were the Patricians; the Minores, the Plebeians: but the late Publisher of Festus saith, That the Majores Flamines were the Dialis, Martialis and Quirinalis; the rest of the fifteen who were added afterwards, were the Minores; The Flamen Martialis and Quirinalis were of the College of Pontifices, as appears by (x)(x)Cicero de Arusp. Resp.Cicero: And the Pontifices themselves were divided likewise into Majores and Minores, as appears both by Festus and the Inscriptions: These lesser were at first Assessours in the College or Court of Pontifices; But afterwards became onelyonly Officers to them; And among these there was a Pontifex Maximus too: But, as Festus saith, he was onelyonly the first in the College: But all this relates onelyonly to the City. That which comes nearer to our business is the Consideration of the Sacerdotes Provinciarum, as they are called in the (y)(y)C. Theod. Tit. de Dec. l. 46, 75, &c.Theodosian Code. (z)(z)J. Gothofr. ad C. Theod. 12. Tit. 1. de Dec. l. 21, 112.Titus 1Jac. Gothofredus saith, The difference between the Flamins and these was; That the Flamins belong'd to particular Cities; But these had whole Provinces under their Care; and so, in the Law, the Honor Flaminii was distinct from the Honor Secerdotii; this latter is called Archierosyne in the same Code; And the Title and Office still continued in the time of Theodosius M. And it is there described p. 81to be a Care that Divine Offices were performed in their Temples; and such as these were (a)(a)Philostr. vit. Sopel.Sopelianus in Asia, and (b)(b)Eunap. in Chry.Chrysantius in Lydia, and (c)(c)Julian. Ep. 49.Arsacius in Galatia, to whom an Epistle of Julian is still extant, giving him charge to look after his Office with great Care, and to warn and punish the inferiour Priests if they neglected their Duty. So that we have now found out what did bear a great correspondence among the Romans to our Bishops and Archbishops.

But it still remains a Question, Whether they did not rather borrow this from the Christians, than the Christians from them? For Julian in that Epistle makes it his business to persuade Arsacius to take all things commendable from the Christians; and no doubt this was thought so by his Predecessours, who first set up this Sacerdotal Government of Provinces among them. And, if I mistake not, it began much later than the first Settlement of Episcopacy in the British Churches; For (d)(d)Euseb. l. 8. c. 14. l. 9. c. 4.Eusebius saith, That Maximinus appointed not onelyonly Priests in the Cities, but foreign, Chief-priests in the Provinces, where Valesius mistakes his meaning; for he thinks all the Innovation of Maximinus was the appointing them himself, whereas they were wont to be chosen by the Decuriones in the Cities: But he speaks of it as a new thing of Maximinus, to appoint such an Order and Office among the Priests which had not been known before: And that which puts this matter out of doubt is, That (e)(e)Lactant. de Morte Persec. c. 36.Lactantius, in his excellent Piece lately published out of MS. by Baluzius, saith expresly of Maximinus, Novo more Sacerdotes maximos per singulas Civitates singulos ex primoribus fecit, i.e. That by a new Custome he appointed Chief Priests in the several Cities, of the greatest Persons in them, who were not onelyonly to doe the Office of Priests themselves; but to look after the inferiour Priests, and by their means to hinder the Christians from their Worship, and to bring them to punishment: But, as though this were not enough, He appointed other Priests over the Provinces, in a higher degree above the rest. Although then Valesius asserted that such were elder than Maximinus, yet Lactantius, whose authority is far greater, hath determined the contrary.

p. 82I am not ignorant that, long before Maximinus his time, (f)(f)Tertull. de Spectac. c. 11.Tertullian mentions the Praesides Sacerdotales, but those do not relate to this matter, but to the Spectacula, as appears by the place. (g)(g)Alb. Piccoli de antiquo Iure Siculae Eccles. c. 11.Eccl 11Some insist on the Sacerdotes Provinciales in (h)(h)Tertull. de Idololat. c. 18.Tertullian; but Rigaltius shews there ought to be a comma between them, it being very unlikely the Provincial Priests should have Golden Crowns when those at Rome had not. And in a (i)(i)Cod. Afric. c. 97.Canon of the African Code we find the Sacerdotes Provinciae, but that Council was long after, Anno Dom. 407. And these seem to be no other than Advocates, who were to appear for the Causes which concerned the Temples and Sacrifices throughout the Province. According to which method, the African Bishops there desire, That the Churches might have Advocates too, with the same Privileges: Which Request was granted by (k)(k)C. Theod. 16. Tit. 2. l. 38.Titus 2Honorius; and was the first Introduction of Lawyers into the Service of the Church, who were called Defensores Ecclesiarum, and were afterwards Judges in Ecclesiastical Causes. But that which comes nearer to this matter is, the Authority of the Asiarchae, who in some Coins, mentioned by (l)(l)Spanhem. de Numism. p. 692.Spanhemius, are said to be Priests over thirteen Cities; And this in the Law is called (m)(m)L. 19. de Mun. & Honor.Sacerdotium Asiae: But these seem to have been no other than those who took care of the publick Solemnities in the common Assembly in Asia, when the People met out of these Cities to perform them either at Ephesus or Smyrna, or any other of the Cities within this combination, as is observed by many (n)(n)Cujac. Observ. l. 2. c. 13. Pet. Fabr. Sen. l. 3. c. 1. Albasp. Obs. l. 1. c. 22. Seld. ad Marm. Arund. p. 164.Learned Men. And although there were but one Chief at a time, yet the Office seem'd to have passed by turns through the several Cities; And he in whose City the Solemnities were to be kept, was the President for that time, and had the Title of Asiarcha. But (o)(o)Alb. Ruben. de Vrb. Neocoris, p. 246.Alb. Rubenius shews from Aristides and Dio, That the Asiarchae had a Superintendency over the Temples and the Priests within the Community of the Asian Cities; But these were onelyonly, he saith, For the Temples erected to the Caesars out of the common Stock; The Temple of Diana at Ephesus belonging to the Ionian Community, and not to that of Asia. Herodes Atticus is called in the Inscription at (p)(p)Spons Voyage, Tom. 3. p. 220.Athens, foreign, p. 83Caesar's High-priest. But that seems to be onelyonly a Title, without Power. But it appears by the (q)(q)Id. p. 114.Inscription at Thyatira, That the Asiarcha was called the High-priest of Asia, and had Power to place Priests in the Cities under his Care. But still this falls short of such Chief-priests in the Provinces as Maximinus appointed.

And thus I have endeavour'd to clear the Antiquity and Original Institution of Episcopacy here, by shewing that it was not taken up, according to the Monkish Tradition, from the Heathen Flamins and Archiflamins; But came down by Succession from the first planting of Apostolical Churches. For although we cannot deduce a lineal Succession of Bishops, as they could in other Churches, where Writings were preserved, yet assoon as through the Churches Peace they came to have intercourse with foreign Churches (as in the Council of Arles) they appeared with a proportionable number of Bishops with those of other Provinces; And their Succession was not in the least disputed among them, they subscribing to the Sentence and Canons as others did. And what Canons did then pass, did no doubt as much concern the British Churches to observe, as any other Churches whose Bishops were there present. Which Canons were passed by their own Authority; For they never sent to the Bishop of Rome to confirm, but to publish them, as appears by the Synodical Epistle which they sent to him; Their words are, Quae decrevimus Communi Concilio, Charitati tuae significamus, ut omnes sciant quid in futurum obser…are debeant. (r)(r)Baron. A. D. 314. n. 68.Baronius had good luck to find out the necessity of the Pope's confirmation here; Whereas they plainly tell him, they had already decreed them by common consent, and sent them to him to divulge them, i. e. As (s)(s)Pet. de Marca de Concord. l. 7. c. 14. n. 2.Petrus de Marca saith, As the Emperours sent their Edicts to their Praefecti Praetorio. Was that to confirm them? It is true, they say, the Pope had a larger Diocese; But if these words had implied so much as a Patriarchal Power over the Bishops there assembled, how could they assume to themselves this Power to make Canons; And onelyonly to signifie to him what they had done, and to desire him to communicate these Canons to others? Would such a Message from a Council have been born, p. 84since the Papal Supremacy hath been owned? Nay, how fancily would it have looked in any Council within the Patriarchats of the East to have done so? But these Bishops of Arles knew no other Style then, but Charitati tuae; And they signifie to the Bishop of Rome what they had already decreed, but not what they had prepared for him to confirm. And they are so far from owning his Authority in calling them together, That they tell him, They were assembled at the Emperour's Command,Communi copula charitatis & unitate Matris Ecclesiae Catholicae vinculo inhaerentes ad Arelatensium Civitatem piissimi Imperatoris voluntate adducti— Quos & Dei nostri praesens Auctoritas & Traditio, ac Regula veritatis ita respuit— Judice Deo, ac Matre Ecclesia quae suos novit aut comprobat, aut damnati sunt aut repulsi. Et utinam, Frater dilectissime, ad hoc tantum spectaculum interesses— Et te pariter nobiscum judicante Coetus noster majori laetitia exultasset. and were so far from expecting Directions from him, that they tell him they had a Divine Authority present with them, and a certain Tradition and Rule of Faith; They wished indeed, he had been present with them, and to have judged together with them. Was this to make him sole Iudge? or could they believe him at the same time to be their Supreme Head? They could have been glad of the Company of their Brother of Rome, as they familiarly call him; But since his Occasions would not permit his Absence from home, they acquaint him what they had done, and so send him an Abstract of their Canons, as may be seen at large both in Sirmondus and Baronius. By this we see what Opinion the British Bishops and their Brethren had of the Pope's Supremacy.

But now to their Canons; Those may be reduced to three Heads; Either to the Keeping of Easter; Or to the Discipline of the Clergy; Or to Lay Communion.

(1.) As to Easter, That Council decreed, Can. 1. That it should be observed on the same day and time throughout the World. And that the Bishop of Rome should give notice of the day, according to custome. But p. 85this latter part was repealed, as Binius confesses, by the Council of Nice, which referr'd this matter to the Bishop of Alexandria.

(2.) As to the Clergy, There were Canons which related to Bishops, Priests and Deacons. (1.) To Bishops, and those were four: (1.) That no Bishop should trample upon another, Can. 17. which Albaspineus well interprets of invading another's Diocese. (2.) As to travelling Bishops, that they should be allow'd to perform Divine Offices in the City they came unto, Can. 19. (3.) That no Bishop should consecrate another alone, but he ought to take seven with him, or at least three, Can. 20. Which shews the number of Bishops then in the Western Provinces and so in Britain at that time. The Nicene Canon, C. 4. takes notice onelyonly of three Bishops as necessary to be present, because many Eastern Provinces had not seven; as Christianus Lupus observes on that Canon. In an African Council in Cresconius we find, That because two had presumed to consecrate a Bishop, they desire that twelve may be present; But Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, refused it for this reason, Because in the Province of Tripolis there were but five Bishops. Therefore when the Council of Arles appoints seven, it doth suppose these Provinces to have a greater number of Bishops. (4.) That if any were proved to have been Traditores in the Time of Persecution, i. e. to have given up the Sacred Books or Vessels, or to have betrayed their Brethren, and this proved by Authentick Acts; Then they were to be deposed. However their Ordinations are declared to be valid, Can. 13.

(2.) As to inferiour Clergy; (1.) Excommunication is denounced against those that put out money to use, Can. 12. (2.) That they were not to forsake the Churches where they were ordained, Can. 2. And Deprivation is threatned on that account, Can. 21. (3.) The Deacons are forbidden to celebrate the Lord's Supper, there called Offering, Can. 15.

(3.) As to Lay Communion: (1.) Those that refuse to continue in their Employment as Souldiers, now the Persecution was over, were to be suspended Communion, Can. 3. p. 86The words are, de his qui Arma projiciunt in Pace. Of which some do hardly make tolerable sense. Binius saith it must be read in Bello. But nothing can be more contrary to Peace than War; How then should such a mistake happen? Albaspineus saith, It is against those who refuse to be Souldiers in time of Peace: Baronius saith, It is against them that apostatize in time of Peace; But if a Metaphorical Sense will be allow'd, that which seems most probable is, That many Christians, now the Persecution was over, neglected that Care of themselves, and that Strictness of Discipline which they used before; And therefore such are here threatned, if not to be thrown out, yet to be debarr'd Communion till they had recover'd themselves. And much to this purpose Josephus Aegyptius and Joh. Antiochenus do understand the 12. Can. of the Council of Nice. But if a Metaphorical Sense be thought too hard; Then, I suppose, the meaning is, against those who renounced being Souldiers, as much now in time of the Churches Peace, as under Persecution, when they could not be Souldiers without committing Idolatry, as appear'd in the Persecution of Licinius and others. Constantine, as (t)(t)Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 2. c. 33.Eusebius saith, gave them all leave to forsake their Employment that would. But the Council of Arles might well apprehend, That if all Christians renounced being Souldiers, They must still have an Army of Heathens, whatever the Emperours were; And therefore they had reason to make such a Canon as this, since the Christians ever thought it lawfull to serve in the Wars; Provided no Idolatrous Acts were imposed, which was frequently done on purpose by the Persecutours, as Maximianus, Licinius, Julian, &c. And this I think the true meaning of this difficult Canon. (2.) For those who drove the Chariots in Races, and acted on Theatres, as long as they continued so to doe; There being so many Occasions of Idolatry in both of them, They were to be cast out of Communion, Can. 4, 5. (3.) That those who were Christians and made Governours of remote places should carry with them the communicatory Letters of their own Bishop, and not be debarr'd Communion, unless they acted against the Discipline of the Church. This I take to be the meaning of Can. 7. (4.) That those p. 87who were received into the Church in their weakness should have Imposition of hands afterwards, Can. 6. (5.) That those who brought Testimonials from Confessours should be bound to take communicatory Letters from their Bishop, Can. 9. (6.) That those who found their Wives in Adultery, should be advised not to marry again while they did live, Can. 10. (7.) That those young Women who did marry Infidels should for a time be suspended Communion, Can. 11. (8.) That those who falsly accused their Brethren should not be admitted to Communion as long as they lived, Can. 14. (9.) That none who were excommunicated in one place should be absolved in another, Can. 16. (10.) That no Apostate should be admitted to Communion in Sickness; But they ought to wait till they recover'd and shew'd amendment, Can. 22. (11.) That those who were baptized in the Faith of the Holy Trinity should not be rebaptized, Can. 8. And this was the Canon which Saint Augustine on all occasions pressed upon the Donatists, as Sirmondus and Launoy think; And therefore they suppose this Council to be called so often a Plenary and Vniversal Council, not from the number of Bishops present, but from the Provinces out of which they came; And so it was the first General Council of the Western Church.