(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us) Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Select Works"

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/ 








tj5eiB«l'*f« ^^^^ 























Mocccxi^yi. ^ 


oo . 


The Rev. Richard Baxter has said, that the Rev. David 
Clarkson "was a divine of extraordinary worth for sohd 
judgment, heaUng, moderate principles, acquaintance 
with the Fathers, great ministerial abiUties, and a godly, 
upright life.*^* Such a testimony it is presumed will 
justify the resolution of the Committee of the Wycliffe 
Society, to collect and repubhsh his " Select Works," 
which have too long shared in the concealment of their 
venerated and modest author, but which, it is beUeved, 
are now destined to take the important place which 
belongs to them in the several controversies to which 
they respectively belong, as they are imquestionably 
written with acuteness and learning, moderation and 

* Reliquis Baxterianae, Part iii. p. 97. 


The long delay in the publication of this volume has 
occasioned the Committee sincere regret; but it was 
rendered imavoidable by the extremely defective and 
inaccurate state of the posthumous Treatises, which 
required much longer time than had been anticipated 
by the Editor to prepare them for the press. 

Robert Ashton, 
John Blackburn, 

Congregational Library^ 
March, 1846. 


I. Historical Notices of tHe Life and Writings of the Rev. 

David Clarkson, B.D ix 


n. No Evidence fob Diocesan Chubches, &c. ... 1 

in. Diocesan Churches not tet discovebkd . . . .59 

IV. Pbdotive Episcopact Stated and Cleabzd from the Holt 

Scriptures and Ancient Records .... 151 

Y. A Discourse coNCERNma Lituboies 245 

YI. A Discourse of the Saving Grace of God . . 375 

Yn. Miscellaneous Sermons. 

1. A Funeral Sermon for Dr. John Owen . 445 

2. What must Christians do that the Influence of Ordi- 

nances may abide upon them ? . . . . 455 

3. The Doctrine of Justification is dangerously oormpted 

in the Roman Church 471 

Ym. Index 491 




There have been but few men amongst the English Noncon- 
formists more eminent for religion and learning than David 
Clarkson ; and yet there is less known of his personal history and 
public course than perhaps of any of his distinguished associates. 

The following notices of his life and writings, though collected 
at considerable pains, from various sources, afford but an imperfect 
account of him, and indeed do not comprise more facts than might 
be recited in his epitaph. 

He was a son of Robert Clarkson, and bom in the town of 
Bradford, Yorkshire, in the month of February, 1621-22, where 
he was baptized on the 3rd of March the same year. His father 
was a respectable yeoman in that important town, and possessed 
of that moral worth and social influence which caused him to 
be ranked amongst its leading inhabitants.^ The names of 
three children of his have been recovered : William, who died, 
rector of Addle, Yorkshire, in 1660; Mary, who was married 
to Mr. John Sharp, of Little Horton Hall, near Bradford;^ 

* There is decUive evidence of this in the fkct that the Corporation of Lon- 
don conveyed, in 1629, the manor of Bradford to John Okell, vicar of Bradford, 
WiUiam Lister, of Manningham, gentleman, Robert Chrkton, and Joshua Cooke, of 
Bradford, yeomen. 

* The Sharp family belonged to the straitest section of the Puritans. Two sons by 
this marriage became eminent : Thomas Sharp, educated at Clare Hall, Cambridge, 
who succeeded, on the death of his maternal uncle, V^Tilliam Clarkson, to the rectory 
of Addle, from which he was removed at the Restoration by the challenge of Dr. 
Hitch, rector of Guisley, who claimed it as his right, having been excluded by the 
Act of the Long Parliament against pluralities. After his ejectment, he succeeded 
Mr. Stretton, at Leeds, where he died, August 27th, 1693, aged 59. Ralph Thoresby 


and David, the subject of this notice. Nothing is known of his 
early training ; but as he went to the University of Cambridge 
young, 80 it is not unlikely that he received his grammar 
learning in the school founded in his native place by the munifi- 
cence of Edward VI. 

^e enter^ Clare Hall, Cambridge, probably about 1640, where 
he distinguished himself as a scholar and a Christian, and secured 
the friendship and confidence of his associates in coUege. In Janu- 
ary, 1642, the town of Bradford, then occupied for the Parliament 
by Sir Thomas Fairfax and his soldiers, suffered an assault from 
the royalist forces, commanded by Sir William Saville, who were 
compelled to retreat to Leeds. Young Clarkson probably returned 
home to visit his family after this alarm, for we find that he was 
shut in his native town, when the Earl of Newcastle invested it a 
second time in June following, and took it by storm. A curious 
piece of contemporaneous biography, written by Joseph Lister, an 
apprentice to Mr. John Sharp, the brother-in-law of Mr. David 
Clarkson, describes the straitness of the siege, and '' the desperate 
adventure" of Sir T. Fairfax and his men to break through the 
enemy's army sword in hand. In this attempt they were joined 
by Mr. Sharp and his brother-in-law David ; but with what success 
the autobiographer recites in the following passage : — 

" My master being gone, I sought for my mother, and having found 
her, she, and I, and my sister, walked in the street, not knowing what 

had the highest regard for him, and has preserved in his diary a very affecting account 
of his death. The following impassioned exclamations from Thoreshy's diary, witness 
to the intenseness of his attachment : " O Lord 1 O Lord I what a hitter and a 
heavy hurden is sin, that has deprived us of the choicest mercy under heaven ; such a 
minister of Jesus Christ as very few have equalled in this, or former centuries—an 
irreparable loss. Oh, black and dismal day !" &c. The Rev. Olirer Heywood says 
that he was " a profound scholar and of excellent refined gifts, and a holy and incom- 
parable man.*' [Vide Calamy's Account, ii. p. 818. Walker's Sufferings of the 
Clergy, p. 277. Thoreshy's Diary, voL L pp. 236, 244. Thoreshy's Letters, vol. i. 
pp. 229, 23a] 

The other was Abraham Sharp, the celebrated mathematician, the friend and asso- 
ciate of Flamsteed, and the correspondent of Newton, Halley, Wallis, and Hodgson. 
He died at Little Horton, where his observatory still stands, on the 18th of July, 
1742, in the 91st year of his age. (Encyclop. Brit, seventh edition. Article Sharp, 
and private information.) Immediately related to John Sharp, the father of Thomas 
and Abraham, was Thomas Sharp, an oilman at Bradford, who was also of the old 
puritanical school, the host of Lord Fairfax during the siege of Bradford, and &ther 
of John Sharp, who was bom in that town, in 1644, and consecrated Archbishop of 
York, in 169L British Biography, vol. vi p. 394. 


to do, or which mj to take. And a 

a young gentleman, called I>aTid 

mother asked him where he had been widi 

made an enay to go with n^ iNnather Sbarp^ i 

through the enemy's kagoer ; hot dK change ' 

i^;ain, and now I know not what to dou' Then 

' Pray, mother, gire me kaTe to go with David, fix- 1 dunk I ( 

him a safe way ;' fer being b(»n in diat town, I knew all die by-ways 

about it 

^ David also desired her to let me go with him, ao die begged a hltm- 
ing on me, and sent me away, not knowing where we could be safe. So 
away we went, and I led him to a pboe caDed die SOl-bndge, whoe a 
foot company was standing; yet I dunk diey £d not see ns, ao we ran oa 
the ri^t hand of diem, and then waded over die water, and hearing a 
party of horse come down die lane towards die town, we laid as down 
in the side of the com, and th^ perea i ed ns not It being about daj- 
break, we stayed here as long as we dmst for being discovered, it begin- 
ning to be light Well, we got iq>, and went in die shade of die hedge, 
and then looking about ns, and hoping to be past the danger of the 
leaguer, we took to the hi^wi^, intpnding to go to a little town called 
Clayton ; and having waded over the water, we met with two men that 
were troopers, and who had left their horses in the town, and hoped to 
get away on foot, and now diey and we walked together, and hoped we 
had escaped all danger, and all on a sadden a man on horseback from 
towards die beacon had eepked us and came riding towards us, and we, 
like poor affirighted sheep, seeing him come fost towards us, with a drawn 
swoid in his hand, we foolishly kept together, and thought to sare our- 
selves by running. Had we scattered from one anodier, he had but got 
one of us. We all got into a fidd ; he croased the field and came to us, 
and as it pleased God, being running by the hedge-side, I espied a thick 
hoUy-tree, and thought periiaps I might hide myself in this tree and 
esci^pe, so I crept into it, and pulled the boughs about me, and presently 
I heard them cry out for quarter. He wounded one of them, and took 
them all prisoners, and said, ' There were four of you ; where is the 
other ?* but they knew not, for I, being the last and least of them, was 
not missed ; so he never looked after me more : but I have often 
thought since how easily we might have knocked him down, had we but 
had courage ; but alas ! we had none.^ * 

He gives no further information respecting young Clarkson, 
bat it is most probable that he was taken to Leeds> and exchanged 

* " An Historical NamtiTe of the Life of Joseph Lister, sometime belonging to 
the religious society at Kipping, in Bradford-dale, in Yorkshire, &c." pp.18 — 20. 


for some royalist prisoner, as he returned to Cambridge, and there, 
in another scene of that great struggle, was exalted to competency 
and honour. 

Soon after the civil wars began, the heads of that university 
resolved to send their plate to the king to be coined into money 
for his military chest. This brought Cromwell, who was the 
member for the borough in parliament, to the town, and having 
raised a troop of horse in that neighbourhood, he employed his 
authority on this occasion in no way to the satisfaction of the 
royalist members of the colleges. Their activity attracted the 
attention of the Parliament to the state of the university in 
general, and the Earl of Manchester, seijeant- major- general to 
the associated counties, was appointed to visit it. He, with a 
committee, was authorised "to call before them all provosts, 
masters, fellows, and students of the university, to hear com- 
plaints against such as were scandalous in their lives, ill-affected 
to the Parliament, fomentors of the present unnatural war, or 
who had deserted the ordinary places of their residence." The 
Earl repaired in person to Cambridge, on the 24th of Feb- 
ruary, 1648-44, and commenced his work of reformation, which 
ended, according to Walker, in the expulsion of "near two 
hundred masters and fellows, besides scholars, &c., which probably 
might bo as many more."^ The inmates of Clare Hall were sub- 
jected to the common inquisition, and Dr. Paske was removed 
from the mastersliip, and seven others were ejected from their 
fellowsliips. Among these was the celebrated Mr. Peter Gunning, 
who, after the Restoration, was elevated to the bishopric of Chi- 
chester, and then translated to that of Ely. " On the first of May," 
says he, " I was expelled the University of Cambridge, for preach- 
ing a sermon at St. Mary's against the Covenant, as well as 
refusing to take the Covenant."* It was to this fellowsliip that 
Mr. Clarkson was appointed : and the circumstances connected with 
it, appear to have been honourable to all the parties conct»med. 
The Earl of Manchester, as described by Clarendon himself, 
" was of a genteel and generous nature : his natural civility and 
good manners flowed to all men, so that he was never guilty of 
any rudeness even to those whom he was obliged to oppress."^ 

" Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, &c., part i. p. 114. 
* Coles' MS. Collections, vol. xlix. British Museum. 
' Clarendon's History, &c., hook vi. 


The course this amiahle nobleman took for filling up the vacant 
fellowships confirms this statement. He directed a paper to the 
colleges, stating, that '' his purpose was forthwith to supply the 
vacant fellowships, and desiring that if there were any in the 
respective colleges, who in regard of degree, learning, and piety, 
should be found fit for such preferment, they would upon the 
receipt of that paper return him their names, in order to their 
being examined by the Assembly of Divines." The eminent 
Ralph Cudworth had been previously appointed master of Clare ; 
and it was no small honour to David Clarkson to be nominated 
by a community over which he presided, and to be approved by 
such an Assembly of Divines as then sat at Westminster. " Mr. 
Clarkson was the immediate successor of Mr. Gunning, 5th of 
May, 1645, by warrant of the Earl of Manchester."* 

There were at this time two brothers collegians at Clare HaU, 
Henry and Francis Holcroft, sons of Sir Henry Holcroft, Knight 
of West Ham, on the border of Essex, near to London, and 
who also became fellows of it. These gentlemen were distin- 
guished by the fervour of their piety, and were, like ^Ir. Clarkson, 
congregational in their views of church government There 
subsisted between them and him ** great endearments," which 
friendship at a subsequent period was confirmed by his marriage 
with their own sister.* 

Mr. Clarkson was now a tutor to the coUege, and on the 29th 
of April, 1647, he received as his pupil, one whom it was his 
honour and happiness to retain as his friend to the end of life — 
the celebrated John Tillotson, afterwards Archbishop of Canter- 
bury. This able young scholar succeeded Mr. Clark.son when he 
resigned liis fellowship, about November, 1651 ; and to his tuition 
he also consigned the scholars then under his own care,"^ amongst 
whom was his own beloved nephew, Mr. Thomas Shtirp.** 

The occasion of his withdrawment from college life, it may be 

• Coles* CoUections, voL xlix. — Neal has preserved the form of these warrants, 
thus, — " Whereas A. B. has been ejected out of his fellowship in this college ; and 
whereas C. D. has been examined and approved by the Assembly of Divines, these 
are therefore to require you to receive the said C. D. as fellow in the room of A. B., 
and to give him place according to his seniority in the university, in preference to 
all those who are, or shall hereafter be put in by me." — Neal's History, chap, iii 

* Calamy's Account, vol. ii. p. 386, 86. ed. 1713. 

"- Birch'f Life of TilloUon, p. 381. ' Vide note, pp. ix. x. 


presumed, was his marriage with Elizaheth, a daughter of Sir 
Henry Hokroft, and sister of his beloved friends akeady men- 
tioned. She appears to have been a lady of eminent intelligence 
and piety, fitting to be the companion of his leisure, and the 
mother of his children. 

Whether he possessed any preferment in the church at that 
time is not known, but at a subsequent period he held the living 
of Mortlake, in the county of Surrey, and from which he was 
removed by the Act of Uniformity. The benefice is a perpetual 
curacy with a reserved salary of forty pounds per annum, paid 
out of the great tithes by the lessee, under the Dean and Chapter 
of Westminster. It had been a peculiar of the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, but was now included in the classis that had been 
set up for that part of Surrey, in which arrangement, however, 
Mr. Clarkson's opinions were not likely to permit him to acquiesce. 
The commissioners who were appointed in 1658 to inquire into 
the state of ecclesiastical benefices, endowed the curacy with the 
great tithes, and made it a rectory. 

The parishioners of Mortlake, judging from the entries made 
in the parish accounts, warmly sympathised with the measures 
of the Puritan party, as the Covenant was duly taken, and a copy 
purchased and framed for the vestry; and the Common Prayer 
books of the parish were delivered up to the committee of the 
county sitting at Southwark, to receive them by order of Parlia- 
ment. At a later period this agreeable village was the residence 
of Sir John Ireton, and Aldermen Pack and Tichboum, who were 
amongst Cromwell's chief city friends, and were probably attend- 
ants on Mr. Clarkson's ministry there.* 

During the civil wars there had been held in the city of London, 
public services of extraordinary solemnity and devotion, called 
" the Morning Exercises," on behalf of those who were engaged in 
the army, or who were exposed to the miseries and perils inse- 
parable from a state of intestine warfare. When the struggle at 
arms happily terminated, the ministers of the metropolis resolved 
to continue these " Exercises," but with a greater regard to pre- 
paration and method than had been practicable or expedient 
amidst the hurry and alarms of civil conflict. 

The second course of these systematic Morning Exercises was 

* Lysons' Environs, L 370, 375, 376. 


fixed at St. Giles's church, Cripplegate, September, 1661, of 
which Dr. Annesley was then the minister, and from that pulpit 
were delivered twenty-eight discourses on *' several cases of con- 
science/' by some of the most eminent ministers. Amongst them 
we find David Clarkson, the tutor, discussing *' What Christians 
most do, that the influence of the ordinances may abide upon 
them ;" and Dr. John Tillotson, the pupil, illustrating " Wherein 
lies that exact righteousness which is required between man and 
man ;" the former to be cast into obscurity as a despised non- 
cx>nformi8t, and the latter to be elevated to the archiepiscopal 
palace of Lambeth ! 

Mr. Clarkson was now in the full maturity of his powers, and 
both able and willing to use them for the good of mankind, and 
the glory of God ; but the Bestoration had been followed by the 
passing of the Act of Uniformity, which came into operation on 
Bartholomew's-day, August 24th, 1662, and removed him with 
about two thousand of his brethren from the national pulpits. 
Whatever may be said in favour of that act as applied to ministers 
who had been episcopally ordained, and who had used the Book of 
Common Prayer, it was very hard upon men who, like himself, 
had entered public life under other auspices, and had adopted 
and defended other opinions. 

" After his ejectment he gave himself up to reading and medi- 
tation, shifting from one place of obscurity to another, till the 
times suffered him to appear openly." « That comprised a period 
of ten years, as the first Declaration of Indulgence was not pub- 
lished until the 15th of March, 1671-2. There is no evidence 
that Mr. Clarkson availed himself of the royal ordinance, as 
many of his brethren did, to resume his pubhc ministry, but 
continued to gratify his native modesty by remaining in retire- 
ment, though probably in London, or its environs: for he largely 
shared in the controversies of those times, a part it was not then 
easy to take far away from the metropohs. 

The state of parties at home, and the aspect of foreign affairs, 
were regarded by aU earnest Protestants as most threatening to 
the interests of the reformed churches, and there was felt a general 
anxiety to fortify the public mind against the aggressions of Romish 
emissaries. Amongst other methods adopted, the nonconformist 

• Neal'8 PiiriUns, vol. ▼. p. 44. 


ministers resolved on a fourth course of Morning Exercises 
against Popery. These originated with Mr. Nathaniel Vincent, 
who had heen ejected from the rectory of Langley Marsh, Bucks., 
but was now the pastor of a large congregation of dissenters 
assembling at a meeting-house near the Maze, in the parish of 
St. Olave, Southwark. He drew the plan, made the arrangements, 
and fixed the services at his own meeting-house. In this service 
Mr. Clarkson undertook to show, that " the Doctrine of Justifi- 
cation is dangerously corrupted in the Roman Church ;** and no 
Protestant can read that discourse without acknowledging the 
learning and talent he has displayed, and the success of the whole 

But Mr. Clarkson was not satisfied with a solitary testimony 
against the errors of Rome, and therefore occupied his beloved 
leisure in the preparation of a work on the practical divinity of 
the Papists, as he thought that " the knowing of it would be a 
sufficient dissuasive from it to those who regard God and their 
souls." He held " that the danger of Popery in points of faith 
had been sufficiently discovered to the world by the divines of 
the Reformation; but their doctrine which concerns life and 
practice had not been so much insisted on." " And yet," said 
he, " there is as much occasion for tliis ; for here the mischief 
is as great; an unchristian heart and life being at least as 
damning as erroneous belief; and hereby the great apostacy 
and degeneracy of the Papal church is as apparent ; and hereiji 
they have proceeded with as much disregard of Christ and the 

* This discourse, with that preached hy him at Cripplegate, will he found at pages 
4t55, 47 1 , in the present volume. Mr. James Nichols, tlie ahle editor of the latest and 
the best edition of the Morning Exercises, ascribes a third discourse in that collec- 
tion, entitled, " What advantage may we expect from Christ's prayer for union with 
himself, and the blessing relating to it ?'' to Mr. Clarkson, viz. the twenty-fifth, in 
" A Continuation of Morning Exercise Questions and Cases of Conscience practically 
resolved, by Sundry Ministers, in Oct 1 682." This he has done " on the strength 
and credit of a List of Preachers, written m an ancient hand, and prefixed to a well- 
preserved copy of the volume." In our copy of his original edition there is h printed 
Httj headed " The names of the Ministers," and the twenty- fifth discourse stands thus, 
*' 25 Mr. N. N." There is a mistake in the numerals towards the close of the 
volume, 25 being printed for 23, and 27 for 25. Assuming that the printer of our 
list overlooked this fact, and we take No. 27, that is ascribed to Mr. Barker, so that 
under either number this discourse is not attributed to our author. Besides which, 
Dr. Calamy only names the two sermons we have reprinted, (Account, ii. 667, 668 ;) 
and we therefore doubt the correctness of the mamucript list on which Mr. Nichols 
has mainly relied. 


souls of men. Their design in this seems to have been, not 
the promoting of Christ's interest, for that is manifestly pros- 
titated, bat the secoring and greatening of a faction which, 
imder the profession of Christianity, might be false to all its 
realities. And their role is the corrapt inclinations of depraved 
natnie, to which they have thoroughly conformed their practical 
divinity ; which easeth it of the duties for which it hath an 
aversation, how mnch soever enjoined; and clears its way to 
those sins to which it is disposed, as though there was no Deed 
to avoid them. This rule ser\'es their design with great advan- 
tage, but souls are more endangered hereby, and their principles 
become more pernicious, because they are so taking. Persuade 
a man, that he may safely neglect the duties which he owes to 
God, his own soul, and others ; and may gratify the lusts he is 
addicted to ; and give him the maxims of religion, and the author- 
ity and conclusions of divines, and the teachers whom he trusts, 
for it ; and he will like that religion, because he loves his sin, and 
is in danger to follow both, though he perish for it eternally. 
And indeed this is it which makes the condition of Papists deplor- 
able, for though the principles of their belief, as it is Popish, be 
mortally poisonous ; yet there might be some antidote in the prac- 
Heals of Christianity, retained and followed, by those who are 
unavoidably ignorant of the danger of their more speculative 
errors ; and so some hopes of such ; but their practical doctrine 
being no less corrupted, the remedy itself becomes poison, and 
their condition who freely let it down, hopeless. Whether tlieii 
errors in matters otfaithhe directly fundamental, hath been, with 
some of their opposers, a question ; but those who will view their 
practical doctrine, may discern that it strikes through the heart of 
Christianity, casting off the vitals of it as superfluous, and cuts 
off those who will believe and follow it from the way of life ; not 
only by encouraging them with security to live and die in all sorts 
of wickedness ; but also by obliging them to neglect, as needless, 
the greatest and most important concerns of Christiaus, without 
wbich God cannot be honoured by us, nor salvation attained." ^ 

To establish this affecting view of the practical influence of 
Popery, Mr. Clarkson brought together the results of vast reading 
and research, with that fairness, accuracy, and candour, which mark 

• The Praetieal Dinnity of the PapisU, &c. pp. 1, 2. 


all his polemical writings. He did not, therefore, avail himself of 
the casuistical writings of the Jesuits, which, as Pascal has fully 
shown, would supply abundant illustrations of a defective morality; 
but he consulted the canonists and divines, secular and regular, of 
every sort, their canon law and decrees of councils. Indeed he 
does justice to the Jesuits by saying, " I cannot discern that the 
practical divinity of the Jesuits is more corrupt than that of other 
Bomish writers their contemporaries. I never yet met with any 
author of that order so intolerably licentious, but might be 
matched, if not out-vied, by others." He, therefore, largely con- 
sulted the works of Cardinal Bellarmine, and their more ancient 
divines, and the best and strictest of their casuists he could meet 
with, the majority of whom were Dominicans, the most opposed 
of all the orders to the Jesuits, and the greater part of whom had 
written before that order was founded. It is true indeed^ that 
he also quoted the voluminous writings of the Spanish Jesuit, 
Francis Suavez, "not for the sake of his own opinions indeed, 
but because he usually gives an account of the common doctrine 
out of unexceptionable autliors." 

In the year 1676, this learned treatise appeared in a small 
quarto volume, entitled ** The Practical Divinity of the Papists 
discovered to be Destructive of Christianity and Men's SouIb." 
It is comprised in ten chapters on the following subjects : 1. By 
the doctrine of the Bomanists it is not needful to worship God 
really in public or private. 2. Christian knowledge is not neces* 
sary for Bomanists by their doctrine. 3. Their doctrine makes 
it needless to love God. 4. There is no necessity of saving or 
justifying faith by the Bomish doctrine. 6. There is no necessity 
of true repentance for Bomanists by their doctrine, 6. Their 
doctrine leaves no necessity of holiness of life, and the exercise of 
Christian virtues. 7. Many heinous crimes are virtues or necessary 
duties by the Boman doctrine. 8. Crimes exceeding great and many 
are but slight and venial faults by the Popish doctrine. 9. Many 
enormous crimes are no sins at all in the Boman account ; and, 
10. The Boman doctrine makes good works to be unnecessary. 

To those who are not familiar with the casuistry of the Bomish 
divines, these heads of chapters will form the counts of a startling 
indictment, and they will require abundant evidence before they 
will credit such grave charges even against the practical theology 
of the Vatican. Our author has fortified every statement by 


citations and references enough to satisfy the most incredolons. 
Respecting his quotations, he thus speaks in the advertisement : 

" When no other shift will serve, to hinder those from being 
nndecdved whom they would delude, it is usual with them to 
make loud outcries of fedse citations, and that their doctrine is 
miarepresented." *' I have been very caiefril," he adds, " to give 
no just occasion for this : being apprehensive that he who doth it^ 
wrongs not them more than he doth himself and his cause. The 
places cited I have viewed again and again, where there might be 
any doubt of misconstruction: and set down their own words 
where it might seem scarce credible that Christians and divines, 
directing conscience, should speak at such a rate ; and where that 
would have been too tedious, have I given their sense fiuthfnlly, so 
far as I could discern it, and directed the reader wh^re he may 
find and judge thereof himself" 

The researches necessary to the composition of this " excellent 
discourse," as Dr. Calamy justly designates it, prepared Mr. Clark- 
son to take part in a controversy that arose in 1679, and which 
stirred the spirit of the nation more than any event which had 
occurred since the Restoration. It was the firm conviction of the 
public at large, that there existed a formidable plot to take away the 
life of the king, to subvert the constitution, utterly to extirpate 
the Protestant religion, and to restore Popery again in all its 
terrors. These apprehensions were strengthened by the myste- 
rious murder of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, a zealous Protestant 
magistrate, who had received the depositions of Dr. Oates and 
others respecting the alleged conspiracy. London became Uke 
a city in a stage of siege. Posts, chains, and barriers were set up, 
the trained bands drawn out night after night, well armed, and 
watching with as much care, as if a general massacre was expected 
before morning.^ A considerable number of Popish lords and 
gentlemen, with five Jesuits, were arrested and brought to trial ; 
and the latter, with whose conduct these remarks have alone to 
do, were tried for high treason, at the Old Bailey, on Friday and 
Saturday, idth and 14 th of June, were found guilty, and sen- 
tenced to death, and were executed at Tyburn, on the following 
Friday, June 20th. They all protested their innocency in very 
solemn and affecting terms, which must have produced an astound- 

* CaUmy*8 Life and Times, L p. 88. 


ing eff'ect on those who read their dying declarations, which were 
printed in various forms, and widely circulated in town and 

To counteract the impressions of tlieir touching appeals to the 
Judge of all respecting their innocency, there appeared several 
pamphlets criticising their statements, and amongst others, one in 
small folio, appended to a copy of their speeches, entitled " Ani- 
madversions on the last Speeches of thi Five Jesuits, viz., 
Thomas White, alias Whitebread, provincial of the Jesuits in 
England ; William Harcourt, pretended rector of London ; John 
Fenwick, procurator for the Jesuits in England; John Gavan, 
alias Gawan, and Anthony Turner, who were all executed at 
Tyburn for High Treason," &c. Although this folio tract is 
without the name of its author, it is attributed in several quarters 
to Mr. Clarkson ; and from the character of its style, the line of its 
argument, and the class of authorities cited, in all which it agrees 
with his " Practical Divinity of the Papists," it is ittost likely to 
have been the product of his learned pen. And though it may 
now be wished that he had not been found amongst the approvers 
of a transaction which Mr. Fox says, has left " an indelible 
disgrace upon the English nation ;*' yet, it must be remembered, 
that he adds, " in which king, parliament, judges, juries, wit- 
nesses, prosecutors, have all their respective, though certainly 
not equal shares," * it cannot be deemed surprising that Pro- 
testant dissenters, with their instinctive dread of Popery, should 
have largely shared in the universal and unspeakable terror of 
the people. 

In this state of affairs, it was felt by most of the moderate 
nonconformists that an accommodation of differences between 
the Church of England and the dissenters would be the most 
effectual way to keep out Popery ; and two of their leading 
ministers, Mr. John Howe, and Dr. Bates, were invited to con- 
fer with Bishop Lloyd, Dr. Tillotson, Dr. Stillingfleet, and 
others, upon the subject of a comjyrehension. The Christian 
spirit which Dr. Stillingfleet, when rector of Sutton, had displayed 
towards differing brethren in his " Irenicum," made him a pro- 
mising negociator in such a business. But the influence of 
Charles II. was successfully employed with the bishops against the 

■ Memoirs of Missionary Priests, &c., part ii. p. 386 — 405. 
* J. C. Fox's History, pp. 33, 34. 


"Bill of Exclusion," then before parliament, "it was," says Hume, 
" on the 15th of November, 1680, thrown out of the Lords by a 
considerable majority. All the bishops except three voted against 
it Besides the influence of the court over them, the Church of 
England, they imagined or pretended, was in greater danger from 
the prevalence of Presbyterianism, than of Popery ; which, though 
favoured by the duke, and even by the king, was extremely repug- 
nant to the genius of the nation." ^ 

The nonconformists naturally regarded this as a great derelic- 
tion of duty on the part of the heads of the church, and they 
began to prepare for a battle with the champions of the establish- 
ment, which now seemed inevitable. Bishop Burnet says, that 
" the clergy stuck up with zeal for the duke's succession ; as if 
a Popish king had been a special blessing from heaven, to be 
much longed for by a Protestant church. They likewise gave 
themselves such a loose against the nonconformists, as if nothing 
was so formidable as that party. So that in all their sermons 
Popery was quite forgot, and the force of their zeal was turned 
almost wholly against the dissenters." ^ 

The signal for the contest came, however, from an unexpected 
quarter. Dean Stillingfleet, the author of Irenicumy and the 
advocate for union, was called to preach in his own cathedral of 
St. Paul's, before the lord mayor and corporation of London, 
on the first day of Easter term (May 2nd, 1680,) and thought 
that a fitting occasion to deliver a sermon from Phil. iii. 16, 
which he entitled " The Mischiefs of Separation," in which he 
charged upon the nonconformists all the blame of separation 
from the church, and all the mischiefs which had arisen from 
it. This unlooked for attack, in which those who had been 
recently called " our dissenting brethren," were represented as 
schismatics, as enemies to peace, and dangerous to the church, 
&c., roused the spirit of the most temperate of the noncon- 
formists, and was repelled by pamphlets from the pens of Howe, 
Owen, Baxter, Alsop, Barrett, and others.* The Dean, nothing 
daunted, in the following year took up his opponents in a quarto 
volume, entitled " Unreasonableness of Separation." This work 
consisted of three parts, " 1st, An Historical Account of the 

• Hume's History of England, chap. Ixviii. 

• Bishop Burnet's Own Times, vol.i. p. 601. 

• Calamy's Life of Howe, pp. 78, 75. 



Rise and Progress of Separation ; 2n(l, Of the Nature of the 
Present Separation ; and 8rd, Of the Pleas for the Present 
Separation." Although Mr. Clarkson had not taken part in the 
first stage of the controversy, yet there were some matters in the 
last portion of the present work which led him to take up his 
pen. These passages occur in Sections 8 — 1 1 inclusive, in which 
Dean Stillingfleet treats of the episcopacy of the ancient 'Oburch, 
and also in sections 24, 25, in which the question of the power 
of the people in the primitive churches is fully discussed. This 
led to the publication of the first treatise in the present volume, 
entitled, " No Evidence for Diocesan Churches," &c., which ap- 
peared in 1681, and which will speak for itself. It was replied to 
at some length by Dr. Henry Maurice, in the preface of what Mr. 
Baxter calls " a learned and virulent book," entitled "Vindication 
of the Primitive Church against Mr. Baxter's Church History," 
which had been published two years before. Mr. Clarkson imme- 
diately wrote an answer, but he laid by the manuscript for many 
months, till in 1682 the importunity of some, and the misrepre- 
sentations of others, forced him to publish it. This piece was 
entitled " Diocesan Churches not yet discovered in Primitive 
Times, ' and is the second tractate in this series. Although he did 
not publish anything more on this controversy, yet he prosecuted 
it in his study, and left behind him two manuscripts on "Primitive 
Episcopacy," and "The Use of Liturgies," which were published 
after his decease, and which will be noticed with his other posthu- 
mous works. 

Twenty years had now elapsed since the Act of Uniformity 
ejected him from his pastoral charge, and that long period was 
mainly spent in privacy, partly the result of persecuting laws and 
partly the consequence of his constitutional modesty. The part 
which he had recently taken in the Stillingfleet controversy, and 
the support he had given to the arguments which Dr. John Owen 
had adduced in his pamphlet in reply to the Dean, may be ima- 
gined to have brought him under the notice of the church of 
which the Doctor was pastor, and who were then seeking for an 
able minister to become the co-pastor and successor of that eminent 
divine. " This church was collected soon after the black Bartho- 
lomew Act, in 1662, by the celebrated Mr. Joseph Caryl, and 
consisted of some of his hearers at St. Magnus, London bridge. 
After his death his people invited the learned Dr. John Owen, 


then pastor of another society, at no great distance. Both con- 
gregations having agreed to unite, they assembled together the 
first time, on June 5th, 1673. At the time of this coalescing the 
united church consisted of one hundred and seventy- three members; 
amongst whom were Lord Charles Fleetwood, Sir John Hartopp, 
Colonel Desborough, Colonel Berry, and other officers of the army ; 
also Lady Abney, Lady Hartopp, Lady Vere Wilkinson, Lady 
Thompson, Mrs.Bendish, grand-daughter of Oliver Cromwell, &c."« 

Although nearly ten years had passed away since then, still the 
church was one of high character for the intelligence, wealth, 
and station of many of its members. With persons of their piety 
and judgment, it was not a valid objection that Mr. Clarkson was 
now in his sixtieth year, for they doubtless considered the matu- 
rity of his mind, studies, and experience, greatly to compensate 
for the absence of youthful fervour and mere rhetorical display. 

He was therefore elected as the co-pastor in July, 1682, Dr. 
Owen having, in a letter to Lord Charles Fleetwood, intimated that 
he should " esteem it a great mercy to have so able a supply as 
Mr. C* The Doctor's complicated infirmities, however, rendered 
their connexion but brief, as he was called to depcui; to his reward 
on the 24th of August, 1683. 

Mr. Clarkson preached his funeral sermon on the Lord's-day 
after his interment, in which he does not enter at length on his 
character, and says nothing of his history. This is explained 
by a single sentence in which Mr. Clarkson says, " It was my 
unhappiness that I had so little and late acquaintance with him." 

Three short years brought the life and labours of the surviving 
pastor to a close. His death was unexpected, so that Ids will ^ 
was only executed the day before he died. Two of the witnesses 

« Walter Wilson's Dissenting Churches, vol. I p. 263. 

* Orme'R Life of Owen, p. 617. 

' Through the kindness of a friend, a copy of this document has been found in 
Doctors* Commons ; and though it is singularly brief and hurried, yet it may have 
sufficient interest with some readers to justify its publication. 

June the ISM, 1686. 
I David Clarkson Clerke Doe make this my last Will. The Land that is at Idele 
or Eshall wherein I was joynt purchasor with my Father was settled upon my well- 
beloved Wife before marry age as parte of a joynture and it is my will it shall soe 
continue ; and after her decease it shall be sold and equally divided among the children 
unlesse any of them shall prove debauch ; if soe my wife shall dispose of their parte aa 
■hee pleases. I give unto my Wife all my Goods, Plate, and Jewells, and make her 



to that document, Henry Sampson and Edward Hulse, were 
educated at Cambridge, ejected by the Act of Uniformity, and 
applying themselves to the study of medicine, became eminent 
physicians in the city of London. Their presence proves that 
there was no lack of skilful advice or of godly fellowship in his 
dying chamber. Although this mortal seizure was unlocked for, 
yet Mr. Clarkson declared it was no surprise, and being entirely 
resigned to the Divine will, he peacefully departed this life on the 
14th day of June, 1086, to see the salvation of God. 

Dr. William Bates preached his funeral sermon on John xiv. 2, 
to which is attached, "A Short Character of that Excellent Divine 
Mr. David Clarkson, who departed this life 14th of June, 1686,"« 
which is as follows : — 

" Although the commendation of the dead is often suspected to be 
guilty of flattery, either in disguising their real faults, or adorning them 
with false virtues ; and such praises are pernicious to the living : yet 
of those persons whom God hath chosen to be the singular objects of 
his grace, we may declare the praiseworthy qualities and actions which 
reflect an honour upon the Giver, and may excite us to imitation. And 
such was Mr. David Clarkson, a person worthy of dear memory and 

•ole executrix of this my Will. The money that is oweing imto me my Will is that 
it be equally divided among the Children unlesse there Mother for their debauchery 
shall thinke fitt to abate them : in that case shee shall give unto them as she pleases. 
If Robert will prove a scholar I give unto him all my Bookes excepting what English 
Bookes his Mother thinks fitt to take to her selfe. And if any controversy shall 
arrise aboute any parte of this my Will I leave it to be dissided by my Wife. 

D. Clarkson. 
Sealed, published, and delivered in the presence of Henry Sampson, 
Edward Hulse, Joshua Palmer, Robert Davis. 
Probatumfuit, Sfc, 

" In Birch's Life of Tillotson this " Short Character," &c. is quoted in a note, 
which says it was ** printed without the name of place or year," This suggested that 
there was extant a separate account of this estimable man ; and the librar^s at the 
British Museum, Sion College, Redcross street, London Institution, and Congrega- 
tional Rooms, were searched for it, but in vain. At length a copy of the original 
edition of Dr. Bates*s sermon was obtained at the sale of the late Duke of Sussex's 
library » and the mystery was explained. That discourse occupies 102 pages, and 
closes with ** Finis," but without a word of Mr. Clarkson, then come two pages of the 
bookseller's announcements, "Some Books lately printed," &c. ; and these are fol- 
lowed by a distinct title-page, " without the name of place or year," containing the 
above character, doubtless written by Dr. Bates, but nowhere so stated. It is pos- 
sible that Dr. Birch had seen this as a detached tract of 14 pages, and quoted it as he 
found it, not knowing that it was from the pen of Dr. Bates, and appended to the 
Funeral Discourse. 


value, who was fiirnished with all thoee endowments that are requisite 
in an accomplished minister of the Gospel. 

" He was a man of sincere godliness and tme holiness, which is the 
divine part of a minister, without which aU other accomplishments are 
not likely US be effectual for the great end of the ministry, that is, to 
translate sinners from the kingdom of darkness, into the kingdom of 
God's dear Son. Conversion is the special work of Divine grace, and 
it is most likely that God will use those as instruments in that blessed 
work, who are dear to him and eamestlj desire to glorify him. God 
ordinarily works in spiritual things as in natural ; for as in the produc- 
tion of a living creature, besides the influence of the universal cause, 
there must be an inunediate agent of the same kind for the forming of 
it ; so the Divine wisdom orders it, that holy and heavenly ministers 
should be the instruments of making others so. I^et a minister be 
master of natural and artificial eloquence, let him understand all the 
secret springs of persuasion, let him be furnished with learning and 
knowledge, yet he is not likely to succeed in his Divine employment 
without sanctifying grace. 'Tis that gives him a tender sense of the 
worth of souls, that warms his heart with ardent requests to God, and 
with zealous affections to men for their salvation. Besides, an unholy 
minister unravels in his actions his most accurate discourses in the 
pulpit ; and like a carbuncle that seems animated with the light and 
heat of fire, but \a\ cold, dead stone ; so, though with apparent earnest- 
ness he may urge men's duties upon them, yet he is cold and careless in 
his own practice, and his example enervates the efficacy of his sermons. 
But this servant of God was a real saint; a living spring of grace in 
his heart diffused itself in the veins of his conversation. His life was 
a silent repetition of his holy sermons. 

" He was a conscientious improver of his time for acquiring of useful 
knowledge, that he might be thoroughly furnished for the work of 
his Divine calling. And his example upbraids many ministers, who 
are strangely careless of their duty, and squander away precious time, 
of which no part is despicable and to be neglected. The filings of 
gold are to be preserved. We cannot stop the flight of time, nor recall 
it when past. VokU irrevocabile tempus. The sun returns to us eyerj 
day, and the names of the months every year, but time never returns. 
But this servant of God was faithful in improving this talent, being 
very sensible, to use his own words, ' that the blood of the soul runs 
out in wasted time.' When deprived of his public ministry, he gave 
himself wholly to reading and meditation, whereby he obtained an 
eminent degree of sacred knowledge, and was conversant in the retired 
parts of learning, in which many who are qualified to preach a profit- 
able sermon, are unacquainted. 


" His humility and modesty were his distinctive characters wherein 
he excelled. What a treasure was concealed imder the veil of humility! 
What all illustrious worth was shadowed imder his virtuous modesty I 
He was like a picture drawn by an excellent master in painting, but 
placed in the dark, so that the exactness of the proportions and the 
beauty of the colours do not appear. He would not put his name to 
those excellent tracts that are extant, wherein his learning and judg- 
ment are very conspicuous. He was well satisfied to serve the church 
and illustrate the truth, and to remain in his beloved secrecy. 

" In his conversation a comely gravity mixed with an innocent pleasant- 
ness, were attractive of respect and love. He was of a calm temper, 
not ruffled with passions, but gentle, and kind, and good ; and even in 
some contentious writings, he preserved an equal tenor of mind, knovdng 
that we are not likely to discover the truth in a mist of passion : his 
breast was the temple of peace. 

'^ In the discharge of his sacred work, his intellectual abilities and 
holy affection were very evident. 

" In prayer, his solemnity and reverence were becoming one that saw 
Him who is invisible : his tender affections, and suitable expressions, 
how melting and moving, that might convey a holy heat and life to 
dead hearts, and dissolve obdurate sinners in their frozen tombs. 

" In his preaching, how instructive and persuasive to convince and 
turn the carnal and worldly from the love of sin to me love of holiness ; 
from the love of the earth, to the love of heaven! The matter of his 
sermons was clear and deep, and always judiciously derived from the 
text ; the language was neither gaudy and vain, with light trimmings, 
nor rude and neglected, but suitable to the oracles of Grod. Such were 
his chosen acceptable words, as to recommend heavenly truths, to make 
them more precious and amiable to the minds and affections of men ; 
like the coloul' of the sky that makes the stars to shine with a more 
sparkling brightness. 

" Briefly, whilst opportunity continued, with alacrity and diligence, 
and constant resolution, he served his blessed Master till his languish- 
ing distempers, which natural means could not remove, prevailed upon 
him. But then the best Physician provided him the true remedy of 
patience. His death was unexpected, yet, as he declared, no surprise 
to him, for he was entirely resigned to the will of God ; he desired to 
live no longer, than to be serviceable : his soul was supported witli the 
blessed hope of enjoying God in glory. With holy Simeon, he had 
Christ in his arms, and departed in peace to see the salvation of God 
above. How great a loss the church has sustained in his death is not 
easily valued ; but our comfort is, God never wants instruments to 
accomplish his blessed work." 


To this elaborate testimony most be added the following from 
the pen of the Eev. John Howe : — " His clear and comprehensive 
mind, his excellent learning, his reasoning, argumentatiTe skill, 
his solid, most discerning judgment, his indefatigable industry, 
his large knowledge, and great moderation in the matters of our 
unhappy ecclesiastical differences, his calm dispassionate temper, 
his pleasant and most amiable conversation, did carry so great a 
lustre with them, as that, notwithstanding his most beloved 
retiredness, they could not, in his circumstances, but make him 
be much known, and much esteemed and loved by all that had 
the happiness to know him, and make the loss of him be much 
lamented. But he was, by the things that made his continuance 
so desirable in this world, the fitter for a better and more suitable 
world. He lived here as one that was more akin to that other 
world than this; and who had no other business here but to help 
in making this better."* 

Dr. Thomas Bidgley, when preaching the funeral sermon for 
Mrs. Gertrude Glarkson, a daughter of Mr. C, thus speaks of 
him — ** He was well known in this famous city, notwithstanding 
all his endeavours to conceal his real worth, under the curtain of 
humiUty. So far were his attainments above what are common, 
that to attempt to set forth his character, though in the fairest 
colours, would be to lessen him. His writings are the most 
lively picture of his mind; his labours as a minister of Christ, 
I had almost said with the apostle, more than a minister, (2 Cor. 
xi. 23,) were refreshing to many, and his course at last finished 
with joy."* 

The long seclusion of this admirable man from the public 
labours of his ministry enabled him to compose several learned 
discourses, which his great modesty forbade him to publish, but 
which were with his other papers, at the disposal of his executrix 
and widow. 

Amongst his manuscripts was the treatise entitled ** Primitive 
Episcopacy Stated and Cleared from thew Holy Scriptures and 
Ancient Eecords," and which contains a great mass of additional 
evidence in favour of Congregational episcopacy. This was 
printed in 1688, without any preface or advertisement except that 

• See Preface, page 380, infra, 

* Sermon on the death of Mrs. Gertrude Clarkson. London, 1701. 


from " the Stationer," Nath. Ponder, who says, *' Though a prefaoe 
be a civility due to the following tract, the name of the author is 
reckoned much more significant than any preface. Those that 
know the calmness of his disposition, and his sincere desire of 
contributing all that he could to the composure of those unhappy 
differences that have so long troubled the Christian church, will 
think this work very suitable to his design ; and being so esteemed 
by divers judicious persons of his acquaintance, those in whose 
hands his papers are, have been prevailed with to send it abroad 
into the world with this assurance, that it is liis whose name it 
bears." Tliis treatise, the tliird in the following volume, will be 
found to justify the judgment of his friends; and although a 
posthumous publication, Dr. Henry Maurice thought it necessary 
to reply to it, in an elaborate work which appeared in 1691, entitled 
** Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy, in answer to a Book of Mr. 
David Clarkson's, lately published, entitled ' Primitive Episco- 
pacy.* " Whatever may be thought of the comparative learning 
and acuteness of the two disputants, there can be no comparison 
between them as to their tone and temper ; Mr. Clarkson always 
maintains the bearing of a scholar and a Christian, but the 
Doctor descends to false accusations and vulgar personalities. 

During the same year there was published another small volume 
called **A Discourse of the Saving Grace of God," with a preface 
by the Rev. John Howe, in which the doctrines of free will and 
free grace are discussed with great ability and force. This forms 
the fifth treatise of the present volume. 

In 1089 appeared his lost polemical work, a ** Discourse on 
Liturgies," which was left by its author in a very imperfect state, 
and which unhappily was committed to very incompetent hands 
for publication, so that the mistakes, both typographical and 
literary, were very gross and numerous. Still it was not a work 
to be slighted, for Mr. Clarkson had assailed the principal argu- 
ments of previous writers in defence of liturgies. He appears to 
have had in view, " Considerations touching Liturgies," by Dr. 
John Gauden, the reputed writer of Et*©!^ Bao-tXuq?, or the Por- 
traiture of liis Sacred Majesty in his Solitude and Sufferings;" 
Sir Hammond L'Estrango's " Alliance of Divine Offices ;" and 
Herbert Thomdike's *' Religious Assemblies, und the Service of 
God." Dean Comber, therefore, published in 1690, in two suc- 
cessive parts, his ** Scholastic History of Liturgies in the Chris- 
tian Church ; together with an Answer to Mr. David Clarkson's 


late Discourse concerning Liturgies," in which he follows tlie 
chronological course pursued by our author down to the year 
1100, and the passages he had cited are strenuously defended 
firom his alleged misrepresentations and glosses by the Dean. 
These facts are necessary to be known as parts of the history of 
these controversies, but a decision on the merits and success of 
the respective combatants is designedly avoided. 

However learned and able Mr. Clarkson was as a polemic, yet 
the sermons and discourses which he wrote out at great length, 
are amongst the most valuable memorials of his excellent abilities 
and eminent godliness. After his decease, his family delighted 
to read them, and there is evidence that two of his daughters 
were greatly instructed and consoled by the perusal of several of 
these manuscripts. In 1 696, thirty-one of these discourses were 
published in a large folio volume of more than a thousand pages. 
They treat on the following topics: — 1. Original Sin. 2. Re- 
pentance. 3. Faith. 4. Living by Faith. 6. Faith in Prayer. 
6. Dying in Faith. 7. Knowledge of Christ. 8. Justification. 
9. Sinners unwilling to come to Christ. 10. The Lord the 
owner of all, an inducement from earthly-mindedness. 1 1 . Hear- 
ing the Word. 12. Taking up the Cross. 13. New Creature. 
14. Christ's gracious Invitations. 15. Man's Insufficiency. 16. 
Against anxious carefulness, but prayer for everything. 17. God's 
End in Afflictions. 18. The Conviction of Hypocrites. 19. Soul 
Idolatry. 20. Not partakers in Sin. 21. Unconverted Sinners 
in Darkness. 22. Christ seeking Fruit. 23. The Lord rules 
over all. 24. Sinners under the Curse. 25. Love of Christ, and 
Sacrifice of Christ. 26. Christ Dying for Sinners 27. Christ 
touched with Feeling of our Infirmities. 28. Boldness of Access. 
29. Christ's Intercession. 30. Fellowship with God. 31. Public 
Worship preferred before Private. These able and evangelical 
discourses were introduced to the " Christian Reader," by the 
following brief advertisement, under the joint names of tlie Rev. 
John Howe and the Rev. Matthew Mead : 

" The Rev. Mr. Clarkson was so esteemed for his excellent abilities, 
that there needs no adorning testimony to those who knew him : and 
the following sermons, wherein the signatures of his spirit are very con- 
spicuous, will sufficiently recommend his worth to those who did not 
know him. They are printed from his original papers, and with the 
Diyine blessing will be very useful to instruct and persuade men to be 
seriously religious." 


Besides these, there are only three other printed sermons of his 
extant, viz. the Funeral Sermon for Dr. Owen, and two discourses 
in the Morning Exercises. It was, therefore, thought preferable 
to reprint them in the present volume as " Occasional Sermons," 
rather than make a selection from the folio volume, or leave the 
reader without any specimens of his pulpit labours. 

A fine print, engraved by White from a portrait by Mrs. Mary 
Beale, an eminent portrait painter of that age, gives a very pleas- 
ing idea of the person of Mr. Clarkson. He had a round hand- 
some face, with an ample forehead, and long flowing hair. An 
expression of cheerfulness and good temper, confirms what his 
writings suggest, that he was blessed with sweet equanimity of 
temper, and a natural gaiety of manners, that contributed much 
to his own happiness and to the pleasure of those who were 
privileged to be connected with him. 

It appears he had four children, one son, Robert, named after 
his grandfather, and three daughters, Rebecca, Gertrude, and 
Katherine. Rebecca, the eldest, was married to a Mr. Combe, 
and lived to a good old age. She died in the faith of Jesus, 
November 20th, 1744, aged 79 years, and was buried in BunhiU 
Fields cemetery. 

The two younger daughters remained unmarried. Gertrude 
died in London, April 23, 1701. Her pastor. Dr. Ridgley, 
preached her funeral sermon, which ho also published and 
inscribed to Mrs. Elizabeth Clarkson, the venerable relict of 
Mr. Clarkson, who thus survived her lamented husband at least 
fifteen years ; but the time of her decease is not known. 

The third daughter, Katharine, was also eminent for her 
piety, and died at Hitchin, Herts, Jan. 11, 1767, aged 84 years.* 
Nothing is known of his son Robert, to whom his father be- 
queathed ** all his books if he would prove a scholar." 

In tlie Rev. Samuel James's ** Collection of Remarkable Ex- 
periences," there are two papers which Mrs. Combe and her sister 
Gertrude gave in, of their religious convictions upon uniting them- 
selves with the Independent church assembling at tlie Three Cranes 
meeting-house. Fruiterers' alley, Upper Thames street, then under 
the pastoral care of the Rev. Thomas Gouge, and Dr. Thomas 
Ridgley. As they contain some references to their honoured 
father, so they will form an appropriate close to these notices. 
* James*8 Collection of Remarkable Experiences, &c., pp. 62 — 66. 


The choice experience of Mrs. Rebecca Combe, eldest daughter of the late 
Bey. Mr. David Clarkson, delivered by her on her admission into 
fellowship tvith the church, late under the care of the late Rev. 
Mr. Thomas Gouge. 

In giving an account of the dealings of God with my soul, I desire 
tmlj and sincerely to represent the state of my case ; I am sensible it 
will be in much weakness, but I hope my end is, that God may have 
the glory of his own work, which he hath wrought on so mean and 
unworthy a creature as myself. 

I had the advantage and invaluable blessing of a religious educa- 
tion, both my parents being eminent for wisdom and grace. Under the 
instructions of my good mother, I had early and frequent convictions, 
though these impressions lasted not long, for I wore them off, either by 
a formal engaging in some religious duties, or else, by running into 
such diversions as were suited to my childhood. But my convictions 
being renewed as I grew up, and it being impressed on my mind that 
this way of performing duties, by fits and starts, merely to quiet an 
accusing conscience, would not satisfy the desires of an immortal soul 
capable of higher enjoyments than I took up with ; this put me on 
serious thoughtfulness what method to pursue, in order to bind myself 
to a more stated performance of those duties, which I was convinced, 
the Lord required of me. 

Accordingly I made a most solemn resolution, to address myself to God 
by prayer, both morning and evening, and never, on any occasion what- 
ever, to neglect it, calling the Lord to witness against me, if I broke tliis 
solemn engagement. But, alas I I soon saw the vanity of my own 
resolutions, for as I was only found in the performance of duty through 
fear, and as a task, and, having once omitted it at the set time, I con- 
cluded my promise was now broke, and from that time continued in a 
total neglect of prayer, till it pleased the Almighty Spirit to return with 
his powerful operations, and set my sins in order before me. Then my 
unsuitable carriage under former convictions, together with my break- 
ing the most solemn engagements to the Lord, woimded me deep. 
Indeed, I was tempted to conclude I had sinned the unpardonable sin, 
and should never be forgiven. 

Yet, in my greatest distress and anguish of spirit, I could not give up 
all hope, having some views of the free and sovereign grace of God, as 
extended to the vilest and worst of sinners, though I could not take the 
comfort of it to myself. My sins appeared exceeding sinful. I even 
loathed and abhorred myself on account of them, and was continually 
brgging a deeper sense and greater degrees of humiliation. I thought I 


could have been content, yea, I was desirous, to be filled with the 
utmost horror and terror of which I was capable, if this might be a 
means of bringing me to that degree of sorrow, which I apprehended the 
Lord expected, from so vile a creature. The heinous nature of mj 
sins, and their offensiveness to the pure ejes of his holiness, were ever 
before me, insomuch that I thought I could not be too deeply wounded, 
or feel trouble enough. 

This put me on a constant and restless application to God through 
Christ, from whom alone I now saw all my help must come. I had 
tried the utmost I could dd, and foimd it lefl me miserably short of 
what the law required and I wanted. I was convinced that an expecta- 
tion of some worthiness in myself, as the condition of my acceptance 
before God, was that which had kept me so long from Christ and the 
free promises of the Gospel ; and therefore, as enabled, I went to the 
Lord, and pleaded those absolute promises of his word, which are made 
freely to sinners in his Son, without the least qualification to be found 
in me. I was enabled to urge those encouraging words, Rev. xxii. 17 : 
'' Let him that is athirst come, and whosoever will, let him take the 
water of life freely." Also Isaiah Iv. 1 : " Without money and with- 
out price ;" with many more of the like nature, which woidd be too 
tedious to mention. I desired to come to Christ, unworthy as I was, 
and cast my soul entirely upon him, for I clearly saw that all I had 
heretofore done profited me nothing, since my very prayers, considered 
as a sinner, were an abomination to the Lord. There was nothing left 
therefore for me to take the least comfort and encouragement from, but 
the free grace of God in Christ Jesus, which I continued to plead with 
much earnestness, and found my soul enlarged beyond whatever I had 
experienced before. 

Soon afler, I providentially opened a manuscript of my father's, and 
cast my eye upon that part of it, where he was showing, what pleas a 
sensible sinner might make use of in prayer. Many things were men- 
tioned which were very reviving. I was miserable, and tha,J; might be 
a plea. I might also plead his own mercy, the suitableness, the large- 
ness, and the freeness of his mercy. I might plead my own inability to 
believe, of which I was very sensible. I might also plead the wiU of 
Grod, for he commands sinners to believe, and is highly dishonoured by 
unbelief. I might likewise plead the descent of faith, it is the gift of 
Grod, and the nature of this gifl, which is free. Yea, I might plead 
the examples of others who have obtained this gifl, and that against the 
greatest unlikelihood and improbabilities that might be. I might and 
could plead further, my willingness to submit to anything, so that I 
might but find this favour with the Lord. Moreover, I might plead 
Christ's prayer and his compassions ; the workings of his Spirit. 


already b^;un ; that regard which the Lord shows to irrational crea- 
tures : he hears their cries, and will he shut out the cries of a poor 
perishing sinner ? — In short, I might plead my necessity and extreme 
need of &ith, a sense of which was deeply impressed on my soul.'* 

On reading these pleas I found great relief, yea, they were to me 
as a voice from heaven, saying. This is the way, walk in it. I was 
enabled to go and act faith upon a Redeemer, and could give up my 
all to him, and trust in him alone for all. I was now convinced by his 
Spirit, that he would work in me what was well-pleasing and accept- 
able to God, and that he required nothing of me but what his free, rich 
grace would bestow upon me. Now was Christ exceeding precious 
to my soul, and I longed for clearer discoveries of him, both in his per- 
son, and offices, as prophet, priest, and king. 

And oh, how did I admire his condescending love and grace to such a 
poor, wretched, worthless creature as myself I I was greatly delighted 
in frequent acts of resignation to him, desiring that every &culty of my 
soul might be brought into an entire obedience, and could part with 
every offensive thing, and would not have spared so much as one 
darling lust, but was ready to bring it forth and slay it before him. In 
short, I could now perceive a change wrought in my whole soul ; I now 
delighted in what before was my greatest burden, and found that most 
burdensome in which I before most delighted. I went on pleasantly in 
duty ; my meditation on him was sweet, and my heart much enlarged, 
in admiring his inexpressible love and grace, so free, and sovereign, to so 
wretched a creature, which even filled my soul with wonder and love. 

But this delightful frame did not long continue, for I was soon sur- 
prised with swarms of vain thoughts, which appeared in my most solemn 
approaches to God, and such violent hurries of temptation, as greatly stag- 
gered my faith, which was weak. Hereupon I was ready to give up all, 
and to conclude that I had mocked God, and cheated my own soul ; 
that these wandering thoughts, and this unfixedness of mind in duty, 
could never consist with a sincere love to the things of God. I thought 
my heart had been fixed, but, oh ! how exceeding deceitful did I then 
find it ! which greatly distressed me, and made me conclude my sins 
were rather increased than mortified, insomuch that I was ready to cry 
out, " Oh, wretched creature that I am, who shall deliver me from the 
body of this death !" and in consideration of the power and prevalency 
of indwelling corruptions and daily temptations, which I had to grapple 
with, I was ready to say, " I shall one day fall by the hands of these 

But these discouragements were fully removed, by reading some of 

'Clarkson'i Sermons and Discourses on Divine Subjects. Folio, pp. 122 — 126. 


my father's writings, where it was observed, that a person had no reason 
to conclude his sins were more increased, merely because they appeared 
more, and became more troublesome, since this arose from the opposi- 
tion they now met with, from that principle of grace which now was 
implanted. Hence I learned, that before the flesh reigned quietly in 
me, and therefore I perceived not the lusts thereof, but now all the 
powers and faculties of my soul were engaged against them, they gave 
me the greatest disturbance, and struggled more and more. Also these 
words were impressed on my mind with an efficacious power, 2 Cor. 
xii. 9, " My grace is sufficient for thee," which gave me peace in believ- 
ing that it should be to me according to his word. 

Thus afler many confficts, comforts, and supports, I determined to 
give myself up to some church, that I might partake of the Lord's 
supper, and have my faith confirmed in the blood of that everlasting 
covenant, which I hoped the Lord had made with me, since he had 
given me his Spirit as the earnest thereof. I accordingly was joined to 
a church, and in coming to this ordinance, found great delight : my faith 
was strengthened, and my love increased, from that sweet commrmion I 
then enjoyed with my Lord by his blessed Spirit, who often filled me 
with joy unspeakable and full of glory. Thus I walked under the sweet 
and comfortable sense of his love ; and whilst in the way of my duty, I 
was thus indulged with such sights of the Redeemer s glory, and such a 
taste of his grace, I frequently wished that I might never more go back 
to the world again. 

But afler all these manifestations, oh, wretched creature I God in 
his providence calling me more into the world by changing my condi- 
tion, this new relation brought new affections and new temptations, 
which, being too much yielded to, insensibly prevailed, and brought me 
into such perplexing darkness that I want words to express it. I lost 
the sense of the love of God, and hence my duty was performed without 
that delight I had once experienced, the want of which made me oflen 
neglect it, and especially in private, while I attended on public worship 
with little advantage or pleasure. 

The consideration of this decay in my love, and the loss of those 
quickening influences of the Spirit which I used to experience in duty, 
increased my darkness, and I had doleful apprehensions of my state. 
And my inordinate love to the creature, and want of submission to the 
will of the Lord, in disposing of what I had so unduly set my heart on, 
prepared me to look for awful things, in a way of judgment from the 
righteous God, which I aflerwards found ; his hand was soon laid on 
that very object by which I had so provoked him ; for a disorder seized 
him, under which he long languished till it ended in his death." 

" Her idolised husband died of a consumption at Hitchin, Herts, but in what 
year is not known. 


This was a melancholy stroke, and the more so as I saw his hand 
stretched out still, for I continued in an unsuitable temper, and with- 
out that submission which such a dispensation called for. The Lord 
still hid his face from me, and it is impossible to give a particular 
account of those perplexing thoughts and tormenting fears which filled 
mj mind. Everything appeared dreadfully dark, both within and with- 
out. Oh, were it possible to describe it to others, as I then felt it, they 
would dread that which will separate between them and Grod I I ex- 
pected, if the Lord did return, it would be in a terrible way, by some 
remarkable judgment or other; but oftentimes, from the frame I was in, 
I could see no ground to hope he would ever return at all. 

But was it to me according to my dismal apprehensions and fears ? 
Oh, no ! my soul and all that is within me bless and adore his name, 
under a sense of his free and sovereign grace, who manifested himself 
unto thee as a Grod, pardoning iniquity, transgression, and sin. This 
was the title by which he manifested himself to Moses, when he caused 
his glory to pass before him, (Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7.) And it was in the 
clear apprehension, and powerful application of this by the Almighty 
Spirit, that I was brought to admire so greatly, the free grace of God, 
thus discovered to me in so extraordinary a manner, that it ev^en trans- 
ported my very soul with love and thankfulness, beyond anything that 
I had experienced, in the whole of my past life. 

The b^inning of this wonderful alteration in my frame, was hearing 
the experience of one, which I thought very much like my own, 
when the Lord first began to work on my soul. I concluded that this 
person was the subject of a real and universal change ; on this occasion 
I determined to consider my former experience, in doing of which I foimd 
the blessed Spirit of all grace assisting me, and witnessing to his work 
upon my heart, insomuch that, ere I was aware, my soul was like the 
chariots of a willing people ; I was wonderfully enlivened in duty, and 
enlai^ed in thankfulness to Grod, for thus manifesting himself, and 
directing me to those means which he had so inexpressibly blessed, 
beyond my expectation. 

Thus the Lord drew me by the cords of love, and hf\ed up the light of 
his countenance upon me, so that in his light I saw light, which scattered 
that miserable cloud of darkness, that had enwrapped my soul so long. 
Yea, he dispelled all those unbelieving thoughts which were apt to arise, on 
account of that low estate out of which he had newly raised me. It was 
suggested to me that this was not his ordinary way of dealing with such 
provoking creatures as myself, but that they are usually filled with 
terrors, and brought down even to a view of the lowest hell, &c. Thus 
Satan endeavoured to hold me under unbelieving fe^rs, but the blessed 
Spirit, by taking of the things of Christ, and showing them unto me, 
prevailed over the temptation. 


I had a discovery of the glorj of the Father's love, as unchangeable, 
free, and eternal, which was discovered in pitching on me before the 
foundation of the world. And the glory of the Son as proceeding from 
the Father, and offering a sacrifice of a sweet- smelling savour, and in 
bringing in an everlasting righteousness, which by his Spirit he enabled 
me to rest wholly and alone upon, as the foundation of every blessing 
which I have received, or he has promised, for the whole of my accept- 
ance before Grod, for my justification, sanctification, and full redemption. ' 
On this foimdation he has enabled me stedfastly to rely, which greatly 
enlivens and enlarges my soul, in its addresses to the Father, through 
the Son, by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, for pardon and strength, 
against those powerful corruptions which still remain in my heart. 

Oh, the love, the infinite, condescending, and imchanging love of the 
Father I and oh, that fulness of grace which is treasured up in my 
Redeemer, to be bestowed on me, by his promised Spirit ! of which so 
much hath already been communicated, that my soul is even over- 
whelmed under the sense and consideration of it 1 The Lord appears to 
me as resting in his love, and joying over me with singing, as it is 
expressed, Zeph. iii. 17; which Scripture, with many others, has been 
so opened and applied, as makes my approaches to him exceeding 
delightful. And this sense of his love lays me low, in the views of my 
own vileness and unworthiness, and constrains me to love him and live 
to him, and to give him all the glory of that change, which, of his own 
free and sovereign grace, he has wrought in me. There was nothing 
in me to move him to this, yea, what was there not in me to provoke 
him to cast me off for ever ? But, thus it hath pleased him to magnify 
his grace and mercy, on a creature the most luiworthy of any that ever 
received a favour at his hands. 

I know not where to end. He has recovered me from amongst the 
dead, and he shall have the glory of it whilst I live : yes, I will praise 
him, and tell of the wonders of his love to others, that so he may be 
honoured, and none may distrust him. He has filled me with his praises, 
though he has not given me that natural capacity which some have been 
blessed with, to express what I feel and find, of his work on my soul. 
But this I can say, I have found him whom my soul loves, he hath mani- 
fested himself to me, and there is nr)thing I dread so much as losing 
sight of him again. His presence makes all his ordinances, and all his 
providences, and everything delightful unto me. It is impossible to 
express the joy of my soul in sweet converses with him, with a sense of 
his love and the experience of his presence, under the influences of his 
Spirit, whose office it is to abide with me, and to guide, direct, and com- 
fort me for ever. 

It is from a sense of my duty and a desire to follow the direction of 


that blessed Spirit, that I request fellowship with you of this church. 
Amongst you my Lord has been pleased to discover himself to me, and 
to make the ministry you sit under exceeding useful and comfortable to 
my soul ; by it I have been built up and settled on the right foundation, 
the righteousness of Christ, that rock that shall never be moved. Your 
order likewise appears to me very beautiful and lovely, being, as I 
apprehend, most agreeable to the rules of my Lord. Hence I desire to 
have communion with you, that so by your example and watchfulness 
over me, and the other advantages arising from church-fellowship, I may 
find what I expect, and earnestly desire in communion with you, namely, 
that I may experience fellowship with the Father and the Son, through 
the eternal Spirit; whilst I wait upon him in the ways of his own 
appointment. Rebecca Combe. 

December 17, 1697. 

The remarkable experience of Mrs. Gertrude Clarkson, second daughter of 
the late Rev. Mr. David Clarkson, given to the church with whom 
she lived in communion. 

My education has been very^ strict. The constant instruction and 
example of my parents had so early an influence, that it is hard to tell 
which was my first awakening. Ever since I can remember anything 
of myself, I have had frequent convictions of the danger of sin and an 
imregenerate state, attended with fears of the punishment due to it ; 
therefore was desirous of an interest in Christ, by whom I might be 
pardoned and saved from the wrath of God. This made me very fearful 
of omitting duties, or committing known sins ; and, though these con- 
victions wore off, yet they oflen returned, and rendered me uneasy, 
unless I was praying or learning Scriptures, or something which I 
thought good. In these exercises I was well satisfied, though it was my 
happiness to be under the most careful inspection and judicious helps for 
the informing of my judgment. 

Before I apprehended what it was to rely upon an all-sufificient Saviour 
for righteousness and strength, I remember my notion of things was 
this, that I was to hear, and pray, and keep the Sabbath, and avoid what 
I knew to be sin, and then I thought God was obliged to save me ; that 
I did what I could, and so all that he required ; and I fiu-ther conceived, 
that if at any time I omitted secret prayer, or any other duty, yet if I 
repented it was suflicient ; and, on this consideration I have oflen ven- 
tured upon the conmoiission of sin, with a resolve to repent the next day, 
and then, having confessed the transgression, my conscience has been 


easj, and I was well satisfied. Indeed sin, at that time, was not burden- 
some. I truly desired that my sins might be pardoned, but thought the 
ways of religion hard ; and, though I durst not live in the constant 
neglect of duty, yet I secretly wished that I had been under no obliga- 
tion to perform it. When I reflect on the thoughts and workings of my 
heart and affections in these times, and the confused apprehensions 
which I then had both of sin and grace, I am fully persuaded that, 
through grace, there is a real, and, in some measure, an uuiyersal change 
wrought in my soul. 

Afber my father's death, I was reading one of his manuscripts, wherein 
both the object and nature of saving faith were described, and the great 
necessity of it pressed, &c. The plain and clear defmition there given 
of the saving act of faith, caused other apprehensious of things than I 
had before." I then began to see, how short I had come in all my per- 
formances of that disposition of soul which the Gospel called for, and 
how guilty 1 was while depending upon these performances for accept- 
ance with God, not casting myself wholly and alone upon Christ, and 
resting on his righteousness, entirely y for pardc n and justification. The 
concern of my mind was very great, that I had lived so long, ignorant 
of those things which related to my eternal welfare. I was sensible, the 
means and helps I had been favoured with, for improvement in know- 
ledge, were beyond what is common, but I had refused instruction, the 
consideration of which was very terrible to my thoughts, fearing lest I 
had sinned beyond all hope of forgiveness. 

But in the most discouraging apprehensions of my case, my heart was 
much enlarged in the confession of sin, and in bewailing my captivity to 
it, which was attended with earnest wrestlings with the Lord, for par- 
doning and purifying grace. Those absolute promises in the 36th 
chapter of Ezekiel, of " a new heart and right spirit," were my continual 
plea, together with Matt. v. 6 : " Blessed are they who hunger and thirst 
after righteousness, for they shall be filled." I found longings and 
pantings of soul after that righteousness, and saw that it could only 
be received by faith : this faith I earnestly begged, and that the Liord 
would pardon that great sin of unbelief, which so provoked and dis- 
honoured him, and that he would, by his own Spuit, enable me to em- 
brace Christ, as freely held forth in the Grospel. 

About this time I was much affected with the consideration of Christ's 
offices, as prophet, priest, and king. And though I durst not claim an 
interest in them, yet was often meditating upon them, admiring that 
infinite condescension which is manifested therein. I thought whatever 
my condition was in this world, yet if I might but be under his ix)¥rer- 

* This is the same discourse that was useful to her sister Rebecca, and is th» 
third in the voluine» entitled " Faiik," and based on Mark xvi. 16. 


fal and effectual teachings as a Prophet, and have the benefit of his 
atonement and intercession as a Priest, and be entirely subject to him in 
every facility of my soul, as my Lord and King, then how satisfied and 
happy should I be ! 

I was under these strugglings a long time, before I came to any com- 
fortable persuasion that I was accepted. Sins against light and lore 
deeply wounded me, and the many aggravating circumstances which 
attended them, were so represented by Satan, that I could not tell how 
to believe such iniquities as mine would be forgiven. But in the midst 
of these distressing thoughts, I found in that manuscript of my father's, 
that none but unworthy sinnerSy who are empty of all good in themselves, 
were the objects of pardoning mercy, that the whole needed not the 
physician, but the sick. This encouraged me to plead with hope, that 
the Lord would glorify the freeness of his own grace in my salvation, 
and to urge that Christ called " weary and heavy laden to him with a 
promise of rest. (Matt. xi. 28.) 

I found my soul was extremely burdened with sin ; it appeared more 
exceeding sinful than ever before ; sins of thought as well as words and 
actions, were then observed with sorrow, and lamented before him. 
Yea, even the sins of my most holy things, those swarms of vain 
thoughts, and wanderings of heart and affections, of which I was con- 
scious in my secret retirements, and most solemn, close dealings with 
God. In short, my own soul was my intolerable burden, which made 
me oflen question, whether there were not more provoking sins in me 
than God usually pardons. Oh, I found how every power and faculty 
were depraved, and that I could not do the good I would ! 

It would be tedious to relate the many particular discouragements 
and temptations I laboured under, sometimes pouring forth my soul with 
some hope in his free mercy, sometimes only bewailing my condition 
without hope, till it pleased Him whose power and grace no im^nitent 
heart can resist and prevail, to put a stop to my imbelieving reasonings, 
from the unlikelihood of such sins being pardoned, sins so aggravated 
and so provoking as mine, by giving me an awful sense of his abso- 
lute sovereignty from those words. Exodus xxxiii. 19, "I will be 
gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I 
will show mercy." Also Isaiah Iv. 1, " For my thoughts are not your 
thoughts, neither are yoiq* ways my ways, saith the Lord." These con- 
siderations were so impressed on my mind, and struck such an awe 
upon my spirits, that I durst not any longer give way to my carnal 
reasonings ; I thought I could commit myself to his sovereign plea- 
sure, let him do with me as seemed him good. 

After some time my mother, perceiving my concern, conversed very 
freely with me, and asked if 1 was not vrilling to accept of Christ to 


sanrtifyy as well as to save me ? I told her 1 desired this above all 
things. She then said he had certainly accepted me, adding, that it 
was Christ who had made me willing to close with him, and that he 
never made any soul thus willing, but he had first pardoned and accepted 
that soul. I shall never forget with what weight these words were 
impressed on my heart. I thought it was as a pardon sent immediately 
to me. I could not but say, I was above all things desirous to be 
entirely subject to Christ in every power and faculty of my soul, that 
every thought might bo brought into subjection to Christ, and nothing 
might remain in me contrary to him, but that there might be a perfect 
conformity to his image and will in all things. 

After this conversation I found great composure in my mind, believ- 
ing that the Lord had created those desires in me, which nothing but 
himself, and the enjoyment of himself, could satisfy, and that he would 
answer them with himself ; " that he would not break the bruised reed, 
nor quench the smoking flax," Matt. xii. 20. My delight now was in 
nothing else but meditating upon, and admiring of, the free and sovereign 
grace of God in Christ, which distinguished me from many others who 
had not so highly provoked him, having called me out of such gross 
darkness which I had been long in, and given me any glimmerings of 
the light, of the knowledge, of the glory of his grace. My desires greatly 
increased afler further discoveries, and clearer light into the deep myste- 
ries of the love and grace of Clod in Christ Jesus : and all diversions 
from these meditations were a burden. 

Oh, I then thought, ** all old things were passed away, and everything 
was become new !" I experienced a universal change in my mind, will, 
and affections ; the bent of them was turned another way. The ordi- 
nances, which were once irksome, were above all things pleasant, and the 
return of Sabbaths continually longed for. I wjis very thankful it was 
my duty as well as privilege to set apart the whole day for the worship 
and glory of my Lord. 1 bewailed much that I could love him no 
more, that there was so much sin remaining in me, and which I found 
mixed ^\^th all that I did, and that 1 was not wholly taken up in those 
blessed and delightful employments, without the least interruption. Oh, 
I longed for that state wherein all these fetters should be knocked off, 
and my soul set at liberty in the worship and praise of my God, being 
freed from corruptions within or temptations without ! 

My soul was thus delightfully carried out for some time, in which I 
heard a discourse from those words, John xxi. 17, " Thou knowest all 
things, thou knowest that I love thee." The scope of this sermon was 
for a trial, whether nf/r ap]K'iil could hv made to him wli(» knows all tilings, 
that we lov(jil him ? Under this discourse I found my heart greatly 
carried out in lovr to Christ, in all' his oixlinances, and the discoveries 


made of his will therein. These subjects concerning the love of Christ, 
and his people's love to him, being long continued, one sermon aflcr 
another, I found I sat under the word with great pleasure and enlarged 

At this time my mother was persuading me to join in communion 
with some church, which greatly startled me at the first. I could by no 
means think of that, not apprehending myself to have come so far yet. I 
thought there must be something more in me, or I should eat and drink 
damnation to myself. But being better informed both as to the nature 
and end of the ordinance, and that it was intended for the increase of 
grace and strength, and that it was a positive command of my Lord, with 
whose will in all things I was very desirous to comply, I was at last pre- 
vailed with to venture on that great ordinance, and was much refreshed 
and satisfied, in my renewed resignation, and enlarged expectations, of 
receiving all needful supplies from Him who is the head of the church. 
Oh, the condescending love and grace of my Redeemer, represented to 
me in these transactions, how greatly did they delight and afiect my 
sonll I wished I might have been always thus exercised, expecting 
with great pleasure the return of those seasons, wherein I might hope 
for further manifestations, and larger communications, of grace and 

But after some time my affections began to cool. I had not such 
sweetness and enlargement in my approaches to God in public, as I used 
to find. I thought the preaching more empty, and came short of what 
I found I wanted. This deadness continuing, filled me with no small 
concern, fearing I should fall ofi^. I was very far from charging the 
ministry I sat under, but my own wicked wavering heart. I have often 
gone to the house of God with raised expectations of receiving those 
quickenings I used to be blessed with, but found sad disappointments. 
This frame of spirit as to public worship, was matter of continual 
mourning and bewailing in secret. I was oflen examining my heart as 
to its cams and ends in my public approaches, and could not but con- 
clude my desires were above all things to glorify my Lord in all his 
appointments, and to receive those blessings from him which might 
enable me so to do. 

The missing of the Lord's presence under the means, in the use of 
which he had commanded me to expect it, and which he had heretofore 
in some measure vouchsafed, was very grievous. I earnestly begged a 
discovery of every sin that might be hid from me, which might be the 
cause of this withdrawing. But the decay of my affections still remain- 
ing, it caused groat misgivings of hoiirt, that tilings were not right with 
me. Yet still I had supports in my secret applications to God, that his 
grace would l)e sufficient for me, and that I should be kept by his 


almighty power, through faith unto salvation, which encoumgements 
kept me still waiting with hope, that he would yet return and bless me. 

After some time being providentially brought to this place, I found 
the preaching of your pastor so suited to my case, that I was greatly 
enlarged in thankfulness to God, who had so directed me. Those ser- 
mons upon Galat. vi. 3, " For if a man thinketh himself something when 
he is nothing, he deceiveth himself," though I had heard your minister 
before, with great satisfaction, brought me to a resolution of sitting 
under his ministry. I do not question but you remember what unusual 
and deep heart-searching discourses they were to me. They razed me 
again to the very foundation, and discovered the many secret holds 
Satan had in my heart, which before I thought not of, and how many 
ways I was taken up in something which was nothing. I wish I could 
express what they were. 

These discourses caused deep humblings of spirit, and enlarged desires 
after further enlightenings. Oh I found these things reached me I I 
needed to be led into the depths of my own deceitful heart, and thereby 
observe, that secret proneness there was in me, to be laying hold on 
something in self to rest upon and expect from. In short, I now saw 
that utter insufficiency and weakness in myself, and everything done 
by myself, to satisfy the cravings of my immortal soul, which I had not 
so much as once thought of before. 

I have been also led more to that fulness, from whence only I can 
receive what may render me acceptable to the Father, and have never 
found so much sweetness and solid satisfaction in my accesses to God, as 
when most sensible of my own unworthiness, and entire emptiness of 
anything agreeable to him in myself, and all my performances, and when 
most apprehensive of that infinite fulness and suitableness of grace laid 
up in Christ Jesus, from whence I am commanded and encouraged to 
be continually receiving fresh supplies. Oh those infinite inexhaustible 
treasures I Nothing, nothing less can satisfy the restless cravings and 
pantings of my soul ! By this preaching, I have been continually led to 
this fresh spring that never fails, and have experienced great quicken- 
ings in my applications to Christ, and comfortable rejoicings in him. 
Notwithstanding aU those miserable defects and failures in my poor per- 
formances, this gives me comfort, that there is a perfect righteousness 
wrought out for me, which I may receive freely by faith, and therein 
stand complete before QkA for ever. 

The insisting on such truths as these, which have a direct tendency to 
lead from self to Christ, by opening and unfolding the mysteries of 
grace laid up in him, so admirably suited to answer all the necessities 
of poor helpless guilty creatures, I find above all things encourages me 
to, and enlivens me in, duty. My low improvements under these suit- 


able instructive helps fill me with mourning, to think there should be 
no greater establishment, upon the sure foundation of a Redeemer's 
righteousness, on which I hope I have been enabled to build. 

At times I can apprehend with some clearness that this righteousness 
was wrought out for me, and can applj to him with confidence and joj, 
as the " Lord my righteousness and strength,*' and gladly hope, that 
through that strength 1 shall be more than a conqueror over every dis- 
turbing corruption and temptation. Yea, that I shall see him shortly, 
as he is, in the full displays of the glory of that grace and love which I 
cannot now comprehend, and by the transforming sight be made Hke 
him. But oh how short ! how seldom are these interviews I my unbe- 
lieving heart still returns to its former darkness and distrust, and gives 
me frequent occasions to bewail the fluctuations of my weak fiiith. Oh 
that it was stronger I that it was more stedfast ! But blessed be his 
name in whom I put my entire trust, there is grace in him, to help me 
under all decays and failings, through weakness. It is from hence I 
receive strength, to elevate and excite the acts of faith and love, when 
sunk so low that I cannot raise them. Yea, it is firom the same fulness 
I receive grace, to regulate the actings of grace, and to set my soul from 
time to time, in a right way of improving the grace I received, and for 
obtaining pardon for all my defects, as well as for the removing all my 

These are truths that feed and support my faith, and without these 
were set home with power on my soul, I must give up, under the great 
aboundings of indwelling corruptions. I desire a submissive waiting for 
further manifestations of his love, in his own time and way. And 
although I have not those constant shines of the light of God's coun- 
tenance, with which some of his people are blessed, yet I humbly adore 
him for the little light he hath afforded me, and beg your prayers that 
I may be kept close to him, and have such constant discoveries as may 
strengthen my faith, by a close adherence to him, and firm reliance on 
him, without wavering. But I am sensible that I am too apt to be 
looking ofi^ from the only support and foundation of my faith and hope, 
and to be depending on, and expecting from, the frame of my own spirit, 
and workings of my affections towards spiritual things. 

Oh the unsearchable deceitfulness of my heart I which is so many ways 
betraying me into an unbelieving temper of spirit I 1 find I need 
greater helps than those may who are more established, and 1 dare not 
n^lect those helps which my Lord has provided for his church. I need 
to be watched over, and excited and encouraged under difficulties, from 
those experiences which others have of the dealings of the Lord with 
them. I havij l:)i!en wishing for these advantages for a considerable 
time being fully convinced that those who are members of his church, 


should be building up one another. I bless the Lord that he has disco- 
vered his will to me in this point, and that he hath provided greater 
helps than what I had been before acquainted with, for my furtherance 
in my progress to heaven. Accordingly I would cheerfully and thank- 
fully fall in with his vrill herein, and so take hold of his covenant in this 
church, expecting the blessing promised to those that are planted in his 

Gertrude Clarkson. 











The epiacopal men wfll hardly find any eridence in Scripture or the practice of the apoetlee, for 
churches oonaisting of many fixed congregations for worship, under the charge of one person, 
nor in the primitive church, for the ordination of a binhop, without the preceding election 
of the clergy, and at least consent and approbation of the people.— Dr. St[iUingJleet] Jren, 
p. 416. 

London: Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns. 

This treatise which is here reprinted is a small quarto volumcy pp. 76, which 
is now somewhat rare. 


The author would neither hava begun nor ended this discourse 
so as the reader finds it, if he had at first designed it for public 
view, or been willing to engage himself in this unhappy contest. 
He was moved to examine the learned part of the Beverend 
Doctor's [Stillingfleet's] volume, because he found it not, 
at first view, agreeable to what, upon some converse with the 
ancients, he had long taken to be the sense and practice of the 
church, especially in the first and best ages. He was encou- 
raged to pursue the inquiry, because the issue thereof, however it 
proved, could be no other than was very desirable. For he 
could not but count it an advantage, either to have his appre- 
hensions rectified, if he were mistaken, or to be confirmed in 
liis judgment, if it were right, and that by a person of such 
eminency, as he knows none of his standing superior to him for 
learning in the Church of England. So that what he aimed at, 
when he first undertook it, was his own private satisfaction ; but 
some papers being got out of his hands, he found liimself 
brought to these terms, that either he must publish them himself, 
or have it done by others ; and had only the liberty to choose 
which of these he counted most tolerable. 

Of what consideration the points here discussed are in refer- 
ence to the main question under debate, may soon be discerned. 
If there were no diocesan churches, nor bishops without the 
choice or consent of the people, in the primitive times, then the 


imputation of schism^ with respect thereto, is not over-reasonably 
fixed on Dissenters. For with what reason can they be branded 
as schismatics for declining such churches, and not submitting 
to such bishops as the church in the best ages of Christianity 
either did not know, or would not own ? In this case either we 
must be acquitted, or the primitive and universal church will be 
involved in the same condemnation with us. And the charge of 
schism is in danger to recoil here. It is counted on all hands, 
far more schismatical to divide from the universal church, espe- 
cially in its primitive integrity, than from any particular church 
in degenerate times : and doth it not look very like such a 
dividing from the prime catholic church, when this is relinquished 
in matters of so great concern, — so that such churches are 
formed as were unknown to the Christian world in the first 
and best times, and bishops of those churches ate only owned 
and set over them in such a way as was universally disclaimed, 
both then and in many ages after? If adhering to these 
churches, (and to none else but in dependence on them,) and 
resigning ourselves up to tliose bishops as our pastors, be made 
BO necessary, that those are counted none of the church, or 
worthy to be cast out, who yield not thereto ; we need not fear, 
in these circumstances, to let our accusers be judges, who are the 
schismatics, when they are under no temptation to be par- 
tial. "A church," says Dr. Stpllingfleet] "may separate her- 
self from the communion of the catholic by taking upon her to 
make such things the necessary conditions of her communion 
which never were the conditions of communion witli tlie catholic 
church. The being of the catholic church lies in essentials : 
for a particular church to disagree from all other particular 
churches in some extrinsical and accidental things, is not to 
separate from the catholic church, so as to cease to be a church ; 
but still, whatever church makes such extrinsical tilings the 
necessary conditions of communion, so as to cast men out of the 
church who yield not to tliem, is schismatical in so doing ; for 
it thereby divides itself from tlie catholic church : and the sepa- 
ration from it is so far from being schism, that being cast out of 
that church on those terms, only returns tliem to the communion 
of the catliolic church. On which grounds it will appear that 
yours is the schismatical church, and not ours. Not only 
persons, but churches may depart from the catholic church ; and 


in such cases not those who depart from the commonion of such 
churches, hut those churches which departed from the catholic 
are guilty of the schism."** 

Upon whom this sentence falls, and who are acquitted hereby, 
may be easily discerned, if there be no evidence that the churches 
and bishops in question, now made so necessary, were known or 
owned in the primitive times. And I know not from whom this 
evidence can be expected, if not from so excellent a person as 
Dr. St[illingfleet,] when he has made it his business to produce 
it Whether he has done it or not, is left to the judgment of 
the impartial, upon the perusing of what follows. 

* Rational Account, part iL chap. i?. sec. iu. pp. 858, 359. 




The testimoiiies of the ancients which the reverend and learned Dr. 
[Stillingfleet] makes use of, concern two heads, and are alleged either 
for diocesan churches, or against popular elections of bishops. Before I 
come to examine the former particularly, let it be observed in general, 
that those reverend persons whom the Doctor opposes, make account 
that in the primitive times a r^ular church was but a particular con-: 
gregation, and constituted of no more than might conveniently meet 
together for church-commimion. Yet they deny not but there might 
be in afler-times some heteroclites, churches extraordinarily numerous, 
so as they could not ordinarily and with convenience hold personal 
communion in one place ; but they find no instances hereof in the two 
first ages of Christianity, nor evidence for any number in the third, 
nor in the best part of the fourth for very many, compared with the 
rest which tran^:ressed not the primitive and regular bounds. And 
this they judge will be no great prejudice to their hypothesis. He 
that shows three or four men (among many thousands) corpulent, 
overgrown, and of extraordinary stature ; doth not thereby prove that 
the rest are not commonly of a r^ular proportion, more like men than 
giants. K those so numerous churches could be thought on that 
account to have been diocesans, yet could it not be from thence inferred 
that the ancient churches were conmionly diocesan, unless we may 
draw a general conclusion from that which is very rare and extraordi- 
nary. But indeed it cannot hence be proved that those few churches, 
consisting of so very numerous members, were like the diocesans now 
contended for. It is just here as it is with our parishes in England ; 
besides those of a common and ordinary size, there are some which are 
excessively numerous, containing very many thousand souls, some 
thirty or forty, or sixty, or more thousands ; yet it would be ridiculous 
to account each of these parishes a diocese, when all know the largest 


of them is but a small part of one. These parishes at first contained 
no more than could meet for worship in one place ; being in some ages 
grown too populous to meet together, they should have been divided, 
so as to answer the ends of their first regular establishment ; but con- 
tinuing as they are, they pass still (as the lesser do) for single congre- 
gations, and these, with himdreds of others, make up but one .diocesan 
church. The ancient churches are in these respects correspondent to 
these parishes. So that if the Doctor had brought us some instances of 
ancient episcopal churches as niunerous as our great parishes, contain- 
ing many more than could well meet together, yet this would not have 
proved them diocesan churches, no, nor more than some single congre- 
gations ; but 1 think all that he produces amounts not to so much. 
This will appear by examining the severals • alleged. 

* To prove that the church of Carthage in Cyprian's time was more 
than a single congregation, (and no less than a diocese, which is the 
thing to be proved,) he shows out of his epistles, that there vrere many 
presbyters in that church. But this will be no proof to those who 
consider, that it was the practice of old to multiply presbyters and other 
officers, beyond what we covmt necessary. Dr. Downham says, at first 
the number of Christians in cities were sometimes not much greater 
than the number of presbyters among them. His words are these: 
" Indeed at the very first conversions of cities, the whole number of the 
people converted, (being sometimes not much greater than the number 
of presbyters placed among them,) were able to make but a small con- 
gregation."^ Such a number of presbyters would be far fix)m proving a 
church in such cities to be more than a single congregation, much 
farther from proving it to be as large as a diocese. This practice, 
which the Bishop will have to be primitive, of making so many pres- 
byters in one church, was followed in after times. Nazianzen tells us, 
in the fourth age, that sometimes the officers in a church did weU nigh 
exceed the number of those whom they ruled, €la\ axMw r\ irXetovf Ij 
oirda-av cipxovai kot apidfiov,'' How, then, can forty-six or sixty presby- 
ters be an argument that the church where they were was as large as a 
diocese, or larger than the greatest congregation ? Justinian, observing 
that officers in churches were multiplied beyond reason and measure, 
takes order that they should be reduced to the numbers at the first 
establishment; but in the great church at Constantinople, he would 
have the presbyters brought down to sixty. No doubt they were 
numerous in Constantine's time, who endeavoured to make that city in 
all things equal to Rome, (<t)dfiiXXov r§ 'Pa>/i;7, and built two churches in it, 

• ParticuUn. • Part iU. sec. iv. p. 229. 

' Defence, lib. il. cap. 1. p. 6. ^ Orat. i. 


says the historian.' Yet in the latter end of his reign, after the death 
of Arius, the Christians there could all meet together for worship. It 
is said expressly, that Alexander, bishop of that church, awa^y av¥ 
vaa% TMff dUKi/HHs ttrtriXwirtv,^ " held a meeting with all the brethren." 

But there is one passage afterwards which may seem more consider- 
able, page 230 : " At Carthage we have this evidence of the great num- 
ber of Christians, that in the time of persecution, although very many 
stood firm, yet the number of the lapsed was so great, that St Cyprian 
saith, every day thousands of tickets were granted by the martyrs and 
confessors in their behalf for reconciliation to the church.^ And in one 
of those tickets sometimes might be comprehended twenty or thirty 
persons, the form being, Oammunicet ille cum suiSj ' Let the bearer and 
his fiiends be admitted to communion.' "' 

The UTunbers of the lapsed were great ; it seems, by Cyprian's expres- 
sion,' they were the greatest part of his church, for he says, " The 
greatest part of the brethren denied the ^ith,** (Maximua fratrum 
nwnertu Jidem suam prodidit,) at the first approach of the persecution, 
before they were apprehended, or so much as inquired after, besides 
those that feU when the danger was nearer, and the trial more sharp. 
Elsewhere he tells us, that this wasting persecution did almost unpeople 
his church,/ and he mentions nwnerosam languentium stragenij et 
exigucan stantium firmitatem, ^^ a copious slaughter of the unstable, and 
little of the firmness of stedfast professors ;'' signifying that those who fell 
were many, those that stood but very few.* Very many hundreds are 
not necessary to make a company numerous, and very few added to 
those (or to some thousands) will not make the church of Carthage so 
exceeding great as some seem to imagine it. However, the lapsed were 
not near so many as is here insinuated; for by this reckoning the 
lapsed Christians at Carthage will be more by many myriads than all 
the inhabitants of the city, Christians and heathens, together. For 
suppose these thousands of tickets were but two or three thousand, and 
every day amounted but to ten days ; and the numbers in each ticket, 
reckoned sometimes twenty, sometimes thirty, were but one with an- 
other ten, the numbers of the lapsed will be 300,000 ; whereas all the 
inhabitants were not above 200,000, as we may weU suppose, since the 
inhabitants of Antioch, a greater and more populous city, (as authors 
generally report it,) were no more, as Chrysostom, who well knew it, 
gives the account, cucxr* /ivptodoj,* " twenty myriads." Therefore the 

• Soi. lib. it cap. U. * Theodoret, lib. i. cap. xiv. 

• Lib. m, Ep. T. [AUter Gyp. Ep. xr] •* Lfl>. Hi. Ep- xv. [al. Cyp. Ep. xi.] 

« Senno de Laptb, [ed. Parii. 1726, p. 183.] / Lib. iv. Ep. iv. Initio, [al. Cyp. Ep. vU.] 

r Ibid, ad flnem. * Orat. in Ignat. torn. y. Horn. Ixx. 



thousands here must pass, as is ordinary in all authors, for very many. 
So Eusebius says there were fivptoi, 'thousands of bishops," in a synod of 
Antioch for the censure of Paulus Samosatenus.* And another ancient 
author speaks of thousands of bishops at the Council of Chalcedon,* 
whereas there was but about six hundred at the latter, and not so many 
by far at the former. Thus Theodoret, givmg an account of his preach- 
ing at Antioch, saith it was known, that many myriads^ (iroXX^ fivpiad^s) 
did meet in one place to hear ; whereas two or three mjniads are more 
than can well hear any one preach. And then the tickets comprehend- 
ing twenty or thirty (which multiply the nimibers of the lapsed excess- 
ively) must be left out of the reckoning, for there was none such 
granted by the martjrrs, as Cjrprian declares in the epistle cited. Though 
there were some drawn up in such a blind form {Communicet ille cum 
8uis) as might include twenty or thirty, yet says he, Nunquam omnino 
h martyrihus factum est^* " This was never done by the martys." Thus 
the expression, Ep. v.* will amount to no more than this: "The martyrs 
were daily solicited and importuned to grant great numbers of tickets." 
So it cannot be hence concluded that the Christians at Carthage were 
more, or so many as are in some of our parishes. It is manifest by 
many plain passages in Cyprian, that his whole church, which in his 
style is, " The whole people — all the laity standing by — ^the whole bro- 
therhood," (J^lebs universa — omnes stantes Unci — tota fratemUcu,) did 
frequently meet together, both for acts of worship, and other church 
affairs ; which as they enforce the sense I have given of the expression 
alleged, on those who will have Cyprian consistent with himself; so 
may convince all, who weigh them impartially, that the Christians then 
at Carthage were nothing near so many as the Doctor supposes. 

In the next head, p. 230, that which he would prove, if we may 
judge by his conclusion, pp. 231, 232, is that the power of discipline 
was not then supposed to be in the congregation, or that they were the 
first subject of the power of the keys, and that they thought it not then 
in the power of the people to appoint and ordain their own officers. 
But this Dr. 0[wen] nowhere asserts, if I understand him, and so it 
might have been spared. However, he proves it ; let us see how. 
" The presbyters and the whole church were under the particular care 
and government of St. Cyprian as their bishop." — p. 230. 

The presbyters were then no ways under the government of the 
bishop, but as those that are joint rulers may be said to be imder the 
government of one another. The whole church was not under the 
bishop's government alone, but was ruled jointly by the bishop and 

• Hist. lib. tU. cap. xx viii. * Vld. et Cecrop. Episc. SebMtop. in Condi. Chalced. 

' Epijt. Ixxxiii. ' Lib. Hi. Ep. xv. [Al. Ep. xi.] ' [Al. Gyp. Ep. zr.] 


elders. That the presbyters and bishop ooncorred in the govemment, 
is acknowledged by the best asserters of episcopacy amongst us, Dr. 
Field, Bishop Downham, Bishop Hall, Mr. Thomdike, Primate Usher, 
&c. Dr. St[illingfleet3 doth not deny it ; nay, he elsewhere asserts 
and proves* it by many ancient testimonies, Cjrprian's particularly. 
" Thus Cornelius at Rome— thus Cyprian at Carthage, one who pleads 
as much as any for obedience to bishops ; and yet none more eyident 
for the presence and joint concurrence and assistance of the clergy at 
aU church debates," &c. And to prevent the usual evasion, he adds, 
'' That they concurred in governing the church, and not only by their 
counsel, but authority, appears from the general sense of the church, 
even when episcopacy was at the highest" 

There is nothing in the passages here produced out of Cyprian, 
(pp. 230, 231, 233) that can be in the least serviceable to prove the 
sole jurisdiction of a bishop. The import of them is no more, but 
that in matters of discipline, the people and elders should do nothing 
without him ; even as he declared that he would do nothing without 
them. How this sets the church of Carthage at any distance from Dr. 
0[wen]*s hypothesis, I understand not. 

. Nor can I apprehend how the third head (p. 232) crosses the Doctor 
more than others, or more than himself. That the pastoral authority for 
governing a church is of Divine institution, is not denied, but that the 
superiority or pre-eminence of a bishop above presbyters is of such 
institution, Cyprian says not, nor is it the sense of any of the ancients, 
as Dr. St[illingfleet] hath declared heretofore, (and retracts not here,) 
proving it by the testimonies of Jerome, Hilary, Augustine, Isidore, and 
a Council at Seville ;* showing also how expressions in the ancient 
writers, which seem to be of another tendency, are to be understood.*^ 

Page 233. ^^ Let the reader now judge whether these be the strokes 
and lineaments of the Congregational way.*' 

If the Doctor had thought fit to take notice of the strokes and linea- 
ments of the Congregational way, supposed to be apparent in St. 
Cyprian's writings, he should have produced something out of him 
against these severals.' 1. That a church then was but a single con- 
gregation, consisting of no more than Sould meet together for personal 
communion. 2. That this church was not under the government of 
any other bishops or rulers besides their own bishop and officers. 
3. That the concerns of this congr^ation were not ordered without the 
common consent of the people belonging to it. If it be plain in Cyprian 
that this was the state of the church at Carthage, it will be the more 

• Ircnicum, pp. S35, 386, 354, 355. * Irenicom, pp. 312, 31S. 

'- lien. pp. S14, S15. ' PmrticuUn. 


considerable because the Doctor tells us, that Cyprian speaks of nothing 
peculiar to his own church, but what was generally obserred over the 
Christian world. 

I meet with no more out of antiquity to this purpose, till we come 
to page 245 ; there he offers two observables,* and fortifies them with 
ancient testimonies. 

'^ Obs. 1. That it was an inviolable rule amongst them, that there 
was to be but one bishop in a city, though the city were never so large, 
or the Christians never so many." 

This was no inviolable rule. No rule at all in Scripture ; none such 
[was] observed or known in Scripture times. Those that are for epis- 
copacy in its greatest elevation, maintain, that there were more bishops 
than one in a city, particularly Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, 
&c., in and afler the apostles' times. Others, that proceed upon other 
groimds, find in one city more of those who in Scripture style are bishops, 
though not in the style of after times. — ^Phil. i. 1 ; Acts xx. 17, &c. 
Dr. St[illingfleet] himself must either hold that there were no bishops 
in Scripture times, or more of them than one in a city ; for he acknow- 
ledges that in the apostles' times in one church there were more presby- 
ters than one ; and yet ascribes the superiority which makes the differ- 
ence between a bishop and presb3rters, not to Divine or apostolical 
appointment, or any act of the apostles ; but to human institution, and 
an act of the church. 

This rule might well be observed in cities where there were no more 
Christians than there are in a single congregation ; and this is supposed 
to be the case of Carthage, and other churches, in Cjrprian's time, and 
after: nor has Dr. St[illingfleet] brought anything sufiicient to dis- 
prove it; and therefore Cyprian's testimony for one bishop might have 
been spared. Nor is there any ground to conclude that 1 Thess. v. 
12, 13; Heb. xiii. 17, were not so understood by the AMcan churches 
as they are by Mr. B[axter.] And Cyprian, who is so positive for 
one bishop f is as peremptory but for* one flock. Esse posse uno m loco 
aliquis existimat aut multos pastores, aut plures greges P " Can any one 
imagine that in one place there should be either more pastors, or more 
flocks ?'' viz. more than one. But the diocesans now pleaded for may 
have many hundred flocks, and [yet] but one pastor. 

When there were more Christians in a city than one bishop could 
perform the duties of a pastor to, this rule might afterwards be observed, 
though not inviolably and without exception ; no, nor where Christiaiu 
were less numerous. At Jerusalem, when Narcissus had the chair, not 
to mention those who were bishops there in his retirement, (Dius and 

« Points tu contid«ratlon. * fbr bat. • D« UnitaU EoclMla, [od. Paiii. ItU, p. IM.] 



Germanicon,) Gordius was in the seat when he returned and resumed 
the bishopric; and Alexander was afterwards made bishop with him.* 
At Cssarea, Theotecnus and Anatolius were for some time bishops 
together;* afterwards Macarius and Maximus were at once bishops in 
that church.' Epiphanius (alleged by Grotius'' for this purpose) signifies 
that other cities had two bishops ; and excepts but one. " Alexandria 
had nerer two bishops (»r al SXXtu irActr) as other cities had."' His 
meaning cannot be, as a great antiquary would have it, that Alexandria 
was never so divided as that several parties in it should have their 
respective bishops there ; for so it was divided, in the time of Epi- 
phanius, when the Catholics had Athanasius, the Arians had Gregorius, 
and then Geoigius; and afterwards the one had Peter, the other Lucius. 
And the Novatians had their bishops successively in that city, till 
Cyril*s time/ But to waive other instances, let me only add one, yet 
such an one as is pregnant, comprising very many at once, and shows 
this was customary in the churches everywhere through the world. 
Valerius made Augustine bishop with him at Hippo, with the con- 
currence of the bishops in those parts, who assured Augustine that this 
was usual, and proved it by examples both in the African and trans- 
marine churches, as Possidonius tells us.^ And Augustine alleges 
nothing to hinder him from making Eradius bishop with him, when he 
designed him to be his successor, but only the prohibition of the Nicene 
Council.* That is the first rule we meet with against it,' and there it 
is not directly prohibited, but only by insinuation. Afterwards the 
bishops were more positive in forbidding it, having in time discovered 
a very cogent reason for it, assigned by a synod in the middle of the 
seventh age,* Ne res eccleaicB scBvd divisione debeant partiri, " Lest the 
church's revenues should be divided f and so one bishop should not 
have all, which seemed a cruel thing to those fathers. 

But to return to former ages : where the custom continued of having 
but one bishop in a city when the multitude of Christians in it required 
more, the practice of their predecessors was pleaded for it, when the 
case was quite altered, and the reason which had led them to it in 
better times was not extant. As if, in the behalf of some parishes 
amongst us, grown in time extraordinarily populous, so as some thou- 
sands of the inhabitants cannot meet at once in the parish church, it 
should be alleged, that they ought not to be divided into distinct 
rectories, because each of them was but one parish under one rector 

• Eufleb. lib. tI. cap. x. xi. 
« Sox. lib. U. cap. XX. 

• Han. IzTiii. [d.tI. Meletian.] 
r Vit. Aug. cap. viU. 

< Cone. Nic. Can. riU. 

» Euseb. lib. rii. cap. xxxii. 

^ De Imp. sum. Potest, lib. xl. sec. xi. 

/ Socrat. lib. vil. cap. vii. 

A Ep. ex. 

* Cone. CabU. L Can. ir. 


at first, and for some ages since; when the reason why it was but one 
at first, and after, was because it contained not too many for one. K 
any offer to derive it from a higher original, and pretend it was from 
apostolical tradition, Dr. St[illingfleet] tells us, they did it upon a mis- 
take, "judging of the practice of the apostles by that of their own 

Yet in cities so well replenished with Christians, where the bishop 
had assistants joined with him, each of which had and exercised the 
entire power of pastors, an honorary presidency only reserved to the 
bishop ; M[r.] B[axter] will not say the instituted species of govern- 
ment is there altered : nor that this is like such a diocesan church, where 
there are many myriads of Christians, more than all the inhabitants of 
Carthage amounted to, all under one bishop as their sole pastor. 

Page 246. " One of the greatest and most pernicious schisms that 
ever happened, might have been prevented, if they had yielded to more 
bishops than one in a city ; and that was the schism of the Donatists 
upon the competition between Majorinus and Cascilian." 

I cannot conceive how yielding to more bishops than one in a city, 
might have prevented the schism of the Donatists, unless the ancient 
church had quite another idea of schism than Dr. St[illingfieet3 has ; 
for he counts those assemblies schismatical, which differ less both in 
opinion and practice from those he allows, than the Donatists did from 
the Catholics. The Donatists held that ordinations by tradiiors^ were 
null and void ; that Ca^cilian, and many others, had no better ordina- 
tion ; and consequently those churches must with them be no true 
churches ; their ofiicers were to be re-ordained, and the people re- 
baptized: and this was their practice. Now I do not see any reason to 
think that CsBcilian's allowing the Donatists a bishop in Carthage would 
have made them quit their principles ; for they presumed they might 
have a bishop of tEeir own there, whether Cax^ilian and his party 
allowed it or no ; and notwithstanding any disallowance, had so actually, 
one bishop succeeding another, for a hundred years together. 

Page 246. " Let M[r.] B[axter] reconcile these words^ to his hypo- 
thesis, if he can." 

If the church Cjrprian speaks of contained no more than some single 
congregation, which let Dr. St[illingfleet] disprove, M[r.] B[axter] will 
not find any difficulty in reconciling what Cyprian says against 

• Iren. p. 817. 

* Traditon or betrayers were tuch as in times of persecution, surrendered the ucred boolu and 
utensils of the church to the heathen to be burnt. 

' [Gyp. Ep. lii. n. 4, Et cum post primum, &c. &c. " Since there cannot be a second after the 
first, whosoever is made biKhop when one is made already, who ouffht to be alone, he is not another 
bishop, but none at alL"J 


Novatian (far being chosen a bishop in that city, where there was 
one before) to his own hypothesis; for it amounts to no more than 
this, that there should be no more than one pastor in the same congre- 
gation ; and till the former be disproved, those testimonies (pages 247, 
248) are to no purpose. 

I see not how it can be justly inferred from what is alleged out of 
St. Augustine, concerning the proposal of Melchiades, (page 248,) that 
" the best, the wisest, the most moderate persons never once thought 
that there could be more bishops than one in a city." What Mel- 
chiades proposes doth not signify that he thought there was a necessity 
for but one bishop, as if there could be no more ; though he might 
think it not expedient where one was sufficient, and more were not like 
to agree together. St. Augustine himself, who applauds the proposal, 
thought there might be- more. He was actually bishop of Hippo, as 
was shown before, together with Valerius ; and he concurred afterwards 
with the rest of the African bishops in allowing it elsewhere. 

I find no such rule on both sides in the conference at Carthage as he 
next tells us of : ^' But one bishop to be allowed of either side of a city 
or diocese." It is true both sides seemed unwilling to own that they 
erected new bishoprics, on purpose to make one party appear more 
numerous than the other : but none of them were disallowed upon this 
account, either as bishops or actors in that conference. All the 
Catholic bishops there, and St. Augustine with them, in their epistle to 
Marcellinus, there recited, offer the Donatists, that being reconciled, 
nee honorem episcopatUs amittant, " they should continue bishops." And 
afterwards in their greatest councils they allow that there might be two 
bishops in one place on several occasions ; particularly if the Donatists' 
bishop was converted, then the place was to be divided between him 
and the other bishop. This the Doctor takes notice of, p. 251, and we 
shall do it further, when he leads us to it. 

Sect. ix. Obs. 2, p. 249. '* In cities and dioceses which were imder 
the care of one bishop, there were several congregations, and altars, 
and distant places. Carthage was a very large city, &c. And there, 
besides the cathedral, were several other considerable churches," &c. 

This was in the fifth age. Victor ends his history in the latter end 
of it, about the year 480. Now it is the three first ages principally, 
wherein it is said there were not more Christians than in some single 
congregation, nor more fixed churches than one in a city. In the fourth 
there might be more in some cities, but those cities were very few. 
Petavius could but name two in the latter end of that age. In the fifUi 
age there might be more, but then the church was greatly declining, as 
appears by the complaints of Austin, Chrysostom, Isidore Pelusiota, 
Prosper, fifedvian, &c. The ambition and other extravagancies of the 


bishops promoted it. Chrysostonii in the violent persecution which 
ended in his ejection and banishment, says he feared none so much as 
the bishops, ddm yhp 'Xoiirhv dtdoiKa &9 tmo'KSnovs* And the bishops 
of those two cities, Rome and Alexandria, which first transgressed the 
primitive boimds of churches, are noted as the first that turned the 
government of the church into domination, and did it in that age.^ 
But yet there is reason to believe that the case was not much altered at 
Carthage in this age; for though there were very many brought over to 
Christianity, yet great numbers of them were with the Donatists. In 
Carthage itself, they had their bishops in succession, Majorinus, Do- 
natus, Parmenianus, Primianus, who was confirmed in the chair at 
Carthage by a synod of three hundred and ten bishops; Maximianus 
being declared bishop there at the same time, by two other synods ; the 
one consisting of above fifty, the other of above a hundred bishops.^ 
So that it seems that sect had two bishops at once in Carthage, in the 
latter end of the fourth age ; and vying with the Catholics for numbers, 
they might have as many churches as they. Rebaptizcmte Donati parte 
majorem muUitudinem Afrorum, " The Donatists rebaptized the major 
part of the Africans," saith Possidonius.^ However, the number of 
their churches will not prove the thing in question. Out of the ser- 
mons De Tempore and De Diverais, which go under St. Austin's name, 
but are of uncertain authors, and so are of little account, he reckons 
eight churches ; but there were more in Alexandria, when the Christians 
did all meet there in one place. And since, after the disturbance by 
Arius, the presbyters were not suffered to preach in Alexandria, either 
the people must meet in one place to hear the bishop preach, or be 
without preaching.* M[r.] B[axter] proved that they did meet in one 
place, and I think his proof is still satisfying,/ notwithstanding what is 
answered. Nor doth it appear that all those churches were for com- 
munion ; they might communicate with the bishop in the greater 
basilica/ and the rest might serve for other ofiices, as Damasus (or 
whoever was the writer of the popes* lives) says. The twenty-five or 
fifteen tituli^ were erected at Rome by Marcellus, propter baptismum et 
pcmitentiam multorum et sepulturas, "for the baptisms, penances, and 
burials of the multitudes." Hence Dr. Taylor* infers, that at Rome 
there was then (viz. in the beginning of the fourth age) no preach- 
ing but in the mother church ; and then not only at Alexandria, but 

• Ep. xiil. p. 95. » Socrat. Hist. lib. tU. cap. vU. xi. 

' August, contra Crescon. lib. Iv. cap. vi. ' Vita Aug. cap. vii. 

« Socrat. Hist lib. i. cap. ▼!. r Satisfactory, 

f One of the early names for a church. 

' The lituli at Rome and the Xavpat at Alexandria, seem to have corresponded soraewhat to 
our modem chapels-of-ease. 
< Episc. Atser. p. S97. 


At Rome, in the fourth age, if the people met not in one place with the 
bishop, they could have no sermon : and the inference is altogether 
as just, that there was no eucharist but at the great church. So 
that those places (call them what you wUl, tituUj or Xavpai, or hcuiliccB) 
seem to be but oratories, and not intended or used for celebrating the 
Lord's supper. And there are more of these in some one of our 
parishes than either at Alexandria or Carthage, and yet the people not 
00 numerous, but they can and do communicate together. 

Page 250, to show that there were more altars than one where Chris- 
tians did communicate in a city (or bishopric, contrary to what he had 
asserted in his sermon,) he alleges a passage in the Conference at 
Carthage, where Fortunatus objects to Petilian, that in the town where 
he was bishop, the heretics had broken down all the altars. But this 
will be no good argument, that there were more altars for the eucharist 
than one in a town, to those who take notice that in Africa there were 
abundance of altars for other designs and purposes than celebrating the 
eucharist Particularly, there were many erected as memorice martyrumy 
memorials of the martyrs, which appears by the fifUi council at 
Carthage, Can. xiv. where those fathers take notice of such altars in the 
fields, the ways, and ubique, *' everywhere ;" and some of them they 
condemn, (viz. those in quibus nullum carpus out reliquicB martyrum 
conduce probantur, in which neither the body nor the relics of any 
martyr can be proved to repose,) others they approve. 

He shows, that places distant from the city were in the bishop's 
diocese, but these will not serve his turn, nor will what is alleged serve 
for proof. It is a canon in the A&ican code, that no bishop should leave 
his cathedral church and go to any other church in his diocese, there to 

But suppose this cathedral church was in some village, it cannot 
hence be proved that any places distant from a city were in the bishop's 
diocese, viz., in the diocese of the city bishop. And this is no impro- 
bable supposition ; indeed, there is near ten to one for it, since in 
Africa, for one bishop in a city, there might be ten in villages. And 
none will doubt of this, who know how many hundred bishops 
there were in Africa, and how few cities. Their cathedral churches 
(though the sound be big to those who measure them by ours) were all, 
but a few in comparison, village cathedrals ; it may be some of our 
chapels of ease out- do them. 

" But it evidently proves that there were more churches in a bishop's 
diocese." And so are there many chapels, and some churches too, in 
some one of our country parishes. But this will be far from evidently 

« Cod. Afric. Can. IzxI. 


proving any such thing, if the canon be rightly represented ; for there 
it is not his diocese, either in the Greek or Latin copies, but a diocese, 
and so may either be a church belonging to another bishop, or a diocese 
that had no bishop : for dioceses there were in that country which 
never had bishops, as appears by the second Council of Carthage, where 
it is decreed that dioceses which never had a bishop, should not have 

The word diocese, as it is most frequently used in ancient vrriters, 
denotes that which is either so much bigger, or so far less than a 
modern diocese, that he who argues from one to the other, may run into 
mistakes himself, and lead others with him. In the former acception,* 
it contains many provinces ; so Balsamon defines it, 7 iroXX^ inapxias 
txovo'aS The whole Roman empire was divided into twelve or thirteen 
such dioceses, and Africa under the Romans was but one of them, 
Justinian reducing all the African provinces into one diocese.' In the 
latter acception* it is used for a country town or village, for a parish or 
part of a parish. Thus a presbyter is said dioecesin tenere, " to hold a 
diocese,"* and Pappolus is said diceceses et villas ecclesice circumire / " to 
make a circuit of the dioceses and villager of his church ;" where 
dioceses and villages seem to explain one another as dioceses and 
parishes do in another council.^ So a diocese is put for a church 
or a chapel, which a man erects in his own ground ; thus a synod 
at Orleafls orders,* that when any man hath, or desires to have, a 
diocese in his ground, he must allow competent land thereto, and pro- 
vide a clerk for it. Like these were the dioceses mentioned in the 
African canons, and their bishoprics were answerable. 

It is determined in several African canons, that the dioceses which never 
had bishops should have none. But this was decreed upon terms and 
with exception, [that] if the Christians in those places were midtiplied, 
and they desired a bishop of their own, they were to have one with the 
consent of those in whose power the places were.* Now, when the 
people were numerous enough for this purpose, we may understand by 
the practice of those churches : there were divers bishops in Africa who 
had but one presbyter belonging to them, as appears by the case which 
Posthumianus puts,* of a bishop having but one presbjrter. Hence 
Bishop Bilson concludes, that bishops oftentimes had but one presbyter.' 
So that the people were numerous enough to have a bishop, where they 

• Can. V. Cod. Afric. Can. liii. * AccepUtion. 

• In Concil. Chalced. Can. xili. ' Novel, cxxxi. [cap. iv.] 

« Cone. Agath. Can. liv. Iv. / Greg. Toron. Hlat. Franc, lib. vl. cap. w. 

f Cone. Tolet. Iv. Can. xxxvi. * Cone. Aurel. Iv. [Can. xxxiii.] 

< Cone. Carth. ii. Can. v. Cod. Afric. Can. liii. * Cod. Afric. Can. Iv. 
' Perpet. Gov. page 256, cap. xiii. 


were too many for the cure and inspection of one presbyter. And this 
ma the sense not only of the African churches, but of the Eastern and 
Western also, as appears by the Council of Sardica, where the bishops 
both from west and east assembled. There those fathers, more carefxil 
than their predecessors, thought needful, lest bishops should be dis- 
paraged by hairing their chairs in small places, to decree,* that bishops 
shall not be made in little towns or villages, and there explain which 
they count little ; Cut satis est unus presbyter, " such as one presbyter is 
sufficient for." But they add, Where the people are numerous, (viz. so 
as one presbyter will not suffice, as the contexture^ shows,) desiring a 
bishop, let them have one. So that it was the sense of the ancient 
Church, both in Africa, Europe, and Asia, that in any place where there 
were so many Christians as that a presbyter needed an assistant, there a 
bishop ought to be placed. By this we may discern whether or no 
their bishoprics were like our parishes, especially considering that they 
thought it requisite to multiply presbyters far more than we do now ; 
and judged too, that one of them was not sufficient for so numerous a 
flock as one hath now in charge. Their great number of presbyters in 
many places shows this. To go no farther than Carthage, where the 
Doctor finds but eight churches, great and small, yet the clergy were 
above five hundred ; so many belonging to Carthage were banished by 
Hunnericus, as Victor tells us.^ Jerome saith, the presbyters were 
multiplied so excessively that they became contemptible ; preshyteroa 
turba contemptilnles fadt,* 

<< And where the Donatists had erected new bishoprics, the African 
Council decrees that after the decease of such bishop, if the people had 
no mind to have another in his room, they might be in the diocese of 
another bishop : which shows that they thought the dioceses might be 
so large as to hold the people that were imder two bishops." — p. 250. 

It was most common in Africa to have bishops in villages, and ordi- 
nary for the Donatists to have a bishop in the same place where the 
Catholics had one ; which shows that they thought that the diocese 
need be no larger than that a village might hold the people that were 
under two bishops. The Catholics decree, that when a Donatist bishop 
was deceased, if the reduced people would have another in his place, 
they were to have one without consulting a council.' 

'* There were many canons made about the people of the Donatist 
bishops. In one it was determined, that they should belong to the 
bishop that converted them, &c. Afler that, that they should belong 
to the same diocese they were in before." 

• Can. Ti. • Context. 

' De Penecat Vandml. lib. i. * Eplst. Ixxxy. ad Evag. [al. Evang.] 

' Cod. Aftic. Can. xcix. 


But if the converted people desired to have a bishop of their own, as 
they had before, then thej were to belong to neither, as appears by 
several canons.' So that in this case, African bishops might be as 
numerous, and consequently as small, after the Donatists were reduced, 
as before ; and so far enough from any resemblance of modem 
Diocesans, and as like our parishes as Mr. B[axter] would have them. 

'' But if the Donatist bishop were converted, the diocese was to be 
divided between them." — p. 251. 

Thus in a city, when there was both a Catholic and a Donatist 
bishop, (than which nothing was more ordinary) if the Donatist was 
converted, the town must be divided between them ; and two bishops 
were to be continued in one city. In some places there were four 
bishops of one party, for one of the other. Yerissimus, bishop at 
Tacara, saith, in his flock there were four other bishops, Datianus, 
Aspidius, Fortunatus, and Octavianus.* Suppose, where there were 
four Donatist bishops, they had all been converted, the place by this 
rule must have been divided amongst five bishops. And so in a village 
where there were two bishops, as there was at Mutagena, (and many 
other such places in Africa,^) the Donatist bishop being converted, 
the village was to be divided between them into two dioceses, and 
each diocese there had been no more than half a parish with us. 
Mr. B[axter] will not be much against such diocesans, nor troubled 
at any such proofs out of antiquity for diocesans of another kind. 

He passes to Hippo, and in the country about it finds divers pres- 
byters and deacons, whereby he would prove the largeness of that 
diocese. But he might there have found divers bishops also. That 
there were more bishops in the coimtry which he would appropriate to 
St. Austin^s jurisdiction, may appear by those very instances which the 
Doctor makes use of to show that he was the only bishop there, and 
the presbyters and deacons in those places all under his care and 

Fussala is one of them, and this is acknowledged to have had a bishop, 
though it was but a castle, and so called more than once in the place 
cited.' The reason why it had a bishop no sooner is signified by Austin, 
when he saith, there were no Catholics at all in it ; In eodem castelh 
nuUus esset omnino CathoUcus, " In this castle there was not a single 
Catholic;" but multitudes of Donatists. Yet when some were gained 
to the church there, or in the parts about it, a bishopric was erected in 
it for the Catholics. The place being remote from Hippo, Austin was 
sensible that the charge was too great for him, extending further than 

• Cod. AfHc. Can. cxviii. Can. zdx. * Collat. Carth. d. i. n. ISl. 

« Ibid. n. 133. and n. 207. ^ [Aug. £p. SCS.] 


it ongbt, and discerning that be was not sufficient for the diligence 
which in all reason was due to it, he took care that a bishop should be 
ordained, and placed there : Me viderem latiua quam oportebat extmdiy 
me adhihendoB sufficere diligenticBy quam certissima ratione adhiberi debere 

But the Doctor says, he was fain to resume it. What he understands 
thereby I do not well know, but if anything be meant for his purpose, 
it must be that this bishopric was extinguished. But there is no ground 
for this. It is true, Antonius, made bishop there, was upon some com- 
{faints put out of Fussala, yet salvo episcopatu, so as he retained the 
epiiicopal dignity ; but the place was not deprived of the episcopal chair, 
for though it might continue void for some time, yet a bishop is found 
there afterwards in the African notitia : Melior Fussalensis is reckoned 
amongst the bishops of Numidia. Hereby it is manifest that this holy 
bishop could not digest so great a diocese as the doctor assigns him. 
He had the wisdom and humility to think himself not sufficient for a 
charge so remote and extended ; and he had the conscience not to 
charge himself with that which he was not sufficient for. So when 
Fussala had a competent number of persons in it of their communion, 
he takes care (which was the general practice of the African bishops) 
to form a bishopric in that castle, and such a diocese, as so small a place 
and some other near it could make. And this about anno 420, when 
the generality of the people tainted with Donatism was reduced, and 
laws made for the banishment of their bishops and clergy, and the 
delivery of their churches to the Catholics ; and so, when it cannot be 
pretended that this schism was the occasion of a further multiplication 
of bishops. 

'' It appears that a place forty miles distant was then imder the care 
of so great a saint, and so excellent a bishop, as Austin was." 

It was under his care, not as one that intended to be their pastor, or 
as a fixed part of his bishopric, as places are which belong to one of 
our dioceses ; but only to make them capable of having a pastor, and 
to have one placed amongst them, as the event makes it evident. 
Hereby it appears that the Doctor might have forborne his queries. We 
need not guess what answer St. Austin would have returned them ; he 
has done it actually in this epistle, though it may be not to the Doctor's 
satisfaction. For the numbers at Fussala, he says, at first there was 
not one Catholic, afterward there were but few ; when there was more, 
they had a bishop of their own. And [as] for taking upon him the care 
of so distant a place, he says, he was not sufficient for it himself : the care 
he took was to have it committed to another. So that Mr. B[axter] sees 
no reason to tell Austin, that he understood not the right constitution of 
churches ; but he may see reason to tell others so, and thank St. Austin 


for here discoyering it. I might have alleged, that this epistle, whioh 
the Doctor makes such use of, is suspected by learned men, as is noted 
in the last edition of Austin^s Epistles at Paris. It is not found in the 
more ancient and less suspected editions. The Papists (from whom we 
have it) are concerned for the credit of it. It helps them to an argu- 
ment for the bishop of Rome's power about appeals from foreign parts. 
For Antonius, bishop of Fussala, being censured in Africa, appealed (it 
is said) to Celestinus, bishop of Rome, to whom this epistle is directed. 
But then it seems not likely that Antonius should have the confidence 
to do this, wheji the African fathers had so positively declared against 
such appeals ; and Apiarius a little before had foimd the like attempt 
so imsuccessful. Nor is it probable that St. Austin, fortified with the 
decrees of the African coimcils, would be so much concerned (as this 
epistle would make him) to hinder Cslestinus from revoking the sen- 
tence, which all the authority of Africa had made irrevocable by any 
bishop of Rome. But there is no need to insist on this ; whether it be 
supposititious or not, we have offered enough to render it unserviceable 
to the Doctor's design. 

Another place he mentions for the said purpose, is Muniapium 
Tullense, or Tulliense, as some editions have it. I meet with Epis- 
copatus TuUitensis in a catalogue of African bishops. It may be that 
denotes this very place; the variation of one letter need not hinder, 
since it is so common with the African writers to vary so much and 
more, in the naming of their towns. Instances hereof might be given 
in abundance: take but this one. Donatianus, a bishop in the province 
of Byzacena, is styled from his bishopric Telepiensis in one council,* 
TeUptensis elsewhere,^ with the change of the same letter that is in the 
instance before us. Whether it be so or not, there is no doubt but, if 
this town was stored with Christians, it had a bishop of its own ; for it 
is scarce credible that when so many contemptible villages in that 
country had their bishops, there should be none in so considerable a 
corporation as this, which, as appears by Austin's description of Murca, 
the sick person, had its duumvirate and common council, answerable to 
the consuls and senate at Rome, and was honoured with the privileges 
and immunities of the imperial city. 

However, Austin doth not say that this town had presbyter and 
clerks under his care and government. This is added without any 
ground that I can discern in the place cited, and without thb addition 
the particular story which the Doctor recites does him not the least 

• Cone. Mllevit, Can. xvli. » Collat. Carth. [n. cxxi.] 


Nor does St. Austin saj to Geedlian, the president, ^at he was bishop 
of that diocese, (which the Doctor represents as a r^on of large extent,) 
but only that he had qnscopalem sarcinam Hipp<men8em, *' the episcopal 
charge of Hippo."* 

The third town which he speaks of as in Austin's diocese, is Muta- 
gena, or Mutigena. But this also had its own bishop, or two for a need. 
In the conference at Carthage there is AnUmius episcopus Mutagenensis 
for the Catholics, and Splendonius bishop there for the Donatists,* 
And thus it was even in Hippo itself; Austin was bishop there for the 
Catholics, and Macrobius for the Donatists, who succeeded Proculeianus 
in the chair there.^ So that Austin is so far from having all the region 
under his jurisdiction (this being parted amongst several other bishops), 
that he had not the whole town: the Donatists had a diocese there, such 
an one as those in Africa used to be, where one little town (and Hippo 
was none of the greatest) would serve for two dioceses. And in some 
places, where the Donatists had one bishop, the Catholics would have 
four; and they were served in the same kind by the Donatists, who in 
other places had three or four for their one; of which there are several 
instances in that famous conference at Carthage.' 

Other towns might be added which had bishops of their own in that 
region, but there is no need of more. St. Austin himself signifies 
plainly that there were more bishops in the territory of Hippo, when 
he moved Januarius, the primate of the Donatists, that they would 
meet together with the Catholic bishops that were in that territory, and 
who there suffered so much by the Donatists.' Ecce interim episcopoa 
nostras qui sunt in regiane Hipponensi ubi a vestris tanta mala patimur 

^ If the region of Hippo was so very large as the Doctor represents it, 
there is no doubt but there were many good villages in it. And 
Mr. Thorndike (whom none can suspect to be partial this way, his bias 
rather leading him the other) tells us, that in Africa bishups were so 
plentiful, that every good village must needs be the seat of an episcopal 
church/ And if, as the Doctor says, the notorious schism of the 
Donatists was the occasion of the multiplication of bishops in Africa, 
they must be most multiplied in Nimiidia, to which Hippo belonged ; 
because the Donatists were there most nimierous. He that finds 
betwixt an himdred and two hundred bishops in the province of 
Numidia, and makes the region of Hippo of more than forty miles 
extent, yet offers to prove there was but one bishop in that region, 
need not despair but he may make any thing probable. 

• Ep. Ijc. « D. 1, n. 13S» et n. 207. « Ibid. n. 138, n. 201, Aug. Ep. Ixxvlii. n. S. 

' N. [1 17.] 121, 65, 19S. ' £p. IxyUi. / Right of Churchet review, p. U. 


Afler such plain evidence of the extent of dioceses, he wonld bring 
as clear proof of metropolitan provinces in the African churches. To 
me they are both clear alike^ who can discern nothing of evidence in 
them. His proof is merely Cjrprian's calling that part of Africa where 
he lived, provincia nostraj " our province," two or three times. Before 
ecclesiastical metropolitans were known in the world, Africa was by the 
£omans divided into provinces, as our kingdom hath been long into 
counties. Cannot one that lives in an English shire, call it "our 
county,'* but that must be a clear proof that he is the governor of it ? 
Cyprian himself never dreamt of any such thing. He disclaims all 
authority over the bishops of that or any other province, Neque enim 
quisquam nostrUm episcopum 86 esse episcoporum constituit* " None of us 
makes himself a bishop of bishops." The great Casaubon, where he 
was concerned to speak as favourably of the English constitution as 
possibly could be, says, " It is most manifest that this superiority was of 
human constitution, and in the first and second ages, and a great part of 
the third, not known in the church." * And Dr. St[illingfleet] else- 
where tells us, " there was no difference as to the power of the bishops 
themselves, who had all equal authority in their several churches, and 
none over another." He not only says this, but brings for it clear proof 
indeed ;* and finds no higher rise of metropolitical power or privilege, 
than the Council at Antioch, near a hundred years after. The great 
privilege of metropolitans, (afler they were established by canon,) 
wherein all their authority consisted while the state of the church was 
tolerable, was their presiding in provincial sjmods ; and there they had 
but a single vote, about ordinations, censures, or other affairs. In 
Cyprian's age, the bishop in the prime city did oflen preside in synods ; 
but this honour they had not from obligation, but courtesy ; nor had 
they it always, but others were chosen presidents, sometimes out of 
some other respect to the place, than because it was a metropolis, or the 
bishop of it a metropolitan. So in a synod in Palestine, Alexander, 
bishop of Jerusalem, was joint president with Theophilus of Csesarea, 
though Csesarea, not Jerusalemj was the metropolis of Palestine.^ 
Sometimes for the worth of the person; so Osias, of Corduba, was 
chosen president of divers synods, in places remote from his diocese and 
country : noias yhp ovk TjyfiaaTo crvvodovr, " Over what kinds of synods did 
he not preside ?" says Theodoret of him.^ Sometimes for their age, as 
Palmas, bishop of Amastris, was president in a synod in Pontus, upon 
this account expressly, m apxaum-aros, " because the most ancient''-^ 

• In Cone. Carth. [«p. Gyp. p. 229, ed. Oxon. 1682.] » Exercit. xvi. p. 5M, [n. 143.] 

« Iren. p. 372. - Euseb. lib. ▼. cap. xx. Tacit. Hitt. Ub. U. [cap. Ixxix.] 

' HiBt. lib. U. cap. XV. / Euaeb. lib. v. cap. xxU. 


And in AMca, long after, not he who had his seat in the chief citj of 
the proYince, but he that was most ancient among the bishops, had the 
primacy in provincial synods," and this settled by canon.* By which it 
appears that the pre-eminence of metropolitans was not established, 
either by rule or invariable custom, for the first three ages. And 
afterwards, when in the fourth age it was settled by canon, yet then it 
was not much any where ; but less it seems in Africa than in some 
other parts, since there ihey were so jealous of the ambition lurking (and 
now and then appearing) in the thing, that the bishops there would not 
admit the names, but declare, that the bishop of the first seat should 
not be called the exarch of the priests, or chief priest, or any thing 
of like nature, but only the bishop of the first seat. Hence, Dr. 
St[illingfleet] concludes, '^ Therefore it hath been well observed, that 
the African churches did retain longest the primitive simplicity and 
humility among them ; and when the voice was said to be heard in the 
church, upon the flowing in of riches, Hbdie venenttm effuswn est in 
ecclesianij " To-day is poison poured into the church," by the working 
of which poison the spirits of the prelates began to swell with pride 
and ambition, as is evident in church history, only Africa escaped the 
infection most, &c. So that however Africa hath been always fruitful 
of monsters, yet in that ambitious age, it had no other wonder but only 
this, that it should escape so free from that typhus scBCularis, " worldly 
phrenzy," (as they then called it,) that monstrous itch of pride and 

*' Victor mentions one Cresoens, who had one himdred and twenty 
bishops under him as metropolitan." — p. 253. 

Under him ; how ? as one over whom he had jurisdiction, or to 
whom they swore canonical obedience ? No such thing ; but imder 
him as an honorary pre^dent in their assemblies, who there could 
do nothing without them as to any matters of moment, but was still to 
be concluded by their votes, he having neither negative nor casting 
voice. Such a moderator he was as the reformed churches have in 
their synods or other assemblies ; only he, after the fourth age, held the 
place and honour for life, as theirs always do not. But this makes no 
material difference, if Grotius mistake not, who says it is not de re, 
"concerning the possession," but de kabendi modo, "concerning the 
manner of possessing it." A dictator made but for the dispatch of some 
present difficulty, was as much a king (in his accoimt) as he that 
reigned during life. Duratio naturam rei non immutat,* " Length of 
time does not alter the nature of the possession." 

• Aug. Ep. [cclxi.] * MUevit, Can. xlil. Cod. Afric. Can. Ixxxvi. 

<^ Iren. p. 373. ^ De Jun Belli, lib. i. cap. iU. lec. 11. [n. 2.] 

n 2 


Sect. 10. He passes to Egypt, and from what Athanasius sap of 
Maraeotis, he draws several observations, which seem not all current. 
He observes, first, that here were true parochial churches, because they 
are called churches ; but so were the titidi at Borne called, yet were not 
better than oratories, or chapels of ease in many of ovar parishes, where 
all Divine offices were not performed. That they were all performed 
there, so as the people were not sometimes obliged to have recourse to 
Alexandria for some one, Athanasius doth not intimate, nor the Doctor 
affirm. He observes also, that they were so under the bishop, as that 
he had the whole government. But if he had the whole, those pres- 
byters had none of it ; and then he was such a bishop, and they such 
presbyters, as that age did not know. This the best asserters of episco- 
pacy acknowledge, and Dr. St[illingfleet] hath proved. He observes, 
that ^^ they were at that distance, that they could not have local com- 
munion with their bishop at Alexandria." But that the distance was 
not such as to hinder them from having communion with their bishop, 
is evident by an epistle of Dionysius, who being banished to Cephro, 
and troubled that afterwards the governor would remove him to 
Coluthion in Maroeotis, the brethren encourage him, because this was 
so near Alexandria, that it might be reputed " but a remoter suburbs," 
a>r €v npoaoTfiois] and though the place was destitute of Christians, yet 
those of Alexandria might frequently have recourse to them, and make 
up a congregation." 

But further, not to insist more upon his observations but the scope of 
them, if Maroeotis was well replenished with Christians when Athanasius 
was made bishop there, it had not been long so ; for Dionysius, in his 
time, declares it to be "a desert as to Christians or any good men," 
tprjfiov dB€\<f>S>v Koi airovbai^v dvBpwrwv.'' 

It was the sense of the church (as I showed before) that where 
Christians were so multiplied in any place as to need more than one 
presbyter, and they desired to have a bishop, it was not to be denied 
them. If this was now the condition of Maroeotis, Athanasius would 
not have hindered them from having a bishop ; but indeed his adver- 
saries were too quick for him, and made Ischyras bishop in Marceotis.' 
It is true, Athanasius was troubled at it, because Ischyras was a very 
bad man, and had this honour as the reward of an ill act ; but not 
because it lessened his diocese, or impaired his revenues ; (though 
country oblations, upon which, with those of the city, the bishop and 
clergy lived, being withdrawn from the city, were allowed to the country 
bishop, where a new bishopric was erected.) For he was well enough 
pleased with others that were deserving in the same circumstances, 

* Eu»eb. lib. vii.cap. xi. * Ibid. * Atluui. Apol.S, p. 622. 


particularly with Dracontiiis, who was made bishop in the same terri- 
tory of Alexandria, cW t^ 'AXt^op^plwv x^P*^* -^^ ™°^ there might be, 
for in those parts, as in others, bishops were seated as little distant one 
from another as country towns are with us. To go no further than the 
country bordering upon this, in Palestine, Diospolis, or Lydda, an 
episcopal seat, was but six miles from Joppa ; and Joppa some four 
miles from Jamnia ; Rhinocorura four miles from Anthedon ; and 
Anthedon not three miles (Sozomen says about twenty ^longs*) from 
Gaza ; and Gaza twenty fiirlongs from Constantia (anciently Majuma.^) 
Strabo makes it little more than seven furlongs.' In Egypt itself, the 
cities, though there were bishops also in the country, were close together. 
Nicopolis was twenty furlongs from Alexandria, as Josephus,* or thirty 
furlongs, as Strabo / and Taposiris, near Nicopolis, and Canopus, 
Heraclia, and Naucratis, not much further one from another. More 
instances hereof might be given in other countries, Syria, the lesser 
Asia, Greece, Macedon, and Italy, where there are divers cities but two 
miles distant, very many at three or four miles distance, abundance at 
five or six : I must not digress to give a particular accoimt of them. 
Those who ordained every such city or town to have a bishop, were far 
from designing any such things as modem dioceses. 

" But Mr. B[axter Js great argiunent is, from the meeting of the 
whole multitude with Athanasius in the great church at Alexandria, 
to keep the Easter solemnity." — ^p. 254. 

And there is some weight in it, because nothing considerable can be 
said against it. It amoimts to more than is said, if a just account be 
taken of it. He tells the emperor there were roaovroi, so many Chris- 
tians at the paschal solemnity, as a prince that loved Christ would wish 
to be in the city, and that these desired to meet in the great church, 
that they all might pray there, loLccI irdyras ci^^'cr^ai ; and so they did, oirtp 
KOI yryovfv. Can this signify any less than that all the Christians in 
that city which adhered to Athanasius did meet and pray in one place ? 
He says, that one place was capable of receiving them all, b((aa3ai ndvras. 
He says, the multitudes there met were such as at other times assem- 
bled in several other little places, irwy cxoi/jov, &c. " How," says he, "did 
the people rejoice to see one another now, when before they met in 
several places ?" Let any one view the whole passage, and I doubt not 
it will be plain to any impartial eye, that the main body of Christians, 
belonging to Athanasius, did meet in that one church. But by this I 
see nothing wOl be plain in antiquity to him that likes it not. Hereby 
the Doctor's following questions are answered. — ^p. 255. 

• Epiit. ad Dracont. * Hist. lib. v. cap. viii. ' Soz. ibid. p. 336. 

' Lib. xri. p. 522. ' De Bello Judaico, lib. v. cap. uU. / Lib. xvii. p. 593. 


It is no good argument, that because all the Christians in London 
cannot meet in St. Paul's, therefore all the Christians adhering to 
Athanasius in Alexandria could not meet in a great church. Alex- 
andria was never, by far, so populous as London, much less at this time. 
The greatest part of the inhabitants of that city were at this time 
heathens or Jews. Of those who passed for Christians, it is like 
Athanasius had the lesser share. The Novadans, and other sects, the 
Meletians especially, and the Arians, did probably exceed his flock in 
numbers. It may be the Arians alone were more numerous, consider- 
ing how many there were there at first, and what encouragements and 
advantages they had imder such an emperor as Constantius ; and 
therefore these cities are vastly different, in that very thing wherein 
they should agree, to make such reasoning good, either for proof or 
illustration. Afler this time Epiphanius mentions about twelve meet- 
ing-places in Alexandria ; whether there were so many now, or whether 
the Catholics had them aU, may be a question. However, Athanasius 
tells us, that all these save one were exceeding small, very short and 
strait places, t&p toivvv iKicKija-u^v fipaxvTarav o0(ro»v.' And afler, he 
says, they were fiucpal koI otckoI,* " small and strait." There are as many 
or more churches and chapels, (it is like' as great as those in Alexandria,) 
in some one of our parishes in England; the parishioners assemble in 
the lesser places at other times, but at some solemnities they are wont 
to communicate at the chief parish church. Will any argue fix)m such 
parishes for our dioceses, or that they could not meet in one place, 
because they had so many other little places to meet in ? 

There is no need for the serving Mr. B[axter]'s hypothesis, that 
Alexandria be shrunk into a less compass ; nor doth Mr. B[axter] 
in the least attempt it. He gives the full dimensions of that city 
out of Strabo, as grave and judicious a geographer, and every way as 
imexceptionable, as any he could pitch on ; who is so far from lessening 
it, that he calls it fieyurrov rrj^ olKoviUvrjs €fin6piovj the greatest mart 
town in the world. Yet he might have told us that Ausonius makes it 
inferior to Constantinople, to Antiochia, and to Carthage,^ who may 
pass for as judicious an author as he that will have it ocrvXXiyirTWf, 
incomprehensibly great. But he, detracting nothing from the greatness 
of that city, offers as fair probabilities that the Christians in it, joining 
with Athanasius, might all meet in one place as can be expected in such 
a case ;* but the Doctor thought not fit to take notice of them. 

" To show the great number of Christians in Alexandria,*' he tells 
us, pages 255, 256, ^Mong before the time of Athanasius, Dionysius 

• Apol. [2,] page 531. » Page 532, • likely. 

'' De Ord. Magn. Urb. ' Church Hisl. pages 9, 10. 


Alexandiinus saith, in a time of great persecution, when he was 
banished, he kept up the assemblies in the city, and at Cephro he had 
a lai-ge church, partly of the Christians of Alexandria which followed 
him, and partly from other places ; and when he was removed thence 
to CoUuthion, which was nearer the city, such numbers of Christians 
flocked out of the city to him that they were forced to have distinct 
congregations ; so the words Karh fUpos signify." 

Cephro was a place in Lybia, at a great distance from Alexandria; 
in the epistle cited it is a idllage near the desert, and that was no place 
for very great assemblies ; that which increased it was the recourse of 
Christians from some other parts of Egypt. However, it was greater 
than what they had or expected when removed to Maroeotis, though so 
very near to Alexandria, as Dionysius and his friends there signified. 
But to encourage him, they tell him, as it afterwards fell out, that their 
meetings, though not so great, might be more frequent. Christians still 
coming to them from Alexandria, one company after another ; so that 
they might often have assemblies for worship and Christian communion 
at CoUuthion, though in less numbers than at Cephro ; and that by the 
contexture of the discourse, seems to be the meaning of Kara fi^pot, 
their assembling in parcels as they came, some at one time, and others 
at another ; not that such numbers flocked thither at once out of the 
city, as that they were forced to have distinct congregations. Indeed, a 
company not very numerous might be well thought too many for one 
assembly in their circumstances, in the paroxysm of a violent persecu- 
tion, when jEmilianus, the governor, passing sentence of banishment on 
them, told them, it should be death to keep a meeting in the place to 
which they were banished, and that they should be narrowly watched 
in order to a discovery. And Dionysius says, he was on purpose dis- 
posed of in such a place, where he might most easily be apprehended. 
And therefore, if they had met in distinct congregations at the same 
time, this had been no argument to prove them so numerous as the 
Doctor is concerned to have them. Less than a thousand, yea, or five 
hundred, will more than satisfy the import of any passage in this 
epistle, which he makes use of to prove the great numbers of Christians 
in that city. However, as if his supposition had been proved, he pro- 
ceeds upon it thus : ^^If there were such a number of Christians at 
Alexandria so long before, under the sharpest persecution, is it possible 
to imagine, in so great a city, after Christianity had so long been the 
religion of the empire, that the number of Christians there should be 
no greater than to make one large congregation ?" — p. 266. 

The professors of Christianity greatly increased after this became the 
religion of the empire ; but the greatest part of those who professed it 
did not adhere to Athanasius ; both the Meletians and the Arians fell 


off from his predecessors, and the breach continued all his time ; so 
that the Catholics in Alexandria seem not to have gained much more 
by the happy alteration in the empire than they lost by those unhappy 
divisions. At the first breach Meletius had many more adherents than 
Peter, as Epiphanius tells us ;' far most of the bishops, clergy, and 
people deseiting Peter and cleaving to Meletius. Constantine granted 
then^ the liberty of their meeting, and Athanasius, who opposed them, 
was by him banished, and so continued many years, (twelve or thirteen;) 
under such encouragements as they had under him and Constantius, 
their numbers were not like* to be impaired. 

As for the Arians, if we may take our measures of the people by 
their officers, they were more numerous than the Catholics in this city ; 
for of nine[teen] presbyters and deacons which the church of Alexandria 
had, as Theodoret reckons,*^ eleven embraced Arianism.' Constantine, if 
he did not favour them, would not oppose them, but was severe against 
those that did ; against Athanasius particularly. Constantius, his suc- 
cessor in those parts of the empire, was both zealous and industrious in 
promoting Arianism. In these circumstances the Arians might well 
outvie the followers of Athanasius in numbers ; and these declined as the 
other increased ; the numbers which these lost being gained by those. 
Alexander, his immediate predecessor, assembled the main body of his 
adherents in Theonas,^ a church not quite finished, as (Athanasius did 
afterwards in another, and pleads it in excuse of his own act;) this 
church is reckoned among the other churches that were small and strait, 
though something greater than the rest. Now is it probable that the 
Catholics there should be so much increased, upon such revolts, and 
under such discouragements, as that those who could meet together in 
an ordinary church with Alexander, should be too many to assemble in 
a very great church with Athanasius ? Let the impartial judge who 
they are that build theories upon strange improbabilities. 

The Doctor proceeds to what he thinks plain enough of itself to show 
the great extent of diocesan power : it is that of Theodoret, where it is 
said he had the charge of eighth [hundred] churches.*' 

This might be dismissed, as out of the bounds we are concerned for, 
being beyond not only the three first, but the fourth age : for this 
epistle, if it be Theodoret's, was Avrit about the middle of the fifth age, 
when all was tumbling into confusion and degeneracy ; only thus in 

- Har. IxvJii. n, 3. • likely. ' Hist. lib. iv. cap. xx. 

* Soz. lib. i. cap. xiv. * Athanas. Apol. 2, page 513. 

/ He who corapares the epistle whence this testimony is taken with Theodoret*! eighty- 
first epistle, will, perhaps, be inclined to suspect that the reading here should be with a very 
slight alteration of the present text, oktw r*«nni% (not oKroucocriair) etucXfio-iaic, " eig^t holy 

9 Epist. cxiii. 


bridl The parage inaisEed on runs thxia : In eight [himdried] churches 
I have been paator, for so many parishes hath Cyrrlius. Cjirhus here 
is but capable of three accep[t-a]tJon8 j it must be taken either for the 
citr alone, or both for the city aud tlie region, or for the region aJone 
without the city. Against this la^t there is an unanswerahle exception; 
(lie word if ne^er thus used in these epktlea, or elsewhere. Nor, I 
tti&k, ean an iastance be given where the proper name of a city^ as 
CTirhiis was, signifies the country alone, and not the city itself. The 
seoond the Doctor rejects, and is concerned so to do, seeing, if he 
admitted it, it would entangle him in a difficulty that seems inextricable* 
If the first be admitted, it must be granted that Theodoret was not the 
aaUior of this epistle, or at least of the passage insisted on, as here 
txptesaed. For he who described Cyrrhus to be a desolate place, Zprjfuif 
owTB Kol ^Xryovf oucqTopat Uxowra, having few inhabitants, and those poor,* 
and elsewhere mentions mXixyfit iprniiav^ signifying it to be a small town 
m a manner desolate,^ would neither say nor dream that there were 
eight [hundred] parishes in it. But there is no need to insist on this or 
other probabilities, that this epistle is spurious, or this passage cor- 
rupted. That which the Doctor delivers in his discourse upon it is 
enough to show that it will not serve his design, nor is pertinent to the 
scope he proposes. He tells us, in that province (called Regio CJyrrhes- 
tica) there was a metropolitan of Hagiopolis, which by the ancient 
noiitice*^ appears to have been then one of the names of Cyrus or 
Cyrrhus.— p. 258. 

If this be so, then Theodoret must be a metropolitan ; and himself 
seems to think no less, when he tells us he ordained Irenseus a bishop.' 
For though others were wont to concur with the metropolitan in ordain- 
ing a bishop, yet the act is still ascribed to the metropolitan, (being chief 
therein,) as if he alone did it. So that when but one ordainer of a 
bishop is mentioned r^ularly, that one must be taken for a metropo- 
litan. He tells us also, that the reason of his confinement, alleged in 
the imperial order for that purpose, was because he was still convocat- 
ing synods,* and that in those times is taken to be the privilege of a 
metropolitan. But there needs no other proof of it ; for since it is 
plain by the notiticBj and acknowledged by the Doctor, that Cyrus was 
a metropolis, none will question but the bishop of it was a metropolitan. 
-^d if Theodoret was a metropolitan, these eight [hundred] churches 
^ show not the extent of diocesan, but metropolitan power. None 
^er doubted but Theodoret was bishop of this city Cyrus: he himself 
declares it plainly and frequently. It is said he was confined to Cyrus, 

• Epbt. xxxIL » Epiit. cxxxvliU. 

' Tbe notiiia are detailed accounts of the ciTil and eccletiattical diTitions of the empire. 

' Epift. ex. • Epist. Ixxix. Ixxx. Ixxxl. Ixxxii. Concil. Antioch, Can. xix. xx. 


being bishop of that city," and that he was confined to his own home by 
the emperor's law, forbidding him to go out of the bounds of that city.* 
He says, this city was committed to his charge,' rrfv tyx^^pitrOtlfrav ^fU9 
wAtv; and since he was the bishop of the city Cjtus, that being a 
metropolis, Theodoret must be the metropolitan. For if he was only 
bishop there, but another and not he there metropolitan, there will be 
two bishops in that city ; which must in no case be admitted against the 
Doctor's inviolable rule. 

How this will be avoided I kn6w not. But the Doctor will have the 
eight [hundred] churches to be in Theodoret's diocese ; and why so ? 
Because Theodoret mentions the metropolitan he was under. But so 
might any other metropolitan in those parts do, without danger of losing 
his province. For all the metropolitans in the diocese of the Orient, 
(wherein, according to the notiticB of the empire, there are fifteen pro- 
vinces, but by the ecclesiastical notitice many more metropolitans and 
archbishops, though divers of them pass as avroicc^oXoi) were under 
him of Antioch, which city Jerome calls the metropolis of the Orient ; 
Ut Palestince metropolis Cesarea sit, et totiua Orientis Antiochia* and 
Zozimus,* naoTjs ttjs Ewar firjTp6no\iv' Theodoret says that (having ruled 
that church committed to him at Cyrus twenty-six years^") he had 
preached six years under Theodotus, bishop o£ Antioch ; thirteen years 
under John ; and it was now the seventh year since Domnus was arch- 
bishop there.*' But that he was under any other metropolitan of Cyrus 
(or elsewhere) he never says nor intimates, and when the Doctor has 
inquired fully into it, I doubt not but he will find it a groundless 

Since Cyrrhus is acknowledged to be a metropolis, and thereupon it 
can no way be denied, but Theodoret the bishop of it was a metropo- 
litan ; this might be improved further for our author's satis&ction, if we 
could know certainly how many bishops were in this province ; but for 
anything I can yet discover, we must be content with conjectures. The 
Doctor tells xis from Victor, that Crescens had one hundred and twenty 
bishops in his province : in that of Zeugitana it is said there was 
one hundred and sixty-four bishops, afterwards reduced to three, by 
the severities of Gensericus the Vandal.* In other Aftican provinces 
there must be as many or more, to make up the account we have of 
the many himdred bishops in Africa. If the bishops imder the me- 
tropolitan of Cyrus, were so many as in one of these provinces, 
and these eight hundred churches distributed amongst Uiem, the 

• Epist. Ixxx. * Epist. cxix. ' Epist. xxxTii xlU. 

' [EpUt. Ixi. ad Pammach.] ' Hist. lib. i. f page 15.] / Epist. cxliL 

i Epi»t. Ixxxiii. vid. Epitt. Ixxxi. cxiii. * Victor, de Pereec. Vundal. lib. i. 


•hare of each bishop would scarce be more than some one of our 
parishes. Or if the bishops there were supposed to be fewer, yet 
would their bishoprics be more like some parishes, than modem 

" By Cyrus, therefore, we understand the region about the city, 
which was imder Theodoret's care." 

He means the region, and not the city. But I suppose none else will 
see any reason so to understand it, since it cannot be found, that C3rrus 
is ever any where else so understood ; nor that the name of any other 
dty doth signify the coimtry and not the city. It is as if it should be 
said, by London we understand Essex, but not the city of London. 
Cyrus was the proper name of the city, (as some think, because it was 
built by Cyrus, and it is called by others, Cyropolis,) but the country 
about it had another name, and [is] called by Theodoret, Cyrrhestica 
B^o,* as the Doctor himself observes ; besides, this makes Theodoret, not 
to have been bishop of the city of Cyrus, but only of the region about it, 
which contradicts Theodoret in many plain passages, wherein he de- 
clares expressly that he was bishop of that city. Of which before. 

" Theodoret himself sets down the extent of it, wherein he says it 
was forty miles in length, and forty in breadth." 

But how doth it appear that this was the extent of Theodoret's 
diocese, and not of the province ? That is it which is questioned, and 
should have been proved. Seeing there were many considerable cities 
in that province, if each of them had a diocese of such dimensions, (and 
no reason to think that Cyrus exceed them herein,) this one province 
vriU. be £ax larger than aU Syria besides. 

^' He saith in another epistle, that Christianity was then so much 
spread among them," &c. 

What he says concerning the spread of Christianity, respects not that 
region pecuharly, but concerns the Christian world, (as will appear to 
those that view it,) though whether it do or no, is not material. That 
which he seems to think of more consequence for the overthrowing 
of Mr. B.'s hypothesis, he thus delivers : " That these villages had 
churches and priests settled in them under the care of the bishop, 
appears from a passage in the life of Simeon, where he speaks of Bassus 
visiting the parochial churches," &c. 

Theodoret speaks not of Bassus visiting parochial churches, but 
villages : his words are, " He then perambulated many villages, 
inspecting the sacred persons (or priests) there." Bassus, the visitor 
who made this perambulation, was a monastic, and a rector of monks. 
Theodoret in the same place tells us, his sodality consisted of above 

« Epist. Ixxxi. & Ixxix. 


two hundred, which he calls his proper flock, oU€iap dycXi/v, and gives 
an account of the rules prescribed. But suppose Bassus was a bishop, 
either these villages which he perambulated were in Theodoret's diocese, 
or no. If thej were in his diocese, then was there more than one 
bishop in one diocese. If thej were not in it, how does this serve in 
the least to prove the extent of Theodoret's diocese, which he is here 
designing to manifest ? Nor will this prove Bassus to have been a 
diocesan, wherever those villages were which he visited. There are 
rectors in England, who have many villages in their parishes, and 
presbyters in them, whom they may visit when they please, yet none 
take them to be diocesans. 

" He saith he had brought ten thousand Marcionists to baptism.*^ 

It is, as he expresses it, more than ten thousands, but this in all 
reason must be taken indefinitely, for very many, seeing in his epistle 
to Leo, it is but rrXtiovs rf xt^tof ) " more than a thousand."* And this 
is more like to be the number in eight villages, (which being tainted 
with the heresy of Marcion, he reduced to the truth,) than many 
myriads ;* unless he will have each village to be more popidous, than 
the mother city itself. However Theodoret doth not say that these 
eight villages were in his diocese ; and he might think himself con- 
cerned to reduce them, though they were but in his province. 

" And we find the names of many of the villages in his lives, as 
Tillima, &c., which are suflicient to show that Theodoret had properly 
a diocesan church," &c. 

It doth not appear in the places cited that all these five were in his 
diocese, but if there had been more than these five, or more than the 
eight forementioned, it would not be sufficient to show that Theodoret 
had properly a diocesan church, unless there be sufficient in several of 
our country parishes, (containing as many villages,) to show that they 
are properly diocesan churches. Some other writings than Theodoret's 
Epistles or Lives must be made use of, if he hopes to make good a 
diocesan episcopacy, like ours, in the ancient church. 

The other point, wherein the Doctor makes use of ancient authorities, 
is about popular elections. He seems willing to maintain, that the 
people in the ancient church had not the power to choose their own 
bishops, but only to give testimony of their good or bad lives. I was 
something surprised at this undertaking, and having seen so clear and 
full evidence for the people's privilege herein, as hath convinced many 
learned papists and others, whose interest swayed them the other way ; 
I was ready to think, that those who would contradict it, might be 
suspected, either to want acquaintance with the ancient records and 

• EpUt. rxlil. » Epist. [Ixxxi.] 


usages of the church, or fidelity in reporting them. The learned and 
ingenuous Doctor is not to be suspected as either of these : onlj persons 
of singular learning and other accomplishments, maj venture some- 
times to defend a paradox, and run against the stream ; and if they 
can with cogent arguments, detect a vulgar error, the more conmion it 
is, the more excellect service will they do. But if they bring only 
straws against a torrent, or show themselves resolved to serve a par- 
ticular interest, rather than to use impartial judgment, and yield to 
evidence ; though they may prevail with some that are weak and pre- 
possessed, yet they will scarce thereby advance their reputation with 
the truly judicious. However, the best that can be looked for in this 
cause, may be expected fix)m the Doctor; and what it is, is now to be 

He lays down several observations. '^ The first of them is this. That 
the main groimd of the people^s interest was founded upon the apostles' 
canon, that a bishop must be blameless and of good report.''" — pp. 312, 

This rule of the apostles was one ground, upon which the people's 
interest in the choice of their bishop and other officers was founded ; 
but it was not the only ground. Cyprian, Chrysostom, and others, 
conclude it from other places of Scripture. But this might be sufidcient, 
if there were no other, to found their right or power in elections. For 
the testimony required, was not only of their good or ill behaviour, 
which a heathen might give, but such as signified that they judged 
them fit and worthy to be, and so desired them for, their ofiicers ; which 
is not a mere declarative testimony, but such as is elective. And this 
will be cleared by the authors which the Doctor cites aflerwards. 

Page 314. " And there is a very considerable testimony in the epistle 
of Clemens to this purpose, where he gives an account how the apostles, 
preaching through cities and coimtries, did appoint their first fruits, 
having made a spiritual trial of them, to be bishops and deacons of 
those who were to believe." 

By the apostles' appointing may be meant, either the instituting of 
those ofilces, and then it is not for tlie Doctor's purpose ; or else their 
fixing those oflicers in particular places. That they fixed officers in 
any places where there were no Christians, is an imagination which he 
doth not seem to own ; and where there were Christians, Clemens tells 
us aflerwards, how their ofiScers were appointed, viz., with the appro- 
bation or choice of the whole church. 

** Here it is plain they were of the apostles' appointment, and not of 
the people's choice." — ^Ib. 

• 1 Tim. iii. 2, 7. 


This is no waj plain ; an hundred instances might be produced of 
C'fficers appointed for people, and yet chosen by them. But there needs 
no more than the Doctor helps us to in this very page. Immediately 
before these words, he mentions the first choice of deacons, and there 
it is plain and express by the text, that they were chosen by the peopley 
and yet appointed by the apostles. And in the words of Clemens, cited 
presently afler, bishops are to be chosen, and yet also appointed by the 
apostles, or other eminent men. The Doctor thus renders his words : 
'^ Therefore foreseeing these things perfectly, they appointed the persons 
before mentioned, and left the distribution of the offices with this 
instruction, that as some died, other approved men should be chosen 
into their offices."* How and by whom they are to be chosen, the next 
words express, owtvdoKija-daTis ndoTji rfjs cKicXiycruiff, " the whole church 
having approved them," i.e. having signified that they thought them 
worthy, and most fit to be their officers, which includes a desire that 
they be appointed or set over them. This declared either when they 
are proposed by themselves or others, is the choice we are concerned 
for. Here it is manifest by Clemens, that this was the apostles' prac- 
tice, and that they lefl order, that in afler times bishops should be thus 
appointed, and thus chosen. 

The Doctor makes some observations upon this testimony of Clemens, 
p. 815. 1. " That these officers of the church were not chosen by the 
people, but appointed by the apostles, or other great men according to 
their order." 

Whereas by Clemens's words it is plain to the contrary, that these 
officers of the church were both chosen by the people, and appointed 
by the apostles, and that according to their order. They ordained that 
their own practice in appointing officers should be followed in afte^- 
times, viz. that as some died, others should be chosen, the whole church 
approving them, into their office, and appointed thereto by other 
eminent men. This is the plain import of Clemens^s words. 

2. He observes, " That they took this course on purpose to prevent 
the contentions that might happen in the church about those who 
should bear office in it." 

The course he means is the appointing of officers, without the choice 
of the people. But this appears to be a mistake, and if it were not so, 
the imiversal church, both in the best ages and many after, did run 
counter to the order of the apostles, made on purpose to prevent con- 
tentions in the church. 

8. He observes, " That all that the people had to do, was to give testi- 
mony, or to express their approbation of those who were so appointed.** 

• [Clem. i. s. 44.J 


But Clemens speaks nothing of a bare testimony. He speaks 
expressly of all the people's approbation as requisite by the apostles' 
order, and this we have shown imports no less than the people's choice; 
and this in the constant sense and practice of the church was previous 
to the settling of any pastor over them. Yet he adds : " For he could 
not allow their power of choosing, since he says the apostles appointed 
officers to prevent the contentions that might happen about it.** 

But it doth not appear that they appointed officers to prevent the 
contentions in elections ; nor can it appear by anything Clemens says, 
but rather the contrary, since he teUs us, officers were both to be 
approved (or, which is all one, chosen) by the people, and appointed by 
the apostles. And this leaves no ground for his following supposition, 
that " the cause of the disturbance made by some men in the church of 
Corinth, was because their officers were appointed by others, not chosen 
by themselves." What pretence could there be for this, when, 
according to the apostles' order, (to which that church was con- 
formed,) no officer was appointed without the approbation of the whole 
church ? 

Page 316. "And this is plain even from St. Cyprian, where he 
discourseth of this matter, &c., for the force of what St. Cyprian saith, 
comes at last only to this — giving testimony." 

But what if, in Cyprian, the people's giving testimony be no less than 
choosing by sufirage ? The clergy had no less interest in the election 
of a bishop than the people, yet he expresses the clergy's concurrence 
in the choice, by their testimony ; and the people's, by their suffi*age.* 
FacUis est Cortieliua episcopus . . , de clericorum pene omnium testimonio^ 
de plebis qnoe tunc affuit suffragio : " Cornelius was made bishop by the 
testimony of almost all the clergy, and by the suffrage of the people 
that were present." And in the same place he saith, " Cornelius was 
ordained both by the suffrage of the clergy and the people." In the 
very next passage cited by the Doctor out of this blessed martyr, there 
is an intimation of a testimony in the people's presence, but the suffirage 
of aU is expressly mentioned, as reqiiisite, " that the ordination may be 
just and lawful." Take it as the Doctor offers it, (p. 816,) that by 
" their presence either their faults might be published, or their good 
acts commended ; that so it may appear to be a just and lawfid ordi- 
nation, which hath been examined by the suffrage and judgment of all." 

To this he adds, " The people there had a share in the election; but 
it was in matter of testimony concerning the good or ill behaviour of 
the person." 

it is as plain as one would desire it should be spoken, that the 

• Epitt. lii. 


people had such a share in the elections as that they were carried by 
their general sufirage ; and this was so necessary, that the ordination of 
a bishop could not " appear to be just or lawful without it." If their 
giving testimony amount to no less than the people's choice by suffi-age, 
the popular elections which are in question are granted; but if it be 
less, and Cyprian be said to allow the people no more, violence is 
offered to his words, plainly expressed, and more than once repeated. 

The original of this practice, (the people thus choosing their bishop,) 
and the universal observance of it, is next expressed. He had said before, 
that it did deDivind atictoritate descendere, '^ descend to them from Divine 
authority \" that it was secundum Divina magisterial " according to 
Divine edicts." Here he says it is of Divine delivery and apostolical 
observance, and as such to be diligently kept and upheld. And for the 
extent of it, he says it was observed almost through all provinces. He 
speaks modestly, for there might be some provinces which he was not 
acquainted with, or some where Christianity did not yet prevaiL The 
Doctor renders his words thus : " And therefore, he saith, it was almost 
a general custom among them, and he thinks came down fix)m Divine 
tradition and apostolical practice, that when any people wanted a 
bishop, neighbouring bishops met together in that place, and the new 
bishop was chosen, plebe prcesente^ " the people being present," not by 
the votes of the people. 

" The people being present, not by the votes of the people," as the 
Doctor notes. But Cyprian had said a little before, that it was omnium 
suffragio^ " by all their votes f and he says it again in that period, and 
the very next words to these which the Doctor translates, though he 
thought not fit to add them. And " this was observed in the consecra- 
tion of their fellow bishop, Sabinus," (so far the Doctor, but Cyprian 
goes on) — ut de universce fraiemitatis suffragio, " that by the voices of 
all the brethren, and the judgment of the bishops that were present, the 
bishopric might be conferred on him, and hands laid on^him instead of 
Basilides." And he says it in divers other epistles besides this. He 
declares Cornelius was made bishop de plebis suffragio, " by the votes of 
the people," and that he was ordained cleri et plebis suffragio^ " by the 
suffrage of the clergy and the people."" He tells his own people, " that 
those who were against his being bishop, were against their suffrage, 
(which he elsewhere* styles, Divina suffragia) and against the judgment 
of God."« 

" Where he doth express the consent of the people, but he requires 
the judgment of the bishops." 

He expresses the consent of the people declared by their votes, as 

• Ep. m. * [Ep. xxxyiU.] * Ep. xl. 


preyions to the ordination, and the way whereby Sabinus came to be 
bishop. And whereas the Doctor seems to intimate, that judgment was 
more than consent ; if it was more, yet was it not thought too much for 
the people. In this epistle it is said to be of Divine authority, that the 
bishop be chosen in the presence of all, and approved by the public 
judgment as worthy and fit for the office ; and afterwards, that the 
ordination may be just and lawful, he says it is to be examined by the 
judgment of «dl.« 

^ St. Cyprian and the African bishops, who wrote this epistle to the 
people, say that it belonged chiefly to them to choose the good, and 
refuse the bad; which is the strongest testimony in antiquity for the 
people's power." 

It is a staxmg and clear testimony, and in truth all the Doctor's 
attempts to weaken it have made it appear stronger to me than it did 
before. There is no fear but it will stand firm a^d unmoved, whoever 
would shake it, when the attacks of a person of such excellent learning 
and other abilities can make no more impression on it. 

'But let us view the particulars he thinks fit to be considered. 
^ 1. It was in a case where a bishop had voluntarily resigned/' 

But the rule laid down by Cyprian and his colleagues, is general, 
asserting the power of the people in all cases, *^ for choosing such as were 
worthy, and rejecting the unworthy." 

" 2. Another bishop was put into his room, not by the power of the 
people, but by the judgment and ordination of the neighbour bishops." 

It is as plain as can be spoken, that Sabinus was put into the room of 
Basilides, not only by the judgment and ordination of the bishops, but 
also by the power of the people's votes, de univerace fratemitatia suffragioy 
" by the suffrage of the whole brotherhood." Nay, the African fathers 
determine, that " the people have most of all this power," pUba mcurim^ 
potestatem habet, &c. 

" 3. They had the judgment of a whole council of African bishops 
for their deserting him." 

And we have in this epistle the judgment, not only of Cyprian, but 
of a whole council of AMcan bishops, both for the power and manner 
of the people's choosing ; the Divine authority for it, and the uni- 
versality of the practice ; and also for their power of deserting those 
bishops which deserved it. The names of above thirty of those bishops 
are prefixed to this epistle. 

" 4. For a notorious matter of fact, viz. idolatry and blasphemy, by 
his own confession." 

The rule of the African fathers is general, and not confined to this 

« Vide £p. xli. 


particular case, nor the grounds of it, but extends to any other wicked- 
ness which may render bishops unworthy to be owned. 

" 5. All the proof which St. Cyprian brings for this, doth amount to 
no more than that the people were most concerned to give testimony as 
to the good or bad lives of their bishops." 

Cyprian and the council of bishops with him, prove what they say 
concerning the power of the people in this matter ; and they say not only 
that the people are to be present when a bishop is to be ordained, and to 
give testimony concerning his good or ill deportment; but also that their 
consent is requisite; [that] their judgment is to be interposed in examin- 
ing and approving such as be offered ; and that they have the greatest 
power in choosing and rejecting bishops ; and that elections are to be 
made by their concurring votes and suffrage, that so the ordination of a 
bishop may be just and lawful ; and judge [that] they are led to this by 
Divine authority. This is evident by the synodical epistle and the 
premises. . Now let any that are impartial, and are not willing to be 
led into mistakes, judge whether this amount to no more than only the 
people^s giving testimony concerning the good or bad lives of their 
bishops. This is no more than the heathens had liberty to do in the 
ordinations of bishops ; and can any one imagine that all the expres- 
sions in this epistle, concerning the power and privil^e of Christians in 
the choice of those pastors who were entrusted with their souls, amount 
to no more than what infidels might challenge in reference to Christian 
bishops ? In another case one would be apt to think, that he who thus 
represents ancient authors did not take the course to be trusted in 
reporting matters of antiquity. But in this case, I would not give way 
to such a thought, but honour the Doctor more than he hath done 
himself in this business. 

Bishop Bilson, a very learned prelate, who was little more a friend 
to popular elections than the Doctor, (and had produced as much 
against them as any, Bellarmine not excepted, if not all that others have 
made use of since,) yet was so ingenuous as to yield that in antiquity, 
which cannot modestly be denied. " The fullest words," says he, " that 
the Greek authors use for all the parts of election, as to propose, to 
name, to choose, to decree, are in the stories ecclesiastical applied to 
the people." And afterwards thus : " So that in the primitive church, 
the people did propose, name, elect, and decree, as well as the clergy ; 
and though the presbyters had more skill to judge, yet the people had 
as much right to choose their pastor, and if the most part of them did 
agree, they did carry it from the clergy,"" &c. 

Alexander Severus, in proposing the names of his officers to the 

• Perpet. Govern, of the Church, cap. xy. pp. S59, SCO. 


people, to hear what they had to object against them, did but imitate 
part of the Christians* practice, and a small part of it too, and what wai 
not the peculiar privilege of Christians; for heathens had the like 
liberty, and their objections might be heard in reference to the candi- 
dates for church offices. And, therefore, it is no wonder, if no man 
can hence imagine that the people had power to make the governors of 
Roman provinces. But if the people of these provinces had obtained 
as much power to choose those governors, as the Christians had to elect 
their bishops, and the emperor could have no more declined whom they 
had chosen in one case, than the ordainers could in the other; the 
former might as well have been said to make their governors, as the 
latter are said to make their bishops. With Chrysostom they are 
ToO dowai Kvpioi r^y riiiriv' '* authorised to confer the office.** And in 
Epiphanius, ol Xaol — iTrurK^frow covroif Karara^avrfs,^ '* they make bishops 
for themselves.** 

Origen hath nothing, either in the words as they are cited, ^ or as 
indeed they are in the Homily, against elections by the people de jure 
or de facto ; nor anything which signifies that the people of Christ had 
no more to do in the choice of their pastors, than merely giving a 
declarative testimony, such as the heathen were allowed to give, and, 
therefore, I waive it. 

" The 2nd Considerable' is, that the people upon this assuming the 
power of elections caused great disturbances and disorders in the 

The people assumed not the power of elections at any time which 
can be assigned after the beginning of Christianity ; they had it at first. 
If the people took to themselves any power herein, which was not their 
proper right, they usurped it, and the usurpation is to be charged, not 
upon the people alone, but the whole church ; for both clergy and 
people concurred in those elections, and made accoimt they had aposto- 
lical warrant for it, and were taught so to do, by Cyprian, and others 
of the ancients. That it was the practice of the church every where 
for the people to choose their own pastors, is evident by those instances 
which are here brought against it ; for there coxild be no disturbances 
or disorders in their choice, if they did not choose. And the disturb- 
ances and disorders objected, when duly weighed, can raise no prejudice 
against the universal practice of the church, nor will be any just occa- 
sion to deprive the people of that power which was by them exercised ; 
and is acknowledged by the ancient church to be their right for so 
many hundred years, without any attempt to divest them of it ; though 

• De 8ac«rdot. Drat. Ui. • Hsr. IxxUi. Num. 28. 

' [Horn. Ti. in Levlt.] '' Point for consideration. 



they were well acquainted with any disorders that fell out in the exer- 
cise thereof. 

There is evidence that this was the practice of the church for above 
a thousand years after Christ; there are about ten instances of disorders 
therein, great and small, for so many ages. Now if every order and 
usage, though of apostolical institution or allowance, should be exploded, 
because of some disorder happening about it once in a hundred years, 
what woxild be left us that is primitive or ancient ? 

But here we have but four instances of any disturbance or disorders 
about popular elections that are considerable in this case ; the rest he 
thinks not worthy of much notice, or fit to be insisted on ; and so 
they are huddled up without giving us the words of his authors, or 
sufficient direction where to find divers of them. As for the four 
which he makes and gives more account of, there are some mistakes 
about them, (such as I never observed the Doctor to be liable to in 
any other cause,) which set right, the instances will not be serviceable 
to his purpose. 

He begins with the disorders at Antioch thus, p. 818: ''Eusebius 
represents the disorders at Antioch to have been so great in the city, 
upon the choice of a new bishop, by the divisions of the people, that they 
were like to have shaken the emperor's kindness to the Christians, &c. ; 
and after much trouble to the emperor, and many meetings of bishops, 
at last Eustathius was chosen." 

Eustathius was not chosen at the end of those troubles, but being 
chosen peaceably long before, his deposition was the beginning of them; 
nor was he ever after there chosen or restored. He was deposed by a 
sjmod of Arian bishops at Antioch, under a pretence that he was a 
Sabellian, (as the Arians were wont to brand those who opposed their 
heresy,) so Socrates." Those of that Action in the town would have 
chosen (in the place of Eustathius, wrongfully ejected) Eusebius Pam- 
philus, then bishop of Cassarea, whom they took to be of that persua- 
sion ; and so violent and irregular were their proceedings therein, not 
only to the disturbing of the civil peace, but violating the constitutions 
of the church, (ofiering to choose one who was bishop of another place, 
as the emperor signifies,^) that all the disturbance may be justly 
imputed to them, as aggressors, thrusting out him who had the right, 
and striving to force in him who could have none. Now is it fidr, to 
make use of the violent attempts of the Arians, enemies of the church 
and the common faith, to derive odium upon the practice of the Catholic 

*' The next is at Csesarea. Gregory Nazianzen sets forth the mighty 

f Lib. i cap. xxiU. » Euseb. De Vita Constantiiii, lib. lii. cap. ItIL 


unraliness of the people of Casarea in the choice of their bishop, saying, 
It came to a dangerous sedition, and not easy to be suppressed," &c. — 
pp. 818, 819. 

We find two hot contests in elections there, one immediately ailer 
the other: whether of them he means, he lets us not understand. The 
first was about the choice of Eusebius. Nazianzen (who alone is said 
to complain of the mighty unruliness of the people) says no worse of it 
in the issue than this, that they proceeded indeed not very orderly, 
ov Xiop fvrdjcTWf , but very faithfiiUy and zealously,' and thereby signifies 
how horribly seditious it was in his account. And his father, the senior 
Gr^ory, bishop of Nazianzum, justifies the action, in letters to the 
governor, as r^olar, and acceptable to God, and defends what they did 
as 6p6At Koi diKoins, done rightly and justly.^ The other contest was 
in the choice of Basil, and he, justly styled a person of incomparable 
worth, carried it, though with some difiiculty, (the rulers and the worst 
of the people joining with them, making some opposition.) There was 
no need to have reckoned these among the most dangerous seditions; 
they might have been passed by, but only that Nazianzen complains 
so much of the inconvenience of popular elections, that he wished them 
altered, and the elections brought to the clergy, as the Doctor tells us. 
Some observe that Nazianzen had sometimes wishes, which would now 
be counted odd and untoward. Once he wished that there were no 
episcopal pre-eminence, no irpo€dpia, by which that pre-eminence is 
most commonly expressed, both by himself and others.^ Another time 
he was ready to wish there were no synods of bishops, and was resolved, 
for his part, never to come at' any, having never seen any good issue of 
them. But he was a very excellent person, and should not be wronged. 
He did not wish, what is here said, that elections might be brought to 
the clergy, (that is, the clergy alone ; that must be the meaning, or 
else he is made to wish for that which he had already,) he would not 
have the power lie in them only, but in them and the select and more 
holy part of people: ry ryjcptr^ «cal KaBaparar^, neither in both these 
only, but in them only, or chiefly, tj bri /iaXiora.' 

The third instance hath no less of mistake in it, or rather more, such 
as renders it wholly impertinent. '* It is a sedition at Aleicandria. 
Evagrius saith. The sedition at Alexandria was intolerable, upon the 
division of the people between Dioscorus and Proterius, the people 
rising against the magistrates and soldiers who endeavoured to keep 
them in order; and at last they murdered Protcriua." — p. 819. 

But this sedition was not raised at the election of Proterius, who 

' Orat. zix. p. 308. * Ibid. p. 310. « OnU. xxYiii. 

^ to. ' Onit. xix. p. 810. 


succeeded Diosconis, but after he was installed, and confirmed^ by the 
common sufirage of a meeting at Alexandria.* No part of the tumult 
but was some time afler this ; but the most tragical part, when Proterius 
was murdered, was five or six years after. And shall poptdar elections 
be decried upon the account of a sedition whereof nothing appeared 
at the election ? Besides, those who moved sedition and committed the 
said outrages, were enemies of the Council of Chalcedon, and of the 
faith then maintained against Eutyches. These were the chief actors, 
and the incendiaries were Timotheus .^urus, some bishops and monks, 
who, upon that accoimt, had separated from the Catholic church, as 
the Eg3rptian bishops and clergy show in their narrative sent to Leo 
the emperor.^ Now shall the people who adhere to the conmion £uth 
suffer in their power or liberty, because some heretics in opposition to 
them do act outrageously ? 

'^ He proceeds to another at Rome upon the choice of Damasos, 
which came to bloodshed for several days, and is particularly related 
by Ammianus Marcellinus,'^ &c. 

Ammianus, in the book cited, discovers the rise and ground of that 
outrageous action to which it may be truly ascribed, and without which 
the election might have been as orderly and innocent as in other 
places. After he hod described this church tragedy, in which a 
himdred and thirty-seven persons were slain, he adds, I cannot deny, 
considering the pomp and bravery at Home, but those that aspire to 
that (bishopric) should, with all their might, strive to attain it, since 
having compassed it, they will be at once enriched matrananan obla- 
tionibuSf with the oblations of matrons, carried abroad in chariots, 
speciously attired, and faring so deliciously, that their feasts are more 
than princely, so that the riches, state, and pleasures, wherewith the 
chair at Rome accommodated those bishops, incited them to make their 
way to it, with all the force they could engage, tiiough they could not 
pass but through blood and slaughters. Then he subjoins, They might 
have been happy (and so avoided this and other miseries) if despising 
this grandeur, they would have imitated the bishops in the provinces, 
whose poor fare, and mean habit, and humble, lowly carriage, com- 
mended them both to Grod and good men. The smallness and poorness 
of the bishoprics in other places secured them firom such scandalous 
proceedings, and temptations to them. We hear no complaints of any 
outrages or irregularities in elections to such bishoprics, nor to any that 
were of the ancient and primitive form and state. Not one instance is 
brought, for three hundred years after Christ, of any such disorders in 
the choice of bishops. But as bishoprics transgressed the ancient 

• Evagr. lib. ii. cAp. 5. • Idem. ibid. ci^. yiii. 


i)otinds, and swelled bigger and bigger, distempers increased accordingly, 
and had their paroxysms now and then, such as this at Rome. These 
are not natural to elections by the people, their order and innocence 
fixr so many ages show it, but accidental and occasional ; and when 
the disorders are ascribed to their true and proper causes and occasions, 
these elections will be acquitted. When the world was let into the 
church, and the church cast into the model of the empire, no wonder if 
the church-men acted where they had temptations, and would have 
others act like the men of this world. 

" But are these tolerable inconveniences ?*^ The worst of them are 
no ways in the nature of the thing, but occasioned by accidents foreign 
to it, and such as may Mi out in the best institutions the church has 
and observes ; and how intolerable soever they may seem, the ancient 
church thought it more intolerable to exclude the people from the liberty 
of choosing. 

What is alleged out of Chrysostom, Jerome, and Origen, with some 
reflection upon the people, I need not examine, unless it were of more 
moment. If it be not applicable to those who succeed the people in this 
power, yet did not these excellent persons think it a sufficient ground to 
decry the current practice and sense of the church, by which popular 
elections were upheld and maintained, both in their times and long 

Come we to the third thii^ he will have us consider, page 820. " To 
prevent these inconveniences many bishops were appointed, without the 
choice of the pec^le, and canons were made for the regulation of elec- 
tions. In the chiux^h of Alexandria the choice of the bishop belonged 
to the twelve presbyters, who was to be chosen not only out of the 
twelve presbyters, but by them." For this Jerome, Severus, &c. are 

But Jerome did not say that the bishop was chosen by the presbyters, 
but out of them, Unitm ex ae (not d se) electwn episcopum nominabant,^ 
'' They nominated as bishop, one chosen fix)m amongst (not by) themselves." 
Nor doth Severus, as he is cited, say that it belonged to the presbyters 
alone. And if there be no evidence that they did it alone, we need not 
be solicitous about what Elmacinus saith concerning its original or con- 
tinuance. The alteration which Hilary speaks of concerns not those 
who were to choose, but those out of whom the bishop was to be chosen. 
Formerly one of these presbyters was to be elected, but now the most 
deserving person might be chosen, whether of that body or not. So he 
not speaking of any change made as to the electors, for anything he 
says, the same persons who did choose in his time did so before ; and 

• Epist. ad EYagT. 


the electors in that age were not oolj the presbjters, but both clergy 
and people ; not in other churches alone, but this particularly of Alex- 
andria, as appears by the election of Athanasius, Peter, and other 
bishops there made, ^^^7^ rov Xaov frovr&ff.* 

But though that of Jerome, on whom the rest cited depend, will not 
serve to prove the sole power of presbyters to choose ; yet it may be a 
proof of their power to do something greater, viz. to ordidn their bishops. 
And this use is made of it by very learned persons, and particularly 
(not to mention the most excellent primate Usher) by Dr. St[illingfleet,]^ 
whom we may see aligning it, like himself, with learning and judgment. 

He seems not unwilling that what the counterfeit Ambrose speaks of 
the bishops djdng, and the next in course succeeding, should pass for a 
particular conceit of that author ; and with more reason may it so pass, 
if he would have the next succeed, though not worthy ; or the people 
no way to interpose their judgment concerning such unworthiness. But 
of this he expresses nothing. 

He proceeds, page 821. '* We find the bishops consecrating others 
in several churches, without any mention of choice made by the 

But this is no tolerable arguing ; there is no mention of any, therefore 
there was none. Otherwise, where a bishop is said to be made, and no 
mention made of any ordination, but only of election by the people, it 
might be concluded that a bishop had no ordination. As when 
Nazianzen speaks of Athanasius's coming to the chair at Alexandria hy 
the votes of all the people, without mentioning his ordination,^ and 
when Jerome speaks of a bishop elected by the people, without any 
mention of his ordination,' would it be thought tolerable to infer from 
hence that a bishop was made without ordination ? Or when one is 
said to be constituted bishop of a church, without mention either of 
election or ordination, doth it follow that he was made bishop there 
without either ? An hundred instances hereof may be found in Euse- 
bius, the author cited ; but we need go no further than the very place 
which the Doctor makes use of. Eusebius says, that Germanic suc- 
ceeded Dius in the bishopric at Jerusalem, and after him Gordius, in 
whose time Narcissus returned ;' he mentions no ordination or election 
of either. And Alexander was settled bishop there by the desires and 
importunity of the people, encouraged therein by revelation, but no 
mention of his ordination ; only, it is said, the people did it with the. 
common consent of the bishops thereabouts/ 

• Nm. Orat. xxl. [p. 377.] Thwxlor. lib. iv. eap. xvlil. > Iron, page 278. 

• Orat. xxi. p. 377. ' In £aek. lib. x. cap. xxxiii. 
' Euaeb. lib. ▼!. cap. x. / Cap. xl. 


*' Severos, bishop of Milevis, in his life-time appointed his successor, 
uid acquainted the deigj with it, but not the people ; great disturbance 
was feared thereupon," &c. 

For a bishop to appoint his successor was both against the ordinary 
practice and rules of the ancient church. It is prohibited by divers 
synods, and particularly by that of Antioch.* But Severus committed 
another error, not acquainting the people with it, and this was like to be 
of dangerous consequence, thereupon great disturbance was feared. St. 
Austin himself shows his dislike of this omission ; Minus aliquid factum 
eraty unde nonnulU contristabcmtur, " Something was neglected, at which 
divers were grieved." And what was that ? Ad populum non est 
locutuSj ''He spake not to the people of it." But Austin coming 
amongst them took care to make up this defect, by prevailing with the 
people for their consent and approbation, as himself tells us ; otherwise 
Severus might have been defeated of his designed successor. St 
Austin would not run into such a mistake, but when he desired a suc- 
cessor calls the people together, propounds Eradius, and obtains for him 
a fair election by the people, with their subscriptions, signifying their 
approbation of him, and that they willed and desired what Austin pro- 
pounded, as appears by divers expressions in that epistle.* 

" So Paulus, the Novatian bishop at Constantinople, appointed his 
successor, Marcianus, to prevent the contentions that might happen after 
his death, and got his presbyters to consent to it.'* 

But the designed successor was neither ordained nor admitted till the 
people had declared their desire and approbation of him ; that is, tiU 
they had chosen him. For three days after the death of Paulus, the paper 
wherein he expressed his desire that Marcian should succeed him, being 
opened before the people, (a great multitude,) they all with one voice 
declare aloud that he was worthy ; which amotmts to no less than an 
imanimous choice of him.^ And after this, Marcian being found out, 
he was ordained and installed. So that the Novatians, though on 
another account they pass for schismatics, yet are not foimd, no, not in 
this singular instance, (of a bishop's designing his successor) to vary 
from the practice of the Catholics, in admitting the people to choose 
their own pastor. 

Thus far we can find no evidence that, either for the preventing of 
supposed inconveniences or other accounts, any bishop was settled in a 
church without the choice of the people. Let us next see what canons 
were made for the regulation of elections, so as to bereave the people of 
this privilege, or diminish tlieii* power. 

> Can. zxiii. in Cod. cii. * Epiit. ex. ' Socrat. Hist. lib. yii. cap. zlri. 


'^ The Greek canonists are of opinion that the Council of Nice took 
away all power of election of bishops from the people, and gave it to 
the bishops of the province." 

Those canonists (if any beside Balsamo) were herein greatly mis- 
taken, as most learned men judge and prove ; nor do I think the Doctor 
is of another mind. If he had thought the reasons of this conceit to be 
of any force, he would have produced them. That this coundl was £ur 
from excluding the people from the power of choosing their bishops is 
apparent enough by their synodical epistle to those of Alexandria and 
Eg3rpt, where they declare their judgments, that if any bishops decease, 
others reconciled to the church may be admitted in their room, if they 
be worthy, Ka\ 6 \a6s alpoiro, " and the people do choose them."* 

'' It is apparent from the Council of Antioch that bishops were some- 
times consecrated without the consent of the people, for it doth suppose 
a bishop afler consecration may not be received by his people." 

The question is not whether the election went before the ordination or 
fdlowed, but whether any bishop might have the chair, and be pos- 
sessed of the bishopric without the people's consent. This canon doth 
not suppose that he might, but rather on the contrary ; it plainly sig- 
nifies that the people might refuse a bishop after he was consecrated ; 
and in that case by the canon he may retain the honour and office, but 
the place he comes not at. For that was a rule in the ancient church 
religiously observed, and the violation of it counted intolerable ; Sicut 
antiqui canones decreveruntj nuUus invitis detur episcopus,* '' As the ancient 
canons have decreed, let no bishop be offered to the people without their 
consent." Such ordinations of bishops whom no church desired were 
not usual, but by the Council of Chalcedon they are plainly forbid, and 
declared to be nullities.* 

Out of another canon he would show that the consecration of a 
bishop was not then performed in his own church. 

It was so by ancient custom, as Cyprian'* declares, and also by 
later canons the bishop was to be ordained among his own people.' 
Whether it be so or no by this canon is not material, since elections by 
the people are not at all concerned in it. 

" Gregory subscribed at Antioch, as bishop of Alexandria, before 
ever he went thither." 

The way wherein Gregory proceeded to that bishopric, is utterly 
condemned by the most eminent bishops in all parts, that were not 
Arians ; particularly in the west by Julius at Rome/ in the south by 

• In Socrat. lib. i. [cap. ix.] * Cone. Aurel. v. Can. xi. • Can. tL 

* Ep. Ixviii. [al. Ixvii. ad Frat. Hisp.] ' Cone. Aurel. iv. [Can. v.] 
/ [JuliuB, Ep. ad Oriental, torn. i. p. 749.] apud Athanas. Apol. il. 


Athanasiiis of Alexandria,* in the east by Nazianzen.* It was an 
iiT^;ular and turbulent act of the Arians; such were they who at 
Antioch made Gregory bishop, and then sent him with military power 
to Alexandria, to take possession by force of arms, and expel the great 
Athanasius. If instances had not been very scarce, this would have 
been waived/ 

^' So St. Basil mentions his consecration of Euphronius to be bishop 
of Nicopolis, without any consent of the people before.** 

If St. Basil did constitute Euphronius without the previous consent 
of the people, which was not usual, yet he did not offer to settle him in 
the chair, till he had gained the consent and approbation of the synod 
and people, as the Doctor's words, " but he persuades the senate and 
people to accept of him,** do plainly signify. But indeed St. Basil doth 
not say that his consecrating of Euphronius to be bishop of Nicopolis, 
was without any consent of the people before, (though the Doctor 
would have it so ;) nor find I any thing in that epistle to prove it. 
Basil there signifies the contrary, when he saith, '* The people judged 
him worthy, and the bishops consented,** S(iov cJym «eal vfUls idoKifjidattn, 
Kid TffjbtU awt&ffieBa ; which imports that the people first declared their 
approbation and desire of him, and thereupon the bishops consented to 
ordain him. " It is true,** he saith, " what the governors do in church 
affairs have their confirmation (jSc/ScuoiWai) from the people, and so 
wishes them to receive the bishop given them.** But a bishop was 
ordinarily given them, i. e. ordained for them, upon their antecedent 
desire to have it so. This the Doctor knows, and signifies in the next 

" If the people did agree upon a person to be bishop, their way then 
was to petition the metropolitan and his sjnod, who had the full power 
either to allow, or refuse him.** 

The usual way was, afier sjmods were settled by rule, (as they were 
in the fourth Age,) for the people, when they wanted a bishop, to meet 
together, and choose one whom they thought fit, by unanimous consent, 
or the major vote of the clergy and people ; and then to draw up a 
writing with the subscriptions of the electors, called by the Latins 
decretum, and by the Greeks ^c^io-^ ; and sending this to the synod, 
thereby signified whom they had chosen, with a desire that he might be 
ordained ; which done, the consecrators, metropolitan or other bishops, 
had no power at all to refuse the person elected, if he was duly 
qualified; and in case he was not, they had no power to put another 
upon them, but only to advise them to proceed to the choice of another, 

• Epist. ad SoUt. [Sd. Col. 1686, torn. i. p. 844, B.] et Epist. ad Orthodox, [torn. L p. 948, D.] 
i Orat. xxi. ' Socrat. lib. [ii.] cap. x. xi. 


as might be made manifest by unquestionable authorities.* Yea, such 
deference had they for elections by the people, that if they had chosen 
one who was incapable by the canons, if the incapacity could any way 
be removed, the election was allowed, and the ordainers proceeded upon 
it. This is evident in the election of Eusebius at Caesarea, and Nec- 
tarius at Constantinople, and Ambrose at Milan, who were choeen by 
the people to be bishops in the places mentioned, not only before they 
were ordained, but before they were baptized ; yet the elections stood 
good, and being baptized first, and afler^ ordained, they were admitted 
to those bishoprics. 

" It is evident from the twelfth canon of Laodicea, that although all 
the people chose a bishop, if he intruded himself into the possession of 
his see, without the consent of a provincial synod, he was to be turned 
out or rejected by them. Which shows how much the business of 
elections was brought into the bishops' power in the eastern parts." 

I find nothing of this in that or any other canon of that synod ; bat 
there is some such thing in the sixteenth canon of the Council at 
Antioch, and the reason of it was, lest an im worthy person should 
intrude into a bishopric, the synod was first to be satisfied of his 
sufficiency:'^ but then if he was found qualified according to the canons, 
the synod had no power to withhold him from those by whom he was 
chosen, nor to choose another for them if they judged him incapable. 
Thus the business of elections was no more brought into the bishops* 
power in the eastern parts, (where he intimates their power herein was 
greatest,) than the business of ordinations was brought into the people's 
power ; for if the bishops could put him by who was unworthy, though 
the people had chosen him ; so the people might refuse him whom the 
bishops consecrated, if they were not satisfied in him ; nay more, for 
the bishops' power was limited to the case of the candidates' insuffi- 
ciency ; but the people might refuse a person commended by the 
bishops as sufficient, if they did not like him on other accounts. The 
consequence of ordaining one for the people, or putting one upon them 
whom they desired not, was intolerable in the judgment of the ancient 
church. Leo, a bishop of greatest reputation in his time, thus ex- 
pressed it: Nullus invitis et non petentihua ordinetur, " Let no bishop be 
ordained for those who are imwilling, and do not desire him." And the 
reason wherewith he enforces it, is very considerable ;•* since it is not 
only an argument for those times, but extends to all ages, and leaves it 
not tolerable at any time, Ne plebs invita episcopum non optatum <tut 
contemncUy aut oderity et Jiat minus religiosa quam convenit, cm nan 

• Greg. lib. vl. Ep. xxxvilj. lib. vii. Ep. xxxiv. lib. viil. Ep, xl. * afterwards, 

f competency. ^ worthy of consideration. 


Ucuerit habere quern volttitj' " Lest the people not consenting, do either 
contemn or hate a bishop whom they desire not ; and become less 
religiouB than they should be, when they may not have such a one as 
they would have." 

Let me only add, that those who have any respect for modem 
bishops, such as get possession of their sees without regard either of 
the people's choice or the consent of a provincial synod, ought to 
beware of this canon; since it leaves them no more title to any episcopal 
chair, than Bassianus and Stephanus had to that at Ephesus, when 
upon this account, they were ejected by the sentence of the Others at 
Chalcedon, and the greatest council that the ancient church ever had. 

" By the law of Justinian, the conmion people were excluded from 
elections of bishops, and the clergy and better sort of citizens were to 
nominate three to the metropolitan, out of which he was to choose 

The law of that emperor enjoins, that the clergy and better sort of 
citizens do draw up the electing decree, (>fn;<^((r/Mzra n-oicii/,) but doth not 
enjoin that the other citizens be excluded from concurring in the elec- 
tion, or to make any without their liking. In the code we have another 
of his laws, where it is enacted. That the choice be made, ir<ipa t&v 
oUovvTw Tffv rrSkiv^ by the inhabitants of the city, in general, without 
any discrimination. Nor doth the former constitution oblige them 
precisely to choose and present three ; they have liberty by it, if they 
find not three sufficient persons, (and none appointed to be judges 
thereof but themselves) to name two or but one. 

" By the canon of Laodicea, the common people were excluded from 
the power of choosing any into the clergy, for they were wont to raise 
tumults upon such occasions." 

That canon, in Bishop Bilson's judgment, concerns only presbjrters ;• 
the meaning of it is this, that it is not fit elections should be left 
to the rabble (©xXoir) only or chiefly, without the clergy and better sort 
of the people, who may keep the rest in order, and prevent tumidts. 
The import of the words cTrcrpcWciv and i^x^ois leads us thus to imderstand 
it ; and the sense and practice of the church every where at that time, 
expressed in the coimcils and the best writers of that age, wherein the 
sj-nod was held, will not suffer us to take it in any sense, exclusive of 
the interest of the common people in the choice of their pastors ; unless 
we will have it to be a singular capriccio^ of a few bishops in this assem- 
bly, in opposition to the common sentiments of the Christian world. 

• Ep. IxxziT. cap. V. * [Lib. i. Tit. iU.] De Epitcopia. Lex. xlii. 

< Perpet. Gov. cap. xv. p. M2. •' caprice. 


" The second Council of Nice restrained the elections only to 
bishops."-— p. 823. 

The third canon of that council determines, that the magistrates* 
appointing of bishops is a nullity ; confirming it by an ancient canon, 
(one of those which passed for apostolical.) But that clause whereby 
Bcllarmine and others will have elections restrained to bishops is mis- 
taken, ordinations being thereby intended, not elections; which is 
apparent because they cite for it the fourth canon of the first Council of 
Nice, in which episcopal ordinations are appropriated to bishops, but 
nothing expressed, or intimated concerning elections. Thus is this 
passage alleged by the Doctor tmderstood by Bishop Bilson f and 
thereby all advantages are cut off which others would make of it, 
against elections by the people. 

The eighth Council of Constantinople might as weU have been 
spared, confirming neither the former, nor anything else for the Doctor's 
purpose, though it be said the people are here excluded with an ana- 
thema. It is well the curse came no sooner, than towards the latter 
end of the ninth age. But what if that synod never anathematised any 
such thing? The canon cited for it is the twenty-eighth, which in 
other Latin copies is the twenty-second, but the Greek edition hath but 
fourteen in all ; and the Greek church (whose coimcil it was) owns no 
more ; so that this canon looks no better than a piece of (some Latin's) 

I need not add that this synod was ten years afler condemned, by a 
far more numerous council at the same place. Baronius gives a fiill 
account of it, though with such reflections upon Photius and his adhe- 
rents, as is suitable to his usual partiality. But it seems there is great 
scarcity of evidence when this canon, and that of the second Nicene 
Coimcil, cited immediately before, must be made use of: seeing this 
leaves the way of making bishops now used amongst us, under a curse; 
the other makes our bishops, however consecrated, to be no bishops, 
and will have those debarred from communion who commimicate with 
them. And this is considerable,^ as grounded upon an ancient canon. 
Indeed it was the sense of the ancient church for many ages, if we may 
judge thereof by coimcils or writers in those ages, not only that bishops 
ought to be chosen by the people, but that none ought to be owned as 
bishops who were not so chosen. 

" The foiuth thing he would have considered is. That when there 
were Christian magistrates, they did interpose in this matter as they 
judged expedient." 

• Can. iii. « Ibid. p. 369. ' worthy of contideFitkm. 


He brings many instances ; I shall begin with those which seem less 
pertinent, and so proceed to the rest. 

** After the death of Alexander, bishop of Constantinople, the people 
fell into parties; some were for Panlus, and others for Macedonius: the 
emperor Constantius coming hither puts them both by, and appoints 
£iisebins, of Nicomedia, to be bishop there." 

The Allans were so hot and violent for the promoting of their party, 
diat they transgressed the rules, orders, and usages of the church, 
trampling on all that stood in their way. This did Constantius, and 
his design was utterly to subvert the Christian faith in that main fun- 
damental of it, concerning the eternal Godhead of Christ.' 

In order hereto, he thrust out those who, according to the rule and 
order of the church, were duly chosen by such who adhered to the true 
faith, particidarly Paidus ; and gives the chair to Eusebius, of Nico- 
media, the cmtesignanua^ of the Arians, and one who, by his great 
interest, subtile counsels, and mischievous actings, did more propagate 
Arianism, than Arius himself: and afterwards gives order that Paulus 
be banished, and that Macedonius, one as bad or worse than Eusebius, 
shotdd have the chair, not according to the rule of the church, but by 
the will of the governor, as the historian notes,^ and his way is made 
to it through the death of three thousand one hundred and fifty of the 
people. Now this is scarce a proper instance, for that was proposed to 
be given in Christian emperors ; but the Arians were not counted 
Christians. Athanasius proves that they ought not to be so called in 
divers orations,' and Constantius was an Arian, indeed a great zealot 
for promoting of that heresy, and suppressing the true faith. He 
banished the orthodox bishops, saith Theodoret.' He made a law for 
the utter demolishing of their churches, says Socrates.^ He com- 
manded Athanasius to be killed, and proposed rewards to those that 
would assassinate him ; and raised a general persecution against the 
professors of the true faith, much like to those under the heathen 
emperors, says Sozomen.*^ What such a prince did against the rule 
and practice of the true church, and the rights of the &ithful people 
in elections, will rather commend them, than be any prejudice to them. 

" When Athanasius was restored, Constantius declared it was by the 
decree of the synod, and by his consent ; and he, by his authority, 
restored likewise Paulus and Marcellus," &c. 

But to what purpose is this alleged ? Is there no difference between 
choosing and restoring ? How did Constantius interpose for the 

• Soerat. Ub. [ii.] cap. Tii. ' Standard-bearer, ringleader. « Socrat. lib. [ii.] cap. xvi. 

* Orat. i. [ed. Col. 1686, tom. i. p. 296, A. ;] Orat. ii. [torn. i. p. 316, ed. Paria, 1627 ;] Orat. 
iT. [ed. Col. 1686, torn. i. p. 481, A.] 

' Lib. ii. cap. xt. / [Lib. ii. cap. xxzyHL] f Lib. iv. cap. xiiL xiv. 


hindering of the people^s elections, by restoring those bishops who were 
before duly chosen by the people ? Their choice hereby is rather 
countenanced and confirmed. I can discern no reason why it is made 
use of against it. There seems to be neither proof nor pertinency in 
these instances. 

" Ailer the death of Sisinnius, the emperor declared, that, to prerent 
disturbance, he would have none of the clergy of Constantinople chosen 
bishop there ; and so Nestorius was brought from Antioch." 

But his being brought from Antioch is no proof that he was not 
chosen by the people ; for Chrysostom was brought from the same 
place, and was none of the clergy of Constantinople more than Nestorius, 
yet was called thither, and placed in the chair by the votes of the people, 
as will appear presently. And why should it be thought Nestorius was 
not chosen by the people ? Doth Socrates, cited as giving this accoimt 
of him, say he was not ? No, " but he doth not mention his choice." 
Nor doth he speak a word of his ordination : shall we therefore condade 
that he was neither elected nor ordained ? If this were an argument, there 
are hundreds that we must accoimt bishops without either ordination or 
election. But though there be no reason why we should think that 
Nestorius was not chosen, yet there is apparent reason why the choice 
should not be mentioned. For an unanimous choice by the people was 
an honour, and wont to be put among the encomiums of worthy 
bishops. But Nestorius, after he got the chair, answered not their 
expectation, but showed himself worthy of an ill character, both by 
his actions and judgment ; and so in fine was condemned as a heretic 
by a general council at Ephesus, and banished by the emperor. There- 
upon the historian might think himself concerned to waive that which 
was much for the honour of one who so little deserved it. 

There are three or four instances which seem more pertinent and con- 
siderable," which I have therefore taken the liberty to put together ; 
but indeed there is some mistake in them, I would not say they are mis- 

" So Constantine did in the church of Antioch, when there was great 
dissension there upon the deposition of Eustathius ; he recommended to 
the synod Euphronius of Cappadocia and Greorgius of Arethusa, or 
whom they should judge fit, without taking any notice of the interest 
of the people." 

But how doth it appear that Constantine took no notice of the interest 
of the people ? No otherwise, but because Sozomen speaks not of it. 
Of what weight this argument is, we have seen before. But what if 
another author declare that he did take notice of it ? Eusebius, who knew 

* worthy of coniideration. 


the whole matter as well and better than Sozomen, being particularlj 
concerned therein, tells us plainly that Constantine did, in his letters to 
the people of Antioch, take notice of the people^s interest in the choice 
of their bishop. For, says he, the emperor advises them not to desire 
the bishop of another church, (in reference to Eusebius, whom they had 
a mind to, though he was then bishop of Caesarea,) but, " according to 
the custom or decree of the church, to choose one to be their pastor," 
as the common Saviour did direct them, ^cct/a^ cVieXi^crtaff rovrov alpfiaOat 
voifupa' And in the emperor^s epistle there are divers expressions 
which signify no less. 

** When Gregory Nazianzen resigned the bishopric of Constantinople, 
Theodosius commended to the bishops the care of finding out a person ; 
who, recommending many to him, the emperor himself pitched upon 
Nectarius, and would have him made bishop," &c. 

If this will any way serve the purpose for which it is alleged, the 
emperor must pitch upon Nectarius, so as to have him made bishop 
without any previous choice of the people ; but there is no ground for 
this, nay, there is clear and unquestionable evidence against it. For 
the general council at Constantinople, in the latter end of their synodical 
epistle to the western bishops, declared that Nectarius was chosen by 
the suffrage of the whole city. We have, say these fathers, ordained 
Nectarius, with the unanimous concurrence of this oecumenical synod, 
aU the clergy and all the city giving their voices for it, irdtnis €9rc>fn;<^c^o- 

" When Chrysostom was chosen at Constantinople, the royal assent 
was given by Arcadius, the election being made, saith Sozomen, by the 
people and clergy ; but Palladius gives a more particular account of 
it," &c.— p. 324. 

About the choice of Chrysostom to Constantinople, Sozomen says, 
the clergy and people having voted it, ^<^ifo/ii<v<»v dc rovro rov Xaov kgI 
Kkripov, the emperor gave his consent. Socrates says, that by the com- 
mon decree {'>ltTf<f>i(rfiari tcoivf) of the clergy and people, the emperor sent 
for him to Constantinople.*^ "But Palladius gives a more particular 
account ;" says he — Yet in that account, and the works cited for that 
purpose, there is nothing at all which denies that Chrysostom was thus 
unanimously chosen by the people. Now, shall we believe that Chry- 
sostom was not thus chosen, upon the testimony of Palladius, who doth 
not deny it, against two credible witnesses, who positively and expressly 
affirm that such was the choice ? To these might be added the writers 
of the life of Chrysostom, particularly George, patriarch of Alexandria, 

Euteb. De VitA ContUnt. lib. Ui. cap. Ivii. « In Theodur. Hiit. lib. v. cap. ix. 

Lib. vi. eap. ii. 



who, as Photius declares, made his collections out of Palladins, among 

'^ So that there was no antecedent election of the people, as Sozomen 
says ; but whatever there was, was subsequent to the emperor's deter- 

Sozomen is here contradicted, without ground, and to little purpose. 
Whether the election was antecedent or no is not material, since the 
emperor^s determination was neither against nor without the people^s 
choice ; yet evidence is produced for the election as antecedent, and 
none at all against it. 

"Maximianus being dead, he gave order that Proclus should be 
made bishop before the other*s body was buried." 

Maximianus being dead, the emperor (cTrcrpc^rcy is the historian^s 
word) permitted Proclus ; so that, if he was not chosen, the emperor 
interposed not there by positive order, but by permission only. But, 
indeed, Proclus, in an election before, had the voices of the major part 
for him, and so had carried it, but for a groundless suggestion that the 
canons did forbid it.* This being but about two years before, the place 
was again void by the death of Maximianus, and the sense and desires 
of the people for Proclus being sufficiently known by their late suf- 
frages, a new election was not needful, but he admitted to be installed 
without more ado. 

Thus we have made it manifest that all these instances are not suffi- 
cient to show that any one truly Christian prince did, from the first, 
think fit, upon any occasion, to make use of their authority, either to 
deprive the people of their power in elections, or to obtrude any bishops 
upon the churches without the people's choice. As for Constantius 
being an Arian, the ancient church did not esteem him a Christian ; 
Hilary makes bold to caU him antichrist. And what he did to the 
prejudice of the people's privilege herein, since it was done to promote 
Arianism, and for the subversion of the Christian faith, is little more 
to be regarded, or drawn into example, than if Julian had done the like 
in favour of heathenism. 

The two last heads concern only the usages of later times, which I 
had no design to take notice of. 

• In ChrysoHt. torn. viii. page 188. * Socrat. lib. vH. cap. xxxv 








ed for Thomas Parkhurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns, at the 
lower end of Cheapside, near Mercers* Chapel, 1682. 


The following Treatise is reprinted from a small quarto Tolnme, which is not 
so rare as the preceding work. 


Dissenters are accused of schism by some of this church : 
both these and the other are branded not only as schismatics, but 
as heretics by the Papists; who upon this account judge us un- 
worthy to live, and had actually destroyed both together, if God 
in mercy had not discovered their devilish plot. The dis- 
covery gave them some interruption, and put them upon an after- 
game, to retrieve what had miscarried. And this was so to divide 
us, as that ourselves should help them in their design to ruin us 
all, when they hod less hopes to do it alone. In pursuance hereof, 
such influence they have had upon too many as to raise in them 
a greater aversion to Dissenters than to Papists. These the con- 
spirators count their own, and think they may well do so, since 
they are too ready to concur with them in their design to exter- 
minate those who are true Protestants in every point, and differ 
no more from this church than those in France do, who by the 
same counsels are at this time in extreme danger to be utterly 
extirpated. Others are so far prevailed with as to make use of 
one of the sharpest weapons they have against dissenting Pro- 
testants, and that is the charge of schism, lately renewed and 

In these hard circumstances, while we do what we can against 
tlie common enemy, we are put to ward off the blows of such as 
(notwithstanding some present distemper) we will count our 
friends. Amongst other expedients, sufiBcient to seciure us against 
this attack, it was thought not unuseftil to answer the allegations 
out of antiquity concerning two points, wherein only the ancients 


were made use of to our prejudice ; viz. 1. For diocesan churches ; 
and then, 2dly. Against the election of bishops by the people in 
the primitive times. Something was performed and published in 
reference to both these in a late discourse ; one-half of which, 
where the latter is discussed, concerning the popular elections of 
bishops, hath yet passed without any exception that I can see or 
hear of; yet this alone is enough to defend us against the afore- 
said charge ; for those who will not make the primitive church 
schismatical must not condemn any as schismatics for declining 
such bishops as that church would not own. 

Against the former part of the discourse, concerning diocesan 
churches, some exception hath been made, but very little. A 
late author, in his preface to a treatise of another subject, hath 
touched about five pages in forty, but so as he hath done them no 
more harm than another, who, to find one fiault therein, runs 
himself into two or three, about fAvpiot, rendered indefinitely 
according to the mind of the author who uses it, and the most 
common use of it. 

I disparage not the gentleman's learning who attacks me in his 
preface ; he shows that which (with answerable care and judg- 
ment) might be serviceable in a cause that deserves it. But 
much more than he shows would not be enough to support what 
he would establish. And he might have forborne the vilifying of 
those who are known to be masters of much more valuable learn- 
ing than appears in either of us. Tlie neglect of some accurate- 
ness in little things, remote from the merits of the cause, in one 
who is not at leisure to catch flies, is no argument that he is 
destitute of learning. 

I complain not of his proceeding with me, but am obliged by 
him that he treats me not with so much contempt as he does 
others, who less deserve it. I wish he had dealt more temperately 
with M[r.] B[axter] : it would have been more for his reputation, 
and no prejudice to his undertaking : a good cause, when it hath 
a sufficient advocate, does not need any indecent supplements. 

After I have cleared my discourse from this gentleman's excep- 
tions, I thought it not impertinent to show what in reason cannot 
be counted competent proofs of diocesan churches ; that if any 
will pursue this debate farther, instead of opposing us, they may 
not beat the air, and amuse those that inquire after truth with 
what is insignificant. Withnl I have given an account of what 

preface: 63 

other allegations out of Scripture and antiquity this author hath 
brought in other parts of his treatise for such churches ; and 
sho^^ed that there is no evidence in them as to the purpose they 
are alleged for. 

In short, I find nothing in this author, or any other before 
him, which may satisfy a judicious and impartial man that in the 
two first ages of Christianity any bishop had more than one par- 
ticular church or congregation for his proper charge ; or that in 
the third age there was any bishop which had a church consisting 
of more than are in some one of our parishes, unless it was the 
church of Rome, (nor is there suflBcient evidence produced for 
that ;) or that in the middle of the fourth age there were four 
churches, each of which comprised more than could assemble in 
one place, (though, if they had contained more, that might be far 
enough from making them diocesans ;) or that afterwards, within 
the time of the four first genend councils, where there were several 
churches belonging to one bishop, he did exercise jurisdiction 
over them alone, or only by himself and his delegates. It will 
be time enough to censure us as schismatics for declining dio- 
cesan churches, when they have made it appear that there was 
such in the best ages of Christianity ; (which not appearing, the 
censure falls upon the primitive Christians, from whom it will 
slide off upon themselves.) If they will forbear us till this be 
performed, we need desire no more ; unless we may prevail with 
those who sincerely profess themselves Protestants, to regard the 
securing themselves and their religion from the destructive designs 
of tlie Papists, more than those tilings which are not properly the 
concern either of Protestants or of religion. 

As for those who prefer the Papists before Dissenters, and 
revile these as worse, though they differ in no one point of reli- 
gion firom other true Protestants, we need not wonder if we meet 
with no better treatment firom them than fi*om declared Papists ; 
since, by such preference they too plainly declare the Protestant 
religion to be worse than Poper}' in their account. The following 
sheets have lain by me many months, and had done so still, but 
that the importunity of some, and the misrepresenting of my 
silence by others, forced me to publish them. 




To show that many presbyters in one church was not enough to prove 
it a diocesan, I made it manifest that it was usual in the ancient church 
to multiply presbyters, beyond what we count necessary, (not beyond 
what is necessary, as it is too often misrepresented.) For this I offered 
two testimonies, one asserting it to be so in the first age, the otlier in 
the fourth ; and thought these sufficient, if they could not be denied, 
(as they are not,) to evince it to have been so in the third : for who can 
reasonably suppose, but that had place in the third, which was usual 
both in the ages before and after ? The first was that of Bishop 
Downham, who says, " At the first conversion of cities, the number of 
people converted were not much greater than the number of presbyters 
placed amongst them." But this, it is said, can be of little use, " be- 
cause. First, This was not the case of the church of Carthage : it was 
not a new converted church, but settled long before, and in a flourish- 
ing condition." 

The church of Carthage, by the fierce persecutions in Cyprian's time, 
(which is the time we speak of,) was brought so low, and reduced to so 
very few, as if it had l^een but new converted ; and how was it in a 
settled and flourishing condition, when it was so lamentably wasted, 
and still harassed one year after another ? or who can believe it, that 
reads Cyprian lamenting, Pressures isHus tarn tvrbidam vastitateniy qua 
gregem nostrum ma^rimd ex parte popiilata est, adhuc et usque populatur^ 
" so terrible a havoc as has destroyed the greater part of oiu" flock, and 
still pursues its ravages;" and that they were positi inter plangentium 
niinas, et tiinentium reliquias, inter numerosam languentium stragem, et 
exiguam stantinm pancitatem, " placed between those who weeping fell, 
and a bare remnant whose hearts fail them, — between a copious 
slaughter of the unstable, and a veiy few stedfast professors ?"" Was 

• Lib. iv. Ep. iT. ad fln. 


not this much the case of the apostolical churches, unless this of 
Carthage was worse, and so less for our author^s advantage ? Or if 
this were otherwise, the churches in Nazianzen^s time were not newly 
converted, but settled long before, and in a flourishing condition ; which 
yet cannot be denied to have had more presbjrters than we count 
needful. So that tliis was the practice in every condition of the church, 
whether flourishing or not. 

Secondly, he says, " Many more presbyters may be ordained in a city 
than is necessary for the first beginning of a church, with respect to 
future increase,'* &c. 

And who will question but the many presbyters in the church of 
Carthage were for the future increase both in city and coimtry ? So 
that herein the case is not difierent ; and the design of that number of 
officers might partly be for other congregations, (episcopal churches, 
though not diocesan,) to furnish them with officers. This b apparent 
afl;erwards in the practice of the Airican churches, which, when a new 
church was erected, supplied it with a bishop or other assistants from 
places better stored with officers ; and it is exemplified particularly (as 
we shall see hereafter) in the provision which St. Austin made for 

He says, further, " The multitude of presbyters belonging to one 
congregational chiu-ch, might be occasioned by the imcertain abode of 
most of the apostles and their commissioners, who are the principal, if 
not the only, ordainers of presbyters mentioned in Scripture." 

But herein he does Init guess, and had no reason to be positive, unless 
the apostles and their commissioners, (as he calls them,) had been then 
the only ordainers ; which he will not venture to affirm, knowing what 
evidence there is against it. 

Lastly, he says, *^ If this opinion of Bishop Downham had any certain 
ground in antiquity, we should probably hear of it with both ears, and 
we should have it recommended upon more ancient authority than his." 

This of Bishop Downham hath certain ground in the best antiquity, 
if the New Testament be such ; where it is plain there were many 
presbyters in divers churches, such as are not yet, nor ever will be, 
proved to be diocesan. 

To that of Nazianzen, he says it hath received its answer; and adds, 
" He that cannot answer it to himself, from the great diflerence between 
the condition of the church in Cyprian's and in Nazianzen^s time, hath 
a fondness for the argument." 

This is the answer it received, (p. 51,) and this diff*erence was thus 
expressed a little before : " But that any church fixed and settled, 
having its bishop always present, should multiply presbyters beyond 
necessity, in the circumstances of the primitive Clu'istians before 


Constantine, is altogether incredible ; for the necessary expenses of the 
church were very great — ^the poor numerous — the generality of Chris- 
tians not of the richest — and the estates they had being at the discretion 
of their enemies, and ruined with perpetual persecution,*^ &c. He says, 
" multiplpng presbjrters beyond necessity, and without necessity." While 
be alters my words so as to change the sense, he disputes against himself, 
not me ; but this looking more like an argument than any thing before, 
I shall take a little more notice of it. First, Is not all this applicable 
to the chui-ches in the apostles' times, when it cannot be denied 
presbyters were multiplied beyond what we count necessary ? " The 
poor numerous, — the generality of Christians not of the richest, — and 
the estates they had being at the discretion of their enemies, and ruined 
with perpetual persecution." 

Further, the church, before Constantine and Carthage particularly, 
supposing these to be its circumstances, might have many presbyters, 
without any great charge ; for, first, the church stock was reserved only 
for those in want, rots dco/xcVotr, as is determined in one of the canons 
which pass for apostolical," and the same decreed in the synod at 
Antioch.^ Ambrose even, in the fourth age, will liave none to have a 
stipend who hath other revenues, Qui fidei exercet militican, agelU sui 
fructibiis^ si habetj debet ease contentus ; si non habet, stipendiorum suorum 
fnictu/^ ** He who fights the fight of faith, ought to be content with the 
produce of his estate, if he have one, and with the proceeds of his 
salary, if he have not." And Chrysostom tells us, that in elections, 
those of the competitors that hsid estates did carry it, because the 
church would need to be at no charge in maintaining of such, oOic Sv 
bioiTo Tp€<fi€&0ai €K Ta>v rljs €KKKrj<rias npoo'dbav.'^ Secondly, when they 
had no estates, and the chiu-ch could not maintain them, they were to 
provide for themselves by some honest employment. The Council of 
El^'ira allows all sorts of clergymen to drive a trade for their living, 
provided they did it only in the province where they lived;* and in the 
fourth Council pf Carthage it is ordered, that the clergy, though they 
be learned in the word of God, shall get their living by a trade/ and 
in the next canon, that they shall get food and raiment by a trade or 
husbandry, with this proviso, that it be not a prejudice to their office. 
Our author says, indeed,*" that this is contrary to the usage of all 
other churches: how true this is, may be seen by the canon before 
cited. He says also, that this is forbidden by the third Council of 
Carthage : but neither is this so ; that canon adds but another restric- 

• Can. iv. * Can. xxv. 

' Offlc. lib. J. cup. jxx\i. '' Dp SaccnI. Rer. lii. p. 25, •dit. Savil 

' Can. xix. / Can. II. 

i Page 154. 


tion, viz. that they got not their livings by an employment that is 
sordid or dishonest,'* where the Latin and Greek both agree in it. 
Thirdly, the church was to allow none of them, no not bishops, more 
than necessary, even afler Constantine^s time. That canon called the 
apostles^ and the other at Antioch forecited, express this in the same 
words : " The bishop may have of the church stock what is needful, if 
he be necessitous," ra dcovra el dcotro irp6s apayicaias ;(p€tar, for neoessaiy 
uses; and these are afterwards explained to be food and raiment. 
Zonaras expresses it fully and clearly, whom he that the canon doth not 
satisfy may consiilt. 

Having showed out of Justinian, that sixty presbyters belonged to the 
great church in Ck)nstantinople, and thence inferred they were numerous 
in Constantine's time, " the number," says he, " was become extravagant 
in Justinian's time ; but what is this to their number in Cyprian's ?" 

He should have asked the Dean* this, who, to prove diocesan churches 
from the number of presbyters, immediately after testimonies out of 
Cyprian, brings this of Justinian. 

" For this very edict of Justinian shows that this multiplying of 
church officers was an innovation, and therefore would have them 
reduced to the first establishment." 

Justinian took order to retrench the numbers of presbyters ; not 
therefore because it was an innovation, but because the church revenue 
could not iiijiintain so many, which is express in the Novel. 

" But that first establishment, it seems, admitted great numbers, for 
one church had sixty. True; but it must also l)e noted first, that these 
sixty were to serve more than one church." 

Some may be ready to ask how it can be true, that one church should 
have sixty, and yet more than one had these sixty amongst them. 

" For there were three more besides St. Sophia to be supplied by 
these presbyters," &c. 

True ; but this still confirms what I answered to their argiunent from 
the multitude of presbyters, that in the ancient church the ofiicers were 
multiplied above what we coimt needfid : for it is not now thought 
needful that any three or four churches in a city should have sixty 
presbyters, a hundred deacons, ninety subdeacons, readers a hundred 
and ten, &c. 

" Yet afVer all, there is no argument to be drawn from this number; 
for these were canons of a particular foundation, designed for the 
service of a collegiate chiu*ch ; and no measure to be taken from thence 
concerning the numbers of presbyters belonging to the diocese. This is 
evident from the preface of the said Novel." 

• Can XV. in Cod. xii. * Dean Stilliugfleet. 


If no argaiDent it to be drawn from tlib number, why did the 
learned Dean draw one from it ? Secondly, this seems scarce con- 
sistent with the former period: there, these presbyters were for three 
or four churches ; here thej are but for one collegiate church, of which 
they were canons, and this is said to be eyident in the preface, where I 
cannot see it. Thirdly, since no measure is to be taken from hence 
concerning the numbers of presbyters belonging to a diocese; it seems 
there may be this number of presbj-ters in a place which cannot be 
counted a diocese, (as this one great church neyer was, nor can be,) 
and then no argument drawn frx>m the number of presbyters at Rome, 
Carthage, Edessa, &c., will proye a diocesan church; for here was the 
greatest number, which any where we meet with. 

Dr. St[illingfleet],to proye diocesan churches from the numerousness 
of presbjrters, mentioned sixty in C. P." in Justinian's time; from hence, 
on the by, I thought it reasonable to suppose they were numerous in 
Constantine's time, when yet Theodoret says, ** all the brethren met 
together with the bishop.** That the number of presbyters is no proof 
of a diocesan church, was eyinced sufHciently before : this fell in 
occasionally, and was added ex abundanti. Yet upon this supemiunerary 
straggler, he turns his main force, spending about twelye pages on it. 
I am little concerned what becomes of it, since the main hypothesis is 
already secured by the premises ; but that this gentleman may not quite 
lose all his labour, I am willing to lose a little, in taking some notice 
of it. 

^* I must confess that what is added concerning the church of C. P.* 
is somewhat surprising; no doubt, says he, that the presbyters were 
more numerous in C. P."* 

Indeed, it might haye been surprising if I had said, as he reports me, 
tliat they were more numerous ; but I saw reason not to say so, though 
what reason there was to impose it on me I know not: I cited Soc., 
misprinted Soz., saying, " Constantine built two churches at C. P.,"« but 
laid no stress on it at all.^ It is true, he says, not that he built no 
more than two, but his expression plainly implies it, and he was 
concerned if he had known any more to haye mentioned it, when in the 
same line he says, " Constantine intended to make it equal to Rome.*^ 
Eusebius's words agree well enough herewith; he says, *^ Constantine 
adorned it (n-Xftovo-iy) with more churches;" and that is true, if he 
built but two more, or any more than was there formerly, or any more 
than was usual. And these more churches were not in the city, but 
(as the historian speaks) partly there, and partly npo rov aartoi^ " in 
the suburbs," which, as the word is used, may denote places many miles 

* Conatantinople. * Soc. lib. i. cap. \,xt\.\ 


distant from the city, as the gentleman elsewhere observes after Valedus. 
Sozomen says he built (m^XXow) many churches, (not very many as he 
will have it ;) but if he thereby meant more than are named by Socrates, 
we need not understand that done before the time Theodoret speaks of; 
nor should a lax expression be more relied on, than one that is pimc- 
tual and definite; unless we have a mind either to be misled, or to set 
the two historians together by the ears. Sozomen names but one church 
more than Socrates did, and that not in, but a good distance from, the 
city, (seventy furlongs by land ;) and three may pass for many, when it 
was a rare thing for any city to have more than one. The best authors, 
as they sometimes express very few by none, and a generality by all; 
so they express more than ordinary by many; and two or three such 
churches in one city were more than ordinary at that time, when one 
city in an hundred had not two churches, and one in a thousand had 
not three churches, that could be styled fUyiaroi: all that Constantine 
built here were such ; both Eusebius's more, and Sozomen*s many, are 
said, by them, to be very great, fjjyiaroi. But no considerable author 
that I meet with in that age, or some hundreds of years after, names 
more than two very great churches erected by Constantine in that city. 
And if comparison be made, there is no historian of those times to be 
more regarded in matters which concern C. P.,<» than Socrates, who tells 
us* that he was born and educated at C. P.,« and continued there (as an 
advocate) when he wrote liis history. 

But if we should suppose that Sozomen intended more than three or 
four chiu'ches, or that the emperor built no more than was reqiusite, 
and only consult<id conveniency, and designed not state or magnificence, 
(which yet our author a little af^cr says he did ; and we know nothing 
is more ordinary than for great cities to have more churches than are 
needful: it was so in London before the fire, and the retrenching of 
their number since shows it:) yet this will be so far from proving 
Alexander's church in C. P." to be diocesan, that it will not prove it 
greater than some single congregations : for there were twelve churches 
in Alexandria, when yet the church in that city adhering to Athanasius 
consisted of no more than are in some of our parishes. For which such 
evidence has been brought, as is not yet, nor, I think, can be defaced. 

" Nor can we imagine that two churches, much less one, could suf- 
fice all the Christians in C. P.," when the city of Heliopolis being con- 
verted to Christianity required more, and Constantine built several for 
them, fKKkrfirias fi< icria-as^ " erected churches.*' 

The word plurally expressed is much improveil by our author, he 
makes out of it divers churches, and all these churches, when yet all 

• Constantinople. * Lib. [v. J cap. xziv. 


these were but one church, as Socrates himself makes it plain a little 
before;* for having related how Constantine ordered a church to be 
built near the Oak at Mambre, he adds, that he ordered another church 
(not churches) to be erected at Heliopolis, Mpav iKKkriaiap KoratrKtvaa^ 
Bivai. And to put it past doubt, Eusebius, whom the emperor employed 
about those structures, and from whom, in all likelihood, Socrates had 
the relation, gives an account but of one church there founded by the 
emperor, which he calls, oUov tvicrripiov iKKkYfo-las,^ *' the house of prayer 
for the church," and that it was furnished with a bishop, presbyters, 
and deacons. So that the bishop of Heliopolis had but one church for 
his diocese, which our author should not be so loth to own, since it 
cannot be proved that at this time one bishop in an hundred had more. 

Yalesius, (whom oiu* author much relies on,) in his Notes upon this 
place, is so far from thinking that Constantine built more churches in 
Heliopolis, that he judges this one at present was not necessary for it, 
the town having then no Christians in it; and assigns this as the reason 
why Eusebius speaks of it as a thing unusual, that it should have a 
bishop appointed, and a church built in it. His words are, Fortasse 
hoc novum et inauditum fuisae intelligit, &c. '^ He may think this new 
and unheard of, that a church should be built in a city, where as yet 
there were no Christians, but all were alike idolators." Therefore this 
church was built at Heliopolis, not for that there was any necessity of 
it, but rather in hope that he might invite all the citizens to the pro- 
fession of the Christian religion. So that the bishop here had none for 
his diocese but one church, and that empty, there being then no Christians 
in that one parish ; which yet was all he had to make him a diocesan.' 

The better to confute Theodoret, who says (for they are his words, 
not mine,) that " Alexander, with all the brethren, met together," he 
endeavours to show the state of that church about the latter end of 
Constantine['s reign], &c. ; this he does here and afler by an undue ap- 
plication of some passages in Sozomen. For the account which that his- 
torian gives of that city is not confined to Constantine*8 time, but reaches 
beyond it, ay, and beyond Julianas too, which appears, as by other 
passages, so by his mentioning the heathen temples in the time of that 
emperor. And with respect to the time after Constantine, must that 
expression be imderstood, which makes C. P.'' to exceed Rome, not only 
in riches, but in the number of inhabitants, otherwise it will be appa- 
rently' false ? For when Chrysostom was bishop there, about seventy 
years afler, (when it is like^the number of the inhabitants were doubled, 

• Hoc. Ub. i. cap. xWii. * Lib. iii. cap. [IviU.] De Vit& Conitant. 

' In lib. Hi. De Vita CoDttant. cap. lyili. p. 235. " Coustantiiiuple. ' Mantfettly. 

' Probable. 


it cannot be questioned but they were far more numerous,) he who be^t 
could do it, reckons the Christians then to be a hundred thousand ;* our 
author will have us look upon the Jews and heathen there to be inconsi- 
derable, but let us count them another hundred thousand. Yet both put 
together will fall incomparably short of the number in old Rome, which, 
by the computation of Lipsus, was at least two millions.^ And, in Con- 
stantine^s time, new Rome was as far short of the old as to its greatness 
in circuit, for whereas Ilerodian declares that Severus quite demolished 
Byzantium for siding with Niger, and, reducing it to the state of a village, 
subjected it to Perintus, Kutfirj bovktv^iv n€piv6iois d&pov cdd^,'^ we cannot 
in reason suppose it to be extraordinarily spacious ; yet, as Zosimus 
reports, all the enlargement which Constantine gave it, was but the 
addition of fifteen furlongs, ara^iois ir€VT€Kaid€Ka,*^ Now suppose it was 
thirty or forty furlongs iu compass l)efore, (and so larger than one city 
in a hundred,) yet this addition will leave it less than Alexandria, 
which, as Josephus describes it, was eighty furlongs, that is, ten miles, 
in circumference,' yet Alexandria was four times less than Rome, for 
by Vopiscus's account, in Aurelian*s time, not long before Constantine, 
tlie walls were made by him near fifty miles in circuit. So it will be 
in comparison of Constantinople when first built, ratlier like a nation 
than a city, as Aristotle siiid of the other Babylon, *;(« ircpiypa^^p fiSXXow 
tlBvovsy ij irSK€<i>t/ If then we will have this passage of Sozomen to have 
any appearance of truth, it must be extended far beyond Constantine^s 
time, when, as Zosimus tells us, many of the succeeding emperors were 
still drawing multitudes of people to that city, so that it was afteni^-ards 
encompassed with walls far larger (woXXw ^/foo-iv) than those of Con- 
stantine. 'f And. in an oration of Themistius, it is made a question 
whether Theodosius Junior did not add more to C. P. than Constantine 
did to Byzantium. 

" Many of the Jews, and almost all the heathen, were converted and 
became Christians." 

The expression of Sozomen does not hinder, but as the main body 
of the Jews remained, so the niunbers of the heathen might be consi- 
derable. Tertullian speaks of citizens in his time as if they were almost 
all Christians, /}ewf (mines cives Christiujios ;^ yet no instance can be givoi 
of any one city whore the Christians were the major part of the inha- 
bitants : those that take his words in a strict sense are very injurious 
to him, and make him speak tliat which no ancient records will warrant. 
Sozomen also may suffer by straining his expression; but I wiD not 

• In Act. Horn. xi. p. 074. » I)e Majfnit. Rom. lib. Ili. c. Ui. 

' Lib. 111. p. 68. [ed. Lugdun. 1624, p. 122.) - Lib. !I. p. 62. [ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 106.; 

« De Bello Jud. lib. ii. cap. xvi. [«. 4] / Pol. lib. lil. c. [iif.] 

r Lib. il. p. 05. (ed. Oxon. Iii7y, p. 112.J * Apol. c. xxxvii. 


digress to take fbrtlier notice of what is not material ; for I design not, 
DOT have anj need, to make any advantage of the numbers of the 
heathens in this city. 

He tells us of nine hundred and fifty work-houses, whose rents were 
allowed to defiray the funeral expences of all that died in the city, (for 
so it is expressed in the constitution, ircpl n)y Kouniv arrayr»v avBpwinav 
Map rh wpayfia wp6€uruf,*' " they provide the expenditure for the public 
obsequies of all men,") these being performed with great solemnity, and 
multitudes of attendants maintained by those rents for that purpose.^ 
How this here makes the Christians in C. P.^ to be so numerous as he 
would have them, he should have showed us; I am not yet so sagacious 
as to discover it. 'fhe number of the Decani** was determined* by 
Honorius to nine hundred and fifty/ Our author thinks it probable 
they were so many at the first establishment, but there is more ground 
to believe, they were much fewer in Gonstantine's time; for about eight 
hundred were counted sufficient in Justinian^s reign, two hundred years 
afler, when the city was both larger, and much more populous and in 
its greatest flourish.' Those that consider the premises, may well think, 
he might have formed his conclusion in terms less confident, to say no 
worse of it. 

Next he forms an objection against himself: "Notwithstanding the 
number of Christians in C. P.*^ might be much too great for one congre- 
gation, yet the major part might be heretics or schismatics, such as 
came not to the bishop's church, and therefore all that adhered to him 
might be no more than could meet in one assembly.*' 

To which he answers, that the number of heretics and schismatics 
was inconsiderable, and will not except the Arians or Novatians. For 
the Arians, he says, they had not yet made a formal separation. 

But if they did not separate themselves, the church would have them 
separated, and did exclude them from commimion, and withstood Con- 
Stan tine's importunity for their admission, both here and in other 
places : Athanasius was threatened by Eusebius of Nicomedia,* and 
banished by the emperor for this cause among others. And Alexander 
being secured by Arius' death from admitting him to communion, was 
the occasion of this passage in Theodoret which gives our author so 
much trouble. Now the Arians being debarred from communion, 
lessened the bishop's church, both here and elsewhere, as much as if 
they had separated themselves. And they were numerous here, this 

• Novel, xliil. • Noyel. Ux. cap. ii. « Constantiiiople. 

' The Decani Copiat« are here meant. These were public officers appointed to take the charge 
of all funerals in the city. They seem to have been first regularly incorporated by Constantino . 
See Bingham's Ant. b. iiL cap. viii. 

' limited. / Cod. de Eccles. [Tit. ii.] Lex. iv. r Novel. lix. cap. ii. 

* Soc. lib. [I.] c. [xxvii.] 



being the place where they had greatest favour ; in Constantine^s edict 
against the heretics whose meetings he would have suppressed, the 
Arians were not mentioned when the other are named.* Socrates writes 
that the people in this city was divided into two parties, the Arians and 
the orthodox : they had continually sharp bickerings, but while Alex- 
ander lived the orthodox had the better; as soon as he was dead (which 
was^ while Constantine lived) it seems they appeared equal, for '' the 
contest," says he, " was dubious," dfi^piaros 17 ftdxn-^ In Nazianzen's 
time 80 far they overtopped the orthodox, that this great diooeean church 
appeared but in the form of a *' private meeting, held in a very little 
house," where he kept a conventicle with them, iv oUitnw fuxpA iuthf 
<riaC€, so Sozomen,' and Socrates agrees with him in the expression, 
iv fiiKpS> oiKiVfco), such a diminutive place seems as unproportionable fer 
such a diocesan chiurch as a nutshell for Homer's Iliads, or a key-hole 
for a witch, to use our author's elegances. 

As for the Novatians, to which he will have no more allowed than a 
conventicle, they were numerous in other places ; they had once divers 
churches in Alexandria, many churches in Rome, and in other places. 
It is like' they were numerous here, for here they had as much fiivour 
or more, and longer too, than in the cities forementioned ; here Socrates 
says they had three churches/ and if three churches would but make 
one inconsiderable conventicle, it is possible the other orthodox churches 
(though he will have them to be many) might be comprised in one vast 

I might observe how much Sozomen is misrepresented in what he 
says next of those concerned in the edict, the Novatians especially. He 
speaks not minciugly, as our author would have him, but fully that the 
Novatians did not suffer much by the edict ; he does not say only that 
it was probable they suffered little, but says this only of a reaaoa him- 
self gives, why they suffered not much. He gives other reasons for it 
than the opinion, the Novatians had of that bishop. He does not say 
the other heretics were altogether extirpated. He does not confess that 
the Novatians suffered the same measure with others everjrwhere, no, 
nor any where else ; it is the Montanists that he says this of. He dares 
to affirm they had a conventicle or more, for he affirms they had tn 
eminent bishop in C. P.,«' and were not only numerous there before the 
edict, but continued so afler. The gentleman was in too much haste 
here, as himself will perceive, by observing how much his aoooont 
differs from the historians. 

At last he comes to that passage of Theodoret which occasioned all 

« Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. iii. cap. Ixii. Ixiii. [Ed. Reading, cap. IxW. IxT.] ' 

* Vale« Observ. in Soe. et 8oz. lib. ii. ' Soc. lib. ii. cap. vi. ' Lib. tU. eap. t. 

' probable. / Lib. ii. cap. xxx. r Constantliiople. 


these lines, " but Theodoret affirms they were no more than could meet 
in one church, and that they did actually do so,** " I answer/' says he, 
^ that Theodoret does not say so, and the passage cited does not con- 
dude it." 

I did not say Theodoret affirms they were no more than could meet 
in one church, but he says the same in effect, viz., that all the brethren 
assembled with Alexander. His words are, " Alexander, the church 
rejoicing, held an assembly with all the brethren, praying and greatly 
glorifying God.'* The words are plain, and the sense, I take them in, 
is open in the &ce of them. Nor do I believe that any disinterested 
person would put any other sense upon them than this, that the gene- 
rality of Christians of which the church at Constantinople consisted, 
assembled together with their bishop, AJexander, to praise God joyfully 
for their deliverance by the death of Arius. But he will not have the 
words taken in a general sense, but will suppose them taken with 
respect to that partictdar congregation, in which Arius was to be 
reconciled. Yet this supposition hath no ground either in the words, 
or in the contexture of the discourse, or any where else that I 
know of, or our author either ; for if he had, we shoidd have heard it 
*' with both ears,'' as he speaks elsewhere. He will not have all the 
brethren, to be all believers at C. P.,*» yet he knows that brethren and 
believers are synonymous terms both in Scripture and ancient authors. 
And those were the believers or brethren at the church of C. P.,* 
which had occasion to rejoice, and that was the whole church 
there: as for tracts, rendered universi^ I do not take it for all 
and every one of the Christians there ; for in ail assemblies, of great 
churches especially, many are always absent. He had dealt more 
fairly with Theodoret, if by all he would have understood the generality 
of Christians adhering to Alexander at C. P.,'> or the greatest part 
of them, and about such an abatement of the full import of the word, 
there had been no need to contend; but his restraint of it to a par- 
ticular congregation agrees not with the words nor the occasion of 
them, nor hath any support elsewhere. 

Nor is that better which follows, imless you will say that, With all 
the brethren, does not signify their personal presence, but only their 

This looks more like a shift than a plain answer, and, therefore, he 
was well advised in not venturing to own it. 

" Theodoret coidd not think that all the believers of C. P.* coidd 
come together to the bishop's church, for he cites a letter of Constan- 
tine's a little afler, where he gives an accoimt of the great increase of 


that church. ^ In the city that is called by my name, by the providence 
of God, an infinite multitude of people have joined themselves to the 
church, and all things there wonderfully increasing^ it seems very 
requisite that more churches should be built; understanding, therefore, 
hereby what I hav^ resolved to do, I thought fit to order you to provide 
fifty Bibles fairly and legibly written.'" 

He does not say an infinite multitude, the words of the letter axe 
fuyiarov irkrjOos: that there was a very great multitude of Christians is 
not denied, nor that he intended to build more churches; but this 
confirms what is signified before, that these very many churches were 
not yet built, but only in design, and that with a prospect of Christaans 
there still increasing. And the Bibles, if they were intended only for 
C. P.," might be for the future churches, not the present only. 

His conclusion is, " Where Christians were so multiplied that it was 
necessary to build more churches, and to make such provisions for the 
multitude of their assemblies, it could not be that they should all make 
but one congregation.*' 

He shoidd have concluded that which is denied, otherwise all he hath 
premised will be insignificant, and to no purpose : it is granted that all 
the Christians at C. P.^ did make more than one congregation, and £ir 
their conveniency met at other times in several churches. That which 
is denied is, that the main body or generality of Christians there could 
not meet in one assembly, or did not so meet at this time with their 
bishop Alexander : as to this he hath proved nothing, and, therefore, 
did well to conclude nothing against that, which is affirmed to be the 
plain import of Theodoret's expression. 

And it may be supposed that Theodoret, if he had not expressed it, 
might well think (though the contrary be suggested) that as great mul- 
titudes as Constandne's letters signified, might meet together at the 
bishop's church; for himself declares what a vast congr^ation he 
preached to at Antioch, having an auditory of many myriads.* I 
will not ask him what Eusebius could tMnk, when he tells us 
the Christian? had fivpiavdpovs ariavvayiayhs, "assemblies consistiiig 
of myriads." '^ Nor what Socrates thought, when he tells us long 
afler, of C. P.,** that "the whole city became one assembly, and 
meeting in an oratory, continued there all day,"^ "Oiktf n^kig fua 
ricieXi7(ria eyeVcro, cy dc rep €VKTrjpt<p ycy($/i€voi, &C. But I would have 
him tell me how he understands that passage of Chrysoetom, al 
yhp Tji rov OcoO xaptrX €ls d/xa fivpiadav apiOftov olfuu rovs trrMa 
avvayofifvovs rtXctv,* ** For by the grace of God I think those here 
assembled are full ten myriads in number." What is the import of 

• Constantinople. * Ep. Ixxziii. * Lib. Tiii. ci|». L 

'' Lib. vli. cap. xxiii. ' Horn. Ixxxx. in Mat torn. ii. p. 529. 


these words ? Do they signify that ten mynada were assembled in one 
place to hear Chrysostom ? If so, there will be no question but that 
the generality of Christians might meet in one church with Alexander 
in Constantine's reign; for that then (about seventy years- before) there 
was anything near so many Christians as a hundred thousand adhering 
to one bishop in this city, cannot with any reascm be imagined. Or 
does he mean only^ that there were so many myriads of Christians 
contained in that city ? If so, then he says here no more than in 
another homily forecited, where the nimiber of Christians in C. P.* is 
oompated to be a hundred thousand, reckoning all besides Jews and hea- 
thens. Now if they were no more in his time, they cannot with reason 
be supposed to have been above half so many in Constantine*s (unless 
any can imagine, that their numbers advanced more in six years than in 
seventy, when the succeeding emperors multiplied the inhabitants excess- 
ively, vircp rrjv xP^Uu^y "beyond necessity,*' as Zosimus tells us,* crowding 
the city so full as that they could scarce stir without danger;) and 
a great part of these were Mien off to Arius while Alexander was 
bishop; the Novatians also were numerous, having several churches; 
and these, with other sects, being deducted, the Christians there that 
conmiunicated^ with Alexander will be no more (if so many) than belong 
to some one of our parishes. 

" It would swell this preface to too great a bulk, if I should answer 
the rest so particularly.** 

Since he designed to be so brief, and to have so short a preface, I 
wish he had employed more of it against that which is the strength of 
the discourse he opposes, and of more consequence to the main cause ; 
and not have spent so many leaves upon a by-passage, for which we 
have little reason to be concerned: for if he could make it appear, that 
the Christians at C. P^" in Constantine's time, were more than could 
meet in one congregation, yea, or in two either; that would be far from 
proving it a diocesan church, unless some one or two of our parishes 
can be counted so. 

Let me add, in fine, that our author has done just nothing towards 
the disproving of what Theodoret was alleged for ; unless he show, 
that C. P.* exceeded old Rome, was furnished with such an infinite 
number of Christians, so many (more than two) magnificent churches 
there erected, the fifty Bibles thought needfiil to be provided, and 
almost all the heathen besides many Jews converted ; before Alexander 
(who is said to hold this assembly with all the brethren) deceased ; 
and so unless he prove that all this was done (which himself, I think, 
can scarce believe) in less than a year. For Valesius** (upon whose 

' CoDStaatinople. • Lib. U. [p. 112, cd. Oxon. 1679.J 

« held commonion. ' Lib. ii. Obierv. in Soc. et Sos. 


authority this gentleman takes much) proves at lai^ (making it the 
business of one of his books) that Alexander died (and yet must live 
some while after this panegyrical assembly) in the year 881. And it 
is manifest, that C. P.* was not built, nor had that name till 831. 
For though it was building the year before, yet it was not finished 
till the twenty-fiflh year of Gonstantine's reign (as Jerome^ and 
others :) and the beginning of his reign is reckoned from the death ci 
Constantius* father, who was consul with MaximianuB in* the year 
806, and died in the middle of it.^ There needs not a word more to 
show that all his discourse on this subject is wholly insignificant, and 
not at all for his purpose, though this be the most considerable part of 
his preface. 

*^ This author gives several instances of several bishops being in one 
city at the same time, in answer to the Dean of Paulas,' who affirmed 
that it was an inviolable rule of the church to have but one, &c. 
Jerusalem is the first instance, &c. I wonder to find a man of learning 
cite this passage, than which nothing can be more disadvantageous to 
his cause." 

There is one who I suppose passes for a man of learning, who for 
the same purpose makes use of this instance, since mine was published: 
" We have," saith he, " examples in ecclesiastical story of two bishops 
'at the same time in the same see, and yet this was never thought 
schismatical, when the second was advanced by the consent of the first 
Thus Alexander, a bishop in Cappadocia, was made bishop of Jerusalem 
while Narcissus was living, but very old ; and Anatolius at the same 
time, sate in the church of CsBsarea with Theotecnus, and this was 
St. Austin's own case, who was made bishop of Hippo, while there was 
another bishop living."* He says also. Nothing can be more disad- 
vantageous to my cause than this passage. If it had been no advantage 
to my cause, I should have thought it bad enough ; but if nothing could 
be more disadvantageous, I am very imhappy: let us see how it is made 

" Narcissus having retired, and the people not knowing what had 
become of him, the neighbouring bishops ordained Dius in his place, 
who was succeeded by Grordius and afler/ by Germanico, (it should be, 
by Germanico, and afler/ by Gordius,) in whose time Narcissus returned, 
and was desired to resume his office, and did so. What became d 
Germanico, (he means Gordius,) is not said, but probably he resigned 
or died presently." 

There is nothing to make either of these probable : it is altogether as 
likely, if not more, that he continued bishop there with Narcissus for 

' Constantinople. * Chronic. « Fast. Contul. 

^ Dr. Stillingfleet. ' Defence of Dr. St[iUingfleet], p. 178. / afterwards. 


•ome time; but becanae Eusebias says nothing of it, I insist not on it. 
fiat beside he tells us Narcissus took Alexander into the participation 
of the charge. That signifies [that] Narcissus was not excluded from 
the episcopal charge ; both had their parts therein. No, but, says he, 
** Alexander was the bishop. Narcissus retained but the name and title 
only," that is, he was but a titular, not really a bishop; and why so? 
because Alexander, says he, " joined with hun in prayers ; and the 
historian says he was not able to officiate by reason of his great age.** 
He was not able it may be to perform all the offices of a bishop, but 
what he was able to do no doubt he performed. Now if they must be 
but titular bishops, who perform not personally all the offices of a 
pastoral charge, (when they cannot pretend \iirap6y y^pasj '^ a green old 
age,**) how many real bishops shall we find in the world ? But besides 
the name and title, did he not retain the power and authority of a 
bishop ? If not, how came he to lose it ? Did he resign, or was he 
deposed? That he resigned there is not the least intimation in this 
historian, or any other; nor any instance in the ancient church, that 
ever any bishop divested himself of all pastoral power upon this 
account. To have deposed him for his great age had been a barbarous 
act, and such as the church in these times cannot be charged with. 
No doubt but he retained the episcopal power, though through age he 
could not exercise it in all instances ; and if he had not only the title, 
but the power, he was really a bishop, and there were two bishops at 
once in one church, and then this instance is so far from being most 
disadvantageous, that it serves me with all the advantage I designed in 
alleging it. 

As for the words of Valesius cited by him, if they be taken in the 
sense which our author would have them, that learned man will not 
agree with himself. For, but a very few lines before, he says these two 
were co-episcopi, " bishops together,** in that cityjSupentiU episcopo adjutor 
et coepi9Copu8 est adjunctus, '' during the lifetime of the bishop, a col- 
league in the episcopate was appointed.** And though he says, (but 
says it doubtfully, with a m faUoTy "if I mistake not,**) this was for- 
bidden at Sardica, (above a hundred years after;) yet he adds that, 
" notwithstanding it was still usual in the church,** nihilominus idmtidem 
in ecclesia usurpcUum esty which is all that I need desire. And ailer- 
wards, where Eusebius* again mentions two bishops in one city, he 
observes, that in one of his copies, the scholiast has this note upon it in 
the margin, kclL tvravOa fUas ario'Kowrjg Ihw wpovarfurav, " here also there 
were two bishops of one church.** Valesius adds, '* the scholiast 
understands Alexander, who was bishop of Jerusalem together with 

• In Ub. Ttt. cap. xxxii. 


The next instance is of Theotecnus and Anatoliiu, who were bishops 
of Ceesarea together. Against this he hath little to saj, I suppose 
because nothing can be said against it in reason. Only he seems 
willing that Anatolius should pass but as episcopua designatus, " bishop 
elect," whereby if he mean one, who is not yet actually a bishop, but 
designed to be one hereafter, as Eradius was by Augustine, it is incon- 
sistent with what Eusebius says and himself quotes but one line before, 
viz. that Theotecnus ordained him bishop in his life-time; for if he 
was not actually bishop after he was thus ordained, he was never 
bishop at all." 

Another instance was of Macarius and Maximus, both bishops at 
once of Jerusalem. 

He woidd not have Maximus to be bishop while Macarius lived, 
because it is said, he was to rule the church after his death. 

But Maximus was to govern the church not only aft;er his death, if 
he survived him, (as he was like to do, being much younger,) but 
while he lived; and so did actually together with him, tnmtpaaBaL, 
which denotes the exercise of the same ftmction together;^ besides, the 
historian says, Maximus was before this ordained bishop of Diospolis ; 
and if he had officiated at Jerusalem, where they were so desirous of 
him, in a lower capacity, their kindness to him had been a degrading 
him, which it cannot be supposed they would either offer, or he 
yield to. 

I alleged Epiphanius, who signifies that other cities had two bishops 
together, and excepts only Alexandria. To which he answers, that 
Epiphanius cannot mean that all other cities had two bishops at a time, 
nor did I say that he meant this, but his expression imports no less 
than that it was usual for other cities to have two bishops. Nor is 
there any reason to think that Epiphanius respects only the cases 
alleged; it was quite another case that was the occasion of his words; 
and divers other instances might be brought of a different nature and 
occasion, though this be sufficient to show that the rule against two 
bishops in one city was not inviolable. He adds, *' I do not see what 
advantage can be made of this passage." 

This passage shows that there was commonly two bishops in a city 
at once ; Alexandria is only excepted as varying herein from other 
cities. And this is advantage enough for me, and it is enough against 
him too, and leaves no reason for his pretence that it was only in 
extraordinary cases. I affirmed it could not be Epiphanius*s meaning, 
(as a great antiquary*^ would have it,) that Alexandria was never so 
divided, as that several parties in it should have their respective bishops 

' Kust'b. liii. vii. rnp xxxii. ^ Sox. lib. ii. cap. xix- ' PetaviuA. 


tliere, and broaght sereral instances to evince it; for so it was divided 
in the time of Epiphanius, when the Catholics had Athanasius, the 
Axians had Gregorins, and then Georgius; and afterwards the one had 
Peter, the other Lucins; and the Novadans had their bishops success- 
ive! j in that citj till Cyril's time. 

He answers, however, *' I do not see why that learned antiqoary^s 
opinion may not be maintained against thi^ gentleman's objections. He 
says, that Alexandria was divided before £piphanius*s time between 
several bishops, (I said, in £piphanins*s time :) it cannot be denied. 
Bnt that is not the thing Epiphanius speaks of, but that before the 
election of Theonas against Athanasius, there were never two opposite 
bishops as in other churches." 

But this doth neither agree with the one, nor defend the other; it 
agrees not with Epiphanius, but makes him contradict himself, for he 
tells us there were two opposite bishops at Alexandria before Theonas 
was chosen. For this was not till Alexander's death, but he says, 
Pistus was made bishop there by the Arians while Alexander was living.** 
And he could not be ignorant of what Eusebius declares,^ that upon 
the division in Egypt, occasioned by Arius, in every city, Koff €Kaxrn\v 
vdXxy, '* there was bishop against bishop, and people against people.** 
Nor doth it defend the antiquary ; for he speaks universally, without 
Hmiting himself to the election of Theonas, EccUsiam AUxandrinam 
nunquam in partes scissam quorum singulce episcopum suum habdxmtf 
'* that church was never divided so as to have opposite bishops." 

*' The instances are all later than this fact, and therefore are insigni- 
ficant," says he. 

They are fully significant, both in reference to the antiquary, 
against whom they are brought to prove that he mistook Epiphanius, 
when he woidd have it to be his meaning, that Alexandria was never 
so divided as to have two opposite bishops ; for they show it was often 
so divided : and also in reference to Epiphanius, they were so late as 
his time, on purpose to show more unquestionably that could not be his 
meaning, which was against his knowledge, and notorious instances la 
his own time. 

But he will not deny the instance of the Novatians to be significant; 
only Socrates does not say that they had their bishops successively to 
Cyril's time. 

Nor do I say he does; but he says Cyril shut up the Novatian 
churches there, and took away all the sacred treasure in them, and 
deprived their bishop, Theopompus, of all that he had. Now when 
our author meets with churches, and a bishop over them, he is 

• Her. Ixxix. Nifni. yUi. p. 733. * ViU Const, lib. Ui. cap. iv. 


not wont to question a sucoession, unless it appeafs he was the 

^'It may be they b^an there after this time, for there is little 
account in church history, that I know, of any Novatians in Alexandria, 
before Athanasius." 

We are little concerned about this, yet it may be they began before 
this time, for there is no account at all in church history that the Nova^ 
tians began there in, or after Athanasius^s time. 

I had produced evidence that many African bishops declared, in the 
case of Valerius and Austin, that it was usual in all parts to have two 
bishops in a city at once ; to this he answers, *^ But suppose all this 
true, that this might be maintained by the examples of several churches, 
what is it, that two bishops may be in one church ? no, that is not the 
matter, but that a bishop, when he grows old, may appoint or ordain 
his successor, to prevent the mischiefs that are usuaUy produced by 
popular elections." 

If what the African bishops did allege were restrained to that par- 
ticular case he contends for, yet this is enough to make good all I intend, 
viz. that usually in the ancient church there were two bishops together 
in one place. For when one is ordained bishop in the same place, when 
another is still living, with whatever design, upon what occasion soever 
this is done, yet there are two bishops at once in the same place. 

I see no reason why this should be restrained to that particular case ; 
the occasion of what the bishops affirm may clear it, and that was 
Austin's scruple, not to succeed Valerius, but to be made bishop of 
Hippo while his bishop there was living, Episcopatum susciperey iuo 
vivente episcopo, recusabaty " He refused to take the episcopate during the 
lifetime of his own bishop," for so there would be two together, which 
he took to be against the custom of the church, contra morem ecclesks; 
but they all persuade him that this was usually done, id fieri iolerey and 
prove it by examples in all parts.* And Valerius's desire and pro- 
posal was that Austin might be ordained bishop of Hippo, Qui sua 
cathedrcB non tarn euccederet sed conaacerdos accederet, " Not as one that 
was to succeed him only, but to be bishop together with him." 

When he assigns this as the reason of appointing a successor, to pre- 
vent the mischiefs that are usually produced by popular elections, he 
speaks his own sense, not theirs ; for they were better advised than to 
brand the general practice of the ancient church as mischievous, and 
how this suggestion becomes one who undertakes to write a vindication 
of the primitive church, let himself consider. Others may judge it a 
more intolerable reflection upon the universal church in the best and 

• PoMidon. Vita August, cap. viiL 


after times than anj M[r.] B[axter] can be justly charged with. 
However, the reason assigned for it by Possidonius is another thing 
than appears in this author's whole account ; it was because Valerius 
feared lest some other church should seek him for their bishop and get 
a person so approved from him. 

Whereas, in fine he says, " These cases specified were not thought to 
violate the rule that allowed but one bishop to a city f yet it was 
thought so by St. Austin, when he excuses his suffering himself to be 
made bishop with Valerius, by this, that he knew not it was forbidden 
by a rule of the Nicene Council, Quod concilio Niceno prohibitum fuisae 
netdihcan^ and gives this as the reason why he would not so ordain 

Next, he would prove that this provision for a successor does not 
destroy that rule, by an instance ; I need not transcribe it at laige ; the 
sum of it is this : when the government is monarchical, if it fall out 
once (in many ages, as it did in England once in about five hundred 
years) that another king be crowned besides him who hath the throne, 
yet it will be true enough that it is the rule of those kingdoms to have 
but one king. To which I say briefly. If it be usual to have two kings 
in such a government, it will scarce be thought true that it is the in- 
violable rule of those kingdoms to have but one king. And then, how 
this instance will suit his purpose let those judge who take notice that I 
have already proved it usual, in the ancient church, for cities in all parts 
to have two bishops at once. 

From page 12 he passes to page 23. To show there were more 
bishoprics than one in the region or diocese of Hippo, I brought several 
instances ; and might have produced more, but that I confined myself 
to those which the learned Dean alleged to the contrary. Fussala is 
one of them, and that alone this gentleman takes notice of St. Austin 
calls it castellum divers times in one epistle. He finds fault that I trans- 
late caatellum a castle. I did no more expect to be blamed for this than 
if I had rendered oppidum a town. But I suppose he coimts it no great 
crime since he runs into it himself, and in a few lines afler calls it a 

" But these castles,'' says he, " were garrison towns, with a good 
dependence of villages belonging to them." 

They were fortresses, and sometimes had villages depending on them, 
and might contain so many buildings as there are in some village or 
little town ; however, he calls them castles, and may give me leave to 
do so too. 

• Potsidon. Vita August cap. viii. 


He adds, ^^ It was forty miles distant j&om Hippo, and was in St 
Austin's diocese, and never had a bishop of its own." 

It is said, indeed, to belong to the diocese of Hippo, but I do not find 
it said to be in St. Austin's diocese or bishopric ; these are two things, 
and should not be confounded. When it is said to belong to the diocese 
of Hippo, so far distant, diocese is not taken in an ecclesiastical sense, 
as it is with us, for part of a country under the goyemment of one 
bishop, but as it was used in Africa, in a civil sense, for part of a pro- 
vince, without respect to one bishop, or to any one bishop at all. Some 
parts there called dioceses had no bishops, nor were to have any, by 
decrees of the African councils." Other places, called a diocese, had 
more bishops than one. Petilian says, that in the place where his col- 
league Januarius was bishop there were four bishops besides, all five in 
una diaecesi,^ *^ in one diocese." And thus it was in many other places, 
particularly in that called the diocese of Hippo, as I showed by divers 
instances, and St. Austin's own testimony. 

Hereby it appears that in Africa a diocese and a bishopric were not 
the same thing, though they be with us. There were divers dioceses 
and no bishoprics, and many bishoprics were but one diocese ; so that 
Fussala, and twenty other castles and towns, might be in the diocese of 
Hippo, at forty miles distance or more, and yet St. Austin's bishopric 
not one jot the larger for it, nor he more a diocesan. 

Whereas, he adds, that it never had a bishop of its own ; it is 
unquestionable that Fussala had a bishop of its own in Austin's 
time ; and this renders it wholly unserviceable to their purpose ; for 
the bishopric of Hippo, said to be of forty miles extent, will not, upon 
the count*' of Fussala, be forty yards larger. Nor will either of these 
bishops, nor any other in that region, be diocesans, unless there can be 
two diocesans, and I know not how many more, in one diocese. 

I assigned this reason why Fussala had not a bishop sooner, because 
Austin declares there was not one Catholic in it, and supposed this 
might serve the turn, not dreaming that those who count all the people 
in a very large parish, or in one hundred parishes, little enough for a 
diocesan, could think his diocese competently furnished when he had 
not one soul (or but some few) in communion with him. 

He says, the town or castle indeed had none, but the comity belong- 
ing to it had some ; he will have the territory or parish depending on 
this castle to be a county. I cannot but observe the admirable power 
of a fancy tinctured and prepossessed. It will turn a parish into a 
county, and a castle into a county town ; and since a county with ns 
was a province with them, one province must be as much as all Africa ; 

« Con. Carth. ii. Can. v. Cod. Afric. liii. * Coll. Carth. D. i. Num. cxvii. ' •ccoant 


and a yeiy small part of Numidia must be far greater than the whole. 
Bat there are some hypotheses which may stand in need of such 

However, he likes not my reason ; and why ? Because, though it 
had no Catholics in it then, it might have some before ; and concludes 
it had, because it belonged heretofore to the diocese of Hippo. 

<< But that it formerly had Catholics (says he) we may conclude by 
Mr. Baxter's reasoning, because it belonged heretofore to the diocese of 

If diocese be taken in a civil sense (as it is frequently in African 
authors) this will be no proof that there had been any Catholics in it, 
because in this sense Fussala might belong to that diocese, though there 
had not been either Christian or bishop in the whole region. Nor will 
it be hereby proved, taking it in the ecclesiastical sense, for that part of 
Hippo which was under the Donatist bishop, had no Catholic, and yet 
dejure, as he tells us, belonged to the diocese (as he calls it) or ch^^ 
of St. Austin. Tet, since he allows Mr. Baxter's argument, he must 
admit what it concludes, viz. that a place that had no Christians or 
Catholics in it belongs to no bishop ; and then Fussala never belonged 
to St. Austin as its bishop, either before it had Catholics, for against 
this the argument is admitted to be conclusive ; not after, for then it 
had a bishop of its own. And so all they have to allege for the large- 
ness of St. Austin's bishopric comes to nothing. 

" So that I conceive the reason will not hold for its having no bishop 
of its own, since the same reason destroys its dependence upon the dio* 
cese of Hippo, which is expressly affirmed." 

The reason I gave for its having no bishop was, because St. Austin 
declares there was no Catholic in it. This reason will hold, imless they 
think a place may have a bishop where there are no Christians at all ; 
when as yet they judge that a place which hath Christians enough to 
make a good congr^ation, or many, ought not to have a bishop. 
Whereas, he says, this reason destroys its dependence upon the dio<^5se, 
I wonder what dependence he imagines, since it is such, as both the not 
having of Christians, and also the having of them, destroys it. The 
former he here affirms, the same reason (which is its not having of 
Catholics) destroys it ; the latter is undeniable, for when Fussala had a 
competent number of Catholics, a bishop was there constituted ; and 
then it depended no more on the diocese of Hippo than one bishop's 
church depends on another when both are independent. 

The dependence of Fussala upon Hippo was such as that of a country 
place upon a greater town, well furnished with officers for their help, to 
convert and reduce the inhabitants, and, when enough arc converted, to 
help them to a bishop or pastor. This St. Austin did for Fussala ; he 



employed presbyters to reduce the Donatists there, and when they were 
reduced he adds them not to his own chai^, woidd not have them 
episcopo cederCy but advises them to have a bishop of their own, and 
procures one for them. This was the practice of the primitive times ; 
in these methods were churches and bishops multiplied ; it was not out 
of use in the fiflh age, this of Fussala, as managed by St. Austin, is a 
remarkable instance thereof ; and if other bishops had imitated him as 
he did the apostles and best ages, the church would not have been 
troubled with debates about diocesans. 

That Austin would not take the charge of a place so far off as Fussala, 
he will have it ascribed to his modesty. But it was such modesty as 
this excellent person made conscience of, being convinced certisnmi 
ratiom, "by most certain reason," that he was not sufficient for it If 
all other bishops had been so modest, so conscientious, there might have 
been, as Nazianzen speaks, when bishops were middplied in Cappadoda, 
^rvx»y cirtficXcia irXctW, " anxiety for many souls," a much more desir- 
able thing, to those that love souls, than a great diocese. 

He gives a reason why this must be ascribed to St. Austin^s modesty, 
because he discharged the office of a bishop there in more difficult 
times, while the presbyters he employed there were barbarously used. 

I need not deny that he performed the office of a bishop there, for it 
is the office of a bishop to endeavour by himself or others the convert- 
ing or reducing of all that he can. Only this will not prove Fussala to 
be then a part of his bishopric, no more than it will prove Athanasius 
to have been bishop of India ; because he encouraged and sent Fro- 
mentius, with others, thither to convert the Indians.* 

The learned Dean^ had cited Austin as calling himself the bishop of 
that diocese (understanding by it a region of vast extent :) I observed 
that in the epistle quoted he only saith, he had the episcopal charge of 
Hippo. By this, the gentleman, changing my words, wiU have me to 
signify that he was the bishop of the town only. This I did not intend, 
bu^ that he was not the only bishop of that whole region. But whether 
he was bishop of part of the town only, or of that and some part of 
the region also, I am not much concerned. His words are, '' aa if he 
had been bishop of the town only, nay, but of part of that neither, for 
the Donatists had their bishop there : so this will strangely HiTninwh 
the bishopric of St. Austin, which at first appeared so large." Then 
he answers, " for the Donatists having a bishop there, it signifies little to 
our present purpose, since he was but an usurper." 

But this signifies as much to my purpose as I need, for the Donatists 
having a bishopric in Hippo, St. Austin^s must needs be diminished 

• Soc. lib. i. cap. XV. Soz. lib. ii. cap. xxlii. • StDUngflcei. 


thereby, and altc^ther as much lessened as if they had not been 
usurpers. And they were counted no otherwise usurpers, but so that if 
the Donatist bishop had been reconciled, by a decree of the African 
church he was to continue in his bishopric there, as a rightful possessor, 
and there would hare been still two dioceses (such as they were) in one 

He would have us believe Austin as if he declared that he was not 
the bishop of the town only ; but his words are, Ut modttm diapensa* 
tionis mecB Tum supergrediar hoc eccksia ad Hipponensem regionempertinenH 
produu cantestor^ " Not to overstep the measure of my charge, I protest 
that this is for the advantage of a church which belongs to the region 
of Hippo," which, says our author, plainly signifies that all the church 
belonging, not only to the town, but also to the region of Hippo, 
belonged to him. 

But if he please to view the words again which himself hath quoted, 
he will find it plainly signified that Austin's church belonged to the 
region of Hippo, but not that all the church, both in town and region, 
belonged to him. Antonius, bishop of Fussala, might have said this as 
troly of his church there as Austin did of his church at Hippo ; it did 
ad Hipponensem regionem pertinerey " belong to the region of Hippo." 
And it may be as justly inferred from hence that all the church, both 
in the town and region of Hippo, belonged to the bishop of Fussala. 
If our author will allow of this, (as he must, if he will stand to his own 
account of this passage,) Austin's bishopric will be strangely diminished 
indeed ; it must be confined to a part of Hippo, and made less than I 
represent it. For I did not say, nor had I any need to assert, that he 
was bishop of the town only. We may allow him, besides his part of 
the town, divers villages in the country (though I have not seen it 
proved) without any danger of assigning him a diocesan church. 
For Kidderminster (as one tells us who very well knows it) hath twenty 
villages belonging to it, and some thousands of souls therein, yet accord- 
ing to our modem measures will scarce make a diocesan church .<* 

To show that there were more bishops in the region of Hippo than 
St. Austin, (besides particidar instances, which he passes by,) I alleged 
a passage of his, where the Donatists were desired to meet together 
with the Catholic bishops that were in that region, and who there 
suffered so much by the Donatists : to this he answers, " That these 
bishops who are said to be m regione Hipponensi, * in the region of 
Hippo,' were not the bishops of that region, but some bishops of the 
province met together there." 

But that these were bishops of the province met together there, is a 

• M[r.] B[axter] of Episcopacy, Part il. p. 9. 


mere conjecture of his own, without the least ground either in this 
passage or any other in that epistle. It will not be .hard to answer anj 
thing &i this rate. If there had been a provincial council then held in 
that region, there might have been some pretence for what he says; 
but there is not any hint of this in the whole epistle. That which is 
desired is a meeting for conference, Hoc eat ergo deaiderium nostrum, ^ 
" this therefore is what we wish," &c.; prmkniy « fieri poUstj.vi ctan 
episcopis noatris pacific^ conferatia, " first, that, if possible ye will peace- 
ably confer with the bishops of our parts ;" idea noa eonferre voiumua^ 
" therefore we wish a conference :" and the prime occasion of it was 
the outrages committed in that region by the Donatists, wherein tl^ 
bishops of that place were particularly concerned. This is signified, 
as in other parts of the epistle, so particularly in the passage cited| 
Epiacopoa nostroa qui aunt in regione Hipponenai, vbi tanta mala patmuTj 
" the bishops of our party who are in the region of Hippo, where we 
suffer so many calamities." This meeting was to be with the Catholic 
bishops upon the place, in regione Hipponenai, " in the region of Hippo," 
not any to be called from other parts. And these words seem brought 
in to prevent an objection which the Donatists might make against a 
more general, or more public meeting, as that which might bring them . 
in danger of the laws in force against them, an fortk iatca legea imperatorii 
voa nan permittunt nostroa epiacopoa convenire; and then immediately 
follow these words in answer to it, ecce interim epiacopoa noatraa qui aunt 
in regione Hipponenai, " look in the mean while to the bishops of our 
party who are in the region of Hippo," &c. ; so that this to me seems 
the plain sense of both objection and answer. If because of the laws 
you dare not meet us in a more general or provincial council, yet give 
a meeting to the bishops of this particular region, where there can be 
no appAhension of danger. All which makes me judge what he says, 
concerning the bishops of the province as here intended, to be no 
better than an evasion. 

To prove that there was but one bishop in the region of Hippo, he 
tells us, " that the clergy there, called in the inscription of an epistle, 
Clerici regionia Hipponensium, * the clergy of the region of Hippo,* do 
call him their bishop, and not one of their bishops," &c. 

But the clergy so called, may be only the clergy of Hippo, and so 
they are in the title of the epistle, Clerici Hippone catholicij **The 
Catholic clergy, at Hippo ;" and well may they of Hippo be called the 
clergy of the region, both because they were in that region, and were 
the clergy of it, kqt i^x^^i " ^^ ^ special sense." But if the expressioa 
should be extended to more or to all in the region, their calling him 
epiacopua noater, " our bishop," will be no proof that they had no other 
bishop but him at Hippo. For that phrase epiacopua noater, " our 


bishop," or epiacopi nostriy " our bishops," all along in this epistle, doth 
not denote the bishop of that particular church to which they belonged, 
(as he would have it) but a bishop of their party or persuasion. So 
they call Yalentinus nostrum catholicum episcopumj " our catholic 
bishop," who yet was not bishop of Hippo. So they call them 
qriscopos nostros, whom they desired the Donatists to meet once and 
again,' and thrice in another page, where our author finds episcopoa 
nosiros.^ He may have many more instances hereof in that epistle. If 
there was so many bishops in Hippo, or in that region, as the clergy 
call episcopoa nostros^ he must grant many more bishops in that region 
than I need desire. So that this phrase, however it be imderstood, is a 
medium unhappily chosen ; if it be taken in my sense it is impertinent, 
and can conclude nothing for him ; if it be taken in his own sense, it 
will conclude directly against him. 

He passes to Alexandria, and to page 32. " The instance of Mareotis 
he says little to," — so our author: I might think it enough, where there 
was so little occasion. 

" He insinuates as if Mareotis might not have number enough of 
Christians to have a bishop ; but this Athanasius does sufficiently show 
to be a groundless conjecture." 

I had no intention or occasion to signify that Mareotis had not 
Christians enough to have a bishop ; I knew that it both had many 
Christians and a bishop also, and named him too ; and therefore the 
groundless conjecture may be fixed somewhere else. 

" And even before Athanasius, the generality of the people there 
were Christians." 

How long before ? Dionysius in the- latter part of the third age 
declares it ipriyMv t6v adcXc/xoy, " quite destitute of Christians,"^. and the 
gaining the generality there to the faith, required some considerable time, 
and it is like'' proceeded not far, till Christianity generally prevailed. 

Besides Ischyras, I had mentioned Dracontius, both bishops in the 
territory of Alexandria, (as Agathammon also was ;') of Dracontius he 
takes notice, and says, " possibly he was a chorepiscopus." 

But a chorepiscopus is elsewhere with him a diocesan,^ and here he 
says that he did accept a bishopric. Now these put together will go 
near to make a diocesan bishop. But then if there were two or three 
bishops in the diocese of Alexandria, besides Athanasius, they will 
scarce be so much as half diocesans. 

He says, Athanasius pressed him to accept it. If so, this great 
person was no more unwilling to have another bishop in his diocese, 

• Page 87S. » Page 871. « Euseb. lib. vil. cap. xi. ' probable. ♦ Apol. il. p. 612. 

Page 590. 
. G 


and in a country place too, than Austin was to have one at Fussala. 
He says further, This was an extraordinary case, though what was 
extraordinary in it I cannot imagine: to prove anything there men- 
tioned to be 80, will be an hard task. 

" And allowing this man a country bishopric, that of Alexandria 
would be a great deal too big for the Congr^ational measure.*^ 

And so it might be, and yet be no diocesan church ; if that will 
satisfy him which is too big for those measures, he seems content to 
drop his cause, and may leave it in the hands of presbyterians. And 
he is in the more danger, because he seems not apprehensiye of it, but 
counts it enough if he thinks a church is any where found larger than 
one congregation. 

I had given instances of several towns that had bishops, and were 
but two, or three, or four, &c. miles distant one from another : this he 
denies not ; but asks. What does this conclude ?• might not those 
dioceses be yet much larger than one congregation ? 

I might conclude that these were just such dioceses as our country 
parishes are ; and had such congregations as those parish churches 
have. And some of them in time might have provision (as some of 
ours have) for more congregations than one. And if our modem dio- 
ceses were of this proportion, they would be much more conformable 
to the ancient models. 

" Suppose the chief congregations of HoUand had each a bishop, yet 
I conceive they would be diocesans, though those cities lie very close 

He might have laid the scene at home, where we are better acquainted, 
and supposed this of our country towns ; or of both the chief and lesser 
towns in Holland ; if he had designed what would be most paraUeL 
But to take it as it is formed, though those cities lay not further distant, 
and had each of them a bishop, yet if their churches were goyemed in 
common by bishop and presbyters, as the ancient churches were, they 
would not be diocesan, but more Uke the model of the churches and 
government which Holland hath at present. 

" And now after all this, though we have several instances out of 
Eg}'pt, how near cities were together in some parts, yet upon the whole 
account the dioceses do appear to be large enough, from the number of 

He would have us think, where cities are so near together (as I have 
showed,) yet because of their nimiber the dioceses might be large 
enough. But where they were so near together, they could not be 
large enough to make anything like the modern dioceses ; no, nor larger 
than our country parishes, if they had bishops in them. And the andents 

• argue. 


thought themselves obliged bj the apo9tle'8 rule to have a bishop, not only 
in some but in every city, twiaKAitw Zt^i 9roXXa>y, " there is need of many 
bishops,*' says Chrysostom, koL naff tiuumiv n6kiv irporiyrjo'afUv^v,'^ " and 
rulers in every city," and Theophylact expresses kot^ ndkw by koB* fKd<mfv 
wSkttfy ^' in every city," without exception of the smallness of the place 
or its nearness to others. The reason divers cities had none was the 
want, or the inconsiderable number of Christians in them. Nothing but 
this hindered any city from having a bishop in the four first ages ; 
though the greatest part of their cities (as may be made manifest) were 
no greater than our market-towns or fairer villages. And upon this 
account many cities might want bishops, and it may be did so, in Egypt 
particularly ; heathenism prevailing in many places there, even in 
Athanasius's time ; for which I could produce sufficient evidence ; but 
will not now digress so far. Afterwards the affectation of greatness 
in some was the occasion of new measures ; and orders were made that 
towns which had no bishops before should have none afler : though 
the reason why they had none before was gone ; and those places had as 
many or more Christians in them than most episcopal cities had of old. 

" For in Athanasius's time there were not an hundred bishops in all 
Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis."* 

I was a little surprised to read this, and see Athanasius cited for it. 
For I knew that Athanasius reckons ninety-five bishops from Egypt 
besides himself, at the Council of Sardica, and others from Africa, 
wherein Lybia and Pentapolis are usually included ; and it was never 
known that a major part or a third of the bishops in a country did 
come to a council at such a distance as Egypt was from Sardica. It is 
scarce credible that Athanasius would so far contradict himself as to say 
there were not so many bishops in all those three countries, when he 
had signified there were many more in one of them. Some mistake I 
thought there must be, and constilting the place I found it nut entirely 
represented. There is this clause (immediately following the words he 
cites) left out, oddcir tovt»v ^fias ffnaro, ^* none of these accused me," 
whereby it appears that the meaning of the whole passage is this, there 
was an hundred bishops in the diocese of Egypt who appeared not 
against him, or that favoured him. But those who favoured Arius, 
(whom he calls Eusebians) and Meletius, to say nothing of Coluthus, 
(for in so many parties was that country then divided) are not taken 
into the reckoning ; otherwise it would have amounted to many more 
than an hundred. Sozomen says, the bishops there, who took Arius's 
part, were many, ir($XXoi tmv cirta-jcoirttv,'^ and in Athanasius there is 

In 1 Tim. Horn. xi. * Athan. Apol. ii. ' Lib. i. cap. xW. 



an account of many Meletian bishops by name;* and in Epiphanius it 
is said, that in every region through which Meletios passed, and in 
every place where he came, he made bishops.^ 

The next thing he takes notice of is the defence of Mr. Baxter's 
allegation out of Athanasius, to show that all the Christians of Alex- 
andria (M[r.] B[axter]*s words are. The main body of the Christians 
in Alexandria) could meet in one church. 

*^ It is to be confessed that the expressions of that father seem to favour 
him, Koxci irdvras €i5xt<r6ai, ^ and there they all prayed,' and that the church 
did ndvras d((aa$aiy *hold all,' " &c. 

I am made more confident by all that is said to the contrary, that the 
evidence is really such as will need no &vour, if it can meet with justice. 

^' Now, suppose that all the Christians in Alexandria, the Catholics at 
leastwise, could meet together in that great church, yet all the diocese 
could not." 

All that was undertaken to be proved by the passage in question was, 
that the main body of Christians in Alexandria adhering to Athanasim 
could and did meet in that one church. 1£ this be granted, nothing is 
denied that he intended to prove. As for a diocese in the country, if he 
will show us what or where it was, and that it had no other bishop in 
it, he will do something that may be considered ; yet nothing at all 
against what this testimony was made use of to evince. 

He says, 2dly, " Suppose this great church could reodve all the 
multitude, yet if that multitude was too great for personal commimion 
it is insignificant." 

Upon this supposition it might be too great for an ordinary meeting 
in the Congregational way, yet not big enough for a diocesan church. 
But the supposition is groundless, and contradicts Athanasius, who says 
they had personal communion, they all prayed together, and did not 
only meet within the walls, but concurred in the worship, and said, 

He says, Sdly, *^ Before the church of Alexandria met in distinct 
congregations, but we are told that those places were very small, short, 
and strait places." 

All these save one, I said, which he ought not to have omitted. And 
they were so small because those who were wont to meet in them 
severally, so as to fill them, could all meet in one church, and did so, as 
Athanasius declares. 

" But that they were such chapels or churches as [that] some of our 
paHshes in England have as great a number as Alexandria, is hardly 

• Apol. ii. p. CM. (Ed. Col. 1686, torn. 1. p. 796.) • Epiph. H«Br. IzvtU. [n. S.] 


I know not how those places could be well expressed with more dimi- 
nution than Athanasius hath done it ; he aays they were not only strait 
and small, but the very smallest. If he will make it appear that our 
churches or chapels are less than those that were fipaxyraroiy " very 
little," I shall understand that which I could never before, that some- 
thing is less than that which is least of aU. But he will prove they 
were not so small, because first, the church of Alexandria was very 
numerous from the beginning. Why it should be counted so very 
numerous from the b^inning I know no reason, but the mistake of an 
historian, who will have a sect of the Jews (which was numerous in or 
about Alexandria) to be Christians. 

" And if they met all in one place, it must consequently be very 

The ground of the consequence is removed ; Yalesius his own author 
says they had but one church to meet in in Dionysius's time, almost 
three ages from the beginning.* If that one was large, yet it is not like^ 
that it stood till Athanasius's time, afler so many edicts for demolish- 
ing of all Christian churches, and a severe execution of them in 
Diocletian^s persecution. 

"Nor is it likely they should divide till they were grown too numerous 
for the biggest meeting-place they could conveniently have." 

It is as likely as that Athanasius speaks truth in a matter which he 
perfectly knew ; he tells us they did divide, and yet were not too 
numerous for one great church, in which they met conveniently too ; 
yea, better than when dispersed in those little places, as he says and 
proves, TovTo /SArtov ijvy " this was preferable," &c. 

2dly, He says, " Though before the empire was converted they might 
be confined to little places, and forced to meet severally,*^ yet after Con- 
stantine became Christian it is not likely that the Alexandrians would 
content themselves with small and strait chapels." 

Nor did they content themselves with those little ones, for besides 
this built in Athanasius's time, there was one greater than those small 
ones finished in Alexander's time, where the body of Catholics assem- 
bled with Alexander, the other places being too strait, trrMv&v 5vr»y 
SKktov T&p r^movf this is that one I excepted when I said (aft;er Atha- 
nasius) that the rest, all save one, were exceeding small. But is it any 
proof that these were not very small which Athanasius represents as 
such, because there was one (expressly excepted from that number) 
something larger ? As for what he adds, that then every ordinary city 
built very great and magnificent cathedrals, it is easily said, but will 
never be proved. 

• Page M. « probable. ' In leporate plaoet. 


<' ddly, Some of these churches had been built with a design of 
receiving as many as well could have personal communion in worship 

Neither will this hold, unless some of those churches could haTe 
received all which had personal communion with A t ha n aai u s in this 
greatest church ; which he denies, and makes use of to Constantius as 
a plea why he made use of the greatest. 

*' As Theonas is said by Athanasius to have built a church bigger 
than any of those they had before." 

Where Theonas is said by Athanasius to have built a church, &c. I 
find not, nor does he direct us where it may be found, I suppose for 
very good reason. Indeed Athanasius in this apology speaks of a 
church called Theonas (it is like" in memory of a former bishop of that 
place) where he says the multitude of Catholics met with Alexander, 
<nfvrjy(p tK€i bia t6 nXrjBoSf " met there because of the crowd ;" in like 
circumstances, as a greater multitude assembled with himself in the 
new church, which was greater, and pleads Alexander's example in 
defence of what he did. But Theonas could not build this church, for 
he was dead many years before, being predecessor to Peter, whom 
Achillas and Alexander succeeded.^ 

'^ And yet this and all the rest were but few and strait in comparison 
of the great multitude of Catholics that were in Alexandria." 

I expected another conclusion, but if this be all, he might have 
spared the premises ; for one part of it we assert, the other we need 
not deny, only adding with Athanasius, that the greatest church was 
capable h^^aaBai ndpras, " of receiving this great multitude." 

But here he sticks, and will wriggle a little more. " But I conceive," 
says he, "after all this, that the expressions of Athanasius do not 
conclude that all the Christians in Alexandria were met in this great 

That all and every one did come, was never imagined. It is but the 
main body of the Catholics that M[r.] B[axter] intends, as our author 
observes a little before. 

" For the tumultuous manner in which they came to their bishop to 
demand a general assembly, makes it probable that not only women 
and children would be glad to absent themselves, but many more, 
either apprehensive of the effect of this tumultuous proceeding, or of 
the danger of such a crowd." 

The women he will not admit ; but was it ever known that such a 
great and solemn assembly for worship consisted only of men ? Were 
not the women in communion with Athanasius Christians, that they 

• prob*blc. ft Euseb. lib. yii. cap. ult. Theodoret, lib. I. cap. U. 


must be left out, when he says all the Catholics met ? Can all be truly 
said to assemble, when the far greater part (women, children, and his 
" many more") were absent ? Are not the women in the primitive 
church often noted for such zeal for the worship of Christ, as made 
them contemn &r greater dangers than here they had any cause to be 
apprehensive of ? The supposed danger was either from the crowd or 
the tumult. For the former, did the women and " many more" never 
come to Christian assemblies, when there was any danger of being 
crowded ? I think there was as great danger from a crowd in Basilis- 
cus's reign, when the whole city of C. P.« is said to have met together 
in a church with the emperor, but yet the women stayed not behind, 
but crowded in with the men, as Theodorus Lector reports it, ndarjs 
6iMav rtfs fnSXctt^ aybpaaw dfia Kal yuyai^iV, cV r^ cucXijcrMi Kara /SacrtXiVicov 
ovvaBpourBtUnisJ* Besides, Athanasius here signifies the danger of a 
crowd was in the lesser churches, (not in this,) where they could not 
meet but iwi updww (rwoxrjs, " with danger of a crowd," and so prefers 
their assembling together in the great church as better. 

As for the tumults, (which might have been concealed in a vindica- 
tion of the primitive church,) if there was anything tumultuous, it 
was over when Athanasius had complied with their desires to meet in 
. the great church. And so no apprehension of danger [was] left to 
women, or any else, upon this account. 

" And even those that did assemble there were too many for one 
congregation, and [it] was an assembly more for solemnity and oston- 
tation than for personal communion in worship, and the proper ends of 
a religious assembly." 

Here he runs as cross to the great Athanasius, and the account 
which he gives of this assembly, as if he had studied it ; debasing that 
as more for ostentation than for personal communion in worship, and 
the proper ends of a religious assembly, which Athanasius highly com- 
mends both for the more desirable commimion which the Christians had 
there in worship, and for the greater efficacy of it as to the proper ends 
of a religious assembly. Let any one view the passages,*^ and judge. 
He sets forth the harmony and concurrence of the multitude in wor- 
ship with one voice. He prefers it before their assemblies, when 
dispersed in little places, and not only because the imanimity of the 
multitude was herein more apparent, but because God would sooner 
hear them, out» Kal rax^^s o Qt6s cVojcovci. " For if," says he, " accord- 
ing to our Saviour's promise, where two shall agree concerning anything 
it shall be done for them by my Father, &c., how prevalent will be 
the one voice of so numerous a people, assembled together, and saying 

• Consunrtnople. » Collect, lib. 1. p. 183, F. ^ Apol. li. pp. 631, 532. 


Amen to God ?" and more to that purpoee, by which we may perceive, 
Atbanasius being judge, how true it is that this assembly was more for 
solemnity and ostentation, than for personal commimion in worship, 
and the proper ends of a religious assembly. And thus much to let uf 
see through the arts used to cloud a clear passage alleged out of 
Athanasius ; if M[r.] B[axter] had betaken himself to suc^ little de- 
vices, in like circumstances, our author would have taken the libertj 
to tell him, that he was driven to hard shifls. 

Before we leave Alexandria, I am to take notice of what is said by 
our author, to part of a letter written by a friend to M[r.] B[axter,] 
concerning this city, and the number of Christians therein in Con- 
stantius*s time. The writer of it observes a gross abuse put upon him 
in the Vindicator's answer to it, and desires his defence may be here 
inserted. It contains an argument to confirm what was concluded torn. 
that passage in Athanasius here insisted on, that the Catholics then could 
meet in one place. Afler that passage, and to this purpose, M[r.] 
B[axter] introduced it, as is very apparent." This our author seems 
to observe when he begins with it ; " he adds," a&js he, " to this of 
Athanasius (the very passage mentioned) another argument given him 
by a learned friend."* And after he hath done with it,<^ [proceeds] 
" because M[r.] B[axter] has endeavoured to represent the church of 
Alexandria [as] so inconsiderable even in Constantius's days, &cJ" And 
yet, how it comes to pass I know not, it is quite out of his thoughts while 
he is examining it. He was so hasty for confuting, that he stays not to 
take notice what he was to confute, though the intent of it be most plain 
and obvious, both by the occasion and words of the letter, but forces that 
sense on it, and makes that the design of it, which I was far from thinking 
would ever come into any man's fancy, when he was awake. The words 
of the letter are these, " The city of Alexandria," says Strabo, "is like a 
soldier's cloak, &c., and by computation about ten miles in compass: a 
third or fourth part of this was taken up with public buildings, temples, 
and royal palaces ; thus is two miles and a half, or three and a quarter 
taken up." He answers, " I will not say this learned friend hath 
imposed on M[r.] B[axter,] but there is a very great mistake betwixt 

But the mistake is his own, and such a one as I wonder how he 
could fall into it. He takes it for granted, that the argument is brought 
to prove what Christians Alexandria had in Strabo's time. Here is not 
the least occasion given for this, unless the citing of Strabo showing the 
dimensions of that city ; but Primate Usher is quoted too, on the same 

• Church Hist. pp. !». 10. ■ Page 58. - Page 63. 


aocoimt; and so as much reason to fancy the design was to show what 
[number of] Christians Alexandria had in the primate's time. Jerome, 
•EpiphauiTis,Theodoret, Socrates, Sozomen, are also cited there ; why could 
not these as well lead him to the right age, which their words plainly 
point at, without the least glance at any age before, as Strabo alone (cited 
without any respect to the time when he wrote) so far misled him ?. Nay, 
the fourth age is expressly mentioned in the letter; and the numerousness 
of the Novatians and Arians in Alexandria at the time intended, is 
insisted on; could he think any man so stupid, that had but the least 
acquaintance with those things, as to speak of Arians and Novatians in 
Strabo's time ? But it may be, though I would hope better, our 
examiner was too inclinable to fix an absiird thing upon the writer of 
the letter, that he might be excused from giving a better answer when 
it was not ready. 

But let us hear what he says to it ; yet what can be expected to be 
said by one who makes his own dream the foundation of his discourse ? 
However, let us try ii* we can find any one clause that is true and 
pertinent in the whole, and begin with the best of iu 

Though Strabo says that temples and great palaces took up a fourth 
or a third of the city, yet our examiner will have us think there might 
be inhabitants there, when Epiphanius says, as I cited him, tliat part 
was ?pi7/AOf, destitute of inhabitants ; so he tells us Bruchium was. The 
examiner denies not Bruchium to be that region of the city which 
Strabo says was taken up with public buildings, but adds, ** What, all 
the public buildings of the town in one region ?" But who said ^* all " 
the public buildings ? This is his own fancy still. 

"And that an outer skirt, too, as it is described by the Greek 
Martyrology, in Hilarion,'* &c. 

If he mean it was not a part or region of the city, Strabo and 
Epiphanius will have credit before a story out of the Greek Martyr- 
ology, or him that tells it, when it appears not in the words cited. In 
Strabo it is lupos, " part of the city ;*' in Epiphanius it is a region, cV r» 
Bpovxi^ Kokovfuvtt KkifUKn," " in the region called Bruchium.'' For as 
Rome was divided into fourteen regions, and C. P.^ in imitation of it, so 
Alexandria was divided into five, whereof Bruchium was one, and the 
greatest of all. So I understand Ammianus Marcellinus,'^ who, upon 
the loss of Bruchium, saith, amisit regionum maximam partem j quce 
Bruchium appelUUur, " Alexandria lost the greatest of its regions, which 
was cidled Bruchium." 

" This Epiphanius says was destitute of inhabitants, in his time, and 

• De Pond, et Mens. p. 166. * Constantinuple. ' [Lib. xxii. cap. xvL] 


not unlikely, and perhaps destitute of public buildings, too, for it was 
destroyed afler an obstinate si^e in the reign of Aurelian, as Ammianus 
Marcellinus [testifies] ; or of Claudius, as Eusebius.** 

When he hath granted all that I designed, that this part was destitute 
of inhabitants, and more too, that it was destroyed, yet he would have 
the city no less, " no necessity of this," says he. Sure we are not yet 
awake : can a city lose rirofnov ij kxu rpirov rov muror wtptfiokav fupoSf in 
the historian^s words, ^' a fourth, yea, or a third part of its laigeness,** 
and yet not be so much the less ? He hath nothing to salve this, but 
'< it may be," and ^* it might be," — ^groundless surmises, without either 
reason or authority. 

" They might enlarge upon another quarter, being, it may be, for- 
bid[den] to build Bruchium ; they might dwell closer than before, and 
so their multitude be imdiminished." 

How far it is from being true, that their multitude was undiminished, 
and how needless either to enlarge, or to dwell closer, may soon app^. 
The multitude must needs be much diminished in such a war, and a 
close siege of many years* continuance, for so it is reported both by 
Eusebius^ and Jerome f and it was much wasted and in a consumptive 
condition, before it was thus besieged and dismantled by Claudius IL, 
or Aurelian. 

It was greatly diminished in numbers by Caracalla, who massacred a 
great part of the inhabitants. Herodian says, roamrros tytvm fftitos 
its pfiBpois atfiarosy &c. ** the slaughter was such that with the streams 
of blood, which ran from the place, not only the vastest outlets of 
Nilus, but the sea, all along the shore of Alexandria, was discoloured.** 
Towards the latter end of the third age, Dionysius gives an account of 
the strange diminution of the Alexandrians,*' signifying that " in former 
days the elderly men were more numerous than in his time, both young 
and old, comprising all from infancy to extreme old age," aw6 prfwim 
dp(afi(vij naid<av, p^€\pi riav (is &Kpov yeyrfpaK^ratv. 

" However, certain it is, that this city, long ailer the destruction of 
Bruchium, retained its ancient greatness, and is represented by no 
author as diminished either in number or wealth." 

This is certain no otherwise than the former, i,e, quite the wrong 
way. For not long after the destruction of Bruchium, in the Egyptian 
war made by Diocletian upon Achilleus, which Eusebius, Eutropius, 
and others mention, it was greatly diminished both in numbers and 
wealth. For Alexandria, after a long siege, was taken by force, and 
plundered, great execution done upon the citizens, and the walls of the 
town demolished. 

'* In Chronic. * Hi«t. lib. iv. [p. 17r>, ed. Lugdun. 1624.] ' In Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xziL 


^ A great part of the dty," saTS the latter, " was assigned to the 
Jews, so Strabo indefinhelj as Josephus quotes him; others tell us 
more punctuallj,' that their share was two of the five divisions ; though 
many of them had their habitations in the other divisions, yet they had 
two-fifth parts entire to themselves ; and this is, I suppose, the r^iros 
diof which Josephus says the successors of Alexander set apart for 
them; thus we see how six or seven miles of the ten are disposed of." 
To this he says, " The number of those Jews was much lessened within 
a little while after Strabo, by an insiurection of the Alexandrians 
against them." 

I suppose he means by that slaughter of them which Josephus men- 
tions,* where ^fty thousand were destroyed; but what were these to 
the vast number of Jews in Egypt, which Philo^ says amoimted to no 
leas than a million ? 

" The civil wars afterwards under Trajan and his successor had 
almost extirpated them." 

It was in Palestine where these tragedies were acted, and they were so 
hr fit>m extinguishing them in Egypt or Alexandria, that thereby, in all 
probabili^, their numbers were there increased ; for being divested of 
about <me thousand towns and garrisons by Severus (Adrian^s general,) 
as Dion reports, and forbidden all access to Jerusalem, as Aristo Pelleus 
in Eusebius,' this made other places more desirable, those particularly 
where they might have good entertainment, as they were wont to have 
at Alexandria; and what Dion Chrysostom says confirms it. 

But all this which he says, if there were truth in it, is impertinent; 
for the letter is not concerned what Jews there were near Strabo^s or 
Adrian's time, but in the fourth age. Yet this is all that he hath to 
say to the rest of the letter, besides the publishing and repealing of his 
own mistake, and upon no other ground making himself sport witl^ ^he 
writer of it. 

Thus he begins : " By the same rule he might have disposed of all at 
once, and concluded out of Strabo's division of the town, that there 
was not one Christian in it:*' and repeats it thrice in the same page. 
" No matter what number of Jews or heathens it had in Strabo's days ; it 
is kindly done to provide for Christians before they were in being; surely 
8trabo, who makes the distribution, never intended the Christians one 
foot of groimd in all that division, and this learned friend might have 
spared his little town of eight or ten furlongs, which he so liberally 
bestows upon the bishop of Alexandria, before our Saviour was bom :"* 
uid he is at it again several times in the following discourse.' 

particularly. * D« Bello Judiac. lib. ii. cap. xxi. * Legat. ad Caium, [p. 1040, ed. Turnab.] 

' Lib. iv. cap. vi. • Pages 69, 94. 


How desirable a thing is it to have M[r.] B[axter] and his friend 
rendered ridiculous, when rather than it shall not be done, our ex- 
aminer will publish his own indiscretion so many times over to effect itl 
But I will forbear any sharper reflections upon this author; for taking 
him to be an ingenuous person, I maj expect he will be severe upoa 
himself, when he discerns his error; which I doubt not but he will see 
clearly by once more reading that letter. 

Next he would disprove M[r.] B[axter]'s representation of the church 
of Alexandria in Constantius's time, by giving a view of that church'f 
greatness from the first foundation of it;' which because it may conceiii 
the letter duly understood, I shall take some notice of it very briefly. 
But there is something interposed, between this and the letter, which 
requires some observance ;^ there we may have an instance of this 
gentleman's severity upon M[r.] B[axter] and how reasonable it is; 
" His remark," says he, " upon two bishops living quietly in Alezandzii 
is so disingenuous a suggestion, that he hath reason to be ashamed of it' 

But what is there in this so disingenuous and shameful ? Does not 
Epiphanius say this, and our examiner acknowledge it ?* Ay; bat 
M[r.] B[axter] means that there were not only two bishops, but their 
distinct churches in this city. Well, and does not Epiphanius gife 
him suillcicnt ground for it ? Does he not tell us that Meletius made 
bishops, who had their Idlat tKKkrfo-ias, " own churches," in every place 
where ho came ? Does he not signify that the Meletians in Alexandrii 
had thoir distinct churches or meetings both in the time of Alexander 
and Athanasius ? Says he not particularly of Meletius that being fami- 
liar with Alexander he stayed long in that city, having Idiap trwa(i9 aw 
To\s IBioiSj " a distinct meeting with those of his own party ?" Were 
there not innumerable cities in that age which had two bishops and 
their churches, some three or four at once? (those of the Arians, the 
Douatists, tlie Novatians, the Meletians, &c., besides those who were 
styled Catholics.) Would this gentleman take it well if M[r.] B[axter] 
should tell him, that he who denies this is disingenuous if he know it, 
and hath some reason to be ashamed if he know it not ? Ay, but 
Epiphanius was deceived in this account of the Meletians, and mis- 
represents them. Indeed, our examiner makes as bold with Epiphanius 
(a bishop of great zeal and holiness, a metropolitan, a famous writer) 
as he does with M[r.] B[axt<jr], charging him with much weakness, 
(as one easHy imposed upon,) many oversights, gross mistakes, diven 
absurd things, and such stories, that he will scarce wish worse to hif 
adversary, than to believe him.*' Nor does Epiphanius alone fall under 
his censure; in his Vindication of the Primitive Church, (as he calls it,) 

• rage Gl ' ohheivation. • Page Iu7. * Ptges 112, 113, *c. 


he goes near to accuse more particular persons (bishops amongst others) 
of eminencj in the ancient church, than he defends ; so that one may 
•aspect his design was, not so much to defend eminent bishops, as great 
bishoprics, such as the ancient church had none, and to run cross to 
M[r.] B[axter] more than to yindicate any. 

'' In St. Mark's time Alexandria had several churches, though but 
QfDe bishop," &c.* 

What Eusebius says of churches in Alexandria at that time, is 
grounded upon a mistake, as appears, because immediately after the 
words cited^ he adds, " So great was the multitude of believers at Mark's 
first attempt there, that Philo in his writings thought fit to give an 
account of them," »t kqI ypatf>Tjs afi&a-M r6v ^tXcoya. Eusebius con- 
ceived that the Essenes, as Scaliger, or the Therapeutse, as Yalesius, 
whom PhUo describes, were the Christians of Mark's conversion ; and 
there being assemblies of that sect of the Jews in Philo's time, the 
historian speaks of Christian churches at Alexandria in Mark's time ; 
but those who believe that he erred in the former, can have no reason to 
give him credit in the latter. Our examiner does not deny that he 
was mistaken, but says, " It is not material whether they were Jews or 
Christians ;" yet those who inquire after truth sincerely, will think it 
material ; and little value a testimony which hath no better grotmd 
than a mistake. 

The next is no better ;* that is an epistle of Adrian, which others are 
puzzled to make sense of, or sud sense as can have any appearance of 
truth. That very passage in it, which is the only groimd of our 
author's argument, himself acknowledges to be false; for he would 
show the Christians in Alexandria to be numerous enough for his pur- 
pose, because it is there said that ^^some," whom he takes to be 
Christians, "did force the patriarch," whoever he be, "to worship 
Christ," and yet adds, " there is no doubt but Adrian does the Christians 
wrong in this point, for they never forced any to their religion." Will 
he have us to rely upon reasonings, which have no better foundation, 
than what is undoubtedly false by his own confession ? He says, also, 
" It is not material to our purpose whether this patriarch were bishop 
of Alexandria, or chief governor of the Jews." If so, then it is not 
material with this gentleman, either to argue from that which is not 
true, or else from that which is nothing to his purpose. For if this 
patriarch was the bishop of Alexandria, that they forced him to wor- 
ship Christ, is not true, he did it of his own accord : and if it be not 
one, who was no Christian, that they forced; there is not anything in 

• Eaieb. lib. it. cap. xvl. • Page 63. 


this passage to his purpose, and Adrian*8 epistle might have been waived 
as a mere impertinency. 

That which follows,* hath not a show of a reason: "The great 
catechists of Alexandria, as Pantsenus, Clemens, Origen, and Heracks, 
did not a little advance the growth of Christian religion in ihaX 
place," &c. 

Must there needs be a diocesan church there because the catechisti 
did advance religion not a little ? 

The next concerning Dionjsius*s church meeting at Chebron 
(Cephro it should be) and Coluthio, is already fully answered, as it is 
offered with better improvement than our examiner gives it.* It cannot 
easily be apprehended how a larger church meeting with Dionysiot, 
made up of those banished with him, and others from several parte of 
Egypt, at Cephro, a village of Lybia, a distant province, should prove 
that he had a diocesan church in Alexandria, to any but those who 
are very inclinable to believe it without proof. Nor will others uider- 
stand that Dionysius is better proved to be a diocesan by the Chrisdani 
which came from Alexandria to Coluthio in Mareotes ; (there being 
none there besides) for the believers in Alexandria itself, were no more 
than one church could hold, as Valesius collects from this very place to 
our examiner's regret. Ex hoc loco coUigitury cetate quidem Diomftiiy 
unicam adhuc fuisse Al^andrice ecclesiam, in quam omnes urlris ilUm 
fideles orationis causd, conveniebant, " From this place we gather that id 
the time of Dionysius there was, as yet, but a single church at Alex- 
andria, in which all the faithful of that city met for prayer."* 

In the next paragraph our examiner argues for the great numben 
of Christians at Alexandria, from the multitudes of martyrs at Thebes. 

" Under the persecution of Diocletian what numbers of Christians 
might be at Alexandria, may be judged by the multitude of mazlyn 
that suffered at Thebes," <* &c. 

But here he mistakes Eusebius, who gives an account not of the 
martyrs which were «V Orj^t, " in the city Thebes," but jcorvk Oi^/Softli, 
" the province Thebais," which was half of that large kingdom, accord- 
ing to the ancient division of it into the upper and lower Egypt. The 
superior Egypt was Thebais, the inferior was called sometimes the 
Delta, sometimes Egypt in a restrained sense, and this division in theie 
terms we have in Eusebius (to go no further) a little before,* jcori 
eri^tSa, " in Thebais," xar "AtyvTrrov, " in Egypt," where he begins hit 
account of the martyrs in this country. Now if the Christians in that 
province of large extent, and comprising very many cities, may be con- 

• Page 63. « No Evidence for D. C. pp. SO, 31. < Not. in Eoieb. Ub. Til. cap. zi. 

^ Page 64. • Cap. vl. 


luded to be very numerous from the multitudes of martyrs which 
mffered there ; yet nothing at all can be inferred for any nimibers to 
lis purpose in the city Thebes, by which he would conclude their 
mmerousness in Alexandria. But if M[r.] B[axter] had mistaken 
me city for so large a country ^^rith multitudes of cities in it, and made 
hat mistake the ground of his reasoning, it is like** our examiner would 
liave exposed him for it in his preface, as he does for some lesser 

In the following paragraph,^ there is a groimdless supposition, that 
'Jhe division of Alexandria into parishes was ancienter than Arius, there 
bwing no mention of it by any ancient author ; as also an accusation of 
Petavius as mistaking Epiphanius^s words, without any cause that I 
am discern in those words, though he says ^* it is plain there.'* That 
irhich he says is plain, the learned dean of Paul's^ could not discern, 
bfut understood Epiphanius as Petavius and others did before him. 
Hiese I took to be preliminaries, and expected his argument, but found 
it not, unless it be couched in the first words. 

'' The division of Alexandria between several presbyters, as it were 
Ato so many parishes,^ &c. 

But this signifies nothing for his purpose, if those in Alexandria 
;hii8 divided could all meet in one place, as Athanasius declares 
hej did ; and that so plainly that any one will judge so, whose 
interest is not too hard for his judgment. Yalesius (who had no bias 
unless what might lead him the other way) understood it as I do ; and 
expresses it in these words, (deciding the matter so long insisted on, 
igainst our author.) ** Afterwards in the times of Athanasius, when 
^here were more churches built by divers bishops of Alexandria, 
iie citizens assembled in several churches severaUy and in parcels, as 
Athanasius says in his apology to Constantius ; but on the great 
festivals, Easter and Pentecost, no particular assemblies were held," 
Mtf universi in majarem ecdesiam conveniebant, ut ibidem testatur Atharuh- 
rttis, *' but aU of them assembled together in the great church, as 
Athanasius testifies.** 

So that there can be no pretence that the church in Alexandria was 
liooesan at this time, unless those who could meet together in one place 
night make such a church. Yet this was then the greatest church 
ji the empire save that at Rome ; and what he adds makes that at 
Borne very unlike such diocesan churches, as are now asserted. 

" Valesius infers from the same passage of Pope Innocent's epistle to 
Oecentius, which Petavius brings to prove the contrary, that though 
iiere were several titles or churches in Rome then, and had been long 

• probable. • Page 65. • Dr. Stillingfleet, Senn. of Separation, p. S8. 



before, yet none of them was as jet appropriated to any presbyter, but 
they were served in common as great cities in HoUand and some other 
reformed countries, that have several churches and ministers," &c. 

The advocates for these churches, who assign the bounds of a diocese 
with most moderation, will have it to comprise a city with a territoiy 
belonging to it ; but there was no church in the territory which 
belonged to the bishop of Rome, he had none but within the city, 
as Innocentius declares in the cited epistle, whereas now the greatest 
city with a territory larger than some ancient province is counted little 
enough for a diocese. Further it is now judged to be no diocese which 
comprises not very many churches with presbyters appropriated to 
them ; but he tells us none of the churches in Rome were appropriated 
to any presbyter, but they were served in common. How ? as greater 
cities in Holland and some other reformed countries, and then they 
were ruled in common as these cities are. The government of many 
churches is not there, nor was of old, ever entrusted in one hand ; and 
thus the bishop of Rome was no more a diocesan than the presbyters of 
that city. 

He concludes" with two assertions, which will neither of them hold 
good. The first that " it is evident out of Athanasius how the bishop of 
that city had from the beginning several fixed congregations under 

This is so far from being evident in Athanasius, that he hath not one 
word which so much as intimates that the bishop of Ale:ltandna from 
the beginning, had any such congregations imder him. 

Tlie other is, that those of Mareotes must be supposed to receive the 
faith almost as early as Alexandria. 

How true this is we may understand by Dionjrsius, bishop of 
Alexandria, towards the latter end of the third age, who declares that 
then Mareotes was €pTffios ad€\<l)a>v koI <nrov6ai<av avOptmwv^^ it was 
so far from having any true Christians in it, that it had none of our 
author's old Christians, i. e. virtuous, good men.*' Nor is it likely that 
the faith was there generally received till many years ailer; and 
therefore not almost so early as Alexandria, unless the distance of 
above two hundred years will consist with his almost. For Alexandiii 
received the faith by the preaching of Mark, who arrived there, sayi 
Eusebius, in the 2nd of Claudius,** others in the 3rd of Caligula.' But 
in tlie time of Dionysius it doth not appear that Mareotes had so many 
Christians, as Bishop Ischyras's church there consisted of, thou^ 
those were but seven, ov liktov iirra rSav avpayofitvatv ^X^iPf — " had not 

« Page 66. • Euscb. lib. vil.cftp. xi. c Page so. 

•^ Chron. Euscb. Chron. Alex. 


more than seven for a congregation/'' But enough of Alexandria, 
though our author is for from bringing enough to prove it, even in 
the fourth age, a diocesan church. He may be excused for doing his 
utmost to this purpose, considering the consequence of it, for if this 
church was not now so numerous as to be diocesan, it will be in vain 
to expect a discovery of any such churches in the whole Christian 
world in those times ; for this is acknowledged to be the greatest city 
and church in the Boman empire next to Home. So that there cannot 
be so fair a pretence for any other inferior to this, such as Jerusalem, 
Carthage, Antioch, &c., much less for ordinary cities, which were ten 
times less considerable than some of the former, as may be collected 
from what Chrysostom says of one of them, dtxa irdXf»y frtvtfrat bwarbv 
fp $p€'^t, that it was able to maintain the poor of ten cities.^ 

So &r the writer of the letter. Let me now return to our author's 
preface : To show that the Christians in Alexandria adhering to 
Athanasius were not so exceeding numerous as is pretended, and not to 
be compared with the Christians now in London, I had said, that '* the 
greatest part of the inhabitants of that city were at this time heathens 
or Jews ; of those who passed for Christians, it is like*^ Athanasius 
had the lesser share,' the Novatians and other sects, the Meletians 
especiaUy, and the Arians, did probably exceed his flock in numbers; it 
may be the Arians there were more numerous.** This last clause (which 
[as] appears by the expression, I was not positive in) he alone fixes 
on, and would disprove it by a passage out of Athanasius. But 
the Greek is false printed, and the sense defective for want of some 
word, and so no judgment can be well passed thereon, imless I saw it ; 
and where to see it he gives no direction. My concern therein is 
not so great as to search for it through so voluminous an author. 
It will serve my turn well enough, if the Arians were but very numer- 
ous, or as Sozomen expresses them, oCk SKiyrf fwipa rov \aov,' ** no small 
portion of the people,** which cannot be denied, though they alone were 
not more numerous. The last thing he would take notice of, is the 
diocese of Theodoret, but this is remitted to the Dean of Paul*s/ 
yet one thing he says he cannot omit ; though some may think that he 
had better have pa^ed it (as he had many other things ;) than being so 
much in haste, to slip at almost every line, as he does in those few 
which concern it. 

*'If these eight hundred churches, not eighty, as this gentleman 
reckons them,** (it was not he but the printer that so reckoned them, 

• Athaii.Apol.S,p.S15. [Ed. Col. 1686, p. 790, B, torn. I.] • In Mat. Horn. Ixvi, 

• probable. ' Page SO. ' Lib. i. cap. xiv, 
/Dr. StilUngfleet. 



as the errata show,) '^ belonged to him as metropolitan, and they were 
all episcopal churches,^ (I never met with any before, that took them for 
episcopal churches, and how he should fall into this mistake I cannot 
imagine ; I will not believe that he creates it, to make himself work,) 
" this poor region of Cyrus would have more bishops than all Africa," 
(not 80 neither, for by the conference at Carthage, and the abbreviation of 
it by St. Austin, much more to be relied on, than the Notitla published 
by Si[r]mond, which is neither consistent with others, nor with itself 
Africa had many more bishops than eight hundred,) " notwithstanding 
they were more numerous there than in any part of the world besides." 
Nor will this pass for true with those who take his own aoooont 
concerning their numbers in Africa,' (which he reckons but faar 
hundred and sixty-six, taking in those of the schismatics too ; about 
sixty-six for each province one with another, coimting them as he does 
seven ;) and the account which others give of their numbers, in the 
ancient Roman province, the kingdom of Naples, the island Crete, 
Ireland, to say nothing of Armenia, and other parts of the world. 

That which follows is, I suppose, instead of an answer to the other 
part of my discourse concerning the popular election of bishops, which 
this gentleman was as much concerned to take notice of, as of the few 
passages he hath touched in the former part; why he did not, I will not 
inquire further, but satisfy myself with what is obvious, especially since 
he tells us he intends a discourse of such a subject. If in this designed 
work he satisfies me that it was not the general practice of the ancient 
church for the people to concur in the choice of their bishops, he will 
do me a greater displeasure than the confutation of what I have written, 
or any other that I can fear he intends me, by taking me off from further 
conversation with ancient authors, as persons by whose writings we can 
clearly know nothing. For if that point be not clear in antiquity, I 
can never expect to find anything there that is so. 

I intended to conclude this discourse here, without giving the readet 
further trouble ; but considering there are misapprehensions about the 
subject in question, those being taken by divers for diocesan churches, 
which indeed are not such, and arguments used to prove them so whidi 
are not competent for that purpose (of which there are many instancei, 
as elsewhere so particularly in the latter end of this author's discourse,) 
I thought it requisite for the rectifying of these mistakes, and to show 
the insufficiency or impertinency of such reasonings, to give an aoooont 
what mediums cannot in reason be esteemed to afford competent proof 
of diocesan churches. 

In general, those who will satisfy us that any churches, in the first 

• Vindie. p. 149. 


ages of Christianily, were diocesan, should prove them to be such 
diocesans as ours are, as large, or near as large; otherwise what they 
offer will scarce appear to be pertinent. For the rise of this debate is 
the question between us, whether the bishops of these times be such as 
those in the primitiye church. This we deny, because modem bishops 
will have another sort of churches or dioceses than were known in the 
best ages. Not that we reject all dioceses or diocesan churches, for both 
wapouda and ^Urftris are used by the ancients for such churches as we 
allow. It is those of a later model, that we approve not, as vastly 
differing from the ancient episcopal churches. The modem dioceses, 
and churches thence denominated, are exceeding great and extensive, 
consisting of many scores, or many hundred particular churches, 
whereas for the three first ages we cannot find three bishops that had 
two particular churches in his diocese, nor in the fourth, one in fifty, (if 
I may not say one in a hundred,) that had more. So that the difference 
is exceeding great, and more considerable in the consequence thereof, 
which I had rather give an account of in the words of the very learned 
D[r.] St[illingfleet] than mine own. " Dioceses generally," says he, 
** in the primitive and eastern churches were very small and little, as 
far more convenient for this end of them in government of the church 
under the bishop's charge ;"« and elsewhere, " Discipline," says he, " was 
then a great deal more strict, preaching more diligent, men more 
apprehensive of the weight of their function, than for any to undertake 
such a care and charge of souls, that it was impossible for them even 
to know, observe, or watch over, so as to give an accoimt for them :* 
men that were employed in the church then did not consult for their 
ease and honour, and thought it not enough for them to sit still, and 
bid others work."<^ St. Austin, speaking of the third age, makes 
account of many thousand bishops then in the world.* Our author 
seems to treat that excellent person something coarsely on this occasion, 
and goes near to question his judgment or veracity for it:' some may 
think this not over decently done (to say no more) when it is his 
business to vindicate some ancient bishops who need it, to reflect upon 
one so untainted as to need none. However, since he says that father 
judged of other ages by his own, when dioceses were exceedingly 
multiplied,'^ we may suppose he will grant there were many thousand 
bishops in the fourth age. Yet among so many thousand bishops I do 
not expect that any can show me twenty, (if I may not say ten,) who 
had so many churches in their diocese as some pluralists amongst us 
may have, who yet never pretend to have a diocesan chiut>h. Those, 

• Iren. p. 376. * Page SS3. ' Page 333. 

' Contra Crcscon. lib. iii. [cap. iil.] • Page 584. / Page 535. 




therefore, who will make proof of such diocesan churches as are in 
question, must show us some in the primitiFe times something like 
ours in largeness and extent. Amongst the instances produced for this 
purpose by former or later writers, I find none anything near to ours, 
save that only of Theodoret in the fifth age. But this in the former 
discourse was showed to be so insufficient to serve the ends it is 
alleged for, that I may hope it will be pressed no more for this service. 

More particularly : 1st, It proves not a church to be diocesan because 
it consists of more than can n^eet tc^ether in one place, for there are 
parishes in this land that contain many himdreds or thousands more 
than can meet in the parish church, and yet are but counted sin^^ 
congregations. Though multitudes in such churches be far from 
proving them to be diocesan, yet I think two instances cannot be given 
in the third age of more in one church than are in some single congre- 
gations amongst us; nor many afterwards, tiU A nanism and Donatism 
were suppressed; which the latter was not in Africa till after the 
famous conference at Carthage^ anno 410, nor the former in other parti 
during the fourth age; for though Theodosius made some sharp decla- 
rations against them and other heretics, yet none but the Eunomians 
were prosecuted ; if we believe Socrates,* that emperor gave not the 
least trouble to the rest, forced none to communicate with him, but 
allowed them their meetings, and even in C. P.* when afterwards the 
Arians divided among themselves, each party had several congr^atioDS 
in that city,' both that which adhered to Marinus, and that also 
which followed Dorothius, these keeping the churches which they had 
before, and the other erecting new churches. 

I know there are those who, from some passages in Tertullian,' 
woidd infer that the Christians in his time were the nuyor part of the 
inhabitants in all cities, and so enough not only for vast congregations, 
but for diocesan churches. But Tertullian was a great orator, and 
frequently uses hyperbolical expressions, which ought not to be strained. 
Such are those insisted on, and by regular construction they import no 
more than that the Christians were very nimierous in many parts of 
the empire. Those that will have them strained, and understood ta 
they sound, offer great injury to Tertullian, making him intend that 
which hath no warrant in any records of antiquity, civil or eoclesiaatical, 
that I can meet with. Before they impose such a sense on him, thej 
ought in reason to make it manifest, that the Christians were the naajor 
part of the inhabitants in some considerable cities at that time ; wben 
I believe they cannot produce two instances in the whole empire : I 
never yet could meet with one. 

• Lib. V. cap. XX. ' ConsUntinople. ' Lib. ▼. cap. xxiO. 

tf Apol. cap. xxxvii. et ad Softpulam. [Ed. Lutet. 1675, p. 71, C] 


Our author from these oratorical exi^essions sticks not to conclude^ 
that it is evident that the Christians were the major part everywhere, 
bat in Rome more eminently so; and Dr. Downham signifies that 
Tertullian speaks chiefly of the city of Bome.* This gentleman says, 
that by his account it is made very probable, that they were the better 
half of the Boman empire; and tells us^^ it is certain that the number 
of Christians at Bome was proportionably greater than in any part of 
the empire. Now how far the Christians at Rome were from being the 
major part of the inhabitants, we may judge by the vast disproportion 
between the poor in the church of Rome, and those in the whole city. 
Cornelius, near fifty years aiter Tertullian, (when it was of more 
growth by half an age,) reckons the poor of his church to be fifteen 
hundred; whereas out of Suetonius, and others, the poorer sorts of 
citizens, qucB e publico victitabat, '^ who were maintained at the public 
expense,** are computed to be thirty-two thousand.'^ 

Many take occasion, from the thousands converted at Jerusalem, 
(Acts ii. and iv.) to conclude the vast number of Christians and exceed- 
ing largeness of churches elsewhere. 010* author hath nothing from 
Scripture for diocesan churches but this, which is considerable;' nor 
will this appear so, if but a small part of those thousands can be 
counted inhabitants of Jerusalem, and so fixed in that church. And 
this is as demonstrable as anything of this nature can be. For this 
miraculous conversion was at Pentecost, one of the three great feasts, 
when there was a vast concourse of Jews and proselytes from all parts 
to that city. These converted were not only inhabitants of Jerusalem, 
but foreigners, and in all reason more of these proportionably, as they 
exceeded the inhabitants in number. And then those of the city will 
scarce be a twentieth part of the five or eight thousand converts. For 
the foreigners that resorted to Jerusalem at these great solemnities are 
reckoned to be three millions, ovk ikdrrovi rpioKoa-i^v ftvpiddavf^ whereas 
the inhabitants of that city were but about a hundred and twenty 
thousand, w€p\ dwdcica fivpiad€s: but of this elsewhere more fiiUy. 

The author of the Vindication will not have so great a part of those 
converts to be strangers, and to return home when the feast was over, 
and assigns something like reasons for it. 

1st. " That the Scripture gives no countenance to this conjecture, 
but says all those strange nations were inhabitants of Jerusalem ; and 
the original word inclines most on this side." 

That he should say the Scripture gives no countenance to this, is 
something strange. It is plain in Scripture, that Grod enjoined the 

• Defenc*, lib. ii. cap. v. p. 9S. * Page 54. « Lipaius da Mag. Rom. lib. ill. cap. ii. 
' Page 435, 9te. • Joaeph. Da BeU. Judaic, lib. tt. oap. xxiT. 


children of Israel to repair to Jerusalem from all quarters of the 
country where they dwelt thrice a year, for the obsenrance of the three 
great feasts. And it is apparent also that they were wont to come up 
to Jerusalem at those solemnities, both Jews and proselytes, di^ ri 
wcurxa (rvytXrjXvStiowf iraaui tu <l>v\a\ firrh xal t£v ctfv&y,' '' all the tribes, 
together with the Gentiles, came together because of the Passover.** 
And it is evident in that chapter cited. Acts ii. : the feast of Pentecost 
being come, there was a resort of Jews and proselytes from all those 
parts of the world to this city. Ay, but the Scripture says, ^aU those 
strange nations were inhabitants of Jerusalem.*" 

He cannot judge that the Scripture sajrs this but upon a supposition 
that the word KaroiKovvrtSj Acts ii. 5, can signify no other thing than 
inhabitants ; but this is a mistake, for the word denotes such as abide in 
a place, not only as inhabitants, but as strangers or sojourners. Thus 
Dr. Hammond will have it translated abiding, rather than dwelling,* 
those that were there as strangers,^ and here expresses those abiding at 
Jerusalem to be Jews which came up to the feast of the Passover, and 
proseljrtes which had come from several nations of all quarters of the 
world. Thus also Mr. Mead,' " for the word KaroiKovmSf saith he, which 
I translate sojourniDg rather than dwelling ; (for so I understand it, that 
they were not proper dwellers, but such as came to worship at Jerusa- 
lem from those far countries, at the feast of the Passover and Pentecost, 
and so had been continuing there some good time) it is true that in the 
usual Greek oiV/o) and KaroiKta signify a durable mansion, but with the 
Hellenists, in whose dialect the Scripture speaketh, they are used indif- 
ferently for a stay of a shorter or longer time, that is, for to sojourn as 
well as to dwell, as these two examples out of the Septuagint will make 
manifest, Gen. xxvii. 44, 1 Kings xvii. 20; there Korouctuf is to sojourn 
only. In a word, otic«a> and KaToiK€<a answer to the Hebrew verb 2U% 
which signifies any stay or remaining in a place.** Grotius saith it 
answers the Hebrew word which is rendered not only by jcarocjeclv but 
napoiKtltf, &c. adding therefore it is not said only of them " who had 
fixed their habitation, but of those who were come to the city for 
the celebrating of the Passover or Pentecost, staying there for awhile." 
The best and most learned expositors generally take it so in this place, 
as denoting, not settled inhabitants, but such as resided there only for 
a time. Indeed, when this author would have the Scripture say all 
these strange nations were inhabitants of Jerusalem, he makes it speak 
things inconsistent. For it is said, verse 9, they were mroticovvm, 
dwellers at Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, &c.; bj 

• Hegeiip. in Euaeb. lib. il. cap. xxiii. * In loc. ' In Act. x. H. 

'In Exercit. in Act. ii. 5. 


which must be understood, either that they were inhabitants or 
sojoomers in those countries ; that thej were now sojourners there no 
man will imagine, nor can any man be said to be actually a sojourner 
in a place where he is not. And if they were inhabitants of those 
regions, they could not be inhabitants of Jerusalem, imless they could 
be inhabitants of several distant coimtries at once. To the same pur- 
pose Mr. Mead,'* " ol Koroucowrts r^y Mtavtrorafuay, where, note by the 
way, that ol Ktmucovmt rijv Mffotnroraft/ay, are comprehended in the 
number of those whom my text saith were Kanucovvns iv r^ IcpovcraXV, 
which confirms my interpretation that Karoucovyrts there signifies 
sojourning, and not dwelling ; for that they could not be said to dwell 
in both places." 

** 2. Suppose there were some of them strangers," &c. 

Suppose, says this gentleman, there were some of them strangers ? 
But does any man that understands how or by whom those ieasts were 
celebrated ever suppose that there were not very many thousands of 
strangers, such as were not inhabitants, present at those solemnities ? 
Josephus (and Eusebius after him) says, there were three millions in 
the city at the Passover, and declares what course was taken to give 
Gestius Gallus a certain account of their numbers ; but then they 
were all in a manner strangers, for he adds, iroXv ^ rovro vKrjBos Z^io^v 
wWiymii ^^ this vast multitude consisted of foreigners."^ Yet our 
author goes on, and confirms himself in the former mistake by another; 
the verse he cites to prove them fixed inhabitants of Jerusalem is mis- 
understood ; the words are irpoaKoprnpovvrtg if ^^xS » which do not 
signify any fixed abode in that place, but only their constancy or per- 
severing in the duties mentioned while they were there. This is the 
use of the expression in the New Testament, Col. iv. 2, rj irpotrtvxi 
irpoowaprtpttn, and SO Bom. xii. 12, continuing in prayer, which they 
might do if they never had a fixed habitation, nor continued as inhabit- 
ants in any place. And thus the evangelist Luke uses the phrase in 
this book of the Acts, chap. i. ver. 14, chap. ii. 46, chap. vi. 4. But 
our author, I think, will never find it used in this form for any settled 
or continued abode in a place, and had no reason to fancy it here. 

He thinks it not probable^ that the zeal and devotion of those con- 
verts would suffer them to leave the apostles, whereas it is certain that 
the primitive zeal and devotion, though it crucified them to the world, 
yet heightened and improved a Christian care of their families, and the 
souls of their relatives and others. And their zeal for Christ and love 
to souls would hasten them homeward, that they might acquaint their 

• In Exeicit. in Act. U. 5. » D« Bel. Jud. lib. vU. cap. 45. • Page 4S7. 


families and others with Christ and the doctrine of saltation, as those 
dispersed from Jerusalem did, chap. viii. 

The five thousand mentioned chap. iv. ver. 4, he will have to be a 
new accession to the three thousand before converted, but should not 
have been so positive in it without reason. Those who are engaged in 
the same cause with him (besides many others) are not of his opinion 
herein, as thej would have been if thej had seen any ground for it 
Dr. Hammond* takes the five thousand to be the number of the 
auditory, not of the converts ; Bishop Downham includes the three 
thousand in those five ;^ and the Dean of Paul V makes account but of 
five thousand in all.' To me it is not material whether they were fire 
thousand or eight thousand, or many more, seeing there was not the 
twentieth part of them other than foreigners, and such as, for anything 
I can see or hear, designed not to dwell at Jerusalem, and so intended 
not [to] fix themselves in that particular church. There can be no 
just reckoning of the numerousness of a church fix>m an occaaonal 
recourse of strangers, who inhabit remote parts or foreign countries. 

If there had been more Christians in the church of Jerusalem than 
could meet in one place, that would be no evidence that it was a dio- 
cesan church, whereas the whole is said in the Acts to meet in (me 
place.' He hath nothing to say against this which is considerable, but 
that the all may denote only those that were present/ and so the sense 
will be, all that were in one place, were in one place : if this can please 
himself, I think it will satisfy none else. Let Dr. Hammond decide 
this business, for in such a cause we may admit a party to be umpire.' 
" What follows," saith he, " of the paucit/ of believers, and their meet- 
ing in one place, is willingly granted by us. What they say of the 
point of time, Acts ii. 41, that believers were so numerous that thej 
could not conveniently meet in one place, this is contrary to the evidence 
of the text, which saith ejcpressly, ver. 44, that all the believers were 
^l TO avTOj which in the last paragraph they interpreted, meeting in one 
and the same place : the like might be said of the other places, Acti 
iv. 4, and v. 14, for certainly as yet, though the number of believen 
increase, yet they were not distributed into several congregations." 

Concerning the dispersion, Acts viii. 1,* he tells us, " Though they 
are all said to be scattered besides tlie apostles, yet it cannot be under- 
stood of all the believers." 

No, but of the generality of them, all that could oommodiously flj 
as strang^^s might do. Nor must it be confined to all the ofiicers onlj ; 

• In loc. * Defence, lib. H. cap. if. page 84. • Dr. StSIUagfleet 

' Sem. of Separation, p. H. • Act. il. 44, vi. 2, kc. / Page 44L 

r Answer to L[ondon] MiniiterB, pp. 78, 79. « Pftfea 44t, 443. 


le generaUtj of expositors are misrepresented if this be made their 
aise, nor doth it appear that Eusebins so understood it ; fioBfiml is 
Bed in Scripture and other writers, and Eusebius himself, to denote 
elievers, and not officers onlj. As for the time of the dispersion 
though I need not insist on it) probably it was nearer this great Pente- 
08t than some would have it. On the first day of the week in the 
mmiTig were the three thousand converted ; the next, or (as some tell 
is) the same day afternoon, at the ninth hour," the number of the con- 
erts was increased to five thousand. While this sermon was preaching 
be ^)ostles are apprehended, and committed to custody till the next 
doming. Another, it is like^ the day ailer, they are imprisoned, but 
nlaiged by an angel in the night, chap. v. In or near that week were 
he seven deacons chosen, presently after the disciples were thus in- 
leased, and the apostles imprisoned and dismissed. The expression sig- 
iifies it, chap. vi. 1. It is not cV cjcfcyoir, in those days, which may admit 
i latitude and some good dintance of time, but cV ravrtus, in these days, 
rhich denotes the time instant, or that which immediately ensues, with- 
mt the interposure'^ of any such distance. And so the phrase is used 
}j St. Luke, both in the Gospel and in the Acts. It is Dr. Hammond's 
observation upon Luke i. 39. *' The phrase cV rtivratt rcut ^fiiptus, in 
hese days, saith he, hath for most part a peculiar signification, difiering 
ix>m €v fifUpait cVciKctr, in those days. The latter signifies an indefinite 
ime, sometimes a good way off, but the former generally denotes a cer- 
ain time then present, instantly, then at that time ; so here, that which 
8 said of Mary*s going to Elizabeth was sure' immediately after the 
ieparting of the angel from her, and therefore it is said she rose up 
4«tA anovdrjt, very hastily ; so ver. 24, firro ravras rht rifitpas, t. e, im- 
nediately Elizabeth conceived ; so chap. vi. 12, h raU ^ftipcus ravratt, 
'. e. then, at that point of time, he went out to the mountain. See chap, 
udii. 7, c. xxiv. 18, Acts i. 5, c. xi. 27, and xxi. 15." 

Immediately after the choice of the deacons, Stephen, one of the 
leven, is apprehended dfut r^ x«Vo»'<m'^» " ^ soon as ever he was or- 
iained, as if he had been ordained for this alone," saith Eusebius, 
[lib. ii. cap. i.) And at the same time the persecution began which 
iispersed that church. Whereas he saith, " whatsoever numbers were 
forced away, it is likely they returned ;" if he understand it of the 
itrangers driven from Jerusalem, that they returned to fix there, or 
>therwise than occasionally, it is no more likely, nor will be sooner 
proved than what he asserts a little after, (page 444,) viz. that *' the 
smpty sepulchre preached with no less efficacy than the apostles.'^ 

This is enough to satisfy' what our author would draw out of Scrip- 

• D[r.] L[lghUoiOL] * probftble. • intenral. ' lurely. • aanrsr. 


ture concerning the church of Jerusalem. After some trifling about 
objections which he forms himself, and then makes sport with, he comes 
to prove that Jerusalem was a diocesan church in the apostles* time. 
But first he would have us believe that James was the proper bishop of 
that church, and would evince it by two testimonies, those of Clemens and 
Hegesippus. But what says his Clemens ? He suth not only that James 
was ordained bishop of Jerusalem presently after our Saviour^s asoensioD, 
but what I think our author was loth to mention. If he had given us 
the entire sentence, it might have been better understood. ^' After the 
ascension of our Saviour, Peter, James, and John, the most honoured by 
our Lord, would not yet contend for the first d^ree of honour, (jai 
im^iKaCfa-Bai ddfi/f,) but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem,"' 
Apoatolorum episcopum, '^ bishop of the apostles," Ruffinus reads it. This 
seems to signify that his being made a bishop there, was some degree 
of honour above their being apostles. A learned Bomanist^ tells us, 
that the books where Eusebius had this did so abound with errors, that 
they were not thought worth preserving, and so are lost, (as those of 
Papias and Hegesippus are for the same reason :) this may prove one 
instance of those many errors. That which seems to be the sense of 
his words is more fully expressed by one who goes under the name of 
Clemens too 'S " James, the Lord^s brother, was prince of bishops, and by 
his episcopal authority commanded all the apostles;" and so the former 
Clemens in Ruffinus calls him the bishop of the apostles.' If he means 
such a bishop as ours, (and otherwise his meaning will not serve our 
author's purpose,) then the apostles were but the vicars or curates of 
James. This is bad enough if James was an apostle— the absurdest 
Papist will scarce ascribe as much to Peter ; — but if he was not an 
apostle, it is yet more intolerable. If our author can believe his own 
witness, some may admire,' but I think few will follow him. 

Let us hear Hegesippus, (not quite so ancient as this gentleman makes 
him, since he was alive in the reign of Commodus;) he says, James 
ruled that church, fx^ra r&v dno(rr6K<ov, If we take this as it is ren- 
dered in Jerome, ** after the apostles," it is not only against grammar, 
but without truth, and makes James to be bishop when he was dead; for 
he was martyred about the fourth [year] of Nero, and all the apostles but 
the other James survived him. But if the meaning be that he ruled 
that church with the apostles, it speaks him no more the bishop of 
Jerusalem than the rest of the apostles, who were not fixed or topical 
bishops, but oecimienical officers of an extraordinary office and power, 
and accordingly is James described. One ancient author says that 
he, no less than Peter, did iniTpoirijv rrjs olKovfitmjt dvad€^€ur$ai. And 

• [Clem, in Eus. lib. H. cap. i.] * Valetius. • Lib. U. RecQgnit. [cap. liz.] 

* Hlat. lib. it. c«p ii. • xronder. 


Epiphanias reports,* that Hyginus after James, Peter, and Paul, was 
the ninth bishop of Rome successively, signifying that he was as much 
bishop of Rome as Paul and Peter. 1 need not quote that other author 
who says he ruled the holy church of the Hebrews, as also he did all 
churches everywhere founded.* 

" However, certain it is that James was bishop of Jerusalem, not 
Cfolj from H^esippus and Clemens A]ex[andrinus,] but also from St. 
Paul, who mentions him as one of the apostles that he had conversed 
with in Jerusalem ; and it is likely there were no more there at that 
time but he and Peter." 

This is no way certain from Clemens and Hegesippus, and so far 
from being certain by St. Paid, that his mentioning him as an apostle 
makes it rather certain that he was not a bishop ; for the o£Sces of an 
apostle and of a bishop are inconsistent, as is acknowledged and proved 
by an excellent person of your own.*^ " The offices of an apostle and 
of a bishop are not in their nature well consistent ; for the apostleship 
is an extraordinary office, charged with the instruction and government 
of the whole world, and calling for an answerable care, (the apostles 
being rulers, as St. Chrysostom saith, ordained by God, — rulers not 
taking several nations and cities, but all of them in common intrusted 
with the whole world ;) but episcopacy is an ordinary standing charge 
affixed to one place, and requiring a special attendance there — ^bishops 
being pastors who, as Chrysostom saith, do sit, and are employed in 
one place. Now he that hath such a general care can hardly discharge 
such a particular office ; and he that is fixed to so particular an attend- 
ance, can hardly look well afler so general a charge, &c. Baronius 
saith of St. Peter, that ' it was his office not to stay in one place, but 
aa much as it was possible for one man to travel over the whole world, 
and to bring those who did not yet believe to the faith, and thoroughly 
to establish believers.* If so, how could he be bishop of Rome, which 
was an office inconsistent with such vagrancy ? It would not have 
beseemed St. Peter, the prime apostle, to assume the charge of a parti- 
cular bishop ; it had been a degradation of himself, a disparagement to 
the apostolical majesty, for him to take upon him the bishopric of 
Rome, as if the king should become mayor of London, — as if the 
bishop of London should be vicar of Pancras." And [a] little before, 
" St. Peter's being bishop of Rome (it holds as well of James's being 
bishop of Jerusalem) would confound the offices which God made 
distinct ; for God did appoint first apostles, then prophets, then pastors 
and teachers ; wherefore St. Peter, after he was an apostle, could not 

• Hcret. [xli.] Cerdon. (n. 1.] » [Clem.] Ep. to James. [In Hard. Cone. torn. i. p. 89.] 

' Dr. Banow, Suprem. pp. 120, 121. 


well become a bishop ; it would be such an irregalarily as if a bishop 
should be made a deacon.** 

" Ecclesiastical history makes James the ordinary bishop and dio- 
cesan of the place." 

There is nothing in ecclesiastical history for it, but what is derived 
from Hegesippus and Clemens, whom others followed right or wrong. 

''It is strange to see Salmasius run his head so violently against 
such solid testimonies as those of Hegesippus and Clemens." 

That great person understood things better, and discerned no danger 
in running his head against a shadow ; and there is nothing more of 
solidity in what is alleged from those authors. 

Further, he would prove it a diocesan church by a passage in Hege- 
sippus, who says, " That several of the Jewish sectaries who believed 
neither a resurrection nor judgment to come, were converted by Jamei, 
and that when a great number of the rulers and principal men of the 
city were by this ministry brought to believe the Grospel, the Jews 
made an uproar, the scribes and Pharisees saying, that it was to be 
feared that all the people would turn Christians."* 

He says many of the prime sectaries were converted by James; 
but this will scarce prove such a diocesan church as he contends 
for. That which would serve his turn (that all the people would torn 
Christians) was not effected, but only feared by the Jews, who took a 
course to prevent it by killing James. But if this were for his pur- 
pose, Hegesippus is not an author to be relied on ; part of the sentence 
cited is false, that the sects mentioned (and he had mentioned seven) 
did not believe the resurrection nor judgment, whereas the Pharisees 
and others of them believed both, which Valesius observes.* One false 
thing in a testimony is enough to render it suspected, but there 
are near twenty things false or fabulous in this account he gives 
of James, many of them marked by Scaliger,*^ divers by Valesius,' and 
some acknowledged by Petavius.* 

He would not have us suspect that the numbers of the church 
at Jerusalem were not so great as he pretends, because Pella, an obscure 
little town, could receive them all besides its own inhabitants, " but we 
must imderstand that town to be their metropolis, and the believers 
all scattered through the whole country, and this as Epiphanios 

But where does Epiphanius write this? Not in the place cited; 
he writes the contrary both there and elsewhere, that all the believers, 
(in one place,/) that ail the disciples (in another place,) warns ol ftaBtfnl 

• Page 44«. * In Euaeb. lib. li. cap. 28. • Animad. In Enaeb. p. 178. 

' In Enseb. lib. U. cap. S8. ' Not. ad Rmtf. 78. [n. 8.] / Epiph. Hmt, zxx.[n. S.] 


^fiafat» €v UiXXjf ;* what he adds is but to describe where the town was 
situated, ''all the disciples, all the believers dwelt bejond Jordan in 
Pella." Archbishop Whitgifb brings this as a pregnant proof that 
the Christians at Jerusalem were but few in comparison, (and no 
more than could all meet in one place, as a little before he affirms 
■gain and again ;) his words are, " How few Christians was there 
at Jerusalem not long before it was destroyed, being above forty years 
after Christ. Does not Eusebius testify^ that they all were received 
into a little town called Pella ? yet the apostles had spent much time 
and labour in preaching there ; but the number of those that did 
not profess Christ in that city was infinite."'^ This might be farther 
cleared' by what Epiphanius saith of that church in its return from 
Pella, but I design briefiiess. 

Our author adds one testimony more, to show that under the 
government of Simeon great numbers were '' added to that church, 
many thousands of the circumcision receiving the Christian fidth 
at that time, and among the rest Justus," <&c. — ^p. 448. 

But those who view the place in Eusebius will see, that he does not 
say those many of the circumcision were converted by Simeon, or were 
under his government, or belonged to that church ; and so it signifies 
nothing for his purpose. And so in fine, the account wherewith he 
concludes his discourse of Jerusalem will not be admitted by any who 
impartially consider the premises. 

As for his other Scripture instances, there is not so much as the 
shadow of a proof showed by him, that there were near so many Chris- 
tians as in Jerusalem, or as are in some one of our parishes, yea, 
or more than could meet in one place, either in Samaria, (where he 
says it appears not what kind of government was established, p. 451,) 
or in Lydda, which was but a village, though a fair one, and far from 
having Saron for its proper territory, that being a plain between Joppa 
and Cassarea ; or in Antioch, — ^p. 452 ; much less in Corinth and 
Ephesus, which he advisedly passes by, — ^p. 456. 

Our author does in effect acknowledge that in Scripture it appears 
not that these churches were episcopal, much less diocesan ; " It 
is to be confessed," says he, p. 461, " that the Scriptures have not 
left so full and perfect an account of the constitution and government 
of the first churches, &c. Thus we have no more notice of the 
churches of Samaria and of Judaea (Jerusalem excepted) than that such 
were founded by the apostles ; but of their government and constitu- 
tion we have not the least information." What information, then, 

• De Ponder, et Meiu. cap. zt. * Lib. Ul. cap. v. 

• D^tence of Answer. Treat, iii. cap. vi. p. 175. ' made clear. 


can we have that they were diocesan or episcopal? He goes on, 
"And the prospect left of Antioch in Scripture is very confused, as 
of a church in Jieri,'^ where a great number of eminent persons laboured 
together to the building of it up ; but only from ecclesiastical writers, 
who report that this church, when it was settled and digested, was 
committed to the govemment of Euodias, and afier him to Ignatius," 
&c. So that after what form the church at Antioch was constituted 
does not appear, (it may be congregational and not diocesan, for anj 
thing this gentleman can see in Scripture,) but only from ecclesiastical 

But his ecclesiastical writers do so contradict one another as T&aden 
their testimcmies of little value. Nor is there much more reckoning to 
be made of the traditional account they and others give concerning the 
Succession and government of the first bishops, than this author makes 
of Eusebius^s traditional chronology, p. 454. Some make Euodias 
the first bishop, and he being dead, Ignatius to succeed him ;^ on 
the contrary, some will have Ignatius to have been the first, and make 
no mention of Euodias ; ^ others will have them to have governed that 
church both together ;<* some will have Euodias ordained by Peter, and 
Ignatius by Paul ; others report Ignatius ordained by Peter, and some 
modem authors of great eminency, both Protestants and Papists, (not 
only Baronius but Dr. Hammond,) find no more tolerable way to recon- 
cile them, than by asserting that there were more bishops than one 
there at once, which quite blasts the conceit of a diocesan church there. 

And what is alleged for the numbers of Christians there, to support 
this conceit of a diocesan church, is very feeble, p. 452, 453. ''A great 
number believed, Acts xi. 21, and much people, ver. 24." The next 
verses show, that there were no more than Paul and Barnabas assem- 
bled within one church ; meeting cV rg iKKXijaia, for a year together, 
and there taught this iKav6v or ndXvv SxXov. The same divine author 
says, Acts vi. 7, noki/s ^x^or, "A great company of the priests were 
converted :" and will this gentleman hence conclude that there were 
priests enough converted to make a diocese ? 

He hath no ground from Scripture to think otherwise of Rome, 
(that we may take in all his Scripture instances together,) however he 
would persuade us that there were several congi'egations there in 
the apostles' times. Let us see how : " By the multitude of saluta- 
tions in the end of that epistle, he makes appear the numbers of 
Christians in that city. ^ Salute Priscilla and Aquila with the churdi 
that is in their house.* " 

• in the coune of formation. * Euaeb. lib. iii. eap. xxii. 

« Chryi. Orat. In Ignat. ' Clemeni Conititut. lib. Tii. cap. xlvi. 


The Dean of PaulV will have this church in their house to be but 
a &mily ; this author will have it to be a congregation, as if it might 
be either to serve a turn. I think it was such a congregation as 
nmoYed with Aquila from one country to another, for this church 
which was in their house at Ephesus before, (1 Cor. xvi.) is said to be 
in their house at Rome, (Bom. xvi.,) that is, there were some of the 
church which belonged to their family. It is a question whether there 
was now at Home any one congregation such as our author intends ; 
Grotius^ thinks it probable there was none at all. But let us suppose 
this to be a congrt^ation, where finds he his several others ? why where 
another person would scarce dream of any. " It is not improbable, 
aaith he, that several that are mentioned with all the saints that are 
with them, may be the officers of several congregations," — pp. 457, 468. 
But it is manifest that in the apostles^ times one congregation 
had many ofiicers ; how, then, can several officers be a good medium 
to prove several congregations? The ancient authors which count 
those officers (mentioned Eom. xvi.) do make them bishops, (and some 
except not Narcissus nor Prisca, t. e, Priscilla, though her husband 
also hath an episcopal church assigned him.) Now if they were 
not bishops at Rome, but other places, they are alleged to no pur- 
pose ; if they were bishops at Rome, there will be very many bishops 
in that one church, (it may be more than Priscilla's congregation con- 
sisted of,) which rather than our author will grant, I suppose he 
will quit his plurality of congregations here. Indeed, what he adds 
next, doth no ways favour them ; ** and this number was afterwards 
increased considerably by the coming of Paul, who converted some of 
the Jews, and afterwards received all that came, whether Jews or Gen- 
tiles, and preached to them the kingdom of God for the space of two 
whole years, no man forbidding him," — p. 458. 

Paul preached at Rome in his hired house for two years ; aU 
this while he received all that came to him : there is no question 
but that all the Christians there did come to hear this most eminent 
apostle; so that it seems from first to last there were no more 
Christians at Rome than a private house could receive. 

He would prove what he intends from "Nero's persecution, who 
is said to have put an infinite multitude of Christians to death upon 
pretence that they had fired Rome, p. 458. Tacitus speaks of the 
Christians as guilty, and says they confessed the crime, and detected* 
many others." 

Now those who suffered, either confessed that they fired Rome, and 
then they were no Christians ; or they did not confess it, and then he 

« Dr. Stfllinfllect. * In Rom. xvi. 5. ' earned the detoetion of. 


wrongs them intolerably, and deserves no credit. But our author 
to excuse him (against the sense of such who best understand him, 
Lipsius particularly, besides Baronius and others) says, they confessed 
not that they burnt Home, but that they were Christians. Whereas 
the inquiry being concerning the burning of Rome, the question 
was not whether they were Christians, but whether they fired the city; 
of this last Tacitus speaks, and will be so understood by those who 
think he speaks pertinently. But for truth in those accounts he gives 
of Christians, it is no more to be expected than from other heathen 
authors of those ages, with w^hom it is customary on that subject, 
splendide mentiriy '^ to utter brilliant falsehoods."* Some other instances 
hereof we have in this report of Tacitus, which I suppose our author 
will scarce offer to excuse, as when the Christian religion is called 
exitiabilia superstition " a pernicious superstition,** and when the Chris- 
tians are said per flagitia invisos vulgb fuisse, " to have been universally 
detested for their crimes." 

But suppose he speaks truth, what is it he says ? Nero put an 
infinite multitude of them to death, but ingens mtdtitudo, which are 
his words, may be far less than an infinite multitude. Two or three 
hundred may pass for a great multitude, and extraordinarily great, 
when that which is spoke of them is extraordinary. The martjn 
burnt in Queen Mary's days were a great multitude ; and few may be 
accounted very many, to suifer in such a manner, as these did by 
Nero's cruelty. " Some were disguised in the skins of wild beasts, and 
worried to death by dogs ; some were crucified ; and others were 
set on fire when the day closed, that they might serve as lights 
to illuminate the night," Ferarnm tergis contecti ut laniatu canum 
interirefity ant critcibus affixi, aut jiammandiy atque ubi de/ecisset dia 
in usum nocturin luminis uterentnry in the words of Tacitus. 

To this he adds the general account which Eusebius gives of the 
success of the Christian faith immediately after the first discovery of it, 
that j)resently in all cities and villages churches abounding with innu- 
merable multitudes were assembled, &c. — p. 459. 

If be will not deal imkindly with Eusebius, he must not set his 
expressions upon the rack, nor stretch them beyond his intention, 
nor forget what is observed to be usual with him ; Oratorum mare rem 
ampUficare, — "to amplify a matter after the manner of the orators." 
These churches consisting of innumerable multitudes are said to be not 
only in all cities, but villages ; now I believe it will be an hard matter 
for our author to show us any villages, even in Constantine*s time, 
where there were a thousand, yea, or iiv^ hundred Christians. Those 
who will not abuse themselves or their readers must give great allow- 
ance to such expressions, and not rely on them in strict aiding. 


And here it may not be amiss to take notice of what he says 
of Borne in another chapter ; M[r.] B[axter] had declared, that he 
found no reason to believe that Rome and Alexandria had for two 
hundred years more Christians than some London parishes, (which 
have sixty thousand souls,) nor near, if half so many.* The chief, 
if not the only argument to prove them at Rome more numerous, 
is a passage in Cornelius's epistle, shovnng the number of the officers 
and of the poor; this was in the middle of the third age, and so 
not within these two hundred years, but yet proves not what it is 
alleged for in Cornelius's time, near anno 260. The number of 
officers signifies no such thing, as hatli been made evident; the number 
of the poor, being fifleen hundred, rather proves the contrary. This 
was cleared ^ by comparing the proportions of the poor with the rest in 
other places, at Antioch in particular, as was showed out of Chry- 
sostom, who reckons the poor to be a tenth part of the inhabitants ; and 
if it was so at Rome in Cornelius's time, the Christians were about 
fifteen thousand. This will serve M[r.] B[axter]'s purpose well 
enough. But the time and circumstances being exceeding different, 
makes it most probable that the Christians then at Rome did nothing 
near so much exceed the poor in nvunber. It is far more likely 
that the proportions were nearer that at Constantinople, where Chry- 
sostom says, the poor was one-half; this would spoil all our author's 
pretensions, and so he advisedly takes no notice of it. 

However, something he would say against M[r.] B[axter,] if one 
coidd understand it. It is about the word ffki^fuvoi, in Corneliuses 
epistle, rendered * the poor.' Valcsius observes the word is used by the 
Roman clergy in an epistle to those at Carthage, sive viducB sivt 
thlibofneniy t. e. indigentes, saith he, as Rufinus translates it, and tell us 
also that Cyprian '^ calls them pauperes et indigentes qui laboranL 
These, says our author, were not only poor, but sick and diseased, 
alleging that of the Roman clergy for it afler Valesius, and if 
he mean not only the poor, but the sick also, and the diseased, 
he is right, for Cornelius signifies those that were maintained by the 
church, widows and indigent, whether sick or well. But when he 
says these poor were such only as were not able to come abroad, 
he seems to confine it to the sick and diseased, and then it contradicts 
the former, and is without reason, against the use and import of the 
word, as rendered by all interpreters former and later that I meet 
with, and indeed against common sense ; for the number Cornelius 
speaks of is fixed, as that of the presbyters and deacons, such as may 
be constantly known, and a certain account given of it, whereas the 

> Chuieh Hist. p. 7. Vindieat. p. S7. * made clear. « Ep. It. 


number of the sick is not fixed, but such a contingency as is very 
uncertain and various. 

But Cornelius says in the same epistle that the people of his church 
were innumerable. True, that is, according to the frequent use of the 
word, very many (it is granted they were more than in any other 
church) as when Dio says the nations conquered by Trajan were innu- 
merable, and Socrates expresses those wounded in the fight between 
the Christians and heathen in Alexandria about the demolishing of an 
idol temple were dvaplBfirjroiy^ " innumerable," which in Sozomen is 
but many ; * and another ancient author says, there were innumerable 
bishops in Africa, which yet this gentleman can easily count, and 
tells us that schismatics and all were but four hundred and sixty-six.*^ 
M[r.] B[axtcr] may allow him what he falls short in this reckoning, 
which is more than half, and may grant there were many more 
hundreds of Christians in Kome than any of these innumerables come 
to, and yet make good what he supposes. 

The great liberality of tlie Roman church is offered as no small 
argument of its greatness ; they sent to a great many churches, relieving 
those that were in want, and sending necessaries to such as were con- 
demned to the mines ; thus in Severus's time, and in the time of 
Dionysius, the provinces of Syria with Arabia were thereby relieved 
every one, p. 53. 

M[r.] B[axter] need not doubt, but some one parish near him 
might do what is equivalent to this, if the ancient charity were revived, 
which opened the hearts of Christians in those times further than their 
purses could well extend. 

But the words are oddly stretched, for they did not relieve every one 
in all those places, but such as were in great want, and those par- 
ticularly who were condc?mned to the miue^ ; and cnapxtly must denote 
as it were the all-sufllcicncy of the Uoniaii church, which some would 
say is, as it were, blasphemy, but our author meant Ixjtter, the proper 
import of the word is no more tlian stipem conferre. 

He alleges two passages in Eusebius;*' the former concerns not 
Rome more than any other place in the empire, the import of it is this, 
not that every soul of every sort, but that many of all sorts were 
led to the Christian religion: if iraaav yjn>xv^ ^ stretched to every 
soul, Eusebius is made to sj>eak what is in a manner notoriously false, 
and monstrously extravagant. The later which concerns Rome does 
but signify, that more of good quality for riches and birth, with 
their families and relatives, came over for salvation.*- These he will 
have to be of the nobility, but those were counted noble who descended 

• Lib. V. cap. 15. « Lib. vii. cap. \!i. • Page 131. ' Page54. « Lib. r. cap. 21. 


from such as had been magistrates in cities or free towns. How 
this can make that church near so great as our author would have it, 
or greater than M[r.] B[axter] supposes, I don't understand. 

What he subjoins* is very surprising and must seem strange to 
those who are acquainted with the state of the church in those times, 
that the Christians were the better half of the Roman empire, that they 
were the major part every where, but in Rome more eminently. This 
hath no good warrant from ancient authors, no, not from Tertullian, 
though he writ many years after Commodus. He, like an orator, 
draws something bigger than the life, (as our author says of Nazianzen, 
p. 137,) and must have allowance on this account by those who will 
not be injurious to him. In that very age wherein Commodus reigned, 
it is said the Christians were so often slaughtered, that few could 
be found in Rome who professed the name of Clirist.* And near one 
hundred and fifty years after, when Constantine had reigned near 
twenty years in Rome, the generality of the inliabitants showed 
such disaffection to Christianity, as that is given for one reason why 
he transferred the seat of the empire to Byzantium.*^ 

He runs beyond M[r.] B[axter]*8 bounds towards the middle of the 
third century, and tells us the greatest part of Alexander Severus's 
family were Christians. And so they might be, and yet no more 
Christians in Rome for that, if they were Christians before they came 
into his family, which is more likely than that they were converted in 
it. However many more such additions will not increase that church 
beyond M[r.] B[axter]'8 measures, nor make it near so numerous 
as that parish to which Whitehall belongs. 

What he next offers neither concerns Rome,** being general expres- 
sions, nor M[r.] B[axter], referring to the ages after those which 
he is concerned for : whether by fivpuufdpovs tmavvdyofyas we understand 
the great multitudes which were gathered into the Christian profession, 
(as Valesius,) or that assembled together for Christian worship, (as our 
author,) is not material ; though the former is more likely, unless 
we can think Euseblus, an elegant writer, would use so much tautology 
in so few Unes. That from which he may expect more service is 
the next expression, which he renders, " the multitude of their meetings 
in every city," but may with better reason he rendered, " the numerous- 
ness or multitudes of those that assembled in several cities ;" for it 
is so far from being true, that every city had many congregations 
of Christians in it, that there were many cities long afler, which had 
no Christians in them. And two instances cannot be given of any 
cities in the whole empire that at this time had more congregations 

• Page 54. * Platlna ViU Xjttl. « Zotimuc, Hiit. lib. il. p. 61. ' Page 55. 

1 2 


than one ; unless where they all might have assembled in one place, 
they thought it better in prudence to disperse themselves into seyeral 
meetings. For in Alexandria, which was the greatest city next to 
Rome, and the most populous church in the whole world, there is 
no appearance of more assemblies till the end of the tenth persecution, 
and the death of Peter, bishop there, who suffered in the ninth year of 
it.« And therefore the elegant gradation, in discovering of which this 
gentleman would have us take notice that he has a more comprehensive 
faculty than Valesius, seems not very well founded. 

That which follows* is an hundred years or more beyond the time to 
which M[r.] B[axter] limits his assertion: "About this time, or not 
long after, Rome had above forty churches, which we must not imagine 
to be built all at the same time, but by degrees, according as the num- 
l)er of believers did require," &c. — page 55. 

From the number of churches, he cannot reasonably conclude such a 
multitude of Christians as he contends for. There were many churches 
in Alexandria when Athanasius was bishop of it, and yet there were 
no more Christians in his communion than could meet together in one 
place. Baronius tells us, that there was a city in Germany which had 
four hundred churches in it;^ and yet no reason to think that town was 
comparable for circuit and populousness either to Rome or Alexandria. 
If I should say that in Optatus there were not so many churches, but 
the number mistaken by the transcribers, this would be as good an 
answer as that of our author, who will have the twelve or fourteen 
years of Athaua^jius's banishment in Epiphanius not to be so many 
months, and that years arc put instead of months by the mistake of the 
copies. — page 113. Or that other about the number of bishops in the 
council at Antiocb, where he will have thirty in divers authors to be a 
mistake of the transcribers, for ninety (or ninety-seven, or ninety-nine*) 
Onuphrius must have liked such an answer to this of Optatus, who 
though he was as much concerned for the greatness of the Roman 
church as any, and no less inquisitive into the ancient state of it, yet 
delivers it as a thing manifest and certain that Rome had but twenty- 
eight titles, and this number not completed till the fifth age.* But 
there is no need to insist on anything of this nature ; it is not so materisi 
how many churches there was, as when there was so many, and about 
the time he will have Blondel to mistake, and M[r.] B[axter] to 
follow him therein ; he had been nibbling at Blondel a little before 
upon a small occasion and with as little reason, as might be showed, if 
it were fit to follow one in his vagaries. Let us see whether he doth 

• Euwb. lib. vii. cap. 32. * Page 55. ' Anno lOIS, No. 1 

' Pages 123, 124, 125. ' Interpret. Voc. Ecclet. art. Titulua. 



not follow Valerius in his mistake, who will have Optatus to speak of 
the churches at Borne in the time of Diocletian's persecution, tempore 
pereecutionie Dtodetiani.^ But Optatus speaks of those churches when 
extant, and capable of recdving congr^ations, as is plain by his words ; 
but what churches were at Borne or other places, in the very beginning 
of that persecution, were all quite demolished, and that in one day, says 
Theodoret,^ or the paschal days, as Eusebius f and there is no probability 
they could rebuild them while the persecution lasted, or that so many 
could be raised in less than many years afVer. Nicephorus speaks but 
of fourteen churches at Constantinople in the reign of Theodorius 
junior ; nor meet I with any author that gives an account of more, yet 
this was about an himdred years after Byzantium was re-edified, and 
both Constantine and the succeeding empercn^ endeavoured to make that 
city as populous as could be, and furnished it with churches answerable 
to the niunbers of the inhabitants.^ So that there is no likelihood 
there could be forty churches at Borne at any time nearer Diocletian's 
than Optatus's. 

But to help this, our author tells us out of Optatus, that there were 
three Donatists bishops at Borne successively before Macrobius, who 
was contemporary with Optatus, and that the first of them was Victor 
Garbiensis, and he will have Optatus to speak of the state of Borne (the 
forty churches there) not as it was in his own time, but in that of this 
Victor; when this was, he says, is not easy to fix. — page 56. 

Yet this is certain, it cannot be in the time of Diocletian's persecu- 
tion, for the schism of the Donatists did not break out till Majorinus 
was ordained, (who was the first bishop of the faction made in Africa or 
elsewhere) and this was some time afler the persecution was there 
ended, as Optatus, and Valerius afler him, and others declare ;' and 
scHue time must be allowed after this for the Donatists' settling in B<xney 
and such an increase of them there as to need a bishop. Baronius 
makes this Victor to be bishop in Silvester's time, which might be 
long enough after Diocletian's persecution, for he lived till 335. All 
which our author hath to allege for the more early date of Victor's 
bishopric is that there were two or three Donatist bishops between 
Victor and Optatus ; but this will scarce serve his turn ; for there 
were four bishops of Bome in the former part of that very age wherein 
we are now concerned, who held not the chair ten years among them : 
MarceUus, Eusebius, Melchiades, and Marcus. But we may allow the 
three Donatist bishops at Bome near ten years a-piece, from the time of 
Optatus, 378, as both Blondel and Valesius agree ; and yet Victor 

• In Euteb. Hb. t1. cap. zliii. * HUt. lib. v. cap. xxxviil. ' Chroo. 

* Lib. Tli. esf . zHz. • De Scbii. Donat. cap. ill. [Ed. Paris. I679« p. 76, la] 


Garbiensis may not be bishop till anno 850, and so nearer to Optatus's 
time, than Diocletian^s. 

2. It is no proof of diocesan churches, that those who belong to them 
occasionally divide tliemselves into distinct meetings. A large church, 
and sonjetimes a small congregation, may hare occasion to divide and 
meet in parcels, for their convenience or security ; particularly in time 
of persecution ) that they may assemble with more safety, and be the 
better concealed from those who would disturb or apprehend them. 
The people that belonged to Cyprian did meet all together on several 
occasions, as is apparent in his epistles ; yet when persecution was hot, 
he thought it advisable, caute non glomeratim nee per midtUudmem 
simul junctam, convenienduniy** '* to meet cautiously, not in large bodies, 
nor in a compact multitude." They durst not, in some parts, tU ni 
<t>dvtpov cMcXija-mCciv, ** keep their assemblies in public,'* in the beginning 
of Constantine*s reign. * 

Damasus, the supposed author of the Popes' Lives, says, EuaarisiuM 
titulos preshyteris divisit, " divided the titles in Bome to the presbyters ;" 
and by titles, some will have us to understand parish churches. But it 
is incredible that the Christians, in Trajan's time, when Euariatus was 
bishop, could erect any structures in form of churches, or had any 
distinguishable from other houses, so as the heathen might take notice 
of them, as used or designed for the religious exercises of Christians. 
Wlio can imagine, that when it was death for any one to be known to 
be a Christian, they should frequent any known places for Christian 
worship ? It is far more reasonable, which Platina says of Calixtus's 
time, more than an hundred years afler, that then the ^'meetings of 
Chiistians were all secret, and rather in chapels, and those hidden, and 
for tlie most part underground, than in open and public places.** Cttm 
ed tempestate oh crebras persecutiones occulta esaent omnia^ et aaeeOa 
potiuSy atque eadem abdita et plerumque subtenwiea; quam aperUa m 
locis ac puhlicia fierent. Dr. St[illingfleet] says,*^ " I confess it seems not 
probable to me that those tituli were so soon divided as the time of 
Euaristus, who lived in the time of Trajan, when the persecution was 
hot against the Christians ;" but Damasus seems not to believe himself, 
for in the life of Dionysius, he saith. Ate preshyteris eccUsiaa divisit^ **it 
was he who divided the churches to the presbyters.** His reason 
concludes as much or more against the titles under this notion asciibed 
to Marcellus two hundred years afler, (which some will have to be 
twenty-five, but Onuphrius shows they could not be more than fifteen') 
for Marcellus was bishop of Rome for six years of the tenth persecution, 

• tEp. V. ) [Ed. Paris, 1726, Ep. iv. ) » So«. lib. i. cap. ii. 

• Iran. p. 857. rf Interpret. Voc. Eccks. Ml. Tttnlus 


begun by Diocletian^ which was the longest and fiercest that ever befel 
the church ; when the Christians were so far from erecting any 
churches, that all before erected were bj severe edicts to be quite 
demolished. But what is said of titles divided bj Euaristus, may be 
true in this sense, that since they could not safely meet together in the 
persecution under Trajan, they dispersed themselves into distinct 
meetings, and had presbyters assigned to officiate in each of them. 
And yet the Christians at Rome were then no more, nor long after, 
than might all meet together for worship, and did so when it could be 
done in safety. In the time of Xystus, who had the chair at Rome 
under Adrian, it is said, *' because of the frequent slaughters of the 
Christians, there were few foimd who durst profess the name of Christ,** 
propter frequentes ccedes pauci reperieidur qui nomen Christi profiteri 
auderent.^ And there was an order in that church, that when the 
bishop celebrated, all the presb3rters should be present. Zepherinus 
vohdt presbyteros omnes adesse celehrante episcopo, quod etiam Euariato 
placuit, " Zepherinus would have all the presbyters present, when the 
bjshop celebrated, which was also the rule of £uaristus f^ this is said to 
be made in the time of Euaristus, to whom this division of titles is 
ascribed, and it was in force an himdred years after, being renewed by 
Zepherinus, who was bishop till anno 218, about thirty years before 
Cornelius, who speaks of forty-six presbyters at Rome. Now the 
Lord's supper was frequently administered in those times, at least 
every Lord's day ; and when the bishop was present, he himself did 
celebrate ; and if all the presbyters were to be present when he did 
celebrate, then all the people likewise were to be present, or else they 
had no public worship, for they could have none without bishop or 

8. A church is not proved to be diocesan by the numbers of presby- 
ters in it ; this 1 have made evident before, and made it good against 
our author's exceptions. But he brings a new instance,^ and vdll have 
Edessa to have been a diocesan church, because of the numerous 
clergy ; " the clergy," says he, " of the city of Edessa, were above two 
hundred persons, not reckoning that of the country within his diocese, 
and this was a diocesan bishop to purpose." 

He did weU not to reckon that of the country in liis diocese, unless 
he had known that something of the country was within his diocese. 
It was not unusual for the bishop's charge to be confined to a town or 
city — Rome itself is an instance of it ;*" cum omnes eccleske nostrce intra 
civitatem cmistitutce sunt, " all oiu- churches are fixed within the city.'* 
But why it should be judged to be a diocesan church, because two 

• Plalina. Vita Xyiti. • Page 552. ' Innocent. P.p. ad Decentimn. [cap. v.] 


hundred such persons belonged to it, seeing the great church at C. P.* 
had above &ve hundred officers assigned it after Justinian had retrenched 
the numbers,* and yet was never counted a diocese, I do not well 
understand ; but he hath some other reasons for it, and because he 
thinks they prove the bishop of Edessa to have been a diocesan to 
purpose, let us, on the by,^ a little examine them. These he gives in' 
summarily — '' This was a diocesan bishop to purpose, who, besides a 
large diocese, had excommunicating archdeacons, and a great revenue." 
I find nothing alleged to show he had a large diocese, or any at all, 
but this — The city of Battina was in the diocese of Edessa ; for Ibas is 
accused of having endeavoured to make one John bishop of it, &c. 

Battina had a bishop of its own ; how then can it be said to be in 
the diocese of Edessa, unless province and diocese be confounded? 
Edessa was the metropolis of Mesopotamia ; the bishop of it was the 
third metropolitan in the patriarchate of Antioch, as they are ordered' 
in the ancient Notitia. The bishop of Battina was one of the many 
suffragans belonging to that metropolitan. How then comes the 
diocese of Edessa to be any ways large upon this account? Is the 
diocese of Canterbury one foot the larger because there is a bishop of 
Peterborough in that province? These things are not easily appre- 
hended, nor can be well digested. 

2.) The greatness of his revenue is no more apparent ; there is nothing 
to prove it but the riches of that church, and its great revenues, and 
hereof our author gives us no clear account, no value of the nttmismatajf 
nor is there any evidence in the council for the manors he speaks of, 
but only the felling of some wood in a certain place there named. But 
where there was a diocesan and archdeacons, deconun required there 
should be manors and vast revenues for the bishop. Nor do I quarrel 
with it, only this breaks the squares a little, and disturbs the corre- 
spondence between those and our times ; that if the revenues of that 
church had amounted to ten times more, yet the bishop would scarce 
have been one jot the richer for it. This will not seem strange to any, 
who take notice of the ancient orders concerning the revenues of an 
episcopal church. The bishop was to have nothing thereof if he could 
maintain himself otherwise. When he was necessitous, nothing wai 
allowed him for himself but necessaries, food and raiment.' He was to 
purchase nothing while he lived, nor to leave anything got by his 
bishopric when he died, to his relatives or others, but only to the 
church that maintained him.* The bishop of Edessa, or any other in 
these circumstances, must be a poor diocesan, and one in a good English 

• ConsUntinople. * Novel, iii. cap. iii. ' in pasting. 

• arranged. / tributes. r Con. Antioch. Can.'xxT. 

' Cod. Justin. Lex xlii. sect. ii. cap. De Episc. Nov. cxxxi. cap. xiii. Con. Garth, iii. can. ilix. 


rectory or yicange, is in a fairer way to be rich than any in the ancient 
bishoprics, so ordered. And if riches or revennes be good arguments 
to prore a diocesan, one of our vicars may be a better diocesan than 
the bishop of Edessa. It is true there is some intimation from Rome, 
that the bishop should have the fourth part of the church's revenues ; 
but there is no appearance of such a distribution till ailer the time of 
the four first general councils, nor in any country but Italy till an 
hundred years after : nor did it ever obtain (that I can discover, after 
some inquiry) in the Greek churches. 

3.) The other proof that Ibas was a diocesan, viz. because he had 
excommunicating archdeacons, our author would make good by telling 
us, that one of his archdeacons excommunicated Maras. Now this, 
though it prove not what it is alleged for, may prove more than he 
likes. An archdeacon in the ancient church (though he be another 
thing now) was not so much as a presbyter ; he was but in the lower 
order of deacons, though chief amongst them, and chosen by them, as 
Jerome signifies:' diaconi eligunt dt se quern industrium noverint, et 
archidiac<mum vacant^ ''the deacons choose from amongst themselves 
one whom they know to be industrious, and call him archdeacon.'* 
Now if a deacon had the power to excommunicate, there can be no 
doubt but the presbyters had it, being of a superior order and power. 
And excommunication being counted the highest act of jurisdiction, it 
cannot be questioned but the other acts thereof belonged to them ; and 
BO the presb3rters having all the jurisdiction of bishops, (all the power of 
government) what did they want of being bishops but the honour of 
presiding in their assemblies ? And if they were no farther from being 
bishops, they will go near to be as much diocesan ; and so this gen- 
tleman may choose, whether he will have all of both sorts to be 
diocesans, or none of either. 

4. It is no argument to prove a diocesan church, to show that it 
consists of such who live at a good distance one from another. Dionysius 
had a great congregation at Cephro, a village in Lybia; but those 
which made up this church were of another country, coming partly 
from Alexandria, partly from other parts of Egypt, as Eusebius shows 
us, yet none ever esteemed that to be a diocesan church. In Justin 
Martyr's time, those that were in the country, and those that were in 
the city, when those were no more than made one congregation, met 
together in one place, irdvr^v Karii n6ktig koi aypoifs fttvovrc^v cVl t6 avT6 
crvycXf ucrtr ; the meeting consisted of such as lived at a good distance, 
but none will imagine it to be a diocesan church, but those who will 
have a single congregation to be such a church. "All the Christians 

• £p. ad Evafrium. 


in city and country/* says Dr. Downham, '- if tfaey had been assembled 
together, would have made but a small congregation.*'* 

Our author would prove the largeness of Basil's diocese by the 
distance between Csesarea and Sasima.^ He makes much of it, and 
takes the pains to measure the distance between these towns, or rather, 
as he says, to make some guess at it out of an itinerary and Putinger's 
tables ; yet tells us the distance must be as great, at least, as between 
Hippo and Fussala, that so St. Basil's diocese may be as great, at least, 
as that of St. Austin's. I think they will prove much alike, for as I 
have showed that Austin's diocese was not one foot larger for Fussala, 
so it will appear that St. Basil's had not the least enlargement upon the 
account of Sasima. That he might not be out in his measures, nor 
have lost all his labour, two things should first have been cleared,^ 
neither of which is (or I think can be) proved. First, that Sasima was 
in Basil's diocese ; for if it was but only in his province, how &r 
soever it was from Csesarea, his diocese can be nothing the larger for it, 
though his province might. To prove it in his diocese, I find nothing 
but his own assertion, that Sasima is said expressly to be taken out of 
the diocese of Basil ; but where is this said expressly, or by whom, 
except by himself? The words in the margin signify no such thing, 
but only some attempt to deprive a metropolis of Sasima ; for a 
metropolis may be deprived of a town which is in any part of the 
province, when another metropolitan seizeth on it. And I believe our 
author is yet more out in taking the metropolis which Nazianzen 
speaks of to be Cajsarea, when it appears by the epistle to be rather 
Tyana ; for as the whole epistle is writ to Basil, so these words cited, 
after many others, by way of sharp expostulation, are directed to him 
as endeavouring to deprive a metropolis of this town, called ironicallj 
rSv XaynrpQiv ^aaifiav, " the illustrious Sasima :" now Ca^sarca was not 
the metropolis which Basil would have deprived of Sasima; he 
earnestly endeavoured to have it annexed thereto : but he would have 
deprived Tyana of it, if Anthimus, the metropolitan there, had not 
made a stout opposition. Secondly, he should have proved, that after 
this part of Cappadocia was divided into two provinces, Sasima was in 
that province which fell to Basil's share ; for if it was not in his 
province, how could his diocese be any larger for it ? But instead of 
this, our author offers what may serve to disprove it, telling us that in 
the ancient Greek Notitia, Sasima is set down in the second Cappadocia, 
which belonged to Anthimus as the first did to Basil ; and so, says he, 
it is not likely to be very near Ccesarea. No indeed ; it is thereby 
proved to be so far from Csesarea, that it did not enlarge Basil's 

« Defence, lib. ii. rap. iv. p. 69. ' Pages 516, 547. <^ made clear. 


jvoyince, much less his diocese. Thus it is also placed in the 
AoirvviMrftff of Leo Sophus, tinder die metropolitan of Tyana, not of 
Ccsarea. It is true Basil laid claim to it, but after some contest he 
yielded, and Anthimus carried it, placing Eulalius there as one of his 
suffi^igans, when Nazianzen had quitted it. 

He goes fiirther on to show the largeness of dioceses in Basil's 

'^ It is plain, by Nazianzen, that Cappadocia had but fifty bishops, 
for so many he says Basil had under him ; and considering the extent 
of that country, the dioceses must needs be large." 

He does not say Basil had no more imder him, nor that he was 
im^king no more ; he knew Basil was constituting more bishops in that 
part of Cappadocia which was his province, and Nazianzen commends 
him for it as an excellent undertaking on several accounts.' 

'* Considering the extent of that country, the dioceses must needs be 
large, for the country, as Strabo computes, is near four hundred miles 
in length, and little less in breadth." 

If he means Basil's own province, where he told us there were fifty 
sofilragans under him besides Sasima, &c.,^ (as I know not what he can 
mean else, if his discourse be not impertinent and inconsistent, for 
Basil, as metropolitan, had no bishops under him, but those in his 
proper province,) Strabo is strangely misrepresented to serve a turn ; 
fiir it is the whole country which passed under the name of Cappadocia, 
that the geographer gives us the dimensions of in the place cited, and 
tells us it was divided into ten prefectures — Mdetena, Cataonia, Cilica, 
Tyanitis, Isauritis, &c., whereof Basil's province was but one, viz. that 
called Cilica, and that of Anthimus, Tyanitis, another, &c. ; Mazaca, 
aftierwards called Csesarea, being metropolis of Basil's, and Tyana of 
Tyanitb, &c. ; and aft«r he hath given some account of these ten 
prefectures, he adds the dimensions of the whole coimtry in these words 
— ^*^ The extent of Cappadocia in breadth, from the £uxine to Taurus, 
is eighteen hundred furlongs ; in length, three thousand." So that 
our author will have the extent of Basil's province to be no less 
than that of the whole country, when it is but the tenth part thereof. 
And as if this were not enough, he makes the breadth of the whole 
country to be near twice as much as it is in Strabo ; but he hath some 
salvo for this, such as it is. 

''And little less in breadth, as Casaubon restores the reading of 
eighteen hundred furlongs in the twelfth book, by a passage in the 
second, where the breadth is made two thousand eight hundred." 

It is true Casaubon observes some difference in the places cited, but 

• Ont. de Bm. * Page 546. 


he shows how they may be easily reconciled without changing the text 
here, or making the coimtry brcMder than it is here described, viz. by 
taking Pontus in one place for the sea, in the other for the region so 
called, separated from Cappadocia by mountains parallel to Taurus; 
and then concludes, Sic non erit discedendum h vtdgatd lectiane, " thus 
we shall not have to depart from the common reading/' So that he 
hath no relief by Casaubon without curtailing the passage. 

'' And in this compass bishops may contrive fifty dioceses of very 
competent extent, and not inferior to many of ours." 

Let him try how in Basil's province of about forty miles in length, he 
can contrive room for above fifty bishops, with as large dioceses as 
those he pleads for. That which is now thought little enough for (me 
bishop, Basil conceived too big for fifty. 

What dioceses Basil (and others before him) thought sufficient for 
bishops, both then and in former times, appears by a passage which 
our author next cites, where Amphilochius, bishop of loonium, is 
directed to constitute bishops for the province of Iconinm, in " little cor- 
porations and villages."^ Hundreds of instances might be brought of 
bishops elsewhere, in such little places and villages, but I will go no 
further now, than the instance himself offers us, whereby it is nuuiifest 
that a little corporation or a village might furnish a bishop with such 
a diocese, as was then thought competent, both by Basil and the church 
before him ; for in such little places there was bishops before, ai 
Basil there signifies, and he gives direction that it should be so still 
Yet he that would advise the reducing of bishops to such sees now, 
would be counted an enemy to episcopacy, and his advice destructiYe 
to bishops. So much do we now differ, both from the judgment and 
practice of the ancient church, and the most eminent bishops in it. 

Hereby also it appears that the multiplying of metropolitans was no 
such occasion of multiplying bishops, but that their nimibers increased, 
when there was not that occasion : and this in Cappadocia, which is 
our author's eminent instance.* For bishops were multiplied by erect- 
ing episcopal sees in villages, and little places ; this was done in Isauiia, 
a province in Cappadocia, as appears by these passages in Basil, before 
the contest between him and Anthimus, upon the constituting a new 
metropolitan : and after that difference was composed, Basil thought it 
advisable that it should be done still. And the like may be said of . 
Africa, the instance he most insists on, and spends many pages upon, 
pretending [that] the occasion why bishops were so numerous there, was 
the schism of the Douatists, whereas the rule by which the African 
fathers proceeded in erecting bishoprics in little places, and so increasing 

• £p. ccccvi. * Paf e 5i6. 


the number of bishops p was^ as themselvea declare, who best knew it, tha 
iaereflae of the number of Chrisrianfl." Where these were mtiiliplied» 
and desired a bishop, they thought themselvca bound to let them hare 
one; not eicepdug the meanness or smallnessof tlie places where he was 
to be constituted. And we must believe (Lf we have any reverence for 
llioee fathers) that they would have done what they judged theniselvea 
obliged to, though there had been no Donatista amongst them. And 
when there can be no such pretence of occasion from the Donatists, the 
practice was continued , as appears by St. Austin's procuring a bishop 
for Fossala, which he calls a caatJe, upon some increase of the Catholaca 
there, divers years after the noted conference at Carthage, where the 
heart of the Dooatists was broken. Nay, many years aAer the invasion 
of the Vandal J?, and the death of St. Austin, Uiey proceeded in the same 
methods, or rather exceeded their predecessors in multiplying bishopflt 
by erecting episcopal seats in smaller, and more inconsiderable placesj if 
Leo's epistle may be credited,* 

But to return to onr-author, and the passage of Basil insisted on, hj 
wliich, says he, ^* it appears thai isauria was part ot Basil b pnjfvinoe.'' 
How tliis appears by anything therein, I cannot imagine. Onr anthoir 
signifies before that Isauria was a distinct province, the metropolis of it 
(as he supposes) Seleucia, which had a metropolitan and suffragans 
before ; and being now destitute, the bishops in the vicinity were 
careful to provide others. Which being so, that it should be part of 
BasiTs province, seems as incongruous, as if it were said, that the 
province of York is part of the province of Canterbury ; but if this 
oould be digest^, that one province is part of another, yet Isauria 
nbuld rather be part of Amphilochius's province, who (as he tells us) 
was to constitute a metropolitan and other bishops therein, than of 
Basil^s, who is only represented as giving advice about it. Or if giving 
advice and direction, would prove anything of this nature, the Papists 
might think it a good argument, that Africa was part of the Roman 
province, because Leo, bishop of Rome, gives advice, how bishops 
should be there constituted.^ 

Next he brings in the chorepiscopi in order to his design,, and teUs 
us' they were " country bishops, and their churches consisted of many 
congregations, and those at a good distance one from another ; and also 
that some of them had the inspection of a large territory, no less it is 
like' than the country of Fussala.** 

But not a word for proof of this, save Basil's mentioning a chor- 
episcopus r^y r<Sirfi0v, of some places ; whereas, if he had been the bishop 
of two or three villages, this might be enough to satisfy the import of 

• C4meil. Carth. 2 Can. ▼. * Ep. Izvxt. [cap. ii.] ' Ibid. ' Page 550. • probable. 


that expression. Yet he knows there is some one country parish, that 
hath ten times as many, or more villages in it, but never pretended to 
be a diocesan church, and that such a pretence would be now counted 

He adds that which, if it were true, would go near to dethrone these 
country bishops, (for Basil speaks of them as having their thrones in 
villages,) and render them less than ancient presbyters, for all their 
large territory, and their being diocesans. 

"But yet these were but the deputies or surrogates of the city 
bishops in point of jurisdiction, for they were to do nothing of moment 
without their bishop." 

If this be so, it would be less wonder that the pope will have bishops 
to be but his substitutes, and that some bishops will have the pastors of 
parochial churches to be but their vicars or curates. I hope our author 
intends better ; however, it is well that such odd hypotheses have no 
better support than that which is added ; for, says he, " they were to 
do nothing of moment without their bishop :" this is his argument, and 
he is not alone in urging it. Let us sec whether it will not do the 
bishops (for whose advancement it is designed) as much disservice as it 
can do the chorepiscopi, or presbyters, divesting them of that which 
is counted more necessary and advantageous to them, than a laige 
diocese. The provincial bishops were obliged to do nothing, fAifih 
TrpiiTTfip (^(7rix*ip€iv) di)(o. rov firjTpo7r6k€os fVtcricoTrot;, without the bishop of 
the metropolis ; tliis the synod at Antioch decrees, according to an 
ancient canon of the fathers." By this argument we must conclude, 
that the bishops in a province were but the deputies and surrogates of 
the metrojx)litan. And it may proceed proportionably against the 
metropolitans with respect to the e^apxoi or primates, and also to their 
prejudice in reference to the patriarchs. It will go near to destroy the 
bishops likewise, if we follow it downwards. In the ancient church the 
bishops were to do nothing of moment without the presbyters ; this the 
most judicious and learned asserters of episcopacy acknowledge.* Nay, 
further, in tlie l)est ages of the church, the bishops were to do nothing 
without the j)eople, that is, without their presence and consent. This is 
most evident in Cyprian's epistles, and is acknowledged by such 
prclatists as are otherwise reserved enough.*^ Now by this argument 
we may conclude tliat bishops were but the deputies or surrogates of 
the presbyters ; or, which will be counted more intolerable, that bishops 
had their jurisdiction from the people by deputation and vicarage. It 
may Ixj this gentleman will not like his argument so well, when he sees 

• Can. Ix. Can. Apoxt. xxxv. Concil. Milcv. Can. xiii. 

» BLp.] Bilion, Dr. Field, Dr. Downham. B[p.] Hall, M[r.] Ttaorndike, B[p.] Uih€T. 

«• Vide Defence of Dr. St[illingfleetl p. 407. 


what improyement it is capable of; yet in pursuance of it he adds, 
*' Basil is so resolute upon his prerogative, that he will not endure they 
should ordain as much as the inferior clergy, without his consent ; and 
if they do, let them know (says he) that whosoever is admitted without 
our consent shall be reputed but a layman." 

I suppose the prerogative for which he will have Basil so resolute, is 
a n^ative in ordinations upon the country bishops ; but this cannot be 
concluded from the words cited ; for the council of Nice gives the 
metropolitan a power as to ordinations, in the same words,*^ declaring 
that if a bishop be ordained by the provincials, x^P^^ V^t^l^i without 
the judgment of the metropolitan, the great council will have him 
accounted no bishop ; and yet the metropolitan had no negative upon 
the provincials in ordinations, for the same council determines, that in 
ordinations, plurality of votes shall prevail, whicli is utterly inconsistent 
with any one's negative voice. What, then, is the import of Basil's &¥tv 
yp»fui^ ? Take it in the words of a very learned and judicious Doctor 
of this church : " It is indeed there said, that none should be ordained, 
X^pit yywfu^f, without the opinion of the metropolitan ; but that doth 
not import a negative voice in him, but that the transaction should 
not pass in his absence, or without his knowledge, advice and 
suffrage," &c.* 

6. It is no proof of a diocesan chui'ch, to show that a town, besides 
the clergy or officers in it, had some presbyters or congregations in the 
country belonging to it. The instances which signify no more, or not 
so much, are produced as sufficient arguments to prove there were such 
churches. As that of Gains Diddensis, presbyter, supposed (with what 
ground I examine not) to have been a country presbyter belonging to 
Carthage, and under Cyprian.*^ And that of Felix, said to do the office 
of a presbyter, under Decimus, another presbyter, a thing unheard of in 
those times ; but let us take it as we find it, and upon the very slender 
reason alleged against Goulartius, (who is of another judgment) believe, 
that he was a priest in some village belonging to Caldonius's diocese.!' 
And that order for the presbyters from their churches, to repair to their 
proper bishop for chrism in Africa,* in Spain,/ and in France.' To 
these are added, for further evidences, the churches (said without 
ground to be many) belonging to Hippo Dioeritorum ; also the church 
of Thyana, belonging to Alypius, bishop of Tagesta, which without 
reason, we must take to be a considerable city,* and the city Milevis, 
because Petilian says Tunca belonged to it once, though now it had a 
bishop of its own ; and by our author's art of computation, towns, 

• C*n. vi. » Barrow of the Pope'n Supremacy, p. 314. * Vindication, p. 504. 

' Paget 500, 507. ' Con. Garth, iv. Can. xxxvi. / Cone. Tol. i. cap. xx. 

r Cone. Vasens. Can. ill. ' Page 527. 


villages, and cities must belong to Milevis, upon the sole account of 
Tunca sometime appertaining to it;* and- these with Fussala, (of 
which before) are the chief instances to prove that Africa had very 
large dioceses, not inferior to those of ours, in extent of territory.* 
Besides, in the council of Neoccesarea, country presbyters are dis- 
tinguished from others ; ^ and that of Antioch provides' that country 
presbyters shall not give canonical epistles,^ and allows the bishop to 
order/ his own church, and the country places depending on itJf And 
Epiphanius speaks of a church belonging to his charge, which we must 
understand to be his diocese, though in the passage cited, it is twice 
called his province ; * in fine, Jerome speaks of some baptized by pres- 
byters or deacons in hamlets, castles, and places remote from the bishop. 

These and such like are used as good arguments for diocesan 
churches, wherciis there are divers towns in England, which besides 
the officers in them, have many congregations and presbyters io 
villages belonging to them, and contained within the parish ; and yet 
our author and those of his persuasion, would think diocesans quite 
ruined, if they were reiluced, and confined to the measures of those 
parish churches, and left no bigger than some of our vicarages azMi 
parsonages, though such as Mr. Hooker affirms to be as large as some 
ancient bishoprics ; he might have said most, there being not one in 
many greater or so large. I yet see no ground in antiquity, nor can 
expect to have it proved, that the larger sort of ordinary bishoprics in 
the fourth age, and sometime after, were of more extent than two such 
vicarages would l^e, if united. Yet a bishop of such a district in our 
times would be counted so far fi-om having a competent diocese, that he 
would scarce escape from being scorned as an Italian episcopellus.' 

But his greatest argument, (in comparison of which his other 
allegations, he tells us, are but accidental liints,-^') which he most 
insists on, and offers many times over, so that it makes a great part of 
his discourse on this subject,* — is drawn from tlie number of bishops 
in councils, by which he would evince the largeness of ancient dioceses, 
when it no way proves diocesan churches of any size. He proceeds 
upon this supix>sition, that there were great numbers of Christians in 
all parts and cities,' in the first age ; and that the bishops were fewer 
in former times than afterwards. The former part of his hypothesis, if 
he understands the numbers of Christians to be anytliing comparable to 
what they were after Constantine, wlftiu bishops were much multiplied, 

• Page 528. * Page 516. ' Can. xlii. * Can. Till. 

' The canonical oplitlen were letters of recommendation given to personK who were in the peace 
and communion of the church, on their passing from one fellowihip to another. See BLaghan- 
Antiq. Book ii. chap. iv. Kcct. v. 

/ regulate. t Can. ix. p. 530. * Page 555. < bithopUng. 

} Page 508. * Pages 508 to p. 535, to p. 539, p. 556 to 562. ' Page 530. 


{m3 he mutt uBd^rstand il^ it he expect anj service fronn it) wan^ 

proof; ami he offefs tione but aofna podea^ei in Tertaliian, stzaxQed hr 

beyond what is agreeable to otiier aDcieni anthoTB, of whidi bdbic. 

Let me add, that Na.ziaasen, comparing the Qumberii of CfafifltiKiB in 

fcrmer times with thoae ia JuHah'^a reigHt sajv, ^^J ^r^re not numj id 

^ fijnner perBecutioiis, (Chiiauamty bad not reached many^ o^» M 

ff&XotTf,) no, not In that of DiocIetiaD, 4ci, (though ibej were at that 

time far more numerotis than in TertuHian's agv) but that Christianiiy 

was found ooJy in a few, « ikryott^* The other part, which needs no 

fffoof, ainoe it is grants, (and may be without any advantage to him) 

he attempts to proTe lar^'ely sn«l industry i.-'r : hut by mch a medium 

at makes that which is granted to be qoestioiiable, such a one which, 

as it IS ordeiedy may oonchidfi backward, and prore the contrary to 

iHiat he designs. That this may be manifest, let it be observed, that 

he win have as take an acooont c^the number (^bishops in the church, 

by their appearing in coondls, more or fewer ; and accordingly judge 

ia sereral periods, whether ihej were less nmnerous, and consequently 

Acir dioceses larger in former times than afterwards. And to this 

purpose, we need view no other instances than himself produces. At 

Tambose, in Africa, there were ninety bishops against Priyatus ; but 

not so many in any council after, (though not a few are mentioned in 

dist country) tiD ihe Donatists grew numerous.* In Spain, the council 

of Eiiberis had nineteen bishops in the b^inning of the fourth age, 

and the first council of Toledo had no more in the beginning of the age 

after. But the foUowing synods, at Saragossa, Gerunda, Herda, 

Valentia, Arragon, had not so many.'^ In France, the council at 

Valence had twenty-one bishops in the fourth age, but those following 

them, in that and the after ages, had still fewer, viz. that of Riez, 

Orange, the third of Aries, that at Angers, that at Tours, and Vannes, 

lad another at Aries. For general councils, the first at Nice had three 

kindred and eighteen bishops in the beginning of the fourth age ; that 

at Ephesus, above an hundred years after, had but two hundred ; that 

>t C. P.,' in the latter end of the fourth age, had but one hundred and 

Sfty bishops. 

So that if we take account how many bishops there were of old, as 
he would have us, by their numbers in councils, there will be more 
before the middle of Uie third age, than in the beginning of the fourth ; 
^oom in the beginning of the fourth than in some part of the fifth ; and 
inore in the b^;inning of the fiftli, than in some part of the sixth ; 
I 9ute contrary to the hypothesis on which he proceeds. Whether by 

•OmtBLpSd.PVit, 16M,toai.i.p.80, A.] * FuifiMi. 

' PhmU7. iM. ' OopttMtiaople. 



bis argument he would lead us to think dioceses did wax and wane so 
oddlj, as it makes bishops to be more or fewer, I cannot tell. However, 
since he grants that in the fourth and fifth ages dioceses were Yery 
smaU,** and crumbled into small pieces,* (and so nothing like oun) 
there is no expectation he can find any larger, if anything near so 
great, in any former age : unless they can be larger, when incomparably 
fewer Christians belonged to these bishops, which will be no less a 
paradox than the former. For it cannot but be thought strange, that 
the bishop^s diocese should be greater, when his flock was undeniably 
fiu: less. And they seem not to be Christian bishoprics, whose measures 
must be taken by numbers of acres rather than of souls ; or by 
multitudes of heathens rather than Christians. 

He denies not, that the generality of bishops, for a long while afier 
the apostles, had but one congr^ation to govern.^ " What then ?" says 
he ; "if all the believers in and about a city would hardly make a 
congregation, that is to be ascribed to the condition of those times.* 
Dioceses with him, were largest in the first times ; but bishops being 
still multiplied, they became less and less, and so were very small, and 
crumbled into very little pieces in the fourth and fifth ages. This is 
the tendency of his discourse all along. Thus dioceses must be largest 
when a bishop had but one congregation ; but in after ages, when he 
had more congregations under his inspection, dioceses were very small. 
If he will stand to this, our difierences may be easily compromised. 
Let him, and those of his persuasion, be content with the dioceses in the 
first ages, when he counts them largest ; and we shall never trouble 
any to reduce them to the measures of the fourth and fifth ages, when, 
in his accoimt, they were so lamentably little, and crumbled so very 

The particulars premised, contain enough to satisfy all that I have 
yet seen alleged out of antiquity for diocesan churches, so that no more 
is needful ; yet let me add another, which will show there is a medium 
between congregational and diocesan churches. So that if some 
churches should be showed out of the ancients exceeding the congre- 
gational measures, (as some there were in the times of the four first 
general councils) yet it cannot thence be immediately inferred that they 
were diocesan, since they may prove a third sort of churches, and such 
as will as little please those of this gentleman's persiiasion as congre- 

6. It is no argument for a diocesan church, that there were several 
fixed churches, with their proper presbyters in a city or its territoiy, 
so long as these churches, how many soever, were governed in common 

• Page 552. • Page 516. • Pag* 71. 


by the bishop and presbyters in such a precinct For though few 
inatanceB can be givai of such churches, in or belonging to a city in the 
fourth age, yet whererer they were extant in that, or the following age, 
in things of oommon concern to those churches, they were ordered in 
eonrnKWi by a presbytery, that is, the bishop with the presbyters of that 
pcednot Jerome declares it dejure^ [that] they ought to be governed 
in oomman, m eonmuni dAert eocUaiam regere,* 

And Felix, third bishop of Rome, (than whom no bishop was higher, 
or mate absolute in those times,) declares it de facto^ when he speaks of 
the presbyters of that church, as duworrw fur ifiov r^ airwmikiKhw 
6pA^w^ <« ruling that church with him." It is the same word that 
the governing of churches by other bishops, is expressed by, lura 
wimft rmw hnan&nmw ol rhs wipi^ d«ciirop iKkkffaias yv^fu/r, " with the 
perfect consent of the bishops who ruled the neighbouring churches,** 
as Alexander saith of Narcissus, 6 wp6 iftov dUwmv t6v t6ww hruTKxmri^f 
" who preceded me in the administration of the episcopal office.'* It 
imports no less than prasidere, and is ascribed to bishops and presbyters, 
jointly by Tertullian,^ Cyprian,' and Firmilian.' Hence the presbjrters 
aze frequently said to be tniXXtirovpyol with the bishop/ for then the 
governing power of bishops was but counted a ministry, \€iTovpyia£ yhp 
hrrX r6 ri^t hrunamfjt irofta diyXwrwc^v,' " the name bishopric is significant 
of ministry,** and the presbyters fellow-ministers with him, and joint 
administrators in the goyemment. They are styled ovfurotficycr,* fellow- 
pastors; they did not then dream that a bishop was sole pastor of many 
churches. They are also called oiWdpcvroi, which is no less than 
mmOpAiKHy* for the presbyters had thrones with the bishop. So Nazian- 
sen speaks of Basil when ordained presbjrter, as promoted UpoU 6p6voi£j 
to the sacred thrones of the presbyters^ They are also called trwdp- 
Xomtf or KoamytH r^r dpxfjty " partners in government.*** 

But further evidence is needless, though abundance may be produced, 
since the great patrons of episcopacy seem not to question it ; that " the 
dkurch was governed in common,** and the bishop was to da nothing 
of importance without the presbyters, is acknowledged by Bishop 
Bilson,' Bishop Downham,*" Bishop Hall asserts it, as " that which is 
universally accorded by all antiquity, that all things in the ancient church 
were ordared and transacted by the general consent of presbyters.**" 

• In TltOM L [5.] * Eateb. lib. vi. cap. xi. 

• Apol. cap. xxxlx. ^ Lib. 1. Ep. 111. • Ep. Ixxv. Apud Cyp. 
/ Theod. Hist. Ub. It. esp. tIU. Eptphan. Her. xUi. [p. SOS, C. Ed. Col. ItSt.] 

f Isidore, lib. It. Ep. [ecxix.] 

» Nss. Orat. L [Ed. Par. 1630, torn, t p. 45, A. Orat. vU. p. 144, A.] 

< Ignat. ad Tral. [n. 8. Ed. Jaoobion.] > Orat. xx. 

• Chrjrs. in 1 Tim. Horn. i. ' Perpet. OoTem. cap. xl. 
« Defence, lib. iiL Ub. i. c. Tfll. " Ixen. p. 47. 



Mr. Thorndikc proves at large, that ''the gcnremmeiit of churcheB 
passed in common ;"' Primate Usher more suocinctlj but effectoallj.* 
Add but Dr. St[illingfleet] who both asserts and proves it,*^ " there waa 
still one ecclesiastical senate, which ruled all the several congr^;ation8 
of those cities in conmion, of which the several presbyters of the con- 
gregations were members, and in which the bishop acted as the president 
of the senate, for the better governing the afiairs of the church,*' &c. 

Let me add, when the churches were so multiplied in ci^ and terri- 
tory, as that it was requisite to divide them into parishes, and constitute 
several churches, the bishop was not the proper ruler or pastor of the 
whole precinct, and the churches in it, or of any church, but one. The 
parishes or churches were divided among presbyters and bishop, they 
had their several distinct cures and charges ; the bishop's peculiar 
charge was the ecclesia principaUs^ the chief parish or church so called, 
or av6€VTixri KaBcdpaj '' his proper see." The presbyters performed all 
offices in their several cures, and ordered all afiairs which did particu- 
larly concern the churches where they were incumbents ; those that 
were of more common concern were ordered by bishop and presbyters 
together, and thus it was in the bishop's church or parish, he performed 
all offices, administered all ordinances or worship himself, or by pres- 
byters joined with him, as assistants. He was to attend this particular 
cure constantly, he was not allowed to be absent, no, not under pretence 
of taking care for some other church ; if he had any business there 
which particularly concerned him, he was to make quick dispatch, and 
not (j(poviCtiv Koi dfifXtlv rov olKiiov \<wv, as Zonaras) '' stay there with the 
neglect of his proper flock ;" this is all evident by a canon of the council 
of Carthage,'' Ruraum placuit ut nemini sit facultas, relicta principal 
cathedra^ ad cUiqiiam ecclesiam in dioeesi conatitutam se conftrrt^ vd in 
re propriay diutius quam oportet consHtutum, curam vd freqtientationem 
proprias cathedroB negligere. " Again we decree that no one shall have 
liberty to the neglect of his principal church, to betake himself to any 
church established in the diocese, or by delajdng longer than is becom- 
ing over his real business, to neglect the care and attendance due to his 
own see." Of this church or parish he was the proper pastor or ruler, 
called there tbiO£ 6p6vo£, and elsewhere' oUiia tcaBtdpOj in contradistinc- 
tion to other parts of the precinct, called here dioceses ; and the people 
of it are called ohflos \a6s by the ancient canonist,/ his proper flock or 
people, his own special charge. This was the particular church under 
his personal government, but he was not ruler of the precinct, or any 
other churches in it, save only in common, and in conjunction with the 

• Prim. Oovern. • Reduct. of Epiaoopacy. 

• Iran. pp. S54p 855, 356. ' In Zona. N. 77, in Code 71. 

• Can. im. / Zona, in loc. 


Other presbyters ; who jointly took cognisance of what in his church or 
theirs, was of greater or more general consequence, and concerned the 
whole, and gave order in it by common consent. 

And while this was the form of government, if there had been as 
many churches there, thus associated, as Optatus in the fourth age says 
there was at Borne, or far more, they could not make a diocesan church, 
unless a diocesan and a presbyterian church be all one. For this is 
plainly a presbyterian church, the ancient presbyteries differing from 
the modem, but in a matter of smaller moment ; in those their president 
being fixed and constant, in these commonly though not always circular. 
The presbyteries in Scotland comprised some twelve, some twenty, some 
more churches ; their moderators were at first, and for some years, circu- 
lar, king James afterwards, anno 1605,' would have them to be constant, 
and so it was ordered ; yet when they were fixed, no man ever coimted 
these presbyteries to be diocesan churches. The church of Geneva 
consists of twenty-four parishes, governed in common by a presbjrtery 
with a moderator, who is sometimes changed, sometimes continued for 
life. Calvin was president while he lived, yet that of Geneva is not 
wont to be taken for a diocesan church. Nor were those ancient 
churches such, while they were governed, not by one bishop, but by 
a senate of presbyters where he presided ; as in the coimcil of Constan- 
tinople all things in the province are said to be governed, not by the 
metropolitan, but by the provincial synod.^ 

Finally, the presbyters are in the ancient church acknowledged to 
have had the power of the keys, both as to the ministration of the word 
and the sacraments, and the exercise of government and censures. This 
power they exercised either jointly in conjunction with the bishop and 
senate of presbjrters ; or distinctly in the particular churches whereof 
they had the charge. The former power concerning the word and 
sacraments is not questioned; nor is there any ground to question the 
latter, if some were not swayed more by the practice of their own times, 
than the principles and declarations of the ancients. Chrysostom 
ascribes to presbyters, not only iidaa-Kokiav, the power of order, but 
wpoarafriavj the power of government,^ giving this as the reason why the 
apostle gives the same rules for the ordering both of bishops and pres- 
byters; there is but little difference betwixt them, says he, for they are 
ordained both to the teaching and ruling (irpocrrao-uiv) of the church. 
Now that irpo<rraata denotes jurisdiction or presidentiam cwn potestate, 
" presidency together with authority," and is as Hesychius renders it, 
Kufitpyrja-isy is plain in Chrysostom himself ; he tells us the apostle Paul 

• Hist. p. 559. [What particular Uiitory Mr. Clarkaon here refers to, the Editor ia unaMe to 

* Can. [Ui.] Soc. lib. ▼. cap. vUi. ' In 1 Tim. Horn. xi. [p. 289, Ed. SaviU.] 


had rfjs ohcovfUvijs rffy irpoanurUmj* **ihe preddencj of the world," 
which he elsewhere expresses by ri^ olKovfunjp Swatraw Kvfiipfimw f and 
speaking of Moses, he sa3rs, It was wonderfhl, that he who was to be a 
ruler, 6 TrpoaTarrjs fi«XXtty Za€<r6<Uj should be bom at such a time.' 
Theophylact makes the difierence as little between bishop and presby- 
ters, and ascribes as much power to the latter, almost in the same 
words.'' So Theodoret declares wpoarwrUv, jurisdiction, to belong to 
every presbyter ;• " against an elder, especially, no less than two wit- 
nesses must be admitted, because he having cmcXi^mv wpoaraaiawy ^ the 
government of the church," and in the exercise of it often grieving 
delinquents, they being iU-afiected to him, will be apt to bring fidse 
accusations." And this is the ^fiot4a included in the presbyters* office, 
ctrc "XdTovpyiav xp^ Xrycur, ttrw ^ytfioyUuf/ '' whether we speak of ministzy 
or of rule,*^ as Nazianzen speaks, and much more to that purpose. 
And besides many other passages of like import, the title of govemon 
is all along in ancient writers given to presbyters ; and all the exjoes- 
sions which signify authority and government, are ascribed to them. 
Thereby those that would curtail their power, and make it no more of 
old •than it is now, are not a little encumbered ; to extricate themsehrei 
a distinction is devised of a power internal and external, the former 
they will allow to presbyters in their respective churches, not the latter. 
But this is devised to disentangle themselves, and salvef the deviations 
and irregularities of later times, not that there is any ground for it in 
antiquity. For the highest act of that external power of jurisdiction is 
excommunication ; and if this was in the presbyters' power of old, no 
other act of that power will, or can in reason be denied them ; but this 
the ancients ascribe to them ; so Jerome,* Miki ante prednfterum sedert 
non licety illi si peccavero licet me tradere Satance ad interitum camUy nt 
spiritus salvus sit, ^^ It is not lawful for me to sit in the presenoe of a 
presbyter ; he has power, if I transgress, to deliver me to Satan for the 
destruction of the flesh." Chrysostom threatened some of his auditory, 
while he was a presbyter, to excommunicate them, ^frayop€vtrm Xoorar 
vfiiv tS>v UpSv TovTciv C7ri/3^vai wpo6vp»v :* to waive all of like nature insisted 
on by others, Justinian in the sixth age signifies plainly that not only 
bishops but presbyters might excommunicate offenders ; in his Gcxisti- 
tutions he forbids bishops and presbyters to exclude any from com- 
munion, till such cause was declared for which the canons appointed it 
to be done, waai dc vols hna-Konon Koi Trp€(rfivTfpoif anayopfvofjLtp, aifiopifaf 

• In I Cor. Horn. xxUI. et Horn. xxv. [p. S88.] • In 2 Cor. Horn. xxr. [p. 681.] 

• In Act. Horn. xyi. * In 1 Tim. [lii. 8.] 

« In I Tim. y. 19. / Orat. i. [Ed. Paris. 1630, p. 3, A, torn, i.) 

r iMlliate. * Ad Hvliodorum. [Col. z. torn. if. par. il. £d. Par. 1106.] 

' Horn. xvU. in Matth. [p. 125] 


TI90 nff aylas jcocattWof, &c., and will have the sentence of ezcommnnica- 
tion rescindedy whioh was passed by bishops or presbyters without 
cause.* In the Code, both bishops and clergy are forbid to excom- 
municate in certain cases, and then mention is made of the cases for 
which they must not, if a/^iC^tv if camBtfun-iCtty, " either excommuni- 
cate or anathematiae,'' kov (Bos tquwtov inpaeniafv,^ ^^ although they had 
been accustomed to [do] it"* 

Now while presbyters had this power there could be no diocesan 
churches, whether they exercised it in common, as was showed before, 
or particularly in their several churches, as will now be made apparent; 
for by virtue of these powers the presbyters were really bishops ; though 
they had not always Uie title, yet, they are called bishops, as a learned 
prelatist observes, by the most ancient authors, Clemens, Ignatius, 
Tertullian,^ and have frequently the names and titles which some would 
appropriate to bishops, and which the fathers use to express the office 
of bishops by, [viz. ] irf)0€<rrwns, prapositi, antistUeSj prcesidentes^^ &c. And 
so there were as many bishops really in every diocese as there were par- 
ticular churches and presbyters there ; and well may they be said to be 
really the same, since they were of the very same office ; for bishops in 
the ancient church were not a superior order to presbyters, but had only 
a precedency in the same order. This some of the most judicious and 
learned defenders of episcopacy assert. And those who hold that 
patriarchs, metropolitans, and bishops differed not in order, but in 
degree only, which is the common opinion of episcopal divines, and yet 
contend that bishops and presbyters were of a different order, will never 
be able to prove it. The difference they assign between bishops and 
metropolitans is, that these presided in synods, and had a principal 
interest in ordinations ; and what more did the pre-eminence of ancient 
bishops, distinguishing them from presbjrters, amount to ? It consisted 
in nothing material but their presidency in presbyteries, and their power 
in ordinations. This last is most insisted on, as making the difference 
wider between these than the other. But with little reason all things 
considered. For those to be ordained were first to be examined and 
approved by the presbyters, /x^ SKK^as x^H'^'^^^'*'^^^^^ «^^ '"«" ^pBM^wf 
kkf)piK£p doiufMC6vT»Vy^ the ordaining of one to the presbytery was to be 
^(f)cS KoX Kpi(r€i rov icX^pov iravros/ " by the vote or judgment of the 
whole clergy." It was a crime for which the greatest bishop in the 
world was censurable, to prefer any, or make ordinations wapa yimpnv 
rov Kkr)pavy " against the consent of the clergy," as appears by what 

• Novel, cxxiii. cap. xl. * Lex. xxxix. sec. li. Tit. lii. de Episc. et Clericb. 

^ Thorndike, Prim. Govern, pp. 73, 74. ' Idem. Of Religious Assemblies, p. 68. 
' Thevphilus Communilor. cap. vi. / Clem. Constitut. lib. viii. cap. xvili. 


Chiysostomwasaccosedofyihotigli itislike^&laelj;* andduBiaooaiited 
by some the substance of oidinationi wherein the presbyten had no 
less share (to say no more) than the biihop. And in imposing handii 
which was the rite of ordaining, the presbyters were to concur with the 
bishop, for which there is better authority than the canon of an Afiican 
council, for, saith a very learned doctor,^ '' to this purpose, the laying on 
of the hands of the presbytery' is no ways impertinently allied, 
although we suppose St. Paul to concur in the action ; because if the 
presbytery had nothing to do in the ordination, to what purpose were 
their hands laid upon him ? Was it only to be witnesses of the fact, or 
to signify their consent ? Both these might have been done without 
their use of that ceremony, which will scarce be instanced in,' to be 
done by any but such as had power to confer what was signified by 
that ceremony." And divers instances are brought by the same hand 
to show that ordination by presbyters was valid in the ancient church/ 

But if the presbyters had been quite excluded from ordination, and 
this power had been entirely reserved to the bishops, yet this would not 
be sufficient to constitute them a superior order. For the rite of ordain- 
ing was so far from being an act of government or jurisdiction, that it 
did not infer any superiority in the ordainer ; nothing being moare 
ordinary in the practice of the ancient church than for those who were 
of a lower degree and station to ordain their superiors. 

While there was no more distance betwixt bishop and presbyters bat 
only in degree, so that as the bishop was but Primus presbyter, (as 
Hilary under the name of Ambrose, and others ;') or Primicerius as 
Optatus, defined by a learned civilian to be vpwroy nyr rd^ms^^ " the first 
presbyter," so the presbyter was a second bishop, h dcvrcpocr Bp^voif, as 
Nazianzen. As the bishop was summus sacerdoSj in the style of Ter- 
tullian and others, that is, chief presbyter, so the presbyter was bishq> 
a degree lower ; not that he had less pastoral power, but because he 
wanted that degree of dignity or pre-eminence for which die other was 
styled chief. As the proeter urbanus was called mtutimus^ '' chief," yet 
had no more power than the other, (Frcetorum idem erat colUffium, 
eadem potestas,^ ^* That which the pnetors possessed in conmion was the 
same to each ; their authority was equal,") but only some more privilege 
and dignity, {dignitaU coeteros anteSbat propterea maximum dicebcUWj^ '' he 
surpassed the rest in dignity, whence he was called Maximus;") and the 
HpX<op fircjwfMs at Athens was Frcptor mcunmuSj yet all the rest were 
pares potestatej' " equal in power ;" [so] bishops and presbyters hstdidem 

« probable. * Phot, in Chrys. torn. viii. p. 155. Concil. Carth. !▼. cap. xxii. CodcU. Tnnio. H. 

• Ircn. p. J75. ' I Tim. ir. 1,4. • shown by a case in point. / Pa|ce ST». 

r In 1 Tim. v. Aug. Quest, in V. et N. T. [cap. cL] ' Ootbofrid. in Code. [vid. torn. I. p. 436.] 

• Bodin. lib. ill. cap. vi. * Fest. in Verb. M^or. ' IMd. 

IN TH£ PRnfrnvE times. 146 

^ tbe same mmiatry," as Jerome, eadtm ordmaHo^^^ the same 
CRimakkm,** as Hilaiy,* they were of the same order and office, had the 
f Mme power, the power of the keys, all that which the Scripture makes 
eneatial to a bishop. While it was thus there could be no diocesan 
ehniohes, that is, no churches consisting of many congregations which 
lad but one bishop only. 


A late writer presumes he has detected a notable mistake in the 
author of '' No Evidence for Diocesan Churches^ (ascribed to one who 
owns it not) about /ivpioi, which, I suppose, he would have translated 
^ ten thousands" definitely; but there it is rendered indefinitely *' thou- 
sands," as we are wont to express a great many, when the precise number 
is not known. Those who imderstand the language, and have observed 
the use of the word, will be far from counting this a fault : and those 
who view the passage will count it intolerable, to render it as that 
gentleman would have it. That of Atticus, bishop of C. P.,^ may satisfy 
any' concerning the import and use of the word, who, sending money 
for the relief of the poor at Nice, to Galliopius, thus writes, ZfUM$op 
IMVplavt tp r$ irdXfft iriwwrras dturBai irapk r&v tvcffiovyrc^y iXtov, Mvplovs 
dff XeytB TO wkrjBogj ov t6¥ oKpifirj drfKAp dpi6fi6¥y " I leam that there are 
myriads starving in the city who need the charity of the pious ; I call 
the multitude myriads, not as though I would define the exact number;" 
where he tells him that by fivpiavs he understands a multitude whose 
number he did not exactly know ; thus (t. e, indefinitely) is the word 
most frequently used by Greek writers, and particularly by Eusebius, 
the author of the passage cited. So he tells us, Nero killed his mother, 
his brothers, his wife, ow SKkots nvpioisj *' with myriads of others," of 
her kindred f and Timotheus of Gaza, he says, endiured fivplovs paadpovt,^ 
** myriads of torments." Many more might be added, where the word 
is not rendered by the translators (Yalesius particularly) ten thousand ; 
but still indefinitely inniemerabiles, or infiniti, or seacenti, &c. Nor have 
I met with one instance (though possibly there may be some) in him 
where it is used to express ten thousand precisely. 

However, it had been an unpardonable injury to Eusebius, to have 
rendered it so in this place ; as if he would have deluded the world 
with a most palpable tmtruth, which both he, and all men acquainted 

• In I Tim. iii. * Cnnttantlnople. 

' Hi«t. lib. iL [cap. xzr.] Ub. Yiii. cap. xili. ' [Pe Martyr. Pal«tt. cap. Ul.] 


with the state of tibe obimslL in thoie timBB, kmnr to be 00. For thia 
makes him saj that ten thousand bishops mefc in ooimcil at Antiodi in 
the ihird age ; when as* he nerar knew a synod of six hondred bishops 
in the fourdi age, while he lived ; though then biahi^ were fiur mon 
nmneronsy and had all eneonragement to meet in greatest uamlMn: 
This makes him signify, that ten thousand bishops aasnmhkd in tfas 
skirts of the east part of the empire : when as* there was not near so 
many (this gentleman is oonoemed to maintain there was not one thou- 
sand) in the whole Christian world. 

This is more than enough to show, that there is sufficient wamnt to 
translate /wpun thousands, more than once ; though that it is in liist 
discourse (which he styles a little pamphlet) so translated mora disa 
once, is another of his mistakes. And a third (all in two lines) is, Ast 
the author grounds his aigument on it. Whereas those that tisw As 
passage, and the occasion of it, will see it had been more £ar his adfsa^ 
tage to have translated it, ten thousands. He that oan allow himself to 
write at this rate, may easUy be ToUmiinoas, and look too big to be 
des[nsed, as the writer of little pamj^ets. 

The letter mentioned, page 96, being oonunnnicated to me by M[r.] 
B[axter], that port of it which concerns Alexandria is here sdded| 
that it may ai^>ear how much it is mistaken, and how fiv from beiqg 

<* [As] for Alexandria, it was the greatest city in the empire, neit 
to Rome, fuylcmi ftcr^ rffv Pwfi^y ^ inSXiff, says Josephus.^ And Epipha- 
nius gives an account of many churches in it assigned to several pici- 
byters, viz., besides Ciesarea finished by Athanasius, that of Dionyrius, 
Theonas, Pierius, Serapion, Perseas, Dizia, Mundidius, Anianns, Banr 
calas, adding xol SXXaif ' and others besides.* This, notwithstanding that 
the Christians at Alexandria, which held communion with AthanaMns, 
might and did meet together in one church, he himself dedarei 
expressly in his apology to Constantius.' The whole passage is too 
large to transcribe or translate: this is the sense of it. He being 
accused for assembling the people in the great church before itwsf 
dedicated, (irply oMjp TtXtimBrjmi) makes this part of his defenoa 
' The confluence of the people at the paschal solemnity was so grsift 
that if they had met in several assemblies (jcar^ lUpot ml duiptii»am) 
the other churches were so little and strait, that they would haws 
l^een in danger of suffering by the crowd, nor would the nniveml 
harmony and concurrence of the people have been so visible and efect- 
ual, if diey had met in parcels. Therefore he appeals to him, whether 

• whereat. * De Bello Judaic, lib. ▼. evp. nit. 

• H»iw. ixiz. p. 7t8. ' Pag« Ml, torn. 1. Ed. CooumIIb. Aium MSI. 


ii WW not better for tibe vdiole multitade to meet in that great church 
(being m place large enough to receiTe them altogether, Uros ip^ rw 
vtfrar dumtfUwav U(Qv&tuw69ratf hf ahu9 owtKBtw^ and to have a concor- 
lenoe of all the p^ofde with one voice (koI njfr aMpf lurh, uvfju^wUu 
fWF Xafiv yhtvBai rifv ^h^') ^^ ^9 ^J> ^®> according to onr 
fl a i i o ur^ g paromise, where two shall agree as teaching anything, it shall 
be done fiir them of my Father, &c., how prevalent will be the one 
veioe of so nnmeroos a people assembled together and saying Amen to 
God I Who, therefore, would not wonder, who would not count it a 
hi^ipiness, to see so great a people met together in one place ? And 
how did the people rcrjoice to behold one another, whereas formerly 
Ontj asaembled in several places ?' 

^Hereby it is evident that in the middle of the fourth age, all the 
Cbostians at Alexandria which were wont at other times to meet in 
seferal assemblies, were no more than one church might and did con* 
tun, so as they could all join at once in the worship of God, and concur 
m die Amen* 

« He tells him also that Alexander, his predecessor, (who died anno 
825) did as much as he in like circumstances, viz., assembled the whole 
mnltitode in one church before it was dedicated.* 

" This seems clear enough, but being c^Mible of another kind of 
pBoof which may be no less satisfactory, let me add that also. This 
dty was, by Strabo's description of it, xKofivdi ttdhs r6 (rxqftaj like a 
soUier's ooat, whose length at either side was almost thirty furlongs, its 
breadth at either end seven or eight furlongs,^ so the whole compass 
will be less than ten miles. A third or fourth part of this was taken 
up wi^ public buildings, temples, and royal palaces, l^ct rt ^ wdKis 
rtfuhff, rii rt KOipii /cdXXurra Koi ro fiaaiXtta rtrofyroP f Ij mai rpirow rov 
vorr^f wMptfiSkov fupos,^ * the dty possesses temples, and fine public 
buildings and palaces, which take up a foiuth or even a third of its area ;' 
two miles and half or three and a quarter is thus disposed of. I take 
this to be that region of the city which Epiphanius calls Bpovxtow, 
(where he tells us, was the famous library of Ptolomeus Philadelphus) 
and speaks of in his time as destitute of inhabitants, Ifprffiop toivvp 
(nFopx^'* A great part of the city was assigned to the Jews, frcXcMc 
ai^mpum fuya fitpog rf l^c rovrf . So Strabo indefinitely, as Josephus 
quotes him.' Others tell us more punctually, their share was two of 
Uie five divisions/ Though many of them had their habitation in the 
other divisions, yet they had two-fiflh parts entire to themselves, and 

• Page 63S. * Oeogr. lib. xvll. p. 646. 

« Ibid. ^ De Punder. et Mensur. n. 9, p. 166. 

• Antiquit. Jiid. lib. xIy. cap. xii. / Usher's AnnaU Latin, p. 859. 


this is, I suppose, the ndror S^, < qoarter of their own,' which Josephus 
saith, the saocessors of Alexander set apart for them, airdU aKf>mpunw.* 
Thus we see akeady how six or seven miles of the ten were taken up. 
The greatest part of the citizens (as at Rome and other cities) in the 
beginning of the fourth age, were heathens. Otherwise Antonius 
wronged the citj, who, in Athanasius*s time, is brought in thus exclaim- 
ing by Jerome,^ Vcb tt&t Alexandria qua pro Deo portenta veneraris; 
vcB tibi civitae meretrix in quam toHua orbie dcemoma oonjltueerej &c. ' Woe 
to thee, Alexandria, who worshippest monsters instead of God ! Woe to 
ihee, harlot city, to which the demons of the whole world resort f 
A chai*ge thus formed, supposes the prevailing party to be guilty. 
But let us suppose them equal, and their proportion half of the three 
or four miles remaining. Let the rest be divided amongst the orthodox, 
the Arians, the Novatians, and other sects : and, if we be just, a laige 
part will fidl to the share of heretics and sectaries. For, not to moi- 
tion others, the Novatians had several churches and a bishop there, 
till Cyril's time.^ The Arians were a great part of those who pro- 
fessed Christianity, rov \aov o^x ^tyif /Mtpa,' and if we may judge of 
the followers by their leaders, no less than half. For whereat 
there were nineteen presbyters and deacons in that church,' (twehre 
was the number of their presbyters by their ancient constitutioii, 
as appears by Eutychius, and seven their deacons, as at Bome, and 
elsewhere,) six presbyters with Arius, and five deacons fell off from the 
Catholics/ But let the Arians be much fewer, yet will not the propor- 
tion of the Catholic bishop's diocese in this city be more than that of a 
small town, one of eight or twelve furlongs in compass. And so the 
numbers of the Christians, upon this account, will be no more than 
might well meet for worship in one place." 

• Bello Jud. lib. H. cap. xzi. * Vit. Paul. p. S4S. 

• Vid. Socrat. Hiit. lib. vli. cap. vii. ' Sosom. Hiat. lib. i. cap. zIy. 

• Theod. HiBt. lib. Iv. cap. xxiU. / Sosom. Hltt. Ub. i. cap. rly. 




Bj the late BeTerend and Learned David Clabxson, sometime Fellow of 
Clare Hall, in Cambridge. 

London : Printed for Nath. Ponder at the Peacock in the Poultry. 


The original edition of Uie ** PrimiUfe Ej^feoptey" it a mall oeta;vo voloM^ 
which, by one who looked merely to the end of tlie treatiae^ mSght be imnioaad ii 
eontain 285 pagea. In hct, howerer, H eontaina only 187 pegea i §», by a tmkm 
error of the printer, the paging, after proeteding regularly to pi^ ISS, 
adraaoea to page 174^ and ia ^aoee eoiitimed«eciMdy totfta ekai^g pi«i^ S8C 



Though a preface be a civility due to the following tract, the 
name of the author is reckoned much more significant than any 
preface. Those that knew the calmness of his disposition, and 
his sincere desire of contributing all that he could to the com- 
posure of those unhappy differences that have so long troubled 
the Christian church, will think this work very suitable to his 
design; and being so esteemed by divers judicious persons of his 
acquaintance, those in whose hands his papers are, have been pre- 
vailed with to send it abroad into the world with this assurance, 
that it is his whose name it bears. 

Nath. Ponder. 




IE benefit of this undertaking — What a])pear8 of Scripture times — Not a tenth 
part Christians in any city in the apostles' times ; scarce a twentieth — Act. ii. 
45, cleared from what is confessed by prelates — 1 . The number of the converted 
in the greatest cities were but small — 2. That in those times there were more 
than one bishop in one city ; it is also proved from Philip, i. 1 — Philippi no 
metropolis — Objection from Act, xvi. 12, removed — Act xx. 17, 18, vindi- 
cated — Acknowledged that one altar was sufficient in those times. 


(ishops in villages, viz. Hydrax, Olbium, Zygris, &c. — Fuller's testimony in this 
matter — Instances of this kind in Cyprus, Armenia, Pontus, Lycaonia, &c. — An 
account of the higness of the places mentioned. Act. xiv. — Many bishops in 
Pis.idia, Cappadocia, &c., yet but few cities — Three sizes of villages then — 
Bishops in villages made provincials by the synod of Laodicea. 


Cities for their largeness were for the most part but like villages, or market-towns — 
That n6\is signifies, in the Testament, a city no bigger than a village — Many 
instances of a city's bigness taken out of the Old Testament — Strabo's and 
Ptolemy's authorities and instances of the several sorts and dimensions of cities 
— The ancients understood bishops to be presbyters in the apostles' sense, Tit i, 
— For one bishop, afterwards in a great city, ten or twenty — The reasons of lessen- 
ing the number — What numbers of people accounted competent for an ancient 


V. consideration of the cities accounted great — How many cities a metropolis had 
under it — Some great cities had but few inhabitants, as Philadelphia, Laodicea, 
and others — Many of the great cities contained no more Christians than could 
meet together in one congregation — Instances in several cities, and the number 
of Christians — An account of the Novatians and Donatists of several cities in 



Concerning the g^atest cities of all — ^Proof g^ven that they did not contain 

Christians than could meet together in one place — Instances of Rome, AlenB.^ 
dria, Antioch, Carthage, Jerusalem, &c. 


Objections against what hath been insisted on, considered — I. From the largenett c»i 
the territories about that city — 2. Such as credit the premises must think tk ^ 
ancient bishoprics crowded so near as to be more like parishes than diocese^b, 
that become the honour of a bishop. 


More objections answered — Several rules obsenred — Practices about receiving in of 
penitents — Duties to which the bishop was obliged — Of one communion table — 
Requisites in admission to church communion and reconciling of penitents- 
Reasons why bishops in alter ages increased their churches as to largeness d 


The thoughts that some of the best and most eminent bishops of the fourth and tSh 
ages had of a very large bishopric, and a flock exceeding numerous. 


The epilogue to the whole discourse; or, what things may be inferred fnm the 





I AM sensible that a discourse representing ancient bishoprics as 
Vastly differing from what they are and have been in latter ages, is 
Hot likeQy] to be well entertained with many ; when it must encounter 
with prejudice and interest, things that do frequently baffle the best 
evidence, in persons otherwise very discerning and judicious. 

To those who take the measures of ancient times and things by their 
own, or are much concerned that they should not be otherwise than 
they now are, it will seem a great paradox to hear that a bishop of old 
was but the pastor of a single church, or that his diocese was no larger 
than one communion-table might serve, and contained no more than 
were capable of personal commimion. But being also apprehensive 
that great advantages may be expected from a clear discovery of the 
truth in this particular ; since thereby not only many passages in the 
ancient writers may be cleared and secured from misconstruction, and 
divers mistakes corrected, into which men otherwise learned have slipped 
themselves, and drawn others after them ; but that it may contribute 
much to the deciding of the controversies amongst us about church 
government, and bringing them to a happy composure, I was encouraged 
to offer what I had observed to this purpose in the records of antiquity 
to public view. 

As for Scripture times, there will be little difficulty, since as much is 
acknowledged by the most learned and judicious asserters of prelacy as 
need be desired. 

First, It is confessed that the numbers of Christians, even in the 
greatest cities, was small. Archbishop Whitgift, concerned to make 


the best of them, acknowledges this :" after he had told us, '' The gospel 
was preached in all parts : it was not generally received in any one part 
of the world ; no, not in any city, not at Jerusalem^ where all the 
apostles were, not in any the least town :" he adds, " There were Christians 
at Jerusalem, at Antioch, at Ephesus, at Rome, &c., but not the tenth 
part in any of these, or any other places in comparison to the Jews or 
Gentiles. In the apostles' times, the visible church of Christ at Borne 
was but a handful in comparison. When Matthias was chosen, the 
whole church was gathered together in one place, and so was it when 

the deacons were chosen. The election might be in the whole 

church when it was together in one place. It might well be that the 

people in every city might meet in one place without confusion, when 
scarce the twentieth part of the city were Christians ; but it cannot 
be so now." So Bishop Downham tells us, " That at the very first con- 
version of cities, the whole number of the people converted (being 
sometimes not much greater than the number of the presbyters placed 
among them) was able to make up but a small congregation.^ "At the 
very first, all the Christians in the city and country, if they had been 
assembled together, could have made but a small congregation."^ 

No instance can be brought against this, but the three thousand con- 
verted at Jerusalem, Acts ii. 41, to which some would add five thousand 
more. But what may be argued from hence for great numbers of 
Christians in cities proceeds upon a mere mistake, which I shall clearly 
remove ; for it is but a small proportion of those thousands that can in 
reason be accounted the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and so fixed members 
of that church : for they were converted at one of the great feasts, at 
which times the inhabitants were not by far a twentieth part of those 
that were assembled in the city. That this may appear, let us inquire 
both after the number of the inhabitants, and of those that from o^et 
places resorted to those solemnities. To begin with the latter of these ; 
Josephus** tells us, and out of him Eusebius,* that Cestius Gallus, will- 
ing to represent to Nero (who contemned the Jews) the strength of 
that people, desired the priests to take an account of their number; 
they, in order thereto, at the Passover, when several companies (the 
least consisting of ten, many of twenty) were each of them to hare 
their sacrifice, numbered the sacrifices, which came to 255,600 ; then 
reckoning as though each company had no fewer than ten, they col- 
lected the number of the people at the Passover to be 2,700,000, «D 
legally clean ; but allowing the families or companies their just number, 
it amounted to three millions ; so Eusebius, Tpianoaias fivptal^y ; and 

• Defens. of Ans. tr. iii. chap. vi. p. 175. • Def. lib. Hi. cap. i. p. 6. ' Page &. 

* De Dell. Jud. Ub. vii. cap. i. f 5. p. 968. « Hilt. lib. iU. cap. r. 


Josepbus elsewhere, olm iXArrovs rptajcoo-/c»y fivpiddwy' " not less than 
three millions." 

But then they were all in a manner foreigners, iroXv d« rovro nkrjBos 
l{ii^ ovXXcyfTm.* The inhabitants of Jerusalem were but 120,000, as 
we learn by HsBcateus,' irtpl d^fxa fivpMts (not centum et quinquaginta 
twHw, 150,000, as the translator.) And it may be Hsscateus, or his 
informer, over-reached, as well in the number of the citizens as 
in the measures of the city. He makes the circuit of it fifty 
feriongs, whereas Josephus says, it was but thirty-three,^ and 
the drcumvallation of Titus in the siege but thirty-nine ftirlongs.' 
And when twelve thousand were slain in Jerusalem in one night, the 
lo88 is represented as though the greatest part of the citizens had been 
destroyed/ But there is no need of these advantages. Let us suppose 
the inhabitants to have been 150,000 (thirty thousand more tiian 
BiBcateus makes them) yet this will but be a twentieth part of three 
millions, (and no less were wont to be at Jerusalem at the three great 
solemnities,) and then in all reason no more than a twentieth part of the 
ooDverted must be accounted inhabitants of the city, and so fixed 
members of the church. For that this happiness should fall in greater 
proportion upon those of the city than upon the foreigners at that time 
in it, both being in all the same circumstances, none can upon any 
ground imagine. And if but a twentieth part of the converted were 
inhabitants, let them be twenty, or forty, or eighty thousand, or as 
many as the myriads, Acts xxi. 20, amount to, the church at Jerusalem 
will not be so much greatened^ by them, but that it might well meet in 
one congregation. If the converts had been a hundred thousand, the 
proportion of that church therein would have been but five thousand ; 
and more have been in one congregation in the primitive times else- 
where, or else Eusebius could not have found fxvpidvdpovs eirtavvayoryas,^ 
« congregations of ten thousand.*' 

2. It is confessed that in those times, and after, there was more than 
one bishop in a city. And if the Christians in any city were but few, 
and those divided betwixt several bishops, how small a diocese would 
the share of each make up ! D[r.] H[ammond] (whom others follow) 
tells us, that there were two bishops at once in Jerusalem, in Antioch, 
at Ephesus, and at Rome.' He ventures to name the several bishops, 
and assigns the reasons why distinct congregations, under their 
respective bishops, in each city were necessary. He affirms it was so, 
not only in the four cities specified, but in others ; and indeed upon 

« Page 798. Edit. Genev. an. 163S. • Lib. vii. cap. xvii. • Joaep. contr. Ap. lib. i. 

^ De BeU. Jud. lib. ▼!. cap. xyU. p. 914. « Lib. ri. cap. 81. / Lib. iv. cap. zx. 

r incieaaed. * Lib. Tiii. cap. i. ' Annot. in Revel, zl. 8, p. 662. 

T 2 


this account it must be so, in all cities where a competent number of 
Jews and Gentiles together were converted to Christ 

But there is no need of this acknowledgment. Nor wUl I insist on 
the grounds on which he proceeds. There is evidence enough in 
Scripture for a plurality of bishops in several cities, which may be 
easily vindicated from the attempts of some who would deface it. That 
of the apostle to the Philippians is pregnant, Phil. i. 1 :" To all the 
saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and 
deacons." To this it is said, that Philippi was the metropolis of 
Macedonia, and the bishops mentioned were not those of that city, but 
of the several cities of the province which was under this metropolis. 

But that Philippi was then a metropolis, or long afler, (which is all 
the support this opinion hath,) is a presumption without any ground, 
there being nothing for it in Scripture, or in ecclesiastical or foreign 
authors, yet produced for the proof of it. A very learned doctor thinto 
that one text. Acts xvi. 12, affords two arguments to evince it; it is 
irpmrrjy " the prime city," and it was beside that, KcXttwioy " a colony ;" 
and of such colonies and chief cities, it is no question they were 
especially chosen to be the places of their assizes, whither the neigh- 
bouring cities resorted for justice, and so were metropolies in the civil 
account.'' But in answer to this, vrpttn; is there the first, (as it is 
rendered by our translators) not the chief city ; the first in sitoatiGni 
not the principal in dignity and pre-eminence ; the first city that 
occurred in passing from Thrace to Macedon/ it being seated at the 
edge of Macedon, and so near Thrace, that some geographers count it a 
city of that country. And so it was the first city of Macedon, as 
Berwick is the first English town to one passing from Scotland, but 
far from being the chief town in England. The very notice of its 
situation, which the best geographers give us, leads us so to take wpmrn ; 
but that it was the chief city, as he takes it, is not only without, bat 
against, all evidence. For it is known with what general consent 
Thessalonica has the pre-eminence amongst the cities of Macedon ; and 
that in Theophylact is taken notice of, where Philippi is called a little 
city, being under Thessalonica the metropolis : it is said that this was 
taken out of an old geographer, and belonged^ to that city, as it was 
built by Philip, not to those latter times under the Roman empire. 
But even in the latter times, and under the Roman empire, when 
Macedon was made a Roman province, Philippi was a place so incon- 
siderable, that it was not thought worthy of mention by Livy, when he 

• D[r.] Hlammond], Vlnd. p. 111. 

* Or M Dr. Du Veil, *' Such as go to Macedonia fh>in the iile of Samotbnoe, the flnt dty 
they meet that Is a colony upon the coast of Edonis is Philippi."— Explan. of Acta xri. II, ^ *'• 

- referred. 


gives an account of the principal cities in the whole country.' Paulus 

^milius divided it into four regions, and the metropolis in each is by 

Uai specified ; regionum ubi concilia Jierent (which shows where their 

courts of judicature or assizes were held) primce regionis Amphipolim, 

kcundcB ITiessalonicain, tertice Pellamy quarUe Pelagoniam fecit, '* of the 

legions in which coiurts are held, Amphipolis was fixed on for the first 

r^on, Thessalonica for the second, Pella for tlie third, and Pelagonia 

ior the fourth." So not Philippi, but Amphipolis, was the metropolis 

of that part of Macedon where it was situate ; thither the neighbouring 

cities were to resort for justice, not to Philippi. 

The other argument, viz. its being a colony, is of no force at all, 
luless none but metropolies were colonies, which is apparently^ false, 
amce colonies were commonly planted in inferior cities. So that often- 
times we find near twenty colonies where but one metropolis, as in 
Mauritania Caesariensis, where there were nineteen ; sometimes above 
twenty, as in Africa Propria, where four-and- twenty ; and in coimtries 
where there were fewer colonies, they were placed in the meaner cities, 
rather than the chief In Macedon, three of the four cities which m 
livy are capita regionum^ " capitals of regions," were without colonies ; 
Thessalonica, Amphipolis, and Pelagonia, if we may credit Ferrarius's 
Bocount of them ; and in England, where there were four colonies, 
London had none. Onuphrius indeed will have it a colony, but Brier- 
wood shows his mistake out of Tacitus, his own author.^ 

In fine, not only meaner cities, but villages, might be colonies. The 
Emperor Severus gave the honour of a colony to a hamlet. Patavi- 
centium vicus a D. Severo jus colonice impetravit, " the village Petavi- 
oentium has obtained the colonial privilege from the Emperor Severus."^ 
Let me but add another text to this vindication. Acts xx. 17, " From 
Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church," who 
are said, ver. 28, " to be made bishops by the Holy Ghost." To evade 
this, some by church will not understand that of Ephesus, but the 
several churches of Asia ; and so by elders, not those of Ephesus only, 
but the bishops of the Asian churches ; whereas, this sense, neither the 
text, nor other Scriptures, nor the ancients will allow. The text itself 
gives it no countenance, but rather refuses it ; nor must it be admitted 
by the best rules expositors follow, of interpreting a text by itself. 
** He sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church :" of what 
church, but of that there mentioned — of the church of Ephesus ? who 
would imagine other, but those who find it cross their pretensions ? I 
need not say that the Syriac version, Chrysostom, Theophylact, (Ecu- 
menius, Theodoret, and the whole stream of the ancients are against 

• Dec. r. lib. v. p. 90. • nuuilfettly. ' Inquir. p. 19. * Lib. 1. Digest. [Tit. xt. lect. Ix.] 


this new sense, not anj favouring it, but one' amongst tbem all ; and 
he in such terms, as those who allege him will not admit the entire 
expression, nor that it crosses the Scripture in its constant style. 
Christians in a town or citj are called a church, and still expressed 
singularly ; whereas those in a country or province are called churches, 
and expressed plurally. 1 pass these as touched by others ; that which 
I insist on is this : 

The apostle Paul resolved to be at Jerusalem at the day of Pentecost, 
and made all haste possible that he might be there, Acts xx. 16, and 
accordingly was there at that day, as D[r.] H[ammond] tells us. Acts 
xxiv. 11 ; and the many myriads that he found there assembled, are an 
evidence of it. But he was not, he could not be, there at the day of 
Pentecost if he stayed long at Miletus ; and he could not assemble the 
bishops of Asia there, miless he stayed long there. Let us make both 
these manifest. If he stayed longer at Miletus than three or four dajs 
at most, he could not be at Jerusalem at the feast of Pentecost ; for 
there being but seven weeks betwixt that and the Passover, he came but 
to Miletus in the latter end of the fourth week, as is clearly discernible 
from Acts XX. 6, 7, 13, 14, 15 verses. He sailed from Philippi after 
the days of unleavened bread were past, ver. 6, and so when one of th» 
weeks was past, he came to Troas in five days, and stayed there seven; 
and so departed from thence on Monday in the fourth week, ver. 6 
and 7 ; iu four days more he arrived at Miletus, in the latter part of the 
fourth week, ver. 13, 14, 15. And three weeks more we have an 
account of, after his departure from Miletus, before he arrived at 
Jerusalem, Acts xxi. ver. 1 — 4, 7, 8, 10, 15. From Miletus by Coos, 
Rhodes, Patara, in four or five days he came to Tyre. Chrysostom 
reckons them five days, iKtlBtv de fifi€pi^v ir<Wc els Tvpop,^ " thence it is a 
journey of five days to Tyre." At Tyre he stayed seven days, ver. 4, 
at Ptolemius one day, ver. 7, and the many days he stayed at CsBsarea, 
ver. 10, €15 Kai(Tdp€iav Trkeiovs /xcv€t rS)v aXXa>i', '^ at Caisarea he remains 
more days than at the other places." And what was requisite to bring 
him from Csesarea to Jerusalem, which was seventy miles distant, could 
not be less than would make up the other days forementioned, as near 
to three weeks as we now suppose. 

So that hereby it is evident, that tliree or four days was all that can 
be allowed for his stay at Miletus ; and this was not time sufficient to 
send smnmons to the several bishops of Asia, and for them to come to 
Miletus upon such summons. It was time little enough to send to 
Ephesus, and to have the bishops and presbyters of that city come to 
Miletus, being three or four days' journey going and coming ; for in the 

■* [Ircn. lib. iii. cap. xiv.] * Ilomil xly. on AcU. 


emmun redknni^^ m dsjs jooraej hy hod w dbu- tv^emr mikS) 160 
or 166 fbrloqgs ; or bj m kzger •coogpu 200 farioi^^ fiT«-«iMi-fw«oty 
milo, as rMiiilwir ofaKTret oat of Hexx)docus« liTj, Fohrbius, Jcc« 
Nov Ephems was ^Ay mOei horn MSetns, 400 fbrioDgs, as CaiMsarius 
teDs DSy and so four dajs jouniey to and &cs aocoidiog to the lavger 
veckooii^; and if tlie mo ss CT ^ c r were acoo mmod a te d for extraoidinsiy 
^eed, one ds^ at least most be aUowed for Epbesus, and no less than 
two for the bishops or presbjters, being nsnally aged persons, especially 
if they came on foot, as the apostks and their disciples were wont to do 
when they trareUed by land ; and a good part of the day might be 
taken up by the apostles' exhortation, prayer, and their conference with 
Um. Bat it is not imaginable, that this time, that was little enough to 
bring the bishc^ from Ephesus, could be sufficient to assemble thcan at 
IQ^os from many several and remoter parts ; or if they will have us 
to understand the bishops through aU the lesser Asia, all Natolia, as 
they sometimes express it, * many weeks* time will be little enough for 
the oonvocating so many dispersed through so vast a mgion : or if we 
Qoderstand it only of the Lydian or proconsular Asia, and of the bishops 
of the principal cities nearer to Ephesus, such where there are mention 
of churches in Scripture, many days (more than can be allovred) would 
be necessary for their assembling together at Miletus, as ¥rill appear by 
the distance of some few : for as Ephesus was fifly miles north of 
Uletos, so Smyrna was 320 furlongs (forty miles) uortli of Ephesus, as 
Strabo f Pergamus further north of Smyrna, 540 furlongs, t. e, nlK>ut 
ozty-eight English miles, and so 158 from Miletus going and coming. 
Sanhs was three days' journey from Ephesus, as Herodotus,^ and the 
bishops coming by Ephesus to Miletus, it will be twice more, besides 
what must be allowed the messenger going thither from Miletus. So 
that there is no possibility of assembling the bishops of Asia at Miletus 
in so few days, as would leave it possible for the apostle to be at Jeru- 
salem at the day of Pentecost. And therefore the elders sent for could 
not be those of the several cities of Asia, but of Ephesus ; and then it 
cannot be denied, but in that church there was a plurality of elders or 

3. It is acknowledged, that both in Scripture times and long oiler, 
the bishop's diocese was so small that one altar was sufficient for it. 
See Mr. Mede, " Proof for Churches in the Second Century,*' p. 29. 
^ Nay, more than this," saith he, " it should seem that in diose first 
times, before dioceses were divided into the lesser and subordinate 
churches we now call parishes, and presbyters assigned to them, tliey 
had not only one altar in one chureh or daminicum, but one altar to a 

« iB SCnb. Ub. uL • [Dodwen] Diw. iv. cmp. tUL feet, vf . ' Ub. xW. Inlt. ' Ub. r. 


church, taking choich for the company or corporation of the fidthfbl 
united under one bishop or pastor, and that was in the city and place 
where the bishop had his see or residence ; like as the Jews had but 
one altar and temple for the whole nation, united under one high priest; 
and yet, as the Jews had their synagogues, so perhaps they might have 
more oratories than one, though their altar was but one, there namely 
where their worship was. Die soliSy saith Justin Martyr, ommtitn qui 
vel in oppidis vel rure degunt in eundem locum conventus JU, " On Sunday 
there is an assembly in one place of all who live in the towns or in the 
country -" namely, as he there tells us, to celebrate and participate the 
holy eucharist. Why was this, but because they had not many pbioes to 
celebrate in ? And unless this were so, whence came it else that a 
schismatical bishop was said instituere or coUocare aliud altare^ " set up 
another altar,** and that a bishop and altar are made correlatives?* 
And thus perhaps is Ignatius also to be understood in that forequoted 
passage of his, h dvaiaoTTjptov, unum altare (mini ecclesice, et ttntu epitcopu 
cum presbi/terio et diaconisy " one altar for the whole church, and one 
bishop with the presbytery and the deacons.'' Where he extends tho8e 
first times, before dioceses were divided, to the latter end of the third 
age, alleging Cyprian for proof To the same effect D[r.] H[ammond],* 
alleging for it Ignatius, Cyprian, and other learned men. The same nxj 
be concluded from D[r.] T[aylor] citing Damasus speaking of the titles 
in Rome.^ Hence he infers that there was yet no preaching in parishes, 
but [only in] the mother church, and so but one pulpit in a diocese. So 
that Damasus, and the Doctor out of him, leave us evidently to conclude 
that there was no communion celebrated, no communion-table but in 
the mother church. The parishes mentioned at Rome were only ap- 
pointed for baptism, and penance, and burial, and this three hundred 
and five years after Christ, and at Rome too, the greatest and most 
populous church in the world. To these I might add Petavius, who 
had no superior for learning amongst the Jesuits, nor any to whom 
prelacy is more obliged. He is positive, that in the fourth age there 
was but one church or title ordinarily in a city, and proves it by Epi- 
phanius, who speaks of more titles in Alexandria as a thing siogular 
and peculiar to that city (there being no other instance thereof before 

* St. Cyprian'8 Epist. x1. 72, 73, and De Unitate Ecdesiie. * Diasert. iJi. cap. iil. sect. XT. 

• Dr. T[aylor,] (Episcopacy Asserted,) giving an account out of Damasus what Enariitui aod 
Dionysius did. about dividing of parishes or titles in the city of Rome; adda, MaroeQaainatMrf 
the number in the year 305. Hie fecit caemeterium, et 25 titulot in urbe Rowut eotuiUmit fMri 
Dicecetrt propter baptismum et pcenitentiam multorum qui eonvertebantvr ; he'made a aepultnittf 

cemetery for the burial of martyrs, and laid out twenty-five parishes in th« city of Rome. Aat 

the use of parishes, which he subjoins, alters the business, for he appointed them only ,pr«y<er 
baptismum et paeniteniiam niultorum et aepulturas, for baptism, and penance, and burial; for si 
yet there was no preairhiBgr in parishes, but [only] in the mother church. 


but Rome,) singalarem tunc temporis AUxandricB morem huncfuisse^ <&c.,* 
« also by the Council of Neocssarea.^ And Dr. Stillingfleet,*^ " For 
lithoogby when the churches increased, the occasional meetings were 
^aent in several places, jet still there was but one church, and one 
iltsr, and one baptistery, and one bishop, with many presbyters assisting 
liim ; and this is so very plain in antiquity, as to the churches planted 
hy the apostles themselves in several parts, that none but a great 
stranger to the history of the church can ever call it in question.^ 

So that this is not barely delivered by persons of excellent learning, 
and intimate acquaintance with antiquity ; but proved by those records 
which are most venerable in their account ; and the evidence reaches 
not only the apostles* times, but divers ages after. 

Hereby it appears that a bishop's see of old was evavptmrot^ '* such as 
admitted of oversight,** as Nazianzen styles his own ; and a diocese far 
from such a thing as hath now the name. For that wherein there was 
but one commimion-table did not differ much from one of our parishes ; 
and the bishop's flock [was] but like the cure of one of our parsons or 
Ticars, when one table would be sufficient for it ; indeed, one is too little 
for divers of our parishes. 

But to give fuller proof of this, let us view the bishops' seats of old, 
and we shall find them either so small, or so few Christians in them, as 
will convince the impartial that we have not made their bounds too 
narrow. There were many bishops in villages ; many in cities, no 
bigger than villages ; most of them in cities which were but like our 
market towns ; no more under bishops in those cities which were 
counted great, than could meet together for Christian communion ; and 
scarce any of the few largest cities contained more Christians for some 
hundred years than are in some of our parishes. 


Those that are concerned to extend the ancient bishop to the modem 
pitch and largeness, will not endure to hear, nor would have any believe, 
that it was usual of old to have bishops in villages, or such little 
places ; and tell their opponents, that " the most learned amongst them 

• Epiph. Hmt. xoTi. p. S76. * Can. xiil. • Senn. against 8«parat. p. 27. 


have not been able, with great labour and hard study, to prodooe above 
^ye instances hereof,"* and that this is not enough, if none of them were 
mistaken, to prove it usual. But there are aevenl things counted usual 
in the ancient church, of which no more instances can be given, nor so 
many. And yet more have been and may be produced for bishops in 
villages than some are willing to take notice of. 

In the diocese of Egypt, Hydrax and Pakebisca, two villages (km^mi 
dc avrai ncyroYroXcciiff, *' these are villages of Pentapolis," says Synesius,) 
had their bishops ; he went thither, as he tells us in the same place,* 
np6d€<r6ai riyv vrrpt tnurK^irov aKt^^iw^ '' to make a proposal about a bishop.** 

So had Olbium, a village in the same region ; d^fior cM KmfOfnit, 
<< they are a village community ;" after the death of Athamas, bishop 
there, ihiritrtv alp€a-€<as eiria-Kdfrov, the election of a bishop was needfiil, 
and Antonius was chosen.^^ 

Zygns is an Egyptian village, in Ptolemy. Athanasius gives us the 
name both of the place and person that was bishop thei^ Maptm 

We meet with *Aprias Kaprf, " the village Antia," in Diodorus.' And 
in the Council of Ephesus with episcopus AnteensiSf " bishop of Antis.'^ 
I cannot find any other place that wiU suit him. 

Schaedia, in Strabo, is KoroiKia Tn^Xcwr, rendered pagita arbi swnlis, **» 
village like a city."^ Athanasius tells us who was the bishop of it, 
AyadodoLfiwv ^x^Blas. 

In the Breviary of Meletius, wherein he gives Alexander an aooount 
what bishops he had made ; amongst the rest there is Kp6vM£ tw McnSVy, 
in Athanasius.' And a place called Andromene was the episcopal seit 
of ZoiluB, as Athanasius informs us, ZtoiKos 'Avdpwfu^Mw.'^ Which two 
last (with divers otliers which I will pass by) are in all probabilitj 
.villages, since there are no such cities discovered in Egypt. 

"YyfniXis is a village in Stephanus. And Hypselis had two bishops at 
once, Arsenius of the Meletian faction, and Paul for the orthodox.' 

Dracontius, eV rfj *AX€(avbf}i(0¥ x^P^ KaraaraB€i£j^ being made a bishop 
in the territory of Alexandria, could have no city for his seat 

Secontarunis was a very small and contemptible village, that Ischyros 
was made bishop of, containing so few inhabitants that there was never s 
church there before, as Athanasius,** kco/xi; ppaxyranf, koi oKiyvw mfOpmwmv, 
" a very smaU village, with few inhabitants." 

And that was little better, where the writers of the life of Chiy- 

• D[r.] D[ownham], lib. ii. cap. vii. pp. 132, 1.H, and J[ereiny] T[ayloT], Ep. AMert. p. 904. 

• Epist. Ixvii. ' Synes. Epist. Ixxvi. ' Ad^Antiochen. p. 452. torn. L 

• Lib. i. [cap. ii.] / Crab. Cone. p. 747. r Lib. xvH. p. 550. 

A Ad Antioch. p. 452. torn. i. ' Apol. ii. p. ni2. * Ad Antioch. p. 45S. 

' Atlian. Apol. ii. - Athan. Epist. ad Dracont. p. 736. ■ ApoL U. p. 622. 


ntom tell lis, Theophilus of Alexandria settled a bishop ; thej all call 
it imfivdpiow, a small hamlet.* 

In the CJouncil of Ephesus there was qnscopits Bacathensisy^ " a 
liahop of Bacathum.** And Epiphanius calls Bacathum firiTpoK^itfAiav rrjs 
'Afofiiaff "a chief village in Arabia.'''^ In that part of Arabia which was 
nnexed to Palestine there was good store of bishops in villages, as 
ippears by the ancient catalogue in Gulielmns Tjrius. There is no 
need to mention particulars, since Sozomen assures us that there cV 
■^fioif oruTitoiroc Upowrai,^ *' bishops are consecrated in villages." 

In Syria, Theodoret tells us of Paul, a confessor, in the persecution 
hf lacinius, one of the fathers at the first Council of Nice, and bishop of 
Neociesarea, which he says is (l>povpiov, a castle or fort near Euphrates/ 
Maionia is described by Jerome to be a village thirty miles from Antioch, 
lod we meet with a bishop there, and the name of him Ttfi6$€os Map«- 
nuv, in Greorgius of Alexandria, in the life of Chrysostom, § 60, p. 236. 
Athanasius gives us the name of a bishop in CalansB, Ev^porccov 6 cV 
toXayatff ; and of another in Siemium, Aofivi6if cV Stcfii^/ which were 
tillages, or such obscure inconsiderable places as no geographer takes 
notice of. Particular instances are needless here. The council at 
Antioch, in their synodal epistle concerning Paulus Samosateuus, men- 
tion bishops both in country and cities, hna-K^irovs rSiv SiAopc^v ay pap rt 

In Palestine, Jamnia was a village in Strabo*s account, cV rijs wkija-low 
mmiui£ lafjt»€ias,^ So is Lydda in Josephus,' yet both [are] bishops' 
seats in Tyrius's catalogue. So is Nais there, and Zoara, (in Ortelius, 
Zoapof pagus, '^ a village.^') And in one of the three Palestines, there 
is an aocoimt of fourteen villages which were bishops' sees. Comes 
(GiT. ic»fufs) NaiSj seu vicus Nais, comes Charus, and many more. Hence 
Mineus observes. Comes idem est quod vicus Greeds, quo nomine multi 
qnscopatus sub patriarcha Jerusolymos pramotantur a Gulielmo Tyrio,^ 
'' Comes means in Greek the same as vicus in Latin, and by this name 
are distinguished by Gulielmiis Tyrius many bishoprics under the 
patriarch of Jerusalem.*' 

In the same list we meet with Pentacomia, in the province of Baba; 
with Tricomia' in that of Csesarea ; with Tricomia,' Pentacomia," Hexa- 
comia," and Enneacomia* in that of Beccrra, each of which probably 
was a precinct consisting of so many villages, as the several words 
denote, under the inspection of one bishop, who had no city, but such 

• Oeoi^. Alexand. p. 210. Anonymus Vit. Chrys. p. S45. Sim. Metaphr. p. 407. inter Chrysost. 
opera. * Crab. t. i. p. 826. ' Anacephal. p. 141. 

' HIrt, lib. vii. cap. xix. • Hist. lib. i. cap. vii. Ortel. / Ad Solitar. Vit. Agent, p. 689. 

r Eoseb. lib. vii. cap. vU. « Lib. xvi. p. 522. [Ed. Casaub. p. 1100 B.J Ed. alt. p. 759.] 

< Antiquit. lib. XX. cap. v. p. 692. * Notit. Episc. p. 301. ' Three-hamleta. 

» Five-hamleU. " Six-hamlets. • Nine-hamleU. 


hamlets for his bishopric ; as of Pnepedius it is said iroXXar htlvnamr 
KtttfuK,' " he was bishop of many villages." 

But there is no need to insist on this ; only it is to be noted what i^ 
friend of episcopacy speaks ingenuously of that r^on. " But at thiv 
time/' says Mr. Fuller, " bishops were set too thick for all to grow, and 
Palestine fed too many cathedral churches to have them generally fat 
Lydda, Jamnia, and Joppa, three episcopal towns, were within fimr 
miles one of another ; and surely many of their bishops (to use Bishop 
Langham's expression) had high racks but poor mangers. Neither left 
it stagger the reader, if in that catalogue of Tyriua he light on manj 
bishops' seats which are not to be found in Mercator, Ortelios, or anj 
other geographer ; for some of them were such poor places that they 
were ashamed to appear in a map, and fell so much under a geogn- 
pher's notice that they fell not under it : for in that age bishops hid 
their sees at poor and contemptible villages."^ 

In Cyprus, Sozomen tells us it was usual to have bishops in villsgei, 
cV K&fjMi? inia-Koiroi l€povvT(u irapa Kvirpiois, and also in other countiiei, 
cV SXXots tBvtfTiVy without regard, it seems, of any restraint which some 
bishops endeavoured to put upon that practice. And thus it continuei 
with the Cypriots to this age ; for whereas there are betwixt twenty 
and thirty bishops in that island, (and it is like^ the number has de- 
creased there as in many other places) there are but four of their seiti 
which have the face of a city, Potiits pagi qitam urbis speciem pnt m 
ferunt, says Ferrari us, " They are more like villages than cities." The 
Catholic of Armenia had above one thousand bishops imder his obedieooe, 
as Otho Frisingius writes from the report of the Armenian l^ates.' 
And after him Baronius, ctd an. 1145, [§ 23.] and our Brerewood; yet 
both the Armenias in Justinian's time (who made the most of them) 
made but four provinces ; and in the first, he tells us, there was but 
seven cities, in the second but five, in the third but six, in the fourth but 
one city, (Martyropolis) and a castle, (t6 KtBapiCov (f>povpiowy "the castJe 
Cethurizum,")' [making] but twenty in all, and divers of them taken 
out of Pontus. If the Armenian bishops had not amounted to above the 
twentieth part of the number recorded, yet more than half of them 
must be village bishops. Justinian, giving an account how maaj 
cities there were in the provinces of Pontus and the r^ons near, in 
Lazica finds seven castles and but one city, and that made so by him- 
self, [viz.] Petra, v<f> fjfiSiv to n-oXtr tlvai re kcu 6vofid{€<rBat nyxHrXd^Sowro/ 
Yet in the biarvrraxris of Leo Sophus, in Lazica, there are fifteen bish(^ 
belonging to one metropolis. 

• Soiom. lib. vi. cap. [3*,1 p. 403. * Hist, of Holy War, bk. ii. chap. II. p. 45, 4«. 
« probable. d Chron. lib. vii. cap. xxxii. 

• Novel, xxxi. chap, i / Novel, xxvill. prafat. 


la Ljcaonia and the parts adjacent we have more instances hereof, 

adoonfiimed by the best authority. The apostles having preached 

fteie, Acts xiv., and their ministry being successM to the conversion 

rf many, so that there were competent numbers for the constituting of 

dmrches in the several places mentioned, they ordained elders for every 

etarch, ver. 2, 3. Those elders were bishops, as they assure us who 

f kave new modelled the principles by which prelacy may be maintained 

with most advantage, and without which (whatever their predecessors 

thought) they judged it not defensible. The places where those churches 

with their bishops were constituted, are mentioned ver. 20 and -21, viz., 

Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra. Now, if we take the account 

which the best geographers give us of these places, it will be manifest, 

ftat the apostles did fix bishops, not only in great cities, but in lesser 

towns, yea in country granges or villages. Antioch was the metropolis 

of Pisidia, says Chrysostom ; a great city, and yet not so great but [that] 

ill the inhabitants in a manner could meet together to hear the word, 

Act. xiii. 44. Iconium in Strabo is iroKixviovy only tinrvu^x^f^^^* * 

small town, but well built." By which we may judge of those places 

which were bishops' seats under it ; there are fifteen of them in the 

iiarvirwrK of Leo Sophus. 

Derbe, in Stephanus, is <f>povpiov^ a fort or castle of Isauria ; it was, 
•ays Strabo, in the borders of Isauria ; and agreeably with Stephanus, 
he calls it not a city, but rov 'Avrindrpov n/powftov, the seat of Antipater, 
who, he tells us, was Xijor^r, a robber,* a <l>povptov being the fittest 
receptacle for such a person ; this could not be populous, being of no 
lai^ge compass. Polybius speaks of Tychos, such a fort, (in the territory 
of £lis,) which he calls also xa>piov ov piya^ a small country place or 
grange but a furlong and a half in compass f and in him, as in others, 
X^o¥ is a village or castle,' a country place distinct fi*om a city, ob 
vdXiff aKKa xo»piov. 

Lystra seems a place no more considerable; it is a small place in 
Isauria, in Ptolemy,' and Strabo, though not by that name. In Ptolemy 
it is ACa-tpaj (which in the Greek manuscript in Selden is Avcrrpa, (as is 
noted in the last edition of Ferrarius,) and in the Latin version which 
Ortelius used, Lystra,) and Ausira is the same with Isaura in Strabo, 
one of those two places in Isauria, which he says were of the same 
name with the country, (for Ausira and Isaura differ but in the trans- 
position of tvi'o letters, as Casaubon observes) and both these with him 
are villages, ^Wavpia Kafias bvo ^xovaa opavvfiovs/ " Isauria has two vil- 
lages of the same name as itself" So that Lystra, which is Ptolemy's 

• Lib. xU. p. 391. » Lib. xii. p. 368. • Lib. iv. [c. Ixxxlii.] pp. 346, 846. 

• Lib. U. p. 1S». • [lib. T.] / Ub. xii. p. 391.. 


Ausira, and Strabo's Isaura, was in his account bat a Tillage ; though, 
it is like,' of a larger size, such as the Scriptures and other andiani some- 
times call a city, r^r fuyakas Kmfuu iritis 6¥Ofia{opT€t,* " Large Tillagea 
are called cities." Hereby it further appears, that in Scripture and other 
authors, villages, and other such small places do pass under the name 
of cities ; Dcrbe, a fort or grange, and Lystra, a village, are called 
cities of Lycaonia, Act. xiv. 6. Also that where there is a church, 
whether the place be small or great, there ought to be a bishop. And 
likewise that the apostle ordained bishops in villages and other places 
as inconsiderable, and left the practice warranted by apostolical example 
and authority. 

Artemidorus, giving an account of all the cities in Hsidia, reckons 
but eleven, whereas there are twenty-two bishoprics in the catalogue of 

Strabo divides Cappadocia (that part of it which was called Taurics) 
into five (rrpanjyias, or prefectures, three of which had no cities in them, 
dvo df txpva-i fM6vov oTpar/jyiat vrAccf , *' two only of the prefectures possess 
cities.*' One of these had Tyana for its metropolis, the other Masact, 
called Cffisarea ; so that Melitene, Cataonia (which Ptolemy makes ptrt of 
the lesser Armenia, though Stephanus and Pliny agree with Stiabo) 
and Isauritis had not one city in them, and yet there were numj bishop- 
rics in them. In the other two prefectures besides Nazianzum, whidi 
in Gregory, who had his name from it, and best -knew it, is not onlj 
fiiKpaf " small," but cXaxtcm; €k ir^ttrivj* " the least among cities," and so 
short of many villages ; there was Doara, which is «c»/ii7, a viUage m 
Basil, and met with a bishop poorer than the place, ^o&pois rt nkf^ 
if>dop6v tivBpatrrovy which Basil expresses his resentment of (as a dispa- 
ragement of the episcopal name) in his epistle to Eusebius SamoeatensiB. 

And Basil advises Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, to oonstitiite 
bishops for that province in little towns and villages.' 

Sasima, in Nazianzen is angusta villula, " a small village,** who, 
by the importunity of Basil and the senior Gregory, was ordaiiied 
bishop there, but with such reluctancy, that he would never settle there, 
being indeed a place far below a person of such eminency/ 

Likewise a country place, where one of a servile condition, having been 
made bishop by Basil, Simplicia, his mistress, after Basil's death, fbraed 
him into her service again, which lady, Nazianzen is importunate with to 
restore him to his episcopal see ; this he calls x^p^v,^ which in him, m 

• probable. * Strab. Ub. iU. p. 112. [Ed. Casaub. p. S47, B. Ed. Paiii, 16S0,p. la] 

• Vid. Strab. lib. xii. p. 392. * Orat. 1x. p. 155. • Epitt.40S. 
/ [Carmen, de Vita sua. Ed. Paris. 16S0, torn. ii. p. 7.] 

i Eplst. xxvill. p. 801. [al. Ep. xxxvlii.] 


B Others, is a place inferior to a city, Ka\ ovdi ir^Kig dXX^ x^P^^^'^ So 

ke represents the Arians expressing the meanness of the place where he 

vas bishop. Such also were those other places which Basil (when a 

gieit part of the province was rent from him upon the partage^ of it 

betwixt him and Anthimus of Tyana) made bishops' seats (for the 

dties were taken up before) : and those bishoprics were not a few, as 

^ipeais by Nazianzen's expression of Basil's action, irXciWty nruric<$frocr 

ffr warpUia KommvKvwras^ ** he studded the country with many bishops ;** 

nd Gr^ory applauds this multiplying of bishoprics, i^t Ka)<Kurra dutrl- 

ifni,^ as an excellent art, souls being hereby better looked afler, ^x^^ 

^icXfia 9rXct6)y,^ though others would have had this less regarded, and 

the bishop's honour more. 

In Pontus Polemoniacus, Pityus alid Sebastopolis were bishops' seats, 
jet they were not cities in Justinian's accoimt, nirvoOvra jtal 2cj3a<rn(- 
9nkt9 €v if>povptots fuOXXop dptdfirjT€ov fj irSKtaw* " Pityus and Sebastopolis 
ire rather to be coimted castles than cities." 

Coracesium is but a castle, in Strabo,/ iciXixoy </>povpu>y, yet a bishop 
)f it is found amongst those of Pamphylia, in Leo Sophus. 

Thymbria is a village, in Strabo.*" A bishop of Timbria imder Ephe- 
los we find in Cone. Chalced. Crab. p. 892. 

Amyzon and Heraclea, (another in Caria besides that ad Lathmum) 
ire both bishops' seats. Vid. Mirseus. 107, 108, 237, yet no more 
hmn castles, as Strabo.* 

Heraclea ad Lathmum, another bishop's seat, but irokixviovj* '* a little 
hj.^ So are Ceramus and Bargesa, iroKLxyui^^ " little cities." 

Docimia is a village, AoKifUa K»fiTj,^ a bishop's seat oflen mentioned in 
rabecriptions of councils, [and] in Leo's Catalogue under Amoreus. 

There is Nea, which in Suidas and Stephanus is a castle, and a Nea 
Q Pliny' and Strabo? that is a viDage. In the council of Chalcedon 
here is a bishop of Nea imder Laodicea, and another under Ephesus." 

Pannonion is a castle in the territory of Cyzicus, says Stephanus, and 
here is a bishop of that title under the metropolitan of Cyzicus, Leo, 
iiarvir. And such a bishop mentioned ConcO. P.* vi. Crab. t. ii. p. 61. 
There is a bishop of Gordi under Sardis, [and] of Midei under Synnoda 
n Phrygia, which in Strabo are Midov and Topdlov oliajTripia — ovd* ixvri 
•^oyra irSKet^v akXh K^fuu fitKpov fi€iCovs r&v ^Xuv,'* '' the habitations of 

« Orat. xxY. p. -135. * partition. • Drat. xx. 

* Page 356. • [Nov. xxvlli.] / Lib. xiv. p. 459. 
r Lib. xiv. p. 438. [Ed. Casaub. p. 943, B. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 636.] 

A Lib. xir. p. 453, Kdit. Atrebat. [Ed. Casaub. p. 943, C. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 635.] 

« Str. lib. xiv. p. 437. / Page 451. [Ed. Casaub. p. 969, C. £d. Paris. 1630, p. 656.] 

* Str. lib. xU. p. 397. [Ed. Casaub. p. 8C5, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 577.] ' [Lib. U. cap. xcrL] 
« [Lib. xii.] Crab. p. 892. • CofDstantlnople. 

p Lib. xii. p. 393. 


Midas and Gordias, which presenre no trace of being cities, biU 
villages little above the common size." 

There were villages of several sizes then, as there are now. 

1. Some very little, such as Zonaras calls /uwoucui,* or such as tho^^ 
mentioned in the constitutions of Isaac Conmenus,* which had but cicoc»^ 
or d€Ka Kcnrvoiftj " twenty or even ten hearths.'* 

2. Some pretty big, as those of the Phocenses in Pausanias, when 
their conquerors had reduced their cities into villages, th tcmfMos ^curAyoar, 
(and stinted them that they might not be too great) which consisted of 
fifty houses. 

3. Some greater, such as Justinian calls luyiaras K&iAas^^ " very Lu]ge 

It would be too tedious to give ^m account of all tho0e paiticiilin 
which are obvious. The synod of Laodicea, which forbade the making 
of bishops in some villages, gives evidence that in such places there 
were bishops, Can. Iv., ov bti cV rais Km/uus Ka\ cv reus X'^P^^ KaSitma^ 
ima'K67rwSf* " bishops are not to be ordained in villages or hamkti." 
This was the only synod in the east that prohibited bishops to be made in 
viUages ; and no wonder, since in those parts of Asia, where the autho- 
rity of the synod reached, there were so many cities, and so dose toge- 
ther, that there seemed no need of any in hamlets; and indeed the 
prohibition was understood of lesser villages, so the Latin version in 
Crab. lib. i. p. 380, qtwd non oporteat in villulis vd in agria comHtMi 
episcopus, or as Leo hath it, in vicuUa' In Zonaras it is such phoei 
Ma fiff 7r\7j3o9 dvBpmirfovj when not enough to make a good congngft- 
gation/ Elsewhere he observes, that it was not needful there should 
be great multitudes, but fitVpac irapouciai Koi ov iroXvirXi^iff, ^'imall 
and thinly-populated parishes," might have bishops, and they were 
allowed cV raU TrapoiKiait rj yovv raU fiucpaig evopUus, in little parishes 
with the consent of him who had the chief seat.^* Those mentioned 
by Nazianzen and Basil were made in the next diocese after this decree, 
and so in other places ; so that this canon was either thus undenrtood, 
or not regarded, or counted not worthy of observation. 

However bishops that were in such country places before tKia synod, 
the words of the canon are plain for it, (roift fUvroi fp^ wpo mi r utfw 
d€VT€s, those who are before this already made bishops in villages and 
country seats) nor does that which follows degrade them, enjoining 
them firjdiv irparrtlv avrv yva>/ii;ff rov iwiaK&rrav rov cV r^ rdXci, '' to do 

• In Cone. Chalced. can. xvil. * Cod. p. 283. • Novel. xzIt. 

' [In Hard. can. Ivii.] • Epi«t. Ixxxv. c. H. 

/ In Cone. Laod. can. Ivil. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. i. p. 480.] 
i In Can. Ix. Cone. Garth. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. 1. p. 692.] 



i^'og without the cogpusonce of the city bishop/' no more than the 
pn^vincial bishops were degraded bj being obliged to do nothing with- 
out him who had his church in the metropolis;" nor he, by being 
6DJoiiied to do nothing without them, ^^cv fijs r&v \otv&¥ yvoifirft. 

For Europe, and the more eastern parts of it, not to insist on parti- 
cular instances, such as Melanicus, a castle in Cedrenus, and Tzurulimi 
in Zonaras, and Bisa or Bizia and Macroatichos in ^milius Probus, 
sod Diabolis, a castle in Macedon, as Nicephorus, and Alalcomens no 
great village of Bceotia in Pausanias, and Cenchrea a bishop's seat in 
Clem. Constit. lib. vii. cap. xlyiii., as the rest are in others ; that 
which is allied against this practice will be a sufficient proof of it, viz., 
the coimcil of Sardica held in those parts, and the only synod in Europe 
for six hundred years after Christ, that did forbid the making of bishops 
in some small towns and villages, if so be it can be counted a prohibition ; 
for however it is in the Greek, yet in the Latin, which is the original, 
the restraint is laid upon foreign bishops, that they shall not erect such 
bishoprics in another province which is not their own, and into which 
they are occasionally sent.^ Thus it runs in the Greek copies (though 
it was not received by the Greeks in Photius's time, if we may believe 
him,) nor known in Africa to Augustine otherwise than as a convention 
of Arians,*^ itfj €^€lyai airkas Ka3t<rrav iwia-Konov €v K&firj tipX tj ^paxd^ TrAct, 
** it is altogether unlawful to ordain a bishop in any village or small 
city." They except such places where there had been bishops already, 
and forbid it to none for the future but such for which one presbyter was 
sufficient, (and it was less than an ordinary parish, for which they then 
thought one presbyter sufficient.*') In Leo's words, there was to be none 
m victdis et possemonibus vel obscuris et solitariis municipiis,' in hamlets 
and country farms or obscure and iminhabited towns. And so there is 
room enough lefl for bishops in large and populous villages. However 
hereby they signify sufficiently, that it was usual before this to have 
bishops in small places. For, according to Justinian's rule, foimded 
upon the wisdom of ancient lawgivers, T6 cnravta>r yiv6fi€vov {Ka36. koi i 
mtkatit Xryct <ro<l>ia) ov rripova-iv oi vofAoBtraif aXX^ t6 y(v6fi€vov a>r initrav 
jcal 6pwn Koi ^r/xnrcvovo-i/ " that which is rare (according to the saying 
of ancient wisdom) legislators do not guard against, but regard and pro- 
vide for what commonly happens." 

In Crete, they tell us, (more than once) there were a hundred bishops ; 
no fewer suffragans must their metropolitan Titus have under him, 
when enthronised there by the apostle; yet Pliny, who writ in Vespa- 

• Cone. Antioeh. Can. ix. * See Crab. torn. 1. p. 331. 

* Contra Cretcon. [lib. iii. e. zxxly.] and Epiat. clxlii. [al. £p. xliv. cap. ill. j 

' Every place that had twelve Cunilies, was to bave a rector, as is decreed by thif lynod. 
' Epiat. IzxxT. cap. li. / Novel, xclv. cap. U. 



objolB time, a little after the apostles* death, found but faity citiee tfa^e, 
(only the memory of sixty more;) and Ptolemy gives an account of the 
same number. So that the far greatest part of Titus's sufiragans, must 
have their thrones in country villages; and the most of the forty called 
cities were little better than villages. Strabo sajrs, CJrete had irXc^ovc- 
ntJXcif," " many cities," but only three of any great note (and one of those 
three lost its greatness before Titus knew it.) It is most like to be 
true which Julius Scaliger makes their character. 

Centum olim eincku <^tero$U meenihut urhe$ 

Reddidit ad pametu iw^teriom dUi. 
Oppida porva lamen reor iUafuiue, §ed aueta 

Quod deest ex reliquis Candia sola rffert.* 

In provincia et ditione Romana aemd hoc loco indicasse mfecerit, 
oppida epiacopali dignitate cohoneatata qtumtumvis exigua ab ItaUs juita 
stylum et phrasim curice Romance civitates nuncupari ; reUqua veto iMa 
dignitate carentia non nisi caateUa vel oppida nominari. " Let it suffice 
to remark here, once for all, that towns invested with the episco- 
pal dignity, and situate in the Roman province and jurisdiction, how- 
ever small they may be, are called by the Italians, according to the 
style and mode of speech appropriate to the Roman court, cities; whilst 
others, which possess not this dignity, are designated but castles or 

In Italy it is known that almost every petty town has a bishop; and 
I cannot discover that there are more bishops now there, than of old: 
in that called in special the Roman province, there are now fewer by 
many than anciently, as, Miraeus tells us, is evident, by comparing the 
old provincial code with the new,^ and all the new erections that I can 
find, (discounting those which are upon old foimdations,) amount not to 
the number of those which are either dissolved or united. And if that 
was the mode of other writers, to call every place a city which had a 
bishop, we need not wonder if they discover to us no more bishops in 
villages ; we must go to some other author to know of what quahtj 
the place was, not to him who, calling it an episcopal seat, la obliged to 
style it a city, though it was otherwise nothing better than a village. 

It is true those small towns (that diocese which had but five hundred 
souls in it was not the meanest of them) though no better than viUaget 

• Lib. X. p. 328. 

* " A hundred cities girt of yore with massive walls imperious Time hM dvlndl*d to « fev. 
Yet were they small towns, I ween, though dignified ; their poverty, thia apait, detert QndJa 

' Notit. Episc. lib. iv. pp. 160, 161. 


^ OUT country towns, pass under the names of oities; but that is 
"fctnae every plaoe which had a bishop was called a city upon that 
^cccmt, though it had nothing else to make it a city, but merely its 
Iiemg made a bishop's seat, as MirsBUs informs us.' 

In Spain the twelfth coimcil of Toledo^ takes notice of one made a 
tiakop in numasterio viUulcBj "in a village monastery," another in 
fuiurhio TdeUmo in eoclesia prastoriensi Sanctorum Petri et Fauli, " in 
tbe praetorian church of Sts. Peter and Paid, in the suburbs of Toledo," 
and of others in cdiia vicis et viUulis similitery " in other villages and 
bamlets in like manner." It is true the bishops there allow it not, 
(though such ordinations might be better justified than their consecra- 
tion of Eringius in the place of Wamba, considering by what means he 
supplanted him ; and they were approved while Wamba had the throne) 
but order it otherwise for the future, yet there is no mention of dis- 
placing any, but only of Convildus, who was made bishop in the 
monastery ; but in this they were singular, since bishops were allowed 
in monasteries both before this 83mod and after. And so these also 
will be a proof of the question in hand, since monasteries were parts of 
a diocese, and also generally less than villages : let me give some 
instances hereof 

Barses and Eulogius had a monastery for their diocese, no city nor 
territory, nrtVcontu cv irdXccof riv6r, as Sozomen tells us, but xf^poTovtjBeyrts 
iv rotr Idiots fumurrrfplois,'' " bishops of no city, but ordained for their 
own monasteries." And one Lazarus also, 6v rpAnov Koi Ad{apos.^ 

To whom we may add those monastics which Epiphanius speaks of, 
one of them a bishop in the desert of Egypt, the other in Mount Sinai, 
iwuntAwtbv lit^fitwoi xtipoBtfrlav, jcal KoBrja-Oai re koI rh. hruTK^nav vpoTTtU 
mt dvrol itrtx^lpow,^ '^ having received the episcopal ordination, used 
thentiselves to ordain and do the work of bishops." 

In the council of Chalcedon, Act. iii. we meet with Helpidius, a 
bishop, Th^mensis monaaterii, " of the monastery of Therma," who gave 
his suffrage amongst the rest, for the deposing of Dioscorus, patriarch 
of Alexandria/ and the same person, or another of his name and title, 
subscribes, amongst other bishops in the sixth cocumenical synod under 

In Theodorus Lector,* Timotheus of C. P.' ordains a bishop in the 
monastery of Studita, after the decease of another who presided there, 
rod ifyoviUvav r^^ it6vris rov arvdirov rcXfvr^(ravrof, ott^X^c TifioSfov 6 ini- 

• Lib. ▼. p. »7. » [Can. iv.] 

« Lib. t1. cap. zzxfT. p. 402. ' Id. ibid. ' Sxpocit. Fidei, p. 109S. / Cone. torn. i. p. 851. 

r Elpidlua Thermensis Monaaterii, in Crabb p. 1026. [Romana vi. in Hardouin.] 

« CollacC. lib. il. < Conatantinople. 



a-Kotros (h rh fiopotrrrffHop,^ In Spain itself Dmnimn is an episcopal aeat, 
locus episcopalis in HispamOj says Ortelius; adding, acepiua ejus membat 
ex coneiliis, '* mention is often made of it in the cotmcils.'' MonasUrvtm 
est apud Isidorum et Honorium unde Martinus episcopus {qui scripsit de 
quatuor virtutibus cardinaUbus) orhmdus, '' In Isidore and Honorius it 
is said to be a monastery, whence Bishop Martin, who wrote of the 
four cardinal virtues, received his title." He tells us also of Hadrian, 
bishop of Niridanum, a monastery near Naples. 

In Britain there were commonly bishops in monasteries, and such too 
as were in subjection to the abbot of the convent, (though but a pres- 
byter) as appears by the synod of Hereford, cap. iv. Ut qnscopi 
monachi non migrent de loco in locuniy hoc estde monasterio in monasterium, 
nisi per dimissionem proprii dbbatiSf sed in ea permaneant obediential quam 
tempore suce conversionis promiserantj^ " Bishops who are monks miut 
not wander from place to place, t. e. from monastery to monastery, unless 
dismissed by their abbot, but shall observe that obedience which thej 
promised at their conversion." And this is one of the constitutioiu 
they made in observance of what was determined by the canons of the 
fathers, qucB definierunt stare canones patrum, as Theodorus, who pre- 
sided there, shows in the preface. 

For the rest, in general, Rabanus Maurus sa3rs, though there were 
fewer bishops at first, tempore vero promovente non solum per dvitata 
ordinati sunt, at (for sed) per singula loca in qutbus nee adeo necessitat 
flagitabatj*^ " in process of time bishops were not only ordained in cities, 
but in particular places where there was no such necessity." 

And so let us come nearer home. I need not tell you how few cities 
there are in Ireland, yet Primate Usher tells us out of Nenius that 
St. Patrick founded there three hundred and sixty-five churches and as 
many bishops. 

Ailerwards the number increased ; muUiplicabantur episcopi, " bishops 
were multiplied," says Bernard, so that when Malachias went into 
Ireland (near six himdred years after Patrick,) an. 1150, Unus eptaeo- 
patus uno non esset contentus episcopo, sed singulce pene ecclesice singuloi 
haberent episcopos,^ " bishops were so multiplied that one diocese was 
not content with one bishop, but almost every parish church had its 

Yea, there was not only one bishop in such a little precinct, but 
more than one, not only in cities but even in villages, as Lanfranc 
writes to Terlagh, then king in Ireland, in villis vd civitatibus pluret 

' Page 188. * Spelm. p. 155. Bed«, lib. iv. cap. ▼. * Tom. iv. p. 14. 

^ Bernard. Vit. Malach. • Baron, ad an. 1089, n. IS. Uih. Relig. of Irish, cap. tUL p. 7». 


And their revenue was answerable, since some of them, as Dr. Heylin 

tells us, had no other than the pasture of two milch beasts.' 

Pass we to Africa. There some (better acquainted with the state of 
the ancient church than those who have the conscience to tell us that 
Iriahops of old were only ordained in great cities,*) acknowledge, bishops 
were so plentiful that every good village must needs be the seat of an 
episcopal church.* 

I need not stand to prove that which is too evident to be either denied 
or concealed ; only this in brief. In five of the provinces of the 
African diocese, Byzacena, Zeugitana, Numidia, Mauritania Ciesariensis, 
and Sitifensis, there were in Augustine's time near nine hundred 
bishoprics, taking those of the Donatists into the accoimt, which we 
have reason to do, since the Catholics decreed, that when the Donatists 
were reduced, those places amongst them which had bishops should con- 
tinue to be episcopal seats, (sane ut illce plebes quce conversce sunt ^ 
DonatistiSf et habuerunt episcopos, sine dubio, inconsuUo condUoy habere 

St. Augustin, in his brief relation of the conference of Carthage, gives 
an account of near five hundred bishops of his side ; for he says the 
names of two hundred and eighty-five were recited, twenty subscribed 
not, suam tamen exhibentes prcesentiamy " although they were present ;" 
one hundred and twenty were absent, quidam eorum senectute, quidam 
infirmitaUj quidam diversis necessitatibus impediti, '* some being hindered 
by age, some by sickness, others by various pressing necessities ;" sixty 
episcopal seats were vacant, seaaginta quibus successions episcopi nondum 
fuerunt ordinati' And he denies not but in the conference the Donatist 
bishops were about four himdred ; elsewhere he makes their number 
more. For he says the Maximinianists were condemned in council by 
three hundred and ten bishops of the other faction, damnaverunt 
in concilio suo Maximinianistas trecenti decern episcopi Donatistce/ 
And one hundred bishops of Maximinianus's party were condemned.*' 
So that the Donatists were not out, plusquam quadringentos per totam 
Africam se esse jactanteSj^ "boasting that they had more than four 
hundred bishops in all Africa.^' 

You see there wanted few if any of nine hundred bishops in this 
province ; but I cannot discover cities there which will make a fourth 
part of the number. Strabo having named about thirty, and divers of 
them destroyed before his time, having pursued his discovery to the 

• Cotmogr. p. 342. » J[creiny] T[aylor], p. 304. 
' H[erbert] Thorndike, Right of Churches, Review, p. 53. 

' Cod. Afric. Can. xcix. vid. Augiistin. De Gestit cum Emerit. torn. vil. pp. 781, 782. 

• Brevis Collat. Prime Diei. / Contr. Epist. Parmen. lib. 1. cap. xi. 

# Id. ibid. lib. i. cap. ir. vid. De Gett. cum Emerit. sec. ix. p. 785, et Contra Donat. pott. Cullat. 
cap. XXX. et Contra Crescon. lib. iv. cap. vi. 

* Contr. Donat. pott. Coll. cap. xxiT. 


lesser Syrtis, concludes it tlitifl, iroXXal d* tM m) SKkm /ura^ wtXix^ai 
oIk S(uu funjfirjg,^ ^' there are many other small cities besides^ not worthy 
of mention." 

After Augustine's death, and the invasion of the country by the 
Vandals, the Africans continued their ancient custom, notwithstanding 
any novel restraint, and made bishops (as appears by Leo's epistle to 
the bishops of Mauritania) in quibusltbet locis, in quibusUbet casteUu, 

itbi minores pUsbeSy minores conventua, " in all sorts of places, in all 

sorts of castles, where the population and assemblies were small," 

where preshyterorum cura suffecerit ih vicuUs poaseasiombuB vd 

obscuris et solitariis municipiia, " presbyterial superintendence was suffi- 
cient in villages or obscure and deserted towns," which Postitutus, 

one of those bishops, liked not, quod nunc in sua dicecesi Postitutus 
episcopus factum esse causatus est,^ " which Postitutus, the bishop, cen- 
siured as now done in his own diocese." 

So that they were not only large villages which the AMcans thought 
capable of bishops. Besides what Leo says, Grennadius, amongst his 
illustrious persons, mentions one Asclepius Afer, in Baiensi territorio via 
non grandis episcopus/' " bishop of a small village in the teritory of Bais." 

Ob}. It is said, though the town was small where a bishop had his 
seat, yet the diocese might be large and extended, and too great for a 
hundred parish priests. And you have an instance of it in AsdepiuB, 
whose chair was in a village, but yet he was Vagensis territorii qjisccpus, 
" bishop of the territory of Vaga," as Johan, de TriUenhaniy De Script 
Eccles. " his diocese was that whole territory."^ 

Ans. They tell us, indeed, the diocese was I know not how large, 
when the town was small ; but we must take their word for this ; we 
never yet could see any proof, any instance of a small viUage, that had 
so extended a territory under one bishop. This is the only instance 
that 1 have met with to give any coloiu: to their assertion ; yet this is a 
great mistake either in them or their author. Trittenham wrote after 
Gennadius many hundred years, anno 1500 ; it is easy to discern whi^ 
should have most regard. Gennadius says, this small village was m 
Baiensi territorio, (where it is like*' (as elsewhere) there were divers 
villages beside ;) he says not that it was the territory of that village, or 
that he was Baiensis territorii episcopus, " bishop of the territory of 
Baiffi." They or Trittenham (1 have him not at hand to tell which) 
change both the word and the form of the expression, and say he mi 
Vagensis territorii episcopus. But suppose, for once, the copy deserves 
more credit than the original. Let Vaga (as they would have it) be 

• Lib. xvii. p. 574. [Ed. Cagaub. p. 1191, B. Ed. Paris, 1620, p. 834.] 

» Epist. Ixxxv. cap. ii. * CaUl. lUustr. Vir. in Jeiom. torn. ix. p. ISJ. 

* Trithem. Ub. U. cap. vii. p. 133, T. T. 305. ' proteble. 


tiiis vku8 rum grandis, and Asclepius bishop both of the village and its 
toritoiy, what shadow of proof have they from Trittenham or any 
other, that this territory was larger than that of an ordinary village ? 
It is trae, villages had ivopLas^ their territories. Zonaras tells us there 
were frapoucUu ^ ipopUu, of several sizes, luiCov^^ and fxUpai. And the 
«nall ov w6kvKkij$€iSy not populous, are divided Wy aypoucucovf koI iyx»piovsy 
then each of them described, dypouuKos, (jmo-iv flycu ras iv ioxariais Kd/j^pas 
Kali SKiyovs tfxovons (p avrais oUovvras at koi ftovoiKia Xryoyrai' eyx^piovg di 
ns aypoig leal K»fAtus irXTftridiovtras koi irXfioyas rovs kotoUovs Ifxovaus.'* 

Since it was but a small village, or no great one, the territory was 
like that of villages which were not great, and so inter /wcpiis, " amongst 
the small," choose which of them you please. 


Come we to their cities : those far the most of them (viz. those that 
were very little, and those that were not great) were but for their large- 
ness like oiu* villages or market towns. 

ndXir is not only a great town, but sometimes a village, frequently a 
place no greater than country towns with us ; yea, many less than some 
of ours have the name, and are called w6k(i5, cities ! For such the word 
is used commonly both in Scripture and other authors. City, Luke x. 8, 
is not only city but town, Matt. x. 11. Acts xv. 21, city there is, 
Matt. ix. 35, not only cities but villages. n6k€is, Luke iv. 83, are 
K»fi(m6k€is, chief villages, Mark i. 38. So Bethlehem is n6kis Ao^td, 
Luke ii. 4, the city of David, but no other than Ko»firj, John vii. 42, 
which Epiphanius takes notice of, and says in one icoXctrcu tr^kig rov 
Aaffid, " it is called the city of David," in the other, Kcifirjp avnjv Kakwai, 
"they call it a village," and gives this reason for it: because it was 
reduced to small compass, and had very few inhabitants.* 

Many instances might be given in the Old Testament : take but two 
or three : Josh. xv. there are thirty-eight towns eniunerated and called 
cities, ver. 21, yet all the cities are said to be but twenty-nine, ver. 32. 
Masius and other expositors remove the difficulty thus, the rest of the 
towns, though called cities, were but villages. CcetercB viUce aut pagi. 

' In Can. xrli. Chalced. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. i. p. 184.] * Hnr. 11. 


So Josh. xix. there are twenty-diree places reckoned by name and 
called cities, yet, ver. 38, there are said to be but nineteen cities ; they 
resolve it as the former, aUa erant nomina vicorum obacuriamm, " the 
others were the names of obscurer villages." So ver. 6, there are four 
called cities, yet those in the 1 Chron. iv. 32, are onxn ; in the vulgar 
translation villcBy in the Seventy-two, jc^fuu, and in that verse ihey are 
called T^S, both cities and villages ; so frequentiy elsewhere.* 

For other authors, Strabo says, that those who did account of more 
than a thousand cities in Spain gave the name of cities to great villages, 
ras fuyakas Kmfias ir6k€is ovofidComf.^ And when Polybius writes that 
Tiberius Gracchus ruined three hundred cities in part of Spain, Possi- 
donius says, that castles were called cities by him, tov^ irvpyavs KoKovprm 
ir6ktLs ; Strabo agrees with him. And Casaubon observes that historians 
oflen do so, Turres scppe ab historiarum Scriptorihua terbium appeLlalioM 
honestarij '* Castles are oflen dignified by historians with the name of 
cities," as cities are often by poets called nvpyovg, fiom whence he 
derives burgus, 

Ptolemy calls Avarum woKiv ^ K»iifip fic<r(^iay/ " an inland city or 
village." In Joscphus, Bethshura is called a city, m^Xi^,' but in the page 
before it is only Kmfirjj '* a village." And Justinian sa3rs of Pityus and 
Sebastopolis, reckoned among the cities in that part of Pontus called 
Polemoniacus, cV <f)pouploig fiaXkov apiBiujriov ^ tr^kftrw, '* they are rather 
to be reckoned castles than cities."* 

And as irSkis is often used for a village or a castle, so very commonly 
for a small town. Bishop Bilson^ tells us, as Doctor Field also,^ that the 
apostle would have the city and places near adjoining to make but one 
church, and that herein they proposed the Jews as their exemplar, who 
had their synagogues in cities, Acts xv. 21. Now in what places the Jews 
had their synagogues (if it were not plain, Matt. ix. 35, that they were 
far from being always great cities) will appear by the seats of their 
consistories ! In cities of less than six score families, they placed the 
consistories of three ; in cities of more than a hundred and twenty 
families, the courts of twenty-three.* And it is well known that many 
of our country towns, with their precincts, have more than a hundred 
and twenty families, and our lesser villages are as great as the cities in 
the lower account. 

In other places, where we meet with cities exceeding numerous, many 
very small towns pass under the name of cities. 

In Egypt, Diodorus Siculus speaks of three thousand cities, not to 
take notice of more than six times as many which, Pliny says, were 

• See Pagnin. Voc. TX. » Lib. iil. p. 112. ' Geogr. lib. v. cap. xtIL 

• Lib. xil. Jud. cap. xlii. p. 416. « Novel, xxvlii. / Perpet Govemment, cap. xk. 
r Lib. v.cap. xxrii. 

• Vid. Maimonidetin Sanhedrim, cap. 1. sec. ▼. and Selden, De Syn. lib. ii. cap. ▼. 


lometime in the Delta. In the tribe of Judah [there were] one hundred 

•od fourteen cities, in half the tribe of Manasseh sixty, and in the other 

tnbes propof tionably. In Crete there were one hundred, therefore called 

Hecatompolis, and so was Laconica called for the same reason,* because 

it had some time one hundred cities in it ; it was but in the whole a 

lerenth part of Peloponnesus, the peninsula being but one himdred 

'ind seventy miles, or fourteen hundred furlongs in length and 

breadth, as Strabo, and four thousand furlongs in circumference, as 

Pdjbius. Paulus JEmilius destroyed seventy cities in Epirus, as Livy,* 

and this was most in one quarter of Epirus, as Strabo tells us. About 

the lake called Pontina, in the ancient Latium, one of the seventeen 

inovinces belonging to Italy, Pliny says, there were twenty-three cities, 

which are more than now in all England. Agrippa in Josephus speaks 

of near twelve hundred cities in Gallia kept in subjection by twelve 

liundred soldiers, when their cities are well nigh more in number.*^ 

Instances might be multiplied of cities that were but like our market 
towns, or no larger than villages. Cities they had of old little bigger 
than some houses, as that whicI^Nero, in Suetonius, auream nomi- 
muntf^ "called the golden palace;" the buildings about his fish-ponds 
irere like cities, says that historian, circumseptum cedifidis ad urhium 
tpeciem. Yea, long before they came to the magnificence or excess of 
Nero, and were content with less buildings, yet amongst those they had 
divers comparable to cities. In Sallust's time, Domos, says he, atque 
villas cognoveris in urhium modum cediJicataSy " you may see villas built 
like cities." And aflerwards some private houses exceeded the dimen- 
sions of cities, so in Seneca's time and complaint, miserum si quern 

delectet cedificia privata laxitatem urhium magnarum vincentia/ 

^ Alas, that men should boast of private houses exceeding cities in mag- 
nificence !" And yet they counted it an excessive great house which 
took up above four acres, as would seem by that of Valerius Maximus, 
Angusti se habitare putat cujus domus tantum patet quantum Cincinnati 
mra patuerunt, " A man thinks he is pressed for room, if his house is 
only as large as the farm of Cincinnatus," when three (as he had said 
before) of his seven acres were gone. 

Emporia, a city of the Greeks, in Spain, was less than half a mile in 
compass, by Livy's account, totem orhem muri 400 passus patentem habe- 
hat/ the whole compass of the wall was but 400 paces. Phaselis, an 
episcopal city in Pamphylia, contained not so many souls as Pompey's 
ship (when in his flight, after Caesar's victory, a small company and 
vessel was counted his security) if we believe Lucan.*^ 

• Strab. lib. vlli. [Ed. Casaub. p. 557, B. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 363.J 

• Dec. ▼. lib. T. • De B«n. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xri. [Ed. Oxou. 1720, p. 10B7, lin. ^.} 
' Lib. zxxi. In Nero. ' De Beneflc. lib. vli. cap. x. 

Dec. It. lib. iv. / Lib. yHi. [▼. 25».] 


Te primum parva Pkaulig, 
Magmmt adii, mee U mehA vetat iacote, rmra 
Eidtatuimqut dowuu populmt wu^forque earhue 
Quam tua htrbafuit.* 

Cucusus a city (Uie civility of whose bishop, Chrysostom, when he 
was there banished commends) was not so good as a market towDi 
fMTTc ayopav, fjLfjrt &vmp l^^* 1 fr6kis,^ " the city possesses no market-place, 
or bazaar.'* And Sasima, where Nazianzen revised a bishopric, wai 
no better, if you will believe his character of it, though it pass for a 
city ; he counted it but angustatn viUulanij " a very small village." 
Nazianzum, where his fatlier was bishop, and from whence himaelf ii 
denominated, did not much exceed it, being nokis tvrtkfis, " a mean city," 
in Socrates,^ M^p^, " small," in Sozomen.^ Aradus in Strabo, and Anta- 
radus in Pliny, were cities of seven iurlongs ; the whole island of Andoi 
was no larger, not so great as many of our country towns. 

To proceed more distinctly, for better satisfaction herein ; (where a 
little observation might prevent great and conmion mistakes abont 
ancient bishoprics.) There were cities of several sorts and dimenaioiu; 
those that were six furlongs in comp&s or under are called ir6ktu lUKfOi, 
such was Pa^nium in iEtolia, a city, but not great, says Polybini, 
being less in circumference tlian seven furlongs, tkarroif y^ ^ hnk 
arabiiov.^ Those which had above six furlongs in circuit, to twelve or 
thereabouts, pass as iroKtis fifrpim, not very little or great, but of an 
indifferent size ; so Antioch upon Meander is fierpia iroXir, in Strabo.^ 
Such was Jessus in Polybius, to bi fx€y€0os rrjs irSKtis «<rri dtxa amlka,^ 
" the size of the city is ten furlongs." Those which had sixteen iurlongi 
in circumference, or near it, and so upward, were counted great cities, 
frdXctr peyakai : for some of their prime cities (the metropolies of coun- 
tries well stored with cities,) were no bigger. Nice is, in Strabo, the 
meti'opolis of Bithynia, and so it was in Ammianus Marcellinus^s time, 
long afler,^ yet it was but sixteen furlongs in compass, cjucatdcjcaaradior^ 
nepLpoXos.^ No larger was Famagusta, the chief city in Cyprus, built 
in the place of Constantia, the ancient metropolis of tliat island.* About 
that bigness was the great and famous Tyre of old, before it was taken 
by Alexander : for he, having joined it to the continent, and upon iti 
recovery not content with its ancient bounds, had much enlarged it, }tt 

• " Thee first, little Phaselifl, the great man api>roachefl, and thy ^est, and the f 
poTerty uf thy dwclling»j and his cre», Inrgcr than thy whole popuUttion. are little adaptci I 
banisli thy fears." 

• Chrys. Epist. xiii. "^ Iliht. lib. iv. cap. x. ' Lib. ri. cap. XTi. 

• Lib. iv. leap. Ixv.] p. 32y. / Lib. xiii. [Ed. Cosaub. p. 935, A. Ed. raris, 1C20, p. 6*.] 
t Lib. [x\i. cap. xl.] p. 731. » Lib. xxvl. cap. i. < Strab. lib. xii. 

> Sands. Trav. p. 219. 


VB8 it but twenty-two fiirlongs in compass, as Pliny." And Sidon was 
of the like size, Tyre being Mfukkos avri koL fUytOos.^ New Carthage, 
flie principal city in Spain, while the Carthaginians bore sway there, 
Vis but twenty iurlongs in compass when largest ; it might be less 
; ftan sixteen when contracted, as Polybius, not long ailer its erection, 
[ mjs it was.^ 

Consequently, their lesser cities were but like ordinary villages, (we 
kve many as large, not less than four or five iurlongs in circuit.) Their 
E liddle sort of cities were answerable to oiu* market towns or boroughs, 
: (ve have some that may compare with their great cities,) or like their 
iuger villages, such as Justinian noted in Pisidia,' and in Lycaonia.' 
OQch were Lydda, in Palestine, KcufAtj irdXccar r6 fiiytOos ovk mrMovtraf '^ a 
village not less in size than a city " as Josephus reports it/ or like their 
lifiniriff>fir, *' village-cities,^' as Amorea, in Strabo.^ 

Those villages, by being walled, or having bUaia rrjs ir<JX««y, piivileges 
fif cities granted them, became cities without further enlargement. And 
•o this sort of cities (far the most numerous) were but walled or privi- 
leged villages ; therefore (to note this by the way) they that grant 
Ififlhops to have been in those cities, (which who will deny ? whereas 
lew else in comparison had bishops besides those,) leave themselves 
^thout reason to deny bishops to viUages ; unless a wall or something 
■8 inconsiderable could be a reason, why one should be capable of them, 
and the other not. 

Bethalaga, a village so called by Josephus, but Jonathan having 
walled it, immediately after called it a city.* Armena, in Paphla- 
gonia, was an unwalled place, till the inhabitants in their wisdom encom- 
puaed it with a wall to keep them warmer, and that may be the reason 
why to Strabo, Ptolemy, and Stephanus it is a village, to Pomponius 
lida, Pliny, and Solinus, it is a city, as Ortelius observes. So Majuma, 
the port of Gaza being honoured with the privilege of a city, for its 
Ibrwardness in the Christian profession, of a village became a city, says 
Soxomen ; but being deprived of the privileges by Julian, it was turned 
again into a village.' And the difference being no more betwixt these, 
Aat may be the reason why the same place by divers writers is called 
both a city and a village. Cenchrea to Stephanus is a city, to others a 
Tillage.* Yea, this is sometimes done by the same author ; as Strabo 
calls Nelias and many other towns both cities and villages in the space 
of three or four lines.' And sometimes both words are joined in one, 

• Lib. V. cap. xix. ' Strab. lib. xvi. < Lib. iii. p. 109. 

^ Korel. zxiv. ' Novel, xxv. / Antiq. lib. xx. cap. v. p. 603. 

r Ub. xU. [Ed. Casaub. p. 864, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 576.] 

« Antiq. Jud. Ub. xiU. cap. i. p. 429. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 557. lin. 45.] 

< Lib. ▼. cap. ▼. * Strabo, lib. viii. [Ed. CaMiub. p. 567, B. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 869.] 

' Lib. ix. p. 868. 


and one place hatb both names at once, and is called jcM/AoiroXir, " a 
village city," a city because it wants not the bigness of this sort of 
lesser cities ; and a village because it was not walled or privileged as 
cities used to be. 

That there were and ought to have been bishops in small cities, if it 
be not evident already, may be further manifest divers ways. There 
are particular instances of it, and great numbers might be produced, 
but I will but instance a few episcopal seats, which were either veiy 
small or not great. Abidus is parva habiUUio, *^ a small settlement," is 
Strabo." Tanis is irdkixvrfj " a small city," in Josephus.* Gerse wiAw 
fUKphy " a little city," in Sozomen.*^ Ascalon is iroKitrtia av lUytu* Joppt 
and Dora are iropvfiaria irapdkia, ^' little port towns," in Josephus/ Dolicfae 
is ndkix^ /**«P«» " a very small city," in Theodoret / Gynna is vo^x"h 
*^ a small city," in Stephanus, bishop of it in the council of Nice. 
Hellenopolis, Basinopolis, and Petnea, in Lazica, villages turned into 
cities, one by Constantine, the other by Julian, the third by Justixiiaii. 
Zeugma, a little tOMm in Cicero, Hypepe, of which Ovid, 

Sardibtu hinc illine parvh penitur H^pepiiJi 

with many others. 

It is taken for a rule, that where there was a defensor civitcUis, there 
was a bishop ; but Justinian appoints such a defensor, which he callt 
tKdiKoSf in every city, enjoining the presidents of the provinces to pre- 
pare such officers, Kaff iKaa-njv troXti^,* and expressly not only of tlie 
great cities, but in the less, appointing what they should have for everj 
decree ; in a great city more, in a less city less ; and there is a law in 
the code, that every city should have a bishop. So it was decreed by 
Leo and Authemius, cicaony noKis idiov hriaKotrov ^X^'^'^j ** let every city 
have a bishop of its own," without exception of little or great, but onlj 
two, Tomis and Leontopolis (which afterwards had its bishop, and Tomii 
before) so that none but those two being exempted, the privilege in 
Europa a part of Thrace, for one to be bishop of two cities, (which 
found some advocates in the council at Ephesus,') was not now conti- 
nued, otherwise the four cities there mentioned would have been within 
the exemption. 

The ancients who imderstand bishops by the apostle^s presbyters, 
Tit. i. ver. 5, understand also the apostle's order to reach every city, 
without exception of small or great, so Chrysostom ;* icar^ irOUf, is with 

• Lib. xvii. * De BeUo Jud. [lib. Iv. cap. xiil.] p. 903. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 1S08, UB.1S-] 
' Lib. vlU. cap. xlx. - Slrabo, lib. xvi. [Ed. Caaaub. p. 1101, A. Ed. Paria. ISM, ^ TSf-l 

• Aniiq. lib. xiT. [cap. vii.] / [Lib. ▼. cap. It.] 
t [Metam. lib. xi. verse 152.] « NoveL xv, 

' [Supplex libel], ab Eupressio Ep. Byges ct Arcndiapolis et Cyrillo Kp. Coelenai nnct. Syi. 
oblal. Cone. Ephes. Actio, vii.] » in Tit. HomlL L 


lam Koff iK&xrn\v inSXtv, '' in each city/' p. 386, and so again, p. 887, and 
Dieophylact after him. 

The ancient practice was answerable, in Cyprian." Jampridem per 
mnes provinciM et singulas urbea instituti sunt episcopi ; since in all the pro- 
nnces and every one of the cities bishops were instituted. And Origen 
mp this was done too cv iK&arji vr<$X€i/ ^* in each city.** It is true there 
las none in some lesser cities, but there were none also in some greater; 
' the reason was, not the smallness of the place (as appears by their 
Baking bishops in villages) but the want of Christians. 

This premised, we may best judge of the apostle's meaning by the 
import of the phrase : He would have a bishop, Karh. m^Xtv, in each city, 
msf the ancient Greek expositors ; in every city, say our translators ; 
in each of the cities of Crete, say our learned prelatists, not one of the 
himdred cities there excepted. Now the word v6kis (and what is equi- 
Tilent to it) is, we see, used by the best authors, sacred and profane, to 
denote both a city and a village. And so much ground we have to 
conclude, that the apostle would have such bishops (as were then insti- 
tated) not only in cities but in villages. However it cannot with any 
reason be questioned, but that the apostolical intention was for bishops in 
places no larger than our boroughs or market towns, (since their middle 
aort of cities were but such as these for largeness or popidousness:) 
jea, in places no greater than ordinary villages, seeing their lesser cities 
were but of the bigness of these, and, consequently, that the apostles de- 
signed the bishop to be generally no more than the rector of a country 
parish, and his diocese commonly no larger than the circuit of a country 
town or village ; this was to be their ordinary stint, because these two 
sorts of cities (such as were either little or not great) were commonly to 
be their sees, and no other, but rarely ; these being so very numerous 
that cities which were great, were rare and few in comparison, as might 
be further showed by many instances. Campania in Italy was a region 
ennobled with cities, being there so thick set, as they seemed to be one 
continued town, fuJas it^K^as 2^tv iraptxovras/^ and yet all were but little 
tO¥ms, besides Capua and Tianum, rh y6p SXXa irokixyia,* So in Laconia, 
where were anciently a hundred cities, in that geographer's time but 
thirty, and all small towns but Sparta. The kingdom of Eumenes, left 
him by his father in a part of Asia, (as well stored with cities as 
any in the world,) besides Pergamus, the metropolis, consisted but of 
such places, as Polybius in Suidas calls \ira n6Ki(rfidTiay " small forti- 
fied places." To add no more, Crete is the most pertinent instance, 
seeing the text alleged concerns that island, and the patrons of episco- 

• Epist. m. (al. 55.) • Grig, contr. Gels. Ub. viii. p. 4S8. 

' Strab. Ub. ▼. ' Face 17S. 


pacj make it the measure and pattern to other countries for the order- 
ing of bishops. We are often told, that when Titus was there it had a 
hundred cities," and that by the apostles* appointment he was to ordsin 
as many bishops there. Now Strabo, who wrote immediately before, 
(viz., in Tiberius' reign,) finds but three very great cities, Gnossos, 
Gortyna, and Cydonia,^ and Cnossus then shrunk into a little town, not 
six, besides these, thought worthy by him to be named; the rest must 
either be very little, or not great, either like villages or our fiurer 
country towns. Such dioceses as these can afford, they must be con- 
tent with commonly, who will be regulated by an intention of tiie 
apostle discoverable in this place. 

For one bishop in a great city there was ten, sometimes twenty, some- 
times more, in these lesser towns ; and more there had been, if the 
ambition of following ages had not, with a nan obstante, " notwithstand- 
ing," to the apostles' rule, judged a small place unbeseeming the hononr 
and greatness of a bishop. Hence some places were wuved as too littk 
to be bishoprics ; and in some such places where they had been 
settled they were extinguished ; and in other places they were nnited. 
So Phulla was united with SugdeDa, and Sotyriopolis with Alama, u 
Callistus tells us ; and too many to be specified in other parts. Let one 
instance suffice, lu Sardinia the many bishoprics sometimes^ there wen 
reduced to seven ; the bishopric of Bisaris being joined to that of 
Olgarium, St. Justa to Arboria, Phausania to Emporcas, that of Torrif 
Libyssonis to Sassaris, that of Turris Alba to Eusellis, and no less thin 
foiu* or five to Calaris. And by such means as these forementioned, Ire- 
land, which had three hundred and sixty-three bishoprics about anno 431, 
the number of which was still increasing till the thirteenth age, came 
in time to have but fifty, afterwards thirty-five, and now but nineteen. 
Yea, in Italy, where bishops are yet so niunerous, there have been 
many bishoprics extinguished, and many united, and yet in Italy every 
baggage town hath a bishop, saith our learned Reynolds. 

But this was in the more degenerate and corrupt ages of the church ; 
there is no council for many hundred years after Christ [which] forbidf 
bishops to be made in the Iciist cities, but only that of Sardica, anno 347. 
I will not say that many bishops there were Arians, though the oriental 
prelates present there showed themselves immediately after at Philip- 
polls ; and the Arians were branded for not being contented with small 

« Bfp.] H[all], Episc. by D!t. Right. " Crete, a populous island, and stoTcd with no ten that 
hundred cities, whence it had the name of ^KaT6/Liiro\if." Dfr.] H[aniraondl, Vlnd. p. 116. "Tlt»- 
a whole Island which had a hundred cities in it, and was there placed that he might ordain 1 
under him in each of those cities." p. 100. " In Crete there was certalnlj manj citiet; 
mentions a hundred, of all which he was made bishop, that under him be might c 

* Lib. X. 'at one time. 


liiahoprics.* Nor will I all^e that this synod was of little authority, 
Bot admitted by the Greeks into the code till the TruUan council, seven 
knndred years after Christ, nor by the Latins some ages after it was 
Ud, otherwise than the adjoining of its decrees to the other canons by 
Dionysius Exiguus, Ferrandus, and Isidorus Mercator, without any 
|nblic authority for so doing, could be accounted an authoritative ad- 
vinion thereof, nor by the African churches, who rejected and would 
M be obliged by its canons for appeals to Rome. Nor need I say, that 
&ia synod is misunderstood, and that the restraint of making new 
I bishops in small places is laid only on bishops of another province ; 
and in a case which rarely if ever occurs, (viz. when aU the bishops in 
I province but one are dead at once) as appears by the canon imme- 
diately preceding, and that clause in this canon. Nee detent illi ex alia 
promncia, &c. There is no necessity to insist upon anything of this 
mtore, since this synod both allows bishops to be continued in any city, 
how small soever, where there was any before, and also to be made de 
novo in any city, for the pastoral charge whereof one presbyter was not 
snfficient. Now one was not sufficient, in the judgment of those times, 
for the cities we here most insist on, viz. those of an indifferent size, 
nor in the judgment of present times for divers market-towns, parishes, 
and some villages with us. Nay, in such cities it requires bishops to be 
made, as being S(iai Trjs ima-KOTnjs, " worthy of a bishopric." It woidd be 
much for our satisfaction, if we could understand punctually* what 
numbers they thought sufficient for one presbyter ; and we may have 
the best direction that can be expected in such a case from Chrysostom, 
who affirms that a cure of one hundred and fifty souls was thought as 
much as one pastor could well, and more than he could without great 
labour, discharge ; his words are, (ninovov fi€v yap koi €Karov dvbp&v koi 
wtirr^Koitra irpoarrjvai fiovovy'^ " It is a very laborious thing for one man to 
have the charge of a hundred and fifly." Upon this account one pres- 
byter was not thought sufficient for a place that contained three or four 
hundred inhabitants ; and these fathers would not deny such a town a 
bishop. There are not many more in some Italian bishoprics in this 
age ; the bishop of Capuccio, when he was concerned to make the most 
pf his flock to the bishop of Paris, at the Trent council, reckoned 
but five hundred souls in his diocese. 

Hereby we may judge what numbers were coimted competent for an 
ancient bishopric. By the decree of a council more solicitous for the 
honour of bishops in the largeness of their sees, than we find any 
fathers or councils for several ages afler Christ ; straiter bounds and 

« Sjrnod. Epist. in Theodor. Hist. lib. ii. cap. viil. and Julius in Athan. Apol. li. [Ed. Col. 
1686, p. 744, torn. I] 
' exactly. * Homil. in Ignat. 


fewer people might be sufficient for an episcopal diocese, than many of 
our country towns can show, when jet all may and do meet together 
for communion. The canon runs thus : '* There shall be no bishop in 
a city so small as one presbyter may be sufficient for ; but if the 
people be found to grow so numerous in a city, (viz. that one presbyter 
is not sufficient for them, as the coherence' makes evident) let there 
be a bishop there, as being worthy thereof." And in all reason this ii 
to be extended to villages as weJl as cities, when the people are as 
numerous in one as the other. And this council of Carthage decrees 
it indefinitely; wherever the people are numerous enough (withoot 
limiting this to cities) if they desire it they shall have a bishop, with 
the good-will of him that presides in the place.^ Dei populum^ st tmM- i 
plicatua deaiderabit proprittm habere epiacopum, ejtia volunUUe in cujm - 
potestate est dicecesis habere epiacopum debere. In fine, the canon forbids 
bishops to be made only in the least of these cities we are now speaking 
of, and these were but few, (as the great towns were also oompaied 
with those of a middle size ;) and so it is of little concernment to the 
business before us, if either Greeks or Latins had thought themselTes 
concerned to observe it. 

However those cities, lesser or greater, the greatest of them being no 
bigger than villages with them, and market towns with us, there will 
be no question but they contained no more than what might meet 
together for Christian communion ; and these being so many that the 
number of great cities was very inconsiderable compared with them; 
what we assert concerning the smallness of ancient bishoprics is clear, 
for incomparably far the greatest number of them. 


There may be more question about the great cities, which we shiD 
now consider. Those were counted great cities which had sixteen or 
twenty furlongs in compass or thereabout. Pelusium, a metropolis d 
a great part of Egypt, was twenty furlongs in circumference, as Strabo.' 
Phocaia, one of the greatest cities in ^olis, had no more, as Livy de- 
scribes it, 2400 passuum murtts amplectiturj^ " the wall embraces a space 

• context. » Cone. II. Can. v. • Lib. xvlf. * Dec. hr. lib. tfl. 


of two miles and two-fifths.** Sebast^, built by Herod, designing to 
make it comparable to the most eminent cities, was no larger, ctteoo-ft 
rMioiSj^ " twenty furlongs.** Byzantium was made by Constantine as 
kige, at least, as two great cities, designing to have it ayripptmw r^r 
M^apr, '' equal to Rome,** as Zosimus tells ;* yet whereas it had been reduced 
to a Tillage by Severus, as Herodian says f the enlargement he gave it 
WM no more than the addition of fifteen furlongs to its former compass, 
ai the said Zosimus shows/ But hereof we have given instances before. 
Such great cities (seeing the largeness assigned them was thought 
sufficient to make one a metropolis) were very few. For whereas there 
WBS wont to be but one metropolis in a province, yet sometimes in 
one province there were twenty or thirty or forty more inferior cities 
under it, (Cone. Chalced. Can. xii. declares it to be against the eccle- 
siastical rules to have two metropolies in one province.) Lesbus was 
tlie metropolis of thirty cities, as Strabo says.' In Phrygia there were 
above sixty cities, yet the same author mentions but two that were 
great, Laodicea and Apamea. In Laconica there were thirty cities in 
his time (a hundred before) but all opidula, " little towns,** save Sparta. 
Some of these great cities had but few inhabitants. Philadelphia, 
(which some will have to be a metropolis,) pauci incolunty ^* few in- 
habit,** says Strabo, being tnurfi&v vXriprjs/ ** subject to earthquakes,** 
which reason reaches Sardis, and Apamea, and Laodicea, and all the 
region near it; likewise Hierapolis, Magnesia, Tralles, and all the cities 
near Meander, which are not few, both in Phrygia, Lydia, and Caria.' 
In Tiberius* reign, twelve famous cities were destroyed in one night by 
an earthquake in those parts.* It is probable Neocsesarea was not very 
populous, considering what Theodoret reports of those banished thither 
by Valens, (who was not wont to choose desirable places for the punish- 
ment of such;) they all died there in a short time through the hardships 
of the place, says he.' And it is strange if Caesarea in Cappadocia were 
very populous, since the situation of it, as described by Strabo,* was 
neither safe, nor pleasant, nor fruitful, nor healthful, an unwalled town, no 
way so accommodated as to attract inhabitants. Of Heraclea, one of the 
most considerable cities in ^tolia, Livy tells us, there was a castle by 
it, as well inhabited, quce frequentius prope quam urbs habitabaturJ 

A great city was counted sufficiently populous if it had six, thousand 
inhabitants. So Herod, ambitious to have Sebast^ not inferior to the 
most renowned cities, made it 120 furlongs in compass, and took care 

• Antlq. lib. xt. cap. xL [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 690, lin. 47.] « Hiat. Ub. ii. 

• Lib. ill. ' Lib. U. p. flS. ' Lib. xiii. 
/ [Lib. xilL CuMb. p. 9S1, B. Ed. Paris. 16S0, p. 828.] 

• Vid. Strab. lib. xiL p. SSI— 194. [Ed. Cawab. p. 866, tq. Ed. Paria. 16S0, p. 578, iq.) 
« Tacit. An. lib. ii. cap. xItIL < Hlat. Ub. It. cq». xx. 

« Lib. xlL [Ed. CaMub. p. SIS, A. Ed. Paris. ISSO, p. 5S8.] ' Dee. It. Ub. vi. 



that it should have six thousand inhabitants.' Placentia and Cremona, 
most eminent cities, had each of them six thousand persons decreed bj 
the Romans for their inhabitants.* Thirty-seven cities yielded to Alex- 
ander near Poms' country, some of which had five thousand, some ten 
thousand inhabitants.^ And that conqueror building a city near the 
river Indus, which he called (after his own name) Alexandria^ thoaghl 
it sufficiently peopled with a thousand persons.' 

So that many of their great cities contained no more than might 
come together in one assembly, as Capernaum, Mark i. 22; Antioch in 
Pisidia, Acts xiii. 44; and Csesarea in Mauritania, and Synnada in the 
Lesser Asia, of which more afterwards. 

As for cities that were greater and more populous, where the inhabitp 
ants were more than could assemble in one place ; yet in them the 
Christians for some ages, were no more than might so assemble, the 
inhabitants consisting most[ly] of heathen, with Jews, and those of the 
Christian profession that were not of the communion, nor would assem- 
ble with the bishop of the place. I can but meet with one city, small 
or great, for three himdred years aft;er Christ, whose inhabitants were 
generally Christians, and that was Neoccesarea, of whose conversioa 
Gregory Thaumaturgus was the instrument; he found bat seventeen 
Christians in it, but turned the whole people, Skw rhw Xao^j unto Grod, 
says Basil/ He knew no more than seventeen that persisted in their 
old superstition, says Nyssen/ But for all this, it appears not that the 
Christians in that city (which we saw before was not very populous) 
were more than could meet together in one place: for Gregoiy built no 
more than one church there ; yet having so much liberty, there beii^ 
no persecution from his time till Dioclesian, and so much enoouiage- 
ment from the people's zeal and forwardness to assist him with their 
persons and purses in that work, (iraynov xphf^^ '^ (r»fuun vwavpyovpnm, 
as Nyssen tells us,) he would doubtless have erected more, if more 
had been needful. 

There is another city in Phrygia, whose inhabitants are said to have 
been all Christians,' and all with the city burnt together; but this wis 
in the fourth century, in the persecution raised by Maximianus, abort 
anno 312, and all these were no more than could meet in one place; thqr 
had but one church, (when being all of one mind they might have hsd 
more, if more had been necessary,) and that one called canventkubrnj 
" a conventicle," by Lactantius, who thus represents the same thing 
vfith Eusebius, Alujui ad occideiidum prcecipiUs extiterunt, &icut iimi«« 
Phrygia qui universum populum cum ipso pariter conventicuh concrt- 

• Jo«5ph. Bell. Jud. lib. I. cap. xvi. * Sjmpc Chronol.pC. ▼. f. 111. 
« Justin, lib. xiL cap. vii. a Curtiui, lib. viii. cap. xx. * Strab. lib. »▼. 

• [De Spir. Sane. cap. xxix. Ed. Paris. 1730, torn. ill. p. 62, C] 

/ Vit. Greg. r Kuscb. Hist. lib. viii. cap. XXT. 


flMotty' '' Some rushed headlong to the work of slaughter, as one in 
Phrygia, who burnt a whole populace in their conventicle.'* 

How predominant heathenism was in* the cities of the Rcmian 
cnpire before Constantine, may be collected from what we find con- 
eoning it in and after his reign. If it was spreading and prevalent 
idien the power of it was by him so much broken^ it will be easy to 
infer what it was before. And that we may afford the greatest advan- 
ti^ to Christianity, let us instance principally in Palestine and the 
eonntries next to it, where the Grospel first moving, may in reason be 
tkfoght to have made the greatest progress. Sozomen informs us, there 
were in Palestine, after Constantine*s death, both villages and cities 
eseeeding heathenish, Syap iXkfiyiCovaat.^ Particularly Gaza, Ascalon, 
Sebttst^, were much addicted to idols in Julian's time.^ Anthedon also 
md Raphea.' And both at Sebast^ and Neapolis, Jephtha's daughter 
mm worshipped as a goddess, and an annual holiday kept in honour of her, 
ii Epiphanius tells us.' All these were episcopal cities ; and Gaza, the 
greatest in those parts of that country next to Jerusalem, [is] stigmatised 
by all as most heathenish/ so that Jerome styles it urbs gentiUum, a " city 
of heathens,'' and calls the inhabitants the adversaries of God, which 
insulted over the church of Christ.' And Ciesarea seems not much 
better, being so forward to comply with Julian.* Both that city and 
Scythopolis are noted by Athanasius as generally deriders of the mys- 
teries of Christianity.' And if the heathen in Jerusalem were not 
mimerous, how came the temple of Venus to stand there so long, and 
the images of Jupiter and Venus to be worshipped with sacrifices 
and oblations, in such places too as could not but be most intolerable to 
Christians, the place of Christ's resurrection, and where he was cruci- 
fied?* Where the citizens were generally Christians, they were not wont 
to endure this, though in more tolerable circumstances. At Neocsssarea, 
Njsaea tells us, the Christians there prevailing overturned their altars, 
and their temples, and their idols.' 

But enough of Palestine. We may be briefer with her neighbours. 
For Phoenicia, that of Theodoret may serve, who says, they were mad 
upon their idols and idolatrous rites,"* and this Observed by Chrysostom, 
in Arcadius's reign, with which that of Jerome agrees, Phcmicium gerUea 
diabohtm pati,* '* the nations of Phoenicia are possessed by the devil." 

• Iiutit. lib. V. cap. [11.] * Hilt. lib. ill. cap. xiii. 

« Theod. Hist. lib. iii. cap. yl. ' Socom. lib. v. cap. viil. lib. vii. cap. xt. 

• H«r. Iv. [n. 1.] Ixxviii. [n. 28.] 

/ Socom. lib. ▼. cap. iii. Theodor. lib. iii. [cap. vi.] [Ed. Reading, cap. yii.] 

# Vit. Hilaiionia. [Ed. Paria. 1706, torn. iv. part U. p. Ixxx.] 
A 80S. lib. ▼. cap. xz. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxi.] 

* Epiat. ad Seiapion. * Soent. Ub. i. cap. xili. 
' Vit. Oreg. • Hiat. lib. ▼. cap. xxix. 

- Lib. U. Contra JorlnUuMtain. [Ed. Paris. 170S, torn. iv. pars U. p.l97.] 

N 2 


Pass we to Syria. In Heliopolis, an eminent city, there was a bishop 
in Constantine's time,** and yet the inhabitants were all idolatrous, as 
Peter of Alexandria, in The6doret, tells us,^ and tAp ipoiKowr^p ov^tf, 
not one of them would endure to hear the name of Christ ; so that 
this bishop had a smaller church than Ischyras, who had but seven 
that assembled with him. Arethusa was not much better furnished with 
Christians, as appears by the imiversal concurrence of the people, men, 
women, and children, in the torturing of Marcus (who had been many 
years bishop there) because he would not re-edify their idol-temple.* 
At Apamea, in Theodosius^s time, (and this was a metropolis,) the mul- 
titude was only restrained through fear of the soldiers, from hindering 
the demolishing of Jupiter's temple, and the execution of the emperor's 
order for that purpose.' The inhabitants of Emesa (another metro- 
political city) turned the Christian church, newly built, into a temple for 
Bacchus, in Julian's time, erecting in it for their worship a ridiculous 
idol, avd/x$yvyoy ayakfjM,' Nor was this the unhappy temper of some 
particular places only, as appears by that of Sozomen ; both that which 
is called Coelosyria, says he, and the upper Syria, except the city of 
Antioch, was long before it came over to Christianity/ And at Antioch 
itself, the heathen in Valens's time publicly celebrated the idoIatioiiB 
rites usual in the worship of Jupiter, Bacchus, and Ceres, and that in 
the open street, without fear or shame, in a high rant.' In Arabia, 
Moses being made bishop there in Valens's time, found very few Chris- 
tians, Kofiidrj oklyovs ;* but how few soever he found, he was more happy 
in his diocese than Milles, who being bishop of a city elsewhere, could 
not persuade one to Christianity, and got nothing from them but blows 
and wounds.* 

And now, having viewed all the next neighbours of Palestine (and 
seen their posture towards Christianity) but Egypt ; let us touch there 
also. Memphis, a metropolitical city, yet in Jerome's time it was the 
metropolis of the Egyptian superstition, (on Ezek. ix.) In Antinoe 
there was a bishop, but he had fwXa oXlyovt, very few that assembled 
with him ; the reason was, the inhabitants of the city were Gentiles.* 
The island into which the two Macarii were banished imder Yalens was 
worse peopled ; it had not one inhabitant that was a Christian, says 
Socrates.' But these were remoter parts, and far from the place where 
Christianity was first embraced, and which had the greatest advantages 

• Euseb. Vit. Conut. lib. Hi. cap. v. vi. ♦ HUt. Ub. It. cap. xx. 

« Soz. lib. V. cap. ix. Tlieod. lib. iii. cap. vi. ' Theod. lib. t. cap. xxL 

' Tbeod. lib. iii. cap. vi. / Lib. ri. cap. xxxir. 

r Tbeod. lib. iv. cap. xxii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxiv.] * Sox. lib. vi. ci^. xxxYili. 
< Soz. lib. ii. cap. xiii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xlv.] 

* Theod. lib. iv. cap. xvi. [Ed. Reading, cap. xviii.] ' lib. ir. cap. xlx. 


iar propagating it. It may be expected that the region nearer 
Alexandria was happier, but it seems not. Bucolia, a region near 
Alexandria, in Ortelius ; jet this is Jerome*s character of it, In BucoUa 
mUhis est Christumorum, '* there is no Christian in Bucolia.'*'* And that 
iMch Hilary fixes on the whole country is not much more favourable, 
Mgyptua idoUs plena eat, et omnigena deorum monstra veneratuVj " Egypt 
IB fall of idols, and worships all kind of monsters for deities.''^ Look a 
IMe further into Africa : Julius Matemus Formicus, in Constantine's 
time, affirms, that a great part of the Africans did worship Juno and 
Venus, he means that part of Africa then known ; and that was it 
in which the Gospel had found some entertainment ; it was best 
noeived in the African diocese, yet one of their councils takes notice, 
that in most maritime places of Africa, and other parts thereof, 
idolatry was in use.^ The most of their cities were maritime, and 
tliose usually most populous. And this may be the reason why there 
was but five bishoprics in the province of Tripolis, when they were so 
numerous in some of the other provinces ; and it is suggested by one 
of their councils. Quia mterjacere videntur harharce gentea,^ ^* those 
ports of the country were taken up with heathens." 

In the west but one instance or two, that I may not be tedious. In 
Torin the heathen were so prevalent that the Christians there were not 
suffered to choose a bishop afler Gratian's decease.' To offer all the 
rest in one ; in Rome itself, in the fourth century, the senate, the 
nobles, and the greatest part of the commons were given up to hea- 
thenish superstitions ; see the Centuriators' evidence for it,*^ and it is to 
me very probable that religion in few or no great cities prevailed at 
that time, beyond the proportion it did at Rome. A little before, it 
seems, the Christians were but a small part of Rome, when with 
general acclamations the people cried out, Ghristiani toUantur duodecieSf 
Chriatiani ntm aint deciea; and the tenth persecution [was] decreed by the 
senate upon those clamours.' And long after this, when Constantine, 
after he had been emperor near twenty years, expressing his detestation 
of the heathenish rites used at the solemnity, for the celebrating of 
which the army was wont to go up to the Capitol, he thereby incurred 
the hatred both of the senate and people of Rome, and was reproached 
therefore in a manner, naph irdm-iov, by all the people,* and the great 
disaffection of Rome to Christianity, expressed unsufferably, in an 
universal reviling the emperor for not complying with their heathenism, 
is assigned as the cause why he thought of transferring the imperial 

• Vit. HiUr. * Comment, in Matth. cap. I. 

« Cod. AMc. Can. ItU. ^ Cod. AAric. Can: xHt. [Hard. Can. xlix.] 

• Greg. Turon. lib. z. cap. xliii. / Cent. iv. [cap. xv.] p. 1484. [Ed. BaiiL 1624, p. 892.] 
r Baron, ad ann. SOI. tact. [13.] • Zoa. lib. U. p. 61. 


seat to another city, as he afterwards did to Bjzantiumy as the same 
historian tells us. And long after it appears the people of Rome were 
generally addicted to heathenish idolatry, by what Jerome obserred 
amongst them in his time, on Isa. IviL ' *' Rome itself^ the lady of the 
world, in every of her houses worships the image of a tutelar dei^," 
that all that come or go out of their houses may be [rejminded of their 
inveterate error. 

And this is the first consideration which induces me to believe the 
Christians were no more in great cities, viz., because the heathen were 
so many, as they were (as is proved) in the fourth century, and much 
more so (as will be granted) in the ages before. 

The Jews also were numerous in the cities; there was no part of the 
Roman empire without multitudes of them ; so Agrippa in his oration, 
dissuading the Jews from war with the Romans, as likely to prove, nol 
destructive to them only in Palestine, but to their coimtrymen in all 
cities through the world," and Strabo, cited by the same author, sayi, 
they were planted in every city ; Josephus himself says as much.* Thus 
it was in the apostles' time; Paul finds Jews and synagogues eveiy- 
where, and they are mentioned almost in every city where he comes, in 
Syria, in the Lesser Asia, in Macedonia, in Greece, in Italy; and so 
continued in Augustine's time, as he declares.^ And Chrysostom says, 
they had their synagogues cv naa-i fr^ktan.* More particularly in 
Palestine, though the calamity which befel them under Vespasian 
was unparalleled, and greater than any nation under heaven had 
suffered, as Josephus afiirms again and again ;' and that the calamides 
of all from the beginning, ri iravrov an aiavos drvxrifiara, were but small 
in comparison of that of the Jews ; thereby giving a clear testimonj 
to the truth of Christ's prediction/ Yet so far as I can obsenre, 
half of the Jews in Palestine were not then destroyed. The same his- 
torian gives a punctual account of all that perished in that war, and all 
the particulars put together amount not to half the number of those 
that he tells us came to the passover. And after[ward8] in Adrian's 
time, they were possessed of above a thousand towns and garrisons: for 
above that number did Severus (Adrian's general) in that expedition 
take and demolish, as Dion relates. And though^ Adrian forbade them 
any access to Jerusalem, (then called by him ^lia;) yet, if we beliefe 
the Jewish records, they had place in all other cities of that countij: 
for Habbi Judah took care that there should be scribes and teachers of 
the traditions in all the cities of the land of Israel; they had their San- 

• Joseph. De Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xyi « Ibid. lib. rii. cap. xxi 

' [De Civitat. Dei, Ub. vii. cap. xxzii.] ' Demonttr. cont. Gent 

' De Bell. Jud. lib. ri. cap. xi. / Matth xxT. r Ariato Pdleoa, in BaMb« Ub. It. eap. vi- 


hedxim in one city after another, and great schools in manj towns.* 
And in Constantine's time they possessed Diocsesarea (anciently Sepho- 
xis) and Tiberias, two of the greatest cities in Gralilee; Diospolis also, 
and many other towns, and were so numerous as to raise a war against 
die emperor.* 

In Chaldea there was not a few myriads of them, says Josephus; in 
£^;ypt a million, says Philo;^ in Cyrene we may conjecture how 
many they were, by the tragedy they there acted in Trajan's time, 
danghtering two hundred and twenty thousand Ghi'eeks and Romans,' 
and some myriads in Cyprus about the same time; yet Josephus tells 
OS, there were more in Syria than any where ;' they were planted in 
erery part of the world, sayd he, but especially in Syria, for its vicinity 
to Palestine ; and there Titus continued them in the possession of their 
ancient privileges, notwithstanding all the importunity of the Syrians 
for their exclusion/ As for their numerousness in greater cities, one or 
two instances may satisfy us. In AJexandria, the slaughter of fifty 
thousand Jews in that city did not extinguish them,' and yet the same 
author seems to intimate, that they were more numerous in Antioch 
khan any city.^ Chrysostom seems to signify, that in his time, they 
were as many as the Christians in that city : for he exhorts each of the 
Christians to reduce one Jew to the Christian profession, Hkootos v/aAt, 
&cJ To conclude this second consideration concerning the Jews, if 
these, with the heathen, took up so very much of the great cities, it 
need not seem strange, that we assign the Christians no larger a pro- 
portion therein, than is before specified. 

There remains another sort of people inhabitants of these cities to be 
taken notice of, whose numbers made the Christian assemblies thinner, 
and the bishops* flocks less numerous. They are such who went imder 
the name of Christians, but were not of the commtmion, nor did assem- 
ble with the generality of them ; such as were called heretics, or secta- 
ries ; these were many, and had bishops of their own, so that there were 
several bishoprics in some one city. 

But I shaU only give a particular account of the Novatians. By the 
multitude of them we may conjecture, what all the rest put together 
would amount to. They had their rise about the middle of the third 
century; and were many from first to last.* They had a diocese in 
Rome itself, with public liberty, till Caelestinus's time;' another in 
AJexandria, till Cyril's time ;* another in Constantinople, where it conti- 

- Vid. D[r.] L[ightfoot], FaUof Jerusalem, 8ec. vH. viii. * So*. Ub. iv. cap. yi. 

• Legat. ad Caium. [Ed. Par. 1640, p. 1 040, D.] ' Dion [Can.] Ub. IzriU. [oap. zxziL] 

' De B«U. Jud. Ub. tU. cap. xxL / Antiq. lib. xU. cap. UL 

f De BeU. Jud. Ub. IL cap. xxi. * Ibid. lib. vil. c^>. xzL 

' Cont. Jud. i. p. 319. * 80s. lib. U. oap. xxx. [Ed. Beading, cap. xxxU.} 

' Soc. Ub. ▼«. cap. Ix. X. [Ed. Readinf, cap. xi. xil.] - Socral. Ub. vU. cap. vH. 


nued with public liberty longer.* They had bishops in all these pkoes ; 
as also in Cyzicus,* in Nic«a,<^ in Ancyra,' in Scythia^' in Nicomedia/ 
in Cotyaeum,' and divers other places in Phrygia; they abounded there 
and in Paphlagonia,* and had Uieir churches in Galatia,' in Mysia and 
Hellespont, as also in Thracia. At Constantinople the same historian 
mentions a long succession of bishops amongst them ; the fifth is Chiys- 
anthus, under whom their churches were more confirmed and enlaiged: 
for he was a person of great place and honour, having been the empe- 
ror's lieutenant in Britain.* Li Rome, Innooentius takes many churches 
from them/ Cslestinus deprived them of more, till which time they had 
mightily flourished at Rome, having very many churches and great 
multitudes of people* 

In the fourth age, as Christians did increase, so were sects and errors 
multiplied. I wiU not be particular herein, my design leading me no 
further into these times than the consideration of the churches then, 
may help us to discover their state in for^;oing ages. I need not show 
how predominant Arianism was in the greatest part of the Christian 
world, ingemuit totua arbisj et Arianum se esse miratus est* *' the whole 
world groaned and wondered to find itself Arian,*^ when it possessed 
the whole orient, having none to oppose it, as Jerome says, but Atha- 
nasius and Paulinus.^ 

Nor how the Donatists prevailed in Africa, when Augustin tells ni 
from Tychonius, that they had a council, consisting of two hundred and 
seventy bishops in the beginning of the fourth age,' and that they were 
in many places more numerous than the Catholics. Nor how the 
Macedonians did abound, who carried away no small part of the people 
to their persuasion, both in Constantinople, Bithynia, Thracia, Helle- 
spont, and the nations round about.? Nor wiU I so much as name the 
other nimierous sects and errors which had their distinct churches and 
respective bishops in several cities, so that there was sometimes four 
or five bishops of several persuasions seated in one city. 

It is probable the church scarce gained more niunbers by the encoa- 
ragement of Constantine than it lost by Arius, and those many other 
erroneous spirits, in which that age (as it every way more d^enerated) 
was more imhappily fertile than any before it. 

To draw this discourse to an issue ; suppose we a city forty furlongi 
in compass, (than which there were very few bigger ;) let us allow half 

* Socrat. lib. vii. cap. xi. « Id. lib. ii. cap. xxx. 

* Id. Ub. iv. cap. zxiU. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxviii.] ' Id. lib. tIL cap. xzrUi. 

' Id. ibid. cap. zlv. / Id. lib. ir. eap. xziU. r Id. Ibid. 

* Id. lib. ii. cap. xxx. < Id. lib. t. cap. xx. 

* Id. Ub. Tii. cap. xU. ' Id. ibid. eap. ix. « Id. iUd. c»p. xf. 

* Jerom. Adven. Lucif. [Page 300. Ed. Parii. 1706, torn. Iv. pan IL] 

* Advera. Jo. Jems. [Ed. Paria. 1706, torn. iv. pan ii. p. 308.] 

p EpUt. xlviU. [sMt. xliii. cap. x.] f Soa. lib. It. cap. xxvi. [Ed. RMdlng, eap. xxriL] 


tereof to hefttheoB, (they had rarely so little in the three first ages ;) 
■flow then a third or fourth to Jews and Novatians, and other sects, 
nd the proportion left the Christians will not exceed the dimensions of 
1 small town, such as some of our market-towns, when yet the inhabit- 
aits, and those also of the villages about it, can and do meet together 
fiv communion. 

But it may be more satis&ctory, to make this evident, in some par- 
tiealar cities ; let us do it in a few of the greater, and some of the 

Berytus was an eminent city, and a special instance of the prodigious 
magnificence of Herod and the two Agrippas, in Josephus ; thought fit 
alio to be the seat of an archbishop ; and yet it had but one church in 
Julian's time, which was then burnt by Magnus, lijv BtjpvTutv 4iutkriaiwf 
^p^aas, it is not one of the churches, but the church of Berytus.* 
1^ was one of the most illustrious cities of the East, the metropolis 
of Phoenicia, and the bishop of it so eminent as [that] he had place above 
all the metropolitans of the orient, next to the patriarch of Antioch. Yet 
Panlinus, bishop there in Constantine's time, had but so many under 
Us episcopal charge (as the pan^yrist in Eusebius informs us^) as he 
could '^ take a personal notice of their souls, and accurately examine the 
Uiward state of every one,'' eirttncon-cw r^r Mordno r&v vfurtpap ^x^^ 

^mpias fKaarw dxpifiat t^oKori f " acquainting himself thoroughly 

With the condition of all those souls that were committed to him," n^ir 

Synnada, after the division of Phrygia into two provinces by Con- 
stantine, was metropolis of Pacatiana. There Theodosius, the catholic 
bishop, in the reign of Honorius and Theodosius junior, persecuting 
the Macedonians, (contrary to the custom of the true church, which was 
never wont to persecute any, as the historian notes, rovro d* aroui otic 
dotfo^ duMcciy t;^ 6pBod6^ tK/ckfja-ia,) Agapetus, the Macedonian bishop in 
that city, on a sudden turns orthodox, and calling together the people 
under him, persuades them to it ; this done, with a great multitude, 
yea, with all the people, fiaXXop dc irayrl rf Xof , he hastens into the 
church,' so that all the people were no more than one church would 

Cyzicus was a great city as any in Asia. Strabo says it might con- 
tend with the chief cities there for splendour and greatness/ Florus 
calls it the Rome of Asia. In Julian's time the greatest part of the 
citizens were heathens, the citizens sending their deputies to him (as 
about other affairs, so) for the re-edifying of their idol temples.' 

• Theod. Ub. iv. cap. zz. 

* Lib. X. cap. hr. 

* Page 179. 

' Page 285. 

' Soccat. Hist. lib. tU. cap.iii. 


i So*. Hist. Ub. T. cap. sir. 

[Ed. Reading, eap. zt.] 


Besides these, and the Jews, nmneroas here as in all other smch citiea 
in these parts, the Noyatians had a church, which Elenaiiis having 
demolished in Constantine's time, Julian enjoins him under great 
penalty to rebuild.' The Arians had a bishop there, tiz. £uno« 
mius.* The Macedonians, the followers of Eleusius, did abound there, 
and it seems were the most considerable part of those that any way 
pretended to the Christian profession.^ Now all these deducted, there 
will not remain for the diocese of the orthodox bishop near so many as 
we may allow him without prejudice to our hypothesis. Yet further, 
it seems all the Christians in this city were no more than could meet 
together in one place, to hear die recantation of £leusius : for he being 
frightened by the threatenings of Yalens, into a subscription to Arianism, 
thought fit, for his own yindication, to declare before them all, the feroe 
that was put upon him, and so he did, irrl vwnht ^aaiuj coram univeno 
populOf* '^ in the hearing of all the people assembled'* iw\ rijs exKhimas' 
*' in the church.** And in an assembly upon such an occasion, we may 
reasonably suppose (if historians had not expressed it) an unirersal 

Constantinople, which I reckon among the greater (if not the greatest) 
cities, because in the beginning of the fourth age it was but in mdHoof 
towards that vastness, which it afterwards arrived at. In Alexander's 
time, designed to be Metrophanes' successor in the bishopric there, about 
anno 317, the Christians were no more than could all meet together; 
so Theodoret informs us, avva^y aitv nacn roit ddt\<f>oi9 tnrriXwim' 
Afterwards, many falling off to Arianism, the remainder made but 
iroiftiffiv fiiKphv, as the same historian tells us.* So that in Yalens^s reign, 
when Nazianzen took the charge of them, a very little house did serve 
them for a church, cV oUiirK<^ tKKktfiruicn,* and Socrates agrees with him 
in the expression.* By Nazianzen many were reduced, and that church 
enlarged, says Theodoret. And Theodosius the Great discountenaneisg 
Arianism, contributed much to the augmenting of it ; yet in the time 
of Theodosius junior, it seems, all amounted to no more than one 
church could contain, if Socrates deceive us not; SXjj inSXir fiU crkXii^ 
iytvero,' " the whole city made one assembly," &c. 

At Ancyra, the chief city of Galatia, besides the Gentiles and Jewi 
there, the Novatians had a bishop," the Semi-arians had a bishop there,* 
the Arians had a bishop also.*' And besides these new sects, a prodi- 

• Soz. Hist. lib. V. cap. y • Theod. Hiit. lib. ii. cap. xxiz. 

' Socrat. lib. Iv. cap. vi. Soz. lib. vi. cap. vUl. ' Socrat. lib. It. cap. xvi. 

' Soxom. li'j. vi. cap. viii. / progreti. r Lib. 1. cap. xir. * Lib. t. cap. TiiL 

< Sos. lib. vii. cap. v. * Lib. iv. cap. i. 

' Lib. [tU.] cap. xxiii. * Sox. lib. viii. cap. i. Socrat. lib. vL cap. xx. 

" Epiphan. H«r. Ixxlii. [n 22.J • Sox. lib. iv. cap. xxir. 


gkms swann of the old sort mentioDed bj Jerome, viz. Gatapbryges, 
Ophite, Borbotite, Manichsi, &c.y by which that church was all rent in 
pieces, aa he complains.' Sets mecum qui vUU Ancyram tneiropoGm 
QolatkBf quod nunc usque sehismatibua dUacerata iit, quod dognuUum 
^arietaiibus constuprataj '< Yoa know as well as I, who have seen it^ 
Iww Ancjra, the metropolis of Galatia, is torn by schisms, and defiled 
with diversities of doctrines," &c. By the state of which city, Baronins 
kcres ns to judge what was the condition of the rest of the cities in 
&e east, which had not such preservatives to keep them from this mis- 
chief, as Ancyra enjoyed under two holy bishops.* 

The like may be said of Csesarea, the chief city in Mauritania, in 
liiich St. Austin desires Emeritus, the Donatist bishop, [that] he might 
there, all the citizens being present, defend his communion.'^ 

At Tiberias, a principal city in Galilee, Epiphanius tells us, that 
Joseph got leave of Constantine to build a church, where there was 
none before ; and accordingly he raised a church, and that but a little 
one, fUKpay tK/cKjia-iop ivirtix'^aas, as also he did at Diocsssarea, or 
Sephiris, and in other cities.** 

At Diocesarea, in Cappadocia, which in Nazianzen is ir<$Xi£ itryakij^ 
" a great city," there was but one church, as appears by his epistle.* 

At Constantia, the metropolis of Cyprus, and other cities of that 
island, there was no plurality of parishes or churches, as Petavius con- 
cludes, in that Epiphanius speaks of them in Alexandria as not else- 
where usual, nor kno¥ni amongst the Cypriots. Uncan duntcusat 
ecclesiam ea^titisse in quam universi confluererU, cujusmodi Cypri urbes 
erant, Unde quod Alexandrice receptum eraty velut popularibus mis 
peregrinum et inusUatum adnotavit Epiphanius/ " There was only one 
church, to which all resorted, as was the case with the cities of Cyprus. 
Hence Epiphanius remarks the Alexandrian custom as being foreign 
and unusual among his own countrymen." 

At Neocaosarea, a metropolis in Pontus, and other cities in those 
parts of Asia, but one church, as appears by the sjrnod there,' which 
the same author observes.* Siquidem initio oppidcmis omnibus par 
esse poterat episcopus; kinc est quod in NeoccBsar. can. xiii. unum 
duntaxat urbis KvpiaK6v nominatur, " in the beginning the bishop could 
serve the whole of the townsmen, hence we see why only one church is 
named in connexion with the city in the thirteenth canon of the council 
of Neoc^ssarea;" and he tells us, plures in eadem urbe tituU, <*a number of 

• Prooem. in Comment, ad GaUt. [lib. ii.] * Ad ann. 873, sec. [xxxiU.] 

« PoMid. Vita August, cap. zir. ' Haer. xxz. [n. U.] p. 186. 

' Ep. zlix. p. 810. / Animadven. in Epiph. H«r. Ixix. n. i. 

r Can. xiii. Mbid.p.281. 


titles in the same city,** was then (when Epiphanins wrote, viz. aboat 
anno 376) either not to be found in other cities besides Alexandria, vtl 
aaltem in paucis, " or but in few." 

I might produce like evidence for others of their greater cities ; but 
no more is needful, since by these (with the other before-mentioned) we 
may judge of the rest ; and the inference ariseth hence advantageously 
for the former ages ; if the bishops' stock were no greater in and 
after Constantino's time, what were they before, when all grant them 
to have less ? 


Come we at last to the greatest cities of alL Concerning these there 
may be the greatest doubt, whether they contained not more Christians 
than we speak of in the three first ages. If we shall bring proof that 
they did not, there can reasonably remain no doubt concerning any of 
the rest. Indeed if our evidence should fail us as to these, yet it would be 
no considerable prejudice to our undertaking : for what are two or three 
too bulky and overgrown bishoprics to the many thousands that ex- 
ceeded not the proportions of our parishes ? But I have not yet met 
with anything to convince me that the greatest of those cities, in the 
first ages after Christ, had more Christians under one bishop than there 
are in some one of our parishes ; but find enough to make the contrary 
seem probable ; which I shall now produce. 

To begin with Rome, which was incomparably the greatest city in 
the Christian world, anno 236, or thereabouts, all the faithful in Rome 
did meet together in one place to choose a bishop in the place of 

Anterus, r&y dd€\<l>&v awdirmp x'^P^'^^'^^^ tP€K€P M, rijf rocXiy<riaff 

€iriK€KpoTTjfUp(ii>v,' Siud & dovc resting upon the head of Fabian, in the 
place where they were assembled, thereupon all the people, tAt wawra 
\a6pj with all alacrity and one consent did place him in the episcopal 
seat. They were no more after anno 250, than could altogether in the 
church importune Cornelius for the re-admission of one of the ordainers 
of Novatian, who entered into the church lamenting, the whole people 

• EuMb. HUt. lib. Ti. cap. xxix. 


interceding for him, irayro^ rov Xaov,'^ They were no more than could 
concur in an epistle to salute their brethren at Carthage, SdkUant vaa 
frcUreSj *' the brethren salute you," say the Romans to those at Carthage, 
rt Ma eccUsiaf " the whole church." They were no more than Come- 
Hos could read Cyprian*s letters to in their numerous assembly ; he 
always read them ampUsmncB pldn, '^ to the people in full assembly," 
and desires him to read that in particular which he then sent, quanquam 

idem Mnetissima atque ampUsaimcB plebi legere te 8miper Uterat 

nostnuf '* although I know that you always read our letters to the most 
holy people in full assembly." They were no more than could all be 
present at consultations about matters of concernment; for such 
matters ought not to be determined (as the Roman confessors write) 
but with the advice of all, Non oportet nisi ut ipse scribis caute modera- 
teque tractari^ consultis omnibus et ipsis stantibus kdciSy ut in tuts Uteris 
et ipse testarisy* *^ the matter ought to be discussed with caution and 
temper, all being consulted, even the laity themselves, who are stanch, 
as is your own view in your letter." They concurred with Cyprian, 
and his way was, hcec singulorum tractanda sit et limanda plenius ratio 
nan tcmtian cum coUegis meis, sed et cum plebe ipsa universa,' " the matter 
must be treated of and settled in detail, in conjunction with, not only 
my colleagues, but the whole people." 

I meet with nothing that makes any show of a probability that their 
numbers were more at that time, but Cornelius's catalogue of officers 
in his epistle to Fabius of Antioch, and the number of the poor, which 
were fifteen hundred/ As for the number of officers, the show will 
vanish, if it be considered that it was the custom of those ancient times 
to multiply officers far beyond what was necessary, yea, so much that, as 
Nazianzen tells us, the officers were sometimes as many as [those] they 
had the charge of, €t(n <rxtd6v rt vXtiovs tj in6a'»¥ &pxovin kot dpiBfi^p,' 
." they are well nigh more numerous than those they govern.*' 

As for the other, how to compute the nimibers of the Roman church 
by the nimiber of the poor, I know no better way than to observe what 
proportion there was betwixt these in other places. Chrysostom, in 
his time, computes the poor at Constantinople to have been half as many 
as all the other Christians there, these dtica fivpiadts, '* 100,000,'' those 
wtvrt fivptddtsj^ " 50,000." If it were thus at Rome in Cornelius's time, 
we may collect the niunber to have been about three thousand. At 
Antioch the same father supposes the poor a tenth part,' where, divid- 
ing the whole into three ranks, he coimts a tenth part rich, and a tenth 

• EuMb. lib. Ti. cap. xliii. « Cyprian. Epist. iU. « Lib. L Epiit. liL 

' Epist. xxvL ' Epist. zzTiii. / EuMb. lib. Ti. cap. xzxTil. 

r Orat. I. « Acta, Horn. xi. p. 674. * Matth. Homil. Uri. p. 411. 


poor, Koi r6 hiiearw ircvTmy rwv ovder tKmt ix^tfnm, miferablj poor (and 
SO come their number to be less) and the rest betwixt both. Now it is 
probable that the proportion of the poor at Rome in the third age was 
nearer the former than the latter of these instances, rather the half than 
a tenth part. For if in Chrysoetom^s time, when Christianity had so 
much reputation, as to tempt the richest to profess it, the poor at 
Antioch was a tenth part ; in all probability, at Rome in time of fierce 
persecution, when few of the rich in comparison reoeiyed the Gospel, 
the poor were a far greater proportion than a tenth. But suppose what 
is not likely, that they were no more, the whole chnrch would but consist 
of about fifteen thousand ; and if one table could not possibly (for those 
times admitted not of conveniences) serve so many, divers of our 
parishes in England are ill provided for which consist of more. Besides, 
all were not commimicants ; and a great part of them of necessity were 
still absent, the sick, the decrepit, the little ones, those that attended 
such, those that looked to their families, and made provision for the 
rest ; a third part may be abated upon such accoimts. Indeed, Corne- 
lius says there, that his people were inniunerable ; but then the ejqtres- 
sion must not be taken strictly for more than could be numbered, 
otherwise we shall make Cornelius speak that which is apparently* fidse: 
for all the citizens of Rome (in comparison of whom the Christians were 
but as it were a handful) were frequently numbered, eveiy fifUi year; 
but understand it as commonly to signify a very great number, and 
those that urge it will have no advantage by it ; ampUssima jM» in 
Cyprian is a full expression of it, who yet are no more than a letter 
might be read to when assembled together. So St. Austin says, in 
Galatia there were regiones innumerabilesf *'*' innumerable regions," and 
Galla Placidia innumeroMea dvitates ItalicB,^ " innumerable cities of 
Italy.'' And the coiuicil of Africa, in an epistle to Celestine, speaks of 
innumerable bishops in synods, (the same word which Cornelius uses, 
dvapidfiijToi, " innumerable,") whereas we find not above three hundred in 
any African synod, not seven hundred in any other ; such a number 
will satisfy the expression which some would strain to their advantage ; 
whereas, if we allow more than twice so many thousands intended bj 
it, that will not make them more than are in some of our parishes. 

Alexandria was counted the greatest city in the empire, next to Rome, 
ftryton; fitra lifp Poi/ii;!/, as Josephus. Strabo calls it the greatest msrt 
town in the world, fjjylarop r^r olKovfuyri£ €fiir6piop, Ammianus Maroel- 
linus calls it verticem omnium civitatum^ " the flower of all cities ;** and, 
when by Ausonius, Carthage and Antioch are preferred before it, that 

• ManlflBstly « De Unit. Ecclet. cap. x. [Ed. Antw. 1700, torn. iz. p. MS, £.] 

« Epiat. ad Theodoi. 


W18, as the same historian tells us, because it was much weakened by 
QTil wars, under Aurelian the emperor. 

Now to show that the Christians were not more there than could 
meet in one place, I shall not insist upon this, that Dionysius, bishop 
tliere in the latter end of the third age, calls that church awttyioyfi, and 
that scrupulous member of it (whose case he is relating to Xystus) rlr 
rfir <nfpay^fjL«ytQ9 d^X<f>&p,' " one of the brethren who meet in assembly,*' 
and that the place of their panegyrical assemblies, (which was their 
greatest of all,) was in his time a place of no great reception, iramryvpuAp 
kfi» yeyum x^P^^^y " & ^^^^ became the place of our assembly/' not 
(kHj a field, or a desert, but a ship, an inn, or a prison,^ though these 
be fidr probabilities. 

But Athanasius, in his apology to Constantius, about anno 855, 
makes it evident beyond all contradiction. He being accused fop 
assembling the people in the great church before it was finished or 
dedicated, irphf oMfv nXtia&rjvaiy makes this part of his defence, *' That 
the confluence of the people at the paschal solemnity was so great ; that 
if they had met in several assemblies, Korii fUpo^ ical dnfpfffUw»Sf the other 
churches were so little and strait, that they would have been in danger of 
snfiRning by the crowd ; nor would the universal harmony and concur- 
rence of the people have been so visible and effectual, if they had met in 
parcels ; and therefore he appeals to him, whether it were not better 
for the whole multitude to meet in that great church, (being a place large 
enough to receive them all together, Svtos Ijbr) rov r6irov dwofUvcv ht^atrBai 
frarras,) and to have a concurrence of all the people with one voice. For 
if," says he, " according to our Saviour's promise, where two shall agree 
as touching anything, that shall be done for them of my Father, &c., 
how prevalent will be the one voice of so numerous a people assembled 
together, and saying Amen to God !" 

So that hereby it is evident, that in the middle of the fourth age, all 
the Christians at Alexandria, which were wont at other times to meet 
in several assemblies, were no more than one church might and did 
contain, so as they could all join at once in the worship of Grod, and 
concur in one Amen.^ 

Further he tells him, that Alexander, his predecessor, who died 
anno 825, did as much as he in like circumstances ; though there were 
several other churches in the city, yet being all strait and little, he 
assembled the whole multitude in the church called Theonas (which 
was then counted the great church ; though it seems not great enough 
now,) before it was quite finished.' 

- EuMb. Htat. Mb. tH. cap. 9. » IbW. lib. tIL oap. xzL 

' Athanat. Edit. Comelin. toin. i. p. 531. ' Id. ibid. p. 5SS. 


This is testimony clear enough ; but it is capable of anotiher kind of 
proof, which might be as satis&ctory to some, jet being prevented in it 
by a better hand, I waive it* 

I think the premises are so evident, that there is no need of the help 
of Dionysius^s observation, that Alexandria in his time, (viz. the latter 
end of ^e third century,) was not by much so populous as of old,^ and 
the old men more in number formerly, than both old and young in his 

Antioch in Strabo*s account was less than Alexandria,^ but greater 
than any other city save that and Home ; and so called by Josephus the 
third city in the world, rpirow oiKovfUvfit txpv<ra rp^ww,* In Zosimus it 
is the metropolis of the whole orient,' and in Chrysostom, the metro- 
polis of the world./ Herodian tells us, that Geta designed it or Alex- 
andria to be the seat of his empire, coming but little short, as he 
thought, of Rome, ov vokv /ifyc^ci diroXciirovotxf .' 

The Christians there in the first age were no more than could all 
meet together in the house of TheophOus, as appears by the author of 
the Recognitions, which, though falsely ascribed to Clemens, is ancient ; 
nor will it be easy to find a reason why the following passage should be 

forged: Theophilus donUb sues ingentem hctsiUcam eccletia 

nomine consecravit, in qua omnis miUtitudo ad audiendum verbum conve- 
niens, credebat sance doctrines,^ '* Theophilus consecrated the hall of his 
house, under the name of a church, in which the whole multitude 
gathered to hear the word, and was brought to faith in sound doctrine."* 

When Paulus Samosatenus, bishop of this city, was for heresy ejected 
out of the bishopric, he would not give up the possession of the house 
where the church did meet, rrjs tKKkrjo'ias HucovJ So that one house, it 
seems, was then sufficient, otherwise they might have had more under 
an emperor so favourable as Aurelian, who upon their address to him 
restored them the possession of this. And that it was the church-house 
in which they assembled, not the bishop*s house, as the translator ren- 
ders it, appears, because it is presently after called the church, cfeXovKr 
rm TTjs €KkXrj<rias, ^^ he is expelled the church f and elsewhere the place 
of the church assemblies is frequently called ^KkXifo-ias oUos,^ the 
" church-house." 

In the fourth age, all the Christians there could meet together for the 
choice of Eustatius, anno 324, Swas 6 Xo^r, says Theodoret.' Afler he, 

• See R[ichard] B[azter], Church History, pp. 9, 10. * Euaeb. lib. tH. [cap. xxl.] 
' Lib. xYi. ^ De BeU. Jud. lib. iii cap. i. ' Hlat Ub. L p. 15. 

/ Tom. V. Homil. xztv. g Lib. iv. p. 9. [Ed. Lugd. 1624, p. 160, A.] 

• Lib. X. ad Jin. * Euaeb. lib. tU. cap. X. 

• EuMb. lib. Ix. cap. ix. De Vit. Constant, lib. iii. cap. xxxtI. and Hlat Ub. TiiL and cap. nit. 
' Lib. i. cap. Til. 


by the malicious practices of the Arians, was ejected about anno 828, 
there were no Christians visible there, but in the assemblies of the 
Arians, during the time that Eulalius, Euphronius, Flacellus, Stephanus, 
Leontius, Eudoxius, and Anianus were bishops, save those who, adhering 
to the truth and Eustathius, separated themselves, and were under the 
ocmduct of the presbyter Paulinus,* and these were no more than could 
meet together in a private house, (where Athanaaius assembled with 
them,) iv UUurmp oUtSms iiadjiin&C^v^^ and, when they had more fikvour, 
in a little church : for so Euzoius the Arian bishop, who had some 
reverence for Paulinus, granted them idt» rw fUKpmif ccicXiycruMr,^ '^ one of 
the sma]] churches.** 

Paulinus, after he had governed them as a presbyter for above thir^ 
years, was made bishop by Lucifer of Calaris, anno 862, having no 
other for his flock than those called Eustathians, nor Evagrius his sue* 
oessor ; yet these the Egyptian, Arabian, Cyprian, Boman bishops, and 
the churches of the west and south, counted the only true lawful bishops 
of Antioch.' 

But thirty-two years after the expulsion of Eustathius, another com- 
pany who had hitherto joined in public with the Arians, Meletius, to 
whom they were addicted, being exiled about anno 850, and Euzoius 
substituted in his place, do withdraw themselves from the Arian assem- 
blies, and met in a church in Paleea;' for the numbers of the Meletians, 
(so they were called) Theodoret^s expression seems to make the 
Eustathians more / however one church, and that no great one, would 
contain them ; and one they had of Jovinian.' And since a private 
house and a small church, or two churches, and those not great, could 
bold both these parties, we may well conclude one large church would 
have contained them both, if both could have agreed to assemble in it ; 
and yet the ages since acknowledge no true bishop at Antioch at that 
time, but he that was head of one of these parties. They aU met in one 
church at the ordination of Chrysostom, if Greorgius Alexandrinus do 
not misinform us,* and so they did five years after Meletius^s death, 
says Chrysostom.' 

It will be needless to add, [that] their numbers were lessened by Vita- 
lius^s falling off to ApoUinarius, and drawing a great multitude after him 
called Yitalians, who had bishops of their own in this and other cities,* 
or to say anjrthing of the Luciferians there, of whom Sozomen,' or of 
any other sects which were there numerous enough, since I suppose it is 

• Tbeod. Hirt. Ub. L cap. zxiL * Sos. Ub. iU. cap. xlx. • Soo. Ub. Itt. cup. tU. 

^ Thcod. [lib. T. cap. zziU.] 80s. [Ub. wii. cap. zr.] • Tbaod. Ub. U. 019. zzzL 

/ Lib. 1. cap. zzlL t Tbaod. Ub. It. cap. zzU. [Ed. Raadlnc, 019. szfr.] 

* Vh. CbiTMwt. torn. tUL p. 17S. * Tom. t. p. 5S7. Edit. SaTU. * 80s. lib. ▼!. 019. ut. 
' Lib. vU. cap. UL 



clear by the premises, that the two main rfirffurra, " sectaons,*^ before thej 
crumbled away by those divisions, comprised no more than might meet 
together for communion ; the aureum domifdcum, " golden church,** 
which the historian speaks of there, might have held them. 

Carthage was not coimted so great by some as the three cities fore- 
mentioned ; jet next to them, one of the greatest in the empire. 
Herodian says, that for riches, multitude of inhabitants, and greatness, 
it was short of Rome only, and contended with Alexandria in Egypty 
irtpl dtvrtp€ioVf for the next place to Rome.' 

That there were no more Christians in that church about anno 200, 
than could meet together in one place for church-administrations, there 
is evidence enough in Tertullian, which at present I shall not further 
take notice of, than in the observation of a great antiquary, the bishop 
of Orleans, who in his notes on TertuUian,* shows the ridiculousness of 
those who would prove the modem processions from Tertullian*s tfi 
Jj^OCttimthxm, ^'how many temples, how many churches must there be 
at Carthage for the performing of these rites ;" una tantum ilUs temparibus 
erat ecedsia et domus sacra, et ita certe humiUa et parum amcUa ut t 
privatis facile non cUgnoacereturS 

In Cyprian*s time, who lived till about anno 260, in all church 
administrations and transactions of moment in the church and bishop- 
ric of Carthage, tota fratemitas — plehs urdversa — omnes sUmUs kddj 
all the people were to be present, as he declares everywhere in hifl 
Epistles ; and how all could be present, if they were more than couM 
meet together, is not intelligible. I should transcribe a great part of 
those Epistles, if I should produce all the evidence for this, which is 
there offered ; a few brief passages may suffice. All were present «t 
reading of letters.** All were present at the sacrament, and therefore 
he would have it administered at such a time, ut sacramenH verUaUmf 
fratemitaU omni prcBsente^ ceUbremuSy^ " that we may celebrate the sacra- 
mental verity in the presence of all the brotherhood." All present at 
exhortations, nee universes fratemitati aUocutio et persuasio nostra 
defuit/ ^^ nor did we fail to address and persuade all the brotherhood.*^ 
All present at censures, causam acturi apud universam pkhem/ '^ intending 
to bring the matter before the whole people.** All present at electioo 
of officers,* particularly a bishop was to be chosen plebe prcesenU, " in 
the presence of the people,*' convocata plebe tota, " at a meeting of the 
whole people/* sub omnium oculis, '* with the cognisance of all,** de u$dv€n(B 

• Lib. vii. [cap. xiii.] p. 153. » Ad Uxorem, p. M. 

« " There was in those times only one church and consecrated buQdlng, and that of so humldt a 
description and so little ornamented, that it would not be easOy distinguished fh>in pilifats houses." 
^ Lib. iii. Epitt. xTi. ' Lib. U. EpUt. iii. [Aliter £p. IzUL Ad CMilinm.] 

/ Lib. iii. EpUt. t. [A1. £p. xiv. Al. xr. Al. xx. Ad Presbyteroe, fte.] r Ub. Uf. Bpitt zir. 
' Lib. ii. Epist. V. [Al. Ep. xxxiii. Ad Clerum et Pleb. de Aurel. Al. Ep. xxzriU.] 


fraUmitatk suffragio^ " by the snfirage of the whole brotherhood,'' and 
80 ooght to be, (is divina auctoritate, '^ bj Divine authority ," and so were 
de facto through the (Christian world, per univeraas fere provinciaa,* 
All present at debates and consultations, hcec aingulorum tractanda sit 
€t Umanda plerdua ratio — cum plebe ipsa unwersa, '* the matter must be 
treated of and settled in detail in conjunction with the whole people;" 
10 he writes to the people, examinabuntur singula praisentibus vobiSj " the 
details shall be examined in your presence."^ 

So long as Cyprian's principles and practice were retained in that 
church, it did, it coidd consist of no more than might all assemble at 
one place ; and we have no reason to doubt but they were retained the 
remainder of that age ; and we find them acting conformably thereto in 
the next. For anno 811, the year before the decree for liberty to 
CShristians was published by Constantine, the whole multitude concurs 
in the election of Caecilian by joint suffrage, suffragio totius popuU Cceci- 
Uanus eligiturS 

And after Constantine declared himself in favour of Christianity, 
many here, as elsewhere, came over from heathenism ; yet there was no 
great alteration made hereby as to the largeness of his bishopric, since 
it is a question whether Carthage gained as many from Gentilism as it 
lost to the Donatists, who were so numerous here as to have a bishop of 
their own, and enough for another diocese in this city, and their bishops 
there successively, Majorinus (made by a synod of seventy ;) Donatus, 
Parmenianus, Primianus, confirmed by a synod of three hundred and 
ten bishops. 

Jerusalem was far inferior in greatness to the four cities foremen- 
tioned, yet may be thought considerable in this discourse, because of 
the many thousands converted there by the apostles : from whence it is 
concluded, that they were more than could meet together in one place 
for conmumion. But I have showed this before to be a mistake, and 
that of those five thousand converted, the twentieth part cannot in 
reason be counted inhabitants uf the city.' About forty years after, 
this church consisted of no more than Pella, a small city, could enter- 
tain, together with its own inhabitants ; for thither they all retired, as 
Eusebius informs us,' being admonished from heaven to leave the city ; 
and Epiphanius,-^ navrts ol fiaBtiralf " all the disciples," being warned by 
an angel to leave the city a little before it was destroyed, obeyed, 
and dwelt in Pella, a city of Decapolis. And they deserv«i the title of 
cn-t^oycW, (whether Josephus intended it for them or others,) who, he 

• Lib. i. £p. It. [A1. IxTUi. Al. IxtU. De BasUide et Martiale.] 

* Lib. ill. £p. xvi. [Al. zi. Al. xlL AI. xtH. Ad Plebem.] 

« OpUt. Ub. i. [Ed. Parii. 1679, p. 19.] ' Vid. cap. i. 

« Lib. tii. cap. T. / De Pond, et Mem. cap. xt. 



says, after the retreat of Cestins from Jemsalain, left the dty as a ship 
ready to sink, wokkdi tAp iwulKvmp,* *' many of the better sot%^&c. And 
from hence Archbishop Whit^gift conoludes the smallness tf their num- 
bers ; " How few Christians,*' says he, *' were there at Jerusalem not 
long before it was destroyed, being aboat forty years after Christ ? 
Doth not Eusebius testify,* that they all were received into a little town 
called Pella ? and yet the apostles had spent much time and labour in 
preaching there: but tlie number of those that did not profess Christ in 
that city was infinite.** 

Not long after the destruction of Jerusalem, if we believe Epiphanius,^ 
they returned from Pella to Jerusalem, and settled in the ruins of a part 
of the desolate city, no fit place to entertain multitudes ; and near fifty 
years after are fbimd there very low and few : fer, as iJie same author 
tells us, Adrian, in his progress through those parts of the empire, 
coming to Jerusalem, finds the whole city laid level with the ground, 
except a few houses and a little church, frap€Kros Skiymw obant&rmm mbI rfv 
Ocov iKKkritrias fUKpiis oCarfs,^ and one would judge they could not be veij 
many, whom so small a church could contain, and so few houses lodge. 

After Adrian had raised the city ^lia out of the mins of the old 
Jerusalem, the church there was so fer firom rising with the c]ty, that it 
fell from what it was before, being in his time very much diminished, if 
not quite ruined, as to its ancient constitution; for Adrian, provoked 
by the rebellion of the Jews, by severe edicts excludes them all, not 
only from Jerusalem, but aU the territory round about it.' And Sul- 
pitius Severus-^says, this prohibition reached not only thoee that were 
Jews by religion, but all that were Jews by extract, though professing 
the Christian religion ; so that if the church then at Jerusalem were 
either wholly, or for the greatest part, constituted of such Jews, by this 
law it was either quite dissipated, or greatly diminished. Now Eusebius 
tells us, that from the apostles to this last devastation of Palestine bj 
Adrian, that church did consist of such Jews, i( 'Eppalmv wurnt9f which 
we must understand either absolutely, so as none else but beUeving Jem 
were members of that church, or else none but they in comparison, very 
few of the Gentiles ; in the first sense by this edict it would be quite 
dissolved as to its being a church at Jerusalem ; in the latter aeose it 
would be reduced to a small compass, and very few members, viz. thoie 
only of the believing Grentiles. And in this sense I take it, becauae 
there was a church here still ; but all of Jewish extract being eidudf!^ 
by the emperor's authority, it was constituted only of GentUes, eeeaam- 
tibua his qui fuerant ex JudaeiBf " those who were Jews i^aring.** So 

« De BeU. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xl. [Ed. Oxon. 17S0, p. 1105, lin. 15.] • Lib. UL flip. ▼. 

• Ubi supra, n. XT. ' Ibid. cap. xir. ' Arbto PelUrat In Sonb. Ub. It. 09. tL 

/ Hilt. Hb. ii. [Ed. Lugd. 1647. p. S81.] e Lib. ir. cap. r. « Jcr. la Cbna. 



EuBebins says, that that church was made up of Grentiles, and the reason 
he gives, because by Adrian's edict immediately before mentioned, the 
city was emptied of all the Jewish nation.* So that upon this consti- 
tation of Adrian, about the eighteenth or nineteenth of his reign, as 
Eusebius computes it, anno 135, the church of Jerusalem consisted only 
of those Grentiles, which were so few, as [that] they are not thought fit 
to be brought to account, by him who gives the best account of the 
state of the church in those times. 

It is like^ their numbers were increased before Narcissus was bishop 
there in the third age, yet then they were not so many, but that the 
whole midtitude could meet together with their bishop at the paschal 
vigil, as appears by what we meet with in Eusebius.^ The people 
assembled with Narcissus at the great vigil, and while they were watch- 
ing, oil failing them for their lights, t6 irav ir\rj$os, the whole multitude 
were greatly troubled, whereupon Narcissus procures them a supply in 
an extraordinary way, as it is there reported. 

Nay in Cyril's time, which was in the fourth age, anno 858, it seems 
they were no more than could assemble in one place : for the people, as 
Sozomen relates it, being astonished at an apparition in the air, all 
leave their houses, their markets, their work, and men, women, and 
children, meet in the church, cir ttju tmcXriaiap tanjXBov, and there all 
together, uno ore, " with one mouth," join in the praises of Christ,* 


Let us consider what may be objected against that which is insisted 
on. It may be alleged, that not only the city but a large territory 
belonging to it and the villages therein, made up the bishop's diocese, so 
that the country inhabitants added to the citizens, might make those 
under the ancient bishops more numerous ; and some would persuade 
us, that it was the apostles' intention, that both the city and the whole 
country should be under one bishop. 

Ans. If the Christians in the villages of the territory added to those 
of the cities, increased them beyond the numbers in some of our 
parishes, or beyond the capacity of holding personal conmiunion toge- 
ther, this must be in the greatest cities where Christians were most 

• Eiifeb. lib. it. cap. vi. ♦ probable. ' Lib. vi. cap. 0. ' Hi»f. lib. Ul. cap. iv. 


ntimeroiui, or else nowhere ; when as* we see by the former instances, 
that it was not so in the greatest cities. It was not so particularly at 
Carthage, where aU the people belonging to Cyprian, met frequently at 
once upon several occasions, which is plain beyond contradiction by near 
a hundred passages in his Epistles. Yea, in the fourth age, it was not 
so at Alexandria, (the greatest city next to Rome ;) for whereas at 
panegyrical assemblies, all the Christians belonging to a bishop, were 
wont to meet, that assembly, of which Athanasius gives an account to 
Constantius, (of which before,) being at one of the greatest solemnities, 
was panegyrical, and yet was held in one church. 

And we showed before, that the Christians in such cities were no 
more in the first ages than the inhabitants of an ordinary town, such as 
some of our market towns ; when we know, that not only those of the 
town, but of many villages (sometimes near twenty) belonging to it, can 
and do meet together in one place for communion ; so that this is pre- 
vented and satisfied in the former discourse. 

But to add something for more satisfaction, though what is premised 
may suffice, it may appear that no great access could come to the bishop*s 
charge by the villages or territory pertaining to his city, nor was his 
fiock hereby made much more numerous. 

For, first, either the territory was little ; and so it was indeed for the 
most part There are some [who] will have it taken for granted, that the 
territories of cities were very large ; and they challenging no more for a 
bishop's diocese than the city with the territory, had need presume it to be 
exceeding large, so as it may bear some proportion to a northern diocese, 
which else will appear such as the apostles never intended. The circuit 
of one of our large country parishes, (yea, or of two together,) they will 
scorn as imworthy the repute or name of a bishop's diocese ; yet it may 
be made manifest that ordinarily the territory of cities where the apos- 
tles and their disciples planted churches, and commonly through the 
whole empire, amounted not to more, if so much. 

Shall we take an estimate of the territory of other cities, and judge 
what it was commonly by that of the Levites' cities ? (Why may we not, 
since divers of them were royal cities, and may be supposed to have had 
the largest aUowance answerable to the very liberal provision the Lord 
made for them in other things ?) We have a particular account of the 
extent of their territory. Numb. xxxv. a thousand cubits, ver. 4, two 
thousand, ver. 5, that is, as the best interpreters take it, a thousand 
from the middle of the city to each quarter, and two thousand from one 
quarter to another, (viz. from east to west, and from north to south,) 
and so in circumference eight thousand cubits, (reckoning two cubits a 

• whereat. 


fcoi mcxre than one pace,) that is, about five miles ; this is &r short of 
the compass of some ooontrj parishes ; many of them are five, six, seven 
anlee, some more in length, (ezoeeding the territory of Tyre, anciently 
^ metn>pQlis of Phcenicia, and the principal city next to Antioch, as 
Sands found it six miles in length, two in some places in breadth.*) 

Or, shall we be determined by Crete, the place whither the text 
maisted on for the purpose leads us, and so the fittest to regulate us 
herein? We are told firequently that there were an hundred cities in it, 
and as many bishops ordained there by Titus ; yet the whole island, 
when h was wholly Christian, and under governors of that profession, 
oontained but two hundred and seven parishes, and was divided into so 
many, according to Heylin's account.* So that two parishes would 
make such a diocese, as by his reckoning the apostle intended for a bishop. 
Yet, such a territory will be contemned, as more fit fixr the scorned 
Italian episcopellus,^ than the grandeur of a more western prelate, divers 
of these counting five hundred times more, not too much for a diocese. 

If we go further, where cities were not great, (and such were fiu: the 
most part of cities everywhere,) the territory was not laige, these being, 
as cannot be denied with any reason, commonly proportionable; nor 
oould it be laige where cities were numerous and stood near together, 
(whether they were great or small,) no room [exists] there for a territory 
of great extent Yet thus they were, many and thick set (for the most 
part as thick as they are said to be in Crete,) in those countries where 
we find the apostles planted churches, in Palestine, Syria, Asia, Greece, 
Macedon, Italy. I could out of historians and geographers give instances 
of hundreds of cities that stand but six, &ve, four miles, or less one from 
another ; let me but give an instance in some mother-cities. In Ferra- 
rius, Laodicea and Hierapolis, (both metropolies,) are but six miles 
distant. Nor can it be thought their territory was large other ways, 
though not where they were so near, for there were other cities which 
must have their territories too, nearer them any way than they were to 
one another. 

But we need go no further for satisfitction than the notion of a terri- 
tory, as it is universally agreed on. Pomponius so defines it, Territorium 
est imiversitas agrorum intra fines cujueque civUatiSy intra quos, praut ait 
Siculus Flaccus, jurisdicendi jua erat,* " a territory means the whole of 

• Trarels, p. 216. * Cosmopr. p. 263. • bishopUng. 

* Digest, lib. 1. tit. XYi. [n. 239. § 8.] De Verb. Slgnif. TerHtctium mi unhftr$Uat ogrorum iniru 
Jhtei eu^tugue eivUatii, quod ab eo dictum guUam altml ^yod magMrahu ^fut loei ItUru §o» Jktm 
terrendi, i. e. »ummop*ndi ju$ habet, " A texritory U the whole of the lande within the bonndailee 
of Any city, which word {territorium) eome lay to tw derlred heoce, becauae the megistntet of 
•neh e piece hsTo the power of ezpoliloii, (tBrrtndi) i. e. of bcniehineiit wfthln thoie bouadarlet.'* 
Cod. lib. X. [tit. xxxi.] lex. llii. Decern virwm iwtpume non liceai emioUere poteetatmm fae ei m m erfm 
wuta* terriiorii propria dvitaiie. " It Is unlawftil for the DeoemTiri to extend the Mtthwity of 
their faeeei beyond the bounds of the territory of their own eity." 


the lands within the boundaries of anj city within which it had a power 
of jurisdiction, as Siculus Flaccus says." By which it appears, the 
territory reached no ftirther than the jurisdiction of the city magis- 
trates ; and how many cities can be shown us in the Roman empire, 
where this jurisdiction reached further than it doth in our English 
cities ? when shall we see any proof, that ordinarily it was of more 
extent ? and with us it is known to be commonly of no more extent than 
the circuit of some of our coimtry parishes : how much further does the 
authority of the mayor of Lincoln, or Winchester, or Canterbury, &c. 
reach ? No more is their territory, and so no larger should their 
diocese be, if the apostles' intention (as themselves state it) were ob- 
served, designing no more for a diocese than the city, suburbs, and terri- 
tory. What more they have than such a x^P^i ^^ wtploiKis, (and some 
have many hundred times more,) they have no right to from anything 
express in Scripture, or any pretended apostolical intention. Or, 

Secondly, If the territory were large, yet the Christians were but 
few in villages for a long time ; the Grospel prevailed not so soon, nor 
was Christianity so readily embraced tiiere as in cities ; its progress 
was from great cities to the less, and from both to villages. When 
heathenism was expelled out of cities under Christian emperors, it stuck 
in the villages, in pagis; hence heathen idolaters were called pagani^ 
as Gothofred observes,^ and pago dediH by Prudentius ; and Chrysostom 
says of the heathen philosophers, the great supporters of that religion, 
fuydkoi elcrlv €v rg kc»^ cVelvot,^ " they pass for great men in the village." 

Afler Christianity was too hard for the Grentiles in cities they 
retreated hither, and finding favourers and abettors, made good their 
retreat for some time, maintaining this post obstinately as their last 
refuge. So that, considering the state of cities themselves as before 
represented, we may well conclude, there were many villages in the 
fourth age, in which there were no Christians, very many in which there 
were but few, and but few in comparison in which all were Christians ; 
and what then were they in the former ages ? If a village wholly 
Christian had not been a rarity even in Jerome's time, why does he 
make it a singular observation of Jethura ? Villa prcegrandia Jethura, 
habitataresque ejus omnea Christiani sunt,*' " Jethura is a pretty large 
village, and all its inhabitants are Christians." 

And when the Christians in the territory were many, yet being dis- 
posed (as they generally were) imder other bishops than him in the 
city, his diocese had no enlargement thereby. 

For though some would have us think, that it was the intention of 
the Apostles, that the territory, though large, should belong only to the 

# In Cod. lib. i. tit. x. * In Johann. Horn. p. 837. ' De loc. Hebxaic. 


bishop of the dty; jet I see no ground for this, seeing neither do the 
i^KMtles signify any such thing, neither do the fathers conclude any such 
thing from them. Nothing is pretended for it but the practice of the 
church, which thej say speaks it plain enough ; whereas, indeed, their 
practice speaks quite Uxe contrary, and declares that they never believed 
the apostles had any intention that the territory, though large, should 
have no bishop but him in the city. For what more usual in the prac- 
tice of the ancients, than to make one or more, sometimes many bishops 
in the territory of that city which had its bishops besides : villages being 
in the territories of cities? There needs no other evidence for this, than 
what was before produced to show that there were bishops in villages ; 
and of this I have given instances, as a common usage in aU quarters 
of the Christian world ; and have discovered bishops, not only in the 
larger, but also, where it was thought requisite, in the smaller or ordi- 
nary villages. It were easy to add more instances hereof. In the terri* 
toiy of Hippo, Austin speaks of divers bishops,* Ecce interim qnscopos 
no8tro8f qui sunt in resume Hipponense, ubi a vestris tanta mala patmuTy 
convenite: " in the mean while confer with the bishops of our party, who 
are situated in the region of Hippo, where we undergo so many wrongs 
from those of your party.'* He mentions a bishop in the castle Sjmica 
near to Hippo,^ and yet would have another bishop made in the castle 
Pussala, ad ecclesics Hipponenaia parceciam,^ And in the territory of 
other cities, we find two, or three, or four bishoprics of new erection, 
besides what were there by ancient constitution. Two are mentioned 
in the territory of Milevis, two in that of Tigava, (though in Ferrarius 
it is but two miles distance from Oppidum Novum, another episcopal 
town,) four bishoprics in the territory of Cassenigrse, four in that of 

Basinopolis [was] a village honoured by Julian vdth the privileges of a 
city, being a place in Bithynia, in the territory of Nice, as Anastasius, 
bishop of that city declares. Ego autem ostendo, BasincpoUm sub Niccea 
jam oUm esse, nam regio, fuit ejus — sicut Tacteus et Doris regianes sunt 
sub Nico!* " I show that Basinopolis was long ago subject to Nice ; for it 
was a territory belonging to it, just as Tacteus and Doris are territories 
belonging to Nice.'* But being made an episcopal seat in the fourth 
age, it was no longer imder the jurisdiction of the Nicene bishop, either 
as part of his territory or province ; for though he of Nice had the 
name and honour of a metropolitan, yet the power being not allowed in 
those times to two in one province, the fathers of Chalcedon adjudged it 
to belong to Eimomius of Nicomedia as the proper metropolitan./ 

• EpUt. Ixviii. • De CiTit. Dei, lib. xxii. cap. vili. « Epist. cclzt 

* Vid. Collat. Carthag . patlim. ' Cone. Chalced. Act. xiU. / Cone. Chalced. ibid. 


This appears also in the bishopric erected in the precinct of Caesarea, 
when Basil presided there, and the contest was hot betwixt him and 
Anthimus, bishop of Tjana, concerning the places belonging to their 
respective cities ; particularly in Sasima, then made an episcopal seat, 
which though afterwards counted a city, (as places were wont to be 
when they had bishops, though they were no better than villages,") yet 
Nazianzen, who best knew it, being the first bishop it had, calls it a 
very little village, and on that account [it] must be in their account in the 
territory of some city, and so is another pregnant instance that the 
bishops of those times, particularly the great Basil, Gregoiy, the father 
of Nazianzen, and Gregory Nyssen, the brother of Basil, and Nazianzen 
himself, in whose ordination to that place these all concurred, had not 
any thought that the apostles intended, that the city and all its terri- 
tories should have but one bishop. Nazianzen, who used all means, 
all pleas to avoid the bishopric, if he could have alleged this, would 
have easily satisfied his father and friends ; his authority and their im- 
portunity (to which after much resistance he yielded) would not have 
been used in opposition to what was accounted the apostles* intent/ 

Not to be tedious ; if that was the territory of Rome, which was 
under the jurisdiction of the provost of that city, it was large indeed, 
(reaching one himdred miles,) none like it, nor it like itself, when 
it was but extended cui quintum aut sextum laptdem^ " to the fifth or 
sixth milestone." But then the diocese of the Roman bishop was 
nothing hereby enlarged ; for in that circuit there are now about forty 
bishops, and of old there were many more, viz. no less than sixty- 
nine, as appears by the ancient provincial in Baronius,*' and taking 
those united into the reckoning, the number arises to seventy-five, 
(more in the territory of one city, than there are now in Great Britain 
and Ireland ;) nor was there any one parish or church in this territory 
that belonged to the diocese of the city bishop : for all his churches were 
within the city, as Innocent the First declares, writing to Decentius, 
bishop of Eugubium, concerning the Eulogies j^ which were wont to be 
sent to all in the diocese,* cum omnes ecclesice nostrce intra civitatem con- 
atitutcB sunt, " since all our churches are fixed within the city :" answer- 
ably, Leo*s diocesan charge was, tantoB urhis populis/ " of the people 
of so great a city." And that of Chrysostom is true in this case, when 
he says, a bishop governs a city only, ttjs n<Sk€»s fidvrjs.f^ It was in other 
places, as at Dublin heretofore, episcopus tantian intra muroa qnscopale 
officium exercet,^ " the bishop exercises his episcopal function only within 

• Vid. Mireua, p. 297. « Vid. Naz. [Orat. xx. p. 356.] in Laud. BaaU. and Epist. xxx. 

' Vid. Mir. Notit. Episc. pp. 68 and 160. 

' The Eulogin were portions of the bread and w\ne conRecrated by the bishop, and aent to those 
who were unable to Join in the public communion of the Church.— Ed. 
' £pi*t. eap. v. r Epist. xiii. r Horn. iii. in Acts. * Vid. Ush. Relig. of Irish, p. -63. 


the irallfl of the city.** So Bitectnm, in Naples, whoee diocesfe non 
e*oedit muraa urhiSy '' did not extend beyond the walls of the city/* as 
Minems tells ns.* And Ragosi, an archbishop^s seat, nsdem fere fadbuM 
quSnts urhis mamia, in Bodinns. Accordingly, the wapoucia, by which 
they will have ns to understand a diocese, is said frequently to be ^ r^ 
frAfi, '^ in the city," of which there are instances more than enough in 
Eusebius, rijs h 'E^o-o* napoucias MtrKsmwf '^ the bishop of the diocese in 
Ephesns,** and of the diocese in Alexandria,^ and in Corinth,' and in 
Sardis, and in Hierapolis/ and in Caosarea/and so the diocese in Tarsus, 
in Iconium, in Jerusalem, in Laodicea.^ Now those that profess a sin- 
gular reverence for antiquity, cannot imagine that the ancient churches 
would have thus acted, if apprehensive of any intention in the apostles, 
that there should be no bishop in the territoiy but he who had the d^. 
Indeed, it will be manifest, that the apostles designed there should be 
such bishops (as they instituted) in country towns, and not in cities 
only, if we may explain that to Titus, by Acts xiv. 28, " When they 
had ordained them elders in every church," as those prelatists do who 
make them equipollent, and by ciders in both places imderstand bishops, 
and wiU have a city and bishop to be adequate ;* inferring from the 
former, that every city should have a bishop : for why may it not as 
well be inferred from the latter, that church and bishop are adequate,* 
and every church should have such a bishop as the Scripture speaks of? 
I am sure there is as good ground for it, since the very reason why a 
city was to have a bishop, was, because there was a church in it, (inso- 
much as where there were not Christians enough in a city to constitute 
a church, it is acknowledged no bishop was placed in it,) and therefore 
when there was enough in a country town, (as there soon might be, 
considering how few were then accounted enough to make a church,) it 
had and ought to have a bishop : for the obligation of the rule extends 
as far as the reason of it teacheth. 

The church of old was so apprehensive of this, that even in latter 
ages, when a coimtry town was more addicted to the religion of Christ 
than a great city to which it belonged, they thought such a town or 
village as worthy of a bishop as a great city ; an instance whereof we 
have in Majuma, (honoured upon this accoimt with the name Constan- 
tia,) it was Xi/i^v, says Strabo, the port of Gaza, in Palestine, seven 
furlongs from that city,' and counted part of the city, mi^^aXikrioir 
fMpof T^ff rrf^faiff,* '* a part of the city bordering on the sea." That being 
better affected to Christianity than Gaza, (which is noted as very 
heathenish,) though the city had a bishop for some Christians in it, yet 

• Notit. p. 167. < Lib. t. cap. xxl. • Lib. il. cap. xxlil. * Lib. iv. cap. xxiL 
' Lib. iv. cap. xxt. / Lib. Ti. cap. xxi. « Lib. rii. cap. xxxii. xxvL ' comlaliTM. 

• Lib. xvi. [Ed. Caaaiib. p. 1101, A. £d. Parit. I6S0, p. 759.] * Sos. lib. v. cap. iii 


the village was thought as worthy to have one. And when the bishops 
of Gaza would have reduced the place under their jurisdiction, and left 
it without a bishop, (being disfranchised hj Julian,) and urged that it 
was not lawful for one citj to have two bishops, firj B^iurhv thai fUas 
wSktots dv6 tnia-K^irovs vpotaravai ; a national ooimcil decrees in favour of 
Majuma, ordains it a bishop, and so it contmued an episcopal seat, with 
distinct altar and territory, as Sozomen declares.' Yea, when a city was 
replenished with Christians, as Corinth, if the town belonging to it had 
as many as would make a church, which Cenchrea had, (one of the 
ports of Corinth,) it was thought fit to have a bishop also. Thus, the 
author of the Constitutions, (a writer of credit enough with prelatists in 
other things,) naming the bishops made by the apostles in several places, 
tells us, that Lucius was by Paul made bishop of Cenchrea.* 

It may be said further, that those that indll give credit to the pre- 
mises, must think the ancient bishoprics crowded so close together, as to 
be more like our parishes than such dioceses as became the honour of a 
bishop ; but they ¥rill not be so credulous, who see instances enough in 
their own country, and other parts of Christendom near us, viz. Ger- 
many, the Netherlands, &c. of bishoprics of another size, to evince the 
ocmtrary ; those of another world must be persuaded to believe this, 
dnce they see nothing like it in this. 

Ans. This is because there is so little or nothing of the ancient bishop 
now to be seen, (unless amongst those who have seen the thing so 
abused, as [that] they shun the name.) The instances touched, are of 
bishoprics of a later erection, and not conformed to the more ancient 
model. The bishop's vapouciaj " diocese,'* of old, was but like a modem 
parish. The modem dioceses are now as big as the ancient provinces : 
for a province was the same with them that a shire is with us. A 
bishop's jurisdiction of this latter edition extended ftirther than many a 
metropolitan's of the former ; such a precinct of ground as had a him- 
dred bishops in the elder send better times, was thought little enough 
for one or two in those corrupter and more degenerate ages. When 
bishops were planted in the parts here objected, it was expected 
bishoprics should be richly endowed, (a thing neither known, nor looked 
for by the ancient bishops,) and such a bounty being rare, the bishoprics 
must be fewer ; more respect was had of the state and grandeur of the 
bishop, than regard of his duty and charge. So he had but terri- 
tory and revenue enough, there was little or no consideration whether 
there were a possibility to perform the duty of a pastor to the hundredth 
or thousandth part of those committed to his pastoral charge. There 
were more of that humour than those whom Leo complains of, dominari 

• iXh, V. cip. iil. » Lib. vll. cap. xlvlii. 


magis quam consulere subdUis qucBruntj " they seek to domineer over their 
subjects rather than to advise them.'' What Anthimus was charged 
with, was the character of too many, t6 ttjs dpx^ptoavmfs fuy^^s ml 
d^mfia ov irvcv/xarcic^v y^vxS>v cyri/AcXciay tlvtu Xoyurdfttvos' dXX* oia riva froXi- 
TUfTiv dpxfiv d*A TovTo Tfjs fjLtiCovos 6pty6fiepos,' " he did not regard the gran- 
deur and dignity of the episcopal office as the spiritual cure of souls, but 
as a certain political power, wherefore he lusted for more." 

Some of the first of this latter edition, were our Saxon bishops ; their 
number was designed by Pope Gr^ory in the beginning of the seventh 
age, but not settled in his time, nor till after his successor had assumed 
the title of universal bishop ; no nor then neither, according to the 
first designment: for Gregory appointed twelve bishops in the province 
of York, where for many ages afler, there were but three; and he would 
have them placed so near together, as [that] they might easily meet when 
there was occasion.^ Ita volumus episcopos ardinare tU ipsi ailn epiacopi 
longo intervcdlo minime distinguantur, " Thus we wish you to ordain 
bishops with as short distance as possible between their sees." And the 
synod at Heradford in that age, collecting some heads out of the ancient 
canons, which they determined should be observed in England, this is 
the ninth of them. In commune tractatum est ut plures epiacopi crescenU 
numero fidelium augerenturf " It was ordered in coimcil that as the 
faithful increased, bishops should be multiplied." 

The difference betwixt the modem and ancient models, is apparent 
in England and Ireland. Patrick, in the beginning of the fourth age, 
establishes three hundred sixty-five bishops in that lesser island ; 
whereas England in the seventh age must not have twenty. I need not 
add, that the German establishment of bishops was long after the Eng- 
lish, though this was after the ancient mould was broken. 

It was the humour of those latter ages, instead of multiplying, to 
reduce bishoprics. In Phoenicia, there had been at least fourteen 
bishops ; the western Christians, when they had conquered those parts, 
were content with four; and whereas there had been an hundred and 
five bishops under the patriarch of Jerusalem, by William of Tyre's 
catalogue, in his time they were satisfied with nine, or (taking in those 
under Tyre into the reckoning, being then subjected to that patriarch,) 
thirteen; of which Vitriacus gives the reason, ne dignitaa qnacopalia 
vilesceretj^ " lest the episcopal dignity should be lowered." 

Under the patriarch of Antioch, there had been above one himdred 
and sixty bishops ; but then imder the Latins they were reduced to six 
metropolitans, and six bishops.' In Crete they will have us belieye 

• Cone. C. p. sub Menna. * Retpona. ad Tiii. Interrof . [Hardooin. torn. lU. p. 51 S.] 
' Spelm. p. 153. [Cone. Heradf. cap. ix.] * Hist. Orient Ub. L cap. IIU. 

• Vid. Mir. Not. p. 8«. 


there were andentlj one hundred bishops, yet in the account of Leo 
Sophus the emperor, about anno 880, there were but twelve, and the 
number lessened afterwards.* In Sardinia, belonging to the prefecture 
of Rome, there is not half so many as formerly ; nor half the number in 
Sicily; and the retrenchment in Ireland I need not speak of. 


It may be said, that the bishops* church consisted of no more than 
could personally communicate together, merely because there were no 
more Christians in the first age, than could oneet in one place ; not 
because they held themselves obliged to admit no more. And this 
appears, because, when Christians in the bishops* precinct were multi- 
plied beyond the capacity of holding personal communion, (as they were 
in the greater cities, at least in afler ages) yet they still continued under 
one bishop, as one church. 

Ana. Till the state of the church was greatly corrupted, there are 
but few instances hereof in comparison of those who retained the primi- 
tive form of churches. And the reason why they did not tran^ress the 
ancient bounds, was not merely for want of temptation, or because (as 
is suggested) they had not numbers to enlarge their churches beyond the 
primitive limits ; but because they thought themselves concerned, not 
to have them too laige for personal inspection and communion. There 
are several rules which they would have observed, by, which this is 
sufficiently declared. 

The council at Sardica,* anno 347, determines that a bishop should 
not be made in a village, or little town, for which one presbyter alone 
is sufficient, and gives this reason, because it is not necessary to place 
bishops there, lest their name and authority be rendered despicable. 
Thereby signifying, that it might be necessary, and no disparagement 
to episcopacy, to have a bishop in such places for which one presbyter 
was not enough ; they add, that when the people in a town shall grow 
so numerous, (viz. that one presbyter will not suffice, as the coherence^ 
requires us to understand it) that the place is worthy of a bishop, and 
ought to have one. So that in the judgment of above three hundred 
and forty bishops, in any place where a presbyter needs an assistant, 
there a bishop should be constituted. 

• VId. Mir. p. 288. » C*n. ri. * cootezt. 


Secondly. The people under a bishop were to meet altogether upon 
many other occasions, besides assembling with him for worship. A 
bishop was not only to be chosen by all the people, but was to be 
ordained in the presence of them all. Eequiritur in sacerdote ordxnando 
etiam populi proBsentia, " the presence of the people is requisite to the 
ordination of the bishop," says Jerome, cited by Gratian.« 

Those that were in the state of penitents, were to express their repent- 
ance not only before the bishop, and all the ministry, but in the presence 
of all the people, in notitia multorumyvd etiam totiuspMns agere pcmitentiam 
non recusetf^ "they will not refuse to express their penitence before 
many, or even the whole of the people." So did Natalius, as Eusebius 
declares, tVi lacrymaa et miserationesy amnem provocavit ecclenam/' " he 
excited all the church to tears and commiseration." And thus does 
TertuUian describe a penitent,^ omnium lacrymas suadenJUmy ofnmum 
vestigia lambentemy " asking the tears of all, kissing the footsteps of 
all," &c. 

When they were reconciled, this was done by imposition of hands, not 
only of the bishop, but the whole clergy, and that when all the people 
were present : Oum omnes fiddea intereaaenty says Albaspineus,' or, as 
Sozomen describes it, r6 vav ttjs (luckrjaias wXrjBos, " the whole multitude 
of the church shedding tears ;" so Jerome, of Fabiola, episcopo preabyteria 
et omni populo coUachrymanti — recepta aub oculia omnia eccUaica commu- 
mone/ " the bishop, presbyters, and all the people joining in tears-^ 
being received to communion in the presence of the whole church." 

Thirdly. The bishop was obliged to such duties, and so many, in 
reference to the people under his charge, that it was impossible for him 
to perform them, to more than a single church. Let me point at some 
few of them. 

He was to be careful, that those who sought admission were duly 
qualified, and to suffer none to enter, but such as upon trial showed 
themselves to be real Christians.^ 

He was to observe those who walked disorderly, and to admonish^ 
reprove, or exclude them as he saw occasion. 

He was to take notice of the temper of such as were in the state of 
penitents, and what fruits of repentance appeared in them, and accord- 
ingly to reconcile them sooner, or to prolong the course of their 

He was to feed the whole flock, preaching to them frequently. Cyprian 
says he failed not to do this to all the brethren, nee univerace fratemitati 

« Caui. viii. Quest. L * August. Horn. xUx. • Hist lib. t. eip. ult. 

^ Lib. de Podielt. • Lib. It. p. 410. 

/ £p. ad Ocean. [£p. IzxxIt. (al. xxx.) Sd. Parts. 1706, torn. It. pan li. p. 859.] 

r Vid. Euaeb. Vit. Constant, lib. It. cap. Izlr. * Cone. NIe. Can. xL 


— alUxmth etperauasio nostra defuiL* And so the ancient bishops were 
wont to doy more than once a week, sometimes everj day. 

He was to administer the Lord's sapper frequentlj, to all in full com- 
munion, they all receiving nsc de aUorum numu quean prceMentiumJ* 
'' from the hands of the bishops alone." 

He was to watch oyer the souls of those under his charge, as being 
accountable for them all. Thus the ancients thought bishops concerned 
in that passage of the apostle, Heb. ziii. 17.^ And Ghrysostom says, this 
was it that made his soul to tremble continually, 6 yitp il>6fios <rvvcx^^ 
KonurtUt yuov ri^v V^X^v*' 

He was not only to observe their conversations, but to acquaint himself 
with the state of their souls, fr€pwinaK<m€i» wavroOtv ri)y rfjs ^xqs c<f ly/ 

He was to accommodate himself, not only in public, but in private, to 
the exigencies of their several conditions. Many of the duties he was 
obliged to on this accoimt, are enumerated by Isidore of Pelusium ; 
who having specified abundance, concludes, that there were many more 
than all these, koX iroXXf rovr«y irXf lono/ And he gives a large account of 
more.<^ And we shall see Chrysostom ofiering more full and punctual 
evidence of the premises, in the next chapter. 

Fourthly. There was to be but one communion-table in a church. 
This was long continued ; so that when their churches were overgrown, 
and become too numerous for one table to serve them all with conve- 
niency ; yet they used divers shifls, rather than they would seem quite 
to abandon it, and such as better ages were not acquainted with. 
Whereas of old, the whole church, pastor, and people were wont to join 
together in the cucharist every Lord's-day ; it was now thought suffi- 
cient to communicate with the bishop at some special solemnities.* And 
when there were so many assembled at such a time, as [that] one church 
could not hold them all at once, they thought it advisable to celebrate 
twice in one day, rather than all the people should not communicate at 
the same place. It was Leo's advice to Dioscorus of Alexandria, 
consulting with him about that case, wherein it is like' both Bome and 
Alexandria, two of the greatest churches in the world, were specially 
concerned. Cum solennior festivitaa, oonventum popuU numeronorU induf- 
erity et ad earn tanta fiddium muitUudo convenerit quam recipere basilica 
simul una non possit ; sacrificii ablatio indubitanter iteretur^ ne his tantum 
admissis ad hanc devotionem qui prmi advenerinty videaniur hi qui post- 
modum confluxerintj non receptiy* &c. " When a high festival bespeaks 

• Lib. Ul. Epitt. T. * TertuIL De Coron. MUit. [cap. UL] 

• Vid. Isidore, lib. t. Epitt. occxxill. Proep. De Viu ContempUtlTa, lib. i. cap. xx. 

' [Horn, xxxiv. p. 602. in loc.] ' Id. De Saceid. Orat. li. / Lib. iiL Eplft. ccxtI. 

r Lib. i. Epist cxUx. a Conca Agath. [Can. xyUL] < probable. 

• Epiat. Ixxxi. cap. ii. 


an nnuraal comiotiTse of people, and so great a multitude of the faithM 
oome to it, that one church alone cannot hold them, let the sacrificial 
oblation be unhesitatingly repeated, lest if those only be admitted to 
this service who come first, those who arrive later should seem to be 
cut off.** Another device invented for this purpose, was the Eulogies, 
parts of the consecrated bread sent to those of the bishop's fiock, who 
did not or could not communicate in the same place with the bishop, and 
the rest of his church. This is said to be the invention of Melchiades, 
bishop of Bome, about anno did, as Baronius reckons. So that it may 
seem from hence, that the Christians at Some were not so numerous before 
this, but [that] they might communicate together. The end of it was, 
as Innocent ad Decentium, cap. y. expresses it, that those to whom it 
was sent might not think themselves parted from our communion on 
that day, Se it nostra oammunUme meunme ilia die rum judicent HparatoB. 
They thought all that belonged to the same bishop obliged to communi- 
cate in one place ; but when they were grown too numerous to observe 
the primitive order, the people must be satisfied with this expedient, and 
think it enough that they had the same bread, the same day, though not 
at the same table. Some sense of the obligation for personal commu- 
nion still remained, which kept them from running quite out of sight of 
it at first. 

There were other principles derived from Scripture, by which their 
churches were regulated in the best ages ; which, if they had not been 
neglected afterwards, the churches even in the greatest cities, where 
they were most numerous, had been kept longer within compass. Let 
us view this only in two instances, and observe how they thought them- 
selves obliged to proceed, in admitting members, and excluding scandal- 
ous sinners from communion. 

For the first, they thought none fit for Christian communion, but 
[those] whom they judged to be real Christians ; and counted none such 
without competent knowledge and visible holiness. These qualifications 
they required in all, before they were initiated. 

In order to knowledge, those who desired admission were first placed 
in the state of catechumens ; and in that station, order was taken for their 
instruction, both privately* {kot Vbieai) and publicly in the Christian 
assemblies ; in reference to which they are called audienteSf " hearers,*' 
by Cyprian,* and inter auditarum tirocinia deputati, by Tertullian,* 
'* those reckoned to be passing through their noviciate as hearers." 
And before they were initiated, they did give an accoimt of their profi- 
ciency in the knowledge of Christ to the officers of the church, bishop, 
and presbyters. 

« Orig. contra Cels. cap. iU. [p. HS.] \ Lib. UL EpUt xtU. [AL £p. xii. Ah xUL Al. XTiiL] 
' Lib. de PoDnitentia, [cap. Ti.] 


Tbey required also a holy and unblameable life ; suck a conyersation 
as had visible holiness in the face of it, in those whom they admitted to 
communion. Justin Martyr says, they initiated none but those who 
would plow ovTios, " live according to the rule of the Grospel." • And 
he concludes, that all else were but nominal Christians. Origen 
declares, that they admitted none as probationers, but those who did 
sufficiently show they were fully resolved jcoXcor )3tow,* " to live a good 
life.'* It was not only a reformation of greater enormities, but unblame- 
ableness in respect of smaller sins, which they coimted necessary. So 
Chrysostom, " I have said it before, and now I speak it ; I will not cease 
to assert it, that if any one have not reformed rh (karr^fAaTa r&v rp6w9»vy the 
fidlings of his ways, let him not be initiated."^ Origen tells Celsus, that 
" amongst Christians, those only might be initiated, who were pure, not only 
from heinous crimes, d7r6 irovr^f fiiaovs, but also those that are counted 
smaller offences, r&¥ €karr6voiiv vofuCofjJvcav dfjLapTrjfidravy ^ Lactantius, 
comparing the heathen religion with the Christian, makes this one prin- 
cipal difference, that the heathen admitted all promiscuously; reckoning 
up divers counted more flagitious ; hie veroy amongst Christians, says he, 
lein communique peccato locus nuUua est, '* light and common ofiences are 
not tolerated.** What then is required, he had said before, bona mens, 
purum pectus, vita innocens; " a good mind, a pure heart, and an inno- 
cent life.**' And St. Austin signifies, " That according to the ancient 
custom, grounded upon the most evident truth, ea ilia Uquidissima veri- 
tote veniens, (i. e., the word of God,) none were admitted into the church 
of Grod on earth, who were visibly such as the Scripture excludes from 
the kingdom of Grod in heaven./ 

They required innocencyand unblameableness of life, proceeding from 
inward renovation ; so Tertiillian.«' Non ideo abluimur, &c. " We are 
not initiated, that we may give over sinning, but because we have left it, 
our hearts being already cleansed, jam corde loti^ And Origen thus 
delivers it ; " After those that are converted, make such proficiency, as 
that they appear K€Kti$ap6tu \mh rov \&yov, to be sanctified by the Divine 
word, and to the utmost of their power, to live in a better manner ; 
then at length we call them to our mysteries.*** And a little aft^r, 
" the mysteries of the religion of Jesus, are duly delivered to those 
only who are holy and pure, /«Jw)tr ayiois koL KoBapoU.^* 

Nor did they think it sufficient, that those who desired admission into 
the church, did make some profession of what was counted pre-requisite ; 
nor would they admit them immediately upon such profession ; but it 
was thought needful to keep them imder trial, and to continue them in 

• Apol. U. p. 159, and p. 141. » Ibid. lib. IIL [p. Hi.] 

' Homil. xxiL ad Populum Antioch. ' Lib. iii. [p. 148.] • De Just. lib. r. cap. xx. 

/ De Fid. et Oper. cap. xvHi. r D« Baptis. » Ibid. [p. 147.] 


the state of probationers for some time. The Goimcil of Nice rectifying 
some disorders crept in against role,'' begins with this, that the catechu- 
mens were admitted too soon into conmiunion ; to redress this they decree, 
that no such thing should be done for the future, and give the reason 
for their decree, koI yhp leal xp^vau dc ? Konfxpvfup^y there must be some 
time for probation, but how much, they determine not. The synod at 
Elvira, where the famous Hosius was present, is more punctual, and will 
have the time of their expectancy, if they be of good conversation, to be 
about two or three years.^ And about two or three years did St. Austin 
continue in this state, as may be collected out of his Book of Confessions : 
he was converted about the thirty-first year of his age, and continued a 
catechumen till he was thirty-four years old, and, was then solemnly 
admitted by Ambrose, at MUan. 

But though the ordinary time of their continuing probationers, was 
about two or three years, yet it sometimes fell out to be much longer ; 
for in case they gave offence to the church, by falling into sin, they were 
stayed^ in the station where they sinned, or in one lower, (into which 
they were thrust down) more or less, according to the nature of the 
offence; sometimes three years, as the Council of Nice determines,' 
sometimes five years, as the Coimcil at Elvira,' sometimes more.-^ 

In this interval, while they were probationers, and in the state of 
expectancy, not misdemeaning themselves so as to be quite thrown out, 
their conversations were carefully inspected. Origen tells us, there were 
officers in the church for this purpose, ^(XoirctHrrrZv row /Stovf , to search 
strictly into the lives and demeanour of such who sought to join them- 
selves to the church. And also care was taken that the state of their 
souls should be inquired into. The same author, to stop the mouth of 
Celsus, reproaching Christianity as entertaining the vilest of the people, 
gives an account of the church's strictness and <circumspection, mani- 
fested in admitting any to their communion. The Christians, says he, 
to the utmost of their ability, vpofiao'apiawtns rw dicnvfuf tnfi&p PovkofU^ 
vav rh£ infxds, " do first exquisitely search the souls of those who would 
be their hearers,** viz., in order to a full admission ; they bring them to 
the touchstone (fls fi&aapw) tq try whether they be counterfeit.' 

They were strict, and showed great caution, especially where they 
had cause of suspicion. An instance we have in Eusebius.* Constandne, 
having put forth a severe edict against those who infested the churches, 
and opposed the doctrines and truths of Christianity ; the pastors appre- 
hended that this might occasion many to dissemble, and pretend the 

• Can. ii. * Can. xlil. ' Can. xiT. * continued. ' Can. Ixxiii. and xl. 
/ Can. IzviiL i Coot. Celnini, [Ub. Ut. p. 142.] 

* De Vlt. Constant, lib. It. cap. Ixlr. 



embracing of Christiamly, when they designed nothing but their own 
security : in this case they took this course ; they endeavoured with all 
accurateness to discern which of these were sincere, which counterfeits ; 
and as for those who sought to join with the church in hypocrisy, cover- 
ing themselves with sheep^s clothing, those they rejected ; but those who 
did this with a sincere soul, when they had tried them a competent timcy 
^oKifidCovrts xp^^i after sufficient experience of them, furii ri)y aurapxt 
dufarcipov, they admitted them into the church. 

For the second, I shall say the less of it, because more commonly 
insisted on. As they were careful not to admit any imworthy persons 
into the church ; so they thought themselves obliged to expel tiiose who, 
after admission, did manifest their un worthiness. It was the sense of 
the universal church, that scandalous sinners were to be excluded from 
commimion. Nor did they thus proceed only for the most atrocious 
enormities, but also for sins of less provocation ; this was their course 
in minoribua peccatis, as Cyprian declares again and again.' These so 
excluded were on no terms to be readmitted, till they gave evidence of 
a true repentance. Take it in the words of Dionysius of Alexandria, 
r^ cfrtorpo^^y tcai furavouuf avrnp tdovng ; '' having examined them, and 
discerning their conversion and repentance to be such as would be 
accepted by him who wills not so much the death of a sinner, as his 
repentance, they received them in."* 

It was not enough that they professed themselves to be penitent ; they 
were not wont to take their words, and reconcile them upon their bare 
profession ; but would have some proof of the sincerity of such profes- 
sion ; and so kept them off from full communion, in the state of peni- 
tents, several years, in some cases for many years. This may seem too 
great severity ; but the Council of Nice qualifies it, first laying down 
this general rule, that the inward state of such, and the fruits of their 
repentance be observed : for whoever with all fear, and continued tears, 
and good works, do demonstrate their conversion, not with words only, 
but really and effectually, afler some moderate stay in that state, the 
bishop may deal more favourably with them, that is, by admitting them 
more early, than the canons do in other cases allow^^ 

Such orders as these took place amongst Christians, while the honour 
of Christ and religion, the purity of the church, her peace with God, and 
security from contagious members, and reproach of adversaries, were 
more considerable than the greatness of a bishop. And if these rules 
had been conscientiously observed, and the practice of the churches in 
the best ages, so far as herein they followed the conduct of the Scrip- 

• Llb.lil. Epiit. xiv. [Al. £p. ix. Al. x. Al. xtL] and Eplat. xiY. [Al. Ep. xi. Al. xU. AL xyU.] 
» SuMb. Hitt. lib. Ti. cap. [xlii.] ' Can. xl. 


tures, had been imitated, the churches afterwards could not [easily have 
g^wn to such an unwieldy and irregular bigness. 

But there was another reason besides what is suggested, why the bishops 
in afler ages would have their churches as great as possible ; and that is an 
affectation of greatness ; a humour, how much soever unbeseeming pastors, 
who should be examples to the flock, as in other things, so in humility, 
and contempt of outward grandeur ; yet this prevailed too much in part 
of the fourth age, though it was more predominant afterwards. By this 
they were instigated to transgress the ancient bounds, and to neglect the 
rules and practice of the churches in their purer state, and to innovate 
every way which tended to promote their greatness, and served to gratify 
that ambition, which was so common, even in persons otherwise of a good 
character, that it seems to have lost the resentments of a crime. And 
those who have the greatest charity for them, that reason will admit, can 
scarce think those innocent in the particular before us,' who were appa- 
rently guilty in instances just of the same nature, and of such connexion 
therewith, as one may well judge them unsevered, if not inseparable. 

In the age we speak of, which seems too justly styled canbitionia aecu- 
lum, " the age of ambition,*^ (though those, whose designs agree with the 
humour of it, have esteemed it most imitable) scarce any in the church 
could keep their own, that had any there greater than themselves ; (some 
bishops, and not only the presbyters found it so) the great still encroach- 
ing upon those, whose lower condition made them obnoxious to the 
ambition and usurpation of the more potent. 

When some of the mother cities had got the bishops in the lesser 
towns under them by custom, they got it confirmed by canon in the 
Council of Nice ; and so came the pre-eminence of metropolitans to be 

When the empire was divided into dioceses, the bishops of the cities 
where the governors of those exarchates redded, advanced as far above 
the metropolitans as they had got above those bishops. 

And then the bishops of the greatest cities soared as high above the 
exarchs and primates, as those had leaped above the metropolitans. All 
in little more than a hundred years, the time of the four first general 

In that unhappy time, what struggling was there in bishops of all 
sorts for more greatness, and larger power I What tugging at councils 
and court for these purposes I 

A bishop of a coimtry parish would be striving to get another pariah 
under him. The third council, at Carthage,* takes notice of such 
bishops, and their attempts to enlaige their bishoprics beyond the 

• odium. * Cmi. zhrt 


bounds allowed them; and makes a role against such ambitious 

When a bishop had part of a city, he was unsatisfied till he had got 
the whole. Thus Flavianus, at Antioch, would not suffer a bishop to 
be made to succeed Evagrius over that part of the flock which he, and 
Paulinus before him, had ruled there; that he might have the city 
entire to himself. And no wonder that he did not stick at this, if, as 
Sozomen says, he broke the agreement, and his oath which confirmed it 
between Paulinus and him, to make his way to the episcopal chair.' 

When a bishop had a great city, yet some Tillage in the vicinity he 
could not endure should be exempt from his power. Majuma found 
this to its trouble. This being a place near to Gaza, and by some 
counted part of that city, was by Constantine honoured with the privi- 
l^es of a city, and the name of Constantia, for its afiection to Chris- 
tianity ; but being upon the same account reduced to the condition of a 
village by Julian, the bishops of Gaza took this advantage ; and leaving 
it no bishop, (as it had before) would have reduced it under their own 

Not satisfied with one city, some would have two. So four bishops in 
£uropa, a province in Thrace, got each of them two cities under him ; 
one of them both Heraclea and Panion, another Byze and ArcadiopoHsy 
the third Celas and Calliopolis, the fi^urth Sabeadias and Aphrodisias. 
So Florentius, bishop of Tebur, would have wrested Momentum from 
the bishop of Ursus, which Innocent accused him of in his epistle to him. 
This was against the rule and general practice of the church ; but the 
bishops concerned, managed a plea for it in the coimcil, at Ephesus, pre- 
tending it was a peculiar custom of those cities.^ 

Not contented with a city or two, they would have all in a province 
under them ; so Cyril contends with Acacius,' and his successors at 
Jerusalem, with those at CsBsarea, till they had got the province (nay 
three in one) and the metropolitical pre-eminence from tiiem ; though 
Csesarea was regularly the metropolis of Palestine:' Juvenal having after 
this attempted it in the general council at Ephesus, carried it in that 
at Chalcedon ; hereby he who was but a private bishop before, subject 
to the bishop of Cesarea, got him and three metropolitans more under 
him, and about a hundred bishops besides ; and thus he also robbed two 
patriarchs, getting Rabba and Berytus from him of Alexandria, as he 
did Cassarea and Scythopolis from him of Antioch, as William of Tyra 
tells us./ 

• Sozomen. Hist. lib. vii. cap. xl. xv. * Ibid. lib. t. cap. iii. 

« Cone. Eph. Act. rii. ad finem. ^ Soi. lib. It. c^. xxiv. [Ed. Reading, cap. zxt.] 

• Vld. Jerom. [Ep. Ixi.] ad Paromach. / Vld. Bart. lib. xxiHi. p. 323. 


When they had a proyince, they would yet reach at some more 
cities ; whereby Anthimus of Tyana gave so much trouble to Basil.* 

When they had no hopes of the province, and the compassing of it 
seemed not feasible, they would gape at the title, or part of the province; 
so he of Nice becomes titular metropolitan of Bithynia, when the council 
at Chalcedon^ would not allow him the cities in prejudice of Nicomedia, 
the more ancient metropolis.^ And this passed after into example ; and 
hence we meet with so many titular metropolitans in the list of Leo 
Sophus, and others; in that of Nilus Doxopatrias, thirty-four; in that of 
the emperor Leo, thirty -nine; in that published by Carolus k St. Paulo, 
forty-one ; all in one patriarchate, that of C. P.** 

When they had got one province, they would stickle hard for another. 

So that part of France, which was called Narbonensis, being divided 
into two provinces, and Proculus having got one of them under him, 
strives for the other, and a synod in those parts' so far favours him, as 
to grant him the pre-eminence there for his life. 

As if one or two provinces had not been enough, they reached at 
more. Thus the exarchs, or primates, got a whole cluster of provinces 
into their grasp at once. Thus the bishop of Ephesus attempted to 
advance himself over all the provinces in the Asian diocese, and the 
bishop of Cffisarea over those in the diocese of Pontus, and he of Hera- 
clea over those in the diocese of Thrace ; but the bishop of Constanti- 
nople, being more potent, defeated them of all save the title : so the bishop 
of Antioch, who seems but reckoned amongst metropolitans by the 
Coimcil of Nice, not content with his proper province, challengeth 
the rest of the provinces in the diocese of the orient, and seems con- 
firmed therein by the coimcil at Constantinople./ So Hilary, bishop of 
Aries, and metropolitan, not satisfied with his own province, strives also 
for the province of Narbonne, and that also of Vienna ; he was indeed 
therein opposed by Leo the First of Rome, but with a more ambitious 
design than that which he appeared against.' 

When they had got a whole exarchate or diocese, consisting of many 
proyinces,*yet one province moire they would contend for : so Alexander 
of Antioch, not satisfied with all the other provinces of the oriental 
diocese, would needs reduce that of Cyprus too, and deludes Innocent 
the First, bishop of Rome, by misrepresenting the case, to give encou- 

« See Nu. In Land. Bull. 

* So a considerable part of the proTince of Tyre had been wrested from Photlus, bishop there, 
and settled upon the upstart metropoliUn of Berytus, had not the eooncll of Chalfoedon (though It 
authorised many other usurpations) hindered it. Vid. Act. It. Concn. Chaleed. [Hard. torn. It. 
p. 435.] 

• Concil. Chaleed. Act. vl. xiU. ^ Constantinople. • Tanxineiu. Can. [i.] 
^ Can ii. r See Leo ^ist. [Izxxix.] ad Vknnentef. 


ragement to this ambitioaB attempt.* But the council of Ephesus would 
not be 80 easily deluded, which takes occasion from hence to declare 
against the ambition of prektes.* There were fifteen provinces in the 
diocese of the orient ; the bishop of Antioch was so far from having all 
those subjected to him before, that he had not the whole city under him 
till the death of Evagrius, (Paulinus*s successor, in a bishopric made 
up of one part of the city,) in the latter end of the fourth age, anno 394; 
yet when he had swept fourteen of them under his power, and invaded 
them without any authority, he would not be contented without that of 
Cyprus also. 

Nay, two whole dioceses, though consisting of more than twenty pro- 
vinces,*^ would not serve some. 

He of Constantinople,' having usurped upon the diocese of Pontus, 
and Asia before ; in fine, gets them, and those of Thrace, settled on him; 
near thirty provinces in all.* 

And not only Eudoadus, Nectarius, Atticus Sicimius, Proclus, and 
Anatolius, are charged with these usurpations, but Chrysostom (the 
best bishop that city ever had) is said to have a hand in them. He 
ordained fifteen bishops in Asia, and deposed thirteen./ He deposed 
also Gerentius, metropolitan of Nicomedia, in the diocese of Pontus. 
This is owned in the Chaloedon council,*^ that they had reason to believe 
that his proceedings herein were not the issues of ambition, but of great 
zeal for the reforming those churches then intolerably corrupted in 
several ages after the Saracens* invasions of the eastern empire. 

And the bishops of Bome, not content with the gobbets which filled 
the mouths of others, would have swallowed up all. That this was their 
design in the former part of the fifiJi age, is apparent enough ; the edict 
of Valentinian the Third, procured by Leo I., signifieis it plainly. And 

« See Eplst. xtIU. * €mi. tUI. [Berereg. Psndeet. torn. 1. p. 104.] 

« Vid. Theod. Hist. Ub. t. cap. xxviiL 

' He wu but a prlTate biihop, inferior to the bishop of Heradea, a great part of the fourth age : 
but the eoancll at Constaottnople, giving him «n honorary precedence, wptcfltlv rrit n^iit, next to 
the bishop of Rome (the common rise of usurpations lb the church) the bishops of that see were 
encouraged thereby to encroach upon the adjoining provinces ; this they did sucoeesiTely, so that 
their usurpations grew customary, and custom was the plea they used in the council of Chalcedoo, 
and prevailed fbr the authorising of their ambitious practices (as it had prevailed with the councQ 
of Nice, for the establishing of metropolitans) : so that three exarchical dioceses are sul^ected to 
him, containing no less than twenty-eight pnn^nces, wherein [were] eighty-one metropolitans, five 
hundred and seventy-four (six hundred and forty) bishops, and thirty-nine archbishops : for so 
many the NoHOa give an account of in the declining time of the eastern empire, when in all 
probability the numbers of bishops were much lessened. Such a prodigious advance had the 
ambition of the bishops of Constantinople made in a little time, the interval betwixt the second 
and fourth general council ( Nor were they contented with the power of consecrating the metro- 
politans of all those provinces, but challenged a right to ordain the inferior bishops, as appears by 
Atius, Protest in Cone. Chalced. Act. [xvL] Vid. Soerat. lib. viL cap. xxviii. and to depose both 
them and the superiors. 

' CondL Chalced. Can. zxviil. / Soc. lib. vl. cap. x. Sos. lib. viii. cap. vi. 

g Act. xi. [Haxdonin. tom. U. p. 9M.] xiii. [Id. p. 570.] 


what indirect arts, divers of those bishops before Leo made use of, to 
subject the African churches to Rome, is too well known to be men- 

There are too many such instances of the ambition of those times ; 
but these are enough to proceed on. It can be no wonder, that those 
who were still designing, and struggling for more and more, as if th^ 
never thought they had enough, were not willing to part with anything 
they had, nor distribute their overgrown churches imder the conduct of 
other bishops, when they thought all little enough for themselves. 


Let us, before we conclude, take notice what thoughts some of the 
best and most eminent bishops of the fourth and fifUi ages had of a very 
large bishopric, and a flock exceeding numerous : when th^ express 
their judgment and consciences herein, thereby we shall perceive, that 
if the church could have been ordered, aoccnrding to the prindplet, 
desires, and endeavours of the most pious and conscientious, their 
dioceses would not have been so excessively numerous in the fourth 
or fifth ages, above what they were in the third. Chrysostom may 
satisfy us here ; and to avoid tediousness, I shall produce him only, 
whom Isidore of Pelusium styles rijt cmeXi^o-Zof itpBaXfios, and elsewhere, 
6«<nr((rios and $€o(l>6poti and who deserves as mudi honour, for his 
generous and vigorous appearing against the corruption and degeneracy 
of his age, as Athanasius, fb»his opposition to Arius, hie hastibua bettum 
intulity iUe vitiis. First, he frequently declares, that it is incomparably 
better the church should consist but of very few that are good, than of 
multitudes that are bad, and walk not according to the rule of Christ. 
Secondly, that the enormous greatness of churches, and the scandalous 
multitudes which swelled them into such a bigness, was of mischievous 
consequence. Thirdly, therefore he concludes, that though a church 
were thereby reduced to a small number, yet the unworthy multitudes 
ought to be expelled the communion of the church, and deprived of the 
privileges of Christians. 

For the first, rl yhp ^x^or, &c, '' Tell me what can a multitude avail 
us ? Wilt thou understand that the (desirable) multitude are the holy, 
not the many — a great multitude (beloved) when it observes not the will 


of God, is nothing better than none at all ; I pray, and desire, and would 
freely endeavour that the church may be adorned with many, but with 
many that are good ; but if this cannot be, I would have the good, 
though but few. Do you not see, that it is better to have one precious 
stone, than thousands of half-pence ? Do you not see that it is better 
to have an eye that is sound, than to have two encumbered and blinded 
with a swelling camosity ? Do you not see, that it is better to have one 
soimd sheep, than thousands full of the rot ? Do you not see, that a few 
good children are better than many that are naught ? Do you not see, 
that in the kingdom there are few, in hell there are many ? What care 
I for a multitude, what advantage in them ? None at all.*^' 

Elsewhere, '' One'* (says he) " that does the will of Grod is better than 
thousands of transgressors. — ^What care I for a multitude ? it is but a 
more plentiful fuel for the fire ; and this you may know by the body, 
how that a moderate diet with health, is better than luxury with a 
mischief, — ^the one is nourishment, the other a disease. And this may 
be seen in war, — ^it is better to have one expert and valiant man, than 
many thousands that are unskilful ; for these not only effect nothing 
themselves, but hinder those that might. And this one may see in navi- 
gation ; it is better to have two skilfhl mariners, than an innumerable 
multitude of them that have no skill ; for these will sink the vessel. Let 
no man tell me, that we are great multitudes, — and that it is so, observe, he 
that has many servants, if they be untoward, how many grievous things 
will he suffer I To him that has none, this seems a grievance, that he 
is not waited on ; but he that has those that are naught, ruins himself, 
together with them ; and the mischief is greater, for it is not so intolera- 
ble for a man to serve himself, as to be beating and fighting with others. 
This I say, lest any should admire the church for its numerousness : let 
him rather study to make it good."* Again, says he, " It is better to 
offer the usual prayers with two or three that observe the laws of God, 
than to congregate a multitude of transgressors, and such as corrupt 
others."^ And so he prefers the state of the church in former times, 
when under persecution, the number of Christians was small, but the 
persons better ; before the condition of it in his age, when they were 
many more, but much worse.* 

Secondly. He declares the excessive greatness of the church through 
the scandalous multitudes which swelled them into such a bigness, was 
of intolerable consequence, yea was highly dishonourable to God ; a 
stumbling-block to the heathen, hindering their conversion, opening 
their mouths to reproach the Christian name ; pernicious also to the 

• In Act. iU. Horn. iriU. pp. 6M, 656. Edit. SarU. * In AeU, Horn. xxIt. p. 752. 

• In Mfttth. Horn. ztU. pp. 125, 126. ^ In Act. Horn. xxiv. p. 7M. 


better part of the church ; likewise extremely dangerous to the pastors, 
exposing them to pimishment hereafter, and shame here ; and in fine, 
that it tended to ruin and subvert all. 

First. This in his accoimt was a high dishonour to God.' Secondly, 
a reproach to the Christian name, the fiir greatest part of those which 
constituted their churches being unworthy the name of Christians ; the 
whole was denominated from the major part ; and the church, says he, 
(jSovorao-iov ovdcv dirftnivoxt Koi nravXc «r iy»p xal ieafA^X«y,)^ " differs nothing 
^m a fold for beasts, or a stable for camels and asses ; they call us the 
pests of the world, Xoifi^v ^fiof Kakov<ny^ The Christian name upon this 
account was both hated and scorned.' Thirdly. This hindered the 
conversion of the heathen, opening their mouths to reproach the Chris- 
tian name,' reproving the corruption of the generality of Christians. 
" We, we are the cause," (says he,) " that they persist in their error, 
ravra AX^vcv jcarcxft ; SO that we must give an account of this, not only 
for the evil ourselves act, but for that the name of God is blasphemed."-^ 
Elsewhere, "Thus they always answer, when we say we are many, 
yea, but such are naught, say they.*^<^ " These are occasions of more 
blaspheming Grod, than if they were not Christian,^ for God is not so 
blasphemed by a flagitious heathen, as by a debauched Christian.' For 
when we have ten thousand times confuted their opinions, they upbraid 
us with the lives of the many congr^ated with us, 6v€tbuiowiw tiiup t6p 
piov r6¥ r»y irdkkmw^ And a little after, when we say that Christ has 
done great things, making angels of men, afterwards an acooimt hereof 
being required, and we called on to give a proof of this in the flock, rirt- 
aTOfu{6fi«Ba, our mouths are stopped : for I fear, lest instead of angels, 
I should bring forth hogs out of the sty, or wild horses." And' " we are 
derided by the heathen, and all that we say seems a fable to them.** 
Fourthly. It is pernicious to the better part of the church. The admit- 
ting 80 many that were corrupt, and folding them together with the few 
that were sound, tended to infect the whole, and debauch all. tt iftol km 
r^ nXriBti. " What care I for a multitude ? What advantage is it ? 
None at all, but rather a plague to the rest : for it is all one, as if he 
who might have ten sound (sheep) rather than thousands that are 
diseased, should mix those thousands with the ten."*" Fifthly. This 
tended to ruin the church utterly and overthrow all, when pastors 
aflbcted to have multitudes under their charge, though they were 
naught. " By this," says he, " all is subverted, all is turned topsy- 
turvy, because even as in the theatres, we desire multitudet, not only 

• Vid. in Act. p. 752. * In Matth. Horn. IxzxiriiL p. 544. • In Johman. Horn. Izzil. p. BBB. 

' In C0I088. Horn. vii. p. 12S. ' Ibid. / In Joluum. Horn. Izzii. p. U7, 8U. 

r In Act. Hon. xxW. p. 752. * Ibid. * In Johann. Horn. Izriii. p. 840. 

* Horn, in Matth. Izxxviii. p. 543. ' In ColoM. Horn. vU. p. 128. « In Act. Hon. xti|, p. •§<. 


those that are good."* Sixthly. This was extremely dangerous to th 
pastors. "The many,** (says he,) "that are not good, procure m< 
nothing but punishment (hereafter) and shame at present."^ Mor 
particularly, a bishop could not take cognisance of the various condi 
tions of so many, nor could possibly discharge all the duties he owei 
ihem, and so could give no comfortable account of them, though he .b 
accountable for every soul, whereby it came to pass, that it was " ahnos 
impossible any bishop should be saved.** 

A bishop at the peril of his soul is to take exact notice of the spirit 
ual state of all under his charge, and constantly to perform all pastora 
duties to the whole flock. *Eittunamii, &c. " The episcopate,** (says he,) " i 
80 called from the inspecting alL**^ He ought to be an overseer of all 
bearing the burdens of all;' fivpl»p (^0 ^ffMkiuiP irp6s t6 ntpttnawmwi 
w6»To$€P r^ Tfjt ^vxijt i(uf ; he had need of many thousand eyes to loci 
into the state of every soul under him, which of them cannot diges 
bitter remedies, and who for want of them grow careless.' He ought U 
leave nothing unobserved, but to search into all accurately:-^ no speck ii 
his flock should escape his notice ; he ought to train up his cluurge tn 
an excellent temper, to admirable comeliness, looking everywhere abou 
him, lest there be any spot, or wrinkle, or blemish, which may spoi 
that beauty and comeliness.**' He will be cast into hell if he be na 
thus accurate about every one ; all exactness as to himself will no 
secure him. " A bishop,** says he, " though he order his own life weU 
if he do not exactly take care of thee, and of all that are imder him 
to hell he goes with the wicked. And often he that miscarries no 
by his own concerns, is ruined by yours, although he very well rectiQ 
all that belongs to him.**^ 

The pastoral duties which he is to perform to all his flock, are many 
and painful, and hazardous. " When the apostle says, ayptrnvova-i, the] 
watch for your souls, it speaks thousands of labours, and cares, an< 
perils,' buyrrytpSai dci, he ought to be up still, and to be ardent in spirit 
and, as I may say, to breathe fire, (irvp irwctv,) and to go the round 
night and day, more than any commander in an army, and to laboiu 
and to toil, and to take care ofj and be very solicitous for all.* A&yov fU> 
d^HTOfitv, &c. " We must give an account of all your souls, when we hav< 
been defective in anything, when we have not comforted, or not admon 
ished, or not convinced."' 

This should be done, not only publicly, but privately also, both U 
men and women ; " For a bishop,** says he, " who regards all his flock 

• In Act. Ham. rlU. p. $U. * In Act ibid. • In 1 Tim. Horn. x. pp. S85, 28C 
' In Act. Horn. iU. p. 6S6. ' De Sacerd. Ont. U. / Ibid. p. 10. 

r Ibid. Ont. iv. p. H. * In Johann. Horn. Ixxxvi. p. 9SS. * In Rom. Horn. p. S26 

* In 1 Tim. Horn. x. p. S86. 'In Bph. Horn. xi. p. 824. 


must not take care only of the men in particular, and neglect the women, 
but of necessity must visit them when distressed, and comfort them when 
in sorrows, and .rebuke them when they are careless, and relieye them 
when under pressures."* Unless he daily go to their houses — ^he will 
be much exposed.^ Further he is, says he, accountable for all and 
every soul, for all their sins, for the damnation of every one that perishet 
any way through his default. In Heb. xiii. 17. 6 yitp ^>6fio£, '' The dread 
of that threatening,*' says he, " continually shakes my soul ; for, if he 
that offends but one (Matt, xviii. 6) shall suffer so much, what then 
shall they suffer, what punishment shall they endure, under whom so 
many miscarry ? &c. Want of experience will be no excuse, nor igno- 
rance, nor necessity, nor force. One of the flock may sooner be excused 
for his own sins, than bishops for the sins of others ; and therefore 
pimishment b unavoidable, if any one (in his charge) happen to perish. 
We must be accountable for a business that requires the virtue of angels.** ' 
'< He is exposed to so great danger, though what concerns himself be in 
good condition, if what belongs to thee be not well ordered, he is obnox- 
ious, and must give a double account.**' " He that has the charge of a 
great city, see to how great flame he exposes himself; he shall be called 
to account not only for the souls that perish, (and he destroys them 
being one that fears not God) but for all the things that are not acted by 
him he shall be responsible. Of all the sins that are committed by him, 
yea, by all the people shall he give account. And if he that offends bat 
one, &c., he that offends so many souls, whole cities and people, many 
thousand souls, men, women, children, citizens, husbandmen, those in the 
cities, those in places belonging to it, what shall he' imdergo ? If thoa 
say thrice more than the other, thou sayest nothing ; so very great is 
the punishment and suffering that he is liable to.**' *Ayfwiryflt, &c. '' He 
watches, he hazards his own head, he is liable to the punishment of 
their sins ; and for this is his condition so fearful.**-^ 

Hence it is marvellous to him if any bishops escape damnation. 0av- 
fjidCa, &c. " I wonder,** says he, '' if any of the bishops can ever be saved, 
considering the greatness of the threatening, and their negligence, any 
of them especially who are greedy of so great a charge, who run upon 
it, hnrp^xovras,' He calls them miserable wretches that desire it, and 
is astonished at them, r\ 3tf ns c&roc, <&c. What can one say to those 
wretches, who plunge themselves into such an abyss of sufferings? Thoa 
must give an account for all whom thou rulest, women, men, children ; into 
so great flame dost thou thrust thine own head. If those that are forced 

• De SMerd. Ont. Tl. p. 49. * lUd. Ont. UL p. S9. • IMd. Out. tL p. 44. 

' In 2 Tim. Horn. IL p. 336. ' In Tit. Hom. L p. tS4. 

/ In Heb. Horn. xxxW. p. 60S. # In H«b. ilild. ud in Aet. Horn. Ili. p. 687. 


on it, be unpardonable, not well ordering it ; how much more thoi 
that labour for it ! Such a one does much more deprive himself of a 
pardon ; he ought to fear and tremble.'^' Elsewhere, '' I am astonishei 
says he, " at those who seek such a weighty charge. Wretched an 
miserable man, dost thou see what thou seekest ? canst thou answer f< 
one soul ? When thou hast got this dignity, consider to the punishmei 
of how many souls thou art liable.^ He cries out astonished at tfa 
greatness of the hazard, pafiai w6<ro9 6 KMvrog."^ 

Before I proceed with this excellent person, let us look a little bac 
on the premises. If there must be so much care and watchfulness in i 
bishop over every soul ; if so many duties in public and private are t 
be performed by him to every one, and if when any sin is committal 
for want of his care and watdifulness, or due measure thereof, or an; 
n^lect of, yea, or remissness, in any of those duties, it will be the bishop* 
guilt, if any soul perish through omission, or defectiveness, or rmdw 
performance, the blood of it will be required at his hands ;' well migh 
he prefer a diocese with one communion-table, before the bigges 
/SovoTxdrfoir that a large country can afford ; well might he say as h 
does,' hnnwwy &c. ^ It is very burdensome to have the charge of a hun 
dred and fiffy souls.'* But it had been too little if he had said a thousam 
times more than I have alleged, against the desperate wretchedness aii( 
blindness of those who are forward to take charge of so many, as [that] 
it is impossible they should be duly watchful over an hundredth part o: 
them, and never p^orm any one of those duties to many thousands o; 
them. But he thought it to no purpose to speak to such (ov yhp fioi wep 
Utiimv, &c.) who come to such a charge as their ease, and give them- 
selves to sloth and remissness ; and yet take a charge, and admit but 
one there to be a pastor, which requires the utmost diligence of i 
thousand pastors. What does the guilt of millions of sins, the blood o: 
myriads of souls weigh upon such heads ? 

Moreover, hereby it is evident that Chrysostom (the best writers ir 
those times concurring with him) would have a church no larger, and 
could not count it tolerable for any one to have a flock consisting oi 
more than he could take exact and particular notice of, and discharge 
all pastoral duties to, and be accountable for, without apparent hazard 
of his soul. Such principles would not admit of very laige bishoprics, 
when the measures of them were set out, with respect to duty and future 
account ; these would confine them to narrow bounds. When these 
measures were laid aside, they grew larger ; but how little this great 
person would have been satisfied with such enlargement, and what 

• In Heb. Horn. xxxIt. p. MS. * In Tit. Horn. i. p. S84. 

• In Heb. Horn. [xxxW.] p. 0OS. * VId. Orat. vi. de Saceid. p. 44 

• Horn, in Ignat. 


methods he thought needful to retrench some excess in his times, 
(though little compared with that in afler ages) will appear by what 
follows. He apprehended the excessive greatness of a church under 
one bishop, to be of pernicious and damnable consequence to all sorts. 
Churches were not such then generally, but in a manner only in very 
great cities, (such as that wherein he presided ;) that which swelled 
them so big tliere, was the admitting and tolerating in their communion 
all that called themselves Christians, though they neither were such 
indeed, nor lived like such. Against this, he resolves to bend all his 
endeavours, though the church were thereby like to be reduced to a 
small number. This is the next head of those before propounded. 

Thirdly, He is peremptory, that the tmworthy multitude should be 
expelled, Km yiip, &c. '^ For the sheep that are full of the scab, and 
abound with diseases, should not be folded together with the sound, but 
driven from the fold, until they be cured.**" And by the expressions he 
uses frequently, he signifies that it was his opinion, that the church 
would lose nothing by such an evacuation, but that corruption which 
both endangered and defaced her ; that though the tumour fell, and the 
body were lessened, yet it would be more sound and healthful, parting 
with nothing in the loss of such bulkiness, but the matter of their dis- 
ease, and the cause of their deformity. That through the neglect of 
such a course, by those who were concerned to pursue it, all went to 
wreck and ruin. That this indulgence was such a sin, as could scarce 
expect pardon ; and for his part he resolved not to involve himself in 
that guilt, as apprehensive that he could never answer such a neglect 
of Christ's laws, before his dreadful tribunal ; and though he lost the 
most of his people by it, yea, though he should lose his place for it, yet 
would he empty the church of those corrupt multitudes. • 

'^ Through the neglect of such a course all went to wreck, mSmi 
otx€T(u ; all goes to wreck and is ruined, and the reason is, because 
those that sin are not censured, and those that rule are distempered,*' 
citing 1 Tim. v. 22. 

'* This indulgence was such a sin as could scarce expect pardon, Tiwa 
^(o/jLtv (rvYY^fui¥, &c. What pardon can we expect, corrupting all by 
such indulgence ? there was reason to look for greater severi^ than £11 
met with.*** 

He resolved not to involve himself in such guilt, because he could 
never give an account of it. " I will not," says he, " tolerate, I will not 
admit you, neither will I suffer you to come over these thresholds ; let 
who will withdraw ; let who will complain of me. For what need have 
I of a multitude that are diseased ? — I will forbear none : for when I 

• In Johum. Horn. IxlU. p. 814. • la MsMl Stan. zvtt. p. lU. 


shall be judged before the tribimal of Ghrist, you yill stand afiur off, 
and your favour will nothing avail me, when Pam called to account.* 
'Airayopffvo-w, &C. I will forbid you hereafter to pass over these threaholdfl, 
and to partake of the immortal mysteries, as if you were fornicators, or 
adulterers, or accused of murder : for it is better to join in prayer wiih 
two or three that observe God's law, than to assemble a multitude of 
tran^;ressors, and such as debauch the rest Let no rich man, let 
none that is potent swell here, and show his superciliousness ; I regard 
these no more than a tale, or a shadow, or a dr^eam ; none of the wealthy 
will then relieve me, when I shall be challenged and accused, as not 
having vindicated the laws of God with due severity."^ 

He would empty the church of those refractory multitudes, though 
he lost many of his flock by it. '* But there are, say they, other sects, 
and they will turn to them, (if they meet with such severity as before 
he had threatened,) ^xP^s oiW 6 \6yof, this is a foolish saying ; it 
is better to have one doing the will of God; than ten thousand trans- 
gressors. And which had you rather choose, (tell me,) to have many 
fugitive and thievish servants, or one that is well disposed ? Let who 
will withdraw, let who will complain, I will spare none. Such words 
spoil all, that he may depart, (they say) and turn to another sect**^ 

Tea, though he ^ould lose his bishopric by such a course, the fear 
of it should not hinder or retard him : '' I will expel, I will interdict 
those that are not obedient ; as long as I sit in this chair, I will suflfer 
none of his commands to be neglected. If any one displace me I shall 
then be unaccountable ; but so long as I am liable to an account, I can- 
not connive, not only in regard of my own punishment, but of your 

• And what great numbers would have been excluded the church by 
this course, considering the great degeneracy and corruptions of those 
tunes, which he so often, so pathetically complains of, will appear by 
the particulars in his account liable to this process, and the vast extent 
thereof. He would have excluded from communion, " Not only mur- 
derers, adulterers, fornicators, swearers,' but the unmerciful,/ the covet- 
ous,*' the envious,* the profuse otherwise, but uncharitable to the poor,' 
the superstitious,* symbolisers with foreign rites, either Jewish,' or 
heathenish,"* fr^uenters of plays,* those that neglected sermons to follow 
their sports.® And not only those that neglected what was good, and 

• In Colou. Horn. tU. p. 1S8. « In Matth. Horn. xvii. pp. 1S5, 126. 

• In Colou. Horn. tU. p. 128. ^ In Act. Horn. rii. p. 656. 

• In Matth. Horn. xtU. p. 125. / Page 515. 

r In Matth. Horn. [IxxxU.] p. 514. and [Horn, xr.] in I Cor. p. S87. 

« In Matth. Horn. xl. p. 269. * In Coloaa. Horn. rii. p. 128. 

• Ibid. p. 184. ' Cont. Jud. torn. t1. p. 878. - In Heb. Horn. iv. p. 454. 

• In Johann. Horn. i. p. 558. and torn. t. p. 89. • In Gen. Horn. vi. p. 88. 


acted what was evil, but evil speakers too." " Whosoever was wicked,'** 
a/ia/iroiX6r. " Whosoever was not cleansed from his sin, dicaBafyr6s,^ 
Whosoever was not a true disciple, but a counterfeit, as Judas was.^ 
Whosover is not KaBaphsy pure/ What then, whom shall we admit ? 
says he, neither those that come but once a year, nor those that come 
often, nor those that come seldom ; but those that come with a pure 
heart, and with an untainted life ; let such as these have access always, 
but those that are not such, not so much as once at any time ; because 
they receive judgment to themselves, and condemnation, and punish- 
ment, and severity," &c. 

Whosoever is not holy, ^ior, which is more than the former ; and 
he took it to be the sense of the church, expressed of old in their solemn 
commimion, r^ cfyta roU ayiois; and so he explains it. '' If any one be 
not holy, let him have no access ; he says not only, if he be clear of 
wickedness, but if he be holy, for freedom from wickedness does not 
make one holy, but the presence of the Spirit, and plenty of good works." 
" I would not only," says he, " have them freed from dirt, but to be white 
and beautiful."'^ In fine, all that are under the giiilt of any sin, which 
excludes from the kingdom of heaven.^ '^ It seems to me the speech is 
concerning the leaven, and it reaches the priests, who suffer much of 
the old leaven to be within, and do not purge it out of their confines, 
that is, out of the church ; the covetous, the extortioner, and whatsoever 
excludes from the kingdom of heaven." 

Now taking this course to which he was drawn by the authority of 
Christ, the inforcements of conscience, and so many and so cogent rea- 
sons ; what a thin church would he have lefl himself, (though he pre- 
sided in one of the most populous cities in the world,) we may easily 
discern by the premises, if withal we add what he tells his auditory.* 
" How many do you think in the city will be saved ? It is an odious 
thing I am going to say, but I will say it notwithstanding ; there is 
not amongst so many m3rriads (which he tells us elsewhere were one 
hundred thousand) a hundred to be foimd that will be saved,' yea, and 
I question," adds he, " whether so many." He alleges the general corrup- 
tion of all sorts, old and young, as the reason why his charity was no 
more extensive. "And* all things," says he, " are ruined and corrupted, 
and the church differs little from a stable of beasts, or a fold of asses and 
camels ; and I go about seeking to find one sheep, but I can see none." 
Affording these passages the allowance which is requisite in like cases. 

• [Horn, xvi.] in 1 Cor. p. 540. « ' In 1 Tim. Horn. t. p. 270. 

' In Matth. Horn. Ixxxii. p. 515. and Horn. [1.] in Tit. p. 384. ' In Matth. ibid. 

' In Heb. Horn. xtU. p. 533. / Ibid. pp. 524, 525. 

r In 1 Cor. Horn. 15. [p. 337.] ' In Act. Horn. 24. 

' Page 753. * In Jo. Horn. IxxxviU. p. 544. 


and underatanding, by not one, very few, and we have ^ke church to which 
Chrysostom's principles and conscience confined him ; — ^principles too 
severe indeed, for that dissolute and degenerate age, into which he was 
fallen; and so his pursuing them, was the occasion of his fall, if that 
may be called a fall, which exalted him to an honour, little less than 
that of martyrdom. 

But suppose the multitudes in his diocese had been such, as he endea- 
youred to make them ; it may be inquired, whether then he would have 
been content with so numerous a flock. 

Ans. This was never the happiness of any bishop, and so it is not to 
be supposed ; but to proceed upon it : his principles before specified, 
obliged him to grasp no more for his particular charge, than he could 
perform all pastoral duties to, so as he might give a comfortable account 
thereof; yet he might have been better satisfied with a very numerous 
flock, if they had been qualified according to his desires ; and a large 
diocese of such a constitution had been more tolerable, in the circum* 
stances wherein he and others were at that time : for there were many 
more pastors within that place where he presided ; he was not so 
strangely arrogant as to count himself the sole pastor of so large a city ; 
all sense and conscience of a pastoral charge was not then lost ; there 
were very many who were both to rule and feed that flock, not he alone; 
and betwixt him and them, he declares there was no difierence at all, 
but only in point of ordination.* 

For their number, there is reason to judge them above an hundred ; 
the great church had sixty presbyters at its first establishment, and 
those increased till Justinian's time, as he shows.^ And in all the rest 
we may well suppose there were as many. The number of Christians, 
good and bad, the sects also included, was one hundred thousand, as he 
tells us.^ Now allow a fifUi part to the sects, no more wiU remain fi)r 
the charge of one hundred or one himdred and ten pastors, than has 
been made account of in one parish in London ; and being divided 
among so many, the charge of each would be no more than a small 

This may be said to be a query, grounded on a supposition, which 
had no place there nor elsewhere, but in imagination. But in the con- 
dition wherein he really was, he would have had a church in his and 
their charge, more than a hundred times less, than the corruption of 
that age (which he so much laments) had swelled it to, since he thought 
himself obliged to exclude so many from the privileges of Christians, so 
that one of the greatest churches and bishoprics in the fifUi age con- 

• Horn. zi. in 1 Tim. * Not. iii. ' In Acts. Horn. xi. 


lained not many more de faetOy than some one of our parishes ; but de 
jurtf Chrysostom being judge, too few to be spoken of, if it had been 
pnmed as he thought it necessary. 


Let me, in the kst place, take notice of something which may be 
inferred from the premises, or which they otherwise offer to our 

The change of the primitive form of churches made a great alteration 
in the government of tiie church, dissolving it in a manner by degrees, 
and reducing it very near to anarchy. 

For when the bishop could not be content with a moderate charge, 
such as he was capable to manage, but extended it to such a lai^geness, 
that it became ungovernable by him, ri^v dpxoy avrov avapxuu^ tUSnts 
K€KkrfKas, (as Isidore," of a bishop of his time,) " this pretended ruling was no 
longer government, but anarchy.** When one church, though consisting 
of as many as tiie church of the ancient bishop did ordinarily comprise, 
and of more than new or old was any way sufficient alone to govern, 
would not suffice him ; but under pretence, tiiat it was his office and pre- 
rogative to rule many such, he did not set himself to govern any one more 
than another, nor would admit any other ruler or pastor in all or any of 
them but hioiself ; the churches were, and coidd not but be left without 
government. Thus, to use Basil^s words, avapxia tU dcim^ atrh ^iXopx^ 
TavTrjs ToU \aoU iw€x»iuurtv,^ '' through this ambition of governing all, aU 
church government came to nothing." As if a pilot, who can be but in 
one ship at once, and is not sufficient to steer that alone, should under- 
take to do this for twenty, or a hundred, or five hundred ships ; and 
should get it ordered under severe penalties, that none else shoidd meddle 
with a helm but himself ; those ships will be steered, and those churches 
in like circumstances will be governed alike. It is all one in effect, as 
if there were no helm in the ships, no government in the churches. 
Zosimus, censuring the Romans for committing the rule of the empire 
(so large a diocese) to one man's discretion, (though such a man as 
Augustus,) says, they minded not, that hereby they hazarded the hopes 
of the universe, as it were upon the throw of a die, tfXaBov covrovr kv/Sov 

« Lib. iii. Epttt. ccczix. • I>e Spir. Sane. csp. ult. 



apapfii^ltaPT€9 Arl raif warrmv Mpctwmv Tktruri ; adding, " that if he were 
minded to rule them duly and justly, it was impossible at so great a 
distance ; if tyrannically, it would be intolerable ; and in fine, there 
was necessity,** says he, '' that the unreasonable authority of one man 
should prove icoiv6y dvorvxiy/ia,'' ' a common calamity.'" I leave the appli- 
cation of this to others, only take along herewith the judgment of 
Chrysostom, '* that it was fax more easy for a prince to rule the 
universe, than for a bishop to govern one town."* But what mig^t 
Zosimus have said, if Augustus ruling the place where he was, no mbre 
than the remoter parts, would have admitted no other governor in 
places near or remote, but himself alone; would not he and all have 
concluded, that the empire must unavoidably be left to the miseries of 
anarchy ? It is true, there seems a great difference betwixt an empire 
and a diocese ; but there is also a great latitude in impossibilities : as 
a man cannot possibly jump into the moon ; so neither is it possible 
for him to spring up twenty miles into the air. 

This clears up to us a considerable practice of the primitive church. 
In the apostles* times, and divers ages after, all the people under the 
inspection of one bishop, were wont to meet together, not only for wor- 
ship, but other church administrations ; all public acts passed at assem- 
blies of the whole people ; they were consulted with ; their concurrence 
was thought necessary, and their presence required ; that nothing might 
pass without their cognisance, satisfaction, and consent. This was 
observed, not only in elections of officers, but in ordinations and cen- 
sures ; in admission of members, and reconciling of penitents, and in 
debates and consultations about other emergencies. There is such 
evidence for this in ancient writers, particularly in Cyprian, almost in 
every one of his epistles, (where we have a more satisfying account of the 
government of the church, and the exercise of in those times, than in 
many volumes of the following age,) that it is acknowledged by modem 
writers of all sorts, such as are the most learned and best acquainted 
with antiquity. 

And when this is granted, it cannot be denied, that of old the bishop's 
charge was as small as we represent it : for it may be easily conceived 
how all the people might use this liberty and privilege, when the bishop 
had but one church ; but if his diocese had been of a modem size, or 
anything near it, this had been altogether impracticable. 

In 'short, the enlarging of bishoprics so much beyond the ancient 
bounds, so as the people were deprived of their primitive privilege, and 
could not have the moderate liberty of intervening at all in church 
affairs, by themselves, or any to represent them, inferred a great, if not 

• Hut. Ub. I. p. 4. [Ed. Ozon. 1679, p. 6. J • la Act. Horn. Ui. p. 626. 


an essential change in the government of the church. Whereas before 
it was mixed, and had something of a popular cast, (as there is in the 
best forms of civil government ;) hereupon the people's interest being 
excluded, it became absolute. It was no longer, as Plato says it was 
sometimes at Athens, and as Grotius tells us it was in the primitive 
church, dpitrrotcparia fur cvdoxtar rov irX^^r,* " an aristocracy ordering all 
things with the good liking of the people." 

Hereby an account may be given of the great diversity of rites and 
usages in the ancient churches. A single congregation was a competent 
charge for a primitive bishop ; so that episcopal churches were greatly 
multiplied ; each of such churches had power to govern and order 
itself, and had so followed such orders as every church thought fit, with- 
out being obliged to conform to those of others. They had no rule nor 
order, in things of this nature, requiring invariable observance ; nor did 
they regard such uniformity as others, many hundred years after, in 
ages as many times worse, seem fond of. None of those churches used 
the same prayers, nor the Lord's Prayer but only at the eucharist. All of 
them had not the same creed, nor used any at their public worship, but 
what was repeated by the catechumens at baptism. They had not the 
same rites in baptism, or the Lord's supper, nor the same way in con- 
firming, marrying, or burying. They used not the same mode either in 
reading the Scriptures, or singing. They observed not the same 
methods in admitting members, or preparing them for communion, 
neither in proceeding to censures, nor reconciling penitents. They 
differed in their habits and postures. They varied in their fasts, both 
for time and manner. They observed not the same festivals ; nor more, 
I think, than two of the many that are now observed. So very various 
were their usages in the primitive ages, each preferring their own, and 
declining others. Such as this, and what might be showed in more 
instances, was the uniformity of the ancient churches. That which is 
now admired appears hereby to be a mere novelty. How far were they 
from counting it worthy of Christian pastors, to make this more their 
business, than the suppressing of sin, and promoting of real holiness ! 
And who can believe, that they design, or understand Christian peace 
and unity, who hurry all into divisions and confusions, for haste after 
that which the best churches thought not worth looking after ? Those 
that have read the ancients, and observed their usages, will question 
none of this, and so there is no need to bring particular authorities to 
confirm it. Only this in general. In Egypt, Sozomen tells us, many 
cities and villages not only differed from the observances of Alexandria, 
and other towns in that country, but from all other churches besides.* 

' Annot. in Act. Ti. 2. « Hitt Ub. tIL cap. six. 


In Africa, Austin expresses the diversities to be innomerabley nM tamm 
omnia cammemorm potuerint'^ In other parts of the Latin church, Italy 
particularly, Innocent the First says, that several churches had their 
several modes of celebrating, divers^ in diversia lods, vel eod^ms obttr- 
neri, aut ceUkrari videntur.^ In the Greek church, and elsewhere, 
Socrates gives a large account of their different rites and usages,^ where, 
after abundance of instances, he says, to reckon up all is not only diffi- 
cidt, but impossible, fpycodcr fioXXov df ddvvcerov,* And yet there was no 
hurt in all this, so long as there was an agreement in the fidth, if we will 
believe one of the greatest prelates in the west, and that at no less than 
six hundred years' distance from Christ, in una fidt nihil officU aancbB 
ecclesicB divena consuetude^ saith Gregory the First ; " where there is 
one i^th, it is no harm to the church if there be diversity of usages ;*' 
that is, the church has no harm for want of uniformity. Nay, the faith 
has advantage by difference in rites, says Irensus to Victor,' ii dta4>mi4a 
Tij£ vn<mLas rriv 6fi6woia» lift fr/oTftor (rvy/onyort, '' a diversity in less matters 
commends the church, when there is an agreement in points of fidth." 

This may restrain us from charging one another with schism for such 
things, wherein the ancient churches are like to be involved in the same 

In the best ages of Christianity, they were still erecting new churches 
in towns and country places, as appears by the former discourse. 

The bishops did commonly consent that such churches should be con- 
stituted of Christians in their vicinity ; or, if they refused imreasonably^ 
it was done without their consent. The bishops of Gaza are instances 

Those churches were single congregations, settled under peculiar 
officers of their own choosing, viz., a pastor or bishop, and usually one 
or more assistants. 

By these they were governed and ordered without subjection to any 
rulers of other churches. Cyprian, in the middle of the third age, (who 
well knew the current sense and practice of those times,) declares, that 
none of them then did take themselves to be bishops of bishops, neque 
enim qtuaquam nostrum se episcopum episcoporum constituit And when 
metropolitans got place in the churches, they had no ruling power over 
other pastors, but a mere presidency in their assemblies, where the rule 
was, (as the council that first authorised them decreed,) Kpardno ^ rSw 
v\€i6vfov yl^rj<f}os, '* that all should be carried by plurality of voices.*'/ 

Those single churches had severed^ assemblies, and held distinct com- 
munion from other churches : they did not think themselves bound to 

• Retract. lib. ii. cap. xx. * Epist. ad Deeentium. * ' Hist. lib. v. cap. xxli. 

' Sm Soxom. ubi supra. ' In £useb. lib. v. cap. xxvi. / Cone. Nic. Can. vi. 

r separate. 


conform to any other church ; either near to them, or further off, in 
rites, forms, or other observances of this nature. They owned no rule 
obliging them to use the same prayers, the same gestures, the same 
vestments or modes of administration ; but every pastor had power to 
order himself in such things according to his discretion ; and it was 
judged tjrrannical for one to prescribe to another, and all power of 
imposing expressly disclaimed." Neque enim quisquam nostrum epUco- 
pum se epiacoporum constituitj aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequencU necessi- 
tatem coUegas suas adegit, quando habeat omnia episcopus pro licentia 
libertatis et potestatis auoe arhitrium proprium, tamque judkari ah alio non 
possity quam nee ipse potest alterum judicartJ* " None of us takes upon 
himself to be a bishop of bishops, or by tyrannical intimidation to 
bring his colleagues to subserviency, since every bishop possesses a 
judgment of his own by virtue of his individual liberty and power ; and 
as he cannot be judged by any other, so neither can he himself judge 
any other." 

Nemini prescribentes aut prcejudicantes, quo minus unusquisque episco- 
porum quod putaverit facicU/' &c. " We neither dictate to any, nor 
forestall the judgment of any, in order that every bishop may act accord- 
ing to his own opinion." 

Nemini prcescribenteSy quo minus statuat unusquisque prcspositus quod 
putat, actus sui rationem domino redditurus.^ *^ We dictate to no one, in 
order that every bishop may decide according to his own judgment, as 
being to give account of what he does to the Lord." 

And thus those churches continued, though they were condemned by 
the civil laws, and forbidden by the magistrates, for three hundred 
years and more. 

These severals' are either clear by the premises, or will not be ques- 
tioned by any who are not strangers to antiquity. And if nothing of 
schism be found in all this, they are not to be charged with it, who are 
now in the like circumstances. This cannot be done with justice or 
charity, no nor with prudence neither ; for those who accuse others of 
schism for dissenting from them, in those things wherein the accusers 
depart from the universal church in the best ages, will find the charge 
recoil upon themselves ; seeing it is not to be doubted, but in time it will 
be counted less schismatical, to imitate the universal church retaining 
her integrity ; than to differ from those who propose the wracks and 
ruins of the church for their exemplar. 

Hereby it appears, with what judgment and charity, some amongst 
us will have none to be true churches that want diocesan bishops. If 
by a diocesan they understand one who is the sole pastor of many 

- St. Jerom. p. 872. * Cypr. in Cone. Carthag. ' Id. Epist. ad Jubian. [Ep. Ixxiii.] 
' Id. Epist. ad Mag. [Ep. Ixzvi. (al. Izix.)] ' particulars. 


churches ; they hereby blast all tihe ohurohes in liie mpotOmf i 
the best ages after, as no ohnrchesy iotr none of these had anj watk 
diocesans ; and so herein they are as wise iad fiiendlyi m» if one, tft 
secure the height of his own turret, should attempt to blow np all tiia 
houses in the best part of the world. Nay, th^ blow up their own too : 
for hereby they deny both the beginning, and succession of chnrcbea for 
divers hundred years. And if there were no churches theUi they will 
not dream there can be any now ; seeing by their principles ihe heoDg 
of them now, depends upon the beginning, and uninterrupted aoooea- 
sion of them. There can be no succeediag at all, where there ia no 
banning ; no uninterrupted succession, where there is a total &ihize 
for whole ages. 

So likewise it is hereby manifest, that Uiere were no diocesaa 
churches in those ancient times ; I mean many churches tinited under 
one bishop, as their sole ruler and pastor. No such thing appears ftr 
diyers whole ages after Christ. The ancient bishop had but one church, 
one temple, one communion-table, where all that belonged to him might 
communicate together. Petavius could discover no more chiuches in 
any city but one. In the fourth age there were indeed, in some citieiy 
some other places where Christians held assemblies for other (^Bioes ; 
but none but one for the eucharist. Those places were called tituU at 
Borne, laurcB at Alexandria. I find them nowhere else, but in those 
two cities, so early ; but they were like chapels of ease rather than 
churches. Epiphanius reckons up above ten of them in Alexandria ; 
but we have more in some one parish in England, yet the vicar there 
was never counted a diocesan. Much less were there any diocesan 
churches of that largeness, whereof those that write for them amongst 
us, do usually take them, as comprising all the churches in a great 
shire, yea, in many counties together ; for such a circuit of old was a 
province, or more than a province, though that comprised multitudes 
of their ecclesiastical dioceses. No single bishop was then allowed to 
be such a pliuulist. It was thought enough for a metropolitan, if not 
for a patriarch, to have the superintendency of such a country canton- 
ised unto multitudes of bishops under him. Yea, many metropolitans 
together had not so large a circuit for their inspection as some one 
modem diocese. The greater Phrygia, if I much mistake not, was 
scarce bigger than the diocese of Lincoln, and yet had in it seven or 
eight metropolitans, viz., of Laodicea, Synnada, Hierapolis, Amorium, 
Cotjraeum, Apamea, Chonse, &c. And to one of them, viz., Laodicea, 
belonged more bishops than all England has ; that, and Synnada only, 
had more bishops than England, Scotland, and Wales. 

Those that plead for such bishops, plead for more than diocesans, 
prodigiously more extending their jurisdiction to multitudes of towns 


and their territories, each of which would have been thought sufficient 
for a bishop's diocese of old. For divers had no territory in their epis- 
copal charge ; and others, and the most of them, had no territory larger 
than that of a parish, (such as we have many,) which will not be allowed 
to be called a diocese without laughter. And where the region was 
larger, and replenished vrith Christians, usually there was some bishop, 
or many in the territory, besides him in the city : for, as we showed 
before, to settle bishops in country places and villages, and towns no 
bigger than villages, was the free and frequent practice of the church, 
without any show of restraint till the middle of the fourth age ; and if 
they had proceeded in that course, probably within the compass of another 
age, every country town, or handsome village, where Christianity pre- 
vailed, would have had its bishop, as M[r.] T[aylor] a learned prelatiBt 
(better acquainted vrith the state of the ancient church, than those who 
have the confidence to affirm, that here were never bishops in villages) 
tells us, it was in Africa. And why they should not have proceeded still 
in the same course in other places, no reason is given, (by those who 
gave some check to it) either from Scripture, or ancient constitution, or 
practice. But some solicitous for such honour for bishops, as former and 
better times showed no regard of, thought it not fit to have bishops so 
common, that they might have more honour. In short, since they will 
have a city with all the region to be a diocese, it is hereby manifest, thai 
neither he that presided in the city, nor he that was bishop in the 
country, could be counted a diocesan, since neither had more for his 
share than part of a diocese, in the modem acceptation of the word. 

Hereby also some mistakes about episcopal ordinations, of ill conse- 
quence, may be rectified. A bishop, in the best ages of Christianity, 
was no other than the pastor of a single church. A pastor of a single 
congregation is now as truly a bishop. They were didy ordained in 
those ages, who were set apart for the work of the ministry by the 
pastor of a single church, vrith the concurrence of some assistants. 
Why they shoidd not be esteemed to be duly ordained, who are accord- 
ingly set apart by a pastor of a single church now, I can discern no reason, 
afier 1 have looked every way for it. Let something be assigned, which 
will make an essential difference herein ; otherwise they that judge 
such ordinations, here, and in other reformed churches, to be nullities, 
will hereby declare all the ordinations in the ancient church for three 
or four hundred years, to be null and void, and must own the dismal 
consequences that ensue thereof. They that will have no ordinations, 
but such as are performed by one, who has many churches under him ; 
maintain a novelty, never known nor dreamed of in the ancient churches, 
while their state was tolerable. They may as well say the ancient 
church had never a bishop, (if their interest did not hinder, all the 

242 PRiHrriVE episcopacy provbd 

leason they make use of in this case would lead them to it,) as deny thai 
a reformed pastor has no power to ordain, because he is not a bishop. 
He has episcopal ordination, even such as the canons require, being set 
mpait by two or three pastors at least, who are as truly diocesans as llie 
ancient bishops, for some whole ages. He is also elected by the people; 
and of old, he could never be, nor be accounted, a bishop, whatever oidi- 
nation he had, that was not so elected. And besides, he has as large a dio- 
cese as most in the best times of the church ; and so makes it his bus&neM 
to feed and rule the flock, and exercise the power of the keys. But il 
it be said, he has no superiori^ over presbyters, nor any under him; it 
may be answered, that this is not necessary for a bishop in the judgment 
of the most learned prelatists ; particularly D[r.] H[ammond3 maintainsi 
that there were no subject presbyters in Scripture times, but bishops 
alone without them ; and supposes a great part of this church * to be of 
his persuasion. The coiuidl of Sardica taking care that a bishop should 
be no way lessened, allows a bishop to be made in any place for whidi 
one presbyter is not sufficient ; so that in the judgment of those fiithezs, 
one assistant may be enough for a bishop. In the third council of 
Carthage,^ Poethumianus inquiring whether, if a bishop had but one 
presbyter, he might be removed from him ; Bishop Bilson *^ infers fixxn 
thence, that bishops often had but one presbyter, and that one mig^ 
be translated to another place. It was ordinary of old to have metropo- 
litans, or archbishops, without any bishops under them. In the Greek 
church we meet with such almost in every province ; and no reason can 
be given, why they might not as well be bishops without any presbyters 
under them. However, that superiority over presbyters which is chal- 
lenged in later times, is quite another thing than it was of old ; and may 
with more reason be thought to lifl him who affects it above a bishop, 
than to leave him who declines it below one. 

In fine, by this we may give an account why they admitted but of one 
bishop in a city. When the Christians were no more in a city than 
made up one church, which one communion-table would serve ; one 
bishop, with some assistants, of the same power, though of another deno- 
mination, were counted sufficient. But this came afterwards to be 
drawn into other consequences than was at first intended. For when 
Christians were so multiplied, heathens and others being reduced, (as 
they were in some greater cities,) that it was necessary to distribute 
them into several churches, they would have but one bishop still, plead- 
ing for it ancient custom, when the reason of the usage was gone. How- 
ever, this was less considerable while the presbyters, fixed to the several 
churches in such cities, retained the power of pastors or bishops, and 

• The Enf lUh Church. * Can. xliv. ' Perpetual Government, p. 802. ' 


there was no difference betwixt them and him to whom the title of 
bishop was appropriated, but only in point of ordaining others ; as 
Jerome and Ghrysostom affirm there was not: for the difference herein 
was but small, ov frokif t6 fita6p, says Ghrysostom,' and Theophylact 
after him, ferme nihU, as it is rendered, '' next to nothing." For this 
power or privilege inferred* no superiority in him that had it, since infe- 
riors did, in the ordinary practice of the ancient church, ordain their 
superiors ; bishops consecrated metropolitans, or primates, or patriarchs. 
And though some now will have it to make that of bishops a different 
order ; yet, then it made neither difference in order nor d^;ree, as may 
be evident by an instance or two. The bishops of Cyprus, and other 
places, that were avroK«<l>akoif had power to ordain their own metropo- 
litans.'' The bishops of Asia, Pontus, and Thrace, &c. had not the 
power to ordain them ; yet all those bishops were so far from differing in 
order, that they did not differ in degree : besides, the bishop of MeletiuB*8 
party in Egypt were, by the council of Nice, denied power to ordain any 
officers, presbyters, or others, without the leave or concurrence of the 
other bishops in that region ; and yet by the same synod were confirmed 
in the office and dignity of bishops ; so that depriving them of that 
power of ordaining, which other bishops had, did neither degrade them, 
nor make them officers of another species.' 

But it seems probable to some, that Ghrysostom and Jerome speak 
only of the Greek church, (or some part of it,) where the former was 
bishop, and where the latter did most reside and write. Whereas in 
those places where the presbyters did impose hands in ordaining, as 
they did in Africa, and other parts of the Latin church, there is not any- 
thing which belongs to ordination, which the presbyters did not actually 
perform : for, that they imposed hands as consenters, and not as 
ordainers, is a mere shifl, without reason to countenance it ; and it may 
be said as reasonably, that when two bishops or more imposed hands 
with the metropolitan in the ordaining of a bishop, they concurred not 
as ordainers, but consenters. And in the Greek church, it is sufficiently 
signified by the synod at Ancyra/ that at the time when the synod was 
holden, and after, the city presbyters might ordain vrith the bishop's 
consent, though he were absent ; and that before this restraint they 
might have done more. However, hereby it appears, that the difference 
between bishops and presbyters, in respect of their power, was in some 
places in a manner nothing, in other places nothing at all ; so that till 
the usurpations, beginning in the fourth age, proceeded higher, there 
were really more bishops in one city, though but one had the name. 

• In 1 Tim. Hom. xi. * ugusd. 

' The avTOK»>aXo< were metropolitans who were Independent of pttriArehal iuriidictioB.— Ed. 
<< Concil. [Trull.] [c«n. S9.] • Vid. Epiat. Syn. NIc. ad Alaxandrin. [Hatdouin, t.l. p. 439.] 
/ Can. xiU. 


By the late Learned and Judicious Divine, 
Mr. David Clarkson. 

ftMy iraripvp firraptu piKortueficramts, oIk iipici&nfftuf roh Idiots iicy^a, iiXX* tfri lad 
r»y irdXM «-oAcfJwy rris d«-o<rroAuc^r 4KK\fiirlas kwKoBpi^ia ivoywpii KUicm kwaxX^f^aP' 
rts, i)S tly^pri ica2 r4\tiop roK6p [8o7/i4rifr] TpofidKXovrau 

" They who striTe to remove the everlattbig landnuirlu of the legitfanate Ikfhen, havliig beeonie 
the parents of many and wicked inTentions, content not themaelTes with their own oflbpriaf , but 
maliciouily steal the ignoble bantlings of the ancient enemies of the apoatoUcal ehnxch, and thract 
them before the world as the high-bom and onattainted oflkpting of her prindptea." 

Maaim, <» Aiktm. torn. iL p. S68. 

KaeraxtUurm rois 4tfT€v^ofi4pots wapaump, &ycv ^lAort utiof mfPiMw tad el fjuh 6p$Sh 
^pvfTai r^ B§^ X^"^ mIH^poi. El 8^ /i^ r^ ytypapSri avyyp^fiiiP rtt/uu, r^ ^ &»^ 
^ytifi4p^ff itXXh roh iprtv^ofidpou iwirpS^eufrt riiP ^9^r. 

" I will conclude by exhorting my readers to weigh the matter doly and without contantionsiMia, 
and if I have well said, to acknowledge the thanks to be God's ; but if otherwise, to grant pardon to 
the writer who commits the decision, not to the demonstrator, but to his readers." 

Sie eom^mdU Ep. cxiL laidor. Felua. lib. It. 

AcOpo 8^ itk T^s Icropltu fiaH(t»p ity9p€^inii<rop d^ h^auyowUof vbr^r oiykp rfi^t* 
por rh ipv&pfi/uu n»r4p9»p iirrl rh Mt/i^XiOir irkp rh h^minfri 9iatp4pow, aii4cifmp. 

" Qo through history and search out its original ; for the InTentlon is not modem. It is a raMo 
of the fluhers. Every excellence of antiquity Is to be yenerated.** 

BatU, dt J^mm. Horn. i. p. 180. [Edit. Par. 1722, p. 9, A. torn. IL] 

MdBwfitP w^ff that Xpurruunl' tl fflfx*^'^^ 0^*^ ta/Mw, Arep Icmy ffftcoAor KtA 
a^pa ^iZiWf r\ r&w tKXmv tMiuBa ; /idH^/inf ffi^ffo-doi &s Xpumopot 

" Let us learn to be Christians at some time or other. If we know not how to pray, which la a 
simple and very easy aflUr,— what shall we know of other matteraf Lotua leara to pray aa Chrla- 

Ckrptoti. in 1 Tim, Horn. tL p. 278. 

London : Printed for Tho. Parkhurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns 
in Cheapside ; Jonathan Robinson, at the Golden Lion in St. Paul's 
Churchyard ; and Tho. Cockeril, at the Three Legs in the Poultry. 


The "Ditcourae eonceming Liturgies/* is a small ocUto Tolume oM98 ptgei. 
It was a posthumous work, and was left by its author in a Teiy imperfect state. 
Dean Comber, in his learned answer to Mr. Clarkson, entitled " A ScliolMiieal 
History of the PrimitiTe and General Use of Liturgies in the Christian Chardi,'' 
passes the following seTere judgment upon the capabilities of the editor into whom 
hands it fell : '* His want of learning appears in learing divers quotations in a wroi^ 
place where they have no reference to the text, snd several referoices in the text to 
passages in the Fathers, which, because the author did not, the editor could not eite ; 
as also in such gross mistakes, both of the names and tracts of the ancients, as made 
it Tcry difficult to guess at the intended quotations." The typographical t 
Tery numerous and glaring. 


The reputation of prescribed liturgies depends on their supposed 
antiquity ; this is their great, their best support. They pretend not to 
Scripture, nor will their adyocates maintain, that the apostles either 
used such, or left any order for the composing and prescribing of them. 

And it will seem strange to those that reverence antiquity, that good 
reason shoiild be found for them, if the ancients for four or fiye ages 
covld see none, in such circumstances as might render it equally visible 
to them and us. 

If they had seen it, it would appear in their practice, there especiaUy 
where the reason is thought to be most cogent, viz., in the administra- 
tion of the sacraments. It is presumed,* that there first of all, there 
especially, forms of prayer were (and are to be) prescribed ; and so it 
will be granted, that if antiquity be not for them there, it owns them 

By prescribed forms are meant such as are imposed upon the admi- 
nistrator, so as those must be used, and no other, nor otherwise, without 
adding, detracting, or transposing. The &yourers of such forms sup- 
pose they have been the constant usage of the church, everywhere, 
ever since extraordinary gifts ceased. Their opposites^ judge this hath 
been rather taken for granted than proved ; and suspect they are vir^ 
(TvvrjBfias irpoKoraktkrffifuyoif " prejudiced by custom ;" and that this 
opinion had not got entertainment, but upon a presumption, that things 

• " The ancient churches, tnm the rery flnt eentniy, did qm nich pattlie whotoeome ftwiiie of 
lound woxdt, in their sacramental celebrations etpedallj, and afterwards in other ImIj administm- 
tions or public duties, as made up their sotomn, deront, and pnhUc lituglea.''— D[r.3 Ofanden,] Con- 
sideration touching LltQigles, p. 8. 

* opponents. 



were so of old, becaiue they are so now ;* and that the mistake had 
not so long prevailed, if it had been sooner examined. 

It is not denied, but there were some forms of prayer of oldy Tis^y 
arbitrary and particular, such as this or that person composed him- 
self, or made choice of, composed by others, for his use in pabHe. 
There is an intimation of this latter sort. Can. 23, Gone. Garthsg. 8, hdd 
in the conclusion of the fourth age ; and it is the first that I meet with. 
But common forms (though arbitrary,) viz., such as many chuichei 
made use of in the same words, I cannot discover till many yean after; 
unless the Lord^s Prayer be made an instance hereof.* This indeed 
was used anciently, but far otherwise than of late, not more than OQoe 
at one assembly, not in prayers before or afler sermon, not at all in Uie 
catechumen*8 office,'^ no where in their ordinary service; but ip r^ mpm 
T&p nioT&Py " in the season allotted to the faithful,^' as Chzysostom calk 
the eucharistical office ; and there commonly in the oonclusioii of the 
prayer for the blessing of the elements. 

But though they used the words of it there, yet not out of any appse- 
hension, that Christ did enjoin them there to use it Augoatine dedarci 
it plainly,' that Christ in the delivery of those petitions, did not teadi 

• IloXXoi r6v itwBpmwmv Ik tAv mJ* iavrovv mU vcp< r6v iXXtn rdr ^Sif am t k^pMPvnr, "Mmf 
men dnir oonelnttaoa from matten belonging to tlieir own time, conoeming otlwr nuttan."— 4irfi. 
Pelut. lib. T. £p. 18. [B. Ed. Patie. 16S8.] 

ToU ye vdvv ixovvt, soi iiwp6\nwro¥ ic«icrt|/Li^voif rStv wpaffidrttv r^ uptr^ptop tra^4t Irrl ^ 
&Xn0^, " Tbe truth it dear to the intelligent, and to those who haTe gained their lodgmeiit eoa- 
oeming the CHcts without prejudice."— Isid. lib. iii. Ep. 191. [C] 

• 'E«eivo4 M^ifoi utra rav Bavfuuriow mSiwat raK iw r& Btitp fiawrianart itKoto* &v efev r6 Ildr^ 

hfiMv X^eiv uiMv kwihtiKvvixtvoi tvnot6rirrat ftc " Those onlj who hare p aa aed throogli the mii»> 
culoua birth-pangs experienced in Divine baptism, could be right in saying, Our Fnthcr, fte.. 
since these manifest their legitimacy as sons."— l&id. Pelus. lib. iv. Ep. 24. [p. 451, C] 

' "Ori lap irio-TOit avrn n mpofftvxh itpocifittt, Koi o\ vofiw Tr\^ icKXtiffior dcMvKovrt, sol t4 
wpooifiiow r^f evxnr * A fdp afxvrirot ovk dw 6vvatTO Haripa tuiKeiw r6v Oc^v, " That thla pcSfW 
pertains to the faithfUl, the laws of the church and the commencement of the prayer both taadu 
For one uninitiated could not call God ' Father."*— Chrysoet. In Matt. Horn, [xix.] p. IM; ni 
Hom. ii. in 2 Cor. p. 553. Amongst other things there recited, which the catechumena ntn not 
partakers of, this is one : — ov6iittt fdp evxri* Ixov0'< riiv vtvoy^iciJii¥nv nau uavrxfi^lomf lnt6 reS 
XfHrrcH, " For they possess not as yet the prayer dispensed and introduced by Christ,** Henoe wbaa 
he is to speak of the Lord's Prayer, he uses the ordinaiy form of concealment, whereby tb* •■''•Hiftt 
denote what was peculiar to Xtitfidtlei, Icrt M o\ wtoroh " Ye who are believers underataad," (b 
1 Tim. Hom. [vi.] p. 273,) and leairtw ol ntfivntiivot, "The initiated understand," (In Gen. Hon. 
xxviii. p. 214,) and that the baptised were admitted to say it presently after haptiim. — YUu la 
Coloss. Hom. T. p. 122. 

Hane orationem baptizati orant, " This prayer the baptixed use.*'— August. Epist. 54. [Ed. 
Antw. Ep. 153. cap. 13.] 

Vide Albaspin. Observ. lib. i. cap. 9 ; and in him Cyprian, Cyril, Ambrose. 

Quam totam petitionem fere omnia ecclesia Dominica Oratione concludit, " Which whole i 
almost every church closes with the Lord's Prayer."— Aug. Ep. 59. [Ed. Antw. Ep. 149.] 

^ In 2 Cor. Hom. [ii. p. 557. ] 

• Aug.: " Non ie ei^o movet quod summus Magister, cum orare doceret discipulos, verba ^ 
docuit, in quo nihil aliud videtur fecisse, quam docuisse quomodo in orando loqoi oportuetf** 
Adeodatus : " Nihil me omnlno istud movet ; non enim verba, sed res ipaas eos verhla doeoit, 
qnlbus et se Ipsi commonefkoerent, a quo et quid esset orandum, cum in penetraUbna, ut dieCnm 
est, mentis orarent." Aug. '* Recte intelligis." " Ave.- Does not the authority of tlM Lord, tlM 
supreme master, weigh with thee, who, when he taught his disciples to pray, Uught t 


his disciples what words they should use in prayer, but what things 
they should pray for ; and understands it to be a direction for secret 
and mental prayer, where no words are to be used. The coherence* in 
Matt. yi. led him to explain it of such praying, as Christ is speaking of 
verse 6, which he took to be mental, and none deny to be secret. 

It is granted also, that divers churches had a certain order, wherein 
they agreed to administer the several parts of worship, and particularly 
the severals ^ in the sacraments ; so as each had its known and fixed 
place. An order there is visible in Chrysostom,* and in Augustine to 
Paulinus.' This was settled in some churches by custom ; and in some 
there was in time a rule for it, such is that. Can. xix. Syn. Laodicen. 
whose title in the Latin copies is, De Ordine Orationum Catechumeno- 
rum atque Fidelium, " Of the Order of the Catechumens' and Believers' 
Prayers." And in the west, the twenty-seventh canon of the Synod of 

words, wherein he ^ypeara to hare doue nothing more than teach them how they ought to speak 
in prayer r Adkodatvs — It weighs with me not in the least: for he taught them not words, but 
things themselves by means of words ; whereby they themselves alio might bring to mind what to 
pray for, when they prayed in the hidden chambers of the heart, aa the saying is. Auo. — Thou 
understandest it aright."— Lib. de Magistro, cap. i. p. 172, tom. i. edit. Lugdun. 

To the same purpose Beda, in Matt. tL And of late writers some of the most eminent: " Noluit 
prKscribere Filius Dei quibus verbis utendum sit, ut ab ea quam dictavit formula deilectere non 
liceat," " The Son of God had no wish to prescribe the words which we are to use, in such a manner 
that it should be unlawful to deviate from that form which he has dictated.''>-CalTin in Matt. vi. 9. 
So Musculus. 

Maldonat. sic : Non his necessario verbis, sed hac aut slmili sententia ; nam non apostolos orando 
his ipsis verbis usos fulsse legimus ; aliis leglmus Act. i. 24. Neque voluit Christus, nt quotles- 
cunque oramus, ista omnia quae hac oratione continentur peteremus ; sed ut omnia, ant aliqua, ant 
nihil certe his contrarium peteremus, " Not necessarily in ihe$e words, but wUk tkU or the like mind : 
for we read not that the apostles used these very words ; nay, we read that they used others. 
Acts i. 24. Neither did Christ intend that so often as we pray, we should seek fox all the 
things which are contained in this prayer; but that we should seek for all, or for some, or at leaat 
for nothing Inconsistent with these things."— In Matt. vi. 9. 

Gomel, k Lapide. 

Grotius, in Matt. vi. 9, o\nmt : In hunc sensum ; non enim prsoipit Christua verba recitaxl, quod 
non leglmus apostolos fecisse (quanquam id quoque fieri cum fruetu potest) sed materiam precum 
hinc promere. In Luc. zi., Docet nos compendium rerum orandarum, neque enim eo tempore 
syllabis adstringebantur, " o&T«#t, L e., according to this sense. For Christ does not teach us to 
recite these words, which we do not read the apostles did, (though this also may be done to good 
purpose,) but to draw hence the matter of our prayers. Idem on Luke zi.— He teaches us a sum- 
mary of what things we should pray for ; for at that time they were not tied down to syllables." 

Casaubon, Ezerdt. 2S5 : Chrlstus vero non de prsdicatione Dei laudimi agit ; sed, ut reete 
monet Augustinus, de mode eondpiendi preces privatas, '* Christ is not treating of the public 
celebration of the praises of Ood, but, as Augnstine rightly hints, of the manner in which we 
should i^aroe our private prayers." 

Mr. Mede conceives that the disciples understood not that Christ, in Matthew, intended it for a 
form of prayer unto them, but for a pattern and example only, ftc p. 5. 

And surely they could less understand, by that in Luke zi., that Christ intended they should use 
the same words (as in a set form,) since the same words are not there used. 

Hence Jansenius infers, that Christ would not have any so careftil of the words, aa of the things 
to be prayed for. " Itaque ut dlsceremus in oratione, non tam de verbis, quam de rebus, esse aazil, 
ac de spiritu orationis, diversis verbis orationem txadidlt, in Luc. zi., " Therefore that we may 
learn not to be so careftil in prayer about words aa about things, and about the spirit of oar 
devotion, he delivered the prayer in different words, in Luke zi." 

• context. * details. • In 2 Cor. Horn. zrUL p. 647. 

'^ Epist. liz. QusBSt. V. pp. 340, Ml. [Ed. Antw. Ep. 149.] 



Pauy in the beginning of the sixth age. And it is provided Ibr In 
general terms by the Council of Yannes,* in the latter end of the fifth age. 

Besides such directions as is in those canons, other written rabria 
were not needful. For the actual disposing of the severala* in tfaflff 
proper place, the &pdfHw senred them, of which, vid. Can. xziL and 
zziii., Gone. Laodio. This managed by a deacon, aoqnainted with Uie 
usages of the church where he ministered, was sufficient, without other 
rubric for that purpose, suf^iosing it answered that descriptioii of its 
ancient use, which we haye in Balsamo.^ 

There was also some kind of uniformity in their sacramental pray a i ; 
that is, a general agreement to pray for the same things, though not in 
the same words. They might haye said thereof, quamUbet aiia tMris 
dicamusj nihil aiiud dicimus, ''though we utter diverse words, we 
utter no diverse thing." This appeared especially in the genenl 
prayer before the eucharist. Therein for whom, and for what they 
prayed, very many of the ancients give some aocoimt Thereby it is 
manifest, that they prayed for the same persons, (for all of all sorti,) 
and for the same things, with respect to the various conditiona of those 
several sorts of persons ; and this in variety of expressions. So that 
herein was exemplified that of Augustine, Liberum M aUia atqm 
alUs verbis, tadem tamen in orando dkere, " We are at liberty to utter 
ever-varying words, so that we utter the same things.*'' And this is 
the uniibrmity in prayer which Celestine urgeth against the' Pelagians,* 
all churches through the world agreeing to pray for those persons, 
and those things, which were inconsistent with their tenets. And 
that mode of praying, which as the author of the books, De Vocatione 
Gentium,-^ says, the Lord, by the apostle, having prescribed, the devo- 
tion of all sorts did concorditer, " harmoniously*' observe. 

* [Can. XT.] • details. 

* AiciKovoi 6tiovvt¥ e7di|ffii> 6td tov Apapi'ov toIV kv r^afifimvi d(ojc6iroif, rnt h^t\o^0tit fivtim 
j^K^Mv^o-CMT' fi fow Tov Koipov THV iiCTCvovv, T«v alrfiatttw T«v tarnxovuhm¥ nai rmv Xmvmw^ 
** The deacon* giTe a signal by means of the orarium^ to the deacons in the reading-desk of the 
bidding proper to be made, or of the time to which the prayers of the catechumens and of Uie c 
classes extend.'*^In Con. Laod. Can. in Cod. 126. 

' Epist. ezxi. [cap. xti. ad Probam.] ' Epist pro Prosper, et Hilar, cap. xL 

/ Praecipit itaque apostoins, imo per apostolum Dominns, qui loquebatur in apostolo, fleri a 
crationes, &e., pro omnibus hominibus, pro regibos, kc^ quam legem supplicationis it« oianHiM 
saoerdotum et omnium fldelium doTotio concorditer tenet, ut nulla pars mundi sit, in qua liqiasmodi 
orationss noa cslebrentur a populis Christianis. Supplicat ergo ubique ecclesia Deo, non solom 
pro Sanctis, et in Christo Jam regeneratis ; sed etiam pro omnibus infldelibus et inimtei s cmds 
Christi, pro omnibiu idolomm eultoribus, pro omnibus qui Christum in membris ipslos press 

* The orailum signified at first a handkerchief for wiping the face, fhnn o«, the countenanee. 
See Dr. Smith's Die. Gr. and Rom. Ant. p. 674. In the ecclesiastical sense, it appears to liSTS 
denoted a part of the TestmenU hanging down fhmi the shoulder, and to hare been used bf the 
elergj in making signals to each other during Divine senrice. Bishops and pres b yts i s w«rs 
pririleged to wssr this on esch shoulder. Deacons only on one, and that, aa testilled by a canoo of 
the fourth eouneil of Toledo (held a.d. 633) the left. See Bingham, Ant ChristlaD Chiuek, 
Fol. It. p. 208.— Ed. 


Such particular and voluntary forms, such an order in administering 
such an uniformity in praying, is not in question ; nor am I concerned 
in common forms if arbitrary, though settled by custom. But this is 
it which is denied, that in the ancient church, for many ages after 
Christ, such liturgies, or forms of prayer, were conmionly imposed on 
those who administered the sacraments, as are before described; or that 
in the ancient church, while its condition was tolerable, or its practice 
imitable, the common and ordinary way of administering the sacra- 
ments, was by such prescribed liturgies and forms of prayer, as are 
before described ; wherein the administrators had no liberty left to 
change words or order, to abridge or enlarge, or otherwise vary from 
the imposed models. 

If there had been such liturgies anciently, as are contended £>r, and 
are now in use, prayers woiild have been read then, as they are now. 
But apayivwrK€ip nx^s, or preces legere, or de scripto recUaref "read 
prayers — recite from a manuscript," or any forms of speech equivalent, 
are phrases unknown, and not to be found, so fiir as I can yet discover, 
in any writers of the four or five first ages at least ; and therefore the 
thing in all probability [was] not knoMm, nor practised in those times. 

We meet not only with the reading of psahns,* reading of lessons ; 
but reading of the narratives of the martyrs' sufferings.^ Reading of 
epistles from some eminent persons or churches ; as Dionysius of Corinth 
says Clemens' epistle had been read, as it was wont to be in their Lord's 
days assemblies.^ And Athanasius wills those of Antioch to read the 
epistle sent from the synod at Alexandria, Ma xaX tUiOart wv6e^<rBai 
ayayvcn-€ ravraf " When according to custom ye meet together, read 

quuntur, pro Judaeii, pro hsreticii, et •cUsnuHcia. Quid autem pro IstU petftr niii ut, lelietii eno- 
ribus suls, convertantur ad Deum, accipiaot fldem, ace^iant charitatem, et de Ignorantte teneliria 
liberati, in agnitionem Teniant TerlUttaf " The apoetle, therefore, teaches, yea, the Lord, \tf the 
apostle, that supplications, Arc. he made for all men, for kings, frc. (1 Tim. 11. 1, It) which rule of 
prajer, the deTotion of all bishops and of all the CalthAil, so harmoniously obserrea, that there is no 
part of the world in which prayers of this kind are not oflbred by Christian people. Therefore, the 
church everywhere supplicates God, not <mly fbr the regenerate already in Christ, hut eren fbr afl 
unbelieTers and enemies of the cross of Christ ; ftar all idolaters ; fbr all who peraeeute Christ In his 
members ; for Jews, for heretics, and schismatics. But what does she aeek on their behalf but that, 
abandoning their errors, they may be oonrerted to God, may reeelTe fUth, tiay reoeiTe lore, and, 
emancipated from the shades of ignorance, may oome to the knowledge of the truth r— De Voe. 
Gent. Ub. i. cap. xii. 

• Theod. lib. IL cap. xiii. p. 63. [F.] 

* Liceat itaqne legi passlones martyrum, cum anniTeraarii diss eoram edebrantvr, " TheieliDre 
it is a lawAil practice to read the passions of the martyrs when their annlTersaries are kept." Cone. 
Carth. iii.. Can. xlvii., Caranx. p. 116. 

Ta uwoiivf\tio*96fiara ti7v *Ayoffr6XMv, t} to ffir)r7pd/A/Mira rmv npo^i|T»ir awafcMMVMTflu lihtP** 
^rx»99h ** The memoranda of the apostles, or the writings of the prophets, are read as long at 
is suitable."— Just. M. Apol. ii. [p. 98. Ed. Col. 1686.] 

ntpk rov kw Vixfifid-nf tiarr^Xta y*^ frepov tpAfw &vaY<M&M«v#ai, '* Of thi leading Ofthi Ctotpils 
on the Sabbath after the other scripture."— Cone. Laod. Can. xtL 

• Euseb. Ub. It. [cap. xzili.] 

* Ad Antioch. p. 461, tom. i. [In Edit. Colon. 1686, p. 769, C] 


this.** And ComeHus was wont to read Cyprian's episliles to ilie ohmdli 
at Rome.* Beading of the diptyches, rw Upmnf wntxj^ ditififtfmtf **iim 
rehearsal of the sacred diptyches f^ mil pAn^ Arx^yovr ml wpamiyaplmf 
«< the names were read.** 

In a word, of the reading of cTeryihing that was wont to be read; 
but of the reading of prayers, not a syllable. We may as aooci find a 
saying of mass, as reading of prayers. None had then the o ppor t un ity 
till since it has been the happiness of many to merit the commendation 
which Pliny gave of his senrant Zosimus.' 

If their prayers had been written, and they confined pareciaelj to the 
words and syllables of the writing, as in prescribed forms, this would 
have obliged them to haye had the writing before them, and to ban 
read the prayers out of it, to prevent varying ftom the prescribed model, 
since there had been as much necessity to read then, as there is now. 

Besides, reading and praying are still represented as distinct thii^ 
and such as were not then coincident. The deacon, when he called to 
reading, was said, iaipv<r<r9i» riiv Jawy^^awy '' to bid reading;'* but when to 
prayer, laipwrartw rifw cv^^, '' to bid prayer.** Prayer b^gan in Jnslin 
Martyr*8 time, mvfrafupau rov dycryiy^oicorrof , '' when the reader had dcme."/ 
So Athanasius calls to praying and reading in terms quite diffinrent; «po- 
OTo^ff itOKovow Kripv(M cvx^v, tMts yjtaXfi6p XtytaStu wapttnuvamf ** aftsr 
commanding the deacon to bid prayer, he again caused a psalm to be read." 
So Socrates,^' which in Theodoret is, 6»ayuf^Ktw ^roXfi^ wpovrptww^ n^ 
vpwrra^as cv^^i^,* '' ^^ moved him to read a psakn, and having directed 
prayer/' &c. And Sozomen, where he shows there was an uniformity 
in his time in public worship, tells us, xal evxaU dt xaX yftakfu»diai£ rau 
aiircus, 1j duayvaxrfuuri icar^ t6v (xMv Kcupbp ov iraarras KrxpfiyJvovt ruptiw 
t<mv,* " It cannot be found that the same prayers or psalms, yea, or the 
same lessons, were used by all at the same time.** 

Indeed it cannot be apprehended how they coiild read their prayers, 
who, while they prayed, had their eyes lifl up to heaven. And that this 
was the posture of the ancient Christians in prayer, there is abundant 

Tertullian thps represents them praying; lUuc suapidentea C%rit* 
ftdui,* " thither the Christians intently gazing.** 

And Clemens Alexandrinus,' Uaa-av yap r^v Mtadrrop SfuXliw 6 B^ 

• Gyp. Ep. IS. * Dionys. JBocI. Hier. cap. [iU. p. 88, D. Ed. Pwri*. 1615.] 

• The Diptyches were regUten of the names of eminent sainU, hishops, and martyrs, whleh for 
tome ages were recited publicly by the deacons in the churches, as an introduction to th« aarriesi 
in commemoration of the dead.— En. * Ueyl. Antid. p. S4S. 

• £p. xiz. 1. T. / Apol. ii. [p. 98, D. Ed. Paris. 1686.] r Lib. ii. [cap. xL p. M9.] 

« Lib. ii. [cap. xiii. pp. 63, 64.] Vide D[r.] H[ammond], PrefiMW to Psalms, and TfertuU. ciftad 
by him. ' Sos. lib. rii. cap. xix. Vide Just. Not. tL p. 36, ea^ ir. 

• ApoU. cap. XXX. ' Strom, lib. Tli. 


ddtaktiirraf arauty ravTjj Ka\ npoatyrtofofitv r^ K€tf>ak^¥ koI ritt X'H^^ '^^ 
ovfxivbv atpoyifv : " God constantlj hears all that mentally regulated con- 
verse wherein we raise our heads and lift up hands to heaven." 

To whom we might add Cyprian Ad Demetrium. 

Amobius,* Ad sidera sublevavit et caelum, et cvm Domino rerum Deo, 
supplicationum fedt verba, atgue oraiionum coUoquia miscere, '' he lifted 
his hands towards the stars and toward heaven, and made the utterances 
of his supplications, and the converse of his prayers, have to do with the 
Lord God of the imiverse." 

And Lactantius. Oculos eo dirigamus, quo iUos naturcB sues conditio 
direxit,^ " Let us thither direct our eyes, whither their own nature 
directs them." Cur igitur oculos in coelttm non toUitiBf^ " Why do ye 
not lift your eyes heavenward ?" 

So Dionysius of Alexandria representing to Xystus of Rome, the 
case of that troubled person, and that, amongst other scruples, he durst 
not join with them in prayer, does it in these terms, itrfit napfirfo-iop fyiup 
tnapcu Toifs o<l>BakfjLovs wp6s t6v Gc^v,^ '' neither has he the confidence to 
lift up his eyes to God." Lifting up the eyes to heaven, is a phrase by 
which prayer is imderstood in this third age.* 

In the fourth age, this was €vxofUpov «r)^fM, " the posture of a sup- 
pliant." And when they represented Constantine in a praying posture, 
it was with eyes lift up to heaven. So his e£Sgies in his coins, *Ey roir 
Xpva-ois pofiitrfiaa-i rrfv airov avT6s thcdva &de ypacJHaBm ditrvnov, »s S^m /3Xc* 
irciv doKelv dvartrafifvog irp6s GfAy rp6no¥ tv^piUvov,^ " He formed the 
project of having his own image portrayed on his golden coin, as one 
stretching forth his hands to God after the manner of a suppliant, to show 
that he looked on high." So in his palace ; 'Ev ahroU fiwrtktloit — iar^ 
tipBios €ypaxf>€To, &«> fiew €ls ovpa»6v ^ft^Xcinov t» X'^P^ ^ ittrtrafuvog tirxPV^ 
vov (Tx^/ixart,^ '* In the palace itself, he was painted in a standing poeturei 
looking on high towards heaven, with his hands stretched out in the 
manner of a suppliant." Others, *Air« /SXcirfiy tU ovptofh^,^ " to look on 
high toward heaven," in praises. 

Chrysostom observes, from Christ's posture in prayer expressed, John 
xvii. 1,' " These words spake Jesus, and lift up his eyes to heaven ;" that 
thereby we are taught, when we pray, to lift up both eyes of body and 
mind : Aia ykp rovrav naidfv6fif$a rh errcvcf ri €P reus dc^o-f (rcy> iva xal iirrAnt 
dvaffX.€iro>ft€v fiij rois i<f>6akiUHg rrjs (TOfmiiS fi6vov, dkkii Koi rrjf dioyouw. 

• Lib. i. p. 28. • Lib. vi. ' Lib. ii. cap. ii. ' Euieb. lib. tU. [cap. is.] p. 188. 

' Or shutting their eyes. Origen contra Celtum, lib. tU. p. S62. Astyriut, 'At/avtvcama m otptf 
vov Mtrtvirat, " lifted up his hands toward heaTcn and prayed." Euseb. lib. viL [ci^. xril.] p. 19A. 
/ Euseb. De Viti Conitantini, lib. It. cap. xt. p. 884. r Ibid. 

* Vit. Const, lib. It. cap. zzix. ' [Horn. Uzx.] 

* P. 890. So Hilary, Eathjmius, Theophylaet, Leontius, Ammoaina, in Maldoaat on Matt. 
xiv. 19. cap. cccii. 


And Angostine intiinates as rnnchy when he teUa qb itpcm liie 
place, Ita se Patri exhSbere voltdi pneatonn^ ut iiiflii i iniii i fli 
€S8e doctarem; he so prayed, as minding to teach lu how we ahooU 


Yea, Damascen, upon those words,* '' Jesos lift op hiB eyes and 
said, Father, I thank thee,** &c. observes, propUrw oeukm mcstelins «f 
farmam nolna traderet arandij " therefore he is said to hsre lifted up 
his ejes, that he might deliver to us the manner in which we afaooU 

Whereby it appears, that not only this de facto was their posture 
in praying, but that they thought ^emselves obliged to it by CSizisfi 

Some bishops (what may we think of presbyters and deaoons) oonld 
not read.^ * 

So that in Damascen*s time, when set forms were grown 
this reading was not in fashion;' I will not inquire into Uie : 
it may be, that which made Pliny loth to read his pleadings, mjg^ 
hinder them from reading their prayers. What he suggests, is obTioiis 
to each one's reason and common sense ; and whether it be not appli- 
cable to some pleaders at another bar, let others judge. Neque emm nm 
prcgteritj octtonM, &c. Then he says, they are thereby bereaved of 
many advantages, which render the plea forvent and available, ut qum 
BolearU commendarej and the want of which must needs dull the audi- 
tory ; quo minus mirum est, auditorum intmUo kmguescit. 

Hortaris ut oradofiem amicis plurihus recitem, faciam quia hartariM: 
qucanvis vekementer addubUem, neque enim me prceteriij acHoms qua reeir 
tantur, impetum omnem caloremque, ac prope nomen suum perdere^ ut 
quae soleant commendare, simul et accendere, — dicentis gestus^ tncessais, 
discursus etiam, omnibusque motOms animi consentaneus vigor corporiB^-^ 
recitantium veto prcecynta pronuntiationis adjumenta, oeuU^ manua praps- 
diuntur; quo minus mirum est si auditorum intentio languescitj nullis 
extrinsecus out blandimentis capta out aculeis excitata;* " Tou recom- 
mend me to read my orations to a ntimber of my friends. I will do so 
since you recommend it, although I am seriously in doubt about it : for 
I do not forget that pleadings which are read, lose all their force and 
warmth, and well nigh their very name, as being things which the 
gestures of the speaker, his bold advances, even his changes of position 

• Traet. in Joh. [cIt.] torn. ix. p. 6S1. * John xL 41. • Blondd, pp. 500, Ml. 

• Hereby it appean that reading of old was not in fuhion : none had then the o pportiuJiy , 
(though tinee it has been the happineie of many) to merit the commendation which PUay gnve af 
hie ierrant Zoaimni. Idem tam commode orationee legit, ut hoe iolum dididaee Tidaotnr. *' Ha 
read! speeches so well, that he seems to hare studied nothing else.** Plin. Sp. six. lai. t. Tet 
Fliny was loth his orations should be read. His reasons, though they eoooem not the aneiaiita, 
may be considerable to othen. 

• Plin. Ep. ix. Ub. U. 


and the actdvity of the body in harmony with all the emotions of the 
mind, are wont at once to enforce and kindle. But the eyes and hands 
of one who reads, which are the main auxiliaries of delivery, are fettered, 
so that it is no wonder if the attention of the auditors flags, since it is 
enchained by no charms, and awakened by no excitements fix)m without." 
What would he have said, how would this wise and judicious person 
have aggravated these disadvantages, how intolerable would this great 
orator have accoimted the motion, if Cerealis had moved him to read 
the same oration to his friends whenever they met, at every solemn 
meeting I 

Chrysostom tells us, that in his judgment, it required a greater con- 
fidence than Moses and Elias had, to pray as they were wont to do 
before the eucharist. '£ya> fih yhp Koi n^y Mfl»v(rf«ff koI r^y 'HXioO 
napprja-iav oifdeirtd irp6s rijp roa-avrriP iKcnjpiap apKibf ^yovfuu ;* " I judge 
that even the confidence of Moses and Elias would never suffice for such 
prayer." Now why such boldness was needful, if they had the prayer 
in a book before them, and no more to do than read it, I apprehend not. 
I never heard of any, who were masters of the art of reading, that foimd 
so much confidence necessary to exercise their faculty upon any prayer 
whatsoever. Ilapprfaia,^ in him is equivalent to iktv6€poaTOftlay as 
Phavorinus, a boldness to express one's self fireely.*^ No freedom is leffc 
him, who must only read what is prescribed him/ 

If the ancient churches had no written liturgies, no books of public 
prayers ; they could have no prescribed, no imposed, no nor any com- 
mon liturgies, (viz. the same in many several congregations) though not 
imposed. And if there had been any such service books, it is not 
imaginable, but there would have been some notice of them in some of 
the writers of those ages ; yet for this, both we, and those who are most 
concerned to find it, are still to seek. 

We meet not with any mention of such books, upon such occasions, 
where it might be expected they would be mentioned, if anywhere; 
and where we might justly look to find them, if they had been to be 

Those who give a particular account of the books, vessels, and several 
utensils, which were to be found in the church, make no mention of any 
such thing as this.' 

Amongst other things, wherewith Athanasius was falsely charged by 
the Arian faction, to make way for his condemnation : Maoarius (with 
reflection upon that great person who employed him) is accused, to have 

• De Saoerd. [Orat. yI] p. 46. • Ujtfi^ wtwa^finna^ixh^i, Iffiit. ZZOUL p. lit. 

• Epist exc. p. IM. 

' Vld.inEph. Horn. uU. p. 891, wlMW>i^^<>faiirm>A>mth»#ip Jaj^^— »*'t>i> 
ImayaajallthincawlikhlwMWBttOMf." Vld. D{4. BIjHiBMO. tf • V. T 

' Vid. DftU. De OI^Mto Cttltui. . . . t ;iu 


leaped upon the altar, oTertihi0wn the table, broke the ooauniuiioii mf, 
bumt the Bible ; €hnnfii<ms tlr t6 Bmnaarlfptmf, Mtp t^^ ftiw rfr ypdnfii^ 

Now it may well be preenmed that Ischyras, the ft]ae aocuaer, eDeon- 
raged with hopes of a bishopric (which waa his Tewaid mftetwmtd) anl 
so concemed to swell the charge as big, and render it as odioiis as he 
could, would have added to the rest some indignity oflfered to the aacnd 
liturgy. This had been as easily alleged as the rest (if die Bubjeot had 
been extant), and might haye been as heinously resented, if tihexe had 
been such liturgies, or such opinion of them, as in our times. 

When Georgius, the Arian bishop, came to take pooaessiaii of iht 
bishopric of Alexandria, and entered a church by force, of what abasei 
were offered to all things therein, Athanasius gives a partiLonlair aooomil: 
the table, aylay rpaweCoxfy '^ the holy table ;'* the Scriptures, r4r Mag fir 
ypanf^ filfikousf ^* the Divine yoliunes of the Scripture ;** the font, Sym 
fiamrurnipwwf '' the holy font;'* the wine, obor iroX^ diraml|ccpor, *^ gnit 
store of wine f the oil, Z\aM¥^ the doors and latticed partttkiiay Bipm 
ml row jcaiucfXow, the candlesticks, the tapers, Xv^v^ <ad rovr Kfplmmt^ 
But not a word of a service book, no more than of a book of hondlieSi 

When the multitude of Christians so increased at Gonetantiiioiil^ 
that it was thought necessary to dispose of them in several chiixdbfli, 
Ck>nstantine takes care, that those churches should be respectively itar* 
nished with Bibles ; and writes to Eusebius of Cssarea to have them 
prepared accordingly.^ Now (let those that are for prescribed litorgiei 
be judges) would it not have been requisite, that those churches ahcmki 
have been also furnished with service-books ; and care taken, that these 
should have been likewise writ out for them, if any such had beoi then 
in use ? Would Constantine have omitted this, if he had been <^ their 
mind ; or would not Eusebius (who overlooks nothing of that QAtare} 
have added this in commendation of him, if he had made any such 

Does it not hence appear, that churches were then thought sufficient)^ 
provided with books, necessary for Divine service, when they were fur- 
nished with Bibles ? And can it be supposed that Constantine, whose 
generousness towards the church is known to have run out in mai^ 
superfluities, woiild have been deficient in things accoimted in any degree 
necessary ? 

In the fourth council of Carthage, it is provided, when the biahop is 

* Socr. Hiit. lib. i. [cap. xxTil] p. 539. 

* Ad Orthodozoa, Ep. tain. i. p. 729. [In Edit. Col. 1686, p. 944, torn, i.] 

* 'O 6i rStv IncXfio'ifiv rw 0«ov kw9frpov6nfi9vof, ircp< KaravKtutiv Btornvtvirrmv XmyimvA^ 
vp^tfwirov kw9ri9€t r6 fpdfifiat " In hit care for the churches of God, he wrote to us a 
eeming a supply of the inspired orades." Euseb. De Vit. Constant, lib. It. cap. 
cap. xxxwi. p. 401, where we hare that ipdfina. 


ordained, the book of the Grospels shall be held over his head, tenecU 
evangeliorum codicem super caput et cervicem ejuSy' " let him hold the 
book of the Gospels over his head and neck." When the exorcist 
is ordained, a book of exorcisms is to be giyen him ; accipiat de nuam 
episcopi libellumj in quo scroti aunt exordsmif '' let him leceiye from 
the hands of the bishop the book in which forms of exorcism are 
written." When the reader is ordained, the Bible, out of which he 
is to read, is to be delivered him, tradet ei codicem^ de quo Ucturus estj 
dicem ad cum ; Accipe, et eato lector verbi Deif '' he shall deliver to him 
the book out of which he is to read, saying. Receive this, and be thoa 
a reader of the word of Grod." 

But no book of public prayers is either used, or delivered, or men- 
tioned, in the ordination of bishop, presbyter, or deacon, (the onlj 
persons who ministered in the prayers of the church,) or any other 
officer. Yet here, if any where, we might reasonably have expected to 
have met with a service book, if there had been any at that time. 

One of the first books for public service, which I meet with, is the 
libellua officialise^ which seems rather but a short directory, than a com- 
plete liturgy, given to every presbyter at his ordination, to instruct him 
how to adfliinister the sacraments ; lest, through ignorance of his duty 
herein, he shoiild offend. Quando presbyteri in parochiia ordinantur^ 
Ubellum officialem a suo sacerdote accipiant^ ut ad ecclesias sUri dqpvr 
tatas inatructi mccedant, ne per ignorantiam etiam ipsia dmnia aacror 
mentis Christum offendant, *' When presbyters are ordained in their 
parishes, let them receive the book of offices, that they may go to the 
churches entrusted to them well instructed, lest through ignorance they 
offend Christ in the Divine sacraments." And many of the canons of 
that coimcil had been needless, if those churches had been before fur- 
nished with such a liturgy ; since that would have provided sufficientlj 
for the severals* there decreed.-^ 

To ascend a little higher ; in the times of the church's persecution, 
in the beginning of the fourth age, if there had been such service 
books, why did not their persecutors call for the delivery of them, as 
they did, not only for the Bible, but for other church utensils ?' Why 
hear we of no traditores^ upon this account? It was not the Christians* 
belief contained in the Scripture concerning the true God, or the 
Grentiles' false gods, that did more exasperate the heathen against them, 
than their worship. The Jews, whose belief was as opposite to theirs, 
had a toleration many times, when Lho Cliristiimsf werw dei*uxjyed. And 

• Can. IL » Can. vlL ' Crni* tWI. ' lo Caot. T*4 It. Caw. latl. mi* d3*. 

• putlealara. / Chi. 11^ r* ft ^m, Lt, £. it xlt tXil %lv, x*, %rh ^rll. 
r VkL Cone. Aniat. Can, ilil. In €«ninf, p. 9it, 

• Tbit iniUmmwm&9kit:h &a^ iu timet nf ptrm«nttqiit ddlriWTd up Ibc BtMc^ • ured 
ftimltave of tta otantes to tba hettthen ta ba bumL—JIti* 



Oiigen (as is remarked by Grodiu*) observes, that thej were not wcaA 
to persecute any for their opinions, Aik wmow yhp My/Ma rmm iw Jp ^f > A si 
ytywfinhw KoKaCorrai koI ^fXXot f " For which of the doctxines cnrrenl 
among men are others punished ?" There were opinions ttnongst tliar 
persecutors concerning God as scandalous to the heathen, aa those which 
the Scripture taught the Christians. The Epicureans wbollj denied 
Divine providence,^ which is Origen*s instance,' ro^ mSyra wpAmm 
araipowTtK, '' those who subvert all providence,** holding tlist tlieir godi 
were composed of atoms, ol rov 'Eirueovpov ^l avr&tvm i$ ilwy p 
rvyxSmsmsy* '' the gods of Epicurus, composed of atoms by chanoe f 
that there were no rewards nor punishments aiWr death ; nor any true 
good, but what is sensible. The Stoics maintained, that a wise man 
was equal to their great god Jupiter. Solebat SexHuB dUeerej Javem 
plus non posse quam bonum virum, — Deus nan vincit sagnsniem feUeitakt 
sHamsi vincU cetaU. — Sapiens tarn cequo ammo omnia apud aUos mdsi 
contemnitquej quam Jupiter: et hoc se magis suspieitf quod Jiqniar uU 
illis non potest^ sapiens non vullJ Est aUquid, quo stqnens an i eesd M 
Deum: ills natura heneficio non sua sapiens eat; suo sapiens.^ ** Seztiai 
was wont to say that Jupiter was not more powerful than a good man — 
God does not surpass a wise man in bliss, even if he does in duration— 
a wise man surveys and despises all things among his fellows widi 
as even a mind as Jupiter; and in this respect he prides himseif 
more, viz., that Jupiter cannot avail himself of these tilings ; the 
wise man has no wish to do so. There is a something in which 

« Neque de diis non recte tcntire crederentur, earn non ftdue Terun MBritte mnwnn ex m 
probat Origines, quod Epiciireis aliitque philosophU, omnem omnino diTinam proTideBtlim 
toUentlbus parcebatur.— Grot. ** Neither wexe they (the Chriatians) deemed to be of p e ticia i 
ientiment concerning the guda. Origen prores this not to have been the true canae of tlM emaUj 
practiied against them, firom the ftct that the Epicureans and other philosophers who altogether 
denied a Divine providence were spared." 

* Adv. Gels. lib. U. p. 68. 

* Ol tiiw jip avrofiarmf Kai iltt ctvxc to vcirra f€ftv^c$at Xifoiwtv, 4if ol 'fLwutaipuH' & ko« rfv 

Tfiv 8\mv wffowoiaw KaV iavrStv oifK «lvat fiv$o\ofov^tt ** Some say that all things oome to poM 
spontaneously and as it were by chance, as the Epicureans, who feign that there is no UBfrenal 
providence concerned with themselves." Athanaa. De Incamatione Verbi, p. 38, torn. L {p,H, 
C. torn. i. Ed. Col. 1686.3 

iX fop twrofidrmt ri mdvra xwp'f wpov6tat Kar airoirt fiyo¥t¥t ftc " If^ acooidilig tO 

their view, all things have been produced sponUneousIy without a providence," fte. Athaa. 
De Incam. Verb. p. 38, tom. i. [In Edit. Col. 1686, p. 54, tom. i.] 

T&v jap avSptrnrnv ol fiiv fin^ tlvai r6 0eXov kv6fitCoVf ol 6i eiwat fiiv, fiij vpovoctv H' mai 
ol fiiv wpoviHsiv fiiv fStv 6* oStpavittv fi6vov, ol H oi fiovmv r&v oipaviwif, itWa Kai r6v kwtf^im*, 
o6 wavrmtv 6i iikXa r&v i^^x***! o^ov fiavt\4tiv re ica* apx6rTttv, ko* ol fiiv ainofiarivfAiwf el A* 

olfiopM^nf ol d* cUfi fiptoBat ru itavra. " Some among men have thought that there fa ■• 
Divinity ; others that, though there is, yet that he is without care ; some also that he carea only te 
oelestial beings; others that he cares not only for celestial beings, but for terrestrial aa weU, and yet 
not for all such, but only for the principal, such as kings and rulers. Some say all things are »»»^i»ga - 
iam; some deatlny ; and others, that they are upheld by chance." Isidor. Ub. iv. Epist. [liz. C.] 

* IhUL • Lib. iv. p. 169. 
/ Senec. Ep. Ixxiii. pp. 672, 673. [Ed. Antw. 1614, pp. 516, 517.] 

ff Ep. liii. liT. [Ed. Antw. p. 474, A.] 


a wise man surpasses God ; the latter is wise by the gift of nature, 
not of himself; the wise man is so of himself." Tijv aMjy iptrijw 
Xeyovrts avBpomov koX Gtov ol arr6 lijg 2Toas <f>ik6<ro(f>oif fu) f^daifunwoTf/Mw 
Xryoxrtv tlvai r6p ar\ jraai GcAir tow O' Mpwirtus Kor avroiff axxf>oVj dXX* Xtnfw 
tlvm T&p dfi<f>oT€p»v €vdatfiovia»,'^ " the Stoic philosophers, who ascribe 
the same virtue to man and to God, to avoid sajing that God over all is 
happier than he who, according to their estimation, is wise, and to make 
the happiness of both equal." 

And the Peripatetics, with other* philosophers, curtailed and con- 
fined the providence of God to generals,^ or to the orb of the moon, so 
as human affairs were not regarded by him ; and all human addresses 
to him, were to no purpose ; r&v aw6 rov irc/MiraTov aifaip6vT»p rip wp69 
^fuis 7rp6votaPy koI rrjv trxttrw nf}6£ a»$pinrav£ rov QtUjv^* " the Peripatetics 
deny all ^providence concerning us, and the relation of the Divinity to 
men." Or, as Justin Martyr represents them,' *Y^ tvtxtipova't mi- 
Buvy or rov flip avfinayrosy kcu avT&¥ rS>v ycvcor xal cidttv intfukMirm 6c^, 
€fiov df Kol a-ov ovK tfri Koi rov KaBtKotrraf cVel ovd* &f ifvx^iuBa aur^ di* S^f 
wkt6s Koi fffupas, ic.r.X. " They imdertake to persuade you, that Grod 
takes care of the whole, and of genera and species, but not of you and 
me and of the individual ; seeing that not even if we should pray to him 
through the whole day and night," &c. 

Nor was it their opinions concerning worship, delivered in the Scrip- 
ture, so much as the exercise of their worship, which incensed the Gen- 
tiles against them ; for divers of the heathen held and published 
opinions highly derogatory to their worship ; as that of Heraclitus, that 
to pray before images was as wise an act, as to talk to a wall, cited by 
Clemens Alexandrinus,-^ 2ov Acovtrw ^iXo(r<$^ov rov *^j(^vlov 'HfMkktlroVf 
Kal aydkftaa-i rovrtoKrip tUxovrM 6kou}¥ ft ri£ d6fUH9 Xf (r^i^vcvocro,' " hear 
your own philosopher, Heraclitus the Ephesian, And they pray to these 
images with as much wisdom as if one should prate to the walls ;" and 
that of the Pythagoreans, who thought it not fit to pray, because it was 
uncertain what was profitable, and so fit to be prayed for, ovk §a €ifx'fr3*u 
xmtp iavr&v dtc^ r6 fiij dMvai. tA trvfufttpoPf^ " he does not permit prayer for 

• Origen. sdr. CeU. Ub. tL p. 309. 

• Epicur. in Senec. de Beneflc. Ub. Iv. cap. xix. p. 44S. Vld. Grot. De Jure BeUi, p. 443. Ibid. 
Cicero, PlaUureh. Euaeb. [lib. ▼.) cap. ▼ 'O 'ApirrorcXifc /itxp* <r«X^f|t vrifaat ri Omov, tA XotwA 
ToZ Koaiiov ix4pn wtfHfpa^i rnr rdu Oeov dionui^tmtt ** Aristotle allows the Dirlnity plaoe at Ikr 
as the moon, bnt marks off all the other portions of the uniTerse from the DiTlne administration." 
Vid. Spens. Not. in Orig. zTi. Chrysostom in Act. Hom. Uy. p. 911. Aino* oU d^act wpo- 
voi'ar dwoXaittv ra inr6 atXiivfiv. ** They grant not that sublonaiy matters hare tha benaflt of a 
Providence.** Vide Doun. Notas Arist. MeUphys. Ub. x. 

• general matters. ' Orig. ooBt. Calanm, Ub. UL p. IM. 

' Dial, cum Tryphone, p. I. / Clem. Alexandrin. Protitpt. [Ub. L Id. Lottt. MM, p. tS» B.] 

r 'HXitfiov c/vM r6 roit i^tiiXtiaeiv ««x«*««. " Thijr think pnfw to ImiiH tUfy," OHf. tOBtr. 
Gels. Ub. Tii. p. 875, Ub. L p. 6, and lib. tU. p. S78. 

• Laert. in Pythag. [Ed. Londtn. 1664, p. S16, B.] 


one*8 self, on aooonnt of our not knowing what is best Ibr us ;* or, 
ihat of the philosophers in Justin Martyr, whO| denying m particokr 
pioyidenoe, conceived God woold take no notice of any person, thoqgh 
he sought him night and day, M* S» iivx&fu&a oXrrf d»* IX^v wmer^ mk 
ifjjpat,* '' not even if we should pray to him through the whole m^ 
and day ;" and that of the Peripatetios, that prayers and seeanfioes were 
good for nothing, as Origen represents* them,' Bfiyd^ ^Acnemnag iamm 
€^X^^> '^<^ ^ «^ ^P^^ ^ ^^^1" ^^'^o^i '' they say that prayers and sscrifieei 
to the Deity are of no use ;** and that of the Platonists, that there ww 
no immediate intercourse betwixt mortals and celestial gods ; but all 
addresses were to be made by the mediation of the demons, which was 
cross to the practice of the generality of the heathen in their derotioiii. 
And what more vilifies their worship, than that of Seneca, QtuB cwmn 
scqnms servahit, tanquam legHma juaaoj rum tamquam dm grata f ^ All 
which things a wise man wiU observe as things enjoined by the law, not 
as pleasing to the gods.'* And that, sk adarainnmSj ut mmmmrimm 
oukitm tnagia ad marem, quam ad rem pertineref* '* we will so wonhi^ 
as to bear in mind that devotion is rather an affair of £uihion than of 
reality.** Just such apprehensions as many prudential conformists' hafS 

• Dial, earn Trypb. Princip. 

• Ob iji6¥0¥ r6 ei^Cirtfoi rotr liyAfiatri h^9i6v kcrtv, &XXck jap Kai ri 9vtiwpt^€p6famw9¥ row wmhXm 
wpo«rwotw$ai roU itfafiavtv tSxtv^ai — 6iroiov irmovetv ol ^v6 rov fleptrdrov ^tXo^o^tStmt ni 
ol TO 'EirtKovpov fi ^fiMOKp«Tow ^viraCofitvot. " It U toUj not only to pxmy to Images, Imt alao ta 
make belioTe to pmy to Imagei in compliance with the crowd, aa the Peripatetic philoMplMta aif , 
andthow who embrace the lentimenta of Epicurus, or of I>emocritu8.'* Orlg. oon. Cela. lib. vIL 
p. 375. 

• Lib. iL p. 68. 

' Quomodo tint dii colendi, solet praecipL Accendere aliquem lucemam >abbathia prohibeamiia : 
quoniam nee lumine dli egent, et ne homines quidem delectantur fUligine. Vetemua aalutatlooi- 
bus matutinis tnngl et ibribus assidere templorum. Humana ambitio istis offleiis capitnr; DwHi 
colit, qui norit. Vetemus lintea et striglles Jovi ferre, et speculum tenere JuncmL Non qwRlt 
minlstros Deus, &o. satis illos coluit, quisquis imitatus est. " It is customary to gire pr ao p l a aa 
to how the gods are to be worshipped. We forbid the lighting of any lamps on their Ksativala ; ftr 
the gods are not without light ; cTcn men delight not in darkness. We forbid the morning obei- 
sances, and sitting at the doors of the temples. Human ambition only is captiTated with tbeae 
serricea. He worships the DiTinity who knows God. We forbid the carrying of napklna and 
strlgil* to Jupiter, and the holding a mirror to Juno. The Divinity does not seek laeqneyi, ae. 
He worships the gods enough who imitates them." Senec. £p. zcv. p. 791. [Ed. Antw. p. SO!* 

OvMv otrrMC i^xvp^i' wapa dvBpmwott itt cwnBtiat iraXwfft rvpavvit — ov6i¥ yap o&tm &opimflH 
^vxh*, K&v ^( XP1'*Vif ''*** Y<Vi|rai, i$t natvorofielw ri Kak (evi^etv, ecu fidXicrra orov vept XarpM* 
Kai wept rrif ritv Ocov 66(n^ rovro yivnrai. Tlavra yap rU euKoXmrepov iL^iti^ftiw $i rd 9€p* $p^r' 
meiav—itd M rovro Kal rivtt rfiv i^ttSev btintpav ^vctv ri^v awijjBttav kxaKtvav, '* There ia »»*f*>**^ 
so influential with men as the tyranny of ancient custom. For nothing so disturbs the aoul eirea 
if it attach to aught useful as noTelty and strangeness, especially if it affect the wonh^ and ^oqr 
of God.— Things of every kind admit of change more readily, than the circumstantials of worship^ 
—On this account some of those without the church, called use a second naturo." Chrya. in 1 Ooc. 
Hom. vii. p. 286. 

• Who have studied to deserve Aristippus's character, ^v ^ap Isoi'^c app-ocacBai mX r^vy mm 
Xp6€if Koi irpotf-^vY, $uii wfUrav ntpivraoiv &pixo¥iav {twonpivacBuit " he was aide to acconuDodala 

• The iiriffU was an instrument used by the Romans to scrape off the pertpfaraUon fttmi their 
bodies after bathing.— Ed. 


of our formality and ceremonious worship, jet both compljring with the 
present modes enjoined, and maTHng some show of liking what they 
secretly deride ; for which feigned consent, and not setting up any 
other way of worship, they (several sorts of the philosophers) escaped 
then, and ours now well enough. 

Now, if the exercise of the Christian worship, which lay, as is sup- 
posed, in the pretended liturgy, were as odious to the heathen, as their 
tenets concerning Grod and his worship, which lay in the Bible ; if there 
had been any such liturgies, why would not the Gentiles have been as 
zealous to destroy them as the Scriptures ? 

However, it may well be supposed, that the delivery of the Chris- 
tians' liturgies, if there had been any, would have been required, if not 
as much as that of their Bibles, yet more than that of their other ohurch 
utensils ;'' since it is observable, that the Bomans, who forced the 
Christians upon that crime, for which they were denominated traditoreSf 
were more zealous against new liturgies, though heathenish, than against 
new gods. These they did more than tolerate, those they would not 
endure. An instance hereof we have in Livy.^ Some at Borne made 
bold to sacrifice and pray in a way not conformable to the Boman mode. 
Mulierum turba eratf nee aacrificantium nee preeantium Deos patrio more^ 
'^ There was a crowd of women, who neither sacrificed nor prayed after 
the manner of the country.*' This was heinously resented by all sorts; 
primo secretes honorum indigncUiones exaudtdxxntur^ deinds adpatrea etiam^ 
et ad pubUcam querimoniam eaeessit res, '' first the secret umbrage of 
good men was buzzed about ; then the affair reached the senate, and 
grew to a matter of public complaint." The inferior magistrates are 
sharply taken up by the senate, because they did not hinder it ; incusad 
graviter ab senatu cediles, triumvirique eapUakB^ quod non prohiberenL 
'^ The ffidiles, and the capital triiunvirs,^ were sharply reprimanded by 
the senate, because they had not prevented it." And when their endea- 
vours were not effectual to suppress it, the pnetor is employed therein 
by the senate ; who, by their order, commands all the new liturgies to 
be delivered in to him by such a day, — Edixit lU quieunque Ubras vaH- 
cinos, preeationesve, out artem saerifieandi eonacnpUnn haberet, eaa Ubroa 
omnes literasque ad ae ante ealend, Aprilea deferret, *' He gave command 
that whoever had in his possession prophetical books or forms of prayer, 

himself to place, time, and person, and to act eTery circumstanoe of eonfonnlty." Dtogen. Laert. 
Aristipp. [Ed. Londin. 1604, p. 49, D.] 

• Torti Prodoaii, EuMb. lib. TiiL p. 242. * Dae. UL Ub. t. p. 11 1. 

« These weie officers of the Roman state, first appointed about B.C. 991. It waa tbalr dutj to 
inquire into all capital crimes, (hence their name e«^taie$,) and to laeaiTe inftmnation iwpaetinf 
such offences. It was also a part of their offlce, in oonnezion with the mUlaa, to prawat all unlaw- 
ful assemblies of the people. See Diet. Or. and jBom. Aui. t. «. JH w ri r.^to. 


or a written rabric of sacrifice, should ddnrer all these boob and doen- 
ments to him before the first of ApriL" 

We see^ihej would not tolerate heathenish litnigies, diflfering from wiM 
ihej used only in mode and rites, though conformable as to the aabstaaoi 
and object of their worship. Would they not be more ▼ioleat for dis 
delivering up of Christian liturgies, more opposite to them erveiy way, if 
there had been any ? But there is not a word, in the axunenta, of any suok 
demand, or any compliance therewith, or any censure of sncsh oomplianoe ; 
when the demand and delivery of other things less material, leas < 
to them, and proceeding against the traditors, are frequentlj ] 

Augustine aUeges some things frequently prayed for in public, but not si 
in the words of any written liturgy, but of the administrator, Ubi auditrk 
sacerdotem Dei ad ejus aUare^* &c. '' Wben hearest thoa God*s prisit 
at the altar ?** &c. And the same petitions he afterwarda aeta down in 
other words ; which signifies, he had them not out of any prescribed cr 
written liturgy ; for then they would, they must, have been the aama 
Pro turn credentibttSj ut eos Deua ad fidem canvertat; '' for unbelieven, 
that God may convert them to the faith ;** but, in another place,* «l 
incredulaa gentes ad fidem auam venire oompellat, '* that he may inflnentti 
ihe unbelieving nations, that they may be brought to fiiith in him." 
Pro fideiibtia, ut peraeverent in eo quod esse ceperuntj mtmsrs suo; ^ftr 
the faithful, that by his gift they may persevere in that profeasicm which 
they have begun to assume ;** and elsewhere,^ ut profidant m eo qmoi 
esse ceperunty '^ that they may make progress in that profession which 
they have begun to assume." 

Augustine mentions the public prayers against the Pelagians ; but no 
othenvise, than as he might have alleged the extemporary petitions of 
such, who seeking the same things that Christians usually do, use not 
the same words ; and agreeing in the subject, vary other ways in the 
expressions ; without any intimation, that they were prescribed or in 
variable forms. And elsewhere he speaks with some note of uncer- 
tainty, whether they did pray so and so, or whether such and such 
were their words in public ; whereas if they had been in a common 
written liturgy, he would have known it, and might have been poaitive. 
Or with some intimation of liberty they had to use such and such 
words or not, those or others ; si voluerimus, " if we shall so please.** 

Finally, it cannot with any reason be supposed, but, if there had been 
such liturgies, they would have been made use of against the errors, and 
for deciding the controversies, wherewith the church was exercised in 
the ages we are concerned in. To waive others, there were two espe- 
cially as to which they might have been this way apparently serviceable; 

• Ep. ovli. p. 567. [Ed. Antw. Ep. ccxtU] * p. 577. ' p. ars. 


viz., that concerning the Godhead of Christ, opposed in the first, second, 
third, and fourth age especially. And that concerning the dyafAafynja-ia^ 
" siiilessness," of the faithful ; and other errors, with which Pelagius and 
his adlierents troubled the churches in the beginning of the fifth age, 
and aflerwards. *» 

None will fancy a Christian liturgy, wherein there is not some 
acknowledgment of, or some address to Christ as Grod, or wherein there 
is not some confession of sin, or some petition for pardon, in prayers 
proper to the faithful, something equivalent to the petition in the Lord's 
prayer, Forgive us our trespasses, and so no liturgies, wherein there was 
not evidence enough against both those errors, dnd others also of the 
Pelagians, inconsistent with the necessity of the grace of God. 

And it will be granted, that if those who were judicious had the 
managing of thase controversies, if they thought it requisite to make use 
of human testimony, they would make choice of that which is most 
cogent and convictive. 

Now they did make use of human testimony, as we find by that 
unnamed author,* who, confuting Artemon's error, who maintained 
Christ Wiis only yftiKos avOptanos, '^ a mere man," alleges Justin Martyr, 
Miltiades, Tatian, Clemens, Irenaeus, Melito, and the hymns composed by 
the brethren of old, ^roXftoi de ^o-oi koL <udai adcX<^»i' air* opx^r viro wiur&w 
ypa<l>f'i(rai, tov \6yov tov &€ov top XfH<TTov wnwvu'i &€6Xcyovrrts ; '' SO many 
psalms and odes composed by the faithful brethren, from the b^inning 
celebrate Christ, the word of God, calling him God ;" but not a word of 
any prayers, ancient or written, by brethren or fathers ; which yet (by 
one who, as it is apparent, industriously sought out all sorts of confirma- 
tions) would not have l)een omitted ; as tending as much, if there had 
been some written of old ; but contributing much more, to the confirm- 
ing of that truth, if there had been any enjoined to be publicly and 
generally used. Also Athanasius against the Arians, and Augustine 
against the Pelagians,^ two of the most judicious writers that those ages 
afforded, make use of the testimonies of their predecessors and contem- 
poraries ; but allege not one passage out of a service-book, or any 
prayers written, or so as to give us occasion to think there were any such 
used publicly, and authorised ; whereas they could not but apprehend 
lis well as we, that one clear allegation out of an ancient and commonly 
received liturgy would have been more cogent and convictive than any 
or all the particular testimonies they produce ; (since the judgment of 

• His tenet see August, contr. ii. Ep. Pelmg. lib. W. cap. U. p. SS9. 

* Eusebius, lib. v. cap. [xxviii.] p. 146. 

« Athanasius Syn. Nic. contr. Hseres. Arian. Decret. torn. i. p. t40. [In Edit. Col. 168S, pp. V4, 
277, torn, i.] quotes Theognostoa, iv r^ Stvrip^ rfiv bworwwmvwv. Alio Dlonja. of Alezand. and 
Dionys. of Rome, with Origen. Eliewbere Ignattna. [Vid. p. 99S, A. Ed. Col. IMS.] 



whole churches, in severml ages too, is fiur more cofisider>Me, than [that] 
of many particular persons.) 

Augustine, and others allege, against the Pelagians, divers things, 
which were frequentlj prayed for in public ; but without aignifying in 
the least wise, that ^e prayers were written or ancient, (which he ia 
Eusebius thought it requisite to express, concerning the hymns he men- 
tions,) or that they were generally received, or in the same form, or author- 
ised for the public service, or prescribed to be invariably used. Yet in 
these particulars lay the force and the advantage of such an ail^ation ; 
and that which would render it most considerable, and of £ai more 
weight than th^ testimony of single writers : and therefore imdoubtedlj 
would these have been insisted on (if there had been any such thing to 
urge) by any, who knew how to manage an argument, or to make use 
of a very obvious advantage. « 

So that we may conclude, either [that] the greatest wits and judgments 
of those times were not wise enough to discern the best advantages they 
bad from human testimony, such as were obvious to every eye ; and 
either could not manage them, as those of ordinary capacities amongst 
us can do ; or would not improve them, as the interest of the truth they 
contended for, and their faftlifulness to it required ; and so were either 
injudicious or unfaithful ; or else that they had no such advantages to 
make use of, and so no such liturgies. 

Further, if there were such liturgies, liow comes it to pass, that we 
meet with no intelligence of any changing of them, or alterations made 
in them, upon such occasions, as we may well conceive would necessarily 
draw on such changes, and in all probability bring us some account 
thereof ? Qttisquis unquanij says one, religionem mtUavit^ et orandi ratio- 
nem mutavit : nulla unquam hceresis fuity quce non continuo suaa ejffinxent 
preces,^ '* Whoever has made a change in religion, has made also a 
change in the methoil of prayer. There never was a heresy which did 
not suddenly devise prayers of its own." This being so, we may expect 
to meet with frequent mention of rejecting old liturgies, and composing 
new, of altering or correcting them, if the ancient mode of praying was 
by prescribed liturgies. But I have not yet met with any mention 
thereof, no not in those circumstances wherein, if anywhere, it might be 

The heresy of Artemon, holding that Christ was a mere terrene crea- 
ture, having seized on Paulus Samosatenus, (Xcyri 'Ii;<roOv Xpiorov nirw- 
^€v, " he says that Christ was of the earth,") bishop of Antioch ; the 
fatliers of the council held there, upon that occasion, tell us, in their 
circular epistle, that he prohibited the use of the psalms sung in the 

• Maid. In Luc. xi. 


honour of Christ, yltaK^iovs dc nvs fuw €ls r6v Kvptov ^'fx&v *lff<rovif Xpitrr^ 
navaaiJ^ And would he have tolerated a litoi^, whose contents were 
as much for the honour of Christ ? Or, can there be supposed a liturgy, 
which had nothing in it for the honour of Christ, «( Sv^^Btv, ^' as from 
heaven?** And if he had made as bold with a liturgy, would this have 
been concealed bj those fathers, who are so large and particular in 
giving an account of all his impieties, innovations, presumptions, (that 
the justice of their proceeding against him might be clear to the world,) 
not omitting those hjrmns, which were of less moment ? 

When the Arians so far ' prevailed, as thej had possessed themselves 
of all the public churches, in a great part of the Christian world, the 
east especially (so as the orthodox, reduced to conventicles, were glad to 
keep them in private houses, fields, woods, or where else they could or 
durst) they had power and opportunity to make what changes they 
would ; and no less will and for^vardness, showing sufficiently how much 
they were given to change, and that no respect would restrain them from 
altering anything, which crossed their tenet, by the alterations they made 
in the doxology, in the words of Christ for administering baptism, yea, 
in the Scriptures themselves, as Ambrose tells us.* And remarkably in 
the universally received confession of faith, since thfey made a new creed 
almost every other year. Socrates gives a particular account of three in 
little more than twenty years.*^ 

And what could restrain tliis innovating humour (when they had 
power enough) from abolishing or altering the supposed lituigies, if they 
were but tempted to it, by what they would count a just occasion ? And 
such occasion they had, if those liturgies contained anything in favour of 
the eternal Godhead of Christ, or his equality with the Father, or the 
divinity of the Holy Ghost, (which the semi-Arians opposed.) And 
some things (if not many) of this tendency they contained, if they were 
Christian liturgies. Why is it, then, that we hear not a word of their 
changing any old liturgy, or composing any new ; when we hear of their 
making bold both with that of greater moment and less ? And how is 
it that their antagonists, who thought themselves and their cause con- 
cerned to give a full account of their innovations, (conceiving their 
novelties to be one of the great advantages they had against them, and 
improving it, by publishing them to the world) make no mention of any 
such thing ? In all reason this must be, because there was no such 
thing, no occasion for it, no such liturgies then in fashion. 

We hear also afterwards, when Eutychianism was prevailing, what a 
tumult was made in Constantinople, what a noise through the world by 

• Buaeb. lib. vll. eap. xzz. * De Splrktt Saneto, Ifl. zl. • Hitt. [Ub. U. cap. xzx.] p. 6M. 



the adding of one 'word or two, 6 oraupmBiU di* ^imos^ " who was crucified 
for us,** to the Trisagion, the hymn so called.* 

And could more changes be made in settled liturgies (with whose 
forms and prayers the people are presumed to have been as well 
acquainted, and longer accustomed to them, than to that hjnm) without 
any noise, without any notice? 

Certainly, if they had been abolished, or such alterations made in them, 
we should have heard of it, somewhere or other. And if there were 
no changes made therein, upon such changes of the Christian religion, it 
was because there was none to be changed, no such liturgies extant. 

In general, that they had no such public liturgies for the administra- 
tion of the sacraments, appears by this, that they thought themselves 
obliged, with all care to conceal the symbols, the rites, the prayers used 
in these administrations, from the sight and knowledge of all that were 
not initiated. The Christians, in the fourth and fifth ages especially, 
counted it a heinous crime, to have any of the heathen or catechumens 
acquainted therewith ; some of them make it no less^ than sacrilege,' 
one of the greatest crimes, and^ worthy of the liighest censure, proUxim 

Hence, they durst not administer them in the sight of the dftwfm^ 
" uninitiated," nor discourse of them intelligibly in the hearing of such, 
nor commit them to writing for common use ; that being the way to 
have them divulged. 

They called baptism, and the Lord's supper, and the prayers used 
therein, with some other rites, fivorrjina,' " mysteries," and used them 

• Theodor. Lcct. Collect. lib. ii. p. 187. [C] 

• Chii&tianln ipsb uiiniinc contieciatU bine saciileglo vidcri non potest, " It cannot be wen 
liy uninitiated Cliristians even, without Bacrilufje." Auctor Sermon. De Coutinentia ; not Zeoo 
Veronensic, who lived nliout a.d. 360 ; but one who says in that sermon, he writ four hundred 3rean 
after the Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians was written. 

' "Oaov tap h iepucrvXiu kukov, owdt iiniv eiweti, " How grcAt a crime .«acrilcge is. is not even 
possible to say." Chrysost in 2 Tmi. Horn. ii. p. 338. ' Concil. Ilerdenx. [Can. xvi.) 

• Sacrae orationis roysterium, ** The mystery of tlie sacred prayer." Ambros. De Fide, ad Gra- 

tianum, cap. v. yitrawoieiTiu fup u^yi/Toa- Xo^ott 6 aproc ovrot dta rni nvcriKr\^ ci'Xu')4ar. ** With 

words ineffable this bread is transformed by means of the mystic benediction." Theodoret in Job 
vi. And Chrysostom of the words used in baptism, ^era 7(ip Ti/f anayYeXiav rtiv uwTtKl^v piuto- 
ru>v tKeiv^v Kai ^o/h(>Stv—hrav niWutfut, /S.iwriCtiv, "after the enunciation of those mystic and 
fearful words — when they are about to baptize." In 1 Cor. Horn. xl. p. 514. Obsccratioiium sacrs- 
menta. " the mysteries of supplications." Caelestln. Epbt. cap. xi. in Crab. p. 525. Ol>secrationam 
quoque sacerdotalium Micramenta re^piclamus, quae ab apostolis tradita in toto mundo, atque in 
omni catholica ecclesia uniformiter celcbrantur. •' Let us have respect to the mysteries of the 
priestly supplications which were taught by the apostles in all parts of the world, and are celebrated 
in uniform manner in every Catliolic church." Ibid, et in fine Operum Prospeii, p. K94. uniform- 
iter, t>ecause they all pray for the same things, viz. those which he speaks of; that there »» 
everywhere an uniformity in words, is apparently* false. 

'Eirtrr\pouvre<t rm r&y a^iMv cux^f TcXerar, " Keeping closc the m>steries of the sacred prayers. " 
Balsam, in Can. cxxvi. Cod. Mvo-tckuv tvXo-nat, " the mystic benedictions." Cyril. Alexandr. Epist 
ad Nestor, cum 12 Anatbem. 

* manifestly. 


according to the import of the word, which in Phavorinus, is tipprjrov 
a€^as Koi to anopprjrov^ " an object of awe, not to be spoken of : also 
what is ineffable," and derived" naph ro Briva fivaavra *« rrfptlv evdow, 
" according to the signification, viz. * certain tilings which men must 
keep within, by shutting them m/?,*" as concerned to keep those secrets to 
themselves, and confine them to their own breasts, without communi- 
cating them to others, either by action, word, or writing. It is not at 
all a mystery, says Basil, if it be exposed to common notice ; ovdc yAp 
oXo)r fiv(rn}ptov to €ts ttjv Bfjfiaidrf koi tiKalav qko^v €K(f>opov,^ It is a 
myst<.Ty, says Chrysostom, therefore keep all close, &c. fivarripiop €<rnp 
— xXflo-ov Toiwv TCLs 0vpas iva fiff tIs tbrj Sntp rn-cdci^i ov Biiusf using a 
like phrase to that wherewith Orpheus'* begins the discourse of his 
myst<jries, for the divulging of which Diagoras (amongst other crimes 
of the like nature) was proscribed, ^Biy^ofuu ols Oipus cot!, Bvpas d' 
tniOfa-Of ft€^i]\oi ndvT€s ofiibs, " I will utter my mind to those to whom 
it is lawful ; but all ye profane shut to the doors." 

Indeed the Christians came not far short of the heathen herein, if 
they had not a design to overtake them. 

Cclsus objecting the secrets of Christianity, t6 Kpv<f>iov b6yiia, as 
matter of accusation, Origen answers, it was not peculiar to Christians 
{ov fiovov idiov Tov \piaTiavc!>v \6yov) to have some things reserved from 
commtm knowledge {firj rls tovs ttoXXo^s <l>BduovTa,) The heathen had 
their mysteries also, and those botli philosophical and devotional. He 
instanceth' in both. For the former, Pythagoras (who himself was 
obliged to be circumcised, that he might procure admission to the 
Egyptian secrets,/) had some hearers who learnt in secret, such things 
as were not fit for profane ears, nor yet purified ; cV dnoppijTt^ 
dida(rK6p.€vot to, firj a^ia <l>Bdv€iv €ts aKoas /3f/3i7Xovff, «cat fit)fifnoii KtunBctpni- 
vas.^ And for the latter, he says, all the mysteries everywhere, both 
in Greece, and amongst the barbarians, were not blamed for being kept 

Nos autcm quoties sacraroenta sumimus, qua per sarm orattonis mystcrium In camem trans- 
flgurantiir et sanguinem, mortem Domini annuntiamuv, " As often as we take the sacramentit. 
which by the mystery of sacred prayer, are transfigured into flesh and blood, we show forth the 
I^ord's death." Amhr. Do Fide, ad Grat. cap. v. 

Christi corpus et sanguinem dicimus illud tantum, quod ex fhictibus terrae acceptum, et prece 
my Htica consecratum rite sumimus. " We call that only the body and blood of Christ, which having 
been taken from the fruits of the earth, and consecrated by the mystic prayer, we worthily receiTe." 
August. De Trinitate, lib. iii. cap. iv. 

Til Toiv Itpoa toi'toic nai <ppiKTotv /x^Wovtu irpoci4viit fivvrrtfjioit i^prii[Of.^vat XP»Jf *' It behores 
him who is about to approach the sacred and tremendous mysteries to be watchftil." Chrysost. 
C.itcches. de Baptismo ad lUuminandos. 

Mvarrjpiov 'flip fiufji^ofitvov ouAiv inr't Xotwov B<w^iai6fAtvov, ** A mystery whcB made known 
is no longer an object of awe." Auth. Qusst. ad Antloch. in Athanas. tom. li. p. 275. [Respons. ad 
Quieftt. 1.] 

■ From fiv€tVf to shut up, and Tn/'oy, to keep. — Ed. 

« De Spiritu Sancto, [cap. xxvii.] p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722, tom. Hi. p. 55, D.} 

' In Matth. Horn. Ixxi. p. 451. ' [In Just. M. Exhort ad GnNM.p. 14, C.) 

' gives examples. / Clem. Alezandr. Strom. I. [Ed. Lntet. 1611. p. 8M, C] 

r Lib. I. Contr. Gels. p. 7. 


secret, icol irdrra di rh moFraxw lUMrr^pui utrii r^r *EXXifta ml r^v PapfiAfW 
itpUfua tmt ov dui/3ff/3X7Tm.« And Seneca before him mentions both, 
where he will have Lucilius observe the difference between h&fiui and 
pnxcqjtum.^ Idem dkert de prcecqfUs posgum^ cgperta sunt; d^creta vero 
aapienltuB in abdito. Sicut sancticra aacrorwn tatUttm imiiati ackmij Ua » 
philoBophia arcana iUa admissis receptisque in sacra ot^mdwUur; atpra- 
ospta et alia hujusmodi profanis quoque nota nmt,^ *' I maj speak of the 
precepts ;, they are public matters. But the fundamentals of wisdom 
are secret As the initiated know the more sacred truths of religion, so 
in philosophy, these arcana are shown to such only as are admitted and 
received to the mysteries. But the precepts and other matters of that 
sort are made known to the profane as well." None were admitted to 
the sight of their mystical rites, but the initiated ; others were warned 
to withdraw.** 

— Pzoenl, O firoeal este profiuil, 
CoDcUunat vatei, totoque abtUtito luco.' 
" ' Far hence I fkr hence ! go, ye profiine,' the prophet crlet, ' and stand off fnnn the wlude 

*Eicar knat S«Tit iXirpot.f 
" Far hence 1 fkr hence 1 oTery profuie one ! ** 

And if they would venture to be present, it was at their peril. 
As Peiitheus in Pausanias •/ and those of Acaniania in Livy* found it 
Nero durst not venture, Eleusiniis sacris, quorum iniUatione impii et 
acelerati voce prceconis suhmoverentur^ interesse rum atisus est,* " He did 
not dare to be present at the Eleusinian mysteries, from whose initiatory 
rites the impious and profane are warned off by the voice of a herald." 

They would not speak of them in the hearing of others, 6 Xrya>y tois 
dfivTfrois TO, fivarripia dcrciSft; he is impious that speaks of tlie mysteries to 
those that are not initiated, says Chrysippus in Lacrtius. This was 

■ Ibid. p. 8. *AXXo 7ap Hjna tuti &XXo Ktipvyfxat rd fxiv yap Aojfxara e-i»iwST<Uf nt 6i Knpvyfutra 
dn/ioin'eirrai, ** Dogma is one thing, and preaching another. For our dogmas are held in silence, 
but our preaching is for tlie public." BasiL De Spiritu Sancto, cap. xxvii. p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722, 
torn. iii. p. 55, £.] 

• £p. zcv. [EA. Antw. 1614. p. 606, A.] ' Page 794. 

' So Pnidentius in Apoth. represents the heathen, excluding Christians from their mysteries. 
—Lotus procul esse et unctus, " Every baptized and anointed person is excluded." 

• Virg. JEn. vi. [258, 259.J / [Callimach. Hymn, in Apollon.j 

r Pentheum alunt, ut focminarum operta sacra specularetur, in arborem asccndisse, atque inde 
omnia conspicatum, quod cum Bacchse animadverti&sent, impetu focto viventem cum lacerasse, ac 
membratim discerpsisse, " It is narrated that Pentheus, in order that he might haTe a ftill riev of 
the sacred ritea of the women, climbed a tree and witnessed the whole ; which when the votaries 
of Bacchus perceived, they rushed upon him, mangled him alive, and tore him limb fhim limb.'* 
Pausan. lib. ii. [cap. IL] 

• Tempore initiorum duo Juvenes Acamanes, qui non initiati erant, Athenas venerant, et in 
sacrarium Cereris, cum aliis popularibus suis intraverunt ; ob hoc tanquam nefas sumntum— c»si 
sunt. Flor. Brev. " At the time of initiation two young men of Acamania who had not been initiated 
came to Athens, and entered into the sacred chapel of Ceres, together with the others of their own 
nation. On account of this, as of the greatest of crimes, they were slain." Liv. Dec. iv. lib. i. c. 7. 

' Sueton. Ner. [oap. xxziv.] 


part of Alcibiades' crime, myateria Ckreria munticniasej^ "that he 
divulged the mysteries of Ceres." And Augustus, when he was to hear 
a cause wherein these mysteries were touched, would not let it be 
opened till the company was dismissed.^ 

They would not commit them to writing. And so we may observe, 
that when the ancient writers have occasion to deliver anything par- 
ticularly concerning them, they waive it with an ov ^/ur, ** it is tmlaw- 
ful :" so ApoUonius of the Samothracian mysteries : 

Nno'or ^/bifif KCXttpOiTO, Ktt« 0( \axov 6pyia kcimi, 

" But farewell that island ! and the gods dwelling theieon, who receive that mytiexknM wonhip 
whereof it is unlaw Ail for us to sing." 

Numenius venturing to write of them, understood by a dream, [that] 
he had incurred offensam numinum, '^ the displeasure of the gods," as 
Macrobius tells us.'' But M . Atelius fared worse, suffering as a par- 
ricide, for permitting the Sibyls' books in his custody (containing secreta 
civiUum sacrarum, and used by the Romans as their extraordinary ritual) 
to be transcribed ; i>s irarpoKT6vo¥ tg cutkov tppa^^ag ^ottov tp^'^p ^U t6 
vfXayos/ &c. '^ lie sewed him up in a linen sack and cast him into the 
sea as a parricide." 

If they trusted them to vrriting, it was in a secret character, such as 

* Alcibiades absens Athenls insimulatur mysteria Cererli initiorum saera, noUo magls quam 
silentio solemnia enuntiavisse, " Alcibiades durinff hit absence ftom Athens, was charged with 
having divulged the mysteries of Ceres, whose sacreoheas consists mainly in their secxeey." Justin, 
Hist. lib. V. cap. i. Vld. ComeL Nepos. in Alcibiad. 

* Athenis initiatus, cum postea Romae pro tribunall de privileglo saceidotum Attics Cererla cog- 
nosceret, et qusdam secretiora proponerentur, dimisso condlio et corona drcumstantium solus 
audiit dlsceptantes, " After his initiation at Athens, when in his judicial capacity he had to decide 
concerning the privileges of the priests of the Attic Ceres, and some things of a more pTivate nature 
were about to be laid before him, he caused the council and the crowd of bystanders to withdraw, 
and himself alone gave audience to the parties." Sueton. Octav. August, cap. xdiL p. 103. 

Pausanias says, Oinvcr d' ucrtv al Kdfitipot mi ^ota kariv avrolt coi r^ fitirpi ra ipmfitvat vtttmiiv 
&fovTt ifwip avTMv vvfyvw^in wapa u¥6pA9 ^XtiK6m9 ivrm fioi, " But as to who the Cabeiil are, 
and what rites are celebrated to their honour and to the honour of Cybele, I shall be pardoned by 
the curious if I keep silence concerning these things." Bceot. [cap. xxt.] Vid. Dionys. Hall- 
camassens. infra. ' [Argon, lib. i. 924.] 

'' Numenio denique inter philosophos occultorum curiosori offensam numinum, quod Eleusiiia 
sacra interpretando vulgaverit somnia prodiderunt, " Numenius, a man more curious in recondite 
matters than most philosophers, was informed in dreams (hat he had incurred tk* tUtpUanart of Ikt 
gods, because by interpreting he had divulged the Eleusinian mysteries." Somn. Sclp. lib. i. cap. il. 
p. 25. 

' Dionys. Halicamass. lib. iv. [cap. Izil.] 

Tarquinius autem rex M. Atelllum duumvirnm, quod librum secreta dvilimn sacrorum eonti* 
nentem custodie suse commissum, comiptus Petronio Sabino describendum dedisset, culeo Insutnm 
inmareabjici jussit; idque supplicii genus mnlto post parricidis lege irrogatmn est, "Tarqnin 
ordered that Marcus Atellius, one of the duumvirs,* should be sewn tai a sack and east Into the sea, 
because he had given to Petronius Sabinus to be copied, a book intrusted to his keeping, whleh eon- 
Uined the secrets of the state religion. This kind of punishment was some tlmt after dea««d hy 
law for parricides." Val. Max. lib. L cap. L p. 8. 

• The duumvirs here referred to, are the dmmmvM aacrvniM, two ofllean vko had Aoft of Ite 
Sybilline books, to which allusion is made in this paaMfew— Sa. 



could not be underatood by tho«e from whom dwj imie to be < 

Ipsa mysteriafigurarum eumeuUi cpernmiurf ^the mjsifries are cam- 

mnnicated bj means of the secret way of dpher " aajB Maorobiiit; 4 

• Uterii ignonbfltbai, m Apnlefin of the ritat of Ms. 
profert qnotdam libroo Uteris IfnoraMinms inraotatai 
coM^ti lenooiili compendioM t«1» tuggerentM; putim nodorit ot in 
capreolathnque condentia apldbiit, a cuxlooitete praftnonnii tocti oao imuifta. Ii 
dicat qoae forent ad unim teletae neecMario pneparmada, ** Tho higli-prieat broug ht teft ham ttort 
cells certain books marked oTer with characters which leonld not rseofBiaa : flu mow parti flinM^ 
ing by means of figures of cTery kind of animal the ahortaned woida of a pneoaealvad ^SmBummi 
the reading being secured in other parU against the eariodtj of tho proteie \j figima kBoMid mA 
tortuous, like a wheel with connected ends projecting like two homa. Oat of thoa* baaka ki 
described to me the preparation requisite to be made by a oaadidata iw Ifriflatton.'' MstHMp. 
Ub. xi. p. 208. [Edit. Ripont. p. 271.] 

XdMrnr a cidor cut in dcaptta ^ nixptijot n ipa^ 6*fe^mpnro¥ Kara^aeMt^bvA tSv kfydtm 
toy ¥ovv, frc. '* The silence, so to speak, and obscurity which the writinff enploya, ia aot laadiy sia 
to convey the sense of the dogmas.** Basil. De Spiritu Saneto, cap. xxtU. p. S7S. pUL Vm. 1IK 
tom. iii. p. 56, A.] And Leo Imperator says, that laws were not to bo wilt obae ng dy, hi i ami Ik ^ 
were not mysteries, ov ydp fivariipta rov vo/iov ra $49tiia m«Tt a wix>*pM» a^ra tin ^Av vnXXfiv — ■ ■ 
XifilrcMt, '* Legal ordinances are not mysteries, that we should pbwa than iMftond tfaie laach tf tti 
understanding of the multitude." NoTel. IzxTiL 

'C^ot 6* o«u fiiv 6pHv hiractv ov BifiiK, oSrt irapd opAvtwv ciico^iv, oM* 2w ^tfpd^mtm 0l$tm 9m, 
*' Matters, which it is not lawftil for all to witness, nor to hear ficom the wttnaaaea of Cham ■■' 
not, I think, be described." Dionys. Halicamass. lib. 1. 

Ov a T&v fxvcrnpittv ^iri KaTfiXOviJiivm¥ Xerafit XaXsv/uMv, liXXo voXXa woXXduut Xtyopttw InMSS^ 
XvfAfifvtoxt tVn oi cidoTcr irio'TOf votiataat nal oi fiif ctA^rcr, fiif fiXaflmwt, ** Wa apaak not daarijtf At 

mysteries before the catechumens, but often say many things under a TaO, that tho fhlthfhl mtf 
understand, and that, at the same time, those unacquainted therewith may get no harm." C^ 
Catech. vi. p. 60. 

'UpoXo^tirai 6i aal rtBtiaerai rd *Oaipti<n, mvrt niv^wvof wapo/8<iXX«##a< Wp69 ri/m | «^ ^ W i 
Osiridis historia sacris sermonibus mysteriisque Celebris est ita ut periculoaum ait earn imiiifiaiatTi 
et narrationibus commendari, ** The history of Osiris is commemorated in saered rarchitioH mi 
mysteries, so that it Is perilous to commit it to parchment and popular deserfptiOD.'* Synaa. Da 
Providentia, p. 123. Ed. Paris. 1633.] 

'lepur XoTOf i-<rrtr, ov ovk ootov i^n-jopttttv ovU i-v fivBtW axh^^<^f*» " ^^ 1* ^ Saocd mattefi wMck 

It is profane tu expose even figuratively." Id. ibid. sect. I. p. 115. Xv^Ypa^ir'di^a^ |iif (Bsaol- 
mentis Intacta) Kut riaiy ov Bt^mv o/i/iu /SaXXf^triv, "Things not committed to parchment, leat tht 
eye foil on things whereon it is unlawful to look.*' p. 124. 

Ei jap Oeiuv \67twv KarifKooi Iftvovro tu r^r evafovt Kai ^nfxifrov ^jitfiv 9p»|««ca«c ««/Sa«puSi 
k^vXarrov, Kai roin ilfviKoin Kai d\6yow rStv wap* f|/i«v ifittv Kai etfiaafiimv a^aa0at ob 

*' Were they obedient to the Divine oracles, they would respect the Teneration due to our I 
able and innocent worship, and would not suffer heathen and unreasonable men to tourii 
and religious things.** Ibid. lib. iv. p. 144. 

A6701 BoiMTioi rnvr IvaWofiivow Kai kwoirreuovraK opjia Atovv^ov ewaparroturtt 6 t« yup i 
6 Tc t6uv vtfittrarat wapd tuv Oetov, " Boeotian arguments distract those who buret in to ' 
Dionysian mysteries. For both he who exposes them.^and he who beholds them, incur ' 
from the Deity.** Id. ibid. p. 124. 

Miontv A bwatktBa irapoKaXvirTorrcc to dfiifivika, " We speak as we are able, Telllnf €bSa^ 
sacred.** Id. ibid. 

'KW* tvXafinriov fdp nin /i'/ ti Kai tS$v a/jp^Mv ^(opx*iv««M«^u» " We must take heed laatwa 
expose any of the mysteries to contempt." Id. p. 125. 

Toit dwop^firotv rov fivBov—iwola utto kcriv iixoi oSfWtt Oifiit ^laYopcvciv, " The Ineflkhle pOItJOl 
of the narrative, such as it is unlawful for us to publish." Id. p. 128. 

'ivaatv ii oi uttrrat to Xt-tSfitvo*, " The initiated know what is meant." Id. Epiat. clzIL Ub. flr. 

Kai TcXcTar niv unii 6 X^^or kivcitm, " Let not the discourse even touch upon the initlatoiy yftaiL'^ 
Id. De Insoraniis. [p. 133.] 

The council of Laodicea, setting down the place and order of those prayers, shows na, thay wars 
made firrd r6 lUXBtU rovt sarnxovM^t'ot^i " ^«r ^^^ catechumens depart** [Can. xix.] 

^E.wtfivtitcKtTt dXXiiXow /uiff Tir riv aXXo^wXJv dvafi4fiiKrtii, " Know one another, leaf tstij of the 
strangers mingle with you." Chrys. Adv. Judssos. 


figuris defendentibus a viUtate aeeretum^* "and by characters which 
secure the secret from depreciation.'* Such were the Egyptian hiero- 
glyphics, and used on purpose for such conceahnent; they could not be 
understood without a fivaraywyhs^ " an initiator ,*" to interpret them; and 
he explained them not, but in secret ; and there but to some few select 
hearers, as the author of the Quasstiones ad Orthodoxoa tells us ; rk 
Upoy\v(f}iKa KaXovfi€va to. iv tois ddvroigj ov rois rv;(ovo-fy, aXX^ rols iyicpi- 
Tois irapadidofifva,^ " the so-called hieroglyphics which are communi- 
cated in secret cells, and not to everybody, but to those only who are 

I will not say, the Christians imitated the Gentiles herein, especially 
if the practice began so early as Tertullian (which some suppose, 
because he waives the mention of the sacrament, when he had occasion 
to give the heathen an account thereof, in such circumstances, as Justin 
Martyr before him had plainly described it.) For there is a great zeal 
visible in his writings against compliances with the heathen. Yet will 
I not deny, but that this custom amongst the Gentiles might have some 
influence upon Christians in afler ages ; when it was thought a good 
expedient (how rightly experience afterwards showed) for drawing the 
pagans over to them, to meet them in some of their observances. And 
it is evident, that many usages amongst the ancients were continued 
upon other considerations than those to which they owed their originaL 

However, it is undeniable, that such concealments were in use 
amongst them, and particularly as to the prayers which were made in 
the administration of the sacrament^, and some other rites counted 

None but the initiated were permitted to be present at these prayers; 
tS)v afivrfTaiv ovdtva xpv irap€iucuy as Chrysostom, having said before, 
Srav oKovoTis ^trfBafitv ndrrts Kowfj^ " when thou hearest the words, Let 
us all pray together." None but the faithful were to be present, when 
they began eucharistical prayers. Those that were not fit to partake 
of the mysteries, were not fit to hear the prayers, ovk cf r^r Bwr'tat ifyos^ 
ovdi TTJs /AcroX^^fur : ovkovv ovdc rrjs evx^r, " Thou art not worthy of the 
sacrifice nor of communication ; neither then art thou worthy to hear 
the prayers ;" they were warned to depart, dicovtit iarSn-ot rov Kffpvieog, mil 
\eyovTos "Oaoi iv furayoitf wrcX^rrc ndrrtt — oircX^crc ol fifj iwdfitpoi 
li(rj6rjvai, " Thou hearest the herald who stands and says, All ye 
that are penitents depart — Depart ye that may not pray." And this 
was done in reference to the prayers, rovro yivenu di^ r&v cvx^s ^ 
■njt /3o^f Tov KTipvKOf, " This takes place at the time of the prayers, by 
proclamation of the herald." Those that were unworthy to see, were 

• Somn. Scip. lib. i. cap. li. p. 23. * p. IM. 


unworthy to hear ; a¥6$toi xul 6^Mi§Moi rSr Btoftirm^ ramn^g Mi(m 
jBol SiooMy* '' Their ejes are unworthy these spectaclea ; ao alao are their 
ears nnworthy." 

So elsewhere, he says, the catechumens were forced away £r(Hn thefle 
prayers, JankaOi^mu rmp ^^puerAw €vx»p ixtivrnw yivofupwf'j they never heard 
those concealed mysteries, oudc y6p ^ficoMraM rwv dtnpprjrmp fivanffdm, 
Inlying that of the apostle to them, A iffMkfii^ oU c2lc,* &c, '< which 
eye hath not seen,** &c. 

So far baptism, the first council of Orange decrees, the catechumens 
should not come at the font, Cateckumeni ad baptisteria nequaquam 
admittendi^*' ^' The catechumens are by no means to be admitted to the 
bi^tisteries." And the pretended Dionysius b^^ins his discourse of 
baptism with fujd€U drcXc<rTo^ tvl rrjv Btop irro^^ " Let no uninitiated 
person come to the spectacle;" conformably enough to the usage of his 
times, though not [to that] of the apostle. 

When they have occasion to speak of these prayers in their sermons 
to a promiscuous auditory, they decline any recital of them, with their 
usual aposiopcsis, Norunt fideUs^ taamw ol firfiwifitvoi, ol fiwmuy or ol 
imrrol, t6 \wy6fuvw, " The faithful know — ^The initiated know — ^The 
fiuthiul know what is meant," so frequent in Augustine, Chrysostom, 
Theodoret, as to the eucharist. For the prayers in baptism, see 

Nor might they commit them to writing; that was the way to divulge 
them. Writing was counted a publishing, though but in an epistle to 
a private friend. So Basil to Meletius,-^ *Iva fifi eV rj a^ TeXc/onTr*, 
ypafifuuri dii^fuxrifvcra) — dirjyrjadfifjv r^ ddfX^o^ Q€o<f>pdaT<j^ ra Kaff cKaarov 

• In Ephes. Horn. Ui. pp. 778, 779. 

AdTertariit Athanasii, pro crimine magno objectum sit, quod de calice confracto contenderint 
OOrain EthniCO, Kai ovk aloTtt^t^ir rai ravra—liri KaTtJXOVfi.kvttv nai ro ft x^^P**"'*** ^''^^ 'EXX^vwv rpu* 
7«ioyirrer ra fivoriipiai ov x/^»j ^op to fLvirriipta duviiTOtt rpaftaAttv, Tva /ifj "EWnvtc /it» a7*'t»r>T€t 
jt\»ich (iaTrixo''Mci'o< ^ wtpiepfoi fivofitvoi aKavfiaXiCtavrai, *' It was cast in the teeth of the adver- 
Mri«s of Athanailnt aa a grcMlt crime, that they went to the law before a heathen concerning a 
broken chalice. ' And they are not ashamed of this, that in the presence of catechumens, and what 
if far worse, in the presence of Greeks, they enacted the mysteries. For it is unlawful! to enact the 
mysteries In the presence of the uninitiated, lest the ignorant Greeks ridicule them, and the cate- 
chumens becoming over-curiou», be scandalised.' " Syn. Alexandrina apud Athanat^ium. Apol. ii. 
p. 569, torn. i. Edit. Commel. 1601. [Kd. Col. ]CHt]. p. 73], A torn, i.l 

*EKi a ri¥ kfhiiM¥ t(ira(o%rwtpi tKKXrifftar, ir«pi froTn^iUi', ircpi rpavt^iir «a< riv iif ti^v, kai to 
6ttv6T€ttovt iBvticavt IkoXovv fiaprvpit^t iffpi wornpiov fxvvTiKov CnTiu'iTer. "They instituted Icfral 
proceedings before heathens concerning the church, concerning the chalice, concerning the table, 
and things sacred ; and what was a more fearful thing, they called heathens as witnesses touching 
the mystic chalice. " Ibid. p. 571. [Ed. Col. p. 733, D.] 

So Julius expresses himself astonished, that wapovrw Kurnxovfi^wv r6 ri xeiptaroi ttri ^^(Km* 

Kai '\ovdait0V rtiv dfo/9c/9Xt)M^*^v trtpi rov Xpitrrtavto^on i^iractt wept aifxarot XptCTOv Kai amfiaror 
XpKTTfw 7<v«Toi, " In the presence of catechumens, and worse still, in the presence of heathen and 
Jewish slanderers of Christian religion, inquisition is made concerning the body and blood of 
Christ." Epist. in Apol. ii. [Ed. Col. p. 750, A.] 

* In 2 Cor. Hom. ii. p. 553. ' Can. [xix.j •' Hier. Eccl. cap. ii. sect. i. p. 21. 

' In Gal. !▼. 28, p. 748 ; in 1 Cor. xv. 29,- Hom. xl. p. 514 ; in 2 Cor. i.; Hom. ii. p. 555. 

^ Ep. iTiL [Ed. Paris. 1722. p. 151, D. torn. itL] 


mrayytXKtu, that what he was intiTnating, might not be divulged by 
writing it, he would acquaint Theophrastus therewith, who should 
declare to him all particularly, by word of mouth.* As they had their 
mysteria chartulce non committenda, '' mysteries not to be committed to 
parchment,*^ in Origen's phrase ;^ so these mysterious prayers were to 
be kept as secret. To write them, so as strangers might come to the 
sight thereof, was not n^/Hiv Mow, *^ to keep them close,** to use them 
as mysteries, no more than to recite them in their hearing. What th^ 
durst not plainly pronounce, they would not venture to write ; aocoid- 
ing to that of Clemens Alexandrinus,^ ^fiovfuvog ypAi^ip h ml Xeytip 
€<l>v\ti(dfiri¥, '^ Fearing to write those things which we are cautious not 
to speak.** By this means they might come to the knowledge of aliens. 
Ruffinus puts this in the accoimt he gives, why the creed was at first 
not written, (idcirco denique Iicbc non scribi chartuUs out membraniSf 
'^ Therefore this is not to be written on paper and parchment,**) it was 
to be used as a watch-word, whereby they might know friends from 
foes, {interrogatua symbolum, prodat, si sit kastis an socius, '* When 
asked for the creed, he shows whether he is an enemy or a friend.") 
But if it had been written, and the Christians got it by reading, the 
design might have been frustrated ; for this way, the infidels might 
have got the word, ut certitm esset hcec neminem ex Uctume qua inter- 
dum pervenire etiam ad infiddes solet, didicisst.* '' By means of this 
reading, which afler a while is liable to come to the ears of even the 

That which they would have kept secret, they did not commit to 
writing, for the view or use of others. Therefore Baronius says, the 
way of dravring up their literoB formates,' was not in writing ; because 
they were concerned to keep it secret, lest it should be counterfeited, 
existimamus ejusmodi formulam nequaquam ab eis fuisse scripto traditam — 
sed penes episcopos catholicos retentam esse secretam/^^ln our opinion this 
kind of cipher was by no means committed to writing, but was kept as 
a secret in the custody of the Catholic bishops.** 

And there wants not direct evidence, that they had not any prayers 
thus writ. Basil says expressly [that] the words they used in blessing the 

• Page 307. » In £p. ad Rom. ii. 4. [Ed. Paria. 1759, torn. iv. p. 479, C] ' 
< Strom, i. [Ed. Lutet. 1629. p. 276.] 

^ Expos, in Symb. in Cypr. Opera, p. 4. [In Hieronym. Oper. Ed. Paria. 1706. col.ezxTiiL torn, v.] 

• The litera forwtata were letters of recommendation sent Uvta the Mahopa of one dmreh to 
the Msbops of another. They were of three kinds : the first sort were only given to penona of 
quality, or to thoee whose character had been called in question ; the second sort w«r» glTen to aajr 
communicant who had occasion to change his abode ; the third kind were granted only to tlw oiBi|7 
who were remoTing from one church to another, and these were called also MUn rf iwls esry . 
These letters of commendation were called fonmalM, from the very cirenmatanee to whkh the 
author nukes reference above, vix. from their being dlatlngutshed by eertaiD f^rwu or ohmclna, m 
a safeguard against fbrgery.— En. / Ad anno tli. a. 44. 


elements, rh r^g ivutkrimm piftara^ were not writteiii they had tliem aot 
4yypA^w ; and that what thej said, botli before and after the conaecn- 
tion, they had not from any writing, ahXh, jboI wftokiyoft^w ml /nXryo^ 
rrrpa, ns /uyaXffv txovra wp6s t6 fiwrnipuHf r^ ^^HC^ ^' ^' dypA^ov Mk- 
(ncaXioff m^NiXd/SoKrcf , '^ We premise and subjoin other thiiigs besdei 
as contributing great efficacy to the mystery, and these we deriTe froa | 
the unwritten tradition/' As much he says of the prayers in baptisiii; ^ 
(the words we shall have occasion to produce hereafter:) «iid#ao haTiog 
reckoned the prayers made in the administration of the sacnunents; 
amongst other things, which of old were kept secret and unwritten ; he 
tells us the ancients were well instructed to reserve them, as mjsteiioaf 
things, in great secresy, Kcik&t €Ktlvoi (ol irarlp^i) IkMay/upoi rmp fivan^im 
n& irtfuA (TioMT^ dta(riaC€<r$€u ; and adds, those administrations^ at whidi 
the non-initiated might not be present ; how could it be lawful, to 
expose the notice thereof by writing them ? & y^ ov^ g'wo mw iy iftm 
Tols dfiwfTois, rovroi>v nSts ay fjv tliehi r^y dtdcKrmXuiy iitBpuMfMfimw h 
ypofifuiarX ;' And all along these prayers with the other arcana there 
mentioned, are awdpprfray ddi^fuxrtnn'a, 3ypa<f>a, and,* rit Sypail>a rff 
^lucXfyo-tar fiwrrripia,^ " ineffable — private — unwritten — the unwritloi 
mysteries of the church." 

Dionysius (who, though he belied his name, and would have been 
thought elder by some hundred of years than he was, yet hath credit in 
reporting the usages of times wherein he really lived*) declaring why he, 
writing of other rites and practices of the church, declined* to give 

• DeSpir. Sancto. rap. icxvii. p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722. p. 55. torn, iii.] * Page 174. 

• Itaquc sflentium hoc quodcunque sit non oppoiii voci sed scriptioni ; ut non ait sensua, noa 
debuisse prnnuntiari : ted tantum non debuisse scripto tradi, " Therefore this silence, wbaterer it 
be, is not to be opposed to speech but to writing. Since it would not be sense that the nysterin 
ought not to be enunciated, but only that they ought not to be committed to writing." 
torn. iT. lib. ri. cap. Tlii. sect. xxvi. 

Nolebat Basilius earn tradltionem UHpujufieitaBat iv fpafifxaciv, atque id periculosum < 
bat Tif ctfiytf Twv nvarnpif^v, " Basil was averse to that tradition's beintr paraded in writing, aai 
thought that such a proceeding would imperil the reverence due to the mysteries." Id. aert. zzls. 

^ Cum et hie, et alii apocryphorum scriptores. sua soleant ad pnesentis suo aevo ecclesiae ritua.inoRt 
ac sermonem efllngere ; primo plerlque eo potissimum consilio sua figmenta sub vetustiorum »wwpl^ 
edant, ut res sui ssculi novas false antiqtiitatis nomine constituant et fonfirment ; clamni eat ctiaiii. 
ex istius generis apocryphis magnam utilitatem percipi posse, si diligenter obsevetur, qaoa ffll 
mores, et quos ritus ecclesis, et Christtianis illis tribuant de quibus loquuntur, " Since both this aai 
other writers of apocryphal books an' in the habit of feigning things of (heir own after the modd cf 
the rites, customs, and manner of speaking in une in the church existing in their own age ; aai 
■ince very many the rather In cnnvequence of this their chief design, viz., to establish and anpport 
the novelties of their own age by a forged ancient name, publish their own figments under the » wfft 
of their predecessors, it is clear that great benefit may accrue from apocryphal writings of that atao^, 
if we carefully note what customs and what ecclesiastical ritc« they ascribe to those Chriatiana eoa- 
ceming whom they speak." Df llaeus de Lib. Suppoftitis Dionys., frc. lib. ii. p. 250. 

• Cur reticnerit precationes quse in mysteriis adhibentur, '* The reason why he has obaerred dtaDea 
at to the prayers which are offered in the mysteries," says his translator, dm ri irdvrav irrot T«t« &fiui 
intKXfivttt, Kai T(iT tvtpftlut iviumnatv, "The reason why he has kept silence as to all, or at laaiL 
as to the sacred invocations, and their cfiects," says Maxinius, his rcholiast, p. 96. If it be Mid, hv 
tpa^lt i^pun^cittv, is to explain or write commentaries on their prayers, not sinply to ^■^iM^ti i t 


an account in writing concerning the sacramental prayers; (rcXcorijcc^ 
€iriKXT}(r€is) assigns this reason, ov B4fUTov cV ypdffxus a^piuifvmiv ; it is 
not lawful to declare them in writing, being mystical and secret, 
fxvoTiKovs ova-as koi diropprirovsj (as Pachymeres,) being secret, and not to be 
divulged. To deliver them in writing would have been fV rov Kfv^Uw 
irp69 t6 Koivbv e^ayciv, to bring them out of secresy into common view, 
as he expresseth it afterward.^ 

For the Latin church, InnoceQtius I., bishop of Rome, may satisfy 
us. Deccntius of Eugubium consulting him about divers particulars 
concerning the church service ; Innocent* in his epistle in answer 
thereto, refers him, not to any written orders or prescriptions, which 
may well be presumed lie would have done, if there had been any; 
but to what he had seen practised at Rome, when he was there. But 
more particularly and expressly,*' he determines that the presbyter 
might anoint the baptized with chrism, rum tamm fronUm ex eodem 
oleo signare; but not anoint their foreheads with it ; that being 
reserved by him (and first by him) to bishops : but what words 
should be used in that rite, he might not tell him in writing ; verba 
vero dicere non possum, ne magis prodere videar^ quam ad ccnauUO' 
tionem respondere; lest he should seem a betrayer (of the church's 
arcana) rather than an adviser. Now if they were thus reserved and 
cautious in a baptismal rite, as much or more caution would be thought 
requisite as to the Liord^s supper, which was anciently, in their style 
and accoimt, secretum,^ and jJ Kp\j(f>ia, " a mystery — ^the secret ordi- 
nance." 'And indeed he shows himself no less reserved about the 
eucharist ; so we find him.^ Cum post omnia quce cq)erire nan debeo, pax 

them to writing, I answer if it were so, this proves as much what I allege him for, as the other. Fw 
this was unlawful, not as commentaries, but as written, it was ov Bttiirhv, " unlawfbl,** not to 
explain or render them intelligible, but to divulge or make them common, cit rh luuvo* k^afttv. 
Now they were exposed to common view by being written, not by being intelligible, for intelligihle 
they were in the most reserved use of the church ; unless their prayers were riddles, and they 
offered to Gi>d they knew not what for a reasonable service. 

• Hicrarch. Eccles. fln. 

' Sterne dilectionem tuam ad urbem venisse, ac nobiscum in ecclesia oonvenisse, et quern monnn 
vel in consecrandis mystcriis, vel in caeteris agendis nrcanis teneat, cognovisse, dubium n<m est ; 
quod sufficere ad informationem ecclesise tun, vel rcformatlonem satis certum haberem— nisi do 
aliquibus consulendos nos esse dixisses. " It is indubitable, beloved, that thou hast often come to tho 
city, and met with us in the church, and observed the routine which obtains as well in consecrating 
the mysteries as in other secret oflices ; which 1 should Imagine suflBcient for the ordering or reform- 
ation of your church ; unless you say that it is necessary to consult us touching certain matters." 
Prarfat. Kpist. aU Decentium, In Crab. Cone. torn. i. p. 452. • Cap. iii. 

' Innocentlue negat se tunc tcmporis, i. e. cum scriberjt ad Decentium Eugubinum deberc dicere, 
" Innocent says that he ou^ht not at that time, (i. f. when he wrote to Decentios of Euguhiimi,) to 
mention the arcana," (Ctiamler, tom. iv. lib. vi. cap. viii. sect. Hi.) lest the writing might have come 
into the hands of the non-initiated. Populus pars erat a/Minroit pars iMfivniUvot, lUte noque Tidcn 
licebat, neque audire, et hi satis erant, ut non auderet omnia Uteris Innooentlus comnittwe, "Pvt 
of the people were uninitiated persons, part initiated. The former ware allowed ndther to ••• nor 
hear ; and the Utter were so numerous, that Innocent did not dare to commit aU mattan to wxittng.** 
Id. sect. liii. Vid. Bcllarm. sect. I. ' Cap. I. 


ait necessario indicenda, " Since subsequently to all those parts of the 
service which I am in duty bound not to expose, the salutation of peace 
must be pronounced." Those things, which passed in the oelebration of 
the eucharist, before the salutation of peace (before which were all the 
prayers) he might not open to him in writing ]" and in reference to the 
whole, he speaks thus, towards the conclusion, EeliqfM veto quae acribifaB 
non eratj quum ad/ueris, interrogali, poterimus edkeref "For the rest, which 
it is not lawful to write, when thou art here, we may, being desired, 
declare them." Now, if to write this in an epistle to a particular person, 
who was not only fufiwjfimt, " initiated," but, as Nyssen speaks, 
fiv(rnjpi<ov \av3av6vTci>p fxvirraytiyhi^*^ " an initiator into the secret 
mysteries," would have been no less than prodere, no better then 
treachery, a betraying the curcana eccUsioBy " the arcana of the church," 
what would it have been to have had thera written for public use, and 
exposed in common prayer-books ! 

I suppose it is hereby manifest, that they were not wont, in those 
times, to commit their sacramental prayers to such books or writings ; 
and 1 cannot apprehend, how the prayers requisite to make up a liturgy 
for the sacraments could be either prescribed, or of common invariable 
use, in many churches, if they were not so written. 

Finally, since they thought themselves obliged to keep the things we 
speak of secret,'' making account [that] the order of the churches, and 
the reverence due to those mysteries could not be otherwise secured ; we 
cannot suppose they would take a course, which would make it next to 

• If a catechumen ask thee what the teachers say, fxniiv Xf7e r.p f^cd, /luirT^^ioir ^np aoi wapaiido' 
fxev, &c. " Say nothing to one who in without ; for we entrust to you a mystery." — ^groti vinam 
quandoque postulant ; quod si intemiK'stive detur ^pevijrnv IpitiCtrai, Kai dv6 Kuxa tivtrat caj o 
vooSfv uirnXXvTui, Kai o iarpot faafiaWtrai' ui/Tcof o Karrwuv^KVOK ia\ uKovCfi wopa vkttov, Kai i 
KUTHXOt'MO'o^ ^^ei'iTiy, ovK oi6t fap t* JiKoucrt, Ku< i\t7xc' to irpu7/ia Kui ^K/iiuKTfi/x'Ctt to X^-^ofitvii^t 
Kai 6 ir»o-Tov wc fipoAornt (caTOKptVcTai, &c. ** Sick men sometimes ask for wine, which if it be unre»- 
sonahly given produces delirium, and two evils supervene ; the patient dies, and the physician li 
blamed. So If a catechumen hear these things from a believer, the catechumen in like manner grows 
delirious ; for he knows not what he hears, and reasons about tlic matter, and scoffs at what is said : 
also the believer is condemned as a traitor." Cyril. Procatcch. [cap. vii. Ed. Oxon. 1703. p. 9.j 

OifK Itariv etfof t^nkDiv 6it\ft~nrHau " It is not our manner to cxi)ound these matters to the hea- 
then." Catech. vi. [Ed. Oxon. sect. xvi. p. 97.] * Cap. viii. 

« De Christi Baptism. 

■' 'A^ywaia of^vorn^ iwi rtXi-r&v, " I[^orance in regard to the sacred mysteries b dignity.* 
Synes. de Provid. sect. ii. p. 124. 

'El- T<p KtKpvfifxivtf Kai a<f>Oi-iKrfft to acfivov tok /uii»<rT»ip«o«v i<piXatrtrov, " They preserved by con- 
cealment and silence the reverence due to the mysteries." IJaail. de Spir. Sancto, cap. xxvfL 
p. 273. OvTOi 6 \6fOi T»ic f&v ii-ipdiptav irapaducrewr, Av fit] KaTafifXriOttanv rm io^fxar^v ri/w 
'fvSttriv, tvKata^p6vr\rov roiv iruWotr -^XvcaBai iia (rvvijifetni; " The reason for unwritten tradi- 
tion is this, that the knowledge of our principles being to be learnt only by experience, may not 
be exposed through folly to the contempt of the multitude." Id. ib:d. Toaoi'Twv &vrtt¥ iiipa^w 
Kai Toffui'rni' ix^vrttv Iffx^v cU i6 t?jv cva^fieTat nvaTijpiov, " So many things being unwritttK 
which possess such great importance in reference to the mystery of godliness." Id. p. 274. 

Lysis, the Pythagorean, To fip Anfiooi,/. tfttXocoiptU, ntfciXn^ elv uv(^p(^7ow n/>fe rAv Otim* koto- 
^pov^crewc, •' Philosophising in public originated a great contempt for Divine things/' reproTing hit 
fHend for publishing something. In Synesius, Ep. cli. [p. 279, B. Ed. Paris. 1633.] 


impossible to conceal that which they deemed themselyes so much oon- 
earned to keep secret. 

Now, if their prayers had been written out, for the use of many thou- 
sands, or many hundred churches, (indeed the supposition must be for 
all in the world ; for all are supposed to have some or other, though 
not all the same) would not this have been a dividging of them, and a 
ready way to make them €K<f>opa roU lf(», *' divulged^ to them that are 
without?" Could all, of such multitudes of copies, be kept either from the 
heathen, who were so inquisitive after the Kpv<^ui, " secret doctrines/' 
of the Christians, as they used all means fair and foul* (sometimes 
tortures, sometimes odious misinterpretations, sometimes subtle insinuft- 
tions) to get the knowledge of them ? .Or, from the catechumens, pas- 
sionately eager to be acquainted with these secrets, iEmy way though 
surreptitiously ; as for other reasons, so because their acquaintance 
herewith would have advanced them inmiediately into the higher form 
of the Jideles, " faithful."* 

It is no way probable, [that] these prayers and their other ivwipuca^ 
^^ esoteric doctrines," could have been concealed, if they had been written 
for common use ; and therefore, since they thought it their duty to keep 
them secret, we may conclude, they had them not thus written, and 

• Quo magis neceMariura credidi ex duabua ancQlifl quae mlnlttne dlcebantur, quid etaet Teri et 
per tonnenta qusrere. Nihil aliud inveni, quam supentitionem praTam immodicain. ** I thereftm 
deemed it necessary to wring the truth by torture from two senring-women, who were called deacon- 
esses. But I discovered nothing save a corrupt and intemperate superstition.** PUn. Ep. Tr^ano, 

xcvii. Just. Martyr. Apol. i. p. 133. 

Aioirep ti.arii\¥ unii vo^car uK^</)wr to Kpv^tov rov Xpurriantafiw iiafiAXXt* air6, " Therefore 
in vain does he, who does not even correctly understand the Christian religion, slander it.** Origen 
contr. Gels. lib. i. p. 8. 

Maximus Madaurens. Ep. ad Augustin. 

To iriar6v n/uttf a^avow Kai awoppiirou KOtvttviat oierat Mai tf'^tfif/iia, " He deems the cipher tO 

be the proof to us of the obscure and secret doctrine of the conunanion." Celsiu in Origen. lib. tUL 
p. 339. 

* Ei 6i r'lK Kar ujvoiav fieraXafioit tovtov rdxiov vrotxtimtravTtt fiviiaare, livtn fAii Kara^poinrr^ 

i^v\6ot, "If any communicate in ignorance, instruct him immediately in the elementary doetrine, 
and initiate him, that he may not depart a scomer." Clem. Constitut. lib. t. cap. xxri.jine, 

Quodam canone uno comperimus, si cui contigisset catechumeno, casu aliquo, ac fbrtuito saert- 
ficiis interesse, aut oculis ilia sacra intucri, eum protinus sacro fonte abluendum ftiiaae. — A Deo 
magnum quoddara in se profectum benefieium arMtrabantur, si casus qoidam inspentvu tuUseet, ut 
ea sacrificia, non tam mentis, quam oculis corporis contemplarentur, " We find by oiie canon in 
particular, that if it chanced to any catechumen to be present by some accident at the saeriflces, or 
to look upon those sacred things with his eyes, he was to be b^itixed forthnith.— >They esteemed it 
a great blessing sent to them by God, if any unexpectt:d chance brought to pass that they should 
gaze on those sacrifices with the eyes, not of the mind but of the body." Albaspln. Obeenr. Ub. U. 
cap. ii. pp. S06, 207. Vid. Notes in Can. p. 206. Timotheus Alexandrinut, in respon. canon. Inter- 
rogatus, si puellus catechumenus, vel homo jam perfectus, dum fleret oblatio, opportune allUeiit, 
ej usque nescius partlceps fisctus sit, quid debet de eo fieri f Respond, debet Uluminarl, a Deo entan 
vocatus est, *' Timotheus of Alexandria, being asked for a eanonJeal eolution of the queitloii— If a 
child, who is a catechumen, or an adult, should be present at the very time when the oUatlMi ia 
offering, and should become an ignorant partieipator of the same, what ought to be done In the eeae 
of such a onet answered. He ought to he baptliid,haeiiiee nieh aoM tooUed of Chm.** InVieeoon. 
de Bapt. Rit. lib. il. cap. Y. 


consequently they could have no prescribed litui^es for the adminiBtra- 
tion of the sacraments. 

And the impossibility of concealment will be more evident, if litur- 
gies were to be not only in the hands of the several ministers , bishope, 
presbyters, deacons ; but also in the people's hands ; as it was necessaiy 
they should be, unless they were quite other things, than either the 
modern now imposed, or the pretended ancient liturgies ; for then the 
people bear such a part in the prayers, as shows their direction by a 
• book necessary. And some part they had of old, as appears by Cyril.* 
Though nothing so much, as in the written liturgies, nor what they 
might not have by custom without book. 

This may sutilce for the sacraments in general, to show how far those 
that administered them were from being confined to prescribed forms. 

For the eucharist in particular, let us view the twenty-third canon of 
the third council of Carthage : Ut nemo in precibus, vel Patrem pro FUio^ 
vel Filium pro Patre norninet, et cum ad altare assistitur, semper ad 
Patrem din'gatur oratio. Et quascufique sibi pj'eces aliquis^ descrilnt, mm 
eis utatury ntsi prim eas cum instructioribus fratribus contulerit. " That 
no man, in prayers, shall name, either the Father for the Son, or the 
Son for the Father. And when they are at the altar, the prayer shall 
always be directed to the Father. And what prayers soever any shall 
copy out for himself, he shall not use them, unless he first discuss them 
with his discreeter brethren." 

The middle clause of this canon evidently concerns tlie eucharistical 
prayers ; the first and last respect both these, and the prayers also in 
other parts of the administrations ; each of tliem make it plain, that in 
those times, they were not under any restraint by imposed forms. 

For the first. Those, who in their prayers named the Father for the 
Son, or the Son for the Father, used not prescribed forms ; for surely 
the church would not prescribe what the council forbids. And as they 
used none before, so these fathers leave them at liberty, for the future, 
to use what they thought fit, only imposing this on them, not to name 
the Father for the Son, &c. 

For the next clause. If no prayers were used, in the administration 
of this sacrament, but what were prescribed by the church (and conse- 
quently allowed by the synod, as duly directed already) it was vain and 
ridiculous to make such an order, ut semper ad Patrem, thsit the prayen 
be always directed to the Father. This is clearly a restraint upon 
those, who before had liberty, in celebrating this ordinance, to address 
their prayers to any Person of the sacred Trinity ; ordering that from 

• Catech. Mystag. v. And Chrysostom in 2 Cor. Horn, xvili. p. 647. 
' Hardouln reads guicuHque and aliunue.— Ed. 


henceforth they should direct such prayers only to the Father. And as 
it clearly supposes, they were neither limited nor directed, by any pre- 
scribed forms before ; so it leaves them free, to use what prayers they 
judged meet, cum ad altare asaistitury " when they stand at the altar," 
provided that they were addressed only to the Father. 

Yea, the weaker and indiscreeter sort, of those that officiated, are 
allowed, by the next clause, to use what prayers they would anywhere 
make choice of, with this limitation only, that their more discreet 
brethren should first be conferred with about them. That of Augustine, 
who was a great part of the African councils, at this time,' is the best 
comment which can be desired upon this passage. Having showed, 
that divers of his brethren had many things against the faith, in prayers 
which they used in sacramental administrations, he gives this account 
of it : Multi irruunt in precea, non solum db tmperitis loquacibus, sed 
etiam ah hcBreticia compositas; et per ignoranticB HmpUcitatem, nan eaa 
valentes dUcemere^ utuntur iis, arbitrofites quod bonce sint, " Many light 
upon prayers, not only which are composed by unskilfrd babblers, but 
also by heretics ; and through the simplicity of their ignorance, not 
being able to discern, they use them, judging that they are good." Here 
we have persons as fit to be confined to prescribed forms, as any we can 
expect to meet with ; (such as could neither make prayers themselves, 
nor make tolerable choice of prayers made by others ; being so ignorant, 
as they could not discern an heretical prayer, when they met with it) 
These are circiunstances, which might justify the imposition of set 
forms, if any could do it. And yet the African fathers^ saw no suffi- 

' De Baptism, oontn Donat. lib. ▼!. cap. xxv. p. 568. 

* Now sine* tome, angry at this canon, (for what reason appean not, onkM becaoie it ihowa what 
they would not have seen) would thifl it out of the AfMcan eonatitutione ; let it be tfbienred, that it 
waa originally a decree of the council at Hippo, aa appean by the brief of its canons ; in which it la 
the twenty-third, in number of forty-one. Crab. torn. L p. 4S3. A general council this waa, as we learn 
by that of Possidonins, Vit. August, cap. viL Coram episcopls, hoc illi Jubentibus in pknarium 
totius Afiricse concilium Hippone agebant, " Thua did they in the presence of the bishops, who sum- 
moned him to a full council of all Aflrica." Vid. August. Retract, lib. L cap. xviL And of such 
esteem, that, as Baronius tells us, Ceterae quae postea in Afirica celebratSB sunt synodi, ex HiniO- 
nensl tanquam archetype quodam, complura ftierint mutuatn, **The other councils which were 
afterwards held in Africa, borrowed very many things from that at Hippo, as tnm a kind of model. 
Ad anno 393, n. 5. 

And no AfHcan council hath ftiller approbation, nor that so frequently and solemnly declared. It 
was confirmed, by a M\ council at Carthage, Ccsario et Attico. Coss. anno 397. So Marianiu 
Scotus mentions it, anno 417. Concilium Carthaginense, ubi Hipponensis concilii statuta iirmantnr 
et infemntur, <* the Council of Carthage, in which the canons of that of Hippo were confirmed and 
cited." And an abridgment (now spoken oO was made of its decrees, that they might be the 
better remembered and observed, as the fiuhers tell us in a synodal epistle ; breve vero statutornm 
huic epistolsB subdi fecimus, ut eompendio (qusB decreta sunt) reeensentes, solidtius observari cura- 
mus, " We have sutjoined to this epistle an abridgment, that we may provide for the more strict 
observance of the decrees by the study of them in a more compendious^brm." In Crmb. torn. L p. 4SS. 
Justel. NotSB in Cod. Af^. pp. 48, 49. And of fifty ascribed to this (so-called third) council ef 
Carthage, thirty-nine are the same with those of Hippo ; and in both this canon ia the twenty-third. 

It was confirmed afterwards (the ceaons thereof heiag recited) not only by the votes, but the sub- 
scriptions of the Ihiheia la the initnl comaa at MOtvla, uino 4M. Aread. et Honor. 8, Cess. 



dent reason, to prescribe snch forms to personB so lamentabfy inmffi- 
cient. But, as thej did make choice of what prajen they thonght good 
before ; so they leave them at liberty, to use what they made choioe of; 
proyiding only, they should first confer with their more able brethren 
about them, that so what was therein erroneous might be amended. 
And accordingly Augustine, in the same place, tells na, mudiorum emm 
preces emendantur quotidie, n doctioribus fuermt recUaUB^ '* the pr a yers 
of many are amended daily, if they be recited to the more learned.** 

There had been no occasion fbr any part of this caaoa, if such 
liturgies as we speak of had been in use ; or if they had thought fit to 
tetve imposed any. A few words would have served the turn, instead of 
those they multiply ; (such as : let no prayers be used, in celebrating the 
sacrament, but what the church prescribes.) But the wisdom of Africa, 
and the great Augustine, thought that course more advisable, which is 
utterly inconsistent with such restraint, and which left the most insuffi- 
cient of their ministers at greater liberty ; fbr such evidently is the 
course they take in this canon; the severals ' of which, if they can be 
reconciled with any kind or degree of confinement to prescribed fimns, 
then may we reconcile light and darkness. 

That no ministers were limited to any prescribed forms, in the admi- 
nistration of the Lord's supper, is manifest also, by the seventieth canon 
in the collection caUed the African council ; which being the same in 
effect with that which passeth for the twelfth canon of the [second] 
council of Milevis, runs thus — 

Placuit etiam hocj ut preces quce probates fuerint in amciUo^ sive pree- 
fationes, sive commendationea, sen manus impositiones, ab omnibus celt- 
brentur; nee alice omnino contra fidem proferantur ; aed qucecunque cum 
prudetitioribus fuerint colUUce dicantur^^ " This also seemed good, that the 
prayers which shall be allowed in a council, whether prefaces, or com- 
mendations, or imposition of hands, may be used by all ; neither may 
any other, against the faith, be used ; but all whatsoever, which shall 
be commimicated with the more discreet, may be used." Where it is 
observable, Uiat, 

1. As much liberty in praying is lefl to ministers by this canon, as 
by that but now insisted on, (though some, upon a conceit it is otherwise, 
have showed more favour to this, than that:) those that were so indis- 
creet, as they could not discern an heretical prayer from another, and 

together with the eonatitutions of the last mentioned council of Carth«g>. VId. GMb. toai. 
pp. 4SI, 509, et Justel. Cod. ccxviii. &c. 

It was finally ratified by two hundred and seventeen bishops in a council at Carfluift, amoiU^ 
and the approbations and confirmations of it forementioned are part of the AArieaa code. In wMk 
the title of Can. xxxiv. is, Quod nihil de Hipponensi concUio sit emendandum, '* That no Mk «f Ai 
council of Hippo be amended." In JnsteL p. 114. Vid. p. 217, ftc. 

• Particulaiv. » Collect, in Cod. Can. eUi. p. S81. Vid. TlMni. ». SH. 


SO gave occasion of jealousy, lest the prayers they made choice of 
might have something in them against the faith, were not, by the 
decree of that coimcil, to use such prayers, till they were approved by 
some prudent brethren : by this canon, they were not to use them, 
unless they were allowed, either by such prudent persons, or else by a 
sjmod. So that, here they have more liberty, in the choice of their 
approvers, and no less upon any other account at all. I have showed 
already, [that] as much liberty is granted by the former canon, as those 
that are most for freedom in prayer do desire ; no restraint in either, but 
upon persons so insufficient, as should not be suffered to officiate at all, 
but in extreme necessities." In both, the prudent are allowed to use 
what prayers or mode of praying they thought fit. For they who are 
esteemed competent judges of others^ prayers, are thereby presumed fit 
to judge of their own. 

2. No prayers at all are forbidden, but such as were against the 
faith ; nee cUicB omnino, contra fidem, proferanturj " nor let prayers 
which are inconsistent with the faith be offered at all ;" by which we may 
judge what prayers both the synod and the prudent would allow. They 
were not so scrupulous about words, if wholesome, though not accurate; 
they could better bear with some incommodious expressions or incon- 
gruities of speech, if the prayer was affectionate, and had such oratory 
as the great God is pleased to listen to,* though the niceness and 

• Which seems to hare been the condition of those chorehes, hy the complaint of Aurdlus, in • 
council at Carthage, Cum una cum episcopis suls consedlsset, adstantlbus dlao<niis, Anreliui episco- 
pua dixit : ecelesianim Dei, per Africam constitutanun, necessitates mecum optlme norit eharltas 
▼estra, sanctissimi fratres— tanta indigentia cleiicomm est, multaeque ecclesls ita deseitK sunt, ut 
ne unuro quidem diaconum (margin, lectorem) rel inliteratum habere reperiantor. Nam de cs»t«rit 
superioribus gradibus, et officiis tacendum arbitror : Quia (ut dixf ) si minlsteilum diaeoni fluile noa 
invenitur, multo magis superlomm honorum inToniti non posse eertissimum est, ef quotidianot 
planctus diversarum psene emortuarum plebium Jam non sustinemus ; quibns nisi ftierit allquando 
subventura, gravis nobis, et inexcusaUIis innumerabilium animarum pereuntium causa ^md 
Deum mansura est, " When he had taken Ids seat, together with his fellow-bishops, the deacoas 
standing by. bishop Aurelius said, *Tou, beloved and most holy brethren, are very well awart 
with me of the necessities of the churches of Ood established throughout Africa. So great is tha 
want of clergy, and many churches are so desolate, that they are not found to possess even one 
illiterate deacon. For 1 think it be<t to be silent concerning the higher grades and offices, because 
if, as I have said, diaconal ministrations be not readily found, much more certain is it, that those 
of the higher ranks cannot be met with ; and already we sink under the daily plaints of flocks 
almost extinct, which unless we succour soon, a heavy unanswerable impeachment on the part of 
Innumerable perishing souls will lie against us in the presenoe of God.* " In Crab. ConciL torn, i . 
pp. 502, 503, in Cod. Jiutelli, p. 185. AureL in Cone. Garth, [v.] anno 401. Tantum antem inopia 
clericorum ordinandorum in Africa patiuntur eceleslse, ut qu»dam loca omnlno deserta sunt. " The 
churches suflbr in AfHea such destitution of ordained clergy that some places are almost abandoned." 
In Capitulo Cone. Hipponensis, Crab. torn. i. p. 434. 

* Ov fup 7Xctfrrf|¥ CnTCt xdWov 6 Ocor ov6i pn/idrttw cwBfiKnv, iWa 4fvxnt Mpov, " For God 

seeks not elegance of language, nor the tacking together of sentences, but beauty of soul.** Chry* 
sost. in Ps. viii. pp. S27, 524. 

XptI T^v irpwrewxhtf nh kv trvWafiaXt hfJ^dt iKw\ttpuvv, uXX/i irpoaipivu ixXKXov ^vxnr, xai irpa(s*< 
ratf Kar uprrifv irarri t^ fi*V wapsKTsivo/i^vait. " It is meet that we supplement prayer not with 
syllables, but rather with porpoee of ioul, and with virtuous deeds extending throughout our 
whole life." [BadL 8enn. Ix. De Omtknep taMD.] 

Diinonfiaeciwfli adiiumiia iw^fcBi^t'ii Inaetwitia et wietltate 1 



curiosity of a vainly critical ear would not be pleaaed with it. Ncwrnd 
(says Augustine) etiam non ease vocem ad auree Deiy md ernhm qfectum: 
Ua enim non irriddfunt, ei aUquoe antistitee et mmtstros eodeauB fofU 
animadverterint, vel cum barbarismis et sokeeiemiM Deum mvooare^* ^ Let 
them understand, that God attends not so much to the Toioe, aa the 
inward affection ; and so they will not jeer, if perhaps th^ ob0er?e 
some bishops and ministers of the church do call upon Giod with some 
(were these prescribed ?) barbarisms and solecisms.** 

3. Any prayers that were approved, either by a synodi or other dis- 
creet persons, might be used, as in other church administrations, (and 
in which of them was not ^ imposition of hands used ?) so pardcu- 

exktiiiuntiir, qui de labrii eoruro punun castamque mentem, quam qui medUatmn canneB Intala- 
rit, " The gods are not to well pleaaed with aocuraqr in prayer on the part of their worahippen m 
with innocence and purity ; and he it deemed more aceeptaUe who ofltoa fhmi Ua Upa a apallaM 
and chatte mind like their own, than he who preaenti a oazefiilly stndiad ode." FUa. la P auu a tJi. 

npoetvxh ov piifia<rt ^i\6it, &\Xa wpajfxofft fiSkXow xpnvroit Karcv^^rcu, " Pnyar ia VM^ 
vnred not 1>y ita smooth sentencea, but hy good deeda." laidor. lib. L £p. oooIzzxtL [C] 

• De Catechiiand. Rudibus, cap. ix. tom. tv. pan poater. p. SSO. 

* By impoaition of hands, here is meant, prayers used when hands were im p oaed ; nuoraa wtf i 
impositio non sicut bi^ttismus, repeti non poteat. Quid est enim aliud niai ondo atqier hiwiiliisBiT 
" Impoaition of hands is not like baptism, which cannot be repeated. For what dae ia it aaro 
prayer orer a manf" August. De Baptia. contra Donat. lib. iU. cap. zri p. 496. 

Hands were imposed almost in all prayers, and all church admiaiatrathma; the pragnen !■ the 
first instance were those for the catechumens and penitents ; impoaition of handa waa naed at both. 

On catechumens. Vincentius a Thibari in Ciprian Connec. Prime per manna tmpoaiHoiif 
in exorcismo, secundo per baptism! regenerationem, possunt ad Christi polUcitatioiiem penreiiire» 
"In the first place, they may obtain the promise of Christ by imposition of hands in ezor- 
cism; and in the second place, by the regeneration in baptism." Vid. Auguat. De B^tia. 
lib. vi. cap. xliv. Augustin, Nam et catechumenos, secundum quondam ™*m^^iip anua, 
per signum Christi, et oraUonum manus impositionis puto sanctificarL " I deem catechumens 
to be sanctified after a cerUin manner by Christ's mark, and the imposition of hands at pnyer.** 
De Peccat. Merit, lib. ii. cap. xxvi. tom. L pars L p. 875. In exorcismis impoaitio manuum, *' la 
exorcivms imposition of hands is used." Leo, Ep. IxxviiL cap. L Vid. Cone. Carth. iv.Can. IxxxT. 

On penitenu, in admission to penance. Albaspin. Obsenr. pp. 230, 2SS, 897, Vid. Cent t. p. Ml. 
In exercise of it while under penitence, fitra r6 i(t\0tiv rovt Koriixov/A^i'ow, tAv kv ^mtovom rift 
•irxh* yivtfi&ai, Kcu ToirrMv wpofftXSotrrttv inro x<^P<*> " After the departure of the catech mneaa 
comes the prayer for the penitenu, and these advance to receive imposition of handa." Gone. Laodie. 
[Can. xix.] Con. Garth, iv. Can. Ixxx. 

In abMjlution, or reconciling penitenu. Cypr. Epist. [Ixxiii.] Euseb. lib. vii. cap. ii. Lao, Noa 
nisi per pcenitentiae medium, et per impositionem episcopalis manus commnnionia re c^ l aat 
uniutem, Epist. Ixxvii. cap. vi. Reconcilientur per manus impositionem, " Only by penanee aad 
imposition of the bishop's hands do they receive reconciliation." Cone. Carth. ir. Can. IxztL 

In confirmation. Tertull.[DeBaptis.cap. vii] EgressidelaTacroperungimurbenedictauiicclgae 
de pristina discipline, dehinc manus imponitur. Cypr. Qui in ecclesia baptixantor pfpealU i 
ecclesise offeruntur, ut per nostram orationem et maniu impositionem Spiritnm Sanctun csa- 
sequantur. [Epist. Ixxiii. ad Jubaian.] Jerome. Ad eos qui longe in nUnoribua uiMlnia p« 
presbyteros et diaconos baptizati simt, episcopus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritua maaum lap^ 
siturus excurrat. Adv. Luciferian. [Cap. iv. In Ed. Par. 1706. tom. iv. coL 295.] ** On leaTlng the 
font we are anointed with the consecrated unction ; after which comes impoaition of haada.— 
Those who are baptized in the church are brought to the rulers of the church, that Iqr our pfafva 
and the imposition of our hands, they may obtain the Holy Ghost.— To those who are beptfaad M 
a distance from the motlier-church, and in the smaller towns by presbyters and deaoona, tiia hUip 
pays a visit to lay his hands on them with invocation of the Holy Ghost." 

In admission of reduced heretics. Leo, Quod si ab hsereticis baptisatum qaempiam fhliaa cm. 
aUterit, erga hune nuUatenus saoramentum regenerationis iteretur ; sed hoe tantmn, quod i 


larly in the Lord's supper, (as the title of the canon, De Precibits ad 
Altars Dicendis, shows) in what mode, or by what person soever they 
were made. And hence it follows, that either those African churches 
had no common form of service at all ; or else (which serves my pur- 
XX)se as well) they had none, but such as, with the good leave of those 
fathers, might never have been used by any, either at the Lord's sup- 
per, or other parts of worship ; since any other prayers, which either a 
synod, or other prudent ministers should approve, have the placet of 
this council. 

The inference is just, and cannot be evaded, unless any will say, by 
tlie preces qucs prdbatce fuerint^ " prayers which shall be allowed of," 
is meant a liturgy established in those churches. But that this would 
be an unreasonable shift, the canon itself (a little further examined) will 
discover. For 

1. An established liturgy (if there had been any such) was used and 
approved already. But the prayers, here mentioned, were not yet 
approved, nor were they to be used, till approved. So the brief of the 
canon tells us, ut preces et orationes compositce, nisi prdbatce fuerint in 
concilioy non dicantur,^ " that written, prayers and supplications, except 
allowed of in coimcil, shall not be used." It is provided that the service 
to be used, be first approved in the usual synod, says a learned advo- 
cate for such liturgies, upon this canon. Then 

2. What is meant by {quascunque^ what prayers soever shall be 

conferatur, ut per episcopalem manus impositlonero virtutem Sancti Splritiu conaequatiir, " But 
if he be auured that any one hat been baptized by heretics, in tuch a man's case the sacrament of 
regeneration shall by no means be repeated, but this only which was wanting in that baptism shall 
be added, viz. that by imposition of the bishop's hands, he may obtain the Tirtne of the Holy 
Ghost." £p. zxxv. cap. ii. Ep. Izxvii. cap. yii. Movn yptivBai r^ hta x<*pm» hri94vmv t^p 
" Prayer offered with imposition of hands is alone to be used." Dionys. in Euseb. libi. Til. cap. [U.] 

In visitation of the sick. Si fbrte ab SBgrotantibus ob hoc peteretur, ut pro lis in pnesenti Deum 
rogaret, eisque manus imponeret, sine mora pergebat, "If it be requested by any sick persons to 
beseech God in their presence for them, and to lay on them his hands, let him do so without 
delay." Possidon. Vita Augustini. He tells afterward of one healed by his laying on hands, who 
had a vision for it. 

In celebrating matrimony. LeAtrange applies that of Clem. Alexand. Psdagog. lib. ill. [cap. xf. 
p. 248. B. Ed. Lutet.] TtVi wp4<rfivrtpo9 twt0i/i$iff«t xeipa ; riva 9i\oyif9ti ; ov ripf fwaixa rffv 
KfKoa/inn4vrtv, uXXd raf iiWorpiat rpixat, " Upon whom will the presbyter lay hands t Whom will 
he bless r Not the adorned wife, but the hidrs of a strange woman." 

In ordination, which needs no proof. Bed rid. Cone. Garth, iv. Can. ii. liL iv. 

In exorcising the possessed. Cone. Carth. iv. [Can. xc] Omni die exordsta energumenis manus 
imponant, " Let the exorcists lay hands daily on the energumens.** Vid. Can. vil. 

In baptizing. Clem. Const, lib. viL cap. xUt. Vid. Vicec. De Bapt. pp. 614, 620. Hence 
baptism is called, impositio manus, p. 8, in abrenundando tub antlstitis mano, ** Imposition of 
hands — in renunciation under the hands of the bishop.** TertuDlaa De Corona Mil. cap, HI. poat con- 
fessionem fldeL Dionys. Areop. Ecelea. HIerar. oap. Ii. [p. 78. D. Ed. Lntet. 1619.] in Ylcee. p. 811. 

Hence Melltlus is, by the NIeene cotmeU, forUdden tlw azardaa of his ftaneUon, In tlieaa ttnna : 
Mnde;i<'uv t^owriav 9x*h M^ irpoxcip^C<'ftu fiffn jBUptStrur inXAv M tA SvfMa viiv n^St mstS- 
Bat, " He has no authority either to ordain, or to taiqpoao hmtiM, but onlj to itlafa pniHMlou of 
the mere name of his offiee.** Bynodiea Zgiat Oooe. Nle. in Thaoiant, 1ft. L Oifi. Is. [f. tl. A.] 

• In Crab. Concfl. torn. 1. p. 48t. 


debated with the more prudenti maj be Mid) in the last cUawe of tht 

1. If we understand bj it the supposed liturgy, it la added Tainly, 
and no tolerable account can be given why. And besides, some pru- 
dent brethren were to be conferred with about these prajexis, who were 
to approve them before they might be said. (This is clearly and 
unquestionably the design of qucBCunque cum prudentianbuB fuarwt tA- 
latcB, dicantuTy " all whatsoever which shall be communicated with tht 
more discreet, may be used.**) So that if hereby the Afrin^n litoxgy be 
understood, it was such a one, as was not yet allowed to be used, and 
possibly never might be. It was at the arbitrement of such judges, as 
those, who were concerned to use them, would choose, whether it 
should ever take place in the church, or no. It might be disused or 
abolished, either in part, or wholly ; as they thought fit. Such was the 
liturgy of these churches, no other established, nor otherwise pre- 
scribed, if the canon here speak of it. 

2. If we understand hereby other prayers, than such as the 
imaginary liturgy contained ; then so much liberty is hereby granted, 
for the use of those other prayers, that the pretended liturgy mig^ 
never be used : for these fathers authorise any other (with a qiuKwtqiii^ 
which prudent brethren might think fit for public use ; and so leave 
none under the restraint of any prescribed forms, either in other parts 
of worship, or (in precibus altare dicendiSy ^^ in prayers to be said at the 
altar,") in the eucharistical service.* 

In the 12th canon of that council, which passeth for the 2nd of Mile- 
vis, for aim ptnidentioribua collcUcPj we have a prudeniionbua tructataf 

• I am the more satisfied with this evidence of the AMcan councils, becsoM BeUaimiiie haih 
nothing to oppose here, but what renders it more unquestionable. Chemnitiua had aUegod, CML 
Afric. can. 70, Cone. Milevit. [ii.] cap. xiL to prove, apud veteres ordinem celebraadi ttaiMMm aiUtn- 
rium, "that the order of celebrating the eucharist of old was arbitrary." Hlne colUgitiir, says 
Bellarmine, non fuisse antiquo tempore prsescriptum certum canonem orationuin, qui omnei tU&- 
garet, sed permissum fuisse, ut quisque componeret preces, modo ese analogae essent fidd, "Hence 
we gather, that in ancient times, there was no fixed canon of prayer prescribed which bound aO* 
but that it was allowed to every one to compose prayers provided they wer» accordinc to tt« 
analogy of faith." De Miss. lib. ii. cap. xviii. 

Chenmitius thus speaks, Non enim conceptis verbis prsescripta fuit una quasdam mta fnona wtA 
libenun fUit uti quacunque forma, modo analoga esset fidei, " One fixed form was not preaoibad 
with words hdd down, but men were at liberty to use any form provided it was agroMhlo to tka 
faith." Examen pars ii. p. 358. 

Bellarmine answers, Canones conciliorum citatorum non loquuntur de eanone miaa* ; ood <• 
eoUectis, quse semper fuerant multiplices et varise, '* The canons of the couneUa dted. do not 
speak of the canon of the mass, but of collects, which were always manifold and Tariooa.** Id. 
ibid. p. 817. Where he denies not, but that those African decrees show, that all other prajrvra, ovm 
in the eucharist, were then arbitrary ; only the canon of the mass, says he, they apeak not o£ Ani 
no wonder, since the canon, which he is so tender of, was not in being tffl near two hundred flHt 
after these decrees were made. And there is not a syllable in them, tn the '^"f Ihig af ay 
other, more than that. Vid. Albaspin. ante. 

• Scholium ad hunc locum in Cod. Pal. TiiaKraic-ria' riniiini liw tfrnifrla lenjiaaila, **! 
which must be scrutinised, examined, tested." Glossss Baellli a Carole X«Mao OL !%• < 


'^communicated with the more discreet;^* a phrase of the same 
import, signifjdng the prayers handled by the more prudent, t. «. debated, 
discoursed of, and so examined by them, in order to approbation,' if 
they were found good, or to amendment, if otherwise. And this sense 
of tractatce agrees best, both with the other constitutions of those African 
churches, and Uieir practice also declared to us by Augustine. But if 
any notwithstanding will thereby understand the prayers composed by the 
more prudent, tractatus being a sermon in Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, 
Optatus,* [be it so;] and I will thence infer, [that] the more prudent had 
no more liberty in prapng than in preaching. If I should yield this, it 
would be no great disadvantage. For, as they were not tied to use ser- 
mons composed by others, being much below those worthies, orationea 
alieno fortnare ingenio, " who owe their public discourses to another's 
invention ;^* so they had and took liberty to preach, either ex tempore^ 
or upon premeditation ; and the former way commonly. 

Jerome tells us [that] many homilies of Origen,'^ which he translated, 
were preached, delivered in the church by the author ex tempore. Ora- 
tiuncuhs has 26 in Jesum Naue ex tempore in eccUsia peraravit Adcanantiue 
seneXf*' " These 26 shorter orations on Joshua, Origen delivered extem- 
poraneously in the church in his old age.'* And Ruffinus speaks the same 
of Origen's homilies upon Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Romans. 

All that we have of Cyril's, bishop of Jerusalem, are extemporary 
discourses, as Vossius observes, fix>m the inscription of them,' nanne 
cogitant catechesea (rx^buiBt'uras sive extemparales, ut inscriptio indicatt 
*' Do they not regard the catechetical discourses as unpremeditated, or 
extemporary, as the inscription shows they were ? " 

And such probably were those, whose occasion and subject was 
the same as the Psalm sung before sermon; as, to omit others, that of 

Chrysostom, while presbyter at Antioch, was advised by Flavianus 
the bishop, to use his extemporary faculty in preaching, irpwfUrrrrtu, 
avrhv avTo<rxt6lc»s i^rjyria'aa'Oai rf Xa^, '^ he advised him to preach to the 

rpoKTaJcat' anoirricat, i^trdaat, rpaxTCt'Civ fap ol Aarc/vot tov (rKoii6v, t6 /9«w(\cv/Lta koi t6 ifira^fia 
Xffovat, " to scmtiniie ; to examine. For by rpoKrci/ctv, the Latini ezpreM the ideas of aerutiiiy, 
deliberation, and investigation." Jiutell. Obs. in Cod. p. 8. 

• 'OirMT t6 wp&ffia 9iiowrt9hf teal h Kvp^9n h dtopBi»Bri, " That the matter may be examined, and 
either authoriied or corrected." Cod. Af^. can. 60. * In Thomd. p. 176. 

' Qua ab Origine, in auditorio eccleti«e ex tempore, non tarn explanatlonis, qnam sdificationii 
intentione perorata sunt : sleut in homilili, sive In oratiunculii in Geneiin, et in Exodum, be. 
" Such things as were spoken extempore by Origen in the church assembly, more for edification 
than by way of explanation, as in his homilies or brief oratkms on Genesis and Exodus,** fte. RuflT. 
Perorat. in Ep. ad Rom. p. 684. 

In the editions of Johannes Orodichis, the title is, Catecheses ExtemporauMe ad IQuminatos 18. 
•t Mystagoffioi 8. *' BlghtMn BxtampcraMmis Csteehctieal Disoounes to the Bi^tiMd; tog«Ch«T 
with flre Myiti«Ogleal OndoM. VId. Rtr. Crit. torn. ir. p. S58. 

' Pndns. in Honi. Orif . fai Jm. Vn. This prologiie is ascribed to Rufflnus. En. 

« De Bynb. p .If /In Pt. exir. 


people extempore,** as one of the writers of hia life relates it. And he 
complied with Flavianus herein, w6pnt BwadfutHH aMm — a&roajfilm 
6/iiXovKra avrois, " thej all saw him preaching to them &r tempore/*^ 

And such were many of his sermons at Constantinople, when he ww 
bishop there ; particularlj those upon the epistles* to the £ipbe8iaD% 
and Philippians ; as Sir Henry Savill, (who deserves so well of him, and 
of the world for him) conceives ; as also those upcm both the epistles to 
Timothy, and that to Philemon ; and more than these he intimates to 
have b^n avro<rxf^utBivT€Sf "extempore." 

Atticus, presbyter at Constantinople in Chiysostom^s time, and after- 
wards bishop there, though far short of his predecessor's acoomplish- 
ments, yet, by industry and practice, as Socrates tells us, he attained 
the faculty of delivering himself ex tempore to his auditory ; <rvv rg ^ttka- 
rroviq. koL irappriifiap icnia-dfiirvos c( avrcxTXcdiov, Kok watn/yupucmnpatf r^ Ms- 
cKoKiajf inoUirof " by dint of pains-taking, he acquired confidence in 
extempore delivery, and made his instructions more popular." 

Jerome had no cure, and so left us no sermons. But of dirers of the 
pieces which survive him, he was as easily and speedily delivered, as the 
forementioned of their popular discourses. Of one piece of his, he teEs 
us, ExtemporaUs^ est dictatto, " it was dictated ex tempore^^^ and fiuter 
than it could be well taken in short-hand. And his interpretation (si 
he calls it) of the three books of Solomon, Proverbs, Canticles, and Ecde- 
siastes, was' tridui opus, " a work of three days ;" in which time, one 
would think the quickest pen could scarce write out the text. 

Augustine also, not only in his conflicts with adversaries, but also in 
his sermons to the people, used extemporali dictfone, "extemporaiy 
delivery," as Erasmus^ observes, in whose judgment, he nowhere ap- 

• Georg. Alexand. Vita Chrytost. p. 179, cap. 17. 

• Homilia in Epbtolas ad Epheslot, Philip, utramque ad Timotheam et PhOemonem, Jcek tA 
avTOirxi^iov rnv \^(cMr, CoattantioopoUtania acceniend«. Not« in Chryiott. Horn. riiL p. SST. 
Commentarii certe mediocres sunt et ut plurimum, qualet illi in epistolam ad Epbeaioa, concU, ct 
airoaxfitaBivTtf (ut puto.) Id. ibid. p. 409. " The Homilies on the Epistles to the Ephesteni, 
Philippians, and those to both Timothy and Philemon, are to be classed, on account of th* want of 
premeditation in their style, amongst the Constantinopolitan ones.— The CommeatarlM an ctv- 
tainly of a middle rank, and like those on the Epistle to the Epheaians as condensed as ] 
and as I think extemporaneoiu." 

• Hist Eccles. lib. vii. cap. ii. p. 7SS. 
' Extemporalis est dictatio, et tanta ad lumen lucemulse facilitate profiiaa, ut noCariorum i 

lingua praecurreret, et signa ac furta verborum, volubilitas sermonum obrueret, ** It n 
extempore, and poured forth by candle-light with such ease, that the tongue outstripped the 1 
of the notaries, and the torrent of sentences marred the signs and snatches of .words.** Ep. tML 
[Tom. Iv. col. 734. Ed. Paris. 1706.] 

« Tridui opus nominivestro consecravi, interpretationem iridelicet trium Solomonis Toluniiiiim, 
'* I have dedicated to thy name a three dayu' work, to wit, an interpretation of the three booka ef 
Solomon." Id. Praef. in Prov. 

/ Plerumque per notarios ex ore loquentis excepta sunt, cujusmodl fere sunt enarratlonca Sci^ 
turarum ad populum, quas ipse tractatus appellat. aut conflictationes cum haereticla, qtue tMm 
publicatas apud plebem fieri consuererant. Nee alibi mihi videtiir admirablUor. Quibua nedloeie 
contigit ingenium, si lucubrandi cura adhibeatur, excudunt interdum aliquid non contemneDdum. 


pears more admirable than in this ; not that these discourses are more 
excellent than his more elaborate works (as if he had been, what the 
historian says of Tiberius, tx tempore quam a cura prcestantior, " better 
extempore than after premeditation,") but because he could do better 
on a sudden, than others (though well accomplished) with time and 
study. One remarkable instance we have in Possidonius," who tells us 
in Augustin's words, of Firmus, a Manichee, converted by such a dis- 
course, as he never designed before he had begun the sermon. And 
that seems another, which is intituled, Concio super gestis cum Emerito 
DoncUista, being occasioned by an acclamation of the people at the 

And those, who having much more work as pastors, did preach ordi- 
narily every day, and some days twice ; yea sometimes twice in a fore- 
noon, and thrice in one day ; (as bishops in those and former times 
did ;) it cannot be thought, but many of their sermons were bom as soon 
as conceived. Such were their tractates : nor was it then thought 
canting, to ascribe such discourses to the assistance of the Holy Spirit 
Nazianzen being to discourse of the Holy Ghost, prays for his assist- 
ance, that he might thereby be enabled for the expressions, TA dc rov 
llvcv/iaror, itapitmo fioi t6 Ilvcv/ia, Koi did6r» X<$yov, Scrov koi /SovXoftoi tl di 
/i^ dc rocroOrov, dXX* Saos y« r^ Kaiptj^ avfifitrpos. ** That I may open the 
mysteries of the Spirit, let me have the presence of the Spirit, and let 
such utterance as I desire be given; or if not so much, yet what may be 
agreeable to the season f^ and says also, [that] they both studied and 
spoke, inspired by it. The Spirit, as he adds, blows where it listeth, and 
inspires whom, and where, and how much he will, otrns rffuU Ka\ vo€w 

Caeterum in eztemporali dictione, tantam adease mentis penpicaciam, tantam memoriK pnewn- 
tiam, tarn paratam orationis copiam, non sine perpetua quadam Jucunditate, quis non moTeturf 
Qiiis hoc hodie praestare queat, vel ex istis qui studiom omne collocaront in paranda dictlonia 
Cacultater " They were for the most part taken hy the notaries from the lips of the speaker; of 
which sort are those expositions of Scripture to the people, which he himself denominated trae- 
taltu, or polemical discussions with heretics, which were formerly wont to be carried on in the 
presence of the people. And to my mind, he does not appear more excellent in any other puts 
of his works. Men whose mind is characterised by mediocrity, now and then, put forth somewhat 
not to be despised, if the care requisite for elaboration be aflbrded them. But who is unaffected, 
when in extempore speaking there is found so great transparency of meaning, such wondrous 
readiness of memory, so available a supply of language, not without a kind of imiform sweetness r 
Who is able to surpass him in our day, even among those who have devoted their whole attenti(m 
to acquiring the gift of public speaking?" Erasm. Epist. ad Arch. Tolet. praeilxa operlbua 

• Ctun prnpositse qusestionis latebras pertractarem, in allum sermonis discursum porrexi, atqua 
ita non conciusa vel explicata qusestione, dfeputationem magis terminavi adversum Manichaeorum 
errorem, unde nihil dicere decreveram, disputans, quam de lis quse asserere proposueram, " As I 
discussed the obscurer points of the question before me, I launched oat Into a digression foreign 
to my discourse, and so without settling or unrarelling that question, oonelnded my dlspntatioa 
with an invective against the error of the Mankhees, (of which matter I had not iatended to eej 
anything,) rather than with those sul^ectt on whieh I had propoeed to njidf to epeek.** Vit. 
August, cap. XV. 

* Tom. vii. pars i. p. 770. ' Ont. xUv. [p. YW. A. titm. L Id. hih. ItlO.] 


Koi \iytiv tfiirv€v6fAtSa vaph rov Ilivvfiarof ; '' aooordinglj we Sire inBpixed, 

both to meditate and speak bj the Spirit.'*' 

Thus they did preach, and thus they might pray. Nasianaen haviiig 
given an account how his father prayed, in celebrating the euchaxist^ 
adds, Koi ravra naprjp avr^ wapa rov ayiav npevfugns^^ " Theae things were 
brought to his mind by the Holy Ghost" 

Answerably Ambrose to Forentianus.^ Docet autem S^inritus Ckrkd 
(jsicut et Chriatus) orare discipuha suos ; quia autem post Christum doc^ 
ret, nisi Spintus ejus, quern ipse misit ut doceret et cUrifferet cr atioMS 
nostras? Oramus enim Spiritu, oramus et menie. Ut bene pasnt mem 
orare, prcecedit Spiritus, et deducit earn in viam rectam^ ne obrqnmt 
carnalia, ne minora ac etiam majora viribus, Novit enim bonus medieus 
qucB esca cui apta sit infirmitati, et cui tempori adperfectum valetudims; 
interdum opportunitas escce sanitatem reddit^ quod si importune aliqm 
accipiet, out non convenienter, implicatur periculo, ErQO quia noB net- 
eimus quid oremus, et qtwmodo oporteat, postulat pro nobis JSpiritiis 
Sanctus, " The Spirit of Christ (as Christ also) teaches his disciples hov 
to pray. Besides, who should teach after Christ save his Spirit, whom 
he himself sent, that he might teach and direct us in prayer ? For we 
pray with the Spirit, and we pray with the understanding also. That 
the understanding may be enabled to pray aright, the Spirit prevents it 
and leads it into the right way, lest carnal things, and things below, or 
eyen above our strength creep in. For a good physician knows what 
diet is suited to every distemper, and to every season, in order to the 
establishment of the health. But if any one adopt a diet unseasonably 
or unsuitably, he is placed in danger. Therefore since we are ignorant 
for what and how we ought to pray, the Holy Ghost makes intercession 
for us." 

Their affections excited by the Spirit could help them to expressions 
without a book, and did form their words in prayer, as Augustine tellt 
us, Qucelibet alia (quam oramus Dominica) verba dicamus, qucs affectui 
orantis, vel prcBcedendo format ut clareat, vel consequendo attendit ut 
crescat,^ "We say in addition other words than those with which we pray 
in the Lord's prayer, such as the emotion of the suppliant suggests by 
anticipating that it may make clearer the petitions, or by following in 
order to intensify them." And if their affections were not always so 
active, their judgment and invention, (which with Divine assistance) 
served them so well on a sudden with expressions in preaching, might 
much more easily help them to words in praying. 

Let us show this more particularly, in the several prayers made in 

• p. 709. * Drat. xix. p 305. 

« Epbt. xzUi. Ub. ir. * Epht. cxxi. Ad Protam, e^. xU. 


the celebration of the eucharist. It appears by the eighteenth canon of 
the council of Laodicea, that in the latter end of the fourth century 
three sorts of prayers were used in that administration; after the 
dismission of catechumens and penitents, ovr»s, rhs €vx^s tS>v mfrr&v 
yivfaBai rpcly; " the prayers of the faithful are three;" the first of these 
silently, fiiov fiev n^v irp&njvy di^ cruvir^r; the other two pronounced, 
rriv dc hivripav, Koti rpirr^v bih irpo(r<l>avfia-€»t. Of which two, one must 
be the prayer for all sorts in general, and the church in particular, 
called avvdrmf lea^oXtic^, the general prayer ; for that such a prayer 
was then made, there is evidence enough in authors both of Greek and 
Latin churches of that age ; the other must be the blessing of the 
elements, called the prayer of consecration ; for this was never omitted, 
so Optatus, legitimum quod in sacramentorum myaterio prcBteriri non 
potestj" " the prescribed part which may not be omitted in the 
mystery of the sacraments." 

Now for the first of these three, viz., that 6Ul (runris, I find no 
mention of it elsewhere. Probably* it consisted only of some secret 
ejaculations, used by the faithful, while the offerings or the elements 
were preparing, to raise their souls to a posture fit for that most solemn 
and sacred ordinance. However, being a mental prayer, there was no 
place, and can be no pretence for prescribing words and expressions for 
it. Chrysostom*' directs to something of this nature.* 

As to the second, the general prayer, that this was not made in a set 
and invariable form, appears by the epistle of Epiphanius to John, 
bishop of Jerusalem.' There was some clashing betwixt these two 
bishops ; he of Cyprus being a great zealot against Origen ; (as another 
John, of Constantinople, found by troublesome experience ;) and he of 
Jerusalem being an admirer of Origen, and under suspicion to be tainted 
with his erroneous opinions. John had heard, that Epiphanius should 
intimate, in the eucharistical prayers, that he by name was warped from 
the faith ; he complains of it ; and that epistle is Epiphanius's answer 
and apology, in reference to this and other particulars he was charged 
with. As to this, he admires,/ that any should report, quod in oratione 
quaiulo offerimm sacrificia Deo, soleamiu pro te dicti*e^ Domine pi^sta 
Johanni ut recte credai, " that in prayer, when we oiSer to God the 
sacrifices, we arc in the habit of praying for you thus. Lord, prevent 
John that he may believe aright." This is the occasion. And hereby 
it evidently appears, they used occasional petitions in this prayer ; for 
such a petition is that complained of; and the occasion, a suspicion that 

• Lib. IL Advera. Pinnenlmnum, [p. 45, Ed. Parii.lC79.1 » Cyrfl in Junius Not. ad Clem. Ep. p. 8L 

• "Oto* cucoi^iir, ^n^Mcv vdvrtt noivri, " When thou hearest th« words, Let ni all pray toge- 
ther." Chrya, in Eph. Horn, ili p. 778. ^ Horn. xxlr. in I Cor. p. 899. 

• In Oper. Hleronym. Ep. Ix. p. 4«6. [In Op. Epiphan. p. JIS. torn. U. Ed. Col. 1681.] 


John was inclined to Origen's errors. If such liberty had never been 
used, to pray in this place as occasion required, who would have been 
so impudent, as to raise such a report ; or so foolish as to affirm what 
none would believe, as being against the constant and invariable custom 
of tliose that celebrated ? AVho can think, that the bishop of Jerusalem 
would have brought such a charge against Epiphanius, as would hare 
appeared false to the world at first sight, and miglit have been convicted 
of impudent slander, by the known imalterable usage of Christians? 
And why does not he, who designed to burden his adversary as much 
as might be, charge him with transgressing the orders of the church, 
to vent his particular spleen at a Christian bishop ? Is it not evid«it 
upon the whole, that there were no such orders, confining them to any 
invariable form, in that administration ; but that they might, and did, 
vary in their expressions, as there was occasion ? 

This will yet further appear, by Epiphanius's answer. iVb^i not m 
tantum putare rusticos, ut hoc tarn aperte dicere potuerimus, &c. " Be not 
ready to think us such rustics as that we could say this so bluntly." He 
takes no notice, that what was objected was inconsistent with the custom 
and pnoctice of that church, and so groundlessly suggested. He appeals 
not to the known form, to which they were precisely confined, refers him 
not to their service-book for his satisfaction; which yet, if there had been 
any such thing, a duller person than Epiphanius would have discovered 
to have been the be^t way, to stop the mouth of his accuser. He deniefl 
not, but they ordered their prayers Jiccording to such occasions ; but 
only tells him, they were not so rustical as to do it so bluntly. 

We have in the English service-book, a prayer for the whole state of 
Christ's church, pretended to be answerable to this prayer we are upon; 
and indeed thc^ only pniyer in the book, that can pretend to any foot- 
steps of antiquity, so high as the fourth age. Now suppose the bishop of 
L[ondon] should be accused, in that prayer to prefer such a petition for 
the primate of Ireland, Domine prcesta /., ut recte credat; what course 
would the bishop take, to clear himself of this accusation ? Would not 
the dullest of his chaplains appeal to the prayer itself, being invariably 
used, as the best way to domoustratc the charge was false ; wliich yet 
the bishop of Cyj)rus, supposed to be just in the same circumstances, 
did not offer at ? 

But let us proceed with his answer; Quando autem completnus orationem 
secundum rituin mysteriorum, et pro otniiibusy et pro te quoque dicimuSj 
Oitstodi ilium qui prcudicat veritatem. Vel eerie ita^ Tu prcesta Domitiey 
et custodi^ ut ille verhum praulicet veritatis ; sicut occitsio sermonia se 
tulerit, et habuerit oraiio consequentiam : '* But when we finish the 
second prayer in the mysteries, we say in thy behalf as in behalf of all, 
Keep him who preaches the truth ; or at least, thus, Do thou, O Lord, 


prevent and keep Him that he may preach the word of truth, according to 
the bearing of the occasion of our discourse, and as the prayer possesses 
coherence." He says, they prayed for all pastors, (all that preached,) 
which shows it to be the general prayer, wherein they were wont to 
pray, imip rSav Upttav koi rav dpx6trro»Vy vntp rov dp^up^os Koi rov /3a(riXc«i>f.* 
" For priests and rulers ; for bishop and king ;" and for him also ; but 
in what expressions they did it, he is doubtful. It is but one article of 
this prayer he gives an account of. It is the same thing (preaching the 
truth) and the same persons, (those that preached) he is telling us they 
prayed for. And they prayed but for the same persons and things 
once in the same prayer ; and yet he cannot tell determinately what 
words they used, as appears evidently, by his disjunction veL 

Now Epiphanius celebrated the eucharist himself thrice a week, as 
he thought by apostolical order ; so he tells us,^ Zvydjccf dc irrmXovfitvtu 
raxB^la-cu cicrcv dir6 tS>v dirofrr^XaVf rtrpddiy koi npoaafifiar^y Ka\ Kvpuu^f 
" Meetings for the celebration of the mysteries have been ordained 
from the times of the apostles on Wednesdays and Fridays, and the 

And if he had celebrated it in a set form, could he have been to seek 
for the words he used so often ? Since if either his memory, or the 
prayer-book would have helped him to the precise words, if they had 
then confined themselves to any, and had had their prayers either by 
heart or in a book ; he would never have writ so doubtfully of them 
when his business was to satisfy a captious adversary. 

Would there be any need, for one who has the prayer for all states 
by heart, or has the service-book before him, to express by a distinction, 
what is there desired for bishops, pastors, and curates ? No more would 
Epiphanius, if the same mode of praying had been then in use. 

To this prayer we may refer what we find of Jerome, who complaioB 
that in his time, the oblations' were publicly mentioned by the deacon, 
and the names of the offerers recited, yea, and the quantity of what 
they offered, and also of what they promised to offer,* PubUce diacontis in 
ecclesiis recitet offer entium fiomina, Tantum offert ilia ; Tcmtum iUe polUci-- 
tus est, " the deacon proclaims in public the names of the offerers — Such 
a person offers so much ; Such a person has promised so much." Which 
he sharply censures, placent sibi ad plauaum populi, torquente eoa coruci" 
entia, " they delight in the applause of the people, whilst their con- 
science torments them." The like complaint he makes elsewhere/ Nufw 

• Clem Const, lib. U. cap. 11. vid. Leitr. p. 190. » Expot. Fldd, [No.xxil.] p. 110. • VU. AlbMp. 

' Aa M[r.] Th[orndIke] olwcrves, it la called aa oblation (vis. the elements, or the offleringB 
out of which they were chosen) according to the ityle of the moat aodent church writen ; not aa 
consecrated, but as presented and offered (whether hj the people, aa the enstom was to blm that 
ministered, or by him that ministered to God) to be oonaeaated. 8«rT. p. 979, 

' In Eiek. lib. tI. cap. xriii. [Tom. iU. eoL 8SS, Ed. Fuii. 17M.] 

/ In Jer. cap. xL [Tom. ill. col. 584. Ed. Paila. 1706. 


publice recitantur oferentium nommaj'et reden^atw peeoatonim nucteter m 
laudem, " The names of the offerers are proclaimed in public, and re- 
demption is published for the purpose of magnifying sinful men." Now 
who can believe, that a practice, worthy of so sharp a rebuke, was pub- 
licly prescribed ; or, if it had been prescribed for common use, would 
have been so severely censured ? And therefore, what can be though^ 
but that those who officiated were left to their liberty, to use #hit 
expressions they thought fit ? If there had been a rule or preflcripdcMi, 
limiting them to anything better, he would have taken notice of it; 
and of this usage, as a transgression of the established order. 

-Pertinent to which is this passage of Augustine ;^ Vir tHbumtiM 
Hesperius qui apud nos est, habet in territ<mo Fuasulensi fundum Zaie^ 
appellatitm, ubi cum {afflictione animalium et aervorum suortm) domvm 
8uam spirituum malignorum vim noxiam perpeti comperissetf rcgarii 
nastros (me absente) presbyteroSj ut aUquis eorum iUo pergeret^ ct^ui ora- 
Uonibua cederent Perrexit unus, obtulit ibi aacrificium corparu ChriMli, 
oransy quantum potuit, ut cessaret ilia vexcAio ; Deo prcUnus tniseraUi 
cessavit.^ "A man of tribunitial dignity, Hesperius by name, who 
dwelt amongst us, has a farm called Zabedi, in the territory of Fossala, 
whither, on finding that his house suffered much from the Tw^tHgn^nt 
power of evil spirits to the damage of his cattle and slayea, he, in my 
absence, requested of our presbyters, that one of them at whose prayen 
they might be banished should go. One of them went, and oflT^ed the 
sacrifice of the body of Christ, praying, as well as he was able, that 
the infliction might cease. Forthwith tlirough Divine mercy it did 

These passages of Chrysostom refer to the same prayer, viz., *Bir\ rm 
Qtloiv fivoTTfpitov — 7rpo<r<f)€poyTfs xmip avr&v ev)(asj^ " Offering prayers OQ 
their behalf in the Divine mysteries." And elsewhere, ^Eon/icffv 6 Itptvt 
Tov Qfov rfiu navT<ou €v\^u ava(fi€p<ov^ ^^ The priest of Grod Stands ofiering 
the prayer for all mankind," and after, *£icrcM>f iiiw rpiiimv wr«p crov rht 
tvxus dva<f>€p€i,*^ " He with trembling offers prayers on thy behalf." 

Those who . had lilDert}-, when they were offering supplications and 
praises, in the celebration of the eucharist, to pray as occasion was 
offen^d, and to put up such petitions as they thought fit, upon particular 
emergencies, were not confinwl to set forms in that administration. 

Cyprian's occasional praises and prayers, in sacriJiciiSj "in the time 
of sacrifice," upon Lucius's return from banishment [are observable]; 
Hie quoque in sacrificiis atque orationibus nostt'iSy non cessanteSy Deo Patri, 
et ChHsto Jilio ejus Domino nostro^ g ratios agere, et orare pariter el 

• August. De Clvit. Dei, lib. xxH. cap. vili. » Blond, p. 2^6. Vid. In Aug. torn. It p. 6S6. 

• Chrj-8. in 1 Cor. Horn. xli. p. 524. ^ Chrya. in Hcbr. Horn. xv. p. 5U. 


petere, ut qui perfectus est atque proficienSj custodiai et perficiat in vobi* 
confessionis vestroe gloriosam coronam^ qui et ad hoc vo3 fortasse revocavit^ 
ne gloria esset occulta, si foris essent confessionis vestrce consummata mar' 
tyria," " Even in our sacrifices and prayers we cease not to render 
thanks to God the Father, and to Christ our Lord, his Son, and in like 
manner to supplicate and seek, that He who is perfect and able may 
preserve and perfect in you the glorious crown of your confession. Who, 
perhaps, for this purpose has brought you back, lest the. glory should 
be concealed, if the perfected testimony of your confession were given 

Add to this, what may be observed in Ambrose.* He, whilst he was 
celebrating, about [the year] 387,*^ (missam facere ccepi) and employed, 
as I suppose, in this prayer' (dum offero) tmderstanding what the Arians 
were doing, and what had befallen Castulus, orders the prayer suitably 
to that occasion ; Orare in ipsa oblatione Deum ccepi, ut subveniret, " I 
began to beseech of God that he would succour us." The whole passage 
runs thus, Sequente die, {erat autem Dominica,) post lectiones atque tractch- 
turn, dimissis cateckumenis, symbolum aliquihus competentibus in haptisteriiM 
tradebam hasilicis, illic nunciatum est mihi comperto, quod ad Portianam 
basilicam de palatio decanos misissent (Ariani) utvela suspenderent, populi 
partem eo pergere. Ego tamen mansi in munere ; missam facere ccepi. 
Dum offero, raptum a populo cognovi Castulum quendam, quern presbyte- 
rum dicebant Ariani, orare in ipsa oblatione Deum ccepi, ut subveniret, 
" On the day following (it was the Lord's day) after reading and 
sermon, the catechumens having been dismissed, I was teaching the 
creed to some of the candidates in the baptisteries of the church. 
Whilst there, it was told me, that the Arians had sent the deans of the 
palace to the Portian church to lift the veils, and that a portion of the 
people were gone thither. I nevertheless continued in the discharge of 
my office. I began to consecrate the sacrament. Whilst I was ofiering, 
I learnt that one Castulus, whom the Arians called a presbyter, had 
been seized by the people ; whereupon in the midst of the very act of 
oblation, I began to beseech God that he would succour us." 

He celebrating this ordinance, and while he was praying before the 
distribution, dum offero, having notice what the Arians were doing at 
another church, applies himself in this prayer to that particular 
occasion; Orare in ipsa oblatione Deum ccepi, ut subveniret; which one 
that had been fettered with prescribed forms could not have liberty 
to do. 

Such occasional petitions, with thanksgivings of like nature, were 

• Cfpr. £p{<t. lib. m. £p. 1. p. 53. • Spirt. [zzzUL] Ad ItaMlUnam Soranm. 

' Spond. p. 2. 

' " The ityle of this prayer, in diTcrt UtUflM, mm in tlw tmni ira cAr." Tbond.p.iM. 


used by Cyprian, in sacrificiis^ " in theee administrations.*'* Nor cm 
this be iinderstood of some general expression constuitly used, com- 
prising Lucius with others ; for the occasion was partictilary and 
such as was not incident every day. And besides, as it had been t 
vanity, to tell him of that which he knew before, being well acquainted 
witli the supposed common form ; so it had been something worse, to 
speak of that as a particular respect to him, when it no more respected 
him, than others. 

Proceed we to the third prayer, viz., that for blessing or sanctiiyiif 
the elements, (called the prayer for consecration) which consisted modi 
of thanksgiving ; and from thence this sacrament, as is thought, came 
to be called the eucharist. It is of this, that Justin Martyr* gives as 
account, in the words alleged by others ; 6 npot<rnis €vx^ SftoUm « 
rifxaptarias ootj dvvafiis avr^ dvair€fi7rti ; '* the president, in like nuuuier, at 
before, prays and gives thanks, according to his ability.'* This praying, 
according to his ability, or as he was able, plainly excludes all praying 
by forms prescribed, or composed for him by others, if he either had 
ability (which none question in the pastors of those times ^) to com- 
pose, or was able to conceive a prayer himself. 

Many several ways are taken to evade this ; no way of one, it seemi, 
satisfying another amongst themselves ; by which we maj guess, what 
satisfaction they are like to give to others. 

One** tells us, it is a compliment of civility, as when we say. Ago 
gratias, non f/uas debeo, sed quas possum ; or, quantas possum majnmaSy 
** I give tluuiks not such as I might, but such as I can, or the best 1 
can.'' But, not well pleased with this (it seems) himself, (at which we 
need not wonder) he tells us (which will no more please others) of some, 
(learned too) who understand it of giving God thanks, with as loud a 
voice as he is able : ycXor ravra koi Xrjpos, " ridiculous this and trifling." 

Another' brings an instance, where ootj dvvafusy is thought to be 
applied to a form ; this is in Gregory Nazianzen. / 4cpc Sarf fiwofus 
TO iiriv'iKiov ad<i)/Li(v, tKfivr^v (odrjVy fjp nuTf ^<rav 6 ^lapa^X cVi rois Alyvnrioa 
TTj ipvBpoi KaTa\r}<f)0(Laiv, ** Come let US, as we are able, sing a song of 
triumph, the song wliich Israel once sung, upon the overthrow of 
the Egyptians in the lied Sea." But here, by €K(iyTjv wd^y, the song 
which Israel sung, we need no more understand the very same words 
of that song, than in Kev. xv. 3, we are to understand the same by the 
song of Moses. Which song of Moses, those who had got the victory over 

« Ep. iv. lib. ii. Ad Mofcm et Maximum, p. 41. * [Apol. ii. p. 98. £. Ed. Colon. 1€8C.] 

* <)l Tjire natfuTai tutv i-iv fubaaKnXtav KptmovK t\<ra.v, "The 8ChoIars of that day WCffe bCttCf 

than the teachers of our own." Chr>><»ht. in Eph. Horn. vi. p. 792. 
•< Anonym, p. 18. Uite of <lnily public prayers. ' Le«tr. Liturg. cap. tU. p. III. 

/ [In\tctiv. coi.t. Julian, i. p. 5-1, torn. i. Ed. Paiis. 1G3U.] 


the beast, are said as expressly to sing, (^fdovcnv r^v Mdi)y Mowrtw rov 
dovXov Tov Otov, "they sing the song of Moses the servant of Crod:**) 
and yet, that which they sing, consists quite of other words, as appears, 
yer. 3, 4. And therefore well might Dr. Hammond give us leave, (as 
he doth) to conceive, by the song of Moses, another song after that 
pattern. And so we may wairantably, by the song, which Israel sung^ 
in Nazianzen. 

The learned remonstrant says, in answer to this, that in Justin 
Martyr's time, they prayed according to their ability, and yet had a 
public liturgy, as we have, though ours pray according to their ability : 
(meaning, I suppose, before and afler sermon.) And so he grants (if I 
understand him) that they used no public liturgy, in celebrating or con- 
secrating the eucharist ; (for of the prayer for sanctifying the elements 
the holy martyr speaks it ;) and thereby yields all that we now allege 
it for, and in effect all that we desire : since it will be easy to satisfy the 
world, that, if they used no public liturgy, no prescribed forms of 
prayer, in this part of worship, they used none, in any.' And 6fioic*ff, 
in this very passage, rendered by themselves "in like manner as 
before ;'^ gives us notice, that as they prayed here, so in like manner 
they prayed in the other parts of worship, which he had given 
account of immediately before, in baptism, in the Lord's supper, in 
all oayj dvyofusy according to their ability, without any public, any pre- 
scribed liturgy. 

Another, of great learning, apprehending, it seems,^ that, to grant they 
prayed according to their ability, is to yield all ; makes much difference 
betwixt Korh dvvofAUf and ^017 ^vafU£. And to show it, explains the 
Greek by Hebrew, and Justin Martyr by Maimonides. I suppose it 
will satisfy others as well, to have an account of this phrase, by the 
Greek glossaries, or Justin Martyr himself. How much difference there 
is between them, Phavorinus shows, when he explains o<nf dwofut by 
Korii dvtmfwf. His words are, on the phrase i<ro¥ <rB4vovy ZvXXa/Sov 
6(rri dvvafus' ckxXimo r($df. Barf fiol itrx^s' cXXccfrrue&f dc ravra Xeytrai, rit 
tvTfXfj, ZvXXa/3ov Korii rrjp dwiifuv Sarf cdi coriy. " Lay hold 6aTf dvyofus. 
I reject this 6<nf fxoi Itrxps- The phrase is elliptical : the full form 
would be, Lay hold according to the amoimt of ability which thou hast.** 
So that, according to him, 0017 dwofus is a defective phrase, which, when 
it is represented entire, must be expressed by tcarii bvpofur. Let me add 
that, in icar^ bwofu^y likewise 6arf is to be understood, when not expressed, 
and all our abilities (as to parts, though not to degrees,) [are] there 
included ; for when any of our abilities for a work we undertake, is not 
exercised, and so oontribntot not to it| m do it not mrrd dvMfuy. 



Anflwerably, Ghiysostom uses kotA, dvM^uy and imm ttxt diwayitw, at 
phrases equivalent.* And elsewhere in these words, Mc^tayuvy JM^^i^ 
r^ KMKpfVfifihnip a^Uof iw rols \6y(ns rov Uvruiunxn^ dttpamAgA^pot, ami 
ivwofup ^fi€T€ptof, ovx ^^ itrrhj dXX^ Haxnf ^fu» ^HKrw^^ *^ Let as lean, 
brethren, the wisdom hidden in the words of the Spirit, ej^plaring it 
according to our ability not as much of it as there is, but as much as is 
attainable bj us." What he had expressed bj kotA, dvvofMy, he ezplauis 
by&roy ^fuv T^fjcroy. And so they differ, no morethan the Latin phrases, 
pro vmbus, and pro factdtate; by which Camerarius and Donnssos 
render xcmk tvrofuv, and quantum possum or quantum in me eatj by which 
others render Zarf dvvofut. 

But Maimonides may make the difierence evident : let ua see bow. 
He tells us of one proceeding in discourses, tending to the humilialioii 
of the people, according to his ability, until he humble their hearti, and 
they return perfectly. 

It is supposed, that if Justin Martyr had been to express this, he 
would have used the phrase Kara ^vvofuv, not 6<ni ^wofus. Well, but 
Justin Martyr, in this very Apology,^ hath a passage just parallel to this; 
where he speaks of the discourses the Christians used, tending to the 
conversion of the heathen ; and they proceeded therein Stni bvpaius^ not 
narii hvvofuv, . His words are, cat bih. \6yov oZw xal a-xfiiun^>v rov ^oipd- 
iu»av 6<ni dwofut frporpc^rd/icyoA vfuis oimtBwoi otdofjtitv \oar^ SwrwSf «Ar 
vfA€is owtoTCiTf , " Therefore, both by the word and the figure of him 
that appeared, they exhorting you, as they are able, know they are 
unaccountable for the future, although you believe not." So Justin 
Martyr's Satf dwa/uf , is no other than our author's Korii dwofiuf ; and the 
vpoiarmsy " bishop," in him prayed, just as he in Maimonides preached ; 
using his own abilities, invention, expressions in praying, as the other 
did in preaching. And thus much our author must yield, if he will 
stand to Justin Martyr's, or his own discourse. 

And others in reason will be content, that the eminent martyr shall 
show us his own meaning. The Christians, in those discourses he 
mentions, whereby they endeavoured to bring the heathen to the faith 
of Christ, used their judgment, their invention, and certainly their 
own expressions. They employed all their abilities in this work; 
and this was i<ni dvva/ut nporpe^frOai ; by which we may understand, 
if we will admit him to explain himself, what he means by tvx^ Sa^ 
btvofut avan-c/iTTfty, and how well they represent his meaning, who will 
have him to intend hereby, neither less nor more than earnestness in 

Hereby I suppose it clear enough, notwithstanding all endeavours to 

• Oen. Horn. xxvU. Ter. 20, page 20«. » Tom. ▼!. p. 759. edit. Savil. • Apol. iL p. 157. 


obscure it, that the principal prayer, in the most solemn part of public 
worship, in those times, was no prescribed form. Nor was it any such 
form two hundred years afler, as appears by that of Basil ; who tells us 
plainly (in the latter end of the fourth age) that no words of such a 
prayer were left in writing by any holy men. TA rrfs irruckri(r€»t pfffiora 
inl TJ dyadti^i rod Siprov Trjs tvxapurrlasy Koi rov mrriplcv rijt tvkoytas^ rit 
rSiv oytW tyypd<l>»s ifuv mroXcXocn-cv ;* thus rendered by Erasmus, 
Invocationis verboj cum canfidtur pants eucfiarisHcBf et poculum bene- 
dictionisy quia sanctorum in scripto nobis reliquit f " Which of the holy 
men have left us in writing the words of the prayer, at the con- 
secration of the eucharistical bread, and the cup of blessing?"* By 
this it is evident, they were so far from having any prescribed forms 
in consecrating the eucharist, as^ they had not so much as the words 
of any such form in writing, to his time, who lived, according to 
Petavius, till 879. 

It will be easily granted by the zealots for prescribed administrations, 
that there never was any liturgy, wherein there was not a form for 
consecration (since they think any part of a liturgy may be more 
tolerably omitted than this ; and those that officiate had better be left at 
liberty anywhere than here;) and they will show us such a form, in all 
liturgies extant, modem or ancient, (or pretended to be ancient,) there- 
fore they cannot reasonably deny, while there were no such forms in 
writing, there were no such liturgies ; and so none in Basil's time. 

By this also we may discern what sentence ought to be passed upon 
those liturgies, which go under the names of Peter, Mark, James, 
Clemens, and Basil himself too. In them the mysteries are clearly 
described ; which, he says, the ancients thought themselves highly con- 
cerned to keep secret. And there we have (as a most necessary part of 
them) the form of consecration in writing ; which, he says, no holy man 
ever left in writing. 

In that, ascribed to him, the forgery is especially impudent. He having 
declared his high approbation of the ancients' practice, in not committing 
any such thing to writing ; and upon such reasons as obliged himself, 
as much as any, not to run counter to them herein ; he, with them, 
thought the (r€fiv6v r&v fivtmjpuip, the ^' reverence due to these mysteries** 
hereby secured ; and another course the way to render them despicable, 
€VKaTa<l>povrfrii ; as is evident by his discourse, in the place alleged; 
icaXfior tK€lv<n MidayfUvot, t&p iivtmiplmif r^ crc/iva aumj duur^C^oBai hf r^ 
K€KpvfifjJvif Koi a<t>6iyKT*f rh a'€fiv6v roU fixMmjpioit i<f>vkacramfy '^ These 
having been well taught to preserve by silence the reverence due to 

• [De Splr. Sane. ci^. zztIL] 

• Biihop Jewel's Apology, p. 60. "BitflbownifM God, that he might oelelntto wtih pogrtn of 
hU own meUnff." * thet 



lihe mysteries, maintained in secreqr and dnmbnen, yBOtanAaa ftr d 


Their prayers at the enoharist were long oidiiiazify : so in Jnali 
Marfyr^s time, tlx^oLpiorimf vwip rov xanyfMMrAu r m n w tf wof^ oAnm A 
iroXv voumuy^ '< He ofien at great length the eochazutio pimjer fi 
those things which he deems desirable." Notlikethose of the moiiki i 
Egypt. Paul said three hundred a day, nsing ^fnT^Xdor^ ** pebUes," fi 
beads.* So in Ghrysostom, 'EcmyKt yAp 6 Upti^ o^ wvp toBan^wpmrn, M 
t6 nycvfta t6 Syuip, Kai r^ UtnipUaf M iroX^ iroccraf-— &a 9 x6p*^ ^"'^ 
<rovira rj BwrU^f " The priest of God stands to bring down not fire, bn 
the Holy Ghost, and offers at great length sappUcatioos for grace t 
descend on the sacrifice.** And elsewhere he says, it required a grette 
confidence than Moses and Helias had, to pray in this ministraticm, fy 
ftiv yitp hcmfpUof dpKtuf Tyov/uu, k,tX.* And why soch boldnesB wi 
needful, if they had the prayer in a book before them, I apprehen 
not. Howeyer, those that were usually large* in this prajer, wn 
sometimes brief, when there was occasion; and performed it Mym 
prtfuuriy '' in a few sentences ;** which is a clear eridence they were no 
tied to a set form, but were left to use their discretion ; and ordflTCi 
their prayer over the elements, so as to be briefer or more enkiget 
therein, according as they were disposed, and as occasion xequired. 

Marcion imitated the Christians herein, norlfpui o&y K»Kpa§M§ma wp^ 
inrotovfuvos €vx*ipurrf7p, Koi iviirkfov crrccWv t6p X6yov rijs hnKkiimms/ Ac 
" He aped the benediction of the cups containing mingled wine, anc 
the lengthened invocatory prayer.** 

This prayer, of old, consisted much of thanksgiving. Ghiysostoii 
gives an accoimt of some particulars, for which they gave thanka. Anc 
having mentioned as many, or more, than are to be found in any eucha 
ristical form, either in the mass-book, or our service-book, adda, ctoi 
his et ccBteria hujugmodi gratiarum actionxbtia accedimtis/ '' With thesi 
and other acts of thanksgiving of the same kind we draw near,** imply- 
ing, they were not confined to those specified, but enlarged themsdvei 
in such like particulars according to discretion. But I insist not 01 
thiSf the former evidence is sufiicient. 

• Apol. U. p. 162. [Ed. C<d. 1686, p. 97, D.] • Soi. p. 897. Mqyiit L p. 386. 

* De Sacerd. Orat. ill. p. 16. ' [Ont. yl. p. 46.] • oopioBB. 
/ Irensiu, lib. 1. cap. ix. In Epipha. lib. L torn. iU. Haer. xxziy. 

r Uomil. xxlv. in 1 ad Corinth. 'Yvfp rovrttv, aai tAv rotovrttv &nAvrmv tiyyurTod' ni oStt 
flrpo<ri>cv, " With these and other acta of thanksgiving of the same kind we draw hmt." p. asi 
E^apiiTTOvrret hrt rnv irXavrif &ir^\Xa(c t^ tAv ^irtfpHnrwv i4vot^ on fiaxpav Svrtt kjyin ^W^mi 
Sti iXnida fiii jfxorrav nai uBtoin iv ryi Kotrfi^ hiiX^w iavrov carctrKcravc ecu vi'yKXtipov6ftmm 

"We giye thanks that he has dellyered the human race fhmi errors; that when we wet* ate ol 
he brought us nigh; that when we were without hope and without God in th« vorid, hm woai 
us brethren and fellow-heirfl with himself." 


Gregory, bishop of Nazianzen, father of Gregory, called the Dxvine, 
having been much weakened by a fever, but very desirous to partake of 
the Lord's supper ; by the help of his maid, he gets to church,' and 
there rhs irap€ifjUvag x^H^^ *'* ^X^ irxiffua-i<ras crvyrfXcc frpo^/MD^, 1j 
YrporcXci Tov Xaov r^ iivarrfpioj prfiiatri fup SKSyoit Koi Savis tvBtvwvj dta^oi^ 
di a»r c/uol doKct Koi \ia» T9k€»T6Tjj — xal mvra frdpi/y avr^ napii tov ayiav 
nveufiOTosj avr^ fiiv yip»<rK6fi€va^ roit napovauf di otfx SpJtfuva. E&o 
iir(in»p rii Trjt cvxapurriaf prifum ovrat &s <rwTf$€S Koi t6v \a^p Konvkiyti^ 
(ra£]^ "lifting up his feeble hands in prayer, he cheerfully celebrates 
the mysteries, with and for the people, with very few words, such as 
his weakness would admit ; but (as seems to me) with a most vigorous 
soul ;^ and afterwards, kqI ravra nafnfv atfrA, &o, " And this he had 
from the Holy Ghost, perceived by him, but not discerned by those 
that were present ;" where, if ravra refer to pfifuur^j which seems most 
congruous, he tells us those few words, wherewith he celebrated, were 
suggested to him by the Holy Ghost ; and so neither by a book, nor by 
his memory. But I need not insist on that. By the former expression 
it is evident, that he was briefer, and used fewer words in his prayers, 
at this time, before the administration, than he was wont to do, when in 
health. Now they that, in celebrating this ordinance, and blessing the 
elements, do pray sometimes longer, sometimes shorter, as their str^iigth 
will serve them, are far from confinement to a certain number of words, 
which is the thraldom of prescribed forms. 

For further evidence, that these, and other parts of the euchaiistical 
administration, were not under the restraint of prescribed orders, in the 
beginning of the fifth age ; let that be observed, which we meet with in 
the epistle of Innocent the First, to Decentius, written anno 416, to 
satisfy him (who was bishop of Eugubium) concerning many severals,' 
which were then, it seems, not determined, but under consultation' and 
inquiry ; so, cap. viii. Sane quia de hoc, sicuH de ccBteria ooMtdere vohnt 
diUctio tua, ''Since touching this, as also other matters you desire 

Particularly, it was inquired, what place in the eucharistical office 

• Narrat Nasiansenui, patrem ranm Mcerdotem ardentlMlma et dintnrnt febrl •zlunittiiin» ab 
anciUa aliquando synaxis tempora deductnm mann in eoetum eecleaiaatteum, in qno pro num 
csnam, aed paudMimia et quibiu turn per morbmn potoit, Terbii oonaecratam, tUla et dlatrlbacrlt, eC 
ex ea participarit ipse quoque. Reyennm Tero ad lectom, cn)oque panunper ac tomno rebetum 
melius itatim habuiue, frc. " NaiUnxen relatei, that hit ftther being wearied oat with a bnntaig 
and daily fever, waa led by the hand of a maid-iervant, at the time of commnnion, into tha ehuzch- 
aasembly. in which as usual he distributed to the reat, and himself partook of the supper, eonae. 
crated, however, with words few in number, and such as he oould command eonsldertaiff bit ilek- 
ness. When he returned to bed, and had partaken of a Uttto food, and been rafreahedtqrtlaep^ ha 
immediately began to mend." Cent. Magdeb. It. p. 421. 

* Naa. Oral, fai Landem Patrlt Oregor. p. 805. Alterwardt ha addt, " ntttrinf tlw wocdi of 
thanktgiring, aa waa utnal, and bletting the peopla." 


shoold be aasigiied to the 08Ctt/«m/MKJf, '^ the kki of peaoe ^ * 
or po8t confecta mysteria, before or after lihe oonieontian of tbe i 
Wbicli Innocent satisfies^ not bj wondering that he took no notioe of Ai 
prescribed order, though (sinoe he was a biahop in hia pireQiiiet» and edb 
Decentioa' clergy cUHeoa noffrot,* ^^oar oleigj,*^ he might jnafi^ haia 
wondered at it, ^ there had been any fooh presoripi ; baft by reaaon,* 
Pads osculwn dandum eat post confecta mf^itma^ ut comtJOt popnlum a4 
cnma, qua in mysteriis agwitur^ atque trt eecletia eeUbraniur, jirmfiiiii 
eonsensum^ acfinita esse pacts cancUidentis aignaeulo demomBtrantur^ ** The 
kiss of peace should be given after the o o naecratian of the myaterie^ 
that it may be manifest that the people have given their aaaent to aQ 
the acts in the mysteries, and to all the rites celebrated in the chmdii 
which are shown to be ended by the farewell emblem of peace." 

It was also matter of consultation and inquiry, whether the namai of Aa 
ofierers should be recited before or after prayer, made over the oUatkn.' 
Whereby it appears [that] there was not then, so much aa any ftnmww 
authorised direction for the order and method of their eochariatical ad- 
ministration ; much less any prescribed forms or modes ; ibr if they had 
not 80 much as a directory, how &r were they from such a litmgy aa is 
now contended for ! If Decentius had known any soch established ocder^ 
his inquiry bad been needless, and so had Innocent's determination beea* 
He might have referred him to the prescribed order, aa oifir prabtei 
would have done in the like case ; and said to him, as he doea to two 
other bishops,' concerning the canons of the church, Ecclesiaeiioonm 
canofium norma nulli esse debet iiicoffnita sacerdoti, quia nesciri hcec a post- 
tijice satis est indecorum; maxime quia a laicis religiosis vtrta et eciatur^ et 
custodienda esse ducatur, " The standard of the church canons ought to 
be unfamiliar to no bishop ; since it is disgraceful that it should be 
unknown to a clergyman, mainly because it is both known and deemed 
worthy of observance by religious laymen f* yea, and judged him miwor- 
thy to be a prelate in his province, who would make a question of that| 
which the wisdom and authority of the church had already determined. 
But there is neither mention of, nor reference to any such order, nor 
any resentment of his calling it in question. He tells him indeed, it waa 
superfluous ; not because it was already determined, but because hia own 
prudence might discern, what was most convenient to be done in the 
case ; quod superfluum sit, et ipse per tuam prudentiam recognoscisj '^ See- 
ing it is needless, and you yourself discern it, of your own prudence." 

In the conclusion, he hopes, that in these, and other such like parti- 
culars, which, if determined, amount to no more than the directive pait^ 
or rubric of a liturgy, Decentius may instruct, and give some order to 

• cv.tlU. •cvpA. '019.11. ' Ep. ▼. in Cl«lk 4to. 


others, which they may imitate, not strictly conform to ; Erit autem 
Domini potential id procurarty ut et tnam ecclesiamj et cUrioas nostroSy 
qui sub tuo pontifido divinis famulantur offlcOSj bene insHtuoBy et dim 
formam tribuaSy quaim debeant imitariy* " You will be able, however, to 
compass this, viz. to instruct your church and our clergy, who, under 
your episcopal superintendence, minister in the divine offices, and to 
deliver them a form which they shall be bound to copy.** 

Where it is observable [that] 1. At this time, there was no setded 
form or order in that church. 2. The order he hopes for, if it comprise 
all the particulars in the epistle, comes to no more than a direction 
or rubric. And [that] 8. This [was] designed for imitation, not for 
strict conformity. 

And what liberty there was in those times, and how far they were from 
imiformity, appears by the beginning of that epistle. Si instiiuta eccU" 
aiasticay ut sunt a beatis apostolis traditay Integra veUent servare Dcmrd 
sacerdoteSy nuUa adversitaSy nulla varietaSy in ^>sis ordimbus et comecratio- 
nibus haberetur. Sed dum unusquisquSy non quod traditum eety eed quod 
sibi visum fuerity hoc cBStirnat esse tenendum ; inde diversa in dwersu lorn 
vel ecclesiis aut teneri aut celebrari videntury^ " If the priests of the Lord 
would preserve intact the ecclesiastical institutes as they were handed 
down by the blessed apostles, there would be no diversity, no varietji 
in ordering worship and consecrating the mysteries. But while evexy 
one judges that is to be kept, not which is delivered, but which seems 
good to him ; there are seen various tenets, and modes of celebrating, in 
the several places or churches.** He speaks as if there were as many 
ways of celebrating, anno 416, (when this epistle was writ,) as there 
were places or churches ; and this variety, m ordinihus et consecroHoni" 
buSy which are his words immediately before, and means (if I understand 
him) *^ both in ordering their worship, and consecrating the m3r8terie8.'* 

It seems, this pleased not Innocent : the character given him by 
Erasmus makes that no wonder ; Scevus potiuSy quam erudituSy et ad dam- 
nandum potiuSy quam docendum instructioTy^ '' Harsh rather than learned, 
and more apt at finding fault, than at teaching.** Those of least worth, 
when they get power, are usually most narrow-spirited and imperious. 

As for the traditum esty which he opposes ;** if he mean by it any apos- 
tolical tradition, he alleges it with the same fidelity, as he mentions 
ancient tradition for the Homan supremacy to the African fiithers f and 
as his next successors, Zosimus, Boniface, Ctelestine, alleged a canon of 
Nice to a council at Carthage, for the same purpose. 

Objection, You take no notice of traditum esty which was something 
that ought to have been observed, and would have left no such liber^. 

• [cap. Till.] • In Cnb. torn. i. p. 462. * Not in l^ltt xetL In U. tarn. Aogoit 

' placet in oontnit. « Epiit. xd. 


Atuwer. Wltatever be mMnt bjr Ui fi^iBhwi «f^ it ' 
tatiye general order, eiyaiiiiiig all to we the «» 
if there had been any aiich ihingy it woiild not bave 

If there had been anything deSrvered, against 
bratingy by ancient or modem anthosTBy worthy of oboervanoe ; it y 
have been taken notice of, by tome of thoae who ued this fibertfyM 
well as by Innocent ; who had manycontemporazijea not inferior to fani- 
self: else that age was very unhappy; since notliiiig of enunmef 
appeared in him, (nor in the Soman bishops generaUy of tliose tinNi) 
but his great place, if that impartial critic* mistake him not^ idio saji^ 
et dicHonem^ et mgeniun^ et eruditionem taU dignam pramtU rfosafgani 
ooghnurj <' we are compelled to deny him the address, and gemos, aal 
learning, meet for such a bishop.'* 

Yet he, ambitious to have all dance after the Boman pipe, thoi^ Si 
yet it gave herein no certain soond, (and indeed their ■*«*i^»*g abost 
this and the supremacy, was to little purpose for one age or two) mskai 
that matter of compliant, which was fiur from being so with his betten^ 
both then and in better times.* But however he resented it ; he halk 
left us evidence, that in his days, as elsewhere, so in Italy, ereiy cos 
held his own way, even m conseorationibusj* and oonsecgeted as hi 
thought fit. And in fine, there is reason to think, this biahop was not 
so much ofiended, because they did not use the same woxcb in ods- 

• Erasmiu. 

* Qua in parte nemini Ttreeondia et modeetia nostra prajudieat, quo mtaraa i 
Toluerit, untiat, et quod senierit, finclat.— Oetendi quid noe, quantom in nobia aat^ 
nemini prsscribentee, quo minua itatuat, quod pntat unuiquieque p ig po aiiu a, Mtna Md aitmtm 
Domino redditurui, " In which reipeet our modesty and moderation judges no man, ao that afoy 
one may think as he pleases, and act aa he thinks. I hare shown what optaloa wm a eao siUf la 
our ability have formed, giving rules to none, so that ereiy bishop may est^bUsh what ha dasiM 
right, as having to render an accotmt of his acts to the Lord." Cypr. ad Magn. Ep. wtL Hh. ir. 
Haec tibi breviter— rescripsimus, nemini priMcribentes aut prejndicantes, quo mhraa twiMqidifat 
episcorum quod putaverit fsciat, habens arbitrii sui liberam flKultatem, ** We hanra wiftten taW^ 
by way of reply, these things, laying down rules for, and Judging no man, so that evieiy ooa of ths 
Ushops may do as he thinks right, haying the free ezerdae of his own ludfniant.'' 1^ ^ 
Jubalan. p. 227. 

Augustine, without expressing any offlmco, says the varieties were man than eookl ha ««■ 
known. August. Retrsct. lib. ii. cap. xz. 

LIbri duo, quorum est titulus, Ad inquisitiones Januarii, multa d« a 
sive qu«B universaliter, sive qusB particulsxlter, i. «. non peraque in onmlbaa lodo i 
nee tamen commemorari omnia potuerant, " Two books whose title is, * Answers to the laqoiila 
of Januarlus,' contain much disputation concerning the sacred rites which the dnmh t^bmnrn, 
either universally or in particular regions, i. «. not in all plaoee alike, and yet It waa tmpnsaHilt la 
notice them all." 

' Si instituu ecdesiastica, nt sunt a beatis apostoUs tradlta Integra veDant sarvara DomlBl «b«- 
dotes, nulla adversitas, nulla varietas, in ipsis ordinibus et conseerstionlbus haberetor, " If tha pttseli 
of the Lord would preserve intact the ecclesiastical institutes as they were handed down bf tha 
blessed apostles, there would obtain no diversity, no variety in ofdering worsh^, and < 
the mysteries." [Innocent, ad Deoent.] VId. Pr»f. ad Cone. p. SM. 


brating and consecrating, as because they did not use the same rites 
and order ; for in these, that epistle of his is most concerned. 

And further, I can see no probability, that at Rome itself, there was 
any settled (much less imposed) form of consecration, before' that men- 
tioned by Gregory.^ For if any of the former bishops had left behind 
them any such prayer, and commanded it to be used by that church for 
this purpose ; it is not credible, that it would have been recited for the 
novel composition of such an obscure person, of whom we can know 
nothing by knowing his name. Gregory tells us, tiiat prayer (or canon, 
as he also calls it) was made by Scholasticus, who, as it is most pro- 
bable,'^ lived about his own time. Some writers of the popes' lives, and 
others, ascribe indeed several parcels of that' canon to bishops before 
Gregor3r's days ; one to Alexander, another to Siridus, another to Leo, (nor 
find I more) but whether they knew better, at such a distance, or ought 
to have more credit than Gregory, is easy to determine. And if those 
parcels be examined, it will appear [that] they are nothing to the pur- 
pose, or else later than the sixth age. This form of Scholasticus, Gregory 
having' altered it as he thought fit, and added the Lord's prayer to it, 
(which, though it were used nowhere publicly, but in the eucharistical 
office, in any place ; yea not in that it seems, at Rome, till he introduced 
it) made use of it in that church ; where, by custom, it came to be 
settied, but not by rule, in his time at least. For, that he neither 
imposed it, nor had a mind to impose it, is apparent, by what he writes 

• Ordo Romanot continet baud dubte ordlnem a B. Oregorlo inititatam : nam at author eat 
JohannM diaconua, oodioem Gelatlanum, quern de miasanun solennflma oompoaiient Oregortna, 
multa lubtrahena, pauca conyertent, nonnuUa adjlciena, in uniua Ubri Toluinen ledegit, qui ofdo 
poatea per untvenoni fere occidentem obtinah, " The Ordo Romanua containa doobtlen an order 
laid down by Qngorf. For, as John the deaeon laji^ Gregory, hy cutting out many things, ehang. 
ing a few and adding aome, compressed the manuscript which Oelasius had written canceming tho 
solemnisation of the church-serrices into a Tolume, consisting of one book, which Ordo aftcrwardi 
obtained throughout almost all the west." Cassand. Liturg. PrBf. ad Ord. Rom. p. 91. 

In neither of those orders, which Cassander gtres na for the ancient Roman order, tho ahoitor 
or longer, are there any prescribed forma of prayer ; but only a baio relation of the order wherein 
they proceeded. • Lib. TiL Epist. [UiiL] 

« Bellarmhie denies not but it is probable, that Scholasticus then lived. Do Misa. lib. iL 09. 
six. p. 819. Gregorii igitur aetata, circa an. 590, vixit consardnator ille canonia, ** In the time of 
Gregory, therefore, about a.d. 690, lived the author of the canon." Chemnit. Exam, pais IL p. MS. 
Si yero Gregoriua per Scholasticus intelligat oertum aliquem hominem, qui vtate ipaiua rixaUt, 
ut adversarii contendant, " It, however, as our opponents contend, Gregory means by Scholaaticua 
any ^particular person who lived in his own time, it is agreed to be a probablo suppoeitJon.'' 
Bellarm. De Miss. lib. iL eap. xix. p. 819. 
The benediction, it seems to be in Augustin. Epist. liz. [Ed. Antw. £p. ezllz.] 
Vid. Thomd. Serv. pp. 384, 885. * 

' Orationem autem Dominicam iddroo mox poet precem dlcimua, quia mos qMMrtolomm ftilt, nt 
ad ipsam solummodo orationem, oblationis hostlam consecrarent £t valdo mihi inooaveniana 
visum est : ut precem, quam Scholasticus eompoauerat super oblationem diceremua ; et ipaam 
traditionem, quam Redemptor noster compoauit, super cjua oorpua et sangninem mm dieoremua, 
" We say the Lord's prayer directly after thia prqrer, becauae it waa the custom of tho i^oatlaa to 
consecrate the sacrifice with that prayer only. And it appeared very uasnitable to ma to eflteonr 
the oblation the prayer which Scholasticus had eompoaod, and not to eOte tho tana which our 
Redeemer eompoaod over hia body and Uood." Orag . Ubb vtt. Iplrt. liUL 


to our AtiBtin ;* who had mentioned the Tsrioos* modes of 
the enchaiiBt in several chnichea, partienlailj the Romen and At 
French ; with a design to know his sense thereof, and wluoh he wonU 
have him follow. 

That part ascribed to Alexander, by Flatom and DnzmiidDa, Uh 
nothing of prayer in it ; being oviy a rehearsal of the woonis aal 
actions, used in the institution of this sacrament ; and ao la impertiMBt. 

That [part] fathered upon Siridus, Oommumocmie8f ieo. is sot ftnad 
in the Roman order; which Bellarmine says, contains the encMiit esnoa 
entirely,^ and so is a patch added somehundreds of years aiier SizioiBs; 
when Rome was so degenerated, as to prefer Maiy before Glirist. 

That [part] attributed to Leo, Hone igitur chiaikmem MrritelBi nortna^ 
&c. is a patch added long after, as M. Moulin' observes. These woids, 
Of our servitude, for, Of us thy servants, show maniieBtlyy that dus 
prayer was added unto the mass in a barbarous age, whensan thcj &i 
say, Placuit nostrcB mediocritaU subdUter mtimare ve$tram /rattndkOmf 
'' It has pleased our Mediocrity correctly to certify your Fratemitf ;* d 
which phrases are stuffed the epistles of the bishops and cleargymen of 
the seventh age, and others following. 

Gregory, in his answer to Austin, (who was his crestare, and whoB 
he might have led into any conformity with a beck,) is so &t htm 
enjoining him to conform to what was used at Rome, that he does not 
so much as advise it ; nay, he persuades him to a course inconsisteBft 
with any restraint ; and will have him use his liberty, in making choice 
of what he saw best, in any of the differing churches, and if he finrnd 
anjTthing which might be more pleasing to Grod, quod plus onrn^pofesll 
Deo possit placercy than what was used at Rome, to prefer that ; (which was 
suitable to his maxim. In una fide^ nihil efficit sanctcB ecclesitB dwerm 
consuetndo: " where there is one faith, there is no hurt to the church bj 
diversity^ of usages ;") intimating, that he was not so fully satisfied widi 
the Roman mode ; but that he had room to think, the way of another 

• Auftln of Canterbury. 

• NoTit fratemiui tua Ronuuue ecclette consuetudinem, in qos m nntrltmn meminlt ; Md aH 
placet, ut liye in sancta Romana, sire in Gallianim, leu in qualibet eedesla, aUquid InTenlati, qpii 
plus omnipotenti Deo possit placere, nolicite eliga*— Non enim pro lodi rea« sed pro 1 
loca axnanda lunt. £x singiiliB er^ quibiuque ecclesiis, qun pia, quas icUcioaa, qu* reete • 
elige, frc. " Thou knowest, brother, the manner of the Roman church, in which jmx i 
you were nursed. But my mind is, that if you discover aught, whether in the Ronum or C 
or any other church whatever which best pleases God, you should careftilly make dioiee i 
For things are not to be esteemed for the sake of places, but places on account of good ( 
Make choice therefore of whatsoever things are godly, religious, and right, in any rin^o ( 
whaUoever." Beda Eccles. Hist. lib. i. cap. xxvii. 

In diversis ecclesiis diversas protulit consuetudines ; nee Romanus ipse ubique Tolult tmjw 
dus, " He patronised different customs in different chiurches ; and did not himtelf think that ^m 
Roman order ought to be universally imposed." Spelm. ConcQ. p. 110. 

< De Miss. Ub. ii cap. xx. p. 828. * Of the Mau, p. SSS. 

' *H dia^via rtfg vn^rtiet* rf}i» 6fi6votav rnt wiartttv cwitrrn^tt ** Tha dlSbmieo about tiM flH^ 
commends the unity of the faith." Irensus to Victor, in Euseb. lib. v. [cap. xxtr.] 


church might be more pleasing to God ; which was in reason sufficient 
to restrain him from imposing it on Austin, or others. And the free 
course he would have Austin take, was not only his advice, but his 
practice : for when it was objected to him, that he followed, even in this 
administration, the customs of some other churches, particularly of the 
Greek ; his answer signifies, that he would not be so circumscribed by 
the customs of Rome, but when he saw anything good, in any other of 
the inferior churches, he was ready to imitate it. * 

And, as Gregory did not impose the Roman canon, or form of conse- 
cration on Austin, nor would have him prescribe it to others : so Austin, 
though rigid and imperious enough, did not offer to impose it on the 
Britons. He requires of them, but conformity in three things only, as 
Beda relates that transaction, whereof this was none.* But, if he had 
insisted on this, he had found no more compliance herein, than in the 
other : for the Britons and Scots were not only<^ enemies to the Roman 
use in the eucharist in Gildas* time ; but were adverse to, and unac- 
qiiainted with any uniformity, as in celebrating the Lord's supper, so in 
other parts of worship ; and had no prescribed liturgies for such 
uniformity long ailer. Which is manifest, by what bishop Usher, the 
most learned of our bishops, affirms of the Irish, (who with the Scots,) 
as he tells us,' differed little or nothing from what was maintained by 

• Epist. xli. ad Leandrum, lib. [i.j Cone. Tolet. It. Cad. t. [In Hardouln, Can. ▼!.] Walaflr. 
Strab. De Reb. Ecclet. cap. xxvi 

Non de ConstantinopoUtana eccletia, quod dicunt ; quii earn duUtat aedi apoatoUee ena ra1»- 
Jectam t Tamen li quid boni, vel ipsa, vel altera eecleaia habet, ego et minorea me» qooa ab lUidtli 
prohibco, in bono imitari paratus sum. Stultus est enim, qui eo ae primum exlatiinat, ut bona qwi 
▼ideret discere contemnat, " Not from the church of Cona tantinople, do I borrow, aa they alkfa. 
Who doubts that that church is subject to the Roman Seef Neyeitheless, if that church or anjr 
other possesses anything good, I am ready to imitate in wnat is good those my inferiors whom I 
restrain trom what is unlawful. For he is a fool who thinks himself superior in such a degree that 
he is above learning what he sees to be good." Lib. rVL Ep. Iziii. 

' Dicebat autem eis, Quia in multis quidem noatrae consuetudini, imo uniyersalia eodeslsB oon- 
traria geritis ; et tamen, si in trlbus his mihl obtemperare vultis, ut pascha suo tempore celebretia; 
ut ministerium baptixandi, quo Deo renascimur, secundum morem sanctse Romanci [et apoatdliese] 
ecdesiae compleatis : nt gentl Anglorum una nobiscum yerbum I>omini pnedioetJs, castera qwi 
agitis, quamvia mortbus nostris contraria, aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus, " He said to them, In 
many respects, indeed, ye act contrary to our manner, yea to that of the unirersal churvh. And 
yet if in these three things ye hearken to me, ris. to keep Easter at the proper time, to administer 
the office of baptism, In which we are regenerated to God, after the manner of the holy Roman 
and apostolic church, and to preach the word of God, together with us to the English nation, wa 
will meekly bear all other things which ye do, thou^ contrary to our customs." Bed. Hist. lib. [iL] 
[cap. iL] 

Another account runs thus : E Britonum et Scotorum episcopis, in synodo in Wigomlenai prm 
vinda, postularit, ut deinceps noa Asiano sed Romano more, pnedicarent, baptiaarent, et paseha 
celebrarent, " In a synod of the Scottish and British bishops, held in the proTince of Worcester, ha 
demanded that thenceforth they should preach, baptise, and keep Easter, not after the Asiatio 
manner, but after that of Rome.** In Spetan. Condi, pp. 107, 108. [Wilkina, torn. L p. SA.] Whtra, 
by conformity in baptism, probably ha meana (aa in tkat about Eaater) the tima of baptising, Hor- 
which the Roman biahopa ware giMt naiWi Tld. Lao IpiiC. 

' Britanni moribua Romania Iniaaial, um wdam la Bliany mA alkm te iiMin, ** Xlia BiUmm 
are enemiaa to tlM Roman eoaloBM, Mt on^ te MfMl l» tfit ^Mih M ll» te VHiaat la llM ten- 
sort." Gi]dMin^Bh.Beiii.eCIllA•^H. 'J^M^IMUp. 


their neigbbours the Britons.* "It la mre {says hci) that in the »tie- 
ceeding ages, no one general form of dirine service was retained ; but 
divers rites and manners of celebration, in divers parts of this kingdom ; 
tin til the Roman use was broiaght in at laat, by Gillibertusj and Mah- 
chiasj and Christianns^ who were the pope^s legates here, about five 
hundred j^e^ars ago."* So tliat the Iri^h for above eleven hundred jears 
(and the Britons and Scots, if not so long^ yet long after ATJstin) 
retained such liber^ herein, as the church ancientlj enjoyed in all* 
quarters of the world. And when GOlibert, one of those Boman legates, 
nils at those Tarions' modes of administering worship as schiamatical, 
and such wherewith all Ireland had been deluded : he does no more, 
than those (whom a better prospect of things, in later and clearer times, 
might have made wiser) who are ready still to brand that as schism, 
which agrees not with their own novel conceits or orders, how oomr 
spondent soever it may be to the general usages of the ancient churches. 
And whether of old, the churches had any such custom, as to confine 
the administration of the Lord's supper to prescribed forms of prayer, 
let those who are disinterested, judge by the premises. 

To proceed ; the words in their delivery of the elements were not of 
old prescribed, nor used in any unvariable form. We need not go so 
high, for proof of this, as the sixth age. Later and worse times afilnd 
evidence enough to satisfy us. Only, in our way, the observation of the 
truly noble Du Plessis, as to the former ages, is true beyond contradic- 
tion. Inter dandum vera verba hujtta mysterii significativa, htpy^araru m 
hfofyiarara quceque prceferfhcmt^ ita tameny ut certie et statis sese non dOiga- 
haanty* " At the distribution they preferred the weightiest and clearest 
words significant of this mystery, in such manner, however, as not to tie 
themselves dovm to fixed and stated expressions." And the variety tised 
herein, both by Greek and Latin churches, is worth our notice, as he 
teUs us. Contra adveraariorum superstitionem, qui sacramentorumj turn 
distribtUionem turn consecrationem, certis verbis adligare voltieruniy ''In 
opposition to the superstition of the papists," (which it were to be wished 
they had kept to themselves,) " who would have both the consecratioD 
and distribution of the sacraments, confined to a set of words."/ 

« ut lup. p. 98. « Relig. of Irish, cap. It. p. SI. 

« For the East, Vid. Socmt. Hlfet lib. [▼.] cap. [zxii.] napi wti^cut epnvKtiait rfiv c^Av, om^' 
tlptiv ffvfi^vovvat AXX^XoiV 6vo Iwi r6 avr6, " In all obsenraoccs connected with the prqrcrii 
we shall not be able to find ttro sections of the church agreeing with each other." 

For the West. Innocentius Epist. ad Decentium. Dirersa in diversis locis celebrari Tidcotur, 
" Divers rights iq»pear to be performed In divers places." 

For the South. Augustin. Lib. De Baptism, contra Donat. [lib. vi. cap. xxr.] 

' Ut diversi et schisroatici iUi ordinea, quibus Hibemia pene tota delusa est, ubi que estbolieo, 
et Romano cedant officio, " That those conflicting and schismatical modes of service, with whick 
almost all Ireland is deluded, may everywhere give place to the catholic and Roman manner of 
officiating.'* Usher, fbid. 

• Da MJaa. p. I4S. / p. U5. 


Yet how superstitious soever thej were, in using their canon as a 
charm, so as a word, a syllable might not be changed ; more liber^ 
was lefl and used, as to the words in the distribution of the eucharist ; 
even afler Charles the Great had suffered himself to be abused, as the 
pope*s executioner, in forcing some uniformity according to the Romish 
orders, on some of his subjects. 

Agobardus, archbishop of Lyons (famous, as for his oppontion to 
images, so for his endeavours to reform the corrupt service of those 
times) could not well like that common Roman form, The body of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, &c. since he was only for Scripture expressions in 
the public offices ; Cum prcBter Scripturas admittere in sacria officUs nihil 
veUet, Whether he was wisely or piously disliked for this, they who 
have a due reverence for the Scripture, are more fit to be judges, than 
either Baronius, or his epitomator/ who says, ch mmiam mam Bcnqmlann 
totem kaud quamputavit conaecuiua ghriam^^ " On account of his extreme 
scrupulosity, he gained but little repute." 

The words, which Adrian the Second used in giving the communion 
to Lotharius, were far from any prescribed form. Post miuarum solm- 
nia, acmctam ei communionem porrigenSj in iUum hac verba aliocutua eaU^ 
Si innoxium te recognoacia a prohUnto et interdicto tibi a Nicolao aduUerU 
acelere; et hoc fixa mente atatutum Juibea, ut nunquam didma vitca turn 
Wcddradce peUicia tucB dudum a te repudiata miacearia nefario concubitu; 
fiducialiter accede, et aacramentum aahUia catemcB Hbi ad remiaaianem pec- 
catorum per futurum percipe : ain autem tua conacientia te accuaatj tequ§ 
lethali vulnere aaziciatum proclamat, out iterum redire mente diapoma m 
mcechice volutabrumj nequaquam attmere prceaumaa, ne forte ad judicium et 
condemnationem tUn adveniat, quod fideUbua ad remedium prcaparamt 
Divina providentiOy* " After the solemnisation of the sacred services, as 
he handed him the holy communion, he addressed him in these words, 
' If thou art conscious of being innocent of the crime of adultery ^bid- 
den and interdicted by Nicolaus, and hast resolved with stedfast purpose 
never all the days of thy life to have sinful intercourse with Waldrada, 
thy concubine, now at length divorced from thee, draw near in fidth, 
and take for the future the sacrament of thy eternal salvation for the 
remission of sins. But if thy conscience accuses thee, and proclaims 
thee to be wounded with a mortal wound, or if thou art minded in thine 
heart to return to the mire of thy adultery, by no means presume to 
take it, lest that which Divine providence has prepared for the fidthful 
as a cure, become to thee judgment and damnation.' " 

The words, with which the same Adrian delivered the sacrament to 

• epitomlstr. * Spond. ad an. Ml. d. S. • Spond. ad an. 8S8. a. 4. 

' In Refin et Almon, Ub. ▼. eap. xzL 


tbd rert of rhe Frencb, are neither tbe same with these now deacnbed^ 
nor with those in the uussal (the words in that administratiou being but 
the tak" of these) aod the form changed too (as well ae tliti matter) being 
expressed bjpotheticaUy. Si domirto et t^i tuo Lothario in (jhj€ct& ailui- 
Wii crimimfavorem nanprmstitiiti^ tieque conjsenstim iribui^i^ ei Waidrada 
cUiisve <ih ha/o »uU apostolica €J:^communicalis 7ion cormnunu^asti ; cOTpia 
et tmkguis Domini r*<wfn Jesu Chriiti prosit iibi in vitam mterruEm^^ ** If 
thou hast given no favour^ and hast yielded no consent to Lothaiios 
thy lord and king in the cnrii<> of rti^iilt+rv hM f-o his charge , and hast 
not oommunieated with Waldrada, or others who have been excom- 
municated by this apostolic see, may the body and blood of our Lord 
Jesus Christ bene 6 1 thee imto life eternal." 

Locig afler this, Leuthericus, archbishop of Sienna, in the delivery 
of the sacrament, used these words ; Accipe, si cUgnus es, "^ Beceire it, 
if thou art worthy J' Robert king of France checked him for it, not 
because thereby he transgressed any established order ; but becauM 
the king, (not well enough acquainted with the apostle's discourse, 
1 Cor. xi.) supposed there were none worthy to receiye ; Cum tamm iU 
nuUua qui habeatur cUgnuSy '^ Since there is no one who can be deemed 
worthy ;** whereas Leuthericus' mode of distribution implied, [that] none 
that were not worthy should receive. As for Spondteus* inference, that 
this bishop was no Mend to transubstantiation, because he delivered 
not the eucharist in the words of the missal, Corpus Domini Jesu Christi 
sit tibi solus animoe et corporis^ " May the body of our Lord Jesus Christ 
be to thee salvation of soul and body," upon a supposition, it seems, that 
the monster they are in love with, is thereby countenanced ; whether 
it is just or no, I leave those to consider, whom it concerns.^ 

To add no more, surely the words wherewith Gregory the Seventh 
took the sacrament himself, and would have delivered it to the emperor, 
cannot be found in any mass-book. They are thus represented by Spon- 
d»us^ out of Lambertus, Cumque sacratissimam eucharistiam sumptuna 
mcmu earn teneret, vocato rege ac universa adstantium multitudiney conU- 
statum esse, earn se sumere in judicium criminum, quce schismatici adversus 
ipsum promulgassent; ut si innocens esset, absolveretur ab omni suspicione, 
si vera reus, subsitanea periret morte, '^ When about to take the sacred 
eucharist, as he held it in his hand, he called the king and the whole 
multitude of by-standers to witness, that he took it as an ordeal in 
reference to the charges which the schismatics had propagated to his 
prejudice; so that if he were innocent, he might be freed from all sus- 
picion ; but if guilty, might suddenly die," 

Or those of Paschal Second, who, cum in ceUbraJtione misses traderei 

• oounterptrt. • Id. Ibid. « Spond. ad an. 1004. n. U. ' Ad an. 1077. n. iL 


Henrico imperatori V. corpus et sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Chriati: 
Domine imperator, inquit, hoc corpus Domini natum tx Maria virgine^ 
passwn in cruce pro nobis, sicut sancta et apostolica tradit eccUsia, damns 
tihi; in confirmationem pacisy inter me et te, idgue factum an. 1111, idibus 
Aprilis, teste Sigeberto,** " When in the celebration of the mass he 
handed to the emperor Henry V. the body and blood of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, he said, My lord the emperor, we give thee this body of our 
Lord which was bom of the virgin Mary, and suffered for us on the 
cross, as the holy and apostolic church teaches, in confirmation of the 
peace between thee and me, made this 13th day of April, in the 
year 1111, as witness Sigebert." 

For baptism there is not any the least reason to imagine they were 
more confined to set forms, in administering it, than the eucharist. 
And therefore, where there is so little need to endeavour for a copious 
proof, we may be briefer. 

The liberty the ancients took, to use several forms in baptism, with 
great variety, to the invariable use of which, those that are for freedom 
in praying, are willingly confined ; signifies [that] they used as much 
liberty in those prayers. 

I can find no more uniformity, in their celebrating this sacrament, 
than the other. But enough may be easily found, to show, that they 
were not, they would not be, tied up to words and syllables. Even where 
varying forms might seem dangerous, they used variety of words, and 
thought an agreement in sense sufficient. And this is observable, as to 
the terms wherein Christ delivered the form of baptizing. Matt, zxviii. 
where surely, if anywhere, they would have been patient of confinement 
to all punctilios. This was accounted a form prescribed by Divine 
authority, " Leu: namque tingendi imposita est, et forma prcescripta est. 
Ite, docete nationes, tingentes eas in nomen Patris, et Filii^ et Spiritus 
JSancti, " The law of baptism is laid down, and the form is prescribed, 
< Go teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, 
and the Son, and the Holy Ghost,* " says Tertullian.* It was not thought 
that any had so much authority to prescribe, as Christ ; nor that any 
prescriptions were so punctually to be observed. And yet, even in this, 
they made account, [that] some liberty was left, and might be used ; and 
used it was accordingly, as is manifest in their practice. 

The first word," baptizing,*' some used in the first person, ego baptiso 
te, " I baptize thee ;" some in the second person, ^wnGBr^ik*^ " be thou 
baptized ;" some in the third person, fimrriCtTM 6 dtiva, " this person, or 
this servant of Christ is baptized."*^ Also they thought it as fit, to use 
in the Latin churches, tingoj (a native of the Latins) as baptizo, (an 

• Cent. xii. mp. ▼!. p. 880. * Dt B«f(tiaB. «pb zUL « TId. TbMd. LmI. Cp. 187.] 


adopted word.) QoCy^^naxk^^ItiBerffat^tdoceUi 
m nomine PatH$^ &c,^ '*Go therefore and teach all natuniay boqptiEiqg tbem 
(tingentes) in the name of the Father,** &c Tet sometimes [he uses] 
hapUzo.^ So Tertulliany^ in the place fi>reqaoted,< Namssime mgmdamtt 
ttf tmgerent in Patrem, &e. ''Lastly he commanded that they should 
baptize (tinfferent) into the Father,** &c. 80 Jerome and Aqgnstiii/ 
render the words of Christ by UnffentsB.' So they nae mergo^ or 
mergitOy for hapHzo, Thus Jerome,* Velut m lavaero^ ter caput mer- 
gitartj ^^e,g. the trine immersion in baptism;** which the Greeb 
express by r^ d^ rpU fianrridetFBai r6w MptmawJ And Tertollian,* 
dehine ter msi^tamur, " hence we are immersed thrice," t^ fwy aurh 
6 Up&px^t fUmriCfif '' the priest baptizes him thrice.** They did not 
think, it seems, that Christ himself (whaterer others take upon them) 
would tie them so precisely to his own words, but that they mi^t have 
leave to change them for others, which changed not the sense. 

The like liberty was taken, in changing the next phrase, cir 2n^ 
'' into the name,** into iw 6p6fum>f, '^ in the name,*^ as it is in Jiutiii 

It. iii. Ub. It. * Epift. iU. lib. IL • Epist. ad Jabidaii. p. W. 

* £t poit restinectlonem spondens, miMarum le dtodpulis promtBsionan Patris, et noTiiciint 
mandant, ut tingexent in Patrem, et Filium, et Spixitun Sanctum, non in unmn. Mam nee mbmI* 
•ed ter, ad singula nomina in pexvonas singulas tingimur, '' He pledged himaelf, after his resume- 
tion, to send on bis disciples the promise of the Father, and lastly commanded them to baptise (at 
tingerent) into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Not into one. Neither once only. 
But thrice are we baptised (tingimur) into the separate Persons on the mention of each sepstst* 
name." Tertull. adv. Pxax. cap. xxvi. 

Neque quicquam refert inter eos, quos Johaimes in Jordane, et Petrus in Tiberi tinzit, *'N«r 
is there any difference whom John baptised (tinxit) in the Jordan, and Peter in the Tiber." D* 
Baptia. cap. [iv.] et cx^. six. Diem baptismi solenniorem pascha pnestat, cum et paado Domijii, is 
quo tingimur, adimpleta est. 

* De Bapt cap. xiii. and Ad Praxeum, ci^. xxvi. 

/ In hoc ergo fonte, antequam tos toto corpore tinguerimus, interrogarimus, credis in Deum, ftc. 
" Hence before we baptised (tingerimus) you in your whole body, in this font, we aslied, Beliereit 
thou in Qodr August. Hom. [iii.] De Myst. Baptism, ad Neophyt. in Vicec. p. 608. t Ytm. 

' Multa, qusB per traditionem, in ecdesiisobservantur, autoritatem sibi scriptse legisusurpsTnari, 
▼elut, in lavacro ter mergitare, " Many practices which are observed in the church by tisdida 
have obtained the authority of a written command, «. g. the trine immersion of baptism." Hieroajn* 
adv. Luciferian. [Ed. Paris. 1706, tom. iv. coL 291.] 

* Basil, de Spirit. Sancto, cap. xxvii. 

* Dehine ter mergitamur, amplius aliquid retpondentes, quam Dominus in evangeUo dctenni- 
navit, "Hence we are immersed thrice, making somewhat more lengthened responses tbsa tto 
Lord has prescribed in the Gospel." Tertull. De Cor. Mil. exp. ilL 

Mysterium Trinltatis in sacramento bi^tismatis demonstratur, dum tertia vice retus homo mef(i- 
tur, " The mystery of the Trinity is set forth in the sacrament of baptism, seeing the old nan if 
plunged thrice." August. De Temp. Senn. cci. [Ed. Antw. Serm. xl. Append.] Quando in Hlatsd 
lavacro tertio Christianl merguntui, " Christians are immersed in the laver of salvation thrice." 
Hom. [xc] De Temp. [Ed. Antw. Serm. xxlv. Append.] Mira Dei pietasl peccator mergitur undii. 
" Marvellous compassion of God I A sinner is washed in the waves." Paulin. Epigr. xii. *d 

As great a change, as if any amongst us now, administering baptism, instead of I baptise tbeef 
should say, I dip, or, I wash thee, in the name, Iec. 

' Tpia fiawricfutra fiiat /iiv^iar, " Three inunerslons ibr one initlatira.'' Can. Apoat. 1. 

Diooys. Xeclsa. HIar. [eap. U. p. 78, D.] in Vosa. « Apol. U. p. 159, 160^ 


And the Latins, for in Jiomen, "into the name," (as it is in Tertullian") 
use in nomine, ** in the name," as in Cyprian, supra ; a difference which 
some coimt more than syllabical. Yet Tertullian varies more, when 
he leaves it (the name) quite out ; which he does more than once : 
Novissiine inandcmit, ut tingerent in Patreniy FiUum, et Spiritum Sanctum,^ 
^ Lastly, he commanded them to baptize into the Father, the Son, and 
the Holy Ghost." Ite ad docendaa et tmgendas nationes in Patrem^ Filiwn^ 
et Spimtum Sanctum f "Go teach and baptize the nations into the 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." They thought it no variation 
of the rule, where the sense and design of it was observed, to change 
something of the expression.** And would they presiune to exact a 
more punctual conformity to rules of their ovm making, than what they 
thought Christ required to his ? Or would they pay more to any 
human constitution, than they made account was due to the Divine ? 
Their practice obliged them to leave others as much, or more liberty 
than here they took ; and neither to fetter others, nor be fettered by 
them, with words and syllables, when the great Lawgiver had lefl them 
so free. 

But proceed we to what may seem yet more considerable. Some 
thought themselves not ol)liged to baptize expressly in the name of the 
sacred Trinity, fi^ iroitla-OoA r^y rpiados eiriKKrja-iv, so as to name every 
Person as they are mentioned. Matt, xxviii. 19, but in the name of 
Christ, or of the Lord Jesus, or of the Lord. 

And this, supposed to be the practice of the best times, hath great 
advocates ; Basil^ defends it thus, ^ yiip rov Xptarov irpoajiyopia^ roO 
navTos tarip SpoXoyia, " the naming of Christ is an acknowledgment of 
the whole Trinity :" ^rjkol yap t6v tc xp^a-atrra Gc6v, Kat t6v xp^a-$€VTa 'Yiir 
Koi TO XP^^V^ '■^ Up€Vfui/ " For it equally sets forth God who ^anoints, 
and the Son who is anointed, and also the unction, which is the Spirit," 
which are almost the words of Irenaius before him,^ In Christienim nomine 
suhauditur, qui unxit, et ipse qui unctus est, et ipsa unctio in qua unctus est 
Et unxit quidem Pater, unctus est vero FiliuSj in Spiritu qui est unctio j 
<< For in the name of Christ is understood, he that anoints, and he that is 
anointed, and the unction with which he is anointed. And the Father 
indeed anoints, but the Son was anointed, with the Spirit, who is the 

Add to these, Theophylact, who affirms, Thv fiajrriCofJLtvov th to Svofia 
*lfjo-ov XpioTovj th Tpidda ^cmrl^tirOtu, ovk arrofitpiCofitvov rov Harpos, Ka\ 
Tov *Ytov, Koi Tov ayiov Hvtvparos.,^ " That he who is baptized into the 

• De Baptit. cap. xiii. * Adv. Pnzeam,cap. xxvl. <* De Prvacrlp. cap. Till. 
•' Vicec. de Bapt. p. 395. Zulngl. de Bapt. torn. ii. p. 201. PIseat. in Blatt. xxTiii. 

' Lib. de Spiritu Bancto, [cap. xii.] / p. 257. r Adr. Hsrea. lib. iii. cap. xx. p. t09. 

* In Act. iL 



name of Jesus Christ, is baptized into the Trizdty; the Father, 
and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, being not parted.** To the same 
purpose Ambrose also following Basil in the defence of it, says, Qui umm 
dixity Trinitatem siffnavit. Si Christum dkas^ et Deum Pairem^ d quo 
unctua est Filius, et ipawn^ qui unctus est, FUhtm, et Spiritum, quo unctm 
est, designastif si tamen id etiam cords camprthmdaBf &c. "He who 
names one Person indicates the Trinity. If thou namest Christ, thoa 
hast named Grod the Father, by whom the Son is anointed, and the 
Son himself, who is anointed, and the Spirit, with which he is anointed, 
provided thou includest these mentally." If the Person was named 
so as the rest were understood, they thought the prescribed form 
sufficiently observed, though it was not verbatim repeated, but liberty 
taken, to change either the words, or their order. So these exceUent 
persons judged, in reference to the form of baptizing, which our great 
Lord delivered to us. And can we think they would take upon than 
to prescribe more imperiously, or would more punctually observe it, 
if others had imposed a form, especially in prayers, where varying is 
more tolerable, and the prescribers of no authority, in comparison of 
him who authorised the form before us ? 

Some used this variation in Cyprian*s time, Quofnodo ergo quiiicm 
dicunt — modo in nomine Jesu Christi, ubicunque et qvomodocunque gentiha 
baptizatum remissioneni peccatorum consequi j}0S8e,^ "According to which 
some say that a heathen, by whomsoever or howsoever he l^ baptized, 
provided it be in the name of Christ, may obtain remission of sins/* 
He allows it not indeed, but it seems some of those that were not of 
his opinion, for rebaptizing of the baptized by heretics, differed from 
him in this. A little before also he says,*' Nan est autem quod cdiqnk * 
ad circumueniendam Ohistianam veritatem Christi nomen oppotiat, ut 
dicat, in nomine Jesu Christiy ubicunque et quomodocvnque baptizatiy 
gradam baptismi sunt consecuti, &c. " It is not as one who to corrupt 
Christian truth puts forward the name of Christ, repi-esents the matter 
when he says, Those who in any place wliatsoever, or by whomsoever, 
are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, obtain the grace of baptism.** 

Others, though they expressed the three Persons in administering 
baptism, yet did they not tie themselves precisely herein to the words' 
of Christ, but enlarged upon them, adding something tliereto, as the 

• De Spiritu Sanct. lib. i. cap. Hi. * Ep. Ixxiii. ad Jubaianuni, page 223. <- pa^rc 224. 

' Fortaase Stephanus Koroa episcopiu, " Perhaps Stephanas bishop of Rome." 
' Those that will have the three Persons to have been always named, deny not, but that their names 
were used with some Tariation; vid. Vicec. de Baptis. Rit.lib. iv. cap. v. Non negaverim tamen 
probabile videri, Christi, aut Jesu, aut Jesu Christi, nomen aliquandiu oppositum fuisM, addito 
item Domini nostrl sed non omisso Patris et Spiritus Sancti nomine, hac forma. Ego te baptizo in 
nomine Patris, et Filil ejus Jesu Christi Domini nostri, et Spiritus Sancti, " I would not deny 
however that the name of Christ, or Jesus, or Jesus Christ, in some cases was used with tbe 
addition also of the words, our Lord, but not to the omission of the names of the Father, and of 


former detracted. This is evident in Justin Martyr, who tlnis repre- 
sents the words they used in baptizing," 'Ett* 6v6jjmtos tov ILarpos rSav oK<ov 
Ka\ btaTTiWov 660V, Koi tov (rayrrjpos rjfiStv *lrj(rov Xpiarov, Koi IlvfVfxaTOS aylov 
TO €v T^ vSoTi t6t€ \ovTp6v iroiovirrai, " In tlie name of the Father of 
all things, and of our Lord Grod, and of our S;iviour Jesus Christ, and 
of the Holy Spirit, this washing \vitli water is performed ;" and after- 
wards, with some variety in the latter clauses, thus,* Kai eV 6v6fiaTos 
dc ^Irjo-ov Xpiarov, tov oravpoiBtirros, erri Uovriov Uikdrov, koi iir 6v6fxaT09 
TlvtvfiaTOs ayiovj u bia rav 7rpo<f>riT£}V 7rpo€Krjpv(€, koi Kara tov ^lijaovv mivTa^ 
6 (f><iiTi(6fKvos Xovrroi, "And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was 
crucified by Pontius Palate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who 
by the prophets foretold all things concerning Jesus, he that is to be 
illuminated is baptized." In which words are contained the regalafidei^^ 
" the sum of the confession of faith,'' as he expressed it. And it' they 
used the words of that ride in baptizing, they tied not themselves to 
one form of words in that administration. For a confession of faith, 
in a common unvariable form, they had not in that age, nor long aft<.'r. 
AU the uniformity to be found herein, is a harmony in sense,*' while 
there is in words a great diversity. The variety of expressions, used 
by the ancients (Justin Martyr, Irenajus, Clemens, Tertullian, Novatiau, 

the Holy Ghost, afler this manner, I baptize tliee in the name of the Father, and of his Sou Jcius 
Christ our Lord, and of the Holy Ghost." 

Cyprian, though for the other, rejects not this, expounding Act. ii. Jesu Christi mentioneni facit 
Petrus, non qua«i Pater omitterctur, sed ut Palri quoquc Filius adjungcretur, &c. " Peter makes 
mention of Jesus Christ, not that the Father was omitted, but that tlic Sou also might he seen to be 
joined with the Father." Ki>ist. ad Jubaian. 

« Ai)0l. ii. p. 159. [Ed. Pari:). 1636, p. !>4, A.] « page 160. 

' 'i\ TOV Kavwva T^t ii\.r\Otia^ iiKXivh iv iavrif KuT^xwv o¥ dick tov fiafrTiafAtirov etXrt^, *' He who 
retains witliin himself, and without swerving, the rule of truth, which he received by means of his 
baptism." Iren. lib. i. cap. i. p. 34. So Basil, Auriiv di tttv 6fio\o^iav Ttit viVrcMr, vtirTci'tiv ccc 
llarepu Kui 'Yuv Koi u7iovIIver>/iia. M iroicav fpapifidrttv ix'^t^^' <* M^ 7<'(> ^* Trtr tov fiafrrianarot 
watfudootw, *' Out of what writings do we receive the very confession of faith ; namely, that we 
believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost ? For If we derive it from the tradition 
concerning baptism," &c. De Spiritu Sanct. cap. xxvii. p. 274. Facillua inveniuntur heeretlci, 
qui omnino non baptizent, quam qui symboli verbis non baptizent, " Heretics who do not baptize 
at all may be more readily met with, than heretics who do not in baptism use the words of a 
creed." August, contr. Don. lib. vi. cap. xxv. 

"Exwf t6 KC^ciXoiov rn^ irt'tfTCWt iv tw fianricfAartf Kai ruiv Tptclw afiaiv o^pa'iiot, " Having a 

summary of the fUth in b^tism, and in the three holy seals." Athanas. contr. Sabell. Orat. torn. i. 
p. 513. [Ed. Colon. 1686, p. 658, B.] 

^ Cur enim veteres, non appellatione profi»Bionis varlare potuerint, quando professionls et 
regular ipsius sententiis, earumque nrdine et verbis, tantopere discreparent ? " Why could not the 
ancionts, seeing they so widely differed as to the articles of the creed itself, and of the rule of faith 
and their order, and the words in which they were expressed, vary as to calling it the creed?" Voss. 
De. iii. Symb. diss. i. sec. xx. p. 17. 

Horum locorum collatio docere nos potest, cum veteres regulam fldei aut baptism I immutabilem 
dicunt, non ad certam et receptam ublque verborum fbnnulam coi respicere, sed ad vim aique 
sententiam interrogationum, "A compariaon of these pauages may teach us that when the ancients 
called the rule of Caith and of baptism immutable, they do not refer to a fixed and universally 
received form of words, but to tho ftnve and meaafng of the Intorrogntorin." Gxot In Matt, xxviil. 
19. QuiB ipsa Cypriani verba ostanden mihl TUntur, qnnMiim life icgulam fldei, ipsiiu state, 
nondum adstiietam fliiase UUe TeiWs, qnibiia peelaa Hilpta tevmitiir; earn tamen eandcm ftiisse 
regul* sententiam, mlnline A d wMf a n i lwii, "Tkammy woidi ct Gyprin seem to me to show 

X 2 


&c,, which jou may see in Grotius on Matt xzviii. 19,) in giving an 
account of its several articles, makes this manifest, [that] they were not so 
strict and severe in anything, as in the rule of faith. In other matters 
though ecclesiastical, they allowed more variableness and greater 
latitude. Hoc lege fidei manente^ ccBtera jam diadplmoB et canvenatiatiis 
admittunt novitatem correctionisy "Provided that the rule of faith be 
unchanged, other matters both of discipline and life admit of reforma- 
tion,'' says Tertullian ;' and yet in this, they were satisfied with such 
an uniformity as consisted only in sense, not in words. To one form of 
words in this nicest point, and where wary'mg was most hazardous, 
they neither limited others,^ nor would be confined by others, no nor 
by themselves. We have seen this before in Justin Martyr. Tertullian 
(and Irenseus, with others in Grotius) is also a very pregnant instance 
of it.^ He gives several accounts of the rule of faith, which neither 

that the creed, or rule of fkith, wm n(^ m yet, in hU time, tied down to those words in which we 
afterwards find it written. At the same time it is not to be doubted that the sense of the rule wu 
the same." Id. ibid. 

In Tertullian, lib. De Prseacrlpt. cap. xiii. contra Praz. cap. U. et lib. De Veland. Virg. cap. i. 

Vide two diftrent fbrms in Irenco, lib. iii. cap. iv. page 172, and lib. i. cap. ii. pp. 34, S3, edit 
Gallnsq. ■ De Virgin. Veland. 

* And when the creeds had more stated finms, in the fourth century, in the same country the 
creeds of seTeral cities were not uniform, r.^. in Italy, that of Rome much differed from that at 
Aquileia, vide Rufin. and Voss. de Symb. page 29, kc. And that of Ravenna trtnn. both. Ush. de 
Symb. page 7. Petr. Chrysol. Senn. Ivii. &c. De Maximo Taurinensi. 

* The creed {regula fidei, 0^0X0710 iriVrewr) was at first no more than the words wherewith 
baptism was to be delivered, Matt, xxviii. 19. Parker, De Descens. Voss. DeSymb. p. S3. It was 
enlarged by degrees, and till it grew too large, probably was used in the delivery of baptism, as we 
have it in Justin Martyr, no other than a commentary, instead of the text ; afterward the use of 
it was, to bo rehearsed by the competfutes, "candidates for baptism," before they were baptixrd, 
and so but once, or twice, or in some places thrice a year. 

[It was] not put into set form till the fourth age, or near it : and those fbrms varied in several 
places in the same country, vid. supra. 

It had no place in the church service, till near the sixth age ; for as the Lord's prayer was ased 
no where but in the eucharistical oflBce, while the orders for the catechumens were observed; «o the 
creed was not used but in baptism, or in order to it, till late. 

The first who brought it into the church service, was (not as Vossius says, Timotheus. but) 
Petrus Gnapheus. a person stigmatized for more heinous crimes than one : part or his character see 
in Evagr. lib. iii. cap. xvii. He, amongst other Innovations, introduced this, iIct^^ ^n^ri ti>» 
Kvatpia ktrtvoritrai r6 uv<rT^piov iv rrj i«rir4p</L ytpecBat, " It is SOid that Peter Gnapheus flrst 
thought of celebrating the mysteries in the evening,** and which was more, xoi kv raari «-if nfct ro 
vvfifioXov \¥j€c0at, " and of the repetition of the creed in each time of prayer." Theod. Lert. 
Collect, lib. ii. p. 189. This was about the latter end of the fifth age at Antioch, obiit an. 4s6. 
Afterwards Timotheus, a flagitious person and a heretic, vid. Spend, an. 511. n. iii. brought it 
Into the same use at Constantinople, being made bishop there by Anastatlus, according to Boronios, 
51 1 till 517. Tijv wiVtcwc ci'-fifioXov Ka$' ^Kaarnv avva^tv \ift<r0ai waptextvatrev, iiridia^tXp iW*<» 
MoKfidovtov, wr uiTuv fii} Aexof^^*"*^ "to o-i'/x/SuXov, airuf tov troiT Xc^o/xcfov vp^rrpov l*riaV9 
vafKHTKCvrt rov Bci'ov wd0ow, r& Kaip& rfiv jtvon^t'ttv inro rov kwnntSnoy narnxh^^^^i " Hecauvd 
the creed to be said at every assembly on account of the accusation of Macedonius that he did not 
hold the fkith, whereas previously it was said only once a year, and that at the sacred preparation 
for the Divine passion, at the time the bishops are engaged in catechising." Theod. Lect. Colled 
lib. il. p. 188. 

The western churches had it from the east (this [was] not the first time the church borrowed of 
heretics, e.g., the unguent from the Valcntinians, Iren. lib. [iii.] cap. [ii.] stated fiasts (himthe 
Montanlsts) lUud symbolum, quod nos ad imitationem Grecorum intra missas adsumimus, " That 
Oreed which in imitation of the Greeks we have received into the church services." Walaft d 


agree with what is given by others, in mode of expression, neither with 
one anotlier ; there being no coincidence in any one phrase observable 
through the whole." And is it probable that diey who left themselves 
and others so much liberty about formulas of creeds, would deprive 
others of it, or be bereaved of it themselves, in forms of prayer, (in 
baptism, or elsewhere) where there is much more reason for more 
liberty ? How incredible is it, that their prayers were limited to a set 
of words, when the regula fidei, which more required it, had no such 
confinement I Surely if they had judged any such limits requisite in any 
thing of this nature, they would have given them to that rule of faith. 
No prayers, supplications, lauds, litanies, &c. could, in their judgment, 
require such strict, and precise, and unalterable bounds, as that which 
they counted and styled iinmohilem et irreformabilem, " immoveable and 
not admitting of amendment." 

The apostles* creed may be objected, but is sufficiently removed by 
the premises. Those who can believe what pleaseth them, may receive 
the story of Ruffinus concerning it ; but his faithfulness and credit is 
not so much with others, as to advance it above a fable. And it seems 
incredible, that there should be a form among Christians, of the apos- 
tles' composing, and yet the ancients, for above three hundred years, 
take no notice of it, yea take the boldness to vary from it ; and, which 
is more, to prefer those of their own conception before it, on the 
solemnest occasions. 

Or, if there were such a form of the apostles', and the ancients would not 
confine themselves to it, as it is apparent they did not ; much less would 
they be confined to forms of prayer, composed by ordinary persons. 

In the Constitutions ascribed to the apostles, Uie creed to be used in 

Strabo De Reb. Eccles. can. xxii. Pint it wai used in Spain, Cone. Toled. iii. can. il. an. 589, P«r 
omncs eccletiaa Hiapaniae et Galliciae, lecundum formam orientalium ecdesiarum, concllii 
ConsUntinopolitani symbolum fidei recitetur, " Throughout all the churches of Spain and Galida 
the creed of the Constantinopolitan council Is recited according to the manner of the eastern 

In France and Germany not untU long after, Walafir. Strab. De Reb. Eccles. cap. xxii. Sed apud 
Gallos et Germanoe, post dejectionem Fslicis hsretici sub gloriosisslmo Carolo, Francorum rege, 
idem symbolum latiua et crebrlus in missarum ooppit oflBciia iterari, " But among the Gauls and Ger- 
mans after the discomfiture of the heretic Felix, in the time of the most illustrious Charles, king of 
the Franks, the same creed began to be repeated in the church services over a greater extent of 
country, and with more frequency." And the Constantinopolitan creed rather than the Nicene, for 
a very weighty reason, (quod aptius videretur modulis musicis, " because it was more easily set 
to music,") of which Baronius seems ashamed. Ad an. 809. n. iii. Felix condemned, an. 794. 

It was not used at Rome till an. 1014, when Bemo Augiensis (lib. De Misa.) relates, [that] he 
being at Rome, Cum Romani presbyteri ab eo interrogarentur, Cur poet eyangellum (ut in aliis 
ecclcsiisflebat) symbolum non canerent? " When the Roman presbyters were asked by him. Where- 
fore they did not (as was done in other churchea) chant the creed after the reading of the Gospel f '* 
they gave him a reason, such a one as it is ; and adds, Imperatorem (Henric. I.) Benedicto 
Papa persuasisse ut ad publican mliaam aymbolum decantarent, "The Emperor (Henry I.) 
prevailed on Pope Benedict to order tli* fihaaHng of tht ci«ed during public senrioa.** In Spond. 
ad an. 1014, n. Ul. « De Virg . Veland. 


baptism, is exceeding different from that called the apostles*, not only in 
words, phrases, order, but in the omission of divers articles, and the 
adtlition of others." 

Moreover, Basil ^ tells us, [that] the confession of faith is conformable 
to the delivery of baptism, and the doxology conformable to the con- 
fession of faith ; that they are all three much alike. That they bap- 
tized as they had received, and believed accordingly as they baptized, 
and gave glory just as they believed ; that there was a necessary and 
inviolable coherence betwixt these, and that an innovation in any of 
these, would destroy the whole, ^ iv tovtois KaumrofiUij rov vturr^ 
^orri KoraXva-is. But he does not think the change of phrase and words 
therein is such an innovation, if it remain tlie same in sense, ravr^p vp^ 
didvoiav, for he himself used tlie doxology very variously, and would not 
be bound up to one form, in the expressing of but four or five words. 
And by what liberty he took in this, he shows what might be taken in 
the rest. Two days befoi-e the writing of this book, in prayer with the 
people, €ifjL(f}oT€p<ii>s bo^Xoyiavj " he used the doxology two ways" (both 
differing from that which is usual) as he tells us,^ Tf Ge^ koX JJarpi ww 
fJk€v fiera tov 'Yiov avv t^ Ilycv/iari ayc^, vvv di dia rov 'Yiov (v ayita nycvfum, 
" Glory to God and the Father, (adding) sometimes, with the Son, toge- 
ther with the Holy Ghost ; sometimes, by the Son, in the Holy Ghost ;" 
but this is but a taste of his variety. Ho that will observe how it is 
used in this book, and in the end of his homilies, may find it diversified 
near forty several ways, and rim almost into so many changes, as so 
few words are capable of. One may think they are put to hard shifts 
for proof of the prescribed forms in question, who are glad to make the 
ancient use of the doxology one of their arguments. We see it would 
not serve their tiuni, if it could be proved, that they were as much 
limited to forms of j)rayer in baptism, as they thought themselves con- 
fined to the words of Christ, m delivering the form of baptizing. Those 
that thought a ravr^v npos didvoiav, " a conformity in sense" suflicient, where 
Christ gives the direction, might with much reason judge this enough, 
or too much, when men only prescribe ; and in cases too, where a 
greater latitude is safer. Their practice, in the severals** premised, show, 

• Vid. lib. vil. cap. xlU. 

* 'llv ^awTifofiet^ii, o'vTtt KU4 irio'TCi'Civ o^«i'XoirTer, ofioia* T<f fiawritrnari rijv OfioXo^iav Karatf 
Ot'^icOa, <7V7X*'pn<r<<TW<rai' iifiiv ^K ritr aurnc unoXovBta^, ifioiav Tf} iriartt, rijv dofav uwo^iiowai — iT-» 
Y.-Cfi ii/iuv diiaerniTiaaat,-, fiij fiairTi(^tiv tSit vnptXti/Joficv' nM*? irtcrrei'Civ wr i^aKritrOn^t* , if fi»} dofci* 
(c(v u>\ wdriarfi-KafJitt-' ^iiKvi'Tca fup riv ti Mf ovK ^vafKuia Kat ap^nKTOf n irpof aXXrjXti TOi'Twr uco- 
XovOia. o*K ovx't ii i'v rotnott Kiuiojunia, k.t.X. "Sincc we ought 80 to believe as we are baptised. 
We lay down ;i cunfcssion of Taith ciirrespcndcnt to baptism. Lot them allow ur to ofler the dox- 
olopr>- ill curreitpuiulunce nith ttie faith, by roafton uf the same iiiReitarahle connexion. Let them 
teach ua not to ba[>ti2c as we arc taught, or not to btlieve as we are baptized, or not to olfer the 
doxology as we have believed. For let any one show, that there is not a necessary and unbroken 
connexion of these things one with another." De Spir. Sanct cap. xxvii. p. 274. [Ed. Par. 1723. 
torn. iiL p. 57.1 *" cap. i. 'particulars. 


[that] they knew no such prescriptions, nor would have honoured them 
with any more observance, or so much. 

To proceed, there was a mode of renunciation generally used in bap- 
tism, aud a general agreement to use the same in sense ; and yet, as to 
words and syllables, a strange variety ; when as* here, if anywhere, a 
commou rule enjoining uniformity in words might have been expected, 
and in such a case, if in any, would have been observed. I have taken 
notice of more than twenty ** variations of this so short a sentence ; and 

• whereas. 

* GriKenes, Quid denunciaverit dUbolo, non te usarum pompU cjiu, et Toluptatlbui paritorum, 
" Why has he renounced the devil, the use of hit pomps, and obedience to his pleasuiea V* In Ep. 
ad Rom. Universis aliis diis et dominis, " In fine all other gods and lords together.* Homil. Till, 
in £xod. 

Coni$taiitiu8, (de se,) Renuncians Satanae pompis et operfbus ejus et unirersis idoUs mana flMtif, 
credere me in Deum professus sum, '* Renouncing Satan, his pomps and works, and all idols mads 
with hands, I profess that I believe in God." In Edict, ad Syhrest. 

Cyril. Hierosolym. Catech. i. MyHtag. pp. 228, 229. [Ed. Oxon. 1703, p. 279.] 'AX\* i^At &«ov<tv 
rera/ie'irn t^ Xti^^ wr irf>or iruf>6vra elirciv, 'AiroTciffO'o^at vo\ Zarav^, %ai mOuak raXt 9p70if aov,— icoi 
wciari Tj; trofiwfj avrov, — Kat wdtr^ tjj XuTpei'f aov, " As soon as thou hearest, thou ait to sajr with 
outbtrctched hand as to one present, I renounce thee, Satan, and all thy works, and all his pomp, 
and all his service." 

Ephrem. Syrus. lib. De Poenit. cap. t. Abrenuncto tibl Satan, et cunctis operibua tuis, " I 
renounce thee, Satan, and all thy works." 

Basil. De Spir. Sane. cap. xxvii. [Ed. Par. 1722, torn. iiip. 55, B.] says there was no prescrlptioii 
for it. 'A\\(t 6i: liaa irepi to ^irritrna uKordtrtreaBai rtf ZuTavyt to* fOK iiffiXotv a^ov, in woiat 
IffTt 7/>a^nr, " Out of what writing is derived tlie renunciation of Satan and his angels at baptism f* 

Nu writiugM mentioned the use of any words whatsoever, any prayer at all OD those occasions, 
none enjoined any set form of prayer: but any words were so Car tmm being enjoined, that there 
were none so much as set down or mentioned in any writing. 

C>Til. Alexandrin. lib. vii. contra Julian. Ibi deposuertmos tenebras a mente nostra, et dsemo- 
niorum turbis valedixerimus, omnemque ipsorum pompam, et cultum prudentissime respuerimos, 
coiilitcraur fidem in Patrcm, " There we dispel the darkness from our minds, and bid fkrewell to 
the crowds of evil spirits, and most wisely renounce their pomp and worship : we proflest ftith in 
the Father." &c. 

Salvian. Massiliens. De Gub. Dei, lib. vi. p. 198. Abrenundo, inquls, diabolo, pompis, specta- 
culis et operibus ejus, " I renounce, sayest thou, the devil, his pomps, his shows, and his wofks." 
Quae est enim in baptismo aalutari Christianorum prima confessio, nisi ut renundare se diabolo, ac 
pompis ejus, atque ispectaculis. et operibus, protestentur f "For what is the first oonftwion of 
Christians in their quickening baptism, but a public testimony that they renounoe the devH, and 
his pomp, and his shows, and his works?" p. 197. 

Dionysius Areop. Eccles. Hierarch. [Ed. Lutet. 1015, cap. iL p. 77, D.] *E^^w9nora« ftiva^r^ 
rpU diantXeverat rtf Zurav^ Kui mpooiti ra rnx Lttora'tn^ 6fio\o^ncat' Kok rpit avr^ iLVorajiiv 
fxupTv/>opevor, " He is bid to use sufflatlons against Satan thrice, and withal to avow his 
renunciation ; and three times to testify against him his renunciation." 

Clemens Constit. lib. vii. cap. xli. ' XwatftWirtt ovv 6 fiawTiC6fAtvot iv Ty &wordcotcBaC <k«ro- 
r(i<r<ru/ia( rtf Zaravif Kai tok ffyfotv ainov, Kat ratv wofivalv atrrov, Kot ToTr Karptituv a^tnif Kat 

TOit uYY^Xoic avTovf Kai raiv iiftvpiceeiv avTov, " Then Ict the person to be b^»tiaed say publicly in 
his renunciation. I renounce Satan, and his works, and his pomps, and his service, and his angels, 
and his inventions." 

Justinian. De Episcop. Audicnt. [Cod. lib. i. tit. iv. cap. xxxiv. seet. L] 'Or sat tom Aprt ti9o»ti4vo€t, 
Kai TMf irpixrKvviTTMv u(iM/u^voir /xvffTtipt«v avroi KpoKnp^rroveiw avorArrtvBat Tff rov ArrUMifi^vov 
6aifLovo^ Xarpciy Kai »d«rj; trofiw^, " Like to those newly faiitiated, and Judged wovthy of the ador- 
able mysteries, they proclaim that they renounce the worship and all the poops of their ad^tCMiy 
the devil." 

Tertullian, De Coron. MUit. cap. ilL Bed et aliqnanto prhu In eceleda rab aatMlli nami, om- 
testamur nos renundare diabolo, et pompv, et angeUs «lns, *' A llttltirlilie Iwlbnv* tatlOfy IbIIm 
church, under the hand of the bishop, that we renctmee the devfl, and UtpflBfl* aid Ml Hftlk'* 

OpUtus Mnevit. contr. Parmenianum, lib. ▼. p. 09. [Ed. IMi. l$n, fi IMb] OMl^ Mi 
peccatores (ut vultis) interrogemus alteram geotHem, as wnn— M dIAdih ft iHM Bn^' ftk 


find no two of the many ancients who used it, to represent the usage of 
it to us, agreeing therein as to words and syllables ; nor yet have 1 met 
with two instances, where the dififercnce is not more than syllabicai : it 
may be others may meet with more ; yet if more than two, amongst 
so many intending to express the same thing, had used exactly the 

et dicat, Renuncio et credo, " On the other hand, we, who aa ye wOl hare It are offendera, interro- 
gate another who is a heathen, whether he renounces the devfl, and believes in Ood, &c. and be 
says, I do renounce and believe." 

C>'prian, Epist. v. lib. L Seculo renunclavimua cum baptiiati sumus, " We renounced the worU 
when we were baptiied.'' Stare illic potuit Dei servus, et loqui, et renunciare Christo, qui Jam 
dlabolo renunciaret et seculo, " Could the servant of God stand up there and renounce Chriift, vbo 
has already renounced the devfl and the world r" Senm. De Laps. p. 151. Ci;^u8 (mundi) pompii 
et delidis Jam tunc rcnunciavimus, cum meliori transgressu ad Dominum venimus, " We rvnounoed 
the pomps and delights of the world by a happier change when we came to Christ.'* De Habit 
Virgin, p. 107. Se camis concupiscentlis et vitiis renunciasse profitetur, " She professes that sbe 
has renounced the lusts and vices of the flesh." Id. ibid. 

Augustin, Do Symbol, ad Catcchum. lib. iii. cap. L Qulsquls huic sdificio conjungi desiderat, 
renundet diabolo, pompis, et angelis ejus, " Let whoever desires to form a part of this building, 
renounce the devil, and his pomps, and his angels." Emissa enim certissima cautione, qua tqs 
abrenuntiare omnibus pompis diaboli, et omnibus operibus ejus, et omni fomicationi diabolirc 
spoHpondistis, " That carefulness being laid aside, wherewith ye pledged yoxirsclves to renounce 
all the pomps of the devil, and all his works, and every kind of diabolical fornication." HomQ. UL 
Ad Neoph>tos. Pro ipsb enim respondent, quod abrenuntient diabolo, pompis, et operibus ejus, 
et ideo pactum, quod eum Christo in baptismi sacramento, conscribunt, custodire contendant. nee 
unquam aliquid de diaboli pompis, vol mundi istius luxuriosi* oblectationibus concupiscant, ** Let 
them answer for themselves, that they renounce the devil, and his pomps, and his works, and lo 
let them strive to keep that covenant with Christ, which they write in the sacrament of baptism, 
and let them never lust after any of the pomps of the devil, or the luxurious delight* of his 
world." Senn. De Temp, [cxvl.] 

Ambrose, Hcxaem. lib. i. cap. iv. Diccns, Abrenuncio tibi, diabole, et angelis tuis, et operibus 
tuis, et imperiis tuw, •* Saying, I renounce thee, Satan, and thy angels, and thy works, and thy 
dominion." Quando te interrogavit sacerdos ; Abrenuncias diabolo, et operibus suis .' quid rc»i)on- 
di'«ti t Abrenuncio. Abrenuncias seculo et voluptatibus ejiis i quid respondisti ! Abrenunrio. 
" When the priest asks thee. Dost thou renounce the devil, and hi» works? what dost thou reply f 
I renounce them. Dofit thou renounce the world, and its temptations ? what dost thou reply ; I 
renounce them." De Sacrament, lib. i. cap. ii. Kepete quid interrogatus sis. rccognosce, quid 
reKponderis. Renunriasti diabolo et operibus ejus, mundo et luxurla; ejus, " Remember it hat 
thou wert asked, what thou repliedst; thou hast renounced the devil and his works, the iiorld 
and its delighu." Lib. de lis qui Myster. Initiant. cap. ii. 

ChrysoHtom, Homil. xxi. Ad Pop. Antioch. p. 609. edit. Savil. ^KKOTdcaofiai cot, Zarava. %di 
rp ironwti trov, Kui rti Xarpcif cov, " I renounce thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy ser^'ire." 
*\irordc<roij,ai out, Zarava, Kai rri wofAwti a-ov, Kai rij Xur^titf. (tov, Kai toic aTji-Xoiv <rov, " I renounce 
thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy service, and thy angels." In Coloss. Horn. v. p. 122. 

M«T« rov Zarava Kai rftv uyyiXMv aifTov, Kai raintj {nofinfi) Tore awfTtiiTTtaife, *' Together with 
Satan and his angels, ye renounced this his pomp also." In' Job. Horn. i. p. 558. 

Hieronym. in Matth. v. tom. vi. p. 6. [Kd. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. cul. 17.] Quidam cc<octius 
dissenmt in baptisraate singulus pactum inire cum diabolo ct dicere, Renuncio tibi. Diabole, et 
pompffi tusp et vitiis tuis, et mundo tuo, qui in maligno positus est, " Some give a more fnrred 
explanation, that in baptism individuals enter into an agreement with Satan, and say, I renounce 
thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy vices, and thy world, which liethin wickedness." Conft's*u» e* 
bonam confessioncm in baptismo, renunciando seculo et pompis ejus. "Thou confessed»t a srnnl 
confession in baptism by renouncing the world and its pomps." In I Tim. vi. tom. viii. p. iTW. 
Secundo post baptinmuin gradu, inisti pactum cum adversario tuo. diccns ei, Renunriu tibi. 
Diaboli", et seculo tuo, ct pom pa; tua*, et operibus (al. opibus) tuis, "In the second place dfit-r 
baptism, thou cnteredst into agreemnil with thine enemy, say in}: to him, I renounce thi-v, S.itan, 
and thy world, and thy pomp, and thy works." Epist. viii. Ad Demetriati. p. 63. [Fji. |7t»r,, torn. 
iv col. 78!).] Abrenunciatiouem illani qua pracputiia dvnudamur, ante oculus collocfnius — sic 
namque dicirous, abrenunciare n«» mundo et pompis ijus, "Let us place before our eyes ilji: 
renunriation by which we became circuinclsed—for thus we speak, thiit we renounce the wurld and 
its pomps." Epist. ad Theraslam. Do Vera Circumcia. tom. ix. (Ed. 1706. tom. v. col, 155.] 


same words, (and where other things besides a rule might have 
rendered their expressions uniform) it would have been no proof 
that the words had been prescribed ; it would rather be strange, 
if in such circumstances, they should not casually fall into such an 
agreement without the conduct of any prescription. But since they 
are so far from observing the punctilios of a prescribed uniformity, and 
vary herein so much, as " one may wonder how so few words could be 
contrived into such variety >. it proves sufficiently, that they were not 
under any orders, obliging them to use precisely the same words. ^ 

And thus we find not only those of the Greek and Latin churches 
differing, or such as lived at a greater distance, and in the parts of the 
empire remotest one from another, but those of the same country and 
the same church, where, if an3rwhere, uniformity is to be looked for : we 
may observe it in Tertullian, Cyprian, Optatus, and Augustin. 

Nor do several persons only differ herein amongst themselves, but we 
may see in divers instances, one and the same person express this usage 
variously ; when as,* he that is not circumscribed by others, nor will be 
imposed on by the imperious, is constant to himself, many times, and 
varies not ^ the use of as many, or more words, than this form con- 
sisted of; and so it is represented by Cyprian, Chrysostom, Jerome, 
Augustin, Ambrose, Origen. 

Now, if in so short a sentence as this, and that universally used in 
some terms or other, with a general harmony as to the sense, and 
wherein also there is nothing of prayer, and so none of that reason 
which there is f