This book made available by the Internet Archive.

ADVERTISEMENT.

The Rev. Richard Baxter lias said, that the Rev. David Clarkson " was a divine of extraordinary worth for solid judgment, healing, moderate principles, acquaintance with the Fathers, great ministerial abilities, 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 republish his " Select Works," which have too long shared in the concealment of their venerated and modest author, but which, it is believed, are now destined to take the important place which belongs to them in the several controversies to which they respectively belong, as they are unquestionably written with acuteness and learning, moderation and charity.

° Reliquiae Baxterianae, Part iii. p. 97.

The long delay in the publication of this volume has occasioned the Committee sincere regret; but it was rendered unavoidable 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,

Secretaries. Congregational Library, March, 1846.

HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIEE AND WRITINGS

REV. DAVID CLARKSON, B.D.

There have been but few men amongst the English Nonconformists 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 born 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. 41 Tlfe 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; 6

" There is decisive evidence of this in the fact that the Corporation of London conveyed, in 1629, the manor of Bradford to John Okell, vicar of Bradford, William Lister, of Manningham, gentleman, Robert Clarkson, 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, William 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, so it is not unlikely that he received his grammar learning in the school founded in his native place by the munificence of Edward VI.

He entered 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 college. In January, 1042, 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 Thoresby's diary, witness to the intensen^ss of his attachment: " O Lord ! O Lord! what a bitter and a heavy burden 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. Oliver Heywood says that he was " a profound scholar and of excellent refined gifts, and a holy and incomparable man." [Vide Calamy's Account, ii. p. 813. Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, p. 277. Thoresby's Diary, vol. i. pp. 236, 244. Thoresby's Letters, vol. i. pp. 229, 230.]

The other was Abraham Sharp, the celebrated mathematician, the friend and associate of Flamsteed, and the correspondent of Newton, Halley, Wallis, and Hodgson. He died at Little Hortgn, 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 father of John Sharp, who was born in that town, in 1644, and consecrated Archbishop of York, in 1691. British Biography, vol vi. p. 894

to do, or which way to take. And as we walked up the street, we met a young gentleman, called David Clarkson, leading a horse. My mother asked him where he had been with that horse. Says he, ' I made an essay to go with my brother Sharp, and the army, who broke through the enemy's leaguer; but the charge was so hot I came back again, and now I know not what to do.' Then I answered, and said, ' Pray, mother, give me leave to go with David, for I think I can lead him a safe way ;' for being born in that town, I knew all the by-ways about it.

" David also desired her to let me go with him, so she begged a blessing on me, and sent me away, not knowing where we could be safe. So away we went, and I led him to a place called the Sill-bridge, where a foot company was standing; yet 1 think they did not see us, so we ran on the right hand of them, and then waded over the water, and hearing a party of horse come down the lane towards the town, we laid us down in the side of the corn, and.they perceived us not. It being about daybreak, we stayed here as long as we durst for being discovered, it beginning to be light. Well, we got up, and went in the shade of the hedge, and then looking about us, and hoping to be past the danger of the leaguer, we took to the highway, intending to go to a little town called Clayton ; and having waded over the Avater, 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 they and we walked together, and hoped we had escaped all danger, and all on a sudden a man on horseback from towards the beacon had espied us and came riding towards us, and we, like poor affrighted sheep, seeing him come fast towards us, with a drawn sword in his hand, we foolishly kept together, and thought to save ourselves by running. Had we scattered from one another, he had but got one of us. We all got into a field ; he crossed the field and came to us, and as it pleased God, being running by the hedge-side, I espied a thick holly-tree, and thought perhaps I might hide myself in this tree and escape, 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, but it is most probable that he was taken to Leeds, and exchanged

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

Xll HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

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, serjeant-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 complaints 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 February, 104;3-44, 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 be as many more." 0 The inmates of Clare Hall were subjected to the common inquisition, and Dr. Paske was removed from the mastership, and seven others were ejected from their fellowships. Among these was the celebrated Mr. Peter Gunning, who, after the Restoration, was elevated to the bishopric of Chichester, and then translated to that of Ely. " On the first of May," says he, " I was expelled the University of Cambridge, for preaching a sermon at St. Mary's against the Covenant, as well as refusing to take the Covenant." 6 It was to this fellowship that Mr. (Jlarkson was appointed ; and the circumstances connected with ii. appear to have been honourable to all the parties concerned. 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 lie was obliged to oppress." c

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

OF THE REV. DAVID CLARKSON, B.D. Xlll

The course this amiable 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 liim 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." 68

There were at this time two brothers collegians at Clare Hall, 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 distinguished by the fervour of their piety, and were, like Mr. 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. 6

Mr. Clarkson was now a tutor to the college, 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 Canterbury. This able young scholar succeeded Mr. Clarkson when he resigned his fellowship, about November, 1651; and to his tuition he also consigned the scholars then under his own care," c amongst whom was his own beloved nephew, Mr. Thomas Sharp. d

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

■ Coles' Collections, 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. 171.'3.

r Birch's Life of Tillotson, p. 381. rf Vide note, pp. ix. x.

presumed, was his marriage with Elizaheth, a daughter of Sir Henry Holcroft, and sister of his heloved friends already mentioned. She appears to have been a lady of eminent intelligence and piety, fitting to he 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, hut 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 Parliament. At a later period this agreeable village was the residence of Sir John Ireton, and Aldermen Pack and Tichbourn, who were amongst Cromwell's chief city friends, and were probably attendants on Mr. Clarkson's ministry there. 0

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 inseparable from a state of intestine warfare. When the struggle at arms happily terminated, the ministers of the metropolis resolved to continue these " Exercises," hut with a greater regard to preparation 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, i. 370, .37.5, 37fi.

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 conscience," by some of the most eminent ministers. Amongst them we find David Clarkson, the tutor, discussing " What Christians must 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 nonconformist, 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 Restoration 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 meditation, shifting from one place of obscurity to another, till the times suffered hini to appear openly. " a That comprised a period of ten years, as the first Declaration of Indulgence was not published 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 public ministry, but continued to gratify his native modesty by remaining in retirement, 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 metropolis.

The state of parties at home, and the aspect of foreign affairs, were regarded by all 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

n NeaPs Puritans, vol. v. n. 4 k

ministers resolved on a fourth course of Morning Exercises against Popery. These originated with Mr. Nathaniel Vincent, who had been 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 Justification 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 argument."

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 this; 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 herein they have proceeded with as much disregard of Christ and the

■ This discourse, with that preached by him at Cripplegate, will be found at pages 455, 471, in the present volume. Mr. James Nichols, the able editor of the latest and the best edition of the Morning Exercises, ascribes a third discourse in that collection, 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. 1682." This he has done " on the strength and credit of a List of Preachers, written in an ancient hand, and prefixed to a well-preserved copy of the volume." In our copy of his original edition there is a printed list, 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 cither 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 manuscript 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 prostituted, hut the securing and greatening of a faction which, under the profession of Christianity, might he false to all its realities. And their rule is the corrupt inclinations of depraved nature, to which they have thoroughly conformed their practical divinity; which easeth it of the duties for which it hath an aversation, how much soever enjoined; and clears its way to those sins to which it is disposed, as though there was no need to avoid them. This rule serves their design with great advantage, 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 authority 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 deplorable, for though the principles of their belief, as it is Popish, be mortally poisonous; yet there might be some antidote in the prac-ticals 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 their errors in matters of faith be 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 Christians, without which God cannot be honoured by us, nor salvation attained." a

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 Practical Divinity of the Papists, &c. pp. 1, 2.

XV111 HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

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; hut 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 Romish 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 consulted 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 authors."

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 Souls." It is comprised in ten chapters on the following subjects : 1. By the doctrine of the Romanists it is not needful to worship God really in public or private. 2. Christian knowledge is not necessary for Romanists by their doctrine. 3. Their doctrine makes it needless to love God. 4. There is no necessity of saving or justifying faith by the Romish doctrine. 5. There is no necessity of true repentance for Romanists by their doctrine. 6. Their doctrine leaves no necessity of holiness of bTe, and the exercise of Christian virtues. 7. Many heinous crimes are virtues or necessary duties by the Roman 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 Roman account; and, 10. The Roman doctrine makes good works to be unnecessary.

To those who are not familiar with the casuistry of the Romish 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 lias fortified every statement by

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

" When no other shift will serve, to hinder those from being undeceived whom they would delude, it is usual with them to make loud outcries of false citations, and that their doctrine is misrepresented." " I have been very careful," 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 faithfully, so far as I could discern it, and directed the reader where 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 mysterious 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 like 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, 13th and 14th of June, were found guilty, and sentenced 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-

" Calamy's Life and Times, i. p. 83.

ing effect on those who read their dying declarations, which were printed in various forms, and widely circulated in town and country. 0

To counteract the impressions of their 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 " Animadversions on the last Speeches of the 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 most 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, witnesses, prosecutors, have all their respective, though certainly not equal shares," b it cannot be deemed surprising that Protestant 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 confer with Bishop Lloyd, Dr. Tillotson, Dr. Stillingfleet, and others, upon the subject of a comprehension. The Cbristian spirit which Dr. Stillingfleet, when rector of Sutton, had displayed towards differing brethren in his " Irenicum," made him a promising 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. 4 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 repugnant to the genius of the nation." a

The nonconformists naturally regarded this as a great dereliction of duty on the part of the heads of the church, and they began to prepare for a battle with the champions of the establishment, 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." 6

The signal for the contest came, however, from an unexpected quarter. Dean Stillingfleet, the author of Irenicum, 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. Tins unlooked for attack, in which those who had beeu 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 nonconformists, 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, lxviii.

* Bishop Burnet's Own Times, vol. i. p. 501. ' Calamy's Life of Howe, pp. 73, 75.

C

Rise and Progress of Separation ; 2nd, Of the Nature of the Present Separation; and 3rd, 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 3—11 inclusive, in which Dean Stillingfieet treats of the episcopacy of the ancient church, 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 appeared 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 hook," entitled "Vindication of the Primitive Church against Mr. Baxter's Church History," which had been published two years before. Mr. Clarkson immediately wrote an answer, but he laid by the manuscript for many months, till in 1682 the importunity of some, and the misrepresentations 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 posthumous 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 Stillingfieet 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 imagined 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 divino. " This church was collected soon after the black Bartholomew 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,

OF THE REV. DAVID CLARKSON, B.D. xxill

then pastor of another society, at no great distance. Both congregations 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." a

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 maturity 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. " b The Doctor's complicated infirmities, however, rendered their connexion but brief, as he was called to depart 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 his will c was only executed the day before he died. Two of the witnesses

° Walter Wilson's Dissenting Churches, vol. i. p. 253.

* Orrae's Life of Owen, p. 517.

c 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 13th, 1686. I David Clarkson Gierke 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 marryage 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 as shee pleases. I give unto my Wife all my Goods, Plate, and Jewells, and make her.

c2

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 unlooked 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, 168C, 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," a 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

sole executrix of this my Will. The money that is oweing unto 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 libraries at the British Museum, Sion College, Redcross street, London Institution, and Congregational 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 followed 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 possible 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 furnished with all those endowments that are requisite in an accomplished minister of the Gospel.

" He was a man of sincere godliness and true holiness, which is the divine part of a minister, without which all other accomplishments are not likely to 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 earnestly desire to glorify him. God ordinarily works in spiritual things as in natural; for as in the production of a living creature, besides the influence of the universal cause, there must be an immediate 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. Let 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 is a cold, dead stone ; so, though with apparent earnestness 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. Volat irrevocabile tempus. The sun returns to us every 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 profitable sermon, are unacquainted.

XXVI HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

" His humility and modesty were his distinctive characters wherein he excelled. What a treasure was concealed under the veil of humility! What an illustrious worth was shadowed under his virtuous modesty! lie 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 judgment 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 pleasantness, 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, knowing 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 the 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 God. 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 colour 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 languishing distempers, which natural means coidd 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 sm'prise 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 with 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 must be added the following from the pen of the Eev. John Howe :—" His clear and comprehensive mind, his excellent learning, his reasoning, argumentative 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 Ridgley, when preaching the" funeral sermon for Mrs. Gertrude Clarkson, 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 humility. So far were Ins 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 that) a minister, (2 Cor. xi. 23,) were refreshing to many, and his course at last finished with joy." 6

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 the Holy Scriptures and Ancient Records," and which contains a great mass of additional evidence in favour of Congregational episcopacy. This was printed in 1G88, without any preface or advertisement except that

" See Preface, page 380, infra.

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

XXV111 HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIPE AND WRITINGS

from " the Stationer," Nath. Ponder, who says, " 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 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 Ions? 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 his whose name it bears." This treatise, the third 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 Episcopacy.' " 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 1689 appeared his last 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 arguments of previous writers in defence of liturgies. He appears to liave had in view, " Considerations touching Liturgies," by Dr. John Gauden, the reputed writer of E'Uav Baa-ikiKj], or the Portraiture of his Sacred Majesty in his Solitude and Sufferings;" .Sir Hammond L'Estrange's "Alliance of Divine Offices;" and Herbert Thorndike's " Religious Assemblies, and the Service of (rod." Dean Comber, therefore, published in 1690, in two successive parts, his " Scholastic History of Liturgies in the Christian Church ; together with an Answer to Mr. David Clarkson's

late Discourse concerning Liturgies," in which he follows the chronological course pursued by our author down to the year 1100, and the passages he had cited are strenuously defended from 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 js evidence that two of his daughters were greatly instructed and consoled by the perusal of several of these manuscripts. In 1696, 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. 5. 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. 11. Hearing 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 Header," by the following brief advertisement, under the joint names of the 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 conspicuous, will sufficiently recommend his worth to those who did not know him. They are printed from his original papers, and with the Divine 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 pleasing idea of the person of Mr. Clarkson. He had a round handsome 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, Bobert, named after his grandfather, and three daughters, Bebecca, Gertrude, and Katharine. Bebecca, 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 Bunhill Fields cemetery.

The two younger daughters remained unmarried. Gertrude died in London, April 23, 1701. Her pastor, Dr. Bidgley, preached her funeral sermon, which he 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, 1757, aged 84 years. a Nothing is known of his son Bobert, to whom his father bequeathed " all his books if he would prove a scholar."

In the Bev. Samuel James's " Collection of Bemarkable Experiences," there are two papers which Mrs. Combe and her sister Gertrude gave in, of their religious convictions upon uniting themselves with the Independent church assembling at the Three Cranes meeting-house, Fruiterers' alley, Upper Thames street, then under the pastoral care of the Bev. Thomas Gouge, and Dr. Thomas Bidgley. As they contain some references to their honoured father, so they will form an appropriate close to these notices.

" James's Collection of Remarkable Experiences, &c, pp. 61 — 66.

The choice experience of Mrs. Eebecca Combe, eldest daughter of the late Eev. Mr. David Clarkson, delivered by her on her admission into fellowship with the church, late under the care of the late Eev. Mr. Thomas Gouge.

In giving an account of the dealings of God with my soul, I desire truly 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 education, 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 whatever, to neglect it, calling the Lord to witness against me, if I broke this solemn engagement. But, alas ! 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 concluded 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 carnage under former convictions, together with my breaking the most solemn engagements to the Lord, wounded 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 begging a deeper sense and greater degrees of humiliation. I thought I

XXX11 HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

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 my sins, and their offensiveness to the pure eyes 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 do, and found it left me miserably short of what the law required and I wanted. I was convinced that an expectation 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 lv. 1 : " Without money and without 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 after, 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 mentioned which were very reviving. I was miserable, and that might be a plea. I might also plead his own mercy, the suitableness, the largeness, 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 will of God, 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 God, and the nature of this gift, which is free. Yea, I might plead the examples of others who have obtained this gift, 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 begun ; that regard which the Lord shows to irrational creatures : 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 faith, a sense of which was deeply impressed on my soul. rt

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 acceptable 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 person 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 was greatly delighted in frequent acts of resignation to him, desiring that every faculty 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 fortli 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, Avhich even filled my soul with wonder and love.

But this delightful frame did not long continue, for I was soon surprised with swarms of vain thoughts, which appeared in my most solemn approaches to God, and such violent hurries of temptation, as greatly staggered 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 enemies."

But these discouragements were fully removed, by reading some of

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

XXXIV HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

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 opposition 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 believing that it should be to me according to his word.

Thus after many conflicts, 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 communion I then enjoyed with my Lord by his blessed Spirit, who often filled me Avith 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 1 might never more go back to the world again.

But after all these manifestations, oh, wretched creature ! God in his providence calling me more into the world by changing my condition, 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 often neglect it, and especial')' 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 1 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 1 had so unduly set my heart on, prepared me to look for awful things, in a way of judgment from the righteous God, which 1 afterwards found; his hand was soon laid on that very object by which I had so provoked him ; for a disorder seized him. under which lie 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 without 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 my mind. Everything appeared dreadfully dark, both within and without. Oh, were it possible to describe it to others, as I then felt it, they Avould dread that which will separate between them and God! I expected, 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 conld 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 God, pardoning inicpoity, 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 even transported my very soul with love and thankfulness, beyond anything that I had experienced, in the whole of my past life.

The beginning 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 found 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 enlarged in thankfulness to God, 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 lifted \i\> 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 fears, but the blessed Spirit, by taking of the things of Christ, and showing them unto me, prevailed over the temptation.

XXXVI HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

I had a discovery of the glory 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 acceptance before God, for my justification, sanctification, and full redemption. On this foundation 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 unchanging love of the Father! 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 overwhelmed under the sense and consideration of it! 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 unworthy 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 manifested himself to me, and there is nothing 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 comfort me for ever.

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

OF THE REV. DAVID CLARKSON, B.D. XXXV11.

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.

Mr 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 unregenerate 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 convictions Avore off, yet they often 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-sufficient 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 further conceived, that if at any time I omitted secret prayer, or any other duty, yet if I repented it was sufficient; and, on this consideration I have often ventured upon the commission of sin, with a resolve to repent the next day, and then, having confessed the transgression, my conscience has been

d

XXXviii HISTORICAL NOTICES OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS

easy, and I was well satisfied. Indeed sin, at that time, was not burdensome. 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 obligation 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 universal change wrought in my soul.

After 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 definition there given of the saving act of faith, caused other apprehensions of things than I had before." I then began to see, how short I had come in all my performances of that disposition of soul which the Gospel called for, and how guilty I was while depending upon these performances for acceptance with God, not casting myself wholly and alone upon Christ, and resting on his righteousness, entirely, 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 knowledge, were beyond what is common, but 1 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 pardoning 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 Lord would pardon that great sin of unbelief, which so provoked and dishonoured him, and that he would, by his own Spirit, enable me to embrace Christ, as freely held forth in the Gospel.

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 power-

■ This is the same discourse that was useful to her sister Rebecca, and is the third in the volume, entitled "Faith," and based on Mark xvi. 16.

ful 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 faculty of my soul, as my Lord and King, then how satisfied and happy should I be !

I was under these stragglings a long time, before I came to any comfortable persuasion that I was accepted. Sins against light and love 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 sinners, 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 conscious in my secret retirements, and most solemn, close dealings with God. In short, my own soul was my intolerable burden, which made me often 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 impenitent heart can resist and prevail, to put a stop to my unbelieving 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 absolute 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 lv. 1, " For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord." These considerations 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 pleasure, 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 I was not willing to accept of Christ to

sanctify; as well as to save me ? I told her I 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 be 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, believing 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 after further discoveries, and clearer light into the deep mysteries of the love and grace of God 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" I experienced a universal change in my mind, will, and affections ; the bent of them was turned another way. The ordinances, which were once irksome, were above all things pleasant, and the return of Sabbaths continually longed for. I was very thankful it was my duty as well as privilege to set apart the whole day for the worship and glory of my Lord. I bewailed much that I could love him no more, that there was so much sin remaining in me, and which I found mixed with all that I did, and that I 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 our appeal could be made to him who knows all things, that we loved him? Under this discourse I found my heart greatly carried out in love to Christ, in all his ordinances, 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 after another, I found I sat under the word with great pleasure and enlarged affections.

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 prevailed 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 affect my sold! 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 love.

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 off. 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 often examining my heart as to its aims and ends in my public approaches, and could not but conclude 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 remaining, it caused great misgivings of heart, that things were not right with me. Yet still I had supports in my secret applications to God, that his grace would be sufficient for me, and that I shoiild be kept by his

almighty power, through faith unto salvation, which encouragements 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 sermons 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 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 ! 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 quieken-ings in my applications to Christ, and comfortable rejoicings in him. Notwithstanding all those miserable defects and failures in my poor performances, 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 God 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 apply to him with confidence and joy, as the " Lord my righteousness and strength," and gladly hope, that through that strength I shall be more than a conqueror over every disturbing 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 like him. But oh how short! how seldom are these interviews 1 my unbelieving heart still returns to its former darkness and distrust, and gives me frequent occasions to bewail the fluctuations of my weak faith. Oh that it was stronger! 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 from 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 defilements.

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 countenance, 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 off 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 1 which is so many ways betraying me into an unbelieving temper of spirit! I find I need greater helps than those may who are more established, and I dare not neglect 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 have been wishing for these advantages for a considerable time, being fully convinced that those who are members of his church,

xliv HISTORICAL NOTICES OF REV. DAVID CLARKSON, B.D.

should be building up one another. I bless the Lord that he has discovered 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 thankfully fall in with his will herein, and so take hold of his covenant in this church, expecting the blessing promised to those that are planted in his house.

Gertrude Clarkson.

TREATISES

CHURCH POLITY OF THE PRIMITIVE TIMES.

NO EVIDENCE

FOR

DIOCESAN CHURCHES,

BISHOPS WITHOUT THE CHOICE OR CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, IN THE PRIMITIVE TIMES,

AN ANSWER TO THE ALLEGATIONS OUT OF ANTIQUITY FOR SUCH CHURCHES,

AND AGAINST POPULAR ELECTIONS OF BISHOPS : IN A LATE VOLUME,

ENTITLED, " THE UNREASONABLENESS OF SEPARATION ;"

SHEWING

THAT THEY DO NOT SERVE THE DESIGN FOR WHICH THEY ARE PRODUCED.

The episcopal men will hardly find any evidence in Scripture or the practice of the apostles, for churches consisting of many fixed congregations for worship, under the charge of one person, nor in the primitive church, for the ordination of a bishop, without the preceding election of the clergy, and at least consent and approbation of the people.— Dr. Sl[illiitgfleet] Iran. p. 416.

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

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

AN ADVERTISEMENT.

The author would neither have 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 Reverend 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 encouraged 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 apprehensions rectified, if he were mistaken, or to be confirmed in his 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 himself 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 reference 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 he 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, especially 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 are 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 those bishops as our pastors, be made so 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 partial. "A church," says Dr. St[illingfleet] "may separate herself 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 with the 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 things the necessary conditions of communion, so as to cast men out of the church who yield not to them, is schismatical in so doing; for it thereby divides itself from the catholic church : and the separation from it is so far from being schism, that being cast out of that church on those terms, only returns them to the communion of the catholic 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 communion of such churches, hut those churches which departed from the catholic are guilty of the schism. " a

Upon whom this sentence falls, and who are acquitted hereby, may he easily discerned, if there he 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 he 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 ii. chap. iv. sec. iii. pp. 358, 359.

NO EVIDENCE

DIOCESAN CHURCHES,

The testimonies 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 regular church was but a particular congregation, and constituted of no more than might conveniently meet together for church-comniunion. Yet they deny not but there might be in after-times some heteroclites, churches extraordinarily numerous, so as they coiild 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 transgressed 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 regular proportion, more like men than giants. If those s% 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 commonly diocesan, unless we may draw a general conclusion from that which is very rare and extraordinary. 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

B

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 continuing as they are, they pass still (as the lesser do) for single congregations, and these, with hundreds 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 numerous as our great parishes, containing many more than could well meet together, yet this would not have proved them diocesan churches, no, nor more than some single congregations ; but I think all that he produces amounts not to so much. This will appear by examining the severals a alleged.

6 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 were 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 Ave count 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." e Such a number of presbyters would be far from 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 presbyters in one church, was followed in after times. Nazianzen tells us, in the fourth age, that sometimes the officers in a church did well nigh exceed the number of those whom they ruled, elo\ crxf86v r\ ifKeiovs rj ottoctcov cipxovcn kot apidfiov. d How, then, can forty-six or sixty presbyters be an argument that the church where they w«*e 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 ecmal to Rome, icpaniWov rrj 'Voipy, and built two churches in it,

« Particulars. * Part iii. sec. iv. p. 229.

< Defence, lib. ii. cap. i. p. 6. d 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, o-wdgtv <rvv naai rols d8e\(po'is eVereAeo-ei','' " held a meeting with all the brethren."

But there is one passage afterwards which may seem more considerable, page 230: " At Carthage we have this evidence of the great number 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. c And in one of those tickets sometimes might be comprehended twenty or thirty persons, the form being, Communicet ille cum suis, ' Let the bearer and his friends be admitted to communion.' " rf

The numbers of the lapsed were great; it seems, by Cyprian's expression^ they were the greatest part of his church, for he says, " The greatest part of the brethren denied the faith," (Maximus fratrum numerus jidem suam prodidit,) at the first approach of the persecution, before they were apprehended, or so much as inquired after, besides those that fell 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 num&rosam languentium stragem, et exiguam stantium firmitatem, " a cojjious 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 another ten, the numbers of the lapsed will be 300,000 ; whereas all the inhabitants were not above 200,000, as we may well 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, f'Uoai /xuptaSas, A " twenty myriads." Therefore the

• Soz. lib. ii. cap. ii. » Theodoret, lib. i. cap. xiv.

• Lib. iii. Ep. v. [Aliter Cyp. Ep. xv.] '' Lib. iii. Ep. xv. [al. Cyp. Ep. xi.]

' Sermo de Lapsis, [ed. Paris. 1726, p. 183.] / Lib. iv. Ep. iv. Initio, fal. Cyp. Ep. vii.]

t Ibid, ad (inem. * Orat. in Ignat. torn. v. Hum. lxx.

B 2

thousands here must pass, as is ordinary in all authors, for very many. So Eusebius says there were pvpioi, "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, 6 whereas there was but about six hundred at the latter, and not so many by far at the former. Thus Theodoret, giving an account of his preaching at Antioch, saith it was known, that many myriads e (7roAAcu fj.vpi.d8es) did meet in one place to hear ; whereas two or three myriads are more than can well hear any one preach. And then the tickets comprehending twenty or thirty (which multiply the numbers of the lapsed excessively) must be left out of the reckoning, for there was none such granted by the martyrs, as Cyprian declares in the epistle cited. Though there were some drawn up in such a blind form (Communicet Me cum suis) as might include twenty or thirty, yet says he, Nunquam. omnino (I martyribus factum est, d " This was never done by the martys." Thus the expression, Ep. v. e 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 brotherhood," (Plebs universa — omnes stantes laid — tota fraternitas,) 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 woidd 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 under 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. vii. cap. xxviii. ' Vid. et Cecrop. Episc. Sebastop.in Concil.Clialced.

Kpist. lxxxiii. >> Lib. iii. F.p. xv. [Al. Ep. xi.] ' [Al. Cyp. Ep. xv.]

elders. That the presbyters and bishop concurred in the government, is acknowledged by the best asserters of episcopacy amongst us, Dr. Field, Bishop Downham, Bishop Hall, Mr. Thorndike, Primate Usher, &c. Dr. St[illingneet] doth not deny it; nay, he elsewhere asserts and proves" it by many ancient testimonies, Cyprian'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 evident for the presence and joint concurrence and assistance of the clergy at all 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[illingfieet] hath declared heretofore, (and retracts not here,) proving it by the testimonies of Jerome, Hilary, Augustine, Isidore, and a Council at Seville ; b showing also how expressions in the ancient writers, which seem to be of another tendency, are to be understood. 0

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 lineaments of the Congregational way, supposed to be apparent in St. Cyprian's writings, he should have produced something out of him against these severals. d 1. That a church then was but a single congregation, consisting of no more than could 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 congregation 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

Irenicum, pp. 335, 336, 354, 355. . * Irenicum, pp. 312, 313.

Iren. pp. 314, 315. * Particulars.

considerable because the Doctor tells us, that Cyprian speaks of nothing peculiar to his own church, but what was generally observed 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, 0 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 episcopacy in its greatest elevation, maintain, that there were more bishops than one in a city, particularly Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, &c, in and after the apostles' times. Others, that proceed upon other grounds, 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 acknowledges that in the apostles' times in one church there were more presbyters than one ; and yet ascribes the superiority which makes the difference between a bishop and presbyters, 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 Cyprian's time, and after: nor has Dr. St[illingfleet] brought anything sufficient to disprove 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 African churches as they are by Mr. B[axter.] And Cyprian, who is so positive for one bishop, is as peremptory but for 6 one flock. Esse posse uno in loco aliquis existimat ant multos pastures, ant plures greges ? c " 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 Christians were less numerous. At Jerusalem, when Narcissus had the chair, not to mention those who were bishops there in his retirement, (Dius and

» Points for consideration, * for but. ' De Unitate Eccksias, [ed. Paris. 1726, p. 196.]

Gerraanicon,) Gordius was in the seat when he returned and resumed the bishopric; and Alexander was afterwards made bishop with him." At Csesarea, Theotecnus and Anatolius were for some time bishops together; 5 afterwards Macarius and Maximus were at once bishops in that church. c Epiphanius (alleged by Grotius rf for this purpose) signifies that other cities had two bishops; and excepts but one. " Alexandria had never two bishops (if al aXXai noXfis) as other cities had." e 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 Epiphanius, when the Catholics had Athanasius, the Arians had Gregorius, and then Georgius; 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 Avorld. Valerius made Augustine bishop with him at Hippo, with the concurrence of the bishops in those parts, who assured Augustine that this was usual, and proved it by examples both in the African and transmarine churches, as Possidonius tells us.s" 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 ecclesice scevd divisione debeant partiri, " Lest the church's revenues should be divided ;" 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 thousands 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

« Euseb. lib. vi. cap. x. xi. l Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xxxii.

c Soz. lib. ii. cap. xx. rf De Imp. sum. Potest, lib. xi. sec. xi.

' Haer. lxviii. [n. vi. Meletian.] / Socrat. lib. vii. cap. vii.

s Vit. Aug. cap. viii. * Ep. ex.

' Cone. Nic. Can. viii. * Cone. Cabil. i. Can. iv.

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. If any offer to derive it from a higher original, and pretend it was from apostolical tradition, Dr. St[ulingfleet] tells us, they did it upon a mistake, "judging of the practice of the apostles by that of their own times.'" 1

. 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 government 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 Csecilian."

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[illingfleet] 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 traditors b were null and void; that Csecilian, and many others, had no better ordination ; and consequently those churches must with them be no true churches ; their officers 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 Cajcilian's allowing the Donatists a bishop in Carthage would have made them quit their principles ; for they presumed they might have a bishop of their own there, whether Ca3cilian 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 e to his hypothesis, if he can."

If the church Cyprian 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. 317.

6 Traditors or betrayers were such as in times of persecution, surrendered the sacred hooks and utensils of the church to the heathen to he burnt.

r [Cyp. Ep. lii. n. 4, Et cum post primum, &c. &c. "Since there canuot be a second after the first, whosoever is made bishop when one is made already, who ought to be alone, he is not another bishop, but none at all."]

Novatian (for 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 congregation; 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 Melchiades 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 episcopatics amittant, " they shonld 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 under 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 fifth age there might be more, but then the church was greatly declining, as appears by the complaints of Austin, Chrysostom, Isidore Pelusiota, Prosper, Salvian, &c. The ambition and other extravagancies of the

bishops promoted it. Chrysostom, in the violent persecution which ended in his ejection and banishment, says he feared none so much as the bishops, ovdeva yap Aot7roe 8e8oiKa o>y eVia7<07rouc. a And the bishops of those two cities, Rome and Alexandria, which first transgressed the primitive bounds of churches, are noted as the first that turned the government of the church into domination, and did it in that age. 6 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. 0 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. Bebaptizante Donati parte majorcm multitudinem 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 sermons De Tempore and De Diversis, 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. e 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 communion ; they might communicate with the bishop in the greater basilica,^ and the rest might serve for other offices, as Damasus (or whoever was the writer of the popes' lives) says, The twenty-five or fifteen tituli h were erected at Eome by Marcellus, propter baptismum et pamitetitiam 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 preaching but in the mother church; and then not only at Alexandria, but

» Ep. xiii. p. 95. t Socrat. Hist. lib. vii. cap. vii. xi.

<■ August, contra Crescon. lib.iv. cap. vi. << Vita Aug. cap. vii.

• Socrat. Hist. lib. i. cap. vi. r Satisfactory. e One of the early names for a church.

* The liliili at Home and the \avpat at Alexandria, seem to have corresponded somewhat to our modern chapels-of-case.

' Episc. Asser. p. 297.

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 will, tituli, or Xavpai, or basilica?) 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 so numerous, but they can and do communicate together.

Page 250, to show that there were more altars than one where Christians 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 memorial martyrum, memorials of the martyrs, which appears by the fifth 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 corpus aut reliquite martyrum conditce 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 African code, that no bishop should leave his cathedral church and go to any other church in his diocese, there to reside."

But suppose this cathedral church was in some village, it cannot hence be proved that any places distant from a city Avere in the bishop's diocese, viz., in the diocese of the city bishop. And this is no improbable 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. lxsi.

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 any. a

The word diocese, as it is most frequently used in ancient writers, 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, 6 it contains many provinces ; so Balsamon defines it, 17 7ro\Xas fnapxias <?Xova-a. c 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 6 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," e and Pappolus is said diceceses et villas ecclesice circumire ■/ " to make a circuit of the dioceses and villages 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 Orleans orders,* that when any man hath, or desires to have, a diocese in his ground, he must allow competent land thereto, and provide 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 multiplied, and they desired a bishop of their own, they were to have one with the consent of those in whose power the places were. 1 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 presbyter. 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. 4 Acceptation.

• In Concil. Chalced. Can. xiii. * Novel, cxxxi. [cap. iv. |

« Cone. Agath. Can. liv. Iv. / Greg. Turon. Hist. Franc, lib. vi. cap. v.

g 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 was 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 careful than their predecessors, thought needful, lest bishops should be disparaged by having 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 ; Cui satis est amis 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 6 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. c Jerome saith, the presbyters were multiplied so excessively that they became contemptible ; presbyteros turba contemptibiles facit. d

" 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 under two bishops."—p. 250.

It was most common in Africa to have bishops in villages, and ordinary 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. 6

" 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. After that, that they should belong to the same diocese they were in before."

« Can. vi. 6 Context.

' De Persecut. Vandal, lib. i. <i Epist. lxxxv. ad Evag. [al. Evang.]

« Cod. Afric. Can. xcix.

But if the converted people desired to have a bishop of their own, as they had before, then they 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 modern 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. Verissimus, bishop at Tacara, saith, in his flock there were four other bishops, Datianus, Aspidius, Fortunatus, and Octavianus. 6 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, 0 ) 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-bj'ters 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 country 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 government.

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 castello nullus esset omnino Catholicus, " 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

Coil. Afric. Can. cxviii. Can. xcix. '' Collat. Carth. d. i. n. 121.

Ibid. n. 133, and n. 207. •> [Aug. Ep. 262.]

it ought, and discerning that he 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 lathis quam oportebat extendi, nee adhibendce sufficere diligentm, quam cevtissima ratione adhiberi debere cemebam.

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 complaints put out of Fussala, yet salvo episcopatu, so as he retained the episcopal 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 under 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 discovering it. I might have alleged, that this epistle, which 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 argument 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, when the African fathers had so positively declared against such appeals ; and Apiarius a little before had found the like attempt so unsuccessful. Nor is it probable that St. Austin, fortified with the decrees of the African councils, would be so much concerned (as this epistle would make him) to hinder Cajlestinus from revoking the sentence, 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 Municipium Tullense, or Tulliense, as some editions have it. I meet with Epis-copatus Tullitensis 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," Teleptensis elsewhere, 6 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 this addition the particular story which the Doctor recites does him not the least service.

« Cone. Milevit, Can. xvii. * Collnt. Carth. [n. exxi.]

Nor does St. Austin say to Ceecilian, the president, that he was bishop of that diocese, (which the Doctor represents as a region of large extent,) but only that he had episcopalem sarcinam Hipponensem, " the episcopal charge of Hippo." a

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 Antonius episcopus Mutagenensis for the Catholics, and Splendonius bishop there for the Donatists, 6 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. c 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. d

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. e Ecce interim episcop>os nostros qui sunt in regione Hipponensi ubi a vestris tanta mala patimur convenite.

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 bishops 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 Numidia, to which Hippo belonged; because the Donatists were there most numerous. He that finds betwixt an hundred 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. lx. « D. 1, n. 133, et n. 207. c Ibid. n. 138, n. 201, Aug. Ep. lxxviii. n. 8.

* N. [117,] 121, 65, 198. < Ep. lxviii. / Right of Churches review, p. 53.

C

After such plain evidence of the extent of dioceses, he would 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 Cyprian's calling that part of Africa where he lived, provincia nostra, " our province," two or three times. Before ecclesiastical metropolitans were known in the world, Africa was by the Romans divided into provinces, as our kingdom hath been long into coimties. 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 qidsquam nostrum episcopum se esse episcoporum co?istituit, a " None of vis 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 constitiitiou, and in the first and second ages, and a great part of the third, not known in the church." 6 And Dr. St[illingfleet] elsewhere 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; 0 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, (after they were established by canon,) wherein all their authority consisted while the state of the church was tolerable, was their presiding in provincial synods; 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 often 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 Cassarea, not Jerusalem, 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 yap ovk r)yi]<raTo (rwobovs, " Over what kinds of synods did he not preside ?" says Theodoret of him. 6 Sometimes for their age, as Palmas, bishop of Amastris, was president in a synod in Pontus, upon this account expressly, ws apxaiaruTos, " because the most ancient,"/

In Cone. Carth. [ap. Cyp.p. 229, ed. Oxon. 1G82.] * Exercit. xvi. p. 533, [n. 143.]

Iren. p. 372. <' Euseb. lib. v. cap. xx. Tacit. Hist. lib. ii. [cap. Ixxix.]

Hist. lib. ii. cap. xv. / Euseb lib v cap xxii

And in Africa, long after, not he who had his seat in the chief city of the province, but he that was most ancient among the bishops, had the primacy in provincial synods," and this settled by canon. 6 By which it appears that the pre-eminence of metropolitans was not established, either by rule or invai'iable custom, for the first three ages. And afterwards, Avhen 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 they 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, Hodie venerium effusum est in ecclesiam, " 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 scecidaris, "worldly phrenzy," (as they then called it,) that monstrous itch of pride and ambition. 0

" Victor mentions one Crescens, who had one hundred 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 under him as an honorary president 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 habendi 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 account) as he that reigned during life. Duratio naturam rei non immidat. d " Length of time does not alter the nature of the possession."

Aug. Ep. [cclxi.] » Milevit, Can. xiii. Cod. Afric. Can. lxxxvi.

Iren.p.373. •* De Jure Belli, lib. i. cap. ill. sec. 11. [n. 2.]

c 2

Sect. 10. He passes to Egypt, and from what Athanasius says of Maroeotis, he draws several observations, Avhich seem not all current. He observes, first, that here were true parochial churches, because they are called churches; but so were the tituli at Rome called, yet were not better than oratories, or chapels of ease in many of our 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 presbyters 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 episcopacy acknowledge, and Dr. St[illingfleet] hath proved. He observes, that " they were at that distance, that they could not have local communion 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," us iv irpoacTTeiois'i 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,"

i'prjfiov d8e\(pa>i> Kai cnrovSaicov dvdpcoTra>v. b

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 adversaries were too quick for him, and made Ischyras bishop in Maroeotis. 0 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,

• Euseb. lib. vii.cap. xi. b Ibid. ' Athan. Apol. 2, p. 622.

particularly with Dracontius, who was made bishop in the same territory of Alexandria, iv rrj 'AXegavSplwv x<*>P a a And more 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 furlongs 6 ) from Gaza ; and Gaza twenty furlongs from Constantia (anciently Majuma. c ) Strabo makes it little more than seven furlongs. 1 * In Egypt itself, the cities, though there were bishops also in the country, were close together. Nicopolis was twenty furlongs from Alexandria, as Josephus, e 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 account of them. Those who ordained every such city or town to have a bishop, were far from designing any such things as modern dioceses.

" But Mr. B[axter]'s great argument 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 amounts to more than is said, if a just account be taken of it. He tells the emperor there were too-ovtoi, so many Christians at the paschal solemnity, as a prince that loved Christ woidd wish to be in the city, and that these desired to meet in the great church, that they all might pray there, Kanel nam-as evxev&ai. ; and so they did, cmep Kai yeyovev. 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, 8(gao-dai ndi/ras. He says, the midtitudes there met were such as at other times assembled in several other little places, 7ra>c exaipov, &c. " Plow," 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 1 see nothing will be plain in antiquity to him that likes it not. Hereby the Doctor's following questions are answered.—p. 255.

« Epist. ad Dracont. * Hist. lib. v. cap. viii. c Soz. ibid. p. 336.

i Lib. xvi. p. 522. ' De Bello Judaicu, lib. v. rap.ult. f Lib. xvii i

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 Novatians, 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, considering how many there were there at first, and what encouragements and advantages they had under 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. After this time Epiphanius mentions about twelve meeting-places in Alexandria ; whether there were so many now, or whether the Catholics had them all, may be a question. However, Athanasius tells us, that all these save one were exceeding small, very short and strait places, tcov to'wvv enKXrjatcbp fipaxvTaTcov ov<ra>v. a And after, he says, they were fxiKpal nal arei>al, 6 " small and strait." There are as many or more churches and chapels, (it is like 0 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 Avont to communicate at the chief parish church. Will any argue from 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 unexceptionable, as any he could pitch on ; who is so far from lessening it, that he calls it ptyto-rov rrjs aluovpivris ifinopiov, 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 dcrvXXrjTTTas, 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 f 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, "long before the time of Athanasius, Dionysius

Aiml. [2,] page 531. * Page 532.

' DeOrd. Mngu. Urb. ' Church Hist, pages 9, 10,

Alexandrinus 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 large church, partly of the Christians of Alexandria which followed him, and partly from other places ; and when he was removed thence to Colluthion, 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 Kara fiepos signify."

Cephro was a place in Lybia, at a great distance from Alexandria; in the epistle cited it is a village 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 Colluthion, though in less numbers than at Cephro ; and that by the contexture of the discourse, seems to be the meaning of Kara /xepo?, 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 persecution, when vEinilianus, 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 disposed 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 proceeds 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. 256.

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 Meletiaus 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 deserting Peter and cleaving to Meletius. Constantine granted them 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. d Constantine, if he did not favour them, would not oppose them, but was severe against those that did ; against Athanasius particularly. Constantius, his successor 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, e 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 Avhat 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.S'

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 writ about the middle of the fifth age, when all was tumbling into confusion and degeneracy; only thus in

• Hccr. lxviii. n. 3. 4 likely. c Hist. lib. iv. cap. xx.

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

/ He who compares the epistle whence this testimony is taken with Theodoret's eighty-first epistle, will, perhaps, be inclined to suspect that the reading here should be with a very slight alteration of the present text, bitTui ooian (not bKraxoaiait) eKKKnv'ais, "eight holy churches."

B Epist. cxiri.

brief. The passage insisted on runs thus : In eight [hundred] churches I have been pastor, for so many parishes hath Cyrrhus. Cyrrhus here is but capable of three accep[fra]tions ; it mUst be taken either for the city alone, or both for the city and the region, or for the region alone without the city. Against this last there is an unanswerable exception: the word is never thus used in these epistles, or elsewhere. Nor, I think, can an instance be given where the proper name of a city, as Cyrrhus was, signifies the country alone, and not the city itself. The second 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 author of this epistle, or at least of the passage insisted on, as here expressed. For he who described Cyrrhus to be a desolate place, ep-qpos ovcra kciI oXlyovs olKrjropas e^owa, having few inhabitants, and those poor," and elsewhere mentions 7ro\lxvrjs eprjplav, signifying it to be a small town in 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 corrupted. 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 Kegio Cyrrhes-tica) there was a metropolitan of Hagiopolis, which by the ancient notitice 0 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 Irenams a bishop. d For though others were wont to concur with the metropolitan in ordaining 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 regularly, that one must be taken for a metropolitan. 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, 6 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 notiticp, and acknowledged by the Doctor, that Cyrus was a metropolis, none will question but the bishop of it was a metropolitan. And if Theodoret was a metropolitan, these eight [hundred] churches will show not the extent of diocesan, but metropolitan power. None ever doubted but Theodoret was bishop of this city Cyrus: he himself declares it plainly and frequently. It is said he was confined to Cyrus,

■ Epist. xxxii. * Epist. cxxxvliii.

• The notitite are detailed accounts of the civil and ecclesiastical divisions of the empire.

i Epist. ex. ■ Epist. lxxix. lxxx. lxxxi. lxxxii. 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. 6 He says, this city was committed to his- charge, 0 ttjv eyxeipurddaap r^yuv ttoXlv] and since he was the bishop of the city Cyrus, 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 know 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, Avithout danger of losing his province. For all the metropolitans in the diocese of the Orient, (wherein, according to the notitiw of the empire, there are fifteen provinces, but by the ecclesiastical notitice many more metropolitans and archbishops, though divers of them pass as avroKecpaXoi.) were under him of Antioch, which city Jerome calls the metropolis of the Orient; Ut Palestince metropolis Cesarea sit, et totius Orientis Antiochia, d and Zozimus, e naarjs ttjs Ea>as p.rjTpoTrokiv' Theodoret says that (having ruled that church committed to him at Cyrus twenty-six years-^) he had preached six years under Theodotus, bishop of Antioch ; thirteen years under John ; and it was now the seventh year since Domnus was archbishop there.s' But that he was under any other metropolitan of Cyrus (or elsewhere) he never says nor intimates, and when the Doctor has incprired fully into it, I doubt not but he will find it a groundless imagination.

Since Cyrrhus is acknowledged to be a metropolis, and thereupon it can no way be denied, but Theodoret the bishop of it was a metropolitan ; this might be improved further for our author's satisfaction, 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 us 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 African provinces there must be as many or more, to make up the account we have of the many hundred bishops in Africa. If the bishops under the metropolitan of Cyrus, were so many as in one of these provinces, and these eight hundred churches distributed amongst them, the

" Epist. lxxx. 8 Epist. cxix. ' Epist. xxxvii. xlii.

d LKpist. lxi. ad Pammach.] « Hist, lib. i. [page 15.] / Epist. cxiii.

«• Epist. lxxxiii. vid. Epist. lxxxi. cxiii. « Victor, de Persec. Vandal, lib. i.

share of each bishop would scarce be more than some one of cmr parishes. Or if the bishops there were supposed to be fewer, yet would their bishoprics be more like some parishes, than modern dioceses.

" By Cyrus, therefore, we understand the region about the city, which was under 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 Cyrus is ever any where else so understood ; nor that the name of any other city doth signify the country 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 Eegio," 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, Avhich contradicts Theodoret in many plain passages, wherein he declares 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 will be far larger than all 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 peculiarly, 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. lxxxi. & l.wi.v

two hundred, which he calls his proper flock, oiKeiav dyeXijv, 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 they were in his diocese, then was there more than one bishop in one diocese. If they 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 Trkeiovs rj xtAias, " 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 ; 6 unless he will have each village to be more populous, than the mother city itself. However Theodoret doth not say that these eight villages were in his diocese ; and he might think himself concerned 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 sufficient 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 wiling 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

- Epist. rxiii. I f.pist. [Ixxxi.]

usages of the church, or fidelity in reporting them. The learned and ingenuous Doctor is not to be suspected as either of these: only persons of singular learning and other accomplishments, may venture sometimes to defend a paradox, and run against the stream ; and if they can with cogent arguments, detect a vulgar error, the more common 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 particular interest, rather than to use impartial judgment, and yield to evidence ; though they may prevail with some that are weak and prepossessed, 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 from the Doctor; and what it is, is now to be considered.

He lays down several observations. " The first of them is this, That the main ground of the people's interest was founded upon the apostles' canon, that a bishop must be blameless and of good report.""—pp. 312, 313.

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 sufficient, 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 officers ; which is not a mere declarative testimony, but such as is elective. And this will be cleared by the authors which the Doctor cites afterwards.

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 countries, 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 offices, and then it is not for the Doctor's purpose ; or else their fixing those officers 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 afterwards, how their officers were appointed, viz., with the approbation or choice of the whole church.

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

« 1 Tim. iii. 2, 7.

This is no way plain; an hundred instances might be produced of officers 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 people, and yet appointed by the apostles. And in the words of Clemens, cited presently after, 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.'" 1 How and by whom they are to be chosen, the next words express, o-vvev$oKr]<Td(TT)s irdo-qs tijs eKK\r](rlas, " 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' practice, and that they left order', that in after times bishops should be thus appointed, and thus chosen.

The Doctor makes some observations upon this testimony of Clemens, p. 315. 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 after-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 universal church, both in the best ages and many after, did rim counter to the order of the apostles, made on purpose to prevent contentions in the church.

3. He observes, " That all that the people had to do, was to give testimony, or to express their approbation of those who were so appointed."

■ [Clem. i. s. 44.]

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 coidd 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 tells 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 siipposition, 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 conformed,) 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 suffrage ? 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 suffrage." Factus est Corneluis episcopas . . . cle clericorum pene omnium testimonio, de plebis quw tunc affnit 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 suffrage of all is expressly mentioned, as requisite, " that the ordination may be just and lawful." Take it as the Doctor offers it, (p. 316,) 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 lawful ordination, 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

■ Epist. Hi.

people had such a share in the elections as that they were earned by their general suffrage; 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 suffrage, 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 deJDivind auctoritate descendere, "descend to them from Divine authority ;" that it was secundum Divina magisteria, " 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 from 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 ;" 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 consecration of their fellow bishop, Sabinus," (so far the Doctor, but Cyprian goes on)— ut de universal fraternitatis '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 plcbis 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 6 styles, Divina suffragio) and against the judgment of God." c

" 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. lii. 4 [Ep. xxxviii.] « Ep. si.

previous 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 all/'

" 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 strong 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 and 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 universce fraternitatis suffragio, " by the suffrage of the whole brotherhood." Nay, the African fathers determine, that " the people have most of all this power," plebs maxime potestatem habet, &c.

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

And Ave have in this -epistle the judgment, not only of Cyprian, but of a whole council of African bishops, both for the power and manner of the people's choosing ; the Divine authority for it, and the universality 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 ride of the African fathers is general, and not confined to this

« Vide Ep. xli. D

particular case, nor the grounds of it, but extends to any other Avicked-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 examining 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 expressions in this epistle, concerning the power and privilege 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, Bellannine 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. xv. pp. 359, 3C0.

NO EVIDENCE FOR DIOCESAN CHURCHES. l-'>

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 was not the peculiar privilege of Christians ; for heathens had the like liberty, and their objections might be heard in reference to the candidates 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 tov 8ovvcu Kvpioi rfjv Ttfifjv, a " authorised to confer the office." And in Epiphanius, ol Xaoi— enio-KOTTOvs eavrols K.aTara£avTes, b " they make bishops for themselves."

Origen hath nothing, either in the words as they are cited, c 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 church."

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 account they had apostolical 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 could be no disturbances or disorders in their choice, if they did not choose. And the disturbances and disorders objected, when duly weighed, can raise no prejudice against the universal practice of the church, nor will be any just occasion 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 Sacerdot. Orat. iii. * Haer. lxxiii. Num. 28.

[Horn. vi. in Levit.] '' Point for consideration.

D 2

they were well acquainted with any disorders that fell out in the exercise 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 would 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. 318: " 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 synod 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 faction in the town would have chosen (in the place of Eustathius, wrongfully ejected) Eusebius Pam-philus, then bishop of Ca?sarea, whom they took to be of that persuasion ; 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, (offering 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 fair, 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 church ?

" The next is at Casarea. Gregory Nazianzen sets forth the mighty

• Lib. i. cap. xxiii. » Euseb. De Vita Constantini, lib. iii. cap. lvii.

unruliness of the people of Cjesarea in the choice of their bishop, saying, It came to a dangerous sedition, and not easy to be suppressed," &c.— pp. 318, 319.

We find two hot contests in elections there, one immediately after 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 \iai> evTUKTas, but very faithfully and zealously," and thereby signifies how horribly seditioiis it was in his account. And his father, the senior Gregory, bishop of Nazianzum, justifies the action, in letters to the governor, as regular, and acceptable to God, and defends what they did as opdSis <a\ StKalcos, done rightly and justly. 6 The other contest was in the choice of Basil, and he, justly styled a person of incomparable worth, carried it, though with some difficulty, (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 npoeBpla, by which that pre-eminence is most commonly expressed, both by himself and others. 0 Another time he was ready to wish there were no synods of bishops, and was resolved, for his part, never to come at d 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: ™ eynpha ko.1 KadapcoTiira, neither in both these only, but in them only, or chiefly, rj on paXta-Ta. e

The third instance hath no less of mistake in it, or rather more, such as renders it wholly impertinent. "It is a sedition at Alexandria. 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 Proterius."—p. 319.

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

• Orat. xix. p. 308. » Ibid. p. 310. c Orat. xxviii.

'' <o. • Orat. xix. p. 310.

succeeded Dioscorus, but after he was installed, and confirmed, by the common suffrage of a meeting at Alexandria." No part of the tumult but was some time after this; but the most tragical part, when Froterius was murdered, was five or six years after. And shall popular 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 JElurus, some bishops and monks, who, upon that account, had separated from the Catholic church, as the Egyptian bishops and clergy show in their narrative sent to Leo the emperor. 6 Now shall the people who adhere to the common faith 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 Damasus, 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 had described this church tragedy, in which a hundred and thirty-seven persons were slain, he adds, I cannot deny, considering the pomp and bravery at Rome, 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 matronarum obla-tionibus, 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 Eome accommodated those bishops, incited them to make their way to it, with all the force they could engage, though 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, commended them both to God and good men. The smallness and poorness of the bishoprics in other places secured them from 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 ni' bishops. But as bishoprics transgressed the ancient

■ Evagr. lib. ii rap. 5, > Idem. ibid. cap. viii.

bounds, and swelled bigger and bigger, distempers increased accordingly, and had their paroxysms now and then, such as this at Eome. These are not natural to elections by the people, their order and innocence for 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 acqidtted. 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 fall 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 ajDplicable 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 after.

Come we to the third thing he will have us consider, page 820. " To prevent these inconveniences many bishops were appointed, without the choice of the people, and canons were made for the regulation of elections. In the church 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 cited.

But Jerome did not say that the bishop was chosen by the presbyters, but out of them, Unum ex se (not a se) election episcopum ?iominabant, a " They nominated as bishop, one chosen from 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 continuance. 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 uoav 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 Evagr.

the electors in that age were not only the presbyters, but both clergy and people ; not in other churches alone, but this particularly of Alexandria, as appears by the election of Athanasius, Peter, and other bishops there made, tyrjcjxp roii Xaov 7ravr6s. a

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 ordain 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[iUingfleet,]* whom we may see arguing it, like himself, with learning and judgment.

He seems not unwilling that what the counterfeit Ambrose speaks of the bishops dying, 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 321. "We find the bishops consecrating others in several churches, without any mention of choice made by the people."

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 by the votes of all the people, without mentioning his ordination, 0 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 Avithout 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 Germanio succeeded Dius in the bishopric at Jerusalem, and after him Gordius, in whose time Narcissus returned f 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/

• Naz. Orat xxi. fp. :>77.] Theodor. lib. iv. cap. xviii. * Iren. page 273.

Orat. xxi. p. 377. '' In Ezek. lib. x. cap. rxxiii.

* Euseb. lib. vi. rap x f Cap. xi.

" Severus, bishop of Milevis, in liis life-time appointed his successor, and acquainted the clergy 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 erat, unde nonnidli contristabantur, " Something was neglected, at which divers were grieved." And what was that ? Ad popidum non est locutus, "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 successor 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 propounded, as appears by divers expressions in that epistle. 6

" 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, till 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 amounts to no less than an unanimous choice of him. c 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 found, 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 their power.

Can. xxiii. in Cod. cii. * Epist.cz. ' Socrat. Hist. lib. vii. cap. xlvi.

" 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 mistaken, 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 council was far from excluding the people from the power of choosing their bishops is apparent enough by their synodical epistle to those of Alexandria and Egypt, 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, ical 6 Xaos alpolro, " and the people do choose them." a

■ " It is apparent from the Council of Antioch that bishops were sometimes consecrated without the consent of the people, for it doth suppose a bishop after consecration may not be received by his people."

The question is not whether the election went before the ordination or followed, but whether any bishop might have the chair, and be possessed of the bishopric without the people's consent. This canon doth not suppose that he might, but rather on the contrary ; it plainly signifies 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 canoms decreverunt, nullus invitis cletur episcopus, 1 " 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. 0

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 d declares, and • also by later canons the bishop was to be ordained among .his own people. 8 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.l * Cone. Aurel. v. Can. xi.

* Eg. lxviii. [al. Ixvii. ad Frat. Ilisp.l ' Cone. Aurel. iv. [Can. v.]

/ [Julius, Ep. art Oriental, torn. i. p. 749.J apud Athanas. Apol. ii.

Athanasius of Alexandria," in the east by Nazianzen. 6 It was an irregular 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. 0

u 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," a^iov elvai teal vfxeis edoKi/jLacrare, Kin fj/Mels avvedefxeda ; 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 (/3ej3<uo{Wai) 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 words.

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

The usual way was, after synods 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 ^(pta-fia ; 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 Solit.. [Ed. Col. 1686, torn. i. p. 844, B.] et Epist. ad Orthodox, [torn. i. p. 943, D.] * Orat. xxi. « Soctat. 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 Ctesarea, and Nec-tarius at Constantinople, and Ambrose at Milan, who were chosen 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 after 6 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 Avas brought into the bishops' power in the eastern parts."

I find nothing of this in that or any other canon of that synod; but there is some such thing in the sixteenth canon of the Council at Antioch, and the reason of it was, lest an unworthy person should intrude into a bishopric, the synod was first to be satisfied of his sufficiency: 0 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' insufficiency ; 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 expressed it: Nidlus invitis et non petentibus orclinetur, " Let no bishop be ordained for those who are unwilling, and do not desire him." And the reason wherewith he enforces it, is very considerable f 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 invito, episcopum non optatitm ant contemned, aut oderit, et fiat minus religiosa quam convenit, cid non

• Greg. lib. vi. Ep. xxxviii. lib. vii. Ep. xxxiv. lib. viii. Ep. xl.

* afterwards. competency. rf worthy of consideration.

licuerit habere quern voluit* " Lest the people not consenting, do either contemn or hate a bishop whom they desire not; and become less religious 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 modern 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 fathers at Chalcedon, and the greatest council that the ancient church ever had.

" By the law of Justinian, the common 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 one."

The law of that emperor enjoins, that the clergy and better sort of citizens do draw up the electing decree, (^rjcpiapaTa ttouiv,) but doth not enjoin that the other citizens be excluded from concurring in the election, 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, napa tS>v oIkovvtu>v ttjv Tr6\iv, b 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 presbyters ; c the meaning of it is this, that it is not fit elections shoixld be left to the rabble (o^Xotr) only or chiefly, without the clergy and better sort of the people, who may keep the rest in order, and prevent tumults. The import of the words ewLTpineLv and o^Xois leads us thus to understand it; and the sense and practice of the church every where at that time, expressed in the councils and the best writers of that age, wherein the synod 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 d of a few bishops in this assembly, in opposition to the common sentiments of the Christian world.

" Ep. lxxxiv. cap. v. * [Lib. i. Tit. iii.] De Episeopis. Lex. xlii.

' Perpet. Gov. cap. xv. p. 342. i caprice.

" The second Council of Nice restrained the elections only to bishops." 0 —p. 323.

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 Bellarmine and others will have elections restrained to bishops is mistaken, 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 understood by Bishop Bilson ; 6 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 well 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 anathema. 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 council it Avas) owns no more; so that this canon looks no better than a piece of (some Latin's) forgery.

I need not add that this synod was ten years after condemned, by a far more numerous council at the same place. Baronius gives a full account of it, though with such reflections upon Photius and his adherents, 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 Council, 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 communicate with them. And this is considerable , c as grounded upon an ancient canon. Indeed it was the sense of the ancient church for many ages, if we may judge thereof by councils 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 fourth thing he would have considered is, That when there were Christian magistrates, they did interpose in this matter as they judged expedient."

Can. iii. 4 Ibid. p. 369. e worthy of consu.eration.

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 Paulus, and others for Macedonius: the emperor Constantius coming hither puts them both by, and appoints Eusebius, of Nicomedia, to be bishop there."

The Arians were so hot and violent for the promoting of their party, that 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 fundamental of it, concerning the eternal Godhead of Christ. a

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, particularly Paulus ; and gives the chair to Eusebms, of Nicomedia, the antesignanus b 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, should have the chair, not according to the rule of the church, but by the will of the governor, as the historian notes, 0 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. e He made a law for the utter demolishing of their churches, says Socrates/ He commanded 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.S' What such a prince did against the rule and practice of the true church, and the rights of the faithful 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

• Socrat. lib. [ii.] cap. vii. ' Standard-bearer, ringleader. ' Socrat. lib. [ii.] cap. xvi.

d Orat. i. [ed. Col. 1C86, torn. i. p. 296, A.;] Orat. ii. [torn. i. p. 316, ed. Paris, 1627;] Orat. iv. [ed. Col. 1686, torn. i. p. 481, A.]

' Lib. ii. cap. xv. / [Lib. ii. cap. xxxviii.] » Lib. iv. cap. xiii. 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.

"After the death of Sisinnius, the emperor declared, that, to prevent 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 mil appear presently. And why should it be thought Nestorius was not chosen by the people ? Doth Socrates, cited as giving this account 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 conclude that he was neither elected nor ordained ? If this were an argument, there are hundreds that we must account 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. Thereupon 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 considerable," which I have therefore taken the liberty to put together; but indeed there is some mistake in them, I would not say they are misrepresented.

" 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 Georgius 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 consideration.

the whole matter as well and better than Sozomen, being particulai-ly concerned therein, tells ns 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 Cassarea,) but, " according to the custom or decree of the church, to choose one to be their pastor," as the common Saviour did direct them, 6«j^io eKK^rjaias tovtov alpeladai Troipeva." 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, all the clergy and all the city giving their voices for it, nda-qs iin^r](pi(o-

fjifvqs Trjs nokecos.

" 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, y\rrj(pi(ofj.fv<x>v be tovto tov \aov not. KXrjpov, the emperor gave his consent. Socrates says, that by the common decree (ifsTjCpicrfuiTi Koiva) of the clergy and people, the emperor sent for him to Constantinople. c " 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 Chrysostom 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,

Euseb. I)e Vita Constant, lib. iii. cap. lvii. • In Tlieoilor. Hist. lib. v. cap. i\.

Lib. vi. cap. ii.

who, as Photius declares, made his collections out of Palladius, among others."

" So that there was no antecedent election of the people, as Sozomen says; but whatever there was, was subsequent to the emperor's determination."

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 {enirpe-^ev 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 suffrages, 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 sufficient 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 call 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.

J In Chrysost. torn. viil. page 183. 4 Socrat. lib. vii. cap. xxxv

DIOCESAN CHURCHES

NOT YET DISCOVERED IN THE PRIMITIVE TIMES;

A DEFENCE OF THE ANSWER TO DR. STILLINGFLEET'S ALLEGATIONS OUT OF ANTIQUITY FOR SUCH CHURCHES,

THE EXCEPTIONS OFFERED IN THE PREFACE TO A LATE TREATISE CALLED A VINDICATION OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH,

WHAT IS FURTHER PRODUCED OUT OF SCRIPTURE AND ANCIENT AUTHORS FOR DIOCESAN CHURCHES 18 ALSO DISCUSSED,

LONDON:

Printed 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 volume, which is not so rare as the preceding work.

PREFACE.

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 unworthy to live, and had actually destroyed both together, if God in mercy had not discovered their devilish plot. The discovery gave them some interruption, and put them upon an aftergame, 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 had 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 conspirators count their own, and think they may well do so, since they are too ready to concur with them in their design to exterminate 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 Protestants, and that is the charge of schism, lately renewed and reinforced.

In these hard circumstances, while we do what we can against the 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, sufficient to secure us against this attack, it was thought not imuseful 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 aforesaid 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 fault therein, ruus himself into two or three, about pvpioi, 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 judgment) 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 learning than appears in either of us. The 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 exceptions, 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, Withal I have given an account of what

other allegations out of Scripture and antiquity this author hath hrought in other parts of his treatise for such churches; and showed 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 hefore hirn, which may satisfy a judicious and impartial man that in the two first ages of Christianity any bishop had more than one particular 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 sufficient 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 general 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 diocesan 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 wc may prevail with those who sincerely profess themselves Protestants, to regard the securing themselves and their religion from the destructive designs of the Papists, more than those things 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 religion from other true Protestants, we need not wonder if we meet witli no better treatment from them than from declared Papists; since, by such preference they too plainly declare the Protestant religion to be worse than Popery 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.

DIOCESAN CHURCHES

NOT YET DISCOVERED IN THE

PRIMITIVE TIMES.

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 other 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 surypose, 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, " because, First, This was not the case of the church of Carthage : it was not a now converted church, but settled long before, and in a flourishing 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 been but new converted ; and hoAv 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, Pressure? istius tarn turbidam vastitatem, qua gregem nostrum maxima ex parte populata est, adhttc et usque popuhittrr, " 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 minus, ct timentium reliquias, inter numerosam languentium stragem, et exiguam stantium paucitatem, "placed between those who weeping fell, and a bare remnant whose hearts fail them, — between a copious slaughter of the unstable, and a vrry few stedfast professors ?"" Was

* Lib. iv Ep iv ail fin.

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 nourishing condition; which yet cannot be denied to have had more presbyters than we count needful. So that this was the practice in every condition of the church, whether nourishing 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 country ? So that herein the case is not different; 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 is apparent afterwards in the practice of the African 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 Fussala.

He says, further, " The multitude of presbyters belonging to one congregational church, might be occasioned by the uncertain 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 but 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 difference 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 difference 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 Christians before

Constantine, is altogether incredible; for the necessary expenses of the church were very great—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," &c. He says, " multiplying presbyters beyond necessity, and without necessity." While he 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 churches 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, rols Seofxevms, as is determined in one of the canons which pass for apostolical," and the same decreed in the synod at Antioch. 6 Ambrose even, in the fourth age, will have none to have a stipend who hath other revenues, Qui Jidei exercet militiam, agelli sui fruciibiis, si habet, debet esse contentus; si non habet, stipendiorum suorum fvuctuf " 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 had estates did carry it, because the church would need to be at no charge in maintaining of such, ovk av fie'otro Tpe<f>eadai in twv ttjs (KKXrjcrias wpoaobcop.' 1 Secondly, when they had no estates, and the church could not maintain them, they were to provide for themselves by some honest employment. The Council of Elvira allows all sorts of clergymen to drive a trade for their living, provided they did it only in the province where they lived ; e and in the fourth Council of 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.

• Offic. lib. i. rap. xxx\i. * De Sarercl. Ser. iii. p. 2.1, edit. Savil.

' Can. xix. / Can. li.

l Page 154.

tion, viz. that they got not their livings by an employment that is g irdid 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 after 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," to deovTa el deotro TTpos avayicaias xpei'as, for necessary 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 consult.

Having showed out of Justinian, that sixty presbyters belonged to the great church in Constantinople, 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 maintain 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 be 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 argument from the multitude of presbyters, that in the ancient church the officers were multiplied above what we count needful: 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 after 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 church; 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. xvi. * Dean Stillingfleet.

IN THE PRIMITIVE TIMES. G9

If no argument is to be drawn from this number, why did the learned Dean draw one from it ? Secondly, this seems scarce consistent with the former period: there, these presbyters were for three or four churches; here they are but for one collegiate church, of which they were canons, and this is said to be evident 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 presbyters in a place which cannot be counted a diocese, (as this one great church never was, nor can be,) and then no argument drawn from the number of presbyters at Rome, Carthage, Edessa, &c, will prove a diocesan church; for here was the greatest number, which any where we meet with.

Dr. St[illingfleet], to prove diocesan churches from the nurnerousness of presbyters, 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 evinced sufficiently before : this fell in occasionally, and was added ex abundanti. Yet upon this supernumerary straggler, he turns his main force, spending about twelve 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."' 1

Indeed, it might have been surprising if I had said, as he reports me, that they were more numerous; but I saw reason not to say so, thoiigh 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 have 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 (TrAeiovo-ii/) 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 irpi> rov <7o-reoy, " in ' the suburbs," which, as the word is used, may denote places many miles

" Constantinople. ' Soc. lib. i. cap. [xvi.]

distant from the city, as the gentleman elsewhere observes after Valesius. Sozomen saj 7 s he built (tto'XXovs-) 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 punctual 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 bj r 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 fieyia-roi: all that Constantine built here were such; both Eusebius's more, and Sozomen s many, are said, by them, to be very great, ptyio-roi. 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 his history.

But if we should suppose that Sozomen intended more than three or four churches, or that the emperor built no more than was requisite, and only consulted conveniency, and designed not state or magnificence, (which yet our author a little after 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 suffice all the Christians in C. P.," when the city of Heliopolis being converted to Christianity required more, and Constantine built several for them, ckkXtio-uis tti ktIo-us, " erected churches."

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

• Constantinople. 4 Lib. [v.] cap. xxiv.

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, irepav fKKkrja-iav Karao-nevao--6ivai. 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, oIkov evKrrjpiov cKK\r)(Tias, b " 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.

Valesius, (whom our 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 fuisse 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 profession 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. c

The better to confute Theodoret, who says (for they are his Avords, 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 after by an undue application of some passages in Sozomen. For the account which that historian gives of that city is not confined to Constantine's time, but reaches beyond it, ay, and beyond Julian's 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 understood, which makes C. P. d to exceed Rome, not only in riches, but in the number of inhabitants, otherwise it will be apparently^ false ? For when Chrysostom was bishop there, about seventy years after, (when it is likeAhe number of the inhabitants were doubled,

■ Soc. lib. i. cap. xvlii. » Lib. iii. cap. [lviii.] Do Vita Constant.

• In lib. ill. De Vita Constant, cap. lviii. p. 235. ' Constantinople. ' Manifestly.

' Probable.

it cannot be questioned but they were far more numerous,) he who best 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 inconsiderable, 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 Herodian declares that Severus quite demolished Byzantimn for siding with Niger, and, reducing it to the state of a village, subjected it to Perintus, kw/jli] 8ov\ei>(iv HepivQiois 8S>pov (86dr], c we cannot in reason suppose it to be extraordinarily spacious; yet, as Zosinms reports, all the enlargement which Constantine gave it, was but the addition of fifteen furlongs, crraSiois 7rtvT(KaL8eKa. d Now suppose it was thirty or forty furlongs in compass before, (and so larger than one city in a hundred,) yet this addition will leave it less than Alexandria, Avhich, as Josephus describes it, was eighty furlongs, that is, ten miles, in circumference, e yet Alexandria was four times less than Rome, for by Vopiscus's account, in Aurelian's time, not long before Constantine, the walls were made by him near fifty miles in circuit. So it will be in comparison of Constantinople when first built, rather like a nation than a city, as Aristotle said of the other Babylon, e^et irepiypa(p^v paWov e'dvovs, fj TToXaos/ 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 afterwards encompassed with walls far larger (n-oXXu pei£o(ri.v) than those of Constantine. 8 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 numbers of the heathen might be considerable. Tertullian speaks of citizens in his time as if they were almost all Christians, penh omnes cives Christianos ; h yet no instance can be given of any one city where the Christians wei'e the major part of the inhabitants : those that take his words in a strict sense are very injurious to him, and make him speak that which no ancient records will warrant. Sozomen also may suffer by straining his expression; but I will not

<• In Act. Horn. xi. p. 674. » De Magnit. Rom. lib. iii. c. iii.

Lib. iii. p. 68. [ed. Lugdun. 1624, p. 122. | ' Lib. ii. p. 62. [ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 106.)

' De Bello Jud. lib. ii. cap. xvi. [s. 4.] J Pol. lib. iii. c. [iii.]

g Lib. ii. p. 65. [ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 112.) '■ Apol. c. xxxvii.

digress to take further notice of what is not material ; for I design not, nor have any 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 defray the funeral expences of all that died in the city, (for so it is expressed in the constitution, nepl rfjv koivtjv anavTcov dvdpuncov oa-iav to Trpayfia TrpoeKriv," " 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. c to be so numerous as he would have them, he should have showed us; I am not yet so sagacious as to discover it. The number of the Decani** was determined 6 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 Constantine's time; for about eight hundred were counted sufficient in Justinian's reign, two hundred years after, 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. c might be much too great for one congregation, 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 communion, and withstood Constantine's importunity for their admission, both here and in other places : Athanasius was threatened by Eusebius of Nicomedia, A 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

0 Novel, xliii. » Novel, lix. cap. ii. c Constantinople.

d The Decani Copiatae 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 Constantine. See Bingham's Ant. b. iii. cap. viii.

• limited. / Cod. de Eccles. [Tit. ii.] Lex. iv. I Novel, lix. cap. ii.

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

F

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 Alexander 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," dficp^pia-ros fj pax*]0 I n Nazianzen's time so far they overtopped the orthodox, that this great diocesan church appeared but in the form of a " private meeting, held in a very little house," where he kept a conventicle with them, iv ot/a'ovcco /xtKpco tKKXrj-<rLa£e, so Sozomen, d and Socrates agrees with him in the expression, ev fiiKpcb otKi'o-K&>, such a diminutive place seems as unproportionable for such a diocesan church 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 e they were numerous here, for here they had as much favour 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 congregation.

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 mincingly, 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 reason himself 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 everywhere, 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 an eminent bishop in C. P.,^ and were not only numerous there before the edict, but continued so after. The gentleman was in too much haste here, as himself will perceive, by observing how much his account differs from the historians.

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

" Euseb. de Vita Constant, lib. iii. cap. lxii. lxiii. [Ed. Reading, cap. lxiv. lxv.]

4 Vales Observ. in Soc. et Soz. lib. ii. c Soc. lib. ii. cap. vi. *' Lib. vii. cap. v.

' probable. / Lib. ii. cap. xxx. ? Constantinople.

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 conclude 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 face of them. Nor do I believe that any disinterested person would put any other sense upon them than this, that the generality of Christians of which the church at Constantinople consisted, assembled together with their bishop, Alexander, 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 particular 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 should have heard it " with both ears," as he speaks elsewhere. He will not have all the brethren, to be all believers at C. P., a 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 Trdures, rendered imiversi, I do not take it for all and every one of the Christians there ; for in all 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 particular congregation agrees not with the words nor the occasion of them, nor hath any support elsewhere.

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

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

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

Constantinople. F 2

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 have 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 are peyio-Tov Tr\rj8os: 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 Christians there still increasing. And the Bibles, if they were intended only for C. P., a 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 should 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 for' 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 multitudes as Constantine's letters signified, might meet together at the bishop's church; for himself declares what a vast congregation he preached to at Antioch, having an auditory of many myriads.* I will not ask him what Eusebius could think, when he tells us the Christians had pvpiavbpovs tiria-vvaywyas, " assemblies consisting of myriads." c Nor what Socrates thought, when he tells us long after, of C. P.," that " the whole city became one assembly, and meeting in an oratory, continued there all day," rf "oXj; ttoAij p,ia

eKK\t]<ria eyevero, iv Se to (VKT7)pia> yevopevoi, &C. But I would have

him tell me Iioav he understands that passage of Chrysostom, ko\ yap TT/ tov Qeov x a P lTl 6 ' ? 8ckcl p.vpiu8div apLQpov olpai rovs ivrdvOa a-vvayopevovs re\elv, e '' For by the grace of God I think those here assembled are full ten myriads in number." What is the import of

« Constantinople. s Ep. lxxxiii. <• Lib. viii. cap. i.

•> Lib. vii. cap. xxiii. " Horn, lxxxv. in Mat. torn. ii. p. 529.

these words ? Do they signify that ten myriads 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 reason 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 number of Christians in C. P." is computed to be a hundred thousand, reckoning all besides Jews and heathens. 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 excessively, inrep tx]v xP fiav i " beyond necessity," as Zosimus tells us, 6 crowding the city so full as that they could scarce stir without danger;) and a great part of these were fallen 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 communicated'' with Alexander will be no more (if so many) than belong to some one of our parishes.

" It woidd 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., a 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. a 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 needful 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 Yalesius^ (upon whose

« Constantinople. * Lib. ii. [p. 112, ed. Oxon. 1679.]

« held communion. * Lib. ii. Observ. in Soc. et Soz.

authority this gentleman takes much) proves at large (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 331. And it is manifest, that C. P." was not built, nor had that name till 331. For though it was building the year before, yet it was not finished till the twenty-fifth year of Constantine's reign (as Jerome* and others:) and the beginning of his reign is reckoned from the death of Constantius' father, who was consul with Maximianus in the year 306, and died in the middle of it. c 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 Paul's,** 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 Cassarea with Theotecnus, and this was St. Austin's own case, who was made bishop of Hippo, while there was another bishop living." e He says also, Nothing can be more disadvantageous 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 disadvantageoxis, I am very unhappy: let us see how it is made good.

" 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 Gordius and after/ by Germanico, (it should be, by Germanico, and after/ by Gordius,) in whose time Narcissus returned, and was desired to resume his office, and did so. What became of 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

1 Constantinople. ' Chronic. c Fast. Consul.

Dr. Stillingfleet. ■ Defence of Dr. St[illiiigfieel], p. 178. / afterwards.

some time; but because Eusebius says nothing of it, I insist not on it. But beside be 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 him 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 \mapov ytjpas, " 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 city,superstate episcopo acljutor et coepiscopus est adjunctus, " during the lifetime of the bishop, a colleague in the episcopate was appointed." And though he says, (but says it doubtfully, with a ni fallor, " if I mistake not,") this was forbidden at Sardica, (above a hundred years after;) yet he adds that, " notwithstanding it was still usual in the church," nihilominus identidem in ecclesia usurpatum est, which is all that I need desire. And afterwards, 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, ko.1 evravda fiias enia-Kmr^s 8vo 7rpov(TTT)aav, " here also there were two bishops of one church." Valesius adds, " the scholiast understands Alexander, who was bishop of Jerusalem together with Narcissus."

■ In lib. vii. cap. xxxii.

The next instance is of Theotecnus and Anatolius, who were bishops of Cassarea together. Against this he hath little to say, I suppose because nothing can be said against it in reason. Only he seems willing that Anatolius should pass but as episcopus 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 inconsistent 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 would 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 after 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, avvupacrdai, which denotes the exercise of the same function together; 4 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

" Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xxxii. • Soz. lib. ii. cap. xix. c Petavius.

there, and brought several instances to evince it; for so it was divided in the time of Epiphanius, when the Catholics had Athanasius, the Arians had Gregorius, and then Georgius; and afterwards the one had Peter, the other Lucius; and the Novatians had their bishops successively in that city till Cyril's time.

He answers, however, "I do not see why that learned antiquary's opinion may not be maintained against this gentleman's objections. He says, that Alexandria was divided before Epiphanius's time between several bishops, (I said, in Epiphanius's time :) it cannot be denied. But 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, 6 that upon the division in Egypt, occasioned by Arius, in every city, icad' iKacrrrju wokiv, " there was bishop against bishop, and people against people." Nor doth it defend the antiquary ; for he speaks universally, without limiting himself to the election of Theonas, Ecclesiam Alexanchinam nunquain in partes scissam quarum singula; episcopum suum habebant, " that church was never divided so as to have opposite bishops."

" The instances are all later than this fact, and therefore are insignificant," 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 would 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 in 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. lxxix. Num. viii. p. 733. * Vita Const, lib. iii. cap. iv.

not wont to question a succession, unless it appears he was the first.

" It may be they began there after this time, for there is little account in church history, that I know, of any Novatians in Alexandria, before Athauasius."

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 Novatians 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 usually produced by popular elections."

If what the African bishops did allege were restrained to that particular 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 suscipere, suo vivente episcopo, recusabat, "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 ecclesice; but they all persuade him that this was usually done, id fieri solere, and prove it by examples in all parts." And Valerius's desire and proposal was that Austin might be ordained bishop of Hippo, Qui suce cathedrce non tarn succederet sed eonsacerdos 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 prevent 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

■ Possidon. Vita August, cap. viii.

after times than any 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 ;" 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 eoncilio Niceno prohibitum fuisse nesciebam, and gives this as the reason why he would not so ordain Eradius."

Next, he would prove that this provision for a successor does not destroy that rule, by an instance ; J need not transcribe it at large ; 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 inviolable 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.

Erom 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 translate castellum a castle. I did no more expect to be blamed for this than if I had rendered oppidum a town. But I suppose he counts it no great crime since he runs into it himself, and in a few Hues after calls it a castle.

" 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.

Possidon. Vita August, cap. viii.

He adds, " It was forty miles distant from 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 government of one bishop, but as it was used in Africa, in a civil sense, for part of a province, 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 colleague Januarius was bishop there were four bishops besides, all five in una dioecesi, b "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 c 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 Avith him.

He says, the town or castle indeed had none, but the county belonging 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 us was a province with them, one province must be as much as all Africa ;

• Con. Carth. ii. Can. v. Cod. Afric. liii. 4 Coll. Carth. D. i. Num. cxvii. ' account.

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

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 Hippo."

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 de jure, as he tells us, belonged to the diocese (as he calls it) or charge of St. Austin, Yet, 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 t|j^y have to allege for the largeness 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 diocese 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, unless 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 congregation, or many, ought not to have a bishop. Whereas, he says, this reason destroys its dependence upon the diocese, 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 are 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 charge, would not have them ejnscopo cedere, 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 fifth 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 certissimd ratione, "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 multiplied in Cappadocia, ■^■vxmp ewiufkeia TrXelav, " anxiety for many souls," a much more desirable 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 ende^our by himself or others the converting 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 Athanasms to have been bishop of India ; because he encouraged and sent Fru-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, will have me to signify that he was the bishop of the town only. This I did not intend, but 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, " as 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 diminish 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. \xiii. '■> Slillingfleet.

thereby, and altogether 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 have been still two dioceses (such as they were) in one town.

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 modum disptensa-tionis mece non supergrediar hoc ecclesice ad Hipponensem regionempertinenti prodesse contestor, " 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 truly of his church there as Austin did of his church at Hippo ; it did ad Hipponensem regionem pertinere, " 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 according to our modern measures will scarce make a diocesan church."

To show that there were more bishops in the region of Hippo than St. Austin, (besides particular 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 in 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[axtor] of Episcopary, Part ii. p. !'.

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 anything at 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 est ergo desiderium nostrum, §c. " this therefore is what we wish," &c.; primum, si fieri potest, id cum episcopis nostris pacifice conferatis, " first, that, if possible ye will peaceably confer with the bishops of our parts;" ideo nos conferre volumus, " therefore we wish a conference :" and the prime occasion of it was the outrages committed in that region by the Donatists, wherein the bishops of that place were particularly concerned. This is signified, as in other parts of the epistle, so particularly in the passage cited, Episcopos nostros qui sunt in regione Hipponensi, ubi tarda mala patimur, " 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 Hipponensi, " 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 forte isto3 leges imperatoris vos rum permittunt nostros ep>iscop>os convenire; and then immediately follow these words in answer to it, ecce interim episcopos nostros qui sunt in regione Hipponensi, " 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 apprehension 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 regionis 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 catholici, " 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, kcit e^oxn", " i n a special sense." But if the expression should be extended to more or to all in the region, their calling him episcopus noster, " our bishop," will be no proof that they had no other bishop but him at Hippo. For that phrase episcopus noster, " our

bishop," or episcopi nostri, " 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 Valentinus nostrum catholicum episcopum, " our catholic bishop," who yet was not bishop of Hippo. So they call them episcopos ?iostros, whom they desired the Donatists to meet once and again, 3 and thrice in another page, where our author finds episcopos nostros. b 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 episcopos nostros, he must grant many more bishops in that region than I need desire. So that this phrase, however it be understood, 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 somew T here 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 i'pr/ixov tSp dBf\(pav, " quite destitute of Christians," ° and the gaining the generality there to the faith, required some considerable time, and it is like 0 " 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 373. J Page 371. c Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xi. d probable. ' Apol. ii. p. C12.

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 mentioned to be so, will be an hard task.

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

And so it might be, and yet be no diocesan chiirch ; 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 apprehensive 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 ? a 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 modern dioceses were of this proportion, they would be much more conformable to the ancient models.

" Suppose the chief congregations of Holland had each a bishop, yet I conceive they would be diocesans, thoi;gh those cities he very close together."

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 parallel. 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 governed in common by bishop and presbyters, as the ancient churches were, they would not be diocesan, but more like the model of the churches and government which Holland hath at present.

" And now after all this, though we have several instances out of Egypt, 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 them."

He would have us think, where cities are so near together (as I have showed,) yet because of their number 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 ancients

« argue.

thought themselves obliged by the apostle's rule to have a bishop, not only in some but in every city, emaicoTTcov i'8ei noXXibv, " there is need of many bishops," says Chrysostom, ko.1 icad' fKaa-rtjv noXiv TrpoTjyTjcrafjievoov," " and rulers in every city," and Theophylact expresses Kara noXiv by ku6' iKnuT-qv noXiv, " 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 after : 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." 6

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 consulting the place I found it not entirely represented. There is this clause (immediately following the words he cites) left out, ovSeis rovrav rjfias f/Tiaro, " 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, ttoXXol tS>v (mo-KOTrwv, 0 and in Athanasius there is

In 1 Tim. Horn. xi. 4 Athan. Apol. ii. « Lib. i. cap. xiv.

g2

an account of many Meletian bishops by name;" and in Epiphanius it is said, that in every region through which Meletius passed, and in every place where he came, he made bishops. 6

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 Alexandria (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, KaKe7 navras evx f o-dai, ' and there they all prayed,' and that the church did 7rdvras degacrdai, ' 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 favour, 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 Athanasius could and did meet in that one church. If this be granted, nothing is denied that he intended to prove. As for a diocese iu 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 cotdd receive all the multitude, yet if that multitude was too great for personal communion 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, Amen.

He says, 3dly, " 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 parishes in England have as great a number as Alexandria, is hardly credible.

• Apol. ii. p. 614. (Ed. Col. 1C8G, torn. i. p. 796.) « Bpiph. Haer. lxviii. [n. 3.]

I know not how those places could be well expressed with more diminution than Athanasius hath done it ; he says 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 fipaxvTaroi, " very little," I shall understand that which I could never before, that something is less than that which is least of all. 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 beginning 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 large."

The ground of the consequence is removed; Valesius 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, after so many edicts for demolishing 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 fieXnov rjv, " 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, e 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 assembled with Alexander, the other places being too strait, aTevwv ovtqw aXXoiv rav T07rcoi/, this is that one I excepted when I said (after Athanasius) 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 6+. ' prulialile. • in separate places.

" 3dly, Some of these churches had been built with a design of receiving as many as well could have personal communion in worship together."

Neither will this hold, tmless some of those churches could have received all which had personal communion with Athanasius 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 ra in memory of a former bishop of that place) where he says the multitude of Catholics met with Alexander, o-uvrj-yev eKel 8ia to 7tA/;#o?, " 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 8egao-dcu Trdvras i " 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 church."

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

* probable. ' Euseb. lib. vii. cap. ult. Theodoret, lib. i. cap. ii.

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 far 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, nda-rjs

Sfiov tt]s TTokeas dvSpdcriv a/xa nal yvvai^iu, iv rfj eKKXrjcria Kara ftacriXicncov

a-vvadpoca-deta-Tjs. b Besides, Athanasius here signifies the danger of a crowd was in the lesser churches, (not in this,) where they coidd not meet but «ri kiv8wov o-woxtjs, " with danger of a crowd," and so prefers their assembling together in the great church as better.

As for the tumrdts, (which might have been concealed in a vindication 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 ostentation 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 commends both for the more desirable communion 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, c and judge. He sets forth the harmony and concurrence of the multitude in worship with one voice. He prefers it before their assemblies, when dispersed in little places, and not only because the unanimity of the multitude was herein more apparent, but because God would sooner hear them, ourm kcu ra^ews o Gedy eVaKouet. " For if," says he, " according 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

• Constantinople. » Collect, lib. i. p. 183, F. ' Apol. ii. pp. 531, 532.

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

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 from that passage in Athanasius here insisted on, that the Catholics then could meet in one place. After 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," says he, " to this of Athanasius (the very passage mentioned) another argument given him by a learned friend."* And after he hath done with it, c [proceeds] "because M[r.] B[axter] has endeavoured to represent the church of Alexandria [as] so inconsiderable even in Constantius's days, &c." And yet, how it conies 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 them."

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. 9, 10. ' Page 58, c Page 63.

account; and so as much reason to fancy the design was to show what [number of] Christians Alexandria had in the primate's time. Jerome, Epiphanius, Theodoret, Socrates, Sozomen, are also cited there; why coidd 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 absurd 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 if we can find any one clause that is true and pertinent in the whole, and begin with the best of it.

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, that part was eprj/xos, 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 Martyrology, or him that tells it, when it appears not in the words cited. In Strabo it is pepos, " part of the city;" in Epiphanius it is a region, iv ™ Bpou^t'co Kakovfxfvo) KXipari," " in the region called Bruchium." For as Rome was divided into fourteen regions, and C. P. 6 in imitation of it, so Alexandria was divided into five, whereof Bruchium was one, and the greatest of all. So I understand Ammianus Marcellinus, e who, upon the loss of Bruchium, saith, amisit regionum maximum partem, qua? Bruchium appellator, " Alexandria lost the greatest of its regions, which was called Bru.chj.um."

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

« De Pond, et Mens. p. 166. » Constantinople. r [Lib. xxii. cap. xvi.]

not unlikely, and perhaps destitute of public buildings, too, for it was destroyed after an obstinate siege 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 reraprov rj /cat rpirov tov Tvavros nepifiokov pepos, in the historian's words, " a fourth, yea, or a third part of its largeness," 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 dweU closer than before, and so their multitude be undiminished."

How far it is from being true, that their multitude was undiminished, and how needless either to enlarge, or to dwell closer, may soon appear. 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 ; a and it was much wasted and in a consumptive condition, before it was thus besieged and dismantled by Claudius II., or Aurelian.

It was greatly diminished in numbers by Caracalla, who massacred a great part of the inhabitants. Herodian says, roaovros eyivero cpovos cos peidpois aiparos, &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, c 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," and vqirLav ap^apevrj naidcov, p^XP 1 T ^ v els & K P 0V yeyr)paKOTa>v.

" However, certain it is, that this city, long after 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. * Hist. lib. iv. [p. 17fi. ed. Lugrtun. 1624.] ' In Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xiii.

" A great part of the city," says the latter, " was assigned to the Jews, so Strabo indefinitely as Josephus quotes him; others tell us more punctually," 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 ronos I'Stoj 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 insurrection of the Alexandrians against them."

I suppose he means by that slaughter of them which Josephus mentions,* where fifty thousand were destroyed; but what were these to the vast number of Jews in Egypt, which Philo c says amounted to no less 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 far from extinguishing them in Egypt or Alexandria, that thereby, in all probability, their numbers were there increased; for being divested of about one thousand towns and garrisons by Severus (Adrian's general,) as Dion reports, and forbidden all access to Jerusalem, as Aristo Pelleus in Eusebius, d 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 repeating of his own mistake, and-upon no other ground making himself sport with the 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 Strabo, who makes the distribution, never intended the Christians one foot of ground 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 born:"' and he is at it again several times in the following discourse/

• particularly. • De Bello Judiac. lib. ii. cap. xxi. " Legat. ad Caium, [p. 1040, ed. Tumeb.]

* Lib. iv. cap. vi. ■ Pages 63, 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 examiner will publish his own indiscretion so many times over to effect it! But I will forbear any sharper reflections upon this author; for taking him to be an ingenuous person, I may expect he will be severe upon 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's greatness from the first foundation of it ; a which because it may concern 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 ; 6 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 Alexandria 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 l c Ay; but M[r.] B[axter] means that there were not only two bishops, but their distinct churches in this city. Well, and does not Epiphanius give him sufficient ground for it ? Does he not tell us that Meletius made bishops, who had their Iblas eKKXrjaias, " own churches," in every place where he came ? Does he not signify that the Meletians in Alexandria had their distinct churches or meetings both in the time of Alexander and Athanasius ? Says he not particularly of Meletius that being familiar with Alexander he stayed long in that city, having I8iap o-vva^iv avv to\s l8lois, " 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 Donatists, the 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 Avho 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 misrepresents 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[i\] B[axter], charging him with much weakness, (as one easily imposed upon,) many oversights, gross mistakes, divers absurd things, and such stories, that he will scarce wish worse to his adversary, than to believe him. rf Nor does Epiphanius alone fall under his censure; in his Vindication of the Primitive Church, (as he calls it,)

« Page 61. * observation. Page 107. rf Pages 112, 113, &c.

he goes near to accuse more particular persons (bishops amongst others) of eminency in the ancient church, than he defends; so that one may suspect 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 vindicate any.

" In St. Mark's time Alexandria had several churches, though but one 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," a>s <al ypacfirjs agicoo-ai t6v <&i\cova. Eusebius conceived that the Essenes, as Scaliger, or the Therapeuta?, as Valesius, whom Philo 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 ground than a mistake.

The next is no better ;* that is an epistle of Adrian, which others are puzzled to make sense of, or such sense as can have any appearance of truth. That very passage in it, which is the only ground of our author's argument, himself acknowledges to be false; for he would show the Christians in Alexandria to be numerous enough for his purpose, 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 w T hat 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 worship 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

Euseb. lib. ii. cap. xvi. 4 Page 62.

this passage to his purpose, and Adrian's 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 Pantamus, Clemens, .Origen, and Heracles, did not a little advance the growth of Christian religion in that place," &c.

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

The next concerning Dionysius'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. A It cannot easily be apprehended how a larger church meeting with Dionysius, made up of those banished with him, and others from several parts 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 understand that Dionysius is better proved to be a diocesan by the Christians 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 colligitur, estate qaidem Dionysii, unicam adhuc fuisse Alexandrite ecclesiam, in quam omnes urbis illius fideles orationis causd, conveniebant. " From this place we gather that in the time of Dionysius there was, as yet, but a single church at Alexandria, in which all the faithful of that city met for prayer." c

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

" Under the persecution of Diocletian what numbers of Christians mi^ht be at Alexandria, may be judged by the multitude of martyrs that suffered at Thebes," d &c.

But here he mistakes Eusebius, who gives an account not of the martyrs which were ev Qrj^ais, " in the city Thebes," but Kara Qrjftatda, " the province Thebais," which was half of that large kingdom, according 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 these terms we have in Eusebius (to go no further) a little before, 6 Kara Qr](3at8a, " in Thebais," Kar "Aiyvnrov, " in Egypt," where he begins his 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. 30, 31. c Not. in Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xi.

J Page 64. • Cap. vi.

eluded to be very numerous from the multitudes of martyrs which suffered there ; yet nothing at all can be inferred for any numbers to his purpose in the city Thebes, by which he would conclude their numerousness in Alexandria. But if M[r.] B[axter] had mistaken one city for so large a country with multitudes of cities in it, and made that mistake the ground of his reasoning, it is like a our examiner would have exposed him for it in his preface, as he does for some lesser matters.

In the following paragraph,* there is a groundless supposition, that the division of Alexandria into parishes was ancienter than Arius, there being no mention of it by any ancient author ; as also an accusation of Petavius as mistaking Epiphanius's words, without any cause that I can discern in those words, though he says " it is plain there." That which he says is plain, the learned dean of Paul's c could not discern, but understood Epiphanius as Petavius and others did before him. These 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 into so many parishes," &c.

But this signifies nothing for his purpose, if those in Alexandria thus divided could all meet in one place, as Athanasius declares they did; and that so plainly that any one will judge so, whose interest is not too hard for his judgment. Valesius (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, against our author.) " Afterwards in the times of Athanasius, when there were more churches built by divers bishops of Alexandria, the citizens assembled in several churches severally and in parcels, as Athanasius says in his apology to Constantius ; but on the great festivals, Easter and Pentecost, no particular assemblies were held," sed universi in majorem ecclesiam conveniebant, ut ibidem testatur Athanasius, " but all of them assembled together in the great church, as Athanasius testifies."

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

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

• probable. * Page G5. « Dr. Stillingflcet, Serm. of Separation, p. 28.

before, yet none of them was as yet appropriated to any presbyter, but they were served in common as great cities in Holland 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 territory 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 him."

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

The 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 Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, towards the latter end of the third age, who declares that then Mareotes was eprjixos ddeXcpcov kcu o-n-ouSatW av6pu>Tru>v, b 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. c Nor is it likely that the faith was there generally received till many years after; and therefore not almost so early as Alexandria, unless the distance of above two hundred years will consist with his almost. For Alexandria received the faith by the preaching of Mark, who arrived there, says Eusebius, in the 2nd of Claudius,** others in the 3rd of Caligula. e But in the time of Dionysius it doth not appear that Mareotes had so many Christians, as Bishop Ischyras's church there consisted of, though those were but seven, ov TrXeo'j/ cirra twv crvvayofievav e'xeiv, —" had not

" Page 66. 4 Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xi. <; Page 60.

rf Chron. Euseb. Cliran. Alex.

more than seven for a congregation."" But enough of Alexandria, though our author is far 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 Roman empire next to Rome. 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, 8e<a Ttokewv irfv^rat 8war6v rjv Operas, that it was able to maintain the poor of ten cities.*

So far 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 c Athanasius had the lesser share,** the Novatians and other sects, the Meletians especially, 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, unless 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 numerous, or as Sozomen expresses them, ovk okly-q poipa tov \aov, e " 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 passed 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,

•Athan. Apol. 2, p. 615. [Ed. Col. 1686, p. 796, B, tom. i.] * In Mat. Horn, lxvi

c probable. ,J Page 30. • Lib. i. cap. xiv.

/Dr. Stillingfleet.

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 so neither, for by the conference at Carthage, and the abbreviation of it by St. Austin, much more to be relied on, than the Notitia 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 account concerning their numbers in Africa," (which he reckons but four hundred and sixty-six, taking in those of the schismatics too ; about sixty-six for each province one with another, counting 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 reader 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 which are not competent for that purpose (of which there are many instances, 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 account what mediums cannot in reason be esteemed to afford competent proof of diocesan churches.

In genei'al, those who will satisfy us that any churches, in the first

• Vindic. p. 149.

ages of Christianity, 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 primitive church. This we deny, because modern 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 napoiKia and ftioUrjo-cs 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 modern 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 account for them : b 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." c St. Austin, speaking of the third age, makes account of many thousand bishops then in the world. d Our author seems to treat that excellent person something coarsely on this occasion, and goes near to question his judgment or veracity for it : e 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 church. Those,

« Iron. p. 376. « Page 332. ' Page 883.

J Contra Crescon. lib. iii. [cap. iii.] ' Page 534. / Page 53a.

a 2

therefore, who will make proof of such diocesan churches as are in question, must show us some in the primitive 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 meet together in one place, for there are parishes in this land that contain many hundreds or thousands more than can meet in the parish church, and yet are but counted single 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 congregations amongst us; nor many afterwards, till Arianism 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 parts during the fourth age; for though Theodosius made some sharp declarations against them and other heretics, yet none but the Eunomians were prosecuted; if we believe Socrates, 0 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 congregations in that city, c 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, 0 " would infer that the Christians in his time were the major 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 numerous in many parts of the empire. Those that will have them strained, and understood as they sound, offer great injury to Tertullian, making him intend that which hath no warrant in any records of antiquity, civil or ecclesiastical, that I can meet with. Before they impose such a sense on him, they ought in reason to make it manifest, that the Christians were the major part of the inhabitants in some considerable cities at that time ; when I believe they cannot produce two instances in the whole empire: I never yet could meet with one.

" Lib. v. cap. xx. h Constantinople. ' Lib. v. cap. xxiii.

</ Apol. cap. xxxvii. et ad Scapulam. [Ed. Lutet. 1675, p. 71, C]

Our author from these oratorical expressions sticks not to conclude that it is evident that the Christians were the major part everywhere but in Rome more eminently so ; and Dr. Downham signifies that Tertullian speaks chiefly of the city of Rome. 0 This gentleman says, that by his account it is made very probable,' that they were the better half of the Roman empire; and tells us,* it is certain that the number of Christians at Rome 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 Rozne, and those in the whole city. Cornelius, near fifty years after 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, quce e publico victitabat, " who were maintained at the public expense," are computed to be thirty-two thousands

Many take occasion, from the thousands converted at Jerusalem, (Acts ii. and iv.) to conclude the vast number of Christians and exceeding largeness of churches elsewhere. Our author hath nothing from Scripture for diocesan churches but this, which is considerable ; d 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 eXdrrovs rpiaKoa-icov p.vpidba>v., e whereas the inhabitants of that city were but about a hundred and twenty thousand, 7repi ScoSe/ca fivpidSes: but of this elsewhere more fully.

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 God enjoined the

' Defence, lib. ii. cap. v. p. 98. * rage 54. c Lipsius de Mag. Rom. lib. iii. cap. ii.

* Page 43.5, &c. • Joseph. De Bell. Jadaic. lib ii. cap. xxiy.

children of Israel to repair to Jerusalem from all quarters of the country where they dwelt thrice a year, for the observance 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, 8ia to

7rdcrxa avveXrjXvdficrav waaai a? (pvXai pera /cat rmv edva>v, a " 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, "all those strange nations were inhabitants of Jerusalem."

He cannot judge that the Scripture says this but upon a supposition that the word KaroiKovvres, 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, c and here expresses those abiding at Jerusalem to be Jews which came up to the feast of the Passover, and proselytes which had come from several nations of all quarters of the world. Thus also Mr. Mead,'* " for the word KaroiKovvres, saith he, which I translate sojourning rather than dwelling; (for so I understand it, that they were not proper dwellers, but such as came to worship at Jerusalem 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 oIkcco and KaroiKiu> signify a durable mansion, but with the Hellenists, in whose dialect the Scripture speaketh, they are used indifferently 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 naroiKdv is to sojourn only. In a word, otx/w and KaroiKea answer to the Hebrew verb 2W, which signifies any stay or remaining in a place." Grotius saith it answers the Hebrew word which is rendered not only by KaroiKeiv but TrapoiKelv, &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 KaroiKovvTe?, dwellers at Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, &c.; by

" Hpg°sip. in Euseh. lib. il. cap. xxiii. A In loe. ■ Jn Act. x. ii.

' In Exercit. in Act. ii. 5.

which must be understood, either that they were inhabitants or sojourners in those countries ; that they 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, unless they could be inhabitants of several distant countries at once. To the same purpose Mr. Mead," " ol KaroiKovvres rrjv Meaonoraplav, where, note by the way, that ol KaroiKovvres ttjp Mf<ro7roTafiiav, are comprehended in the number of those whom my text saith were kotoikovvtcs iv tq lepovaaXrjp, which confirms my interpretation that KaroiKovvres 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 feasts 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 Cestius Gallus a certain account of their numbers ; but then they were all in a manner strangers, for he adds, iro\v 8e tovto ttXtjOos e£co#ez> avWeycTai, " 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 misunderstood ; the words are irpoo-KaprepoviTes rfj 8i8axfi, which do not signify any fixed abode in that place, but only their constancy or persevering in the duties mentioned while they were there. This is the use of the expression in the New Testament, Col. iv. 2, 77} Trpoo-evxfi npoa-KaprepelTe, and so Rom. xii. 12, continuing in prayer, which they might do if they never had a fixed habitation, nor continued as inhabitants 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 converts 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 tlieir

■ In Exercit. in Act. ii. 5. * De Bel. Jud. lib. vii. cap. 45. ' Page 437.

families and others with Christ and the doctrine of salvation, 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 they would have been if they 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's c makes account but of five thousand in all. d To me it is not material whether they were five 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 from an occasional 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 diocesan church, whereas the whole is said in the Acts to meet in one place. e He hath nothing to say against this which is considerable, but that the all may denote only those that Avere 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 paucity of believers, and their meeting 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 they could not conveniently meet in one place, this is contrary to the evidence of the text, which saith expressly, ver. 44, that all the believers were .«ri to avro, which in the last paragraph they interpreted, meeting in one and the same place : the like might be said of the other places, Acts iv. 4, and v. 14, for certainly as yet, though the number of believers 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 the apostles, yet it cannot be understood of all the believers."

No, but of the generality of them, all that could commodiously fly as strangers might do. Nor must it be confined to all the officers only ;

« In lor. b Defence, lib. ii. cap. v. page 85. c Dr. Stillingfleet.

v Serin, of Separation, p. 20. ' Act. ii. 44, vi. 2, &c. / Page 441.

i Answer to Lfonrlon] Ministers, pp. 78, 79. « Pages 442, 443.

the generality of expositors are misrepresented if this be made their sense, nor doth it appear that Eusebius so understood it ; padrjral is used in Scripture and other writers, and Eusebius himself, to denote believers, and not officers only. As for the time of the dispersion (though I need not insist on it) probably it was nearer this great Pentecost than some would have it. On the first day of the week in the morning were the three thousand converted ; the next, or (as some tell us) the same day afternoon, at the ninth hour," the number of the converts was increased to five thousand. While this sermon was preaching the apostles are apprehended, and committed to custody till the next morning. Another, it is like* the day after, they are imprisoned, but enlarged by an angel in the night, chap. v. In or near that week were the seven deacons chosen, presently after the disciples were thus increased, and the apostles imprisoned and dismissed. The expression signifies it, chap. vi. 1. It is not iv indvcus, in those days, which may admit a latitude and some good distance of time, but iv ravrais, in these days, which denotes the time instant, or that which immediately ensues, without the interposure^ of any such distance. And so the phrase is used by St. Luke, both in the Gospel and in the Acts. It is Dr. Hammond's observation upon Luke i. 39. " The phrase iv ravrais rals rjpepais, in these days, saith he, hath for most part a peculiar signification, differing from iv rjpepais eKelveis, in those days. The latter signifies an indefinite time, sometimes a good way off, but the former generally denotes a certain tinie then present, instantly, then at that time ; so here, that which is said of Mary's going to Elizabeth was sure rf immediately after the departing of the angel from her, and therefore it is said she rose up fiera <nrov8rjs, very hastily ; so ver. 24, pera tclvtcls ras f)fiepas > i. e. immediately Elizabeth conceived ; so chap. vi. 12, iv rals rjpepuis ravrais, i. e. then, at that point of time, he went out to the mountain. See chap, xxiii. 7, c. xxiv. 18, Acts i. 5, c. xi. 27, and xxi. 15."

Immediately after the choice of the deacons, Stephen, one of the seven, is apprehended dpa rrj x fl porovla, " as soon as ever he was ordained, as if he had been ordained for this alone," saith Eusebius, (lib. ii. cap. i.) And at the same time the persecution began "which dispersed that church. Whereas he saith, " whatsoever numbers were forced away, it is likely they returned ;" if he understand it of the strangers driven from Jerusalem, that they returned to fix there, or otherwise than occasionally, it is no more likely, nor will be sooner proved than what he asserts a little after, (page 444,) viz. that " the empty sepulchre preached with no less efficacy than the apostles."

This is enough to satisfy 6 what our author would draw out of Scrip-

* P[r.] L[ightfoot.J ' probable. ' interval. <* surely. ' answer

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 lis believe that James was the proper bishop of that church, and woidd evince it by two testimonies, those of Clemens and Hegesippus. But what says his Clemens ? He saith not only that James was ordained bishop of Jerusalem presently after our Saviour's ascension, 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 degree of honour, (/ijj emSLKciCeo-dat. So£r??,) but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem,"" Apostolorum ejriscopum, "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 Romanist* 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 : c " 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, e hut 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, fxera row aTToarokav. If we take this as it is rendered 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 oecumenical officers of an extraordinary office and power, and accordingly is James described. One ancient author says that he, no less than Peter, did eTriTpoTrrjv rrjs oiKovfievrjs dvabegaaOai. And

° [Clem, in Eus. lib. ii. cap. i.] ' Valesius. c Lib. ii. Recognit. [cap. lix.]

H Hist. lib. ii. cap ii. • wonder.

Epiphanius reports," that Hyginus after James, Peter, and Paul, was the ninth bishop of Rome successively, signifying that he was as much bishop of Pome as Paul and Peter. I need not quote that other author who says he ruled the holy church of the Hebrews, as also he did all churches everywhere founded. 4

" However, certain it is that James was bishop of Jerusalem, not only from Hegesippus and Clemens Alex[andrinus,J 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. Paul, that his mentioning him as an apostle makes it rather certain that he was not a bishop; for the offices 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 attendance, can hardly look well after so general a. charge, &c. Baronius saith of St. Peter, that ' it was his office not to stay in one place, but as 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 Pome, which was an office inconsistent with such vagrancy ? It would not have beseemed St. Peter, the prime apostle, to assume the charge of a particular 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) woidd 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

■ Haeres. [xli.] Cerdon. [n. I.] » [Clem.] Ep. to James. [In Hard. Cone. torn. i. p. 39.]

* Dr. Barrow, Snprem. pp. 120,121.

well become a bishop; it would be such an irregularity as if a bishop should be made a deacon."

" Ecclesiastical history makes James the ordinary bishop and diocesan 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 Hegesippus, who says, " That several of the Jewish sectaries who believed neither a resurrection nor judgment to come, were converted by James, and that when a great number of the rulers and principal men of the city were by this ministry brought to believe the Gospel, the Jews made an uproar, the scribes and Pharisees saying, that it was to be feared that all the people would turn Christians." a

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 turn 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 purpose, 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. 6 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, c divers by Valesius, rf and some acknowledged by Petavius. e

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 understand that town to be their metropolis, and the believers all scattered through the whole country, and this as Epiphanius writes."

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 all the disciples (in another place,) iravrts ol fiadrfral

" Page 446. s In Euseb. lib. ii. cap. 23. ■ Aiiiinad. in Euseb. p. 178.

* In Euseb. lib. ii. cap. 23. " Not. ad Haeres. 78.[n. 3.] / Epiph. Hser. xxx.[n. 2.]

coK-qa-av iv TleXkr] ;° what he adds is but to describe where the town was situated, "all the disciples, all the believers dwelt beyond Jordan in Pella." Archbishop Whitgift 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 again 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 6 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." c This might be farther cleared d by what Epiphanius saith of that church in its return from Pella, but I design briefness.

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 faith 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 Christians 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 Csesarea ; 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. 4G1, "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 Judaga (Jerusalem excepted) than that such were founded by the apostles ; but of their government and constitution we have not the least information." What information, then,

■ De Ponder, et Mens. cap. xv. 4 Lib. iii. cap. v.

» Defence of Answer. Treat, iii. cap. vi. p. 175. rf 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 fieri,' 1 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 government of Euodias, and after 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 any thing this gentleman can see in Scripture,) but only from ecclesiastical writers.

But his ecclesiastical writers do so contradict one another as renders their testimonies 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 ; b on the contrary, some will have Ignatius to have been the first, and make no mention of Euodias ; c others will have them to have governed that church both together ; d some will have Euodias ordained by Peter, and Ignatius by Paul; others report Ignatius ordained by Peter, and some modern atithors of great eminency, both Protestants and Papists, (not only Baronius but Dr. Hammond,) find no more tolerable way to reconcile 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 assembled within one church ; meeting ev rfj eKKkrja-la, for a year together, and there taught this Uavop or noXvv 6'^Xoi/. The same divine author says, Acts vi. 7, noXvs 6'xXoy, "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 congregations there in the apostles' times. Let us see how : " By the multitude of salutations in the end of that epistle, he makes appear the numbers of Christians in that city. ' Salute Priscilla and Aquila with the church that is in their house.'"

" in the course of formation. 4 Euseb. lib. iii. cap. xxii.

« Chrys. Orat. in Ignat. •> Clemens Constitut. lib. vii. cap. xlvi.

The Dean of Paxil's" will have this church in their house to .be but a family ; 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 removed 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, (Rom. xvi.,) that is, there were some of the church which belonged to their family. It is a question whether there was now at Rome any one congregation such as our author intends ; Grotius 4 thinks it probable there was none at all. But let us suppose this to be a congregation, where finds he his several others ? why where another person would scarce dream of any. "It is not improbable, saith he, that several that are mentioned with all the saints that are with them, may be the officers of several congregations,"—pp. 457, 458.

But it is manifest that in the apostles' times one congregation had many officers; how, then, can several officers be a good medium to prove several congregations ? The ancient authors which count those officers (mentioned Rom. xvi.) do make them bishops, (and some except not Narcissus nor Prisca, i. 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 purpose ; if they were bishops at Rome, there will be very many bishops in that one church, (it may be more than Priscilla's congregation consisted 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 Gentiles, and preached to them the kingdom of God for the space of two whole years, no man forbidding him,"—p. 458.

Paid preached at Rome in his hired house for two years ; all 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 iipon pretence that they had fired Rome, p. 458. Tacitus speaks of the Christians as guilty, and says they confessed the crime, and detected 0 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. Stillingfleet. ' In Rom. xvi. 5. ' caused the detection 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 Rome, 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 whom it is customary on that subject, splendide mentiri, " 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 exitiabilis superstitio, " a pernicious superstition," and when the Christians 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 multitiido, 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 martyrs burnt in Queen Mary's days were a great multitude ; and few may be accounted very many, to suffer 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 Avere crucified; and others were set on fire when the day closed, that they might serve as lights to illuminate the night," Ferarum tergis contecti ut laniata canum interirent, aut crucibas ajfi&'i, aut Jiammandi, atque ubi defecisset dies in usum nocturni luminis uterentur, 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 presently in all cities and villages churches abounding with innumerable multitudes were assembled, &c.—p. 459.

If he will not deal unkindly 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 more rem amplijicare, —" 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 five hundred Christians. Those who will not abuse themselves or their readers must give great allowance to such expressions, and not rely on them in strict arguing.

And here it may not be amiss to take notice of what he says of Eome 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, showing 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 hath been made evident; the number of the poor, being fifteen hundred, rather proves the contrary. This was cleared b 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 number. 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 could understand it. It is about the word dXi^ofxtvoi, in Cornelius's epistle, rendered ' the poor.' Valesius observes the word is used by the Roman clergy in an epistle to those at Carthage, sive vidnce sive tJdibome?ii, i. e. indigentes, saith he, as Rufinus translates it, and tell us also that Cyprian c calls them paiqjeres et indigentes qid laborant. These, says our author, were not only poor, but sick and diseased, alleging that of the Roman clergy for it after 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

■ Church Hist. p. 7. Vindicat. p. 27. 4 made clear. c Ep. iv.

I

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 innumerable, and Socrates expresses those wounded in the fight'between the Christians and heathen in Alexandria about the demolishing of an idol temple were dvapidnijroi, 11 " 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. c M[r.] B[axter] 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 Rome than any of these innumerables come to, and yet make good what he supposes.

The great liberality of the 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 condemned 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 particularly who were condemned to the mines ; and eVap^eZj/ must denote as it were the all-sufficiency of the Roman church, which some would say is, as it Avere, blasphemy, but our author meant better, the proper import of the word is no more than stipem conferre.

He alleges two passages in Eusebius ; d 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 ndcrav ^rvxn v be stretched to every soul, Eusebius is made to speak 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. e These he will have to be of the nobility, but those were counted noble who descended

" Lib. v. cap. 15. ' Lib. vii. cap. 15. c Fage 131. J Page54. • Lib. v. 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 Christ.* And near one hundred and fifty years after, when Constantine had reigned near twenty years in Rome, the generality of the inhabitants 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]'s 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]'s measures, nor make it near so numerous as that parish to which Whitehall belongs.

What he next offers neither concerns Rome,** being general expressions, nor M[r.] B[axter], referring to the ages after those which he is concerned for: whether by pvpidvdpovs iina-vvayayas 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 Eusebius, an elegant writer, would use so much tautology in so few lines. 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 Avith better reason be 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 after, 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. 4 Platina Vita Xysti. • Zosimus, Hist. lib. ii. p. 61. d Page 55.

i 2

than one ; unless where they all might have assembled in one place, they thought it better in prudence to disperse themselves into several 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. a 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 Avhich follows 6 is an hundred years or more beyond the time to which M[r.] B[axtex] 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 number 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; c 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 Athanasius's banishment in Epiphanius not to be so many months, and that years are put instead of months by the mistake of the copies.—page 113. Or that other about the number of bishops in the council at Antioch, 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 incmisitive 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. e But there is no need to insist on any thing of this nature; it is not so material 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[axterJ 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

• Euseb. lib. vii. cap. 32. h Page 55. c Anno 1018, No. 1.

* Pages 123, 124, 125. ' Interpret. Voc. Eecles. art. Titulus.

not follow Valesius in his mistake, who will have Optatus to speak of the churches at Rome in the time of Diocletian's persecution, tempore pevsecationis Diocletiani.' 1 But Optatus speaks of those churches when extant, and capable of receiving congregations, as is plain by his Avords ; but what churches were at Rome 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 after. Nicephorus speaks but of fourteen churches at Constantinople in the reign of Theodosius junior ; nor meet I with any author that gives an account of more, yet this was about an hundred years after Byzantium was re-edified, and both Constantine and the succeeding emperors endeavoured- to make that city as populous as could be, and furnished it with churches answerable to the numbers of the inhabitants.^ So that there is no likelihood there could be forty churches at Rome 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 Rome 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 Rome (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 persecution, 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 after the persecution was there ended, as Optatus, and Valesius after him, and others declare f and some time must be allowed after this for the Donatists' settling in Rome, 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 Rome in the former part of that very age wherein we are now concerned, who held not the chair ten years among them : MarceHus, Eusebius, Melchiades, and Marcus. But we may allow the three Donatist bishops at Rome near ten years a-piece, from the time of Optatus, 378, as both Blondel and Valesius agree; and yet Victor

In Euseb. lib. vi. cap. xliii ■ Hist. lib. v. rap. xxxviii. ' C'hron.

Lib. vii. cap. Xlix. ' Ue Schis. Donat. cap. iii. [F.d. Taris. Ifi7D, p. 76, s<\]

Garbiensis may not be bishop till anno 350, 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 themselves into distinct meetings. A large church, and sometimes a small congregation, may have occasion to divide and meet in parcels, for their convenience or security ; partictdarly 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 multitudinem simul jimctam, conveniendum," "to meet cautiously, not in large bodies, nor in a compact multitude." They durst not, in some parts, ei'? to (jtavepov cKKXrjo-id&iv, " keep their assemblies in public," in the beginning of Constantme's reign. b

Damasus, the supposed author of the Popes' Lives, says, Euaristus titulos presbyteris divisit, " divided the titles in Eome 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 Euaristus 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. Who 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 after, that then the " meetings of Christians were all secret, and rather in chapels, and those hidden, and for the most part underground, than in open and public places." Cum ed tempestate ob crebras persecutiones occulta essent omnia, et sacella potius, atque eadem abdita et plerumque subterranea; quam apertis in locis ac publicis fierent. Dr. St[illingfieet] says, 0 "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, hie presbyteris ecclesias divisit, " it was he who divided the churches to the presbyters." His reason concludes as much or more against the titles under tliis notion ascribed to Marcellus two hundred years after, (which some will have to be twenty-five, but Onuphrius shows they could not be more than fifteen d ) for Marcellus was bishop of Rome for six years of the tenth persecution,

[Ep. v.] [Ed. Paris, 1726, Ep. iv.] * Soz. lib. i. cap. ii.

Iren. p. 857. * Interpret. Voc. Eccles. art. Titulug.

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 by severe edicts to be quite demolished. But what is said of titles divided by 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 found who durst profess the name of Christ," propter frequentes ccedes pauci reperientur qui nomen Christi profiteri auderent. a And there was an order in that church, that when the bishop celebrated, all the presbyters should be present. Zepherinus voluit ])resbyteros omnes adesse celebrante episcopo, quod etiam Euaristo placuit, " Zepherinus would have all the presbyters present, when the bishop celebrated, which was also the rule of Euaristus :" 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 hundred 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 presbyters.

3. A church is not proved to be diocesan by the numbers of presbyters in it; this I have made evident before, and made it good against our author's exceptions. But he brings a new instance,* and will 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 well not to reckon that of the country in his 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 ; c cum omnes ecclesice nostra intra civitatem constitutor sunt, " all our churches are fixed within the city." But why it should be judged to be a diocesan church, because two

« Platina. Vita Xysti. * Page 552. ' Innocent. Ep. ad Decentium. [cap. v.]

hundred such persons belonged to it, seeing the great church at C. P.° had above five 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, c a little examine them. These he gives in d 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 e 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 apprehended, 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 numismata/ 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, decorum 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 correspondence 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 was 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

• Constantinople. ' Novel, iii. cap. iii. ' in passing. d renders.

• arranged. / tributes. f Con. Antioch. Can.xxv.

• Cod. Justin. Lex xlii. sect. ii. cap. De Episc. Nov. cxxxi. cap. xiii. Con. C'arth. iii. can. xlix.

rectory or vicarage, is in a fairer way to be rich than any in the ancient bishoprics, so ordered. And if riches or revenues be good arguments to prove a diocesan, one of our vicars may be a better diocesan than the bishop of Edessa. ty 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 after 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:" diaeoni eligunt de se quern industrium noverint, et archidiaconum vocant, " 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 so the presbyters 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 gentleman 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 five 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, 7rdvTa>v Kara TroXeis kcu dypovs {ifvovTwv eVi to avro (rweXevo-ts ; 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

■ F,p. ad Evagrium.

in city and country," says Dr. Downharn, " if they 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 Ca?sarea and Sasima. 4 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, 0 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 far 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 Csesarea, 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 ironically t5>v \a\mpav ^,a(TLjj.u>v, " the illustrious Sasima :" now Csesarea was not the metropolis which Basil would have deprived of Sasima; he earnestly endeavoured to have it annexed thereto : but he Avould 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 coidd 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 Csesarea. No indeed ; it is thereby proved to be so far from Csesarea, that it- did not enlarge Basil's

• Defence, lib. ii. cap. iv. p. 69. '- Pages 546, 54 7. ' made clear.

province, much less his diocese. Thus it is also placed in the Aiarvncocris of Leo Sophus, under the metropolitan of Tyana, not of Caesarea. 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 suffragans, when Nazianzen had quitted it.

He goes farther on to show the largeness of dioceses in Basil's province.

" 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 under him, nor that he was making 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 suffragans under him besides Sasima, &c., b (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 ; for 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—Meleteua, Cataonia, Cilica, Tyanitis, Isauritis, &c, whereof Basil's province was but one, viz. that called Cilica, and that of Anthimus, Tyanitis, another, &c. ; Mazaca, afterwards called Caesarea, being metropolis of Basil's, and Tyana of Tyanitis, &c. ; and after he hath given some account of these ten prefectures, he adds the dimensions of the whole country in these words —" The extent of Cappadocia in breadth, from the Euxine 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

■ Orat. de Bas. * Page 546.

he shows how they may be easily reconciled without changing the text here, or making the country broader 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 ti vulgatd lectione, " 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 one 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 Iconium, is directed to constitute bishops for the province of Iconium, in " little corporations 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 manifest 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, as 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 destructive 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 numbers increased, when there was not that occasion : and this in Cappadocia, which is our author's eminent instance. 6 For bishops were mvdtiplied by erecting episcopal sees in villages, and little places ; this was done in Isaiuia, 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 Donatists, whereas the rule by which the African fathers proceeded in erecting bishoprics in little places, and so increasing

• Ejj. rcccvi Page 545.

the number of bishops, was, as themselves declare, who best knew it, the increase of the number of Christians. 0 Where these were multiplied, and desired a bishop, they thought themselves bound to let them have one; not excepting the meanness or smallness of the places where he was to be constituted. And we must believe (if we have any reverence for those fathers) that they would have done what they judged themselves obliged to, though there had been no Donatists 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 Fussala, which he calls a castle, upon some increase of the Catholics there, divers years after the noted conference at Carthage, where the heart of the Donatists was broken. Nay, many years after the invasion of the Vandals, and the death of St. Austin, they proceeded in the same methods, or rather exceeded their predecessors in multiplying bishops, by erecting episcopal seats in smaller, and more inconsiderable places, if Leo's epistle may be credited. 6

But to return to our author, and the passage of Basil insisted on, by which, says he, " it appears that Isauria was part of Basil's province." • How this appears by anything therein, I cannot imagine. Our author 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 Basil's province, seems as incongruous, as if it were said, that the province of York is part of the province of Canterbury ; but if this could be digested, that one province is part of another, yet Isauria would 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 Home, gives advice, how bishops should be there constituted. 0

Next he brings in the chorepiscopi in order to his design, and tells us d 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 e than the country of Fussala."

But not a word for proof of this, save Basil's mentioning a chor-episcopus t£)v tottoov, of some places ; whereas, if he had been the bishop of two or three villages, this might be enough to satisfy the import of

• Concil. Carth. 2 Can. v. * Ep. Ixyxv. [cap. ii.] c Ibid. J 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 ridiculous.

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 see 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 large diocese. The provincial bishops were obliged to do nothing, pr)8ev npciTTeiv (eTri^etpeli/) fii^a ro ^ ^TponoXeos eVto-KoVou, without the bishop of the metropolis ; this 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 metropolitan. And it may proceed proportionably against the metropolitans with respect to the egapxoi 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. 6 Nay, further, in the best ages of the church, the bishops were to do nothing without the people, that is, without their presence and consent. This is most evident in Cyprian's epistles, and is acknowledged by such prelatists as are otherwise reserved enough. c Now by this argument we may conclude that 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 be this gentleman will not like his argument so well, when he sees

« Can. ix. Can. Apost. xxxv. Concil. Milev. Can. xiii.

' B[p.] Bilson, Dr. Field, Dr. Downliam, B[p.] Hall, M[r.] Thorndike, B[p.] Usher.

' Vide Defence of Dr. St[iilingneet] p. 407.

what improvement 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 negative 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 ls y^M s J 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, which is utterly inconsistent with any one's negative voice. What, then, is the import of Basil's avev yvmfiris ? 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, \<>>pis yv^p-yjs, 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*

5. It is no proof of a diocesan church, 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 Gaius Diddensis, presbyter, supposed (with what ground I examine not) to have been a country presbyter belonging to Carthage, and under Cyprian. c 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. d And that order for the presbyters from their churches, to repair to their proper bishop for chrism in Africa, e in Spain/ and in France, e To these are added, for further evidences, the churches (said without ground to be many) belonging to Hippo Diaeritorum ; also the church of Thy ana, 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,

■ Can. vi. » Barrow of the Pope's Supremacy, p. 314. ■ Vindication, p. 504.

* Pages 506, 507. ' Con. Cartli. iv. Can. xxxvi. / Cone. Tol. i. cap. xx.

I Cone. Vasens. Can. iii. » 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. 6 Besides, in the council of Neocresarea, country presbyters are dis-tinguished from others ; c and that of Antioch provides 1 * that country presbyters shall not give canonical epistles, e and allows the bishop to order-^ his own church, and the country places depending on ii.s 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 ; h in fine, Jerome speaks of some baptized by presbyters or deacons in hamlets, castles, and places remote from the bishop.

These and such like are used as good arguments for diocesan churches, whereas there are divers towns in England, which besides the officers in them, have many congregations and presbyters in 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 reduced, and confined to the measures of those parish churches, and left no bigger than some of our vicarages and 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 be, if united. Yet a bishop of such a district in our times would be counted so fir from having a competent diocese, that he would scarce .escape from being scorned as an Italian episcopellus. 1

But his greatest argument, (in comparison of which his other allegations, he tells us, are but accidental hints/') 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 the 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 supposition, 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 anything comparable to what they were after Constantine, when bishops were much multiplied,

"Page 528. * Page 516. ' Can. xiii. d Can. viii.

' The canonical epistles were letters of recommendation given to persons who were in the peace and communion of the church, on their passing from one fellowship to another. See Bingham. Antiq. Book ii. chap. iv. sect. v.

/ regulate. r Can. ix. p. 536. * Page 555. ■ bishopling.

> Page 508. * Pages 50S to p. 535, to p. 539, p. 556 to 562. ' Page 530.

(as he must understand it, if he expect any service from it) wants proof; and he offers none but some passages in Tertullian, strained far beyond what is agreeable to other ancient authors, of which before. Let me add, that Nazianzen, comparing the numbers of Christians in former times with those in Julian's reign, says, they were not many in former persecutions, (Christianity had not reached many, ovttcd eir\ ttoWovs,) no, not in that of Diocletian, &c, (though they were at that time far more numerous than in Tertullian's age) but that Christianity was found only in a few, iv oXlyois." The other part, which needs no proof, since it is granted, (and may be without any advantage to him) he attempts to prove largely and industriously ; but by such a medium as makes that which is granted to be questionable, such a one which, as it is ordered, may conclude backward, and prove the contrary to what he designs. That this may be manifest, let it be observed, that he will have us take an account of the number of bishops in the church, by their appearing in councils, more or fewer ; and accordingly judge in several periods, whether they were less numerous, and consequently their dioceses larger in former times than afterwards. And to this purpose, we need view no other instances than himself produces. At-Lambese, in Africa, there were ninety bishops against Privatus ; but not so many in any council after, (though not a few are mentioned in that country) till the Donatists grew numerous. b In Spain, the council of Eliberis had nineteen bishops in the beginning of the fourth age, and the first council of Toledo had no more in the beginning of the age after. But the following synods, at Saragossa, Gerunda, Ilerda, Valentia, Arragon, had not so many. c 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, and another at Aries. For general councils, the first at Nice had three hundred and eighteen bishops in the beginning of the fourth age ; that at Ephesus, above an hundred years after, had but two hundred ; that at C. P., d in the latter end of the fourth age, had but one hundred and fifty 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 the third age, than in the beginning of the fourth ; more in the beginning of the fourth than in some part of the fifth ; and more in the beginning of the fifth, than in some part of the sixth; quite contrary to the hypothesis on which he proceeds. Whether by

Orat. iii. [Ed. Paris, 1G30, torn. i. p. 80, A.) * Page 500.

Pages 557, 558. d Constantinople

K

his argument he would lead us to think dioceses did wax and wane so oddly, 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 very small," and crumbled into small pieces, 6 (and so nothing like ours) 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 far 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 after the apostles, had but one congregation to govern. 0 " 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 differences 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 account, they were so lamentably little, and crumbled so very small.

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 congregational 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 persuasion as congregational.

6. It is no argument for a diocesan church, that there were several fixed churches, with their proper presbyters in a city or its territory, so long as these churches, how many soever, were governed in common

"Page 552. * Page 516. • Page 71.

IN THE PRIMITIVE TIMES. J89

by the bishop and presbyters in such a precinct. For though few instances can be given of such churches, in or belonging to a city in the fourth age, yet wherever they were extant in that, or the following ao-e, in things of common concern to those churches, they were ordered in common by a presbytery, that is, the bishop with the presbyters of that precinct. Jerome declares it de jure, [that] they ought to be governed in common, in communi debere ecclesiam regere."

And Felix, third bishop of Rome, (than whom no bishop was higher, or more absolute in those times,) declares it de facto, when he speaks of the presbyters of that church, as bunovroov per e/xot) rbv dnoo-TokiKov dpovov, " ruling that church with him." It is the same word that the governing of churches by other bishops, is expressed by, pera. irda-qs tcov cnia-KOTvav ot ras 7repi£ SicIttov eKuXrjo-ias yvatpTjs, " with the perfect consent of the bishops who ruled the neighbouring churches," as Alexander saith of Narcissus, 6 npo Zpov Ste-rrav tov tottov eTno-Konrjs, 1 ' " who preceded me in the administration of the episcopal office." It imports no less than prcesidere, and is ascribed to bishops and presbyters, jointly by Tertullian, c Cyprian/ and Firmilian. e Hence the presbyters are frequently said to be avWeirovpyol with the bishop/ for then the governing power of bishops was but counted a ministry, Xtirovpyias yap earl to ttjs eTrio-Koirrjs ovopa 8t)\cotik6v,^ " the name bishopric is significant of ministry," and the presbyters fellow-ministers with him, and joint administrators in the government. They are styled crvpiroiptves,* 1 fellow-pastors ; they did not then dream that a bishop was sole pastor of many churches. They are also called onWSpeurai, which is no less than o-vv6p6voij for the presbyters had thrones with the bishop. So Nazian-zen speaks of Basil when ordained presbyter, as promoted Upois Bpovois, to the sacred thrones of the presbyters.-' They are also called o-vvap-xovres, or Koivcipoi ttjs dpx^s, " 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 church was governed in common," and the bishop was to do nothing of importance without the presbyters, is acknowledged by Bishop Bilson,* Bishop Downham, m Bishop Hall asserts it, as " that which is universally accorded by all antiquity, that all things in the ancient church were ordered and transacted by the general consent of presbyters.""

" In Titus i. [5.] * Euseb. lib. vi. cap. xl.

<■ Apol. cap. xxxix. d Lib. i. Ep. iii. « Ep. lxxv. Apiul Cyp

/ Theod. Hist. lib. iv. cap. viii. Epipban. Her. xlii. [p. 302, C. Ed. Col. 1682.]

r Isidore, lib. iv. Ep. [ccxix.]

* Naz. Orat. i. [Ed. Par. 1G30, torn. i. p. 45, A. Orat. vii. p. 144, A.]

' Ignat. adTral. [n. 3. Ed. Jacobson.] i Orat. xx

* Chrys. in 1 Tim. Horn. i. ' Perpet. Govern, cap xi. "• Defence, lib. iii. lib. i. c. viii. ■ Iren. p. 47.

Mr. Thorndike proves at large, that " the government of churches passed in common ;"" Primate Usher more succinctly but effectually.* Add but Dr. St[illingfleet] who both asserts and proves it, c " there was still one ecclesiastical senate, which ruled all the several congregations of those cities in common, of which the several presbyters of the congregations were members, and in which the bishop acted as the president of the senate, for the better governing the affairs of the church," &c.

Let me add, when the churches were so multiplied in city and territory, 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 principalis, the chief parish or church so called, or avdevTiKr) Kadedpa, " his proper see." The presbyters performed all offices in their several cures, and ordered all affairs which did particularly 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 presbyters 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 (xpovl(eiv icai dfieXflv rod olxeiov Xaov, as Zonaras) " stay there with the neglect of his proper flock ;" this is all evident by a canon of the council of Carthage/ Rursum placuit ut nemini sit facidtas, relicta principal! cathedra, ad aliquam ecclesiam in diocesi constitutam se conferre, vel in re propria, diutius quam oportet constitutum, curam vel frequentationem propria cathedra 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 delaying longer than is becoming 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 "8ios dpovos, and elsewhere 8 oiVeta Kade8pa, in contradistinction to other parts of the precinct, called here dioceses ; and the people of it are called oIkuos ~ha6s 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. Govern. 6 Reduct. of Episcopacy.

• Iren. pp. 354, 355, 356. ■' In Zona. N. 77, in Code 71.

' Can. liii. / 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 Rome, 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 modern, 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, circular, king James afterwards, anno 1605," would have them to be constant, and so it was ordered ; yet when they were fixed, no man ever counted these presbyteries to be diocesan churches. The church of Geneva consists of twenty-four parishes, governed in common by a presbytery 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 council of Constantinople all things in the province are said to be governed, not by the metropolitan, but by the provincial synod. 6

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 presbyters ; 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 8i8aaKa\iav, the power of order, but Trpoo-Taaiav, the power of government/ giving this as the reason why the apostle gives the same rules for the ordering both of bishops and presbyters ; there is but little difference betwixt them, says he, for they are ordained both to the teaching and ruling (Trpoaraa-iav) of the church. Now that izpoaTauia denotes jurisdiction or presidentiam cum potestate, " presidency together with authority," and is as Hesychius renders it, KvfiepvTjo-is, is plain in Chrysostom himself; he tells us the apostle Paul

• Hist. p. 559. [What particular History Mr. (larksoii lure refers to, the Editor is unable to conjecture.]

6 Can. [iii.] Soc. lib. t. cap. viii. « In 1 Tim. Horn. xi. [p. 289, Ed. Savill.l

had 1-179 olKovfievqs ttjv npo(TTa(Tiav, a " the presidency of the world," which he elsewhere expresses by rf/v 0lK.0vp.evqv anao-av Kvfiepvav ;* and speaking of Moses, he says, It was wonderful, that he who was to be a ruler, 6 irpoa-TaTqs peXkoov taeadai, should be born at such a time. c Theophylact makes the difference as little between bishop and presbyters, and ascribes as much power to the latter, almost in the same words/ So Theodoret declares irpoo-Tao-iav, jurisdiction, to belong to every presbyter ; e " against an elder, especially, no less than two witnesses must be admitted, because he having eiacXrio-ias 7rpoo-Tao-iav, " the government of the church," and in the exercise of it often grieving delinquents, they being ill-affected to him, will be apt to bring false accusations." And this is the qyepovia included in the presbyters' office, et're \eiTovpylav xpi Xey«i>, e'tre rjyepoviav/ " whether we speak of ministry or of rule," as Nazianzen speaks, and much more to that purpose. And besides many other passages of like import, the title of governors is all along in ancient writers given to presbyters ; and all the expressions 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 themselves 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 salved 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,* Mihi ante presbyterum sedere non licet, Mi si peccavero licet me tradere Satance ad infantum carnis, tit spiritus salvus sit, " It is not lawful for me to sit in the presence 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, iTrayopevo-a> Xoinou vpiv tcov Upaiv tovtcop iiri(5r)vai Trpo8vpa>v : l 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 Constitutions he forbids bishops and presbyters to exclude any from communion, till such cause was declared for which the canons appointed it

to be done, nacri Se rols inio-Koirois kcu Trpeo-fivrepois (iffayopevopej', a(pnpi£eiv

" In 1 Cor. Horn, xxiii. et Horn. xxv. [p. 388.] s In 2 Cor. Horn. xxv. [p. 681.]

« In Act. Horn. xvi. rf In 1 Tim. [iii. 8.]

« In 1 Tim. v. VJ. f Orat. i. [Ed. Paris. 1630, p. 3, A, torn, i.]

i palliate. * Ad Heliodorum. [Coi. x. torn. iv. par. ii. Ed. Par. 1706.]

Horn. xvii. in Mattli. fp. 125.]

rwa ttjs aylas Kowoovias, &c, and will have the sentence of excomnxunica-tion rescinded, which was passed by bishops or presbyters without cause.™ In the Code, both bishops and clergy are forbid to excommunicate in certain cases, and then mention is made of the cases for which they must not, fj d<popl£etv rj dva6epaTl(eiv, " either excommunicate or anathematise," kciv edos toiovtov iupdrqa-ev, 0, " 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 the title, yet, they are called bishops, as a learned prelatist observes, by the most ancient authors, Clemens, Ignatius, Tertullian, c 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. ] Trpoea-Tares, prcepositi, antistites, prcesidentes^ &c. And so there were as many bishops really in every diocese as there were particular 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 presbyters, 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, pfj aXKcos xcipoToveladSxrav aXXa t£>i> 6pdo86£av kXtjpimBv 8oKtp.a{6vTcov, e the ordaining of one to the presbytery was to be \JM](p(3 ml Kpicrei tov KXrjpov ttcivtos/ " 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 irapa yva>pi]v mv icXripov, " against the consent of the clergy," as appears by what

» Novel, cxxiii. cap. xi. » Lex. xxxix. sec. ii. Tit. iii. tie Episc. et Clericis.

r Thorndike, Prim. Govern, pp. 73, 74. * [dem. Of Religious Assemblies, p. OS. * Theoplulus Commonitor. cap. vi. / Clem. Constitut. lib. viii. cap. xviii.

Chrysostom was accused of, though it is like" falsely ;* and this is counted by some the substance of ordination, wherein the presbyters had no less share (to say no more) than the bishop. And in imposing hands, 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 African council, for, saith a very learned doctor, c " to this purpose, the laying on of the hands of the presbytery^ is no ways impertinently alleged, 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, e 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 ordaining was so far from being an act of government or jurisdiction, that it did not infer any superiority in the ordainer ; nothing being more 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 but only in degree, so that as the bishop was but Primus presbyter, (as Hilary under the name of Ambrose, and others f) or Primicerius as Optatus, defined by a learned civilian to be irpoorov ttjs rat-eas,* 1 "the first presbyter," so the presbyter was a second bishop, ev devrtpois Bpovois, as Nazianzen. As the bishop was summits sacerdos, in the style of Ter-tullian and others, that is, chief presbyter, so the presbyter was bishop a degree lower ; not that he had less pastoral power, but because he wanted that degree of dignity or pre-eminence for which the other was styled chief. As the pr alter urbanus was called mawimus, " chief," yet had no more power than the other, (Prcetorwn idem erat collegium, eadem potestas, 1 " That which the praetors possessed in common was the same to each ; their authority was equal,") but only some more privilege and dignity, (dignitate coeteros anteibat propterea maximus dicebatur, k " he surpassed the rest in dignity, whence he was called Maximus;") and the apx^v tnaivvpos at Athens was Prcetor maximus, yet all the rest were pares potestate/ " equal in power ;" [so] bishops and presbyters had idem

<• probable. b Phot, in Chrys. torn. viii. p. 155. Concil. Cartli. iv. cap. xxii. Concil. Turon. ii.

' Iren. p. 275. * 1 Tim. iv. 1,4. • shown by a case in point. / Page 379.

i In 1 Tim. v. Aug. Quest, in V. et N. T. [cap. ci.] h Gothofrid. in Code. [vid. torn. i. p. 436] ' Bortin lib. iii. cap. vi. * Fest. in Verb. Major ' Ibid.

mitiisterium, " the same ministry," as Jerome, eadem ovdinatio, u the same ordination," as Hilary," they were of the same order and office, had the same power, the power of the keys, all that which the Scripture makes essential to a bishop. While it was thus there could be no diocesan churches, that is, no churches consisting of many congregations which had but one bishop only.

POSTSCRIPT.

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 pvptoi, which, I suppose, he would have translated " ten thousands" definitely; but there it is rendered indefinitely " thousands," as we are wont to express a great many, when the precise number is not known. Those who understand 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., 6 may satisfy any concerning the import and use of the word, who, sending money for the relief of the poor at Nice, to Calliopius, thus writes, %p, a Qov fjivpiovs iv rr\ Tvokei ireivavras 8el<rdat. napa tgji> ivcrf^ovirrcov ekeov. Mvplovs 8e Xeyo) to nXr/dos, ov tov aKpifirj BrjXoiv apidpov, " I learn 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 pvpiovs he understands a multitude whose number he did not exactly know ; thus («'. 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, o-vv aXkois pvpiois, " with myriads of others," of her kindred f and Timotheus of Gaza, he says, endured pvplovs j3ao-dvovs, d " myriads of torments." Many more might be added, where the word is not rendered by the translators (Valesius particularly) ten thousand ; but still indefinitely innumerabiles, or infoiiti, or sexcenti, &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 untruth, which both he, and all men acquainted

* In 1 Tim. iii. • Constantinople.

' Hist. lib. ii. [cap. xxv.] lib. viii. cap. xiii * [De Martyr. Palsst. cap. iii ]

with the state of the church in those times, know to be so. For this makes him say that ten thousand bishops met in council at Antioch in the third age ; when as a he never knew a synod of six hundred bishops in the fourth age, while he lived ; though then bishops were far more numerous, and had all encouragement to meet in greatest numbers. This makes him signify, that ten thousand bishops assembled in the skirts of the east part of the empire : when as" there was not near so many (this gentleman is concerned to maintain there was not one thousand) in the whole Christian world.

This is more than enough to show, that there is sufficient warrant to translate /xvptot thousands, more than once ; though that it is in that discourse (which he styles a little pamphlet) so translated more than once, is another of his mistakes. And a third (all in two lines) is, that the author grounds his argument on it. Whereas those that view the passage, and the occasion of it, will see it had been more for his advantage to have translated it, ten thousands. He that can allow himself to write at this rate, may easily be voluminous, and look too big to be despised, as the writer of little pamphlets.

The letter mentioned, page 96, being communicated to me by M[r.] B[axter], that part of it which concerns Alexandria is here added, that it may appear how much it is mistaken, and how far from being answered.

" [As] for Alexandria, it was the greatest city in the empire, next to Rome, peyio-TT) pera ttjv Papf/v 17 ttoXis, says Josephus.* And Epipha-nius gives an account of many churches in it assigned to several presbyters, viz., besides Cajsarea finished by Athanasius, that of Dionysius, Theonas, Pierius, Serapion, Perseas, Dizia, Mundidius, Anianus, Bau-calas, adding ko.1 aXXat, c ' and others besides.' This, notwithstanding that the Christians at Alexandria, which held communion with Athanasius, might and did meet together in one -church, he himself declares 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 it was dedicated, (nplv airrjv TeXetco&Ji/ai) makes this part of his defence. ' The confluence of the people at the paschal solemnity was so great that if they had met in several assemblies {Kara fiepos nal Si^pr/^eVcos-) the other churches were so little and strait, that they would have been in danger of suffering by the crowd, nor would the universal harmony and concurrence of the people have been so visible and effectual, if they had met in parcels. Therefore he appeals to him, whether

' whereas. '' De Bello Judaic, lib. v. cap. nil.

• Hseres. lxix. p. 728. * Page 531, torn. i. EU. t'ommelin. Anno 1601.

it was not better for the whole multitude to meet in that great church (being a place large enough to receive them altogether, ovtos jJ'St; toC

tuttov bvvapivov bi^aaOai Trdvras, ev airu avveXdelv,) and to have a concurrence of all the people with one voice (/ecu ttjv avrrjv peTa o-vp(pa>vias t5>v XaS>v yiveadai ttjv (pewrjv.) For if, says he, according to our Saviour's promise, where two shall agree as touching anything, it 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 ! Who, therefore, would not wonder, who would not count it a happiness, to see so great a people met together in one place ? And how did the people rejoice to behold one another, whereas formerly they assembled in several places ?'

" 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 God, and concur in one Amen.

" He tells him also that Alexander, his predecessor, (who died anno 325) did as much as he in like circumstances, viz., assembled the whole multitude in one church before it was dedicated."

" This seems clear enough, but being capable of another kind of proof which may be no less satisfactory, let me add that also. This city was, by Strabo's description of it, ^Xa/ivSt ei86s to o-xrjpa, like a soldier's coat, whose length at either side was almost thirty furlongs, its breadth at either end seven or eight furlongs, 6 so the whole compass will be less than ten miles. A third or fourth part of this was taken up with public buildings, temples, and royal palaces, e\et re f) noXis repivrj, ra re koivci KaXXiara Kal ra fiaaiXfia reraprov, rj kcu rpirov tov iravros 7re/jt/3oXov pepos, 0 l the city possesses temples, and fine public buildings and palaces, which take up a fourth 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 Bpovxiov, (where he tells us, was the famous library of Ptolomeus Philadelphus) and speaks of in his time as destitute of inhabitants, eprjpov tolvvv iimipxov-' 1 A great part of the city was assigned to the Jews, ircXeas dfpupurro p.eya pepos r» edvet tovtco. So Strabo indefinitely, as Josephus quotes him.* Others tell us more punctually, their share was two of the five divisions/ Though many of them had their habitation in the other divisions, yet they had two-fifth parts entire to themselves, and

* Page 532. ' Gcopr. lib. xvii. p. 516.

' Ibid. rf Do Ponder, el Mensur. n. 9, p. 166.

• Antiquit. Jud. lib. xiv. cap. xii. ' Usher 1 ! Annals Latin, p. 859.

this is, I suppose, the tokos iStos, ' quarter of their own,' which Josephus saith, the successors of Alexander set apart for them, avrols dqbd)picrev. a Thus we see already 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 city, who, in Athanasius's time, is brought in thus exclaiming by Jerome, 4 Vce tibi Alexandria qua pro Deo portenta veneraris; vm tibi civitas meretrix in quam totius orbis dcemonia confluxere, &c. ' Woe to thee, Alexandria, who worshippest monsters instead of God ! Woe to thee, harlot city, to which the demons of the whole world resort !' A charge 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 large part will fall to the share of heretics and sectaries. For, not to mention others, the Novatians had several churches and a bishop there, till Cyril's time. c The Arians were a great part of those who professed Christianity, tov \aov ovk oXiyrj /xoipa, d and if we may judge of the followers by their leaders, no less than half. For whereas there were nineteen presbyters and deacons in that church,* (twelve was the number of their presbyters by their ancient constitution, as appears by Eutychius, and seven their deacons, as at Rome, 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 proportion 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. ii. cap. xxi. b Vit. Paul. p. 243.

c Vid. Socrat. Hist. lib. vii. cap. vii. d Sozom. Hist. lib. i. cap. xiv.

' Theod. Hist. lib. iv. cap. xxiii. / Sozom. Hist. lib. i. cap. xiv.

PRIMITIVE EPISCOPACY

STATED AND CLEARED FROM THE

HOLY SCRIPTURES AND ANCIENT RECORDS.

By the late Reverend and Learned David Clarkson, sometime Fellow of Clare Hall, in Cambridge.

London : Printed for Nath. Ponder at the Peacock in the Poultry.

The original edition of the " Primitive Episcopacy " is a small octavo volume, which, by one who looked merely to the end of the treatise, might be supposed to contain 235 pages. In fact, however, it contains only 187 pages; for, by a curious error of the printer, the paging, after proceeding regularly to page 125, suddenly advances to page 174, and is thence continued correctly to the closing page, 235.

THE STATIONER TO THE READER.

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 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 Ins papers are, have been prevailed with to send it abroad into the world with this assurance, that it is his whose name it bears.

Nath. Ponder.

THE CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

The benefit of this undertaking—What appears 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, vindicated—Acknowledged that one altar was sufficient in those times.

CHAPTER II.

Bishops 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 bigness of the places mentioned, Act. xiv.—Many bishops in Pisidia, Cappadocia, &c, yet but few cities—Three sizes of villages then— Bishops in villages made provincials by the synod of Laodicea.

CHAPTER III.

Cities for their largeness were for the most part but like villages, or market-towns— That Il6\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 lessening the number—What numbers of people accounted competent for an ancient bishopric.

CHAPTER IV.

A 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 particular.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER V.

Concerning the greatest cities of all—Proof given that they did not contain more Christians than could meet together in one place—Instances of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Carthage, Jerusalem, &c.

CHAPTER VI.

Objections against what hath been insisted on, considered—1. From the largeness of the territories about that city—2. Such as credit the premises must think the ancient bishoprics crowded so near as to be more like parishes than dioceses, that become the honour of a bishop.

CHAPTER VII.

More objections answered—Several rules observed—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 after ages increased their churches as to largeness of

jurisdiction.

CHAPTER VIII.

The thoughts that some of the best aud most eminent bishops of the fourth and fifth ages had of a very large bishopric, and a flock exceeding numerous.

CHAPTER IX.

The epilogue to the whole discourse; or, what things may be inferred from the premises.

PRIMITIVE EPISCOPACY

PROVED FROM

RECORDS OF ANTIQUITY.

CHAPTER I.

I am sensible that a discourse representing ancient bishoprics as vastly differing from what they are and have been in latter ages, is not like[ly] 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 communion. 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 govermnent, 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 Rome 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 conversion 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." 0

No instance can be brought against this, but the three thousand converted 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 other places resorted to those solemnities. To begin with the latter of these ; Josephus rf tells us, and out of him Eusebius, e that Cestius Gallus, willing 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 have their sacrifice, numbered the sacrifices, which came to 255,600; then reckoning as though each company had no fewer than ten, they collected the number of the people at the Passover to be 2,700,000, all legally clean ; but allowing the families or companies their just number, it amounted to three millions ; so Eusebius, rpiaKoa-las ^vpiabav ; and

■ Defens. of Ans. tr. iii. chap. vi. p. 175. * Def. lib. iil. cap. i. p. 6. » Page fi9.

* DeBell. Jud. lib. vii. cap. i. § 5, p. 968. ' Hist. lib. iii. cap. v.

Josephus elsewhere, ovk ekdrrovs Tpiaxoo-iav fivpidBav," " not less than three millions."

But then they were all in a manner foreigners, 7roXu Se tovto 7r\r)0os i'£a>dev o-uXX/yerat. 6 The inhabitants of Jerusalem were but 120,000, as we learn by Ehecateus, c nepl StaSe/ca pvpidftes (not centum et quinquaginta millia, 150,000, as the translator.) And it may be Hascateus, 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 furlongs, whereas Josephus says, it was but thirty-three,** and the circumvallation of Titus in the siege but thirty-nine furlongs. 6 And when twelve thousand were slain in Jerusalem in one night, the loss 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 than Hecateus 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 converted 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 greateneds' 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 elsewhere, or else Eusebius could not have found pvpidvdpovs eTnavvaycoyds,' 1 u 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. 1635. 4 Lib. vii. cap. xvii. • Josep. contr. Ap. lib. i.

* De Bell. Jud. lib. vi. cap. xvii. p. 914. ' Lib. vi. cap. 31. / Lib. iv. cap. xx.

s increased. * Lib. viii. cap. i. ' Annot. in Revel, xi. 3, p. GG2.

L 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 will 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 after, (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 thinks that one text, Acts xvi. 12, affords two arguments to evince it; it is 7rpo)7-?;, " the prime city," and it was beside that, KoXcovla, " 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 neighbouring cities resorted for justice, and so were metropolies in the civil account." But in answer to this, Trparr) is there the first, (as it is rendered by our translators) not the chief city ; the first in situation, not the principal in dignity and pre-eminence ; the first city that occurred in passing from Thrace to Macedon, 6 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 7173001-77 ; but that it was the chief city, as he takes it, is not only without, but 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 0 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 Avas made a Roman province, Philippi was a place so inconsiderable, that it was not thought worthy of mention by Livy, when he

« D[r.] H[ammond], Vind. p. 111.

» Or as Dr. Du Veil, "Such as go to Macedonia from the isle of Samothrace, the first city they meet that is a colony upon the coast of Edonis is Philippi."—Explan. of Acts xvi. 12, p. 5". ' referred.

gives an account of the principal cities in the whole country." Paulus vEmilius divided it into four regions, and the metropolis in each is by him specified ; regionum ubi concilia fierent (which shows where their courts of judicature or assizes were held) prima? regionis Amphipolim, secundcB Thessalonicarn, tertia? Pellam, quartce Pelagoniam fecit, " of the regions in which courts are held, Amphipolis was fixed on for the first region, Thessalonica for the second, Pella for the third, and Pelagonia for 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, unless none but metropolies were colonies, which is apparently* false, since colonies were commonly planted in inferior cities. So that oftentimes we find near twenty colonies where but one metropolis, as in Mauritania Ca?sariensis, where there were nineteen ; sometimes above twenty, as in Africa Propria, where four-and-twenty ; and in countries where there were fewer colonies, they were placed in the meaner cities, rather than the chief. In Macedon, three of the four cities which in Livy are capita regionum, " capitals of regions," were without colonies ; Thessalonica, Amphipolis, and Pelagonia, if we may credit Ferrarius's account 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 colonial impetravit, " the village Petavi-centium has obtained the colonial privilege from the Emperor Severus. " d

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. v. lib. v. p. 90. * manifestly. r Inquir. p. 19. * Lib. 1. Digest. [Tit. xv. sect, ix.l

this new sense, not any favouring it, but one ™ amongst them 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 city are called a church, and still exjDressed singularly ; whereas those in a country or province are called churches, and expressed plurally. I 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[ammondJ 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, unless he stayed long there. Let us make both these manifest. If he stayed longer at Miletus than three or four days 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 the 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 ; in four clays 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, eKfiBev Se r)pepS>v ivevre ds Tvpov, b " thence it is a journey of five days to Tyre." At Tyre he stayed seven days, ver. 4, at Ptolemais one day, ver. 7, and the many days he stayed at Cassarea, ver. 10, ets Kaurdpeiav wXeiovs pevei ra>v ({XXcou, "at Caesarea he remains more days than at the other places." And what was requisite to bring him from Caasarea 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 Ave now suppose.

So that hereby it is evident, that three or four days was all that can be allowed for his stay at Miletus ; and this was not time sufficient to send summons 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

3 [Iren. lib. iii. cap. xiv.] * Homil xlv. on Acts.

common reckoning, a day's journey by land was near twenty miles, 160 or 166 furlongs ; or by a larger account, 200 furlongs, five-and-twenty miles, as Casaubon a observes out of Herodotus, Livy, Polybius, &c. Now Ephesus was fifty miles from Miletus, 400 furlongs, as Camerarius tells us, and so four days' journey to and fro, according to the larger reckoning ; and if the messenger were accommodated for extraordinary speed, one day at least must be allowed for Ephesus, and no less than two for the bishops or presbyters, being usually aged persons, especially if they came on foot, as the apostles and their disciples were wont to do when they travelled by land ; and a good part of the day might be taken up by the apostles' exhortation, prayer, and their conference with him. But it is not imaginable, that this time, that was little enough to bring the bishops from Ephesus, could be sufficient to assemble them at Miletus from many several and remoter parts ; or if they will have us to understand the bishops through all the lesser Asia, all Natolia, as they sometimes express it, * many weeks' time will be little enough for the convocating so many dispersed through so vast a region : or if we understand 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 chiu'ches in Scripture, many days (more than can be allowed) woidd be necessary for their assembling together at Miletus, as will appear by the distance of some few : for as Ephesus was fifty miles north of Miletus, so Smyrna was 320 furlongs (forty miles) north of Ephesus, as Strabo f Pergamus further north of Smyrna, 540 furlongs, i. e. about sixty-eight English miles, and so 158 from Miletus going and coming. Sardis was three days' journey from Ephesus, as Herodotus,** and the bishops coming by Ephesus to Miletus, it will be twice more, besides Avhat 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 Jerusalem 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 bishops.

3. It is acknowledged, that both in Scripture times and long after, 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 those first times, before dioceses were divided into the lesser and subordinate churches we now call parishes, and presbyters assigned to them, they had not only one altar in one church or dominicum, but one altar to a

" InStrab.lib. xxi. ' [Dodwell] Diss.iv. cap. viii. sect. vi. r Lib.xiv. init. •' Lib. v.

church, taking church for the company or corporation of the faithful 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 solis, saith Justin Martyr, omnium qui vel in oppidis vel rure degunt in eundem locum co?we?itus Jit, " 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 places to celebrate in ? And unless this were so, whence came it else that a schismatical bishop was said instituere or collocare aliud altare, " set up another altar," and that a bishop and altar are made correlatives ? a And thus perhaps is Ignatius also to be understood in that forequoted passage of his, ev Bva-iao-Tripiov, unum altare omniecclesice, et units episcopus cum presbyterio et diaconis, " one altar for the whole church, and one ■ bishop with the presbytery and the deacons." Where he extends those 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], 6 alleging for it Ignatius, Cyprian, and other learned men. The same may be concluded from D[r.] T [aylor] citing Damasus speaking of the titles in Ronie. c 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 appointed 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 singular and peculiar to that city (there being no other instance thereof before

" St. Cyprian's Epiat. xl. 72, 73, and De Unitate Ecclesiaj. ' Dissert, iii. cap. iii. sect. xv.

c Dr. T[aylor,] (Episcopacy Asserted,) giving an account out of Damasus what Euaristus and Dionysius did, about dividing of parishes or titles in the city of Rome; adds, Marcellus increased the number in the year 305. Hie fecit ccemeterium, et 25 titulos in urbe Romce constituit quasi Ditecesespropter baptismum etpasnitentiam multorum qui convertebantur; hernade a sepulture or

cemetery for the burial of martyrs, and laid out twenty-live parishes in the city of Rome. And

the use of parishes, which he subjoins, alters the business, for he appointed them only propter baptismum et paenitentiam multorum et sepulturas, for baptism, and penance, and burial; for as vet there was no preaching in parishes, but [only] in the mother church.

but Rome,) singalarem tunc temporis Alexandrite morem huncfuisse, &c.,° as also by the Council of Neocassarea. 6 And Dr. Stillingfleet/ " For although, when the churches increased, the occasional meetings were frequent in several places, yet still there was but one church, and one altar, and one baptistery, and one bishop, with many presbyters assisting him ; and this is so very plain in antiquity, as to the churches planted by 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 ivo-vponTos, " 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 communion-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 vicars, 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.

CHAPTER II.

Those that are concerned to extend the ancient bishop to the modern 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. Hser. xcvi. p. 276. * Can. xiii. ' Serm. against Sepaiat. p. 27.

have not been able, with great labour and hard study, to produce above five instances hereof,"" and that this is not enough, if none of them were mistaken, to prove it usual. But there are several 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 Palasbisca, two villages (kgj/xcu Se avrai nevrcnroXeas, " these are villages of Pentapolis," says Synesius,) had their bishops ; he went thither, as he tells us in the same place/ ■npodeadai ttjv irepl eTria-KOTtov aK€\p-iv, " to make a proposal about a bishop.''

So had Olbium, a village in the same region ; dijfios ela-l Kto/x^r, " they are a village community ;" after the death of Athamas, bishop there, iderja-ep alpetreoos iiria-Koirov, the election of a bishop was needful, and Antonius was chosen. e

Zygris is an Egyptian village, in Ptolemy. Athanasius gives us the name both of the place and person that was bishop there. Mapnos ZvypStv.

We meet with 'Avrlas kcd/jltj, " the village Antia," in Diodorus.* And in the Council of Ephesus with episcoptis Anteensis, " bishop of Antia."^

I cannot find any other place that will suit him.

Schaedia, in Strabo, is KaToutia irokecus, rendered pagns urbi similis, " a village like a city/'s' Athanasius tells us who was the bishop of it,

Ayadoddipoov S^eStay.

In the Breviary of Meletius, wherein he gives Alexander an account what bishops he had made ; amongst the rest there is Kpovios eV MerdX/7, in Athanasius.* And a place called Andromene was the episcopal seat of Zoilus, as Athanasius informs us, Zw'iXos , Av8pwpr)i>as. k Which two last (with divers others which I will pass by) are in all probability villages, since there are no such cities discovered in Egypt.

"Y\j/rj\is is a village in Stephanus. And Hypselis had two bishops at once, Arsenius of the Meletian faction, and Paul for the orthodox.'

Dracontius, h> rrj 'AXegavSpimv x^P a KaTdo-Tadeis,™ being made a bishop in the territory of Alexandria, could have no city for his seat.

Secontarurus was a very small and contemptible village, that Ischyrus was made bishop of, containing so few inhabitants that there was never a church there before, as Athanasius," Kaprj fipaxyraTr), ko.1 oXiycov avBpomoav,

II a very small village, with few inhabitants."

And that was little better, where the writers of the life of Chry-

« D[r.] Djownham], lib. ii. cap. vii. pp. 132, 134, and J[eremy] T[aylor], Ep. Assert, p. 304.

4 Epist. lxvii. ' Synes. Epist. lxxvi. d Ad Antiochen. p. 452. torn. i.

« Lib. i. [cap. ii.] / Crab. Cone. p. 747. e Lib. xvii. p. 550.

' Ad Antiocb. p. 452. torn. i. ' Apol. ii. p. 612. * Ad Antioch. p. 452.

' Athan. Apol. ii. " Athan. Epi.st. ad Dracont. p. 736. » Apol. ii. p. 622.

sostom tell us, Theophilus of Alexandria settled a bishop ; they all call it Kafj.v8pi.ov, a small hamlet."

In the Council of Ephesus there was episcopus Bacathensis, b " a bishop of Bacathum." And Epiphanius calls Bacathum pt]TpoKu>pUiv tt)s 'Apaplas, "a chief village in Arabia." c In that part of Arabia which was annexed to Palestine there was good store of bishops in villages, as appears by the ancient catalogue in Gulielmus Tyrius. There is no need to mention particulars, since Sozomen assures us that there iv Kwpais inio-Koivoi lepovvrai, d " bishops are consecrated in villages."

In Syria, Theodoret tells us of Paul, a confessor, in the persecution by Licinins, one of the fathers at the first Council of Nice, and bishop of Neoca3sarea, which he says is (ppovpiov, a castle or fort near Euphrates." Maronia is described by Jerome to be a village thirty miles from Antioch, and we meet with a bishop there, and the name of him Tipodeos Mapa>-velas, in Georgius of Alexandria, in the life of Chrysostom, § 60, p. 236.

Athanasius gives us the name of a bishop in Calanae, Evcpparlav 6 iv KaXavals ; and of another in Siemium, Aopviov iv IZiepia/ which were villages, 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 Samosatenus, mention bishops both in country and cities, iirio-Koirovs rav opopav dypav re Ka'i n6\ea>v. s

In Palestine, Jamnia was a village in Strabo's account, i< rrjs wXtjalov Kciprjs \apve'ias. h So is Lydda in Josephus,' yet both [are] bishops' seats in Tyrius's catalogue. So is Nais there, and Zoara, (in Ortelius, Zodpa, pagus, " a village.") And in one of the three Palestines, there is an account of fourteen villages which were bishops' sees, Comes (Gr. K(6pr]s) Nais, sen vicus Nais, comes Charus, and many more. Hence Miraaus observes, Comes idem est quod vicus Greeds, quo nomine rnidti episcopatus sub patriarcha Jerusolymm prcenotantur a Gulielmo Tyrio, k 11 Comes means in Greek the same as vicus in Latin, and by this name are distinguished by Gulielmus Tyrius many bishoprics under the patriarch of Jerusalem."

In the same list we meet with Pentacomia, in the province of Raba; with Tricomia* in that of Caasarea ; with Tricomia/ Pentacomia," 1 Hexa-comia," and Enneacomia 0 in that of Becerra, 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

■ Georg. Alexand. p. 210. Anonymus Vit. Chrys. p. 345. Sim. Metaphr. p. 407. inter Chrysost. opera. i Crab. t. i. p. 820. « Anacephal. p. 141.

d Hist. lib. vii. cap. xix. ' Hist. lib. i. cap. vii. Ortel. / Ad Solitar. Vit. Agent, p. 629.

f Euseb. lib. vii. cap. vii. * Lib. xvi. p. 522. [Ed. Casaub. p. 1100 B.] Ed. alt. p. 759.]

1 Autiquit. lib. xx. cap. v. p. 692. * Notit. Episc. p. 301. ' Three-hamlets.

■ Five-hamlets. " Six-hamlets. ° Nine hamlets.

hamlets for his bishopric ; as of Praepedius it is said noXkas eneo-Koire Kcofias, 11 " he was bishop of many villages."

But there is no need to insist on this ; only it is to be noted what a friend of episcopacy speaks ingenuously of that region. " But at this 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 four miles one of another ; and surely many of their bishops (to use Bishop Langham's expression) had high racks but poor mangers. Neither let it stagger the reader, if in that catalogue of Tyrius he light on many bishops' seats which are not to be found in Mercator, Ortelius, or any 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 geographer's notice that they fell not under it : for in that age bishops had their sees at poor and contemptible villages." 6

In Cyprus, Sozomen tells us it was usual to have bishops in villages, iv Kto/xai? eTrt(TK07roi Upovvrai napa Kvirplois, and also in other countries, iv aXkois edveatv, without regard, it seems, of any restraint which some bishops endeavoured to put upon that practice. And thus it continues with the Cypriots to this age ; for whereas there are betwixt twenty and thirty bishops in that island, (and it is like e the number has decreased there as in many other places) there are but four of their seats which have the face of a city, Potius pagi quam urbis speciem prce se ferunt, says Ferrarius, " They are more like villages than cities." The Catholic of Armenia had above one thousand bishops under his obedience, as Otho Frisingius writes from the report of the Armenian legates. 1 * And after him Baronius, ad 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, (to Kfdapi(ov cppovpiov, " the castle Cethurizum,") 6 [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 many cities there were in the provinces of Pontus and the regions near, in Lazica finds seven castles and but one city, and that made so by himself, [viz.] Petra, v(p : rjpa>i> to noKis elvai re Kal 6vopd£co-0ai Tvpoo-kafiovo-af Yet in the 8iaTV7r<oo-is of Leo Sophus, in Lazica, there are fifteen bishops belonging to one metropolis.

« Sozom. lib. vi. cap. [34,] p. 403. * Hist, of Holy War, bk. ii. chap. ii. p. 45, 46.

« probable. <* C'hron. lib. vii. cap. xxxii.

• Novel, xxxi. chap. i. /Novel, xxviii. prsfat.

In Lycaonia and the parts adjacent we have more instances hereof, and confirmed by the best authority. The apostles having preached there, Acts xiv., and their ministry being successful to the conversion of many, so that there were competent numbers for the constituting of churches in the several places mentioned, they ordained elders for every church, ver. 2, 3. Those elders were bishops, as they assure us who have 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 lis of these places, it will be manifest, that 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] all the iidiabitants in a manner could meet together to hear the word, Act. xiii. 44. Iconium in Strabo is irdkixviov, only evo-vvcoxia-pevov, a small town, but well built. a By which we may judge of those places which were bishops' seats under it; there are fifteen of them in the 8iaTV7T(0(Tis of Leo Sophus.

Derbe, in Stephanus, is (ppovpiop, a foit or castle of Isauria ; it was, says Strabo, in the borders of Isauria ; and agreeably with Stephanus, he calls it not a city, but rod 'AvrnruTpov rvpaweiov, the seat of Antipater, who, he tells us, was X^crr^y, a robber,* a cppovpiov being the fittest receptacle for such a person; this could not be populous, being of no large compass. Polybius speaks of Tychos, such a fort, (in the territory of Elis,) which he calls also ^wpioi/ ov p.eya, a small country place or grange but a furlong and a half in compass f and in him, as in others, Xcoplov is a village or castle, 6 * a country place distinct from a city, ov noXis aXXa xaipiov.

Lystra seems a place no more considerable; it is a small place in Isauria, in Ptolemy , e and Strabo, though not by that name. In Ptolemy it is Avo-ipa, (which in the Greek manuscript in Selden is Avarpa, (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 transposition of two letters, as Casaubon observes) and both these with him are villages, 'laavpia Kcapas 8vo e'xovo-a opmvvpovs/ " Isauria has two villages of the same name as itself." So that Lystra, which is Ptolemy's

• Lib. xii. p. 391. * Lib. xii. p. 368. ' Lib. iv. [c. lxxxiii.] pp. 345, 34C.

' Lib. ii. p. 139.. ' [lib. v.] / Lib. xii. p. 391..

Ausira, and Strabo's Isaura, was in his account but a village ; though, it is like," of a larger size, such as the Scriptures and other authors sometimes call a city, ras peydXas Ktopas noXeis ovopd(ovTes, b " Large villages 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 ; Derbe, 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 Pisidia, reckons but eleven, whereas there are twenty-two bishoprics in the catalogue of Leo. c

Strabo divides Cappadocia (that part of it which was called Taurica) into five arpaTrjyias, or prefectures, three of which had no cities in them, 8vo Se e'xovcri povov a-Tparijyiai TroXeis, " two only of the prefectures possess cities." One of these had Tyana for its metropolis, the other Mazaca, called Csesarea; so that Melitene, Cataonia (which Ptolemy makes part of the lesser Armenia, though Stephanus and Pliny agree with Strabo) and Isauritis had not one city in them, and yet there were many bishoprics in them. In the other two prefectures besides Nazianzum, which in Gregory, who had his name from it, and best knew it, is not only pUpa, " small," but ekaxio-rr) i< Tr6keatv, d " the least among cities," and so short of many villages ; there was Doara, which is Koopr), a village in Basil, and met with a bishop poorer than the place, Aodpois re Kaprj cpdnpov avdpcoTTov, which Basil expresses his resentment of (as a disparagement of the episcopal name) in his epistle to Eusebius Samosatensis.

And Basil advises Amphilochius, bishop of Iconium, to constitute 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 ordained 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, forced him into her service again, which lady, Nazianzen is importunate with to restore him to his episcopal see; this he calls x<>>piov, s which in him, as

<• probable. s Strab. lib. iii. p. 112. [Ed. Casaub. p. 247, B. Ed. Paris, 1C20, p. 1G3.]

c Vid. Strab. lib. xii. p. 392. d Orat. ix. p. 155. ' Epist. 406.

/ [Carmen, de Vita sua. Ed. Paris. 1630, torn. ii. p. 7.] *■ Epist. xxviii. p. 801. [al. Ep. xxxviii.]

in others, is a place inferior to a city, ko.1 ov8e iroXis d\Xa x<»piov. a So he represents the Arians expressing the meanness of the place where he was bishop. Such also were those other places which Basil (when a great part of the province was rent from him upon the partage* of it betwixt him and Anthimus of Tyana) made bishops' seats (for the cities were taken up before): and those bishoprics were not a few, as appears by Nazianzen's expression of Basil's action, nXeioo-tv eirHTKonois rrjv TrarpiSa KciTanvKvucras, " he studded the country with many bishops;" and Gregory applauds this multiplying of bishoprics, as KaXXia-ra 8iari-6rjrai, c as an excellent art, souls being hereby better looked after, ^rv^u>v enifj-eXeia 7rXetui/, rf though others would have had this less regarded, and the bishop's honour more.

In Pontus Polenioniacus, Pityus and Sebastopolis were bishops' seats, yet they were not cities in Justinian's account, nirvovvra ko.1 2e/3ao-ro-noXiv iv (ppovpiois fxaXXov dpidfjajTfov i) 7r6\e<riv, e " Pityus and Sebastopolis are rather to be counted castles than cities."

Coracesium is but a castle, in Strabo/ kiKikcov cppovpiov, yet a bishop of it is fcamd amongst those of Pamphylia, in Leo Sophus.

Thymbria is a village, in Strabo.^" A bishop of Timbria under Ephe-sus we find in Cone. Chalced. Crab. p. 892.

Amyzon and Heraclea, (another in Caria besides that ad Lathmum) are both bishops' seats. Vid. Miraeus. 107, 108, 237, yet no more than castles, as Strabo. A

Heraclea ad Lathmum, another bishop's seat, but noXlxvipvj " a little city." So are Ceramus and Bargesa, noXixviaJ " little cities."

Docimia is a village, AoKipla Kwprj^ a bishop's seat often mentioned in subscriptions of councils, [and] in Leo's Catalogue under Amoreus.

There is Nea, which in Suidas and Stephanus is a castle, and a' Nea in Pliny* and Strabo" 1 that is a village. In the council of Chalcedon there is a bishop of Nea under Laodicea, and another under Ephesus."

Pannonion is a castle in the territory of Cyzicus, says Stephanus, and there is a bishop of that title under the metropolitan of Cyzicus, Leo, biarxm. And such a bishop mentioned Cone. C. P." vi. Crab. t. ii. p. 61. There is a bishop of Gordi under Sardis, [and] of Midei under Synnoda in Phrygia, which in Strabo are Mt'Sov and Topbiov olKrjrrjpia — ovd' 'ix vr 1 <r<i)£ovTa tt6\(<x>v d\Au Kwpai pixpov p.tl£ovs tcou aXka>v, p " the habitations of

<• Orat. xxv. p. -135. * partition. • Orat. xx.

d Page 356. • [Nov. xxviii.] / Lib. xiv. p. 459.

g Lib. xiv. p. 438. [Ed. Casaub. p. 943, B. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. G36.]

* Lib. xiv. p. 153, Edit. Atrebat. [Ed. Casaub. p. 942, C. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 635.]

' Str. lib. xiv. p. 437. i Page 451. [Ed. Casaub. p. 969, C. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 656.]

* Str. lib. xii. p. 397. [Ed. Casaub. p. 8C5, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 577.] ' [Lib. ii. cap. xcvi.] " [Lib. xii.] Crab. p. 892. • Constantinople.

p Lib. xii. p. 392.

Midas and Gordias, which preserve no trace of being cities, bnt are 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 povoUia, a or such as those mentioned in the constitutions of Isaac Comnenus, 6 which had but ewcoo-t, or 8eKa Kanvovs, " 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, els Kwpas c^Kio-drjo-av, (and stinted them that they might not be too great) which consisted of fifty houses.

3. Some greater, such as Justinian calls peyta-ras Kapas, c " very large villages."

It would be too tedious to give an account of all those particulars 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. lv., ov Set iv rais Kapais Ka\ iv rais xcopals Ka8i<TTa<r8ai e7ri(TK6Trovs, d " bishops are not to be ordained in villages or hamlets." This was the only synod in the east that prohibited bishops to be made in villages; and no wonder, since in those parts of Asia, where the authority of the synod reached, there were so many cities, and so close together, 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, quod non oporteat in villulis vel in agris constitui episcopus, or as Leo hath it, in viculis* In Zonaras it is such places 'iv6a /j.fj nXijOos dvOpoinav, when not enough to make a good eongrega-gation/ Elsewhere he observes, that it was not needful there should be great multitudes, but pUpai napooc'iai kci\ ov noXvTrXrjOels, " small and thinly-populated parishes," might have bishops, and they were allowed iv rais Trdpoiiciais fj yovv rais piKpals ivopiais, 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 understood, or not regarded, or counted not worthy of observation.

However bishops that were in such country places before this synod, the words of the canon are plain for it, (tovs pevroi rjb-q irpoKarao-Ta-Bcvres, those who are before this already made bishops in villages and country seats) nor does that which follows degrade them, enjoining them prjbfv irparreiv civev yvooprjs tov inicrKOTrov tov iv rf} TroXet, u to do

« In Cone. Chalced. can. xvii. * Cod. p. 283. « Novel, xxiv.

d [In Hard. can. lvii.] • Epist. Ixxxv. c. ii.

/ In Cone. Laod. can. lvii. [Bevereg. Pandect, tom. i. p. 480.] ! In Can. lx. Cone. Carth. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. i. p. 592.]

nothing without the cognisance of the city bishop," no more than the provincial bishops were degraded by being obliged to do nothing without him who had his church in the metropolis;" nor he, by being enjoined to do nothing without them, livev t?js t&v Xoincov yua/irjs.

For Europe, and the more eastern parts of it, not to insist on particular instances, such as Melanicus, a castle in Cedrenus, and Tzurulum in Zonaras, and Bisa or Bizia and Macroatichos in iEmilius Probus, and Diabolis, a castle in Macedon, as Nicephorus, and Alalcomena? no great village of Bceotia in Pausanias, and Cenchrea a bishop's seat in Clem. Constit. lib. vii. cap. xlviii., as the rest are in others ; that which is alleged against this practice will be a sufficient proof of it, viz., the council 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 Avhich they are occasionally sent. 6 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/fj.j) e'^eii/at cnvkas KaOicTTav enlcrKOTTov iv KcJoprj nul t) j3pa^eia 7r6Aei, " 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. d ) In Leo's words, there was to be none in viculis et possessionem vel obscuris et solitariis municipiis, e in hamlets and country farms or obscure and uninhabited towns. And so there is room enough left 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, founded upon the wisdom of ancient lawgivers, To o-navLois yivopevov (icada ko! jy 7ra\aia Ae'yei <ro(pia) oil rrjpovo't.v ol vopoderai : dXXa to yevopevov coy iwiTTav

Kai opaxri kcu Oepanevovo-i/ " that which is rare (according to the saying of ancient wisdom) legislators do not guard against, but regard and provide 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. Antioch. Can. ix. * See Crab. torn. i. p. 331.

' Contra Crescon. [lib. iii. c. xxxiv.] and Epist. clxiii. [al. Ep. xliv. cap. iii.] d Every place that had twelve families, was to have a rector, as is decreed by this synod. ' Epist. lxxxv. cap. ii. / Novel, xciv. cap. ii.

M

sian's time, a little after the apostles' death, found but forty cities there, (only the memory of sixty more;) and Ptolemy gives an account of the same number. So that the far greatest part of Titus's suffragans, must have their thrones in country villages; and the most of the forty called cities were little better than villages. Strabo says, Crete had ttXciovs TrdXeis," " 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 cinctas operosis moenibus urbes

Reddidit adpaucas imperiosa dies. Oppida parva tamen reor illafuisse, sed uucta

Quod deest ex reliquis Candia sola refert.*

In provincia et ditione Romana semel hoc loco indicasse suffecerit, oppida episcopali dignitate cohonestata quantumvis exigua ah Italis juxta stylum et phrasim curia? Romance civitates nuncupari; reliqua vero ista dignitate carentia non nisi castella vel oppida nominari. " Let it suffice to remark here, once for all, that towns invested with the episcopal dignity, and situate in the Roman province and jurisdiction, however 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 towns."

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, Mirasus tells us, is evident, by comparing the old provincial code with the new, c and all the new erections that I can find, (discounting those which are upon old foundations,) 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 quality the place was, not to him who, calling it an episcopal seat, is 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 villages

■ Lib. x. p. 328.

' " A hundred cities girt of yore with massive walls imperious Time has dwindled to a few. Yet were they small towns, I ween, though dignified; their poverty, this apart, desert Candia reveals."

» Notit. Episc. lib. iv. pp. 160, 161.

or our country toAvns, pass under the names of cities; but that is because every place which had a bishop was called a city upon that account, though it had nothing else to make it a city, but merely its being made a bishop's seat, as Mirseus informs us. a

In Spain the twelfth council of Toledo* takes notice of one made a bishop in monasterio villulce, " in a village monastery," another in suburbio Toletano in ecclesia prcetoriensi Sanctorum Petri et Pauli, " in the praetorian church of Sts. Peter and Paul, in the suburbs of Toledo," and of others in aliis vicis et villulis similiter, " in other villages and hamlets in like manner." It is true the bishops there allow it not, (though such ordinations might be better justified than their consecration 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 displacing 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 synod 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, iiricricoTroi. ov iroXecos twos, as Sozomen tells US, but ^.tipoTovrjOevres iv toIs Idiots ixovao-T-qpiois, c " bishops of no city, but ordained for their own monasteries." And one Lazarus also, bv rpotrov nal Ad£apos. d

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,

iiuo~K.6ir<tiv Sf^upevot, xeipoOtcriav, Kai Kadrjcrdal re Kai to. tmcrKOTrcov nparrtlv

teal dvrol €7T€x^povv, e " having received the episcopal ordination, used themselves to ordain and do the work of bishops."

In the council of Chalcedon, Act. iii. we meet with Helpidius, a bishop, Thermensis monasterii, "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 oecumenical synod under Symmachus.*'

In Theodoras Lector,* Timotheus of C. P.* ordains a bishop in the monastery of Studita, after the decease of another who presided there, tov rjyovptpov Ttji povTjs tov <ttv8itov TtXevTTjaavTos, aTTrjXde Tipodeor 6 irri-

• Lib. v. p. 297. » [Can. iv.J

c Lib. vi. cap. xxxiv. p. 402. rf Id. ibid. • Exposit. Fidei, p. 1095. / Cone. torn. i. p. 851. s Elpidius Thermensis Monasterii, in Crab. p. 1026. [Romana vi. in Hardouio.] ' Collect, lib. ii. ' Constantinople.

M 2

(memos els to iJ.ovao-TTipiov. a In Spain itself Dumium is an episcopal seat, locus episcopalis in Hispania, says Ortelius; adding, scepius ejus meminit ex conciliis, " mention is often made of it in the councils." Monasterium est apud Isidorum et Honorium unde^Martinus episcopus (qui scripsit de quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus) oriundus, " 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 presbyter) as appears by the synod of Hereford, cap. iv. Ut episcopi monachi non migrent de loco in locum, hoc est de monasterio in monasterium, nisi per dimissionem proprii abbatis, sed in ea permaneant obedientia, quam tempore suce conversionis pro7niserant, b " Bishops who are monks must not wander from place to place, i. e. from monastery to monastery, unless dismissed by their abbot, but shall observe that obedience which they promised at their conversion." And this is one of the constitutions they made in observance of what was determined by the canons of the fathers, quce definierunt stare canones patrum, as Theodoras, who presided there, shows in the preface.

For the rest, in general, Rabanus Maurus says, though there were fewer bishops at first, tempore vero promovente non solum per civitates ordinati sunt, at (for sed) per singula loca in quibus nee adeo necessitas flagitabat, 0 " 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.

Afterwards the number increased ; multiplicabantur episcopi, " bishops were multiplied," says Bernard, so that when Malachias went into Ireland (near six hundred years after Patrick,) an. 1150, Unus episco-patus uno non esset contentus episcopo, sed singula? pene ecclesia? singidos haberent episcoposf " bishops were so multiplied that one diocese was not content with one bishop, but almost every parish church had its bishop."

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 vel civitatibus plures ordinantur."

" Page 1S8. b Spelm. p. 155. Beda, lib. iv. cap. v. c Tom. iv. p. 14.

* Bernard. Vit. Malach. ' Baron, ad an. 1089, n. 10. Ush. Relig. of Irish, cap. viii. p. 79.

And their revenue was answerable, since some of them, as Dr. Heylin tells us, had no other than the pasture of two milch beasts. 0

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 bishops 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. c

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, Nnmidia, Mauritania Cassariensis, and Sitifensis, there were in Augustine's time near nine hundred bishoprics, taking those of the Donatists into the account, which we have reason to do, since the Catholics decreed, that when the Donatists were reduced, those places amongst them which had bishops should continue to be episcopal seats, {sane ut illce plebes quae conversce sunt a Donatistis, et habuerunt episcopos, sine dubio, inconsulto concilio, habere mereantur. d )

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 prccsentiam, " although they were present ;" one hundred and twenty were absent, quidam eorum senectute, quidam infirmitate, quidam diversis necessitatibus impediti, " some being hindered by age, some by sickness, others by various pressing necessities ;" sixty episcopal seats were vacant, sexaginta quibas successione episcopi nondum fuerunt ordinati.' And he denies not but in the conference the Donatist bishops were about four hundred ; 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 Donatistw/ And one hundred bishops of Maximinianus's party were condemned # So that the Donatists were not out, plusquam quadringentos per totam Africam se esse jactantes, h " 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

« Cosmogr. p. 342. 4 Jferemy] T[aylor], p. 304.

c H[erbert] Thorndike, Right of Churches, Review, p. 53.

d Cod. Afric. Can. xcix. vid. Augustin. De Gestis cum Kmerit. torn. vii. pp. 781, 782.

• Brevis Collat. Primae Diei. / Contr. Epist. Parmen. lib. i. cap. xi.

«■ Id. ibid. lib. i. cap. iv. vid. De Gest. cum Emerit. sec. ix. p. 7S5, et Contra Donat. post. Collat. cap. xxx. et Contra Crescon. lib. iv. cap. vi.

* Contr. Donat. post. Coll. cap. xxiv.

lesser Syrtis, concludes it thus, iroWai 8' etcri ko.1 aXkai fieragv noXixvai ovk a£iai nvr)H7]s, a " 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 quibuslibet locis, in quibuslibet castellis,

ubi minores plebes, minores conventus, " in all sorts of places, in all

sorts of castles, where the population and assemblies were small,"

where presbyterorum cura suffecerit in viculis possessionibus vel

obscuris et solitariis municipiis, " presbyterial superintendence was sufficient in villages or obscure and deserted towns," which Postitutus,

one of those bishops, liked not, quod nunc in sua dioecesi Postitutus episcopus factum esse causatus est, b " which Postitutus, the bishop, censured as now done in his own diocese."

So that they were not only large villages which the Africans thought capable of bishops. Besides what Leo says, Gennadius, amongst his illustrious persons, mentions one Asclepius Afer, in Baiensi territorio vici non grandis episcopus, 0 " bishop of a small village in the teritory of Baiae."

Obj. 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 Asclepius, whose chair was in a village, but yet he was Vagensis territorii episcopus, " bishop of the territory of Vaga," as Johan. de Trittenham, De Script. Eccles. " his diocese was that whole territory." d

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 village, that had so extended a territory under one bishop. This is the only instance that I have met with to give any colour 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 which should have most regard. Gennadius says, this small village was in Baiensi territorio, (where it is like e (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 Baise." They or Trittenham (I have him not at hand to tell which) change both the word and the form of the expression, and say he was 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. Casaub. p. 1191, B. Ed. Paris, 1620, p. 834.]

4 Epist. lxxxv. cap. ii. • Catal. Illustr. Vir. in Jerom. torn. ix. p. 183.

* Trithem. lib. ii. cap. vii. p. 133, T. T. 305. • probable.

FROM RECORDS OF ANTIQUITY. J 75

this vicus non grandis, and Asclepius bishop both of the village and its territory, what shadow of proof have they from Trittenham or any other, that this territory was larger than that of an ordinary village ? It is true, villages had ivopias, their territories. Zonaras tells us there were irapoaciaL r) ivopiai, of several sizes, pelfaves and pUpai. And the small ov 7ro\vn\7)0ets, not populous, are divided els dypoixiicovs Ka\ tyx^piovs, then each of them described, dypouams, (paaiv eivai ras iv e'o-^artaty Kfipevas Kai oXiyovs e)(ov(ras iv dvrais oiKovvras at (cat povoUia Xiyovrai' iy\a>plovs 8e ras aypois Kal tcwpais 7r\t)o-td£ov(ras Ka\ jrXciovas tovs kcitoikovs exovo~as. a

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 p.iKpds, " amongst the small," choose which of them you please.

CHAPTER III.

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 largeness like our villages or market towns.

ndXts 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 noXeis, 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. ndXety, Luke iv. 33, are KcoponoKeis, chief villages, Mark i. 38. So Bethlehem is 7r6Xis Aafild, Luke ii. 4, the city of David, but no other than Kwprj, John vii. 42, which Epiphanius takes notice of, and says in one icake'irai iroXcs tov AajB\8, " it is called the city of David," in the other, Kap-rjv dvrrjv xaXovo-t, " 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 enumerated 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. Cceterce villce aut pagi.

• In Can.xvii. Chalced. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. i. p. 134.] » Hser. Ii.

So Josh. xix. there are twenty-three places reckoned by name and called cities, yet, ver. 38, there are said to be bitt nineteen cities ; they resolve it as the former, alia erant nomina vicorum obscurioriim, " 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 Diin ; in the vulgar translation villa, in the Seventy-two, napai, and in that verse they are called HS, both cities and villages ; so frequently 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 peyakas Koofias noXeis nvopd^ovTesfi 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, robs nvpyovs KaXovvrai noXeis ; Strabo agrees with him. And Casaubon observes that historians often do so, Turres sozpe ab historiarum Scriptoribus urbium appellation ie honestari, " Castles are often dignified by historians with the name of cities," as cities are often by poets called trvpyovs, from whence he derives burgus.

Ptolemy calls Avarum nokiv rj Kcoprjv peo-6yeiav, c " an inland city or village." In Josephus, Bethshura is called a city, ir6\is, d but in the page before it is only Kcaprj, " a village." And Justinian says of Pityus and Sebastopolis, reckoned among the cities in that part of Pontus called Polemoniacus, iv cppovpiois paWov dpidprjTeov rf woXea-iv, " they are rather to be reckoned castles than cities."*

And as 7rdXt? 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

« SeePagnin. Voc. 11D. > Lib. iii. p. 112. ' Geogr. lib. v. cap. xvii.

* Lib. xii. Jud. cap. xiii. p.416. ' Novel, xxviii. .'Perpet. Government, cap. xiv.

i Lib. v.cap. xxvii.

1 Vid. Maimonidesin Sanhedrim, cap. i. sec. v. and Selden, De Syn. lib. h. cap. v.

sometime in the Delta. In the tribe of Judah [there were] one hundred and fourteen cities, in half the tribe of Manasseh sixty, and in the other tribes proportionably. 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 seventh part of Peloponnesus, the peninsida being but one hundred and seventy miles, or fourteen hundred furlongs in length and breadth, as Strabo, and four thousand furlongs in circumference, as Polybius. Paul us iEmilius 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 provinces 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 hundred soldiers, when their cities are well nigh more in number. 0

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 which Nero, in Suetonius, auream nomi-navit, d "called the golden palace;" the buildings about his fish-ponds were like cities, says that historian, circumseptam cedificiis ad urbium speciem. 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 urbium modum cedijicatas, " you may see villas built like cities." And afterwards some private houses exceeded the dimensions of cities, so in Seneca's time and complaint, 0 miserum si quern

delectet cedijicia privata laxitatem urbium magnarum vincentia,"

" Alas, that men should boast of private houses exceeding cities in magnificence !" And yet they counted it an excessive great house which took up above four acres, as would seem by that of Valerius Maximus, Anguste se kabitare putat cujus domus tantum patet quantum Cincinnati rura 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 orbem muri 400 passus patentem habe-bat/ 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.S"

« Strab. lib. viii. [Ed. Casaub. p. 557, B. Ed. Paris, 1620, p. 362.]

* Dec. v. lib. v. ♦ De Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xvi. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 1087, lin. 30.]

Lib. xxxi. la Nero. ' De Benefic. lib. vii. cap. x.

Dec. It. lib. iv. s Lib. viii. [v. 253.]

J 78 PRIMITIVE EPISCOPACY PROVED

Te primum parva Phaselis, Magnus adit, nee te metui vetat incola, raree Bxhaustceque domus pnpulus majorqtie earince Quam tua turba fuit."

Cucusus a city (the civility of whose bishop, Chrysostom, when he was there banished commends) was not so good as a market town, firjre dyopav, prjre toviov e%ei tj ir6\is, b " the city possesses no market-place, or bazaar." And Sasima, where Nazianzen refused a bishopric, was no better, if you will believe his character of it, though it pass for a city; he counted it but angustam vilhdam, " a very small village." Nazianzum, where his father was bishop, and from whence himself is denominated, did not much exceed it, being noXis evreXr/s, " a mean city," in Socrates, c fiiKpa, " small," in Sozomen. rf Aradus in Strabo, and Anta-radus in Pliny, were cities of seven furlongs ; the whole island of Aradus 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 common mistakes about ancient bishoprics.) There were cities of several sorts and dimensions ; those that were six furlongs in compass or under are called nokeis pacpal, such was Paeanium in iEtolia, a city, but not great, says Polybius, being less in circumference than seven furlongs, eXarrov yap fjp iirra (TTabL<»v. e Those which had above six furlongs in circuit, to twelve or thereabouts, pass as iroXeis fierpiat, not very little or great, but of an indifferent size; so Antioch upon Meander is perpla noXis, in Strabo.-^ Such was Jessus in Polybius, to 8e peyeBos rr)s noXeis iari 8tKa ard8ia, g " the size of the city is ten furlongs." Those which had sixteen furlongs in circumference, or near it, and so upward, were counted great cities, noXtis peydXai : for some of their prime cities (the metropolies of countries well stored with cities,) were no bigger. Nice is, in Strabo, the metropolis of Bithynia, and so it was in Ammianus Marcellinus's time, long after/ 4 yet it was but sixteen furlongs in compass, eKKaidfKao-rdbios 6 ■jrepiftoXos. 1 No larger was Famagusta, the chief city in Cyprus, built in the place of Constantia, the ancient metropolis of that 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 its recovery not content with its ancient bounds, had much enlarged it, yet

« " Thee first, little Phaselis, the great man approaches, and thy guest, and the fewness and poverty of thy dwellings, and his crew, larger than thy whole population, are little adapted to banish thy fears."

* Chrys. Epist. xiii. c Hist. lib. iv. cap. x. d Lib. vi. cap. xvi.

* Lib. iv. [cap. lxv.] p. 329. / Lib. xiii. LEd. Casaub. p. !)35, A. Ed. I'aris, 1(120, p. 630.]

* Lib. [xvi. cap. xi.] p. 731. * Lib. xxvi. cap. i. ■ Strab. lib. xii. * Sands. Trav. p. 219.

was it but twenty-two furlongs in compass, as Pliny." And Sidon was of the like size, Tyre being evdfxiWos airy kcu fieyedos. 6 New Carthage, the principal city in Spain, while the Carthaginians bore sway there, was but twenty furlongs in compass when largest; it might be less than sixteen when contracted, as Polybius, not long after its erection, says it was. c

Consequently, their lesser cities were but like ordinary villages, (we have many as large, not less than four or five furlongs in circuit.) Their middle sort of cities were answerable to our market towns or boroughs, (we have some that may compare with their great cities,) or like their larger villages, such as Justinian noted in Pisidia,** and in Lycaonia. e Such were Lydda, in Palestine, Kafir] TrdXews to fieyeSos ovk d7ro8eovo~a, " a village not less in size than a city," as Josephus reports it/ or like their KcofumoXeis, " village-cities," as Amorea, in Strabo.^

Those villages, by being walled, or having SUaia tjjs 7r6\ea>s, privileges of cities granted them, became cities without further enlargement. And so this sort of cities (far the most numerous) were but walled or privileged villages ; therefore (to note this by the way) they that grant bishops to have been in those cities, (which who will deny ? whereas few else in comparison had bishops besides those,) leave themselves without reason to deny bishops to villages ; unless a wall or something as 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. A Arinena, in Paphla-gonia, was an unwalled place, till the inhabitants in their wisdom encompassed 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 Mela, Pliny, and Solinus, it is a city, as Ortelius observes. So Majurna, the port of Gaza being honoured with the privilege of a city, for its forwardness in the Christian profession, of a village became a city, says Sozomen ; but being deprived of the privileges by Julian, it was turned again into a village.' And the difference being no more betwixt these, that 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 village.* 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. c Lib. iii. p. 109.

* Novel, xxiv. « Novel, xxv. / Antiq. lib. xx. cap. v. p. 692. s Lib. xii. [Ed. Casaub. p. 864, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 576.]

* Antiq. Jud. lib. xiii. cap. i. p. 429. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 557, lin. 45.]

' Lib. v. cap. v. * Strabo, lib. viii. [Ed. Casaub. p. 567, B. Ed. Paiis. 1620, p. 369.]

' Lib. ix. p. 863.

and one place hath both names at once, and is called Ko>p.o7r6Xis, " 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 very small or not great. Abidus is parva habitatio, " a small settlement," in Strabo.™ Tanis is TroXlxvrj, " a small city," in Josephus.* Gerae noXis fiiKpa, " a little city," in Sozomen. c Ascalon is nokia/ia ov peya. d Joppa and Dora are Tropvpana napaXia, " little port towns," in Josephus/ Doliche is ttoXixvt} pcKpa, " a very small city," in Theodoret / Cynna is ttoXixvt], " a small city," in Stephaniis, bishop of it in the council of Nice. Hellenopolis, Basinopolis, and Petraea, in Lazica, villages turned into cities, one by Constantine, the other by Julian, the third by Justinian. Zeugma, a little town in Cicero, Hypepe, of which Ovid,

Sardibus hinc illinc parvis venilur Hypepis.S

with many others.

It is taken for a rule, that where there was a defensor civitatis, there was a bishop ; but Justinian appoints such a defensor, which he calls (■'kSikos, in every city, enjoining the presidents of the provinces to prepare such officers, naB" eKaarrji/ tv6\ivJ 1 and expressly not only of the great cities, but in the less, appointing what they should have for every 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 Anthemius, iKda-rrj noXis t8iov iivia-KOTTov e^era), " let every city have a bishop of its own," without exception of little or great, but only two, Tomis and Leontopolis (which afterwards had its bishop, and Tomis 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 continued, otherwise the four cities there mentioned would have been within the exemption.

The ancients who understand 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 ; k Kara iroXiv, is with

« Lib. xvii. * De Bello Jud. [lib. iv. cap. xiii.] p. 903. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 1208, lin. 25.]

« Lil). viii. cap. xix. <* Strabo, lib. xvi. [Ed. Casaub. p. 1101, A. Ed. Paris. 1G20, p. 759.]

• Antiq. lib. xiv. [cap. vii.] / [Lib. v. cap. iv.]

e [Metam. lib. xi. verse 152.] * Novel, xv.

' [Supplex libell. ab Eupressio Ep. Byges et Arcndiapolis et Cyrillo Ep. Coelensi sanct. Syn. oblat. Cone. Ephes. Actio, vii.] * in Tit. Homil. i.

him icaff €Kda-TT]v ttoXiv, " in each city," p. 386, and so again, p. 387, and Theophylact after him.

The ancient practice was answerable, in Cyprian.™ Jampridem per omnesprovincias et singulas urbes instituti sunt episcopi; since in all the provinces and every one of the cities bishops were instituted. And Origen says this was done too iv eKdarrj 7r6\ei, b " in each city." It is true there was 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 making 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, Kara nokiv, in each city, say 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 hundred cities there excepted. Now the word ivokis (and what is equivalent 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 instituted) 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 sort of cities were but such as these for largeness or populousness:) yea, in places no greater than ordinary villages, seeing their lesser cities were but of the bigness of these, and, consequently, that the apostles designed 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, puas -rroXecos 8\jnv napexovTas, 0 and yet all were but little towns, besides Capua and Tianum, ra yap «XXa iro\Lxvia. d 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 Xtra iroXio-paTia, " small fortified places." To add no more, Crete is the most pertinent instance, seeing the text alleged concerns that island, and the patrons of episco-

• Epist. Hi. (al. 55.) • Orig. contr. Cels. lib. viii. p. 428.

' Strab. lib. v. <> Page 172.

pacy make it the measure and pattern to other countries for the ordering of bishops. We are often told, that when Titus was there it had a hundred cities,' 1 and that by the apostles' appointment he was to ordain as many bishops there. Now Strabo, who wrote immediately before, (viz., in Tiberius' reign,) finds but three very great cities, Cnossus, Gortyna, and Cydonia, 6 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 fairer country towns. Such dioceses as these can afford, they must be content with commonly, who will be regulated by an intention of the apostle discoverable in this place.

For one bishop in a great city there was ten, sometimes twenty, sometimes more, in these lesser towns ; and more there had been, if the ambition of following ages had not, with a non obstante, " notwithstanding," to the apostles' rule, judged a small place unbeseeming the honour and greatness of a bishop. Hence some places were waived as too little to be bishoprics ; and in some such places where they had been settled they were extinguished ; and in other places they were united. So Phulla was united with Sugdsea, and Sotyriopolis with Alama, as Callistus tells us ; and too many to be specified in other parts. Let one instance suffice. In Sardinia the many bishoprics sometimes c there were reduced to seven ; the bishopric of Bisaris being joined to that of Olgarium, St. Justa to Arboria, Phausania to Emporese, that of Turris Libyssonis to Sassaris, that of Turris Alba to Eusellis, and no less than four or five to Calaris. And by such means as these forementioned, Ireland, 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 numerous, 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] foi'bids bishops to be made in the least 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-polis ; and the Arians were branded for not being contented with small

« B[p.] H[all], Episc. by Div. Right. " Crete, a populous island, and stored with no less than a hundred cities, whence it had the name of UaTo^woXis." D[r.] Hfammond], Vind. p. 110. "Titus— a whole island which had a hundred cities in it, and was there placed that he might ordain bishops under him in each of those cities." p. 100. " In Crete there was certainly many cities; Eusebius mentions a hundred, of all which he was made bishop, that under him he might ordain bishops."

s Li U . x. ' at °ne time.

bishoprics. a Nor will I allege that this synod was of little authority, not admitted by the Greeks into the code till the Trull an council, seven hundred years after Christ, nor by the Latins some ages after it was held, otherwise than the adjoining of its decrees to the other canons by Dionysius Exiguus, Ferrandus, and Isidorus Mercator, without any public authority for so doing, could be accounted an authoritative admission thereof, nor by the African churches, who rejected and would not be obliged by its canons for appeals to Rome. Nor need I say, that this synod is misunderstood, and that the restraint of making new bishops in small places is laid only on bishops of another province ; and in a case which rarely if ever occurs, (viz. when all the bishops in a province but one are dead at once) as appears by the canon immediately preceding, and that clause in this canon, Nee debent Mi ex alia provincia, &c. There is no necessity to insist upon anything of this nature, 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 sufficient. 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 ci£iai rrjs emo-Konr)?, " worthy of a bishopric." It would be much for oiir 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, in'nvovov p.kv yap koj Zkutov avbpwv ko\ irevTrjKovTa TTpocrTrfvai p6vou, c " It is a very laborious thing for one man to have the charge of a hundred and fifty." Upon this account one presbyter was not thought sufficient for a place that contained three or four hundred inhabitants ; and these fathers woidd 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 of 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 counted 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 after Christ; straiter bounds and

« Synod. Epist. in Theodor. Hist. lib. ii. cap. viii. and Julius in Athan. Apol. ii. [Ed. Col. 1686, p. 744, torn, i] 4 exactly. c Honiil. in Ignat.

fewer people might be sufficient for an episcopal diocese, than many of our country towns can show, when yet 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 is to be extended to villages as well 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 (without limiting this to cities) if they desire it they shall have a bishop, with the good-will of him that presides in the place. 6 Dei populum, si multi-plicatus desiderabit proprium habere episcopum, ejus voluntate in cujus potestate est dicecesis habere episcopum 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 compared 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 themselves 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.

CHAPTER IV.

There may be more question about the great cities, which we shall now consider. Those were counted great cities which had sixteen or twenty furlongs in compass or thereabout. Pelusium, a metropolis of a great part of Egypt, was twenty furlongs in circumference, as Strabo. c Phocaja, one of the greatest cities in iEolis, had no more, as Livy describes it, 2400 passuum murus amplectiturf " the wall embraces a space

• context. ' Cone. ii. Can. v. « Lib. xvii. * Dec. iv. lib. vii.

of two miles and two-fifths." Sebaste, built by Herod, designing to make it comparable to the most eminent cities, was no larger, eUoo-i o-TaSiois, 11 "twenty furlongs." Byzantium was made by Constantine as large, at least, as two great cities, designing to have it avTipp<mov ttjs Po)/x»;f, " equal to Rome," as Zosimus tells ;* yet whereas it had been reduced to a village by Severus, as Herodian says f the enlargement he gave it was no more than the addition of fifteen furlongs to its former compass, as the said Zosimus shows. d 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 was 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 ecclesiastical rules to have two metropolies in one province.) Lesbus was the metropolis of thirty cities, as Strabo says. 6 In Phrygia there were above sixty cities, yet the same author mentions but two that were great, Laodicea and Apainea. 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 incolunt, " few inhabit," says Strabo, being o-eiapcbv TrXrjprjs/ " 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.S' In Tiberius' reign, twelve famous cities were destroyed in one night by an earthquake in those parts. h It is probable Neocassarea was not very populous, considering what Theodoret reports of those banished thither by Valens, (who was not wont to choose desirable places for the punishment of such;) they all died there in a short time through the hardships of the place, says he. 1 And it is strange if Cassarea 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 iEtolia, Livy tells us, there was a castle by it, as well inhabited, quae frequentius prope quam urbs habitabatur. 1

A great city was counted sufficiently populous if it had six thousand inhabitants. So Herod, ambitious to have Sebaste not inferior to the most renowned cities, made it 120 furlongs in compass, and took care

« Antiq. lib. xv. cap. xi. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 690, lin. 47.] * Hist. lib. ii.

c Lib. iii. <* Lib. ii. p. 62. < Lib. xiii.

/ [Lib. xiii. Casaub. p. 931, B. Ed. Paris, 1620, p. 628.]

s Vid. Strab. lib. xii. p. 231—234. [Ed. Casaub. p. 866, sq. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 578, sq.] * Tacit. An. lib. ii. cap. xlvii. • Hist. lib. iy. cap. xx.

1 Lib. xii. [Ed. Casaub. p. 812, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 538.] ' Dec. iv. lib. vi.

N

that it should have six thousand inhabitants. 0 Placentia and Cremona, most eminent cities, had each of them six thousand persons decreed by the Romans for their inhabitants.* Thirty-seven cities yielded to Alexander near Porus' country, some of which had five thousand, some ten thousand inhabitants. 0 And that conqueror building a city near the river Indus, which he called (after his own name) Alexandria, thought 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 Cassarea in Mauritania, and Synnada in the Lesser Asia, of which more afterwards.

As for cities that were greater and more populous, where the inhabitants 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 assemble with the bishop of the place. I can but meet with one city, small or great, for three hundred years after Christ, whose inhabitants were generally Christians, and that was Neocassarea, of whose conversion Gregory Thaumaturgus was the instrument; he found but seventeen Christians in it, but turned the whole people, SXov rbv Xdov, unto God, says Basil. 6 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 Gregory built no more than one church there; yet having so much liberty, there being no persecution from his time till Dioclesian, and so much encouragement from the people's zeal and forwardness to assist him with their persons and purses in that work, {rravrav xpi^iao-i kcu o-toynao-i vTrovpyovvrcov, 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 was in the fourth century, in the persecution raised by Maximianus, about anno 312, and all these were no more than could meet in one place; they had but one church, (when being all of one mind they might have had more, if more had been necessary,) and that one called conventiculum, " a conventicle," by Lactantius, who thus represents the same thing with Eusebius, Aliqui ad occidendum prcecipites extiterunt, sicut units in Phrygia qui universum populum cum ipso pariter conventiculo concre-

• Joseph. Bell. Jud. lib. i. cap. xvi. • Symps. Chronol. pt. v. p. 112.

• Justin, lib. xii. cap. vii. Q. Curtius, lib. viii. cap. xx. d Strab. lib. xt. t [De Spir. Sane. cap. xxix. Ed. Paris. 1730, torn. iii. p. 62, C]

/ Vit. Greg, e Euseb. Hist. lib. viii. cap. xxv.

mavit, a " Some rushed headlong to the work of slaughter, as one in Phrjgia, who burnt a whole populace in their conventicle."

How predominant heathenism was in the cities of the Roman empire before Constantine, may be collected from what we find concerning it in and after his reign. If it was spreading and prevalent when 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 advantage to Christianity, let us instance principally in Palestine and the countries next to it, where the Gospel first moving, may in reason be thought to have made the greatest progress. Sozomen informs us, there were in Palestine, after Constantine's death, both villages and cities exceeding heathenish, ciyav iXXrjviCova-ai. 6 Particularly Gaza, Ascalon, Sebaste, were much addicted to idols in Julian's time. e Anthedon also and Raphea. d And both at Sebaste and Neapolis, Jephtha's daughter was worshipped as a goddess, and an annual holiday kept in honour of her, as 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 stjdes it urbsgentilium, a " city of heathens," and calls the inhabitants the adversaries of God, which insulted over the church of Christ/ And Caesarea 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 mysteries of Christianity.* And if the heathen in Jerusalem were not numerous, 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 crucified?* Where the citizens were generally Christians, they were not wont to endure this, though in more tolerable circumstances. At Neocsesarea, Nyssen 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," 1 and this observed by Chrysostom, in Arcadius's reign, with which that of Jerome agrees, Phcenicium gentes diabolum pati, n " the nations of Phoenicia are possessed by the devil."

■ Instit. lib. v. cap. [11.] 4 Hist. lib. iii. cap. xiii.

c Ttaeod. Hist. lib. iii. cap. vi. d Sozom. lib. v. cap. viii. lib. vii. cap. xv.

« Haer.lv. [n. 1.] lxxviii. [n. 23.]

/ Sozom. lib. v. cap. iii. Theodor. lib. iii. [cap. vi.] [Ed. Reading, cap. vii.]

s Vit. Hilarionis. [Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. pars ii. p. lxxx.]

* Soz. lib. v. cap. xx. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxi.]

' Epist. ad Serapion. * Socrat. lib. i. cap. xiii.

' Vit. Greg. ** Hist. lib. v. cap. xxix.

■ Lib. ii. Contra Jovinianatum. [Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. pars ii. p.li)7.]

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 Theodoret, tells lis, 6 and rai> €voikovvto>u ov8e\s, 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 universal 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. c At Apamea, in Theodosius's time, (and this was a metropolis,) the multitude 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, dv8p6ywov ayciXpa. 6 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 idolatrous 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 Christians, Ko/jLibrj oXiyovs \ h 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 fidXa oXiyovs, 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 under Valens 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. Const, lib. iii. cap. \. vi. * Hist. lib. iv. cap. xx.

' Soz. lib. v. cap. ix. Theod. lib. iii. cap. vi. rf Theod. lib. v. cap. xxi.

■ Theod. lib. iii. cap. vi. / Lib. vi. cap. xxxiv.

€ Theod. lib. iv. cap. xxii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxiv.] A Soz. lib. vi. cap. xxxviii.

' Soz. lib. ii. cap. xiii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xiv.]

* Theod. lib. iv. cap. xvi. [Ed. Reading, cap. xviii.] ' Lib. iv. cap. xix.

for propagating it. It may be expected that the region nearer Alexandria was happier, but it seems not. Bucolia, a region near Alexandria, in Ortelius; yet this is Jerome's character of it, In Bucolia nulhis est Christianorum, " there is no Christian in Bucolia." a And that which Hilary fixes on the whole country is not much more favourable, jffigyptus idolis plena est, et omnigena deoram monstra veneratur, " Egypt is full of idols, and worships all kind of monsters for deities." 6 Look a little further into Africa : Julius Maternus 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 received 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. c The most of their cities were maritime, and those 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 interjacere videntur barbaroe gentes, d " those parts of the country were taken up with heathens."

In the west but one instance or two, that I may not be tedious. In Turin the heathen were so prevalent that the Christians there were not suffered to choose a bishop after 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 heathenish siiperstitions ; 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 tollantur duodecies, Christiani non sint decies; 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 rip to the Capitol, he thereby incurred the hatred both of the senate and people of Rome, and was reproached therefore in a manner, napa vravrav, 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. Hilar. * Comment, in Matth. cap. i.

' Cod. Afric. Can. lvii. * Cod. Afric. Can. xliv. [Hard. Can. xlix.]

« Greg. Turon. lib. x. cap. xliii. / Cent. iv. [cap. xv.] p. H84. [Ed. Basil. 1624, p. 892.]

r Baron, ad ann. 301. sect. [13.] * Zos. lib. ii. p. 61.

seat to another city, as he afterwards did to Byzantium, as the same historian tells us. And long after it appears the people of Rome were generally addicted to heathenish idolatry, by what Jerome observed amongst them in his time, on Isa. lvii. " Rome itself, the lady of the world, in every of her houses worships the image of a tutelar deity," that all that come or go out of their houses may be [re]minded 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, not destructive to them only in Palestine, but to their countrymen in all cities through the world,® and Strabo, cited by the same author, says, they were planted in every city; Josephus himself says as much. 6 Thus it was in the apostles' time; Paul finds Jews and synagogues everywhere, 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. 0 And Chrysostom says, they had their synagogues iv tvcmti 7r6\e<n. d 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 affirms again and again ; e and that the calamities of all from the beginning, ra ttuvtuv an alibvos drvxwara, were but small in comparison of that of the Jews; thereby giving a clear testimony to the truth of Christ's prediction/ Yet so far as I can observe, half of the Jews in Palestine were not then destroyed. The same historian 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[wards] 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 iElia;) yet, if we believe the Jewish records, they had place in all other cities of that country: for Rabbi 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. xvi. t Ibid. lib. vii. cap. xxi.

" [De Civitat. Dei, lib. vii. cap. xxxii.] * Demonstr. cont. Gent.

' De Bell. Jud. lib. vi. cap. xi. / Matth. xxv. I Aristo Pelleus, in Euseb. lib. iv. cap. vi.

hedrim in one city after another, and great schools in many towns." And in Constantine's time they possessed Diocaesarea (anciently Sepho-ris) and Tiberias, two of the greatest cities in Galilee; Diospolis also, and many other towns, and were so numerous as to raise a war against the emperor. 6

In Chaldea there was not a few myriads of them, says Josephus; in Egypt a million, says Philo; c in Cyrene we may conjecture how many they were, by the tragedy they there acted in Trajan's time, slaughtering two hundred and twenty thousand Greeks and Romans, d and some myriads in Cyprus about the same time; yet Josephus tells us, there were more in Syria than any where ;' they were planted in every part of the world, says 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 Alexandria, the slaughter of fifty thousand Jews in that city did not extinguish them, ff and yet the same author seems to intimate, that they were more numerous in Antioch than any city. A 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, emo-ros vy.S>v, &c. f 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 proportion 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 under the name of Christians, but were not of the communion, nor did assemble with the generality of them; such as were called heretics, or sectaries ; these were many, and had bishops of their own, so that there were several bishoprics in some one city.

But I shall 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 Caslestinus's time;' another in Alexandria, till Cyril's time ; m another in Constantinople, where it conti-

• Vid. D[r.] L[ightfoot], Fall of Jerusalem, sec. vii. viii. 4 Soz. lib. iv. cap. vi.

• Legat.adCaium. [Ed. Par. 1640, p. 1040, D.] * Dion [Cass.] lib.lxviii. [cap. xxxii.] « De Bell. Jud. lib. vii. cap. xxi. / Antiq. lib. xii. cap. Hi.

f De Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xxi. * Ibid. lib. vii. cap. xxi.

1 Cont. Jud. i. p. 319. * Soz. lib. ii. cap. xxx. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxxii.1

' Soc. lib. vii. cap. ix. x. [Ed. Reading, cap. xi. xii.] " Socrat. lib. vii. cap. vii.

nued with public liberty longer." They had bishops in all these places; as also in Cyzicus, 6 in Nicsea, c in Ancyra, rf in Scythia," in Nicomedia/ in Cotyaeum,' and divers other places in Phrygia; they abounded there and in Paphlagonia,* and had their 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 Chrys-anthus, under whom their churches were more confirmed and enlarged: for he was a person of great place and honour, having been the emperor's lieutenant in Britain.* In Rome, Innocentius takes many churches from them/ Caslestinus deprived them of more, till which time they had mightily flourished at Rome, having very many churches and great multitudes of people. 7 "

In the fourth age, as Christians did increase, so were sects and errors multiplied. I will 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 foregoing ages. I need not show how predominant Arianism was in the greatest part of the Christian world, ingemuit totus 07"bis, 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. 0

Nor how the Donatists prevailed in Africa, when Augustin tells us from Tychonius, that they had a council, consisting of two hundred and seventy bishops in the beginning of the fourth age f 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, Hellespont, and the nations round about.? Nor will I so much as name the other numerous 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 numbers by the encouragement of Constantine than it lost by Arius, and those many other erroneous spirits, in which that age (as it every way more degenerated) was more unhappily fertile than any before it.

To draw this discourse to an issue ; suppose we a city forty furlongs in compass, (than which there were very few bigger ;) let us allow half

• Socrat. lib. vii. cap. xi. J Id. lib. ii. cap. xxx.

• Id. lib. iv. cap. xxiii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxviii.] d Id. lib. vii. cap. xxviii.

• Id. ibid. cap. xlv. / id. lib. iv. cap. xxiii. I Id. ibid.

• Id. lib. ii. cap. xxx. . Id. lib. v. cap. xx.

• Id. lib. vii. cap. xii. ' Id. ibid. cap. ix. - Id. ibid. cap. xi. ■ Jerom. Advers. Lucif. [Page 300. Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. pars ii.]

« Advers. Jo. Jerus. [Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. pars ii. p. 308.]

p Epist. xlviii. [sect, xliii. cap. x.] i Soz.lib. iv. cap, xxvi. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxvii.]

thereof to heathens, (they had rarely so little in the three first ages ;) allow then a third or fourth to Jews and Novatians, and other sects, and the proportion left the Christians will not exceed the dimensions of a small town, such as some of our market-towns, when yet the inhabitants, and those also of the villages about it, can and do meet together for communion.

But it may be more satisfactory, to make this evident, in some particular cities ; let us do it in a few of the greater, and some of the greatest.

Berytus was an eminent city, and a special instance of the prodigious magnificence of Herod and the two Agrippas, in Josephus ; thought fit also to be the seat of an archbishop ; and yet it had but one church in Julian's time, which was then burnt by Magnus, ttjv BrjpvTicov eKKkrja-iav efiirpr]<Tas, it is not one of the churches, but the church of Berytus. a Tyre 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 Paulinus, bishop there in Constantine's time, had but so many under his episcopal charge (as the panegyrist in Eusebius informs us 6 ) as he could " take a personal notice of their souls, and accurately examine the inward State of every one," fTriaKonelv rijs fv8ordrco rcov ifierepcov ijfvx<0t>

6ea>pias €kci<ttov aKpLpcos egrjraKori f " acquainting himself thoroughly

with the condition of all those souls that were committed to him," rf/v ra>v avra K(K\r]p(op.ev(ov -^rvxmv evdtayivoaKoov kol (piXoicpivwv bidvoiav.

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, tovto 8 y eVotei ovk elodus 8iu>K(iv rfj 6pdo86ga> e/cfcX^o-t'a,) Agapetus, the Macedonian bishop in that city, on a sudden turns orthodox, and cabling together the people under him, persuades them to it; this done, with a great multitude, yea, with all the people, p.SX\ov 8e iravrl t<5 Xaw, he hastens into the church/ so that all the people were no more than one church would contain.

Cyzicus was a great city as any in Asia. Strabo says it might contend with the chief cities there for splendour and greatness/ Floras calls it the Kome 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/

Besides these, and the Jews, numerous here as in all other such cities in these parts, the Novatians had a church, which Eleusius having demolished in Constantine's time, Julian enjoins him under great penalty to rebuild." The Arians had a bishop there, viz. Euno-mius. 6 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. 0 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 the recantation of Eleusius : for he being frightened by the threatenings of Valens, into a subscription to Arianism, thought fit, for his own vindication, to declare before them all, the force that was put upon him, and so he did, eVi ttclvtos Xaov, coram utiiverso populof " in the hearing of all the people assembled" hr\ rrjs exfcX^o-ias,' " in the church." And in an assembly upon such an occasion, we may reasonably suppose (if historians had not expressed it) an universal concourse.

Constantinople, which I reckon among the greater (if not the greatest) cities, because in the beginning of the fourth age it was but in motion^ 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, <rvva£iv avv natri rols ddeXcpo'is irreriXea-ev . g Afterwards, many falling off to Arianism, the remainder made but iroiixvrjp fiiKpav, as the same historian tells us. A So that in Valens's reign, when Nazianzen took the charge of them, a very little house did serve them for a church, iv oliao-Ka eKKXrjo-iaae,* and Socrates agrees with him in the expression.* By Nazianzen many were reduced, and that church enlarged, says Theodoret. And Theodosius the Great discountenancing 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; oXrj noXis pia tKKXTja-ia eyevero, 1 " the whole city made one assembly," &c.

At Ancyra, the chief city of Galatia, besides the Gentiles and Jews there, the Novatians had a bishop," 1 the Semi-arians had a bishop there," the Arians had a bishop also. 0 And besides these new sects, a prodi-

» Soz. Hist. lib. v. cap. v. » Theod. Hist. lib. ii. cap. xxix.

' Socrat. lib. iv. cap. vi. Soz. lib. vi. cap. viii. d Socrat. lib. iv. cap. xvi.

» Sozom. lib. vi. cap. viii. / progress. « Lib. i. cap. xiv. * Lib. v. cap. viii.

' Soz. lib. vii. cap. v. * Lib. iv. cap. i.

' Lib. [vii.] cap. xxiii. "■ Soz. lib. viii. cap. i. Socrat. lib. vi. cap. xx.

» Epiphan. Hser. lxxiii. [n. 22.] " Soz. lib. iv. cap. xxiv.

gious swarm of the old sort mentioned by Jerome, viz. Cataphryges, Ophitas, Borboritae, Manichasi, &c, by which that church was all rent in pieces, as he complains." Scis mecum qui vidi Ancyram metropolim Galatice, quod nunc usque schismatibus dilacerata sit, quod dogmatum varietatibus constuprata, " You know as well as I, who have seen it, how Ancyra, the metropolis of Galatia, is torn by schisms, and defiled with diversities of doctrines," &c. By the state of which city, Baronius leaves us to judge what was the condition of the rest of the cities in the east, which had not such preservatives to keep them from this mischief, as Ancyra enjoyed under two holy bishops. 6

The like may be said of Cassarea, the chief city in Mauritania, in which St. Austin desires Emeritus, the Donatist bishop, [that] he might there, all the citizens being present, defend his communion. 0

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, fiiKpav eKKXrjaiav eVtret^eVaf, as also he did at Dioca?sarea, or Sephiris, and in other cities.^

At Diocassarea, in Cappadocia, which in Nazianzen is noXts fieyaXrj, 11 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 concludes, in that Epiphanius speaks of them in Alexandria as not elsewhere usual, nor known amongst the Cypriots. Unam duntaxat ecclesiam extitisse in quam universi confluerent, cujusmodi Cypri urbes erant. Unde quod Alexandria} receptum erat, velut popularibus suis peregrinum et inusitatnm 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 Neocajsarea, a metropolis in Pontus, and other cities in those parts of Asia, but one church, as appears by the synod there/ which the same author observes.* Siquidem initio oppidanis omnibus par esse poterat episcopus; hinc est quod in Neoccesar. can. xiii. unum duntaxat iwbis Kvpianop 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 Neocaesarea;" and he tells us, plures in eadem urbe tituli, "a number of

" Prooem. in Comment, ad Galat. [lib. ii.] * Ad ann. 373, sec. [xxxiii.]

* Possid. Vita August, cap. xiv. d Haer. xxx. [n. 11.] p. 136.

' Ep. xlix. p. 810. / Animadvers. in Epiph. Haer. lxix. n. i.

e Can. xiii. * Ibid. p. 281.

titles in the same city," was then (when Epiphanius wrote, viz. about anno 376) either not to be found in other cities besides Alexandria, vel saltern 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 Constantine's time, what were they before, when all grant them to have less ?

CHAPTER V.

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 exceeded 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, to>v d8e\(f)5>p dirdvrav ^etporoi/etas evtKfv eVl rrjs eKKkrjcrlas

firtKeKporrjfjLevcov," and a dove resting upon the head of Fabian, in the place where they were assembled, thereupon all the people, rov ndpra Xaov, 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

' Euseb. Hist. lib. vi. cap. xxix.

interceding for him, irdvros tov Xaov. a They were no more than could concur in an epistle to salute their brethren at Carthage, Salutant vos fratres, " the brethren salute you," say the Romans to those at Carthage, et tota ecclesia, b " the whole church." They were no more than Cornelius could read Cyprian's letters to in their numerous assembly; he always read thern amplissimce plebi, " to the people in full assembly," and desires him to read that in particular which he then sent, quanquam

sciem sanctissimce atque amplissimce plebi legere te semper literas

nostras, 0 " 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 laicis, ut in tuis Uteris et ipse testaris, d " 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 non tantum cum collegis meis, sed et cum plebe ipsa universal " 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, e'lcri a"x_ebov ti jrkeiovs rj ottoctoov apxovai /car apiOpovf u they are well nigh more numerous than those they govern."

As for the other, how to compute the numbers of the Roman church by the number 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 Btxa pvpidftes, " 100,000," those nevre pvpi.d8es, h " 50,000." If it were thus at Rome in Cornelius's time, we may collect the number to have been about three thousand. At Antioch the same father supposes the poor a tenth part,' where, dividing the whole into three ranks, he counts a tenth part rich, and a tenth

' Euseb. lib. vi. cap. xliii. » Cyprian. Epist. iii. c Lib. i. Epist. iii.

^ Epist. xxvi. ' Epist. xxviii. / Euseb. lib. vi. cap. xxxvii.

i Orat. i. * Acts, Horn. xi. p. 674. ' Matth. Homil. lxvi. p. 421.

poor, /cat to beKarov ir(vr\Ta>v rcov oi)8ev oXcos ixpvrov, miserably 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 Chrysostom'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 received 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 church 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 communicants ; 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 accounts. Indeed, Cornelius says there, that his people were innumerable ; but then the expression must not be taken strictly for more than could be numbered, otherwise we shall make Cornelius speak that which is apparently" false : for all the citizens of Rome (in comparison of whom the Christians were but as it were a handful) were frequently numbered, every fifth year ; but understand it as commonly to signify a very great number, and those that urge it will have no advantage by it; amplissima plebs 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 innumerabiles, b " innumerable regions," and Galla Placidia inniimerabiles civitates Italics, 0 " innumerable cities of Italy." And the council of Africa, in an epistle to Celestine, speaks of innumerable bishops in synods, (the same word which Cornelius uses, avapidjj.r)Toi, " 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 by 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, fieyio-Trj /iera ttjv Pafnjp, as Josephus. Strabo calls it the greatest mart town in the world, pkyiarov rrjs oIkovh€vtjs epnopiov. Ammianus Marcel-linus calls it verticem omnium civitatnm, " the flower of all cities;" and, when by Ausonius, Carthage and Antioch are preferred before it, that

■ Manifestly » De Unit. Eccles. cap. x. [Ed. Antw. 1700, torn. ix. p. 243, E.]

c Epist. ad Theodos.

was, as the same historian tells us, because it was much weakened by civil 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 there in the latter end of the third age, calls that church a-vvaywyrj, and that scrupulous member of it (whose case he is relating to Xystus) rls tS>u trvvaywfieirap d8e~\<fi<0v, a " 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, wavr)yvpiKov fjfiiv yeyove ^wpioi/, " a field became the place of our assembly," not only a field, or a desert, but a ship, an inn, or a prison, 6 though these be fair probabilities.

But Athanasius, in his apology to Constantius, about anno 355, makes it evident beyond all contradiction. He being accused for assembling the people in the great church before it was finished or dedicated, nph avrfjv TfXeicodrjvai, 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, /caret pepos ka\ BitipTjptvcos, the other churches were so little and strait, that they would have been in danger of suffering by the crowd ; nor would the universal harmony and concurrence 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, ovtos t}8t) tov tottov bwapevov be^aa-Oat 7rdvTas,) 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 God, and concur in one Amen. c

Further he tells him, that Alexander, his predecessor, who died anno 325, 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/

« Euseb. Hist. lib. vii. cap. 9. 4 Ibid. lib. vii. cap. xxi.

• Atlianas. Edit. Comelin. torn. i. p. 531. * Id. ibid. p. 532.

This is testimony clear enough ; but it is capable of another kind of proof, which might be as satisfactory to some, yet being prevented in it by a better hand, I waive it. a

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 the third century,) was not by much so populous as of old, 6 and the old men more in number formerly, than both old and young in his days.

Antioch in Strabo's account was less than Alexandria, 0 but greater than any other city save that and Eome ; and so called by Josephus the third city in the world, rpirov oinovpivrfs e^ovaa Tpoirovfi In Zosimus it is the metropolis of the whole orient, 4, and in Chrysostom, the metropolis of the world/ Herodian tells us, that Geta designed it or Alexandria to be the seat of his empire, coming but little short, as he thought, of Rome, ov tto\v utyedet d7roXeiirov(ras. e

The Christians there in the first age were no more than could all meet together in the house of Theophilus, 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 domus suce ingentem basilicam ecclesice

nomine consecravit, in qua omnis multitude) ad audiendum verbum conveniens, credebat sana? doctri?io3, h " 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, r^s €KK\t]crias ukov. 1 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 renders it, appears, because it is presently after called the church, i^ikavva-rai ttjs iKKXrjarias, " he is expelled the church;" and elsewhere the place of the church assemblies is frequently called €KKXt)<rias o?Kos, k the " church-house."

In the fourth age, all the Christians there could meet together for the choice of Eustatius, anno 324, anas 6 Xaos, says Theodoret.' After he,

u See R[ichard] B[axter], Church History, pp. 9, 10. » Euseb. lib. vii. [cap. xxi.]

c Lib. xvi. rf De Bell. Jud. lib. iii. cap. i. « Hist. lib. i. p. 15.

/ Tom. v. Homil. xxiv. e Lib. iv. p. 9. [Ed. Lugd. 1624, p. 160, A.]

* Lib. x. ad fin. ' Euseb. lib. vii. cap. A.

* Euseb. lib. ix. cap. ix. De Vit. Constant, lib. iii. cap. xxxvi. and Hist. lib. viii. and cap. ult. ' Lib. i. cap. vii.

by the malicious practices of the Arians, was ejected about anno 328, 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 conduct of the presbyter Paulinus," and these were no more than could meet together in a private house, (where Athanasius assembled with them,) cv Idiarav oUelais eKK\t]<Tid£a>v, 1 ' and, when they had more favour, in a little church : for so Euzoius the Arian bishop, who had some reverence for Paulinus, granted them plat/ twv pt.Kpa>v iKK\rjcno)v, c " one of the small churches."

Paulinus, after he had governed them as a presbyter for above thirty years, was made bishop by Lucifer of Calaris, anno 362, having no other for his flock than those called Eustathians, nor Evagrius his successor ; yet these the Egyptian, Arabian, Cyprian, Roman bishops, and the churches of the west and south, counted the only true lawful bishops of Antioch. d

But thirty-two years after the expulsion of Eustathius, another company Avho had hitherto joined in public with the Arians, Meletius, to whom they were addicted, being exiled about anno 350, and Euzoius substituted in his place, do withdraw themselves from the Arian assemblies, and met in a church in Palaea f 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.s' And since a private house and a small church, or two churches, and those not great, could hold 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 all met in one church at the ordination of Chrysostom, if Georgius Alexandrinus do not misinform us, A and so they did five years after Meletius's death, says Chrysostom. 8

It will be needless to add, [that] their numbers were lessened by Vita-lius's falling off to Apollinarius, and drawing a great multitude after him called Vitalians, who had bishops of their own in this and other cities,* or to say anything of the Luciferians there, of whom Sozomen/ or of any other sects which were there numerous enough, since I suppose it is

« Theod. Hist. lib. i. cap. xxii. » Soz. lib. iii. cap. xix. • Soc. lib. iii. cap. vii.

* Theod. [lib. v. cap. xxiii.] Soz. [lib. vii. cap. xv.] « Theod. lib. ii. cap. xxxi.

/ Lib. i. cap. xxii. g Theod. lib. iv. cap. xxii. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxiv.]

» Vit. Chrysost. tom. viii. p. 178. " Tom. v. p. 537. Edit. Savil. * Soz. lib. vi. cap. xxv

' Lib. vii. cap. iii.

clear by the premises, that the two main rfx^ara, " sections," before they crumbled away by those divisions, comprised no more than might meet together for communion ; the aureum dominicum, " golden church," which the historian speaks of there, might have held them.

Carthage was not counted so great by some as the three cities fore-mentioned ; yet 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 Egypt, nepl 8evrepela>v, 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 Tertullian,* shows the ridiculousness of those who would prove the modern processions from Tertullian's JM 30vocttftntlim\, "how many temples, how many churches must there be at Carthage for the performing of these rites;" una tantum Mis temporibus erat eccelsia et domus sacra, et ita certe humilis et parum ornata ut a privatis facile non dignosceretur. 0

In Cyprian's time, who lived till about anno 260, in all church administrations and transactions of moment in the church and bishopric of Carthage, tota fraternitas — plebs universa — omnes stantes laid, all the people were to be present, as he declares everywhere in his Epistles ; and how all could be present, if they were more than coidd meet together, is not intelligible. I shoidd 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 at reading of letters. d All were present at the sacrament, and therefore he would have it administered at such a time, ut sacramenti veritatem, fratemitate omni prasente, celebremus, e " that we may celebrate the sacramental verity in the presence of all the brotherhood." All present at exhortations, nee universa? fraternitati allocutio et persuasio Jiostra defuit/ " nor did we fail to address and persuade all the brotherhood." All present at censures, causam acturi apud universam plebem^ " intending to bring the matter before the whole people." All present at election of officers/' particularly a bishop was to be chosen plebe prwsente, " 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 universa?

<• Lib. vii. [cap. xiii.] p. 153. * Ad Uxorem, p. 25.

t " There was in those times only one church and consecrated building, and that of so humble a description and so little ornamented, that it would not be easily distinguished from private houses." d Lib. iii. Epist. xvi. ' Lib. ii. Epist. iii. [Aliter Ep. lxiii. Ad Caecilium.]

/ Lib. iii. Epist. v. [Al. Ep. xiv. Al. xv. Al. xx. Ad Presbyteros, &c] e Lib. iii. Epist. xiv. * Lib. ii. Epist. v. [Al. Ep. xxxiii. Ad Clerum et Pleb. de Aurel. Al. Ep. xxxviii.]

fratemitatis siiffragio, " by the suffrage of the whole brotherhood," and so ought to be, de divina auctoritate, " by Divine authority," and so were de facto through the Christian world, per universas fere provincias. a All present at debates and consultations, hcec singulorum tractanda sit et limanda plenius ratio — cum plebe ipsa universa, " the matter must be treated of and settled in detail in conjunction with the whole people;" so he writes to the people, examinabuntur singula prcesentibus vobis, " the details shall be examined in your presence."*

So long as Cyprian's principles aud 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 Ave find them acting conformably thereto in the next. For anno 311, the year before the decree for liberty to Christians was published by Constantine, the whole multitude concurs in the election of Csecilian by joint suffrage, suffragio totius populi Caci-lia?ius eligitur. 0

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 communion. 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 of the city. d About forty years after, this church consisted of no more than Pella, a small city, could entertain, together with its own inhabitants ; for thither they all retired, as Eusebius informs us, e being admonished from heaven to leave the city ; and Epiphanius/ Travres oi paBrjTai, " 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 deserved the title of emcfiavfls, (whether Josephus intended it for them or others,) who, he

■ Lil). i. Ep. iv. [Al. lxviii. Al. lxvii. De Basilide et Martiale.]

4 Lib. iii. Ep. xvi. [Al. xi. Al. xii. Al. xvii. Ad Plebem.]

' Optat. lib. i. [Ed. Paris. 1679, p. 19.] <* Vid. cap. i.

• Lib. iii. cap. v. / De Pund. et Mens. cap. xv.

o2

says, after the retreat of Cestius from Jerusalem, left the city as a ship ready to sink, ttoKXoI twv em^auM," " many of the better sort" &c. And from hence Archbishop Whitgift concludes the smallness of their numbers ; " How few Christians," says he, " were there at Jerusalem not long before it was destroyed, being about forty years after Christ ? Doth not Eusebius testify, 6 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 the number of those that did not profess Christ in that city was infinite."

Not long after the destruction of Jerusalem, if we believe Epiphanius, 0 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 found there very low and few : for, as the 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, TrapenTos oXiycov olKrjpdrcov koi rrjs Qeov €KK\t)o-ias fiiKpas ovarjs,' 1 and one would judge they could not be very many, whom so small a church could contain, and so few houses lodge.

After Adrian had raised the city iElia out of the ruins of the old Jerusalem, the church there was so far from rising with the city, 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 all the territory round about it.' And Sul-pitius Severus / says, this prohibition reached not only those 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 by Adrian, that church did consist of such Jews, e£ 'Eftpalcov mo-Tcovf which we must understand either absolutely, so as none else but believing Jews 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 qirite dissolved as to its being a church at Jerusalem ; in the latter sense it would be reduced to a small compass, and very few members, viz. those only of the believing Gentiles. And in this sense I take it, because there was a church here still; but all of Jewish extract being excluded by the emperor's authority, it was constituted only of Gentiles, cessan-tibus his qui fuerant ex Judceisf " those who were Jews retiring." So

" De Bell. Jud. lib. ii. cap. xl. [Ed. Oxon. 1720, p. 1105, lin. 15.] * Lib. iii. cap. v.

c Ubi supra, n. xv. d Ibid. cap. xiv. ' Aristo PelliEus in Euseb. lib. iv. cap. vi.

/ Hist. lib. ii. [Ed. Lugd. 1G47, p. 381.] s Lib. iv. cap. v. * Jer. in Chron.

Eusebius says, that that church was made up of Gentiles, 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 constitution of Adrian, about the eighteenth or nineteenth of his reign, as Eusebius computes it, anno 135, the church of Jerusalem consisted only of those Gentiles, 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 6 their numbers were increased before Narcissus was bishop there in the third age, yet then they were not so many, but that the whole multitude could meet together with their bishop at the paschal vigil, as appears by what we meet with in Eusebius. 0 The people assembled with Narcissus at the great vigil, and while they were watching, oil failing them for their lights, to nav nX^dot, 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 353, 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, els rqu eKKXrjo-lav anrjkdov, and there all together, uno ore, " with one mouth," join in the praises of Christ.**

CHAPTER VI.

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.

Am. 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 communion together, this must be in the greatest cities where Christians were most

• Euseb. lib. iv. cap. vi. 4 probable. ' Lib. vi. cap. 0. * Hist. lib. iii. cap. iv.

numerous, or else nowhere ; when as a we see by the former instances, that it was not so in the greatest cities. It was not so particularly at Carthage, where all 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 prevented 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 flock 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 unworthy the repute or name of a bishop's diocese ; yet it may be made manifest that ordinarily the territory of cities where the apostles 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 allowance 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

foot more than one pace,) that is, about five miles ; this is far short of the compass of some country parishes ; many of them are five, six, seven miles, some more in length, (exceeding the territory of Tyre, anciently the metropolis of Phoenicia, 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 insisted on for the purpose leads us, and so the fittest to regulate us herein ? We are told frequently that there were an hundred cities in it, and as many bishops ordained there by Titus ; yet the whole island, when it was wholly Christian, and under governors of that profession, contained 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 for the scorned Italian episcopellus, c 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 far the most part of cities everywhere,) the territory was not large, these being, as cannot be denied with any reason, commonly proportionable ; nor could it be large 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, five, 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 satisfaction than the notion of a territory, as it is universally agreed on. Pomponius so defines it, Territorium est universitas agrorum intra fines cujusque civitatis, intra quos, prout ait Siculns Flaccus, jurisdicendi jus erat, d " a territory means the whole of

<• Travels, p. 216. * Cosmogr. p. 263. « bishopling.

rf Digest, lib. 1. tit. xvi. [n. 239. § 8.] De Verb. Signif. Territorium est universitas agrorum intra fines cujusque civitatis, quod ab eo dictum quidam aiunt quod magistratus ejus loci intra eos fines terrendi, i. e. summovendi jushabet. " A territory is tbe wbole of the lands within the boundaries of any city, which word (territorium) some say to be derived hence, because the magistrates of such a place have the power of expulsion, [terrendi) i. e. of banishment within those boundaries." Cod. lib. x. [tit. xxxi.] lex. liii. Decern rirum impiine non liceat extollerepotestatem fascivm extra metas territnrii propria* civitatis. " It is unlawful for the Decemviri to extend the authority of their fasces beyond the bounds of the territory of their own city."

the lands within the boundaries of any city within which it had a power of jurisdiction, as Siculus Flaccus says." By which it appears, the territory reached no further than the jurisdiction of the city magistrates ; and how many cities can be shown us in the Eoman 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 country 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 observed, designing no more for a diocese than the city, suburbs, and territory. What more they have than such a x^P a i or ^epioiKis, (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 Gospel prevailed not so soon, nor was Christianity so readily embraced there 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 dediti by Prudentius ; and Chrysostom says of the heathen philosophers, the great supporters of that religion, fieydXoi flaw iv t% napr) enelvoi, 1 ' " they pass for great men in the village."

After Christianity was too hard for the Gentiles 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 prcegrandis Jethura, habitatoresque ejus omnes Christiani sunt, 0 " Jethura is a pretty large village, and all its inhabitants are Christians."

And when the Christians in the territory were many, yet being disposed (as they generally were) under 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. Hebraic.

bishop of the city; yet I see no ground for this, seeing neither do the apostles 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 they say speaks it plain enough; whereas, indeed, their practice speaks qirite the 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 practice 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 all qviarters of the Christian world; and have discovered bishops, not only in the larger, but also, where it was thought requisite, in the smaller or ordinary villages. It were easy to add more instances hereof. In the territory of Hippo, Austin speaks of divers bishops," Ecce interim episcopos nostros, qui sunt in regione Hipponense, ubi a vestris tanta mala patimur, 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 Synica near to Hippo,* and yet would have another bishop made in the castle Fussala, ad ecclesiw Hipponensis para?ciam. c 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 Cassenigrae, four in that of Tacara/

Basinopolis [was] a village honoured by Julian with the privileges of a city, being a place in Bithynia, in the territory of Nice, as Anastasius, bishop of that city declares, Ego antem ostendo, Basinopolim sub Niccea jam olim esse, nam regio, fuit ejtis—sicut Tacteus et Doris regiones sunt sub Nica?, e " 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 under 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 Eunomius of Nicomedia as the proper metropolitan./

« Epist. lxviii. * De Civit. Dei, lib. xxii. cap. viii. ' Epist. cclxi.

* Vid. Collat. Carthag. passim. • Cone. Chaired. Art. xiii I one. ("halted, ibid.

This appears also in the bishopric erected in the precinct of Cassarea, when Basil presided there, and the contest was hot betwixt him and Anthimus, bishop of Tyana, 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, Gregory, 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 territories 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 importunity (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 Eome, which was under the jurisdiction of the provost of that city, it was large indeed, (reaching one hundred miles,) none lik*e it, nor it like itself, when it was but extended ad quintum aut scutum lapidem, " 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, c 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 Eulogice, d which were wont to be sent to all in the diocese, 6 cum omnes ecclesice nostrce intra civitatem constitute sunt, " since all our churches are fixed within the city :" answer-ably, Leo's diocesan charge was, tantce urbis 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, rrjs noXeais fiovrjsJ It was in other places, as at Dublin heretofore, episcopus tantum intra muros episcopate officiam evercet,' 1 " the bishop exercises his episcopal function only within

« Vid. Mireus, p. 297. 4 Vid. Naz. [Orat. xx. p. 356.] in Laud. Basil, and Epist. xxx.

• Vid. Mir. Notit. Episc. pp. 68 and 160.

'' The Eulogiae were portions of the bread and wine consecrated by the bishop, and sent to those who were unable to join in the public communion of the Church.— Ed. ' Epist. cap. v. f Epist. xiii. t Horn. iii. in Acts. * Vid. Ush. Relig. of Irish, p. 63.

the walls of the city." So Bitectum, in Naples, whose diocese non excedit muros urbis, " did not extend beyond the walls of the city," as Mirarus tells us. a And Ragusi, an archbishop's seat, iisdem fere Jinibas qidbus urbis mcenia, in Bodinus. Accordingly, the irapoucia, by which they will have us to understand a diocese, is said frequently to be iv rrj noXei, " in the city," of which there are instances more than enough in Eusebius, rrjs iv 'E<£eVco 7rapoiKias eTrl(TKoiros, b " the bishop of the diocese in Ephesus," and of the diocese in Alexandria, 0 and in Corinth , d and in Sardis, and in Hierapolis, e and in Cassarea/and so the diocese in Tarsus, in Iconium, in Jerusalem, in Laodicea.s" Now those that profess a singular 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 territory but he who had the city. 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. 23, " When they had ordained them elders in every church," as those prelatists do who make them equipollent, and by elders in both places understand bishops, and will have a city and bishop to be adequate ; h 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, (insomuch 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 account with the name Constan-tia,) it was Xipfjv, says Strabo, the port of Gaza, in Palestine, seven furlongs from that city, 1 ' and counted part of the city, napadaXdrTiov pepos ttjs 7r6\ea>s, k " 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. 267. 4 Lib. v. cap. xxi. c Lib. ii. cap. xxiii. * Lib. iv. cap. xxii.

• Lib. iv. cap. xxv. / Lib. vi.cap. xxi. s Lib. vii. cap. xxxii. xxvi. * correlatives.

• Lib. xvi. fEd. Casaub. p. 1101, A. Ed. Paris. 1620, p. 759.] * Soz. 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 by Julian,) and urged that it was not lawful for one city to have two bishops, p) depirov etvcu fiias nokews 8v6 emaKonovs npoea-ravai ; a national council decrees in favour of Majuma, ordains it a bishop, and so it continued an episcopal seat, with distinct altar and territory, as Sozomen declares.* 7 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 Avriter 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. 6

It may be said further, that those that will give credit to the premises, 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 will not be so credulous, who see instances enough in their own country, and other parts of Christendom near us, viz. Germany, the Netherlands, &c. of bishoprics of another size, to evince the contrary; those of another world must be persuaded to believe this, since 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 bishoj^rics of a later erection, and not conformed to the more ancient model. The bishop's irapoiKia, " diocese," of old, was but like a modern parish. The modern 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 further than many a metropolitan's of the former ; such a precinct of ground as had a hundred bishops in the elder and 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 territory 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

" Lib. v. rap. iii. ! Lib. vii. rap. xlviii.

magis quam consulere subclitis qucerunt, " they seek to domineer over their subjects rather than to advise them." What Anthimus was charged with, was the character of too many, to tt/s dpxiep<oo-vvrjs peyeBos ml dt-lcopa ov irvevpctTiKr)i> yj/vxajv entpeXeiav eivai Xoyiadpevos' dXX' ota riva ivoXl-

riKrjv dpxqv Sta roCro rfjs pei^ovos 6pey6fi€i>os, a " he did not regard the grandeur 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 Gregory 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 after, 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 or dinar e ut ipsi sibi episcopi longo intervallo 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 episcopi crescente numero fidelium augerentur, 0 " It was ordered in council that as the faithful increased, bishops should be multiplied."

The difference betwixt the modern 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 English, 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 dignitas episcopalis viksceret, d " lest the episcopal dignity should be lowered."

Under the patriarch of Antioch, there had been above one hundred and sixty bishops ; but then under the Latins they were reduced to six metropolitans, and six bishops. 6 In Crete they will have us believe

« Cone. C. P. sub Menna. * Respons. ad viii. Interrog. [Hardouin. torn. iii. p. 512.]

' Spelm. p. 153. [Cone. Heradf. cap. ix.] <i Hist. Orient, lib. i. cap. liii.

■ Vid. Mir. Not. p. 82.

there were anciently 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.

CHAPTER VII.

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 meet in one place ; not because they held themselves obliged to admit no more. And this appears, because, when Christians in the bishops' precinct were multiplied beyond the capacity of holding personal communion, (as they were in the greater cities, at least in after ages) yet they still continued under one bishop, as one church.

Am. Till the state of the church was greatly corrupted, there are but few instances hereof in comparison of those who retained the primitive form of churches. And the reason why they did not transgress 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 large for personal inspection and communion. There are several rules which they would have observed, by which this is sufficiently declared.

The council at Sardica, 5 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 0 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. 283. * Can. vi. ' context.

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. Requiritur in sacerdote ordinando etiam populi prcesentia, " 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 repentance not only before the bishop, and all the ministry, but in the presence of all the people, in notitia midtorum,vel etiam totiusplebis agere pcenitentiam non recuset, b " they will not refuse to express their penitence before many, or even the whole of the people." So did Natalius, as Eusebius declares, in lacrymas et miserationes, omnem provocavit ecclesiam, 0 " he excited all the church to tears and commiseration." And thus does Tertullian describe a penitent,** omnium lacrymas sitadentem, omnium vestigia lambentem, " 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: Cum omnes fideles interessent, says Albaspineus, e or, as Sozomen describes it, to nav rrjs eKKkrjo-ias nXrjdos, " the whole mixltitude of the church shedding tears ;" so Jerome, of Fabiola, episcopo presbyteris et omni populo collachrymanti — recepta sub oculis omnis ecclesiw commu-nione/ " 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 accordingly to reconcile them sooner, or to prolong the course of their repentance.*

He was to feed the whole flock, preaching to them frequently. Cyprian says he failed not to do this to all the brethren, nee universal fraternitati

<• Caus. viii. Quest, i. 4 August. Horn. xlix. c Hist. lib. v. cap. ult.

* Lib. de Pudicit. « Lib. ii. p. 410.

/ Ep. ad Ocean. [Ep. lxxxiv. (al. xxx.) Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. pars ii. p. 659.]

e Vid. Euseb. Vit. Constant, lib. iv. cap. lxiv. * Cone. Nic. Can. xi.

— allocutio et pevsuasio nostra defidt. a And so the ancient bishops were wont to do, more than once a week, sometimes every day.

He was to administer the Lord's supper frequently, to all in full communion, they all receiving nee de aliorum manu quam prajsidentiumf "from the hands of the bishops alone."

He was to watch over 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. xiii. 17. c And Chrysostom says, this was it that made his soul to tremble continually, 6 yap cpofios a-wtx^s

KaraaeUi pox) ttju ■tyvxr)V. d

He was not only to observe their conversations, but to acquaint himself with the state of their souls, TrepuTvio-KOTveiv Tvavrodev tt)v ttjs ■v/^v^r f|ii/. e

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 account, are enumerated by Isidore of Pelusium ; who having specified abundance, concludes, that there were many more than all these, icai ttoWco tovtu>v TrkeLovaZ And he gives a large account of more.^ And we shall see Chrysostom offering 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 shifts, rather than they woidd 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 eucharist every Lord's-day; it was now thought sufficient to communicate with the bishop at some special solemnities. h 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 2 both Rome and Alexandria, two of the greatest churches in the world, were specially concerned, Cum solennior festivitas, conventum populi numerosioris indix-erit, et ad earn tanta fidelium multitude) convenerit quam recipe?^ basilica simul una non possit; sacrijicii oblatio indubitanter iteretur, ne his tantum admissis ad hanc devotionem qui primi advenerint, videantur hi qui post-modum confluxerint, non receptif &c. " When a high festival bespeaks

« Lib. iii. Epist. v. 4 Tertull. De Coron. Milit. [cap. iii.]

c Vid. Isidore, lib. v. Epist. ccexxiii. Prosp. De Vita Contemplativa, lib. i. cap. xx.

d [Horn, xxxiv. p. 602. in loc] • Id. De Sacerd. Orat. ii. / Lib. iii. Epist. cexvi.

a Lib. i. Epist. cxlix. * Concil. Agatli. [Can. xviii.] ' probable.

* Epist. lxxxi. cap. ii.

an unusual concourse of people, and so great a multitude of the faithful come 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 Eulogiaj, parts of the consecrated bread sent to those of the bishop's flock, 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 Eome, about anno 313, as Baronius reckons. So that it may seem from hence, that the Christians at Eome were not so numerous before this, but [that] they might communicate together. The end of it was, as Innocent, ad Decentium, cap. v. expresses it, that those to whom it was sent might not think themselves parted from our communion on that day, Se a nostra co?nmnnione maocime ilia die non judicent separates. They thought all that belonged to the same bishop obliged to communicate 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 communion 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 themselves obliged to proceed, in admitting members, and excluding scandalous 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" (/car I8iav) and publicly in the Christian assemblies ; in reference to which they are called audientes, " hearers," by Cyprian, 6 and inter auditorum tirocinia deputati, by Tertullian, c " those reckoned to be passing through their noviciate as hearers." And before they were initiated, they did give an account of their proficiency in the knowledge of Christ to the officers of the church, bishop, and presbyters.

• Orig. contra Cels. cap. iii. [p. 142.] * Lib. iii. Epist. xvii. [Al. Ep. xii. Al. xiii. Al. xviii.}

• Lib. de Pocnitentia, [cap. vi.]

They required also a holy and unblameable life ; such a conversation 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 fiiovv ovtcos, " live according to the rule of the Gospel." a 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 KaXas ftiovv, b " to five a good fife." It was not only a reformation of greater enormities, but unblame-ableness in respect of smaller sins, which they counted 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 ra eXaTrapara rav rponap, the failings of his ways, let him not be initiated." c Origen tells Celsus, that " amongst Christians, those only might be initiated, who were pure, not only from heinous crimes, dno ttovtos piaovs, but also those that are counted smaller oifences, t<ov tXarrovodv vopifapevav dfiapri]ficiTa>v." a Lactantius, comparing the heathen religion with the Christian, makes this one principal difference, that the heathen admitted all promiscuously; reckoning up divers counted more flagitious ; hie vero, amongst Christians, says he, levi communique peccato locus nullus est, " light and common oifences 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 innocent life.'" And St. Austin signifies, "That according to the ancient custom, grounded upon the most evident truth, ex ilia liquidissima veri-tate veniens, (i. e., the word of God,) none were admitted into the church of God on earth, who were visibly such as the Scripture excludes from the kingdom of God in heaven./

They required innocency and unblameableness of fife, proceeding from inward renovation ; so Tertullian.^ Non ideo abluimar, &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 KeKaOapdai vtto toC \6yov, 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." h And a little after, " the mysteries of the religion of Jesus, are duly delivered to those only who are holy and pure, povois dyiois m\ KaQapoU."

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 under trial, and to continue them in

• Apol. ii. p. 159, and p. 141. » Ibid. lib. iii. [p. 142.]

c Homil. xxii. ad Populum Antioch. d Lib. iii. [p. 148.] ■ De Just. lib. v. cap. xx.

De Fid. et Oper. cap. xviii. i De Baptis. » Ibid. [p. 147]

the state of probationers for some time. The Council of Nice rectifying some disorders crept in against rule," begins with this, that the catechumens were admitted too soon into communion; to redress this they decree, that no such thing should be done for the future, and give the reason for their decree, ml yap kcu xp° vov ^ KaTrjxovpiva, 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. 6 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 Milan.

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 c 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 Council at Elvira, e 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, (ptXanevaTelv tovs ftiovs, to search strictly into the fives and demeanour of such who sought to join themselves to the church. And also care was taken that the state of their soids 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, manifested in admitting any to their communion. The Christians, says he, to the Utmost of their ability, Trpofiaaavio-avres t&v aKoveiv (r<pa>v /3ovXo/ne-vav ras tyvxas, " do first exquisitely search the souls of those who wordd be their hearers," viz., in order to a full admission; they bring them to the touchstone (els fiao-avov) to 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. A Constantine, having put forth a severe edict against those who infested the churches, and opposed the doctrines and truths of Christianity ; the pastors apprehended that this might occasion many to dissemble, and pretend the

" Can. ii. * Can. xlii. f Can. xiv. * continued. ' Can. lxxiii. and xi.

/ Can. lxviii. g Cont. Celsum, [lib. iii. p. 142.]

* De Vit. Constant, lib. iv. cap. lxiv.

p2

embracing of Christianity, 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, covering themselves with sheep's clothing, those they rejected ; but those who did this with a sincere soul, when they had tried them a competent time, boKi/xdCopTes xp° v( i?i after sufficient experience of them, pera ttjv avTapxq SiaTreipav, 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 unworthy persons into the church ; so they thought themselves obliged to expel those who, after admission, did manifest their unworthiness. It was the sense of the universal church, that scandalous sinners were to be excluded from communion. Nor did they thus proceed only for the most atrocious enormities, but also for sins of less provocation ; this was their course in minoribus 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, rr)v eTrio-rpocpriv Ka\ peravoiav avrcov 'ftovres ; " 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." 6

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 profession ; and so kept them off from full communion, in the state of penitents, 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, after 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. 0

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-

« Lib.iii. Epist. xiv. [Al. Ep. ix. Al. x. Al. xvi.] and Epist. xiv. [Al. Ep. xi. Al. xii. Al. xvii.] » Euseb. Hist. lib. vi. cap. [xlii.] ' Can. xi.

tures, had been imitated, the churches afterwards could not 'easily have grown to such an unwieldy and irregular bigness.

But there was another reason besides what is suggested, why the bishops in after 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 resentment" 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 apparently 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 ambitionis secu-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 encroaching 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 authorised.

When the empire was divided into dioceses, the bishops of the cities where the governors of those exarchates resided, 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 councils.

In that unhappy time, what struggling was there in bishops of all sorts for more greatness, and larger power ! What tugging at councils and court for these purposes !

A bishop of a country parish would be striving to get another parish under him. The third council, at Carthage,* takes notice of such bishops, and their attempts to enlarge their bishoprics beyond the

• odium. * Can. xlvi.

£'■12 PRIMITIVE EPISCOPACY PROVED

bounds allowed thern; and makes a rule against such ambitious encroachments.

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 Paidinus 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 Paidinus and him, to make his way to the episcopal chair."

When a bishop had a great city, yet some village 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 privileges of a city, and the name of Constantia, for its affection to Christianity ; 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 jurisdiction.*

Not satisfied with one city, some would have two. So four bishops in Europa, a province in Thrace, got each of them two cities under him ; one of them both Heraclea and Panion, another Byze and Arcadiopolis, the third Celas and Calliopolis, the fourth Sabsadias 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 council, at Ephesus, pretending it was a peculiar custom of those cities. 0

Not contented with a city or two, they woidd have all in a province under them ; so Cyril contends with Acacius, 6 * and his successors at Jerusalem, with those at Caesarea, till they had got the province (nay three in one) and the metropolitical pre-eminence from them ; though Caesarea was regularly the metropolis of Palestine: e 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 Caesarea, 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 Caesarea and Scythopolis from him of Antioch, as William of Tyra tells us.-'

" Sozomen. Hist. lib. vii. cap. xi. xv. * Ibid. lib. v. cap. iii.

c Cone. EpH. Act. vii. ad finem. * Soz. lib. iv. cap. xxiv. [Ed. Reading, cap. xxv.]

• Vid. Jerom. [Ep. lxi] ad Panimach. / Viii. Bart. lib. xxiii. p. 323.

When they had a province, 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 6 would not allow him the cities in prejudice of Nicomedia, the more ancient metropolis. 0 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 a St. Paulo, forty-one ; all in one patriarchate, that of C. P. d

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 6 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 Cassarea over those in the diocese of Pontus, and he of Hera-clea over those in the diocese of Thrace ; but the bishop of Constantinople, being more potent, defeated them of all save the title: so the bishop of Antioch, who seems but reckoned amongst metropolitans by the Council of Nice, not content with his proper province, challengeth the rest of the provinces in the diocese of the orient, and seems confirmed therein by the council 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 provinces, yet one province more 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 Naz. in Laud. Basil.

4 So a considerable part of the province of Tyre had been wrested from Photius, bishop there, and settled upon the upstart metropolitan of Berytus, had not the council of Chalcedon (though it authorised many other usurpations) hindered it. Vid. Act. iv. Concil. Chalced. [Hard. torn. ii. p. 435.]

• Concil. Chalced. Act. vi. xiii. <* Constantinople. ' Taurinens. Can. [i.]

-''Can. ii. s See Leo Epist. [lxxxix.J ad Viennenses.

ragement to this ambitious attempt. 0 But the council of Ephesus would not be so easily deluded, which takes occasion from hence to declare against the ambition of prelates. 6 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 provinces^ 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. 6

And not only Eudoxius, 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 Chalcedon 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 Rome, 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 fifth age, is apparent enough ; the edict of Valentinian the Third, procured by Leo I., signifies it plainly. And

" See Epist. xviiL » Can. viii. [Bevereg. Pandect, torn. i. p. 104.]

' Vid. Theod. Hist. lib. v. cap. xxviii.

<* He was but a private bishop, inferior to the bishop of Heraclea, a great part of the fourth age : but the council at Constantinople, giving him an honorary precedence, npe<r/3eZv tjjc ti/x^c, next to the bishop of Rome (the common rise of usurpations in the church) the bishops of that see were encouraged thereby to encroach upon the adjoining provinces ; this they did successively, so that their usurpations grew customary, and custom was the plea they used in the council of Chalcedon, and prevailed for the authorising of their ambitious practices (as it had prevailed with the council of Nice, for the establishing of metropolitans): so that three exarchical dioceses are subjected to him, containing no less than twenty-eight provinces, wherein [were] eighty-one metropolitans, five hundred and seventy-four (six hundred and forty) bishops, and thirty-nine archbishops : for so many the Notifies 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 metropolitans of all those provinces, but challenged a right to ordain the inferior bishops, as appears by jEtius, Protest, in Cone. Chalced. Act. [xvi.] Vid. Socrat. lib. vii. cap. xxviii. and to depose both them and the superiors.

• Concil. Chalced. Can. xxviii. / Soc. lib. vi. cap. x. Soz. lib. viii. cap. vi.

g Act. xi. [Hardouin. torn. ii. p. 558.] 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 mentioned.

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 they never thought they had enough, were not willing to part with anything they had, nor distribute their overgrown churches under the conduct of other bishops, when they thought all little enough for themselves.

CHAPTER VIII.

Let us, before we conclude, take notice what thoughts some of the best and most eminent bishops of the fourth and fifth ages had of a very large bishopric, and a flock exceeding numerous : when they express their judgment and consciences herein, thereby we shall perceive, that if the church could have been ordered, according to the principles, 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 rrjs inKkr^a-ias S(p0a\pos, and elsewhere, deanea-ios and deo<f)6pos ; and who deserves as much honour, for his generous and vigorous appearing against the corruption and degeneracy of his age, as Athanasius, for his opposition to Arius, hie hostibus helium intulit, Me 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, r\ yap o^Xos, &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 carnosity ? Do you not see, that it is better to have one sound 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." a

Elsewhere, " One" (says he) " that does the will of God 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 navigation ; it is better to have two skilful 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 ! 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 intolerable for a man to serve himself, as to be beating and fighting with others. This I say, lest any shoidd admire the church for its numerousness : let him rather study to make it good." h 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." 0 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. d

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. iii. Horn. viii. pp. 655, C56. Edit. Savil. * In Acts, Horn. xxir. p. 752.

• In Mattli. Horn. xvii. pp. 125, 126. * In Act. Horn. xxiv. p. 752.

better part of the church ; likewise extremely dangerous to the pastors, exposing them to punishment hereafter, and shame here ; and in fine, that it tended to ruin and subvert all.

First. This in his account was a high dishonour to God." Secondly, a reproach to the Christian name, the far 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, (J5ov<TTacrlov ov8ev birjvrjvo^e kol enavXecos ovcov koi Kap.r]\a>v,y j " differs nothing from a fold for beasts, or a stable for camels and asses ; they call us the pests of the world, Xoi/xrjv rjpas Kakovo-i." c 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 Christian name, 8 reproving the corruption of the generality of Christians. " We, we are the cause," (says he,) " that they persist in their error, ravra tWrjvas /care^ei ; 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 God, 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 fives of the many congregated with us, 6veibel£ovo-iv tj^Iu tov plov tov tS>v TToKhG>v. k And a little after, wfien we say that Christ has done great things, making angels of men, afterwards an account hereof being required, and we called on to give a proof of this in the flock, eVt-o-TOfxi(6iJ.€0a, 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 admitting so many that were corrupt, and folding them together with the few that were sound, tended to infect the whole, and debauch all. Tt epal ical tw n\r)6ei. " 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 miglit 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 affected to have multitudes under their charge, though they were naught. " By this," says he, " all is subverted, all is turned topsyturvy, because even as in the theatres, we desire multitudes, not only

« Vid. in Act. p. 752. » In Matth. Horn, lxxxviii. p. 544. ' In Johann. Horn. Ixxii. p. 85S. d In Coloss. Horn. vii. p. 128. « Ibid. / In Joliann. Hum. Ixxii. p. 857, 858.

r Id Act. Horn. xxiv. p. 752. * Ibid. ' In Johann. Horn, lxviii. p. 840.

* Horn, in Matth. lxxxviii. p. 543. ' In Coloss. Horn. vii. p. 128. ■ In Act. Horn, xvii p. 65f.

those that are good."" Sixthly. This was extremely dangerous to the pastors. " The many," (says he,) " that are not good, procure me nothing but punishment (hereafter) and shame at present."* More particularly, a bishop could not take cognisance of the various conditions of so many, nor could possibly discharge all the duties he owed them, and so could give no comfortable account of them, though he be accountable for every soul, whereby it came to pass, that it was " almost impossible any bishop should be saved."

A bishop at the peril of his soul is to take exact notice of the spiritual state of all under his charge, and constantly to perform all pastoral duties to the whole flock. 'E7ricn<o7rr/, &c. " The episcopate," (says he,) "is so called from the inspecting all." c He ought to be an overseer of all, bearing the burdens of all; d pvpiav (Set) 6(pda\p.av Trpos to irepeino-Koirfiv navTodev ttjv ttjs ^vxrjs ?£«»; he had need of many thousand eyes to look into the state of every soul under him, which of them cannot digest bitter remedies, and who for want of them grow careless. e He ought to leave nothing unobserved, but to search into all accurately \f no speck in his flock should escape his notice ; he ought to train up his charge to an excellent temper, to admirable comeliness, looking everywhere about him, lest there be any spot, or wrinkle, or blemish, which may spoil that beauty and comeliness." s He will be cast into hell if he be not thus accurate about every one ; all exactness as to himself will not secure him. " A bishop," says he, " though he order his own life well, if he do not exactly take care of thee, and of all that are under him, to hell he goes with the wicked. And often he that miscarries not by his own concerns, is ruined by yours, although he very well rectify 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, dypimvovo-t, they watch for your souls, it speaks thousands of labours, and cares, and perils,' difyrjyepdac Set, he ought to be up still, and to be ardent in spirit, and, as I may say, to breathe fire, (nip irveeiv,) and to go the rounds night and day, more than any commander in an army, and to labour, and to toil, and to take care of, and be very solicitous for all.* Aoyov p.h 8a>o-op,ev, &c. " We must give an account of all your souls, when we have been defective in anything, when we have not comforted, or not admonished, or not convinced."'

This should be done, not only publicly, but privately also, both to men and women ; " For a bishop," says he, " who regards all his flock,

• In Act. Horn. viii. p. 055. * In Act. ibid. « In 1 Tim. Horn. x. pp. 285, 286. d In Act. Hom. iii. p. 626. ' De Sacerd. Orat. ii. / Ibid. p. 10.

i Ibid. Orat. iv. p. 34. * In Johann. Hom. lxxxvi. p. 922. ' In Rom. Hom. p. 226.

* In 1 Tim. Hom. x. p. 2R6. ' In Eph. Hom. 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 relieve them when under pressures." 3 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 perishes any way through his default. In Heb. xiii. 17. 6 yap <po(3os, " 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 ignorance, 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 punishment is unavoidable, if any one (in his charge) happen to perish. We must be accountable for a business that requires the virtue of angels." c " 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 obnoxious, and must give a double account." d " 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 but 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 undergo ? If thou say thrice more than the other, thou sayest nothing ; so very great is the punishment and suffering that he is liable to.'" 'Aypvirpei, &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. Qav-ndfo, &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, eTriTpexovTas.z He calls them miserable wretches that desire it, and is astonished at them, rl av tis e'lnoi, &c. What can one say to those wretches, who plunge themselves into such an abyss of sufferings? Thou 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 Sacerd. Orat. vi. p. 49. » Ibid. Orat. Hi. p. 29. « Ibid. Orat. vi. p. 44.

* In 2 Tim. Horn. H. p. 336. • In Tit. Horn. i. p. 384.

/ In Heb. Horn, xxxiv. p. C02. t In Heb. ibid, and in Act. Horn. Hi. p. 627.

on it, be unpardonable, not well ordering it; how much more those that labour for it! Such a one does much more deprive himself of all pardon ; he ought to fear and tremble."" Elsewhere, " I am astonished, says he, " at those who seek such a weighty charge. Wretched and miserable man, dost thou see what thou seekest ? canst thou answer for one soul ? When thou hast got this dignity, consider to the punishment of how many souls thou art liable. 6 He cries out astonished at the greatness of the hazard, /3a/3at Trdo-os 6 kIv8vpos." c

Before I proceed with this excellent person, let us look a little back on the premises. If there must be so much care and watchfulness in a bishop over every soul ; if so many duties in public and private are to be performed by him to every one, and if when any sin is committed for want of his care and watchfulness, or due measure thereof, or any neglect of, yea, or remissness, in any of those duties, it will be the bishop's guilt, if any soul perish through omission, or defectiveness, or undue performance, the blood of it will be required at his hands ; d weU might he prefer a diocese with one communion-table, before the biggest povo-Tdaiov that a large country can afford ; well might he say as he does, e ennrovov, &c. " It is very burdensome to have the charge of a hundred and fifty soiils." But it had been too little if he had said a thousand times more than I have alleged, against the desperate wretchedness and 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 of them, and never perform any one of those duties to many thousands of them. But he thought it to no purpose to speak to such (ou yap fio) rrepl eKfivcov, &c.) who come to such a charge as their ease, and give themselves to sloth and remissness ; and yet take a charge, and admit but one there to be a pastor, which requires the utmost diligence of a thousand pastors. What does the guilt of millions of sins, the blood of myriads of souls weigh upon such heads ?

Moreover, hereby it is evident that Chrysostom (the best writers in 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 of more than he could take exact and particiilar 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 large 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, xxxiv. p. G02. • In Tit. Horn. i. p. 384.

« In Heb. Horn, [xxxiv.] p. 602. d Vid. Orat. vi. de Sacerd. p. 44

" Horn, in Ignat.

methods he thought needful to retrench some excess in his times, (though little compared with that in after 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 there, 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 unworthy multitude should be expelled, Kal yap, &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." a 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 disease, 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, ndvra oixerai ; 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, Tlva egofxev <rvyyva>ij.rjv, &c. What pardon can we expect, corrupting all by such indulgence ? there was reason to look for greater severity than Eli met with." b

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 1 of a multitude that are diseased ?—I will forbear none : for when I

• In Johann. Horn, lxiii. p. 824. * In Matth. Horn. xvii. p. 125.

shall be judged before the tribunal of Christ, you will stand afar off, and your favour will nothing avail me, when I am called to account." 'Airayopevo-co, &c. I will forbid you hereafter to pass over these thresholds, 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 with two or three that observe God's law, than to assemble a multitude of transgressors, 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 dream; 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,) \jsvxpbs ovtos 6 \6yos, this is a foolish saying ; it is better to have one doing the will of God, than ten thousand transgressors. 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." c

Yea, though he should 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 suffer 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 cannot connive, not only in regard of my own punishment, but of your salvation." d

And what great numbers would have been excluded the church by this course, considering the great degeneracy and corruptions of those times, 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 murderers, adulterers, fornicators, swearers,* but the unmerciful,-^ the covetous/ the envious, A the profuse otherwise, but uncharitable to the poor,* the superstitious,* symbolisers with foreign rites, either Jewish/ or heathenish,"' frequenters of plays," those that neglected sermons to follow their sports. 0 And not only those that neglected what was good, and

« In Coloss. Horn. vii. p. 128. » In Matth. Horn. xvii. pp. 125, 12G.

c In Coloss. Horn. vii. p. 128. * In Act. Hom. vii. p. 650.

« In Matth. Hom. xvii. p. 125. / Page 515.

g In Matth. Hom. [lxxxii.] p. 514. and [Hom. xv.] in 1 Cor. p. 337.

* In Matth. Horn. xl. p. 269. • In Coloss. Hom. vii. p. 128.

* Ibid. p. 134. ' Cont. Jud. torn. vi. p. 373. •» In Heb. Hom. iv. p. 454. " In Johnnn. Hom. i. p. 558. and torn. v. p. 39. ■ In Gen. Horn. vi. p. 33.

acted what was evil, but evil speakers too." " Whosoever was wicked," 6 dfiaprtuXds. " Whosoever was not cleansed from his sin, aKa6apr6s. c Whosoever was not a true disciple, but a counterfeit, as Judas was. d Whosover is not xadapos, pure. e 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 punishment, and severity," &c.

Whosoever is not holy, ayios, which is more than the former ; and he took it to be the sense of the church, expressed of old in their solemn communion, to. ayta rots aylois ; 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 guilt of any sin, which excludes from the kingdom of heaven .s " 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 reasons ; what a thin church would he have left himself, (though he presided 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 myriads (which he tells us elsewhere were one hundred thousand) a hundred to be found that will be saved, 8 yea, and I question," adds he, " whether so many." He alleges the general corruption 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. v. p. 270.

• In Matth. Horn. Ixxxii. p. 515. and Horn. [1.] in Tit. p. 384. * In Mattli. ibid.

■ In Heb. Horn. xvii. p. 523. / Ibid. pp. 524, 525.

f In 1 Cor. Horn. 15. [p. 337.] * In Act. Horn. 24.

' Page 753. * In Jo. Horn, lxxxviii. p. 544.

and understanding, by not one, very few, and we have the 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 endeavoured to make them; it may be inquired, whether then he would have been content with so numerous a flock.

Am. 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 circumstances 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 difference 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. 6 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. e Now allow a fifth part to the sects, no more will remain for the charge of one hundred or one hundred 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 congregation.

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 condition 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 fifth age con-

« Horn. xi. in 1 Tim. * Nov. iii. ' In Acts. Horn. xi.

tained not many more de facto, than some one of our parishes ; but de jure, Chrysostom being judge, too few to be spoken of, if it had been primed as he thought it necessary.

CHAPTER IX.

Let me, in the last place, take notice of something which may be inferred from the premises, or which they otherwise offer to our observation.

The change of the primitive form of churches made a great alteration in the government of the 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 largeness, that it became ungovernable by him, ri]v apxty airov avapxi-av eiKorws KtKkrfKas, (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 the 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, that it was his office and prerogative 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 himself; the churches were, and could not but be left without government. Thus, to use Basil's words, dvapxla rls deivrj otto (pikapx^as TavTTjs rots \ao1s iirex«>pa<Tev, b " through this ambition of governing all, all 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 undertake 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, TKaBov eavrovs kv(3ov

• Lib. iii. Epist. cccxix. » De Spir. Sane, cap ult

Q2

dvapptyavres eirl reus iravrav avdpanrav fXiriai ; adding, " that if be 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 koivov bvo-Tvxnpa, a ' a common calamity.'" I leave the application of this to others, only take along herewith the judgment of Chrysostom, " that it was far more easy for a prince to rule the universe, than for a bishop to govern one town."* But what might Zosimus have said, if Augustus ruling the place where he was, no more 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 worship, but other church administrations; all public acts passed at assemblies 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 censures ; 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 modern 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 modern 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

J Hist. lib. i. p. 4. [Ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 6.] * In Act. Horn. iii. 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, dpia-TOKparia /xer evSoKias rov n\rj8ovs, a " 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, without 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 confirming, marrying, or burying. They used not the same mode either in reading the Scriptui-es, 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. 6

• Annot. in Act. vi. 2. « Hist. lib. vii. cap. xix.

In Africa, Austin expresses the diversities to be innumerable, nee tamen omnia commemorari potuerint. a In other parts of the Latin church, Italy particularly, Innocent the First says, that several churches had their several modes of celebrating, diverse in diversis locis, vel ecclesiis obti-neri, aut celebrari videntur. 6 In the Greek church, and elsewhere, Socrates gives a large account of their different rites and usages, 0 where, after abundance of instances, he says, to reckon up all is not only difficult, but impossible, epya>8es fiSXXop 8e abvvarov. d And yet there was no hurt in all this, so long as there was an agreement in the faith, 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 fide nihil officit sanctce ecclesice diversa consuetude-, saith Gregory the First; " where there is one faith, 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 Irenseus to Victor, e r\ Siacpavia rfjs vr)<TTeias ttjv dfiouoiav rijs nia-Teas avviaTrjcn, " a diversity in less matters commends the church, when there is an agreement in points of faith."

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 condemnation.

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 constituted of Christians in their vicinity ; or, if they refused unreasonably, it was done without their consent. The bishops of Gaza are instances hereof.

Those churches were single congregations, settled under pecidiar 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 quisquam 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 ride was, (as the council that first authorised them decreed,) KpareiTa f) twv likeiovuv yp-jj(pos, " that all should be carried by plurality of voices."-^

Those single churches had severed^ assemblies, and held distinct communion from other churches : they did not think themselves bound to

<• Retract, lib. ii. cap. xx. i Epist. ad Decentiurri. ' Hist. lib. v. cap. xxii.

' SeeSozom. ubi supra. ' In Euseb. lib. v. cap. xxvi. / Cone. Nic. Can. vi.

g 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 tyrannical for one to prescribe to another, and all power of imposing expressly disclaimed." Neque enim quisquam nostrum episco-pum se episcoporum constituit, aid tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitate™ collegas suas adegit, quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis suo3 arbitrium proprium, tamque judicari ab alio non possit, quam nee ipse potest alterum judicare. b " 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 aid prajudicantes, quo minus unusquisque episcoporum quod putaverit faciat, 0 &c. " We neither dictate to any, nor forestall the judgment of any, in order that every bishop may act according to his own opinion."

Nemini prescribentes, quo minus statuat unusquisque propositus quod putat, actus sui rationem domino redditurus. d " 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 questioned 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. 3?2. b Cypr. in Cone. Carthag. ' Id. Epist. ad Jubian. [Ep. lxxiii.J

4 Id. Epist. ad Mag. [Ep. lxxvi. (al. lxix.)] » particulars.

churches ; they hereby blast all the churches in the apostles 1 times, and the best ages after, as no churches, for none of these had any such diocesans ; and so herein they are as wise and friendly, as if one, to secure the height of his own turret, should attempt to blow up all the houses in the best part of the world. Nay, they blow up their own too : for hereby they deny both the beginning, and succession of churches for divers hundred years. And if there were no churches then, they will not dream there can be any now ; seeing by their principles the being of them now, depends upon the beginning, and uninterrupted succession of them. There can be no succeeding at all, where there is no beginning ; no uninterrupted succession, where there is a total failure for whole ages.

So likewise it is hereby manifest, that there were no diocesan churches in those ancient times ; I mean many churches united under one bishop, as their sole ruler and pastor. No such thing appears for divers 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 churches in any city but one. In the fourth age there were indeed, in some cities, some other places where Christians held assemblies for other offices ; but none but one for the eucharist. Those places were called tituli at Eome, laurce 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 pluralist. 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 modern 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, Cotyamm, Apamea, Chona?, &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 episcopal 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 with 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 prevailed, would have had its bishop, as M[r.] T[aylor] a learned prelatist (better acquainted with 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 shoidd 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, that 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 modern acceptation of the word.

Hereby also some mistakes about episcopal ordinations, of ill consequence, 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 duly ordained in those ages, who were set apart for the work of the ministry by the pastor of a single church, with the concurrence of some assistants. Why they should not be esteemed to be duly ordained, who are accordingly set apart by a pastor of a single church now, I can discern no reason, after I 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

reason they make use of in this case would lead them to it,) as deny that 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 apart by two or three pastors at least, who are as truly diocesans as the 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 ordination he had, that was not so elected. And besides, he has as large a diocese as most in the best times of the church ; and so makes it his business to feed and rule the flock, and exercise the power of the keys. But if it be said, he has no superiority 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[ammond] maintains, that there were no subject presbyters in Scripture times, but bishops alone without them ; and supposes a great part of this church a to be of his persuasion. The council of Sardica taking care that a bishop should be no way lessened, allows a bishop to be made in any place for which one presbyter is not sufficient; so that in the judgment of those fathers, one assistant may be enough for a bishop. In the third council of Carthage,* Posthumianus inquiring whether, if a bishop had but one presbyter, he might be removed from him ; Bishop Bilson c infers from thence, that bishops often had but one presbyter, and that one might be translated to another place. It was ordinary of old to have metropolitans, 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 challenged in later times, is quite another thing than it was of old ; and may with more reason be thought to lift him who affects it above a bishop, than to leave him who declines it below one.

In fine, by this we may give an accoiuit 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 denomination, 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, pleading for it ancient custom, when the reason of the usage was gone. However, this was less considerable while the presbyters, fixed to the several churches in such cities^ retained the power of pastors or bishops, and

* The English Church. ' Can. xliv. ' Perpetual Government, p. 302.

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 Chrysostom affirm there was not: for the difference herein was but small, ov irokv to fiarbv, says Chrysostom," and Theophylact after him, ferme nihil, as it is rendered, " next to nothing." For this power or privilege inferred * no superiority in him that had it, since inferiors 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 degree, as may be evident by an instance or two. The bishops of Cyprus, and other places, that were avTOK.e<jia\oi, c had power to ordain their own metropolitans. d 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 Meletius's 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 Chrysostom 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 anything 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 shift, 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 hoklen, and after, the city presbyters might ordain with 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. Horn. xi. 6 argued.

r The auTonttpaXoi were metropolitans who were independent of patriarchal jurisdiction.— Ed. d Concil. [Trull.] [can. 39.] « Vid. Epist. Syn Nic. ad Alexandria [Hardouin, t. i. p. 439.] / Can. xiii.

A DISCOURSE CONCERNING LITURGIES.

By the late Learned and Judicious Divine, Mr. David Clarkson.

HoWwv Kal irov7)paiv TexvaafiaTuiv yeyovSres warepes, ol ra aldovia 6pia twv 4v8eo~-fioiv irarepcov fj.eTa.pai (piKoveiKT]0~avTes, ovk ripKedrjaav roTs Idiots eKy6vois, a\\' eTt Kal t&v ird\ai Tro\efiioov tt)s cbroo-roAiKTJy eKKArjo-'ias aTrAadpiSia Svay evrj ko.kws cwroKAciJ/ai'-T6S, &s evyevrj Kal TeAewv tok6v \Jooyfj.aTwv^ irpofiaWovTai.

" They who strive to remove the everlasting landmarks of the legitimate fathers, having become the parents of many and wicked inventions, content not themselves with their own offspring, but maliciously steal the ignoble bantlings of the ancient enemies of the apostolical church, and thrust them before the world as the high-born and unattainted offspring of her principles."

Maxim, in Athan. torn. ii. p. 266.

KaTawavcoD tois evTev^opevois irapaivuiv, &vev <pt\oveLKlas o~vvi8e7v Kal el fiev 6p6a>s eYpyrai t$ ®e$ x°-P LV «'8cVai. El Se ft)) t$ yeypa(p6rt avyyvwfj,f\v vetfiai, t<£ jtl^J a7ro-(pTfvafxevaj, aAAa tois evTev^ofievois eirnpeipavTi t^v iprjcpov.

" I will conclude by exhorting my readers to weigh the matter duly and without contentiousness, 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."

Sic concludit Ep. cxii. Isidor. Pelus. lib. iv.

Aevpo Si) Sia. rrjs lo-roplas fSaSl^aiv avepevvTjffov t))v apxatoyovlav avrrjs' oil yap vedre-pov to e<pevprifia. XlaTepcov earl rb Keifj.i)Kiov irav to apxai6Tr)Ti 8ta<pepov, alSeatfiov. " Go through history and search out its original; for the invention is not modern. It is a relic of the fathers. Every excellence of antiquity is to be venerated."

Basil, de Jejun. Horn. i. p. 130. [Edit. Par. 1722, p. 3, A. torn, ii.]

Ma.6iafJ.ev iroVe elvai Xpto~Ttavol' el evxeo~6ai ovk Xfffxev, '6-rrep eCTiv etjKo\ov Kal a<p68pa pdStov, tI toiv aKKttiv elo~6fxeda ; fj.d6aifj.ev evx(0~6ai cos XpiaTiavol.

" Let us learn to be Christians at some time or other. If we know not how to pray, which is a simple and very easy affair,—what shall we know of other matters ? Let us learn to pray as Christians."

Chrysost. in 1 Tim. Horn. vi. p. 273.

London : Printed for Tho. Parkhurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside ; Jonathan Eobinson, at the Golden Lion in St. Paul's Churchyard ; and Tho. Cockeril, at the Three Legs in the Poultry.

The "Discourse concerning Liturgies," is a small octavo volume of 198 pages. It was a posthumous work, and was left by its author in a very imperfect state. Dean Comber, in his learned answer to Mr. Clarkson, entitled "A Scholastical History of the Primitive and General Use of Liturgies in the Christian Church," passes the following severe judgment upon the capabilities of the editor into whose hands it fell: " His want of learning appears in leaving divers quotations in a wrong place where they have no reference to the text, and several references in' the text to passages in the Fathers, which, because the author did not, the editor could not cite ; as also in such gross mistakes, both of the names and tracts of the ancients, as made it very difficult to guess at the intended quotations." The typographical errors are very numerous and glaring.

DISCOURSE CONCERNING LITURGIES.

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 advocates 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 should be found for them, if the ancients for four or five ages could 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 especially where the reason is thought to be most cogent, viz., in the administration 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 nowhere.

By prescribed forms are meant such as are imposed upon the administrator, so as those must be used, and no other, nor otherwise, without adding, detracting, or transposing. The favourers of such forms suppose 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 in-d a-vvrjdeias wpoKarakeXrjunet/oi, " prejudiced by custom ;" and that this opinion had not got entertainment, but upon a presumption, that things

o " The ancient churches, from the very first century, did use such public wholesome forms of sound words, in their sacramental celebrations especially, and afterwards in other holy administrations or public duties, as made up their solemn, devout, and public liturgies."—D[r.] G[auden,] Consideration touching Liturgies, p. 8.

4 opponents.

K

were so of old, because they are so now ; a 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 old, viz., arbitrary and particular, such as this or that person composed himself, or made choice of, composed by others, for his use in public. There is an intimation of this latter sort, Can. 23, Cone. Carthag. 3, held 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 churches made use of in the same words, I cannot discover till many years 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 once at one assembly, not in prayers before or after sermon, not at all in the catechumen's office, 0 no where in their ordinary service; but iv tw Kaipa t&v tthttcov, " in the season allotted to the faithful," d as Chrysostom calls the eucharistical office ; and there commonly in the conclusion of the prayer for the blessing of the elements.

But though they used the words of it there, yet not out of any apprehension, that Christ did enjoin them there to use it. Augustine declares it plainly, e that Christ in the delivery of those petitions, did not teach

■ IloWoi tSi/ a.v6pwirwv en tu>v KaB' iavToiis Kat 7repi tUv aWwv Tar ^fj<povs eK(pepov(riv, " Many men draw conclusions from matters belonging to their own time, concerning other matters."—Isid. Pelus. lib. v. Ep. 18. [B. Ed. Paris. 1638.]

ToiV ye vovv exovai, Kat u7rp6\f]TTOi/ KeKTfj/ievoiS' twv npatfidrtov to Kpnljptov tratpes eo-ri to U\>)0h, " The truth is clear to the intelligent, and to those who have gained their judgment concerning the facts without prejudice."—Isid. lib. iii. Ep. 191. [C]

4 'Exeii/oi ixovoi jue-ra Tar Oavfxaaiovt wdlvar Tut hv tu) 6elw /3aVTi<rfiaTi SUatot 'av eiev to IlaTep bfiuiv \ejetv via>v iirtSetKvvfj.evot 71/no-ioTiiTa, &c. " Those only who have passed through the miraculous birth-pangs experienced in Divine baptism, could be right in saying, Our Father, &c, since these manifest their legitimacy as sons."—Isid. Pelus. lib. iv. Ep. 24. [p. 451, C]

c "Ot( yap ttmttois avTy] ft irpoaevxh TrpocrrjKei, Kai 01 vo^xot t?j? 6KK\no"iav ot&aaKOvtrt, Kat to wpooi/j.Lov tTjc eix'f 9 ' o fdp u/ui/ijTor oun av bvvatro IlaTepa KaXeiV toi/ Oeoti, " That this prayer pertains to the faithful, the laws of the church and the commencement of the prayer both teach. For one uninitiated could not call God ' Father.' "—Chrysost. in Matt. Horn, [xix.] p. 139; and Horn. ii. in 2 Cor. p. 553. Amongst other things there recited, which the catechumens were not partakers of, this is one :—ouotTra) -yap evxhv t'xouo-i t'^v vevofjuer/ievrtv kcu el<revex6eia-av U7r6 tou Xp(o-ToC, " For they possess not as yet the prayer dispensed and introduced by Christ." Hence when he is to speak of the Lord's Prayer, he uses the ordinary form of concealment, whereby the ancients denote what was peculiar to the fideles, 'imt o<= oi rrio-Toi, "Ye who are believers understand," (In I Tim. Horn, [vi.] p. 273,) and Uacriv o\ ne.y.vr]nivoi, "The initiated understand," (In Gen. Horn, xxviii. p. 214,) and that the baptized were admitted to say it presently after baptism.—Vid. In Coloss. Horn. v. p. 122.

Hanc orationem baptizati orant, " This prayer the baptized 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 omnis ecclesia Dominica Oratione concludit, " Which whole service almost every church closes with the Lord's Prayer."—Aug. Ep. 59. [Ed. Antw. Ep. 149.]

d In 2 Cor. Horn. [ii. p. 557.]

0 Aug.: " Non te ergo movet quod summus Magister, cum orare doceret discipulos, verba quaedam docuit, in quo nihil aliud videtur fecisse, quam docuisse quomodo in orando loqui oporteret?" Adeodatus: "Nihil me omnino istud movet; non enim verba, sed res ipsas eos verbis docuit, quibus et se ipsi commonefacerent, a quo et quid esset orandum, cum in penetralibus, ut dictum est, mentis orarent." Aug. " Recte intelligis." " Aug. —Does not the authority of the Lord, the supreme master, weigh with thee, who, when he taught his disciples to pray, taught them certain

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. vi. 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, e 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. Laoclicen. 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 appears to have done nothing more than teach them how they ought to speak in prayer? Adeodatus —It weighs with me not in the least: for he taught them not words, but things themselves by means of words ; whereby they themselves also might bring to mind what to pray for, when they prayed in the hidden chambers of the heart, as the saying is. Aug. —Thou understandest it aright."—Lib. de Magistro, cap. i. p. 172, torn. i. edit. Lugdun.

To the same purpose Beda, in Matt. vi. And of late writers some of the most eminent: " Noluit praescribere Filius Dei quibus verbis utendum sit, ut ah ea quarn dictavit formula deflectere 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."—Calvin in Matt. vi. 9. So Musculus.

Maldonat. sic : Non his necessario verbis, sed hac aut simili sententia; nam non apostolos orando his ipsis verbis usos fuisse legimus; aliis legimus Act. i. 24. Neque voluit Christus, ut quoties-cunque oramus, ista omnia quae lfac oratione continentur peteremus ; sed ut omnia, aut aliqua, aut nihil certe his contrarium peteremus, " Not necessarily in these words, but with this 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 for all the things which are contained in this prayer; but that we should seek for all, or for some, or at least for nothing inconsistent with these things."—In Matt. vi. 9.

Cornel, a Lapide.

Grotius, in Matt. vi. 9, outw? : In hunc sensum ; non enim praecipit Christus verba recitari, quod non legimus apostolos fecisse (quanquam id quoque fieri cum fructu potest) sed materiam precum hinc promere. In Luc. xi., Docet nos compendium rerum orandarum, neque enim eo tempore syllabis adstringebantur, " Oi/nar, i. 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 xi.—He teaches us a summary of what things we should pray for; for at that time they were not tied down to syllables."

Casaubon, Exercit. 235: Christus vero non de praedicatione Dei laudum agit; sed, ut recte monet Augustinus, de modo concipiendi preces privatas, " Christ is not treating of the public celebration of the praises of God, but, as Augustine rightly hints, of the manner in which we should frame 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, &c. p. 5.

And surely they could less understand, by that in Luke xi., 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 careful of the words, as of the things to he prayed for. " Itaque ut disceremus in oratione, non tarn de verbis, quam de rebus, esse anxii, ac de spiritu orationis, diversis verbis orationem tradidit, in Luc. xi., "Therefore that we may learn not to be so careful in prayer about words as about things, and about the spirit of our devotion, he delivered the prayer in different words, in Luke xi."

« context. » details. ■ In 2 Cor. Horn, xviii. p. CA7.

d Epist. lix. Quffist. v. pp. 340, 341. [Ed. Antw. Ep. 149.]

R 2

Pau, in the beginning of the sixth age. And it is provided for in general terms by the Council of Vannes," in the latter end of the fifth age.

Besides such directions as is in those canons, other written rubrics "were not needful. For the actual disposing of the severals* in their proper place, the apdpiov served them, of which, vid. Can. xxii. and xxiii., Cone. Laodic. This managed by a deacon, acquainted with the usages of the church where he ministered, Avas sufficient, without other rubric for that purpose, supposing it answered that description of its ancient use, which we have in Balsamo. c

There was also some kind of uniformity in their sacramental prayers; that is, a general agreement to pray for the same things, though not in the same words. They might have said thereof, quamlibet alia verba dicamus, nihil aliud dicimus, " though we utter diverse words, we utter no diverse thing." This appeared especially in the general prayer before the eucharist. Therein for whom, and for what they prayed, very many of the ancients give some account. Thereby it is manifest, that they prayed for the same persons, (for all of all sorts,) and for the same things, with respect to the various conditions of those several sorts of persons ; and this in variety of expressions. So that herein was exemplified that of Augustine, Liberum est aliis atque aliis verbis, eadem tamen in orando dicer e, " We are at liberty to utter ever-varying words, so that we utter the same things. " d And this is the uniformity 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 devotion of all sorts did concorditer, " harmoniously" observe.

* [Can. xv.] 4 details.

c Aicixoi'Oi dtdouaiv ei&iwv did tov wpapiov toTs en tu> d/j.(3<Zvi SiaKovoir, Tijr o^ciXovcrti? five9at eK^itoy/fcrea)?' r\ yovv rov natpov rris einevovs, tiov alW/crewi' rwv KaTrixovutviov Kai rwv \oinwv, " The deacons give a signal by means of the ovarium* 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 the other classes extend."—In Con. Laod. Can. in Cod. 126.

* Epist. exxi. [cap. xii. ad Probam.] « Epist. pro Prosper, et Hilar, cap. xi.

/ Praecipit itaque apostolus, imo per apostolum Dominus, qui loquebatur in apostolo, fieri obse-crationes, &c, pro omnibus hominibus, pro regibus, &c, quam legem supplicationis ita omnium sacerdotum et omnium fidelium devotio concorditer tenet, tit nulla pars mundi sit, in qua hujusmodi orationes non celebrentur a populis Christianis. Supplicat ergo ubique ecclesia Deo, non solum pro Sanctis, et in Christo jam regeneratis; sed etiam pro omnibus infidelibus et inimicis crucis Christi, pro omnibus idolorum cultoribus, pro omnibus qui Christum in membris ipsius prose-

* The orarium signified at first a handkerchief for wiping the face, from os, the countenance. See Dr. Smith's Die. Gr. and Rom. Ant. p. 674. In the ecclesiastical sense, it appears to have denoted a part of the vestments hanging down from the shoulder, and to have been used by the clergy in making signals to each other during Divine service. Bishops and presbyters were privileged to wear this on each shoulder. Deacons only on one, and that, as testified by a canon of the fourth council of Toledo (held a.d, 633) the left. See Bingham, Ant. Christian Church, vo\. iv. 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 commonly 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 sacraments, 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 for, and are noAv in use, prayers would have been read then, as they are now. But avayivaxTKew evxas, or preces legere, or de scripto recitare, " read prayers—recite from a manuscript," or any forms of speech equivalent, are phrases unknown, and not to be found, so far 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 known, nor practised in those times.

We meet not only with the reading of psalms," reading of lessons ; but reading of the narratives of the martyrs' sufferings. 6 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, %v6a ml elwdare awdyeadai dvdyvwTf Tavra, d " When according to custom ye meet together, read

quuntur, pro Judaeis, pro haereticis, et schismaticis. Quid autem pro istis petit, nisi ut, relictis erro-ribus suis, convertantur ad Deum, accipiant fidem, accipiant charitatem, et de ignorantiae tenebris liberati, in agnitionem veniant veritatis ? "The apostle, therefore, teaches, yea, the Lord, by the apostle, that supplications, &c. be made for all men, for kings, &c. (1 Tim. ii. 1, 2,) which rule of prayer, the devotion of all bishops and of all the faithful, so harmoniously observes, that there is no part of the world in which prayers of this kind are not offered by Christian people. Therefore, the church everywhere supplicates God, not only for the regenerate already in Christ, but even for all unbelievers and enemies of the cross of Christ; for all idolaters ; for all who persecute Christ in his members; for Jews, for heretics, and schismatics. But what does she seek on their behalf but that, abandoning their errors, they may be converted to God, may receive faith, may receive love, and, emancipated from the shades of ignorance, may come to the knowledge of the truth 1" —DeVoc. Gent. lib. i. cap. xii.

« Theod. lib. ii. cap. xiii. p. 63. [F.]

4 Liceat itaque legi passiones martyrum, cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur, "Therefore it is a lawful practice to read the passions of the martyrs when their anniversaries are kept." Cone. Carth. iii., Can. xlvii., Caranz. p. 116.

Ta a7ro/in]/iOK£i5jiiaTa t<3v 'Atto<tt6\wv, t\ Tii <TU77pa/i/uaTu tcoi/ Iluo0riTa)i< UvaTtvtbaKe-Tat /uexP' r «7X<»pe<. " The memoranda of the apostles, or the writings of the prophets, are read as long as is suitable."—Just. M. Apol. ii. [p. 98. Ed. Col. 1686.]

Hepi to! hi <m/3/iaTui evayfi\ia /jlct' 'i-repov ypd<f>oi' uvayiviocrKcaOat, " Of the reading of the Gospels on the Sabbath after the other scripture."—Cone. Laod. Can. xvi.

' Euseb. lib. iv. [cap. xxiii.J

d Ad Antioch. p. 451, torn. i. [In Edit. Colon. 1686, p. 759, C]

this." And Cornelius was wont to read Cyprian's epistles to the church at Rome." Eeading of the diptyches, t5>v Up&v tttvx&v dvdppr)o-is, b " the rehearsal of the sacred diptyches ;" c ko.\ povov ikexfyo-av al Tvpoo-qyoplai^ " the names were read."

In a word, of the reading of everything that was wont to be read ; but of the reading of prayers, not a syllable. We may as soon find a saying of mass, as reading of prayers. None had then the opportunity till since it has been the happiness of many to merit the commendation which Pliny gave of his servant Zosimus. e

If their prayers had been written, and they confined precisely to the Avords and syllables of the writing, as in prescribed forms, this would have obliged them to have had the writing before them, and to have read the prayers out of it, to prevent varying from 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 things, and such as were not then coincident. The deacon, when he called to reading, was said, Krjpvo-o-eiv rfjv dvayvaxriv, " to bid reading;" but when to prayer, KTjpvaaeiv rfjv ei>xr)v, " to bid prayer." Prayer began in Justin Martyr's time, navo-apivov tov dvayivaxTKovros, " when thereader had done."-^ So Athanasius calls to praying and reading in terms quite different; 77730-crrd^as diaKovov Krjpv^ai ev^r/v, avBis yjrakpov \iyea6ai napecrKevaae., " after commanding the deacon to bid prayer, he again caused a psalm to be read."

So Socrates,^ which in Theodoret is, dvayivaaKeiv y^aXpov TrpoeTpenov, kcli

■n-poo-rdgas evxr]v, h " he moved him to read a psalm, and having directed prayer," &c. And Sozomen, where he shows there was an uniformity in his time in public worship, tells us, ko.1 eixais Se ical \jraXpa8lais reus avrals, rj dvayvaxrpaa-i Kara tov civtov Kaipov ov Tvdvras K^xpripivovs evpetv

eo-Tip, ' " 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 could read their prayers, who, while they prayed, had their eyes lift up to heaven. And that this was the posture of the ancient Christians in prayer, there is abundant evidence.

Tertullian thus represents them praying; Illuc suspicientes Chris-tiani, k " thither the Christians intently gazing."

And Clemens Alexandrinus/ Udcrav yap ttjv ivbidQerov opiklav 6 Qeos

• Cyp. Ep. 12. b Dionys. Eccl. Hier. cap. [iii. p. 88, D. Ed. Paris. 1615.]

' The Diptyches were registers of the names of eminent saints, bishops, and martyrs, which for some ages were recited publicly by the deacons in the churches, as an introduction to the services in commemoration of the dead.— Ed. d Heyl. Antid. p. 342.

• Ep. xix. 1. v. / Apol. ii. [p. 98, D. Ed. Paris. 1686.] e Lib. ii. [cap. xi. p. 559.]

* Lib. ii. [cap. xiii. pp. 63, 64.] Vide D[r.] H[ammond], Preface to Psalms, and Tertull. cited by him. ' Soz. lib. vii. cap. xix. Vide Just. Nov. vi. p. 36, cap. iv.

* Apoll. cap. xxx. ' Strom, lib. vii.

d8ia\elirra>s inaui, ravrrj Kai TrpoaevTelvopev tt)v Ke(pa\r)v neat ras x f ^P a s ds ovpavov atpofitv : " God constantly hears all that mentally regulated converse wherein we raise our heads and lift up hands to heaven."

To whom we might add Cyprian Ad Demetrium.

Arnobius, a Ad sidera sublevavit et caelum, et cum Domino rerum Deo, supplicationum fecit verba, atque orationum colloquia 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 universe."

And Lactantius. Ocidos eo dirigamus, quo illos natural sua? conditio direxit, b " Let us thither direct our eyes, whither their own nature directs them." Cur igitur oculos in cozlum non tollitis? 0 " 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, prjbe nappTjo-iav ex ilv iirapai tovs 6<p6a\p.ovs irpos top Q(6v, d " 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 understood in this third age. e

In the fourth age, this was evxopevov o-xnpa, " the posture of a suppliant." And when they represented Constantine in a praying posture, it was with eyes lift up to heaven. So his effigies in his coins, 'Ei> toIs Xpvcrols voplapaai ttjv avTov avros eiKova a>8e ypafpeadai Bierinrov, as avco pke-neiv So/cetf avarerapevos npos Qeov rponov evxopevov/ " 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 ; 'Ei/ avrols fiao-iXciois — ioTa>s bpdios iypdepero, ava> pev (Is ovpavov fpfSXencov ro) x f ^P e & eKreraptvos evxope-vov o-xvpan,^ " In the palace itself, he was painted in a standing posture, looking on high towards heaven, with his hands stretched out in the manner of a suppliant." Others, "Ava ftXeireiv «s ovpavov, h " 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: Aid yap tovtwv irai8ev6p(6a to fKTeves to iv rats 8er)aeaiv, iva Ka\ i OTwres dvafiXtTToopev pr) tois 6(pda\po1s ttjs crapKos povov, aXAa Ka\ tt)s biavolas.

« Lib. i. p. 28. * Lib. vi. * Lib. ii. cap. ii. d Euseb. lib. vii. [cap. ix.] p. 1S8.

' Or shutting their eyes. Origen contra Celsum, lib. vii. p. 362. Astyrius, 'AvaveiWvTa eir ovpavov tKerevo-ai, " lifted up his hands toward heaven and prayed." Euseb. lib. vii. [cap. xvii.] p. 195. S Euseb. De Vita Constantini, lib. iv. cap. xv. p. 394. t Ibid.

* Vit. Const, lib. iv. cap. xxix. ■' [Horn, lxxx.]

* P. 890. So Hilary, Euthymius, Theophylact, Leontius, Ammonius, in Maldonat. on Matt. xiv. 19. cap. cccii.

And Augustine intimates as much, when he tells us upon the same place, Ita se Patri exhibere voluit precatorem, ut ?neminisset nostrum se esse doctorem; he so prayed, as minding to teach us how we should pray."

Yea, Damascen, upon those words,* " Jesus lift up his eyes and said, Father, I thank thee," &c. observes, propterea oculos sustulisse ut formam nobis traderet orandi, " therefore he is said to have lifted up his eyes, that he might deliver to us the manner in which we should pray."

Whereby it appears, that not only this de facto was their posture in praying, but that they thought themselves obliged to it by Christ's example.

Some bishops (what may we think of presbyters and deacons) could not read."

So that in Damascen's time, when set forms were grown common, this reading was not in fashion f I will not inquire into the reasons : it may be, that which made Pliny loth to read his pleadings, might hinder them from reading their prayers. "What he suggests, is obvious to each one's reason and common sense ; and whether it be not applicable to some pleaders at another bar, let others judge. Neque enim me prceterit, actiones, &c. Then he says, they are thereby bereaved of many advantages, which render the plea fervent and available, ut quas soleant commendare, and the want of which must needs dull the auditory ; quo minus mirum est, auditorum intentio languescit.

Hortaris ut orationem amicis pluribus recitem, faciam quia hortaris: quamvis vehementer addubitem, neque enim me preterit, actiones quo? reci-tantur, impetum omnem caloremque, ac prope nomen suum perdere, ut quas soleant commendare, simul et accendere, — dicentis gestus, incessus, discursus etiam, omnibusque motibus animi consentaneus vigor coiporis, — recitantium vero pracipua pronuntiationis adjumenta, oculi, manus pra>pe-diuntur; quo minus mirum est si auditorum intentio languescit, nullis extrinsecus aut blandimentis capta aut aculeis excitataf " You recommend me to read my orations to a number 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

« Tract, in Joh. [civ.] torn. ix. p. 621. » John xi. 41. ' Blondel, pp. 500, 501.

d Hereby it appears that reading of old was not in fashion: none had then the opportunity, (though since it has been the happiness of many) to merit the commendation which Pliny gave of his servant Zosimus. Idem tarn commode orationes legit, ut hoc solum didicisse videatur. " He reads speeches so well, that he seems to have studied nothing else." Plin. Ep. xix. lib. v. Yet Pliny was loth his orations should be read. His reasons, though they concern not the ancients, may be considerable to others.

' Plin. Ep. ix. lib. ii.

and the activity 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 from without." What would he have said, how would this wise and judicious person have aggravated these disadvantages, how intolerable would this great orator have accounted the motion, if Cerealis had moved him to read the same oration to his friends whenever they met, at every solemn meeting !

Chrysostom tells us, that in his judgment, it required a greater confidence than Moses and Elias had, to pray as they were wont to do before the eucharist. 'E-yw pev yap Kal ttjv Mcovaecos Kai ttjv 'HXiov Trapprj(Tiav ovdenco npos ttjv to(to.vtt]v LK€Trjpiav dpnelv rjyovpai ;" " 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 found so much confidence necessary to exercise their faculty upon any prayer whatsoever. Happ^o-iaf in him is equivalent to eXevdepoa-ropia, as Phavorinus, a boldness to express one's self freely. 0 No freedom is left him, who must only read what is prescribed him. d

If the ancient churches had no written liturgies, no books of public prayers ; they coidd have no prescribed, no imposed, no nor any common 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 found.

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. 8

Amongst other things, wherewith Athanasius was falsely charged by the Arian faction, to make way for his condemnation : Macarius (with reflection upon that great person who employed him) is accused, to have

• De Sacerd. [Orat. vi.] p. 46. * Evxal neTTapf>r\a-ta<xn4vai, Epist. xxxviii. p. 118.

c Epist. cxc. p. 18G.

d Vid. in Eph. Horn. ult. p. 892, where 7rajjpn<r<a is Vvu irdvra a tirintpQtiv elneiv, eiW, " That I may say all things which I was sent to say." Vid. D[r]. Hfamraond]. N. T. [p. 291.] ' Vid. Dall. De Objecto Cultus.

leaped upon the altar, overthrown the table, broke the communion cup, burnt the Bible: fiaTrtj^Tja-as (Is to dvtna m - \-t pe* r^v Tpa7rc£av,

Voryptor be KCtTea£e pvcrriKov, Kai or* ra lepa 3i3\ia KareKai'cre. a

Now it may -well be presumed that Ischyras. the false accuser, encouraged -with hopes of a bishopric (which was his reward afterward) and so concerned to swell the charge as big. and render it as odious as he could, would haTe added to the rest some indignity offered to the sacred liturgy. This had been as easily alleged as the rest (if the subject had been extant \ and might hare been as heinously resented, if there had been such fitm _ such opinion of them, as in our tibm -

When Georgius. the Arian bishop, came to take possession of the bishopric of Alexandria, and entered a church by force, of what al - -were offered to all things therein. Athanasius gives a particular account: the table, ayiav Tpcnre£av, " the he 1 the Scriptures, ras fcias ru>v

ypixfriov z.: "he Divine volumes of the Scripture :" the font. Syiov

3ajrruTTT)piov, " the holy font:" the wine, olvov mrnkm a7roKeipevov. " great store of wine :" the oil, tkaiov. the doors and latticed partitions, fopas «u raws KtucKeXovs, the candlesticks, the tapers. Xs^pmc *a\ rove lajpiwas. Bnt not a word of a service book, no more than of a book of homilies.

When the multitude of Christians so increased at Constantinople, that it was thought necessary to dispose of them in several churches. Constantine takes care, that those churches should be respectively furnished with Bibles : and wiil si -area to have them prepared accordingly." Now (let those that are for prescribed liturgies be judges) would it not have been requisite, that those churches should have been also furnished with service-books : and care taken, that : -should have been likewise writ out for them, if any such had been then in use ? Would Constantine have omitted this, if he had been of their mind : or would not Eusebius (who overlooks nothing of that nature) have added this in commendation of him, if he had made any such provision ?

Does it not hence appear, that churches were then thought sufficiently provided with bock ssazy for Divine service, when thev were fur-

nished with Bibles ? And can it be supposed that Constantine. whose generousness towards the church is known to have run out in many superfluities, would have been deficient in tilings accounted in any degree necessarv ?

In the fourth council of Carthage, it is provided, when the bishop is

• Socr. Hist. lib. 1 [cap. xxvii ] p. 539.

' Ad Orthodoxos. Ep. torn. i. p. 729. [In Edit. Col. 16S6. p. 944, torn, i.]

• - - • -■- .'.-. --. _.._ . ( ....

«-p6ru - .---. in kj s care f or the churches of God. he -wrote to us a letter con-

cerning a supply of the inspired oracles." Euscb. De Vit. Constant, lib. ir. cap. xxxiv., and cap. xxxri. p. 401, where we have that ipaiina.

ordained, the book of the Gospels shall be held over his head, teneat evangeliorum codicem super caput et cervicem ejus," " 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 given him ; accipiat de manu episcopi libellum, in quo scripti sunt exorcismi, 6 " let him receive 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 ledums est, dicens ad enm; Accipe, et esto lector verbi Dei, c " he shall deliver to him the book out of which he is to read, saying, Beceive this, and be thou a reader of the word of God."

But no book of public prayers is either used, or delivered, or mentioned, in the ordination of bishop, presbyter, or deacon, (the only 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 libellus officialise which seems rather but a short directory, than a complete liturgy, given to every presbyter at his ordination, to instruct him how to administer the sacraments ; lest, through ignorance of his duty herein, he should offend. Quando presbyteri in parochiis ordinantur, libellum offi.cia.lem a suo sacerdote accipiant, ut ad ecclesias sibi depu-tatas instructi succedant, ne per ignorantiam etiam ipsis divinis sacra-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 council had been needless, if those churches had been before furnished with such a liturgy ; since that would have provided sufficiently for the severals e 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 h upon this account ? It was not the Christians' belief contained in the Scripture concerning the true God, or the Gentiles' 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 the Christians were destroyed. And

« Can. ii. * Can. vii. c Can. viii. d In Cone. Tol. iv. Can. xxvi. an. 633.

• particulars. / Can. ii. v. vi. viii. ix. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. xv. xvi. xvii. s Vid. Cone. Arelat. Can. xiii. in Caranz. p. 65.

* The tradilnres were such as, in times of persecution, delivered up the Bibles and other sacred furniture of the churches to the heathen to be burnt.— Ed.

Origen (as is remarked by Grotius") observes, that they were not wont to persecute any for their opinions, Aid. noiov yap boy pa twv iv dvOpdmois yeyevrjuevav Kokd£ovTai, Kal ciXkoi ; b " For which of the doctrines current among men are others punished ?" There were opinions amongst their persecutors concerning God as scandalous to the heathen, as those which the Scripture taught the Christians. The Epicureans wholly denied Divine providence, c which is Origen's instance, 1 * tovs Ttdvra ivpovoiav dvaipovvras, " those who subvert all providence," holding that their gods were composed of atoms, ol tov '~Eivuiovpov 6to\ crvvderoi e'£ aropav TvyxdvovT€s, e " the gods of Epicurus, composed of atoms by chance ;" that there were no rewards nor punishments after death ; nor any true good, but what is sensible. The Stoics maintained, that a wise man was equal to their great god Jupiter. Solebat Sextius clicere, Jovem plus non posse quarn bonum virum. — Dens non vincit sapientem felicitate, etiamsi vincit estate. — Sapiens tarn cequo animo omnia apud alios videt contemnitque, quarn Jupiter: et hoc se magis suspicit, quod Jupiter uti illis non potest, sapiens non vult.f Est aliquid, quo sapiens antecedat Deum: ille natures beneficio non suo sapiens est; suo sapiens. g " Sextius 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 with as even a mind as Jupiter; and in this respect he prides himself more, viz., that Jupiter cannot avail himself of these things ; the wise man has no wish to do so. There is a something in which

» Neque de diis non recte sentire crederentur, earn non fuisse veram saevitias causam ex eo probat Origines, quod Epicureis aliisque philosophis, omnem omnino divinam providentiam tollentibus parcebatur.—Grot. " Neither were they (the Christians) deemed to be of perverse sentiment concerning the gods. Origen proves this not to have been the true cause of the cruelty practised against them, from the fact that the Epicureans and other philosophers who altogether denied a Divine providence were spared."

4 Adv. Cels. lib. ii. p. 68.

e Q\ n€v yap auTOfj.('ntxjs Kai a)? €tvx€ Ta ncivra yeyevTioOat Xeyovtrtv, i!>9 ol 'V.7rtKoi'ptot' a Kai rtjv rwv o\uw irpovoiav naff faurwv ovk eivat fivOoXoyoi'iori, " Some say that all things come to pass spontaneously and as it were by chance, as the Epicureans, who feign that there is no universal providence concerned with themselves." Athanas. De Incamatione Verbi, p. 38, torn. i. [p. 54, C. torn. i. Ed. Col. 1686.]

El 7<ip ayTOjUaTo)? t« iriivTu. x^P 1 * Trpovoia? Kaf avrovs ytyovev, &C. " If, according to their view, all things have been produced spontaneously without a providence," &c. Athan. De Incarn. Verb. p. 38, torn. i. [In Edit. Col. 1686, p. 54, torn, i.]

Tuii» fttp uvOptoirwi' ot jutf p\r]oe elvai to OeXov evopn^oi', ol dt" eivai ^v, p.r) TTpovoeiv dtr' Kat

o't fxev npovoeiv /xey -rwi/ 5' ovpavitav [lovov, ol de ov u<> twv ovpaviiov, u\\a Ka't t(7jv lirtytiuiv,

ov iravTbiV de uXXci twk efoxuii/, oiov /3a<ri\(u>v re Kai uoxovtwk, Kai ol fj.ev avTouaric/jLov, ol d' einapnevw o't 3' e'tari <pepea6ai tc'« nana. " Some among men have thought that there is no Divinity; others that, though there is, yet that he is without care ; some also that he cares only for celestial beings; others that he cares not only for celestial beings, but for terrestrial as well, and yet not for all such, but only for the principal, such as kings and rulers. Some say all things are mechanism; some destiny; and others, that they are upheld by chance." Isidor. lib. iv. Epist. [lix. C]

d Ibid. « Lib.iv. p. 169.

/ Senec. Ep. lxxiii. pp. 672, 673. [Ed. Antw. 1614, pp. 516, 517.]

r Ep. liii. liv. [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." Tr)i/ avrfju aper^v Xeyoires avopinrov kcii Qeov ol a7ro ttjs 2roac (pikoaocpoi, pfj evhaipoveo~Tepov Afyaxriv eivai tov errl iraai Qeov tov e'v dvdpdnrois hot civtovs <ro(pov, dXA' iarjv eivai tS>v dpcporepav ev8aipoi>iav, a " the Stoic philosophers, who ascribe the same virtue to man and to God, to avoid saying 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 confined the providence of God to generals, 0 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 ; t£>v cltto tov Ttepmarov dvaipovrcov rrjv rrpos rjpds rrpovoiav, Kal rrjv cr^eo-iv irpbs dv6pamovs tov Qeiov, d " the Peripatetics deny all 'providence concerning us, and the relation of the Divinity to men." Or, as Justin Martyr represents them, e 'Y/xSs emxetpovo-i Trel-

aeiv, coy tov pev avp.7ra.VT0s, Kal avTwv Tav yevmv Kal el8a>v eTTipeXe'iTai Qeos, epov be Kal aov ovk en Kal tov KadeKaaTa, eVei ovb' av r]V)(6pe6a aurco Si' SXrjs

wkt6s Kal fjpepas, k.t.X. " They undertake to persuade you, that God 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 Scripture, so much as the exercise of their worship, which incensed the Gentiles 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 Skovo-ov cpiXoo-6(pov tov 'E<£eo-/oi> 'HpaKXelrov, Kal ayaXpaai TOVTeoiaiv ev^ovTai okoIov e'i tls bopois \ecrx*lvevoiTO, g " 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 ed evxeo-dai vnep iavT&v Sia to prj ei'SeVai to o~vp,(pepov, h " he does not permit prayer for

• Origen. adv. Cels. lib. vi. p. 309.

* Epicur. in Senec. de Benefic. lib. iv. cap. xix. p. 442. Vid. Grot. De Jure Belli, p. 443. Ibid. Cicero, Plutarch. Euseb. [lib. v.] cap. v. 'O 'Apid-To-reXi;? fiexp't o-eXi/vtir o""7<rar T " QeTov, t« Xu<7r<< tov KoafjLov /ut'fji 7r€p<7pd0e< T>i? -rov Qeov (5ioi/o;a-ew?, " Aristotle allows the Divinity place as far as the moon, but marks off all the other portions of the universe from the Divine administration." Vid. Spens. Not. in Orig. xvi. Chrysostom in Act. Horn. liv. p. 911. Airol ovk dcpiaat 7rp<>-voiar airoXai'/eiv to. into ae\i]vr\v. " They grant not that sublunary matters have the benefit of a Providence." Vide Doun. Notas Arist. Metaphys. lib. x.

« general matters. d Orig. cont. Celsum, lib. iii. p. 156.

« Dial, cum Tryphone, p. 1. / Clem. Alexandria Protrept. [lib. i. Ed. Lutet. 1629, p. 33, B.]

S 'H\16iov thai to to7s tyd\paaiv tvxeaOaL, " They think prayer to images silly." Orig. contr. Cels. lib. vii. p. 375, lib. i. p. 6, and lib. vii. p. 373. 1 Laert. in Pythag. [Ed. Londin. 16G4, p. 216, B.]

one's self, on account of our not knowing what is best for us ;" or, that of the philosophers in Justin Martyr, who, denying a particular providence, conceived God would take no notice of any person, though he sought him night and day, ouS' av ^u^o/xe^a aira 81 oXrjs pvktos ko.1 t)ixepas, a " not even if we should pray to him through the whole night and day ;" and that of the Peripatetics, that prayers and sacrifices were good for nothing, as Origen represents 6 them, 0 Mr)bev (pao-Kovras avveiv evxas, icai ras as ivpbs to Qeiov dvaias, " they say that prayers and sacrifices to the Deity are of no use ;" and that of the Platonists, that there was 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 devotions. And what more vilifies their worship, than that of Seneca, Qua? omnia sapiens servabit, tanquam legibus jussa, non tamquam diis grata ? " All which things a wise man will observe as things enjoined by the law, not as pleasing to the gods." And that, sic adorabimus, ut meminerimus cultum magis ad morem, quam ad rem pertinere ? d " we will so worship as to bear in mind that devotion is rather an affair of fashion than of reality." Just such apprehensions as many prudential conformists e have

" Dial, cum Tryph. Princip.

* Ov /xovov to ei'xeo'^c" tois aydjxacrt hXiOtov €(TTiv, uWu yap Kai to a-vp.nept(pep6fjL€vov Tot? 7roAAoZr npo<nroiei<r9ai to!? ayd/jiaaiv e'ux^^Oat —oTrotOf ttoiovgiv o\ utto tov riep<7raToi/ <pi\o(TO<poTn>Tes Kai o\ Ta 'E7riKoi'»pou J) An/jLOKptTov u<r7rafo/aevoi. "It is folly not only to pray to images, but also to make believe to pray to images in compliance with the crowd, as the Peripatetic philosophers say, and those who embrace the sentiments of Epicurus, or of Democritus." Orig. con. Cels. lib. vii. p. 375.

« Lib. ii. p. 68.

d Quomodo sint dii colendi, solet praecipi. Accendere aliquem lucernam sabbathis prohibeamus : quoniam nee lumine dii egent, et ne homines quidem delettantur fuligine. Vetemus salutationi-bus matutinis fungi et foribus assidere templorum. Humana ambitio istis officiis capitur; Deum colit, qui novit. Vetemus lintea et strigiles Jovi ferre, et speculum tenere Junoni. Non quaerit ministros Deus, &c. satis illos coluit, quisquis imitatus est. " It is customary to give precepts as to how the gods are to be worshipped. We forbid the lighting of any lamps on their festivals ; for the gods are not without light; even men delight not in darkness. We forbid the morning obeisances, and sitting at the doors of the temples. Human ambition only is captivated with these services. He worships the Divinity who knows God. We forbid the carrying of napkins and strigil* to Jupiter, and the holding a mirror to Juno. The Divinity does not seek lacqueys, &c. He worships the gods enough who imitates them." Senec. Ep. xcv. p. 791. [Ed. Antw. p. 604, A.B.]

Ovdev oUtw? \ax v P ov TTo-pa dvOpwirois tup trvvtiOeias 7ru\aul9 rvpavvi? — oudtv yap ovtio OopvfieX ^ivx>]v, Kav ewi xpnaifjiw tiki yivr\Tai, uk KatvOTOp-etv Tf Kui fei/ifeiu, Kai judXi<TTa otuv 7repi Xarpeias Kai n-epi t5)9 tov Oeuv 66% *i? tovto yivr\Tat, Ila^Ta 7«p T*r euKuXwTepov afxei\l/eiev Vj Ta Trepi 0pt)tr-Keiat —oia dt tovto Kai Tt'vec twv efiotfei/ deinepav tpoaiv ti/v avvrjtieiav iKi'tXeaav. " There is nothing so influential with men as the tyranny of ancient custom. For nothing so disturbs the soul even if it attach to aught useful as novelty and strangeness, especially if it affect the worship and glory 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 nature." Chrys. in 1 Cor. Horn. vii. p. 286.

« Who have studied to deserve Aristippus's character, nv yap ixaior up/ioo-aa-flai Kai Toirtp Kai Xp6eu> Kai irpoaoirif, Kai iraaav itepimaaiv upjuoviat viroKpivaoOat, " he was able to accommodate

• The strigil was an instrument used by the Romans to scrape off the perspiration from their bodies after bathing.— Ed.

of our formality and ceremonious worship, yet both complying with the present modes enjoined, and making 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 supposed, in the pretended liturgy, were as odious to the heathen, as their tenets concerning God 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 Christians' 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 church utensils ; a since it is observable, that the Komans, who forced the Christians upon that crime, for which they were denominated traditores, 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 Rome made bold to sacrifice and pray in a way not conformable to the Roman mode. Mulierum turba erat, nee sacrijicatitiiim nee precantium 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 bonorum indignationes exaudiebantur, deinde ad patres etiam, et ad publicam qiierimoniam excessit 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; incusati graviter ab senatu osdiles, triumvirique capitales, quod non prohiberent. " The aediles, and the capital triumvirs, 0 were sharply reprimanded by the senate, because they had not prevented it." And when their endeavours were not effectual to suppress it, the praetor 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 ut quicunque libros vati-cinos, precationesve, aut artem sacrijicandi conscriptam haberet, eos libros omnes literasque ad se ante calend. Apriles 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 every circumstance of conformity." Diogen. Laert. Aristipp. [Ed. Londin. 1664, p. 49, D.]

' Torti Prodosis, Euseb. lib. viii. p. 242. * Dec. iii. lib. v. p. 111.

• These were officers of the Roman state, first appointed about b.c. 292. It was their duty to inquire into all capital crimes, (hence their name capitales,) and to receive information respecting such offences. It was also a part of their office, in connexion with the aediles, to prevent all unlawful assemblies of the people. See Diet. Gr. and Rom. Ant. s. v. Triumvir. — Ed.

or a written rubric of sacrifice, should deliver all these books and documents to him before the first of April."

We see, they would not tolerate heathenish liturgies, differing from what they used only in mode and rites, though conformable as to the substance and object of their worship. Would they not be more violent for the delivering up of Christian liturgies, more opposite to them every way, if there had been any ? But there is not a word, in the ancients, of any such demand, or any compliance therewith, or any censure of such compliance ; when the demand and delivery of other things less material, less offensive to them, and proceeding against the traditors, are frequently mentioned.

Augustine alleges some things frequently prayed for in public, but not as in the words of any written liturgy, but of the administrator, Ubi audieris sacerdotem Dei ad ejus altare, a &c. " When hearest thou God's priest at the altar ?" &c. Aud the same petitions he afterwards sets down in other words ; which signifies, he had them not out of any prescribed or written liturgy ; for then they would, they must, have been the same. Pro non credentibus, ut eos Deus ad fidem convertat; "for unbelievers, that God may convert them to the faith ;" but, in another place,* ut incredulas gentes ad fidem suam venire compellat, " that he may influence the unbelieving nations, that they may be brought to faith in him." Pro fidelibus, ut perseverent in eo quod esse ceperunt, munere suo; " for the faithful, that by his gift they may persevere in that profession which they have begun to assume ;" and elsewhere," ut proficiant in eo quod esse ceperunt , " that they may make progress in that profession which they have begun to assume."

Augustine mentions the public prayers against the Pelagians ; but no otherwise, 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 uncertainty, 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 positive. 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 especially as to which they might have been this way apparently serviceable;

• Ep. cvii. p. 567. [Ed. Antw. Ep. ccxvii.] * p. 577. ' p. 578.

viz., that concerning the Godhead of Christ, opposed in the first, second, third, and fourth age esj^ecially. And that concerning the dvapaprrja-Ui, " sinlessness," of the faithful; and other errors, with which Pelagius and his adherents troubled the churches in the beginning of the fifth age, and afterwards."

None will fancy a Christian liturgy, wherein there is not some acknowledgment of, or some address to Christ as God, 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, and 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 those 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 was only \jri\os cwdptonos, " a mere man," alleges Justin Martyr, Miltiades, Tatian, Clemens, Iremeus, Melito, and the hymns composed by the brethren of old, yjsaXpol 8e ocroi Kal d>8a\ d8e\(pa>i> air dp^ijs vtto ttlcttcoi' ypcKpe'iaai, rov \6yov tov Qeov rov XpurTov vttvovctl deoXoyovvres ] " SO many psalms and odes composed by the faithful brethren, from the beginning 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 confirmations) would not have been omitted ; as tending as much, if there had been some written of old ; but contributing much more, to the confirming 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, 0 two of the most judicious writers that those ages afforded, make use of the testimonies of their predecessors and contemporaries ; 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 as 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. Pelag. lib. iv. cap. ii. p. 239.

4 Eusebius, lib. v. cap. [xxviii.] p. 145.

c Athanasius Syn. Nic. contr. Haeres. Arian. Decret. torn. i. p. 240. [In Edit. Col. 1686, pp. 274, 277, torn, i.] quotes Theognostos, ev T<ji <5euTt'p«J t5v u7roTi>7ru>crea>i<. Also Dionys. of Alexand. and Dionys. of Rome, with Origen. Elsewhere Ignatius. [Via. p. 992, A. Ed. Col. 1686.]

whole churches, in several ages too, is far more considerable, than [that] of many particular persons.)

Augustine, and others allege, against the Pelagians, divers things, which were frequently prayed for in public ; but without signifying in the least wise, that the prayers were written or ancient, (which he in Eusebius thought it requisite to express, concerning the hymns he mentions,) or that they were generally received, or in the same form, or authorised for the public service, or prescribed to be invariably used. Yet in these particulars lay the force and the advantage of such an allegation ; and that which would render it most considerable, and of far more weight than the testimony of single writers : and therefore undoiibtedly 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 had 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 faithfulness 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, how 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 ? Quisquis unqiiam, says one, religionem mutavit, et orandi ratio-nem mutavit: nulla unquam hwesis fuit, qua; non continuo suas ejfinxerit preces.' 1 " Whoever has made a change in religion, has made also a change in the method 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 expected.

The heresy of Artemon, holding that Christ was a mere terrene creature, having seized on Paulus Samosatenus, (Xeyet 'ir/aovv Xptarov Kara-6ei>, " he says that Christ was of the earth,") bishop of Antioch ; the fathers 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

o Maid, in Luc. xi.

honour of Christ, \j/a\ixovs 8e tovs fiev els rbv Kvpiov rjfxiov 'irjcrovv Xpiarov

iravaas.' 1 And would he have tolerated a liturgy, 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, as avaBev, " as from heaven?" And if he had made as bold with a liturgy, would this have been concealed by 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 hymns, which were of less moment ?

When the Arians so far prevailed, as they had possessed themselves of all the public churches, in a great pail; 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 forwardness, 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. 6 And remarkably in the universally received confession of faith, since they made a new creed almost every other year. Socrates gives a particular account of three in little more than twenty years. c

And what could restrain this innovating humour (when they had power enough) from abolishing or altering the supposed liturgies, if they were but tempted to it, by what they woidd count a just occasion ? And such occasion they had, if those liturgies contained any tiling 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. AVhy 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 concerned 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 aU 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

Euseb. lib. vii. cap. xxx. * De Spiritu Sancto, iii. xi. ' Hist. [lib. ii. cap. xxx.] p. G(M.

s2

the adding of one word or two, 6 aravpmdfls 81 rj/j-as, " 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 hymn) 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 administration 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, c one of the greatest crimes, and d worthy of the highest censure, prolixiori anathemate.

Hence, they durst not administer them in the sight of the ajxvrjToi, * l 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, fivarr]pia, e " mysteries," and vised them

" Theodor. Lect. Collect, lib. ii. p. 187. [C]

b Christianis ipsis minime consecratis sine sacrilegio videri non potest, " It cannot be seen by uninitiated Christians even, without sacrilege." Auctor Sermon. Dc Continentia; not Zeno Veronensis, who lived about ad. 360; but one who says in that sermon, he writ four hundred years after the Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians was written.

c "Oo-oi/ 7<ip »j lepoo-uXi'a kolkov, ovdt sariv enreiv, " How great a crime sacrilege is, is not even possible to say." Chrysost. in 2 Tim. Horn. ii. p. 338. d Concil. Ilerdens. [Can. xvi.]

• Sacra orationis mysterium, " The mystery of the sacred prayer." Ambros. De Fide, ad Gra-tianum, cap. V. MeTa7r<neiTai yap uppijTOiS Xd^oit 6 aproi ovro? Stu rr)S fiva-riKtis evXoyias. " 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, pteru -yitp tJjk ciwayyeXiixv ™» /jlvo-tikwv pnp.a-■ruiv imivav Kai <fio/3epwv —oTav ixiWoi/j-ev /3a7r-n'feiv, " after the enunciation of those mystic and fearful words—when they are about to baptize." In ] Cor. Horn. xl. p. 514. Obsecrationum sacra-menta, " the mysteries of supplications." Caelestin. Epist. cap. xi. in Crab. p. 525. Obsecrationum quoque sacerdotalium sacramenta respiciamus, quae ab apostolis tradita in toto mundo, atque in omni catholica ecclesia uniformiter cekbrantur. " 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 Catholic church." Ibid, et in fine Operum Prosperi, p. 894, uniformiter, because they all pray for the same things, viz. those which he speaks of; that there was everywhere an uniformity in words, is apparently* false.

'E7r!T(ipoi<i/Ter ras twv ayimv ei'xwv TeXti-af, " Keeping close the mysteries of the sacred prayers." Balsam, in Can. cxxvi. Cod. Mva-Tinas tl/Xoyias, " the mystic benedictions." Cyril. Alexandr. Epist. ad Nestor, cum 12 Anathem.

* manifestly.

according to the import of the word, which in Phavorinus, is apprjTov <re/3as Kal to d7r6ppr}Tov, " an object of awe, not to be spoken of: also what is ineffable," and derived" wapa to aTiva p.vo-avTa del rqpelv ev8ov, " according to the signification, viz. ' certain things which men must keep within, by shutting them up,' 1 " as concerned to keep those secrets to themselves, and confine them to their own breasts, without communicating 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 ; ovde yap o\ios p.vaTrjpiov to els ttjv 8r]p.a>8r} Kal eluaiav aKor/v eK<popov. It is a mystery, says Chrysostom, therefore keep all close, &c. pvarTjptov eo-Tlv — <Xe7o-ov Toivvv Tas dvpas iva prj tis 'i8rj amep eVriSei^ai ov 6ep.is, c USing a

like phrase to that wherewith Orpheus^ begins the discourse of his mysteries, for the divulging of which Diagoras (amongst other crimes of the like nature) was proscribed, ®6ty£op,ai oh Oepis earl, dvpas &' enLQeo-de fte(3r)\oi ttclvtzs 6p.<os, " 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.

Celsus objecting the secrets of Christianity, t6 Kpixfiiov 86ypa, as matter of accusation, Origen answers, it was not peculiar to Christians (01) p,6vov Ibiov tov XpiarTiavmv Xoyov) to have some things reserved from common knowledge (/xr) els tovs 7tokXovs cpddvovTa.) The heathen had their mysteries also, and those both philosophical and devotional. He instanceth 6 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 ; iv aTroppr)Ta> btSao-Kopevoi Ta p.rj agia (pdaveiv els aKoas (3e(Br)\ovs, Kal p.rj8eira> KeKadappe-

vas. g And for the latter, he says, all the mysteries everywhere, both in Greece, and amongst the barbarians, were not blamed for being kept

Nos autem quoties saeramenta sumimus, quae per sacrae orationis mysterium in carnem trans-figurantur et sanguinem, mortem Domini annuntiamus, "As often as we take the sacraments, which by the mystery of sacred prayer, are transfigured into flesh and blood, we show forth the Lord's death." Ambr. De Fide, ad Grat. cap. v.

Christi corpus et sanguinem dicimus illud tantum, quod ex fructibus terra? acceptum, et prece mystica 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 receive." August. De Trinitate, lib. iii. cap. iv.

Tov rot? iepot9 Toi'Tott Kal (ppiKTOis [AtWovTa jrpotrtevai fivcrrritjioi? eypwyopevat xpht " 1^- behoves him who is about to approach the sacred and tremendous mysteries to be watchful." Chrysost. Cateches. de Baptismo ad Illuminandos.

MuCTTJjpiov 7<ip 7vu>p<f6jievov ov&iv hcrri Xoarov Bau/iaL&iitvov, " A mystery when made known is no longer an object of awe." Auth. Quasst. ad Antioch. in Athanas. torn. ii. p. 275. [Respons. ad Quaest. i.]

" From fivetv, to shut up, and TtipeiV, to keep.— Ed.

8 De Spiritu Sancto, [cap. xxvii.] p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722, torn. iii. p. 55, D.]

<- In Matth. Horn. )xxi p. 451. <* [In Just. M. Exhort, ad Graecos, p. 15, C]

« gives examples. / Clem. Alexandr. Strom, i. [Ed. Lutet. 1629. p. 302, C]

t Lib. i. Contr. Cels. p. 7.

secret, kcu iravra §e to iravraxov pvarrjpia Kara ttjv 'EAXaSa Kai ttjv fiapftapav Kpvcpia ovra oi dia^e/Skrjrai. 11 And Seneca before him mentions both, where he will have Lucilius observe the difference between 86yp.a and prceceptum. h Idem dicere de prceceptis possum, aperta sunt; decreta vero sapientice in abdito. Sicut sanctiora sacrorum tantum initiati sciant, ita in philosophic/, arcana ilia admissis receptisque in sacra ostenduntur ; atprm-cepta et alia hujusmodi profanis quoque nota sunt, 0 " I may 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 Avere warned to withdraw.^

—Procul, O procul este profani, Conclamat vates, totoque absistite luco/ " ' Far hence! far hence! go, ye profane,' the prophet cries, ' and stand off from the whole grove !'"

'EkuS EKaf 0<TT1? AXlTpOS. /

" Far hence! far hence ! every profane one! "

And if they would venture to be present, it was at their peril. As Pentheus in Pausanias ;«■ and those of Acarnania in Livy A found it. Nero durst not venture, Eleusiniis sacris, quorum initiatione impii et scelerati voce prceconis submoverentur, interesse non ausus est, 1 " 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 \£ya>v rois dpvi]Tois to. p.va-TTjpia aaefZel ; he is impious that speaks of the mysteries to those that are not initiated, says Chrysippus in Laertius. This was

a Ibid. p. 8. "AAAo yap doy^a Kai tiWo Ktjpvyfxa, to. [lev yap doy^xara (riwir&Tai, rd 5e Kr\pvynaTa driiJioo-UvTat, " Dogma is one thing, and preaching another. For our dogmas are held in silence, but our preaching is for the public." Basil. De Spiritu Sancto, cap. xxvii. p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722, torn. iii. p. 55, E.]

» Ep. xcv. [Ed. Antw. 1614. p. 606, A.] ' Page 794.

d So Prudentius 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.] / [Callimach. Hymn, in Apollon.]

t Pentheum aiunt, ut fceminarum operta sacra specularetur, in arborem ascendisse, atque inde omnia conspicatum, quod cum Baccha' animadvertissent, impetu facto viventem eum lacerasse, ac membratim discerpsisse, " It is narrated that Pentheus, in order that he might have a full view of the sacred rites 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 from limb." Pausan. lib. ii. [cap. ii.]

* Tempore initiorum duo juvenes Acarnanes, qui non initiati erant, Athenas venerant, et in sacrarium Cereris, cum aliis popularibus suis intraverunt; ob hoc tanquam nefas summum—caesi sunt. Flor. Brev. " At the time of initiation two young men of Acarnania 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. [cap. xxxiv.]

part of Alcibiades' crime, mysteria Cereris emmtiavisse, a " 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 particularly concerning them, they waive it with an ov defies, " it is unlawful :" so Apollonius of the Samothracian mysteries :

Nijo-or 6/uuis- Ktx«pono, Kui o'i Xdxov opyia KeTva, Aai'juoi'ef evvdeTat, ru fiev ov Otjui? li/i/iiv deiSetv. e " But farewell that island ! and the gods dwelling thereon, who receive that mysterious worship whereof it is unlawful 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. rf But M. Atelius fared worse, suffering as a parricide, for permitting the Sibyls' books in his custody (containing secreta civilium sacrorum, and used by the Romans as their extraordinary ritual) to be transcribed ; cos irarpoKTovov is ao-Kov eppafyas fioeiov eppixjtev els to 7reXayos, e &c. " He sewed him up in a linen sack and cast him into the sea as a parricide."

If they trusted them to writing, it was in a secret character, such as

" Alcibiades absens Athenis insimulatur mysteria Cereris initiorum sacra, nullo magis quam silentio solemnia enuntiavisse, " Alcibiades during his absence from Athens, was charged with having divulged the mysteries of Ceres, whose sacredness consists mainly in their secrecy." Justin, Hist. lib. v. cap. i. Vid. Cornel. Nepos. in Alcibiad.

* Athenis initiatus, cum postea Romae pro tribunali de privilegio sacerdotum AttictE Cereris cog-nosceret, et qujedam secretiora pvoponerentur, dimisso concilio et corona circumstantium solus audiit disceptantes, " 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 private 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. xciii. p. 103.

Pausanias says, Oi'tu'C? 5' eiaiv o'i KafSeipoi aai oiroXa etniv auTOi? Kai rtj fxriTp'i *ra dpiojuefa, ctanr'tiv ayon-i uirtp avTwv a-v/iiu)jj.n 7rap« uvdpwv <pi\t)n6o>v ?<tt(o fiol, "But as to who the Cabeiri 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. xxv.] Vid. Dionys. Hali-carnassens. infra. c [Argon, lib. i. 924.]

d Numenio denique inter philosophos occultorum curiosori offensam numinum, quod Eleusina sacra interpretando vulgaverit somnia prodiderunt, " Numenius, a man more curious in recondite matters than most philosophers, was informed in dreams that he had incurred the displeasure of the gods, because by interpreting he had divulged the Eleusinian mysteries." Somn. Scip. lib. i. cap. ii. p. 25.

« Dionys. Halicarnass. lib. iv. [cap. Ixii.]

Tarquinius autem rex M. Atellium duunivirum, quod librum secreta civilium sacrorum conti-nentem custodie suae commissum, corruptusPetronio Sahino describendum dedisset, culeo insutum in mare abjici jussit; idque supplicii genus multo post parricidis lege irrogatum est, "Tarquin ordered that Marcus Atellius, one of the duumvirs,* should be sewn in a sack and cast into the sea, because he had given to Petronius Sabinus to be copied, a book intrusted to his keeping, which contained the secrets of the state religion. This kind of punishment was some time after decreed by law for parricides." Val. Max. lib. i. cap. i. p. 8.

• The duumvirs here referred to, are the duumviri sacrorum, two officers who had charge of the Sybilline books, to which, allusion is made in this passage.— Ed.

could not be understood by those from whom they were to be concealed." Ipsa mysteriafigurarum cuniculis operiuntur, "the mysteries are communicated by means of the secret way of cipher," says Macrobius; et

" Literis ignorabilibus, as Apuleius of the rites of Isis. Summus sacerdos—de opertis adyti profert quosdam libros literis ignorabilibus praenotatos; partim figuris cujuscemodi animalium, concepti sermonis compendiosa verba suggerentes; partim nodosis et in modum rotae tortuosis, capreolatimque condensis apicibus, a curiositate profanorum lectione munita. Indidem mihi prae-dicat quae forent ad usum teletae necessario praeparanda, " Tlie high-priest brought forth from secret cells certain books marked over with characters which I could not recognise : in some parts suggesting by means of figures of every kind of animal the shortened words of a preconceived discourse ; the reading being secured in other parts against the curiosity of the profane by figures knotted and tortuous, like a wheel with connected ends projecting like two horns. Out of these books he described to me the preparation requisite to be made by a candidate for initiation." Metamorp. lib. xi. p. 208. [Edit. Bipont. p. 271.]

Sictfjrfjf de eidos Kai h dadtpeta t] Ke%p>iTat h 7pa0>/ dvtrtiewpiiTOv KaTao-Kevd^ovaa twv SnyfidTtav tov vovv, &c. " The silence, so to speak, and obscurity which the writing employs, is not readily seen to convey the sense of the dogmas." Basil. De Spiritu Sancto, cap. xxvii. p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722, torn. iii. p. 56, A.] And Leo Imperator says, that laws were not to be writ obscurely, because they

were not mysteries, nv yap /jLvtTTtipta tov vofiov tci Oeapita iittTTe uvaxwpeiV aura Tfjff TUiv iroWitiv Ktxra-

Xi/'l'ewr, "Legal ordinances are not mysteries, that we should place them beyond the reach of the understanding of the multitude." Novel, lxxvii.

Eyo) o 1 '6<ra /ifcv opav diraatv ov Oepus, ovts napd dpwvTtav duoueiv, ovd' dv eirtypd^etv oip.at 3eti/, " Matters, which it is not lawful for all to witness, nor to hear from the witnesses of them, must not, I think, be described." Dionys. Halicarnass. lib. i.

Ov oi rwv fivirriipiuiv kir't Kcmixo^mv XeuKwt \a\ovpiev, d\\d noWd jroWaKic Xeyo^ev kirtKeKa-Xv/j.p.eva.ii, 'iva o\ eidoTt? kiotoI vol]<ru>cn Kai oi fx>] eiooTCf, jut) /3Xa/3u><ri, " We speak not clearly of the mysteries before the catechumens, but often say many things under a veil, that the faithful may understand, and that, at the same time, those unacquainted therewith may get no harm." Cyril. Catech. vi. p. 60.

'lepo\oye7Tat de Kai reBeiao-rat tq 'Oaipidos, wene Ktvdvvo? napafidWecrQat 7rpo? rijv btijyriatv. Osiridis historiasacris sermor.ibus mysteriisque Celebris est ita ut periculosum sit earn monimentis et narrationibus commendari, " The history of Osiris is commemorated in sacred revelations and mysteries, so that it is perilous to commit it to parchment and popular description." Synes. De Providentia, p. 123. Ed. Paris. 1633.]

'Iepor \6yos ka-Ttv, ov ova batov hSayopevetv ovde hv /ivDov <7x»;M aT 'i " It is a sacred matter, which it is profane to expose even figuratively." Id. ibid. sect. i. p. 115. 1vyypa<paX^dvena<pa p.tj (monimentis intacta) Kai rlaiv oil 0e/uis 6p.p.a (SdWtjaiv, " Things not committed to parchment, lest the eye fall on things whereon it is unlawful to look." p. 124.

Et 7<ip 0e('uv Xoyidjv KarrjKooi eyevovTO to tTjp eL-a^oi"'? Kai dfiiouijTov fijuwc Bptiaaeais a€J3dap\tov £(pu\aTTOv, Kai tou? eOvtKov? Kai d\6yovs tu>v Trap' fi/Jiiv dyimv Kai cre/3aa , jiu'wi' d-^aaOat oif <rvi>ex i * , P ovv t " Were they obedient to the Divine oracles, they would respect the veneration due to our irreproachable and innocent worship, and would not suffer heathen and unreasonable men to touch our sacred and religious things." Ibid. lib. iv. p. 144.

A070C BotwTtot Toyf fci/aWojueyoi;? Kat enoiTTevovTa^ opyta fciuvvaov cnrapdrTOvtrij 6 re jap €K<p*]vas t 6 Te i'ouc vepietrarat napd tov Betov, " Boeotian arguments distract those who burst in to witness the Dionysian mysteries. For both he who exposes them, and he who beholds them, incur vengeance from the Deity." Id. ibid. p. 124.

Aeyopev » T ; owdneBa 7rapaKa\v7rTovT€s ra dpifinXa, " We speak as we are able, veiling things sacred." Id. ibid.

'AW' eb\a/3riTeov yap t'ldii /i.J; Ti Kai tom' dppi]Tu>v e^opx'ict'ifXiBa, " We must take heed lest we expose any of the mysteries to contempt." Id. p. 125.

Tot? dnoupl]Tot<; tov fivBov —<Woia arra itn'tv e/ioi oiiVa) 6tut? e^ayopevetv, " The ineffable portions of the narrative, such as it is unlawful for us to publish." Id. p. 128.

"icrucrtv oi o\ jUi''<TTai to Xeyo/ievoi', " The initiated know what is meant." Id. Epist. clxii. lib. iv.

Kai Te\6Tac iiev firioe 6 X070? KtvetTo), " Let not the discourse even touch upon the initiatory rites.' Id. De Insomnias, [p. 133.]

The council of Laodicea, setting down the place and order of those prayers, shows us, they were made /ueTa to tfeX#eiV Toi/r KaTtixovp.{vovs, " after the catechumens depart." [Can. xix.]

'K7ri7ii'<<Ki , K£Te aWi/Xou! /uJ; tJ? twv dWotpvXuiv ai'a/if/iiKTai, " Know one another, lest any of the strangers mingle with you." Chrys. Adv. Judaeos.

figuris defendentibus a vilitate secretum, a " and by characters which secure the secret from depreciation." Such were the Egyptian hieroglyphics, and used on purpose for such concealment; they could not be understood without a pvcrraycoyos, " 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 Qucestiones ad Orihodoxos tells us ; ra Upoy\v(f)iKa KaXovfifva tu iv rols dSvrois, ov rols i~ux.oiiaiv, aXXa rols eyicpi-rois napaBidofxeva, 6 " the so-called hieroglyphics which are communicated in secret cells, and not to everybody, but to those only who are approved."

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 after 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 sacraments, and some other rites counted mysterious.

None but the initiated were permitted to be present at these prayers; to>v afivrjroiv ovdcva ypi) Trapelvai, as Chrysostom, having said before, orav anovo-qs Afr]dcop.ev iravres Kotvfj, " 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 el ttjs Ovo-las agios, ovde rrjs pfTaX^fois: ovkovp ov8e Tijs ev^c, " Thou art not worthy of the sacrifice nor of communication ; neither then art thou worthy to hear the prayers;" they were warned to depart, aicoveis eo-raros tov ktjpvkos, koi

Xeyovros "Ocroi iv peravoia cnrekBtTe ndvTts — aTvehOfTe ol prj 8vvapevoi Seqdrjvai, " 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, tovto yiverai 8ia twv ex>x^>v, 8ia ttjs fiorjs tov KTjpvicos, " This takes place at the time of the prayers, by proclamation of the herald." Those that were unworthy to see, were

■ S( inn. Scip. lib. i. cap. ii. p. 23. ' p. 146.

unworthy to hear ; dvd£ioi Kai 6cp8aXpoi ra>v deapdrcuv tovtuv, dpd^iat

Kal aKoai, a " Their eyes are unworthy these spectacles ; so also are their ears unworthy."

So elsewhere, he says, the catechumens were forced away from these prayers, aTrikavvovTat. rd>v <ppiKTa>v (i>xa>v eKeivcov yivopevcov; they never heard those concealed mysteries, ov8e yap rj<ovcrav ra>v a7ropprjTcov pvcTTrjpitop, applying that of the apostle to them, a 6cp6a\p6s ovk fi'Se,* &c, " which eye hath not seen," &c.

So for baptism, the first council of Orange decrees, the catechumens should not come at the font, Catechnmeni ad baptisteria nequaquam admittendi, 0 " The catechumens are by no means to be admitted to the baptisteries." And the pretended Dionysius begins his discourse of baptism with prjbels dreXearos eV! rrjv deav ura, d " 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 aposiopesis, Norunt Jideles, lo-ao-iv ol pepvrjphoi, ol pvarai, or ol mo-Tol, to Xeyopevov, " The faithful know—The initiated know—The faithful know what is meant," so frequent in Augustine, Chrysostom, Theodoret, as to the eucharist. For the prayers in baptism, see Chrysostom/

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 /xr) iv tj\ 077 riKe'ioT^Ti,

ypdppacrt birjpocruvo'a) — 8irjyqa-dp.r)v tu> d8e\(j)ai Qeo(ppdo~Ta> ra Ka#' eKaarov

■ In Ephes. Horn. iii. pp. 778, 779.

Adversariis Athanasii, pro crimine magno objectum sit, quod de calice confracto contenderint coram Ethllico, Kai ovk ai<TX , ' 1 ' OVTC " TaWa— eTri KaTfixoi'/utvcoi/ Kai to ye xeipiarov em 'EXX/jvcon rpa-yuydovvres rot p.vart)pia, oi' XP'1 7 C *P Ta ^vtrrrjpia au.io/TOi? Tpaywoeii', 'iva fit] "EWrii'e? fJLCv cLfvovvTes •yeXajn-i, KaTiixov^evot 6e Trepiep-yoi ■yivo^ievoi <TKav&a\i£u>vTat, " It. was cast in the teeth of the adversaries of Athanasius as a great 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 is 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 catechumens becoming over-curious, be scandalised.'" Syn. Alexandrina apud Athanasium, Apol. ii. p. 569, torn. i. Edit. Commel. 1601. [Ed. Col. 168(5. p. 731, A torn, i.]

'Eni <3e tcuv tOviKtiiv fc£fTu£ov Trepi eKKXtiffias-, 7rtpi irorripiov, Trepi Tpa7re'£»]9 Kai tioi< 07/(01', Kai to oeu'oTepoi', kOvtKovs tK<i\ovv juapTUpa?, 7repi 7roTt]piov pwunKov ^^rovi/res, tl They instituted legal 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 Trapoi'Twi' Karnxovixivav to t<= xc'p'O'tov eiri kOviKwv Kai '\uvdaiwv rwv oiafiefiKnpLtvtov irepi tov Xpitrriavia-pLov efeTa<r(9 7repi aVjUaTO? Xp^rTOU Kai awpiaro? Xpto-Ttw yiverat, " 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.]

4 In 2 Cor. Horn. ii. p. 553. r Can. [xix.] '' Hier. Eccl. cap. ii. sect. i. p. 21.

• In Gal. iv. 28, p. 718 ; in 1 Cor. XV. 29; Horn. xl. p. 514 ; in 2 Cor. i.; II0111. ii. p. 555. f Ep. Ivii. [Ed. Paris. 1722. p. 151, D. torn, iii.]

an-ayyeiAat, that what he was intimating, 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 ; b so these mysterious prayers were to be kept as secret. To write them, so as strangers might come to the sight thereof, was not r-qpelv i'vdov, " to keep them close," to use them as mysteries, no more than to recite them in their hearing. What they durst not plainly pronounce, they would not venture to write ; according to that of Clemens Alexandrinus, c &o(3ovpevos ypdfaiv a ku\ \4yeiv e<f>v\atjdfxr)v, " 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 account he gives, why the creed was at first not written, (idcirco denique hcec non scribi chartulis aut membranis, " 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, (interrogatus symbolum, prodat, si sit hostis 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 certum esset hcec neminem ex lectione quce inter-dutn pervenire etiam ad infideles solet, didicisse. d " By means of this reading, which after a while is liable to come to the ears of even the unbelievers."

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 drawing up their literce format&, e was not in writing ; because they were concerned to keep it secret, lest it should be counterfeited, existimamus ejusmodi formidam nequaquam ab eis fuisse scripto traditam — sedpenes episcopos catholicos retentam esse secretam/"In 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 Ep. ad Rom. ii. 4. [Ed. Paris. 1759, torn. iv. p. 479, C]

« Strom, i. [Ed. Lutet. 1629. p. 27fi.]

d Expos, in Symb. in Cypr. Opera, p. 4. [In Hieronym. Oper. Ed. Paris. 1706. col. cxxviii. torn, v.]

' The Uteris formates vere letters of recommendation sent from the bishops of one church to the bishops of another. They were of three kinds : the first sort were only given to persons of quality, or to those whose character had been called in question ; the second sort were given to any communicant who had occasion to change his abode ; the third kind were granted only to the clergy who were removing from one church to another, and these were called also letters dimistory. These letters of commendation were called formatce, from the very circumstance to which the author makes reference above, viz. from their being distinguished by certain forms or characters, as a safeguard against forgery.— Ed. / Ad anno 325. n. 44.

elements, ra rrjs emK\r]<reo>s prjpara, were not written, they had them not eyypdcpcos ; and that what they said, both before and after the consecration, they had not from any writing, dKka K.a\ npoXeyopev kcii iiri\eyop,ev erepa, a>s p.eyciXt]i> e'^ovra npos to p.v(nr]piov ttjv lo~)(vv €K rrjs aypdcpov 818a-aKaXlas Trapa\d(3ovTfs, " We premise and subjoin other things besides as contributing great efficacy to the mystery, and these we derive from the unwritten tradition." As much he says of the prayers in baptism ; (the words we shall have occasion to produce hereafter:) and so having reckoned the prayers made in the administration of the sacraments; amongst other things, which of old were kept secret and unwritten ; he tells us the ancients were well instructed to reserve them, as mysterious things, in great secresy,KaA<ws f'/celyoi (01 Trartpes) 8e8i8aypevoi t£>v pvo-Trjpiaiv ra o-ep,va <Tia>Tvfi 8iao-ii>Ceo-0ai ; and adds, those administrations, at which the non-initiated might not be present ; how could it be lawful, to expose the notice thereof by writing them ? a yap oide inonTeveiv i'geo-n

rois dpvrjTois, tovtcov ttuis av rjv elubs Ti]v 8i8aaKa\lav etcdpiapfteveiv ev ypappacrl ; tt And all along these prayers with the other arcana there mentioned, are diropprjTa, d8r]p,oo~UvTa, aypa(pa, and. ra ciypcKpa rrjs eKKkijalas pvo-rrjpiaf " ineffable—private—unwritten — the unwritten 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 clrarch, declined'' to give

« De Spir. Sancto. cap. xxvii. p. 273. [Ed. Par. 1722. p. 55. torn, iii.] * Page 274.

c Itaque silentium hoc quodcunque sit non opponi voci sed scriptioni; ut non sit sensus, non debuisse pmnuntiari: sed tantum non debuisse scripto tradi, " Therefore this silence, whatever it be, is not to be opposed to speech but to writing. Since it would not be sense that the mysteries ought not to be enunciated, but only that they ought not to be committed to writing." Chamier, torn. iv. lib. vi. cap. viii. sect. xxvi.

Nolebat Basilius earn traditionem hK$piaixfleve<r8ai tv Ypa/ti/iatrtv, atque id periculosum existima-bat tiu aeixxw rS>v )xvcnr\pi<ov, " Basil was averse to that tradition's being paraded in writing, and thought that such a proceeding would imperil the reverence due to the mysteries." Id. sect. xxix.

d Cum et hie, et alii apocryphorum scriptures, sua soleant ad praesentis suo sevo ecclesiae ritus, mores ac sermonem effingere ; primo plerique eo potissimum consilio sua figmenta sub vetustiorum nomine edant, ut res sui szeculi novas falso antiquitatis nomine constituant et confirment; clarum est etiam, ex istius generis apocryphis magnam utilitatem percipi posse, si diligenter obsevetur, quos illi mores, et quos ritus ecclesiae, et Christianis illis tribuant de quibus loquuntur, " Since both this and other writers of apocryphal books are in the habit of feigning things of their own after the model of the rites, customs, and manner of speaking in use in the church existing in their own age; and since very many the rather in consequence of this their chief design, viz., to establish and support the novelties of their own age by a forged ancient name, publish their own figments under the name of their predecessors, it is clear that great benefit may accrue from apocryphal writings of that stamp, if we carefully note what customs and what ecclesiastical rites they ascribe to those Christians concerning whom they speak." Dfllseus de Lib. Suppositis Dionys., &c. lib. ii. p. 250.

« Cur reticuerit precationes quae in mysteriis adhibentur, " The reason why he has observed silence as to the prayers which are offered in the mysteries," says Ills translator, did -ri wdvTas firoi T<ir ayias JwiKXno-eir, kuJ Tar kvepfela? kauimntrev, "The reason why he has kept silence as to all, or at least, as to the sacred invocations, and their effects," says Maxinms, his scholiast, p. 96. If it be said, ex ypa<pais a(pepnrivei'ei\<, is to explain or write commentaries on their prayers, not simply to commit

an account in writing concerning the sacramental prayers; (reXeo-riKas erriKXrjcrfis) assigns this reason, ov depirov iv ypd<fiais (Kpepprjveveiv ; it is not lawful to declare them in writing, being mystical and secret, fivariKovs ov<ras ical djroppijTovs, (as Pachymeres,) being secret, and not to be divulged. To deliver them in writing would have been «c rov Kpvcpiov npos to koivov egdyeiv, to bring them out of secresy into common view, as he expresseth it afterward."

For the Latin church, Innocentius L, bishop of Rome, may satisfy us. Decentius 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 he 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 , c he determines that the presbyter might anoint the baptized with chrism, non tamen frontem 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 ; verha vero dicere non possum, ne magis prodere videar, quatn ad consulta-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 Lord's supper, which was anciently, in their style and account, secretum, d and t] Kpvcpla, " a mystery—the secret ordinance." And indeed he shows himself no less reserved about the eucharist; so we find him. e Cum post omnia quce aperire non debeo, pax

them to writing, I answer if it were so, this proves as much what I allege him for, as the other. For this was unlawful, not as commentaries, but as written, it was oi Benirov, "unlawful," not to explain or render them intelligible, but to divulge or make them common, eU to ko tvov kt-dyet v. Now the} r were exposed to common view by being written, not by being intelligible, for intelligible they were in the most reserved use of the church; unless their prayers were riddles, and they offered to God they knew not what for a reasonable service.

<• Hierarch. Eccles. fin.

4 Saepe dilectionem tuam ad urbem venisse, ac nobiscum in ecclesia convenisse, et quem morem vel in consecrandis mysteriis, vel in cseteris agendis arcanis teneat, cognovisse, dubium non est; quod sufficere ad informationem ecclesia? tuae, vel reformationem satis certum haberem—nisi de aliquibus consulendos nos esse dixisses, " It is indubitable, beloved, that thou hast often come to the city, and met with us in the church, and observed the routine which obtains as well in consecrating the mysteries as in other secret offices ; which 1 should imagine sufficient for the ordering or reformation of your church ; unless you say that it is necessary to consult us touching certain matters." Praefat. iipist. ad Decentium, in Crab. Cone. torn. i. p. 452. c Cap. iii.

d Innocentius negat se tunc temporis, i. e. cum scriberet ad Decentium Eugubinum debere dicere, " Innocent says that he ought not at that time, (i. c. when lie wrote to Decentius of Eugubium,) to mention the arcana," (Chamier, torn. iv. lib. vi. cap. viii. sect. Iii.) lest the writing might have come into the hands of the non-initiated. Populus pars erat apiriTOi, pars pe^uq/icvot, illis neque videre licebat, neque audire, et hi satis erant, ut non auderet omnia literis Innocentius committere, " Part of the people were uninitiated persons, part initiated. The former were allowed neither to see nor hear; and the latter were so numerous, that Innocent did not dare to commit all matters to writing." Id. sect. liii. Vid. Bellarm. sect. 1. ' Cap. i.

sit necesscmo 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 celebration 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, Eeliqua vero quce scribi fas non erat, quum adfueris, i?iterrogati, poterimus edicere, 6 "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 fiefxvrifievos, " initiated," but, as Nyssen speaks, fivo-TTjplcov XavdavovTom ixvarayoayos, 0 " an initiator into the secret mysteries," would have been no less than prodere, no better then treachery, a betraying the arcana ecclesia, " the arcana of the church," what would it have been to have had them 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 I 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, ixnbtv Xeye tm ef co, fivoTtipiov 7<<p <ro\ ■napa&i&o-nev, &c. " Say nothing to one who is without; for we entrust to you a mystery."—iEgroti vinum quandoque postulant; quod si intempestive detur tppevfjTtiv tpfu£tTai, Kai dvo Kami flverai Kai b voalhv UnoWvTai, Kai b \arpbs 6ia/?d\\eTai' o'inu>? 6 KuTrrx 01 '/ 1 "' 09 £"" aKOvari iraptc irtarov, Kai o Ka-rrixoii/ievor (ppevcria, ovk oibe yap ti ritiovat, Kai e\t7X ei TO Tpa7/aa Ka ' ^KfJ-vKrr^pi^ei Til \ey6p.6vov, Kai 6 wio-tos ")? upodoTtif KaxaKpivcTai, &c. " Sick men sometimes ask for wine, which if it he unreasonably given produces delirium, and two evils supervene ; the patient dies, and the physician is 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 the matter, and scoffs at what is said : also the believer is condemned as a traitor." Cyril. Procatech. [cap. vii. Ed. Oxon. 1703. p. 9.]

Owk htrrlv 20os kOviKols dniyeTaOac, " It is not our manner to expound these matters to the heathen." Catech. vi. [Ed. Oxon. sect. xvi. p. 97.] * Cap. viii.

c Dc Christi Baptism.

d 'Afvuiaia atp.voTr\i evl reXerSi/, "Ignorance in regard to the sacred mysteries is dignity." Synes. de Provid. sect. ii. p. 124.

'Ev tiu KeKpuiU/ievw Kai u<ptiifKTu> to oefivbv Toit /ii/0-Tiipioiv i$v\a<nrov, " They preserved by concealment and silence the reverence due to the mysteries." Basil, de Spir. Sancto, cap. xxvii. p. 273. OvTOi 6 \o70? t7jc Tuiv uypci(pwv 7rapa5o(T€aK, (f»v [it] Karap.e'KtiOei&av rtis doyfjidnov rijv fvuxxiv, evt«na<pp6vtnov Toly ifoXXoit y'lveoOai but avvifietav, " The reason for unwritten tradition 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. ibid. To<tovtu>v Svrav afpd(po>v Kui toctuutiii' e%6vTwv i<rxi ,l/ els to t>iv evaefteias p.v(7Tt]piov, " So many things being unwritten which possess such great importance in reference to the mystery of godliness." Id. p. 274.

Lysis, the Pythagorean, To ydp dn/.io<r<a <pi\oao<p6tv, ij.e-,u\t^ eiv uvOpcinrovs jjpfe tov Qeiwv koto-<ppovi]criw;, " Philosophising in public originated a great contempt for Divine things," reproving his friend for publishing something. In Synesius, Ep. cli. [p. 279, B. Ed. Paris. 1633.]

impossible to conceal that which they deemed themselves so much concerned to keep secret.

Now, if their prayers had been written out, for the use of many thousands, 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 divulging of them, and a ready way to make them etcfyopa toU e£a>, " 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 Kpinpia, " secret doctrines," of the Christians, as they used all means fair and foul" (sometimes tortures, sometimes odious misinterpretations, sometimes subtle insinuations) to get the knowledge of them ? Or, from the catechumens, passionately eager to be acquainted with these secrets, any way though surreptitiously ; as for other reasons, so because their acquaintance herewith would have advanced them immediately into the higher form of the Jideles, "faithful." 6

It is no way probable, [that] these prayers and their other ecrcorepiKa, " 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 necessarium credidi ex duabus ancillis quae ministra dicebantur, quid esset veii et per tormenta quserere. Nihil aliud inveni, quam superstitionem pravam immodicam. " I therefore deemed it necessary to wring the truth by torture from two serving-women, who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing save a corrupt and intemperate superstition." Plin. Ep. Trajano, xcvii. Just. Martyr. Apol. i. p. 133.

-Voyrep ^(itiih fjLtlie vorfaas uKpi/3<«s to Kpixptov Toti XpiiTTtavicrixov oia/3d\\ei auro, " Therefore in vain does he, who does not even correctly understand the Christian religion, slander it." Origen contr. Cels. lib. i. p. 8.

Maximus Madaurens. Ep. ad Augustin.

To ■kiotov hiiTv u0uvoi<? Kai Uiroi>p>\rov Koiviaviixs oierai eivat auvOn/ia, " He deems the cipher to be the proof to us of the obscure and secret doctrine of the communion." Celsus in Origen. lib. viii. p. 339.

* Et de T*s Kclt 1 ayvoiav fxeTaXafloi, tovtov rdxtov (JTOix^iwcravje^ /ii///craTe, o7ra)? /j/y KaTa<jjpoi>t}Tii<? efeXfloi, " If any communicate in ignorance, instruct him immediately in the elementary doctrine, and initiate him, that he may not depart a scorner." Clem. Constitut. lib. v. cap. xxvi. fine.

Quodam canone uno comperimus, si cui contigissct catechumeno, casu aliquo, ac fortuito sacri-ficii-s interesse, aut oculis ilia sacra intueri, eum protinus sacro fonte abluendum fuisse.—A Deo magnum quoddam in se profectum beneficium arbitrabantur, si casus quidam insperatus tulisset, ut ea saerificia, non tarn mentis, quam oculis corporis contemplarentur, " We find by one canon in particular, that if it chanced to any catechumen to be present by some accident at the sacrifices, or to look upon those sacred things with his eyes, he was to be baptized forthwith.—They esteemed it a great blessing sent to them by God, if any unexpected chance brought to pass that they should gaze on those sacrifices with the eyes, not of the mind but of the body." Albaspin. Observ. lib. ii. cap. ii. pp. 206, 207. Vid. Notas in Can. p. 206. Timotheus Alexandrinus, in respon. canon, inter-rogatus, si puellus catechumenus, vel homo jam perfectus, dum fieret oblatio, opportune affuerit, ejusque uescius particeps factus sit, quid debet de eo fieri.' Respond, debet illumiuari, a Deo enim vocatus est, " Timotheus of Alexandria, being asked for a canonical solution of the question—If a child, who is a catechumen, or an adult, should be present at the very time when the oblation is offering, and should become an ignorant participator of the same, what ought to be done in the case of such a one ? answered, He ought to be baptized, because such a one is called of God." In Vicecom. de Bapt. Kit. Ii!). ii. cap. \ .

consequently they could have no prescribed liturgies for the administration of the sacraments.

And the impossibility of concealment will be more evident, if liturgies were to be not only in the hands of the several ministers, bishops, presbyters, deacons ; but also in the people's hands ; as it was necessary 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. a Though nothing so much, as in the written liturgies, nor what they might not have by custom without book.

This may suffice 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 lis view the twenty-third canon of the third council of Carthage : Ut nemo in precibus, vel Patron pro Filio, vel Filium pro Poire nominet, et cum ad altare assistitur, semper ad Patrem dirigatur oratio. Et quascunque sibi preces aliqids 1 describit, non eis utatur, nisi 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 the eucharistical prayers ; the first and last respect both these, and the prayers also in other parts of the administrations ; each of them 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 consequently allowed by the synod, as duly directed already) it was vain and ridiculous to make such an order, ut semper ad Patrem, that the prayers 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, xviii. p. 647. 4 Hardouin reads guicunque and aliunde. — Ed.

henceforth they should direct such prayers only to the Father. And as it clearly supposes, they were neither limited nor directed, by any prescribed forms before ; so it leaves them free, to use what prayers they judged meet, cum ad altare assistitur, " 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 preces, non solum ab imperitis loquacious, sed etiam ab hcereticis comp>ositas; et per ignorantim simplicitatem, non eas valentes discernere, utuntur Us, arbitrantes quod bono? sint, " Many light upon prayers, not only which are composed by unskilful 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 circumstances, which might justify the imposition of set forms, if any could do it. And yet the African fathers* saw no suffi-

« De Baptism, contra Donat. lib. vi. cap. xxv. p. 568.

b Now since some, angry at this canon, (for what reason appears not, unless because it shows what they would not have seen) would shift it out of the African constitutions; let it be observed, that it was originally a decree of the council at Hippo, as appears by the brief of its canons ; in which it is the twenty-third, in number of forty-one. Crab. torn. i. p. 433. A general council this was, as we learn by that of Possidonius, Vit. August, cap. vii. Coram episcopis, hoc illi jubentibus in plenarium totius Africa concilium Hippone agebant, " Thus did they in the presence of the bishops, who summoned him to a full council of all Africa." Vid. August. Retract, lib. i. cap. xvii. And of such esteem, that, as Baronius tells us, Cetera quae postea in Africa celebratae sunt synodi, ex Hippo-nensi tanquam archetypo quodam, complura fuerint mutuatae, "The other councils which were afterwards held in Africa, borrowed very many things from that at Hippo, as from a kind of model. Ad anno 393, n. 5. .

And no African council hath fuller approbation, nor that so frequently and solemnly declared. It was confirmed, by a full council at Carthage, Ca?sario et Attico. Coss. anno 397. So Marianus Scotus mentions it, anno 417. Concilium Carthaginense, ubi Hippouensis concilii statuta firmantur et inferuntur, "the Council of Carthage, in which the canons of that of Hippo were confirmed and ^sited." And an abridgment (now spoken of) was made of its decrees, that they might be the better remembered and observed, as the fathers tell us in a synodal epistle ; breve vero statutorum huic epistola; subdi feeimus, ut compendio Cqua= decreta sunt) recensentes, solicitius observari cure-mus, " We have subjoined 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 form." In Crab. torn. i. p. 433. Justel. Xota? in Cod. Afr. pp. 48, 49. And of fifty ascribed to this (so-called third) council of Carthage, thirty-nine are the same with those of Hippo ; and in both this canon is the twenty-third. It was confirmed afterwards Uhe canons thereof being recited) not only by the votes, but the sub-sciiptions of the fathers in the general council at Milevis, anno 402. Arcad. et Honor. 5, Cuss.

T

cient reason, to prescribe such forms to persons so lamentably insufficient. But, as they did make choice of what prayers they thought good before ; so they leave them at liberty, to use what they made choice of; providing 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 us, multorum enini preces emendantur quotidie, si doctioribus fuerint recitatce, " the prayers of many are amended daily, if they be recited to the more learned."

There had been no occasion for any part of this canon, if such liturgies as we speak of had been in use ; or if they had thought fit to have 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 insufficient of their ministers at greater liberty ; for such evidently is the course they take in this canon; the severals a of which, if they can be reconciled with any kind or degree of confinement to prescribed forms, then may we reconcile light and darkness.

That no ministers were limited to any prescribed forms, in the administration of the Lord's supper, is manifest also, by the seventieth canon in the collection called 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 hoc, tit preces quae probates fuerint in concilio, sive prce-fatio?ies, sive commendationes, seu manus impositiones, ab omnibus cele-brentur • nee alice omnino contra fidem proferantur; sed qua>cunque cum prudentioribus fuerint collata? dicantur, b " This also seemed good, that the prayers which shall be allowed in a council, whether prefaces, or commendations, or imposition of hands, may be used by all; neither may any other, against the faith, be used ; but all whatsoever, which shall be communicated with the more discreet, may be used." Where it is observable, that,

1. As much liberty in praying is left 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 indiscreet, as they could not discern an heretical prayer from another, and

together with the constitutions of the last mentioned council of Carthage. Vid. Crab. torn. l>p. 4S1, 509, et Justel. Cod. cexviii. &c.

It was finally ratified by two hundred and seventeen bishops in a council at Carthage, anno 419, and the approbations and confirmations of it forementioned are part of the African code, in which the title of Can. xxxiv. is, Quod nihil de Hipponensi concilio sit emendandum, " That no act of the council of Hippo be amended." In Justel. p. 114. Vid. p. 217, &c.

• Particulars. i Collect, in Cod. Can. ciii. p. 281. Vid. Thornd. p. 244.

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 council, to use such prayers, till they Avere 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 synod. 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 alice omnino, contra Jidem, proferantur, " 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 incongruities 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 have been the condition of those churches, by the complaint of Aurelius, in a council at Carthage, Cum una cum episcopis suis consedisset, adstantibus diaconis, Aurelius episco-pus dixit: ecclesiarum Dei, per Africam constitutarum, necessitates mecum optime novit charitas vestra, sanctissimi fratres—tanta indigentia clericorum est, multaeque ecclesiae ita desertae sunt, ut ne imura quidem diaconum (margin, lectorem) vel inliteratum habere reperiantur. Nam de cseteris superioribus gradibus, et officiis tacendum arbitror: Quia (ut dixi) si ministerium diaconi facile non invenitur, multo magis superiorum honorum inveniri non posse certissimum est, et quotidianos planctus diversarum paene emortuarum plebium jam non sustinemus; quibus nisi fuerit aliquando subventum, gravis nobis, et inexcusabilis innumerabilium animarum pereuntium causa apud Deum mansura est, "When he had taken his seat, together with his fellow-bishops, the deacons standing by, bishop Aurelius said, ' You, beloved and most holy brethren, are very well aware with me of the necessities of the churches of God established throughout Africa. So great is the want of clergy, and many churches are so desolate, that they are not found to possess even one illiterate deacon. For I think it best 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 presence of God.'" In Crab. Concil. torn. i. pp. 502, 503, in Cod. Justelli, p. 165. Aurel. in Cone. Carth. [v.] anno 401. Tantum autem inopia? clmcorum ordinandorum in Africa patiuntur ecclesia?, ut quaedam loca omninodeserta sunt. "The churches suffer in Africa such destitution of ordained clergy that some places are almost abandoned." In Capitulo Cone. Hipponensis, Crab. torn. i. p. 434.

4 Oi f&p 7\uiTTt)r CnT«i KciAXor 6 Geor oliok pii/ictTum <7vvt)>'iKiiv, HKK.A -j/vx'is iupai', " For God seeks not elegance of language, nor the tacking together of sentences, but beauty of soul." Chry-sost. in Ps. viii. pp. 527, 524.

Xpi; tiji/ -jpoaevx't" M'J £" <rv\\afiatt r,l*as eiar\>ipai<v, u\\a irpoaiptcret juuAXov \livxhs, Kai irpa%e<ri it' ajieT/;i/ wai/i-i tco jiiu> irapeKTen'o/ie'i-ai?, " It is meet that we supplement prayer not with syllables, but rather with purpose of soul, and with virtuous deeds extending throughout our whole life." [Basil. Serm. ix. De Oratione, initio.]

])ii non tarn accuratis adorantium preeibus, quam innocentia et sanctitate Isetantur: gratiorqne

T 2

curiosity of a vainly critical ear would not be pleased with it. Noverint (says Augustine) etiam non esse vocem ad aures Dei, nisi animi affectum: ita enim non irridebunt, si aliquos antistites et ministros ecclesios forte animadverterint, vel cum barbarismis et solwcismis Deum invocare, a " Let them understand, that God attends not so much to the voice, as the inward affection ; and so they will not jeer, if perhaps they observe some bishops and ministers of the church do call upon God with some (were these prescribed'?) barbarisms and solecisms."

3. Any prayers that were approved, either by a synod, or other discreet persons, might be used, as in other church administrations, (and in which of them was not * imposition of hands used ?) so particu-

existimantur, qui de labris eorum puram castamque mentem, quam qui meditatum carmen intule-rit, " The gods are not so well pleased with accuracy in prayer on the part of their worshippers as with innocence and purity; and he is deemed more acceptable who offers from his lips a spotless and chaste mind like their own, than he who presents a carefully studied ode." Plin. in Panegyr. ad Trajan.

Upoaevx'l ov pijfxaai \l/t\o7s, AWa 7rpa7juaen /uaWov xpr\aro'ii Ka-evOiweTai, "Prayer is measured not by its smooth sentences, but by good deeds." Isidor. lib. i. Ep. ccclxxxvi. [C]

■ De Catechizand. Rudibus, cap. ix. torn. iv. pars poster, p. 330.

* By imposition of hands, here is meant, prayers used when hands were imposed; manus autem impositio non sicut baptismus, repeti non potest. Quid est enim aliud nisi oratio super hominem ? "Imposition of hands is not like baptism, which cannot be repeated. For what else is it save prayer over a man?" August. De Baptis. contra Donat. lib. iii. cap. xvi. p. 496.

Hands were imposed almost in all prayers, and all church administrations; the prayers in the first instance were those for the catechumens and penitents ; imposition of hands was used at both.

On catechumens. Vincentius a Thibari in Ciprian Connec. Primo per manus impositionem in exorcismo, secundo per baptismi regenerationem, possunt ad Christi pollicitationem pervenire, " In the first place, they may obtain the promise of Christ by imposition of hands in exorcism; and in the second place, by the regeneration in baptism." Vid. August. De Baptis. lib. vi. cap. xliv. Augustin, Nam et catechumenos, secundum quendam modum suum, per signum Christi, et orationum manus impositions puto sanctificari. " I deem catechumens to be sanctified after a certain manner by Christ's mark, and the imposition of hands at prayer." De Peccat. Merit, lib. ii. cap. xxvi. torn. i. pars i. p. 875. In exorcismis impositio manuum, "In exorcisms imposition of hands is used." Leo, Ep. lxxviii. cap. i. Vid. Cone. Carth. iv. Can. lxxxv.

On penitents, in admission to penance. Albaspin. Observ. pp. 230, 233, 397, Vid. Cent. v. p. 665. In exercise of it while under penitence, fxerct to e£e\0eTv tous naTnxovfj.evovt, rwv iv jueTavot'a t>;i/ ev%>]v fiveaOat, tai tovtoiv irpoaeXOovTuiv inrd x«'P a > "After the departure of the catechumens comes the prayer for the penitents, and these advance to receive imposition of hands." Cone. Laodic. [Can. xix.] Con. Carth. iv. Can. lxxx.

In absolution, or reconciling penitents. Cypr. Epist. [lxxiii.] Euseb. lib. vii. cap. ii. Leo, Non nisi per pcenitentiae medium, et per impositionem episcopalis manus communionis recipiant unitatem, Epist. lxxvii. cap. vi. Reconcilientur per manus impositionem, " Only by penance and imposition of the bishop's hands do they receive reconciliation." Cone. Carth. iv. Can. lxxvi.

In confirmation. Tertull. [De Baptis. cap. vii.] Egressi de lavacro perungimur benedictaunctione de pristina disciplina, dehinc manus imponitur. Cypr. Qui in ecclesia baptizantur praspositis ecclesise offeruntur, ut per nostram orationem et manus impositionem Spiritum Sanctum con-sequantur. [Epist. lxxiii. ad Jubaian.] Jerome. Ad eos qui longe in minoribus urbibus per presbyteros et diaconos baptizati sunt, episcopus ad invocationem Sancti Spiritus manum impo-siturus excurrat. Adv. Luciferian. [Cap. iv. In Ed. Par. 1706. torn. iv. col. 295.] "On leaving the font we are anointed with the consecrated unction; after which comes imposition of hands.— Those who are baptized in the church are brought to the rulers of the church, that by our prayers and the imposition of our hands, they may obtain the Holy Ghost.—To those who are baptized at a distance from the mother-church, and in the smaller towns by presbyters and deacons, the bishop pays a visit to lay his hands on them with invocation of the Holy Ghost."

In admission of reduced heretics. Leo, Quod si ab haereticis baptizatum quempiam fuisse con-stiterit, erga hunc nullatenus sacramentum regenerationis iteretur; sed hoc tantum, quod ibi defuit

larly in the Lord's supper, (as the title of the canon, De Precibus ad Altare 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 purpose 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 supper, 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 the preces quce probata fueri?it, " 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 composite, nisi probata? fuerint in concilio, non dicantur," " that written prayers and supplications, except allowed of in council, shall not be used." It is provided that the service to be used, be first approved in the usual synod, says a learned advocate for such liturgies, upon this canon. Then

2. What is meant by (quaicunque, what prayers soever shall be

conferatur, ut per episcopalem manus impositionem virtutem Sancti Spiritus consequatur, "But if he be assured that any one has been baptized by heretics, in such 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 virtue of the Holy Ghost." Ep. xxxv. cap. ii. Ep. lxxvii. cap. vii. Movn xph^Oai rij 5u'< \tipwv iiriOecrew? evx<i " Prayer offered with imposition of hands is alone to be used." Dionys. in Euseb. lib. vii. cap. [ii.]

In visitation of the sick. Si forte ab a?grotantibus ob hoc peteretur, ut pro iis in prassenti 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. Lestrange applies that of Clem. Alexand. Paedagog. lib. iii. [cap. xi. p. 24S. B. Ed. Lutet.] Tt'n irpeaftvTepos ewi6>]t)iaet x il P a '< rlva eiiKofijaei; ov rifv yuvaixa rijv KeKoir/xii/ueniv, i\\a tcW iiWorpiav rptxas, " Upon whom will the presbyter lay hands ! Whom will he bless ? Not the adorned wife, but the hairs of a strange woman."

In ordination, which needs no proof. Sed vid. Cone. Carth. iv. Can. ii. iii. iv.

In exorcising the possessed. Cone. Carth. iv. [Can. xc] Omni die exorcistje energumenis manus imponant, " Let the exorcists lay hands daily on the energumens." Vid. Can. vir^

In baptizing. Clem. Const, lib. vii. cap. xliv. Vid. Vicec. De Bapt. pp. 614, 620. Hence baptism is called, impositio manus, p. 8, in abrenunciando sub antistitis maim, " Imposition of hands—in renunciation under the hands of the bishop." Tertullian De Corona Mil. cap. iii. post con-fessionem fidei. Dionys. Areop. Eccles. Hierar. cap. ii. [p. 78. D. Ed. Lutet. 1615.] in Vicec. p. 325.

Hence Melitius is, by the Nicene council, forbidden the exercise of his function, in these terms : MijOEjui'av ifoiKTtav ?X e 'i f-h re nf>oxet(ii£eaOat M'/t£ x e 'P°^^~^ v ' 4"7\.ov oe to ovofxa T>h' ri/iij? KeKTtj-Oat, "He has no authority either to ordain, or to impose hands, but only to retain possession of the mere name of his office." Synodica Epist. Cone. Nic. in Theodoret, lib. i. cap. ix. [p. 21. A.]

« In Crab. Concil. torn. i. p. 482.

debated with the more prudent, may be said) in the last clause of the decree?

1. If we understand by it the supposed liturgy, it is added vainly, and no tolerable account can be given why. And besides, some prudent brethren were to be conferred with about these prayers, who were to approve them before they might be said. (This is clearly and unquestionably the design of qucecunque cum prudentioribus fuerint collate, dicantur, " all whatsoever which shall be communicated with the more discreet, may be used.") So that if hereby the African liturgy be understood, it was such a one, as was not yet allowed to be used, and possibly never might be. It was at the arbitrament 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 prescribed, 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 might never be used : for these fathers authorise any other (with a qucecunque) 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 precious altare dicendis, " 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 cum prudentioribus collatce, we have a prudentioribus tractatce, b

• I am the more satisfied with this evidence of the African councils, because Bellarmine hath nothing to oppose here, but what renders it more unquestionable. Chemnitius had alleged, Cod. Afric. can. 70, Cone. Milevit. [ii.] cap. xii. to prove, apud veteres ordinem celebrandi fuisse arbitra-rium, "that the order of celebrating the eucharist of old was arbitrary." Hinc colligitur, says Bellarmine, non fuisse antiquo tempore praescriptum certum canonem orationum, qui omnes obli-garet, sed permissum fuisse, ut quisque componeret preces, modoeae analogae essent fidei, " Hence we gather, that in ancient times, there was no fixed canon of prayer prescribed which bound all, but that it was allowed to every one to compose prayers provided they were according to the analogy of faith." De Miss. lib. ii. cap. xviii.

Chemnitius thus speaks, Non enim conceptis verbis praescripta fuit una quaedam certaforma—sed liberum fuit uti quacunque forma, modo analoga esset fidei, " One fixed form was not prescribed with words laid down, but men were at liberty to use any form provided it was agreeable to the faith." Examen pars ii. p. 358.

Bellarmine 4>swers, Canones conciliorum citatorum non loquuntur de canone missae; sed de collectis, quae semper fuerant multiplices et variae, "The canons of the councils cited, do not speak of the canon of the mass, but of collects, which were always manifold and various." Id. ibid. p. 817. Where he denies not, but that those African decrees show, that all other prayers, even in the eucharist, were then arbitrary; only the canon of the mass, says he, they speak not of. And no wonder, since the canon, which he is so tender of, was not in being till near two hundred years after these decrees were made. And there is not a syllable in them, for the excepting of any other, more than that. Vid. Albaspin. ante.

J Scholium ad nunc locum in Cod. Pal. TpaKrai<nia' a hott to Tea, efeTacn-ea hoKtfxaojia, " things which must be scrutinised, examined, tested." Glossse Basilii a Carolo Lubbeo CI. Viro editee,

"communicated with the more discreet;" a phrase of the same import, signifying the prayers handled by the more prudent, i. e. 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 tractates agrees best, both with the other constitutions of those African churches, and their practice also declared to us by Augustine. But if any notwithstanding will thereby understand the prayers composed by the more prudent, traetatus being a sermon in Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, Optatus, 6 [be it so;] and I will thence infer, [that] the more prudent had no more liberty in praying than in preaching. If I should yield this, it would be no great disadvantage. For, as they were not tied to use sermons composed by others, being much below those worthies, orationes alieno formare imjenio, " 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 vis [that] many homilies of Origen, e which he translated, were preached, delivered in the church by the author ex tempore. Ora-tiunculas has 26 in Jesum Nane ex tempore in ecclesia peroravit Adamantius senexf " These 26 shorter orations on Joshua, Origen delivered extemporaneously in the church in his old age." And Kufhnus speaks the same of Origen's homilies upon Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Eomans.

All that we have of Cyril's, bishop of Jerusalem, are extemporary discourses, as Vossius observes, from the inscription of them,' nonne cogitant catecheses axf^tadfla-as sive extemporales, ut inscriptio indicat? " 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 Nazianzen./

Chrysostom, while presbyter at Antioch, was advised by Flavianus the bishop, to use his extemporary facrdty in preaching, irpoTpineTai avTov avToaxeBias e^yrja-aadai ra Aa<3, " he advised him to preach to the

-rpaKTattrat' anonriaat, efeTaa-ai, TpaHTeveiv fup ol AaTeiyoi -rov vkoitov, to /3oi)Xeujia Kat to efeTaff|u« \iynvai, " to scrutinise; to examine. For by rpaKTevetv, the Latins express the ideas of scrutiny, deliberation, and investigation." Justell. Obs. in Cod. p. 8.

■ "07ra>9 to TTpa-fna <TKoTrnQri, Kat »i KvpwOh q 6wp0a>8ri, " That the matter may be examined, and either authorised or corrected." Cod. Afr. can. 50. 4 In Thornd. p. 176.

c Quae ab Origine, in auditorio ecclesiae ex tempore, non tarn explanationis, quam aadificationis intentione perorata sunt: sicut in homiliis, sive in oratiunculis in Genesin, et in Exodum, &c. " 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 orations on Genesis and Exodus," &c. Ruff. Perorat. in Ep. ad Rom. p. P34.

In the editions of Johannes Grodicius, the title is, Catecheses Extemporaneae ad Illuminatos 18. et Mystagogicae 5. " Eighteen Extemporaneous Catechetical Discourses to the Baptized; together with rive Mystagogical Orations. Vid. Riv. Crit. torn. iv. p. 258.

* Prolus. in Horn. Orig. in Jes. Nau. This prologue is ascribed to Rurrinus. Ed.

« De Symb. p .38 / In Ps. cxiv.

people extempore," as one of the writers of his life relates it. And he

complied with Flavianus herein, ttcivtcs 8ea.aap.evoi avrov — avTocrx^icos

SixiXovvra avToTs, " they all saw him preaching to them ex tempore."' 1

And such were many of his sermons at Constantinople, when he was bishop there ; particularly those upon the epistles b to the Ephesians, and Philippians; as Sir Henry Savill, (who deserves so well of him, and of the world for him) conceives ; as also those upon both the epistles to Timothy, and that to Philemon ; and more than these he intimates to have been avroo-xe^iadevres, "extempore."

Atticus, presbyter at Constantinople in Chrysostom's time, and afterwards bishop there, though far short of his predecessor's accomplishments, yet, by industry and practice, as Socrates tells us, he attained the faculty of delivering himself ex tempore to his auditory ; o-vv 777 (pi\o-Trovla K.a\ ivappr)<r'iav KTrjaupevos e'£ airoo-^eSiou, <al 7^tvr)yvpiK(orepav tt]v di8a-

o-KaXiav eVoietro, c " 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 divers 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 tells us, Extemporalis d est dictatio, ""it Avas dictated ex tempore" and faster than it could be well taken in short-hand. And his interpretation (as he calls it) of the three books of Solomon, Proverbs, Canticles, and Eccle-siastes, was e 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 dictione, " extemporary delivery," as Erasmus^ observes, in whose judgment, he nowhere ap-

• Georg. Alexand. Vita Chrysost. p. 179, cap. 17.

4 Homiliae in Epistolas ad Ephesios, Philip, utramque ad Timotheum et Philemonem, oiu to ainoaxiotov ttit Xefew?, Constantinopolitanis accensendae. Notae in Chrysost. Horn. viii. p. 227. Commentarii certe mediocres sunt et ut plurimum, quales illi in epistolam ad Ephesios, concisi, et alTooxe.biatiivTts (ut puto.) Id. ibid. p. 409. "The Homilies on the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and those to both Timothy and Philemon, are to be classed, on account of the want of premeditation in their style, amongst the Constantiuopolitan ones.—The Commentaries are certainly of a middle rank, and like those on the Epistle to the Ephesians as condensed as possible, and as I think extemporaneous."

* Hist. Eccles. lib. vii. cap. ii. p. 733.

rf Extemporalis est dictatio, ettanta ad lumen lucernulae facilitate profusa, ut notariorummanus lingua prascurreret, et signa ac furta verborum, volubilitas sermonum obrueret, " It was dictated extempore, and poured forth by candle-light with such ease, that the tongue outstripped the hands of the notaries, and the torrent of sentences marred the signs and snatches of words." Ep. xlvii. [Tom. iv. col. 731. Ed. Paris. 1706'.]

' Tridui opus nominivestro consecravi, interpretationem videlicet trium Solomonis voluminum, " I have dedicated to thy name a three days' work, to wit, an interpretation of the three books of Solomon." Id. Preef. in Prov.

/ Pleruniqui per r.otarios ex ore loquentis excepta sunt, eujusmodi fere sunt enarrationes Scrip-turarum ad populum, quas ipse tractatus appellat, aut conflictationes cum haereticis, quae olim publicatas apud plebem fieri consueverant. Nee alibi mihi videtur admirabilior. Quibus mediocre rontigit ingenium, si lucubrandi cura adhibeatur,excudunt interdum aliquid non contemnendum.

A DISCOURSE CONCERNING LITURGIES. "287

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, ex 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 discourse, as he never designed before he had begun the sermon. And that seems another, which is intituled, Concio super gestis cum Emerito Donatista, being occasioned by an acclamation of the people at the assembly. 4

And those, who having much more work as pastors, did preach ordinarily every day, and some days twice ; yea sometimes twice in a forenoon, and thrice in one day ; (as bishops in those and former times did ;) it cannot be thought, but many of their sermons were born 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 assistance, that he might thereby be enabled for the expressions, la be tov Uvevparos, trapeara pol to TLvevpa., kcu 8i86tg> \6yov, oaov kcu (3ov\op.ai el be p.rj be toctovtov, dXX' oaos ye rat Kaipa> crvpp.erpos. " 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;"' 1 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, ovras rjpeh ku\ voeiv

Caeterum in extemporali dictione, tantam adesse mentis perspicaciam, tantam memorise preesen-tiam, tarn paratam orationis copiam, non sine perpetua quadam jucunditate, quis non movetur? Quis hoc hodie praestare queat, vel ex istis qui studium omne collocarunt in paranda dictionis facilitate? " They were for the most part taken by the notaries from the lips of the speaker; of which sort are those expositions of Scripture to the people, which he himself denominated trac-taius, 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 parts 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 afforded 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 uniform sweetness ? Who is able to surpass him in our day, even among those who have devoted their whole attention to acquiring the gift of public speaking?" Erasm. Epist. ad Arch. Tolet. prasfixa operibus Augustini.

" Cum prnpositae quaestionis latebras pertractarem, in alium sermonis discursum porrexi, atque ita non conclusa vel explicata quasstione, disputationem magis terminavi adversum Manichaeorum errorem, unde nihil dicere decreveram, disputans, quam de iis qua; asserere proposueram, " As I discussed the obscurer points of the question before me, I launched out into a digression foreign to my discourse, and so without settling or unravelling that question, concluded my disputation with an invective against the error of the Manichees, (of which matter I had not intended to say anything,) rather than with those subjects on which I had proposed to myself to speak." Vit. August, cap. xv.

(cat \eyeiv ip.rrvev6p.eda Trapa rov Hvevparos; " accordingly Ave are inspired, both to meditate and speak by the Spirit.""

Thus they did preach, and thus they might pray. Nazianzen having given an account how his father prayed, in celebrating the eucharist, adds, /coi Tavra Traprjv aura Trapa rov ayiov Ylvevparos, " These things were brought to his mind by the Holy Ghost."

Answerably Ambrose to Forentianus. e Docet autem Spiritus Christi (sicut et Christus) orare discipulos suos; quis autem post Christum doce-ret, nisi Spiritus ejus, quern ipse misit ut doceret et dirigeret orationes nostras ? Oramus enim Spiritu, oramus et mente. Ut bene possit mens orare, prwcedit Spiritus, et deducit earn in viam rectam, ne obrepant carnalia, ne minora ac etiam majora viribus. Novit enim bonus medicus quce esca cui apta sit infirmitati, et cui tempori ad perfectum valetudinis; interdum opportunitas escw sanitatem reddit, quod si importune aliquis accipiet, aut non convenienter, implimtur periculo. Ergo quia nos nes-cimus quid oremus, et quomodo oporteat, postulat pro nobis Spiritus Sanctus, " The Spirit of Christ (as Christ also) teaches his disciples how 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 even 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 coidd help them to expressions without a book, and did form their words in prayer, as Augustine tells us, Quwlibet alia (quam oramus Dominica) verba dicamus, quce affectus orantis, vel procedendo format ut clareat, vel consequendo attendit ut crescat, d "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. * Orat. xix. p 305.

Epist. xxiii. lib. iv <* Epist. cxxi. Ad Probam, cap. xii.

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, ovt<os, ras evxas twv ttmttZov yiveadai rpeh ; " the prayers of the faithful are three;" the first of these silently, plav pev ttjv 7rpcoT7/i/, dia <rtco7r^j; the other two pronounced, ttjv 8e SevTtpav, koi rpiTrjv 8ia irpo<r(pa>vr)(T€<>>s. Of which two, one must be the prayer for all sorts in general, and the church in particular, called o-vuanTT] kci6o\ikt), 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 rnysterio prceteriri non potest," " the prescribed part which may not be omitted in the mystery of the sacraments."

Now for the first of these three, viz., that 8ia <na>nfjs, 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 Avere 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 c 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 quando offerintus sacrificia Deo, soleamus pro te dieere, Domine pvvesta Johanni nt recte credat, " that in prayer, when we offer to God the sacrifices, we are 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.ii. Advers. Parmenianum, [p. 45, Ed. Paris.1679.1 J Cyril in Junius Not. ad Clem. Ep.p.SI. <■■ "Oron laiovant, Aen0£pei it ii-rc? Koivri, " When thou hearest the words, Let us all pray together." Chrys. in Eph. Horn. iii. p. 778. * Horn. xxiv. in 1 Cor. p. 399. ' In Oper. Hieronym. Ep. lx. p. 466. [In Op. Epiphan. p 213. torn. ii. Ed. Col. lGSL'.l / Wonders.

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 those that celebrated ? Who can think, that the bishop of Jerusalem would have brought such a charge against Epiphanius, as would have appeared false to the world at first sight, and might have been convicted of impudent slander, by the known unalterable 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 evident 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 Avill yet further appear, b}' Epiphanius's answer. Noli nos in 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 practice 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 best way, to stop the mouth of his accuser. He denies not, but they ordered their prayers according 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 the only prayer in the book, that can pretend to any footsteps 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 prozsta I., 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 demonstrate the charge was false ; which yet the bishop of Cyprus, supposed to be just in the same circumstances, did not offer at ?

But let us proceed with his answer; Quando autem complemus orationem secundum ritum mysteriorum, et pro omnibus, et pro te quoqae dicimus, Custodi ilium qui prcedicat veritatcm. Vel certe ita, Tn prcesta Domine, et custodi, ut ille verbum prcedicet veritatis; sicut occasio sermonis se tulerit, et habuerit oratio 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, vnep ru>v lepea>v Kal rcov dp^ovrau, imep tov dp^iepeas kcu rov ($a(ri\e(os. a " 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,* 2wd£et? S<= emnXovpevai TaxOeicrai e'laiv dirb rav aTroaroXcov, rerpdSi, Kai Trpocraftfidrcp, kcl\ Kvpiaicfi, 0 " Meetings for the celebration of the mysteries have been ordained from the times of the apostles on Wednesdays and Fridays, and the Lord's-day."

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 complains that in his time, the oblations d 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,* Publice diaconus in ecclesiis recitet offerentium nomina, Tantum offert ilia; Tantum ille pollici-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 plausum populi, torquente eos consci-entia, " they delight in the applause of the people, whilst their conscience torments them." The like complaint he makes elsewhere/ Nimc

• Clem. Const, lib. ii. cap. li. vid. Lestr. p. 190. * Expos. Fidei, [No.xxii.] p. 110. « Vid. Albasp.

• As M[r.] Th[orndike] observes, it is called an oblation (viz. the elements, or the offerings out of which they were chosen) according to the style of the most ancient church writers; not as consecrated, but as presented and offered (whether by the people, as the custom was to him that ministered, or by him that ministered to God) to be consecrated. Serv. p. 379.

• In Ezek. lib. vi. cap. xviii. [Tom. iii. col. 822, Ed. Paris. 1706.] / In Jer. cap. xi. [Tom. iii. col. 584. Ed. Paris. 1706.

publice recitantur offerentium nomijia, et redemptio peccatorum mutatur in laudem, " The names of the offerers are proclaimed in public, and redemption is published for the purpose of magnifying sinful men." Now who can believe, that a practice, worthy of so sharp a rebuke, was publicly prescribed ; or, if it had been prescribed for common use, would have been so severely censured ? And therefore, what can be thought, but that those who officiated were left to their liberty, to use what expressions they thought fit ? If there had been a rule or prescription, limiting them to anything better, he would haA^e taken notice of it; and of this usage, as a transgression of the established order.

Pertinent to which is this passage of Augustine ; a Vir tribunitius Hesperius qui apud nos est, habet in territorio Fussulensi fundum Zabedi appellation, ubi cum (afflictione animalinrn et servorum suorum) domum suam spirituum malignorum vim noxiam perpeti comperisset, rogavit nostros (me absente) presbyteros, ut aliquis eoram illo pergeret, cujus ora-tionibus cederent. Perrexit wins, obtulit ibi sacrificium corporis Christi, orans, quantum potuit, ut cessaret ilia vexatio; Deo protinus miserante cessavit. 5 " A man of tribunitial dignity, Hesperus by name, who dwelt amongst us, has a farm called Zabedi, in the territory of Fussala, Avhither, on finding that his house suffered much from the malignant power of evil spirits to the damage of his cattle and slaves, he, in my absence, requested of our presbyters, that one of them at whose prayers they might be banished should go. One of them went, and offered the sacrifice of the body of Christ, praying, as well as he was able, that the infliction might cease. Forthwith through Divine mercy it did cease."

These passages of Chrysostom refer to the same prayer, viz., 'Enl rS>v

Qeicnv pvarqpiav — TrpoacpepovTes inrep avrav ei^ay, e " Offering prayers on their behalf in the Divine mysteries." And elsewhere, "Eo-ttjkcv 6 Upevs tov Qeov ttjv TTavraiv ev\h v ava(pepav, " The priest of God stands offering the prayer for all mankind," and after, 'Ek(7vos p-ev rpepav vnep crov ras evxus dva<pepei, d " He with trembling offers prayers on thy behalf."

Those who had liberty, when they were offering supplications and praises, in the celebration of the eucharist, to pray as occasion was offered, and to put up such petitions as they thought fit, upon particular emergencies, were not confined to set forms in that administration.

Cyprian's occasional praises and prayers, in sacrijiciis, "in the time of sacrifice," upon Lucius's return from banishment [are observable]; Hie quoque in sacrijiciis atque orationibus nostris, non cessantes, Deo Patri, et Christo filio ejus Domino nostro, gratias agere, et orare pariter et

August. De Civit. Dei, lib. xxii. cap. viii. b Blond, p. 2:-fi. Vid. in An£. torn. ii. p. 686.

C'lnys. in 1 Cor. Horn. >:li. p. 524. u Chrys. in llebr. Horn. XV. p. 515.

petere, ut qui perfectus est atque proficiens, custodiat et perficiat in vobis confessionis vestrce gloriosam coronam, qui et ad hoc vos fortasse revocavit, ne gloria esset occulta, si foris essent confessionis vestrce consummata mar-tyria, a " 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 abroad.

Add to this, what may be observed in Ambrose.* He, whilst he was celebrating, about [the year] 387, c (rnissam facere ca>pi) and employed, as I suppose, in this prayer d (dum offero) understanding what the Arians were doing, and what had befallen Castulus, orders the prayer suitably to that occasion; Orare in ipsa oblatione Deum cwpi, ut subveniret, "I began to beseech of God that he woidd succour us." The whole passage runs thus, Sequente die, (erat autem Dominica,) post lectiones atque tracta-tum, dimissis catechumenis, symbolum aliqidbus competentibus in baptisteriis Iradebam basilicis, illic nunciatum est mihi comperto, quod ad Povtianam basilicam de palatio decanos misissent (Ariani) utvela suspenderent, populi partem eo pergere. Ego tamen mansi in mnnere; missam facere co?pi. Dum offero, raptum a populo cognovi Castulum quendam, quern presbyte-rum dicebant Ariani, orare in ipsa oblatione Deum cocpi, 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. W'hilst I was offering, 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 capi, 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

« Cypr. Epist. lib. iii. Ep. i. p. 53. * Epist. [xxxiii.] Ad Marcellinam Sororem.

c Spond. p. 2.

* '• The style of this prayer, in divers liturgies, runs in the terms we offer." Thornd. p. 380.

used by Cyprian, in sacrificiis, "in these administrations."" Nor can this be understood of some general expression constantly used, comprising Lucius with others; for the occasion was particular, and such as was not incident every day. And besides, as it had been a vanity, to tell him of that which he knew before, being well acquainted with the su]:>posed 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 sanctifying the elements, (called the prayer for consecration) which consisted much of thanksgiving ; and from thence this sacrament, as is thought, came to be called the eucharist. It is of this, that Justin Martyr 6 gives an account, in the words alleged by others ; 6 Trpoearas ct^ac Spoias ko.1 tv^apia-TLas oar) Swa/xts avrco dvciTrefx7rei; " the president, in like manner, as 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 c ) to compose, or was able to conceive a prayer himself.

Many several ways are taken to evade this ; no way of one, it seems, satisfying another amongst themselves ; by which we may guess, what satisfaction they are like to give to others.

One rf tells us, it is a compliment of civility, as when we say, Ago gratias, non quas debeo, seel qaas possum; or, quantas possum maximas, " I give thanks not such as I might, but such as I can, or the best I 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 : ye\<os ravra xai \rjpos, " ridiculous this and trifling."

Another 6 brings an instance, where ocrrj Svvapis, is thought to be applied to a form ; this is in Gregory Nazianzen. / &epe oar; fivvapis to eiriviKiov a8a>pev, eKeivr/v co§iji>, rjv irore rjcrav 6 Icrparfk eVt rols AlyvnTiois Trj ipvOpoi KaraXrjcpde'io'iv, " Come let us, as we are able, sing a song of triumph, the song which Israel once sung, upon the overthrow of the Egyptians in the Red Sea." But here, by cWi/iji/ w8i)u, the song which Israel sung, we need no more understand the very same words of that song, than in Rev. 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 Mosem et Maximum, p. 41. ' [Apol. ii. p. 98. £. Ed. Colon. 168fi.]

c Ol tote /iay>)Tui -ttav vvv didaaKuXwv KpeiTTouc iia-av, "The scholars of that day were better than the teachers of our own." Clnysost. in Eph. Horn. vi. p. 792.

d Anonym, p. 18. Use of daily public prayers. ' Lestr. Liturg. cap. vii. p. 218.

/ [InvtTliv. cont. Julian, i. p. 54, torn. i. Ed. Paiis. 1630.]

the beast, are said as expressly to sing, (adovo-tv rfjv ndr/v Mova-ecos rov BovXov rov Qeov, "they sing the song of Moses the servant of God:") and yet, that which they sing, consists quite of other words, as appears, ver. 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 warrantably, 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 after sermon.) And so he grants (if I understand him) that they used no public liturgy, in celebrating or consecrating 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. a And Sfioicos, 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 Sa-q Swapis, according to their ability, without any public, any prescribed 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 /cara 8vvafj.iv and 6crq bvvafiis. 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 00-17 dCva/iis by Kara, bvvapiv. His words are, on the phrase oa-ov o-devos, 2uXXa/3ov

ocrq bvvafjus' ckkXh/o) robe, 00-77 fioi lo~xvs' eXXet7rTi/ca>s 8e tcivtci Xeyerat, ra evriKrj, 2uXXa/3o£i Kara rrjv 8vvafiiv 00-77 o~ol icrriv. u Lay hold 00-77 8vvafiis. I reject this 00-77 /j.o\ laxvs- The phrase is elliptical: the full form would be, Lay hold according to the amount of ability which thou hast." So that, according to him, 00-77 8vvafj.is is a defective phrase, which, when it is represented entire, must be expressed by Kara 8vvafiiv. Let me add that, in Kara Siivafiiv, likewise 00-77 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 contributes not to it, we do it not Kara bvvaynv.

• Anonym, p. 16. O

&96 A DISCOURSE CONCERNING LITURGIES.

Answerably, Chrysostom uses Kara 8vvap.iv and ocrov ei^e 8vvapeo>s, as phrases equivalent." And elsewhere in these words, Mddapev, d8e\<pol,

tt)v KfKpvppevrjv crocpiav £v rots Xoyois tov TJvevparos, 8iepevva>pevoi Kara. 8vvap.iv fjperepav, oix oar) eariv, dXXd ocrov rjplv e'cpiKrov, " Let US learn, brethren, the wisdom hidden* in the words of the Spirit, exploring it according to our ability not as much of it as there is, but as much as is attainable by us." What he had expressed by Kara 8vvapt,v, he explains by oo-ov fiplv ecpiKTov. And so they differ, no more than the Latin phrases, pro viribus, and pro facilitate; by which Camerarius and Donnseus render Kara. 8vvapiv, and quantum possum or quantum in me est, by which others render co-77 Svvapis.

But Maimonides may make the difference evident : let us see how. He tells us of one proceeding in discourses, tending to the humiliation of the people, according to his ability, until he humble their hearts, and they return perfectly.

It is supposed, that if Justin Martyr had been to express this, he would have used the phrase Kara 8vvapiv, not 00-77 8vvapis. Well, but Justin Martyr, in this very Apology , c 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 00-77 8vvapts, not Kara. 8vvapiv. His words are, Ka\ 8lo. \6yov ovv Ka\ axyparos rov <f>aivo-pevov oarj 8vvapis irporpe^rapevoi vpas dvevdvvoi o't8apev Xonrov ovres, mv vpds dirio-Teire, " 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 00-77 8vvapis, is no other than our author's koto. 8vvapiv ; and the 7rpoeo-Tcos, " 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 00-77 8vvapts irpoTpe^ao-dai ; by which we may understand, if we will admit him to explain himself, what he means by et^a? 00-77 8vvapis dvaTreprreiv, and how well they represent his meaning, who will have him to intend hereby, neither less nor more than earnestness in praying.

Hereby I suppose it clear enough, notwithstanding all endeavours to

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 after, 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 rrjs eVtKA^o-ecuy prjpara

en\ rfj dva8et£ei rov aprov rrjs fv^apiarias, Kai tov noTTjpiov tt)s evkoyias, tis rav ayiav eyypdcpcos eplv KaraXekonrev ; a thus rendered by Erasmus, Invocationis verba, cum conficitur panis eucharistice, et poculum bene-dictionis, quis sanctorum in scripto nobis reliquit ? " Which of the holy men have left us in writing the words of the prayer, at the consecration of the eucharistical bread, and the cup of blessing?" 6 By this it is evident, they were so far from having any prescribed forms in consecrating the eucharist, as c they had not so much as the words of any such form in writing, to his time, who lived, according to Petavius, till 379.

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, modern or ancient, (or pretended to be ancient,) therefore 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 concerned 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 a-epvbv tcov pvo-njplcdj/, the " reverence due to these mysteries" hereby secured ; and another course the way to render them despicable, €VKaTa<ppovr)Ta ; as is evident by his discourse, in the place alleged ;

Ka\u>s eKelvoi 8e8i8aypevoi twv pvarrjpiwv rd (repva (Tiomrj 8iacra>£e(T0ai iv tu> KfKpvpp(va> Kai d<p8tyKTa> to crepvov rois pvarrjpiois i(pv\acr(TOV, u These

having been well taught to preserve by silence the reverence due to

« [De Spir. Sane. cap. xxvii.]

4 Bishop Jewel's Apology, p. 60. " Basil besought God, that he might celebrate with prayers of his own making." c that.

u 2

the mysteries, maintained in secrecy and dumbness, veneration for the sacraments."

Their prayers at the encharist were long ordinarily : so in Justin Martyr's time, ev)(aptaTiav vnep tov KaTTj^icoadai. tovtoov Trap' avrov eni noXii 7rot€irai,° " He offers at great length the eucharistic prayer for those things which he deems desirable." Not like those of the monks in Egypt. Paul said three hundred a day, using ^(plSas, "pebbles," for beads. 6 So in Chrysostom, "Eo-Tt)ne yap 6 Upevs ov nvp Karafpepav, dWa to Tlptvpa to ayiou, kol ttjv iKeTTjpiau eVi ttoXv irofiTai — iva tj x^P ls «rwr e-o-ovo-a Tfi 6vaia, c " The priest of God stands to bring down not fire, but the Holy Ghost, and offers at great length supplications for grace to descend on the sacrifice." And elsewhere he says, it required a greater confidence than Moses and Helias had, to pray in this ministration, «y» pep yap liceTrfpiav apKelv rjyovpai, K.T.\. d And why such boldness was needful, if they had the prayer in a book before them, I apprehend not. However, those that were usually large e in this prayer, were sometimes brief, when there was occasion; and performed it SXiyois prjpao-i, "in a few sentences ;" which is a clear evidence they were not tied to a set form, but were left to use their discretion ; and ordered their prayer over the elements, so as to be briefer or more enlarged therein, according as they were disposed, and as occasion required.

Marcion imitated the Christians herein, Horfipia ofoa> Keicpappeva irpo-crnoiovpevos ev^apiaTtlv, na\ eVt7rX tov €KT€iva>v tov \6yov ttjs tTriKXrjaecos/ &C " He aped the benediction of the cups containing mingled wine, and the lengthened invocatory prayer."

This prayer, of old, consisted much of thanksgiving. Chrysostom gives an account of some particulars, for which they gave thanks. And 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, adds, cum his et ceteris hujusmodi gratiarum actionibus accedimus^ " With these and other acts of thanksgiving of the same kind we draw near," implying, they were not confined to those specified, but enlarged themselves in such like particulars according to discretion. But I insist not on this, the former evidence is sufficient.

' Apol. ii. p. 162. [Ed. Col. 1686, p. 97, D.] 4 Soz. p. 397. Moysis 1. p. 396.

c De Sacerd. Orat. iii. p. 16. d [Orat. vi. p. 46.] ' copious.

/ Irenaeus, lib. i. cap. ix. In Epipha. lib. i. torn. iii. Haer. xxxiv.

8 Homil. xxiv. in 1 ad Corinth. 'Yjrep ioiItov, Kai iwv toiovtm aTravTwi/ evxapiaTOWTes o'inio npoai/iev, " With these and other acts of thanksgiving of the same kind we draw near." p. 396. Euxapwrovines on t»)9 irXdvris u7r//\\afe to tujv u.v0punrwv -yevor, oti juaKpay ovres 677^9 knoitjaev, on eAirtda iu/ ex 0|/TaP Ka * u-Oeoii? kv rtZ koc^lw adt\<t>ovs £avTov KaTetrKei'ucre Kai (Twyn\npoi>6fjiOvs t " We give thanks that he has delivered the human race from errors; that when we were afar off, he brought us nigh; that when we were without hope and without God in the world, he made us brethren and fellow-heirs with himself."

Gregory, bishop of Nazianzen, father of Gregory, called the Divine, 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, 0 and there ras Trapeiptvas x f W as " J ev X*l v 0-xrjpario-as o-vvreXel Trpodvpios, jj 7rpore\e! rov Xaov ra pvarqpia, prjpao~i pep oXiyois kciI ocrois ecrdevev, §iavoia 8e cos epoi BoKel Kai Xiav reXecordrr] — Ka\ ravra rrdprfv avrco napa rov dyiov Uvevparos, avrco pev yivcocrKopeva, rois irapovcriv 8e ot>x opcopeva. Eira hre'nrcov ra ttjs evxapicrrias pr/para ovrcos cos avvrjOes Kai rov Xaov KarevXoyrj-

cras; 6 "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, ko.1 ravra ndp-qv avrco, &c. " And this he had from the Holy Ghost, perceived by him, but not discerned by those that were present;" where, if ravra refer to prjpao-i, 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 strength 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 eucharistical 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, c which were then, it seems, not determined, but under consultation and inquiry ; so, cap. viii. Sane quia de hoc, sicuti de cceteris consulere voluit dilectio tua, " Since touching this, as also other matters you desire advice."

Particularly, it was inquired, what place in the eucharistical office

<• Narrat Nazianzenus, patrem suum sacerdotem ardentissima et diutuma febri exhaustum, ab ancilla aliquando synaxis tempore deductum manu in ccetum ecclesiasticum, in quo pro more CEenam, sed paucissimis et quibus turn per morbum potuit, verbis consecratam, aliis et distribuerit, et ex ea participant ipse quoque. Reversum vero ad lectum, ciboque parumper ac somno refectum melius statim habuisse, &c. " Nazianzen relates, that his father being wearied out with a burning and daily fever, was led by the hand of a maid-servant, at the time of communion, into the church-assembly, in which as usual he distributed to the rest, and himself partook of the supper, consecrated, however, with words few in number, and such as he could command considering his sickness. When he returned to bed, and had partaken of a little food, and been refreshed by sleep, he immediately began to mend." Cent. Magdeb. iv. p. 421.

4 Naz. Orat. in Laudem Patris Gregor. p. 305. Afterwards he adds, " uttering the words of thanksgiving, as was usual, and blessing the people." « particulars.

should be assigned to the osculnm pads, " the kiss of peace ;" whether ante, or post confecta mysteria, before or after the consecration of the elements. Which Innocent satisfies, not by wondering that he took no notice of the prescribed order, though (since he was a bishop in his precinct, and calls Decentius' clergy clericos ?iostros, a "our clergy,") he might justly have wondered at it, if there had been any such prescript; but by reason, 6 Pads osmium dandum est post confecta mysteria, ut constat populum ad omnia, quo? in mysteriis aguntur, atque in ecclesia celebrantur, prmbidsse consensum, ac finita esse pads concludentis signaculo demonstrantur, "The kiss of peace should be given after the consecration of the mysteries, that it may be manifest that the people have given their assent to all the acts in the mysteries, and to all the rites celebrated in the church, which are shown to be ended by the farewell emblem of peace."

It was also matter of consultation and inquiry, whether the names of the offerers should be recited before or after prayer, made over the oblation. 0 Whereby it appears [that] there was not then, so much as any common authorised direction for the order and method of their eucharistical administration ; much less any prescribed forms or modes ; for if they had not so much as a directory, how far were they from such a liturgy as is now contended for ! If Decentius had known any such established order, his inquiry had been needless, and so had Innocent's determination been. He might have referred him to the prescribed order, as our prelates would have done in the like case ; and said to him, as he does to two other bishops,** concerning the canons of the church, Ecclesiasticorum canonum norma nidli esse debet incognita sacerdoti, quia nesciri lime a pon-tifice satis est indecorum; maxime qida a laicis religiosis viris et sciatur, 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:" yea, and judged him unworthy 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 was superfluous ; not because it was already determined, but because his own prudence might discern, what was most convenient to be done in the case ; quod superfluum sit, et ipse per tuam prudentiam recognoscis, " Seeing 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-cidars, which, if determined, amount to no more than the directive part, or rubric of a liturgy, Decentius may instruct, and give some order to

« cap. viii. ' cap. i. c cap. ii. * Ep. v. in Crab. 4to.

others, which they may imitate, not strictly conform to ; Erit autem Domini potentia, id procurare, ut et tuam ecclesiam, et clericos nostros, qui sub tuo pontificio divinis famidantur officiis, bene instituas, et aliis formam tribuas, quam debeant imitari, a " 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 settled 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] 3. This [was] designed for imitation, not for strict conformity.

And what liberty there was in those times, and how far they were from uniformity, appears by the beginning of that epistle. Si instituta eccle-siastica, ut sunt a beatis apostolis tradita, integra vellent servare Domini sace7'dotes, nulla adversitas, nulla varietas, in ipsis ordinibus et consecratio-nibus haberetur. Sed dum unusquisque, non quod traditum est, sed quod sibi visum fuevit, hoc astimat esse tenendum; inde diversa in diversis locis vel ecclesiis aut teneri aut celebrari videntur, h " If the priests of the Lord would preserve intact the ecclesiastical institutes as they were handed down by the blessed apostles, there wordd be no diversity, no variety, in ordering worship and consecrating the mysteries. But while every 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, in ordinibus et consecrationi-bus, which are his words immediately before, and means (if I understand him) "both in ordering their worship, and consecrating the mysteries."

It seems, this pleased not Innocent: the character given him by Erasmus makes that no wonder ; Swvus potius, quam eruditus, et ad dam-nandum potius, quam docendum instructor, 0 " 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 est, which he opposes ; d if he mean by it any apostolical tradition, he alleges it with the same fidelity, as he mentions ancient tradition for the Roman supremacy to the African fathers ; e and as his next successors, Zosimus, Boniface, Caslestine, alleged a canon of Nice to a council at Carthage, for the same purpose.

Objection. You take no notice of traditum est, which was something that ought to have been observed, and would have left no such liberty.

« [cap. viii.] » In Crab. torn. i. p. 452. • Not. in Epist. xcvi. in ii. torn. August.

* places in contrast. « Epist. xci.

Answer. Whatever be meant by his traditum est, it was no authoritative general order, enjoining all to use the 6ame words in prayer ; for if there had been any such thing, it would not have been universally disregarded.

If there had been anything delivered, against such freedom in celebrating, by ancient or modern authors, worthy of observance ; it would have been taken notice of, by some of those who used this liberty, as well as by Innocent; who had many contemporaries not inferior to himself : else that age was very unhappy ; since nothing of eminency appeared in him, (nor in the Eoman bishops generally of those times) but his great place, if that impartial critic" mistake him not, who says, et dictionem, et ingenium, et eruditionem tali dignam prcesule desiderare cogimur, " we are compelled to deny him the address, and genius, and learning, meet for such a bishop."

Yet he, ambitious to have all dance after the Roman pipe, though as yet it gave herein no certain sound, (and indeed their stickling about this and the supremacy, was to little purpose for one age or two) makes that matter of complaint, which was far from being so with his betters, both then and in better times.* But however he resented it; he hath left us evidence, that in his days, as elsewhere, so in Italy, every one held his own way, even in consecrationibusf and consecrated as he thought fit. And in fine, there is reason to think, this bishop was not so much offended, because they did not use the same words in cele-

« Erasmus.

» Qua in parte nemini verecundia et modestia nostra praejudicat, quo minus unusquisque, quod voluerit, sentiat, et quod senserit, faciat.—Ostendi quid nos, quantum in nobis est, sentiamus: nemini praescribentes, quo minus statuat, quod putat unusquisque propositus, actus 8ui rationem Domino redditurus, " In which respect our modesty and moderation judges no man, so that everyone may think as he pleases, and act as he thinks. 1 have shown what opinion we according to our ability have formed, giving rules to none, so that every bishop may establish what he deems right, as having to render an account of his acts to the Lord." Cypr. ad Magn. Ep. vii. lib. iv. Hsc tibi breviter—rescripsimus, nemini praescribentes aut prejudicantes, quo minus unusquisque episcorum quod putaverit faciat, habens arbitrii sui liberam facultatem, " We have written briefly by way of reply, these things, laying down rules for, and judging no man, so that every one of the bishops may do as he thinks right, having the free exercise of his own judgment." Ep. ad Jubaian. p. 227.

Augustine, without expressing any offence, says the varieties were more than could be well known. August. Retract, lib. ii. cap. xx.

Libri duo, quorum est titulus, Ad inquisitiones Januarii, multa de sacramentis continent disputata, sive quae universaliter, sive quae particulariter, i. e. non peraeque in omnibus locis servat ecclesia, nee tamen commemorari omnia potuerant, " Two books whose title is, 'Answers to the Inquiries of Januarius,' contain much disputation concerning the sacred rites which the church observes, either universally or in particular regions, i. e. not in all places alike, and yet it was impossible to notice them all."

c Si instituta ecclesiastica, ut sunt a beatis apostolis tradita integra vellent servare Domini sacer-dotes, nulla adversitas, nulla varietas, in ipsis ordinibus et consecrationibus haberetur, " If the priests of the Lord would preserve intact the ecclesiastical institutes as they were handed down by the blessed apostles, there would obtain no diversity, no variety in ordering worship, and consecrating the mysteries." [Innocent, ad Decent.] Vid. Preef. ad Cone. p. 233.

brating and consecrating, as because they did not use the same rites and order ; for in these, that epistle of bis 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 mentioned by Gregory. 6 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, that prayer (or canon, as he also calls it) was made by Scholasticus, who, as it is most probable, 0 lived about his own time. Some writers of the popes' lives, and others, ascribe indeed several parcels of that canon to bishops before Gregory's days; one to Alexander, another to Siricius, 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 purpose, or else later than the sixth age. This form of Scholasticus, Gregory having d 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 settled, 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 Romanus continet haud dubie ordinem a B. Gregorio institutum: nam ut author est Johannes diaconus, codicem Gelasianum, quern de missarum solennibus composuerat Gregorius, multa subtraheus, pauca convertens, nonnulla adjiciens, in unius libri volumen redegit, qui ordo postea per universum fere occidentem obtinuit, " The Ordo Romanus contains doubtless an order laid down by Gregory. For, as John the deacon says, Gregory, by cutting out many things, changing a few and adding some, compressed the manuscript which Gelasius had written concerning the solemnisation of the church-services into a volume, consisting of one book, which Ordo afterwards obtained throughout almost all the west." Cassand. Liturg. Praef. ad Ord. Rom. p. 92.

In neither of those orders, which Cassander gives us for the ancient Roman order, the shorter or longer, are there any prescribed forms of prayer; but only a bare relation of the order wherein they proceeded. * Lib. vii. Epist. [lxiii.]

c Bellarmine denies not but it is probable, that Scholasticus then lived, De Miss. lib. ii. cap. xix. p. 819. Gregorii igitur setate, circa an. 590, vixit consarcinator ille canonis, " In the time of Gregory, therefore, about a.d. 590, lived the author of the canon." Chemnit. Exam, pars ii. p. 358. Si vero Gregorius per Scholasticus intelligat certum aliquem hominem, qui astate ipsius vixerit, ut adversarii contendant, " If, however, as our opponents contend, Gregory means by Scholasticus any .particular person who lived in his own time, it is agreed to be a probable supposition." Bellarm. De Miss. lib. ii. cap. xix. p. 819.

The benediction, it seems to be in Augustin. Epist. lix. [Ed. Antw. Ep. cxlix.]

Vid. Thornd. Serv. pp. 384, 385.

d Orationem autem Dominicam idcirco mox post precem dicimus, quia mos apostolorum fuit, ut ad ipsam solummodo orationem, oblationis hostiam consecrarent. Et valde mihi inconveniens visum est: ut precem, quam Scholasticus composuerat super oblationem diceremus; et ipsam traditionem, quam Redemptor noster composuit, super ejus corpus et sanguinem non diceremus, " We say the Lord's prayer directly after this prayer, because it was the custom of the apostles to consecrate the sacrifice with that prayer only. And it appeared very unsuitable to me to offer over the oblation the prayer which Scholasticus had composed, and not to offer the form which our Redeemer composed over his body and blood." Greg. lib. vii. Epist. lxiii.

to our Austin ; a who had mentioned the various* modes of celebrating the eucharist in several churches, particularly the Eoman and the French ; with a design to know his sense thereof, and which he would have him follow.

That part ascribed to Alexander, by Platina and Durandus, hath nothing of prayer in it; being only a rehearsal of the words and actions, used in the institution of this sacrament; and so is impertinent.

That [part] fathered upon Siricius, Communicantes, &c. is not found in the Eoman order; which Bellarmine says, contains the ancient canon entirely, c and so is a patch added some hundreds of years after Siricius ; when Eome was so degenerated, as to prefer Mary before Christ.

That [part] attributed to Leo, Hanc igitur oblationem servitatis nostrce, &c. is a patch added long after, as M. Moulin** observes. These words, Of our servitude, for, Of us thy servants, show manifestly, that this prayer was added unto the mass in a barbarous age, wherein they did say, Placuit nostrce mediocritati subtiliter intimare vestram fraternitatem, " It has pleased our Mediocrity correctly to certify your Fraternity;" of which phrases are stuffed the epistles of the bishops and clergymen of the seventh age, and others following.

Gregory, in his answer to Austin, (who was his creature, and whom he might have led into any conformity with a beck,) is so far from enjoining him to conform to what was used at Eome, that he does not so much as advise it; nay, he persuades him to a course inconsistent 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 found anything which might be more pleasing to God, quod plus omnipotenti Deo possit placere, than what was used at Eome, to prefer that; (which was suitable to his maxim, In una fide, nihil efficit sanctce ecclesice diversa consuetudo: " where there is one faith, there is no hurt to the church by diversity 6 of usages ;") intimating, that he was not so fully satisfied with the Eoman mode ; but that he had room to think, the way of another

■ Austin of Canterbury.

6 Novit fratemitas tua Romanae ecclesise consuetudinem, in qua se nutritum meminit; sed mihi placet, ut sive in sancta Romana, sive in Galliarum, seu in qualibet ecclesia, aliquid invenisti, quod plus omnipotent Deo possit placere, solicite eligas—Non enim pro locis res, sed pro bonis rebus loca amanda sunt. Ex singulis ergo quibusque ecclesiis, quae pia, qua? religiosa, qua? recta sunt, elige, &e. "Thou knowest, brother, the manner of the Roman church, in which you remember you were nursed. But my mind is, that if you discover aught, whether in the Roman or Gallican, or any other church whatever which best pleases God, you should carefully make choice thereof. For things are not to be esteemed for the sake of places, but places on account of good customs. Make choice therefore of whatsoever things are godly, religious, and right, in any single church whatsoever." Beda Eccles. Hist. lib. i. cap. xxvii.

In diversis ecclesiis diversas protulit consuetudines ; nee Romanus ipse ubique voluit imponen-dus, " He patronised different customs in different churches; and did not himself think that the Roman order ought to be universally imposed." Spelm Concil. p. 110.

« De Miss. lib. ii cap. xx. p. 828. * Of the Mass, p. 295.

• 'H dia<pu>i'La rijs vr\areiai rtfV ofiovoiav t>|9 wio-reou avviarnai, " The difference about the fast, commends the unity of the faith." Irenaeus to Victor, in Euseb. lib. v. [cap. xxiv.]

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 consecration 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 c enemies to the Roman use in the eucharist in Gildas' time ; but were adverse to, and unacquainted 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 after. 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, d differed little or nothing from what was maintained by

« Epist. xli. ad Leandrum, lib. [i.] Cone. Tolet. iv. Can. v. [In Hardouin, Can. vi.] Walafr. Strab. De Reb. Eccles. cap. xxvi.

Non de Constantinopolitana ecclesia, quod dicunt; quis earn dubitat sedi apostolicae esse sub-jectam ? Tamen si quid boni, vel ipsa, vel altera ecclesia habet, ego et minores me, quos ab illicitis prohibeo, in bono imitari paratus sum. Stultus est enim, qui eo se primum existimat, lit bona quae videret discere contemnat, " Not from the church of Constantinople, do I borrow, as they allege. Who doubts that that church is subject to the Roman See .' Nevertheless, if that church or any other possesses anything good, I am ready to imitate in what is good those my inferiors whom I restrain from 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. vii. Ep. lxiii.

4 Dicebat autem eis, Quia in multis quidem nostra censuetudini, imo universalis ecclesia con-traria geritis; et tamen, si in tribus his mihi obtemperare vultis, ut pascha suo tempore celebretis; ut ministerium baptizandi, quo Deo renascimur, secundum morem sanctae Romanae [et apostolicae] ecclesiae compleatis : ut genti Anglorum una nobiscum verbum Domini pradicetis, caetera quae agitis, quamvis moribus nostris contraria, aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus, " He said to them, In many respects, indeed, ye act contrary to our manner, yea to that of the universal church. And yet if in these three things ye hearken to me, viz. 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, we will meekly bear all other things which ye do, though contrary to our customs." Bed. Hist. lib. [ii.J [cap. ii.]

Another account runs thus: E Britonum et Scotorum episcopis, in synodo in Wigorniensi pro-vincia, postulavit, ut deinceps non Asiano sed Romano more, pradicarent, baptizarent, et pascha celebrarent, " In a synod of the Scottish and British bishops, held in the province of Worcester, he demanded that thenceforth they should preach, baptize, and keep Easter, not after the Asiatic manner, but after that of Rome." In Spelm. Concil. pp. 107,108. [Wilkins, torn. i.p. 25.] Where, by conformity in baptism, probably he means (as in that about Easter) the time of baptizing, for which the Roman bishops were great zealots. Vid. Leo Epist.

c Britanni moribus Romanis inimici, non solum in missa, sed etiam in tonsura, " The Britons are enemies to the Roman customs, not only in respect to the mass, but also in respect to the tonsure." Gildas in Ush. Relig. of Irish, p. 34. d Epist. Dedic.

their neighbours the Britons. 0 " It is sure (says he) that in the succeeding ages, no one general form of divine service was retained ; but divers rites and manners of celebration, in divers parts of this kingdom ; until the Roman use was brought in at last, by Gillibertus, and Mala-chias, and Christianus, who were the pope's legates here, about five hundred years ago." 6 So that the Irish for above eleven hundred years (and the Britons and Scots, if not so long, yet long after Austin) retained such liberty herein, as the church anciently enjoyed in all c quarters of the world. And when Gillibert, one of those Roman legates, rails at those various d modes of administering worship as schismatical, 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 correspondent 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 afibrd 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 contradiction, Inter dandum vero verba hujus mysterii significativa, eVepyeVrara /cat iuapyea-Tara quceque prcefereba?it, ita tamen, ut certis et statis sese non alliga-bant, e " At the distribution they preferred the weightiest and clearest words significant of this mystery, in such manner, however, as not to tie themselves down to fixed and stated expressions." And the variety used herein, both by Greek and Latin churches, is worth our notice, as he tells us, Contra adversariorum super stitionem, qui sacramentorum, turn distributionem turn consecrationem, certis verbis adligare voluerunt, " In opposition to the superstition of the papists," (which it were to be wished they had kept to themselves,) " who would have both the consecration and distribution of the sacraments, confined to a set of words."^ -

« Ut sup. p. 98. b Relig. of Irish, cap. iv. p. 31.

c For the East, Vid. Socrat. Hist. lib. [v.] cap. [xxii.] n<jp« Traaats Opwueiat? t£v evx&v, ouk eanv evpetv avfjL(paivov<rat aWtjXait ouo tirl to oUto, " In all observances connected with the prayers, ■we shall not be able to find two sections of the church agreeing with each other."

For the West. Innocentius Epist. ad Decentium. Diversa in diversis locis celebrari videntur, " Divers rights appear to be performed in divers places."

For the South. Augustin. Lib. De Baptism, contra Donat. [lib. vi. cap. xxv.]

"* Ut diversi et schismatici illi ordines, quibus Hibernia pene tota delusa est, ubi que catholico, et Romano cedant officio, "That those conflicting and schismatical modes of service, with which almost all Ireland is deluded, may everywhere give place to the catholic and Roman manner of officiating." Usher, ibid.

» De Miss. p. 145. / p. 155.

Yet how superstitious soever they were, in using their canon as a charm, so as a word, a syllable might not be changed ; more liberty was left and used, as to the words in the distribution of the eucharist; even after 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 opposition 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 prater Scripturas admittere in sacris oj/iciis nihil vellet. 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, ob nitniam suam scrupulosi-tatem hand quamputavit consecirtus gloriam, 6 " 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 missarum solen-nia, sanctam ei communionem porrigens, in ilium haic verba allocutus est. 0 Si innoxium te recognoscis a prohibito et interdicto tibi a Nicolao adulterii scelere; et hoc fixa mente statutum habes, at nunqaam diebus vita? tuo3 Waldrado3 pellicis tuo3 dudum a te repudiate miscearis nefario concubitu; fiducialiter accede, et sacramentum salutis o?terna? tibi ad remissionem pec-catorum per futurum percipe: sin autem tua conscientia te accusat, teque lethali vulnere sauciatum proclamat, aut iterum redire mente disponis in mojchia? volutabrum, nequaquam sumere pro3Sumas, ne forte ad judicium et condemnationem tibi adveniat, quod fidelibus ad remedium praiparavit Divina providential " 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 forbidden and interdicted by Nicolaus, and hast resolved with stedfast purpose never all the days of thy fife to have sinful intercourse with Waldrada, thy concubine, now at length divorced from thee, draw near in faith, 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 faithful as a cure, become to thee judgment and damnation.'"

The words, with which the same Adrian delivered the sacrament to

» epitomizer. » Spond. ad an. 831. n. 2. ' Spond. ad an. 868 n. 4.

* In Regin et Aimon, lib. v. cap. xxi.

tbe rest of the French, are neither the same with these now described, nor with those in the missal (the words in that administration being but the tale a of these) and the form changed too (as well as the matter) being expressed hypothetically. Si domino et regi tuo Lothario in objecto adul-terii crimine favor em non prcestitisti, neque consensum tribuisti, et Waldrada aliisve ab hoc sede apostolica excommunicatis non communicasti; corpus et sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi prosit tibi in vitam ceternam, b " If thou hast given no favour, and hast yielded no consent to Lotharius thy lord and king in the crime of adultery laid to his charge, and hast not communicated with Waldrada, or others who have been excommunicated by this apostolic see, may the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ benefit thee unto life eternal."

Long after this, Leuthericus, archbishop of Sienna, in the delivery of the sacrament, used these words ; Accipe, si dignus es, " Receive it, if thou art worthy." Robert king of France checked him for it, not because thereby he transgressed any established order ; but because the king, (not well enough acquainted with the apostle's discourse, 1 Cor. xi.) supposed there were none worthy to receive ; Cum tamen sit nullus qui habeatur dignus, " 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 Spondams' inference, that this bishop was no friend to transubstantiation, because he delivered not the eucharist in the words of the missal, Corpus Domini Jesu Christi sit tibi salus animce 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. 0

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-dseus'* out of Lambertus, Cumque sacratissimam eucharistiam sumpturus manu earn teneret, vocato rege ac universa adstanlium multitudine, conte-statum esse, earn se sumere in judicium criminum, quoz schismatici adversus ipsum promidgassent; ut si innocens esset, absolveretur ab omni suspicione, si vero 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 suspicion ; but if guilty, might suddenly die."

Or those of Paschal Second, who, cum in celebratione misso? traderet

• counterpart. * Id. ibid. • Spond. ad an. 1004. n. ii. <> Ad an. 1077. n. ii.

Henrico imperatori V. corpus et sanguinem Domini nostri Jesu Christi: Domine imperator, inqidt, hoc corpus Domini natum ex Maria virgine possum in cruce pro nobis, sicut sancta et apostolica tradit ecclesia, damns tibi; in confirmationem j)acis, inter me et te, idque factum an. 1111, idibus Aprilis, teste Sigeberto, 11 " When in the celebration of the mass he handed to the emperor Henry V. the body and blood of onr Lord Jesus Christ, he said, My lord the emperor, we give thee this body of our Lord which was born 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, xxviii. where surely, if anywhere, they would have been patient of confinement to all punctilios. This was accounted a form prescribed by Divine authority, " Lex namque tingendi imposita est, et forma pro3scripta est. Ite, docete nationes, tingentes eas in nomen Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, " 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. 5 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 baptizo te., " I baptize thee ;" some in the second person, ^aTmadrjTcu, " be thou baptized ;" some in the third person, j3cnrTi£cTcu 6 8e7va, " this person, or this servant of Christ is baptized." c Also they thought it as fit, to use in the Latin churches, tingo, (a native of the Latins) as baptizo, (an

• Cent. xii. cap. vi. p. 88f>. * De Baptism, cap. xiii. ' Vid. Theod. Lect. [p. 187.]

adopted word.) So Cyprian," Ite ergo, et docete gentes omnes, tingentes eas in nomine Patris, &c* " Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them (tingentes) in the name of the Father," &c. Yet sometimes [he uses] baptizo. 0 So Tertullian/ in the place forequoted,' Novissime niandavit, ut tingerent in Patrem, &c. "Lastly he commanded that they should baptize (tingerent) into the Father," &c. So Jerome and Augustin-^ render the words of Christ by tingentes.^ So they use mergo, or mergito, for baptizo. Thus Jerome,* Velut in lavacro, ter caput mer-gitare, " e.g. the trine immersion in baptism;" which the Greeks express by to 8e rpls ^aiTTi^eadat. tov avdpunvov. 1 And Tertullian,* dehinc ter mergitamur, " hence we are immersed thrice," rpls pev avrbv 6 Updpxrjs /3a7rn'£ei/ " the priest baptizes him thrice." They did not think, it seems, that Christ himself (whatever others take upon them) would tie them so precisely to his own words, but that they might have leave to change them for others, which changed not the sense.

The like liberty was taken, in changing the next phrase, els ovopa, " into the name," into or ovopaTos, " in the name," as it is in Justin Martyr."*

« Epist. iii. lib. iv. b Epist. iii. lib. ii. • Epist. ad Jubaian. p. 227.

6 Et post resurrectionem spondens, missurum se discipulis promissionem Patris, et novissime mandans, ut tingerent in Patrem, et Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, non in unum. Nam nee semel, sed ter, ad singula nomina in personas singulas tingimur, " He pledged himself, after his resurrection, to send on his disciples the promise of the Father, and lastly commanded them to baptize (ut tingerent) into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Not into one. Neither once only. But thrice are we baptized (tingimur) into the separate Persons on the mention of each separate name." Tertull. adv. Prax. cap. xxvi.

Neque quicquam refert inter eos, quos Johannes in Jordane, et Petrus in Tiberi tinxit, "Nor is there any difference whom John baptized (tinxit) in the Jordan, and Peter in the Tiber." De Baptiz. cap. [iv.] et cap. xix. Diem baptismi solenniorem pascha praestat, cum et passio Domini, in quo tingimur, adimpleta est.

* De Bapt. cap. xiii. and Ad Praxeum, cap. xxvi.

/ In hoc ergo fonte, antequam vos toto corpore tinguerimus, interrogavimus, credis in Deum, &c. " Hence before we baptized (tingerimus) you in your whole body, in this font, we asked, Believest tliou in God?" August. Horn, [iii.] De Myst. Baptism, ad Neophyt. in Vicec. p. 608. f Voss.

* Multa, quae per traditionem, in ecclesiisobservantur, autoritatem sibi scriptae legisusurpaverant, velut, in lavacro ter mergitare, " Many practices which are observed in the church by tradition have obtained the authority of a written command, e.^.the trine immersion ofbaptism." Hieronym. adv. Luciferian. [Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. col. 291.]

' Basil, de Spirit. Sancto, cap. xxvii.

* Dehinc ter mergitamur, amplius aliquid respondentes, quam Dominus in evangelio determi-navit, "Hence we are immersed thrice, making somewhat more lengthened responses than the Lord has prescribed in the Gospel." Tertull. De Cor. Mil. cap. iii.

Mysterium Trinitatis in sacramento baptismatis demonstratur, dum tertia vice vetus homo mergi-tur, " The mystery of the Trinity is set forth in the sacrament of baptism, seeing the o ' man is plunged thrice." August. De Temp. Serm. cci. [Ed. Antw. Serm. xl. Append.] Quando in salutari lavacro tertio Christiani merguntur, " Christians are immersed in the laver of salvation thrice." Horn, [xc] DeTemp. [Ed. Antw. Serm. xxiv. Append.] MiraDeipietas! peccator mergitur undis, "Marvellous compassion of God! A sinner is washed in the waves." Paulin. Epigr. xii. ad Severum.

As great a change, as if any amongst us now, administering baptism, instead of I baptize thee, should say, I dip, or, I wash thee, in the name, &c.

' Tpi'a /3airTio>iaTa fiias fxvrjaiai, " Three immersions for one initiation." Can. Apost. 1.

Dionys. Eccles. Hier. [cap. ii. p. 78, D.] in Voss. " Apol. ii. p. 159, 160.

And the Latins,for in nomen, "into the name," (as it is in Tertullian") use in nomine, " in the name," as in Cyprian, supra ; a difference which some count more than syllabical. Yet Tertullian varies more, when he leaves it (the name) quite out ; which he does more than once : Novissime mandavit, ut tingerent in Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, 1 " Lastly, he commanded them to baptize into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." Ite ad docendas et tingendas nationes in Patrem, Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, 0 " 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 presume to exact a more punctual conformity to rules of their own 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 left them so free.

But proceed we to what may seem yet more considerable. Some thought themselves not obliged to baptize expressly in the name of the sacred Trinity, firj noieladai ttjs rpid8os eVt/cX^o-ii/, 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 e defends it thus, fj yap tov Xpio-Tov irpoo-rjyopia, tov navros i(TTiv opokoyia, " the naming of Christ is an acknowledgment of the whole Trinity:" §77X01 yap tov re xp' l0 ~ avTa ©eoi>, Kal tov xpio-OevTa 'Yi6v Kal to xpto~p-a to Hvevpa/ " 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 Irenagus before him,^ In Christienim nomine subauditur, qui unxit, et ipse qui unctus est, et ipsa unctio in qua unctus est. Et unxit quiclem Pater, unctus est vero Filius, in Spiritu qui est unctio, " 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 unction."

Add to these, Theophylact, who affirms, Tov fianTi£ope.vov els to ovopa

'iTjaov XpiaTov, els Tpid8a j3aTTTi^ea6ai, ovk dnopepi^opevov tov Harpos, Kal

tov 'Yioi, Kal tov ayiov Hv(vpaTos, h " That he who is baptized into the

» De Baptis. cap. xiii. 4 Adv. Praxeam.cap. xxvi. ' De Praescrip. cap. viii.

d Vicec. de Bapt. p. 395. Zuingl. de Bapt. torn. ii. p. 201. Piscat. in Matt, xxviii.

• Lib. de Spiritu Sancto, [cap. xii.] / p. 257. * Adv. Hasres. lib. iii. cap. xx. p. 209.

* In Act. ii.

X

name of Jesus Christ, is baptized into the Trinity; 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 unum dixit, Trinitatem signavit. Si Christum dicas, et Deum Pattern, a quo unctus est Filius, et ipsum, qid unctus est, Filium, et Spiritum, quo unctus est, designasti, si tamen id etiam corde comprehendas, a &c. " He who names one Person indicates the Trinity. If thou namest Christ, thou hast named God 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 excellent persons judged, in reference to the form of baptizing, which our great Lord delivered to us. And can we think they would take upon them 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, Quomodo ergo qitidam dicunt — modo in nomine Jesu Christi, ubicunque et quomodocunque gentilem baptizatum remissionempeccatorum conseqid posse, b "According to which some say that a heathen, by whomsoever or howsoever he be 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, e Non est autem quod aliquis d ad circumveniendam Ghristianam veritatem Christi nomen opponat, ut dicat, in nomine Jesu Christi, ubicunque et quomodocunque baptizati, gratiam baptismi sunt consecuti, &c. " It is not as one who to corrupt Christian truth puts forward the name of Christ, represents the matter when he says, Those who in any place whatsoever, 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 e of Christ, but enlarged upon them, adding something thereto, as the

' De Spiritu Sanct. lib. i. cap. iii. b Ep. Ixxiii. ad Jubaianura, page 223. c page 224.

<* Fortasse Stepbanus Romse episcopus, " Perhaps Stepbanus 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 variation; vid. Vicec. de Bap'ris. Fult. lib. iv. cap. v. Non negaverim tamen probabile videri, Christi, aut Jesu, aut Jesu Christi, nomen aliquandiu oppositum fuisse, addito item Domini nostri sed non omisso Patris et Spiritus Sancti nomine, hac forma, Ego te baptizo in nomine Patris, et Filii 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 the 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 thus represents the words they used in baptizing,"'E7r' ovoaaros rov Harpos tcov o\cov /cat beo-TTorov Qeov, /cat rov o-corrjpos fjpcov 'irjaov Xpicrrov, /cat Hvevparos ayiov to iv tcZ vdan rore Xovrpou ttoiovvtcii, " In the name of the Father of all things, and of our Lord God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, this washing with water is performed ;" and afterwards, with some variety in the latter clauses, thus,* Kat «r' ovoparos be 'IjjctoO Xpicrrov, tov crravpaidevTos, eVt Hovtlov Uikdrov, /cat eV ovoparos Uvevparos ayiov, 5 Sta tcov TrpofprjTaiv Trpoeicrjpv^e, /cat /caret top lijaovv 7rdpra, 6 cpcoTi£6pevos Xovercu, "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 regula fideif " the sum of the confession of faith," as he expressed it. And if they used the words of that rule 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 after. All the uniformity to be found herein, is a harmony in sense, rf while there is in words a great diversity. The variety of expressions, used by the ancients (Justin Martyr, Irenseus, Clemens, Tertullian, Novatian,

the Holy Ghost, after this manner, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, and of the Holy Ghost."

Cyprian, though for the other, rejects not this, expounding Act. ii. Jesu Christi mentionem facit Petrus, non quasi Pater omitteretur, sed ut Patri quoque Films adjungeretur, &c. " Peter makes mention of Jesus Christ, not that the Father was omitted, but that the Son also might be seen to be joined with the Father." Epist. ad Jubaian.

« Apol. ii. p. 159. [Ed. Paris. 1636, p. 94, A.] » page 160.

c 'O tov Kavwva rris uXrj^ia? aK\tvrj hv eav™ KaTexwv ov dia tov fiaTTTiafXaros €i\r}<pe, " He who retains within 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, Alnriv 6t tjjv 6fj.o\oyiav rn? wiVTewr, mo-reveiv elr na-repa Kal 'Yuv Kal ayiovTlvevfia, €K iroiuiv fpaixjicniav ex^M^"' *• /**" Y«P i* TI)S tov /SawTiV/iOTor 7rapa56(Tca)s, "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. Facilius inveniuntur haeretici, 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.

"E%av to Ke<jK(\aiov tTJ? 7ri'<rTe&>? tv tu> ^amlafjiaTi, Kal Tour Tpialv ayiais a<ppayXai, " Having a summary of the faith in baptism, and in the three holy seals." Athanas. contr. Sabell. Orat. torn. i. p. 513. [Ed. Colon. 1686, p. 658, B.]

d Cur enim veteres, non appellatione professionis variare potuerint, quando professionis et reguhe ipsius sententiis, earumque ordine et verbis, tantopere discreparent ? " Why could not the ancients, 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 fidei aut baptismi immutabilem dicunt, non ad certam et receptam ubique verborum formulam eos respicere, sed ad vim atque sententiam interrogationum, "A comparison of these passages may teach us that when the ancients called the rule of faith and of baptism immutable, they do not refer to a fixed and universally received form of words, but to the force and meaning of the interrogatories." Grot, in Matt, xxviii. 19. Quae ipsa Cypriani verba ostendere mihi videntur, symbolum sive regulam fidei, ipsius a;tate, nondum adstrictam fuisse illis verbis, quibus postea scripta invenitur; cum tamen eandem fuisse regulae sententiam, minime sit dubitandum, " These very words of Cyprian seem to me to show

x 2

&c, which you may see in Grotius on Matt, xxviii. 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. Hac lege fidei manente, ccetera jam disciplines et conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis, " Provided that the rule of faith be unchanged, other matters both of discipline and life admit of reformation," 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 varying 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 Irenasus, with others in Grotius) is also a very pregnant instance of it. c He gives several accounts of the rule of faith, which neither

that the creed, or rule of faith, was not as yet, in his 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 was the same." Id. ibid.

In Tertullian, lib. De Praescript. cap. xiii. contra Prax. cap. ii. et lib. De Veland. Virg. cap. i.

Vide two different forms in Irenaeo, lib. iii. cap. iv. page 172, and lib. i. cap. ii. pp. 34, 35, edit. Gallusq. « De Virgin. Veland.

4 And when the creeds had more stated forms, in the fourth century, in the same country the creeds of several cities were not uniform, v. g. in Italy, that of Rome much differed from that at Aquileia, vide Rutin, and Voss. de Symb. page 29, &c. And that of Ravenna from both. Ush. de Symb. page 7. Petr. Chrysol. Serm. lvii. &c. De Maximo Taurinensi.

c The creed (regula fidei, 6fj.o\o-/ia wt'o-Teojs-) was at first no more than the words wherewith baptism was to be delivered, Matt, xxviii. 19. Parker, De Descens. Voss. De Symb. p. 23. 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 be rehearsed by the competentes, " candidates for baptism," before they were baptized, 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 forms varied in several places in the same country, vid. supra.

It had noplace in the church service, till near the sixth age ; for as the Lord's prayer was used no where but in the eucharistical office, while the orders for the catechumens were observed; so 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 of his character see in Evagr. lib. iii. cap. xvii. He, amongst other innovations, introduced this, riei-poi- <p»o'' tov Kva<f>£a imvori<rat to ui/c-r/;p<ov ev rrj eatripa. i'ii>eo&ai, " It is said that. Peter Gnapheus first thought of celebrating the mysteries in the evening," and which was more, Kal zv nao-t] <rwttfei to o-i>h/3o\ov \t-/eaOat, " and of the repetition of the creed in each time of prayer." Theod. Lect. Collect, lib. ii. p. 189. This was about the latter end of the fifth age at Antioch, obiit an. 486. Afterwards Timotheus, a flagitious person and a heretic, vid. Spond. an. 511. n. iii. brought it into the same use at Constantinople, being made bishop there by Anastatius, according to Baronius, 511 till 517. Ttji Tr/o-Tecoi ct'fifioXov KaO' fKamnv criWfiv Xt'-yeaflui irapecKevaaev, ewi 5ia/3oXi"; dtiOev MaKe&oviov, u>? uvtov /xi] &ex°f i ^ vov T ° <rvp./3o\ov, a7raf tov Ztov? Xe-yo/uet/ov irporepov iv TtJ u7iy napacwevrj tov Qeiov irdOov;, tu> Kaiplo twv ytvofxevwv iiiro tov eiriaKowov KaTiix'/ffea)!*, " He caused the creed to be said at every assembly on account of the accusation of Macedonius that he did not hold the faith, 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. Collect, lib. ii. 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 Valentinians, Iren. lib. [iii.] cap. [ii.] stated fasts from the Montanists) Mud symbolum, quod nos ad imitationem Graecorum intra missas adsumimus, " That oreed which in imitation of the Greeks we have received into the church services." Walafrid.

agree with what is given by others, in mode of expression, neither with one another ; there being no coincidence in any one phrase observable through the whole/' And is it probable that they 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 Jidei, which more required it, had no such confinement! 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 immobilem 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 apostles' 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, the creed to be used in

Strabo De Reb. Eccles. can. xxii. First it was used in Spain, Cone. Toled. iii. can. ii. an. 589, Per omnes ecclesias Hispaniae et Gallicias, secundum formam orientalium ecclesiarum, concilii Constantinopolitani symbolum fideirecitetur, " Throughout all the churches of Spain and Galicia the creed of the Constantinopolitan council is recited according to the manner of the eastern churches."

In France and Germany not until long after, Walafr. Strab. De Reb. Eccles. cap. xxii. Sed apud Gallos et Germanos, post dejectionem Faelicis haeretici sub gloriosissimo Carolo, Francorum rege, idem symbolum latius et crebrius in missarum ccepit officiis iterari, " But among the GaulsandGermans 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. Baronius.

It was not used at Rome till an. 1014, when Berno Augiensis (lib. De Miss.) relates, [that] he being at Rome, Cum Romani presbyteri ab eo interrogarentur, Cur post evangelium (ut in aliis ecclesiis fiebat) symbolum non canerent? "When the Roman presbyters were asked by him, Wherefore they did not (as was done in other churches) chant the creed after the reading of the Gospel ?" they gave him a reason, such a one as it is; and adds, Imperatorem (Henric. I.) Benedicto Papae persuasisse ut ad publicam missam symbolum decantarent, "The Emperor (Henry I.J prevailed on Pope Benedict to order the chanting of the creed during public service." In Spond. ad an. 1014, n. iii. « 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 addition of others. 0

Moreover, Basil* tells us, [that] the confession of faith is conformable to the delivery of baptism, and the doxology conformable to the confession of faith ; that they are all three much alike. That they baptized 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, fj iv tovtois Katvoropla, tov ttclvtos «m Kardkvats. But he does not think the change of phrase and words therein is such an innovation, if it remain the same in sense, ravrbv irpbs hiavoiav, for he himself used the 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 before the writing of this book, in prayer with the people, dfxfroTepas dogdkoyiav, " he used the doxology two ways" (both differing from that which is usual) as he tells us, c T<» Qe& kcu Harpl vvv pev fxera tov 'Yiov avv r<S HvevpaTi ayico, vvv 8e 8ia tov 'Yiov iv ayico ILvevpari, 11 Glory to God and the Father, (adding) sometimes, with the Son, together with the Holy Ghost; sometimes, by the Son, in the Holy Ghost;" but this is but a taste of his variety. He 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 turn, if it could be proved, that they were as much limited to forms of prayer in baptism, as they thought themselves confined to the words of Christ, in delivering the form of baptizing. Those that thought a tclvtov wpbs didvoiav, " a conformity in sense" sufficient, 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 d premised, show,

• Vid. lib. vii. cap. xlii.

* 'ft? fiairTi£6[j.eQa, ovtio Kai irio-Teveiv utpeiXovres, 6'j.oiav tgS fiaTrria/jiaTi rijv 6fio\oylav Harare-GeneOa, <7vyx a, P*l°'" T6J<Tal ' hp^v tK t7j? ainTjS aKoXovOias, 6/j.otav rrj Triarei, rijv do^av unodidovai — vvv 7<ip t'fjuuf d(<5ao-/«Tco(Tui<, /u>; fiaTTTtgtiv ai! 7raptXo/io/uev Vj fii} luorevetv tor hfiair-ricDnnev, fj ;ui; 6o(d-£eif wc 7re7TicrT€t'Ka/jLti/' deiKvvrw yap ris tj ai? ova avayaaia Hat UppriKTOS i] irpus u\\t]\a toi'tojv aKO-\ovtiia. uj? oix! r'i iv tovtou Kaivoro/xia, u.r.X. "Since we ought so to believe as we are baptized, we lay down a confession of faith correspondent to baptism. Let them allow us to offer the doxology in correspondence with the faith, by reason of the same inseparable connexion. Let them teach us not to baptize as we are taught, or not to believe as we are baptized, or not to offer 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. 1722, torn. iii. p. 57.] c cap. i. d 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 baptism, and a general agreement to use the same in sense ; and yet, as to words and syllables, a strange variety ; when as a here, if anywhere, a common 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.

6 Origenes, Quid denunciaverit diabolo, non se usurum pompis ejus, et voluptatibus pariturum, " Why has lie renounced the devil, the use of his pomps, and obedience to his pleasures I" In Ep. ad Rom. Universis aliis diis et dominis, " In fine all other gods and lords together." Homil. viii. in Exod.

Constantius, (de se,) Renuncians Satanae pompis et operibus ejus et universis idolis manu factis, credere me in Deum professus sum, " Renouncing Satan, his pomps and works, and all idols made with hands, I profess that I believe in God." In Edict, ad Sylvest.

Cyril. Hierosolym. Catech. i. Mystag. pp. 228, 229. [Ed. Oxon. 1703, p. 279.] 'AW' 6)xa>s uKoveir TCTan^vr] rr; x ei P l ^ Trpoc irapovra eLiretv, 'A7roTa<7<7'OjUai aoi SaTava, Kai ttu<xi toi? '4pfoi$ gov, —Kai ndatj t>5 7ro/u7rij av-rov, — -Kai 7ra<r»; rrj \u7peia aov, " As soon as thou hearest, thou art to say with outstretched 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 Pcenit. cap. v. Abrenuncio tibi Satan, et cunctis operibus tuis, " I renounce thee, Satan, and all thy works."

Basil. De Spir. Sane. cap. xxvii. [Ed. Par. 1722, torn. iii. p. 55, B.] says there was no prescription for it. 'AUii Se oaa irepl to /3d7rTio>ia uTrordaaeaOai tiZ Sarai/u, Kai toi? d-yyeXoti aiiov, &K 7roiar eo-ri 7pu0>j?, " Out of what writing is derived the renunciation of Satan and his angels at baptism ?"

No writings mentioned the use of any words whatsoever, any prayer at all on those occasions, none enjoined any set form of prayer: but any words were so far from being enjoined, that there were none so much as set down or mentioned in any writing.

Cyril. Alexandrin. lib. vii. contra Julian. Ibi deposuerimus tenebras a mente nostra, et daemo-niorum turbis valedixerimus, omnemque ipsorum pompam, et cultuni prudentissime respuerimus, confitemur (idem in Patrem, " There we dispel the darkness from our minds, and bid farewell to the crowds of evil spirits, and most wisely renounce their pomp and worship: we profess faith in the Father," &c.

Salvian. Massiliens. De Gub. Dei, lib. vi. p. 198. Abrenuncio, inquis, diabolo, pompis, specta-culis et operibus ejus, " I renounce, sayest thou, the devil, his pomps, his shows, and his works." Quae est enim in baptismo salutari Christianorum prima confessio, nisi ut renunciare se diabolo, ac pompis ejus, atque spectaculis, et operibus, protestentur? "For what is the first confession of Christians in their quickening baptism, but a public testimony that they renounce the devil, and his pomp, and his shows, and his works?" p. 197.

Dionysius Areop. Eccles. Hierarch. [Ed. Lutet. 1615, cap. ii. p. 77, D.] 'Efupvarioat /xev airy Tp<9 5iaKe\ei''£Tai T<« Jorouj, Kai irpoai-n tc'i t7i5 umoTayTis 6fxo\o-/ii(Tai' Kai Tpif avTiZ airorayiiv juapTVfjojuevor, " He is bid to use sufflations against Satan thrice, and withal to avow his renunciation ; and three times to testify against him his renunciation."

Clemens Constit. lib. vii. cap. xli. 'A7ru77eWeTw ovv 6 /3aim^6jxevo9 kv T<p ciwordaaecrBai' ano-T(i<T(ro|ia( tw JaTaca Kai to7? epyots outou, Kai rats 7ro/A7ratV auTov, Kai Tai? Aarpeiai? auTou, Kat toi? a77t\oi? auToS, Kai Ta7? €^)cupe<re<riv ixvtov, " Then let the person to be baptized 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. Audient. [Cod. lib. i. tit. iv. cap. xxxiv. sect, i.] 'fir Kai to!? dp-n nvovpevoir, Kai tcTiv 7rpo<TKvvt]Twv afiwjLteyot? fxvtnr)piiov avroi 7TpoKiipvrrovatv inrordTTeirOat rtj rov avrtKet^ievov oui/ioi/09 XaTpeia Kai irdaij Ttop.ir7u " Like to those newly initiated, and judged worthy of the adorable mysteries, they proclaim that they renounce the worship and all the pomps of their adversary the devil."

Tertullian, De Coron. Milit. cap. iii. Sed et aliquanto prius in ecclesia sub antistitis manu, con-testamur nos renunciare diabolo, et pompae, et angelis ejus, " A little while before we testify in the church, under the hand of the bishop, that we renounce the devil, and his pomps, and his angels."

Optatus Milevit. contr. Parmenianum, lib. v. p. 59. [Ed. Paris. 1679, p. 106,] Contra, nos peccatores (ut vultis) interrogemus alterum gentilem, an renunciet diabolo, et credat Deo, &c.

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 I met with two instances, where the difference is not more than syllabical: 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 as ye will have it are offenders, interrogate another who is a heathen, whether he renounces the devil, and Believes in God, &c. and he says, I do renounce and believe."

Cyprian, Epist. v. lib. i. Seculo renunciavimus cum baptizati sumus, " We renounced the world when we were baptized." Stare illic potuit Dei servus, et loqui, et renunciare Christo, qui jam diabolo renunciaret et seculo, " Could the servant of God stand up there and renounce Christ, who has already renounced the devil and the world?" Serm. De Laps. p. 151. Cujus (mundi) pompis et deliciis jam tunc renunciavimus, cum meliori transgressu ad Dominum venimus, " We renounced the pomps and delights of the world by a happier change when we came to Christ." De Habit. Virgin, p. 107. Se carnis concupiscentiis et vitiis renunciasse profitetur, " She professes that she has renounced the lusts and vices of the flesh." Id. ibid.

Augustin, De Symbol, ad Catechum. lib. iii. cap. i. Quisquis huic aedificio conjungi desiderat, renunciet 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 vos abrenuntiare omnibus pompis diaboli, et omnibus operibus ejus, et omni fornicationi diabolicae spospondistis, " That carefulness being laid aside, wherewith ye pledged yourselves to renounce all the pomps of the devil, and all his works, and every kind of diabolical fornication." Homil. iii. Ad Neophytos. Pro ipsis enim respondent, quod abrenuntient diabolo, pompis, et operibus ejus, et ideo pactum, quod cum Christo in baptismi sacramento, conscribunt, custodire contendant, nee unquam aliquid de diaboli pompis, vel mundi istius luxuriosis oblectationibus concupiscant, " Let them answer for themselves, that they renounce the devil, and his pomps, and his works, and so 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 delights of his world." Serm. De Temp, [cxvi.]

Ambrose, Hexaem. lib. i. cap. iv. Dicens, Abrenuncio tibi, diabole, et angelis tuis, et operibus tuis, et imperiis tuis, " Saying, I renounce thee, Satan, and thy angels, and thy works, and thy dominion." Quando te interrogavit sacerdos ; Abrenuncias diabolo, et operibus suis? quid respon-disti? Abrenuncio. Abrenuncias seculo et voluptatibus ejus? quid respondisti? Abrenuncio. " When the priest asks thee, Dost thou renounce the devil, and his works? what dost thou reply? I renounce them. Dost thou renounce the world, and its temptations ? what dost thou reply ? I renounce them." De Sacrament, lib. i. cap. ii. Repete quid interrogatus sis, recognosce, quid responderis. Renunciasti diabolo et operibus ejus, mundo et luxuriae ejus, " Remember what thou wert asked, what thou repliedst; thou hast renounced the devil and his works, the world and its delights." Lib. de iis qui Myster. Initiant. cap. ii.

Chrysostom, Homil. xxi. Ad Pop. Antioch. p. 609. edit. Savil. 'A7roTa<7<rojua< aot, ZaravS, «a« TiJ notxTrij aov, Kai rn \arpeia aov, " I renounce thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy service." ^kiroTttaaoixai aoi, EaTCu/d, Kai t7; Tro/j.'Krj aov, Kai Ttj Xur^eia. aov, Kai toI"? ciyyeXois aov, " I renounce thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy service, and thy angels." In Coloss. Horn. v. p. 122.

Me-ra toD SaTava Kai t£i/ ayfeAwv avrov, Kai toiItij (nofiirfi) Tore aneTaTTeaoe, " Together with Satan and his angels, ye renounced this his pomp also." In Joh. Horn. i. p. 558.

Hieronym. in Matth. v. torn. vi. p. G. [Ed. Paris. 1706, torn. iv. col. 17.] Quidam coactius disserunt in baptismate singulos pactum mire cum diabolo et dicere, Renuncio tibi, Diabole, et pompae tUEe et vitiis tuis, et mundo tuo, qui in maligno positus est, " Some give a more forced explanation, that in baptism individuals enter into an agreement with Satan, and say, 1 renounce thee, Satan, and thy pomp, and thy vices, and thy world, which lieth in wickedness." Confessus es bonam confessionem in baptismo, renunciando seculo et pompis ejus, "Thou confessedst a good confession in baptism by renouncing the world and its pomps." In 1 Tim. vi. torn. viii. p. 270. Seeundo post baptismum gradu, inisti pactum cum adversario tuo, dicens ei, Renuncio tibi, Diabole, et seculo tuo, et pompae tUEe, et operibus (al. opibus) tuis, " In the second place after baptism, thou enteredst into agreement with thine enemy, saying to him, I renounce thee, Satan, and thy world, and thy pomp, and thy works." Epist. viii. Ad Demetriad. p. 63. [Ed. 1706, torn, iv. col. 789.] Abrenunciationem illam qua prseputiis deriudanrur, ante oculos collocemus—sic nanique dicimus, abrenunciare nos mundo et pompis ejus, "Let us place before our eyes that renunciation by which we became circumcised—for thus we speak, that we renounce the world and its pomps." Epist. ad Therasiam. De Vera Circumcis. torn. ix. [Ed. 1706, torn. 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 shoidd 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 a 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 anywhere, uniformity is to be looked for : Ave 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 in the use of as many, or more words, than this form consisted 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 for freedom in praying, they were not limited, nor did tie themselves to a set of words : who can believe they were, or would have suffered themselves to be, confined to an unvariable form of words, in praying at baptism ?

And that there were none limited to any forms of prayer, is made evident, more directly by that of Basil, c where, mentioning the several prayers used in baptizing, he declares there were none of them to be found in writing, 'EvXoyovp.eu 8e to v8<op tov (3a7TTiapaTos Ka\ to e'Xaiov ttjs Xpi-0~eas, kcu npoo-eTi avTov tov (BcnrTi^opevov, drro tvo'iwv eyypdcpcov ; Ovk cnro ttjs o-i(OTroopevT]s, Ka\ pvo--iK)]s 7rapa86o-ea>s\ fl "We bless the water in baptism, and the oil used in unction, and the party also baptized ; but out of what writings ? Is it not out of the silent and secret tradition ?" They had no prayers for these severals,* in or before his times, written ; none found, none set down in writing ; and how there could be prescribed forms of prayer, and yet no prayers in writing, is not intelligible. There were no writings enjoining them that prayers should be used for these purposes ; much less, therefore, what praj-ers should be made use of, or in what form of words. For where the existence of a thing is not supposed, there is no giving rules for the mode

■ that. * whereas. c Lib. De Spir. Sane. cap. xxvii. <> p. 271. ' details.

of it, amongst those who are regulated by reason. They had then no rules nor prescriptions in Scripture, or councils, or fathers, or any church liturgies, for the use of such prayers (much less for the words of them:) anb iroiwv eyypdcfxov reaches all. There was nothing for them in his time, but cria)7rcopevrj kcii jjivo-TiKr) napdBoais, " silent and secret tradition," in opposition to (eyypdcpois) " what is written ;" a which is utterly exclusive of, and inconsistent with any such rules or prescriptions, and so quite clears the church for all such prescribed forms in baptism, in all ages till that day. And clear of them it was long after.

For the impostor, 6 who forged those Constitutions, under the name of Clemens, many hundred years after the apostles, and one age at least after Basil, though he set down prayers for the baptismal office, yet he ties none to those forms (no not when he pretends they were of the apostles' composing) nor to any other ; but leaves all at liberty to pray as they saw good, only he would have them pray to the same effect. He requires not, that they should use those prayers (of his) but such prayers with a Toiavrr) t\s, " his words are," c 'Eav yiip pfj ds eKacrrov rovrav

" Duobus modis dici posse observationem aliquam esse scriptam: id enim scriptum cum ab aliquo vel scripta lege fuisse prasscriptum (qui proprius est et usitatius horum verborum sensus) vel tantum in scripto libro commemoratum, " An observance may be called a written one, in two ways; for that may be said to be written when a thing is prescribed by some person, or by a written law, (which is the more proper and frequent use of these words) or when it is only spoken of in a written book." Dall. De Pseudep. p. 334. He takes Basil in the former sense, ibid.

Objection. But by writings Basil may understand the Scriptures only. Answer. His words plainly deny it of all writings, and not of the Scripture only, vide Dall. p. 334. He alleges many expressions of Basil in the same place, concluding, Ex quibus vel caecus videt, qua ista accepta erant, traditionem, Basilium non quibusdam, sed quibusvis; non canonicis, sed omnibus omuino libris opponere, " From these expressions even a blind person may see in what sense those words were taken, viz., that, Basil opposes tradition not to certain books, but to any books whatever; not to the canonical books, but to all books of every kind." Ibid.

Objection. Cook (p. 123.) and others deny the latter part of this book to be Basil's. Answer. The generality of protestant writers do not question it, e.g. Chamier, Casaubon, Dalleus.

Mr. Cook thinks it was writ by one living after Meletius, who survived Basil, and so after Basil's time. The later he lived, the less ancient will prescribed forms appear to be by his testimony, which in this cannot be suspected; for who will think him so impudent [as] to affirm what everyone knew to be false?

* Bishop Usher inclines to think, the interpolations of the six ancient epistles ascribed to Ignatius, with the six latter, and also Clemens' Constitutions, did, ex eadem officina prodire, " issue from the same workshop," and yet the former were not extant before the sixth age; and therefore the Constitutions are no elder. Dallaeus, De Supposit. Ign. lib. ii. cap. ii. p. 237. Vid. pp. 232, 233.

0 Lib. vii. cap. xlv. After the prayers in baptism, in reference to the oil and water, and chrism, cap. xliii. xliv. xlv. lib. vii. having said, cap. xliii. 'ETnKaXelVcu ovtui, "He makes invocation after this manner," he adds, cap. xlv. Tol™ kcu -ra toutou UkoXovOo. \eje-ru>, haec atque alia his consentanea dicat, "Let him say these things, and other things of like import," edu -yap nij eis- 6Ka<TToi/ tovtwv, ewiKXtio-ii' yevrtTat roiavrn, &c. " for if he does not adhere to every one of these expressions, let the invocation be of some such kind."

For the catechumens, K\<vovto>v Se avr&v rds KeipaXas, euXoyelru) clvtovs 6 x^'poTovriOeU tiri-<rKo7ro5 ev\ofiav Toukv&e, " Whilst bending down their heads, let the appointed bishop bless them with some such benediction as this," some such, hujusmodi benedictione, lib. viii. cap. xvi. med.

For the penitents, 'Entvxfatiu olv 6 kniaKoiroi roidhe., "Let the bishop offer prayer over them in some such terms as these," in some such manner, in hunc modum, cap. viii. fin. In the blessing of water and oil, Xe-ytTw di- ovrat, "Let him speak after this manner," cap. xxix. lib. viii. irepi elixaf nr-na? oS™ XtyouTcs, " speaking concerning the eucharist after this manner," lib. vii.

erriKXrjais yevrjTM Ttapa toxi evcrejUovs Upeas TOiavrr) tic, etc v8ap povov Kara-fiaLvei 6 f3aTTTi£6p,evos, as 'lovbaioi' kol imoriderat povov tov pvirov tov o-wpa-tos, ov tov pvnov t?js tyvxqsi " For if some such prayer be not made by the godly minister at each of these, he that is to be baptized, goes into the water only as the Jews, and parts with only the impurity of the body, not the impurity of the soul."

By which we may discern, what was the freedom, as to prayer at baptism (and consequently elsewhere) in those times when he writ (probably about the latter end of the fifth, or the beginning of the sixth age,) when forms through necessity were growing more common. Prayers to the same effect would then serve the turn, as they now serve the reformed churches. He that appeared to the world about that time, in the vizard of apostolical authority," would not by virtue thereof presume to tie any, in administering baptism, strictly to one form, any one form of words; no, not to those words which he would have them believe were formed by the apostles themselves. The apostles as he personates them, gave liberty to waive their own supposed forms, and think it well enough, if prayers to the same purpose be used instead thereof. In all probability, if this actor had laid his scene in places and times where more restraint had been tolerable, he would have represented it otherwise.

But there needs no other evidence, for this liberty in baptismal prayers, to any who are willing to see, than that in Augustin,* where he examines the allegations of the several bishops in the council under Cyprian, to Sedatus of Tuburbis, who pleads thus for the rebaptizing of those baptized by heretics ; in quantum aqua, sacerdotis prece, in ecclesia sanctifi-cata, abluit delicto, in tantum, hceretico sermone, velut cancere infecta, cumulat peccata: " as the water, by the prayer of the priest in the church, is sanctified to the washing away of sin ; so by an heretical prayer, as by a cancer, it is infected, to the increasing of sin."

Augustin answers, Si non sanctificatur aqua, cum aliqua erroris verba

cap. xxvi. pro primitiis collatis, oIItu; evxaptaret, " he offers thanksgivings after this manner," lib. viii. cap. xxxix. Pro mortuis cuxapuxeTrro) \tyav Totdde, "let him offer thanksgivings, speaking after this manner," lib. viii. cap. xli. Post sumptionem eucharistiae, nera 6t ri/v iierd-Xrn/ai- oUtwv ei'xapKTTt'/o-uTe, "After the reception of theeucharist, give thanks after this manner." lib. vii. cap. xxvii. riept Si tov nipov oSrat evxapi<n!\cra.-re, " As for the oil, give thanks after this manner." lib. vii. cap. xxviii. Pro eucharistia quidem in hunc modum, lib. vii. cap. xxvi.

And by these instances, when he calls for prayer or praise, with Xt-ye-rui, " Let him say," or eiiraTw, "Let him speak," or e7rei>xe'o'0a> Xf^wx, " Let him offer prayer," or the like; we have warrant to understand Toidae, "in some such way," or outio, " after this manner," or to toutois aKoXoi'Oa, " in terms of like import with these," and that such liberty is allowed.

« Lib. viii. cap. xv. Where he presumes to say, To»Ta n-epi Tri? /ivo-TtKrir XaTpei'a* oia.Ta<ro-6fie0a rijieir 01 uttocttoXoi iifut to?? hmcTKoTrots, Kai toT? 7rpea-/3i>Ttpoi?, Ka'i tois otaKovotr, " These things concerning the mystical worship we the apostles ordain for you the bishops, and the presbyters, and the deacons." > De Bapt. contra Donat. lib. vi. cap. xxv.

per imperitiam precator effundit, multi non solum mali, seel etiam boni fratres in ecclesia non sanctificant aquam, " If the water be not sanctified when he that prays, through unskilfulness, utters some erroneous words ; then, not only many evil, but good brethren in the church do not sanctify the water." Multorum enim preces emendantur quotidie, si doctioribus fuerint recitatce, et multa in Us reperiuntur contra catholicam Jidem, " For the prayers of many are daily amended, if they be recited to the more learned, and many things are found in them contrary to the catholic faith ;" (they were vitiosce preces, et in quibus aliquid perversum, as he speaks afterwards.) Now such prayers cannot be supposed to have been any common forms, commanded, or used, much less prescribed by the church. The course taken to redress this, was not a total prohibition of the prayers they had chosen ; nor the tying of such ministers to the use of any common form ; no nor the commending of any such to their use: but (what divers synods (of which [I have spoken] before) had decreed) the prayers, which such indiscreet persons made choice of, being recited to the more learned, were by them amended, and the errors being left out, they are left to use them still, (for the amending of them cannot be otherwise interpreted, than in order to future use :) and this course, as it is inconsistent with the imposition of any set forms, so it argues forcibly, [that] the churches then had not in the administration of baptism, so much as any common form in free use ; otherwise, instead of daily trouble to others and themselves, about correcting their very faidty prayers ; why are not persons so intolerably indiscreet (who could not discern when a prayer was heretical) so nmch as advised to make use of the common form ? And finally, under what restraint can any fancy the more discreet and learned to have been in baptizing, when the weakest and most imprudent had so much liberty therein ? Nothing needs be more manifest, than that neither the prudent nor indiscreet were then confined to prescribed forms in the ministration of baptism.

And thus we have made it siifficiently evident, that in the ancient church, the order for administering the sacraments (the prayers especially used in their consecration) were not prescribed ; nor the administrators thereof under such restraint, as later and worse times thought fit for them. I might endeavour to give the like satisfaction concerning other parts of worship, which were administered by prayers ; and might do it now with more ease than this already done. But it is not needful, since those who show the greatest passion for the forms in question, affirm, that in the sacraments they were and are most necessary, and were first there used; and so must acknowledge, that when they were not in use there, they were nowhere used, nor anywhere counted needful : and besides, this discourse grows long, (and so may be tedious) beyond what I expected or designed. I will therefore only add some few testimonies, which give evidence against such forms in

general, and will reach the particulars, as therein involved ; easing myself and others thereby of a tedious and superfluous labour.

Begin we with Justin Martyr, one of the first writers left us of unquestioned credit, after the apostles' times : who hath these words," Adeoi fiev ovv ws ovk eapev, rov 8r/piovpyov rovfte rod Travros cre(ii6p.evoi, dvevderj alpdrau/ Kal (nrovbcov Kal dvpiapdrav, cos ihiftaxdrjuev \eyovres, \6ya> ev^s Kal evxapiaTtas e(f) ois Trpocrcpepopeda nacriv oar] dvvapts alvovvres' " We are not atheists, since we worship the Maker of all things, affirming, as we are taught, that he hath no need of blood, drink-offerings, or incense; in all our oblations, with prayer and thanksgiving, according to our ability praising him." In his time, they prayed and gave thanks according to their ability. Now certainly, the abilities of the pastors, at least of those times, reached further without stretching, than the reading or reciting of some prayers, composed for them by others. They were persons ordinarily of greatest abilities amongst the Christians. When ordinary Christians were superior to the pastors of after times,* they wanted not the knowledge of Divine things, nor the sense of their spiritual condition, or their people's, nor a faculty to express tolerably what they knew and felt. They were not besotted by intemperance, nor had lost the use of their faculties for want of exercise, nor were their gifts shrivelled up by a curse, because they did not employ them: they had ability to frame their own prayers, as well as to make their own sermons ; and if they confined themselves to prayers made by others, they did not give thanks and pray, as the holy martyr says they did, oo-rj 8vvap.ts, " according to their ability," or as they were able. The phrase hath been sufficiently vindicated before ; but because it here occurs again, let this be added for further satisfaction. It is said, that it denotes not the exercise of abilities for prayer, but earnestness in praying, neither less nor more : but this is only said, without any proof, without any instance where it is so taken, either in Justin Martyr, or any other. The best way to discern the import of it, will be to observe, how this and other [phrases] of the same signification are used commonly in this or other authors. Now five hundred instances might be produced, wherein this expression, and others of the same import, do clearly denote the exercise of abilities for the work, to which they are applied. I will but give a taste hereof in a like case, preaching or writing, pastoral works, as prayer is. Justin Martyr says, they did c exhort the brethren, 00-77 8vvap.is, and tells Trypho he would make a collection of all the places of Scripture which concerned the millennium , d &>s 8vvap.is fiov.

• Apol. ii. p. 139. [Ed. Colon, p. 60, C] b Chrysost. in Eph. Horn. vi. pp. 792, 793.

c "Ootj diW/u<5 TTpoTpe^/ciiievoi ijuu9, &c. " Exhorting you according to their ability." Apol. ii. p. 157.

d Tuiv tefevnniv<>>v hpiv Xo7o>k uiriivTwv, ws Ovva/jLi? /xov avvra^iv iroi>]aofiai, " I will, according to my ability, make a collation of all the declarations which have been made to us." Dialog, cum Tryphon. p. 88. edit. Rob. Steph. Lutet. an. 1551. [Ed. Colon. 1G8G, p. 306, E.]

Origen says, the Christians instructed 0 many oa-rj bi/vafiis, and what Celsus alleged he would examine Karu Bwapiv. So in* Eusebius, when he tells us, the bishops made panegyrical orations as e/cao-ra) Traprjv 8wdiJ.eas. c Likewise in Basil, when he speaks of praising Gordius Kara dvvafiiv, forgetting his own** weakness, and says, he will explain 6 the words of the apostle as 8war6v, and that the impiety (he is mentioning) was elsewhere refuted Kara dvvafiiv, and that he had preached the day before k.o.6'' 6<tov t}v bwarov. Also in Chrysostom/ when he says it was necessary he should Kara Bvvafiiv, "discourse of prayer ;" and frequently^ elsewhere.

« o!!tu) Oeov iXnOG? <7e/3ovTe9, Kai woWovr oar) ovvapiv iraioevovTe?, " Worshipping God thus in truth, and instructing many according to our abitily." Contra Cels. lib. viii. p. 428. #ep€ wdXiv Kara ovvapiv, avrijv e^erdo-wpev oKto)? '4%ovoav. Id. ibid. p. 395. Vid. pp.409, 410, 411, edit. Cantabr. an. 1658.

4 'Eki'vei oe Kai Xo-yoi/r 'airas t«3v irapovTaiv apx 01/Ta,v 7ravr\yvpticovs, air ffinir™ iraprjv ovvapeto?, Qeid£u>v -t>]v 7ravi'/7upiv, " Every one of the bishops present, made a panegyrical oration, as each one had ability to inspire the assembly." Hist. lib. [x.] cap. iii. vid. Vit. Const, lib. iv. cap. xxix. infra. « Constantine exhorted his subjects "0<rti nep av >'i dvvapis, "to lead a pious life," itpoinpeire re oar\ irtp av i) ovvap.tt to» ivaefir) pt-TaoiwKeiv (3lov, " He exhorted them to the utmost of his ability to lead a pious life." De Vit. Const, lib. iv. cap. xxix.

'' 'EK\a0o/ic'voiT Tii? aa-Oei/ei'ac, oevpo d>; Kai avro't -rjj Ka-rd oivap.iv <f>covrj oiov rivi av6o$ twv rot avopoi ipytov wep[/3o/i/3)';<r(d^ei', " Forgetting our weakness, come, we ourselves with such utterance as we can command, will buzz around such a flower of manly deeds as falls to the lot of any." Homil. in Gord. p. 204. edit. Basil, an. 1551.

' 'tis bvvarov ptupov vorepov SiriyriaopeOa, " We will expound as we are able a little farther on," Hom. de Eucharist, p. 142. "AU»t re Kai kv ciWois KaTci 6vvap.iv ii<p' npuiv Tf]r uc7e/3eiar oie\e7x#€i<rriS' " This impiety being refuted according to our ability in another place and in other terms." Lib. De Spir. Sancto, cap. xvii. p. 264. We preached na8' oaov r\v owarbv, " to the extent of our ability." Hexaem. Hom. iii. initio.

/'AvafKcuov oe to koto: 8uvap.iv \eyetv nep'i tov npdyparot, "It is necessary to speak of the matter according to our ability," Tom. vi. Hom. ii. de Orat. [p. 758.] edit. Savil. et in Philip. Hom. vi. [p. 37.] [Hom. iv.] in 2 Tim. p. 346. et Tom. i. in Gen. Hom. xvii. initio, fin. Hom. xxv. p. 183. Hom. xxxii. p. 254. Hom. lviii. p. 452. Hom. lix. p. 459. els ovvapiv hptTepdv, Hom. xxxviii. p. 306. g Add that in Cyprian, Propter hoc etiam libellum hunc de bono patientiae quantum valuit nostra mediocritas, permittente et inspirante Domino, conscripsimus, " On this account we have written, as our slender abilities stood us in stead, this little book concerning the advantages of patience, by the Lord's permission and Divine assistance." Epist. ad Jubaian. and often, Pro nostra mediocri-tate, "according to our slender abilities."

Augustin, De quibus in aliis opusculis, quantum Domino adjuvante potuimus, satis nos dis-seruisse meminimus, " Whereof we remember to have spoken sufficiently in other works, as with the Lord's help, we were able," De Peccat. Orig. lib. ii. cap. xxxiv. Et hoc pro viribus ago, " And this, according to my powers, I do," Contra Cresc. lib. i. cap. ix. Si autem ministri adsint, pro viribus, quas eis Dominus subministrat, omnibus subvenitur; alii baptizantur, alii reconcili-antur, nulli Dominici corporis communione fraudantur, omnes consolantur, sedificantur, exhor-tantur, ut Deum rogent qui potens est omnia quae timentur avertere, &c* " But if ministers are at hand all are succoured according to the abilities which the Lord affords them ; some are baptized, others are received back into fellowship, none are defrauded of the communion of the Lord's body, all are comforted, edified, exhorted to beg God to ward off threatened calamities." Epist. clxxx. Honorato, p. 928. edit. Lugduni, an. 1561. [Ed. Antw. Ep. 228.] Retract, lib. ii. cap. i. In secundo libro tractantur caeterae quaestiones, et pro nostra quantulacunque facultate solvuntur, p. 58.

Athanasius, about to give an account of man's degeneracy, ni«s ot Kai rauTa noitl evKoyov Kara ovvapiv trnpdvai, " But howhe does so, it is but reasonable, according to our ability, to show." Cont. Onules. p. 3.

And reciting too some passages of Scripture, b<pei\op.ev olv ipet? Kara ro ivvarov tiji/ ovvapiv airtibv ((rrtijaaaOat, De Natura Human. Suscept. torn. i. p. 465. init.

Maximus in Athanas. torn. ii. says he had confuted heretics, 1wTopu>\- Kara divapiv uvreinovTes, " in few words, according to his ability," p. 255.

It is evident, that in these passages, the phrases signify [that] they used their own abilities, judgment, invention, expressions ; in preaching, expounding, disputing, &c. And it would not be imagined, but that they denote the same when applied to prayer, in Justin Martyr and others, had not custom settled another mode of praying than was used in those times, when abilities to pray were counted a qualification as requisite for a pastor, as ability to preach ; and more thought necessary to accomplish a minister for public prayer (so great a part of his work) than a child is capable of.

Who ever imagined, that by writing oa~q bvvapis, or pro vir'ibus, they meant no more than the transcribing another man's discourse ; or by expounding or preaching Kara 8vvap.iv, &c. no more was to be understood than their reading or reciting another man's sermon, &c. with what earnestness soever ? This would be no better, than to offer plain violence to their words, and unpardonable injury to the authors. And why it is not as intolerable, when they speak of praying oar) 8wap.is, to say they meant no more than their reading or rehearsing another man's prayers with all earnestness ; let those who are not dirb TrpoXrj^ecos Karexo/xevoi, " possessed by prejudice," judge.

Nay, it cannot be denied, but these phrases do sometimes denote, when applied to prayer or thanksgiving, the exercise of personal abilities for prayer ; as when Chrysostom tells us a that Noah gave

thanks rr)u Kara 8vvapiv ev^apia-riav Trotrjadpevos, " according to Ids

ability" (sure it was in no form composed for him by another) and then exhorts to imitate him ; and in the application shows how, viz., by taking account every day and hour, not only of mercies common to others, but particular and personal ; yea and those which we observe not, vnep hv dyvovvres evepyerovp.e8a, " for the benefits we receive ignorantly," (all this could not be done in a stated form) sajdng, Kal vnep tovtwv et'xapi-o-Tovp.ev, 1 ' "even for these we give thanks:" he adds, God made us rational, 8id yap tovto XoyiKol, therefore he gave us

faculties, souls and tongues, 81a. tovto yap Kal ■fyv)(r)v rjplv evinvevae Kal

y\acro-as ixapiaaTo, that we might be sensible of his favours, and koto. bvvapiv evxapio-Tiav dva<pepa>pev, c " offer thanksgiving according to our ability." And in the next homily, (Horn, xxvii.) We should endeavour tt)v Kara. 8vvap.iv evxapiariav dvafapeiv, " to offer thanksgiving according to our ability" having always his benefits in our minds (tva \mb tt)s pvrjprjs o-vvadovpevoi, " that our memory may be helpful to us therein") though they be more than we can recount, Too-avTai to 7r\r)dos, &c. For who can (jl yap hv tIs XoylaaiTo,) reckon up those which we have, those

In Gen. Horn. xxvi. [p. 202.] ' p. 202. ' p. 203.

which are promised, and ra icaff eK.a(rrqv epepav yivopeva, " those which we meet with every day." ^so every day there is new matter of thanksgiving;) then enumerating abundance of particulars, 0 and adding still ovk av TTore 8vvq8ei-qpev i^api6peia6ai, " they can never be numbered ;" ttws yap dvdpco-lvt] ykarra 8vvrj<rerai; "how can any tongiie of man express them ?" iraaav avQpanrivqv evvoiav V7rep,3au'0t'crac, " they transcend all human apprehension;" yet will have us notwithstanding, remember, conceive, reckon them up, and express them as we are able, and would have us employ mind, memory, tongue, all faculties, therein, as much as we can : for he adds again after all, we must rfjv koto. 8vvap.iv rh,v fjperepav evxapLa~rlav noir}(rai, '"make such thanksgivings as are according to the abilities of him who offers them." And Kara 8vvapw (which I proved before to be the same with 00-77 8vvapis) signifies that which is inconsistent with any confinement to a set form, by ourselves or others. Basil also, giving directions how to pray,* premises, that there are two sorts or parts of prayer, thanksgiving or praise of God with self-abasement, and petition; then he adviseth to begin with the former, and therein to make choice of Scripture expression (ano rav ayiav ypa(pa>v inXeyopevos, which it seems was Basil's formulary;) after he has given something by way of example, he adds, orav 8e 8o^oXoyf](rr}s anb tS>v ypa(p£>v as Bvvaaai, "when thou hast praised him (with expressions selected) out of the Scriptures, as thou art able" (or according to thy ability, the same phrase with 00-77 8vvapis, and koto. 8vvapiv,) then begin with self-abasement; in which, after thou hast been large {orav oiv a7roTeLvT)s \6yov Ta7reivo(ppoa-vvrjs, c " when thou hast extended to some length thy profession of self-abasement,") then proceed to petition. There he would have him beware of praying for the severals** he mentions,but [counsels him] to seek that which is prescribed or enjoined; not in any liturgy (for if there had been such, these directions had been needless, and if they should and might use no other, ridiculous, yet some men's fancies are so strong, as to stretch these even to private devotions;) but in the Scripture, and the words of Christ (seek first the kingdom of God, &C.) dXX' atrel Kadcos 7rpoa€Tax8rjs ttjv jBacriXeiav rav ovpavav povov, u but ask, as thou art commanded, for the kingdom of God only," and will have him careful in any wise, that his whole mind be e intent upon God, and him alone and no where else (oAov tov vovv rerapevov tx ovra npbs

• p. 204, 205. * Ascet. cap. i. p. 554. c p. 555. d particulars.

« Ut collectis et congregatis intra se sensibus, oret Deum, non evagetur mente, et cogitationibus evolet, utipsis Dei conspectibus, atque ineffabili illi lumini se intelligat assistentem, ibique orati-ones, et obsecrationes, postulationesque, et gratiarum actiones suas profundat, nuVtius extrinsecus pharttasiae solicitatus imagine, " With collected and concentrated faculties let him beseech God, let him not wander in mind and fly off in his thoughts; that he may keep in mind that he is standing in the very sight of God, and in the ineffable light, and there let him pour forth his prayers, his deprecations, his intercessions, and his thanksgivings, disturbed by the image of no fancy from without." Origen. vid. Dall. De Objecto Cult. p. 396.

uvtov fidvov, Ka\ dXXayot) /i^Sa^iou) which will be very hard for him, who, praying in public or private, hath his book to mind.

By this we may also judge, what it is to pray oar) Siva/xis, "according to ability," or which is all one, cbs bvvarai, " as one is able." And to add no more, it cannot be supposed, that there was any prescribed form of prayer, for the case which Augustin mentions, viz /' a house possessed by the devil ; for the relief of which, he tells us, one of the presbyters of Hippo prayed quantum potuit, " as he was able," a phrase equivalent to oo-rj Svvanis, and therefore it may be presumed, he prayed there according to his ability. And why oar) 8vi>afiis, in Justin Martyr, should not signify the same, as in these forementioned instances, and be rendered " according to their abilities," so as their prayers should be understood to be the product of them ; I can discern no reason at all, but because they who deny it, are loth it should be so.

Let us proceed ; That of Tertullian,* sine monitore, quia de pectore oramus, " we pray without a prompter, as praying out of our own breast," hath been pleaded by others, and not without reason. Bishop Hall in answering it, when he was concerned to be most reserved and cautious, so as to yield nothing but what the words would extort, grants the mode of praying was not then under any superior injunction, and so not prescribed. Bishop Bilson concluded from this passage (before it came into debate by the differing parties) that extemporary praying was used in Tertullian's time, rendering it " without any prompter," e as coming from the free motion of our own hearts, and ascribing it to the extraordinary gift, of prayer then continued ; (how reasonably may be considered elsewhere;) and this shows, it is not fcr want of evidence in the expression, that this sense of it is since rejected by his followers, but from something else. I doubt not, but if it would have been serviceable another way, there would be no question but this was Septimius's rf meaning, [that] the Christians did pray without any such prompter as the heathen, because their hearts were their prompters : or, as Bishop Bilson, because they pray as their hearts move them. Prayers suggested to the heathen by their monitors, were suggested to the Christians by their own hearts ; they had not their petitions out of a writing, but out of their own breasts.

The Gentiles' monitor, as Rigaltius on the place observes, did prmre

' " A man of tribunitial dignity, Hesperius by name, who dwells amongst us, has a farm called Zabedi, in the territory of Fussala, whither, on finding that his house suffered much from the malignant power of evil spirits, to the damage of his cattle and slaves, he in my absence requested of our presbyters, that one of them, at whose prayers they might be banished, should go," Sec. August. De Civit. Dei, lib. xxii. cap. viii. p. 686, edit. Lugduni.

4 Apol. cap. xxx. Christian Subject, part iv. p. [111.]

' Sine monitore, " not being urged by any superior injunction."

d i. e. Tertullian's : his full name, as prefixed to the MSS. of his works, being Quintus Septimiua Terlullianus Florens. See Bishop Kaye's Tertullian, p. 5.— Ed.

preces de scripto, " dictate the prayers out of a book." Amongst the Greeks, their prayers were read out of a book, as appears by Apideius, describing a great solemnity amongst them, where their monitor, whom they called grammateaf from a high pulpit, de libro fansta vota prcefatus, " prayed out of a book."

Amongst the Persians, Pausanias, representing the rites of their Pyre-theia, as they were used in Hierocaasarea and Hypaspas, brings in the dvrjp fidyos, 1 ' " a man who was a mage," (who was a priest, a sacred person amongst them,) thus praying : e He coming into a place in the temple, and having laid wood on the altar, first puts on his sacred habit, and then prays to some god ; and this prayer he says « /3i/3Ai'ov, " out of a book."

For the Eomans, Livy tells us, Numa gave them in writing all that belonged to their worship ; eique (viz. to Marcus the chief priest) omnia sacra exscripta exsignataque attribuit. d Upon special occasions, the Decemviri transcribed their prayers out of the Sibyls' books, (their extraordinary ritual.) e Pacem deorum peti precationibus, quce editor ex fatalibus libris essent, " they sought to make peace with the gods, with prayers taken out of the Sybilline books." When they were distressed by Hannibal, sending Fabius Pictor-^ to Delphi, Apollo Pythius prescribed them a liturgy in writing ; which he returning, recited out of that writing ; in which was contained, what gods they should supplicate, and in what mode: and the senate enjoined an accurate observance of it.S' "When Scipio iEmilianus was censor/' the scribe (their prompter)

<• Tunc ex his unus, quem cuncti grammatea dicebant, pro foribus assistens, ccetu Pastophorum (quod sacrosancti collegii nomen est) velut in concionem vocato, indidem de sublimi suggestu, de libro, fausta vota, praefatus, "Then one of them whom they all called the scribe, stood before the doors in the assembly of the Pastophori* (which is the name of the sacred college) who were summoned as it were to a conclave, and there, from a high pulpit, prayed out of a book." Apuleius Metamorph. lib. xi. p. 204.

4 GeoXoYo?, "a theologist," in Hesychius. Mdyov toi/ OeocreftTi Kal deoXoyov Kal iept'a \iyovat, *' They call a devotee, and a theologist, and a priest, a Mage." Phavorinus.

c 'Eo-e\#<i>v Se ks to oiVri/ua ui/t;p lUayos, Kal f i'\a enKpupi'jaai ai>a knl Tor fiut/xov, npana fxev irapav 67re0eTO enl Ttj Ke(pa\ri' oewrepa 5' eiriKXijatv otov oe Bewv ewa&ei ftiip/3apa, Ka't ovdauats a-vven't eXXna'"'' t'Taoei de imXeyonevos en pi/3\iov. Pausan. lib. i. Eliacor. [Prior, cap. xxvii.]

Ammianus Marcellinus, Hist. lib. xxiii. cap. viii.

<' Liv. Dec. i. lib. i. p. 16. ' Liv. Dec. v. lib. i. p. 15.

/ The reader will form some idea of the state in which this treatise of Mr. Clarkson's (and a similar remark will apply to the others) first saw the light, when he is informed, that in the original edition we find instead of " Fabius Pictor," the words, " Fabius's picture."— Ed.

e Q. Fabius Pictor, legatusa Delphis Romam rediit, responsumque ex scripto recitavit; divi quoquein eo erant, quibus, quoque modo supplicaretur, " Quintus Fabius Pictor, the ambassador, returned from Delphi to Rome, and communicated the response out of a book. In this book the gods were mentioned whom they should supplicate, and the manner in which they were to pray." Liv. Dec. iii. lib. iii. p. 64.

* Qui censor, cum lustrum audiret, inque solito fieri sacrificio, scriba ex publicis tabulis solenne ei precationis carmen praeiret, quo dii immortales, ut populi Romani res meliores amplioresque

* These were an order of priests whose office it was to raise the richly embroidered shawl, (waffTo?) which concealed the statues of the idols, with the performance of an appropriate chant, so as to discover the god standing in the adytum, and generally to show the temple with its sacred utensils; of which, like modern sacristans, they had the custody. See Dr. Smith's Diet. Gk.and Rom. Ant. sub voc.—Er.

at a lustration, reads the usual prayer, ex pitblicis tabulis; Scipio, mis-liking an expression therein, alters it, and orders the alteration to be made in the public writing, out of which it was to be read ; and so reforms their common prayer-book.

Thus were the devotions of the heathen regulated; but the Christians, says Tertullian, (describing them in opposition to the Gentiles) had no such monitor, did need no such prompter ; their prayers are not de scripto, but de pectore. In answer to this, thus much is granted, that the Christians in those times prayed without book ; and so it is acknowledged, that those who read their public prayers out of a book, are therein nothing like the ancient Christians, but more resemble the pagans in that mode of praying, for which Tertullian here derides them. This cannot be denied, it seems ; yet, which is the only shift left them, de pectore, they will have to be no more than saying their prayers by heart.

But this is not to pray de pectore, but de memoria, not as their heart moves and prompts them, but as their memory serves them.

And this supposes, that in those times they had written liturgies, and were wont to get their prayers by heart; for which they should produce some expression, or intimation, or show of proof, from some credible author of that age, before they take it for granted. I have yet seen no proof of it, and I am confident never shall.

Certainly it was a hard task (and required so good a memory, as all cannot be supposed to have had, who were employed therein) to get all the prayers they then used by heart ; since the Christians then continued, and principally in prayer, sometimes nine hours (and this twice every week) in their stations ; a sometimes twelve hours, as at

facerent, rogabantur : Satis inquit bona? ac magna? sunt; itaque precor ut eas perpetuo incolumes servent. Ac protinus in publicis tabulis, ad hunc modum carmen emendari jussit, "Who when he was censor, as he gave audience at the lustrum, and the scribe during the customary sacrifice dictated to him out of the public books, the solemn supplicatory chant, in which the immortal gods are besought to increase and prosper the interests of the Roman people, said, ' They are prosperous and extensive enough; therefore I pray that they may ever be safe,' and immediately ordered the chant to be corrected in the public books accordingly." Valer. Max. lib. iv. cap. i. p. 191.

■ Jamhorum conventuum proprius ac praecipuus finis erat oratio, atque deprecatio, unde factum, ut stationes dicerentur, quod 5JmTO3? statio Hebraeis sit oratio, " The proper and chief end of these assemblies was prayer and deprecation, whence it came to pass that they were called stations, because the word OTTOJ, which means in Hebrew station, is used for prayer." Dall. De Jejuniis, lib. iv. cap. v. ex J. Capell.

They began at sun-rising, Statim ab exortu solis, " immediately after sunrise." Rigalt. Obs. ad Tertull. De Orat. p. 43.

Their stations were continued till three in the afternoon, Terpd&t kcu ev npoaafificnip 8«as alpa? iwaTq?, " On Wednesday and Friday till the ninth hour, (3 p.m.)" Epiph. Expos. Fid. p. 110. Others [i. e. the Montanists] longer, Arguunt nos, quod stationes plerumque in vesperam pro-ducamus, " They censure us because we prolong our stations for the most part till towards evening." Tertull. De Jejun. cap. [i.]

Their fasts till six in the afternoon, T n v eoirepav hvafirpieis ei? /iCT<<\m//a', "Thou waitest for evening to break thy fast." Basil. De Jejun. Horn. i. p. 133.

v 2

their fasts, besides what were usual at their vigils, festivals, and Lord's-day assemblies, at their baptizings, ordinations, reconciling penitents, and other occasions ; all requiring variety of prayers.

And who can believe their pastors were then Hmited to written forms in praying, when the ordinary sort of Christians were not tied to any forms at all in singing ? There seems more reason for a restraint in hymns, than in supplications ; and those who are earnest for liberty in the latter, are well enough content to be confined to Scripture forms in the former. It is evident by Tertullian, that in his time, Christians had the liberty in their church assemblies, to choose either such hymns as they collected out of the Scripture, or such as were of their own conception." So he tells us, describing their love-feasts ; at which we are told, the eucharist was celebrated. Post aquam manualem, et lumina, tit quisque de Scripturis saeris vel de proprio ingenio potest, provocatur in medium Deo ca?iere, b "After washing hands and the introduction of lights, encouragement is given to every one to sing publicly to God as he is able, either out of the Scriptures, or from his own mind." And these, if we believe Grotius, [were] extemporary 17 hymns, and such [were] used by others, both before and after those times.

It is excepted, that Tertullian, in the place we have insisted on, speaks of private devotions : but if they will have it of private only, any that considers the words, will see it evidently mistaken. Illuc sus-picientes Christiani, manibus expansis, quia innocuis; capite nudo, quia non erubescimus, " The Christians thitherward lift up their hands, because their hands are innocent, and pray with the head bare, because we do not blush." He shows Christians Avere unlike the pagans, in their mode of praying, for such reasons, as would not admit them to be alike anywhere, either in private or public ; since they thought themselves concerned to signify, they were more innocent, and less conscious of what was shamefid, than the heathen, as well in public as in private.

This manner of praying was continued in the following age, as is evident in Origen, who declares it both of the Greek and Latin churches, which divided betwixt them the whole Christian world/ They prayed

Diebus atque noctibus jugiter et instanter oramus, propitiantes Deum, " Days and nights we pray continuously and successively that we may propitiate God." Cypr. Insistamus per totam diem precibus, et oremus, "Let us continue in prayers throughout the whole day, and make supplication." Idem.

« Thornd. Serv, p.293. * Apol. cap. xxxix.

' Non solebant pro re nata extempore hymnos quos JfVTOl vocant, eflundere Hebrsei? "Were not the Hebrews wont to pour forth hymns made extempore for the occasion, which they called nTTO! ?" Nee dubito quin et hoc canendi genus vel praecipue commendat Paulus, F.ph. v. 19. Col. iii- 16. Mansit din is mos in ecclesia vetere, Tertullianus meminit, et Plinius, &c, " Nor do I doubt that Paul commends this species of singing in Eph. v. 19, and Col. iii. 16. This custom continued for a long ppriod in the ancient church. Tertullian mentions it, and Pliny."

^ Cnnt. Cels. lib. viii. p. 402.

in his time, not only in their own language, but also according to their ability, Ol pev "EXKrjves 'EXXrjviKols xpcWcu, ol $e 'Pco/xcuot 'PapaiKols, Kai ovras eKaaros Kara n)v eavroi StaXe/crov evx.erai rS Oea>, Kai vfxvei. avrov its Bvvarai, " The Grecians in Greek, the Romans in Latin ; and so every one in his own dialect, prays to God, and praises him as he is able." Precantur Deum, et celebrant pro viribus," " They pray to God, and worship according to their ability." The most learned and judicious that have appeared in this question for prescribed liturgies, do yield, that if oar) dvvapis in Justin Martyr, were duly rendered " according to his ability," and be of the same import with Kara. 8wau.iv, then the prayers there mentioned were such as we say, viz., the issue of the administrator's abilities, not formed for him, nor imposed on him by others. Now as dvvarai, in Origen, is exactly correspondent to, and of the very same signification with Kara. hvvau.iv : nor can it be better rendered than by " according to his ability," or, which is all one, " as he is able ;" and therefore, that those prayers mentioned in Origen were such, may be taken for granted ; and those also which we find in the same book,* where the expression is of the same sense, but comes nearer to the form and sound of the other, which they yield is for us, Top eva Qeov, ko.1 rbv eva 'Yiov avrov Kai \6yov Kai (iKova, rals Kara, ro dvvarov tjfilv iKecriais Kai a^tcocrecri cre/3o/xei> npoadyovres ra> Qem rutv o\u>v rhs ev%as 8ia rod povoyevovs avrov, " That one God, and his only Son both in word and image, we worship with prayers, according to our ability, and honours ; offering prayers unto the God of the universe, by his only begotten." It is acknowledged, by the most zealous friends of these liturgies, that in the apostolical times, there was a di/va/xis, x"P l °~ r JLa evxrjs, " an ability or gift of prayer," enabling those who had it, to conceive their prayers themselves ; and the exercise of this gift or ability, in the NeAV Testament, is, npoo-evxeo-dai iv Tlvevfiari ayla, " to pray in the Holy Ghost," Ju.de ver. 20, and eV ILvevpari, "in the Spirit," Eph. vi. 18. c But this, so expressed, they will have to have been an extraordinary and miraculous gift, as those of healing, prophesying, tongues, &c. Now the former (that there was a gift of prayer) we acknowledge with them ; but the latter (that it was extraordinary and miraculous) should not be granted without proof, being also inconsistent with other principles equally acknowledged, and with those Scriptures too now alleged. Not to take notice, that the gift of prayer is not reckoned amongst those that were miraculous, where we have a particular account of them, Mark ult. 1 Cor. xii. 8, 9, 10, 1 Cor. xiv., rf it is granted by them, that, as all extraordinary gifts were not conferred

B|ish<»]>J H[all.] Hferbert] T[horndike.] p. 386.

Dlr.] H[;immond] in Jude 20. * nfr J H [ainmond,] p. 586.

upon any one person, except the apostles ; so no one gift was conferred upon all; this is plain in the apostle, 1 Cor. xii. 8, 9, 10,11; particularly this gift of prayer is asserted to have been bestowed upon some one of the multitude, fj'pxeTO ^apio-pa ev^s els eva riva rwv Tore, " The gift of prayer entered into some one among the men of that age." So Chrysos-tom a [testifies] (whom alone, amongst the ancients, they have to allege for it, as an extraordinary grace :) But all the believing Hebrews (all that are sanctified, to whom Jude writ, ver. 1,) are required to exercise this gift : (npoo-evxeo-dai iv Hvevpan ayia, "to pray in the Holy Ghost,") and all the converted Gentiles at Ephesus to whom Paul writ, are exhorted by him, to exercise it, Eph. vi. 18, (and all other Christians in them, if those epistles be of general concernment.) Now it could not be their duty to exercise it, if they had it not; and if they all had it, it was an ordinary gift, and continued to the church in all ages. And so Origen, in reference to this gift or ability, might well say, every one prayed £>s Bvvarai, and Kara to Swarou, " according to his ability." However, he that was able to conceive a prayer himself, yet made use of prayers formed by others, did not pray as he was able.

Proceed we to the times following. 6 Basil in the beginning of his tract, De Spiritu Sancto, tells Amphilochius, that he lately praying with the people, and concluding his prayers with a doxology, c used variety of expressions therein; (sometimes to the Father with the Son, together with the Holy Ghost ; sometimes by the Son, in the Holy Ghost) and

" [Horn, xiv.] In Rom. viii.

6 Athanasius was exercised with more conflicts than others : Theodoret calls him elegantly, 'O TrivTaa6\os riic u\ri6eias aymviaTnt, " The five-crowned* champion for the truth." After many before, he meets with a new encounter in Julian's time; of which that historian gives this account, Ouk hveitiovTe? yup ot dai/j.ove? t»)9 'AOavatriov yXwrriis Kai 7rpo<rei'X^? tov lax^Vy lib. iii. cap. viii. " The devils were not able to endure the power of Athanasius's preaching and praying ;" so that they could less bear his prayer and preaching, than that of others; and therefore they raised him more troubles than others met with.

Now, if his preaching had been but the reading of the same homilies which others read, who could give a reason, from thence, why Satan should not endure it in him, as well as in others ! So, if his praying had but been the reading of the same prayers that others did read, no account can be given why the devils should be more troubled at his praying, than of the rest. The ordinary deacons or readers at Alexandria, and elsewhere, could read a prayer as well as he. Certainly his power in preaching was something else than his reading another man's sermons; and was his power in praying no more than his reading another man's prayers ? One would think it could denote no less than that he had a more powerful (way or) faculty in preaching and praying.

And if it be said that this lay only in his more devout or earnest reading, &c. I answer—If the disinterested can be satisfied that his powerful faculty in preaching, was but his fervency in reading other men's sermons, I shall not contend, but that his powerful faculty in praying, might be no more than his devout reading of other men's prayers.

Athanasius himself shows us that prayers were not then had from prayer-books and prescribed forms, when he tells us, Mens orationis fons est, " the mind is the fountain of prayer."

• Hook. Eccles. Pol. lib. v. § 42.

* The epithet alludes to the five different exercises in the Grecian games; viz., leaping, throwing the discus or quoit, racing, wrestling, and boxing.— Ed.

that offence was taken at one mode of his expressing it, npoo-fvxopeva

pol 7rpa>T]v eVt tov Xaov kcu dpcpOTepoos ti)v So£o\oyiav dvaiik^povvTi to Gew ku\ Ilarpl vvv pev pera tov 'Ytou, o~vv tw Tlvevpari ayt'co, vvv fie 8ia tov Yiov, ev ayi'w TlvfCpari, eneaKTjcpav Tives tu>v 7rap6i'Tcov £ew£oucrais rjpas (pcovals KfxpwQai- ~keyovT€s, a " Lately in my prayers with the people I concluded with the doxology to God and the Father in two ways, saying, at one time, With the Son, together with the Holy Ghost ; and at another, By the Son, in the Holy Ghost; upon which some of those present said, that we used unusual expressions." Hence it appears, Basil was not, would not be, limited to the same words, in any the least part of public prayers; not in one clause, so short a clause ; not in the conclusion of a prayer, where those who vary in other parts, many times agree ; not in a doxology, where those that are for more liberty elsewhere, can be content with less. He varies in this once and again, in several prayers, and none of his variations fall in with the usual mode, (to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost;) nor did the fear of offence restrain him from using this liberty.

Now, if in such circumstances he would not be confined, in the part of a prayer, to the invariable use of so short a clause, as the half of the doxology now used ; would he be confined* himself, or confine others to the invariable use of whole prayers? No, it is hereby evident, [that] his times knew no such bonds ; he used such expressions, as to his auditory seemed strange and unusual, which the words of a common-prayer book could not have been.

Augustin, giving directions how the catechumens are to be instructed, adviseth the catechists (Deo gratias [being] particularly [mentioned,]) to accommodate themselves to their several capacities ; and when they are to deal with those of some learning and eloquence, 0 to let them understand, that God minds not so much the expressions, as the inward affection ; ita enim non irridebunt, si aliquos antistites et ministros ecclesia? foi'te animadverterint, vel cum barbarismis et solcecismis Deum invocare; d "so

* cap. i. p. 248.

4 Basil, in praying publicly, used fewCouo-cu? <pa>vaXi, " strange or unusual expressions," which could not be the words of a common-prayer book, of ordinary, though free use, much less of one prescribed and enjoined to be constantly and unvariably used. If there had been any such, you will not think, but Basil would have been confined to them; but he is far from it, he would not be limited to the same words.

« Qui loquendi arte caeteris hominibus excellere videntur, " Who are thought to surpass other men in the art of speaking," but not to be reckoned inter illos doctissimos, quorum mens ma^na-rum rerum est exercitata quaestionibus, " amongst those who are truly learned, whose mind is occupied with questions relating to weighty matters." [Id. ibid. p. 329.]

Discant non contemnere, quos cognoverint morum vitia, quam verborum, amplius devitare " Let them learn not to despise those whom they find avoiding defects of morals more than those of speech." Id. ibid. p. 329. His enim maxime utile est nosse, ita esse praeponendas verbis sen-tentias, ut praeponitur animus corpori, " For it is especially useful to these to know that thoughts arc to be preferred to words, in like manner as the soul to the body." Id, p. 330.

4 De Catechis. Kudib. cap. ix. p. 330. torn. iv. pars poster.

they will not jeer, if perhaps they take notice, that some bishops and ministers of the church, do invocate God with barbarisms and solecisms." Prayers, wherein there were barbarisms and solecisms, none will imagine to have been prescribed by the church ; yet such were the prayers both of bishops and ministers, in Austin's time.

Socrates, who lived in the middle of the fifth century," and whose history reaches anno 439, gives us an account of the variety then used in prayers, altogether inconsistent with any common prescribed liturgy/-' KadoKov, jxivroi Travraxov, Kai Tvapa 7racrais dprjcrKeiais tcov eu^wv ovk ecrriv evpelu dXXj/Xots crvptpwvovcras 8vo eVt to airo, " Generally, in any place whatsoever, and amongst all (the sorts of) worshippers, there cannot two be found agreeing to use the same prayers." Now where there was diversity of prayers everywhere, how could there be the use of one common liturgy? Where there was no o-vfKpcovia, no agreement or concurrence, in using the same prayers in any place ; how could there be one prescribed model ? When there could not be found two, anywhere, using the same prayers, where were they to be found, that used the same service-book ?

For the west, we may understand by Innocent's epistle to Decentius, formerly alleged, how far they were, in the same age, from being confined to one form of church-service ; when he tells us, every one celebrated, as pleased him.

And long after this, something of the ancient liberty is discernible, in the several countries, which was retained in some of them, even after the imposing spirit was roused and active. And by the remaining ruins, we may guess what it was, when it stood entire. At the time when the fourth council of Toledo was held, anno 633, the Spanish churches were not subject (though forwarder for such subjection than others) to imposed orders, for one form of worship ; no not in the sacraments. Even these in the said churches, were celebrated in various modes, and in some of them unduly f as is expressed in the preface to that synod, In sacramentis divinis, qace diverso atque illicito modo in Hispaniarum

<• Antonius of Valentia, a Dominican, (in the council of Trent,) said that it was plain, by all history, that anciently every church had her particular ritual of the mass, brought in by use, and upon occasion, rather than by deliberation and decree ; and that the small church did follow the metropolitan, and the greater, which were near. The Roman rite hath been, to gratify the pope, received in many provinces, though the rites of many churches are still most different from it, &c. And that of Rome also hath had great alterations, and the true Roman rite, not that which is now observed by the priests in that city, &c. Hist, of the Counc. of Trent, lib. vi. pp. 548, 549.

Prayers in the end of ancient councils [were] not premeditated, hut as the Spirit did excite some bishops.

In Trent, not giving way to the extemporary spirit of any, they repeated it out of a paper. Ibid. p. 813.

Vid. Augustini Rctractal. lib. ii. cap. xx. of varieties in sacraments, Nee tamen commemorari omnia potuerunt, " nor is it possible to mention them all."

< Lib. v. cap. [xxii.l p. 098. l Crab. torn. ii. p. l<J(i. [Binius, torn. ii. par. ii. p. 345.]

ecclesiis celebrantur, " In the divine sacraments which are administered in various and improper modes in the churches of Spain."

In France" they had books for public service, in the eighth century ; yet were they used at the discretion of those that officiated, who added or left out, what they thought fit; till Charlemagne, in the beginning of the ninth age, would have them reformed after the Roman guise. 6

And in Germany, long after Boniface had been stickling to reduce it to the Roman uniformity, the whole country was so far from submitting to any one prescribed order of service, that in one c diocese there were various modes of administei'ing, particularly in that of Cologne. And Bruno,** bishop there in the middle of the tenth age, was endeavouring to reform this, as church-matters, in those days, were wont to be reformed; Diversitatem sacra peragendi in sua provincia corrigens, ac tit eadem ubique esset ratio constituens, " He reformed the diversity in the administration of the sacred rites, and decreed that the method of procedure should be everywhere one and the same."

And in Ireland, (with which the Britons and Scots symbolised) we showed before, out of the great Usher, that till the twelfth century, no one general form of service was retained ; but divers rites and manners of celebration were observed, till the Roman use was brought in, by the popes' legates.

So that all along it is manifest, [that] the uniformity aimed at, in the common prescribed liturgies, was only the issue and darling of late dark and degenerate times ; an innovation upon the church's usages, in better times, and an invading of her ancient liberty ; for which the bishops of Rome were the greatest zealots, designing therein the subjection of all other churches to that of Rome ; and gaining thereby, both an acknowledgment of the papal authority, from those who submitted to this yoke,

a Percipiens de omnibus civitatibus Franciae magistros scholae, antiphonarios eis ad corrigendum tradere, et ab iis discere cantare : correcti sunt ergo antiphonarii Francorum, quos unusquisque pro arbitrio suo vitiaverat, vel addens vel minuens, et omnes Franciae cantores didicerunt fonnam Romanam, " Perceiving that the professors of all the cities of France gave to them the service-books to correct, and learnt the art of chanting from them ; the service-books of the Franks, which every one had corrupted at his pleasure, either by additions or omissions, were accordingly corrected, and all the singing-men of France learnt the Roman fashion." Chron. Engolismense in Morn. De Miss. lib. i. cap. viii. p. 221. J fashion.

« Quoniam in plerisque partibus intra eandem civitatem atque dioecesim, permixti sunt populi diversarum linguarum, hahentes sub una fide varios ritus et mores : districte praecipimus, ut pon-tifices hujusmodi civitatum sive dicecesium provideant viros idoneos, qui secundum diversitatem rituum et linguarum, divina illis officia celebrent, et ecclesiastica sacramenta ministrent, " Seeing that in most regions within the same city and diocese people of divers tongues are mingled together, possessing in subordination to the one faith various rites and customs, we strictly charge the bishops of cities or dioceses of this sort to provide proper men who shall celebrate for them according to this diversity of rites and tongues the divine offices, and shall administer the sacraments of the church." Decret. Greg. (3. q.) tit. xxxi. He Offic. Jud. Onl. cap. xiv. • Rotger. Vit. Brunonis, apud Surium. obiit an. 96.3, Oct. 11.

and an advantage of diffusing the poison of her superstitions, through the body of the western empire, where uniformity in liturgy and rituals, became a chief part of the uniform apostasy of the latter times.

Thus we have gone through the disadvantages of proving a negative : a let us now see, how they acquit themselves, upon whom the proof lies ; affirming, that the liturgies they contend for, have been ever, from the beginning. And here, if anywhere, it woidd be an easy matter, to give the world abundant satisfaction, that what they assert is true, if indeed it were so : he that takes notice, what clear and full evidence may be easily had, from the writers of some one country, in a part of the last age, for prescribed liturgies ; or what convincing and unanswerable proof may be brought for them, from the few writers, which were in part of the eighth or ninth centuries, when they had got place in the world; may justly expect, that, from that multitude of writings, in those many ages, which this question concerns, such ample and evident testimony for imposed forms, would be found by those who have laboured for it, as would leave no place for the least doubt but there were such in use all along, if they had been really, as is pretended, the usage of the churches, from the apostles' times. And if no such thing be produced, by those whose interest led them to ransack all antiquity for it; even this, if there were no more, will be a convincing argument, that the ancient church had no such custom. Let us then view, what the learned advocates for these liturgies have collected out of the ancients, and published for the satisfaction of the world, in this point; and impartially examine, whether it amount to such proof, as may be reasonably looked for in those circumstances, or whether it come not short of any just and competent proof at all.

Clemens Alexandrinus is one of the ancientest authors produced for

this purpose ; and he in these words.* To cidpoicrfia rcbv iv rats (vxals ava-Keipevcov fxiav axmep e^ou (pcovrjv ttjv koivtjv /cat fiLav yva>p.rjv, thus rendered,

" The congregation addicted to their prayers, having as it were one mind, and one voice common to all." Now (says my author) a congregation cannot have one voice in their prayers, without a set form for them to join in. But this is very strange and mysterious. I had thought, as others do, that the congregation had one voice, in respect of the minister speaking in their stead, one for all, and therefore accounted the koivt) (pcovrj, " the common mouth," the mouth of the people in praying,

« Parker of Cr. lib. ii. p. 125.

Cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probatio nulla sit, " Since in the nature of things there is no proof of a negative fact." Decret. p. 2. Cans. vi. Quest, v. cap. ii.

Doth your discretion serve you to put us to prove the negative? you cannot prove they had. ami that is cause sufficient for us to avouch they had not. Bils. Apol. cap. iv. p. 351.

* Strom, lib. vii. [cap. vi. p. 848. Ed. Oxon.J

as when he preaches in the name of Christ, he is x €l M *w X-pio-Toi, " the lips of Christ," in Clemens' style," or arofia tov Xpia-rov, " the mouth of Christ," as Basil calls Nazianzen.* Now who can imagine, why he should not be their mouth, in uttering a conceived prayer, as well as in reading a prayer out of a book ? e He had told us immediately before (and it is generally, by those of his persuasion acknowledged) that while the gift of prayer lasted, viz., in the apostolical age, there was no form settled ; and therefore, if the people cannot have one voice in their prayers, without a set form ; an apostle, or other primitive minister, praying with a congregation (since he used no set form) was not their mouth ; nor did any church pray with one voice, all that age.

As insufficient for this purpose, is that of TertuUian.^ Oramus pro im-peratoribus, pro ministiis eoram ac potestatibus, pro statu seculi, pro rerum quiete, pro mora finis, " We pray for the emperors, for their servants, for their governments, for the condition of the world, for peace, for a postponement of the end." And that of Cyprian,* Pro arcendis hostibus, et imbribus impetratidis, et vel auferendis vel temperandis adversis, rogamus semper et preces fundimus: et pro pace ac salute vestra, &c. " For the expulsion of foes, for the obtaining of rain, for the removal or tempering of calamities, we ever make request and pour forth prayers, as well as for your peace and safety." And that of Basil/ (which though in the age following, we join with these, because of the same import.) A friend of his, gone to travel, had written to him, that he would be mindful of him in his prayers; to whom his answer is this: emXcifco-dai 8e <rov, &c. " To forget thee in my prayers is impossible, for thou rememberest,

on Ka\ vnep tojv ev dTrodrjfMiais d8e\<fia>v Beo/xeda, &C. that in the church we

make prayers for all our brethren that travel, for all that are enrolled soldiers, for all that confess freely the Name, for all that bring forth spiritual fruits."^

Here is, in these severals,^ some account for what, and for whom they prayed ; but not a syllable to signify, that they did it in set or prescribed forms. If those that pray without such forms, were to give an account of the scope and import of their usual prayers, and to express for what persons and things they ordinarily do pray ; they would do it in such terms, as might be as just a ground for our author's inference, as any alleged. Indeed, these allegations are so far from proving an imposed liturgy, with set forms of prayer, that they do not prove so much as a directory : for, in that which was composed for these nations, we have more than the persons for whom, and the things for which we

- Strom.[lib. vii.] » Ep. cxli. c L'Estr. Allianc. of Div. Off. cap. i. p. 19.

H Apol. cap. xxxix. • Epist. ad Deinetr. / Epist. cxli.

s Anonym. Use of Daily Public Prayers, pp. G, 8. * particulars.

should pray ; yet no more is specified in, or can be collected from any, or all the places now mentioned. I dare offer many more, of this nature, to any judicious eye, without fear that he will see any such thing therein, as the producer of these three would fain have seen. Let him that is minded, look."

The same author thinks he hath discovered a church common prayer-book in Origen ; but without any ground at all, save his desire to discover one so ancient: his words are, " Origen, in his fourth book against Celsus, quotes three or four several passages of Scripture, out of their eiixai, or prayers ; by prayers meaning that which the Grecians now call their euchologium, or prayer-book." But if he had consulted a little more with Origen, he might have discerned, that by ei>xa\ he means the Psalter, or Psalms of David, and no other church-service book, besides the Scripture. For, in that book against Celsus, quoting any passage out of the Psalms, he says, so it is found iv elxfi, " in the prayer." So lib. vi. p. 285, [edit. Cantabr. 1658,] where alleging Psalm cxxx. 1, 2, 3, he says, XeXeKrai iv evxfj, "it is said in the prayer," Kvpie, ovk v\jrd>0i] fj Kapbla pou, &c. "Lord, my heart is not lifted up," &c. So alleging Ps. 1. 10, 8ia tovto Xeyerat vnb rov iTTio~Tr)p.6va>s ei'xopivov, " therefore it is said of him, praying under standingly," viz. the Psalmist, Kapbiav Kadapav kt'ktov iv ipo\, 6 Qeos, " create in me, O God, a clean heart."* So lib. iv. p. 178, olrives iv rais evxais evpopev Self rl Xeyeiv cppovovvras, " who find in the prayers what the prudent ought to say," on rov iXeovs Kvplov TrXrjprjs rj yrj, that " the earth is full of the mercy of the Lord;" which, being found in two Psalms, xxxiii. 5, and cxix. 64, may be the reason he quotes it in the plural, iv elxais. And this may be the place my author intends ; for he had not the confidence to transcribe it, nor direct particularly to it ; having, it is like, no hopes that any, whose fancy was not deeply tinctured with his conceits of such liturgies, looking upon the place, would mistake the Psalms of David for a Greek prayer-book.

Origen is again produced by him : who, says he, gives this description of true Christians, Ot diet rov 'lrjaov tov eVt waai Qepairevovres Ocov, Kai ftiovvres Kara to evayyeXtov avrov, reus 7rpoo"ra^^et'craiy ie evxeus o~vvex f ~

trrepov Kai Seovrcos, vvktos ko1 rjpipas xp^^ €vol f that is, as he renders it, " They that serve the God of all, through Christ, and live according to his gospel ; who also frequently and duly, both night and day, use those prayers that are (prescribed, as he will have it, or, which is all the word imports) commanded." There needs not many words, to

« Cyril. Catech. 5. [n. 3.] Tertull. Apol. cap. xxx. Chrysost. Horn, [vi.] in 1 Tim. p. 271. and in 2 Cor. p. ")57. and Hilary, in Cant. iv. p. 414. Auctor De Vocat. Gent. lib. i. cap. xii. p. 798. Coelestin. Epist. in Prosper, p. S94, pro Trosper. et Hilario, cap. xi.

■• Lib. vii. p. 354. " Lib. vi. against Cels [p. 302.]

show the irnpertinency and unserviceableness of this passage, for the purpose for which it is alleged. When it appears," first, that those were not private prayers, which were to be put up night and day, at any hour of either; secondly, that there are no prayers commanded, but in set forms, or that, if it had been Trpoo-TaxQeivais 6/xiAiW, any one would have understood thereby, prescribed and set forms of sermons; and thirdly, that there are no commands for frequent praying, but human inventions or prescriptions : then this allegation may be thought pertinent, and further considered. But the producer of it would not judge it worthy so much, professing his distrust of its sufficiency to prove what he desires ; " Yet, I profess," saith he, " I do not allege this passage, as an infallible proof, because I know the word rrpoarax^fi'Tais may be also otherwise interpreted." If he had said, the word, when applied to prayers, in Origen, or any near his time, could never be but otherwise interpreted, he had spoken with more ingenuity, 6 and no less truth.

Another place in Origen is more commonly insisted on, viz. in Homil. xi. upon Jeremy ; and for imposed forms, they argue from the mode of an expression there, which, what it was in Origen, no man can tell; since in those Latin commentaries, we never have his words, and can never know (as his translators have used him) when we have his sense, or whether we read him or them. c However, these are the words alleged, Ubi frequenter in oratione dicimus, Da Omnipotens, da nobis partem cum prophetis, da cum apostolis Christi tui, tribue ut inveniamur ad vestigia unigeniti tui; " When we often say in prayer, Grant, Almighty, grant us a lot with thy prophets, with the apostles of thy Christ, give us that we may be found at the steps of thy only Son." Here it is presumed, that these are Origen's words, and not his translators' ; and that the form of his expression (on which alone the reasoning is grounded) is exactly and faithfully transferred to us, by those who declare they used no such exactness or faithfulness in reading him. It is presumed also, that this was his meaning, that they frequently used, not only those petitions, but those very words, which there is no need we should grant: yet, if all these were yielded, no more can hence be concluded, than what is common with those who pray extempore, viz., that they often in prayer, preferred one or two petitions, in the same words. Or,

• The same Origen [says] in Gen. Horn. x. Sine intermissione orandum, apostolus prascipit: vos qui ad orationes non convenitis, quomodo impletis sine intermissione, quod semper omittitis ? " ' Pray without ceasing,' the apostle commands; how do ye who meet not at the prayers fulfil without ceasing that duty which ye always omit ?"

4 ingenuousness.

<■ Satis constat, Origenis, quae Latine tantum extant, a Ruflino et aliis interpretibus ita fuisse interpolata, ut ex iis vix possit certo intelligi, quid vere sit Origenicum, " It is clear enough that the works of Origen, which are extant in Latin only, have been so interpolated by Ruflinus, and other translators, that it is scarcely possible to gather from them what is truly Origen's." Dull. I)e lib. Suppos. Dionys., &c. lib. ii. cap. xxxiv. p. lin.

if I should grant, that this was a form of prayer, when there is nothing to persuade it, more than that the apostles' was a set form," (ov rravofiai -rravTore, " I never cease," there being no less than frequenter here") yet what shadow of a proof is there, that it was a prescribed form ?

Another very learned man thinks there is sufficient evidence for the forms in question, from one or two words {Dominica solennia, " Lord's-day solemnities,") in Tertullian.* But what Tertullian means by those solennia, " solemnities,'' himself particularly declares in the same place ; Jam vero prout Scriptunv leguntur, aid psahni canuntur, aut petitiones delegantur, aut allocutiones preferuntur, ita inde visionibus materia? sub-ministrantur, " Already whilst the Scriptures are reading, or psalms singing, or petitions offering, or addresses delivering, materials are thus furnished from these exercises for visions ;" the reading of the Scriptures, the singing of psalms, the prayers, and the sermons, are the Dominica solennia mentioned. Now, if he who alleges this can persuade the world, that at every assembly the same chapters were still read, the same psalms always sung, and the same sermons still preached; he may persuade us, that the same prayers in the same form and words, were always made ; because forsooth, these (as the other, and no more, no otherwise than the other) are solennia, in Tertullian's style. Yet, if we were so credulous, as to be persuaded into such a paradox, his work would not be done ; for prayers might be, (and are frequently) the same, and yet not prescribed. In c Tertullian's time, neither the order of reading, nor singing, nor preaching, was prescribed; and yet they were in his style and account, solennia; and that prayers must be concluded to have been in prescribed forms, merely because he reckons them, as the other, inter Dominica solennia, " amongst the Lord's-day solemnities," will seem wonderful to an ordinary reason.

By this we may judge, how reasonably the same word in Cyprian is made use of, for the same purpose, Ubi vero solennibus adimpletis dare calicem diacoiuts pr&sentibus ca?pit, d " "When the things wont to be done, before the distribution, being performed, the deacon began to give the

■ Eph. i. 16—IS, &c. 2 Thess. i. 11, 12. * De Anmia. cap. ix.

c Ut quisque de Scripturis, vel de proprio ingenio potest, provocatur in medium Deo canere, " Appeal is made to every one as he is able either from the Scriptures or out of his own mind, to sing publicly to God." Tertull. [Apol. cap. xxsix.]

Now, as concerning the ancient and general course of God's praises, and reading the Scripture, it appears by Justin Martyr, and Tertullian, that the order of reading the Scripture in the church was arbitrary in their time, as accommodated to the condition of the times and occasions of their assemblies, by the guides of several churches. The one of them saith, that the Scriptures are read nexp's tTX«V> 6 '> " as l° n g as is meet:" the other words are these, Apol. cap. xxxix. Coimus ad literarum divinarum commemorationem, si quid praesentium temporum qualitas aut praemonere cogit aut recognoscere; " We assemble to repeat the Scriptures of God, what the condition of the present times enforceth, either to forewarn or to recognise." The order, which is accommodated to the condition of the times, cannot be certain and appointed afore. H. Thornd. Serv. at Publ. Assem. pp. 397, 398. rf Serm. De Lapsis.

cup to those who were present." Prayers were some of those things which were wont to be performed before, and so may be included in solennibus. But that solennia shoidd here denote prescribed forms of prayer, or such forms as were generally frequented, or indeed, any forms whatsoever, there is not the least show of reason (which we made evident by Cyprian's master, even now.) Nor could it have fallen into any imagination, but of one only fully possessed with a conceit that none but such forms were then in use. The learned person producing those words, tells us a little before, 0 [that] the eucharist was celebrated with solemn prayers, in the apostles' times ; and yet acknowledges, 6 these were not set forms, but such as were suggested by the Spirit, and made by virtue of the extraordinary gift; which, with Chrysostom, he calls xap^a-fia ev^ij? : so that solemn prayers were not set forms then ; and who can divine, why they must needs be so in Cyprian ?

But in answer to these testimonies, this may suffice. I will add no

more, Iva fir] vrrmrXtop to. apax"i8ia 8uik6wtoi'T{s KaTa7roL(ofX(v, " Lest by

rending cobwebs we overdo the matter," to use Chrysostom's words. 0 Hitherto we meet with no evidence, for so much as any arbitrary forms of prayer, in the first and best ages of the church ; much less for prescribed forms. And yet this is the very best evidence that I can meet with (produced by any that have laboured in this argument) for the first three hundred years ; and indeed all, that hath any show of proof, if so be all that hath been examined, may seem to have so much. I should show too much contempt of the reverend author's judgment, if I shoidd offer with more words, to satisfy him, that the pretended Ignatius's fiia 7rpocrevxri, d " one prayer," or Justin Martyr's koii>t) evxr), e " common prayer," or the ancient preface, or Tertullian's mode of renunciation/ Sursum corda, " Lift up your hearts," or the use of a doxology (of these two last, see what is said before) have not so much as the face of a proof for the liturgies in question. And I might be suspected of some design to render their advocates contemptible, if I should insinuate, that any of them rely upon that, in this cause, which yields not the shadow of a support. I am much mistaken, if those that are judicious and disinterested, can count anything proved hereby, more than this, that those who make use of such allegations, are at a great loss for want of proofs. But I must not overlook what I met with, when

» p. 240.

' I acknowledge, that under the apostles, the prayers of the church were not prescribed, but conceived, by those that were employed in that office. Thornd. Right of Church, 328.

He makes it an argument for prescribed forms, that deacons were employed; yet says, they were not in prayers at the eucharist, p. 329, but appropriates these to presbyters, 328. And that which deacons did in the other was ir/jocripuM'iicm, " bidding of prayer," not praying, which Clem. Constit. distinguishes. Videl. irpoa(jiuwn<m, "the deacon's part," hrU\n<rK, "the bishop's." Lib. viii. cap. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. xv. ' In 1 Cor. xv. p. 514.

•' Epist. ad Magn. [sect, vii.] • Apnl. ii. fp. 97. Ed. 1686.] / De Corona Milit.

I had thus far proceeded. I was not a little amazed, to see some Protestants willing to allege that impudent forgery, called the liturgy of St. James, as evidence for prescribed liturgies ; a piece stuffed with many superstitions and novelties," such as were never dreamt of in the apostles' times, nor long after ; and not without some strictures of blasphemy and idolatry (offering incense to God, for remission of sins, and invocating the Virgin Mary.) So that Bellarmine himself (though the interest of a desperate cause, needing such supports, might have tempted him (as well as others) to it; many corruptions, which he is engaged to defend, being therein countenanced) durst not say it was his, on whom it is fathered. De Jacobi liturgia sic sentio, earn aut non esse ejus, aut multa h jjosterioribus eidem addita, " Concerning the liturgy of James, it is my opinion, either that it is not his, or that many things have been added by later hands than his." He instances 6 in divers particulars, 0 not known in the first times, and then adds, Multa sunt alia, qua; redolent novitatem, " There are many other things therein, that savour of novelty."

All that Baronius hath to d say for it, is, [that] some passages in the

* Obii fup KtxOapov -r?ic clttoctoXikiis bp9o&o£ i'ac inrotTio^et -rov x a P aKT ^iP a i " I" or it does not pre" serve the pure character of apostolical orthodoxy." Euseb. Hist. lib. iii. cap. xxxii. The dialogues betwixt Peter and Apion were condemned as counterfeit, upon this account. The following are a few instances from the Liturgy, npoo-defai ~cb 0vfxla.ua tovto el? bafiijv evwdia? Kai 'atpemv twv afiafmuiv q/iSf' 36fa aol Mapta —" Receive this incense as a perfume of a sweet savour for the remission of sins. Glory to thee, Mary I" Mvtiixwvevw/jiev &e<nroiv>is OeoroKov, &c. " Let us make mention of the queen, the mother of God !" Postea, Mariae et omnium sanctorum, ut precibus et intercessionibus eorum misericordiam consequamur, ut oblatio sit in requiem animarum, quae ante nos dormierunt, Afterwards, " (Let us make mention) of Mary and all the saints, that by their prayers and intercessions we may obtain mercy, and that the oblation may procure rest for the souls which have fallen asleep before us,"— fxaKapiais i/uxai~? avairavav, " giving rest to the souls of the blessed." * gives instances.

c Nam in ea jubet fieri mentionem apostolorum, martyrum, confessorum, et alibi meminit anacho-retarum, et Christianorum damnatorum ad metalla; cum tamen constat anachoretas ccepisse a Paulo primo eremita, et Christiauos ccepisse damnari ad metalla post tempora apostolorum. Ibidem jubet recitari, Gloria Patri et Filio, &c. quern hymnum compositum fuisse in concilio Nicaeno, communis opinio est. Jubet et dici, Sanctus Deus, Sanctus Fortis, Sanctus et Immortalis, Miserere Nobis, qui diu post tempora sancti Jacobi inventus est. Multa sunt alia, quae redolent novitatem, " Herein he orders that mention be made of the apostles, martyrs, and confessors ; and in another place, of anchorets and Christians condemned to the mines : whereas it is clear, that the anchorets took their rise from Paul, the first hermit, and that the Christians were first condemned to the mines subsequent to the times of the apostles. In the same book he orders that the Gloria Patri, et Filio, &c. be said, which hymn, it is the common opinion, was composed in the council of Nice. He also orders that the Sanctus Deus, Sanctus Fortis, Sanctus et Immortalis, Miserere Nobis, be used, which was made long after the times of St. James. There are many other things in it which savour of amodern date." Vid. Rivet. Crit. Sacr. pp. 110, 271.

rf The cardinal brings five instances : most he misrepresents ; none serve his turn.

1. Sursum corda, "Lift up your hearts," so in Cyril, avu> tos xapcSi'ar, " Lift up your hearts," but in the liturgy not so, but &va <rxu>nev tov vovv Kai t«s- Kap&ia?, " Let us lift up our mind and our hearts," and the answer in Cyril is, exo^ev irpos toi< Kvpiov, " We lift them up unto the Lord ;" but in the liturgy quite otherwise, viz. afioi< Kai iUaiov, " It is meet and right."

2. Orate pro vivis et defunctis, " Pray for the living and the dead," which words neither priest nor deacon useth, either in Cyril, or the liturgy."

8, Osculemini invicem in osculo sancto, " Kiss one another with a holy kiss ;" in the liturgy, afa-wi'/mo/iei' u\X>)\our fv (ptAijLiaTi ayio), " Let us embrace one another with a holy kiss," but in Cyril,

catechisms called Cyril's," [are] agreeable to somewhat in the said missal, as he will have it; ( Quam vere ejus esse plane cog?ioscet, qui earn conferat cum iis, quae Cyrilhis ejusdem ecclesice Tlierosolymorum episcopus in suis mys-tagogicis orationibus habet, qucc quidem ipse non aliunde quam ex Jacobi liturgia cognoscitur accepissef " How truly it is his, he who compares it with those things which Cyril, bishop of the same church of Jerusalem, has in his mystagogic orations, will plainly discern, which things Cyril himself acknowledges he took from the liturgy of James,") which is a very serviceable argument, and may happily^ prove as well, that Cyril was the author of the liturgy ascribed to James, or that James was the writer of the catechisms attributed to Cyril. How it is known, that Cyril could not have these passages anywhere else, but from James's liturgy, I apprehend not; we must take the cardinal's w r ord, nor is it capable of better proof: but, that those particulars might be transferred out of the catechisms into that liturgy, we may well understand another way.

It was some disparagement to the church of Rome, not to have a liturgy which might pretend to be apostolical, as well as the church of Jerusalem and Alexandria. A missal is formed, wherein the prayer for consecration, is verbatim the same with that called " The Canon of the Roman Mass :" this missal, for the reputation of that canon, must pass for St. Peter's. But Gregory, bishop of Rome, who six hundred years after Christ, knew no apostolical liturgies, and says, [that] in the apostles' times, there were no forms used in the eucharist, no not for consecration, but only the d Lord's prayer, tells us also unhappily, that one Scholasticus made the canonical prayer used in the Roman church, for consecration of the eucharist; so that, if we will believe Gregory, (who knew the original of the Roman liturgies, as well as most parents know their children") their St. Peter must be beholding, for the said prayer, to Scholasticus (even as James was to a catechism for the forementioned

/3ou 6 bianovo':, ltK\rj\ovs awo\uj3eTe, Kai a\X//\ow aamaCu>iJ.eOa., " The deacon calls out, Receive ye one another, and let us embrace one another."

4. Sancta Sanctis, " Holy things for holy men." Resp. Unus est Spiritus, &c. The response is, " There is one Spirit." So in the liturgy, hut with the addition of tir d6fai< Geo5 riai-po? w 3ofa eif a'tutva, " To the glory of God the Father, to whom be glory for ever," which is not in Cyril.

5. Gustate et videte, quoniam suavis est Dominus, "Taste and see that the Lord is good," is in other liturgies (as some of the former are) and so may as well prove James to be the author of them, as of this. « Ad an. 63, n. 17. b Ibid. e haply.

■* Orationem autem Dominicam idcirco mox post precem dicimus, quia mos apostolorum erat, ut ad ipsam solummodo orationem, oblationis hostiam consccrarent. Et valde mihi inconveniens visum est, ut precem quam Scholasticus composuerat, super oblntionem diceremus ; et ipsam tra-ditionem, quam Redemptor noster composuit, super ejus corpus et sanguinem non diceremus, " We say the Lord's prayer directly after this prayer, because it was the custom of the apostles to consecrate the sacrifice with that prayer only. And it appeared very unsuitable to me, to offer over the oblation the prayer which Scholasticus had composed, and not to offer the form which our Redeemer composed, over his body and blood." Greg. [Magn.] lib. vii. Ep. lxiii. [p. 230.]

c Omnis ecclesiastici officii institutio veteris fuit Gregorii, "The whole ordering of the ancient ecclesiastical service was Gregory's work." Platina. Vit. Greg.

Z

passages) unless we can imagine, that Gregory," by Scholasticus, understood the apostle Peter. But even this should not seem strange ; since to Bellarmine, in his zeal for the canon of the mass, it is probable ; and yet* probable too, that Gregory, by Scholasticus, understood some person who lived in his own time. How hard is it for the greatest persons to manage the defence of apostolical liturgies, without rendering themselves ridiculous! °

But these, whom I deal with, seem not to own this missal of James directly, speaking of it only as the opinion of some Greeks who tell of such a liturgy. What Greeks these are, I know not; not finding any Greeks owning it, till seven hundred years after Christ: yea, the Greeks under the patriarch of Constantinople, and those in the diocese of the orient also, did utterly disclaim that liturgy one thousand two hundred years after Christ, as rf Balsamon, the patriarch of Antioch, declares.

Those that own it, or others, as apostolical, or did so heretofore, never did, never will, give any account thereof to the world, to clear them from imposture. e

To waive the arguments usually insisted on, (that we may not actum agere, " do what has been done,") these liturgies were not known (nor used) before the seventh or eighth century y For if they had been known in the foregoing ages,

" Admittere possumus totum canonem, exceptis verbis Domini, a Scholastico compositum, quia nimirum et Sanctus Petrus, et cseteri sancti pontifices Scholastici dici possunt, " We may admit that the whole canon, with the exception of the words of our Lord, was composed by Scholasticus, since St. Peter, and other holy bishops, may very well go by the name of Scholastics." Bellarm. De Miss. lib. ii. cap. xix. p. 819.

4 Si Gregorius, per Scholasticum, intelligat certum aliquem hominem, qui aetate ipsius vixerit, ut adversarii contendunt, utraque probabilis est, " If, however, as our opponents contend, Gregory means by Scholasticus any particular person who lived in his own time, it is agreed to be a probable supposition." Id. ibid.

• Flagrans cupido nobilitatis avitse cogit homines interdum delirare, " A burning desire after ancient nobility sometimes drives men mad." Baronius.

d Attamen 85 canon sanctorum et omni laude celebrium apostolorum, et 59 canon Laodicenae synodi, enumerantes Veteris Testamenti et Novi, ipsosque apostolicos libros, qui in usu nobis esse debent, nullam sacrificii S. Marci, vel S. Jacobi mentionem faciunt, neque etiam catholica sanctis-simi et cecumenici throni Constantinopolis ecclesia, ullo modo eas liturgias agnoscit. Pronuncia-mus igitur, non esse has recipiendas, " The S5th canon of the holy and famous apostles, and the 59th canon of the council of Laodicea, when enumerating the books of the Old and New Testaments, and the writings of the apostles, which we ought to use, make no mention of the missal of St. Mark or St. James ; nor does the catholic church of the most holy and oecumenical throne of Constantinople acknowledge in any manner those liturgies. We pronounce, therefore, that they are not to be received." Balsam, in Respons. ad Quaest. Marci. Petr. Alex. writ[ten,] as Baronius observes, an. 1204.

< The last particular, of i>7r<kp<crir \l/ev&o\6ja>v, " the hypocrisy of liars," I made to be counterfeit writings, under the names of the first and best antiquity ; St. Peter's liturgy, the liturgy of St. James, Matthew, Mark, &c. Through which we need not doubt, but the doctrine of demons was promoted, when we see some not ashamed still to maintain it, by those counterfeit authorities. Mede, Apost. of Lat. Times, p. 139.

/ The dialogues betwixt Peter and Apion were rejected for less than this, Jn> <w6' o\a>t /W//J-1 rlt irapa toIs TraXannr, " Of which no mention is made by the ancients." Euseb. Hist lib. iii. cap. xxxviii. Yea, the epistle of James was in danger, not because it was never mentioned (it would never have been received by any under such silence) but because it was not so frequently men-

1. Certainly there would have been some mention of them, by some fathers, councils, or other writers ; by those surely, who give an account of all apostolical writings, both questioned and unquestionable ; or those who lived upon the place where these counterfeits, assuming those great names, are said to have been entertained, particularly for that of James, by Eusebius, Cyril, or Jerome, who resided in Palestine.

2. Undoubtedly they would have been generally admitted, as other apostolical writings were. None would have seen reason to have composed other liturgies, nor would any other have been preferred before them.

3. Finally, none would have presumed, or would have been suffered without control, to have enlarged, curtailed, inverted them, and made all kind of alterations therein, as some have done, a so as they are quite transformed from what they were once ; insomuch as their favourers can show us no one part of them, which may with any assurance be ascribed to the first authors, whoever they were. This is acknowledged, and said to be done in several ages, by the guides of those churches, where they had entertainment: who by thus using them, evidently declared, either that they did not believe them to be apostolical, nor would have had them so accounted ; or else, that themselves

tioned, ou noWol yovv, tu>v iriiXai ai-njv e^j.vy]jx.i>vevtrav, " Not many of the ancients mention it." although it was received and approved, kv TrXeitnats hKK\t]aiais, " in most churches." Euseh. lib. ii. cap. xxii. Gkec. k-^'.

The second epistle of Clemens was not approved as genuine, ou pev eO' 6)xoio>i t>J nporepo. ko.1 TavTtjv *ivii>pi.)XOv e7r«TTc»jue(?a" oti fxi] de Toi/9 apxaiovs alnij KeXP»i/ie"u"t iff/uev, " We are aware that this is not in equal repute with the first, because the ancients, as far as we know, did not use it," Euseb. [lib. Hi. cap. xxxviii.]

So Augustin rejects the writings under the name of Andrew and John, because they were not admitted by the church. Contra Advers. Leg. lib. i. cap. lxx. Contra Faust, lib. xx. cap. lxxix.

« Nam utLatini ipsiet Grasci pontifices, multadeincepsin suis liturgiis, quas jaminde abapostolis acceperant, pro re nata, vel immutarunt, vel addiderunt: ita etiam ab Alexandrinis et iEgyptiis, par est credere, pro temporum opportunitate factitatum, " For as the Latin bishops themselves, and the Greek successively, either added or changed as they had occasion many things in their liturgies which they had received even from the apostles, and onwards, so also it is reasonable to believe, that the same was frequently done by the Alexandrian and Egyptian bishops, as the times served." Victorius Scialach. Preface to his version of Three Arabic Liturgies.

Illud accidit (quod etiam apud Latinos factum esse constat) ut in sacratissima missa (viz. Jacobi) aliis superadding precibus, aliis autem breviori summa contractis, vitibusque nonnihil auctis aut immutatis, vel tamen substantia integra permanente paulo diversior ab ilia pristina habeatur, " It happened (as is clear took place even amongst the Latins) that by the addition of some prayers, by tlie abridgment of others into a short compendium, by the amplification or change in some degree of rites in this most sacred missal (viz. of James's,) whilst, however, the substance remained unimpaired, it assumed a somewhat different shape from its primitive one." Baronius in Spond. ad an. 63, n. 5.

Extat etiam liturgia eidem S. Jacobo attributa, quas tamen A posterioribus ita locupletata est, ut non sit facile dijudicium, quae pars ejus liturgiae S. Jacobum habeat authorem, "There is also extant a liturgy ascribed to the same St. James ; which, however, has been so interpolated by later hands, that it is not easy to decide what part of it has St. James for its author." Bellarm. De Script. Eccles. p. 33.

And [H]erbert T[horndike] compares the pretended primitive liturgies to Theseus' ship, which had been so changed, as no man could tell what part of it remained. Serv. of Ch. at ltelig. Assemb. p. 250.

z 2

were impious wretches, in making so bold with that which should have been preserved inviolable as the Scripture ; and wretched impostors too, who would thrust their own patches, and others no better than their own, upon Christians, under apostolical names : and so, one of these ways, all the credit is lost, upon which they are recommended to the world as apostolical.

But, if they were not known (as is manifest by the premises they were not) for so many ages ; then, neither were they extant, and so, owe not their original to the apostles, or any near their times. For it is impossible, that, if they had been extant, and composed by the apostles, for the constant and daily use of the churches, they should not be known to the generality of Christians, supposed to have so used them : or, if any will say, [that] the churches used them not, he must condemn them as highly impious, living in Avilful disobedience to the apostles' orders, and open contempt of their authority, from generation to generation : and further, if they were not known to be apostolical, before the seventh or eighth ages, there is no way left to know it after. Innate arguments there are none, in those pieces, to evidence it, but many which show the contrary; no features or lineaments truly apostolical, but much of the scurf and luxuriousness of corrupt and decrepit ages. So that there is nothing but testimony to rely on, and he that will admit writings to be apostolical, upon the testimony of times wherein delusion and degeneracy prevailed, without the least attestation of the first churches, and so many intermediate ages, is well disposed to be deluded, or delude others.

To conclude, if those" who allege them, did know any prayers, in that [liturgy] of James, or the rest, which they really believed to be apostolical, they would use those themselves, they would employ their authority and interest to have them used by others; they would not be so arrogant, as to think their own models, or so weak, as to judge the forms of others better ; or so perverse, as to make choice of the worse ; they would not show such contempt of the apostles, as to prefer others before them ; or such disobedience, as never to observe what they prescribed. All the writings of the apostles (they being universal officers divinely inspired) oblige all ; so that I see not what room there is for excuse, unless they will say, that though the apostles composed these liturgies, yet they did not enjoin the use of them, but left it arbitrary, imposing on none. Yet even thus, though there be less disobedience, there is no less contempt. For those that will have prayers of others' composing used, when there is also choice of them ; do they not offer an affront to the

* Bilson, Apol. par. 4, p. 401). When the papist reasoneth after this manner, Sure[ly] the apostles had some precise form of service, though we know it not; the reply to them is : Since you know it not, why make you it your anchor-hold, seeing what the apostles did observe, none would have dared hut have observed it, after their example '.

apostles, with the aggravations forementioned, it they neglect theirs, and use and impose those of others ?

And if the apostles did not enjoin the use of their supposed liturgies, nor would impose them on any, why are they not imitated herein? Why, having less authority, (to say nothing of wisdom) do our liturgists take more upon them, than the apostles would do, in imposing on those, whom they thought best to leave free ; and imperiously prescribing their own weak inventions, or others, weaker and worse than their own, when the apostles, divinely inspired, did not so much as advise the use of their supposed forms ?

But if they do not know, nor really believe, (as the premises persuade me they do not) that those forms and prayers, or any of them, are the apostles'; is it ingenuous to offer that for proof, which they do not themselves believe ?

Let us then leave them to those who can believe them, which I shall wonder if any can, but those who have a faith at command, (when it will serve a turn) wide enough to swallow Jacobus de Voragine 8 without mincing.

If I have stayed the longer here, they will, 1 hope, bear with me, who tender the honour of the apostles, and of the Divine and infallible Spirit, to whose inspirations we owe all their writings ; and would not have them lie under the unsufferable reproach, of having such deformed brats fathered on them ; which indeed were the issue of darkness and degeneracy, and the ages wherein those prevailed; but borrowed those great and sacred names, to hide their shame, and gain them reputation, in a world much under the power of delusion, where alone it was to be hoped for.

Thus we have cleared the first three hundred years after Christ, from all suspicion of worshipping God publicly, in the way under debate ; having examined all that is alleged, either for prescribed or arbitrary forms ; and finding nothing of weight therein, to sway a disinterested person to believe there was any such thing, or to procure the assent of any, but those who are disposed to yield it without proof. And since that is not found to have been the way of the three first ages of Christianity, it is not very considerable, 4 nor scarce worth the inquiry, in what times else this may be found,—a way of worshipping God in public assemblies, for which there is nothing in the apostles' writings or practice, or in the practice of the first churches, and those after them for three hundred years ; and so, neither rule, nor reason, nor example, in the best and most imitable ages ; where also, their way of worship-

« Jacobus de Voragine was the author of the " Legends Aurea, or Golden Legend," a book full of the most astounding narratives concerning the saints. He was the mediaeval Alban Butler.— Ed. 4 worthy consideration.

ping is deserted, who served God most regularly and acceptably. If it find anything to excuse it, it will have nothing to commend it to any, unless we will admit those of such palates to be our tasters, who like a puddle better than either the spring or the streams while they run anything clear.

In the two next ages, erri to x^pov ra Trpdypara 7rpor)\de, " things grew worse and worse,"" as he tells us, who resolutely set himself against the stream of the then prevaihng corruptions, but found it too violent for him, and warned others by what befel him, that to strive against it, was the way to be sunk. Those who have no great affection for these liturgies, will not envy them the honour of having their rise in such degeneracy, as the best writers of those days saw so much cause to lament. The chief, if not the only ornament of those times, were those great persons, who had such reason to complain thereof. And many there were excellently accomplished, in the fourth age, and some till about the middle of the fifth. It may seem something for the credit of these liturgies, if they can be found in the church, while there was anything of such eminency in it; let us therefore view what is produced, as a discovery thereof.

The eighteenth canon of the council of Laodicea is alleged for

prescribed liturgies. Tie pi tov ttjv civttjv Xeirovpylav t£>v evx<ov iravrore <ai ev rais evvarais /cat ev reus ecnvepais 6(peikeiv yevecrdai, " That the same

ministration of prayers ought to be used both, at the ninth hour and at evening, viz. three in the afternoon."

Hence it is argued, the same prayers are to be used, both at nones and vespers ; therefore forms of prayer are imposed. But this is a very lame inference ; for, neither is the consequence good, neither is the antecedent true.

The inconsequence is apparent, since the same prayers may be used often, and yet the words thereof not be prescribed or imposed. We have instances enough, to clear this, in our pidpits ; where many, before their sermons, and after, use the -same prayers morning and evening, whereas none prescribe the words, or impose those forms on them, but themselves. And so we might dismiss this canon, as making nothing for prescribed forms. If this synod would have had the same prayers used, yet here is not a syllable for prescribing the words thereof, or enjoining what forms should be used.

But, indeed, here is nothing to signify that it was the intent of the synod, to have the same prayers used, at the times specified ; neither the whole phrase, (7-771/ airrjv Xeirovpyiav rcov cix£>v, " the same ministra-

" Chrys. in 1 Cor. Horn, [vi] p. 277.

' Titulus in Cra'o. De Orationibus Quotidianis.

tion of prayers,") nor any word in it imports such a thing; and they make the fathers absurd, who fix such a sense on their decree. Aeirovp-yia will not serve the turn ; for it does not here (as in later times) signify a book or model of prescribed and stinted forms of prayer, and other administrations. Indeed, as some papists, where they meet with this word, conclude they have found their mass ; so others, when they find it, may fancy they have discovered a service-book : but both ridiculously, to those who understand the ancient use of the word.

For, no instance hath yet been produced, nor can be, wherein it is used in this sense, by any of the ancients, before this council, or long after : and therefore none will believe it is so taken here, but such whose desire to have it so, will serve for reason enough to believe it.

But Xarovpyla,' 1 according to the notation and ancient known use of the word, denotes sometimes a public function or office, most commonly the exercise and administration of it,* and then it is not the forms of action, but the action itself, the public use, employment, exercise, or ministration of that, to which it is applied, civil or religious. Applied to worship, it is not the forms of worship, but the ministration of it; so, Xfirovpyia Twv vpvcov, in Theodoret, is not a model of prescribed hymns, but the singing of hymns ; SO Xeirovpyia rav dvayivaxrKopevav ypa(p<ov, m Justinian," is the holy exercise of reading the Scripture, not a rubric prescribing what lessons should be read ; of which the ancient church knew nothing : and, (which comprises all) he will have him capitally punished, K€(paXiK<os ripcopeladai, whosoever ras Qelas Xeirovpyias rapdgoi, "shall disturb the Divine ministrations;" the disturbance surely is of

" AeiTovpyia Kvpiias h &r\p.o<ria imripeoia, "Xtnovpyia properly signifies any public service." Suidas Lex.

Kai ov tpevyovTe? ye t«? Koti/OTepa? tov @lov Xetrovpyias Xpftrnavoi ra roiavja TreptunavTat' uXXa mpovvTes iavroin fleto-repa Kai iivayKaio-ripu Xetrovpyif eKKArierias Qeov, ewi (runripia. a.\vpu)-wwi', " Not because they shun the commoner offices of life do the Christians decline the same, but as reserving themselves for the more divine and necessary service of God's church, in order to men's salvation." Origen cont. Cels. lib. viii. p. 428.

Theodoret, Hist. lib. ii. cap. xxiv.

* "Excii' ntv ai/Toii? t>;i/ -nyuJ/v Kai Xeirovpyiav, " That they should have the honour and exercise of their function." Epist. Synod. Nic. in Theodoret, lib. i. cap. ix. Vid. Cone. Antioch. [Can. iv.] in Cod. Can. xcvii.

e Kai tepa yeyove Xenovpyia, onoiav elu)#o? feirriv kv rat? ayiWTuTais eKuXncriatj yiveoBai, twv re Oeliov uvaytvaxTKoiitvwv ypatpwv, " A holy service of reading the Divine Scriptures is held, such as is customary in the churches of God," Just. [Nov. 7.]

^aWeivraTc wKTtpii/a Kai Tti bpffpiva Kai Ta ioirriptva, " To sing the nocturnal and morning and evening hymns," is in the Code, Tais Xenovpyias yivea-Oai, " to engage in the exercises." Id. ibid. [Lib. i. tit. iii. Lex. xli. § 10. De Episc. et Cler.]

Prayers and liturgy are sometimes contradistinct, as when [it is said] Privatae domus tvx<ov X"P"', sed non Upas- Xenovpyias, " Private houses are for the purpose of prayers, but not for the holy service (XeiTovpyia?.)" [Authent. Coll. v. tit. xiii.] Novel. 58. Aenovpyia and Kotvwvia, [are] distinct, Cod. lib. i. tit. iii. De Episc. et Cler. [Lex. xliv.] p. [19] Vid. De Episcoporum aleaiorum aut spectatorum, &c. " Of bishops who are gamblers or play-goers." TTir icpa? atpopl-£ea0ai Xenovpyias, "that they be excluded from the sacred ministration," (Xenovpyias.) [Lib. i. tit. iv. Lex. xxxiii.]

d Auth. Coll. ix. tit. vi. [Nov. exxiii.] cap. xxxi. [p. 174.]

Xetrovpyia tcov KfjpvrTovrcov, "the ministration of preachers," in Theophy-lact, and others," is preaching; which exercise will not be denied to the exercises of Divine ministrations, not of any written models. So have been performed without any prescribed forms, for many hundred years.

So, applied to prayer, Xeirovpyia tcov ev%cov, here is not a model of prescribed prayers, but the exercise of praying ; and therefore, unless we will prefer a sense of the word then utterly unknown to Christians, before the proper and* usual acceptation of it, tt)p avrfjv Xeirovpyiav t£>v ev^coi/, is not the same prescribed forms of prayer, or the same of any sort; but the same exercise of prayers, when long, was better performed, and such may be without such forms.

If Upovpyia had been put by the synod in the place of Xeirovpyia, (a word apt to be mistaken, since it was applied to a later invention) nothing would have been understood hereby, but a holy exercise, or as it is in Hesychius, epyov lepariKov, " a sacred employment;" and by the whole, no other than the same holy exercise of prayer, instead of what is now made of it, the same prayers ; and yet these two words were of the same import anciently. The apostle expresses his acting as a Xei-rovpyos, by Upovpyfiv, Rom. xv. 16, and Chrysostom e useth them as synonyms, and explains Xeirovpyelv by lepovpyelv.

Again, for the phrase, let it be observed, that the expression is not tt]v Xeirovpyiav tcov avrmv evxcbv, " the ministration of the same prayers:" this indeed might have signified the use of the same prayers. But ttjv avrrjv Xeirovpyiav tcov ei^cou, " the same ministration of prayers," is no more here the praying of the same prayers, at three and six afternoon, than ttjv avrrjv Xeirovpyiav tov Kr}pvyp.aros, " the same ministration of preaching," would have been the preaching of the same sermon twice in one afternoon. And as there might have been f) avrr) Xeirovpyia rav vp.vcov, " the same exercise of singing" at nones and vespers, without singing the same psalms at both hours ; and the same service or exer-

" T» c(tt( \eiTovp-fovvTO>v; tout' 6<jt< KiipuTToi'Twi', "What is the meaning of XetTovpy6\nwv, (as they ministered, Acts xiii. 2) ? It is ' as they preached.'" Theophyiact. in Act. xiii. v. 2. So CEcu-menius, ibid. So Chrysostom, in Act. Horn, xxvii. p. 766. Aenovpyoi evxatt Hp.a kuI diaXefeo-i, " Ministers (Xetrovpfoi) in prayers and preaching." Euseb. Vit. Const, lib. iv. cap. xlv. Ouk airXws Xurpetav Xt'ycoi', Katidirep hv apx~h uXXu Xtnovpyiav nai ttpovpylav' avrt\ yup pot tepo&vvti, to unpvTTetv Kai K.iTa77<=XXeii/, " Not saying simply Xurpeiav, (worship,) as hi the beginning, but Xeirovpyiav, (ministry and priesthood.) For this is my priesthood, to wit, preaching and proclamation." Chrysost. in Rom. Horn. xxix. p. 221, ver. 16.

* So part of the presbyter's ministration, Xeirovpyia, Cone. Ancyr. is npoaipepeiv and opiXeiv, " to offer and preach," Can. i. And the deacon's employment, or Xeirovpyia, is apTor h irorijpiov ivaipipetv ~>\ unpinrcrecv, "to bear the bread and the cup, or to preach," Can. ii. And there is the Xeirovpyia of the deaconess, Cone. Chalced. Can. xv. SeHa/xevri re xt<P°^ CT ' a,/ > Ka < xpovov tivo napapeivaara ti) Xeirovpyia, " Receiving imposition of hands, and remaining a certain time in her ministration (XeiToup^i'o..)"

» Horn. xxix. in Rom. p. 22), and Balsamon in Cone. Ancyr. [Can. i.]

cise of reading the Scripture, though the same chapters had not been read, or any by the prescript of a rubric ; and the same ministry or exercise of preaching, though the same sermons had not been preached twice over within three hours, or without using any set forms of homilies : as well might there be rrju avrfjv XeLrovpyiav tu>v evx™"i the same exercise of praying at the third and sixth hours, without using the same prayers, or any set forms at all.

Besides, no rational account can be given, why the same prayers might be used at six, which were used at three [in the] afternoon. No decree, parallel to this (if so taken) can be produced ; nor anything, in the practice of the church, before or after, agreeable to it. Where can it be showed, that the same prayers, without variation, were always used, at several hours of the same day, the same invariably at the sixth hour, as at the ninth, &c. ? Even after unalterable forms were introduced, their several hours had their different offices; each of them, in the Latin church, did statui temporis respondere, " correspond to the character of the season," and were suited to the time for which they were appointed, as" Durandus tells us : and in the Greek church, they did tu eladora r<5 Kaipco XfiTovpyelv, as Leo [tells us], " accommodate the service to the season." 6

Beda speaks of a hymn sung potius in vespertinis, quam in aliis ojficiis, 11 rather at vespers than in any other office." c And Basil, long before him mentions one, which he calls iiriXyxviav evxapio-rlav, "the candle-light thanksgiving," which was used at candle-light, rf tov rjcmepivov <pa>r6s <pavevTos. e And such a one we have set down, by the most learned of primates,-^ called vpvbs tov Xv^vikov, "the candle-light hymn;" so proper for the evening, as^ it could not be congruously used at any other hour of the day. What reason is there to doubt, but their npoo-evxal Av;jwkcu, "candle-light prayers," as Epiphanius'' calls them, or those iv rals Xvxva-(piais evxa\, " prayers at candle-light," l were also accommodated to the

<• Sane ofiicium sextse statui temporis respondet, sicut et officia aliarum horarum ; in prima nam-que hora est inchoatio, in tertia perfectio, in sexta consummatio, &c. Quod indicant verba hymno-rum, quae in ipsis horis, et etiam in nona permittuntur, " The office of the sixth hour, (i. e. noon,) corresponds to the character of the season, as also the offices of the other hours. For in the first hour, (i. e. six, a.m.,) we have beginning: in the third, (i.e. nine, a.m.,) maturity : in the sixth, (/. e. noon,) the end. Which the words of the hymns that are gone through in these hours, and als'J in the ninth hour (i. e. three, p.m.,) indicate." Durand. Rational, lib. v. cap. vii. p. 1G0.

1 [Vit. Chrys. Int. Op. torn. viii. p. 288.]

•In Durand. lib. v. cap. ix. p. 102.

<* In the Cathemerinon of Prudentius, containing hymns for all parts of the day, the fifth (in the editions of Aldus, and all others but those of Giselinusand Fabricius)is intituled Ad accensionem lucernae, "At the lighting of the lamp," and was afterwards made use of as a church hymn, different, both from those four that go before it, (ad galli cantum, " at cock-crowing," ad matu-tinum, " at dawn," ante cibum, "before meat," post cibum, "after meat,") and those two that follow it. Vid. Rivet. Crit. Sacr. lib. iii. cap. xxvi. p. 881.

' Dc Spirit. Sanct. cap. xxix. p. 276. / Usher, De Symb. p. 35. g that.

• [Epiph. Exp. Fid. n. xxiii. torn. i. p. 1106.] ' In Socrat. Hist. lib. v. cap. xxn.

time from whence they are denominated, and at which they were used, as well as their hymns ? To conclude, there is no need to make the canon thus confound the offices, which were always distinct, and without all reason, to run counter to all the Christian world ; nor to force a sense upon the phrase, which it is impatient of; nor to put a construction upon XetTovpyia, which those times were utterly strangers to. The design and import of it is but this; that those in that province, should assemble for worship twice [in the] afternoon ; and as they had prayers at one of the hours, so should they have the same holy employment or exercise at the other ; or as it is more briefly expressed in the Latin editions of that council, Quod semper supplicationes orationum, et ad horam nonam, et ad a vesperam oportet celebrari, b " That devotional supplications ought to be used at the ninth hour, (i.e. three p.m.) and at vespers (i.e. six p.m.)" Quod id ipsum ministerium orationum, et in nonis et vesperis fieri debeatf " That the same ministration of prayers ought to be used at nones and vespers." Quod id ipsum officiumprecum et nona et vespera semper debeat exhiberi, d " That the same office of prayers ought to be used at both nones and vespers."

This canon of the Laodicean synod (which I have been the longer in examining, because I see some apt to mistake it, who have not so much bias as others to mislead them) is all considerable, 6 that I find alleged for prescribed liturgies/ in the fourth age. For I would not disparage all, with the unadvisedness of those who produce the twenty-third canon of the third Council of Carthage (and also the twelfth of Milevis) to support that which we have seen they utterly overthrow.

Only I must not forget that some make an offer at the liturgies which go under the names of Basil and Chiwsostom ; as though these would help their cause. But they do this but faintly, as knowing them to be by Protestants, generally branded for counterfeits ; and that for many reasons, such as their ojjposites s count very cogent, in like case : such being the order and matter of them, such rites there used, such persons there mentioned, many words, many things, therein, that they cannot but ridiculously be ascribed to those great persons, or to any, in or near their times. Our English prelates formerly had no more favour for them ; take a taste thereof in Bishop White's censure* of them: " The liturgies," saith he, "fathered upon St. Basil and St. Chrysostom,

" In Clem. Constit. lib. viii. hwiKkntrts hpBpcuij, et (Wepivi;, et eni\v\vios, " the morning, and evening, and candle-light invocations," are distinct and different. Cap. xxxv. xxxvi. xxxvii. xxxviii.

* Caranz. ' Cod. Justel. p. 73. «* In Crab. torn. i. p. 377.

• deserving consideration.

/ Liturgy, in Martinius and others, [stands] 1. for any public office of ministry, and especially of distribution. 2. For the public service of God, in reading, teaching, praying. 3. For stated orders and forms of that public service. Bellarmine adds a fourth [sense], for the sacrificing offices only.

g opponents. * opinion.

have a known mother (to wit, the late Roman, church ;) but there is (besides many other just exceptions) so great dissimilitude between the supposed fathers and the children, that they rather argue the dishonest dealings of their mother, than serve as lawful witnesses of that which the adversary intendeth to prove by them."" Indeed the Romanists are the great sticklers for the legitimation of these missals, seeing them full of those sores, which they count the beauty of their church. They are made use of, to countenance the worship of images and altars, the intercession and invocation of saints, the sacrifice of the mass, the real presence, the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, &c. And yet none of them have the confidence to affirm, that as we have them now, they were the issue of those on whom they are fathered. Only some, very loth quite to lose the advantages they would make of them, are willing to suppose that though they have suffered very great changes, by additions, interpolations, inversions, substractions, &c, yet something may yet remain therein of Basil's and Chrysostom's. But they give no reason why they suppose this, when it is necessary they should do it in this case, if [in] any ; since there are the same grounds for the entire rejection of these liturgies, which they count (and many more than they count) sufficient for the total rejecting of some others. If such groundless surmises may be admitted, no brat, though evidently spurious, but will procure a legitimation, in part at least, if any can expect thereby to serve a turn ; a way is hereby opened for an equal defence of the most impudent and pernicious forgeries that the church hath been pestered with. Some will be apt to suppose the like of the liturgies fathered upon Peter, James, Mark, and all the apostles, in their pretended Constitutions. Something therein may be theirs, and they may as reasonably suppose it; for the Gospels which went under the names of Peter, 4 James, Thaddeus, Thomas, Andrew, though they were changed and corrupted, yet what was found therein consentient 0 to primitive and catholic doctrine, might be the apostles', and the substance of them of their composing. It is true, those gospels were not received by the first churches, but that makes no difference : since neither were those liturgies received by them, no nor known, or mentioned, as Ave showed before, (and so not extant) till many hundred years after the apostles' times ; and upon this account, their pretence to apostolicalness is more ridiculous than that of the other. And they who received those spurious liturgies so late, might, upon the same terms, have

» Against Fisher, p. 377.

* Those mentioned in Synopsi Scriptura?, in Athanas. torn.H. p. 134. Heplodot Uirpov, 'ludvvov, 0<7,;ia, 'EvaytiXtov kut.V Ow/iu, rnA,, x <i ijroo-ToXcov, K.\tip4vTta, Bee., " The journeys of Peter, John, Thomas, the Gospel according to Thomas, the teaching of the apostles, of Clement," &C [In edit. Paris. 1627, torn. ii. p. 55.] c agreeable.

admitted the forged gospels, viz., changing and patching them, as they listed. But enough of this before.

As for the liturgies before us ; those who will suppose something of them to be Basil's or Chrysostom's, do not, cannot show us what that is ; nor do they, nor can they, give us any rule by which we may know it; and so it is not, it cannot be known, that any prayer in them is theirs, to whom the whole is intituled : ° and therefore it cannot be hereby proved that ever either of them composed any prayers, for the public use of others ; much less that they prescribed any to be used, in the same form and words. And so, if this shift were honest, and safe, and reasonable ; yet is it wholly unserviceable for the proof of prescribed liturgies. To be brief, it is manifest in the genuine writings of both those fathers, that they judged it necessary to conceal and keep secret the sacramental rites and prayers (which is all that is considerable* in those liturgies) from all but the communicants. Now they did not take the course to conceal, but divulge them, if they writ and published those liturgies, though but for the common use of the province or diocese where each of them presided ; and therefore, since we cannot conceive that they would run counter to their declared principles, it cannot be believed that they were the authors and divulgers of those, or any other such liturgies, or of any such prayers in them ; and consequently it is injurious to them to father these missals (if they were not otherwise so leprous, and every way unlike them) upon these worthies.

And so I leave them, stuffed so full with the corruptions of later times, that none but those who are fond of such corruptions, and would fain have them, right or wrong, of ancient generous extract, can believe them to be the issue of those fathers ; only let me interpose my conjecture, how it came to pass that Basil, Chrysostom, and Ambrose too, were accounted the authors of liturgies, though neither themselves nor any that lived with them, or near the time in which they nourished, mention any such thing. It is recorded of each of these persons, signally and peculiarly, that they introduced a new mode and order of singing, into the respective churches, where they presided, never there used before. Basil's new psalmody, brought in by him to Csesarea, was made more remarkable, by the offence taken thereat by the clergy of Neocassarea, as an innovation in the worship of God. He defends it, and gives an account what it was, c Kav rfjv alriav epcdTtjdcixTi tov aKypvu-tov tovtov kcli ao-novbov irokepov, yjsaXpoiis Xeyovai, Kai. rporrov peXcoftlas Tr)S Trap vpiv KenparrixyLas o-vvrjdeias napaXXaypevovs, " It the cause be asked of this implacable and perpetual quarrel, they say, It is the psalms, and

• ascribed. * worthy consideration. « Epist. lxiii.

the mode of singing, altering the custom which hath been retained amongst us." And afterwards, aXX' ovk r\v <pd<ri ravra «rt tov fxeyakov Tprjyopiov, " There was none of this (say they) in the time of Gregory the Great." Now Basil denies not, but he had begun another way of singing than they had been accustomed to ; but that it might appear how little reason there was to quarrel with him for it, he declares

what it was, TfXevratoy dvacrravTes ra>v Trpocrev)(6)v, «? rr)v ■^raXpcodlai' KadicrravTai, Kai vvv fiev 8i)(d SiaixpTjdtiiTfs dvTi\fsdX\ovcnv dXXr}Xoiv, &C. " Finally, rising from prayer, they betake themselves to singing, and sometimes the company being distributed into two parts, they answer one another in singing." The first who brought up this mode of singing" was Flavianus and Diodorus, at Antioch, using it in their conventicles, when the Arians had possessed themselves of the public churches, as Theodoret relates it. From thence it passed to other places, and was first at Czesarea practised by Basil.

Ambrose, who borrowed many other things of Basil, liked his psalmody so well, as 6 he introduced it into the West, first using it in his church at Milan, 0 and this when Augustin was there, who assures us, from his own knowledge, that it was not long since the practice there began ; Nimirum annus erat, aut non rnidto amplius, cum Justina Valentiniani regis pueri mater hominem tuum Ambrosium persequeretur hteresis sua? causa, " It was but a year, or little more (before Austin was leaving those parts) when Justina, the mother of the young emperor Valentinian, persecuted the servant of God Ambrose, for her heresy's sake," (she being an Arian.) Excubabat pia plebs in ecclesia mori parata cum episcopo suo; tunc hymni et psalmi, ut canerentur secundum morem orientalium partium, ne populus matrons tadio co?itabesce.ret, institutum est, " The godly multitude did watch in the church, ready to die with their bishop; then, lest the people should languish through the tedious-ness of their grief, was the singing of psalms and hymns, after the mode of the orient, instituted." And from Milan, where Ambrose**

" Ovrot TTpwroi Six*/ bieXovre? rovv rwv ^aWovTtov x^pour, *K diudoxvs udetv rijv &avidiKi]v edl-6a(av neXw&iaV Kai tovto ev 'Avrioxeta Trpwrov iip^ufxtvov, irdvroTe Sie&imfte Kui Kare\a/3e Ttjr oiKou/iei/ri? tci repfiara, "They were the first who divided the choruses of the singers into two bands, and taught them to sing the psalmody of David by course. And this custom, which first began at Antioch, spread everj'where and reached the ends of the world." Theodoret Hist. lib. ii. cap. xxiv. p. 78. And by this it appears that the account which Socrates gives of the original hereof, (lib. vi. cap. viii.) is a fable, and either not known, or not believed by Theodoret, who yet was best acquainted with the customs of Antioch. * that.

« Non longe cceperat Mediolanensis eccle<-ia genus hoc consolatinnis et exhortationis celebrare, magno studio fratrum concinentium vocibus et cord'.bus, " The church of Milan had not long commenced this mode of consolation and exhortation." Et ex illo in hodiernum retentum, multis jam ac pene omnibus gregibus tuis, et per caetera orbis imitantibus, " And from that time it has been retained to the present day ; and many, and indeed well nigh all the flocks, even throughout the other parts of the world, already imitate it." August. Confess, lib. ix. cap. vii. p. 221.

d Antiphonae hymni et vigilia' in ecclesia Mediolanensi celebrari primum cceperunt, cujus cele-britatis devotio, usque ad hodiernum diem, non solum in eadem ecclesia, verum per omnes pene

began it, did it pass into other churches of the west. Paulinus testifies as much in the life of Ambrose.

And Chrysostom was the first that brought in this order of singing amongst the orthodox, in the church at Constantinople, though the Arians had a little the start of him in practising it in the streets ; for these, in the nights of the weekly festivals, as Socrates calls Saturday and the Lord's-day, ra and ev rats irnaripois eoprais, " on the principal [annual] feasts," (which Sozomen adds) koto, top tg>p avrupcavav Tporrov tyaXXov, " sung by course,"* S8as dvTi<pd>vas, c " antiphonal hymns." Chrysostom, lest any of his flock should be hereby enticed from him, puts his people upon singing in the same manner, eVi rbv tcrov Tporrov ttjs yj/aXpco-8las rbv avrov Xabv nporpfTrei, and upon such an occasion the orthodox, first taking up this mode of singing, continued it till now, says he ; ol 8r) dwb rrjs KadoXiKrjS e§ ciItlcis rotacrSe rbv evp-qpivov rponov vpvelv dp^dpevoi,

kcu do-en vvv ovtco 8Up.eivav. d Now as these three fathers were the first introducers of that way of singing, in their several churches ; so it is further observable that singing was anciently called Xeirovpyla, " a liturgy." So Chrysostom himself calls singing of psalms, ovde padvpovvres 7r6re irporjo-opeda ttjv KaXfjv \eiTovpylav, e " We sing the beautiful liturgy, and never give way to sloth." And Theodoret calls that very mode of singing which they in their respective places first used, Xetrovpyiav, " a liturgy." Leontius' desire that the Meletians would sing by course in public, is thus expressed, 'Ev rait eKKXijalais tcivttjv yivto-6ai Trap avrav ttjv Xeirovpylav rj£iov, " He desired that the same ministration (Xeirovpyiap) should be used in their churches."-^

So in Justinian's Code, -^aWdv rd re vvKrepiva kol tci dpdpiva, " to sing the nocturnal and morning hymns," is said to be irpdypa rov KkrjpiKov npbs ttjv Xeirovpyiav, " the business of the clergy in reference to the liturgy." And thus yj/aXXdv is there rats Xeirovpyiacs 7rpoo~KapTepel.v. g

Now they being found authors of that which is called liturgia, this might seem a sufficient ground, to account them the formers of liturgies; and Xeirovpyia, in after ages being used for a model of set forms of prayer and other administrations, those that found them accounted the authors of liturgies, might easily mistake them to be the authors of such a thing as the word then signified.

Nor will this seem improbable, if it be observed, that a liturgy was

occidentis provincias manet, " Antiplionies first began to be used in the church of Milan, whose celebrated mode of devotion remains to this day, not only in that church, but throughout almost all the provinces of the west." Paulin. Vit. Ambros.

Besides, some hymns were composed by Ambrose; of which, there is ancient and sufficien: testimony, though none such for the prayers ascribed to him.

° lib. vi. cap. viii. i Soz. [lib. viii. cap. viii.] • Soc. ibid.

* Soz. ibid. « Horn, in Psalm, xli. / Theod. Hist. lib. ii. cnp. xxiv. p. 7S.

e [Lib. i. tit. iii.] Lex. [xli.] § x. De Episc. et Cler.

actually fathered upon James (called d8e\cf}6deos, " the brother of God,") merely because Hegesippus in Eusebius styles him Xeirovpyus. Unde (says Cassander) quidam putant opinionem natam, quod Jacobus primus missce ritum instituerit, quern Hegesippus apud Eusebium primum ah apostolis constitutum fuisse episcopum, et liturgum dieit. a " Hence, some think, came the opinion that James was the first author of a missal; Hegesippus in Eusebius affirming that he was by the apostles first made bishop and liturgus." And this might encourage those whose inclinations led them to father their own conceptions upon great and eminent persons, to compose such forms, as are the contents of those liturgies, and expose* them under their names.

Add hereto, that amongst the Latins in those ages, when the framing and counterfeiting of liturgies was in fashion, almost every part of them went under the name of Cantus, " singing," not the prayers excepted. 0 So in the [thirteenth] canon of the fourth council of Toledo, all the several offices and prayers by name, pass under the notion of singing. The law of Charles the Great, imposing the Gregorian office upon the churches in his dominions, is in these terms, Ut secundum ordinem et morera ecclesio? Eomanw fiat cantatus, d " That the singing shall be after the order and custom of the Roman church." So when Durandus would tell us what liturgies they had in the primitive church, all is comprised under Cantare : In primitiva tamen ecclesia diversi diversa quisque pro suo velle cantabant, e " But in the primitive church different persons sang, every one according to his own mind, different things." And Belethus after him, In primitiva ecclesia diversi diversa cantabant, quisque pro suo libitu/

Now those who were the introducers of a particular way of singing in their churches, might thus come to be accounted the authors of liturgies for them, when these were expressed and understood by cantus, and cantare became equivalent with Xeirovpyelv in its modern signification. And it will be hard for them who ascribe a liturgy to Jerome, to give

<• Cassander, Liturgic. cap. vi. p. 1G. Hegesippus apud Eusebium, de Jaccbo inquit, eum ab apostolis primum constitutum fuisse episcopum et liturgum, i. e. sacrarum et divinarum rerum administratorem. Unde quidam putant opinionem natam, quod Jacobus primus missae ritum instituerit, "Hegesippus in Eusebius says of James that he was made by the apostles the first bishop and liturgus, i. e. an administrator of sacred and divine things. Whence some think the opinion took its rise that James was the first author of a missal." * circulate.

• So all the several offices and prayers by name, pass under the notion of singing. Componuntur missa?, sive preces, vel orationes, sive commendationes, sivemanus impositiones, ex quibus si nulla decantentur* in ecclesia, vacant officia omnia ecclesiastica, " Rituals are composed, whether prayers or supplications, whether commendations or impositions of hands, whereof if none be sung in the church, all ecclesiastical offices are wanting." Cone. Tolet. iv. cap. xiii.

d Capit. lib. vi. cap. cexxv. ' Rational. lib. v. cap. ii. p. 139.

/ Expl. Diver. Offic. cap. xix.

* One MS. reads "dicatur."—En.

any better account to the world than this, why they do so. It was believed, that by his means, the same mode and order of singing was first used at Rome ; that the Alleluiah," after the eastern mode, was by his advice there sung; and the doxology, secundum usum Antiochice, b " according to the custom of the church of Antioch," where, as I showed before, singing by course was first invented ; and that pope Damasus writ to him for his direction, how the Grecians' mode of singing might be practised at Rome. Hence Durandus says, cantum orclinavit, " he set in order the singing," and [means] nothing else, but an order for reading the Scripture. e So, upon these grounds, an ecclesi-asticum ojicium, " church ritual," is ascribed to him, and he is made the author of a liturgy, made up in time of a lectionary, an antiphonary, and a sacramentary, as Pamelius represents it.

These forementioned were the most eminent persons, both in east and west, in those times, when the church flourished with persons of greatest eminency, for learning and oratory. Now, when liturgies were all in all, (the happiness of the ancient church, and the excellency of its pastors in preaching and praying, being turned by the lamentable degeneracy of the following ages, into** chanting and reading) it behoved those, who were zealous for their honour, they having no worth of their own, 6 to borrow or steal some for them, from great names ; and to have them thought of noble descent, that the meanness of their true and lawful parents might not discredit them. In these circumstances, a smaller matter than I have insisted on, would serve to prove their title and pretence to an extract so honourable. This might well

" Ut Alleluiah hie diceretur, de Hierosolymorum ecclesia, ex beati Hieronymi traditione, tempore beatte memorias Damasi papae traditur, traetum, " That the Hallelujah is said here, is handed down as a custom derived from the church of Jerusalem, in pursuance of the instructions of the blessed Jerome, in the time of pope Damasus, of blessed memory." Gregor. M. lib. vii. Epist. lxiii.

4 Secundum Antiochiae usum, in fine omnium psalmorum, Gloria Patri Romas cantare, eo instante, coeptum est; et eo emendante Roma legendos canendosque in ecclesia lxx interpretum psalmos suscepit, " At his instance they began to sing at Rome the Gloria Patri at the end of the whole of the psalms; and Rome, receiving from him a corrected copy, instituted the reading and singing of the Septuagint psalms after that manner." Marian. Vita Hieronym.

Pati item charitatem tuam, ut, sicut a creatore tuo Alexandro coepiscopo nostro didicisti in gre-mio Grfecorum psallere : ita ad nos tua fraternitas dirigere delectetur, " I also ask your charity to grant, that as thou hast studied psalmody in the bosom of the Greek church, so, brother, you will be pleased to give directions to us." Epist. Damasi, in Operibus Hieronymi, torn. ix. p. 219.

c i.e. the Canonical Psalms.

d Et postremo, omnes ordines, majores et minores, tandem transformati sunt in lectores et can-tatores: quid enim aliud quotidie agunt? " At length all the orders, superior and inferior, were transformed into readers and singers. For what else is their daily duty ?" Chemnit. Exam, pars ii. p. 415.

<■ Restincto inde valde studiorum omnium ac religionis apud eos ardore, in paucis ejusmodi preculis, earumque fere sola recitatione, nimis segniter, vulgo amant acquiescere et immori, " Hence enthusiasm for every kind of study and for religion being repressed among them, they commonly love from their excessive slothfulness to take their ease, and to die with scarce anything but the recitation (,f a few short prayers as their occupation." Hoornb. Sum. Controv. lib. xi. p. SS6.

encourage some to entitle" their liturgies to those worthies, and call them their fathers, and might persuade others, who were willing enough to have it so (for the credit of their churches that used them) to believe it was so indeed. But this, as I said, is but my conjecture; but whether it were so or otherwise, let others judge, as they see reason. It suffices me, that these liturgies are spurious, and so generally accounted, in a manner, by all but those who are engaged in a cause that needs such a defence ; and to uphold their trade, must deal in false wares, and so see cause to plead for them, against very much of that reason, a little of which they themselves count a sufficient evidence of forgery, in cases where such an interest is not concerned.

The next authority I meet with, is the fifteenth canon of the Venetic synod, in which six bishops, towards the conclusion of the fifth age, made this decree, Rectum quo que duximus, ut vel intra provinciam nostram, sacrorum ordo et psallendi una sit consuetudo, " We have also thought it right, that, as to the order of sacred administrations and singing, there be one custom throughout our province." What is intended here by ordo sacrorum, may be best understood by the council of A«-de, being a synod of the same country, held not long after this of Vannes, that in the beginning of the sixth age, an. 506, this in the latter end of the fifth. There* Ordo ecclesice ab omnibus cequaliter custodiendus, " The order of the church to be observed equally by all," is the disposing of the responsals, prayers, hymns, and psalms, each in the place thought most fit (according to Augustin's definition of ordo, Est parium dispari-umque rerum, sua cuique loca tribuens, disposition "It is an arrangement of things like and unlike by assigning to each its proper place,") and so, applied to sacred administrations, ordo, established by a synod, if it reached all particulars, will amount to no more than a rubric or directory. One and the same order might be observed by all the churches in a province, in all offices, yea, and in prayers too ; d though the same

« ascribe.

4 Et quia convenit, ordinem ecclesiae ab omnibus aequaliter custodiri, studendum est ut (sicut et ubique fit) post antiphonas, collectiones, ab episcopis vel presbyteris, dicantur. Et hymni matu-tini vel vespertini diebus omnibus decantentur, et in conclusione matutinarum vel vespertina-rum missarum, post hymnos, capitula de psalmis dicantur, et plebs collecta oratione ad vesperam ab episcopo cum benedictione dimittatur, " And since it is suitable that the order of the church be observed equally by all, if is decreed (as is everywhere the practice) that after the antiphonies collects be said by the bishops or presbyters, and let the morning or evening hymns be sung every day; and at the conclusion of matins or vespers, after the hymns, let lesser sections from the psalms be read; and in the evening let the congregation be dismissed with prayer and benediction by the bishop." Concil. Agath. Can. [xxx.]

• Civ. Dei, lib. xix. cap. xiii.

* August. Ep. ad Januar. cxviii. cap. vi. Apostolus de hoc sacramento loquens, statim sub-texuit: Caetera cum venero ordinabo; unde intelligi datur (quia multum erat ut in epistola totum ilium agendi ordinem insinuaret, quem universa per orbem servat ecclesia) ab ipso ordinatum esse, quod nulla morum diversitate variatur, " The apostle speaking of this sacrament, immediately subjoins, The rest will I set in order when I come; whence we are given to understand (since it was too much to introduce into the epistle the whole order of procedure which the universal

2 A

expressions were not used, nor those that officiated, at all tied up to words and syllables. For example ; if, in the common office (at which all might be present) they began with psalms, and then read some part of the law, or prophets, and next some part of an epistle, or of the gospels, and afterwards proceeded to the sermon ; the same order was observed," though the same psalms were not always sung, nor the same lesson twice in a year, and the same sermon never twice preached. So for the prayers, if according to the order specified, 6 first prayers were made for the catechumens, then for the penitents, after that for the faithful. And, if in that office peculiar to the faithful, the prayers be ordered, as Augustin thought the apostles' method was, c so as first prayer be made for all sorts ; then the d elements be consecrated ; after that the people

church throughout the world observes) that it has been ordained by himself, that it should be raried by no diversity of customs." Vid. Three Positions about Public Prayers.

• The phrase ordo psallendi, is used by the second council of Tours, and means, not, qui psalmi, but quot; requires not the same, but so many psalms to be used, Cone. Turon. ii. Can. xix. in Crab. xiv. in Caranza, [xviii. in Hardouin.] This was a council held in the same country with the former, an. 570.

What the stated order of worship was, we have an account in Cyril. Catech. Mystag. v. p. 259. Vidistis diaconum vi\jja(J0at oioovTa no iepei Kai toIV kvkXovgi to Ovcrtaariipiov tov Oeov irpeafiv-Tepoi?, " Ye have seen the deacon give water to the bishop, and to the presbyters encircling the altar of God."

EJTa fioa. diaconus,'AW/jAous' airoXufiere, Kai a\\>]\ow u.<jnat,ii>p.t6a, " Then the deacon calls out, Receive one another, and let us embrace one another."

Postea clamat sacerdos, "Akw Tar Kapdiar, " Afterwards the bishop cries, Lift up your hearts." p. 240.

Vos deinde respondetis, "Exofxev rrpor toi/ Kvpiov, " Then ye answer, We lift them up unto the Lord."

Dicit deinde sacerdos, Evxapto-T>i<ru>ij.ev Tl i> K-"P.'V> " Then the bishop says, Let us give thanks unto the Lord."

Vos dicitis, "Afiov Kai dinawv, " Ye say, It is meet and right so to do."

Kara Ttxina fjiv>tp-ovevop.ev ovpavov Kai 7119 Kai OaXdao-t)?, !]\lov Kai <re\!]vr\s, a<TTpa)i/ Kai vaar]t T?i<, KTitreui' \07iKri? tc Kai a\6fOv, opaTJjr re Kai uopaTOu, 0.776X101', apxa77eXa>i/, dvvdfieaiv, Kupio-Ttjrioi', apx«Jv, h^ovart&v, Opovuiv, twv x 6 P ou /^M T( ~ ,l/ TO 'ffpoo-onrov KaXvnTOVTuyv, \e70vTe? to tou Aa/iio McyaXi'vaTe tov Ki/pioi< avv ifxor /j,vt]fjiovevofxtv vvv Kai tS&v xepoti/Jiju, Qua; in Spiritu Sancto cane-bat Esaias, circumstantia thronum Dei—atque dicentia, Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus Deus Sabaoth—sic per ejusmodi hymnosnos ipsos sanctificantes, Deumbenignissimum oramus, to ciyiov Tivevfxa tfa7rocrrei\a< t7ri t« TrpoKetp,eva, 'iva Troika*} rov juei* aoToy truipax Xpiarov' tov dt' oivoi' aip.a Xpia-Tov, " After this we make mention of heaven and earth, and sea, and the sun, moon and stars, and all the creation, rational and irrational, visible and invisible, angels, archangels, hosts and dominions, principalities and powers, thrones and cherubim veiling their faces, saying with David, ' Magnify the Lord with me.' We also make mention of the cherubim which Esaias saw in the Spirit, standing around the throne of God,—and saying, Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of Sabaoth;—thus with hymns of this kind sanctifying ourselves, do we beseech God most gracious, to send his Holy Spirit upon the elements, that he may make the bread the body of Christ, and the wine the blood of Christ."

4 Cone. Laodic. Can. xviii. « Epist. lix.

d Deinde, postquam confectum est illud spirituale sacrificium, et ille cultus incruentus super ipsa propitiationis hostia, napaKa\ovp.ev tov ©eov Iwep koivTh rffiv tKK\t|<T«uK eipi'/i'fir, vnip Tnt tov Kofffiov evaraOeias, vTrt-p /3a<n\t(Oi', UTre/j arpaTtuiTwv Kai erujU/Aax'^i', v-nep twv ev u&Oeveiats, bir&p tujv KaTairovov/ievav, Kai u7rafa7r\Sr, \nrip ttuvtlov fto>]t)eias 6eop.ivoiv, " Then after that spiritual sacrifice is finished, and that unbloody worship over the propitiatory host itself, we intreat God for the common peace of the church, for the well-being of the world, for kings, for soldiers, and allies, for the sick, for the afflicted, in a word for all who need help." Then follows what Rivetus says is interpolated, ^6o/n60a aov waiter hv-tXs Kai touti/i/ ■Kpoo-tpepap.ev <rol t)]v Ova-lav, 'iva iivi)noveva>nev Kai tSv 7rpoK6Koiu.>iMt-'i<wi', primum patriarcharum, prophetarum, apostolorum,

blessed; and the elements being distributed, all be concluded with thanksgiving : the same order of prayer is observed, though the same prayers be no more used, than the same psalms or lessons always, or the same sermon more than once. And the same is to be understood of Can. 27 Cone. Epaon. anno 517.

But, if I minded not the discovery of the truth, more than upholding of my opinion, or disproving of yours, I would grant, that by ordo is understood a liturgy with prescribed prayers ; and it would be a great disadvantage to your cause, to grant it; for here is a plain signification, [that] they had no such liturgy before, and the original hereof from six bishops, in one province of France, where [were] fifteen or seventeen, and this not till the latter end of the fifth age, when all [was] cr(p68pa koku>s, " greatly amiss."

And this is all which I can find alleged in behalf of these liturgies for five hundred years after Christ, that is considerable," unless the hymns Benedicite and Te Deum may be counted worthy of consideration : and so, perhaps, they may be accounted, if not otherwise, yet in respect of the persons that so make use of them.

But the inference is not good, from forms of hymns to forms of prayer ; much less from arbitrary forms of hymns, to prescribed forms of prayer, or liturgies. Hymns are more elaborate, require more art and ornament than prayers : and therefore, those who are not for set forms of prayer, if they admit hymns of human and ordinary composition, see reason to have them in forms, and not without premeditation. And their opposites * will not deny them here [to be] more needful.

Nor will the inference hold, from prescribed hymns to prescribed liturgies, from a small part (for which there is a different reason) to the whole; e.g., if Nicephorus' report were true, c that Theodosms junior, with his sister Pulcheria, enjoined the rpicrdyiov, (a hymn of six or eight words,) to be sung throughout the world (which yet he makes question-

martyrum; oiru>s 6 ©6o? evxui* avriov kuJ irpeafieiait wpocrdef tjTat ttfi&v t!jv dtwaiv, deinde pro defunctis, Src. "We all beseech thee, and offer to thee this sacrifice, that we may he mindful also of those who have fallen asleep ; first, of the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, that God through their prayers and intercessions, may receive our supplication; then for the dead," &c. Cyril. Ibid. p. 241.

Eitu \tyonev tiji) evx'iv, " Next we say the prayer," (the Lord's prayer,) which he expounds, pp. 242, 243. Expleta oratione dicit aju>;i/. "The prayer being finished, he says Amen."

Sacerdos postea dicit, iiyia ayiois' vos respondetis, els ufio?, eic Kiipior '\r\aow Xpioros, deinde audistis psallentem, ac ad communionem adhortantem, Tevaacrde Kai 'idere ori xP'/ CTTO *' ° Kupior -accedens ad communionem, ostendit quomodo, &c. Kvn-Tiav, ku» Tpo7rw wpoanviiiioews Kai aefiuaixa-Tot Xeytav o/xqV) " The bishop afterwards says, Holy things for holy men. Ye answer, There is one Holy, one Lord Jesus Christ. Then ye hear him sing and exhort, Taste and see that the Lord is good. Advancing to give the communion he shows, &c. bowing and saying with a kind of worship and reverence, Amen."

Postremo exaltata oratione evxapia-ei -<u Oeijj, qui te tantis mysteriis Divinum reddidit, "Lastly, with uplifted voice, he gives thanks to God, who has rendered thee worthy of the Divine mysteries." « worth considering. 4 opponents. c Lib. xiv. cap. xlvi.

2 a 2

able, by adding such a legend of its miraculous original,) could it be inferred from thence, that they enjoined [upon] the whole world the same liturgy ? Besides, hymns there were prescribed and so used, (viz. the psalms of David, and others of Divine inspiration) in the apostles' times, when all our liturgists in a maimer acknowledge [that] there were no prescribed liturgies.

As for those two hymns alleged, there is no evidence that they were imposed, or so much as used, in any time, which will serve to prove the antiquity of those liturgies, which is pretended, or any which is for their reputation. That which begins with Te Deum, is found by the great Usher," in some ancient manuscripts ascribed to Nicetius, (who, if it be he of Triers, lived not till after anno 565.) He concurs herein with Menar-dus, that it is not mentioned in any author ancienter than the rules which Benet writ for the monks of his order, which was about the middle of the sixth age, as may be collected from Baronius ; and those rules had their first public approbation, anno 595. How long after this, that hymn came to be used in the church, and when it was thought fit to be imposed, is not worth the inquiring.

The other, called the Song of the Three Children, I have nowhere discovered, before the fourth council of Toledo. It is mentioned,* as used before, but then first imposed, anno 633. Such like hymns were so far from being generally prescribed in the former ages, that the use of them is forbidden in public, by synods, both in the Greek and Latin church. Thus the Council of Laodicea c decrees, "On ov 8el 18lcotikovs

■^raXfj.ovs Xeyecrdai iv Trj eKKXrjcria., ov8e aKavovKTru /3t/3Xia' dXka pova ra KavoviKa rrjs Kaivrjs ical naXaias 8ia6rjKrjs, " that private (or uncanonical) psalms ought not to be used in the church, neither books that are not canonical, but only the canonical (books) of the Old and New Testament." Where 18kotlkovs seems by the clause following, to be opposed to kclvovlkovs, as writings I8las eViAvo-ecoc are, by the apostle, 1 * opposed to those of Divine inspiration. So that the fathers of Laodicea, as they prohibit any books but those that were canonical, so do they forbid any psalms or hymns, save such as were of Divine inspiration, to be used in the churches ; and the canons of this synod were received by the church, amongst her universal rules. Add hereto/ a canon of the Council of Braga, Extra psalmos Veteris Testamenti nihil poetice cotn-positum in ecclesia psallatur, " Besides the psalms of the Old Testament, let no poetical composition be sung in the church."

Thus I have given an account of the testimonies produced for the antiquity of the liturgies in question, and of all that I have met with, after

" Epist. ante Diatribam de Symbolo, p. 2. i Can. xiii.

« Cone. Laod. Can. ult. [In Hardouin, the last but one.] d 2 Peter i. 20, 21.

' Cone. Bracar. i. an. 565, [cap. xii.]

endeavours to meet with all, having waived none wherein there mi^ht be conceived to be any strength, or wherein I could perceive any sht.w of it. What opinion others may have hereof, I will not conjecture. For my own part, after a careful observance a of whatever might seem to have any force or evidence, for that purpose, I may profess, that (as this was it, which first swayed my judgment to that part of the question wherein it now rests ; so still) I am very well satisfied, even by these testimonies, that there was no such thing, as that for which they are alleged. To me there needs no more arguments, nor (if I much mistake not) will more be very needful to any other, whose minds are not prepossessed with something too hard for their reason.* For if there had been such liturgies used constantly in all churches through the world, for five hundred or six hundred years next after Christ, it is not imaginable, but [that] there would have been such remarkable traces, yea, such clear evidence in some, yea, in many of the ancients (especially the writers being so numerous, their writings left us so full and voluminous, and the occasions of mentioning them so very frequent,) that there might have been had as full and clear proof thereof, and with as much ease, as of any one thing, whose antiquity hath been questioned. Now, when many have curiously searched antiquity for this, and being pricked on by opposition, have pursued the search with great industry, under a quick sense too how. much they are concerned herein, and being withal, persons of as great ability for the discovery, as any we can expect will attempt it, divers of them seeming as well acquainted with what is obvious in antiquity (which is all that is needful in this case) as with their own lodgings, and some of them no strangers to her in her retirements and less traced recesses ; after they have (as they tell us, and we might have believed it, if they had not said so) made the fairest proof thereof they can, yet produce nothing which any that are impartial can account, or which I am apt to think they themselves can believe to be sufficient proof, (if their belief were beholding to nothing but their reason :) may it not be hence reasonably concluded, that what, in these circumstances, is not now discovered, was not then extant ? Such liturgies used everywhere, for so many hundred years, are a matter of that nature, which would have been obvious at a superficial view, and of easy proof to such as have no intimate acquaintance with antiquity. If then, we can have no intelligence thereof from those who may think themselves wronged, if they be not counted her secretaries ; if no discovery thereof be made by

■ consideration.

* Ov Ta Trpay/jiaTa ottujs 7rt(pvK€ <TK07T£t, a\\« Ttjv eavrov fvwfjLiiv iravri a&evet Kvpuiaai irpoai~ petrat'6 fiouXeTai rovro Ka't otenu, Kairot TrpafHi'tTwv iroWt'iKis uvrKpO^yofi^voiVy '* He doe not regard the nature of the facts, but resolves beforehand to confirm with all his might his own opinion ; what he wishes to be, that he thinks to be, although facts often give an opposite verdict," Isldor. lib. v. Ep. di. [B]

that diligence which has ransacked all the corners, penetrated the inwards, and dived to the bottom of antiquity for it: what ground is there to expect any discovery thereof hereafter ? What reason is there left us to believe any other [wise], but that such search hath been for a thing that was not, and that the supposed liturgies of those ages had no being, but in the imagination of later times ?

And now, I may from the premises conclude, that for five hundred years after Christ (if not more) the ordinary way of worshipping God in public assemblies, was not by prescribed liturgies.

Instead of a more particular discovery of their introduction, this may suffice, and is enough for my purpose, that they were not the common usage, while the state of the church was anything tolerable, nor till it was sunk deep into degeneracy, and was much worse than when Chry-sostom complained 2(p68pa tea/cms to. rrjs eK/ckr/alas 8ta/cetret,° " The church is in an exceeding bad case," and compares it to one laid out for

dead, "Slo-rrep ampa vexpbv rijs eKKkqalas 6pa> to nkqdos eppippevov tmv &C.,* " I see the church for the most part laid out like a dead body." And again to a house quite burnt down, having taken fire at the pillars, which should have supported it f where he says, it was many a day since the church through the world was overturned, and laid flat on the ground, all being equally involved in evil, but those that were its rulers more guilty than others ; IloXXal qpepai e£ ov rrjs oltcovp.6vqs 17 eKKkrjo-ia KaTeo-TpcnrTai Kai els e8a<pos Kelrai, iravTv>v ef-io-qs rat nana /care^o-p.evcov, paXXov 8e tcov ev appals ovruiv rots avrols VTrevdvvcov. And elsewhere [he] represents it to us, by a woman 11 robbed of her jewels and treasure, having nothing left, but dqKat. kol Kij3a>ria, " cabinets and caskets," some poor empty significations of what precious things once she had. In which description he is followed by Isidore of Pelusium/

• Horn. xxix. in Act. [pp. 776, 777.] 4 In 2 Cor. Horn, [xxvil] p. 692.

• In Ephes. Horn. x. p. 816. d p. 817.

• 'AW' ZoiKev i'i £KK\i)<r<a vvv -^vvatKi tTis 7ra\aiac eirjuepia? enTttaova^, Kai T<i oi'ii(3o\a. KaTexoi'<7t; noWaxov novov T?ir apxaia? einrpafius tKeiioi?, Kai Tat utv Oi'jKa? tSi/ xpv<ria)i/ iiridetuvviievr) Kai T<i K(/3uina, tov de ti\ovtov a0»pfiJiU v>f ravrn TrpoatoiKtv >'i €KK\r}<ria vvv, " But the church of our day resembles a woman who has lost her former fortune, and only retains in many places the symbols of that ancient splendour, and shows the caskets and cabinets of her jewels, but hath been robbed of her wealth; such a woman is the church like now." Chrys. in 1 Cor. Horn, xxxvi . p. 487.

/ Oti jUt'i/ aK/iafoi><r>]5 tijc eKn\r\<ria?, Kai /u/;7ro) vevo<rt]Kvias, to. Qeia irepi auT>;v kxopeve %apla-/jLara, tov aytov XlvevfiaTO? 5t]fiaytayovvro^, Kai twv irpoeo'TWToiv bKaarov kivovvtos, Kai oi/pavov

TIjV £KK\t](TiaV TTOIOVVTOS, TTULGI ot)\ov kffTlV' OTl 06 V 0<T Y\<T « <T Y\<i Kai G T a(7ia<Td(T IJV, a7T67TTrj TTai'Ta

eKeiVa Kai aireTrijotiaeV ov T<i x a P'°'M aTa M 01 ' 0 " (°^ 7"P >>'' "wtu deivov el touto novov tjv) a\Au Kai ftioi Kai upeTfj, " It is manifest to all that when the church was in her bloom, and had not as yet fallen sick, the Divine graces danced around her, the Holy Spirit inspiring and stirring up each of the bishops, and making the church a heaven ; but that, now that the church has become diseased and paralysed, all these have taken wing and sped away: not her graces alone (for were this all it were not so fearful) but even her life .and virtue," Src. Isidore, lib. iii. Ep. 40S. And this, as Isidore adds, tlapu t>;i/ r«ii< ov deovru? -ra irpAffiara /■icTuxeipitouenoi' KOKt'av, " Owing to the vices of those who improperly undertake to manage her affairs," &c. Lib. v. Ep. xxi. Tavra ii

Particularly the degeneracy of the church was lamentable, as on many other accounts, so (to waive those that are less pertinent to the business in hand) in respect of worship, and the persons who ordered and administered it.

The worship of God was first fearfully corrupted ; the native plainness and simplicity of it, (to anXaa-rop nal drrepUpyop fjdos) most amiable to God, and all that are like him, dirodeKrop Qea> kcu ttclo-L toIs eWvco eoiKeiov/j.epois," was vitiated and defaced with the paint and patches of bold and wanton fancies.

The law of God, the only rule and standard of Divine worship, was overlooked in the regulating of it; and that offered to God at a venture whether it pleased him or no, which was pleasing to men ; without consulting his word, by which alone is known what is* acceptable to him.

There were more compliances with the heathens, than with the scripture; and so the church [was] too far from being, as Origen says, what God, in sending Christ and the Gospel, designed them to be, tKic\r]o-las dpTnroXirevofxfpas eK*cXr/criatj beio-idaifiopap, " congregations opposite to the assemblies of the superstitious." c

The Christian worship was made more ceremonious than that of the Jews, and clogged oneribus servilibus, " with more badges of thraldom;" whereby the state of Christians was rendered far more intolerable than theirs under the law; their impositions being from the pleasure of God, but these from the will of presumptuous men, enthralling that religion which God in mercy would have had free. So Augustin, d

crvufiaivet in tov noWa Kcti ■navTO&a.TTa knapTnaOai roh to di&aaxaKiKov uf/w/xa eyKexeipKT-nl\voi<;, " This comes of sins numerous and of all kinds committed by those who have undertaken the office of teaching." Vid. lib. ii. Ep. v. [p. 129.]

« Origen contr. Cels. lib. viii. p. 418.

' Oideh 70^ fS\ewa)v toT? Tijf ^ux^f b<p9a\fX0i'; a\\ui rpoirtp otftei to OeToi/ irapa tov inrudeiK-vivra, " For no one who looks attentively with the eyes of his mind, worships the Divinity in any other than the prescribed manner," &c. Id. ibid. lib. vii. p. 367.

Tuj ycif> Ti/ua>/xev<j) Ttfx'r] n&icnt\, nv [auTOt] 6e\ei, ov% ')" »1M £ ' ? vo/U'tojuei/, " That honour is most agreeable to Him who receives our honours, which He wills, not that which we think proper." Chrysos. in Matt. Horn. [1.] torn. ii. p. 323.

c Contra Cels. lib. iii. p. 123.

d Sed hoc nimis doleo, quia multa quae in divinis libris saluberrime prse[cepta] sunt, minus curantur; et tarn multis prsesumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia, ut gravius corripiatur, qui per octavas suas terrain nudo pede tetigerit, quam qui mentem vinolentia sepelierit. Quamvis enim nequehoc inveniri possit, quo modo contra fidem sint; ipsam tamen religionem quam paucissimis et manifestissimis celebrationum sacramentis, MISERICORDIA DEI ESSE LIBERAM VOLUIT, SERVILIBUS ONERIBUS PREMUNT, ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum, qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnoverint, legalibus tamen sarcinis, non humanis praesumptionibus sub-jiciuntur, " But over this I chiefly grieve, that many most wholesome duties which are prescribed in the Divine books are least regarded ; and all institutions are so stuffed with so many fancies, that he is more severely censured who during his octaves bares his feet,* than he who over-

• Augustine here alludes to the ancient custom of abstaining from the bath for a week after baptism.—En.

complaining thereof, expresseth it; for. one institution of God's, there were ten of man's, and their presumptuous devices more rigorously pressed, than the Divine precepts ; so that if the whole had been denominated from what was predominant therein, it was in danger to lose the name of Divine worship.

Nay, some of the most horrid" abuses were invading it; invocation of saints, adoring of pictures, and giving Divine honours to the creatures. After such company those forms found entertainment. So was the worship of God adulterated, and the corruptions still increasing and growing worse, before these became the highway of worshipping. And by it, the rest became general and incurable errors and abuses, [which] before [were] but private and voluntary ; being hereby authorised and enforced.

This was after all the great lights of the church were extinct. Such liturgies were not t5>v narepcov to Keiprfktov, " the legacy of the fathers," but veu>repov ((pevprifia, as Basil [speaks] in another case,* "a later invention;" after those, whom we honour under the notion of fathers, were dead and gone, 6\lyoi de ol narpdo-ii' Spoioif " few are there like the fathers." Their successors'* (who may glory therein) were nothing like them, but too commonly under the character of Boniface, lignei sacer-

whelms his mind in drunkenness. For though it cannot be discovered wherein these customs are contrary to the faith, yet they overload religion itself, WHICH THE MERCY OF GOD WOULD HAVE TO BE FREE, possessing very few and very simple sacramental observances, WITH SERVILE BURDENS; so that the condition of the Jews is more tolerable,who, even if they do not recognise the dispensation of liberty, yet are subject to legal impositions, not to human fancies." August. Epist. cxix. Ad Januar. cap. xix.

Multa denique de cultu divino usurpata sunt, quae honoribus deferentur humanis: sive humilitate nimia, sive adulatione pestifera; ita tamen, ut quibus ea deferentur, homines habe-rentur qui dicuntur colendi et venerandi; si autem iis multum additur, et adorandi, "Many things, in fine, pertaining to Divine worship, are in use, which are abused to the honouring of men ; either from an excessive humility, or from a noisome habit of flattery; so that those men to whose honour it is prostituted, are looked upon as men who may be said to be worthy of worship and religious veneration; nay, if the practice proceed much farther, of adoration." Id. De Civit. Dei, lib. x. cap. iv.

• Vid. Theodoret. de Curand. Grasc. Affect, lib. ix.

rieTpov tpnal tov Kvatyea fc-7rn<Ofjcrui, ev eKao-Trj €l>x»7 T 'I" QeoToKov bvo/j.d£e(T0ai, " It is said that it was Peter Gnapheus, who enjoined that Mary should be called in each prayer, the Mother of God." Theod. Lect. Collect, lib. ii. p. 189. Vlpwrov ewevonae ev eKdarij evxn ti;v OeoroKov ovo/jid-&o9ai, " He first enjoined that Mary should be styled in each prayer the Mother of God." Cedren. Comp. Histor. p. 299. Nolite consectari turbas imperitorum, qui vel in ipsa vera religione super-stitiosi sunt, " Abstain from following the crowds of the simple who, even as it regards true religion itself, are superstitious." Novi multos esse sepulchrorumet picturarum adoratores, "I have known many to be worshippers of tombs and pictures." Augustin, lib. i. De Moribus Eccles. Cathol. cap. xxxiv.

» De Jejun. Horn. i. p. 130. [ed. Paris. 1722, p. 3, A. torn, ii.] c Clem. Alex. Strom, i.

d Isidore ascribes the lamentable condition of the church to the degeneracy of pastors, Tore /j.ev ol (piXdperot eU tjjv \epa><Tvvr\v ■nporftovro, vvvl be oi <j>i\dpyvpor tots oi <pei")0VTe^ to irpayiia bid to fiiyeOu? tiis- upx»15'> vvvl be ol evnrnbu>vTes Tip irpd^fXaTi 6k'« to fiefeOos tiiv Tpixpfjr' TOTe oi uKTnM 0<ri ' , '1 enovaup evaPpwofievoi, vvvl de oi wXeovefia tKovoiw xpiM aT 'C°M £1 ""' Tt > Te <" n P° l)tl>9a\iiu>v e'xovT« to eeTov 5i«affT>;piov, vvvl de ol p.t]Ae 'ivvoiav toitov €'xovte9" Tore ol -rvTneadai, vvv he oi rvmeiv tTOi/ioi, " In former times lovers of virtue were promoted to the episcopate; now, loveri of gold; then, men who shunned the office on account of the magnitude of the oharge;

dotes, "wooden priests," and though so much of another temper than those that went before them, yet served the better for this turn, being imperious, or slothful, or insufficient.

Prelacy was declining into tyranny long before ; and bishops in many places grew insolent and intolerable, forgetting that they were ordained, ov Tro'ijivrjs ap^eiv, a\\' avdpairwv iTvurraTflv •v^u^ais'," " not to exercise dominion over the flock, but to take charge of souls." The stirrings of this domineering humour were complained of in part of the fourth, and [in the] beginning of the fifth age ; and shooting up daily and speedily, we may guess to what height it might come by an hundred years' growth. Nazianzen complains in his time, of prelates who when they had overrun all things else with violence, in fine tyrannized over piety itself, ol orav iravTa 8ie£e\6a>o~i j3ia£6fiei>oi, TeXevraiov rvpavvovai Kai rr\v ivo-efieiap, 1 ' and wishes that there were no prelacy in the church, not only under the notion of local pre-eminence, wpoedpia ml tottov Trporlprjo-is, but of tyrannical prerogative, rvpawiKr) wpovopia. c

Their tyranny was one thing, if Erasmus mistake not, which drave Jerome out of the world into a cell. To be sure Chrysostom, so rigorously persecuted for endeavouring to reform the then prevailing corruptions, professed that he feared none so much as bishops, ovSeva yap \oltt6v 8e8otica a>s [tovs^ £irio-K6irovs. d And Arcadius puts one of them in mind, viz., Theophilus of Alexandria, that the audaciousness and tyranny of the bishops before him had ruined the nation, and dispersed

but now, men who jump at the office for its great luxuriousness; then, those who boasted of voluntary poverty ; now, however those who enrich themselves by wilful covetousness; in former days, those who set before their eyes the Divine judgment-seat; but now, those who have not so much as a thought of the same ; then, those who were ready to be stricken ; but now, those who are ready to strike." Isid. lib. v. Ep. xxi. Id. lib. iii. Ep. ccxxiii. [p. 346, A.]

Horrid Corruption of the Clergy, lib. v. Epis. 131.

'H xf'poTOH'cc om elf eiovaiav (pepei, oiik eh inj/os eiraipet, ov ovvaOTtlav irapex^h "Ordination does not bring to power, does not raise on high, does not offer sway." ToTr \&ion aoeX^otr dov\tvetv tjfiWe, " He thought it to be the serving of our own brethren." Chrysos. Horn, xxxvii. torn. vi. p. 442.

'H Kfieirrwv Trdcrnr eXiridos re Kai evxns t«3h irpayndrwv iiravopOaxTt? h into tov Xpt<7TOv yeyevti-fxevr\, Ktvdvvevei a/xavpovaffai inro Tijr ™v Trap avrov Tifir)9evTu>v dvvTrep/3\>iTov KaKias, "The more desirable reformation of matters for which is all our hope and prayer, viz., one made under Christ, is in danger of being hindered by the matchless wickedness of those put in office by him." Isid. lib. v. Ep. 272. [p. 346, A.]

He adds, ''Civ ovk 6 rpoiros Toy /3at)fjLov, 6 /3a6fi6t oe tov rpoirov Tno-Teverat, TrapaTtoXv T>jr Tafeu)? tuaWaTTo/ieVrjs, " Whose conversation does not accredit their degree, but their degree their conversation, with a great perversion of order." Either so indulgent, wr av n<iri uvanoir-vono KuKi'a, uWri Kai oiddffKocro, '») TH tpox>'t»iti T»is upx>is Ta iavr&v o-vfKa\v7tTOv-!e^, "that vice is not only unrebuked, but even taught, or else smothered up by the harshness of their rule, and their own faults."

• Naz. Orat. i. p. 3.

» Orat. xxi. in Laud. Athanas.

* Mnoe 7rpotdpia, /u»)6e -rir tottov 7rpOTi'yun<rir Kai Tvpavvturi TTpovOjila, 'Iva £f upe-r»jc /aonjc yivu-aKofxeOa, " Let there be neither prelacy nor any local pre-eminence and tyrannical prerogative, that we may be known by our virtue alone." Orat. xxviii.

d Epigt. xiii. p. 95. Vid. Epist. ii. ^64.

the people through the world, ov XeXrjdas 7rdvTcos on rmv -irp\v dpxtepecov navroXpla Kai rvpavviu to edvos coXecre Kai els Tracrav Tr\v olKovpevqv 8t,f(nveipev. a

So ill Isidore Pelusiota* episcopacy, as divers exercised it, is rvpawtKr] avrovopia, a "tyrannical licentiousness," because they turned it into domination, or rather to speak freely, into tyranny; eneiSfj els apx^v, paXXov 8e, el XP*) P-fTa irapprjcrlas elirelv, els rvpavviSa avro pereppv6pi(rav rives. 0

The chiefest of them made bold to leap over the just bounds of their place and office, napa. rrjs lepao-wtjs eVi dwaareiav, to secular domination, as Socrates tells us. d And as there is his testimony for those of Rome and Alexandria, so have we the fear of the fathers at Ephesus for others,

Iva pr] ev lepovpylas 7rpocr^)j/xari, e^ovaias KoapiKrjs rvcpos TrapeiaBvrjTai, ' lest

under the pretence of a sacred function, the pride (haughtiness) of secular power should creep in." e Also the observation of the Council

of Chalcedon, rjkdev els rjpas, ft)? rives napa tovs e'KK\r]0-iao-riKOVS 6eo~povs

npoo-8pdpovTes 8wacrTeiais/ " that some, against the ecclesiastical rules, did affect domination."

The bishops^ of Rome affected it with a witness, asserting and con-

« In Georg. Alex. Vit. Chrysos. cap. xxxix. p. 212.

* After instances of great degeneracy, lie adds, Kai t« Set tu ttoWi'i \iyeiv; paTairenriaKevai \otirov to u^iuifxa edofei/ utto iepo)&vi'n<: ei? rvpavvtoa' Liro Taneivotppoavvt)? eir i>irepi}<pavto.v' utto vt](neiav els Tpv<pi\V aTro oiKovop.ia'i el? 5e<T7roTetav* ov yap iIjs- oiaovopoi tx^tovct diotnetv, u\X we aeo-noTai <r<j>eTepi^eaOat, " And what need is there of many words? The office left us seems to have degenerated from a bishopric, into a tyranny ; from humility, into superciliousness; from fasting, into luxuriousness; from stewardship, into lordship. For they do not seem to administer like stewards, but to appropriate like lords." Isid. lib. v. Ep. xxi.

He says he accuses not all; there were some ko.t« diroo-TnXiKov xo-paKrfipa, " after the apostolic stamp," but very few r , (Epist. lxxxix.) and those guilty, because such was the multitude of the uKo\do-Twv, " licentious," that they were afraid, and durst not speak against them.

Though things seemed desperate, yet there might be some hopes of better, if the v<ptiymai, " under-rulers," the chief of the church, iravadfitvoi -tw Tiipai/n'oor, 7raTp<io/i< Kijoti/uoii'aK em&ti-ftoi/Tai, " ceasing their tyranny, would manifest fatherly solicitude." Lib. v. Epis. cxxvi. Bishops' tyranny hindered reformation, which was otherwise feasible, though to some it seemed impossible.

Those who observed the apostles' rule were 0X1701 Kop.idrj, " very scarce." Lib. v. Epis. lxxxix.

AeiKi/{<? to fxecov tjj? apxata? Xenovpyias Kai tTj? vvvi Tvpavvidos, " Exhibiting the mean between the ancient ministry and the present tyranny." Lib. iii. Epist. ccxxiii. vid. Having shewed in many particulars on el? rvpawida to tij? 7rpaoTtiTOf jueTaKexwpnxev afia)/ia, " that the office of the ministry has degenerated into a tyranny." Ibid.

' Epist. (ad Theodos.) cxxv. lib. ii.

* Hist. lib. vii. cap. vii. et cap. xi. Some except against Socrates, as a Novatian. But who can except against Isidore, who represents it worse, and complains of it as general? Vid. lib. v. Epist. xxi. and lib. iii. Epist. ccxxiii. The bishops affected the grandeur of princes, lib. v. Epist. lxxxix. Epist. cclxxxvi. TiVer hi] tuiv vvvi veiarepi^ovrwv, Kai t>;v Troijuewio/K <pi\o<TTopylav elr TvpavvtKtjv avjovouiav p.eTt/3a\ov ' ova virev&vvov dpxijv ^TreTTiarcvtrOat, a\X' avroKparopcutjv efou<riai/ Ken\r)pwotlai vop.ioavre<;, "But some of the modernizers of the present day, change pastoral affection into tyrannical self-will, fancying they are entrusted not with responsible rule, but are possessed of autocratic authority." Lib. v. Epist. cclv. [Lib. v. Epist. ccxxxiv.] [Lib. iv. Epist. ccxxix ] • Can. in Cod. clxxviii. / Can. xii.

f Ad spiritualem (monarchiam) cceptum est aspirari palam et aperte, a nonnullis paparum, circa an. 100, "Some of the popes began to aspire to a spiritual monarchy, openly and without disguise, about the year 400." C'asaub. Exercit. xvi. num. ccix. p. 541. Vid. Exerc. xv. p. 302.

Circa an. Dom. 420, prinio Zosimus, deinde Bonifacius, duo pneeoces Hildebranduli, reges agere incipiunt, et KaraKvpievetv tSv k\>';pwv dominium exerccre adversus electos in spiritualibus, "About A.n. 420 Zosimus first, and then Boniface, two precocious forerunners of Hilclebrand,

tending for a supremacy over all other churches; and were so irnpotently zealous for it, as" they attempted to get it acknowledged by a gross forgery used by Zosimus, Boniface, and Celestine, to a council in Africa ; 6 by Leo also in his letters to Theodosius the emperor ; and by his legate to the Council of Chalcedon. c

Nor did the bishops of Rome domineer alone in the west; other prelates acted, in lower capacities, answerably, as appears by Prosper, complaining of the bishops in his time, as if they made account that for this alone they had their power, that they might exercise a tyrannical dominion over those who were under them. Ad hocpotentes tan-thn [effecti,"] ut nobis in subjectos tyrannicam dominationem vindicemus. d Such and worse was the tyranny and imperiousness of bishops, before they conspired to make orders, that none should use a word in public prayers, at the most solemn administrations, but what, and as they thrust it into their mouths.

Nor was this before those who ordered and administered the public worship, were grown negligent and slothful, easing themselves of the chief duties of pastors, viz., those which were laborious and required any intense exercise of their faculties. Particularly it was after diligent and frequent preaching (which was the happiness even of the fourth, and part of the fifth age, and their security too, (some stop being hereby put to that degeneracy into which all was sliding down) and the excellency also of those bishops, who were the lights and ornaments of those times,) was growing out of fashion. When that of Maximus was too true, Qui reipsa doceant aut doceantur admodum pauci, " They who really teach, or are taught, are in a manner few." When those who had the charge of souls, declined the work, but were eager after the power, profits and dignity of the place ; and so retaining the name of pastors, were really no such thing : which Prosper thus bewails,* " But we,

began to play the king, and to domineer over the clergy, and to exercise rule in spiritual things, to the prejudice of the elect," &c. Id. ibid.

'Eiri to xe'fo" Tti wpdi/iina npo>i\f)e, Kal tovtuiv fi/xeis atrtoi, " Matters grow worse and worse, and we are the cause of these things,"/j^ier? oe /3ou\6jueSa 7roX\rif ilj o\aZaat TptxpJjr Kai Uvairav-<reu>? Kal udeiat, " yet we determine to enjoy luxury and ease and pleasure," -rpvcpiin faiovnev Kai ouu'as \aju7rpu9 Kai 7raerav Ttjv clWw d<p6oviav, " We seek luxury and splendid palaces, and every other delight." Chrys. in 1 Cor. Horn. vi. p. 277, 278, et in Eph. Horn. vi. p. 792. That of Chrysostom was forgot, ov yap apxovTwv Ti'#or eo-ri xd tvravBa, ovoe apxa/iivuiv 6ov\onp€neia' dWa dpxh irvevixaTiKJi, rovrifj pid\t<TTa TrXeoveKTovaa, rip xo 7r\fcov rwv irovwv i/7rtp tTj? viiwv, avabix ta Q M i <pp<'vti'oo9, ov tm tiju«s irXetoi/r e7ri£iiT6iV, " We have not here the haughtiness of rulers, nor the servility of subjects, but a spiritual rule, especially in respect to this assumption of the heaviest labours, by reason of care for you, not in respect to a craving after the greatest honours." Horn, xviii. p. 047, in 2 Cor. Vid. Horn. ii. in Tit. i. 5, p. 386.

« that. s [Cone. Carth. vi.]

* Act. xvi. torn. ii. Cone. d De Vit. Contempl. lib. i. cap. xxi.

' Sed nos pra'scntibus delectati, dum in hac vita commoda nostra et honorcs inquirimus, non ut meliores, sed ut ditiores; nee ut sanctiores, sed ut honoratiores simus, [ca-teris] festinamus. Nee gregem Domini, qui nobis pascendus tuendusque eommissns est; sed nostras voluptates,

(modestly including himself, that they who were guilty might take less exception) delighted with things present, while we hunt after the advantages and honours of this life, make all haste to be prelates, not that we may be better, but richer ; not that we may be more holy, but more honoured. Neither do we regard the Lord's flock, which is committed to us, to be fed and preserved ; but we carnally (mind) our pleasures, domination, riches, and other allurements. We will be called pastors, but we strive not to be such. We decline the labour of our office, affecting (only) the profit and dignity," &c. This way of worship was well suited to the humours of such pastors ; and they were more thoroughly and generally of this temper, than in Prosper's time, before it could have free entertainment.

The lamentable insufficiency of those who took up this ministration, we may judge of, by the noted defectiveness of those times, part whereof were in this respect, incomparably better. The unworthiness of those who were preferred, is noted by Ambrose, 0 Nazienzen,* and almost every one, who was not obnoxious. Not only the pride, but the ignorance of the western bishops, and some of the chief of them, is censured by Basil,^ Elena (BoTj&eia dno rrjs SucrtK^j 6(fipvos ', ol roye aXrjdes, ovre 'iaacriv, ovre pade'iv dvexovrai ; d " What relief can be expected from the superciliousness of the west, where they neither know the truth, nor will learn ?" The condition of the east was not much better, for a little after

dominationem, divitias, et caetera blandimenta carnaliter cogitamus. Pastores dici volumus, nee tamen esse coritendimus. Officii nostri vitamus laborem; appetimus dignitatem.

And in a subsequent passage, Gregem Domini pascendum, pastores facti, suscepimus : et nos ipsos pascimus, quando non gregum utilitati prospicimus, ;ed quid foveat et augeat nostras volup-tates attendimus. Lac etlanas ovium Christi, oblationibus quotidianis, ae decimis fidelium gauden-tes, accipimus : et curam pascendorum gregum ac reficiemiorum a quibus perverso ordine volumus pasci, deponimus, " When made pastors we undertake to feed the Lord's flocks, and we feed ourselves, seeing we look not to what is good for our flocks, but regard what may soothe and increase our own pleasures. The milk and fleeces of Christ's sheep we receive, enjoying ourselves with the oblations and tithes of the faithful; and we lay aside all care for feeding and refreshing our flocks, by whom with a perversion of order we want to be fed." De Vit. Contempl. lib. i. cap. xxi.

« Ambros. De Sacerd. Dignit. cap. v. Qui mentis torpore habetati sacerdotalem ditfamant dignitatem, "Who stupified by the drowsiness of their mind, bring the sacerdotal dignity into contempt."

4 Nazianz. Orat. Funeb. Athanas. oi mnSti* rn U/Jbxn-'vrr irpMrti'ttKovTe? unit mv naXov n-poTa-

\anr(up>i<ravT6t, ofiov Te jiu#r]Tai Kai dtd<i<rKu\ot Ttjv evot/Seias uvadeiKvvvTai, &C. " Who bringing nothing with them suitable to the priesthood, and having previously laboured in no honourable toil, turn out to be at once learners and teachers of piety." Vide et Orat. in Laud. Basilii, where he says, the holy order was in danger to be rendered most ridiculous—and the bishop's chair, not for the most worthy, but [the] most potent.

c Damasus is included in that censure of Basil. Siricius passes for a dull and sluggish person ; a simpleton in Jerome, simplicitati illuderet episcopi, "he amused himself with the simplicity of the bishop," (Epist. xvi.) and sluggish even in Baronius, causam fidei segnius tractans, "dealing with the cause of the faith somewhat sluggishly." In Spond. ad an. 397, n. 6. And Innocentius, if we may believe Erasmus (passing that judgment on him for a piece wherein he might be presumed to have shown his best) had nothing in him worthy of his place. Yet we can scarce find two of the bishops of Rome in three hundred years, better accomplished than these. What were the lesser lights commonly, when the greater were so dim! * Epist. p. 285.

we hear from Sozornen and others, that Asia and the parts about it were sick of their unworthy bishops, vevoo-r^KOTutv, and languished under the want of such as were really pastors.

In the diocese of the orient, Chrysostom a complains that the unworthy were preferred, and those fitly qualified cast out; ov yap tovs ava^iovs iyKpivovcn fiovov, aWa. Kal tovs e7riTt)8eiovs eK/3aXXovcrt, M a double misery and equally grievous;" Kal yap e£ 'lo-rjs olpai elvai 8(ivbv. b [To the same effect Isidore speaks,] \6yos to'ivvv 7repi(poiTa Kara yrjv Kal OakaTTav, oti ov8fls Tciov (v fiiovpTcov Xoiffov els iepaa-vvqv Trpo^fipio-drjo-erai, u therefore the saying is borne over land and sea, that none of the virtuous are preferred to the priesthood ;" not because there are none such, dXXa Kal pio-ovvrai Kal emfiovkevovTai, Kal e£oo~TpaKL£ovTai, as twv ttoWwv eXey^ovres tov j3loi>, c " but they are even hated and intrigued against, and outvoted as reproving the multitude's manner of life." If they endeavour to reduce but a mean person, they are hissed at, as those who are guilty of greater

evils themselves. Aioirep 7rpcorjv pev rju 6 lepevs ra> Xaai <poj3epos 7 vvv 8e 6

Xaos tu lepel/ " Therefore formerly the priest was a terror to the people, but now the people to the priest." Ancient discipline [was] neglected, the virtuous [were] oppressed, the wicked indulged f cpoftepov eo-rc, Kal Xlav <po(3ep6i> to els lepao-vvrjv vwl TeXecrai, " it is a fearful thing, and more than fearful now-a-days, to initiate any one into the priesthood," because he must either be evil, or hated and endangered if good, by those who observed pernicious custom as a divine law, and expelled those that lived well/ How [was] episcopacy degenerately abused.s' The riders [were] generally [the] worst.*

In Egypt, it was the custom of Theophilus of Alexandria (without

« What better could be expected, when the dignity was put to sale, and he carried it too commonly, not who had the richest soul, but [the] fullest purse ? So in the west, Ambrose complains, Ut videsin ecclesia pessimos, quos non merita, sed pecuniae ad episcopatus ordinem pervexerunt, " Thus you may see many of the worst character in the church, whom not their merits, but money has promoted to the episcopal order." Ambr. De Dign. Sac. cap. v. In the east, iovriTai al apxal, "the dignities are venal." Chrysost. in Ephes. Horn. vi. pp. 793, 9. Vid. Isid. lib. v. Ep. cclxxvi. [p. 642. E.] cccclxx. [p. 698. A.]

6 De Sacerdot. Orat. iii. p. 24, 25, torn. vi.

• Isidor. lib. v. Epist. cclxxvi. [Lib. iii. Epist. ccxlv. p. 354. B.] d Ibid. [lib. v. Epist. cclxxviii.]

• Lib. v. Epist. ccccxxvi. lib. iii. Epist. cclix. [p. 361. A.] / Lib. v. Epist. cccclxxxi. t Lib. ii. Epist. 1.

• Epist. lxxi. 'Y7r6 irafiuw -ras Xa'ta Kal Trepif eKK\r]triaf eTrtrpon eveo-fl 'at, " The churches of Asia, and the country round, are served by worthless men." Soz. lib. viii. cap. vii. p. 452. N«i/o-<rr)KOTu>v 5rpa7/udTu)i/ oXtj? rij? 'Acrtavtiv 8iotni]<reii>t 81' airetptav >i epu/ui'av irotfievtav, " The affairs of the whole diocese of Asia, languish by reason of the inexperience or the want of pastors." Georg. Alex. Vit. Chrysost. Int. Opt. torn. viii. pp. 202, 632.

TGi/ enK\i)crioiv i'i /xiv Ka-rt'di/, >'i di <ra\everai, erf-pa xaXewo'S irepiavrAetTat Kvp.a<rtv, a\\>i t<i iix>;-Keo-ra irtirov6ev, i] fliv \ukov uv-ri notjxivo<; [\a/3ul/cra,] h de weipaTi/v avri Kv/3epvi]Tov, t; Si diiutuv avrl larepov, " Of the churches one sinks, another is shaken, another is encompassed with grievous waves, another has suffered past all cure, one has a wolf instead of a shepherd, another a pirate instead of a pilot, an executioner instead of a physician." Chrysos. Epist. ii.

whom no bishop was to be ordained in those parts) to consecrate not knowing a men, el pr) t\ &v da-rox^o-oi, " unless he missed of his aim ;" choosing rather to have the ordering of them, as of fools, than to be liable to the control of any that were prudent: a thing which would scarce have passed as credible upon the word of George of Alexandria, had not Palladius said as much before him. 6

And, as he in Egypt would have none, so they in Africa could scarce get any that, were fit to be pastors : for so Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, in a council there assembled, anno 401, complains, that so great was their want of ministers, as c many churches were found to have not so much as one d illiterate deacon ; and leaves them to consider, at what a loss they must needs be, for persons qualified to be superior officers, when they could not find such as were fit to be deacons.

And Augustin tells us, there were many good pastors, who could not discern, per ignorantice simplicitatem, " through their ignorance and sim-pleness," when there was heresy in a prayer ; but made use of such as were heretical, accounting them to be good.'

Yea, many bishops [there] were, (and many more consequently of lower rank,) who knew no letters/ and could not so much as write their

■ intelligent.

s "E0or avTif i)v fxij xeipOTOKelv tovs ex*<Pp otlas *' M') T ' <•"' lio-TOX'/coi, fiovXu/xevos uurwv up%eiv d)9 uvofjTwv, a^eivov hyovp-evo? avrwv Kpareiv ») <l>pi>vip.u)v uKoveiv, " It was his custom not to ordain prudent men unless he missed his aim; since he was desirous of ruling them as fools, esteeming it hetter to rule such than to hearken to the wise." Georg. Alex. Int. Chrys. Op. torn. viii. p. 1S5.

Eusebius of Pelusium did as bad or worse, ordaining not only cWaidevo-ia? Opefj-pLara, " untaught nurslings;" Isid. Ep. lxxxi. lib. iii. [p 287. A.] himself being aKojias tfpe/x/ia, "a senseless

nursling," Epist. iii. but apeiXlUTa Oiipia Kal dai/jLOvas u\acrTOpa?, Kai rri? Kotvris 0t/cea>9 €%8povi,

" ruthless beasts and raging demons, and foes of our common nature," lib. v. Ep. Iii. liii. liv. Autiots diet t«s upTTayas, Kvtri de diet tcw Xayveias, u\u)iret;i de diet ti]v KaKavpyiav, irapa 5e tovs fiev airovdalovs e£o<TTpa/a'£'e(, roiis de <pav\ovs tjvyKpoTei —td<*)Ke to iroipLviov, " wolves by reason of their rapine, dogs for lustfulness, foxes for craft, and moreover, rejects the worthy, and claps his hands on the vile—to such he gave the flock." Ep. cxlvii. c that.

rf Communi periculo providendum, maxime, quia tanta indigentia clericorum est, multasque ecclesiae ita desertEe sunt, ut ne unura quidem diaconum, vel inliteratum (Graec. dipumiaTov, habere reperiantur. Nam de caeteris superiorihus gradibus tacendum arbitror, quia, ut dixi, si ministerium diaconi facile non invenitur, multo magis superiorum honorum inveniri non posse certissimum est, et quotidie nos planctus diversarum pene emortuarum plebium jam non sustine-mus : quibus nisi fuerit aliquando subventum, gravis nobis, et inexcusabilis innumerabilium animarum pereuntium causa apud Deum mansura est, " We must provide against the common danger: chiefly because there is so great a want of clergy, and many churches are so desolate, that they are not found to possess even one illiterate deacon. For I think it best 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 presence of God." In Justell. p. 164. In Crab. Concil. torn. i. pp. 502, 503.

« De Bapt contra Donat. lib. vi. cap. xxv.

/ Helius, episcopus Hadrianopolitanus, definiens subscripsi per Romanum episcopum Myronum, eo quod nesciam literas. Caiumus, episcopus Phoenicensis definiens subscripsi per coepiscopum meum Dionysium, propter quod literas ignorem, " I, Helius, bishop of Hadrianopolis, have subscribed my judgment by the hand of the Roman bishop Myro, because I am ignorant of letters.—I, Cajumus, bishop of Phenice, have subscribed my judgment by the hand of Dionysius, my fellow-

own names, but were glad to get others to subscribe for them, even in councils, where, we may think, such insufficiency would have been ashamed to show itself, if it had not been too common.

Not to be tedious, Leo the emperor, about anno 460, is commended, as having well provided that the church should have able bishops, because he would have none ordained, but those who had learnt their psalter ;

ovdeva e^eipoTovei. to yfraXrfjpiov prj yivaHTKOvra.' 1 Such was the State of the

church, as to the sufficiency of her prime guides before the sixth age, and much worse afterwards, when they steered this course in their worship ; all sorts of learning, together with holiness, declining apace ; and barbarism, ignorance, and viciousness, more and more prevailing. Under such planets were those liturgies born, and by their influence nourished !

To conclude, they were not entertained, till nothing was admitted into the church, de novo, but corruptions, or the issues thereof; no change made in the ancient usages, but for the worse ; no motions from the primitive posture, but downwards into degeneracy ! Till such orders took place, as respected not what was most agreeable to the rule and primitive practice, or what was best to uphold the life and power of religion in its solemn exercises, or what might secure it from that dead, heartless formality, into which Christianity was sinking, and which is at this day the sediment of popery : but what might show the power, and continue occasion for exercise of authority to the imperious and tyrannical ; or what might comport with the ease of the lazy and slothful ; or what might favour the weakness and insufficiency, and not detect the lameness and nakedness of those who had the place * and name, but not

bishop, because I am ignorant of letters." Concil. Ephes. ii. in Act. i. Cone. Chalced. in Crab. torn. i. p. 830. So amongst others, Cone. Ephes. i. Patrieius, presbyter de vico Paradioxilo, manu utens Maximi eompresbyteri, obhoc, quod literas ignorarem. Zenon chorepiscopus. Manum accommo-davi pro eo ego Flavius Palladius, ob hoc quod praasens dixerit literas se ignorare, " Patrieius, presbyter of the village Paradioxilus, availing myself of the hand of my fellow-presbyter Maximus) because I am ignorant of letters.—Zeno, chorepiscopus. I, Flavius Palladius, have set to my hand for him, because he being here present says that he is ignorant of letters." In Act. i. Cone. Chalced. in Crab. p. 816. Theodorus Gadarensis per alterius manum, i.e. yEtherii diaconi, "Theodore of Gadara, by the hand of another, i. e. of iEtherius the deacon." In the Greek copy, yEtherius the deacon subscribed, 47riTpa7rei9 nap uv-ov ddvidrov 01/T09 i| /j.ij ~/pd<(>oi>Tos, " commissioned by himself, seeing he is unable to write," which is likely [to be] the cause, though not expressed, why those that were present, subscribed by others ; of which see instances. Cone. Eph. ii. in Crab. p. 831. Cone. Constantinop. sub Flaviano, contra Eutych. in Crab. p. 781. et Cone. Eph. i. in Cone. Chalc. Act. i. Crab. pp. 819, 820.

Pantinus Zenensis literas nescit, " Pantinus of Zena is ignorant of letters." Collat. Carth. d. i. n. 133.

» Theod. Lect. Collect, lib. i.

* Sentio, negligente me, crescit sentina vitiorum, et tempestate fortiter obviante, jam jamque putridse naufragium tabulae sonant, " I feel that by my negligence the sink of vices chokes up ; and through the strong opposition of tempest, every now and then, the rotten planks sound warning of shipwreck." Gregor. M.

"Ayptos 6 xti^uji' o Tot 6KK\>i<nas KaraXafiwv Kai £o<pii>dr\s, Kai vvktcl dai\t]Vov ndvra ttp-^daaio, Kai Kaff kudajriv Kopv(j>oinai t')\v kp-ipav. TriKpa Tt'va wdlvoov vavdfia, Kai avt-eTai >| navuiXeOpia T>jr

the real accomplishments of pastors and teachers. In a word, not till the state of the church was rather to be pitied than imitated ; and what was discernible therein, different from preceding times, were wrecks and ruins, rather than patterns.

oiKou/ievw, " Wild and dark is the storm which has overtaken the church, and she toils through the moonless night, and some bitter waifs of her pangs turn up every day, and the total destruction of the world hurries on." Chrys. Ep. i. p. 51.

Toy <pt\av8ptj}'KOv Geoit TrapaKaXovvres bovvat \vciv ly koivw ttj? oiKOfjUeyrj? vavayiw, " Beseeching God, the friend of man, to give deliverance from the common shipwreck of the world." Id. Epist. xxix. p. 115.

Qpr)vovpLev toy kolvov twv kmi\r)txiwv x€f^tu>va, nai to Ttjv o'wovpLevtiv Kara\a/3dv vavdycov, Kai 7rat/Ta9 u/xdr TrapaKaXovfxev evxais /3or\6elv t ware Ttjv Travu)\e9piav ravrt\v XuOhvai rrOTt, " We bewail the storm common to the churches, and the shipwreck which overtakes the world; and we entreat you all to help with your prayers, that this total destruction may sometime be stayed." Id. Epist. clxxviii. p. 186.

A DISCOURSE

SAVING GRACE OF GOD.

By the late Reverend and Learned David Clarkson, Minister of the Gospel.

LONDON :

Printed by J. Astwood, for Tho. Parkhurst, at the Bible and Three

Crowns, at the lower end of Cheapside, near Mercers' Chapel.

1688.

A PREFACE.

The very title-page, mentioning the subject, and the author of the following discourse, leaves little need of a recommendatory preface.

For what subject can be supposed more inviting than this of the grace of God—represented to such as were lost, and designing their salvation ? If we were the inhabitants of some other world, never lost, or in which sin and vindictive justice had no place; it were a grateful contemplation to us, if from thence, we had the opportunity to view the methods of grace for the saving of miserable perishing creatures in such a world as this. As the kindness and benignity of the unfallen angels make them stoop down," and pry, with earnest desire, 6 and no doubt high pleasure, to observe what was doing to this purpose in this wretched world of ours.

But who can consider himself as lost, and not apprehend the name of saving grace to carry with it a pleasant, joyful sound ? It too plainly argues a strange complication of stupidity, and lightness of mind, when to any, who are themselves of that lost race, the grace of God, by which only they can be saved, is unsavoury, and without relish. And it is not less strange if they can expect to be saved without it. There are so many sensible miseries continually urging mankind, that if they be compared with what obtains in the common belief of the most, (of whatsoever religion,) and whereof few profess any doubt, that one would wonder all should not be much taken up in meditating some way of escape, and how they may be saved out of such a gulf as this. For, setting aside the inward evils that infest men's minds, (which carry most of sting and pungency in them, to those of an awakened

■ Hapanv^ai &irit)vn<w<Ti. 4 1 Pet. i. 12.

mental sense) it is obvious to their duller outward senses, that they are encompassed, and often seized with innumerable calamities, sicknesses, pains, violences from one another, and other disasters, from which they cannot be certain to be safe one moment, and that they are all mortal, and after a little time must certainly die. The most profess themselves to believe they have about them somewhat immortal, and that this world will at length have an end. Divers pagans have agreed with Christians, in the apprehension, that it will end by fire, an universal conflagration, and of an after felicity to be had somewhere else.

Now what power of nature can they think of, that should save them out of so common a ruin ? Or, what is left them to think of besides, unless they will yield themselves to perish without remedy (which the nature of man abhors from) but of being saved by grace ?

They that have any notion of G od, cannot think grace unworthy of him. Some of the Epicurean faith, that thought it unsuitable to the nature of God to be touched with anger, (and who might therefore think our infelicities to befal us of course, without being any effects of Divine displeasure,) yet were less averse to think he might be touched with grace, (as Lactantius" takes notice,) and so left themselves room for the apprehension, that our felicity slipuld be owing to the benignity and favour before God. But what thoughts of Him can be more unworthy, or less agreeing with themselves, than, while He is acknowledged to be a Mind, a Spirit, the First, Eternal Mind, and the Father of spirits, to suppose He should be less kind, benign, and gracious to our minds, and spirits, than to our baser flesh ? Or, that they who expect from his favour a state of future freedom from bodily pains, diseases, and death, should not expect from it much more a felicity suitable to their nobler part, and seek thence what is of so apparent necessity, beforehand, to prepare and form their minds and spirits for such a felicity ?

And one would think, that they who are better instructed in the affairs of God's government over men, and that know how to ascribe to him a just displeasure and anger for their common apostacy and revolt from him, that shall be no way unbecoming, but most agreeable to an infinitely perfect Being; should be most

« De Ira Dei.

A PREFACE. -37 9

apt to approve, and admire the methods, which the grace of God hath pitched upon, for expiating the guilt of sin hy a Eedeemer : so they should not he unapt to apprehend the necessity of gracious operations upon the spirits of men to deliver them from such distempers and disaffections, as are plainly inconsistent with their final salvation and hlessedness; and give them such dispositions as are requisite thereto.

Can anything he more suitable to the grace of God, than, when he hath found out a way, wherein he might, upon terms not injurious to the dignity of his government, pardon their sins, he should also inwardly apply himself to them, cure the blindness, carnality, and aversion of their minds, incline, and enable them to know, trust, love, obey, and converse with him, without which an atonement and pardon would avail them nothing, and in which of themselves they can effect nothing ?

It is easy to frame abstract discourses, and general ideas of what might be performed by those noble powers, a man's own understanding, and will: but what can actually be effected, in particular and circumstantiated cases, against the stream of sensual inclination, either to the engaging of intense thoughts, or by thinking, they perhaps are most apt to pronounce confidently, who have least tried.

Nor is anything more congruous to the notion of grace, than that it be at liberty herein. Unfree grace were to every man's understanding a plain contradiction. Neither can any inconvenient or ill consequence follow upon its being apprehended most sovereignly free, or, anything that is not most suitable to God, and to us. It naturally follows that he be not neglected, that he be supplicated, and sought unto, that we absolutely, and with great reverence and hope, surrender, resign, and commit ourselves to him, which how majestic, august, great, and God-like is it, on his part! how correspondent to his very nature ! Whereupon we are told, (Psalm cxlvii. 11,) " The Lord taketh pleasure in them that fear him, in those that hope in his mercy.'' And how suitable is it to the condition of wretched and impotent creatures that are perishing, and cannot save themselves! And to such, one would think no subject should be more acceptable than this of the saving grace of God: nor, therefore, a discourse upon it unacceptable.

Especially from such an author, who though his great humility,

and remoteness from all ostentation of himself, did as much avail him, as was possible to him; yet his singular worth could not be hid, and indeed the less, by how much more he endeavoured it. His clear and comprehensive mind, his excellent learning, his reasoning argumentative 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. From such an hand one may reasonably expect a treatise very highly valuable upon such a subject. Which I do with so great confidence, that, though I have not as yet (wanting opportunity) thoroughly perused it, I make no doubt to invite such to the reading of it, as apprehend the value of the grace of God, and their own salvation; earnestly desiring that, as their satisfaction herein may be, in its completion, alike early, so it may be equally great with that, which is with much assurance expected by

One very desirous any way to promote the common salvation,

John Howe.

CONTENTS OF THE ENSUING DISCOURSE.

PAGE

That Salvation is wholly and only from Grace, proved 383

Grace free in respect of—1. Constraint; 2. Merit; 3. Motive 384

That Salvation is by Grace, demonstrated from God, from Man 384

1. From man, in several particulars 384

2. From God, demonstrated in several particulars 390

Use. Those condemned who will have us saved by Free-will, and not by Free

Grace 394

The Doctrine of Free-will displayed, in four particulars: 1. What Grace the Patrons of Free-will do own, and count sufficient. 2. What they ascribe to Free-will. 3. What is the Tendency of their Principles. 4. What they Object against the Doctrine of Free Grace 394

1. What Grace by them is counted sufficient 394

2. What they ascribe to Free-will 396

3. The Import and dangerous Tendency of the Doctrine of Free-will, in twenty particulars 399

4. Objections against the Doctrine of Grace, answered, and Prejudices removed 427

Some Practical Inferences from the Doctrine of Free Grace 440

A DISCOURSE

FREE GRACE.

" By grace ye are saved." — Ephes. ii. 8.

The apostle, the great asserter of free grace, in the 20th verse compares the church to a temple: and it is his design in this epistle to show the influence grace hath to the raising of this building. He undertakes to prove, that the whole structure of salvation is to be attributed alone to grace.

The foundation was laid from eternity by grace in election; chapter i. 4, 5. The polishing and disposing of each particular stone in the building, by justification and sanctification, were all acts of grace ; chapter i. 7, and ii. 5, and iv. 13, 14. And it is grace that lays on the top-stone in glory ; chapter ii. 6. So that we may honour this temple with the same acclamations which they used to theirs, Zech. iv. 7, and cry, Grace, grace unto it. The sum of the whole discourse is propounded in the text, " By grace ye are saved."

We will not divide what God from eternity has joined together, grace and salvation : but from them entirely taken, offer you this

Observation : — Salvation is wholly and only to be attributed to grace.

We need go no further for Divine testimony to this truth, than these two chapters. Election, chapter i. 4, 5. Redemption, verse 7. Vocation, verse 19. Justification, chapter ii. verses 3, 4. Sanctification, verse 5. Glorification, verse 6. What he speaks of the whole here, he affirms of every part thereof in those places. The whole and all the parcels are of grace.

For explication. By salvation, understand both the decree of God, by which the elect were ordained to salvation, and the execution of that decree, begun here, and consummated in glory.

That we may know what grace means, take notice of three words, used promiscuously in Scripture, which yet admit of some distinction ; the knowledge whereof will lead us to the distinct knowledge of this term. These are love, mercy, grace.

To love, is velle bonum, to will the happiness of the object loved. It is not in God such an affection as in us, though in effect it proves affectus unionis, and brings God and his people together.

Mercy does velle bonum miseris. So it adds a limitation to the object which love leaves indefinite. It is for those that are miserable.

Grace does velle bonum liber e. So this limits not the object, as the former, but qualifies the act. It acts freely.

So that mercy, is love to those that are miserable. Grace is love in him that is unobliged. Unobliged, I say, either by necessity, merit, or motive. Grace then, in God, is nothing but free love.

1. Free in respect of constraint; when there is no necessity he should fix his love upon this object at all, or upon this rather than another, this is spontaneum.

2. Free in respect of merit ; when there is nothing in the object that deserves love, either absolutely or comparatively, this is gratuitum.

3. Free in respect of motive ; when there is nothing in the object to move this affection to pitch upon it at all, or upon it rather than another, this is liberum, though it express it not fully.

In all these respects, the grace of God in bestowing salvation upon any of the sons of men, is free love.

1. There is no necessity God should save men. He is a most free agent, whose liberty is inconsistent with every degree of necessity ab extra. It was in his choice either to have created no man, or to have condemned all men, or to have saved those who are now condemned.

2. There is nothing in man that can merit salvation : for there is no good thing in him that he can call his own. All is of gift ; and the best thing in man bears no proportion to salvation : but where there is merit, there must be both propriety and proportion.

3. There is nothing in man can move God to save him. If anything, his misery ; but this is no motive absolutely, because it is wilful. Man willingly involved himself in it, and is unwilling to be delivered from it upon the terms propounded in the gospel. Nor can it be a motive comparatively, to save one man rather than another, because all are by nature equally miserable.

So then salvation is by grace, because it is a gift of free love to such in whom there can be nothing to enforce it, nothing to deserve it, nor anything to move him to bestow it.

The demonstrations are drawn from God, from man.

From man. The impotency, deformity, enmity, of man against God, makes it evident, that salvation must be wholly, only from grace.

1. Impotency. What a poor despicable creature is man—the best of men ! What a wonder the great God should think of saving him ! His rise was from the earth. He is but at best dust and ashes, a poor piece

of clay. He dwells in houses of clay. His foundation is in the dust, and is crushed by the moth, Job iv. 19. A stately thing sure which the very moth can crush, and crumble into his first principle, dust !

The most potent victorious king that ever Israel had, puts a worm among his titles, Psalm xxii. 6, " I am a worm." The greatest man in the East derives his pedigree no higher ; " I have said to corruption, Thou art my father ; and to the worm, Thou art my mother and my sister," Job xvii. 14. And if the greatest men on earth, who best understood themselves, were no greater in their own account ; what do we think men are in God's account ? The numerous posterity of Jacob have no greater title, Isaiah xli. 14, " Fear not, worm Jacob :" and if that vast multitude, which was like the stars of the heavens, and the sands on the sea-shore, which cannot be numbered, be but as one worm in his eye, what do we think is one man ?

But we are too high yet. Men in the account of God, compared with him, are not so much as worms. Absolutely, in themselves, they are more ; but compared with him not so much, Isaiah xl. 22, " It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers :" this is something less than worms ; yet less in his eye, than these in ours.

But we yet go lower. Worms and grasshoppers, though most despicable, are yet animate beings ; and the soul of the least creature, in Augustine's account, is more excellent than the body of the sun. This is too high yet; what then are men in God's esteem ? see verse 15, " The nations are as the drop of a bucket, and are accounted as the small dust of the balance ; behold, he takes up the isles as a very little thing." What ! all the nations of the earth as one drop—as an atom ? What proportion then do ye think we bear to this drop, to this atom, who are but as drops and atoms in comparison of all the nations of the earth !

Sure now we are low enough. Our thoughts can scarce go lower. I,° but stay, we are not in God's account thus much. A drop, an atom is something, though a very little thing. But verse 17, " All nations before him are as nothing." Alas ! where are we then, so near the low condition of nonentity ? Yes, and lower too ; for it follows, "and they are accounted to him less than nothing."

See then what man is in God's account, as less than that which is less than nothing. And can you imagine anything in this nothing, man, that should oblige the great God to save him ? Oh, sure it is grace, free love, and such as may astonish heaven and earth, that the great God, who measures the seas in the hollow of his hand, who spans the heavens, and weighs the mountains, should condescend to do thus much

» Aye !

for any of those poor despicable nothings ; should contrive their salvation from eternity, and send his Son, the Son of his love, of his delight, to procure it with his blood, and then admit them to an eternal enjoyment of himself in glory.

2. The deformity of man as he is sinful. We showed before, man was nothing, less than nothing, in the sight of God. Now we will show, he is worse than nothing ; even a deformed nothing, or rather nothing but deformity.

It is true, by creation he was a beautiful creature, moulded after the image of the first beauty, bearing the superscription of God. He was then as a bright morning star, when he first appeared in the world. But he forthwith fell from his primitive station, the orb of innocency : he fell from thence into the puddle of sin, into " thick mire and clay," as the Psalmist, Psalm xl. 2. And being drenched in sin, he became more deformed and abominable in the eye of God, than that which is most loathsome to us. The veil of light and holiness, wherewith he was beautified, being torn off the soul, sin besmeared it with ugly filthiness and pollution. The Divine light and holiness, which shined in his soul, is vanished ; and darkness and deformity has seized on him, and overspread him. Holiness was the moral form of the soul ; but now sin gives it morally both its being and denomination. So that, what may be said of sin in the abstract, as that it is deformity, pollution, filthiness, may be said of man in the concrete, he is deformed, filthy, polluted. We have cause to complain of this woeful change, in the words of the prophet, with a little variation, Isaiah iii. 24, " Instead of a sweet smell, there is a stink ; instead of well-set hair, baldness; and deformity instead of beauty."

Sin has left neither a-vynierpia nor evxpaila in the souls of sinners, neither proportion nor good complexion. The fall put all out of joint, and left the soul blind, lame, crooked, diseased, nay dead in sins, &c. These are the familiar epithets which Scripture gives our sinful state.

The visage of the soul is loathsomely bespotted. Nor has sin brought upon it simple deformity alone ; but which is worse, uncleanness, such as is compared to that of a " removed woman," Ezek. xxxvi. 17. Nay, the best thing that is in it, or proceeds from it, is but as a " menstruous rag," Isaiah xxx. 22.

I," but though this be noisome and unpleasing, yet there is no danger, no infection in it. Oh, but sin is a contagious pollution, it is like a ]>!ague-sore in the heart, an infectious leprosy ; it will diffuse its malignity like the poison of asps.

I,° but if a man be visited with the plague or leprosy, he seems rather

" Aye !

an object of compassion, than detestation ; rather to be pitied than loathed. Go yet one step further.

Sin is not only contagious, but a loathsome noisome filthiness. The Holy Ghost compares it to the stench of an open sepulchre, to the vomit of a dog, to the corrupted matter of a putrefied ulcer. Such is the temper of a soul by sin.

I will go no further. It may be the hearing of these is offensive ; how much more to see, smell, or touch them ! Yet a sinful man is more ugly in the eye, more offensive to the nostrils, more loathsome to the Lord, than any of these can be to the quickest or most delicate of our senses.

Alas, wretched man ! how justly mayest thou or I speak, what Mephi-bosheth uses in compliment to David, 2 Sam. ix. 8, " What is thy servant, that thou shouldst look on such a dead dog as I am ? "

Can any soul expect, that such a monster as this should be the object of any one's love, much less of God's ? How hopeless may man's salvation seem, if we look on him in this state. ! What ! is the eternal love of God, the precious blood of Christ, for such a wretch as this ? Is there anything in him, in us, to merit, to move love ? Who would not rather think, every son of Adam should with indignation be kicked out of the presence of so holy a God ? Sure if there be any hopes, it must be from grace, free love, and such as could nowhere be entertained but in the breast of infinite goodness.

3. The enmity of sinners against God, this makes it evident beyond all exception. The impotency and deformity of man, in the state of sin, shows there is nothing lovely in him ; but if there were not, yet if he had any love for God, this love, without any other consideration, might be some inducement to move the Lord to love him ; and so his love might seem less free, as having some motive from without.

But the case is otherwise. As there is nothing lovely in him, so neither is there any love to God ; nay, there is a high degree of hatred and enmity.

The wisdom of the flesh, the very best thing in man, " is enmity to God," Rom. viii. 7. And this enmity is manifested in contradicting the will of God, and running cross to his commands ; for if this be our love to God, as the apostle says, " that we keep his commands," 1 John v. 3, then this is hatred of God, that we will not keep them.

And this disobedience of a sinner proceeds from his hatred of the God that commands, and not only of that which is commanded, yea, rather from that than this. For what sinner is there, who does not believe, that what the law commands is just in itself and good for us ?

So that the enmity reaches God himself. " Who is the Lord," says the sinner in his heart, " that I should obey him ?"

Further, sinners revolt from God, and conspire with his greatest enemy, join in confederacy with Satan. They (as those in Isaiah xxviii. 15) have made a covenant with hell; and with death are they at agreement. They give up their " members as weapons of unrighteousness," to fight against God, Bom. vi. 19. It is the condition of all, by nature. Every sinner, before the Lord conquer him by his grace, is at open enmity with God, and does in effect bid defiance to the Almighty. The acts of his life are acts of hostility against God. Nor is it a defensive war only, that would be more excusable ; but the design is, not to secure himself only, but to put down God, and divest him of his sovereignty. This is the voice of their hearts and lives, We will not have this God to rule over us. Sin, where it reigns, does as much as is in its power to depose the sovereign Lord of the world. It denies in effect that he is God : for that which denies his essential perfections and attributes, does deny him to be God. He that gives up himself to sin, denies in a manner all his Divine excellences, his goodness, wisdom, power, justice, mercy, immensity, Psalm 1. 21. He would not go on in sin, if he did not say in his heart that he is not the chief good ; because sin deprives him of this good, cuts him off from the enjoyment of it : or else he believes not that it will deprive him of the chief good, and so denies his truth, who has affirmed and declared it; and not believing him herein makes him a liar.

He durst not sin, but that he thinks God is not present to see him ; and if so, he denies his immensity. Or if he see him, he thinks he cannot punish him ; and so denies his power. Or if he be able, yet he thinks he will not punish him ; and so denies his justice. He would not turn aside to other ways than he prescribes, but that he thinks he either cannot direct him in the best way, and so denies his wisdom ; or that he will not direct him to the best, and so denies his mercy. And thus much we might show of the other Divine perfections, how it tends to deface them all.

Lo here the horrid enmity of sin and sinners against God. They deny he is God ; call him, constructively and in effect, a finite, a weak, a foolish, a false, an unjust and unmerciful thing.

It is true, sinners cannot do what they say and wish in their hearts. They have not power to undeify God, or to deprive him of his Divine perfections ; but this does not lessen nor excuse their enmity against him : for it is true in evil, as well as in good, where there is a willing mind, it is accounted as if it were done.

Oh, the horrid nature of sin ! Be astonished, O heavens ! and be ye horribly afraid at this prodigious enemy, which is in the hearts of sinners against God. Why is thy wrath restrained, O Lord ? why does not thy indignation break forth, and destroy all sinners from off the

face of the earth ? Nay, why was not heaven and earth annihilated at the first appearance of such horrid treason, of such desperate enmity ?

But we have not yet discovered the height of this enmity. What is the reason, that a sinner should thus set himself against God ? It may be, he despairs of salvation, while the Almighty rules ; and therefore the desire of his own happiness may be the cause of this opposition ; and so it will not be pure enmity, but some principle of self-love, that may make him so desperate.

It is no such matter ; it is not salvation that he cares for. He sets himself against God; not out of any respect to secure his own well-being. For whom would he advance into the place of God ? It is the great enemy of his salvation, Satan, 2 Cor. iv. 4. It is he who, by the consent of sinners, is the " god of this world ;" it is he they would have to rule in and over them, Ephes. ii. 2. They are children of obedience to him, but of disobedience to God, and will be so, though they perish for it.

Here then is the height of the sinner's enmity against God. They had rather perish eternally under the sovereignty of Satan, than be happy in subjection to the sceptre of God. Nay, sinners would persist in the height of this enmity, and therefore reject all motions of reconciliation, though the Lord condescend to beseech them, with all moving arguments, to " be reconciled," 2 Cor. v. 20. They despise salvation, and the means that tend to it. They manifested it, by crucifying the Lord of life, when he came on purpose into the world to bring salvation. " Come," say they, " this is the heir," Matt. xxi. 38. We cannot reach the Father, he is too far above us ; but we have a fair occasion to show how well we wish him. This is the heir, here is his Son, his only Son, the Son of his love and delight, " come let us kill him :" and so they did ; and so would other sinners do, if they were in the same circumstances with those that did it. And there are those who " crucify again" the Lord of life. And what do we less in venturing upon ways of sin ? since this is it which first crucified him. This is the desperate disposition of all sinners in the state of nature. We had so continued to eternity, if the power of grace had not broke in upon us, and drawn us to terms of reconciliation.

And this being our state and temper naturally, can you think there was anything in us, that could have moved the Lord to save us ? What ! can hatred, such desperate enmity, such prodigious malice against the Lord, move him to love us ? Oh, if free grace had not moved itself, we had persisted in our opposition against the Lord ; and had been eternally miserable, as those deserve to be, who are found fighters against God, and open enemies to him !

There are other demonstrations, that salvation is of grace only, which

may be drawn from God himself; the consideration of his all-sufficiency, sovereignty.

(1.) The all-sufficiency and independency of God. He stood in no need at all of man, either for happiness or glory, the least degree of either. He had been eternally as happy, as glorious, if man had never been, or been ever miserable.

1. In respect of happiness. He was perfectly, infinitely happy without us. He did not expect, he could not have the least degree of it from us. All degrees, all fulness of it was in himself, before we had a being. The Divine understanding was infinitely pleased and satisfied in the contemplation of himself, the first truth. The Divine will took infinite contentment and complacency in the enjoyment of himself, the chief good. The object here was infinite and glorious excellences ; and the acts were infinitely perfect ; and the issue thereof must needs be infinite happiness, both formal and objective. Christ the eternal wisdom of the Father, thus expresseth it, Prov. viii. 22—30. Here are the mutual delights of the Father and the Son ; those enjoyments, which hold forth the highest degree of happiness, before any creature had being. The Son was the Father's delights D^W^', " daily," every moment, without the least intermission ; and rejoiced, the word is npntftt, " was laughing before his face." Those happy souls, who are already admitted into the glorious presence, may guess, though not comprehend what happiness there is in those delights : we are in the dark, and can neither express nor conceive how much it is ; but though we cannot conceive how great that happiness is, we may easily apprehend, that it cannot be made greater by any creature.

Besides, happiness must arise from union with some good, or the enjoyment of it. Now all goodness in perfection, is included in the Divine Being ; and whatever good is in the creature, it is but an imperfect participation of that primitive goodness, or rather but a dim resemblance of it. And shall we think that there can be any addition to his happiness from that which is so imperfectly without him, when all excellences are perfectly, eminently, infinitely in himself? Shall the ocean of blessedness seek an increase from that which is less than a drop ? Or the Sun of glory borrow lustre from a glow-worm, a dim spai'k ? Or the universe of all happiness greaten itself by a point, a mote ? No, the Lord was blessed for ever, before man was in being ; and he had been blessed for ever, if man had never been. And if nothing had moved the Lord to save him, but a design to add to his own happiness, none of the children of men had ever known salvation.

2. In respect of glory. The Lord does not depend upon man more for glory, than happiness. He had been as glorious, if we had continued in the state of nonentity, or if we had perished in our sin, and sunk into

misery. It is true, we say the Lord glorifies his mercy in our salvation; but this is such a glory as he might have wanted, and yet have been no less glorious. To clear this a little. The glory of God is essential or relative. God's essential glory is those infinitely glorious perfections and excellences which meet in the Divine essence. This is that glory, which no mortal eye ever saw, or can see. When Moses desired to see his glory, the Lord says to him, " Thou canst not see my face and live," Exod. xxxiii. 18, 20. The face is the seat of beauty, where all the lines of perfection do concentre, where all the rays of glory are united. These we can no more behold in his face, than a lump of snow can sustain the united vigour of the sunbeams at noon-day.

When the queen of Sheba had seen the glory of Solomon, it is said, " there was no spirit in her," 1 Kings x. 5. The soid, or spirit in her (as in others) has a strong inclination to unite with that which it apprehends to be most good ; and beholding something transcendently better without, than in the body, seemed willing for that time to leave the body, that it might enjoy and close with what was more excellent. If the Lord should unveil himself, and let us have a clear sight of his glorious excellences, as they shine in himself; the soiil would leave the body, the union between them would be dissolved; the spirit would be rapt away with such a sight, and leave the body dead. This may be the reason of what the Lord said to Moses ; " No man can see my face," i. e. my essential glory, " and live."

Further, the essential glory of God is God himself, and therefore both infinite and eternal. It is infinite as he is, and to that which is infinite nothing can be added, it can no way be greater than it is already. It is eternal too, and so before anything was created, and consequently no way dependent on the creatures. By which it is manifest, that essential glory is not at all increased by working man's salvation.

For relative glory, that indeed depends on the creatures. But the Lord had been as glorious in himself, if this glory had never been, as will appear from the nature of it. The essential attributes of God are his Divine perfections, absolutely existing, without respect or relation to the creatures. Relative attributes are those essential perfections, as manifested to the creatures, or rather the manifestation of them. If then essential glory be the lustre of those essential attributes, as shining in the Divine essence, which we showed before, it must follow, that relative glory is that which results from the manifestation of those perfections to the creatures. For example, relative mercy is the manifestation of essential goodness in the salvation of the elect, and relative justice % the manifestation of essential righteousness or justice in the condemnation of the reprobate.

Now God had been as glorious in himself, if he had never made

2c

known his mercy or justice to the world, if there had been no world, no creatures made, to manifest these to, if there had been no men or angels to take notice of them. For, is the sun made more splendid or beautiful by our beholding of it ? No, it woidd be as glorious, if no eye ever saw it. Did the Israelites' eating manna add any sweetness to that pleasant food ? No sure, it had been as sweet in itself, if no palate had ever tasted it. Even so the Lord had been as powerful, if he had never created the world ; no less merciful in himself, if he had never saved any, if there had been none to save ; no less righteous, if there had been none to condemn, if he had never condemned any.

But because this may seem strange, and some may stick at it, let me add a reason for it. The manifestation of his attributes to the world is a free act, a transient act. It is a certain rule in divinity, Quicquid Deus operatur ad extra liber e sit; every act of God terminated on the creatures, is a free act. A free act is that which may be done or not done. So that it was in the choice of the Divine will (before it had determined itself) to manifest mercy, or not to show it; to save man, or not to save him; to make him, or not. But if salvation did add anything to the glory of God, our salvation had been a necessary, and not a free act; because without it the Lord had wanted some degree of glory, and so had not been most glorious, most perfectly so, and consequently not himself.

Hence, it is evident, that the Lord did not stand in need of our salvation, to make him more glorious any way. He was infinitely glorious from eternity; but these manifestations of himself are in time, therefore can add nothing to his glory, which was infinite before all time. The reason why he revealed his mercy in saving man, was not because this was needful to make himself more glorious. "We must, as Christ showed us, find the reason of it in his evBonia, the good pleasure of his will, Matt. xi. 25, 26, on ovtos eyevero evSoKia ; this was the reason of it, " Thy good pleasure." And to this the apostle leads us, Eph. i. 5, 9.

It is true also, we are said to glorify God by our services, by the acts and exercises of holiness, Psal. 1. 23, and John xv. 8. But how is this to be understood? even as he is said to glorify himself, when he manifests to us that he is glorious. So we are said to glorify him, when we acknowledge he is glorious, when we give a testimony to his glorious perfections by word or deed. But neither his manifestation, nor our acknowledgment, does add to his glory. He shows it, we take notice of it, but neither of these imports any addition to it. Hence, Psal. xvi. 2, " My goodness extendeth not to thee." If our apprehensions of God were as high as their object; if our affection to him were more thaffthat of the angels ; if all our prayers and praises were raptures, and all our performances screwed up to the highest degree of perfection that a created

being is capable of; yet were we in this respect unprofitable servants ; the Lord upon this account would have no advantage by us : for as Eliphaz says to Job, chap. xxii. 2, 3, " Can a man be profitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself ? Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous ?" &c. No, the Lord may glorify us, but he gains no glory by us, that is any advantage to him. He stands in no need of us to glorify him ; he had been as glorious if we had perished, or if we had been nothing. Therefore what motive can there be in, or from us, to oblige him to save us ?

(2.) The sovereignty and dominion of God over his creatures. As in respect of his all-sufficiency, he stands in no need of us; so in respect of his sovereignty he owes us nothing; he is no way engaged to us, or obliged by us: but may do what he will with us, either to save or not to save vis. So it stands with us clearly, if we consider his dominion over us, in antecedence to his purpose and promise.

1. For he might have been satisfied in the sole enjoyment of his blessed self, and never have vouchsafed a being, much less salvation and glory, to any creature.

2. Or if he would manifest himself to the creatures, he might have formed more excellent creatures, and more fit to be the objects of his great and transcendent love : for he did not act as a natural agent ad ultimum siri posse, " to the utmost of all his power."

3. Or if the Divine will would determine itself to give a being to those very creatures that are now existent; yet there was no necessity that he should save any of them. He might have annihilated them without any show of unrighteousness : for who can say unto the King of kings, " What doest thou ?" Dan. iv. 35. Might he not do with his own what he will ?

4. Or if he would manifest his love and goodness in the salvation of any that he had created ; yet who would not think all the angels (those sometimes glorious creatures) more capable of it, than any of the children of men ?

5. Or if unworthy man must be the subject of it; yet why so many men ? He might have made fewer vessels of mercy, than are now formed by it, to be for ever filled with it.

6. Or if he would pitch upon so many, yet why upon those who are now set apart for salvation, rather than those who are passed by ? Why are these chosen, and the other left ? Why are these vessels of honour rather than the rest, when all were of the same clay, formed by the same hand ? Rom. ix. 21—25. There is no reason can be given, but his good pleasure, his mere grace. And, oh, what beams of this glorious grace do break forth from this consideration ! What ! must men be chosen from all other creatures to be the objects of God's peculiar love ? Will

2c2

the Lord vouchsafe the eternal enjoyment of himself to none but men alone of all lapsed creatures ? " Lord ! what is man that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man that thou visitest him ?"

And how exceedingly does this endear free grace, that any of us should be separated from the rest of perishing sinners ; that we should be vessels of mercy, when others are vessels of wrath ! Lord, what are we, or what are our fathers ? Why hast thou revealed thyself to us, and not to the world ? Even so, Lord, because it pleased thee 1 No other reason can be assigned, but mere grace. There needs no more, to demonstrate that salvation is to be ascribed to grace only.

1. Use. —This condemns their doctrine, who will have us saved rather by free-will, than by grace; which will have the text inverted, and read thus:—By free-will are ye saved, not by grace, but of yourselves.

This has too many patrons, and those of greatest name and ability amongst the opposers of truth. It is the capital error of the Remonstrants, the foundation of their other opinions that concern grace, and with which they all stand or fall. The Socinians, and the worst among the Papists, the Jesuits, join with them, all following Pelagius, condemned by the ancient church as the enemy of the grace of Christ.

That we may the better understand them, and what in them is to be condemned and avoided, let us see,—(T.) What grace they own and count sufficient: for something they must own under this notion, who will not plainly renounce the Gospel. (2.) What they ascribe to freewill. (3.) What is the tendency of their principles. (4.) What they object against the doctrine of free grace.

I. For the first. They count no grace necessary to bring a sinner into a saving state, and continue him in it, but that which they call moral grace or suasion. This consists in a presenting of the object to the will, with motives and arguments to embrace it. Or thus, in a proposal of our duty, with rational considerations to move him to yield to it, leaving us to do as we please. For example, to turn from sin to God, and to believe in Christ, are duties propounded in the Gospel; the advantage of yielding hereto, and the danger of refusing, is there declared; and so it is left to the sinner's choice, whether he will comply or no.

This is all the grace which the Lord affords to save us. It amounts to no more than a moral excitement, or a rational proposal. This proposal is made with some light, tending to excite affection. If it were altogether in the dark, it would be in effect no proposal. Whether this 'light be natural, or supernatural, they are not agreed. Some, and those most followed, would have the light of natural reason sufficient. Others would rather have it counted a light from the Spirit.

But all agree, that it is no special illumination, but a common light, vouchsafed to all, under the Gospel; and so such as those have, who live and die in the gross darkness of ignorance and wickedness, they must not by their principles deny to heathens. And those, who will have it called the light of the Spirit, count it as weak and powerless as natural light, i. e., of no more power and efficacy to determine or sway the will, than the light of reason; no, nor so much as some dictates of reason are commonly thought to have. The difference is so little (if there be any) as to the thing itself, that those who call it the light of the Spirit, seem but to give it that name and title, to decline the odium of ascribing nothing at all to the Spirit of grace. However a common proposal, with such light, made in the Gospel unto sinners, is all the grace which they count needful.

1. They deny eternal grace, i. e., all free mercy in God to any particular persons from eternity. According to them, he had no mercy, no purpose of it for any, but what he was obliged to by the foresight of the good use of free-will. This is no free mercy, and so no grace.

2. They deny aU habitual grace, which is not of ourselves. They will have no such thing wrought in us by the Spirit of holiness. All gracious qualities or principles, planted in the heart by the Spirit, they reject under the notion of infused habits.

3. They deny actual grace, i. e., any operation of the Spirit to determine the will,—all gracious influences whatever that will or can certainly incline it to act, or incline it any more to act than not to act. Grace, with them, only proposes to the will, and leaves the determination to itself; it must be left indifferent to act, or not to act, as it likes.

No other grace, than this of proposing; none, habitual or actual, wa designed for any person in the eternal counsel of God, or purchased for any by the blood of Christ, or administered to any by the Spirit of grace. It is enough that it be propounded to the will to turn to God, and arguments offered to that purpose, such as the Gospel contains, and are managed in the ministry of it. So that all the grace, which they count necessary, is no special, sufficient grace.

1. It is no special, but only common grace, afforded equally to those that are damned, as to any that are saved. No other grace, than that which suffers the far greatest part of those who partake of it to perish eternally. That grace, wherewith any man may be damned, as soon as saved. If any be saved in their way, it is without special grace. It is ten to one, for any grace the Lord vouchsafes to sinners, they will never be saved.

2. It is not sufficient grace, unless nature has power enough for saving acts, without the least access of strength from grace : for their grace gives not the least degree of strength to the will; but only rouses its

native power : as Delilah's voice gave Samson no more strength, when she said, " The Philistines are upon thee," but only excited him to use the strength he had. When they will have this suasive grace to be sufficient, they commend not grace at all, but magnify the power of nature, as being great indeed, when it needs so little help for acts of the highest quality and importance. If any be saved in their way, it must be without any grace sufficient to salvation.

3. It is not effectual grace. This is plain by the former. There can be no pretence that that will be effectual which is not sufficient. But suppose it were sufficient, (as they without ground would have it accounted) yet it is not of itself effectual. The efficacy of it, by their doctrine, is not from its own nature and virtue, nor from the Spirit of grace, but from the will of man. If he will, it is efficacious ; if he will not, it is of no effect. So that, if it should prove effectual to save any, yet that is to be ascribed to free-will, and not to grace ; to that which makes it effectual, when otherwise it would be of no effect.

In short, it is not saving grace, take it in any of their senses. As saving grace is peculiar to the saved, so it is far from being saving. In this respect it is no more saving than damning, if so much, since the most incomparably that have it are damned.

Or, if we take saving grace for that which is sufficient for salvation, it is not saving, unless there be a power in man's degenerate nature to save itself; power enough in the worst for saving acts, such as needs nothing but exciting.

Or, if we take it for that which is effectual to salvation, it has no such efficacy from itself, or from God ; it is only from the will of man that it is effectual to salvation, if ever it prove so. So that in their way, either there is no grace at all that is saving, or none that is saving at a better rate than the will of man can make it so, when it has no saving virtue of itself, or from God.

There needs no other arguments against this doctrine, no artifice to engage us against it, but a true and plain discovery of it. If we be saved by grace, this doctrine tends to lead us out of the way of salvation.

II. Let us see what they ascribe to free-will. And that in general is a power to be willing or unwilling, as to any motion that is made, any object that is offered to it. It has a power of itself, and by its own natural constitution, either to choose or refuse, either to embrace or reject whatever object is propounded, however it be propounded. The will, they say, is never determined ad umim, never so set upon one good or bad, but that by rational inducement, i. e., by motives and arguments, it may be led to the contrary ; and never so moved by such inducements, but that it may reject the motion. Never so set upon sin, but

that by suasive proposals it may be moved to leave, not only the acts but the state of sin : nor ever so moved by that, or anything else, but that it may repel the motion, and quite stifle it.

We may view-it more distinctly in these two branches. (1.) A power to choose whatever good is offered. They will have it able of itself to embrace any good object of what nature soever; not only natural or moral, but what is supernatural, of the highest nature and quality ; and the embracing of it saving, such as will pass a man into a saving state. It has a power to repent of sin, to believe in Christ, to turn to God, to love, fear, and delight in him. Not only a capacity, but an active power for these, &c. Only these things must be propounded to it with some clearness and earnestness, as the Gospel propounds them to all under its ministry. And that such a proposal is required signifies no inability in the will itself for these great things : for the most sufficient faculty imaginable cannot act upon an object that it discovers not; and the faculty of greatest power may, in some cases, need exciting. And so it is requisite [that] the will have light to discover its object, and some arguments to commend it, at least when the soul is under the disadvantage of rooted prejudices, or habitual and inveterate wickedness.

However, all the help they think needful for the will, is so far from denying its power and sufficiency for those great concerns of salvation, that it supposes the will to have it in and of itself, if saving things be but represented to it as necessary and worthy of its choice and embraces. (2.) A power to refuse any object, however it be offered, with what advantage soever it be propounded by the Spirit of God, or the ministry of man. For the liberty they make essential to the will, consists, they say, in an indifFerency either to choose or refuse, either to act or not to act. And it must be left indifferent in all cases ; so that nothing in heaven or earth can determine it, but itself. God himself, they say, cannot without fail determine it to the choice of this or the other, without destroying it. Voluntas hominis ad actus suos motione irresistibili deter-minari non potest ne ab ipso Deo quidem. a " He cannot incline the will irresistibly, he cannot by Divine motion of unwilling make it willing." Whatever power he does or can put forth for this purpose, the will may and can resist it, and render it of no effect. If the Lord do desire and intend to convert a sinner, and do what can be done by the power of his grace in order thereto, yet the will may hinder him. Take it in their own words, " A man may hinder his own regeneration, when God has a mind to have him regenerated, and it is his will to regenerate him."* Corvinus (the most subtle and cautious of their writers) says expressly , c JPositis omnibus ad agendum requisitis, &c, " when all the operations of

* Syn. Dor. 212. Vid. Ames Rescript, p. 129. * Coll. Hag. 282. Viil. Hickm. p. 33.

grace in order to conversion are passed upon the will, yet it is still in the free power of the will to convert or not to convert itself." So that, when God has done his utmost to bring a sinner into a saving state, yet it is in the power of the will to defeat and hinder him. In plain terms, when God has done Avhat he can, the will may do what it list. They will have the will to be so free, as that it can be under no necessity of any sort, not only such as is natural, or compulsive, or absolute, which is granted ; but such as is only respective, and that in reference to God himself. So that if it be needful in respect of the decree and purpose of God, or in respect of his will and desire, or in respect of his word and engagement, or in respect of his design and intention, that the will should move this way, and not the other ; yet it may incline and determine itself the other way, and so may act counter to God in these his concerns, defeat him in them all, and carry it against him. The purpose, the promise, the providence, the grace of God, the undertaking of Christ, the operations of the Spirit, may be frustrated unavoidably by man's will. So great a power they give it. The Lord shall not have his will, nor make good his word, nor make his grace prevalent, nor accomplish his greatest designs, if man's will comply not; and it is never under any necessity to comply, but may always resist, when the Lord has done what he can to bring it to a compliance. This is the true visage of their doctrine, if you will see it plain and naked. There needs no ill language to render it ugly.

But as to our present purpose. The first branch of this power, ascribed to the will, makes the grace, which we stand in most need of, to be needless. For if the will can embrace any object in order to salvation, upon a common proposal, there needs no strength from grace to enable it.

The other branch makes all the grace they own, to be fruitless, of no effect, a mere cipher, which stands for nothing, does, can do, nothing but at the discretion of free-will. For the will, when the object is propounded, with what advantage soever the proposal be made, can always resist and reject it utterly. So that the grace of God comes to nothing, at the mere humour of man's free-will.

By the former branch of the will's sufficiency, the power, in matters of salvation, is from free-will, and not from grace : for their grace gives it no power at all, but supposes it there already.

By the latter branch, the act, in the concerns of salvation, is from the will, not from grace : for grace leaves the will indifferent to act or not to act; and, therefore, its acting is no more from grace than its not acting ; its accepting of Christ no more from grace than its rejecting him.

Now if both the power and the act, in the concerns of salvation, be

from free-will, and not from grace, then it is by free-will, not by grace, that we are saved.

III. Let us view the import and dangerous tendency of this doctrine ; and then you will see sufficient reason to reject it. Every particular will be an argument against it; and the particulars are very many.

(1.) They make no grace needful, but what was acknowledged by those persons who were condemned by the ancient church as enemies of the grace of Christ. Pelagius, the patriarch of the asserters of free-will, to the prejudice of Divine grace, acknowledged not only a natural, but a doctrinal grace, viz., the word of God discovering and propounding that which is good, and persuading sinners to embrace it; suadet onme quod honum est, " it persuades to all that is good." Here is the suasive grace of his modern followers. Nay, he went farther, and not only required an external proposal of the object, in the ministry of the word ; but acknowledged an inward operation of the Spirit, for enlightening the mind, and exciting the affections ; nos ineffabili dono gratice ccelestis illu-minat, " he enlightens us with the unspeakable gift of his heavenly grace ;" futures gloria? magnitudine et prcemiorum policitatione accendit, " he inflames us with promise of rewards, and the greatness of the future glory," and excites the stupid will, by the revelation of wisdom, to desires after God. Some of his late followers think it not fit to come short of him in this, but seem to require some act of the Spirit to enlighten the mind, and to stir up the affections. But others of them, most applauded and followed, deny all necessity of any immediate illumination by the Spirit; and tell us, " that every one who has the use of reason, may, without any special inward light, very easily apprehend whatever in Scripture is necessary to be known or believed." 0 " And that no immediate operation of the Spirit upon the mind or will, is needful for any one that he may believe." 6 So that no grace is needful with these men, but only an external proposal by the word: for what the word propounds may, without the light of the Spirit, be sufficiently understood and offered to the will : and the will, they say, has unquestionably power to embrace whatever is so offered by the understanding. If anything could hinder the will from embracing the good proposed, it must be some corruption in man's soul, some strong prejudices or vicious habits determining the will unavoidably to that which is evil: but no such thing can be admitted, as they state the will's liberty. For, as no power of grace, no operation of the Spirit, can determine the will irresistibly to that which is good, but when it has done its utmost, the will remains free to the contrary evil ; so no power of corruption can determine the will to any evil, but it will remain free to choose the contrary good propounded to it.

" Episcop. b De Perspicuit. Script. Thess. i. et iii. Id. in Syn. Dor. p. 200.

The "will of fallen man, notwithstanding any supposed corruption in the soul, native or acquired, still retains its primitive power entire ; only it is under some impediment as to the exercise of it, there is one thing wanting which hinders it from acting ; it cannot act without an object. And this signifies no defect or weakness in the will: for the most perfect facidty of man or angel in heaven must have an object that it may act. Now the object is offered in the Gospel, and the proposal of the object by the Gospel, with the motives and arguments there contained, is all the grace, all the supernatural aid and Divine assistances, which they think requisite to help the will, to believe and turn to God. This is to ascribe less to grace than the old Pelagians did, who yet were branded by the church as the capital enemies of supernatural grace, and upon that account scarce thought worthy to be called Christians.

(2.) By their doctrine, grace is given according to merit. This was the most leprous part of Pelagianism, which the ancient church had in greatest detestation, and for which Pelagius himself had been anathematised, branded with the highest censure, by a synod in Palestine, but that he pretended to renounce it.

Yet merit, in the sense of that age, was a far less thing, and much more tolerable than the Papists' merit of condignity. It was not only a good work, of such value and worth in itself, as that a reward should be due to it in justice ; but merit, as they understood it, was any good act which a man did of himself, upon the account of which grace was vouchsafed. This Bellarmine himself acknowledges, however he was concerned to deny it. " The fathers (says he) understood grace to be given according to merit, when anything is done by our own strength, in respect whereof grace is given, although it be no merit of con-dignity." a

And in this sense of merit, the modern asserters of free-will woidd have all grace given, according to merit. How universal soever they make grace to be, yet no man shall have it unless he merit it That grace may be universal, they will have it communicated both to those that are without the Gospel, and to those that enjoy it. For those who have not the Gospel, he is ready to give all of them the grace of the Gospel, if they will use the light of nature well; and he does give it actually to those who, by the good use of their free-will, make such an improvement of natural light. Here the good use of natural light is a good act; and upon the account of that, the grace of the Gospel is given, i.e., this grace is given according to merit, in the sense of the fathers, who^counted it so execrable to have it given according to merit. " Those (say the Remonstrants) whom God calleth, and to whom he does

" De Grat. et Libr. Arbit. lib. \i. cap i

vouchsafe the grace of preaching, we confess, for the most part, to be such men, that their virtues do deserve no less.""

For those who have the Gospel, God is ready to give further grace to them, if they would be worthy hearers, as they may be, if they would use their free-will well in hearing. " But there are some worthy hearers of the Gospel, and some unworthy, says Corvinus: and sufficient grace is not given to all promiscuously who hear, sed iis qui digni sunt evangelii auditoresf ' but to those who are worthy hearers.'" Which is in effect as though he spoke out, and said, it is given according to merit, which is all point blank against the apostle, 2 Tim. i. 9, Tit. iii. 5.

This they extend to the fountain of all, the eternal purpose of God. All the grace, which is comprised in the election of grace, will be ordered according to merit. Election of particular persons depends upon their faith or works foreseen. The Lord foresees who will believe, and because they will believe, upon the account of this good act he does elect them ; so they are elected according to merit. But does he not purpose from eternity to give faith in time ? No, by no means ; for if he had decreed this, they would be under some necessity to believe ; and such necessity is not consistent with the liberty of man's will. Therefore it must be left to their free-will whether they shall believe or no: and when God foresees that they shall make so good use of their free-will as to believe, then upon that account he elects them. In plain English, he chooses those whom he foresees will merit the election of grace by the good use of free-will.

Nay, all the grace, in the great and precious promises, and in the whole covenant of grace, will be according to merit. For they will have the accomplishment of all suspended upon some condition; such a condition, as is to be performed merely by the power of free-will, assisted by no grace at all, but that gentle excitement which they call suasion, which enables not the will to perform the condition, but plainly speaks it able beforehand. Such a condition performed is indeed a cause, a moving and engaging cause, and no less merit, than that which the ancient church condemned in Pelagius. For it is a good act performed by our own strength, upon the account of which the grace of the covenant is vouchsafed, which a Jesuit will not deny to be the merit that is under the curse and execration of synods and fathers twelve hundred years ago. Their other principles overthrow the grace of God, and lay it prostrate; but this quite destroys it, and makes it no grace, if the apostle's arguing be good reason, Rom. xi. 6.

(3.) This doctrine (which owns no more grace, and ascribes so much to free-will) makes God not to be the worker or real cause of the

• Epist. contr. Walach. p. 44. in Cwisa

spiritual and saving blessings of conversion and regeneration, nor the author and giver of faith, repentance, holiness. These are rather to be ascribed to man, than unto God. This will appear—

1. In general.—Conversion, regeneration, sanctification, perseverance, and what else of this nature is required to our salvation, is to be attributed to a man's self, more than the Spirit of grace; they are the effects and achievements of free-will, rather than of grace.

A man converts and quickens himself, regenerates and begets himself, creates himself so far as he is a new creature, and upholds himself when he is created. This seems strange and uncouth, (not to say absurd and horrid;) but there is plain reason for it, such as may convince any who will yield to evident reason.

Grace, however considered, (either in election, or redemption, or the Holy Spirit's operations,) does no more for the quickening and regenerating of those who are converted, than it does for those who are never converted ; therefore it is not grace, but something else, that does the work. If the Lord had done no more for the making of this world, than for making of other worlds that were never made, the creation of the world could never have been ascribed to him. If Christ had done no more to raise Lazarus from the dead, than he did to raise others who continued dead in their graves, he could not have been said to raise him to life. He that does no more towards the effecting of a thing, than when it is not done at all, he cannot be said to do it. Now grace does no more for the quickening of those that are alive to God, than for those who are still dead and will be so for ever. Therefore it is not grace that does the work ; it must be ascribed to something else, not to the Spirit of grace, but to a man's self, and his own free-will.

This is evident in the nature, visible in the very complexion of their moral grace. This (which is all the grace they own) consists in suasive proposals. Now he that only persuades or propounds the doing of a thing, does not thereby do it at all, but would have you to do it yourselves, and supposes you can if you will. So that this is the plain import of their doctrine, that men can convert and quicken themselves, and do it if it be done. However any be said to be born of God, yet they may beget themselves ; however they be said to be " the Lord's workmanship, created of Christ Jesus unto good works," verse 10; yet they are their own workmanship, and make themselves new creatures. However the apostle saith, verse 1, " You hath he quickened;" yet indeed they raise themselves to life. And since they do it themselves, to themselves they may in all reason ascribe it, and accordingly glory in it. The crown is not to be cast at the feet of Him who sits on the throne. Grace is to have neither throne nor crown; that is to have the crown which does the work: free-will does it, and this must wear it.

2. More particularly, it is manifest, that they make not God to be the real cause of those saving works, or the giver of those spiritual blessings ; because, by their doctrine, neither the power nor the act can be ascribed to him : for they say, he does nothing to this purpose but by virtue of moral grace : and it is evident that this, or he, by this, gives neither the power nor the act,'&c.

(1.) Suasive grace, or the Lord by suasive proposals, gives no man power to believe or turn to God ; it rather supposes that he has it already before or without this grace. The virtue of it (of all the grace they own) is only that of advice or suasion : and no man reasonably persuades or advises another to be able, but only to be willing to use what already he has. He that holds forth a light to a man lying on the ground, and moves him with arguments to rise and walk, does not thereby give him legs and strength, but supposes he has these already, if he would use them. He that only shows another what he has to do, and offers reason to persuade him to do it, not taking any other course to strengthen him for it, takes it for granted that he is aforehand able for it. Now this is all that their moral grace pretends to ; it shows the sinner that it is his duty to turn to God, &c, and uses arguments to move him to it, but gives no other strength for it than what this advice includes, which, as persuasion or advice, does indeed give none at all, but plainly supposes it in being. They say, a sinner, under the influence of this moral grace, is able to convert and regenerate himself, to beget himself to a new life. But if he be able, his ability is from nature; and the power of his natural faculties was not from grace, seeing this their grace is not for the giving of ability where it is not, but only for exciting it where it is before.

(2.) As the power for these great concerns of salvation is not from God or his grace, so neither is the act from him. For, 1. That which gives or works the act, determines the will, or causes it to determine itself; but the Lord by this grace (which is all they own) brings it only to the will's choice, and leaves it to do as it list, and so plainly leaves the act to itself; so that, if the soul do actually believe, or repent, or turn to God, this is of itself: their grace leaves the will indifferent to act or not to act, and so no more works the one than the other, and is no more the cause that it acts than that it acts not. It leaves it to the will, either to yield or refuse ; if it yield, it is not from grace, but the will. Grace leaves it in the power of the will to resist; if it resist not, it is from the will, not from grace. The Lord, by his power, works not the will to turn to God, to love, to embrace Christ, to yield to the Spirit; but leaves it indifferent to turn to God or against him, to love God or to hate him, to embrace Christ or reject him, to yield to the Spirit or resist him. It.must be left indifferent as to either ; grace turns not the scales, but leaves the

will at an equal poise, that the will of man, not the grace of God, may-have the casting weight; if grace should weigh it down, the liberty of the will, they say, would be violated, and its nature destroyed.

(3.) Nay, their grace is so far from working the will to actual faith or holiness, that by their account it seems to lead a man into sin, and leave him in it: for it is a sin for a man to be indifferent whether he believe or believe not, whether he accept Christ or reject him, whether he love or hate him : but all that this grace does to the will, is to bring it to such an indifferency ; and so the grace of God with them does no other, no better office for a sinner, than to bring his soul into a wicked posture ; and in that posture it does and must leave the will to itself; and, there left, if the will be no better to itself than grace is, or can be, it shall never come into a better posture.

Nay, further, the Lord is so far from determining the will, and so from causing the act by making it willing, that it is impossible for him to do it. They say (as was showed before) that the will cannot be determined by God himself without destroying it ; they will have it an inconsistency, and to imply a contradiction. And thus the Lord is so far from being the worker or real cause of actual faith, conversion, sanctincation, that it is impossible he should be the cause thereof; he is so far from actually working these, that he cannot do it.

Let me but add one argument more. This grace is given equally to all, and effects no more in one than another ; and, therefore, can be no more the cause of actual conversion in those that turn to God, than in those that are never converted ; works regeneration no more in those that are sanctified, than in the unregenerate ; i. e., works it not at all, is no cause of it. The Lord, by virtue of this grace, gives actual faith and repentance no more to those that believe and repent, than to such as persevere in impenitency and unbelief ; gave faith no more to Paul than to Judas, repentance no more to Peter than to Simon Magus ; i. e., he gives it not at all.

This is the clear consequence of their doctrine. The Lord is not the author and finisher of our faith, or of our repentance ; nor the real cause of conversion or sanctification, and other saving blessings ; and so, not the author of salvation. It is not by his grace, but of ourselves, both as to the power and the act, in direct opposition to the text and the whole strain of the Gospel. And it is as reconcilable with Scripture and the perfections of God, to say he is not the creator of the world, or the author of anything, as to say he is not the author or real cause of those great concerns of salvation.

(4.) This leads them to deny original sin. They must of necessity-make little or nothing of the corruption of our nature, since they will have their suasive grace to be a sufficient relief against it ; as if all the sin in man's nature could be argued out of him without more ado, and

all the power of corruption, natural and contracted too, might be effectually subdued and crucified by rational advice ; whereas, this moral suasion is of itself of no efficacy at all for this purpose, and appears to be so in that it effects no such thing in far the greatest part of those who partake of it as much as any, but leaves them altogether as corrupt as it found them.

I cannot discern, that they will acknowledge any corruption at all to be in the will, though Scripture and experience show that it is most of all there. The will seems to be now as sound (by their doctrine) as it was in innocency; nor stands it in need of more help by grace, than Adam before the fall : for then he had and needed suasive grace. " In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt die:" here is the duty propounded, and the proposal enforced with a powerful motive by God himself, that is the sum of suasive grace, which the Lord seeing needful for our first parents, did thus administer it, as far from corruption as it was then. And if the will need no more now, it is as free from corruption as it was then. Thus for the affections, there must be no more corruption in them than in the will, these being but the acts and motions of it. Or, if they will consider them as in the sensitive appetite; yet common illumination is enough to heal it there: for thereby the affections are sufficiently excited and quickened. Nor is there any depravation in the mind, but what may be cured by common light, such as the most corrupt and wicked men have.

That which admits so easy a cure must needs be slight and little; and that little too, which they acknowledge, is with them neither sin nor punishment properly, and so not evil at all, unless there be some evil which is neither. The depravation of our natures by the fall, however it be aggravated in Scripture, is not in their account properly either our sin or our punishment; but only our infelicity ; and no great infelicity neither, since with them it can be neither spiritual death, nor mortal disease, no nor very considerable weakness. For if it were such a weakness, no grace would repair it but that which communicates an answerable strength. But that grace which they think sufficient to repair all, gives not any strength at all, but supposes there is power enough in nature to recover itself, if it be but excited.

This in a manner makes Christ of none effect. The great end of his coming was to restore our natures fallen from God, and made incapable of honouring and enjoying him : therefore he took our nature, and performed and suffered so much therein. But what need all this waste, if we can lick ourselves whole by virtue of a little common fight ? and so little not needful with some of them. The great Augustine" reduces the whole Christian doctrine to two heads, the knowledge of the first Adam,

" De Peccat. Orig. cap. xiv.

and the knowledge of the second: what we suffered by Adam, and what we gained by Christ. But though these be fundamental in the Christian doctrine, how little they stand for in the doctrine of free-will, we may hereby perceive. And it will be further manifest by another fundamental, which, depending on this now insisted on, falls with it.

(5.) By this doctrine there is no need of regeneration. To be regenerate, is, in the language of the Holy Ghost, to be born of God, John i. 13 ; to be born again, or born from above, John iii. 3; and that is to receive a principle of spiritual life and motion from God. a But no such principle is necessary in the will, which indeed most needs it. But no habit of holiness is planted there, no good quality created in it by the Spirit; that they say is a necessitating act, and would be prejudicial to its liberty. The image of God needs no repairing in the heart or will, though that be the chief receptacle and subject of it; even the schoolmen making this the principal seat of all virtues. It needs no such infused principle or quality, to incline it to that which is good; they will have it able of itself, by its own native power, to embrace any good, how supernatural soever, which the mind offers to it. It can produce the best acts, without any inward principle suitable or proportionable to them. The tree need not be good, that the fruit may be good ; or rather, it is good enough already, it is so naturally. The will or heart of man (how nought soever the Scripture speaks it, representing it to be desperately wicked, Jer. xvii. 9, and the fountain of all wickedness, Matt. xv. 19,) seems by their doctrine to be as good by nature, as God can or will make it; no worse than it was when first formed. It lost no spiritual qualities or accomplishments by the fall, for it had none before ;* so that all regenerating grace as to the will is clearly cashiered. Nor will they allow any new qualities to be infused by the Spirit of grace into the mind or affections, no more than into the will: for that, they say, is repugnant to the administration of the means of salvation. All that they think requisite, is common light, such as they deny not to the vilest men, (nor can well deny to devils: for they discern the truth and goodness of what is proposed in the Gospel;) by the bare help of such light, their own wills can regenerate them, so far as they think any regeneration needful. I find it no easy thing to discern what their regeneration is. The best I can make of it is this. The mind needs no new birth or life, but what it has from common light; nor do the affections need any exciting or quickening, but what that same effects. But though they count this sufficient quickening, they do not call it regeneration: for many, thus quickened, do live and die unregenerate.

" Vid. Ham. in John i. 13.

4 Collat. Hag. p. 248. In spirituali morte non separantur proprie dona spiritualia ah ho minis voluntate, &c. Syn. Dor. 196.

It is an act of the will [which] must do the work, and for that the will must be left to itself. The Spirit of God must not touch it, must not give it any principle of life, must not act" it by any special or immediate influence ; but if of its own accord it turn itself to that which is good, the sinner is thereby born again. So that regeneration is completed by a little common light, such as the children of darkness have, and an act of free-will, without any further assistance, or any other work of the Spirit in or upon it.

Thus, by this one act of free-will at first, they are regenerated actually; and afterwards, by repeated acts of free-will, they may be regenerated habitually: for, the will, by repeated acts, can beget gracious habits, and so help them to habitual regeneration ; though they deny [that] the Spirit of grace can work in them any such thing as habits or principles of holiness. Now, this is to be "born again of the will of man, not of the will of God," John i. 13. The Scripture declares, that they who are regenerated, are born of God, 1 John hi. 9; born of the Spirit, John iii. 8 ; but this is to be born of free-will, not of God, nor of the Spirit, unless free-will be God or the Spirit. The apostle says, " Of his own will begat he us," James i. 18; but they must say, of their own wills they beget themselves. Yet, this is all the regeneration which they count necessary, and so make that new-birth a needless thing, which the Scripture calls for and describes by other characters, and declares all access to the kingdom of heaven impossible without.

(6.) This takes sinners off" from that which is really saving, and leads them to take up with that which falls short of salvation. It teaches them to rest satisfied with such a faith, a repentance, a conversion, a regeneration, as common light and rational proposals (such as every one meets with in the ministry of the word) are sufficient to effect. But these alone can never produce any saving faith or repentance, any saving regeneration or conversion.

Those who persuade them, that this is enough for those saving effects, go about to delude sinners ; and if they look after no more, their souls are like to be ruined for ever. Moral grace may perhaps prevail for some morality ; but this alone can never be effectual, to turn a heart of stone into a heart of flesh, to turn the enmity of the will into love to Christ, to turn sinners from the power of Satan unto God, to raise the soul to life that is spiritually dead, to make them new creatures, &c. These are not the effects of a gentle suasion, but of an Almighty power. They mean something else than Scripture intends by these expressions, who make these saving works so low, common, and easy things, and so much in the power, and at the beck of a sinner's corrupted will. Nothing

" actuate.

2d

more ruins souls, than resting in that as saving which is not so ; and when divines promote the delusion, how pernicious is it like to prove!

(7.) It destroys holy obedience, inward and outward ; leaves no place for the exercise of grace in the heart, or works truly good in the conversation. It plucks up these by the roots, taking away habitual regeneration which is the root of them, the exercise of grace in the acting of an inward gracious principle ; but they say there is no such principle planted in the heart or will by the Spirit of holiness ; and where the principle is not, it cannot be acted. There can be no vital acts, where there is no vital principle ; that which is not alive, cannot put forth acts of life. Or, to use the terms wherein Christ expresses it, " The fruit is not good, unless the tree be good." No good acts can be produced by the heart or will, till itself be good. It is not, it cannot be, good, when there are no good qualities in it. It has no good, no holy qualities planted in it by the Spirit of grace ; that (with them) only acts morally, and does no more sanctify those that are holy, than those that are profane. So that, if the will have any goodness, anything that is holy in it; it has it from itself, not from the Spirit of holiness. Thus the fruits of the Spirit will be no other than the fruits of free-will; of free-will unsanctified, unless it sanctify itself : and the acts of obedience will be no other than the acts of natural morality, such as man's degenerate will can produce by its natural power, without any assistance but that of moral or suasive grace ; which begets no good qualities, gives no inward strength, affords no help of any kind, more to those who do most, than to those who do nothing at all.

"We need not wonder, if those of this persuasion should satisfy themselves, and would have others satisfied, with such a morality ; their principles do afford, and can require nothing better. But, whether the acts of it be those gracious acts, those fruits of the Spirit, those good works, which the Scripture so much calls for, and makes the way to salvation ; let those consider who are concerned indeed in the way to salvation.

They charge their opposers, for not pressing moral duties. If they mean thereby practical Christianity, there are none in the world [who] press it more. But we are not for a pagan, but a Christian morality; and think it not advisable to press external acts alone, without minding the principle and root from whence all that is truly Christian must spring. We count it absurd and preposterous to look for fruits where there is no root, for gracious acts where grace is not planted in the heart. They may deck a maypole with as many garlands as they please, and set off a mast with flags and streamers ; but they will never thereby make them fruit-trees. The Lord will condemn those who bring not forth good fruit; and those also who lead them in a way where they are never like to be truly fruitful, without better conduct.

(8.) This stifles love to God, takes away that which is the foundation and ground of a special transcendent love to him. That which is the rise of our love to God, is " his love to us," 1 John iv. 19 ; it is this that kindles our affection to him, and raises love into a flame : but he that believes and considers that God had no more thoughts of love for him from eternity, than he had for those who are under his everlasting hatred; and that Christ had no more love for him in the work of redemption ; did obey, suffer, satisfy, purchase no more for him, than he did for those who were in hell, when he suffered ; and that the Spirit of grace does no more for him, in order to his salvation, than he does for the vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction ; will scarce find anything in the love of God (on this consideration) to engage his soul to a special love for God: he will be in danger to love God with no more than a common love, such as a carnal man may have ; who believes that the Lord loves him no more, than he loves those who are to be tormented for ever with the devil and his angels. He will find a motive from hence, to hug and love himself rather than God : for, when that which they call love in God, seems but an indifferent respect, not intending more good to one than another, but as themselves determine it; he had got no special benefit, no particular advantage by that love, if he had not been better to himself: the Lord, as they represent him, (whatever is pretended concerning the greatness and universality of his love to mankind) seems indifferent as to love or hatred, as to the happiness or misery of man. The Lord left it indifferent, in his eternal purpose, whether any should be saved or no ; and Christ, in the work of redemption, left it indifferent whether any should be actually redeemed or no ; and the Spirit, in calling sinners, leaves it indifferent whether any be effectually called or no : there was no affection in all this, but what might have ended in love or hatred, i. e., in the damning of all, as soon as the saving of any. That which determines this indifference, and makes it prove love, is the sinner himself, the good use of his free-will: had it not been for this, for any love that God had for him, for any expression of it from Father, Son, or Spirit, he had been one of the children of wrath, in the same condemnation with others. So that the plain tendency of their doctrine, is to lead sinners to reflect affectionately on themselves, but with indifferency upon God.

Such is the general love which they will have in God to mankind: it is but an indifferent respect to all, which proves love or hatred, as the sinner's will determines it. But when they ascribe any particular love to God, it is no other than what arises from the sinner's love to him : he foresaw that we would believe, and so love him, and therefore he intended life for us : he foresaw that we would embrace and choose Christ, and therefore did he choose us. So that God did not love us

2 d 2

first, but we him, whatever the apostle says, 1 John iv. 10, 19. He did not choose us first, but we did choose him, whatever Christ says, John xv. 16. Thus they stop up the spring of our love to God ; they destroy the reason, and raze the ground of our love to him, if that be it which the apostle assigns. It is the greatness, the riches, the freeness of Divine love that engages, that constrains us to love him : but this doctrine not only defaces the riches and freeness, but in a manner takes away the true nature and notion of his love, when it makes it an affection so indifferent to man's happiness or misery.

(9.) It destroys the exercise of faith, and takes them off from a continued dependence on God, and trusting in him. It is inconsistent with that life of faith, which must be the life of every Christian.

This takes them off from depending on God, both in their spiritual concerns, and in common and human affairs.

1. For those affairs which depend on the wills of other men : they cannot depend on God for the ordering of them; for none are to depend on him for things which are not at his disposal : but the wills of men, and so the affairs which depend thereon, are not (with them) at God's disposal ; since, by their principles, he cannot sway their wills effectually one way or other ; for this, in their account, is to destroy their natural liberty.

2. As to spiritual concerns, for the making of grace, or the means of grace effectual. For the promoting of holiness, for the growth or exercise of it, or for perseverance in it, there is no need to depend on God: for it is not necessary to depend on another for that which is in his own power. Now these things, and the like, are in the power of his own will; he is the master of them, if he will not be wanting to himself. Indeed, it is more in their own power, than in the power of God ; for every man's will can determine itself to these things, but God cannot without destroying the will : for if he determine it, he leaves it not indifferent; and if it be not indifferent, it is not free ; and if it be not free, it is not an human will: and, therefore, they have more reason to depend on themselves, where they believe the power is, than on God, where they say it is not. If there be any reason to rely on God, it is for further continuance of that which they call sufficient grace : but there is no more need to depend on him for this, than the other ; for this is never withdrawn, unless they be contumacious, and obstinately resist it: but then it is in their power not to resist, but comply with it; and if they will not, God cannot help it : for when he has put forth all the operations of his grace upon the soul, the will is at liberty, and has power to do as it list. The power is most in man still; and where the power is, there must be the dependence, upon themselves rather than upon God ; though this self-dependence be under the curse of God in Scripture, and plainly deserves his heaviest curse.

(10.) It overthrows humility and self-denial. One may smell from whence it comes, by the rank tendency of it to pride and self-exaltation. The design of the Gospel is clearly to debase man, and take from him all occasion of boasting or glorying in himself; or of ascribing the praise, either of his state or actions, to himself, Rom. iii. 9, 27; 1 Cor. i. 29, 30. But this doctrine obliges a believer to ascribe the difference which is betwixt him and others who are in the state of sin and misery, not unto grace, but to himself; leaves him no ground to imagine that it was grace which made the difference.

Grace is, with them, indifferently affoi'ded unto all sinners under the Gospel at least. Others had the same light, the same rational proposals, with as much clearness and earnestness, in the same degree, and of no less power and sufficiency ; it is common in all respects. That which is every way common and indifferent, could not possibly make us to differ. But when they had it in common, this man would make good use of it, without any other help from grace than the rest had ; they would not. His will complied with the proposal; their wills, no less assisted than his, resisted. Grace brought it equally to the choice of their wills, and there left it: his will determined itself to comply ; their wills determined against it: that made the difference, not grace, which was alike in all, but free-will, which he used better than others. If my will (may he say) had not been better to me than grace, it had been as bad with me as them ; for grace was as good to them as me. The apostle asks, " Who made thee to differ ?" 1 Cor. iv. 7; supposing none would have the confidence to arrogate this to himself. But he that is for free-will must say, I made myself to differ. Grace brought it to the choice of my will, whether there should be any difference or no ; it does no more for any ; if there be any difference made, it is free-will that makes it. Those of them that are so ingenuous as to use plain dealing, speak out, and say expressly, Ego me discerno, " I make the difference myself."

The apostle says, " By the grace of God, I am what I am," 1 Cor. xv. 10; but they must say, By the good use of free-will I am what I am : for grace is such a thing (with them) as moves all, affects all, leaves all alike: if any one be better than another, as to state or actings, it is not grace that makes him so, for the worst have as much of their grace as the best; the difference must be ascribed to free-will. Nor can their doctrine show them any reason, why they should not ascribe it to themselves, and glory in it, whatever become of the glory of Divine grace.

(11.) It makes it unnecessary or unreasonable, to pray for themselves or others, for those things which we should most of all pray for : this is evident enough, in that it leaves not place for faith and dependence on God, in common affairs, or spiritual concerns, as was showed before.

For we are not to pray to God, but where we may rely and depend on him ; nor seek him for what we may not trust him, Rom. x. 14. But further, the things that Christians are principally to pray for, are spiritual and heavenly blessings ; these are all comprised in, or depend upon, grace. Let us see how favourable their principles are to praying for grace, either effectual or preventing.

As to the former, they need not pray for efficacious grace, for it is in their own power to make it effectual; and who needs beg that of another, which he has in his own power ? Their grace is effectual in the soul, when it becomes willing, (for then it has its effect;) but with them, nothing is more in their power and will, than to be willing: and it is needless and senseless to pray to God to make them willing, i. e., to make grace effectual, when they can do it well enough of themselves : Quid est stultius, quarn orare ut facias quod in potestate habes ? a " What more foolish, than to pray God thou mayest do that which thou hast in thine own power ?" And elsewhere, Ne fallamus homines, &c. " Let us not deceive men, for we cannot deceive God :" we pray not to God at all, but only feign that we pray, if we think that ourselves, not he doth what we pray for.

And as they need not, so they must not pray, that God would make grace effectual, or make it work effectually in them; for God cannot do it, and they must not seek that of him which he cannot do. To make grace effectual, is of unwilling to make them willing, to determine the will to what he proposes ; but this (they say) he cannot do, without invading its freedom: all that he can do, is to propose, and leave the will to do as it likes; if he should bow it effectually one way or other, that would be a breach upon the liberty which is essential to it; so that to beg this of him, would be to seek an impossibility. So that, unless they will be absurd, they must not pray that God would effectually bow or incline their wills, to believe in Christ, to turn to God, to love him, to fear him, to walk in his ways, to hate sin, or mortify it; yea, or to avoid it. They must not pray, that God would effectually subdue their wills to his will in anything: for, to be so stibjected, though to God, and by a Divine motion, is not consistent with that freedom which the nature of the will requires.

If their petitions be of such import, (as the best petitions of Christians are,) their prayers contradict their principles; their prayers are a plea for the truth which they dispute against. Whatever they argue with men, they must be for us, when they have to do with God, if they will have anything to do with God in prayer, or pray anything like Christians.

» August. De Nat. et Grat. cap. xviii.

As for preventing or sufficient grace, they need not pray for that; for they have it already, or they will have it, though they pray not for it; for all have it, even those who never pray while they live.

But if they should pray for it, their petitions must bear such a sense as will be very harsh to any Christian or rational ear. Sufficient grace is that which enables a man to turn to God if he will. So, this must be it they pray for : Lord, give me such grace, that I may love thee if I will, that I may fear thee if I list, that I may obey thee if I please. This grace leaves, and must leave the will indifferent, to choose or refuse, to act or not to act, at its pleasure : for so far the Lord may by his grace proceed with the will, but no farther, without intrenching on its liberty : so that it is this which they pray for ; Lord, give me such grace, as will leave me indifferent, either to love or hate thee ; either to turn or not to turn unto thee; to obey or rebel against thee ; either to believe in Christ, or to be an unbeliever: this must be the import of their prayers for grace, if they be consistent with their principles : but if they will pray with the sense of Christians or sober men, they must renounce their doctrine of free-will.

Further, they must not pray for others more than themselves : not for enemies, that God would effectually turn their hearts, that they may not oppress, persecute, obstruct the Gospel, oppose Christ's interest. They must not pray for children, friends, strangers ; that God would effectually turn them to himself, that he would create in them new hearts, or inspire their wills with gracious principles; that he would conquer their rebellious wills, or not leave them in a capacity to resist him, or reject the Spirit of grace. They must not pray for themselves or others, that God will give them any grace, but what will leave it at the choice and arbitrement of their own wills (when there is no good quality in them) as well to resist as not to resist grace, before conversion; as well to expel as to retain it, after conversion.

Prayer is such an acknowledgment of God, so essential to all religion, that without it there can be no religion, either Christian or natural; therefore so far as this doctrine makes it unnecessary or unreasonable to pray, so far it tends to extirpate all religion.

(12.) It is inconsistent with that thankfulness and gratitude which should make up the life of a Christian; with those praises, whereby God is glorified in a special manner, and which must be the employment of eternity. It is the most ungrateful doctrine that ever any under the name of Christians entertained: for hereby, he that is in the state of grace, has no more cause on that account to be thankful to God, than he that is in the state of sin and damnation: for he is not obliged to be thankful for more than he has received; and the best saint, as such, has received no more from God, owes no more to his grace, than he

that continues the worst of sinners. That he is in a happier condition, is from himself, and the good use of his free-will. Grace was common, afforded him and others indifferently ; it was his own free-will that made the difference, so far as there is any. Nay, a saint in glory will, by their doctrine, have no more reason to be praising God, or admiring Christ, than one in hell: but of that hereafter.

The recovery of man out of the state of sin and misery, into which he is fallen, either by Adam's transgression, or his own wickedness, is more to be ascribed to himself, than unto God; and so he owes more thanks to himself than to God. He does more to convert, to quicken, to sanctify, to establish, to save himself, than God does by his grace; and so he has more reason to thank himself for all. The Lord does very little, in comparison of what man does in these great concerns ; and that little which God does, would come to nothing at all, if man himself did not give it efficacy, and make something of it: so that there is left very little ground or occasion of giving praise and glory to God, where, if for anything, the highest praise and glory is eternally due to him, and where above all he designed the greatest praise and glory to himself. There seems much more occasion to ascribe the praise and glory of man's salvation, both on earth and in heaven, unto man himself: Not unto thee, O Lord, must they say, not unto thee, but unto ourselves be the praise, or at least more unto ourselves than unto thee. View this doctrine well, and compare it with the doctrine and design of the Gospel, and you will find them just as agreeable as light and darkness.

(13.) It tempts men strongly to neglect God and their souls, to live in any wickedness their inclination leads them to, and not to break off a course of sin by speedy repentance : for their pretended sufficient grace is universal, and denied to none ; that brings repentance to every man's power and choice ; he has grace enough to repent if he will. And since it is in his own power, he may take his own time for it, and need not fear to satisfy himself with the pleasures or advantages of sin.

What is to be feared, to restrain them here from the practice of ungodliness and unrighteousness ? unless they will say, that common grace being abused, may be withdrawn, and the sinner by the judgment of God given up to obduration. Here would be some clanger indeed, if that obduration did irresistibly determine the sinner's will to such wickedness : but there is no fear of that; for, by their principles, the will cannot be so determined, either to good or evil; it is inconsistent with that liberty which is essential to it, and which it cannot want while it is a will. Therefore no light can be withdrawn, no hardness can be contracted ; but the will must still be at liberty, to turn to God or not to turn, to repent or not to repent, at pleasure. They have security,

from their principles, to go on in their evil ways, till they be in danger to live no longer ; and then it is not a peradventure, if God will give them repentance ; they have enough for that in their own power, and may repent and turn to God when they list. Accordingly, one of the prime asserters of this doctrine, being admonished of his debauches, made this return : " I am a child of the devil to-day, but I have freewill, and to-morrow I will make myself a child of God."

(14.) It destroys justification of the Gospel, all justification of sinners, which the Gospel gives notice of: it will have us justified, not by the righteousness of Christ, or of God, but our own righteousness ; by our own righteousness, in the fullest and grossest sense ; by a righteousness which is in ourselves, and of ourselves, and by ourselves : by our own acts or works, not performed by the help of any special grace, but by the power of free-will.

Their justification is thus stated : The act of faith (or sincere obedience, or inherent holiness,) though it be imperfect, yet is accepted of God instead of a perfect righteousness ; and so by it we are justified, as if it were a perfect righteousness. Now those acts of faith, or obedience, or whatever they call it, which they will have to be the righteousness by which we are justified, is not of grace neither : it is not the gift of God, he never purposed or promised to give it unto any : it is not the purchase of Christ, he never merited it for any : it is not the work of the Spirit of grace, he does no more towards it in those that have it, than in those that never have it.

So that the righteousness whereby they are justified, is so far from being that which Christ performed, that he did not so much as merit it; so far from being the righteousness of God, that he does not give it; so far from being the issue of God's free grace, that it is the product of our free-will. How sinners are justified, the apostle declares in the text, and Tit. iii. 7, and Rom. iii. 24. But by this doctrine, we are so far from being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, that we are justified without the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ; not freely, not by his grace, but by acts of our own freewill, passing for a perfect righteousness ; when they are no such thing, nor can upon any ground be so accounted.

(15.) It tends to destroy the covenant of grace ; to make it a covenant without grace, I had almost said an ungracious compact; such, wherein the Lord shows himself less gracious to men, than if they had been left under the covenant of works ; and under which, they are more liable to sin and damnation, than if it had never been made : which thus appears.

The covenant of works required perfect obedience ; and man, being created after the image of God, with holiness and righteousness, was able

to perform that perfect obedience which was the condition of that covenant ; but transgressing it by that first act of disobedience, in eating the forbidden fruit, he lost the image of God, wherein his strength for observing the covenant consisted. The Lord, they say, deprived him of that holiness and righteousness, and thereby of ability to perform the condition. Now they say, a man cannot sin in not doing that which he is not able to perform, though he be disabled by his own fault ; and so in this state of disability, he was not capable of sinning, and consequently was not liable to condemnation.

If things had continued in this state, none could have been damned for actual sin, but Adam only ; and they say, for original sin none are damned.

But the covenant of grace made a sad alteration in man's state and circumstances ; for therein, sufficient grace being offered to all, whereby they may avoid sin if they will, they hereupon become capable of sinning, as they were not before ; and in danger of damnation, when before they were safe. So that their covenant of grace makes man's condition worse than it was, instead of relieving him, so far is it from being truly gracious ; even the supposed grace of it, brings him more within the compass of sin and damnation than he was without it.

(16.) It cashiers the Spirit of grace, and all its special offices and operations. To pass by those who ascribe nothing at all to the Spirit; those who attribute most to it, so far as I can discern, will have us beholding to him for nothing at all, but common light, such as the children of darkness have ; and so weak and powerless, that the will needs not follow it, is not determined, nor effectually moved or inclined by it. The Spirit of grace (with them) has no immediate influence upon the will or affections ; and this is all, too, which the mind has from the Spirit; it moves neither will nor affections, but remotely, but by virtue of this light : so that the Spirit of grace does nothing in the whole soul, mind, will, or affections, but what this light amounts to. No more is needful, either for the first rise of holiness, or for the increase and growth, or the strengthening and continuance of it.

At first, the will, by no other help than that of moral grace, (which pretends to no inward operation of the Spirit, but only this common illumination; for the proposal is by the word without, and the enforcing of motives and arguments, is by the ministry of man,) determines itself to turn to God ; and so, without more ado, is converted and regenerated. There is the rise of holiness ; afterwards, by determining itself again and again, it acquires a habit, and that is a free and permanent quality : a the will exercises, increases, strengthens, and confirms holiness, as it

« Hoornb. torn. i. p. 316.

began it, by determining itself: it has power to do this in and of itself, and nothing else does, or can do it. The Spirit, neither by this light, nor by any other gracious influence, does, or can determine it; nor does the will need anything for the exercise of its power, but only light to make a sufficient discovery of the duty or object propounded. Thus all the motions, operations, assistances of the Spirit of grace, are confined to this light : all its healing, strengthening, quickening, and establishing virtue, amounts to no more than this : the soul neither has, nor needs any spiritual life, health, strength, or motion, either first or last, but what this does effect; and yet it effects no such thing in far the most that have it : for those have it, no less than others, who are, in the style of Scripture, not only in the dark, but darkness. And if it have any more effect upon others, than it has upon the children of darkness, yet this efficacy it must have from free-will; not of itself, nor of the Spirit, (whom they call its author,) otherwise it would be equally effectual in all, since all have it equally, and the Spirit is supposed to give it equally to all. And if the Spirit of Christ give it not its efficacy and virtue, but it owes this only to free-will; it is of no worth as it proceeds from the Spirit, of no more value than a fruitless and ineffectual thing ; of no virtue, and so of no value, but what it derives from man's will.

Now what honour is it to the Spirit of Christ, to ascribe to him a fruitless, a worthless thing ? They seem to honour the Spirit as much, who will borrow no light at all from him, but count the light of reason, with the help of the written word, sufficient : and what great difference is there betwixt them who ascribe nothing at all to the Spirit, and those that ascribe to him that which is nothing worth ? That which is fruitless and ineffectual, of no virtue, of no value, but what it owes to man's will, may as well be ascribed to human reason, as the Divine Spirit.

(17.) It tends to destroy the mediation of Christ: that liberty, which they make essential to man's will, makes Christ incapable of being the Mediator between God and man, and so tends to ruin all the concerns of God and man in Christ's mediation. For, either the will of Christ was undeclinably fixed upon that which is good and holy, so that it could not incline to disobedience and wickedness : and if so, it had not that indifferency to good and evil, in which they place the liberty of man's will, and count it essential thereto, so that it cannot be a human will without it ; and then Christ, wanting that which is essential to human nature, was not indeed a man, nor did assume our nature ; consequently could not be the mediator between God and man, being not the man Christ Jesus.

Or, if his will was not undeclinably fixed on that which was good, but left in a state of indifferency to that or the contrary; so that he might have observed his Father's will, or not observed it; might have

loved him, or not loved him ; might have fulfilled all righteousness, or not fulfilled it : and if he might have sinned, or not sinned, then he was not God ; for he that is God cannot sin.

So that as they state the freedom of man's will, either he was not man, or he was not God ; and either way he could not be mediator, who must be both. Thus all the advantages sinners have by his mediation perish; and all the glory the Lord designed to himself thereby, is blasted by the extravagant doctrine of free-will.

(18.) It defaces redemption by Christ, and leaves little or no place, or no necessity, either of satisfaction or merit, in his obedience and sufferings.

1. He did not merit faith, or regeneration, or holiness, or perseverance, for all, or for any particular persons. They declare expressly, that it is foolishly said, that Christ procured faith or regeneration for any : their principles engage them to maintain this ; for if he merited these for any, it would have been necessary that these should have been wrought in some of the redeemed ; it would have been necessary, that some or other of them should be believers, regenerate and sanctified, and stedfast unto the end ; but all such necessity they deny, as inconsistent with that freedom of man's will which they contend for. It must not be under any necessity, either from the decree of God, or the purchase of Christ: faith, repentance, sanctification, perseverance, must be mere contingencies, in respect of those former causes ; or else they could not be free acts in respect of the will, their next cause. Christ, by his death and merit, must not be the author or cause of these, though there be no pardon or life without them ; so much must not be ascribed to his merits, lest too little be left to free-will.

2. Upon the same account, Christ did not merit pardon or salvation for auj' one certainly ; and so his death makes neither the means nor the end certain. After he had done and suffered so much, been obedient unto death, made his soul an offering for sin, and obtained eternal redemption by his blood ; yet there was no necessity that any one sinner should have pardon and life ; no certainty, that any one would be pardoned and saved : Christ left this altogether uncertain, and not to be determined but by man's free-will. After Christ had finished the work of redemption, as all might have been saved, so all might have been damned ; there was no value, efficacy, merit or satisfaction, in Christ's death or obedience, to make more sure work : it was left at uncertainty, as it were at hap-hazard, whether salvation or damnation should carry it; and free-will alone must have the honour to determine it." Christ, they say, procured by his death a power to destroy unbelievers : so that he no more purchased salvation than damnation : he is, by virtue of his death and obedience, no more a redeemer than a destroyer of mankind :

• Grevincov. in Ames. Coron. p. 142.

whether he should prove a saviour of any, or a destroyer of all, is left to the arbitrement of free-will." There was, they say, no other necessity, nor advantage, nor value, in the death of Christ, but what might have been perfectly saved, though all the redeemed had perished eternally.

They declare for an universal redemption, and that equally extended to all and every one, and so woidd seem to magnify it more than others: yet, indeed, it is no other redemption of all, but such as is very well consistent with the damnation of all and every one. Christ loved them all, and washed them from their sins in his own blood ; yet for all that, every one of them might have been damned. Though they say, he died and shed his blood for the whole world ; yet there is no value, efficacy, or merit, in the death of Christ, in the blood of God, to secure pardon and salvation, or any saving advantage, to any one person in the world. All might have perished, for anything he had effected by the work of redemption ; and all had perished certainly, if he had procured no more for them, than the doctrine of free-will can admit of; not one of them can ever come to heaven, if Christ did not procure more for them, and more effectually, than their doctrine will suffer them to acknowledge, or give him any thanks for.

3. If he did not purchase pardon and life certainly for any, nor faith and holiness, or other such necessary requisites thereto, what then did he procure ? Why, he procured, they say, a covenant or promise, that all should have pardon and life, if they would believe and obey him.

But if, antecedently to Christ's undertaking, the Lord had declared his willingness to save such as believe and obey, there was no need of such a promise ; and so Christ procured a needless thing, or nothing.

Or, if he did not purchase the conditions of this covenant, (viz., grace to believe and obey,) unless it was in the power of their own wills, without Christ, to perform the conditions ; still he procured for them as good as nothing.

But if it were otherwise, yet those who would have us to ascribe to the death and obedience of Christ nothing but this, would not have us obliged to ascribe to it either satisfaction or merit. No satisfaction, unless it be to his Father's will, not to his justice in this sense. The obedience and death of Christ was so fully satisfying, so very acceptable to his Father's will, he was so well pleased with it, that hereupon he entered into this covenant. There was no need of other satisfaction than this ; it was enough, if he did merit it ; sufficient, if his righteousness did deserve such a promise for us.

Nay, there was no need of merit : for, as the Lord was so well pleased with Abraham's faith and obedience, as [that] for his sake he vouchsafed his posterity many favours, though the patriarch did not

• Grevincov. in Ames. Coron. p. 142.

merit so much ; so the Lord might be so well pleased with the obedience and sufferings of Christ, as for his sake to make such a promise, without any merit obliging him to it. Thus, way is made to strip redemption both of satisfaction and merit, without Avhich it is, it can be no redemption indeed; the name may be retained, but the thing denied; all necessity of it, and all advantage by it too, but what is left to the arbitrement of free-will.

(19.) It is inconsistent with the perfections and attributes of God; with his mercy, power, wisdom, truth, and faithfulness, with his sovereignty and government of the world, and other Divine excellences. But, that I may not stay too long on this subject, let me insist only on these mentioned.

1. It defaces the mercy of God, and makes it in effect no mercy. They pretend indeed to represent God under such a notion as will endear him, and render him lovely to the world, upon the account of his mercy and goodness, the extensiveness and universality thereof; but when their pretensions are strictly and impartially examined, they prove quite of another tendency ; that mercy which they ascribe to God, is without an object, or without effect, or without grace ; a mercy which is not an honour to him, nor an endearment of him to others.

1. It is a mercy without an object; a mercy not for any certain person, but for qualities, which are no objects of mercy : a mercy for some, when it appears not who they are or whether there will be any such. A mercy for nobody, which pretends to be for all and every one, when it is not for any one. This is their antecedent mercy, whereby they pretend that he loves all that believe and obey, before he knows who they are, and is uncertain whether ever any such will be. It speaks" a respect to those qualities, but no love or good-will for any particular person.

2. It is a mercy without effect : they ascribe to him a will of universal salvation ; when they discern it can be no other than a mere velleity, an incomplete intention, a weak, ineffectual desire, a faint and fruitless wishing of such general happiness, when he knows it will never be effected, and is resolved not to take the course to effect it. This is such a mercy, as jostles out and clashes with his other perfections, and is inconsistent with his knowledge, power, sincerity, wisdom, blessedness, and mercy itself in the true notion of it.

With his knowledge ; for who will desire and design that, which he knows will never be effected ? With his power ; for who will not effect that, which he really intends and designs, if he be able? With his sincerity ; for what ingenuous person will pretend to desire and design

* bespeaks.

that which he never means to bring about ? With his wisdom ; for who will propose to himself an end, and never intend the means which are proper, and alone sufficient to obtain it ? With his blessedness ; for to fall short continually of what one desires and intends, is an unhappi-ness. With the nature of Divine mercy and goodness ; for that is not real goodness, which does no good, or not the good it makes show of. That is not saving mercy indeed, which leaves the objects of it miserable, when it can relieve them ; that wishes them well, but lets them perish eternally. But that which they ascribe to God, is such a mercy, as can well digest the everlasting misery of all mankind : such a love, such a goodness, as could be satisfied, if not one person in the world should be saved.

They decry the doctrine of their opposers, as that which straitens the mercy of God, and confines it to a few ; whereas indeed it makes salvation sure to very many. But by their principles, for any mercy there is in God, all men may be damned; nay, which is more, no man can be saved. By all the mercy they ascribe to God, no man can escape damnation ; all being left to the arbitrement and indifferency of man's corrupt and degenerate will ; which, without other help than mercy in their way provides, will certainly ruin them eternally. Mercy, they say, will save all that believe, and none else ; but this mercy intends not to work saving faith in any ; there is no decree for that, it must be left to- man's will; and if that be not better to him herein than the mercy of God, he must unavoidably perish. All must be damned, unless free-will help them by its own power, without any effectual assistance that mercy prepared for them from eternity.

3. It is a mercy without grace: a mercy which is not free and gracious, which will not express itself to any, but such as are worthy, such as have some merit, or some motive to oblige him to be merciful. And being a mercy that is not free and gracious, whatever mercy of this nature they ascribe to him, we can never be saved by grace.

Nay, since it is not grace, it is not mercy indeed ; no mercy that the Lord will own, or sinners can have any advantage by : it is affection of their own, not that Divine excellency which he glories in, and glorifies upon lost sinners : for that which saves sinners is free mercy, and free mercy is nothing but grace. So that, if we be saved without grace, we are saved without mercy too, that which is so indeed ; and if they have no salvation for sinners, but that which is without grace and free mercy, they leave them none at all.

That they admit of no free mercy, no grace in God for sinners, appears, in that they make his first purpose of love (the decree, which comprises all the mercy he had from eternity for particular persons) to have its rise from faith or works foreseen. He foresees, that when it is

left to the free-will, to the choice of all, these will of themselves, without Divine determining power, believe and love him ; others will not ; and, therefore, he will love, and purposes to save these, and not others : and so he loves them not freely, but because they oblige him : he loves them, i. e., he purposes to save them, because they love him first. Thus that which God foresees in man, is the condition of the mercy and favour he intends ; and such a condition, as is indeed the cause, the motive, and in the ancient sense of the word, the merit of his favour and mercy; and so they leave no free mercy in God for sinners ; and sinners, being capable of no mercy at all, but what is free, they leave in him no mercy at all for them. This is, in the apostle's sense, Gal. v. 4, to fall from grace, to deny, to renounce all grace, all free mercy of God which the Gospel discovers. The doctrine of free-will obliges them to disclaim all the mercy of God, by which any sinner can be saved.

2. This destroys the prescience of God : though they be concerned to maintain this, as well as we, and pretend to do it ; yet their doctrine is utterly inconsistent with it, and makes it impossible for him to foreknow certainly anything that depends upon man's will, and so bereaves him of the certain foreknowledge of those things, which are of greatest moment and consequence, both to God and man. For example :

He cannot certainly foresee, whether any will have the Gospel; the preaching of it depends on man's will. And so, whether any will use the light of nature well ; whether any will have moral grace, any rational advice or excitement by the word : nor whether any will repent and believe, whether any will be justified or sanctified, whether any will persevere to the end, whether any one will be saved, nor whether any would be redeemed ; whether Christ would be put to death, or anything else, to which the concurrence of man's will is necessary. This is plain, because by their principles, the will of man is always indifferent to act or not to act; and so before, and until it act, it cannot but be uncertain whether it will act or not: (nothing can make it certain, no decree, no act of God, without destroying its liberty ;) and being uncertain, it cannot be certainly foreknown.

All that ever I could hear in answer to this, was only, that God's knowledge is infinite : and though we cannot comprehend, how that which is uncertain can be certainly known ; yet an infinite understanding can reach it, and have the certain knowledge of that which is uncertain.

But this makes it more evidently impossible : for the more perfect any knowledge is, the farther it is from error and mistake. So infinite knowledge must be farthest of all from erring ; but to know that as certain, which is not certain, is not to know, but to err; not to apprehend things as they are, but to mistake and misapprehend them, to have false and erroneous apprehensions of them. As they state the freedom of the

will, God can have no certain foreknowledge of those things, without false and erroneous conceptions thereof. They leave him nothing here but conjectures, or nothing but mistakes and error.

3. It impeaches the truth and faithfulness of God ; overthrows the truth and certainty of his word, in all the parts of it; leaves no certainty of his truth and faithfulness in pi'ophecies, promises, threatenings, assertions, contained in Scripture. It cannot be certain, by their principles, that the prophecies will be accomplished, the promises fulfilled, or the threatenings executed ; and so it must be uncertain, whether they are true or false : there is no certainty that they will prove true, they may as well prove false. The same must be said of many assertions too; there is no necessity, no certainty, that they will prove true, v. g., Cant, i. 4 ; Jer. xxxi. 18 ; Lam. v. 21.

By this doctrine, there can be no necessity that they will turn, whatever course the Lord take to turn them ; or that they will run after him, what course soever he take to draw them: and so those assertions are not necessarily true, but may prove false ; and so may those, and the like to those, Psal. cxix. 33, 34. This is manifest also in those predictions and promises, where the concurrence of man's will is requisite : for as they state its freedom, there can be no certainty, which way it will incline and determine itself, whether Avith the word, and according to the tenor of the prediction, or against it. Nor will they allow, that God can make sure of it, or take any course that will so determine it, that the accomplishment of his word shall not be defeated. For when he has done what he can to incline it that way which his word requires, that it may prove true ; yet it is, and must be left free to incline the other way, and make his word prove false. Let us clear this by some instances, in each of those parts of the word, wherein the truth and faithfulness of God is (if anywhere) eminently concerned. There is an ancient prophecy, of the " cabling of the Gentiles," Gen. ix. 27, " God shall persuade Japhet," i.e., the Gentiles who descended from him, and they shall "join themselves to the people of God." Now by the doctrine of free-will, the Lord is to do nothing that can make it certain, that Japhet's posterity shall comply herewith : he is only to propose it to them by the preaching of the Gospel, and leave their wills in an indifferency, to yield hereto, or not to yield. So that it must be a mere contingency, whether this prophecy would be accomplished or no : if it might prove true, so it might prove false. The same may be said of those expressions, John x. 16 ; Acts xxviii. 26 ; Johnxii. 32. The truth [and faithfulness of God in these and other prophecies is evidently exposed, past all security their principles can possibly give.

So it is likewise in the promises and the covenant of grace, styled everlasting; everlasting truth and faithfulness being engaged for the

2e

performance of it, Jer. xxxii. 39, 40 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27. Every clause of this may prove false, and not be fulfilled to any one person in the world : for, with them, the Lord does nothing which will certainly change the hearts of men, but only offers arguments to move them to renew their own hearts ; and so leaves it to the arbitrement of their own wills, whether ever the promise shall take effect or not. Now, if it were possible that it should prove true, that man should make himself a new heart; yet it is more likely that it should prove false, because man's corrupt will, to which it is left, is more inclined to make it false than true. Take it at the best, to make the truth of God in the everlasting covenant to depend on man's will, supposing it indifferent, is bad enough : for if it be indifferent whether God shall be true or no, it must be indifferent whether he be God or no.

Thus it will be, not only as to the promises made to us, but also those which are made to Christ, Tsa. xlix. 6, 7 ; and liii. 10 ; and lv. 5 ; Psal. ii. 8; and lxxii. 8—11; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6. These, and the like, may all prove false : man's will, to which it is left, may so carry it, and this unavoidably, that not one of them shall be made good. Nor will they allow the Lord to take any course with man's will, or have any such influence on it, as will be sure to prevent this, or make it any way certain, that his truth herein shall not fail: he must not determine the will that way which is necessary to secure his truth in performing his promises. Nor in the threatening neither, Rev. xvii. 16, 17. Whatever be said of God's putting it into their hearts, yet they will not have us imagine, that the Lord will effectually determine their wills to this ; but these must be left free and indifferent, either to love or hate the whore ; either to do what is foretold, or not to do it; to make it true, or to make it false.

Now, if these parts of the word of God may prove false, or if they be not certainly true, all the rest will be suspected, the truth and certainty of all the Scripture is overthrown : if the truth or faithfulness of God may fail us here, where can we be sure of it ? The glory of this Divine perfection is utterly defaced. The truth and faithfulness of God is the ground of all Divine faith. We believe God, because he is infallibly true, and what he says, cannot prove false : but it may prove false by their doctrine, and so the ground of all Christian, of all Divine faith is quite razed, and the foundation of all religion is hereby undermined, yea, quite blown up.

4. It destroys the government of God, as to the greatest concerns of the world. By their hypothesis, the will of man is not, cannot be ruled by him : he must not touch it immediately ; it is a thing so sacred, that a touch, even of God, may violate it. He must not inspire it with any new quality, nor move it by any real influence, but only make his

addresses to it at a distance, by proposing an object, and offering motives and arguments : and if this will not do, (as it does not, nor alone ever can do, in the concerns of salvation,) he must leave it to itself, to do what it list. Now that which is left to do as it list, is not ruled, it is not under government.

They will have the Lord to treat it as an orator, not as a sovereign ruler. The will (with them) seems to have a sovereignty exempted from the sovereignty of God ; not subordinate to it, if not above it; not subjected to the sovereign government of God, further than to do what it list.

Hereby God is excluded from the government of the world. Men are governed by their wills, that is the ruling, the commanding faculty ; therefore if the will be not under his government, men will not be under it, nor the rest of the world, so far as it is governed by men. If he dispose not of that which orders the rest, what is there left at his disposal ? All the affairs of the world, which depend upon human conduct, will be governed more by the will of man, than by the will, power, and providence of God : by the will of man independently, as if he were God ; but by the Lord of heaven and earth only precariously, and at the pleasure of man's will, as if he were a subject, an underling, an inferior creature.

5. It denies the almighty power of God, will not admit him to be omnipotent, and his power infinite. It is not infinite, if it be bounded and limited ; yet man's will bounds and limits the Divine power. By their principles, the Lord can no way deal with the will, but so that it may resist him, and render all his actings and operations on it ineffectual : he cannot prevail with it in anything so far, but that it may at once stand out and repel his motions, render every Divine attempt upon it successless: when he has done all that can be done by the power of his grace, the will may be too hard for him ; it must be always left to do what it list. He cannot save a man, how much soever he intends or desires it, unless it be the will's pleasure : nor can he take any course to make the will pleased with it. He can neither so change the faculty, nor so represent the object, but the will may still reject it. He cannot work faith in him, nor bring him to repentance, nor create holiness in his heart; nor can he continue him in a state of holiness, unless it please the will to submit; nor can he bring it to submit so, but that it may refuse, when all is done that his grace can do. He can make no particular decrees concerning man, that are positive and peremptory, because he cannot master man's will : his purposes must be conditional and respective to free-will. He cannot make good his own word, not verify what he asserts, nor accomplish his own prophecies, nor perform his promises, if man's will stand in his way : nor can he clear

2 E 2

his way of it in any method, but what the will of man may defeat. He cannot accomplish his desires and intentions, if man's will resist him, and can never put the will out of a capacity of resisting and opposing, while it is a will. It is essential to the will, to be always able to resist; and if they stand not to this, they yield all, Psal. cxxxv. 6. No, must they say, there are innumerable things which God cannot do, unless man pleases. [In] Phil. iii. ult., [we read that] Christ has a power, whereby he " can subdue all things," &c. No, must they say, the things wherein he is most concerned of all other in this world, the wills of men, he cannot subdue to himself. [Contrary to] Prov. xxi. 1, No, must they say, neither the hearts of kings, nor of any other men, are thus in the Lord's hands : whatever he does to turn the current of them, they may run in the old channel, and keep their own course for all that: it is not whithersoever he will that they turn, but whithersoever they will, they run, for all his turning.

(20.) It idolises man's will, makes it in divers respects equal with, or above him.

It seems to subject God, and make him an underling to man's will; and that in respect of his will, his word, his grace, his design. Some of these are apparent by what is already said: let me only insist on one particular. It makes God dependent on the will of man, even for his glory; where it is most intolerable for the Majesty of heaven to be dependent, and most inconsistent with his infinite perfection and happiness. The Lord, in all the operations of his grace, leaves the will indifferent either to comply or resist. This leaves it to the determination and arbitrement of man's will, whether God shall have the glory of that, by which he designs to make himself most glorious. It must be in the power of man's will to defeat God there, where he intends most of all to glorify himself; to spoil and deface the glory of his grace and love, where the riches thereof are most displayed : and this is in the greatest and most signal instances of it, and where each person in the Godhead is most eminently concerned.

Whatever decree or purpose of love and grace the Lord had from eternity, to save lost sinners, it must be at the determination of man's will, whether any one shall be saved or freed from misery. After the work of redemption finished by Christ, it must be at the pleasure of man's will, whether any one shall be actually redeemed. After the Spirit of grace has done what can be done, for changing the hearts, and renewing the natures of sinners ; yet not one of them shall be changed or sanctified, unless they list.

So that, unless man will, when he is left indifferent to will or not to will, electing grace, redeeming grace, renewing grace, shall be of no effect, shall never arrive at what it tends to. And if it be rendered

of none effect, it is rendered inglorious, it is defeated, defaced, and the glory of it turned into shame. But so it must be, if man will ; all the grace of God must be in vain, and all the glory of it vanish.

Thus is God evidently made dependent on man's will, even for his glory, that of his grace ; and he will as soon be subjected to the will of man in anything, in all things, as [in] the greatest concerns of his glory.

The grace of God, where it should appear in its greatest lustre, and was designed for the greatest honour of Father, Son, and Spirit; must wait as a handmaid on man's degenerate will, and be ordered at its arbitrement, and stand to its pleasure, whether it shall come to anything or nothing; whether it shall have any glory or none.

Let them believe it who can; I can never believe that the doctrine is of God, which offers such an intolerable indignity to him: if there were no other argument against it, this seems enough to me.

IV. The fourth head I propounded, was to give an account of the objections they make, and the prejudices they have against the doctrine of grace ; and to show, [that] the worst they can object against it is as chargeable upon the doctrine of free-will. So that their embracing it seems to proceed from neglect of impartial consideration, and some want of the exercise of that reason which they so much magnify. That uses not to be accounted a rational and considerate 8 invention, which serves not the turn for which it was devised, but runs men into the same difficulties which they seek to avoid. Let us see briefly in two or three of the chief instances, whether this be not the case here.

1. They charge us with making God the author of sin: (Tilenus says this was the reason that turned him off to the Eemonstrants.) We disclaim and abhor it, and condemn those who assert any such thing. They say, it is the consequence of our doctrine, which will have things so ordered by the decrees and providence of God, that sin is thereby unavoidable. We say, if God be made the author of sin on this account, their own doctrine is to be charged with making him so, by as good consequence. And so they must acknowledge that they wrong us, or else condemn themselves and their own principles.

That they are as liable to this charge, if it be just, does thus appear. He that puts men in those circumstances, wherein he foresees that they will certainly sin, orders things so, that sin becomes unavoidable: but by their doctrine, the Lord decrees to place men, and by his providence disposes them in those circumstances, wherein he foresees they will certainly sin; e. g., the Lord foresaw, that if Adam was created so and so, and set in such circumstances, he would certainly sin and fall by it:

• well-considered.

yet foreseeing this, the Lord decreed to create him so, and dispose of him in such circumstances, and actually did it. He foresees, that if Peter be put in these circumstances wherein he was found in the high priest's hall, he would certainly deny his Master: but he decreed thus to dispose of him, and by his providence actually did it. This is the plain import of their doctrine concerning a conditional foreknowledge in God, as will be evident to any that understand it. It was an invention of the Jesuits [of] the last age, to make good their doctrine of free-will and moral grace, and to avoid the supposed inconveniences of the opposite doctrine ; and is commonly embraced by those who agree with the Jesuits in their opinion about the power of the will: but a very imprudent and unhappy device it was, since it involves them in those very absurdities which it was devised to avoid.

2. They charge our doctrine, as making God unmerciful, because he gives not to the greatest part of mankind, that grace which is necessary to salvation: whereas we deny not that God gives that grace which they count sufficient; we grant he gives all that grace which is necessary by their doctrine, even to reprobates. But we say, their doctrine, how much soever it triumphs in advancing and extending God's love to mankind; yet it makes him far more unmerciful, in that it will not have God to vouchsafe that grace which is necessary or sufficient for salvation, special grace, to any at all. Mere suasive grace, which leaves it to the choice of man's unrenewed will, whether it will turn to God or no, which they say is all that God vouchsafes to any, did never alone, can never of itself save any man: and so they will have, not only some, but all men to perish, for any grace that God gives them. Whatever ostentation it make of magnifying Divine mercy, yet what doctrine can be more unmerciful, than that which leaves all men to be damned, unless their free-will do something more for them than the grace of God?

3. They say, we impeach the sincerity of God, when he by his word calls such as perish to repentance, that they may be saved; and yet has decreed not to give them repentance, but to damn them: so that it is certain (while those invitations and offers are made in the word) that they shall not repent and be saved. This, they say, makes the word and the ministry of it delusive, and no better than simulation, making show of that to sinners which is never intended, and which it is impossible they should have.

The ground of this charge, is a certainty that such shall never repent and be saved: but their own principles make this no less certain: for they say, God foresees from eternity that such will never repent, and so shall never be saved: and what he foresees (his foreknowledge being certain and infallible) will as certainly come to pass, and is as impos-

sible not to be, as that which he decrees. Nay, they say, that the Lord, upon his foreknowledge that such would not repent, did decree from eternity to damn them, and never decreed to give them repentance, nor any grace or aid that would effectually bring them to repentance; no, nor any but what he certainly foresaw would be ineffectual. So that here also they must either justify our doctrine, as to this charge, or condemn their own.

4. They say, our doctrine makes God unjust and cruel, in exacting that from men which they are not able to do; and condemning them for not doing that which he gives them not strength to do; v.g. } for requiring sinners to believe and turn to God, and condemning them for not complying with him herein ; when he knows they cannot do it of themselves, and when he gives them no grace to empower them for it. They make large harangues on this subject, tending to render their opposites a odious ; and set them off with such similitudes and illustrations as make impression on weak minds, which are more apt to be taken with words, than to weigh and consider things. Whereas after all, the plain truth is, there is no doctrine that I know of more chargeable with this than their own. For it is very evident in Scripture, and in the nature of the thing, that their suasive grace does not give sinners sufficient power to believe and turn to God; it cannot subdue the corruption of the heart opposing this: it pretends not to give any new spiritual principle of life or strength for these effects ; it leaves the will in its natiual impotency and corruption, to do as it list. And therefore, since, by their doctrine, he gives sinners no more power but this, and yet requires them to believe and turn to Christ, and condemns them for not doing it; he condemns them for want of that which he gives not sufficient power to do.

Can any one imagine, who will not offer plain violence to a multitude of expressions in Scripture, that mere moral suasion, which does not so much as move the will out of its indifferent posture, can quicken those that are dead in sins and trespasses ? can take away the heart of stone, and give hearts of flesh ; or write his laws in them ; or make those hearts that are desperately wicked, to become holy and heavenly ? can form new creatures of the old man, and make old things pass away, and all things become new ? can give strength and life to those who can do nothing, are without strength and life ?

He that cannot believe this, in opposition to an hundred of such passages in the word of God, must believe that their doctrine, concerning free-will and moral grace, makes God to condemn more than any [other] for not doing that which he gives them not power to do.

■ opponents.

5. They say, we destroy the liberty of the will, by bringing it under a necessity of inclining one way, and not leaving it indifferent to incline the other, or to suspend its acts ; e. g., when God intends to convert a sinner, and puts forth the power of his grace for this purpose, it is necessary that the will incline no other way than his grace moves it.

But if this destroy the liberty of the will, their own doctrine overthrows it: for they teach, that God, from eternity, before any act of his will, foresaw which way every man's will, in such and such circumstances, would incline. He foreknows certainly and infallibly, that in those circumstances it will incline this way, and not the other. Now if he know that certainly, it must be certain and of necessity : for to know that as certain, which is not certain, is not to know, but to mistake, to apprehend a thing otherwise than it is. And if the will might or could incline otherwise than he foresaw, his foreknowledge would not be infallible : for that excludes, not only actual error, but a possibility of it.

If then it be true from eternity, that the will must incline this one way, it is not indifferent to incline that way or another ; and so its indifferency, its freedom from a necessity to incline but this one way, is gone by their own principles. They must either grant, that the liberty of man's will is consistent Avith a necessity of inclining one way and not another, or yield that their own doctrine destroys its liberty.

Whether they will be so ingenuous or no, it is very certain that some necessity may very well consist with liberty in the freest agents. God is necessarily good, and yet freely : so are the saints and angels in heaven ; they cannot but be holy, and act holily, yet they are so, and do so freely. The devils and damned in hell, are necessarily wicked, they cannot be other[wise] ; and yet they are so, and act wickedness freely. Wicked men on earth, that are habitually and judicially hardened in wickedness, they are necessarily evil, and cannot but sin, and yet they sin freely. So that this conceit, though it be a fundamental doctrine with them, and the main weight of their cause lies on it, that liberty is inconsistent with necessity, is against the sense, reason, and experience of heaven, and earth, and hell.

Objection. If salvation be of grace, it must be a free gift, offered and given freely. But we see in Scripture (and the promises of saving mercy make it plain) that it is offered, and so given upon terms and conditions required of those that will be saved. The promises are many of them expressly conditional ; and so will the covenant of grace be, of which the promises are but several articles. Now that which is not given or promised, but upon terms and conditions, seems not to be given or offered freely ; the more conditional, the less free and gracious.

Answer. The offers of salvation, the promises of saving mercies, notwithstanding any conditionalness in them, any terms annexed, are free

and gracious, upon a manifold account: for in many cases, conditions or terms do not hinder a grant or promise from being free.

1. If the condition be so only in respect of outward form and manner of proposal, not properly and really : for then it seems to be a condition, but is not strictly. So here : Gospel promises are conditional Kara to 4>aiv(o-6ai, not Kara to ttvai, quoad externum formam et modum propo-nendi, not proprie et quoad rigorem .- as to manner of proposal they seem conditional; but examine them by the laws of conditions, and they will be found rather absolute. If the denomination must be taken a majori, or a potioi'i, if the number or weight will carry it, bring them to the test, examine why they should be counted conditional or absolute ; and it will be found, that in more respects, and for more weighty considerations, they ought to pass for absolute, rather than conditional, in the Pelagian sense ; so [there is] no reason to question their freeness.

2. If the condition be our duty. If such, as a when we perform it, we do nothing but what we owe, and the promiser owes nothing to us for doing it; then, if he promise anything, he promises freely. It is promissio indebita pro opere debito, " a promise not due for a Avork of obligation," that is, gratuita, "gratuitous." That which is not ex debito, "due," is gratuito, "gratuitous." These are opposed, Rom. iv. 4. That which is no way due, if promised, is freely promised. Now all that is required, is our duty; we owe it; and for all that we can do, God owes us nothing. Debitum non redit in Deum : Prcemium non est divini juris naturalis; his nature engages him not to reward his creatures. That which he does this way is of free-will. Deus ad premium nemini est obligatus, " God is under no obligation to reward any." Rom. xi. 35. Eternal life had not been due to Adam, if he had performed perfect obedience ; it was only the promise [that] entitled him to it. If not due to him, much less to us ; he might vouchsafe no more reward to us than to the inferior creatures. And since nothing is due from God, Avhat he bestows or promises, he does it freely. When we have done all, we are but unprofitable servants, we have but done our duty, we can challenge no reward : there is none due ; therefore, when he promises any, he does it freely. The condition being but our duty, makes nothing due ; no more than reward is due to him that pays his debts.

3. If the condition be inconsiderable, compared with what is promised. Suppose one should promise his tenant a thousand pounds per annum, if he will pay him a pepper-corn ; would any say, this promise is not free, because of such a condition ? Whatever the Lord requires of us, is no more than this, compared with what he promises to us. Believing and active obeying are not so much as suffering ; yet if the

Lord should have made sufferings the conditions of promises, they ■would have been free in this respect: because the greatest sufferings, (such as Paul's, and those in the primitive times,) would be small and inconsiderable, compared with the glory promised, Rom. viii. 18; 2 Cor. iv. 17. Now if the hardest conditions be so inconsiderable, what are the smallest ? even nothing compared with what is promised, grace, glory, God himself, &c.

4. If the condition be not so much for the advantage of the promiser, as to make us capable of the thing promised. That which is not so much for the advantage of the promiser, as for his to whom the promise is made, must needs be from free bounty ; the promiser herein more respecting the good of another, than his own. What can be more of grace ? Or if the favour promised be not feasible, without that which is propounded as a condition of the proposal: if it be necessary to make capable of that which is promised, then it is rather a direction how the favour may be attained, than a strict condition. It does no way prejudice the freedom of the promise, but rather renders it more free and gracious. But such are many of those things, which the Lord prescribes as conditions ; they are more for our advantage than his ; he expects, he gets little or nothing by our performance of them, Psal. xvi. 2 ; Job xxii. 2 ; Job xxxv. 7, 8. What advantage has the Lord by our mourning, sense of our lost condition, apprehensions of the burden of sin, hungerings and thirstings after righteousness ? Why then does he annex these to the promises ; but because without them we are not capable of those mercies which he is willing to bestow ? Christ comes to seek and save what was lost, Matt, xviii.* 11 ; Luke xix. 10. Why is this condition added? those that are lost, sensible of their lost condition ; but because sinners are not capable of this favour till then ? they will not be found of Christ, till they feel themselves lost. Why [must they] hunger and thirst, before [they] be satisfied? Matt. v. 6. Because the soul is till then closed, shut up, not capable of satisfaction, Psal. Ixxxi. 10. How can it be filled, except first opened? So [speaks the Lord] himself, Matt. xi. 28. Why labour? because not till then capable of rest. When the Lord offers a favour, and withal shows how it may be attained ; he deals more freely, more graciously, than if he should barely propound it, and leave us to our ownselves to find out the way and means how it might be effected.

Conditions of this nature are so far from making promises less free, as° they are rendered hereby more gracious : there is as much of free grace in prescribing these, as in promising to them, because without these the promise might be of no effect, the favour not feasible, the sinner not capable of it.

5. If the condition be easy, [and] no cost, charge, trouble or hazard attends it : he that offers upon such easy terms, offers freely. If one should promise to entertain his friend, if he will but come to him ; or visit him, if he will but let him in; or advance him, if he be willing; or give him a jewel that will enrich him for ever, if he will but receive it; or supply him with all his heart can desire, if he will but ask it: would any man have the face to say, [that] such offers were not free and gracious ? Are they not as free as heart can desire ? If a man might choose his own terms, could he imagine, invent, any more easy?

Such are the promises of the Gospel: the Lord will entertain sinners, if they will but come, Isa. lv. 1. [He will] ease [them,] Matt. xi. 1. [He will] satisfy [them,] John vi. 35. Or, as if it were too much for sinners to come to him, he will come to them, if they but open to him, Rev. iii. 20. Give himself, the pearl of great price, if [they will] but receive him : marry, if [they will] but consent to him, John i. 12; Matt. xxii. 2, 3. Give eternal life, if [they be] but willing, Rev. xxii. 17. Give all heart can desire, if [they] but ask it, John xvi. 23. Open the treasures of grace and glory, if [they] but knock, Matt. vii. 7. Be your friend for ever, if [you will] but love him, John xiv. 21. Bear the weight and burden of all your cares, if [you] but lay them on him, Psal. lv. 22. Never fail you in life or death, if [you] but trust him, Psal. xxxiv. 22 ; Psal. cxxv. 1.

Oh how free are these offers! how easy these terms! It wordd be intolerable impudence, to desire these [blessings] upon any terms more free. Would you have Christ your friend, and not love him ? marry you without your consent ? or take care for you, and not trust him ? Who can be so unreasonable ? The conditions here are of such a nature, that it is even all one as if they were absolute : no promise of this nature can be more free, more absolute ; for the nature of what is promised, will admit of no other terms, they are as free as can be. Can Christ come to you, if you Avill not let him in ? or entertain you, if [you do] not come to him? or give himself, if [you do] not receive him? Nor need you say, these are not easy v we cannot do them of ourselves. Christ prevents this ; they are easy, if he concur and assist; and he engages to assist all those who have interest in the promises, all that come to him.

6. If the condition be promised. He that annexes a condition to a promise, and withal promises to give that condition, does all one as if he promised absolutely. Suppose Hiram had promised Solomon cedars to build the temple, upon condition they were cut down ; if Hiram had also promised to cut them down, his former promise had hereby become absolute. Or suppose Pharaoh had promised Jacob that he should come and be entertained in Egypt, upon condition that wagons were

provided to carry him ; if Pharaoh should also send him wagons, (as he did by Joseph, Gen. xlv. 19,) it is all one, as if the former promise had been absolute.

So it is here : and this is enough, if there were no more, to make this truth evident, and to prove it unanswerably. That which the Lord seems to make a condition in one place, he promises absolutely in another : for the promises of regeneration are absolute : the Lord freely engages himself to implant all spiritual graces and holy affections in the soul. Now to these, either in habit or exercise, are all the promises made, which we count conditional. So that the condition of them being absolutely promised, they are in effect absolute ; e. g., the Lord promises salvation to perseverance, Matt. xxiv. 13. He promises perseverance to faith, Psal. cxxv. 1 ; 1 Pet. i. 5 ; and faith is promised absolutely, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. A new heart is a believing heart; so that the two former, their conditions being promised, are absolute. He promises life to those that have Christ, 1 John v. 12. He promises Christ to those that fear him, Mai. iv. 2 ; and he promises fear absolutely, Jer. xxxii. 40. So wherever you find anything annexed to a promise, as a condition, in another place you may find it, either expressly or implicitly promised : and therefore all the promises are, in this respect, as good as absolute ; and if absolute, [there is] no reason to question their freedom.

7. If the terms or conditions be such, as it is not possible in the nature of the thing, that the mercy offered should be effected without them ; then the offers of saving mercies are as free and gracious as can be, as there is any possibility they should be; and no more can be desired.

Let me clear this in one of those terms, which is comprehensive of all the rest. It is required of those who will partake of saving mercies, that they leave sin, [and] forsake their evil ways, Prov. xxviii. 13 ; Isa. Iv. 7; 2 Tim. ii. 19.

This is the sum of all conditions ; and whatever is required in other terms, is included in this, or may be resolved into it. Now it is not possible, that saving mercies should otherwise be had, that they should be received or enjoyed but upon these terms ; not only because the Lord would have it so, but because the nature of the thing does so require it, that it is not otherwise feasible.

For sin is our impotency. Now can we possibly have strength in the inner man, if we will not part with our weakness ? Sin is our deformity, that which renders our souls loathsome and ugly in the eye of God. Now can our souls be made lovely, if we will not part with that which is our defilement and ugliness ? Can we be made clean, if we will not part with our leprosy? Sin is our enmity against God, therein it consists. Now can we possibly be reconciled, if we will not lay aside our enmity ? Sin is the poverty of the soul, that which robs and spoils,

and utterly impoverishes the soul. Now can you be made rich, if you will not part with your poverty ? Sin is the soul's restraint, the dungeon where it is imprisoned, the bonds and fetters wherewith it is loaden. Now is it possible you should have liberty, if you will not leave your dungeon, and part with your fetters ? Sin is the wound, the mortal disease of the soul; and can you be healed, if you will not part with your disease ? Sin is your misery ; can you be happy, if [you] part not with misery? Happiness consists in the enjoyment of God ; but adhering to sin, and the enjoyment of a holy God, are utterly inconsistent: and can you be happy without happiness, or by retaining that which is inconsistent with it ?

So that you see, there is an utter impossibility that salvation should be had, but upon these terms: there is an inconsistency, a plain contradiction, in any other supposition. It is an impossibility, not only to us, but to the Almighty; and therefore the terms are as free and gracious as possibly could be; Omnipotent grace itself could not make them more gracious.

To clear this, several things are to be observed.

(1.) The first blessings of the covenant are promised absolutely ; effectual calling, faith, repentance, conversion, regeneration are offered, are promised without any conditions. The promises of these mercies are absolute, Ezek. xxxvi. 26 ; Jer. xxxii. 39, 40 ; under the notions of a new heart, a new spirit, putting his Spirit, his fear within them, &c, the blessings fore-mentioned, called the first grace, are promised absolutely; and so are the same things in other terms, Jer. xxxi. 31, 32, 33; repeated by the apostle, Heb. viii. 8. There can be no instance given in Scripture, where these things are promised upon condition. Indeed, if they were promised upon condition, grace would be promised to something natural : for this being the first grace, there can be nothing before it to be the condition of it, but what is natural ; and to make that which is natural the condition of grace, is gross Pela-gianism. If there were any conditions of those first gracious favours they must be those things, which are previous to, and preparations for them, viz., diligent attendance on the word and means of grace, convictions of sin, legal sorrow for it, sense of wrath and misery, which often go before conversion, and are counted dispositions or preparations for faith. But these previous works are not conditions of conversion, or the other blessings included therein, nor are they promised upon such terms : for the condition is never separated from the favour promised to it; where the condition is performed, the promise is always accomplished : but these preparatory acts have been in many who were never truly converted and regenerated, never had a new heart and a new spirit given them: so that these preparations are no condi-

tions of faith or regeneration; much less is there anything of congruous merit in them. Our divines, that insist on such preparations for Christ, decried the conceit of merit, though in the lowest form. This merit of the Papists, infers a dueness of the thing so deserved; a dueness in con-gruity, though not in justice: and what is due from the Lord any way, he will infallibly bestow : but there may be these previous dispositions, where faith is never given. There is not so much as a conditional connexion between such preparations and those blessings ; they are promised absolutely, without any condition expressed or implied.

(2.) The subsequent blessings of the covenant, those that follow the first, are in some sense conditional, and so offered and promised in a conditional form, and yet are nevertheless gracious. There are terms and conditions, taking the word conditions in a latitude, as comprising qualifications, adjuncts, and necessary antecedents, which do no way derogate from grace; neither detract from its freeness, nor obscure, but rather illustrate it, Rom. x. 8—10 ; Rev. hi. 20. Upon siich terms are justification, adoption, salvation offered, and not offered but upon terms, and yet most freely and graciously, Rom. iii. 24, " freely by his grace," and yet " through faith," no otherwise but upon such terms, John iii. 18. Upon the same terms we are adopted, John i. 12; we are saved by grace, but through faith, Eph. ii. 8; and not only faith, but holiness of heart and life, and perseverance therein, are the terms upon which salvation is promised, Matt. v. 8 ; Heb. xii. 14 ; Rev. ii. 10 ; Mark xiii. 13. It is all one as if they were expressed conditionally. This is not because the Lord makes a conditional bargain with us, leaving the condition to our own wills, being uncertain whether it will be made good or no: but the reason is, because Divine wisdom has made a connexion betwixt these blessings, so that they shall never be separated; one of them shall not be had without the other: no justification without faith, no salvation without holiness, no glory without perseverance: and has constituted an order amongst them, so that one of them must go before the other : we must believe before we be justified, and be holy before we can see God. He has appointed one of them to be the means or way to obtain the other: we are justified by faith, we are created unto good works, that we should walk in them. Acts of holy obedience are the way wherein we must walk to salvation: so that here is an antecedence of some duty, and that necessary by Divine appointment and command, and this tending to obtain a favour freely offered.

And by this we may understand what a condition is, in a sense very innocent, and no way injurious to grace. It is an antecedent necessarily required, as the way to attain or arrive at what is promised.

And in this sense it must not be denied that there are conditions in the Gospel, and its promises; unless we will deny that there are duties

necessary to salvation, and made necessary by Divine command: for such a condition is nothing but something of a command joined with a promise in a conditional form; and Divine commands must be no more questioned, when they are joined with promises, than when they are delivered apart. He commands all to repent, and he promises pardon ; put this promise and that command together, and it becomes a conditional promise ; if you repent, you shall have pardon, or as the apostle delivers it, 1 John i. 9, " If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

(3.) There are conditions that are injurious to grace, and inconsistent with it. None such are annexed to any promise of the Gospel, none such must be admitted by those who will reserve to the Lord the honour of his grace, or have our salvation entirely ascribed to it.

1. Meritorious conditions, when the condition is presumed to deserve what is promised. There is no such condition of salvation as this, but in the proud fancies of presumptuous sinners. For, 1. There must be a disproportion between that which is procured, and the condition that deserves it: it is of favour, not of merit, if the promised blessing exceed the worth of the condition. To make this plain ; suppose the worth of a day's work be twelve-pence ; a man promises another a thousand crowns for a day's labour; it cannot in any reason be imagined that his day's labour deserves so much ; if he receive so much, he has it of favour, not of merit. Now the disproportion is far greater betwixt salvation, and all that is required of us in order thereto. Sufferings for Christ are more considerable on this account than holy actings ; but all the sufferings of this life, such as those of the apostle and the primitive Christians, bear not the slightest proportion to the glory promised, Rom. viii. 18 ; there is no proportion betwixt them; the glory offered does infinitely exced them; it is the eternal enjoyment of God himself; and between that which is finite and infinite there is no proportion, 2 Cor. iv. 17. If glory were promised on these terms, as it seems to be, 2 Tim. ii. 12, yet suffering would be far from deserving the croAvn; there is no correspondent worth in them to so vast a crown. Merit quite excludes grace ; for that which is deserved is due in justice, it is a just debt; but that which is of debt, is not, cannot be of grace, if the apostle understood these things, Rom. iv. 4. He makes a plain opposition between grace and debt. And therefore, if by the performance of any condition we can deserve salvation, it will be of debt, and we must expunge the text, and conclude [that] we are not saved by grace.

2. Natural conditions, such as may be performed by the power of nature, without the concurrence of omnipotent or special grace. All that is required to salvation, under the notion of conditions, must be of this nature, by that doctrine which will have nothing necessary for the

performance thereof, but suasive grace : for this gives no power sufficient for performance ; and therefore if there be any performance, it must be by the power of nature. Their grace gives not the power, but supposes it in the will already: all that it can justly pretend to, is to excite what it finds, not what it gives. It does not, it cannot subdue the will's corruptions, natural and contracted, which is its moral inipotency : and that which leaves it impotent, as it found it, gives it not power ; it plants no principle of spiritual life and strength in the will, but disclaims these expressly. And as it does not give the power, so neither does it give the act; it determines not the will, nor causes it to act; but leaves it to incline as it list, when there is no principle in it to incline it towards that which is saving, and corruption enough to incline it the other way.

The case standing thus, if the will comply with the terms of salvation, it must be by its own power, since it has no more from above : and then, in opposition to the text, salvation will be of ourselves, by our own strength, not by grace; nor will grace which is saving, be the gift of God: for if he give neither the power, nor the act, who can imagine how it can be counted his gift ? They may as well say, we are saved by the power of nature, as that the conditions of salvation are to be performed by such a power, without any other assistance of grace.

3. [There are] no legal conditions, no conditions performed by us, nor our righteousness. The righteousness by which we are justified, the righteousness by which we have pardon, or by which we have right and title to salvation—neither faith, nor sincere obedience, are required of us for this end; nor can they, when performed by us, be any such righteousness. It is Christ, and he alone, that is our righteousness ; it is by his righteousness, and that alone, that we are justified : it was he, who by his obedience to death satisfied Divine justice, and procured title to eternal life. It is not pretended that any performances of ours do or can satisfy Divine justice ; nor can it with more reason be pretended, that our performances give us title to life. Those that say he did not both, may as well say he did neither. Our performances may evidence our title, but they give it not, nor are the ground of it. It is Christ, his righteousness, that is the only foundation of our title, Rom. x. 4. The end of the law, i. e., of the covenant of works, was, that man, by the righteousness of perfect obedience, might have title to eternal life. This being rendered impossible in man's fallen and sinful state, how shall the end of the law, which the Lord aimed at, be attained ? Why, Christ attains the end of the law by his righteousness, giving title to life to those who believe.

Faith and obedience are not our righteousness now, as perfect obedience was to be in the state of innocency; they are not in the stead

of it, they heave not the virtue and office of it, they are not conditions of the covenant of grace, as that was of the covenant of works ; i. e. they are not the righteousness by which we are justified, and have title to life. It is Christ that is the end of the law for righteousness to those purposes ; and to ascribe that to our performances, which is proper to him, is injurious to the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

And how is it of grace upon these terms ? How is the covenant of the Gospel more gracious than that of works ? It cannot be said that it is more gracious, because it requires and accepts less, sincere obedience being not so much as that which is perfect: for sincere obedience may be counted as much to man in his present state of sin and impotency, as perfect obedience in the state of innocency and perfection. But the transcendent graciousness of the Gospel-covenant consists, not in requiring less righteousness to give title to life, than was due at first ; but in not requiring a perfect righteousness of us personally for that end, but providing and accepting that of a surety, according to that of the apostle, Rom. viii. 3, 4. The law could not give us life, because, being weakened by sin, we could not perform the perfect righteousness which is required; but what the law coidd not do, Christ has done, giving us title to life, fulfilling the righteousness of it in our behalf. But does not the Scripture declare, that our obedience is the obedience which gives title to life? Rev. xxii. 14. I answer, there is a double right, jus ad rem, and jus in re , " a right of title," and " right of possession ;" holy obedience gives us not the title, but leads us into possession. It gives not the title, for that we have in justification, Rom. v. 18. Now obedience is after justification, and so cannot give that which is before itself, and does not give that which is given already. But it leads us into possession, it is the way by which we enter ; so the words immediately following" will have it understood. When the apostle had declared that we are saved by grace, Eph. ii. 8, and so excluded works, ver. 9, that we may count this to be our title to salvation, yet he adds, ver. 10, " We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." These are the ways wherein we must walk, if we will arrive at salvation ; but they are not our title to it, as perfect obedience would have been in the first covenant, the law of works ; they are not such conditions, they are not our righteousness, (upon which our title is founded,) as that was designed to be : they are not legal conditions.

4. Obliging conditions. There is no performance of ours, that can of itself oblige the Lord to perform any promise; the reason [is], because it is defective, and falls short of what is required : and amongst men, he that

viz Rev. xxii. 15. 2 F

promises upon conditions is not obliged, if the terms be not duly observed. The law of our creation required of us perfect performance ; and no less than perfect obedience to God will be due from us, while we are creatures. It is true, man now wants power to answer his engagements, but that was through his own fault; and the Lord does not lose his due, because man sins against him. Now being defective, and falling short of his duty, it is sinful; and that which is sinful, is to be punished, not rewarded; as such it has not a moral fitness for promised reward : that which is sinful, brings the performer under the curse, Gal. iii. 10.; it deserves eternal death, Rom. vi. 23 ; and so cannot oblige the Lord to reward it.

Upon this account, the best performance of any supposed condition, is so far of itself from making any promised blessing to be due in point of justice, that it cannot make it due in point of faithfulness. That Avhich needs pardon cannot of itself make anything due to us, but punishment. Our faith, our repentance, our obedience, being sinfully defective, cannot as such make anything due to lis, but punishment ; and so cannot oblige the Lord to perform the promises, to justify, pardon, or save us : for that which obliges the Lord to execute the threatening, cannot oblige him to fulfil his promise. How then is the Lord obliged ? How come the promises to be accomplished ? Why, not upon the account of our defective performances, but for Christ's sake, and so through grace.

Christ has satisfied for the sins of his people, for the sinful defects of their performances : upon his account they are pardoned and accepted, and so for his sake they are rewarded, and the promises performed. Thus, as 2 Cor. i. 20, all the promises are performed with unvariable faithfulness ; he engages the faithfulness of God to fulfil all the promises, whenas" our performances, considered in themselves, do oblige him and would rather engage him against it.

5. Uncertain conditions. When it is uncertain whether the condition will be performed or no. Such conditions have place amongst men, and men only, such as suspend the affair in eventum incertum, and leave it at uncertainty as to the event; it is uncertain whether the condition will be performed or not, and so uncertain whether the promise will be performed. The reason why man proposes such conditions, is his weakness and imperfection, for want of power or foresight. He has not the wills of others in his power, cannot make them comply with his will, and so cannot tell what they will do. So that it is also for want of certain foreknowledge or foresight, when we will not bestow a favour on another, but upon terms. If we were certain that the terms would be observed,

' whereas.

we would promise absolutely ; if we were certain the condition would not be observed, we would not promise at all; but because we are uncertain, therefore we promise conditionally. Now the ground of these conditions being weakness, they must in nowise be ascribed unto God. It derogates from his infinite wisdom, and infallible foreknowledge ; it derogates from his power and providence over man's will and human affairs : it derogates from the efficacy of his grace, as though this could not determine man's will, or prevail with it certainly and infallibly to comply with his proposals ; but must leave it indifferent, and in suspense, and so at uncertainty, whether it will comply or not comply with what he propounds.

For use. —(1.) Acknowledge this grace. How? By getting high apprehensions of it, and entertaining frequent thoughts about it. Say, How precious are thy thoughts to me, 0 God ! how great is the sum of them! Let the meditation hereof be sweeter than the honey and the honeycomb.

(2.) Let this beget suitable affections ; love, joy, admiration, delight, both in the fountain and streams of free-grace.

(3.) Let it be a motive to all holiness and obedience. Let the grace of God, the love of Christ constrain you to an obsequiousness to him, and affectionateness to one another. If God so loved us, how ought we [to] love one another !

(4.) Let it strengthen our faith, in afflictions and temptations, [arising] from the power of sin and [a] sense of unworthiness.

(5.) Hold it forth to others : take all occasions to magnify it; oppose every practice and opinion that obscures the lustre of it. Use it as a touchstone, to discover what persons are most holy, what tenets are most true, even those which most illustrate free-grace.

(6.) By glorying in the Lord, [let us] use it to make us and keep us humble. We had nothing to merit, nothing to move, for salvation: what we are, or have, we are by, and have from, this grace. Let no man boast, Rom. ix. 16. If you have any laudable, amiable accomplishments, give the glory to God.

For motives. —1. Consider how thankful God's ancient people were for temporal salvation ; what sweet strains of grateful hearts appear in those songs of praises which we find recorded usually after any deliverance ! And have we not much more reason to be thankful for eternal salvation ?

2. Consider what a comprehensive blessing salvation is, and take an estimate thereof, by comparing it with the temporal deliverances of the Israelites : those proceeded from a common ordinary love, these from a peculiar distinguishing affection. Their deliverances were effected, not without the hazard of their persons ; our salvation is effected only by

2 F 2

-142 A DISCOURSE OF FREE GRACE.

the blood of Christ: the issue of theirs was not much more than civil tranquillity, sitting under their vines and fig-trees ; the issue of ours is grace, glory, joy, and those things that eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man to conceive.

3. This is the end of all God does in the world, even to glorify himself; as Rom. ix. 23, in showing the exceeding riches of his grace, in his kindness towards us through Jesus Christ. Now we have no other way to glorify him, but by an active, affectionate acknowledgment of his grace.

4. This is the employment of glorified spirits in heaven, to praise, admire, and adore his grace : this is the subject of those seraphic praises, the thoughts of this stupendous love transport angels and men into an eternal rapture. This is the way to be in heaven upon earth, to anticipate glory, to enter into our Master's joy before we come at"it: nay, this is the way by which our Master's joy enters into us. Never are our souls hlled with such ravishing pleasures, as when we are taken up with such heavenly employment. Never do we rise higher above the world, than when these thoughts wing our souls : nay, sometimes they will steal into heaven, as the Israelites' spies into Canaan, and bring from thence into our souls, grapes, and figs, and pomegranates, some taste of what we shall fully enjoy in the land of promise.

Salvation is a comprehensive blessing ; it includes the eternal love of God ; that is its foundation : which eternal love broke forth in time into such high expressions, as to send his Son, to live miserably, and die shamefully for us, and interest us in all the merits of his death. This was the purchase of salvation, and it is the conclusion ; as though unwilling [that] those whom he loves so well, should be at such a distance from him, [he] takes us to himself, to see his glory, to bathe ourselves in that stream of bliss, in those rivers of pleasure, that are at his right hand. This is the accomplishment of salvation. Surely this deserves to be acknowledged.

MISCELLANEOUS SERMONS.

A FUNERAL SERMON

ON

DK. JOHN OWEN."

Phil. iii. 21.

" WHO SHALL CHANGE OUR VILE BODY, THAT IT MAY BE FASHIONED LIKE UNTO HIS GLORIOUS BODY."

The occasion why I pitch upon these words at this time, you are not unacquainted with. The apostle in the beginning of this chapter, warns the Philippians to beware of false teachers; he enforceth this with several arguments, the principal of which are drawn from his own example, in the body of the chapter ; and then he concludes it with an elegant antithesis, opposing them to himself, and those that faithfully follow Christ with him: he makes use of this to enforce the dissuasive [from an evil conversation,] in a subserviency to his main scope, ver. 19—21, " Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, whose glory is their shame, who mind earthly things. But our conversation is in heaven, from whence we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body." You may observe an antithesis in all this; they mind earthly things, but our conversation is in heaven; their God is their belly, but we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ; their end is destruction, but our end is glory; their glory is shameful, they glory in their shame, but our glory shall be like that of our Lord Jesus Christ; that which they count most glorious, is shameful; but that which is vilest amongst us, shall be glorious: " Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body."

The observation from hence is this:

Observ. The bodies of the saints shall be conformed, and made like unto the glorious body of Jesus Christ.

The bodies of the saints, how vile soever now, shall at the resurrection be made and fashioned like unto the glorious body of Christ. The apostle gives a particular account of this, 1 Cor. xv., which I may take notice of in some particulars afterward.

• This Sermon was preached the next Lord's-day after the Doctor's interment.

446 A FUNERAL SERMOX ON DR. JOHN OWEN.

For the present, the great inquiry for the explaining of this truth is: How the bodies of deceased saints shall be like to the glorious body of Christ ?

1. Negatively.

(1.) Not by any substantial change.

The substance of their bodies shall not be changed, as one of the ancients thought, by a mistake of the word /ierao-x^/xan'o-et used here, inferring that the bodies of the saints at the resurrection, shall not be of the same substance as they are now, but they shall then have ethereal bodies : whereas both the words <rxnpa and /iop$j) denote quality, a change in quality, not such a substantial change as they imagined.

(2.) They shall be like, not equal.

The words do import a resemblance, not an equality; they shall not be equally glorious with the body of Christ. The Lord of glory in all things must have the pre-eminence; as he was "anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows," so he shall be exalted with greater glory. But then,

2. Positively : How shall they be fashioned like unto his glorious body ?

You must not expect an exact account of this; it requires the tongue of an angel, or of some translated saint, that hath seen, and been invested with this glory, or hath had some full view of it. This is of the number of those things we must believe though we see not, though we know not; it is an object of faith, not of sight, and so is incomprehensible to us, who walk by faith, not by sight. " Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for those that love him." If this be true of what is offered us in the Gospel, much more of Avhat is reserved in glory. " Now are we the sons of God," saith the apostle, " and it doth not appear what we shall be ; but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is;" 1 John iii. 2. And who can describe that which doth not appear ? Here " we see but as in a glass darkly," we have but a dim sight, such a sight of the kingdom of glory, as the ancient people of God had of the kingdom of the Messiah: " Abraham saw his day afar off, and rejoiced." The wisdom of God hath drawn a veil before that glory, and he bath drawn it in great wisdom If so be we had the full discovery of that glory that shall be put upon the bodies of the saints (not to speak of that upon the soul,) if we had the full discovery of it here upon earth, it woidd be as hayd to persuade the saints to be content to live on earth, as it is to persuade the men of the world to die. As in judgment to them, so in mercy to us, the veil still remaineth upon us ; but though the veil be not quite withdrawn, yet the Lord is pleased in the Scripture, to lift up,

as it were, a corner of the veil, that we may see some glimmerings of that glory which hereafter we shall see face to face, of which I shall give an account in some particulars.

The raised bodies of the saints shall be like the glorious body of Christ in these six or seven respects.

(1.) In respect of perfection, the body of Christ is perfect, so shall theirs be perfect, both in respect of parts and degrees.

Their bodies shall have integrality" of parts in exact proportion, there shall be no defect of members, no, not of those that are now wanting; those that could find no remedy for lameness, or blindness, or mutilation on earth, shall find it in heaven: their bodies shall be raised in glory. So the apostle tells us, 1 Cor. xv. 43, " It shall be a glorious body:" but it would not be so glorious if these imperfections and defects were not removed: and it shall have exact proportion too, there shall be no distinction in heaven between small and great; as there shall be no infant of days, so no decrepit old age, but all shall be reduced* to a perfect stature, either to the stature of the first man Adam (for the resurrection shall be as a new creation) or to the stature of the Lord from heaven, as the apostle calls our Lord Jesus. There shall be a conformation to the image of the heavenly, and so [it] shall not want its proportion. The word fiop<firj in the text, signifies "outward form," and crx^fj-a denotes " external figure." Now there could be no resemblance of the body of Christ in external form and figure, without such proportions.

(2.) The bodies of the saints shall be like the glorious body of Christ, in respect of impassibleness.

The body of Christ is now impassible; that is, it is not liable to any sufferings, and so shall the bodies of the saints be ; they shall be secured from all hurtful impressions from without, and all distempers from within ; there shall be no hunger, nor thirst, no pain, no sickness, nor suffering whatsoever ; the body shall suffer no disturbance, no inconvenience from earthly melancholy, or from dull phlegm, or fiery choler, or from the levity of a sanguine humour, but all shall be brought to such an exact temperament, as shall place them above any sufferings imaginable. The body will not be passible, nor liable to corruption, or suffering ; for that which is liable to suffering, is more or less liable to corruption, in whole, or in part ; but the bodies of the saints will be incorruptible : "It is sown in corruption, but is raised in incorruption:" 1 Cor. xv. 42; their bodies shall be secured from whatever may blemish their glory, or impair their perfection, or any way disorder the constitution of it.

(3.) The bodies of the saints shall be like the glorious body of Christ in respect of immortality.

The body of Christ is immortal; as the apostle expresses it, Rom.

0 due complement. restoi

vi. 9, " Christ dieth no more, death hath no more dominion over him;" so it shall be with the bodies of the saints, " mortality shall then put on immortality," as the apostle expresses it, 1 Cor. xv. 53; when the bodies of the saints shall be raised, they shall commence, take the degree of souls, that is, they shall be immortal; they shall be more secured from death in heaven, than our first parents, while innocent, were secure from death in paradise ; there shall not only be a posse non mori, " a possibility not to die ;" but a non posse 7nori, " an impossibility of dying;" and that not arising from the nature of the body, but from the decree and purpose of God, from the victory of Christ, and from an immunity from sin : " Death shall then be swallowed up of victory ;" death shall then lie under the feet of glorified ones, while they sing that song, 1 Cor. xv. 54—57, " Death is swallowed up in victory : O death, where is thy sting ? O grave, where is thy victory ? The sting of death is sin; the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."

(4.) The bodies of the saints shall be like that glorious body of Christ, in respect of agility ; that quickness, nimbleness, and wonderful celerity of glorified bodies, an instance whereof we have in the ascent of Christ's body from earth to heaven. The distance between the highest heaven, and the earth, is computed by astronomers to be some hundred millions of miles, so that if he finished that distance in a day, and we have no reason to think it so long, his body must move some millions of miles in an hour. But not to insist upon that, the bodies of the saints shall move when, where, how, and as fast as the soul pleases, without any reluctancy, without any toil or trouble to the body. The body shall be then immediately subject to the soul, as the soul shall be subject to God : nor will this motion be any disturbance to them. For what one of the ancients saith of the angels, shall be true of the bodies of the saints : " Wherever they move, they move not out of the blessed presence, out of the inhappying a presence of Christ."

(5.) The bodies of the saints shall be like the glorious body of Christ in respect of spirituality.

The body of Christ is now a spiritual body: not that it is changed into the nature of a spirit; Christ prevents that mistake, Luke xxiv. 39. " Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have." The body is not changed into the nature of a spirit, but it is said to be spiritual, because it is elevated to the highest degree of perfection and excellency that the body is capable of, brought as near to the angelical nature, as is consistent with the essence of a body. So the bodies of the saints shall be spiritual bodies, not changed into the nature of spirits, but they

0 beatifying.

shall be purged, defecated, and cleansed from all the dross, and mud, and feculency of an earthly temper, and their senses shall be refined to heavenly, all their acts and motions shall be advanced to a spiritual perfection : there shall be none of those parts, none of those actions from which the body is denominated a natural, or an animal body : " It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body :" there will be no need of meat, drink, or sleep. Our Lord Jesus Christ calls the raised bodies, ladyyeXot, like to the angels in this respect, for in the resurrection, " they shall neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven," Matt. xxii. 30.

(6.) The bodies of the saints shall be like the glorious body of Christ, in respect of splendour and beauty.

He gave a glimpse of that glory to his disciples in bis transfiguration ; Matt. xvii. 1,2. " He took some of his disciples into a high mountain apart, and was transfigured before them: his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light;" it was glistering, saith the other evangelist; so shall the bodies of the saints be, they shall shine as the firmament and stars ; Dan. xii. 3. " They that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever;" not only as the firmament and stars, but as the sun; Matt. xiii. 43. " Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun, in the kingdom of their Father." The purest and most lovely complexion, the most exquisite beauty on earth, is but darkness and deformity to that which shall shine forth in the glorified bodies of the saints : they shall shine as the sun, with a brighter lustre than that of the sun, with such a splendour as shall never be clouded, never be eclipsed, never obscured. If the glory of Solomon did transport the queen of Sheba, when she saw him, so that it is said, " there was no more spirit left within her," 1 Kings x. 5, how ravishing will the sight of those glorious bodies be, whose splendour, whose glory shall as far exceed that of Solomon's, as the glory of the sun exceeds that of a lily ! If a little converse with God put such a glory upon Moses's face, that the people were not able to behold it, [because] their eyes were too weak ; what glory will shine forth in the bodies of the saints, of those that converse with God for ever, who will see him face to face unto all eternity ! " And we all with open face," saith the apostle, " beholding the glory of the Lord, as in a glass, are thereby changed from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord." By this we may guess, indeed we can do little more than guess as to these things, farther than the Scripture leads us, but by this we may conjecture, how these bodies that are now so vile, should have such a glory derived upon them. The moon is of itself a dark, gross, opacous" body, much like the earth, as it

is now generally concluded, and capable of demonstration ; but the sun darting its beams upon it, makes it a lightsome and glorious planet ; so the bodies of the saints, though vile in themselves, yet by the glory of Christ darting on them, shall be made glorious bodies.

(7.) They shall be like him in respect of glorious dignities and privileges.

It is the glorious privilege of Christ, that he sits on the right hand of God, as Mediator, in respect of his human nature ; " The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand. Him hath God exalted to be a prince, King of kings, and Lord of lords ;" and he hath glorious regalities, ensigns of royalty ; he hath a throne, and a crown, and a sceptre : " Thy throne, O God" (it is spoken of Christ, as Mediator) " endures for ever ; the sceptre of thy kingdom, it is a right sceptre, a sceptre of righteousness." And he shall exercise his royal power in a glorious manner, in a judiciary way, when he shall descend corporally to judge both the quick and the dead. Now the saints shall partake of these glorious privileges, or of something like them : they shall stand at the right hand of Christ: " Upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir," Psal. xlv. 9. The bodies of the saints shall have possession of a glorious kingdom, a kingdom of glory : " Fear not, little flock, it is your Father's good pleasure to give vou the kingdom." And they have glorious ensigns of royalty ascribed to them. They have a crown : "whenthe chief Shepherd shall appear, we shall receive a crown of glory ;" yea, the Lord himself will be their crown, as the expression is, Isa. xxviii. 5. " In that day shall the Lord of hosts be for a crown of glory and for a diadem of beauty to the residue of his people." How glorious will it be for them, not only to be crowned by the Lord, but to have the Lord himself to be their crown ! And they shall partake with him in the glory of judging quick and dead ; they shall sit with him in his throne : "To him that overcometh will I give to sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father on his throne." They shall join with Christ as assessors in that glorious act of judgment; they shall not only judge the world, but the angels : "Know ye not," saith the apostle, " that we shall judge angels ?"

And so much for the explication of this truth.

I might improve it several ways.

Use 1. By the way of inference : If the bodies of the saints shall be so glorious, what glory then will be put upon their souls ! If the body, the vile body shall be advanced to such a glory, what glory will be put upon the soul, which is the prime receptalce of the image of God ! If glory be the portion of the body, the soul will much more exceed in glory.

Use 2. Let us here take notice of the love of Christ, the wonderful love

A FUNERAL SERMON ON DR. JOHN OWEN. -151

of Christ, that he will take notice of the bodies of his people, of that which is so vile, bodies that are vile in themselves, and much more vile as they are instruments of sin ; bodies that are vile while they live, but much viler when they are dead ; noisome by putrefaction, or devoured by vermin, or dissolved into dust. Will the King of glory take notice of such vile things ? Can he think thoughts of love concerning objects that are so unlovely ? Yes, thoughts of love indeed, to make things so vile to be glorious, glorious like himself. Was it not enough that he redeemed men from wrath, delivered them from going into the pit of destruction ? Was it not enough to make their souls glorious, but will he make their bodies glorious too ? Was it not enough to make their bodies like the stars, or the sun, but to make them glorious like himself? Must his own glory be the pattern of theirs ? Will nothing less satisfy the love of Christ, but imparting to these vile bodies his own glory ? Oh, what manner of love is this ! So dear are the saints to him, such love he hath for them, as a the very vilest thing belonging to them shall partake of his own glory, shall be made glorious like himself. As Mephi-bosheth said to David : " What is thy servant that thou shouldest look on such a dead dog as I am ?" With much more reason may we say, and that with astonishment, What are we, O Lord, that thou shouldst look upon such vile dust, which is even trampled under the feet of the beasts, that thou shouldst advance us to such a height of honour, that thou shouldst crown us with glory, with such a glory, a glory like thine own?

Use 3. For inquiry: How shall we know whether we fire of the number of those whose vile bodies shall be fashioned like to the glorious body of Christ ? There are several characters in this chapter by which it may be known : I shall only name them.

(1.) Those that worship God in the spirit.

(2.) Those that rejoice in Christ Jesus.

(3 ) Those whose conversation is in heaven. And,

(4.) Those that look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ; you have these two last in the verse before my text, but I must not insist on them.

Use 4. This should teach us to mix our grief for the loss of deceased relatives (those that die in the Lord) with joy. Some sorrow is alloAved. They are reckoned among the worst of sinners, that are aa-mpyoi, without natural affection. Stoical senselessness is inhuman, it is far from being Christian, or evangelical. We may mourn for ourselves in reference to the great advantages that we lose by those we are bereaved of, especially if they are spiritual advantages : we may mourn in reference to the places where they lived, it portends evil to those places: "For

452 A FUNERAL SERMON ON DR. JOHN OWEN.

the righteous are taken away from the evil to come." When those that should stand in the gap are removed, there is wrath breaking in upon that people without any remedy : we may mourn in reference to ourselves, but in reference to them we have cause to rejoice. If we mourn, it should not be as those without hope. Immoderate sorrow hath its rise from self-love. Will you count him a friend who grieves at your preferment ? The death of the saints is the highway to glory. The apostle calls death a seed-time, that is, a time of hope, not of mourning ; and a time in reference to an expected harvest, is a time of rejoicing.

But we may mourn, we of this congregation have a particular cause to do it. I shall speak something of that excellent person that we have lost: but what I shall say, as the time will permit me, is but little concerning that great worthy. It was my unhappiness that I bad so little and late acquaintance with him, which makes me not competent for such an undertaking; the account that is due to the world, requires a volume, and a better hand than mine, which I hope it Avill meet with in time : only let me touch some generals," which may help us to a sense of our loss, without which we are not like[ly] to make such an improvement of it, as the Lord expects from those upon whom his hand is fallen so heavy.

A great light is fallen ; one of eminency for holiness, learning, parts, and abilities ; a pastor, a scholar, a divine of the first magnitude ; holiness gave a Divine lustre to his other accomplishments, it shined in his whole course, and was diffused through his whole conversation. I need not tell you of this that knew him, and observed that it was his great design to promote holiness in the power, life, and exercise of it among you. It was his great complaint that the power of it declined among professors. It was his care and endeavour to prevent or cure spiritual decays in his own flock. He was a burning and a shining light, and you for a while rejoiced in his light: alas ! that it was but for a while, and that Ave cannot rejoice in it still!

Those practical discourses which he published to the world, did give a taste that his spirit and temper was under the influence and power of holiness. There are some creatures that love to bark at the light, instead of making a better use of it: he met with such, I mean some that wrote against him, who thought themselves concerned to represent him [as] odious to the world, but with great advantage to him, because they could not do it but by groundless surmises and false suggestions, such as showed the authors of them malicious, and rendered them ridiculous.

He was master of all parts of learning requisite to an accomplished divine ; those that understood him, and will be just, cannot deny him the reputation and honour of a great scholar; and those that detract from him in this, seem to be led by a spirit of envy, that would not

" general considerations.

suffer them willingly to see so great an ornament among those that are of another persuasion. Indeed he had parts able to master anything he applied himself unto, though he restrained himself to those studies which might render him most serviceable to Christ, and the souls of men. He had extraordinary intellectuals, 61 a vast memory, a quick apprehension, a clear and piercing judgment; he was a passionate lover of light and truth, of Divine truth especially; he pursued it unweariedly, through painful and wasting studies, such as impaired his health and strength, such as exposed him to those distempers with which he conflicted many years : and some may blame him for this as a sort of intemperance, but it is the most excusable of any, and looks like a voluntary martyrdom. However it showed he was ready to spend, and be spent, for Christ: he did not bury his talent, with which he was richly furnished, but still laid it out for the Lord who had intrusted him. He preached while his strength and liberty would serve, then by discourse and writing.

That he was an excellent preacher none will deny who knew him, and knew what preaching was, and think it not the worse because it is spiritual and evangelical. He had an admirable facility in discoursing on any subject, pertinently and decently, and could better express himself extempore, than others with premeditation. He was never at a loss for want of expression ; a happiness few can pretend to ; and this he could show upon all occasions, in the presence of the highest persons in the nation, and from the greatest to the meanest. He hereby showed he had the command of his learning. His vast reading and experience was hereby made useful, in resolving doubts, clearing what was obscure, advising in perplexed and intricate cases and breaches, or healing them which sometimes seemed incurable. Not only we, but all his brethren will have reason to bewail the loss of him. His conversation was not only advantageous in respect to his pleasantness and obligingness ; but there was that in it which made it desirable to great persons, natives and foreigners, and that by so many, that few could have what they desired.

I need speak nothing of his writings, though that is another head that I intimated ; they commend themselves to the world. If holiness, learning, and a masculine unaffected style can commend anything, his practical discourses cannot but find much acceptation with those who are sensible of their soul concerns, and can relish that which is Divine, and value that which is not common or trivial. His excellent Comment upon the Hebrews gained him a name and esteem, not only at home, but in foreign countries. When he had finished it (and it was a merciful providence that he lived to finish it) he said, Now his work was

" mental powers.

done, it was time for him to die. There were several other discourses that seern controversial, and are so: our loss of him in this respect seems to be irreparable, for anything that is in our present prospect. The due management of controversies requires so great abilities, that there is not one among a hundred of our divines, are competently qualified for that; and the truths of the Gospel, which should be dearer to us than our outward concerns, are like to be suppressed or adulterated, unless the Spirit of truth stir up and empower some to assert and vindicate them. He had a singular dexterity this Avay, for the managing of controversies ; and those truths that he vindicated, were such as were most in danger by the apostatising spirit of this age : some may think his genius led him much to study debates, but so far as I have observed, he did not affect to be an aggressor, but still was on the defensive, and proceeded with such temper, that he would rather oblige his adversary (if a lover of truth) than exasperate him. He made it appear [that] he did not write so much against any man's person, as for the truth: I heard one of them declare, it would not trouble a man to be opposed in such a way as this great doctor did treat his greatest antagonist. It is usual with persons of extraordinary parts, to struggle from the common road, and affect novelty, though thereby they lose the best company ; as though they could not appear eminent, unless they march alone. But this great person did not affect singularity ; they were old truths that he endeavoured to defend, those that were transmitted to us by our first reformers, and owned by the best divines of the Church of England. "What the truth has lost by this, I cannot easily say.

But it falleth heaviest and most directly upon this congregation ; we had a light in this candlestick, which did not only enlighten the room, but gave light to others far and near : but it is put out; we did not sufficiently value it; I wish I might not say, that our sins have put it out. We had a special honour and ornament, such as other churches would much prize ; but the crown is fallen from our heads : yea, may I not add, Woe unto us, for we have sinned ! We have lost an excellent pilot, and lost him when a fierce storm is coming upon us, when we have most need of him. I dread the consequences, considering the weakness of those that are left at the helm. If we are not sensible of it, it is because our blindness is great. Let us beg of God, that he would prevent what this threatens us with, and that he would make up this loss, or that it may he repaired, or at least that the sad consequences of it may be prevented. And let us pray in the last words of this dying person to me : " That the Lord would double his Spirit upon us, that he would not remember against us former iniquities ; but that his tender mercies may speedily prevent us, for we are brought very low."

WHAT MUST CHRISTIANS DO,

THAT THE INFLUENCE OF THE ORDINANCES MAY ABIDE UPON THEM?"

1 Chron. xxix. 18.

O LORD GOD OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND ISRAEL, OUR FATHERS : KEEP THIS FOR EVER IN THE IMAGINATION OF THE THOUGHTS OF THE HEART OF THY PEOPLE, AND PREPARE THEIR HEART UNTO THEE."

In the preceding chapter we have David's oration, or, if you will, his sermon, the design of which was, to excite the people to a contribution for the erecting of a temple, and promoting the public worship of God. It begins ver. 2 of that chapter, and is continued to the 6th verse of this chapter.

This sermon was effectual upon the auditory ; David had the happiness, (which the best orators and most powerful preachers often want,) not only mBava \eyeiv, but neideiv ; he not only spoke what was in itself persuasive, but did actually persuade his hearers to comply with his design. The effect thereof is expressed, ver. 6, 7, 8; they offered, and (which was the marrow and fatness of their offering) they offered willingly. Though will-worship be the worst service of all other, yet those that serve God willingly are the best worshippers ; and, therefore, David in this sermon commends such service to his son, chap, xxviii. ver. 9, " And thou Solomon, my son, know thou the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart, and with a willing mind." None serve God with a perfect heart, but those who serve him with a willing mind ; to such a temper were the people wrought by this powerfid exhortation, ver. 9; " with a perfect heart they offered willingly to the Lord." Hereupon, David, much affected with his success in this affair,

• Thi8 forms the last discourse of the second volume of the " Morning Exercises." The first series was delivered "at Giles in the fields, May, 1659," and was edited by the Rev. Thomas Case, rector of that parish, to which he was just preferred. There are three other volumes usually entitled " Morning Exercises at Cripplegate," but without adequate evidence. One series was probably delivered at Mr. Doolittle's meeting house, which had been recently built in Monkwell street, in that parish, and the two others were most likely preached in Dr. Annesley's own meeting house, in Little St. Helen's place, Bishopsgate street; as he edited the volumes, and incurred the risk of their publication.

("David the king also rejoiced with great joy,") his soul being now upon the wing, he flies to God by prayer, and therewith conchides his sermon. The prayer consists of petition and thanksgiving, both of them not conformed to any common model, but suiting the particular occasion now before him. He blesseth God for making such an impression upon the hearts of the people, as moved them to offer, and after this sort to offer, so cheerfully, so generously, from ver. 10 to 18, and beseecheth God still to keep their hearts in such a temper, to make this holy impression durable and abiding, ver. 18, " 0 Lord God of Abraham, &c. keep this for ever in the imaginations," &c. Where we have the enforcement of the petition, and the matter of it. It is enforced from the covenant of God, by virtue of which, he was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, and had laid an obligement on himself, to have a gracious respect to their posterity; hence this expression is frequently used, being no small encouragement to the faithful, to pray for covenant mercies, and to pray in faith.

The matter of the petition, that which he prays for, is, that the effect which his words had upon the people might be durable and continuing, that the efficacy thereof might abide upon their souls, and every part thereof: that it might sink into the depths of their hearts, and stick fast there : that it might pierce through their fancies and imaginations into their mind and thoughts, and through their thoughts into their hearts and affections ; that the Lord would continue it there, and continue it long there, even for ever.

David was apprehensive what a slippery and inconstant thing the heart of man is, how like a deceitful bow, to which he elsewhere compares it; how apt to slacken on a sudden, when it hath been bended to any good inclinations or resolutions, by the power of the word, or any other ordinance ; what an unhappy womb it is, how ordinarily holy motions miscarry before the heart hath gone out its full time with them; what clanger there was, lest their righteousness, which now made such a flourishing appearance, might prove like the morning cloud, or the early dew. And, therefore, having raised their hearts to so good a posture, he takes the best course to fix them there. His words having had a powerful influence upon their souls, he useth the best means to render it durable and abiding. Hence observe,

Doctrine —The people of God should endeavour to keep the influence of the ordinances abiding upon their souls.

I must not prosecute this doctrine in the usual method, but mention it only, as leading us to the practical case at this time to be resolved. A conscientious hearer observing what his duty is, will be presently inquisitive how he may perform it: the duty is made known in the observation ; the inqiiiry is in the case before us,

What must be done that the influences of the ordinances may abide upon us ? By the ordinances, we understand those principally which are public, the word, sacraments, and prayer. The text and this exercise lead us to have a more special respect to the word, which we shall a little observe, but so as not to exclude the rest. By the influence of the ordinances, is meant the effect they have upon us, while we are employed in them ; their gracious or comforting efficacy, that which tends to make our hearts and lives more holy or more comfortable ; that whereby our souls are quickened, strengthened, restored, or refreshed. By its abiding on us, understand the continuance of this effect after the duty is done, that so the ordinances of God be not like those human ordinances ( [which] the apostle speaks of) which perish in the using, Col. ii. 20, 22. If you would have it stated clearly and more at large, take it thus: What course must we take, that the gracious and comforting efficacy of public ordinances may not only reach us while we are employed in them, but may continue on us afterwards ; so as we may walk under the sense and power thereof all along ?

To resolve this without further preamble, the course you must take for this purpose, lies in the practice of some things, and the avoiding of others. The things to be practised take notice of in these severals : a

1. Get new hearts, and get them daily more and more renewed : an old heart is a heart of stone, Ezek. xi. 19, and the hardness of it is not removed but by degrees. Now that which will sink deep into a tender heart, a heart of flesh, Ezek. xxxvi. 26, will glide off from an old heart as water from .a stone, without leaving any impression: and where none is left none can continue. The good seed which fell on stony ground, it sprang up indeed, but it continued not, " it withered away as soon as it sprang up," Luke. viii. 6; but they which with an honest and good heart heard the Avord, they kept it, and brought forth fruit with patience, (i. e., with perseverance,) ver. 15; the fruitful influences of the word abode upon them : a good and honest heart not only hears the word, but keeps it ; not only brings forth fruit, but persists so doing. The more tender, humble, and spiritual the heart is, the more spiritual fruit and advantage doth it reap from the ordinances, and the longer doth it continue in possession of those advantages ; the less the soul is renewed, the more resistance doth it offer to the ordinances ; and the more they are resisted, the weaker is their efficacy; and the less their efficacy is, the less while doth it continue. A heart thoroughly sanctified, is to the ordinances like tinder, which soon takes fire, and is apt to keep it till it be forced out: whereas a carnal unmortified heart, is like green wood, whose moistness giving check to the activity of the

« particulars.

2 g 2

fire, is not soon kindled, and will soon go out, if it be not well looked to. Naturalists observe, that transmutation is easy in symbolical elements, such as agree in some prime qualities : water is more easily turned into air than into fire. A holy and spiritual heart will be easily wrought on by holy and spiritual ordinances, for here is an agreement in qualities ; and the more agreement the less opposition, and the less the opposition is, the more easily will it be mastered ; the power of the ordinances will more easily both take place and keep possession. Holiness makes the soul both receptive and retentive of holy impressions. Make it but your great business to grow every day more holy ; and it will not be so hard a matter, to have the ordinances work effectually on you, or to have their efficacy continue with you.

2. Labour to be much affected with the ordinances while you are employed in them. Slight impressions will be soon worn out: and weak influences will quickly spend themselves and vanish. If the ordinances have but little effect upon you, while you are under them, it is not like[ly] to last long : for that which is little is near to nothing, and that which is so near to it, may soon come to nothing. It is not enough that your hearts be a little warmed, but they must burn within you, Luke xxiv. 32, while Christ is speaking to you, or you are speaking to him; if you would have that heavenly heat to be lasting. The good seed miscarried upon one sort of ground in the parable, because it had no deepness of earth, Matt. xiii. 5, 6 ; it quickly withered because it took no deep root. If the ordinances pierce no further than the surface of the soul, if the work of them be but superficial, if they do not penetrate into the depths of the heart, the efficacy of them is not like[ly] to continue. Therefore, prepare your hearts before you draw near to God; get them so disposed as a they may be capable of lasting influences. The text directs us to this, "0 Lord, keep this for ever in the imagination, &c, and prepare their heart unto thee." Then is the heart prepared to the Lord when it is made tender, and sensible, and open. Bring tender hearts to the ordinances, get them broken up beforehand; break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns, Jer. iv. 3 ; Hos. x. 12. A tender heart drinks in Divine influences; they insinuate themselves more easily into the intimate recesses of it. That which can make no impression at all upon a flint, will sink deep into softened wax.

Come with sensible hearts, apprehensive of your spiritual wants and necessities ; burdened with your lusts and corruptions ; pained with your inward distempers and foul grievances. I cannot commend to you anything more effectual, to make you capable of great and lasting advantages. Such a quick sense of your spiritual condition will open

your hearts and make them ready to receive so much from the ordinances, as will not be soon spent. " Open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it," Psalm lxxxi. 10. Now it is desire that opens the heart, and the stronger the desire is, the wider is it opened : then is the soul wide open, when it pants and breathes after God, when it hungers and thirsts after holiness, as appears by equivalent promises, Psalm cvii. 9; Matt. v. 6, " Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness : for they shall be filled." That which we get by holy duties, is soon spent, because it is so little : and we get so little, because we desire no more. We come to the ordinances tanquam canis ad Nilum, too like the Egyptian dog, which laps a little as he runs by the side of Nilus, but stays not to drink: we take but a taste of them as in transitu, too little, and too cursorily ; whenas a Christ invites us to eat and drink abundantly, Cant. v. 1. Such cursory tastes may cheat you a little, but they will not furnish you with strength for continual service : you must feed and feed hungrily, and come with a strong appetite, that you may be capacious of much ; a little will not serve you long.

3. Mind the ordinances after your use of them; be much in meditation if you would have the efficacy of ordinances to continue long. Be often considering what you have heard, what you have prayed for, what you have received and are obliged to by the sacraments. Much of heaven and holiness is engraved on these ordinances, and the seal is as it were set upon the heart, while you are under them : but after consideration lays more weight on it, and impresseth it deeper, and so makes the characters both more plain and more durable; for the deeper they are, the longer will it be ere they be defaced.

Most men lose their souls, and the best men lose great advantages for their souls, for want of consideration. There is a quickening, a healing, a comforting, a strengthening virtue, in the ordinances ; and this virtue may fall upon your souls, while you are employed in them : but you cannot expect it will stay Avith you, unless you fix it there; and [there is] no better way to fix it, than consideration. This will rouse it up when it lies dormant and inactive; this will put spirits into it, when it grows weak and languid ; this will both diffuse and fasten it, yea it will heighten and improve it. " My heart was hot within me, (saith David, Psalm xxxix. 3,) while I was musing the fire burned." The heart takes fire at the mind, and it is musing or consideration that kindles it, and keeps it in, and blows it up : those sparks which fall from heaven upon your hearts, while you are hearing, or praying, &c., they will die, they will go out, and come to nothing unless you do avafairvptlv, 2 Tim. i. 6, unless you blow them up by meditation. " He sent forth his word and

" whereas.

healed them," Psalm cvii. 20. The word hath a salve for every soul-distemper, but that it may be effectual, the plaster must be laid on, and kept on too, till the cure be wrought: the preacher may apply it, and lay it upon the distempered part, but it will not be kept on without meditation. " How sweet are thy words unto my taste," saith David, Psalm cxix. 103. How came they to be still so sweet? why, they were his meditation day and night, the delicious relish of them still continued, because he kept them still upon his palate, by ruminating and musing on them.

The word of God in Scripture is as honey in the comb, there is that which is incomparably sweeter : now by meditation you squeeze out this sweetness, and it will be still dropping comfort and sweet refreshment upon your souls, while you are pressing it by consideration. 1 John ii. 14, "I write unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you." If you would be strong and continue so, the word of God must abide in you ; now how can it abide in you if it have not leave to stay in that, which is but the portal of the soul, if it abide not in your minds ? You lose all for want of consideration; both the gracious and comforting influences of the ordinances, slide from you through this neglect. And no wonder it is so great a damage to you, since it is so great a sin : you cast the word behind your backs, and throw the ordinances at your heels, when you do not mind them after you have done with them. And will the Lord encourage any with a durable blessing, under such guilt ? will not this provoke him rather to curse your blessings and blast them in the bud? Meditation is a known duty, and commonly insisted on, and, therefore, you may be tempted to slight it; whereas indeed, upon this account, you should the more regard it; for, since it is a known duty, the neglect of it is a known sin ; now to say nothing how inconsistent it is either with grace or comfort, to live in a known sin, how can you expect the efficacy of ordinances should be continued, while you neglect the means which the Lord hath appointed, and commended to you, as most effectual for the continuance thereof ? The blessing of the ordinances will not abide upon him who continues in sin, especially when his sin is the neglect of that medium which should fix the blessing upon him.

4. Let the efficacy of the ordinances be pursued presently into act[ion]; if they convince you of any neglected duty, fall immediately upon the practice of it. If they make you more resolute against any carnal or worldly hist, betake yourselves presently to the mortifying of it. If they kindle any holy affection to Christ or his people, give some real expression thereof without delay. If they revive any languishing grace, let it be forthwith exercised. This was David's practice, Psalm cxix. 60; you will find this one of the best expedients for the fixing and securing

of those good motions, which are raised in your minds and hearts by the ordinances. When the blossoms of a fruit-tree are once knit, though the flourish thereof be gone, and you see nothing but the bare rudiment of the expected fruit, yet you think it more secured from the injury of frosts and winds, than if it were still in the flower; good motions, when they are once reduced into act[ion], are thereby, as it were, knit, and brought to more consistency. They are then well past one of their critical periods, where most miscarry, and so are more like[ly] to live, and continue with you. Besides, the act strengthens that good motion and disposition which led to it, and so makes you more ready for another act, and that disposeth to more acts, and those to better, and repeated acts beget a habit, and this (as the philosopher tells us) is IxovijxmTepov ti, something that will stay by you. The hearts of the people being raised by Hezekiah's zealous speech, 2 Chron. xxix., they were kept up in that posture, till the work designed by him was finished, (till religion was restored and reformed;) and how came this to pass? Why, the thing was done suddenly, ver. 36, he pursued the people's good inclinations, and brought them into act suddenly: he struck while the iron was hot. When your hearts are heated by the ordinances, set immediately upon your work ; the primus impetus, "first onset," affords a great advantage, if it be improved ; possibly in the vigour of it, you may overcome those great difficulties and oppositions, which have been too hard for you formerly, and may otherwise give you impediment hereafter ; and this being mastered,your progress will be easier, you may go on towards heaven under the power of the ordinances, with less interruption and fewer intercisions a of these Divine influences, James i. 22, 23, "But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves: for if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, (i. e., if he do it not presently, as appears by what follows,) he is like to a man beholding his natural face in a glass: for he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was." The glass discovers what spots and sullages* are in his face, that he may wash them off, or what is disordered about him, that he may correct and compose it; but if he do not this presently, if he put it off till some occurrence divert him from the thoughts and remembrance of it, his looking in the mirror -will prove but a loss of time, a vain curiosity. Your use of the ordinances is like[ly] to prove no better, if you practise not what they lead you to without delay, it is like[ly] to be no other than such a viewing of yourselves in a glass, a mere fruitless speculation.

5. You must take much pains with your hearts, if you would have them retain the virtue and efficacy of the ordinances. The effect of

• interruptions. • * stains.

them should be as a nail fastened in a sure place, but the heart is so hard and knotty a piece that you cannot drive it in without many blows ; it will require all your strength to force it in far enough, and all your care and watchfulness to keep it in when it is there. They grossly mistake Christianity, who take it to be consistent with our carnal ease and slothfulness, who place it in notions or opinions, in fair shows and a specious profession, in forms, gestures, or external observances, in conforming to this or that mode of worship or discipline. It were well for the world if one could be a Christian at such an easy rate ; but they that please themselves with such conceits, they err, not knowing the Scriptures. The action of a Christian is, all along in the New Testament, expressed by striving, wrestling, running, and combating, exercises wherein he that will not be worsted, must intend 3 all his spirits, stretch all his sinews, put forth all his strength ; he that is a Christian indeed, he must 7ra\aUiv, "wrestle," Eph. vi. 12; 8id>Kecv, "follow on," Phil. iii. 12, 13,14 ; Heb. xii. 14; dyaviCea-Bcu, "agonize," Luke xiii. 24; his daily course must be a combating as for victory, a running as for a crown, a striving as for life. The power and life of holiness can neither be attained nor upheld without an effectual use of the ordinances ; the ordinances will never be effectual to purpose, unless the virtue of them abide upon the heart; now it meets with such reluctancy and opposition from the heart, (so far as it is unrenewed,) that it can never be fastened there, without striving, and struggling, and earnest contending ; it must be done in despite of our own ease, and carnal humours, and natural inclination, and all the resistance of the body of death. If you think this too much, you think much to be Christians indeed, however you pretend to the name. Those that are acquainted with their own hearts find it very hard to get them raised to a spiritual and heavenly temper, very difficult to get them pulled up (though they have the advantage of the most powerful ordinances) to any good posture ; and when with much ado they are got up, exceeding difficult to keep them there. Alas 1 we seem to be forcing a weighty stone up a steep hill; when with much toil we have got it near the top, take but our hands off a little, leave it but to itself, and down it runs further in a moment, than we can get it up again in some hours. Our way to heaven lies up the hill; that which is spiritual and heavenly is above us, the natural bent and tendency of our hearts is downwards ; as there is no getting them up without toil and pains, so when we have raised them a little, leave them but to themselves, grow but a little remiss and negligent, and down they run on a sudden, we shall quickly find them at the bottom of the

hill, in a carnal, lukewarm, earthly temper. When our hearts are effectually touched and raised, and moved in the use of ordinances, there is no keeping them in a quick and lively motion, without striving, and struggling, and, as it were, forcing them on with might and main. The influence of the ordinances falling upon a slothful soul is quite lost and merely thrown away upon it: Prov. xii. 27, " The slothful man roasteth not that which he took in hunting." So he loseth all his former labour because he will not take a little more pains ; a slothful soul loseth all the advantages he gets by following the ordinances, for want of care and industry to retain and improve what he hath gotten.

6. Comply with the Spirit of God. These influences, both as to the rise and continuance of them, are from him. When you comply not with him, you grieve the Spirit, and provoke him to withdraw ; and when he withdraws, these influences will be discontinued. If you detain the truth in unrighteousness, if you confine it to your minds, so as a the power thereof descends not upon your hearts and affections, comes not forth in your lives and actions, you do narexeiv, imprison the truth; and that is a great affront to the Spirit of truth. If when the Spirit of God calls you to take up the cross, to leave all to follow Christ contentedly and cheerfully in a low, reproached, afflicted condition ; or if, when he calls you up to a higher degree of self-denial, mortification, and holiness, you hang back, or turn aside, and refuse to follow his conduct, this grieves the Spirit of holiness. If you decline his institutions for other devices, shrink back from the work you are engaged to, when it grows hazardous; strain your consciences to secure your outward enjoyments, will not be influenced by him, further than is consistent with your ease, credit, safety, and worldly interest, you dishonour the Spirit of wisdom. This provokes the blessed Spirit to withdraw; and when the fire is gone, the heat will not long continue. If you refuse to continue under the influences of the Spirit in some things, it is righteous with him not to continue them upon you in others. If you fear the displeasure of man more than the grieving of him, if you lean more to the hopes of this life, than his supports, and consult with flesh and blood, instead of being directed by the wisdom which is from above, it will be no wonder if he give you over to your own conduct, and intermitting his own, leave you under the influences of your carnal fears and worldly hopes.

7. Be frequent in the use of ordinances; good impressions do most usually wear off in the intervals of holy duties, and the longer these are, the more danger there is; therefore make these interims as short as may be by quick returns to the ordinances. It is observed, that places

• that.

under the line are not so hot as some climates at a further distance from it; and this reason is given for it, [that] those under the equinoctial, though they have the sun more vertical, and the beams, falling perpendicularly, cause a more intense heat*; yet the nights being of equal length with the days, the coolness of those long nights doth more allay the heat than where the nights are shorter. Long intermissions of holy duties are like long nights, you may find them by experience to be great coolers ; if you live under more powerful ordinances than some others, yet if they be more frequent and diligent in the use of what they have, they are like[ly] to have more spiritual warmth than you, and that with less allay and intermission. Besides, when the advantage you have got by one ordinance is declining and wearing off, the use of the same, or of some other, may revive and recover it, if you take it speedily before it be too far gone. Further, a slight impression, such as is not like[ly] to last long, may be re-enforced for a longer continuance, if you lay yourselves quickly under the instrument that first made it. When Elijah had once tasted of the provision the Lord made for him in the wilderness, he laid him down, saith the text, as having enough ; but the angel calls him to it again ; for, saith he, " the journey is too great for thee," 1 Kings xix. 6, 7. Hereupon he arose once more, and did eat and drink, and " went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights," ver. 8. Once tasting will not serve your turn, a little will not be enough, so long a journey as yours is will spend much ; nothing but a frequent, an often repeated use of the ordinances will furnish you with such strength as will last you many days.

8. Finally, Look up to God for the continuance of this influence; pray, and pray in faith. Seek him and depend on him for it; he will be found of those that seek him, Matt. vii. 7. You have his promise for it, and dependence on him obligeth him too ; " the expectation of the poor shall not perish," Psalm ix. 18: it is not for his honour to fail those whom he hath encouraged to rely on him; an ingenuous man will not do it, much less the faithful God. This course David takes in the text: he prays and encourageth his faith while he is praying by that interest which the faithful have in the Lord by virtue of the covenant, " O Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, our fathers, keep this for ever," (fee. Yea the Lord himself leads us to this, Deut. v. 24, 27, 29. The people were much affected, in that they had heard the Lord's voice, ver. 24, this brought them up to a noble resolution, ver. 27, " Speak thou unto us, all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee ; and we will hear it and do it." Hereupon the Lord thus expresseth himself, ver. 29, " O that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear me and keep my commandments always," &c. What greater encouragement can we have to desire this of God, than that he expresseth

himself desirous we should have it? Faith is the main strength of prayer, and the great supports of faith are these two, that he is able, and that he is willing. These are to faith like the two pillars of the temple, 1 Kings vii. 21, and the names of them (there expressed) are very apposite. " He set up the right pillar, and called the name thereof Jachin, i. e. He will establish, he is willing, and he set up the last pillar, and called the name thereof Boaz, i. e. In him is strength, he is able." Now faith hath both these pillars to support it in this business. That the Lord is able to continue his influences, you will not question, I hope. " He is able to do exceeding abundantly above all we ask or think, according to the power which worketh in us," Eph. iii. 20. And that he is willing, he puts it out of question, when he useth such an expression, as amongst men signifies a passionate desire. " O that there were such a heart izi them," &c. Now (saith the philosopher) eav tls 6e\rj Kai Svprjrai, &c. that which one is both able and willing to do, shall be done. Both reason and faith see ground enough to conclude this. Pray then, and pray believing, for as the Lord is able to do it, so it is according to his will; and whatsoever you ask according to his will, believing, it shall be done, Matt. xxi. 22.

Thus much for what you are to practise: there are some things to be avoided, if you would have the influence of the ordinances to be lasting. These we shall comprise in four particulars.

First, Take heed you perform not holy duties negligently. A heartless, formal, negligent attendance on the ordinances, will be so far from procuring a durable blessing, that it will fix a curse upon you, Jer. xlviii. 10, " Cursed be he that doth the work of the Lord negligently ;" see Mai. i. 8, 14. If you invert the apostle's advice, 1 Cor. vii. 29, and deal with the things of God, as you should do with those of the world; if you pray as though you prayed not, and hear as though you heard not, and use the ordinances as though you did not use them: they will be no otherwise effectual, than if there were no efficacy in them, it will continue on you as though it continued not; like that of the sun on a winter day, which thaws the earth a little at noon, but so as it is harder frozen up the next night. Therefore let your hearts be engaged in every holy duty, Jer. xxx. 21, " Who is this that engaged his heart to approach unto me ?" You must hear as for life, Deut. xxxii. 46, 47, " Set your hearts unto all the words which I testify among you this day, &c. For it is not a vain thing for you, because it is your life," &c.: you must wrestle in prayer, your hearts in this duty should be as it were in a conflict, in an agony, awaycovio-ao-dai, is the apostle's word, Rom. xv. 13, " Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me." Your prayers should be such as

the other apostle describes, James v. 16, " The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." The word rendered effectual fervent, is cvepyovfievr). Now evepyovfievos is one possessed with a spirit, and acted [upon] by it. If the word here used look that way, then suitable to the matter to which it is applied, it imports a possession in a good sense. And deijcns ivepyovpevr) will be a prayer full of the Holy Ghost, wherein that blessed Spirit is operative, exerting its force and "energy." Such a prayer as shows the soul to be possessed of the Holy Spirit and acted [upon] by it, so as all the powers of that soul are set a work, and put upon a motion towards God effectually ; such a prayer avails much, procures great advantages, and [those] of long continuance.

Generally, in all holy ordinances your souls should stretch out themselves to reach the Lord, they should spring up to him in acts of love and desire, and clasp about him with delight and complacence, and lay hold on him with a humble and filial confidence, and stir up themselves to lay hold on him. We do all fade as a leaf, saith the church, Isaiah lxiv. 6, (both their persons and their righteousness did so;) and the reason thereof follows, ver. 7, " There is none that stirreth up himself to take hold on thee."

Secondly, Beware of the world, meddle not with it more than needs must; and when it is needful, engage not therein but with fear, caution, and vigilance. Carry yourselves amongst worldly objects and employments as though you were among cheats and thieves; they have the art to pick your hearts slily, and to rob them of that which is more precious than gold, when you little think of it.

Let not your minds and hearts plunge themselves in the world : nothing sooner, nothing oftener, extinguisheth Divine influences than this puddle. The cares, and delights, and employments of the world, when they are immoderate or unseasonable, " they choke the word," Matt. xiii. 22; they stifle the issue of holy ordinances, so as it becomes like the untimely birth of a woman.

When your hearts are warmed in holy duties, you should be as cautious and wary how you venture into the world, as you are of going into the frosty air, when you are all in a sweat. What is kindled by the word or prayer, &c, how quickly is it puffed out by the world, when you rush into it unwarily ! it requires as much care to keep it in, as to keep a candle in, when you would carry it through the open air in a rainy, blustering night. The farther you are above the world the longer you may retain any spiritual impressions. Geographers write of some mountains whose tops are above the middle region of the air ; and there, lines and figures being draAvn in the dust, have been found (say they) in the same form and order, untouched, unde-faced a long time alter : and the reason is, because they are above

those winds, and showers, and storms which soon wear out and efface any such draughts in this lower region. The lower your minds and hearts and conversations are, the more in the hurry of this boisterous world, the less will anything that is heavenly and spiritual abide upon them. Let the soul be brought into never so good order, by the help of holy duties ; yet a little unwary engaging in earthly business, will ruffle, disturb, and quite discompose it.

When your souls are, by the power of the ordinances, set on motion towards Christ and heaven ; if you would hold on in a continued course, you must beware of worldliness, and keep free, as much as may be, from earthly incumbrances and entanglements; " Let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us," Heb. xii. 1. Let us persevere and hold out in that gracious and heavenly course, which the Gospel hath put us on : but that this may be done, one great impediment must be removed; " the sin that doth so easily beset us," must be shaken off. Now that sin, as some expositors conceive, is worldliness, and it is probable, for Keplo-rao-is being a circumstance, dpaprla evirepia-Taros, if we render it literally, is the sin that hath goodly circumstances. And no sin sets off itself with more goodly circumstances than worldliness ; no sin hath more specious pleas and pretences to excuse, vindicate, and justify itself; no sin hath more fig-leaves to cover its nakedness, and to shroiid it from discovery and conviction, than worldliness. This must be shaken off, it is the great defacer of heavenly impressions, the chief interrupter of holy motions : if you would hold on, when the impetus which is impressed on you by any ordinance hath set you agoing, beware of the world, beware of worldliness.

Thirdly, Take heed of any inordinancy in affection, inclination, or design ; such inordinances give the heart a strong bias, holy duties check it but a little, give it but, as it were, a small rub ; when this is once passed over, it will hold on in that course to which it is most swayed. The ministry of John Baptist had some influence upon Herod, " he heard John gladly, and did many things," Mark vi. 20; but sensuality being predominant, those better inclinations were quite overpowered. The word had some effect upon Simon Magus, " he believed," Acts viii. 13, and being taken for a believer, was baptized, and afterwards " continued with Philip," &c.; but a strong affectation of vain-glory suppressed those better motions, and the worst got uppermost. Take heed of any inordinancy as to lawful things, your relations, studies, ordinary callings, &c.; this will not suffer you to come so often to holy duties, to stay so long in them, or to be so intent upon them, as is requisite for the deep impressing of their efficacy ; and after they are done, this will hurry your soids from under those thoughts

and exercises, which should fix and settle their virtue and influence upon your minds and hearts. Natural bodies follow the tendency of that element which is predominant in them; a stone moves downwards, it would be at the centre; that which stops it, offers it violence, and, when the force is removed, down it falls freely. Just thus doth the heart follow the tendency of these inordinances, if it meet with a stop in an ordinance, that is but an ungrateful violence to it; it will struggle to break through it, will be restless till the force be removed, till the power of the ordinance be shaken off, which checks an inclination natural and acceptable to it, and what hopes [are there] in this case, that the efficacy of any holy duty will long continue ?

Fourthly, Rest not in the best performance of any duty, nor in any assistances you find therein, though they be special and more than ordinary. If this satisfy and exalt you, you will be apt to grow secure and careless, not looking to the improvement of ordinances when once they are over, and that is the way to lose all. We are apt to take the most dangerous colds, when we are in the greatest heats. And it is observed that some professors have had the foulest falls, after they have been most elevated in holy employments. The resting upon the opus operatum, the mere outward performance of a duty, when the heart is not engaged therein, is an open pit, which none fall into save those that are blind ; but the resting upon the opus operantis, a duty affectionately performed, is a more secret, and so a more dangerous snare. He that makes account he hath done enough, because he hath done well, may be apt to think he is not obliged to look further after it: and so the continued influence of the duty upon his heart and life, which is indeed the principal advantage of it, may be neglected, and consequently lost for want of looking to.

To conclude, make not the ordinances your end, but use them as the means to attain it. They are not enjoined us for themselves, but in order to something more desirable, their end is something further than their use. Take heed you place not all your religion in hearing, praying, communicating, &c, neither count yourselves religious enough, because you are much and often in these duties. This is to make them your end, and then you will rest therein, without proceeding further (for the motion of the agent is terminated in his end:) and so you will stay short of that for which they were principally intended, namely, the keeping of your hearts and minds in a settled posture of holiness and righteousness; and neglect that by which this main end of the ordinances is only to be attained, namely, the continuing of their influence upon you.

So much for the case propounded, which I have endeavoured to resolve (as the nature of it requires) practically: and therefore as there

is no time for, so there will be less need of application. Bnt that I may not dismiss you without something of this nature, having laid your duty before you in the observation, and showed you how it may be performed in satisfying the case, let me iioav press you to the performance of it by one consideration, which will have the force of a motive, where there is any sense of soul-concernments.

If the efficacy of the ordinances abide not on you, you cannot be fruitful under them, at least you cannot " bring forth fruit unto perfection," (as the expression is, Luke viii. 14:) you may bring forth buds, or leaves, or blossoms, &c, but if their influence continue not, that which you bring forth will never come to ripeness and perfection: it will be crude and sour at best, and sour grapes are as bad as no fruit-in the Lord's account ; and unfruitfulness will provoke the Lord to deprive you of the Gospel and ordinances, Isaiah v. 2, 5, 6. " He looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. . . . And now go to, I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard, I will take away the hedge thereof, ... I will lay it waste, that it shall not be pruned nor digged. ... I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it." The meaning of this parable (so far as concerns our purpose) is expressed by another threatening, denounced for the same sin, Matt. xxi. 43, " The kingdom of God (i.e. the Gospel of the kingdom) shall be taken from you, and given to a people bringing forth the fruits thereof." And Christ's threatening of Ephesus amounts to as much, Rev. ii. 4, 5, " Nevertheless I have something against thee, because thou hast left thy first love." The first impressions of the Gospel were worn off and vanished. And what follows? " I will come against thee quickly, and remove thy candlestick out of its place, unless thou repent." So that this sin will pull up your hedge, and break down your wall, level all your securities; and so lay you open to the boar of the wood, and the wild beasts of the field : such as instead of digging and pruning you, will devour and lay you waste, and Sharon will become a desert. This sin will provoke Christ to let the stars fall out of his right hand: so as you will be left to perish for want of vision. This sin will provoke the Lord to take the Gospel of the kingdom from you; and leave you under the hellish influences of the prince of darkness. This sin will overturn your candlesticks, and extinguish your lights, and leave you nothing but the snuffs. This sin will deliver your strength into captivity, and your glory into the enemy's hand. This sin will smite the shepherds and scatter the flocks, and lay the heritage of God desolate. This sin will cause your sun to set at noon, and turn the day of your gracious visitation, into a sad and dismal night. This sin will turn the place which hath been a valley of vision, into a seat of darkness and a " valley of the shadow of death."

If then you would avoid a judgment, which strikes not only at your estates and lives, but at your souls: if you would prevent that dreadful stroke, which may not only reach yourselves, but your posterity, your children and children's children; if you would not have them and yourselves, and thousands and millions with you, bereaved of the Gospel, and the means of grace and life; take all care and pains that the influences of the ordinances do not slide from you, that they be not as water spilt upon the ground. Be faithful and diligent in the use of the fore-mentioned directions, and all other means which may be effectual to fix them. And if hereby your hearts are wrought up to such a resolution, " the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, keep this for ever in the imagination of the thoughts of your hearts."

THE

DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH."

Romans iii. 24.

" BEING JUSTIFIED FREELY BY HIS GRACE THROUGH THE REDEMPTION THAT IS

IN CHRIST JESUS."

The apostle, in these words and the following, gives an exact account of the doctrine of justification, dictated to him by the Spirit of truth. And this will be the best ground we can proceed on, to discover the errors by which it is corrupted. That is our present business, to which I hasten ; only first opening the words by a brief touch upon them.

Being justified. —To be justified, is to be freely accepted of God as righteous, so as to have pardon and title to life upon the account of Christ's righteousness. We cannot be accepted as righteous, till we be acquitted from guilt. The apostle describes justification by remission of sins. (Rom. iv. 5, 6.) And being accepted as righteous, we are accepted to life : the apostle calls it "justification of fife." (Rom. v. 17, 18, 21.) This is upon the account of Christ's righteousness. We cannot be justified upon our own account; for so we are condemned, and cannot but be so : nor upon other account but Christ and his righteousness ; for there is no justification without righteousness, and none sufficient but that of

■ The fourth course of " Morning Exercises " in the order of time, though placed last in Mr. Nichols'uniform edition, is entitled, " The Morning Exercise against Popery: or, the Principal Errors of the Church of Rome detected and confuted, in a Morning Lecture preached lately in Southwark, hy several Ministers of the Gospel in or near London, mdclxxv." This course originated with Mr. Nathaniel Vincent, one of the ejected ministers, 1662, who had a large congregation at a meeting-house near the Maese, or Maze, in the parish of St. Olave, Southwark, where the discourses were delivered. Mr. Vincent edited the volume, and in his address " To the Reader," he says, " I exceedingly rejoice that my pulpit was so much honoured by my fathers and brethren when they preached in it, and that ever such a project against popery came into my mind." This discourse on Justification, by Mr. Clarkson, is the twelfth in the numerical order, but is the fifteenth in the logical arrangement, as is shown by Mr. Nichols from the " Table of Theses."— Morning Exercises, vol. v. pp. 543—546.

Christ; which the apostle includes in " the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."

Freely by his grace. —The Lord justifies by his grace, and this acts freely. That which moves him is called, in Titus iii. 4, xpw r ° ri l s Kal cj)i\av8pd)7na, " kindness and love ;" which in verse 7 is " grace :" " That being justified," rrj ine'ivov x°-P lTL i " by hi s grace." So justification is to xapto-fia, " the free gift;" (Rom. v. 16 ;) h 8a>pea ev x ci P iT h " the gift by grace." (verse 15.) This grace, as it is free mercy, so it acts like itself, dapeav, " freely ;" (the word used in Matt. x. 8 : Ampeav eXa/3ere, " Freely ye have received" it;) he gives it freely to those who have no merit to deserve it: there is none in us ; what there was, was in Christ. It is

Through the redemption. —Redemption is deliverance by a price, or valuable consideration. This price was the blood of Christ, (Rom. iii. 25 ; v. 9 ; Eph. i. 6, 7,) his death, (Rom. viii. 33, 34,) his obedience, (Rom. v. 19,) his righteousness, (verse 18.)

We may view the text distinctly in three parts :—

I. Believers are "justified."

II. " Freely by his grace."

III. " Through the redemption that is in Christy

Against each of these the Papists have advanced several errors of pernicious consequence, and thereby dangerously corrupted the whole doctrine of justification.

I. That a sinner may be saved, the Scriptures declare that he must be both justified and sanctified : the Romanists, as if one of those were but reqvrisite, call that "justification," which in Scripture is " sanctifica-' tion;" and that which in Scripture is "justification," they admit not, as distinct from inherent righteousness.

The apostle Paid, who most insists upon the doctrine of justification, delivers these two as distinct things. (1 Cor. vi. 11, and elsewhere.) He ascribes justification commonly to the blood of Christ ; (as in the text, and Rom. v. 8, 9 ;) sanctification to the Spirit of Christ. (Titus iii. 5.)

However, the Papists' promiscuous use of the words might be tolerated, if they did not confound the things, and contend that we are formally justified by that which is the form and essence of sanctification, namely, inherent righteousness. The danger is that which the apostle would have the Jews avoid, when he expresseth his hearty desire that they might be saved : " For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." (Rom. x. 3.) The Papists trust to their own righteousness for acceptance and life, and will be justified in the sight of God by that which indeed is imperfect and culpable, and, so, liable to be condemned ; and being convinced that they

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 473

cannot be justified by an imperfect righteousness, therefore they will have their inherent righteousness to be perfect: not so perfect as it will be in heaven ; a but so as to be free from sin, and to answer the demands of the law, 6 since they know, otherwise, it would not justify them. And this fancy of a sinless perfection runs them into many absurd and pernicious conceits.

First. For they are hereby obliged to maintain, that no corruption in their natures after baptism, no aversion from God, no inclination to evil, though habitual and fixed, has anything of sin in it; no, nor any vicious habits acquired by frequent acts of sin : c all is sinless that is in the soul when grace or charity is once therein. And so there is no need of mortification, no possibility of it ; for there is nothing of sin in them to be mortified, no habit or disposition, natural or accessary, upon which the charge of sin can be truly fixed. And as they leave no need of, no place for mortification, so after they have discarded the Scripture justification, to make way for a sanctification to justify them, they deal no better with that neither ; whether it be taken for the first rise of holiness, which is properly regeneration ; or for the growth and increase of it, which is the sanctification that the Scripture calls for commonly under this notion ;—they will have it to be a second justification. As for the first sanctification, by their principles, it excludes all sin, and is, so far, perfect, or nothing ; and so indeed is a mere chimera, such a thing as God never gave, never promised, as no mere man on earth ever had. (1 John i. 8.) Yet this and nothing else must justify them, and make them worthy of eternal life : and thus they will be justified and saved by a mere fancy, or nothing.

As for growth and increase in holiness, which is the sanctification that the Scripture makes so necessary, and calls for with so much importunity, this they make superfluous and unnecessary. No man needs design or endeavour it; for what needs he look after more of that which he hath already in perfection ? They have it in such perfection, as [that]

■ Quod dieebamus, justitiam et charitatem in hac vita non esse perfectam, comparatione dun-taxat ad illam patriae reputandum est. Dominicus a Soto De Nat. et Grat. lib. iii. cap. iv. p. 134.

4 The council of Trent calls it justitiam candidam et immaculatam, [" white and spotless justice."] Sess. v. cap. Ixvii. In the Trent catechism it is divina qualitas in anima inhaerens, qua? animarum vestrarum omnes maculas delet, " A divine quality, inherent in the soul, which takes away all stains and spots from your souls." Ea (charitas) siquidem est verissima, plenissima, perfectissima justitia, " Since it (grace) is a most true, full, and perfect righteousness." Bellar-minus De Justif. lib. ii. cap. xvi. p. 806.

' Habitus justitiae contrarius est habitui injustitiae ; quia non est peccatum, sed vitium, ex malis actibus contracture; quale etiam in justificatis reperiri potest, " A habit contrary to righteousness is a habit of unrighteousness : for it is not a sin, but a vice, contracted from evil acts ; such as may be found even in justified persons." Ibid. p. 805. Dispositio vel habitus acquisitus vitium est non peccatum, " A disposition or acquired habit is a vice, not a sin." De Amiss. Grat. lib. v. cap. xix. p. 337. Omnes siquidem leges praecipiunt vel prohibent actus, non habitus, " Since all laws command or prohibit acts, not habits." Melchior Canus De Pcenit. p. 870.

there is no culpable defect in it. a It is no sin to have no more ; (else it would not be sufficient to their justification ;) and what necessity is there to labour for that which it is no sin to want? Their doctrine of justification by a righteousness of their own inculpably perfect, obliges them to hold, that what grace they receive at first, though in the very lowest degree, is all that God commands and makes necessary. If he commanded more, the want of more would be culpable. So that every degree of holiness or charity above the least of all, is only sub consilio, " mere matter of counsel ;" 6 which they may neglect without contracting so much as the guilt of a venial fault. 0

Thus all progress in holiness is hereby superseded : after the first step they sin not, though they never make another. And all the degrees of holiness above the lowest are unnecessary : they may be without all of them, safely and inculpably. In short: if the want of all other degrees but the least of all, be a sin ; if the lowest degree of all be not righteousness in perfection ; by their principles, they are not justified, and cannot be saved. And so the main stress of their salvation lies upon a gross and palpable delusion, that such a righteousness is perfect as is furthest of all from perfection, and in a degree next to nothing.

Secondly. They seem to include remission of sins in justification ; but it is not that pardon which the Gospel offers, but another thing under the disguise of the same word ; and particularly, such as lies cross to every part of the text. Their pardon is not an act of God, absolving a guilty person upon the account of satisfaction given ; but an act or consequent of infused grace or charity within us, abolishing sin, and not otherwise taking away the guilt but by taking away the being of it. rf

The best account I can give of it, in brief, is this, collected out of their chief authors. They observe in siu the fault and the guilt: and the guilt, either as it is the desert of sin, and the offender worthy of punishment ; or as it is an obligation to punishment, and the sinner bound to suffer it. The former is, with them, reatus culpce; the latter,

« Nulla euim est charitas simpliciter imperfecta: sufficit autem quilibet gradus charitatis, ut quis servet verbum, id est, prascepta, Domini, " For no grace is simply imperfect: but any degree of grace is sufficient for any one, in order to bis keeping tbe word, tbat is, tbe precepts, of tbe Lord." Bellarminus De Purgat. lib. xxii. cap. iii. p. 13S1.

4 Si non pecco (ex sententia S. Thomce) si amem Deum nisi uno gradu amoris, certe non teneor in rigore amplius amare: implicat enim contradictionem, qudd non peccem, non faciendo quod facere teneor : erg6, si addairi alterum gradum amoris, amo plus quam teneor, atque eo modo facio actum supererogationis et consilii. Idem De Monacb. lib. ii. cap. xiii. p. 1102.

c Nee ullae (leges) divinae consultorine etiam ad veniale obligent. Navarri Manuale, cap. xxiii. n. xlix. p. "iH4; et cap. xxi. n. xliii. ; Sylvestri Summa, in verb. Inobedientia, sect. ii.

d Charitas culpam delet per actum suum proprium: poenam autem tollit per opera satisfactoria qua ipsa charitas imperat, " Grace destroys the guilt by its own proper act: but it removes the punishment by the works of satisfaction which grace itself commands." Bellarminus De Purgat. lib. ii. cap. iii. p. 1381.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 475

reatus pcence f and all this is taken away by charity, or infused grace. The fault in sin is the aversion, or the soul's turning away from God : but charity, or inherent grace, brings it back again, and joins it to him ; and thereby the fault is remitted.* Now the fault being gone by virtue of inherent grace, the guilt must vanish too : for where there is no fault, there is no desert of punishment; and where there is no desert of it, there can be no obligation to it. So that, infused grace having left sin no being, by necessary consequence the guilt is taken away together with it. c Accordingly Bellarmine shows particularly how this charity takes away all that belongs to sin,—the aversion from God, the stain of sin, the desert of punishment, and the obligation to it. And the sum of all is this : The formal effect of habitual charity is the abolishing of sin : d and, with him and others, remission of sins, and infusion of grace, are but one and the same motion; whereof these are the two terms; as it is in the diffusion of light, and the dispelling of darkness/

So that this doctrine leaves sinners no hope of pardon in this life, or for ever: for hereby sin is not pardoned, till by inherent charity it be quite expelled, which is not in this life; or till the sinner be rendered not worthy of punishment, merely by virtue of such charity, which will never be.

However, those who understand what pardon is, by the light of Scripture, will soon discover that this is not the gospel-pardon. To go no farther than the text, it clashes, as I said, with every part of it. For, First, by their account, pardon is by a physical or super-physical act of charity within us ; whereas the first word in the text, 8iKaiovfj.evoi, shows that pardon in justification is a judicial act of God toward us. The perpetual use of the word in Scripture assures us of this : it implies a judicial proceeding ; and is set opposite to condemning or accusing. For a judge to acquit one at the bar, accused in order to condemnation, is not to qualify him ; (that would be to prevent misdemeanours for the future ;) but to discharge him from what he is accused of, as past: nor can they give any instances in Scripture of such use of the word as will bear their

« Reatus culpae, qui est dignitas odii, indignitas gratiae, et meritum pcenae : reatus pcenae;—id est, ordinatio sive obligatio ad luendam poenam. Idem De Amiss. Grat. lib. v. cap. xix. p. 337.

4 Quando per gratiam remittitur culpa, tollitur aversio animae a Deo, in quantum per gratiam anima Deo conjungitur. Aquinas, Tertia, Quaest. lxxxv. art. iv. Ideo ex hoc dicitur culpa mor-talis remitti, quod per gratiam tollitur aversio mentis a Deo. Idem, ad Primam, artic. iv. Quaest. lxxxv.

c Per consequens simul tollitur reatus pcenae. Idem, ibid. Non possunt non tolli, si donum illud praecesserit, says Bellarmine of the guilt and offence of sin, " They cannot be otherwise than taken away, if that gift has preceded." De Justific. lib. xii. cap. xvi. p. K0(>.

d Habtmus primum effect urn formalere jusfitise, id est, charitatis habitualis, divinitils infusae esse, de medio tollere ac dclere peccatum. Idem, ibid.

• Idem, ibid. lib. ii. cap. ii. p. 7(.(i; and Soto (after Aquinas) De Nat. et Grat. lib. ii. cap. xviii. p. 1IU.

notion. Indeed, it is against the usage of the world and common sense, that a man should be said to pardon one, by enduing him with good qualities. Secondly. The pardon in justification is free ; a gift of undeserved grace, as the next words express it. But their pardon is not free, neither in itself, nor in that which they make the rise of it,—inherent charity. They deface the freeness of it in both, by a conceit of their own merit; and so transform it into another thing than the pardon of the Gospel is ; which shall be made apparent when we come to the second part of the text. Thirdly. The gospel-pardon is entirely through the redemption that is in Christ, as the next words represent it ; but their pardon excludes this redemption, or leaves it but a minute and remote influence into" it, if any at all.

The Lord, by Christ's undertaking, is moved to show mercy to sinners : he shows it by infusing charity into their hearts. This takes aAvay the fault or being of sin ; and, that being gone, the desert of punishment vanisheth, and, by consequence, the obligation to it. So we must pass several stages before we can discover what the redemption of Christ hath to do in the pardon of a sinner ; and when we have gone so far, may be at a loss too, as they order the matter. But that will better be showed in the last proposal.

Moreover, though they will have their pardon do more than mere remission can do, yet they make it fall short of that which is most proper for pardon to do. It quite dissolves not the obligation to punishment ; but leaves the sinner, when he is said to be pardoned, to suffer, as if he were condemned. He must, for all his pardon, be damned to a temporary hell; (for such is their purgatory ;) and there he must be punished in the severest manner and measure: with the greatest suffering of all, as- to loss, —the want of the vision and fruition of God ; and the most exquisite tortures, as to sense, 6 —such as are equivalent to the torments of hell : c and all this, it may be, for a hundred or a thousand years, they know not how long. All the pardoning mercies of God, and

" upon.

4 Poena danini est maxima poenarum. Oinnis qui in puigatorio (legit, cruciatur saltern lute poena damni, qu,x> est omnium maxima, " The punishment of loss is the greatest of all punishments. Every one who dwells in purgatory is tormented at least with this punishment of loss, which is the greatest of all." Aquinas in Quartum, Dist. xx. xli. art. ii. Si ibi est verus ignis, erit omnino acer-rimus; cum ad hoc solum sit institutus, ut sitinstrumentum justitiae Divinae: sinon sit ignis verus, erit aliquid horribilius, quale Deus parare potuit, qui potentiam suam in hoc ostenderevoluit, "If there be in purgatory a real fire, it will assuredly be most fierce and sharp ; since it was ordained solely to the end that it might be an instrument of the Divine justice: if there be not a real fire, there will be some punishment yet more horrible ; such as God can prepare, who wills in this to show his power." Vide Bellarminum De Purgat. lib. ii. cap. xiv. p. 1400.

c Nam, ut recte explicat cardinalis Cajetanus, poena ilia qua; luenda restat post culpae remissio-nem est ilia ipsa poena sensus quam in gehenna pati debuisset peccator, remota solum aeternitate, " For, as cardinal Cajetan rightly expounds it, that punishment which remains to be endured alter the remission of guilt, is the very same punishment of sense which the sinner ought to have suffered in hell, eternity alone being excluded from the account." Idem De Poenit.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 477

the redemption of Christ, cannot secure him from this." Surely this pardon looks nothing so like remission as condemnation.

Thirdly. What we said last, respects those sins which they call " mortal ;" but there is with them another sort of sins which go under the notion of " venials," and which in number exceed the other vastly and incomparably. And these sins, by their doctrine, are not pardoned, or need no pardon ; and so justification, the free grace of God, and the redemption of Christ, are excluded hereby, as needless, and unconcerned in them.

The pardon in justification frees the sinner from eternal punishment; but they teach, that these sins (all of them together) deserve not eternal punishment : God cannot justly inflict it for them ; it is not due to them. If the guilt of all the sins in the world of this sort were charged upon one man, or if there were no covenant or promise of God for pardon, says their great cardinal, (that is, if there were no Gospel, no Christ,) yet a sinner could not be punished for them eternally :* so that there is no place for, no need of, the pardon of the Gospel as to these sins. Then for the temporal punishment of them, the sinner either must or may suffer it himself, and so satisfy for it: if he may satisfy for it, there is no need of pardon ; if he do satisfy for it, there is no place for pardon. He that suffers what punishment the law will have inflicted for his offence, neither is nor can be said to be pardoned. 0 So that plainly, by their doctrine, venial sins have not, or need not, pardon of any sort, either in respect of eternal or temporal punishment.

And yet these venial sins, which need no pardon, are many of them, for their quality, great and heinous ; for their number, far the greatest of all.

As to their quality, their casuists, who are dictators in this business, make what sins they list to be venial. Whereas, by their common reckoning, there are seven mortal sins ; even divers of these, by their handling, are shrunk into small faults. They make covetousness and

" The pope (surely his holiness has no mercy left him) can do it when he list: Si quaeratur utrilm possit spoliare purgatorium pro libito suo, dico quod non voluntate sua precise, sed mediante illo infmito thesauro, "If it be asked whether the pope can despoil purgatory at his pleasure, I answer that he cannot do so by his own will precisely, but by means of that infinite treasury." Sylvestri Summa, in verb. Papa, Quaest. vi. But he is wise, however; and considers, [that] if he should spoil purgatory, he -would spoil something else, which is more regarded at Rome than another world.

4 Negamus posse Deum juste punire peccatum quodlibet, etiam veniale, poena omnium gravis-sima, qua? est mors seterna. Bellarminus De Amiss. Grat. lib. i. cap. xiv. p. 92. Etiamsi omnia peccata venialia simul colligerentur in unum, nunquam efficerent id quod facit unum lethale. Idem, ibid. cap. xiii. p. 91. Etiamsi nullum esset pactum Dei nobiscum de remissione poena-adhuc, tamen perspicuum esset, peccatum veniale ex sua natura non inducere reatum poena: sempiternal. Idem, ibid. cap. x. iv. p. 95.

• Non enim remittitur quod totaliter punitur. Bellarminus De Purgat. lib. i. cap. vii. p. 1359.

prodigality too," ambition, 4 vain-glory, c gluttony , d and drunkenness,* (if it do but half brutify a man,) the neglect of the public worship of God/ of all worship indeed which can be truly called so, and the neglect of charity and mercy to men,^ except in such cases which rarely or never fall out,—also common swearing,* great irreverence to the Divine Majesty, 1 ' abhorring of divine things , k yea, divers sorts of blasphemy' and perjury," 2 murder," with others of like nature,—to be but venial faults. They assign several ways wherein the highest impieties against God, and greatest outrages to men, may pass under this gentle notion, and so need no pardon. This might be clearly showed out of the writings of the leading men amongst them, of several orders, and such as have the chief conduct of their consciences, though the Jesuits were left out; but it requires a large discourse, and I must not here digress a little.

And as these sort of sins are great otherwise, so that they are the greatest of all for number, is no question. Their church enjoins but confession once a year ; and presumes that any wicked person may give an account, in a little while, to his confessor of the mortal sins he commits in a whole year ; but of venial sins no account can be given, being so numerous, that they are beyond remembrance or notice. So that by their doctrine there are very few sins, in comparison, that need pardon ; and so, few that need either the free grace of God, or the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. These corruptions are dangerous and evidently damnable. I have insisted the longer thereon, because in this point, about pardon, the Romanists are conceived to come nearer the truth and us than I fear they do indeed.

II. Proceed we now to the second part of the text, " Freely by his grace." When the Lord justifies a sinner, he does it most freely : it is an act of mere grace ; it is no way due to us before he vouchsafe it. He owes it not, but gives it, when he is no way pre-engaged by any desert in us : merit in us is utterly inconsistent with this gracious act. These two are opposite in their nature ; and the apostle plainly expresses the opposition in Rom. xi. 6, and iv. 4. If it be due by virtue of any act or work of ours, it is debt; if it be debt, it is not grace, the grace of God

» Aquinas, Secunda Secundae, Quaest. cxviii. art. iv.; Navarri Enchir. cap. xxiii. n. xviii. 8 Cajetani Summa, in verb. Ambitio.

* Aquinas, ibid. Quaest. cxxxii. art. iii.

* Cajetanus, ibid, in verb. Gula, et Emunditia.

« Navarrus, ibid. cap. xiii. n. ii. ; et cap. xxi. n. i.

/ Cajetanus, ibid, in verb. Eleemosyna. t Idem, cap. xxiv. n. v.

* Lopez, Instruct. Cone. cap. xlii. p. 227 ; et Sylvestri Summa, in verb. Juramentum, ii. 48.

* Jacob de Graff, Decis. Aur. lib. ii. cap. Iii. n. x.

* Sylvester, ibid, in verb. Malitia, p. 170.

' Idem, ibid, in verb. Blasphemia, Quaest. iii. 4.

» Dominicus a Soto De Just, et Jur. lib. viii. Quaest. ii. art. iii. pp. 269, 270.

* Idem, ibid. lib. v. Quaest. i. art. viii.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 479

herein is no grace : " If by grace, then it is no more of works : otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace : otherwise work is no more work." " Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt." The apostle's discourse cannot be answered with reason, nor evaded with any conscience : a and yet the Papists will presumptuously crowd merits of all sorts into justification. And by this means, too, they corrupt this doctrine dangerously and intolerably. They do it against all evidence of Scripture ; they do it to the foul defacing of the glory of free grace, and the redemption of Christ; they do it with great hazard to their own souls. For if they will not be justified freely, if they will stay till they deserve it, they are likely to be condemned. Yet they will venture and stick not to ascribe all that they include in their several justifications to some sort of merit: —inherent grace, and pardon of sin, to congruous merit; title to glory, and increase of grace, (which they make a second justification,) to merit of condignity.

Inherent, which they call "justifying" grace, and count it (after the council of Trent 6 ) unanimously the formal cause of justification, by their doctrine, falls under merit. They mince it, indeed, calling it " merit of congruity ;" but it is big enough, how small soever they would have it seem, to bid defiance to the grace of God in the text.

There are some preparatory works which, they say, must go before justification, 0 (as, dogmatical faith, some sorrow for sin, fear, hope,&c.,) to which justifying grace is due in congruity, though not in justice ; and this dueness they express in the definition of " congruous merit." " It is," says Navarrus, (after Aquinas, and their common gloss,) " a good human act of one without the grace of God, to which spiritual or temporal reward is in some respect and congruity due. d Now if justifying grace be due on our account, before the Lord vouchsafe it, he gives it not freely, but only pays what he owes, and is before obliged by us to let us have ; and Bellarmine says, this merit is not founded on the promise of God, but in the worth and dignity of the work. e

This sort of merit is generally owned by the Romanists. Soto tells

• Nee esset gratia, si non daretur gratuita, sed debita redderetur, " Nor would it be grace, if it were not bestowed gratuitously, but were rendered as due." Augustini Epist. cv. Aquinas himself [says] : Manifestum est quod omne meritum repugnat gratiae, quia, ut apostolus, Rom. " It is clear that all merit is repugnant to grace, because, as the apostle says, Rom. xi.," &c. Prima Secunda;, Qutest. iv. art. lvi.

4 Sess. vi. cap. vii. c Vide Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. cap. vi.

d Est actus humanus bonus factus ab aliquo extra gratiam Dei existente, cui de quadam con-gruitate et secundum quid debetur aliqua merces spiritualis vel temporalis, ut sentit glossa. Enchirid. Praelud. vii. n. iii. p. 40.

• Quod objiciebatur, meritum de congruo non fundari in dignitate opens sed sola promissione Dei; respoiulemus, contrarium esse verum. And a little after: Nos existiniamus potius fundari meritum de congruo in aliqua dignitate operis, quam in promissione. De Justific. lib. i. cap. xxi. p. 753.

us, a it is asserted by Scotus, Durandus, Adrian, and, in a manner, all the school-doctors whom they call " Nominals ;" and this is one division of their schools. He says also,* that Aquinas, the leader of the other division, following the common opinion, affirms it likewise ; though he would have us think that he afterwards retracted it. But Bellarmine, not acknowledging any such retractation, together with Aquinas, reckons up to us by name the chief of the schoolmen as of this persuasion. 0

It is true, there is some difference among them about the name : some would not have it called " congruous merit;" but all, as Bel-larmine,** Vega, e and after him Sancta Clara/ tells us, agree in the thing. And it is the thing, not the word, that is so injurious to the grace of God, and wherein the corruption and the danger lie; and therein they conspire.

I need bring no particular testimonies to show, that by their doctrine pardon of sins falls under this sort of merit: for pardon and inherent grace are by them involved together, and made one and the same motion. And I have stayed the longer on that which is evidence for both, because some question, whether this congruous merit be commonly owned by their writers. I think it might as well be questioned whether the proper merit of condignity be their common doctrine; for there are some among them who dislike this, and scarcely more the other, so far as I can compute the numbers.

As for the other particulars, title to glory, included in the first, and increase of grace, which they call a second justification, the council of Trent has made it an article of their faith, that good works are truly meritorious of both ; and denounceth those accursed who deny it: and their writers unanimously since understand it to be merit of condignity, as Aquinas expressed it before.S' So that these things are due from God upon the account of their good works in strict justice, and not

« De Natura et Gratia, lib. ii. cap. iii. p. 65 ; et Medina, in Primam Secundae, Quasst. cix.

* Cilm S. Thomas, (Secunda Sent. Dist. xxvii. xxviii.) opinionem communem insequutus, affir-masset turn qu6d homo ex naturalibus posset se disponere ad gratiam, turn quod dispositio ilia esset meritum de congruo. Soto, ibid. p. 66.

e Magister Sententiarum, [" the Master of the Sentences,"] St. Thomas, Bonaventure, Scotus, Durandus, Gabriel, and others. De Poenitentia, lib. ii. cap. xii. p. 945. Sancta Clara tells us, it is certe communis et recepta sententia scholarum, " It is certainly the common and received opinion of the schools." De Natura et Grat. problem xxi. p. 125.

<* Quod attinet ad catholicos, quasstio videtur esse fere de solo nomine rneriti, &c. De Justif. lib. i. cap. xxi. p. 752.

« Recte advertit Vega de re, Non est inter doctorcs catholicos quaestio.

/ Itaque de nomine solum est quaastio, an ea debeant vocari meritum de congruo. Sancta Clara, ibid. p. 129.

g Quum Justus homo per opera sua bona, quatenus movente Deo facta sunt, vitam aeternam de condigno mereatur, ipsum etiam gratiae et charitatis augmentum mereri dicendum est, " Since a just man, by his own good works, so far as they have been done by divine impulse, procures eternal life through merit of condignity, it must also be said that he merits an increase of grace and charity." Prima Secundae, Quaest. cxiv. art. lxxxvi.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 481

alone in congruity. It is not my business to argue against their doctrine of merit; only let me suggest this which the text leads me to.

Their opinion of merit makes the special grace and mercy of God needless. For if a man by what he doeth can make heaven dne from God in point of justice, he needs not his mercy to save him ; so long as he is sure the Lord will not be unjust, he is not concerned to regard whether or not he be gracious and merciful. As in a like case, when a man's cause requires nothing but justice, if he be sure the judge will do him justice, there is no need at all to be beholden to him for his mercy. Thus grace and mercy being excluded as needless and superfluous, all obligements a to love and gratitude, to all ingenuous obedience and worship, are taken off, and all sense of religion likely to be razed out of the souls of men. I may forbear telling you that this is of dangerous tendency.

III. Come we to the third part of the text. The justification of a sinner is " through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ." That doctrine quite overthrows the justification of a sinner which removes from it this redemption : but so doth the Popish doctrine, and thereby tends to make Christ of none effect. For without that redemption, he is not, he cannot be, the Saviour of any man. Their errors here strike deep, and tend to undermine the foundation of Christianity. Let me give you an account hereof in respect of the satisfaction, the merit, and the application of this redemption.

1. The satisfaction of Christ is unnecessary, by their doctrine; there is no need of it for the justifying of a sinner; he may he pardoned and freed from eternal punishment without it. —For if the pardon ofsinbethe abolishing and utter extinguishing of it, as they teach, 6 and [if] it be by infused grace or charity that sin is thus abolished ; (as darkness by the approach of light, and one contrary by natural consequence at the presence of another ; which is their doctrine,^ if I understand it;) then there was no more requisite to free a sinner from guilt and liableness to eternal punishment, but only that Christ should purchase for him habitual grace. Now, to purchase this, his merit would serve, and there would be no need of satisfaction. d And there are those who seem to acknowledge the former, when they deny the latter.

« Obligations.

4 Bellarminus De Justif. lib. ii. cap. vii. p. 783, initio. Dicere Deurn peccata remittere, non tamen prorsiis tollere, hominis est vocem remissionis ignorantis. Soto De Nat. et Grat. lib. ii. cap. xix. p. 111. Omnin6 idem plane valet, peccata esse tecta, atque sublata esse et nulla prorsus relicta. Pererius in Rom. iv. Disput. iii. Admonemus (peccata) dimitti esse, non solum non im-putari, non solum non puniri; sed penitus etiam tolli, penitus celari. Maklonatus in Matt. vi. 12. p. 145.

c Quo fit ut gratia gratum faciens ex diametro opponitur peccato, atque arieo foimaiiter per modum contrarietatis expcllat ipsum ; ut author tst S.Thomas, Prima Secunds, Quest, cxiii. art. ii.; Soto, ibid. p. 100 ; Bellarminus, ibid. cap. ii. p. 766.

<* Aliquod mcritum est sine satisfactions- et e contraro, " 'I hire is fome mtrit without satisfaction, and on the contrary." Idem De Purgat. lib. i. cap. x. p. 1370.

Then as to the temporal punishment, they leave no place at all for Christ's satisfaction ; this is quite excluded here, though this punishment be no less in their account than the torments of hell, eternity excepted: the sinner must or may satisfy for himself; and therefore Christ did not satisfy. Otherwise, the Lord would take payment twice for one debt, and require double satisfaction for every sin, and punish it ultra demeritum, " more than it deserves," which would be cruelty ; yea, he would not be satisfied when he had satisfaction, which would be unreasonable. Nor is this my inference only ; they do as good as acknowledge it. For they grant that Christ did not satisfy for temporal punishment, but mediately, by procuring grace for sinners, that they might satisfy for themselves." And if he satisfied no otherwise, he satisfied not at all; no more than I can be said to travel a hundred miles, when I do not stir out of doors, because I help another to a horse, who performs such a journey.

Thus by their doctrine of justification and pardon, the redemption of Christ, as to satisfaction made thereby, is reduced in a manner to nothing. For venial sins, to which, they say, temporal punishment only is due, they cannot with any reason pretend that satisfaction by him is necessary. For mortal sins, (a small parcel of the infinite midtitude, venials considered,) habitual grace (which Christ might merit, though he did not satisfy) is sufficient to abolish fault and guilt, and so to procure remission as to eternal suffering.

Or if habitual grace were not sufficient for this, yet still they make the redemption of Christ insufficient, and so no satisfaction. For notwithstanding all that he hath done and suffered, the Lord is not appeased to those that believe ; he will punish, he will inflict the torment of hell, for a time at least; how long, none of them can tell; but, without question, they say, till his justice be satisfied, till that be done by themselves or others, which Christ alone can do ; and that will be long indeed, and not end but with eternity. So that it is plain by their principles, that the Lord is not yet satisfied by the redemption of Christ: it was not as much as justice required, it was not enough, and so could not be satisfaction. And therefore Bellarmine concludes, suitably enough to their principles, that, of the several opinions which are amongst them concerning Christ's satisfaction and man's, " this is the most probable,—that there is no actual satisfaction but one only, and this is ours." 6

• Satisfacit mediate pro poena etiam temporali, quatenus gratiam praebet per quam ipsi nos Domino satisfacimus. Bellarminus De Pcenitentia, lib. iv. cap. xv. p. ]07fi ; et De Purgat. lib. i. cap. x: Non qu6d immediate ipsa ejus satisl'actio toilet pcenam temporalem nobis debitam, sed qudd mediate earn toliat; quatenus, videlicet, ab ea gratiam babemus, sine qua nihil valeret nostra satisfactio. p. 1369.

'• Tertius tamen modus videtur prob.ibilior,— quod una tantum sit actualis satisfactio, et ea sit nostra. De Purgat. lib. i. cap. x. p. 1069.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 483

2. The merit of this redemption is also by their doctrine made unnecessary for the purchasing of eternal life, to which ice are aecepted in justification. —For they teach that men may (and must, if they will have it) merit it for themselves. Now there is no need of the merit of redemption, if men can and do merit heaven : for merit is the worth of what it is said to deserve ; it must be, by their computation, equal or proportionable in value to it.™ Now if Christ bring the worth of heaven, and we must bring the worth of it too, the Lord lets none have heaven till he have double the value of it, till he receive twice as much for it as it is worth. So that heaven, upon this account, will be a very hard bargain, however the Lord declares it to be a gift.

There is no avoiding this, but either by making the merit of Christ needless, or the merits of men. The Papists in this case choose rather to make the merit of redemption unnecessary. And indeed, when they think it advisable to speak out, tbey say expressly, that there is no need of the merit of Christ, that we may get eternal life. Thus Vasquez, one of their most eminent writers. " Seeing the merits of a just man," saith he, " do condignly merit eternal life, as an equal recompence and reward ; there is no need that any other condign merit, such as is the merit of Christ, should intervene, that eternal life may be had."* But how then must we understand them, when they tell us that Christ did merit eternal life for us ? They inform us by their doctrine of satisfaction,—as Christ satisfied for the temporal punishment due to sin mediately, by procuring grace to satisfy for it ourselves ; so he purchased life for us mediately, in that he was worthy to obtain grace for us, whereby we merit life ourselves. c But by this account he did not merit life for us at all, no more than he can be said to confess or repent of our sins, because he obtained grace for us to confess and repent thereof ourselves. This is but to own the merit of redemption as Pelagius owned the grace of God, when he said [that] it was grace for Him to form us with wills able to act sufficiently, and perform the office of grace, without it. d

• In opere bono ex gratia procedente sit quasdam proportio et aequaiitas ad praemium vitae asternae. Bellarminus De Justific. lib. v. cap. xvii. JEqualem valorem condignitatis babent. Vasquez.

4 Cum opera justi mereantur vitam aeternam tanquam aequalem mercedem et praemium, non opus est interventu alterius meriti condigni, quale est meritum Christi, ut eis reddatur vita aeterna. In Primam Secundae, Quajst. cxiv. Disput. ccxxii. cap. iii. n. xxx.

c Nunquam petimus a Deo per merita Cbristi ut nostris dignis operibus et meritoriis reddatur merces aeterna; vitae ; sed ut per Christum detur nobis gratia, qua possemus digne hanc mercedem promereri. Idem, ibid. They use this illustration :—A farm being given to a son, he may, by the commodities reaped out of that farm, buy anything that it shall please his father to set to sale. Dr. Bishop in Abbot " Of Merits," p. 640.

>' The Pelagians said, (as Augustine represents them,) Posse suflicere naturam humanam, quae condita est cum libero arbitrio; eamque esse Dti gratiam, quia sic conditi sumus, ut hoc voluntate possimus. De Gestis, contra Pelag. cap. xxxv. And Jerome : Ita Dei gratiam ponunt, lit non, per singula opera, ejus nitamur et regamur auxilio; sed ad liberum rcferunt arbitrium ; ut in eo Deo referenda; sint gratis, quinl Ules nos condiderit, qui nostro arbitrio possimus et eligere bona et

Besides, secondly, their principles do not allow them to say, that we have inherent grace by the merit of Christ. And that being with them the formal cause of justification, if it was not procured for us by his redemption, this is quite excluded from being interested in justifying us. And indeed all the interest of Christ's redemption in our justification, and salvation too, is reduced by them to this one point,—his purchasing inherent grace for us, as appears by the premises. So that if this be disclaimed, there Avill be nothing ascribed to Christ.

Now it cannot be expected, that while they profess themselves Christians, they should, in plain terms, make Christ a cipher ; but they do it by consequence too plainly. The other principles render Christ's meriting inherent grace for us to be needless : and surely he would not do and suffer so much for a needless thing. By their doctrine of congruous merit, a man destitute of inherent (or, as they call it, "justifying") grace may do that which will make it due to him from God. Now that which a man can make due to himself needs not at all the merit of Christ to make it due. The Lord will certainly let him have his due without the mediation of any other merit.

Yea, if we should bate the word " merit," and debitum, or " dueness," too, as Soto would have it, yet if a man can do that upon which justifying grace will necessarily and infallibly follow, there is no need that Christ should purchase it; for it is altogether unnecessary that Christ should merit that for us which we can make sure to ourselves, so as to have it necessarily and infallibly. Now that a man can do thus much, to make such grace sure to him, the Dominicans (the best friends that the grace of God can find amongst the Romanists) do affirm. Dominicus a Soto, a principal and the leading man amongst them, asserts it, and that upon the express testimony of Aquinas, whose conduct they are wont in their divinity to follow as " angelical :" " Out of necessity, not that of constraint, but that of infallibility, grace is given to him that prepares himself for it by some help of God." a They hold, that when a man doth

vitare mala: et non intelligunt, istadicentes, qu&d peros eorum intolerabilem blasphemiam diabolus sibilet, " They so define the grace of God, as that, in each of our works, we do not depend upon, nor are we governed by, its aid: but they refer them to free-will: so that therefore thanks are to be returned to God, because he has so made us, that we can by our own will both choose the good, and avoid the evil: and, whilst uttering these sentiments, they do not perceive that the devil, by their mouth, is hissing forth intolerable blasphemy." Ad Ctesiphontem, p. 253.

" Quod ex necessitate, non quidem coactionls, scd tamen infallibililatis, detur gratia se per auxi-lium Dei prasparanti. De Nat. et Grat. lib. iii. cap. xiii. p. 165. And this divine assistance, others of them say, a graceless person may merit: Profecto longe probabilius diceietur, per opera bona moralia, quibus aliquis ante acceptam gratiam faceret quod moraliter potest, eatenus primam gra-tiam ex congruo ilium mereri, quatenus conveniens et congruum est ut, cum talis facit quantum in illo statu moraliter potest, Deus etiam prsestet id quod suarum est partium; hoc est, ei homini auxilia actualia augeat, quibus adjutus possit facilius gratiam consequi, atque aded consequatur, si sibi non desit, " With much more probability, indeed, might it be said that, by the moral good ■works in which, before the reception of grace, anyone exercises what moral power he possesses, he merits through congruity primary grace, since it is fitting and congruous that—when, being such

TS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 485

his endeavour, God will not deny him grace ; (there is their congruous merit ;) a and think they salve all, by saying [that] this endeavour must be from Divine assistance. But Pelagius acknowledged that, no less than they ; and Augustine, with other his opposers, take notice of it: yet because he would have grace to be given according to merits, (though by merits was understood, not that which deserved it, but anything done by a sinner in respect of which grace is given, as Bellarmine confesseth,)* they condemned him, as evacuating the redemption of Christ, and the grace of God.

In fine : if a man by their principles could not merit justifying grace for himself, yet still, by their doctrine, there would be no need of Christ's merits'; for they teach that any other just man may merit it for him de congruo, [" with merit of congruity,"] e and do so much on his behalf as [that] it would be indecent 6 * and incongruous to the bounty of God to deny him grace. And this is enough to make him sure of it infallibly ; seeing the Lord is as far from acting undecently e or incongruously, as he is from dealing unjustly.

I need not tell you, these errors are dangerous ; unless you need be told, that there is danger in making Christ signify little or nothing in the justifying of sinners.

3. The last thing propounded is the application of this redemption, that is, of the blood of Christ, or his obedience, or his righteousness; for those are used by the apostle as terms of the same import. If we be accepted as righteous, it must be upon the account of some righteousness. We have none of our own that can acquit us before the Lord's tribunal: that of ours will neither satisfy for what is past, nor serve us for the future ; it cannot of itself be a good title to life, which has in it just ground for condemnation. The righteousness of Christ is all-sufficient for

as he is, he does as much as in that state he morally can—God also should perform his part; that is, increase to that man his actual aids, by the assistance of which he may be enabled the more easily to acquire grace, and so may actually acquire it, if he be not wanting to himself." Gregorii De Valentia liber de Grat. Divin. pars iv. cap. ult.

» Peccator per bona opera facta extra charitatem meretur de congruo primam gratiam : ibi est enim quaedani congruitas, quia facit quod in se est. Bonaventura in Secundam, Dist. xxviii. n. xxxix.

* Gratiam autem secundum merita nostra dari intelligunt patres, cum aliquid fit propriis viribus, ratione cujus detur gratia, etiamsi non sit ilium meritum de condigno. De Gratia et libero Arbi-trio, lib. vi. cap. v. p. 659.

c Merito congrui potest aliquis alteri mereri primam gratiam. Aquinas, Prima Secunda>, Qurest. cxiv. art. Bellarmine will have this past all doubt: Sicut certum est, non posse unum alteri ex condigno gratiam promeriri; ita non dubium est, posse id ex congruo fieri. De Justificat. lib. v. cap. xxi. p. 969. Bonaventure will have this to be meritum digni [" merit of worthiness"]. In Primam, Dist. xli. n. viii. Est dignitas cum indignitate, sicut cum vir Justus meretur peccatori primam gratiam: dignitas enim ex parte viri justi, "There is worthiness with unworthiness, as when a just man merits primary grace for a sinner : for the worthiness is on the part of the just man." In Secundam, Dist. xxvii. n. xxxix.

J unseemly. e unbecomingly.

all the exigencies of our condition. But, that it may be our justification, it must be our righteousness, (Rom. v. 18:) and how can that be? We need no other man to tell us than Bellarmine himself. " The sin of Adam," says he, " is communicated in such a manner as that which is past can be communicated ; that is, by imputation."" If the cardinal had not been a mere servant to his hypothesis, he would have followed this so far as the reason of it leads him ; and then it would have brought him to acknowledge no less of the righteousness of the Second Adam than of the sin of the first: both are past; and [there is] no other way to communicate what is past but by imputation.

This imputation is it which they will deny, and yet cannot but confess. And in their great champion we may see manifestly the evidence of truth struggling with the power of interest and prejudice ; and prevailing so far as to force from him three or four acknowledgments of this imputation, in that dispute where he sets himself with all his might to oppose it. 6

There are these severals 0 considerable , d about the imputing [of] this righteousness : First, substitution .- Christ satisfied in our stead ; that is, he tendered that which was due from us. Secondly, acceptance: the Father accepted what Christ performed in our stead as performed on our behalf. Thirdly, participation: we have the fruits and advantages of his undertaking no less than if we ourselves had satisfied. Now the first of these the Eomanists assert; the third they acknowledge; and the second they cannot deny, unless they will deny that the Father accepted Christ's perfect performance on the behalf of those for whom he undertook it by his own appointment. And as this performance, so stated, is that we mean by " Christ's righteousness ;" so this acceptance, as declared in the Gospel in reference to those that believe, includes all that we mean by " imputation." Nor need we contend for more than they cannot, without something like blasphemy, deny ; namely, God's acceptance of Christ's satisfaction.

Then doth God impute the righteousness of Christ to a believer, when he accepts what Christ performed for him, as if he had performed it; as we say, then a creditor imputes the payment of the debt to the debtor, when he accepts of what the surety pays for him, as if himself had paid

o Nobis verb communicatur per generationem eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit; nimirum, per imputationem. De Amiss. Grat. lib. v. cap. xvii. p. 332.

» Kt hoc modo non esset absurdum, siquis nobis diceret, nobis imputari Christi justitiam et mcrita, cum nobis donentur et applicentur, ac si nos ipsi Deo satisfecissemus, " And in this manner it would not be absurd, if any one should say to us that the righteousness and merits of Christ are imputed to us, since they are bestowed upon and applied to us just as if we ourselves had satisfied God." De Justific. lib. ii. cap. xvii. p. 785 : Ss. Quarto refellitur. Et cap. x. pp. 793, 794 : Ss. Respondeo et Ss. Hac igitur falsa, &c.

• Particulars. d worthy consideration.

/S DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED TN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 487

it. There is ground enough in Scripture to use this for illustration at least; (Heb. vii. 22; Matt. vi. 12;) and by the light hereof, a mean capacity may see a clear answer to the greatest objections made by the Papists against Christ's righteousness imputed."

Objection i. " If Christ's righteousness be truly imputed unto us then we might be called and accounted ' redeemers of the world.' "

Answer. He might as reasonably say, " The debtor may be called and accounted the surety, because the surety's payment is accepted for him."

Object, n. " If Christ's righteousness be imputed to us as if it were ours, then we ought to be accounted as righteous as Christ."

Answer. He might as well argue, [that] the debtor is as rich as the surety, because the surety pays his debt.

Object, hi. " If by the righteousness of Christ imputed to vis, we may be said to be truly righteous ; then Christ, by our unrighteousness imputed to him, may be truly called ' sinner.' "

Answer. Which is just as if he should say, "If the acceptance of the surety's payment acquit the debtor, then the surety, because the debt is charged on him, though he contracted it not, is as bad a husband and as much a bankrupt as the debtor."

I need bring no particular arguments for this. All the Scriptures, where there is mention of Christ's dying for us, his sufferings, cleansing us with his blood, his obedience to death, &c, (since it cannot be denied but all this was well-pleasing to God, and accepted by him, as it was performed on the behalf of believers,) are undeniable proofs, that his righteousness is imputed.

And it is a wonder to me, that any who acknowledge the satisfaction of Chi'ist should have the confidence to say, there is no evidence for this imputation in the sense expressed ; but their causeless prejudice against the word makes them, it seems, so sullen, that they will not take notice of the things we mean, though they meet with it everywhere in Scripture.

In short (I fear I have transgressed already, and must omit much of what I intended) : If Christ's righteousness be not imputed, it is not accepted ; if it be not accepted, it is not performed ; and so there will be no satisfaction, no redemption in Jesus Christ. This is Bellarmine's own inference when he is disputing against Osiander,—to deny God's accepting Christ's righteousness for us, which is, by the premises, his imputing it to us, is to " overthrow the whole mystery of man's redemption and reconciliation." 6

" Without lessening the difference betwixt debts and punishments, a surety as to either will serve our purpose. ' From his opinion, says he, certe sequitur, ut Cluisti justitiam Deus non acceptet; which cannot

USE. FOR APPLICATION.

Let me admonish you, as you tender the honour of Christ and the comfort and happiness of your souls, to receive and preserve the doctrine of justification pure and untainted as the apostle delivered it. Beware especially of the Popish corruptions, whereby they have adulterated and wherewith they have overwhelmed it. Whereas it is, as delivered in Scripture, the foundation of our hopes, and the spring of our comforts; they have made it a sink into which a great part of their other corruptions do run and settle, or the source from which they rise and are fed. I might make this good by an account of particulars ; but those I have touched already are too many. They tell you, to be justified is to be sanctified, and so sanctified as to need no further sanctification after the first infusion ; no growth in grace, no increase of holiness, no progress therein, nor mortification neither ; no need of, no reason for, it. Their principles are so indulgent, as to free you from such trouble. But then you must not take notice of the many commands of God which enjoin these, and make them necessary, nor of the hazards that attend such neglects : they will assure you, there is none under the notion [under] which they represent them.

They tell you, you must be justified by your own righteousness, and that a perfect righteousness within you ; that is it you must trust to. And if you think much to be justified as never any sinner in the world was, and know not how to compass a righteousness absolutely perfect within you, they will inform you, that any degree of charity, the least, the weakest, is righteousness in perfection. Thus you may be justified in their way, if you will but have patience till your inherent righteousness in this world be perfect and spotless, or till the lowest degree of it be absolute perfection. If you think it impossible to be justified upon such terms, they will tell you there is nothing more easy : any of their sacraments will help you to it ; for they all confer justifying grace, and that by the mere external act. You may have it, though you never mind what you are a-doing, when you are at sacrament, to get it. An easy way to heaven indeed, if it were as easy to be saved as deluded!

They will have you believe that their doctrine of justification is that which we must approve, since it includes pardon ; and yet they have no pardon by their doctrine while there is one speck of sin in their souls, and so not in this world; and the other is no world for it. And though they fancy, that fault, and stain, and desert, and the very being of sin, is abolished when they have so full pardon ; and will have none that is not lawful ; yet are they not pardoned for all that, but plainly condemned,

be admitted, nisi quis velit totum niysterium human;e redemptions et reconciliationis evertere. De Justine, lib. ii. cap. v. p. 778.

IS DANGEROUSLY CORRUPTED IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. 489

and into infernal fires they must go, and be there tortured, after they are so fully pardoned, till themselves have fully satisfied, and paid the utmost farthing, or others for them. And if they cannot do that which Christ only can do, namely, satisfy the justice of God for all sorts of sins, as to part of the punishment due to some, and the whole punishment due to others, their purgatory will prove hell, everlastingness not abated ; and they will find themselves damned eternally, and cast into hell, who, by their doctrine, were betrayed into that state, under a pretence of being punished there a while, in order to salvation. And if the demerit of sins which they call " venial" prove greater than they believe, (without and against Scripture,) they are in hell while they dream they are but in purgatory; for the partition between hell and purgatory is but the distinction made in their fancies betwixt mortal and venial sins, as to their demerit.

Thus are they in danger to be pardoned : and no wonder, since there is not one sin in five hundred which, by their doctrine, needs Christ or his blood for its pardon : there is no need of " the blood of sprinkling" (Heb. xii. 24) for the infinite numbers of their venials ; they have a sprinkling of their own [that] will serve, a holy water, conjured into such Divine powers, as to wash away a world of sins, fault, and punishment both." This is the " fountain" one of them (which themselves have " opened for sin and uncleanness ;" Zech. xiii. 1 ;) and the other, opened by Christ, may be shut up, unless there may be some use of it for another sort of sins, but those very few in comparison.

Indeed, it is the intolerable injury they offer to Christ, his redemption, and the free grace of God, which makes their doctrine of justification most intolerable. To strip the redemption which is in Jesus Christ of its merit or satisfaction, without which it is no redemption ; to make the mercy of God needless, or the free exercise of it impossible, and his grace to be no grace ; is the way not to be justified, but condemned. This is to seek pardon of former offences by new crimes, as if one would not receive a pardon without interlining it with something of treasonable import against him who offers it. Yea, it seems an attempt to blot out of the pardon all that is pardoning ; and to affront and deface that upon which all the hopes of a condemned sinner depend, and without which no flesh can be justified. Whenever the Lord justifies any, he doth it " freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ:" they that will not be justified, are in danger to be condemned.

" Remissio venialium, qui est effectus aquse benedictse, sine collatione gratia? et sanctitatis con-fertur. Non poenas culparum mod&, sed, id quod mihi probabilius est, culpas quoque veniales, remittet, "The remission of venial sins, which is the effect of the blessed water, is conferred without the communication of grace and holiness. It will remit, not merely the punishment of sins, but, as seems to me more probable, even venial sins themselves also." Mi-lchior Canus, De Sacris, pars i. p. 751.

TO THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF

THE REV. DAVTD CLARKSON, B.D.

Adrian, words of, at giving the communion, 307, 308.

Africa, bishops in, 173, 174; few Christians in its maritime cities, 189.

African churches, customs of, 285.

Alexander, a bishop at Alexandria, 93, 94; a bishop at Constantinople, 70, 71, 74, 77.

Alexandria, Christians in, 30, 31 ; state of, under Constantine, 32; choice of a bishop at, 47 ; churches in, 70, 75; several bishops in, 81; all the Christians in, met to pray in one church, 92; extent of the city, 96 ; its divisions, 97,147 ; its partial destruction, 98; its bishops and churches in the time of Constantius, 100 ; in St. Mark's time, 101 ; had the largest churches, except Rome, 103 ; not diocesan in the fourth century, 105 ; the greatest city next to Rome, 124; church in, in the fourth century, 147 ; titles at, 160; region of, 189 ; slaughter of Jews in, 191; its greatness, 199; Christians in, 199, 206.

Ambition, the age of, among churchmen, 221.

Ambrose on prayer, 289; his prayer at the Lord's supper, 293; his mode of singing, 355.

Antioch, disorders at, in choosing a bishop, 44; constitution of the church at, not diocesan, 118; bishops in, 165; idolatry in, 188 ; number of Christians in, 200; their bishops, 201.

Antioch, in Pisidia, bishops in, 165.

Apostle and bishop not the same, 115.

Apostles, success of their first preaching, 113; not made bishops, 116.

Apostolical constitutions, forgeries, 315, 353.

Archbishops, metropolitans, and bishops, 224, 242.

Archdeacons in the church of Edessa, 128; how appointed, 129.

Arianism prevails, 192; in Constantinople, 194.

Arians not accounted Christians, 55 ; at Constantinople, 73, 74, 77; at Alexandria, 105, 148; churches at Constantinople, 108; their prevalence, 265.

Arius occasions divisions, 55, 81.

Arnobius on praying, 253.

Athanasius, his life threatened, 5, 73; sends Frumentius to convert the Indians, 86; calls a meeting in the church at Alexandria, 94, 95; his account of the sacred furniture of the church, 256.

Augustine, or Austin, bishop at Hippo, 82, 83; his bishopric, 84, 85, 87; aids in procuring a bishop for Fussala, 85, 86 ; had not the largest party in Alexandria, 105; assembles the people in one church, 146 j his conversion and admission to the church at Milan, 219 ; his rule of praying, 254 the preaching of, 286 ; on baptismal prayers, 321 ; his directory for prayer,

INDEX.

333; declares the corruption of Divine

worship by men's devices, 366. Aurelius, Bishop, on the necessities of

the churches, 281. Austin's rule among the Britons, 304,

305.

Baptismal prayers not written, 321.

Baptism, various forms in administering, 309—311.

Barrow, Dr. on the apostleship, 135; on ordination, 135.

Basil, St. his diocese or province, 130 —132; aids to multiply bishops, 135; his contest as to his bishopric, 210; appeal of, as to prayer, 297; testimony of as to unity, 316; that the prayers were not written, 319, 332.

Baxter, Mr., Dr. Stillingfleet's objections to, 16, 22,96; wrongly censured, 100.

Bede, his testimony as to consecrating the eucharist, 305.

Bellarmine, testimony of, as to the liturgy of St. James, 342; his perversion of the doctrine of grace, 475, 479.

Bibles, fifty, ordered by Constantine for the churches, 76.

Bilson, Bishop, on the choice of bishops, 42; on church government by presbyters, 129; on Tertullian regarding prayer, 327.

Bishop, election of one, 28, 38, 39 ; of Rome, his wealth and pomp, 46 ; a pastor of a single congregation, 85, 86, 153, 241 ; and presbyters govern a church. 91 ; his duty limited to his congregation, 140; first forbidden to be appointed in a village, 214; duties of a, 215; regarding his pastoral charge, 228, 230; changes his character by his ambition to rule, 235.

Bishop Ischyras, his church consisted of

seven persons, 104. Bishoprics, congregational, 21 — 23 ; their corruption, 46, 47 ; many in one diocese, 84, 88, 89; their character, 138 ; in villages, 167, 168, 209, 210; ancient, 178; in small towns, 182; number of souls in, 183; in Constantinople, 194; modern unlike the

ancient, 212; reduced in number in modern times, 213; changed from the primitive, 236. Bishops, authority of, 12; no rightful pre-eminence over presbyters, 13; several in one city, 14, 15, 17, 25; of Rome and Alexandria, dominion of, 18 ; who preside in synods, 26 ; in all towns, 29, 34, 133, 134; could not appoint their successors without the people, 49; councils regarding their election, 54; two in one church, 79, 82; promotion of, 78; several at Alexandria, 81 ; settled in all towns where Christians were, 91; their number in Egypt, 91 ; number of, in Africa, 106 ; in the world, 107; at Rome, 119,125; their names, 128; how multiplied, 132, 133; number of in councils, 137 ; had each but one congregation, 138 ; presidents of the church senates, 140; not a superior order to presbyters, 143; have the same titles, 143; number of, 146; at Antioch, 155; plurality of, in a city, 156, 209 ; at Ephesus, 157 ; meet the apostle Paul, 159 ; in villages, 161, 181 ; in Egyptian villages, 162; in Arabia and Syria, 162, 166; constituted by the apostles, 165, 166; in Europe, 169; a hundred in Crete, 169; in Spain, 171; in Africa, 173; in small cities, 180 ; in the greatest cities, 192, 193 ; in Antioch, 201 ; designs of the apostles respecting, 211 ; pride of, 221 ; their struggle for power, 222; ambition of, 223; of Rome, ambition of, 224; how elevated above presbyters, 212; their usurpation, 243; frequent preaching of ancient, 287; tyrannical licentiousness of, 368; of Rome and other cities, 369 ; ignorance of many in the West, 370 ; in the East, 371 ; in Egypt, 372; liturgies made for them, 373.

Bishops of bishopscondemnedbv Cyprian, 238 ; Jerome, 239.

Blessings of the covenant promised freely, 435.

Bodies of the saints vile and mortal, 445;

493

how to be changed, 446; in their glorified state, 447; impassible and immortal, 447 ; spiritual, 448 ; glorious in beauty, 449 ; dignities and privileges of, 450 ; use of the doctrine, 451 ; who shall enjoy the glory, 451. Britons and Saxons differ in their church rites, 305.

Caesarea, disorders in, at the choice of a bishop, 45 ; two bishops at, 80.

Canons against the people's power to choose their bishops, 50, 53, 54; regarding prayers, 250; regarding the duty of bishops and presbyters, 257.

Carthage, church at, 10; number of lapsed members in, 11, 65; bishops in a synod at, 18; bishops at, 173; number of Christians in, 202.

Catechumens not allowed to attend the church mysteries, 272.

Cathedral churches in Palestine, 164.

Cathedrals in villages, 19.

Cathedral towns, 164.

Changes in the creed, not in liturgies, 265.

Chapels, small at first, 93; or titles, subterranean, 126.

Charles the Great the pope's executioner, 307.

Choice of bishops by votes of the people, 40, 42.

Chorepiscopus, or country bishop, what, 134.

Christian religion, embraced by many, 122; opposed at Rome, under Constan-tine, 123 ; numbers professing it, 136.

Christians of one city meet to pray in one place, 29, 92 ; not the richest, 67, 77 ; divide and meet in different places, 93 ; not the majority in any city, 108; few in the cities of Judea, 117; in towns and villages, 120; at Rome, 121, 154; at Jerusalem, 154; only in name, 191 ; their required character, 218, 220 ; corrupt professors in, in the fifth century, 227; what they must do, 455; get more renovating grace, 457; more impressions of the value of ordinances, 458; reflect on them, 459 ; what they must avoid:—

negligence, 465; excessive worldli-ness, 466; inordinate desires, 467 ; resting on the merit of duties, 468.

Christ our righteousness by grace, 439, 440.

Christ's mediation denied, 418, 419.

Chrysostom on the number of Christians, 11 ; chosen bishop at Constantinople, 56, 57 ; his testimony as to the support of presbyters, 67; his hearers, 77 ; threatens excommunication, 142; accused respecting ordination, 144; despotism of, 224; his judgment regarding his bishopric, 225 ; his arguments for church purity, 226 ; his zeal for purity in the church, 230 ; state of his church at Constantinople, 234; on praying, 253, 255; on pretended Christian mysteries, 267 ; his mode of preaching, 285, 286; his prayers, 292 ; his reference to Noah's prayer, 325 ; his rules for prayer, 326; published, but with no mention of liturgies, 354; reforms the singing in the church service as a liturgy, 356 ; on the corruptions in the church, 364.

Church, a particular congregation, 9; congregational, 13 ; at Heliopolis, 71 ; presbyterian in the fourth century, 141 ; one in each great city, 194,195.

Churches, two at Constantinople, 10,69; in cities, 70; in Alexandria, 70, 103; mentioned in Scripture, not diocesan, 117; four hundred in a city in Germany, 124; several in a city, how governed, 138,139; assigned to different presbyters, 146; in the second century, 159 ; testified by Dr. Stilling-fleet, 161 ; single congregations, 238.

Church order, what, and how ordained, 359.

Church service not uniform, 334; in France, 335.

Church, the, corrupted, 214, 233; corrupt state of, testified by Chrysostom and Augustine, 364, 365.

Cities, very small, bishops, 175; in Spain, 176; many small, 178, 179; great, 183; in Spain, 188; chief, with their bishops, 193; the greatest, 196.

INDEX.

Clarkson, David, birth and family, viii. ix.; adventure at the assault of Bradford, ix. x.; Fellow of Clare Hall, xi.; tutor, xii.; friendship with the Hol-crofts, xii.; marries their sister, xiii.; at Mortlake, xiii.; Morning Exercises, xiv.; ejectment, xiv.; lecture against Popery, xv.; "Practical Divinity of the Papists," xvi.; Popish plot, xviii.; Protestant union, xix.; Dean Stilling-fleet's sermon, xx.; " No Evidence for Diocesan Churches,'' xxi.; co-pastor with Dr. Owen, xxii.; last will, xxii.; death, xxii.; character by R. Baxter, v.; by Dr. Bates, xxiii.; by Mr. Howe, xxvi.; by Dr. Ridgley, xxvi.; posthumous works, xxvii.; portrait, xxix.; his children, xxix.; experience of his eldest daughter, xxx.; of Gertrude, xxxvi.

Clemens, Epistles of, read in the church, 251; forged liturgies of, 297.

Clergy, numbers of the, 21 ; required to follow trade, 67.

Common prayer book of the Roman idolaters, 329; none among ancient Christians, 338.

Communion table, one in a church, 216 j for real Christians only, 216: preparations for, 217; qualifications for, 218.

Conditionalness of God's promised blessings, 432.

Conditions of grace, not meritorious, 437; nor natural, 437 ; nor legal, 439 ; nor obliging to God, 439.

Confession, as enjoined by the Roman church, 478.

Congregations of ancient Christians, 155.

Constantine, churches in his time, 10; recommends bishops, 56, 57 ; orders fifty Bibles, 76 ; vexed by the heathen, 189.

Constantinople, church at, 68 ; its magnitude, 72; when built, 78; Christians at, 73, 194; churches in, 125; ambition of the bishops of, 224.

Constantius, appoints an Arian bishop, 55 ; called Anti-Christ, by Hilary, 58.

Constitutions, Apostolical, give a different creed, 315, 316; of Clemens, forged, 320.

Contradictions respecting the bishops at Antioch, 118.

Controversies among the early Christians, 263.

Cornelius, bishop of Rome, 121; number of his church members, 122.

Corruptions of the writings of the fathers, 304; of the church when liturgies were prescribed, 373, 374.

Councils as to the election of bishops, 54; number ofbishops in, 137.

Creed, called the " Apostles'," its origin and use, 314; introduced into the church service, by P. Gnapheus, 314; first used at Rome, 315 ; a different one in the " Constitutions," 315, 316.

Crete, its cities and bishops, 170, 177, 181, 182, 207.

Cyprian, St., his church at Carthage, 10, 11, 13, 17; his testimony on the choice of bishops, 39, 41 ; number of Christians in his bishopric, 202, 203 ; his writings show the true nature of a church, 236 ; on the church service, 340.

Cyril persecutes the Novatians, 81.

Damascen on praying, 254.

Derbe and Lystra, bishops in, 165, 166.

Determination of man's will, false notions of the, 423.

Difference between bishops and metropolitans, 143.

Dignities and titles of bishops and presbyters in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, 144, 145.

Diocesan bishops in Alexandria, 89.

Diocesan churches, claims for, 9; no evidence for, 9 ; power of pretended, 32; none discovered in primitive times, 89 ; insufficient evidence, 106; only congregational, 107, 138; not such, if the members could meet in one congregation, 108 ; not proved by having many presbyters, 127; nor by having some presbyters in the country, 135; nor by the number of bishops

495

in the country, 136; nor by several churches in a city, 138, 139; not apostolical, 240; not primitive, 241.

Diocese, its ancient meaning, 20; one having many bishops, 84; not the same as bishopric, 84, 85; extent of one, 90; includes only one congregation, 153 ; of a primitive bishop, 155 ; in Italy, 170; objections answered, 205 ; extent of, 206 ; the jurisdiction of a city, 207.

Dioceses of ambitious bishops, 224.

Dioclesian persecution, 126, 127.

Dionysius, church of, in Lybia, 102; on praying, 253.

Diptyches read in churches, 252.

Discourses of Cyprian, Origen, and others, 285.

Diversity of rites commends the church, 234; of expressions by Basil, in the doxology, 316.

Divine worship by the heathen, 260.

Donatists, bishops of the, 16 ; their origin, 125; in Africa, 192.

Downham, Bishop, his testimony as to presbyters, 65 ; as to Christians, 109, 112; to a congregational church, 128; on the government by presbyters, 139.

Dublin, ancient bishopric of, 210.

Edessa, metropolis of Mesopotamia, 128.

Egypt, Jews in, 99; cities in, 176; many had but few Christians, 188.

Election of bishops and deacons, popular, 36, 37 ; mode of in the fourth century, 51; of grace, founded in God's love and mercy, 384; false notions of, 401.

Enmity of sinners against God, 387.

Ephesus, the bishops of, 157, 158.

Episcopacy, the ancient, congregational, 132; in villages, testified by Dr. Taylor, 173.

Episcopal churches,not diocesan, 66,173. seats in every good village, 25 ; towns, 21,165; in Italy, 170; in Africa, 173; zeal for the dignity of, 213.

Eucharist, taken every Lord's-day, 216 ; prayer before the, 250.

Eucharistical office, the Lord's prayer used in the, 248.

Eulogiae, the, invented, 217.

Eusebius, Arian bishop of Nicomedia, 55; the historian, criticism on a word of, 145 ; to furnish fifty Bibles to the churches, 256.

Exarchs or primates, ambition of, 223.

Excommunication executed by the presbyters, 142.

Extempore prayer the custom of the ancient Christians, 252, 322, 329 ; hymns, 330.

Fathers, the, prayed according to their ability, 295, 323, 324.

Foreknowledge of God, 422, 430.

Forgeries, numerous, in the pretended writings of the Christian fathers, 352, 353.

Free act of God's grace in saving men, 384, 392.

Free grace, how justification by, 478.

Free-will in fallen man, its abettors, 394; how influenced, 396 ; examined, 397 ; its pretended powers, 397, 398 ; dangerous doctrine, 399, 402; denies God to be the author of spiritual blessings, 403 ; denies original sin, 404 ; denies regeneration, 406; it leads sinners from Christ, 407 ; destroys holy obedience, 408 ; stifles love to God, 409; destroys the exercise of faith, 410; overthrows humility, 411 ; renders p ayer unnecessary, 412 ; inconsistent with Christian gratitude, 413 ; tempts men to neglect their souls, 414; destroys gospel justification, 415; tends to destroy the covenant of grace, 415, 416 ; destroys the mediation of Christ, 417; defaces redemption, 418, 419; inconsistent with the attributes of God, 420; his prescience, 422 ; his truth, 423 ; his government, 424 ; his omnipotence, 425 ; it idolises man's will, 426.

Friends, deceased, joy in sorrow for them if Christians, 451.

Fussala, Augustine aided in procuring a bishop for, 86.

Gauden, Dr., his claim for liturgies, 247.

INDEX.

Germany, church service in, 335.

Glorified spirits, their employment, 442.

Gnapheus, Peter, introduces the Creed into the church service, 314; enjoins that Mary be called the " Mother of God," 366. (See Creed.)

God, his grace in saving sinners, 384; his excellences, 390, 391 ; his sovereignty, 393; dishonoured by the doctrine of free-will, 426, 427.

Grace, justification by, 471 ; how held by Papists, 473, 474.

Grace and salvation, 383 ; free and unmerited, 384; variously denied, 395 ; saving, 396 ; efficacy of, 402; moral or suasive insufficient, 402; various opposition to it by free-will, 403,426 ; prejudices against, 427; its sovereign freeness, 435; how to be acknowledged, 441; motives to it, 442.

Gratitude destroyed by the doctrine of free-will, 413.

Gregory, Pope, originates prescribed prayers, 303 ; his counsel to Austin as to rites and prayers in Britain, 304; the originator of the Roman liturgy, 343.

Gregory the Seventh, words of in giving the sacrament to the emperor, 308.

Hall, Bishop, on church government by

presbyters, 139; regarding Tertullian

on prayer, 327-Hammond, Dr., on Acts ii., 110, 113;

on bishops at Jerusalem, 155 ; and at

Ephesus, 158. Happiness in God, 390. Heart, preparation of, 461, 462. Heathenism in Palestine, 187 ; in Rome

under Constantine, 189. Hebrews, commentary on, by Dr. Owen,

453. Hegesippus, false testimony ascribed to

him regarding James, 116. Hippo, bishops of, 89. (See Augustine.) Holiness false views of by Papists, 474-Holiness, from the Spirit, 408. Holy Spirit desired by preachers, 287 ;

his work denied, 416, 417. Hooker, Mr., on ancient bishoprics, 136.

Hymns for Divine worship formed the early liturgies, 356, 361, 362.

Idolatry in Jerusalem, 187.

Ignatius bishop of the great church at Antioch, 118.

Impostors pretend liturgies by the apostles, 346.

Impotency by sin, 434.

Imputation of sin and righteousness, 485, 486.

Inherent righteousness, vain for justification, 488.

Initiated, the, none else allowed to hear prayer at the pretended Christian mysteries, 271.

Innocent the First, regarding prayer, 299, 300 ; imperiousness of, 301.

Ireland, bishops in, 172, 182, 213; church service in, 335.

Italy, its villages and bishops, 170, 183.

James, falsely pretended bishop and prince of the apostles, 114, 115; the pretended liturgy of, an impudent forgery, 342, 343.

Jerome regarding archdeacons, 129; his extempore pieces, 286; he becomes the means of liturgical singing at Rome, 358.

Jerusalem, population of, 154; its magnitude, 155; "a city of heathens," 187; number of Christians in, 203; Gentile church in, 204 ; only one congregation of Christians in, 205.

Jesuits, their invention against free grace, 394, 428.

Jews in Egypt, 99 ; numbers of, 190; their sufferings and slaughter, 191 ; excluded from Jerusalem, 204.

Julian's time, apostacy in, 188.

Jupiter, doctrines concerning, 258.

Justification as held by Pelagians and Papists, 415.

Justification by faith, 471; the doctrine of, corrupted by Romanists, 472.

Justinian's " Constitutions " forbid bishops and presbyters to excommunicate, 142, 143; his code as to the liturgy, 356.

497

Justin Martyr's prayers, 294, 296 ; his testimony as to prayers, 323.

Kiss of peace at the eucharist, 301.

Lactantius on praying, 253.

Laodicea, canon of the council of, on morning and evening prayers, 348 ; on hymns, 362.

Letters of recommendation to the churches, 273.

Leuthericus, archbishop, giving the sacrament to Robert, king of France, 308.

Liberty in prayer, 250 ; in the time of Augustine, 279, 280.

Life eternal to Adam only by the promise of grace, 432.

Light of nature and of the Spirit, 395.

Liturgical services necessary for ignorant, slothful bishops, 370; made in corrupt ages, 372, 373.

Liturgical singing, 356, 357 ; supersedes praying and preaching, 358.

Liturgies, Dr. Gauden's claim for, 249; unknown to the ancients, 251, 255, 262; not delivered up by the Tradi-tores, 257, 267; of the heathen, 261, 262 ; not used in the controversies of Christians, 263, 265 ; no notices of changing them, 261; direct evidence against written, 273, 274; none for the sacraments, 278; forged ones, 297; the innovation of Roman bishops, 335; arguments for, groundless, 336, 367; of Peter, James, Matthew, Mark, &c, forgeries, 344; not known or used in the early ages, 345 ; teach false doctrine, 346; not imposed or left by the apostles, or existing in the first three centuries, 347 ; supposed origin of, 348, 356; pretended, of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, 353, 354 ; their spuriousness, 359; sum of evidence for five hundred years, 361 ; insufficient, 363.

Liturgy, the African, what, 281; pretended of St. James, an impudent forgery, 342.

I,ivy on ihe prayers of the heathen, 328.

Lord's Prayer not enjoined for use, but a model, as Augustin, 248; and others, 249.

Lord's supper, when administered, 127 ; prayer at, 289 ; often celebrated, 291.

Love of God to man, 409.

Man, his insignificance, 385 ; his sinful condition, 386 ; his loathsome state, 387.

Mark, St., preaches at Alexandria, 101.

Martyr, Justin, on the praying of Christians, 252.

Martyrs in Egypt, 102.

Mass, the Roman, its origin from Pope Gregory, 343.

Mead, Mr., on the dwellers at Jerusalem, 110.

Meetings, distinct, do not prove diocesan episcopacy, 126; private, of the persecuted Christians, 127.

Mercy of God denied by free-willers, 420, 421.

Merit of condignity, 400.

Merit, the Romish doctrine of, 479, 480; according to Pelagius, 483.

Metropolitan, power of a, 33, 209; Basil of Csesarea, 130, 132; his character and prerogative, 135.

Metropolitans established, 26, 27 ; how authorised, 221 ; how they advanced, 222; examples of ambitious, 223 ; their jurisdiction, 240.

Misery of man, 384.

Missals, the Roman, teach false doctrine, 353.

Montanists at Constantinople, 74.

Moral grace pretended, 403, 407.

Morality the fruit of grace, 408.

Mortal sins, what by Papists, 477.

"Mother of God," a title given to the Virgin Mary, 366. (See Gnapheus.)

Motives to acknowledge God's grace, 441.

Mysteries, pretended, in the worship by Christians, 266; baptism and the Lord's supper so called, 266, 267; concealed from the uninitiated, 267; catechumens not permitted to witness them, 272.

INDEX.

Nestorius, an Arian bishop, 56.

Noah, an example of prayer according

to ability, 325. Novatians at Constantinople, 73,74, 77 ;

their numbers in chief cities, 191,

192.

Objections of free-willers against free grace answered:—that it charges sin upon God, 427 ; that it makes God unmerciful, 428 ; that it impeaches the sincerity of God, 428; that it makes God unjust and cruel, 429; that it destroys the liberty of the will, 430.

Oblations published in the church, 291.

Orarium, its use, 250.

Order of worship in the churches, 219, 360, 361.

Ordinances, their influence upon our souls, 456; what are ordinances, 457; how to profit by them, 457, 460; frequent use of, 463 ; their efficacy must abide, 469.

Ordination, a crime of a bishop, without consent of the clergy, 143 ; of a bishop, 215; its true character, 241; required election by a congregation, 242; practice in the Greek church, 243 ; of a bishop, 256; of an exorcist, 257.

Origen, prayers of, not prescribed and liturgical, 339.

Owen, Dr., funeral sermon for, 445 ; his character as a scholar, 452; as a preacher, 453 ; his writings, 453 ; as a divine, 454.

Papists advocates of free-will, 394 ; and of human merit, 400 ; how they pervert the Gospel, 472; and the doctrine of sanctification, 473; their false views of pardon, 475,477; purgatory of, 476; human merit held by, 479.

Pardon through Christ alone, 475 ; the Gospel doctrine of, 481.

Parishes, ancient, 10; at Rome, 161.

Passover, numbers at, in Jerusalem, 153.

Pastoral duties of a bishop, 226, 228, 230.

Pastor of a church, a true bishop, 241.

Pastors in Constantinople, 234 ; of the ancient Christians, their abilities, 323.

Pelagians, their prayers, 262; and Papists abettors of free-will, 394,399, 400; argue for moral suasive grace, 403; deny corruption by original sin, 404, 405; their contradictions by prayer, 412,413 ; their notion of justification, 415.

Pelagius, his doctrine of grace, 483, 484.

Pella, how many Christians at, 117.

Penitents forbidden to hear prayers at, or to see, the pretended mysteries, 271, 272.

People, the, their right to choose their bishops, 41, 43; their presence in ordaining a bishop, 215.

Persecution in Cyprian's time, 65, 126.

Philippi, the bishops at, 156.

Pisidia, bishops in, 166.

Pliny, on reading his orations, 254.

Pluralist, no bishop allowed to be a, 240.

Pluralists have more churches than ancient diocesan bishops, 107.

Poor, proportion of at Constantinople and Rome, 121.

Power of bishops and presbyters equal, 142; of man's will pretended, 410.

Prayer, prescribed forms of, not used in the first ages, 248; first intimation of a composed form by a minister for himself, 248 ; reading or reciting, unknown, 251 ; manner of, 252, 331 ; sentiments of the heathen regarding, 258, 259; against evil spirits, 292 ; according to ability, '294, 295; of consecration, not writter, 297 ; length of time spent in, by some Christians, 329 ; the gift of, from God, 331 ; the duty of all Christians, 332; unnecessary to free-willers, 412 ; necessary to profit in ordinances, 46 1.

Prayers for the churches not written, 277 ; of ministers, canons respecting, in council at Milevis, 280 ; what forbidden, 281; what approved, 282; what allowed, 284; at the Lord's supper, 289; in the English service-book, 2 90; of Chrysostom and Cyprian, 292; at the eucharist, long, 298 ; suggested

499

by the Holy Ghost, 299; written, in any service, not prescribed by the ancients, 322; according to their ability, 323, 325; from the heart, not from memory, 329; daily, canon for, 349, 351.

Prelacy, the working of its poison, 27 ; the tyranny of the church, 367.

Prelates, their ambition, 224 ; their tyranny and licentiousness, 367, 368.

Presbyterian churches in the fourth century, 141.

Presbyter, of the same rank as a bishop, 13, 143, 242; one to a bishop, 20.

Presbyters, many in one church, 10; how in its government, 12; ordain their bishops, 48 ; many in a congregational church, 65, 66; in the church at Constantinople, 68 ; meet sections of the Christians for worship in chapels, 126 ; many, do not prove diocesan episcopacy, 127; many in country places, 135, 136; their station in the third and fourth century, 139 ; had the power of kings in churches, 141 ; not subject to bishops by Scripture, 242.

Prescience of God denied, 422.

Presidents of synods, 26.

Primitive episcopacy, 26.

Primitive form of churches changed, 235.

Promises of God, whether conditional, 430, 433 ; absolute in blessings, 434.

Providence, heathen doctrines of, 258, 259.

Provinces, bishops in, 34.

Purgatory, punishment in, as held by Papists, 476.

Heading psalms and lessons, not prayers,

251. Redemption by Christ, 472; rendered

vain by the Papists, 483, 484; secures

our justification, 485. Regeneration, can free-will hinder it ?

397; not needed by the Pelagian

doctrine, 406; the work of the Spirit,

407. Repentance required in candidates for

church fellowship, 220.

Righteousness of Christ, imputation of 487.

Rites and usages differ much in the primitive churches, 237.

Roman cities and bishops, 170.

Rome, disorders in, at the election of a bishop, 46; the bishop of, not diocesan, 104; poor persons in, 109 ; the first Christian church at, 119; who burnt the city, 120; number of Christians at, 122, 123, 189; its churches in the fifth century, 124 ; Jews in, 190, 196 ; churches in, 193; bishoprics in the diocese of, 210; ambition of the prelates of, 224.

Rubrical council regarding prayer, 300.

Ruffinus, his story of the creed, 315. (See Creed.)

Rule of faith differed, as held by the ancients, 314, 315.

Saints, the bodies of, how to be changed,

445, 446. Salvation of the elect decreed, 384; its

apparent conditionalness answered,

430, 431 ; its comprehensiveness, 442. Sanctification and salvation, 384. Sanctification, the true doctrine of, 473. Sardica, bishops of, from Egypt, at its

councils, 91. Schism, not dissenting from the other

churches, 239. Scotland, presbyteries in, 141. Scripture affords no evidence of episcopacy, 117. Secrecy, improper, of the early Christians

in their worship, 266. Sermons, extempore, 287. Service-book, none such among the

church-furniture, 256; the earliest

noticed, 257. Sharp, John, of Little Horton Hall,

brother-in-law to David Clarkson,viii.;

his two sons Thomas and Abraham,

ix. note ; his apprentice, Joseph Lister,

x. Sin contagious, 386 ; our impotency, 434. Sinners at enmity against God, 387 ;

confederate with Satan, 388; obstinate

perverseness of, 389.

INDEX.

Sins venial and mortal, according to Papists, 476, 477.

Socinians, abettors of free-will, 394.

Socrates, the historian, testifies concerning the prayers of the Christians, 334.

Spirit, Holy, his influences denied by free-willers, 416, 417; compliance with in ordinances, 463.

Stephen, the deacon, ordained, 113.

Stillingfieet, Dr., his sermon at St. Paul's, xx.; episcopal controversy, xxi.; claims for diocesan churches, 9, 13; on church government by presbyters, 140.

Stoics, doctrines of, 258.

Sybils, books of the, 269; prayers in, 328.

Te Deum, its antiquity, 361, 362.

Terms of salvation, 437.

Tertullian, hyperbolical language of,

108 ; on the praying of the Christians,

252; testimony of as to prayer and

singing, 340. Thanksgiving at the eucharist, 298. Theodoret regarding the Christians at

Constantinople, 75, 76. Tradition, none for uniform prescribed

prayer, 302. Traditores delivered up no liturgies, 257.

Uncertainty of God's purposes and promises, by free-will, 424.

Uniformity in ceremonies did not exist in the primitive churches, 237, 238; a kind of, in prayers, 251 ; Roman, introduced into Britain, 306; compelled by Charles the Great, 307; in sense but diversity in words, among the Fathers, regarding baptism, 313.

Usher, Archbishop, on the government of the churches, 140; on the bishops in Ireland, 176; testifies the different modes of the Irish from the Roman, 305 ; as to Roman uniformity being introduced, 306.

Variety in expression among the ancients regarding baptism, 317; both Greeks and Latins, 319.

Various modes and prayers in the fifth century, 301; in Italy, 302 ; at Rome, 303; counselled by Pope Gregory, 304; in baptism, 309, 313.

Venial sins, 476, 482.

Village bishops, 161, 163.

Village cities, 179, 211.

Villages, their size, 168; Christians, few in, 208; bishops in, 209, 241.

White, Bishop, on the liturgies ascribed to St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, 352.

Whitgift, Archbishop, on the number of Christians at Jerusalem, 117, 204.

Will of God, sovereign and gracious, 392.

Will of man, vicious, 397,400 ; pretended power of, 410.

Worship of God, corruptions in, 365.

Writing the prayers esteemed a crime, 273; how regarded by the Latin church, 275, 276; canon respecting, 278 ; some such used in the time of Augustine, 279.

Written prayers used by the heathen priests, 328.

York, province of, first appointment of bishops in, 213.

1 1012 01147 7488