Page images
PDF
EPUB

in ancient or modern History whatsoever) and yet his Territories and Dominions as fruitful in Parishes and Churches under him, as any City Diocese in the Land befides.

But this Argument is exhausted by the excellent Dr. Maurice long ago; and Epifcopal Villages furvey'd with fuch Patience, and the Objections from them confuted with fuch Learning and Reason, in his admirable Defence of Diocesan Epifcopacy, that one would little think it fhould appear in Publick again. Yet I will not wholly pafs by the Authorities that are offer'd for it here.

I fhall join the two first of them together, becaufe in the Application here made of them, they really are an Answer to one another. Clemens Romanus tells us, that § the Apostles preaching both in Country and City, conftituted Bishops and Deacons there. Thus he tranflates the Words of Clemens in the Margin, tho' thro' Regions and Cities are at least as genuine a Translation, as that; and by the Precedency of Regions in the Text, they may more naturally be understood of Provinces or Countries in the largest Sense of them, than of meer Country Villages. But let us hear what S. Cyprian adds to this: Bishops (says he) were Ordain'd, throughout all Provinces and all Ci

ties.

Now by our Author's quoting these two Fa. thers to the fame purpose, (as he tells us he did) he has all the reafon in the World to understand S. Clemens's Countries, and the Provinces mention'd

Ο Καλὰ χώρας ἦν καὶ πόλεις κηρύωον]ες καθίσανον εἰς ἐπισκόπες και διακίνες. Ep. 1. ad Corinth,

mention'd by S. Cyprian, to be the fame thing: And fince the latter never understood Provinces in any other Senfe, than as large Tracts of Countries, containing Cities, Towns and Villages in them; fo by Parity of Reafon, he ought to allow, that S. Clemens meant fuch fort of Countries too; and then both Cities and Countries might originally have Bishops fet over them, and not a Village have a Bifhop in it ftill; which I have only taken Notice of, to fhew how little these two Quotations prove the thing they were intended for; fince, if they were equivalent, or much to the fame purpofe, (as our Author fays they are) they make no Proof, I think, of VillageBishopricks at all. But I have elsewhere otherways accounted for the doubtful and undetermin'd Senfe of S. Clemens's Bishops, in the Age he wrote in; to which I may refer the Reader for farther Satisfaction in the Cafe.

Another Argument there is from an Inftance of a Bishop in *Comane, which, I am free to own, the Hiftorian calls a Village,and difpute not,but it really was fo; for I have fhewn above,that Villages may have a Bishop's See in them, (tho' Examples in Antiquity are rarely to be found indeed) and yet their Jurifdiction be large enough too; and that Comane was of that kind, may the rather be prefum'd, fince it appears, that that particular Place had a Bishop's Seat in it, even in the Fifth Century,

+ Vide fupra, Ch. I. p. 22, 24. * Ζωτικὸν ἀπὸ Κομάνης κώμης. Εufeb. H, E. 1. 5,

C. 16.

Epifcopus Comanenus memoratur in Epiftolâ Epifcoporum Pamphylia ad Leonem Aug. See Valef. in Eufeb. ubi fupra, & Concil. Chalced. Part 3. P. 391.

Century, and at the time of the Council of Chalcedon; when, I believe, no Man thinks there was any one Bishop in the Chriftian Church, that had no more than a fingle Village for his Diocese. In a word, 'tis ftrange to fee what narrow Search is made, to find here and there an Inftance of this kind, amongst so many thousand Bishopricks as the Hiftory of the Church affords; whereas, had Villages been Bishops Sees by Apoftolical Inftitution, (wherever any Congregation could be gather'd in them) the Advantage in Number, one would think, fhould foon have been on their fide, in the general Account of Epifcopal Churches in the Chriftian World.

But 'tis furmiz'd ftill, that there must have been many Bishops of Villages, and very obfcure Villages too, amongst those 78 Bishops that fat in Council with S. Cyprian, (in the Year 258) because we don't meet with the Names of many of their Sees in Ptolemy, or the old Geographers. Now, whatever may be miffing in the ancient Geography, (here referr'd to) 'tis plain, that every Diocefe, named in that Council, is very learnedly accounted for by the venerable Editor of the Oxford Edition of S. Cyprian's Works, in his Notes upon it; partly from those ancient Geographers themselves, and partly from other Authors of unquestionable Credit in the Cafe; fuch as Antoninus, Optatus, S. Auftin, Victor Vitenfis, the Notitia Africe, Collatio Carthaginenfis, and the like. And as they are generally ftyl'd Cities in direct Terms; fo, if one in twenty of them fhould be fufpected to be otherwife, it neither proves their Diocefes to be fingle Congregations, (as we have

feen

feen before) nor fhould be thought strange in the Confines of those inhofpitable Countries, where the Natives rarely multiply'd their Cities, yet were numerous in their leffer difperfed Corporations, and becoming Chriftians muft have their Bishops feated in the most convenient Manfion for them all. Such Inftances in the more unciviliz'd and defert Parts of the World are unquestionably to be found: But to take a Model of the Chriftian Church from them, is peculiar only to a few Authors in our own Times.

To close this Caufe and the Second Chapter together, we have Justin Martyr's Sundays-Affemblies once more recommended to our better Confideration, and S. Ignatius's ftrict Charge to the Magnefians to keep in clofe Union with their Bishop; which, without going all to his fingle Houfe of Prayer, our Enquirer feems to think impracticable. But how different the Senfe of thofe holy Fathers is from what is here put upon them, I have fhewn at large before; and hope fo genuine a Construction of them, being plainly conformable alfo to the Principles and Practice of the Catholick Church of Chrift will find no hard Admittance with any peaceful Friend of the like Primitive Conftitution in our own natiye Country and Times.

*

CHAP.

Vide fupra, P. 44, & p. 46.

CHA P. III.

Enquiry into the Conftitution, &c. of the Primitive Church, &c.

THE Bishop's Flock (we have seen in the former Chapters) is moderate and small enough His Duty is now represented to the full: The Particulars are many, and yet but little controverted (as this learned Author obferves) on either fide; they are with great Exactnefs fumm'd up in this Place, to introduce the abfolute Neceffity of his refiding constantly upon his Cure; which in the next Paragraph is fo earnestly infifted upon. And in that View of them, I can't but take Notice, that the feveral Acts of the Epifcopal Function (here mention'd) are many of them fo reprefented by the Authors he quotes about them, as to imply an inherent Right in the Bishop, of ordering and difpofing the Discharge of them,as much as a perfonal Obligation upon him to discharge them all himself. Thus, for instance, in the Act of Preaching; 0rigen here quoted, to prove it was the Bishop's Duty, elsewhere informs us, that the Bishop commanded him to preach, and enjoin'd him the very Subject he fhould preach upon; (Enquiry Pag. 58.) which fhews the Bishop to be as much,

[ocr errors]

at

* Origen. in Ezek. Hom. 3. Origen, Hom. de Engaftrim. p. 28. Vol. 1.

« PreviousContinue »